[14:24] up for new and uh new will be on the
agenda. It'll be an agenda item, so
[14:28] there will be no need to have it under
public comment. Before I call the
[14:31] meeting to order, um when we do have
public comment, if you could just keep
[14:35] your comments to three minutes or less,
state your name and address up here at
[14:38] the front of the podium. Even though you
have it signed in here, we need it uh
[14:42] verbally for the record. And um just
know the public won't be able to respond
[14:46] to you especially uh if there's some
topics on here uh particularly we won't
[14:51] be able to respond. Um any item on the
agenda here I will open up for public
[14:55] comment
and I think that that should cover
[14:58] everything.
Okay. So let's uh start out and I'll
[15:02] call the meeting to order.
Will you please stand and join me in the
[15:06] pledge of allegiance?
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[15:11] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation
[15:17] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[15:21] » Thank you. Click call the role, please.
[15:27] » Mayor Carsp
>> here.
[15:29] » Mayor Prom Murphy
>> here.
[15:31] » Trusty Hardy,
>> yes.
[15:33] » Trusty Alrech
>> here.
[15:34] » Trusty Wing
>> here. Trusty Ays
[15:37] » here.
>> Trusty Brody will be absent this
[15:40] evening.
>> Thank you, Clerk. All right. Next on the
[15:43] agenda is citizen participation. I'm
looking for anything. This all looks to
[15:47] be for new except one and the one is for
Richardson which we can put under the
[15:52] parks master plan update.
>> That sure. Okay. So, um we'll just move
[15:58] on now to consent. Do trustes like
anything removed from consent?
[16:02] Otherwise, is there a motion to approve?
>> Motion to approve. consent items.
[16:06] » All right. Uh, Trusty Hardy's move.
Trusty Wing has seconded. Clicker, can
[16:09] we have a roll call vote, please?
>> Trusty Wing,
[16:12] » yes.
>> Trusty Hardy,
[16:13] » yes.
>> Trusty Ays,
[16:15] » yes.
>> Mayor Prom Murphy,
[16:16] » yes.
>> Trusty Alrech,
[16:18] » yes.
>> Mayor Carsback,
[16:20] » yes. Thank you.
>> Is Trish Werner in the uh audience
[16:23] tonight? Welcome, Trish. If you could
come to the front here. Trish is from
[16:26] the League of Women Voters, and uh we
have a proclamation for you tonight,
[16:31] and this is for Women's Equality Day. I
can uh would you like for me to read it
[16:35] and then if you'd like to add anything
or
[16:37] » Sure.
>> Okay. Great.
[16:39] » Whereas on August 26th, 1920, the 19th
amendment to the United States
[16:44] Constitution was certified, securing
women's right to vote and marking a
[16:47] historic victory in the long struggle
for women's equality. And whereas
[16:51] women's equality day serves as a tribute
to the generations of women who fought
[16:55] tirelessly, courageously, and
relentlessly for the fundamental right
[16:59] to participate in our democracy. And
whereas the League of Women Voters,
[17:03] founded in 1920, just months before the
ratification of the 19th Amendment, has
[17:07] stood at the forefront of the movement
to protect and expand voting rights,
[17:11] promote civic engagement, and empower
voters for over a century. And whereas
[17:16] despite the progress made, barriers to
equality and equitable representation
[17:22] persist in many areas of society,
including pay, equity, reproductive
[17:27] justice, representation in leadership
roles, and full access to the ballot.
[17:31] And whereas we honor and continue the
work of trailblazers like Sojourer
[17:34] Truth, Susan B. Anthony, IdB Wells,
Alice Paul, and countless unnamed women,
[17:40] especially women of color, whose voices
and leadership have shaped the course of
[17:44] history. And whereas the League of Women
Voters remains committed to advancing
[17:48] inclusive democracy, defending the right
to vote, and ensuring that every voice
[17:52] is heard in the dem democratic process.
Now, therefore, we commemorate women's
[17:57] equality day, August 26, as a day to
celebrate the importance of the women's
[18:01] suffrage movement and the work to secure
and expand equal rights today. Further,
[18:06] let it be resolved that I, William
Karpc, mayor of the town of Berth, do
[18:10] hereby proclaim two Tuesday, August 26,
2025 as Women's Equality Day in the town
[18:16] of Berth. And I'll go ahead and sign
this
[18:20] 12th day of August 2025.
Would you like to, you don't have to.
[18:26] Would you like to add anything by
chance? Okay. Well, thank you for
[18:29] bringing this before us. Let's give a
round of applause.
[18:33] [Applause]
[18:41] Excellent.
[18:45] Okay. Um, let's move on. Now, I'd like
to bump up new, but um, we can do this
[18:50] Excel Energy update and presentation by
Hans Rodick.
[18:54] Is Mr. Rodick in the room tonight?
Welcome. We have a full crowd.
[18:58] » Thanks for being here.
>> Picked quite the day to come and
[19:01] present. Everybody gets to learn about
Excel.
[19:03] » That's right.
>> Let's see here. Do I use the clicker?
[19:06] Okay. Thank you, uh, Mayor Carspec and
town board. Chris, thanks for having me
[19:10] and coordinating. Uh, we're just going
to do a quick presentation here today to
[19:14] give you guys an update about who XL
Energy is. Uh, it's kind of unique
[19:18] timing for us as we're in conversations
with uh, reestablishing our franchise
[19:23] agreement with the town of Berthood. Uh,
we've been serving the community for
[19:27] many decades now. Um, but we're looking
forward to getting that done. So, Excel
[19:33] Energy, we're a uh a nationwide utility.
We're a dual fuel company where we have
[19:38] electric and natural gas service. Um,
our our corporate headquarters is in
[19:42] Minnesota with our largest secondary
base here in Colorado.
[19:49] Um, basically this slide kind of shows
what we're This one has the right
[19:55] figures on it on the left hand side
there. is supposed to show what our 2005
[19:59] emission levels were and what they are
today in 2024. Um, we're at about a 57%
[20:05] reduction so far and on track to hit
that 80% reduction by 2030. And you can
[20:11] see our our energy mix here in the state
of Colorado. So, we've got a pretty
[20:16] unique uh blend. Actually, this is
companywide. We have we have no nuclear
[20:21] here in this in Colorado.
So, our long range vision, we kind of
[20:26] have four main pillars. We want to be
safe, we want to be clean, we want to be
[20:30] reliable, and we want to be affordable.
So, trying to plan uh today's work to
[20:34] ensure that those goals are met uh takes
a lot of hard work, and we've got about
[20:39] 4,000 employees here that are working
every day to achieve these goals.
[20:45] But kind of diving in a little bit
deeper, we've got our short-term goal of
[20:48] 2030 where we're on we're on track to
hit that uh state mandate of an 80%
[20:53] reduction in the CO2 emissions. Uh we've
got our goals related to our natural gas
[20:58] service. Uh by 2035, we're going to have
taken a step internally as a company to
[21:04] have converted uh roughly 20% of our
fleet to EVs. Actually drove here from
[21:09] Gley in an EV. It's pretty sweet. Folks
want to check it out in the parking lot.
[21:12] You can see the wrap on it. Uh and then
by 2050, looking ahead, we've got some
[21:17] pretty intense uh and aggressive goals
to be fully carbon-f free when it comes
[21:21] to our electric generation. Uh we're
going to be a net zero natural gas
[21:25] service and have a lot of options for
that EV infrastructure.
[21:31] Turning here to the state, uh you can
see this is our service territory. So
[21:35] obviously we're here in Berth uh but we
go basically all the way to the southern
[21:39] border out west to Grand Junction and
then up north to Wyoming. Uh I'm the
[21:44] area manager for northern Colorado. So I
cover Lammer County, Well County, Logan
[21:49] and Morgan counties and then additional
uh three eastern plains counties where
[21:53] we have some of our large renewable wind
assets. Uh so our our mix of customers
[21:58] is pretty even there on electric and
natural gas.
[22:03] This is our our energy mix in Colorado.
Uh we're going to be out of the coal
[22:08] business roughly by 2030. That is the
target if all goes well. We're uh
[22:13] converting a couple of plants to natural
gas. Our pawn plant in Morgan County is
[22:18] in the process of converting. And then
you can see the wind and solar. Uh those
[22:23] numbers are going to tick up here as we
get closer to 2030. You can see uh very
[22:29] substantial jumps in our wind and solar
generation and we expect to be 88 8%
[22:35] carbon-f free uh by 2030.
[22:39] So and again this is in back in 2018 we
came out as the first company nationwide
[22:45] to establish uh those production those
emissions reduction targets by 2030. And
[22:52] we've been leading on that effort uh
really over the last decade.
[22:57] In 2019,
uh, we got started with the Colorado
[23:01] Clean Energy Plan and that portfolio was
fully approved this last year by the
[23:07] Colorado Public Utilities Commission,
which were fully regulated by. So any
[23:11] sort of our big plans to build a new
power plant or build very large
[23:15] transmission lines has to go through the
PUC. And you can see the diverse mix of
[23:20] energy resources. Uh just to your east
in uh Well County, we're going to be
[23:26] adding a couple new uh gas combustion
turbines to our fleet. So to have that
[23:30] firm and dispatchable generation on the
system for super hot days like we're
[23:35] experiencing right now.
Uh we're going to be able to do all this
[23:40] over the next uh five years. We're talk
a little bit more about our um
[23:44] substantial investment plan, but the the
goal and our projections are to continue
[23:49] to keep our bills uh below that national
average and to keep any sort of
[23:54] increases below this standard historical
rate of inflation, that that 2 to 3% uh
[23:59] range, not co inflation.
So, like I mentioned, over the next uh
[24:06] five years as a company, we're going to
be raising and deploying about 45
[24:10] billion dollars of investment of of
investment across our eight states. The
[24:16] bulk of that is going to come here to
Colorado. We're looking at roughly $22
[24:19] billion. So, um, that's going to include
everything from the new generation, you
[24:25] know, new wind farms, new solar farms,
new gas plants, uh, maybe nuclear one
[24:31] day, depending on how the state uh,
looks at that. And then we're going to
[24:35] be doing a lot of transmission, which is
kind of the backbone of the electricity
[24:39] network, our grid, the big tall
transmission lines that take that
[24:43] generation uh, from the power plants,
bring it to a substation. We're going to
[24:47] be building a lot more substations over
the course of the next five years
[24:51] because we're seeing more demand on our
system than we ever have basically since
[24:55] the 1950s and60s when AC became a thing.
Um, and so it's going to be a very
[25:01] aggressive plan. We have a lot of high
hopes that it's going to go well. We got
[25:05] to work with communities like yourselves
to make sure that we can build our
[25:08] infrastructure to serve, you know, end
users like everybody here in the in the
[25:13] room.
So this kind of the breakdown of that
[25:16] $22 billion uh generation is actually
not as large as you would think it would
[25:21] be. We're really going to be working a
lot a lot on our distribution system. So
[25:26] that's customer impact that increases
reliability and that that increases
[25:30] capacity for towns like yourselves to
continue to grow and attract businesses.
[25:35] You'll see a lot of transmission. Um and
here in a second here we'll talk a
[25:39] little bit about our wildfire
mitigation. Uh, as I was driving in on
[25:44] 56th, I looked at the foothills over
here and saw some smoke. And so, it just
[25:49] reminds us how important it is to uh for
us as a utility to ensure that we're
[25:54] doing everything we can to make sure our
system is safe and does not cause any
[25:58] sort of catastrophic wildfires.
Um, our Colorado Pathways, it's a five
[26:04] roughly 500 miles of new transmission,
uh, starting at Fort St. rain and doing
[26:09] basically a giant horseshoe back up to
Denver. Um, it's our it was our largest
[26:14] infrastructure project to date as a
company and we're still continuing
[26:17] progress on it.
This just touches on our our EV 2050
[26:23] vision. I don't want to dive too much
into that. I want to be respectful
[26:26] everybody's time. Uh, we do have these
plans before the PUC to enhance that EV
[26:31] infrastructure which is really the
critical uh kind of first step to making
[26:35] sure that more EVs can get on the road.
a little bit of the fun stuff. We uh we
[26:41] have a lot of programs to make sure that
our customers have, you know, the most
[26:45] efficient homes and businesses as
possible and we really try to do a lot
[26:49] of outreach on those on those programs
and uh looking forward to bringing some
[26:55] more of those resources to the community
as we move forward.
[26:59] just a little bit of uh our impact here
in the state in terms of supporting
[27:04] local jobs, supporting local communities
and what we do to give back to the to
[27:08] the places that we live in.
Uh we got a lot of great, you know,
[27:13] stats on here, but I think it's just a
great thing. Every year we do what's
[27:17] called our day of service in
midepptember where companywide. We get
[27:21] hundreds of projects and you'll probably
see a ton of people out wearing their XL
[27:25] red shirts uh you know working at
various projects in their communities.
[27:31] We're a big military support uh company.
We we love our veterans. Got a lot of
[27:36] veterans actually within our various
teams. So we we're highly supportive of
[27:41] them and what they do for us. Real quick
on the wildfire mitigation. Uh Berth is
[27:46] on that on our tier two risk zone. And
so tier one is our lowest, tier two is
[27:52] our mid, and tier three is our our
highest risk zone. The further west you
[27:57] go towards the foothills, the more of a
of a high risk we're going to see. We
[28:01] don't have as many electric assets over
there. Uh so that that's kind of a good
[28:05] thing for us, but further south in
Boulder County and some of those other
[28:08] southern counties, very high risk.
We have uh done a substantial amount of
[28:15] work over the last couple of years. Uh a
lot of that work is at the distribution
[28:20] system level. So replacing high-risisk
poles, visually inspecting lines, using
[28:25] drones to inspect our our transmission
lines and those real mountainous areas
[28:30] and making sure that, you know, we're
replacing any sort of equipment that is
[28:34] potentially on its way out ahead of
schedule.
[28:39] And we've got a whole a whole plan that
was actually approved by the PUC uh just
[28:44] in the last couple of months to execute
this work and happy to come back at any
[28:49] time to give you guys more of an update
on that. But I obviously want to make
[28:52] sure you can get to the uh the hot topic
here in the room. So I appreciate
[28:56] everybody's time. I left everybody uh
except Trusty Alrech with my card. So
[29:01] I'll make sure you have that. If you
guys ever have any questions about what
[29:05] we do, what we have going on, and any
other services we provide, just give me
[29:09] a shout.
>> Thank you.
[29:11] You are it. We're all here for you.
[29:16] » There you guys go.
>> Thank you.
[29:20] » Any questions?
>> I have one.
[29:23] So, I I um I don't know if I got it in
an email or or in the US mail, but I
[29:27] think I received a letter from Excel
saying asking for us to cut our usage
[29:30] during peak times because there was a
risk that we may use our power. Can you
[29:35] speak to that quickly and kind of what's
being done to mitigate that?
[29:38] » Yeah, it's a great question. So last
week um with very high temperatures and
[29:45] you know very high demand on the system
and some of our generation capacity uh
[29:51] we were
we were at risk of having to do some
[29:55] controlled outages to preserve the
integrity of the grid. Uh and so we made
[29:59] it what's called a call for conservation
across the state. Reached out to our
[30:04] local communities and our customers. Um,
we used a lot of tools in our toolbox. I
[30:09] can't go into all of them because it's
some guidelines and things that we're
[30:13] not really allowed to discuss in a
public setting, but we due to those that
[30:17] call to conservation and the inner
workings of our team, we were able to
[30:21] avoid having to do any of those. Um,
it's actually pretty unique timing. The
[30:27] public utilities commission this week,
last week, and this week has been
[30:31] debating uh our plan, one of our plans
to build more generation
[30:36] And um so it was a pretty unique uh I
think factoid for them to consider is
[30:42] that we need that firm dispatchable
generation when the wind's not blowing
[30:46] and the sun isn't shining and so things
can happen. We have really high
[30:50] reliability ratings. Uh but nobody is
perfect. So we're continuing to you know
[30:55] move forward with that plan to build
that generation of enhanced capacity.
[30:59] So, with the hot weather, the increased
population, I don't know how many data
[31:03] centers Colorado is getting, but
obviously that'll be a draw. Yeah. Do
[31:06] you think this mitigation you just
discussed uh will be in effect, possibly
[31:11] when so that we can avoid outages?
>> Yeah, it's a good question. So, we're in
[31:16] the process of building out a variety of
new generation out east. Couple of new
[31:22] wind farms that are going to be coming
online. The uh the new combustion
[31:26] turbines in Well County at Fort St.
brain are expected to come on in 2028.
[31:32] And it's, you know, to be honest, it's
not soon enough. You get a big data
[31:36] center, you know, a hyperscaler that's
300 to 800 megawws. For comparison, our
[31:42] Pawn plant in Morton County is 500
megawws. And so trying to figure out how
[31:47] to make that all work and mesh is
something that we're in conversations
[31:52] with the PUC right now. So, uh, yeah,
it's it's a very exciting time in the
[31:57] the energy business and, uh, we will
continue to move forward as best as we
[32:02] can.
>> Thank you,
[32:05] » um, if I could, um, I've been following
the sustainability actions Excel has
[32:09] been taking for a long time, so I'd like
to commend you on your work on that
[32:13] ambitious goal. Um, but I did have a
follow-up question on conservation
[32:18] notices. Uh, we received the email, I
believe it was from you, maybe like two
[32:24] hours ahead of time. Is there any way we
can get that expedated so we can inform
[32:28] the community?
>> That's a very good point. Uh, Trusty
[32:32] Murphy's, um, we were scrambling to be
honest on that Thursday. Uh, we had some
[32:37] internal things happen and pop up and
the the information was coming to us as
[32:43] fast as we could get it. Um, I wish that
we could have, you know, advanced notice
[32:48] of it. Uh but sometimes things happen at
a generation facility that then tips the
[32:52] scale in the opposite direction of where
we need it to be.
[32:56] » Um we're the state's largest utility and
we're also basically the balancing
[33:01] authority on the the grid. And so when
when some of our assets maybe go down or
[33:08] aren't producing as as much, uh we have
a real heightened level of
[33:12] responsibility to make sure we do what
we can. Uh, but I I'll take that back to
[33:16] the team to see if there's any way we
can, you know, 24 hours in advance or
[33:22] anything of that nature. But, you know,
sometimes things really all the dominoes
[33:26] fall in the wrong direction was really
what happened on Thursday.
[33:30] » No, much appreciated. And I think we're
willing to forward that information onto
[33:35] the community
>> and we do greatly appreciate everybody's
[33:38] assistance. I know a lot of folks uh
from around the region, counties and
[33:41] town owns were forwarding and putting on
social media. So, thank you guys because
[33:46] every every little bit helped.
>> Just a quick question. Um, the wildfire
[33:53] mitigation, I appreciate all those
efforts, but I was curious if you have a
[33:56] what the procedure is for reinforcing
infrastructure that gets taken down with
[34:00] a wildfire, how we get everyone back
online with utilities after an incident
[34:05] occurs.
>> Yeah. So, we It's a good question. We're
[34:09] a um I'll take a step back. We're really
in that a nationally recognized leader
[34:15] in storm restoration. U Minnesota gets a
lot of very intense uh storms during the
[34:22] summertime. I've seen way more outages
uh coming out of our Minnesota service
[34:26] territory than than we have thankfully
experienced this summer. Um when a big
[34:32] event does happen, we are able to rely
on what's called mutual aid. So you get
[34:36] a bunch of other utilities nationwide
who will come in and support us. So it
[34:41] won't just be XL crews trying to carry
that burden and getting everybody back
[34:44] online. Um so recently we sent probably
hundreds of guys from Colorado to
[34:50] Minnesota to help with some of those
outages. And when some of the big
[34:53] hurricanes take place, we'll send crews
all down there. So in the event where
[34:58] you know major wildfire happens and
facilities get taken out, power gets
[35:03] lost, it'll be an all hands-on deck
effort to get drowned back out as fast
[35:07] as possible.
>> That's awesome. I know that's how the
[35:09] fire department responds too is sharing
resources, but I didn't know Excel did
[35:14] that. So, that's really neat.
>> Yeah, it's a pretty cool A lot of the
[35:17] major utilities are part of uh trade
associations and we all have these these
[35:21] agreements with each other to assist.
So, a line we can pull linemen from
[35:25] anywhere in the country to come and
help.
[35:28] » Thank you.
>> Appreciate you guys. Thanks for
[35:33] appreciate that.
[35:37] Okay, next I will bump up new farm
concept park concept update. We'll have
[35:41] uh Keith Null to present on this and I'm
going to move it up just given the
[35:45] amount of people in the audience that
are here for this tonight.
[35:50] Welcome Keith.
[36:21] All right. Thank you. We can get
started. Um so this is just a quick
[36:25] update from the new farm um park concept
update. After the last board meeting in
[36:31] July, um it was brought to our attention
to look into doing a conceptual design
[36:36] for the new farm property. The dual farm
property is a 13acre property on the
[36:42] east side of uh County Line Road.
And so
[36:49] for the planning process, we typically
have a handful of uh park properties.
[36:55] And eventually those park properties if
we decide to move f further with them,
[37:00] they usually go first into a conceptual
design. Um before the conceptual design,
[37:05] port committee has been talking about
them. Um, as an example, the Juskowski
[37:08] property we've had as it in our
inventory since 2012. Um, every year
[37:13] I've been on the port committee for
about five, six years. We talk about
[37:15] that property still and just um, you'll
see later on that we are trying to get
[37:20] further along with that property into a
conceptual design. So, that would be the
[37:24] next step for the the dual farm property
is to move it forward into a conceptual
[37:28] design. Uh, this can take anywhere from,
you know, six to 12 months depending on
[37:33] how uh, thorough we want to get with
this concept design. Uh following that,
[37:37] we go down to usually another year, year
and a half to do construction documents
[37:42] and then there's property construction.
So, we're still just uh with this
[37:46] property, we're just learning uh what's
possible out there, what would the
[37:49] community like out there, which is the
port and the board uh possibly like to
[37:53] see out there in the future.
And so just to follow up, the port
[37:58] committee met about this property last
Wednesday. Um following a presentation
[38:03] from staff Sarah and Butch and public
comment, the port committee recommended
[38:08] moving forward with a conceptual design.
Um there was then a brief discussion
[38:14] following that. Uh we looked at some
examples of some amphitheaters because
[38:19] uh with this property there is a yearly
uh concert event that takes place up
[38:25] there. Um and so some ideas for the
property having an amphitheater or
[38:29] possibly community arts center and and
those will be uh the ideas we take in
[38:34] these early discussions uh with
consultants as we go out for bid. So the
[38:39] port committee and uh kind of talk about
bike and trail access maybe golf cart
[38:44] parking out there and then
briefly discussed
[38:50] looking at like the list of amenities
that could actually fit on the property.
[38:54] Um, so it wasn't a a real deep dive and
and we're not going into a real deep
[38:58] dive with it tonight. Um, because we
still those will be the first steps with
[39:02] the consultants. So that is the update
>> addresses questions.
[39:10] » Pretty straightforward here.
>> All right. I'll open it up now for uh
[39:15] quite a bit of people signed up. Um,
says again reminder, I'll call your
[39:19] name. If you could state come to the
podium here to the left of the room,
[39:23] state your name and address and please
keep your comments to three minutes or
[39:26] less. We'll start off with Sarah
Lincoln.
[39:42] My name is Sarah Lincoln and I live at
236 East Highway 56, home of No Farm
[39:48] Park. Um, good evening trustees.
When you bought the farm from us in
[39:54] January 2023 and five of you took part
in that purchase. Um, we all understood
[40:00] that the establishment of New Farm as a
town park would preserve a cherished
[40:05] farmstead while the town built a music
and arts park around the protected
[40:10] structures.
For a couple of years since then, New
[40:14] Farm Park was put on the back burner to
make headway on other important parks
[40:18] projects. Recently though, it's become
apparent that New Farm Park needs to be
[40:23] moved from the back burner to the front
burner and kept there. And here's why.
[40:28] First, developments are now occurring
around the park. The town needs drawings
[40:33] and words to reference when they
communicate the original vision and
[40:37] intended use of Noah Farm Park to
others. To make my second point, I just
[40:42] want to ask how many people are here for
no for no park?
[40:48] We hear for the past decade so many
people who talk to us at the farm
[40:54] concert and in between like these folks
that they want an amphitheater and they
[40:58] would like it there because they know it
works. Um their words are we need a
[41:04] larger amphitheater and we need more
concerts.
[41:08] So to underline this point, I'd like to
read from the 2024 parks and recreation
[41:13] community survey where the community at
large asked for this as well. And I
[41:17] quote, "Overall the top rated future
amenities in terms of importance include
[41:24] bike and running trails, an outdoor
pool, natural areas, and an
[41:30] amphitheater.
The town is currently making good
[41:34] progress on trails, natural areas, and
an outdoor pool. And that's awesome. We
[41:39] now feel we need to start on the new
farm park amphitheater.
[41:44] For these reasons, the port, which is
the parks and wreck committee,
[41:49] they reviewed no farm park at their
August 6th meeting as Keith Null said,
[41:53] and they unanimously recommended moving
forward with a concept plan for the
[41:57] park, including an amphitheater as part
as part of that concept. In that review,
[42:02] it was made clear that funds exist in
this year's town budget to create the
[42:06] Kata plan, and we need to take advantage
of those funds before the year ends. In
[42:11] light of all this, I would like to make
two requests in closing. First, please
[42:16] vote to start the concept plan now to
take advantage of available funding. And
[42:21] second, please keep No Farm Park on the
front burner by setting aside 2026
[42:27] funding to move the park through the
planning process that Keys outlined and
[42:32] get to the next steps so that these
folks here and the greater community
[42:37] know that the amphitheater they want is
coming in the not too distant future.
[42:42] Thank you.
>> Thank you very much.
[42:47] » Next would be Mr.
[42:53] Oh, hi. My name is Butch Haw. I live at
236 East Highway 56, New Farm Park. This
[42:59] is my wife Sarah. You just heard Sarah
mention a word several times in her
[43:03] speech, and that word is community.
Bertha is more than just another town
[43:08] along the road. It's a community of
kind, generous people who choose to live
[43:12] here because they want to. From the
fifth generation farmers to the
[43:17] hopefield newcomers, this valley
provides some of the finest living that
[43:21] can be found anywhere along the front
range. And when these people speak up
[43:26] and make their wants and needs known,
it's only proper to listen to their
[43:30] requests and act accordingly.
There's nothing more powerful in
[43:35] bringing a community together than the
arts and music. It's the universal
[43:40] language that exists in all of us,
whether we realize it or not, that
[43:44] transcends the challenges we face in
everyday life. An independent survey
[43:49] conducted last year revealed the top
priorities which Sarah mentioned. In
[43:54] January 2023,
Bertha had purchased New Farm with the
[43:58] idea of eventually making it a music and
arts park. Sarah and I would live in the
[44:03] historic 1879 farmhouse until our
passing from this life. Now, two and a
[44:09] half years later, we find ourselves with
a project nearly forgotten as developers
[44:14] prepare to move dirt and build a
subdivision that will surround this park
[44:19] with no plans in place as to how the
park will fit in with that neighborhood.
[44:24] So, the next key word to remember
tonight is the word wait. We can no
[44:30] longer wait for New Farm Park to be
planned, especially with the developers
[44:34] pushing hard to keep the park from being
built for its intended purpose. And
[44:40] friends, waiting is an incurable
disease. Every day that we wait takes us
[44:46] one day closer to our last sunset.
We started the farm concert 22 years ago
[44:51] with a hope that the community would
respond to our dream of filling the
[44:55] valley with music.
150 people showed up for the first one.
[45:00] And now we sell 500 tickets every year
in less than 15 minutes.
[45:09] But that's as many folks as we can
handle with our current amphitheater. On
[45:13] one hand, it's great to know that we'll
fill our venue every year and we can
[45:17] plan to pay for top tier national
talent. On the other hand, only a
[45:22] fraction of the people who love music
and the arts are able to attend our
[45:26] yearly shows. What that proved to us, to
paraphrase Kevin Cosner and Field of
[45:31] Dreams, if you build it, they will come.
We know after two decades of successful
[45:38] shows, the people in this community will
indeed come.
[45:43] So, we're not asking the town to drop
anything that's already in progress in
[45:47] favor of New Farm Park. All we ask is
for a concept plan to be initiated, paid
[45:53] for with the funds already budgeted for
25 and for additional funds to be
[45:58] allocated in 26 and beyond as the new
farm park moves forward toward
[46:03] completion, taken from the back burner
to the front burner, so to speak. The
[46:08] community has proven to us that they
want this and they deserve to have it.
[46:12] Thank you for your time, citizens. Thank
you for your support.
[46:17] » Thank you very much.
>> Um Casey Grace.
[46:33] » Hi everyone. Good evening board of
trustees. I am Casey Grace. This is
[46:37] Norah Grace and the reason why the farm
concert isn't happening this year. So,
[46:41] very cute reason.
I live at 218A Cadmin Street. Um, I'm
[46:46] speaking on behalf of New Farm as the
operations manager of the annual farm
[46:50] concert, but also as a citizen of
Berthood for more than 15 years. Um,
[46:54] it's really hard to follow up the public
comment after Butch and Sarah um because
[46:59] they've covered this vision so well. So,
this is what I can add. Uh, many of you
[47:04] have been to the farm to at least see
the property and take in the views. Uh,
[47:09] most of you have been to at least one
farm concert and have been able to see
[47:12] what this magic is all about. So, I'm
proud to talk to my friends and extended
[47:17] family about how the town of Bertha had
bought the farm in 2023 to develop it
[47:22] further to benefit the community with
ideas like a bigger amphitheater, a
[47:26] performing arts center, a community
center, and more. But we've reached a
[47:30] fork in the road with Farmstead third
filing where in order to work with the
[47:34] developer to make decisions that are
beneficial to them and for us, New Farm
[47:38] Park needs a fullyfledged concept plan.
And since this filing has already been
[47:42] approved, the need for a concept plan
has never been stronger.
[47:47] We've heard from the community that they
want an amphitheater and and the new
[47:50] farm team is committed to providing
input on that concept plan and logistics
[47:54] to make it happen. So I have come here
tonight to ask two things with regard to
[47:59] New Farm. Number one, please tonight
vote to approve moving forward with the
[48:04] concept plan and thereby officially
declaring the start to New Farm Park.
[48:09] And two, approve funds to be allocated
specifically to New Farm Park in 2026 to
[48:14] keep momentum going for the development
into the future. Many of our parks have
[48:19] had great attention paid to them within
the last 5 years like Wagner Farm Park
[48:23] and Town Park. I believe it's New Farm
Park's turn to shine. Thank you very
[48:28] much for your time.
>> Thank you very much.
[48:34] Michael Stein.
[48:42] » Good evening. My name is Michael Stein
and along with my wife Carla, uh we live
[48:47] at 310 Victoria Street in uh Thickle
Farm just uh about a mile as the crow
[48:54] flies from New Farm. And I I prompted to
be here tonight both from a sense of
[49:01] grief and also a sense of enthusiasm.
the the enthusiasm is to en echo what's
[49:07] already been said and to encourage you
to move to to move the uh the project
[49:14] and the and the conceptual plan for the
project uh forward with with haste. Uh
[49:21] the grief comes from the fact that there
won't be a concert this year. There
[49:25] won't be a farm concert this year. We
have for the last several years
[49:30] introduced people from Bertha and from
around Colorado to the joy that is the
[49:35] farm concert. And now we have to tell
our friends that it's not going to be
[49:40] here this year. And uh the only relief
from that is I don't get to sit at my
[49:44] computer and and and try to be one of
those first people to get tickets
[49:49] because it it happens fast. So you got
to got to be on it.
[49:53] But the people that we have introduced
to the concert have come from other
[49:57] places. Uh some of whom travel all over
the world and see worldclass venues and
[50:03] worldclass acts. But they make it a
point every year to want to come to
[50:07] Bertha and share this with us because of
not just the the talent that comes but
[50:13] also the ambian ambiance that comes
along with it and and I don't think you
[50:18] can separate those things. Uh so so the
what what speaks for this particular
[50:25] design and venue. Uh a lot of the cities
around here have amphitheaters. They're
[50:30] usually some kind of concrete structure.
Uh but th this this concept blends
[50:37] nature and blends the outdoors along
with the opportunity to hear music. Uh
[50:45] not only for adults but also for
children. There's not a lot of places
[50:49] where you can go and take kids and go
listen to a concert and they can kind of
[50:53] wander around and not be in people's way
and and enjoy that. So, um we we need
[51:00] the amphitheater. We need expansion of
the amphitheater so even more people can
[51:05] enjoy it. B people from Bertha and from
around the the the rest of the state who
[51:11] will come and hear shows here. uh so
expansion of of the venue itself and
[51:17] also expansion of the opportunities for
other concerts and and other events to
[51:23] be there. Uh and thank you very much for
your time and thank you for
[51:29] consideration. Let's let's get this
done.
[51:35] Deian Mville.
[51:45] » Hello. I'm Dian Mulah Hill. I live at
1504 Chokeberry Street here in Bertha.
[51:50] Good evening, council members and
neighbors. I'm here tonight to speak
[51:54] about New Farm Park, specifically the
proof of concept plan that has already
[51:59] been funded uh by our town budget. The
funds are there. The need is clear as
[52:04] you can see and now it's time for
action. Newell Farm Park is more than
[52:09] just an idea on paper. It's an
opportunity to create a multi-purpose
[52:14] space where our community can gather
together, connect, and enjoy the
[52:20] outdoors in the garden spot of Colorado.
This vision includes areas for children
[52:26] to play, families to picnic, walking
paths for all ages, and an entertainment
[52:32] venue where we can host concerts,
theater performances, festivals, and
[52:38] other events bringing people together
while preserving a piece of our
[52:42] heritage. The proof of concept plan is a
critical first step. It's how we take
[52:48] this vision and turn it into something
tangible. designs, layouts, cost
[52:53] estimates, and timeliness. Without it,
the park remains a someday dream. With
[53:00] it, we can move forward with purpose and
momentum. Since the town has already
[53:05] allocated money, the question is not if
we can do it, it's when we will start.
[53:13] The longer we wait, the more likely we
are to lose both community enthusiasm
[53:18] and the benefit of current pricing. I'm
respectfully asking the council to
[53:24] prioritize this plan and direct that it
be started immediately. The residents
[53:30] who supported this budget item deserve
to see the visible progress and our
[53:35] community deserves to benefit from this
investment sooner than later. I've been
[53:41] asking for a concert venue since 2013.
Let's take the fundraising we've already
[53:48] committed and turn it into action. Let's
make the new farm project proof of
[53:54] concept plan with its community
gathering spaces and entertainment venue
[53:59] a priority and let's begin the work now.
Thank you so much for your time, your
[54:05] service to the community and your
attention this evening.
[54:08] » Thank you.
Steve Mo.
[54:13] » Uh my name is Steve Mulvahill, Deian's
husband.
[54:17] Um live at 1504 Chuckberry Street in
Berett
[54:22] and been there uh going on 12 years.
Um
[54:29] I hadn't planned on speaking. So the
first thing I'll say is what she said.
[54:39] I can't I can't duplicate that. There is
one point I'd like to ask the the board
[54:45] and the mayor to consider seriously
and that is as I've watched the the the
[54:51] funding grow and the projects grow for a
lot of work uh worthwhile recreation
[54:57] oriented projects. It seems that the
town has gotten into the either the
[55:03] habit
or the the model of approving a project
[55:09] and then once the project is approved,
altering the project and moving the
[55:14] priority to something else, leaving
behind unfinished projects and projects
[55:20] that vary quite a bit from the original
approved uh concept by by the voters.
[55:28] So, I think that most of those end up in
pretty good shape, but by the same
[55:33] token, they're not exactly what people
were expecting. And they do expect
[55:40] things to be done and they're and I
think the things that have been done
[55:45] have been done very well. But we
continually get into the same pattern
[55:50] that we're in with New Farm. And that is
we we go off on a project
[55:55] and we get it approved to a certain
degree and then the next thing we want
[56:00] to do is start another project and the
and the project behind either gets
[56:05] partially done, done late, never done.
And in some cases, things are still
[56:11] sitting there and the concept is is very
different than what was originally
[56:17] approved. And I realize it's not
possible for the board to come to the
[56:22] town or the the residents every single
time that they want to make a change,
[56:28] but I think you should consider the fact
that when you originally ask somebody to
[56:33] vote for something, they vote for the
package and then the the
[56:40] option of providing input to the town
when you go to make a change is is very
[56:48] short. It's not well distributed
and the decision is made for the changes
[56:55] without consideration for completing the
project. So all I'm asking is to
[57:00] complete the projects that are in place
and stop putting things aside and re
[57:06] reassessing the whole town putting
multiple projects on hold while
[57:12] something new is started. And in most
cases, all these things are years down
[57:17] the road to get completed. So, let's
complete some stuff while we have the
[57:21] money and that's it. And then what she
said is more than I could have figured
[57:28] out. So, thank you all for your time.
[57:35] » Uh, next is Karen Simmons.
[57:43] Um, it's probably not the right format.
Um, if you could send an email,
[57:49] that'd be better here. We're just doing
a public comment right now. Uh, Vance
[57:53] Bunker.
>> Well, I don't really have much more to
[57:58] say other than what everybody's already
said. Um, excuse me, Vance Bunker.
[58:02] Jackie Nelson, that's my wife, and we
live at 1110 Fourth Street here in
[58:06] Berth. Um, we're 12-year veterans of the
farm concert and I think we're one of
[58:12] two couples that have been married at
the farm concert or at the farm. Uh,
[58:16] that being Butch and Sarah and us. So,
um, that place has a special spot in our
[58:22] heart as well as Butch and Sarah. Um
um
[58:30] over the years we've seen some epic
performances. Some um people like Pete
[58:37] Huntinger who on his guitar played 14
different parts all at the same time.
[58:42] I'm exaggerating, but um as we're
watching him, you're you're you're
[58:48] flabbergasted. Am I really listening to
this? Is this really happening? um uh
[58:54] just um different things like Baxter
Black and Kevin Davis and the Haunted
[58:59] Windchimes. And one of the most magical
moments that I'll probably never forget
[59:03] was when Don Edwards um finished his set
with the Coyote song and it's quiet. You
[59:11] could hear a pin drop out there and
there's a full moon and stars and he
[59:16] finishes up this set with that. It's a
once in a-lifetime chance. He's now
[59:21] gone. Um not not going to be around
anymore. Um but year after year, that's
[59:26] the acts and the performers that we got
to see that Butch brought in. People
[59:30] that have so much talent, in my opinion,
they're never going to be famous because
[59:34] they are too talented. Um so, somebody
spoke a little while ago about how
[59:40] magical it is. It's extremely magical
out there. I have I don't like to go to
[59:46] concerts. I don't like noise. I don't
like being surrounded by thousands of
[59:50] people. To go to the farm concert and be
sitting around with 500 of the most
[59:55] well- behaved people um you've ever been
around and then to have sound that you
[1:00:01] can still have conversation with the
person next to you and still not bother
[1:00:06] the people in front of you or behind you
is it's incredible what they do out
[1:00:10] there.
Um,
[1:00:14] that's only been done by Butch and Sarah
and Casey and Mike. And this little baby
[1:00:19] right here held up this year's show.
That proves that this family has put
[1:00:25] their heart and soul in this and with
volunteer help, of course. Um, but it's
[1:00:30] time for the town, especially now with
the funds in place, get that concept
[1:00:35] plan going. Let's move into a
construction design. Let's figure that
[1:00:38] out. I agree wholeheartedly that should
be being designed as the development is
[1:00:44] being designed. And the folks that get
to buy houses next to that
[1:00:49] if they keep putting on the same shows
and the same things that have been
[1:00:52] happening year after year, what a
blessing. They'll be able to walk out
[1:00:56] their back door on their deck and watch
a really fabulous show. Um
[1:01:02] it's a I think it's important. Um I
don't want to see it drag on like Wagner
[1:01:07] Farm Park. And I realize that there was
other circumstances that the town didn't
[1:01:10] have money back 20 years ago when that
first started.
[1:01:13] » Mr. Buck, we're hitting the three
minutes.
[1:01:15] » Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
>> Um, so um um I realize that was going
[1:01:19] on. Um but yeah, we got some time and
some money. Let's get this done and push
[1:01:23] forward. I appreciate you guys.
>> Thank you very much.
[1:01:25] » Thank you.
>> Was 1110 one4 Street correct?
[1:01:29] » Yes.
>> Okay, perfect. Thank you. U Mrs.
[1:01:31] Simmons, was there a question regarding
the wolf farm by chance?
[1:01:39] I got you. Okay, that'll be at the end
of the agenda. I'm sorry to Yeah,
[1:01:42] dismiss you on that. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh Jane Valier.
[1:01:57] » My name is Dave Valer. I live at 980
Mountain Avenue. I've lived in Bertha a
[1:02:01] long, long time. Um, and I'm pleased
that Port recommended the trustees begin
[1:02:07] concept planning for New Farm Park,
Muse, Music and Arts Park, I think is
[1:02:11] what they would like to call it. I feel
this is a unique location that should be
[1:02:16] preserved for future use as a performing
arts venue. I would like to think that
[1:02:21] our children and grandchildren will be
able to enjoy the farm concerts as we
[1:02:26] have. Um, and I echo everything that
everyone has said about those concerts.
[1:02:30] It's an unbelievable experience. And if
you haven't had one, I hope you get to
[1:02:34] come next year because it's just really
something very special. Um, I understand
[1:02:39] that you have already allocated money
for the concept plan and I am here to
[1:02:44] urge you to allocate money in 2026
budget to continue that process and move
[1:02:50] on to the next step in making the music
and arts park become a reality. The
[1:02:55] window of opportunity is now and I think
it is critical for you to act on it
[1:03:00] immediately. so that it doesn't get lost
in a lot of other parks issues and
[1:03:06] priorities that come to you. Thank you
for your consideration.
[1:03:10] » Thank you very much.
[1:03:15] » Mark French.
Welcome.
[1:03:21] » Yeah, I don't have a uh baby or a
script, so you just have to bear with me
[1:03:24] for three minutes. Uh, my name is Mark
French and I live at 2022 French Hill
[1:03:30] Drive and that's south of Berth about
two miles and I'm a 70 plus year
[1:03:36] resident of Bertha
and I know when everybody sees me they
[1:03:40] expect a history lesson so we'll make it
real short.
[1:03:44] The first event in this town in 1884 was
a dance in the flower mill. Um, they
[1:03:50] brought in the band from Longmont. They
danced till sunrise. 1884. How far
[1:03:56] behind are we?
[1:04:00] Following that, for about 50 years,
there was a band stand in Bertha from
[1:04:05] the mid1 1890s to 1943.
And the band stand was at a variety of
[1:04:10] different locations from Third Street to
the southeast corner of Fourth and
[1:04:16] Mountain uh to the school grounds which
is now Fickle Park to the U area behind
[1:04:23] the United Brethren Church which is now
the four square church. Uh we can do it.
[1:04:28] It's now's the time is to take to take
the deep dive. Uh my idea of uh this
[1:04:34] whole project was that we would have a
book end of Wagner Park on one end of
[1:04:40] the uh community and a book in on the
other end of the park and that would be
[1:04:46] New Farm Park. Uh we're lacking one of
those bookends right now. So now it's
[1:04:52] time to take the deep dive and move to
this conceptual plan and um honor the uh
[1:04:58] wishes of all these uh people here
tonight. Thank you.
[1:05:02] » Thank you.
>> We have no one else signed up. I
[1:05:07] understand that the agenda item slot for
this was already full. So plus I moved
[1:05:11] it up. Is there anyone here that wishes
to speak to New Farm that did not sign
[1:05:14] up?
All right. Well, thank you everyone for
[1:05:18] speaking. I'll close bring it back to
the board for deliberation on this.
[1:05:23] Do you have any other questions for uh
staff before we go into deliberation
[1:05:27] regarding this concept?
[1:05:31] Look out again. How do we all feel? I'll
just go down the row. I'll start with
[1:05:34] Trusty Albert.
>> Um well, I could not agree more with the
[1:05:40] sentiment that's in the room.
I think there's there's a lack of words
[1:05:44] for how magical and important the space
is for Berthood and the historical value
[1:05:49] is unparalleled and the time is now. And
so I'm excited that there are
[1:05:53] trailblazers in this room who aren't
letting this go. We're making sure that
[1:05:56] this stays top of mind. And I absolutely
support us not only approving the funds
[1:06:02] to get the design work in place, but to
actually have a motion in place so that
[1:06:06] we can have a set date and time that we
have that plan come back before us. And
[1:06:11] then I'd also like to make sure that we
discuss allocating funds in 2026. I'm
[1:06:16] not sure what those would look like and
what we would need to approve for
[1:06:20] funding and that that's where staff can
weigh in, but um I definitely would like
[1:06:24] to see this move forward and and I
really resonated with um Mr. Mobile's
[1:06:29] comments that I think sometimes we can
tend to see so many projects ahead of us
[1:06:34] and and started all on all of them and
and not finish some of the more key ones
[1:06:38] that we need to complete. And so to me,
this is one that was ahead of some of
[1:06:42] the ones that are on our docket and it
hasn't had any traction. And so I'd like
[1:06:46] to personally see this move up in
importance in our our line of events.
[1:06:51] So, and thank you so much, Mark French,
for the history lesson. It it makes me
[1:06:56] it makes me positively weepy when I hear
about the things that they were doing,
[1:07:00] you know, in the 1800s. So, thank you
again.
[1:07:03] » Okay. Um, administrator Kirk, on that
note with this to answer this question.
[1:07:09] So, uh, it's a $30,000 ask here or or
Keith, I guess it um, when would this
[1:07:14] come back and forth? Do you have any
idea of a timeline
[1:07:18] » of to actually see a design? I mean,
sometimes it takes uh it probably take
[1:07:24] us a month to solicit some some bids
right now and then typically takes four
[1:07:28] to eight weeks before they start working
on the design because they do some
[1:07:32] internal research and and dive into the
property a little more and then
[1:07:36] following that it's usually you don't
see a design for maybe another eight
[1:07:39] weeks. Um we we have had discussions
with a design earlier in the year and
[1:07:46] then that's kind of the timeline they
they put on the property. Um,
[1:07:50] » okay.
>> Just curious.
[1:07:53] » Um, trusty.
>> Um, yeah, I'm obviously super supportive
[1:07:58] and for what it's worth for everyone,
um, if it appears that we're kind of
[1:08:01] resting on our laurels, that's not um
the face that we like to put out there.
[1:08:07] Um, so I'll take my own personal
responsibility for that and apologize to
[1:08:11] you all if that's if that's the
appearance that it that it is. Um,
[1:08:16] the community aspect of this
possibility is amazing. Um, as all of
[1:08:22] the points that were made, it's a
bookend. Um, it's a community event.
[1:08:26] It's a community venue. It is a legacy
of not only Butch and Sarah, but also of
[1:08:33] the town itself, the community members.
It's something that everyone takes part
[1:08:36] in. It's something that everyone enjoys.
Um, and so I think that we can't pass up
[1:08:43] the opportunity to act as as quickly as
we can in government. Um, and on top of
[1:08:50] that, if you guys agree, I would suggest
that we also um make sure that Butch and
[1:08:58] Sarah's vision of the property be taken
at a high level when any u
[1:09:05] designs are being made or whenever plans
are being made because they have spent
[1:09:10] their lives in this business with this
kind of event with this kind of um
[1:09:17] situation. and they know what they were
initially looking for. And whether or
[1:09:23] not that comes to 100% fruition, I don't
think that we can discount their um
[1:09:28] ideas for the design and the layouts and
the uh the different amenities that that
[1:09:34] may or may not be put on this property.
[1:09:40] » Trusty Hardy,
>> what Carl said. Okay. And then um
[1:09:46] because I'm in a few words usually. So,
but uh yeah, I definitely like the idea
[1:09:51] of getting a concept plan on here just
so that we don't have developers around
[1:09:55] the park saying they didn't know what
was going on there and then having
[1:09:59] neighborhoods and houses being purchased
going complain about noises,
[1:10:05] » complain about noise and and things like
that. So having it uh pre-planned would
[1:10:11] definitely be helpful for
preempting any developments plans.
[1:10:19] » Thank you for that reminder. We just
received mics again. We for a while did
[1:10:23] not have mics. So thank you for that
throughout the night. All right. Thank
[1:10:26] you. Um Trusty Wing.
>> Yeah. I'm just wondering if Mr. French
[1:10:29] enjoyed himself at the 1884 dance. I
hope you did. Just just just kidding.
[1:10:37] Just kidding. Hey, uh I absolutely
support support getting started with the
[1:10:41] concept plan. Um I'm very excited to see
the plans and uh would absolutely love
[1:10:47] to attend a concert and there are uh
there are wonderful examples of venues
[1:10:52] similar to this all across the country
and I have a lot of faith in the town
[1:10:55] that will come up with a great concept.
>> Thank you, Mayor Pro.
[1:11:01] » Um I've been supportive of this project
from the get-go. Um, I thought it was
[1:11:07] really critical that we get this in the
budget last year, which I'm happy staff
[1:11:11] added. Um, going forth on this plan. I
think it's time that we take this
[1:11:16] concept and provide a foundation for all
of you out here in the audience involved
[1:11:22] on what this property, what this park,
what this concert is going to look like
[1:11:26] in the future. I think it's important
for Sarah and Butch who have made this
[1:11:30] sacrifice to have their input considered
and waited on this. Um, going beyond
[1:11:37] that, obviously it's incredibly critical
for an arts and music venue to have a
[1:11:43] really in-depth concept plan that
includes all the program and elements
[1:11:48] that go with that. Um, so I would like
to see a really detailed level of
[1:11:54] concept um, that accounts for a lot of
the unique input that you would have
[1:11:59] from artists or musicians as well as the
audience. Um, and then seeing this come
[1:12:05] back to review um, before us and the
port I think is really critical to
[1:12:09] getting this one right. Um, so I would
really love to get this thing moving.
[1:12:15] Um, and to everyone in the audience,
thank you for attending. Thank you for
[1:12:19] showing up and we want your input on
this going forth. Uh we want you at the
[1:12:25] port meetings to provide that niche
input that a venue like this deserves.
[1:12:32] So like to thank you all for showing up
and let's get it going.
[1:12:38] » I agree with everything stated and uh
Sarah and Butch, thank you for your
[1:12:41] diligence. Thank you for coming before
us several times uh earlier this year
[1:12:45] recently, keeping our eye on the ball of
this uh the developments coming in
[1:12:50] around you. Um though it wasn't ideal
how this all all turned out, I I'm
[1:12:54] really happy that you stepped up and um
made some calls and we're at at the port
[1:13:00] meeting and thank you Keith for um
allowing Sarah to to present. I'm very
[1:13:03] happy that port uh is recommending this
going forward and very happy to see the
[1:13:08] turnout tonight though it does not
surprise me. um just the amount of of
[1:13:13] community that has surrounded you Sarah
and Butch and what you guys have done
[1:13:17] there is truly taken on um its own wings
and now part of the town. So um I'm very
[1:13:23] happy to see this go forward and I agree
with everything else the other trustees
[1:13:26] have said. Um and I also agree too that
I the consultants whoever the is chosen
[1:13:32] to do this concept plan do interview
Sarah and Butch and uh keep them a part
[1:13:37] of this whole process of of developing
this um concept.
[1:13:42] So that's all I have to add.
Um are we all supportive of
[1:13:49] who made this original suggestion?
Trusty errors suggestion of having Sarah
[1:13:52] Butch be part of this concept plan
update interviewed. Okay. And the other
[1:13:56] one I think you wanted was a time frame.
It sounded like it would be
[1:13:59] » I think it'd be good to set something
out there even six months to say in six
[1:14:04] months we'd like to see this come back
before us just so that it doesn't go to
[1:14:07] the wayside.
>> Okay, that's fair. Is everyone supported
[1:14:10] with that? It should be done before
that. But okay, great. Okay, sounds like
[1:14:15] um in it
this is level is an update. It's
[1:14:19] probably good we do a motion anyway
since uh we're directing staff to put
[1:14:22] 30,000 into this. Um
so let's say is there a motion? Go ahead
[1:14:28] and type
>> for clarity. There's already $30,000 in
[1:14:30] the budget that we put in uh for this
fiscal year.
[1:14:34] » We will receive proposals from
interested design consultants we can
[1:14:40] review and um it may or may be may or
may not be $30,000. So I think it's a
[1:14:45] you know you don't have to direct us to
spend 30,000. We already have it
[1:14:48] budgeted. We're already planning to move
forward with the concept plan. It's
[1:14:51] great to hear your feedback and the
feedback of the community tonight and um
[1:14:54] understand the timeline. We'll get it
done.
[1:14:56] » Um May,
>> if I could ask this as well,
[1:14:59] Administrator Kirk, um when it comes to
a six-month update, would it be
[1:15:04] appropriate then to consider um
additional supplemental funding for the
[1:15:08] design process should we choose to go
forward at that point?
[1:15:11] » Yes, that's our typical process. So,
just as a reminder for everybody, the
[1:15:14] way that that we typically pursue
projects is uh they're either identified
[1:15:19] in a master plan that you've approved or
you've directed us to uh put a project
[1:15:23] at the top of the priority list. Sounds
like you're doing that tonight. Um and
[1:15:27] so
we would then solicit proposals from
[1:15:31] consultants. We either do that in one
fell swoop. If we have enough money
[1:15:35] budgeted for a larger design effort all
the way through construction drawings,
[1:15:38] we would go ahead and solicit proposals
for that entire amount. Uh at this point
[1:15:42] we had planned to do a concept plan. Um
I think before tonight there hadn't been
[1:15:47] talk of expediting construction
drawings. So if that's something you
[1:15:50] want to do in the future, we can
certainly do that. Um the intent was to
[1:15:54] get a concept plan prepared uh so that
we had a kind of an agreed upon vision
[1:15:58] for the future of that property.
>> The um after we do a concept plan, that
[1:16:02] typically gets us a pretty good idea of
what we're asking a design consultant to
[1:16:06] then do from a construction drawing
standpoint. That would be the next
[1:16:08] phase. That gets us a better price
typically because we have a better idea
[1:16:12] of what that scope of that design work
is going to be. We would bring that to
[1:16:15] you for approval at that point, budget
the funds uh as needed and then move
[1:16:20] forward with that design effort. And
then once the construction drawings are
[1:16:23] done, then if you want to build it, you
ask us to go out to bid. We
[1:16:26] » uh go find contractors to do the work
and we contract for that work. That's
[1:16:31] how we've done every park in town.
[1:16:36] » Does that answer your question?
>> Yeah. Um,
[1:16:39] so would it be typical to look at like a
midsummer adjustment um for this?
[1:16:44] » Uh, it it depends on how long the
concept design takes. Um,
[1:16:49] » you know, I think we hear you loud and
clear. We'll we'll move this to the
[1:16:52] front of the list. And um
>> I would be surprised if it takes six
[1:16:56] months to do a concept plan.
>> Um, but the reality is, as you know,
[1:17:01] there's a thousand things that happen
every day. This will be one of them.
[1:17:04] » Uh, and we'll work expeditiously to get
it done. uh would definitely be done in
[1:17:08] less than six months. So, if we can be
done before the end of the year, you
[1:17:10] could budget some money to do the next
phase if that was your um preference. If
[1:17:15] not, we could certainly do a meteor
budget adjustment or we have um prior to
[1:17:19] our mid-year budget adjustment, which
typically takes place in August, as you
[1:17:22] know, we're going to be doing that at
our next meeting. Um,
[1:17:26] if you have something you want to add to
the budget in March or April or some
[1:17:31] other time period prior to that, you
know, kind of formal midyear adjustment,
[1:17:35] you can approve and authorize us to do
that work and make the motion at the
[1:17:40] time to add funds at the midyear. So, we
can kind of do that anytime and we will
[1:17:44] formally incorporate those funds at
midyear if needed, but you can authorize
[1:17:48] us to do that prior to. Does that make
sense?
[1:17:50] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. And and I I guess from my
[1:17:52] standpoint, I think we've got enough
here and enough direction from port to
[1:17:57] for sure move forward on the concept
plan and then we'll meet back six months
[1:18:02] or sooner. Does that make sense?
>> Yep.
[1:18:05] » Okay.
>> Okay. So, we're good on the direction.
[1:18:07] » I think so.
>> We're good.
[1:18:09] » Yes.
>> Okay. Great. Awesome. Thank you
[1:18:11] everyone. We're here for new.
[1:18:17] » Do not feel the need to stay if you
don't want to. That's for sure. We
[1:18:20] appreciate you all showing up.
[1:18:26] We'll give it a second here. Next on our
agenda will be the short-term rental
[1:18:29] regulation change.
[1:18:45] Wow, quite a turn for that. It's
impressive.
[1:18:49] » And folks, if um if so we can keep the
meeting going, if you'd like to talk, if
[1:18:53] you could please discuss outside of the
uh boardroom. Thank you.
[1:19:42] Come on in. Take a seat.
All right.
[1:19:51] Okay. I'm going to call this meeting
back to order. Next on our agenda is a
[1:19:54] short-term rental regulations or
regulation change, excuse me. This is a
[1:19:58] public hearing and I'll have um our
senior planning manager, Ton Hill and
[1:20:02] Brand discuss that in in depth here. Uh
thank you all for being here tonight.
[1:20:05] I'll turn it over to Ton. Thank you.
[1:20:17] All right. Good evening, mayor,
trustees, Ton Hill, Brand Town's
[1:20:20] planning manager.
[1:20:25] » Also be Thank you. This is these are all
good points. I also want to shout this
[1:20:29] this room is notoriously terrible for
song. Just since I started it has been
[1:20:34] generally we have uh earpieces to help
out. I don't know if they're all
[1:20:37] deployed already. They are. Okay. Uh
we're doing our best here, but there's
[1:20:40] more remaining. Okay, there's more
remaining if folks have a tough time
[1:20:43] hearing. Thank you. Thank you.
>> Excellent. Okay, so as you likely
[1:20:48] recall, the proposed short-term rental
regulations code amendment was first
[1:20:54] presented to you on July 22nd, 2025.
This is the second reading this evening.
[1:21:00] There have been no changes since the
last hearing on the 22nd.
[1:21:05] Before the record, the code amendment
proposes removal of the current 200 foot
[1:21:11] separation requirement between approved
short-term rentals. Since implementing
[1:21:16] the short-term rental regulations in
September of 2024, the town has received
[1:21:21] consistent feedback from one community
member opposing the separation
[1:21:25] requirement and requesting its removal
or requesting an exemption from the
[1:21:30] regulation. This individual was one of
the four applicants that was not
[1:21:35] approved due to the separation
requirement.
[1:21:38] The planning commission heard the
proposed code amendment at their meeting
[1:21:42] on Jul July 10th, 2025 and voted
unanimously to recommend denial of the
[1:21:48] proposed uh amendment to the short-term
rental regulations to the town board.
[1:21:54] The planning commission cited their
rationale for denial based on the
[1:21:58] original purpose or intent of the
separation requirement to protect the
[1:22:03] sense of community and livability of the
town neighborhoods. Based on the reality
[1:22:08] that the proposed amendment comes at the
request of only one community member and
[1:22:12] based on the limited amount of time the
separation requirement has been in
[1:22:17] place, which is not sufficient to
determine if the separation requirement
[1:22:21] needs revision.
So again, no other changes are proposed.
[1:22:27] So I have two additional slides this
evening and then we'll wrap up rather
[1:22:30] quickly I believe. But these slides are
here um to show you examples of the
[1:22:37] separation requirement. So uh they
provide a visual of the existing 200
[1:22:43] foot separation and that's per the
current regulation and that is shown
[1:22:46] here in blue and then they also show a
100 foot uh separation which was a
[1:22:53] number that was brought up in the p last
public hearing. So um again the 100 ft
[1:22:58] is based on that previous conversation
um and we have done no additional
[1:23:02] research on the 100 but since it came up
we just wanted to show you what that
[1:23:06] would look like. So again, the blue is
the existing 200 foot separation and
[1:23:10] this uh what you're looking at in
example one is the Heron or the yeah the
[1:23:15] Heron Lakes town homes. Um and then the
100 ft would be the yellow.
[1:23:21] And of course I have one additional sign
and I'm happy to go back and forth
[1:23:25] between the two. So, on this particular
screen, this shows um an approved
[1:23:30] short-term rental in a separate
neighborhood and this is more your
[1:23:34] standard single family detached
residential lot. So, again, 200 feet is
[1:23:39] represented with blue and then the
yellow would be that 100 ft. So this
[1:23:42] gives you an idea and as a reminder the
separation requirement is measured from
[1:23:47] center of dwelling to center of dwelling
and the purpose of that is because GIS
[1:23:52] data sets typically uh assign the
address at the center of the structure
[1:23:58] and again for ease and management um and
mapping purposes that tends to be the
[1:24:03] the best route. Additionally, um it
should technically from be from the
[1:24:08] dwelling itself as that's where you're
going to get any kind of disturbance or
[1:24:12] noise or what have you. So, it's
dwelling to dwelling. So, with that,
[1:24:16] since there are no additional changes
and this is the second hearing, I'm
[1:24:20] available for any questions you may
have.
[1:24:22] » Thank you. Planner Hill trustes
questions.
[1:24:25] » I have one trust.
>> Can you go back to the previous slide,
[1:24:28] please?
I'm a little confused about the
[1:24:32] separation and I apologize if you've
answered this previously. Um, it says on
[1:24:36] the bottom here, for this reason, the
separation of rings of color can
[1:24:39] overlap. However, they cannot touch
another home
[1:24:44] that is the center location. So, I
>> Yeah, that I can see. Yes, it's be kind
[1:24:52] of confusing.
>> So, according to this plot, all four of
[1:24:56] And these are not real, right? These are
>> these are actually four approved
[1:24:59] currently approved short-term rentals in
the town in the town homes at Heron
[1:25:02] Lakes.
>> Okay. So, the one that was denied its
[1:25:07] sphere of influence was actually
touching one of the other ones.
[1:25:11] » So, yes. So, the as you see with the
blue, there is overlap in the actual
[1:25:16] sphere. But what we don't want to see
because it is center of dwelling to
[1:25:20] center dwelling. if that sphere actually
touched the other residence, that's when
[1:25:25] it it's within that 200 ft.
>> So the Yes, you'll find that. Um so the
[1:25:31] two that are there on Grand Market or
adjacent to the rideway, um they're
[1:25:35] actually the two blue ones are further
than 200 feet apart. If those spheres
[1:25:40] started to cross even more and where you
see the little house symbol in the
[1:25:44] middle and if that sphere actually
touched that house in the middle, that's
[1:25:48] when we would have a problem. said
differently. It's a radius from dwelling
[1:25:51] to dwelling.
>> Yeah. Correct. Yes.
[1:25:56] » Thank you.
>> Yeah.
[1:25:58] » Other questions?
[1:26:02] » Go ahead.
>> Sure.
[1:26:03] » Um, and you said because of the distance
requirement, four have been denied in
[1:26:10] the past year.
>> That is correct.
[1:26:12] » And how many are currently operating?
>> We have eight total within the town of
[1:26:16] Bered. So, we have four just in the
Heron Lake town homes and there were
[1:26:20] four four others that had applied but we
had to reject their applications because
[1:26:24] they did not meet that separation
requirement and then we have four others
[1:26:28] throughout the town that have been
approved and we've had none no others
[1:26:32] within the town of Bertha that have been
denied due to separation requirements.
[1:26:36] » And there's a max of 50. Is that
correct?
[1:26:39] » Correct.
>> Okay, I'm done now for real.
[1:26:43] » No, that's good. Um,
>> just say that again real quick. How many
[1:26:45] were rejected due to the 200 ft? So,
four total and they're all within the
[1:26:51] town homes.
>> Okay, that was going to be mine. So, out
[1:26:55] of those rejected, they're all
multi-unit or town homes, I should say.
[1:26:58] » Yeah, and just the Herald Lakes town
homes. Okay,
[1:27:00] » correct. And then um if you could
refresh me, have we talked about an
[1:27:04] exception process that if someone were
to come before court and ask and
[1:27:09] demonstrate their property is within a
reasonable distance from another
[1:27:13] property and that they're an exceptional
STR manager that they could possibly get
[1:27:20] some type of variance for their
property.
[1:27:22] » Yes. And so we did discuss this last
time as well as during the hearing
[1:27:25] process. So generally the rule of thumb
is that if you were wanting to make
[1:27:29] exceptions to a rule then the rule
should not be adopted. So it's either as
[1:27:35] with the public hearing when this was
adopted back in 2024
[1:27:39] um right getting my dates all mixed up.
I think you're right. Um
[1:27:43] the idea was that either you establish a
hard fact the hard rule that it's 200 or
[1:27:49] whatever whatever denomination and then
if that's truly what you are comfortable
[1:27:53] with it has to be applied equitably and
across the board to each and every
[1:27:59] property. It's when you start getting
into exceptions, it's then looks as if
[1:28:04] that's very very arbitrary and
additionally what why would one property
[1:28:10] deserve an exception over another and so
it be starts to become very messy very
[1:28:14] quickly and so generally the idea is if
you want exceptions then it's best to
[1:28:20] just not go with the regulation.
[1:28:26] Did we discuss in the last meeting about
a 100 foot for multi-unit or town homes
[1:28:30] and 200 foot for residential or am I
making this up? I thought there was some
[1:28:34] confusion over what we would do in that
kind of boundary area where multif
[1:28:38] family would go up against a single
family.
[1:28:40] » We did come up. Yes. Yep. We did discuss
that. Um because again there are
[1:28:44] challenges and again defining why there
should be one separation for a certain
[1:28:49] housing type and not for another can
become problematic. And that was one of
[1:28:54] those also unique scenarios that would
inevitably come up is that uh when you
[1:29:00] have town homes for instance that are
adjacent to a single family residential
[1:29:04] lot. How then do you make that
distinguished? How do you define that
[1:29:08] and how do you draw that line becomes
very challenging. enforcing becomes
[1:29:12] challenging.
[1:29:17] » Okay. Thank you. Other questions?
[1:29:22] » Okay. Well, this being a a a public
hearing, um there's no other questions,
[1:29:27] we can now move on to the actually uh
public hearing portion.
[1:29:34] We have three signed up.
Once I state your name, if you could
[1:29:38] come to the front to the podium here on
your left, please state your name and
[1:29:41] address and keep your comments to three
minutes or less. Thank you. Start out
[1:29:44] with Mindy Cruz.
Welcome.
[1:29:54] » Hello. I would mention that with the um
whole new farm thing, it would be great
[1:29:59] to have STRs for people to stay at when
they come to those venues. Um I'm going
[1:30:04] to talk really fast. Can you say your
name and address real quick?
[1:30:08] » Mickey Cruz uh 1520 airb.
>> Thank you.
[1:30:10] » So I'm going to talk really fast like a
New Yorker so I can get through this. Um
[1:30:14] so as you already know that we bought
our town home um for STR purposes and we
[1:30:19] were operating by the metro responsible
until Dante Bay happened and rather than
[1:30:25] that person being dealt with we were all
suffered. So when you voted not to only
[1:30:29] limit the number of STRs but also added
the distance requirement which is very
[1:30:34] unusual. Um, we hunted down, paid for,
and created all the 12 documents that
[1:30:39] the planning committee uh deemed that we
needed. I stood here and told you guys
[1:30:44] at that time that that was going to
cause tension within our community. And
[1:30:48] our pressure to hit a button at
midnight, one of our four documents
[1:30:51] failed to send somehow. And even though
we had had it and it was stamped in
[1:30:57] data, we were not allowed to submit it.
So Dave and I at financial losses found
[1:31:02] a renter for nine months while we
pursued the STR. This renter loved our h
[1:31:08] town home but was very disappointed in
the neighborhood. Then knowing that we
[1:31:12] had a month-long rental July August, we
decided to let friends and family stay
[1:31:18] during the next 12 month uh two months.
So Dave and I are full-time caregivers
[1:31:23] of my parents 85 89 years old, both with
cancer and one with dementia. So, that
[1:31:29] does not allow us to stay in a
three-level town home. It's not an
[1:31:34] option now, but we were hoping an option
someday. The first um friends that we
[1:31:39] had today were approached by a woman in
the neighborhood and asked what they
[1:31:42] were doing there. They were told that
they told them they were on vacation.
[1:31:46] Then Dave and I received a message that
night saying that we were being reported
[1:31:50] to the village for operating illegal
STR. The village is what a handful of
[1:31:56] ladies call themselves. Uh we have a
different name but we corrected them and
[1:32:03] um told them that they were our friends.
Um see the village feels like that they
[1:32:09] are now empowered and emboldened
uh to by the town to harass or question
[1:32:16] anyone that comes to stay in our place.
So, I'd like to know who in this room
[1:32:22] has to tell the community before you
have a family member come stay at your
[1:32:27] house if that's okay.
So, next we had my brother and my family
[1:32:31] come. Two ladies approached them and
asked them if they were renting from us.
[1:32:36] This harassment continued through
anybody else we had staying.
[1:32:41] We manage a a year-long rental next to
one of the ladies who wrote a long
[1:32:47] widely
uh lying email to you guys. A young
[1:32:51] family of two children and they have
been approached by these ladies and they
[1:32:55] feel like they're constantly watched.
So, mayor
[1:32:59] » um mayor
>> and trustees
[1:33:02] » um if the speaker could focus on the
issue and not the character of
[1:33:10] » any any person that would be
appreciated. Thank you.
[1:33:14] » So, next we had a corporal rental uh
corporate rental in August. The first
[1:33:19] couple of days they were constantly
watched and uh scoured out. One of the
[1:33:25] um ladies called the community officer,
Teresa, and she came out and spoke to
[1:33:29] two of the workers. They had no clue
about their accommodations as it was
[1:33:33] done through a corporation.
They were told they told her that they
[1:33:38] were that we were operating a illegal
STR.
[1:33:42] » Thank you. I'm sorry. We've hit the
three minute limit.
[1:33:45] » Okay. Can I say one more thing really
quick, please?
[1:33:48] » You can do one sentence here.
>> Yeah. So, I'll take Dave's time. So, um,
[1:33:55] so our our three-month rental was, um,
they sent us a message and said, "We
[1:34:00] want to break our contract because we
feel like we're being harassed." So,
[1:34:04] this this has caused Dave and I a lot of
not but financial problems, but also
[1:34:10] physical pain and emotional pain. We
have now decided to sell our property
[1:34:15] because we've not been allowed to do the
short-term rental as we bought the
[1:34:20] property for. Apparently, we can't have
friends and family over without them
[1:34:24] being harassed. And now we can't have
long-term rental without them being
[1:34:29] arrested. So, the decision that you guys
make today is really not going to affect
[1:34:32] us, but you should know that your
decisions have already affected our
[1:34:37] community. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:34:41] » And Mr. Cruz, I'm just assuming Well,
that's just going to have to go into
[1:34:44] that time, too. Okay. Uh John Evans,
welcome.
[1:34:50] Good evening, mayor and trustees. Uh,
thank you for your time tonight. Uh, as
[1:34:56] I'm one of the Don Zante Bay mafia that,
uh, I think was kind of referred to a
[1:35:02] year ago tomorrow.
>> Mr. Evans, do you mind state your name?
[1:35:05] » Oh, sorry. John Evans, 3252, Donzante
Bay Court.
[1:35:08] » Thank you.
>> Um, a year ago tomorrow, this board
[1:35:12] approved the now policy for short-term
rents. Um
[1:35:17] Ton Hillbrand just spoke to the distance
separation which was highly debated
[1:35:24] prior to the approval which started out
at 500 feet and ultimately ended up at
[1:35:29] 200 feet uh at separation and if if I
were to go on the VBL website today and
[1:35:37] I can show you there are 10 operating
short-term rentals in the Heron Lakes
[1:35:43] town homes. There are two and maybe
three elsewhere in the town of Bertha.
[1:35:48] So per Tom's own document, you know, 12
short-term rentals were applied for,
[1:35:54] eight were approved, four were denied.
Um I am wholeheartedly in favor of what
[1:36:00] the um planning commission recommended,
which is to leave it at 200 ft. We
[1:36:06] haven't had the policy in place for a
year yet. Having exceptions and waiverss
[1:36:11] will turn this into kind of a
free-for-all. And I don't believe that
[1:36:15] there's anybody being served by that.
And when we approve the town approved 50
[1:36:21] and you only have eight operating, that
means that there's not that much of a
[1:36:25] demand. And I believe the ultimate
solution is look for a hotel year to
[1:36:31] come into town to help strengthen the
attraction tourism base. It will benefit
[1:36:38] the local businesses. It will get be an
anchor property to help bring other
[1:36:44] growth into the community. So, I would
highly recommend that you do not change
[1:36:49] this uh requirement right now and give
it time like the planning commission
[1:36:54] said and let it play out. Thank you very
much.
[1:36:56] » Thank you.
[1:37:00] » Matt Gavin, welcome.
>> My name is Matthew Gavin. I live at 3270
[1:37:06] Dante Bay Court. Um trustees, Mayor
Tarbach, thank you for listening this
[1:37:11] evening. Um I I just want to make two
quick points. You you have heard me for
[1:37:15] the last year. I was here a lot along
with a lot of my neighbors and a lot of
[1:37:19] people throughout Bertha. This was a
really highly contested issue. Turns out
[1:37:24] it was kind of a tempest in a teapot
given only 12 people applied and most of
[1:37:28] them were in those town homes. But I
really believe and what the city has
[1:37:32] said is once you set this policy, you
have to make policy and study strong.
[1:37:36] You need to stay there and you need to
give it some time to work so that you
[1:37:39] can collect data and then you can
analyze and see if any changes are
[1:37:43] necessary. This was a really hard fought
community compromise. There were not a
[1:37:48] lot of happy people when that got done.
But through this democratic process and
[1:37:52] through people neighbors listening to
one another, we came to that compromise
[1:37:55] and now the city is is implementing
that. I'm really hoping that one
[1:38:00] person's personal financial situation
doesn't undo all the work that this body
[1:38:05] and all the other members of the
community that showed up over a year of
[1:38:08] hearings um came up with this
legislation. The other thing I'd like to
[1:38:12] remind you all of is having been one of
the people that lived on Don Sante Bay,
[1:38:16] clearly there was a problem with the one
property renting to 30 people at a time
[1:38:20] and having conventions and parties. Um
but the other problem was concentration.
[1:38:25] There were seven short-term rentals in
our block and now it sounds like there's
[1:38:29] four in the town homes. They want eight
and maybe they want more. The
[1:38:33] concentration is a problem. While there
are bad actors, even the people that do
[1:38:38] this better than the others, when
there's seven of them within your local
[1:38:42] community, it's noise, it's disruption,
it's loss of community, it's all those
[1:38:47] things. So again, I just urge you to
take that hard thought decision. listen
[1:38:52] to your uh town employees, listen to the
planning commission, and let's give this
[1:38:57] the time to work itself out and
reconsider using data and analysis down
[1:39:00] the road where the entire community can
participate again. Thank you for your
[1:39:04] time.
>> Thank you.
[1:39:07] » That's all we have signed up. Is there
anyone else that wishes to speak?
[1:39:12] » All right, I'll close the public
hearing, bring it back to the board for
[1:39:14] deliberation on this.
[1:39:19] Uh trustes, do we have any uh after
public hearing any questions for staff?
[1:39:24] » Um I'll have to answer question. Um, has
the number,
[1:39:30] um, based on some of the comments, I I
can't remember exactly who specifically
[1:39:34] said it, but um, has the number of, I
guess, um,
[1:39:41] I hesitate to use the word, but it
illegal rentals gone down since the
[1:39:46] policy has been enacted, or is it still
as hard to identify uh, people who are
[1:39:51] renting against um, policy?
>> Uh, great question. My understanding is
[1:39:57] that uh we found initially that those
numbers did go down. Um but
[1:40:02] unfortunately I can't speak um
completely um as I've had I haven't had
[1:40:08] this question um with or had this
conversation with Teresa Morgan who is
[1:40:13] our neighborhood services officer. Um,
last I knew is that through her uh,
[1:40:19] evaluation of, you know, VRBO or Airbnb
that she was not finding nearly as many
[1:40:26] violations. Now, that's not to say that,
um, individuals aren't finding unique
[1:40:32] ways to post their short-term rentals.
Um, I know you can list them in
[1:40:38] different ways that then they aren't as
noticeable, if you will, and you can use
[1:40:42] other platforms or even local property
management um, companies can also
[1:40:48] advertise for them. So, that's not to
say that that may be taking place. Um,
[1:40:52] but I do know that Teresa does um, take
steps to as when she can regulate and
[1:41:00] um, find those if she can. And we do I
on occasion receive com uh concerns and
[1:41:06] I know we have received a few just in
the course of the last few weeks.
[1:41:11] » And on that note, and you may not be
able to answer this because things are
[1:41:15] off the books in that regard, but um for
the properties that were found to be
[1:41:21] operating outside of the policy, how
many of those ballark, right? Um, how
[1:41:28] many of those
could operate within the policy even
[1:41:32] with the 200 foot setback?
>> Oh, that's a good question. And I I'm
[1:41:38] not sure since I don't know the
specifics. Um, yeah, I'm not certain.
[1:41:43] Yeah, sorry.
[1:41:47] » Okay, that's anything else for staff.
>> All right. Well, we can bring it back to
[1:41:53] the board here regarding um has been
discussed before
[1:41:58] um a separation
lack of separation requirement or
[1:42:01] keeping it as is with the 200 foot.
Um
[1:42:08] do we want to get initial thoughts or
just go for a vote? Go ahead.
[1:42:12] » I was going to say that I appreciated
Ton's response about the exceptions. I
[1:42:16] think that makes perfect sense and I
completely agree and so I think having
[1:42:21] the policy be delivered equitably and
the same to every person makes a lot of
[1:42:26] sense and so I'd like to move forward
with that. I also really appreciated was
[1:42:30] it Mr. Gavin his comments about the the
democratic process we did go through. we
[1:42:35] came, you know, out of it with a lot of
compromise, making everyone virtually
[1:42:39] unhappy, which is usually a good sign
that you made a good compromise, right?
[1:42:44] » Same thing at home with your kids. If
everyone's mad at you, then it's
[1:42:46] probably because, you know, everyone got
a little bit of something they wanted.
[1:42:49] But
>> I think I think for me, I still would be
[1:42:53] open to reducing the limits to 100 ft
just to make it more available to town
[1:42:59] homes because I think it can be a
valuable thing to our community. I think
[1:43:02] we do need people visiting to have an
economic center in Bertha that's that's
[1:43:07] viable which we don't have a lot of
right now and so I I I take that really
[1:43:12] seriously. Um I do not agree at all with
removing the 200 the 200 or 100 foot
[1:43:18] buffer entirely. I think that could be
really detrimental. Um as some people
[1:43:24] mentioned in the room too that I think
having an entire street full of STRs
[1:43:27] would be would change your way of life
if you lived here. So, those are just my
[1:43:32] initial comments.
>> Trusty, we can get down. You don't have
[1:43:36] to say anything if you don't want to,
but trust.
[1:43:38] » Um, yeah, I would I would agree with
those points. Um, and I think
[1:43:43] one, the policy hasn't really been on
the books for long enough for us to
[1:43:49] understand the data points across the
town. I think two, they are lumped in
[1:43:56] certain specific areas, which is granted
unfortunate for people who have had
[1:44:01] financial hardships for this. Um, and
um, regardless,
[1:44:09] I'm still in favor of a buffer. I'm I'm
okay negotiating whatever. I'm I'm I
[1:44:17] don't really 200 one foot 200 feet. Um,
I'm okay with having a conversation
[1:44:22] about that. But the reason that I am
more in favor of keeping a buffer at
[1:44:29] least until we find out that it's not
working is one based on the question
[1:44:34] that I asked, right? How many how many
might we actually have in town and is
[1:44:39] there a way to make sure that they're
they're following procedure and policy?
[1:44:43] And two,
I don't want
[1:44:47] the people in areas of town that don't
have HOAs or are not in a metro district
[1:44:52] district to
now be inundated possibly without a
[1:44:59] buffer in those neighborhoods where
short-term rentals are either rare or
[1:45:03] not the sort of stereotypical place for
a short-term rental. And so I'm I'm that
[1:45:09] was kind of the reason that I was for a
distance buffer even though it's unusual
[1:45:15] in our in our initial meetings back a
year ago was because I want to make sure
[1:45:19] that the people like I said who are who
don't have the infrastructure already uh
[1:45:25] to protect them from
um over overcrowding
[1:45:31] that they now become um affected by
having zero buffer and having, you know,
[1:45:39] old town homes or older neighborhoods um
sort of pop up neighbor to neighbor to
[1:45:44] neighbor. Not that that would happen
because there's not the 50 that we
[1:45:48] allowed in the first place, but just in
case um that were to possibly crop up in
[1:45:53] a specific area in the future based on
developments or or whatever that might
[1:45:57] come into town that we have no idea
people might want to be next to. If that
[1:46:00] makes English sense. Sorry, everybody.
Yeah, Trusty Hardy.
[1:46:06] » Yeah, I completely agree with Ton on the
whole thing about having variances. It's
[1:46:11] like we shouldn't have any variances.
Just tells us that there's something
[1:46:14] wrong with our code. I'm I'm for either
one. Either have either turn it on or
[1:46:19] turn it off. Um, but there is a demand
out there for people to stay and I think
[1:46:24] that's where develop economic
development really should be pushing
[1:46:27] towards getting I don't know Marriott
town suites or somebody out there to
[1:46:32] build to take up this need that's out
there.
[1:46:37] » Yeah.
>> Okay,
[1:46:38] » that's about it.
>> Trusty Wing.
[1:46:40] » Yeah. I um I support the planning
commission's unanimous decision not to
[1:46:44] change anything, but I have one
question. Do the shortterm rental
[1:46:49] tenants get to use the metro district
amenities?
[1:46:54] » That'd be a Terry Smith,
would you know the answer to that?
[1:47:01] » I don't know the answer to that. And it
may vary from district to district as to
[1:47:06] how they identify in district residents.
seems to me that if they were
[1:47:13] identifying
>> your mic,
[1:47:14] » it seems to me I I think it may vary
from special district to special
[1:47:19] district. Um, but it seems to me that it
would depend on how the district is
[1:47:26] identifying in district residents and
that if you have a driver's license from
[1:47:32] outside of the district, you would be an
outside of the district resident. So my
[1:47:40] thought is that probably in that case
you would not be allowed to use those
[1:47:45] amenities.
>> Doesn't change my decision. I was just
[1:47:47] curious. Thank you,
>> Mayor Pim.
[1:47:50] » Um I'll just state that I stand with
planning commission's decision and the
[1:47:55] substantial outcry I've heard in
retaining the setbacks that we have set.
[1:48:00] I think it would be premature to drop
those setbacks. It would be much easier
[1:48:04] to go down to 100 if we've got
significant public outcry for that, but
[1:48:09] I don't believe we've heard that. And it
would be much harder to go up from 100
[1:48:14] to 200 if we do have problems in the
future. So I am for um retaining the 200
[1:48:21] foot setback for those reasons.
>> Thank you.
[1:48:28] » Can I respond to that just really quick?
I just I I disagree with the assessment
[1:48:33] that we haven't had outcry against or
against the setbacks because the people
[1:48:40] who disagree with it are moving on.
They're not coming to town hall and
[1:48:44] raising cane. They're just moving on.
And that's evidenced in the fact that we
[1:48:48] had 30 and now we have how many do we
have on the books? 12. And so that those
[1:48:55] statistics tell us alone in the last
year we've lost half of the STRs because
[1:48:59] the policy and I do think setbacks were
probably a key component to that among
[1:49:03] other things. Um but I do think we need
to understand that the people who have
[1:49:08] issue with it have just left our town or
have sold that property and are no
[1:49:12] longer operating. They're not coming and
telling us about it. Would it be equally
[1:49:17] accurate to say that those people maybe
didn't want to take on the regulation or
[1:49:22] the duty as an SDR owner to their users
to the community and moved on without
[1:49:30] making those comments? I mean, how many
applications did we have?
[1:49:38] » Um, so to confirm, we had 12 total.
>> Yeah.
[1:49:44] And and I would agree there's probably
many components that go into why we have
[1:49:48] not seen the 30 that we're operating. Um
yeah, it could very well be because of
[1:49:55] probably elements such as the separation
requirement or the other slew of
[1:50:01] requirements that are within our
short-term rental regulations. I don't
[1:50:04] know that there's any indication that it
would be solely because of the
[1:50:07] separation. Um, I know much of our
research that we did on the different
[1:50:12] types, the the 200, 500, 600 that we
presented during the public hearings, we
[1:50:18] were using um maps of those short-term
rentals we knew were existing and
[1:50:23] operating um, illegally as our base, and
that's what we were using for those
[1:50:29] examples. Um, so I do believe some of
those, from my recollection, would have
[1:50:33] very well been able to meet the
separation requirement. So, I don't I
[1:50:38] think that would be only one component
or element and probably a very small
[1:50:42] percentage um may have walked away for
that reason, but I don't know that it
[1:50:47] would be fair to say that they solely
walked away for that reason.
[1:50:51] » And I wouldn't want to make any
definitive statement one way or the
[1:50:54] other. I'm just proposing the
possibility
[1:50:59] » and I do agree it could it's a variety
of reasons I think people are walking
[1:51:03] away. I just think this could be one of
them and for us to consider that we're
[1:51:07] not hearing about it because they have
just decided to move on.
[1:51:11] » Fair enough.
>> Yeah, I'm um
[1:51:17] Mr. Gav um
looking out the names. I used to know
[1:51:21] you guys by the back of my hand. So,
thank you. This all started before what
[1:51:24] happened in Don Zante. So, um, how we
leave this agenda item tonight, I just
[1:51:30] want to thank you, uh, no matter what,
for all your hard work bringing this to
[1:51:34] us, and now we actually have some type
of policy. Um, I know it may or may not
[1:51:39] be ideal, but it's better than how it
started and what happened to you guys
[1:51:41] and Don Zante. So, thank you. Um,
I I'm a fan of moving it to 100. I don't
[1:51:49] think uh it doesn't sound like anyone's
a fan of of totally eliminating it right
[1:51:52] now. Um and the not having any kind of
uh exception process or appeal process.
[1:51:58] I agree with that. Um but the reason I'm
I think distance requirements are
[1:52:03] important. So it's not neighbor to
neighbor to neighbor. Um
[1:52:08] ton your your um visual was actually
kind of help kind of threw a wrench in
[1:52:13] my spokes watching that because some of
these areas could be looks like a
[1:52:17] neighborto neighbor situation if it was
100 foot.
[1:52:20] Um, regardless, I'd like to give it a
shot. I also want to remind people that
[1:52:24] this, if you're living in an HOA or an
area with a metro, um, you are allowed
[1:52:28] to put in regulations that are more
stringent than anything the town puts
[1:52:31] on. Uh, so this is really covering
traditional areas of town before HOAs,
[1:52:37] uh, were in place.
And not having any um,
[1:52:43] lodging to speak of, I' I'd like to
encourage that. And uh I think we have
[1:52:47] other areas in our policy that um really
can manage I can't ensure but really can
[1:52:54] manage uh that we have good hosts and if
we have bad guests there's a way to get
[1:52:59] them out promptly and uh keep the hosts
accountable. U so I'm I'm a fan of
[1:53:03] moving it to 100. Um
I'll stop there. Is there anything else
[1:53:08] anyone wants to add question?
>> Um
[1:53:11] » maybe if I could just add one thing. I I
really feel it's detrimental. I'm always
[1:53:17] open to reopening these things, but the
fact that we're less than a year out on
[1:53:22] this policy,
I think is a serious concern. Um, and
[1:53:26] what does it say when we're making
policy that we are making a turn this
[1:53:31] early in
policy with very little data? Um, I
[1:53:38] think that's a significant concern for
me.
[1:53:42] Sorry, that's all I've got. Yeah,
>> if I respond to that. I think the reason
[1:53:47] I wanted to reduce it is because of the
town homes. U figuring there needed to
[1:53:51] be a chance for them to be treated
separate from single family. Um and
[1:53:55] that's why kind of that compromise came.
Those are my thoughts.
[1:54:00] Um anything else? We want to go to a
vote or I guess we have to decide how we
[1:54:04] vote.
>> Well, I have a a question now on based
[1:54:07] on y'all's comments. Would it be
worthwhile for us to discuss um I
[1:54:14] understand it would be difficult to um
to make sure or to to sort of um police
[1:54:24] the difference between town homes or um
higher density houses versus single
[1:54:31] family houses. If the pro if that is the
sort of hangup that we're having,
[1:54:39] could we not address that since that is
the hangup? The the separation doesn't
[1:54:45] seem to be by itself the hangup. The
hang-up seems to be the difference
[1:54:51] between someone who lives in a higher
density area and someone who lives in a
[1:54:54] lower density area. And yes, it is more
complicated and yes, it is more
[1:54:58] difficult,
>> but it seems like the spirit of the
[1:55:02] decision that we're trying to make would
possibly be better served with a more
[1:55:07] specific policy as opposed to a
one-sizefits-all policy that just does
[1:55:13] not work within different districts.
That that's a a genuine question. I'm
[1:55:17] not making a statement one way or
another. Um, if I can maybe respond,
[1:55:21] trusty ears, um, I really struggle with
creating any kind of differentiation
[1:55:27] because of the wide variety of existing
product that's out there that could be
[1:55:34] used for this. You have products of all
types and to define town home versus
[1:55:39] single family home versus duplex or
quadplex, it gets really hairy. So, um I
[1:55:46] think it's important that we stick to
one consistent standard and um I believe
[1:55:52] the 200 accounts for the density across
those areas. Um obviously in a denser
[1:55:59] area it's harder. Um in a less dense
area um as you kind of saw in existing
[1:56:04] neighborhoods where it's homes you could
have literally every other house or
[1:56:09] across the street. So obviously we have
to come to a balance on this. I I just
[1:56:14] think the reality of the diversity of
the product that's out there that could
[1:56:19] be used for this is
hard to define and leaves us exposed in
[1:56:25] my opinion.
[1:56:29] » I have a quick question. So if if the
board does not want to change the code
[1:56:36] and keep the 200, then we don't have any
motion tonight. Is that correct?
[1:56:40] » That's correct.
>> Okay. or if we have a tie. I think same
[1:56:44] thing,
>> status quo, right?
[1:56:46] » That's correct. If if unless a motion
passes to adopt an ordinance that
[1:56:53] changes the code, then we continue
status quo.
[1:56:58] » Makes sense.
And the motion right now would be to
[1:57:02] totally
um
[1:57:06] yeah repeal and replace
removing any kind of distance
[1:57:11] requirement
>> and would that be the motion or because
[1:57:14] planning commission recommended denial.
Would that be the motion?
[1:57:18] » Uh I think that in this case I think a
lack of action is sufficient. We
[1:57:24] continue status quo. There's no need to
deny uh the ordinance that was that was
[1:57:30] put in front of you. It just doesn't
pass for lack of a a motion and a vote.
[1:57:38] » Okay.
>> So, is there any desire to go ahead with
[1:57:45] this with a 100 foot buffer said instead
of a 200?
[1:57:51] I'm actually more confident um leaving
it as it was
[1:57:54] » 200.
>> Okay.
[1:57:58] » Um yeah, I would based on all of the
comments on the
[1:58:02] length that this policy has been in
place, I would feel more comfortable
[1:58:06] waiting until we come up with a better
idea.
[1:58:11] » Okay.
Does anyone want Go ahead. No, I'm
[1:58:16] concur.
>> Okay. Does anyone want to try to make a
[1:58:18] motion?
You don't have to if you don't feel
[1:58:22] passionate about this.
>> Otherwise, this thing just dies.
[1:58:26] » Kill it.
>> For lack of a motion.
[1:58:29] » Okay.
[1:58:32] » Uh yes. Ordinance 1356
never moved. So, this will uh never be
[1:58:37] in existence. So, thank you all uh for
the short-term rental and thank you
[1:58:41] staff for all your work on this.
Good to keep going. Trustees.
[1:58:46] » Yeah.
>> Okay. Okay, we'll move on now to item
[1:58:48] number five. And this is a Habitat for
Humanity Oldtown Hall
[1:58:53] Town Hall concept.
[1:58:58] And we have our uh director of Habitat
for Humanity, Tiffany Grody, here to
[1:59:02] present.
[1:59:06] Mayor Carb as Tiffany's coming up. Um,
just as a quick bit of background, as
[1:59:10] you may recall, the town owns the Old
Town Hall property uh at the corner of
[1:59:15] Massachusetts and Third Street,
uh, the feed store, the Old Town Hall,
[1:59:20] and the bank building adjacent to it. A
few years ago, we solicited proposals
[1:59:25] from interested developers to redevelop
the site, turn it into um, you know, a
[1:59:31] mixeduse center with some new retail
uses and offices and other things. Uh we
[1:59:36] got pretty far down the road on that
project and unfortunately the developer
[1:59:39] and the town couldn't come to an
agreement that made sense for them um uh
[1:59:44] in order to get financing to construct
the project. Since that time um Habitat
[1:59:49] has reached out to us and asked about
the possibility of redeveloping that
[1:59:53] site. They've prepared a concept that
we've looked at um you know briefly from
[1:59:57] a staff perspective but that I think is
potentially exciting and and worth
[2:00:01] looking at. And so we asked them to
bring it to you so we could get your
[2:00:05] feedback uh if you want us to move
forward and take some next steps and to
[2:00:08] see this thing move forward. And if not,
that's okay, too. But um that that's why
[2:00:12] we're here tonight. We're excited to
have Tiffany Brody, the executive
[2:00:14] director from Habitat for Humanity to
present that to you.
[2:00:19] » Welcome.
>> Thank you. Thank you very much. Good
[2:00:22] evening, Mayor Carbc and members of the
board of trustees. Thank you for
[2:00:26] allowing us to present this concept. I
will be presenting this evening as well
[2:00:31] as Davidson and Josh McCarron with Asher
Architects and Engineering
[2:00:37] as uh Administrator Kirk mentioned birth
at Habitat for Humanity.
[2:00:42] » Yes,
>> I think she is got turned on. Okay,
[2:00:44] perfect.
>> Is that better?
[2:00:45] » Yep.
>> Okay. All right. Sorry about that. Uh
[2:00:49] Bertha Habitat for Humanity endeavors to
partner with the town of Berth to help
[2:00:54] solve the affordable housing crisis by
presenting a proposed concept plan to
[2:00:59] redevelop the old town hall property
located at Third in Massachusetts. This
[2:01:05] redevelopment will revitalize historic
landmark, support economic development,
[2:01:10] expand access to affordable housing, and
enhance downtown vibrancy, creating a
[2:01:18] lasting community asset uh that will
actually serve current and future
[2:01:23] generations. Furthermore, it will help
position Birth at Habitat for Humanity
[2:01:28] to achieve our strategic goals
surrounding partnership development and
[2:01:32] advocacy
uh increase awareness and engagement and
[2:01:37] also focus on our comprehensive fund
development so that we can build more
[2:01:42] homes uh like Troy here that just closed
recently. She is so excited.
[2:01:49] All of which will provide the needed
funding to build capacity to further our
[2:01:54] impact in alignment with the needs of
the community.
[2:02:02] And with that, as we all know, Berett is
growing, but so is the housing gap. Too
[2:02:09] many local families are struggling to
find a home that they can afford. Based
[2:02:14] on the Berford housing diversity plan by
heirs associates from April of this
[2:02:19] year, the housing crisis in Berford can
really be summarized as a convergence of
[2:02:25] rapid population growth, limited housing
diversity, and rising home price prices,
[2:02:32] which together threaten housing
affordability and community inclusivity.
[2:02:38] So the next few slides I just want to
walk through quickly in an effort to
[2:02:42] highlight the findings from that Berth
housing diversity plan. Berth's
[2:02:47] population has more than doubled since
2010 and is on track to continue growing
[2:02:54] steadily by 139% I'm sorry to the tune
of 139% by 2040. Median home prices have
[2:03:02] increased significantly pricing out many
working families. And a gap exists
[2:03:08] between what the home costs and what our
local workers earn, especially those in
[2:03:14] education, healthcare, service, and
retail.
[2:03:18] This image here uh depicts the Can you
still hear me? Sorry about that. Depicts
[2:03:23] the community engagement efforts by AIRS
Associates. When discussing the housing
[2:03:28] needs assessment with community members,
they attended the October Fest event. uh
[2:03:34] and they were they asked the community
members to take a sticker and consider
[2:03:39] and indicate what types of housing they
thought that we needed and what they
[2:03:44] would like to see in our community. Some
of you may have been there and
[2:03:48] participated in that. And if you did, I
really appreciate you doing so.
[2:03:52] Ultimately, the town lacks the missing
middle housing, which could be duplexes,
[2:03:57] smaller single family homes, and
affordable rentals. There is a very high
[2:04:01] percentage of costburden households and
that means any household spending more
[2:04:06] than 30% of their gross monthly income
on housing and entrylevel homeownership
[2:04:12] opportunities are scarce even for dual
income households.
[2:04:18] So this slide talks more about the
demand and the rise for affordable
[2:04:23] housing for families that earn the 40 to
80% of the area median income precisely
[2:04:31] the range that Beret Habitat serves. So
existing and incoming residents in this
[2:04:36] income bracket can really not find
housing that meets their needs even
[2:04:40] though they work locally and contribute
to our economy and community. Habitat
[2:04:46] truly does serve the heart of Berthood's
workforce.
[2:04:51] The colored boxes you see here on the
screen, I've included various scenarios
[2:04:55] in order to depict who these individuals
and families might be that we know. A
[2:05:01] Habitat homeowner might earn 40,000
annually. And with that salary, they may
[2:05:07] work at a local restaurant. They may
work at Hayes Market or even be a town
[2:05:12] of birth employee or perhaps a
registered nurse earning 80,000 annually
[2:05:18] that has has a child. Another likely
scenario is a second grade teacher at
[2:05:22] Ivy Stockwell or any school within the
district who has two children and earns
[2:05:27] 91,000 a year or perhaps a dual family
uh consisting of a recently hired
[2:05:33] firefighter or EMT earning just shy of
72,000 where his spouse also works
[2:05:39] perhaps at the library on a part-time
basis with three children for a combined
[2:05:45] household gross annual income of 89,000.
And so these area median income levels
[2:05:52] are established by the Colorado Housing
and Financing Authority on an annual
[2:05:56] basis. And you might be surprised to see
that these annual income ranges, the
[2:06:01] minimum 40% and the maximum 80.
Those amounts are rather high and we
[2:06:08] just don't have the housing to
accommodate them. Without intervention,
[2:06:14] we risk losing these teachers,
caregivers, and essential workers to
[2:06:18] more affordable communities, diminished
economic diversity, and lack of civic
[2:06:23] engagement.
And so in an effort to do our part to
[2:06:30] meet the growing need of increasing
affordable housing stock, we are
[2:06:33] proposing a bold initiative, relocating
and expanding our restore and creating a
[2:06:40] permanent home base for our operations.
The strategic move will increase
[2:06:46] revenue, improve efficiency, and give us
the capacity to build more homes for
[2:06:52] individuals and families in our
community that need it the most. We
[2:06:56] truly think that this opportunity to
partner with the town is worth
[2:07:00] considering given the vibrancy that this
project is sure to yield along with the
[2:07:05] creating inclusivity and equity for all
community members. Just imagine. Well,
[2:07:10] you really can't because you haven't
seen it, but just wait.
[2:07:14] » Our mission is not to be a developer.
Rather, we see ourselves as an anchor
[2:07:18] tenant. Much like House of Neighborly
Services will be the anchor tenant for
[2:07:21] the Sonokco project. I envision a
financial structure that blends multiple
[2:07:27] funding sources. A mix of public and
private. Perhaps the town remains the
[2:07:32] owner of the property or perhaps the
partnership is formalized with the
[2:07:36] developer to build out this concept.
Before we unveil the concept, I also
[2:07:41] want to make note that in addition to
considering the data from that Berke
[2:07:45] housing diversity plan, this plan also
incorporates prior community
[2:07:51] um I'm sorry, prior commentary in regard
to proposed downtown redevelopment
[2:07:56] projects, the needs and wishes expressed
by many community members, and takeaways
[2:08:01] from the brand assessment that the town
uh just invested in created by Chandler
[2:08:07] Thinks in May of is here as well. So,
with that, I'm going to allow Josh to
[2:08:14] get in to the goodness.
[2:08:21] » Thank you, Tiffany. I'm Josh McCarten
with Asher Architects and Engineers. And
[2:08:26] uh so, if you all are not familiar with
the site we're looking at here, it's on
[2:08:32] the corner of Third in Massachusetts.
Um on the uh left of this image you can
[2:08:38] see the old town hall which used to be a
first national bank uh way back in 1929.
[2:08:46] Um converted the town hall. Uh they had
used to store a a fire engine in there.
[2:08:52] Um there was also a jail cell and a
police magistrate in there as well.
[2:08:58] uh later I believe is early 60s the
addition uh was added on next door and
[2:09:06] um which is not a historic aspect. Um
and then the other historic building on
[2:09:11] this site uh you can see uh right behind
that little red Prius there is the old
[2:09:17] uh scale house for the grain elevator
there. And currently
[2:09:24] um you know it's kind of an
underutilized corner. there's not a lot
[2:09:28] happening there. Um, and we took a look
at this uh with Tiffany as you know
[2:09:36] potential office space in the uh old
town hall building and to see what we
[2:09:40] could do uh um as far as you know
expanding uh the restore operations
[2:09:46] um to help out the community in that
way. So without further ado, I'll show
[2:09:52] you what we came up with here. Uh so,
you know, leading off on that historic
[2:09:59] point, um you know, Massachusetts did
used to be the um original main street
[2:10:06] in town. And as you would get off the uh
train depot, uh you exit the train depot
[2:10:13] and you walk off. Um you'd have a
bustling downtown here, you know, um
[2:10:18] hotel down at the end of the block,
shops, uh goods for sale, um you know,
[2:10:25] all sorts of war is available to you.
And um now, you know, this corner is,
[2:10:32] you know, kind of underutilized, not uh
not that exciting anymore. So we um in
[2:10:39] partnership with uh Habitat have uh
taken a look at this site um to figure
[2:10:45] out how we can uh use it, how uh we can
bring uh some vibrancy back to this uh
[2:10:51] corner of downtown Berthood and and
connect with that history as well as
[2:10:57] connect with some of the uh improvements
that are already slated for Bertha.
[2:11:02] So, um, what we're looking at, uh, just
from a planning perspective here is, uh,
[2:11:08] old town hall, uh, old town hall, uh,
would be the new habitat administration
[2:11:13] offices.
Um, the, uh, habitat restore would be
[2:11:19] contained in a first floor and, uh, a
basement area. And then there would also
[2:11:25] be um availability for micro retail um
to help out you know small uh
[2:11:33] businesses, startups, things like that.
So um you know people aren't burdened by
[2:11:39] you know huge rents and uh um of an
enormous space.
[2:11:44] » Josh, if you'll do us a favor, will you
just move a little closer to the mic
[2:11:47] just
>> it'll pick up better if you're closer
[2:11:49] and I apologize. Yeah. Thank you. Does
that better everybody?
[2:11:51] » I hate to have you lean down, but thank
you.
[2:11:54] » Try and raise this thing up here. All
right. Um Oh, yeah. I can hear myself
[2:11:59] now. Um All right. So, uh we also had uh
space for uh restaurants and then uh to
[2:12:07] help uh you know solve some of the uh um
the issues with uh you know, visitors to
[2:12:14] town not having a place to stay. Um, you
know, we looked at, you know, where are
[2:12:19] people staying when they come for events
in town? Where are they staying when
[2:12:24] they come for weddings? And it seemed
like the perfect spot, you know,
[2:12:29] historic context and all to have a hotel
introduced in this area. So, um, we're
[2:12:36] also proposing a, uh, you know, be a
boutique, uh, hotel, you know, something
[2:12:41] around 15 to 20 rooms to, uh, help with
that. And so we're not losing all the uh
[2:12:47] visitors uh to neighbor neighboring
communities and also to kind of bring
[2:12:53] people into uh into this area over here.
You know, they're staying there. They're
[2:12:57] walking by other shops. And this will
just start to be a catalyst for um you
[2:13:03] know, development uh adjacent. You know,
kind of incentivize other business over
[2:13:08] owners to make improvements. And the
other thing we're doing here is, you
[2:13:13] know, um you all are probably aware of
the third street improvements that are
[2:13:17] uh uh slated to happen. We're kind of
looking at this as a uh you know,
[2:13:22] terminus to that. So, a buffer before
you get to the uh the neighborhood
[2:13:28] beyond um a stopping gathering space for
people. of this plaza, you know, events
[2:13:35] can uh you know, bleed right off of
Third Street uh into this plaza. And all
[2:13:41] of these uh you know, micro retail, um
restaurants, the hotel, Habitat, all
[2:13:48] have increased visibility as well as all
the other uh businesses in the area.
[2:13:54] And uh so that kind of sums it up from
our uh planning perspective. I'm going
[2:13:57] to turn it over to uh uh David from our
office to uh clue you in on uh how we're
[2:14:04] looking at the architecture for this.
Thank you.
[2:14:10] » Good evening. Thank you for your time.
Can you guys hear me? Okay. Is that
[2:14:14] good? All right. Great.
>> I want to lean in too. I think
[2:14:18] » Yeah,
>> I got to lean into
[2:14:20] » there. You good?
>> There we go.
[2:14:21] » All right. One goal for this was to
create a building that fits in with the
[2:14:25] existing character of Berth. We all love
downtown. We love the red brick
[2:14:29] buildings. So, we wanted to make sure
that we we fit in with that. We also
[2:14:33] wanted to create a unique atmosphere
that would draw people to this new
[2:14:36] destination. Create a space that people
want to go hang out and be within. So,
[2:14:42] at the ground floor, we kept an
approachable scale with features that
[2:14:46] are common within buildings that are 100
years old. While the upper level is a
[2:14:50] more contemporary feel, inviting guests
to to explore the upstairs utilize one
[2:14:55] of the upper level seating areas. As
Josh mentioned, this property is
[2:15:00] bookended by two historic buildings that
uh will remain. And uh we've got on the
[2:15:06] right hand side the old birth at
elevator mill, the scale house. We've
[2:15:11] got one thought here to turn that into a
bakery as a potential adaptive reuse.
[2:15:17] We've got a structure that reaches over
top of it without touching it to comply
[2:15:22] with the uh Secretary of Interior
standards for historical buildings to
[2:15:26] create a a new outdoor seating area
upstairs that is a part of the uh the
[2:15:31] hotel bar and restaurant.
And then on the leftand side we have the
[2:15:36] old First National Bank which as
mentioned would become Habitat's
[2:15:41] offices. And then next door to that to
the east, we uh pulled from some older
[2:15:47] kind of stylings of of downtown, you
know, what what downtown was and birthe
[2:15:52] it in early 1900s to create a a classy
upscale Habitat for Humanity Restore.
[2:15:59] This would be their primary entrance
right off Massachusetts. They'd have a
[2:16:03] second entrance off the pedestrian alley
that's there to the right. And then just
[2:16:08] to the right of Habitat's Restore is
about a thousand square foot retail
[2:16:13] space. Maybe that gets divided into two
retail spaces if there's a need. Trying
[2:16:18] to look for opportunities to create a
space for a small business that someone
[2:16:23] that uh can't handle the the larger rent
or a larger space. A lot of the spaces
[2:16:28] that are available occasionally in
Berlin are are much larger than that and
[2:16:32] it's tough to take on as a small
business owner.
[2:16:36] And then on the corner, that would be
the primary entrance to what we're
[2:16:39] calling the Bertha Grand Hotel. And you
would enter in there to a lobby. And on
[2:16:44] the second floor, we have about 1,000
square ft of indoor seating area along
[2:16:49] with a kitchen area for a restaurant.
And there's almost 1,000 square feet of
[2:16:54] outdoor seating on the lefthand side
above habitat space. That's an outdoor
[2:16:58] seating area. And then on the right hand
side above uh the old the old uh the
[2:17:04] weight station there is another outdoor
seating area. And then on the third
[2:17:10] floor we have a small indoor space for
the hotel bar. It's a just a rooftop bar
[2:17:16] with some additional outdoor seating up
there. And as Josh said, we've got
[2:17:21] that's currently designed with about 20
hotel rooms. That's a mixture of of
[2:17:26] double queens, single queens, and some
kings and a few suites. So, it all fits
[2:17:31] in here really nice. And then you can
kind of see in the distance there
[2:17:34] underneath the bridge, we have four more
micro retail. They're all about 300 to
[2:17:40] 500 ft. Again, looking at small spaces,
easy to rent, and the furthest structure
[2:17:46] is a two-story restaurant space with
another rooftop seating area there. So,
[2:17:52] hopefully this allows everyone to dream
a little bit. It's a It's an honor to
[2:17:55] keep getting to come in front of you
guys with these fun uh concepts and
[2:17:59] can't wait to see some of them come to
life. So, appreciate it.
[2:18:03] » Thank you.
[2:18:11] » Just as some samples of other
communities around that have done some
[2:18:15] similar things up in BV in the
mountains, they've they've repurposed
[2:18:19] some areas. It's these are new
structures obviously, but they've it's
[2:18:23] just some simple detailing that creates
some charm, some character. That's
[2:18:28] really what we're after. So, just wanted
to show some uh some real world examples
[2:18:32] of what this space could look like.
[2:18:40] » Thank you both. Uh I'm just amazed at
the concept plan myself. it. I am just
[2:18:46] in awe of your creativity and taking all
of the conversations we've had in
[2:18:51] presenting this. So, thank you. Um, so
in addition to the benefits to the town
[2:18:58] and the economic development and filling
the needs that they shared, this
[2:19:02] redevelopment project also does expand
our capacity to serve. So, I just want
[2:19:06] to dive into that a little bit more. So,
our local restore opened in 2001
[2:19:12] as a donation center that sells new and
gently used products in which the
[2:19:16] proceeds from the sales directly support
our mission of building homes and
[2:19:21] improving the community. With expanded
restore operations and permanent office
[2:19:26] space located in the hub at Oldtown,
Birth at Habitat will increase our
[2:19:31] revenue to fund more affordable housing
while operating more efficiently and
[2:19:36] sustainably in alignment with our
mission and vision, ultimately
[2:19:40] contributing to the town's long-term
housing stability as well as workforce
[2:19:45] retention.
Furthermore, the positions are restored
[2:19:49] to better serve the community as a
result of the increase in the retail
[2:19:54] sales floor square footage. Currently,
even though we have a twostory building
[2:19:59] consisting of about 10,500 square ft,
our main level is only 4,500 square ft.
[2:20:06] So, we often have to turn away the
community that want to donate to us. We
[2:20:11] have to send them elsewhere because we
just don't have the space.
[2:20:17] So, we would be able to add the
following departments. And I just want
[2:20:20] to share this with the community so you
know in the future if this comes to
[2:20:24] fruition, we would be glad to take your
donations so we can build more homes. We
[2:20:30] would be able to uh accommodate
appliances, building materials much like
[2:20:34] a typical Habitat Restore, cabinets,
doors and windows, electrical and
[2:20:39] lighting, flooring, lawn and garden,
outdoor patio furniture, paint and
[2:20:44] plumbing.
[2:20:48] So all that said, in a true
collaborative spirit with partnership in
[2:20:52] mind, Berth and Habitat, we respectfully
request that the town board of trustees
[2:20:58] consider further exploration
and due diligence in search of a
[2:21:04] potential right path forward.
Accordingly, we at Berthood Habitat, we
[2:21:08] are committed, my board is supportive,
several of them are here, my staff is
[2:21:12] here. We're committed to implementing a
comprehensive capital campaign
[2:21:17] uh inclusive of historical preservation
grants and support from Habitat for
[2:21:22] Humanity International in order to fund
our portion of the project. The proposed
[2:21:28] redevelopment, let's just get back to
the goodness. The proposed redevelopment
[2:21:32] at Berth's old town hall represents a
unique and timely opportunity to address
[2:21:37] our community's most um pressing
challenges while honoring our historic
[2:21:42] roots. We invite the town to join us in
advancing this bold vision because when
[2:21:48] we do build together, we build a better
future for all. Thank you very much.
[2:21:55] » Any questions for D or Tiffany?
>> Yeah.
[2:22:00] Um the architecture is easy easy to
comprehend. You see it great ideas,
[2:22:06] rooftops, restaurants, little buildings,
your space. That that's to me that's the
[2:22:10] easy part.
>> The enigma comes in on the on the money.
[2:22:14] » Sure.
>> So you're talking about I think I don't
[2:22:17] know what your term exactly was, but
national habitat could help with the
[2:22:20] funding. So is there a next phase for
you where you say here's exactly what
[2:22:26] we're looking for from the town? Um,
we're trying to get a private investor
[2:22:31] to come in for the hotel. We're going to
pony up our percentage of the square
[2:22:36] footage we're going to use. I'm I'm I'm
lacking sort of that glue that says how
[2:22:42] is this really going to going to come to
fruition? Who's paying the bills? Who
[2:22:46] » That's a great question. Yes. And as I
stated, we our mission is not to be a
[2:22:50] developer, you know, to revitalize
downtown properties by any stretch of
[2:22:54] the imagination, but we want to partner.
What does that look like exactly? I'm
[2:22:59] not sure. But I know that we have a
board and we would form a targeted
[2:23:03] steering committee to put heads together
in the community that have financial
[2:23:08] understanding and the wherewithal to
create a very comprehensive capital
[2:23:13] stack again for our portion of the
funding. Now that being said, uh
[2:23:17] trusting we would also leverage
relationships that we currently have and
[2:23:22] use our network to see what the
possibilities are. But what I'm really
[2:23:26] asking for is to collaborate with the
town if to find out if you are
[2:23:31] supportive of this to take it to the
next step and dive in to figure out
[2:23:36] actual cost. what is the scope and then
to back into it that way. Almost like
[2:23:42] reverse engineering if you were if I
were a developer and I came here with my
[2:23:45] concept planned I would obviously go
through the planning commission and
[2:23:48] through the process but here it's
backwards to say this is truly what we
[2:23:55] feel would be um a great opportunity for
the town and birth of habitat so
[2:24:02] together we can address affordable
housing. Does that kind of answer your
[2:24:06] question? I wish I had all the
>> It sounds like the phase two or the next
[2:24:09] step is what you just described and um
you know, I commend you on thinking
[2:24:13] outside of the box and bringing what
looks like a nice addition to the town.
[2:24:17] So, thanks for all the work you've put
in so far.
[2:24:19] » Sure. My pleasure.
>> Questions?
[2:24:24] » Is there anything else going on Habitat
like this? Is there anything else going
[2:24:28] on in Habitat International like this at
all?
[2:24:30] » That's a great question. I've talked to
uh the restore division at Habitat
[2:24:35] International and asked that question.
They have given me contact information
[2:24:40] for somebody in Philadelphia. There may
be one if if at all. So, I don't exactly
[2:24:46] have that answer, but I am completing
that due diligence to find out because
[2:24:50] I'm willing to bet this is not common
because typically if you go to Fort
[2:24:54] Collins, if you go to Gley, if you go to
Leland, you know, these buildings, it's
[2:24:59] the low rent district for lack of a
better word, right? I'm in real estate,
[2:25:02] not commercial. like on the residential
side, but I know enough to know that
[2:25:07] Habitats will, you know, move towards
empty spaces, maybe an empty big lots
[2:25:13] building or something like that, a strip
mall, or just off the beaten path where
[2:25:17] they're really not getting that
community vibrancy and engagement. Um,
[2:25:21] so this, in my opinion, and I'll get
clarification from International, would
[2:25:25] truly potentially be a model of how we
can be more inclusive
[2:25:30] in a community and create space I mean,
think about the shopping equity there uh
[2:25:37] within the community. So, I I don't know
for sure, but I'll get back to you on
[2:25:41] that.
>> Thanks.
[2:25:42] » Yeah.
[2:25:45] » Go ahead,
>> Mayor Carpect. Um, I search for Habitat
[2:25:53] Humanity resale stores when we travel.
It's just a little hobby of mine. And I
[2:25:59] have seen some um more boutique style
settings for some habitat in the state
[2:26:06] of Washington, in California
um where it is set in like a downtown
[2:26:13] setting and it is more like a little
shop than necessarily a restore. Now, if
[2:26:19] you want to get your tile and your sinks
and things like that, there will be an
[2:26:23] area for that. However, the storefront
with household goods and more, you know,
[2:26:29] antiques and things like that. Um,
there's been some juicy things at this
[2:26:34] Habitat store. So, um, I just wanted to
let you know that I have been to Habitat
[2:26:41] resale stores where they're more set up
like an antique store for that frontage.
[2:26:46] » And if I could, can I jump in? Ann, you
bring up some good points and I just
[2:26:50] want to I brought some financial
information for the last five years. I
[2:26:54] have our, you know, birth at habitat
financial amounts, but what I really
[2:26:58] want to focus on is our restore. So
2021, our income was 622,780.
[2:27:04] That's on donated goods, y'all. That is
amazing. Uh 2122 we're at 633, 2223,
[2:27:12] 590, 23, 24, 610, 2425, 555, and then we
budgeted 600,000 for this ne current
[2:27:19] fiscal year. Um, so our profit margins
have been they have ranged though during
[2:27:24] that 5-year period uh 21% to 33%.
Not too shabby. And we reinvest every
[2:27:32] single dollar back into our mission.
>> So are those numbers are those are those
[2:27:36] net numbers after expenses?
>> Those are gross are
[2:27:39] » those revenue after expenses, right?
>> They're after expenses. All expenses.
[2:27:44] » Well, the the first figure I gave you is
gross
[2:27:47] » gross sales
>> and then I gave you the profit margin.
[2:27:49] So, I can tell you the expenses. Yeah.
But I thought it'd be good to focus on
[2:27:53] that income and then give you the margin
and I can do that for each year if you
[2:27:58] want. I'm also happy our financials are
public information. So, if anybody wants
[2:28:02] more information, we can definitely dive
into that and take a look.
[2:28:08] » Well, we just go down the line because I
have trusty uh Alrech last time Trusty
[2:28:13] Wing.
>> I'm not exactly sure what the question
[2:28:15] is. I like the concept. I like improving
the town. I I like the artist's
[2:28:20] rendition, the architecture. So, I it
all looks like a plus to me. Um I just
[2:28:24] think the devil's in the detail and
there's a lot of financial questions to
[2:28:27] address. So, I don't exactly know what
the question is. I like the concept. I
[2:28:32] » I think that is that is the answer to
the question. I think the intent of
[2:28:35] tonight is not to make any decisions.
Obviously, the intent of tonight is to
[2:28:39] present the concept, to get your initial
feedback, and if this is something that
[2:28:42] the town board wants us as staff to work
with Habitat on uh to refine a concept,
[2:28:48] to put together financial models, do all
the things that we would typically do in
[2:28:51] a redevelopment project like this, uh
then we will do that. We just don't want
[2:28:55] to spend the time and energy to do it.
If you look at it and you go, "Hey, we
[2:28:57] don't want to we this this is neat, but
no thanks." I mean, I don't think that
[2:29:01] was we didn't expect that to be the
response, but we also want to make sure
[2:29:05] that that you guys uh feel like this is
worthy of of the town's time and money
[2:29:09] to pursue this redevelopment opportunity
>> based on what I've seen. I would support
[2:29:13] that.
>> Great. Thanks.
[2:29:15] » Uh Trusty Hardy.
>> Yeah, I think it's better than what's
[2:29:19] there now.
>> I just want to see it move forward and
[2:29:23] see something happen. Be nice to get
that infill completed.
[2:29:28] » 50 years. Yeah. Um, possible hotel,
check. Rooftop space, check. Third
[2:29:34] street improvements, check. Parallels
with Senako and the whatever happens
[2:29:38] with the skate park, check.
>> Um, it's contained within a small area
[2:29:43] which doesn't add to sprawl. So, you're
getting a lot of bang for for whatever
[2:29:49] buck may or may not be proposed. Um and
then partnership with Habitat which puts
[2:29:56] money in different parts of the the
money that is spent basically goes back
[2:30:02] into the community which is something
that we're concerned with in other areas
[2:30:06] as well. So it it I mean it checks a lot
of boxes and if the ask is just would
[2:30:11] you like to move forward with
negotiations or with planning I I think
[2:30:15] that's an easy an easy yes.
>> Dr. Albert
[2:30:19] » yeah I completely agree. I feel like the
concept and um the idea is just truly
[2:30:25] inspired to put a boutique hotel in the
downtown area and make it feel historic
[2:30:31] and really highlight the history of the
trains and people coming into town and
[2:30:36] and that Massachusetts Avenue
reactivating that with not only the
[2:30:40] historic component but the commercial
component where people can come and
[2:30:44] visit and spend money. I feel like
that's all very um connected. And so to
[2:30:49] have a an organization our town bring
that to us and you guys, you know,
[2:30:53] fronting the money and doing these
designs and bringing that to us is
[2:30:56] really amazing. And you didn't have to
do that. And so in order to move
[2:31:01] forward, just please continue to let us
know how we can partner and and make
[2:31:05] things, you know, continue. And I think
the boutique version of the Habitat's
[2:31:10] going to be so awesome for our community
and it's going to benefit so many
[2:31:14] different people in the future. And I'm
excited that it's all uh it's all going
[2:31:18] to bring money to Bertha to stay in
Bertha to help berth it families. So
[2:31:22] thank you so much
for
[2:31:26] » um I did have one question. Um were
something like this to proceed from a
[2:31:31] habit standpoint? Uh would this take
priority over homes or would side by
[2:31:38] side?
>> No, I I it wouldn't take priority by any
[2:31:42] means. We would that capital campaign
would be separate from our budget that
[2:31:46] we have already approved and we're
tracking towards. Um, also I didn't give
[2:31:50] any history but it's in the board
packet. If you all take a look to see
[2:31:53] what our impact has been, we have
historically only built one to one and a
[2:31:58] half a year and we're a 25-year-old
organization. This year, if things go
[2:32:03] well and we're on track with Harvest 47,
we will close six homes. So, we're
[2:32:08] already, you know, um, making that
impact and we would not I'm I can't
[2:32:13] sleep at night if we're not doing our
part to build homes for families.
[2:32:18] » Okay.
>> Yeah.
[2:32:19] » And so, I would just second
[2:32:26] uh I think it's a really great concept.
We've been
[2:32:30] property
and I I think it really comes down to
[2:32:36] what kind of
looking at
[2:32:41] other folks on board more than happy to
investigate that. Thank you for bringing
[2:32:47] this to us.
[2:32:51] » I agree. I um it's just it's so novel to
me. So I I'm I'm very appreciative of of
[2:32:57] this. And when you brought up that these
usually go into kind of lower rent
[2:33:01] areas, it's so true. So, if you were to
say this without having the concept plan
[2:33:05] or just talk about this,
I would be a little more hesitant, but
[2:33:09] I'm so appreciative. And Asher, I'm
appreciative that you guys are in town.
[2:33:12] You guys do fantastic work. And Tiffany
decided to bring them on board to see
[2:33:16] how this could look. And it it looks
fantastic. Um to have that kind of
[2:33:21] upscale front to have all the different
um possibilities of a hotel, of a
[2:33:25] restaurant, different meeting areas, and
then still have the Restore out back. It
[2:33:30] it I think it if this works out, it's
almost better than the first the first
[2:33:34] go around at this where that fell
through. I if this goes the way that
[2:33:38] this is kind of being presented right
now, this is it's a win-win. It's
[2:33:42] absolutely fantastic. So, and I'd
imagine I brought you're just so novel
[2:33:47] in and entrepreneurial so many different
areas that this hasn't been done before
[2:33:50] anywhere. So, I I'm no habitat expert,
but I imagine there's gonna be a lot of
[2:33:54] people watching you as this goes to see
how this can be brought across the
[2:33:58] nation. Well, and I that leads me to
share with you when we were at a
[2:34:02] conference in Vale for Habitat Colorado
put it on, but Habitat Capital was
[2:34:06] there. Daniel Gura is his name with
Habitat International. And he came up to
[2:34:11] me and he said, "I remember meeting you
the first time, but I just want to say
[2:34:16] that I'm hearing great things are
happening in Berlin." So there eyes are
[2:34:21] on us. So I just think it's we need to
strike while the iron's hot and leverage
[2:34:26] that partnership. Awesome. Well, I'm
completely supportive too of just this
[2:34:30] next step and I guess the steering
committee is it and working with staff
[2:34:33] to figure out that next step. So,
>> if I say anymore, I will start crying.
[2:34:39] » So, I really appreciate your
consideration and support.
[2:34:43] » Thank you.
>> Thank you, thanks so much,
[2:34:47] [Applause]
>> Mayor. Can we
[2:34:55] » All right.
[2:35:00] yellow.
[Laughter]
[2:35:05] » I'm so excited for you.
>> Awesome. Thank you for the invite.
[2:35:11] » The yellow door. All right.
>> Pink door.
[2:35:17] » Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
[2:35:20] » Excuse me. Could I speak to the issue?
>> Sorry.
[2:35:24] » Could I speak to the issue? Um, sure.
Mr. Lack, go ahead.
[2:35:27] » Thank you, Brian Lack. Uh, 706 7th
Street and 606
[2:35:33] uh 2nd Street where my business is. This
is genius.
[2:35:38] This is next level. Jimmy Carter is up
there in heaven. He is looking down upon
[2:35:45] this and it will be a blessed thing that
will happen. The only thing I would add,
[2:35:51] what a great place to have a little fix
it repair shop.
[2:35:56] » I I hope you guys can make this happen.
This would just be so awesome.
[2:36:01] » Thank you.
>> Uh I did this out of order, but this
[2:36:04] brings up a very good point. Is there
anyone here that was here for Habitat
[2:36:07] that wishes to speak to that? I'm sorry
for not bringing that stuff up earlier.
[2:36:12] » Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lack. We want to
take a five minute break. All right.
[2:36:16] Let's take a five minute break.
[2:43:30] for entertaining that break. I'm going
to call the meeting back to order and we
[2:43:33] will uh move on now to the Jesuscowski
update. Here we have Keith Null back to
[2:43:38] to uh present on this. Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you. So, this is the
[2:43:43] Juskowski property concept update
and I'll wait for it to
[2:43:49] present on the screen.
Okay, here we go. Thank you.
[2:43:56] Uh, the Juskowski property is located in
the northwest corner of town. It's a 78
[2:44:02] acre property north of Lone Tree
Reservoir.
[2:44:08] The town acquired this property from
Eileen Juskcowski in 2012.
[2:44:14] Um, it is under a conservation easement
promoting the property's agricultural,
[2:44:18] natural, scenic, and open space values.
Uh, historically, retriever dog training
[2:44:23] was performed on the property. And if
you read through the conservation ement
[2:44:27] indeed, you'll see that it's brought up
multiple times throughout it.
[2:44:32] Uh, what you're looking at in this
picture, we have the 78 acre property.
[2:44:36] What's also shown in the red area is the
building envelope. This is the only
[2:44:40] areas of the property where uh buildings
can be de uh built on.
[2:44:49] So we've talked about this property with
port the port committee probably over 10
[2:44:55] years. Um, in 2022, uh, the poor
committee decided, uh, to kind of just
[2:45:03] write out some amenities and plans for
the property. Uh, we were then going to
[2:45:08] take those pro uh, take those plans and
share them with Colorado Openlands.
[2:45:11] Colorado Openlands oversees the deed on
the property. They monitor it and and
[2:45:15] make sure uh, we're in compliance.
So after the uh the port committee at
[2:45:21] that point had recommended uh disc golf
course um agricultural
[2:45:29] uses of the property still um the
buildings have always been something
[2:45:34] that are not well thought out yet. Um
and that's going to be a recommendations
[2:45:40] from the board tonight if they have any
recommendations for them.
[2:45:45] Um and then dog training was also
something that was never uh the port
[2:45:49] committee never said no dog training but
always just said keep exploring it. Uh
[2:45:56] in uh after they came up with their uses
of the property, we shared that with
[2:46:00] Colorado Openlands in 2023. Um Colorado
Openlands has a lot of questions every
[2:46:05] time you tried to describe what you'd
like to do to the property. So, it
[2:46:08] became clear we need a picture we're all
looking at together. Um, so we can try
[2:46:14] to determine uh a proper use. Uh, I
think it would be I think the port
[2:46:20] committee also felt this could be easy.
It could it be an open space to go walk
[2:46:24] trails? Yes. Uh, little development and
that's that maybe was the easy way.
[2:46:29] throughout the uh port meetings, anytime
this um property was brought up as an
[2:46:34] agenda item, we had uh members of the
disc golf community show up and we had
[2:46:39] usually dog training uh members also
show up for the property. Uh and so
[2:46:43] that's what's kind of led into the
design uh where it is at now. Um so in
[2:46:49] 2024, we began working through the
conceptual design with Wink, our design
[2:46:54] consultants. And in 2025, we have a uh
design to share. Um this is kind of some
[2:47:01] stages of where that design went
through. Uh we talked about an artist
[2:47:06] um shop in some of the buildings as
maybe a possible use. We talked about
[2:47:11] having a dog park out there. We talked
about having a 36hole disc golf course.
[2:47:17] And um where we left off with now is a
property. And if you start on the east
[2:47:23] side, this is where the disc golf um was
placed. It seemed like this area had
[2:47:28] more hills and topography to work with.
Uh the center of the property has ponds
[2:47:35] that were historically used for
retriever dog training and those areas
[2:47:39] are also considered the wetland areas.
And then uh the west side of the
[2:47:44] property would be maintain a working
farm. Uh the building areas are not
[2:47:50] really uh uses aren't really figured out
for them yet. There is a large arena on
[2:47:54] the site. Uh there is a a condo
apartment attached to that. Uh the port
[2:48:01] committee had recommended maybe that'd
be a good place for a public restroom if
[2:48:05] that site ever was uh to be developed
because the plumbing and utilities might
[2:48:09] already be there. Um, there is a garage
on site that's uh what could possibly be
[2:48:15] a good storage or maintenance building
uh for the future. And then there is
[2:48:19] also a house on the site.
[2:48:25] Uh throughout the property there would
be trails uh working around. Now
[2:48:30] discussing this concept with Colorado
open lands, it is highly unlikely that
[2:48:37] um we could
try to uh for the the acreage of grass
[2:48:43] and stuff there. It'd be hard to uh you
know replant native grass in there
[2:48:48] without proper irrigation installed um
because they they're very hesitant to
[2:48:52] disrupt a large portion of this property
at one time. Um, and that's because
[2:48:57] they've had history in the past where uh
entities
[2:49:01] uh went through trying to reestablish an
area and then they're just dealing with
[2:49:05] weeds. So, anytime they see any type of
development, um there's a lot of
[2:49:12] questions. Uh the topography we have
shown some little ridges and hills, uh
[2:49:18] probably those would be unlikely uh to
be done on the property. Um, so
[2:49:22] basically how the topography sits now is
probably how it have to stay. Uh, they
[2:49:27] want to see as little disturbance as
possible.
[2:49:30] » Keith, if I may, um, just as you're
looking at this map and and if you're
[2:49:34] accustomed to looking at contour maps,
uh, it may be a little it may feel a
[2:49:38] little, um,
misleading, the contour lines on the
[2:49:43] disc golf course, uh, that would
normally be a little tighter. You can
[2:49:46] kind of see them up in the top corner of
the screen because there is more
[2:49:49] topography on that east side. they've
been removed so it's easier to kind of
[2:49:52] see the disc golf course. So you're
you're seeing the you know the kind of
[2:49:56] the primary contour lines those
secondary ones that would show that
[2:50:00] that's a kind of a steeper there's more
terrain there those are kind of cleared
[2:50:04] out to make it easier to see the disc
golf course arrangement. So while it
[2:50:08] might look like that area is flatter
that is as Keith mentioned that's the
[2:50:11] kind of the hillier side and then the
west side is a little bit flatter um it
[2:50:17] it still has little contours weld up.
>> Could I clarify on that? We're looking
[2:50:20] at one foot for the lighter and then
five foot for each larger. Is that
[2:50:25] correct?
>> I believe that's true. Yeah. Okay.
[2:50:29] » But there there's some significant
terrain differences out there. When
[2:50:31] you're standing up on the on the south
end of the property or, you know,
[2:50:36] portions of the east end, you know,
you're at least 15 or 20 feet above,
[2:50:43] you know, where the grade where the
house is.
[2:50:46] » All right.
Thank you.
[2:50:51] Uh these are some concepts or maybe some
parking up at the north side. Uh the
[2:50:55] disc golf community had shared that I
believe it was in Erie that a new course
[2:51:00] was built and there was only about 20
parking spaces or something like that
[2:51:04] and definitely not enough. So parking um
was looked at a little deeper.
[2:51:12] Now how this compares to our our port
survey from 2024, this process started
[2:51:17] before then. Um,
disc golf is listed
[2:51:24] uh circled there. Um, it's also listed
as the least important features, feature
[2:51:30] amenities as well in the survey. So, it
just kind of kind of sits in the middle
[2:51:35] there. Um, for the dog training, uh,
like I said, we've historically had
[2:51:42] different groups asked to use the
property as it is now. Um,
[2:51:49] and we consistently decline those
requests.
[2:51:53] Lawn, what's al what's brought this a
little more to the forefront for maybe
[2:51:56] hunting or retriever dog training is
Lawn Hag long Haggler Reservoir. Uh, to
[2:52:03] the northwest is a CPW maintained
property. It used to allow some sort of
[2:52:08] dog training. Uh, I believe along the
eastern portion of it. Colorado Parks
[2:52:13] and Life did a audit of all of their um
state wildlife areas a couple years ago
[2:52:19] and those areas are supposed to be done
or used for hunting and fishing. So, dog
[2:52:23] training didn't fit. So, they removed
dog training out there. Um and that was
[2:52:28] brought to our attention during this
process.
[2:52:31] Uh they uh CPW did keep a dog training
area up. It's uh north of Fort Collins
[2:52:38] at the Cobb Lake State Wildlife Area. Uh
so about 35 minutes from here. So, there
[2:52:42] is a dog training site. Um, there's a
pond out there. It's uh very large up
[2:52:50] in, like I said, north in Fort Collins.
So, for board feedback tonight, uh any
[2:52:57] comments on the conceptual design so
that we can take this and the the
[2:53:00] questions you ask will always my
response a lot of times will be like
[2:53:04] we'll check with Colorado Open Lens on
that. Um so uh
[2:53:10] you know feedback on the amenities disc
golf the ponds the agricultural reuse uh
[2:53:15] buildings and then we also have a
recommendation that the port committee
[2:53:18] made. Uh this is in February. Um
after after the February meeting we have
[2:53:24] met with Colorado Openlands a few times
to discuss uh this concept before we
[2:53:30] felt we could bring it to the board
still. So, the port recommendation was
[2:53:34] for the town board and staff to consider
a trial program for dog training on the
[2:53:38] property prior to full development. Um,
the staff recommendation is not to open
[2:53:42] a training. Um, just because it doesn't
seem like it's a a birthed need and
[2:53:47] birthed residents highly trying to use
the property. It seems like uh groups
[2:53:53] from out of town I I believe they do
live in the area. A lot of them do too
[2:53:57] still. Um, with that I pass it to the
board for any feedback.
[2:54:02] » Thank you, Keith.
>> Yeah, any questions right there off the
[2:54:05] bat?
[2:54:08] » Are there any kind of um
facts about disc golf? Is it is it
[2:54:15] growing in popularity? Is it dying?
Would people really use it? I mean,
[2:54:20] people talk about our parks and our
trails and they love all that. And I
[2:54:24] just wonder is this the you know get the
uh best juice for the squeeze when in
[2:54:29] doing a disc golf. I I'm speaking from
an area of ignorance. I just have no
[2:54:32] clue.
>> Right. And I I can't speak to numbers. I
[2:54:36] know there are some members of the disc
golf community here that could possibly
[2:54:39] answer that. Um I do know we've
consistently heard it uh from a small
[2:54:44] group in town to have a disc golf course
and this was a site that seemed like
[2:54:48] it'd work. Uh it I do think they are
popular.
[2:54:53] you can go, you know, out of your way an
hour into the mountains and there'd be a
[2:54:58] disc golf course randomly and the
parking lot's full out there. Um, so
[2:55:04] I think it could be used. I I think it
could be a decent draw pulling from
[2:55:07] Lovelin as well to use this course.
>> You you illustrated the the path and
[2:55:12] trails in some of the diagrams, but I
don't I don't see them listed as a
[2:55:16] number here unless it's just the port
recommendation, but our intent is still
[2:55:20] to have trails all through this.
Correct.
[2:55:22] » Correct. Okay. Okay. Great.
>> Thank you.
[2:55:28] » Um, if I may, one thing about disc golf,
um, it's it's typical that disc golf
[2:55:33] doesn't function like traditional golf
and that you don't go to the clubhouse
[2:55:37] and, you know, pay for a tea time. Um,
you know, it's much more informal.
[2:55:41] You're able to walk. Uh, there might be
other folks out walking trails nearby
[2:55:45] while you're playing disc golf. Um, you
know, there are disc golf courses like
[2:55:49] on school sites and other places. You
know, it's a
[2:55:54] It's not an exclusive use of the
property is I guess what I'm trying to
[2:55:56] say.
>> It's frisbees with steel nets, right?
[2:55:59] » Yeah. And it's and it's a it's a very
low impact um opportunity I think
[2:56:03] relative to some of the other things.
And and the real issue here uh and this
[2:56:07] is one of the reasons why I'll just uh
editorialize for a minute if you don't
[2:56:11] mind. One of the reasons why we've had
such a hard time figuring out what to do
[2:56:14] with this property is the conservation
easement is very restrictive. For
[2:56:17] example, it says no livestock is allowed
on the property. And so, um, you know,
[2:56:23] when I very first started here back in
2018, uh, some of the first meetings I
[2:56:27] had were with the school district and
some interested folks who really wanted
[2:56:29] to do FFA, uh, a collaborative
relationship with the school district
[2:56:34] and their FFA program or 4. Um, but we
couldn't have livestock on the property.
[2:56:40] And so, while it could be used as a
learning center, they couldn't they
[2:56:44] couldn't bring animals out there and
other things. There were some real
[2:56:46] limitations. Um, as Keith mentioned,
Colorado Openlands that that owns and
[2:56:51] holds the conservation easement does not
want a significant amount of disturbance
[2:56:55] on the property. And so regrading uh
buildings are are very limited if if um
[2:57:01] not kind of explicitly excluded in a lot
of ways. There's just there are a lot of
[2:57:06] restrictions on this property. So a low
impact use that requires very little um
[2:57:11] quote unquote development like disc golf
uh is a great this is a great spot to
[2:57:15] put that kind of recreational amenity.
It also has some unique terrain and
[2:57:18] features and other things. So, um that
that's really the reason I think why
[2:57:22] disc golf came to the forefront as a use
for this site if that makes sense.
[2:57:27] » Yeah,
questions.
[2:57:31] » I have a couple. Um, one question that I
have is what would it take? What
[2:57:37] resources and infrastructure would it
take to just make this accessible to the
[2:57:41] public for public use for park for just
trails and recreation,
[2:57:48] » right? I think uh we would typically
like to see some uh proper restrooms ADA
[2:57:54] um type of setup. So, you would need a
whole parking area uh figured out out
[2:58:00] there. you need restrooms.
Um,
[2:58:05] that's like the minimum. I There's the
concern of what do you do with a house
[2:58:10] out there and some of the other, you
know, buildings. What do you how do you
[2:58:15] handle that when um, you know, you do
have the public showing up and there's,
[2:58:21] you know, houses and stuff that people
aren't living in and and monitoring, I
[2:58:25] guess. So to follow up on that, are
those structures are we able to remove
[2:58:30] any of those structures?
>> Yes.
[2:58:32] » And then my third question is, can we
monetize
[2:58:37] anyone using the park like for disc golf
or for the retriever training? Could
[2:58:41] that be something that brings in money
to help pay for those park improvements
[2:58:45] or is that does it just have to be open?
>> We'd have to confirm the exact type of
[2:58:51] reservation use on the property with
Colorado Openlands. commercial uses I
[2:58:54] believe is not allowed on the property.
Uh agricultural
[2:58:59] using as a lease for that is allowed and
that's currently uh one of the uses
[2:59:04] that's uh happening now. And I will say
um you know again this this project was
[2:59:11] kind of at the top of the um burner list
and it got back burned mostly because of
[2:59:16] the um challenges associated with the
conservation easement trying to find
[2:59:21] some creative uses. U I will say I met
with Colorado Openlands again very early
[2:59:27] on in my tenure here. Um and and I don't
say this flippantly. We we said, you
[2:59:31] know, we went through this long list of
things. Jeremy and I, Jeremy Olinger,
[2:59:35] our deputy town administrator, and I met
with them, said, "Hey, could we do this?
[2:59:38] Could we do this? Could we do this?"
Most of the answers were no. And the few
[2:59:42] things that they said yes to were kind
of like, "You'll have to show us exactly
[2:59:45] how you're going to do that before
before we'll say yes." Um,
[2:59:50] and and you know, we threw out things
like, "Could it be rented out as a
[2:59:53] wedding venue? It' be it'd be a
beautiful wedding destination." Nope.
[2:59:56] Absolutely not. That's commercial use.
Um, could we have a golf course there?
[3:00:00] No, that is a commercial use because
you'd be charging for um you know green
[3:00:05] fees and and things like that. So I
think Keith's answer is a reasonable one
[3:00:10] which is any ideas we have are good
ideas. Um we just need to run them past
[3:00:16] Colorado openlands uh to get their
feedback at the end of that very first
[3:00:19] meeting. And I'll admit I was a little
discouraged. Um you know we said well
[3:00:23] what what should we do with the
property? and they said, "Well, your
[3:00:26] best bet is to sell it. Um, you know,
sell it for residential use, um, for
[3:00:31] farming. It'll maintain its conservation
easement. Somebody could live there,
[3:00:34] farm it if they want to, or just have a
a great piece of property." We
[3:00:38] considered that. Um, but the but the
park was added into kind of our port
[3:00:43] list as a as a future town park, and
that then also prohibits us from selling
[3:00:49] it under state law without a vote of the
public. So, that that complicates those
[3:00:53] things. So these are some I think having
gone through um the
[3:01:00] port committee process this kind of
refinement of concepts back and forth
[3:01:05] with Colorado open lands um we could
remove the buildings. I think the
[3:01:09] buildings from our perspective as staff
is the biggest concern. You know you've
[3:01:12] got a lot of buildings out there that
are um you know that are currently
[3:01:16] monitored but that with the public being
out there on a daily basis wouldn't be
[3:01:20] monitored enough where we'd feel
comfortable that they were safe. um that
[3:01:24] they were, you know, if they were not
occupied, if they weren't being
[3:01:26] regularly used, right? They become kind
of an attractive nuisance. Today,
[3:01:31] they're behind a gate in a fence. They
are monitored by staff and by the police
[3:01:34] and other things. And so, you know, we
feel like they're they're okay today,
[3:01:37] but that's because there is no public
out there. Um that that dynamic changes
[3:01:42] a little bit. So, I think that's an
important part of the conversation um
[3:01:45] for you to consider.
>> I do have one more question. When we
[3:01:50] have a a conservation easement, is there
ever any documentation of what the
[3:01:54] family's original intent for the
property is?
[3:01:57] » That that is exactly what the
conservation easement is intended for.
[3:02:00] Um, so the the conservation easement
itself is a is a long document that
[3:02:06] specifies, you know, these are the
conservation values of the property,
[3:02:10] these are the allowed uses, these are
the prohibited uses. uh you know it it
[3:02:14] really the deed of a conservation
easement it specifies all those things
[3:02:18] and that's agreed to by the property
owner that gave the conservation
[3:02:21] easement to Colorado openlands in the
first place which was Miss Jesuski. So
[3:02:25] what is included in the deed of
conservation easement really reflects
[3:02:28] what her intent of the property was.
>> That makes sense.
[3:02:32] » All right. And uh the easement was
created in 2003
[3:02:36] uh before that she had uh an idea of
where the property was going to go to.
[3:02:41] And uh like I said, the town acquired it
in 2012. So I think there was a period
[3:02:46] where uh
other entities were being approached to
[3:02:51] take on the property and they declined.
I believe Lovelin declined and a couple
[3:02:54] others. So
[3:02:59] » questions.
>> I have a question that just came to my
[3:03:02] mind. Um for the I'm
as far as tearing down the buildings and
[3:03:07] whatnot. I'm I'm hesitant to tear down
that arena whatever happens just because
[3:03:12] it's a big giant building. Um
do you guys know if there's a limitation
[3:03:19] on the possibility of use by the fire
district or sheriff's department for
[3:03:24] something in that arena?
[3:03:29] » I think that's something we'd want to
Yeah.
[3:03:31] » evaluate and run past Colorado. Yeah.
[3:03:36] » Good question. A few years ago, the
sheriff's department lost their Toys
[3:03:40] location,
but it's too late.
[3:03:46] » You know, we've we've considered moving
our um some of our staff out there, uh
[3:03:50] you know, like our forestry team,
forestry and open space department, but
[3:03:54] it is it's really as far from town as
you can get and still be in the town
[3:03:58] limits. Um
>> excluding I25. Um, but you know, it is
[3:04:02] it is kind of at the edge of town and
and someday as the town grows east,
[3:04:05] which will inevitably happen uh and more
development occurs out by a 25 and those
[3:04:10] kinds of things, it'll be really at the
farthest part of town. And so moving
[3:04:14] staff out there, we've talked about, but
um may not make sense, but using it for
[3:04:18] kind of temporary or maybe even
permanent or semi-permanmanent uses that
[3:04:21] are public in nature might be possible.
Um but we'll have to evaluate that.
[3:04:26] » Indoor cough um
I could car
[3:04:34] » um I I just had a question for staff.
What kind of security or additional
[3:04:38] funding would we need to implement?
Should we go forward with some sort of
[3:04:43] pilot program for any user group out
there?
[3:04:48] Has that been considered?
>> Um it I think a lot of it depends on how
[3:04:53] the how the property ultimately ends up.
um kind of what the uses are, when it's
[3:04:56] open, when it's not open, um whether or
not the buildings stay or don't stay.
[3:05:01] The buildings actually provide a visual
obstruction in a lot of ways. So like,
[3:05:05] you know, uh and the property is large
enough that, you know, a a police
[3:05:09] officer can't just drive by on Canada
Road 14 and see the entire property,
[3:05:13] right? So you have to drive into the
property. um and and even accessing the
[3:05:18] southern end of the property, you really
can't see a lot of that even from the
[3:05:22] house without walking or driving back
there. So, you know, we'd want we
[3:05:26] definitely want to have cameras um in
strategic locations to be able to
[3:05:29] monitor and be able to see what's going
on out there. We'd want gates that lock
[3:05:33] um at at certain times uh to prohibit
overnight use. I think that's probably
[3:05:38] an important consideration out there. No
camping and that kind of stuff. Um, so
[3:05:42] you we talked through some of those, but
I think a lot of it again depends on
[3:05:45] ultimate use and whether or not the
buildings stay.
[3:05:50] Thank you.
[3:05:53] » There's other questions right now. I
know there's members of the public that
[3:05:55] want to do this.
>> Okay.
[3:05:59] » Um, thank
you state your name.
[3:06:04] » Yep.
>> Yep. Um, my name is Joe Soek with the
[3:06:07] Plat Valley Hunter Retriever Club. Uh my
address is uh 564 Marcelina in Loveland.
[3:06:15] Yep. Um so I guess
some of the um restrictions that uh Mr.
[3:06:22] Kirk was pointing out to the property is
um it's very restrictive in its use. But
[3:06:28] one thing that it's not restrictive in
is dog training. It's mentioned four
[3:06:32] times in the in the easement and it
actually says um on the section 3
[3:06:39] paragraph H commercial or industry
industrial activities no commercial or
[3:06:45] industrial uses are allowed on the
property except for dog training and
[3:06:51] then it goes on to say also agriculture.
So those are the two things that you
[3:06:56] could actually utilize it for
commercially. Um, we have proposed to
[3:07:02] have a pilot program um to open up for
us uh the Flatbelly Hunter Retriever
[3:07:09] Club to have access to the property um
on a trial basis so that when um
[3:07:16] hopefully when it is opened up for the
public that we would have a track record
[3:07:21] and a relationship with the town of
Berth so that you know what our club is
[3:07:24] about, how we operate, how we take care
of the property and Um
[3:07:30] so so when it did open up to the public,
we would also be able to work in
[3:07:35] conjunction with the public for the
areas that we'd want to use. Um the
[3:07:39] ponds is one of the biggest things.
Those ponds are cut for um dog training.
[3:07:46] um specifically it has different uh
types of um retriever
[3:07:53] um skills and factors to train your dogs
in in those ponds. Um that's why she
[3:08:01] built them. I I think the contour to the
land is also um big for dog training and
[3:08:07] that's why she's got it laid out the way
that she did. And you know that it's
[3:08:12] been 13 years that Bertha has had this
property and one of the biggest things
[3:08:19] that she's asked for is dog training and
there hasn't been any dog training and
[3:08:25] we as a club can offer that without any
cost to the town of Berthan. We have our
[3:08:33] own insurance. We would be able to list
the property um on our insurance policy.
[3:08:39] Um, we monitor our members so we know
who is on the property and um we can
[3:08:46] tell whether or not they are members.
Um,
[3:08:52] and it's just uh something that Mrs.
Janowski really wanted was to have dog
[3:08:57] training at that property
and we w we can we have the solution and
[3:09:03] can offer that without any impact to the
town of Berlin.
[3:09:09] Can I answer any questions? Does anybody
have a question on
[3:09:13] » what we do? How we do
>> that? I just want to see if there's
[3:09:15] anyone else uh that wishes to speak to
this real quick.
[3:09:17] » Sure.
[3:09:21] » My name is Wes Dylan, 2343 Helena Court
in Loveland. Miss Djanowski was a legacy
[3:09:28] member of our club
and um you know the property that she
[3:09:33] has is very unique. Professional dog
trainers utilize properties just like
[3:09:39] that for the sole purpose of developing
a professional hunting retrieving dog.
[3:09:46] We're not professionals, although we
interact with professionals in our
[3:09:50] national organization, the United Kennel
Club hunting retriever group. We're a
[3:09:56] certified 200 member club. Uh basically
front-range membership.
[3:10:03] The ability to find a property with
these characteristics is virtually
[3:10:08] impossible
for
[3:10:11] anyone other than a professional that's
going to generate it like Miss Jascowski
[3:10:15] did, Janowski did for her own personal
use. So the value may not be commercial
[3:10:22] and the value may be very
[3:10:27] very unique
in a in a an urban setting or a
[3:10:33] community setting, but to a select group
of people, it is absolutely invaluable.
[3:10:40] and we drive by it all the time and
realize what a waste it truly is
[3:10:46] for the resource that we try to to uh
develop. So whereas
[3:10:53] the ultimate solution is very complex
and and we've talked to you all before
[3:10:58] about this. We do offer a very specific
very unique solution that's specific to
[3:11:10] the concept or to the um document that's
been drawn up without
[3:11:16] terrible cost without um anything other
than a access to the property under the
[3:11:24] guidance and and regulations that you
set for us. Um, it's something that it's
[3:11:31] a it's a shame to see it go to waste.
And also, I think that that we would
[3:11:37] have the ability to work with
the town for the development and co-use
[3:11:43] of the Frisbee golf thing is wonderful.
So, you know, that would not be a
[3:11:48] conflict for us at all and would
welcome, you know, to have a multi-use
[3:11:52] thing. However, you know, the the the
key for us is the the beauty of the
[3:11:58] property itself
and what we can do with it. So, thank
[3:12:03] you very much. I appreciate that.
>> Jeeoff.
[3:12:06] » Um, mayor, I move to extend the meeting
to 10:30.
[3:12:09] » Second.
>> All those in favor say I.
[3:12:12] » I. All right.
[3:12:16] » Hi, my name is Jeff Miller. I live here
in Bured 739th Street. Um,
[3:12:23] we are members of the club. We do look
for places to train. We don't have a lot
[3:12:27] of places available to train with these
unique features. We don't have a lot of
[3:12:32] places available to let the dogs run off
leash. Um,
[3:12:37] the way we train, we don't get all the
dogs out together and let them all run
[3:12:41] and have a good time. It's usually very
specific. One, maybe two dogs out at a
[3:12:46] time. They're under control.
We take care of the properties because
[3:12:50] we respect it and we don't want to lose
access to it. So,
[3:12:54] I'd urge you to allow us to show you
what we can do and how we would treat
[3:12:58] it.
>> Thank you.
[3:13:02] » Is there anyone else?
[3:13:05] » I'm uh I'm Chris Huber. I live on 1513
Branch Street in Berth
[3:13:11] uh just uh east of this property. I'm
the father of birthed resident and
[3:13:18] junior world champion disc golfer Haley
Huber and now a twotime major winner. We
[3:13:26] have nowhere to practice in town. Um so
here's a few numbers real quick. Uh
[3:13:33] Centennial Park in Longmont had nine
almost a thousand unique players. And
[3:13:40] this is just from our scoring app that
we use. Uh almost a thousand unique
[3:13:47] players and uh 4,500 rounds just last
year. Um
[3:13:55] there was
again almost a thousand unique players
[3:14:01] at Lou Miller Park and 4,000 rounds
played last year.
[3:14:06] The West View Middle School, which is a
brand new course in Longmont, had uh 355
[3:14:14] unique players. And because it's on
school property and it's really
[3:14:18] restrictive of when we can play, there
was uh 1,500 rounds. Uh River Ranch in
[3:14:27] uh just off the interstate in I don't
know if it's Johntown or Lovelin there.
[3:14:32] Um, it's probably the least desirable
course in the area. Had almost 500
[3:14:38] unique players last year as well. Um,
Mahaffy Park, they put us in the the the
[3:14:46] wasteland of the property. So, there's
no trees. Our our local club, I'm uh
[3:14:54] part of the leadership board for the
Longmont Club and the Lovelin Club. Um,
[3:14:59] we've taken all the dead trees that the
city of Lelin is cutting down and
[3:15:05] putting put them on the course so we
have obstacles to play with. And um
[3:15:13] we also have a second set of baskets out
there now donated from the club. So now
[3:15:20] we have multiple
baskets we could play to on on each uh
[3:15:25] hole. Um so
we have nowhere to go within uh you know
[3:15:32] of without driving 20 minutes to play
and practice. Um
[3:15:39] the the sport
I don't have any data to back it up but
[3:15:44] I heard during co it was the second
fastest growing sport on the planet. So
[3:15:50] only beat by pickle ball and that was
the first the first meeting I was here
[3:15:54] for and there was a lot less people. Um
I just uh we we desire a course near us.
[3:16:03] Uh I I almost guarantee that we can put
it to great use. Uh,
[3:16:13] you know, there's bad apples in every
group, but most of us are dedicated to
[3:16:20] cleaning up after ourselves. Uh, not
making a mess, not, you know, doing
[3:16:26] anything irresponsible on the course
except playing. Um,
[3:16:31] the Longmont Club sold has just this
year sold almost 400 tags, which is kind
[3:16:39] of the the membership
uh part of the club. And Lublin, which
[3:16:46] is a
couple years old now, has sold almost
[3:16:50] » Oh, sorry.
>> Okay.
[3:16:52] » We want some disc golf.
>> Is there anyone else?
[3:16:59] Thank you all for speaking. Yeah, thanks
for coming back up. Um, if the trustes
[3:17:04] have any questions for um the uh either
the count club or the disc golf course,
[3:17:09] I consider you guys subject matter
experts. So, bring it back up if you
[3:17:12] guys have questions.
>> And one question for the the importance
[3:17:15] of the water for the dogs. What's what
feeds those ponds and do they stay at a
[3:17:21] high level all the time? Does anyone
know that? There there is a little bit
[3:17:25] of ground water in the property that
kind of probably seeps from loan tree.
[3:17:28] Uh but the water does have over, you
know, 60 shares of CBT water and two
[3:17:33] shares of home supply water that's tied
to the property and can't be moved off
[3:17:37] the property. Um so when the farmer does
irrigate, that also does trickle into
[3:17:41] the ponds as well.
>> Okay.
[3:17:43] » There used to be some I don't know if
there still is, but there's some pretty
[3:17:46] good largemouth bass on the in those
ponds.
[3:17:51] If if if it gets opened, I I suspect
those ponds will be empty real fast.
[3:17:58] » I guess I'd like just clarification on
whether if the training takes place,
[3:18:05] could that be co-used with public use or
would that just be private use only?
[3:18:11] Meaning like the public could use it as
as recreation
[3:18:15] in addition to training or would it have
to be exclusive? We we got to get you in
[3:18:20] front of a mic to answer that. Um Keith,
do you have any thoughts on that? I
[3:18:22] guess you can ask.
>> I'll pass to Christie. Sorry.
[3:18:28] » Um yeah. Yes, we could work
simultaneously. Um the way that that
[3:18:33] last plan was where the uh the farmland
and then on the other side was the disc
[3:18:38] golf. Um we're primarily interested in
the um ponds. So on the wetlands area,
[3:18:44] which is um kind of isolated by itself
there. Um, it wouldn't be a problem to
[3:18:50] have disc golf people out there or even
people walking certain trails and stuff.
[3:18:54] I mean, there might there might be a
little bit of logistics depending on the
[3:18:59] trail where the trails are going, but we
would be able to figure that out. Um,
[3:19:03] and then as far as um depending on the
time of year, we would want to be able
[3:19:09] to use the farmland if it's possible,
depending on, you know, where the crops
[3:19:13] are. if it's the off season and there,
you know, it's in the winter time and
[3:19:18] the crops aren't growing that we could
run the dogs on that side. Um, and then
[3:19:23] also um it uh you know maybe prior to or
certain certain vegetations that um
[3:19:32] would allow the dogs to run through it
without damaging the crop. Um we would
[3:19:36] like to use that also. Is that
>> that's very help?
[3:19:41] Any
other questions?
[3:19:48] » All right. How do we feel generally?
>> I really good. I again I think um it's a
[3:19:54] it's a beautiful piece of property,
beautiful views, and for it to be not be
[3:19:58] used by anybody does seem like quite a
way. So I I support the uses we've
[3:20:03] talked about.
[3:20:08] seems like
>> I don't think it'd be one of our lower
[3:20:13] expensive projects because we can't
really do any grading or earth moving or
[3:20:19] anything like that out there. Just go
plant the metal frisbee trees, tree
[3:20:24] stakes,
>> parking, lighting, and security.
[3:20:28] » Parking, lighting, security are the
biggest expenses.
[3:20:30] » Yeah. And then and then obviously we'll
want to have restrooms out there that
[3:20:33] those
>> uh being able to use an existing
[3:20:36] building if we're able to do that will
help bring that cost down, but there
[3:20:38] there'll still be some expense there.
Yes, it's likely to be one of our you'll
[3:20:42] see here in a moment one of our least
expensive opportunities.
[3:20:45] » And what were some ideas for the large
arena building um besides storage and
[3:20:50] stuff? Could would that be of interest
to the dog trainers for the winter to
[3:20:54] use indoors or that's something the
Frisbee golf would want to have a couple
[3:20:58] things inside for something? I don't
know.
[3:21:03] » Yeah,
>> there's one.
[3:21:04] » Uh, that I'm not sure exactly the answer
to that one. So, we the the poor
[3:21:09] committee didn't really have an intended
use. We've talked about uh, you know,
[3:21:14] opening that up for parking, I think.
Yeah. Yeah. I mean,
[3:21:18] » it's a nice size arena.
>> Yeah.
[3:21:20] » It's a great great space to
>> you variety of those things.
[3:21:26] » The farm, the current farmer has stored
equipment. um or hay in there from time
[3:21:31] to time uh with permission. So that's
about all it's been used for lately.
[3:21:40] » So what would be your reason with this
uh with the hound club to not
[3:21:45] a lot? I know it's not a potentially a
town priority. It wasn't even in the
[3:21:49] surveys and whatnot, but um do you see
any other reasons not to or can you just
[3:21:55] expound upon that? They're not being
recommended here. Right.
[3:21:59] » Right. I think so. We can't I don't
think we can be exclusive to just one
[3:22:02] club. So now we're, you know, opening up
for possibly other clubs wanting to use
[3:22:07] the property. Um so it feels like
there'd need to be some type of
[3:22:11] reservation system created for this. I
don't think uh so then we're we're
[3:22:17] figuring out the form and how to do
that. Um is an automatic gate? Is are we
[3:22:23] set giving a combo out? How do we handle
a property? Uh I I do agree like what
[3:22:27] like like they've said the property is
ready for them to use. It's um and uh it
[3:22:34] is a lot nicer than the Cobb Lake
property. Um I'd say just because the
[3:22:38] way it's been maintained um and it was
built for this essentially. Um but it is
[3:22:45] figuring out that reservation system and
maybe not agreeing fully that it is
[3:22:48] something that you can also mix disc
golf with with at the same time. Um, I
[3:22:54] don't think do loose dogs are very
popular. Uh, I know we do allow that in
[3:23:00] town in certain areas, but uh, we also
do receive a lot of complaints on it as
[3:23:04] well. Um,
>> okay. Thank you.
[3:23:08] » Mhm.
>> I'm seeing here one to three hours. I
[3:23:10] mean, they this would all have to be
worked out if the board didn't want to
[3:23:12] go ahead with this, but doesn't seem
like they're projecting an everyday
[3:23:17] thing, right? Seems to be pretty limited
in the scope of when they want to
[3:23:22] Sorry, I'm breaking my own rule here.
Um,
[3:23:26] I'm just, by the way, we we just got
this, so I'm just reading this now, but
[3:23:29] it seems like they want one to three
hours with additional one to two group
[3:23:32] sessions per week. So, it doesn't sound
like this is a every day.
[3:23:37] » Um,
>> okay. Thanks. That's a question I'm just
[3:23:40] thinking out loud here.
>> Okay. I I think I think the con the
[3:23:43] issue and the concern that we've had
from the beginning is one opening it up
[3:23:46] for reserved or or kind of specialized
uses prior to it being open to the
[3:23:52] public we think is problematic. Um, and
I think I I hope everyone understands
[3:23:57] that, um, practically speaking, this is
a publicly owned piece of property and
[3:24:02] the minute you open it up to one group,
then you have a lot of other groups
[3:24:06] immediately saying, well, I, you know,
why can't we use it and we need to be
[3:24:09] able to have it for our time? And now
we're trying to balance, we're trying to
[3:24:13] turn this into a scheduled, rentable
asset, uh, for for a large list of
[3:24:19] groups. and we've been approached by
others, not just this retriever training
[3:24:22] group. Um, and so I think prior to it
being open to the public, that's
[3:24:26] problematic. Okay.
>> After it's open to the public, um,
[3:24:29] whether that's with disc golf and
walking trails, uh, farm or otherwise,
[3:24:35] um, being able to utilize the property
with some kind of reservation system is
[3:24:39] something that we could work through. I
don't think that that's now
[3:24:42] » that was going to be my point because
like you can reserve a fickle for an
[3:24:45] event. You know, there's a process, but
you're saying we could do this. It's
[3:24:48] just out of order kind of doing that.
>> But again, I think, you know, part of
[3:24:51] the challenge is
>> we don't have a lot of facilities with
[3:24:54] the exception of our ball fields. So, we
do have some that are that are like
[3:24:58] rented on a very consistent basis,
>> right? Where it's like, you know, we're
[3:25:02] going to have it every Tuesday from this
time to this time. We're going to have
[3:25:05] it every, you know, once a week uh from
this time to this time, and then we're
[3:25:08] also going to have it on Saturdays from
this time to this time. So, that um we
[3:25:13] don't have a lot of those arrangements.
Um, it's not to say that we can't. Um,
[3:25:17] but that's just something we need to
work through. But my suggestion would be
[3:25:20] that we not do that until it's open to
the public. Um, and part of that is
[3:25:24] because I think there's going to be some
missing infrastructure. Um, this again,
[3:25:28] we're going to have concerns about how
does the property accessed? How is it
[3:25:31] managed? Um, and and frankly, you know,
it it kind of speeds up that process
[3:25:37] ahead of the rest of this planning and
and development effort. And sometimes
[3:25:43] you get the cart before the horse and
then there's things that happen that you
[3:25:45] wish hadn't happened uh because it
throws the other pieces off. We've had a
[3:25:49] lot of that conversation tonight already
too about other park projects. So, um
[3:25:53] you know, from our perspective,
if it's not open to the public, let's
[3:25:57] not open it yet. Once it's open to the
public, let's work work through the
[3:26:00] logistics of reserving the property for
unique uses. And we're going to get a
[3:26:04] lot of those requests, right?
>> It's going to be a popular park.
[3:26:07] » It's going to be a popular spot. It's a
beautiful place
[3:26:09] » because I can see it with even with the
disc golf the disc golf clubs too if
[3:26:13] you're if you want to host an event over
there or if you want
[3:26:17] » events multiple clubs wanting to
>> have it. So, we're going to have to try
[3:26:22] to balance all those respective users,
which is a good problem to have, right?
[3:26:25] If we're going to have this asset, we're
going to invest the money. We want it to
[3:26:28] be well utilized. We want it to be used
for both its, you know, kind of
[3:26:32] primarily intended purpose, but also
other good public uses. Balancing all
[3:26:36] those, I think, going to be the trick.
>> I think I think what happens a lot is
[3:26:41] that we look at the full picture of what
it can be and what it can do, and it
[3:26:46] tends to stall things out because we
can't put all the pieces together quite
[3:26:50] yet. And so I like the idea of taking it
in in stride. Let's open it up. Let's
[3:26:55] get it available to the public. Let's
allow the public access so that it's
[3:26:59] absolutely striking out there. When we
did our tour, I I was just amazed how
[3:27:04] beautiful it is. And I'm so grateful for
the conservation ement and how
[3:27:08] restrictive it is because we tend to
want to build on everything that we
[3:27:11] have, all of our assets. It would be
really great to not do that with this
[3:27:14] one and have it be just a place where
you enjoy the beauty and it's not super
[3:27:20] um active. I do respect greatly the
groups that are coming forward with the
[3:27:24] retriever training because that was the
heart of the owner and I I I think
[3:27:30] honoring that what that was intended to
be used for is incredibly important and
[3:27:34] we think we'd all want that if we
donated our property to a public use is
[3:27:38] that we would have specific things we
want to be honored and so I'd love to
[3:27:42] work with those groups to create spaces
where perhaps they have private access
[3:27:46] to where we where you can observe the
training taking in place, but it is
[3:27:51] separate from the public. So perhaps
some fencing or whatever implements you
[3:27:54] could put in where it's still happening
simultaneously, but and you can have a
[3:27:58] nature and can have public use, but
they're able to use at their leisure,
[3:28:03] something like that where it's
happening. And when you have the
[3:28:06] argument of, well, why can't we rent the
park and all those people coming
[3:28:09] forward, I think you could directly
point to the conservation movement, just
[3:28:12] like you said, that the owner's
intention was to have it be used for
[3:28:16] that use as well as farming. And those
were the two the two laid out uses from
[3:28:20] what I understand in tonight's meeting.
Any other uses are probably above and
[3:28:24] beyond. And perhaps we can find one of
our other amazing parks to locate those
[3:28:29] things because those are important to
disc golf would be amazing. And having
[3:28:32] locals who are just thriving at that
would be amazing. But if that doesn't
[3:28:35] fit in this park, I don't want to slow
this project down to make everything fit
[3:28:41] when perhaps it shouldn't.
Does that make any sense? Cool.
[3:28:47] Trusty.
>> Um I I agree with everyone's points. I'm
[3:28:51] all for dog training specifically
because it's M. Jakowsk's um legacy um
[3:28:59] disc golf seems like a good low impact
um sport to be putting on the property
[3:29:05] especially since it's so uh restricted
in the conservation easement. Um, I am
[3:29:10] concerned from the town's perspective,
if you if you open it up for
[3:29:14] reservations, you have to open it up
equally to all reservations. Um, as far
[3:29:19] as the multi-use, I'm not as concerned
about having the dogs there with other
[3:29:24] multi-uses because those dogs are voice
commands and they're not running around
[3:29:29] chasing squirrels. They're they're
working. They're working dogs. They're
[3:29:33] not they're not a they're out there
having fun because they're dogs and
[3:29:36] that's what they like to do, but they're
not just kind of willy-nilly running
[3:29:39] around the property and getting into
everybody's business. Um they don't
[3:29:42] chase frisbees. They don't, you know,
run up to people and and say hello
[3:29:46] because they are there to work and
that's what they want to be doing at the
[3:29:49] at that point. So, I'm not I'm not
concerned about having it.
[3:29:54] A dog park, I think, is mis a misnomer
for what would be happening there. Um,
[3:30:00] what
to your point about kind of opening up
[3:30:05] as soon as possible,
is there anything keeping it from being
[3:30:12] just an open space that the ponds are
reserved for dog training right now
[3:30:18] without any infrastructure, without any
changes?
[3:30:22] If people just want to go to and walk in
the field because it's an open space, is
[3:30:26] there anything keeping them from doing
that besides possible um problems with
[3:30:31] security?
>> That's our biggest concern is the
[3:30:34] security piece.
>> How's that different than like Bertha
[3:30:40] Reservoir and that property and those
trails? Like how because we're not
[3:30:45] necessarily monitoring closely all of
our trails and and parks. So, how would
[3:30:51] this one be unique? And I know the
buildings are unique, but we can almost
[3:30:54] we can almost section those off as to
not be accessible in some way until
[3:30:58] they're removed or is what is what I
would assume, but I think that that's a
[3:31:04] fair point. What's keeping us from just
allowing people out there to use it? And
[3:31:08] then could maybe there be some
disclaimer for people entering the park
[3:31:11] to say there's retriever training
happening, you know, just, you know,
[3:31:15] please be respectful of the the training
that's taking place.
[3:31:20] those things happen.
>> Again, I think um there are illicit
[3:31:26] activities that happen at the reservoir
from time to time and the police have to
[3:31:29] show up and and deal with them. Uh and
that's true of public open spaces. And
[3:31:33] so I think you know from a community
design perspective
[3:31:37] uh and the idea of of community policing
through environmental design,
[3:31:41] the intent is to create highly visible
and highly active spaces, right?
[3:31:47] Spaces that don't get used very
frequently are also higher targets for
[3:31:51] um vandalism and other illicit
activities. And properties that where
[3:31:56] it's very hard to monitor the entire
property or to easily see. One of the
[3:32:01] benefits of the reservoir is it's highly
visible. Um it's visible from the
[3:32:05] neighborhood. It's visible from the
freeway. You know, it's clear and open,
[3:32:09] right? So you can see this property has
some some hiding spots. Um, not to say
[3:32:15] that that's
that is not uncommon with public open
[3:32:20] spaces, right? That's the reality of
public open spaces. So, my biggest
[3:32:24] concern is the buildings. It's not so
much the open space itself. I think that
[3:32:29] if it is open to the public and it's um
and it is not adequately monitored,
[3:32:35] we're going to have problems with those
buildings.
[3:32:40] That's my biggest concern.
I I I don't think that that will be a
[3:32:43] regular and frequent occurrence. I'm
hopeful that it wouldn't be, but you
[3:32:46] know, we have we have buildings in the
middle of town that are abandoned that
[3:32:50] are regular and frequent um vandalism
targets even though they're in a highly
[3:32:55] visible location. And so
they're also highly accessible and this
[3:33:00] is a little bit farther from town, so
maybe you know kids or other folks who
[3:33:03] are up to no good may not want to walk
out there or drive out there to go
[3:33:07] damage things. But um it's just the
reality is we're concerned about the
[3:33:11] buildings.
>> I was just going to say I would be in
[3:33:16] support of just taking the steps to
remove the buildings because we can't
[3:33:20] quickly address that issue. It'd be a
lot easier to just construct the
[3:33:24] buildings that we need. Um and I'd also
be in favor of constructing soft surface
[3:33:30] trails similar to like Hillsdale, which
isn't I don't think there's any lighting
[3:33:35] on that trail either.
um you'd have lighting in the parking,
[3:33:40] but the trail would be lit, but that
would at least provide access for
[3:33:43] responders or whomever to to monitor and
get around safely.
[3:33:48] » There's an existing access road. Um so,
you know, police officers can drive in
[3:33:53] and drive around the property. Uh at
night time, it'll be really dark, but
[3:33:56] that's true of every open space.
[3:34:02] » We do have one more question. He brought
up the comments about the dogs not
[3:34:08] chasing after frisbes. What about u just
the general public that are taking their
[3:34:12] dogs out there that aren't so well
trained?
[3:34:14] » That's a problem in every park we have.
>> Yeah,
[3:34:17] » there's lots of folks who walk their
dogs off leash in areas where that's not
[3:34:20] allowed.
>> Um if you have a dog and you've walked
[3:34:23] it in town, you've probably experienced
somebody else who is not a responsible
[3:34:26] owner and whose dog was not on a leash
and was not despite what they said was
[3:34:29] not under voice control.
>> Yeah. Because you got dogs out there.
[3:34:32] » We have those we have those problems on
a frequent basis. got the working dogs
[3:34:35] out there on leashes, you know, because
they're highly trained. But then
[3:34:39] someone's like, "Oh, their dog's not on
a leash." But anyway, that's just one
[3:34:44] thing that popped in
here,
[3:34:47] » right? And I I'll just bring up I know
Colorado openance has expressed um
[3:34:51] maintaining the way the property looks.
So, in my head, I believe you'd have to
[3:34:56] separate dog training and disc golf and
say dog training's open 3 days a week
[3:35:01] and that's all that's allowed on
property and disc golf is open the other
[3:35:04] four days a week. And that way the
properties have time to rehab. Um, they
[3:35:09] have concerns about the wetlands being
destroyed by the dogs and um so they've
[3:35:14] already said that dog use should be
limited on the property. Um, so it's
[3:35:20] I think I think there'd have had to be a
balance like that that had to go
[3:35:22] through. I think it I do think it'd be
tough to mix both at the same time.
[3:35:26] » And and I do think there was concern
from Colorado openlands even about this
[3:35:29] golf uh folks walking kind of through
the native grass or the existing grass.
[3:35:34] I don't know if it's native but
whatever's been farmed out there. Um you
[3:35:38] know kind of you make your own path when
you're playing disc golf, right? You
[3:35:42] know you're not staying on a improved
trail. Uh, and there was even concerns
[3:35:46] about, you know, ongoing regular use of
folks walking through those those areas
[3:35:51] and impacting the conservation value of
the property. I think that's I think I'm
[3:35:55] accurately describing that. Yeah. So, I
mean, just, you know,
[3:35:59] it's it's a unique property and it has
some incredible assets and is a great
[3:36:02] destination for I'm sure for retriever
training. Um,
[3:36:06] » and I think it'd be a great spot for
disc golf.
[3:36:08] » I'm just glad we finally got a a yes
that we could do something.
[3:36:13] » Yeah. Yeah, and I mean I think that's
what we've been working towards is
[3:36:15] getting some concurrence from Colorado
Openlands and um you know if if the
[3:36:20] board wants us to to work with the
Retriever Training Club and um provide
[3:36:24] them some access through some lease or
other permitted activity, you know, we
[3:36:28] can figure that out, too. So, I think
that's kind of up to you guys.
[3:36:33] » This is a I'm sorry. Um, this this is a
really difficult property and I'm
[3:36:41] kind of concerned that
we have yeses, we have yeses, we have
[3:36:47] nos, we have nos, we have yeses, we have
nos, and we're in this feedback loop
[3:36:53] where nothing is happening because
everything that could happen could be a
[3:36:57] no. even though it's a yes now, but if
it's a if it's a no now, it it's it's
[3:37:02] not going to be a yes. And we won't know
unless the property is being used. And
[3:37:07] if the property can't be used, maybe the
best policy is to just sell it or use it
[3:37:13] for something that is not open to the
public. Um I just I I don't want to keep
[3:37:19] going back over and over and over again
with this property. And thank you guys
[3:37:24] for communicating with with Oaklands and
everything for the past what you say
[3:37:27] since 2013.
>> I mean
[3:37:32] » that that's a long time, right? So if
it's if it's not being used,
[3:37:38] it needs to be and if through using it
we violate or are in danger of violating
[3:37:44] the conservation easement. Well, that
answers that that answers the question
[3:37:48] right there. But if we don't use it,
we're never going to know whether or not
[3:37:51] those uses are acceptable.
[3:37:58] » Okay.
[3:38:01] » Uh did we you already spoke, right?
Couple times.
[3:38:06] » How do you feel?
>> I was I was go
[3:38:09] » um
just another thing. What supplemental
[3:38:13] clearance do we need from open lands or
are we more or less good to go? Do you
[3:38:18] need the direction to take this concept
further in the uses or flush those out
[3:38:24] more?
>> I think uh we do need to flush out the
[3:38:27] uses of the buildings and stuff a little
more. Uh I know we'll have to check, but
[3:38:31] I believe they're going to want to see a
a a management plan of the property
[3:38:35] » uh for any areas we allow open for
public use. And how are we going to
[3:38:39] manage that? So that would have to be
put together first also probably before
[3:38:43] public can use the property.
>> Um I guess from my perspective I'm
[3:38:48] supportive of both uses. Obviously we
have security concerns and it revolves
[3:38:53] around the building. So I would argue
the next step for us would be what are
[3:38:58] our options for the building and what
are we replacing most of that. Um I
[3:39:02] think that makes the most sense to
proceed in that direction. I hesitate
[3:39:06] opening a pilot program that staff is
not on board just yet. Um, but I think
[3:39:12] it's worthwhile to take this to the end
of the road and get to a final decision
[3:39:19] on, you know, cost and use um, and what
this property is going to look like for
[3:39:27] us.
>> Yeah, I'm thank you for speaking too. uh
[3:39:33] all old disc golf too and u together
this is super tough. I mean going
[3:39:38] through two rounds of potentially trying
to sell this property, salvaging it,
[3:39:42] bringing it back. We're here. So this is
a huge uh accomplishment just to even
[3:39:45] have some kind of design in front of us.
And I love it. I love the idea of disc
[3:39:49] golf. I love the idea of folks coming
here and have some kind of passive
[3:39:52] recreation on this area of town. Um
doesn't have anything else really other
[3:39:57] than the golf course. Um,
and I really like the idea of trying to
[3:40:02] integrate in uh retriever retriever
program. Um,
[3:40:06] and it might not be and it's why we have
some locals here, but you know, just if
[3:40:10] it's not just locals, that's okay, too.
You know, we have other things that can
[3:40:13] bring people into town and maybe others
will grow to use it. Um, I would love to
[3:40:18] try and keep the retriever keep this
idea alive here. I do agree with uh
[3:40:23] trustees on it's good point that um
well I think several you brought up but
[3:40:30] just looking at these structures first
because those always seem to get in the
[3:40:33] way is the parking and the structures
and I would love to also keep that arena
[3:40:37] too. So it's deciding which ones are
totally useless for a municipality and
[3:40:41] ones that we could um use for other
types of recreation from there. I I
[3:40:46] agree with staff. It makes sense to not
add the kennel club in until we have
[3:40:51] public access and other programs. Um but
I could go the other way too and have
[3:40:57] kennel could do a permit with them. But
um bottom line is I don't see a no. I
[3:41:03] think it's just a time frame of trying
to wiggle in when we could do the kennel
[3:41:07] club if we wanted to do that the
retriever program. So I'm not looking at
[3:41:10] tonight as a no. Just it might not be uh
next on the
[3:41:16] next thing we look at
to me I think yeah the next thing to get
[3:41:21] back to Sean's point would just be to
look at the structures those seems to be
[3:41:24] the security concern um of tampering
with and also blocking the view for
[3:41:28] emergency services
um once that's figured out then it's
[3:41:32] just an implementation question of um
what program we putting in first and I
[3:41:38] agree with May if if there's multiple
people saying well they get to use it we
[3:41:41] do too well you can always point back to
the easement that says particular
[3:41:45] particularly this is for um retriever
training and this is an ideal property
[3:41:51] for that. So I'm for all this. I I think
I guess if we needed specific next steps
[3:41:56] it would be to look at the structures.
>> Okay.
[3:41:59] » Does that help?
>> I have a couple
[3:42:02] » if I could just add one more thing. I
took a look at the parking schematics
[3:42:06] and there is one point I wanted to bring
up. I I think a hammerhead style
[3:42:10] turnaround is probably negative. Um,
having people back up and turn around
[3:42:16] seems like trouble. Um, having some sort
of circular turnaround like scheme three
[3:42:21] I think would be more desirable. That's
all I've got.
[3:42:25] » Um, I was just going to come back to
Trusty A's point about it would be I
[3:42:30] think it would be beneficial to ask
first responders if they could utilize
[3:42:34] those buildings um before we tear them
down. Perhaps it could be a type of hub.
[3:42:39] I know that the fire district was going
to put in a a station hub um on 287 and
[3:42:45] now that is not going to move forward
because that they're not building out
[3:42:49] there and so perhaps a hub would be
beneficial of some kind. Maybe just
[3:42:53] asking the question before we move
forward and then I would be in favor of
[3:42:57] moving forward with putting whatever
buildings that are beneficial to public
[3:43:01] use. If that means tearing them down and
putting in bathroom structures or an
[3:43:06] office building for recreation, I'm in
favor of that. I think we have to put um
[3:43:10] what's beneficial to the entire
community at the forefront. I do think
[3:43:14] it is I think that because like the
easement says that the the dog training
[3:43:20] should continue. I I still would be open
to sectioning that off so they'd have a
[3:43:24] private entrance almost or private
sections of the the property if it
[3:43:27] benefited them, benefited the town. And
I I would challenge us to say that this
[3:43:32] may not be the right property for disco
golf because it's not in the easement
[3:43:35] and it is going to cause the other
groups to come in and say, well, why
[3:43:39] can't we do our type of recreation? I
would just say let's find a different
[3:43:44] property for dis golf because it is
important, but perhaps this isn't it.
[3:43:48] And having that one more thing in here
might convolute it for our open lands
[3:43:53] request. and you know when it's not
specifically outlined and we can't
[3:43:58] really have a trajectory of how much
impact it's going to have on the land I
[3:44:02] would I would recommend that we remove
that as from this part of the design and
[3:44:07] um have some onus in looking for
additional properties for those guys.
[3:44:13] » Interesting. Okay. Anyone else that
wants to look into removing disc golf
[3:44:19] thoughts on that? I would I guess I
would ask the question before we
[3:44:23] preemptively remove that. I guess
what does that use look like? I mean
[3:44:30] obviously it could be I don't see it as
an intense use of the property. Um I see
[3:44:36] it as compatible with retriever training
which is the thrust of the property
[3:44:39] along with the agricultural. Um
I would hesitate to take that option off
[3:44:45] the table just yet. I guess
>> and I think
[3:44:49] Keith, correct me if I'm wrong, but for
clarity, the disc golf we have run past
[3:44:54] Colorado openlands. They expressed some
concerns about how it be managed. We
[3:44:58] would definitely have to deal with that
in our management plan. U but they've
[3:45:01] they've kind of given us the tentative
green light for disc golf.
[3:45:05] » Well, I think it's different if it's
just there's disc golf amenities out for
[3:45:10] the public to use versus a club of disc
golfers using it regularly. Those are
[3:45:15] those are two different things to me. I
think our our clear expectation is that
[3:45:18] is a public open disc golf course.
There's no there's no club use. I mean
[3:45:22] other than what might be done
>> similarly to dog training through some
[3:45:26] reservation system for an event from
time to time just like we do all of our
[3:45:29] parks, but it would absolutely be an
open public amenity.
[3:45:32] » I see.
>> Yeah.
[3:45:33] » Okay.
[3:45:36] » Okay. Sounds like we're largely
supportive. Do you have any particular
[3:45:40] questions, staff, or uh clarity you need
out of us? No, I I think I'll maybe
[3:45:45] bring this back to the port committee
and we'll finish up this conceptual
[3:45:48] design and and try to hammer out the the
buildings and the parking. Maybe there's
[3:45:53] a a phased approach where one amenities
phase be in the other amenities phase
[3:45:58] and what would that look like if one
started before the other. Maybe we can
[3:46:01] look into that and and bring that back.
>> Excellent.
[3:46:06] » Yeah, this is great feedback. Uh I think
that's really what we were hoping for.
[3:46:10] kind of take the board committee's
recommendations, the concept plan, get
[3:46:12] your feedback and understanding and take
it and refine it from here. This is
[3:46:17] good. Thank you.
>> Okay. Yeah. Thank you.
[3:46:19] » Okay. Thank you. And thank you. And we
have all your stuff. Let me get ribbons.
[3:46:24] » Someone has
[3:46:38] those buildings.
There you go.
[3:46:46] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[3:46:48] » Be great to have the fire department out
there. They'd be there 24 hours.
[3:46:51] » Yeah. Really? Sure. Built in security.
>> Okay. Our final agenda item tonight,
[3:46:57] regular agenda item tonight, is the uh
parks update. And this is parks master
[3:47:01] plan update, excuse me. And uh I'll turn
this over. Yeah, we have our deputy town
[3:47:05] administrator, Jeremy Olinger.
>> Yeah. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Thank
[3:47:09] you. And trustees.
Um I before I start I just want to say
[3:47:15] yeah I am very aware it's late. Um I
didn't know I didn't hear though. Do we
[3:47:20] extend the meeting? Do we need we
already do that?
[3:47:22] » We already did that.
>> I was in the restroom too. So I just
[3:47:24] want to make sure that
>> um also I appreciate the people that you
[3:47:27] know stuck it out this late for this for
this item. So I appreciate that. Um just
[3:47:31] want to give you a parks master plan
update.
[3:47:34] um kind of kind of a big picture general
kind of the projects we've been working
[3:47:38] on. Some of them you know you're very um
um well verssed on or fond of fond of or
[3:47:44] or recently just got completed. So I'm
not going to I'm going to try to get a
[3:47:47] condensed version. I had an hourong
presentation tonight but seeing how you
[3:47:51] know it's later I'm going to try to get
you fit it in about 10 minutes. So,
[3:47:58] um, want to start with the the 2018 MR
master plan. Um, was born out of the two
[3:48:03] 2016
um, port. Um, through uh, a lot of
[3:48:08] previous boards or a couple previous
boards, previous committee work, uh,
[3:48:12] consultant work, um,
citizen initiative groups, um, different
[3:48:18] groups we had to put this together. And,
and so we didn't have a plan before
[3:48:23] this. We had lots of properties, lots of
different ideas, lots of things. The
[3:48:26] reason why I state this early and why
it's important when when we developed
[3:48:30] this parks master plan, it gave staff,
you know, some direction. It gave staff
[3:48:34] some a path and and so, as you'll see as
I work through this, staff has been
[3:48:39] following that. It's great for staff to
follow uh bring you bring you um
[3:48:43] projects um let you decide, you know,
what you want or don't want, get the
[3:48:47] community involved, um get get our
communities involved. Um so in 2018
[3:48:52] we um we kicked this off with we
identified four properties um working
[3:48:57] left to right would be Kalval um park on
the other side of 287 Richardson Park
[3:49:03] just north of Lovelin Reservoir. Wagner
Park as you all know is home to our rec
[3:49:07] center and our and our Fourth of July.
And then of course Town Park. Um when we
[3:49:12] started the top three except for Town
Park were were just dirt. um town park
[3:49:17] was was was thrown in as a as an anchor
park to to the center of town at the
[3:49:22] time and and desperately needed
renovation.
[3:49:27] Um so when we started in 2018, just
wanted to bring up kind of the top the
[3:49:32] the priorities that we were we were
looking at um back then in 5 to 10 years
[3:49:37] is you know people wanted trails and
trail connections. uh rec center was
[3:49:41] important uh priority with aquatics,
gym, fitness and wellness. Um and and
[3:49:45] that program space they they really
wanted they preferred it at Wagner Farm.
[3:49:50] Also the things that we talked about and
and were preferred were athletic fields
[3:49:54] and then more more space for special
events.
[3:49:57] Um so we identified some priorities. The
priority was the rec center, Wagner Farm
[3:50:02] and and and Town Park uh renovation. Um
the other two were not as shovel ready
[3:50:08] as as as the Wagner Farm Park and the
rec center and and definitely not as
[3:50:12] priority. People wanted rec center. Um
so we went through that process. What it
[3:50:16] does is just show you on the left that
the what the concept um from the master
[3:50:21] plan was. Um the area in red is is where
the rec center's at. Just just over 25
[3:50:27] acres uh developed on that northern
side. um completed um just at 30 million
[3:50:34] um in and opened in 2021 and and and
going strong. Um people very
[3:50:40] complimentary, very appreciative of that
project. Um
[3:50:44] after that was done or during that um we
went on and and we were working on plans
[3:50:49] as well for the next project is town
park. We put this in two phases. Uh we
[3:50:55] identified the two phases early uh
mainly because in the in the second
[3:50:59] phase on the eastern side of the park
there's ball fields there that you may
[3:51:03] or may not be aware of um that we still
need today. Um we didn't have any to to
[3:51:08] displace ballfield teams and softball
teams and people that use that community
[3:51:12] that uses those fields um on the eastern
side. We needed to wait until we built
[3:51:18] some more. So we we phased this as a
kind of a at the time a lowhanging fruit
[3:51:23] at the at the time to do phase one and
get get some more park amenities for for
[3:51:27] the community. So we did the left side
of the hash um red line the west side um
[3:51:33] and you'll see some pictures and render
uh pictures from that opening. We opened
[3:51:38] that last year as you guys are aware of
um under this board 2024
[3:51:43] in September um it's open to the public
um we'll come back to phase two or in at
[3:51:52] the end of the chart but phase two as
you see uh is it does have design excuse
[3:51:58] me construction documents uh at 100%
that's that's ready to go that's ready
[3:52:03] to be bid out um next week if if if
um meaning that it's ready to go, not
[3:52:11] meaning that it's ready to to be built.
Obviously, I talked about the the
[3:52:14] baseball fields, but you'll see that,
you know, the plan there is um the open
[3:52:19] fields. There is a a band show or an
auditorium um amphitheater type um in in
[3:52:25] the south southern part and then more
veterans memorial um designed in there
[3:52:29] as well as some more open field open
areas for the community and a kind of a
[3:52:34] bathroom type uh picnic area um as part
of that.
[3:52:43] We moved on part of the the third third
area is Richardson. We uh MVP Park uh
[3:52:48] Mountain Vista is what what that stands
for. So we moved to that. We did that.
[3:52:53] We did these plans kind of in parallel.
Once the rec center got done, we picked
[3:52:57] up Richardson um and Town Park. Did them
in parallel. Um these are construction
[3:53:03] documents as well. Ready. This area is
just north of Lovelin Reservoir. Um
[3:53:08] you'll see some renderings there or some
concepts uh kind pictures on the side of
[3:53:12] what that what that is in it could could
be intended to look like. Um and then
[3:53:18] Richardson um kind of the the the outlay
plan. This could be phased. Uh this
[3:53:23] could be done at once just depending on
on the plan moving forward. But this
[3:53:28] this is 100% um CDs are done and the
aquatics are at 50%. for this project.
[3:53:36] Um while we were doing these things, you
know, like we talked about and you heard
[3:53:39] earlier tonight with some projects that
come in and projects that are
[3:53:42] approached, um people got really excited
with the rec center getting done. Um
[3:53:47] wanted more the appetite. They were
hungry. They were thirsty. They So this
[3:53:51] was a project that um is part of
Richardson property, part of MVP MVP
[3:53:57] park design. Still part of the master
plan. Um, but they wanted again the
[3:54:01] tournament a couple years ago that kept
getting thrown out as lowhanging fruit.
[3:54:05] Is there something we can do for a
couple million bucks to give a the
[3:54:08] public amenity and this was one of them
chosen? Um, so that's why it got kind of
[3:54:12] accelerated as you also heard tonight.
Why why things get celebrated, why
[3:54:16] things get chosen, why things get
shelved. The the southern portion um as
[3:54:21] you go around the lake of the bike park
um u was chosen to um be that lowhanging
[3:54:27] fruit. So, we got this project done
opened um I think it's been open for 2
[3:54:31] years now uh just at 2.2 million um to
do this just a little over 20 acres and
[3:54:38] there's some finished pictures of the
the product. All these so far been out
[3:54:43] of that master plan uh staff just
working through it. Um
[3:54:48] this is the last um
last uh property to to that uh master
[3:54:55] plan. This is Canal Park. It's on the
other side of 287. Um on the other side
[3:55:00] of Riches Park. Um this is the southern
piece of of
[3:55:06] the shared with the developer. This has
been master plan that's still in
[3:55:09] concept. That's still at the 2018
concept. Um there hasn't been any plans
[3:55:15] or any discussions of anything started
on that. Um so that's still in the 2018
[3:55:20] master plan concept um stage.
So we started completing things, started
[3:55:27] getting excited. Um started looking
around. We going we still in the master
[3:55:31] plan. Um the arburum came about. Um we
real successful with the bike park, real
[3:55:38] successful with the the rec center, real
successful with the town park. Um once
[3:55:43] we moved, we felt that uh developing the
southern portion of the Wagner Farm Park
[3:55:49] and completing that um and completing
the master plan for for this property.
[3:55:55] That's how this came up. This this as
you guys are aware um the southern part
[3:56:00] where the the red kind of the red I
don't know Tetris pieces at is is the
[3:56:04] where the arburum currently we're at 90%
construction drawings. We we intend to
[3:56:10] finish up um in November and bring that
to you at 100% ready to you know
[3:56:16] continue if we'd like uh into
construction or out to bid as they as we
[3:56:20] say. Um and and and that's going along
real well. So that that'll be something
[3:56:26] we'll talk about or discuss. That's come
to shortly.
[3:56:32] Then also we had some along the ways we
we as staff goes through the master plan
[3:56:36] and they kind of steer that bus and
continue um their their focus is on that
[3:56:41] along the way even in tonight we you get
added park projects for whatever reason
[3:56:46] organizations you know citizen
initiative groups people that just care
[3:56:50] a couple people multiple people um to
come to you and say hey I want to do
[3:56:55] this and you heard that earlier tonight.
So in the last 3 years, you know, we
[3:56:59] followed that master plan, but here's
one to show also to update that kind of
[3:57:03] the challenges, right, with dollars is
is is what happens and and we make those
[3:57:08] decisions and and they're, you know,
good good, bad, or indifferent. But so I
[3:57:12] just want to show you some added park
projects. So a low hanging fruit, which
[3:57:16] is great. uh you know the lowest
probably the of the fruit um almost on
[3:57:21] the ground as far as you know when you
talk about money um compared to the
[3:57:24] other projects was the Pioneer Park
project. Really great project updated
[3:57:28] that community garden over there. Um you
guys approved that just under you know
[3:57:33] we just I think we spent just under
100,000 with our time and our staff uh
[3:57:37] involved in that. On the right is a
concept plan for Robert's Park, Roberts
[3:57:44] Lake Park. It's on the east side. It's
an infield project. Um it's just at a
[3:57:49] design level right now, design concept.
Um finished um probably three years ago
[3:57:54] and shelved.
Um no interest yet to to revive that,
[3:57:58] but I just want to show you that that
concept is done for for Robert's Lake on
[3:58:02] the north side. Um so you're aware that
we finished that. another uh project
[3:58:09] that that spawned from, you know, closed
in the town park and the and the kind of
[3:58:13] the used tennis courts uh transitioned
into pickle ball at Town Park. You know,
[3:58:18] this is one of those examples of a group
coming in and saying, "Hey, you know,
[3:58:22] sports popular. We'd like a place to go.
Where can we go?" Um we had a spot at
[3:58:27] Wagner that, you know, we chose and
selected and and we were able to with
[3:58:31] your guys' support and the community
support and your help uh to decide the
[3:58:35] eight eight new courts over there. and
that's that's going well and that's a
[3:58:38] that's a great project. Um
and and there's eight courts over there
[3:58:42] with shelters and and just on the south
side of the basketball courts over
[3:58:45] there. Um the next one uh just recently
the outdoor pool uh at the rec center.
[3:58:53] Um
again just
[3:58:58] importance of an outdoor pool. the the
the the old pool or the the pool that
[3:59:02] the town park, the outdoor pool became
old, I should say.
[3:59:06] Um so that was decommissioned to do the
renovation at the town park. Uh we knew
[3:59:11] about that. We didn't want to duplicate
amenities. We had aquatics indoor at the
[3:59:17] um rec center that we just completed. We
developed a splash pad over at the town
[3:59:21] park as part of that design and that
input um at the time from from our comm
[3:59:25] committees and boards and things like
that. Um so what came about um through
[3:59:30] port um in the community is is is
um those voices um to start and look at
[3:59:36] uh building an outdoor pool with the rec
center. So this as you can see is is
[3:59:42] some designs and and you guys worked
this board has worked through those
[3:59:45] currently that will come in a proposal
and you'll see in the last one of the
[3:59:49] last slides here um we'll bring you a
proposal um in September after this
[3:59:54] meeting and you'll have an opportunity
to you know decide if you want to move
[3:59:58] forward with that that proposal just
just to begin design to give you an idea
[4:00:02] was just at 650,000.
So that'll get us through design, get us
[4:00:06] construction plans. That's the next
step. Uh as far as our process and you
[4:00:10] saw some of that Keith explained some of
that through the um
[4:00:15] just house no um no no plan um as as
part of that process. So we just want to
[4:00:21] make sure we we commit to that in the
next in uh next meeting possibly. So
[4:00:27] these are a couple other ones and uh
that you heard tonight. Chiskowski, you
[4:00:32] just heard um new farm you heard earlier
as well. And then I put this other one
[4:00:37] on here just this recently. You don't
know much about it probably unless you
[4:00:40] got some emails. Hasn't been in a
meeting yet. I put this up here because
[4:00:45] one it it identifies another sport that
you know like a disc golf and and uh
[4:00:51] pickle ball and things like that. So
you're used to those you know and and
[4:00:54] and working through those. Also it it uh
suggests potentially some properties.
[4:00:59] One of them's conval which is in our
master plan. So you hear about that. And
[4:01:03] then lately um I think last week I think
it was last Wednesday um they the
[4:01:08] presentation was made at the the port
level and I believe it's wellreceived
[4:01:12] enough that they suggested that they
come to you all. So this will be coming
[4:01:16] to you just so you're aware. You don't
we don't need to pick paint colors and
[4:01:20] things tonight and roof shingles. But it
just let I'm just saying hey I'm going
[4:01:24] to throw it on here so you guys are
aware of the full picture at this point
[4:01:27] and it'll be coming to you September. um
you guys can or maybe October depending
[4:01:31] on how the meetings lay out, but it'll
be coming to the soon and you guys can
[4:01:34] work through that.
>> One, just one quick question. The upper
[4:01:38] right hand square, I can't tell where
that is.
[4:01:40] » Upper right hand,
>> that's a property we don't currently
[4:01:43] own,
>> uh but that the project proponent
[4:01:46] » uh said might be a great spot.
>> So,
[4:01:49] » we're not disclosing where it is right
now.
[4:01:51] » Yeah. No, it's fine. It's the property
south of uh Heritage Ridge. It's called
[4:01:55] the Wilson Farm. Uh we do have a portion
of that farm under contract, but not the
[4:01:59] entire thing. Okay. So, um
>> didn't we just buy that?
[4:02:02] » Uh we haven't closed. There's still, you
know, some due diligence work. There's
[4:02:05] annexation work that has to be done.
There's a lot of things that have to
[4:02:08] happened before we can close on the
portion that we intend to buy. Um but we
[4:02:12] are under contract.
>> Thank you.
[4:02:14] » The the board approved that.
>> Uh trusty, I think, has a question.
[4:02:19] » Yeah. Just because it came out tonight.
Um so that you guys are aware part of
[4:02:22] the presentation on the the conval
golf um aspect was that that sort of
[4:02:30] strip below the the outlined golf holes
was um 30,000 foot view of a possible
[4:02:38] disc golf course as well and I only
bring that up because it it came up
[4:02:42] earlier.
>> Yeah. The the project proponent met with
[4:02:45] me about this park and and I don't want
to get bogged down in this one because
[4:02:48] this was a idea brought to us by a
resident who's also a golf pro. Um, and
[4:02:53] I think it's a great it's a great idea I
think for the canal park or for anything
[4:02:58] else. But the idea of a golf park,
community facility, trails, other
[4:03:03] non-golf amenities, but also really, you
know, learning focused facility, it's a
[4:03:07] it's a neat idea and the port committee
did recommend uh that they present that
[4:03:12] to you. So, we are going to bring that
to you in the next couple months.
[4:03:14] » Cool.
[4:03:17] So then last slide is just putting it
all together. Um from the top down
[4:03:22] you'll see that the progression the the
top is there's the master plans. Uh as
[4:03:27] you'll see staff has been following the
master plan. The green is what's
[4:03:30] completed.
Um and I what I just ran through and and
[4:03:34] and what you'll see is the projects um
the current status and then the total
[4:03:38] project cost whether it's been completed
or it's been estimated. As we move
[4:03:42] through the top where it's, you know,
the master plan, you'll see the yellow.
[4:03:45] The next three, those are ones that we
are uh finishing up on construction
[4:03:51] documents and and we spent the time and
and you guys invested the money in those
[4:03:56] um to get those ready for, you know,
whenever it is you decide um through
[4:04:00] this process. But I just want to say
that as we work through we're you can
[4:04:04] see we're either completed or we're uh
and open to the public or we have three
[4:04:10] ready to go as we you know finish out
that master plan. Um so then you you
[4:04:16] drop down to the next ones and with the
added park projects that come in kind of
[4:04:20] through you know the meetings and
different deals for whatever reason and
[4:04:23] and we completed some of those. That's
that Pioneer Park uh community uh garden
[4:04:29] um the pickle ball courts. Um, I put
Farmstead play program. That's not our
[4:04:32] our playground. Excuse me. Talking a
little fast. Sorry. Um, I put that in
[4:04:37] there in Talics. It's not our project,
but you did invest in it and I wanted to
[4:04:41] show that um, show you that you you know
the the the dollars that went out and
[4:04:45] and great investment there. But I just
wanted to show that as well as that is a
[4:04:48] part um part of our your park uh update
for tonight. Just just to be aware of
[4:04:53] that the big picture. Um the orange the
outdoor pool rec center like I like I
[4:04:59] suggested a proposal for design and
construction uh document services
[4:05:04] uh will be presented uh you know in the
next meeting or so through consent. Um
[4:05:10] you guys have approved us to to get you
that proposal. If we move forward
[4:05:15] that'll be your opportunity at that
time. But that that proposal is coming
[4:05:18] at 6:50 and then you heard from New Park
Farm tonight. I assumed we were going to
[4:05:23] move forward with the design. Um so that
went orange there. So those are in
[4:05:27] design. Um different stages of of
moving. Um the next three just as as as
[4:05:37] Keith showed you before, the design
concept has been completed. He's you
[4:05:40] know we're going to move to next steps
um and working with the open lands and
[4:05:44] and tweaking some things from that. Uh
Roberts Lake Park is still shelved uh
[4:05:49] for now until further notice. And then
Bertha Golf Park, like I suggested, is
[4:05:54] on here and it's presented to you
sometime this in the next couple months.
[4:05:57] Then what I did at the at the bottom and
under the blue was just took everything
[4:06:01] that's been completed out so you can
kind of for clarity just kind of see
[4:06:05] what you're working with that we have um
in the bottom if you if you don't want
[4:06:09] to move back and forth along the grid
and things like that. I just kind of I
[4:06:13] don't know cleared it up in no
particular order. I just kind of threw
[4:06:16] this stuff from the top to the bottom so
they're not prioritized in any other
[4:06:20] way. Um,
that's my uh presentation for this now
[4:06:26] and Chris Farley, he's gonna hopefully
tag team on this with me and and let you
[4:06:31] know what what we kind of the direction
and the expectation I guess.
[4:06:35] » Yeah. Um, you know, part of part of our
intention when we originally scheduled
[4:06:39] this was just to get all these projects
in front of you. We have a lot of
[4:06:42] competing priorities and you've heard
that tonight. Juscowski, disc golf, dog
[4:06:46] training, uh, new farm, amphitheater,
um, you know, outdoor pools. We have a
[4:06:52] lot of competing priorities and we have
a limited amount of funding, right?
[4:06:55] We're fortunate. The town is is healthy
financially and I've said this before.
[4:06:59] You probably, you hopefully recall me
saying this lots of times. We're not
[4:07:02] broke. We just have to decide where to
spend our money.
[4:07:04] » Um, we cannot build all of these things
at once. And so, um, I think as as these
[4:07:11] projects come before us, some driven by
the original 2018 master plan, that's
[4:07:16] where we've focused most of our time and
attention as staff, others driven by,
[4:07:20] you know, motivated user groups and
other other folks who who are excited to
[4:07:24] see new amenities built. Um, we need
direction from you about where you want
[4:07:29] us to focus. Um, you know, when we look
at the the list at the bottom of the
[4:07:35] page, um, that could be, uh, for
clarity, um, Jeremy has the number 30 to
[4:07:41] 40 million for Richardson. That we don't
believe that's the total cost of the
[4:07:45] project. We believe that's a portion of
the project. Um, the original cost
[4:07:49] estimate we had done by a third party
construction firm for that entire park
[4:07:54] uh, was was upwards of $70 million. And
so, we can't afford a $70 million park.
[4:07:59] I can I can be confident of that today.
Um we had proposed doing that in a
[4:08:04] phased fashion starting with ball fields
at the north and then kind of working
[4:08:08] south to the aquatics uh center you know
maybe in 10 years depending on kind of
[4:08:12] how funding lays out. That's actually
kind of what the outdoor pool
[4:08:16] conversation I think was like hey we
need an outdoor pool. This is a neat
[4:08:21] pool at Richardson but if we can't get
this done you know for 10 years that's
[4:08:24] that's not going to work. We got to get
something done sooner. So that's why we
[4:08:27] pivoted to this um Wagner Farm Park
concept. You know, there are there are
[4:08:34] creative funding strategies. Uh there's
financing. There's all kinds of things
[4:08:37] that could occur, but a lot of that is
driven by what are the priorities that
[4:08:41] the town board sees. Uh we can certainly
give you what we think are the best
[4:08:44] priorities as staff. Um the poor
committee has weighed in on multiple
[4:08:48] occasions on a lot of of these issues.
And so, um, you know,
[4:08:54] we're hoping, and it doesn't have to
happen tonight, right? There's no
[4:08:58] there's no rush. You're not going to
decide to spend $70 million tonight,
[4:09:01] right? Um, but we want to start this
conversation because I think what's
[4:09:05] happening is we had this really defined
parks master plan and we started working
[4:09:10] that and it's great. Um, the rec center
is a result of that. Town park is a
[4:09:15] result of that. The bike park is a
result of that.
[4:09:17] Um, we started Richardson with the
intent that that was the next phase of
[4:09:21] the parks master plan. And you know,
we've had a lot of these uh issues and
[4:09:25] ideas come up as over the last five
years. We have a lot of awesome ideas,
[4:09:30] but we've got to zero in on what do we
want to do as a community first so that
[4:09:34] we can we can get through this list,
right? We can't focus on everything. If
[4:09:40] you focus on everything, you focus on
nothing, right? And that's a cliche. Um,
[4:09:44] so we got to say, what are we getting
done first? what what's the biggest bang
[4:09:47] for the buck? What's the highest need?
Um and where do we want to focus our
[4:09:51] money first? We may be able to be we may
be financially capable of doing two or
[4:09:56] three things at once. Um
and again, I think from my perspective,
[4:10:02] we want to start that conversation with
you. We want to start you thinking
[4:10:05] about, you know, maybe if money wasn't
an object, what's the number one
[4:10:09] priority? Where do we focus there?
Right? Um and and then we figure out how
[4:10:15] to get to that place. I think that's a
great place to start. Um
[4:10:20] if we if we work the other direction and
say, "Well, hey, we have x amount of
[4:10:24] money and and let's do what we can
afford, I think we pigeon hole ourselves
[4:10:28] into um maybe doing I think we'll get
some great projects. We have some
[4:10:34] awesome projects on the list and I I
hope that you and the community also
[4:10:39] believes that we can deliver great parks
projects like we have with the rec
[4:10:42] center, town park and others. Um but
my suggestion would be let's not pigeon
[4:10:48] hole ourselves by restricting us by
funding. Let's say what is the highest
[4:10:52] need? What do we want to get done first?
And let's prioritize that and let's
[4:10:56] figure out how to do it and then let's
work down the list from there.
[4:11:00] Again, you extend the meeting till
10:30. So, I will uh point out it's
[4:11:04] about 10:27 right now. Um I'm sure
everybody's getting tired. This isn't
[4:11:08] the best decision-making time of the
day. Um but I think it's important that
[4:11:12] we hear public feedback if that's okay
with the board. Um and maybe you guys
[4:11:17] start think about that.
>> So, I guess we put out our our our
[4:11:22] um priorities here already. We've had
multiple iterations with outdoor pool
[4:11:26] with the arburitum. So, this is back in
front of us and you're asking for
[4:11:30] priorities again, but we just you're
you're adding Richardson in here.
[4:11:34] » No, I Richardson's been in from the
beginning, right? That was in the 2018
[4:11:38] parks master plan,
>> right?
[4:11:40] » Um I'm I'm concerned about New Farm
Park. I'm concerned about um Richardson.
[4:11:45] I'm concerned about Conneal. I'm
concerned about all of those. I think
[4:11:49] practically speaking, you know, from a
town staff perspective,
[4:11:53] we don't have a dog in the fight, right?
I mean that our I live here. I have my
[4:11:58] own personal views about what I'd love
to see. Um from a staff perspective, I
[4:12:02] think we have an idea of of what the
priority needs are.
[4:12:06] » Um you know, what do we need for our
current programming? What do we need for
[4:12:10] future programming? I think we also have
an idea of what the community wants are
[4:12:13] based on the surveys that we've done and
the feedback that we've received in
[4:12:16] these public meetings. We have to try
and balance all of that. And
[4:12:19] » yeah, and I'm sorry, I I phrase that
wrong. Richardson is important. You guys
[4:12:23] are doing a great job.
>> It is. I I I'm I'm concerned is the
[4:12:26] wrong word. I'm a little curious though
because we've gone through pool seems to
[4:12:31] be the next and then the outer
>> and and I will say I think part of my
[4:12:34] concern as the town administrator um
part of what's driving this is that we
[4:12:39] have some very big ticket items in front
of us and I want to confirm that we're
[4:12:43] spending the money on the things that
you want and so we have talked about
[4:12:46] those things but we haven't talked about
them in the context of all of the things
[4:12:49] in front of us. That's why I wanted to
bring this to you because the arburedom
[4:12:53] could be $10 million. The outdoor pool
could be 10 million plus. Um new farm,
[4:12:58] who knows? I mean, if we're talking
about amphitheaters and music venues,
[4:13:02] that could be 10 million plus. Um these
aren't like the one and two million
[4:13:06] dollar
um lowhanging fruit projects. And I
[4:13:11] think what we're staring at are big
ticket items. And there's several of
[4:13:15] them. We just want to make sure that as
we move forward in the next two or three
[4:13:18] years and we start to spend tens of
millions of dollars on parks if that's
[4:13:21] the board's desire that we're doing that
all and I'm starting to have some
[4:13:25] concerns that I'm not sure I know what
your priorities are and I don't mean
[4:13:28] that in a negative way. It's just we've
talked about a lot of things and I think
[4:13:31] we're all excited about all these
projects.
[4:13:33] » Yeah. Yeah.
>> And I just want to make sure we're doing
[4:13:34] the right thing
>> because this came before us with a
[4:13:37] really good job. You guys did a good
presentation on Richardson with kind of
[4:13:40] the funding that could be done at the
time. This is why we all kind of got a
[4:13:44] little cold feet. Yeah.
>> And then that's when we decided to kind
[4:13:47] of backtrack and just focus on put the
pause and stuff, focus on the arburetum
[4:13:52] and an outdoor pool or some kind of
pool, right? And then that's when we
[4:13:57] decided to do a survey to see where we
stand.
[4:13:59] » Yep.
>> So, we did already look at Richard and
[4:14:01] stuff like that. This just is coming to
us back, but you want everything.
[4:14:04] » I just want you to see it all in
context. Okay.
[4:14:06] » Um so that so you know, look, we've got
a long list of stuff. some things that
[4:14:11] would have been on the books for a
while, some things that are more recent.
[4:14:15] Um, some things that are very
challenging to pull off like Jessowski,
[4:14:19] some things that are much more
lowhanging fruit, easy, and we could
[4:14:21] knock out pretty quick. You know,
there's just a lot in front of us. And I
[4:14:25] think part of what came out of the
discussion, at least from my
[4:14:28] perspective, part of what came out of
the discussion when we talked about
[4:14:31] Richardson was we need to look at the
port plan again, right? We've you could
[4:14:36] see I mean out of the out of the four
parks that were in the 2018 master plan
[4:14:40] we've done two right and we've got a
third one designed. So but we've also
[4:14:44] added three or four more projects to the
list.
[4:14:48] So for me this is rather than go through
a full new parks and open space master
[4:14:53] plan. If that's what you guys want to do
we could do that but that will delay
[4:14:56] things a lot. I just wanted to put it
all in context for you so that you could
[4:15:00] see it and say these are the things we
think are most important. Okay. Um and
[4:15:05] and if the answer is, look, we already
told you to do the outdoor pool at the
[4:15:08] Wag at Wagner and the Arbreedom and we
budgeted money to construct the
[4:15:11] Arbreedom this year, by the way.
>> Um that's fine with us. We just want to
[4:15:15] make sure we're on the same page.
>> Okay. So, this is like a final check.
[4:15:19] » That's kind of how I feel. This is a
this is a check-in and confirm that
[4:15:22] we're heading in the right direction as
we're preparing to spend millions of
[4:15:26] dollars on park amenities in the next
few years.
[4:15:28] » Okay, that's fair. And so
we're both on the same page that the 30
[4:15:33] to 40 million didn't seem accurate. In
my head, it was about 7 to 84 million.
[4:15:36] It was said. So you're saying 40 is
probably
[4:15:40] » 40 is probably ball fields and an
aquatics facility.
[4:15:43] » Um it's not the community lawn. It's not
the uh it's not the full ball field
[4:15:48] complex. It's a portion of um it's an
aquatics facility. Uh that's probably
[4:15:54] scaled down a bit. Um but still nice.
Um,
[4:16:00] but I don't I think I also had this
realization that the $70 million number
[4:16:05] scared a lot of folks, myself included.
Um, when we started that design project,
[4:16:09] we actually told the consultant we
thought our max budget was 40 and that's
[4:16:13] what we were designing to. Um, and when
we got to the end of the design uh, the
[4:16:19] initial design phase and had it cost
estimated and it was $70 million, we all
[4:16:22] choked. Actually, it was more than that.
we actually value engineered way down uh
[4:16:27] even to that number. And so I also don't
want everybody to feel like that is the
[4:16:32] only option. Hey, it's 70 million or
nothing. It's not. We can phase this
[4:16:36] project in creative ways if that's
something you want to do. We think we
[4:16:40] need ball fields. Um, we can walk
through all those details about how our
[4:16:45] current ball fields are used, the
limitations they have, how our
[4:16:49] programming is capped and limited
because of the amount of time and space
[4:16:52] that we have on those fields. We think
ball fields are an important amenity.
[4:16:56] They were an important amenity in the
2018 master plan. And I don't want those
[4:16:59] to get shelved either from from the town
administrator perspective because we
[4:17:02] have really good recreation programs
that are limited in their scope because
[4:17:07] we don't have the programming space. So
that's part of my concern with
[4:17:12] Richardson, too. I'm a little I'm
concerned that we've spent this time and
[4:17:15] energy and money to prepare that project
and that we might put it on the shelf in
[4:17:19] favor of some other things. And if
that's what the board wants, that's fine
[4:17:22] with us. But at the same time, that's
going to limit what we can do from a
[4:17:26] programming standpoint moving forward.
>> We're good.
[4:17:29] » Yeah.
>> Okay. I'm not trying to I'm just trying
[4:17:33] to give all these. So this is an issue
of budget, right? because you did put a
[4:17:37] 30 to 40
>> 100%.
[4:17:38] » If we wanted if money wasn't an issue,
we'd just say do all this, right?
[4:17:42] » It is an issue of of money.
>> If we had $100 million, we'd just say,
[4:17:45] "Let's get it all done."
>> But we don't.
[4:17:47] » And one doesn't preclude the other,
right? So an AR rating does not preclude
[4:17:51] efficiency.
>> I think it we can do a couple of these
[4:17:56] projects at a time. It depends on how
you want to do them. So like we don't
[4:18:00] have 30 or $40 million cash to build
Richardson anyway. You would have to
[4:18:04] finance that project. Um,
we could do, you know, we could do a
[4:18:10] portion of uh the arburidum and the
outdoor pool. We can do um we can mix
[4:18:18] and match, I guess, is what I'm saying.
But I think a lot of that depends on
[4:18:20] priorities and what you're willing to
fund.
[4:18:22] » It's 10:30 and these are huge, huge
dollars and huge complex issues and I
[4:18:28] don't think a lot of things are put to
bed even though we think they are. I
[4:18:32] think there's people that have different
opinions and would like to discuss them.
[4:18:35] I I would recommend that either we do a
special session or we get together or we
[4:18:39] set aside three or four hours where we
actually can delve into the details of
[4:18:44] each of these and that's not what
tonight's about.
[4:18:48] » If I could to respect the public here,
do we have public comment on this? How
[4:18:53] would you do that?
>> We're just making our comments before
[4:18:56] » public comment and then let's let's have
a study session to discuss everything
[4:19:01] that comes forward.
>> Okay, no more questions from the board.
[4:19:05] We're just going to Okay, let's do that.
So, we have two signed up and then I
[4:19:09] know a lot of folks didn't have an
opportunity to call on So, we'll start
[4:19:13] off with the first
um
[4:19:19] » Can we get a copy of this? Is Karen
Shimon still in here?
[4:19:23] Yes, we'll send you a copy.
>> Okay. Karen was gonna speak to that. U
[4:19:27] but we have Carolyn Hopson.
[4:19:33] » Good evening. Good night. Uh Carolyn
Hobson. I live at 817 Greenwood Drive.
[4:19:40] Um, like many of you, when I checked my
mail last week, uh, I found a flyer that
[4:19:47] said that we could build Richardson all
at once and have a pool in the next two
[4:19:52] years. Um, that sounds great. Not quite
what I had heard. Uh, but what do I
[4:19:59] know? I'm only on the port committee the
last four years. Uh, been in several
[4:20:05] meetings about these projects. had hours
and hours of discussions about these
[4:20:10] projects. Um so given that surprising
information, I had some questions for
[4:20:15] town staff. Um number one, the
financing, uh is it feasible to
[4:20:24] take out, you know, some kind of loan
and finance this project all at once,
[4:20:28] build it all at once versus phasing it,
which is what we were told would happen
[4:20:33] in cash taking seven to 10 years. Um
my second question is uh
[4:20:41] oh uh sorry very late. Um can the
aquatic center be built in phase one?
[4:20:49] Because now we're hearing ball some
ballparks and the aquatic center where
[4:20:54] we were told explicitly the aquatic
center had to be built last because of
[4:20:59] the dirt work and where it's located on
the property. We went around and round
[4:21:04] on how could we make the aquatic center
happen first so that it could be a less
[4:21:09] expensive project be done first. Um we
suggested moving it to the top of the
[4:21:14] property or a different place on the
property so it could be done first and
[4:21:18] we were always told that is not an
option. It has to be done after
[4:21:22] everything else is completed. Um,
so thirdly, uh, if if both of those
[4:21:28] things are true, then why did we ever go
down the road of a pool at the rec
[4:21:33] center if we could afford to do
Richardson and get a pool within a
[4:21:40] couple years, then I feel silly now that
I came to you all and said, "Let's find
[4:21:46] out how to get an outdoor pool direct
center." Because that's not what was
[4:21:50] communicated to port through all of
these meetings. Um, so I guess just
[4:21:55] clarification on that and you did
clarify the 30 million because what port
[4:21:59] was communicated was 84 um in the first
meeting through all the different
[4:22:05] phases. So um I feel like the I
understand wanting to move that number
[4:22:10] down but that is not the full scope of
the project. Um so I appreciate the
[4:22:16] clarification on that cost difference.
So thank you.
[4:22:20] » Thank you.
95.
[4:22:23] » Okay.
[4:22:27] » Hello. Uh, my name is Laura Shafeld and
I live at 940 Bruce.
[4:22:31] » Thank you.
>> Uh, so my house is 50 years old. It was
[4:22:35] built in the 70s and it had no water
issues for the first 50 years of its
[4:22:41] existence. Um, once the rec center was
built, there's been extensive flooding
[4:22:45] in the basement. There's black mold.
It's causing health issues for my
[4:22:49] children that live there and for myself.
So my question for all of you
[4:22:56] because you all seem to be very into
doing all these projects. When you plan
[4:23:01] these projects or when you built the rec
center, what type of impact study is
[4:23:06] done looking at groundwater? Um this
seems to be a very marshy area and
[4:23:12] Bertha is not specifically known for
strong like structural integrity and its
[4:23:17] marshiness. So proceeding forward, if
these pools, these ingground pools are
[4:23:23] built and the pond and the atorium which
is in the picture, what impact studies
[4:23:29] will be done to make sure that there's
not additional flooding in my house, in
[4:23:34] my neighbor's houses, in any of the
surrounding area. Then if there is an
[4:23:40] impact study done, ideally by a third
party, does the town of Berid actually
[4:23:45] look at that impact? Does it look at the
study and really use that data?
[4:23:50] Furthermore,
if you use the data or don't use the
[4:23:54] data of an impact study, what are the
consequences for the city of Berthid and
[4:23:58] the trustees for make going ahead with
projects that cause damage to the
[4:24:04] community? So this has been an ongoing
issue and I don't understand how these
[4:24:11] projects are like move forward without
looking at how the environment's
[4:24:17] impacted. So that's my question.
>> Thank you.
[4:24:21] » Thank you.
>> Okay. Thanks. We're going to take uh
[4:24:23] questions right now. I'm writing down
>> Cool.
[4:24:25] » Write it down the address.
>> Um there. Yes. Thanks.
[4:24:34] [Music]
Uh, so Jeff Heindman, 1024 Street.
[4:24:40] I really appreciate you guys' service.
It is late. I sat for 16 years on the
[4:24:45] other side of that dis, so I kind of
have a sense of how this goes. And it is
[4:24:50] really, these are really difficult um
tough issues.
[4:24:55] Fortunately,
we do have 1% sales tax or we wouldn't
[4:24:59] be talking about any of this um stuff.
So, but anyway, you're our elected
[4:25:03] leaders.
You're the representatives we charge to
[4:25:07] solve problems and prioritize and figure
out these complicated things. Um, I
[4:25:12] think over the years, some of my
experiences with Berth has been that
[4:25:15] it's really common to come up with the
reasons why things can't get done
[4:25:20] instead of focusing on how to get them
done. And I really believe that myself
[4:25:24] and my colleagues on the 2018 town
board, um, if we didn't have the can do
[4:25:32] attitude that we did, the rec center and
Wagner would not be there today. Um, we
[4:25:38] ultimately prevailed by two votes in a
special election to stop us from
[4:25:41] borrowing money, which it could not have
been built without financing. You just
[4:25:45] can't build 30 million, $40 million
projects with cash in a timely fashion.
[4:25:51] But we directed staff to solve problems,
overcome obstacles, and figure out how
[4:25:56] to get it built. And it's okay to get
new information and change your mind and
[4:26:02] change course. You don't just I mean, as
an elected official, I was always open
[4:26:07] to changing course if something came to
light. And um you know, I wish I would
[4:26:12] have gotten involved in some of the
outdoor pool discussions, but you know,
[4:26:15] there is no news really about Bertha or
what the town board's doing. So I was
[4:26:20] not aware of the outdoor pool concept
until uh pretty recently. But anyway,
[4:26:24] the survey identified new parks, trails,
and an outdoor pool as a top priority.
[4:26:30] Did not identify an arboritum. And
building Richardson Park in phases,
[4:26:35] checks all these boxes. Following the
master plan, um makes sense. And you got
[4:26:41] to figure out how to weave in some of
these other projects if they trump if
[4:26:43] you know like so maybe conval has to
wait. the new and some of these other
[4:26:48] things were not on the uh list when
Conval was designated in 2018. But
[4:26:54] anyway, I fully support an outdoor pool.
The town really needs an outdoor pool.
[4:26:58] We had to close the old one because of
safety concerns and it was very
[4:27:02] unpopular. But we also really need ball
fields. My kids are 31 and 28 and we
[4:27:08] have the same number of ball fields as
we did when they were playing. Right? So
[4:27:14] I've lived here 30 years. We have the
exact same number of ball fields. And
[4:27:17] the ball fields on Fifth Street are
totally inadequate. They're dangerous.
[4:27:20] There's people standing in the street.
There's balls hitting cars. They're just
[4:27:24] they're outdated. So, we need those as
much as we need an outdoor pool. Um, and
[4:27:30] my dad, 89 years old, swims twice a week
at the rec center. Three lap lanes is
[4:27:34] not adequate for a town of 14,000
people. And it's not going to get
[4:27:38] better. And the lap lanes are not just
used for swimmers. They're used for fire
[4:27:42] training, lifeguard training, water
aerobics. So anyway, so the current plan
[4:27:47] to spend $10 million in cash on the
arboritum and 10 million in cash on the
[4:27:52] pool at Wagner are just not the best
long-term thinking. And financing makes
[4:27:58] a lot of sense. It spreads out your
cash. We have a guaranteed revenue
[4:28:02] stream. Saving your cash will free up
money to design the concept at new. And
[4:28:07] um I think the reason we got here is
because of the 80 million $70 million
[4:28:11] number and talking about a pool 10 years
down the road which is not acceptable.
[4:28:15] So Richardson's bid ready. It can go out
to bid. The dirt work could start this
[4:28:20] year. And while the pool's designed the
cost of $650,000 to design the new pool
[4:28:25] at Wagner is the same about cost to
finish the design of the pool at
[4:28:30] Richardson and lap lanes could be added
to that if you told staff to do that.
[4:28:34] And so if you phase and finance and
value engineer Richardson
[4:28:40] um it can get started this year. The
pool could start next spring and it
[4:28:43] could be open the summer of 2027. They
built the 30 uh 50,000 foot rec center
[4:28:49] in the 30acre park. FCI built that in 16
months. It was amazing. So um appreciate
[4:28:55] your time.
>> Thanks. Let me just do one more. Will if
[4:28:59] you don't mind.
>> So a minute.
[4:29:02] » Okay. Thanks. So, the 10 million for the
Wagner pool can be a 20% down payment.
[4:29:07] » Mr. Hyman, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to
follow the rules here.
[4:29:10] » Okay.
>> All right. Uh, anyone else? Yeah.
[4:29:22] » Lauren Roth, 1735 Exit Street. Sorry, my
voice. I've been sitting for a few hours
[4:29:28] just like y'all. Um, I have been on the
port committee for the last four years
[4:29:32] and we have been working on all of these
projects and I was really excited about
[4:29:37] Richardson Park. I thought it was an
awesome park. I still do think it's an
[4:29:40] awesome park. Um, the funding of course
was a question which I don't have to
[4:29:46] answer which I was really happy about.
Um but when we were going through
[4:29:50] everything last year looking at those
plans which were not at the 100% mark in
[4:29:54] terms of construction documents at that
point um it came to light that it was
[4:29:59] the pool at that property was going to
be 8 to 10 years and that's where the
[4:30:03] survey came from last year was us saying
you know we probably need to ask people
[4:30:07] what they want and the pool was as you
saw from the survey results earlier
[4:30:10] tonight number two on the list. Open
parks and trails are always number one.
[4:30:14] We're working on those constantly. the
pool was number two. Um, and so looking
[4:30:21] at Richardson Park, looking at an 8 to10
year timeline and a $70 million price
[4:30:26] tag, we thought, what could we do
differently? And so that's where we
[4:30:29] started looking at that outdoor pool.
Um, looking at the outdoor pool at the
[4:30:33] rec center. There have been
conversations recently saying things
[4:30:36] such as that the plumbing that was at
the rec center was for an indoor pool to
[4:30:41] be put out there which I have never
heard before just this recent
[4:30:46] conversation. Um I was always just told
that they had plumbed it in the
[4:30:51] anticipation that something could be put
there. Um the outdoor pool at the rec
[4:30:55] center was something it fit the
timeline, it fit the cost. It was
[4:30:58] something that we could do that the town
really wanted. And so that was my
[4:31:03] motivator. Um, and I want to remind you
all that the 100% construction documents
[4:31:08] of Richardson Park and being ready to
break ground on that was a conversation
[4:31:12] that we had during one of our uh,
meetings that
[4:31:17] I think it was Chris Kirk asked if they
could continue with working on
[4:31:21] construction documents while we did the
survey with the caveat that the survey
[4:31:26] results would drive what that next
project was. And so it wasn't that those
[4:31:30] construction documents were there are
there and ready to go because we were
[4:31:34] going that direction. It's because there
was the ask that we continue with that
[4:31:38] because that project was already working
with the caveat that we would change
[4:31:42] route if those those survey results
showed something different. And so I
[4:31:46] think that's where I start to get a
little anxious because I feel like the
[4:31:51] town said something very clear in that
survey that they wanted that outdoor
[4:31:54] pool. And I don't think that the con
that the the projects are mutually
[4:31:59] exclusive either. I think like Chris
said, you can work on multiple projects
[4:32:02] at one time, but I do think priorities
um
[4:32:07] are there that that the town really does
want the outdoor pool. And so I'm
[4:32:10] hopeful that you guys will keep that as
kind of one of those top priorities.
[4:32:13] Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[4:32:16] » Anyone else?
[4:32:23] » Hi. I'm Alex Hy 2033 Cuda Court in
Berthood. Um I think just in listening
[4:32:30] to everything that's gone on tonight um
and I've been kind of looking on from
[4:32:36] the the outside over the years um you
know we want a pool or we as the
[4:32:42] community it seems want a pool. We as a
community need more uh ballparks.
[4:32:47] I'm uh I'm not as uh call me not as
supportive of my kid to drive across the
[4:32:54] country to go to uh to baseball games.
Um and I've had to drive to Fort Collins
[4:33:01] all the way to Fort Collins every time
for my my kids baseball game in a in a
[4:33:06] birthed club. And um
uh granted Chris goes to across the
[4:33:13] country for these things, but he's he's
more a committed dad than I am, I guess.
[4:33:17] Um but uh I guess all I'm saying is it
seems clear to me that we need ballparks
[4:33:23] and we need a pool. And it seems like
Richardson is the place to do both of
[4:33:28] those. And if that comes at the loss of
a of the arboritum or the delay of our
[4:33:33] arboritum, I would think that would make
a lot of sense for
[4:33:38] uh what the community has been reaching
out wanting to see. And so taking that
[4:33:44] 650,000
and plugging it into a design that would
[4:33:49] um put that lap or put those pools over
at Richardson to me makes a lot of
[4:33:54] sense. Um but uh and then also using our
cash and you know maybe I finance too
[4:34:01] many things in life but using our cash
towards financing to make those
[4:34:05] community needs um granted. I think that
would be uh uh I don't know a wise wise
[4:34:12] approach but um that's all I have. Thank
you.
[4:34:15] » Thank you.
Anyone else?
[4:34:21] » All right. Thank you all for seeing in
attendance tonight. I'll close the
[4:34:24] public comment portion, bring it back to
the board. Uh it sounds like uh we want
[4:34:28] to push this into a study session. Is
that correct?
[4:34:31] » Okay. Um Administrator Kirk, you have
any final thoughts here?
[4:34:35] » You want me to answer the questions that
were asked?
[4:34:36] » Oh, that would be great. Uh start out
with that groundwater one because I
[4:34:39] don't know if that uh not really related
to recreation, but how we do business.
[4:34:42] So
>> there is
[4:34:44] » there was an extensive amount of
geotechnical investigation that was done
[4:34:47] during the construction of the rec
center. um we drilled um test wells and
[4:34:54] um took ground cores to do structural
design and that's typical on any project
[4:34:59] of that magnitude. Um civil engineering
firms reviewed all of those and made
[4:35:03] recommendations about um all the
infrastructure that would get built, the
[4:35:08] underground storm water infrastructure,
the above ground storm water
[4:35:10] infrastructure. um that pool, the indoor
pool actually sits on 121
[4:35:15] um concrete quesons that go down to
bedrock because of the high groundwater
[4:35:19] in that area. The groundwater was
actually on the park in some areas, if I
[4:35:23] remember right, and I'm quoting this off
the top of my head. Um but if I remember
[4:35:28] right from those test well observations,
the groundwater was as high as three or
[4:35:31] four feet below the surface before we
built the park. And so, um, we have, um,
[4:35:37] communicated extensively with the
previous property owner who sold it in
[4:35:39] 2024 at 940 Bruce, uh, about that issue.
Um, he I understand that he had flooding
[4:35:47] in his basement. He installed a sump
pump to deal with it and a trench drain
[4:35:51] around the outside of the foundation or
around the exterior of the foundation.
[4:35:56] So
>> yeah, it's I'm sorry. It's in inside the
[4:36:00] basement adjacent to the foundation
walls as I but
[4:36:04] » Okay. So we do look at groundwater.
>> Yes, absolutely.
[4:36:07] » repercussions. Yeah, we verify all that.
>> But you don't have any monitoring wells
[4:36:12] throughout.
>> I'm not I'm not trying to downplay. I
[4:36:15] think you have very specific concerns. I
just don't know. What I'm saying is I
[4:36:18] don't know how it's I see how it's
related to like if you build a pool, how
[4:36:22] does that affect the groundwater? I
think what needs to happen is we can
[4:36:25] just sit down as a group. I think that'd
be best.
[4:36:27] » I would love to come to that meeting.
>> Thank you. No, I would love to invite
[4:36:29] you. Yeah. Okay. Do you mind emailing
me?
[4:36:32] » I will.
>> Okay. My card is right behind you by
[4:36:34] Sergeant Williamson, but I'd love to set
up a meeting with you.
[4:36:36] » Thank you.
>> Phenomenal.
[4:36:37] » Um,
>> do we want to go uh Miss Hobson's
[4:36:42] questions about aquatics in phase one?
Uh, White Pool at Rec Center if
[4:36:45] Richardson if it was in phase one of
that. Um,
[4:36:49] » I can answer those questions relatively
briefly, I think. Um the the reason why
[4:36:55] we didn't believe we could build the
outdoor aquatics facility initially was
[4:36:59] because of the cost. Um we didn't have
the cash to fund it. Um I at the time we
[4:37:05] were under the impression that we could
not finance that park. Uh so the the the
[4:37:09] financing mechanism that we used for
Wagner uh requires the kind of the
[4:37:15] building serves as collateral. And so,
um, it's a it's a complicated financing
[4:37:22] process. I'm not going to try to explain
tonight. I'm happy to at a study
[4:37:25] session. Um, but that those certificates
of participation are unique from bonds.
[4:37:30] It's not like a you you don't get a lump
payment. You're actually paying a lease
[4:37:33] payment back to a trustee who holds
that. You own the property, but a
[4:37:37] trustee is responsible for it, and you
pay them back for the financing you
[4:37:40] receive. That's the simplest way I can
explain it. U, but that building serves
[4:37:44] as collateral. We were under the
impression that you could not do that.
[4:37:47] um because there wasn't enough asset
value with Richardson Park. We've
[4:37:51] learned recently that may not be the
case and that we could uh likely issue
[4:37:54] that kind of financing in order to
construct the park and literally within
[4:37:58] the last you know six weeks or so. So it
is possible I think um that that that
[4:38:04] could be done but uh and that that was
just through conversations with our
[4:38:09] underwriter that helped with us with our
bond issuance uh that you approved for
[4:38:13] refunding the wastewater bonds. So it is
possible um potentially although that
[4:38:19] there's you know those financing deals
take months to put together um and the
[4:38:25] market has to be right in order to make
them work. There's a lot of things that
[4:38:29] have to be done to figure that out. I I
don't want to preclude I do think what I
[4:38:34] and what I think uh Miss Hobson and Miss
Roth articulated was like I think
[4:38:37] everybody was excited about Richardson
Park including staff. it was the next
[4:38:41] phase of the park's master plan. Uh from
a phasing and financing perspective, it
[4:38:45] it looked like it was undoable. Um and I
also don't want to foreclose on the
[4:38:50] opportunity to build that park if that
is the preferred construction, maybe
[4:38:56] with some tweaks um and and some value
and some creative value engineering. But
[4:39:00] if that's the preferred park project, I
don't want to foreclose on it because we
[4:39:06] have new information that could give us
the opportunity to potentially construct
[4:39:09] it. Not saying we definitely can. That
requires a lot of analysis, requires
[4:39:14] comprehensive, you know, financial work
with an underwriter and and bond council
[4:39:19] and all these things to try and figure
all that stuff out. Um, but I would also
[4:39:23] be remiss if we moved forward with tens
of millions of dollars in cash funded
[4:39:26] park projects if that was the board's
priority. And I don't know that we
[4:39:30] really had that conversation clearly at
the time. It was, hey, we can't afford
[4:39:34] this park and we can't build this pool
today because we don't have the cash to
[4:39:37] do that. It's going to take a lot of
time for us to get there. And no, we
[4:39:40] cannot build that as phase one with with
the money that we have. Um, and so we
[4:39:44] pivoted to to this outdoor pool concept.
Um,
[4:39:48] with the idea that it would be a lot
simpler to build. The infrastructure is
[4:39:50] already in place, generally speaking. uh
there's parking, there's, you know, all
[4:39:54] these other things that you don't have
to construct in order to build a pool uh
[4:39:58] that you would have to do at Richardson.
And so I think that's what drove us down
[4:40:02] that road. And admittedly, this is
relatively newer information that I
[4:40:05] think is relevant to the conversation.
So that's why we didn't I think that's
[4:40:11] why it's new information for everyone,
including um the board committee and the
[4:40:15] board.
>> All right. So if there's nothing else,
[4:40:19] trustes, it sounds like we'll just
schedule this for a meeting. I don't
[4:40:21] know if we can set that date tonight,
but we'll have an upcoming meeting uh
[4:40:25] special
study session just to focus on our parks
[4:40:29] master plan and priorities.
>> And would you expect to have funding
[4:40:34] options? We have a little bit better
idea of financing.
[4:40:37] » Yes. Yeah. And knowing that we would
have the time, we'll give you a really
[4:40:40] comprehensive overview of how that could
how that could be done if that's what
[4:40:43] you want to do.
>> Okay. All right. Well, thank you
[4:40:47] everybody.
Uh we will go into executive session
[4:40:50] after this. So, uh, we will do, uh,
reports next
[4:40:57] » and we'll start off with, uh, Trusty
Wing this time.
[4:41:00] » I'll bring my reports back next time at
the, uh, time that we're looking at
[4:41:05] right now.
>> Okay. Um, Trustee Alrech.
[4:41:09] » Um, I just wanted to make mention of the
citizen email about having to pay to
[4:41:15] take their kids to rec center. Um, I
know it was a while ago that we had
[4:41:20] brought up implementing some type of
system where you don't have to pay.
[4:41:24] You're not using the facility. You're
just taking your children. So, I I don't
[4:41:28] know if we have an update on when that's
going to be implemented, but we'll get
[4:41:32] some news soon.
>> Do you have any thoughts?
[4:41:36] » Um, I think we generally solved that
problem. Um,
[4:41:40] but it's late and I don't remember the
specifics. I will make sure that I get
[4:41:44] that answer back to you. U, but Amanda
and I did talk about it. she reviewed it
[4:41:47] with her staff. Uh we talked about all
the various kind of you know u what's
[4:41:53] the right term the unintended
consequences um and how can we limit
[4:41:57] that in kind of practical ways.
So you know again anytime you're there
[4:42:02] for a program like you know swim lessons
or basketball we don't charge parents to
[4:42:07] get in but if you're taking your kid to
the pool and they're swimming during
[4:42:10] open swimming we typically charge
parents even if we you know if they tell
[4:42:14] us they're not going to swim. There are
some other ways we can handle that and I
[4:42:18] think we generally dealt with that but
I'll I'll I'll get a formal response. I
[4:42:21] apologize.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[4:42:23] » Trusty.
>> Um I have a few as well but I'll recall
[4:42:27] them until next time. There's nothing
pressing.
[4:42:29] » Trusty Hardy.
>> Just a quick one. Um Earth Main Street
[4:42:33] is in in talks with Downtown Business
Collaborative. We're going to be merging
[4:42:39] it looks like.
>> All right.
[4:42:40] » Trying to form a new board. And part of
the main street thing is to get town
[4:42:44] support. So I've been speaking with Gail
down at Colorado Main Street. She is
[4:42:51] free September 30th to give the town
trustees a 30 minute virtual
[4:42:55] presentation if that's possible to get
on the agenda for September 30th.
[4:43:02] » I was making a note about the um rec
center. I didn't want to forget what was
[4:43:06] that. I was trying to ask if if we could
possibly the to get main street support
[4:43:10] we have to have town town support. So
Gail of the Colorado Main Street wants
[4:43:15] to do a virtual presentation takes about
30 minutes and September 30th she will
[4:43:21] be available which is Tuesday night
>> September 30th.
[4:43:26] » Uh that's a fifth Tuesday. Um so
we'll have to talk about do you want to
[4:43:32] have a study session to talk about park
priorities on that fifth Tuesday? Do you
[4:43:35] want to do that sooner than that? Um,
but September 30th, I think, is a fifth
[4:43:41] Tuesday where we would not normally have
a meeting.
[4:43:44] » And you need it sooner rather than later
because
[4:43:46] » we can do it later, too. But let's just
>> Okay.
[4:43:50] » We're in motion.
[4:43:54] » Well, regardless of the date, are we
supportive of getting this on the agenda
[4:43:57] so they can move forward?
>> Yeah. I think I'd like clarification on
[4:44:00] the structure, how the town's involved,
um, how businesses are going to be
[4:44:05] represented. Just a little bit more of
that because I I basically I would like
[4:44:11] to make sure we're able to help get
grant funding to business owners and if
[4:44:15] town staff can do that or not. I don't
know if they're allowed to or if it has
[4:44:18] to be a separate entity. Um, with
everything Ted's done, I'm glad he's,
[4:44:22] you know, heading this up. But I'd also
like to see if we could get some other
[4:44:25] business owners to take charge and get
them invested and involved and to take
[4:44:29] ownership of it. And so, you know,
wanting to see if how that structure
[4:44:32] works since Tim's on the board if they
would feel more involved if they could
[4:44:36] take the a leadership role in that. And
so, just some of those questions I think
[4:44:40] Tim would help us know what the
structure is going to be like going
[4:44:43] forward so we can get some moving parts
from staff.
[4:44:46] » The structures and what the board is
going to look like.
[4:44:48] » Yeah.
>> The board and also how the town can
[4:44:51] support it. Can town staff work, you
know, toward grant funding alongside
[4:44:56] this group since we have designated
staff now
[4:44:59] » um to help and can
>> I think that's where the presentation
[4:45:02] from Carl Main Street would be helpful
to the board.
[4:45:05] » Okay. Yeah, that would be awesome. Thank
you.
[4:45:08] » Okay. So, let's I don't know.
>> Do you need that date in particular?
[4:45:14] » It's just one of the dates she gave me.
I think she may have calculated the
[4:45:17] Tuesday night. So I can ask her if
>> you mind sending that Gail's contact to
[4:45:22] staff to Chris and then we can reach
out.
[4:45:24] » Yep.
>> Awesome. Okay. Yes, sounds great. Um
[4:45:29] Mayor Pro Tim,
>> um just wanted to bring up thank you for
[4:45:32] participating in the seed dot meeting
yes or is it yesterday? I I've lost
[4:45:37] track. Um anyways, they're adding
additional sidewalk bars at the Ninth
[4:45:42] and Mountain Crossing. Uh right now
we've got engineers working on a design
[4:45:47] that features largely four ballouts at
that crossing along with additional
[4:45:51] safety improvements they're considering.
Uh it sounds like it's very likely that
[4:45:56] they will have internal design funding
to provide us with the design and bring
[4:46:01] that forth. Um there will be
confirmation on that funding in a couple
[4:46:05] of weeks hopefully. Um the biggest
challenge that from my understanding was
[4:46:11] surveying the actual location which uh
largely would require their internal
[4:46:17] staff's time to go out and survey the
location. Although it's a possibility
[4:46:22] that consultants could be hired to go do
that work. Um but that's the update I
[4:46:28] wanted to provide on that and stuff. I
think we had a good meeting on safety
[4:46:32] improvements there. Um and C dot is
moving. So, I'm pretty happy about that.
[4:46:38] But, um, if there's any other additional
information or if you guys would like to
[4:46:42] participate in these meetings, um, I'm
welcome you to join and stuff. Um,
[4:46:48] otherwise, I'll continue to provide
updates.
[4:46:54] » Yep.
>> Well done. Well, that was going to be
[4:46:58] one of mine. It was Thank you for that
um meeting yesterday, staying on it.
[4:47:02] I mean, that's that's unbelievable. They
got seat out the move. So, that's that's
[4:47:06] 100% testament for you taking on them.
So,
[4:47:08] » kind of surprised myself.
>> Yeah, that was that was really cool to
[4:47:11] hear. Um, sorry I couldn't be at the um
transportation meeting today.
[4:47:15] Administrator Kirk, I just did email out
what I thought the board was interested
[4:47:19] in as far as this initial um
uh subcommittee for transportation. How
[4:47:25] you respond to that?
>> You didn't miss uh the meeting today.
[4:47:27] It's next Tuesday.
>> Oh, sweet. their their meeting their
[4:47:30] meeting was today which is why they were
kind of pressing us to give them
[4:47:33] something.
>> Oh, great. That's why I will be there uh
[4:47:36] draft RFP to them yesterday.
>> You did not miss. Carl thought he missed
[4:47:40] too. So
>> I told Carl he missed it. That's why.
[4:47:42] All right. Well, that's good.
>> Um also great job with the first uh
[4:47:47] national night out. Wish Teresa was here
for this, but
[4:47:51] » unbelievable. I know by you.
>> I know you had to be gone, but it was
[4:47:55] all it was for you guys and hopefully be
there next year. But Teresa did a just a
[4:47:59] fantastic job. So May showed up. Uh
Brett was there. Sean was there. What?
[4:48:05] » Uh yeah, you the face you had when you
were throwing baseballs at me or balls
[4:48:10] still will haunt me for a long time
coming here. But I think Brett, you hit
[4:48:13] three out of three on on the targets to
get me in there. So need more signups
[4:48:17] next year. But um truthfully, the
sheriff and uh the chief of the EMS both
[4:48:22] and I have them talk to Teresa about
this too, but they both volunteered to
[4:48:25] do the dunk next year.
>> Nice.
[4:48:28] » Staff did an awesome job with that. So,
thank you.
[4:48:30] » Um I was out of town, so I did miss a um
mental health meeting um Monday.
[4:48:36] Unfortunately, I talked about driving.
Anyway, um that's all I have for now, so
[4:48:41] I'll turn it over to staff. The only
item I'd like to cover tonight, we can
[4:48:44] deal with uh any other updates in other
ways. The November 11th meeting uh would
[4:48:50] be a regular town board meeting that
falls on Veterans Day. Um and so
[4:48:56] question we have is town hall is closed.
Our staff will not be here. Um no issue
[4:49:01] for me. and come to the meeting. But um
would you prefer to move the meeting to
[4:49:05] November 10th, which would be a Monday
night instead of a Tuesday or maybe the
[4:49:10] 12th uh which would be a Wednesday, or
would you prefer to just have it on
[4:49:13] Veterans Day
>> or cancel it? But I I do think we'll
[4:49:17] probably have items to deal with. I
mean, it's uh it is uncommon for us not
[4:49:21] to have agenda items, so
>> I'd prefer 10.
[4:49:26] » I would agree.
Okay,
[4:49:29] » that's a Monday night.
[4:49:33] works for me.
>> And we don't have to decide tonight, but
[4:49:38] uh we will prioritize the 10th. We'll
confirm with you. Um but if that if that
[4:49:43] works for y'all, that would I think that
would make sense.
[4:49:46] » All right.
>> Move it from the 11th to the 10th. Is
[4:49:49] that what we're trying to do?
[4:49:53] » Cool. Works for me. Thank you. Set that
out. Uh Attorney Smith, anything?
[4:49:57] » Nothing.
>> All right. Anything from Sheriff's
[4:49:59] Office?
>> Nothing.
[4:50:00] » All right. Welcome back. All right.
Thank you everybody. Um let's uh have
[4:50:04] someone move us into an executive
session here. Anyone like to move on?
[4:50:09] [Applause]
>> Well, there's a particular
[4:50:14] revised statute.
[4:50:19] » CS24-6-42
[4:50:24] Ethereation
[4:50:29] developing strategy for negotiations and
instructive negotiations and the
[4:50:34] following details are provided. Bacon
Lake Interceptor East, oil and gas lease
[4:50:39] and 290 Mount.
Is there a second? All right, the motion
[4:50:44] has been seconded. Clerk, can we have a
roll call vote, please?
[4:50:47] » Trusty Wing,
>> yes.
[4:50:48] » Trusty Hardy,
>> yes.
[4:50:49] » Trusty Ays,
>> yes.
[4:50:51] » Mayor Prom Murphy,
>> yes.
[4:50:52] » Trustee Alrech,
>> yes.
[4:50:54] » Mayor Carsbach,
>> all right. Yes. Thank you. All right.
[4:50:57] So, we'll move into uh executive session
in the back room there, and then we'll
[4:51:00] adjourn from