[9:00] [NO AUDIO]

[1:00:36] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Good evening,

[1:00:39] I call the city Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m..

[1:00:45] Please call the roll.

[1:00:52] [Roll Call]

[1:01:02] Would everyone please rise and join me

[1:01:06] for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[1:01:13] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

[1:01:16] and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God,

[1:01:16] indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[1:01:27] Next is the approval of the agenda.

[1:01:31] If there are no objections, the agenda

[1:01:35] will be approved pure caring none,

[1:01:37] the agenda is approved as presented.

[1:01:39] Moving on to public comment, it's

[1:01:43] designed for you to share your thoughts with council

[1:01:47] but it is not an interactive discussion.

[1:01:51] If you are attending in person tonight and would like to give

[1:01:55] a general public comment, please sign up at the clipboard

[1:02:00] in the back of the room .

[1:02:05] If you called in to tonight's meeting,

[1:02:08] the clerk will recognize you by the last four

[1:02:10] digits of your phone number and we

[1:02:12] ask the chat feature online only be used to sign up

[1:02:16] to give public comments.

[1:02:17] Before I give instructions, do we have anyone signed up?

[1:02:26] Clerk: We do have individuals signed up for public comment

[1:02:29] tonight.

[1:02:33] Mayor Tracy Engerman: There's a three limit time limit

[1:02:37] for individuals and a five minute time limit for anyone

[1:02:42] representing an organization .

[1:02:51] Your feedback is important to us.

[1:03:11] Doug Gilbert: Good evening , members of council and staff,

[1:03:19] I wish to voice my Opposition to item 8D,

[1:03:31] the resolution opposing the upcoming ballot measure.

[1:03:36] I think in this era of Citizens United, large campaign

[1:03:42] contributions not just here but also in lone tree,

[1:03:45] I think we need to be having more direct democracy and not

[1:03:48] less of it, because it focuses the electorate

[1:03:51] on a particular issue and not on the broad range of issues

[1:03:55] a candidate election might focus on, so it's a different animal.

[1:04:00] Secondly, I think the arguments being

[1:04:02] made the city needs latitude negotiation are really

[1:04:06] talking about the wrong mission of the city.

[1:04:08] The mission of the city is to look after the health and safety

[1:04:12] and welfare of its citizens and the area under which it

[1:04:16] operates, it is not to be a real estate developer.

[1:04:22] The city or maybe the staff is considering

[1:04:24] it should be a real estate developer

[1:04:26] and I don't think that's what we like

[1:04:28] to see as citizens of the city.

[1:04:30] Obviously we want a prosperous city,

[1:04:33] we voted for taxes and things to make things better.

[1:04:37] Third, many citizens are concerned about the track record

[1:04:40] of this city with respect to its application and administration

[1:04:44] of zoning.

[1:04:45] We've had the troublesome area of the McDonald's

[1:04:50] with that agreement, I don't need to go to into detail

[1:04:55] and bring up painful memories but beyond that there

[1:04:58] are multiple complaints in the canyons about a lack

[1:05:02] of effective code enforcement.

[1:05:04] I think the resolution tonight illustrates

[1:05:08] a certain amount of tone deafness

[1:05:10] and we should get beyond this.

[1:05:13] Last but not least, pursuing the item agenda

[1:05:18] sends a message city Council is making a bold statement that it

[1:05:22] knows better than those who elected it,

[1:05:25] and I think that is problematic for a number of reasons.

[1:05:28] It's very different from the approach we took in 2010 when

[1:05:31] I was on council and we had a referendum

[1:05:34] to undo the Urban Renewal Authority.

[1:05:38] Essentially, we let the democratic process play out.

[1:05:41] I was very opposed to the referendum,

[1:05:43] but I had to respect democracy and I

[1:05:46] would hope that you can do the same

[1:05:49] and that you would vote against or postpone indefinitely 8

[1:05:56] D this evening, thank you very much.

[1:06:13] Whitney Schenk: Good evening mayor

[1:06:18] and members of city Council, I am the executive director

[1:06:22] of the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce

[1:06:24] and I'm here tonight on behalf of the chamber

[1:06:26] to express our support For 8 C, 8 D,

[1:06:37] and 8 E. What matters is the growth is

[1:06:44] thoughtful and intentional in a way that benefits people that

[1:06:47] already live here, businesses already invested here,

[1:06:50] and the future of our community.

[1:06:52] For businesses, predictability matters and they

[1:06:56] need to understand the process, what will be expected of them,

[1:06:59] and what the city is trying to accomplish long term.

[1:07:02] We believe this policy provides that clarity

[1:07:05] while still allowing City Council to look

[1:07:07] at each annexation individually and determine whether it

[1:07:11] makes sense for Castle Pines.

[1:07:12] We especially appreciate the focus

[1:07:14] on fiscal sustainability, infrastructure

[1:07:17] and public service, community benefit,

[1:07:21] and opportunities for future commercial development.

[1:07:25] The chamber also supports opposing the proposed charter

[1:07:29] amendment that would require voter

[1:07:32] approval for certain annexations over 20 acres.

[1:07:34] We believe our elected city Council

[1:07:36] needs to maintain the ability to evaluate these proposals

[1:07:40] individually and make decisions on what is best

[1:07:43] for Castle Pines as a whole.

[1:07:45] Annexation is already a very public process

[1:07:48] including multiple steps, public hearings,

[1:07:50] opportunities for residents to provide input

[1:07:53] and ultimately a decision by the City council members

[1:07:57] elected to represent them.

[1:07:59] Requiring an election simply because our property exceeds

[1:08:02] a certain acreage could make the process significantly more

[1:08:05] complicated and could limit the city's ability

[1:08:08] to respond when economic development opportunities come

[1:08:10] our way.

[1:08:11] I also think it's important to remember that Castle Pines

[1:08:14] residents already have a strong voice in their local government,

[1:08:18] our home charter preserves initiative and referendum rights

[1:08:22] for our residents providing important checks and balances

[1:08:26] for our local government.

[1:08:27] We absolutely believe residents should

[1:08:30] have a voice in how Castle Pines grows,

[1:08:32] at the same time we believe our elected city Council needs

[1:08:35] the flexibility to carefully evaluate each annexation based

[1:08:39] on its individual merits rather than requiring

[1:08:41] an automatic election based primarily on acreage.

[1:08:45] Finally, the chamber supports item 80, the 2026 Economic

[1:08:51] Development Strategic Plan.

[1:08:53] This is something incredibly important to the Castle Pines

[1:08:56] chamber, we hear all the time from our residents

[1:08:58] that they want more restaurants, retail, services and amenities

[1:09:03] right here in Castle Pines, but those things don't just happen.

[1:09:07] We know we have to be intentional about creating

[1:09:10] an environment where businesses want to invest,

[1:09:12] and where businesses we already have can succeed.

[1:09:15] A strong economic development strategy

[1:09:17] helps us do just that, it gives us a road

[1:09:20] map for attracting the right investment,

[1:09:22] growing our commercial tax base, supporting our existing

[1:09:26] businesses and ultimately creating the kind of community

[1:09:29] our residents continue to tell us they want.

[1:09:32] The chamber is excited to continue

[1:09:34] partnering with the city on this work,

[1:09:36] thank you for your leadership, continued commitment

[1:09:39] to thoughtful, responsible growth, and economic development

[1:09:43] in Castle Pines.

[1:10:00] Mayor Tracy Engerman: We are moving on

[1:10:02] to the presentation of our minutes, any corrections

[1:10:04] to our minutes from the City Council meeting?

[1:10:10] Hearing none, the minutes are approved as presented.

[1:10:14] Tonight's consent agenda is resolution 26-50

[1:10:25] for the coordinated election held on November 3rd 2026.

[1:10:32] A resolution which also sets ballots and places to the Castle

[1:10:39] Pines charter on the ballot for the coordinated election held

[1:10:42] on November 3rd 2026.

[1:10:46] The resolution awarding a construction contract doing

[1:10:53] business as Nicholas Construction Inc.

[1:10:57] For the Happy Canyon Phase one construction projects .

[1:11:09] I have a motion and a second, clerk please call .

[1:11:26] The motion passes.

[1:11:29] Moving on to our general business,

[1:11:31] our first item is the Douglas County Sheriff's Office update.

[1:11:52] Speaker: We had an incident that happened in Castle Pines,

[1:11:55] on August 20th at about 624 we had a suicidal subject

[1:12:00] in the 600 block of Yellow Drive with a handgun,

[1:12:05] the reporting party stated her ex husband had threatened

[1:12:10] to shoot himself and refused to return to jail.

[1:12:16] He did say he would shoot officers

[1:12:18] if they would attempt to take him to jail,

[1:12:21] so that's really the call we went to.

[1:12:25] I know it seems it was a long time,

[1:12:28] it was three hours for the total incident but the important thing

[1:12:31] was the suspect , no one was injured from this.

[1:12:38] The suspect surrendered, it was three hours of negotiation

[1:12:43] and we also had to evacuate some of the apartments

[1:12:49] within the complex for the safety of those surrounding

[1:12:52] and they issued an alert to make sure

[1:12:55] those who lived in the apartment complex sheltered in place.

[1:13:02] Safety takes a priority, sometimes

[1:13:05] we have to take the time it needs because this

[1:13:08] is if we would have pushed the issue we would have had injuries

[1:13:12] to citizens or those involved.

[1:13:14] The important thing is is the person was taken into custody,

[1:13:19] did surrender, and is facing multiple charges.

[1:13:24] Party in the park, phenomenal event.

[1:13:30] Officers enjoyed it thoroughly, air traffic team

[1:13:35] came to help out with those that left.

[1:13:38] That's going to be an ongoing event,

[1:13:41] well received and well attended, no issues to report from that.

[1:13:45] I think the only thing to report is

[1:13:47] there's some barricades that need

[1:13:50] to be more noticeable around night time,

[1:13:53] but they said the event went flawless.

[1:13:55] The last thing real quick , we've been receiving complaints

[1:14:04] when it comes to speeding, and this summer has been no

[1:14:09] exception to that.

[1:14:11] We feel speeding is a problem because it's a safety issue

[1:14:14] for the city of Castle Pines.

[1:14:16] We did step up enforcement, you will

[1:14:19] hear we were aggressive in the enforcement.

[1:14:24] In a 30 day period, there were 66 citations

[1:14:29] for people driving ten over.

[1:14:35] Unfortunately, we have residents and nonresidents

[1:14:39] speeding through the city of Castle Pines.

[1:14:41] Hopefully the enforcement will get people to change that

[1:14:45] behavior, because really safety applies to everybody .

[1:14:51] We've got kids going to school, people driving through normal,

[1:14:56] we really have to have people appreciate that .

[1:15:03] We were heavy on the reinforcement, that's

[1:15:08] something to change behavior, the citation

[1:15:10] takes a little hit for your wallet

[1:15:13] and gives the person something to think about.

[1:15:32] I'd have to pull the stats up, monarch and Castle Pines

[1:15:38] was big.

[1:15:40] There were certain areas that had

[1:15:43] the majority of the citations.

[1:15:45] We always have issue with the school zones,

[1:15:49] people forget the school zones are active .

[1:15:54] 10 to 19 over in a school zone is a big deal,

[1:15:57] we ask the residents in general and those coming to Castle Pines

[1:16:02] whether to the businesses or they live here, be mindful

[1:16:05] of the speed, mindful of what's going on in the city

[1:16:09] because safety is ultimately what's important for all of us.

[1:16:22] When I see things like the 20 to 24 over,

[1:16:28] sometimes we have to remind them through a piece of paper .

[1:16:46] We want to make sure the culprits are

[1:16:50] held accountable and responsible for that, thank you.

[1:17:03] Speaker: I would like to thank the Sheriff's office generally.

[1:17:07] To have handled that without the negative outcome to everybody

[1:17:13] involved, including the person struggling ,

[1:17:19] and without an inappropriate use of force,

[1:17:23] it was handled the right way and I appreciate that very much.

[1:17:28] I also want to thank the Sheriff's office

[1:17:32] for its dedication to human trafficking,

[1:17:34] I had an event today where members of your force

[1:17:38] appeared including the Sheriff and I just

[1:17:41] want to communicate that out loud to you

[1:17:44] as well because it happens in places that people don't always

[1:17:47] see.

[1:17:58] Councilmember Kori Salazar: How do you

[1:17:59] break out the speeding from residents to non residents?

[1:18:08] Speaker: We do have that in the stats,

[1:18:09] we can see where a person lives from the citation violation.

[1:18:13] It's a mix, we have a lot of people that come here

[1:18:17] for business reasons and sometimes we don't necessarily

[1:18:22] look at the surroundings and think about school

[1:18:25] being back in service.

[1:18:26] We hope the community will take a look

[1:18:28] and take a step back for the safety of our kids

[1:18:33] and community.

[1:18:33] I know you feel the same , that can make a difference if a child

[1:18:43] or a citizen so we just want people to really think about

[1:18:46] that.

[1:18:58] Have a great night!

[1:19:04] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Next we are moving on

[1:19:06] to a public hearing for the ordinance of the City

[1:19:10] Council of the City of Castle Pines Colorado amending section

[1:19:14] 27 Site Improvement plan of the City of Castle Pines

[1:19:17] zoning ordinance on second reading.

[1:19:20] Our staff presentation will be given

[1:19:23] by the community Development Director Donna Ferguson.

[1:19:36] Donna Ferguson: This proposed amendment

[1:19:37] to section 27 of the city's zoning code

[1:19:41] is brought to you by the Community Development

[1:19:45] Department authorized under section 109 of the Zoning

[1:19:50] Ordinance.

[1:19:53] Your policy question tonight is does the City Council

[1:19:58] approve an amendment to the city's zoning ordinance

[1:20:00] to update the process, procedures,

[1:20:03] and approval criteria for site improvement plans?

[1:20:09] ever since Castle Pines became a Home Rule city in 2008 we have

[1:20:17] been working towards updating our Land development codes

[1:20:21] to make them make sense for the city ,

[1:20:29] and not Douglas County from which we adopted it from.

[1:20:33] This is not new, it's something we've

[1:20:36] been striving for and working towards.

[1:20:41] A little bit about what we went through to get here today,

[1:20:45] we did start with the Planning Commission study session

[1:20:49] and brought the question of updating the site approval plan

[1:20:53] approval criteria to Planning commission, got their feedback,

[1:20:57] we then took it out to a referral process and when

[1:21:03] the referral process closed we took the information we learned

[1:21:07] from the referral process back to the Planning Commission with

[1:21:12] a formal red line, which you also have in your packet .

[1:21:25] Then, this ordinance was on first reading two Tuesdays ago,

[1:21:28] tonight it is on second reading and public hearing

[1:21:32] for your review and consideration .

[1:21:39] The referral period took place from July 2nd to July 23rd,

[1:21:47] the referral was sent to Douglas County agencies , Parker,

[1:21:57] Castle rock.

[1:21:58] We sent it to our known homeowners associations,

[1:22:02] including Castle Pines North, high Park, the canyons.

[1:22:09] We also set this out to metro districts and the canyons,

[1:22:15] we also sent this out to our business community,

[1:22:23] our shopping center where Safeway is and King Soopers is,

[1:22:28] and also our office park that sits right in front of city

[1:22:34] offices .

[1:22:39] We received one comment response from Douglas County Community

[1:22:46] Development, it was really interesting

[1:22:49] because they provided feedback on why

[1:22:54] there were certain criteria.

[1:22:58] The reason we had a three year expiration policy

[1:23:01] is because it was inconsistent with this,

[1:23:05] it was being informative and it did point out a few errors,

[1:23:13] so it was helpful but not substantive in nature.

[1:23:18] We also published this public hearing in the newspaper,

[1:23:23] and you also received a copy an affidavit

[1:23:26] for that in your packet.

[1:23:31] This is an image of our land development process steps,

[1:23:38] and this is actually in the city's website.

[1:23:41] Anybody can come here, understand what the land

[1:23:47] development process is.

[1:23:49] It is several steps, starting with a comprehensive plan which

[1:23:55] all of the steps below are informed by.

[1:23:58] On the right side, you will see the level of discretion each

[1:24:03] land development step has .

[1:24:08] High discretion at the very top, our comprehensive plan

[1:24:14] and annexation policy high discretion

[1:24:17] level, but as you move down in the land development process

[1:24:22] it becomes less discretion, and this is purposeful.

[1:24:26] It's supposed to start very high and lofty,

[1:24:30] and could get refined .

[1:24:39] I wanted to point something out, a lot of talk through this

[1:24:43] process has been about the self storage development,

[1:24:48] and that property --

[1:24:51] we inherited that property when the city incorporated,

[1:24:56] it was in the city and it was zoned business district ,

[1:25:03] and then the property owner came in and said hey,

[1:25:07] I want to talk about changing the uses.

[1:25:10] We went through a rezoning and a planned development process,

[1:25:15] and through that legislative process

[1:25:17] which does have discretion, they asked us primarily the impetus

[1:25:23] for this was that we want indoor storage units.

[1:25:31] This was right next to a residential community,

[1:25:35] there's going to be impacts.

[1:25:39] Planning Commission and Council said

[1:25:42] you have to have minimum heights,

[1:25:44] this building has to look a certain way.

[1:25:49] It can't have lights adjacent to the residential community,

[1:25:53] it has to be esthetically pleasing

[1:25:57] with a lot of landscaping and buffering.

[1:26:00] All of those land development controls were set in the zoning,

[1:26:06] and then the site improvement plan simply

[1:26:09] becomes the review of making sure they

[1:26:12] meet all of those technical requirements that you set out.

[1:26:16] Once it gets to a site improvement plan,

[1:26:20] the land use is already set , the technical requirements are

[1:26:27] already set, so site improvement plan is just about did you do

[1:26:34] what the rules said you are supposed to do?

[1:26:38] Keep that in mind, and we will go to the next slide.

[1:26:45] So, the review of the site improvement plan.

[1:26:50] These proposed amendments are to make the site improvement

[1:26:57] plan review technical in nature, basically clean it up and remove

[1:27:02] some old procedures that were fine for the county,

[1:27:06] but not for us.

[1:27:08] The first one being to focus the review on its consistency with

[1:27:16] the codes, with the zoning, with actual regulations and not

[1:27:24] policy .

[1:27:27] It's not about are you consistent with the plan,

[1:27:30] it's about are you consistent with the zoning?

[1:27:37] Specifically, we are proposing to remove two approval

[1:27:43] criteria which are very policy oriented,

[1:27:45] and those are to remove supports the goals and objectives

[1:27:50] of the comprehensive plan which by the way

[1:27:54] is something we reviewed with the zoning already,

[1:27:57] as well as further public health safety and welfare.

[1:28:02] With regard to this, furthers public health

[1:28:09] safety and welfare, we have already distilled that

[1:28:14] into discrete regulations.

[1:28:15] I did provide you a list of those regulations for all three

[1:28:20] of those considerations.

[1:28:22] For example, one of them is a setback from a street.

[1:28:30] It's inherently chosen based on the level of the street .

[1:28:44] That's an example of an actual regulation

[1:28:48] that you can meet or not meet that protects the public welfare

[1:28:55] safety, I just want to make sure you understand that.

[1:29:01] Next slide , other things we are changing is the formal public

[1:29:10] comment process.

[1:29:12] Right now, we send referrals to agencies,

[1:29:19] and we have advisory agencies and we have regulatory agencies,

[1:29:26] and the code right now says you Must respond to Speaker:

[1:33:42] They were in two separate areas, we

[1:33:49] did remove one requirement the city doesn't use.

[1:34:40] They have standardized notes and expiration dates,

[1:34:45] the expiration dates for the civil drawings is three years

[1:34:51] but in our manuals it is two years .

[1:34:59] We wanted to update it to make sure it is consistent,

[1:35:03] also there's a post approval procedure having

[1:35:06] to do with the certificate of occupancy

[1:35:09] I was mentioning earlier.

[1:35:11] It's an outdated procedure, it's not something we need or use

[1:35:16] and we would like to clean that up.

[1:35:27] These proposed Staff feels that this will make it easier

[1:37:08] to administer, more predictable for applicants,

[1:37:14] for planning commissioners, for staff.

[1:37:17] There's a clearer basis for findings and decisions,

[1:37:21] as I mentioned before we are going

[1:37:24] to add a public hearing and public notice,

[1:37:27] and public comment opportunity.

[1:37:31] It just standardizes many things,

[1:37:35] like the notice requirements, and it

[1:37:39] doesn't eliminate any development requirements

[1:37:42] that are really key to getting us our good site developments.

[1:37:52] Planning Commission, as you saw on that process slide voted

[1:37:59] to support the proposed amendments,

[1:38:02] we had two absent planning commissioners .

[1:38:09] Most of the conversation focused on the approval criteria ,

[1:38:18] Most of the planning commissioners thought that

[1:38:22] the two approval criteria removed were too subject policy

[1:38:28] oriented, they view their role as reviewing the building,

[1:38:36] design, parking, landscaping, walkways is how they view

[1:38:43] their role, and therefore they voted 4 to 1 to recommend

[1:38:50] approval.

[1:38:55] Your proposed motion is there in front of you,

[1:38:59] I am there to answer any questions you might have on this

[1:39:03] process, any procedures .

[1:39:12] Mayor Tracy Engerman: This is an opportunity

[1:39:14] to ask clarifying questions, please

[1:39:16] hold your debate for later when we have a motion on the table.

[1:39:19] Does anyone have any questions?

[1:39:27] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: Please go to the slide

[1:39:31] before staff announced this.

[1:39:34] I just want to clarify, what does it mean

[1:39:39] does not change any upstream?

[1:39:45] Speaker: If we were to flip back ,

[1:39:54] site improvement plan is at the very bottom .

[1:40:08] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: The first one is multi-part.

[1:40:11] On this slide, is it possible that a subdivision plot

[1:40:18] step would be completed and then the SIP would follow years

[1:40:27] later?

[1:40:38] If it comes years later, where would the planning Commission

[1:40:46] or the council be able to consider current policy that

[1:40:53] may have changed between the date of the subdivision plot

[1:40:57] and the date of submission if it was several years away?

[1:41:04] Speaker: On a quasi judicial application,

[1:41:06] that would need to be done well before a site improvement plan

[1:41:13] is presented to you .

[1:41:28] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: If the subdivision plot process

[1:41:31] and all the policy that goes with it including traffic

[1:41:34] studies and things like that, if that occurred three years before

[1:41:40] and then three years later the improvement plan is submitted,

[1:41:46] is there any place in the process

[1:41:48] that that three years later point

[1:41:50] where policy considerations could be considered?

[1:41:58] Speaker: No, because the site improvement plan is not

[1:42:01] a policy consideration, it's a technical review consideration.

[1:42:11] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: You said our criteria were

[1:42:13] removing two policy related things ,

[1:42:18] is there some source document that says the site improvement

[1:42:22] plan is never a consideration, who says that?

[1:42:42] Is it something y'all learn in textbooks that site improvement

[1:42:46] plans never have public policy in them?

[1:42:51] Speaker: You can put a policy question in there if you wish,

[1:42:54] that is certainly up to you.

[1:42:57] But we are trying to explain that you have really addressed

[1:43:01] all of those questions and considerations in the upstream

[1:43:05] already, and in your example, a subdivision plan is simply

[1:43:12] the creation of a legal lot that can be developed earlier,

[1:43:17] we already know it has access and the ability

[1:43:22] to be served by water and sewer.

[1:43:27] This, now, is simply reviewing the lot

[1:43:31] to make sure it's consistent with the zoning that's already

[1:43:34] in place.

[1:43:35] If now there's a policy, if you go this route

[1:43:45] it shouldn't be a burden on the site improvement plan.

[1:43:48] If you want a policy question in the site improvement plan,

[1:43:53] you may have one.

[1:43:59] Speaker: If the original plat is created,

[1:44:05] let's take the commercial area or Parkway Plaza as an example.

[1:44:10] If changes needed to be made to zoning, that's

[1:44:14] where we're saying the policy changes occur so you would go

[1:44:17] through a rezoning process for the West commercial area,

[1:44:21] and whatever those additional new zoning requirements are

[1:44:25] on whatever those particular uses are or would be,

[1:44:30] that's where you're making the policy decision and site

[1:44:33] improvement plan is solely the technical implementation of what

[1:44:36] happens upstream, so part of the conversation in here is are

[1:44:41] there ultimately more upstream changes

[1:44:46] you want to make relating to specific uses

[1:44:50] in the West commercial area and potentially the Parkway Plaza

[1:44:54] area, but by the time you get to the site improvement plan

[1:44:58] whether it is one year or three years,

[1:45:01] it's the council over that period of time that is deciding

[1:45:05] if we want to make changes upstream and then

[1:45:09] the implementation of the improvement plan has to be what

[1:45:13] the rezoning or change was .

[1:45:32] Speaker: The city can propose text amendments

[1:45:36] to address more stringent standards for car washes or gas

[1:45:43] stations, and if an SIP isn't pending,

[1:45:49] they have to comply with whatever standards are in place

[1:45:54] at the time they submit an application,

[1:45:56] so that is where you make your policy changes is in code

[1:46:03] or through initiating a rezoning.

[1:46:17] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: If planning Commission gets an old

[1:46:21] car wash down the street in the town center or something

[1:46:24] and the subdivision plot was previously done ,

[1:46:37] does the process apply to certain conditions like it must

[1:46:42] be screened by X amount of landscaping or set a certain

[1:46:48] way, is that still permitted on an SIP?

[1:46:58] Speaker: Yes, through the design guidelines.

[1:47:05] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: If it's a planned development,

[1:47:08] that doesn't apply.

[1:47:13] Speaker: The design guidelines goes further

[1:47:16] to talk about location.

[1:47:18] You could technically put a parking lot here,

[1:47:22] but our site design guidelines say

[1:47:26] you should move this parking so it doesn't interfere

[1:47:29] with the residential next door.

[1:47:32] That is how we further the design and the site changes.

[1:47:50] Speaker: I don't believe this is germane to what

[1:47:53] we are talking about tonight.

[1:48:02] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I think

[1:48:04] the chair has to make a ruling on that point of order.

[1:48:09] Mayor Tracy Engerman: I'm going to move to accept a motion.

[1:48:18] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: The chair may not ask a motion.

[1:48:26] Mayor Tracy Engerman: I'm going to close the motion and we will

[1:48:28] open public comment .

[1:48:36] We're going to open the public comment ,

[1:48:39] if you would like to give public comment and our attending

[1:48:47] in person, please sign up on the clipboard at the back

[1:48:50] of the room.

[1:48:53] If you've called in tonight's meeting --

[1:49:16] Doug Gilbert: I have voted for this hot mess of zoning

[1:49:25] and so forth probably four times I think ,

[1:49:33] and I believe we voted on it twice.

[1:49:35] I think we've had these discussions,

[1:49:38] I actually was not in favor of the way

[1:49:41] that this came out because I wanted all the notices to be

[1:49:44] moved to an annex and more modern processes,

[1:49:51] and at that point in time the mayor persuaded

[1:49:58] me to withdraw my objections and we move forward.

[1:50:02] But please give your serious consideration tonight

[1:50:05] to amend this proposal and leave the comprehensive plan

[1:50:11] element in here.

[1:50:12] I think all the procedural stuff is great,

[1:50:15] that needed to be done 16 years ago,

[1:50:18] and it has been very frustrating for me

[1:50:20] to see that it hasn't been done at that period of time.

[1:50:24] I left council 15 years ago and it still hasn't been done,

[1:50:29] and that was the objection to Commissioner Wiley

[1:50:33] at the Planning Commission that we are taking a halfway approach

[1:50:37] here and are possibly setting up some situations where

[1:50:40] we have approvals under an old system that

[1:50:43] are going to flow through and cause potential liability.

[1:50:47] It would be good to do a holistic review of things,

[1:50:51] if you leave the provisions for the comprehensive plan in there,

[1:50:55] it at least gives you an anchor to make

[1:50:58] a very solid quasi judicial determination that is not just

[1:51:02] where the parking lot is, because that may not

[1:51:05] be sufficient to get you past court

[1:51:07] as we learned from the McDonald's case.

[1:51:10] My suggestion is do all those procedural things ,

[1:51:15] but comprehensive plan we have even to date good fairly

[1:51:20] comprehensive plan leave that in there.

[1:51:23] My question to you would be why don't you

[1:51:26] remove the land use goals from the comprehensive plan?

[1:51:31] With that, I urge you to have a motion for amendment

[1:51:35] to leave the plan criteria in there.

[1:51:38] I've demonstrated in my written comments this is not that

[1:51:41] difficult for staff to do, and they can challenge the developer

[1:51:45] to do that .

[1:51:50] Thank you very much for your attention.

[1:52:07] Whitney Schenk: Good evening again,

[1:52:11] the chamber supports the ordinance

[1:52:16] and the proposed updates to the site improvement

[1:52:20] plan approval criteria.

[1:52:22] One of the most important things we can provide

[1:52:25] is someone considering an investment

[1:52:27] in Castle Pines, a process clear consistent and predictable.

[1:52:32] By more clearly connecting project approvals

[1:52:37] to the existing zoning regulations, division standards,

[1:52:42] technical requirements, and design guidelines,

[1:52:45] applicants have a better idea of what

[1:52:47] is expected from the beginning, and that doesn't

[1:52:50] mean lowering our standards.

[1:52:51] We can make the process more predictable

[1:52:53] while still maintaining high expectations for quality

[1:52:56] development that helped make Castle Pines so special.

[1:53:00] When businesses and developers understand the process

[1:53:03] and know what is expected of them,

[1:53:05] it makes Castle Pines a more attractive place to invest.

[1:53:09] For those reasons, the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce

[1:53:13] supports 2606 on second reading, thank you.

[1:53:32] Mayor Tracy Engerman: May I have a motion to begin discussion?

[1:53:51] We will begin with Council discussion.

[1:54:01] Councilmember Kori Salazar: I appreciate

[1:54:03] the Planning Commission and our community director.

[1:54:07] I think this was needed to get away from some of the ambiguous

[1:54:11] language that we have .

[1:54:16] I also spoke to one of our commissioners

[1:54:18] today at our workshop, and he also

[1:54:22] agreed it needs to be based on fact to eliminate

[1:54:26] ambiguity to increase predictability

[1:54:29] not only for developers, but for the city, community and Planning

[1:54:35] commission to make easier decisions so that is why I am

[1:54:39] in favor of this and appreciate all the work that

[1:54:41] has gone into this.

[1:54:49] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Any other comments?

[1:54:54] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I would appreciate

[1:54:56] hearing the other members, as I am still

[1:54:58] formulating my thoughts.

[1:55:08] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: I'm in support of this,

[1:55:10] I remember the McDonald's case which was

[1:55:12] painful for everyone involved.

[1:55:13] I also do think that was the wrong decision by us,

[1:55:17] I felt that all along, I was one of the two votes

[1:55:20] in favor of the McDonald's because I

[1:55:22] thought it met the criteria.

[1:55:24] I do believe the site improvement plan process should

[1:55:27] be an objective process, it should not be a policy process.

[1:55:33] I think it needs to have a clear delineation

[1:55:40] of the standards of what it's going to be measured against.

[1:55:51] I think that's important for everybody involved

[1:55:55] from the residents to the developers,

[1:55:58] so they know what they are dealing with.

[1:56:02] By the time we get to the SIP, that's where I think it

[1:56:06] doesn't meet the criteria , that's the process we should

[1:56:16] have in place .

[1:56:26] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I'm

[1:56:28] concerned that the comprehensive plan and Policy are a little bit

[1:56:35] too set aside by this process.

[1:56:39] I fully support every element of this,

[1:56:46] but it is my understanding that the requirement to submit

[1:56:52] the traffic study and the construction plans has just

[1:56:56] moved, and not removed.

[1:57:01] As I look at the discretion arrow slide,

[1:57:07] I am seeing that the comprehensive Plan

[1:57:12] compliance is not in the decision making process.

[1:57:19] I know it's in some of the criteria for zoning but what

[1:57:25] concerns me is that when years pass,

[1:57:28] it's too difficult to go back and change zoning on somebody

[1:57:32] to assert a new policy, because if we do change zoning

[1:57:36] on somebody or something or a landowner,

[1:57:40] they may potentially have a right to complain about that,

[1:57:45] and that would be even more confusing .

[1:57:51] So I think there was a better way to lend more clarity

[1:57:55] and certainty to the process , and what we are seeing is a lot

[1:58:03] of time between subdivision plan and site improvement plan,

[1:58:07] at least in the several years I've been involved,

[1:58:12] and council is unwilling to go back and change zoning when

[1:58:16] something changes in the community or when the community

[1:58:19] and the council has its retreat and sets its vision we don't go

[1:58:23] back and review all the zoning and other decisions that might

[1:58:26] be important .

[1:58:32] As an example the zoning and considerations for case seven

[1:58:36] were a long time ago, things have changed in traffic has

[1:58:42] changed .

[1:58:47] It's just too complicated to go back and change all that,

[1:58:50] when it could just be part of the process .

[1:59:02] I would have been in favor of this

[1:59:04] if it would have not been removing the first criteria.

[1:59:09] I would have been in favor of changing

[1:59:12] the phrase in furtherance of to some other thing,

[1:59:16] and I think that's even more important when

[1:59:19] we're considering changes to our comprehensive plan

[1:59:22] now to make it clearer.

[1:59:24] The problem in the past was that the comprehensive plan

[1:59:32] itself contained conflicting items, so anything

[1:59:37] would be found to be compliant or in furtherance of ITT.

[1:59:41] When we are changing our comprehensive plan,

[1:59:43] we remove those.

[1:59:45] We talked about a more concise document,

[1:59:50] so if we were to keep that in I could support this

[1:59:55] because I support every other part of it

[1:59:58] and all we need to do is change that in furtherance concept

[2:00:03] and change our comprehensive plan to be easier to work with,

[2:00:08] which we are already doing.

[2:00:20] Councilmember Geoff Blue: The developer of the McDonald's had

[2:00:23] updated the traffic study that was missing during the hearing.

[2:00:26] The second piece I want to point out

[2:00:30] is we had just rezone that area just two years before

[2:00:34] or something like that when we did the self storage.

[2:00:37] This isn't 10 or 15 years difference,

[2:00:41] this is just a few years before we changed the zoning,

[2:00:45] left in the restaurants and did not remove the restaurants

[2:00:49] and we ended up declining a restaurant even

[2:00:52] though it met the criteria.

[2:01:04] You started the process by asking questions about

[2:01:07] the length of time , I'm telling you in this situation it was

[2:01:14] just a two year process.

[2:01:16] At the end of the day, that's my piece on this.

[2:01:29] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Please respect our protocols.

[2:01:32] Do we have any further discussion or comments?

[2:01:38] please call the vote.

[2:01:45] [Voting]

[2:01:56] The motion passes.

[2:01:58] I will close the public hearing at 731 ,

[2:02:08] and we are going to take a rest break.

[2:11:36] We are back and will go ahead and move

[2:11:39] on to the next item on the agenda, resolution

[2:11:49] 26-49

[2:11:52] , a resolution of the City Council of the City of Castle

[2:11:56] Pines, Colorado, adopting the city of Castle Pines annexation

[2:12:00] policy.

[2:12:35] Donna Ferguson: Your policy question tonight is does Council

[2:12:40] support the adoption of resolution 26-49 which approves

[2:12:47] the annexation policy establishing a comprehensive

[2:12:50] framework of guiding principles, evaluation criteria,

[2:12:54] and procedural requirements to guide how the city considers

[2:12:59] future annexations.

[2:13:04] Annexation is the process of adding territory to the city,

[2:13:10] and there are four steps to doing so.

[2:13:13] The first two are state statute procedures,

[2:13:18] and the last two are city procedures.

[2:13:21] The first is substantial requirement, required

[2:13:26] by the state, it's a determination

[2:13:30] of whether annexation requester has provided us

[2:13:34] all the information we need to review an annexation

[2:13:39] application.

[2:13:40] The second step is the eligibility,

[2:13:42] and this is where we go through the review criteria based

[2:13:47] on the state to see if a property that is in the county

[2:13:54] actually qualifies to be annexed by any city, not just ours.

[2:14:00] The third step is the annexation decision that is made by City

[2:14:05] Council .

[2:14:11] This is what the policy will help address and help guide,

[2:14:15] and the last step is the zoning .

[2:14:25] What are going to be the standards for development,

[2:14:28] this is the third step we are addressing .

[2:14:37] The city was incorporated in 2008 at which time approximately

[2:14:46] the city became a rural city in 2019,

[2:14:51] at which time we gained more local control of how we grow .

[2:15:00] There have been three major annexations that have increased

[2:15:03] the size since we have incorporated,

[2:15:07] we are now about 9.9mi².

[2:15:14] Currently we have no formal annexation policy in place,

[2:15:22] we did the previous annexations without one

[2:15:27] but with the presentation of an annexation crow's nest

[2:15:35] which we are all aware of, we realized

[2:15:39] we are in a state where we need to have some annexation

[2:15:43] guidelines so City Council directed

[2:15:46] us to pause the annexation request

[2:15:50] and reach out to the community and put together an annexation

[2:15:54] policy based on resident values.

[2:16:08] A formal policy will help applicants and residents

[2:16:12] set clear expectations of what the city would expect

[2:16:18] from an annexation, also be clear to residents

[2:16:23] about what is important to us based on their values.

[2:16:28] Will help provide complete information with annexations

[2:16:37] so that we can look at it comprehensively

[2:16:42] and comparatively, and it will help residents see the criteria

[2:16:51] that we are looking at and applying while still maintaining

[2:16:56] the discretion we have At Really this annexation policy is meant

[2:21:32] to be up front and available for somebody who Wants to annex,

[2:21:38] so they know right up Just because a proposal comes in it

[2:23:10] Just because -- an annexation proposal comes in I'm happy

[2:23:44] to answer any questions you might have about the process let

[2:23:48] me know.

[2:23:56] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Please hold your discussion and debate

[2:23:59] topics for when we have a motion on the table.

[2:24:13] Councilmember Kori Salazar: We had some suggestions from one

[2:24:16] of our community members about the process,

[2:24:18] it does not need to be included in this,

[2:24:22] but just to state there was some suggestion about timeline

[2:24:25] between when applicant applies and when

[2:24:27] they have to do public comment.

[2:24:35] Speaker: It had to do with public comment at the last

[2:24:42] meeting related to the timing between the public comment

[2:24:46] period and the submittal .

[2:24:54] Those are things we would build into the application process,

[2:24:57] if that was something Council wanted to see we would certainly

[2:25:01] build those things in and we can come back if there's

[2:25:04] a desire for that particular one,

[2:25:06] but if there's other things you want to see in the application

[2:25:11] process around timing but as you do

[2:25:14] with all applications on the administration side

[2:25:18] we develop what the process is, it ends up on our website

[2:25:22] so anybody that is interested can go and look at the process

[2:25:30] and understand what that timeline looks like.

[2:25:42] We would be clear on the website,

[2:25:45] so everybody understands that.

[2:25:49] The implementation of the process as

[2:25:53] opposed to the policy.

[2:25:59] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Additional questions?

[2:26:04] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I will refrain.

[2:26:08] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Any other questions for staff?

[2:26:15] Councilmember Nate Winegar: I had

[2:26:16] a question on the 30% open space, concerns

[2:26:20] with the wildlife corridors and understanding 30% which I think

[2:26:28] is a good number of realistic open space,

[2:26:30] but is there any definition of what discretion

[2:26:36] does the Council have during the process when

[2:26:39] presented with something what that 30% looks like.

[2:26:49] Donna Ferguson: You will have full discretion

[2:26:51] to determine if it's adequate open space for whatever

[2:26:54] values you have set forward in that policy.

[2:27:00] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Any additional questions?

[2:27:05] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: How many is a lot?

[2:27:11] Mayor Tracy Engerman: I'm going to ask

[2:27:12] you to hold your discussion back and forth until we

[2:27:15] get to discussion and debate.

[2:27:16] Do we have any staff questions?

[2:27:23] we will go ahead and I will entertain a motion.

[2:27:52] We begin discussion with Council member Mulvey.

[2:27:59] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: It would seem to be a minor change,

[2:28:02] but under guiding principles it calls for specific reference

[2:28:07] to the part of our policy that defines open space,

[2:28:12] and so it just adds three words to specifically refer

[2:28:17] to the rest of the section, and I think that comports with what

[2:28:24] our residents wanted and doesn't detract from the overall need

[2:28:28] to have the policy.

[2:28:47] Councilmember Geoff Blue: I know you said where it goes,

[2:28:50] but I'm lost in trying to find where you

[2:28:52] are putting those three words.

[2:28:57] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: There's

[2:28:58] two places, or three, in this policy that

[2:29:03] are kind of what we need to do.

[2:29:08] one is guiding principles, one is general policy,

[2:29:11] the next one is preferences pure rather than put

[2:29:16] something under preferences, I'm suggesting

[2:29:19] that when we mention our guiding principles under number three,

[2:29:25] we say preserve significant natural resources

[2:29:29] but then we define open space later in the document

[2:29:34] and so I am proposing that it's consistent to add

[2:29:40] open space there so that it makes direct reference

[2:29:43] to that later section.

[2:29:48] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Additional discussion?

[2:29:57] Councilmember Kori Salazar: You want

[2:29:58] to add and open space to C3?

[2:30:06] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: Yes.

[2:30:15] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: I feel like sometimes we in this

[2:30:19] council use the term a lot, and I'm curious about what the scale

[2:30:24] of that is .

[2:30:33] Councilmember Nate Winegar: It means on a routine basis of how

[2:30:36] many emails or people that were upset and brought up,

[2:30:40] I'd say it's brought up 35 to 40% of the time,

[2:30:46] there's a silent majority I never hear from

[2:30:50] but of the people I've spoken with who come to meetings ,

[2:30:57] I would say it's about 35 to 40% of those people who really worry

[2:31:01] about the wildlife and that they have access corridors for some

[2:31:07] of these things .

[2:31:20] Councilmember Geoff Blue: I am in support of this,

[2:31:22] I really like the process we went through.

[2:31:25] I take exception to the comment earlier today

[2:31:27] that the annexation process was filled with holes

[2:31:30] and problematic or whatever the phrase that was used,

[2:31:33] I think we handled it perfectly appropriately at the time

[2:31:36] and went through the process and the things we needed to do.

[2:31:40] We stepped back when we got to a point

[2:31:42] that we decided we didn't have a good policy document in place

[2:31:45] to give us the framework within which we wanted to be making

[2:31:49] the decision, I think that's what this is about

[2:31:53] and so I am very happy with this.

[2:31:56] Tying this into other things, I think

[2:31:59] this policy highlights the fact this is a decision that belongs

[2:32:03] at the city council level, annexation,

[2:32:06] and if someone believes that annexation is problematic

[2:32:11] they always can go out and get signatures and do initiative

[2:32:15] on the specific annexation as opposed

[2:32:18] to making a requirement for all annexations to go to the voters.

[2:32:22] I think this policy helps guide that process,

[2:32:25] so I am in support of this policy for a lot of reasons.

[2:32:43] Councilmember Kori Salazar: I also

[2:32:45] appreciate the work that went into this,

[2:32:47] and how much of the community was involved

[2:32:50] and how many community members expressed their desires,

[2:32:54] they gave feedback, they attended meetings.

[2:32:57] That's something we want to continue to have,

[2:33:01] and I think this policy integrates

[2:33:03] a lot of their concerns and also a lot of their criteria

[2:33:07] that we want to have for our city

[2:33:09] to have high standards, so we attract high quality people that

[2:33:15] want to protect the land and the wildlife.

[2:33:17] One thing the residents always ask about

[2:33:21] is wanting more businesses and retail, wanting more restaurants

[2:33:25] and our parks maintained and roads maintained.

[2:33:29] For us to do that, we need to grow

[2:33:32] and I think this policy allows us

[2:33:34] to grow in a way that protects what we have, but then grows it

[2:33:38] to a thoughtful manner.

[2:33:41] So, I am supportive of this and excited about it.

[2:33:54] Mayor Tracy Engerman: It was great to see the community come

[2:33:56] out and make sure their voice was heard in this policy.

[2:33:58] The reason we started with this is because the community came

[2:34:01] out, and we also recognized that we needed some guidance from

[2:34:05] what the community needed to see for its future and what it looks

[2:34:09] like when we are analyzing annexations .

[2:34:14] I hope the community feels like their voice was heard,

[2:34:18] we encompass a lot of the things that were mentioned

[2:34:20] between the survey and open houses and all

[2:34:23] the other outreach that we had.

[2:34:24] This was absolutely in conjunction and collaboration

[2:34:28] with the community trying to incorporate their voices here,

[2:34:33] and I think it's important that we have clarity for anyone that

[2:34:36] wants to become a stakeholder in Castle Pines,

[2:34:40] and this policy document creates that additional clarity

[2:34:43] for what we have an expectation for our community in the future.

[2:34:52] Please call the vote.

[2:35:06] The motion passes.

[2:35:22] Resolution 26-53, A resolution of the city Council of the city

[2:35:33] of Castle Pines Colorado expressing opposition

[2:35:35] to a ballot measure which would amend the city charter

[2:35:38] to require voter approval for certain annexations in excess

[2:35:40] of 20 acres.

[2:35:51] Mayor Tracy Engerman: I have a motion and a second.

[2:35:59] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: I was torn on this one,

[2:36:01] on one side I understand having resident input

[2:36:04] but on the other side, to me 20 acres is not a lot.

[2:36:11] It seems to me any annexation would have a vote for it,

[2:36:15] I also want to reiterate that we have discretion for everyone.

[2:36:21] Even if we don't support this measure,

[2:36:23] that doesn't mean we don't take that into account when we vote.

[2:36:28] For those reasons, I am in favor of opposition of this --

[2:36:36] I'm in favor of approving this measure which is in opposition.

[2:36:41] That's my comment, mayor.

[2:36:48] Councilmember Ron Cole: I struggled with this one a little

[2:36:50] bit because I really want more city input ,

[2:36:58] but we need to maintain the flexibility for us to make

[2:37:00] a decision for the city to grow , so I'm in favor of saying no.

[2:37:14] Councilmember Kori Salazar: I also support opposition of this.

[2:37:18] The reason is I did some research,

[2:37:22] and none of our neighbors in lone Tree, Parker, or castle

[2:37:27] Rock specifically have this as a policy which

[2:37:30] means if this is our policy, we are not

[2:37:34] attractive to any developers and that means our neighbors are.

[2:37:41] As an example, across from the canyons,

[2:37:45] if the property wants to annex into lone tree,

[2:37:50] we have no say over how much open space there is going to be,

[2:37:55] if it's going to protect the wildlife.

[2:37:57] Lone tree can decide they want to put

[2:38:00] affordable housing, high density apartments, many of the things

[2:38:05] we do not want in our community but that

[2:38:07] would be in our community because they

[2:38:08] are right next to us.

[2:38:10] We would have no say over it because we are basically

[2:38:12] closing the door for any conversation,

[2:38:16] like I mentioned if we are the only city where a developer has

[2:38:21] to go to a vote of the people, it links the amount of time

[2:38:24] and also increases their uncertainty and probably cost,

[2:38:29] so they are going to go to our neighbors

[2:38:31] and then we are stuck with whatever our neighbors decide,

[2:38:35] I think it is in the city's best interest

[2:38:39] to not approve this vote, because we

[2:38:44] went through this whole annexation policy process

[2:38:46] to get the community input to make sure we have a policy that

[2:38:50] supports the community.

[2:39:06] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I am by nature and definition

[2:39:09] always opposed to telling people how to vote.

[2:39:13] I strongly believe in our Constitution and citizens rights

[2:39:17] to express their freedom and our collective rights

[2:39:22] to our freedom of speech.

[2:39:27] Our policy was actually a knee jerk reaction

[2:39:32] to learning about this.

[2:39:34] I think it had a great result, but the citizens chose

[2:39:39] to persist with this process , I think they are valid and I think

[2:39:49] the voters need to decide.

[2:39:59] It took this much to get us to that annexation policy,

[2:40:05] and a lot of citizen involvement .

[2:40:12] They may be very happy now with what is produced .

[2:40:19] The third reason might just be the principle I believe in that

[2:40:23] it doesn't matter what party you are in ,

[2:40:34] we are a democratic republic that allows our residents

[2:40:37] to vote, and we put it on the ballot in our consent agenda we

[2:40:45] should not be putting our finger on the scale by having this

[2:40:49] in our agenda and by having this conversation,

[2:40:52] we have by definition told people what we think and we

[2:40:56] could have done that without telling them how to vote .

[2:41:01] So, I strongly oppose it for those reasons.

[2:41:09] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: I see it differently, I

[2:41:11] don't see this resolution telling people how to vote.

[2:41:16] This also doesn't mean it won't move forward,

[2:41:19] what this is saying is that those of us

[2:41:22] tonight who vote yes for the opposition,

[2:41:24] we don't support that.

[2:41:26] That doesn't change what actually happened,

[2:41:29] it's just our opposition so I want to be clear about that.

[2:41:33] We aren't saying you should or should not vote for it,

[2:41:36] we are saying those of us who will vote yes

[2:41:39] don't necessarily support that.

[2:41:49] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: The distinction I seek to make

[2:41:52] is that we each could have done so privately.

[2:41:54] Many times we've received talking points and information

[2:41:57] we can disseminate privately by approving

[2:42:01] this sort of resolution which contained

[2:42:03] many whereas clauses and many sections, we are as a body

[2:42:08] weighing in and I do not think that is appropriate, thank you.

[2:42:17] Councilmember Geoff Blue: I don't

[2:42:20] want to totally repeat everything I said,

[2:42:23] but what I said at the end of the annexation policy

[2:42:27] kind of applies here.

[2:42:29] I think the initiatives are a bad idea for our city,

[2:42:35] I think they are constraining the representative system we

[2:42:41] have set up, I think the city council is better

[2:42:45] served to do the negotiation and handling the annexation

[2:42:49] and it's been a process to have the City

[2:42:54] Council make a decision.

[2:42:56] If there's a problem or a lot of opposition

[2:42:59] to a specific annexation, they can get the vote and signatures

[2:43:03] and go out and run an initiative to overturn it.

[2:43:07] I'm very much opposed to the initiatives ,

[2:43:16] frankly I've struggled with whether we should pass this

[2:43:21] resolution.

[2:43:22] I am sympathetic to what Councilwoman Mulvey is saying.

[2:43:33] I kind of disagree on what Councilor Eubanks has said.

[2:43:46] I'm not certain how I'm going to vote until my vote comes,

[2:43:51] but I did want to be very clear about my opposition

[2:43:54] to the initiatives, I think the annexation policy does

[2:43:59] what needs to be done and sets up a nice system where we have

[2:44:04] a good framework within which to analyze any annexation that

[2:44:09] comes to us, and my expectation is we will see something.

[2:44:14] We have land to the south of us, land to the north of us,

[2:44:19] east of us -- a bunch of homes, who knows what they want to do

[2:44:26] so I expect we will see something in the future and I

[2:44:28] think we need to have the flexibility to analyze it

[2:44:30] on a case by case basis and make good decisions and meet

[2:44:35] our citizens needs and our desire to keep the character

[2:44:39] of our city.

[2:44:44] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Additional comments?

[2:44:48] Councilmember Nate Winegar: I want

[2:44:50] to say that I do respect and appreciate

[2:44:52] the passion of the citizens in the community and their voice.

[2:44:57] I think we've come a long way since I've joined the Council

[2:45:01] on making efforts to hear the voice and creating different

[2:45:04] ways to make sure that we are getting their input and creating

[2:45:07] multiple opportunities for that .

[2:45:12] I also respect Council Member Mulvey

[2:45:15] and respect your stance on this.

[2:45:17] I've already spoken out on this, I

[2:45:20] think that there are unintended consequences sometimes

[2:45:24] about good intention and well meaning of people,

[2:45:29] and I think that I understand and am sympathetic to reasoning

[2:45:35] as to why they feel like this is something that needs to happen

[2:45:39] and I also feel like there are unintended consequences that

[2:45:43] can severely impact the city of Castle Pines, its growth,

[2:45:48] its finances and its character.

[2:45:52] And for that reason, I will be voting in opposition.

[2:46:06] Mayor Tracy Engerman: I understand some of the council

[2:46:08] members hesitance for not wanting

[2:46:10] to weigh in on this as a resolution,

[2:46:14] but for me, this resolution, us not doing this resolution to me

[2:46:22] doesn't stand as us remaining neutral,

[2:46:25] I think it's us withholding information from our citizens.

[2:46:29] We have information from sitting at this dais and what it looks

[2:46:33] like to pass anything else in front of us

[2:46:36] including annexation, and we have

[2:46:38] knowledge from sitting here and learning those things,

[2:46:42] and for us not to weigh in to make statements

[2:46:45] about what kind of impact if this measure were to pass,

[2:46:49] we are doing a disservice to our community

[2:46:52] and that's why I believe we need to actually weigh in

[2:46:55] with the resolution in this case.

[2:47:01] This ballot measure, if it passes, essentially

[2:47:06] sets up a binary choice to residents about yes or no

[2:47:12] on an annexation, it doesn't give you

[2:47:15] an opportunity to negotiate on what is best for the community.

[2:47:19] It's whatever the developer puts in front of us,

[2:47:22] and then we vote on it.

[2:47:25] It really gives us no opportunities

[2:47:27] to make things better in an annexation possibility, I don't

[2:47:33] think we are actually going to see

[2:47:36] any annexations if this measure passes,

[2:47:38] which means oftentimes we are not at the table for annexation

[2:47:43] options, we are on the table.

[2:47:47] For that, call a motion.

[2:47:57] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I move

[2:47:58] to amend the resolution to only section one, state

[2:48:03] all the things we have affirmed about the City Council's

[2:48:07] position and the impact it might have,

[2:48:10] and it would simply remove that one item about how

[2:48:15] to vote the opposition part, everything else would remain.

[2:48:20] My motion to clarify is to amend the resolution to remove only

[2:48:29] section one, which states opposition to the ballot measure

[2:48:35] and so forth .

[2:48:44] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Hearing none, the amendment dies.

[2:48:48] Please call a vote for the motion.

[2:49:07] Clerk: The motion passes.

[2:49:15] Mayor Tracy Engerman: We are moving on to the very last one.

[2:49:28] Resolution 26-54, A Resolution of the City Council of the City

[2:49:31] of Castle Colorado Approving the 2026 Economic Development

[2:49:32] Strategic Plan

[2:49:34] .

[2:49:35] our staff presentation given by city manager Michael Benning.

[2:49:52] Michael Benning: The policy question --

[2:50:12] does Council support adoption of the resolution approving

[2:50:18] the city's economic development strategic plan?

[2:50:24] I just want to point out as a side note

[2:50:28] we are trying to standardize some of our presentations

[2:50:31] so you see a lot of the same types of process

[2:50:35] and policy presentation similar, that's

[2:50:41] why you see these in here.

[2:50:44] In developing the strategic plan,

[2:50:47] really want to focus on the lower part of the slide.

[2:50:51] The consultants I am not going to go back through

[2:50:55] because you've heard from them before,

[2:50:57] but they came to understand what the market was, defined

[2:51:01] that strategy and proposed actions

[2:51:05] for us through the implementation strategies.

[2:51:09] I do have Handouts that are large if anyone wants those

[2:51:20] for their shelf or whatever you might have .

[2:51:26] In the market findings, I'm sure you saw in both the staff

[2:51:31] memo and the presentation I think

[2:51:33] there's some repeats with some different words in here,

[2:51:37] but we really operate more as that residential hub,

[2:51:43] and what has happened both to the north

[2:51:45] and our south is they have created strong retail

[2:51:52] both from a park meadow standpoint,

[2:51:55] but they've got headquarters for lots of corporations

[2:52:00] and standard employee base in the South

[2:52:03] primarily in the services industry

[2:52:07] through the outlet stores and dining, those kinds of things.

[2:52:11] We leave the city to do that, we repeat ourselves a little bit.

[2:52:21] Organic development is occurring,

[2:52:24] we know we have primarily three major property

[2:52:28] owners in town that are all very experienced developers.

[2:52:35] They don't call us and ask us to help them find anything,

[2:52:38] they have brought us development opportunities.

[2:52:50] establishing job centers outside the city

[2:52:53] could have some limiting factor on us,

[2:52:57] I don't know that I would emphasize prohibiting it

[2:53:01] but certainly there are other kinds of gravitational pulls,

[2:53:07] especially in lone tree.

[2:53:08] We do have the purchasing power, if the retail and service

[2:53:13] industry comes here we certainly can be supported by the existing

[2:53:18] community and hopefully pull some of the regional support

[2:53:21] here.

[2:53:22] The west side is mainly built out,

[2:53:29] I have a little bit of updates but essentially the west side

[2:53:36] is 100% leased.

[2:53:42] they are investor owned .

[2:53:48] Parkway Plaza has three parcels left, but that is very minimal.

[2:53:55] The east side is really where we have an opportunity ,

[2:54:04] you will see this in the future slides.

[2:54:06] Really what I think the role for the city and the council

[2:54:10] is, goes to your approval of this

[2:54:14] is not being on the front end trying to recruit the businesses

[2:54:19] but creating policies and ordinances

[2:54:23] so that the built environment looks

[2:54:25] and feels like you want to ultimately see partnering

[2:54:33] with the developers and those public spaces,

[2:54:38] we will get to that in a little bit.

[2:54:40] This basically says what I just said.

[2:54:43] In this slide, it really illustrates what that is.

[2:54:47] We know it's coming, so to reiterate back

[2:54:51] to the other conversation, are you

[2:54:56] happy with what is in the design guidelines

[2:54:58] and if not let's look at amending those

[2:55:00] so we can really work on those upstream things so

[2:55:04] the businesses that are negotiating with the property

[2:55:07] owners directly and then coming to the city

[2:55:11] once they purchase a sale agreement

[2:55:14] or whatever the issue happens to be, ten at least or something,

[2:55:20] the expectations are clear and they know what to expect

[2:55:24] and through those expectations your adoption

[2:55:27] of update of the regulations or ordinances

[2:55:31] create the environment you ultimately want to see

[2:55:34] and the infrastructure policy alignment really

[2:55:37] ties into the best private investment

[2:55:40] that I have ever seen.

[2:55:42] I think if you talk to your colleagues ,

[2:55:50] its public investment into the right of way.

[2:56:02] One of the recommendations later on deals with specifics

[2:56:07] related to where is the library going to be

[2:56:12] and how can those be incubators for other businesses

[2:56:17] around there.

[2:56:22] Through those ultimately early actions we improve the quality ,

[2:56:34] so we create our own gravitational pull .

[2:56:44] This kind of breaks down just a little bit similar to what I was

[2:56:48] just saying .

[2:56:52] On the town center property on the west side,

[2:56:56] that corridor has potential which is about 120 acres

[2:57:00] and I think I mentioned during the council budget retreat

[2:57:04] one of the things that at some point we may bring to you,

[2:57:09] we might want to frontload as an example

[2:57:18] of the public infrastructure being invested

[2:57:21] because it is the developer's responsibility, pushing that

[2:57:27] forward.

[2:57:28] Definitely again having conversations with the property

[2:57:31] owner on the east side, a lot of you

[2:57:35] have said you better do that commercial development

[2:57:39] and bring that main street here, I

[2:57:45] think that's really the role that we can play

[2:57:48] is making sure that as the development is on the east side

[2:57:53] that council is communicating our expectations

[2:57:57] around that public space, because that is not necessarily

[2:58:03] what the developer is going to do on their own.

[2:58:06] I think we are generally blessed with high quality expectation,

[2:58:13] so luckily we are generally in alignment on the east side.

[2:58:21] Council has very much supported our organization,

[2:58:28] we are not looking to add a staff member .

[2:58:52] More internally is using key performance indicators,

[2:58:57] we will be starting to work on that

[2:59:00] and it would tie into the city's dashboard.

[2:59:04] We would certainly build that, I've already referred

[2:59:11] to discussions around the library saying how we can best

[2:59:16] support on the east side .

[2:59:21] They do recommend establishing clear commercial positioning

[2:59:26] statement, I think as a good partnership on the east side

[2:59:30] they have been very clear with us on the meetings

[2:59:33] and they want to incorporate the council

[2:59:37] and adopt into the commercial.

[2:59:41] We don't ultimately know what that looks like, but by the time

[2:59:48] the council had approved that, the commercial development

[2:59:54] we very much believe they are going to build that and so

[2:59:59] it helped to maintain or establish

[3:00:02] that commercial identity.

[3:00:04] So again, they did the assessment

[3:00:08] of the current standing with the economics, demographics,

[3:00:11] the business climate was they did talk to our property owners

[3:00:15] in addition to the residents and key stakeholders.

[3:00:20] They ultimately are defining a road,

[3:00:23] identifying those opportunities for growth,

[3:00:27] location for infrastructure needs

[3:00:30] I just talked about and long term strategies

[3:00:36] that I needed to print on 11 by 17 to be able to see it,

[3:00:41] that is what it looks like on the screen.

[3:00:43] One of the things we will start working on

[3:00:48] is of those short term pieces.

[3:00:52] There are some of those longer term

[3:00:54] pieces that I think tie into things like the design

[3:00:57] guidelines, and what we are really

[3:01:01] thinking about and working with Council on how do we

[3:01:03] create that regulatory framework so that businesses that

[3:01:07] come here are the quality type of buildings that you all

[3:01:14] want to see.

[3:01:17] We are really keen on this, what your leverage is so you're going

[3:01:22] to see this on a regular basis.

[3:01:24] It sets the guidance for development, strength

[3:01:28] and local services, economic vitality,

[3:01:30] community character and long term quality of life.

[3:01:33] It doesn't establish an aggressive or business specific

[3:01:36] recruitment program, because again,

[3:01:39] I think our unique property ownership in terms

[3:01:42] of the undeveloped land that is not what they have ever asked

[3:01:48] of the city, and because the current environment on the west

[3:01:53] side is least, and as you know the property owners

[3:01:58] in the Safeway property village no, that one's --

[3:02:03] what's the Safeway one called?

[3:02:07] That's not important.

[3:02:09] They have been very specific about we

[3:02:12] will call you don't call us type of thing.

[3:02:15] So the consultants heard that and really wanted

[3:02:19] to honor that given we have again, a unique situation.

[3:02:23] Ten, 20, 30 years from now that very much could change.

[3:02:26] And we would be more in line with other communities that

[3:02:30] are looking to support backfill, and redevelopment

[3:02:32] and those kinds of things.

[3:02:34] But that's not where we are at, but identify

[3:02:37] any specific concerns incentives,

[3:02:39] but again we are not looking to propose additional staff it's

[3:02:47] really around the policy making and those property

[3:02:51] investments that is what we can do to support and influence

[3:02:58] future business in our community.

[3:03:01] So we believe that they did a good job,

[3:03:04] we believe that the plan has a realistic strategic framework

[3:03:09] that we can start working on this plan this evening,

[3:03:16] there's no immediate fiscal impact

[3:03:17] as I just said we will be working if council approves it,

[3:03:21] on 27 implementation component from here.

[3:03:24] And if there are some components to that those will be included

[3:03:30] in the 27 proposal for you so we propose

[3:03:33] that you approve resolution 2654 adopting the Resolution

[3:03:39] Strategic Plan and there's a proposed motion here.

[3:03:44] >> Council members do you have any questions for staff at this

[3:03:47] time?

[3:03:54] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: This was an investment

[3:03:56] that we all agreed on but for the public's sake

[3:03:58] could you share the consultant?

[3:03:59] And if you don't have the exact, maybe the ballpark perhaps?

[3:04:06] >> We think of a 65000, but if you want we can confirm

[3:04:10] and communicate that to council.

[3:04:15] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Any additional questions

[3:04:17] come out Councilmember Cole?

[3:04:19] Councilmember Ron Cole: Not so much a question

[3:04:22] but a Mayor Tracy Engerman: Can I

[3:04:25] ask you to hold it until discussion?

[3:04:27] Okay.

[3:04:28] Thank you.

[3:04:29] All right comment any further questions for staff?

[3:04:33] All right.

[3:04:34] May I have a motion to begin discussion?

[3:04:38] >> I move to approve resolution 2624 a resolution of the city

[3:04:45] of the Council of Castle Pines Colorado approving the 26

[3:04:48] Economic Development plan.

[3:04:52] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Councilmember blue

[3:04:53] will start with you then Councilmember Salazar

[3:04:55] then Councilmember Cole.

[3:04:58] Councilmember Geoff Blue: I'm very impressed with this,

[3:05:01] we went back and forth over years Councilmember Mulvey

[3:05:05] and I going back and forth, I think

[3:05:09] this is a good compromise I think this gets us moving down

[3:05:11] the path and at some point we may need a development director

[3:05:13] but at this point I don't think we do

[3:05:15] and I think this shows that.

[3:05:17] And I'm looking forward to seeing how this is implemented.

[3:05:21] So many questions, this answers a lot of questions

[3:05:24] and creates a framework, but it also asks a ton more.

[3:05:28] But these are the kinds of questions that we are here for.

[3:05:32] That's what our job is.

[3:05:33] So I think this is great.

[3:05:34] You guys have done a great job to put us

[3:05:37] in a position to really start looking at this kind of thing.

[3:05:41] Especially as everything is developing

[3:05:44] and now is a really good time to be doing this.

[3:05:47] So thank you.

[3:05:50] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Councilmember Salazar.

[3:05:55] Councilmember Kori Salazar: I know this is something

[3:05:57] that they mentioned in our study session

[3:05:59] with the Ayres group, (laughs) so I'm

[3:06:02] happy to see the implementation, and I

[3:06:05] know that it does match our policy direction in where

[3:06:08] we want to go, and what the community also

[3:06:11] has expressed where they want to go

[3:06:12] and a lot of the things listed in the implementation matrix

[3:06:15] are desires of the community.

[3:06:18] So I'm excited to see this come into fruition.

[3:06:20] And I am happy that we have the support and good relationships

[3:06:24] that the city has built with our landowners.

[3:06:26] So thank you.

[3:06:29] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Councilmember Cole?

[3:06:33] Councilmember Ron Cole: Just a comment

[3:06:34] the six bullets under the strategic presentation

[3:06:37] just blew me away you guys did a phenomenal job pulling

[3:06:39] that together, I think it lays out a solid path for where

[3:06:43] we need to go.

[3:06:44] And I appreciate your work.

[3:06:50] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Councilmember Eubanks?

[3:06:52] Councilmember Chris Eubanks: Thank

[3:06:54] you mayor, while I may not have been a huge fan

[3:06:56] com I think it came together nicely in the message,

[3:06:59] I think that we can consider this going forward.

[3:07:02] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Any additional comments?

[3:07:05] Councilmember Mulvey?

[3:07:08] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I think

[3:07:09] these are an example of how we as a council

[3:07:12] can get something done.

[3:07:13] This is a long time coming, should

[3:07:15] have been done a long time ago.

[3:07:18] And you know gone with the expenditure of what

[3:07:22] would be half an FTE to get to this point,

[3:07:25] it was worthwhile worthwhile.

[3:07:28] So whether we hired somebody to do the outside as a consultant

[3:07:31] or hired somebody to do an inside, to me,

[3:07:35] that's irrelevant.

[3:07:37] It finally got done.

[3:07:39] And it took us a while to get consensus to get that done.

[3:07:43] I do think it's important to look at the implementation,

[3:07:47] and it might require some additional costs.

[3:07:51] And I think we have to be open to that,

[3:07:54] and to be open about it.

[3:07:56] But we can't stop.

[3:07:58] We were pushed to do an annexation policy,

[3:08:00] we were pushed to do this, let's not

[3:08:04] stop on what we need to do to govern properly.

[3:08:08] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Additional comments?

[3:08:10] All right clerk deputy please call the vote.

[3:08:16] [Members voting]

[3:08:28] Clerk: The motion passes.

[3:08:31] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Thank you we are moving on to products

[3:08:34] and report city manager do you have anything

[3:08:36] to report this evening?

[3:08:37] >> I do.

[3:08:38] I have more slides for you tonight.

[3:08:40] Special.

[3:08:43] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Are they surprised slides?

[3:08:45] >> All right I'm just going to read this quickly.

[3:08:47] This is a great little story.

[3:08:49] Over the weekend staff received a voicemail

[3:08:51] from a concerned parent reporting

[3:08:52] that their son's skateboard had gone into the stormwater system.

[3:08:56] Parent was concerned about the water washing it away,

[3:08:59] but their son was worried about the Ninja Turtles taking it.

[3:09:04] (laughs) taking it out of the sewer system.

[3:09:07] We are not staffed on the weekends

[3:09:08] so the parents left us a voicemail.

[3:09:11] But, of course we didn't get it until Monday,

[3:09:14] so they had to wait until Monday to find out

[3:09:17] the results of the skateboard.

[3:09:19] Well there you have it.

[3:09:21] Right there.

[3:09:21] Is the first thing Monday, our storm manager Joe

[3:09:25] went to find the wayward skateboard,

[3:09:28] and after going above and beyond and pun intended below,

[3:09:32] the response we got from the parent was we got it,

[3:09:34] the storm water management got back to me

[3:09:37] they retrieved it this morning and he was awesome.

[3:09:39] Awesome.

[3:09:40] I just wanted to say I thought this was

[3:09:43] great the policy of our staff.

[3:09:45] So we're very cool in the pictures we're

[3:09:48] very cool so they got me going.

[3:09:50] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Happy ending.

[3:09:54] >> And just so you know stormwater bots we knew it

[3:09:57] wasn't going to go away because would have had to already been

[3:10:02] filled up and the sediment Joe was pretty confident that he

[3:10:08] knew where it was and it was going to be right there.

[3:10:10] Continuing the positive, we received an email

[3:10:15] from the resident, I commend the crews

[3:10:17] that did Eldridge Park they did an excellent job the restrooms

[3:10:28] were clean, the grounds were cleaned of any debris,

[3:10:32] they said it's a jewel of the decree,

[3:10:35] they said it was wonderful and spectacular

[3:10:38] thank you and everyone else who put it together

[3:10:40] many many hours of work and collaboration.

[3:10:41] We don't get a lot of these so I thought I would share it

[3:10:44] with the City Council.

[3:10:45] And then, a couple of you heard this

[3:10:49] but Larry Nimmo has announced his retirement.

[3:10:52] He will be leaving us at the end of the year, he just turned,

[3:10:58] I probably shouldn't say it so I won't.

[3:11:03] But, he is ready to move in to his next statement.

[3:11:09] I know he wouldn't mind me sharing,

[3:11:14] the passage of our group really got

[3:11:17] him thinking about the fixture in the transportation.

[3:11:23] I worked with him in the 80s?

[3:11:28] 90s came back in Boulder when we both worked for the city

[3:11:31] of Boulder, he was in transportation then and just

[3:11:35] made it his career and I think he communicated this

[3:11:40] to the staff.

[3:11:42] Got him talking to his wife about what their future holds.

[3:11:47] So we don't have any retirement details,

[3:11:58] ultimately we're just thinking about the timeline people

[3:12:00] are relocating and doing different jobs,

[3:12:02] and he's here through the end of the year.

[3:12:05] We'll update council with a retirement plan.

[3:12:09] And I think that was it.

[3:12:11] That was the last one.

[3:12:13] Sorry mayor.

[3:12:15] So Village square which is the road,

[3:12:19] they have reached out again interested,

[3:12:21] this is a conversation you all had during the budget retreat,

[3:12:26] so they continue to be interested,

[3:12:28] so we will be meeting with them again

[3:12:31] and potentially have an update for council on that.

[3:12:34] I'm sorry, it is connected to the you are a.

[3:12:39] My guess is they will want to tie that together,

[3:12:41] I don't know for sure Council finds marketplace that's what I

[3:12:46] was trying to remember for sure ,

[3:12:51] we don't have any names or anything like that but they are

[3:12:56] getting very close to fully leasing the Safeway and they

[3:13:00] have some tenant backfills that they are working

[3:13:04] on for the bakery space as well as --

[3:13:08] I'm calling it the medical office space,

[3:13:10] but it's where the veterinarian had been.

[3:13:14] And they did all of the remodel in their office space

[3:13:17] and then they moved out.

[3:13:19] If they divide the Safeway in half

[3:13:22] they've got four tenant spaces, and so they're

[3:13:25] working diligently to get all of those filled,

[3:13:28] and if that's the case, of course

[3:13:30] we would be 100% leased on the west side of town.

[3:13:36] So thank you.

[3:13:38] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Council member blue?

[3:13:41] Councilmember Geoff Blue: Any news

[3:13:44] on when Old Pinos is going to open?

[3:13:46] >> They are going to be doing some soft opening and tests next

[3:13:49] week, so I would think, let's call it two weeks as long

[3:13:54] as the soft test goes well.

[3:13:57] So, the second week in September if I have my calendar right.

[3:14:06] >> Toby it sounds like we have dinner for next council meeting.

[3:14:16] >> I don't know if they'll be open by the time we're here.

[3:14:18] It's a hard pass.

[3:14:22] Mayor Tracy Engerman: All right.

[3:14:23] We will move on to council member reports.

[3:14:25] I'm going to try and go in alphabetical order.

[3:14:28] So council member blue?

[3:14:31] Councilmember Geoff Blue: I assume that I

[3:14:34] will be first with the b.

[3:14:35] Two things.

[3:14:36] One, first of all, at the Cherry Creek Basin Water Authority

[3:14:42] board, meaning we're talking about Thinking about

[3:15:01] for our city and city manager, I raised that with Michael I

[3:15:04] asked the question, our current number for him is 5000.

[3:15:09] We are going to get the numbers of what

[3:15:12] the local jurisdictions around us are,

[3:15:15] and I think we should consider raising that

[3:15:19] just because I think it would make sense

[3:15:21] to have more flexibility.

[3:15:22] And frankly I trust Michael to make the decision

[3:15:27] if he makes a bad decision we'll know about it pretty fast

[3:15:31] anyway.

[3:15:32] That's implicit though right?

[3:15:36] The other thing that I wanted to point out,

[3:15:39] we have this great space here, and I know we shouldn't be

[3:15:42] talking about it already, but we only have --

[3:15:45] I mean this is not a permanent solution, we know that.

[3:15:47] This is a temporary solution for us as the west or east side

[3:15:52] is built out, it's built out in the mixed use.

[3:15:58] I know they're talking about putting it

[3:16:00] in for the library there tonight we

[3:16:04] need to start considering we need to consider

[3:16:08] where do we want a city hall?

[3:16:13] We need to start having a conversation

[3:16:15] and the discussion and the two obvious places

[3:16:18] are clearly in this space, but with a new building.

[3:16:22] With some sort of civic area around it

[3:16:25] in the park or whatever.

[3:16:27] Or, over in the canyons.

[3:16:30] Those are the two obvious places.

[3:16:32] And obviously we can talk about the Vickers property

[3:16:35] as another place we can go.

[3:16:37] But I think we need to be thinking about it.

[3:16:40] It's never too early to have these conversations,

[3:16:42] 70 years can go by really fast or ten years can go by really

[3:16:47] fast -- seven years or ten years.

[3:16:49] So I think we just need to have it front of mind

[3:16:51] as we go forward.

[3:16:54] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Council member Cole?

[3:16:56] Council member Eubanks?

[3:16:58] Council member Mulvey?

[3:17:07] Councilmember Deborah Mulvey: I'm

[3:17:08] glad you brought it up early because when

[3:17:09] we think about our budget and capital infrastructures

[3:17:12] and implementing things we really have to look forward.

[3:17:14] And if we want to spend a bazillion bucks,

[3:17:16] we better figure out how we are going to get a bazillion bucks.

[3:17:19] Unless we are willing to go into debt.

[3:17:22] So thanks for bringing that up.

[3:17:23] And, to that end two, civility matters.

[3:17:27] And thank you is okay.

[3:17:29] And I appreciate the civility that we have here.

[3:17:32] Another thing that comes to mind is

[3:17:37] we each have principles when we are voting, and I am glad

[3:17:42] that we respect them.

[3:17:43] I would suggest if you're struggling with something then

[3:17:46] there's a reason.

[3:17:49] And just stick to your principles.

[3:17:53] Lastly, well not lastly but lastly on this topic.

[3:17:59] I'm not going to express how I intend to vote all the time.

[3:18:03] And what I think of a ballot measure all the time.

[3:18:07] And I appreciate that anybody can and anybody should.

[3:18:12] And the place to do that is in your own sphere.

[3:18:16] Because the fair Campaign Practices Act calls for that.

[3:18:23] I want to thank staff for the proclamation for Constitution

[3:18:28] Week.

[3:18:28] I want to thank the Sheriff for his interest

[3:18:33] as I mentioned earlier, there was an event

[3:18:37] to kick off and raise funds for a program

[3:18:42] to prevent and help people suffering from trafficking.

[3:18:47] You would be surprised where it occurs.

[3:18:51] We had a clerk that you would have never known.

[3:18:54] It just happens, and you wouldn't know it.

[3:18:59] So, some of those things you may see initiatives

[3:19:03] coming to pass on that.

[3:19:05] I know I'm going to be dealing with it.

[3:19:07] And then lastly, there are some tough votes

[3:19:09] that have to be done this week.

[3:19:12] And my other spheres, if you have questions about them

[3:19:15] please let me know.

[3:19:16] This isn't the time or the place to get

[3:19:18] into the content, because it's not on the Douglas County

[3:19:22] ballot, but if you have any, please,

[3:19:26] I invite you to have a conversation with me.

[3:19:30] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Thank you.

[3:19:32] Council member Salazar?

[3:19:36] Councilmember Kori Salazar: Thank you.

[3:19:38] Two as well for me I attended the Municipal Leadership Academy

[3:19:41] day one in Alamosa, and I got to meet council members

[3:19:44] from across the state.

[3:19:45] From towns as small as 200 people to those of over 100,000

[3:19:50] and our workshop this past -- it was the 14th of August,

[3:19:56] we focused on good governance.

[3:19:58] My biggest takeaway was the need for us as council or as a city

[3:20:07] just for increased communication as what council is,

[3:20:12] how it's involved, and all of you sitting here and all of you

[3:20:19] sitting there.

[3:20:20] Also this past Thursday the parks board

[3:20:22] met for the first time in a couple months.

[3:20:24] We took the summer off and we are

[3:20:26] working on phasing for the Soaring Hawk Park

[3:20:29] in the canyons, which again we need funding for which growth

[3:20:33] would help with that funding, so just another tie

[3:20:36] back to the annexation policy.

[3:20:40] Good news policy Ridge will start beginning work here

[3:20:44] after Labor Day, and we are hoping to be completed by April,

[3:20:48] and then the parks board also talked

[3:20:50] about trailhead kiosks and mile marker placement,

[3:20:54] as part of our trail systems.

[3:20:56] So that is it for me.

[3:20:59] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Council member Winegar?

[3:21:02] Councilmember Nate Winegar: Thank you mayor I do

[3:21:04] have something.

[3:21:04] I have a kudo.

[3:21:06] Two Saturdays ago, I was messaged on Facebook,

[3:21:11] which, I usually am.

[3:21:13] That there were concerns canyon side for a blind spot

[3:21:18] due to some of the construction on all three

[3:21:24] sides of that intersection that had created what my community

[3:21:30] and citizens in the county would call an issue

[3:21:35] where people would be coming out and not be able to see at.

[3:21:38] I contacted the city manager Penny on a Saturday,

[3:21:42] he was extremely responsive, and just so

[3:21:46] you know when I say a lot of people per year, Councilmember

[3:21:50] Eubanks, was probably 35 people that had messaged

[3:21:55] and questioned this concern.

[3:21:57] There was a quick response, a quick action by you

[3:22:02] and your team.

[3:22:03] And, everybody was very appreciative.

[3:22:06] They were appreciative of that and they

[3:22:09] were happy with how fast the city responded so thank you.

[3:22:12] I appreciate that.

[3:22:12] Thank you.

[3:22:13] That's all I have.

[3:22:16] Mayor Tracy Engerman: Thank you.

[3:22:18] I have a quick kudos because I have

[3:22:19] a teenager that keeps calling me so I

[3:22:20] need to adjourn the meeting.

[3:22:22] I need to say thank you to the Public Works department,

[3:22:25] they've done an awesome job trying

[3:22:27] to adapt to the start of school and the traffic that's happening

[3:22:30] and the construction along with it,

[3:22:32] and backups and things like that when everyone's just

[3:22:34] trying to figure out you know, what does the new school

[3:22:37] year look like?

[3:22:37] So I want to thank them, they are doing a great job.

[3:22:40] So thank you.

[3:22:41] We will go ahead and adjourn at 8:52 p.m..

City Council Study Session and Regular Meeting

Transcript