[0:16] All right, it is six o'clock and welcome to the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees for

[0:29] the

[0:42] Hi, honey.

[0:42] Here.

[0:43] Trustee Torty.

[0:45] We have a quorum.

[0:48] All right.

[0:50] Stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance.

[1:15] All right.

[1:17] Moving on to approval of the agenda, I know we have several moves.

[1:21] If I have a motion for the moves, we're just going to put the agenda.

[1:29] Motion approved.

[1:30] Please.

[1:34] Do I have a second?

[1:35] Second.

[1:38] All those in favor?

[1:39] Hi.

[1:40] All those opposed?

[1:42] Motion passes?

[1:44] Public comment.

[1:59] The first one is Drew Peterson.

[2:06] Name and address for the record, sir.

[2:08] Group Peterson.

[2:09] 22.

[2:10] Silver Leaf Avenue.

[2:11] Firestone Colorado.

[2:12] First, thank you all for your service to our town. I appreciate it. I want to ask a rhetorical

[2:18] question. I don't want to expect an answer, of course. Do you know why you're called

[2:21] trustees? Do you know why the town is called the board members are called trustees versus

[2:28] Councilman or any of that? You know why? There's an actual legal reason for that. That's a legal

[2:33] designation that you, you know, town, because of the way the government set up and it was intended

[2:39] for small governments, and then as they grow, they delegate authority down, but you start

[2:45] out with all the responsibility of the town starts with the trustees, all the financial

[2:50] responsibilities, everything starts with the trustees, and as the town grows, you start

[2:55] to hire people and delegate authority down and those kinds of things, but the one thing

[2:59] you never do is your responsibility to citizens as a trustee of the town, the citizens

[3:07] money. It is their money and you're entrusted to manage that money and to make good

[3:15] decisions about how we spend that money. On the agenda there's an item and I can't remember

[3:21] because I don't have the agenda been front of me but it is one of the things is to prove

[3:25] a contract that would not follow through the procurement process. Now I know this because I saw

[3:33] that's on the back end, that he actually made a conscious decision to not follow the procurement

[3:39] process. And why is he not following? The process, of course, is you have a bid. You go through

[3:45] a bid process. There is, however, the ability to have an exception to that process. That exception,

[3:53] however, is for very specific, very cases where it's necessary to go that direction because there

[4:01] isn't anybody, but a particular vendor that can provide the services.

[4:06] That is not to say that because one vendor likes to work with another vendor,

[4:11] or it says that another vendor is a really good vendor.

[4:15] That's not a reason to not have go through the procurement process.

[4:19] It is, however, a good differentiator.

[4:23] That obviously, that would be something you would want to take into account

[4:26] when you're looking at selecting a vendor.

[4:28] But one of the reasons I bring this up in why it's important, it's about the price, it's not so much about the services, it's about the price, how do you know that you're getting the most competitive and appropriate price for the services rendered?

[4:42] Well, you do that through the bid process by getting multiple bids, you now know what?

[4:49] The bid, the, the, the, the, the, the, the pros you're getting is one that fits that criteria,

[4:56] that that meets that, that competitive criteria.

[4:59] And that's what I think you need to consider when you're looking at this.

[5:02] You, you currently are violating, like, if you go through with this, you will be violating that policy.

[5:08] And that's, I just want to make sure you understand that, because that's not a valid reason for an exception.

[5:13] to the bidding process. Okay, thank you. Thank you, appreciate comments. All right, Linda

[5:21] Aller, did I pronounce that correctly? Aller. Aller. Okay. Close enough. I've been called

[5:28] other things. Name and address for the record person. Linda Aller is 605 South Park Avenue

[5:34] Fort Lapton. Okay. Good evening. My name is Linda Aller. I am the Goodwill Ambassador for the

[5:42] flight 629 Memorial Organization. My group in this area native of this area so I really

[5:47] speaks to me. We sincerely appreciate the support and suggestions from the Firestone

[5:52] Mayor so far and the purpose of tonight is just to introduce myself and advise the council

[5:59] and public of the Candelite Service November 1st at the Carbon Valley Lutheran Church behind

[6:04] Ziggy's and Auto Zone on Simran Street. The names which I explained later will be red and

[6:10] display of information will be set up. Denver 7 will be there as well as my

[6:15] cast with the Denver Police Museum and we encourage you all to attend. We have found

[6:20] that there is not a lot of awareness of the November 1st, 1955 crash that happened

[6:25] just outside of Longmont, which is now a part of Firestone, Weld County, 66 and 13. As a brief

[6:32] summary, a man put a dynamite bomb in his mother suitcase in a plot to get her life

[6:36] insurance and this actually was the first recorded sabotage of a commercial airline 44 people

[6:43] lost their lives. It is our desire to create a memorial to honor these 44 victims as well

[6:50] as the hundreds connected to this crash police fire department area towns and cities multiple

[6:56] towns and cities involved state federal agencies and what we like to call community champions.

[7:02] The local farmers who actually heard and saw the crash and were the first ones unseen.

[7:08] And some of those farmers are still alive today and I've met some of them and we'd like

[7:12] to have this memorial in place next year on the 70th anniversary before they pass.

[7:18] There's just so many parts to this.

[7:20] I can't explain it.

[7:21] Google 629.

[7:23] It's significant in that laws were changed regarding accountability for commercial attacks.

[7:29] baggage checks now, it changed how the FBI performed forensics, the case was actually intentionally,

[7:37] even though it was federal, it was handed over to the state of Colorado because we still

[7:42] had the death penalty. And within a 15-month period, this man was tried convicted and put

[7:47] to death. But the victims and all the community champions were then forgotten about. It was

[7:53] just some big sensational trial, and it was unfortunate for those who lost, and they just

[7:58] have never been recognized.

[8:01] So that's our goal.

[8:03] We just hope that we want to build this memorial.

[8:06] It's actually connected.

[8:07] The Grand Canyon, no, Canyon City Museum also references

[8:12] John Graham as being executed there.

[8:14] So we just want your support in our mission.

[8:17] OK.

[8:18] Thank you.

[8:18] Thank you for your comments.

[8:22] Is there anybody else in the audience that

[8:24] would like to make a comment?

[8:28] OK, moving on.

[8:29] Now we'll go to consent agenda.

[8:32] And we do have some changes to that consent agenda.

[8:38] Yeah, I'm here to request a resolution 2494.

[8:41] We move the discussion item HG.

[8:44] And resolution 24102.

[8:46] We move the discussion item HF.

[8:49] All right.

[8:52] And then the original letter will now be 8H.

[8:58] Okay.

[8:59] We'll make that movement.

[9:05] See, do I have a motion to approve the agenda?

[9:08] If you can send to gender, we're going to approve trusty doority and trusty version.

[9:17] Okay, here we go.

[9:21] We're really quickly resolution 24101.

[9:26] Where's where are you?

[9:27] We're going to replace the easement and the packet with the correct easement.

[9:34] Okay.

[9:34] So can we just deal with resolution 24101?

[9:37] on then quickly to make sure you're substituting the correct

[9:40] easement.

[9:41] OK, so we just deal with that then.

[9:44] Please.

[9:45] OK.

[9:48] So just making sure of what you're asking you

[9:52] when we're doing with the consent agenda,

[9:55] we're just going to bring that one out.

[9:56] So what you want?

[9:58] Yes.

[9:59] Yes, please.

[10:00] Just call up resolution 24101 and then substitute

[10:04] the correct easement.

[10:05] OK.

[10:10] I'm sorry this is this is it right here right they had correct these one

[10:17] There's that where you put it?

[10:22] I'm sorry.

[10:24] It's it's in the packet. Okay, I don't have the computer in front of me

[10:28] So fine can you pull that up for me?

[10:34] Oh, got you. Hey

[10:36] Let me

[10:49] read this real quick. So I know where it's

[11:01] at. All right, mayor. If I may make this just

[11:04] I live it. Yeah, I think read the title and then just please note for our minutes

[11:08] that the correct easement wasn't included. Okay, you are showing all these

[11:13] crew balls that means they're not going to figure it out. It's marium.

[11:21] All right, so those in favor of the consent agenda are a voice vote. So those

[11:33] in favor. All right, I go against. Okay, got that. And the consent agenda is approval

[11:42] of the October 9th 2024 Board of Trustees regular minutes. Approval of the October 16th 2024 Board

[11:51] of Trustees special meeting minutes. Consolation of the November 27th 2024 and December 25th 2024 Board

[12:02] of trustees minutes. Meeting? Yes. Meeting? Sorry.

[12:10] Let's go down. Okay. Resolution 24-100. Resolution

[12:17] is the Board of Trustees of the Board of Firestone Colorado. Accepting the dedication of a

[12:23] building setback utility and drainage easement from collective land holding partnership LLC

[12:29] and vacating a portion of the existing buildings sit back, drainage, and utility.

[12:40] These must be pertaining to one-be-one of the Del Camino, Johnson's POD.

[12:48] The resolution, oh, that was this right here. Let's do this again, a resolution of the Board of Trustees.

[12:55] Wow, having a day, sorry folks.

[12:58] Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone, Colorado, accepting the dedication of a building set back utility and drainage easement from collective land holding partnership LLC and vacating a portion of the existing building set back drainage and utility easement pertaining to lot one be one of the Del Camino Junction Park PU and D and this is the new new and correct.

[13:25] You've got to read, you haven't read 24 101 and that's where we'll insert.

[13:32] Good.

[13:33] Okay, I was lost on that one. I'm sorry,

[13:38] folks.

[13:41] Resolution 24101, a resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone Colorado,

[13:46] accepting the dedication of a utility easement from quick trip corporation pertaining to the final development plan for quick trip store.

[13:55] to find that one real quick.

[14:09] And it's store 42.79, all right? You would like me to read

[14:15] through it.

[14:20] But this needs to make sure that that correct these men is attached to the

[14:24] resolution. This got it, okay. Clearers may begin to go a bowling pen while you're at it, though.

[14:31] Yeah, well, that's, that's all right. Haven't, haven't got through one of these clean yet,

[14:36] So one of these days I'll actually do that.

[14:40] All right, so that's what we have for consent agenda.

[14:46] All right, moving on to presentation.

[14:50] Star Award presentation.

[15:00] Mayor, can I just do one more bit of housekeeping really quickly? We got a little bit out of sequence. You have read every item for the consent agenda. There was a motion made to approve it, and there was a voice vote to approve the consent agenda, but just out of sequence, read all the items.

[15:19] Okay, so I do you want me to

[15:21] I think you through it. I just want to make sure you the board understands that you've approved the consent agenda

[15:26] We just leave it with that

[15:28] Okay, I'm sorry folks

[15:30] Try to do better next time

[16:03] It's a good

[16:10] evening Mayor, the Board of Trustees, Jan Sloot, human resources director for the

[16:16] telepirestone. I apologize for that delay. But tonight we are here to actually recognize

[16:25] five of our officers that for their bravery, professionalism, and because of the fact that I think

[16:32] It's really important for the chief of police to convey what they really did and how proud we really are of them.

[16:40] I'd like the chief to come on off,

[16:47] and I'm going to turn that over to you.

[16:48] Thank you, Jim. Mayor Trustee, good to be there. Just go out line up guys. They start lineing up.

[16:55] I just want to kind of give you a picture of what occurred tonight.

[16:57] And a moment, Commander Jim Stroud will actually read the nomination that he submitted.

[17:01] But last month, our officers and little old firestone, we were able to put some bad people behind bars and it just happened a little bit of luck and a lot of skill.

[17:14] So some of the crimes that you're going to hear about involved auto theft, alluding from police, suspect striking one of our officers, drug possession, murder.

[17:27] Recovery of a weapon that was we believe was used in that murder not here in Firestone, but with another agency, so we actually facilitated an arrest for another agency because of these, this intervention right here.

[17:39] So I'm going to invite Commander Stroud to come to read the nomination and what was not the awards afterwards.

[17:45] Good evening Mayor Tom Board.

[17:48] Bear with me for just a minute.

[17:49] got a little bit of a long chronology of kind of what occurred but gives a good representation

[17:54] of what happened on September 9th. On the morning of September 9th 2024 several officers from

[18:02] the Firestone Police Department demonstrated exceptional bravery, professionalism, the coordination

[18:07] during the pursuit, and apprehension of three suspects involved in a violent criminal act.

[18:13] Their hard work and dedication exemplify the core values of our department and for the outstanding

[18:19] efforts they are nominated for the town of Firestone Blue Star Award.

[18:23] The incident began when the suspects were contacted in a stolen vehicle in Firestone

[18:28] and during an initial encounter, used the stolen vehicle to strike one of our officers.

[18:34] The suspects then fled the scene, leading officers on a high-speed pursuit.

[18:39] Despite the dangerous circumstances, the officers maintained a composure and skillfully

[18:43] pursued the suspects.

[18:44] The pursuit concluded when the suspects crashed their vehicle into a concrete, concrete and

[18:51] bankman, in the area of Highway 52 and I-25.

[18:56] Undeterred these three suspects fled on foot, and two of them took refuge in a water drainage

[19:03] tunnel, attempting to barricade themselves.

[19:06] With precision and calm, our officers immediately secured the area, protecting the public,

[19:12] creating a tactical perimeter.

[19:15] There's swift actions ensured that the unfolding situation was contained, and nearby civilians

[19:20] were kept out of harm's way.

[19:24] Through the collaboration with neighboring police departments, our officers allocated the

[19:29] necessary resources, and enacted a carefully executed plan to apprehend the suspects.

[19:35] Clear and coordinated commands were issued to the suspects, and over the course of about

[19:39] 45, 10 minutes, all three suspects were taken into custody without further incident.

[19:45] However, one of the suspects initially refused to cooperate with the officer's commands,

[19:50] standing at the foot of the water drainage tunnel, instead of raising both hands as ordered,

[19:55] he kept one hand at his waistband and used the other to beat on his chest,

[20:00] taunting officers, and indicating he had a gun in his waistband.

[20:05] Despite the provocation, our officers remain calm,

[20:08] and continue to issue clear commands while positioning themselves in the safest manner possible.

[20:14] In an effort to de-escalate the situation without lethal force,

[20:18] officers deployed a less than lethal foam round, which struck the suspect in the thigh.

[20:24] This decisive action led to the suspect eventually complying with officers orders

[20:28] and being taken into custody.

[20:32] After the suspects were apprehended, officers initiated an evidence canvas

[20:35] in the area where the suspects had been hiding.

[20:39] A thorough, calculated search was conducted

[20:41] and critical items inconspicuously hidden by the suspects were uncovered.

[20:47] Thanks to the officers keen to attention and detail during their search,

[20:51] they discovered key pieces of a handgun that had been disassembled and hidden.

[20:56] These crucial findings later secured charges against the suspects

[20:59] related to a recent homicide and a neighboring jurisdiction.

[21:04] In addition to the handgun, the suspects were found to possess a significant quantity of fentanyl

[21:10] pills as well. The discovery of this evidence alongside the calm and strategic handling of the incident

[21:16] highlights the professionalism and diligence of our officers in this department. These officers

[21:22] are commended for their bravery, perseverance, and teamwork, and safely apprehending dangerous criminals,

[21:27] preventing further harm and upholding the safety of the public.

[21:32] Their actions on September 9th, 2024 reflect the highest standards of law enforcement,

[21:38] and they are deserving of the town of Firestone's blue star award

[21:42] for their outstanding service.

[21:46] The gentleman that we're involved with that call from left to right,

[21:50] Sergeant Michael Chinick, Sergeant Kurt Bringle, Officer Michael Gunner, Officer Michael Riem,

[21:55] and Officer Brandon Minner, those are all our Michaels

[21:59] by the way in the department, so I think.

[22:01] That everybody, yeah, we brought them all up tonight.

[22:04] Gentlemen, thank you for what you did that day.

[22:06] I know this is just another call, high stress call for us all,

[22:11] but this is what we trained for.

[22:13] You guys did an outstanding job,

[22:14] and this is what we see with everybody in our department.

[22:17] This is just a small sample of who our officers are.

[22:21] So please, please welcome and help me thank them

[22:24] for this blue star award.

[22:43] Over and wherever your stars so that they can

[22:46] get a picture of you.

[22:47] I would like to thank you.

[22:49] Thank you.

[22:51] Yeah, we're quick board.

[22:51] Well, they're minding up.

[22:52] Let me just say quick.

[22:53] Thank you for giving us the tools and the resources we need to

[22:58] to take suspects like this to take suspects into custody like this without having to use lethal force.

[23:03] Without your support and you're approval of budget items for us to purchase the equipment.

[23:07] This could not have been possible.

[23:08] I just want to state that we also completed our sergeants process and I just also like to

[23:12] state that Michael Gunner and Candle was not here. So Officer Gunner will be our next sergeant

[23:19] who's get promoted to fill one of our two vacancies. Candle will be our second officer.

[23:28] Absolutely. And finally, Brandon Winter will be on the list. So if we have a third opening,

[23:32] Brandon will be also on that list for the next year to get promoted to sergeant. So we're

[23:35] we're going our own internally within the department. So we'll end gentlemen. So I got to get into

[25:08] All

[25:11] right, thank you again, gentlemen, and the best part to that whole incident was every

[25:18] one of you came home safe, and that was, that's a big deal.

[25:23] All right, presentation number two, 2024, shine, prom, presentation, Matt Cody.

[25:31] I'm Matt.

[25:34] Good evening.

[25:35] Mayor, Board of Trustees.

[25:37] My name is Matt Cody.

[25:38] I serve as the lead pastor of Rocky Mount Christian Church.

[25:41] We've got two campuses, which one of them is just right down the road here at Colorado, off a Colorado.

[25:48] I'm here to say thanks for being one of our sponsors for our shine prom event.

[25:54] That we've hosted at our church the last seven years at the town.

[25:58] a firestown has been a sponsor for us. I think maybe the last three or four years and if you're

[26:04] not familiar with the event, this is a a prom that our church puts on for people in our community

[26:08] with special needs and so we started this seven years ago and this event had just continued to grow

[26:15] and grow and grow. This year we hosted a largest prom we've ever put on. I may be biased, I think it's

[26:23] best party in the Tritown area, something very special happens when a group of people come

[26:29] together, and serve a part of our community that oftentimes gets overlooked. And so this

[26:37] is a night where we go all out. We do our best to put on the best party. All of this is

[26:45] free for all of our guests. And this year we had over 200 guests, so the biggest party we've

[26:49] put on. We had over 500 volunteers who helped us serve and to be buddies, dates for all of

[26:59] our guests who show up. Chick-fil-A, sponsored art event, provided all the food for us this year

[27:06] for free. And so so many people come together to make this event so memorable and so special

[27:15] and the town of Firestone helped us to be able to do that.

[27:18] So I want to show you a quick video, and then I'll just say just a couple more things.

[27:22] So take a look at this.

[28:31] Yeah, that's good.

[28:35] I've lived in this area for the past 10 years, I have sort of their church for past 10 years.

[28:42] I think one of the cool things about this event that makes us so special is that everybody

[28:48] can stack hands.

[28:49] Everybody understands just how awesome it is to serve, you know, this part of our community.

[28:56] And this year was the first year that we actually had the town of Fires down the town of Frederick

[29:01] and the city of DeCono all jump in as sponsors. And I just thought that was a great win for our community.

[29:08] We have volunteers that come from all three of our towns. And I'm just proud. I'm proud of our community

[29:14] for being all in on this and in proud of the town of Firestone for being a part of that.

[29:22] So on behalf of our church and just you know a father and a husband and somebody who lives in our community I just want to say thank you for for jumping in with your support financially.

[29:35] It has allowed us to continue this event and each year just keep getting better and better.

[29:41] So thank you.

[29:42] Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. All right.

[29:51] All right. We'll move on to land

[29:53] development.

[29:57] Do I have a motion to prove resolution?

[30:00] In 24-98, the resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone Colorado, proving an agreement

[30:07] between the town of Firestone and Davis Partnership Architects for Architectural and Landscape Design Services

[30:14] pertaining to development of a general PUD district plan for Central Park. Do I have a motion?

[30:22] Thank you.

[30:23] Thank you.

[30:24] Thank you.

[30:25] Thank you.

[30:25] Hi, Todd.

[30:28] Good evening, Board.

[30:30] Mayor.

[30:31] Todd, be your instructor of Planning and Development.

[30:33] The resolution before you is for a professional service agreement with Davis Partnership

[30:37] Architects for services related to the creation of a Central Park Plan Unit Development

[30:43] PUD rezoning document.

[30:45] In conjunction with the Central Park Master Plan and Feasibility Study, a rezoning of

[30:50] Central Park property is necessary to provide for orderly development and entitlement of

[30:56] land use projects and development plans consistent with the master plan.

[31:01] The town only finds that Davis partnership architects has expertise qualifications and

[31:07] experience to perform the work, but is also uniquely qualified in that they are already working

[31:12] on the Central Park Master Plan and are intimately familiar with the process, the proposed uses,

[31:19] as well as the public engagement that has occurred over the last year related to the project.

[31:25] And it's determined that it's in the town's best interest to have DPA perform the project services.

[31:32] The agreement in your packet is hourly and includes an amount not to exceed $45,000.

[31:38] Staff's available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.

[31:42] So real quick, if my member serves me, this is below the budget ceiling for the town manager to just sign off on this with my correct on that.

[31:56] Yes, okay, so you're just doing this for transparency.

[32:00] Well, sure, two things.

[32:02] I think that it's important.

[32:03] I think it represents a pretty significant step in the evolution of Central Park we are now about to embark on a process that will draft land use regulations and come up with a PUD so it didn't feel like the kind of thing we just wanted to do in a back office at Town Hall.

[32:24] So, yes, for transparency, yes to recognize, into acknowledge what is a big step and the development of a final central part point.

[32:38] This will put the land use regulations in place. This is a big deal, I think.

[32:41] Yeah, because I know, I noticed that amount, I'm like, okay, there's there's reasons why it's on.

[32:46] Trustees, any questions? Trusty, any?

[32:50] Is this time to make a comment?

[32:52] Yeah, you're big kind of.

[32:57] Yeah, I think part of my job is to watch over the money, right?

[33:05] That's what I got elected to do.

[33:07] So if I'm not able to look over Bids per state regulation, then I cannot do my job.

[33:18] So it's not that I have anything against these people.

[33:21] I would just like some competitive bids so that I can follow the state regulations and from

[33:32] here forward I'd like to see competitive bids, that's just compliant with the law, it's

[33:41] good business, it's good for us to have a say in it because we're the final word on improving

[33:50] it so I think we should really understand what our choices are.

[33:56] Mayor, I'll happy to address that if you would like to, there are other trusty comments.

[34:01] We are absolutely complying with the town's purchasing policy and I know we don't make

[34:07] a habit of addressing public comment or public commenters, but it's just not correct to say

[34:16] that we aren't following the policy.

[34:17] And the policy adopted specifically provides for situations arise or when standard competitive

[34:28] processes are deemed non-practical, the town manager and designate may enter into non-competitive

[34:33] negotiations in the best interest of the town.

[34:36] In this case, board, as you know, Davis has been hired by P3, that is not the qualification

[34:44] that we based this decision on, we based our decision that it was in the town's best interest to move forward with Davis because I think they performed exceptionally well.

[34:56] The board has had an opportunity to meet with them and to talk with them on on three or four occasions.

[35:03] You have seen firsthand their ability to synthesize feedback and have it impact or have it

[35:14] effect the land use plan as we've added additional detail to it.

[35:23] You even see as part of the information we provided you, some of the baseline work they've

[35:29] already done.

[35:30] And it would be impractical and it would be expensive for us to go out and hire a new contractor

[35:35] and have them start with nothing.

[35:37] Have them not have any baseline information about the site, not have them had the benefit

[35:42] of any previous contact or communication with the Board of Trustees.

[35:48] We felt all things considered that it wasn't a town's best interest to hire Davis.

[35:53] There we think they're in the best position to move forward.

[35:56] We don't find that $45,000 as a not to exceed is out of line for this type of work,

[36:05] particularly given its long term importance to Central Park.

[36:09] But ultimately, to the mayor's question, this is on the agenda so the board can make this decision

[36:14] and not just town staff. So I think we've been diligent, we've been careful, we've been thoughtful,

[36:20] Hopefully, as a board, do you agree?

[36:24] To go see more?

[36:27] Sorry, that gets further away every meeting.

[36:31] I couldn't agree more.

[36:33] I had questions about this because we all received emails.

[36:38] And so I did some research on it.

[36:41] And it is outlined in the purchasing policy that this is completely within the realm of what is appropriate.

[36:48] So, I do not believe that if there is an accusation that something is not being done correctly, that it's true.

[37:01] Right.

[37:02] To us to welcome.

[37:04] So, AJ, I think he's trying to spoke to my concerns that we've kind of gone.

[37:08] We started this whole process with feasibility, and I don't think we've.

[37:14] I think we could all agree we still haven't seen that the form results are that and so

[37:20] You know, I understand kind of why we're

[37:23] What I would call going going to like concept or and design kind of this is the next stage

[37:28] This is kind of the next thing we were looking at and we're kind of over in my mind

[37:32] We didn't create a gate where we make sure that's everything's feasible before we jump over open the gate and go to the next step

[37:39] but

[37:39] it is

[37:41] You know, the dollar and purchasing procurement policy, you know, obviously, you know, I'm always going to bring that up when I think it's an issue and I'm not going to try to do that

[37:51] time because I think it's more important to talk about.

[37:53] We're shifting kind of shifting gears here with the project and it's,

[38:00] and if I thought the way we set things up with P3 was that that was kind of,

[38:08] you know,

[38:11] into the nuts and bolts of the project, we would start that would kind of be a new era.

[38:18] And that's kind of where I'm, you know,

[38:23] 45,000 dollars is a significant outlay, but it's

[38:26] probably, you know, given it probably take, if we went to a different organization, we probably

[38:31] have to spend some portion of that to get it up to speed. So it's probably just a break even

[38:36] would use this group. But it's, I don't want to get into this incremental kind of, you know,

[38:45] I always want the town to get the best value for the money and the best design work and the best

[38:52] and I think staff does too. But at some point we've got to kind of set a gate, you know, that

[38:59] hurdle. It says, okay, we've gotten to this point. Let's let's assess and then let's let's see

[39:05] see if there's others out there that can improve that process. I'm going to, I'm going to,

[39:11] I'm going to vote yes for this because I'm fine, but I'm just saying, we're kind of at that,

[39:15] we're kind of at that hurdle. And so I just want the board to kind of consider that and when we get

[39:20] the next kind of the next hurdle, the next part of this era that we we consider potentially looking

[39:27] an alternate, you know, different ways of doing that. So, okay. And real quick, what would that next step be?

[39:35] When we finally started to go like, like, like, when we, when we, sorry.

[39:39] Turn on my microphone. I think the next step would be when we finally have a, like, a final design.

[39:45] Okay. You know, if I don't, you know, if we, we talked about breaking up into the bubbles, we're going to probably, you know,

[39:51] we're going to set those up, and then when we start thinking out, what's going to be in those

[39:54] bubbles, that's kind of that.

[39:59] So if I remember that, I apologize, I'm not more familiar with the P3 agreement, but I thought

[40:05] there was that get through the feasibility, and then we'll go on and look at the other stuff.

[40:10] And that's, it's kind of gray right now.

[40:13] I think we could all agree on that.

[40:15] and we don't want to stop this process,

[40:19] but we do need to take a breath every once in a while

[40:21] and say, okay, did we get, looking back,

[40:25] did we get we want, do we have everything

[40:26] we need to go to look forward?

[40:28] So, okay, can I just quickly jump in

[40:30] because I think I agree with everything that you just said.

[40:34] I just want to make sure the board understands

[40:36] what we're doing tonight or perhaps set a different way,

[40:40] what we're not doing tonight, what you aren't doing tonight

[40:42] is approving any sort of development.

[40:44] So trust the hook one, when you reference feasibility, that's absolutely where P3 is.

[40:51] This is the town tonight acting independently of P3 so that we can put land use regulations

[40:59] and ultimately a PUD in place. Presumably the work that P3 has done is doing will inform that PUD.

[41:10] I'm sure you look at the proposal, but when you look at it, it's worth, I think, referring

[41:17] to looking at land use categories for each development block or so, those special, the

[41:23] super blocks or the planning areas.

[41:25] It's just putting together, it's putting in place some minimum pieces and starting to work

[41:30] on things that would be like design guidelines for, for instance, from the proposal, for

[41:35] major roadway right of ways for general streetscape standards along each right of way.

[41:43] There are certain things, open space and parking requirements for each use in the development

[41:48] blocks, setback requirements, things that are, I don't want to necessarily call them mundane

[41:52] because they're important to the overall, orderly and efficient development of the site,

[41:59] but I just want to make sure we're clear, this isn't a P3 project at this point.

[42:04] This is a town project, putting in place land use standards and land use restrictions, and we made the decision that we wanted to hire Davis because of their familiarity with it.

[42:17] I appreciate it. It's maybe a little bit nuanced. I understand that.

[42:21] But I just want to, when you say feasibility, and I sort of like the way you said that you talked about gates, I think this is actually beginning to put in place gates that future projects are going to have to,

[42:33] if you will go through or hurdle over or however you want to carry the analogy but

[42:39] this is putting in place gates and benchmarks and things that future projects and future

[42:45] applicants will have to adhere to and speak to when they're standing in front eventually

[42:50] of the plan commission and in the board of trustees again.

[42:55] Yeah and that's it and I think the

[42:56] thing is just I'm just concerned is getting too far ahead of the feasibility. You know is

[43:01] I think I think I was correct in saying that there's some overlap in terms of concept and feasibility

[43:06] and it's just making sure we don't over, you know, extend over our skis too much where we can kind of like

[43:12] modify our concept based on the feasibility.

[43:17] So.

[43:17] Should we?

[43:19] Yeah, just for the record.

[43:21] Yeah.

[43:22] I'm a huge fan of request proposal, fair and bid, fair bids across the board.

[43:28] In this case here doesn't seem like that would make a whole lot of sense.

[43:32] It seems like it was already just, this is more of an extension of what they are already doing.

[43:37] So I definitely supported, yeah, but if it's something outside of this, yeah, 100% we need to go through the mid-process.

[43:45] Just my two cents.

[43:47] I was just gonna, for my information on the gates, because I'm kind of like, maybe I'm just, I'm not recognizing the greenness,

[43:58] But I think I expected a feasibility study from P3 to be able to look at and say,

[44:08] okay, this is what they're recommending and be able to process and then make decisions on

[44:15] land use and other things. I thought there would be a delineation of the gate.

[44:23] I guess something I'll say is you will, I believe, get a feasibility, you will see P3, follow through on the scope of work and the deliverables in their contract.

[44:35] This is a separate activity. Obviously it's related, it's central park. Obviously there's a little bit overlap or whatever the word trustee will come use, not agree with.

[44:44] But this is different than feasibility.

[44:48] I think we can set certain design standards and certain public

[44:52] road-of-way standards without knowing whether or not

[44:54] a particular use is feasible yet.

[44:58] We know we want roads.

[44:59] We know...

[45:00] We're going to have parking lots. We know we're going to have open space areas. We're going to have all these things. I think we can begin to set some standards, some design guidelines, some material guidelines, etc., for those things.

[45:11] And land use regulations get amended all the time. PUDs get amended all the time. Maybe there'll be future amendments that individual users will propose based upon the outcome of that feasibility.

[45:23] So I don't want anyone on the board to think that the feasibility work will seize it won't.

[45:28] It will proceed on its own separate track.

[45:34] I think that's the last time I won't talk anymore.

[45:38] I think that's key is that since it's essentially the PUD that's serving the town's interest,

[45:45] it won't be who was to make modifications of if we see things change and it's easy to change your own stuff.

[45:53] Okay, sorry, yeah, anybody else?

[45:58] Roll call, please.

[46:04] Trustee Dorty?

[46:06] Trustee Holcomb?

[46:07] Yes.

[46:08] Mayor Protem Homenes?

[46:09] Yes.

[46:10] Trustee Bird?

[46:11] Yes.

[46:12] Trustee Haney?

[46:14] Trustee Morton?

[46:16] Motion passes.

[46:20] All right, moving on to resolution 24-99.

[46:24] A resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone Colorado.

[46:27] of proving an amended and amended and re-stated agreement for services with the

[46:33] check-it code consulting LLC.

[46:38] Do I have a motion?

[46:45] Thank you Mayor and Board. The resolution before you this evening is an amended

[46:51] and restated professional services agreement with check-it code consulting. The town

[46:56] has been in our contract with check it code consultant since May of 2022 and they up to this

[47:02] point have provided not only plan review services but also other services including training

[47:07] and education for our staff. The cement and restated agreement changes a couple of things

[47:15] including adding on call inspection services which we talked about a little bit during budget.

[47:23] So, it adds that provision of services as well, but also clarifies some of the indemnification

[47:29] for any sub-consultance that check it code consultant may use specifically as it relates

[47:34] to structural engineering plan review services, which obviously are critical for the town, including

[47:39] those more complex projects that have higher levels of structural review that are necessary.

[47:44] The agreement in the packet includes an amount not to exceed $80,000, the $20,24 budget

[47:52] includes $210,000 for consultant building review and inspection services.

[47:58] Staff recommends approval of Resolution 24.99, happen to answer any questions you might

[48:02] have for us.

[48:03] Thank you.

[48:06] Any questions?

[48:07] I was trying to understand how this, you know, I assume this still applies to her year

[48:14] 2024.

[48:15] Correct.

[48:16] So we can help with the numbers, what did we budget initially budget with them for this year and then how are we changing that for this year and then I'm assuming next year it'll be it's in next year's budget right.

[48:27] So one of the things this agreement also cleans up is that it gets the agreement on our budget annual cycle instead of being made a May and having these weird in between periods and so the budget for 2024 was 210,000.

[48:45] 2025 proposed is 110,000 and so the 80,000 regardless of if it finishes up this year through December 31st.

[48:54] But is renewable January 1st, 2025, it sets that term to restart.

[49:00] The 80,000 is within both.

[49:02] But it's.

[49:04] And in terms of the identification, that's pretty substantial.

[49:08] I mean, you know, we've, you know, you get it.

[49:12] I assume they've got to, I'm just trying to think how you, they provide ongoing, like if they go out of business next year,

[49:21] ten years from now, if that somebody files a suit against that structure,

[49:28] how are we ensuring our town is covered for those kind of things if we're, I mean, or do we have to worry about that?

[49:41] Well, I mean, we've been indemnified, and I mean, I think, quickly from wrong, Bill, we've been

[49:48] indemnified if there isn't another party for someone to sue or to initiate some kind of

[49:53] complaint against.

[49:56] That's, yeah, we're additionally listed as an additional insured within the certificate of

[50:02] live voting insurance with them, as well as any other sub-consultment.

[50:05] And that was continued, whether our relationship with them continued beyond 2025, I mean, that's

[50:11] separate that relationship, say, say 20, 20, 26 weeks

[50:14] determined they're not, we've found another source.

[50:17] So the answer is, we've been indemnified

[50:19] for what they do.

[50:21] So we're harmless for what they do, right?

[50:25] OK, I was just wondering, if somebody's been,

[50:29] if they don't come to your defense, if there's a suit

[50:34] and they don't come to your defense, because they're

[50:37] out of business, we're still on the hook.

[50:41] Right. I mean, if they cease to exist, is there any kind of, you see, I'm saying it's like an insurance policy or something in case they cease to operate? I mean,

[50:52] I'm only chuckling, because I mean, it's something if we've been identified for the work that they do.

[50:58] Right. So we're not liable. Right. So I think that would be the answer.

[51:02] If somebody wouldn't be able to sue us, but you understand how lawyers work. I mean, if,

[51:12] And they would attach to anybody who would have had some sort of, you know, they'd look for people to attach to, right?

[51:20] Yeah, I believe that's correct and I believe we would show that we've been identified and if that are the party doesn't exist, it is a nice as a replacement.

[51:28] But I believe what I'm saying is that identification doesn't exist if they don't exist, right?

[51:34] Well, we've been identified for the work they're going to do.

[51:37] Okay, okay, so the obligation does not fall upon the town.

[51:42] I mean, if they don't find who was the contractor, then, but the obligation is not upon the town, it's town didn't do the work.

[51:50] Okay, okay, so I need to come forward with it.

[51:54] Anybody else?

[51:56] Rule come, please.

[52:00] Trustee Holcomb?

[52:01] Yes.

[52:02] Trustee Morton?

[52:04] Trustee Bird?

[52:05] Yes.

[52:06] Trustee Haney?

[52:07] Yes.

[52:08] Mayor Pro Tem Humminus?

[52:10] Yes.

[52:10] Trustee Dorty? Yes. Thank you. Motion passes. Thank you, Todd.

[52:18] All right, we're going to move on to

[52:19] discussion. Action items. We have, do I have a motion to approve Resolution 24-95, your resolution

[52:28] of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fire at Stone Colorado, acting by and through its water

[52:33] activity enterprise, approving the collective land holding partnership LLC, native water credit,

[52:41] purchase agreement. Motion to approve. Second.

[52:46] Majorly. Good evening, Board Mayor.

[52:47] Julie Pesias, Director of Water and Community Resources for the town.

[52:52] Before the board tonight is a native water,

[52:54] or native water credit purchase agreement for one acre of water

[52:59] to collective.

[53:02] Project is collective land holding partnership.

[53:05] I'll see this is a commercial developer out in the Del Camino Junction commercial subdivision that is wanting to develop their land.

[53:15] This one acre foot would be required for dedication to provide water service to that property.

[53:22] They had inquired about their options with the town and we did have some native water rights that were available and we were able to

[53:30] and present this purchase agreement to them.

[53:33] They've agreed upon it, and it's before the board tonight, for consideration.

[53:38] All right.

[53:39] Any comments, questions from the trustees?

[53:44] Who called, please?

[53:47] Trustee Morton.

[53:49] Trustee Holcomb.

[53:51] Yes.

[53:51] Mayor of Pro Temminus.

[53:52] Yes.

[53:53] Trustee Bird.

[53:54] Yes.

[53:55] Trustee Haney.

[53:56] Yes.

[53:56] Trustee Dordy.

[53:59] All right.

[54:00] Resolution passes.

[54:03] All right.

[54:03] do have a motion to approve resolution 24-96, a resolution of the board of trustees of the

[54:10] town of Firestone Colorado, acting by and through this water activity enterprise,

[54:15] approving a purchase and sale agreement with Michelle and Brian Heritage.

[54:20] We can do a proof.

[54:21] Second. All right. Got that, Missy. All right, too.

[54:27] Good evening again, so before the board is the purchase and sales agreement with Michelle and Brian Heritage, this is for one share of the new coal rich ditch.

[54:37] There's a board may recall we've brought in a couple purchase and sale agreements previously this year for larger quantities.

[54:46] This is just for one single share, which is equivalent to around one acre foot of water.

[54:53] Thank you.

[54:57] Any questions?

[55:01] Roll call please.

[55:04] Trustee Haney?

[55:06] Yes.

[55:07] Trustee Dordy?

[55:09] Trustee Holcomb?

[55:10] Yes.

[55:11] Mayor Pro Temham and is?

[55:12] Yes.

[55:13] Trustee Bird?

[55:14] Yes.

[55:15] Trustee Morton?

[55:18] All right.

[55:18] Motion passes.

[55:20] Moving on.

[55:22] Resolution.

[55:22] Do I have a motion to approve?

[55:24] Resolution.

[55:25] 24.

[55:26] 4-97. Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone Colorado, adopting the baseline

[55:33] agency growth plan.

[55:37] Motion to approve. Back in.

[55:40] Thank you, Mayor. Board of Trustees, Jan Slough, Human Resources Director for the Town of Firestone.

[55:46] Before you tonight, you have Resolution 2497, a Resolution requesting that the town of board

[55:54] adopt the baseline agency growth plan which was shared at the retreat this September.

[56:01] As you very well know, the packet or actually I included those documents as I had mentioned

[56:07] at the retreat that I would provide you with.

[56:11] So, the purpose of this growth plan is to coordinate and I'm sorry.

[56:21] Let me grab my documents.

[56:24] that's okay. Sorry about that. The purpose of the agency growth plan is to establish a baseline that aligns the current and future workforce needs.

[56:36] We'll monitor and revise it during the annual budget each year and it gives us an opportunity to create a timeline and develop our recruitment strategies as they relate to each department's overall growth.

[56:55] You have any questions?

[57:00] Yeah, there we go.

[57:01] Here we go.

[57:01] Any questions?

[57:02] There's no presentation.

[57:04] No presentation.

[57:05] I mean, I presented it at the retreat in September.

[57:09] So just a little bit.

[57:10] Just a little bit.

[57:10] You're not necessarily.

[57:12] The information in the packet was always presented.

[57:16] It's you're not necessarily approving anything.

[57:19] And I'm not spending any money tonight.

[57:21] What the board is adopting is a plan framework that will use as as

[57:27] mentioned that will use as part of the annual budget process to benchmark our overall staffing

[57:35] and she mentioned recruitment and that kind of thing are overall staffing against population

[57:40] milestones. So you're not, if you, yes, though tonight doesn't implement this plan, it's adopting

[57:46] it as a guide, as you say one more thing, as you might recall, it was one of the items in our

[57:52] 2024 or 2025 work plan.

[57:59] Yeah, when I was looking at spreadsheet,

[58:00] I was just trying to understand, you know,

[58:02] it obviously, you know, you're planning,

[58:05] so you're trying to take your best,

[58:07] you're planning the work and working the plans, they say.

[58:11] And, you know, there's some growth projections on there,

[58:14] and I would just, you know, they're kind of attached to annual,

[58:18] I guess every year that would be adjusted, you know,

[58:22] you know, use the gated knowledge analogy before,

[58:23] but it may take two years of growth to get to something that's, you know, 10% like I thought I thought I saw 10% to get to that level.

[58:33] May take two or three years, it may take half a year. I mean, so it's kind of.

[58:37] Absolutely. I'm sorry. Is it iterative? I mean, I, I, I, those are the questions.

[58:42] I mean, yes. Yes. I mean, so again, the intention is to, I think,

[58:48] Jan and her staff did the next little job of doing this, the board has previously talked about how we do some succession planning and how we build out overall capacity.

[59:00] And so as subjective as it may be, the approach was to tie it to population milestones and so you've undoubtedly seen that.

[59:09] And so yes, it will be iterative.

[59:11] That's why I say you're not adopting anything.

[59:13] It's not going to be vote yesterday that then automatically we're going to be hiring

[59:19] these positions as we grow.

[59:21] The intent is this will be another document that we use, a bit of another resource that we use

[59:27] for now going forward as part of the annual budget.

[59:30] We'll look at the kinds of positions that cities and towns our size are at those various

[59:37] population milestones, have and how they use them, and that we can have a discussion about

[59:42] do we need one of those or two of those or none of those, I mean, so your question about

[59:46] is it iterative?

[59:47] It's absolutely iterative.

[59:50] And if I could add, Trustee Hokong, when we did the exercise, we had all the department directors

[59:56] forecast their needs for based on...

[1:00:00] For mental population increases of 500 people. So on the left side of that document, you'll see different requests throughout each of those increases.

[1:00:14] And on the right side of the document, we're just trying to give you an idea as to the costs that are associated with personnel and benefits.

[1:00:24] for other towns that we hope to grow to so clearly it gives you an indication as to what we can see

[1:00:32] or where we will be at in the future.

[1:00:38] Okay.

[1:00:38] Any other questions?

[1:00:40] So, Stuart.

[1:00:41] And I'm sure you went over this at the retreat.

[1:00:44] I just can't remember.

[1:00:45] But the savings at 2.2 million?

[1:00:47] What drives that?

[1:00:48] So we actually had budgeted 129 employees for this year.

[1:00:53] We haven't filled all of our positions for this year.

[1:00:55] So therefore, we will have a $2.25 million saving in personnel savings.

[1:01:02] Okay.

[1:01:03] Thank you.

[1:01:04] That's always good to have.

[1:01:05] So you exist?

[1:01:06] Yes.

[1:01:07] Mayor.

[1:01:08] Trustee, you may as well.

[1:01:10] Just want to thank you and all the other directors that put together some meaningful

[1:01:14] effort on this.

[1:01:15] I think it's very important when you talk about a town that is expected to grow and you

[1:01:21] talk about transparency.

[1:01:22] I think this clearly lays out.

[1:01:24] what the board staff and our residents can expect as we grow and I appreciate all

[1:01:30] effort you and the directors did on that. It's very meaningful and very

[1:01:34] important. So thank you. Thank you.

[1:01:37] Thank you.

[1:01:43] Roll call, please.

[1:01:47] Mayor, Protem, Jimenez.

[1:01:49] Trustee Haney. Yes.

[1:01:50] Trustee Holcomb.

[1:01:52] Yes.

[1:01:52] Trustee Dority. Yes.

[1:01:54] Trustee Bird.

[1:01:55] Yes.

[1:01:55] Trustee Morgan. Yes.

[1:01:57] All right.

[1:01:58] motion passes. Moving on, do I have a motion to approve resolution 24-103, a resolution

[1:02:09] of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Firestone Colorado, adopting the Board of Trustees

[1:02:15] 2025, 2026 work plan. May I have a motion?

[1:02:20] Second. Mayor and Board, this is in keeping with a little bit of a theme on this part

[1:02:27] the agenda. The previous item this item in the next item are all product discussions at our annual retreat.

[1:02:37] This is updating the 2025 or updating the 2024 2025 work plan to be 2025 and 2026.

[1:02:47] You have seen where we have added or replaced or modified goals and milestones and objectives.

[1:02:55] and this will be the guide for staff for the next couple years and as you know from our meeting

[1:03:05] last time it's part of the basis for the evaluation of the town manager and I'll obviously use it

[1:03:14] when I'm evaluating our department directors but it's a process or it's a plan that we came up

[1:03:20] together at the retreat. So, of course, I would recommend approval.

[1:03:25] This may be a story.

[1:03:27] Yeah, and I just want to plug in for that session,

[1:03:31] that it's a full afternoon.

[1:03:35] The, with the third party engagement and facilitation,

[1:03:38] I just thought, I was surprised how, to me,

[1:03:44] how substantive that was in terms of the,

[1:03:47] the objectivity, because it's easy, you know,

[1:03:50] just kind of being a part of the family

[1:03:51] and with a lot of insight knowledge,

[1:03:53] but just kind of like the challenging of assumptions

[1:03:56] and presumptions and past and what are we really saying

[1:03:59] for the future, I thought those guys were great.

[1:04:05] Well, it's interesting to, if I made to that point,

[1:04:08] how much of the 2024 or 2025 we revised

[1:04:11] because of what I think you're talking about.

[1:04:14] Maybe forgive the expression drilling down

[1:04:16] a little bit on what do you mean by this particular goal

[1:04:19] or object of a milestone or whatever it might have been.

[1:04:22] So, I agree.

[1:04:26] First of all, any?

[1:04:27] Yeah, I have a question.

[1:04:29] And unfortunately, I can't download this on my computer.

[1:04:34] So, I'm going to go, it was on the section

[1:04:37] that says, encourage community governance.

[1:04:43] Is this the time for me to ask questions about that?

[1:04:46] No.

[1:04:49] It's a developer process for the board to respond to public comment, and I had thoughts about that, but I think I'd like to know what's meant by that before I sing.

[1:05:02] Well, I'll try and go out if unless you want to go first, AJ.

[1:05:07] You're called. Yeah, we talked about this up at the retreat that we all talked about, you know, the public comes up. They give us our comment or their comment and we look at them and I say thank you for your comments and they walk away and I don't think they're feeling that they're being heard.

[1:05:29] And so the question was posed.

[1:05:33] How can we take the comment and then, and if there's a question and it's not a statement,

[1:05:41] but there's a question that they need help finding what would that process look like to get them

[1:05:48] that answer and contact them?

[1:05:50] Am I pretty close with that answer?

[1:05:51] I think your right.

[1:05:52] I think my recollection is it was trusty bird who articulated it during their treat,

[1:06:00] But having said that it's come up several times over the course of the last few years, I think a degree of frustration perhaps on on resident on the residents part at times they they they stand at that the lectern and and make their comment and I think hope or maybe expect to be engaged and

[1:06:21] I think what Trustee Bird asked for in the course of the board supported and it's been something we've talked about for a couple of years is an organized way to do exactly that.

[1:06:32] And the only other piece I'll add to it is I emailed the board last week and some that working with the town clerk's office to see what other cities and towns are doing.

[1:06:44] Perhaps I don't have to reinvent the wheel or come up with something elaborate, but we just want to see what other cities and towns are doing.

[1:06:54] Yeah, I just want to say thank you for

[1:06:56] bringing it up and yeah, I think at the end of the day

[1:07:00] We all went to the public to have some type of response, so that's what the whole intent was

[1:07:05] Okay, because if you're going to stand here for three minutes you would you want to know that you're heard?

[1:07:10] So I

[1:07:10] Yeah, I don't know the solution looks like but it's a great way to turn it to try to approach this

[1:07:17] And I agree with Trustee Bird on that, a lot of people do walk away frustrated and they're

[1:07:24] not getting answers that they would like and sometimes they're easy.

[1:07:29] We've got to figure out a way that we stop them, we do a form that we can contact them

[1:07:36] with an email or something so that we could get some answers out there so that they feel

[1:07:41] like they've been heard and we've been answering.

[1:07:43] What that looks like, what do I don't know?

[1:07:47] Yeah, I mean, I was just thinking about it because I didn't, I didn't know, I think that makes perfect sense.

[1:07:52] I would be frustrated too if I made a comment and it just went to nowhere.

[1:07:59] But I think maybe we could remind people we have like four or five ways in place already, you know,

[1:08:08] that they're free to call us.

[1:08:12] Leave a voice message.

[1:08:13] We'll call them back on our town phone.

[1:08:16] They can write us.

[1:08:18] We can, and we'll respond.

[1:08:19] We'll hopefully, we will respond.

[1:08:22] They can attend the chat and speak to us personally.

[1:08:28] They can call and set up a lunch with us or coffee or whatever.

[1:08:34] I've had people catch me in the lobby or in the parking lot and chat, you know there maybe we need to make them feel like that's not their only shot is to stand up and say that they can really initiate solid interactions with us.

[1:08:56] I guess to take it to an extreme, I don't know how, because the board couldn't answer one board

[1:09:08] member couldn't answer for everybody, because one person might be a different perspective.

[1:09:15] So I don't know, I understand what you're saying,

[1:09:23] I just don't want to get in the position of,

[1:09:29] and this is extreme, but like, monitoring people's comments, oh, that's misinformation.

[1:09:37] I'm going to straighten you know, I mean, we want people to get up and talk, we want

[1:09:42] people to write, we want them to.

[1:09:44] So, we don't want in any way to feel like we're going to,

[1:09:50] not even retaliate, but like push back.

[1:09:53] So, people aren't going to want to say anything.

[1:09:56] If they feel they're going to get...

[1:09:57] Yeah, I don't.

[1:09:58] I think there was, that was ever even a conflict.

[1:10:00] No, I don't think that's intended, but that's just...

[1:10:03] I think it needed to be said.

[1:10:05] Because I have felt that way as a resident.

[1:10:08] Okay. Well, as far as this process goes,

[1:10:11] It's literally trying to figure out how we can get that information to them that they requested.

[1:10:17] That's what this process is about.

[1:10:20] Trustee Warden?

[1:10:24] Well, and those are all really good things that you brought up, Linda.

[1:10:28] And I think that residents do make outreach and talk to trustees or the mayor or the town manager

[1:10:35] and various ways and all that is good.

[1:10:37] but I also think a lot of people feel very comfortable

[1:10:41] coming to a board meeting and so that it's recorded

[1:10:44] and so that their opinions and comments are out there.

[1:10:49] But I have to agree with Ray.

[1:10:50] I think a lot of times people don't realize

[1:10:54] we're not gonna respond and so they're not quite sure

[1:10:58] what's going so I think it's a great idea

[1:11:01] that Ray brought up to respond.

[1:11:04] And I don't think it's to give just raise opinion.

[1:11:09] I think if it's information about what's going on in the town, or something that the

[1:11:14] board has done, I think there's, and I'm not saying AJ reaching out to other communities

[1:11:19] to see what they're doing, I think it's a great start.

[1:11:23] And at the end of the day, we'll probably come up with something that we can all agree on.

[1:11:29] I'll say it's interesting, I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I don't know of a

[1:11:35] city or town that has a set process or procedure for responding, because I think the intent is to respond if we can't at the meeting.

[1:11:43] And maybe it winds up being some kind of a subsequent meeting or an email or some kind of a communication, but

[1:11:49] generally the rule, not generally the approach,

[1:11:55] and I think I can't think of a local government

[1:11:58] that doesn't do this way is that you don't respond to public comment.

[1:12:03] You take it, you take it under advisement, and then after the meeting, you can do whatever you want with it.

[1:12:07] So I think it's an interesting step to try and be, you know, to try to have two way communication

[1:12:15] in as much an organized and controlled way as possible.

[1:12:20] So I'm sort of curious to see what other cities and towns

[1:12:23] are doing if anyone's doing that.

[1:12:25] Yeah, my thought on that, and I agree with you,

[1:12:28] AJ, is that at the end, when we do reports,

[1:12:36] if there's something that staff or somebody

[1:12:40] has the answer why we're sitting here

[1:12:42] during the meeting and if the people actually stay here during the whole entire meeting after

[1:12:49] they've given their comment,

[1:12:52] they'll get their answer here in the exact meeting they asked.

[1:12:56] That may be, and maybe that will be a process that other towns will start to follow because

[1:13:02] it would help. It definitely shows that we're trying to respond as best we can to the residents.

[1:13:09] So how this looks, don't know, but I think it's a great idea,

[1:13:16] trusty of it as well.

[1:13:17] If I may, just want to make a brief comment to my fellow trustees, you Mayor and staff,

[1:13:24] I think our plan for 24, 25, when we look at it was a huge success and I think that impacted

[1:13:31] where we did for 25, 26, we had to add, I wouldn't say had, but we had the opportunity to add

[1:13:38] a few more items because we were so successful in implementing what we had put out in for 2425

[1:13:45] as a reminder, these are one to two year plans and we did, I think, trusty, uh,

[1:13:50] birth calculated 85% of that two year plan in just under a year. I think this is great. I love

[1:13:57] that we do this. I think the board for being thoughtful and coming up with many suggestively

[1:14:01] and then I thank AJ and his team for taking this seriously and implementing it. I appreciate

[1:14:08] the effort that goes into it. I think this serves our residents well. When the question is posed

[1:14:13] what direction is the board leading this town? This clearly defines what that direction is and when

[1:14:19] the question is, how effective is our town manager and his staff? That clearly shows you how effective they

[1:14:25] are when they are meeting the objectives of the board and set in place. So thank you board. Thank you staff

[1:14:30] for a successful 24-25 plan, and I look forward to seeing what comes over our 25-26.

[1:14:37] Thank you, Trustee Jim, and as eloquently spoken, thank you for that. I couldn't agree

[1:14:43] more of them. I believe the work plan. We have master plans for transportation. We have

[1:14:48] a town master plan. We have a parks trails and open space, a national plan. Our work plan

[1:14:54] is nothing more than another master plan, and those plans help us.

[1:15:01] In direction, and knowing where we're going. And I think it was AJ that brought up the idea of a work plan. If I'm correct.

[1:15:11] Well, if you like it, it's already obvious, but the work plan one, it makes us the board

[1:15:24] accountable for the direction this the town is going because we have to come up along with

[1:15:31] the staff and AJ these goals.

[1:15:35] It's just not one-sided. It is a collaborative effort.

[1:15:40] And with that, everybody knows which way the town is going.

[1:15:46] And I'll tell you what it's showing.

[1:15:50] The work that's been moving forward with that work plan is

[1:15:54] is also a nothing short of amazing.

[1:15:56] I've been part of government for 38 years.

[1:16:00] And I haven't seen a work plan that that was that clean

[1:16:03] And well done over the power of over the course of two years.

[1:16:09] Yeah, I just wanted to add my two senses as well.

[1:16:12] Just incredible job that again have that much work done off of a two-year plan.

[1:16:17] That's incredible.

[1:16:19] And I can tell you, I've actually been looking at your work plan.

[1:16:21] And figuring out how to do it, doubt that in the private sector.

[1:16:25] So it's outstanding work.

[1:16:26] Of course.

[1:16:27] Of course.

[1:16:28] Thank you for all the comments.

[1:16:32] Thank you.

[1:16:33] But in all seriousness, if you want to know who to think they're sitting out there.

[1:16:37] Yeah, that's fantastic jobs.

[1:16:41] All right.

[1:16:43] Roll call please.

[1:16:47] Trustee Hulcomb.

[1:16:48] Yes.

[1:16:49] Trustee Morton.

[1:16:50] Yes.

[1:16:51] Trustee Bird.

[1:16:52] Yes.

[1:16:53] Trustee Haney.

[1:16:55] Yes.

[1:16:55] Mayor Pro-Chema Minas.

[1:16:57] Yes.

[1:16:58] Trustee Dardi.

[1:16:59] Yes.

[1:17:00] All right, motion passes.

[1:17:02] All right, moving on to Resolution 24 104.

[1:17:05] Do I have a motion for a resolution 24104, a resolution of the Board of Trustees of the

[1:17:12] Town of Firestone Colorado, approving an underwriter engagement letter with Piper

[1:17:17] Sandler and Company for Services regarding Water Revenue Bonds?

[1:17:21] Do I have an motion?

[1:17:24] Motion to approve.

[1:17:25] Second.

[1:17:28] Mayor and Board, this actually is the product of two separate discussions between our

[1:17:36] water team and the board recall we met in July and then we picked up that discussion at the retreat in September.

[1:17:47] As we look to, it's also, it's on the work plan that you just adopted is further implementation of the water action plan.

[1:17:54] You recall that when we updated or when we did the water rate study and adopted it, there were placeholders for future debt.

[1:18:04] And I would always kind of say, look, that's not been decided, that's just a placeholder.

[1:18:10] What this does is engage Piper Sandler for service and helping us plan for what might be a

[1:18:20] future water debt issue and still help us work through the mechanics of it, they'll help us

[1:18:27] to the sizing of it, they'll help market it to the bond community, the potential buyers.

[1:18:38] And then finally I'll say one more thing, I think if someone's wondering whether or not

[1:18:43] Piper Sandler is the right group, I'll point back to our December 22 issuance of $20 million

[1:18:50] of water enterprise that that with piper centimeters help we cash funded a

[1:18:57] debt service reserve we cash funded capitalized interest we held did everything

[1:19:02] on our power with their help to hold that cost down they helped us negotiate a

[1:19:07] private placement that allowed for retirement at par at any time that we

[1:19:12] wanted to and seven or eight months later I can't remember but seven or eight months

[1:19:16] later, we completely retired that debt.

[1:19:19] And I think Piper Sandler understands

[1:19:22] our water action plan, they're very familiar with our staff,

[1:19:25] they're very familiar with Jessica and Chris and Julie

[1:19:29] and the water team, they get our system,

[1:19:32] they get our goals, and they've been a good partner.

[1:19:36] And ultimately, this doesn't have any cost

[1:19:38] unless and until we issue debt.

[1:19:45] Josh, do you do it?

[1:19:47] Could you just give maybe a hypothetical example or two of the types of, I guess, capital improvements

[1:19:56] on something that we would be embarking on that we would want this day?

[1:20:01] Thank you.

[1:20:02] Everything from additional reservoir storage, everything from additional distribution above ground,

[1:20:10] tank storage, expansion of the water treatment plant itself, all those things.

[1:20:16] And as a companion piece, expanding our raw water portfolio.

[1:20:23] Thank you.

[1:20:26] Do you want to see the whole come?

[1:20:27] AJ, is this, you know, there's the, at the end of the day,

[1:20:31] it's the rate that they're charging for that for the bond work.

[1:20:34] Is, is that comparable to what they did in 2022?

[1:20:37] Is it the same standard same?

[1:20:39] Okay.

[1:20:40] And we, it's, depending on, I assume between bond companies

[1:20:45] It'd be, we'd probably have the same rate if we went to three different companies.

[1:20:50] It'd be very comparable and the only other thing I'd say is, this engages them.

[1:20:57] We don't have an agreement.

[1:20:58] We won't.

[1:20:59] I mean, there'll be a final issue in agreement that would nail down a fee and, you know,

[1:21:05] not to negotiate on a, during a meeting that Piper's Nailer could watch, but I would

[1:21:10] imagine we'll have some additional discussion about a proposed fee at some point and

[1:21:13] Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else?

[1:21:21] We'll call please.

[1:21:25] Trustee Morton? Yes.

[1:21:27] Trustee Holcomb? Yes.

[1:21:29] Mayor Pro Temham Minas? Yes.

[1:21:31] Trustee Bird? Yes.

[1:21:33] Trustee Haney? Yes.

[1:21:35] Trustee Dordey? Yes.

[1:21:37] All right. Motion passes.

[1:21:39] Moving on to Resolution 24. Yes.

[1:21:42] One zero two.

[1:21:43] Do I have a motion to approve Resolution 24-102 of Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the

[1:21:51] Town of Firestone, Colorado?

[1:21:53] Supporting the St. Rain Valley School District RE1J proposed the bottom of the measure to

[1:21:59] have a motion.

[1:22:03] Second.

[1:22:06] I'm bringing this up.

[1:22:07] I'm the one that requested this on the agenda.

[1:22:12] Over the course, of course, everybody knows

[1:22:16] the same thing.

[1:22:17] School district is going for their bond,

[1:22:21] and it's a hefty bond.

[1:22:23] It's $786 million dollars, I believe.

[1:22:28] But we had discussion of this earlier with the board,

[1:22:34] and they wanted to stay neutral.

[1:22:38] Since then, though, I have had numerous residents of the town of Firestone that wanted us

[1:22:46] to put this on the agenda and ask me what the board was going to do, and I said, I cannot

[1:22:53] speak for the board themselves, and in a little moment, let me back up.

[1:22:59] The first part was to ask me what the board was going to do, and I said, I cannot speak for

[1:23:03] the board.

[1:23:03] I can only speak for myself but for the board, they wanted to know what the board was going

[1:23:08] wanted to do and so they were asking that it would be put on the agenda and so I granted

[1:23:16] their request to put it on the agenda and so with that I'm asking for support for the

[1:23:25] For new schools,

[1:23:29] right now the bonds do not help the town of Firestone is for schools in the district.

[1:23:35] There are some schools that will serve the district but there will be outside Firestone.

[1:23:42] One will be close to meet high school and another one will be I believe over in the Windham Hill area of Frederick.

[1:23:49] So, firestone kids will go to those schools, but there will be no school and firestone.

[1:23:56] But I believe that this bond will help bring schools to firestone eventually.

[1:24:04] And so, if anybody's got a question or a comment, so I'm more trusty.

[1:24:10] Yeah, I comment.

[1:24:14] I was one of the ones who feel strongly that the board should remain neutral.

[1:24:19] on issues that cost residents money and is their choice to make, it's not my choice to

[1:24:29] make how you vote. So plus I have my, all my voter stuff sitting by my chair ready to read

[1:24:38] and study and I have not had a chance to read through and study that. So when I vote no I don't want

[1:24:48] to be misunderstood that I'm not behind the measure.

[1:24:54] I just, number one, Phil, we should be neutral in number two.

[1:24:58] I don't know how I would vote personally yet,

[1:25:03] so I can't vote as a board, how I would vote.

[1:25:07] Or how to recommend you to vote for something.

[1:25:10] Thank you.

[1:25:11] Good comments.

[1:25:13] Trusty, welcome.

[1:25:16] So, you know, when we talked about this in the pre-session, we talked about kind of what

[1:25:25] showing support for the school board.

[1:25:27] And I think the school board would be realistic and understand what the residents are doing.

[1:25:35] I mean, I would guess we have probably an 80 to 90 percent of the students in this community

[1:25:41] attend of same frame value school. So that's one level of support. We've got numerous landowners

[1:25:49] that pay taxes every year to do that. The town specifically, we divert impact fees, we divert

[1:25:59] land dedications, we coordinate with their needs to make adjustments to our development plans.

[1:26:05] we provide security police officers to help with schools, we used to help doing, we don't do

[1:26:14] the crosswalk stuff anymore, but we try to make, we, we, we, we, the crosswalks, we,

[1:26:21] we put those in place at a high expense to do that. So I, you know, the school is ingrained

[1:26:28] in our community is as much as anything.

[1:26:31] And so what I would advise people to do

[1:26:36] and because I fundamentally think my opinion on this bond

[1:26:40] is meaningless to a voter, another voter.

[1:26:43] I think I won't know my opinion, I can give it to them.

[1:26:45] But my position as an individual or as a part of this board,

[1:26:49] I think, is mood.

[1:26:50] I think it's up to the individual

[1:26:52] to decide how that impacts their situation.

[1:26:54] And if they think extending this, this, this millevy for the board, for the district is a good thing.

[1:27:01] And that's, I, I would not, I would not, I would not, if somebody said they voted, yes,

[1:27:06] for it, if somebody said they voted, no, I, I, it doesn't chase away my opinion of them anyway.

[1:27:11] It's, it's their choice.

[1:27:12] And so I, I, you know, I, I just, I, these things, I struggle because I think, I think my opinion

[1:27:19] and my vote as a trustee is meaningless to this.

[1:27:22] And so I, I, I, I don't,

[1:27:24] I don't like to be, you know, because I respect what people have to decide that they have to

[1:27:28] decide that for themselves and their families.

[1:27:31] So that's kind of what I'm at.

[1:27:32] And I think I think, you know, I think with this town, as we support schools, I, my neighbors

[1:27:40] do, and you can tell, we have, we have full schools.

[1:27:43] It's not like they're struggling.

[1:27:45] And I watch parents every day go to school, pick up their kids.

[1:27:48] These are things that indicate of a vibrant community.

[1:27:52] Yeah, maybe you and you can decide whether those extra dollars for your personal budget make a difference or not, and that's that's kind of where I'm planning so

[1:28:01] And be honest with you. I agree with everything you said Matt. I

[1:28:06] You know, I gave them my opinion of the bond, but they wanted to know the boards position was on it and and there was enough of them that it was

[1:28:19] I just thought it was prudent for us to least

[1:28:22] talk about the question in and decide.

[1:28:27] Trustee Morton.

[1:28:31] I just want to be clear that what we are doing if we vote in favor of this is we are supporting the school.

[1:28:43] We are, we as a board representing the town of Firestone.

[1:28:49] Sorry, it was a fun.

[1:28:50] Okay. But we are in support of the bond for the school district. That does not mean that

[1:29:04] we personally, it's not an indication of how we personally or our neighbors would vote

[1:29:10] or anybody would vote. It's just saying that we are in support of supporting the schools

[1:29:20] in our community.

[1:29:21] Okay.

[1:29:22] Thank you.

[1:29:23] Just a few minutes.

[1:29:26] I appreciate and agree with everything that's been said so far on this matter.

[1:29:30] The way I view this is we have heard many times from residents, they're concerned about

[1:29:38] availability of schools to our children that are in our community now and those that are

[1:29:43] moving here.

[1:29:44] what I see with this measure is there will be opportunity for additional

[1:29:49] buildings for those children to attain to attend. I am wish there would be a

[1:29:57] school in Firestone on the little disappointed it's not.

[1:30:00] I encourage residents to continue to push that with that school district and that school board,

[1:30:06] because ultimately, they're the ones who make that decision. But for my perspective, if my fellow

[1:30:13] residents are asking me, well, this serve my children, I think it does. It doesn't bring you a

[1:30:19] school in your neighborhood, but it does bring additional schools that are residents who are going

[1:30:26] school can attend. So for me I will support this but I am frustrated there is no school in

[1:30:33] firestone.

[1:30:37] I think everyone said the same thing I'm thinking out and typically not a support

[1:30:43] of putting my thumb on the scale one way or the other but in this case here I think it's a good

[1:30:48] thing to support the schools but it's more about down the road how do we attract the school here

[1:30:54] So, yeah, the I'll support it somewhat reluctantly, so I'm going to just say that I'm not, I don't think we should sway voters' opinions.

[1:31:05] I agree with you, I agree with you.

[1:31:08] Any other comment?

[1:31:12] Trustee Jordan.

[1:31:13] I think is a symbolic gesture.

[1:31:15] I'll support it.

[1:31:16] I appreciate everything.

[1:31:18] Frozen cons, both of them, at the, I really do.

[1:31:24] But I think it's a symbolic gesture.

[1:31:27] I don't want to get in the business of being

[1:31:31] lobby to support legislation, you know, that's just.

[1:31:34] But this is, you know, God-configured kids, schools,

[1:31:38] education, Saint-Rain Valley, you know,

[1:31:41] embedded in all of our lives.

[1:31:43] We're all touched by it.

[1:31:46] So in this one instance, as a symbolic gesture,

[1:31:49] I will support it.

[1:31:51] Thank you, Angela, like I said, I was hesitant to do it, but enough people came forward

[1:31:57] that I finally said, yeah, well, and it is, well, Blake, I mean, we're two weeks away from

[1:32:03] the election, but enough people were asking, and so I agreed to do it.

[1:32:09] We get a 70, 739 million dollar bond.

[1:32:14] Do we know how much of that will actually be spent in the Carbon Valley?

[1:32:17] And I mean, there's not a whole lot in firestone about that.

[1:32:21] Right. No, what I know right now off hand with what I did peruse the bond is there will be a new high school in

[1:32:30] Frederick. It'll be a new K-38 bill near Mead, Mead, Mead, Mead, Mead, Mead, Mead, Mead. So that would be very close to

[1:32:37] barefoot lakes, and there'll be a innovation center, I guess, career development center or

[1:32:47] something, an innovation center that's around long-month.

[1:32:50] There's going to be one built out here for the Carbon Valley kids, so they don't have to travel

[1:32:55] to long-month to attend that.

[1:32:58] So it'll be safer for the kids.

[1:33:00] They're not driving as far as either, so that's what I know of right there, just perusing

[1:33:04] the body.

[1:33:05] Yes, and I know they're doing some improvements on Centennial. I elementary. I don't know whether it's a new roof or whatever

[1:33:12] But they're doing something there and I think there's a couple of other schools that they're making some minor improvements to

[1:33:19] So yeah, so there is there is some infrastructure within this body,

[1:33:26] right roll call, please

[1:33:31] Trustee Haney no

[1:33:33] Trustee Doready. Yes

[1:33:35] Trustee Holcomb? No, may your pro-temmeness? Yes

[1:33:40] Trustee Bird? Yes. Trustee Morton? Yes.

[1:33:47] There's your passes.

[1:33:49] Okay. Moving on to Resolution 24-94.

[1:33:57] Do I have a motion to approve Resolution 24-94,

[1:34:00] a resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Fire,

[1:34:03] Stone, Colorado,

[1:34:04] approving an agreement between the town of Firestone

[1:34:07] and Colorado Civil Group incorporated

[1:34:09] for engineering design services

[1:34:11] pertaining to the new coal-rich ditched lateral final design project. Do I have a motion?

[1:34:18] No, it's an approved. Second.

[1:34:21] All right.

[1:34:23] Go ahead, trusty Hulkin.

[1:34:25] I'll speak to this. I'll try not to. I won't try to go on to one.

[1:34:29] You know, the contract amount was a not to exceed 283,000 and some change.

[1:34:36] This is just another one. Obviously, it makes sense since it is the final part of the design

[1:34:40] contract to probably go as long as the preliminary parts were good, of good work and a good

[1:34:45] value to continue that. So that's not the part of it. It's just the, some of the

[1:34:51] verbage here in the resolution is just, you know, it's a bit much to, you know, that the,

[1:34:56] let's see, let me read it here, because I thought it was, it's not you. The service is a sole provider

[1:35:04] because there are expertise, so I'm pretty sure they're not the only ones with the expertise,

[1:35:08] They're qualifications.

[1:35:10] They're not the only ones with this qualifications.

[1:35:13] They're experienced.

[1:35:14] I'm thinking there's some other companies

[1:35:15] and down with the experience.

[1:35:17] And they're knowledge.

[1:35:17] That's probably the only thing of the town's water flow.

[1:35:21] And that's about the one thing.

[1:35:24] But I think those conditions that are made that led to naming this,

[1:35:32] and like I've said in the past.

[1:35:33] This isn't an indictment on the provider.

[1:35:35] It's just, those are not unique things that, to a company that would do service for the town so that's all I want to say.

[1:35:47] And I'll go a little bit on some of your things with experience.

[1:35:54] Yeah, I mean, engineers all have a certain amount of experience.

[1:35:58] I think I tend to use that word in what this company knows about the entire plant because

[1:36:08] they've been here at the very start for the plant and wave before.

[1:36:13] This company I think has gone a long ways to build our entire water system.

[1:36:18] And so that knowledge alone is worth a lot of money because a new group coming in would have to take a lot of time and a lot of effort that we would be paying them to come up to speed.

[1:36:34] So that's a balancing act, there are a degree.

[1:36:40] But then also this group has done amazing work

[1:36:47] and very good work.

[1:36:49] So there's a trust factor there.

[1:36:52] Do I think that we should always check their numbers

[1:36:55] to make sure that we are spending correctly?

[1:36:58] And that we're not overspending just because

[1:37:02] the most experienced. Yeah, I do believe we should make sure that they are charging a fair price.

[1:37:11] But this group, the vast knowledge that they have at the town of Fireson's water system,

[1:37:17] makes them pretty hard to beat. I think we just got to do our due diligence.

[1:37:21] Make sure that we're not overspending.

[1:37:26] May I have a question?

[1:37:27] Trustee Jimenez.

[1:37:29] Thank you.

[1:37:29] I don't know if it's in for the end.

[1:37:32] Go ahead.

[1:37:34] Oh, I was just going to say, and this is not in any way intended to argue the point.

[1:37:40] This is the second meeting a row.

[1:37:43] Trustee Hokem is pulled what I would call like a companion item off of consent and what I just

[1:37:51] want to point out and for the public's benefit that just like with the master meter control

[1:37:59] vaults at the last meeting in the coal-ridge lateral tonight. A couple of things have happened.

[1:38:08] One, CCG was hired to do the preliminary design. That's pretty significant. If we were to bring

[1:38:15] in an outside firm or a new firm to do this, the very first thing they would have to do is to spend

[1:38:23] time going over the primary design and get familiar with it and I think there would be I know

[1:38:30] there would be cost there and this is not intended to in any way argue the point. What I want

[1:38:35] to propose is that perhaps as a staff we can do a better job of pointing out to you the times

[1:38:47] when someone's doing a preliminary design and there might be a built-in expectation that

[1:38:53] because of their familiarity, because of their expertise, whatever it may be, that we might

[1:38:59] just point out.

[1:39:00] And maybe this is worth some future discussion and a work session about our purchasing

[1:39:04] policy.

[1:39:05] Because I will say again, we are absolutely adhering to our purchasing policy and the language

[1:39:10] that trusty-hulcome referenced is exactly that, is to show that we are adhering to our purchasing

[1:39:17] policy.

[1:39:17] All by way of saying, it may be worth some discussion at a future work session, maybe the board would

[1:39:23] like us to be a little more intentional and a little more obvious when we are hiring somebody

[1:39:29] to do some preliminary design work that maybe it's worth an extra sentence in the aim or the

[1:39:35] resolution or whatever it might be to point out or presentation, whatever it might be to point out that

[1:39:40] our expectation would be this firm would be in line to do the final design if that's what it is because

[1:39:46] of their familiarity. I think that's a reasonable and fair point and we can make that adjustment

[1:39:51] if that's what the board would want. Maybe we want to have 20 minutes of discussion at a

[1:39:56] work session about it or and or if the board wants to revisit our purchasing policy we could

[1:40:02] we can certainly do that. I don't mind making Jessica redo the purchasing policy.

[1:40:08] Thank you, AJ. Did anybody else have any comment on that?

[1:40:14] Okay, we'll call, please.

[1:40:20] May your pro-tem hummus?

[1:40:22] Yes.

[1:40:23] Trustee Haney?

[1:40:24] Yes.

[1:40:25] Trustee Holcomb?

[1:40:26] Yes.

[1:40:27] Trustee Dordey?

[1:40:28] Trustee Bird?

[1:40:29] Yes.

[1:40:30] Trustee Martin?

[1:40:31] Yes.

[1:40:34] Motion passes.

[1:40:37] Now we're going to...

[1:40:38] Let's see.

[1:40:40] Take a five minute right here.

[1:40:41] What's that?

[1:40:41] Can I request a five minute break?

[1:40:44] Yes.

[1:40:45] We'll have a five minute break.

[1:40:46] Request it.

[1:40:47] Thank you.

[1:40:48] Be back. I'll give you 7 minutes. Be back at 8. 747.

[1:40:57] Just because I want to be difficult.

[1:41:12] Yeah, I really need this one right now.

[1:41:16] Well, uh...

[1:41:18] You know, because I'm scared.

[1:41:20] Yeah, I'm afraid.

[1:41:21] Go in space.

[1:41:22] I've got to worry about the people because I do people.

[1:41:36] All right, we'll get started again, and we are on six or 747, so thank you, and what we have now is the 2025 budget review.

[1:41:51] So, Mayor and Board, at a high level, we'll go through everything that we have covered, thus

[1:41:59] far.

[1:42:00] And we're going to put on the screen.

[1:42:02] Balancing actor.

[1:42:03] We're going to put the...

[1:42:04] Okay.

[1:42:04] Balancing actor.

[1:42:06] As a quick aside, Board, we'd be interested in getting your feedback and finance committee to

[1:42:12] the extent, and went from the public, if you've paid attention to it and if you have,

[1:42:17] You know, followed along the individual budget presentations and discussions, we would be interested in getting your feedback about balancing act.

[1:42:27] It was our first go-round.

[1:42:29] I think in particular, IV is done.

[1:42:31] Anchorists have done an exceptional job of making it make some sense.

[1:42:36] And he should have been at the first staff discussion we had about it.

[1:42:43] I would say it wasn't fluid.

[1:42:46] But, anyway,

[1:42:51] you want to get your feedback, we want to develop this as a resource, you know, one of the goals, one of the objectives was to begin to implement some kind of an open budget platform and there are a bunch of them out there, but there's some additional functionality that will eventually work our way to.

[1:43:09] Anyway, as far as the town's budget remind the board that we started this process, reviewing it publicly on September 18th and almost every meeting since then, we have had at least some portion of the meeting devoted to the budget.

[1:43:26] Townwide, our townwide, in 2025, we are projecting revenues of 82 million of $623,493.

[1:43:39] We are proposing expenditures of $68,747,639.

[1:43:47] So generally, by the time we transfer out for capitals and our capital improvements, and

[1:43:56] service payments a little more than five and a quarter million dollars. We are projecting

[1:44:02] townwide a budget surplus of eight million eight hundred and seventeen thousand three hundred

[1:44:08] eighty six dollars. We are projecting an ending townwide fund balance of seventy four million

[1:44:14] eight hundred and forty seven thousand and ten dollars and seventeen point six million dollars

[1:44:21] as an unassigned fund balance.

[1:44:24] But that's high level.

[1:44:25] We don't always deal with the town why,

[1:44:27] but I think it's interesting to have that perspective.

[1:44:31] If you recall, we went through the general fund.

[1:44:34] We're about $1.8 million as an operating surplus

[1:44:38] in our general fund.

[1:44:39] We're adding to our general fund balances.

[1:44:43] We're adding, particularly, to our unassigned fund balances.

[1:44:46] I think, carrying the theme from 24 into 25, I think we are appropriately conservative

[1:44:57] with our both our revenue projections, and...

[1:45:00] As we always try to be, we are all in, try to be all in with our expenditure projections, you know, we've walked you through all those, of course, the department directors made their department by department presentations.

[1:45:15] So as we're moving toward on the November 13th adoption, a public hearing and adoption of the budget,

[1:45:23] we've made our presentations now between myself, Chris and Jessica were available to answer any questions

[1:45:30] of Board might have.

[1:45:34] Board members?

[1:45:38] You know, I want to use every time wisely. So I just kind of reviewed back when back through the

[1:45:48] Those are, I can submit them later, I'm kind of whatever, if I'm going on, you can

[1:45:54] hit me in the head.

[1:45:55] This is fun or review, so go ahead.

[1:45:57] Let's do it.

[1:45:59] So I wanted to look at the water fund capital projects here first, and just that's basically

[1:46:07] because that's kind of, you know, with the water rates and that's, you know, as far as

[1:46:16] in interaction with the public, that seems to be the thing that usually comes out, is why are

[1:46:20] my water rates so high? So I just wanted to kind of go through it and make sure to see if I

[1:46:24] was understanding something these things correctly. So I'm on the sheet fell, the water, very

[1:46:32] first one with a couple improvement, suddenly for the water fund. Right, but before you get any further,

[1:46:38] you made a distinction that I need to make sure that we got.

[1:46:45] So I'm not sure if all of these projects

[1:46:50] are from the water fund or if they're from the water action fund or is this a plan?

[1:46:54] That's part of my question.

[1:46:56] So if you let me go for it.

[1:46:58] So if you look like for either the carry-off in 2024 or the proposed budget from 2025,

[1:47:05] It looks like there's five things that are probably water-rate funded versus, and some of

[1:47:15] this may be just the way it was put on the spreadsheet here, so in other words, the

[1:47:20] next participation, the water line replacement, the scatter upgrade, or scatter, which

[1:47:27] where you like to say it. Upgrade the water tank number two and the flow control meter vaults.

[1:47:36] Those appear to be not part of the water action plan. If I understand that had capital things,

[1:47:44] is that the way you interpret those? Yeah, I think I was trying to do my best to follow you all the way along,

[1:47:51] but so here's my concern. So we're trying to, I think next year we're trying to get about

[1:47:56] almost 9 million of water rate revenue right that's kind of where we 8.9 or 8.9 I think is what's the number

[1:48:03] so if you take those those capital projects you've got almost five million dollars there

[1:48:12] so that's a pretty big chunk of that is that are some of those dollars going to come from

[1:48:19] And that seems high to, in terms of what, it seems like we're going to run the water,

[1:48:27] if you divide the water fund into the water rate and the water action plan, it seems

[1:48:30] like the water rate side is going to run it at a deficit because of that, but that makes sense

[1:48:35] is that that makes sense and that is accurate and basically what has been happening for

[1:48:42] the last year or two, is that the water action plan, revenue funds have been supplementing

[1:48:50] some of the capital improvements. So the capital improvements and even some of operating expenditures

[1:48:55] if and when necessary. If you're like in this real quick, I don't want to really

[1:48:58] know please I just do want to keep going. We can come back to that.

[1:49:06] That's kind of so just

[1:49:07] looking at those five things saying, okay, if those are water basically water-rate-based

[1:49:14] revenue of a funded things, it's you're just doing a whole. Once again, I think in

[1:49:20] terms of dollars.

[1:49:25] So, you know, first of all, is that true? And then if so, is there, you know,

[1:49:29] I think last year I mentioned about the NISB, actually maybe being considering moving that,

[1:49:34] I'm looking for things that help keep our water rate pure and if it's truly a water action

[1:49:44] plan thing, try and push that to that side because that side seems to be a little more

[1:49:50] flush with funds.

[1:49:52] The versus this, if we're having to come up with 5 million for capital improvement from

[1:49:58] water rate that doesn't get it's a lot of room for personnel and paying for the water

[1:50:04] with treat water. So I agree with how you said it. We are, this is one of the reasons we made

[1:50:13] such a long presentation on September 25th was to go over that point. We just deal for a second,

[1:50:21] take a step back and deal with vocabulary. We make the internally for us as a town. We make

[1:50:28] the artificial distinction between water action plan revenues, but they're all water

[1:50:35] fund revenues. It's all one water fund because of the board's direction. We take the

[1:50:43] extra step to make sure that things like debt service on the the water treatment

[1:50:50] plant, debt service on that pump station, debt service on the Aluvia Wellfield,

[1:50:55] that service on the injection well,

[1:50:57] those kinds of things are not a component of water rates, right?

[1:51:02] And so we're all, everyone's clear on that.

[1:51:05] So we kind of artificially make a distinction

[1:51:09] between water action plan revenues,

[1:51:12] and so-called water fund revenues or water rate revenues.

[1:51:15] It's all water fund revenues,

[1:51:16] but we go the extra step of making a distinction.

[1:51:19] And I'm glad you, I'm really glad you pointed that out.

[1:51:21] Do you remember the, one of the, a couple of the charts that Jessica and Julie pointed out on the 25th was net revenue in the water fund?

[1:51:33] And they, they show they demonstrated how tight that is, how tight that spread is.

[1:51:39] And I think it's exactly the point you're making.

[1:51:43] By the time we paste a half and by the time we maintain our system and by the time we pay for O&M and managed,

[1:51:50] And we manage a water system, it's very tight, and in fact it is relying on water action

[1:51:59] plan, revenues, to subsidize the overall operation of our water system.

[1:52:06] So we agree with you, the larger point you're making, and just to cherry pick one thing

[1:52:11] you said, because it came up, remember we had a fair amount of discussion about it during

[1:52:16] water rate study. The NISP component has been in the towns, water rates, Julie helped me. I guess

[1:52:25] really back to the inception of NISP, right?

[1:52:30] Okay, 07. So NISP has been a part of the towns

[1:52:34] water rate structure since 07. The board could absolutely take that out. I mean, we didn't

[1:52:43] in 23 when we went through a water raid exercise and the board left it in there.

[1:52:52] The board could absolutely take it out and does that give some breathing room?

[1:52:57] Does that provide a little space for operation or for maintenance of our water system?

[1:53:03] Yes, but we got to make up that 1.3 million somewhere.

[1:53:06] So either way is going to come from our water fund fund balance.

[1:53:10] I guess that's, so I was looking, you know, that seemed to be the one of the five things

[1:53:16] that's listed there that would possibly be the one that, you know, looking for just

[1:53:21] any opportunity to help produce the expense on the water rate side, to help that, you know,

[1:53:30] the other thing that, you know, kind of stands out as that is the meter vaults, that's like

[1:53:36] points of a million. I don't know, you know, in terms of, you know, not the technical side

[1:53:42] of it, but, I mean, spreading that over multiple years or something to help emitarize

[1:53:48] that cost or multiple years is, you know, because that's another huge driver and that, you

[1:53:54] know, and we're trying to be, you know, in part of this being honest with the residents and

[1:53:59] transparent. It's like if we have 5 million percent capital improvement that's basically

[1:54:05] tied to the water rate, we're still even at the, you know, and I'm not trying to get

[1:54:12] a bit, but even if the 13% increase, we're still not meeting the expenses that are being

[1:54:18] generated on the water rate side. And so, I just wanted to kind of go through that exercise

[1:54:24] to see if that's true.

[1:54:26] Trusty, welcome. I'm really glad you said that because you're exactly right. That may be you shouldn't hate the presentation

[1:54:32] No, I don't accept it because you did it. You did it in two and a half minutes. What do you and Jessica took away too long to do?

[1:54:39] No, but that's right. Yeah, that's how I mean, that's the point I'd like to make and the point I'd like for people to walk away with is

[1:54:46] how it narrowly

[1:54:48] we are operating

[1:54:50] the water fund generally, our water system is specifically, and frankly, how dependent

[1:54:57] our water fund is on water action plan, or water action plan, revenues that wouldn't

[1:55:04] be there if we hadn't built the water treatment plant, and we hadn't diversified our

[1:55:09] water portfolio.

[1:55:09] I know I went a little farther, I think, do you want to do it?

[1:55:12] I absolutely agree with your, I think the central point that you're making.

[1:55:17] So I guess I'm not necessarily want to resolve that this evening, but I just noticed that was

[1:55:23] That was just one of those things I noticed and then I started digging in here. I was like, oh, that's

[1:55:27] Ouch, you know, that really does hurt. So that was that's related to the water things

[1:55:33] So I don't you know board you guys just you just info so we I think trusty men

[1:55:38] How many of us wanted to come in and you could go in?

[1:55:40] Yeah, I just wanted to add to what you said because you woke them in our town manager said

[1:55:47] I think that you have pointed out very eloquently that the actions that are being taken as part

[1:55:56] of the water action plan that the board set place of the staff is executing is absolutely

[1:56:02] benefiting the residents in form of having lower rates.

[1:56:07] I don't think any clear right now that that action plan is subsidizing rates to your other

[1:56:15] point how can we reduce some of the stress on that. I have said this before, and I think this board really needs to complement,

[1:56:23] contemplate this. This year is our participation in this. We are putting in a lot of money into that.

[1:56:30] And I'm not seeing the benefit, and I get that we have already put in a lot of money.

[1:56:35] And if the board were to say, okay, we're out, you know, we've potentially lost some money.

[1:56:41] But I think the board needs to consider when, do we stop chasing bad money and, to your point, trust your hook on my think, we should probably talk about that this year.

[1:56:53] Yeah, because if you look, if you look at that same sheet of 2026, the estimate is 3.7 million.

[1:56:58] So it goes up.

[1:56:59] Two million.

[1:57:00] So, you know, I think I've been consistent in saying,

[1:57:07] Peel this back, get, let's charge our residents as much, just what is essential to provide the municipal water and then everything else sticking out in the water action plan and figure out ways of making that work, so that that was just my only kind of observation in the water rate, so if anybody else can.

[1:57:30] I will say going to trust me for 10 minutes is point that.

[1:57:37] We talked a lot about this at the board retreat, kind of with hand-wringing.

[1:57:48] Because we've been paying, you know, it's getting more expensive,

[1:57:52] but let's just say in terms of relative experience modest sums to be a part of the club.

[1:58:01] with all of the inevitable delays that go on in years, decades, I don't know, but lots of time.

[1:58:10] And that has been seen historically as a primary source to provide us the water that we need.

[1:58:18] Now with our water action plan, maybe not so much as we project our potentially the water that might be available for us to purchase outside of this.

[1:58:29] I think we saw it even clearly, like to the point, like our projected needs for water can very realistically potentially be met outside of the niss system altogether.

[1:58:44] And so it came down to, well, why we paying for an est. And it came down to, there wasn't a clear conviction to shut it off right now.

[1:58:54] Um, because the sums are still generally not, uh, not traumatic, painful, but, um,

[1:59:03] going to, um, um, um, uh, trusty, uh, may pretend, um, reminiscent of point that I do

[1:59:10] think it's a conversation that we want to have sooner because, um, I was thinking that somehow

[1:59:16] this year or like, is when we saw a significant boost.

[1:59:19] Now, I think there's also an element of realism from the folks at NIST, but they can't

[1:59:27] be ramping up that fee schedule, that club dues, even though it was projected to go substantially

[1:59:39] up.

[1:59:39] There's probably more hesitation to do that to keep municipalities like firestorm from bailing.

[1:59:47] Um, and so I don't have a lot of clarity on how long we can expect that to be tamped down.

[1:59:53] Um, but yeah, now we're, you know, now we're talking a million bucks, a couple million bucks.

[1:59:58] Like at what point do we say?

[2:00:00] Let's see very clearly, you know, put a fine point on it. Can we obtain the water that we need as we look

[2:00:07] on long term to growth elsewhere, cheaper, and decide as the board, whether to, you know, to leave

[2:00:15] the club?

[2:00:20] If I, if I may, I think that and feel forgive, maybe a bad pun. We're, we may be

[2:00:27] switching midstream here. I mean we may be moving away from this. I always try and

[2:00:33] think of it this way. I mean a lot of times you'll hear in an energy policy debate

[2:00:38] you'll hear well we've got to be renewables or we can fossil fuels or fine or

[2:00:42] they're this or that. And then eventually something that's always made sense to me is

[2:00:46] you'll hear someone say, look let's just adopt an all the above energy strategy and

[2:00:51] figure out how we can, if different energy sources can scale up and if they can meet the demand

[2:00:58] and if they can do it in a way that's economical, et cetera.

[2:01:03] I think you can kind of apply that same mindset to where we are right now with our water.

[2:01:09] For years, I mean, going back to at least 2007, I'm sure if we could go back to every board

[2:01:15] from 2007 through, you know, I mean, in 2018-19, every single board would have said,

[2:01:24] we're just holding on to Nesp, we're planning for Nesp, and that's going to solve our

[2:01:31] water issues.

[2:01:33] As an aside, I don't think it would have, I don't think it ever would have, and what we

[2:01:38] see now is it's been so delayed and it's becoming so expensive that I think it is forcing

[2:01:42] the kinds of conversations or analysis that Trustee Hort, Dirty, you're talking about, that

[2:01:49] we have a pro-temp of men as you're talking about, Trustee Hort, you're talking about,

[2:01:53] I totally agree we need to do it.

[2:01:55] I think it's going to be an in-depth and kind of a difficult conversation because we have

[2:02:01] like five and change million into it.

[2:02:04] And Trustee Hort is your point, I may not say it exactly, but at some point it's time to stop

[2:02:09] throw in, you know, bad money or good money after bad or however that expression goes,

[2:02:13] I agree. There's potentially a time and I think we're approaching the point at which

[2:02:19] the board needs to make it, needs to make a policy, just an long-term policy decision.

[2:02:26] But that requires resources that are beyond us, I think, because I think they're all kinds

[2:02:30] of far-reaching ramifications to just, forgive the expression, turn in the spigot off and

[2:02:37] saying we're not going to be a part of this. We've been planning for forever, but I do agree with

[2:02:41] one of the things you said. Our water team, our water brokers, have helped us. That's why it's so

[2:02:50] invaluable. They have helped us develop a plan. There isn't this dependent. It isn't this

[2:02:56] centric. And it's going to give us options. Right now I think we're at that all the above stage

[2:03:02] trying to figure out where we can scale up and where we can economically immune our demand.

[2:03:14] Alright, so I'm done with the water part of it, I also looked at, you know, and don't roll your eyes, I'll look at the fear of stuff, so I just, which one that?

[2:03:29] So let's see here. I just kind of just go to the first one and see the southern.

[2:03:35] So I just did some math and so, so I told revenue, if you looked at the budgeted revenue,

[2:03:42] it comes out to like about 10.8, personnel is actually three, almost three million dollars.

[2:03:50] So just pretty, this is essential portion of that.

[2:03:53] So I'm not going to quantify what that means, but just those numbers, that's what the

[2:03:58] many people. So that's basically taking about four and just summing them together.

[2:04:05] Okay, okay. So I was trying to, so I was trying to, you know, because of my interest

[2:04:12] in the furious, I was trying to see what, so I looked at the capital improvement page, the

[2:04:19] general one there. And I see one project, so if you look at the very right column, it talks

[2:04:28] where the funding comes from, and in that case it just talks about the road 20, sorry I got

[2:04:35] for my glasses on, can't tell if it's 20 or 26.

[2:04:41] So it shows that as being one of the

[2:04:44] funded projects. On the Capital Improvement Program summary page, in fear, no, it's under

[2:04:52] a couple of improvement tabs, a couple of projects on the townwide, so that's the only one that's

[2:05:01] funded with furer of funds, is that as out of this list, it's not the only one funded out

[2:05:08] of this list.

[2:05:09] Out of that list, but there's also 1.8 million that's being funded from the Northern, the

[2:05:16] I don't remember any other one.

[2:05:18] And it's the i25.

[2:05:19] Interchange.

[2:05:21] Okay, so there's those two.

[2:05:22] So that makes.

[2:05:23] And then.

[2:05:24] Okay, please.

[2:05:24] There's also the ADA ramp project.

[2:05:27] And that was.

[2:05:28] That was from Southern.

[2:05:29] That's on there too.

[2:05:31] Did that.

[2:05:31] Did that not get.

[2:05:34] The ADA.

[2:05:35] Yeah.

[2:05:35] That's on the.

[2:05:37] It's on the townwide one.

[2:05:38] It's the $25,000 match from Southern.

[2:05:40] It's grants.

[2:05:42] Townwide.

[2:05:44] And.

[2:05:44] Okay.

[2:05:45] So it shown that it's not showing any amount that was budget so that was why I didn't include that one

[2:05:51] So you might want to that might be 2024 and some carryover funds over carryover from 2024. It doesn't show that either

[2:06:01] So I don't know if it's just a oversight or played it for in 2024

[2:06:05] So that's why there's nothing to do with that. So we've got the we've got the ditch crossing we've got the

[2:06:11] price and exchange, so between those two is about 2.8 million in capital improvement projects.

[2:06:18] Then, so the other thing that I noticed is the purchase services, so what in the

[2:06:28] Fira is there's, what does that include, is there's the 2.7 in the, it is the, it is

[2:06:42] for whatever reason, the town, and everything, but big horn was adopted before the significant

[2:06:53] amendments to urban renewal, the changes to urban renewal that the legislature made.

[2:06:57] I think in fourth-teen, well, quite exactly, but I think around the 2014 or so timeframe,

[2:07:05] the purchase is the shareback, is because when the town formed, the urban renewal plan areas,

[2:07:11] They didn't keep the increment so that's that mouth is diverted to the different districts right so we just passed

[2:07:21] That's the pastor

[2:07:23] Okay, okay. Oh, so we consider so also so 10th seven of the 10 million in revenue is actually just is not really a tribute

[2:07:32] Yeah, I mean this is not a not exactly but

[2:07:35] But you might recall, it wasn't this iteration of the board.

[2:07:41] It was a couple boards ago made the decision to actually include the towns increment

[2:07:48] to be captured within the various of other various fewer plans.

[2:07:53] And once we did that, that put us at around 40 cents on the tax increment dollar, if you

[2:08:03] around 40% of the incremental revenues.

[2:08:09] Okay, so that I think that kind of goes through,

[2:08:12] you know, just kind of summarizes what I was 10, 20 million.

[2:08:16] It looks like about 2.8 of that between the two projects,

[2:08:22] 3.3 million is used for personnel,

[2:08:25] and then the purchase services or the transfers

[2:08:30] are pretty substantial, so that would be about, let's see, 5.5 million would be transferred

[2:08:38] to other entities, so I won't make any commentary on those numbers. I still still

[2:08:47] thought that I thought you'd like to know when I wanted to see those numbers for myself,

[2:08:50] So that's what I did, so.

[2:08:52] Okay, is he made it?

[2:08:55] That's another good point though,

[2:08:56] five point five million testing.

[2:08:58] That's a big chunk.

[2:09:00] A huge chunk that would be nice to have.

[2:09:03] That's a big chunk.

[2:09:04] That hurts.

[2:09:05] I mean, you're going to talk about it.

[2:09:07] And I'm not passing judgment.

[2:09:08] I don't know what the rationale was.

[2:09:10] And I mean, easy to look in the rearview mirror

[2:09:12] and say, well, we should have done differently.

[2:09:14] Then, for whatever the reasons were,

[2:09:16] whatever the rationale was.

[2:09:18] I mean, look, if you look at the southern plan area,

[2:09:20] for whatever reason at the time, they didn't include a lot of the real property.

[2:09:26] So it's hard to understand if you try and imagine or think back what the rationale was,

[2:09:33] but why wouldn't you have included the real property that had the possibility of generating

[2:09:39] incremental revenues? I don't know. I mean, and I wasn't obviously here and it's convenient

[2:09:44] in all those things. I don't know what the decision making was, and probably they had real

[2:09:49] valid decision making and reasons to do it, but, yeah, I mean, we're essentially, our

[2:09:56] fear is for the most part, a pass through agency.

[2:09:59] I know the answer to that one, the Southern, because that was a imminent main thing.

[2:10:05] You had basically established, you know, you think of that, that's basically old town.

[2:10:10] You've got established properties, you know, those folks, probably, you know, in general,

[2:10:15] do not, they're happy with their homes, they could be some small increment to them improving

[2:10:22] their homes.

[2:10:23] But in general, it wasn't probably scraped and rebuilt type situations.

[2:10:28] So there wasn't going to be a large amount of money anyway.

[2:10:30] But by putting the public right away is things like that, that way money could be utilized

[2:10:36] It's diverted to those areas to be improved.

[2:10:40] So that was your idea, trust me, I'll come to come and kill you.

[2:10:47] Not a big man I haven't been to go being.

[2:10:51] Is that it, Matt?

[2:10:51] Where did you have it?

[2:10:52] I have a question.

[2:10:53] Thank you.

[2:10:54] Those fear of numbers, I'll remind you that next time we talk about fear of,

[2:10:59] but...

[2:11:00] Trustee Hany?

[2:11:02] New topic.

[2:11:03] I was wondering how our lodging tax compares to other towns around us, or cities,

[2:11:10] for competitive? I don't know, and our lodging is such an antiquated formula. It's $2 per room

[2:11:19] per night. It's not a percentage of the room rate. I don't know. I mean, we could probably

[2:11:26] find that out relatively easily, but as we've said right now, I don't know. I'm sure it's far less.

[2:11:32] Yeah, just from what I could look up, I think Longmont was 3.53. I'm not even sure if that's correct,

[2:11:40] But yeah, I think that would stand looking at to bring us up to

[2:11:44] what everybody else is charging.

[2:11:47] Of course, we can't do that by board action.

[2:11:50] That would be a table question, but sure.

[2:11:54] That's something that's been talked about in the past.

[2:11:57] Yeah, I just jump in.

[2:11:59] I wholeheartedly agree that we should at some point add that to our to

[2:12:02] do list as some who've traveled frequently for work.

[2:12:06] can tell you those taxes are 8, 13, 15 percent. I don't know if we could get away with that

[2:12:12] here, but I think we could certainly look at it and present some of our voters to consider.

[2:12:18] So I agree with you there. Well, if we call ourselves Las Vegas, we could George 24.

[2:12:22] Yeah.

[2:12:26] That emotion. But on the worst plan that just got approved.

[2:12:31] You have put it on the word plan. There you go. Any other questions, comments?

[2:12:37] Okay.

[2:12:41] You guys can read this?

[2:12:43] This?

[2:12:43] Just kidding.

[2:12:45] Yeah.

[2:12:46] All right. Thank you.

[2:12:49] All right.

[2:12:49] Moving on to second public comment.

[2:12:53] Nobody's there to come.

[2:12:55] Okay.

[2:12:57] Moving on to report staff.

[2:13:01] The third quarter financials put beyond that.

[2:13:03] We don't have anything.

[2:13:06] All right.

[2:13:11] Got that?

[2:13:11] All right, down to Mayor's report, okay, she does have, he tried to get you out of it.

[2:13:19] Right, he gets you out of it.

[2:13:22] Very quick, Liz.

[2:13:24] Good evening, Mayor Board of Trustees, Jessica Clinton, finance director.

[2:13:29] Going to go over the third quarter financials in the same format that you guys have seen.

[2:13:34] Maybe going on three years now and we've talked about the finances and how the town is doing

[2:13:41] through the budget process as well.

[2:13:43] So I won't make this too long.

[2:13:46] Sales and use tax.

[2:13:48] Here's our graph.

[2:13:49] This is cash basis, not a curl.

[2:13:52] So we're looking at November 2023 through July 2024.

[2:13:56] Numbers,

[2:13:59] some big spikes.

[2:14:01] This is dependent on our sales tax

[2:14:03] as well as the use tax, which comes from permit numbers,

[2:14:07] how the housing unit is doing.

[2:14:09] So this is more than just retail.

[2:14:12] But 17% higher than where we were last year, and we've continued to grow every year.

[2:14:19] So to be 17% above prior year, which has continued to be higher in higher each year is crazy to me.

[2:14:27] And then if we look at just sales tax,

[2:14:34] we look at just sales tax.

[2:14:36] A lot of times the graphs look, the lines will look different, I was surprised that they have a very similar look different sales and use tax lines versus just the sales tax, a lot of times you can see a big difference.

[2:14:49] For the third quarter we didn't see a much of a difference they look very similar, the big spike and then coming back down.

[2:14:57] I did notice that motor vehicle sale.

[2:15:00] Further down a little bit, the tax we received from the motor vehicle, as well as we haven't received

[2:15:06] the PIFF revenue for, we haven't received the PIFF revenue for September, which would actually

[2:15:14] be for August. So that's why these are a little bit low. Those come in pretty late, sometimes

[2:15:20] a few months, behind more than a normal lag. So that's why this is looking kind of the way it is,

[2:15:26] it's still showing 12 percent above prior year. Any questions on those numbers?

[2:15:36] Okay, so we'll

[2:15:37] move into the general fund revenue. We're showing seven months of revenue for the sales tax

[2:15:45] because of the two-month lag. The rest of the revenue that we see is usually about eight months

[2:15:52] through the third quarter. So we would want revenue to be anywhere from 58 percent collection rate

[2:15:58] to about 66% collection rate and as you can see for taxes, we're at 68% and other revenues

[2:16:06] were at 71%. So third quarter, a lot of times you expect the 75% but because of the lag and revenues,

[2:16:16] it's less than that. You can also see that we're above where we were at the same time last year in revenues.

[2:16:22] So the general fund is looking healthy.

[2:16:26] If we compare the revenue of the general fund

[2:16:29] to the expenditures, this is by department

[2:16:34] and overall the spending rate is 66%.

[2:16:38] This does show for the most part nine months of expenditures.

[2:16:42] So we are below the spending rate expected for the year.

[2:16:46] What I really like to see is that our expenses

[2:16:50] through this third quarter are less than 5% higher than they were in 2023. I had to remember

[2:16:57] what you were in. I've been looking at the budget. We all know how much costs have gone up,

[2:17:05] personally, and through everything that the town does, so to see that expenses from last year to

[2:17:11] this year have only gone up four and a half percent shows you how diligent all of the employees for

[2:17:17] town are and how fiscally aware that they are. We'll move into capital

[2:17:23] project fund unless there's questions on the general fund. Capital

[2:17:28] project fund you have your two different types of sales taxes the 1% which is

[2:17:33] only sales tax and then the 0.6% which includes motor vehicle and sales that's

[2:17:39] why those numbers show different collection rates. Again, you're doing very well

[2:17:44] with the sales tax use tax and impact fee revenue

[2:17:47] as well as cash and loo.

[2:17:50] A lot of that is timing has to do with market.

[2:17:54] I'll point out that the Intergovernmental Revenue

[2:17:57] that $200,000 that we received

[2:17:59] is from the school district.

[2:18:00] We have that assigned for, I think the Hawksignal,

[2:18:05] but it can be any type of,

[2:18:08] I don't know that it was specific for the Hawksignal,

[2:18:11] but that's our plan.

[2:18:12] Okay, so we have that in there

[2:18:14] that will be under an assignment or a restriction.

[2:18:19] Again, the revenue for capital projects is good.

[2:18:22] The detail of the capital improvement expenditures

[2:18:24] will be in the back, so you can see each project

[2:18:27] that we've done there, any questions on that.

[2:18:36] We'll look at the water fund, the water fund,

[2:18:41] we have it split with our operating revenue at 74%.

[2:18:46] That is one month behind in revenue, so that one is doing good right on how we had budgeted

[2:18:55] and then if you compare that to our operating expenditures, again, we are doing well in that realm.

[2:19:01] In these financials, the tap fee and what will be system development fee revenues are in that operating revenue number.

[2:19:10] Starting in 2025, I'll split it out between tap fees and system development, and it won't just show up in the operating revenue, but I did want to point out that the tap fees are in that 7.8 million dollar number.

[2:19:25] Still, water rate, water revenues are doing good, especially compared to the operating expenditures.

[2:19:30] And we can see that revenue and expenditures are on pace with each other in the fund, both at a little less than 50% spending rates.

[2:19:45] And then we have our stormwater fund, and that is right on pace again 75% through the third quarter,

[2:19:52] where a little bit higher than our operating expenditures for that fund, still within every fund,

[2:19:58] a way of how there's spending money, how a cost-effective they are, and saving where possible,

[2:20:04] and that can be seen in all of the funds and the overall finances of the town.

[2:20:10] And then there's just the capital improvement projects listed out. I won't go over those there

[2:20:17] in the presentation and you guys can have those. If there's any questions, I'm happy to talk about them,

[2:20:23] But that's all I have.

[2:20:27] Any questions?

[2:20:30] Thank you.

[2:20:36] Oh, it looks like I like those reports.

[2:20:39] We're supposed to be.

[2:20:40] So I'm happy.

[2:20:43] All right.

[2:20:44] Mayor's report real quick.

[2:20:46] Yesterday, I attended the Weld County State of the County meeting.

[2:20:53] That aims community college.

[2:20:54] and Welc County is doing well.

[2:20:58] They've done a lot of stuff.

[2:21:00] They're, I believe, there are recordings of the meeting

[2:21:04] and recordings of the speech

[2:21:07] that was given by Chair Commissioner Kevin Ross.

[2:21:13] One of the things that struck me interesting and curious

[2:21:18] because I've come kind of wonder now how they come up

[2:21:20] with the number.

[2:21:22] I'm sure they have a way.

[2:21:23] But they now are a designated county in the fact that they have exceeded one billion dollars

[2:21:30] that they have not taxed people, which is good.

[2:21:35] I just don't understand how they come up with that number.

[2:21:40] But hey, I guess they could have taxed you that amount of money, but they didn't.

[2:21:46] So that was one of their big points.

[2:21:52] Let's see, if you look in front of you,

[2:21:54] you have an emergency preparedness guide.

[2:21:58] I brought those from that meeting yesterday.

[2:22:02] And on October 31st, there is emergency exercise happening

[2:22:07] with the come valley of emergency preparedness section that's Mary Garner.

[2:22:19] If you can possibly be there, I think it would be a great thing for everybody to see,

[2:22:25] especially what our role would be in a major emergency situation where it could be widespread,

[2:22:34] It could be regional and what our roles as policy makers would be within that role.

[2:22:43] And trust me, we will have a role.

[2:22:46] What's that in your house?

[2:22:48] What's that?

[2:22:48] I'm running a year out.

[2:22:51] Okay.

[2:22:52] But yeah.

[2:22:53] So that would be something I highly recommend.

[2:22:57] That's all I have for now.

[2:23:00] Any trustee reports?

[2:23:03] Trust you, Hoka, one last thing, and it's kind of a general thing.

[2:23:11] So for those that weren't around for the 2024 budget, if staff, we warned us that they

[2:23:20] thought it would be kind of a lean year, so we kind of went in, lean in terms of expenditures

[2:23:26] and revenues and so forth.

[2:23:30] So when we picked it up this year, to me there was some confusion about whether, so when

[2:23:38] you look at the budgeting for 2025, you know, you've got your actuals and you've got the

[2:23:43] 2024 budget at numbers.

[2:23:45] And we kind of balanced, I don't know if you guys noticed, I kind of noticed when I mentioned

[2:23:49] it one time, we were kind of balancing it back and forth between those, you know, both numbers

[2:23:54] were listed there for our information, but depending on how, you know, sometimes the increase

[2:24:01] was a lot because we were born from the actuals. Sometimes it was marginal because we were

[2:24:06] going from the budget, because there was substantial difference between the two. Just consistency,

[2:24:13] I guess, and the going for maybe next year in terms of, you know, it's always, I guess, the fiscal

[2:24:23] conservative part of me says, hey, if you, if you, if you can, if you can set your

[2:24:28] actuals down here, let that become your new baseline. And then grow from there,

[2:24:33] not, not from what it should have, what you thought it would be a year ago. So that, you know,

[2:24:39] we got nine months to think about that. But I just wanted those things, I think, sometimes like,

[2:24:45] hey, staff was able to trim some costs. Okay, let's see if we can live with that and grow from

[2:24:50] versus going from where we thought we were going to be a year ago. So just just just one of those things. I know this so

[2:24:59] Thank you

[2:25:00] Any others

[2:25:02] All right, we're looking for motion to adjourn. Motion adjourn. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed

[2:25:12] We're adjourn

Board of Trustees Meeting

Agenda

Transcript