Name: City Council Work Session
Uploaded: 2026-09-08T00:00:00Z
Duration: 2 h 31 min 27 s
Description: That's what that money was used for. In 2024, we negotiated a contract with flock safety for license plate readers and for our raven system that we'll discuss.

[0:26] Council Member

[0:27] K sort of spend

[0:27] Chair.

[0:30] Council Member Wilson R Mayor

[0:32] Chairman llson. Council Memberthank

[0:36] council Member Olsen?

[0:37] Professor프

[0:37] Council Member sounding.

[0:39] associate

[0:39] Council Memberup available.

[0:40] President MayorPower.

[0:41] President.

[0:42] Let's reflect on all 7 members of council are present.

[0:46] Item number three is reports or council members.

[0:50] Are there any reports tonight?

[0:56] Attorney Oldson

[0:58] Thank You, ma'am.

[1:00] I'm going to do a merge update. I know there's a lot of consternation, a lot of people out there

[1:04] wondering where merge is, are we going to deliver merge? So I'm going to have read after this,

[1:10] can you send this memo to the rest of the council. But we have our monthly meetings and we're

[1:16] just making a lot of progress, but I sort of wanted to highlight some of the things that have been

[1:21] done in the last six months that probably should have been done over the last two years.

[1:26] Governance established, the charter creating clear direction, project team assembly now with

[1:32] C.Dont managing the project for us, setting out all up to a pretty significant hand with

[1:38] Greeley staff on us on how we're going to manage it.

[1:41] Design is advancing, design task order, I think was implemented like three months ago, two

[1:47] and a half months ago, so the line project goals, they're looking at the design and they're

[1:52] starting to move it forward.

[1:53] They have a cost range update, they refresh all the project costs, kind of start to scratch

[2:00] a little bit.

[2:02] CMG, C selection, general manager contractor was interviewed last week and they should

[2:09] be having somebody on board, so when you get a contractor on board things start to move

[2:12] a little bit faster.

[2:14] Financing framework drafted, federal grant executed, the raise grant, over the next few months

[2:20] they're going to start doing value and constructability, so they're going to start trying to optimize the project.

[2:26] Bring builders on board, so whoever the contractor is will come on board, start working through the CMGC process to optimize project.

[2:34] 30% design, advance environmental review.

[2:37] There is an environmental assessment that has to be done to meet the Colorado and federal rules.

[2:43] So they're working on that. See that's actually doing the environmental assessment for us.

[2:50] Engagement in the community and informed decision-makers.

[2:53] So keeping things moving, keeping greedy officials, leaders abreast.

[2:56] Looking ahead, increase cost certainly.

[3:04] You don't want to get too far out ahead and get too few alone before you need it.

[3:08] So it's like an 18-month process, but that'll be the final payments when we get down there

[3:12] that will be paying for the construction.

[3:16] Complete environmental clearance, the EA, and then moving to construction and constructions

[3:21] looking like some time starting late 27. So it is moving. I promise you.

[3:31] Okay. Right.

[3:35] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just briefly had the opportunity to take a museum tour by some of the museum

[3:39] staff as well as friends of Greeley Museum. Pretty, too cool, pretty exhibits going on right now.

[3:44] Highly encourage our community to take advantage of. One is the our history, our voice. Mexican-American

[3:49] history project of Greeley. Of course, that fantastic organization just released a book that is

[3:54] highlight it in that exhibit and then the one that I found pretty interesting as well

[3:57] was the 13-minute warning, Weld County in the Atomic Age. So, highly encouraged community

[4:03] members, get out, support our local museums and see those two pretty cool exhibits. Also,

[4:08] unfortunately, City Manager McBroom could be here this evening. He is still probably mostly

[4:14] shameful, but they ended that in a brat. I'm sorry, Michigan football game this weekend and

[4:19] we'll have to catch up with him next week and just give him the ribbing that he's so

[4:23] reachedly deserves. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Anyone else?

[4:31] Okay. Then we will move on to item number 4,

[4:37] which is North Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, Air Quality Council Executive Director

[4:44] updates. We have Hannah Friedman, Senior Transportation Planning Manager, and Elizabeth Ralford,

[4:50] from the North Front Range Executive Director.

[4:54] Welcome to you both.

[4:58] Thank you, Mayor and Council.

[5:00] Great to see you all.

[5:01] My name's Hannah Feldman.

[5:03] I'm our Senior Transportation Planning Manager

[5:04] here at the City of Greeley.

[5:06] And I would just like to introduce Elizabeth Rillford.

[5:08] She's the Executive Director

[5:10] of the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization.

[5:13] The NFR MPO for some background

[5:15] is the federally designated transportation

[5:17] and air quality planning agency

[5:19] for the urban portions of Lairmer and Weld counties.

[5:22] It brings together the 15 local governments, including the City of Greeley to coordinate

[5:27] regional transportation planning and help direct state and federal transportation funding

[5:31] to priority projects.

[5:34] So with that, take it away.

[5:38] Great.

[5:39] Thank you so much, Hannah.

[5:40] While they're pulling on my presentation, I'd be remiss if I didn't acknowledge Hannah's

[5:45] great work as the Technical Advisory Committee representative on behalf of the City of Greeley

[5:50] and Councilman Olson who represents as your member representative for the North

[5:55] Front Range MPO. You don't really have a choice. You have to be a part of the

[6:01] MPO because you're federally designated in a census district. So thank you

[6:06] for participating in our organization. I really appreciate it. I was asked to

[6:11] come today and spend a few moments. Really I want to personally invite you all to be

[6:16] able to attend our Inter-Mountain West Ozone Conference that we are partnering with

[6:22] Pike's Becaria Council of Government to host.

[6:26] Transportation doesn't always hear about the air quality side but our organization

[6:31] is also federally mandated to do the air quality planning for Northern Colorado as well.

[6:36] So we are hosting a conference and we are inviting you and included in the presentation tonight

[6:43] tonight is just some information about the conference and making ourselves available

[6:47] to answer any questions that you might have about it.

[6:50] And we appreciate this public forum so that the public would know that they're invited

[6:55] to participate and attend as well.

[6:57] Our Inter-Mountain West Conference, this is just kind of a highlight of what we're going

[7:02] to go over.

[7:02] I'm going to touch face on from an agenda perspective.

[7:06] So why is a transportation organization having an air quality conference?

[7:12] And that was essentially the question that some of the researchers in air quality planners were asking, we don't understand why the North Front Range and why Pike Security Council of Governments is doing in air quality.

[7:26] But what we found is we had many partners across the Inter-Mountain West and other states, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, who were experiencing similar situations to air quality not responding to.

[7:41] what we were seeing in our region, just because we have similar issues.

[7:46] And so we had started meeting with them 10 years ago.

[7:49] We actually had a dose on conference in 2016 that the North Front Range participated

[7:54] on having these similar conversations of what is happening in our Inter-Mountain West communities

[8:00] and are you guys experiencing the same issues that we're experiencing?

[8:03] And it turns out that they are, and they are doing their own research.

[8:07] And so, we're going to essentially bring together these other agencies, and the slide, you

[8:13] know, I don't expect you to be able to necessarily understand it.

[8:16] But the gist of this slide is that since 2011, the bars, the dark gray and light gray bars,

[8:24] they continue to go down.

[8:26] Those are all of our control strategies that our state has implemented since 2011, where

[8:32] we have been improving our air quality and those other colored line graphs above it are

[8:39] our ozone in the other states for Colorado, for Utah, for Arizona, Las Vegas area.

[8:49] And what's happening is our ozone isn't correlating to the reduction of our precursors,

[8:55] our ozone precursors.

[8:56] So, we're trying to understand how we continue to improve our, have all these different

[9:03] controls, strategies that are reducing our man-made precursors, but our ozone is not correlating

[9:09] or having that same correlating effect to reducing.

[9:13] And so what we're doing is we're bringing all of these other agencies together to talk

[9:16] about why are, what's going on that we're all reducing our man-made ozone precursors

[9:22] that our ozone is not responding, what's going on in all of our regions.

[9:26] And does it make sense if we all have our scientists researching the same information,

[9:31] or could we be more of an economy scale and figure out how we could tag team different

[9:36] research to find different solutions that would help the entire region?

[9:42] So that's essentially our goal.

[9:45] It's a very broad audience that we're really targeting in this effort.

[9:50] everybody is invited. We are essentially trying to set up the ability where people can ask

[9:58] questions and bring all of our scientists together. So there's been great research that

[10:03] has been occurring over the last, even just three years, five years. Bring these scientists

[10:09] together and talk to us about the data that they're finding with all of their research.

[10:14] And so, not just Colorado, but in our Utah, Arizona, because we are seeing similar situations.

[10:24] And so our goals essentially are to have that conversation to talk about the challenges

[10:28] that we see with ozone and why we're not able to meet our ozone standards.

[10:35] I don't know how familiar everybody is with the Clean Air Act.

[10:40] It's very complicated.

[10:41] These are not just easy conversations to have air quality, like a lot of other topics

[10:48] gets very technical very quick.

[10:50] So day one, the intent is to do a high level, just education about air quality 101.

[10:58] What is the next, the National Ambient Air Quality Standard?

[11:02] What is the Clean Air Act?

[11:05] What standards do we have to do our air quality planning at?

[11:09] why does our standard keep changing?

[11:13] And while some of these things are just fact-based

[11:17] and data-driven, the intent of the conference is

[11:21] not to debate the ozone health effects

[11:23] or the regulations because they are what they are

[11:27] and that would be an entirely different conference

[11:30] if we just had a conference where we're debating

[11:32] that kind of information.

[11:34] This is really about what is going on,

[11:37] what is the data that we have right now that we're trying to understand so that elected officials

[11:42] who are asked to sit on our organization and have to make policy decisions and recommendations.

[11:49] How are we equipping our elected officials, our local governments with the tools they need to be

[11:53] able to be informed and speak into these complicated matters? Day two is to bring in our scientists.

[12:00] So we've got scientists coming from all over, from BYU, from CSU, from CU, from Arizona.

[12:09] So this again is going to be scientists who are really, this is the data they're getting

[12:16] grants for to get, you know, the information to us.

[12:20] So what's the latest data that's out there?

[12:22] What are we hearing?

[12:24] What do we do with this information?

[12:26] You know, are we are scientists doing the same research that the scientists in Utah are doing or are they finding different things?

[12:35] The scientists don't have enough time to get together and actually talk about what all of their data is showing.

[12:42] And so what we did is we asked them to put together abstracts.

[12:47] And these abstracts are essentially formed to the agenda that we're going to be talking about as part of the conference.

[12:55] We received 61 abstracts from all over the Inter-Mountain West.

[13:00] It was, I think, a very positive number of scientists that are submitting their projects

[13:09] and everything they're working on.

[13:10] We're also going to do a poster session.

[13:12] Of those 61 abstracts, basically that turned into almost 90 speakers over a three-day period.

[13:19] So this three-day period, oh, I'm going the wrong way, sorry, let me go back.

[13:23] This three days is jammed packed.

[13:28] So if you come and you can only make one day,

[13:32] I at least wanted you to show what we're looking at over those three days.

[13:36] The first day is the Air Quality 101, second day is the research data,

[13:40] and the third day is really the public health communication aspect side of it.

[13:45] So we have a lot of data out there that gets communicated on the health of our air

[13:51] and it's all coming from different data sources

[13:55] and every agency is using something different.

[13:58] And so how are we communicating what,

[14:01] which data source is the public supposed to listen to?

[14:05] How do they know which one is accurate?

[14:07] When we have a message coming out and saying,

[14:08] hey, your air is bad, where is that data coming from?

[14:13] How is it getting communicated?

[14:14] Because we do know that there is a health,

[14:16] there is a definite health effect with ozone.

[14:20] And we've also seen that we haven't been able to, you know, affect the change at the

[14:26] rate that we would want based on the standards that we have to meet.

[14:29] So we're in this kind of, you know, in-between area, we're doing everything we can do.

[14:36] The ozone isn't responding, but we also care about our citizens' health and that they're

[14:40] breathing good air.

[14:42] So this conference is to bring all those conversations together and really talk about, okay, what are

[14:47] the next steps that we should be focusing funding on and I'm really happy to say as part

[14:53] of this one we did receive an air quality enterprise grant of $300,000 to be able to help

[14:59] I'll pass that the-

[15:00] We think this is about a $700,000 conference, so it's not even half, but we are relying on registration fees to help with this. But what you see up here is that we are also offering scholarships and stipends. So people would be able to come and participate. We know there's a lot of nonprofits and local governments that can't always afford to participate in conferences. So if you do sign up and come, your agency could ask for up to $1,500 in scholarships.

[15:29] to be able to participate in a tent and we're looking at approximately $300 a person for government nonprofit agencies, 400 for industry and we think late registration would start about October 5th.

[15:45] So register sooner than later.

[15:48] We have the QR code to the registration site, and this is who's putting this on.

[15:56] We are a small but mighty team, and this is a grassroots effort.

[16:01] We are not hiring other people, we're doing this internally, and I just a shout out to

[16:09] the planning team.

[16:10] They've spent a lot of time really trying to facilitate and put this together.

[16:14] our abstract review committees made up from people like I said from all of those other communities

[16:19] and states that participate in the selection of the abstracts that they think is going

[16:24] to help talk about the program the most you know like day two we're talking about wildfires

[16:29] we're you know I would just recommend go to the website we have the program up on the website

[16:37] Intermountain West actually that's totally and that's a lie.

[16:40] It's ozone exchange dot org. We just created a new website specifically for the conference and for the ability to be able to put all of this information going forward that comes out of the conference.

[16:52] So we we hope you can attend. We hope you can be part of the conversation and thank you Councilman Nelson for inviting me. I appreciate it.

[17:01] Anything else?

[17:03] Did it? Any questions?

[17:07] Johnny.

[17:09] I have more of a...

[17:11] I don't want to ask questions.

[17:13] More of the statements.

[17:14] Elizabeth has our executive directors done an outstanding job

[17:18] moving us from an organization of not just doing but actually planning and looking ahead.

[17:24] One of the things that I think sort of spurred this,

[17:28] since on this whole idea was there's a lot of states,

[17:32] including Colorado in the Norfolk range,

[17:34] that we can't clean our air.

[17:39] We, about 68% of its transport comes in from somewhere else.

[17:43] 38% is actually created in Colorado,

[17:46] but we're held to those higher numbers.

[17:48] Mariposa, is that where it was?

[17:50] They did a study down there and found

[17:52] and got some exemptions from trying to hit the regulations.

[17:56] Even the rack mic from the rack, he does presentations and he came in about a year ago and he had a presentation and it said basically if you removed every vehicle and Colorado never to drive again, just person buggy, we still wouldn't meet it.

[18:12] We wouldn't meet the Arizona requirements today in our area.

[18:16] So, even if you removed every single vehicle, we would never meet the requirements of the

[18:23] EPA to be below, which tells you a little bit about where we're at.

[18:30] It's really different for the state of Colorado because of our hopes, hopes in the front

[18:35] range, and Elizabeth and her team, and Anna's loves them.

[18:40] We don't talk enough, I tell her all the time, but she represents us well.

[18:43] But there's a bigger issue to this than just, not on the Colorado.

[18:50] It is a regulatory nightmare, and we have to remember everything that the air quality commission or

[18:57] rack implements in the state of Colorado, it affects all of us in terms of cost.

[19:04] This is not an affordability program.

[19:07] Air quality is not affordability program.

[19:09] It's probably, it has cost us significant amount of dollars over the years, every citizen

[19:15] and every person.

[19:17] So there's a affordability thing that makes it difficult for businesses, for people to

[19:22] live here and these requirements that we've been putting upon people aren't working.

[19:29] And they put all, every time it's federal law, we have to develop something.

[19:33] We have to develop strategies, and we keep developing these strategies, and it's just not

[19:38] not affecting the Arizona or ozone and the particulates in our air, which you're causing cost to our citizens.

[19:46] So, I would recommend people that want to learn about air quality to go to this conference.

[19:53] I probably won't be attending because my daughter's going to be having her baby on one of those days, and that's more important to me than all of these.

[20:01] But thank you very much.

[20:02] staff is welcome to.

[20:05] Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, the, um,

[20:12] Johnny and brought up a good point that I was going to ask because you were talking about how we,

[20:16] we made all these measures and then we flatlined. And I feel like we get into the point where we're,

[20:22] our energy costs are going asymptotic because of the decisions that are states making about energy.

[20:28] And at what point, if we're at flatlining and we're not making any improvements, does

[20:34] the conversations switch away from a, we've met as much as we can, let's stop putting

[20:41] the pressure on cost of energy because to me, if you ask the average citizen, they feel

[20:47] like the air is clean enough to flatline their electrical bill, they'd probably be okay

[20:53] with flatlining their electrical bill at this point.

[20:56] As any of those conversations came about where we've done, like Johnny said, we've done enough.

[21:01] Now let's talk about how we've continued this flatline going forward and make energy cheaper.

[21:08] I would say there has been conversation in the sense that we do have, let me

[21:16] say back, the Clean Air Act hasn't had a full revamp since 1990.

[21:22] So the standards that Councilman Olson's referring to is a timing issue with our state.

[21:29] So if we are not attaining, they are automatically ramping us up to the next level.

[21:34] And it reaches a point where once you get to extreme, then they step in and they say this is where your funding is going in your state.

[21:41] Similar to transportation does the same thing.

[21:43] If transfer is seeded, it isn't maintaining the roads at a, you know, good, fair, if

[21:49] they have 5% go below poor, then the feds step in and say, where you have to spend your

[21:53] money to repair your roads, air quality is the same.

[21:57] So we haven't had a revision of the regulatory standard.

[22:02] I would say the conference that we're having is to maybe more have the education about

[22:07] what you're talking about if this is how it's affecting everyday people.

[22:11] You could almost have a separate conference on the regulatory environment with really

[22:18] we need to revisit, you know, if the Intermountain West is seeing a very similar response to

[22:24] ozone levels, not reducing based on topography, meteorology, international transport, things

[22:32] like that.

[22:33] Then there's things beyond the control of our region that the standard is never going

[22:39] to meet.

[22:39] And so that's where we right now, we have to, I would say if you're wanting to support

[22:45] some change, we have two acts that have gone through the, they're at the federal level,

[22:54] two bills that have been introduced, one's called the Fire Act and the other's called the Fence's

[22:59] Act. And the Fence's Act is about foreign emissions and non-attainment clarification for economic

[23:05] stability. And that house resolution essentially is to amend the Clean Air Act to talk about international

[23:12] transport in the sense of

[23:23] from an economic perspective. And so those are, they've passed the house,

[23:29] they have not passed the Senate. The other one, the Fire Act is Representative Gabe Evansville,

[23:35] he's a co-sponsor, and it's also bipartisan. It has passed the house and is at the Senate.

[23:40] And I imagine none of this is going to get picked up until after the election.

[23:45] But there are some opportunities from an elected official level.

[23:49] I don't know where our senators are at with these bills, but it would be good.

[23:53] I would say if there's a difference you want to make, that might be a good start to say,

[23:58] hey, where are you guys at with these bills that are going through Congress to really help us understand

[24:05] And the difference that it can make because we have the Clean Air Act as one standard for

[24:12] our entire United States.

[24:13] We are all held to the same exact standard.

[24:16] And I think what we're seeing in the Intermountain West with all of our other states is we have

[24:20] very different topography with our mountains and our jet stream that is affecting our ability

[24:27] for the air flow to happen the same way it might in the Midwest and in the East.

[24:32] so, you know, does a one size fit all necessarily make sense? I don't know, I think that that would be some of the recommendations that we need people like local government officials to come and speak to to say, yeah, as a local government, what are we supposed to be doing?

[24:47] How are we supposed to be making a difference when the standard is a one size fits all and our, you know, we're doing everything we can in our control to affect change and we're not getting the results that we're looking for.

[24:59] I think that's hearing those voices from you guys is way more powerful than a staff person sitting at a table saying you know

[25:07] What do you guys want to do? Not for me because they hear from me every month. So there's just for fences at fences acts

[25:15] It's HR6409 and then the buyer act is HR6387. Okay

[25:24] Sounds good. Thank you

[25:25] Okay, any other questions?

[25:27] questions? Okay, thank you. Thank you.

[25:33] Moving on to item number five, automated license plate

[25:38] recognition and drones. Added and purged police chief and Tony Catherius Commander,

[25:48] welcome.

[25:49] Good evening.

[26:04] Okay. Good evening, Mayor and Council. With me tonight is Commander Tony Gutierrez,

[26:10] who oversees our real time information center along with the responsibilities of the well

[26:14] kind of drug task force. Behind me in the far back row of the chambers is Sean Reinhardt,

[26:21] our police legal advisor from the City Attorney's Office, Judge Gonzales, and then Sergeant

[26:26] Greg Reinhand is behind us as our subject matter expert when it comes to more detailed questions

[26:32] that you may have. The purpose tonight is to provide an overview of the police department's current

[26:37] use of automated license plate readers, our drones, and drones as first responder program.

[26:42] This presentation is in response to Council's initiative requesting more information about

[26:47] flock license plate readers and police drone technology.

[26:51] Next slide.

[26:54] We're going to begin our program overview of ALPR automated license plate readers and

[27:01] the specific vendors we use.

[27:03] We're going to address flock safety, including both local use and broader issues currently

[27:08] being discussed nationally.

[27:09] We'll then cover our Skydo drone program, including our docked DFR drones and portable drones,

[27:16] and then I'll close with our transparency efforts and where the public can find more information.

[27:21] Next slide.

[27:24] So I'm going to do a real high-level overview of how we got here today with our real-time

[27:29] information center.

[27:32] In 2023, after being appointed the police chief, we formed a project team to start researching

[27:37] real-time information centers or crime centers around the country to find out best practices

[27:43] and which model would be most applicable to public safety in Greeley. In May of 2023,

[27:51] Council had an initiative and tasked the police department to come back at a work session to discuss

[27:57] available technology for enforcement when it comes to noise, red light cameras, and speed cameras.

[28:05] commanders. Commander Heck and I did the presentation in May of 2023. We brought back a lengthy

[28:12] presentation with available technology when it comes to enforcement regarding noise,

[28:17] red lights and speed cameras. Just a quick overview, the noise technology enforcement was not at a

[28:25] place structurally or with the technology to actually incorporate. There were some pilot programs

[28:32] being done in Longmont, they didn't like it, so Council decided by consensus not to move forward

[28:39] with the noise technology enforcement. Council at the time also chose and gave us direction

[28:45] not to move forward with red light cameras in the city of Greeley. There was consensus from Council

[28:51] for us to move forward with mobile speed enforcement, hence our two photo radar vans that we have deployed

[28:57] throughout the city with seasonal part-time workers.

[29:01] In March of 2024, we did a council work session presentation of the real-time information

[29:06] center, the mission and vision, and how we saw it being used, all of our technology being

[29:13] leveraged and used proactively in the city of really.

[29:16] We came to council, a wish-time council appropriate at $2.3 million from our current 0.16 public safety

[29:26] tax fund, and this was for start-up costs and operational costs.

[29:31] No general fund money were used other than Sergeant Ryan Salary and Benefits as he oversees

[29:36] the real-time information center.

[29:38] In September of 2024, we applied for and received a $300,000 Department of Justice grant, which

[29:45] paid for two years of our software fuses, which is our single pane of glass that we use

[29:52] in our real-time information center that ingests and displays all of the technology currently

[29:57] available to our real-time information center.

[30:00] That's what that money was used for. In 2024, we negotiated a contract with flock safety for license plate readers and for our raven system that we'll discuss. And this money came out of that original council appropriation. As a result of some savings from the remodel, we had planned to build our real-time information center and the annex building next to the police department. But due to some

[30:32] incentive priority,

[30:34] Audit, Anybt,

[30:42] I meant for the tick missed on blot species to converse in.

[31:12] to be the only entry point to be able to also get to a virtual portal and to get to a virtual

[31:20] time to do that or process, but some of the progress that I've done is a little down

[31:26] to the

[31:34] Chambers.

[31:36] We're all with communication, so you can get to some other key, we can help out a lot in the

[31:46] community.

[31:47] to talk all kinds of really good about the privacy.

[31:51] And if you're that moving, the point is to say reader who

[31:58] remains in stock and the last year.

[32:01] And

[32:10] if you're made of the same thing or public safety,

[32:12] go vote that you're being

[32:20] so long.

[32:51] You can't use it all.

[32:52] Maybe it's

[33:42] about how in 20 percent bill and

[33:56] subletment

[33:56] will

[34:23] be used the most day.

[34:24] for

[34:51] the

[34:59] safety of the COVID-19 system.

[35:01] This is just a little bit of the phrase

[35:03] and what's different from how the COVID-19

[35:05] is.

[35:06] We need to take our youngest one and

[35:14] team box

[35:14] that there is no

[35:20] room for many federal agencies

[35:23] and these children that are in the care of remains.

[35:27] And we sure, I suppose, what we have to say is

[35:30] that there are some cases where we need to

[35:33] that I would support the other teams in the United States,

[35:40] so they have the same ability to help the other teams.

[35:44] We retain record groups, and we cannot share the other

[35:48] law enforcement agencies.

[35:50] That is a strict law enforcement commitment

[35:52] to the state patrol groups, and the state-owned states

[35:57] and the most important potentials in the United States.

[36:02] So I'm going to give you a list of examples

[36:10] for the data on where the standard is the top

[36:17] picture to see is a double-term and a full state.

[36:22] A lot of what I've produced is the data.

[36:28] So, the 6th step is the facial recognition, full generous.

[36:36] and the cumulative costs before paying an employee's action.

[36:41] Commonly used hot lists include stolen vehicles, wanted individuals, amber, silver, or Medina

[36:48] alerts, and other case-specific searches involving individuals associated with vehicles identified

[36:54] as suspects or subjects in criminal activity.

[36:58] ALPR alerts are treated as investigative leads, not as automatic enforcement decisions.

[37:03] Really PD currently has policy in place for ALPR use and ALPR records release which have been provided to you in the blue folders.

[37:11] Next slide.

[37:14] Really PD currently has two areas where flock Raven aka gunshot detectors are located.

[37:21] Each area is approximately a quarter mile wide and has devices to capture the sounds of gunshots.

[37:26] It would be extremely expensive for us to equip the city approximately 49 sperm miles with these raven devices.

[37:35] So based upon data, we selected two quarter mile areas that had the highest number of reports of shots fired in 2025.

[37:43] Since we went live with the ravens in November of 2025, we have evaluated our return on investment on this pilot program.

[37:50] The data we have received is not support renewal or continued use once our contract ends.

[37:57] Recent damage to several Raven sensors has left us with only one area covered.

[38:02] We have never captured voices or audio stress calls on these Raven devices.

[38:06] We never had the ability to do so from the beginning or now.

[38:12] Next slide, please.

[38:12] Release,

[38:16] release, FOX safety, Raven, I'm sorry,

[38:20] Greeley, FOX safety and record A, let me get on the right

[38:24] slide here.

[38:29] Can I have it?

[38:30] All right.

[38:32] Release, FOX safety and record ALPRs have a 30-day data

[38:36] retention period.

[38:37] Data is used for law enforcement purposes only in its own

[38:40] by the Greeley Police Department.

[38:42] Data is never sold to third parties, as the chief mentioned.

[38:45] Any official ALPR use user who accesses information requires

[38:49] As far as a valid reason for search, case number and offense type, he or she is investigating.

[38:54] Every keystroke and access is logged and tracked.

[38:58] So you can see in the lighter box of blue, every time a play is searched, the user must

[39:04] provide an offense type, a case number, and a reason.

[39:08] The prohibited uses of ALPRs include immigration enforcement, most traffic enforcement, harassment,

[39:14] personal use, and use based solely on a protected class.

[39:17] We say most traffic enforcement because we do utilize ALPR technology for

[39:22] hit-and-run accidents, felony eluding cases, careless and reckless driving,

[39:27] because the drop-down options available oftentimes traffic infraction is

[39:31] selected. These restrictions are important because they define what the

[39:35] technology is not for. Really PD currently has 94 total employees with access to

[39:41] flock. Out of the 94 employees, 82 are active users meaning they have logged in and

[39:46] searched within the past 90 days.

[39:49] Those users include both sworn and non sworn officers,

[39:52] non sworn include our real-time information technicians,

[39:56] our civilian investigators as well,

[40:02] sort of like chief.

[40:04] All right, next slide, please.

[40:06] So I want to talk about the current issues facing flock safety.

[40:11] There's been significant national attention on flock safety

[40:15] and the ALPR program is more broadly.

[40:17] The major themes are data sharing, privacy, who can access the data, and how local governments

[40:24] maintain control over the technology.

[40:27] Some communities have raised concerns about whether ALPR data can be used beyond the original

[40:32] local public safety purpose.

[40:34] Law has publicly stated that their customers control their data sharing relationships, and

[40:40] that data is not shared without customer authorization, except were required by law,

[40:45] law, search warrant, subpoena, legal process or emergency circumstances.

[40:51] For really, the key takeaway is that local government matters along with the focus on victims.

[40:57] We have clear policies, restricted access, documented justifications, retention limits,

[41:04] audit logs.

[41:05] We comply with state law, and we continue to work with ongoing public transparency.

[41:11] We have no federal agents who are users of our FOX system, nor can any federal agent

[41:17] log into our FOX system under our credentials.

[41:24] Next slide.

[41:27] I'd like to now provide a high level look at some of our ALPR statistics over the past

[41:31] four and a half years.

[41:32] Our ALPR supports serious felony cases such as homicides, kidnappings, attempted murder,

[41:38] arson shootings, robbery, aggravated assaults, felony menacing, and felony alluding.

[41:44] ALPRs have assisted in identifying vehicles, locating suspects, and supporting rapid apprehension

[41:49] of suspects, including 19 arrests and the arrests of 31 individuals associated to stolen

[41:54] vehicles.

[41:55] When it comes to gun violence, ALPR has assisted in eight shootings or shots fired investigations

[42:01] seven of which resulted in arrests and one generated an investigative lead.

[42:07] ALPRs provide us better investigative leads.

[42:09] They turn partial plates, vehicle descriptions, images, and time stamps into suspect vehicle,

[42:16] identifications, probable cause development, and valuable trial evidence.

[42:21] From 2024 to 2025, we saw 58% decrease in vehicle thefts, although we cannot make a direct

[42:28] nexus between the drop in stolen vehicles and ALPRs, and we believe ALPRs act as a deterrent

[42:34] and assist in the recovery of citizens vehicles.

[42:37] Next slide, please.

[42:43] So we'll switch gears to the drone program.

[42:47] In addition to ALPR, really PD uses

[42:49] Scadiomobile drones and Doc Scadiodrones

[42:52] as first responders, also known as DFRs,

[42:55] to improve our situational awareness.

[42:58] Drones and DFRs provide us with timely information

[43:01] in situations where officer safety, public safety

[43:04] and rapid decision making are vital.

[43:08] Common examples include critical active incidents

[43:10] incidents, search operations, traffic crashes, large scenes, or rapidly evolving events.

[43:17] The purpose of our day-of-art program is to improve response, gain real-time information

[43:22] for first responders, and reduce our uncertainty.

[43:25] As with ALPR's, drones are a tool to support decision-making.

[43:29] They're not a replacement for people, policy, supervision, or officer judgment.

[43:37] We do not fly drones for general surveillance.

[43:40] Our drone and DEFR manuals dictate the type of calls we provide aerial support for, including

[43:45] calls involving public safety, police and fire calls, traffic accidents with injuries,

[43:50] structured fires, wildland fires, missing persons at risk persons, disasters, and special events.

[43:58] Next slide, please.

[44:02] We have four docked drones in the city of Greeley on four fire stations, fire station one downtown,

[44:08] station 2 off Reservoir Road, station 4 off Highway 85 and

[44:12] 22nd Street and station 5 near center place.

[44:15] The placement of our dock DFRs allows drones to respond quickly to priority calls and provide valuable

[44:20] strategic and safety information before first responders arrive or as they are arriving.

[44:26] DFRs on fire stations can arrive within 90 seconds to a call for service within

[44:31] a one and a half mile radius of its dock.

[44:33] This response time can help determine whether a scene is active,

[44:36] whether it's suspect, or suspect vehicle is present, whether a person is flamed, or whether

[44:42] additional resources are needed both fire and police.

[44:45] DFRs also help reduce unnecessary risk, which could lead to use as a force by giving

[44:51] officers better information before they enter a scene, thus allowing the officers to create

[44:55] a plan or identify the need of additional resources and plan for de-escalation.

[45:00] Chief Turk has been providing biweekly updates to council on DFR stats involving our drone usage.

[45:06] Our drones are often first unseen for priority calls when available.

[45:11] Next slide.

[45:14] In addition to the four docked drones, we also have two portable scatio drones,

[45:18] which will be placed into the patrol sergeant's hands shortly. Real time information technicians

[45:25] can fly, and each of these drones both docked and portable upon request. We can also fly

[45:31] really fires portable drone. Field resources can deploy mobile drones and when a

[45:37] dock drone is not the best option, street supervisors can take the mobile

[45:42] drone and place it out into the area and the real-time information center or

[45:46] certified DFR pilot can take over flying. Portable drones are useful for

[45:51] instance outside the immediate docked area coverage when more localized

[45:54] deployment is needed. Portable drones are currently deployed within our patrol

[46:00] division in sergeant vehicles, mobile drones provide flexibility for patrol, special operations,

[46:06] critical incidents and other public safety needs. Together, docked and portable drones give the

[46:11] department a more complete drone response capability. We have been increasingly using our DFR program

[46:17] for fire and medical calls, giving fire leadership a better picture prior to their arrival.

[46:22] Next slide.

[46:25] Some statistics on our drone activity. Our drone is a first responder

[46:28] program went live on March 27th of this year. To date, real-time information center has

[46:33] documented over 1,600 drone flights, which averages approximately 10 flights a day. We

[46:38] have achieved 1,600 flights even though the real-time information technicians work primarily

[46:42] as solo operators for eight of their 10 hours of their shift. Our technicians balance

[46:48] DFR operations and flights, live camera support, analytical and historical workups, radio traffic,

[46:54] get an officer support responsibilities. Since going live, our DFR was first on scene

[47:00] for 1555 incidents which equates to 74.6% of approved DFR calls for service.

[47:07] Our tech technicians with the use of DFRs were documented as first on scene giving responding

[47:12] personnel situational awareness before arrival. Our technicians and DFRs have recorded arrests

[47:18] Assess this in 201 police incidents, including more related calls, traffic, vehicle incidents,

[47:24] property crime, disturbances, assaults, and weapon related calls.

[47:30] Next slide.

[47:33] So a central point for this presentation is transparency.

[47:37] The police department recognizes that public safety technology must be understood by our community.

[47:43] We have made information about our technology, including our drones, flight paths, flight

[47:48] patterns, our flock license plate readers available on our police department website at www.grillipd.com.

[47:57] The city's ALPR page explains how APLs help APL, ALPRs help locate vehicles connected to stolen vehicles,

[48:07] missing persons, and criminal investigations and support faster police response.

[48:12] We want our residents to know what tools we use, why we use them, and what safeguards exist.

[48:19] Next slide.

[48:27] Next slide. This is just a key takeaway in a summary of what we've already

[48:31] provided in the presentation. And this evening's item is for information and discussion

[48:37] only based on the council initiative requests from our information on FLOx Safety AOPRs and

[48:43] our drone program. Next slide. We're happy to answer any questions.

[48:48] Is there any questions at this moment?

[48:55] Great.

[49:01] Thanks for putting this together.

[49:02] And thanks for getting, I had a few questions beforehand

[49:06] that you guys answered very thoroughly.

[49:08] And I want to be clear, my questions,

[49:12] darn reflection of my belief, are police officers

[49:17] are very honorable, very trustworthy?

[49:22] And your record shows that you guys haven't had

[49:26] any instances of misuse or abuse, and I'm very thankful for that.

[49:31] I think my concern is, as the presentation noted, was the 91 other entities that have

[49:39] access to this data, and I think, and then also what was discussed is, the lock does not

[49:47] allow us to put this data on our own servers and control that.

[49:53] So for them to say, we own the data, but we don't get to choose to keep the data on our

[49:58] servers seems a little bit conflicting.

[50:01] I guess my first question is with this 91, do we regular review their retention policies?

[50:08] Do we have the ability to have an agreement with the ones we share saying, hey, we will

[50:13] won't share this data with you if you don't comply with our 30-day policy and stuff like

[50:19] Yeah,

[50:22] I'm going to start the conversation, I'm going to pass over to Commander Gutierrez

[50:25] or even Sergeant Ryan for that matter.

[50:27] But I think, well, I know we have incredible policies, but we're not perfect.

[50:36] I know that a mistake could happen.

[50:38] We have made it very clear to our department, not just with ALPRs, not just for sensitive data,

[50:44] because that exists in all of our records management systems, it exists by the mere fact that

[50:48] that I can get on the radio and run somebody's license plate and our officers and our

[50:54] non-sborn employees know the rules of engagement and they know what the consequences are and

[51:01] they reflect all of public safety, not just a really police department.

[51:06] So I can only speak for our employees, our policies.

[51:09] I know that those data standards that we, that Commander Guterres explained in terms of

[51:14] of searchability is pushed out to all departments

[51:17] within the FOX safety.

[51:18] I don't know how it works.

[51:20] Well, we don't share a report,

[51:21] but I don't know how it works with LSAG.

[51:24] Yes, I'm not sure on LSAG as well,

[51:26] but as far as other out-of-state agencies searching

[51:30] within FOX specifically,

[51:32] they too have those three mandatory case numbers,

[51:35] offense type, and reason.

[51:36] As far as their policies, do we read every policy

[51:40] of the agencies that we share with, we have not.

[51:43] No.

[51:44] Um, because I think that's my, I think that's my little bit of my major rub is because I like.

[51:51] Um, I like the drone technology because it's, it's implemented per incident.

[51:57] I think there's an active incident and we send out the drone, whereas this is a constant.

[52:02] And we also don't really have control over that.

[52:06] Um, so I, I think that's kind of, that's kind of where I'm at.

[52:09] I mean, like I said, I think the drones are great.

[52:12] I think it protects our officers.

[52:14] I think it's a good deal, but that's where I have struggles.

[52:21] What of the other providers, can you briefly tell me of the other providers?

[52:27] Maybe some of the benefits, if you guys were to switch away from flock, as opposed to what

[52:34] we currently have.

[52:36] So I'm going to go back to your first question real quick and just make a comment that

[52:39] that crime does not have jurisdictional boundaries, so the fact that we are able to share with

[52:46] our partners makes it a lot more efficient, and we're successful about it, and I'm just

[52:52] making a comment about the sharing source, and I know that if we got a complaint about

[52:57] a misuse or an abuse from another agency, and we saw all these searches, we would be referring

[53:03] it to that other agency, no different than if another agency suspected our employees of abuse,

[53:08] we would get that same courtesy to look into and investigate.

[53:12] Your second question, yes, there are companies in the industry who provide other options,

[53:18] other leaders in the industry, who provide options where the data is not stored with their company

[53:25] like Flock and we have no option or say in that, where we could house it on our servers

[53:31] and basically the competing companies say, this is your data, share by MOU, but we cannot

[53:39] access it, regardless if we get a warrant, a subpoena, or a court order, where Flot can

[53:46] and Flot got one a few weeks ago and called us and said, hey, we got this court order, it's

[53:52] your data, but we pulled it up and saw that you have the image. So, we know we have an example

[53:56] of how they're pulling it up by court order. Other industry leaders don't have that option.

[54:02] They say it's your data and we can't access it. We'll never be able to access it and good luck to

[54:06] you.

[54:11] Yeah. I think it'd be worth looking into and at least seeing those pluses and minuses,

[54:16] because I think that's, I think, personally, I'm of the Benjamin Franklin point of view given

[54:23] of essential liberty for temporary safety. We deserve neither. I know that's not necessarily

[54:30] a popular one, and it's not an indictment on you guys. Like I said, I think you guys do a fine

[54:33] job, and you guys have a great job of reducing crime in our city. It could be contributed to the use

[54:39] of this technology, certainly. So I admit my bias to it, but I would like to look at some other

[54:47] options where we can have more control of our data if we're going to continue to use this product.

[54:54] Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I do like that statement by Benjamin Franklin.

[55:01] What question?

[55:02] Have you or has anybody in the United States found that it is?

[55:12] No, I'm going to speak like an attorney here because we've had a lot of conversations

[55:16] internally.

[55:17] We have one in the room.

[55:18] There's a few in the room.

[55:21] Because this isn't a new conversation, right?

[55:23] It is balancing privacy and safety.

[55:27] We pick them both.

[55:30] To be responsible and choosing them both is understanding what the parameters are.

[55:34] Similar to our drones, similar to searching a car, searching a house, where you can have

[55:39] these readers, where you can.

[55:41] There is Supreme Court case law, there is constitutional rules on the Fourth Amendment, there is case

[55:48] law that tells us when we have to issue someone their Miranda rights.

[55:51] So this does not get excused, the definition or the articulation that we received from the Supreme Court is that there is no expectation of privacy in a public roadway.

[56:06] Harriet.

[56:07] The plain view doctrine.

[56:10] No different than, sir, no different than us putting 100 officers along 10th Street in Highway 34 and logging license plates and vehicle descriptions and taking pictures with their phones as they drove by.

[56:23] So, one of my concerns, the data storage and the data is a concern of mine.

[56:30] How that's used, who uses it when it's used.

[56:34] My understanding, flock is 30 days, it's stored on a national database, right?

[56:42] We set the retention date, so we set 30 days.

[56:45] Yeah, but it's on a national database, it's not like stored in Greeley, it's stored somewhere else.

[56:49] It is stored off site.

[56:51] Okay.

[56:52] What about record or L-E-L-S-A-G, whatever, L-S-A-G?

[57:01] That's stored off site.

[57:03] It's well.

[57:03] We do have a recourse, or do I confirm?

[57:06] That is stored to onsite.

[57:08] So, recourse and L-S-A-G records onsite?

[57:14] Recourse in a cloud server.

[57:16] But only CD, really PD has access to it.

[57:20] That is correct.

[57:21] And then L-S-A-G?

[57:22] It's state-owned by state-colors of state patrol.

[57:26] Well, that's a state program.

[57:28] Yes.

[57:28] And you follow their rules on that?

[57:30] Well, they have set their own retention for one year.

[57:33] One year?

[57:34] Yes.

[57:35] So on retention, help me understand why you need license plates for a whole year that didn't

[57:44] get it yet.

[57:45] 30 days.

[57:46] We have 30 days.

[57:47] I know we have 30 days, but L-site has a year.

[57:53] I mean, if you hit my plates, and I had to have no various things I'm done that you know of,

[58:01] that you know of, why would you store my license for that length of time for a year,

[58:07] or 30 days, or anything? Like, if you hit my license and it has a pop-up hot or any,

[58:12] they could call it pop-up. Whatever you call it, why would you store that?

[58:17] Well, consider cold cases.

[58:18] I can give an example in Aurora where they were able to help solve the, I believe, the

[58:22] murder case at the 11th month with that one-year retention.

[58:27] So it's not everything but a cold case that can help.

[58:31] So with, among that note, so like let's say, I drive in Greeley.

[58:35] I think I drive all over Greeley 100 times a day.

[58:39] Don't you storm my license plate every day I drive?

[58:43] We do, but we keep that for 30 days within Greeley.

[58:45] I know, so I'm saying, so a year ago, I didn't park my car and I never drive it again,

[58:50] that license plate is still active.

[58:53] So my question is, it's storage for a year or 30 days.

[58:56] What, in your mind, is a good reason to, not the one case in Aurora, but a good reason

[59:03] to have to store past 30 days?

[59:07] So it's a great topic, a great question, and this is for us to have conversations, not

[59:13] Not just internally, but I've been on the phone with other police chiefs because a lot

[59:18] of communities are facing the same issue.

[59:20] Not just with flock, but also with license plate readers.

[59:25] And I think flock rolled out some best practices and new guidelines for new customers recommending

[59:34] a seven-day retention.

[59:36] And the articulation was 90% of searches done by law enforcement are done in the first seven

[59:42] days.

[59:42] I asked what that percentage was in Colorado and I didn't get a response, so I'm just going

[59:50] to assume that the 90% is also applicable to the state of Colorado and users of flock here.

[59:56] My response is, what about that other 10 percent?

[1:00:00] What about those victims? What about those cases? Do we owe it just to the 90% because they discovered the crime or made the report in the first seven days, but I'm sorry because on day eight, it's gone. So we've been talking internally about a lower retention period that still accomplishes what our detectives need. From the time we take a report,

[1:00:26] or transcribe it, approve it, assign it to detectives.

[1:00:31] You're probably at seven days if they've even read it yet.

[1:00:35] So I think there is a common ground or a compromise in place

[1:00:39] to where we can reduce it to whether that's 21 days,

[1:00:42] whether that's 14 days.

[1:00:44] I have a fellow chief in Durango

[1:00:47] who does a lot of sharing with neighboring states

[1:00:50] because a lot of their crime is transient

[1:00:52] between different states.

[1:00:53] And they made a policy that says, and he searched after seven days, which is only 10%, not your 90% needs to be approved by a supervisor.

[1:01:03] Totally reasonable. That's something that we can implement.

[1:01:07] I don't want to say tomorrow because you guys are going to have to do all the work on the policy on that.

[1:01:12] But like there was a safeguard that we can put in place to help balance the safety versus privacy.

[1:01:17] I mean, one of the chiefs, I trust you, sorry, I trust you, you guys done great work.

[1:01:23] You too won't be here forever.

[1:01:25] And the policies that we put that you put in place, the council has really little control.

[1:01:31] So my fear is if we don't set something in our charter and our code that says this is

[1:01:37] what's going to happen, one bad apple kills the entire system.

[1:01:42] It's just the way it works, and one bad vote kills an elected official, right?

[1:01:49] So one bad actor, it could be a situation where you guys are all gone.

[1:01:54] We're on our third situation down, and my daughter, and anybody else's kids are involved.

[1:01:59] So I think we have to set something in place as a council, as my recommendation.

[1:02:04] It sets things in place to protect our citizens that is livable, but

[1:02:10] Yeah, we get the benefits of the system because there is some some concerns.

[1:02:14] And got to listen to those concerns, but at the end of the day, the system does work too.

[1:02:19] So I really think that we have to do that and figure out what our policies are.

[1:02:24] Isn't the state I heard the state was looking into some new policies that they're going to implement?

[1:02:28] State why we can implement more strict, but we just can't go under, right?

[1:02:33] So yes, we cannot be less restrictive, but I've read a draft today.

[1:02:39] We have a law enforcement stakeholder meeting with Senator a mobily at a boulder on draft legislation that's going to come out at the beginning of the legislative session in 2027.

[1:02:49] We know it's coming.

[1:02:51] I've seen a sneak preview of what's on there and it's going to be restrictive regardless of concessions or compromises that are made.

[1:03:00] So I'm happy to have the conversation, happy to evaluate our current policies.

[1:03:05] So what fits really, what fits us, knowing that it may have to change in January or February?

[1:03:13] Yeah, Chief, I really appreciate what I'm with Craig.

[1:03:16] You guys do a great job, but it's just what's the next chief to do, what's the next sergeant to do, what's the next, and the drones, I love those.

[1:03:25] So, I mean, it's the only thing I think I've ever brought back from NLC when I come back.

[1:03:29] I called you right away and said, we need drones and you guys have done a great job

[1:03:33] in there.

[1:03:34] So thank you.

[1:03:36] Melissa.

[1:03:43] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:03:45] I think you all understand that part of the reason that why we're at this point today

[1:03:50] is that there's been bad cops in the past that have taken advantage of their position and

[1:03:55] the situations that they've had and there's just a few that ruins it for everyone.

[1:04:01] So I believe in checks and balances.

[1:04:03] And I know that there is an audit that's done on a quarterly basis.

[1:04:08] I would like to see that narrowed down to a monthly basis.

[1:04:13] And there's a couple things that I have a whole bunch of things on here.

[1:04:17] So let me just go through my list.

[1:04:19] Something that you triggered that I wanted to ask about is you said that the sharing with other agencies is you'll only share if it's a public safety threat.

[1:04:33] So, what are those guidelines that, I mean, you couldn't, it could just be another officer

[1:04:41] and another jurisdiction that says it's a public safety threat and they're tracking down,

[1:04:48] they're trying to drag down their ex-wife.

[1:04:50] So, what are those guidelines?

[1:04:53] I would say those individuals are people associated with plates involved in criminal activity.

[1:04:59] That's that's the general kind of broad those involved in criminal activity.

[1:05:05] And I would expand that because if you look at our drop down list we have a bunch of things on there.

[1:05:11] And as I've learned in the last week you can't put our entitled title 42 code from Colorado by statute as a drop down.

[1:05:18] Like I didn't see spilling loads on a highway as one of the search items when a truck dumped a bunch of nails and cause an accident.

[1:05:27] But it goes beyond just the criminal part, and I think I've tried to share some examples

[1:05:31] with Council and with our team at the police department about an elderly person who was

[1:05:36] being taken advantage of for an elaborate scam, missing persons, runaways, I shared a kid

[1:05:43] napping.

[1:05:43] What we thought was a kid napping example a few weeks ago, they'll let us to New York.

[1:05:48] So I think public safety threat is harder to find if we're just talking about criminal activity

[1:05:53] because it's not just that.

[1:05:58] So I think we have a really good police department.

[1:06:01] I trust you fully until you show me otherwise.

[1:06:05] But how do we hold other agencies accountable?

[1:06:08] So that's, I think that's part of the audit process too,

[1:06:11] is to be able to lag those officers or I think it's a number

[1:06:17] that is hitting something out of the ordinary too often.

[1:06:23] Is there a reporting agency that you can report to that you feel like this is being abused or how do you hold other agencies accountable?

[1:06:34] Well, if you want to speak to the Sergeant Ryan, because I know you do the audits, I'm just going to speak real highly of it.

[1:06:39] I think if we get a complaint, obviously, we would refer that to the agency that employs their people.

[1:06:46] But in these new rollouts and guidelines from FOX safety in the last few weeks and there's been new technology that's come out to help us narrow down audits and be more specific in terms of running the same plate multiple times.

[1:06:59] The same plate within a defined period of time.

[1:07:03] So I think those are some tools that will help us with the audits and go ahead, Sergeant Ryan.

[1:07:07] Hello,

[1:07:11] to answer your question. So within the past, I think it's been about three weeks now to four weeks.

[1:07:17] The audit capability that FLOG has integrated into their system is now a flagging system.

[1:07:24] So it goes through and it has a preset what it's looking for.

[1:07:29] Is somebody lurking that has somebody run the license plate 20 times within a five day period?

[1:07:36] and has somebody tried to look for the same plate

[1:07:39] on multiple different case numbers

[1:07:42] over more than a 30-day period

[1:07:44] or trying to run it more than a 30-day period.

[1:07:47] So it actually flags it and it points it out as,

[1:07:50] we're not saying this is criminal activity

[1:07:52] on the officers that are doing it,

[1:07:54] but what it does is it flags it and says,

[1:07:55] hey, you need to pay attention to this.

[1:07:57] So when I go into that system

[1:07:58] and I start looking through that,

[1:08:00] then I start going to each one.

[1:08:02] If there was something that I saw that was inside there,

[1:08:05] that I was like, hmm, this might be concerning,

[1:08:07] then I would make that phone call

[1:08:09] and to the agency, the agency that ran it and say,

[1:08:14] hey, just so you know, this is what popped up

[1:08:16] on our flock audit and have you looked into this

[1:08:20] and notified, and then it's a conversation

[1:08:23] back and forth between me and them.

[1:08:25] On our side, what I can, I go in, I look,

[1:08:29] I look what those are for and the majority of the time,

[1:08:32] what it flags are like, multiple cases,

[1:08:34] cases that are same individual, continually getting new cases.

[1:08:40] So those are what I'm mostly seeing inside that and then I will just go in and I put

[1:08:44] comments and this is normal investigative activity.

[1:08:48] If there was something that wasn't that then I have the option of looking at what the case

[1:08:52] number is and going in to the case number into our system and looking to see and then start

[1:08:57] asking those questions.

[1:09:05] So mistakes do happen, and I think mistakes are accidental, and those work human, and

[1:09:11] so we can fix those mistakes, that's when it's intentional, and so these checks and

[1:09:15] balances I think will help certainly prevent that as much as possible.

[1:09:23] So tell me this, because I feel like when I'm in public anywhere, that's public space.

[1:09:34] It's not, I'm not in my home, I'm not on my property.

[1:09:38] So leaving recorded or somebody taking pictures of me or taking pictures of my car, they don't

[1:09:45] really have to have a reason to do that, and so I'm viewing this as the same-set thing.

[1:09:49] So tell me how, because when I pull into Walmart, I'm recorded essentially as soon as I pull into

[1:09:56] that parking lot. My vehicle, they know what my vehicle is, because there's been questions about

[1:10:03] or comments made about patterns, your living patterns. And in Walmart, quite frankly, they could know

[1:10:13] everything about me. They could know whether I'm dieting or I like to eat junk food or I'm on

[1:10:19] It's that time of the month for me, or I'm buying, you know, baby clothes or I'm about

[1:10:25] to have a baby.

[1:10:26] I mean, there's a million things that they can track, and then that takes patterns.

[1:10:31] That would track my patterns, the minute that I go into Walmart and being photographed,

[1:10:36] and that's not my privacy.

[1:10:37] So, tell me how this is different, tell me how these cameras are different than when I go

[1:10:45] into Wal-Mart and I'm essentially being taped a minute. I pull in there.

[1:10:54] So, interesting question because we give a tour this morning at the Real-Tem

[1:10:58] Information Center. Some people who had concerns or questions about it and I

[1:11:02] posed the same question about Wal-Mart. And the response is, well, I can choose to shop at Wal-Mart.

[1:11:08] I can't choose to not be, have my license plate recorded.

[1:11:11] Right.

[1:11:12] Because I can't shop anywhere, I quite frankly, you can't shop anywhere, you can't go

[1:11:17] anywhere.

[1:11:18] So, keep going.

[1:11:20] And all that technology at Ulta, who has the best cameras in town by the way, and these

[1:11:26] big box stores help us solve crime.

[1:11:29] When it comes to our license plate readers, if you look at our map, we followed the data,

[1:11:35] And we put them in entry and exit points to our city for criminal activity for safety

[1:11:42] reasons, and they're on public roadways.

[1:11:48] The expectation of privacy isn't there, and we're not targeting anyone.

[1:11:54] It's strictly an investigative tool that requires some of verification.

[1:11:58] I doubt that answers your question, Council Member McDonald, because I'm not sure how to

[1:12:01] compare Walmart other than everything you said about that is true.

[1:12:05] Oh man, I teed this up for you.

[1:12:07] Walmart, there's no oversight with Walmart, so they can sell my information to whoever's

[1:12:15] paying them to know what kind of diet coke that I like, or what kind of brand of shoes

[1:12:21] that I'm wearing.

[1:12:23] I mean, that's how we get these ads on our Facebook page, but the difference is the oversight,

[1:12:28] this is the government, so they are going to, they are not going to just sell our information

[1:12:33] and give it to anyone, and the more the technology evolves, the more crackdown there is going

[1:12:40] to be.

[1:12:40] So I feel very blessed in Greeley, and I think this place with Department feels very blessed

[1:12:46] with the community that we have that supports law enforcement, but nationally, would you

[1:12:54] say that numbers are down in the police academies?

[1:13:02] I think that's a hard question to answer.

[1:13:04] I can say, Greeley, we don't have any problems, you know, finding people who want to work

[1:13:10] for us, and I would say the trend is actually going upward where people are re-engaging

[1:13:15] and law enforcement, young people, or police crews, in my opinion.

[1:13:21] The reason I ask that is because we can't, we could just hire people to be having binoculars

[1:13:26] and taking pictures and chasing people down based off of their license plate.

[1:13:30] So this is just a tool not to have a sworn officer that is monitoring the cars that go by and it just

[1:13:40] provides your jobs a little bit easier to actually catch the bad guys and focus on crimes that are

[1:13:46] happening in real life. Laura in the Arctic, I love to this quote that she said, so I wish it was mine

[1:13:54] but she said it. She said if we take the cameras away, we are protecting the criminals and if we

[1:14:00] keep the cameras, it protects the victims. So thank you for answering all my questions tonight.

[1:14:08] Yep. Thank you, Mayor. I am curious if we could make the transition away from flock to this other

[1:14:17] company record. What would that mean? I think flock has a bad public relations problem. I also do not

[1:14:26] like them having data, really citizens. I'm comfortable with our local police department having that data.

[1:14:37] So can we make the transition away from flock? And it's so approximately what the cost would be,

[1:14:46] what would the timeline of that be? Yes.

[1:14:52] To be very blunt, and we've been working on and out

[1:14:56] and other options for several months now. I've been working with Kaelin and...

[1:15:00] Nathan in budget, we try to make some magic happen. We would take a hit on our current

[1:15:06] FLOG safety contract that we have through 2027 if we terminate or abandon it.

[1:15:11] Through 2027. Yes. Okay, that's fine. So 2028, they're done. Notice, give them a notice.

[1:15:19] With April of 2027, this one our contract ends with FLOG. Okay, great. Yeah. And Chief

[1:15:26] If you and I talked about retention policy, 30 days currently holding for local citizens

[1:15:33] data.

[1:15:35] I'd like to see maybe 14 days, but you thought 21 days was amenable.

[1:15:41] That seems like when there is a violent crime or a crime, the police know about it within

[1:15:49] a few days.

[1:15:50] So, what do you think about reducing the amount of time for retention?

[1:15:56] Well, you're asking me for my opinion on what gives us the best use of the technology and the tool.

[1:16:01] I'm going to argue for 30 days.

[1:16:04] And I think we can sit here and vary over this and come up with examples of someone that's been on vacation for two weeks.

[1:16:11] Someone that's been gone from their house for 21 days.

[1:16:14] I know they're a few in far between, especially when we update a saying that 90% of the searches

[1:16:19] are done in the first seven days. So we are definitely agreeable to looking at that and

[1:16:24] making some modifications on retention. That'd be my request. Does that need to come from council

[1:16:31] or is that a policy police policy? I'm going to try and wrap this up with that concept in mind when

[1:16:38] and we'll give it all in the comments and put it out, yeah.

[1:16:41] So Ryan, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:16:46] Thank you Chief, sergeants for being here tonight.

[1:16:48] I really do appreciate everything all of you do

[1:16:50] in our community to keep us safe.

[1:16:51] Thank you again for the two or the councilman Rudy

[1:16:53] and I were able to have the Arctic a couple of weeks ago,

[1:16:55] very enlightening.

[1:16:57] And thank you also to opening that up to community members

[1:16:59] that had concerns and questions.

[1:17:02] You never know until you see it.

[1:17:03] So thank you to each of you that spent that time

[1:17:06] showing around the Arctic.

[1:17:07] Couple of real quick questions.

[1:17:08] I love real world examples.

[1:17:09] I know council gets some updates from you on the use of these ALPRs and successful stories.

[1:17:17] Do you have maybe one or two over the last couple of weeks that you could share that these were

[1:17:23] helpful, instrumental in apprehension, solving these crimes?

[1:17:28] I have a personal story. I have an uncle that was recently diagnosed with dementia.

[1:17:33] He's a single man. No families, kids. So my brother and I are essentially his caretaker.

[1:17:40] He was supposed to meet family for dinner. He didn't show up.

[1:17:45] He was still driving at the time. We call the local authorities in the metro area advised him of that.

[1:17:52] They immediately ran his plate through flock. We knew that his vehicle was still moving across the south metro area.

[1:17:58] So that was somewhat of a relief, but we still needed him home, right?

[1:18:02] So that metro area advised us that they would follow the flocks and they would attempt

[1:18:07] to stop the vehicle to make sure it was my uncle, in fact, in the vehicle.

[1:18:11] So we were working with that agency and the my uncle luckily found his way home.

[1:18:16] But that's a personal win for me, thanks to flocks.

[1:18:21] And we do, I think we have a list of 1200 cases where it has either assisted or solved.

[1:18:27] And I know I've been sharing some recently with Council in terms of recent kidnapping.

[1:18:33] Came out as a kidnapping, turned into a runaway, a lot of stolen vehicles, and we have a list.

[1:18:41] Could you then either, my glad your uncle was found safe and then it turned out okay.

[1:18:46] Could you extrapolate it all on, hey, if we didn't have these things, if we didn't have flock or whatever,

[1:18:53] what could have been the outcome or what would have been the work that would have had been either put in with your own goal or in that kidnapping slash runaway.

[1:19:02] Yeah, we've had a lot of these conversations also because we've been asked, well how many primes could you not solve if you didn't have it or what would your solvability be or what would your part one crimes?

[1:19:11] I'm not sure we're in a position right now to answer.

[1:19:14] We'd have to go through every single case and say, okay, we would have solved this maybe

[1:19:19] three days later if we didn't have the tool.

[1:19:22] So I think it's a really good question, but I think it's really hard to answer with

[1:19:27] quantifiable empirical data to say what our crime rates or solvability would be without it.

[1:19:32] I just can tell you with all of my heart knowledge and our team that it's a tool that helps

[1:19:38] our officers and our residents.

[1:19:40] You talked a little bit about it in your presentation.

[1:19:43] I think it should be brought to the forefront as well.

[1:19:46] Talk about the deterrent that these cameras can have,

[1:19:49] flock or otherwise in these communities either.

[1:19:52] And then I'll ask a follow-up question.

[1:19:53] So I guess talk about any possible deterrent in your profession

[1:19:57] with paying you feel these would be as bad guys are considering their life choices.

[1:20:03] Yeah, a great question.

[1:20:04] Again, hard to quantify, but don't come to Greeley if you want to commit crime.

[1:20:08] If you're going to pick retail theft as your enhanced way to make a living, don't come

[1:20:14] to Greeley.

[1:20:16] I think I absolutely think it's a deterrent in my professional opinion.

[1:20:20] And then I know it's fairly recent that many of these communities, not only around

[1:20:25] Northern Colorado, throughout our state, maybe around the country, would begin to discontinue

[1:20:30] use of these flock cameras and other devices similar to that.

[1:20:34] But has there been any causality recently that they've been able to have between communities

[1:20:40] that have gone absolutely?

[1:20:42] No, we're getting rid of them.

[1:20:43] We're not going to have these here anymore.

[1:20:44] Have they seen, and it may be too early to talk about empirical evidence?

[1:20:48] Have they seen any sort of either increase in crime, lengthening of time between victims

[1:20:55] coming forward and solving of those, or is this just simply too early to know the outcomes

[1:21:01] of these communities that have decided to go on the exact opposite of the

[1:21:04] spectrum and get rid of all license plate readers.

[1:21:08] Again, another great question, I think it's too soon to put a number on that,

[1:21:12] but I will tell you that I have weekly conversations with other chiefs,

[1:21:16] both of those communities who have state discontinued or on a pause from the tool,

[1:21:22] and I'll continue to have those conversations. But I think we're seeing a wave right now,

[1:21:27] of this decision making by councils and communities on what works good for them or doesn't, but

[1:21:32] I'll be interested to work with these other chiefs and find out where it helped and bring

[1:21:38] those examples back.

[1:21:40] Thank you, Chief.

[1:21:41] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:21:44] Melissa.

[1:21:48] Ryan sparked a couple questions for me that kind of relates, that kind of doesn't, or a sex

[1:21:55] trafficking ring or like a drug bus, like how long do you want to, like if it's statewide or

[1:22:03] interstate, how long does that take to usually solve?

[1:22:12] I'll talk to the drug aspect. That's what I

[1:22:15] know. I can give you a very recent example. We had an individual supplying a large amount of

[1:22:22] of methamphetamine to Greeley specifically.

[1:22:26] She changed vehicles.

[1:22:28] We knew she had rented a car

[1:22:30] and we all we had was the makin' model of the vehicle

[1:22:33] and then we were able to identify

[1:22:34] that she was actually in Greeley,

[1:22:37] providing methamphetamine to our citizens

[1:22:39] at two or three in the morning.

[1:22:40] We were able to identify that vehicle

[1:22:42] and track that vehicle back to her residence in Denver

[1:22:46] via some flock cameras

[1:22:47] and via the old fashioned wave surveillance.

[1:22:50] That ultimately ended in the search warrant, seizure of approximately 10 pounds of methamphetamine

[1:22:56] in any drug trafficking organization taken down that was directly affecting our community.

[1:23:02] So how long was how long did it was the animal process?

[1:23:05] Well, from the time we got the flock hit, that process was less than a week.

[1:23:11] Do you know what like a I know we don't have big sex trafficking care but do you know

[1:23:15] know about how long that takes to solve.

[1:23:20] I mean, I don't, but I would guess I don't. Drug

[1:23:24] investigations can go for months for the bigger organizations. So I can only imagine that human

[1:23:29] trafficking or sex trafficking would be at least two, three months in order to get the organization.

[1:23:35] We can always go pick up individuals, but in order to cut the head off the snake, it takes,

[1:23:39] you know, lengthy investigations using all the technology and tools that we have to include flock.

[1:23:44] Because we're talking about all these dates here, like I'm an on-pride opposite of a lot

[1:23:48] of my council members up here, like a year would be good for me for those cold cases or

[1:23:53] things.

[1:23:54] I mean, in my opinion, I don't think we have enough information to be deciding on how

[1:23:59] long we retain that information.

[1:24:01] I think we need a real analysis of some real situations of what makes sense, because if

[1:24:08] If it saves one child or one, you know, can bus one sex trafficking, I know there's been

[1:24:15] a lot to talk about how this is all around traffic and all these hits and kidnappings

[1:24:20] and murders are very few, but you know what, fits that it's one life, just one.

[1:24:25] All of this is worth it, in my opinion.

[1:24:29] So that's, I guess that's where we got to find this.

[1:24:32] And I think something council needs to really consider is if, you know, we've been talking

[1:24:37] about deflock freely or decamorize or whatever we make that decision on is that I don't want to tell

[1:24:46] parents that of a child that got kidnapped or with sex traffics. I don't want to have to look

[1:24:52] them in the eye and tell them we didn't have what we had these resources. We opted out of them

[1:24:57] because there were people upset about their privacy. So that's where I'm at.

[1:25:03] Okay. Anybody else? So I have one quick question. You brought up Raven. Does I understand

[1:25:12] you correctly that you're planning on not renewing that? That is correct. Okay. And so you

[1:25:18] did that based on examination of usefulness and cost and all that. Yes, sir. Okay. So I've

[1:25:27] I've been up here jotting down a lot of notes, and I've got a healthier sculptor worth of notes here, but I think what we've talked about is how long data is stored and who can it be shared with

[1:25:41] who's the oversight for the data and who's using it and is there an audit process which you've described already.

[1:25:51] city. I think I've heard from numerous council members that we would like to see you

[1:26:01] evaluate what you're currently doing within your rules and regulations and see if there's

[1:26:07] any ways to tighten those up. And that's what I'm going to ask for. Consensus on to do

[1:26:13] that. And I don't know if it's just an internal rules and regulations or can we do that on

[1:26:18] on a city council level and that might be St. C. R. Zeta to try and advise us on, you know,

[1:26:27] is it going to be just a city department rule or is it going to be a citywide council rule?

[1:26:36] Thank you, Mayor. I think you could do it either way. Council could.

[1:26:40] The policies and procedures that the police department have, the chief has the authority to enact those.

[1:26:46] and so I think that's what they have now. Council could always choose to enact an ordinance,

[1:26:53] governing these systems. That I would suggest that needs to be a little bit higher level and

[1:27:00] still give some just discretion to the police department within their policies and procedures.

[1:27:04] That's pretty typical, but you could do that.

[1:27:08] Okay.

[1:27:09] So.

[1:27:11] I don't know.

[1:27:12] I don't know.

[1:27:12] Johnny is biting at this.

[1:27:13] I'm biting at Mike.

[1:27:14] I apologize.

[1:27:15] It's a nervous.

[1:27:16] Yeah.

[1:27:17] I also think we should put in our ordinance if we decide to go that path, which I think we should.

[1:27:24] Is the punishment by someone breaking the law.

[1:27:28] I don't want to just get him fired.

[1:27:30] I want to.

[1:27:31] We can prosecute this on which is the break the law.

[1:27:34] And I think it needs to be in there because if they're breaking the law, it's a civil rights

[1:27:39] offense. And we should be sending that case to the district attorney and saying, hey, you

[1:27:43] broke the law. Now, they'll make the determination that they prosecute, obviously. But I think it

[1:27:48] should be in our thing that we're not going to, as a counsel, we're not going to tolerate this

[1:27:53] misuse of this equipment.

[1:27:55] Just to clarify, Council Member, if it was in our ordinance, it would be a municipal court

[1:27:59] violation, but there may be, and I can work with Sean Reinhardt, who's our police legal

[1:28:05] advisor and with the chief to determine what state law crimes might be implicated.

[1:28:09] And then we can always work with the district attorney to talk through processes to make

[1:28:14] sure we're referring people appropriately for, if there's a crime.

[1:28:19] Yeah, even if it's federal, you can refer, doesn't mean they take it, but it needs to be federal

[1:28:23] and state.

[1:28:24] Right.

[1:28:25] I think it would have been under a official misconduct, and for the conflict of interest,

[1:28:29] we would not send them an immunosupple court.

[1:28:32] We would refer it to the DA's office for county or district court, sir.

[1:28:36] Okay.

[1:28:37] So, if I can get a consensus on having the police department evaluate their current policies

[1:28:46] for possible changes and have the rules and regulations over these, this type of technology

[1:28:57] created in a ordinance passed and approved by the City Council.

[1:29:02] Does that make sense?

[1:29:05] Okay.

[1:29:07] Is that okay?

[1:29:09] Perfect.

[1:29:10] Yes, sir.

[1:29:10] Thank you.

[1:29:11] All right.

[1:29:11] Thank you, Matt.

[1:29:16] Item number six

[1:29:18] is Downtown Traffic Control.

[1:29:21] We have Seth Swornison,

[1:29:26] and Stephen Yankee is in his wake.

[1:29:32] Mayor and Council pardon the interruption.

[1:29:34] I just want to say that we have been experiencing some intermittent zoom issues with the Zoom

[1:29:40] platform.

[1:29:41] We currently are still online with our audio and our presentations, but our camera is going

[1:29:46] to be offline for the remainder of the meeting.

[1:29:48] Okay.

[1:29:49] Thank you.

[1:29:52] Seth, go forward.

[1:29:53] Mayor and Council thank you for allowing public works to present to you this evening on

[1:30:00] Opposed changes to downtown traffic on 9th and 10th streets between 8th and 11th avenues.

[1:30:08] The agenda for this evening will be largely background information, but we'll end up on two different options that we're asking the council to provide us guidance on what you would like to see. And so we'll be going over the purpose and the need for the proposed changes.

[1:30:27] We will be throwing in just as a sidebar some information on the safe streets for all project that is also scheduled for the downtown to make sure that we don't have any conflicts there.

[1:30:38] We'll be talking about the proposed conversion of 9th and 10th to 2-way traffic.

[1:30:43] How these changes will impact the justice center.

[1:30:49] And again, we'll be asking for a specific direction from the council.

[1:30:53] The two options that are going to be offered really are a kind of a balancing act between pedestrian accessibility and parking versus the through movement of vehicles.

[1:31:08] So we're asking for this direction because we have several other decisions related to the downtown campus that are waiting on this to be made.

[1:31:19] and we are already under construction so time is of the essence.

[1:31:33] As you can see from this infographic this was taken from the downtown plan that was adopted by the city in 2023.

[1:31:41] And the number one word to show up in this word was safe.

[1:31:47] So the bigger the word the more often our citizens said that's what they want to see from the downtown.

[1:31:52] And so we are trying to accommodate the citizens desire to have a safe, clean, vibrant, fun downtown, which accommodates parking and is walkable.

[1:32:05] But we're actually looking to the council to help us determine what does that look like in practice.

[1:32:13] So as our sidebar, the safe streets for all, this is a pilot project that will take three to five years.

[1:32:20] and as you can see by this map it covers a large part of town in various locations but in

[1:32:27] particular what we were interested in is the 11th Avenue where it is proposed to go from

[1:32:33] 20th Street all the way to D Street so it's a pretty good length and right in the middle of all that

[1:32:39] is the downtown project and so we have coordinated that we're not going to do any of that pilot program

[1:32:46] until 2028 when it is anticipated that utility work will have been completed in that section.

[1:33:01] So why do we want to convert 9th and 10th street from one way to two way traffic?

[1:33:08] Basically, we are having a change in land use.

[1:33:11] We are trying to reconfigure the entire purpose of the downtown, we're trying to make it a draw so

[1:33:17] that people are coming there by having Weld County District 6 and the city of Greeley

[1:33:24] all located there. We're hoping to increase foot traffic, which we hope will in turn impact

[1:33:29] local businesses for the better.

[1:33:33] One of the things that has come to our attention is comments

[1:33:39] from Weld County concerning the Justice Center and their concern over having improved walkability,

[1:33:46] having people who are able to get in and out easily, and because they're pulling from

[1:33:51] citizens that don't just live in really, that may not be familiar with the downtown,

[1:33:59] they're concerned about people getting lost or getting distracted by having to go around

[1:34:03] the block multiple times due to the one-way configuration that's currently in place.

[1:34:08] And so we took that into consideration when we were making these recommendations.

[1:34:12] But overall, this project is intended to improve safety for people that are driving, walking and biking, while strengthening the downtown connections, and to create a more comfortable pedestrian environment.

[1:34:30] A lot of engineering is like a big seesaw where we are trying to balance the needs of different groups.

[1:34:37] This project is absolutely no different in that we're trying to balance pedestrians and vehicles, which is the first and foremost thing.

[1:34:46] But safety and speed, what are the costs of delays in traffic versus what are the costs of loss of life?

[1:34:55] What is the offset between parking and more traffic capacity?

[1:35:02] And so it's just one big teeter tauter that we're trying to balance and because this

[1:35:08] is a difficult decision, again we're bringing it to council to help us weigh out what

[1:35:13] are those highest and most important items that the council wants to see out of this project.

[1:35:25] So we have two scenarios that we're asking the council to weigh and choose between.

[1:35:29] One of these scenarios takes the current cross section which is three lanes of through traffic and converting that down into two lanes of through traffic.

[1:35:39] The second scenario takes it from three lanes of through traffic down to a single lane of through traffic.

[1:35:46] Both of these scenarios share similar assumptions and feedback that we received in the design process.

[1:35:53] Both are going to implement a continuous center left turn lane.

[1:35:56] and we're asking that you consider the Justice Center in particular for this

[1:36:04] block when weighing your decisions. In a very oversimplified manner and at its

[1:36:13] most extreme level, two ends of that teeter totter that C song is A is our

[1:36:20] emphasis more on pedestrian accessibility being pedestrian friendly and increasing parking

[1:36:28] or is it on getting cars through that intersection as fast as possible?

[1:36:37] That's feasible.

[1:36:40] So the question for Council to begin with is, what is your vision for the downtown and

[1:36:48] how do our streets play into that vision?

[1:36:51] how do you view parking and its role in the downtown?

[1:36:57] How do you view our responsibility for moving both pedestrians and vehicles through the downtown area?

[1:37:09] So one of our considerations in this design was the Justice Block.

[1:37:14] As you can see on the left hand side is their proposed parking structure.

[1:37:18] They have requested to have three different entrances and exits with the ability to go both in and out of each of those three locations.

[1:37:29] And then on the right-hand side is the Justice Center itself.

[1:37:32] And again, they expect to have a lot of traffic here coming in on a daily basis.

[1:37:38] People that may or may not be familiar with the downtown.

[1:37:42] If they're on jury duty, they may not be happy to be there in the first place.

[1:37:45] but trying to make it as comfortable as possible without adding to the confusion and the stress

[1:37:52] of that day. And so there are concerns for access and for safety, both for pedestrians

[1:37:58] and for vehicles in this area.

[1:38:06] As you can see, we're proposing to take the two-way traffic

[1:38:10] that already currently exists, one block to the east, extend that back to the west to include

[1:38:17] the Justice Center and the to be determined area by World County.

[1:38:24] Under both of the recommended cross-sections tonight includes the center turn lane and

[1:38:32] includes to a traffic as our base assumption and we are trying to coordinate this traffic

[1:38:37] not just for this block but for the entire downtown.

[1:38:45] So you see here that this is what we have titled our preferred alternative.

[1:38:49] It is preferred only in the sense that this is staff's recommendation to council.

[1:38:56] It includes for the block between 11th Avenue and 10th Avenue to have one way traffic in

[1:39:02] each direction, that center turn lane and with parallel parking on both sides of the road.

[1:39:09] After that for the next two blocks is a similar cross section but with the exception of angled

[1:39:15] parking, which allows us to get even more vehicles in there as opposed to parallel parking.

[1:39:25] Some of the pros for this cross section include that the intersections are shorter for pedestrians

[1:39:32] who are trying to cross, makes it a little bit easier to do ADA accessibility, better lane

[1:39:38] alignment with the current low through that area.

[1:39:42] And again, it has the senator turn lane, which at the intersections will convert into either designated left or designated right depending on the need.

[1:39:54] The cons or the drawbacks of this cross section include that it is going to result in a longer delay to vehicles and a longer queue.

[1:40:05] Now, I'd say longer, but we're not talking exponential.

[1:40:11] We're talking basically a few seconds.

[1:40:15] So between our no-build solution, which is basically that we keep a three-road cross-section

[1:40:20] and either going to this one, which is a single lane through,

[1:40:27] we're talking a delay anticipated of three seconds.

[1:40:34] That is in 2045.

[1:40:36] One of the things that we can deduce from that is that currently the three lanes that we have going through is overbuilt for our needs.

[1:40:48] The next alternative, if

[1:40:52] I don't click too fast, is to keep two lanes as through traffic.

[1:40:58] We still have a two-way traffic and a center turnling.

[1:41:02] However, rather than having the angled parking, especially between eighth and tenth,

[1:41:07] We are now looking at one side of parallel parking through the entire three blocks of

[1:41:14] the downtown project.

[1:41:16] It does increase throughput as I mentioned, the three-second delay in the model for the

[1:41:23] one lane, having two lanes results in no additional delay anticipated.

[1:41:30] So basically whatever traffic we're going to have in 2045 with three lanes, we expect

[1:41:35] to have the same level of traffic in 2045 with two lanes.

[1:41:41] It does allow for more speed and throughput.

[1:41:45] I think we can see through various examples throughout town.

[1:41:49] Usually the wider the street, the more open it is,

[1:41:53] the more lanes you have.

[1:41:55] The tendency is for people to go faster.

[1:41:58] It's just human nature for whatever reason.

[1:42:00] The tendency, once you shrink lanes down,

[1:42:03] you put up some trees.

[1:42:05] You have some more traffic in front of you.

[1:42:07] It just has a natural effect of slowing traffic.

[1:42:11] And so this does allow for more throughput, does allow for higher speeds.

[1:42:16] Again, we still have the center to a left turn lane.

[1:42:20] It is much closer to current expectations.

[1:42:23] So whatever we would see now, we would see with two lanes, whatever we see 20 years from

[1:42:27] now, we would see the same situation.

[1:42:30] It does result in a shorter queuing.

[1:42:32] It does result in less delay.

[1:42:34] Some of the cons of this are you reduce parking by quite a bit.

[1:42:39] It's also more difficult to parallel park than it is to pull into angle parking into back out.

[1:42:44] It takes a little bit longer and so there is a tendency of people to get up right on your tail as you're trying to make that maneuver and back in on their horn.

[1:42:54] Be a little bit less than cordial with you.

[1:42:57] And so that is a possibility that we would run into that more and more with the parallel parking.

[1:43:05] With that all being said, we are asking the council if there is a consensus one way or the other,

[1:43:12] between one of these two options.

[1:43:15] If there's not, then we will certainly go back to the drawing board and we would love to hear what we should be looking at,

[1:43:24] as far as that seesaw of what we're trying to balance so that we have some better

[1:43:29] items of what that third option might be.

[1:43:38] Are we ready?

[1:43:41] Okay, so let me ask a question before Johnny gets involved here.

[1:43:45] Can we all go to that?

[1:43:47] Yes, I'll go.

[1:43:48] You guys all go to form me.

[1:43:52] So why are we having a center lane?

[1:43:57] What do they call this?

[1:43:58] Two-way left-turn lane.

[1:43:59] Two-way left-turn lanes?

[1:44:01] Why do we have that?

[1:44:02] downtown, where are you going to turn? I don't get that. That is an excellent question.

[1:44:11] Some of it is a safety aspect. By having it be more restrictive of only having one

[1:44:19] lane and having a space between you and other traffic, if you get the wild hair to go ahead

[1:44:26] to make a left-turn lane from the wrong lane.

[1:44:31] You have a few extra seconds to hit the brakes.

[1:44:35] Where are you gonna turn?

[1:44:37] So the Justice Center is a good example.

[1:44:39] Both on 9th and 10th Street,

[1:44:41] they're requesting to have entrances

[1:44:44] into their parking structure.

[1:44:52] They're making sense to me.

[1:44:54] And I'm just for the record,

[1:44:55] I hate parallel parking, so whatever.

[1:44:59] So.

[1:45:00] John, did you really want to go last? Sure. Okay. You guys asked my questions. I'll either count. Let's, let's go to Melissa first.

[1:45:10] I'm going to really pass somebody off with this question. But why do we have to have parking in front of the, I mean, we have all these parking garages and parking lots. So can't we just make it prettier without the parking? We can. That is definitely an option. One of the

[1:45:29] The assumptions that was made early on in this process was the desire to maximize parking

[1:45:37] throughout not just on the campuses themselves, but in the surrounding area.

[1:45:43] And so that was what we were working off of is this desire to maximize parking.

[1:45:51] There's not like a real need for it, is there a need for it or?

[1:45:56] We're only in the eyes of those that like to have parking right out front of their structure.

[1:46:03] And so for any businesses that are located along there, not necessarily on the blocks

[1:46:09] that we're describing.

[1:46:15] So we're kind of linear and so that is a lot of us.

[1:46:21] But if anyone's wanting to get into city hall, anyone's wanting to get into the county administration,

[1:46:29] We tend to be lazy as humans and so we try to find the shortest path possible.

[1:46:35] Do we have to have parking that's additional on street we do not.

[1:46:39] We have looked at some of the agreements with district six which are not necessarily this area right here.

[1:46:45] We're there asking for some parking but as far as I can tell in my research there's not a specific number assigned to that.

[1:46:55] It's just the general desire to have parking.

[1:46:58] Well, a lot of those parking spaces are limited by two hours or permit, say, is that going

[1:47:04] to, would this be a permit, would it be like anything else that we have going on out there?

[1:47:09] Even if you're similar to what we have in the rest of the downtown.

[1:47:12] Okay. Thank you.

[1:47:15] Dennis.

[1:47:17] Thank you, Mayor. I like what the citizens said. They want a safe place and I think that means

[1:47:25] walking and biking and neither of these alternatives are good for cyclists and in my opinion are we going to direct them on the sidewalk because there's no bike trails in your proposal on either design.

[1:47:45] There's no room unless we do away with someone else.

[1:47:49] Okay. Well, we just had a fatal accident here on this corner. A lot of people ride bikes.

[1:47:55] And I think that our business people downtown want folks to kind of linger and come on in.

[1:48:03] So my hope and wish would be to slow things way down and give pedestrians and cyclists

[1:48:11] the priority to get through the intersections in the street safely so if you think option

[1:48:17] one is the safest for home for the walker in the cyclist at the intersections it is traveling parallel

[1:48:30] to traffic it is probably not the ideal for by seconds that's

[1:48:39] problematic okay Greg I

[1:48:48] agree with

[1:48:48] mayor on the parallel parking. I don't think anybody

[1:48:52] generally knows how to parallel park to begin with. So your

[1:48:55] assessment that parallel parking be quicker, I think it's

[1:48:57] probably slower as long as it takes people to parallel park. So

[1:49:03] my vote would be to do the diagonal parking. I think it's

[1:49:06] pre-effective in the other parts of the city as far as getting

[1:49:10] people around. So anyone else before I turn it over from an

[1:49:17] insurance perspective, I would disagree on the ankle parking.

[1:49:23] I'm going to mention that.

[1:49:24] We're steadies on that one.

[1:49:27] All right, Johnny, do you have anything you'd like to say?

[1:49:30] Yeah, I've got a few things.

[1:49:33] One of the things we'll start with parking.

[1:49:36] If you really look at the accident history on ankle parking,

[1:49:39] is anybody ever been to Windsor during a normal day and try to get back out of

[1:49:44] an angle parking onto 392 and that is a nightmare.

[1:49:51] So, angle parking, I'd rather do, I can, I can, I can move the parks.

[1:49:56] And cars have that in features now that you don't need,

[1:49:58] you just push a button and it does it for you.

[1:50:01] So, I, I, I agree with parking to me in this vicinity,

[1:50:06] parking in front of the Centennial block,

[1:50:08] or a future developments, a future dev,

[1:50:12] or West Justice Center or City Hall, we're going to have parking garages for all those people and having parking on that street.

[1:50:19] I would say if it was five or six restaurants, or there was businesses down there, all this would make sense.

[1:50:26] But right now, I'm going to take it down a different path.

[1:50:29] What is this road classification? What is it classified? What's the road classification in Greeley for death right now?

[1:50:36] I believe it's an arterial. Major arterial. I'm going to read you something.

[1:50:40] The major arterial is a high capacity urban road designed to move large volumes through traffic across the city or between major regional destinations.

[1:50:50] Can you name one other street in the city of Greeley that goes almost all the way through because it ends at 8th.

[1:50:56] It almost goes through the entire city.

[1:51:01] You're asking my geography when I'm new on the job.

[1:51:06] Say no.

[1:51:06] No, I think the answer is no.

[1:51:09] Our city is about as close as it gets, and that's a collector.

[1:51:14] So no, there's no major arterial, other than West 30, 34 bypass, and 10,000 are the

[1:51:20] go-completely through our communities.

[1:51:22] So I read you the definition of a major arterial.

[1:51:25] It is for throughput, major arterials are made for throughput.

[1:51:30] So I want you to think about that.

[1:51:32] And I agree with all the pedestrian safety and the bike and ped, and I agree with all the

[1:51:36] safety components. I'm not anti-safety, but it's the combination of a major arterial

[1:51:42] versus all the other integration of the other modes. On slide six, I'm going to go through

[1:51:51] slide six, seven, twelve, and thirteen.

[1:51:58] So I agree with everything you have on this slide,

[1:52:01] and I do agree with converting this one way to two way between 11th and 10th Avenue. I think

[1:52:08] I think that's a smart thing for the circulation of the jurors and all the parking in the area.

[1:52:12] So I'm not going to take that away from you.

[1:52:14] That was an excellent idea and I think that's, that's great.

[1:52:18] safer vehicles, walking and biking on your first alternative, your preferred alternative, I think is wrong.

[1:52:24] People often don't walk to intersections.

[1:52:26] They typically walk between cars to run across the street, which impairs vision and

[1:52:31] impairs driving sight distance.

[1:52:33] So that parking is going to hinder because people will not always go to the corners.

[1:52:38] I don't know. I run across the street quite often. I play for auger and traffic. That's what we do.

[1:52:44] Don't say anybody up here has never jaywalked in their life.

[1:52:48] So I think it's more dangerous for

[1:52:52] the vehicles

[1:52:54] Walking and biking. It's really not safe and let's go to the intersections

[1:52:58] But everything else on that slide. I agree with slide seven.

[1:53:03] I want to do this major materials

[1:53:05] One of the things that I really think that's important is that we do have a safer bike and pet, but that's not always slowing traffic down.

[1:53:14] That's enforcing the bike and pet laws. A lot of times people don't, they don't follow the laws of biking and walking and they do stupid things like me and run across the street.

[1:53:24] So I really think that we really got to look to how we're going to maximize that, move the parking to facilitate some of that.

[1:53:30] So there's more site distance along with it.

[1:53:36] Um, one of the things that I would say go to slide 13.

[1:53:43] I think that's the third alternative.

[1:53:52] Well, I don't go go to 14.

[1:53:54] 14.

[1:53:55] Which yeah, 14.

[1:53:56] Which is the one that.

[1:53:58] So this right here.

[1:53:59] I didn't care less about the side parking.

[1:54:02] I don't think I agree with everybody.

[1:54:03] I don't even know why we need it.

[1:54:05] I think this design does a lot of things.

[1:54:07] So it adds one extra lane.

[1:54:10] You've reduced it down to three, which is three today,

[1:54:14] but it also gives locations in the left-turn,

[1:54:17] two-way left-turn lane.

[1:54:18] You can put refugees in there down at the intersection,

[1:54:21] so they have safer paths to cross.

[1:54:24] There's things you can do at the intersections

[1:54:25] to improve safety.

[1:54:27] But this right here really means the definition

[1:54:30] of major arterial.

[1:54:31] And I will tell you right now, this council,

[1:54:33] if we took that down to one lane in each direction they would be asking who is the idiot that

[1:54:40] approved that. And I won't be the idiot that consensus that. I promise you that.

[1:54:48] Well, they will. We've had it. That's what they call us. Who is the idiot that approved that?

[1:54:52] Do you not get that every other Tuesday? So I really think it's important that we look

[1:54:58] out through put movements on this corridor. I think it's major arterial. It needs to be handled

[1:55:03] as a major arterial. I don't think we're going to reclassify this to a collector or a minor arterial

[1:55:11] in the anytime soon because it's still a state highway. It's not even really our road,

[1:55:17] borrowing it and paying for the use of it. So I really think that I disagree with the one-way

[1:55:22] each direction. I do think the left turn line is a safety feature, but it also gives access to

[1:55:28] that access to the parking facility so people don't have to drive completely around, but it does

[1:55:35] give you full movements, and I do like the revised alternative. Obviously, we talked about this before,

[1:55:42] but I do think this is still a safer situation, especially if you get rid of the parking.

[1:55:49] I'll stop there.

[1:55:50] Can I engage with Johnny for a second?

[1:55:55] Sure.

[1:55:56] Please.

[1:55:57] I'm just curious.

[1:55:58] We just did 16th Street, which is a thoroughfare.

[1:56:02] It's an arterial.

[1:56:03] What about doing something like that here?

[1:56:07] And these two bots.

[1:56:09] Center parking.

[1:56:11] A little slower going through.

[1:56:14] If it wasn't a major throughput road, I would agree with it.

[1:56:17] but a lot of people come in ten to ninth and come into the community through those two

[1:56:21] corridors. That street is made to move traffic. It's not made, it's to be safe, but it's

[1:56:27] made to move traffic through our communities. And if we start shrinking down our major arterios,

[1:56:32] we start, and I disagree with their numbers in terms of seven-second delays. I haven't seen

[1:56:37] the assumptions or the traffic model, so I can't counter on that. But there's going to be a lot

[1:56:43] more delays. You know, you think of Friday Fest, you think of Stampede, you think of all the

[1:56:47] things that we go, the people do go down town for, those roads are going to be blocked up. If you

[1:56:52] stood down there at 7 a.m. in the morning, there's a lot of traffic, and you start taking that three lanes

[1:56:58] into one.

[1:57:01] The traffic is going to move and go into the neighborhoods. It's called redistribution of

[1:57:05] traffic, and then all of a sudden those streets that are collectors aren't designed for major traffic,

[1:57:10] so we're going to start having to do more projects in those communities. One of those pizza

[1:57:14] that live in their homes and their residents are going to start complaining that, why

[1:57:18] have a son to have more traffic? And that's just going to be a compounding thing that's

[1:57:22] going to happen to us over the course of this one way each direction. So, I just disagree

[1:57:29] with it and it's just going to be a really big blunder on our side. I feel.

[1:57:36] Do you think that on this picture that we're on right now, Seth? If we took out that parking

[1:57:42] because there's just one row of parking.

[1:57:44] Would that be, is there enough room to put two bike lanes

[1:57:47] on each side if we just took that parking out?

[1:57:51] So I'm going to assume I've got a look to Steven,

[1:57:54] my walking in cyclepedia, but I believe it's eight foot.

[1:57:57] Does there kind of leave for the parking?

[1:58:00] And so that would obviously split out into four foot lanes.

[1:58:04] Typically it's a little bit more comfortable

[1:58:05] if you can get five or six foot for a bike lane,

[1:58:08] but for urban area.

[1:58:10] Yeah, you can, but if you took the left turn lane, the left two way left turn lane, down, down, down, down, yeah, shrink it down, shrink the lanes down to 11 foot, there's 11 foot lanes on a major arterials is acceptable according to the green book after green book.

[1:58:23] So I think you can get that bike path, that's six foot bike path and by just making some reduction in your lanes.

[1:58:28] And I have to agree with the council member, the beauty that we're not taking into account

[1:58:36] the bicycles, and being on the puter of the trail quarterboard, one of the things that

[1:58:45] we're working on this very second is getting the trail to downtown.

[1:58:51] And the downtown development authorities is bringing that up in their next meeting to

[1:58:56] trying to discuss how do we get bicycles into the downtown area and this doesn't mean anything

[1:59:04] to me and I guess I'm if we go along that line we start looking at whether or not we've got

[1:59:10] bike lanes in what this is like three blocks or four blocks what about the rest of the blocks how

[1:59:16] you know where does that start and stop we've got to we've got to fix all that too so

[1:59:25] hopefully

[1:59:27] Yeah,

[1:59:30] I don't think this just gives anything to the pedestrian or the well at least to the bike

[1:59:39] The pedestrian's got sidewalks, but I still think this center lane is kind of goofy

[1:59:48] So what I'm hearing just to recap is this would be the preferred but in lieu of the parking on one side

[1:59:54] We would split that out and have bike lanes in each direction. Is that accurate?

[2:00:04] The only question I guess I have in that design concept is that, like I said, it's only four blocks. What happens to the block after it and the block after that and going from there? How do you, how do you get rid of parking in one block? And that's a, it's a big kind of warrant. It is, and you are 100% correct mayor. It is a big ask and it's a big

[2:00:30] big change, culturally, even, especially as people are used to being vehicle people to

[2:00:38] get around. The SS4A, the state streets for all project, is, again, a five-year pilot

[2:00:44] program to implement, quite a few lane miles of pedestrian improvements, especially for

[2:00:53] bike lanes, and the whole idea is to get people used to the idea of sharing the road.

[2:00:59] and so this is a substantial step in that direction. Our hope is that our findings are going to

[2:01:06] support that the citizens are behind this concept of share the road. They're buying into the idea

[2:01:13] of more bike lanes and it's like anything else. If you were to just cover the entire map in bike

[2:01:20] lanes, you'd have a lot of resistance but as it has more buy-in and more people who are utilizing it,

[2:01:27] more people who feel safe using the bike lanes.

[2:01:31] It begins to grow and there's more support

[2:01:33] for widening that network.

[2:01:37] And if I'm understanding what John is concept

[2:01:39] is having two lanes eastbound.

[2:01:44] And then two lanes westbound.

[2:01:46] Yeah, it would be two lanes on,

[2:01:49] so looking at two lanes headed into town

[2:01:51] and two lanes headed out of town with one lane circulating.

[2:02:00] Okay, then.

[2:02:01] That's my that's my vote so that would be alternative to turn it to with the substitution

[2:02:09] for bike lanes but I'm I'm not convinced that you need to get rid of parking just to

[2:02:15] get bike lanes so I heard our expert here say you could shrink it I don't yeah I don't

[2:02:25] think there's enough with to do parking and bike lanes because you you can reduce lanes

[2:02:29] So you've got three lanes, that's three foot, then you reduce the center lane turning to 12 foot, or what is the center turning lanes at 16?

[2:02:40] Steven, is that center turning lane 16?

[2:02:43] With the center turning lane.

[2:02:48] Jumping in on the lane discussion.

[2:02:53] The lanes are already 11 foot, so both the preferred and revised alternative.

[2:02:58] of 11 foot through lanes, 8 foot parking lane for the parallel parking, and I believe

[2:03:04] an 11 foot to a left turn lane.

[2:03:06] We've already got a reduced.

[2:03:08] We could go further.

[2:03:10] We've consulted with our transit folks.

[2:03:12] We can't go less than 11 for a bus lane, which there is bus service running along here.

[2:03:19] The interior lane could go down to 10.

[2:03:22] It's going to feel a little bit tight.

[2:03:23] You see those in Denver periodically.

[2:03:26] It's where you feel like you're right next to the mirror of the car next to you, but you can do that

[2:03:34] So you've already got reduced lanes in here. Correct, sir

[2:03:38] So my question is could you reduce your buffer area where the green space is

[2:03:42] What is the green I mean the green space how wide so give me sort of a typical section. You got a 10 foot sidewalk

[2:03:49] Correct, so existing is I believe six foot

[2:03:54] maybe a bit wider. We did not include a wider shared use path, primarily because that is planned to come with new development.

[2:04:03] You can see on the 10th F block and the 11th F block on the south side that there is future development.

[2:04:11] So we thought we would wait until new development comes in.

[2:04:14] At that time, we could look at more of a 10 foot, even 12 foot wide shared use path,

[2:04:20] which could accommodate shared bikes and pedestrians.

[2:04:26] However, until that happens, on-street bicycle facilities

[2:04:33] would likely be the most realistic option to implement on the interim.

[2:04:38] So I answered my question, what's that green space between the back of curb and the sidewalk?

[2:04:44] How wide is that?

[2:04:44] So, for the block from 11th to 10th Avenue, I believe it's around 8th foot.

[2:04:52] I'd have to consult my notes on that.

[2:04:54] But it changes when you get to the Centennial block where that green space goes away and

[2:04:59] it's primarily paved surface all the way from the back of the sidewalk to the back of

[2:05:06] the curb.

[2:05:07] So we can reduce that green space to help reduce the green space, get rid of the parking

[2:05:13] to get your six-foot on each side, at least for one block and we can investigate the other two

[2:05:19] blocks of whether we can reduce the width of the sidewalk in that area. And between 10th and 8,

[2:05:26] there is businesses along that corridor. Do you have parking in there too?

[2:05:32] Between 10th and 8th, 9th and 8th. So this would, if we replace that with a bike lane,

[2:05:41] and there would be no on-street parking for those three blocks.

[2:05:44] All right,

[2:05:54] so I'm not sure what we're going to be doing here,

[2:05:56] but I've converted to Johnny's plan so that when somebody's upset,

[2:06:01] it's his fault.

[2:06:05] I don't have to stamp it, but I've been loaned it.

[2:06:10] So I still

[2:06:15] think option two has some refinement that could go into it

[2:06:21] as far as the final design, but we do it with a two-way in and the way it's option two, a good option

[2:06:30] is our consensus. So that's an option. What do we need any more? Do we need any more on

[2:06:38] refinement of what we can do with the two lanes in? No, the overall concept that you've agreed to

[2:06:48] gives us plenty of guidance. Now it's just getting down to the cat on the survey to squeeze

[2:06:54] it in. Okay. I'm

[2:06:59] going to look and see if they can reduce

[2:07:01] thousands getting developed to meet standard. And I'm not I'm not sure you're going to get rid of

[2:07:06] parking, but. So, Mayor and Council, if I can just to make sure that we come back to you with any

[2:07:12] additional information, I heard you have some consensus around option two and you'd like us to continue

[2:07:17] to explore if via option two we also have the opportunity to look at bike lanes in there

[2:07:23] if we end up and are able to get rid of that parking and reduce the green space and the staff can

[2:07:28] go back and look at that to ensure that we have enough room for that and if not option two is

[2:07:34] amenable to council.

[2:07:38] Lane configuration, yeah. Two lanes, three lanes basically, two in and two out

[2:07:46] or one out.

[2:07:49] I didn't say that right but two lanes one way one way the other way okay you got it

[2:07:55] just to recap okay go for it we're striving for bike lanes if bike lanes can't be fit we want to

[2:08:03] default back to having one side of parking a parallel parking is that accurate okay yep yep okay thank

[2:08:12] Thank you for the guidance.

[2:08:13] That's accurate.

[2:08:14] Okay.

[2:08:14] Thank you.

[2:08:19] Okay.

[2:08:20] Item number seven.

[2:08:21] Capital Improvement Program update.

[2:08:24] Uh-huh.

[2:08:25] Haley Myers and Bretton Neighbor.

[2:08:43] You're the last one on the list, so don't feel any pressure.

[2:08:46] Yeah.

[2:08:47] Good evening.

[2:08:49] Hello.

[2:08:50] Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[2:08:52] I'm happy to be with you tonight to present our second update as part of the quarterly

[2:08:58] early CIP reporting process that we introduced earlier this year in May.

[2:09:03] So the intent of these reports is really to give council visibility into how the capital

[2:09:08] program is progressing throughout the year, not just during budget adoption.

[2:09:14] So trying to be as transparent as possible provide a full list of projects.

[2:09:19] That's all available in the appendix.

[2:09:21] We can certainly get into project specific questions this evening.

[2:09:25] And if there's anything we can't answer, we can bring updates back to you.

[2:09:30] So the point here is really visibility.

[2:09:35] So tonight you'll see a snapshot of year to date spending at a high level.

[2:09:40] And then in the appendix is the detailed by project.

[2:09:43] We'll highlight some of the more meaningful project changes that have taken place

[2:09:48] since our last report out in the CIP and provide updates on a few projects that we've been following.

[2:09:54] Then I'll hand it over to deputy city manager Brett neighbor for a deeper look at the asset

[2:09:59] management work that's underway and how we assess and prioritize our infrastructure needs.

[2:10:04] There's no action requested from council tonight. It's intended to be a report out and really an

[2:10:09] opportunity for questions.

[2:10:13] But starting at the highest level, how is the capital program progressing?

[2:10:18] So this chart on the slide is the same framework that we introduced at our first report.

[2:10:26] These numbers have been updated through late August.

[2:10:30] So in the chart, the dark blue represents what has actually been paid through late August.

[2:10:36] The pattern portion of the bar is funding that's under contract.

[2:10:40] And then the white portion of the bar is remainder or plan work.

[2:10:45] So there are 345 individual projects represented here.

[2:10:50] So that's ranging from relatively small annual replacement programs to major infrastructure

[2:10:56] projects that will be delivered over multiple years.

[2:10:59] So it's a very large and diverse capital portfolio.

[2:11:04] The clearest indication of activity since our first report is the call out on the upper

[2:11:08] right.

[2:11:10] So in May, when we gave this report for the first time, we had paid about 56 million in capital

[2:11:17] expenditures.

[2:11:18] and now through late August that has grown to approximately $141 million, which is about

[2:11:24] $85 million in additional spending since our first report.

[2:11:27] There's a variety of projects underway as evidenced by that increased spend.

[2:11:33] And beyond what's already been paid, you can see that a significant amount of the program

[2:11:37] is also under contract and moving toward expense.

[2:11:40] So I also want to emphasize that we don't expect all of the remaining planned funding.

[2:11:45] So in other words, that whites are represented here to be spent by December 31st.

[2:11:52] Many of these are multi-year projects.

[2:11:55] So depending on where the project is in design or procurement construction,

[2:12:00] the timing of expenditures can look very different.

[2:12:03] Also captured in that white bar are projects that maybe are on hold or postponed for some reason.

[2:12:09] So a couple of good examples of that are in the water sewer and stormwater bar that includes about 24 million for the Bellevue Gold Hill pipeline.

[2:12:22] As a reminder, that's a project that our staff have been working very hard to get additional grant funding for and have been successful in some of that following the termination of the brick grant program.

[2:12:33] So that's an example where that $24 million is within that 46% planned for that category.

[2:12:41] So it may seem in some cases like that's not being spent, but there are some very large projects

[2:12:47] that just aren't proceeding for various reasons.

[2:12:52] So what we're hoping for right through these reports is the continued movement

[2:12:56] through the pipeline from planned to contract it to paid and understanding the projects

[2:13:01] or something has materially changed.

[2:13:05] And that brings me to the next slide.

[2:13:08] So this is meant to just highlight meaningful changes

[2:13:11] that have occurred since the last quarterly report.

[2:13:17] One reason for this, we've heard from council

[2:13:21] or request for more visibility just into capital transfers.

[2:13:24] So that's really what some of this is trying to get at.

[2:13:27] There's detail in the appendix

[2:13:29] but this slide highlights just a couple high level items.

[2:13:33] So one major theme since our last presentation

[2:13:35] is downtown infrastructure.

[2:13:38] So several water, sewer, storm,

[2:13:41] and transportation projects have had savings

[2:13:43] or work that shifted to future years

[2:13:46] to allow funding to be redirected

[2:13:48] for infrastructure associated with downtown construction.

[2:13:51] So a lot of the transfers that we've seen

[2:13:53] over the past several months are related to that work,

[2:13:56] basically consolidating funding from other sources

[2:13:59] in order to move forward on the downtime of the structured timeline.

[2:14:03] We also had some more immediate asset needs, so a couple of examples, the Coyote run and

[2:14:08] Feasant run playgrounds required urgent replacement.

[2:14:12] So funding was transferred from another place to make sure that those could happen.

[2:14:16] Funding was also redirected to each back needs at the UCCCC and other facilities.

[2:14:22] And there were also a couple notable priority changes.

[2:14:26] So, the customer experience CRM initiative was discontinued.

[2:14:31] Its remaining funding was redirected to West Greeley Planning and Project Development

[2:14:35] that allows us to continue some of that work without spending down the COPs further.

[2:14:41] And then separately following a refresher approach on the project, staff received direction that

[2:14:46] the 500,000 that was budgeted for Phase 3 of the Pooter River Restoration Initiative

[2:14:51] be restored to allow that project to move forward.

[2:14:53] So, there's just a couple of examples of some changes since the last report that you saw in.

[2:15:00] Aye, and again, there's a detailed listening index. We'd like to dig into any of those further.

[2:15:09] And then just quickly wanting to walk through some of the projects that we highlighted in the first quarterly report and just give a status update. So I'll start with the we sort of treatment and reclamation facility. This project continues to be one of the largest active capital projects in report folio. We spent approximately 12.5 million through late August of this year.

[2:15:31] That's from about half that in the first report that project is definitely moving along and there's another 27 million obligated that reflects a generational investment in our sewer enterprise.

[2:15:43] In that project, that's well into construction as opposed to the nearest project, which is at a very different point in its life cycle.

[2:15:51] So that work is currently focused on design and pre-construction or a pair to a portion of the pewter river trail.

[2:15:57] So that's why expenditures remain relatively low, but the significant development there is

[2:16:03] that Neuron House Civil has been selected as the CMGC contractor for that project and

[2:16:10] constructions anticipated to begin in November and continue through the spring.

[2:16:18] Moving from a project, preparing for construction to one that's nearing the finish line, 0 and 59th

[2:16:22] reached substantial completion this quarter.

[2:16:24] So we've now spent approximately 4 million of the 6.4 million, the work that's remaining

[2:16:30] is really final acceptance, close out, and seed up documentation.

[2:16:35] The project is anticipated to be fully complete later next month.

[2:16:40] And then finally at the U-Triple C we have another project that's moved into design with

[2:16:44] construction deliberately timed around the facility's operating schedule.

[2:16:48] So we've spent about 300,000 to date, or 30,000 today, excuse me, with another 30,000

[2:16:54] obligated for the Orcasur pit lifter placement.

[2:16:58] And that is planned to be installed next summer between June and August.

[2:17:01] So a couple of examples of those multi-year projects as well.

[2:17:09] So there's considerably more project level detail behind the report in the appendix.

[2:17:17] So happy to go into questions at the conclusion of the presentation, but before we do that,

[2:17:25] for each report, we're also wanting to spend a little time going deeper on an issue that

[2:17:29] affects how we manage capital across the board, so this sort of that's asset management.

[2:17:34] So we're making capital decisions across a very large and diverse portfolio of infrastructure,

[2:17:39] knowing what we own is one piece of that, but understanding what condition it's in, what

[2:17:44] what happens if it fails and how that shouldn't form where we invest is another.

[2:17:50] So with that, I'll turn over to Brentney, where to walk us through that work.

[2:17:55] Thank you.

[2:17:56] Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[2:17:58] So I'm just going to take a quick dive into asset management to, again, as Kaylin said,

[2:18:04] just go into some of the detail and some of the work that's going on behind the scenes.

[2:18:08] We're emphasizing these core competencies, particularly asset management to make better

[2:18:14] data to form data informed decisions. So it felt like this was a good time to highlight

[2:18:20] this so jump in. So asset management isn't just buying the assets or creating the assets

[2:18:26] but it's also maintaining them and a lot goes into that and it's complicated and it's expensive

[2:18:31] so it's something worth spending our time on. We have a lot of good financial information

[2:18:37] on our assets. As you can see here, we, but there's a lot of other factors that go into

[2:18:44] asset management that we need. So we need to understand how critical the asset is, and

[2:18:50] we also need to understand the condition of the asset. So this is an example of information

[2:18:58] that we have now. We take an example like the one up above from another municipality.

[2:19:05] They have information about asset categories, the total values, and the condition of the asset.

[2:19:11] this allows you to understand a little bit better what those assets look like. We have examples in water

[2:19:17] and sewer that might be a little bit more like the example of an example that we'll use to

[2:19:25] sort of highlight where we are as an example of stormwater. So as you can see here, you have the

[2:19:30] condition of the asset, but we still are missing two thirds of the information that we need for the asset.

[2:19:35] And so what this leads you to do is you just sort of fixate on the red and you say I'm going to

[2:19:40] Just replace or fix the asset that's critical and you lose a lot of other information you don't know a lot of other factors

[2:19:51] So we've been working on

[2:19:53] Excuse me is a risk framework so the likelihood of failure the consequence of failure some of these pieces of information

[2:20:00] Help us understand better what those assets look like help us make a decision so we can use a weighted average and come up with a score and

[2:20:07] And take a look and decide which assets we want to replace.

[2:20:11] So that's what's been going on behind the scenes.

[2:20:13] And this is one of the reasons we want to talk about this is that it's, you know,

[2:20:17] this is a far more robust way to track assets and to manage these things.

[2:20:22] But this is how we are making these decisions now.

[2:20:25] So about a year ago, the team got together and said we need to make a change in the way

[2:20:30] that we manage our assets and we need more visibility and we need to use data

[2:20:34] to help us make decisions.

[2:20:35] So this is something that we've been devoting a lot of time and energy into and have a lot of

[2:20:40] smart people behind the scenes pulling this together. And again, the likelihood of failure,

[2:20:47] how critical the asset is, how close it is to important things like a hospital or some other

[2:20:52] piece of infrastructure. All that is taken into account to help us come up with the score. So I think

[2:20:58] you'll see more of this information as time goes on. Like I said before, this is not a small task.

[2:21:05] this is a huge task. Getting all that asset information, being able to track it, being able to know what condition it is in is a huge effort and something that we want to make sure it's happening across the organization.

[2:21:18] So this isn't just happening in water and sewer. It's not just happening in storm water. This is happening in vertical and horizontal assets.

[2:21:24] So this is, again, a big initiative and I thought it was important to talk about it tonight.

[2:21:32] I think that's about it.

[2:21:34] Like I said, it'll be pretty quick.

[2:21:35] And in the appendix, there's some more information about some of the scoring and the weighted averages.

[2:21:41] And again, making this priority.

[2:21:44] This is, you know, a better way to look at our deferred maintenance and our capital improvement program.

[2:21:50] So I'm sure we'll be back with more information as time goes on.

[2:21:54] And just to link it into the budgeting piece, so a lot of the work that staff have been

[2:22:00] doing around the asset management and the scoring and using this more robust risk framework

[2:22:05] is to integrate that into the budgeting process.

[2:22:10] I've presented to you all on some of the scoring that we do as part of the CIP process every

[2:22:15] year.

[2:22:15] This will just allow us to make that more robust when it comes to criticality of failure

[2:22:21] and having a better view into our assets.

[2:22:24] So part of what we're hoping to do is ask projects

[2:22:26] are coming through the budget process.

[2:22:28] It's able to run through this risk framework

[2:22:30] and really give us more insight into

[2:22:33] when is the right time to invest those dollars.

[2:22:36] So it'll take some time, but we're maturing in that area.

[2:22:40] And this information, you know, sees gathered

[2:22:43] from best practices and other municipalities

[2:22:45] and government agencies and is really following more

[2:22:48] or like an ISO 55,000 framework, which is something industry standard.

[2:22:53] So we didn't make this up on our own.

[2:22:57] This is where we're adopting some of those principles.

[2:23:01] That concludes our presentation.

[2:23:03] Happy to answer questions.

[2:23:04] Okay. Anybody have a question?

[2:23:12] Greg, based on that last slide,

[2:23:14] it looked like some of the grading was a little bit subjective.

[2:23:20] And so, you just passed it, sorry, the scoring matrix.

[2:23:27] So it kind of looks a little bit subjective.

[2:23:29] Not to say that there's not actual data behind those numbers selected.

[2:23:34] But how are those numbers, like, how do you guys figure in those numbers?

[2:23:40] Yeah, I may ask if any path key to come up in and talk about that a little bit as well.

[2:23:46] Obviously, this is still a work in progress, but these are items that we're trying to

[2:23:53] gather that information.

[2:23:54] So if it's not there, we try to stay away from the subjective pieces of information.

[2:24:00] I don't know if Ben, if you have anything to add, so Ben Radke is our interim data manager

[2:24:05] and he's been working on this program.

[2:24:12] Well, Mayor Counsel, we have numbers that are associated with the score.

[2:24:30] Are you going past into the disarranger?

[2:24:33] Yeah. And so those numbers don't, I don't know what those numbers mean. They seem pretty subjective.

[2:24:42] And I'm in the front of it. There's true data aligning with those numbers.

[2:24:47] In the blue column? Yeah. So those are all scored based off of definitions.

[2:24:52] Okay. And those will be on the next couple of slides. This is just an example.

[2:24:58] So, we have definitions for all of our factors to keep it as objective as possible.

[2:25:07] Okay, so when you're talking about remaining life, that's based on manufacturer recommended

[2:25:12] replacement.

[2:25:13] So wait that.

[2:25:13] Okay.

[2:25:14] Okay.

[2:25:15] No.

[2:25:16] I'm good now.

[2:25:17] The only other question I had is this is kind of like we ran into the ice house where you

[2:25:24] can't get replacement parts for it.

[2:25:25] Is there, is there somewhere where we're looking at finding out if we can replace the, yeah, in the consequences failure?

[2:25:35] Okay.

[2:25:36] It's like essentially one of the things we like to use is like if you have to fly someone in from the North Pole to fix something, then it's a pretty high consequence of failure.

[2:25:44] Okay.

[2:25:44] So yeah, it's being tracked and we can look at all these factors individually.

[2:25:47] Okay.

[2:25:48] Sounds good. Thanks.

[2:25:50] Okay.

[2:25:52] So whether you believe it or not, I'm an asset management junkie started in 2009 on asset management.

[2:26:02] Caitlin, one of the things that I wanted to mention before I get an asset management was one of the things that this council really struggled with over the last four years is projects that are delayed or there's something going on and we don't track scope schedule and budget very well.

[2:26:18] like put some criteria in or KPIs, like did it meet at schedule, right?

[2:26:23] Why did it miss at schedule?

[2:26:25] And I think that's one of the things we struggle with because projects that were funded four years ago,

[2:26:30] still haven't, I'm going to talk about your pedestrian cross 134.

[2:26:35] We were told about that four years ago.

[2:26:38] And I, that is, I understand projects take time, design right away, utilities,

[2:26:43] all the things that go into a design project.

[2:26:46] But at the end of the day, are we not scoping these correctly?

[2:26:50] Are we not driving these critical issues into our schedule to make sure that we're meeting

[2:26:56] the schedule?

[2:26:57] Because four or five years, I think it was seven years on 59th and O street, right?

[2:27:04] And it had a railroad.

[2:27:05] I get it.

[2:27:06] It had an augmentation plan.

[2:27:07] I get it.

[2:27:08] It had irrigation.

[2:27:09] I get it.

[2:27:10] But at the end of the day, that should have been scoped into that project so you can deliver

[2:27:14] reliable and realistic schedule. That's what we're struggling with. I mean, you did give us some

[2:27:20] projects in the delays, but when we start putting money in the bank and we budget money in the bank

[2:27:27] and that money sits in the bank, it's not doing what it needs to be doing and it's just sitting there.

[2:27:32] So I think that's where this council struggled on CIP in the past.

[2:27:36] Absolutely. So what I would say to that is this financial report is a really big step

[2:27:42] and it's allowed us to organize the data in a new way.

[2:27:49] So I would say the next step obviously to having data is evaluating the data and really

[2:27:54] starting to press in on our colleagues and our staff and just start to come together as

[2:28:01] a team to make the IP execution, something that's more robust and mature and I think that

[2:28:06] we're coming a long way and this report is just one piece of that.

[2:28:10] that is the transparent financial reporting, but everything you've just discussed is absolutely

[2:28:16] are things that staff are working on and having conversations on every day between, you

[2:28:23] know, Seth Sorenson and Sean Chambers stay in Africa, all of our leaders in capital and

[2:28:27] Brett and some of the work that he's trying to do around CAP execution and management.

[2:28:32] Thank you.

[2:28:33] When it comes to asset management, one of the worst things to do is look at worse first.

[2:28:38] It's maintaining what you have so you don't have those first.

[2:28:42] Like I was mentioning, facilities that have a boiler that's no longer made, I mean that

[2:28:50] should be not worse first, we should have been looking at that five years ago of replacement

[2:28:54] and not looking at it because we just can't fix it anymore.

[2:28:58] So I hopefully when you guys start looking at asset management, like pavement management,

[2:29:04] There's a 40% cost if you do worse first unless you just went out and chipped sealed or put a two inch overlay on something you can extend the life of that service, that service life of that road a lot longer if you got to a sooner.

[2:29:18] Same with other things you know and vertical and vehicles and some of the other assets are harder to do that with because you run the useful life of it but knowing your useful life because some vehicles they break down sooner than others and they have to be replaced.

[2:29:31] So, I mean, worst first is not, hopefully that's not where we're headed.

[2:29:35] No, not at all.

[2:29:36] In fact, this is quite the opposite.

[2:29:38] It's really taking a look at all those factors first.

[2:29:42] And we just had a discussion about this with KGM, for instance.

[2:29:46] And I think it'll be a good presentation to come back and talk about

[2:29:48] with the keep really moving.

[2:29:49] And when we decide to do the roads and we don't wait until they completely fail,

[2:29:53] we try to catch them about halfway,

[2:29:56] try to bring them up as much as we can, make them last another 10 years.

[2:29:59] and so...

[2:30:00] I think that's exactly the strategy that we're trying to apply to the other assets. You know, the vertical and horizontal assets to go, you know, of course we should be doing the preventative maintenance, make sure that the assets last as long as they possibly can, but what other things can we do to sort of make them last a little bit longer, and it's not waiting until they fail and then fix them. And we have ketchup to do. I mean, that's $1 million. Yeah, it's more than 20 million. I mean, as far as deferred maintenance goes, it's a huge number, right?

[2:30:29] I mean, in order to fix all the assets that need to be replaced, you know, it's a large

[2:30:35] number. I'll just say that.

[2:30:37] So, and we're playing catch up.

[2:30:39] So some of those things have gotten past that curve, and are on the tail end, and are

[2:30:44] going to have to be replaced.

[2:30:47] Recognize that, too.

[2:30:51] Any other questions?

[2:30:55] Okay.

[2:30:56] I see none.

[2:30:58] Thank you all for coming.

[2:31:01] Item number eight is scheduling of meetings and other events.

[2:31:04] Ms. Johnson, is there any other additional meetings we need to work out?

[2:31:10] No additional meetings, Mayor.

[2:31:12] I would just ask Council to direct your attention to some email communication that

[2:31:15] you received this evening while you were in your meeting.

[2:31:18] Okay.

[2:31:19] Item 9.

[2:31:20] There's a adjournment there being, no further business, the Council will now adjourn the meeting

[2:31:25] at 848.

City Council Work Session

Transcript