[1:25] Maybe that help.

[1:34] » Okay. Public comment period. Any member of the public may address the board on

[1:39] matters which are within the jurisdiction of the board. If you are

[1:43] addressing the board regarding a matter listed on the agenda, you are requested

[1:47] to limit your comments to three minutes per member or five minutes per group.

[1:53] The public comment time is not for questions and answers. It is your time

[1:57] to express your views. To ensure there is adequate public comment time, please

[2:03] provide your name, com contact contact information,

[2:06] and any affiliation prior to the meeting by contacting the board assistant at

[2:12] 970-878-9575.

[2:17] If you would like to submit written comments, please contact the board

[2:21] assistant. If any member of the public would like to comment at this time,

[2:26] please state your name, contact information, and affiliation for the

[2:30] record. Bobby

[2:36] » up here, please. Thank you. So, we can get you on record.

[2:43] » My name is Bobby U 564 Larry Lane, Colorado.

[2:50] And I'd just like to thank you for putting

[2:54] item C under new business. Uh very important issue of moving our health

[2:58] service district board back to a sevenperson board like the voters of

[3:03] eastern Roano County first voted for back in 2006 when the district was first

[3:10] created. This has been a big concern for me and

[3:14] others since 2021 um

[3:20] the resolution to change the will of the people by illegally um as there is no

[3:28] Colorado revised statute allowing a board to go from seven members to five.

[3:33] a flagrant disregard of the will of the people and um made the resolution to

[3:40] amend their bylaws. And on August 19, 2021, PMC sent a resolution

[3:47] um along with a letter to then commissioners Gary Moyer, who was under

[3:52] recall, Jeff Recctor, who had resigned, but had yet uh had not yet stepped down

[3:58] and newly elected Ty Gates, um who later became the maintenance manager out there

[4:05] PMC, uh while working as a commissioner. Uh

[4:10] the commissioners never did discuss the resolution, nor did they put it on on

[4:15] publicly. They didn't discuss it publicly back in 2021. Nor did they put

[4:20] the resolution on the agenda to determine if it was a material

[4:25] modification of the district service plan move from seven to five members.

[4:31] With no response from the commissioners P after 45 days, PNC attorney Christina

[4:37] Harney submitted the motion that the district court to accept the amendment

[4:42] to their bylaws reducing the number of board members from 7 to 5. Motion was

[4:49] denied by the honorable Patrick Nordon on April 29th, 2022.

[4:57] Yet PMC ignored the court order and amended their bylaws April 26, 2022, two

[5:04] weeks before an election with seven people on the ballot running for three

[5:09] seats. you as Will Blanko County Commissioners

[5:12] have the authority to correct this immediately by pointing to two members

[5:21] who we recently had an election um and and appointing the next two highest vote

[5:27] getters from the May 26 election to get us back to a sevenperson board like the

[5:34] people the voters of Milano County originally voted for.

[5:40] Thank you for your time and your consideration.

[5:43] » Thank you.

[5:47] » Okay, can move on to the

[5:50] » um I check and see if there's anybody online that public comment.

[5:54] » Is anybody online that needs to do a public comment?

[5:59] » Somebody wanting to join.

[6:08] There's somebody looks like they want to join.

[6:14] » They said there is not. >> One to join is the AI piece.

[6:19] » Oh, okay.

[6:25] » So, the this is the tenative agenda which includes all information available

[6:29] as of September 5th, 2025. The final tenative agenda will be posted at the

[6:35] Woodco County Historic Courthouse, 555 Main Street, Maker, Colorado, and at the

[6:41] Rangely Town Hall, 209 East Main Street, Rangely.

[6:48] » Mr. Chair, I would move to approve the agenda for September 10th, 2025 with one

[6:56] change. If we could move agenda item 3 in, which

[7:02] is the NRCS um natural resources conservation

[7:07] service letter up to business item A. We'll put it at the

[7:14] very beginning of business. We have Todd Bolt on the phone with us as soon as we

[7:19] can get to it. >> So, we're not going to make it a We're

[7:21] going to move in up to the beginning. >> Yes.

[7:24] » Just to keep everything straight. >> Okay. Okay.

[7:28] And you have to second, I guess. Huh? >> I'm going to second that motion.

[7:33] Any discussion? I just want to uh note that Jennifer is not here today. She's

[7:38] in Washington DC doing Roano County's business.

[7:42] » She's not going in virtually. >> No, she's not.

[7:47] » She's in the middle of uh meeting with some senators right now. Um would you

[7:53] please call the >> ROS?

[7:56] Hi over to you. >> Hi.

[8:00] Good. So we are going to do line item business N which is

[8:09] » um consent items. >> Oh yeah we have to do the consent items.

[8:12] I'm sorry. Oh yeah. >> So Mr. Chair, I would move to approve

[8:16] the below list items of the consent agenda. That includes payroll management

[8:21] report for August 15th and 29th. Accounts payable management reports for

[8:27] June 25th or June of 25. Special meeting minutes for July 23rd. Special meeting

[8:35] minutes for August 2nd. Meeting minutes for August 12th. Special meeting minutes

[8:41] for September 2nd. Special meeting minutes for September 4th. Motor vehicle

[8:48] um DMV report for August 25 and DHS.

[8:54] um their EBT register and warrant register for August 25th.

[8:59] » And I'm going to second that motion. Any discussion?

[9:04] » You please call the role. >> I

[9:12] Okay. So now we are going to move on to business N which is

[9:19] » in our >> consideration of a request to Clint

[9:23] Evans Natural Resources and Conservation Service requesting federal assistance

[9:29] under the provisions of section 216 of the Flood Control Act of 1950

[9:36] public law 81-516 or section 403 of the Agricultural

[9:41] Credit Act. Act of 1978, public law 95-34

[9:49] to restore damages sustained in real blanko county by the Lee and Elk RBX

[9:55] Real Blanco County fire on August 25th.

[10:02] » So I had asked um NRCS. So Todd Bolt is um with us remotely today to be able to

[10:13] explain to us a little bit about what this would look like.

[10:16] » Stay with NCS. >> NRCS is Natural Resource Conservation

[10:20] Service. And Vicki, I have an extra sheet that Todd shared with us.

[10:25] » Okay. >> If you want it. Um

[10:29] okay, give her that one. And um so I had had a brief conversation

[10:36] about this and have very vague knowledge of it due to conservation district work

[10:41] in the past, but um I think that Todd will go over kind of what the program is

[10:49] briefly and then what our role would be if we were to be a sponsor of it.

[10:56] Floor >> is yours, Todd.

[10:58] » Good morning. Can you hear me? Yes.

[11:02] » Uh, thanks for having me. Um, my name is Todd Bolt. I work for the Natural

[11:09] Resources Conservation Service. I'm located in Fort Collins. Uh, I cover the

[11:14] entire state uh of Colorado for NRCS and I manage the emergency watershed

[11:21] protection program which is the program you were referencing with all of that

[11:25] program statutory authorities. also manage the public law 566 which is

[11:32] our watershed operations and then also our dam rehab. Uh you guys have been

[11:37] working with Clinton Whitten is that correct Cali?

[11:41] » Yes. >> And uh Clinton Clinton works for me.

[11:44] He's located out of Steamboat. He's been up and around taking a look at the some

[11:48] of the issues that are going on uh postfire uh with the rainfall and and

[11:54] the runoff that's occurred. So to get right into it, the objective of the

[11:59] Emergency Watershed Protection Program, and I'm sharing my screen. I don't know

[12:04] how well you can see that, but hopefully you have a sheet of paper that you can

[12:09] follow along with. Um, the Emergency Watershed Protection Program is set up

[12:15] to um relieve imminent hazards to life and

[12:20] property caused by a watershed impairment. And a watershed impairment

[12:25] is a fire and then we have floods. The wershed is impaired. It cannot act the

[12:30] way it's supposed to act. So the primary goals of EWP are to reduce erosion,

[12:38] sedimentation, and the threat from future flooding to life and property.

[12:44] The key item here is, and I'm bringing this up. Hopefully, you can see that um

[12:51] implementation or the flowchart fairly well. Um I'm not going to get into great

[12:56] details of this. I think what you're really interested in and and and correct

[13:00] me if I'm wrong. You guys want to know what what you have to do once you

[13:05] request assistance. And so but the process is

[13:09] » you have to rec a sponsor has to request assistance from to our agency and our

[13:17] boss is Clint Evans. That's why you referenced him and you have to send in a

[13:21] request to him and say, "Hey, we need assistance under this program due to

[13:25] this fire and the and the flooding that we're getting." and that you have to do

[13:29] that within 60 days. And then we we have some time to come in and help you out

[13:35] and assess the damages and come up with a cost estimate and see what

[13:39] everything's going to take to get uh protect life and property. So, you need

[13:44] to be a sponsor needs to be a unit of government, which you are. So, we're

[13:48] good there. the responsibility of the sponsors. You must request assistance in

[13:54] writing to my boss, Clint Evans, who is the state conservationist for NRCS in

[14:00] Colorado. You must let the public know that this program is available. And this

[14:07] is the one big thing to remember here is NRCS in this program works through the

[14:16] sponsor to provide technical and financial assistance to address the

[14:21] issues that are occurring on private property and also any public

[14:27] infrastructure that might be impacted postfire.

[14:32] So all of that means is you guys are in charge of working with the land owners.

[14:40] We provide the guidance and technical and financial assistance to get the work

[14:45] done to you so that you can help the private land owners or take care of the

[14:51] protection of infrastructure, county roads, county infrastructure, etc., etc.

[14:58] Um so we put after After we get the request from you, then

[15:05] we initiate what's called a damage survey report team, which would be NRCS

[15:13] and Rio Blanco personnel to go out and take a look at what the potential or

[15:19] already damaged sites are, what it's going to take to protect those sites,

[15:24] come up with a cost estimate, and then therefore request assistance from

[15:30] national headquarters in terms of dollars that would help pay for the

[15:36] installation of this stuff. You guys are required to get access or permission

[15:44] from the land owners to do the work. So, John Q public out there, you are

[15:50] required to go out and say, "Hey, we want to do this on your property to

[15:54] protect your house. Are you okay with that?" And you have to get permission to

[15:58] do that. If there's a permit that's required from the feds or the state or

[16:02] the local government, you're required to get those permits. Um, if you go out and

[16:10] hire a private company to do all of this work that might come from EWP,

[16:18] you guys have to administer the contract to do that with that contractor. We

[16:24] oversee that to make sure that everything's being done correctly. But

[16:28] you're responsible for requesting bids, requesting or approving bids, and

[16:36] then following the cost and making sure that uh uh everything by that contractor

[16:42] is done according to NRCS standards and specs with us overseeing and helping you

[16:47] out. The big number is we pay for 75% of the

[16:52] cost. The sponsor has to come up with 25%. As

[16:58] I talked to Cali about this, we prefer cash,

[17:02] but if you don't have cash, you can offset that with inind services. And we

[17:09] can get into the gory details of that, but that just basically means um labor,

[17:15] machinery, uh time by the county can be used by doing the work can be used to

[17:24] offset the cash requirement. We have to agree on what those costs are prior to

[17:33] getting to work. As I told Cali, you know, some guy working a shovel,

[17:39] we're not going to pay him a hundred bucks an hour. That's all there is to

[17:42] it. You know, whatever whatever you would charge for that from a county

[17:46] perspective, that's probably acceptable. And then um after that

[17:54] the only other responsibility that you have after paying the bills we it's a

[17:59] reimburseable program. So you pay the bills we reimbur you submit for

[18:04] reimbursement. We don't give you the cash upfront um to go out and and and

[18:09] and hire these contractors and pay them and everything else. You got to uh um

[18:15] get reimbursed. We are pretty good about getting reimbured within a couple of

[18:19] weeks. So that's no issue. And then after it's all said and done and the

[18:23] work is installed, the sponsor is responsible for the operation and

[18:29] maintenance of the items that we put in. So, if we

[18:35] put in some flood barrier bags to protect a house, there's another event

[18:40] that comes along and damages or moves those

[18:46] blood barrier bags, then the county is responsible to uh operate and maintain

[18:53] those as they were designed to protect that house.

[18:57] And then I get into a lot of details of the damage survey report, priority list,

[19:02] eligibility sort of stuff. You can read through this. Here's a matrix that we

[19:06] have on what's high or low uh uh risk sort of stuff and some other stuff. But

[19:13] that's that's the gist of it um for you guys to consider. The first

[19:19] step again to review is you have to request assistance. And Cali, I think we

[19:23] had you were having a conversation with um Clinton on this. Just to assure you,

[19:29] uh requesting assistance does not commit the county to anything. All it does is

[19:36] initiate NRCS to come out and start working with you and whoever your

[19:41] partners might be to do a damage survey assessment. And that basically is coming

[19:48] up with what are we going to do to protect life and property and how much

[19:52] is it going to cost? And then once we get that done, you guys look it over and

[19:57] if you're okay with it, you sign the damage survey report. We submit that to

[20:02] national headquarters. We get money back from them and then what happens is

[20:09] we uh put together an agreement between NRCS and the county. and it says the

[20:16] county will do this, NRCS will do that, and here's some timelines that we need

[20:22] to meet, and that's basically how the program works. See, Cali, I told you it

[20:28] was simple. >> Okay. Yeah, right, Todd.

[20:32] I know better than this. >> It's it's simpler than a lot of programs

[20:37] you might be involved with. That's for sure.

[20:39] » Yeah, exactly. So just um so the county could send in this letter, get things

[20:48] rolling. That gives us time to work with the conservation district and then if

[20:53] the conservation district decided to be the sponsor, they could do that. Is that

[20:57] correct? Well, technically if the count if the if the county is going to submit

[21:04] and then the conservation district's going to be the sponsor, um

[21:09] realistically we should be getting a request from the conservation district

[21:14] sometime within that 60day time frame. Okay.

[21:18] » Okay. >> Right. I because I I if I I need

[21:24] whoever's going to be the sponsor, they got to ask for they got to ask for help.

[21:29] Well, the elephant in the room here is the 25%.

[21:33] » Yeah, I know. >> That the county is going to have to come

[21:36] up with or the conservation district. Yes, Vicki.

[21:41] » I think another part of the elephant in the room will be

[21:45] the management of that. You're going to have to increase staffing. We don't have

[21:49] existing staffing to be able to manage that. Plus, I think you're going to end

[21:52] up look adding grant management to this piece. So I think that definitely will

[21:59] have to be part of that consideration. >> Not only do you have manage the

[22:03] management process of that. >> So let go

[22:07] » let me back up just a little bit. So there's let's say we go forward with

[22:10] this. Let's say it's a million bucks. Okay. Just a nice easy number to work

[22:15] with. So uh we're going to provide $750,000

[22:20] worth of construction money. Uh and then the county's on the hook for the

[22:25] $250,000. Right. So, that's for the construction

[22:28] money. There's two pots of money. One of them is called FA, financial assistance.

[22:34] That's the construction money. That's that $750,000

[22:38] of federal funds coming in and you're on the hook for $ 250. The other side of

[22:44] that is what's called technical assistance dollars. Hold on.

[22:50] Technical assistance dollars. Those are TA dollars. And that's based on a a

[22:58] a calculation of 15% of the estimated construction cost. So

[23:06] we estimate through the damage survey report that it's going to cost a million

[23:12] bucks to do this all this work that might need to be done in Rio Blanco

[23:16] County. It's Cal TA technical assistance is

[23:21] calculated at 15% of construction costs. So that's $150,000

[23:28] of TA that comes in with the $750,000 of FA of federal dollars. So you we put

[23:38] a portion of that $150,000

[23:43] plus all of the financial assistance the 750

[23:48] we put that into the agreement that the reason I'm telling you this

[23:53] you can use those TA dollars to reimburse employees or or or have us pay

[24:01] for employees administering these contracts. administering this agreement

[24:07] and doing all of the administrative work that needs to be done to implement this

[24:14] project. You can also use those funds to go out and hire an engineering firm to

[24:19] man or a consulting firm to manage this project for you. So, it's not going to

[24:27] be money from a project management standpoint. It's not going to be money

[24:34] out of your pocket because we will reimburse you for those administrative

[24:39] costs at 100% of those costs as long as they're reasonable. Right? So, you can't

[24:47] be charging us 500 bucks an hour from for somebody running a copy machine. You

[24:52] see what I'm saying? So those are the two the two funds that come into this

[24:57] thing is the FA which is the construction which you're on the hook

[25:00] for 25% or incind which can offset that and then

[25:05] also the TA which is the 150 I was talking about. Does that make any sense

[25:09] or is that kind of clear or >> Well, but the other thing Todd, I think

[25:14] you're making it sound like the county has to actually provide the money

[25:19] » and my understanding is the state, we would work with other partners to get

[25:25] that 25%. >> It doesn't have to come out of counties

[25:28] coffers. It can come from the state, the Colorado River District, or others. Is

[25:33] that true? >> That's true. you can work out an

[25:36] agreement and have an agreement with them for them to reimburse you or supply

[25:41] you money. So, that's fine. We're good with that.

[25:45] » And we have time to figure that out once we send this letter, whether it's the

[25:50] county or the district requesting the assistance while you're doing the damage

[25:54] survey report. And then you give us the dollar figure that it would be, we can

[25:59] be working with those other partners. I say we, whether it's county or district

[26:04] to determine if they will pay the other 25%

[26:08] before we ever sign your agreement that then would kick off the 220 days. Is

[26:13] that true? >> That is true. If it that is true to

[26:19] there there's Yeah, I'm just going to say that's true right now. We'll keep it

[26:23] simple. >> Okay.

[26:29] So, I think we as the county need to have this conversation with the

[26:33] conservation district. And the reason I'm saying that, you you know this

[26:37] better than I, but typically across the state, it's the conservation district

[26:43] that does this when NRCS comes in with an EWP. Is that accurate?

[26:49] » Uh, no, it's not. >> Okay.

[26:54] So we go just the most recent history, the East

[26:59] Troublesome Fire down in Grand County. Northern Water was the main sponsor uh

[27:05] above Windy Gap Reservoir and then below Windy Gap, Grand County was the sponsor.

[27:11] So we had two specific sponsors for two specific areas. The Middle Park uh

[27:17] conservation district was heavily involved with that from a landowner

[27:21] outreach situation, but they did not provide uh they were not a sponsor so to

[27:29] speak. Uh they were just supportive of Northern Water and supportive of Grand

[27:34] County. On the Cameron Peak fire, it was city of Gley L and Lmer County that were

[27:41] the two main sponsors for the work that got taken care of off the Cameron Peak

[27:46] fire. Uh Callwood fire, that was Boulder County.

[27:51] » Okay, so I for >> I can go on and on. The one in

[27:55] Glennwood, it was the city of Glenwood, Pine uh Pine Gulch, uh was uh Mesa

[28:02] County, and then we also had Garfield County on that, too. So, it's you that

[28:07] the conservation districts typically have not been involved uh in recent

[28:13] memory going back to when I started working on EWP full-time uh 2015.

[28:22] » Okay. Thank you. So

[28:27] the 25% if uh the county's budget right now is not in

[28:33] very good shape. If we decide that we want to pursue this, can we get the

[28:40] private land owners to kick in the 25% and is that u an option?

[28:48] » You can do that. It is. Yes, it is an option and it is a royal pain

[28:58] » to try and collect it. >> Not not only that, not only that, let me

[29:03] let me we did this on the Spring Creek fire with Warfan County. Uh they they

[29:09] were adamant that they wanted to have the land owners have some skin in the

[29:13] game. And so whenever there was a change order during

[29:19] construction, so we had 100 ft of this, it was going to cost 1,000 bucks to do

[29:24] this, whatever we were doing down there. Now when there was a change order, now

[29:30] we're going to do 125 ft of whatever it was. And that increased the cost. All of

[29:36] a sudden, we got to go through this. The county had to go through this whole

[29:40] process to work with the land owner for the increase in cost for the additional

[29:46] 25 feet and it just turned into a nightmare from an administrative

[29:52] standpoint. It really did. Uh and if you want to take that on and and you think

[29:56] that's worth it, uh go ahead. But you have to get permission from that

[30:01] landowner first and foremost to do the work. And then you're going to have to

[30:06] have that follow-up conversation with them. Okay, now we come out and say this

[30:10] thing's going to cost, you know, $5,000. You're on the hook for 25%. So that's

[30:17] what a,000 bucks, let's say, or 1,250 bucks. You're on the hook for 1,250

[30:24] bucks, landowner, to get this work to protect your property. And you're going

[30:28] to have to have some agreement and some process all set up for them to pay you

[30:33] $1,250. And then like I just said, if it changes

[30:38] all of a sudden now the cost went up to six grand or 7500

[30:42] uh whatever for whatever reason because nothing ever goes in, you know, right as

[30:48] it was designed and there's always a little something going on there. Um then

[30:53] all of a sudden we got to get the landowner permission that they're on the

[30:56] hook for an additional x amount of dollars. So, like I said, in in in in

[31:02] hindsight, I would not recommend doing that unless you are adamant that you

[31:08] need the land owners to chip in on this thing.

[31:12] » Well, it's not necessarily the adamant that they need to chip in. It's where

[31:16] else are we going to get the money? >> Yeah, I understand.

[31:19] » I appreciate your input. >> So, Todd, just one last thing and then

[31:24] we better move on to our other stuff. Um,

[31:28] so that 60 days to get the letter in there is from when?

[31:34] » When you get uh access basically. So when it's safe to go into the area to

[31:44] assess the damages. I'm assuming that's already occurred. I saw some emails

[31:49] going back that that was August 25th. Is that correct?

[31:53] » Yes. So August 25th would put us somewhere in

[31:56] October, right? Say October 24th or whatever the day would be. Yeah. So it's

[32:02] it's based on when access is allowed to get in to do this damage survey

[32:11] assessment. >> Okay.

[32:16] Thank you, sir. Appreciate all the info. I know we will have plenty of other

[32:20] questions, but thank you. You're welcome. So, I sign off right now.

[32:27] » I think you're good to go with that. >> All right, you guys have a great

[32:30] meeting. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you.

[32:32] » All right. Byebye.

[32:36] » So, >> lots of food.

[32:39] » So, you don't want toize this right now?

[32:42] » I don't think we do just yet. I think we have some more conversation of who

[32:46] submits that. >> Okay. Very good.

[32:50] Okay. Good discussion. So, we're going to move on now to business

[32:56] line B. >> Mr. Chair, I would move ratification of

[33:04] contract amendment with Kenneth E. Harrison Family Trust amending the

[33:08] contract to end one month early on September 30th, 2025.

[33:14] » I will second that. So what this is is this this was a uh

[33:21] when we were looking for a u

[33:27] accounting >> finance director

[33:29] » finance director thank you finance director. We there was no place in Mer

[33:34] to live and we were aware of that and when we started uh uh doing

[33:45] applications and stuff, we thought that it would be a uh benefit if we had a

[33:51] house for this person to live in when they got here. We went out on a limb and

[33:57] rented a house to do that. We cannot find a finance director.

[34:04] Um, and so we rented a house and didn't fill it up. Now, we're trying going to

[34:11] end that contract early because we don't nobody's using it. So, we're going to

[34:17] end that contract early. That's what this is about.

[34:22] Um, I'm going to second it. Did I second it?

[34:26] » I think you did. I think we're good to call.

[34:29] » Okay. So, we need to roll call, please. >> I

[34:39] » Okay, let's move on to line item B.

[34:45] Mr. Chair, I would move to ratify um anou with Yampa Valley Community

[34:51] Foundation, an existing 501c3 organization as fiscal agent for the

[34:57] purpose of recovery efforts for the Lee and Elk fires.

[35:01] » I'm going to second that. This is a uh people wanted to start

[35:07] making donations to the victims of the Lee and Elk fire and the county entered

[35:12] into a contract or anou with Yampa Valley Community Foundation to accept

[35:19] all of the money and then go through a process to distribute that money. And we

[35:25] were able to uh put some people on the board that decided where that money

[35:31] goes. And um I think it's going to work out pretty good. It kind of puts our

[35:38] intention was to funnel the money to one place and then distributed instead of

[35:43] having money spread all over the place. Our intention

[35:48] » and I might I would like to because in that contract it says that they will

[35:53] provide us I think it's monthly or quarterly how much they've got.

[35:57] » We need to follow up with that and make sure that we see that. I haven't seen

[36:00] it. You may have. I don't think that uh they have distributed any monies yet

[36:06] » but yes we'll find out follow up with them.

[36:09] » Okay. >> You please call the role.

[36:13] » I

[36:19] » Okay, let's move on to line item C. >> So, Mr. Chair, I would move the um to

[36:25] approve

[36:29] under CRS31-1-902

[36:35] um.51B of whether the certified copy

[36:41] of the resolution of Eastern Rioano County Health Service District Doing

[36:46] Business is Pioneer Medical Center to increase the board from five members to

[36:52] seven members. is a material modification of the district's approved

[36:56] service plan. >> I'll second that.

[37:02] » So, let me explain where the county stands on this and and what our deal is.

[37:08] And I agree with Bobby that that uh when with your comments earlier, the way that

[37:14] that was gone done was was uh for lack of a better word, sloppy.

[37:21] the judge turned it down because of the the

[37:26] statute that they used to do it. She had no authority to do it under that

[37:30] statute. And so she just said she didn't turn it down the the the

[37:36] board number down. She just said I have no

[37:39] authority to do anything and so I'm denying your motion is what she did. So

[37:44] that didn't do anything to uh the the service plan. Then it came to

[37:51] the county and the county uh for some reason didn't they said that it didn't

[37:58] look like it would affect the service plan that they had filed. When a special

[38:03] district is formed, they have to file a service plan with the county

[38:09] and and uh they have to maintain that service plan and the county at that time

[38:15] determined that they that would not affect the service plan. So they didn't

[38:21] respond. Then uh

[38:25] the hospital board then decided to go back

[38:31] well then the hospital board did it through a some other way by changing

[38:36] their bylaws or something like that. And uh so they went to a fiveman board. I

[38:42] don't know that that was ever legally a fiveman board but that's not our issue.

[38:48] The issue now is that they used a statute to go back to a sevenman

[38:54] board. The statute that they used to do that does not give us authority to

[39:01] appoint people. It does not give the hospital district authority to appoint

[39:06] people. It has to go to an election. the statute that they that their lawyer used

[39:13] to go back to a sevenman board, it has to go to either a special election or a

[39:19] regular election. So, we have no the way that the the hospital filed for this. We

[39:26] there's nothing we can do and there's nothing the hospital can do.

[39:31] It has to go to a special election unless they file something different.

[39:39] So that's the story

[39:44] » if I may. >> Yes.

[39:47] » But we're saying we there is no material impacts to go

[39:54] from five to seven. So we are supporting that with this motion. Correct. This

[39:58] motion is saying that they there's this does not affect the service plan that

[40:04] they filed with the county of rec for record and so we don't have a problem

[40:10] with it

[40:15] and I wish it was different but because of the statute that the lawyer

[40:20] used we have nothing we can do our hand are tied.

[40:27] Did I second that? >> You did.

[40:29] » Okay. >> Overton.

[40:31] » I

[40:34] » Okay, let's move on to line item D. >> Mr. Chair, I would move um approval of a

[40:42] renewal of an agree of agreement for services

[40:46] with Redlands Accounting for interim finance director services.

[40:51] » I will second that. Um, as I stated before, we are having a

[40:57] hard time finding a uh finance director and so we contract with uh Lisa, who is

[41:05] the owner of Redlands Accounting to help us get through the these hard times and

[41:09] she's doing a really good job and we need to retain her until we can get this

[41:14] position filled. We do have some uh uh resumes in now and and are going through

[41:22] the process. So hopefully we can get this taken care of, but until

[41:27] then we need to retain Lisa uh Redland services

[41:35] for the interim.

[41:38] » Would you please call the role? >> I

[41:44] » Okay, let's move on to line item B business E.

[41:50] » So Mr. Chair, I would move um to approve the core service plan for the second

[41:56] year of a three-year plan for human services.

[42:00] » I will second that.

[42:05] » I'm going to have to get somebody else to help me out with that. Vicki, would

[42:09] you help me out with line item E, >> which is the services plan for human

[42:17] services? Okay. So that particular plan is something that comes up annually and

[42:22] what that is is what DHS has to do for minimum um DHS contracts. So core

[42:28] services would be like your um child interaction uh therapies um if there's

[42:36] alcohol counseling, if there's um it's it's like when a DHS plan comes about,

[42:43] it's how do you get the family reunited? That's what the poor services plan is

[42:49] and the state gives us an appropriation of money for that and this is the second

[42:54] year of that particular plan. >> Very good.

[43:00] » Would you please call the RO? >> Hi.

[43:03] » Hi. >> Good. Let's move on to line item

[43:07] business F.

[43:13] » Mr. Chair, I would move approval of the 2025 RBC EEO and I can never remember

[43:19] what that means. Mer Airport Cter um Cterfield winter maintenance policy and

[43:25] procedure.

[43:28] » I'll second that. Eric, do you want to explain that a

[43:33] little bit? >> Um yes, sir. So this is uh a general

[43:39] general policy to align how Maker airport manages winter maintenance at

[43:46] the airport. Um the intent of the policy is to clarify the responsibilities

[43:53] between the county and airport oper uh managers snow removal or winter

[43:59] maintenance procedures and uh and methodology. and then also

[44:04] privatelyowned hangers and their responsibility for the exclusive area in

[44:10] front of their hangers. Uh it is also intent is to align with FAA and CD

[44:17] aeronautics guidance on how as sponsors uh as real county as the sponsor of the

[44:23] maker airport manages the airport for winter maintenance along with how the

[44:29] FAA and C. Aeronautics uh use the exclusive area for privately held

[44:35] hangers. The uh definition of exclusive area for

[44:39] privately held hangers is the 50 foot in front of the hanger from the front face

[44:45] of the hanger that ties to the apron or general use area.

[44:53] The uh one of the key aspects of it is that then this will then tie to ground

[44:59] lease expectation or ground lease uh terms and conditions

[45:04] for the hanger.

[45:11] Okay. So, I have some questions and I didn't get to um visit with you about it

[45:18] before. Um and I So, one thing just a a what do

[45:25] you call a formatting question I would have before we totally finalize it. Um

[45:30] but I think if I'm not mistaken, those first three are basically definitions.

[45:35] Right. >> Right.

[45:36] » Okay. I'd put that under a definition's title just so it's clear to somebody.

[45:40] That's a minor detail. Um, under exclusive use,

[45:49] I understand it exactly the way that you said it, but do I see in here anything

[45:53] that says that there is that 50 foot in front of this?

[45:58] It talks about exclusive use areas

[46:04] may include and I would suggest includes but are not limited to the land

[46:09] footprint defined in the private um hangers ground lease. I guess that's

[46:14] where it would be, wouldn't it? It would be in that ground lease is 50 feet.

[46:18] » Is that true? Okay. Is that the way it is in our all of those current ones?

[46:23] uh the um >> not necessarily because any ground lease

[46:29] that was executed prior to 2023 when the FAA defined their or basically

[46:37] uh started enforcing the exclusive uh use area and front hangers would not

[46:43] have uh had that definition as clearly defined okay

[46:46] » in those ground leases. But from moving forward from that point, new adoption of

[46:53] the ground lease. So it will have that 50 exclusive area property.

[46:59] » Okay. So would there be value in actually stating 50 foot in here since

[47:03] some of those don't have it yet? I don't know. I'm just thinking that might be

[47:06] something that would be valuable. >> There's no issue with adding additional

[47:10] clarification in the in the policy. >> Okay.

[47:14] I I think that would help, but I hadn't caught that it would potentially be

[47:18] under the ground leases, but I if we could makes sense to me. Um,

[47:26] and so under number four, county responsibilities,

[47:30] the county um responsible for performing the winter maintenance. So, are we going

[47:35] to do that or is the manager going to do that?

[47:39] » That is up to how we manage the airport. So if

[47:45] » at the larger umbrella we're responsible as airport sponsorship to do airport for

[47:51] winter maintenance at the airports. >> Okay.

[47:54] » How we delegate those responsibilities within

[47:58] uh FBO and airport manager uh contracts is is up to us as long as somebody's

[48:04] covering winter maintenance. And so it's ultimately our responsibility. However,

[48:09] we have the ability to delegate. And I would say the flexibility because there

[48:14] may be a reason why I mean you're just saying the county owns the property.

[48:18] This is what we're going to do but then we have the flexibility to say maybe we

[48:23] decide the road and bridge is going to do it or maybe we decide someone's going

[48:26] to do it or the FBO is going to do it. So

[48:29] » again it's our responsibility but that gives us the flexibility to figure out

[48:33] for what best meets the county purposes. >> Okay. And I missed this when I first

[48:37] read it. My apologies because it does say through its designated airport

[48:41] management. So that covers what my concern was.

[48:45] Okay. Um

[48:53] so in the condo part we're looking at doing on that new one the bigger one

[49:00] doing condos. So when if there becomes an issue

[49:05] or back up so that 50 ft in front of in front of each one of those is that going

[49:10] to be the associations um responsibility that's who we would go

[49:17] to if there's an issue or would we need to go to each one of those four people

[49:20] if it's sold or if it's four different people

[49:24] » in addressing this to the uh the larger hanginger where it's it's four bays uh

[49:31] the owner and and constructor of those hangers has elected to uh pursue doing a

[49:38] condominium association so that they can individually sell off each hanger. with

[49:44] that condominium association there'd be a declaration and in that it would

[49:49] clearly identify that the uh HOA or the however that's built would

[49:57] be the ultimate responsibility with the the ground leases and then that then

[50:03] falls to the individual owners that would then be part of that condominium

[50:07] association in anger

[50:11] ownership. So it being shared property and I by no means am I an attorney. So

[50:17] » I meaning >> but as as I as I understand it

[50:22] if we have issues we would address it with the the HOA or the condominium

[50:26] association >> association

[50:28] » and then condinium association would then need to address it with those

[50:31] individual owners. again in the under the umbrella of keeping it defined

[50:39] on roles and responsibilities yet also leaving flexibility amongst the parties

[50:45] to figure out the best solution for the operation of the airport. Um, at the end

[50:50] of the day, if the condominium association comes back and let's say,

[50:53] for example, us as airport sponsorship, we write into the airport managers

[51:00] contract as a subcontractor to the Rio County, their responsibilities is to do

[51:07] winter maintenance for the airport. Now, it would be well within that airport

[51:12] manager's contract if they want to negotiate with the condominium

[51:16] association to come in and say, "Listen, it makes sense. I'm out here doing snow

[51:21] removal. I know what needs to be done. It makes sense for them to strike up a

[51:26] negotiation on how that's done. In that event, as an airport sponsor for Rio

[51:32] Vaka County, we only care that we're meeting FAA seed obligations and good

[51:37] stewardship of the airport. And so, as long as snow is being removed and that

[51:42] is we understand where those roles and responsibilities fall, then I feel like

[51:48] we're properly covered under both the policy and ground leases and airport

[51:52] management. >> Yep. Okay. Thank you, sir. So that's the

[51:56] only thing I would just say is that one if we just kind of clarify the 50 foot

[52:00] piece is the only thing I would suggest we update that.

[52:04] Thank you.

[52:07] » Okay. Any other discussion?

[52:12] » Just call the roll. >> I

[52:22] wait. >> Okay. Let's go on to uh business line

[52:26] item G.

[52:31] » Um

[52:36] so can we have conversation about this before we do a motion? Do I need to move

[52:42] that we discuss it? How do I do that? You can I believe you would move it,

[52:47] second it, and then it's open for discussion. And then at that point, if

[52:50] you decide you want to table it, you'd make another motion to table.

[52:57] » Think about this. Just second on the record.

[53:06] » So

[53:09] I want to make So Mr. Chair, I would make a motion

[53:17] to approve the EEO RBC Maker Airport Cterfield new building ground lease

[53:24] amendment number one with hangers west with amendments

[53:30] and those amendments. Miss I would like to have discussion first but

[53:37] I think I forgot to bring it in. Okay. Um,

[53:42] » my apologies. I think I forgot to bring >> I'll second that for purpose of

[53:47] discussion. You need to go get it. >> I think I got to run and get it. My

[53:51] apologies, guys. M was must left it sitting there.

[53:54] » Okay. >> Don't run very fast for the record.

[53:58] » We'll be here when you get back.

[54:19] Okay.

[54:59] Okay. So, the concern that I had is just again, and it's not about what's in it.

[55:06] It's just I don't want it to tie us down to our snow removal.

[55:12] and and I get the snow removal that's in this contract is equal to this one we

[55:18] just approved. Right? So my concern is

[55:25] a contract will supersede policy. Is that accurate?

[55:30] » Not necessarily. >> If I don't

[55:33] » policy is what what is your concern with the with the lease?

[55:37] » I just don't want it to nail us down to that. So if later on Eric decided there

[55:42] was a better way or a new way to do it, I don't want it in the lease. So or in

[55:47] the contract. So I'm thinking even if we just said

[55:52] subject to county policy amendments in that section or something like that so

[55:58] that we're not locked in there >> because we are not going to amend that

[56:03] to give them any more property. >> No, it's not property. All I'm talking

[56:07] about is no removal. But the 50 ft is it's kind of the same thing as the other

[56:14] deal. So by saying that you're setting that at 50 feet in the contract, you're

[56:20] saying this that 50 ft is yours. No matter what, that 50 ft is yours. That

[56:23] is in the contract. If we decide, if for some reason Eric's now decided that it's

[56:28] more important for us to do something within that 50t that is the private

[56:34] property of those hanger owners, we can do that.

[56:39] He just can't do less than that. He can't do, you know, I don't feel it. I'm

[56:44] going to just do, you know, >> I I think um the back story

[56:52] set the context of terminology that's in the amendment with hangers west.

[56:57] » Okay. And I and I want to hear that, but just just keep in mind

[57:02] if it's not written, it's not there. >> Yeah. Okay.

[57:07] » I would like to give context on what's why it was written the way it was.

[57:10] » Okay. Thank you. So um prior to Hangers West constructing their hanger which is

[57:16] a 400 by 125 hanger uh which gives them 400 ft of linear linear uh space along

[57:24] the GA ramp with their 50 foot exclusive use. The way the methodology in which

[57:31] the county and of course by proxy the airport manager did snow removal is they

[57:36] would blade all the snow off the edge of the GA ramp to the east. Uh this was

[57:42] concerning for Hangers West when we wrote in that they would be responsible

[57:46] for the winter maintenance for that 50 foot as if we were to stay with that

[57:51] same methodology and the winter maintenance, we would be plowing our

[57:57] snow onto their apron. And it's much the same we experience it in our

[58:01] neighborhoods, right? like the city the city guys they plow across the uh you

[58:07] know through the uh street and then it covers your sidewalk and then you got to

[58:11] go out and shovel it out. That's a that's a pain for a resident.

[58:15] That's a that's a significant task when you have 400 linear feet. And so the

[58:23] going back and forth in that agreement, the hangers west just wanted to make

[58:27] sure that they were clear on they understood that they're responsible for

[58:31] that 50 foot of winter maintenance. They just felt that it needed more definition

[58:36] on methodology on how we do our winter main. So we're not creating a a bigger

[58:42] problem than what they what they have and clarifying, hey, look, if you guys

[58:47] are going to do snow removal into that 50 foot, please do it in a manner that

[58:52] pushes it, you know, towards the north, towards the south, but doesn't create us

[58:56] a a bigger mound of snow than what we have to so that we can properly adhere

[59:01] to our ground lease and make sure we're doing everything.

[59:06] It's hard to write that so that you all understand it and that's what the goal

[59:12] of that technology was in there. >> So help me understand what what just to

[59:20] make it simple. What are what are we going to do with the snow? Are we going

[59:23] to plow it onto the them and they're going to plow it back? Is it is it are

[59:27] we going to plow it off the end? Is there a designated spot for the snow and

[59:31] a and a way to do it or >> so? Uh this is a this is a tough one

[59:38] because given the storm conditions, right?

[59:40] » Yeah. >> Y

[59:42] » um landing for years, culterary aviation for years. We assist with road and

[59:47] bridge on the snow removal out at the airport.

[59:50] » And so we assist with we have a truck that we provide culter aviation with a

[59:55] plow. It's a a larger single axle dump truck. you do quite a bit, but you know,

[1:00:01] when you're talking thousands of feet of asphalt can get

[1:00:05] bogged down. So, we do help with a a snowblower attachment to a front end

[1:00:10] loader. So, they come in, they set that up, and they usually do a border area to

[1:00:16] establish edge of runway, taxi ways, that kind of thing. And then that way

[1:00:19] landing kind of see where he needs to push the snow. I believe right now the

[1:00:25] thinking is is that we move that snow to the north. there's a 200 foot area that

[1:00:31] hasn't been constructed on. Uh we try to maximize the use of that. There is also

[1:00:38] uh towards the very north of it. So that's kind of northeast section at the

[1:00:42] end of uh the uh hangers west. And then there's uh and then there's a section

[1:00:48] where there's no structure or anything at the very north. And so the the

[1:00:52] attempt is push as much as you can to that north to get it removed. work with

[1:00:59] Road and Bridge to get the snow blown away from and then and then that allows

[1:01:04] Hangers West and the other hanger owners to have the best shot of not being over

[1:01:09] overtaken with snow from the large air prints onto their 50 foot exclusive.

[1:01:15] I think a lot of this is figuring out how it works. It's just everybody's, you

[1:01:20] know, Hangers West is going, "If you plow this all over onto us,

[1:01:24] » right, >> we're going to have a big problem." and

[1:01:27] and as airport we're going yeah but you also need to take care of what's going

[1:01:33] on because we got everything else that we gota we got to do out there and so

[1:01:38] » it's the uh the goal is to keep it broad yet

[1:01:42] defined >> and yet and then you know and so if the

[1:01:47] language isn't fitting I mean we could could work on that but that was intently

[1:01:53] » I totally get and understand that intent Yeah, I I think that this is going to be

[1:01:58] a just knowing that the the plow that he's using is a side delivery plow and

[1:02:04] so to move that snow the north is going to require new

[1:02:08] equipment or or not new equipment but different methods and different

[1:02:13] equipment. So, it's going to be a moving till they get it figured out

[1:02:19] » and degree of storm. Right. >> Yes.

[1:02:22] » Exactly. Last year wouldn't have been a problem.

[1:02:24] » Yeah. We get five or six inches. No one's It's probably gonna be gone before

[1:02:27] they actually move. >> Yeah. we get a good two foot and and and

[1:02:33] then another foot on top of that and you know that's when

[1:02:37] it it becomes a logistics uh

[1:02:41] » and so the way that this is written is is uh

[1:02:46] we're going to work together with them or we're going to uh plow our GA ramp

[1:02:54] and then take it all our snow north and they're going to take their snow north

[1:02:58] or How how do you perceive that happening?

[1:03:02] » The the intent the way it was written is that we're we're going to try to get the

[1:03:06] snow and the snow to the north and to the east away from their building,

[1:03:09] » right? >> And then use any means we can to kind of

[1:03:13] keep it from creating a a big issue for them. Uh

[1:03:19] the uh the tough part is is until we really start getting sto uh snowstorms

[1:03:24] in and we have the new hangers, we now have a new facility there. Um there's

[1:03:30] going to be some logistics working out. And then I'm I'm not the one personally

[1:03:35] doing it >> or coordinating it. So, um, that's going

[1:03:40] to be also tough because it's going to be left up to the build side to culture

[1:03:45] aviation and hangers west and everybody else out there. We currently have

[1:03:51] texts where, you know, we've done snow removal for years. the um the small

[1:03:56] aircraft apron even though we call small aircraft apron is

[1:04:02] the u larger

[1:04:07] that I'm I am adding some complexity doing where we're planning our farm and

[1:04:13] I think there's just going to be a lot of things we have to work around and

[1:04:17] change up how we've done it in the past doing as a result of the new

[1:04:21] infrastructure and of course uh the new Yeah. And and and I can see that and and

[1:04:27] snow removal is not cheap. And I can see us getting into a little more expense

[1:04:33] there somewhere. Whether it's where that expense falls, I don't know,

[1:04:38] but it's it's it's concerning.

[1:04:43] » It is. And and until we kind of see it in action, too. I mean, we can plan all

[1:04:49] we want. >> Exactly. But I mean, now we have a 400

[1:04:53] 125 building. We're going to have a we're going to have a farm that we're

[1:04:57] going to have to work around and some new roads and we're kind of shifting up

[1:05:01] how we access the airport. I think those all create new new uh you know, and I

[1:05:10] agree with your approach on it because, you know, we could hire an engineering

[1:05:14] company to engineer the snow. >> Let's not.

[1:05:21] So what if our amendment is as simp

[1:05:34] likely be adjustments. So we need to build something in that gives us that

[1:05:39] latitude. So, kind of towards the end there, um, in partnership, in

[1:05:44] partnership with owners or whatever, however you I know

[1:05:51] with words, but you'll get you'll get it, but in partnership with them and

[1:05:57] subject to county policies, you know, it could be adjusted something

[1:06:03] to that matter. I just think I know you're good enough with words to

[1:06:07] understand that if that makes sense. I would like to be a a big advocate for

[1:06:11] hangers west with this. I I have no objection and I think that there's no

[1:06:16] harm in and are in this out. We are they are at a

[1:06:23] point of wanting to get CO this amendment needs to these signs that they

[1:06:29] get their water meters get their se they move on they've done a substantial

[1:06:34] investment airport. So if I would make a suggest if there's no objection that

[1:06:40] that you guys are able to approve this and then in that we we iron some of

[1:06:47] those those out that way I can then I can let the other pieces together part

[1:06:52] of the body of this one is the creation of the condominium

[1:06:56] the approval of the the additional area for the on-site wastewater treatment

[1:07:01] system. Those are very crucial to them getting their CEO and I want to make

[1:07:05] sure we don't we don't hold them up in the process of trying to cause them some

[1:07:11] hard. >> I agree with you 100%. I'm want to get

[1:07:17] this done also. >> Yeah. So, I would I'd love to to craft

[1:07:21] that and then at least I could uh and I I could work with uh Vicki and Dawn of

[1:07:27] course uh in their make sure we get that ironed out but knowing the main keys in

[1:07:34] this we're okay with and then we kind of figure that language say okay upon

[1:07:39] accept that okay >> so so my thoughts are exactly that I

[1:07:45] don't want to hold it up I I think a motion will say

[1:07:50] approved with this you know minor modification or subject to a

[1:07:56] modification that satisfies those parties and that can happen with

[1:08:02] one conversation done so you move it on but I don't I

[1:08:07] mean you can't sign a contract and then come back and change it without having

[1:08:12] another modification. Well, the way I would recommend is that you actually

[1:08:16] just do agree to that and back the same part.

[1:08:21] They're not going to be able to get their

[1:08:27] I wor

[1:08:31] it doesn't fall in that amendment if this amendment right here doesn't

[1:08:36] suffice. Remember, you still have legal evidence. So either party could say I

[1:08:42] want another amendment to adjust this piece of it. I'm disappointed they're

[1:08:47] not here to have the conversation with I I'm not okay. It should be simple

[1:08:54] or two can they wouldn't be okay with it and

[1:08:59] run it. That's my thought.

[1:09:06] That's a read me the motion how you have the motion please. So it reads currently

[1:09:13] um move to approve the EO RBC field

[1:09:22] LLC with you guys.

[1:09:41] gives you.

[1:09:51] I bet I have

[1:09:56] too much today.

[1:10:05] I don't want to be difficult. I don't think

[1:10:11] I just I'm saying that it could blow it up or

[1:10:22] it would be something need to go through the county.

[1:10:26] They have legal representation.

[1:10:33] whatever you want to do and then

[1:10:38] if we do this the motion is right now it will have it

[1:10:44] will postpone it will it will have to go through the attorneys and come back to

[1:10:49] us. >> Well, they signed the agreement as it

[1:10:53] is. They've already executed the agreement as it is.

[1:10:57] So they think which is typical we as to

[1:11:02] execute and then you guys execute. So by >> so that's news to me but I don't see any

[1:11:08] signature on nobody had told me they actually find it. the uh the attached

[1:11:13] document. So to save on time, we uh we attached the final word document to the

[1:11:19] agenda items and that was done for request for the agenda to give us time

[1:11:25] to review the documentation for today's meeting.

[1:11:28] Then on on Monday of this week, they had sent over the fully executed agreement

[1:11:35] and then we attached that to the u the u the gym items and we said that I gave

[1:11:42] that verification to them that I wanted them execution so get this into a

[1:11:47] circular loop that we signed it and they get back you know and so they clear that

[1:11:54] up. So they send that over Monday.

[1:12:07] » So I guess bottom line is this has been a mess from the getgo. from what I can

[1:12:13] tell they're here the getgo

[1:12:19] from all sides and all angles and I don't know I mean I'm not I do not

[1:12:27] want to hold it up I do not but we've got to find a better way to do

[1:12:33] business is all I'm going to say and so do they is the bottom line I'm not

[1:12:37] saying it's more their fault or our fault it is a mess and I'm being nice

[1:12:44] and I I do not want to hold it up, but we are going to find a better way to do

[1:12:49] business there and get these things done a lot more efficiently, effectively, and

[1:12:54] not put ourselves in this position that I feel like I am right now that I don't

[1:12:58] have a choice. I'm not okay with that point. I don't have a choice. Well, I

[1:13:04] think your option is you can table it and then we can send the amendment back

[1:13:09] to them and say, well, they sign that and then represented so that it's done

[1:13:16] you know that were up that were holded up and is

[1:13:24] pattern that's happened before in the horse and maybe it's better to just draw

[1:13:28] a line and say no this isn't going to proceed forward let's draw line here

[1:13:32] back up would make the whatever it is that would make the commissioners the

[1:13:36] board happy and you know for the betterment for the better business so

[1:13:41] the county. You know, I think it's one of those things. We've done this

[1:13:45] throughout the process. It seems like we set something and we've had to back up.

[1:13:49] They've set something, they've had to back up. You said it's been on both

[1:13:52] sides of the table, but is it better to do that and not end up with what you

[1:13:57] want versus just making the decision now. So,

[1:14:02] » so specific what you're wanting to change is the snow removal step

[1:14:06] » is just to say that it's subject to policy. If policies change in the

[1:14:10] future, the snow removal policies, that's all I'm asking for is that then

[1:14:15] this doesn't hold us our feet doesn't make a mess for you down the road.

[1:14:19] That's I'm just trying to keep it from making a mess for you down the road. And

[1:14:24] maybe it won't, but maybe it will. >> And you feel that we can change the

[1:14:29] policy and this won't affect it. Is that what you were telling me? Well, I think

[1:14:34] when the policy changes, policy can be I'm going to move it from the left to

[1:14:38] the right or I'm going to move it from the right to the left. That's within the

[1:14:40] county's discretion. So, the policies, you can amend your

[1:14:45] policies without affecting it. What sets this amendment is is that that 50 ft is

[1:14:49] your private property. What we do, if we choose to pull out

[1:14:54] more, that's fine, but always we can't plow less than that. how we determine

[1:15:00] how we want to plow it. Just like we have a contract right now with a um NBO

[1:15:07] that is going to do the plowing for us. It's up to us to assign who is going to

[1:15:11] do that. That's our policy. We have that capability.

[1:15:16] » Yeah. Just to just because it bothers me a little bit, I guess it's not the

[1:15:22] private property, it's their lease property.

[1:15:24] » It's their lease property. I'm sorry. It's their their individual respond. I

[1:15:28] mean, it's I guess I'm I'm thinking of that as nobody else can do anything with

[1:15:33] that piece except for them. >> They're responsible for that 50 foot,

[1:15:37] » right? That 50 foot. >> But does that preclude us from plowing

[1:15:42] the snow on it because they're responsible for it?

[1:15:47] We can still plow the snow on it. >> Oh, you No. Yes. Absolutely. So, you're

[1:15:52] saying if we decided Eric wanted to plow up to the door?

[1:15:55] » Yeah. >> Absolutely.

[1:15:59] Let me read the last sentence. See if it makes sense. Snow may be p pushed both

[1:16:05] and it says may be pushed both north and south of the hangers. And in the case of

[1:16:11] the for the south side, snow may be pushed from the access road between the

[1:16:17] hangers to the east over to the main north south access of the road. There's

[1:16:23] something missing in that sentence there where that semicolon is. Um, but I'm

[1:16:28] almost thinking if we just eliminate that last sentence, you've got what you

[1:16:32] need. They have their 50 feet.

[1:16:50] » I don't know guys. >> What if we do this? What if um

[1:16:58] » it's a stupid little >> We have another meeting coming up. We

[1:17:03] probably could do a special meeting just confirm that that that they're okay with

[1:17:08] that agreement. Um,

[1:17:11] I think you could say, how about if you said contingent upon

[1:17:17] that you're going to approve amendment one contingent upon an amendment agreed

[1:17:23] to by the other by Hangers West. If they don't agree to that, then your amendment

[1:17:30] fails to pass. If they agree to it and the attorneys

[1:17:37] worked that out, then it would pass. That makes sense. I don't think you can

[1:17:41] do that. >> There's another option here that we go

[1:17:45] ahead and do this like Callie's talking and then I make a motion that we let

[1:17:50] them have their water so that they can continue on.

[1:17:56] Is that an option? I guess one of the things that um might

[1:18:02] be a suggestion is you guys just strike through the snow all together

[1:18:07] and uh initial executed that would then what is remaining in the

[1:18:13] document is is the key aspects they need for a co and to create the condominium

[1:18:18] association and then we could say uh per additional amendment clarification for

[1:18:26] over

[1:18:31] amendment. >> Yeah. You do a the second amendment.

[1:18:35] » The reason that the clarification is in there is because Angers West was trying

[1:18:41] to make sure that they were protecting that. Hey,

[1:18:45] there's move to the north, south, you know, off of it. Just don't put it

[1:18:51] on our apron and we then we can handle it. So if that needs additional

[1:18:55] clarification, um I believe you can do that if seen

[1:19:00] strike through in in agreements and then we put a note that says the additional

[1:19:06] amendment. >> So I I I see where you're going. I like

[1:19:11] it. So my motion is going to but I don't think there's another amendment. It's a

[1:19:15] matter of our motion and we accept it like I make the motion and either they

[1:19:20] can initial it because they've already signed it and it's a done deal and we've

[1:19:25] signed it and we're done. So I would just move that we strike

[1:19:31] everything after owners and HOA. So it's the third sentence up.

[1:19:38] I don't know if you can if you if you got do you have

[1:19:45] it

[1:19:49] just the last sentence

[1:19:55] is the amendment that I would like on that.

[1:20:01] » Does that make sense to you Doug? >> Yeah it does. I'm just wondering how

[1:20:04] we're doing that. That's an idea. I'm not saying that.

[1:20:10] » I I think it is. I mean, and I'm no attorney either, but I'm going to say

[1:20:15] that we could move it forward that way and see what happens.

[1:20:18] » That That really wasn't where I was going. Procedural. Do we need to deny

[1:20:22] the first motion and make another motion stating what you just said? Or can you

[1:20:27] amend your first motion or >> I can amend the first motion because I

[1:20:31] basically started into that language. >> She did. At the beginning she said that

[1:20:35] she was going to move with amendments and now you guys have decided.

[1:20:41] » So I will move an amendment to be striking the last sentence

[1:20:49] in the winter snow.

[1:20:55] » I'll second that. >> So we need to vote on that.

[1:21:00] » Correct. Will that work?

[1:21:05] » I believe it will. >> Okay.

[1:21:07] » It covers what we need to go. And then if uh from my viewpoint, if they they

[1:21:15] throw a their arms up and they say, "No, not accepted." Well, then then it goes

[1:21:21] to the attorneys and then it's not on our our shoulders that we we held this

[1:21:26] up one more time. But that's that's my personal.

[1:21:31] » Yeah. >> And this isn't a hard I mean it says

[1:21:34] May. So okay, I'm done holding everything up. Sorry.

[1:21:40] » So if So what they're being held up on is the water meters to continue with

[1:21:48] their final. Is that correct? They they have three key factors in this

[1:21:55] amendment that's needed to add to their additional ground.

[1:22:00] Uh one is that they have the additional permission for their on-site wastewater

[1:22:05] system, >> right?

[1:22:08] » That they have the right to create the condominium association.

[1:22:13] And then of course by having that this when this gets signed then they they

[1:22:18] have the right to on-site water system and then they can we can then not hold

[1:22:23] them up with giving the town the letter. It says please issue them the water

[1:22:27] meters and they have the water meters and then they can then send that to the

[1:22:31] building official to get certificate occy and completion of the building and

[1:22:36] then they can be get the cognity. >> Right. So just so I understand when we

[1:22:42] do this that lets them do those three things. Without that this they can't do

[1:22:46] those three things. Right. >> Thank you. Um okay let's uh vote on the

[1:22:55] amendment. I

[1:23:00] » motion passed. Now let's vote on the original motion

[1:23:03] » as amended. >> As amended.

[1:23:07] Over to you. >> Hi.

[1:23:09] » Hi. >> Thank you,

[1:23:13] » Eric. And all I'm sorry to be a pain in the neck, but

[1:23:17] » I do a good job of it. Sorry.

[1:23:23] » Okay, that's

[1:23:25] » stay there for the DLC or the

[1:23:30] » Excuse me. >> I was gonna ask Eric want to stay there

[1:23:33] for the next >> I'm I'm hanging out. Okay. You got line

[1:23:35] item H and M. >> Okay.

[1:23:38] » Yeah. Okay. >> I guess this one's me too.

[1:23:41] » I'm saying you don't get off the hook. >> Go back there and take a nap.

[1:23:46] » Okay. >> After the last one,

[1:23:49] » business line H.

[1:23:54] » So, this is another one of those I'm really not comfortable making a motion

[1:23:57] until we talk about it. Um because I don't understand what it really does.

[1:24:02] Um, I'll move to consider the executing the BLM, Bureau of Land Management

[1:24:09] request for relinquishing of grant COC-19633

[1:24:16] communication site logo. Motion to consider it.

[1:24:22] » Okay, I'll second it for the purpose of discussion.

[1:24:28] » Yes, sir. Okay. So, we have two leased sites on Lobo, which is the mountain

[1:24:35] here to the uh to the west here that we use as communication site. Um we have

[1:24:42] the original one which is is this and it it is uh expiring 2025.

[1:24:48] Um what we did was when we built the new tower communication site, we

[1:24:56] u demoed out the old there was a a shed and a smaller tower site and then what

[1:25:02] we did was we went and we built our new tower site, our new building and that

[1:25:06] lease is is uh through 2045 with BLM. And part of that agreement with BLM is

[1:25:15] that uh once this came up, there would be no renewal of this lease and that we

[1:25:21] would have um no structures or equipment or anything there and they would then

[1:25:28] accept that as as uh as as done with. Um I did a tour site with Katie Day with

[1:25:35] BLM and we went up there and she inspected it said all looks good. there

[1:25:39] isn't an old, you know, rusted old tower there. And then we're just basically

[1:25:45] giving this lease, letting it expire and relinquish it back to BLM.

[1:25:51] They're done at >> So that was contingent on the new lease

[1:25:56] that we turn this one back. >> Yes.

[1:25:59] » Okay. Why is it a grant? >> BLM herbage and land granting.

[1:26:07] um how they administer those type of sites is why it's considered a grant.

[1:26:13] It's not a dollar grant. >> Different different meaning.

[1:26:15] » Okay. >> Thank you.

[1:26:17] » Yeah. Thank you. Because I'm like going, why are we releasing the

[1:26:22] We got a lot of stuff going on up there. So, okay. Thank you.

[1:26:26] » Okay. >> Understand there's two.

[1:26:27] » Any other discussion? >> Learn something new every day.

[1:26:32] » Oh, so let's see. So, I moved consideration of

[1:26:36] » No, I think you have to. >> So, we're gonna

[1:26:40] do >> Let's vote on that because we It's a

[1:26:44] motion, right?

[1:26:47] » Does it not go through? Is the same thing if they open it for discussion and

[1:26:50] then vote on what they discussed. Wouldn't that argue one motion?

[1:26:54] » I don't like that consideration thing, but um Okay. So,

[1:27:05] Okay. So, Mr. Chair, I would move an amendment to my motion.

[1:27:10] » Motion on the table. >> Yes. So, I'm moving an amendment.

[1:27:13] » Go ahead. >> Move an amendment to strike

[1:27:16] consideration

[1:27:20] and replace it with approve

[1:27:24] » exe executing the BLM. >> Good. I'll second that.

[1:27:30] Will that work for you Vicki or good? Okay, let's vote on the amendment.

[1:27:37] » I >> motion passed. Now let's vote on the

[1:27:43] motion.

[1:27:48] » Over 10. >> I

[1:27:51] » Good. Motion pass. Good. You don't get to go anywhere yet.

[1:27:57] Okay, let's move on to line item B I discussion of the direction of the PAL

[1:28:04] park broadband tower.

[1:28:09] Okay, so um I apologize if I go too far back or or too much in into detail. So

[1:28:17] first is definition. Um the pow park tower can be referenced into basically

[1:28:24] it gets referenced with three nimings. One is the pow park tower. The second is

[1:28:31] Schulz tower given the lease agreement or for the tower spacing and then also

[1:28:37] within our network systems we call it county road 127 tower. This tower is um

[1:28:45] was built under a um project that we did within the broadband network to develop

[1:28:53] uh secondary power sites to expand the broadband um network system, the fixed

[1:28:59] wireless system out into Rio County. Uh that was outside of our primary tower

[1:29:05] sites and also outside of our fiber network. This tower is um I think it's

[1:29:11] approximately 40 foot tall. It has what's called a a back hole which means

[1:29:17] it has a satellite dish on it and we call it radio backing but it has a dish

[1:29:22] on it and it receives uh a pointto-point communication from logo tower site and

[1:29:30] then from there it has two sectors. uh these are radios that are on top of the

[1:29:35] tower and they provide wireless internet to people within line of sight of that

[1:29:42] that tower. So then they have a radio on their house and these access points then

[1:29:48] distribute that network the the frequencies to do Wi-Fi to those houses.

[1:29:54] Um the site also because it does not have utility power meaning which you

[1:29:59] know there's no power lines to that tower. It has a solar s uh power system

[1:30:04] to it. And so that amounts to uh two sections of solar panels. Those tied to

[1:30:12] um a main control system that then manages the two battery banks and the

[1:30:20] recharging of those battery banks and the power. This power is then utilized

[1:30:25] to power the equipment that is needed for the access points in the back. Also,

[1:30:31] you open a secondary cabinet there. What is called POE, so power readther

[1:30:38] and there's also some additional um inversions for because the the power

[1:30:44] coming off the solar is DC. So, there's some equipment in there.

[1:30:49] We have about 24 subscribers that was on this tower prior to the Lee and Elk

[1:30:56] fire. Um the uh the subscribers are both on the the two different sectors.

[1:31:03] we uh kind of going back to the date. I think it was about

[1:31:08] I don't have um I think it was probably about that later part of the week of

[1:31:15] August 7th that we saw the net where those radios go down and then it was the

[1:31:21] week of August 11th that we confirmed through photos because we still could

[1:31:26] not go up to the site and actually see but we used a um spotting scope and

[1:31:32] could see that the the radios had experienced damage on the tower site.

[1:31:38] Um, we weren't able to actually go up to the site until the week of, I believe,

[1:31:43] August 18th. We went up, we did the inspection. Essentially, the steel part

[1:31:49] of the tower is good. the tower, its platform, the mounting brackets for the

[1:31:54] uh for the uh solar panels, the cabinets for the batteries, the cabinets for the

[1:32:00] equipment are all in in good shape and do not need to be replaced. However,

[1:32:06] everything else inside or both the solar power and and the radio equipment is

[1:32:12] have been burned and melted. And of course, even if it doesn't look like it,

[1:32:17] you're not sure quite what's going on. Uh we reached out immediately to uh thin

[1:32:23] air communications which is our provider of the cambium so the radio side of it

[1:32:28] and uh thin air solutions which were the solar side of it or estimates. It took

[1:32:34] them a little while to get those estimates to us about about a week and a

[1:32:39] half two weeks. Um and so we've now received those. The overall repair

[1:32:46] summary for that is it's about 20 their estimate as $29,76123

[1:32:55] for the repair of the solar system, the solar power system repair.

[1:33:01] And I I apologize. Castle Rock Microwave is the ones I don't know if I them.

[1:33:08] Castle Rock is the site for the radio equipment and they've given us an

[1:33:12] estimate quote of $65,52.73

[1:33:17] to repair the radio equipment side. Um they're expecting a lead time on the

[1:33:24] equipments of between 4 to 8 weeks and then after that they uh there's a lead

[1:33:31] time of deployment of 8 to nine weeks from hey we got equipment we're now

[1:33:37] ready for a team to go up and deploy it. Uh we now have it up and deployed. Now

[1:33:42] we have it back and and working and now we have uh internet being provided to

[1:33:48] our subscriber.

[1:33:55] » So the total on that do you have the total

[1:33:58] » about 95 roughly? >> That's okay. 95.

[1:34:02] » Yeah about 90 94. Yeah $95,000 total repair. And that's that's assuming

[1:34:09] that's no contingency. and we get deciding we're getting it out in our

[1:34:13] case.

[1:34:18] » So, excuse me. Sorry. >> Um,

[1:34:24] » do Okay, so 24 people that were using it, they've been down for at least a

[1:34:28] month, right? >> Right.

[1:34:30] » So, do we know what they're doing in the meantime for

[1:34:35] » or for internet? >> Okay. Okay. So, I guess I would I I've

[1:34:42] heard from a few of them and I know some of them want it back up and going. Given

[1:34:48] that cost and given what technology is available today, I think

[1:34:55] we need to have a conversation with more of them. So, what if we did a I don't

[1:35:02] know if it's a workg group or a hearing or whatever to hear from those 24

[1:35:08] people, you know, kind of what we could just have a conversation. I don't I want

[1:35:13] to just have a conversation about what what the options are if we showed them

[1:35:17] different options and then what would work best for them. We'll never satisfy

[1:35:21] everybody. We know that. But what would work best for most people as well as the

[1:35:26] county taxpayers or covering it. Does that make any sense?

[1:35:32] » Well, I like the idea of of letting them come in and and voice their opinion. Um,

[1:35:37] it gives us a uh line in the sand whether they they have an opportunity to

[1:35:43] come in. They may not. If they don't, then they've had their opportunity. If

[1:35:48] they do, then we can >> evaluate their conversation and and uh

[1:35:53] move on. Where you at? I think that uh I you know I'm in the

[1:36:00] support of the board um I think um this is a complex issue and so understanding

[1:36:07] where they're at because the last thing we would want of course is to put

[1:36:12] resources and and money into repairing the site if they've already found

[1:36:15] alternatives and they experience managing the

[1:36:18] broadband. Uh we get we get calls if there's disruptions of 10 minutes. So

[1:36:25] there's there's a pretty low threshold of of um of expectations for us

[1:36:32] maintaining that network. And so uh this is a complicated this is not something

[1:36:37] we'd ever thought, you know, and so I think having them come in and voice and

[1:36:41] seeing where are they at. I mean, there's probably a number of them that

[1:36:45] just, you know, there's many options or especially with low orbiting satellite

[1:36:50] internet that didn't exist when the tower was constructed and put in place.

[1:36:55] Um, that's just becoming more and more of a better solution than than fixed

[1:37:00] wireless, especially given solar power. Um, and so they might have already said,

[1:37:06] well, you know, this is I was on the fence anyways because I needed better

[1:37:09] internet and this was the one that kicked me over. So of those 24 core

[1:37:13] subscribers, there might be a certain number that has already moved on and I

[1:37:17] think that is good that's good data for us to know and and would help on

[1:37:22] decision of where we want to go. >> And I I don't always understand this. So

[1:37:29] are they all county customers or do they go through

[1:37:35] » Zimmeron? Does that is that an option? >> Yeah. So um when discussing network and

[1:37:43] and then of course internet service providers

[1:37:46] uh the network is is always us. We're we're the one providing the connection

[1:37:51] managing of that for the network and then however they can choose to go

[1:37:56] through real broadband as the internet service provider or Simron majority of

[1:38:02] these customers are Simron's customers and so um they they go through and they

[1:38:09] you know and then we we collect wholesale on management.

[1:38:13] » So we probably need to have Simmer on as part of that conversation as well.

[1:38:16] » Yeah, they would be invited for sure. Yeah, I guess that's where I

[1:38:20] » was notified of the outage. >> Yeah. So, they were they were notified

[1:38:25] immediately. Um, this being such a new aspect, you know, we we were very honest

[1:38:32] with someone and said, "Listen, um, uh, the tower's down. We know it experienced

[1:38:38] damage. We knew it was due to fire." what that extent was, you know, for a

[1:38:43] while. I mean, when we got there, some of the equipment was still on and and so

[1:38:48] it was like, well, how much damage is there? We didn't know. And so, until we

[1:38:52] got there and it got saved and then we got it in and we said, okay, now we

[1:38:55] going to do reach out to our partners and figure out how much this event costs

[1:39:00] and how much needs to be redone. We've notified them, but we've also not had

[1:39:04] many answers for them until we've had this conversation. And of course,

[1:39:09] there's also some complexity with our insuranceances and and FEMA response and

[1:39:16] you know, you guys been in the meat of that. And so there's those those aspects

[1:39:20] too of it. And and so we we've really not had a lot of information to give

[1:39:25] them because we >> we didn't have.

[1:39:29] So, I think this conversation leads to a much larger conversation and

[1:39:34] I'm going to try and explain what I'm talking about is when the county decided

[1:39:40] to uh do broadband within the county, it was a good deal because we were one of

[1:39:48] the first counties in the United States to do it and we did a pretty good job of

[1:39:51] it. Um, but we use these radio towers to do that. And at that time there was

[1:40:00] no other technology to do it. Had the technology

[1:40:04] that we have today with the low orbiting satellites been available then we would

[1:40:09] have never done it that way because it doesn't make sense to put that much

[1:40:14] money into a system to give somebody internet that

[1:40:21] they could get way cheaper. the county essentially uh used grants

[1:40:28] and stuff to get internet to people in remote areas that cost thousands of

[1:40:33] dollars and we would have never done that had we knew known what was

[1:40:38] available today. So where I'm going with that is because of the technology that's

[1:40:46] available today I'm not sure that it is in our best interest to keep

[1:40:53] the rest of our towers up. I think that we need to have a work

[1:40:59] session to discuss this with the public and figure out what our what our uh most

[1:41:07] economical way is to get down the road. And and and I'm not talking about I'm

[1:41:14] talking about the whole county. I don't think that that uh

[1:41:20] it behooves the uh county to provide services for a very few in the future

[1:41:27] that cost thousands of dollars when they can get it for hundreds of dollars

[1:41:32] themselves. So, I'd like to

[1:41:37] get a a work session figured out that we can discuss this with the public and get

[1:41:44] a direction for Eric to move on.

[1:41:50] Where's that, Eric? Where are you at with that idea?

[1:41:53] » I would appreciate that. Um, we have a lot of day-to-day operational decisions

[1:42:00] that I have to make for the team and and having a pathway for board on how we we

[1:42:08] manage this and and how we inform our subscribers uh would help in us in

[1:42:13] building in the efficiencies because I mean technolog is moving and and demands

[1:42:20] on on internet by our subscribers is getting more and more expansive and and

[1:42:27] you know the tough part is is um within the the fiber it's we have a much more

[1:42:33] option array that's uh a lot easier to deploy and and you know much better

[1:42:39] return on investment for for us in the broadband but wireless is is a tough one

[1:42:45] and then you have this new emerging or not new but you know that the emerging

[1:42:51] accessibility to the low orbiting satellite network systems that didn't

[1:42:56] exist when we first deployed the X wireless is I full support of that

[1:43:02] » and it's my understanding that the fiber that we're using now they in the future

[1:43:08] there is nothing out there that anybody can think of at this date that's any

[1:43:13] better. So the fiber in the future we can't see an end to it. There might be

[1:43:19] someday but right now we can't see that. >> Yeah. In telecommunications, fiber is

[1:43:25] king. Uh even when you're deploying a fixed wireless system,

[1:43:31] you start with fiber because that's how you're able to increase that trunk line

[1:43:36] and then you know uh for the foreseeable future when you have that connection and

[1:43:42] we tried we tried a number of different ideas to get fiber at every address in

[1:43:48] Rio Blanca County. We tried it in our CPF grant option that was well within

[1:43:53] that grant to to make that lofty goal of getting fiber to every address knowing

[1:43:58] that that's that's the ultimate old standard for real WER County that we

[1:44:03] want we'd love to achieve. We again did a a valid attempt in the bead given all

[1:44:10] the many stipulations they had to try to expand that that our fiber network

[1:44:14] knowing that that's the ultimate um it's not without trying and exploring many

[1:44:19] ideas have we not tried to get fiber out. we're just in a very um challenging

[1:44:26] geographical area that that makes those kind of

[1:44:29] things and that's also partly into why it's wireless is so difficult because

[1:44:34] without line of sight you don't have that

[1:44:36] » and and we just need to recognize that Gre Blanco County has been a leader in

[1:44:41] this and we just need to keep thinking forward. Yes, Reggie.

[1:44:46] » I was just going to mention that same thing about going after the grants that

[1:44:48] we did to try to try and increase the the fibers of the home footprint in both

[1:44:54] communities, both Maker and Rangely. That doesn't mean that it, you know,

[1:44:58] another grant may present itself that says, you know, you can, you know, it'll

[1:45:03] now be feasible for us to push that fiber out further. Even if I chose at my

[1:45:08] house to go to um >> Starlink,

[1:45:13] » Starlink, I always forget. I always find I know what it is. But anyways, um if I

[1:45:18] chose to do that at my own personal residence and then they end up running

[1:45:22] Viber or there's an opportunity that fiber is going to come right by my house

[1:45:25] through the power line through ground, whatever that is, it would still be

[1:45:31] better at this point for me to say, hey, I can switch off that and then go on

[1:45:34] this. You know, it those funding decisions come up as technology of

[1:45:39] course changes and increases, but like he said, fiber is the gold standard. So,

[1:45:44] » well, I did just final comment, we'll move on.

[1:45:48] » If in this it it makes sense to me that if

[1:45:52] we don't have to spend thousands of dollars on radios

[1:45:56] to provide one person that we would have more money to expand our fiber,

[1:46:04] we could use the money more wisely. Anyway, anything else? Anybody have any

[1:46:09] discussion on that? Okay. and let's move on.

[1:46:14] Are you finished? >> Yes, sir.

[1:46:17] » Thank you. >> Thank you.

[1:46:19] » Thank you, Eric. >> Let's move on to line item business J.

[1:46:28] » So, Mr. Chair, I would move approval of a letter or ratification of a letter of

[1:46:35] support for the Northwest Colorado Outdoors

[1:46:39] um 2025 regional partnership, we call it RPI implementation grant application.

[1:46:47] » I will second that. So that is um

[1:46:53] regional outdoor partnership um is a effort I guess I would call it

[1:47:00] that the state has is pushing. They created a regional partnership

[1:47:05] initiative state level program very similar to the

[1:47:10] Colorado water plan and then they are in that they have identified certain air

[1:47:17] all areas grouped them into regionals regions and they're calling regional

[1:47:23] partnership initiatives and

[1:47:27] this is um some people look at it as 100% recreation

[1:47:33] Um our take on it when you when they came and presented to us um is it's

[1:47:40] about conservation, recreation, and he said keeping agriculture on the

[1:47:47] ground. Um and I reference that because I've als I haven't read it every word of

[1:47:53] it, but I am told that agriculture is included in the re the statewide report

[1:47:59] 27 times. So they do think that it's a value. Um so long story short,

[1:48:06] there was an effort started. It wasn't have been very locally controlled. So we

[1:48:11] requested that it come back to the local level. The county and our county and

[1:48:16] Moffett County are in the same region. Um, so we have uh AGNC, Associated

[1:48:23] Governments of Northwest Colorado is um the fiscal agent on that and we are in

[1:48:30] the process of getting ready to start doing public meetings to verify what

[1:48:35] people really want to do in our area so that we can qualify for the $50 million

[1:48:42] in Go funds that could help us do projects in this area. So, this letter

[1:48:51] was looking at next year's funds was quite challenging to get that right

[1:48:58] because we haven't while there's a lot of there has been some work done that

[1:49:05] has not been guided much by locals and then we have a number of local plans

[1:49:10] that are out there. Um but we tried to word it so that it was fairly

[1:49:17] um open and that we okay we think that

[1:49:22] people will support this but if they don't we would look at these other

[1:49:26] options too. So, this was just a letter um that we wrote in support of that

[1:49:33] effort to try to get money for next year and it made it through the first round

[1:49:40] and now we're being asked to come and do a presentation the end of September. So,

[1:49:46] long story for short line. Yeah. Okay. >> Okay.

[1:49:53] You want to do roll call, please? Hi. Hi.

[1:49:59] Okay, let's move on to line item business K.

[1:50:04] » I move the ratification of a letter for public public comments to the Colorado

[1:50:09] Energy Office regarding the evolution um evaluation and assessment of local

[1:50:15] government processes for the sighting of commercial clean energy and energy

[1:50:20] transmission project projects draft report.

[1:50:26] And Reese did this. >> Second.

[1:50:31] » Well, I want to second that motion.

[1:50:36] » So, do you want to >> One of you guys needs to talk about this

[1:50:40] because I'm >> so um

[1:50:45] it's basically for us it's solar energy, but they're also looking at windmills

[1:50:51] and so forth. Um, one of the things I'm trying to think of a conversation that I

[1:50:57] had with the Delta County Commissioner. Um,

[1:51:02] one of the com I think one of the specific comments that Reese made in

[1:51:05] there was in regards to the cumulative impacts

[1:51:10] of these. So that if there's one, you know, if there's one that's a 100 acres

[1:51:14] or one that's 500 acres is one thing, but by the time you add 10 of those,

[1:51:19] that's a very strong cumulative impact, which of course oil and gas has to deal

[1:51:24] with um and address. And so we want to make sure that that's addressed and we

[1:51:29] want to make sure that local control is still in control is the big message.

[1:51:36] And yes, Reese wrote the letter for us and submitted that in conversations with

[1:51:42] the Delta County Commissioner that's very involved in this and CCI.

[1:51:46] » So, just to give you an overview, we are not in support of that. I'm going to

[1:51:51] read you a one thing that Reese put in this letter. It says this report is

[1:51:57] being utilized in conjunction with the state of Colorado's energy goals and it

[1:52:02] is placing a burden of the delivery on the rural communities like Rio Blanco

[1:52:07] County without giving the local governments the authority to manage

[1:52:11] resources appropriately. So, it's stuff that is being pushed down to us and

[1:52:15] we're we're trying to push back a little bit.

[1:52:21] » Anything else? Okay.

[1:52:25] Would you roll? I

[1:52:32] » um let's move on to line item business. I

[1:52:37] or L.

[1:52:40] » Okay. So, I'll make the motion to approve. We're going to hear about it.

[1:52:47] Um the bid award and contract for the 2025 Rio Blanco County pavement marking

[1:52:53] project to Branson Traffic Control Inc. Doing business is Branson Road Works.

[1:53:00] » I'll second that for the purpose of discussion.

[1:53:03] » You want me to talk about it a little? >> Please. uh very low bid

[1:53:09] this year, but I my due diligence they appear to be a very reputable company

[1:53:15] and they're out of Durango. They're a long ways away,

[1:53:19] » but uh they were hungry. They just lost a big job.

[1:53:26] uh and uh in lie of uh laying off their people, they're trying to do whatever

[1:53:34] they can to keep their people working. But anyway, it uh we saved at least

[1:53:42] $40,000 on this on this bid. So it uh

[1:53:48] » What's your amount? >> Yeah. What's the amount?

[1:53:52] » 107. >> How many biders did you have?

[1:53:55] » Three. What was the high one?

[1:53:59] » 159 believe it was

[1:54:05] » and you did your due diligence on the company.

[1:54:09] Good. >> Yeah, they appear to be very good

[1:54:12] people. >> Good

[1:54:17] question. >> Okay. And so we're paving where? Or not

[1:54:21] paving but striking. Uh well can't remember all the roads but I was going

[1:54:27] to do all of county road 8 but we're going to have to skip about four five

[1:54:31] miles probably in there that where we've got flooding issues.

[1:54:35] » No sense >> driving it and having to then scrape it

[1:54:39] off. Uh uh

[1:54:44] and road 4 and the landill road are all the new uh

[1:54:51] tipsal projects this year. >> And then I was going to do uh 15

[1:54:59] uh 10 up the river

[1:55:04] 7 7 6 and 39.

[1:55:09] Much of 10 is paved. >> Uh it's about a little over two miles, I

[1:55:14] think. >> Yeah. Most of that is dirt.

[1:55:18] » Yeah. From uh road 8 over to >> Yeah.

[1:55:22] » 17 is paved and then where it goes on up.

[1:55:28] » Okay.

[1:55:33] » Thank you. Good job. >> Glad you got them. Would you please call

[1:55:38] the RO?

[1:55:42] » Good. >> Let's move on. Business line item M.

[1:55:48] » Come on up.

[1:55:54] » Okay. Uh we just got these. So I'd like to show you guys these. This is

[1:56:01] um brought in um 826. This is a just one of the examples of

[1:56:08] why we would like to see a magnet out at the landfill that hooks to the

[1:56:14] track. This is a bunch of I beams and metal that was brought in on a roll out.

[1:56:21] Do the guys have to get out and manually and get a hold of this stuff and get it

[1:56:27] moved over or to the basin

[1:56:32] fan over there where the magnet we can keep people out of there. They just go

[1:56:37] over there, hook on to it, energize the magnet, and then uh

[1:56:44] get it over to the recycle stuff and it's got little claws. Um right now

[1:56:49] we're we're in the process of u processing quite a bit of the concrete

[1:56:54] that's been brought to us from Chevron >> um over it down and we just last week we

[1:57:00] worked a half a day and tore the magnetic belt again because some of the

[1:57:05] rebars get through um that magnetic part of the shredder was supposed to it does

[1:57:12] help but it doesn't get um and then we like to use it to build

[1:57:18] roads out there. Um, for the winter for the budence,

[1:57:24] uh, you end up with chunks of rebar and I've got them on my phone. Sorry, we

[1:57:30] just I just got the pictures yesterday. Little chunks of rebar that'll get

[1:57:34] through there and that's hard on the tires or the uh rolloffs stuff to go

[1:57:39] into the landfill. But it's a we can get we've got the concrete up there. We're

[1:57:44] processing it. We've got all the equipment to process it. This would just

[1:57:47] take one more step to clean it up and then it goes into the recycle bin which

[1:57:51] uh we get paid for that to haul off >> and then I we can get a lot more of

[1:57:56] these I beams stuff like that out of there and a lot safer. That's the big

[1:58:00] thing is the safety for the for the employees out there

[1:58:05] is a is a big part of is it's a quick connect for the track home. Um, when I

[1:58:11] worked with CAT to talk and make sure that this one was compatible. They have

[1:58:15] a head that goes right on it. Quick connect with just two hydraulic hoses to

[1:58:20] connect to it. So, it's much safer. They that could be done on the pad, not down

[1:58:25] in the itself. >> So, would you turn the uh one on the the

[1:58:32] shredder recycler off, not use it? Um, I think I would hate to turn it off

[1:58:39] completely, but we would probably go ahead and leave it on and pull what we

[1:58:44] can off of it and then and then um but my hopes would be that we could get more

[1:58:50] of it out of there before it even gets to the shred.

[1:58:53] » So, what's the issue with the tearing the belt? And I thought this was

[1:58:56] supposed to help though you wouldn't tear the belt. So,

[1:59:00] if you're going to continue using it, you're going to continue tearing the

[1:59:03] belt. Uh, well, the the hopes is we we get it out of there before it even gets

[1:59:08] to the shrimp is what I'm hoping is we can we can sort

[1:59:13] it a lot better before it even gets into the shredder. So, we're not putting the

[1:59:16] rebar the pieces with the rebar into the shredder as fast.

[1:59:25] And then once we do, we can sip through it because the um the magnet has claws

[1:59:31] on it that we literally drag through and sift through it with the magnet on and

[1:59:36] it pulls out. >> And I would I could make a couple of

[1:59:41] comments on it. Um one thing, by removing the big pieces of metal, of

[1:59:45] course, um you're going to save the solid waste landfill that spacing. So

[1:59:50] number one, you're pulling it out of there to preserve your landfill. Then

[1:59:53] number two, it can go in the bin and then we actually receive revenue for

[1:59:58] that those big purchases. The third part to keep in mind is this is an enterprise

[2:00:02] fund. Um it is an enterprise fund that um so this purchase would not affect any

[2:00:08] other portion of your budget or your balance sheet. It is solely within

[2:00:13] enterprise. Um, as we have more metal and things

[2:00:19] that will be coming in from the fires, only anticipate that this would help

[2:00:26] sort that to keep the landfill from filling up in the wrong places.

[2:00:31] And this I I was going to use the the funds that were already budgeted for

[2:00:35] 2025, do the concrete for the uh gin shed,

[2:00:40] some stuff like that that we're going to look at redoing the scale houses next

[2:00:43] year anyway. So that we do have a budget item that we this

[2:00:52] have any questions? >> No, I just don't see it on my it's not

[2:00:56] coming up. So how much are we talking? Um, I have the quote here. U, it was the

[2:01:02] quote is $58,930. Um, and then there is a side note at the

[2:01:08] bottom that you're going to have some hoses and some adapters. U anticipated,

[2:01:14] so just right around the 61,000.

[2:01:22] » Okay. >> And that is in stock, so it's a fairly

[2:01:25] quick turn around. Okay. and they come and install it kind of deal or it's just

[2:01:31] a piece of >> hook right up to our current meter

[2:01:37] with some hose just some hydraulic that's how it was controlled it off.

[2:01:44] » Excuse me. >> Okay, Mr. Chair, I would move um

[2:01:49] approving the purchase um to purchase a magnet for the

[2:01:54] excavator at Solid Waste Landfill. >> I'll second.

[2:02:03] » I

[2:02:07] thank you. >> Thank you, sir.

[2:02:11] » Okay, we're down to resolutions. We have none. public hearings. We have none.

[2:02:16] Let's go to

[2:02:20] update on the current disaster fire situation. Who's going to do that?

[2:02:27] » I guess

[2:02:32] and Cali I, you know, will the water. >> So, just to kind of give everyone an

[2:02:37] idea because I have no idea how many meetings we've had. Um, August is a

[2:02:42] blur. September's coming in to be a blur. Um but

[2:02:47] the we've had the state team here um Colorado department

[2:02:53] public DHSM and I get >> public safety

[2:02:58] » public safety and emergency management here off and on. Uh

[2:03:03] the state is helping us to move through getting a possible FEMA public

[2:03:08] assistance declaration, but that isn't for the homes or individual owners.

[2:03:14] Wouldn't affect a necessarily um what that would be is for

[2:03:21] public infrastructure, utility companies, county roads, bridges, the

[2:03:26] old Maker Landville. Um there's just there's a lot of damage that has been

[2:03:33] done because of both fires and then the floods that came in the rapid flooding

[2:03:40] that we had right after that. The um so you know they're helping us to move that

[2:03:44] through that. The actual event closed as of I heard two different dates. Danielle

[2:03:50] um who I had I'm sorry I had to pop out of the meeting a couple of times to meet

[2:03:54] with those folks. um said it ended August 30th, although uh Jim had told us

[2:04:00] that it was August 28th, I think, something like that.

[2:04:05] » Whatever they qualify that closing date of the fire. So when the Lee fire was

[2:04:10] officially closed, that is what we're looking at for a FEMA

[2:04:15] declaration. So any resulting floods after that fact may or may not be

[2:04:20] covered, probably not. Um, but that flooding that was in that time period up

[2:04:25] to the fires will possibly be included. We're challenging trying to get the two

[2:04:30] fires linked. Right now they're two separate fires. That will be critical to

[2:04:34] try and get that infrastructure, you know, combined as one incident. Um,

[2:04:39] right now they are two separate incidences. Both two separate incidents

[2:04:43] have fire and they have flood. So working through all that has been

[2:04:47] critical. Um >> and excuse me, but the advantage to

[2:04:51] getting them combined is so that we get our numbers up to qualify.

[2:04:56] » Yes, >> thank you.

[2:04:58] » Um yes, that's a critical part to it. Um we did an infrastructure tour yesterday

[2:05:04] and with and divided up into two teams because we have significant issues on

[2:05:09] both sides of the fence. One is infrastructure, one is how your group is

[2:05:14] water >> waterhed and natural resources. wershed

[2:05:17] natur >> um and I can speak to the infrastructure

[2:05:21] tour uh we were very um I don't want to say it was good news um but the

[2:05:27] infrastructure damage is significantly more than what the HSCM was anticipating

[2:05:34] and they said typically they go out on an event and people are saying oh it's

[2:05:37] really bad it's really bad it's really bad and they get into it and they say

[2:05:40] it's really not that bad um you know this doesn't look like it would qualify

[2:05:43] this doesn't look like it would qualify we started did the tour out up um by

[2:05:48] Lake Avery and then came down went out 13 33 builds out a old landfill and then

[2:05:56] down five then came back into town and of the sites that they were looking at

[2:06:01] um the overall consensus of the their entire team was this is a lot more than

[2:06:05] what they were anticipating they were which is that a good thing no because I

[2:06:10] would rather us not need a dime of FEMA assistance. Um but right now it that's

[2:06:14] what we're we're trying to go for. Um that application process has to be is a

[2:06:20] quick turnaround and so I've not focused at all on the budget on letters on doing

[2:06:26] anything but trying and I'll be working with Antina and Thad

[2:06:31] as well as Callie's team to try and get things documented to make our case as

[2:06:36] presentable. The process will be we'll submit our application. The state will

[2:06:41] then take that. They have till September 30th, 28th to 30th to submit that to the

[2:06:46] governor's desk. The governor then will have to choose whether to submit it or

[2:06:50] not to the president. Um upon submitting it to the president, then the president

[2:06:55] can have any length of time to approve whether they want to go through FEM or

[2:06:58] not. So now is a critical time period for us to make sure that we put the most

[2:07:03] pressing issues and case of why we need this assistance to the to the governor

[2:07:10] and ultimately for him to be able to forward to the president.

[2:07:14] So it's been fast and furious and constant moving. I thought it would be

[2:07:17] done when the fires were over. That is not the case. I have put in just as many

[2:07:21] hours since August 30. Um so it is definitely getting a little

[2:07:26] wearing. Yeah. So anyhow, that's where we're at

[2:07:30] with that. At least my side. So all different accounting for their structure

[2:07:34] or their work. >> So on the um natural resources and

[2:07:39] watershed side of things. Um so the the ranchers and so forth that

[2:07:45] way. Well, let's see. Go back up. So there are two surveys that are out that

[2:07:48] I want to encourage anybody and everybody to fill out. If you have any

[2:07:51] kind of business, need to fill out the economic survey. Um, and both of them

[2:07:57] are on the county's website. The other one is the agriculture survey because it

[2:08:02] covers things that other business don't have like cows and fences. Um, and we

[2:08:08] need to get those completed and there's just not that many people that are

[2:08:12] filling those out. But in order to know what kind of assistance we need from the

[2:08:17] outside whether it's from for individuals or for the whole, we have to

[2:08:24] know what they need. Um so um we need those filled out then from and so the

[2:08:32] the economic development side we've asked Caitlyn

[2:08:37] um Cook thank you and Carly >> Thompson thank you um from the town to

[2:08:47] help us um with that side of it since that's really not a huge expertise that

[2:08:52] I have anyway um and they're doing a good job. And then um

[2:08:59] they're going to be um they are reaching out to Sasha and others as needed to to

[2:09:06] move forward with that. On the A side of it, um the conservation district and Ree

[2:09:13] are really leading that effort. Um working with NRCS and FSA. So, long

[2:09:19] story short, if agriculture producers have been impacted, they need to reach

[2:09:24] out to FSA, ASAP. Get all my acronyms in order,

[2:09:29] » farm service agency, as soon as possible.

[2:09:33] Um, and then, um, because those are going to be individual basis. Um,

[2:09:40] then the tour wise and watershed wise, um, water quality is a big concern. Um,

[2:09:49] and of course what it will do to the river. So ex one example is down river

[2:09:53] where that's come across and went into the river. There's a pretty big fan

[2:09:58] that's come out there which is going to drive that river right straight at the

[2:10:01] bank. And I'm wondering about that bridge that it comes into and it's going

[2:10:05] to drive it right to the bridge. So that's infrastructure issues, water

[2:10:09] quality issues. Definitely the reservoir and Rangely are already seeing those

[2:10:14] impacts. I'm told that even the town of Rangley's um water treatment facility

[2:10:20] just smells like you just dumped water on a campfire. It and they're

[2:10:24] struggling. And um so that group that was there, we also had

[2:10:32] CDPHE, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment was one of the

[2:10:36] guys that was on that tour to get them engaged and help Rangely because Rangely

[2:10:41] going to have to have some potential assistance there. So there will be that

[2:10:46] piece, but not only the reservoir um the Kenny reservoir, but then there's the

[2:10:51] issue with the um >> Lake Avery and so and I don't know CPW

[2:10:59] staff that was with us really didn't know the answer there

[2:11:04] because that's going to shed a lot of that debris off into that reservoir.

[2:11:10] Um, so are they going to close it off and try to hold it and then some of the

[2:11:17] state guys talking about potentially trying to dredge some of that out or do

[2:11:22] they leave it open and let it go but it'll go to the river directly. So

[2:11:28] there's pros and cons both ways. Probably the biggest thing is with the

[2:11:33] EWP money from NRCS that we were just talking about and they will work with

[2:11:39] the state as well is doing a lot of catch ponds and stuff in each one of

[2:11:44] those drainages particularly above Lake Avery. That looked like a good

[2:11:48] possibility there. I don't know how you build catch ponds in the White River to

[2:11:53] keep it from going to the um to the one down there. So anyway, water quality

[2:11:58] » trailer >> at trailer draw. There you go. Um, but

[2:12:02] but I think that there is potential for doing some of that kind of stuff in in

[2:12:06] Pian Creek and stuff and just trying to keep it from getting down Pants Creek

[2:12:11] that goes down yonder. So, >> and the ditches

[2:12:14] » and the ditches. Oh my gosh, those guys that have been hit time and time again

[2:12:18] because we did see multiple homes or outfits, I guess I would say. One home

[2:12:23] that was darn close to um actually right up against it but didn't hurt it, I

[2:12:28] don't think. um but coming out of those draws and

[2:12:34] filled up trails, filled up barns, um ditches, fields and so forth that way.

[2:12:39] So there's a lot of and the worst problem is it's just you clean it up

[2:12:44] this time and it's going to be there again. Um so that's the conversation to

[2:12:48] be had. Just one more point on that. Um so I reached out one of the things that

[2:12:52] our say DHSN said we got to find out if there's any historical

[2:12:57] um things that have been destroyed. That's a whole another piece to this um

[2:13:02] you know is that aspect of were there um you know old schools that were damaged

[2:13:08] or anything. And so I reached out to Teresa Reed Ruckman and bless her heart

[2:13:12] she jumped right on it and initially got me and I will be submitting that. I

[2:13:17] talked to Jim uh from the the Rigus the HT or the Herald Times published an

[2:13:23] article back in 2023 about the the big where they branded the hill, you know,

[2:13:30] the RH the giant that we've all driven by a million times.

[2:13:34] » It was not on the historical register, but since it was actually created

[2:13:39] um in when was it? It was I'll have to look back in the article and see when

[2:13:45] that was done. It was long long time ago.

[2:13:48] » Yeah. I mean, it actually would qualify had we registered it. Um, however, that

[2:13:53] doesn't mean they won't get necessarily get funding for it, but it does draw the

[2:13:57] attention and to make the case that we had significant resources that were

[2:14:00] damaged in this fire. Um, so that is a a critical piece. the um the house that

[2:14:07] was destroyed um on you know the um the ball house I think is what what they

[2:14:15] actually called it that was actually slated to get registered on the

[2:14:18] historical registry. >> Oh really?

[2:14:20] » The reason why is the house and the barns were the barns were for sure

[2:14:26] constructed in the early 1900s and would have qualified for that. um and the

[2:14:32] house they weren't quite sure on but the actual that whole homestead was a

[2:14:35] homestead original homestead. So um you know those are records that we will

[2:14:40] include in our story and that was the thing that DHSM said some of this will

[2:14:44] or will not qualify to help us push us into that FEMA decoration but it dang

[2:14:49] sure is something a story that we need to tell and preserve for history. Um so

[2:14:54] anyhow it's just there is any thread that you can think that you pull on

[2:14:58] there's more to it. So, you know, it's just those two pieces. I thought Terry

[2:15:02] will be putting together something as far as the economic impacts of the

[2:15:06] museum has suffered. Um, and then she's continuing to try and find little niches

[2:15:11] that says, you know, could there have been a wiki up somewhere? Could the, you

[2:15:15] know, what have we truly lost in these fires?

[2:15:22] » And that's it. >> Good. Okay.

[2:15:27] So, let's go to road bridge update.

[2:15:35] » Uh, first of all, I'd like to make a motion for have a motion request for

[2:15:41] some adding legislation. [Laughter]

[2:15:46] » Don't blame you.

[2:15:51] » Either that or not to have to sit there so long. Right.

[2:15:55] of all the meetings I've been to, this is one of the longest it was. So, u

[2:16:02] rangely this past month's haul been hauling a

[2:16:06] lot of gravel pit run on I go through all of the roads if you would like. We

[2:16:12] did some spot graveling on 116 and 73 and uh they were doing quite a bit of

[2:16:20] work on 116 kind of reshaping the the road a little in places some of the big

[2:16:26] curbial corners. Uh they did cover cleaning and cattle guard cleaning on

[2:16:34] 109. Uh hauling reject material on 25

[2:16:41] reshaping the road and filling in wash outs and that kind of thing. a lot of

[2:16:47] grading uh border graders uh 116 27 73 109 89 99

[2:16:57] uh they've been doing a lot of gravel pit work in the redwash

[2:17:03] grizzly 4 in material there and uh they had some flood

[2:17:12] uh clean up on 102 And we actually early in the month we

[2:17:20] send some guys down uh and

[2:17:25] trucks to help them haul ground and anyway that's they've been busy and

[2:17:32] for Maker uh primarily firefighting uh we and

[2:17:41] all the I don't know how

[2:17:46] weeks it was but recently then they've been cleaning up uh flood and debris and

[2:17:53] yesterday finally kind of got done with the their cleanup on five. So the next

[2:18:02] rain uh we could be right back down there. Like you say, this is this is

[2:18:07] going to be uh all through next year at least. I think for

[2:18:11] » they say a minimum of minimum of three years is what they were telling us

[2:18:15] yesterday. >> Yeah. They they may get a little bit of

[2:18:18] growth next year, but it's not going to >> not going to save us much for Yeah. So

[2:18:24] that's going to be an ongoing problem for us for road bridge guys. Uh we did

[2:18:33] have to replace a a culbert that actually barked clear through a plastic

[2:18:39] co well HDP >> on county road 5. And um

[2:18:46] and then tomorrow we're going to get some asphalt in there and patch that.

[2:18:55] and a couple other spots that mark you some patching.

[2:18:58] » Was there just one of those >> that burnt like that?

[2:19:01] » Yes. >> Or that melted or whatever.

[2:19:02] » Only one that that melted all the way through, but there was another one that

[2:19:06] just melted on the end. So, we're >> um we're going to be able to splice up.

[2:19:12] » Okay. >> And uh I've had uh I had the uh chips

[2:19:20] project. We got started up on eight and then the fire came along and they it

[2:19:26] took me 10 days to just get permission for them to go ahead and get their

[2:19:30] equipment out. >> Uh so anyway, they're supposed to be

[2:19:33] they were supposed to be back today. >> Okay.

[2:19:36] » But maybe tomorrow hopefully. I had her trouble.

[2:19:41] Uh so we got to finish eight uh uh box seal and then we'll come down and do the

[2:19:50] Mesa road four and the landfill hook. Um

[2:19:59] I hope soon as they get here we can get that done in a week or thereabouts.

[2:20:05] And I got uh the striping obviously that you approved. Um

[2:20:13] I don't know what we may try to start the the week of the

[2:20:19] 22nd. I'm trying to push them back just a little bit so we have plenty of time

[2:20:25] get everything done chip seal and pod coat and then wait a

[2:20:32] few days. left the pod. Sure.

[2:20:37] And then uh I also got uh they should be they fired up their

[2:20:45] crushing equipment up at Sleepycat yesterday.

[2:20:50] You should be making gravel there right away. And gonna try to get

[2:20:58] hauling hauling a lot of it out as we make it so that we because we don't have

[2:21:05] much room to pile it through. So if we can haul it out and use and they they

[2:21:10] need to do a lot of work up on 17 >> because

[2:21:20] yes

[2:21:24] you you have questions. If not I'll be done. I would just like to say real

[2:21:30] quick, um, you know, the road and bridge crew, the entire crew, including Solid

[2:21:35] Waste Landfill, Bobby was out there through the whole time and and they just

[2:21:40] have worked extremely extremely hard. I think I know everybody has in that that

[2:21:46] respect, but the work and the things, you know, just trying we still have

[2:21:50] roads that we still have to uncover and get to, and that was something that we

[2:21:53] saw on the tour. There are roads that we cannot yet do.

[2:21:56] » We've got three roads that are still closed. 22 76 and 127

[2:22:02] they're have totally impassive >> and it's not just like one thing I mean

[2:22:07] it's not like okay there's just a little section of road I mean it is just

[2:22:11] sections of road at a time and you know danger of falling trees and so it's just

[2:22:18] you know to have to crystal was another one that has been out and just making

[2:22:22] maps gising um >> what is it called she was putting them

[2:22:26] on each little thing that had damage. She was mapping and saying, "Okay,

[2:22:30] here's >> way marks." And she's Yeah. She's

[2:22:32] mapping out all of the onyx. >> Onyx is what

[2:22:36] » signing that was burned up. Just And then we have to do warning signs, but

[2:22:41] then if you're in a blood visit, could be a flash blood area. You've got to be

[2:22:44] aware. Um >> if you're in Rio Blanco County, you

[2:22:48] could be in a flooded area. >> If you look across in Rio Blanco.

[2:22:52] » Yep. So anyways, I just wanted to give a shout out especially like I said Crystal

[2:22:56] and all those guys have just been working extremely extremely hard.

[2:23:01] » They did a good job. They did a great job

[2:23:03] » and they're going to keep doing a good job and it ain't over yet.

[2:23:08] » Thank you guys. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. Thank you.

[2:23:15] » Good. So let's move on to uh county attorney is not here.

[2:23:22] and the county administrator. >> Uh so just my only update for you is in

[2:23:27] between fire stuff, recovery stuff. Um I've done some work on the budget. We

[2:23:34] continue to have some budget scrubs. We're making headway on shortages. Um

[2:23:40] you know, we are by no means done with with there's been no decision. I want to

[2:23:45] make sure everyone knows there has no been no decision on personnel benefits.

[2:23:49] that's still in the conversation phase and

[2:23:55] the cuts that we've done so far to budgets and people have said that it's

[2:24:01] been one of those things even including the commissioner's budget. It's where

[2:24:04] can we cut it's going to hurt. I understand that. Let's figure out where

[2:24:08] we can to try and preserve what we can preserve. And so by

[2:24:15] no means are the conversations finished. they're just now starting that this

[2:24:19] would have had August gone the way that I would have liked it to have gone, we

[2:24:23] would have those conversations in August. That didn't happen. God had a

[2:24:27] different plan for us. Um but as we continued, we've done the majority of

[2:24:34] first round scrubs. Kelly and I have three more to do on Thursday. Um no one

[2:24:39] has left the budget scrubs happy. Um, I'm going to say they've all seen the

[2:24:45] potential and said, "Okay, if I give up this, does that help for the greater

[2:24:49] good? Can we get to hear from there?" So, we'll continue to do that. And um,

[2:24:56] you know, so in between doing that, that's where I'm at on that. I have not

[2:25:00] had a chance to work on anything else. I understand we have some uh constituents

[2:25:05] uh regarding Coline Park trying to schedule a uh meeting um for them to

[2:25:11] voice their concerns. I had not had that done. Gosh,

[2:25:16] I had a situation where Mark had asked me about a public road uh situation that

[2:25:21] he had. Um, and I'm just I'm begging that just give me a few more weeks

[2:25:28] because this is the critical nature of this beast is I've got skin that's gap

[2:25:32] by uh September 25th. So everything else is kind of back burnered until I can get

[2:25:39] to that point and then we'll move forward with the rest of budget and all

[2:25:42] that fun stuff. >> Good. Thank you.

[2:25:47] any administrator or I mean uh county any commissioner updates.

[2:25:54] » Um first of all just thank you Vicki because I know how much time, energy and

[2:26:00] lack of sleep you are dealing with. So thank you.

[2:26:06] Are we not working? >> Oh it's still going. I was just

[2:26:09] sleeping. I just want to know where you guys are so I can go back into transpose

[2:26:12] later. >> Oh, you're all good. Yeah.

[2:26:16] » Um, let's see. So, it seems like it's been forever since we've had a regular

[2:26:22] commissioner meeting. So, I don't I just went back through my calendar really

[2:26:25] quick. Um, this fire recovery and the tour, we kind of covered that. I think

[2:26:31] since the last meeting, I've met with Hickinlooper and Bennett, senators,

[2:26:37] um, primarily to ask for support to do joining these fires. But we've now

[2:26:42] learned that that's done at the state level instead of at the federal level.

[2:26:46] So we do need to, as you had said, reach out to our state senator and

[2:26:52] representative um to see if they can help us there. Um

[2:26:58] went to a CCI meeting. Um the tour was in regards to solar. Um was good. Delta

[2:27:05] County has a really cool solar project there. if you want to if they can be

[2:27:10] cool. I think that one is it's on irrigated egg and they are they have

[2:27:15] seated it and they're sprinkling most of it and it's growing pretty good feed for

[2:27:20] sheep um underneath it. But the one thing that he they suggested that we

[2:27:25] keep in mind should we ever have one that in your list of things that you're

[2:27:30] requiring is that they're um when that equipment comes in

[2:27:38] that it's point of sale. So you get the taxes on when those are

[2:27:45] delivered. I know we may have a different way of doing it, but that was

[2:27:48] Delta said that was critical because they missed that step. And so those

[2:27:52] millions and millions and millions of dollars that were delivered to

[2:27:55] California, they got nothing on it. >> We're covered there because we haven't

[2:28:01] used >> use tax piece. But um and then um let's

[2:28:05] see, there was a second thing that he mentioned.

[2:28:09] Oh, I can't remember. So I did make a note of it. So if we ever go down that

[2:28:13] road, hopefully I can find it. Um, I've met with Carrie Brennan is going to be

[2:28:19] our facilitator for the regional partnership initiative. I The plan is we

[2:28:25] will have a meeting, a public meeting before the end of this month. I don't

[2:28:29] know the exact date, but we will have our first meeting and get that rolling

[2:28:33] before the end of the month. Um,

[2:28:38] we've had a number of news folks interested in the county. Um Reese is

[2:28:45] covering a lot of that. Um which has been and I thought he's done a nice job.

[2:28:49] I did he and I did the seven news um one I think it was not nine.

[2:28:57] » And um then the other thing more recent went to club 20 last week Friday and

[2:29:03] Saturday. Um I think was one of the better meetings they've had in a while.

[2:29:09] Um Barb um Kirk Meyer uh who is a joint budget committee member at the state

[2:29:16] level out of Weld County um has announced this week that she's going to

[2:29:22] run for governor and we heard her speak on budget stuff and um she's pretty much

[2:29:28] a nononsense get her done but a very ambitious lady

[2:29:32] and so I'm looking forward to learning more about her. um comes from a dairy

[2:29:37] farm, has owned a flower shop, has been a county commissioner, has now been a

[2:29:43] senator, but also on the joint budget committee. I think she's got a good set

[2:29:48] of credentials behind her. So, I'm pretty excited about her. Wasn't so

[2:29:52] excited about the attorney general's presentation.

[2:29:55] Um and then we also heard from the common sense institute. Has anybody I

[2:30:01] was not aware of them. I will be sending out um they have done the research on

[2:30:06] what the WOF program has actually cost Colorado and so that's but they're

[2:30:12] they're digging into that kind of stuff and oil and gas and all the Oh, and by

[2:30:17] the way, I've been asking the question, how many staff FTEEs have been added in

[2:30:24] this to our state government since this governor took office?

[2:30:31] » 7,000 Yeah. >> Now that includes the colleges, but

[2:30:35] that's 7,000 people. And we wonder why the state is broke.

[2:30:41] » Yeah. Didn't they use the mandatory layoffs just recently?

[2:30:45] » Had a hiring freeze. >> Had a hiring freezes and they didn't do

[2:30:48] that until after the general session or the special session.

[2:30:53] » Um the other thing, um BLM did a presentation at lunch was the keynote

[2:31:00] speaker. um was um I will think of her name because she

[2:31:07] wrote our land use plan. She wrote it for Karen. No, it wasn't Karen. It was

[2:31:12] the one that actually wrote it and then Karen reviewed it for us.

[2:31:16] » I am really disgusted that I forgot her name. Had a really good conversation

[2:31:20] with her. Her she is working is the senior policy advisor to the BLM

[2:31:28] director. So, she's doing some really cool stuff right now on um all the

[2:31:34] different things that basically support our land use plan. So, some really good

[2:31:40] stuff there. So, that I'll quit with that.

[2:31:46] » Okay. I went to a AGNC meeting in Rifle. It was a economic

[2:31:51] summit >> and it was it was uh

[2:31:57] eye opening. They they talked about workforce development and generational

[2:32:01] strategy and they're they're uh talked about the the youth today not uh there's

[2:32:08] not as much uh demand for four-year degrees. You get

[2:32:13] a four-year degree and then you never use it. There's a So, they suggested

[2:32:17] that a lot of kids go out and figure out what they want to do and and get a

[2:32:20] career before they spend the money and time on a four-year degree.

[2:32:25] Um, what else did they talk about?

[2:32:30] Networking, collaboration,

[2:32:34] economics in in this end of the county or this end of the state are not doing

[2:32:40] real well. All the counties are are hurting.

[2:32:44] A lot of that's due to our our governor and what he's doing to us with our oil

[2:32:50] and gas. And then uh

[2:32:55] I met with the land owner to discuss the rightaway stuff for County Road 77

[2:33:01] bridge. Kind of trying to get that smoothed out. Uh we had a fire

[2:33:06] cooperators meeting. We're trying to get all the meetings tied up with a lot of

[2:33:10] this fire stuff. Met with the sheriff's office, the road bridge fleet weedenfest

[2:33:17] on budget scrubs. um more fire recovery meetings.

[2:33:26] I met with an shoots to uh for their planning and progress on the county road

[2:33:32] 77 bridge. We're going to eventually get that done.

[2:33:37] Um meant to approve a second Oh, we did a a meeting yesterday from the

[2:33:45] second house on a parcel of land. uh spent uh time working on the budget

[2:33:51] and trying to figure out where we're going to get money for benefits and

[2:33:56] wages. That's all I've done.

[2:34:02] » I might just at the CCI meeting I was at, they went around the table and had

[2:34:07] kind of a round table of all the counties and every county of course

[2:34:12] budget was top of their priority. Um, I would say the majority of them have done

[2:34:18] hiring freezes. Mesa County is doing they they had some creative language for

[2:34:24] it, but basically they did volunteer retirement upfront and then their second

[2:34:30] round was a little more encouraging than just volunteer.

[2:34:34] I don't remember what they called it. It was kind of interesting, but everybody

[2:34:38] is having the same issue.

[2:34:43] Yeah, I've talked to some other comm benefits and and wages as we are. It's

[2:34:48] uh and and uh the the horrible part about

[2:34:52] that is it doesn't look better next year.

[2:34:56] Um,

September 10 - Rio Blanco County Board of County Commissioners Meeting

Transcript