November 15, 2023 — Boulder Junction Access District Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:02] Okay, we are recording 405 Pm. Today is Wednesday, November fifteenth, 2023. Welcome to the Boulder Junction Access District Joint Commission's meeting. I will call Roll. Susan Prince here. Jennifer Schreiber. Rebecca du Michelle. here. Brian, cook here. Kevin Matt here. and Robin Ronan here. and then I'll turn the meeting over to our chair for procedural items. Okay, thank you. We have approval of the September twentieth, 2023 meeting minutes.

[1:00] I know that I wasn't present, and it looked like a few of us weren't so. I will recuse myself. Does somebody else want to make a motion? II can make a motion, if no one else has questions or corrections about any discussion. Yeah. I'll second on vary. All right. Any opposed. It passes okay. Next on the agenda. We have our elections for chair and vice chair. Is that something we want to take up now. not having a quorum on the Tdm. So you can still go through the process for parking. Yeah, we cannot do a formal vote for Tdm, but I just wanna know, Kevin, you've been our our chair for some time now, which we definitely appreciate your end. Your seat has expired, but we didn't have anybody to fill it, so we're glad that you're willing to continue showing up

[2:06] in your seat, but we'll leave it up to the Parking Commissioners to determine if we, whether you want to give Kevin a little bit of a brief and shuffle some responsibilities. I think that's an invitation to to step down from my my chair role, which is great. Is there any interest in in taking on these positions of chair and vice chair for the coming year? Or would anyone care to nominate another Commissioner. I'm happy to be vice Chair. Thank you, Robin Ryan. I believe you're currently vice chair. So the the natural progression would be to to elevate.

[3:01] elevate you or I'm happy to be chair. I think it's okay. Yeah, she she's concerned about it. But oh, that's that's great. If, unless Rebecca would like to be that. Okay, I'm seeing a head shake, I'm happy to be. I'm happy to be chair. Okay. I will make a motion to nominate Ryan as chair and Robin as vice chair for the coming year of the Bjat Parking Commission. I second it. Thank you all in favor. Okay passes unanimously. Congratulations at Ryan. Would you like to take over on the meeting? Absolutely fantastic. I think after the elections we'll come back, I guess if Jennifer shows up, if we want to proceed with Tdm.

[4:10] and then we looks like that. We are are looking for approval on the meeting dates for 2,024. Did everybody have a chance to look at the dates proposed in the packet? Looks like there are a couple of suggested changes from Staff. Thank you. We'll get the pen in just a minute. Any concerns about those dates. or I can read them off. If that's helpful. I'm just gonna check the March date that it doesn't correspond to just spring break.

[5:11] March. Looks like, it's okay. Yeah. These are good by me. Okay, is, is there a requirement for a vote on this, Chris? Or you just want thumbs up to those. Those dates are okay, including the suggested changes. There doesn't have to be a formal vote, but if we get a nod of of everyone, then we will consider that unanimous vote. Yes. item, kangaroo. We're kidding. I think I saw 5 thumbs ups. Thank you. Okay. Great. I think that moves us to

[6:01] matters. Oh, sorry public participation. Do we have any members of the public here. I'm not seeing any members of the public here for open comment. Okay. oops, we haven't. So that's Lisa alright. Great. So I think then, we can move to questions about. Oh, sorry transit transport connections, transit connections. Update. Yeah, we have will shepherd here from Bpc, here to share some updates transportation options at Boulder Junction. Thanks, Chris. Nice to see some familiar faces congratulations, Ryan. I wasn't sure this is in all ages meeting, but I do have a 2 year old, so if we are involved in some subsequent times, and I'm on toddler duty, I'll be happy. Let him chime in for what it's worth as a resident of Boulder Junction.

[7:09] If if I'm I guess, would it? Would it please the group for me to share my screen. I've got a few graphics that I can talk through. So I will get that going here in just a moment. So it looks like that's been disabled by the host. So if if maybe, Robin, if that's you, or we will take care brochure to begin with. and you should be able to share your screen. Now, if you would like. Let's do that. Okay, got it so I can everyone see we've got Btc. Chamber City Logos at the top, with a few modes on the side. That's good. So I just wanted to start by sharing this and I'll back up just a step. So I'm covering for Karen Warming House to give essentially the the active mobility update for Boulder Junction. We've got things about an event recap and some other updates for next year. That'll be coming in January when Karen is present. So I just wanna make sure that everyone on the call, was aware of the the benefits that we actively offer and promote to everyone who lives and or works in Boulder Junction.

[8:26] So we've we've modified this slightly from what we've been promoting over the last few years to include QR. Codes, to really activate and encourage the transition to my ride to be fully clear with everyone. This is a system wide update from Rtd, so every rider in the entire metro area, it's about a 60 mile radius will be going through this conversion currently and through the end of the year the first major adjustments will be on the business side through Eco passes, and then it'll be through the neighborhood side, through Eco. Passes as well, and there has been my ride digital ticketing available for a while, so Rtd. Often phrases. This is reintroducing my ride, but it is a comprehensive systematic change, not just on the customer, or rather the rider's side, but also on the back end.

[9:19] The original Eco pass. Cards were through a different vendor, which is the transitioning to a a much larger platform through the just ride accounts, both for digital eco passes on mobile phones and consistent sorry upon tax cards that will still be available just through a new process. In addition to my ride. Our local nonprofit car share provides a free application and usage credit to every resident and employee. There's one vehicle here in Boulder Junction currently with plans to add more, and I'll speak to that on our recap in our info sheet below

[10:01] Boulder B cycle also offers a substantial benefit where there is essentially free, unlimited rides as long as bikes are returned within an hour. So, together with a program of my way to go, and some new changes of the guaranteed ride home program. We're trying to offer a comprehensive toolkit to the Boulder Junction area to give a bit of a overview on year to year comparisons specifically with B cycle. We've seen a a consistent increase across a few different categories, such as those free codes being redeemed, which is approximately a hundred $50 value per year. The trips initiated that was originally only from one station. which had between 12 and 15 operable docks, right by the RTD. Transit station for lack of a better word. Near the Height hotel that increased considerably from 2,022 to just this year of October of of almost 5,000 additional trips. We're expecting this to continue to increase. So really happy with the usage. In Boulder Junction for individual bike rides, as well as the infrastructural side, where a new station has been

[11:23] added within what I would call the core area of Boulder Junction at approximately 30, fourth and Meredith place. If anyone is familiar with Splunk and the little corridor where Twitter formally was, there have been the second generation, docs added, which enables B cycle to more nimbly expand and contract because a single dock can be added at a time. Riders are still able to use the physical card. If there's any sort of equity or usability issue with activating their digital controls for releasing the bike and tracking the ride, there is still a contact to pay on those contact, to release the bike on those new stations.

[12:09] So we're happy to see that. And it's just about 2 blocks from where I live, and I've noticed there's a small bodega, which will be a a beer, wine and sort of cheese and snack shop that's opening in the next few weeks. It's the owners of the Jungle drink bar on West Pearl, who are kind of expanding in the Boulder Junction, so that I think that should substantially increase visibility and ridership for B cycle. I've spoken with Kevin Krauss and Brian from their operations team, and it does seem like the current assignment of docs and bike balancing is meeting demand. I also noticed there's typically one or 2 bikes at that merited station when I go by. So we're pretty pleased with the B cycle. Uptake and I will assume that everyone knows. But just to reiterate B. Cycle has converted to an entire electric fleet with a pedal assist model. That's a very gentle introduction to electric bike riding. So we find that it's it's a really great way for folks to experience bicycle commuting with electric assist if they're not used to that. From prior travel.

[13:15] Hello, car! Let's see. Maybe we'll pause here for a minute for Rebecca, if there's a question specifically to B cycle. Yeah, so this is anecdotal, and it's just coming from other social networks like nuts. Or but there have been complaints about not being able to find B cycles in other parts of town. Do you have any any feedback on balancing across it right because it it's nice to obviously be able to start your trip. But you also need to be able to get home absolutely. II would say that that is a a very real situation that B cycle deals with, particularly with student population, specifically with Williams village being something on the order of 1212 times more popular. I helped be cycle do balancing in recent years. I'm not currently directly involved, so I don't want to speak too much on their part, but I know that they have increased staff for both maintenance and deployment to keep operable bikes out in the field.

[14:11] and I honestly have a sense. It's an overwhelming demand based on their capacity to balance a sort of inconsistent demand system. that's probably the best way that I could say it from the Btc. Lens when we are advocating for B cycle as an active mobility mode. most of us, and certainly myself, always encourage usage of the app to check bicycle availability before the trip begins and destination parking availability. So it's a bit of technology training and reminding for folks that have used B cycle in the past, that they have had exponential growth consistently, each year being much more busy than the prior year. So II can respect the comment, Rebecca, and

[15:02] I think it's something that they're continuing to work on. No, that's great. Can you tell me real quick? Do you know, did they still offer the public like incentives for actually balancing for them. I do remember that when I was with car share so there was pips which were positive impact points, and I don't think there is any current. At least my account doesn't get any credit when I help balance things out. But for everyone's contacts. There was essentially a gamification where, if you were to return a bike to an empty station, you'd get some points, and you could redeem those points for gift cards at whole foods, and I haven't thought to remind that. But I'll bring that up to Kevin the next time you talk crowd sourcing, balancing honestly with the Cu campus. They they tried to deploy this pips, gamification there, and I don't think there was enough traction to actually make a difference. So I could see it be more localized, and we are looking at a partnership with commutify which Karen can speak more to in January and second quarter meetings, where that that could be an option

[16:07] in the interest of time. I'll go ahead and move forward with a recap for car share. So this is round trip car sharing just to make sure that everyone's clear. It's almost the opposite of the cycle where you do need to return to the same place rather than going to one direction. So the codes redeemed, or promo codes for the free application as well as $75. Credit for usage Colorado. Cartier, lacking some staff capacity, actually saw less codes redeemed this year compared to last year, although there were slightly more trips taken and an increase in miles driven at first. That concerned me. Because sort of the notion is that we're not driving as much in that. I realize that there's essentially less people taking more trips. and this vehicle has has been serving as something of their their mountain car. So currently there is a prius hybrid with snow tires and ski racks that serves at the Boulder depot. Sorry at the depot square garage

[17:09] for all of Boulder Junction. So it's essentially one car that is supporting this system for thousands of people within the local area. I was not able to get a geographic sense, for how many members live within the Boulder Junction district just due to privacy. But all 25 of these codes being redeemed this year, would be qualified residents who are applicable to those discounts, be it affordable housing or market rates. Some of the things that are exciting for car share coming forward, and Boulder Junction is a rapidly expanding area. I know a few of you are present at our electrify October event, and could almost hear and see the construction underway. So there are mixed use, commercial, affordable and market rate housing being built and hammered right now today, and once a garage is available there will be additional electric vehicles by directional charging.

[18:05] So that'll expand this plug in hybrid to all electric vehicles, one of which will likely have that same mountain capacity. So if people want to do a long range trip to go ski or mountain bike. They'll be able to do that without burning any gas. For lime. I really commend Robert Perry and his team for their data collection. They have excellent resources. We can see the Boulder Junction riders which would essentially be the amount of people who initiated a trip in Boulder Junction, during 2,022 there was a geofence, so these riders could not proceed with assist, for really legally, in the system beyond 20 Ninth 28 Street. And so within 10 months of 2,000 of this year, they've achieved almost that same amount and expect that to continue into the 7 and 8,000 range

[19:02] for individuals who are choosing a lime scooter as a mode of travel to at least depart Boulder Junction. The amount of trips across all devices was seem to increase a bit year over year. But again, I think these numbers are very impressive, considering that the city wide deployment is relatively recent compared to 2,022, where they were one of the only micro mobility solutions in Boulder Junction. So we really appreciate that I've been quite keen on dedicated parking, because we've heard that as potential concern from residents. And so Robert is I won't say assured, but indicated that additional lime groves where there is marked, approved, dedicated return end of trip zones will be added within Boulder Junction instead of just the peripheral areas as they exist. Currently.

[20:03] I'll pause to see if anyone else has questions before I move into RTDI see there's one chat from Robin. I'm glad you that pips was remembered and underutilized. I'm sorry to hear that. So to give a few stats, II changed mode on this, because from our original eco passes into the myride system. It's been quite a conversion. There are some privacy issues that we did not foresee when we reach out to companies to say, would you please send us a spreadsheet of every employee's name and email address? There's there's there's been some understandable and appreciable hesitation on that. And at the same time we've been able to build, rapport, establish trust, and and really grow with some of the largest employers, such as uplay and net App, who has recently moved from downtown to Boulder Junction to use them as just an example, I was able to get more than a hundred of their staff

[21:03] uploaded earlier this week, and as of this evening, more than 60 of their staff has already clicked through and gotten approval. So in a few days we've seen that it's certainly possible and much easier on the user experience to go through this digital ticketing process for pass issuance rather than traditional ways of issuing a form going to a bus station, having a picture taken and then being issued a card to make sure everyone in the group is clear. It is certainly still possible to get a card. It no longer looks like the Eco pass. It's sort of a more generic logoed contact card. But if anyone does not have consistent access to a smartphone or affordability to pay for a mobile Beta plan. They can certainly use a tap to ride that's available to every rider in the system. We just need to know and have either employment or residential verification from a coordinator or property manager.

[22:01] Google has done an exemplary job of migrating almost the exact amount of staff proportion that they originally had of approximately 1,300 staff, seated in boulder, with a little less than a thousand eco pass usage to approximately the same staff who have now downloaded and activated their myride pass. The Boulder Junction employee roster this is actually increased to just over 300, I believe, as we've uploaded a few more in a similar, yet slightly more broad dispersed uptake for residents. Since we have new buildings opening, for instance, Boulder Commons, which is originally just on junction place and bluff, is now expanding each day to open new units and sign new leases. So I've I've been able to build a really good rapport with JJ. And some of the other property managers here to help support folks in this migration, and one thing that we were pleasantly surprised by is how effective

[23:07] our in person out reaches. I went to Rev. Which is on Pearl and Junction Place, across the street from Zeal Restaurant on Thursday last week, and literally didn't get a break between 4, 15, and 5 30, because almost every person that came down had their phone was ready to sign up, and some ran into some glitches. So Rtd is evolving this new system. There's a slightly different cadence on updates for the Android and the Ios platforms. So I actually caught a little bit off guard that Ios had updated earlier last week, and I was looking so my my reference guide, which will show below, was not actually updated to reflect some of the the challenges that residents were finding the instructions that were furnished to us by Rtd. Which I've got on the screen here, I found needed a little expansion, particularly at the end, because if you haven't gone through this process yourself.

[24:03] you you might get stuck in a way where you need to be certain to choose a bar code rather than a card, and the primary source of confusion is, I really emphasized here, not so much in Step 5, but in big red exclamation point is that folks who are receiving a free, unlimited ecopass need to choose to not add funds. So this was our our sort of sole cause of conflict or user challenge in getting everyone onboarded with that said, going through these 4 and a half steps. We've seen more than an 80% efficiency. So with that, I can probably pass it along. I'm happy to field a few questions, and I'll stay on for the remainder of the call. Thank you, Will. Let's go

[25:02] any other comments or questions on the updates. Thanks for the updates. Okay, great moving along. Then, did folks have any comments or questions on the consent agenda items. Suppose we can address those or the fund financial spreadsheet. At the same time, if anyone has comments or questions on either of those items. go ahead. If you do.

[26:00] You raised your hand. Rebecca. Okay. you make maybe just an an update request for going back to the minutes of last month. II saw the discussion about you know the the possible refunds, and seeing that the surplus funds, especially in in parking this year, is there any status update from that or the Council meeting last week, or study session on boards and commissions. Is it really you can. Yeah, I'm happy to provide some updates that are so. At the meeting that we discussed the options presented through some work by the city attorney's office. the first recommendation was, Wait and see what happened with proposition. HH. Which we now know did not pass, which had some implications with the possible revenue that each of our property taxing districts would have been bringing in the future. So now that we have the outcome of that.

[27:02] we did commit to coming back to the commissions in of 2024 with further analysis. So we're not ready to to dive into anything additional right now. But we will be adding an agenda item in to take some further steps. Now that we know the outcome of hh, the recommendations at the study session for the Citywide Board and commission program included some really specific recommendations for general improvement districts. So that would be all of the commissions that work with community vitality. 2 key elements that were recommended were to reduce the term requirements from 5 years to 2 years, in hopes that more folks would be interested in volunteering if the term was not as long

[28:00] unknown, whether or not, if if the if we do move forward with that recommendation, then there would probably be another component to it, related to the number of consecutive terms that commissioners can serve. Because if we move to 2 year terms, but we don't then, allow folks to serve consecutively. Then we can find ourselves in a challenge spot in our smaller districts where we're we're running out of people to to serve so more to learn there. The other big component that would make a big difference for our smaller districts, where we've been challenged with finding folks to serve in in our vacant seats, is moving to a city manager appointed commission for all of our advisory boards, and our general improvement district boards. So that would mean that we would be able to tap into relationships that Staff would be able to tap into relationships that we have, and

[29:06] be able to recommend through that process to the city manager Commissioners as opposed to waiting for folks to come out of the woodwork and go through a city council interview process to fill seats. So again, these were just preliminary recommendations at a study session. They were not voted on but they were given a thumbs up to continue developing further. There were some questions that Council had, so the consultant team and the staff team are going to continue working on that and developing some more details to bring to a new council sometime in 2,024. So these aren't changes that are going to be implemented. In advance of this upcoming recruitment round. That's going to be happening here next month. But I think that overall. I'm hoping that it's feeling like it's representative of some things that some folks on on these commissions have been sharing for some time given. This is one of the commissions that we've been most challenged with. Keeping seats filled.

[30:14] Thank you. And II saw there was mentioned, too, and speaking of that of consolidation. And but yes, think that these 2 boards would come to mind as potential consolid consolidation, opportunity. Yes, absolutely. These commissions are certainly on that list for examination in conjunction with the other Gids. There are some limitations, for you know, when we think about all of the Gids, but for this. These commissions, specifically, I think there could be a really good opportunity to combine our efforts to reduce the mill, levy obligation, and combine the districts together into one in hopes that we can, you know, both simplify and reduce the the taxing obligations through that process.

[31:05] Great thank you thanks, Chris. Any other questions about either the consent agenda or the fund financials? I'm actually back now. Sorry I'm working with a different right. And on a during keyboard setup, and I usually on today. So take a second to find a new button. It said that we were ready to start construction on the way, finding project on November first. At that start. Is there a particular corner that people should go check out first? Yeah, we actually have an item later for Regan to share the progress so far. So well, that's on our agenda later in the meeting.

[32:01] Great! So I don't think we have Jennifer still, unless I'm doesn't look like it. So Chris, should we say she did text me back, saying she hoped the meeting was cancelled, and I said, Can you come on now? But she hasn't texted me yet, so alright. We do have the petitioner here in the room with us. I would suggest we don't. It doesn't look like we have any members of the public here for participating in the public hearing regarding the petition. We have not, to my knowledge, received any written comment. but and we do have a presentation prepared. But without a aurum of Tdm. We can't take a formal action on the petition. So I would suggest that we wait and see if Jennifer can join us. If if Alex doesn't mind waiting for a little while longer going, and go through the rest of our agenda items and hopes that she can at least attend for that presentation and a formal motion.

[33:11] Sure. With. Let's jump to the next, then, and and then we can come back hopefully. Jennifer is able to attend for a little bit. So that takes us then to manage from staff. Chris. Alright. The first thing we have is that update on the way, finding and branding project. So Regan updates, Chris, I have some pretty pictures to share with you all. So let me share my screen. Alright. So good news is, there we go. We were approved for permits for all the signage in the public right of way. There were a handful of signage locations that we identify after looking at the property lines and submitting for permits that actually fall on private property.

[34:10] And so we are gonna be rolling this out in phases. We're tackling those in the public right of way first which construction has started, and I'll show you some photos in a in a moment here, and then we'll address the signage locations on private property with property owner. Approval. Likely. Beginning in 2024, hopefully with signage installed in the spring, and that's just a handful, a couple of vehicular directional, and I believe, one secondary gateway sign. But in the meantime construction has started for those in the public right away, the photo on the left hand side here. So this was the process of hydro backing which for those who are not familiar. It's removing the ground with high water pressure so that we can install the foundation which you'll see in the middle, and then for the concrete on the right. So that's been completed for all the signage locations in the public right of way. And I'll share my screen again for anyone who's interested.

[35:26] And additionally, the fabrication has begun. So these are not complete. This is an interesting example here, and this is a secondary gateway sign and so these are photos of them being fabricated. They're still gonna install the lettering, so it will say Boulder Junction there and depending on whether and fingers crossed hopefully. Signage will be installed by the end of this year. So that's all very exciting. and I'm happy to share my screen and show the location again as well.

[36:09] So the bulk of them that were approved are in and around the depot square area of the Resurrection. So all of all of these, aside from O. 3, one on the bottom center. Here were approved. So to the primary gateway signs are being installed, all of those in Depos Square and then around the plaza. These on the right hand side, on the parking garage. Those are on hold as well, since they're on private property. but the majority of them within this area are in the process of being installed

[37:00] happy to field any questions was there any on the slonks side? The north, the north end? Yes, so those were identified as being on private property. So there was a secondary gateway sign, I think, a couple vehicular directional which we're gonna address at the beginning of 2024 hopefully get property owner, approval and signage installation in the spring. Thank you. Okay, just to confirm, I heard that right, that this is kind of a phase approach. And so we're only doing the south end of the district right now. And and the installations that started this month. Yeah, that just happens to be, how how it worked out, because those on the north side did fall on private property lines.

[38:00] but the majority of them are being installed every week. Alright, if there are no other questions. The only other matters from staff that we have. Were the questions for recruitment. I wanted to give you all an opportunity to review those questions as we do every year. Make sure they're still on track, and we would like to ask potential applicants for the commissions. If there are no questions or changes needed, then we don't need a formal motion or anything. But we can move on to matters from commissioners

[39:11] any comments on the application questions proposed. I do not have any. Okay. actually, I sorry I do have one should we actually ask about their personal modes of transportation? Maybe. What myths they use? We're happy to entertain the question if other commissioners agree that that's something that would be helpful. I don't think that's a bad idea. I think that's that could be a helpful piece of additional information.

[40:09] So if someone was applying Rebecca, can you just say like, if they said, I transit mostly by bike or micro mobility, or something as opposed to car like you're saying the question would help a a as a factor to maybe picking someone who uses alternate transportation. It could go both ways, right? So some of the destruct. But people who are trying and using different modes of transportation may have different points of view. That would be helpful on tdm, right? So there's not a wrong answer. It's just understanding whether or not they've they've navigated the city using the different ways that

[41:05] I just drafted a question. Would love feedback. What modes of transportation do you use in and around the Boulder Junction area? I think we could even open it up to to around the city right? Because we do have some at large seats. I don't think necessarily just how they get to and from Boulder Junction is. I don't think we have to be that specific? What modes of transportation do you use in and around boulder? That would be my vote. You want to show a hands, Chris, or I've yeah, I as long as nobody disagrees. Then the discussion is all we need, and we will add that question.

[42:03] It looks like there's some questions, though. First from Robin and then from Sue. Hi! Sorry I didn't have a question. I was actually raising an affirmation. Me, too. Alright, and I have my thing off, cause it just keeps cutting out. That's why II got dropped. And you know one other thing before we move on from that. Should we actually line what those modes of transportation might include, including things like personal and shared bike. shared micro mobility. transit. driving or or leave it completely open, ended for them to answer. However, they wish I like the idea of open ended, because that way you can actually hear what their overall.

[43:01] but their overall experiences versus of like a leading question which might limit them or make them think of something not as being an alternative form of transportation. I agree with Robin alright. Thank you for the input that concludes matters from staff. Great there was one item on the agenda related to matters from Commissioners. so still, not seeing Jennifer, let's proceed to that. It is saying it's about other commission member from Think. It was Tab related to a letter in support of the parking ordinance updates it.

[44:04] I don't know what action we need to take here. Trying to find it in the packet. What page was that? And just for some context, commissioners from our other general Improvement districts also heard from members of the Transportation Advisory board on this topic. Is this just a vote to send this letter to the city for? Yeah. Looks like there's a draft in the packet, a suggested draft from from us should we choose to approve it? I think that would need to be based on what it says. I think that would need to be a unanimous vote

[45:07] otherwise, I think we're free as individuals to to support it separately from our responsibility. It says Commissioners, so If if we have a unanimous vote, Chris, is this something that Staff would include in a future Council packet? Or would one of would one of us Commissioners need to volunteer to to send this in any formal motions from the Commission are then passed on to counsel in their consent items or informational. So they certainly that's how they. That's how these things get transmitted. Got it? Okay? So if we if we do a vote, then staff would include it in their consent, agenda saying that we did vote unanimously on this letter, or something to that effect.

[46:02] Correct? Okay. is there any discussion that we want to have in terms of folks, opinions or any questions about what this says. I'll just mention that I'm okay with supporting it as am. I same agreed. Okay, do we want to? I don't know. Should we vote on this without Jennifer? I think the question is, can we vote on this without Jennifer. Okay? Sure. So you can. As the Parking Commission cannot. As the Tm. Commission so you could in your motion language, say, you know. So as the parking commission, those of you that are on on parking

[47:04] approve the language contingent on removing the mentions of Bj. Tdm. From the memorandum. In that case I'd like to make a motion that the parking commissioners vote on this with the addendum just mentioned. Okay, Jennifer's looking for the link that can we see if Jennifer's in response for anybody? Not from Zoom. Amos. Okay, appreciate oops she's on.

[48:01] thank you. Hi, Jennifer. alright. Let the minutes reflect. The Jennifer Shiber arrived at 4, 53. Let's stop sharing this screen. If so, If the chair doesn't mind, do we can. We move to our public hearing Gender Islands? Yes, please, let's go for it right? She's showing up delicious welcome, Commissioner Schreiber. Alright. So in your packet. Hopefully, you're able to review a petition that we received from the Blue Bird Development. Let's go next slide. Oh, sorry. Let's get full screen. Whoa.

[49:06] okay. alright. Next slide. So hopefully, you are, are all familiar with the development that's going. Been going in at 2445 Thirtieth Street otherwise known as the Blue Bird. That's correct. The other bird project, blueberry Departments next slide. So this project includes 40 permanent supportive housing units. So it's critical housing and supportive services for older residents who have been experiencing homelessness. This property was not rezoned to allow for any additional development and density. So typically, when we get a petition to include a parcel in one of the districts, it's through a development requirement. Contingent on planning board and Council approval. That's not the case with this

[50:03] personal. So just wanted to note that a little bit it's a little bit different than what we've dealt with in the past. When we've had petitions which translates into some of the considerations when it comes to catch up fees and proposed pilot fees, which we'll talk about shortly. The project is anticipated to be completed next month. So that's why we're we're working hard to hopefully. Get this property included in the Tdm district, so that we're able to start providing the Tdm services to residents. There is no parking so very there's 8 parking spaces, 8 parking spaces for 40 units. It's not anticipated that the target demographic of the folks who are living here or are arriving with vehicles at all. So it's been critical that they're able to access other modes of transportation. for their day to day movements. So next slide.

[51:07] So yes. The reason for the proposed inclusion is to promote multimodal transit options for the residents. And of course, you know, we want to help realize the the goals of Boulder Junction and provide all these other transportation options. That you heard about today from boulder transportation connections to these new residents of the area next slide. In including this parcel, because the property is actually property tax exempt due to the type of affordable housing and ownership model. The parcel won't be producing revenue for the Tdm district. As the other parcels do, which we do account for that in the structure of the Boulder Junction districts, with the option of entering into a cooperation agreement with

[52:09] properties that are tax exempt to make sure that they're still able to contribute to the the fund that supports the provision of all of the services within the district. And so we have been working to draft a cooperation agreement for the Bloomer department's consideration that includes language related to the payment in lieu of taxes. As well as the catch up payment. Presuming that the in the catch opinion is about making sure that there's a fair contribution to the fund. Considering all the other persons that are in the district that have been in the district for well, since it's creation 7, 1314 years ago now. Because the developer is a tax exempt entity. There is, another component where that catch up obligation is reduced by 35%

[53:12] and so the the proposed catch up payment in the cooperation agreement is this, $13,034 and 96 cents? The pilot in perpetuity that is being proposed in the in the agreement is, of course, the equivalent of 5 mills on the anticipated assessed value of the parcel to be consistent with the other properties in the district next slide. So the decision that we need of the the Tdm Commissioner specifically is a motion to grant the inclusion of the person grant with modifications. So if there's any changes, or you don't agree with the approach

[54:02] of the cooperation agreement, the amounts that we are recommending or you can deny the petition out right if you if you're not comfortable with adding the parcel and the obligation to provide services to this property. Next slide, please. With that we have alex with element properties and Blue Bird apartment. They are the petitioners here to talk a little bit about the project and make a statement hopefully to gather the Commissioner's support. Yeah, yeah, thank you, Chris, and thank you. Commissioners for the opportunity to present and consider this petition manager with Elvin properties, which is a boulder based real estate development firm Blueberry Departments Project. Start back in 2,019 with major help from the city boulder to provide funding to help acquire the property. It was previously a auto repair shop

[55:10] and then in partnership with the city, with Boulder County, with the State of Colorado, and with housing load composite tax credits Project is able to be developed into 40 units of permanent supported housing that provides I call the apartments for individuals experiencing homelessness in our community. And so this is really the deepest level of affordability. They can get. These are reserved units for for folks making up to 30% of the area immediate income, but for the most part, really, really people who are transitioning out of homelessness. And so the property Blue Bird will also have supportive services in case management let by the boulder shelter for the homeless

[56:02] which is really a key component to making sure residents have get access to whatever these needs they have. And we see this this apartment building as as kind of infrastructure for Boulder Junction, helping provide a a really critical service to the community. As Chris mentioned, you know, this property wasn't rezoned, so it didn't get any of those those parking reduction benefits. We actually got a parking study done by third party that found only about 8% of permits for housing residents actually own a car. So so really is is important for for these folks to have access to multi multi modal transit options. it being an affordable housing project, you know, we're we're limited in our ability to raise additional revenue. And so

[57:02] the Commission is willing. Those catch up fees could be a bit steep for the project. So if the Commission is willing to provide a waiver of those catcher fees that would be really helpful in in helping the project long term operationally. Of course those 5 mills will will remain to perpetuity and and help provide a critical service for the residents. But We'd just like to give give a little background on where we're coming from, and and why why are we making this request? Great. Thank you. Next slide. Oh, any questions from commissioners for the petitioner. I see. Sue raised her hand. Maybe stop sharing screen for me. Hey, Chris and Brian. Maybe. Can I cut in really quick? Here, I'm just gonna mention that I am involved with the development entity here. So I'll recuse myself from the discussion and vote.

[58:13] Thank you soon. Okay, 2 questions. So I number one, will, how long will people stay in these apartments? Do they have to? They don't. No, they can. They can stay in there as as long as they'd like. We have 40 project-based vouchers that help cover the residents rent. so the residents will pay up to 30% of their income, and the remainder of the rent will come from these project based doctors. But the the residents are not there's no no I and date on on how long they could stay as long as we continue with the income requirements. Right? Yeah. As long as they meet meet those income requirements they can't earn more than 30% or immediate income. Long term goal, of course, you know, is is really to kind of help these residents.

[59:09] that gonna be as much as possible, and, and, you know, move into wherever else they'd like. But they could stay in there as long as they meet those requirements. Okay? And then the second question, I guess, is more, for can just gotcha The fund is in a healthy space. I would say that the the ordinance language is not terribly flexible. The Commission can recommend that. The catch up bees being waived. That would then need to be considered through the city attorney's office. And would be included in a consent agenda item to council if if we were able to implement that. So there's still be the chance of of

[60:12] Council wanting to dive into that. But we can certainly consider the request from the Commission, and then we'll run it through city attorney's office, if that's the the will of the majority. we reduced it by half. Would that be helpful to the particular? And then maybe raise less red flag? It would be great greatly helpful to the project. is mentioned earlier that we have a a tight budget here and and there's a lot of button that comes in from the city county State. and and long term, you know, planning of paying those those 5 bills. But a waiver of that catcher fees would be greatly helpful, because, you know, we, of course, are limited and inability to raise

[61:06] revenue and and operate expenses of yeah, consistently been increasing over the last year or 2. But we can't hear you soon. So I said, thanks. Then the question thank you a minute. Any other question Rebecca might have her hand raised back. Alright. First of all I want to clarify that the number that we are discussing that you are requesting away before is the $13,000 and change that has been discounted by 35%. That is the amount that we're discussing.

[62:01] That's correct. Okay? And then, do you have an estimate on what valuation the 5 mills will be calculated against for this kind of property and sizable plot. Think it was in the 2,000 range 2 to 3,000, if okay. okay. So so we're expecting beyond this, 2 to 3,000 a year would be your contribution, or would that be a further discount as well? Is that the actual amount. So because it's a residential project there are written in reductions. We gonna see. Did you have? I was just gonna confirm that for the 2022 assessed value. The 5 mills is 2,300, a little over $2,300. And so yeah, in Colorado, commercial properties pay significantly more property taxes than

[63:06] residential properties. And so the the 5 mills on a residential project yup, or we'll produce less than a mixed use or commercial project. Okay? So in Colorado and all apartment building is considered residential and not commercial, even though something like An actual landlord company is is usually commercial in other places. I believe. So. Yeah. okay. well, maybe apartment for rent. So versus a condo it, I think it depends on the ownership model. So it might. So this might be tax to the commercial rate. Yeah, II thought, rental units for commercial. But but that's fine. Okay, alright, thank you for that. Those are my easy questions. The other ones were related to Sue's question. She she actually asked. My first question was, was, whether or not people. You know how long they would stay.

[64:14] respect to to stay, and they can stay forever as long as they continue to meet those requirements. But it also sounded like in your answer that they have to have a minimum income as well, because they're responsible. Responsible for part of that rent. Is that correct? No, they get out, and it could put 0 and then the voucher would pay the records rent. But if they have income above 0. Then they would pay 30% of their income towards the rent. Okay? And then how long on average, do do populations in in this? You know, demographic, do they are that they usually successful and staying like a year or 3 months or

[65:00] anything. Do you have any? Yeah, we've you know I don't have good stats off top of my head, but it's really modeled after this housing. First approach. Refined. Get residents into housing, and then it's it's easier to address other issues, whatever those may be, and and across the country and in Boulder County this kind of permanent, supportive housing housing first model has a has been the most successful in getting residents off the street and into long term housing and and addressing other challenges so I could probably find some some good statistics on on it. I don't wanna say anything off top. I had my head that I can't back up, but I do know that. you know, it's been been supported by the White House and support by the the it's Boulder County's approach of this permits for housing, housing. First model. So I've just seen it implemented a lot of commutes across the country where where once you get folks out, it's so much easier to, you know. Deal with anything else. They may be. Basic

[66:06] absolutely. I will tell you why. One of the reasons I'm asking is actually more about the provisioning of the transit cards. Right? So this is probably a population that is more likely to have physical cards than in my ride app on a on a smartphone. And I do know, obviously there's a little bit more friction. With the setup and transfer of those cards. So if there's a high turnover of residents that may be an additional overhead that needs to be accounted for. that's that's a good point. I appreciate when we'll mention that physical card folks who don't have smartphone so alright. Thank you. Thank you.

[67:01] Alright. If there are no other questions. Now is the time that we would go into a public hearing. But we do not have any members of the public in attendance, and we did not receive any responses from our mailing to members of the district in the area. So from there we can move into a formal motion of the Commission. I would note that We have not signed. We have not fully executed a cooperation agreement yet with Bloomberg departments, and so this language is proposed by the city attorney's office for the Commission's consideration. It would put a condition on the inclusion of the parcel on our ability to fully execute this cooperation agreement.

[68:02] If you were so inclined to add some language related to recommending a further reduction of the the catch up fee, you could certainly choose to include that as well. And then we again we go to the city attorney's office and determine if and how we would be able to possibly pursue that as we move to full execution. Seen some raised hands. Sue, would you like to go ahead? That much is the current reduction. And is that is that because they're a nonprofit because they are tax exempt entity, they are eligible for a 35% reduction in the catch up fee. Is that city policy, or a law? Or what? What's the basis for that

[69:02] city? It's city policy by attorney's office. And that was policy. This Commission considered. It's been a few years ago now. That was previously drafted and included in yeah established policy. Got it? And then sorry I did have a question. I just didn't get to it before you had started explaining the next steps. I got a little confused about the conversation related to the residential versus commercial levy rates. and related to specifically, is. is the mill levy. On this property anticipated to cover the costs of the additional services, the city will be responsible for providing. or will other members of the district that pay a higher levy be offsetting any shortage due to the lower levy of this being residential.

[70:04] So as the department billing, it's not private residence, then it's I believe it should. It's taxed commercial. So that's not a consideration. While private residences are tax to the lower rate. Just in my quick research here, because it's not private residence. It would be text at that other rate. Okay, got it. So then I guess just a general question. Would we anticipate the if, as we're considering whether we want to recommend a reduction or removal of the catch up fee. Is is it true that the annual no levy from this property will cover the costs of additional services for the city to provide as a member of the district. So thanks for the question, I would say that that's not an approach that we typically take on a personal by personal basis.

[71:05] and so I don't want to provide opinion one way or the other, because the same thing could apply for another number of other parcels, and it's kind of the nature of using property taxes as a funding mechanism. Whereas in for instance, the Forest Glen general Improvement district. It's a neighborhood up in North Boulder, where everyone is eligible for an Eco pass. but it's paid for through property taxes. So the larger homes are that are are worth more, or paying more into that general improvement district, then the smaller homes. But everybody is is eligible for the same benefit. So when it comes to pooling funds together through property taxes provide services. We don't necessarily apply a parcel by personal basis.

[72:01] we'd rather focus on. What are the services that we're able to provide within the budget that we have available to us, and if our appetite for services exceeds our revenues, then we would need to have a mill levy rate discussion. We're not currently in a space where we're we're using all of the resources that are available to us in the district. So we're not concerned that even if this parcels, not producing the same amount of resources through property taxes and the benefits that they are. receiving we. We're not in a position where that is concerning to us at this time. Thanks for your perspective on that. Appreciate it. Soup and 2 more questions. So then they're not being taxed at 2,300 a year, and they would be more

[73:08] going forward. Is that true? The only question I would have on that is the assessed value is that that's on the anticipated assessed value or the current, so the 2,300 is on the current assess value, presumably with the improvements. The assessed value will be quite a bit higher. so the 5 mills on the future assessed value will be significantly more than the 2,500. Okay? Second question is, when the new housing at the corner of comes in. That's also housing, right? So will they have to clear.

[74:04] And I'm just wondering if we we're saying a press in it. And that's gonna come back to haunt us. Great question. That's why we we would like to just follow the standard policy in this decision-making process, because then we're getting to a place where we're treating different petitioners. Differently. That parcel is already in both districts. And we already have a cooperation agreement. There were other circumstances nuances associated with catch up in pilot for them, because the the parcels have been in the district since the formation of the district, and so they weren't subjected to this. Catch up clause

[75:01] that said the parcels were owned by the city and not taxed because the city was a tax exempt entity. So in some ways it's apples and oranges. Yeah. So this catch up would only be for new businesses trying to come in right new parcels, petitioning, and which we would anticipate. A few more you know, as Thirtieth Street continues develop. you have to do. Determine what the implications are for Boulder Junction phase 2 with all the parcels. East of the railroad tracks. There's a lot of work and consideration to be done before we know what that's gonna look like. But yeah. does the okay? I guess I'm just wondering what the other commissioners. And this is just Pvm, so this is me and Jennifer and Becca

[76:07] that correct? Yep. Did I hear you right. Chris, that you Staff's position is, it would be recommended not to take a per parcel approach in terms of changing the catch up fees. Yes, that would be staffs. Recommendation and preference. Sure. Okay. And then for other commissioners, I guess. Does it change the calculus of whether or not to recommend that, considering that we're discussing property tax refunds starting in 2025. II mean, obviously there's no nothing guaranteed or or like decided there, but that we have that on our agenda to discuss next year.

[77:14] That is a really poignant question to your other commissioners in the sense of this parcel, once they're in the district, would be eligible for any refunds that would be commiserate to as if they were in the district. From inception. So depending on what those refunds look like, it would be just a percentage based on assessed value. Not a not a calculation based on how long they've been in the district and our current fund balance to some of the fun financial.

[78:02] Think it was between one and 2 million for Tdm. Yup, that sounds about right. Go ahead, Rebecca. Can we break this up in this 2 motions I think it would probably pass fairly easily to admit them to the district and have a second motion that tackles the catch up payment? Or do they need to be one? They do not need to be one. Okay, that would be my recommendation to the Tdm board to move forward with the easy. Yeah, for sure. Okay. so II mentioned to conditionally grant the petition and to get on the petitioner executing a cooperation agreement in a form approved by the city attorney's office for inclusion of the property located at 2, 4, 4, 5, 30,

[79:02] second. and 8 N. 2 VJ. Tdm. By resolution. and I'm not actually chair. So I guess. Aye. Frank looks like that, she not the anonymous press for admission into the district. And now now we can go back to the question of the do. They have a motion that will make it so? There's still a couple of ways to look at this one is downstream of. If there's refunds, whether or not they would get back a refund without paying anything into it.

[80:01] The other one is that we right now don't have full service, so there's not been full service for a little while, which your hands at so they can't use what we don't have. And then the third point is that there is a 35% discount applied to this, so that number A already reflected the discount. If I understood correctly. The discount was not in addition to that number that already applies. Nobody feels strongly about this. One other thing I'll say about the refunds. I think the refunds are mostly geared towards the parking district that has a 10 mill levy, which this property is not in

[81:08] versus the Tdm. Alright, maybe make a motion to give them a discount to make it up to 50% instead of 35. You. how do people feel about that? I stuck at that motion. If you're actually motioning it. Attorney, look at second thank. and and we can certainly, if if the motion is to recommend a 50% reduction as opposed to 35% reduction on ketchup fees for tax exempt entities. We can take that back to the city attorney's office and and consider that in the formation of this city attorney's office

[82:16] approved cooperation agreement. We would also include that motion in our update to city Council on consent. With some information on how that motion was applied. Okay. to me, seems a little bit more fair, because that's not just this one. It's all the nonprofits moving forward. I agree, so would would this apply to future petitioners into either of the districts? Or would this recommendation be specific for Tdm. I think I think I don't give anybody reduction.

[83:04] but would apply to teachers. I have opinions on parking, and they align with what Sue just said. hey? There again, Rebecca. I I'm agreeing with you, but that's only would apply to entities coming into the Tdm district that lines up, Chris. That's possible. We're not you were. You were understanding the same as far as what we would the city's attorney's office. Okay? And again, I'd say, if and I don't, wanna II do. Wanna make sure we're really clear on what the motion is. And so, since we, I don't have language on the screen specifically for this element is the motion to recommend that the catch up fee reduction for tax exempt entities, petitioning into Bj, tdm.

[84:09] be 50% rather than 35%. Yeah. not 50% of the 13,000 is a total of 50. So we're we're upping it from 35 to 50. Right? If we could. I did hear Mark had a second from Rebecca. If we have vote, and it's unanimous, then we can certainly move forward unless there's any more discussion. just like one more question. So they have no parking. So they really should get like something special for having no parking. I don't know if they already do get something special for having no parking.

[85:03] but as waste to encourage others don't have their own market. you know. III guess I don't know quite how to incorporate that name. The just thinking, if anybody has any problem, II believe the benefits of having no parking are already reflected and their financials right? They did not have to build the additional parking. And I had. That's true. Okay, okay, I just wanted to bring it up alright. So we have have a motion from Sue to increase the total discount from 35% to 50% applicable to any non zone.

[86:04] Infinity that is coming into the T. DM. District. I have seconded that, can we take a vote? Those in favor? Correct? Okay. Great. Alright. hey? Thank you for that. So now, with those motions passed. our next step, of course, is to come to an agreement on the cooperation, agreement. And consideration of your motions. Once that has been fully executed, we will transmit the Commission's motions to City Council with all of the associated documentation attached. And we would presume that they would approve that inclusion on their consent. Agenda in an upcoming meeting once that has been completed, then we notify the county assessor that. This parcel has been added to the district once that is recorded.

[87:12] Then they are eligible for older junction services. Any questions on next steps. Alright. Well, then, that concludes our public hearing. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you for your support. Commissioners really appreciate it. And we'll be in touch, of course, on working out details. If you don't mind. it would be great to go back to the beginning, since we have a core over the first time on both commissions. In a while there are a number of minutes from previous meetings. That would be I would love if if the Commissioners are okay to approve those minutes from previous meetings up to

[88:07] to date. and then we have one final conversation regarding the letter. On parking ordinance updates great any questions or comments on the september twentieth meeting minutes. No. Would anybody like to make a motion to approve the minutes. I'd like to make a motion to approve the September meeting minutes. Second. Okay, thank you, Jennifer. All in favor. Thank you for that do we want to try to tackle the Tdm. Minutes from the last meeting.

[89:05] 2 meetings 2 meetings ago, I think. Right right. It was. Yes, to approve the job. The July meeting minutes for Julia and it. We don't have to make it super formal. I second it pretty sure already approved it from the parking slide. So a show of hands from Tdm. Members for approving the July minutes. Thank you. Thank you so much. I think we're all cut up that. Great. Did we want to talk about Tdm, elections? Yeah, yes. for our 3 Tdm, members. Would you like to discuss your let's say the only issue is that I'm off of it and January, my term is up. So then you only have 2 members. so I don't know if you can.

[90:11] delay this until maybe a more members. I don't know. That is like. Let's say your chair's not your your seats not vacant till after March and if we don't find a replacement for your seat, you do have, as Kevin has stayed on in his seat. You do have the option to continue in your seat until a replacement has been identified which we would certainly welcome. Because if you wanna leave us soon, then we'll we'll be really hard hard up when it comes to portal. Yeah, vice chair.

[91:12] Jennifer, for would you like to be chair? II have probably the longest term here, so I have many opportunities coming up so. I would say it would be great if you were Chair. I would prefer alright. Then I will be chair congratulations. It would be nice if we could take a formal vote of the Tdm. Commission on. If Rebecca has been nominated as chair voting on that.

[92:09] and sorry, and as vice chair would be. Then you Jennifer. okay. all right. I motion that I become chair and Jennifer becomes vice chair. So we you only do it once all in favor, or get second, and then all in favor. Second, I second the motion and vote. Yes. alright. thank you for that. Alright thanks everybody. I think. We needed to discuss whether we were going to vote as a joint commission. all of us in favor of supporting a letter, the letter to counsel regarding

[93:00] parking reductions. Right? And can you remind us what page that's on since Jennifer joined after we started discussing that. we add that back up to the screen. Since I don't think Jennifer was part of that conversation, I had just made a motion for the parking side, but we have not voted on that yet. It looks like it's page 26, page 27. Thank you. And it'll be coming up shortly.

[94:04] Nick Jennifer, unless you have any questions or concern every everybody else had mentioned before you jumped on that they were open to supporting this. So. yes. okay, okay. Would. Would you like to make a motion that we, as a a all of us commissioners? If we vote unanimously that we would send this to council as a recommendation. I move that that we send this to council as our recommendation. I, second. okay, can we get a show of hands from all commissioners. Okay, that was unanimous. Thank you. Anything else you needed from us related to that. Chris. Nope, that's very helpful. Thank you.

[95:01] Any other matters from commissioners to discuss today happy holidays and events. Thank you. To you, too. II will say there's been kind of the one looming item related to kind of future fund health, and II know we were starting to get into that topic a bit related to discussing the options with the the mill levy, and and the potential for refunds. I don't know, Kevin, especially if your time, you know, might be coming to a close here in the next year, or, you know, months. If you had anything you would want to leave us with in terms of inspirations or suggestions, or, you know, just kind of your thoughts and your perspectives around that maybe it's not something you want to jump into today. But I know you are. You are interested in the topic. So

[96:07] yeah, I appreciate it. And, you know, appreciate Chris and and staff kind of bring that forward and and elevating it. You know. I think my my position in it on and it holistically is said the parking commission doesn't do a whole lot right now. there's not a a big budget for it. It's a substantial mill levy that is assessed on property taxes. I think that district and that mill. Levy really draws back from the vibrant vibrancy of the area. Because, you know, these tenants are really said retail tenants there that we're trying to bring into the area that we're putting these 10 mills on to. And you know, it's it's a deterrent. It's it's higher operating expenses for those for those businesses, and you know you can see that with the you know. I think we had a.

[97:00] you know, surplus funds in there of in excess of 2 million dollars, and I don't think those are going to be are going to be spent down anytime soon. There's very few opportunities within the district to provide more parking, you know where it is right now. So I I'd be in favor of you putting an end to the district or consolidating it. And also, if there was an opportunity to give. You know some of that surplus tags back to the property owners, I think that would be an equitable thing to do. Thanks for sharing that. I know one other perspective you'd had in the past related to the phase the phase, 2 expansion, and I think it plays into the property taxes a little bit. Do you? If if I'm understanding or maybe remembering is the better word it was, it was around whether

[98:05] new properties in the phase 2 area. we're joining the same district that they enter at a significant advantage to the people who've been paying in the past. So a as someone who's not a developer that's like maybe a little hard for me to wrap my head around. So if you might expand. I'll say that, and you know and disclosure that I have. You know, property interest on the northern end of the these districts that are in the parking districts that pay the mill levy into the district, and don't necessarily see any of the advantages from being in the parking district, seeing that there's the one parking garage along Pearl, and you know our property is up on upon Vailmon. You know we don't utilize any of the the assets from the from the parking commission. Still, you know, paid into it for years. I don't think it would be

[99:02] inequitable solution to just have this district roll over into phase 2. And so when you go out to the build out. you know, on the other side of the tracks that they would take advantage of this 2.5 million dollar surplus, while the properties, such as spark and some of the surrounding northern end. Properties that are in the parking district still can't take advantage of what we're paying into. And you know, I think the Thirtieth Street property that we just saw and any others a petition in the long thirtieth. and what we saw with Google and with others. Nobody wants to join the parking district. you know. There's there's no you're you're paying 10 mills, and you don't. You're not. You're not getting any advantage for those payments, and so as long as we have 2 different districts, you're not gonna have anybody, you know, beating down the door to join this this parking district.

[100:04] But you know I'd love to hear other thoughts and perspectives, too. And I see Rebecca's gonna chime in. Yeah, I mean, I'm coming up from a residential owner perspective, right? Is that II don't have any benefit from the parking district. So other parts of town, right? Even owners can buy like $17 a year like neighborhood parking permit for busy or meanwhile, I'm paying extra taxes for it. And then my question was to Chris, I think we covered this in one of the last meetings, but our debt portion for the parking garage is paid off correct. were not continuing to pay on that. I don't know if they've if they froze. II think that's true.

[101:01] Yeah, it didn't show up within the within the financials we looked at today. Yeah. So I. So if if our debt portion is paid off and we don't get any benefit, and things like parking enforcement for the streets is coming from a different area anyway, right? Because on street parking goes. revenue goes back to the city, not to the district. Then I'm I'm not sure what we're paying for at this point. and then, either rolling, rolling refunds or permanent discount. Back down from 10 mill to 5 mill would be things I would recommend. Obviously the garage is going to have to have maintenance at some point. But again.

[102:00] go ahead, sir. I think she was answering my question about the staff people. and Kevin's right. No one's gonna petition into the parking district. So II tend to agree with all the comments that are being made. I think that at least the 10 mill is is just seems accessible at this point, especially when we are having additional I'm open to all possibilities, including, but I would like to know a lot more. This is what that looks like in reality and specifics. I think I'm about to die. By cell phone. Wise, by the way, not a not many. Goodness.

[103:00] If I go disappear. It's it's not personal. Yeah, I mean, it's a really big question. I think, Kevin, you mentioned even I think just now dissolution right? Did I hear you say that, like I'm curious what that looks like, what? What would be the disadvantage to this, to the city, or to the residents and and businesses in the area if the district didn't exist, and the hoa is is self sufficient, based on the fees in the garage. So I don't know there's a lot of factors that are there. and I would be interested in discussing it more, because if it doesn't make sense and people are paying for something for for that. They don't get to to use or get any any value from then. I think we're doing. We're doing the property owners and the and the residents of disservice by letting it continue. been paying $10 fine.

[104:03] And last time, when we had talked about the the refunds about it being a temporary thing that we would vote on each year. II mentioned I I don't know if that would be a good choice to do long term to vote every year. It seems like if we you make it something that everybody gets used to. But you never make it permanent, and all of a sudden. It just kind of comes back one year like that would be. I don't know. That. Seems like it wouldn't be the best thing for the district, either. So I almost would consider us discussing more seriously, like what a permanent reduction or dissolution looks like before we would consider voting to do a temporary refund just in perpetuity annually. You know. temporary refund helps retail so much because they, you know, they don't know if it's gonna

[105:00] go away. So we want something that's gonna really encourage the retail. You you're saying. Probably a better likelihood of seeing slower increases in rent, or even I don't know about decreasing, or I don't know what the economics of all that are, but if we just make it temporary, it might not change anything on the ground in terms of cost. reducing the cost you you you so as promised, we plan to continue this conversation with the Commission in

[106:00] there are a lot of considerations, and some of them outside of of the Parking Commission, specifically and also it's important to know that the districts are an animal of the city council. So while the Commission does have the power to adjust the melody rates and make some some recommendations, it would anything to the extent that we're discussing one way or another would need to be approved through city council process. So that's another consideration that we need to be thinking about of evaluating options and potential outcomes. As Commissioner Nap mentioned earlier, this whole conversation around the boarding commission program ties into this conversation, some in the sense of having these 2 overlapping districts continues to be administratively challenging on a variety of fronts. That there, there might be a way to weave

[107:07] both. This conversation around dissolving Boulder Junction parking, just creating one big access district. there's a lot of puzzle pieces, you know. The the devils in the details of the nuances of what the there cause. There are assets there. There are cash assets associated with the existing district that somebody would need to own and if Tdm's gonna own it tdm buy from older junction parking and then refund. Go out. Anyhow, there's a lot to just there'll be a lot to untangle. Not that we're not interested in doing it. We just need to make sure that we're we're thinking through all of those details. And then there's all the things that we don't know that we don't know when it comes to. What is the future of Boulder junction phase 2. What are some other possibilities

[108:02] when it comes to? Maybe a boulder county transit system where our TV is no longer, we're no longer dependent on this uninterested partner in provision of service. And what's the role of our access districts and making something interesting happen just as a hypothetical. So make sure not you know. How are how are we keeping both ends of the spectrum open? And in the conversation, appreciating that that the tax burden currently is significantly high compared to all of our other districts. And and what's the best way to to help with all of these challenges? So certainly looking forward to that conversation. in our upcoming meetings. Yeah, that thanks, Chris. I mean, II don't think that you know some of the transit options really fall under the per view of the parking districts, you know. Maybe the and I know that was just a hypothetical, but you know, really I. And I think we're in agreement here, and I know it's not a decision that's up to us. But this district is putting a substantial tax on property owners without a use for that tax.

[109:12] So you know, we need to. You know, we've tried the last few years here to, you know, have on our agenda like, what is the 10 Year Budget? What is that long term plan for the district? But the parking district doesn't have a future use of these funds that we continue to collect. So I think it's. you know, a responsibility of the of the district itself to recognize that which I think we have, and now to, you know, rectify it in some way. so I always appreciate the discussion. Chris. at our next meeting, do you think

[110:00] stuff can come back with a couple of different scenario proposals. Now, I'd say we certainly committed sometime in the first quarter. She early January is not gonna be an option for us on that right now. But probably. Certainly. By March. Okay, I'm I'm wondering when the best time is to give more specific guidance. If we have it. or you're just gonna come back with a lot of different options. We'll discuss all the options. Then that would be the intention is And following up on the considerations and the conversation we had at our last meeting. with some additional work done by our city attorney's office to to map out some of these options more in a more detailed manner.

[111:08] Thank you, sir. So Chris. Sorry. So not just discussing the process for suggesting a refund on an annual basis. You're saying ideally, we would be discussing some of these other options. In addition to that, at at that March timeframe as well. Okay, thank you. Were there any other thoughts on these topics, or any other topics from commissioners to go over today? Is, is there is council again, not requesting letters from commissions this year.

[112:03] So far no the Council retreat is being scheduled for mid march, as opposed to previously been happening in late January, February, so we will be able to have our January meeting. Hopefully, we'll have some more direction at that time. What? Their asks of commissions are. Okay. Anything else before we adjourn. Okay. think that's it. Thanks, Seth. Things set for presentations as well. Thanks, Ryan. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Bye.

[113:00] Okay, good night. Take care.