March 20, 2024 — Boulder Junction Access District Joint Session

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:01] Okay, we are recording. And this is the Boulder Junction Access District Parking and Tdm. Commission meeting, and I will call Roll. It is March twentieth, 2024. Zoom friend. Oh, she's here again. Jennifer Schriber. Oh, there's zoom. Okay, thank you. Rebecca do Michelle. She's not to make it Ryan cook. President and. And Kevin, now. Present. Robin, Roman. Present. Perfect. Okay, and I will join the chat. The meeting over to our chair for procedural items.

[1:00] Present. I don't know why I didn't have the link to this. But anyway, okay. Have been. Welcome, Sue. No problem we just have for procedural items the approval of the January Meeting minutes. Did everybody have a chance to read through those? Or do we need a minute to let anyone read through them? I have no notes. Okay. Yeah, motion. To approve. Second. Great a all in favor of approval of the January minutes. Everything. Okay. Thank you. Fires. I believe that moves us to public participation. Do we have any members of the public here today? If there is a member of the public that wishes to speak, if you could raise your hand now

[2:03] are some special. I'm not seeing any raised hands. Great thanks. That moves us to our update from Btc. Hello, everyone I see mostly familiar faces. Good to be back with you all. And Ryan, I'm glad you have a co-pilot joining us again. That's a lot of fun. In terms of our transportation demand management. We are proceeding. It's I guess, the we is really me. I'm the primary point of contact for all ecopass issuing as well as a protocol for signing up with B cycle and Colorado car share I've got great relationships now with the property managers, it's pretty much first name basis. I would still like to extend sort of an ongoing request and welcome for

[3:02] Rebecca and anyone else who might be directly affiliated with condo owners as there's turnover in. Well, there's not a lot of turnover, but when there are new folks moving into the nickel flats, condos and the sparkwest town homes at 30 s and bluff. That can be a little bit difficult unless I'm literally there in person and meet someone which has happened a couple of times. But the communication to individual condo owners is always welcome, so I'm will@bouldertc.org, and most of our communication is through the ecopass channel. So that's eco pass eco pas@bouldertc.org. And those individual owner. Connections are always welcome. Both the Spark town homes and nickel flats on Junction Place, near Goose Creek Path are eligible for the full suite of benefits. Which is essentially unlimited. V cycle for 60 min rides. There's typically a credit card requirement. But with the annexing end of the New Blue Bird Housing development on the west side of Thirtieth Street. There can be exceptions made from their director, Kevin Cross. So that's a nice piece of news. But both

[4:19] the nickel flats and sparkwest townhomes I was mentioning eligible for B cycle, the $100 discount to Colorado car share as well as the unlimited ecopass, be it through the new digital, my ride app, or a physical card being issued. If there are any specific questions, I'm happy to field. Those at this time. Maybe the on your computer. And I I will close with a a promising note of our connect boulder luncheon in June. We are giving good consideration and some effort to hosting within Boulder Junction. Our sort of first and second choice of the Hyatt is actually going through some renovations at that time, so it is highly unlikely we'll be able to host there. I've reached out to Rocky Mountain Institute.

[5:11] do the other local businesses, and it's a little tricky to invite the public into a place of work. So net, app, and splunk were understandably a polite no, to that. If anyone has suggestions or other contacts for hosting up to 60 people. That would be a mix of general public and business stakeholders. We would really like to have that located in Boulder Junction to make it as easy as possible for the most amount of employee and resident attendance that we've had at a connect boulder quarterly. Thanks, Will. We will be sure to let you know if we, if we think of any any spaces.

[6:00] did anyone have hold on! Hold on! Did anyone have questions or comments on on those topics? And maybe I'll just close with to sort of save the dates, of course. Bike to work days coming up June 20 sixth. We'll have a strong presence here at the Chamber, and I'll also be doing some activations within Boulder Junction. I I'm forgetting Diana's last name, but she's the owner of Cassie's Cafe, which is on Junction place underneath Rocky Mountain Institute. Wonderful gal. We had a very successful winter bike to work day in February, with, I think it was 67 people attending her cafe, which has had intermittent opening, but an excellent turnout there, and she is, transferring to the former Twitter office locations to approximately 1,500 square feet of a female focused. Yet everyone welcome community hub with a cycling boutique. What? She's calling a bike spa. So if you ride regularly and want to clean your bike, there will be a way to do that. A as well as merchandise, boutique and community gathering space. So that'll sort of rebrand from Cassie's to Cassia

[7:16] with a expected opening in June or July 50. 1,000, back over. Exciting thanks for that info. It's pervading that correctly. Okay. Not hearing any questions or seeing any raised hands. So thank you. Will for all those details. On the idea. That moves us to the consent agenda. Did anyone have questions for staff about the consent agenda. 81. Same same goes for fund financials. Any questions for staff about the fund, financials.

[8:03] holly. Marty, for all of that. Okay, great, thank you. I think that moves us to matters from staff. Updating. Thank you, Mister Chair. We have a number of items for you all today. The first really is just a a check in you. We just talked about the phone financial, or didn't we we shared the year end numbers. We do have Elliot Levante on the call here. Happy to talk through how things ended. And some of the nuances with each of the individual funds. And where we're planning to go in 2024. Ella, do you wanna talk a little bit through? The current status of older Bj. Parking? And bj, tdm. We had a pretty decent year. The one thing I wanna say is, we're gonna get into this a little bit more. Once matches anski does this presentation on an alternatives? Analysis? And I know a big topic we've been wanting to discuss is the mill levy?

[9:17] so we can cover that a little bit more once we get into that presentation. That being said, just just as we need to be aware of expenses, we need to be aware of revenue. You have to have one for the other kind of concept. So when we are discussing Bill Levy that the revenue side of things. Really wanna pay attention to the expense side of things, too. And what does it look like for the future of Bj. Tdm, and and then bjed parking, and don't wanna dive too far into it. But if there was any specific questions about the fund, financials and kind of how we ended the year. Be happy to answer those. I will say that. The expenses came in pretty low this year. That doesn't necessarily mean that that's where it will end up.

[10:03] One of the biggest things to consider is the capital funding for parking was not expensed and that will roll over into this year. So although we didn't spend the money last year we still anticipate spending it this year which will obviously impact the 24 ending fund balance. Something else I wanted to know, too, is as we transition to a new financial software, city wide we will be having probably a little bit different looking reports. So just something to be aware of as we kind of do that transition. The go live date, for that is actually January 1, 2025. But I do want to start pulling in a little bit more graphics for you all. So if there are specific things that you'd like to see, it'd be happy to hear them, and we can start pulling those in but I just wanted to kind of give you guys a little bit of a heads up on that.

[11:04] Hey! Robin with that. And so she. What new software program? What's the software package that you're going to? And what is it gonna offer that the current software package does not offer. Great question. So we're transitioning from a Tyler technology software platform, which is our erp intercise enterprise, resource planning software, that used to host our financial systems as well as our hr human resources systems, we've transitioned to our our Hcm, our human capital management. Hr. Related things to work day. and the second phase of us transitioning to workday will be our financial system. The one thing I will say, that the big change that I probably would be incorporating is actually from our budgeting software which we have used in the last 2 years. It's called Open Gov, and if you've gone through our budget book online. You've seen a lot of those reports, and you can see that they're interactive. You can actually click on them

[12:07] and get a little bit more details with those. So I'm working with Central Budget to be able to produce those kind of reports for you all, and for all of our commissioners, so that you have access on a rather than a static report. It's a little bit more dynamic. And you can actually play around with it. So thanks. of course. Alright, if there are no questions on the fun financials, we can dive into our next item, which is the district. Alternative analysis and capital planning project. This relates to the topic. That this Commission has been bringing up for some time relative to the district mill levies and long term capital planning, taking care of what we have covering operations. We need to be doing this work, not just in Boulder Junction, but within each of the general improvement districts we manage and matches. Anski and his team are going to be leading this effort. So he's here today. We shared a memo that he and the team have prepared and we wanna talk through anticipated timing

[13:18] for this work and we have some questions. I believe that Ben posed that we'd like to to get some discussion around today. So without further ado over to Matt's Anski. Thanks very much, Chris. I'm gonna share my screen with the presentation. But I just wanted to thank you all for continuing to ask questions about these issues, and we're going to be responsive in making sure that we do a considered approach in how we how we make plans for the future. So let's see. I am ready to show you this. The questions we're gonna ask you at the end of this presentation are.

[14:03] W. Certainly. We want you to ask any clarifying questions of us. Make sure that you fully understand the project. But then, if there are project components. That, we're gonna discuss that we're fully considering that are in this project. If there's anything that we've forgotten or that you're interested in or that are incomplete. So being on lookout for those issues. and then we're gonna be talking about engagement and want to talk about stakeholders. You recommend to advise us as we go forward in the project, but we'll come back to that in a second. That the scope of work for this project which we're calling the district alternatives. Analysis and capital planning is really around 2 sets of of issues that we've framed as questions. First is the current state. And we want to take a look at 3 things governance

[15:00] revenue and the current state of infrastructure. Basically to fully understand what is going on the districts now. and how we can be responsive to that with the financial tools that we have available. and then on the in the future state. We want to take a look at a vision. What do we see ahead of us? That programming or infrastructure will need to accommodate? How do we enhance structure and governance? to deal with that, and to to make sure that we're managing that? Well. what are the rates of taxation needed to achieve that vision. What are the fund financials outlook? And then the capacity of business owners, residents, property owners. to absorb all those costs and make sure that we have the programs and the the structures in place to be basically, what all of this says is that we need financial recommendations

[16:05] for you with both Boulder Junction districts with our other general improvement districts and for ultimately city council to make wise decisions about the future. And so the way that we visualize this is this balancing act that we need to do that Elliot. Just kind of talked about right is that we have a revenue side, and we have a lever we can pull to affect the, you know, through the the mill levies and the parking revenues, and what that means for businesses and residents. And then, on one side, we have the current state, our obligations, our operating expenses, services, operations, maintenance. and then our vision for the future. We need to keep these in balance over the long term. And so that's the core of this project. Is we? In order to understand how to set the revenue side. We need to have a full understanding of the current state and a vision for the future.

[17:01] So to get there. We want to do a couple of things. First and foremost, is community engagement. In order to really understand that vision piece, but also to to fully understand the the impacts that are happening right now. We need to get feedback from the businesses and property owners in each district. We need to have regular check ins with members of all the districts in order to get the public feedback. For from you as representatives of the community. We need to do surveys and online engagement to reach out to the people who are most affected by this. So that's why that's Number one. It may not happen first. but community engagement is going to be central to how we figure all of this out. We certainly, though, need the data. We need to understand the conditions right now. And so we'll be working with a consultant to analyze very carefully the the situation in each district.

[18:02] We're eventually going to draft the recommendations and have some time for you to consider that as well as having final approval. We expect by each district as well as city council. So actually, here's Elliot slides. But before I hand it over I did want to point out that there's really good reason to do this right now that there's situations that have evolved over time, but especially in the past few years that we need to really be considered about. There's certainly the new economic conditions coming out of the pandemic. There's also new opportunities with for instance, the hotel in in University Hill. New opportunities with the retirement of debt. And the, you know, challenges that we face especially in Boulder Junction around how transportation is going to be managed in the future, and what new opportunities or new vision we need to have in order to really fully realize the way that Boulder Junction was put together. So this is actually a great time

[19:10] for us to do this analysis in order to both address new challenges and meet new opportunities so wanted to make sure. I pointed out that you know this is this is the moment, and we're glad that you're gonna be a part of this. But Elliot, why don't you take the wheel and walk us through some of the financial background on all this. Awesome. Thanks, Matt. First thing I wanna mention is, I talked about capital carryover that was actually for Bj, tdm, I apologize, not Bj. Parking, and you'll see an asterisk here on this slide. Which reminded me that it was for Boulder Junction parking. So I saw you raise your hand. Did you have a quick question? Little. I'm sorry. Say that again. How much is a mill? So you say the reduction in the slide instead of the reduction mill? What it calls the function. How much does one mill cost per person.

[20:03] Yep, that's great. So we will. I'm gonna hopefully cover all those questions, get into like the details on how it actually affects the property owners as well. Districts itself. I wanted to kind of start at the high level, just some things to be considering and things to be thinking about as we're discussing use of funds and collection of funds for both districts. So right now, as is the end of the year, parking is projected to have about a 1.1 1.1 4 million dollar end of year balance. Now, that's you know. That's if we spent 100% of our budget which we know from past experience that that typically I'm not gonna say always, but typically does not happen. So there's a chance that that might go up on the Tdm side. It's a little bit higher again. That does not include the capital funds. That will be rolling over from 2023 into 24 so if we do end up completing all of that, then that would obviously make that fund bounce closer to that 1.4 million.

[21:12] The biggest unknown in all of this right now is a state ballot issue that is kind of a taber. 2 point. O, it's not being called that. I just nicknamed it, but it. It puts a revenue growth limit on all property taxes across all districts, across all States, and I have not seen any sort of supplemental funding from the State for any loss of revenue that districts or municipalities may see if this initiative did pass. You'll probably recall in 23 we had proposition HH. Which did not pass which would have limited some reduced more than limit the property tax collections. But there was some funding sources in there for tabor reserves to be used to supplement some of the loss of revenues, the municipalities or districts would have seen. This initiative, however, does not do that.

[22:14] What that means is this year. If this were to pass, this would not necessarily prevent the revenue from growing and Tdm. Or parking, but it would prevent it pretty substantially. And the reason why I call it a a tabor type of limit is because it would require the voters to approve the collection of any excess above that 4 every year. So just something to be thinking about. I don't know the appetite of this across the city, and what the constituents are feeling. But I do know that property tax is still at the very front of a lot of people's discussions in terms of affordability in Colorado. So just something to be considering

[23:00] the other one is what Matt just mentioned is, what's the future spending of Tdm and parking? What do we want to try to accomplish? What services do we wanna provide do we anticipate the cost of services to to continue to rise, as we see, with the cost of everything? So having that flexibility into the future is also something to consider. And then also for any large capital investments that either district would like to do. We obviously have to have the funds to to provide those capital improvements. So just something to consider as well looking at the options. so from a revenue collection standpoint. So what what the district actually brings in? Right? So this isn't affecting the property owners. In Tdm for every mill which right now, the mills in Tdm. Is 5, and the mills in sorry is 10, and the mills for parking is 5 so in Tdm. A one reduction

[24:05] is about a hundred $1,000 less in revenue collected. And once you start to hit and I'm sorry I apologize. Tdm's 5 parkings that one of these slides as a error on it will have to correct. But Tdm, once you get down to about 2 and a half mill reduction, which is basically half of what it currently is. Expenses start to exceed revenues. So you start to run into a a deficit. Opportunity. So. and I'll like, I said, I'll get into the impacts on residents here as well, and then at around 6 mills. For parking. That's when you start to exceed your expensive start to exceed your revenues. So there is some wiggle room. But with all those considerations we wanna just be very cognizant of the impacts it would have on what the fund is capable of being able to provide to the residents. And those are the types of things that we need to consider as well as what a mill levy reduction may look like.

[25:11] Matt, you want to go on to that next slide. Thank you. So this is the impact to property owners. 2023 was a very special year for property taxes, although Proposition HH. Did not pass Senate Senate Bill 23 B dash 0 0 one did pass. You'll probably remember that was a Governor Polis initiative to kind of last minute. Once Hh. Did not pass to kind of do an emergency? Congressional session to be able to pass a Senate bill. And what that did is it basically reduced the assessed value on multi family and residential properties by $55,000, and on commercial properties by $30,000,

[26:04] and that one is actually referring to a separate Senate bill from 2022. So if you were to reduce one mill on a $650,000 house, it's about $40 in savings a year. So if we were to look at Tdm. And you were to reduce it to that 2 and a half mill reduction. You're looking at, you know, about a hundred dollars a year off on the Tdm side. And again, that 2 and a half mill level is when you start to see expenses exceeding revenue commercial properties obviously have a little bit different calculation. On a roughly 1.5 million dollar commercial property for every one mill change. It's about $410. So a little bit bigger impact to the commercial properties. But then, again, their values are a little bit higher. I included there in the space below the formula for residential as well as commercial, just to kind of give you some insight into how lovely and complex property tax calculations can be. And just to kind of give a little bit insight on on where these numbers came from

[27:19] so you could replace that assessed value number with any number that you'd like. For the residential side. Obviously you'd want to use the top one there, cause it does have a little bit different change. The assessment rate is significantly lower than on the commercial side. Which has a really big impact on that. And then next slide. Matt. Well, actually sorry. Once we go back one. Are there any questions on that? I know, Sue? You had a specific question. Are there any other questions on this? That I could answer before we move on to the next one? You pay for resource. And that's pretty clear. Okay. It's great! So this is the slide that has the error. I apologize. It says, Bj. P. 5. Mills and bj, tdm, 10 mills that should actually be reversed.

[28:09] but the the Nope. So. So that is, the rest of the data is true. So we have 4 districts, general improvement districts, or access districts in the city of Boulder of which community vitality manages, 2 of which have the revenue limits. So they have the 5 revenue growth, and they have the table limit as well, and those are Eugene and Kj, and you can see really what why, we included these is. You can see what a revenue growth really does to the mill. Levy when you have a revenue growth limit. So going back to that initiative, 50, if it were to pass and we were to get that 4% would be a relatively big hit for both districts. So Eugen and cajet their mill levies before revenue limits are relatively close to where Boulder Junction, both parking and Tdm are. It's actually 5 and around 10 oddly enough, and you can see how much of a reduction. It has from that revenue limit. So it goes from that 9.9 and cage it down to 3.5, and then the 5 down to 1.7 and and

[29:25] and of course Cajun has a little bit different funding model as well. There. They own 5 garages which bring in revenue as well as the surface lot. So that's something to be considered. I know Boulder Junction parking also has some shared parking and depot square. I don't know. That all being said, the overall. And and this is one of the reasons why there's not a huge change to property owners. With the change in property taxes is is because the amount of mills assessed across the property from the districts itself are relatively small compared to the entire pool. Of course, that's

[30:02] you have city of Boulder. You have Boulder County. There's a lot of other mills that are associated against the property beyond just the district. So with within the districts itself, you know, at at the most, it's a 10% of the total property tax mill levy. So that's really where we're at right now. We don't really have with without knowing where we're going and how we're going to get there we were, and and kind of what it looks like to move things around. And with initiative. 50. We wanna continue to keep an eye on this and really have a better understanding of what revenue collection needs to be, and should be before we can really make any changes to anything. Morning. have. Questions. Yeah. Robin? Fine.

[31:00] I think Sue had her hand up before me. So was your hand up from previous before. Did you have another question. I have another question. So yes, we pay. So. Wasn't there an issue with like the? There was another law. There was recently a balance on it, where, like residential had to be a certain percent of the taxes and and within the district, and then commercial had to be another 7%. And how was that impacted by this. So I I think you might be referring to the Gallagher Amendment. Yeah, that's a, yeah. So that was actually repealed. So back in, I wanna say (202) 020-2021 voters! Repealed the Gallagher Amendment. Which? What the Gallagher Amendment did, is it? It tried to balance out commercial and residential, so that as residential properties increased, it wasn't like they were the majority of the property tax collection. So the Gallagher Amendment is one of those ones that created a revenue limit. For commercial and residential properties. But that has since been repealed.

[32:14] I didn't realize I was totally, very killed. Okay. So then my question is. we could say that we wanted to lower mills, or I was asking, could we say that we wanted to lower mills on businesses, but keep residential the same. So that's unfortunately the the way mills are assessed. It does not dictate whether it's commercial or residential. The mills are the same. What does change is the assessment rate which is set at the state legislative level. Okay, so we, it's not in our ability to give the businesses a break. Not that I know of. I'd honestly have to check in with our city attorney's office, but from what I've seen and how property taxes are calculated. I I don't believe there is a way to distinguish

[33:10] residential verse commercial, and that's the same thing like in in Kjet, for instance. Those mills are assessed against residential and commercial properties, and you did well, I guess there is some residential and Ujjit, if I remember correctly. But there isn't a way to distinguish from a mill levy standpoint, residential verse, commercial. Now, what typically happens is, districts are created that are called bids a business Improvement district and there is a business improvement district within downtown boulder, and that's voters. Of the businesses decided to tax themselves an additional amount on top of the General Improvement district. So a bid operates a little bit different than a Gid but that would have to be a whole new district that would have to be created, and that would increase mill levies on business.

[34:10] For businesses. Most of the left. Okay? Would add, though, that we do have the ability on the other side, right? So we bring these revenues in, and we have the option to implement programs that benefit the businesses within the district. So, for instance. residents who are paying into the central area in general improvement district are not currently eligible to purchase parking permits in the district on garages. That's a decision that that was made many years ago. That might change. Similarly, we are using CAD dollars to implement a affordable commercial pilot program that will benefit minority owned businesses within Cajun. So we are experimenting with ways to to benefit businesses on the other side. Of the equation.

[35:04] Yep, and that's a great point, Chris and I I feel like that's one of the big key components of this, you know, property tax and revenue collection discussion is is having that flexibility. So any change in revenue obviously changes the expenses. So the flexibility is a little bit easier as the revenue is there. And that's just something to consider, and that could go both ways right? So we can look at it from a residential standpoint or a commercial standpoint. But there's not really any mechanisms for us to change the tax burden on commercial versus residential Robin. I'm sorry it's a little bit robotic, and I apologize. I did not hear right now. understanding the the data, this came up

[36:03] on average, 1% low cost is about $40, 8, 45. Here. So I think if I heard that right and, Matt, could you actually go back to that previous slide. Could you repeat the question? I couldn't. I had a hard time understanding. So I think, Robin, are you. I see about. This one here. So. Yes. represents accurate calling. and 5. So, Robin.

[37:00] could you? Could you type it in? You're coming in? It's. Sorry I am roboty. I do it. Oh, wait now, you sound great! Oh, now you're back to robot one year. Sorry about that. That's fine while you type Robin. I'm just gonna go ahead and we'll come back to the slide. But I just wanna okay. The project schedules next. So let's answer this question first, then we'll go to more clarifying questions. After that's done. Yeah, and I think, and and I, the property tax stuff is, it's so I. Personally, I keep track of my own property taxes, and I'm always very curious about how much I put towards everything, and it's an entire spreadsheet that ha is re required to do this property taxes. So question is at 2 and a half in no levy cuts, we will see deficits which would effectively only be about a hundred dollars in savings for homeowners. Okay? So in the

[38:03] tdm, side, 2 and a half mills would put us at around a deficit. Assuming we spend the full amount assuming we don't increase expenses right? So cost of services. We're we're flat lining right at 2 and a half mills. The district is starting to reduce. It's revenue to a point where expenses are going to exceed it, and to answer your question is, yes, it would be about a hundred dollars in savings a year for a residential property, assuming that $650,000 valuation. hey? Appreciate, over. Great did that answer your question, Robin. That's what I was interested in. Thank you.

[39:03] Yep, yep, absolutely. So. That is exactly what a general resident would look. For savings. Now, those residents who live within both districts obviously have a little bit different tax burden than those who live within. Just tdm, we know that, you know, parking overlaps. Tdm, but not entirely. So something to also consider. Great. And do you wanna jump into the next few slides here. You know, I think that question's great and sort of leads us to the core of the project. Right is that we can make some. We. We can study some of these options. and I can't imagine a situation where Staff will come in and say, yes, let's grow the deficit over time. What we'll be talking about is the other side of the of the balance. And what do we cut in services programs? Maintenance operations and future building. So that's why we have to be very careful about this and and thoughtful. And so, in order to be thoughtful, here's who.

[40:05] Here's what we plan to do. Just be careful. So we're starting up right now with project scoping and going to find consultants to help us with the data collection and the public engagement part of this in order to build those eventual recommendations to for you and city council. In order to do that, as I mentioned before, engagements going to be at the core of this, and we'll be doing that in the third quarter of this year, and part of that engagement is going to be around an advisory group from all of our general improvement districts. So we'll talk about that specifically in a second after you ask your clarifying questions? But after review and approval and adoption in through in the third quarter of 2025, we're gonna get everything lined up for the 2026 budget cycle which will go through a summer and fall of 2025. So that's really our deadline to get everything in order and get some decisions made.

[41:06] And then, if there are any policy or ordinance changes that will happen at the end of 2,025. But we don't know that yet. We got to figure that out. So before we go into your any further clarifying questions that you might have. I wanted to just check with Chris and see if there's anything you want to wrap up this presentation with from the staff side. Nothing more for me. Great. So we had some good discussion already, but wanna open it back up and see if there are any other clarifying questions that you need to fully understand the project before we ask you a few questions. Okay? Well, let me You know. Yeah. Kevin. I'll I'll step in and save see a few things I think, in, you know, in our circumstance, and you know, as mentioned, that we've been asking about this for a little bit

[42:01] I. I don't know if if this process really reflects the reality of the the parking district, which has been the biggest concern where, yeah, the parking district, as far as I understand, it, wasn't able to build out the parking that it initially envisioned to benefit the entire district. And so when you you look at things like, you know the engagement and and the public process part of it, I I don't know, if that's really gonna be yeah, that's gonna provide much valuable input. So depend on on who's who's really in there. But think as a as a commission. We need to think about what you know what our our goals are. And if you know this Tdm, new levy has really accomplished what it was set out to accomplish, and where they're continuing it will, you know, change any of those outcomes.

[43:04] No, I think that's a great observation. And Chris, I'll ask if you have anything to add to my statement about that, which is that maybe it's important in the data and research phase to fully understand the history, the outcomes that were the district was designed for and get the input necessary from experts on. You know not only what is the State today, but also where are we going in the future with the intent of the district. because it may not only be, you know. we may need to confirm the direction that we're pointed, and see how our different tools line up with that. And that's that is gonna require, you know, you and council and members of community to help design. If there's a if there's a course correction, Chris, did I phrase that right. Sure I'd say that you know in how that could play out could be a strategy around actually acquiring

[44:01] some of the privately built parking that has the others paid for in the beginning. But the district could end up owning in order to create a more predictable parking and access experience and additional revenue streams for the parking district, and that was part of the realm of possibility when the district was created. So we wanna use this process to call the question and determine whether or not that's something that we should be pursuing, so that we are actually providing more publicly owned parking within Boulder Junction as one possibility. and that's you know, something that we've done in downtown we just wanna make sure we call the question. Sure, and that, and that said. you know a good thought that that I didn't consider. I I guess it's you know, when you look at the district as far as developing new

[45:01] district, owned parking within the boundaries of the current district. I think the options are pretty limited, if not eliminated. But yeah, that good thought that, you know. Maybe there is a purchase of existing assets. Thanks. Brian. Thanks. I just wanted to continue the thought a little bit that Kevin mentioned around the circumstances in the Boulder Junction districts versus the other ones. I think the one factor related to both of our Boulder Junction districts. That's a little bit different is the potential changes around the phase 2. We don't have the potential for expansion. Really, in in any of the other districts, in the same way, at least, as far as I'm aware. And so I would be so just slightly concerned to have a uniform approach across the districts without factoring that in

[46:05] I just I think it lends itself to like a lot of a a kind of a different track for the Boulder Junction districts than the other ones might experience. So I don't know how that might be taken into account over the next year and a half or year while we're. you know, going through this process. But maybe something worth, you know, looking at a little bit upfront. so that you know we don't get to the end of the process. And and phase 2 is happening at the same time and realize we've made all these things kind of assuming something static that is actually very dynamic occur. So anyways, just a thought. Oh, that! Appreciate that! And actually, that's a great clarifying point. That we should add to the scope is to make sure that we're not only sort of looking at the way that boulder organizes its districts generally, but each district is going to have unique challenges, and those should be addressed separately. So we'll make sure that's clear in the scope.

[47:05] Thank you for that. And actually, that's great. Because I'm just gonna put into the chat the 2 questions that we had for you? That we put at the beginning. And this is a great one about. the project components. Is it comprehensive? Are we missing things like. how do the districts in this project have their unique opportunities and challenges addressed? And then what stakeholders you would recommend? And just so, you know, this is the first of many conversations we're gonna have about this. So as you think of answers to these questions and observations, you can always reach out to us and continue to help us refine this. Sue, you have your hand up. I thought. I can't. I have 2 questions. So one continuing, what Ryan and Kevin are saying about moving, going forward? Well, actually, Ryan, with section 2, do we know in

[48:02] phase? 2. How much of that is going to be commercial, and how much of that is going to be residential, because that would predict the revenue from phase 2. And what? To adapt our future revenues. throw. I don't have an answer for that right now. I'm not sure if there is one we can offer at this point. Chris Elliot, do you know what the the right answer is at this time. Not right off the top. My head! No. Correct that the commercial generates more money. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. I have to do. So just yeah, just like, you know, anecdotally, it seems to me like the conscious bay owns a lot of section 2, phase 2, and they seem to be doing a bunch of bio sciences bioscience stuff. So it might be that we're getting a lot of. you know, high ticket taxes from this section to phase 2. So that's question number one and question number 2 is in the beginning of your report. You talked about the governance and stuff like that that you would look at that. And I know that it's been such a problem getting people to serve on this board Kevin is entering year, 2 of being beyond each of left, and.

[49:21] Like. It's not what. That so? We can't seem to find people. It's like a lifetime commitment to be on this board. So it would be, and and every year when this comes up before council on the they appoint people they're like, we really should look at that beach at situation. It doesn't seem like the governance is working. Will this finally look at that. So first of all, you've uncovered our plot to keep Kevin permanently on the board. So good good for you. But This this will touch on that. I I think that there are several things happening at the same time, right? That there's a assessment that's gone on across all city boards and commissions and the issues for the Boulder Junction boards, because Boulder Junction Commissions has come up in that, and it was also mentioned at at Council quite recently. So the current city Council does have their eye on this as well. So yes, to the extent that

[50:22] any efficiencies that can be gained by examining governance over time. That the way that the commissions recruit and point is a part of that. But it will probably be more about aligning with the work that the rest of the city is doing and making sure that that is mentioned in here as an improvement that needs to be made. Outside of the scope of what the general improvement districts. Actual functions are. I. I would add that general improvement districts in the State of Colorado are enabled through State statute.

[51:00] That's what governs the makeup of our Commission, not a decision of city council. So while we certainly put through this process, identify some things that we would like to see change through state legislation. That's a bigger hill to climb than locally led ordinance change. So there is work going on for boards and commissions across the organization. There is a lot of awareness around this particular issue, and it is a bigger challenge for our Gid commissions than it is for a lot of the other boards and commissions. So we would love to improve in this realm as well. Again. So I don't know that this work is going to be able to get those things across the finish line. But we can continue to push that topic. In this work. The clarifying question, Chris. The fact that there's 2 separate boards that's the state, not the city.

[52:06] Though that is, the city created the 2 separate districts. And the hard thing with that is, if I'm doing what's been done is quite challenging, like you are making changes to what's been done is really is is would could be done locally, but making adjustments. would be challenging in the sense of the direction that we've gotten so far is the district either exists as it does or it doesn't. If we don't like the the way that the districts currently exist. Now it means we have to start all over again with a brand new district. So go ahead. The fact that the 2 separate boards, and it also includes the requirement to have land owners, Service Commissioners. Correct.

[53:00] Okay. Thank you. Right. So if there are no other discussion or suggestions from Commissioners. Like, I said, please reach out, and as you think of things, and especially of people who are important. Let us know. Oh, Brian, yes. And one other question. It is, fairly detail oriented around the the parking district in particular. Maybe it's not even something we want to answer now, but something we could just follow up with over email, with some, some details. The question is, I was a little surprised by the how. It didn't seem like reducing the mills. That much caused the parking district to go into a deficit. Motion. So I was curious. If there's a way to talk about that easily, or if not, if there's a way to kind of write down. You know what the what the mechanics are there a little bit more like if we're looking at the fund spreadsheet that we have in our packet. You know what what are the what boxes are would be changing as we reduce the mills. And and where did you know? Where do we see that

[54:10] that deficit happens? So anyways, I just, I'm a little curious about the details of the mechanics there for the parking district in particular, because it seems like we have one asset. you know, that's Co. Owned. So it. It has its own revenue. I don't know if that's totally self sufficient, as far as the hoa is concerned, with with the garage. So I'm just curious. I don't know necessarily what the remaining of expenses are. And and If if there were more details around that, that could be helpful context like like, I said. Maybe it's for upcoming conversations, future meetings, etc. It's not something we have to go into now. Elliott. Yeah, I can elaborate on so yes, you you do. Mentioned the cut the hoa coa that.

[55:00] The garage is shared with and Depot Square. So there are costs associated with that. So there is a fee as being part of the Condo Owners Association. The revenue isn't significant. That said we received a fairly large deposit of revenue in 2019 2021. Can't remember couple of years ago. because it hadn't been calculated correctly. So once it got recalculated we got a nice lump sum payment. But that was kind of an offshoot other expenses is our staff. So staff cost. So we do have maintenance staff. That does go out to the district and does do some maintenance. And then, you know, signs and those types of things, and then we have administrative costs as well to to provide customer service. And then, obviously, the administration of the district. I would say that the the biggest thing is the unknown costs that could be potential when coming up in like the phase 2. Or is there any desire to do a development or or a purchase of a already established parking asset, so that we could kind of standardize the parking in Boulder Junction right now with the the Central area, General Improvement District owning 5 garages.

[56:21] It makes for a relatively seamless process for visitors to come and and park in one of those 5 garages. Of course, there are also private parking garages downtown as well. So it's not that it's completely standardized. But that's just something to think about with Boulder Junction parking. Another cost coming up this year is is the capital cost associated with the Cross district analysis, I believe, was the correct term for the capital project, which is what we're working on now. So there's gonna be some costs associated with that, and bringing in professional help to really understand the the the desires of the stakeholders make sure we get the right stakeholders in place.

[57:11] So there are some costs associated with that so that's kind of where we are within an expense side. And if I remember correctly, I think it was it could be reduced down by 6 and a half mills, if if I remember correctly, so it could technically be reduced pretty significant. But before it goes into a deficit. Again, it's just the it there is that something to keep in mind about. What is the future impact of it? And then, if something like initiative, 50 did happen. Post reduction of the mills, that's it's lack of a better term, adding salt to the wound, so to speak. Thanks for all those those details. Appreciate that. Of course, of course. And that said, we'll continue to provide that detail as we're analyzing options. I. I talk about a spectrum of possibilities when it comes to these conversations, there is a spec. There is a place a a dimension that might exist out there where we completely dissolve the parking district, and then just have one district, and instead of calling it, you know, just Tdm.

[58:21] we get an agreement of recommendation from you all on a city council acceptance that the Bj. Tdm. Owns and operates. The parking, the 100 parking spaces and participates in the Owners Association. There would be a lot of work to do to get there. I don't know if that's the dimension that we're all going to live in in the future. But but it isn't the realm of possibilities that we want to evaluate and understand through this work. As an example. You know, 1 one more comment from for me in the whole kind of process, and I appreciate the amount of thought that's going into this packet and and setting up the entire the entire process here is that

[59:05] if we get to these next steps, and you know, if I was wearing a different hat. And on this engagement committee, or on any of these other decision making committees. I would want to know from this commission what are your plans like? What? What is that long term spending plan, or what do you? You know? Where would you like to spend this money? You know, if we had. I think that's one of the some of the consternation that's come up particularly around the parking is that we've had no plans to acquire new parking. We've had no plans to build any parking. We haven't really had much of anything other than a you know the capital improvement plan for the signage. And then, you know, maintaining what's there. And so you know, maybe that's a process that this committee could do or this commission can do simultaneously, or you know some other, some other process to say, you know, hey.

[60:02] this is what we're advocating for, because this is what we see. You know where we want to be in 5 years, 10 years down the road. Yeah, that's a great point. And you've hit at the core of what we need to do with this project is that we on staff great ideas. But it is not us who decides what the vision is. Right. We need to understand. The people who are paying the taxes the people who are affected by the district programs. And you as the representative of the community, need to design that vision. And so yeah, that's core to the project. We'll make sure that gets highlighted and clear. I don't need to update. Sue. Yeah. Who would decide if we bought an existing parking lot or built another one. Who who would make the decision, I mean ultimately, ultimately City Council as the official. What is it called? Board of Governors of the district?

[61:01] Board of directors. We're good. Directors. Thank you. So you know, obviously, with your careful consideration and advice. But with a you know, when the alternatives analysis is done. We, you know, can identify that. That's a need, do some work on exactly where and how you know we would acquire or or build. Then that would become a proposal as part of the process. The decision making process of city council. I could also say, Well, I mean, we we could vote on. We could say, like, I mean, private branches is fine. We don't really feel, need to own another branch, correct. That might be an outcome. Yes. okay. Are. Yeah. And I I would like to clarify, too, that the the city Council's job, for as the Board of Directors is from a a fiduciary standpoint with budget appropriation. So commissioners across all of our districts are totally welcome to provide. Input and the budget development which is really what we do ask for, and that then once we have those inputs and the budget is then developed, we then present it to city council, and they basically either say yes or no or yes, but so that's kind of the process behind.

[62:25] The decision pro authority, if you will. So, although there's not direct authority for the Commissioners to appropriate funds from a fiduciary standpoint, the input is still su suggested and re and requested for City Council as well. and I I know, will. You've had your hand up for a little bit here. Coffee. Well, first to comment, Matt and Elliot, I really appreciate all the insights you've shared. I'm still relatively new to some of these Boulder Junction access details. Very informative. My question was just to a comment that Kevin had made

[63:06] the statement that no new parking has been added. I just wanna clarify if that includes the underground parking immediately east of 30 perl, which would essentially be 30 first and spruce. I know that those that ramp and parking spaces have been accessible for 6 to 8 months, and I believe Colorado car share has a big plan for innovative electric vehicle to grid charging down there. So I'm just wondering if that's factored into parking allocation, or if that might actually be a new consideration of approximately 100 spaces. Thank you, sir. I don't believe that garage is in the district. Crying that you. It. It might not be to my understanding all the residents of 30 perl and Boulder commons, which are sort of immediately adjacent to that garage are eligible for the Tdm. Benefits that we administer. So I guess that was an assumption there on my part that that would geographically be included. But I'm really not sure.

[64:11] Yeah, I think that that's right, and that I think that's part of the issue, too, is that they built their own private parking. They're not a part of the district they receive the Tdm. Other properties have done that and built their own private parking, but are paying this 10 mills in. So there, there's a little bit of inequity that's going on with this. You know this tax payment where there's half this district is paying for it and not receiving any direct benefit. As as far as the parking goes. So maybe to clarify the existing structure that I mentioned, I would describe it as facing spruce might have been privately owned, and I know that one is soon to open sort of facing 30. First, as part of the core boulder Commons properties. It seems like those would all be assigned to condo owners and not accessible to the public community. In Boulder Junction.

[65:07] So let me hit the pause button here. So there's the difference between district owned parking and in district parking. So those parking spaces are all in the parking district, but they're not owned by the parking district. But through the development agreement for land uses within the district. while the all the parking has been built privately, it is required to be shared on, bundled manage, paid to the greatest extent possible. There are some nuances with affordable housing. Federal tax credits that do guarantee a certain number of spaces for affordable units within those buildings. But the remaining spaces are all public parking, but they're not owned by the the Gid they're just part of the the general

[66:02] realm of public parking in the area similar to downtown, where we have garages that are owned by private operators, but the general public is allowed to park in them. They each have inconsistent rates and consistent technology. There's a there's a downside to having private operators kind of go their own way. Because then there's a less of a piece of experience for folks who are visiting the district. That's helpful insight. Thank you, Chris. Thanks. Thanks for the question. One great well, if it's all right with everyone, I'll go back to the slideshow real quick to talk about next steps. I think I remember how to do this. I'm with you. Okay. good. So sorry. The screen is not friendly to me yet. We're getting there.

[67:04] Here we go. Oh, yeah, now, I gotta make you dizzy. So Oh, I'm so sorry. This is the wrong slide. I'm just gonna talk you through next steps. Apologize that that got in there. We are. Gonna be working with an internal group of experts from across a bunch of departments in order to help build out a scope of work for a consultant, and we'll be trying to move that forward very quickly and before even we get to talk again. So we'll have an update on that at our next meeting. One other thing that's happening is we want to get together that group. I mentioned an advisory group with representatives of all the districts. and so we'd love to get volunteers. I I think it would be best to have 1, 2 at the most from each of the 2 districts to work in between meetings to provide some consultation and advice. We don't have to make that decision today. It would be great. We could do this at the main meeting if you prefer

[68:05] but it. It would be great to get volunteers, so we can start to loop them in on in between conversations and a little deeper dive into the issues. So that is the conclusion of the presentation. Like, I said, not the end of our conversations about this. I think you'll be sick of us talking about this over the next year, year, year and a half. But we're really glad that you're in the room, and that we're going to have a great process to get these very important decisions made. So. Chris, anything to wrap this up. Nope, Nope. thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Hey? That does leave our next item. It is related. We've been asking each of the commissions for a representative or 2 to work with us. Outside of the formal meetings on this alternative analysis and capital planning effort. They've been electing to largely to wait until new commissioners have been seated.

[69:08] Those of you that were paying attention to City Council last Thursday might have noticed we did have one applicant for each of the Boulder Junction districts. One of the applicants that also applied to the Transportation Advisory Board Council ended up electing to appoint that person to tab instead of Boulder Junction parking and so we no change in the Boulder Junction parking Commission seats. So even if your seat has expired and I'm looking at both you Ryan, and excuse me, Kevin. We appreciate your continued service. You are under no obligation to continue serving in your seats. But we are opening up recruitment again, and we had the greatest turnout and applications that we've seen since before the pandemic

[70:13] for all of the boards and commissions in the city. We're hopeful that we'll get now that there's a few commissions that still have vacancies that will get another group of candidates focused on a narrower number of vacancies. And so we'll we'll hopefully be able to get some new folks on. Soon the as far as the Tdm. See goes again the we have one new applicant and one person appointed, but as for a seat that's been making for some time. So sue your seat. Well, it expires this year. Your seat was not fill. It will also be advertised. So you're also welcome to continue serving in the seat until your specific seat is fill. So we will have one new person

[71:08] at the next meeting. And I hope that everyone will continue to join us as we seek new members for the the expired seats that concludes updates or matters from staff. Thanks. Chris. Any final questions from other commissioners about recruitment? Okay. so matters from Commissioners. We have our Council letter for the upcoming retreat to discuss. Did everyone have a chance to read through the letter.

[72:03] Yeah. And I actually thought it was Sam. But okay. So. we have summarized all the points that we received from commissioners on both commissions. We did present this letter to the Tdm. Special meeting that we had earlier this month. Knowing that we would not have a quorum for Tdm. At this meeting the Tm. Commissioners voted unanimously to support this language. There were a couple of edits that they requested. It's our hope that this commission at least the parking commission that we have a quorum for today votes in support of this language, with at least, if there are changes, very minor changes that are substantive, we would like to be able to submit the letter jointly from both commissions.

[73:02] So, Mr. Chair, if you would like to, if there's a motion and a vote, we can wrap things up, or if there's any edits happy to discuss those well. I'll throw a thought I had out there just to see if any other commissioners want to comment on agree or disagree. I guess the proposal of a no idling regulation feels like a little theatrical or flimsy in relation to the importance of what the overall point is for that for that bullet. I don't. When I did research on them it didn't seem like they were very effective as as regulations. hard to enforce. You know. What? What are the chances that you're by someone who's idling and have the ability to to enforce. So

[74:00] I get, I definitely get the sentiment. But it doesn't necessarily feel very applicable to to making change related to addressing environmental concerns and promoting sustainable transportation. So I I don't know if anyone else has thoughts about that feel free to jump in, Sue. Thanks. So I know Rebecca, who is not here today, has been she no longer lives in the district, but she still owns her apartment that she lived in, and now she rented out. But I know, being on the first floor of to get the name of the building. That. Thoughts. Yeah, yeah, that this was a huge issue for her. And she it was the reason why she got on the Boulder Junction board the second time she was on it once, and then was off, and then got on second time.

[75:01] so to the extent, you know, it's just like the twentieth plenty thing, you know. We tried to pass that. A lot of people said, well, it doesn't look change anything but Some people do abide by loss, so in in the sense of it, cuts down the one person that's saying outside your apartment to you. It's a big deal, you know, so I think it speaks to the quality of life and the Junction, because it's a dense place without setbacks. In some cases which is really unusual in the city of Boulder. Most. Every apartment has large setbacks, so they're not necessarily impacted by things happening right on the street. Apartments like these are. And so I think it's it's good. I I support it because it's a way of thinking that needs to happen in the junction that may be in other places in the city is not so important.

[76:04] Yeah. I'll just jump in here, too, you know. Brian, too, I mean, I think those are. Those are both good comments you to me it seems like a little outside of the purview of the commissions and that we could continue, you know, creating more ordinances that would enhance the environmental. Oh, that's not. you know, quality the area like no smoking. No. I don't know, you know more trying to reduce more things. I I just it just seems like a little outside of of what we are meant to do. And then I would just add that it's like my impression of the issue or the issue that there has been is that it was with construction, traffic. awesome. and at least that she seems to be, you know, should in the next year be coming to an end

[77:01] with the contractors. I mean when I'm in the district. I I never see Car sideline. so I'm not not saying it. It doesn't happen. But and it's not like. Are safe. You're outside 7, 11, and someone leaves the car run into going. And you know. Make it. Like purchase. Believe the city might have passed this around schools because it was an issue around schools. Not your visual and faces. I don't know. Maybe Chris or somebody in the city staff would know better, but I feel like at some point that this was. That's good. What's cool is. But yeah, I'm not sure I would start sailing all right. I don't think it's something they're gonna move on, anyway. So just hearing it

[78:01] is kind of a good thing. Class. I don't. I would support leaving it in. I don't think they're gonna do anything. I bet a lot of money they're not gonna do it unless somebody like is out there like bugging them every day about it. Might I offer to the parking Commissioners? is there some other pressing issue that you feel is important to bring up with Council. They did request for 3 top community issues or priorities. If there was something else that you as Commissioners wanna highlight in your letter to counsel. Then what we would need to do is probably, except this is a approved letter from the Bj. Tdm. Commission and submit a separate letter from the Bj. Parking Commission. If we can agree on what the what we want to replace this item with.

[79:11] When I think about thanks for that, Chris, when I think about you know the effects of exhaust on the environment. Obviously, transportation created exhaust is a huge, a huge factor overall reducing vehicle. Miles traveled in finding ways to support. That I think very much aligns with the Tdm. Mandate. and I'm very much in support of that, you know, as a you know, someone on the parking commission, even though that's slightly out of the parking commissions. Purview in in some ways, so I don't know if we can maybe just change the wording, such as something along the lines of, you know. regulations

[80:01] curtailing or or eliminating, idling and supporting. You know other things that reduce vehicle miles traveled, or I don't know something along those lines that includes what in includes no idling, maybe, but not as the only the the main or only way that we could. We could support the the top line goal for for Number 2. They haven't. Alright. So what I heard was, and what edits we could con consider is we propose implementation of regulations to discourage air evolution caused by vehicles such as a citywide, no island ordinance would that

[81:03] accurately represent what you suggested? Brian. Gonna jump in and say, and a other measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled. I I thought, I if I get that right, Brian, I felt like. That's what you would want to see, added. Yeah. Elena. It's more in our purview. It feels more in our purview. and it feels like it puts across the point that the district is focused on the top line concern with potential suggestions, and and less about something specific that they may not do anything about. Anyways, I don't want to take it out of there, because I want to respect what I'd like to. I we we function jointly. It'd be nice to submit a joint letter. I want to respect what Tdm. Already discussed, so

[82:01] maybe a slight change like you said could could, you know. could succeed at that? At that idea? I don't know. See? Okay. I can make a another suggestion, too, that if if we leave this in which I'm kind of fine with either way, I mean, if we can move it to Number 3 and move the other one up. Just so we're not, you know, showing that as our second biggest concern cause, you know, this issue is never really been on a work plan. Never really, you know, been a part of our. A part of our mission here seems like a little bit outside the scope, so I don't. I don't want to give the appearance that. That's. What were set out undoing for the next year, I mean. Good for her. But of. Sorry. What was that to. Hi! There! I think that's a good call for us. Okay.

[83:00] Yeah, I'm comfortable with with that change as well of the reordering. Okay? Bye. I like the thanks, Robin. I see the thumbs up. I like the wording. I believe, Lisa, you that you typed So maybe if we can switch that to number 3, then we'd all be okay to vote on. That's what we'd like to submit. So why are we, as early as I did shift my buttons that we're actually doing? Gracie. Okay, any other questions or comments? Or do we feel ready to give a group thumbs up on on this. Yeah, and and Lynch, I will probably do that. Sorry I I see you there now. But admittedly, this incorporates some personal dynamic. I've lived in Boulder Junction for the last 3 years, and I still spend most days there. If there's consideration, if not for this submission, and a subsequent one, of expanding the concept of sustainable transportation to state and sustainable travel.

[84:04] the vehicle speeds along block from Junction Place are consistently, visibly above 20 miles an hour. So from a safety standpoint it's dangerous, and from a compliance standpoint it's illegal. but there's not many of those speed limit vision 0 signs on those roadways. And this is one of the the new population centers with a lot of market rate garage available parking, which means there's more vehicles traveling up and down those roads. So just as a real life expression to the group, I I think the safety component is is something that is on par with the sustainability initiatives from the the community standpoint kids, pets, cyclists. Everybody out there. On in terms of point number one, Dtc is working with the city and some other stakeholders to look at alternative transportation options. It sort of as a stopgap for

[85:05] resuming service at Depot Square. We don't have a lot of details yet, but information collection, especially with the upcoming community. Parking cash outreach will give us a lot more that we can share hopefully in May. At the next commissions. Just do that on that Friday. Thank you for that. Input. That's helpful. And for Llc's. Okay, I believe we're ready to all raise our hands in favor of voting to submit this. Florence, Christmas Day. Feed out. Okay. think that was everybody present. Chris, did you need anything else from us about this letter? No, that I saw unanimous vote of those President. We will check in with Rebecca, just to make sure she's comfortable. With the changes just to make cause we wanna make sure that her vote is adequately accounted for represented. I I doubt that she'll have any issues with it. But just wanna let you know that we'll do that, and then we'll get these submitted accounts. There.

[86:14] Thank you. I would note I in the chat also. Hopefully, you all saw Lane. put in a save the date in the chat related to the big dedication of the gateway monuments. So on Monday, April twenty-first, it's not final final yet, but we'd love to see you all there. More information to come. I'm reading. I guess that's April twenty-twond twenty-second. Yes. You have a time, Chris. Not yet.

[87:00] I'm guessing. Afternoon. Great. I don't see any other items on the agenda to discuss. Is there anything else that any commissioners wanted to discuss today other than the letter. Okay. Anything else from staff. Nope, that's it. Thank you so much. Okay, thanks. Everyone have a good rest. Thanks. See ya bye.