March 6, 2023 — Cannabis Licensing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] Okay, and we are recording. Hey, we're all set. Ish. We are awesome. Okay, welcome to the March Sixth meeting of the City of boulder's, cannabis, licensing, and Advisory Board. Let's go ahead and start with instructions for virtual meeting and rules of the no problem. I'm going to share my screen. Oh, br! This is the public participation at Cannabis licensing and advisory meetings. The city has a case with community members to co-create a vision for productive meaningful and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and board and commission members, as well as democracy. For people of all ages, identities lived experiences and political perspectives.

[1:02] More about this vision and the project's using engagement process can be found on our website. So, following our examples of rules up to foreign phone and the Border Revised code and other guidelines on support. This vision These will be upheld During this meeting all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participants shall make threats, or use other form of intimidation against any person. obscenity, racial epidets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impede the ability to conduct a meeting are prohibited. Participants are required to sign up, to speak, using only the name they are commonly known by an individuals, must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online currently on the audio testimony is provided permitted online. And so for anyone here who is looking to give public comment, you will need to rename yourself to your the name that you're commonly

[2:03] okay. subject them. Next I'm going to do a member roll call. Your your audio is coming in and out a little bit. Okay. it is better. Yes, that's good. All right. I'm gonna do member roll call here. You'll just speak your presence so loud. Member Christie. present Member Great Here. chair kids, Me present member below present Member noble as in present. actually Bailey present. And I don't believe Member Anderson has joined us yet. and do not have a text from him, either. So

[3:01] okay. and then by shirking, and will join us around between for the Exactly. So. I assume everyone has seen the minutes from January ninth. Was there any comments, correction suggestions about a motion to approve them. Anyone. Stacy. I know you're just itching to do that, Since that all right. Any votes against approving those or abstentions. Okay, they're approved. So going on to general public comments for the Board as stated and planned.

[4:01] we're going to divide up public comments into 2 different sections. This section is the same as every other month selection for general public comments, and then there will be a second. Our public comment session, just with respect to hospitality. so those that would like to speak just generally about issues pertaining to the Cannabis Board should choose to do so now, and those that want to sign up to speak against our Excuse me. We speak in about the issue of hospitality to wait for that moment. If you're wanting to do, if you wanted to speak on general public comments, go ahead and raise your hand. Now.

[5:08] i'm not saying any. Okay. So any policy suggestion forms there were not okay. So we'll move on to item Number 4 on the agenda. the marijuana, Hospitality City or no, that's not. That's not a good title. Did we come up with that title issues pretending to establishing hospitality establishments in the city of Boulder. So those that want to do public comment on that issue. Please raise your user virtual. Well, yeah, virtual hands and i'll have

[6:00] Caitlin. Do you want to explain to anyone who is new to this how to raise your hand. Yeah. So there's 2 options. If you go down to reactions. you can give me a thumbs up or you can select, raise your hand. I'll take either. And then, if everyone will just bear with me for a second, I'm going to make a list of everyone that we have raised in their hand in order. and i'll ask the Board if they have It's 3 min for public comment. for the section is appropriate, or if they wanted to adjust that so far I see 9, 10,

[7:02] and our plan was to take people in order which they raised their hands. It seems the only fair way to do that I currently have 11 with their hand raised. I'll give everyone another second. Raise your hand or give me a thumbs up. You can do that by selecting the reactions button if you are here by phone. I'm sorry. Say that earlier, but if you're here by calling in, you can hit Star 3, and that'll raise your hand for you. And I'm going to mute myself for one moment and just try to call out

[8:03] and last transfer hand raises. Okay, Think I have my list here, and then the way that this is gonna work is I'm gonna lower everyone's hand. Now and then I will go in order that we raised our hand. I'll ask you to unmute, and then i'll start a timer for you, so i'm going to share a 3 min timer. and i'll ask the participant to unmute. They can give their public comment. and then we can move on to the next one. If anyone on the board has anything else i'd like to see in that process. Please just let me know. And then I know Brian's not here, but as Brian and I am the city staff discussed when planning this meeting. We're going to allow 3 min for speaker.

[9:07] and on this location. just as we did last time. We're not gonna allow questions unless somebody has an absolute burning question, I guess. But we'll just confine it to the 3 min, her speaker. and then we'll have our own discussion afterwards. I hope. Is that okay with everyone? Hey, Tom, before we start. Just so that you're aware on the board where I've got a call that I've got to take. If it comes in it'll just be like a 2 to 3 min call. But i'll just drop off if that call comes through. Okay. Okay, and just so, Fy: I I tried Evan by phone. I got no answer. so I don't know. So let's go ahead and get started. Caitlin, do you want to call them by name? Yes, I'm gonna lower everyone's hand just so that I can keep track.

[10:04] and then I will call by name. This is not our only opportunity. If someone in the room and they do want to get public comment. we're going to call for it again. and if I miss you once again we're gonna call for it again. I think I perfect. So okay. Oh, right. Our first public commenter is Suzanne. I'm going to unmute you, but give me a second, so I can share the text. Okay. and timers starting to go ahead. Good afternoon Board members. This is Suzanne Chick. I'm. A professor of medicine, and I work at the University of California, San Francisco. I am here to share with you the results of the research I've been doing in public events and hospitality venues. In the city of San Francisco I have been in to about 5 cannabis dispensaries that have onsite consumption areas.

[11:16] I have published 2 scientific papers Peer reviewed on my research. So far one of the dispensaries I studied tried to control the particles that are put into the air by consuming cannabis, by smoking, vaping, and dabbing, by banning, smoking, and allowing, vaping and dabbing. and that was not enough in their dispensary to reduce the particle levels in the air to levels that are safe for people to work in and be around. I've been to 4 different dispensaries, one of the many times. others several times that have tried to control the particles in the air, the Pm. 2.5 using ventilation, and none of them again came anywhere near. If anything, ventilation was less successful in removing the particles created by smoking.

[12:09] If you want hospitality venues in boulder to be safe. we don't yet have a proven solution. People here in San Francisco are doing their best Dispensary owners are trying to create ventilation systems that work. But when you're in the same room as people who are throwing millions of particles into the air by smoking, vaping, or dabbing You're gonna get exposed to those particles and less people take measures that I have not yet seen, taken such as combining ventilation with bans on combustion, containment, and strict limits on the number of people who are allowed to consume. At the same time. I can't promise that will be entirely successful. But if you are bound and determined, and absolutely sure

[13:01] that it is your job to allow people to basically break smoke-free laws and consume cannabis in your public places in boulder colorado. That I encourage you to embark on a series of experiments, combining multiple methods for controlling Pm. Because using single methods as numerous people of goodwill in San Francisco, and the greater bay area have tried so far has not worked. Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Peter Marcus. After Peter Marcus. We I will call Rachel free. So, Peter, my kids. you should be unmuted and go ahead. Oh, can you hear me? Great! My name is Peter Marcus. I'm the Vp. Of communications for tariffing Care Station. We have 2 dispensaries in Boulder, and hold the first adult use license for the city. I'm. Also a member of the Board of directors of the Boulder Chamber tariff, and actually spearheaded in 2,019. The legislation and the State House that allows us to have the conversation here today.

[14:13] Conversation was always about opportunity. It's about about taking Cannabis consumption off the street out of our parks while providing new business opportunities for entrepreneurs who've otherwise been unable to access the industry. There are significant barriers to entering the canvas. Space. Licenses are hard to come by. They're expensive. You have to be well capitalized to start a dispensary even more for cultivation. It's a mature competitive industry. New hospitality licenses would allow those who have been unable to participate to seize a new opportunity to engage. and the possibilities are analysts. We're talking entrepreneurs with backgrounds and event planning, music, culinary arts, fitness, etc. They could couple their existing skills with the new twist and cannabis.

[15:00] It's an exciting time for those waiting in the wings so long as the city acts and actually sets these businesses up for success, while the current prop proposal will get us to hospitality. It's burdened. Some restrictions would likely lead to failure. Quickly putting on my chamber hat for a second. Let me say that as a member of the Board of Directors, we carefully weighed whether a cannabis hospitality policy is right for the city. We realize that regulated cannabis hospitality establishments would provide additional business opportunities for the city. Following what was a tough time for hospitality, thanks to the pandemic. Here's the policy of the chamber landed on. Given the nascent nature of this industry we support the ongoing collaboration of a community based and community-wide stakeholder engagement to balance the complex interaction between State on local policies. We know that as our experience with the cannabis industry grows and initial concerns prove unfounded, it is appropriate to conduct a more thorough regulatory review when developing policies. This includes the opportunity to explore new avenues for the responsible consumption and delivery of cannabis

[16:09] products, boulders, initial regulations proved excesses compared to surrounding communities which threatened the competitiveness of our local businesses. The bottom line, the boulder chamber works to maintain a predictable economic climate for all businesses and industries, by seeking appropriate congruence between State law and local ordinances and opposing laws and regulations based on unsubstantiated perception, as opposed to fact-based concerns. That's what we're talking about here. I thank you for your consideration as you can See Cannabis hospitality is the logical next step in our evolution to provide additional opportunity and safe and regulated spaces so long as we actually set those businesses up for success. Thank you, Peter. Thank you. Next we have Rachel Freeman.

[17:03] and I will ask you to unmute, and I do want to make a quick note that if you did raise your hand, wanting to get public comment. I've added you to the list. I did lower your hand. so don't here I've got you. So racial agreement is next, and on deck is Truman Bradley after Rachel. Hello, Members of the Cloud. My name is Rachel Freeman, and I am the program manager for the tobacco education and prevention partnership at Boulder County Public Health. Our program serves Boulder County communities by providing resources. that support individuals in quitting tobacco, reducing tobacco-related health disparities reducing youth initiation of tobacco and vaping products and reducing exposure to secondhand smoke. I'm here today to oppose the city of boulder opting into cannabis. Social consumption sites due to the negative health impacts. That second hand, marijuana smoke and vaping aerosol will have on employees youth and adult residents of boulder.

[18:10] So more research is needed on the long-term health implications of secondhand marijuana. Exposure. Evidence shows that second-hand marijuana smoke has many of the same chemicals as tobacco smoke and you heard some of these facts from my colleague Suzanne, and you'll hear from others today as well. allowing marijuana, smoking, and vaping can have negative health implications for employees by leaving them unprotected from exposure from tobacco prevention. Best practice. We know that smoke-free policies are associated with reduced second-hand smoke, exposure decreased adverse health effects and a decrease in use prevalence among young people. Over the last 15 years. Our program at Boulder County Public health in partnership with the community has worked really hard to establish smoke free policies in boulder, including many outdoor locations, such as restaurant patios and the downtown business district.

[19:07] The presence of cannabis social consumption. But in the community would further de-normalize marijuana, use and decrease the perception of harm among young people. to protect health and ensure consistency. Marijuana in addition to tobacco and nicotine should be included in smoke, free and vapor, free protections in public places and workplaces. We believe that allowing cannabis, social consumption businesses is a step back and really weakens the policies that we've worked hard to put in place in the way of clean air protections and use prevention and smoking and substance use. Again. I thank you for your thoughtfulness. and the time and the energy and effort that you put into the development of the package of recommendations that will go to city council. We really do appreciate the time you dedicated to this issue. Thank you.

[20:00] Thank you, Rachel, and I just realized that I, when I thank Peter, I might have been muted. So. Thank you, Peter. Also. Thank you. Next we have Truman Bradley, and on deck after Truman Bradley is Gregory to good Afternoon Board members. My name is Truman Bradley I'm. The Executive Director of the Marijuana Industry Group. The Trade Association for Colorado Cannabis businesses. Our members are all across the State, and include half a dozen licensed in boulder. Prior to serving in this role I owned and operated a grow facility in boulder for 9 years. I also grew up in boulder and attended Southern Hills Middle School Fair view, and then see you for both undergrad and B school. We commend the cloud on recommending marijuana hospitality, and would suggest that, as the city moves forward, that you please consider hospitality licensure through an equity lens That, said I'm, deeply concerned about the recommended ban on adults. H. 21 through 24, as well as the prohibitions on edibles, and concentrates. These policies equate to prohibition 2.0 a flawed and outdated position, and one that's very unpopular among bolder voters

[21:11] according to polling done in 2,02185 of Colorado Democrats support legal marijuana in regards to the age limit. Let's not have an Emperor's new close situation where we pretend that adults in their early twenties. Don't consume cannabis in boulder. Of course they do. I did it in boulder in my early twenties, and I promise you it's the same today 21 to 24 year Olds are the exact people who should be provided a safe place to consume a hospitality lounge can help monitor younger patrons and make sure they're not driving home impaired a value that passed unanimously in this committee prohibiting younger adults from Marijuana. Hospitality will not stop them from consuming. They'll just be more likely to do it in their cars, or on Pearl Street, or potentially in the presence of minors. A lounge guarantees there won't be miners present.

[22:01] The logic against prohibition is the exact same for bands on vapes, concentrates, and edibles. Well, Meg disagrees with the premise that concentrates and dates are more harmful than other consumption methods. Even if you think that you should allow concentrate consumption? Adults of all ages are going to consume these products anyway? Please allow them to do so safely away from kids, and in a place where impairment can be monitored. Lastly, Clouds recommendation to ban edibles is nonsensical. Edibles do have a delayed onset when compared to smoking but the delay is typically about 45 to 60 min. Something that the hospitality businesses and consumers are well aware of. And can adjust to the recommendations should, instead, be around edibles, purchase limits and times, as the effects of edibles typically wear off in about 2 and a half hours. The edibles ban is especially ridiculous. Since you're approving beverages, there's no effective difference between a marijuana soda and a gummy. In conclusion, I commend you for starting the process to legalize hospitality. Please amend the policy to permit all legal forms of cannabis, and allow all legal adults to safely consume. Lastly, please consider social equity and your recommendations. Thank you very much.

[23:19] Thank you, Chairman. It could be one thing. Okay. Next we have Gregory Topple. I'll ask you to unmute and on deck we have Liz Zooowski. Hello! My name is Greg Telpel. I'm fortunate enough to be one of the managers over at Stella's Coochina. I wanted to share how things have been going so far. We've been open for just under 2 months now, and have exceeded all of our expectations in

[24:05] the response that we're getting from the community. It has been very evident that it is something that the boulder is very hungry for the elements of the aesthetics and the service, and the food and the music. It's just been wildly, wildly well received, and we are incredibly grateful, for it feels important to mention that that this concept is has been exceeding our expectations. Now we've got a team of incredibly seasoned individuals, Stella Spanner. The honor has spared no expense in in in gathering one of the most pedigree staff and supervisors and management teams that I've ever at the pleasure of working with truly seasoned professionals. Each member of our team is tips certified. We have recurring tip certification program that takes care. It takes place every 90 days within our building. The level of

[25:06] of Stella's dedication to this community and the level of long term thinking applied to all that she has done and all that she is doing it. It felt important for me to bring that to the table. This is this is a in. It is an innovative concept and and a and a first time concept for Stella and Jason the honors. But it it's the the the level of professionalism, the serious nature with which they take it. and they're truly. truly benevolent intent. It really needs to be talked about from the treetops. As far as i'm concerned. I am again feeling incredibly fortunate to be a part of this very, very special and and possibly historic kind of transformative concept, and I I felt the need to make sure that

[26:00] I told the larger community of what's going on within those 4 walls. Thank you. Thank you, Gregory. Thank you. Next we have Liz Zikowski. and on deck we have Henny Lackley. and this you should be on. Okay, thanks, Caitlin. My name is Liz Zukowski. I am the policy and public affairs manager for Native Roots Cannabis Company. We are a vertically integrated operator, with 20 locations across the State. 2 of which are in the city of Boulder. I'd like to start by thinking all of you cloud numbers for your diligence and researching and analyzing hospitality programs nationwide, and your thoughtfulness. And considering how those programs could influence hospitality in Boulder. After reviewing the recommendations made for city council, I'm. Sharing the following suggestions to improve the proposal.

[27:00] The bans on concentrate use, and non drinkable edibles feel misguided. They pens are very popular, especially among novice users, because users can easily self titrate to receive the desired amount of product and the desired effect. But these would be banned under the current proposal. Additionally allowing vape usage in hospitality. Establishments will help curb vaping in unsanctioned areas. An alternative idea is to ban the use of open flames and dabricks, while not completely banning concentrate use chewable edibles are not less predictable or less consistent than drinkable edibles. All edible products go through the same rigorous testing, packaging, and labeling requirements that are set by the state. Further, many of the edibles on the market today are considered fast acting, and the desired effect comes on in 10 to 15 min and last 2, maybe 3 h. providing legal and regulated environments for vape and edible consumption, with knowledgeable staff, encouraging responsible consumption and promoting the start. Low Go slow message is a superior public health and safety policy over outright prohibition of these products.

[28:12] The recommendation that patrons must be 25 or older, to enter should be reduced to 21 years old, to align with State law. 21 to 24 year olds in boulder likely rent their home, as I did when I lived in Boulder. Many landlords have restrictions on Cannabis use in the dwelling, as my landlord did when I lived in boulder limiting hospitality. Access to patrons that are 25 or older does not solve the issue for the 21 to 24 year. Olds who are legally allowed to consume, but are left with no real options, for where they can legally consume. I ask that you consider the message you're sending to boulder residents and constituents regarding the use of cannabis versus the use of alcohol. On my 20 first birthday I created up and down Pearl Street, stopping at nearly every bar, and most of them provided me with a free shot of liquor to celebrate.

[29:06] This is a widely accepted practice in boulder and across the country a young person would view the age. Disparity for entering a bar versus a hospitality establishment as a de facto endorsement to use one substance alcohol over another substance. Cannabis. I'll leave you with this, according to the Cdc. 200 people die from alcohol poisoning annually in the Us. And 0 people die annually from consuming regulated cannabis. Thanks. Thank you, Liz. Thank you. Next we have honey. Lastly, i'll ask you to unmute. and on deck we have shard. One Chance To Grow Up: Good afternoon, members of the Club, My name is Henny Lesley, and I'm. A co-founder and executive director of an organization called One Chance to grow up. We are a statewide organization that looks out for the public health and safety of youth as marijuana and marijuana products continue to be readily available and commercialized.

[30:08] One Chance To Grow Up: First, we appreciate the steps for public health and safety that the cloud has taken. If you do intend, as you do intend to make recommendations to city council. However, we must look beyond this. One Chance To Grow Up: In January of this year the C. Dot announced that 745 individuals lost their lives on Colorado roadways. We must ask ourselves the most important question: Will hospitality licenses contribute to this sovereign statistic. One Chance To Grow Up: See? That will be the first to tell you that the agency has spent millions of tax dollars on working to change behavior of those who consume thc and then drive T. H. C. Impaired. Fatalities have increased 63% over the prior year, and dual youth of out of alcohol and thc increase 25% One Chance To Grow Up: 22% of deaths involved, those outside of the vehicle, including pedestrian cyclists and motorcyclists, think about the bolder way of life and how many of your citizens and students, both high school and university, fit. Into this category

[31:08] One Chance To Grow Up: Marijuana edibles do present another danger due to delayed impairment according to the State Health Department. The delayed onset is anywhere between 4 and 6 h. The Buffalo Highway is a terrible place for an edible to reach the maximum impairment One Chance To Grow Up: increased marijuana commercialization. Since the wrong message to kids adding consumption sites will increase sales density by creating additional sales. Of Thc. One Chance To Grow Up: A. Rand report showed that young people, aged 18 to 22, have lived in neighborhoods with more marijuana, commercialization, use marijuana more frequently than their peers, and have a more positive view of the drug One Chance To Grow Up: according to monitor the monitoring the future out of the University of Michigan. One Chance To Grow Up: past year, past month, and daily marijuana use reached the highest levels ever recorded since These trends were first monitored in 1,988

[32:00] One Chance To Grow Up: marijuana use in the past month was reported by 29% of young adults in 2,021 compared to 21 5 years ago and 1710 years ago. One Chance To Grow Up: One chance puts kids in communities first, instead of those looking to profit from additional sales. For these reasons we stand in opposition a bolder going forward with host hospitality licenses One Chance To Grow Up: to our knowledge. If the data were actually in existence that this would alleviate One Chance To Grow Up: outdoor smoking, we would definitely take a different position. But to our knowledge no such data are available. Thank you again, and we do recommend the cloud. Look to what's best for your entire community. Thank you. Thank you, Hendy. Thank you. Next we have shar Shar day. I'll ask you to on me and on deck. We have Jonathan Stinker. Thank you, Caitlin. My name is Shar Day, and I represent American nonsmokers Rights Foundation.

[33:06] and I I really do want to thank you guys, for your members of Cloud for your extremely thoughtful, diligent work on this important issue in Our foundation is not anti- cannabis use for personal choices by adults, just not using it in ways that harm others so not using it in ways that harm others. We are opposed to boulder opting in to social consumption of cannabis marijuana, because doing so would create a new unprotected class of workers. Those in the social consumption industry and everyone deserves to work in a Smoke-free Workplace Smoke is smoke. Let's put people over profit secondhand marijuana smoke is every bit as harmful as tobacco smoke

[34:01] and just so folks know Pearl Street is a smoke-free zone. and our foundation will continue to speak up on this issue. Thank you again. Thank you, Shar. Thank you. and I do want to point out that member Anderson did join us before 3, 38 Next we have Jonathan singer. I'll ask you to unmute and on deck we have via cable. Good afternoon, members of the club. I'm. Jonathan Singer, the Senior Director of Policy programs for the Boulder Chamber of Commerce, also the author of the legislation that enacted the opportunity for local governments to be able to opt in to the hospitality model. But before that I wanted to give you a little history of who I am and what brought me here today. I graduated from Fairview High School.

[35:02] and in my time at Fairview high school. I spent my time volunteering for causes that I cared about. including, working in the world of social justice and social work, where I eventually got my degree in social work at Colorado State University, trying to return to Boulder, only to find that housing costs went up a little bit more than I could expect. And now I reside with my family in Longmont. I spent the next 10 years of my life actually working on college campus drug courts. working with youth in at risk. and there are truancy courts. And so what I. When I finally was elected to office, I came to the conclusion that we needed to start to treat marijuana like the drug it is. and not the drug that some people fear it to be The reason that I see that is while working with youth at risk. the risks of marijuana. We're so overstated that my youth didn't understand what to believe and what not to believe

[36:02] this opportunity that the cloud has today is about ensuring that we can do a legal behavior in a regulated environment with the best safeguards possible. without further pushing things underground, or making a drug scarier than it really turns out to be. We hear about perception of risk. Perception of risk is incredibly important. But we've heard 20 years ago that, per as perception of risk goes down. youth goes up. We haven't seen those numbers since marijuana has been legalized. What is important is ensuring that the cloud is able to pass on recommendations to the city Council, as it was charged with over 2 years ago to allow this public process to continue to ensure that everybody is able to make their voice heard on this. What's unfortunate is the consumers of cannabis are still discriminated against. You're not going to hear from a lot of them today, because they fear losing their jobs.

[37:07] They fear losing their livelihoods, and they fear losing their family. Sometimes we have still a criminal justice system that unfairly discriminated against marijuana consumers. and not having social establishments similar to what you've laid out here today, only further allows that perception of risk to continue. So. I look forward to the conversation I look forward to listening in and thank you. Please pass these recommendations on. Thank you, Jonathan. Thank you. Next we have. I'll ask you to unmute, and on that we have Nick tore. My name is Bia Campbell. I'm an associate with, Yes, strategies, a public policy consulting firm that works with businesses, industry, associations, and governments. On adopting responsible cannabis policy.

[38:10] We represent Stalus kitchen, a restaurant currently operating boulder who wishes to open a marijuana hospitality establishment. We have been following collaps, process and hospitality discussion for the past 2 years. Andrew, it thankful for collaps time and thoughtfulness over this time, and appreciate the boards well in your work. Why, we do not agree with all the decisions made by the Board. We respect the process, and the intensive time and discussions that happen to arrive at this point. On May third, 2,021. Almost 2 years ago Clab held an initial public hearing on the top of my hospitality. and at that point community members in favor of hospitality were in the majority. considering past elections and vote to marijuana issues. We believe that the boulder community has this historical track of being in favor of fair and responsible marijuana policies.

[39:02] We also know that between 22 and 25% of older Communist population are current cannabis consumers we believe that the majority of older residents would be in favor of adopting, reasonable and responsible for policies to allow for marijuana, hospitality, and hospitality licenses within the city Considering the 24 months of discussion, the marijuana industry our friends allies, consumers, and businesses, opted to be respectful of Collaps time, and decided to not have a multitude of speakers here today trying to influence policy decisions that were solidified, discussed, to exhaust, and by this board it is our hope that today clad can vote to move this process forward and recommend the policies outlined in our memo memo to City Council. We thank you for your time and commitment to the Boulder community. Thank you for you.

[40:00] Thank you. Next we have Nick Torres. I'll ask you to unmute, and on deck we have Pete. Good afternoon. My name is Nick Torres. I am as the City director of the American Lung Association in Colorado, and also a boulder resident here to relay the long associations concerns with the cloud moving forward with recommendations that would represent a major step backward for public health, for boulder residents smoke for your laws have a long history of having a positive public health impact on the residents of communities with strong smoke, free air protections. and we would certainly oppose any changes to Boulder's law that would allow

[41:02] on site, consumption for burning or vaping and marijuana. Whether we're talking about tobacco smoke, marijuana, smoke. wildfire smoke, or a neighbors leaf pile smoke, you know. Smoke inhaling smoke is harmful to the human body. and fortunately we've had now nearly a generation voter rights growing up in a community where public tobacco smoke is just not something that they come across. You know we're not asking folks smoking or non-smoking when going to a restaurant anymore. And and I think that part of the the challenge that we have to overcome in the public health community is educating on the perceptions, changing the perceptions of of marijuana smoke, and we've done so much in regards to changing public perceptions around tobacco smoke over the last generations that we now find ourselves having to educate that

[42:06] inhaling marijuana. Smoke is not a healthy way to engage in marijuana consumption. There are many, many well documented impacts on cardiovascular and pulmonary systems at the individual level. and we would certainly support ongoing research into the effects at the public health level of of marijuana, smoke and and vaping. However, there is an abundance of evidence recognizing that that smoke is smoke is smoke when it comes to inhaling particulate matter. That is a negative impact on public health. And so the long association will look forward to continuing to monitor this process, we will continue to advocate for members of the public, for example, a a family with children with asthma. who can no longer open their windows

[43:00] because they might be downwind from an onsite consumption. Hospitality, licensee. Those stories are not something we deal with in Colorado. We deal with them in many other places where smoking is still more commonplace, and so we would hope that Boulder would protect the smoke Free Air Law and not allow on site consumption with smoking and vaping. Thank you, Nick. Thank you. Next we have Pete Felix, and on deck we have Don Rainfield. Hello! This. My name is Pete. Thank you for your time members of the I am the president of the group to alleviate smoking pollution gas. But Colorado, a nonprofit organization founded in 1,977, and that has been in boulder since I moved here in 1,983.

[44:00] Our mission is to protect the public from exposure to any type of second, and smoke or vape at work in public places in a multi-unit housing through education and advocacy. Gasp has some concerns about allowing any indoor or outdoor social consumption under our current smoking and vaping regulations, the most complaints, gas per se, or about tobacco, marijuana smoke drifting into businesses drifting into homes, departments in outdoor settings, and we have had people complain about marijuana smoke coming into their homes even in boulder. I do think that outward consumption I do not think that outdoors social consumption will change that prom unless it's limited to remote areas. Furthermore, social consumption would weaken the current smoking regulations we have in Boulder, so I think the city council would need to approve it by a 2 thirds vote, or put on the ballot, because in 1,995. About measure was passed, regulating smoking

[45:03] in boulder by the people of Boulder by 55 there's no safe exposure to secondhand smoke, as it's been said, and has some of the same chemicals. I think people who deliver goods or services, and all workers deserve to be protected from second and smoke. Gas does not oppose the use of marijuana products indoors or outdoors that are an alternative to smoking or vaping like infused beverages and tinctures, and those can be found in soda pops, coffee, drinks, juices. I read online that we drinks and pictures could take effect within 30 min, but somebody else said it to Mac faster. I've read also that they those can last 2 to 4 h. You know that's where the industry should concentrate if they're really concerned about their workers and exposing other people to second and smoke. We do not entirely oppose allowing smoking or vaping out in outdoor settings not visible to the public that can be controlled in such a way that it does not drift into other public places or workplaces, and that can minimize the health dangers to workers.

[46:10] The Chamber of Commerce often has promoted Boulder as one of the healthiest places to live in the United States. I hope we can keep it that way. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Thank you, Pete. Thank you. And next we have John Green. I'll ask you to on me and on deck we have. Julie and I do want to call if anyone else would like to make public comments. So they last you on our list. Anyone else would like to make public comment. Please raise your hand or give me a thumbs up, and i'll add you to the list and don i'm asking you to Hi. My name is Don Reinfeld, and I am the executive director of Blue Rising.

[47:02] We strongly oppose the opting into social consumption in the city of Boulder, and will urge the City Council to opt out. We appreciate that the cloud intentionally excluded high potency Thc. Products from its recommendations. But we maintain that allowing any marijuana consumption in our restaurants and bars would be extremely problematic, with no upside for the broader community. One of the arguments for opting in is that providing places for legal consumption might decrease illegal consumption. But there is no evidence to support this theory, and communities with social consumption, like Las Vegas and West Hollywood. The order of illegal consumption is still as strong as ever. Our community is in the midst of a mental health and addiction. Crisis Colorado adolescents use Marijuana use of marijuana is 43% higher than the national average. The presence of consumption venues and prominent locations would further normalize marijuana use which is particularly problematic for our young people who are vulnerable to its mental health risks.

[48:08] Boulder is already struggling to deal with this addiction crisis, and contrary to the myth that marijuana is not addictive. Even the state of Colorado now warns that Thc. Is addictive and can cause serious mental health impacts like psychosis. Boulder does not have the resources to deal with our current level of addiction and mental health impacts. We should not be encouraging. More use for our youth. Boulder Doesn't need to lead the way on social consumption sites. We are about health, fitness, and vitality, not smoking and leaning into drug culture. We need to be listening to the families that are raising kids here, not the interest of an industry that profits from addiction. Blue rising advocates on behalf of many Colorado families who have been impacted. We will continue to be active in this debate. Thank you

[49:06] how you doing. Thank you. Our last speaker is Julie. Julie, and i'll ask you to unmute, and i'll call again if anyone else would like to get public comment. Please raise your hand, and I'll add you to the list. Julie. Thank you. My name is Julie, dry fault, and I'm. Representing myself today. First and foremost, I really appreciate that cloud is chosen to exclude this high teaching marijuana products from your recommendations. As there are significant mental health concerns about these 5 teams and products. As has been stated by previous testimony, CD. Ph. She has issued substantial health warnings around Thc. Including that it can cause acute psychotic symptoms, hallucinations, paranoia.

[50:03] and the possibility of developing a schizophrenic disorder in adulthood If used as adolescents and kids. I am a parent of a CEO Boulder, Jr. And a resident of Colorado, and I am opposed to boulder opting into social consumption because of growing access to marijuana and other substances to those under 21, and our beloved State is shocking and substantial. We at the sync last weekend and the observation of underage drug use I encountered on the hill in just about 55 min, was very troubling cu has poured millions of dollars into campaigns like be boulder which tends to lean away from the party school image and tell us to use Boulders better story, their stronger story to advance the school's reputation, retention, engagement, goals, and reputation all of these which only benefit the greater boulder community. The city should not undermine these efforts by opting into commercialization and social consumption.

[51:00] As most of you are aware, the Us. Surge in general states that no amount of marijuana uses safe for the developing brain of our adolescent, and science tells us that the brain is information until one's mid to late twenties. So I applaud the 25 plus age demographic that you're looking at. but creating these additional outlets with this increase in commercial commercialization for all of older students sends the wrong message. The elementary age, kids, middle schoolers, the students at Boulder and Fairview and our Cu cohort suggest to them that marijuana is safe. A study in La concluded. As marijuana outlets open and expand after legalization. It showed the association of density, with greater intensity of use among young adults and adolescents. as you know, adding marijuana social consumption will increase density like additional licenses and create these marijuana mini-marts in already existing stores. as the school superintendent told me several years ago legalize marijuana only brings more marijuana to our communities and to our kids.

[52:03] hey, key, boulder and protect our community's greatest effort assets. I'm: sorry our children, our kids and our students. For these reasons I hope the City Council will reject the idea of opting in the social consumption, and please know I will continue to speak up on this issue. Thank you so much for all your work. Thank you, Julie. Are there any other speakers? I do see other names that have not spoken Chance Here's your chance. You can give me a thumbs up or raise your hand. If you're calling in using a phone number, you can push Star 3 to raise your now. I don't see any other hands being raised.

[53:02] Okay. all right, let's close public comment and go on to discussion. I'd almost I know it's premature. but Brian's going to be able to join us momentarily, I hope. What would you think about taking a break? Just a short break right now? I'll check in with Brian just as I checked with Alana and Evan. and see if you can join us for discussion. My understanding was that he might be as late as 4, 30, so that's 30 min. It seems it may just I I was gonna check with them right now and see that'll give me a chance to do that. Just a short break.

[54:08] All right. Let me just like let's say 4 or 5. Give give you a chance to get something to eat before we discuss a quick snack. Okay, 4 or 5,

[55:57] all right for those. I can hear us come on back.

[56:05] although if they had their audio on they would have heard recording in progress. Okay. I think we have a Karm. And Brian said he'll be he's on his way home. I'm driving home right now. He'll be here within about 5 to 7 ish minutes. But let's go ahead and get started. And first of all. speaking on behalf of all of the top members, I would oh. like to show gratitude to all the speakers for their insight and information and your passion. and so take that all into account as we discuss the recommendations.

[57:01] So we didn't really have a way to go through this other than go through them. But we've already discussed them and voted on them. and so I I I guess I would love to keep comments brief. so that we can make it all the way through. And then, hopefully, as am I right, Kristen, that our timeline is good if we i'm looking for Kristen's face, but not seeing it. that our plan was to finish them this time and present them to city, console in the near future. That's correct, Tom. So the proposed timeline was to finalize the recommendations in April, and then present those to council. He's a finalized the recommendations in March.

[58:02] present them to council in April. I mean, that's especially helpful for the members who may be leaving the Board, because we do have. We may have one or 2 new Board members coming in April. so now maybe the last time for the current board to have these conversations with the existing board members. Does everyone understand that new board members will be appointed mid-month and I was gonna wait till later, but. Alan, I was gonna also express gratitude for all of your users, you. But towards this, because, as I understand you did not reapply. Is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. And I I should have done my homework before I tried to do this.

[59:00] But how many years did you put in to map that began in 2,016. So it's been 7 years between map and cloud. You've been working on this as long as if not longer than most of us. Obviously so. I think the city of older should be thankful to, and we're all thankful to you. It's okay. Did you want to? Well, I was like to the end. If you you can decide whether you want to say anything special at the end. But anyways, does anyone else have any insight as to how to go about this. Okay. So if we use as a common document.

[60:00] let me just pull up. Is it in here, or do I have to open a page? I think I probably have to open a page. Is that right? Or the full text of the memo is in your reading packet. That's what I thought. Additionally, the link. If anyone on the Google Doc, that link is there as well. What P. Is it in the reading? Okay. Age 33, i'm almost there. and while the cher is writing that page, I will let everyone know that Member Vicar. Welcome, Brian. Good afternoon. Everybody apologize for my tardiness. Life happens. Okay. if I if we go through it motion by motion, the intention is not to change the vote.

[61:04] I mean, I think we've already done that. but we can have a discussion just in general about the issues. Brian, did you have any idea on how to go about this? I am just getting settled in. So i'm proud to all right. So the first one is easy motion. One we opted out of Mobile, or bring your own canvas hospitality. and it was unanimous. and unless there's further discussion on that

[62:00] I'm gonna try to keep. I really wish I had more than one screen. But, Donna. I was just gonna ask what the Board prefer that I share this document, or are you okay to reference on your own? You put so you can put it up as a exit. Or. yeah, I can share that screen on the screen. If you'd like. sure anyone opposed to that. why not? I mean, it's in the packet which people could have at people probably did, or it could have access. But still, why not? Okay. where you're gonna have to make the size, right? Perfect. That's okay. Looks good. So motion 2. It's going way back in time now.

[63:04] So the motion, 2 in motion. 3 can go hand in hand. It's kind of the same boat. It's relatively twice. and the first was to continue discussion and opt in. and then the second vote. Really, it was just to kind of clarify that further discussion needs to occur. Which would it was going to happen anyway. So so, unless somebody has more to say about this. we can go on to more topical things. I guess that sound. Okay. See? I can't see everybody's face when that's up on the screen. That's the only problem.

[64:02] Yeah, thanks, Tom. I'm. Just wondering just a suggestion. And and of course I welcome the Board's thoughts on this. But is there any reason to keep any motions that failed on on this? Is there any value in that, or does it create more confusion? There's some confusion. and by asking that question, you're hoping to simplify it for. Oh, yeah, I mean I just. I guess I just want to make sure that it's in a format that will be helpful to Council, and and and maybe it's just if you wanted to keep it in there. If if you think that there's some value in doing that, then that's fine, but maybe

[65:01] highlighting the ones that did pass just to kind of differentiate. So they don't kind of get mixed in together. so it's a little bit of just sort of some formatting concerns that I have that I think we can address, but I think it'd be important to get the board's input on that in terms of how that looks. And then the other thing I would say, too, is that just in terms of sharing this document, it it it would be helpful, I think, at the very beginning to kind of have a little bit of background about why this document is coming to them, and if there is an ask what that ask is. So maybe you all can think about that as we're working through the motions. But I do think that you know they they're not gonna really. Well, some of them may. But oh.

[66:01] some may not know why this is coming to them. Yeah, what's gonna My plan was to have that discussion towards the end of this. But that's okay, that I mean it's an important part of this. So just for clarification. If we were to take our either change the order, or I'm not sure if I heard you say, do not present the failed motions. I think it would be missing some substance, but we could regroup things and put the failed and one withdrawn motion towards the end. Something like that. But Robin and then Alana. Okay. Sandra brought up 2 different things. I just want to speak first to the first thing she brought up about whether we should include failed motions in this memo. And I think there, this first one that we're looking at on page one motion 3.

[67:05] I do see where that doesn't. Add a lot to the conversation that's hard to explain. There's not context behind it. It just kind of sits there in a weird way. But there are other failed motions later, like on page 2 motion, 5 and page 2 motion 7. Those are substantive, and probably should be represented in this document, because they show that we were looking at the you know, full product type. So I I do think that first one, though, could be eliminated without, you know. causing harm to this overall document and what we're trying to do, and that one is motion 3. Okay. And did you want to speak about the second issue, or just stay with the first issue

[68:03] request is that it be just a very straightforward, non-persuasive type language in the beginning, this is y-claps meeting. These are our recommendations. and we wanted to provide context to the full balance of our conversation. I think it can be pretty straightforward. Hey, Alana? Yeah, I agree with Robin on her comments as Well. I just wanted to make sure that all the Board members wanted to go through these motions one by one before we did that. So it just seems really exhaustive, and I thought we did that. But like the last meeting. maybe we could gather which motions we I don't know just kind of a pull the membership, and before we just go, one by one, or if there's a purpose to going one by one through them, maybe I missed that. Well, i'd like to hear from others, but I guess my point of view is that we heard some passionate speakers addressing certain aspects of

[69:05] sort of specific motions like motion 5 that Robin just mentioned, or the age related motion. and it seems like it would do service to the people that spoke, and passionately to take their comments, and just at least touch bases on those motions. And this is the way to make sure that we get to each each of those. Okay. So i'm looking for for desired changes, because I feel like we've also all had multiple opportunities that we've raised to reconsider some of these. But even despite individual board member efforts to look at these on both sides, you know, at take another glance at them. We've continually decided to

[70:09] keep them, as is so I mean. are you saying that we're reconsidering these one by one, based on the topics that we heard from public comment? I'm not wedded to any particular way to do this. I guess I just wanted to give merit to the speakers that spoke. I mean we could we, I mean alternatively choosing an an extreme scenario. If we didn't hear any game changers in the speakers today. then we could just approve the whole. A list of recommendations in mass. What do. What do others want to do. Stacy? I want to hear from you, Brian Michael. Everyone

[71:06] I don't. I don't have everybody on my screen right now, so it looks like Member Anderson. Remember what I looked like, mister. I remember Anderson. How does he end up there? Give me a thumbs up. Oh, okay, see, I can't see that right now, so I will scare you guys. all of my extended conversation here. But I think we have still avenge for 7. 1 one moment. So just to help explain Evans on the airplane, I believe. and his audio is marginal and including your audio coming to us, is marginal. I don't know if you can hear that.

[72:01] but and then maybe go off. And now there you go. I did not Who? I did not see, who said that, and I did not hear what that was is that you cable? No, sorry. Member Anderson: yeah, you turn your camera off. It might be easier for you for us to hear you If you draw that. you want to give that a try, Evan. How about now? Can you? Can you guys hear me at all much better. Okay. I took out my bluetooth, and now i'm just holding my mouth real close to the phone. I I My only point would be that. I think we've we've exhaustively discussed all of this. I think both both sides of every opinion have been pretty well documented in our record, and I think it would be appropriate for us to approve this memo in whole. Obviously, I think there's some things I would like to change and revisit. But I think that's the that is the process for

[73:03] for us to pursue. When this comes in front of council, I think at this point it would be appropriate for us to move. To make this recommendation as a wholesale document. We all had opportunities, and I just don't think it. It's my take. We were good on the audio until the last sentence. I just don't think it's necessary for us to revisit each one of these individually. I would like to. I would like to approve this memo in whole and send it off to Council. Okay, Michael. Thanks, Tom. Yeah, I agree with a lot. I agree with Evan. I agree with Robin into Council's point. I'm. Not necessarily. Well, I I would be opposed to sending forth to council just those motions that have passed. I think, at least for for me, from

[74:09] not only a a personal but also professional perspective. It's important to me that I think Council sees at least how I voted on these different motions that they're going to be considering. So I would. I would ask that we keep the format as it is, showing those motions that passed, and which members voted for to pass, and which remote members voted to not pass each motion. It is noted that Evan just gave a thumbs up. Hey? Yeah, I was just gonna say kind of just highlighting, you know, just on saying that I agree that the motion 3, I think, is, is not very helpful. I think it's more confusing than so. I agree with Robin that that that could be removed. I also think that

[75:01] I think that the fields I think a lot of people agree, and we've kind of talked about wanting the failed ones to be there, so I think that I, you know. Would you know I support that because we've had multiple conversations about making sure that everybody's voice is her. I think that's part of it. I do also like Sandra's idea of highlighting the past ones in some way. I don't know what that looks like, but maybe all of the past ones look a little different than the ones that failed, so that they pop out a little bit. Not really sure if we can highlight the rose in in this way that might be a little tacky. But there's gotta be a way that maybe we can make that a little bit more pronounced. And then I was gonna just mention there's a couple of I mean, I. However, you guys want to, or you all want to do it, whether we go through each one or not. I don't know that that's necessary. I was only gonna mention that Number 14 Motion number 14. We have number 22. That's also about hours. I just didn't know if we wanted to make some notation that led to that next

[76:03] for to connected 14 and 22 in some way. That that was my only comment about anything that's on the sheet. But i'm happy to follow whatever everybody thinks in terms of the process. But as I mentioned, there's thanks. You want to scroll down to 22. Also there it says in the notes it says motion was reconsidered or a reconsideration of motion 14, but motion 14 doesn't say anything about motion 22, so we could combine those. I I I feel like i'm being the devil's advocate, but there was a session by one speaker I can't remember who now I was keeping notes, but

[77:04] someone who spoke passionately for allowing edibles to be consumed. maybe until I' a lesser hour. So just to make sure people don't want to revisit any of these issues. Robin. Yeah, Tom, I think we've been clear. We're not revisiting the issues for debate. But back to Kate's point on clarity within the document. I think I agree with you, Kate. I think. as one suggestion would be that where we have motion 14 on page 3 that we follow that, and maybe just make a parenthetical remark that says. you know later revisited. And then this is what passed was 22, and I do think them being separate is confusing, and that can be helpful.

[78:00] And then, with respect to the comment Kate just made, I mean, I don't think it's tacky if we just take the document, and however it's going to be presented to city council, we could bold the word past under each one that passed. or something like that. I was saying. The highlighting might be tacky, but you could. Yeah, I think you're right. Highlighting just confused us in the past. Others. Stacey, Allison, Stacy. I am on the same page as far as what most people are saying. We don't need to maybe reh this point by point. We've done that. I really appreciate all the people who did come to speak. There were some ideas that were interesting, but I think you know one of the things we have talked about

[79:04] as we've gone through. Our discourse on these different motions is that none of this is like 7 zoom forever. We're looking at a starting point. Some of this is more intended that way, like if we're gonna do this, maybe we should start here before we start here right like, and I think to the people in the public who are worried about what we're not allowing. I think you know we want to. If we're going to try and do it, or recommend that we do it in bolder that we do it in those tight traded away. Therefore, hopefully, as safe as a way as possible. so I don't think we need to go back through anything. There. I I agree with what you just said, Tom, about you know the speaker on the edibles? That's really interesting idea that hopefully we can he on file, so to speak, somewhere, because I think those kinds of things. If this ends up going forward and Boulder are the things that we are going to want to revisit

[80:01] at some point, and these were really important points that we heard from the speakers today, so as far as the actual structure of the document itself. maybe using a lighter color text, a grayed out kind of text for the ones that did a pass versus just regular black text ones that did. I don't know. I I agree. Highlighting can get kind of intense, so maybe doing it that way. But i'm on the same page as far as having them all up here, because I think, like Robin was saying, there's an important, and Michael, I think so. The same thing. They there's important counter points to all of these things, whether it passed or not. I think it's important that Council understand all of it. The only other thought I had that could work on that, and was maybe doing like Here's the ones that passed. Here's the ones that failed like kind of break the whole document like. So there's 2 sections, but I i'm not really attached to any particular thing.

[81:06] I think they're gonna have to kind of dig into this document, no matter what. And you know we could either leave it or try different highlighting formats or whatever. But I don't think we need to revisit every single issue, unless there's any board member that feels compelled to talk about something in particular, or revisit it, I guess. Right? Yeah, I'll just close out. I agree that we don't like with other board members that we don't necessarily to visit every motion that's been discussed here. We've all been had an opportunity to You're from public comment, and experts say our own piece here. Have that be documented. I'm also a little bit reluctant to get into the weeks about formatting choices here, because I think that'll just introduce additional delays and the approval process here. So I'm. Inclined to just approve the document. as is, so that the expertise and the perspectives on this board can be brought to other matters that are pressing in this space.

[82:09] And yeah, it's all good. I would ask a question to Sandra Kristen Kaitlyn we were, and I thought there was. Besides, Pam, I thought there were initially, was another person representing the city. But I do not see that person anymore. just to give merit to the speakers that did speak not only this time with the previous time. Our minutes do not summarize those comments. Is that right? I see you moving your head a little bit. That's correct. Our our minutes likely Won't

[83:00] summarize every single comment we received, because we do record these meetings and make the recordings available. If someone did want to listen to the details of every comment we do receive today. Caitlin feel free to add anything to that, if you'd like. Yeah, that's what I was gonna say. Our practice is to record action, minutes, meaning that we create minutes based on whatever actions the words took. So we don't document in word. specific discussions. But all of that can be revisited. Okay. So correct. correct me if i'm wrong if and when this goes to city, console, which i'm, assuming we'll be soon, people will have another opportunity to comment. I'm. Assuming at City council. But not only that if the City Council wants to access today's comments and the comments from the past. We can reference those days, or those

[84:05] sessions. So if City also wants to get more background and hear the the speakers as they spoke previously. They can do that easily, right? Yes, all of that is on our website. on the Cloud website. Okay, because I just want the speakers to know that you know that they were not only heard today, but they will have the option of of just out having their comments heard again by city console. But is it also true that they will be able to comment at City console? I believe that's your Yeah. So you know, folks always have the opportunity to provide public comment at the beginning of every Council meeting. And so if there is an item

[85:00] that's on the agenda, or if there's an item that's in the public packet, or even if it's not even a topic that's on the agenda. They have the opportunity to provide public comment at the beginning. Okay. That's what I thought. Allison. Your thoughts I agree with what's been said. I think that moving forward with the document. it's really important. I think we heard that from a lot of folks today that they're ready for this to they have the the the conversation with city council. The only question I have a question. But one question I think to revisit is what Sandra brought up about a summary at the top. Is that something that staff, if folks are interested in that? Is that the something that Staff would provide that background? Or is that something that members of the cloud.

[86:01] if it's desired to add that members of the cloud would track that. Do you want to answer that city folks, or do you want me to? Staff is happy to provide any support that cloud would like. We're happy to draft the introduction, or if clouds would prefer to do that. you know it's completely up to the board. But we are more than happy to provide any levels for it that you would like in getting this remote finalized. So i'm just trying to make sure I did not. I'm not miss speaking when I say this. Kristen sent the original document before we started discussing all this to me and I. I just been too busy. I haven't had a chance to look at it.

[87:05] It would be short, you know, like a one paragraph or thing. It would refer to the you know, the original. The earth. What is it called? Jonathan would know. But I can't ask Jonathan right now. The original bill that started us on on this direction. Correct. We have a memo that oh, sorry, Kathy or Sandra. Please go ahead. I just didn't mention Kathy's memo Go ahead, Kristen. We have a memo that Kathy Haddock, the original city attorney for a lab drafted earlier in this process. That is a great starting point for this. We we would likely need to make some updates to it. But that's the document that Tom was referring to Sandra. Please feel free to add anything.

[88:03] Yeah, not the only thing I was gonna add is just that. I mean, I think that in order to kind of keep it simple, I think you know, Staff could certainly provide the introduction, and without making too many changes. I think that there is well, for lack of a a better word is a little bit of distrust, and I think that the less that staff messes with the memo the better. And so I think our intention would be to just provide just to t it up for Council, so that they know what it is that they're looking at. So the the less that we make changes the better, I think, from our perspective. And so it would really just be about and just providing the background. Why is it they're getting this? And then allowing them to just take in all the information that you all have provided.

[89:05] I've been. I've been trying to go through my email in the background here to try to find that my have not done it yet successfully. Do we have that available for presentation, Caitlin, that we could. if we're not gonna Well, I I think we need to have a vote to approve if it I mean, and almost sounded unanimous to go with the document, as is. which means that we have time to work on them. The payload, hey? Do you? Wanna all right. You had asked Caitlin the question about If if the city has a copy of that. Yeah, but no answer that well go ahead.

[90:00] I'm sorry a copy of which document. if there was something we could use as a prelude recommendations to city console. I had an opportunity to look at that, and it really is outdated. I don't think that we should use that. It's really outdated, and it doesn't I think it would create more complexity than we need to. So I I actually think that the the that you have is just fine. It's just a matter of adding a couple of sentences at the beginning to te it up. and if it, you know, if we' the staff is offered to do that if if folks are not comfortable with that. Then then you'll have to do that during this meeting, because I think then you're out of time. Okay, Kate, Did you want to speak next, or or I mean the gist of the what we were talking about in our preparatory meeting was a a statement of what the bill in charge. You know the State Bill charged us with.

[91:03] and what Why, the cloud is making these recommendations. The city console. Go ahead, Kate. Yeah, I mean, whatever you all discussed. Sounds sounds fine for me. I was just gonna say that you know that just even talking about like this document is a representation of the work that we've done over the last 2 years to talk about hospitality, I think, explaining why we set it up this way, so you know it captures kind of the story of our motions, the results, and who voted for what I think. Because again, we all had kind of a a, a an important. I think there's a lot of emphasis on wanting. You make sure that each thing was captured, and that each vote was captured. So I think, making sure that they know. Why are these things here? Why am I seeing all the pass in the fails? Why am I seeing who voted so? Maybe just like a short thing about, hey? We've been doing this for 2 years. We put a lot of effort in. We had a couple of public hearings.

[92:00] and then, also about Here's kind of the story of all of our motions. Here's who voted Here's the past, and and then descriptions, you know. Please see any descriptions about the individual things from you know the the perspectives of each voter as they wanted to at the end of the document. Okay. Robin. I like that I think that makes a lot of sense. I do want to just look back for 1 s on. You know we've had these public hearings intentionally, 2 of them where people had a chance to come and speak, and I really appreciate everyone who had comments to add today. And I think that if there's a little bit missing when we're not talking about what we heard through the public comment. I mean, you know I know, Bia, Campbell said in her remarks. You know your first public hearing. We had a majority of people who came to spoke to speak in support.

[93:02] and I have really copious notes from that meeting there were 17 people who spoke in support, and 16 people who spoke in opposition. But of the 17 almost everybody but one was had a business interest, and I think there's something I think there's something important in saying who came to speak, and what their who they were representing, because we happened in today's hearing. We saw everyone who spoke in support has a business interest. and that's not good or bad. It just is so, you know. I don't know if the Board is interested in capturing some of that for this particular memo. Maybe it doesn't matter. People will have an opportunity to speak later, but I do think it's. I do think it's, you know, relevant.

[94:03] I I am actually remembered that vote. I remember that tabulation without having to refer to any notes 1,670. I think it's safe to say that the public speakers that commented our it's pretty divided almost right down the middle. If you you know, add tabulate today's, and then add the tabulations from the past. One. It's pretty divided right down the middle. Yeah. And and then you had a sort of diversity of interests that were that came forward that I thought were kind of relevant as well. I mean, we had people talking about the age limitation, you know, and you had people talking about health concerns around secondhand smoke and impaired driving and edibles versus drinkables, versus you know, and I don't know that that's relevant, or that we could capture that in some way. That

[95:02] would be helpful to the Council. But I do think who came and who did they represent is relevant. Thank you. Any other comments along that line, or is someone ready to make a motion to approve the document? Right? I just want to get Sandra's input on like, what is the appropriate way to frame a motion? Or is it simply as simple as I motion that this document. and they're reading Packet the Sent City Council for their consideration. Oh, yeah, thanks, Brian. I I think it's probably just as simple as that. If there are any deviations from the way that it looks. Now, then, I would include that in the motion, otherwise it's gonna go exactly the way it looks right now.

[96:05] so is there something that you want different or addressed? I would add that to your motion. Awesome just to that point about how it looks right now there were some changes and edits in the Google doc version of the document. So people are. If you're approving what's in the Google document, or if you're improving what's in the the reading packet because they're technically they They read differently in this moment. It sounds like people are all talking about the Google Doc, but just wanting to make sure before forward with the motion. I don't have the Google document up in front of me. What? What's a a notable difference just some additional comments from folks clarifying their There's just some additional edits. I don't think it's anything substantive that has to do with this top part, but just people adding to their perspectives in the second section of them above the memo.

[97:14] Okay, then, I think that Google Doc should be the binding one. If that's where people have the most up to date versions. Yeah. I I agree with that. Anybody. Is there any reason somebody would be opposed to that, using the latest version. and then we we would add a preamble short preamble of some kind, and then also, maybe at the end, have references for which meeting. Maybe even just give them the the URL for the meeting audio for the 2 public comment meetings

[98:01] in the preamble You could just say what what the dates were for the to public hearings as part of the explanation of the past 2 years. And so then they could reference that straight forward. Okay. you ready to make a motion, Brian. you're the classic motion maker. I'm sorry everyone makes excellent motions, and I apologize that i'm violating our own intent to have these motions written down ahead of time. But I would motion that the current version of the Google document that contains the motions, voting history and members arguments for motions he sent to city Council for their consideration. subject to any changes the preamble that city staff will add.

[99:00] and you want to take out motion 3 in the process. Oh, this is another edit of my team. That would be my friendly amendment. Brand would be removing motion 3, and then combining or putting one right after the other. The motions about ours of operation the 14 and 22, and we just make those changes directly with documents, since we are referencing. Now. does anyone oppose that doing the making those changes? So i'm going to change the number of everything? By the way. it's just procedurally, I mean with drama motion, since it sounds like they're still at a so i'd say, let's make these edits to the document, and that'll make the motion again for the half the stable document. Is that there? Okay?

[100:02] So I withdraw my motion. We're going to make some edits, and then i'll reintroduce my motion. Are we going to change the number? It's a third change. Now. you're you're in the Google I I guess I should get into the Google document. I think, Brian, he's saying, If we remove 3, then we'll have to remember everything. But if we group 14 with 2240, then that'll change the numbering of those, and then I go. I guess I would ask Evan how he feels about keeping the withdrawn motion. or anyone who wants to comment on that I can't hear you. Sorry.

[101:03] I think that would be confusing to include withdrawn motions. And yeah on the numbering thing. Yeah, I think we don't have to remember them. We can just delete 3. You can make a note if you wanted to. But the I'm. Looking for Evan in the list. Here is he Still. I don't believe Member Anderson is still on me. You still on it. Okay, I mean ideally, it would be best to have it come from him. But so I've made 2 changes to the document I have from the table. I've removed motion 3. I've also removed the proposed motion section at the end. So Those are 2 changes I've made now. Okay. instead of moving 14 and 22, you could just write in 14

[102:00] that it was was revisited or overruled by 22. However, we want to say that. And what about the red text? You can make that black that was just a that was in red previously because that was what was in in question. and that's why it was revisited. But that's originally. But there was added stuff on there. and if and it's in red in 2 places, and I agree with you, Kate. I think it doesn't add anything to have the red there. Where else is red? I think i'm in the comments section

[103:01] on page 18 at the bottom. Thank you. I just I just changed it. Yeah, I changed it. Okay, so to review, we have changed the font color. We added a note. and this motion 14, indicating that the substance of this motion is revisited in motion 22. We've removed motion 3 we've removed the suggested motions that weren't voted on There's also some re some support and oppose bullets in this that don't have any responses. Can I is everybody. Okay with me, Deleting this. I would say that members of the Board have an opportunity to leave a comments, but they weren't required to leave any. So I would say, we can remove ones that are empty. and if people still wanted to do pass versus failed, you could just bold all the past ones and not both the failed ones

[104:13] right, saying that again. I didn't hear that. Okay. If people are still interested in in making a difference between the the past versus failed, you could fold the entire row for all of the ones that have passed, and you could keep the ones that have failed as regular text. the entire row. So the date. Yeah, just I can show you. Well, whoever's oh, wait, I'm looking at. Yeah, yeah. yeah, it would look like that the whole thing. Well. okay, I I was just gonna suggest the word past, but like the way you were doing it, Tom, where it was just the word past. Because again, there is some substance in these failed motions that I think

[105:07] the Council we don't want to give them an indication that these they shouldn't be looking at some of this stuff, I mean, and that's for a pro or aosed standpoint. For instance, on you know, a couple of these things like the concentrates question. I mean. okay. yeah. everybody okay, with that. Any other, I mean. besides adding references to the Urls for the meeting audios. And, more importantly the preamble.

[106:09] So what about the ask? Do you? Do you all want there to be an ask of counsel? I I mean. I would think the next logical step is to add this to the work plan for council. But I I don't want to put words into people's, mouths. which is elaborate. What you mean by that. What do you want Council to do with this information? Yeah. we are just an advisory body. So we're asking them to review our recommendations, and for the city recommendations.

[107:06] I guess my question that council would be. What would a workflow be like, or or is this a normal workflow where we submit some sort of recommendation to city council, and they and their staff then would come up with the ordinance, or would. or is it still in our capacity that we should be recommending an ordinance to city council. Well, we you can take whatever approach that you would like. I would, I mean, if you wanted it to be added to the work plan, then the work would have to be scoped by staff. and you know Staff would need to determine when they would have capacity for the ordinance changes to come forward. Many or some of these items will have to go through

[108:02] the planning department and planning board if it has to do with zoning and those sorts of things. So there's quite a lot of work that would need to be scoped out. But if you, if you wanted council to do that, then you would have to ask them to do that, or you could ask for an opportunity to have a discussion with Council about it to to kind of take their temperature to see if this is something that they would be interested in bringing forward. So there's a couple of different approaches. Does that answer your question? So I think. Then a motion would be that the Board recommends that these recommendations be added to Council's work plan. Is that an appropriate recommendation? It's appropriate if the Board agrees to that.

[109:02] But I do think that it's adding it to the work plan doesn't necessarily mean that you're bringing forward an ordinance. It could be that you are inviting more discussion with Council about it. or it could be more. But I think just getting it on. Somebody's radar would be the next logical step, and that part of that is putting it on a work plan. and I agree that a work plan should be part of the motion that we clarifying question Sandra. Sorry chair. Do you mind something that mentioned? But thank you, Sandra. So the the a board like ours makes a request that our recommendations go on. The Council's work plan. Then does that automatically mean they're part of the work plan, or is, would counsel consider that? And then did they vote to decide what goes on their work plan? Or can you just elaborate on that a little bit more

[110:06] so. Council would be involved in this decision on whether it becomes part of the work, plan or not. They typically make decisions on what is put on the work plan at their annual retreat, which happens at the beginning of the year. And so. you know, they've already established their work plan for 2,023. So when they got together again for their next retreat. presumably in January 2024. Then, you know, they've been collecting items throughout the year, and that would be discussed during the retreat, and they would either provide, you know they would provide staff with Russian, and whether or not that should be included on the. So let me mention at this point, that in the past month I applied for an interview for

[111:01] continuing on the board. In my interview Rachel, Friend was the city council representative. and and Sandra and Caitlin and Kristen are well familiar with this. and Brian is has been read in Also, when Rachel asked me. I can't. I wish I can remember exactly what, but that she asked if I had any questions for a city console. And one of the things I asked is whether city council would like to have an informal like introduction to what we've been discussing for the past 2 years. and and then there's been a couple of emails back and forth that Rachel suggested that it might be helpful to for city Council to have a study session, and to use the analogy to when city council decided to

[112:08] allow electric scooters in town. Some of the city council people did not know much about electric scooters, and so they had a study session just just to find out more information. And she, she she suggested that potentially that would work well for the hospitality discussion also. Now you all know the rules that you know it's a public meeting, if you have more than 2 members of anybody present. So she at that point in time. When she threw it off, she suggested one or 2 cloud members presenting just kind of like a study session to city council. So that's another thing. Now i'm in a difficult spot in the sense that I don't know if i'm going to be

[113:00] on the board, you know, come next month, so I don't know whether i'm the right person, and some people might have their own opinion as to who should be the 2 people, one or 2 people to present the information so far to city council, to just to get them thinking about this, because some of them are not thinking about it. or, you know, have very little knowledge about it at all at this point in time. Sandra. Yeah, thanks, Tom. So may I make a suggestion. You know the the format that Council hears. This information is probably going to go more like you know that you all are sharing this information with Council. It'll be included as part of a a a council meeting package. And then, you know, Council members have an opportunity to ask questions about the packet. If there is interest in in doing a study session, that interest would have to come from

[114:12] a majority of council members, they could set aside some time to talk about it in terms of whether or not they would actually have a study session. But again, it needs to be added to the work plan in order for it to move forward. And so that's why i'm recommending that ask in the memo, so that they can make that happen. So yeah, I don't know if that helps or not. I I've never seen. and that doesn't mean anything that I I don't. I don't think I've seen from a procedural perspective. Members of a board come to a presentation to counsel one that they haven't been teed up on the agenda.

[115:02] I agree I just wanted to be completely transparent. With respect to the discussions going on behind the scenes. You. I was just gonna suggest that we move. I would like to make the motion, or someone else is often to make the motion. and I think some of the issues that Tom is just describing about how city council is right into this. If there's a study group, I mean, I think a lot of that would have to come from Council itself that it's we're getting ahead of ourselves in terms of trying to find for that as well. So yeah. I wouldn't suggest that at this point I mean as as Sandra correctly summarize that that request would need to come from city console. So I think, according to Sandra's verbiage, the

[116:01] part of your motion, or someone's motion would be to have this put on to the what was the correct term onto their work plan? Alana. Yeah, I just have a motion. Marita. Yeah. I moved to on the recommendations with the staff intro to City Council to be advanced into ordinance for implementation. prioritizing this in councils, city councils and staff work plans. using the most recent version of the Google document. Yeah. And in my motion I cited also with the staff Intro. Okay. So you want to have Well, is there a second on that Bryan second. So on this motion and further discussion.

[117:12] Sandra did. Is the verbiage correct? I'm just having trouble finding my I read it one more time on it. read it slow there motion to send the recommendations with staff intro to city council to be advanced into ordinance for implementation. Prioritizing this within city council and city staff work plans perfect. Do you have any questions about that. Sandra? Oh, sorry I didn't you! You're I didn't hear you. I I heard you say something, but I didn't hear what you said.

[118:09] Okay. I have a question. Does that mean that the writing of a draft ordinance would happen prior to this going on to the Council's work plan. Okay? Okay. Any further discussion. Oh, that there was I i'm sorry. I just notice another city of older person, Joel Wagner. I don't know Joel don't know Joe's role, either. So do you want to introduce yourself real quickly, and whether you have any input I don't know who you are. So

[119:00] this is I've been installed like the director of the Finance Department. So just really here, listening in and supporting stuff and all the Kristen and her team. Thanks for let me Okay. thank you. And Pam was on earlier. But I do not see her anymore. and I think I don't know. Kristen, do you need? Do I'm just allowing option for comment. Kristen, Did you have any comment? I don't have any further comments. I think the next steps for staff are are pretty clear at this point, so I I don't have anything bad. Thank you. I forgot there's actually 2 Christians. So right now, do you know that? Have you noticed that

[120:04] we do have another Kristen on our team named Kristini? She is the licensing analyst. It looks like she is potentially on this call as well. Okay, Michael. Yeah, Alana, Can you please read back the language of your motion again? I'm sorry I I heard it. I just there's some language in there that I guess, in questioning motion to send the recommendations with the staff intro to city council to be advanced into ordinance for implementation prioritizing this in city councils and city staff work plans.

[121:02] Mike Michael, can you? Oh, go ahead? Yeah. Sandra, with the language and a lot of motion to be advanced into coordinates for further implementation. I think that's what you said on it. Is that correct on the screen? So standard the language that I'm just asking you about is the language to be advanced into ordinance for implementation. To me it seems like what we're what we're telling. City Council is. approve the approve, the the the motions that have all passed. It seems to me like the intent of this next step, or the motion to counsel putting forth this document should be something more along the lines of for your consideration for further discussion amongst Council, or something to that effect.

[122:07] and my or my to down in the weeds. With respect to the language. I think it's within this board's discretion on how they want to couch that I think that first and foremost it needs to be added to the work plan. Whether Council wants to pursue it in an ordinance or not would probably be discussed in a study session. I would imagine that they would want to learn more about it before actually. you know, directing Staff to to draft an ordinance, but it's really within this board's discretion on how that is present it Go ahead, Michael. So, Lana, would you entertain a friendly amendment to your motion just to change that leg which that I questioned.

[123:01] just to say something for for implementation or for inclusion, and into councils, work, plan or study session, or something like that. Michael. The City council process is a process that I have confidence in, and they're going to do the process that they want to do on this set of recommendations. I want to honor the work that we've done by signaling the desired outcome, which is policy through ordinance. So the answer to my question is yes or no. I think that my language accomplishes. What would honor all of the work we've done. Everything that we're all looking for. It just also points to the fact that we're doing this for the means of eventual policy through ordinance.

[124:06] A study session is not an adequate response to the work that we've done the desired outcome is policy. I'm not sure. I don't want to try to put words and Michael's mouth. But i'm wondering if the the just of his concern is that we are an advisory board, and we're making advisory recommendations for them to for their consideration. It does say recommendations. I mean. Yeah. It also says to be advanced into ordinance, which would be city policy or city law.

[125:07] And that's the language that i'm questioning. Is there any more discussion on the motion. It sounds like there's not. I was not willing to change the the motion. It has been seconded, so is there more conversations about the motion, or thank you for 10 min. I guess I would. Just. I'm just wondering if there's a way to do this where it says something along the lines of motion to send the recommendations with the city staff, intro to city council with the specific. Ask that the City Council add this issue to their work plan. Yeah.

[126:03] I like that language. But I would just add at the end, in order to advance this into ordinance for implementation. What do you think, Robin? Yeah, I mean part of me Doesn't like that because it's prescriptive. And again, as an advisory board, we're asking them to look at it. I think it's prescriptive in that. It's. you know. But I understand where you're coming from, and I I probably could support that, because I think the Council will decide what the I don't necessarily think that this is telling the Council they have to do this. So I don't think it's that big of a deal. I think I it's not the hill to die on today. So I just want to add, in my experience, when you add something to city council and city software plans. It's gonna go through double what it's gone through. And this experience going in cloud. And as an advisory board, we do have the ability to work with the city attorney to advance

[127:12] policy into ordinance, as we've done in the past. This set of recommendations is just too comprehensive and far reaching for us to do that exclusively with city with the city attorney. So I just hear everybody saying that we're just an advisory board, and that's true, but it's a policy advisory Board, and we actually do have the ability to advance our recommendations into policy without city council, and we've done that. We've done that here, together with the city attorney's office, providing us with red lines on our recommendations. And then i'm sending those through somebody's audio. Hmm. So I just don't. You know my desire is yeah, I appreciate that. Your comments, Robin and I just don't want to send something that just says, you know that doesn't include

[128:11] the End goal policy. I think the City Council is going to do what City Council does. So in some ways the verbiage doesn't really matter that much. I just want to make sure that I understood from Sandra that this doesn't prescribe to counsel that they've got to create an ordinance before they start to dig into anything. No, it will still be up to Council to decide what they do. This Board doesn't have the authority to direct Council, so it's. I think I think that it's fine the way it is. You know it. You could say for consideration.

[129:02] you know, to be advanced into 4 min for implementation. But essentially Council is going to do what and prioritize the work as they see it. And so they're not going to take one action over the other based on this motion. Are there other discussion, or are you ready for a vote? Oh, that's what I just said, except I was mute. Okay, I think. Caitlin, we're ready for a vote. all right. Remember, Kristy. Yeah, i'll. I'll oppose the motion Member Green.

[130:02] I want to be sure. I'm clear. But I believe I support the post, and by strike again support. The motion chair comes from. I'll support the motion Member Malau I support. Remember noble. I support. and Member Anderson is at okay. So how about we take another short break and we're we have a luxury of time where it might finish early. I think we'll finish early. and we'll come back, and I don't know 6 min, 7 min. How about 7 min? 7 min. All right. So that makes it 5, 28.

[131:01] Thank you.

[132:27] All right. I wanna congratulate City staff that you have successfully ebated. giving me your cell phone number so I could try. Call you during the break to see how you would feel about throwing together a paragraph. and then I also left messages for several others of you. But. Oops. you'll get that message later. including Uk: because you're good at word, Smithy. but anyways because so now that we have successfully

[133:02] past the motion, we do have a little time. I although I, as I said, in the last voicemail that I left God, I hate the idea of where it's my thing. my committee. But we could. because it's just a short paragraph. How long would it take? I mean, really. what do you all think I have the confidence in city staff to be able to come up with their own message. The trouble with that is that we can't go it on it. Then we can't. It's not coming from us per se. I agree with you. I I have a 100% confidence in that. but it seems like it's something we should vote on.

[134:05] We could go on to some other things. I mean. the previous motion did delegate that responsibility staff. I guess we could always take that up and vote on it again, but I guess I would wait for city staff to come back versus the we just passed destructive city staff to come up with that language. So which one of the city staff that i'm now looking at. because I can see you on the same screen. Now. who who would take that out. And how confident did you feel about that? Got that Figure it out? I'm sure we could probably figure it out between our. I don't want to saddle you with something that that you know one might be reluctant to do. So. Okay, good.

[135:03] If it will help to, I will include, or I'm not going to be doing club next month, but the person that's doing cloud next time will include what we row in the packet for next month, so you'll see it's it won't just like blindly. Yeah, yeah to City Council. Yeah. All right. I'm trying to find one of my many windows. Today's agenda. There it is, I just found it. So next on the agenda, officially, as matters from Senior Council. and you can pass, I don't have anything today. Okay? Regulatory licensing office.

[136:01] Caitlin, Would you like to provide a quick update on board recruitment? And then i'll talk about agenda items for future meetings? Sure. Yeah. So the update for board recruitment, and I apologize everywhere the applications for the Board members who interviewed or are in your meeting packet. I just neglected to put them in your reading packet, so they are in your meeting pocket. If you wanted to see those those people, there was 4 of them were interviewed in February, mid February, and then I believe that city council will be making the recommendations this week on who they will be appointing to the Board. So you will. You can tune into that to see we. They don't tell us ahead of time, so you can tune into that to see, or we will let you know the next month. Just one quick note.

[137:00] So Council will appoint board and commission members on the large sixteenth meeting. Not this week, but the week after. Thank you, Sandra March Sixteenth. No. i'm seeing more than 4. It I thought you just for clarification. I think you told me 4 interviewed. Is that correct? I did say that it might. Was it 5? It might have been 5. I'm: so sorry. Okay, All right. Thank you. Time. Did anyone have any questions about that just wanted to clarify that member of Malone didn't reapply so this might be her last meeting.

[138:04] Oh, yeah, I was gonna mention that once again. Oh, you were not here. We already took note of that, and we were gonna have. Give her the last word. Alright. And I apologize. It was 5 interviews. Okay. Okay, Kristen. Well, now that we are finished with our discussions around hospitality, we'd love to hear what the Board would like to discuss at the April meeting. We do have a list, an ongoing list of suggestions for feature cloud meetings that we've been collecting ideas from members over the past few months, so happy to share that. But we'd love some directions on the board on

[139:00] what you would like to discuss in the April meeting. So we compare the packet for you. Is that in our pack it either on one of the packets. Caitlin, Would you mind sharing that document on your screen? Yup, Just me 1 min, because I believe it is in your packet as well. If I don't want to give you the page number so page 60 is in your packet, and then i'll share it on my screen. This is just did you say 6 0? Your audio went down again. 6 0. So the these are the discussion topics that we've heard from different members so far, and we're happy to add to this, or.

[140:04] you know, re reorganize the order whatever you'd like to see who go ahead. Okay, I'll recognize Kate. Okay. I was just gonna mention that I I don't see the the licensing kind of portion of the cloud on here. It's something that we had talked about before. But that was just one thing that I noticed that wasn't on here, but i'll let the board decide kind of what's next, but just wanted to mention that.

[141:04] Thank you, Kate. We'll definitely add that on there, because that's an important discussion to have is when cloud would like to transition to a more quasi- judicial. And what you would like that to look like. Okay, Robin. Thank you. Is there a possibility that we'll be meeting a new board member as soon as next month. or possibly 2. I think new Board members as soon as next month. and could our agenda be, you know, a discussion of little bit of orientation for those new members, and also a broader conversation about what we hope to cover next. In other words. if it's going to be a bit of a reset, we're transitioning out of this conversation on social consumption moving into a new direction, I almost feel like an intentional meeting that really looked at those things and people. Could.

[142:08] you know, I know we've all been looking at this document and working on that, and you know i'd like a little more time to prepare in April for some of the things i'd like to see Clap do next. So we had this discussion before everyone came on at 30'clock, right around 30'clock. That new members will be starting presumably next month. Now how will they be trained. Sandra Kristen Caitlin. There you are. Staff does have some training materials for new board members. Some informational packets will be be meeting with the new members, one on one, and providing some training prior to their first meeting. We also always encourage new members to connect with current members, so they may be reaching out to you all individually to connect before the next meeting

[143:09] and let me augment that alana. Would you be okay communicating with? I mean you. You've offered to speak. So would you be okay with giving your insight to new folks? Yeah, sure. You mean the new members? No. Yeah, of course I i'm not not going far and plan to continue to. you know, Support the the board from my new role as a community member. Constituent. Hmm. Okay, Brian. And then i'll come back to you, Atlanta. Right? I wanted to echo Kate's suggestion that the training support will need to sort of take up licensing, and our quality of judicial authority. At some point

[144:06] my second contribution would be to here from the industry as we exit emergency declarations related to Covid. If there are policy calibrations or input that needs to happen. Third Member Noble has continued to emphasize, and I share her concern around youth, consumption, which is captured here. but continue to make sure that we are engaging with county and city programs around youth, intervention, and prevention. and a fourth one. But it will come to me later. Not at least prepares a lot now with writing things down Alana? Or did they? Did anyone, even including city staff, have any questions about what Brian just suggested.

[145:04] Okay, Alana. Yeah, I I think, as I raised at our retreat, and I think at a recent meeting as well, I think, using a a meeting every now and again for education. Is. it's going to be worthwhile in my time on the board? I I didn't really push, for you know, industry-based concentrate education as as well as I probably should have, and and I especially in just hearing some of the comments tonight, like, you know. there's no upside for our community. It just gives me the sense that there's maybe a lack of awareness, a potential lack of awareness surrounding the adult use kind of the the forms, methods, reasons behind it. You know why the cannabis industry, the market and products, have gained such acceptance among

[146:03] adult consumers. and I just want to echo my support for an availability it doesn't have to be me. It could be without staff Member for taking, giving, providing opportunity to just do a one on one on either all products, form factors and their consumption methods. or concentrate specifically, because that's obviously been a hot topic. There's a lot lot lot to understand about what drives, you know consumption behaviors, and it's certainly changed a lot over the last decade and 2 decades. So I just want to my support for that educational session, and of course. the other ones like the one that Robin has raised. So I just wanted to reiterate that.

[147:06] Did anyone have any suggestions for someone to address the the issue of social equity. I think it would depend on this particular aspect that we're looking into like. Are we looking at the regulatory framework for social equity. Or you know the opportunities there. There's there are some organizations that are set up to so support social equity and the industry, they might be a good resource. I think native roots is. This comes to mind us. I think they're connected with. As you've heard, a lot of the retailers are connected with the social equity.

[148:01] Any other suggestions? What about? Also on the same vein any suggestions for impairment experts? Stay, she. I think it would be great to hear from cinnamon updates on where their research is at. As far as I use experts. I would suspect that would be a top notch person to hear from; also really helpful, probably for new members to hear stuff like that, as well as address some of the issues on the list already. so I think she could be interesting, and as far as social equity, Jonathan Singer has come to speak multiple times at our meetings, and you know from what he describes of his background, he might be an interesting person to hear more from on that topic.

[149:06] Those are my first thoughts. I feel pretty committed to hearing more about different educational programs for. like a public health kind of sense. In addition to like we've already said, the you focus that research that I had put the summary into this meeting packet or sent it to everyone. I think your audio it it's. It's 70% there somewhere. Yeah, you're you're we're not here. That packet or that information that I sent out with this Month's reading packet. I thought just really highlighted that we do need more public health, education, focus and all manners related to cannabis. So somehow, getting more speakers in that realm or more information in that area to feels important, the youth focus is just kind of part of that

[150:08] to me. Okay. And I would just suggest that cinnamon is not the only professor. I have a new person from the labs from change live. I mean it doesn't have to be her. But somebody who could represent that research and what they're doing, what they're looking at what sets them apart, and why it's more unique per se than some of the other research out there. I think that's useful for all of us, plus certainly a new board member, if they weren't as informed. Yeah. And I so just whoever is making notes is that you Caitlin. I make you notes from? Oh, you are kristin sorry. So the cinnamon did well, and but that's like more broad. It doesn't have to be her like I said she, she she could be the contact person, and she would be. I mean, she's great and perfectly.

[151:11] Yeah, exactly. She could. She could suggest somebody from it's called the Chain. That's it's an acronym. Ch. A. And Ge change lab. Are you asking me or to say that recording Yeah. Brian? Yeah, I think one more speaker could be a Tristan Balkans. He's the program manager for the canvas business office and the Governor's office. and he, since we are having a lot of social equity, issues and initiative as well. I think he came in the office about a year or 2 ago. Now the fourth point that I just remembered would be, I think, building on Member Malone's kind of point

[152:00] that what is sort of new innovations or sort of new developments with different kinds of cannabis technology. So I guess, for the lack of a better term in terms of we. During the discussion about edibles, I think the issue of like fast acting kind of came up, but I would sort of be interested in like only scaring, checking in once a year, or something like that around, like just what ours the latest and greatest, and how that might impact the policy we consider recommending to the city? Is it just me, or are several people's audios going in and out. I'm not having any issues. Oh, okay, all right. Maybe it's just maybe it's my wi-fi I don't know one speaker on that. Because it does appear like there's a lot of competing viewpoints on the same thing which is interesting, and so it maybe we could find a couple of people to come and talk to us about that.

[153:14] Robert. Another topic that I think the clap has a lot of indicators that would be good for us to dig in is is around impaired driving. and not just what's happening out there. We heard some kind of disturbing statistics today from one of the people who spoke. But you know it's come up over and over and over again, starting from the standard that you, where you measure somebody's level of intoxication, is just scientifically invalid the whole roadside thing you know what's happening with. If these numbers are getting worse, is there something our board could do to dig into this to understand it, and maybe suggests that you know certain new technologies come to the forefront that sort of thing. And also Evan really just expressed a lot of

[154:07] just nervousness around having this responsibility for knowing when people are intoxicated or not intoxicated, and it just seems like a really tricky question. I think it would be worth a conversation to try to see if we could develop some recommendations. I don't know whether that's to law enforcement, I mean, I read about a law enforcement training standard that it's a really high standard for It's it's goes above and beyond what sort of a basic roadside is. And the mad groups are recommending because of all these difficulties in determining if somebody's intoxicated. Because again, you get people caught up who are intoxicated, they've used earlier, or they have a higher tolerance level, or what have you? So it? It really runs both ways, but it's problematic. And there's a police officer training thing that gives people a much better

[155:12] tool set to evaluate people at the roadside. Maybe there would be a way to recommend for that, or to try to get money to support officer training a certain number of officers, so I think that could be a good agenda topic to look at. Look at. You probably need a little prep time to pull those speakers together. I'd be glad to work on that if that's something the board's interested in. Okay, Stacy. I was just interesting like on this topic, Robin's bringing up in the report in our packet that I added on, You know the research. It was interesting to see the drop in youth driving under the influence or reported drop. I should say I have my

[156:05] thoughts on that. But it was also interesting that among adults the driving or the percentage of adult consumers who say they drive after using has been pretty stable under 20%, said, I think 17 and a half. So I I think that was really interesting, too. And so it just kind of brings to the questions like that. The best focus, I guess, is what I said here and think to myself. Is that really where we want to focus our time? Given that we don't have technology yet the way we would want to to support officers at the roadside, and I remember a speaker even saying that I I think he was a officer who came to speak with us. Who said it. You know that's their problem. That they face is they don't have that technology right now, and a lot of it ends up just being, you know, qualitative, which we need to do. The you know, be able to do better, but we don't have it so. I guess

[157:01] I I would wonder if that was the best use of our time and focus. If we have a limited amount just given the amount that's unknown on this and what appears to be a somewhat significant but stable amount of users driving. I don't, I should say. And then. beyond that, I think, like you, said Robin, there is this massive effect of daily users of canvas versus new users. And so when we're considering hospitality that to me at least comes into my mind like some of these people aren't the daily users. They're the new users. But then there's this other group that we've seen in research that use heavily and regularly, and although maybe they would test positive past the threshold. They're driving seems less impaired. And so it's just. I guess, that it's just really confounded area for me like thinking about it, and i'm not sure what our goals would be as a board on that, you know, just because it feels intangible at this point to me with no technology, etc. I think

[158:09] there's a lot we can do to focus on stuff that we see is a problem, and we know his problem and to learn more about it. So I kind of I kind of not really support the idea of like going down the path of like, you know, trying to figure out roadside training for officers, and I i'm not sure that feels like the best use of our time at this point. Maybe we could. Okay, I hear you. Maybe what we could do would be to have somebody from this mad group come in, and because they've really thought about this, and they've thought about Why, this is really really hard. And again they've come up with one possible solution. Maybe they could come in and talk with us about that. Explain what it might cost to get people trained on this new and higher standard. And you know that because what we have seen is, you know, and it's hard to draw it exactly to these different use statistics. But Colorado right now has a huge problem with impaired driving fatalities.

[159:10] So I do think it's worthwhile to dig in, and at to your point, Stacy. Maybe a focused presentation from a group like mad on this particular new standard would be worthwhile. Yeah, I I guess I support what you're saying like. Absolutely. It's terrific. What's happening statistically with those numbers. But I suspect we're trying to PIN it on something that maybe is the wrong. you know. Suspect it's the usual suspect that one of the speakers today even said, You know Cannabis tends to get a pretty bad rap, and based on what I'm seeing in the latest research from Cdpt. It's like, maybe that's true, right like we would expect to see much higher rates of adults driving under the influence of cannabis to pair well and blame it with. you know, or blame it, for what we're seeing in these, you know, driving fatalities under the

[160:12] and if we're, you know, moving into ways of expanding commercial cannabis, it's really would be responsible for us to think about consequences, and how to mitigate for those. Yeah, I think absolutely inviting education like in my mind, especially if we're talking about these hospitality places like I was saying before the you know idea of having new visiting users. That kind of thing to me feels like a great opportunity to have more educational programs, you know, and it that's at least where I would through my support, is like more education, as opposed to you know, putting money into training officers on a system that's, you know. At this point we don't have any reason to support, because we don't know if it shows up in data or later. So you know what i'm saying like. I just feel like

[161:03] public health. Education is massive, especially with something new, like cannabis, or relatively new, like cannabis or new, is, as we consider all these new things that we're adding like hospitality establishments. Okay, Allison. I agree, I think, depending on where city council goes with hospitality. I think there's a lot of opportunity to continue to make recommendations, and to keep an eye on how things are going. But I think that depends on what happens at City Council. So if there, and when that happens we heard from Sander tonight that that might not be a a short timeline. So I think. Yes, but putting a PIN in that until there's a more clear timeline. and also going back to what folks are saying about. There may be some new people. We've really focused on hospitality that a lot of things on this list would be really interesting and great to learn. But it might be helpful

[162:04] when we have new folks to spend some time thinking about what? What's the goal like? What is the next thing to provide input on? And is that impaired driving recommendations is that you know other other. So learning about social equity and making recommendations there, I think we had a really clear charge around hospitality from Council and from the community. and I think it might. It might be helpful to think about. What are we trying to do? What are the next couple goals to then focus some of this list. I think everything on this list would be amazing to learn about, and I think really interesting. but it might be important to take a step back before deciding on any of these in isolation, and think about what is it in service to? Somehow we'll have to decide on what we're gonna

[163:01] what what the Board is going to talk about next week, though our next month I agree with. I hear what you're saying, and I agree with you. So you might want to pick a couple that team most pressing. Anyone else I would mentioned that Tristan is with the can. It's it's it's appointed by the governor, but it's called the Cannabis Business office. and and if people did not see the recent press release. Jared Polis tweeted about. I wanted to go later. having cannabis available and vending machines. I wonder if I saw that i'm curious if everyone would agree with maybe taking a

[164:04] the question on all angles of concentrates as one of our major next issues. And are you speaking in support of that? Or. yeah, I would support that because it feels like today's speakers, you know, just as far as our hospitality questions were concerned, there was a lot of questions around our decisions or recommendations on concentrates. Likewise. I know a lot of sorry if there's growing. That's my dog. but there's also a lot of us, I think, who don't feel very sure, one way or another, and I know some of us in our meeting together in person, said it would be great to have a little more information Alana has offered already to help with at least one side of that. And, like all things, I always like to hear multiple opinions, and I think maybe we could spread it out over a couple of meetings where we have people speak to us about concentrates.

[165:05] you know, for against the research to support those things. I think it's always changing. I think we heard today also about something that is a really good point that there's a lot of new products that meet the market regularly, and you know, fast acting this or that. And so I think you know, under that umbrella it would be useful to learn more about that if we're. you know, making recommendations and sending on things like that to Council, I think it's important that all Board members have at least a base level of education on those topics, and i'm not sure we all do. I'd say I'd love to hear that stuff, and just to bring me up to speed, and that's something I already do know a little about. Right. So I I would support pushing that to the front of our list. Of what are we talking about Next time anyone else want to advocate for another topic or 2 to

[166:01] push to the forefront. I think. By the way, just to mention. I think Michael was no longer Michael and Evan, or both not with us right. I remember my Michael said he had to dip out at 6, if I remember correctly. Yeah. Just trying to notice who's still in the room versus not It's hard. I'm wondering. I think this was mentioned last time. There's a discussion topic Number 1 2 3 4 5, Is it doesn't it go against the ordinance, or against

[167:02] some rules. I mean, that's not something we can control. Is that correct, Sandra? It's established through Charter. and it would have to go to a vote of the people in order to change that so currently. you have to live within the city in order to serve on a so. It may not be a fruitful discussion. Well, it may or may not be. I mean it. It's the board. Feel strongly about it, you know. They could push the idea of bringing forward something on the ballot, but I think that they would the odd for it to come from a board. It usually would be more about the citizen initiative that it would come from, or sometimes it is something that's been that's brought forward by council.

[168:07] So, and Council workers to be persuaded that it's something that's worthwhile to bring forward. They would make the decision on whether or not to put it on the ballot. Well, I guess in the same vein as what Stacy recommended. I I don't know Tristan lock, Watkins, and I notice that there's other people There's a staff of 4 in the Cannabis business business office. It looks like maybe Tristan's the best person. and Brian. You might know that better than I do. But it it would be interesting to hear right there we go. Oh, that's Michael! You're I goes back right there we go

[169:00] to to hear from someone close to the governor what's like what's coming down the pike. I guess if that person would be willing to speak to that. just building it on that time. I think that when the legislative session closes there might be other things happening at the State level. It's for us starting to digest as well for the city of Boulder. So maybe in May or June. just putting that on a regular roadmap of our board, just considering anything that came through the legislative session. Certainly legislation related to prop 1 22 is currently be considered, and I think that our relationship of our board with what happens in the prop and 22 natural medicine spaces. a relationship or a conversation.

[170:01] Okay, that makes sense to piggyback on that. There's also the marijuana Enforcement division that has typical, you know, annual work groups and things like that with rules coming out. So if we Wanna not just a legislature, but also the rule making from But just to keep that on our roadmap as well. either Allison or anyone. Do you think there's any recent update that Elizabeth Crow would want to include us on on. I know there's still the C program still exists, and it is failing me. If there was a new round of funding since she lost talked to us. There's and I believe they do produce an annual report that folks could look at and see if there were specific questions.

[171:04] I'm not sure. I'm seeing on this list, but it wasn't there something that we were waiting for study to be finished, or some data to be finished gathering. That's the C. You Scientific Review Council as the color of School Public health. They just had a recent meeting, and they are expecting to complete their you know report, I believe they said in the next couple of months, so they're still working on it. Okay, so not for next month. I do agree that when that's available that would be great to have that update for the board. I'm gonna add it to a little. You tell me what it's called again. It's right there at your very top, where you've got so under Speakers the Scientific Review Council of the Colorado School of public health. That's that's the group.

[172:00] Okay. it's already there. Great? Well, we bet that I I I wouldn't be surprised if someone from the change lab either sent them in, or someone she points would be ready and willing to give some kind of update on what they've all been working on. That's separate from the Review Council. You realize that right? Yes, yes, I'm jumping. I'm just trying to come up with ideas for maybe at least 2 things for next month's meeting. or have we narrowed it down to 2 things? No, but I've only heard one concrete suggestions so far. and that was to hear more about concentrates the here

[173:08] as recommended by Stacey. I mean you were. That's what you heard. What I what I heard was that we want to have, you know, a minute to talk to new members. And then. yeah, people had asked several times to understand better understand what this quasi judicial thing might be, and you know, to get a presentation on that. So Okay. So I'm: up to 3. Is that where is that on the list? Oh, there it is. Okay, all right. Can we put an asterisk or something after the 3 that have been so? Those 2 are right next to each other.

[174:02] Sorry one. Hmm. A mouse is going where it wants to go. Okay. we have. This one has been changed. They have transition. This one was mentioned. and this one was mentioned for next month is from what I heard from what I understand. How is that a full enough agenda? Or do you want to add one more? I don't. I would say, I don't, I don't think, adding something just for the sake of adding, it is is a good way to go. I think if there's something pressing that folks want to hear about. That would be a good use of the board's time and a staff time great. But if we've got a few things that will be in service to the board and service to the city. Then I think we just stick with a few.

[175:05] I do imagine that the transition to quasi-judicial role is a probably a meeting in itself. and may require more prep than just a few weeks before the next meeting. But that is just a guess on my part. I'm also guessing it'll take more than one session. Okay. the next one might be an intro. Kate. You were going to say something earlier goes to the I second with Allison for some. Okay. Okay. Anyone else have any further comment on complex for next meeting or meetings. That's more specifically the next meeting. First

[176:02] one more comment or question, because we're having new. or possibly a new board member for sure, but possibly new Board members is there? When do we do an election, or are we set for a certain time period? Or could somebody remind me? I think it kind of depends on who's here next month? And then I think we should have another election. even if I am still here. Yeah, I mean, are we supposed to do it every. Do you know, if there's if it's meant to be done once a year, or is there any guidance i'd have to look at the rules of procedure. I don't know if anyone knows off the top of their head. I I wasn't around when you guys created those

[177:02] and look for it while we're. We're discussing it here. You get back to you. but I also, I I guess I just want to check in with staff and just make sure that they're okay with the topics that have been selected since it's there's not a whole lot of time to prepare in advance. but I and I guess it all depends on how deep you want to get into, cause I judicial, because, as someone already mentioned. that could be a whole meeting in itself. So if we could get a little bit more direction in that regard that would be helpful. I think, in previous discussions we had talked about what our options are in terms of where we draw the line with the quality judicial, whether it's. you know, just certain applications or all applications; and if it's, you know violations or not violations if it's so, I think.

[178:17] When we talked before Michawn and and Kathy I talked about, or I talked about it being maybe like a a half hour to 45 min, just an intro of what kind of the structure is, and then what? Some of the rules are and just kind of like an intro. And then what our option, you know, we can have a discussion about the options and what what it, what it would look like. And then we had talked previously about potentially like having somebody from the the the the liquor board. Come and speak at some point. Just give us an idea of what things they did and like how and that we need to also talk about like listening in on one. But anyway, those were their conversations. But that's that's what I remember from previous conversations about the first steps

[179:05] of this process. Thanks, Kate. Any other guidance for staff on that issue. Okay. on the pull up. so do I don't think we have to, As I remember Well, first of all. the thing that you're trying to look up Sandra. I don't think we had any particular rules in terms of how often a chair asked, or she'd be voted on, or a vice chair. Do you remember anything, Brian.

[180:02] I Don't. Yeah. And then do we need to vote on the the list of 3 things. I think we'll take that up in our planning meeting next month. Okay. Sandra. Yeah, that's fine. You don't need to know. Okay. Sounds like you have consensus. Yeah, Sounds like it. And then, in terms of just in terms of transitions that you all are talking about. I mean, I I would think that as a new member I would need a little bit of time to get my bearings before a revo. But I don't know if that's something that you normally do or not. Yeah, I think that's logical. All right. I think we're ready to go on to agenda. Item Number 7,

[181:01] which there. There are some things in the packet today, but you want to talk about things that were in the packet. not seeing any buddy jumping up and down about that. So again I would like to express gratitude to Alana, or now many years of service. I may also may. I might not be back here next month also. but I think everyone is thankful for your service. Alana and Michael just texted me and said to make sure that that he's grateful for your years of service also. Then he wants me to express that specifically to you so.

[182:01] but anyone else to just be me. Thank you, Alanna. Your time has been tremendous, and your expertise and what you've brought, even from what I've learned since I joined the board, went on before. It's been incredible, and I know the time you've taken and dedicated, and that you run a business. You have a family. So that's an amazing thing you've done. And yeah, I really appreciate it. So we'll miss you for sure. Yeah, I want to thank a lot as well again for your work over the last 3 years on our board, your your work on the predecessor, this the map doing all that on top of front of the business, having a family being proactive, and all these kinds of policy discussions since they have been everywhere. I'm just grateful for your expertise. And your advice through all this is, we all learn a lot about something that is brand new for many people.

[183:02] Thanks, guys. I I just want to share that. I have a lot of mutual gratitude and share that same level of honor with working with all of you guys. And you know I know we're all. We all have a lot going on with families and and jobs, and so there's a lot of mutual respect and gratitude. And I just wanted to. Also, just add a lot of you and I have been together on this train for for a good amount of time, and just wanted to thank you for, you know, being a a leader, being a mentor, being somebody who's really helped, you know. Just guide me in this process even to, and they have a lot of respect for for what you've done, and and and all the juggling that you've done, whether it's, you know, with time and and all of the responsibilities as well as how things have have been. The story that's been told throughout this process surrounding you and surrounding your business. And and I just really have a lot of respect for you, and it could not have been easy.

[184:12] And I look forward to whatever you're gonna shift into next, and focusing your time on other other things. So just good luck and thanks for for everything that you done for not only the board, but also for the industry and for for my role in this port as well. So Sandra. Yeah, thank you. I I also want to express my gratitude to a lot of you. You and I work together on the marijuana advisory panel, and that's when I first met you and I've always appreciated just the thoughtfulness in your comments and your intelligence in this area, and just really appreciated your time. I think in expertise that you've shared with the panel. And now here with this group.

[185:10] You know, as someone who has served on a volunteer board in my community. I know what it means, and it's a sacrifice. and for you to have done it as long as you have it. It's really quite amazing, and so really appreciate your time and efforts. So thank you. And I want to personalize it by saying. But I don't want to have people think that everybody can get a tour of your facility. But I learned so much coming in doing the tour with you that I'm: I was so grateful and much more educated. Yeah, Allen, I really also just want to add that I think the

[186:00] You've put so much time and energy into this board over the years, and really taking the lead from the beginning on how this board functions and and serving the the city of Folder. So just really appreciate all all that you've brought your expertise and time. I know whoever that is. She's getting complimented. Give her 5 more minutes. But yeah, thank you so much all. And I really appreciated working with you and excited to stay in touch in some way. Yeah, you guys are surprising me, and and it's a bringing up a little bit of an emotional response which I didn't expect. This is my last meeting, and as I said, it's been. It's been since the beginning of time since we started the business. We realized early on at the advice of the founder of the farm that you can't, just, you know, Think you can run a canvas business. You have to be really dedicated, involved

[187:01] Community member. There's just no way to get through this experience without, you know, trying to. you know. Let people know what it's like to be in this in the side of the community. The business community as well, and I just want to share that. It was a really difficult decision not to reapply. And there's a lot of aspects of this work that I really enjoy, and I find it to be obviously incredibly important. And I'm. I'm. Passionate about representing business owners and cannabis, business owners and canvas employees, and can and responsible adult consumers as well, and and that work will continue definitely in my role as a founding CEO. I have not held on to many things for very long. As long as I have held on to my role in in Border Cannabis policy. it's in building a business. I've had to learn things, and then train other people to do them and empower them to to to take that work on, so that I can move on and kind of continue building and and growing. And so it's really just in that spirit of passing the torch and empowering others to lead, that that I decided not to reapply.

[188:22] Almost no lack of of desire to be here or or passion for the work. And yeah, like I said earlier, I won't be your board member after this meeting, but I plan to be the constituent of every single Board member here, and, you know, be in touch and and communicate it communicative about, you know there's the latest, latest, and greatest. so my time will be instantly gobbled up by the business and and the family. But I also have really wanted to have more time to participate in oversight of the schools that my kids go to. So you know, i'll be present in like Pto and Accountability committees, and also.

[189:10] you know, in the last 10 years our our business has grown outside of Holder the you know, the cultivation, size, limitation, and boulder forces to to move a a part of our business to Denver. So I have to kind of broaden my aperture of of Cannabis policy advocacy. So that's you know a little bit of kind of where my time will go to on the policy advocacy side after cloud. But it's not to say that I I won't be, you know, listening and paying attention, and and and participating from my constituent side of things. So it's been a really pleasure to get to know all of you to work with you. and thanks for thanks for having me. Okay. i'm trying to run an efficient meeting that gets out early weird.

[190:04] I know. But let's do it. I may or may not be back next month. If i'm here i'll see you. If not, you can. You can roast me after i'm gone. How about that? Just so, you know I did look up the rules of procedure related to election, chair and vice chair and Section 2.8 in your rules, and it doesn't specify when it should happen. But it says the Cloud shell point from amongst its membership a chair and a vice chair announces that both the chair and the vice chair. the chair shell point and acting chair. So while it doesn't specify the timeframe. I think it's. Maybe Kristen or others can jump in, but I think it's pretty common for that to be addressed when new members come on board.

[191:04] so you might want to think about whether or not that's something that you want to bring forward next month or not. Well, someone suggested. I can't remember what it was Allison, maybe that it might be wise to do it a little while after the numbers are here. So. Brian, you're on mute, so I agree that it's probably worth members getting the acclimated to the culture and priorities of the Board before. like the new leadership. So yeah, it should probably be done annually. Or okay. my son's coming over, so i'm gonna go have dinner with him. So motion to anyone on the motion to adjourn

[192:00] all right. Second behind second the last motion anyone opposed. All right. Have a good month. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Thanks.