Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[1:20] [Music] [Music] you [Music]

[2:27] [Music] [Music]

[3:08] [Music]

[4:56] [Music]

[5:13] [Music] okay good evening everybody and welcome to the Boulder City Council's business

[6:02] meeting of September 19th 2017 Heidi will you call the roll yes Applebaum Brockett here Burton Jones here more Zell shoemaker Weaver here Yeates and young here we have a quorum okay we are gonna go straight to open comment just a reminder sign up it's already been closed for that all those who are signed up are free to speak to us about anything except for the topics for our hearings that are coming just a little bit later in evening and those hearing items are the boulders shelter and management plan amendments the arts grant the arts grant program and inclusionary housing and we already had a public hearing on an inclusionary housing so I actually there will be no public comment on that that one so other

[7:01] than that you are more than welcome to speak to us about any topic if you would start with your name and address that would be great each person will have two minutes mm-hmm and with that we'll go ahead and get started you only have five people signed up and Carrie Christ Dana you are first up followed by Patrick Murphy hi folks 30 Eastern or Avenue and Berthoud Colorado and an account holder at a rental here in Boulder and I wanted to come down tonight to make sure that all of you guys know that I am not campaigning this year and I'm not taking any particular position on at least a few of them and I'm gonna be following closely of course and in in irony I do think that they said you may actually need the money because of I I think that it's just completely obvious that the city is in any circumstance and how you cut it with

[8:00] the QC decision is going to incur more cost and more time that's my opinion and I would honestly ask each of you when looking at the data and as things are more evaluated know give give the energy future folks more time to evaluate but you really need to do your own thinking on whether this really does add cost and time because to me it's a complete no-brainer and it also concerns me that Excel will actually trust the city if this city does not come forward with the station state statement that is more realistic the last thing is I hope you will take a big step back Denver is almost certainly going to reach 100% renewable energy more quickly in likely other cities in Colorado than Boulder the goal may not be what it was that I thought it was six or seven years ago but if the goal is still the same there are going to be ways there's going to be an important meeting this Friday the 22nd at Xcel from 9 to 1 I hope that somebody from staff will come it's very important reading about

[9:00] potential future programs the last meeting we talked about citywide programs and Denver has been attending those regularly and the last thing I wanted to say is I brought my daughter to the airport today she saw solar in California she has personally sold two megawatts of solar that represents roughly an eighth of all of the installed solar in Boulder and it just goes to show that you know some people are making a difference and I think my daughter is one of them I hope the city will get on a path that is really making valid difference and quickly thank you very much Thank You Kari Patrick and then Matthew Jensen my name is Patrick Murphy I live in Boulder this is about the boulder Muni money con let's start with a statement

[10:02] by Councilman Matt Applebaum around 2011 the worst case scenario is we spend 16 decide to scrap it so here we are the true path cost the future costs that are better than the often underestimated cost produced by Boulder current cost to the end of 2017 that includes the hidden costs from other departments as well as last undergrounding is 27 million based on public documents ignoring lost undergrounding would be deceptive true costs to the end of 2019 would be 36 million and that only missed it by 30 million dollars or 600 percent then there are separation costs of well over 100 million not 10 Moines is originally estimated 36 million but wait there's more acquisition costs might be less but let's assume 214 known to be safe instead of foolish now at 350 million the startup cost of 36 million puts us

[11:00] at 385 million then there are stranded costs of about 300 million not zero as originally estimated that puts us at 685 million going concern also assumed to be zero is likely to be about 200 million based on the often touted 20 million of profit that Excel takes out of Boulder now we're at three hundred and eighty eight hundred and eighty-five million 20 million annual profit pay off the true build and a 2 percent boundary a 30-year bond or just on just the 685 million would require 150 percent of the profit a 50 year bond would require 110 percent of the profit now add 200 million to that calculation and we need 100 years just to pay off our debt the better nakhon needs to end state of course equals stay the curse Thank You Patrick

[12:00] Matthew Jensen and after Matthew we have Rob smoke I don't know how I'm gonna follow that up Matthew Jensen eight one eight Timothy Drive in Longmont I'm here today to advocate and to create some awareness around an organization that I started called the boulder collegians actually I didn't start it I revived it if you're a historian of the community you'd know that the team existed back in the 60s and 70s and was a huge part of Boulder's history over 200 major league ball players came through Boulder over all those 20 years six years ago I revitalized the team and have grown it exponentially to the point of tapping into the boulder chamber the Boulder Boulder a lot of nonprofits in the community really trying to just create more than just a baseball team but a

[13:02] truly community oriented event and there have been some challenges that have come with that growth with facilities just with some of the dates that we've been getting getting and I just wanted to bring to your attention this amazing organization that I've created that I think can really really grow and continue to be synonymous with something to do in Boulder like band on the bricks or the farmers market it's affordable family entertainment we play over a scott Carpenter park we bring in collegiate athletes from all over the country currently playing college ball we get them host families to get them jobs we've gotten them internships and that's kind of been one of the greatest parts is just that connection that has transcended the team that we've created on the field and trying to show people that what we're doing isn't just like a men's league beer league baseball team we're really doing some amazing things

[14:01] this was my passion I played college baseball I grew up here in Boulder and I just wanted to tell you guys about it until you were doing some really amazing things so thank you I'm Matthew why don't you send us an email that kind of says a little bit more about the organization and why you're up to you that would be helpful so we have a fuller understanding I would love to you just email us at Council I will thank you very much as appreciate you I'm Rob smoke and then Walter good ecchi my name is Rob smoke I live in Boulder and on the hill in Boulder and trust me this is empty you know somebody actually asked me am I gonna add counselor not today anyway okay so I have here in my hands a box of handsome brook farm

[15:00] pasture raised organic eggs I don't mean I you know I don't mean to be speaking out of turn but it says right here on the box they give every chicken 108 square feet of space it's a little number right here on the box they put it couple places here I'm sorry in aggregate form we don't do as well for people who are homeless and Boulder you have to be lucky they get 108 square feet of legal space for yourself if you're almost tonight in Boulder and you know I was gonna just all family say maybe there's room for a public-private partnerships on the island with and some farm we have a ready to work program maybe that could change to ready to sit on some eggs for 108 square feet of space program I don't

[16:00] know but just a thought people are so asking me about this this thing you know I was assaulted Boulder I've lived here 31 years I didn't expect it I didn't provoke I'm sorry and I apologize for signing up for the last couple of meetings and not making it happen - at the end of July anyway thanks sorry sorry Rob Walter Walter Goedecke 3210 Dartmouth Avenue and Boulder I wanted to see if the council would consider oops creating in an issue ordinance to raise

[17:03] the minimum age of people being able to buy tobacco products or nicotine products from 18 to 21 and there's this this is the most effective way to prevent teen smoking is just raise the minimum age to a point where teens would not be addicted through their life Boulder could follow California Hawaii Oregon New Jersey and Maine and naive an even Aspen Aspen has done this the while while the smoking is dropping in the United States in some places like I think here nicotine use is going up and I'm essentially interested in this as a 15 year old a neighbor of - has started

[18:01] smoking and this is largely in due to due to vaping what while vaping is an off-ramp for hardcore smokers it's also an on-ramp for teens and if the age of buying cigarettes are nicotine product products is up to 21 this this prevents teens from getting tobacco products say from peers which is the most common way it's circulated among teenagers so that this is also a way to cut health care costs and I say don't let tobacco companies profit on our youth I'd be interested in if there if there might be a sponsor or any questions offline or sighs yes and no

[19:02] questions at this time but um folks probably know how to get ahold of youth if they have um for their comments interesting idea sure thank you all right with that we are got to the end of our list we're gonna close public comment Heidi the next item on the agenda is your consent agenda we're not gonna we're not projecting it okay on our consent agenda we have a whole bunch of meeting notes and the interesting stuff is at the end we page down [Applause]

[20:00] [Music] [Applause] the two things on second reading have been discussed at length and a pretty pro forma can I just point out I think there's an error in the text up there it's correct on our agenda item G up on the board includes something about the comprehensive plan with the working group update so just just to be clear item G is just about accepting the study session summary on the public participation working group update yes okay yeah I think it ran into yeah okay any emotion sure I move for approval of items three a through J second any discussion okay this is a roll call vote all right let's move Weaver

[21:01] oopsie just step down Yates I young I Appelbaum rocket I'm Burton hi Jones aye Marcel shoemaker all right and Weaver hi thank you unanimous though all right the next item on our agenda is the call up check in tonight we have 1102 Pearl Street for landmarks alteration certificate is there any interest in calling this up or questions for staff good I know of anybody that staff is here take it ask you Leslie [Music] hello hello thank you so this was passed

[22:04] for 2-1 by the Landmarks board and there was one dissenting vote could you explain that it was in our packet but it had to do with a list of items that were conditions of approval and then the design can you go through that I will do my best so Leslie Ellis of representing staff from Historic Preservation who couldn't be here listen thank you for being here yes and I do have notes from the meeting but the basic reason was just for design design reasons and the idea that I'm just going back through my notes here to make sure I have some information so I could ask you know there's eight conditions of approval and I guess what

[23:01] in reading the call-up report or whatever the with the landmarks board did I guess I'm wondering if these conditions of approval were met or if the reason why one board member opposed this was that the applicant design and boards conditions of approval didn't arrive at the best solution that was what that was what was stated in the packet and there was I know quite a lot of discussion back and forth so in essence what was originally approved in May was the three-story design and then this new design was submitted and then the board approved the two-story design with the setback and I think the apathy the one board member who stated some reasons why she was not in favor was for the design reasons that you and do you know in the back it go so in the front

[24:01] it's two stories and then it sets back and then grows the third story and in the back does it just look like stories you can see the elevation sure that's set back and you can see there are some elevations in your packet right so you can see that roof structure from the street level but it is set back so it wouldn't be at the street level okay thank you so three of these conditions are considered something considered unifying or integrating the overall design consider extending the design of the masonry portion blah blah blah so how how will staff interact with conditions of approval that say consider how does that consider become something that is real that's a more affirmative so the next where the process goes from

[25:00] here the landmarks Design Review Committee will meet with the applicant to review those conditions and work with them toward a satisfactory approvement of those conditions and then it will actually be submitted for site review and then go to planning board so there's several steps moving forward to ensure that those conditions can be met satisfactory in a satisfactory way got it so landing board will see all of these conditions and they can also then evaluate a site review if these conditions are met okay right be good yep Thank You Leslie the next item on our agenda is your public first public hearing consideration of a motion to request the boulder shelter for the homeless to amend its management plan

[26:17] good evening Council Marianne wiedemann deputy city manager city manager Jane Brautigan will be joining us as soon as possible as we move forward with this agenda item city attorney Tom Carr has some comments and context for this item and then Karen Rahn Director of Human Services will provide a brief presentation okay thank you I just want to put a little legal context on what you're doing tonight and so the I think most of you understand but I want to make sure the public understood what what's happening so when the shelter was approved in 2002 it was actually the end of litigation there was a settlement agreement between the community and the city and the

[27:01] shelter to to put some things into the management agreement the shelter approval process is under a specific section of the code that deals with shelters and one of the elements of shelter approval is something called a management plan and a good neighbor reading meaning the purpose for those things is to mitigate the impacts of the shelter on the surrounding community so the settlement of the lawsuit was the lawsuit was aimed at the management agreement saying that it didn't really do it adequately protect they agreed to make some changes and they adopted to settle the management plan the management plan has to be resubmitted every three years or if there is a change in the management of the shelter the the city's role is really to accept it and to review it to see if it mitigates the impacts so now the city as part of its overall homeless strategy has to request the shelter to make some changes to the management plan which Karen will described in more detail so to do that the shelter is going through the process that's required by the law

[28:01] to change the management plan and that part of that process is a good neighbor agreement which will be held council decided to hold this to gushin to let the community give their input to the council members so the council could also give their input on the on the good on the management plan and that the good neighbor meeting if necessary council doesn't control the shelter although we certainly give them money and we do listen to what you'll say so as I view this process you're not approving the management plan and you're not you're not really directing the shelter you're listening to the community to help form your own views on how what kind of input you want to give to the shelter and really this is a request of the city to for the shelter to change its management plan so the city can implement a more thorough homeless program using the the sheltered ways that we believe are more effective Tom just to clarify more or less what you said the point is that we are not approving a management plan tonight right oh you're not right so we're we are giving feedback on requested changes

[29:03] that are then going over to the shelter as they revise their management plan yes okay great although those changes implement the homeless strategy which you've already approved right but there are definitely details there you could implement them in a number of different ways absolutely very clear to everybody okay okay good evening I'm Karen Rahn Director of Human Services and I am here to present on the boldest shelter management plan an update on that in the process and also an update on the homelessness strategy there's some specific areas of the homelessness strategy which you approved in June and we want to provide an update at your request on what is happening leading into the upcoming shelter uses so we will talk a little bit about coordinated entry navigation services we'll be doing a housing update we will be talking

[30:01] about the boulder shelter for the homeless management plan to receive public feedback on that and also get council feedback in addition to myself Curt fern Harbor from community planning and sustainability deputy director for housing will be presenting on the housing section and then we have other city staff and our service provider partners who are also available here to answer any questions that you might have so just I just want to do a high-level review to set the context an overview Council approved the homelessness strategy on June 20 and I in June of 2017 and that included changes to what in-house services for single adults are provided which is specifically related to our public hearing tonight on the shelter management plan the new strategy is consistent with best practices for addressing and reducing homelessness with a with a focus on long-term

[31:00] solutions including permanent and rapid rehousing prioritizing services and resources and matching individuals based on their service needs with service providers stakeholders and other jurisdictions we put together an aggressive timeline for implementing some of these new services particularly for this sheltering season and established key elements that we wanted to move forward October 1st with the start of the new system so key features key changes being implemented coordinated entry which includes a common assessment and screening tool and referral to two paths one path is navigation services or lower needs clients and short-term sheltering the other path is called program based shelter higher needs clients higher need

[32:00] cry higher needs clients who might need a longer term sheltering case management and services until they are placed in permanent housing program based shelter is a component of this which is our moderate and high needs client they would be provided year-round sheltering and case management so this is a significant change in our current system of services so in August the city in Boulder County and city of Longmont released an LOI for coordinated entry services because these services are countywide they're not just specific to the city of Boulder or city of Longmont Bridge House was selected for our navigation services coordinated entry well the shelter for the homeless was selected for that and city of Longmont is currently in a parallel process to identify navigation service provider for the city of log map we want to

[33:00] coordinate and integrate the type of navigation services in both communities we also anticipate that navigation services and coordinated entry would be co-located for efficiency of service and convenience for client and convenience for clients so currently in partnership with our service providers and housing we've had a pretty aggressive few months on trying to identify a site longer term site for coordinated entry and navigation services an opportunity has provided itself which Curt will talk about under the housing update to actually stand up coordinated entry in navigation on an interim basis for the next couple of months we anticipate we will be continuing the bridge house path the home program which is providing case management navigation services and

[34:00] shelter services for those lower needs clients the shelter will open on October 1st with 160 beds they will be prioritized for moderate and higher needs clients and it will also provide a reserved beds so clients will not the moderate and higher needs clients would not be having to come to the shelter every day to re apply for a bed so now the daytime services that might be associated with these higher needs clients of course will dependent will be dependent on the outcome of the management plan Changez that council will hear about tonight and that voter shelter with the homeless is going through we're also currently looking for and trying to establish a temporary coordinated entry site so we're still working on that piece of it so path to home navigation services will continue past October 1st

[35:00] until our coordinated entry site is identified and stood up and the shelter will be opening for their hundred and sixty beds on October 1st so one of the really key aspects of this whole strategy is having permanent housing solution exits for people to move into so they are not running in the cycle the housing division has been working pretty hard over the last couple of months working with us identifying a coordinated entry site but also on meeting their housing targets that were established in the strategy so I want to turn it over to Kurt who's going to give you an update on some of the great work that is going on around meeting those hires of housing targets good evening Kurt fern hopper deputy director of housing thank you Karen so when the homeless strategy was adopted I think the folks in housing were a little bit nervous about meeting our goals they

[36:01] were a little bit aggressive but as as an overview if you'll remember we're tasked with creating 35 permanent supportive housing units per year starting October 1st and so back about the the beginning of July we said let's see what we can do this year let's see what we can get done by the end of the calendar year so we started meeting at almost a weekly basis with Boulder housing partners the the boulder shelter and bridge house looking at ways that we can aggressively accomplish this so there's two aspects of housing ferma supportive housing individuals one is getting the vouchers so you can pay for the for the units and other the other part of it is getting the units so there's there's two aspects to that this this first slide looks at

[37:00] the vouchers so we put a proposal together with the boulder shelter and Boulder housing partners to the metro Denver homeless initiative and this proposal would create 36 vouchers it will start at the beginning of the year the the division of housing would be putting in two hundred thousand towards that and it would be leveraged with an additional 400,000 it's a it's a three year program so we're very excited about you know that that opportunity we were able to move that forward and with with the city's funding we'll be able to start that those Vaart vouchers prior to the end of the year so who else the four hundred KS from who else that comes from

[38:00] the metro Denver homeless initiative which is state funding and so this is this has come through and so now we have 36 vouchers per year for them in additional these are 36 additional vouchers to what we would have had before and the other thing that I'll add is that older housing partners has a whole program that that manages vouchers and the boulder shelter has programs that support the vouchers so as individuals are residing in these units they're going to be receiving services as well so the the this program helps fund those programs as well to the shelter so you know we have two questions Erin and them to Kurt that's exciting news thank you and so where do you anticipate the vouchers being used do we do we have a sense of where that people might actually be housed with those veterans if I could go to the next slide okay you aren't done okay yeah so this is a

[39:01] this is a housing update this is so this is talking about creating units for these and other vouchers to go into so the first is you'll remember that the nest properties finished leasing up a couple months ago so we started working with the shelter and nest properties and ten individuals through that the partnership of the two of them were able to get ten individuals housed in the nest properties so we're quite excited about that transitional units so we're transitioning twelve twelve units they're in transitional housing now into permanent supportive housing so those are individuals that could come from the shelter and have a more permanent place and so we're actually updating the covenants on those units right now

[40:01] bhp has also been reaching out to private landlords in working with them to accept vouchers currently there's 20 vouchers that are being held at private landlords and that's not something that just happened this summer but something that they've been working on for a while and then question if I may yep the vouchers stay with the person how does that work I'll let Karen answer that good question I'm gonna answer because the vouchers there's a number of different ways to use vouchers so when you came for by dead if we can wait after Curt's done if that's better yes so the vhp is also working on an acquisition that they hope to have under contract by the end of the week which we'll be targeting at housing

[41:01] six individuals per year for a total of twenty and you know a lot more information on that the you know as the contract comes through but they would only be putting these individuals in as there's turnover within the the current development so this is an existing development that they're purchasing okay and when you say annually does that mean like it nest is that ten this year then 20 next year in the 32 year after that well for those for the creating new units at the bottom that's six annually for just over three years okay so for three ten total of your one two three Esther's so 30 at nest 18 at the bottom right okay right okay are you gonna keep going or should we ask you now we have one I have one more slide okay let's let him finish and then we're gonna harassing or something

[42:02] I appreciate your eagerness last thing we've been working on is the the navigation Center and that's been a fairly difficult one as well trying to find a site that will work for this so we're currently working on a site right now that is likely going to be redeveloped in a couple of years and so it would provide the the the day services and the night shelter for 50 individuals we believe that we'll have that in place probably towards the end of December and it will need some modifications as well we're in the process this week of of the negotiations on that property and this we've worked in close coordination with with Bridge

[43:00] house on this trying to find a place that actually meets the requirements for those uses as well we've been working with with the with a building department and planning to find a site that's that meets that the requirements for that use so we think in the next week or two we'll be able to report further on that but our target is at the end of December okay I think we have a few questions Sam so my question is also about vouchers so I don't know Wendy if you want to come up and good evening Wendy Schwartz homeless programs manager should I start with Mary's previous question so there are generally two

[44:01] types of vouchers and one type is called project-based and you usually apply for it when you're trying to get funding for a project in one example that's 1175 Lee Hill and in that case the vouchers stay with the units in that building so if someone moves out of 1175 Lee Hill the voucher stays there with that unit however the vouchers that Kurt is referring to are the other kind of vouchers which are tenant based vouchers and those are portable with the tenant so with the ones that stay with 1175 Lee Hill is that a funding stream that comes in every year so in other words you talk about a voucher is how does that work those are funded through the same source as through HUD federal funds that come to our region through metro Denver homeless initiative often referred to as

[45:01] mdh I and the the federal NOFA that Awards those types of homeless project funds is is renewed reissued every year and so technically any project that's funded through that source could not be renewed on any given year by HUD however that's very unusual in practical experience for an existing and previously funded project to not continue funding and in particular it's very unusual given the federal guidelines for a project such as 1175 li hill which is permanent supportive housing to not be renewed most the time if they're not renewed it's it's something that's not permanent housing it's transitional housing or supportive services got it so what would happen in this strange

[46:02] political time that we live in if federal funding were slashed and it did the vouchers did get cut off we would have this facility right for a permanently supportive housing but we wouldn't have funding for its operations is that correct if the vouchers were to be cut what would happen in the case of the vouchers being cut that is correct that we would not have the funding that supports the the rental payment and the supportive services that go with those vouchers in this particular case and so other funding sources would have to be identified at that point okay and with the vouchers that go with the individual so we get the vouchers funded this year through the mvh I plus our our housing dollars how did they get funded next year so you want you talked about having each year more vouchers so does

[47:03] each time you get given a voucher that's funded in perpetuity or how does that work I would have to check on that answer with older housing partners and Boulder shelter for the homeless the co applicants on this unless Kurt knows the answer I I don't know the answers that question okay because I'm just curious you know we've been talking about trying to add affordable housing primarily affordable housing so these vouchers one sounds more stable maybe than the other but you need to at least understand how we're going to get them renewed so is that there's a difference between adding a space of affordable housing which is an actual dwelling unit versus which program could be cut Gregg harms the executive director of the shelter is expected to arrive here relatively soon and so when he gets here one option is

[48:03] to ask and see if he he more likely knows the answer to that question okay sorry Lisa and then Aaron Sam it's my question I wanted to know about the permanency of those vouchers and then how they how'd the individual moves around the system and so we'll wait till great get to ask you to come back up and go to the previous slide please just wanted to get a little bit of a better sense of these that so the the first group are 10 per year at the nest properties I get the third one which is 6 per year at a new acquisition that bhp hopes to close on soon yes this would be additional units we'd be adding to the audible housing stock in the city some of which would be dedicated to permanent supportive housing that's correct yes the nest properties currently has 10

[49:01] we don't know this is somewhat of a pilots as well okay I think we need to see how many individuals that make sense to have it you know each of the properties and I think will in in how that aligns with the support of programs that go along with it from the shelter I think we'll sort of track that as well we're also talking to our other affordable housing projects as they come through and request funding in the future that like zero diagonal as an example that they must allocate a percentage of their affordable units you know towards psh housing great and that that that last the last the bhp acquisition do you have a sense of roughly what percent like how many units is that going to be 20 units in total total yeah end up being a fair amount of it and then the the in that middle bucket the transitioning units the partnership with the boulder shelter for the homeless so would that be units beds with

[50:00] in the shelter no these are all of these are outside of the shelter okay these are existing transitional units that we have that we're moving - psh housing okay so train changing their function right and then the so all of those in that 36 are their existing housing units that are in one affordable program or another it would be rededicated to procure supportive although the bhp is really targeting to drive to try to give as many of those in privates landlords as possible and like I mentioned they have twenty at this point so it's not reducing their portable housing stock okay then that's great to hear so it may be a way to frame this like a way to think of it as instead of adding new buildings like Lee Hill Drive right you know where you have one one building with a number of people were scattering it a little that's correct a good way of thinking about it great thanks very much and I was oh I just had a follow-up follow-up question on the

[51:02] the bsh transitioning it's those are all over the city is that correct and they are been operated for a long time by the shelters they're not all over the city but they have been around for a while yes thank you well in terms of so I'm getting in then Jan then Lisa when we say they're scattered around the city is it pretty good distribution no most of them are in the North Boulder area okay June thanks for this I just want to confirm 52 or I understand supportive housing but they're aimed as exit for the homeless people yes for people that primarily are in the shelter right now who don't have an exit out yeah so you're saying we'll have 52 per year this is what we have this is what we've have now or what we will be putting in

[52:01] place over the next few months and so the 52 is we'll have a total of 52 every year or we'll have 52 that will add and then another 52 so our goal for the next three years is 35 per year 35 per year yes and you're pretty much committing to that and you're over exceeding your commitment for year 1 that's correct okay thank you Lisa and then so and maybe I don't know if you can answer this but for the private landlords that are providing housing is there some kind of incentive for them or how do we entice people to do this that they can sleep all that night well that would be good it's really bhp reaching out to these landlords and describing to them what kind of supports as well as with the boulder shelter what kind of support these individuals are going to receive that they have a number to call

[53:01] if they have challenges and really showing that the overall management that comes along with those vouchers no that's good Sam so I wanted to talk about the nest communities a little bit so as I look on the website at the buildings here these are the ones that were purchased with older housing partners as well as housing no it's just the they had a contribution from housing correct that's correct yes it was with element and Allisyn development okay and who's operating these it's being operated by elements element itself is the operation right they do have a I'm not sure who the manager is that the property manager is it's they've hired someone to do that I can get their name for you though okay so this is in a way kind of a new model for affordable housing it really the approach for that

[54:02] was to ensure that the property managers had an understanding and training and that sort of thing of what's involved in supporting these individuals and their in their development and being able to provide the support necessary I see and then of these three are in North Boulder right these are in South South right this to the extent that people are going to nest it's spreading around geographically it looks like yes it also looks like it's spreading around and the fact that you'll have low-income and permanently supported mixed in the same buildings that's correct yes okay thank you we'd also add that the 20 units which we can't talk about exactly where it is is not in North Boulder I think that works okay the you mentioned we're looking to add 52 this year or the next few months and then 35 a year for the next few years right what would what's my anticipation of the

[55:01] overall demand in other words if if I was unlimited how many do we think we would need to house all the people that would qualify for permanent supportive housing yeah I think Karen can answer that better we did talk about that with the homeless strategy yes so we we don't have that number we don't know exactly what the demand is we know the numbers of people who have come to service providers in the past to access services and and shelter and housing but one of the goals of the new strategy is to have a really robust data collection so we can track people we could we can track where people are going previously we didn't have in individual assessments and screening so we don't we weren't able to match individual needs with the resources and housing that was available we'll be able to do that in the new system of services we'll be able to track how many people need what type of service what type of housing and and the

[56:00] services that match that so we don't exactly know the demand so that's something that we'll be tracking in the future Thanks this is only about housing or yeah then we're going back to Karen who's gonna finish your presentation so if I could add one more thing as well so Jan talked about you know reaching this goal of 50 to really what we've obtained is 36 because without vouchers I mean it takes both both of those so we may have units that we can get people into but we also need the vouchers you know to make the whole system work so you have 52 sites available in 36 about your 52 units yes units available yeah but 36 vouchers to fund them that's correct so we still need some more vouchers to actually utilize the sites that's correct

[57:00] do we know the cost of a voucher that's right I think it's about 16 thousand a year 16 and kind of on a related note does do the vouchers cover the entire operating cost or is there some a gap that needs to be made up generally speaking they cover a one-bedroom unit at a 60% ami rent as well as the additional services that would go along with that so it's no go ahead well so if we think so in other words if we have an existing deed restricted affordable unit at 60% ami it basically covers the cost to change it in - that's correct only supportive possible that that amount also reflects about $6,000 a year in the services portion of that okay Thank You Kurt that's great news and

[58:00] we'll turn it back to Karen to finish okay one other update that we wanted to provide was on severe weather shelter so we talked a little bit about the hundred and sixty year-round program based beds that are anticipated at the shelter the fifty shorter-term beds at the navigation Center through path to home but also the strategy anticipates standing up some severe weather shelter during severe weather conditions this information has come back to council in the past but we also wanted to just highlight that there will be additional severe weather sheltering available on those roughly 20 days or so obscure weather when that's triggered that type of sheltering will be available to anybody in the community will not be through coordinated entry he will not be a sustr screen for that that would be walk up on those approximate 20 days when we have that need we are partnering

[59:03] with faith-based community we have on several faith-based sites who are willing to provide that shelter and we are working to the to get a service provider for staffing for that type of shelter so Karen on any given night yep that will be in a different in addition to the 50 short-term beds right that would be an addition to 160 long-term beds yeah Erin she said this and I missed it are we anticipating a limit on that or is it kind of whatever the church will bear yes whatever the capacity would be at the site so it would be the physical capacity rather than a fixed number follow-up to that Karen so if I understood correctly I'm between now and or October 1 and the end of December when we hope to have this 50

[60:00] longer term longer longer term navigation beds will rely on the faith-based community through bridge house in the path to home is that right that's right so similar to what we've been doing the last summer which is extend that for other two or three months then after on this new site is the faith-based community would really step in only on these severe weather days after we called the first of the year is that right that's right our past experience what's the maximum demand for emergency beds during severe weather days what numbers are we talking about one hundred hundred so we would we would have our 50 beds which we use for those and then up to maybe fifty more on a particularly bad night is that right that's right okay thanks so the way I look at this then we have increased our capacity for emergency sheltering plus the people who are chronic needs that will be in the

[61:01] program bed so I have up to 116 program beds 50 in navigation beds if needed and then whatever the overflow is and so the capacity of the city will be in the neighborhood of 210 beds so when you say overflow are you referring to severe weather sure 21 days yes yep that's correct and that does but that doesn't include the permanent supportive housing we just talked about no that does not include housing first permanent supportive housing vouchers transitional housing that doesn't include any of that but so okay so I've just one more question encourage presentation you mentioned that these were services for all the county and I'm just wondering to what extent do we receive support from other

[62:01] entities around the county yes so for coordinated entry navigation services and program based shelter city of Longmont Boulder County and city of Boulder our funding we are working out those budgets right now the county is is providing most of the funding or will be providing most of the funding for the coordinated entry piece we will be providing most of the funding if not all of the funding for navigation services in the city of Boulder and the city of Longmont will be providing most of the funding or all of the funding for city of Longmont navigation services so we're still working out exactly what those budgets will look like but the system as we have laid it out will be fully funded the way that we anticipate thank you you know Jim to Mary's question which was my question the other towns that don't seem to ever get a

[63:01] mention Louisville on/off yet and all the others are they contributing any dollars and is there a strategy overtime to have facilities out there because it seems like they're kind of getting away with pushing people our way and then the follow-up question on that would be this coordinated entry system are we I've forgotten if we're asking for ID no we're not asking for ID to get into coordinated entry that will be identified through the intake process when someone comes into the system but we are not asking for ID and have we and forgive me I don't think we're asking for ID let me double-check that yeah if you could check on that and also are we providing services to people who are coming in from out of the county so Monday are we asking for ID we are not

[64:00] asking for ID however one key functioned to help people in terms of benefits and this is something that our service providers already do is help people obtain valid ID in answer to some of the other questions that were posed we will also be utilizing existing service system data in the new data system to help establish how long someone has been in Boulder County and so if the person can be identified our prioritization system does have an element that includes length of time in Boulder County and so while we can serve people from other places for our especially high-value services such

[65:01] reserved beds for program-based shelter at Boulder shelter for the homeless then people who have been in Boulder County longer would be prioritised okay Sam so presumably you'll be asking for their name is that correct yes we will and one of the things I understood about withers navigation services or program beds was that we expect a certain amount of cooperation out of people who were gonna give assistance to is that correct yes we do and and really the more information they can give us the more we can help them sure and would it be fair to say that if they are that they won't be in the navigation program or the program bed program it it will certainly limit their options especially after the first night right so and and and I should add that for many of our local

[66:00] programs that are already in existence this is also true because there is a limited amount of help that folks can be given if if they don't want to participate or give information and as far as the data sharing so another piece of coordinated entry has been to be able to share data with other service providers or across service providers I'll say that has not been discussed to my knowledge yet I think that might be on the horizon the Boulder County connect client portal which is the chosen data system that is being enhanced for this purpose the county is the owner of that and so I would have to ask at what point that's in the planning but I would imagine that at some point it would this is the starting place for

[67:02] the system in terms of early launch okay thanks so kind of back to the countywide aspects of it so that the 160 beds at the shelter are these program beds the people who go through the coordinated entry and so on and so on but there are other people who go through that program who are elsewhere or is that not true I'm sorry men under so you go through this coordinated entry and you get accepted into this you referred either to the shelter or did navigation services let's assume you referred to the shelter for the beds that the only place so people this coordinate entry around the whole county in theory some number of them qualify it referred to the shelter is that the only place that those people go in the entire boulder

[68:01] county who are in this program program based shelter yes okay well that doesn't sound very countywide the shelter is and has been since inception has been the countywide shelter it seemed to be more coordinated around the county and I guess the question is is there some sense that in fact there will be these types of services elsewhere in the county at some point so I think to maybe also answer another question about what are other communities doing to help support this system right now not a lot we are not getting funding from the city of Louisville or Lafayette or Erie or any other community to help fund this at the moment there there is permanent supportive housing units and affordable housing units that are going in in Louisville for example the kestrel project which you have heard about and

[69:00] in Longmont and some other locations but we we are leading this effort with the city of Longmont and Boulder County you know one of the mechanisms that we talked about in June was through the consortium of cities the regional affordable housing was presented through the through the consortium of cities and also the permanent supportive housing study that the consortium commissioned for this very purpose we had talked about it in June that this could be the mechanism for really engaging the other communities in the county because they are aware of the regional affordable housing strategy the housing issues and the homelessness issues this could be a mechanism for really engaging these other communities and reaching out through that body to get more support to get services located maybe in other areas and more affordable housing from

[70:02] the supportive housing units and maybe even services so we had talked about that being the next step to really reach out to other communities and to make that part of the implementation plan and currently I mean the shelter's role is kind of evolving here it's changing to some extent and I know it's currently funded to some extent by us and a little bit by long night in the summer by the county is that is that when you kind of say some of the budgets are being looked at is that being looked at because its role is changing and its surface services the county is kind of changing so is that being reconsidered about how that funding comes from at least those sources yes and I think that will be an ongoing conversation with all the funding partners we had a pretty aggressive time label a timeline to get this up and going October 1st just to make some progress on this issue because we've been talking about a very long

[71:01] time so I think that will be part of the mix and our funding and partnership conversations and through the homeless governance board that we've established so yes I think that will be part of the conversation in the future and the last question I've got or not maybe this is obvious but I mean if 160 beds at the shelter really are used as these program beds which you'd expect them to be eventually I mean that that seems to change both the role of the shelter and the type of people who are hat the shelter with their role is no longer kind of the day changing passive residence but a rather different sort of operation is that accurate right yes I think it is accurate and then when we get Greg up here to talk about the vouchers he could probably talk a little bit more about this also the program based shelter clients are anticipated to be moderate

[72:01] to high needs clients people who need more support for a for a longer period of time the data that we were able to look at around the use of the shelter in the development of the strategy and through the working group indicated that a high percentage of those clients coming to the shelter were only accessing services or the shelter for on average less than eight days I think that's the right number might be seven days so so whether they are were only accessing the shelter services because they were low needs clients or because they were high needs clients or moderate needs client but we're just going somewhere else and that can coming back to the shelter we don't know that but what we do know is that if a significant percentage of those clients who didn't stay at the shelter for more than roughly a week our lower needs clients

[73:02] then that's a pretty big diversion from the shelter system into navigation where we might be able to bring other resources to bear to help those clients more quickly connect to a solution in a shorter period of time for example maybe someone might need a month or two of rental subsidy or maybe what they really want or need because we do hear about this occasionally they need transportation funds to get somewhere and they just simply don't have them and can't access them we are going to be expanding homeless mediation hopefully in 2018 so maybe there's some reconciliation that could happen through mediation with where they just left or to get back into a permanent place so there's other resources and tools that we could use for a portion of that population so let me in terms of process

[74:03] yeah we're gonna get to the homeless piece are the shelter piece of this right yes so let's not ask questions about the shelter piece because we haven't heard the presentation yet but do we have any more so we are we have concluded the update on the implementation right and we're going to be moving to the the shelter management plan so if you have any additional questions on this piece correct okay Lisa and then so Dan and Mary I don't know which one wants to do it but could you explain this coordinator entry a little bit more I mean it seems to me you want to have coordinated entry and navigational services in one-stop yes and but not necessarily at the homeless shelter so the vision is that we would have coordinated entry and navigation at one site someone would come through the front door and they would say they need some help they would speak with someone

[75:00] an intake worker a case manager and they would be screen for what their needs are what they're looking for or the type of housing and resources that they need based on that screening they would either be referred to program based shelter if there are more moderate or higher needs client they would be referred to the shelter to get into the program based shelter program if they are a lower needs client and it appears as though they're issues could be resolved with shorter term services or shelter they would be referred to the navigation side and they would stay there at that site to receive navigation services that make sense that's good thank you I have other questions but I'll wait until after your presentation okay we have Jane in the Mary I'm gonna think about a community impact no now at the shelter everyone has to leave every morning okay we're going to

[76:00] do the shelter in a minute to do with so if this has to do with management plan changes we're going to be doing that presentation about this program based okay system which now will have a hundred sixty five people who will potentially be in that which means they don't leave every day because that it will act like a shelter you know they can stay all day correct well that is one of the management plan changes that's being proposed Sokka maybe we could cover that in that okay you want to cover that after okay great Mary so if one were someone who is serving on the consortium of cities and one one to make a suggestion to other cities how they could contribute is there something that that person could bring - yes we

[77:00] can provide you with that thank you okay why don't you proceed with the second part okay before we close this out I know that Greg is here and he could ant he might be able to answer your question about how Bowser's but the the lifespan or the continuity of vouchers are from a funding perspective Greg would you be able to answer that question we had a question earlier about vouchers and their expiration and and the continuation funding so as we're adding vouchers how we rely on that continuation for the funding for that so I'm assuming this is permanent supportive housing vouchers we're talking about yes sorry I missed the original question so just react the question yeah so we have currently we have about 2223 housing vouchers that we get through HUD through

[78:01] the Metropolitan or homeless initiative continuum of care we have to apply every year to get those refunded so far we've been able to do that every year for the last ten years so it's not a sure thing it's not funding in perpetuity but the programs have been pretty solid these extended vouchers that we've been talking about would be in or a similar situation where if we get the grant we have to reapply every year for additional funding for the next year but unless we really don't do a good job typically we get refunded every year so that's how those vouchers work does that answer the question oh wait is there more about your questions are you concerned at all in this current political state that we might lose any of those vouchers and I understand

[79:04] you're saying it's not a sure thing but things are up in the air more than they have been in the past I think I don't really know at least I think our current vouchers are probably safe the bigger question is is any new kind of program that we put in place I think those are the things that are on the bubble right now so these new vouchers that we've applied for I think we're on the bubble right now we're hopeful we've been recommended for funding but it all depends on Congress yes so yeah there were two flavors of vouchers there was the flavor of our that stayed with actual structure permanently supportive housing 1175 Lee Hill and then there was one that went with the tenants as they went to different locations is there a difference in the certainty between those two or are they both out of the same pool of HUD money

[80:01] they're they're really kind of equal and likelihood of being funded the the extensions we asked for we're all to paste but I don't think whether it's project-based or tenant based makes a lot of difference in and how they get ranked or funded so I would imagine if you didn't get ones that were tenant based and the affordable housing could still be rented as affordable housing rather than permanently supportive housing what would happen to 1175 Willie Hill if it lost its vouchers that's that's probably a question we'd have to come to contemplate with bhp because bhp is providing those project-based vouchers right now so unless bhp came completely apart I think we would still be able to survive ok that situation great so it would be a loss of operational funding but not something that was insurmountable my guess is yes

[81:02] that that would be true ok we get on vouchers okay thank you Greg Karen okay we're going to move on to the shelter management plan so older shelter for the homeless is identified as the program based shelter provider and the shelter operates under a management plan which identifies operating requirements and is based on really a long-standing partnership at the neighborhood and the neighborhood shelter action group which the shelter consults with about the plan so under the current management plan the program based sheltering features which are not currently allowed are access to shelter May 1st to September 30th and the summer time for program based clients who may not be sober at the entry of the program so the shelter currently allows clients who are not sober at the shelter those are walk-up

[82:00] clients during the sheltering season October 1 to May 1 so if we're having year-round program based sheltering then clients would be there during summer who may not be sober when they enter the program and the other feature which is not consistent with the management plan currently would be to allow those year-round program based shelter clients to stay at the shelter during the day not at necessarily as just sheltering during the day but they to be engaged also in programs and services they may have appointments outside of the shelter or at the shelter but that there would be an allowance for them to be at the shelter during the day opt in this idea of sober and I think people have different views of what summer is and and what not what I mean what kind of checking is that we talking

[83:02] about breathalyzers is that you know historically been done or is this just someone who is sort of stumbling and then likewise even with what's being talked about here assuming that there's no removal of behavioral standards that is if someone's violently drunk whether or not sober is irrelevant it's whether they're being disruptive right in the shelter and I might invite Greg back up to discuss this in detail the shelter has has pretty clear behavioral policies and expectations to be at the shelter so so this doesn't necessarily apply to behavior as there's still behavioral requirements it does apply to however if they are sober in a program so Greg can speak more specifically to their behavioral rules and what the program requires yes so tonight for example we're sober only so if we suspect that

[84:02] you've been drinking we'll breathalyze you that will go away come come October and we have always had behavioral based rules so we've we've had people who guys who could come to the shelter or in the wintertime having had a lot of alcohol consumption and still be appropriate to stay because the behavior was fine so going forward that's how we will operate year-round as opposed to just during the wintertime be you know that based under behavior ability to build the ability to stay at the shelter has always been based on behavior hmm in the summer we added the hurdle of sobriety we're proposing that that hurdle goes away in the summertime okay so we have a couple questions just follow what wood is it was a question that I asked him okay what is the definition of sobriety triple zeros okay so that just means you can have not have had a drink period correct not even a beer earlier in the

[85:01] day correct it's in your blood okay presumably sobriety includes other drugs as well and so what if somebody comes in smelling of marijuana in the summer we hit we don't do you a urine Ellen analysis we we don't have the capacity to do that we're not trained to do that so we can breathalyze people but beyond that people who might be under the influence it's really a we have to base it our decisions on behavior so the only time that you would breathalyze somebody would be in the summer program is that right right because otherwise it's just all behavioral standards-based well we breathalyze in the summer everybody in the wintertime we we would breathalyze our transition clients but again all of that's changing as of October 1st sobriety as a requirement to stay at the shelter goes away so very no way no goes

[86:00] away yeah and it's really alcohol sobriety that you're talking about that's the only thing we can test for but starting October 1st really our only ability to define whether someone's appropriate to stay or not it's going to be based on behavior right and that's the way it has been in the sheltering season up till now correct thank you as I understand it Craig um up until now or up until this proposed change you've had at least 60 and sometimes more beds that are program based sheltering beds right 60 of v100 60 beds so I have that right yeah we we have had about 60 beds set aside for what we've called our first step in transition program on a year-round basis so though that's been in place for a number of years would that be comparable to what we're now referring to as program based sheltering we're turning the whole model on its head so now we're gonna have the entire

[87:00] shelter is going to be this program based sheltering bed system where we're prioritizing people based on need and their connections to the community setting aside just for a second the numbers the difference between 60 and 160 but I want to understand the difference but the qualitative difference between the the I think was referred to as transitional housing or what did you call it the succeed with the people that in the sixty beds have strong clear we've called that program our transition program okay so how would you contrast qualitatively the transition program and do a process thing you want to give a presentation and we're already questions so maybe can we just hold off and let her finish sure and then we'll just let her rip on the questions and then we can come come back to the loop on this this Greg might elaborate on when he comes back up okay program based sheltering is geared toward moderate and high needs clients

[88:00] who are more likely to have sobriety barriers and so to have sobriety as a criteria to be able to have year-round shelter with services it's a pretty high barrier for some people so Greg could probably talk a little bit more about the transitions program and the requirement for sobriety and what some of those characteristics are of the transitions program clients program based shelter is expecting higher needs clients who would any years as Tom pointed out earlier the city may require a good neighbor meeting to identify the potential impacts adverse impacts and mitigation when the management plan has changed and the good neighbor meeting also provides neighbors and in the surrounding neighbor and the surrounding community an opportunity to comment on proposed plan changes and feedback for improvements so the shelter

[89:02] is already undertaken some outreach to the stakeholders and neighborhoods to let them know that this plant there are some proposed changes to the plan and that the good neighbor meeting will be held on October 2nd just to get the word out there so this is just a list of I think most but probably not all of the outreach efforts and meetings that the shelter has already engaged in leading up to the good neighbor meeting on October segments so the good neighbor meeting will be an open house type format the shelter has hired a facilitator consultant to help facilitate the meeting and help put together an agenda for how the meeting will go and that is currently underway public notice was sent from the Planning Department on September 8th to businesses renters residents in the area requirement is 600 feet radius but of

[90:00] notification was sent to a 2,000 foot radius just to make sure that all the contiguous neighborhoods got notification of the meeting so information is also posted on the city website and the boulder shelter the homeless website there's been a push out through next door and there is an online feedback form on the shelter website that will be ongoing September and October through the the good neighbor meeting so the next steps in this process would be the good neighbor meeting on October 2nd the shelter would make revisions based on public feedback and suggested mitigation options to the proposed changes to the management plan the revised plan would be submitted to the city with their conditionally use application and that would happen in late October and staff and city manager would

[91:00] be reviewing that application and then we would come back and update City Council on what the decision was regarding the management plan so the motion tonight for council is a motion to request that the boulder shelter for the homeless to amend its management plan to allowed a sheltering and year-round sheltering for qualified clients to implement the city of Boulder homelessness strategy yes my question yes you may know things maybe this is a better so the regs I understand it you have traditionally provided 60 beds for what you I think you refer to transitional housing sometimes that's gone up a little higher than 60 bill is just uses 60 to keep it simple and and people have certain qualifications and certain needs those 60 transitional beds and now we're talking about 160 beds

[92:02] that are program based that's can you tell us the difference the qualitative I understand the difference between sixty one hundred and sixty can you tell us the quality at a difference between people and the services and the transition program you have now and the program based sheltering that would just be proposed I think that the two big differences are one of the requirements to get in so the requirements to get into our transition program right now are sobriety and some source of income with this new strategy those requirements go away because we anticipate we're going to be serving potentially higher needs people potentially more vulnerable people potentially lower functioning people so we need to lower the bar to be able to serve those folks so that's the first big change is we get rid of the sobriety and income requirements for all of our programs at the shelter so we will then of the perk none of the shelter beds will have those

[93:02] requirements anymore the second change is we will be more focused with our case management resources on housing exits to Kurt's talk earlier we we are really focused on helping people find their exit out of homelessness so we have been housing focused in the past but we will be even more housing focused in the future on how do we find resolution to your homelessness what's the best exit strategy for you and that that's going to be our focus for all of the people who are at the shelter that's helpful so to to followup questions the the 60 people or the 60 beds that you have right now in your transition program those aren't going to be displaced they'll be subsumed within 160 in other words if somebody qualified for your transitional program they presumably would still qualify for this this program based sheltering as well right because it's all now a lower standard so those people would still qualify I don't know because the qualifications will now

[94:00] be the qualifications of coordinated entry that's how you'll get to your ticket to the shelter so the requirements of sobriety and income will be dropped but the requirements of medium to high needs and ties to the community will be added so I can't tell you whether all of our folks who are currently in our program would qualify under the new system I can't tell you that we're grandfathering everybody in who we made commitments to you know what pardon we are we are grandfathering all of our our current clients if we committed to them a particular program and a particular length of stay they will be grandfathered in for that that duration but after that everybody goes through the coordinated entry system and that that determines qualif qualified or I'm not qualified for shelter services and then my last question and the other end of the coin of the the incremental HotList a that the 60 still qualify the

[95:00] incremental hundred those people had previously just been provided sheltering through emergency services on a seasonal basis is that correct correct where they're they're gonna come from correct okay thanks okay Jim then Lisa I'm trying to understand the impact to the community both North Boulder being the location as well as the rest of Boulder and now everyone pretty much 00 and then they come back by a certain time correct correct so they're getting on the bus or they're walking around the neighborhood they're heading down to the library or whatever and what is your estimate of the the number of people who will be staying in the shelter based on the fact that now you will be giving services there you'll be encouraging them to stay I assume there will be a showers there and a lunchtime meal so will this kind of be

[96:03] like home away from home until they exit so there will be the I'm trying to figure out is if there's less wandering around town what the new program I don't know I don't know how many people will want to stay in the shelter every day all day I just I really don't know there will be structure to the day for the people who do stay and so some people may not want to sign up for that I just I really don't know the one thing I can't say as far as the impact on on the neighborhood especially immediately around the shelter is we anticipate that a lot of people are gonna gonna end up in navigation services who might have come to the shelter otherwise so two years ago we had 1,600 unique individuals come to the shelter we're anticipating that number is going to drop dramatically because a lot of people will go to coordinated entry and

[97:00] they will be they will be sent to navigation service as a set up to the shelter did you say to stew one six or to six so how many thank you sixteen hundred two years ago I came to the shelter you know that this this new strategy anticipates that that number will will drop dramatically so a fewer number of people are gonna come to the to the shelter to start with which I think will have a positive impact on on any negative impacts that sap might that we might have on the neighborhood but to answer your question about how many people will stay during the day I just don't know we haven't ever done this before but this is a really good solution for what has been they've had to kind of travel around to get different services and that kind of thing they would have in previously have to go somewhere else to get mental health services and somewhere else for

[98:01] lunch and somewhere else and that is all gonna be done on site if someone wants that is that correct that's correct we offer those most of those services now but arguably they'll be more accessible and under the new system okay thank you we have Lisa then married and Aaron first thing I was gonna comment about the area of notification but I am grateful that you've expanded it so that you've notified a lot of a lot more people than would be in that 600 radius so that's good thank you I wanted to know for those people who aren't going through coordinated entry will they like right now you can show up if you haven't stayed at night where my understanding is if you haven't stayed at night at the shelter you can show up for breakfast and shower is that correct or so we have what we call morning

[99:02] services right mm-hmm where people can come between 6 and 8 a.m. and get breakfast and take a shower and do their laundry we've we've had those services for many years and so what will happen with those services will those be that or will you still be open for people I think that's going to depend on the feedback from the neighborhood so that'll come out of the good neighbor plan yes so in do we the navigation Center might have take over those morning services has there been discussion about so I can answer that so I think in this transition time we were anticipating those services staying and as the navigation Center its online and up and running that there could be showers lockers those types of things at the navigation Center for navigation Center clients whether food service would be

[100:01] available for navigation clients at the navigation Center I think that's that's we're looking at that to be determined yeah okay but but we would at least continue these services in the transition period most likely again I think that's part of our conversation with the neighborhood okay thanks Lisa so think so then I wanted to ask about this neighborhood shelter action group and my understanding is where but read in the packet was there's a maximum of 10 and that includes shelter board members shelter staff and neighborhood representatives correct and so how many neighborhood representatives are in that group officially I think we have seven right now oh and how many board members I think there's two two official board members sometimes more

[101:01] come to the meetings but I think we have two two official board members myself and I think there's seven six or seven neighborhood folks who are officially on the committee that's great okay Mary so Greg previously with the lottery system you would have how many beds available each evening it would depend it would depend on how many people we had in our transition program because they mm-hmm they had first priority so 00 o'clock or we would know by foot two years ago we ran the lottery last year we ran a reservation system so last year what the requirement was you called in by 10 o'clock we ran a computer

[102:01] lottery and then by noon we had posted the number of the names of people who had a bed for the night so and that was based on how many beds we had available on top of our transition program so in the previous year when you were running purely on the lottery system how many about how many folks would you turn away I mean I realize it depended on the number of transitional beds but on average how many folks would you turn away it varied dramatically from night to night because we would over booked like the airline's we would over booked because some people wouldn't show every night so we were always trying to maximize the use of our facility but not knowing who was going to show up hopefully you didn't drag people out no but we we had to give vouchers to Mexico a couple of times no I think the maximum

[103:05] number of people that we could not offer a reservation to was probably 820 and those folks when they were turned away were they provided transportation to boho or were they on their own to find their way somewhere else well they they weren't really turned away because they just didn't get a reservation so they knew by noon they did not have a reservation at the show I mean the previous year when you weren't doing the reservation so two years ago yes we for some some period of time we actually ran a bus what that didn't get utilized very much so we've offered bus in the past we've offered bus vouchers to people so that they could get back to Poho or get go to some other place where they wanted to but again we stopped that over over a year ago

[104:00] you monitor at all if of those folks that did not have a bed if they were if they stayed around and in the vicinity in the neighborhood we really don't have a way of knowing that okay Thank You Erin yeah a couple of the slides it talks about the new program back to sobriety I guess which maybe we're spending too much time on but it says the time of entry you have to meet well you used to have to be sober and now it doesn't matter what happens after I'm trying to get someone just tired of entry is to have entry whatever these people get through the coordinated entry and get into the program based services at the shelter assuming they don't do

[105:01] something behaviorally that is unacceptable I mean then why are there some requirements that they have to be in certain programs that they have to do anything that they just there for as long as they're there until some housing is available for them I'm kind of unclear about what happens next so we will we will try to engage people with whatever there are housings their particular housing solution may be it might be that somebody drinks every day and they stay at the shelter and they continue to drink every day but their behavior is appropriate because that person might be a perfect candidate for Prime Minister supportive housing and so we don't want to lose that person on the streets if if they could be a great candidate for psh so we we will engage people with our case management team as much as we can again focus completely on

[106:03] housing and how do we get people housed as quickly as possible but we're not we're not trying to resolve people's sobriety or or addiction problems or their mental health problems before we find them housing we found that that just doesn't work very well and it's it's probably better for us to try to address addiction and mental health issues after somebody is housed and so that that's the approach we've been taking well I guess is Lisa the question is probably more for you care and means 100 in theory that could be 160 people here I don't know at what rate you think they will find permanently supportive housing and therefore how long people will actually have to stay in the shelter yeah it could be a year it could be longer but I think the goal is to move those highest needs people particularly those who might be housing first

[107:00] qualified candidates those group of people into housing first or permanent supportive housing with services I think - just to add on to what Gregg said I don't think we're anticipating in program based sheltering that people just go into shelter and there's no case management plan for them or a plan for access to services whether it's mental health or whether it's addiction recovery if people are interested in that or whatever the the services are that the client is ready willing and able to access so some clients may be at the shelter for a year longer than a year they may be there for a year and a half maybe two years the majority of clients who've accessed the system are not those super high needs utilizers but they are the clients who are the highest priority for getting into program based sheltering to get stabilized so that

[108:01] they can move in - from your supportive housing or a housing first type situation okay and one other thing in terms of the number of people there I mean that the management plan now since I just looked at it says you're gonna have up to 160 people but in practice in the summertime at least now you don't have 160 people right because you have your transitions program but that's it the last couple of summers we've added some summer beds we call them but yes we're we we have been you know at 6,800 people on the shelter during the summer traditionally up until now okay so I mean there's a require management plan changes if there's a practical a potential practical change depending on how the numbers will work out and now these programs though work I just wanted to better understand that correct okay thanks we have Sam and then Andrew

[109:03] okay I would like to ask about three very different subjects here one is women at the shelter now my understanding from previous tours was that you have that all women who applied for overnight sheltering were admitted is that correct they got priority yes they got priority okay and didn't that effectively mean that you weren't turning women away for capacity reasons yes okay and did they have a separate facility that they slept in a separate room within the facility or separate was it segregated by gender yeah we have four dorms at the shelter so we have two men men's dorms and two women's dorms the one one one male dorm for our old emergency services and one male dorm for our transition program and the same is true for the women okay great how will

[110:01] that work in the future what is the plan is is it separated somehow by gender or I mean what's the capacity for your female dorms our capacity is based on our experience that about 75 or 80 percent of the population is male and so that's historically been the case that's the case and other locations and so that's how we built the shelter and that's how we've always operated the shelter I think total total capacity for women we actually have more than 160 beds in the shelter because we never exactly what the ratio is going to be between men and women and so on but I think the total capacity we have right now is about 55 or 60 beds thick that could be used for women we've actually put mattresses on the floor on occasion if if we ran out of bed capacity for

[111:00] women okay and when you talk about 160 beds just so I know how to do the math is that 160 beds in the men's dorms where's that 160 in the two men's dorms plus the two women storms 160 for the building okay and so we can look at this as something like a hundred beds for men that will be program beds I'm just thinking forward to the program beds time 100 for men and 60 for women we have a total of 60 beds we could we can put women in but they're often not full it really depends on the ratio that happens to be there that night so we could have we have 35 women and if we have 35 women then all the rest of the hundred and 60 beds are available for men so it just do you moved the beds out of there women's storms so we have we have almost 200 beds and we shift people get shifted around just based on what the need is I see and some of those 200 beds are not

[112:02] deployed at any given time correct got it so then I'll segue to families so how and maybe this question is more for Karen but when the family comes to navigation services will they always be diverted to ephah and not to the shelter if they're going to have program beds how will how will the families who are unsheltered be handled so we're rolling out the navigation services and coordinated entry for this single adult system first the system of the family emergency system is works pretty well through fo so we're not making any changes to that right now I think the long-term vision is to have all homeless services have you know really robust assessment intake coordinated entry so that it's it's kind of a one-stop shop right now on the

[113:01] family side that system is working pretty good we want to pilot this just standing up the system for single adults because that's where we hit where we have the most need and the biggest issues right now so if a family happened to come into the coordinated entry site and they were a family they would be referred to fo got it and just a reminder for those who might be watching and who haven't heard this about half of the homeless that we are aware of in Boulder County are families and so they're often not nearly as visible and that's a separate program that helps them so finally the last subject is the sexually violent predator question I assume that that subject will come up at the good neighbor meeting and I was curious how you were thinking about addressing it there you know we will take feedback on that really the good neighbor meeting is to be focused on the changes that we're making but if if neighbors come with comments and

[114:01] concerns and questions about other aspects of the shelter will certainly have those conversations and capture that feedback okay and Karen if somebody comes in through navigation services who's identified as a sexually violent predator either actively being monitored on parole or having previously gone through burrow and now not in the system are there any plans for how that will be addressed we haven't developed a plan for how that will be addressed but we can certainly talk with the police chief and the service provider and presumably maybe the parole board as well because it would seem like potentially here we've learned about the halfway house and that probably isn't appropriate for ones that may be off of parole but for ones who may be on parole perhaps that could be an option so that we have yet another way to divert those folks into places that are equipped to deal with their particular

[115:01] characteristics that's it David man we have Andrew and then yeah Greg so it's when I took from the earlier earlier line of questioning that we're talking about sobriety it's alcohol sobriety right that's because that's what you can test for right yeah and then and then surprise surprise means the lack of any alcohol in the system that's detectable right okay so do do we win the sobriety requirement that was put in place that's being discussed going forward when that was put in place do you know if there was any what the basis was for saying that you know one basically someone the people need to abstain from alcohol to

[116:01] benefit from homeless services yeah I think the the the basis for that again this goes back probably 20 years now was that for somebody to transition out of homelessness they needed to have some source of income to pay some kind of rent somewhere to somebody and that their ability to to do that if they were not sober would be really difficult for them to transition into housing not being sober and not having income would be really challenging but when you say sober again that's not not drunk or drunk or not drunk it's not having any alcohol whatsoever and so I guess the question is do you know of any studies or otherwise that suggests that if you have a beer a day that you can't earn an income or that you otherwise will be challenged in terms in terms of being able to get yourself out of homelessness well I think that's why we're changing

[117:00] the system okay and it's because we I don't think that we have strong data to suggest that you can't be housed if if you cannot meet those two requirements of sobriety and income and in fact we've proved it with our permanent supportive housing program that you don't have to be sober to be able to be housed on a on a permanent basis so I think we're catching up with what the data has shown and what our own programs have shown is that those requirements probably probably weren't necessary Thanks so I have Mary and then hopefully we get to the public hearing some not sure if this question is for you Gregg or for Karen but the the management plan has a transportation section and so my first question is is it likely that folks in the program bed will in the program beds will be employed some some will and if

[118:06] they are employed is it a possibility that they might be getting off work very late at night yes so given that there's a transfer as transportation section in the management plan have you thought about how folks would get from work after there are no buses running and via mobility services and isn't running how would people get back to the shelter so we we do handout bus passes on a very limited basis for people who have extenuating circumstances and that might be one of them I'll remind everybody that we still anticipate writing the free bus service that we provide through via mobility services every day picking up downtown at five o'clock and coming up to the shelter and then picking up at 00 a.m. in the morning and going back to the downtown area so we we

[119:00] anticipate that transportation to continue and then you know the the exceptions to the rule we deal on a one-on-one basis so you would provide some you would there's an assurance that there will be transportation if somebody 00 a.m. in the morning but I can make no assurances but we we look at those situations on a case-by-case basis and if we can help we do you know it depends on our ability to have bus passes and our budget and a lot of things so I would hate to make commitments that I couldn't couldn't follow up on but traditionally that's what we have done I think there's probably not that many clients who would be working and trying to get to the shelter after the the bus service to North Boulder ends but that probably is something that we could figure out with the shelter and make sure that yes I think that would be a good thing that we can work a plan in place you work at the shelter on that thank you Tom this is

[120:02] probably a question for you I'm going back to Sam's line a question on sexually violent predators if counsel wanted to limit or eliminate the number of sexually violent predators that resided at the shelter would be would the best way to do that be through the management plan or through a separate ordinance related to land use I would recommend doing it through an ordinance relating to land use you have more authority there Craven thank you anything else Greg thanks so much why don't we move to the public hearing looks like we have seven folks signed up you'll each get three minutes if you could start with your name and address that would be great and we will start with Michelle Stevens followed by Kirk Deaton there it is hi I'm Michelle Stevens I'm in 1740 yellow pine Avenue and I came tonight because it's

[121:01] September 19th and the good neighbor meetings October 2nd but the city is gonna be starting its new homeless strategy on October 1st and I went and I looked online at the pretty requested changes to the management plan and their minor edits and their vague the wording is vague and I don't know I think you need a big rewrite for this management plan and I don't know how you're going to get that done before October 1st with any kind of neighborhood input your request in big changes to the shelter at a time on the relationship with the surrounding community is strained because of the events over the summer you're gonna be sending hiney clients from all over the city up into North Boulder and so you need to think about the transportation and how those things are going to get there so what I'd like to see in a management plan is some something that addresses a policy on parole beds which are not in the current management plan something that addresses

[122:00] a policy of acceptance of violent offenders for those Philip roll beds which is not in the current management plan the policy on sexually violent predators or predators or an ordinance regarding sexually violent predators I'd like to see some way to oversee the shelter so that the shelter is held accountable when it doesn't follow the management plan it's currently not there is nothing in the management plan about parole beds or summer bed program excuse me if you want to agree just do that but please don't make noise and we need a dispute resolution process that uses a neutral third party rather than requiring as it is now to go through four levels of resolution that are all controlled by the shelter okay plan also needs to be more specific on transportation so the shelter's going to be providing long-term shelter for higher need individuals with increased hours of service and without a requirement to be clean and sober so how are they going to get there I don't

[123:00] think the skip is a good option there are a lot of children who ride the Skip and putting somebody who's not required to be sober now next to them is not going to work the management plan language as it sits needs to be rewritten it's very vague it says limited excuse me limited free skip tokens will be available to shelter residents what does that mean how many is that how many free skip tokens are going to be given out and it also says the shelter will provide shuttles and use mobility services but again it has no specifics so really the shelters not going to be required to provide any kind of transportation and finally I'd say please consider the impact on the changes that you're already proposing will have on the neighborhood and give us some kind of assurance that the shelter is not going to become a coordinated the coordinated entry point because you're scrambling to find one thank you thank you Brook in them Patricia I'm Burke Deaton

[124:00] I've been Boulder this time for 20 years and another four years back at CU in the late 80s I was homeless for three years ten years ago including a year in the shelter and I'm homeless this month this time for 14 months I have a little unique perspective on a lot of the things regarding the homeless in Boulder and now that Tom's past maybe you could use me some major concerns well first of all a few questions there are a few things that came up earlier the shelter as far as ID in order to get a TV card you have to have ID you have to have the TV card within two weeks last year during a winter we had up to 200 in the boho program and another 160 in the shelter you can confirm that through people who worked at boho last year the

[125:01] concerns regarding the shelter let's see I'm sorry we are limited seriously in our speech we have no right of appeal I've been kicked out over the last year eight times for various reasons none of which we're all that serious we don't have a way to appeal we are at the mercy of the people who worked there and if they develop any kind of personal grudge we can easily be kicked out for a number of things including for example one of the more odd things was two black guys were calling each other the n-word as they will do friendly and they both got 90 days for that that's one example there's also guilt by association there whereas if you sit down upon someone

[126:01] else's drinking you get kicked out too no right of appeal we don't generally get intrusive services they're the people who meet with us to admit us that seem to be more concerned with other matters and services I've received primarily through Bridge house and through Mental Health Partners and Boulder mental health prior to that the 00 we're out for the night and they don't fill the beds if we're kicked out and that's something that I think could be addressed to the problem with the addicts and alcoholics of course the alcoholics and of course marijuana users are far easier to detect the way things worked before in Boulder amongst the homeless is we knew each other a lot better and we also

[127:01] communicated with the police we communicated with the service workers and everybody else a lot better than we do now as a result when someone was a problem in Boulder and not just by addiction or something but an actual problem they usually didn't last too long I have other things to say but my times up thank you for living hang on one second yes yeah mr. Dayton thank you for coming and speaking you your last comment would you can you repeat that beside the what was the last comment you mean before you said you had a lot more to say oh I do I mean there's a bedbug issue with a heat treatment there and it spread through a few of our houses who have homeless people there they need to chemically treat it there's not really another option but mostly my concern would be knowing the homeless

[128:02] yeah yeah that was it you said in previous years you know the group in Boulder they knew each other very well and and worked well together and communicated well with police so what do you attribute this decrease in communication very simply it's the feeling that we get when we have laws like no smoking downtown with that adequate signage or no smoking areas that also decreases the number of snipes that we can get half burned cigarettes which used to take care of us now we bum more than we used to no sleeping in parks when you get a ticket in you're homeless you end up leaving town that decreases the number of regular travelers we used to have who came through you to town every year and would actually defend the city we still have a number of homeless by Carl and JT

[129:01] who will clean up our bus stops it is unusual for us to have homeless who defecated our sidewalks who spread graffiti downtown these are the things that have happened as a result of an increase of anger at Boulder because of these kind of rules that tend not to affect the standard Boulder rights but of course since we're far more exposed and since we do more things in public always we get the tickets and when we get the tickets those who have resources the drug dealers and the groups of drugs they tend to stay they have a better stake than a lot of us me myself I'm here because my life holders all of God's good thank you thank you for coming and speaking and if you if you access to a computer would be happy to hear more from you I I will and I don't have anything real secret or major anything else but they did want to address those concerns thank you sir

[130:00] just from your experience do you think do you see numbers of people that are homeless today this last year we did simply because of Boulder of Denver's busts and we saw a lot more Denverites and a lot of the people that we homeless who were around your regular don't care for okay so yeah thank you sir patricia and after patricia we have Michael Fitzgerald hello I'm Patricia DeAngelis Ratner on the committee for a safe North Boulder and I live in North Boulder I've come in and spoke with you before and without repeating everything that Michelle said I think she hit it on the head in terms of your moving forward with all these changes in terms of the homeless structure and particularly the shelter in North Boulder and yet you have a terrible relationship I've been up here

[131:02] to speak three times over 1200 people of signed petitions you know we've talked about the ordinance mr. Yates proposed we move forward and then at the last minute your law director says no we'll give recommendations this management plan management agreement is one of the loose least written documents I've ever seen you don't have any definitions in the documents regarding qualified residents coordinated entry process but overall most importantly you're not gonna get the cooperation in the neighborhood when you haven't addressed the SVP issue I don't come up here because I want to be on TV and people don't sign petitions you're supposed to respond when we have issues you're supposed to solve them and then and you're just railroading right through with okay we're gonna change the procedure at the shelter have an adjust the SVP issues that the the neighborhood

[132:03] is going the meeting on October 2nd is going to be extremely difficult I've got a list of things I was going to talk about that should be amended and then you have to address the safety issue in the SV piece and then on top of that you want to bring in high needs people you talk about alcoholism you haven't seen the meth users with rotten teeth around the property you haven't seen the needles on the tree lawns around the property the alcohols are the least of your problems so as a homeless person I can come to the shelter you'll send me to the long-term if I'm high needs I can keep drinking and then you're gonna find me a home as well and I'll have an apartment with a voucher and I can continue drinking I don't hear anything about the jobs piece of it it seems to me if you can be accepted and given a bed and free room and board in a shelter there should be a hard emphasis on jobs

[133:02] them working putting them in a program and I think you need to look at some more of these issues not just take people off the streets find them rooms and lastly you've got 160 beds in North Boulder 30 additional beds out of the 54 I think it was you talked about that you could put people in with vouchers you have the majority of homeless people being sheltered in North Boulder and I think what you're telling the young people in North Boulder is sell your house sell your house thank you Thank You Patricia I need to make an announcement that channel 8 is working but because of the powder out power outage the web stream has frozen Sophie people want to watch they can do so on YouTube because the live stream is frozen so all the people who are stuck

[134:01] on the frozen live stream no notice which to YouTube said to make the announcement yes we tried Michael Fitzgerald and you're pulling with a Kevin and Evan yep okay you'll get five minutes Michael Fitzgerald 1940 walnut play I'm about your goes with me but I plan on staying Thanks I think I think we're on our way finally lot of holes though still you know I worry about not the people you're gonna care for I don't worry about the 160r gonna live up at the shelter I'm not gonna worry about them I'm not gonna

[135:02] worry about the people that are been at the whole summer at the the path to home program I'm gonna worry about those people that won't make it in those programs people like me I did not qualify for housing sheltering or any program that radius offer five years ago because I did not pass a VIP debt and mainly because I'm a functional alcoholic then so I could make it in drunk 90 days then I was out you know you're putting people out for a lot longer than just 90 days you're putting them out for probably the rest of their life because you're not offering them a chance for temporary housing went during

[136:01] at least of the winter and this is a great number we're looking at the point in time last year taken numbers were 600 I don't think that number has decreased that much you know we won't know but we're looking at 210 people we're looking at right now starting October 1st there will get something what about the rest people haven't come down from Netherland still pretty nice up there people haven't settled from Lafayette yet you know you say the shelter is order County well there's people in long meant that love the the shelter there's people in Lafayette to love the shelter they found something in Lafayette for the summer that may not last for them we can't we can't surf

[137:02] cultures all our lives that works for a little bit we can't find boyfriends and girlfriends that doesn't last forever then see those people will feed in to our city streets again get back into Boulder and I'm seen it I'm running into people I haven't seen for three years they're coming back because they like it here in Boulder these are people I met in 2007 eight nine and ten so and those people may not qualify they may qualify for the program I love the program you know I wish it was around when I was there I'm a pre boho you know hard that how hard that was I had 91 days in the winter that's what I look forward to the rest of the time I

[138:00] was getting caught in places you wouldn't want anybody to be in I mean I don't know how many alleys I can count that I would get behind a dumpster and wrap myself in my emergency blanket that the shelter gave me do you think that's gonna be a race because of this you need to make sure and I can't say this enough that you have as safety net we don't have a safe knew it you're saying 20 days for bad weather I remember of winters we'd have probably 30 days in a row where was - something or zero and so you know it's cold at 30 try to be outside at 30 degrees 30 degrees at three o'clock in the morning you can't sleep and you got an emergency blanket that's all they gave you eight tokens a meal and I'm grateful I'm

[139:03] grateful for that but 27 days one-one winter I was turned away and eight tokens eight tokens got me downtown on the skip then where do I go I went to averaging fine I went to a picnic table I went behind a boulder you think that stops it doesn't people are still gonna use it that's what we got thank you Michael um James Duncan and then my corner good evening Council my name is James Duncan I live here in Boulder and thanks for your attention and your commitment and compassion in this issue how we treat the least among us is says a lot about who we are my dad used to say James you know what's wrong

[140:01] with you you procrastinate too much I says oh yeah just wait 40 years ago there was a democratic uprising what I want to do is offer of a perspective there was a Democratic uprising and to that like the Lewis Powell memo was a response please look it up if you don't know about it but part of that reaction from the the business community was to try to control people and one way they did that is to create shelters frake Morales was speaking about this and he mentioned the Kerner commission where there's a difference between sheltering and housing right if we would have had housing which would have which creates

[141:02] community which creates democ see we wouldn't be in this mess we are today trying to deal with this so I just want to point that out that in sheltering Travis smiley says he says I'm with her referring to Naomi Klein who speaks about it's a systemic problem 40 years an attack on the public sector and you know we're part of that is the driver of that is this inequality so what I wanted to try to do is bring in that inequality causes a lot of a yeah homelessness hold on yeah I wanted to

[142:02] finish with a conclusion from a reversing inequality if you will it goes like this unleashing equality the initiatives outlined in this report which I can give to you could change our current political economy in fundamental and beneficial ways revolutionising for example corporate structure and banking and finance moving to an encountering society one that healed the wounds of extreme inequality and exclusion which self helped forge a new system in a more egalitarian society where people are more economically secure we can break free of the work in spin cycle break free of exploitative exploitative prop bosses right and we could have any galaxy American it's a fundamentally different thanks folks yeah thank you very much Mike and thanks for the joke and then Sarah Jane hey

[143:01] folks doing it's been a while Mike Connor North Boulder resident in the holiday neighborhood right next to the shelter I am absolutely astounded that we are hopefully going to use the shelter year-round an empty building is a empty building just like the hospital we should be using or any other municipality building that's not being used should be considered to be used to help the homeless over over the wintertime at least the two ladies that were up here they were talking and I know they were compassionate and they were worried about everything but we heard that worried when we did 11:57 Lee Hill we heard the worst of the worst and I can tell you from being on that committee from start to finish and continuing now on the Advisory Council in three years we have not had one complaint from the community about that unit it is an apartment complex and the

[144:02] reason why I say that is that that's what we're gonna start saying we're and the shelter is gonna be a more contained unit people are not going to be walking around the street they're gonna be inside hopefully getting services we can't guarantee that but that's probably a good thing there I'm as thankful that we're starting to see more vouchers okay I'm really jazzed we saw the big number 52 but I think the hard numbers 36 that we got to keep in our head we have said that we are going to accept 160 inside the shelter and 52 the path to home that's 210 as Mike pointed out our point in time survey was 600 last year those 600 people are here during the winter those are real residents not the summertime people but those are the residents they're here so

[145:01] that's the real number that we have to wrap our head around in reality and I don't think we're doing that we talked about in the work group about 80/20 split 80% we're using 20% of the services and 20% we're using 80% so we're gonna help that 20% I want you guys because probably never once have you spent the night out being homeless I want you to think about your ten digits that you have on your hands and on your fingers now take 20% decide which one you're gonna keep because I saw many people lose their fingers and toes to frostbite so decide which ones are important to you because we didn't have that choice we were stuck walking around freezing Mike can tell you and I I did it too you walked around because we couldn't lay down with a blanket it was against law and people don't want to stay by the

[146:01] shelter they don't want to sleep in a trowel or anything they want someplace to sleep thank you and I have a lot more awesome email thanks Mike Sarah Jane Cohen I'm Sarah Jane Cohen I live in North Boulder I'm gonna read what I want to skin you justice grab the mic there I don't want to miss anything first thank you for recognizing that the city shares the responsibility for providing shelter and services for the unhoused members of our community and they are members of our community I see them every week when we were doing path to home at our synagogue and I've seen some of these people for years I mean kids who went to Fairview and whatever I want to talk about the emergency warming centers or ewc s that have been barely mentioned tonight but there are an important

[147:01] component of this new proposal I know that you know that the city and the nonprofit's who are taking the lead on this issue of homeless services cannot do it without help and the help is in the form of both venues and volunteers from the faith community the venues and volunteers will be needed both for path to home for the navigation system clients and for the emergency warming centers these venues by the way are located throughout the city they are not burdening one particular neighborhood so I'd like that myth to be put aside I have been involved with my synagogues participation in past and current programs for almost 10 years I speak tonight only for myself but I know that people in my synagogue and in many of the other congregations that have worked in this area for years because there have been a lot of meetings in the last few weeks agree with what I'm going to say it is tempting to think about

[148:02] providing emergency warming services on only the coldest or wettest nights I can curl up at home with my family if I don't have to go and feed somebody because it's not cold enough I can spend the day doing something other than making soup for a hundred I can stop obsessing on a weekly basis about signing up enough volunteers and of course all the other people and all the other congregations can do that too but a weather dependent schedule is not fair to the congregation's who must keep their facilities free anyway in case they are needed it is not fair to the volunteers who must keep their calendars clear in case they are needed it is not fair to the bridge house staff who need to know whether they will be working and getting paid so that they can manage their monthly budgets it isn't fair to the staffs at the congregations who don't know if they're going to be working that night setting up tables or whatever and of course it isn't fair to the guests who

[149:01] are trying to find a place to sleep there is no place legal to sleep outdoors in Boulder so what the heck are they going to do and they can't tell the difference between a 32 degree night and a 33 degree night okay in consideration of the faith communities and the nonprofit's who are essential to implementing these proposals you must approve emergency warming centers for every night please do that thank you thank you Sarah Jane okay so with that we're gonna close the public comment and turn back to Council for discussion does anybody want to open up some more questions okay briefly Karen I was curious if we could hear from the bridge house about I have

[150:01] a couple questions I'd like ask sure so thanks for being here first I just wanted to make sure I had the number right and you're ready to work program 44 yourself sure I'm Isabelle McDevitt I'm the executive director of bridge house thanks great and how do you see bridge house being part of this I know that you're probably going to run the navigation services at the current plan but you're ready to work program so there we've had a lot of talk tonight about the shelter and people who would be referred to program beds and then we've talked about navigation services will the bridge house ready to work program be referred to out of navigation services yeah so the way I think about

[151:04] it is coordinated entry and the screening tool is the overlay for the entire system and then based on how someone presents in that coordinated entry screen they will be sent to really one of two programs either the program based shelter that we heard a lot about tonight or the navigation sheltering option which will be 24/7 and have capacity for up to 50 people much like the program based shelter the navigation plans will be really housing focused however the model will be very similar to the program that we piloted this summer called path to home where we'll be working with folks on shorter with shorter increments and really looking to develop plans quickly and work to help

[152:00] people exit into housing very quickly so they're ready to work program which provide housing employment and supportive services for one year is really an exit it's it's not a voucher program it's not permanent supportive housing but similarly it is a it is a housing exit for someone experiencing homelessness so I envision that those beds will be filled through either folks who get referred to program based shelter or folks who are referred to navigation and part of that that work with those case managers on within either program will help determine who gets into ready to work and so you do have a sobriety requirement and ready to work is that correct we do okay so that would be part of the navigation assessment would be our site the coordinated entry assessment where you could have someone with an addiction challenge and they might end up at the shelter but someone who didn't have an addiction challenge and was able to work might end up

[153:01] referred to ready to work storms yes okay is your sobriety test the same as we heard as the shelters that is complete abstinence we breathalyze and we do your analysis as well so that covers not just alcohol but other drugs other drugs yeah and is that just periodic test or do you do it every night or what's what's the what would trigger you to do a breathalyzer or your analysis we breathalysed every time people come in or come into the building and the urinalysis is random so sometimes it's two days in a row sometimes it's you know once a week but we keep it random and I will say that the majority of our staff have certified addiction counselor credentials our many of our staff worked for Public Health and the ark before it was taken over by

[154:01] mental health partners so we have a strong emphasis on recovery and working with folks in addiction recovery services so we have groups on-site we have one on one addiction counseling and are really Gaston helping people in their recovery people do relapse and we work with them to make sure that they're getting the proper treatment but no one can be on our work crews or living in the house if they're gonna jeopardize the sobriety of anybody else okay got it and then the last question I have for you is what is your thought on the best way to provide the walk up emergency services so we've heard one idea from staff about it's a weather based criteria to trigger that what are your thoughts about that about best practices around that in a climate like ours mm-hmm well I think we've done a lot of work you know with the homeless work group and in the last year but even

[155:02] before that the boulder homeless service collaborative which was you know discussion between the three primary providers of homeless services the shelter bridge house and boho really for three and a half years prior to the work group to really really put a strong emphasis on trying to create a continuum of services that make sense for the community and most of all makes sense for folks experiencing homelessness so I think we're making a ton of changes this season and I think they're all really positive I mean the idea that we will have 210 beds you know and the navigation they won't quite be beds but they will be safe and legal places to sleep coupled with services the fact that we will have 210 365 days a year with 24/7 access is a huge influx to the system I mean I know we still have to go through a process but that is the intent of the plan and that's really exciting however

[156:02] there will be people who either don't know about those services before it's too late and it's freezing cold or you know we will have some limitations on our capacity to screen everyone in in a quick way so I think we have to be thinking about how we would manage overflow for that system in a safe and humane way but also tie it to the system I think that there's a compromise to be considered where we listen to the faith communities who I think are assumed to potentially provide that overflow space about how it would fit into their space needs and have more of a regular schedule than just a national weather service morning I think we have to look at really the realities of what what it's like to be out in the cold weather even if it's not you know a blizzard and I then think we have to be realistic about how we bring folks into the system intentionally even if we allow for

[157:02] emergency weather walk up I think you know we we have to be intentional about very quickly putting them through the the coordinated entry process because they might be eligible for something much better and we should be intentional about doing that so I would I would advocate that we spend a little bit more time defining that criteria quickly because winter is coming and I would I would advocate that we look at how we integrate it with the system so that it doesn't create an alternate system because if we don't do that it is very possible that we might undo some of the work that we've been done to consolidate and then have an alternate system with folks who are not getting the opportunity to get into either program based or navigation shelter because they're in an emergency site that is not tied to this overall plan so you've been running path to home during the summer I assume that's going to continue until this program is really ready to be implemented what are your thoughts about

[158:01] how packed the home might be integrated with both coordinated entry navigation services and with the I'll just call it overflow sheltering that the faith community would help with well so pass a home is a model that we piloted this summer which combined walk-up shelter with navigation case management services transportation meals and you know really that that that idea of getting people onto a housing focused plan we've seen a lot of success I think I emailed counsel you know with the the update on how we did through August we anticipate continuing to run the path to home model as the navigation provider we anticipate that we will have a 24/7 space soon hopefully to bring to the public's consideration soon but in the

[159:00] meantime we're we're very grateful that our faith partners are considering you know allowing us to maintain our current 00 p.m. to 10:00 a.m. each each day for those services and then we hope to integrate coordinated entry staff into the path to home model and we will continue our community table dinner program which is also anticipated to be part of the 24/7 center but it won't be until we have that space up and running thank you thanks Isabella and I had a question on the coordinated entry intake site is that anticipated to be at the navigation Center yes yes I just there was a concern that losses miss Stevens brought up about not having that at the shelter but that is the intention is not to have intention is not to have it at the

[160:00] shelter great thank you yep but is C plan to have it at the shelter to start with no okay I'll just ask how close do you think you are to identifying the place close but of course until you identify it you're not close enough right right right we were hoping you wouldn't ask that question okay but and I think we're I think we'll know within the next week and a half thank you that's great okay um shall we add a question oh wait Mary so we received an email from some I forgot the name I just looked but I forgot it regarding Boulder County cares and there was a speaker who mentioned

[161:00] the folks that are gonna be out there and aren't gonna make it to some sort of a shelter and I was wondering what kind of role if any will Boulder County cares play in this plan so Boulder County cares program will be subsumed into community outreach in other ways and I will let Greg and talk about currently Boulder County cares and how this is going to change so yeah we anticipate that Boulder County cares which is the street outreach program of the shelter will continue but it will morph so instead of just handing out materials we will be much more engaged with our clients trying to get them to the coordinated entry through the coordinated entry process so we'll still be doing outreach on the streets but it may look a little different than what we've done in the past because we will have a different emphasis on trying to get people into the system rather than just you know handing out socks and how

[162:03] will that be coordinated with the homeless outreach team so I think it's a kind of a referral and support system so I think the homeless outreach team they can be referring people to the coordinated entry they can be working with the street outreach folks I think it's it's referral and information but the how much outreach team will be able to you're speaking of the the police department yes they'll be able to refer directly to coordinated entry thank you okay so first of all I want to say thank you to everybody that's been involved in this process I know it has been long and it's taken some flexibility to take a look at doing things differently than we've been doing it for a long time and for that thanks to everybody because I know it has not been easy but I think um what it looks like we have as a plan

[163:03] is an improvement on what we started with and it looks like it you know we have to wait and see what the results are like but I have a slightly different count beds that will be available yes it's the 210 beds from the navigation services in the shelter we've also got our housing department committed to at least another 35 permanently supportive housing vouchers which is a huge step in the right direction hopefully to get to 52 this year which will be fantastic and then we've got 44 spaces at the bridge house which weren't here until about three years ago so we've we have a capacity of almost 300 that are either permanently supportive housing which are intended for people's exits as well as the other shelters spot Lee Hill Drive as well what's that Lee Hill try Emily Hill Drive which is relatively recent as well which is 32 or so I think so we've really been taking this issue seriously

[164:01] and we've been doing it in a way that I'm very hopeful will not be disruptive to the neighbors in North Boulder I mean I think there's an outstanding issue of the sexually violent predator question which kind of is in its own box in my mind that we need to work with law enforcement with potential ordinance and with maybe the management plan of the shelter but outside of that I'm hopeful that the program beds will have people who are focused on exits that's the intention there are folks that we can coordinate care closely there and they're folks that won't be told that they need to leave early in the morning they'll have the opportunity to stay in so it's my hope that the clientele change in North Boulder generally is an improvement as we heard from the director of the shelter there will be a lot fewer walk-up clients those folks are going to be intended to go through coordinated intake so that alone might

[165:01] reduce some of the impacts in North Boulder I also want to point out that some of these are being spread around so the navigation services the 50 beds there will not be in North the permanently supportive housing voucher beds will mostly not be in North Boulder and the bridge house facility is not in North Boulder so I think we're trying also to be equitable with where the services are provided so I'm gonna be happy to support the motion to amend the management plan of the shelter which is what the subject here really is about but you've got to have all that context to know if the management plan is gonna going to work I think some of the feedback we've heard from the community about maybe a little bit more Christmas in the net and management plan a little more specificity and perhaps a little bit more about how you know arbitration

[166:00] can be managed so that if there are issues that the community feels like there's a process that maybe involves a third party and the city but in general I think this is a ton of progress I think everybody involved for having helped with it and I look forward to where we land tonight Aaron I'll piggyback on that just basically agree with everything the same just said it was well put that I do think that the the overall plan is I think a huge step in the right direction for homeless services in Boulder and that's I think true for the clients and it's true for the community as a whole I think we're gonna see better results that are more focused on exits and people getting people to better places I'll leave I won't make a big speech I'll leave it at that but I am a neighbor of the shelter I live about five blocks away and so the the daily migrations of folks to and from the shelter are part of my daily reality that's my neighborhood I'm walking through there all the time and I find it

[167:00] manageable personally but I understand that there are some impacts and there they can be occasionally difficult to cope with I see these changes is actually making those impacts smaller because in in the past you have this as as Greg mentioned you had 1,600 unique individuals coming to the shelter and it in a given year that number is going to go down dramatically because you're going to have people in longer term program beds which I'm sure will have some turnover but you're gonna have more regular folks you're not going to have the same kind of churn of new people maybe maybe misbehaving maybe not and I think you're also by allowing people to stay there during the day sometimes you're going to change the the migration as well because typically there's a big group of people heading downtown and heading back up and I think you'll see a lot more of that spread out so personally I'm guessing that these changes will be a positive 1 in terms of

[168:00] neighborhood impacts you do lose the sobriety requirement but as I think as we've been talking hearing that's a best practice in terms of getting people off the streets and into a more permanent placement where they can be safe and they can be functioning members of society and they can you know hold down a job potentially even if they have had a couple of drinks that day which is something that many people in our community - to follow up I want to emphasize what Sam said about the crispness and the management plan I thought that was well put that I think some additional specificity in the management plan I think would be helpful again miss Stevens mentioned about the shuttle there is a mention of the shuttle in the plan but not how often it runs her and what what kind of timeframe should some some specifics around that could be helpful I would I think it's really important that the the neighborhood meeting on October 2nd is one where there's an honest exchange

[169:01] with the community where so we have a couple of particularly large things of larger issues that we're addressing here in our recommendation but there are a lot of details and how those might be implemented and in the management plan as a whole I think it's really important that the shelter and the city be open to hearing feedback from the community about their desires around ways that the management plan could be tweaked to improve how the shelter works with its neighbors so I think that's very important for that meeting I'll be there I'm sure some other council members will be as well the one other thing I wanted to bring up was to come back to issue of the sexually violent predators Sam also brought up I think it's worth considering writing into the management plan that s VPS would not be accepted at the shelter I say that in the context of that right now that I think as of today all the s VPS in town are at the shelter at the moment I think there's a disproportionate impact because of that

[170:02] and we do have a lot of there are various other sheltering options in town and particularly the the navigation and the emergency beds provide some short-term options and there are other permanent supportive housing options available but currently there's like I say a disproportionate impact so I think that should be considered as part of the management plan revision can you say when and where the good neighbor meeting is going to be oh yeah that's October 2nd at shining 30 p.m. 30 p.m. thanks for asking yeah okay we have Matt than me then Mary yeah so almost entirely agreement with Sam and and Aaron not going to nitpick over a few differences you know Sam and in terms of numbers and it's not a matter of of kind

[171:00] of tuning our own horn here but I do think we continually understate the effort we make it's not only whether all the units you noted but there's all the work fo does and and we provide a lot of money into that as well as other services frankly there's all of the affordable housing we've created which keeps people from becoming homeless which should not be underestimated that is after all the goal is not for them to be homeless and then help them it's to keep them from becoming homeless in the first place and while it's hard to count that or enumerate that it's also impossible that that can't be making a very substantial difference that doesn't mean that you know the whole problem solved but I think Boulder does it's part and as a number of us have noted there would be very nice if the rest of the county and in particular the rest of the region stepped up and did its part anywhere

[172:01] near as much as we did because I think that would change things substantially the suppose it's 600 count or whatever it is most certainly includes substantial numbers of people who are from outside of Boulder County and frankly outside of the Denver metro area and from other states and so on and it's just really hard to solve all of those problems I don't think it's possible but I think what we're trying to accomplish here is a is a great start the only thing I'd say about the management plan which is really what's in front of us is I agree with you two guys said in general I'm not so sure about the sexually violent predators I agree there's probably too many at the shelter but I don't think going 2-0 is the answer I think we need a smarter approach to that but the one thing that jumped out at me especially if it's going to go to 160 year round and it's going to go to access during the day is

[173:00] the question of morning services especially walk up and I don't think the shelter is the right place for that that probably should be co-located with navigation frankly because I really do think you need to limit this it should be for the people who are the 50 or so who are part of the navigation services not everybody in anybody because I think what we're trying to do is make sure that people have gone through the system and we have some coordination here the whether or not council goes that route I think that's a key piece of the shelter because that there's a fundamental difference between those types of services and the permanently supportive housing up there that the program beds in terms of are they walk up are there people who there for a longer term are there people who have been through the coordinated entry or not and I don't know that we want to mix

[174:00] on one site I mean I don't know for sure honestly and this needs to go through the good neighbor meeting and some smart people need to think about this but that's the one part that is not really in front of us which is fair enough for now but I think that needs some more work and my preference would probably be not to have it up there okay I'm gonna jump in all that this review I've said it I tend to agree with I'm glad that we live in a community that prioritizes taking care of folks that are so vulnerable and experiencing homelessness that's the right thing to do and I really appreciate all of the thought and hard work that the homeless

[175:00] working group has put into really revamping the homeless strategy and I think this new strategy that really emphasizes investing in getting people up and out of homelessness rather than just an emergency shelter is the right way to go I also think that we the shelter is a community asset and we should figure out how to make the most of it and these recommended changes see to me make good sense in terms of really really utilizing that resource year-round the other part of that though is just its hearing loud and clear from people especially in the North Boulder about the impacts they're experiencing some of the fears they have around kids and traveling on the buses and bus stops and I hear that from folks and I think we need to be caught in a cognizant of that I appreciate as Sam mentioned how we're

[176:02] really focused on sort of spreading services across the city and housing opportunities in order to kind of all share as a community in the solutions and I think that makes a lot of sense I agree with what Matt was saying about that on at least unless somebody convinces me otherwise it makes sense to me that warning services not also be at the shelter again so that we can disperse some of the concentration of impacts that people experience I I will unfortunately be out of town for the good neighbor meeting so I won't be there I do think it's a really good opportunity to hear from neighbors and I hope it is a model of all that we've learned about public participation I agree that the management plan could be much

[177:00] you said crisper tighter it could be a little more rigorous I'll just put that in there and that there's an opportunity there to further flush it out based on well what is heard at the good neighbor meeting and I hope that happens the SP the sexually violent predator issue our problem is we don't have a good solution but I also hear it loud and clear having a concentration in one neighborhood doesn't feel right or fair so if if we need to think we need to figure out a solution to that to lessen that impact and I don't think we have a magic bullet yet but I think that might threaten to upset this positive solution we are moving towards so it's not worth upsetting the possibility of a solution that the native neighborhood would embrace so if we need to address s vp's and figure something else another place

[178:02] to direct them then we should do that and maybe this conversation is the place to do that I think that's it I assume that we will we're doing a lot of pilot piloting measuring responding improving and I think we need to commit to the folks in our community that we will continue that process you know as we try out the new strategy that we will be monitoring it and making tweaks as necessary so that it's effective for the clients and workable for neighborhoods okay we have Mary Andrew and then Lisa so I don't have much to add to what my colleagues have already said which I agree with most of what's been said I will add that a point that with respect to lifting the

[179:01] sobriety requirements as a criteria being able to enter the program beds in the shelter is actually will likely reduce the number of people that are left outside under the influence and perhaps wandering in around in the neighborhood so that could actually be a better situation for people that live in the neighborhood I agree with respect to the specificity regarding the management plan and I think especially around transportation that is such a critical piece of making people's lives whole and so and in particular anyone that's trying to get back to the shelter after public transportation has quit running so I look forward to seeing that I agree with Suzanne it's it's this is a

[180:00] really good plan and it's something when Mike the Mike's back there are coming up and saying that this is a step in the right direction so I I think it really is a big step in the right direction and I hope that at the good-neighbor meeting at which I will be at the community comes with an open mind ready to offer some constructive criticisms and some constructive ways in which we can improve prove upon what is in draft form right now and you know and and we'll try it out we'll try it out and I think we should we the counselor should be open to changes and and perhaps make it a living document for a period of time until we things settle out and we know what's working and what's not with

[181:00] respect to the sv peas and and parole beds that were brought up during the public comment I had an email exchange with Robin Bohannon who is the director of Boulder County Human Services and one of the in the exchange one of the things that she talked about was because I asked who's managing who manages the the halfway house that is out on Canyon and and she said that that there's there's a board that was created by the county commissioners and that their charge is reviewing cases for placement of residents and state-funded halfway houses and that the Charter includes the responsibility to convene and administer a board of citizens the board of citizens reviewers as well as manage the resident service providers ultimately the goal of the entire operation is community safety every board representative wears the Hat of community member and looks to ensure

[182:00] public safety to the greatest extent possible so I with respect to the sv PS and especially those that are out in Pearl I think we should look to that board and work with them to see how we might be able to make that improve the situation so that there isn't a concentration up in North Boulder but again I I hope that the community up into the holder does come out with an open mind ready to make constructive suggestions and that we will listen and be open to making changes as we go so I agree most everything's been said I agree with almost everything that that has been said as well we spent a lot of time earlier in the year talking about the actual plan itself with respect to homeless services and how this is an improvement it's it's its movement towards best practices and it's an

[183:00] attempt to really address at a number of levels a more constructive compassionate and and workable solution to our situation in a city so we've spent a lot of time talking tonight about impacts because that's really you know we spent the time before talking about sort of the reasons for for a new program and and and and I think you know we'll hear at the good-neighbor meeting which I'll be at plan to be at as well you know the impacts to the North Boulder and I'm very sensitive to those issues and we've heard a lot about them we've gotten a lot of emails on the subject and I you know right now what my take is that this is and and this is we you know this is something we've thought about and talked about a lot so this is this idea that this is hopefully an improvement for the problems that we've heard in the North

[184:02] Boulder community the issue of migration back and forth every day has been discussed but also just the fact that that we you know the type of client is going to be different and this is somebody that's going to have more ties to the community and you heard you know both with people inside and outside the homeless community say that that that locals effectively are they care more about the community and and they cause less problems and if they do cause problems you know who they are and and folks can deal with with that as well the and and the types of people were talking about and the types of program we're talking about I think creates a motivation for people to pull themselves out do their best as opposed to being sort of an attractant for travelers and other kinds of things that we often hear about the

[185:01] and I agree as well with Matt and and I think others have have chimed in on this with respect to the morning services issue and I think that will further address the character or that the type of client that that's traveling to North Boulder every day the I tell you I think it's probably evident from some of my questioning questioning I have some concerns about this continued use of the term sobriety whether it's in connection with a management plan or whether it's in you know connection with this neighborhood meeting I have a lot of people come up to me saying I can't believe you want to change the fact that that that that you've got to not be drunk to be and in the homeless shelter and that's clearly from tonight that's not the test it's abstinence and I think it should be called eliminating the abstinence tests not the sobriety test and and obviously we heard tonight that

[186:01] there is no science or whatnot behind it and again we're moving towards instead of arbitrary rules that may have some sort of moral basis that were created 20 years ago that we're focusing on actually helping people and trying to find the best solution and being realistic about how we might go about doing that just hit the SVP issue as well I just echo what Dan said we have some real legal issues here and some other issues that we've got to deal with there's not a right answer right now but the concentration issue is important and I'm certain council will continue to work on that and finally I just want to extend to thank you again Sam did it but I want to thank you to both the shelter and to Bridge house in particular for all of the work this has been a tremendous amount of work and overtime a bridge house really stepped up to the plate this summer and I really appreciate that

[187:00] effort and and it took a lot of effort and the shelter to then under take addressing the status quo also took a lot of for a lot of a lot of initiative so we appreciate that Jen oh I'm sorry sorry Lisa than Jen so I agree with what's been said and I'll add my thanks not only to the boulder shelter in and bridge house but also to Poho who has done an enormous task at providing housing when there wasn't any other place for people to sleep and keeping those people safe I don't have much to add except that I think this is great in that it really focuses on people's lives and focuses on exits from the streets to

[188:02] something much more constructive I do think though that the the management plan it does need to be a document that is crisp and specific and is predictable so that people know exactly when things are happening and when things aren't we've gotten a few emails from people about how they would revise some of the management plan and I've been asking them have you been to any good neighbor meetings and I've been told now by a couple people that there haven't been any since I moved here for you five years ago so I think it's really important that we keep communication up and going I think the more people can understand people from the other side that helps in in communication and just

[189:03] understanding I think we need to make sure that the public is involved in the dialogue and does have a way to appeal different decisions but I think we're on the right step and the two mics in the back I think you know they they told us to they were excited about this so I think this is good and I think we have to give people options and the best option is a way out and so I'm happy to support this and I too will be going to the good neighbor meeting on October 2nd Monday and and I do encourage people to be involved and really tried to have a dialogue and communicate and we're all trying to work

[190:00] towards a good outcome for everybody so a good outcome for the community and a good outcome for those people who are not in the best of circumstances right now so thank you to everyone Jen oh I just wanted to say one other thing and that is the walk ups and in the mornings I do not think it's a good idea to keep them at the boulder only shelter I do think they're a good idea but I'd like to have a central place such as maybe the coordinated entry or the navigation services where people can actually take a shower can put their stuff in in lockers and go out on the street and try and get jobs or whatever but we need to have some kind of options so that people can come to that in the morning I just

[191:00] think it needs to be separated from the polder homeless shelter yeah I agree with all my colleagues I'm not gonna repeat a thing that anyone else has said I'm just gonna say one thing which is what we do with the homelessness does impact the entire community in the entire area not just one area not just North Boulder clearly that has a big impact but it really impacts the whole area to request I would have one would be I think before we have a good neighbor meeting if there's any way come to a projection of the number of people who would stay in the shelter all day that might help get people more comfortable with the fact that they're not in and out in and out of the of the neighborhood all the time and there may be no way to do that but if you could try to quantify that somehow so people get a feeling what that might be like and then the second thing would be I

[192:01] would just like with Sarah Jane's concern about all the impact of only doing the forty weather-dependent days what is what was the criteria for that what were the considerations you don't have to answer now but if we did you know increase that what is that is it budgetary issues is it that boho is no longer really in operation what was the criteria there and would there be some way to relook at that there's a number of issues one is we we certainly want to be providing emergency shelter people who are not in programs or services not interest interested in programs or services when the weather is really critical when bajo is operating and providing sheltering every night as overflow to the shelter on an unlimited

[193:01] basis what we saw over time was a growing demand and need for walk-up overflow warming centers the cost was becoming very very high as this alternative sheltering system was growing significantly high so the focus on the strategy being permanent solutions more and more resources would have had to have gone into emergency warming centers people who are coming to our emergency warming centers were not going into a coordinated entry system they were not going into a screening system of program based sheltering so that was a it was a significantly growing portion of demand and need and resources it is inconsistent with best practice and policy to grow unlimited warming Center capacity at the expense of permanent solutions and that is where

[194:01] we were headed it is just not consistent with best practice and policy so there is the need and the desire of course to make sure people are safe there's a safe place for people to go regardless of whether you're in navigation services or program based sheltering but that has to be very clearly defined and how it was defined to at least test in the new system of services was those days where there are weather advisories warnings or temperature warnings advisories warnings or watches to provide those additional days for anybody who needs it in the community regardless of whether you are in a system we don't know what that exact number is but it's somewhere around 20 21 degrees based or 21 21 20 or 21 days during the winter season in

[195:02] this area so could we expand those number of days to 40 or 50 we could you could expand it to every night under during the winter sheltering season but that is getting us into a system an alternative system of services which is not leading to permanent solutions and is requiring more and more significant resources it is not something that is proposed to recommended in the strategy that's not something we would recommend but we certainly understand the concern and what we would encourage is that we test the system out based on how it's been set up and we monitor that and we adjust that as we go so I was gonna bring that up in a minute but I'll go ahead and tag on to that because the

[196:00] that's the one other piece that I wanted to revisit should I hold off on that until we finished the manage discussion or should I talk about warming now what do you think I'll go for all right well just when the last time when we discussed this at my memory is that counsel expressed a feeling that the twenty days was not the right number that we needed some additional numbers but that hopefully that it could be based on threats to human health and and in the memo tonight there there was no such information who said impacts to human health vary based on weather conditions but to me that the it seems to me likely that at twenty days a winter that we're not going to get to the bar of keeping people from freezing to death and to which to me is the bar that we should go out so I would be interested I think I would I think we

[197:00] should not let it rest at twenty days for this winter as a pilot but Sam I liked where you're going with a questioning Isabelle and bridge house about maybe looking at it's in some way to have some additional winter sheltering to protect people from the elements but to coordinate it with our larger sheltering system so that we don't create the kind of parallel and inefficient setup that we could get into if we want yeah every day so I would just add that we didn't do that research for you and we sent that information to you in August regarding because in June you did ask for some information about what constitutes the threat to health or or well-being in terms of weather conditions and what we found in that research is that virtually any weather condition can create a hazard to human health when you are outside human health or safety and of course when the conditions get worse there's a greater

[198:01] risk but there is no perfect way of determining what that threshold is so the threshold you're talking about is that twenty days is it 25 days or 40 days begins to become subjective feedback from our service providers are they cannot operate in the system which is not really clear so our faith community has stepped up to provide sites for severe weather sheltering and they have said they would be happy to do that and partner with us some of the sites but our service providers are saying when they are subjected to lack of clarity about having to stand up emergency sheltering and we heard this from Sarah Jane tonight to you when you have to stand up emergency sheltering at really 24 hours notice sometimes less it has a significant impact on staffing

[199:02] location space etc so when we're standing up additional sheltering it has to be really clear and in these circumstances weather conditions are not going to be exact we're not going to be able to have a system that is 30 degrees six inches of snow and 40 mile an hour winds the the system or the the best indicator of severe weather was when the National Weather Service is saying we should have some temperature issues we could have some advisories there could be a winter advisory weather advisories warnings or watches so it has to be really clear to make it work for service providers and clients so whether we we say it's 20 days or 30 days or 40 days we have to be really clear about it because we are not going to get a service provider to participate with our faith community unless we are really

[200:01] clear and we and the reason we have to get clarity is so that when someone is worried about whether we're standing up a shelter we have criteria and protocols to point to to do that so that we are not becoming unclear about what's triggering standing up a shelter I agree with clear as a criteria it's just the question of what those criteria are Sam so I'm gonna put a motion on the table mm-hmm I move that City Council request the boulder shelter for the homeless to amend its management plan to allowed a sheltering and year-round sheltering for qualified clients to implement the city of Boulder homeless strategy and I would add further that I move that the boulder shelter for the homeless listened closely to the feedback it gets from the community and incorporate that into its plan second needs to be said anything

[201:04] Mary will you I was gonna I was going to put a motion on the table a second but thank you which is to the faith communities that have stepped up with for the sheltering over the years with boho and then over this summer with path to home and who continue to do so was it the lemon tree unity walk on Sunday and we that included congregation Hashem and atonement Lutheran I heard a lot of passion from congregation members at both locations about their support for these services also saying the intrusion Boulder Mennonite so thank you to all of those communities who have done such great work and I do have one more thing that I want to say of course thank you to all who have been thanked tonight that I want to add that I agree completely with Aaron clarity is important but that doesn't just mean the weather warnings we could have some other definitions in there that are

[202:00] objective and clear and that we understand so I think we need to have an open mind about that and talk a little more about it so I think that we can adjust as we go but I just want to reinforce Aaron's points there Thanks I would agree with that but got your point about clarity yep final word final word I wanted to also thank Housing staff for the tremendous effort and number of units and being so far ahead of the gold that's just outstanding so I wanted to make sure that you're here they got thanked in addition to everybody else that did such outstanding work now we're just going to raise the standard okay show of hands show of hands all those in favor of the motion which is unanimous all right thank you okay and everybody okay our next public hearing

[203:02] is the second reading and consideration of a motion to adopt ordinance a 207 amending chapter 14-1 arts grant program to update arts grant program processes and setting forth related details so mad this is you matches sanski our arts and culture manager right thank you very much and I just have a few brief words to introduce this to you this these changes to the Charter language that governs the Arts Grants Program it's an important step that was recommended in the cultural plan so far over the past two years the Arts Commission has been implementing changes to the grants program within the 30-year old language of the existing ordinance but making these changes would help the arm the Commission to make further improvements

[204:00] and to build upon the success we're seeing in how we're measuring both the the Grants program itself the processes that we're going through as well as the outcomes we're seeing in the community that that success we can we can amplify there's five categories of changes and just real briefly there's recommended improvements to the legislative intent language to align with the cultural plan there is a rule in the ordinance that pieces of art are donated to the city that we feel is not helpful and actually hard to implement so we recommend removing that rule the changes improve the review criteria making the Commission better able to execute review criteria and the jury process it puts the responsibility for final approval of the grants with the Arts Commission and it simplifies language for clarity and efficiency so

[205:00] the Arts Commission unanimously voted to recommend that you make these changes and and adopt the motion and I'm here for any questions that you have as well as Lauren click our grants coordinator great Mary thanks man I have just one question regarding you mentioned that the Arts Commission has final say on the grounds did you all consider adding a council call-up is similar to the way mining board yes so we would want to make sure that council is fully informed about the decisions the way it operates right now under the current ordinance is that council has final approval over the grants program with certain exceptions and basically the exceptions end up being a budget number that's set grants over a certain amount go to council and grants under a certain amount do not so we don't feel that that's enough clarity so the

[206:02] example that we recommend is that the Arts Commission final approval and then council is updated through an ie information packet item and that council's authority lies in approving the budget every year and and coordinating with the Arts Commission that way there are several different ways to do it and would be very interested to hear what you think is the best to operate that but we feel that because the Arts Commission reads all of those applications interviews the the applicants and makes that decision that we can make this decision process by letting the approval rest there and I'll just note that this was an issue we discussed at CAC and it was just simply there's a lot of different grants programs in the city and some of them we

[207:00] approve and some of them we don't and just that we be clear about when we do it the criteria for when we decide that and I know that Jane was going to you I think think about it and just apply that that rigor to that the choices about how we do that so we're being consistent and it makes sense yes what we're doing is we're having all of the departments in the city that give out grants of one form another and we are finding that there are many of them we're preparing a matrix we will be presenting it to probably the next council I think it would be ready before the end of this council however there's no time really on your agenda to spend time to look at it but we will bring it forward and and then the council whichever one wants to work on it can decide if they want to make changes or

[208:01] not but we are gonna try to explain why in some circumstances you improve things and other circumstances a commission would or the city manager would so we'll try to make sense of all of that and if it if one or two don't make sense then you can help us make some changes but I did like your answer it's true there's a lot of work that goes into approving grants okay Lisa and then Jim so I was gonna ask the question Mary asked about call up and what comes to mind and maybe this isn't the right example but several years ago there was a proposal for a piece of material that had the big yes in red and I don't know if that grant would have come under the Arts Commission so can you address that yeah absolutely so that would have not have been part of the Arts grants program that was done through the public art

[209:01] process okay so no it would not have gone through that same process it does have approval with the Commission and the city manager under the current public art policy so that's the the map of approvals however for that project specifically that was before the current public art policy so it didn't apply there okay thank you Jim I very much support this one thing we've talked about as a council is how do we get out of some of the details and when we select our boards and commissions we've talked about how do we empower them more we're picking art experts and on our boards so I think they have much higher capability of analyzing these and making decisions than we do and I very much like the idea of entrusting them and empowering them

[210:00] to do that so I'll make the motion if oh we have to have a public hearing oh we do okay do we have any more questions otherwise we'll turn to that thanks Heidi has anyone signed up to speak does anybody want to speak okay then we'll close the public hearing again okay I'll make the motion I move that we accept the ordinance amending chapter 14-1 arts grant program 1981 BRC to update arts grant program processes and setting forth related details second who is the second oh thank you I guess you already spoke yeah I already spoke it's a great improvement I really appreciate how you continue to improve our arts processes and thanks for writing us out yep very so I want to specifically thank you for

[211:00] adding the history and heritage I believe that's an addition and I think that's a great addition because it now enables grants to organizations like the Museum of older so I think that's great thank you I'll just chime in I feel like arts is on the ascendancy in Boulder and a lot of it has to do with the good work you're doing so thank you for helping to elevate that within our city okay this is a roll call vote Yates young I Appelbaum bracket hi Burton Jones aye where's L I like art shoemaker and Weaver all right it's unanimous thanks man all right coming down the

[212:00] homestretch here all right the next agenda on your or the next item on your agenda is a continuing second reading to adopt ordinance 8 201 which is inclusionary housing and our deputy director of housing Kurt fern hover is here to make this presentation which will be short it will be short I think it's worth saying we already had a public hearing on this issue and talked at length as a council but one of our colleagues Mary was not here so we just wanted to recap where we were let Mary speak to it and move forward okay we're gonna get we're gonna get a brief okay brief ketchup ketchup yeah

[213:04] good evening so this as you mentioned this is a continuation I'm just going to give a very brief overview of the changes that were being recommended for inclusionary housing ordinance so again why the update this is based on the in part on the middle-income strategy that was adopted last year as well as a number of items that had come forward as needing updates as it hadn't been updated in over ten years there's three focus areas that we looked at which I'll go through on the next slide and then the implementation schedule it has sort of two dates in which it would be implemented one is 30 days after adoption in wanted one is July 1st of 2018 so the the first one

[214:07] and we went through a financial analysis around this to add a 5% middle-income affordable housing requirements and this is based on again the middle income strategy and creating a path forward or creating particularly homeownership middle income units the second is adding incentives for achieving more on-site affordable units this is based on projects that have a home ownership as approach to the development and we we provided different incentives to encourage those types of developments to to put at least 50% of the affordable units on site and then the the third

[215:01] area that we focused on was having a you review a staff review process for affordable housing projects that didn't go that were not used by right projects it would go through a quality design process the the Planning Board recommended in a vote of 6-0 to recommend to the City Council the repeal and replace of the inclusionary housing ordinance and lastly these these are the next steps City Council third reading on consent October 3rd and then the effective date would be 30 days after that however the the 5% middle-income component in order to give the development community time

[216:01] to adjust to this impact would occur on the first of July 2018 which is the time when our normal updates costing updates changed within IH so that is my my summary as a result of the continuation of this meeting I'm assuming we don't have questions since we already covered that so thank you for that recap I'm gonna turn it over to Mary and thank you I sent out a hotline post this afternoon just mentioning some thoughts on condo conversions and there was an exchange that Kurt and I had and I conveyed some thoughts that Sam and I had discussed regarding three two categories of condo conversions with the

[217:02] three inclusionary housing and post inclusionary housing such that when the condo conversion occurred they could come into compliance with the current or and not and not incur double-dipping so as I understand it that's not possible and that that's what's necessary is an analysis so what I wanted to just ask you all and see if you are interested that as we move forward and when new changes to this ordinance come forward that we do look at an analysis and see how we might be able to encourage and provide incentives for more affordable housing units upon condo conversion so if you all are on board with that I would like to direct staff to do this so

[218:04] would it be fair to say that that would be a request for not a five did we get a sense of how labor-intensive that would be so I think there's there's two components to it one would if it's an incentive based program we would have to do a financial analysis of what what that financial incentive would look like and at what level it would have to be we would have to look at what options an owner would have and what the performer looks like and whether the you know sort of the equivalent amount of IH is the right amount or if they would need need more there's also some history of a couple other communities we were looking

[219:01] this afternoon that have tried this in the past or something similar we'd probably want to look at what the results of those programs were and then there's also a legal component that we would have to consider and how it fits into the legal context of the ordinance within the city so thanks for that and I think maybe an out of five could be something really the information that you provided in attachment II some of its new to us right or was this the same so we we had three different I three different components that we added that we you a you asked for additional information when this was presented a week or so ago and we we sent that information to you right and so I just had some some thoughts here I wanted to pursue a little bit because this gave us more information about who is eligible for

[220:03] the either middle income or I think affordable as well right which is where do they work where do they live and if I understand the proposal that we're about to agree to it's there's no preference for people who live in Boulder in the new ordinance that would be correct so these four tiers that we find on page 253 of the packet are the way it's going to be moving forward with percentages for the current folks who are in each of these scattered looks like now and those that have applied for affordable housing how that breaks out right and so then where we would go is that there is no preference for live in Boulder there just could not

[221:00] and it wasn't quite clear about the logic particularly the not Boulder not Boulder meaning that they don't live here and they don't work here that's correct that the effect of the ordinance would be to increase the odds that they get into the program I'm reading here effective live in Boulder preference removed and it goes down to that one for not bold or not Boulder and says increased odds tier 4 would be combined with tier 3 yeah so I mean there's there's simply fewer tiers but our history has shown that virtually everyone has as fit into the the top tiers so we haven't we haven't selected people who haven't worked or or lived in in the city of Boulder I see so the fact that Tier three combines three and four you don't think will be meaningful that's correct so the 76% work and live in Boulder of

[222:08] the current applicants and so we take the 8% that work in Boulder but don't live in Boulder and it would increase their odds because it would combine them right in the top tier yeah that also represents those that have applied so people have applied that haven't worked or lived in the city of Boulder mm-hmm but their likelihood of being selected because of the tier system is essentially zero okay I just don't quite follow the rationale but I don't think it's such a big deal of it I'm gonna move it I just thought I would make sure I understood it okay we said one more question Oh two weeks ago I brought up the issue about people who about looking at well one of the speakers part up about does

[223:00] the city of Boulder look at the annual incomes of people who are in subsidized housing and Michelle you said no that we don't do that but I think since housing is such a a needed commodity especially affordable housing I guess I would like to have some kind of annual review of people who have gotten into our housing and having it subsidized but then later their incomes have risen substantially and they no longer they could buy their own housing and they no longer need that subsidy so I know how much work that would be but I certainly would like to look at that or get some comment back on that because it doesn't it's not right for people who no

[224:01] longer need affordable housing to still be occupying it and the only way that the city can identify that is to be requesting annual incomes from people and I think that's a pretty simple ask so there's two components to that from for our rental housing we actually do look at their incomes every year and once they go over a certain threshold which is fairly high they you know they're given a time period with when they do need to move out and someone else needs to move in that system is actually work pretty well mm-hmm for the homeownership program we don't track people's salaries after they move in I'm not sure Tom if you have any feedback on what the the legal components would be around that in forcing people to sell their house I'm not sure that I've seen that so the challenge lease is that in our in our

[225:01] ownership program that people actually hold the deed to the property and you'd be sort of evicting them out I'm not sure we have the power to do that so the way we keep it affordable is with the deed restrictions so that when they do resell it they can only make a certain level of profit and it stays at an affordable level that's that's kind of the deal I'm not sure how you would structure it so as as Curt says you you toss somebody out if their income got too high from a property that they actually hold and fee simple I think Lisa from our experience we've seen that generally those people do move out and typically when their salary gets that high they start looking at something else that fits their needs better yeah so we see it turnover of about 5% a year and some of those people are those that would fit into that category or you find people that they actually start living somewhere else and they're not using the property in accordance with

[226:02] with the covenants and then we take steps around that as well you know it's just unfortunate that there's people taking advantage of it so so just a real brief comment comment on page 254 we talked about potential next tools to address middle-income housing needs knowing I wanted to just make sure gets captured in the futures the downpayment assistance at least the way I've thought about it would then have a deed restriction on it afterwards so anyone who received it it might be helpful to make sure that that gets recorded in because that to me is the most important part of the program to have to have a down payment assistance loan but if you didn't get permanent affordability right in your just a bank yep I just can respond to Lisa's point but I think after next year look at waiving

[227:13] the fees for affordable projects because right now we're just taking money from one pot and pin it to the other so I'd really like to see you do that but other than that I think it's you guys did some great work on this really appreciate it okay I'm gonna make a motion then that we that we adopt ordinance 8 - oh one sorry a 201 repealing and replacing chapter 9 - 13 inclusionary housing BRC 1981 and amending and adding related definitions to chapter 9 - 16 definitions BRC 1981

[228:01] in order to include a middle-income housing requirement incentivize new affordable units on site create a new design review process and set forth related details second okay I think we talked at length last week so I'm going to refrain from going on on and on except for to say that this is something we've been talking about doing for a long time and I think a lot of thought went into it and it's I don't know I'm excited to actually be walking our talk on this one so I'm glad we're passing it did you say all you want to say yeah okay so let us vote on this first anything anybody else want to speak to this spoke last we spoke last week okay this is a real call vote okay let's vote on that young I Appelbaum it

[229:01] did it does I guess it does there was a couple minor word changes that were made as for to reflect some input did we receive from Steve Pomerance no it's not okay yeah all those in favor thanks man it is unanimous okay okay not a five Mary yeah not a five on the condo conversions can I just have it maybe suggestion on the scope of that because I think that's a great idea to look into it but of course there are a lot of initiatives waiting for our attention maybe a first step would be to get a report on what other cities have done and how successful they've been and that we could look at next steps after that as opposed to preparing an initiative is the next step it might be nice to plan this as part of our overall work plan for next year as well so we can prioritize how it sits against other initiatives mm-hmm would you like us to

[230:01] comment on whether there's five of us who would like to see it and then as far as I'm concerned you can we can either give you direction that's the most important thing or we can say I'm fine with staff prioritizing it well here's what I I'm thinking with respect to Aaron's suggestion is a report that looks at what other cities have done would probably be good and then put it on the list of retreat items because then it'll probably become that kind of thing that we look at retreat I and then may or may not be here so there you have it yeah Matt yeah I mean I've raised this for a number of years so I'm glad people are kind of looking at it but and there is a big but I do think it's a fairly big item it really should be at the retreat for you guys who are gonna be here and I also think it's not so obvious I mean it raised it because I've been concerned about just the fact that we keep talking about less rental housing and I think a lot of its going

[231:01] to convert and it's really just planning for the understanding the implication of that the step of doing something about it is rather different both because of cost then also I think and this is something I think you need to look at quite a few of the conversions although you might lose some of the rental that you like might also give you some middle-income housing and so it's a bit of a trade-off here and I have no idea how it would play out I mean that's kind of hard to figure out but I guess I just caution about making an assumption that of course you have to do this whereas actually some of the outcome might provide you certain types of housing that we actually have the most trouble creating in Boulder which is market rate middle-income housing which we don't know how to create so I just leave it with that but to me it's why it makes it a kind of bigger project than just an oh

[232:00] we will do X I have raised the issue it's sure not obvious to me what it is you do other than at least acknowledge it and understand it as you're trying to plan your housing approach and understanding this may change some of those numbers fairly significantly but that's for kind of I was coming from but I I think it really should be on the retreat and I think if you can provide some information to council along those lines before the retreat that would help a lot in helping folks figure out is it a priority or is it not a priority cuz really hard tell right now is that I think that's funny to go oh yeah basically Aaron's suggestion yeah and does it that's how it works thank you okay and there's five people that are nodding okay so great on that you got some matters matters all right

[233:01] so the next item on your agenda is under matters for mayor and members of council it is consideration of a motion to adopt resolution 1216 in support of the extension of the worthy cause tax so we had a presentation from the county at our last study session we gave a nod to preparing a resolution of support and Erin looks like he wants to make a motion I move that we adopt resolution 1216 in support of the extension of the worthy cause tax second any discussion it's one of the best tools that supports our nonprofits and the county it's a great great has a great track record does okay show hands all those in favor

[234:00] okay the next item a consideration of a motion to approve changes to council rules and procedures fun the council rules provide as you've just noticed that on the matters you're not allowed to have a vote until after you've opened a public hearing about opening a provision for public comments and the public comments all at the end of matters some members CSU suggested that perhaps in certain matters it would be best if you had the public comment immediately after the discussion and then you could follow with the vote so what's in your packet is a proposed rule change that would allow the mayor the discretion to have the public comment immediately after the matter was the motion was made and then you could follow with the vote mm-hmm and that would be particularly applicable for instance in our upcoming agenda we want to move something and I forget what it is to the very front of the agenda and then be able to have a hearing and vote on it write that in there that I just have a question I think it's a fine change and

[235:02] I don't honestly remember exactly what we did it this way probably because we thought it was more efficient but the world changes I just have one question which is right now even though it almost never comes up the rules say that public comment under matters is limited to 15 minutes with the mayor has discretion to extend it blah blah in the edit text it says is an option of opening a public hearing without any reference to whether there is any nominal time limit on that or whether it's part of the 15 minutes or each one of these hearings gets 15 minutes or what and maybe it's okay to just leave it vague but I don't know what you intended and that's really my only question well Matt I didn't actually think about that so I didn't accelerate anything I will confess the thought was that this would occur when there were matters there were issues under matters that were of significant

[236:02] public interest and we've had a few matters where the room is full people want to come and talk but they have to wait until they've been several non-consequential so Mike Mike thought is that on those circumstances you're going to want to suspend the 15-minute rule anyway that's fine I mean frankly just as a kind of note to see AC which I'm sure knows this if you really have a matter that's got that much public interest that probably belongs as a public hearing anyway and not as one of these weird end of meeting late at night matters but admittedly sometimes it's hard to predict okay are you proposing anything no I just thought on the time and he's answered it and it's fine Aaron I had a question so um we would allow public comment immediately after discussion of the matter would we also have the vote immediately after the public comment yes so so the way the rules are written is it says that the vote occurs after the public comment if you move the public comment dump and then have the vote

[237:00] okay great because that wasn't clear to me from the language that I think that's out okay is there a reason you wouldn't clarify that maybe because I missed that completely - so today but it's true that it's kind of in there it's just buried yeah it's the way it's written I mean I could improve all of these rules written by a lawyer it was to confuse okay you know how to interpret it we're fine yeah okay so well yeah we have to hold a public hearing here um but do we have a motion oh so moved second okay I'm gonna open the public comment would anybody like to speak to these okay I'm gonna close the public comment okay we have two motions before the first one was on the worthy cause tax all those in favor unanimous we have a motion to approve changes to our council rules all those in favor

[238:02] unanimous the only other thing is do we have any debriefing on how Suzanne I have an issue I I missed this thought this was just on our desk there's a addendum for item three Jay if I could have the unanimous consent for council to amend item three Jay to include language it's the sort of language we put in to preserve the local authority option from preemption under state law and it's an important language I did I as I said I didn't see it until I read it there at my table this evening but I would recommend that you make a motion to amend item three Jay to include the language on the blue sheet this is this is just first reading language yeah okay thank you any discussion all those in favor unanimous any debriefing I thought it was a good meeting considering enough easy subjects pretty - okay thanks

[239:05] everybody I'm just nice to have anything [Music]