November 3, 2022 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

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

[1:14] thank you thank you thank you thank you

[2:22] foreign foreign

[3:42] thank you [Music]

[4:02] foreign [Music] foreign [Music]

[5:16] foreign [Music] foreign [Music]

[6:32] thank you [Music]

[7:04] thank you [Music] foreign [Music] [Music] foreign [Music]

[8:28] foreign [Music]

[9:05] to the November 3rd meeting November 3rd 2022 meeting of the Boulder City Council it's great to have you here I've got a couple announcements to get us started the first announcement is that we are very hybrid tonight so we've got council members in person staff members in person we have members of the public here in person great to have you here uh we've got members of the public remote and council members remote so Rachel friend and Lauren Focus are both attending remotely so please have patience with us as we negotiate all kinds of hybrid nests this evening and next announcement is about covid-19 vaccinations so for testing information and provider locations for free covid-19 testing you should go to boco.org covid testing and the boulder site for that is 2445 stazio Drive Boulder seven days a week 8 A.M to 6 p.m and for vaccine information provider

[10:01] locations you can go to boco.org coveted vaccine all right let's do a call to order and a roll call please Elisha councilmember Benjamin is absent for the record so we will go with mayor Brockett present council member Focus present mayor Pro tem friend here councilmember Joseph present speaker present wallet present weiner present and Yates present mayor we have our forum great thank you and then I'll ask for a motion to amend the agenda we've got a couple uh changes one is to um remove the section on item 3G for

[11:01] amending Council procedure section 16 rules of decorum this is at the request of City attorney Teresa Tate and she's looking at making some additional adjustments and bringing it back at a future meeting to have that right foreign yes mayor that's accurate great and then the other one is to add item 8B which is to check in on ballot measure endorsement procedures maybe I could get a motion so moved second Motion in a second uh this would be a show of hands so all in favor there we go everybody in person and virtual raises their hands so the agenda is duly amended great we now have a couple of declarations the first one is a world day of remembrance declaration to be presented by council member Yates

[12:01] thanks yeah come on up here oh well this is powerful uh Commando Trini um folks I'm I'm joined up here by Trini Wilton who's a member of the transportation Advisory Board and I'll do a little bit more of an introduction of training in just a second um we're here to read a declaration which I'm trying to grab here sorry um and then we'll talk a little bit about it but let me read the Declaration first world day of remembrance for road traffic victims the world day of remembrance for road traffic victims is a global event to remember the many millions who have been killed and seriously injured in the world's roads and to acknowledge the suffering of all affected victims families and communities the objective is to provide a platform for crash victims and their families to remember all people killed and seriously injured on our roads to acknowledge the crucial work of

[13:00] emergency service service providers First Responders and medical professionals to advocate for better support for road traffic crash victims and their families and to promote evidence-based actions to prevent and eventually stop further road traffic deaths and injuries traffic violence killed more than 42 915 people in the United States in 2021 according to the national highway traffic safety administration and according to the National Road Safety Foundation here in Colorado there were 636 traffic deaths reported Statewide in 2021 including 92 pedestrian deaths which was up 21 from the previous year in the city of Boulder a vision zero City there's been one traffic death in 2022. there have been 13 traffic deaths throughout Boulder County this year even one death is too many as we strive to eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries

[14:00] we recognize that Boulder's residents are responsive to public education measures and we can take personal steps to increase safety on our roads we recognize that street design and Engineering measures can address road traffic deaths while increasing safe healthy and Equitable Mobility for all we can prevent the tragedy of traffic Violence by taking proactive approaches that prioritize Traffic Safety as a public safety health issue the 2022 World day of remembrance theme Safe Streets save lives effectively serves remind us all to increase safety measures and so we the city council of the city of Boulder declare November 20 as world day of remembrance for road traffic victims and we encourage all members of the community to participate in the activities related to this day now trini's up here for a whole lot of reasons first of all Trini is a member of our transportation Advisory board our news member of tab

[15:02] um and Trini and I are both um road traffic victims trees incident was on May 8 2018. and I was a road traffic victim on July 19 2021. uh after her crash Trini founded a organization called it could be me they're dedicated to improving the relationship between motorists and other users of the Road by creating an environment of mutual respect Community is not going to tell us a little bit about um it could be me and an important event coming up in a couple of weeks so with that training it turned over to you oh thank you Bob and thank you to everybody here at city council and to DK and to everybody in the transportation and mobility department that made this possible I'm very very grateful and yes like you said um I found that it could be me to try to avoid from hap what happened to me and

[16:01] to you to others and um yeah we're gonna have a rally on November 19th we moved it a day before because well the whole week is actually the world they have the world week of remembrance but on the 19th we will be meeting in front of the courthouse and we will walk toward the band show the banjo will be illuminated with the color yellow to solo to exemplify the solidarity and the unification of our city and you know with our members that have been lost in all the family members that will be there as well so um thank you so much and anybody that wants to continue to support this event please look up our website which is it could be me.org and we have facilitated lots of materials to to make this possible so and please come to the event it's at 5 pm so thank you

[17:00] I'm sorry thank you thanks so much for that training [Applause] okay our next declaration will be read by council member Wallach thank you mayor I'm about to read a declaration of solidarity with the American Jewish Community before I do an apropos to that declaration this afternoon the Federal Bureau of Investigation issued a threat warning to all synagogues in New Jersey based on what they deemed to be credible evidence and urging all of them to heighten security the threats to those of the Jewish faith and the hatreds that animate such threats remain with us today October 27 2022 marks four years since the horrific events at the Tree of Life synagogue in

[18:01] Pittsburgh Pennsylvania that tragically took the lives of 11 worshipers and injured seven more in the deadliest anti-semitic attack in American history hate crimes are on the rise throughout the United States and in Colorado though Jews account for less than two percent of the population according to Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics they are the victims of more than 50 percent of religious-based hate crimes in the United States in response to a survey conducted by the American Jewish committee 80 percent of American Jews stated they believe anti-Semitism has increased in the United States over the past five years nearly 40 percent of American Jews have avoided certain places or have avoided identifying themselves as Jewish out of fear of anti-semitism we are committed to confronting hate and biased crimes and recognize that anti-Semitism represents a unique and millennia-old enduring hatred of the

[19:00] Jewish people we the city council of the city of Boulder declare October 27 2022 as a day of action to reaffirm our commitment to combating all forms of hatred and anti-Semitism and to ensuring the safety and dignity of our community thank you thank you so much for that Mark that's so critically important so appreciate you reading that Nicole yeah and as I'm raising my hand to speak um I am remembering that while I talked to some of you about this I did not talk to all of you about this and so I wanted to apologize for not sending out a hotline Post in advance but I just wanted to take a moment to lift up the impact of recent events in Iran on Iranian and Iranian American members of our community six weeks ago 22 year old Masa Jeannie amini was arrested outside a subway station in Tehran while on

[20:01] vacation for not wearing her hijab correctly she was tortured and beaten while in police custody and died from her injuries on September 16th for seven weeks Iranians have sustained large-scale demonstrations for women life and freedom son sandaki Azadi in person more than 300 people have been killed and over a thousand have been brutally arrested or gone missing in these demonstrations mostly young adults and women our city has many iranian-american students professors artists and other professionals whose presence add so much to our community life this is a challenging time and I hope we will all stand with those standing for equity and human rights in Iran and in our community thank you thank you for that Nicole all right we're now going to move on to open comment and I believe we're going to have our guidelines read before we do that so Sarah good evening Council my name is Sarah Huntley I'm the director of

[21:00] communication and engagement for the city of Boulder I see Emily has pulled up slides for me thank you so much so we have a number of people participating tonight in person as well as a number of people participating online as you said mayor Brockett this is truly the hybridist of hybrid tonight we want to just review some of our guidelines for participating at City Council meetings so the city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive meaningful and inclusive Civic conversations this vision is designed to support physical and emotional safety for community members staff and Council as well as promoting democracy with perspectives offered by people of all ages identities lived experiences and politics for more information about this vision and the community engagement that led to it please visit our website next slide please Emily yeah to be more specific there are some specific rules of decorum found in the boulder Revised Code and guidelines that

[22:00] support having a productive Civic conversation we want to run through a couple of these just quickly tonight all remarks and testimony whether it's in person or online shall be limited to matters related to City business no participants shall make threats or make use other forms of intimidation against any other person obscenity racial epithets and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct this meeting are prohibited participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they're commonly known by and we ask that you display your whole name if you're in an online format currently only audio testimony is permitted online in-person participants are asked to refrain from expressing support or disagreement verbally we really want to make sure that every perspective in the room feels equally welcomed and heard traditionally support has been shown silently either through American Sign Language Applause or what

[23:01] some people refer to as jazz hands which I'm demonstrating right now okay are there any other slides Emily yes no that's it okay we just updated these slides today so I believe that's the completion of the guidance offered this evening great thanks Sarah so we're going to start with our in-person uh speakers and I understand that Robert Tuney and Tim Thomas have withdrawn so we have six other in person ah thank you for clarifying so Tim we'll keep you on the list for open comment so we've got seven people testifying in person and please come on down as your name is called we've got uh and you have two minutes to speak we have Patrick Murphy Elisa Darrow and Patrick O'Rourke mayor if I may Please Mr O'Rourke has notified us that he wants to be moved to Virtual so he will be number six on your virtual list very good so that's Patrick Murphy Elisa Darrow and Tim Thomas

[24:02] my name is Patrick Murphy I've lived in Boulder 53 years 2A or not 2A 2B or not to be those the climate action ballot questions a pair of no's are a good answer I want carbon reduction fast and honestly documented No Such Thing exists in 2A or 2B we do need to spend money and effort to reduce carbon but our bureaucracy is Road slop that's spinning our Wheels fewer employee paychecks more solar incentives wind incentives wrecks and energy use reduction are what we really need we need to reduce electric use first not increase it with heat pumps EVs and electric bikes step two comes after The Grid is updated and the Renewables are 90 plus coming into every home and Business Boulder has a long history of rejecting

[25:00] wrecks and providing a denigrating obfuscating story to make Rex taste like poison they aren't they stimulate the renewable industry and we should be buying all the wrecks we can afford because that is quantifiable carbon reduction the boulder climate and action narrative will try to convince you otherwise why because that simple solution would end some of their jobs while it may be true that this is a complex problem paralysis complexicus is what we're suffering at a cost of tens of millions of dollars by voting no the message of dissatisfaction is clear fix it first then show us the carbon reduction and the true cost so then what you ask without the taxes one of which expires next year and the other in 2025 there will be time to reevaluate don't feel bullied into voting yes think critically the planet Burns floods and dies while

[26:03] Boulder fiddles with climate change thank you Patrick now we have Elisa Darrow Tim Thomas and Miles Posen is Elisa president not seeing her okay well if she shows up a little later we'll bring her back in so we've got Tim Thomas Miles Posner and Jonathan singer good evening Tim Thomas so with the uh some of the ballot measures that are coming up next week we're talking about changing from odd year elections to even your elections I strongly feel that we should keep our local elections local most the interactions that people have with government are local at the federal level you tend to

[27:00] interact with the TSA the IRS nobody calls the FBI if you have a crime it's local government that does the things that we think are important if we want to solve climate change or we want to reduce crime in our communities one of the bravest things that a politician can say is I don't know a former city council member contacted me yesterday and heard about what I'm talking about as far as performance Audits and the budget and they've expressed their frustration when they were on council with their lack of being able to really dig in and see what's actually going on again I ask all those watching as well as current council members to look at the work of Tim O'Brien the elected independently elected City auditor of Denver and the work that he has done on many many different issues

[28:01] um one of my passions is the housing authority of Boulder they're planning on increasing their portfolio of apartments by hundreds and hundreds of units by 2024. with very little lack of accountability they do have a board I know at least one of you is on it but the transparency is lacking I've heard comments that say that some of the people from Boulder housing partners are residents of which I am one when they come and they speak about the things that we're we're dealing with they say that we're the loud voices I'm afraid your time is up but if you can email us long story short we're going to do our own survey because we've been asking others to do it and they won't do it themselves so we'll do it ourselves okay thank you very much thank you Tim miles Posen Jonathan singer and Sven steinmo

[29:06] hi I'm miles pose and a friendly neighbor of Chautauqua for 24 years I along with many members of this community were appalled to learn about the establishment of a centralized trash collection site designated for 100 homes and Cottages located in the East parking lot of Chautauqua very limited notification about the site was provided months after construction began consensus concerns include among others overall intrusion to chautauqua's Beauty we've all come to enjoy not to mention playground safety and increases in noise Wildlife activity traffic litter and smells I shared the same sentiments as many neighbors because the site is located approximately a hundred feet from multiple homes including mine we are confused as to how the site was initially approved since there's a 1985 mandate agreed upon by The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and landmarks

[30:01] board citing quote the East parking lot be strictly used for overflow parking and not to be developed or asphalted and to be controlled and managed during appropriate functions with that intent end quote further we find it shocking there's been no Community collaboration about the site despite requirements specified in the lease agreement between Chautauqua and the city of Boulder other lease requirements not followed include cooperation transparency and quote opportunities for public input for collaborative stewardship in the public interest end quote this lack of collaboration is in stark contrast to other recent successful Chautauqua projects where all stakeholders were involved I'm here today to urge you to postpone further development of the trash collection site until there's a proper review affording all relevant stakeholders opportunities to participate in the process while Chautauqua has primarily been a

[31:00] good neighbor sadly in this case it has fallen short thank you for your time and consideration thank you miles now we have a Jonathan singer and Sven steinmo good evening mayor members of city council it's nice to see you again uh so um the reason that I'm here today actually is to compliment uh you on your last hearing that you had last week on the recommendations that you took in from the housing Advisory Board this is a great time to be thinking outside the box on these issues and it is high time for this conversation I talked to so many primary employers on a regular basis who are struggling to find and then keep employees because of the cost of housing I'll just share one story today because I think it highlights how important this issue is not only for those employers and employees but for the community at large there's a major medical provider in our community right

[32:01] now that is thinking about closing its doors and moving somewhere else it's not because of high rent rates not because of high property rates on the commercial level it's because they cannot attract the employees to come here to provide medical services for patients who live here in our community which means our community members will have to travel to Westminster to Erie to tacono to Firestone to get the critical medical services that they need now it's one thing to complain it's another thing to actually come up with some Creative Solutions I just wanted to list a couple that I thought were incredibly great around edu's whether it's changing parking requirements or Expediting the permitting process or making it lowering the fees or making sure that the fee paid into the affordable housing fund for new residential units considers the number of units rather than the square is right now is based on the number of units rather than the square footage maybe

[33:00] it's time to change those numbers a little bit um I live by the terms what can I do for you what can you do for you and what can we do together there's a lot the business Community is willing to step up and do I know that you're going to make some right decisions starting next week and I look forward to seeing what we can do together thank you Jonathan uh last in-person speaker Sven steinmo thank you my name is Sven steinmo I've been a resident here for 35 37 years something like that I live in South Boulder I'm here for a fairly specific issue but I think it's a broader issue but first I want to acknowledge that you all deal with really difficult problems and none of us want to say oh deals my problem and no one else where I'm the most important person in the world that's just wrong however I'd have been South Boulder near the Shanahan Ridge access Trail which is

[34:00] actually not a Trailhead which is the problem or part of the problem according to open space data that is a third or second most used Trailhead in the entire County we have over a hundred thousand people used it last year sometimes 700 in a day very commonly 400 or 500 on a weekend day the problem is parking because it's not a Trailhead it doesn't have a parking lot and people from all over the county and indeed all over the state come to our Trail access point because they don't have to pay to park the consequence is the people in the neighborhood many older people many people have been there for 20 and 30 and 40 years even can't access their own driveways and in fact it's quite dangerous uh people it no one would have been able to predict that there were one Trailhead in Boulder that would have a hundred thousand users when they built the system

[35:00] so we're caught a little bit between the open space which have their needs and the parking or the city which has its parking needs what we're asking for are a couple simple things one we want to we'd like to have a neighborhood parking program in our neighborhood that's operated on weekends because that's critical secondly we would like to have enforcement of the rules that currently exist I cannot tell you how often we have someone parking in our driveways you call the police and they come but the person's moved more consistent enforcement would be very very helpful ultimately build a prostate Park I'm afraid your time's up but thank you so much all right we're going to switch to our remote speakers now and we have of which we have six the first three are Susan Duncan Lynn Siegel and Nick Forster

[36:02] yes hello can you hear me yes okay this is Susan Duncan great good evening council members my husband and I are Boulder residents living year around in Chautauqua Park out of the 97 cottages and two lodges on the camp on the Chautauqua campus 38 Cottages are privately owned I'm here tonight to talk about the new trash collection system that is being implemented here the Chautauqua Association plans to remove the current five trash disposal sites from the park and provide one Consolidated space at the foot of the park next to the playground in pickleball courts this change was approved by the landmark's design Review Committee in June 2021. homeowners received no notification of this until a full year later we had no opportunity to provide input the homeowners agree that having the large Western Disposal trucks drive through the park is problematic and their removal would be positive for the park we were blindsided however when we were told that the association will stop

[37:01] providing trash pickup service to our homes but continue to provide daily service to their rentals we must drive our trash down to the site at the foot of the park the association has told us that the trash site is ADA Compliant but to get to the site we was first exit our cars unlock a chain barrier continue our drive to The Container empty the trash and then relock the chain on the way out the site is currently still a concrete slab and metal scaffolding the homeowners requested meetings with the association to try to arrive at a solution that would be more Equitable but all our suggestions were turned down the single alternative available to us is to purchase special Western disposal bags and use these for weekly curbside pickup by Western this solution requires that we still our trash in our homes because none of us have a garage plus we must still pay Chautauqua trash pickup fee the cost of the bags plus the photography will be more expensive than what people in the surrounding neighborhood pay I respectfully requested the council

[38:00] delay any further action on this item to provide all concerned parties an opportunity to reach an amicable resolution thank you thank you Susan now we have Lynn Siegel Nick Forster and Bella cloud hi let me see see here get my post up um for one Aaron Brockett and the wife of one of our Noble laureates can you hear me clearly yes yes um from CU in the Bose einsteinian Gardens in Nobles um around middle cover and a motorcycle Bond went off on one of the Lion's Den folks there he had a five-month-old kid and

[39:02] two other kids so I think we need a resolution for Palestinian Justice um just as you know Mark had his discussion of protecting Jews in the United States the Palestinians need to be protected too and our own folks could have gotten harmed in that situation they were in the same neighborhood as this motorcycle bomb um exploded and killed the guy not okay we have another palestinian-american Shireen Abu aklet that was killed in Janine a month I think we've lost Lynn's Audio is it just me we can't hear you Lynn

[40:02] she appears to be unmuted in the system so it sounds like it's a mic issue so Lynn if you could sorry we can't hear you anymore but if you could email us the remainder of your comments please we'll we'll take a look at those all right should we go into the next speaker then I think all right sure uh that's uh Nick Forster followed by Bella cloud and suprant hello everyone um first of all I want to let you know that eTown is one of the fortunate Arts organizations that has received General operating support uh over a number of years and in our case uh it's for an extra large organization that support makes a huge difference for us and I want to say thank you for that um covid obviously has had a huge impact

[41:00] on our facility and our business as well as all performing arts organizations in Boulder post covet has been kind of awkward and Recovery has been slow so um one covet after effect is both positive and negative and that is that wages for contractors have gone up it's more fair for folks like sound engineers and lighting designers it's more expensive now for Arts organizations so I'm here just asking that you strongly consider allocating remaining arpa funds especially for those Arts organizations that qualified for funding but were not awarded funds this would affect it won't affect me or eTown would it make a huge difference for those others who really are qualifying and deserve our our support in addition as a founding board member of create Boulder I hope to work with all of you to continue to advocate for increases in arts funding such that we can address the larger issues of affordable Studios and performance

[42:00] spaces affordable housing for creatives and even the establishment of a Performing Arts facility in central Boulder I want to thank you again for the support that we've received I also want to acknowledge that Arts funding has increased over the past few years it's a great start again I look forward to working with you all so we can substantially increase funding for the Arts and make this a community where creatives can still afford to contribute to both our economy and our lifestyle and our culture thank you thank you Nick now we have Bella cloud suprant and Patrick O'Rourke yeah hi um I recently moved to uh I bought a condo in Remington post in Boulder um uh Remington post is managed by Hammer Smith Corporation 275 units Hammersmith has land that it manages all over Boulder

[43:01] Hammersmith uses panorama which is a company that uses toxic chemical pesticides I thought Boulder was environmentally conscious and I believe it is and I'm thankful for this opportunity to speak out against the use of such dangerous pesticides the nrdc says 20 it's the main ingredient in the pesticide they use is to comma four dash D the nrdc said call it the most dangerous pesticide you've never heard of it was an agent orange it was first used in 1940s but it the Rachel Carson Landmark Alliance says that the health of pet people pets and Wildlife as well as bees and broadleaf plants may be adversely impacted by two comma four dash D I don't know what Boulder City Council can do to stop the use of this our bees are being endangered it's

[44:01] getting in the water table it is not okay it's not even on the approved pesticide list but on the approved pesticide list here too though conditional Boulder Boulder City approved the use of clear cast on the Wonderland Trail and um I walk that trail every day and it has moderately a toxic effects to bees and other wildlife and plant life even moderately is not okay but mainly it has a high probability of leaching and there's streams on both sides of this trail that ran most of the summer all on Spring and um it's obviously going to leach into the water table thanks for your time thank you Bella now we have suprant and Patrick O'Rourke I am soprano with Community Cycles I'm here to speak quickly on two issues the

[45:02] first issue is amps we would like to strongly second thoughts put forward by council member Benjamin we are nowhere near achieving our climate change TMP or Vision zero goals now is not the time to reduce parking prices as Matt says parking is one of the few levers we have to reduce VMT our parking doesn't begin to pay a fair return on the massive public investment in land and infrastructure that it represents and subsidized parking is subsidized driving we should be moving to a structure in which all public parking is fairly priced not subsidized to get there we should be increasing parking prices to the extent possible and not decreasing them job parking policy meet our climate TMP and vision zero goals it needs to be managed by a department with a broader scope perspective and understanding of best practices in VMT reduction transportation is that department Community Cycles very much supports the council having this discussion the second issue I'm speaking on is the

[46:01] new CU Aspen skiing company Conference Center Broadway in Grandview we've discussed this extensively with City staff the C manager of the C attorney the relevant boards and most of you simply put the current design does not meet the city's Vision zero principles and goals we're asking CU Aspen skiing company to conduct a safety study by the nation's leading biped design experts tool design this will bring best practices to this intersection many of you also like the Native American rights but Audi alternative I showed you this needs to fill feasibility study now in order to proceed and become and have any chance of becoming a reality we urge you to recommend to CU Aspen skiing company that the commissioned tool design to do a safety study on the current Broadway Grandview intersection design and conduct a feasibility study on the North alley alignment thank you very much thank you sue our last speaker is Patrick O'Rourke

[47:02] good evening city council I was hoping to be there in person but along with the first snow of the year comes the first accident of the year and then Canyon road was closed for from 5 30 until about 6 15. so thankfully I'm able to speak tonight about a month ago I was playing pickleball of all things at Chautauqua and I'm one of those people that gets served right around sunrise and I looked to the over the beautiful Boulder Valley setting the open land there and from the tennis courts and I saw this metal structure there and I said to myself oh I wonder what that's doing I wonder if they're going to put a storage structure there well lo and behold it turns out it's a garbage collection center for Chautauqua the reason it's important to me is I'm the preservation chair for historic Boulder so anything that goes on at your doc Club I try to be aware of and I was not aware of that and

[48:00] apparently I wasn't aware of it because back in and it was October of 2021 through the ldrc this project was approved the challenge I have with it is when you do it through the ldrc you have a staff member from the city of Boulder doing the presentation the city of Boulder is the client and this staff person is permitted to vote on it and if they weren't permitted to vote it would automatically go to the landmarks board for a review in my opinion that's probably what should have occurred so I just wanted to make you aware of it number two is that it's on the sight line so what my request tonight is delayed construction of the project and do everybody a favor and do an on-site visit and meet with the neighbors I think you'll be pleasantly surprised or you will be surprised that there's some better solutions to what's been proposed by Chautauqua and if you get the people involved and work together I'm sure

[49:00] um there can be a satisfactory conclusion thank you thank you Patrick all right that brings us to close for open comments I'll turn to City staff to see if there are any responses to what people said thank you so much mayor I appreciate it I'll say there are a couple subjects tonight that we're going to be talking about later in the presentation particularly with regards to the issue we just heard right now regarding Chautauqua and the issue um that um Sven brought up about the trailhead and we'll be talking about that as well we'll also be talking about I'm sorry with the issue with the trailhead that will be part of the amps discussion and so you'll hear from staff soon about those I did want to say to Bella who called Ann about the pesticide it's disturbing to hear this and just be reassured that we will be following up to make sure that any such issues conform with the regulations and the ordinance that we have so we will follow up on that and we believe great and can I actually ask a clarifying question on that Nuria

[50:00] because my understanding is that we have regulations for the pesticides that are used on our own properties right we have control over that we have very strict rules over what we allow to be applied but I don't believe we have regulatory authority over the pesticides that are applied on private property and maybe somebody can confirm that for me but I don't I think that's preempted by the state legislature uh yeah I think that is correct uh mayor and still we want to make sure that when we hear about it that we're able to investigate and perhaps explore some resolutions so we don't want to just lift our hands and say that is not ours there are times and it is so important that we want to look into it so we will do so as we think about this case but yes you are correct that we uh regulate in our ordinance regulates things that are on um city property great well I appreciate you going forward and trying to figure out what's going on there and see if we can help I just wanted to clarify about kind of the limits of our Authority there great other Genie question or two questions based on some

[51:02] of the comments that were made earlier about the channel Shanna henridge parking spill over in the neighborhoods and as far as the neighborhood parking program is this something that the community has to opt into or is it more research that the city does and eventually if they find it necessary is that how that goes that program or I confess that I'm not familiar with the particulars of how that process goes but I believe in the conversation that we will have staff will be able to address that perfect thank you so much and also as far as the question on enforcement uh the world that'd be answered later too is that is that the hope I think that it'll be great to hear about what that looks like and I'm myself anxious to continue to hear from staff about what that is but if there is enforcement to be had then I presume that staff from Community Vitality can speak to that and if there's more questions that we have we can continue to follow up on that thank you very much

[52:01] I got Mark and then Bob um yeah can somebody speak to this um Chautauqua issue and and how we've gotten to where we are and whether there's anything to be done I am going to call down our resident historian uh Chris Mess check who has a lot of background and recalls where these things started so Chris thanks an area Chris Mess Jack Deputy city manager good evening Council uh so I might I'm going to I'm going to go a little high level real quick and then get into the specific issue just there may be community members just to set some ground council's probably aware Chautauqua is a unique location um and the city plays a unique role in that the city is the owner of the land at Chautauqua as well as three of the buildings and then that landed those land and buildings are then leased to the Colorado Chautauqua Association that runs the operations at Chautauqua and

[53:02] then there are uh about a little less than half the Cottages are owned by private owners that then have a sub lease with the Colorado Chautauqua Association for their land lease that their house sits on and so uh specific to the concerns that were raised by some of the folks tonight regarding trash collection um much of that comes out of there's been an effort between the city and the Colorado Chautauqua Association that began in 2019 called the the Chautauqua sustainability and resilience uh um plan and part of that was a vulnerabilities assessment and and what that identified is one of the needs in Chautauqua is around deteriorating road conditions one of the recommendations in that draft plan is to try and limit heavy vehicle traffic on the roads and so Chautauqua as an organization has chosen to do is to modify the way trash collection works

[54:00] in the Colorado Chautauqua which is one of their operational decisions and they have centralized that collection to one location to avoid having trash trucks drive down in each of the individual roads so that's the background on the trash collection issue that is uh an item that is outside the purview of the city there's nothing in the lease that the city has with the Colorado Chautauqua Association that I'm aware of um that would dictate any City role in how trash service is provided up at Chautauqua the item on your agenda tonight is the landmark alteration certificate that is you know specific to the proposal that they have for a trash enclosure uh that would be evaluated against the historic preservation code and the criteria and the code for its construction and I know we have staff here to answer specific questions about that if you have any and we we will get to that item separately here in a little bit you're

[55:01] good okay um and then I just wanted to respond uh personally uh Lynn Siegel mentioned a time that I was in navless not long ago in Palestine and just want to mention that uh I did visit our sister cities of navless and Palestine and Vermont Han Negev in Israel and actually my colleague Bob Yates here visited dushanbe in Tajikistan not Longo and we're hoping to have a time at a future council meeting where we can talk a little bit about our experiences with building those connections with our sister city so to say look out for that coming at a meeting near you anything else all right we can be done with open comment thanks to everyone for coming and speaking to us and the Valiants of the in-person speakers with the weather outside so this moves us to our consent agenda yes sir our consent agenda is number item number three on tonight's agenda and includes items three a through 3G any questions comments or a motion that was G was stricken though

[56:01] so Teresa could you maybe be specific about what change was made to G oh yes Teresa Taylor Tate City attorney specifically you may recall a hotline post this week where we separated out the item we are no longer looking to amend the rules of decorum on this evening's agenda but we are still looking to amend the nominations and elections procedure to change the mayor Pro tem um elections from Tuesday evening to the Thursday evening second any comments see none we'll call for for a roll call vote all right so we will start tonight's roll call with mayor Pro tem friend

[57:02] yes councilmember Joseph yes spear yes Wallach yes Winer yes Yates yes mayor Brockett yes and council member falkerts Lauren yes thank you mayor the consent agenda items a through G have passed unanimously so much all right so we now are moving to our call-up check-ins we have two of them unless you want to introduce that first one yes sir that is item four on tonight's agenda our call up check-ins 4A is the landmark alteration certificate to install cementius siding on a existing garbage enclosure

[58:02] at 900 Baseline Avenue city of Boulder Colorado a property in the Chautauqua Park historic district under chapter 9-11 historic preservation BRC 1981. thanks Alicia I guess I would start with a request to staff that given some of the concerns about trash pickup that's been voiced maybe to talk about how this does or does not relate to those concerns so I wonder if someone City staff could could address that like what specifically is this call-up and and how does it relate to some of the stuff people were talking about thank you mayor we have our director here of planning and development services Brad yes good evening council members uh I uh would like to also pass it off to Christopher Johnson and uh Claire a Brandt who are on line uh to be able to speak directly to that great Christopher you want to chime in yes I'm happy to do that thank you mayor

[59:00] Brackett Christopher Johnson comprehensive planning manager so I oversee the um Landmark preservation team uh this the call-up that is before you this uh this evening is specific to the material and there was a request made by the Colorado Chautauqua Association from the previous approval for this trash enclosure to change the material from wood siding to a cementitious sighting so that particular item uh did get referred to the board and that was reviewed as part of that being referred to the board it was a public hearing so neighboring properties were notified and that cementitious citing was ultimately approved by the board so that is what is before you uh before you this evening the comments that were made earlier in particular seem to be more around the location of the trash enclosure that decision was made by the landmarks

[60:00] design Review Committee which is comprised of a staff member and two landmarks board members any one of which can call up a particular item to the full landmarks board for a public hearing but the location of the trash enclosure was approved by that ldrc back in 2021 in October of 2021 so that is not what is before you this evening thanks Christopher to clarify then that what is before us is uh simply the the siding material being used that is correct okay thanks for that um any other questions on this item or desire to call it up uh I don't either so I'm not seeing any interest in calling that up so I think we can move on from this one thanks for that explanation we have one more yes sir item 4B is a landmark alteration certificate to install a 6K wpv array mounted on the street facing roof at 875 14th Street

[61:01] city of Boulder Colorado a property in the University Place historic district under chapter 9-11 historic preservation BRC 1981. any questions or interest in calling this one up nope seeing none looks like no interest on calling that one up either so I think we can move to our public hearing for the evening please sir tonight's public hearings are item number five on the agenda 5A is the consideration of a motion to adopt resolution 1321 declining all participation in the Colorado Family Medical Leave insurance program referenced as f-a-m-l-i thank you so much and uh as I let our new HR Chief HR Director officer get settled I'll say that we are so lucky to have David Bell in the city he has been up to speed this has been an issue obviously that a lot of the state is

[62:00] aware of and when to have a quick presentation or an overview by David so I will send it over to you thank you neria thank you Council for allowing me to be here this evening I Am David Bell the Chief Human Resources officer I've been with the city for four months and finding my way through and navigating to this position this evening to speak with you about the Colorado family and medical insurance program commonly known as the family insurance program in November of 2020 Colorado voters did approve by vote Family and Medical Leave insurance program which requires most businesses in the state of Colorado to participate in this medical support or leave support program it does however allow for local governments to decline participation the impetus at the time was to respond to identified needs with some private businesses that did not have leave programs available covering many many categories but to allow for the

[63:00] declination by local governments because of high quality benefits collaborative Partnerships with our labor unions Etc that drive some of our leave programs this program in the instances in which a organization does decline participation does allow for employees to directly participate to the family program with direct contribution of partial wages at this time Human Resources is recommending that the city of Boulder decline participation in the family insurance program to do so the law requires the public body to vote on the declination of participation if that's our chosen option and an organization could choose two other options to participate in full or to accommodate direct payroll deduction and contribution for individual employees to participate should we decline participation we however are recommending at this time full declination of participation in the family program these are some of the decision points that came into this recommendation

[64:00] currently our leave benefits do cover the majority of our staff and the types of issues that would be covered by Family participation the 0.9 percent salary or wage contribution does approach 1.3 million dollars annually that could be divided 50 50 with employees and City contribution but is still a significant contribution on both parts also a decision point is the income replacement amounts through the family program it is differentiated by earning level and currently most of the employees earn salary wages that would return approximately 70 percent in income replacement through the family program versus our current income replacement or sick leave programs holiday leave floating holiday vacation Etc that have a hundred percent income replacement when we're using sick leave Etc this is a bit small but the coverage comparison here on the left side of this chart shows the covered Family Leave opportunities and on the right side our benefit programs so we can see here the first row care of a new child including

[65:01] adopted or fostered children our programs such as paid parental leave sick leave you short-term disability floating holiday vacation leave cover that type of absence care for personal illness or injury or serious health condition our program sick leave short-term disability long-term disability our extended sick leave holidays and vacation leave third piece care of family member series health condition sick leave floating holiday vacation leave emergency leave Etc making arrangements for a family member's military deployment we allow sick leave floating holiday and vacation leave for our employees and the last piece the ability to address immediate safety needs associated with the impacts of domestic violence and or sexual assault sick leave floating holiday vacation leave in addition we have policies in place for support of victims of domestic violence and support of military leave and deployment this piece of slide deck here is a sample from the Colorado Family Leave

[66:01] program website and it does show the income replacement of options now this is still a formula being developed by the program but it's an estimate right now available for individuals to see and we can see the higher percent 90 for our lower wage earners with a cap of 1100 weekly benefit for advanced earners or higher wage earners so it's a differentiated percent income replacement based on earnings through that program we have as required by the family program had a series of communications with our employees you can see October 13th October 20th October 27th we have communicated through our employee news and through employee live Town Hall discussions Our intention to decline or recommend declination of the family insurance program we notified staff of the opportunity for public comment on October 27th to be available and present tonight for that comment we offered an opportunity for individuals to send information to the human resources benefit team with their commentary on

[67:02] this particular program we collected that feedback through yesterday November 2nd we had a small handful and the general statement from folks is that there is an interest in seeing Improvement in benefits for seasonal and temporary staff all of our respondents came with that particular focus and consideration of other Leaf benefits for that seasonal and temporary group currently our seasonal staff and all employees at minimum earn the required sick leave by the healthy family workplace act which is one hour for every 30 hours worked which equates to 2.67 sick leave hours per pay period over a two-week period and a cap of 48 hours so there is an availability of sick leave for seasonal employees not as extensive as some other benefits but some partial benefit for individuals working in a seasonal category we have about 450 seasonal employees many working under a 30-hour week threshold of those that work over 30 hours a week also are eligible for medical insurance

[68:01] benefits their small number of those individuals and and of that small number only about half engage with our benefit programs and with that our recommendation is to adopt resolution 1321 declining all participation in the Colorado Family Medical Leave insurance program and by making that declination we would be exempt from this program I would not have to readdress participation for another eight years at which time we'd have to choose to be in or out again at that particular time however any time in the coming years we can choose to change our participation level so if we find a year from now two years from now it's more appropriate we can address it at that time in human resources and the city could make a recommendation to make an alternate plan all right thanks so much for that David and uh welcome to your first council meeting it's great to have you on board and here with us thank you yes so we'll have questions for staff and then we'll go to a public hearing and then we'll discuss amongst ourselves any questions this time

[69:00] Nicole yeah and thank you got a few questions and thanks also for answering my questions in advance um so you mentioned that we could change our minds potentially so say next year is that a time where where we would be able to opt in if we chose to at that point there is an opportunity to opt in at a future date the State has yet to clearly Define when that opt-in period comes if it's January 1st of each year right now they seem to be following a first of year period and Human Resources would monitor the development of the program and consider a recommendation in a different way in the future should it be appropriate okay thank you um and then I also just had a couple of other questions so one of the things that I understand about the family program is that it the threshold for reaching that 12 weeks of paid leave is really quite minimal that you need to I think earn about twenty five hundred dollars over the last few quarters or something like that and then you qualify for the paid leave and

[70:00] with our current system I think probably like most paid leave you have to earn your vacation leave or your sick leave that you're using over time so um you know one of the things I'm wondering is how many of our employees are actually accruing enough leave to kind of get their full 12 weeks paid by the time they're actually using it and I understand you may not have that answer tonight I'm just wondering if there's if that's anything that was taken into account in the decision around how quickly that leave kicks in for employees who are newer to the organization it's a piece of analysis that we need to dig in a little more deeply of course we have employees you know 1400 standard employees with a various length of tenure in the organization and there are some large accrued sick leave Banks vacation Banks Etc newer employees they're earning sick leave generally at about a day a month so it does take some some time to hit that 12 weeks in total there is after 1250 hours protection through FMLA for job protection we also

[71:02] are earning the vacation hours for individuals so near the same rate and of course we have emergency leave or bereavement leave Etc that can come into place so it's not an immediate response of 12 weeks of paid leave for General serious illness for the person or for their family member but there are when we do have those dollars available or Cruise available they're at 100 percent of pay rather than the differentiated income from the family thank you um and then one of the things I was wondering about is so our employees are getting short-term disability they have the option of having short-term disability insurance I believe right who are above a threshold for for accessing those benefits um is family something that could take the place of the short-term disability that we have I mean do they kind of serve the same purpose that look like they were in similar places on the charts up there so I was just wondering about that there was similarity between short-term disability coverage and the family coverage yes the short-term disability coverage is a city paid benefit so there's not contribution from

[72:00] employees for that piece nor the long-term disability or life insurance benefits so they they come in package right now and we are committed to reviewing the aspects of that short-term and long-term disability plan so yes it does have that level of income replacement for individuals there's also an ability to with family program with our parental leave program Etc to receive benefit through short-term disability and balance out the remainder of the income replacement with sick leave thank you and then just one last question so as I understand it this is something that individuals can opt into on their own whether or not we are participating as an organization is that is that correct absolutely correct okay and with that um are there any kind of incentives that the governments have been offering to employees because the way that I understand it it's likely to be our either part-time workers or seasonal workers those that are that may be the lowest paid workers who would be most interested potentially in the family program so have we thought about whether

[73:02] there are any incentives we could offer to those employees because sometimes it's it's hard as an employee especially if you are a lower wage employee to think about spending a little bit of extra money in the moment when everything is fine right and you're not thinking about any of these things that may come up requiring 12 weeks of leave so I was just wondering if we thought about incentives yeah I think we'd have to step very carefully into an incentive program to encourage people to participate in an alternative benefit program so we'd be looking at how can we supplement our current benefit programs Etc and make the positions more appealing to hold and to have appropriate benefits with our organization and potentially make the individual choice to participate in the family program what we do know is that first and foremost we are not certain yet from the state what their process will be for direct contribution for employees what it might look like Etc but as soon as we have that we are not only committed to but obligated to communicate to employees about how to participate in addition we're in the

[74:00] same spot as many other organizations throughout Colorado there are less than 10 organizations the municipalities that are contributing or planning to participate in family right now so the other the 90 Plus in our Circle right now are monitoring the same things that you're asking about tonight thank you so much and welcome thank you other questions I got Jeannie thank you I just want some clarification about the opt-in opt out you mentioned that there's two things I hear that's not it's not matching for me you mentioned we can appton in the future but I'm thinking but if we opt out we will not revisit the issue for another eight years that's what I hear if we opt out we are required by the state to reaffirm that opt out at the eight year mark but we can choose to opt in again at one year mark to your mark through your mark for your mark anytime in the future if after eight years we do not reaffirm or opt out then we would be automatically opted in okay thank you so

[75:03] that would probably be next year for well that's too hypothetical I'm thinking how would we bring if today you asking us to decline what would change for us to somehow magically said yes we're obtaining this year I think that what we would project during the next year or second year of the program is we'll be watching the growth of the family program the success of the family program and our employees will as well and they'll be speaking to Human Resources through feedback through town hall Etc and they'd have opportunity to speak with you or engage with you as a board or as a council members through General communication so those would be our our kind of flash points of how we'd be monitoring this from the employee level and then we would always be making recommendation of best practice for benefit plans to the city manager okay no thank you for that so what I'm hearing is you'll study this as it and see what happens maybe in a year if it's favorable or not favorable but if it makes sense for

[76:02] the city then you might be able to bring it forward to council again for another consideration but that's not necessarily what you're saying but just hypothetical maybe that is correct okay thank you I do have another question about the opt out contribution so basically the city itself can decide to opt out but also there is a program or a system for employees who wants to participate to participate right yes so but I'm trying to understand the opt-in process the opt-in process there would be a city contribution with the opt-out process in helping guiding employees through there would not be that contribution that's correct if we opt out we are not contributing as a city any percent of wages employees could choose to directly contribute and that direct contribute would be them sending EFT or direct deduction from a checking account or a

[77:00] banking account or writing a check directly to the state or there they want to make an opportunity for the state to allow employees to engage human resources and say we want to contribute individually directly and then we have to be the pass-through and making those payroll deductions Etc which is kind of a technical component that we haven't investigated because the state hasn't provided any pathway or specifications for that yet thank you any other questions all right seeing none then let's go to the public hearing so uh our one in person speaker Tim Thomas did bow out so we got three virtual speakers Lynn Siegel Vanessa Quintana and Sonia Sarabia each of you will have three minutes to speak so if we can start with Lynn please um please let me know somehow visually since I can see you although you can't see me if I drop out all of a sudden because my computer's lately been just stopping in

[78:02] the middle and when I was in public comment I thought I was going on and I thought this seems like a long time and it was just because you've gone on to the next speaker and I didn't know because I didn't have any audio visual well I had visual only anyway um I support the family leave and the any extra benefits the city can give I've I recently found out I worked at Denver General for 10 years for 12 years and found out that um because they've been mailing to my old address for the last 22 years and I only had one other address the dress I'm at now um I lost thirty five thousand dollars worth of um retirement benefits because I didn't know about them and they have a clause in the Denver Municipal Code that allows them to not pay retroactive uh retirement benefits so now I have to go

[79:02] to a lawyer and fight this somehow so I know the city is trying to save money but I don't think we should be saving money on our employees and the seasonal employees are employees that are short-term or what have you they deserve all the more benefits because it's hard to get people and and splitting up jobs into little jobs instead of you know a regular full-time is is you know not a reason that you should receive any less in family leave or other benefits and the the other argument and I find this very specious argument for many things that oftentimes Republicans want to put want to resist on and that's based on the fact that oh this is already paid for in some way or this is already covered well if that's the case then so what why not approve something that wouldn't even be used right

[80:01] I've never understood that um so I fully support um going through the maximum benefit and it's a not an easy job you have to deal with people and that can be tough and Lynn we're getting a lot of feedback on your line oh sorry can you hear now yeah okay as a public working for the city and as a public servant you know you're subject to hard work so you should get your benefits and so I say go for it don't hold back it's kind of like the library district 10 million dollars that was hidden into the um city coffers that's really not very ethical to thanks thanks Lynn now we have Vanessa Quintana and Sonia Sarabia

[81:02] good evening Boulder City councilors my name is Vanessa Quintana and I'm a senior strategist at Colorado nines at five we chair the family implementation Coalition and represent Community leaders who are also residents of Boulder I have I'm speaking today in as well as one colleague and we're here to voice concern with the city of Boulder declining participation in family with doubt that the bill will be implemented equitably in coverage of workers I'm honestly surprised to see Boulder City Council is debating whether to decline participation in family given the track record of being pro-worker policy makers it's possible the city of Boulder may be looking to other governments who are also declining to participate in family but please note that um it is false to believe that when you opt out that you're automatically going to have something better have better benefits in reality um better benefits are often only to the

[82:00] economically advantaged workers even if most of your workers will be fine that will not be an equitable solution for paid leave something that family the family statue is specifically designed to address for example low-wage workers part-time workers seasonal workers and workers with oppressed identity such as women lgbtq workers black and indigenous people of color or other workers these workers are more likely to be in lower paid part-time or short-term positions and have a higher need for safe time caregiving leave and and an expansive family definition I represent that respects intergenerational households and community cultivated families under family workers only need to earn 2500 in the last several quarters to be eligible there's no local time our requirements or Etc even if workers opt in as individuals to family they will not be covered by the Law's job protection requirement which is a significant deterrence from taking lean we have also learned that your

[83:01] workers who clock at least 20 hours a week and do have access to Leading benefits existing benefits fall short in comparison to family for example short-term disability caps at 60 percent of wages cannot be taken intermittently and has a longer delay on claim approvals and benefit pay payout the details of your parental leave should be examined to understand if all families will be able to care for a new child whether through birth foster adoption and various legal biological and chosen family relationships also if your emergency leave would serve for safe timely for all scenarios without barriers equivalent wage replacement and duration of leads it is essential that this analysis is conducted to ensure that the city of Boulder upholds the attention of the voters in approving the statute to provide Equitable coverage for all workers and their families please participate in family and if you don't ensure that by January 1st 2024 that coverage is ready for all workers

[84:01] including that the short time of seasonal workers thank you thank you Vanessa now we have Sonia Sarabia hello my name is Sonia with 95 Colorado I'm also a boulder resident at 95 we organize and build power collectively to improve democracy and Champion Justice Center public policy many of our members and Community leaders are residents of Boulder I encourage you to respect the will of Boulder voters and participate in families for the collectively Collective good of every Boulder worker we all we all benefit when everyone in our community is cared for according to the Boulder County 2020 election results proposition 118 was overwhelmingly supported with over 70 percent of the vote that means seven internal Boulder voters

[85:03] supporter they pay Medical and family campaign because they value the coverage of 12 weeks pay leave to support family facing the challenge or welcoming your child to their life while facing the challenge while you're both your vote tonight will not change non-city workers access your family it appears that contradiction for their local government to the nine city workers the same access and until not participate as an employer in the community adapting to a new program is an adjustment that affects budgets and other benefits however this is already happening at the state in the private sector condition me I like your voice that concerned for the Boulder City workers who are seasonal temporary and part-time below 20 hours a week these workers do not have an

[86:00] existing leave benefits from the city support themselves and their families but we're equally deserving of themselves and the serving as a boulder resident I'm invested in a well-round city government is able able to attract and retain the workers in all positions if workers are able to gain these benefits elsewhere the city voter will be less attractive employer I urge you to find a solution that includes these workers thank you for listening thank you Sonia right that concludes the public hearing so I'm going to bring it back to city council for discussion so who would like to kick us off yes Tara I should ask this question at the time I needed to be clarified in my own head tell me what I don't understand why you would not want to buy into this program

[87:00] what would be the downsides what are the re what are your specific reasons why not because I'm thinking about all the temporary workers and the seasonal workers and people have a point they definitely have more stress more you know I mean to me just hearing it from their point of view it makes a lot of sense to buy into it so tell me what are the negatives so it's maybe a bit less of there's negatives to what does this program cost for coverage and where does it overlap with what we currently have and how does it counteract things that we have in place already the large component in our recommendations which I put up here again would be the income replacement amount is not as rich as some of our benefits now with our seasonal employees they earn a smaller amount of sick time as a council member sphere noted or questioned a little bit earlier and I responded there as well a little bit less and it doesn't accrue quickly

[88:00] enough to cover early 12-week periods so that is a negative but the other piece is second bullet point here we would be paying premium on every employee in the organization and many of those wouldn't actually use this program because they're going to be using their other benefits that we have in place so we are putting monies in covering every employee for the benefit of a smaller amount who may or may not be using the benefit and there's there's kind of a cost ratio in there that we're trying to identify the idea of the short-term disability plan is their benefit to moving into the family program and ending our short-term disability program there's a possibility there but the cost ratio is not in Balance right now it is not a 1.3 million dollar cost for our short-term disability so we'd still be looking at adding a million dollars plus into this program to cover the rest of that balance to cover every employee that's the primary concern right now sorry I had to walk out of the room when you were giving your presentation thanks for repeating yourself and just to just to clarify in terms of the cost it'd be

[89:00] point four five percent of each employee's salary that they would have to pay and then the City would contribute point four five percent of each employee salary as well do I have that right that is the most common selection of cost sharing for this particular program or the these expected cost sharing for this program some organizations could choose to pay the entire point nine percent and not pass any cost to their employees if we were to do that we'd be paying the full 1.3 million dollars plus as a city if we divide it evenly 50 50 then yes the 0.45 percent would come out of employee paychecks each pay period thanks for clarifying Juni thank you I thank you so much I know I hear Tara and it's very confusing as well so I just need some clarification for myself and I'm sure there are some people who are also wondering this is basically an additional entitlement and based on what I hear from you and I was looking as well the employee handbook from fmle online it says

[90:01] employee may choose to use sick leave or other employee provided paid time off before using fmly benefits but they're not required to do so right so that means they can use their their City benefit and then if they so choose they can at a later time if they still have they can use it as well so it's an additional entitlement so it's not really in conflict with the benefits that we have so if someone let's say as a CD employee I decide okay I'm gonna use my CDM benefits then once that's run out I still have the opportunity to use the fmle is that correct so there where I want to make sure we're clarifying FMLA versus Family Insurance so two different programs there FMLA is the job protection for 12 weeks for a serious injury illness care of a family member this family program is an insurance program and it's still to be

[91:00] determined and what you read is correct but it is to be determined how all the different benefit plans interact an employee could use their sick leave time before making a claim to the state under the family insurance program and thus extend out a period that they would be absent from work or not contributing on their work site with us and have an extended period of time away using both of those benefits it's incumbent on us to make sure we're being thoughtful and responsible in the benefits that we provide to our team members whether it's through a vacation accruals of this family insurance program the short-term disability program Etc we also do not know yet how our short-term disability vendors are going to react and respond to a program such as family insurance if that changes their premium gain each month each year Etc so we're watching that it's not it's not a perfect answer I understand that but we're all learning about this program because we're not buying an established program we'd be contributing wage percentage each period each pay period for something that's in development and we're still trying to understand the intricacies of use

[92:01] well maybe my follow-up question would be then can we reduce our current program if people are not using it as opposed to say we're just gonna stay out of this program that could potentially help as you mentioned a smaller pool of our employees we could change our benefit structure and what we offer to our employees that we could do that it will take some time to review our short-term disability benefit programs the impact in the long-term disability program the accrual rates those are things that could be changed and many of those are negotiated agreements with our three local unions and it's one idea to approach changing that and another to actually accomplish that kind of change thank you Lauren thank you Erin um I I have another question it sounds like you know based on some of the Outreach that you did to employees that there's been this kind

[93:00] of need identified around um benefits for seasonal workers and so I'm just wondering what are we doing is that something that we're going to be looking at addressing sort of regardless of whether or not we choose to opt into this program um or is that anyway could you kind of address if that's something that we're going to be looking at based on the feedback that we're hearing from all of our staff in support of seasonal employees and the seasonal employees themselves yes we are monitoring that program we are working on that actively of course right now we're stepping into our open enrollment period for this coming year with our existing benefit programs but it's something that we intend to Monitor and make recommendation to the city manager for any change in the future thank you if I could follow up on that so Nicole earlier asked about incentives

[94:00] for participation which you said you know there are issues with that um but in terms of looking at our temporary and seasonal employees I think what I'm hearing is that's where we have a gap between the the benefits that we provide and the the benefits that the family program provides so are there there are ways that we could at least notify people of of the existence of the program you know so include information about it maybe have somebody on staff who said who could answer questions could say oh yeah you would apply for it this way you know guide them through the process if they were interested in participating so there's kind of a clear pathway for those employees who'd be interested in participating to get them into that program absolutely and should the city council take the recommendation forward to decline participation it is an obligation to the declining employer to communicate to all the employees the option for direct contribution and we will make that part of our onboarding for all new employees and part of our open enrollment process as well each year with our benefits programs thanks for that

[95:00] further comments we've only had questions so far maybe a comment oh go go ahead if you have another question and then Rachel um oh she was my question I just forgot it I'm gonna have to think about it it was a good question I'll think about it I was just going to ask um kind of following up on Aaron's question if could we offer to all employees um you know we're opting out but anybody can opt in as I understand it not just seasonal but anyone like it sounds like there's maybe an add-on benefit possibly to anyone to do it could we still do the the matching like 0.45 and they could do 0.45 or is that like disqualifying like so we'll be offering it to all employees so I I think what I hear is is there an opportunity to put resources to support certain populations even though we're not opting if we were to choose not to opt into the family program you know we

[96:00] can design benefit support programs by categories of employees in different ways so there's an opportunity to look at if we have resources how we distribute that either through wages or support of additional sick leave or other supports that might be most appropriate for seasonal employees or to change the volume of hours that are worked for a seasonal employee by coupling jobs together and that's operational and has not been discussed with our departments that most frequently use seasonal employees but in in this moment that's one of those options that we could build to change the wage structure earning structure of seasonal employees well and X actually I meant it broader than seasonal um and part-time like why couldn't anybody opt in even though we're all opting out like I'm I I might be somebody who wants to run through the cities you know allotment and then still have the family with an i uh option Insurance option available so is there something that that prohibits us I assume that a lot of employees would not opt in but could we not have a

[97:01] program what anybody could opt in and we will do the 0.45 and they can do the 0.45 and it's going to be something less than 1.3 million ticket everyone because it sounds like we don't maybe want to take on the additional expense but some people would be helped by it is there something that that stops us from doing that thank you for clarifying the question certainly have to investigate that a little more fully my initial thoughts on that particular piece is when an employee directly contributes to the program after an organization declines participation they contribute at the point four or five percent of their wage or salary but it doesn't lower their benefit when they actually make a claim so the idea of us contributing additionally or parallel it would not go to supplement their leave usage should the time of need come in the future but we could look at how we use our resources in a different way to support employees in general but not as a direct correlated family participation

[98:00] component but something I need to look into the number then I think maybe I'm saying could we pay half the cost how you would do if we opted into the program it sounds like some employers pay half and employees pay half could we just say hey anybody can enroll in this and we'll even kick in half it's sort of to Nicole's incentive which it sounds like we don't want to disincentivize people from participating in our own programs but this could be an add-on for anyone so I hear the clarification and again I think we need to spend a little more time researching and modeling what that might look like and investigate allowances for this program with that kind of contribution but I hear the message Nicole thank you so it is another question and I do have some comments whenever we get to those this is just around I know in the budget that we just approved right so I understand one of the issues with this is that we just approved our budget for next year so the idea of trying to find 1.3 million dollars in a budget that was already approved is challenging if not impossible but with that I know

[99:01] that we had some money in there for recruitment retention those kinds of things David I've heard you talking about doing some work to kind of assess um our lower wage earners and figure out you know what how do we need to raise those wages what do we need to do to recruit and retain more folks so I'm just wondering if there is anything that's a part of the recruitment of attention work that's being done that could tie into benefits for and leave benefits specifically for some of our seasonal temporary or workers or part-time workers who don't quite qualify for paid leave as well as those who maybe haven't accrued enough leave by the time they need to take some you had mentioned earlier it was a good question when you were trying to recall it and yes very much so a good question but when we haven't imagined yet the recruitment efforts around the recent budget has been around uh support and drawing folks into and certainly retention is an envelope there as well

[100:00] but we haven't stepped in to leave usage and other benefits yet but a good question and we'll investigate that as well great another question yeah just needs some clarification did you say earlier that it was maybe a million dollar more if we were to participate in that program is that what I heard or the modeling is that a 0.9 total contribution for the family program comes out to be about 1.3 million dollars and we could distribute that evenly half to employees and half to the city okay and I heard Rachel's comment can I go and going okay um I think part of my I would not be in supporting and declining today um this seems like a benefit that is an additional entitlement as opposed to and I understand the idea that one million dollars 1.3 you mentioned would be the

[101:00] additional cost but if we were to look into if we were to opt out trying to set up a program I would imagine it would require staff and that would also require hours and that would require dollars so I I just don't see why we couldn't do this so I'm in full support and tonight as of tonight I don't think you've presented to me how do I put it in a way that would convince me that we should not participate in this program that could benefit a lot of our current employees especially knowing that some people can only be seasonal workers they can only work seasonally so they should not not have the opportunity in these benefits thanks Nicole um so I think where where I'm stuck on this is that I really don't like leaving

[102:00] temporary workers seasonal workers workers who haven't accrued enough leave behind especially when some of these workers were causing a lot of um shortage of these workers was causing some concerns for our community around hiring some of the workers so I you know I also hear that we you know have approved the budget right trying to think about where this comes from it also I believe the um the benefits would not start for employees until January 1st 2024 if I'm understanding correctly um so what I would really like to see from this is some more Outreach to staff especially staff who don't qualify for City paid leave but also staff who qualify for paid leave that has to be accrued because I think that it does affect them as well because with the family program they can take their 12 weeks of paid leave and not use their other leave this was one of the things when when I had my first child I had

[103:00] four weeks of paid leave that was it I had a C-section I was back to work after four weeks and when my child started getting sick from going to daycare so early I had used all my leave right so this is something that kind of parents especially are running into so I really would love to think about what are we doing that is matching the benefit of the family program especially for the workers who are struggling the most with low low wages and the cost of living around here child care all of those things the so the family program is available to everybody regardless of how much they work I think that's a huge benefit it's not just for workers who are fifty percent time or more it can be used in a variety of circumstances so including escaping unsafe situations like domestic violence or stalking recovering from sexual assault that to me feels like a really important piece of this people are eligible very quickly it doesn't need to be accrued like I mentioned I think you only need to learn earn twenty five hundred dollars and then you're

[104:00] eligible for 12 weeks of paid leave and again it can't be required to use your other leap first so when you come out of it you still have leave that you can use for whatever it is that's coming up and I think one of the public commenters also noted that Boulder voters overwhelmingly supported this so I feel like there is support in our community we were one of the the groups that were driving this this bill forward and it does feel a little strange to to stay out of it for that reason what I would really love is to come back with us with some costs more input ideas before our budget discussions next year so that we can think about how we can include food or workers who would benefit from this program in that program because I really don't like putting the honest on our workers who may not enroll especially when these are going to be some of our lower income workers and those most at risk of not having paid leave from their their job situation so to me these feel like exactly the employees that we

[105:01] really want to be encouraging and enabling to participate in this program so I would really love to you know four or five months from now have a discussion well before we get to our budget discussions and understand what can we do and how can we include this because I really want to see workers have leave it's important thanks for that Nicole um before I call on my cell phone Nuria do you want to throw in a thought yeah thanks so much mayor and I just wanted to appreciate David and his team for all the work that they've done around this and wanted to just share some thoughts as you're thinking about this too and first one to say that we so appreciate the thoughts about our temp and seasonal employees we also want to make sure that we are an employer of choice that also means for our temp and seasonal workers we're taking that very seriously and while we know that anyone can opt into the program and that would include our temp and seasonal workers we're also trying on staff side to really think about what does that look like going forward how do we continue to add and think about retention

[106:02] protections and move that so it is something that we continue to think about we are coming to the end I hope of this phase of a class on classification class and compensation study where we are looking at wages we are looking at what does that look like for us in the region we are looking at all those sort of Economic and the total rewards package that we offer as a city so we'll be continuing to bring that forward as we move on and I think what's interesting about this particular program as it um as we're continuing to learn more about it which is the other thing that perhaps gives one pause and I know that many other cities are opting out as well but part of that is also just thinking about what are the new guidelines as those are moving forward the nice thing about it and I appreciate your questions on what to bring back is that we can with your direction bring back additional answers additional analysis monitor the program as that moves forward and nothing precludes us from

[107:01] coming back next year and answering these questions and rethinking again um what that looks like because none of our intent is to ever leave any of our employees behind but also wanting to make sure that we're thinking about what does that look like as we move forward and then the last thing I'll say is um and and council member Joseph's point I want to appreciate her comments as well this would still require us to administer a program there's some reporting requirements if we've opted in some remittance that we would have to do so it would still have some additional sort of administrative costs in a pro program that we yet don't know how that's going to work but what I hope is clear from us and I hope that we're that you see that we are aligned with you is that we also want to make sure that we're taking considerations for our um Temp and seasonal workers as well it's important as we continue to to be that employer of choice thanks for that Nuria and I'll go ahead and call on myself here's um I thought that was very helpful and my thoughts

[108:02] align well with Nicole's I think in terms of I think I think for our full-time employees I think we have an absolutely exemplary benefits package that is you know in general most respects better than the the family options and there is a non-trivial amount of money associated with this but for our temporary non and seasonal non-full-time employees that I think there is a gap here right they would they would benefit more from this program than that they would get a better substantial benefit from this program and so I thought Nicole's points about um and Nuri is about taking some time and really looking at where the gaps are and how we can potentially plug those gaps and thinking about coming back next year looking at this again hard I think part of the struggle right now is that this program has not been fully defined in terms of its operating parameters right next year we'll know those much better and we can look at what all our alternatives are for for those part-time folks and see how we could plug that Gap into Rachel's point you know maybe there are creative things that we could do in

[109:00] terms of cost sharing you know for for those employees to participate in in this program uh but it's I think it's still a little unclear how that might all work so I'm I'm okay with moving forward with this tonight but I think we should not for sure leave this for eight years this should be something we should be looking at closely in the upcoming months and come back next year and consider you know is there some maybe we do participate uh in 2024 or maybe instead there's ways that we plug some of these gaps so that that would be my thoughts I got Lauren thank you Aaron yeah I I'm in agreement with a lot of what you just laid out I think that um for me reading comments from city employees was pretty impactful you know Nana even though you did Outreach to the entire organization we really didn't see a lot of feedback that said that people

[110:02] really wanted to see this um implemented what instead we saw was a lot of comments about or several comments about some gaps existing gaps that while they would be addressed by this program there might be more efficient ways for us to do that so I would really like to see us um either kind of look at a program like Rachel was discussing about trying to incentivize people for whom this program makes a lot of sense being able to join or perhaps in addition looking at kind of long term how we might modify our existing programs to either cover the gap or so that if we did implement this program um that there wouldn't be so much overlap and that we might benefit from reducing some of our programs and other areas to balance everything out

[111:03] thanks for that Lauren we got Rachel yeah I agree with most of what you all have said just wanted to clarify or do we have a firm date of when this would come back to us because I think that all what you're what we're hearing is that we're all concerned that we're leaving some people behind and we don't want to do that and we definitely don't want to do it for like a whole extra year if we don't get to it in time to to jump on board if that's what we decide we want to do or make sure that we're offering easy ways for people to opt in so is this something that for those of us who are on the fence and you know are are maybe some reluctantly agreeing to opt out could we get a firm date of when we will get to look at this again looking at you all yeah We Believe Just In This Moment here maybe we're looking at later in the spring so may ish for a return discussion here prior to the beginning of the budget process

[112:00] I'm holding everybody to that me thank you further comments or we could do a motion potentially Nicole can I just and I'm just wondering because I'm I'm not totally comfortable I want to make sure that if we're opting out completely employees still have the choice and so I'm looking at the options that you presented Us in the agenda item and it looks like we have the opt-out completely decline employer participation and then participate for the decline employer participation is that what we're talking about with um we as a city would not participate in it for this next year we would have a discussion earlier next year about it but employees could still choose to participate for is that correct declining participation completely tonight would still afford employees the opportunity to directly engage with the state with their contributions and

[113:00] participation on an individual level dialing that back one level would be us building Avenues through payroll deduction and we are not at the ability point right now with new systems to be able to put that in place for January so that's the full opt-out that still allows employees to participate directly okay great thank you I appreciate that and then again for employees they would not start if they were to choose the individual option say they enrolled in January of 2023 the benefit would not actually kick in until January 1st 2024. is that correct that is correct okay thank you Rachel is that a new hand It's actually an old hand I'm sorry um but I will say like I I wonder I won't be here in in January 2024 but I think maybe some of you could beta test this like you could enroll we are we're part-time employees I think right we should somebody could maybe

[114:00] just see what's happening I don't think I'll be here to get the benefit so I'm probably not going to do it but I challenge someone to try it I volunteer as tribute I I heard challenge accepted from Nicole thanks for that I'll make a motion if nobody else is going to all right so I I will go ahead and and move to adopt resolution 1321 declining all participation in the Colorado Family Medical Leave insurance program second okay and then I'm going to speak to my motion if I may um which is that I think you've heard the comments from us tonight right so I think the there's some I think as I said before we have an exemplary benefits package right but not everybody gets access to every piece of it I think we've given a lot of feedback to look at how we address those gaps so I trust when you when you say you're going to look at that and we're going to come back in May to look at you know how we might address those and think about whether we might consider participating in a future year so I just want to make sure for everybody before we vote that we have commitments from staff to

[115:00] investigate all of those things and come back to us in May agreed great uh Mark did you want to speak to the second at all no I think we've outlined a clear plan of action um you've heard our concerns about the seasonal employees and you're going to have some lead time to develop suggestions and programs for us and I look forward to hearing them any final comments before vote seeing none do we have a show of hands on this one no sir we must do a roll call all right let's have a roll call all right we'll start this roll call when councilmember Joseph no spear yes Wallach yes Winer yes Yates

[116:00] yes mayor Brockett yes councilmember folkerts yes and mayor Pro tem friend also a reluctant yes which I heard in Lauren's voice thank you resolution 1321 is hereby adopted with a vote of seven one to one right okay right well um thanks very much uh David uh you didn't get an easy one on your first time in front of council but I appreciate all of your excellent answers and willingness to look into next steps so yeah appreciate the collaboration all right that concludes our public hearings and we now have one matter from the city manager to look at our next item which is item number six on tonight's agenda Matters from the city manager it is the access management

[117:01] and parking strategies implementation update and recommendations for 2023. thanks so much Council this is an update I know that we had a conversation about this last year an additional conversation today I'm gonna throw it to Chris Jones or interim director of community Vitality but I'll say that the bulk of the presentation will be given by Sam Bromberg who is new this is her first presentation to council so please be nice good evening Council uh thank you so much for having myself and Samantha here this evening we are glad to be back to share with you our uh one year update for those of you of you that were on Council a year ago you'll recall that there was support for three key strategies under amp's access management and parking strategy performance-based pricing for our on-street parking system uh priority-based neighborhood access

[118:02] management taking a look at parking challenges in residential areas and then graduated and safety Mobility fines so these are three three key strategies that Council expressed support for last year with the 2022 budget process there was also support for hiring a human a fixed term position to help us Implement those strategies and that lucky lucky human is Sam and so we're so happy to have her on the community Vitality team and she's here to share the good work that she's been pursuing for the past year and looking forward to having discussed session with you all after this presentation so with that I'll end it over to Sam said my name is Samantha Bromberg I'm here from Community Vitality to talk about performance-based pricing and the residential access management program today before we get into the presentation

[119:00] here's a brief overview of what you'll be hearing about tonight we'll start with a refresher on the work that has led up to this point and then we'll get into staff's recommendation for performance-based pricing the work done to date to build the new residential access management program staff's proposed Trail access management work and what the next steps are for these initiatives we'll then have some time for questions about the work and for discussion on the requested feedback from Council in early 2014 an interdepartmental team of City staff began a new project called access management and parking strategy or amps amps was designed to be a guiding framework that balances today's multimodal access needs Trends and choices while also preparing for inevitable shifts and demographics economics travel choices physical design and Technology this guiding document was adopted by Council in 2017 and still plays a key role in shaping the work that is done today towards improving access to Boulder special places

[120:00] here are the current and ongoing amps initiatives outlined by The Guiding document this graphic visualizes the key ongoing projects related to amps such as one of the first work items to emerge out of the process which was the ongoing Chautauqua area management plan pilot known as camp today we'll be talking about numbers 2 and 3 parking pricing strategy and residential access management to build on the amp's work and the areas identified for change the city of Boulder's Community vitality and transportation and Mobility staff began the revitalizing access and Boulder project in 2019. the project set out to rework the city's parking products including the existing neighborhood parking permit program and paid parking in our commercial districts to better reflect reflect the amp's vision the community played an integral role in developing and refining strategies for parking pricing and permitting through a variety of Engagement methods between polls and questionnaires meeting with Community organizations boards and commissions over 8 700 members of the

[121:01] broad Boulder Community with many varying viewpoints participated in the process ultimately three strategies emerged as the best ways to reflect the amp's vision and goals the three identified strategies were performance-based pricing graduated and safety Mobility fines and priority-based neighborhood access management in January of 2022 the first steps were taken towards implementation of performance-based pricing and graduated in safety Mobility fines were fully implemented today we'll be talking about the next steps for performance-based pricing and the work completed to implement priority-based neighborhood access management a strategy which is the basis for the new residential access management program or ramp before we launch into these topics let's review why managing parking is necessary make sure you're self-driving somewhere and looking for a parking spot close to your destination but finding block after block completely full of cars congested parking has a social cost greater than the inconvenience of losing time trying to find a space the act of driving around looking for

[122:01] parking crates and environmental impact adding extra vehicle miles traveled or VMT to any trip which emits additional greenhouse gases this cruising Behavior can also lead to conflicts with other users of the curb such as bikers and pedestrians by managing parking we can create a safer environment for all people who wish to access Boulder special places one measure of effective parking management is parking occupancy so what is parking occupancy imagine these rows of cars of Cur are curb spaces the top curb is 100 occupied there are no available spaces the middle curb is just over 85 percent occupied there's one space but depending on how other cars have parked it may be tough to access the bottom curb is 60 occupied plenty of available spaces for performance-based pricing the targeted occupancy is somewhere between the Middle curb and the bottom curb or 60 to 85 percent occupancy performance-based pricing entails

[123:00] looking at existing supply and demand of on-street parking and adjusting pricing accordingly to better distribute parking across the available space by pricing the in-demand blocks higher we can encourage turnover and reduce cruising behavior of vehicles looking for parking the intent is to provide a suite of parking options to the community so each Parker can prioritize parking price location and availability based on their unique needs and resources the strategy relies on key performance indicators to reflect the parking behaviors and adjust pricing as a reaction to parking demands implementation of performance-based pricing is expected to reduce overall VMT in Boulder support increases in transit usage increase TDM investment and access for active Transportation modes like walking and biking on high demand streets this slide shows an excerpt from the new city manager role which introduces the regulations for performance-based pricing rates will be adjusted annually and 50 Cent increments based on measured occupancy levels based on the results from this year's study staff have determined that the

[124:01] downtown area is stable enough to implement performance-based pricing but due to changes in land use and ongoing Construction in both the Boulder Junction and University Hill areas and the readily available free parking nearby staff do not recommend implementing performance-based pricing until the area is stabilized and can be addressed with the holistic management approach for performance-based pricing in the downtown area We examined data from the historically busiest months of April through August using transactional data from 2022. this map indicates those blocks where Peak occupancy was above 85 percent in red and those where Peak occupancy was below 60 in blue temporary outdoor dining expansions from April through August 2022 are indicated in yellow and those blocks which fell within the target range of 60 to 85 percent occupancy and do not require any changes to price are indicated in Gray the highest utilized blocks and service slots indicated and bread will increase in price by 50 cents per hour while

[125:00] those lowest utilized blocks indicated in blue will decrease in price by 50 cents per hour there are a couple of exceptions to the data above you will notice that parking utilization data is missing from the two blocks of Pearl Street between 9th and 11th streets due to the temporary closures historical data indicates that those blocks are typically highly utilized and as such City staff recommends that they be considered for an increase staff also recommend that the 1100 block of Spruce Street and the 1600 block of Pearl Street be considered for increases to help provide a more seamless customer experience based on their proximity to other Tier 1 blocks or lots and how the parking kiosks are utilized additionally oops sorry about that additionally there is data missing from just a second here your mouse might be on that screen I saw it

[126:01] I need this to go down maybe just use your oops sorry no we're trying to get to notes yeah there's data missing from uh the municipal loss between Canyon and Arapahoe due to a suspension of temporary suspension of the employee parking program through December of 2022. so exit out of full screen mode oh you're doing great thank you apologies oh now we're gonna have to go back and we're good although the map indicates that

[127:00] utilization for those losses below 60 it is likely that the actual number is higher the 1400 block of Juana on the north side of the RTD Station downtown is missing data from a coin meter head that was removed during the study period and the 1700 block of 15th Street is currently impacted by construction activity staff recommend no price changes to these areas including those Municipal Lots between Canyon and Arapahoe until future data can be collected in a push to take abroad and active approach to managing parking and Mobility Behavior the residential access management program or ramp was introduced to the revitalizing access and Boulder work to build and expand upon the existing neighborhood parking permit program ramp-like performance-based pricing takes a data different approach to manage parking in our residential neighborhoods it is built on an annual assessment of the entire city based on

[128:01] key metrics such as parking occupancy High trip generating land use and resident or staff identified areas of Interest the goals for the program to be more responsive to the individual needs of each neighborhood or area as opposed to the previous one-size-fits-all approach of managed parking the previous neighborhood parking permit program initiated in 20 1994 created the 13 zones that exist today most zones allow users without a permit to park for a limited time typically between two and three hours once per day the program's intent was to manage spillover parking from activity centers like downtown into surrounding neighborhoods zones were created or expanded through a citizen-driven petition process followed by a city review and a public hearing the displayed map shows the Whittier NPP Zone over the past year staff have been busy building the ramp program from the ground up starting with the parking management strategies which can be utilized under ramp and the annual

[129:00] city-wide assessment staff collected parking occupancy data from 38 unique study areas containing over a thousand block faces this being a new program and having never conducted data collection on this scale staff turned to a consultant for help with the data analysis to understand the trends of parking occupancy the data was analyzed by season day of week and time of day resulting in 12 categories in each category the maps display the peak or highest observed occupancy these occupancy Trends will help staff and the public understand when these areas are most utilized the end result is a tremendous amount of data which will help inform decision making and help staff track occupancy Trends over the years to come staff have only just begun to study the results from this first year of data collection but found that overall the existing npps assist in keeping parking utilization below 85 percent in the managed zones certain blocks within existing npps have Peak utilization above 85 percent mostly

[130:00] in the transitional areas such as the residential blocks surrounding downtown these high occupancy areas will continue to be flagged as priority B it's priority a to determine if additional management strategies are needed staff also noted that the blocks just surrounding several of the existing npps were flagged as being highly utilized and indicate that several existing npps may need to have their current boundaries evaluated to determine if any changes are recommended here we can see the key metrics for what thresholds need to be met for staff to consider adding a new managed parking zone or adding blocks to an existing managed parking Zone the metrics include parking occupancy visitation zoning barriers to movement and Resident petition if any existing zones do not meet key thresholds for three years in a row they may be identified by staff for termination residents in existing zones may also petition for removal of a zone or part of a Zone which will trigger a review by staff

[131:03] once the key metrics are met and a corresponding petition has been received staff Begin work on drafting the proposed boundaries management strategies and hours of enforcement for the area based on the observed metrics The Proposal is then sent to All potentially impacted residents in the area to solicit feedback and encourage engagement in the public process a public hearing is held with the transportation Advisory board and the proposal along with tab's recommendation is sent to the city manager for approval and then to council as a call-up item I will now show an example of the study results from an existing NPP Zone and its surrounding blocks here is a sample of the results from the current Whittier NPP Zone from a typical summer weekday between 3 and 9 pm note that overall the parking occupancy is between 50 to 70 percent which is in the optimal range but that some blocks closer to downtown have a much higher occupancy and might benefit from

[132:00] additional parking management strategies this map shows the results from the unmanaged Block just outside of the current Whittier NPP these results are from Summer weekdays between 5 and 11 am we can see that there is parking spillover on several of these blocks this data would suggest that we should take a closer look at this area including expanding the scope of the study to additional nearby blocks the original NPP program assessed the need for new NPP zones and extensions of existing zones based solely through the process of Resident petition under ramp residents can still request that their neighborhood be studied for possible inclusion in a new or existing NPP blocks identify through the petition process are automatically prioritized for study to determine whether any parking mitigation may be necessary between the years of 2019 and 2022 while the staff the city was developing ramp

[133:00] three separate resident petitions were received for NPP expansions the petitioned expansions include a one-block addition to the University Hill MPP a one block addition to the Mapleton NPP and a 16 block addition to the East Aurora NPP the first two petitioned areas did not meet the required metrics for implementation of an NPP following are the results from the petition East Aurora NPP expansion for the petition 700 through 800 blocks of 31st through 38th Street we found Peak occupancy during fall to Spring weekdays during the hours of 11 A.M and 3 P.M at 57 percent the 50 57 percent Peak is aggregated across all the blocks in the petitioned area however as is shown on the map some blocks peaked at over 85 percent While others were below 50 percent visitation to the area accounted for 24 of all parked Vehicles which is just below the recommended 25 percent the

[134:02] data suggests that this area May benefit from managed parking so what comes next for ramp now that we have our initial results in staff can prioritize certain areas that fell within the optimal occupancy thresholds and focus in on the areas that fell outside of those optimal thresholds the next steps will involve expanding the scope of the areas of interest to understand where the boundaries are and what possible solutions should be recommended when all key thresholds are met and a petition receives staff will prepare that the proposed regulations and boundaries for the zone and conduct the required community outreach staff plan to return to the transportation Advisory board with recommendations on the areas that met all key metrics next year in the annual Citywide study ramp aims to identify High trip generating public and Community uses a budding or adjacent to residential areas such as open space

[135:00] access points and trailheads which can create parking impacts to adjacent residential blocks historically most neighborhood parking permit zones have been near traffic generating destinations such as downtown that already offer alternative modes of arrival beyond the personal vehicle as ramp expands its approach to look at access Citywide the neighborhoods adjacent to highly utilized osmp land should be studied since many os impetual areas do not have access options beyond the personal vehicle it would be osmp visitors that would feel the impacts of any parking management implemented in those areas as public use lands require special Care Community Vitality cannot operate without the involvement of osmp as well as transportation and Mobility staff who bring relevant subject matter expertise to the table similar to the camp pilot which brought together multiple departments to implement a project that accounted for parking management and Public Access staff recommends the formation of a trail access management work group who can capitalize on the momentum from the

[136:01] upcoming Camp evaluation to create a strategic plan and framework to guide future implementation of parking management and TDM strategies for impacted neighborhoods near osmp Trail areas in 2022 osmp staff helped identify a list of eight trailheads and access point areas based on visitation and mode of arrival data within walking distance to residential neighborhoods and city limits these staff identified locations were included in a preliminary ramp study to determine whether there are significant parking impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods overall the initial results rate most Trail access areas would lower optimal parking utilization by creating this interdepartmental work group we can further study these results to understand whether what other relevant studies or data should be accounted for and studying these Trail areas as well as factoring Community concerns frequently heard from some of these areas

[137:00] here we can see the cinitas and Dakota Ridge areas there are 10 access points in addition to the Centennial Trailhead which service this area overall occupancy levels are between 50 to 70 percent at Peak observed times though certain blocks are much higher than others especially those closest to the Centennial trailhead the recently published osmp phase one and two parking studies identified Centennial Trailhead as having the second highest relative average percentage occupancy of ultra Hood Lots with only Chautauqua having a higher occupancy based on its capacity the study found that 57 of vehicles that entered the lot were turned away during Peak periods the Chautauqua area remains one of the highest utilized areas and data collected will also help inform the camp evaluation being kicked off later this year by the transportation and mobility department the next steps for trail access

[138:00] management are to kick off in the wake of the upcoming Camp evaluation at which time the work group will determine the appropriate path forward including what if any additional study or Outreach should be conducted the camp evaluation should be wrapping up by the fall of 2023 Lessons Learned From The Pilot will help inform how we can scale down effective Management Solutions to less impacted areas the work group will then develop recommended strategies and framework for addressing Trail spillover into residential areas based on measured impacts the next steps for performance-based pricing and ramp include the development of a Communications plan to inform the public of the upcoming changes the scheduled fee increase for residential and commuter parking permits the introduction of a discounted residential parking permit for income qualified residents the implementation of the recommended price changes for paid parking in the downtown area the kickoff of the trail access management work and the continued data collection and Analysis for

[139:00] performance-based pricing and ramp to close the work on all the close the loop on all the work that has been completed to date on these projects Community Vitality staff presented to eight boards and commissions to answer questions and solicit feedback on the work completed to date towards implementing the strategies supported by Council in 2021 some of the highlights of the feedback we received are synthesized on this slide overall most boards and commissions were supportive of staff's recommendations and work to date staff heard a suggestion for other curbside uses for tier 3 blocks under performance-based pricing instead of lowering pricing some concerns that were heard for ramp included the speed of cost recovery for the program the price difference between residential and commuter permits and a desire for more flexibility as it relates to permit issuance and removal of underperforming zones for trail access management a concern was voiced about Equitable Trail access for all community members moving forward staff will continue to solicit feedback from the Transportation

[140:01] Advisory board on all proposed changes and will work with the open space Board of Trustees to solicit feedback on the development of the trial access management work at this point I would like to open it up for questions that Council has on the work that has been discussed tonight the questions on the slide are areas of Interest staff would like to hear from Council on great well Sam thanks so much for that and great to have you here for the first time good to have you on the team thanks for all the work that you're doing uh so questions for staff before we go to answering their questions for us Tara wasn't I was on Chautauqua access management plan as everybody knows because when you did all those forms with me I mentioned it like a thousand times but it was why I'm here today right because it was such a great experience to be in that working group that I loved

[141:02] it even though a lot of people in the neighborhoods did complain I'm not gonna lie but that's a whole nother story not use fed because you were awesome just to be clear okay and I'm really glad that you're here because I do my hiking in Shanahan Trail well I have a secret place so no but that's a whole nother story just add some humor we're parking you know we need parking humor don't we okay so my my first question is is we had to talk with access management plan in what in 2016 was it so we've had a pilot program what year is this it's 2022. 17 18 19 20 21. six years of a pilot program is this the first time we're thinking about how it worked or do you already have some ideas about how it worked well the the pilot was initially scheduled to run for five years and it was extended last year for an additional

[142:00] year um so that's so a little bit more detail on that thanks Sam um so and thanks for the question the pilot was established for five years allowing for two years for evaluation data has been collected every year of the program we have extensive data nothing that we've collected so far suggesting that it has not been successful yay um and so what we're really wanting to do is build on the good things that we learned from the program we'll be working with transportation and mobility and open space and Mountain parks in 2023 to codify the program the elements of the program that that worked and we'll be working with Council on that and then hopefully build off of those successes in other areas of the city that are experiencing similar challenges yep we had um we had we put meters in and we added neighborhood parking program and we had a lot of community feedback from all the neighborhoods and so that's one of the reasons why we're glad you're here tonight as one of the few remaining community members tonight

[143:02] so we get to hear this soon because I'm really excited to hear about it yes it is a key a work plan that will be on translational Mobility is the lead on the camp evaluation with support from Community Vitality okay mark first welcome Sam and I promise not to be mean oh there's the first time for everything well I was going to say I can't promise the same to Chris but I will not be mean to Sam just kidding Mark just kidding it's a nice presentation thank what's going with humors swayed Vengeance will be mine um with respect to tier one um is your objective to get people to look for parking on other blocks or you're trying to get them out of their

[144:00] cars entirely what's the goal yes so the the goal is to have higher prices on certain blocks if community members know that they can find less less expensive parking elsewhere then they'll seek it out elsewhere not everyone will will know this but we really only need one or two people per block to change their behavior in order for this to work the idea is to have at least one or two Open Spaces on each block so that people looking for parking aren't cruising around they can simply find a space so those who know about it will be able to go to the places they know are less expensive like our garages which have a static rate that's that's lower and then those that don't might end up paying the higher rate but then maybe they'll figure it out while they're there and realize that next time they can change their behavior won't that be offset to some extent by people cruising around first looking for

[145:00] something that that is close into where they want to go at the higher rate and then cruising around finding something cheaper is there an offset there that's an interesting question um I think but not mean it might it might be um there's there's a number of different ways that we can communicate the pricing tiers to folks and so I don't know how closely people will be paying attention to the signage as they're looking for the space initially um but we have other ways of communicating to folks ahead of time what to expect when they come downtown for parking and so that's what we're hoping to capture um or to inform some of those some of those folks and my last question is did you give some consideration to the equity impacts of raising fees you've got restaurant workers who need to get to their place of work for whom five dollars an hour is not

[146:01] going to be very satisfactory um is there an element of that in in these calculations well we are raising fees in areas but we're also lowering fees in other areas which is also controversial in its own right but there are options for Parkers depending on what they want to prioritize so if they're looking for a less expensive option they can park further out or look for space in one of our garages and walk to their destination okay I will add a big component as you've been alluding to is education of the number of options that we do make available specifically for employees who need longer term parking what we really want to do is is encourage them to use the garages at the lower rate or the three dollar product for evening shift workers we also have the dollar 25 per day parking permit for the Alpine Balsam garage that does require to use your Eco

[147:01] pass to get to downtown we have developed a lot of products whether or not people know about them is the question okay all right thank you it was painless wasn't it you weren't even mean uh I've got Junior then Rachel thanks for being here um earlier I was missing for a little bit uh for good reasons I will not tell you more but um I just wanted to know if by any chance you earlier talked about how communities can get into the program the parking program because of um or Community member here he was having concerns with Spiel over from people who are at Shanahan thank you Shanahan Ridge uh Trail who this bill over into his community so how can we help alleviate that or also what are some of the enforcement mechanism if there is any thank you

[148:00] foreign thank you for that question yeah so in the building of the ramp program staff um realize that the the previous city manager role did not allow for him for managing parking near Community use lands on the weekends and so that was the impetus for the trial access management work was we we recognized that if we can't manage parking on weekends we're not going to be able to provide a benefit to neighborhoods like like Lehigh and Shanahan Ridge and so uh but because it's Community use lands we also know that there's special requirements for Equitable access to those areas which are public use areas and so that's why we create that's why we're recommending this Trail access management work group is so that we can come up with a pro an approach that accounts for both parking management and also um

[149:00] access to to those special places and if uh once that work is complete then hopefully there will be um a a petition process based on those thresholds that that we're measuring every year with the annual city-wide study so that those those areas that meet those thresholds can petition in and we can we can come up with those solutions for the existing ramp program for areas that are not a budding or adjacent to community uses we already have this program in place and so once the once the area meets all those thresholds and we do have the petition then we can come up with the proposed regulations and go through the public process Chris thanks Sam and I want to also point to our enforcement program does regularly try to get to the Shanahan Ridge area this is one of the challenges with the the neighborhood parking permit program as it currently exists is the farther away the neighborhoods are

[150:01] um the more challenging it is for a fix team uh to get out to the edges of town so it is part of the consideration as we if we are going to consider expanding residential residential access management program and having more neighborhoods with more regulations we do need to be thinking about how do we make sure we're resourcing the enforcement piece as well thank you so much and for your first time you're excellent yeah we chill then Lauren thanks thanks for the great presentation too um so yeah I'm sticking with the trail access management and my point of view I guess is is um maybe different than than um some of my colleagues I live somewhere where I have to basically cross highways to get to open space like I can't walk out my door and go um somewhere lovely so I'm more concerned or equally concerned maybe about ensuring that people who do have

[151:01] to drive to Trails or bike to Trails um and some people really have to drive because they're far if you're planning to hike um have good access I've been at a at Shanahan Ranch Lehigh area and and been chased off from parking in places that I think are legal by people who didn't didn't like me parking there so one question I have is do we um are we looking at also signage that says hey you can park here and I was with one of you a colleague when that happened to me once so somebody could vouch for me if they wanted to but um it's not just making sure that residents have parking but also people who who have equal right to that land can access it so that's one question is um sort of for signage that we're looking at you can't be here but you can be here do we ever look at that yeah that's an interesting question and I will say part of the trail access management

[152:00] work is to ensure that there is a corresponding travel Transportation demand management plan in place for those areas so that there's other access options but with the implementation of any parking management for example in an NPP enabled parking permit Zone we usually do put up signage that has those regulations for where you can park and for how long and under what conditions and then we also have signs that point to where you can't park so for example if you're too close to a curb cut or a driveway not always the driveways but certainly the curb Cuts there'll be a No Parking sign with an arrow that indicates where you can't park too close to a stop sign or the edge of a curb okay um well we'll get to comments later but maybe I'd be super unexcited about a program that makes it harder for people who don't live adjacent to open space to use

[153:01] open space and then my second question is in the memo talks about Trail access management and osmp participating in the next stage of that or phase of looking at that and I I have just one concern which is I was advocating to get um uh with the sort of the the city to look at um being part of the County's um shuttle that goes from Chautauqua to El El Dorado and wanting a stop at um I think it was South Mesa Trailhead and osmp that the feedback I got was that there were concerns that it might increase you know too much increase on on open space use by people using that shuttle and so I just have concerns if that's the the philosophy of of one of the main participants there and I'm not saying it shouldn't be a voice but I don't know if there's a a countervailing sort of

[154:01] um you know if we cut out the people who would shuttle there and we'd cut down parking spaces there who can use open space it's it's really um as far as I can tell people who have money to live right near open space and so I'm very skeptical of us um just having it maybe inviting into that conversation the lens of of um reducing numbers possibly on open space because that is what happened in the one area I'm aware of where parking and and shuttles and open space intersected so I wanted to understand um how why open space and who else is is maybe going to be invited into that conversation to make sure that that there's a real strong focus on on equity and um our our transportation goals and just just before you respond to that I'll just note thanks for raising that Rachel that osmp did eventually agree to that and the South Mesa Trail it was added as a stop but there was a delay

[155:01] while concerns about increased visitation were were vetted so anyway thanks for that that's right yeah and so uh that's why transportation and Mobility would be part of the trail access management work group is to to lead up the the TDM management side of things so that we have a plan for Access TDM strategies can involve anything as elaborate as a shuttle like the Chautauqua shuttle but they could be much smaller strategies as well like providing additional access for for bike storage and things like that so they come at all it comes in all sizes and shapes and formats but that's why we we can't operate in a vacuum and do need the assistance of transportation and Mobility to help us with these strategies and um framework and then in terms of the the equity piece I mean I know we all look at it but we did delay to you make it harder for people to you

[156:00] know had to go farther to get to that one Trail yeah and I would add that uh on top of putting this work group together again we are leading out with the camp evaluation so it really is a great example um that we already have in our community of a high demand Trail area where these questions uh were posed and there was a lot of work and resources allocated to make sure that we were able to to provide equal access to the radius extent possible if there's more that we need to be doing in Chautauqua that's a conversation that we want to have with Transportation mobility and osmp in the camp evaluation process that will lead into lessons that can be applied in future areas such as Shanahan Ridge or Centennial or sunitis trailheads so my questions thanks Rachel Lauren thank you Aaron and thank you guys for that presentation um so first I kind of wanted to touch on why you're making recommendations for

[157:02] reducing costs in some areas um is that my initial understanding was that it we're mainly trying to look at shifting Behavior so that um that the areas that are most densely parked most often might some pressure might be alleviated and so that people aren't doing that circling the block thing as much is that true is that why we're looking at also reducing prices in some areas thanks Lauren for the question so yes um in the introduction of performance-based pricing as part of the amps Implement implementation strategy last year we communicated that our our policy approach would be a one dollar per hour floor and a five dollar per hour ceiling through the conversations

[158:00] that we've been having this year we understand that there might be some desire to raise the floor right now our our rates are a dollar fifty per hour and so with these changes we would be based on the the previous conversations that we've had and the policy that we discussed last year we are suggesting that we would reach that floor with some specific block faces in town if there is a desire to revisit that floor we can certainly explore that if that's the will of counsel but again the dynamic is trying to make sure that we're educating folks on where they can get affordable parking if we are going to be raising parking prices on block faces that are highest demand and if we don't have those lower rate areas we it's it's it's less compelling for folks to really understand why we're doing this work okay in that vein I guess I was wondering because you did the survey

[159:01] looking at utilization rates and then we're looking at pricing it seems like purely based on utilization rates in turn like I guess I'm wondering if the places where we're looking at reducing fees would be not just where there's lower utilization rates but where we think that that change would have the highest impact on Behavior has any thought gone into making changes Beyond kind of what what the data shows taking that kind of thinking into account or or do you think that the best way forward is to base those changes as close as we can to what we believe the utilization rates are will be

[160:01] well so first I just want to say you know what we've charged uh Samantha with is implementing the performance-based pricing strategy which was communicated to be a reflection of utilization data and so if there is a desire to take a different approach I just want and I'm having a little bit of a hard time getting to the the question um and maybe Sam if there's anything you want to add but I that's what we charge Sam with and if there's a different direction that we want to explore then that would be a different conversation a and just to add to that I think that there's still a way to to in a roundabout way get to what you're saying by implementing performance-based pricing because we we're going to be keeping track of this utilization data year over year and so we'll see those changes next year once we implement the new pricing and then we'll change the pricing again the following year as a reaction to how the supply and demand changes and so I think that you know by

[161:01] using utilization data we'll still get at this kind of Behavioral shift that that you're asking about and hopefully that's helpful um context but because because it's not just a one-time change this is a a program that will monitor this utilization data annually and make changes annually based on based on how things evolve and change we can we can um approach that okay thank you um another question that I have is around um garage utilization rates just because that's sort of been mentioned as where we're trying to one of the places we're trying to get people to move to and I'm wondering if they're if we have data on when those are full and if they're full at the same time as the street parking and like are we are there actually places that people can park

[162:01] that are more affordable yes thanks for the question Lauren we do collect and keep extensive utilization data for all of our on-street parking where it's paid as well as garage parking right now post pandemic given the um the date the daytime employees who have not been returning full-time our utilization rates average about 50 56 percent overall for all garages the spruce garage continues to be prior to the pandemic and continues to be now our highest utilized garage it does regularly fill up primarily on weekends and then we are still experiencing Peak utilization in both on street and garages and full garages around Memorial Day weekend with the Boulder Boulder Boulder Creek Festival big events parents weekend is always really big so we're at a point where fortunately our

[163:00] garages aren't filling up every day because if that's the conversation we were having then we'd uh we'd have a lot more to be talking about when it comes to providing more parking or trying to solve more traffic congestion challenges but we do have days in the year where our garages are fully utilized and it is the same day is that our on Street system is also fully utilized thank you um and then moving into the sort of Trailhead management parking um I guess I'm a little bit unclear as to the need that we're addressing I mean I understand I live in Shanahan Ridge I understand that there are a number of people who come and park at the trailheads particularly on weekends but I don't know that that the Dynamics are quite the same as in other areas where we have managed

[164:00] parking for instance you know people generally aren't running errands it's not the kind of like drop-off parking situation that we see downtown and also in terms of like the the residential parking you know the predominantly in neighbor in or at least in Shanahan Ridge you know these are neighborhoods where every you know the housing is mostly in compliance with our zoning that requires um houses to provide an off-street parking stall and so um it's it seems like a permit system for residences where parking is predominantly provided on properties I I'm just a little bit Unsure how that [Music] um

[165:00] yeah again what the need is exactly that we're solving for and dude sorry Lauren you've got a question coming in yeah could you maybe go into a little bit more detail as to why we're looking at this and what what we're hoping to solve for with the trailhead thank you for the question Laura and I think that's really what we're posing to council tonight as we do understand and appreciate that there are parking challenges there are hot spots around the city associated with um access to public lands and we want to we're exploring the possibility of forming this ongoing work group that would like we've done with Camp around the Chautauqua area take a look at possible Management Solutions and that balance all of the different needs and challenges for residents and for trail visitors um if that's not something that Council would like us to be exploring then this is your opportunity to tell us and we have plenty of other parking challenges

[166:01] and other work plan items that we can be exploring outside of that but we do know that there are members of the community that have continued to express a desired for not just an enforcement approach because that's really been our our approach right now is we have parking rules there are folks who are breaking those rules and that's happening more frequently in these high demand areas and we can continue to just throw enforcement at it or we can explore other options that will help manage that differently and so if if Council would like us to continue exploring those options the trail access management work group is is the strategy that we're suggesting thank you kind of following up on that what are the you know we're always told that there are impacts for choosing these things and non-staff timelines and thing um you know one area that this Council has seems particularly excited about is

[167:02] the implementation of the can program and you mentioned that some of this would be through Transportation would involve Transportation so would there be impacts on how quickly we could Implement things like the can program if we decided for or against the Trailhead parking program yeah that's a really good question and I can't speak for Natalie in transportation Mobility I'm not sure if Natalie's on the call but it's a really good question I don't know that what we've envisioned right now and Sam correct me if I'm wrong is a huge draw on Transportation Mobility staff right now we meet with them regularly on a variety of things and so Trailhead access management will just be one of those because barking is not a topic that touches just one department and it never has been and it never will be no matter where parking might live in the organization and so

[168:01] um I just you know it's there it's a topic that we all have different passions about and we're going to continue to work with Transportation Mobility on this whether or not it's part of trailer access management or other work plan items but over time perhaps it could if there is a suggestion that we want to start a shuttle system associated with Trails across the city that is a work plan item that could be contemplated in a future budget cycle certainly not in 2023 so more to come anything else to learn thank you great and I got Terry here but maybe we could we're I think we're trying to express some feedback here so maybe we can wrap up our questions and then move to the the feedback Tara and then let other people to get a question yeah I just have one follow-up question about the work group for the trail access management is this a work group that would just focus on parking because one of the things that I often hear is you know folks would love to have more

[169:00] bike parking for example easier access to the trails that way to which may reduce some of the parking demands so I was just wondering about the scope of it yeah the scope of the work group would be looking at both parking management but also TDM strategies so it would be looking at alternative modes of a variable for trail visitors okay maybe we can move on to the questions for us then if that's good enough for our questions so question number one does council support the implementation of the recommended performance-based pricing changes once to get us started Tara I really liked it and the reason why is the microphone God it's such a small group I didn't even think about it I really like that presentation and I really like the recommended performance-based price changes because you had this entire section about Equity the equity tool in the back that I really I found really interesting

[170:00] one of the things we're trying to do and some of us are on committees to make the downtown more welcoming for instance like Bob and to make the downtown more welcoming to all skyrocketing parking is not going to do that in my opinion so to have alternatives would be really important and besides just a lot I really like the idea of lowering the parking in outside areas I know anything that makes somebody say I don't want to go downtown is something the business Community also would not want so we parking strategy is a funny thing like how do you get more people to come downtown how do you also work on our different modes so that and work on our climate goals and at the same time not lose business it's a it's a it's a very tight path and so that's why I liked it I feel like you really did talk about a lot of different things and

[171:00] even though I really don't like the five dollars personally because something about small town Boulder where you can just go downtown and it's not a fortune like for instance in Philly it was like 16 an hour it was crazy it's more of a small town feel here and I like to keep it that way but I understand the reason for doing it and so I think as long as we have other options less expensive parking in the outer areas and in the garages I feel like that will take care of the other side so you're looking for the right word it could be ameliorate but maybe it doesn't so that's what I have to say about that great Bob well I'll just I'll disagree with Tara I I understand that people may have some reluctance to lowering price in some places I get the fact that we have this wonderful goal of a car free world that may happen someday but it's probably a little ways off there's some people who just need to drive because of mobility issues because they're coming from a

[172:00] long ways away we do want to welcome people to our town from other places ooh does that mean and um and so I I think for us to have an effective differential we need to have a differential we can we can we can raise some prices and there's a bit of a differential there but I like to what you guys have done with lowering some prices as well to kind of move people into those places where there's less usage and and to change some behavior um and and so and then again as Tara said we have this overriding Equity issue we have employees who don't make a lot of money who um need to come downtown to work and we want to give them inexpensive options inexpensive places to work and if we only raise prices and didn't lower some prices we're going to price some of those people out of jobs quite frankly um the number one complaint we hear about downtown um is people's perception and I think it is a perception but you know feelings are facts that um that it's too expensive to park or there's no place to park and and I and I think all we did

[173:00] was raise prices we would just feed that perception and there'd be a greater belief the downtown is not a place to go either for people in our community or people outside of our community so I think you guys have hit the nail right on the head as far as demand pricing make expensive place with places where people um tend to park right now anyway and if they want to pay that higher rate that's swell and but also keep it low or lower even lower it for our employees and for those people who are willing to walk an extra few blocks in exchange for for lower pricing so thanks what you did I fully support what you what you proposed Rachel I think for the people who want to walk a few blocks there's already like free places to park near downtown one of my kids worked at a downtown restaurant and I think parked near Casey middle school and you know she didn't want to pay so um I don't I guess I just don't think we have to to lower costs I think that um

[174:00] that that is it just feels like a bit of a move in the wrong direction for um for our master plan and where we're trying to go and and really um nudge people out of cars and appreciate interior at his small town but one of the nice things is it's also really easy to bike places and use the public transportation to get around here um so I I also think it's not that much of a differential that that um for a lot of people they're probably not going to even appreciate um you know the the dollar difference to research where you can park versus not um and I think that for people who really need it they'll probably continue to look for free parking which is um what a lot of us do if we have to drive down there thanks great uh junior that I'll call myself yeah thank you I remember when you came last year with this discussion and I remember I was one of the few who are

[175:01] skeptical about the rate increase because of exactly what Bob said about the um the impact on some of our workers lower income workers I'm A working woman and I can tell you I do really think about where I'm going to park and in Boulder if you're not wealthy it's very hard for you to live near downtown it's very hard to live near these accessible bikes and Trail areas right so some people have to drive because it becomes a necessity of everyday life But ultimately I support your recommendation but I did hear something that one of the speakers said earlier um subsidizing parking is like subsidizing driving so I think again part of it is having that Equity piece and looking further into this to ensure that all Community benefit But ultimately I I support the recommendation so

[176:00] for performance space pricing change yeah so I'll go ahead and call myself I think overall I do support where you're going with this I appreciate all the data and the analysis of the different parking utilization different areas I think this data is really a great thing to build upon and um and and then adjusting uh increasing the price where the the utilization is is high enough that there's no available parking I would not personally I would not reduce uh parking price at this time I think our garages offer a great lower cost opportunity for parking the city particularly to the lower income workers with the evening flat three dollar rate so I think we have a great option there so so I would I would um I would stick with the or I would shift our floor which it currently is to a dollar fifty and ex raise where you propose to raise it and then continue to evaluate year after year but I think overall you've got a you've got a great plan and then I'll maybe I'll move this towards a straw poll here in a minute Lauren

[177:02] sorry I'm having trouble clipping clicking buttons yes um you stole what I was gonna say about the parking garages and um for the same reasons that you mentioned I feel similarly great so um so let me just ask does anybody have any disagreement other than some for some of us disagreeing with lowering the price any other disagreements okay not seeing any so then maybe I could call for a straw poll because I think we're split on this so maybe if you could raise your hand if you support lowering the cost of some of the on-street parking to a straw poll ution yeah go ahead pop in so as I was reading this right it seemed like everything was kind of interconnected and tied together this management strategy that you have so my question is if we were to you know change one of the areas how does that affect the rest of it or does it at all does that make sense because it seemed like it was just all

[178:00] connected right the strategy that you have different kind of bands and places and so I'm just wondering if one changes does that impact foreign just to clarify when you say one change are you referring to like changing one the pricing of one block in particular or the price or like the bottom to your price the bottom tier price is what I was talking about yeah that's basically what my colleagues some of my colleagues are suggesting I was just wondering how that impacts overall strategy if at all right and so uh right now our our sort of base price is a dollar fifty so for next year if we're talking about not lowering the price for some of those blocks from a dollar fifty to a dollar they would remain at a dollar fifty and then we would just have two basically two tiers we have a two dollar price block and a dollar fifty Place block and then our garages right and so um in future years that will continue to

[179:00] change because every year we can either raise or lower the pricing so the blocks that are two dollars next year could be 250 the year after that and then three dollars a year after that um but it does mean that we would lose um some of that like some of those options for the variety of different tiers for next year if we if we decide to raise the floor up to a dollar fifty um does that then looks like Christmas yeah I was just going to say it does it does impact the data collection for next year um with that Delta between the lowest tier and the highest tier so it just means we have two prices as opposed to three tiers of pricing sorry if I continue with this drop hole there's so we can close this out so so who who would like to well can I ask one quick question yeah yes go ahead Lauren um so what is the hourly rate in the garages because wouldn't that still be a different tier it's a dollar 25 per hour in garages up to six hours and then it's

[180:02] a fifteen dollar fifteen dollar flat rate plus the evening rate right and then there's an evening uh program so if you enter between the out if you enter after 3 pm and leave before 3 A.M it's a it's a flat three dollar rate okay so uh stroppol who would like to see the price for some parsing parking decreased per the staff recommendation we got three we got four we got four and a half Nicole you're gonna have to go like this here's the tiebreaker yeah I I've come up with a complete split then on this I've got four and a half to four and a half for a straw full um

[181:01] are we allowed to are we allowed to look at Matt's hotline post I so I was I was essentially including that because I think he was pretty clear on on that one so that was so I have a question didn't didn't you tell us in your wasn't that the plan in your um performance-based price changes to lower some and increase some so we can just say we that's a good plan to start with I'm just going to say that one it seems like the half of you are interested in in implementing as proposed the other half are not interested in the price decrease right um which so then I'd say there are probably possibly two options if we then wanted to still have a Delta between the lowest utilized block faces and the highest utilized block faces and I'm not suggesting that a straw poll would be nice I guess on do we want to entertain two dollars and fifty cents

[182:00] per hour um next year on our highest utilized block faces two dollars on our me our you know a two dollar middle range and then a dollar fifty on our lowest utilized spaces um in the downtown I can test that out but Nicole go ahead I was just going to ask a question so one of the reasons that I'm really torn here is that if I read um the engagement description the racial Equity tool correctly 8 500 people weighed in on this right and so I think what I'm struggling with is um kind of going against that going against some you know thinking from all the boards and commissions from all the people who weighed in on this um at nine o'clock at night so I'm I'm that's that that's part of the reason that I'm really struggling with that okay well so I mean who likes Chris's revised proposal maybe maybe raise your hand if go ahead yeah

[183:01] so instead of a decrease we're going toward an increase now that's basically the proposal the new proposal okay yeah so who likes who liked his plan I had yes so Chris I'm not getting a huge amount of uptick on on your I personally am not troubled by having two tiers rather than three tiers that does not bother me personally um that's what it takes to kind of move us forward I think I'm in a similar spot where having two tears feels okay to me we have the parking garages as Lauren pointed out I think that that still have the lowest here my question is I mean from all the engagement that you did is that okay I mean what what is your what is your thought there well I I guess I am a little unclear as to whether we're proposing two tiers for just next year or if we're proposing

[184:00] that moving forward we don't lower in areas we only raise in the areas that qualify and so that's where I'm a little confused I think as I've understood it is to say it's not about some Grand future plan it's about don't lower pricing next year set the floor at dollar fifty okay so did you but to Nicole's point question Yeah in our engagement with the community during the AMS implementation conversation there wasn't that we didn't get into the exact pricing um it's just making sure that folks always had a an affordable option I think you the garage is still intended to be the affordable option exactly for folks who have long-term parking needs because we still have parking time restrictions on all on-street parking in the downtown so the intent is not to not have people parking for more than two hours anyway um on street so I don't think that you know by raising the ceiling to a dollar

[185:01] fifty it just means that we'll we'll not lower the rates on the lower utilized block faces we'll collect data in 2023 and we'll have recommendations for 2024 that will include raising uh rates on the highest utilized block faces and then in 2024 we'd have those three tiers so it's just it's a slower step to getting to that point of having the three price levels so Nicole given that all right which would be clear please I think it would be with the um not lowering prices next year because we still have the garage as a lower cost option we now have a bare majority for for that approach two tiers not lowering prices all right so move forward with that if that's right the next one does council have any questions or feedback we've already given questions but do we have any feedback on the ramp city-wide

[186:00] assessment process I thought you're doing a great job but just one really quick one which is that I read the note about offering income qualified residents um a discount and I really appreciate that and I was also thinking about those residents as being some who may benefit from the e-bike rebate program when we get there so we got thumbs up to help they're doing any other comments on that Rachel the the document I'm looking at has a different number two question so is there still a number three question that'll there's there is a number three question coming up which I'll go ahead and move to sounds like we're ready does council have any input about the proposed next steps for the ramp and the associated Trail access management work group I got some input let's say you got Tara and then Rachel Tara did you have someone yeah I'm going to wait I'll take a turn afterwards you go ahead okay

[187:03] I think it's a great idea to do something similar to Camp it was a great experience for everybody on Camp and we got to hear from all different sides and a huge amount of community engagement I really like what Rachel said about um equity in terms of Trail access and we also have Sven here who gave us the other side so I feel like that is the best of of Both Worlds to really on all the higher impact neighborhoods to um do that type of thing I really think that would be a great idea Rachel yeah so thanks for that Tara I I guess I just want to make sure that that what we're doing as part of that you know to the extent that that any look would be like the impact on visitation I think that if we're worried about any Trails being overused the the answer should not be

[188:00] through um parking or Transportation because that that to me just gives like Priority Access to people who can walk to those Trails so if if open space is worried about in some spots which it sounds like they are Trails being overused then I would not like that to be part of these conversations um you know if if there are other ways that we need to look at them let's look at those but I would not tether that at all to this conversation because this is just about I think making sure that people can park in their neighborhoods and park near where they want to access Trails so that's um the first thing and then second I guess I was intrigued by by Lauren's question like you know why are we looking at some of these spots um and I guess uh I don't I would just want to be sure that um in looking at this we're not making it easier to keep people out because I'm I'm worried that by looking by focusing

[189:01] on like um you know parking permits then it makes it harder if those you know we all we always talk about like you don't you don't own the street in front of your house so um I would not want for for people who have um ample you know driveway parking to to turn that into a much harder Trail to access in a lot of those neighborhoods so I think that's maybe where Lauren was going sorry if I'm paraphrasing or misfaising your thought there but um I guess I'm still a little bit unclear on where we're trying to go with that and why we're trying to go there and and who it's going to benefit and it's not to be insensitive to people who struggle you know with with a teen parking in their front you know out front after school or whatever that's that is I'm not insensitive and that's a really popular hiking area that I think we should have as Nicole said better bike parking and and you know more easy um as Tara was getting at shuttles to

[190:02] the areas but just would not want to do anything that makes it harder for people who don't have um what must be really nice of of Trail access out your backyard um to not make it harder for those people who are bolder residents to enjoy what we all should be able to enjoy thanks search I'll call myself and then go to Lauren I agree with generally Rachel's comments here I think this is an issue that deserves looking at right I mean we've heard from we have a very long suffering Community member here who's dealt with issues in his neighborhood and so I think it's it's important to take those seriously but I also think we need to look carefully at the equity issues in terms of access to our public lands and how access to publicly owned parking and publicly available parking you know make sure that there's still access to publicly owned land through publicly owned right-of-way so while still taking these things into account I think part of why Camp was so successful up at Chautauqua is the variety of options that we offered right so that we have the transit piece in there so it was like look okay maybe it's expensive now but you can hop on the bus so there

[191:00] are options so in some of our more remote Trailhead areas that may not be feasible you know but but if it is fantastic like cinitas for example I would so love to see our shuttle extend up to cinitas I think that would be phenomenal and then you could Institute you know some more parking controls Etc et cetera so I think we need a holistic set of tools which I know you're thinking about as well but I would I would definitely look more towards applying more controls to where we can offer more options primarily and then just the other thing is that this is I think valuable work to to be working on but we also continually hear about a lack of capacity to address priority projects right so we know we want to look at the downtown and potential parking and access and Street changes there transportation is super busy with can so I wouldn't want to see this push out our other initiatives so to the extent that you can integrate it fantastic but I wouldn't I wouldn't delay other important work as we get this started because

[192:00] but but it's it's good work to be doing so that's my thoughts any others we got uh Lauren and then Bob thank you Aaron um yeah I think for me one of the most important things is that we are you know we have projects like the can project and things like that that really represent um trying to deal with some serious life safety issues for our community and so I want to make sure that you know anything that that that that is prioritized um and being sensitive to staff resources I think that I just would like to see kind of feasibility or I mean I like Aaron mentioned extending the shuttle things like that that can be easily done and provide a lot of extra options for people I think are great

[193:01] I do worry about spending a lot of time looking at parking programs that are um the the cost to implement would be extremely it seems like it would be higher than it is in other areas of the city which we know that we already aren't necessarily capturing our costs on and in addition to that so you're looking at Eric Trail heads and parking areas that are smaller and farther away when I think about my own neighborhood while there are able you know at least one block potentially a little bit more where this might make sense um it seems like that you're quickly going to run into parts of the neighborhood where people are probably less interested in implementing something like this I don't know that for instance you know I'm

[194:03] like three blocks from the trailhead and I imagine that in my neighborhood people would be more you know residents would be more concerned about the increase in costs than they are in having to deal with the occasional person parking in our neighborhood so the the fall off is really quick around those trailheads in terms of what blocks are affected and so must to implement these programs is then worn by a smaller number of people and it just I to me it feels like it gets tricky economically really fast um and I I'm in support of us looking at Solutions I just want to make sure that those Solutions again like Aaron said are about providing I'm most excited about ones that are providing alternative options for people to access trailheads

[195:03] thanks Lauren Bob well I'm hearing a lot of agreement with respect to asking you guys to magically strike that balance between a providing good and Fair parking for the people who are fortunate enough to live in those neighborhoods but on the other hand also not cutting off access or reduce the number of people who access or open space and that's a really challenging job that you guys have I don't know how you're going to solve that I I have to say that I am hearing a little inconsistency tonight among my colleagues because on the one hand we just agreed that it was okay to make it harder and more expensive to park downtown but we don't want to make it harder to park near trailheads and so I'm not sure what you do with that but it does seem like we're making some value judgments here and and I worry a little bit about Equity there because we do have employees we have a lot of employees who who must come downtown to work and

[196:01] um you know I love our open space but it is you know it is it's a luxury it's a nice thing to do it's not something you got it unless you're working in open space um and I think they park for free anyway um it's something we do recreationally and so it's it's a little troubling to me that we're saying we're going to prioritize parking for Recreation over parking for people who want to go or need to go to work so um I don't know what you I'm just making an observation I'm not making a comment there but it is a little troubling to me that we're we're kind of picking winners and choosers here so we're choosing pictures winners and losers it's getting a little bit late um so good luck with this um and striking the balance I look forward to what you guys come back I do have a question I don't think I heard from you all um your timing on trail access management presentations and I know we have lots of areas to look at I know you're going to prioritize the the highest pressured spots first can you

[197:00] give us any indication of um those yeah I couldn't quite read those before so you're going to come back I get to Camp with the trail access the first batch will be in the follow-up next year is that right yeah and I think uh what we're proposing is that we come up with the strategy and framework but we're not necessarily proposing any changes we're just coming up with the strategy and framework based on metrics so we can say you know if it hits if a neighborhood Hood hits these thresholds then we can apply these strategies and tools these are the different Tools in our toolbox based on what the measured impacts to that neighborhood are and so that's the first step is coming up with those thresholds and those tools based on what we're seeing before we actually are proposing implementing any changes just want to give people some hope thank you very much anything else can we wrap up here all right seeing nothing else um I really appreciate all your hard

[198:00] work is this been clear enough for next steps do you feel like you've gotten what you needed I have a question I'm sorry are you saying that you did a lot of community engagement and people wanted to lower the parking and raise the parking they people like that idea we engaged around the concept of the strategy of performance-based pricing and and and ask the community about whether or not they felt that it's appropriate to price parking based on demand and utilization of the curb space and a majority of folks that we heard from communicated an understanding and appreciation that that is a good idea to pursue do you think we're not did we decide not to do that then in this no I think we could have taken a a confident big step forward today and we took a confident small step forward today okay I don't know about small but maybe smaller but okay and I will less big okay less big how about that

[199:02] um I will say with Camp ramp and and Tamp you should think about a children's book here I think there's there's potential but anyway thanks so much for all your work thank you so much Council this is very helpful all right so we're on to a matter from the city attorney yes sir that is item number six I'm sorry number seven on tonight's agenda 7A is a consideration of a motion to request a nine of five to re increase the settlement threshold amount Council if you'll give me just a moment to get um set up here I have just a really brief PowerPoint for you great and just say I'm welcome again thanks I wasn't prepared Teresa usually I'll try to talk for a moment just to give

[200:01] people some time to get up and get their presentation and oh there you go so all of this was in your materials but just wanted to do a really quick brief overview um as you know I'm looking to see whether there's a not of five to increase the settlement Authority settlement Authority is vested with the city attorney with the approval of the city manager up to a certain dollar amount and currently that dollar amount is ten thousand dollars that amount was established uh back in 1985 and um has not has not had any increase uh since that time um to just provide some context since 2017 claims were settled for more than ten

[201:00] thousand dollars and of course all of those came to council as is required by code um of those 17 claims 11 of those cases were settled for less than fifty thousand dollars which is the the potential increase that I'm hoping we can discuss tonight is Authority up to 50 000. um to give you an idea of what kind of claims typically we would see between that ten thousand dollar Mark and that fifty thousand dollar Mark we're looking at property damage auto accidents um sewer backups bike accidents oil and gas and so as I said uh we're looking to see if if there is desire to change that settlement authority to fifty thousand dollars would be my proposal just uh looking at um what neighboring communities do what uh settlements the type of claim that we're settling at that dollar amount and

[202:01] so that's that's the the context for this happy to answer any questions thanks Teresa any questions and if I don't see any questions maybe we'll just go yes question Jenny I do 's word this is coming from of course times I've changed and I'm sorry I don't remember the exact date as you mentioned the ten thousand dollars but I'm wondering what if it's something that is a more like a political question or political issues that concern Council as well how would you go about I because I understand settling some some legal matters it's okay the news will never find out it's okay but what if it's something that is contentious and Council would like to probably would have liked to weigh in yeah thanks for that question uh so typically these um this kind of

[203:02] authority is is divided by dollar amount rather than by topic um I I would note that all settlements entered into by the city are matter of public record and so certainly the public can always find out any settlement that we've entered into that is part of the open records law um I I think this Council knows um that it is this city attorney's practice to consult Counsel on matters that um on litigation matters or claims that seem to have a political aspect and or um are raising significant Community interest uh you know likewise um certainly I make an effort to to alert Council when we've when we've settled a claim okay anything else if not can we just check

[204:01] and see if people are ready to nod their heads maybe we'll go with a hand raise here for everyone comfortable with this okay I'm seeing eight and not of eight thank you Council we'll bring that Amendment back great do you need another comment yeah I just wanted to add I know I did ask the question but you've been excellent in your Outreach to us you've been very gracious in ensuring that we have all the information that we need on legal matters so thank you for that thanks I I appreciate that and certainly I understand that you know this ordinance is uh not about any particular City attorney or city manager right but instead about the authority vested in those roles yes Nicole just one more comment um which is that I really appreciate you bringing this to us and noting that this is an issue for you and coming to us about that so thank you and I just realized I should have done a time check at the end of our last thing but we have two things left on the agenda that are supposed to go for

[205:00] roughly 20 minutes are we all right with charging forward and finishing up here all right very good so uh Alicia we got a Matters from the mayor member of council members of Council next hi sir item eight on tonight's agenda 8A is the mayor Pro tem speeches of Interest okay so this is uh opportunity I think the way this is structured is that tonight anyone who wants to can raise their hand and give a speech of interest for mayor Pro tem and then at a later meeting we would come back and and vote on who that might person might be but for now we can just throw the floor open and anybody I guess other than myself I don't think I'm allowed to put myself forward anyone else could raise their hand and give a speech of Interest so we have uh we got mark although most of my colleagues will question the possibility of this I'm actually going to be brief traditionally the post of Mayor Pro tem

[206:00] is awarded to the most senior member of council who's not previously served in that capacity in this case that would be me and I hope that this Council will adhere to that tradition I would note that mayor Pro tem is not a political position primarily confers the responsibility to attend CAC meetings and to serve in the mayor's place when he or she is otherwise unavailable I believe that I have the skills and more particularly The Experience after three years serving on this Council to perform the functions of that office I have no agenda beyond that I do acknowledge that electing me as mayor Pro tem would result in two men in the positions of Mayor and mayor Pro tem but that is a temporary situation two of the five women who sit on this Council have already served in this position and I fully expect that in future years they will be joined by others some of whom may ultimately serve as mayor I'd be honored to serve in the capacity of Mayor Pro Tem

[207:00] and if elected we'll perform that role to the best of my ability thank you thanks Mark anyone else Nicole thank you and Elisha do we need to say that we're nominating ourselves or is it just kind of obvious it's kind of obvious okay thinking it's also for speeches of Interest so you can just okay start with that all right thank you for checking though well thank you all for giving me this time to share with you why I'm putting myself forward for mayor Pro tem as you've seen in this past year I'm a thoughtful evidence-based decision maker who may get tired sometimes but is generally honest about the struggles we face and fearless in my dedication to finding Solutions you've seen me work collaboratively and equitably on our Council agenda committee to help our meetings run smoothly and ensure everyone's requests for agenda items are given Fair consideration I am always prepared for our meetings and have not missed a single one since I was sworn in almost a year ago and when I'm out in the community acting in an official capacity such as speaking at

[208:00] the rainbows over Pearl event to kick off pride month earlier this year I'm well prepared and I represent us with dignity in Council meetings study sessions and committee meetings I am collaborative and respectful with you all with staff and with the community even when we disagree I have the leadership and communication skills needed to step into the pro tem role and I bring some important perspectives from our community that are not typically represented on this Council and especially not in our leadership I share with most of you the privilege of being a white homeowner as an openly queer woman a parent of school-aged children and a worker who balances two jobs I bring a unique perspective to our policy making and problem solving I hope you'll consider my unique perspectives as you consider your mayor Pro tem vote because we are at risk of embodying the glass ceiling we're a majority female Council but we are considering all male leadership I appreciate that male leadership is often the norm and I don't point this out to disparage my male colleagues at all rather I feel strongly that we should

[209:01] not care more about upholding the status quo then we care about making progress on gender Equity particularly at a time when the rights of women trans and non-binary members of our community are under attack a key role of leadership is recognizing when old practices have outlived their utility and courageously choosing to follow a different path in asking for your vote for mayor Pro tem I am asking you to choose A New Path one that recognizes the importance of female and lgbtq Leadership at all times and especially in these times I will bring my experience and expertise to the three major functions of the mayor Pro tem role helping to set the council agenda and anticipate which items will need significant discussion filling in for the mayor to fairly run the City Council meetings if he is absent in supporting the mayor and representing our city to the public and the media all the work that I've done in my tenure on Council was done in partnership with all of you and it's my commitment to you to continue and grow that partnership as

[210:01] your mayor Pro tem this next year for us as a governing body is going to be difficult the majority of our work plan is still in progress and the community is counting on us to make the necessary positive changes we committed to my collaborative approach to leadership will help us achieve our goals in a way that is considerate of each of you and of the community we serve I hope you'll vote for me not just to support gender diversity and Leadership but because you recognize that when people come from communities that are not typically represented in leadership roles their voices and experiences are critical and cannot be substituted thank you for your consideration thank you Nicole is there anyone else who'd like to put their name forward all right seeing no one then I think we've got our two speeches of Interest so uh Nicole and mark thank you both for putting your names forward it's an important role for our community so um I will call something out here in

[211:00] terms of scheduling which is that we are scheduled per normal like per a regular schedule we would have this vote in two weeks on the 17th but my understanding is that we've got two members absent at that meeting and I believe that is Rachel and Mark and so I wanted to check in with folks um you know Teresa I believe we would be allowed to defer that vote to the to the first legally but maybe you could talk that through about whether that's a possibility and then I'll check with my Council colleagues to see if there's interest um yes mayor so the timing for the uh mayor Pro tem election is prescribed by the council rules of procedure um which you just updated tonight um so that while that timing is prescribed the council rules of procedure also state that the rules can be suspended and so what would be required is a motion to suspend the

[212:00] rules in addition there is a public hearing with it and so I believe you would also need a motion to to continue the public hearing to a date certain but certainly there's a legal mechanism for you to move that that the date of that vote so if we were to do such a thing then would Rachel stay the mayor Pro tem for two additional weeks mayor I apologize I haven't I have not looked in into that I'm happy to have a look and and get back to you thanks so I just want to put that out and see what folks thought about waiting until we had a full Council to to take this vote all right yeah Mark yeah obviously um I would like to participate I cannot participate on the 17th and um although that is a self-interested comment I would like to be there and I would like to experience the the proceeding yes

[213:02] um I'm very surprised I didn't know there would be an extension of Mayor Pro Temp friend not that it but I just want to understand what is the legal ramification before we make that decision so is that something that would happen on the 17th and I know you mentioned that you will get back to us on that yeah Teresa I did have an opportunity to to look this up um as you all were speaking and the council rules of procedure provide that the mayor Pro tem serves for one year so it's actually a prescribed amount of time you all again right because this is in the council rules of procedure you could vote to suspend that rule um and and allow um council member friend to serve that role or you you could choose not to do that and let her time elapse okay I've got Lauren Rachel and then Bob

[214:00] hearing portion of it because you mentioned that we could suspend the rules but there would be a public hearing does that mean would there be a public hearing for the rule suspension what meeting would that occur at I mean if right because our next voting meeting is in two weeks when we're we were scheduled or are scheduled to vote for mayor Pro tem so does that mean at that meeting we would have to have a public hearing to determine if at that meeting we were going to vote for mayor Pro tem Theresa uh I was not as precise with my language as I should have been the public hearing is for the mayor Pro tem election no public hearing would be required to suspend the rules that is completely within the council's ability it does take either a two-thirds majority vote or five members whichever

[215:02] number is higher Rachel Bob Nicole I um I'm happy to serve or not serve an extra week as Pro tem so please do not read what I'm about to say is as any sort of an attempted one-week coup of this role I would love to have the vote um Extended so I could participate so given the two of us are out that does make sense to me and and honestly they I think we're fine without a pro tem for a week if that's the will of council again until I get hit by a bus or something um not that that should happen but Bob I was I was just gonna ask we're talking about Rachel as if she wasn't here so I was just going to ask her if it was the willow Council would you be willing to serve another two weeks I I yes I'm already going to be out that week so uh and then I think we're off

[216:01] the next week for Thanksgiving so it seems like a really light lift for whoever it falls to yep happy to do it thank you yeah and um I mean I just want a name right I'm not I'm biased in saying this and I think the the question that I have is more about the process and the Precedence so what does it mean if we start deciding that we're going to move votes around based on who is here and who is not here um that to me feels like a significant issue and Mark I very much hear it right I really would be um it would be odd right to to not be here for the vote of this thing that you have stepped up for and thank you by the way um and it this doesn't feel like good precedent to set up to move things around based on people being present or not and I don't know if we've I mean do we do this before like

[217:00] is this something that we've like have we sort of in past history taken into account you know people present not present I I just worry about this because it seems like a way of Shifting of Shifting things in the future so I don't know if we've ever done this before Teresa and then I've got Bob with a hand up I I don't have that historical knowledge I wonder I wonder if our resident historian might might know come on don't say this as I as I think about Chris so I appreciate the question right we we have had at least in my tenure here there have been um votes or items that have been um asked to be moved or postponed because there was a council member who had a particular interest in an item and so I don't necessarily believe this would be setting precedent the and where you're voting to suspend it then I I think that is um that is appropriate Chris am I wrong in this

[218:00] I'm gonna apologize that I didn't hear the first part of what you said to assist a gentleman that was right outside the door in my life I believe that in the past that we have had certainly some occasions where an item has moved or not that rules have been or or an item has been postponed or or changed because there was a council member that was not present had an interest there have been discussions on the dice about the timing of certain votes and I believe at least in my time I've seen that happen and I assume that in your history you have seen that that's correct that's what my experience of council has been is um if there's an agenda item that maybe is a very contentious item uh that sometimes that item will be rescheduled to another meeting uh to ensure that all nine council members can be there so there is a previous precedent of doing that uh on agenda items that are that are out there

[219:01] thanks Chris Bob can I ask Aaron I'm sort of I'm confused right now because I thought there was an agenda item tonight that was moved that was requested like behind the scenes to be moved because a council member wasn't going to be here and I'm it seems like council members would be aware of that and a it's part of why I don't think we should do things like not in front of you know like we should do things on the dice with those requests but I think that that happened tonight so that that's just confusing to me that statement so I believe you're referring to the the G the rule the council rules and procedures things that that request came from Teresa a couple days ago I believe because you wanted to make additional updates it was my understanding my understanding also though all right good uh both and that there there was a request to move the item and we wanted staff we wanted to package the item with some additional um procedural changes if

[220:02] okay I don't think I saw the request to move from I just saw it from you personally uh I believe that well it came to me it may had Nuria copied can I just step in and clarify here so I mean this this was me I had reached out and yeah thank you Rachel for bringing that up and after having a conversation with Teresa that was where um I kind of backed up from that and said um no that actually may not be a good idea but what I hear folks saying tonight is that there is precedent for moving votes when when we have an issue of significant importance and it is one that we have done this before so um so anyway I just just wanted to clear up the confusion because it's getting a little weird with talking about things that were said and who said it whatever so that was me I backed off when I realized that it may not be a good idea to ask to move things for people's presence and

[221:00] um I also just want to recognize that having heard there is a precedent for it thank you I understand that better now okay I think so Nicole sir are you too clever are you comfortable then with this with delaying until the first I said it right okay so anybody else that one wanted to could personally I I have seen us wait until we have nine council members on on issues that that there's some disagreement on so I I think it's a reasonable thing to do to wait until the first just for two weeks um if if council is amenable um okay so I'm not seeing any other disagreement at this point I appreciate the discussion over it so then from a procedural standpoint Teresa would we have a motion on the consent agenda on the 17th to uh suspend the rules of procedure to move it to uh the first December 1st I believe it's a motion that has to be initiated by Council and so I I would

[222:03] expect that you would do that at the top of the meeting before the consent agenda got it okay thanks maybe we can check in at CAC on the specifics but happy to okay do we just a question clarify question um Teresa thanks for that and is is it a two-part motion do we have to move to suspend the rules as to the date of voting for mayor Pro temen do we also need to vote to extend Rachel's term by another two weeks is that kind of is that a little housekeeping that to do as part of that I think the best form of the motion would be to suspend the rules with respect to a particular section and then and then name What specifically is being suspended so that would be the date of the election and potentially the one-year term of the mayor Pro tem great thank you very much appreciate it

[223:00] Lauren so and this is coming up because we're at a point in the meeting where we cannot vote on this kind of a thing right is that treason uh no um you would you would not vote to suspend the rules until you are in the particular meeting at which you want to suspend them okay but just to clarify in like if someone were to look up the agenda without listening to this meeting are they going to see the mayor Pro tem election on our agenda in two weeks yep that's exactly right and they will see a public hearing for it in listed in two weeks and so um council could think about um some kind of hotline or advanced communication um in an effort to alert the public that

[224:01] they into if it's the will of counsel that Council intends to um to suspend the rules to hold the the election stating the date on which you're going to hold the election and that the public hearing will be continued until such time is there anything we could do in terms of the title of that agenda topic or a notification that we could send out if people were to sign up for that public hearing do we have any legal limits to what we could because I you know it does I don't like wasting people's time I don't um want people to show up for a public hearing that we're not going to have I hear your concern at the same time I think we cannot assume the outcome of a vote um and so that's the tension here right is that we it would be inappropriate to assume the

[225:01] outcome of the vote to suspend the rules so thanks for reading that Lauren so what I might suggest uh Teresa is that maybe think about this a little bit more tomorrow and then we can talk about it at CAC on Monday and discuss the the best kind of labeling of agenda items and communication strategy based on Council feedback from tonight that seems reasonable learn to set address as best we can what you're just raising okay uh Rachel and then well before we do that do we even know though if there's like a straw poll of support for possibly not voting on the 17th because if if there's not enough support for that then maybe we we wouldn't have to look at it right so I I got not informal head knots from Council that they they were willing and interested in rescheduling to December 1st yeah I'm getting like can we get like a got it I couldn't see it from the the computer maybe yeah there's the in-person thing going on there

[226:02] okay good well uh seeing nothing else I just want to thank Mark and Nicole for putting your hats in the ring for the potential being sentenced to an entire year of 9 A.M Monday morning meetings I appreciate your your interest in in serving the community 50 50 weeks 50 weeks 50 weeks oh all right uh last item yes sir that last item for tonight is our item 8B and it is the check in on ballot measure endorsement procedures so uh Nicole would you like me to do this or do you want to bring it up because you this was your idea actually but I'm happy to take it if you'd rather not go ahead yeah so um this came up at CAC this past week and the issue was that the human relations commission had sent us a letter letting us know that they strongly supported our endorsing measure

[227:00] 2E on the ballot the move to even year elections and so we we kind of talked about you know at this stage are we going to endorse Bala measures you know that we haven't talked about before what we basically got to was um it is a little bit uh late in the the year for us to think about this and it would be nice to discuss it for next year to have a process in place by which we are thinking about which ballot measures are we going to endorse and what is the timeline for that so that we have enough time to get information to the community I think there was also some concern about taking direction from a board as well and so the idea is that possibly at our mid-year Retreat we can have a conversation about what is our process for thinking about ballot endorsements before we head into 2023 elections so that it's clear to the community to our boards to everybody when and where we may endorse ballot

[228:03] measures thanks Nicole and I appreciate you bringing that idea up at CAC I thought it was a really good idea because we it's been very ad hoc this year we've like we did one and then we almost did another one then this idea came up at the last minute and so I would love to have a process that we had for to follow for whether we endorse and which ones we endorse or are people comfortable with thinking about this at our mid-year retreat talking this over right I'm generally seeing nun heads okay great that I think that's it it's a rap so great any final comments before we close the meeting all right seeing none I will give us to gavel us to a close at 9 43 PM thanks everyone take care and have a good night I missed it for 29 minutes [Music]

[229:03] foreign [Music]