May 1, 2025 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[5:09] Elisha, do we have channel 8 going? All right, 7 o'clock. So, good evening everyone and welcome to the Thursday, May 1st, 2025 regular meeting of the Boulder City Council. Welcome all. Uh, I'm going to gave us to order and ask Elisha to do a roll call, please. Yes, sir. Good um, good evening, everyone. And we'll start tonight's roll call as usual with council member Adams, present. Benjamin, present. Mayor Brackett, present. Coun Mayor Pro Tim Folks, present. Council member Marquis, present. Shuhart, here. Spear, present. Wallik here and Winer present. Mayor, we

[6:00] have our quorum. Thanks so much, Elisha. All right. And now we're going to go over our public participation guidelines. Um so please uh folks listen carefully to these because we do enforce them pretty strictly. So Elisha, if you would please. Thank you sir. Good evening everyone and again thank you for joining us. I'll go over the public participation at city council guidelines. The city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff, and council, as well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives. For more information about this vision and the community engagement processes, we ask that you please visit our website at votercol.gov/services/productive-mospheres

[7:00] and the Boulder revised code council procedures section 16B. The city will enforce the rules of decorum found in the voter revised code in the noted section 16B, including participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they are commonly known by and individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted online. No attendee shall disrupt, disturb, or otherwise impede the orderly conduct of any council meeting in a manner that obstructs the business of the meeting. This also includes failing to obey and lawfully any lawful order of the presiding officer to leave the meeting room or refrain from addressing the council. Only one person at a time at the podium unless an accommodation like an interpreter is required. All remarks and testimony shall be

[8:00] limited to matters related to city business. No standing in or otherwise blocking the owls in violation of the fire code or in a way that obstructs the vision or audio of other audience members. No signs or flags shall be permitted in council chambers except for one sign held by a person measuring no more than 11 by 17 in which is held no higher than the person's face. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. We ask that you not affix items to the podium or deis or walls or other surfaces of the chamber. Signs, flags, or other items used to communicate must be held by one person when displayed. Obscinity, other epithets based on race, gender, or religion, and other speech, and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the meeting will not be tolerated. And lastly, in-person participants are asked

[9:02] to refrain from expressing support or disagreement verbally or with sounds such as applause or snapping, with the exception of declarations. Traditionally, support is shown through American Sign Language applause or jazz hands. Thank you for listening and again, thank you for joining us. Thanks for that, Elicia. I'll note additionally that um city council u has agreed that if city council members have any responses to open comment that we'll do that under matters from mayor, members of council towards the end of the meeting, not right after open comment. So, um, we've got, uh, 20 people signed up to speak, 13 of them in person, seven of them virtual. Each person will have two minutes. The come down to the podium. Uh, we got a full house tonight. I know I think probably a lot of you don't come here on a regular basis. Just so you know, um, we do stick to those rules pretty tightly. Um, and so if we can have quiet in the audience as people testify, we want to give everybody who testifies a chance to speak and be heard

[10:01] and listened to respectfully. And I am going to ask that the signs that you have kind of stay in front of you. Um not block aisles, not go up to block other people's vision. Um and that that sort of thing. Um and I got one one sign kind of out in the aisle here in the middle if you wouldn't mind just pulling that back a little bit. Great. Uh looking forward to hearing from folks. So I will read three names at a time. The first three people are Christopher Cissano, Leah Fioronei, and Nathan Connect. So, Christopher Sissano, you're the first speaker. Greetings, city council. I'm Christopher Cesaro, and I have been involved with education for 30 years and with this program for 30 years. Um, and we were all going to sing a song together because we do a lot of singing in our

[11:01] program with the children and they've now elected me to sing one of the opening songs. So that's how I'm going to start. May this pool of love we have gatherred here fill our hearts and minds so so clear. We are blessed in our hearts to the stars up above. May our love bless everyone. Thank you. Um in those 30 years I've helped start this program and it's been really a blessing to work with so many children. And one of the things you will hear today is that we consider ourselves a uh a program for homeschool families, an

[12:01] enrichment program, resource program and not a school. I mean, we only meet three days a week and u I I don't know of any schools in Boulder that only meet three days a week. So, we see ourselves as a an enrichment program for homeschoolers and that's one of the points we're trying to make tonight. My current uh hat I wear at the school is doing the buildings and grounds and the gardens. I do get to do nature walk with the children uh every day. Um I also we help you know I'm part of harvesting beans and potatoes which is a messy job with kids and um elderberries and flowers and of course the kids eat every raspberry they find in the fall. Um and that looks like my time your time is up. Thank you for your testimony. And um folks uh do need to be seated unless they're coming down to speak for fire code purposes. So, if you're standing up, if you can

[13:00] please find a seat. And if we run out of seats, there is overflow space um downstairs. All right. Our next speakers are Leah Fioronei, Nathan Connect, and Sage Hamilton. There's the timer goes the other way. Good evening, city council members. Thank you so much for being here. I really trust that you have a ton of other stuff going on in your house. Get into the mic there and I appreciate you being here. As a parent, I'm asking the city of Boulder to truly see Sage programs for what it is and most importantly for what it is not. My family has been deeply touched by this powerful program and its closing has been devastating. Sage Programs is not a school and it has never operated like one. It is something far more meaningful and rare. It is a nature-based spiritually rooted enrichment program for homeschool families. It is a

[14:00] community, a sanctuary that honors mother earth, the ancestors of this land, and all in the spirit that lives in all things. We are pleading with the city of Boulder to grandfather sage programs and the existing accessory building into its zoning framework using the original unused permit that we have from the 1980s for that property. This land has been lovingly tended for decades, long before zoning grew up around this program. And now the regulations are just simply too complex, too costly, and too institutional for a tiny grassroots community-based program like this to continue. And the logistical burden of pursuing it is far beyond what our 80-year-old elders, Sage and Christopher, can manage. While a use review process technically does exist, um imposing school regulations would change this vibrant sacred space and it would strip the spirit and essence from the program. It just isn't the right fit for what sages

[15:02] truly is. As a parent, I've seen how this space provides connection, healing, and meaning. Our children don't sit in desks. They play in the mud. They climb trees. They tell stories. They cook food together. And they walk barefoot on the earth. My twins have asked me every single day since their first week at program five years ago, "Mama, is it a program day?" Your time is up, but thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Um, I still got somebody standing up in the back. If I could just ask you to to sit. She's good. Oh, she's good. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. I appreciate it. All right. We got Nathan Connect, Sage Hamilton, and James Duncan. Good evening. My name is Nathan Connect. Uh I'm an architect in Boulder and I'm working on behalf of Sage programs. Um so what we have is two enforcement violations at the property. One was about the program itself being called a school. Um Sage and Christopher opted to just shut the program down immediately

[16:01] to try to explore what this kind of invasion was that was happening to them. So we've been doing that. On the other hand, we also had violations on buildings and we've narrowed it down to one accessory structure that has been submitted for permit. And in the narrative to that permit, I have asked that uh the city make some exceptions for us and just inspect the building for electrical, plumbing, and mechanical. And so I think we're just bringing this to your attention now um while we wait for city staff to respond to us. My sense is, you know, they don't have a lot of room to tell us we can keep the oven for cooking and baking and doing crafts or the sink for the same reason. So, we're expecting some comments that would would ask us to deconstruct. Um, we're also a little hesitant if they're going to make us inspect the actual structure, which has been there since the 80s. Christopher has done a great job maintaining it. It seems like it's in really good shape. I've looked at it and engineers looked at it, but in terms

[17:00] of it meeting today's city codes, it may not. Um, so the other the other enforcement in the programs that we're kind of bringing to you is um we don't really know how to classify it. We know it's not a school. We know it's a program that offers something that a school doesn't offer. Um, and it's an amazing magical place. My kids have also attended programs there. They're older now, but Sage has run um programs for coming of age, both boys and girls. Christopher has hosted men's groups. So there's lots of things that happen on this property that aren't just children's programs. Um so in our exploration with the city, we don't really have a clear path yet, but we're here trying to bring that. Thank you. Right now we have Sage Hamilton, James Duncan, and Aaron Brooks. Hi you guys.

[18:02] Up until now, it has been part of my destiny and purpose to honor and serve children and their families all in the service of spirit that moves in all things and knowing ourselves better through creative expression and community. Together we have honored mother earth's turning through poetry, singing, dancing, playing, harvesting, shucking, cooking, brewing teas, making medicines, blessing the land in gratitude. Each day on morning walks, we gather around Fairy Tree, singing greetings to our heart friend whose berries are the source of many heart remedies. berries we harvested and brew for our fall festival gatherings where we toasted and called for the healing of our hearts. In gratitude, we have told myths and legends from cultures from all over the world. These stories filled our hearts and minds with wisdom to know and

[19:00] understand ourselves better. These stories we offered as food for our souls, light for our minds, courage for our hearts. And along the way, we had a great time. Supported by the parent choir, the children performed many of these wisdom stories upon the circle in the center of Turtle Medicine Garden, the ceremonial centerpiece of our land. We have held hands in thousands of circles. We've known peace. Peace in our minds. peace in our hearts and peace in our bodies. For peace was the only rule for peace is the way. Well, we stumbled many times, I'm sure you. Um yet we've always found our way our way back to peace until one day in March, a heart broke, aching hearts broke, and we were shut down. And I am so very, very sorry. I thank you for listening and the opportunity to share a

[20:00] bit of who we have been in our longing. Thank you. Now we have James Duncan, Erin Brooks, and Ayana Rutherford. James, are you coming to the podium? Good evening, council. My name is James Duncan and first I'd have a little announcement that there's going to be a vigil, a Mayday vigil. It's worker justice is for Palestinian justice and it's going to be at the sister city plaza right outside this uh building 30 and you all are welcome to come and I hope you to see it see you there. Um I don't know if you can see this clearly but here's two little uh

[21:02] angels toddlers that were um exterminated if you will um very tragically right needlessly. So, so this is my message for tonight, but I do have a couple other uh pieces for you that I'd like to share. Um, first off, I want to say that I, you know, I have nothing but love for my Jewish brothers and sisters. Um, as city council, I understand where you at. You're between a rock and a hard place on on this uh uh issue. And uh I want to let you know that I understand what that rock and the hard place is. the the rock is Apac. It's that Zionist lobby machine that's so powerful that keeps people from speaking. I've got a couple of pieces of alternative some independent professional news that explains that a lot more as a mainstream media here does not explain it. The the rock is the

[22:02] pressure that you're feeling and the hard place is the ground. The the ground that is the earth that's the truth. That's us. So I invite you uh to to come to the earth to it's home to come home with us that you've made that choice to stand to to stay with that that rock right that rock is not going to serve you the earth the ground the hard place will come home. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have Aaron Brooks, Ayanna Rutherford and Todd White. Good evening. My name is Aaron Brooks and I've been attending public meetings for over 15 years, long before moving to Boulder a couple of years ago. I don't come for theatrics. I come because I care. I stay informed. I even watch your meetings on off weeks and that is real civic engagement. Unlike the group that

[23:00] constantly comes to disrupt these meetings, I'm not here for one issue. I am here because the false narratives being spread here and in the daily camera need to be challenged. These people have every right to speak for two minutes. But what they don't have is the right to hijack meetings, scream at public officials, or hurl words that many rightfully consider to be anti-semitic. I've got the video. It happened and it's indefensible. Everything that happens here, even during recess, is documented, my friends. And as I talk to people across Boulder and I show them video, I'm struck by how few people actually know what is going on at these meetings. What doesn't surprise me, however, is how disgusted they are when they find out. Realtors I know, for instance, with very deep networks here that have go back a long way say the same thing. People are sickened by this behavior. Let's be clear. Some of the people that disrupt these meetings are the same ones who circulated and are here this evening holding wanted posting posters targeting council members who refuse to cave into their demands. And one s council member who wasn't targeted because she appears

[24:00] to agree with them, which is her right, often thanks them for showing up. She may think she's supporting civic engagement, but she's legitimizing a group that smears her colleagues. That's not leadership. Meanwhile, it was good to see this the Daily Camera publish a piece by Mark Wallik and Matt Jip Benjamin. However, this paper refuses runs what re reads like a hit piece on the council full of provable inaccuracies while refusing to publish my reasonable factual letter. That's not journalism. That's enabling. These people don't represent Boulder. Not even close. If I'm generous, 50 people have shown up out of 105,000. That's less than onetenth of 1%. I'm not going anywhere. Honest leadership in this city deserves respect. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have Ayana Rutherford, Todd White, and Abel

[25:00] Villaorta. Hi, I grew up in Boulder. I grew up on the Sage programs property. When people come, they enter through a very large gate. You're all welcome to come and visit. It's almost an absurdly large gate and there's no reason that it really needs to be so big except for that somehow it makes sense. We have been welcoming all different kinds of people from all different ways of living who believe all different kinds of things for almost the entirety of my life. So maybe you do need a big gate if you're going to be that welcoming. And I mean it when I say all kinds of people. People whose labels wouldn't normally mix out in the real world. Labels ranging from conservative to liberal to hippies and to professionals. But what's interesting and almost magical about our gate is that when people walk through it, they seem to breathe a sigh of relief because it's the human who gets to walk through not quiet and that get

[26:03] the labels are what gets left behind. People are complicated and messy, but they're also beautiful and noble. In a world where loneliness is rampant and where disconnection and divisions are everywhere, my family has spent most of my entire life trying to foster something different. They have tried to foster the humans, not the labels. So, what I'm asking the city to do is I'm asking you to see us. We've been part of Boulder for a long, long time and we're wondering, do the people that are running this city want programs and spaces like ours. We've been told that we need to get into compliance. But the problem is we don't fit into the boxes that are being offered. We are not a school. We don't want to be zoned as a school. That's not who we are. When I looked through zoning options, I saw religious assembly and I thought, maybe that's it. Maybe that's who we are.

[27:00] We're asking the city council to see us. Thank you. And now we have Todd White, Abel Vilorta, and Trish Mern. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the council. It's a true blessing to be here before you tonight. And uh I would like to propose to you guys um a uh help me fund an invention. Um I'm a inventor uh DC electrical engineer. Um I've had businesses in the past that I've run successfully. Um my body kind of took me out of that. But um this is a non-carbon burning uh emitting uh power plant. this holy grail of power. Um I don't think it's quite there. Uh we got to start small. Um and then build from there. But um it has to start somewhere.

[28:02] Um now this uh nonprofit that I've opened is called New World Energy. um donationbased uh and um that's that's the point um is to bring people together um build a scale model, prove the ability um to create this energy non-carbon emitting. I'm targeting cars. We got to do something about this guys. We just have to um time is up. That's that's that's what I feel. I do not want to hand the younger generation a problem without a plan for solution. Um, and if I get busy now, um, this can happen. Uh, we have National Renewable Labs right here. I would love access to the staff, the engineers. Um, I'd love access to to be able to work with them. Um, we as a species are always on the move, right? So eventually I want

[29:01] charging stations, rapid charging stations. We put these in where the EV vehicles uh the plants are originally, you know, we we've got these plans, but we really don't have the energy source to do uh to do what we want to do. Um and so I want to create that. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have Abel Villa Corta, Trish Emzer, and Carolyn Beninski. Joseal Boulder. Good evening. Um, city council. My name is Abel Viaort and I was originally from Peru and I moved here 28 years ago to this beautiful city. Um, I'm here to uh represent and speak for Sage Programs. Um, Sage Programs offers

[30:00] a rich experience for young children. It's not found anywhere else. It is a garden of Eden, a magical place to behold beauty and be in awe of everything the universe provides. Children feel at home and deeply nurtured by the people that bring this rich nature experience to children. They develop a strong sense of belonging in the world by feeling the love that surrounds them. Boulder has always been a place of bliss and miracles for our family. It's rich with great human beings, nature, and lots of activities to keep one's mind and body healthy. In the grand scheme of places to live, Boulder is hard to beat. In this increasingly challenging, fast-paced, changing world we live in today, children need a strong sense of belonging through song, art, and doing performances together. Sage programs provide a sweet magical foundation through which children develop a sense of strength and well-being that stay

[31:02] with them for years to come. I have a family of three children, two of which went to CH programs. Uh the uh eldest is 18 years old and she's about to graduate from Naiwat. Uh she's a beautiful human being and I I uh feel that a lot of her ground and foundation was made at sages by going to that place. It is an incredible uh place where they can really feel that they are one with nature. I strongly endorse SAGE programs and ask city council to honor our request. Thank you. Now we have Trish Mer, Carolyn Beninski, and Rafael Ernnandez Guerrero. Good evening. Trish Mzer here on behalf of Bike Boulder. I think you all received an update from me earlier today. Hopefully you did. I'm going to hit the high spots. Um, so far this year we've had 99 bikes stolen reported to

[32:02] Boulder Police. Most of them um were not returned. In fact, only seven were and very few that were of any value. Um, on the positive side, Bike Boulder is working with different bike shops to do point of sale bike registration with Bike Index. Full Cycle's been doing it since 2019. They've registered 10,000 bikes or more. Trek and University Cycles joined the team with the integration in the last month and so they've added about 250 more and we're going to all the bike shops. Um in addition to that, another positive is at the farmers market bike valet, people are thrilled. They're riding up on their bikes, their cargo bikes. Uh we let them know that this service is supported by the city of Boulder and they're like, "Wow, that is amazing. Thank you so much. It's fast and easy." So, in your packet, you should have a picture of a couple smiling there because they were very happy about that. Um, so the last

[33:02] topic I have, and I have just enough time to cover it, is the bike and ride shelters. There are three that are maintained by different entities in different ways. I actually brought this that goes along with picture three. I didn't know what it was. It's a golf putter half. It's been used to leverage locks and break them within the bike and ride shelter at Table Mesa where three bikes were stolen in February. And a month later after I gained access, I found the burglary tools there. So, I really feel that if we could work together, maybe we could find someone who would pay a little attention to some beautiful assets that we have within the city that are either underutilized, insecure, or just not working for people, and I think it would be a great way to help out the community. Thank you. Thank you. Our last three in-person speakers are Carolyn Beninski, Raphael Ernnandez Guerrero, and Susan

[34:00] Baka. I want to give you a brief update on Palestine. Uh, since March 1st, Israel has closed the borders into Gaza. No food, water, medical, or humanity humanitarian supplies have been allowed to enter Gaza. On April 28th, the head of the UN humanitarian agency in Gaza warned of quote fullscale famine conditions. ENRA, another UN agency serving Palestine, stated, quote, "Nothing can justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people." As Pulitzer Prizewinning uh journalist Chris Hedges puts it, this is the final chapter of the genocide. In addition, 92% of the buildings in Gaza have either been badly damaged or destroyed. People are sleeping outside

[35:01] regardless of the weather. Estimate of the death to poll toll in a population of 2 million ranges from 5 50,000 to 400,000. According to American medical personnel who have gone to Palestine, numerous children are coming into medical clinics with gunshots to the head and chest. As of late March, according to Brown University, 232 journalists have been killed since October 7th. This is more than the combined death toll of journalists of the past seven major US wars. In addition, the Palestinian Palestine Journalist Syndicate estimates estimates that 380 journalists have been wounded. There is some evidence that journalists are being targeted. This keeps me up at night.

[36:01] Does the council want to continue to remain silent as this genocide reaches its final chapter? What will you say to your grandchildren when they ask you what you did? Your time is up, but thank you for in Gaza. Thank you very much. Our last two um two inerson speakers are Raphael Ernnandez Guerrero and Susan Baka. A switch to proportional representation is necessary. The current first pass the post at large elections significantly hamper Latino representation in city council. Latino inclusion in this body will be a great and critical step toward lifting Boulders Latino community out of poverty. It is reasonable to demand a change that would significantly improve the ability of minorities to represent their own interests. In fact, such a change is long overdue. This change will

[37:01] strengthen borders institutions, enabling them to more effectively address the complex issues faced by our community's most vulnerable members. Right now, our institutions serve the powerful first and only the weak when it is convenient and low cost. Now, let me tell you what is truly unreasonable. expecting the most marginalized among us to carry the burden of participation in a system that was never built for them. Do you think a young Latina mother of two working at the fast food restaurant like my older sister has a real shot at running for and winning a seat on the council? Why would she even vote when she knows that no one on the ballot speaks for her or understands her struggles? That is precisely what we need to change. After all, gone are the days where hooded men in white robes marched through the streets of Boulder. Gone are the days when whites would hang signs in

[38:02] front of the businesses spelling out, "No dogs or Mexicans allowed." I want to live in a boulder where someone like my sister doesn't just cast a vote. She can be on the ballot, win, and shape policy. Proportional representation will help us achieve that vision. Thank you. Thank you. Last person in person speaker, Susan Baka. And our first two virtual speakers will be Russell Miller and Robin Noble. Thank you for your time. I hope I can get the through this without crying. I started to read it to my husband earlier and fell apart. Uh my name is Susan Vaka and you've heard from the founders of Sage programs, the current program director, former parents, current parents, their architect, and I'm here to speak on behalf um from the perspective of a

[39:00] neighbor because I've lived two doors down from Sage programs for 20 years. And what I have to say is simply this. These are the kind of neighbors we all long for. They are so conscientious and communicative and fair. They are building community and bonds in a world where we are desperate for authentic relationships with our neighbors and a strong foundation from which to raise our children so they'll grow up to be healthy contributing members of society. Their homeschool program not only offers a beautiful heart-c centered platform, but also a stunning natural environment with trees and owls and sand and dirt. Their property is a sanctuary and a benefit to our wildlife and fits seamlessly into our rural North Boulder

[40:02] neighborhood. The positive energy and joy that comes from these homeschooling families bring to our street is solely a product of the vision of the program founders and their mindful care of the children and acreage that they tend. It would be a huge disservice. It is a huge disservice to our street and to our neighborhood, the atmosphere, and to the larger Boulder community that that attends the school uh support program to not allow them to continue this impactful system for homeschooled children as they've done for over 20 years. But thank you for your testimony. All right, our first three virtual speakers are Russell Miller, Robin Noble, and Laya Tour. Mayor, I do not see uh Russell online tonight, but I do see Robin. Let's go to Robin then.

[41:05] Thank you so much. Hi, Boulder City Council members. My name is Robin Noble. I'm a legislative aid at the state capital and I serve on the city's cannabis licensing and advisory board. But tonight I'm just here as simply as a boulderite representing myself and I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Um I wanted to thank council members Wallak and Benjamin for their op-ed in the daily camera this week. I just wanted to underscore that I thought their clarity on the difference between free speech and chaotic disruption was really greatly appreciated. I've lived in Boulder since 1991, and I love this place with all my heart. But I'm increasingly distraught that as a community, we are growing tragically accustomed to the human misery of untreated severe mental illness and addiction, which inevitably result in a cycle of jail and homelessness.

[42:02] This is a difficult and urgent problem and I know that you and many good people are working on solutions, but we have a long way to go. I'm just speaking up to simply underscore the importance of your leadership and focus on this and many other local issues that impact Boulder citizens, especially those who are suffering. I'm so grateful for your service to this community. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have Laya Tor, Leah Dagen, and Lynn Seagull. Hello, my name is and I'm here along with the others you have heard tonight to speak about Sage programs. This nature-based homeschool enrichment program that ran for more than 30 years without any issues was more than just an enrichment program for children to spend time in nature. It was a deeply intentional heart-c centered spiritual

[43:01] community. The learning for the children and all the families who have had the incredible privilege to have been a part of it were rooted in deep connection to nature, community, and creativity. I've had the gift of being both a parent in the program and working with the team that runs it. And I can say without hesitation, they bring an extraordinary level of integrity and care to everything they do. Every decision is thoughtful. Every interaction is guided by respect, safety, and a true commitment to the children and communities. well-being. Sage, Christopher, Ayana, and everyone who has been a part of running the program are stewards of a vision of for what community and learning can be. The environment they created supported a wide range of children and families, including those who didn't always fit into conventional environments. It offered a village of support for parents, a safe and free space for children, and a model of nature-based education and community grounded in values we should be protecting. They are in the process of working with the city to bring their outuildings up to code, but we are asking that the accessory dwelling have the exceptions that have been requested in the permit to be

[44:00] allowed. This building is an intricate part of their offerings and there are just not the funds to bring it up to the current 2025 code standards, especially with the program not able to operate. The loss of revenue has been devastating. We know that the city feels it has offered the program a path forward through land use. However, land use is extremely lengthy, costly, and most often fails. In addition, the current view from the city for land use review is as of the program being a school, which is is not and does not want to be. The closure of this program has left a deep void. I ask for you to consider how you can help to find a creative pathway with zoning and licensing for this life-giving program to continue to serve our community in the incredible unique way it has because what they offer is rare and it is worth preserving. Thank you. Now we have Leah Dagon, Lin Seagull, and Meredith Bar. Hey, good evening. Do Do you hear me? Yes. Oh, perfect. Sorry, I'm with my two

[45:02] kids here. Um, I just want to begin by thanking you. Um, thanking the city council members who have stood firm against hate, especially the hate that we've witnessed from some individuals who come time and time again to vilify um my very existence, the existence of my family. We arrived from what's we arrived from uh sorry, it's bedtime. We arrived from Israel in October after being displaced by kamasib. Okay. Um they're back they're back again. Um what sorry my husband is gonna take care of it but um we love the city and we are so grateful to call Boulder our home but since arriving we've been so disheartened by such a small but vocal group who are fixated that come time and time again to the city council to just resent the fact that me and my family survived. And um you know I'm a teacher.

[46:02] I spent years working on peaceuilding projects in Israel alongside Palestinians. And I can tell you that so many Palestinians that I know who generally want peace with Israel are perplexed how people come here to city hall claiming to be pro Palestinian. And in fact, they're just really anti-Israel. And these voices have been silent about the Palestinians in Gaza who have risked their lives right now on the ground trying to protest against Hamas who are stealing. We know aid, humanitarian aid, who are silent about the funds being diverted from relief efforts to build, you know, war tunnels used to hide weapons and and we know that there's 59 hostages still held and their only crime was to be liberal and progressive and in many cases peace activists. um many of among them Hersh Goldberg Pollen my husband's cousin whose dream was to build a Palestinian Israeli soccer camp and others like Emily who was released um but you know without many of her body

[47:00] parts a member of the LGBTQ uh TQ community so I just want for your testimony our final two speakers are Lynn Seagull and Meredith Rod. 10 years ago, I tried an energy retrofit through Energy Smart Boulder County. I was gaslighted regarding that 10 years later when I recently through the city got a retrofit that was free for my income range but will cost me piles of money to get rid of because I was gaslighted. I couldn't have anything to do with my own retrofit in my own house. And five and a half months later I have heard nothing. Nothing. There's a fire hazard on the side of my house that is not anchored. A compressor that blocks my

[48:02] sideyard setback. There's $25,000 worth of an air handler in my bedroom upstairs that I don't need and I won't use. It's too expensive to use. It's 30% less efficient than a mini split for $7,000. and they spent $25,000 of the taxpayers money and the city blamed the county and the county blamed the city and I got left out of my own retrofit and I waited a year for it to be a little bit warm before my dream after after 10 years of fighting for energy liberation with m municipalization 10 years and $30 million of the best spent money that we've ever spent in this city. I am furious. Furious that you act like you're

[49:02] sustainable. No, you discourage solar. It'll be lifetimes before I can afford to get solar now after this retrofit and free Palestine. Thank you. Thank you. Our um final touch quiet in the audience, please. Uh our final test fire tonight is Meredith Bar. Good evening. Thank you for having me. Um I just wanted to say first and foremost, thank you to the city council. You guys do great work. you put up with a lot and um I know how hard you work and I know that you're hungry and you're tired and you're sitting here listening to a lot of really good issues that are coming up in our community and a lot of issues that have absolutely nothing to do with our community and have no place in a city council meeting. And I am saddened that you have to put up with a

[50:01] wanted poster. It's absurd and ridiculous. And I want you guys to know that many many people in Boulder think you are doing a very good job and applaud you for everything you put up with uh and you have put up with from a few vocal and confused people in our uh population. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Um that brings us to the close of open comment. I want to thank everybody for attending and uh giving us your thoughts on different issues. and I'm going to turn to city staff uh to see if there are any responses to what we heard tonight. Thank you so much, mayor. Um, a couple things I'll say uh and I know we have um talked to Lynn a few times. Um we continue and I'm sure that we will continue to try to support uh Lynn. She is uh the program that she has been working on is a program under Energy Outreach Colorado. Um the city has tried

[51:02] to intervene on her behalf in support of that. Um I'm sure we will try again, but it is not a city program. We are continuing to try to support her and we'll continue to do so. Um I want to thank Trish for her comments on bike safety. It is something that we will continue to work on. Um in fact, I know uh council member Winer has sent us uh some information that uh of a program that's happening in Denver. We ourselves are aware of other programs and pilots of bike safety programs. I know myself something that's happening in Minneapolis um and been speaking with transportation and Boulder police about uh some other programs and pilots that are happening. So, we're going to continue to work on things um and different opportunities uh and see what we can do uh in the city. Um I know first of all uh so thank you uh to hear my own uh first language in um council chamber. So always a pleasure. Um and I know that

[52:01] many of you have spoken on behalf of uh the sage programs. Thank you for that. I will say uh I know that staff has been uh working to try to find a solution and a path forward. Um, uh, I know that we are trying to be supportive. I know that our director of planning and development services is here. I know that we are in the midst of trying to find that path. Council, uh, I know that Brad is here if there are additional questions and we can't get into all those details, but please know that we are trying to find a pathway as we move forward. We see you. We hear you. We are trying to find a pathway. Uh, and that is all on my Thank you. Nothing for me. Thank you, mayor. Great. I'm going to turn to council for clarifying questions only. I'm going to start with myself. I would welcome uh Brad, if you wouldn't mind uh just giving us a little bit of a more detailed update on where things stand with the the Sage program and you know what the next steps are to come into compliance with city codes.

[53:02] Uh good evening council members. I'm Brad Mueller. I'm the director of planning and development services. Thank you for that question. Uh first of all, I do want to uh be very clear that we we certainly honor and respect the uh history of the Sage School and the work that they do and their place in the community. Uh we were uh asked to review the site after a couple complaints were received and as you know many of our code compliance uh the vast majority actually start uh our investigations start from complaints and that that happened to be the case in this instance. uh we are always very cognizant of life safety issues and some of the violations that were found uh involve safety issues and we have been working with them to identify those and and some correction has begun. Uh in addition while uh we respect that uh there is a difference of opinion about what constitutes a school we use the definition of course that's

[54:00] found in the municipal code and it does qualify for a school under that uh designation. uh we were able to identify a path forward through the use review. Um I do want to share for the uh benefit of the audience that u many if not the vast majority of our use reviews do get approved and and so we have been encouraging them to go through that process and are happy to um walk them through that and and bring them along through that. Um so we continue to work with them and and hope that we can come to conclusion on some of these issues. And I'd be happy to provide a written uh detailed summary if that's something the council's interested in. Yeah, thanks for that, Brad. I for one would welcome an additional summary just so we have a little bit better sense of what's going on there. So, thanks for that. And uh as we mentioned before, we not responding uh right now. We'll respond to anything that we might want to at the end of the meeting. Any other clarifying questions for staff from council?

[55:01] Yeah, Lauren Brad, maybe you could step back up. Um, just related to this issue, could you maybe just because I've heard that the city is looking for a site review, and I appreciated you saying it's a use, correct? But just kind of for an educational aspect, could you maybe expand a little bit on what the differences are between those two processes? Sure. Um I I may actually rely on my colleague uh Charles Pharaoh who's available virtually I believe. Um but I'll I'll get started here and see if if Charles is able to chime in. Uh fundamentally there's a hearing process that's uh can that is associated with the use and some certain criteria that speak to the operational elements as well. And uh we have let the school know that our initial assessment is that it would meet those criteria and it's a

[56:00] matter of um of documenting that and coming into compliance. Charles, are you available? I see him popping up. Trying to pop up. Um, no, Brad. I think that's a great summary. I I don't know that I have much more to add. Use review is really just about evaluating the impacts of a potential use um based on the criteria that are in the code. So, I think that's well said. Do you mind introducing yourself, Charles, for the record? Apologies, Charles Pharaoh, Planning and Development Services. Thanks. Good enough, Lauren. Yes. Thanks, Brad. while you're there. Um, and maybe just for my own personal education, forgive me. Um, I'd heard reference to the the there might be a potential path for that use review that would change to school. I think there was a point about we're not going to do school. Is there something that a change

[57:02] to school would imply or obligate that would be obviously problematic or what would that impl? Sure. Thank you for the question, Councilman. I I think this is where maybe a more detailed uh summary would uh clarify things, but the the designation of it being a school is not a change. That's just a a reading of how it's defined, how how various uses are defined in the zoning code. And as council's familiar, there are variety of uh uses that are defined in in the zoning code, and it meets that criteria. Okay. Not seeing any more questions. And that brings us to complete end of open comment. Uh thanks again everybody for coming out tonight. We're going to move on to the rest of our agenda. Uh if if folks are walking out, I would just ask that you do so quietly if you have conversations to have those in the hallway or downstairs. If we can go to our consent agenda, please, Elicia. Yes, sir. Thank you. Our consent agenda is item number

[58:00] three on the agenda and it consists of items 3A through 3H. Thank you. Any questions or comments on the consent agenda or perhaps a motion? Tina, I move to approve the consent agenda. Second. Uh, we've got a motion and a second. And again, just folks can be quiet as you file out. If we can do a roll call, please. Elicia. Yes, sir. Thank you. We'll start the consent agenda for items 3A through 3H with Council Member Adams. Yes, Benjamin. Yes, Mayor Brackett. Yes, Mayor Pro Tim Fogerts. Yes. Council member Marquis, yes. Shuhard, yes. Spear, yes. Wallik, yes. And Winer, yes. The consent agenda items 3A through 3H are hereby approved unanimously. Thanks

[59:01] very much, Elicia. All right. If we can go to our public hearing item 5A, please. Yes, sir. Item 5A is the site review for the redevelopment of 1855 South Flat Iron and the second reading and consideration of a motion to adopt ordinance 8685 granting authority to the approving authority under title 9 land use code BRC1981 to grant a 9-year vesting period for the approved sight specific development plan. This is reviewed under case number LUR2024-00000036. Nuriel, I'll look to you to get it started. Yep. And actually, I'm going to send it straight to staff unless Brad was going to say anything. Oh, Allison, are you straight to you? Sorry. And usually I have something pathier to say and buying time and I don't have

[60:00] anything and so Allison, I see your thing. So, off you go. Thank you for the introduction. Okay. Hi, my name is Allison Blaine. I am the senior planner and case manager presenting this next item. Uh before I jump into the staff presentation, I just wanted to take a moment to go through the quasi judicial process. Um first, council members should note any exparte contacts. I can take a moment. Not seeing any. Um staff and the applicant will each give a presentation with the opportunity for council to ask questions after each presentation followed by the public hearing. The public hearing is then closed and council can discuss the decision. A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least five members to pass and motions must state findings, conclusions, and a recommendation. Tonight I will describe the pling process to date, the existing site and surrounding context, a summary of the proposed project, key issues for discussion, and conclude with staff

[61:02] recommendation. The project was first presented to planning board as a concept plan in December of 2023. City council did not call up the concept plan, but did refer the project to TAB to review site circulation and the TDM. At the tab hearing in August after the initial site review application, the board expressed support of the parking reduction and TDM. Staff then reviewed the application and recommended approval before planning board on January 21st where the item was then continued to February 4th due to the late hour. The item was continued again to February 18th for staff to draft denial findings which were ultimately not adopted because the motion did not receive an affirmative form votes and the motion failed leading to denial of the project. Council called up the item on March 18th and is now considering the site review application which includes a request for a vesting period greater than three years. The site review is required due to the size of the property and size of the de development and requested modifications include a 23% parking

[62:01] reduction, height modification and access exception. The height modification and requests for vested rights require a final decision by planning board subject to city council callup and the extended vesting period can only be approved by city council via ordinance. Lastly, the site was posted and public notice was provided and no public comments are received on the item during the review period. The subject site is located at the end of South Flat Iron Court south of Central A and north of the railroad. The proposed application will include the property addressed 1855 South Flat Iron as well as two outlots to the west. The entire site is indicated here in yellow. The majority of the site is designated as mixeduse industrial which includes light industrial uses as well as retail, office and commercial uses and some attached residential and a small portion of the site is designated as OSO and those areas are protected by easements. The site is zoned industrial general with the definition here on the slide. It's surrounded by other IG zone

[63:01] properties and the uh South Boulder Creek which is zoned public. The site is located within the Flat Iron Industrial Business Park in East Boulder and is surrounded by a hub of industrial and commercial uses including technical offices, biosciences, and manufacturing uses. Immediately to the east of the site is East Boulder Creek and adjacent multi-use path. The BNSF railroad runs adjacent to the site with the Arapjo and 55th Street station and other commercial uses along Arapjo Avenue to the south. The site is mostly covered by surface parking and asphalt and currently lacks mature trees or vegetation and is also occupied by the offices for Lumen. There are high functioning wetlands along the southern eastern property line and the site is impacted by the 100year 500year high hazard and conveyance flood zones. The site is located within the East Boulder sub community plan which envisions mixeduse developments with residential that integrate with the proposed flat iron greenway and the fifth 55th and Arapjo station. Per the

[64:02] plan, the business park is designated as an area of change with a goal to provide high-quality industri industrial and office spaces while creating opportunities for introducing residential uses. Specifically, the area is proposed to be a walkable hub for workers and nearby residents. The plan also includes a variety of defined place types. Much like the rest of the park, the site is considered destination workplace, which prioritizes business and industry uses while supporting the introduction of housing and ground floor activation as well as commercial spaces. The place type calls for improved access and mobility and specifically proposes options for first and last mile connections. So, the proposal being discussed tonight is for three three-story buildings that will function as research and development uses with ground floor and surface parking and a ground uh floor commercial space. The proposal will maintain the two existing access points from South Iron Court to facilitate vehicle and emergency access circulation with a two-way road pattern. Vehicles will primarily move through the site via the

[65:00] surrounding perimeter road and center pickup drop off area. Bike access to the site is also from South Iron Court as well as a new multi-use path connection proposed along the northern side of the site as shown in the East Boulder sub community plan which will connect to the South Boulder Creek path to the east. The circulation pattern directs the majority of vehicle traffic to the outer edge of the development while separated internal walkways are proposed for in uh pedestrian circulation. Parking will be located on the ground floor of each building along the perimeter road and a adjacent to each building. The proposal includes three dedicated car shell spaces, 66 EV spaces, and a total of 144 bike parking spaces. A 23% parking reduction is requested to allow for 398 spaces where 519 are required. The submitted TDM plan outlines strategies that support the requested reduction including telework, eco passes, and car share. About 30% of the site is dedicated to usable open space where 20% is required and open space is provided in the form of sitewide landscaping, decorative paved walkways, rain gardens,

[66:01] dispersed seating areas, and amenities like a fire pit and space for future outdoor fitness classes. A large portion of the site is also encumbered by a drainage easement which will restrict development in that area but will still count towards open space. The number of building material types is limited to concrete, metal panels and glazing. Primary building entries and building lobbies are delineated by curtain wall, metal trim and accent features. Building form incorporates terraces, overhangs and canlevers that frame frame the primary entryways. Front doors are oriented around the entry courtyard and interior circulation route. Each building has also been designed with a third level terrace on the primary corner that is meant to be expressed as a lantern. Perforated metal panels at the edge and an overhead trellis bring variation to the roof line and visual interest by creating a glow in evening hours and moving pattern of shadows during the day. The project is requesting a height modification for two out of the three buildings for a height of 50 feet. Building one will be 45 ft in height, which is permissible because it meets the requirements for a 5-ft conditional

[67:00] height increase above the byite height of 40 ft. Buildings two and three are eligible for the height modification due to their to their location within the flood zone. Building three is located along the multi-use path and therefore introduces additional architectural elements to provide a sense of human scale as required by the site review criteria. Such elements include a facade recession and decorative glazing on the ground floor. The proposed project will be developed in three phases. Phase one will include construction of building three in the ground floor commercial space, the multi-use path, associated improvements for building three, and the full perimeter access road. Buildings two and buildings one will be developed in the remaining phases. The applicant expects the proposed project and phasing plan will take nine years to implement and is requesting an extension of vested rights from a period of three years to a period of nine years, which requires approval of an ordinance by city council. So there are four key issues that were raised and I'll detail these in the next slides. Key issue one is the proposed project consistent with the site review

[68:01] criteria. Overall staff finds that the project is consistent. It promotes alternatives to the automobile, provides a variety of common open space and landscaping and building and sighting design is not only compatible with the character of the surrounding area, but the sub community plan as well. Building design creates visual interest in a vibrant pedestrian experience. Key issue two is the proposed project consistent with the site review criteria for larger floor plate buildings and projects with multiple buildings. Staff finds that the applicant has taken measures to add roof line variation and incorporate varied heights. Overall, staff appreciates the design decision to create visual interest with the anchor corners. Um, however, staff is also recommending a condition of approval that requires the applicant to propose additional design elements at time of tech. Key issue three is the proposed parking reduction consistent with the criteria. Staff finds that the 23% parking reduction request is consistent with the criteria found in the site review as well as 996F. And last key issue is the proposed

[69:00] project consistent with the East Boulder sub community plan. Staff finds that overall the project is consistent with the plan. The proposal includes a ground floor commercial space to serve the entire business park and the proposed multi-use path connection to the north is in keeping with the area plans destination workplace place type. We'll move forward to the staff recommendation. This includes two motions. The first one is for the site review and the second one is to adopt the ordinance to grant the 9-year vesting property right. And I will open it up to questions. Thanks so much Allison. Uh, council questions for city staff and I'll mention if you have a question for the applicant, I think that would come a little later. So, any clarifying questions for staff? Tina? Yes. Um, I didn't catch what number of EV parking spaces are there as a percentage of all the parking spaces. Um, I don't have the percentage off the top of my head, but or the numbers. There's 66 EV parking. 66. So, I think it was like over half, right? or EV. Well, the they're pro providing 398

[70:03] total parking spaces where the required is a little over 500. Okay. And then my second question in this type of project, there's the commercial space. Does the use of the commercial space need to be defined at this point or can it stay open throughout the process based on what they think is the demand when it's complete? At this point, it will stay as a future amenity space and if it turns into be a use that would trigger a use review, then they would go through that process later on. But right now, I believe it's um just shown as an amenity space. But at this point, there's no um requirement from our end to say it must be a cafe or a bike repair or a gym or anything like that. No, it just be in keeping with the East Boulder sub community plan, which is calls for ground floor commercial space. So it would be up to the applicant what they want to provide. Nicole, I just had a process uh clarifying question. Um can you please uh clarify for me the role of the East Boulder sub

[71:00] community plan in the um in basically our criteria based decision-m process here. Yeah. So consistency with area plans does come up I think in four of the site review criteria. Um, so that is weighed into the overall decision made on consistency with site review. Can I follow up with that? Yeah. Yeah. Could could you speak a little bit to how the east area subm community plan interacts with the industrial zoning because they feel a little different? Can you clarify or Teresa might jump in? I believe we have Laurel Wit from my office participating remotely and um I Tina I'm not sure that she can speak to the interaction with the industrial but I I I do think if we get back to council member Spear's question first um we can

[72:02] speak a little more with how the sub community plan interacts with the site review criteria. Good evening everybody. Can you hear me? Okay. Yes. Wonderful. This is Laura Whit with the city attorney's office. Thanks, Teresa. Um, thank you for giving me an opportunity just to weigh in on sub community plans. Um, we've had this question come up and generally sub community plans are planning advisory type of documents. Um, however, the city has adopted subcommittee plans into the site review criteria. Um, and as a criterion, it has to be, you know, you have to meet the criteria to approve a project or offer a condition if you want to approve it or deny it. Um, historically plans have been applied such that each guideline, vision or goal doesn't have to necessarily be exactly applied on a particular property. It's an overall finding and the language needs to be considered when you're looking at it. So, um, that's generally how we have advised in the past, how we advise now here. I can't really speak to the IM zone. I think that's a little bit maybe more of a planning question, but

[73:00] hopefully that's helpful and I can dive into that a little bit more. Tina, do you mind if I follow up on on your question? Not at all. Um just maybe Laurel to I don't know if this is what Tina was thinking just that the zoning has a certain list of uses that are allowed um by that zoning and um and then things like heights and you various other things that are allowed and not allowed whereas the sub community plan in the destination workplace is a little bit more aspirational and broad. So like can you talk maybe about the interaction between the differences levels of those two things? Right. Right. So one of the things that we or that courts have looked at generally is how specific the language is. So when you're looking at something like a criterion, what's more specific in the language, courts basically say um you know if if there is specific criterion in the sub community plans and you can use that as part of your review. Um whereas something like a height is it's a little bit more black

[74:01] and white. Does it meet that height? Does it not meet that height? If it doesn't, then what do we need to do to amend the criteria versus more of a planning document, which is, as you said, um, mayor, it's a little bit more aspirational. It's more of an idealistic of what we want this area to look like. Um, and that's why we use for the BBCP side of it, for example, we use on balance, like that sort of language. It's more of an overarching plan versus um, a specific criterion. But we do tie into the site review criteria, which is where um, where we've been talking about this a little bit more. I hope that was helpful. I can explain a little bit further too. So it it is helpful. Um so if the planning board were to issue conditions of denial, would they generally reflect the sub community plan or the other criterion or can it be a bit a mix of both and they would carry the weight? Yeah. So in order to deny a site, we have to show that it doesn't meet our criterion. um whether that's height or whatever other criterion

[75:01] that's in 9214 that could also include sub community it doesn't meet this but generally it is where doesn't it meet that criterion and why doesn't the planning board or city council think that this particular site meets that criterion the other option of course is to offer amendments and and say that with this amendment that that criterion does fit into and and would be approvable can and then my last question just to clarify further would be so the the planning board or the council could deny something purely on attributes from the more aspirational subcommunity plan even if the site met the criterion in the other uh zoning criterion set. Yeah. So, so you can deny based on any site review criteria. So, you would have to say um under 1914h that this particular um criteria doesn't match. And so we what we usually recommend is um is for sorry said um a

[76:01] few a few too many times for this particular criterion what what we're looking at is does it meet the the compatibility of the sub community plan and if it does um then you we wouldn't deny based on that and if it doesn't then then you would say why. So generally we deny things based on you know a criterion and this is a criterion. Um, we however generally say that this is an aspirational planning document. It is a little bit more of a of a a planning document, not necessarily the search criteria unlike like the mayor said about height and things like that. Um, yeah. Um, mayor. Yes. Teresa, do you want to follow? Do you mind if I ask a followup? So Laurel, would it be accurate to say then that um while the sub community plan is is incorporated into the criteria, the sub community plan itself does not become criteria. That's correct.

[77:00] Well said. Okay. I've got a question for you. um which is I noted in the in the packet that you felt like it would be good to have a condition for the staff to continue to work on height variation uh as you move into the tech doc phase and um that's not called out in your recommended motion. Is it because it's embedded in the uh recommending conditions of approval in our packet already? That's correct. Okay. So if we made that motion that you put there would include that working with the applicant on the roof lines. Great. Any other clarifying questions from council? Uh not seeing any then uh would I would invite the applicant up for presentation.

[78:16] presentation. Waiting for a presentation to come up. Yes, there's anything else to do. It's on the laptop. Who um provided the presentation and or because did we get the presentation or do you have it Allison? Yes. It can't be done from their computer. They can send it to Emily at the city clerk's office because normally they don't hook up outside computers to our system. That's Yeah, we we can hook up. I can just think of IT security and what they would

[79:00] say about plug like no, we can't do that. Plug that in directly. Matt, your audience is smaller, but we've got a minute or two. Okay. We've got it now. All right. Are we good to go? Yeah. Good evening. I'm Sal Pipoli with Biomod

[80:01] Realy. Uh, thank you for the opportunity. I know you have a full agenda and it's late. I really appreciate the chance to present our project. Um, we're here to reiterate our commit. I'm sure you're a little quiet. If you can get over that mic, please. Um, next slide. Next slide, please. Next slide, please. Thank you. Uh first and foremost uh we're here to reiterate our commitment to the innovation ecosystem to our clients and to Boulder. We'll continue to deliver mission critical facilities that don't go bump in the night. Um essentially we're delivering a lot of peace of mind to our clients, our customers who are create, you know, creating innovation in their facilities. We're also creating very contextsensitive uh real estate solutions. Next slide, please. These aren't just words. Over the past couple of years, we've celebrated a lot of positive transformation in East Boulder. Next slide. We've also made large capital

[81:02] investments in very complex R&D infrastructure. Next slide. We've also invested in very long-term alliances, regional partnerships in areas like quantum research. Next slide. We've also invested in major neighborhood placemaking, retail expansion. This is two doors down from 1855. That's the project under consideration. East and Co. is a brand new restaurant, market hall, conference facility for East Boulder, open to the public. 15,000 square ft. It's opening April 26. It's in permitting right now. This is in addition to the cafe that we have at 1855, the subject property. Um, we're doing a lot. Next slide, please. We're doing a lot to get the flywheel going within the innovation

[82:02] district. U page bottom in green is the subject property 1855. And as you'll see with the rest of the presentation, um, it fits really well within a very broad portfolio of solutions. all towards fostering innovation. We're also tracking very closely um some macroemerging macroeconomic uncertainty and policy changes uh that are impacting many of our customers. And through all of it, you know, we reiterate our commitment. We're standing by ready to serve and help, you know, with real estate, with services, and with capital. Andrew, you're up next. Thank you. Thanks, Ail. And good evening, council members. Here are the guiding principles of our proposed 1855 development. And you can also see the before and after image on the right here. As you can see, we're not only continuing to revitalize Flat Iron Park, we're doing so in a manner that advances city goals, optimizes our existing site, and

[83:02] utilizes advanced design principles. Before I hand it over to Perkins to talk about those design principles, I wanted to expand on two and three a little further. Do you mind clicking the next slide? So on advancing city goals as Alan Allison spoke to earlier we've worked a lot with staff and you can see in their most recent report uh they found we are consistent with the site review criteria and are recommending approval. We also went before your transportation advisory board last August and they're very supportive of our project as well as you'll see throughout this presentation. Uh you mind clicking click? Uh yeah, thank you. Um they also found consistency with the B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B Boulder Valley comp plan policies as you can see on the left here and these are really the foundation for a lot of the guiding principles of our project. As you can see in the lower right here, the Boulder Valley comp plan calls out revitalization of the bioscience industry specifically in East Boulder.

[84:00] And again, that was our first guiding principle for this project. Am I clicking uh quickly on zoning? Our our zoning as Allison mentioned is industrial general and our proposed use research and development is allowed by right. Next slide please. So to meet these city review criteria we had a very challenging site to deal with. Do you mind clicking once to go through a few of them uh the first one being site perimeter. So 94% of our site perimeter is constrained to the east and south by a restricted drainage easement and to the west and north by fence third party lots. Click one more time. We also are at the end of a culde-sac which requires a perimeter ring road for emergency vehicle access. And one more time. And we're also uh the eastern twothirds of our site is a 100-year flood plane posing challenges for our critical infrastructure. Next slide, please. So to address these site challenges, um do you mind just clicking through? There's a couple iterations and

[85:01] I'll speak over them. Um we first installed a ring. Do you mind clicking? Uh, yep. Thank you. Uh, we first installed a ring road around the perimeter as you can, uh, see here, to meet that emergency vehicle access requirement. Um, and we consolidated parking to that ring road as well as beneath each building with podium parking. You can see the very positive feedback we got from TAB last August in the lower right here. And that open that also opened up the center of our site for a courtyard. Uh we located that courtyard next to the culde-sac, make it accessible to the public, lined it with 100% transparent facade and uh lined it with activated uses such as our lobbies, retail cafe, bike centers, etc. to elevate the experience of that courtyard. We made it accessible with pedestrian pathways and bike uh pathways. Um and in the one location we could, if you don't mind clicking one more time, uh we extended that multi-use path uh into our site. And again, this is the only location possible because of

[86:00] that restricted drainage easement I spoke about on that prior slide. And then one more uh time. Thank you. Um and as I mentioned before, these eastern two buildings are in the flood plane. So to increase resiliency of these buildings, we're proposing to raise them 5 feet out of that flood plane. One more time. So with these design moves, we're able to provide not only 200,000 square feet of innovation space, but a number of amenities for both our tenants and the community. And then click one more time. while also enhancing the site. So you can see here we're increasing the amount of open space. We're increasing the number of trees by over five times amount of pvious area, bike spaces, etc. So with that, I'll hand it over to Perkins to talk more about the design. Thank you. Next slide, please. I'm Luke Murphrey and I'm a senior landscape architect with Perkins and Will. We're going to home in on site activation, connectivity, building design, and sustainability. Next slide. The site design for this project takes

[87:00] in next slide, please. Sorry. Site design uh takes its inspiration from the beauty of Boulder Creek as it winds through the iconic Flat Iron Mountains. Like the creek itself, which sculpts the land and fosters life sustaining environments, this design channels its biofilic forms to shape pathways and connect a series of outdoor amenities for both employees and the public alike. Next slide. We believe innovation grows through connection. So for this project, we're creating outdoor spaces that bring people together, supporting socializing, focused work, exercise, and the local environment to foster this engagement and collaboration. Next slide, please. The first of these spaces, the commons. It's a dynamic open space that serves the campuses as the campus public front door. Highlights the architecture while embracing and celebrating the beauty of the regional landscape. The central courtyard features a flexible plaza for drop offs, pickups, and emergency access, which can be closed off for campus events. Next

[88:01] slide. The terrace offers employees and visitors a great spot to watch the sunset with step seating overlooking the primary rain garden that naturally filters storm water before it leaves the site. Next slide. The Glade is defined by its programmed spaces and tree groves that frame views to the sky. These trees provide shade in the summer and let warmth in during the winter, creating ideal spots for exercise, work, and relaxation year round. Next slide. This outdoor living room is designed for flexibility, perfect for a quick meeting, coffee break, bird watching, or friendly game of ping pong. Next slide. Lastly, the Ramble offers a quieter space for escape and discovery with winding path, rain gardens, and intimate gathering zones. At its east end, bold landforms and native plantings create a striking entry from the parking lot. Next slide. Locally sourced stone boulders define the Ramble gathering spaces and further reinforce connection to the

[89:01] front range landscapes. Now I'll turn it over to Ryan to discuss connectivity, architectural design, and sustainability. Great. Thanks, Luke. And this is our last section, so I'll speed through this. Uh if you could skip two slides, great to this one. Um, as you've heard from Allison and from our team, this site is well connected to the community in terms of public transit and the multi-use path. As you can see, within a 5 to 7 minute walking radius from the site, we have the major lines on Arapjo and 55th Street, as well as, as we heard, the direct connection of the multi-use path not only on the eastern side of our site, but actually entering into our site and going on to Flat Iron Court. Next slide. Um, you'd also heard the support that we received from TAB for our TDM plan. The cornerstone of that is a 23% reduction in the parking on site which as we've seen as in our research is one of the highest uh reductions that we've seen within Boulder as well as eight kind of robust strategies that working together allow us to meet this very aggressive

[90:01] plan. Next slide and next one. So really we've designed the architecture and the landscape to really create a welcoming place, a place where science and community meet. As you heard from this, there's only 6% of our entire site that meets the public way. But we've really tried to maximize that in terms of the architecture and landscape experience for the public. Next slide. Um, in that space, we've really opened up the buildings, created glazing, the public spaces, lobby areas, and a lot of these beautiful landscape moments, all accessible at that central courtyard space. Next slide. Um, we've also embedded within the architecture a series of moments that break up the scale of these buildings from transparent apertures, trelluses, green space, series of bay windows, these glazing portals, lifted corners that really create variety and texture as you move around the site. Next slide. We've also thought a lot about the roof line variation. These buildings are highly technical. Think about the next generation of science, quantum computing that could be coming here or other types of science that we can't even predict now. Because of those

[91:01] restraints in the flood plane, we still try to maintain variety along that roof line with five different devices here from this kind of cornice line, flat projections, trelluses, pushing those areas down for reveals or roof terraces, as well as just the nature of the building fabric as you can see in the plan diagram in orange, having a serrated roof edge, which breaks up the skyline and where the building meets the sky. Next slide. Sustainability is important to you as well as to our client. We've exceeded that in terms of above code. So our project baseline is going to be lead gold certification as well as thinking about what's important to communities. So reducing carbon on site through carbon offsets, increase renewables on site as well as Luke talked about increasing the habitat, protected habitat and open space uh on this site. Next slide. We've also thought a lot about the architecture, the character of it to break up the scale of these buildings. Think of it almost as a melodic rhythm, musical as you move around that with series of punch windows, banking the

[92:00] larger expanses of glazing at those public areas at that central courtyard and then having high quality long-lasting materials all around this building. Next slide. And we're almost done, I promise. Um, you know, these buildings and we've talked a little bit about the height are really challenging in terms of anticipating next generative science. They're different from residential buildings, different from office buildings. They require robust structural systems, robust mechanical systems. So you can see here that those have been embedded in this and still being able to work with those constraints with the building height limits. Next slide. And this is our last one. So we've really thought about how this building also works not just with the public interface in that central courtyard, but also as experience and connects to nature as we heard about the open space, its connectivity and really embracing its the beauty of this place. So, we look forward to your questions and be able to unpack this further for you. Excellent. Thanks so much for that presentation. So, I'll look to council. Do we have any clarifying questions for the

[93:03] applicant? Tina? Yeah, thank you for being here and providing that uh presentation. Um, based on your other projects in that same area, do you have a sense of how many of the people working in your existing projects live within the city limits of Boulder? I'm just thinking about the electric charging stations and you know this a lot of people still need to drive because they can't live here. So, if the questions about electric charging, you know, we want to put a lot of them in. We've been doing that across all our campuses. We're on to the second wave now. You know, we've started like deploying fast chargers, not just the regular ones, but the quick ones. So, that's a baseline policy across all our campuses. To to the specific question about how many people live in town, I don't have the number handy. We can do a poll and, you know, base additional upgrades and design, you know, with data. I don't have the number handy.

[94:00] Okay. And then I guess my other question would be when you're thinking about the the bicycle parking you currently provide and the EV charging you currently provide, what is the utilization of those two amenities look like in your existing projects? There are some very loyal users. We've learned, you know, we've learned that quickly. You know, there's folks who really are committed to coming in and out on cycles and and as such, we've broadened our program. It's not just for small bikes, but the heavy ones. We've got a lot of feedback through these discussions over the past year that you know the vertical ones are very difficult for heavy bikes and ebikes and so we've built that into the program. The idea isn't to cut corners. We want to do the right thing. We'll put in as me you know the team has the numbers but enough infrastructure to support electric bikes the slightly longer ones the heavy ones all of it. That's the intent and it should be reflected in the data in the numbers in the package. Okay. Thank you.

[95:00] Lauren, do you have a first floor image where you could show us where kind of that bike parking is located? Do you mind pulling up the presentation again? It's probably while Okay. So, while we're pulling it up, we um it's right off the lobby, but in its separate entrance, so you don't have to go into and through the building. It's right off the central plaza. Every building at, you know, at the lowest level has an entire corner dedicated, Am I right? Yes. Okay. The um dedicated to bike infrastructure. So that's a fact and we can verify it. We've submitted the plans. Do you want to do you guys want to find it in here? It's going to be in the appendix at the end. Sorry.

[96:07] Sorry about this. Um it's towards u if you if you don't mind clicking through. I think there's a plan view in the second section here. I didn't realize um yeah, just pause uh right there. It actually highlights in blue. um council or um I know they're all shades of blue, but um in in building three, which is the top right building, uh you can see in a lightly shaded blue in the top left there. So that's where the bike room is. In building two, which is the bottom right, uh it's just south of the lobby. So um the kind of middle shaded blue. Uh and then in building one, which is the building on the left, it's the uh

[97:00] northernmost shade of blue that you can see there. Is that helpful? Yes, very much. Thank you. No problem. I have I have a question for you. Uh which is whether you feel like you need every single one of the parking spaces that are proposed in the project. And to be spec specific, what I'm looking at is um outside the perimeter road on that east side where you're bordering the bike path. Do you need all of those spaces? Um or if we granted a bit of an additional parking reduction, could you maybe use landscaping in there or a walkway for the users? Happy to look into it. We um parking costs us a lot of money. you know, every space under the building is 90,000 or 120,000 in the flood zone, right? So, we're aligned in that it doesn't help us to add more parking and a lot. So, we also gather a lot of feedback from brokers and, you know, tenants and everybody. And so, this is

[98:01] we're also goal seeking for the least we can build in terms of parking spaces to have a minimum viable project that, you know, our tenants can use. And so, in that sense, first principles, we're aligned. We want to build the least number of spaces, very expensive. Um, so happy to look into additional landscaping around the connector. So if if we gave you that as an option, that could be something that you could look into as you moved into final technical documents and such. Okay. Thanks. That's all I had. Oh, do you have an additional thought there? Yeah, if we could just add one thing to. So the existing design incorporates a series of landscape screening as well as burming to hide the parking and make it less visible from the multi-use path. And we also have the advantage one few of the advantages with the natural grade here is that also helps to hide that. So the rendering at the end if you notice there weren't very few cars visible is actually a product of how that landscaping and screening would actually work there. Yeah. And I did see that but I appreciate the

[99:00] clarification. Yeah. So, previously we've had some projects come through where they've looked at um parking structures that are removable um with the idea that like as things change and they might need less parking, how much do you have any idea how much it would add in terms of cost to try and make a larger portion of the lower level parking on the buildings flexible for use over time as something other than parking or is that something you could look into? It's height. Height is the issue. And so because of the um the height restrictions, we've sort of limited it, right? So the parking level is no more than 12 feet and research space. Office you could, but that's not what we do. Office you can jam into 12 floor 12 feet. And so we see a lot of projects where, you know, they're building for the future with parking optionality, you

[100:01] know, where in X years from now maybe, you know, somebody toggles and says no more parking, let's make it an office. But with research, you need the 16. That's that's the that's the constraint. Um, only a fraction, a portion of I don't know what the number is, but let's just say, do you know how many spaces are under the building, you guys? It's not all of it, right? So some of it is under and the rest of it is around the ring road. So that might be a toggle in the future. You know, if we found X years from now that, you know, everyone now lives in Boulder and, you know, is doing research with molecules and they don't need to drive in and they're all biking or walking in, great. So that becomes the future toggle. But the short answer to your question is within 12 ft, which is approximately what the parking is. It's very difficult to squish in research. That's the lowest floor. Is that helpful? Yes. Thank you. Ryan, just on the bike rooms, are they all at um ground level?

[101:03] Uh yes, the bike rooms are all ground level and they're all full height glazed areas. So the idea was to make them welcoming inviting and they're oversized so that in the future they can be future proof for different kind of rack systems or even bike repair areas. Um, and if I could jump back to the comment about the grade and the piece, the one thing that's a little, it's hard to represent the threedimensionality of the site with the flat 2D plan. We've gone and you've seen in some of the renders, we really gone to extents to hide any of the ground level parking either with public program as you can see in this diagram, all lining that central courtyard where the grade is kind of manipulating those areas where bike rooms and lobbies or actual lab spaces push down as close as we can to get to grade. And then we've birmed up so with the plantings and landscape to hide that in all the major public areas. So the ramble area. So I'm trying to answer your question about flexibility. Those areas where there was no daylight. So we're using the landscape to actually hide and cover that area. So in the Ramble area that

[102:02] Luca showed the rendering that planting's pushed up against that garage essentially to make it subterranean. And then there's other areas around the courtyard where we also push grade up to really try to hide any of that parking in that what would be essentially blank walls or have program in front. Thank you for that. So what is the like approximate floor area elevation of those lobby spaces compared to kind of the parking area? You're you're saying that they're a step up. Is that correct? Yeah, they due to the complications with the site essentially you could think of them uh the lobbies as being at the lowest level of the site but that does vary depending on how it works on each of the buildings. So for example on buildings two and three essentially the lobbies are flush with the parking but that's one of our lower points of the site the grade starts to climb up against the building as you head further east or right hand side of the image. The lefthand building it's kind of the

[103:01] lobby is its own level. So the garages push down as far as possible. And we've pulled the lobby up because the grade there goes from the uh north side to the south climbs up. So lobbies have great connectivity. They're kind of at our grade level wherever the existing grades or manipulated grades had to be due to the flooding issues and flood proofing. And then the garage uh sometimes aligns and other times it's even lower than the lobby. For example, on building one. Thank you. All right. I'm not seeing any other hands raised. So that comes to uh an end of our clarifying questions. Um so we will now go to the public hearing. We have two people signed up. Um each of you will get three minutes to speak. The one inperson speaker is Jonathan Singer and then we'll go to Lin Seel virtually. Good evening members of council. I'm Jonathan Singer, senior director of policy programs at the

[104:01] Boulder Chamber. And I want to thank many of you for uh joining us just yesterday to help educate the public about what it's like to run for city council. It was not a scared straight program. You inspired a lot of folks. Um speaking of inspiring folks though, I wanted to uh start with a quote from uh Michael Jordan. Uh to achieve greatness, you must trust the process and have unwavering belief in your abilities. There was an exceptional process that Biomed went through. They've been a wonderful partner and they've reimagined an industrial area that was pragmatic and clunky to inspirational, pragmatic and flowing. They've met the site review criteria. They work closely with staff and advisory boards. And at a time when we're looking at the decimation of hundreds of research and development jobs potentially risking Boulder's foothold in the world of research and

[105:00] development, we are seeing this partner step up to help provide those fill that gap. Lastly, we're looking at something that uh I heard a few of you actually mention uh about um clarifying is the East Boulder sub community plan is aspirational. I want to ask you a question. When does aspiration stand in the way of inspiration? This should not be one of those times. This is an inspired plan that seeks to build a sense of place in a in an area that never had it before. So, back to that original quote about achieving greatness, I believe that the unwavering commitment that we have here today will actually help us achieve greatness in a part of Boulder that deserves it, in a way that meets many of our goals. And I encourage the council here to stick with biomed, stick with

[106:01] the uh work that they've done with tab and approve this as uh as pre presented. With that, I look forward to the conversation. Thank you for your time and your diligence. Thank you. We will now go to Lynn Seel online. I'm as inspired as Jonathan is about this beautiful design, but guess what? The chamber missed it on the franchise. We need to end the franchise now. Now. Okay. Now, the shameless begging and this project is not appropriate for Boulder. Violates Boulder Valley Compound jobs housing imbalance. Do you developers think that your clients that that are going to be in this space can afford the $10 million house that's available in Boulder

[107:01] because I don't think you're paying them that much with CU South with Sundance. We don't need a second health sciences center. And believe me, I'm in I'm a health sciences professional. I'm an ultrasound technologist. I appreciate health sciences very much. My mother died of leukemia poison poisoning from rocky flats plutonium. I get good health. Okay, I get it. This is international workers day. Such an appropriate time because this project does not supply on the worker side. You know, they bought this place with a flood zone confluence and then they begged to you. They begged to the city council for a 23% parking reduction and a height amendment. And Aaron wants even more than 23% parking reduction. Do you know what parking cost in Aspen?

[108:02] $425,000 of space. Yeah, you bet. developers. It's It's expensive. Parking is This is just not what Boulder needs. It's a beautiful design. Take it to California. Take it somewhere else. The East Boulder sub community issue. There's a lot of problems with integrating this with housing in East Boulder sub community. And the issue gets to be where are your people going to live? Where are they going to live? All the people in this space because there's already trouble with an industrial space being converted to housing. The city council wants nothing but housing, housing, housing, and more housing. And you know what? Housing, housing begets housing. That doesn't work. The more housing, the more expense in a in an

[109:02] inelastic market like Boulder. There's no middle housing here. You people see that every day. We have no middle housing. Are all these people making, you know, millions of bucks a year? I don't think so. Thank you for your testimony. All right. Um, this is the point at which we would ask the applicant if they would like to rebut anything that was said in the public hearing. Nope. Okay. Um, and I did uh miss a step earlier, which was to check and see if anybody had any exparte communications about this project. Any of those from council members? Yes, Taiisha and Mark. And then Mark. Yes. Oh, I'll let Matt go. Mark go first because I'm still learning. I have previously met with the developer, but I do not think it will alter my analysis of the project. I also have met with the developer and I do not believe it will compromise my

[110:01] decision making. Thank you. Very good. And same met with the developer. Don't think it'll compromise my objectivity. Same Lauren I did as well and we specifically avoided discussion around this project. Yeah, I I wouldn't have disclosed this. I have spoken with the developer but not about this project. So, I don't consider that an exparte communication. I met the developer years ago and had a really good time, but I'm pretty sure that it was nothing about this project. Tell me if I'm wrong. Yeah, wasn't wasn't about I don't think it counts if it wasn't about this project, but good enough. Okay, so that brings us back here. So, we have four keyish Yes. Um at this time would you like to um ask the applicant if they have any objection based on those exparte disclosures? You all have any objections? No.

[111:00] Okay. Thank you for making sure we check that box. So we have four key issues. My proposal is that we address them together. I thought I would read them uh quickly, but that ask people to just um they could make their comments about the project as a whole keeping the key issues in mind. So quickly uh key issue number one is whether the proposed project is consistent with the site review criteria including additional criteria for building required height modification. Number two is it consistent with site review criteria for larger floor plate buildings and projects with multiple buildings. Number three is the proposed vehicular parking reduction consistent with parking reduction criteria as well as applicable site review criteria and four is the proposed project consistent with the East Boulder sub community plan. Um, who would like to begin our discussion about the consistency with these various criteria? Anyone? Matt, I can keep it pretty simple. Um, uh, having sort of looked at the site

[112:00] review criteria, I mean, I find that the applicant largely meets this and I think to, uh, Jonathan Singer's point, this has been a pretty robust process. So I think a lot of the a lot of that work's been done and and thankfully kind of done in front of us and so certainly with regards to the four criteria I think this project um meets those um um in that regard. There's certainly things I'd love for them to try to enhance but with but that would be outside the criteria and hopefully in good faith they try to do some of those but I think it meets the criteria as stated. Thanks others Mark. Uh, I'll have some other comments later, but initially I want to say that I I answer all of the questions in the affirmative. Very good. Um, I'll call on myself. I agree with uh, city staff's analysis of the criteria and also um, agree that the project generally meets it. I think the applicant has put together um, an excellent highquality project that is um, what the code is looking for and I think what our um, the East Boulder sub

[113:00] community plan is. one of the kinds of projects that we're looking for in this area. So, I appreciate that you all moving forward with this. I I would like to explore this possibility of an optionality to removing additional um parking and replacing it with landscaping or circulation space. And so, I would look to the city attorneys. This would be based on site review criteria 2A5 which says the design of vehicular circulation and parking areas make efficient use of the land and minimize the amount of pavement necessary to meet the circulation and parking needs of the project. My thought would be that if city staff could look at the parking needs of the project with the applicant as they move towards the tech phase and then have the option of removing that parking and replacing it with um landscaping or circulation use. Is would we be able to craft um an amendment that would allow for that? I believe you would. You'd probably just need to give a limit to what percentage parking reduction you're approving as part of this review. Got it. Laurel, do

[114:02] you want to weigh in on that? Yeah, thank you so much, Mayor. Um, I think it's helpful to give a limitation and then we could say at the end of the condition at time of tech talk to the uh satisfaction of staff that that they can approve the design. So just making sure that that staff is the one approving it so it doesn't have to come back to you. Great. And I think that would require a number to be used in an amendment. Um and I don't I wonder if anyone is able to do the math. I did a rough it would be a further 10 to 15% reduction on top of the 23 that was approved. Okay. So it could be in the range of 33 to 38 total. I wasn't exact, but that was rough. You could say up to 38% if you wanted to. Those are some bigger numbers than I expected, but yeah. Tina, so just a process question. Would you be offering an amendment to provide an option? Okay. But we're not creating a new condition for the applicant to comply with. Correct. It would be an amendment

[115:00] that would uh allow for an option. Okay. And but we will most likely reduce parking minimums by the time they even get close to construction. So I'm wondering they won't have any they could reduce it to zero in two months. So maybe Laurel Trishi could weigh in on this. We're we're making a decision tonight. We may well remove parking minimums in a few months. Would uh they be all their parking requirements go away if we remove parking minimums or would they still be um stuck with the not stuck with would they still be bound by the conditions um of the approval tonight? Teresa, do you want me to weigh in? Sure. Great. So, what we've done in the past is if there is a new ordinance that comes down that loosens the restrictions, then usually what we do is we have the developer um opt into it. So, they're allowed to opt into it if they're still developing. So, they could choose to do that. Um if it's less less or more restrictive, then they would have to they would be able to stay with what they were approved at. So, it's

[116:00] kind of like an opt-in sort of situation. That's what we've done in the past. It depends on what the how the ordinance comes down and what the language says and we don't know that yet or I don't know that yet. Yeah. And we we don't know, right? That's subject to future legislative action. But Tina, that's a point. So it might perhaps we could offer the option without specifying a percentage if do you think that would work? Uh, I think it would be I think it would the specificity is better. Okay. Fine. And mayor, just noting uh staff is letting me know that while they're fine with 38% reduction, 33% is a typical number. Yeah. So maybe 33%. Um, okay. So that that that's it for me. I plan on offering that amendment when we get to the time of u making a motion, but I'd like to hear from other council members. Can I call you with Yeah, please. I I'm a little confused. Are you going to make an

[117:01] amendment that requires a 33 or 38% reduction or permit the applicant to determine the feasibility of same the latter and specifically with regards to removing the parking on the eastern edge of the site? Okay. Fine. Thank you, Ryan. I I think I have a question for staff, but are we have we passed that? Is that No, no, you can always ask a question. Sure. Okay. So, um I'm just reviewing again some of the previous planning board comments and I remember I'm sorry, I'm reading that um there were some planning board members who expressed a concern that this it doesn't meet site review criteria. I think Laura Kaplan in particular on the was it like the fe the February meeting talked about um a few things um concerned that it doesn't meet the form and massing um requirement to be consistent with the character. I guess I'm just wondering if if could staff just maybe address again um that they have considered this

[118:03] feedback and feel confident that um the proposal does meet that site review or if that's staff's role to do. I think that's staff's role to tell us that that's correct. Staff still feels that it meets the criteria. Um and any other additional design elements to like the roof line would be addressed at tech do as far as the other form and massing still feels it's consistent. Okay. So staff I I would also add that this is a denovo review and what that means is that you're looking at this a new and you are substituting your judgment for that of the planning board and that's what you've done by calling it up. And so while certainly that record is informative, you are not bound by that record. Thank you both. Yeah, Brad Mueller. And I will just add Teresa took most of my thunder there, but uh also that um that the staff recommend is really at the

[119:01] front end of the process. So it's a new a new consideration as she was describing. Did you want to offer a comment at all while you had the floor? Okay. Can I just ask staff one more question since we're going back to that? There was some mention in the memo about the terraces on the corners and is there anything in the conditions that we're approving that would require those to be changed or is there the option to remain um covered? There was nothing in the conditions of approval that would require those. Okay, that was just a comment made during the during the review. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, in general, I am very supportive. I really appreciate um particularly the efforts to uh around green building. Um, I also appreciate the intersection with agriculture um and again having more

[120:00] food and food opportunities on the east side of town. Um there are just a couple of I agree and concur with um my colleague Ryan regarding um you know comments from our planning board which again I think it's interesting that we lean so heavily on what they have to say sometimes and then other times we're like well so again this is where interpretation comes into play and I I just want to honor the the both the issues that were raised um again I although I appreciate staff's comments around some of these issues Um I still again around, you know, the main entrances that do not address the public realm, the ground floor. Um you know, again, these aren't, you know, gray areas. And so um and and I hear you on um that the East Boulder plan is aspirational, right, John Jonathan? Um, and I also believe that the folks that put that aspiration together were trying

[121:00] to address issues that we'd seen previously. Um, and so I know as a resident for 14 or 15 years coming up, um, that I didn't I was not even aware of these public spaces until I joined council. And not just this one. I'm just saying apparently there are all these spaces that are open to the public that nobody knows about. and that's a problem because that's supposed to be uh a part of the work that we're doing. So, I'm hopeful um that those kinds of issues can be addressed because again that plan is in response to what our community saw as barriers um and we want to make sure that that's a that's an issue. But just in general and at large um I'm very very supportive. Another area though that I'm hopeful that um the team considers is ebikes and the parking situation. the ebike parking in particular as a ebike owner. The idea, the audacity of me trying to lift and I'm a strong girl trying to lift that thing to get anywhere. I mean, I can't even lift it

[122:01] onto the bus thing. So, the idea that I'm going to lift it to do anything is absurd. Um, and you know, again, I just want to make sure we we have a group, Bike Boulder, that has been very clear around the increase in bike thefts and the need for more secure bike parking. And so, I'm hopeful, this is a light lift in my in my eyes. And so, I'm hopeful that that's something that can be addressed. Um, in addition, I appreciate planning board chair Mark uh Mc Thank you, M. Sorry, Han. um his proposed language around some of those issues. I I'm not hearing from my fellow council mates in interest in doing anything conditionally, but I would be open to some of those things because again, accountability is love. So, um and then one thing that we haven't talked about at all, um but I'm hopeful that again, um this project can be a model for uh on-site energy generation and just energy and water considerations

[123:00] more broadly. Um, we know that there is an RFI right now open for public comment around the creation of data centers here at the renewable lab. Um, and as you know, um, especially data centers of that size take in a considerable amount of water and energy. Um, and so that really is top of mind. So although we need the jobs and all of these wonderful things, guess what our community cannot live without? Uh, and that is clean water, uh, clean air and clean soil. And so those are areas that I'm hopeful. And in addition, um the agricultural footprint and work that you're doing, I'm hopeful that there are some considerations around deepening partnerships with our local agriculture, um our local farms here and ranches. Uh we have a 15,000 acre working lands and I would love to make sure that those are robust and used um and uh and have a stronger connection between our agriculture and our business community and

[124:00] specifically our science community, but in general very supportive of the plan, but there are some micro issues that I'm hopeful that we can be that can be addressed before final approval. Thank you. Thanks, Tisha. Um, want to make sure people get their thoughts in if they want to before we move to a motion. Uh, Lauren, thank you. Um, I appreciate that this project, um, does meet a lot of our criteria and really makes a strong effort to be a highquality, well-designed building. Um, I think it really shows excellent taste. I do have concern around um, its ability to support the public realm. Um, and I'm not sure how I would want to condition that at the moment. I I struggle a little bit with this. This is an area of change and we are in a time of change and sort of knowing what to do

[125:00] with those two things. Like um I appreciate that right now the applicant is not interested in office space, but I also have seen our economy shift in significant and unexpected ways. And just knowing that in this area we did put forth an intention to try and um create ground floor space that is um that would support you know housing and vibrancy in this area if not in this building. Um I'm not I'm not sure that this current plan does that um sufficiently. I think, you know, one way might be making trying to ensure that some of the parking was adaptable over time. Um, because I'm not sure that we need

[126:01] more office space right now in our city, but I could see a future where we might want it. Um, I I don't know that I'm not exactly sure, but that's what I'm struggling with right now. Do you mind if I call on that, Lauren? Yeah, because the plane blur really wrestled with those issues and and I really thank them for their work. they worked really hard on this and um came to had differences of opinion u I think because of some of the things that you're talking about in part and um the site is inward focused and if this were along one of our major um corridors like 30th Street I don't think that would be an appropriate solution like it wouldn't address the public realm sufficiently but given that it's often this um corner of the culde-sac um adjacent to the railroad and the uh the kind of levy area with the the bike path and then other industrial parcels right next to it. I find that if you attempted to address the edge of the site um that there wouldn't be a public realm necessarily to address. So my my my sort of thinking

[127:00] there is that to kind of go with staff's analysis of that is that given this kind of unusual corner isolated site that more of the inward focus creates a public realm for itself because there's not really a public realm around it. So, just my two cents, Tina. Yeah, I um I agree with the four conditions. I think that they've been met per staff's recommendation and you know, I'll just add kind of following up with some of Erin's comments. Um I I went to the site today. I drove over there and you know, you drive there and there are four or five for lease signs there and then you go to the site and it's surrounded by giant empty parking lots. there are no people walking around at all. And that's part of the impetus for the East Boulder community plan is to start changing that outcome. Um, but it's going to take a long time. And I think um I think it's great that someone is starting to look at that area with an attractive, compelling building that is thoughtful and sets an example for good

[128:02] design. And while the public realm piece is very small, I think that's appropriate, especially given they're making the investment in the cafe community space. and you have the existing coffee shop, which I've been to, it's never full. Um, I don't, and one of the reasons I'm hoping that the commercial space is flexible is I don't think they'll be able to support any kind of commercial retail there for years. I we have so much empty retail space at this point in our city that I think we're going to have to be very thoughtful about where we require it. Um and also in that space we want to create an energy and it may be that we'll want fewer places where people can come together kind of what they've described with that community building. Um so I you know the just being at the area today and then also this railroad track is an issue. Um and I'll say this is completely separate from the decision we're making tonight but there is a there is a lot of asphalt space there and there's very few cars and there are no people. Um, and one of the things,

[129:02] you know, that we might think of over time, depending on what happens, is how would you create a massive incentive to build some town homes there or some, you know, we haven't created an incentive for housing. We've just created more conditions, but we haven't really gone that next step that says what we really want is some housing alongside that workspace because most of the people working there will be driving from Lewisville and Dono and Brighton. And I think that's the experience when I toured the area. So I I hope that we think about incentives that we can layer on top of this use. Um and I I appreciate the patience of the applicant. This has been a long process. It started in December of 2023. Um I appreciate the work of TAB who's fully supported this whole um TMD. So I I probably won't support your amendment because I feel like there have been enough conditions around parking and they've been met. But we're reducing parking minimums most likely. So, if you want to save money and reduce parking, I think that's an option for you. Um, and

[130:01] then finally, um, I do appreciate planning board and I absolutely understand the struggle, but being at this location, I don't see how this is a public public realm issue, but I wish it were, and I wish there were a better solution. Didn't you mention it was 6% of the prop of that property was public realm? Okay, so that's very small amount. I'm just throwing that out there. I don't mind that it's inward facing because a lot of your tenants I would think that they're they have propriety information and they don't exactly want the world to know. So it makes sense to me that it's somewhat inward facing anyway. And I want us to all remember as a council how much we wanted to keep our light industrial and our um biofarma and different um industries like that. When we first approved the sub community plan, I'm almost positive that we I was worried that if we did the

[131:01] sub community plan, does that mean we're going to lose some of our um industrial? How can we make sure that we don't? And I was told, well, it's just a it's aspirational. It's a suggestion. Uh we're allowing these other uses. And so that's one of the reasons why I approved these Boulder sub community plans. So there will be flexibility and so I like this project and I like a lot of things about it and especially the bike situation because we like T said we do have a lot of stolen bike issues if you were here earlier and so I approve one two three and four and I agree with uh what Aaron said about the um parking reduction. Thanks See I got Mark and then Nicole we can make general comments at this point. Sure. Okay. Um, I'm going to vote to approve the project uh known as 1855 South Flat Iron Court. I support staff's findings that the project is compliant

[132:01] with the BBCP and the East Boulder sub community plan and I believe it will have many beneficial effects both for Boulder and its efforts to develop its research industry. However, I do want to comment on some of the proposed findings of proposed findings of fact and law uh that came from the planning board because they came within one vote of approval and I I really don't want us to have to revisit this uh time and time again. First, the finding that the uh applicant failed to produce some combination of housing, commercial or retail uses on the site is quite frankly absurd. This is a research facility in a research park. These buildings are intended to be marketed and occupied as single-use structures with specialized requirements and systems. This is not a 15-minute walkable residential neighborhood. Uh second, the proposed finding that the applicant did not provide commercial ground flooror spaces

[133:00] would have been contrary to how these buildings are actually used and forcing commercial activities onto those buildings is simply not realistic given the nature of the area. Third, there was a proposed finding that the applicant did not provide a quote significant shift away from single occupant vehicles to alternative mo modes of travel. Once again, reality calls. The applicant has provided many programs to support alternative uh modes of transportation and they are willing to consider uh additional uh reductions in parking if it if they deem it to be feasible. I think they've more than met their obligation in this regard. And finally, um, planning board, and I I say this with difficulty and trepidation or certain of its members, needs to restore their sense of perspective. The East Boulder sub community plan and the BBCP are meant to be guides, not weapons, to bludgeon a developer into altering the fundamental

[134:00] nature of a project. I would hope that those planning board members would be more thoughtful and restrained in the use of the review power granted to them in the future. Thank you. Thanks for that, Mark. Um, I'll turn to Nicole and I'll note, of course, we're considering 1755 flat iron tonight, right? Oh, please. That was just 18. Sorry, 1855. Got my number. Um Um, yeah. I just uh I I wanted to say thank you. I agree. it meets all of the um it it meets all the criteria uh for for this decision for me. Um and and I just uh I wanted to thank you because what I am seeing in this plan in some key ways is really um interesting and not something that I have seen um in a lot of other things that come toward us. And what I see is that focus on connection. It really is obvious in this plan and I appreciate

[135:01] that. Um when you know for me the key issue with the consistency uh with the East Boulder sub community plan um when I looked at that plan it was about connection. It was about creating more spaces for people to come together. Um creating alternative ways for people to move around that space. Um and this is what I see here and seeing things like a rain garden filtering storm water. um so many more trees, uh pollinator landscaping. Um seeing some of that pop up on these slides up here too was really different and I just wanted to appreciate the um the thought as well that has gone into this and creating a space for connection not just with the people who will be um working there, eating at the cafe, um sitting outside, uh passing by on the paths um but also with some of the natural elements of the community too. So um thank you Thanks for that, Nicole. Ryan, so I' I've had a kind of a hard time with this one reading uh through the planning

[136:02] board's discussion and um I think um I'm very grateful for our planning board and that that um there was such viciferous debate about what this looks like and how this should work. And um ultimately I'm I think it meets site review. I um have a lot of confidence in our staff and um I I'm I'm happy with it, but I just wanted to appreciate planning board and the the level of sophisticated debate and rigor that went into this and which ultimately came to us. And uh I do support Erin's um idea about parking reduction and trying to be um ambitious about that, keeping in mind again that we're going to be completely reforming our parking policy within the next couple of months. Thanks. Thanks, Ryan. Yeah, Nicole, final thought. Sorry, I just forgot. Um I was going to uh add

[137:00] that I agree with Tina's uh comments that I think this um the issue around parking has been addressed a lot. Um, and I feel comfortable moving forward uh without any additional um reductions. I think with our changing rules, you may have the opportunity for changing that in the future. Got it. Yeah, Matt, go ahead. All right. Um, let's go ahead and make a motion. Um, I'd like to make a motion to approve site review application under LUR2024000036 adopting the staff memorandum as findings of fact including the attached analysis of review criteria and subject to the conditions of approval recommended in the staff memorandum. Second. Oh, could I make could I could I make a comment about my motion? Yeah, please feel free to speak to it. I know you wanted me to be done. I didn't get to say anything. I just moved on. No, it's all good. Uh all I wanted to say was um this is great work and I think you know we so often get caught in the myopic nature of looking at a single project which we have to do in site review but stepping out and seeing the forest for the trees. Um this

[138:01] is an amazing ecosystem and hub that I think is being put together here and I think it's really cool to see these puzzle pieces get put together and the grander vision of what's possible in our community. So I'm excited for that and I'm excited to see these pieces come together. So, um, I appreciate you going through our process to get to this point. Um, but we're excited to see what the next steps are. So, thank you for everything you guys are doing. Thanks, Matt. Um, I'd like to offer an amendment before we go to votes. Um, so I've got some language that, uh, the city attorney's office has assisted me with. So, um, I vote to amend your motion to add the condition that the applicant be allowed to consider up to a 33% total parking reduction through modification or reduction of parking on the east edge of the site to allow for landscaping and/or pathway circulation to to a design and amount acceptable to staff at the time of technical document review. Second. And just to speak to my amendment there, um, this is an optional thing. Uh I think if we move in a

[139:01] direction with less parking, less asphalt, more landscaping, more plants, I think that's a positive direction. Uh but this would defer to staff and the applicant to make sure that the project still is functional uh with that change. Um any last thoughts before we move to votes? Yes, just process. Since I had a motion on there, I would normally need to accept that amendment prior to it being in there. Is that correct? Actually, no. By Robert's rules, I need a second. And then we would vote on the amendment and then we would go back to your original motion either to say if I would accept it at that point after it's approved. You actually don't need to accept it. Like under Robert's rules, it's really a vote rather than a Oh, I thought the original Okay, fair. If Fair enough. We we sometimes have done like friendly amendments, but it's not really in Robert's rules. Gotcha. It's unfriendly. Is that what you're saying? Correct about that. Just kidding. Yes, mayor. That's the procedure you outlined is the correct procedure. Just very verified. Thank you so much. So, it's an unfriendly amendment. I'm just kidding. It's not in friendly. It's It's just

[140:00] It's just an idea. I'm having fun. Appreciate the clarity. Has your amendment been seconded? It has not. Well, I will. I seconded it. Oh, you did. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. He did. Okay. Yes, it has been. Um, any further thoughts before we go to votes? Uh, not seeing any. Then, um, I will call for a vote on the amendment that I proposed. And this would be a show of hands. All in favor, please raise your hand for that amendment. All right, you got Six. So that um what was that? I didn't Oh, Taiisha. I missed Taisha. Thank you. Seven. So, um your motion uh has been amended by my proposal amendment. So, we can now go to a vote on your Nope. Nope. Nope. I would like to offer another amendment. Okay. Um so the amendment I would like to offer uh has been offered previously um by a

[141:02] planning board member and this is that the site design will be redefined at the culde-sac to create a larger more welcoming entrance to pedestrians and cyclists to the central open space of the site and access to the multi-use path connection. Do you want to speak to that? Yeah, I guess I think that that um because there aren't a lot of other ways that we can enhance um beyond what the applicant has already shown the public realm connection. Um that to me feels like one of the few remaining ways that we could reasonably do that. Thanks. Do we have a second for that? What? I I think we probably asked for a second before we went to discussion. Second. There you go. T got a second.

[142:00] Um, so yeah, go ahead. I know we have the authority and the power to do so, but I'm very reluctant to redesign this project on an ad hack ad hoc basis and on the fly. So, this is not an amendment I would I would want to entertain, although it's well thought out. Do you mind if I ask a question related to that? I would I would I actually wanted to turn to city staff first and say this has been mentioned before. Is this something that city staff feels like they could work with the applicant to implement? And I'd be curious to hear the applicant's opinion as well, but maybe start with staff or start with the applicant. Everybody's racing to the Allison, do you want to weigh in? Sorry. Would you mind just repeating the clarification you needed? Uh, sure. So the the question is whether this condition is something that is uh the staff feels would be workable to work through that condition and implement with the applicant. I think we'd probably defer to the applicant to see if that's something that they would be able to incorporate into their design. So then I would invite the applicant up

[143:00] to answer that question. If you can just turn on the microphone. Can you hear me? Yeah. The um this has come up before porosity and transparency around the edges. And again back to first principles every campus we design we take all the walls down. That's the first thing we do if we can and that 6% came from like that's the only thing we can control and we want to open the whole thing. So that front the culdeac we want to make it as open as possible and we will that's the intent. That's what's shown on the drawings. Right inboard of the culdeac are fences put up by neighbors. That's not our property. So the intent is absolutely aligned uh with what you're saying open up the front. Similarly along the bike path enhancing it with landscape and such. So embedded in the design is the philosophy of a very porous edge around the campus if that's helpful. But you know we can continue to look from a design perspective what else we can

[144:01] do. Do you mind if I go ahead or well I just wonder if there might be language like to the extent possible. Yeah, I think and this is probably because I'm, you know, copying someone else's language on this, but my intention is primarily around kind of how the um circulation works around the outside of the buildings. I actually think the buildings themselves w are welcoming towards the courtyard but um how the for instance the multi-use path connects up to kind of the general circulation space in the center of the site feels like it there's kind of a sidewalk connection it it's a challenging area I know because of the existing conditions but I still feel like there is room for improvement there. Yeah. Is this on? Okay, great. It It's a little um I'd

[145:02] start kind of explaining the current design. So, so part of the So, the multi-use path is has a twofold purpose. It's the way the public will actually enter into Flat Iron Court, the general public, and that's being provided on the property, but we have provided a spur that connects into that, which is the sidewalk. It's actually quite large in terms of its dimension so that pedestrians and bikers can move through that. It's also designed in a way to slow bikers down. We don't want bikers to bike at high speed through through the middle of this area and intersect with pedestrians. So, the design of it has been very intentional. The other component to this is that obviously we feel like we've done a very good job of connecting to the public realm in terms of sidewalk connectivity, visibility of the buildings. There aren't fences or barriers between the public realm and the project. And the two um entryways into the project for vehicles actually match the existing curb cuts and those are part of the requirement of this

[146:00] continuous ring road that we heard for fire department emergency vehicles on site. So we feel from a planning point of view we've done a very good job of connecting to the public realm in terms of site circulation the multi-use path and architecturally we've preserved kind of the framing of this quarter space that feels welcoming in essence pulling the culde-sac further into the project visually. The only other thing I would say is it's hard as architects and designers to have what could be ambiguous language of how to then work with staff to reflect that in a design. Okay, I'm going to get more specific in my concern. I think that in people who aren't coming to this site from the multi-use path, if you're coming along the street, when you access this site, like if I'm biking there, I bike on the streets because the sidewalks in this area are not great for biking on. Um, and you hit kind of the

[147:03] end of the culde-sac and you have to either go into like either of the roads the curb cuts that you explained earlier. Um there isn't a more direct connection kind of into the internal circular circulation space that you have. Okay. And and I feel like that that sense of arrival from the perspective of a cyclist could be improved particularly for those who are not accessing the site from the multi-use path. Okay. Yeah, I I can see the point. It's it's a it's a little bit um we have lots of situations where bikers will they're on the road already. They're now entering a comm road that's on site. And then the two bike rooms for building one and three are at the furthest corner

[148:00] closest to the street and closest to the public realm. So building one's bike room isn't directly adjacent to the lobby. It's at the northeast corner of the project, closest to that. Um, and the bikers could choose to go along the roadway or actually go up onto the sidewalk at that point if they chose to to avoid that. Uh, building three does a similar that you could actually choose to get right on the sidewalk and it is also at the closest point and then building two's bike room is at the back of the building but is fully connected through that kind of pedestrian realm through that. So a similar piece. So with with with the exception of moving the bike rooms directly on that and eliminate any roads between yourself and that I find it hard to imagine how we accommodate not just the bikes uh not just the sidewalks, the connectivity, the roadways, but also um we have a lot of storm water requirements at this location as well. All of the storm water on site, not to bore you all with this, but all the storm water on the site has

[149:00] to actually be um flooded across the site or I say flooded actually controlled and outleted to our rain garden feature which is on the culdeac piece and then outleted and sheet flowed onto flat iron court. So there are a lot of like technical requirements and ingress and egress points that are determining beyond the architectural design components. Fair enough. I yeah I understand the difficulty of getting stormwater requirements on sites. Um, I I would say that I feel like it could be as simple as adding some sidew additional sidewalk curb cuts to the culdesac that would make it so instead of having to go through the drive path to the sidewalk, you could actually just access the sidewalk directly on a bike to through its own curb cut. Um, again, I I get that it seems like a really big change, but I'm I think it is more of a minor tweak, but again, I also understand the

[150:00] concerns around it is hard to come up with specific enough small enough language to make that to communicate that well from the dis at this point in the project. We want to say yes, let's if the intent is clear, let's work on it with um with staff. How's that? I'm not sure. I I'm tracking exactly what the intent is, but as long as it's clear to Perkins and Will and staff, we can work on it. And I'll I'll just call myself Lauren. I'm struggling about what exactly what we would be changing specifically. I will retract it. Okay. All right. Well, I I appreciate the intention behind it. Okay. Um in that case, I think we can move now to the Matt's original motion as amended by my amendment. And this would be a roll call, I believe, Elicia. And just for my clarity, we are doing the roll call for the site review only. Uh, well, that's what we're on right now. And then we'll have to do the

[151:00] ordinance next. Yes. All right. Just wanted to make sure. All right. So, we will start the roll call with Council Member Benjamin. Yes. Mayor Brockett, yes. Mayor Pro Tim Folkertz, yes. Council member Marcus, yes. Shuart, yes. Spear, yes. Wallik, indeed. Yes. Winer. Yes. And Adams? Yes. The site review is hereby approved unanimously. Very good. And we have one more thing. We have an ordinance about vesting. I'll I'll just call on myself and go ahead and and um move to adopt ordinance 8685 granting a 9-year vested property right for the approved sight specific development plan for a property located at 1855 South Gladn Court and setting forth related details. Second. Second. Got a motion and a second. I think this is a roll call as well.

[152:00] Yes, sir. We'll start the roll call for ordinance 8685 with Mayor Brackett. Yes. Mayor Pro Tim Folks. Yes. Council member Marquis. Yes. Shuhard. Yes. Spear. Yes. Wallik. Yep. Winer. Yes. Adams. Yes. And Benjamin. Yes. Ordinance 8685 is hereby approved unanimously. Congratulations to the applicant. Uh we look forward to the next steps and seeing this come out of the ground. All right, that brings us to the end of our public hearings. If we can go to item 6A, please. Elicia. Yes, sir. Item 6A on tonight's agenda, manage from the city manager, is the agenda management

[153:00] and boards and commissions program actions. Thank you so much. Our next item, council, is uh kind of a twofur really. Uh and as we wait for our assistant city manager to get situated, I'll say that we had discussions on um our agenda management system if you'll recall uh when we were at your retreat and I seem to recall sort of an interest in making our memo shorter. Uh and that's the only thing I remember just memo shorter. No. Um uh there were a lot of uh there was an interest in sort of thinking about what our fiscal note was going to look like and rethinking um how we integrated our values, our racial equity um goals, our climate goals, how we really thought about that. The other uh piece of our agenda tonight is also thinking about some of the improvements we've been making and some of the conversations we've been having about um boards and commissions as well. Um, and so our assistant city manager is going to be

[154:01] talking about both of those items as we move forward and asking you some questions as well as giving you an update on our agenda management system. And as you get ready to do that, Pam, I just want to thank you. You've, uh, been doing a lot and your leadership. Um, and Elicia, as you've been doing that, and all your clerk's team and our agenda management system, I know that has been a whole lot of work. Um, so thank you for the work you've been doing to really update an antiquated uh and a system that really hasn't been working for us. So, thank you so much for that. And with that, I'll send it off to Pam. Thank you, Nuria. Good evening, council. My name is Pam Davis. I use she her pronouns and I serve as assistant city manager here in Boulder. As Nur mentioned, tonight I have the opportunity to tuck two items into one presentation for you tonight. The goal of our first topic, city council agenda management, is to inform you of upcoming technological process and content changes to how you will receive information to support your meetings. I anticipate that this section will be a

[155:00] quick update followed by a pause in the presentation for brief clarifying questions from all of you. Our second topic is the more robust one this evening as we address recent and upcoming boards and commissions program improvements. Following the presentation, staff will have multiple discussion questions for you. And before diving in, as Nuria alluded to, I want to acknowledge that while I'm the person representing this work tonight, these two critical areas of our city government have been supported by many remarkable colleagues. Specifically, our city clerk's office, our city council program manager, our communications and engagement department, all of our boards and commissions liaison and secretaries, our department administrative support across the city, and numerous others throughout the organization who have been thought partners, techno guinea pigs, and more. Our update on agenda management will include a refresher of anticipated changes and when they will take place, highle details about our new system, and

[156:02] what you and the public can expect. So, we'll start with why the city of Boulder is transitioning from our current agenda system novvice agenda to one meeting in order to streamline the way we manage city council, board, and commission agendas and packets. Our first city council meeting using one meeting is scheduled for July 24th, 2025. Novvice agenda is being discontinued by its parent company, Granicus, and no longer meets our needs. Their newer product, One Meeting, will offer a more user-friendly experience, making it easier to manage agenda items, as well as produce digitally accessible packets for the public. Staff has also taken advantage of this platform change to integrate long-awaited process improvements as well. These include a new memo template reflecting feedback from city council and enhanced staff training tools to improve quality and consistency of

[157:00] information. One meeting will make the process of creating, reviewing, and submitting agenda items more efficient and transparent citywide. This transition will simplify staff workflows, enhance coordination, and provide better visibility for everyone involved in our agenda management process. It will also, as I mentioned, bring boards and commissions onto the same platform for the first time in the second phase of our transition. Here you can see the overall project timeline from today forward. What you do not see on this slide is just over a year of work that has already taken place to configure the system, conduct process mapping and improvement workshops, test, retest, and test it all again. Looking ahead, we highlight July 24th as the first city council meeting to benefit from the new system. With that packet release no later than July 17th in advance, city council members will receive instructions, support

[158:01] guides, and the opportunity for one-on-one training by request to ensure that you all are comfortable navigating the new system. Anticipating in 2026 the roll out of the system for all boards and commissions. We have also been fortunate to have had the planning board support staff in addition to the city clerk's office working on this project since day one to prepare for that change and create the model that will be used to support all boards and commissions. So, this chart shares the process changes to the meeting packet andformational item distribution that city council agreed to during your September 5th, 2024 meeting. Benefits of the changes on the screen include moving forward, council will receive no more than one full packet of information in a given week with a week's time minimum for review. Currently, study sessions and final

[159:00] packets are distributed at the end of the same week, creating a significant volume of information for council as well as a strain on staff resources twice per month. We also will see that separating information item distribution from meeting packets allows for more timely distribution not dependent on regular meeting schedules. These items, in addition to being provided in real time as they are produced, will also be archived in city records and can be easily accessed on demand. It will reduce the total size of meeting packets each week. And we are grateful that business rhythms for city staff will be more consistent and balanced. We also want to acknowledge that while a majority of council members supported these changes, we have taken your feedback in mind. And as we move along, we are going to consider that when an anticipated item coming before you is particularly complex. We will explore additional opportunities to communicate information to council members further in advance of meeting

[160:02] dates as capacity and project timelines allow. We also heard you while you're generally supportive of the information items and other communications no longer being attached to packets that you'd like more consistent reminders of where you can find information online when you need it. Staff will bring back a revision to council procedure to update these new distribution deadlines for council consideration on an upcoming consent agenda. And now for the fun part. As mentioned, a new memo template will be introduced as we launched the new system. back at the April 2024 retreat. And since then, staff has received extensive feedback from you all on improvements to memo content, including reducing redundancy of information, better identifying outcomes of potential decisions, demonstrating connections between items and existing plans and programs, and using attachments and links for related information in order

[161:01] to keep the memos as concise, aka short, as possible. New templates for policy memos, study session memos and summaries, and quasi judicial items have been developed for use when one meeting goes live. Staff have also developed a comprehensive memo writing handbook and internal training series to provide enhanced support for all of our staff who write memos. And now for the high note of this presentation, pun very much intended. We also heard the call for standard inclusion of a fiscal note and identified equity and climate resilience impacts for items wherever possible. The new template has thoughtfully designed sections for all three of those within the staff analysis and has been a key part of our ongoing staff training. Finally, while public access of council agendas will not be significantly changed, we are excited about the look

[162:00] and feel of a more up-to-date public-f facing portal that will come with the new system. We are in the final configuration steps. So, here you see see a snapshot of another city currently using one meeting. This public portal will now visually separate upcoming meetings from past meetings and feature a much easier to navigate archive. This archive will be populated after go live in July as the records migration is a small project within itself. This is the final slide of the agenda management update. So I will pause here for any brief questions before moving on to boards and commissions. All right, I will move on to boards and commissions. Thanks very much. Okay, as we discuss boards and commissions, I want to begin with thanks to council members Folkarts and Winer as the members of the council boards and commission subcommittee for your input

[163:00] while shaping this presentation. Today we're focused on the boards and commissions program at a as a whole and specifically improvements that can be applied universally and managed centrally by our city clerk's team. Improving boards and commissions has been an ongoing work plan item since 2021. Recognizing that the body of work spans years and multiple city council terms, this update will refresh your awareness of the policy context, progress to date, long-term goals, and raise a few specific items that you see for discussion and feedback. Our truncated recent history of boards and commissions improvement work began in earnest back in 2021 following the adoption of the city's racial equity plan. The plan contains multiple goals impacting boards and commissions, including the first goal, everybody gets it, that asks us to normalize and operationalize understanding of institutional and structural racism among people who work

[164:02] for or represent the city of Boulder, including boards and commissions. And goal number five, representation matters that asks us to eliminate barriers and create opportunities to enhance diversity across boards and commissions. So in that spirit, the city has redesigned the interview and selection process to create a more welcoming environment for candidates. Staff has pursued additional training and collaborative workshops to develop inclusion and belonging plans for specific boards and commissions. We have refined data practices to begin measuring the demographic diversity among our members. After great incremental progress at the staff level through 2022, we pursued a more holistic assessment by a third party core flection in 2023 to help us identify a longerterm work plan of improvements. That led us to work in 2024 to improve our orientation and onboarding as well as for council to

[165:00] pursue a ballot question that would have lifted charter restrictions on certain aspects of board and commission structures. Ultimately, voters did not pass that in 2024. So far in 2025, we've continued our incremental process improvements related to creating more incon more consistent and simplified applications for all boards and commissions and successfully piloted a boards and commissions recruitment openhouse that gave community members the opportunity to come in person to learn about all open seats across all boards in one place. So now I'll shift gears to today to set the context for your discussion. Um in the category of what's going well across our boards and commissions, we continue to see a deep commitment of our community members to volunteer their time for this important work. We see the value of boards and commissions vetting complex issues with departments before ultimately coming before city council.

[166:00] We see consistent department support for supporting their boards and commissions. We've seen the benefits of the city clerk's office central management of the recruitment and administration of boards and commissions and we believe that we continue to see success through our continuous improvement efforts. In the vein of ongoing challenges, we continue to see barriers to participation, including things like term lengths, the time commitment asked of our community members to participate in their boards and commissions and so forth. We do have currently limited staff capacity for major transformational improvement of the system. We see challenges achieving consistent council and board communication that works in both directions. challenges maintaining role clarity and boundaries as well as enhancing consistent experience across all boards and commissions so that regardless of which board and commission you serve,

[167:00] you feel a similar experience from the city of Boulder. And it was this list of challenges that inspired the discussion items for you tonight. As I discussed in the recent history slide, the city council did attempt to place charter changes in November 2024 that ultimately did not pass. And so I'd like to remind you that in our current state, as long as our current charter language around boards and commissions remains in effect, there are several aspects of boards and commissions that cannot be changed without voter approval. These include the number of members of each board and commission, the age requirements. We currently only allow members to be 18 and over. The term length of appointment, which currently is five years, the uh ability to provide any sort of financial compensation to board members is currently prohibited in our charter. the meeting frequency is dictated, the appointment process by

[168:01] city council and the timing of that appointment and the cause for removal of board member language. You all will have an opportunity next week on May 8th during your study session to discuss another the timing of another potential ballot attempt uh to look at making these changes. Okay. So, for the rest of the presentation, I want to do a brief overview of uh the recommendations coming from staff and your boards and commission subcommittee of kind of improvements for the next um stretch of this year. And so, I'll briefly go over those, but I will pause at each one for discussion and before describing the next one in detail. So, we're going to be seeking feedback specifically on numbers one, two, and four tonight. Number three is an administrative item, but we wanted to bring it in front of you so that you could be aware of our uh willingness to adapt to some recent

[169:00] issues that have come up. Okay. So, our first topic here is related to communication between boards and commissions and city council. This has risen as a topic annually as long as I've been at the city. Currently, the primary way for boards and commissions to communicate directly to council as a body is through written communication that is fulfilled in part by the board secretary who's designated to be city staff. This has been done by a council requested letter from each board and commission with a set of questions to respond to. However, year-over-year for the last several years, the timing and the instructions of this invitation has varied quite a bit. Please keep in mind in addition to the direct writing to council that can happen, boards and commissions do influence city decisions in other ways from their participation in the budget process to their advising role on any given project within their department

[170:01] work plan. And any significant changes you might want to consider about this communication flow, we would need to be able to apply across all 20 of our boards and commissions. staff is recommending as a starting place for your discussion that we standardize a practice of boards and commissions producing a bianual so twice yearly report to council. One report that would be produced in a December January time frame would focus on forward-looking priorities of the border commission that align with the strategic plan and department work plans. So in 2026 and the subsequent oddnumbered years beginning in 27, this report would serve as the input to your annual uh sorry semianual retreat in which you set your priorities. So that would be the vehicle of communication for priority setting. The second report that we would recommend be produced in that June July time frame would focus on progress

[171:00] updates of ongoing work and staff strongly recommends that as part of implementing a recommendation like this that boards and commission staff would aid significantly alongside their board and commission in drafting and managing an efficient report writing process that would then be contingent on border commission approval. If supported by city council, staff would work with the council subcommittee to finalize communications to all boards and commissions, requesting this new communications cadence, providing format and length parameters, and describing how the information will be considered by council and staff throughout our ongoing work. I will pause now for questions and discussion on this recommendation. Any questions or thoughts on this one? Nicole, um, yeah, I just I I appreciate the

[172:00] suggestion and what I really like about this is the standardizing across boards and commissions, communicating in a way that everybody understands what is expected, what's coming, and when. So, um, I just appreciate the suggestion and am looking forward to it. Great, Ta. And then Mark Um, I like the idea of receiving bianual reports. I'm just wondering whether it's really essential that we receive them from every board and commission. I, you know, BOSA does what Boza does. I don't know that unless they have a specific request in terms of more resources or a complaint and how they're they're being dealt with, I don't know that that there's much to say in a bannual report. Um, and there are several other boards you could make the same comment. Uh, I'd love to receive them from open space and parks and and the major boards where there's a lot of ongoing activity, but some of our boards are basically

[173:00] carrying out functions and unless they have a particular problem at which point they should certainly contact us immediately, I don't know that there's a report to be made. expect some angry emails from BOZU members tomorrow. Mark, but point taken. Did you have something, Ryan? I think this is fantastic. And um I count I did a count um of the boards more than half of them in in city code are required to advise city council. Some of them are to make recommendations to city council and thereabouts. Um, so more than half of them um should be doing this and I think this is a great vehicle. I do think there's a there's a second step that I want to talk about in the next one we get to but fully supportive. Tina then Tara um in this scenario do we still get the minutes from the boards? Yes. So thank you for the question. Um minutes would still be handled through the board and commission's current

[174:00] processes. um they would be drafted, approved at their their subsequent meetings and then available publicly. Okay. And yeah, I think this sounds good. I just hope that the boards and commissions don't spend their all time make all their time making reports. So, I hope that we can create expectations that are manageable and short and all that. Yeah, thank you for that. And to address that comment as well as council member Wallocks, our thought is that this is an invitation for that frequency of communication to be maintained. And so, um, I would suggest that the it would be possible for a board to sort of opt out of a given report if you were, uh, amendable to that and or as we think through with the subcommittee of these length requirements and suggestions, some reports may be a three sentence like here's what we did, you know, the end spoken. On that note, I would love to

[175:02] see like blickerboard like five fun things we did in just the last six months. So, I think that it it would even the more detailed uh like you're laughing, but I like to know what our all of our boards are doing. So, I think it would be nice to know like you said, this is what we've done and including Boza. I'm curious what they've been doing. Ta. Um I agree with uh having the bianial report but not in isolation. I love what you shared in the recommendation that it's really tied to inform um our council priorities. Uh again and thank you for for I'm so sorry everybody. I'm very very tired and um I have a 6 a.m. flight tomorrow. So um I was hopeful that this wasn't going to take as long as it is, but it is very important. So, I'm grateful that we're here. Um, I just feel like the boards

[176:01] and commissions are over there except for like two or three of them that we meet regularly with. And I would I do think that um this is a really great strategy to better align our strategic visioning to inform that. Um, I still prefer having the meeting notes in the agenda as they become available. um I read them and they're very helpful and there are moments where they are lifting up something that is impacting something that we're making a decision on. So just curious if that would still be something that we could access um on a more regular basis. Um there is one piece that is missing from all of this and that is our um Boulder Police Oversight Panel. Um and recognizing again we that they are it's not apples to apples. However, the intent and purpose are very much the same. And so as we're considering all of this, really thinking deeply about how do we align so that we don't have yet another thing that we're going to be having to circle back in. Uh but in general, I'm supportive of the

[177:00] bianual report, specifically the alignment to inform the council retreat and then also the midyear. So I think if that if that's what the timing was thinking, then that's something that I would strongly um strongly support. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Adams. I want to quickly respond to two things you said. One on the meeting minutes. Um, connecting to the previous presentation, we'll have a unified platform now. So, what you'll be able to do is, uh, filter our new one meeting platform by a particular board and commission, read their packets at the same time they're being released for those boards and commissions, uh, which will include their draft and then accepted minutes. So that will be one way, but we can also continue to explore how to kind of keep those front and center for you. Yeah, that matter is going to be really critical. Thank you. And then the second thing I just wanted to address was were your comments on the police oversight panel. And for your awareness, while it does exist under its own ordinance, functionally from a like recruitment perspective, from a um sort

[178:02] of administrative what's the board and commission experience you get, we have been working to integrate the police oversight panel where it makes sense into those experiences in terms of again aligning recruitment timelines, ensuring some of the training and orientation that happens can be offered to those members as well. Awesome. Thank you. I'll call on myself and just say that yes, I do like this. Over the years when we've done this early, I found it to be really valuable. Just briefly, I think the the wording of the invitation is important. I think the make being clear that it's optional. We'd love to hear from them, but it's optional. And the other that I sometimes over the years uh boards had thought, okay, we are changing what their priorities are going to be. And um and usually their letters don't make it into the priority list. And so people found that really frustrating. So just to word it in terms of we really invite it, we look forward to their insights leading up to their retreat, but not necessarily tie it to the priorities that we decide

[179:01] on. Yeah. How does this how does this tie into the proposed work plans? Like that's we're trying to figure out where that fits in because if we're doing bannual and we may be providing them with with these work plans kind of know like what are we asking like what to Erin's point what's the invitation? Is it whatever you want to say or is it a report on the work plans? Is it what you So, I'm just sort of curious. I think Aaron brings up a good point that we would like to have this kind of focus so it's not just a spray-in pet prey, but we also don't want to make this like Bill Lumbberg's TPS reports. So, you know, we got to find a balance. I was going to say the TPS report. You beat me to it. No, thanks for the question. And I do think that we want to see these things align well. So, um, and perhaps in retrospect, flipping the order of one and two would have been great. So, thanks for that. But, um, in parallel to this, we want to be working in a similar way to, um, being really consistent and

[180:02] supportive of how boards and commissions are setting those work plans in alignment with the strategic plan, in alignment with existing council priorities and so forth. So we will be sort of working in that realm that we'll talk about here in a minute with these letters. I think the idea would be there's sort of once every two years there's this brief window prior to the newly seated council's retreat where our understanding as staff at this point is you are looking for inspiration from your boards and commissions as you're thinking about what priorities to set. So there would be that window for boards and commissions to sort of present that forward-looking bit of lobbying kind of your way about that. Then those subsequent reports, we would make it pretty clear, you know, your work plan stems from the direction of council and the priorities of council. And so those sort of subsequent if we're thinking of it in a two-year cycle, those subsequent three reports would include updates

[181:02] andor informing you of upcoming work that aligns with those things. That's very helpful. Thank you for that. Yeah, appreciate. I'm glad they're structured. Yeah. Followup, Mark. Are the bannual reports intended to be the exclusive communications between the boards and commissions and council or can I I assume if they feel need on a particular issue they can communicate with us outside of the uh bianual reporting structure. That is true. I think at any time a board and commission as part of their work can produce information for you, produce um ideas in line with their work plan to send your way. Um as we saw at a recent meeting, you know, open comment is available if a board and commission member on their individual um bequest or by virtue of being empowered by their border commission can come speak to you during open comment. So you will have interactions and

[182:00] opportunities in other ways. This would be a way of kind of setting the bar for what's that um predetermined pathway to communicate that doesn't currently exist. Good enough. All right. Does that give you enough direction? It does. And I look forward to a future subcommittee meeting where we'll iron out some of these details. Great. Sorry, juggling a lot of technology here. Um, so our next topic has already been foreshadowed quite a bit related to managing the work plan and scope of each board and commission. Generally speaking, the charter and the enabling ordinance for each board and commission uh does outline the responsibilities and scope of each board. But over time, as I think we've seen examples of, boards and

[183:01] commissions can pursue or try to try to pursue work beyond their designated scope that can disrupt staff work plans, challenge capacity or cause confusion. So staff recommends that our central project team moving forward is going to provide sort of a greater guidance and support related to how more uniform work planning happens across boards and commissions in line with city council priorities as well as our strategic plan. That was a little repetitive. So I think I'll pause for discussion here. Does anyone disagree with this idea? You disagree? No, but go ahead. Go ahead. Right. So, I I'm really interested in this one and I specifically think we should I I would like us to consider um a process where city council directly addresses boards and commissions. Um so, you know, this could look like there we have a 160 minute session and we could go through the work plan items and or um the the what is coming up this year and

[184:00] we just have a chance to weigh in and talk to the boards and commissions. Um as a board as a former board member I found often that staff was would try to convey things from council but it was just it's we the the board and commission members are appointed to advise at least the majority of them to advise council and that is to advise us directly I think implied and um I think in order to set up the the first one we talked about which is getting um good structured information from boards and commissions I think it is I think we have an obligation to be able to address them directly. And maybe the answer is like most council members don't have anything they want to say. But it could be the case that in the next time that we develop a work plan, there's a couple of items that we look at and we say, "Wow, this this thing is is going to involve a few different boards. There's going to be some thorny or interesting issues. We we just like to ask for help on these. We have such expertise with across these boards. These are political appointees. We should have a chance to

[185:00] address them directly." And there's a kind of a bigger way to do it. There's a simpler way to do it if you want to just have a simple meeting and let folks talk individually. But um I suggest we give that consideration. Ta. I support that. So I wonder if that's something that you could take that interest in doing something like that back to the boards and commissions committee subcommittee to discuss how something like that might work. That that sounds appropriate. I think the devil's in the details in uh that recommendation just in terms of um if the vision were every board and commission that's 20 hours of of council time. And so we'd want to think about the different processes we already use for referring issues to boards and commissions. And I see our city manager. No, and I was just going to say that and I I think I think I'd want to understand a little bit more. I I appreciate that and want to understand whether that

[186:00] means how much you want to do that with all of your boards and commissions because that would be multiplied by every single one of the boards and commissions. I also want to see how that reconciles. There is code language on how um how boards and commissions work through um frankly there's delegation to the secretary and that is named a city manager and through the delegates through departments. So there is some reconciliation there with language and you want to think about that and certainly I do not want to be the intermediary for all the boards and commission there. Um, and so I just as as you're working with um the subcommittees, I um I caution you to be thoughtful about what the implications are for time and your agenda for every single board and commission and what you're going to be thinking about um as you're uh coming into um what your desire is for those kind of meetings um in your work plan. So, I

[187:02] just put that out there as a as a conversation for you to think about. Yeah, Tina, go ahead and then Ryan and then Yeah, I um would want to understand how that works and also because it's um staff sets the work plan. We set priorities, but staff does the work plan. I would imagine we would want our boards and commissions aligned with the work plan and that might first come through staff. One alternative might be that staff creates the um work plan for the boards and commissions and then we approve that um rather than us actually developing it because I could see some it could become a process that looks a little bit more like prioritization and I'm not 100% sure it's going to be as simple as just echoing what we've already prioritized and what staff has already done. I'm open to that. I appreciate the the sort of thinking the different sides of this. I do think in in principle this is

[188:01] as simple could be as simple from council's standpoint as it is with single meeting in the year. We have 60 minutes to it and we just could go through the 10 work plan items and for each one ask does anybody want to offer any guidance? We could vote on do we agree on that guidance and then we just we move on. And the second thing is I I would observe that the current state is um the majority of our boards are supposed to advise city council. I don't I haven't heard from the majority of our boards this year. And in fact, I can't it's hard to think of many I have heard from. So I I would suggest that there there is something we we need to do here to to prompt that. And I I know that that's partly what we're doing here. Um but I just again think that um if it starts with staff, maybe that's the way to do it. But I would like it to be a direct address from council to to the to the board members. Thanks. Did you have that, Lauren? And then I do. It's a little bit tangential, but because we keep talking about the number of boards and how much time this takes

[189:01] for all of them. And I remember one of our recommendations was thinking about winding down some of our boards. Where are we at that process or thinking about that process? Yeah. So, we're that's sort of pending a a policy discussion at your level as well as um these potential charter changes that would So, there's and correct me if I get the exact numbers wrong. There's about six specific boards and commissions that are baked into the charter. So, if any of those were potentials that would need to go to voters to adjust. the additional 14 or so boards and commissions are generally um addressed in the charter but then specifically addressed in ordinance. So that would just look like an initial really comprehensive um request for probably a study session to really explore that followed by numerous code and um potentially charter changes. Can I call? So just to clarify what I'm hearing is that one of us should make a

[190:00] request for a study session to talk about that in more detail. That's sort of what I heard. That is why we sent you that report again. So feel free to read it and send it back to us on a CAC request. That sounds great. Can I call because my entire time on council we've been talking about this. So I don't So I'm wondering if there's a little bit of a game like a little chicken in the egg. I I don't know if there's a chicken in the egg to be honest. We when we sent the first report, it was lengthy and there was a lot in there. there was a desire to first move forward with charter changes and that's where it started first and when that failed because there was a desire first to go through some of those charter changes that would allow us to do something more and that got stagnant and so that has been the the thing we can now still move forward with some additional changes if that is the desire of council there are other things that we can continue to do Iond in in this packet you had a list of all the many many different things

[191:01] related to boards. Some were complete, some were in process, some were not yet started. That was in that list. Yep. So, it's not like it's fallen off the list and everybody's forgotten about it. It's just it's not currently on like something you're working on actively right the second and there's some decisions to be made about it. I' I'd like to move forward because it's getting late. Um just I'll just call myself in just real real quick. Um just I mean this does sound really intriguing. I think 60 minutes is very optimistic. That sounds that sounds like more of an whole evening to me. So I'm not sure exactly how it does work out. We do and I will say though while we have not gotten like a policy position paper from any of our boards and commissions, we do regularly hear their recommendations when items like we just had in our packets tonight on the the site review and and board's recommendations on those. So I I do think we get some input from boards, you know, in terms of the the regular operations of council. So, I'd be interested. Um, but I just would be cautious about the length of time and how that would work

[192:00] out. All right. Uh, any other any objections to what's on the screen or can can we move on to the the next side? Go ahead. Hearing the the desire for expediency, I won't go through the every detail of this one because it is administrative. Needless to say, 2025 selection process, we heard concern about attaching representational requirements like professional affiliations to specific seats. We have found an administrative solution to open that door. Cool. I will move on to the next one. All right. Our last one here. So again, I'll just cut this short. So, um, meeting minutes and sharing information. The question has already come up a couple times this evening that, you know, council wants real-time information. The conversation here is the meeting minute process won't change with boards and commissions, but will become more transparent through our

[193:01] new platform. The boards and commission subcommittee have a recommendation for council that staff explore opportunities that when there's sort of a hot topic or a surprise big conversation at a board and commission or something that the turnaround time to inform you of a board and commission issue is shorter than the minutes process that we explore opportunities to send you brief and occasional notes related to uh those issues and are just seeking any other feedback about um kind of the types of things that you might be looking for in that. Can I ask a clarifying question? Do you feel like this this is manageable within staff's work plan or would it have a big impact? Our thought here because we we have not had time to vet it through staff fully since the board and commission subcommittee meeting is if they were brief and sort of at our discretion that we could say, "Oh, council should know about this." We could sort of socialize that and normalize that with our staff. It would

[194:00] not be producing a full memo. It would not be sort of anything other than, hey, just so you know, 14 people surprised us by showing up to OSBT to talk about this one thing. Want you to be aware in case you weren't following. That kind of thing. So, I'll just say that sounds appealing. Maybe I could just ask for a quick show of hands of who likes that idea. I got seven, eight. So, we seem pretty interested in it at that scope. And any other comments from council members other than just Yeah, that sounds pretty good. Just um I appreciate that everything we do is iterative and we'll learn. So if this turns out to be something that we didn't expect, just please keep letting us know and we're I'm certainly flexible and I we're going to learn through all of these. I I appreciate that and I just want to keep expectations clear. It's it's that quick heads up. If it starts to get more detailed of, oh, give me more detail. Give me a memo. That's where it starts to get out of hand and it provides a

[195:00] little bit more burden on staff. If it's a quick, hey, this was unexpected for us. You may want to go look at this meeting. That's the kind of level that we're thinking of. And if that's okay with you all, we can certainly do that. Yeah, I was just wanting to make sure that it's not a big burden. So, thank you for that. Yeah, that will be great. And then if someone asks you for more information, can't you just say go listen to the meeting? That's exactly what we're going to do. You can listen to it on double time. Um, what I like about this is that it's very similar to what Ryan said in the sense that we are need to be I believe why wanted to do this like years ago, why we beca why Lauren and I went on to this subcommittee is because we need to be more connected to our boards and commissions. So, this is another good thing we can do. Also, I want to have a dinner with all of them, every single one.

[196:01] Take that last one with a grain of salt. We can have at dinner on our own maybe without a party. Party. That was the conclusion of my presentation and questions. So if there's any Oh, excellent. Okay. And then so about this or in J. Yeah. Okay. Go ahead. Go for it. Okay. Um, so although I've appreciated all of this conversations and the memo that was shared, there are a couple areas that I wanted to lift up. One is around the recruitment. And so although it is mentioned um you know that there the recruitment efforts were more successful, there was no evidence to pro provide it to indicate that. So for example, were there more applications? Were there different types of applications? So again, um I just thought that that was an area I'm also curious where and how community connectors and their level of engagement

[197:01] if you're seeing impacts on, you know, having them be more engaged and involved. So again, that these are just things as I was reading the memo that I was like, "Oh, I really wish that we had that information to inform this conversation." Um the orientation again, what evidence do we have on the impacts of the orientation? So it's again the conversation that we're having around outputs versus outcomes. Um although I appreciate orientations and training, I've talked extensively about having training and training without an accountability system is violence. Um and I'm still not seeing the accountability components. I'm seeing more training um which there is zero evidence that providing more training leads to changed behavior unfortunately particularly in these areas which I happen to be an expert in. Um there's one area that I didn't see addressed at all in partic in in uh and that's the dispute resolutions and um there was a mention in bias in discrimination. Um but but my question

[198:00] is is you know conflict resolution and if there are disputes um you know within currently it is my understanding that the boards and commissions police themselves. I don't know that's not how accountability works. Again, if I'm wrong, I just that's how I based on conversations that I've had around particular comm one specific commission and how uh grievance was handled. It was my understanding that it was an internal um and it was not an external staff did not come in to kaka. So, if that is not the case, um you're welcome to go back to the staff that shared that information with me. Either way, um, an area that I'd be interested in, um, hearing more about is what are our policies around grievance? What is our policy around conflict resolution and dispute resolution in particular? Um, for the charter conversation, um, I noticed that there was no mention of geographic considerations. So, I would

[199:00] love for us to consider in that list of when we get to that part just the geographic because I'm noticing there's a strong representation on the west side and the north side of town, but I'm not seeing again these are assumptions based on no data that I don't have. So, I am curious about this the geographic breakdown of our boards and commissions. I think um having the library experience as a trustee when uh uh Tina and I are on the library trustee and they just did a really great job of um making sure that the geographic considerations were present. Um there weren't any specific criteria but that information was available when we were create when we were making decisions and I found it to be particularly valuable um for the workshops I've already talked about um the de um there's some comment around depoliticizing the selection by having it be under the city manager and I just

[200:01] wanted to lift up that according and again thank you Ryan um these boards and commissions are supposed to report and provide information to the council. And so if that is the case, then it is my preference um that that remain. And I am actually concerned that the considerations and decisions around the contract for the Boulder Police Department is under the city manager and not under city council because again our constituents are uh the public. We are accountable to the public. The city manager is not accountable to the public. So although it is she is one they are the city council role is a staff of ours. It is not the public is not she is not accountable to the public. It is our responsibility to be accountable to that. So I just wanted to um say that I it is my preference that the council continue to serve in the role that it has. Um that's all I have on that. Thank you very much for the opportunity to share some general comments around just the process itself. Thank you. Thanks. All

[201:02] right. All right, I think with that Ryan Pam, I just wanted to say thanks for this work. And you you asked if we had questions on on the first item, but you didn't ask for comments. So, I'm just commenting that the the memo the new memo format. I It's really exciting. Um I was having uh like a a consistent methodology for some of those items like climate was a pipe dream for me when we got started. I know we've talked about fiscal note and um it's very powerful what you've put together and the team has been putting together. So, thank you. I I'll say that we had a comment with Yoab that, you know, it's a dream if we can do things in a two-year time frame. Well, since I got on council, there was always a disclaimer banner at the top of our website that this thing was just not to our standard. So, the fact that we can get it done in a council term is sensational. So, I think not just Pam, but I think the clerk's office cuz they they take the brunt of this um on the chin all the time. And if that system ain't working, their lives are a whole lot harder in in meeting everybody's needs. So, I'm glad that you found the solution that's going to work for everybody and uh I know the pain will be

[202:01] over soon. So, thank you. Will it be over though? Really? Maybe just a little better. Anyway, good point, Lauren. And just on behalf of the boards and commissions committee, I wanted to thank the all the staff that has done a tremendous amount of work on um wrangling a complicated thing that has we've created over many decades. So, um, really appreciate all the work you guys have put in. Thank you. Yeah, echo those. Huge thanks to to you and to John Morse and everybody else in the department and Pam for all the work you've been doing and Megs has been doing phenomenal work in this area as well. So, huge thanks to all the the team and also the length of that memo was just delightful. We we practice what we preach. All right. That would be awesome. All right. Adam choking to death. All right. So, that uh brings us to the end of our agenda. If anybody

[203:00] wanted to say any words under matters from mayor, members of council, this would be your chance if you had one to take up to two minutes before I choke to death. How does that work if I have two items? Because one of my items is around the um responses to the chat, the council chat. Is that like if there's two topics like how does that work? because this is not like my responding to thing. This is my I my understanding is that we said two minutes for council at the each council member at the end but did do I miss I mean I appreciate that but it was my understanding I thought that that was just for if we're responding to thing can I get some clarification I'll look to Teresa I'm sorry I'm responding to um public comment mayor I understood the two minutes to be for response to public comment Mhm. Um not not for all remarks. Got it. All right. So Tisha, as you were two minutes for public comment, if you

[204:00] want to comment on something else of a little time, you can. Thank you so much. Um so again I just want to thank the team um my fellow council members who were able to participate in the food security council chat as well as the staff um who continue to you know I went to the first one and I could see the improvements on just the structure and the communications and it was just really wonderful. Um I really just wanted to lift up some of the comments that were shared there around um the work we're doing around food security is not charity. It really is again a debt owed. Um I also wanted to lift up the individual and community barriers to food food security. Um I really appreciated again um comments around agricultural land and leasing. One area that wasn't included in that and my apologies for not providing additional feedback when it was in draft form, but there were com conversations around um the possibility of accessing food from our leased land at a discount for um you

[205:02] know uh and having more collaboration and partnership um between our um food security um nonprofit organizations and our agricultural leases. Um, and I just thought that was a really powerful recommendation. And again, just the reminder that we spend $5 million to renovate a garage in 3.6 um for our entire a portfolio. Um, also there was a mention of the agricultural report um from 2017 and can't wait to get um are there annual reports since then or because that's another area um that there was interest in learning more about our agricultural portfolio. I have made requests and I got a list of the least in the lease the lease names. Um but that was all. So although I appreciate the guidance and the plan around our agricultural portfolio that was created in 2017 um I continue to be concerned about not having any information on an annual basis of what's

[206:01] being produced, what's being sold, what are the problem areas, um etc. So, I was um I'm grateful that the council chat also lifted up um these issues um and recognizing that these issues um and connections around our agricultural portfolio and food security are issues that are within our wheelhouse um and within our authority and we have the resources to do something more meaningful. So, thank you so much for for that. There was also um just fear around even showing up for that meeting which I thought was um really something worth considering. There were several people there who said look we wanted to invite other people but they didn't feel comfortable coming. Um and so you know what can we do to dshame um around issues of food security for our community members when we know that one in 10 families are food insecure. Um, I think that's just certainly something that, um, I'm hopeful that our count, this council, um, our staff and

[207:01] and our incredible community partners can help us with, but that message was heard loud and clear. Um, and I'm just really grateful um, that we're having more conversations about food. Although I care about parking limits, I also care about food. Thank you. And then, Tyel, while you have the floor, if you wanted to address open comment, you could have two minutes. Okay, Nicole. Go ahead. Um I just uh wanted to clarify um something that came up earlier uh in in our public hearing. Um some comments came up uh regarding um our board members decisions in that discussion. And I think that um the way that some of those comments were phrased, they may have had an impact that wasn't necessarily intended. Um and I just wanted to take a moment to clarify that. And if I am speaking on behalf of all of us in a way that does not feel right, um please someone else go after me and uh uh clarify this. But um I I just want to

[208:00] say I think all of our board and um commission members like us bring a lot of integrity to their decision-m. Um they may sometimes have a different perspective than I do, but um I'm usually better for having heard them. Maybe that doesn't work in reverse. They can decide. Um but especially given that we're headed for some stormier waters, um really working in partnership with our boards and commissions, um feels like that's going to be absolutely crucial in helping us and staff um think through uh some of the solutions and address some of the problems that are coming up. Um from, you know, the comments that I've heard from all of us over the years um with our boards and commissions, uh I'm pretty sure we all agree uh that they are universally awesome and do great work and we we really value that. So, I just wanted to clarify um in case anything was interpreted in a different way that we um really do value and appreciate our board and commission members. Um and uh anyway, as I think that last uh agenda item just showed that we are

[209:01] always looking for ways to improve their experience, too. Uh but again, if I uh spoke out of term, please please feel free. Um I just wanted to try to clarify that. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that, Nicole. and and I'll I I did try to um call out the planning board and thank them for their efforts because I think our board the the board's work there is they worked super hard and thought very deeply about the uh item on our agenda tonight. Mark. Um, very briefly, um, I could not help but notice that, um, having been called out for the inappropriate and, uh, anti-semitic nature of the wanted poster, uh, that has been circulated on the internet, uh, a number of individuals thought that it would be good to double down on that and we're displaying that poster uh, this evening. Uh, I don't know if they thought that would be humorous. Uh, it is not. Um uh I can only suggest that if you want to u uh Google the definition

[210:00] of classless uh you will find some of their photos next to that definition. So uh they will do what they do um without apparently recognizing that what they do is entirely um offensive and anti-semitic. But I don't think they recognize that. Thank you. Um, I'm going to call on myself if you can time me on two minutes. Uh, just wanted to follow up from the folks who came to testify about the Sage program. Just turn to city staff. Looking forward to getting that more detailed report on the situation over there. And just a personal thought from myself that of course in a situation where you have children attending some program that all life safety issues have to be resolved. Um but just u a thought that if there are um kind of zoning tangles that the that that exist that maybe that's something that we could look to find a way to resolve. Just throw that out there as something that we might consider going forward. That's all I

[211:01] got. Anybody else? All right. See none, that wraps us up for the 26 p.m. Thanks everybody.