August 21, 2025 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:06] everyone and welcome to the Thursday, August 21st, 2025 regular meeting of the Boulder City Council. I'm going to get us started with an announcement. The city is hosting our annual citywide engagement event, What's Up Boulder, on Sunday, September 7th, from 1 to 4 p.m. at Scott Carpenter Park. This is your opportunity to talk with staff from all across the city and learn about projects happening now and in the future. It is also equally fun. We will have free popsicles, music, lawn games, and arts and crafts. It's free fun for the whole family. Interpretation services will be available as well. So, we hope to see you there. And with that, I will go ahead and call the meeting to order. And Alicia, if we can have a roll call, please. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. And good evening, everyone. And thanks for joining us. We'll start the roll call with council member Adams >> present. >> Benjamin >> present. >> Mayor Brackett >> present. >> Mayor Proim Folks

[1:00] >> present. >> Council member Marquis >> present. >> Shuhart >> here. >> Wallik >> here. >> And Winer >> present. >> Council member Spear is absent and mayor we have our quorum. >> Thanks so much. So we need a motion to amend the agenda. And Theresa, I'm going to turn to you with a question. We also need to post. We're adding something, but we also need to postpone the BPOA item. Do you want that in the motion to amend the agenda or under the consent agenda? >> Um, mayor, either place is appropriate. >> All right. In that case, I would request um consideration um of a motion to I would request a motion to amend the agenda to do two things. Add item 11A, which is consideration of a motion to call an executive session of the city council as authorized by 246424 CRS related to Sundance Film Festival confidential legal advice and

[2:01] determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations. developing strategy for negotiations and instructing negotiators and also to remove item 3G from the consent agenda and postpone that to the date of September 4th. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Got a motion and a second. All in favor, please raise your hands. Great. Thank you. The agenda has been amended. So we now are going to go to open comment. So Elisha, if you could read our guidelines, please. All right. Thank you. I'll now go over the participation at city council meeting guidelines. Again, thank you for your participation at tonight's council meeting. We ask that you abide by the rules of decorum found in the voter revised code, including participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they are commonly known by. Individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak

[3:01] online. Only audio testimony is permitted during open comment. 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 any lawful order of the presiding officer to leave the meeting room or refrain from addressing the council. Our remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. And lastly, asities, other epithets based on race, gender, or religion, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the meeting will not be tolerated. Thank you again for listening and thank you for joining us. >> Thank you, Elicia. All right, we've got uh 20 people signed up to speak, although I understand one person withdrew. We're going to um rotate between inerson and virtual speakers.

[4:01] Each speaker will have two minutes to speak and I am going to be strict about that time limit in fairness to all of the speakers. So our first three speakers are Candid Candid Jordan in person, Britta Siner virtual and Leslie Glstrom in person. Candidates you can get us started. I told you I have two questions for you tonight, but I want to begin by saying this is little Bailey. I'm sure I don't have to inform any of you that I don't own him. In Boulder, Bailey is recognized as a sensient being with legal rights. So, I'm representing myself and Bailey. I forgot my glasses. Excuse me. I have

[5:02] requested a meeting with Red Fern. I have requested a meeting with Miss Tate. And I've not been given those meetings. I have bent over backwards and put myself in jeopardy many times to communicate with you all about the issue with the Boulder Police Department, the Boulder County Drug Task Force, and the 20th Judicial District. It has not been my pleasure to inform you of these matters, and I've paid a very high price for doing so. I can hardly wait to see how our room is contaminated when I get back today. I'm hoping that Nicole Spear, who's not here, and Miss Fulkurtz will make a comment to council before you leave um before your term expires in in the fall. It's your right to deny me these meetings. It's your right not to read my

[6:02] emails, but sadly that leaves me with only my own right, which is to litigate. And I know that you all know I have tried very very hard not to do that. I think you'll be amazed at the witnesses that I have of the evidence and I wish you were all more curious about that so that I could have informed you more. Again, I forgot my glasses. >> Um, your time is up. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Right now we have Britta Signner virtual Leslie Glster in person and Daryl Monley in person. >> My name is Brida Singer and I live in South Boulder. I am asking you to schedule a session to study proportional representation which is a better way to elect members of the city council. In 2023,

[7:01] the city of Boulder used instant runoff ranked choice voting to elect our mayor. In that election, Bob Yates was ahead in the first round with 47% of the votes. The second round of counting showed that Aaron Brockett had more first and second choice votes than any other candidate, and Brockett won. Either one would have made a great mayor, but the people of Boulder had a slight preference for Brockett. What about the people who would have preferred Yates? When only one person can win in a competitive race, it means that some people were disappointed. In this case, a lot of people were disappointed. Fortunately, the multi multi-winner method we use to elect the council opens the doors to proportional representation, which makes it likely

[8:00] that more voters will be happy with the results. 598 people signed a petition asking for a session to study proportional representation. An advocate for proportional representation has spoken at every single open comment session since February 10th, February 6th until two weeks ago when open comment was cut short. I am back again today to ask for one more time, please schedule a study session for proportional representation. Thank you. >> Thanks. Now we go to Leslie Glustester in person, then Daryl Monley in person, and Richard Kate virtual. Is Leslie here? All right. Not seeing Leslie Glstroom. If she gets here before the end, we'll get her back on. So, that means Dariel Monley is up. Any Darl Monley in the room? Ah, there

[9:01] you go. So, I'm here to question the community assembly which has been formed by the B Boulder Valley comprehensive plan to develop a community version or vision of the 15minute neighborhood in Boulder. First, I'd like to read this short excerpt from an invitation I received to participate in this community assembly. If chosen, let's see. The community assembly will explore and create recommendations around how and where to implement 15minute neighborhoods in Boulder. 15minute neighborhoods are places where community members can meet many daily needs and access essential services with just a short walk, roll, or bike ride. This has been a long-standing part of our community vision as captured in previous comprehensive plans, but we've struggled to define it, develop clear action steps, and make progress towards it. To be eligible as one of the 48 people

[10:00] randomly chosen, this is part of this invitation. To represent the citizens of Boulder, you had to be at least 16 years old. You had to have lived in the city of Boulder or unincorporated Boulder County for at least six months. You had to attend all seven sessions of the assembly, but you didn't have to be a citizen of the United States. Why? I'd like to encourage everyone here to wonder why is the community assembly envisioning 15minute neighborhoods very quietly behind closed doors. Why were invitations to participate in the community assembly mainly sent to mobile home parks and lowincome housing communities? Why did the 48 people representing the Boulder City residents have to be US citizens? Nothing was mentioned about whether they must be legally residing in our country. If they weren't citizens, they don't have the right to vote. And yet, they are representing all the voting citizens of Boulder. And why has there been no opportunity for the Boulder citizens to

[11:01] give meaningful input to this process when 15 minutes cities is a very controversial idea which the citizens of Boulder should have a right to weigh in on. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Now we'll go to Richard Kate virtually then Patty Fustra Aguilera virtual and then Eve Partridge in person. >> Mayor, I do not see Richard online tonight. >> Okay, then uh can we have quiet in the room, please? Quiet in the room, please. Uh then we'll go to Patty Foster Aguiler who I um understand will have a translator and we do give additional time for the translation process. So we'll go to Patty. >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay.

[12:04] Caterpillar. Toyota, and I quote, Intensific

[13:12] Iraq, Afghanistan, trauma. Okay, time is up, but we can switch to the English translation. This is the interpreter. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Here is the interpretation. Boulder

[14:01] invests $35 million in companies who benefit from genocide. How does this align with our city values? This makes this city complicit in genocide, not only in Gaza, but in the Congo and Sudan. We demi we demand disinvestment. 10.5 million from Caterpillar, whose bulldozers demolish homes and kill Palestinians. 6.5 millions from million dollars from Microsoft fueling Israel's war with artificial intelligence and it also exploits people in the cobalt mines in Congo $4.7 million from Cisco powering the Israeli military status system $13.7 million from Toyota whose trucks patrol occupied Palestine Boulder excludes and I quote firearms or weapons used for national defense. I argue that there is no such thing as national defense. War profitering is war profiteering and there is nothing ethical about this. A clear example of the misuse of this term is that quote, "Israel has the right to defend itself," unquote, by killing more than 18,000 children in Gaza, not counting those who have been mutilated and orphans who are

[15:00] left without a future and stripped of their childhood. How is this defense? How about all of the wars that our country has started or escalated in the name of national defense and the killing of so many innocent lives? Iraq, 1 million innocent people we have killed. Afghanistan, 300,000. Vietnam, 3 million. Granada 500. We are angry. We are grieving. Our indigenous brothers and sisters are reliving the trauma of genocide they endured here. And I will not be silent. Silence is complicity. There is no peace without justice. And there never will be. Divest now. From the river to the sea. Palestine will be free. You took a summer break, but Gaza cannot take any breaks. Ceasefire now. >> Thanks. Quiet, please. All right. Just a note um that signs cannot be held higher than your face. So I'm just seeing some signs go higher. Please keep those lower. Our next three people are Eve Partridge in person, Annabelle Brown in person, and Rob Smoke in person.

[16:02] Hi, I have three topics. One, the city has in its investment plans to not profit off of war. It is simple to follow the structures that are already in place, which I couldn't be more thrilled already exist. By divesting in Microsoft and Caterpillar, we will be in accordance with the policies of the city of Boulder and therefore representative of the community as a whole. Number two, Boulder has a policy of inclusivity and diversity in place already, and we need to be attentive to Arab and Muslim community members. Hate crimes absolutely have gone up. Not just offensive words, but stabbings, shootings, and threats of safety. We need the anti-Islamophobia and anti-Arab hate proclamation to be finished as soon as possible to make a statement that our community truly does not tolerate bigotry. Number three is about our

[17:00] federal rights. Banning six community members and closing open comment for two months sets a dangerous president. We need our first amendment of free speech protected as well as the fourth amendment which is our right for due process. Both are eroding through manipulative actions by our federal totalitarian government. And we need to protect our rights against censorship and forced detention. We need our community protected from harmful entities and federal agents like ICE that do not have our best interests at heart. We need your support and representation, not division and smear campaigns against council members and longtime Boulder peace and justice residents. You are here to represent us and represent boulder plans already in place against profiteering from wararmongering. This isn't that hard. Thank you. >> Thanks. Now we'll go to Annabelle Brown, Rob Smoke in person. Um, and Eric Gross virtual. So, Annabelle.

[18:13] Hello, my name is Annabelle Brown and I am a CU Boulder student and I've lived in Boulder for three years. Over those three years, Boulders Boulder has become my home and it is important to me to know that it is a place that acts with conscience. Right now, the city has over $18 million invested in Microsoft and Caterpillar. Microsoft provides the Israeli state with technologies that enable its illegal occupation and surveillance of Palestine. Caterpillar bulldozers are used by Zionist settlers to demolish Palestinian homes. UN bodies have labeled both companies as complicit in apartheid. their products and therefore we as investors enable a system of violence that has killed an estimated 400,000 Palestinians in Khaza,

[19:00] almost four times the population of Boulder. I can say with certainty that each of those lives was a universe. Here in Boulder, we can't even provide safe housing for our own unhoused neighbors. Yet, our city's money flows to corporations making Palestinians homeless halfway around the world. Boulder already recognizes that investments are legitimate moral decisions. That's why we divested from fossil fuels and why municipal code precludes investment in industries like private prisons, weapons, and tobacco. We already accept that where we put our money reflects who we are. I know some of you believe that the issue of Palestine is outside of your purview, but it is within your purview to decide how Boulder spends its money. And if that money is tied to war crimes and what human rights scholars call genocide, then the responsibility sits right here in this room. Do not attempt to hide behind bureaucracy while our city profits from death. Divesting now

[20:01] is the difference between complicity and integrity. Now is the time to prove that we can stand for justice. Take our money out of Microsoft and Caterpillar and show the world that Boulder will not be genocide. Thank you. All right. Now we have uh Rob Smoke in person, Eric Gross virtual, and Tim Plass in person. Yeah. Hi. Um my name's Rob Smoke. I live in Boulder. I want to read a quote that I um saw this morning, really pretty early, right when I got up. This is from a Daily Camera article. Um, quote, "If we were twiddling our thumbs and our budget was great, we solved every problem, and we're actually just looking for stuff to do, then yes,

[21:02] okay, let's have a conversation." Council member Matt Benjamin said, "That is absolutely not the state we're in right now." And um you know around the same time in the morning I was listening to Democracy Now which um you can find online. I mean I I recommend I recommend it wholeheartedly because there's a lot of truth and honesty that comes through on that show. But this morning they had an interview with a woman a a woman doctor a physician not being allowed into Gaza, an American doctor. And uh they also played um audio of uh her associate who's currently in Gaza and unable to treat uh children coming in with massive trauma. Uh you know, non-stop uh casualties, non-stop views of of people

[22:01] starving. And this this poor woman who's a six-year medical student was um just uh really at the point of absolute exhaustion. And it just seems uh incredible to me that I read a quote like this twiddle about twiddling our thumbs, you know, and if you know we could have a conversation maybe. I mean these are people who are dying who are being slaughtered in Gaza. And it's not me. It's not just me saying this. There's uh over a hundred human rights and humanitarian organizations saying the same thing. Something has to be John. Something has to change immediately. Thanks. >> Thanks. Now we go to Eric Gross virtual Timlass in person and Sra Chairan in person. >> Yes. So we received this message today from friend Gaza said to the local government in Boulder.

[23:00] I am not writing these words from behind a desk or a safe place. I write from the heart of hell, from beneath the rubble, beneath the sound of planes, amidst the blood of children and the cries of mothers. My name is Muhammad, a young man from Gaza. I no longer count the days because every day feels like the end. We are not living. We are just trying not to die. I write to you because you have a voice that can be heard and a stance that can be recorded. You vote there while we burn here. Your silence hurts and your refusal to divest from companies that kill us is a betrayal of our humanity. Do not ask for miracles. Just stop supporting those who sell their weapons to kill us. At least say the word ceasefire. Give us some hope, dignity, and justice. I write this message not knowing if I will be alive tomorrow, but I hope it reaches you and awakens the humanity in your decisions. That's from Muhammad Gaza, child who grew up too soon, witnessing what should never be seen. And as to the divestment

[24:03] which you will hopefully be discussing shortly, I want to remind you Caterpillar has been mentioned of the photo that I brought in several months ago and I handed to each of you to look at of a human body that had been crushed by a bulldozer into what looked like tomato soup that I will never forget that I can never get out of my head. And then I want to inform anyone because only one member of the council was at the march in Boulder this weekend the marching for our lives or the run for our lives. One of your members was there. One of the other members of that march. I said more than 1,000 ch children under the age of one have been killed in Gaza. Someone in the march shouted not enough. Shouted not enough. And I begged anyone there to disagree. No one would. Your time is up. All right, we're going to go now to Tim

[25:00] Plast then Esra Cheran in person. Martha McFersonson in person. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> No. >> Good. Okay. Uh, thank you, mayor. My name is Tim Plass and I am the president of Historic Boulder and I'm here tonight speaking on behalf of Historic Boulder and I'm here to address the Silver Saddle Annexation Agreement, uh, which is amendment which is consent agenda item 3D. And I want to say at the outset that historic Boulder is not against the project moving forward. However, we have real concerns about the treatment of the historic resources on the site. Both the hotel motel and the vintage neon sign. The Silver Saddle Motel is a vestage of the automobile tourist trade that flourished at the west end of Arapjo from the 1920s through the 1960s. It's one of the few remaining reminders of the bygone inexpensive tourist lodging that once existed many places in Colorado. Sadly, the motel and the neon

[26:01] sign have both degraded significantly under the current ownership over the course of almost eight years. Much of the exterior material has been removed from the landmark structures and almost all the neon tubes on the sign have been broken. The sign is sitting halfhazardly on the ground in front of a motel. A landmark property deserves better. In addition to our concern about the treatment of the motel and the sign, we are also very concerned about the recommendation from planning board to delandmark the property. We were relieved that the recommendation did not make it into the annexation agreement amendment. The agreement with the developers to landmark a portion of the property came at a time of annexation. Annexation is a huge benefit to the developers. Without it, their project couldn't move forward. In return, the city has the opportunity to receive community benefit. In this case, several acres of open space, a portion of units dedicated to affordable housing and the landmarking of the historically significant property. The retention of historic resources on the site continues

[27:01] to be an important community value. To undo that would be a loss to this site as well as a terrible precedent to the future annexations that have history worthy of preservation. We at Historic Boulder look forward to seeing the motel faithfully restored in the iconic neon sign repaired and reiter >> at the west end of Boulder. Thank you. >> All right. Now we'll go to Esprea Cher in person, Martha McFersonson in person, and Wen Ross Teliche in person. I came to encourage you to divest from Microsoft and Caterpillar to align with Boulder's values. Um because to me the ob the decision is an obvious no-brainer. However, as I thought about what I might like to say tonight, I realized that there's something weighing on my heart.

[28:00] I was appalled and shocked and frankly embarrassed for you to see seven council people publicly gang up on their colleague, the only person of color among you. I thought Boulder had values, a welcoming and inclusive community. one that fosters racial equity, inclusion, and diversity. One that wishes to advance racial equity and confronts oppression, and that ensures the city is an inclusive workplace. How is it then that seven privileged white council people made public statements condemning the one council person of color? Why didn't you sit down with her to seek understanding? Don't you know that a person of color has a perspective that privileged white

[29:00] people can learn from? How do you think that makes people of color in our community feel when the one member of council whose lived experience informs her knowledge of count of of oppression and injustice is slapped down for speaking out about crimes against humanity by seven privileged white people? Are you kidding me? That you know more than she does about oppression and injustice? You've shown yourselves to be closed to learning from others. The seven of you need to take an anti-res racism workshop so that you can do better. Time is up. Thanks. Now we have Martha McFersonson in person, Walkin Ross Teliche in person, and Patrick Oor virtual. I would like to reiterate what Ezria

[30:01] just said. I feel like the reality of who we see representing us is a reflection that does not sit well with I think the majority of people. I would hope the majority of people in Boulder and perhaps we'll have a Mam Donnie uh event here that deposes this cabbble of unconscious people. That's all I can say at this point. How you can defend a genocide and attack Taiisha who says this is not a case of anti-semitism. It is a case of destruction, you know, and that you fail to be able to look at yourselves and that you've held on. We have been here since October 7th every two times a

[31:00] month begging for a ceasefire resolution. Instead, what did we get? We got an anti-semitism ordinance. How dare you? How dare you? It's unfathomable that you can continue to defend Israel. How do you sleep? It's a sign of you have lost your humanity or you're in such denialism that you you can't face yourself. And I have a hard time facing myself as an American. and I'm so ashamed of what we're doing to the world and you have a little bit of power and you refuse to face it. Instead, you attack Taiisha for the fine line of saying this firebombing was not a case of anti-semitism. It was a case

[32:00] of this. >> Your time is up. Tragedy. Thanks. >> All right. Now we have Waqin Ross Teliche in person. Patrick Oruror virtual and Da Al- Nisal in person. >> Hello, you hear me? Hi, I'm Wen Rosa. I'm the community outreach and public policy coordinator at EA and I'm here to talk about our community priority survey today. Uh this is a survey we do every year uh to gauge the priorities and concerns of almost 8,000 members of our community for families, seniors, and individuals who come to Epha for services such as housing and food assistance. And many of these people are low-income residents of Boulder. From this survey from our from the results we collected, the three greatest concerns amongst this part of our community are one, affordable housing, which was the same as last year. two, a loss of benefits such as Medicaid and SNAP, especially with the retraction of the federal safety net by the new administration in Washington. And third, a lack of job opportunities in Boulder.

[33:01] And among Spanish speakers, which was half of our respondents, one of the top three concerns was feeling secure in their community. The survey also helps us measure e the economic situation of these households in the past year. Regarding income, 13% of households saw an increase while 42% stayed the same and 45% actually saw their income decrease. In terms of expenses, 56% of households saw their expenses increase over the past year. Noting these two trends, it is no surprise that 62% of households say they cannot cover their typical monthly expenses here in Boulder. We think it is important that city council is aware of this concerning situation in our community. Low-income households in Boulder are seeing their economic situation erode. We will send you our full report with policy recommendations to the next council to take under consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. Now we go to Patrick or work virtual then Danielle Alnosell in person and Evan Rabbits in person. >> Good evening, city council. I'm from

[34:02] historic Boulder. I'm calling or calling in regarding 90 Arapjo and I'm requesting that it be called up tonight. it's on your consent agenda. There's a variety of uh issues that concern me even after the planning commission sent through a notice and I'm just going to go through a couple of them. We've all been watching this project for the last eight years at the mouth of the canyon. I actually live just two miles west of it and I've watched uh them struggle getting out of the ground and getting this project going. uh we cannot be held responsible for the developer not making a profit on a building. That being said, uh he went before the planning commission requesting that uh the annexation agreement be amended. The concern I have is he didn't go before the landmarks board or the before the planning board requesting that the deandmarking of that particular site

[35:02] which is historic in nature and it's part of the annexation agreement um be modified. This came solely at the request of the planning department. Laura Kaplan bought it up and the other members batted around as if they were um proficient in and what a landmark property is. And the reality here is that we cannot let a developer come into our town uh fail on a project, come back to the city and say, "Hey, I'm sorry I messed up and uh in order to move forward, I need to uh adjust this plan." That being said, I just request a couple things. Number one, if you call it up, u set aside and send it back. I know Marcy's going to be there tonight to talk about uh this particular project. Don't let them de landmark this project. Uh this developer is a quality developer. He has the ability to restore those buildings. He by neglect for only his own purpose let those

[36:01] buildings uh fall fall into disarray. Thank you. >> Thanks. Now we'll go to Da Alnosal in person, Evan Rabbits in person, and Chris Alred in person. I'd like you all to close your eyes and think of your mo favorite moment from today. Please humor me for a moment. Do close your eyes. Was it when you dropped off your kid at school? Or was it when you looked outside your office window and saw the striking beauty of the flat irons? Perhaps it was as simple as when you had your oatmeal with a little bit of added dark chocolate. Whatever your favorite moment of today is, I suspect it involved one of three things. The company of the people we love, the serenity and safety of where we are, and

[37:02] perhaps the delicacies we enjoy every so often. We are privileged. The parents in Gaza do not get to drop off their children. What remains of schools is the rubble. the sea. Gaza's refuge from the occupation has become a place where they are killed. As for food, there is no food. Countless children have starved to death. Basic human rights are not met. How can we, the residents, the students, the parents of the city of Boulder, live the life we have, enjoy the company of our loved ones, eat and sleep in the comfort of our homes, while knowing that our great city, our home, our boulder, is investing in companies supporting the demise, starvation, and continued expulsion, and uprooting of those in Palestine. Let's not be responsible. Let's not have blood on our hands. Let us live our

[38:01] lives morally. Let our boulder divest. Thanks. Now we'll go to Evan Rabbitz in person, Chris Alred in person, and Julie Van Dlin in person. Good evening. Evan Rabbitz, 47year resident, finally divest from Microsoft and Caterpillar. At least a whole year ago, mathematician Aram Bingham at Open Comment told you they were complicit. Both he and I have reminded you several times since these investments violate city policy which prohibits investing in quote firearms or weapons not used in national defense. When used to kill software and bulldozers are weapons just like a baseball bat used to kill is legally a weapon. Microsoft and Caterpillar stocks

[39:01] have both doubled just since this genoc just during this genocide. So the city made about 8.5 million in less than two years just on these two stocks. Now worth 17 million $170 per boulderite. Congratulations on all the new blood money. But I think you did it mostly to pre please our drill baby drill kill Israel kill baby governor. It's backfiring now. 92% of Democrats are against what Israel is doing. But you thought you could, pardon me, but you thought lying to us repeatedly that there's some city rule that says you can't take a position. And you have 37 PR propagandists on staff to spread the lie. Triple the

[40:02] number in 2018. Now Bob Yates is spreading the lie on Boulder Reporting Lab. Did you, Tina, consult the city's propagandist before telling your newsletter subscriber there were only three or four of us when there's usually 20? Times up. Thanks. Now we go to Chris Allred and Julie Van Dalman. If we have time, we'll go back to people that we weren't here earlier. Good evening, council. Hi, my name is Chris Alred and I work with Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center. I'm here tonight to address the topic of Boulder's investment portfolio. It's important for the city's investments to reflect the community's values, and I commend Council Member Adams for bringing this topic to the council's attention tonight. Please see that I

[41:01] distributed a recent article from July 29th in Democracy Now titled Designed as Death Traps. Former Green Beret who worked at Gaza food sites reveals rampant war crimes. Let's not downplay the severity of what's happening. These are not mil these are not military actions. They are war crimes, violations of the Geneva Conventions. setting up so-called aid distribution in active combat zones, targeting of civilians, massacres, and starvation. In a time of war crimes, it is essential to oppose the systemic conditions which allow them to happen. Howard Zinn once said, "You can't be neutral on a moving train." To be silent in a time of such horrible systemic violence is choosing a side. In regard to the agenda item tonight, I am citing the new evidence being brought to light by the UN Human Rights Council 59th session,

[42:00] which has very serious implications for US involvement and corporate involvement in war crimes. All levels of the US government have a duty to speak out against this injustice. The conditions of corporate crime and human rights violations will only worsen if local governments don't speak out to hold the federal government accountable. A healthy democracy has representation at every level of government. Therefore, I urge you to divest from the company's Caterpillar and Microsoft due to the evidence presented in the recent UN Human Rights Council report. Please summon all of your courage to face this important issue and vote yes to divest. Thank you. >> Thanks, Julie Van Delman. And then Leslie Glustester and I think Richard Kater here as well. >> Good evening. My name is Julie Van Damlin. This is the last time I'm going to appear in front of you as the executive director of Epha as I retire next week. Um, and Debbie Pope will be taking over who has been the director of the YW.CA. Um, I wanted to make sure I

[43:03] stopped by to say thank you. It's been an incredible 11 years for me and the partnership between Epha and the city of Boulder has been a core part of that. um from the beginning of launching the keep families housed program with you which is one of the most successful prevention of family homeless programs around to getting through COVID and everything else that we've gone through. So I wanted to just um really highlight the importance both of um your support as a council and the great professional um work we do with your staff Elizabeth and the whole crew. I see you there. Um, you know, this partnership with FA is all the more important because of the results that Waqen just shared with you from the survey. Um, one of the things that caught my eye was that the expenses that respondents said had gone up the most were rent, food, and medical uh, expenses. Those are the three areas that are going to be shrunk most dramatically

[44:01] in the federal safety net. Um, we were already seeing less food in our food bank at EA. um community food share which provides half of our food has seen budget cuts. Um so my parting words are about the dark skies ahead. Um we've always shared with the you've been the canary in the coal mine and we know that EF and the city will keep uh working together. Um but since I won't be asking for money at the September budget hearing like I always do um I just want you to please keep the strain on the safety net in mind. It's going to be tremendous. Um, EA will is out trying to get as much private money as possible, but the city will be have to contemplate how much you're going to uh support the poorest in our community. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, and now we'll go to Leslie Glustrm and finish with um, Richard Kate.

[45:01] >> Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. I'm sorry I missed the new start time. Appreciate the opportunity. My name is Lesley Glustester. I do a lot of work on climate change and I have three thoughts for you tonight. Always I just want to begin with a thank you for your service to the community. It's definitely not easy and I sincerely appreciate it. I appreciate that for the most part it's done in a civil fashion. I share the deep concerns about Gaza and I would love to see my city find a way to balance this incredibly difficult situation. You're all pretty smart. I think you can do that. Uh my second comment uh is really about the handout you've just gotten. As you know, I've spent over 20 years at the Public Utilities Commission working in large part to try to reduce the carbon emissions associated with our electricity. Um and as part of doing that, I've watched our rates go up and up and I've watched Excel's profits go up and up when we could still show PowerPoints. You saw this PowerPoint many times. sales are flat over the last

[46:02] 20 years. The red line, their profits have soared. Every year I I kind of track this through Excel's financial reports and I decided to just give you a copy of the actual data. The first page um is the 2024 10K. I've highlighted the 782 million and after tax net income from 4XL in Colorado. This is just the Colorado branch. We're about 3% of their load. So that means that over 20 million is leaving our community every year. So we've been pennywise and pound foolish. The municipalization was about 2 to three million a year. About 10 times that amount leaving our community every year in the monopolies profits. I'm always shocked. I always think I'm not going to be shocked. If you turn to the next page, it's the half, it's the second quarter report, and you can see that the the rates have gone up over 22%. Finally, Denver City Council is taking

[47:02] action. I encourage you to >> time. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And um we're going to finish up with uh Richard Kate online. >> Good evening, Cers. Can you all hear me? Yes. >> All right. So, I'm here to talk about one of the fastest, lowest cost ways Boulder can add housing right now and why our current rules are stopping it. We have office buildings sitting vacant. Many of these spaces are already built out with kitchens, bathrooms, and sprinklers. With a simple change of use, they could become apartments in weeks, not years. But under current policy, the second we reclassify these as residential, the city applies the full inclusionary housing fees, the same as if we were breaking ground on brand new development. That extra cost doesn't just slow projects down, it kills them. A small

[48:00] conversion that could add four, 12, even 15 homes just can't absorb a six figure fee. Instead, these newer units never come online and Boulder loses both housing and supply and a chance to reuse underutilized commercial space. I'm asking council to consider a change, exempt, or reduce affordable housing fees for adaptive reuse projects where no new square footage is built. Give us a path to deliver homes faster, cheaper, with far less environmental impact. These conversions align with Boulder's values. They add housing, reduce vacancies, and strengthen neighborhoods, all without sprawl or massive new construction. Let's take a page from other progressive cities around the nation. Let's stop treating adaptive reuse like new construction. If we clear this one hurdle, Boulder can unlock dozens of ready to go homes in months, not decades. This is the lowhanging fruit for our housing crisis. Let's not leave it on

[49:00] the tree. Thank you. >> Thank you. That brings us to the end of open comment. I'll turn to city staff to see if there are any responses. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh I'll say uh I know that there are some topics that we're going to be talking about later today, so I won't address that. Um I'll there was a comment um by someone about 15minute neighborhoods, and I'll note that staff is going to follow up. Uh 15-minute neighborhoods are actually already in our Boulder Valley comp plan. Um but staff is going to follow up on community assemblies, how they came to be, and answer those questions. So know that they will be reaching out. Um and I also just want to take a moment to thank Julie for her service. Uh it has been an extraordinary partnership all your years here. Just an amazing thing. I know council will probably do the same, but I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for all you've done and we will of course remember you at budget time because I've got you in the back of my head. So just thank you. >> Teresa, sh quiet. Quiet in the audience, please. Quiet in the audience.

[50:01] >> Quiet in the audience. This is your last warning. >> All right, we're going to have to call a recess. >> Six members of our community. >> Back into session. Um, and I think now comes the time where council members can respond with up to 30 seconds to open comment. I'm going to start by calling for staff. >> Oh, questions for staff. Yeah. Yeah. Good point. Any questions for staff? >> I did. >> Lauren? >> Yeah. Um, I was someone uh referred to 37 propagandists and I was wondering if you could provide I believe that's our communications team that they were talking about. Maybe you could provide us a little more information about that. >> I'm happy to. And I um I'm sorry that they are spoken to about in that way. Um, our communications and

[51:02] engagement people do tremendous things for our community. I will say we have 34 positions, 33 full-time positions and two for uh part-time positions uh in our communications and engagement department divided into three main areas. 18 deal with general communications um responsible for your most general portfolio. Uh there are 8.5 FTE that do engagement functions. You see those in communities and in neighborhood work. And then 5.5 that do creative services. Many of the people that you see here doing the boards and commissions work. The folks that keep these live streams going. Uh I can go ad nauseium about the important and really great work that they do and engaging our community. I will spare you from that. But they are extraordinary professionals that do a lot to do engage community to share out and disseminate information. Um and I stand behind the staff that we have. Thank you.

[52:00] >> Thank you. I also had one other about um the affordable housing fee being applied to the conversion of commercial buildings. I suppose that makes sense, but I hadn't thought about that before. Could you clarify that that if that is indeed what we do or we could get that as a follow-up answer? Yeah, happy. >> I see Kurt um uh standing up and perhaps telling me that we can get back to you on that. I don't know if Kurt is coming down, but we can get back to you. We will get back to you on that. >> Great. >> Uh I saw Tina and then Taiisha with questions. >> Yeah, I had the same question about the conversion um and and have and interested in learning more about that and opportunities. Um and then the second is where are we on the anti-Islamophobia uh proclamation? We looked at that um in February, I think, and we're hoping to get back to it. >> Uh I will say that that is >> uh Thank you. Um I will say that that uh

[53:02] declarations are the province of uh council certainly uh we had um thought to work on that. We will continue to see if we can move that forward um as that works. I know that uh other council members were working on that and we'll love to bring that forward as we can. >> Can I call you on that please? >> Yes. And then you can roll into your question. >> Oh, awesome. Thank you. That's all your questions. Thank you. Um so, uh yes, I am happy to work and always will with any council member that is interested in working with us on continuing that. um there were some stumbling blocks on agreement on terminology on on and I welcome you know multiple conversations about it instead of just one. So happy to talk about that at any time. Um my question was about the um Excel Energy conversation and I just wanted to get a reminder on and have our community be reminded of what the next conversation we're having about Excel Energy. Thank you.

[54:02] Uh, I'm actually not recalling when that's coming up. I know we have it during the year, but we will I'll get back to you and happy to write a hotline so that those that follow hotline will have it out publicly, but I know that it will be some point during the year. >> Okay. Not seeing any other Oh, Ryan question. >> I Well, on the Sorry, not a question. >> Okay. So, then I'll roll into we do um are allotted 30 seconds if we would like to uh speak to open comment. I'm going to start by calling on myself because I want to thank Julie Van Dolman for her years of incredible service as the head of Epha. So just so grateful to the partnership to keeping families housed and everything you've done to keep people uh clothed, housed, and fed in our community. So just deep gratitude. Thank you so much. Good. I mean, you're just going to hear us gush about Julie, so you know, you just come on up here, I guess. Uh, no, I'm just I mean everything that the mayor said and I'll just say exemplary public public servant there. There's

[55:00] really been few that meet the standard that Julie has provided in our community and just gracious for all the work you've done and really look forward to seeing what you're doing in your next chapter. Hopefully that involves some cool rest and some fun activities because you have really done an amazing job serving our community and so I hope to see you in the next chapter. Uh yes, Julie, thank you so much. An amazing job and we very much appreciate what you've done for the city of Boulder. I had one other comment. Um I am very supportive of the uh uh gentleman who um was promoting the concept of adaptive reuse of buildings. But I do want to throw out one cautionary note. It's not as easy as uh one would think. You have to work with an existing envelope. You have to gut it. You have to make sure you've got kitchens in all the right places. Um I that was what I always did as a developer, but it's not easy.

[56:01] >> Yeah, time's up, I think. But thanks, Ryan. >> So, first point of order. I thought this 30 seconds was to respond to problematic commentary or is this just 30 seconds for whatever? >> For anything related to open comment. >> Fine. Okay. I just wanted to then come to the defense also of our our staff members who were called um a dirty word and um if you didn't have 30ome at least communications professionals operating a city of this size doing the kinds of things we are trying to do I guarantee you would be asking for for more of it or at least the things that would lead to that. It's some of the most fundamental work that this study does is communicate with engage with and let people understand how to get involved and what we're doing. So, um, I just want to say thank you to our communications and engagement staff and, um, you are well loved. >> Well said. Thank you, chair. And then, Taisha >> Julie, thanks for everything. You, every time I came to visit, you taught me everything that I would ever need to know about EA and everything that we can do to help people. And you're going to

[57:00] be missed. Also, thanks to Richard Kate, like everybody else already said about talking about adapt adapt uh, that was a tongue twister. adaptive reuse as well as um trying to solve some of our uh housing problems in a more um creative way. >> Ta. >> Um first I just want to thank all of our community members um sometimes mislabeled as protesters um for coming and asking us to use the authorities that we have. I will have more on that later. I also wanted to thank Leslie Gisham who also comes to this meeting for the last year and a half reminding us of our responsibilities around energy and I look forward to continuing to have a high level of corporate accountability everywhere we spend our money. And then lastly, um I I just want to say thank you to Julie. Thank you.

[58:00] >> Okay. Uh, if that's everybody, then that brings us to the end of open comment. Um, we would take a break if it weren't 30. So, since it is 6:31, let's roll right into the rest of the meeting and go to the consent agenda, please, Elisha. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. The consent agenda is item number three on tonight's agenda, and it includes items 3 A through F, H, and I. >> Thank you. And I might start off. Nuria, I want wonder if you might just speak to why we postponed item 3G. >> I will be limited in what I say. We have reached a tentative agreement uh with our uh Boulder Police Officers Union. Um we uh are waiting for that agreement to now be ratified by the membership. Um, and while I am hopeful, I do not want to get ahead of myself and so I will leave

[59:00] it there. Um, but we will have to come back to councel. >> Thanks for that. Right. Any uh questions or comments on the consent agenda? >> Chair, I have a question on I just got you know what go with somebody else first. Let me just find the number. >> Mark. Uh yeah, I have a number of questions with respect to 90 Arapjo. Um I don't know if we want to do it here, if we want to pull it off consent and do it in a different form. Um I'm happy to talk to Brad if he's available. Maybe we can clear many of them up >> in in advance. >> Do we have Brad in the audience right up front there? >> Of course we do. >> Okay. Thank Thanks, Brad. Um the um what's the current condition of the um uh the property that is currently scheduled to be landmarked? I'm told

[60:02] that it was that it's in desperate condition. >> Uh thank you, Councilman Wallik. Brad Mueller with Planning and Development Services. Um I'm going to let Marcy Gerwig, our historic preservation specialist, speak to that. Um I will say there's multiple interpretations of condition but we can give you the history of its uh historic designation and its current condition in that context. Okay. >> Good evening council members. Marcy Guring uh principal planner in PNDS. The uh property at 90 Arapjo a portion of that property was landmarked already in uh 2021. So it is already designated. The condition of the building is that that project is in construction. So uh the uh exterior materials have been removed. That's within the approved landmark alteration certificate approved

[61:00] by the landmarks board and uh foundation repair has occurred and additions have uh been constructed on the rear of those buildings. So it is in construction and already designated. >> I assume this is a a wood exterior. >> Uh yes, both now and historically. >> And the property is in the WOOI, is it not? >> Uh yes, it is. >> Do we have any conflict between our desire to make Boulder a little more fire resilient and our desire to preserve uh you know, landmark properties? I mean, it it looks a little bit um strange to me that that we have two >> impulses here. >> Yeah, thank you. I would say this particular instance was already well in process before the WOOI was adopted or the current version of the WOOI. I think uh as we've talked about in study sessions, it it certainly is an open question about um timing relative to

[62:01] historic preservation properties and and those types of things. >> Okay. and Marcy >> if it's if that's all right. Um I I spoke at a wildfire preparedness event in Mapleton Hill um yesterday about this topic specifically where uh it is a question of how can historic buildings also meet of wildfire regulations and um the reality is that there's actually quite a bit of alignment in what you can do. And so there are uh construction methodologies to or uh wall constructions that would meet the fire rating um with wood siding, but there are other ways to achieve that as well. >> Um now I want to move to the money. Um how do we negotiate the degree of relief to be offered to a developer who's saying he's impoverished and and and the project is not economically feasible? I mean, how do we get to the amount of

[63:00] relief to be offered? Is that a number that the developer uh suggests or is there an analytical process that we engage in to determine uh that number? And and and for instance, the the request today is for a reduction to 24% affordable housing. >> How did we get to that number as the appropriate degree of relief versus 28% or 30%. >> Sure. Yeah. Thank you for that question, too. Um I will defer to my colleague uh Kurt Fernhopper on the specifics, but I will say that the criteria for considering an amendment to the development review uh agree or the development agreement um is somewhat agnostic to specific costs. It's more in reaction to whether it can be supported under any amended proposed amendments, but I'll again let Kirk elaborate. Uh thank you Mark. Uh Kurt Fernhabber

[64:00] housing and human services. So uh uh our department does not go into the proforma uh and analyze it with a developer in in this type of negotiation. What we do however look at is uh for example a study which was done a couple years ago that was used to update our inclusionary housing ordinance. it was an outside consultant um who has expertise in this that looked at different types of developments and the level of of affordability that they could actually create on on a site. So they looked at generic five different generic type uh developments. We use that as sort of background in understanding um this particular annexation as well as other annexations. The other the last thing I'll add is that um we we look at the full community benefit. There's other community benefits like the landmarking we've just

[65:00] spoken about and there's cost related to that. There's landmarking of uh historic walls. There's site constraints. Um uh there's open space that was dedicated. So looking at really the whole package and at the affordable housing in isolation. >> One last question. Um, as the applicant suggests, we've not really seen the full impact of tariffs on on building costs yet. What happens if in a year the applicant comes back again for additional relief? Is this a one-off or could we be having this conversation again next August? Uh we we did have that conversation with the developer and um uh at at the time of those negotiations uh things were changing and it was hard to understand I think what those impacts would be. Um but I I do believe that the developer took some of that into consideration. Um and we also talked about the fact

[66:02] that we don't want to come back again um on this. Um further questions on that I think would have to go to the developer though. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And I'm just going to call in myself here because I wanted to get one thing on the record. Um so can you confirm that if we pass the annexation agreement that is the amendment that is on the consent agenda, those buildings will still be landmarked. Correct. >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Just wanted to make sure everybody understood that. >> Yeah. Right. >> I also have a question or two, Brad. Um, my understanding is the property has the status of both being affordable housing and landmark designation and that both of those conditions are something the city prompted as part of the annexation agreement. Is that right? >> That is correct. >> Great. Thank you. And then secondly, the combination of being affordable housing and landmark designation. My understanding is that is very unusual.

[67:00] Is that is that true? Do you know? >> Boy, I appreciate the question. Uh, Council Member Shuhart, I'm I'm not sure I can answer that. I I think each annexation is unique. And I think one of the things we recognize more and more is that uh it's important to think of all aspects of the proposal in the context of a variety of city uh policies, but certainly affordable housing is often one of those uh in cases where historic conditions exist that that inevitably is going to come up as well. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, I think I was just getting at if it is the case that the city had prompted both of those statuses to occur, affordable housing and landmarking, and if that is very unusual and then also if um landmarking would make affordable housing more expensive and the city is the entity that prompted this in the first place. It I'm just trying to understand maybe we ought to be looking at this. >> Yeah. No, I appreciate that and and I think what that speaks to is the concept that there's u maybe an inherent

[68:00] conflict between affordability and landmarking and the maintenance of it. I don't know that as staff we agree with that premise. Uh there are many many different conditions and uh if if Marcy would like to elaborate, I think she can speak to the instances where that actually can be advantageous towards affordability. Um so maybe I'll defer Marcy if you feel you've got something to add. >> Sure. Sure, I'm happy to answer specific questions as well, but um to your earlier question, there are very few landmarks uh that are also affordable units. Um to my knowledge, I think there are three, the biggest one coming up with the Geological Society of America um building. Um but there is one just east of this property um on Arapjo that entered into the inclusionary housing program in 2016 and there were two to three times the number of applicants for that unit compared to the average number

[69:01] at that time. Um but to uh the point about the cost of maintaining these buildings when they come in through uh site review or annexation part of a bigger redevelopment project the buildings are thoroughly renovated before they enter into the inclusionary uh housing program. So the first owners are starting out with like new construction and then the inclusionary housing um program recognizes that older buildings older than 20 years uh may take more to maintain. So the cap is increased to the amount that owners can invest in those. And then for owners of designated properties uh they're eligible for state tax credits uh to help offset the cost of rehabilitation. And that's um capped atif at $100,000 in general, but with the inclusionary housing cap, it would be a $10,000 uh tax credit that resets every 10 years or upon the sale of the property.

[70:01] >> Okay. Thank you both. That's all. >> Terry, do are you ready to be come back to? >> Sure. >> Um not necessarily, but any but you can ask your own question. Okay. Well, then if anybody else has questions on 90 rap, why don't we do those? >> So, a question in terms of process going forward, if they were to approve this annexation, do they need to come back for a site review given that the previous one approved a different site plan basically and items or does this annexation basically cover that? >> I I'm going to have to defer to Chandler who is also on the line and is the uh staff planner for this particular case. I believe we're past site plan, but I don't want to misspeak here, so deferring to >> Yes. Hi. Hi. This is Chandler Vansk, um, principal planner. Um, there will be some level of amendment required to the site review. Um, we're not sure exactly,

[71:00] but really they're just kind of moving, um, affordable units into what were market rate units and vice versa. So, it's kind of an internal reconfiguration of the site. So, they would have to amend some of the site review documents, but it would likely it might be possible administratively um or at the very most it would likely be kind of a call up to planning board type situation. So, um not a major site review amendment. >> Okay. Well, I appreciate the assessment on not major. I just curious if there was more discretionary process in front of us after this. So, it sounds like there may be depending on what Yes. >> Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Yeah. I just had a quick question about whether because we're using the analysis on affordability to come up with a new number of affordable units, whether that um helps us not have other developers who are looking for some financial relief to come back to us for their projects when they find that their conditions change for whatever reason. We don't have a specific reason why this is changing. whether we would anticipate

[72:02] having more requests such as this whether it's an annexation or not. >> Uh here again I'm going to defer to my colleague uh for the most of the answer but I will say that uh we are fond of saying in the land use um uh review process that every site is unique uh and sight specific. So whether it sets precedent or not is kind of a matter of of context. Uh, we recognize that that each site needs to be considerate on its own merits. Kurt feels like I answered, but let's see. Yeah, I'm not sure I have much to add. Um, we do know that there have been annexations that have um uh uh been approved over the last few years that have not been built. um uh and what we we've been told by the

[73:00] developers they can't seem to make it work. Um so I think it is possible. Um we have seen annexations that they thought they were going to get out of the ground and it's it's been a few years. Um and uh the the market also changes. Um, so an annexation that was approved, you know, six, seven years ago, um, you know, it may look different today, but I think it's like with any planning process, there is, um, there is there's always room to come back and amend a site plan and annexation process. >> Can I ask a follow-up question of Kurt? Do you feel comfortable with the new affordability percentage were that to be used in general >> the 25%. >> Um I think it is it's it's right at the top of well I will say that there's some some projects um uh that it will that cannot happen

[74:02] because of the high percentage. It takes a particular type of project um for it to occur. Um, in my nine and a half years, there's only been one project that's done on-site uh affordable of 25%. And they've really they really struggled to uh to make that happen. So, I I think the market sort of answers that question um a little bit as well. >> Any other questions on this topic? >> Seeing none, then go to your next one, Tara. >> Okay. This is in regards to E, which is uh 5691 South Boulder Road. So, we got I don't know who wants to speak to this, Brad or Chandler, but we got quite a few letters with um the neighborhood being concerned about the um increase in the height to 32 feet. And I'm wondering if somebody can uh speak to that. >> Absolutely. Brad Mueller, Planning and Development Services. again. Uh we've

[75:02] got uh several staff who can speak to that, so I'll let them selfidentify which one wants to go first. >> Yeah, Brad, I'm happy to address that if that's all right. Um this is Chandler Vansk again. And um so you know, the background of this, right, is is the way that the city measures height um is from the low point of natural grade within 25 ft of the tallest side of the structure. And natural grade is defined as the grade that was existing at the time that the charter was adopted in 1971. So it's essentially historic grade, whatever the grade was at 1971. And when applicants come in, they're required to provide documentation of what that grade was at that time. And then we use that to measure the height of buildings. Um so when in this instance, um the developer, as you guys know, came in had an annexation at a site review approved. as part of the site review, they had a preliminary grading plan. Um, and we don't require full engineering documents

[76:01] at the time of site review. Um, we require them to provide some, but then we have the technical document review process to really get into the details of the engineering and the grading and civil, etc. Um, so when they came in, they they thought that they were going they knew they were going to have to add some grade because this site um does sit in a depression. um it's, you know, between five and seven feet lower um than the adjacent street, 55th Street um to the west and the adjacent neighborhood to the south. Um so they knew they were going to have to add some fill in order to make drainage work. Um and they originally proposed about three feet during site review. Then when they came back in for the technical document review and went through um our engineering review, they realized that they actually had to add another two to three feet of grade. Um and this is to fit utilities and also to provide um adequate drainage so that all the water um flowed into the detention areas um off the site to the north. Um

[77:02] so essentially their their where we measure height from um got pushed up about six feet and they were anticipating about three feet and they thought that they could make it work. Um as as you may recall this developer um kind of relies on like pre-esigned homes in order to um be able to construct them, you know, quickly and predictably and and make them affordable. Um so they thought they could fit the pre-esigned homes when they had three feet of increased height. Um but then when they realized that they actually had about six feet of increased height and that the low point where we measure height from was getting pushed down further um they realized that uh they couldn't really modify the homes to fit the height standards and still make them um livable in the way that they uh wanted to and they would essentially have to to customize and and do all sorts of stuff and and reduce the amount of livable space. Um, so the, you know, I understand the neighbors concerns. Um, we have reviewed this and engineering has reviewed this. Um, they're not

[78:01] asking to add more fill through this process. The f the amount of fill that is going on the site has already been approved through the technical document process. They're essentially just asking for um, leniency or for additional height just based on the way we measure it. But the homes themselves will be the same size. um all of the um drainage and storm water meets all of our design and construction standards. Um so we do not anticipate any off-site impacts to the neighboring properties um and all the water um will match historic storm water levels. So um did that answer your question? >> Yeah, Terara's nodding. Thanks. That was very thorough, Chandler. >> Okay. And any other questions on any other matters? Matt and then Tina, >> I'm going back to um the other one. Uh and this might be a legal question, but I'm not sure. So, are we in making this

[79:02] annexation affordability change or this change in affordability? Are we are we setting a number that we should be taking more time to think through or is there enough individuality with the site because the open space because it was an annexation that this wouldn't be considered a precedent that's specific this the precedent of reducing the number of units might exist but not it doesn't have to be 24% because we have a different set of criteria that we chose to do the annexation. Uh I'm I'm not sure that's entirely a legal question. What I can say is annexation agreements are individualized. They're they're contract by contract. And so um one annexation agreement does not necessarily inform or influence any other annexation agreement. Do you mind if I call a queue in on that? Just because I've been dealing with these for 15 years and um every

[80:01] annexation agreement that comes forward does have its own unique characteristics. So I generally don't see us saying well we're doing it exactly the same way we do all the other ones. So they eb and flow over time. >> So my question is around 3F. So probably a question for Nuria. It's regarding the um Verizon on South Boulder Rec Center. And I'm just wondering um after the ENCAR fire, we there were some conversations about um some inadequate service and some holes and some dead zones and stuff. And so I'm just wondering that if there is going to be a new lease agreement, have there been conversations about boosting that reliability, especially given our uh WEIA and our other emergency broadcasting systems? There were certainly some known and well doumented instances of people not getting those messages because of poor service a mere quarter mile away, especially uh a school um did not have adequate cell service that was needed for emergency sort of communication. So, I'm just wondering if those conversations were discussed in the uh

[81:00] leasing agreement with Verizon to use South Boulder Rec Center to sort of boost coverage so we have better reliability uh for community safety. Yeah, >> I don't believe that the current contract discussed that particularly, but we can certainly take that back to Verizon and make sure that that conversation gets covered. >> Appreciate that. Thank you. >> Y >> All right. I'm not seeing any further hands raised, so I wonder if someone might contemplate a motion. >> I move to approve the consent agenda. >> Second. Right. We've got a motion in a second. Elicia, can we have a roll call, please? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. We'll start tonight's roll call for the consent agenda items 3A through FH and I with Council Member Wall. >> Yes. >> Winer. >> Yes. >> Adams, >> yes. >> Benjamin, >> yes. >> Mayor Brockett, >> yes. >> Mayor Pro Tim Folks,

[82:00] >> yes. >> Council member Marquis, >> yes. >> And Shuhar, >> yes. The consent agenda items are hereby approved unanimously. >> Thanks very much. And can we go to our call-up check-in, please? >> Yes, sir. Callup check-ins are item 4A on tonight's agenda. And we have the site review amendment including a height modification request to amend the approved design guidelines and allow for s six six market rate units to be up to 40 feet in height within the approved peacock place development at 5691 South Boulder Road. This is referenced under LUR 20250022. >> Any uh questions, comments, or desire to call this item up? question. >> So, I don't know if this is for Chandler or Brad. I have the same question that I had. Does the same thing that applied for the co uh for the uh consent agenda agend

[83:01] um apply to this 40t in height um increase? >> Um hi. Oh, yes. Um yes, it's exactly the same thing. There are two different processes um just because of the way the code works essentially. Um they had to ask for an annexation agreement amendment for the ADU height and a site review amendment for the principal dwelling unit height. Um but it is the the same exact reasoning behind it. >> Is that it? Okay. Anything else on this item? >> Seeing none then that's no desire to call this one up. So, can we go to our item 8A, please? >> Yes, sir. Next on tonight's agenda is our item number 11A, and that is the executive session. >> No, I think we got 8A, the matters >> from mayor members of council. >> Thank you. I totally missed that on my notes. My apologies everyone. Next on

[84:00] tonight's agenda, as I was corrected, is item 8A, matters from the mayor and members of council. 8A is the city of Boulders's investment portfolio discussion. >> Thanks for that, Isla. So, we do have this um set for 15 minutes of discussion. Um and Elish and Emily, I wonder if we might just put a timer up just so we can be mindful of the time if that's doable. And just encourage folks to keep remarks uh limited so we can get through it in that amount of time because it is prescribed by our rules and procedures. And then Teresa, I'd reach out to you to get us started in terms of what exactly we're discussing here or considering. Uh yes, happy to help, mayor. So um this is a a consideration um of whether there has been a material change in law or fact. A material change in law or fact means a change that if having occurred prior or before the prior council decision would have made it unlikely that a majority of council would have supported the prior decision.

[85:04] So if five or more council members support reconsideration of prior of the prior decision, then only at that time would you schedule a substantial discussion of the item? So there's a threshold question tonight which is is this a material change of law or fact such that five council members would reconsider their prior decision? >> Thanks for that clarification. Well, Taiisha, you brought this forward, so if you would like to to speak to it. >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Today, I asked my fellow council members to walk our talk on sustainability, equity, and resilience by holding ourselves accountable to our city's values and goals by removing Caterpillar and Microsoft from our investment portfolio. If this decision results in more Oh, sorry, that was the beginning.

[86:01] I sit here before you today as an African-American elected and if it were not for the local and global divestment efforts from the free goods movement in the United States starting in 1838 and the United Kingdom which started in 1840s and 1850s during enslavement as well as the Mississippi bus boycott which brought the state of Mississippi to its economic needs resulting in integration and pathways towards equal justice. This request is also policydriven. Now that this request um to align our investment portfolio with our human rights and climate goals and values is not the responsibility of the federal government. It is our responsibility as the sole authority of our city council's investment portfolio. Please do not let anyone gaslight you into thinking our city has no power here. We must not lose sight of the power of

[87:01] our local cities and states when it comes to saying no to genocide in Gaza, in Sudan, in Congo, and anywhere that poisonous root rattles. In 2017, the city of Boulder established the sustainability, equity, and resilience framework, and the council and community identified focus areas that included uh responsibly governed and environmentally sustainable. In 2022, the city of Boulder aligned our budget approach towards outcomesbased budgeting with the SUR framework, hoping to understand the understand the impacts of our funding choices and the allocation of our city's resources in support of our goal. This data is visible and embedded within the 2025 budget dashboard online, which includes outcomes for our city's investment portfolio. Sadly, those outcomes do not address issues of equity or

[88:00] sustainability, only fiscal returns. So, what evidence has been provided in the United Nations report about Caterpillar and Microsoft? We know that based on the UN report, Caterpillar has demolished Palestinian homes, infrastructure, and lives. We know that based on the UN report, Microsoft technologies are embedded embedded in prisons, policing, universities, and schools, including in colonies. And I have witnessed firsthand during my recent visit to the West Bank, sitting next to the partition wall in Bethlehem while children played next to the wall with an AI powered uh machine gun pointed at them. According to the UN in July 2024, an Israeli uh cardinal described cloud tech as quote a weapon in every sense of the word inciting these companies >> and just it's been three minutes so >> yes thank you um and then I would just

[89:01] like to conclude with are these violations specific to Gaza and sadly the answer is no. Microsoft is in Congo where there are continued allegations against child mining used for cobalt. Caterpillar has been in Sudan since 1952 providing m um machines that have been found in illegal mining facilities. And so today I ask my fellow council members to walk our talk as I mentioned by not investing in these companies and more importantly being brave enough to align our values with our investments. Just like other cities, we are indeed the ones we have been waiting for. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, does anyone else want to speak to this matter? Ryan got something. I want to thank you, Council Member Adams, for bringing this forward and appreciate your perseverance on the issue. The devastation and suffering is unimaginable and our community is having

[90:01] a collective traumatic experience. Palestinians Jews, Muslims, people with family and loved ones in the region, residents who can't look at their television or feed without seeing it, neighbors who feel a shared humanity, people whose identities are a target of hate and abuse and who are being treated even worse now. People of all different with all different hopes and dreams who are caught in the horror of this conflict against their will. I am saddened and I'm grieving especially for the Palestinians and the Jews who have lost their lives and had their lives shattered. And I know a lot of people are asking the city to intervene because they feel the federal government has turned its back and is working against people who are oppressed and living at the margins and they are left with a deep bank of injustice. This weighs heavy on me. The situation in Gaza is untenable and unacceptable and it needs to be resolved. It's gone on for too long. It needs to deescalate. needs to end and I am wishing for a

[91:00] speedy resolution the parties can accept and I hope our congressional representatives and other federal officials will do everything to support that outcome. Still, I continue to think that investing the city's resources in this conflict is not wise. For one, the opinions in our community are very divided. Number two, we don't have the expertise to our capacity to facilitate a resolution in this conflict, and we risk bringing additional harm to community members and relationships if our best attempts go ary. And the third, the resources needed to take this on in a well-considered way are substantial and they will divert resources from our efforts to increase affordability, create better services and access to them and to deal with the degraded economy, degraded funding, and the chaos coming at us from the federal government that we are running to keep up with. So unfortunately, I think weighing in on investments in this conflict follows from that. And so I'm not in favor of moving forward. And I also am reticizent to be selecting and deselecting individual stocks in response to a specific problem from the dis. I think

[92:01] it warrants a fuller process. What I do see in the UN report is that a long list of companies that are bound up in this conflict. And my takeaway is that where there is violence and injustice, the capitalist economy and the technologies we use every day tend to be right there with it. So, I would endorse that we consider updating our investments framework broadly, doing so in a way that is comprehensive, global, clear about what we want to invest in and what it means for the city's connections to the economy more broadly, including our procurement of products and services, our partnerships, we think about it, and I would like that to happen above and beyond the specifics of the Gaza conflict. I think the right way to do it is to build on the existing sustainable and responsible investing approach we have which screens out companies and industries and categories that are problematic which we last updated in 2017. That's something I would like to see consideration of at the new work plan setting session when this council comes back in 2026. So just to close uh I welcome those to disagree with me on

[93:00] the particulars of broadly. You might be right, I might be wrong and I'm listening and I can hopefully learn from you and be better. But as we go forward, I invite all who would consider it that this is a terrible crisis. It's taking a terrible toll on our community in so many different ways, and I hope for us to be able to treat each other as humans and to be able to hold space for all the difficult things one another going through. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thanks, Ryan. Um, any other notes? I'll just note we have seven minutes left. So, is anybody else have any um thing they need to add before we check the will of council? Tina? Yeah, I just wanted to appreciate both Council Member Adams and Council Member Shuhard for your comments. Um, and uh, especially uh, it's it's just a really hard time and it I think we're it's incredibly sad and feels hopeless, but ultimately I agree with Ryan's um, analysis, but uh, it's really tough. Yeah, Lauren,

[94:01] >> as Ryan mentioned, our investment portfolio hasn't been revisited since 2017. Um, this item that Taiisha has brought up was something that I originally voted for, and I would still like to see us revisit our investment procedure in a detailed and comprehensive manner. Um, our rules ask if I believe the new information presented would have changed the outcome of our council's vote had it been available prior to that decision. And unfortunately, I do not believe that to be the case. And because of that, I cannot support revisiting that decision at this time. I see so many of our community members in pain and I would like to see us work towards a resolution, a statement to reflect the pain that our community is feeling. Um, I know we do not have the power to solve international issues, but we do have the

[95:00] privilege of being able to call out the actions that we see um and find disagreement with. And I hope that that is something that we will consider. Thanks. Anybody else? I'll just um call on myself and say I really appreciate um everyone's remarks um about the horrendous um tragedy that's going on in the Middle East. Um but I do fall where Ryan is as well. I thought that was all very well stated, Ryan. Thanks for that. Seeing no other hands uh raised, then Teresa, would a a straw poll on this be appropriate? Uh yes, mayor. Because we're under matters, no vote is permitted. Um however, you do need to find some way for people to indicate whether this would result in uh amount rather to a material change of law or fact. >> Okay. So, I would ask for a show of

[96:00] hands of people who do feel like there has been a material change of law or fact that would lead us to reconsider this decision. I see that got one. And people who do not think that that is the case, please raise your hands and that's seven. So um that will not be taken up. Um but again um thank you with for the passion with which you address this issue. >> Okay. >> And quiet please everybody. >> Need quiet in the room. We still have another agenda album. >> Okay, last warning. >> All right, we're going to go into recess. >> We just have one very brief last thing to do. If we can have 11A, please Elicia.

[97:00] >> And again, my apologies for uh missing 8A. 11A on tonight's agenda is our executive session. We have the consideration of a motion to call an executive session of the city council as authorized by 22 24-6-424 of the CRS related to the Sundance Film Festival confidential legal advice and strategy. I'm sorry, legal advice and determining positions related to matters that may be subject to negotiations. developing strategy for negotiations and instructing negotiators. >> Thanks, Elicia. All right, I've got a script to read here. The city manager and the city attorney have requested an executive session pursuant to CRS section 246424B and E for a conference between city council and the attorneys for the city for the purpose of receiving legal advice and determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and instructing negotiators related to the Sundance Film

[98:00] Festival. This topic announcement provides as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the executive session is authorized. I will entertain a motion to convene an executive session pursuant to CRS section 246424B and E for a conference with the attorneys for the city for the purpose of receiving legal advice and determining positions relative to matters that may be the subject may be subject to negotiations developing strategy for negotiations and instructing negotiators related to the Sundance Film Festival. >> So moved. Uh, we got a motion in a second. Can we have a roll call, please, Elicia? >> Yes, sir. >> Yes, sir. We'll start the roll call for the executive session with Council Member Winer. >> Yes. >> Adams, >> yes. >> Benjamin, >> yes. >> Mayor Brackett, >> yes. >> Mayor Pro Tim Faulkers, >> yes. >> Council member Marquis, >> yes. >> Shuhard, >> yes. >> And Wallik, >> yes. Item 11A regarding the executive

[99:01] session is hereby approved unanimously. >> Okay. And I'll note that that needed to be passed by 2/3 and it was with a vote of 8 to zero. So the motion has passed. The council will now recess and reconvene immediately in executive session to discuss the matter previously stated for the purpose purposes previously stated. 07 p.m. and the executive session has been concluded. The participants in the executive session were Taiisha Adams, Aaron Brockett, Matt Benjamin, Lauren Fulkurtz, Tina Marquis, Ryan Shuhard, Nichol Nichols, Mark Wallik, Terra Winer, Nuria Rivera, Vandermide, Chris Mestchuk, Mark Wolf, and Terresa Taylor Tate. For the record, if any person who participated in the executive session believes that any substantial discussion of any matters not included in the motion to go into executive session occurred during the executive session or that any improper action occurred during the executive session in violation of the open meetings law, I ask that you

[100:01] state your concerns for the record. Seeing none, I continue the regular meeting agenda which has one item left which is item number 12, adjournment. 08 p.m. Thanks everybody. Have a good evening.