April 2, 2025 — Landmarks Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:02] Thank you, Aubrey. I'd like to call to order the April second, 2025 landmarks board meeting and the 1st order of business tonight that we're all very excited about is Marcy Gerwing will be swearing in our newest board member. All right. thank you, Abby, and welcome, Michael, and for this oath of office. If you could kindly read the text on the screen, which is your oath of office, and then you'll have a written. You'll sign the hard copy that I think is there? It's the same. If you want to read it from there. turn on your microphone. There we go. It's red when it which defies logic. Thank you. I'm Michael Ray. Do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America and the State of Colorado, and the charter and ordinances of the City of Boulder, and faithfully perform the duties of the office of a member of the Landmarks Board, which I am about to enter.

[1:15] Thank you. This is more of a heads up for your next meeting, but traditionally the chair and vice chair have been chosen soon after a new board member is selected, and so This is something that the Board could do at your next meeting on May 7, th and please probably go smoother if you contact Abby beforehand, if you're interested, so that she knows if there's 4 people who are interested, or one person, just go ahead and send her an email. And then, if you are curious about what the duties of the chair are.

[2:00] The chair which Abby's in that position now is responsible for conducting the Board's meetings in an orderly and democratic manner, and assuring that the minority opinion may be expressed, and that the majority is allowed to rule the chair, calls the meeting to order, and runs the meeting according to the agenda. The chair decides all points of order or issues of procedure, unless otherwise directed by a majority of the Board. and the chair is allowed to debate issues, make motions and vote on motions, and for each meeting the chair should be familiar with the order of business for the day, parliamentary procedures, and how to conduct meetings. and then the vice chair which John is in that position currently presides in the absence of the chair, and assumes all duties of the chair. And then, for all of you, your duties are contained in chapters 2, 3, and 9, 11 of the Boulder Revised Code, and you all apply standards and criteria debate, and decide on the matters brought before you all in quasi judicial hearings, and then also debate and decide on other historic preservation policy and legislative matters.

[3:12] So nothing to do this evening but think about whether you'd like to serve as chair or vice chair, and I think traditionally, either people have self nominated or nominated a fellow board member. And, Abby, anything you want to add about this position? No, I know that my cell by expire date is really in the rearview mirror, and I always think it's very healthy to have someone take over new blood. The only thing I want to add about this is that I've spent over 40 years in the nonprofit world, and many of those nonprofits had boards of directors which I would work with, and I've really come with a sense, not only from that experience, but serving on the landmarks board is, any board member

[4:03] can be a board chair, and I think that with staff support and everything they do to make you successful as a board chair or vice chair. I really do think anyone is qualified to do it now. I don't know, Michael, that you necessarily want to sign up immediately, but you know it's I just feel most people who are appointed to a board. Also have the skill set to then serve as a chair or vice chair. And I think anyone who takes those roles next month. although they would probably actually start at the June Board meeting if they're elected next month, I think you'll find it very, very rewarding. So let me know if you have any questions prior to May's meeting. Wonderful. All right. So this meeting is a little different than a typical landmarks board meeting, but we wanted to take the opportunity, despite not having any public hearings, to use this time as an intentional welcome for our new board member, Michael. And so what we'd like to do is some brief welcome and introductions for from board, members and staff, and then I'll give a very brief

[5:15] overview of the program, knowing that Michael will join Staff from the Historic Preservation and Planning and Development Services Department and the city attorney's office before the May meeting for a more in-depth orientation. This is not that. This is more of a very broad overview, and then there are a couple questions. you know, offered to have a discussion amongst the Board members and and staff, if appropriate about you know. What do you wish you would have known as a new board member what's been the most rewarding part of your service? What's been the most challenging? And while this is not a retreat, what do you hope to accomplish on your time on this board? And and there's no right or wrong answers. There's just short and long ones.

[6:07] and so we'll get to that point, and Abby will facilitate that discussion. But the intention of this meeting today is really just to get used to the space welcome, Michael, and then get to know each other a little bit in a kind of more thorough way than a typical board meeting with quasi-judicial hearings allows, for. So with that I might hand it over to Brad Mueller, the planning director, planning and development Services director for welcome and introductions. Welcome and introductions. Yes, I am Brad Mueller. It is always a pleasure to welcome a new board member. We recognize that this is

[7:03] something that takes time and commitment and preparation, as you will find as you get your packets, which we try to make succinct and and meaningful, but yet thorough for the public record and and for your decision-making process, and we'll look forward to. you know, helping you learn about all the different procedural efforts and and mechanical issues. But, most importantly, is the collective wisdom of this group, coming forward within the parameters of the code and and making thoughtful decisions which, as staff we very much appreciate. You know, we have wonderful professional staff who, I guess, are going to introduce yourself separately. Yeah. So a little bit about their backgrounds and and that type of thing as well, but we also know that that at the end of the day these are quasi judicial decisions in many cases, and so bringing the professional discernment

[8:00] and context of that which is a little bit different than the staff. Analysis is a key part of the overall process. and really, ultimately it preserves the integrity of a historic preservation program. You know, there is no natural selection that says there must be these types of programs or organizations. And we're blessed to have that and the origins of it now 50 years within the city. Certainly the mark that it is had on the city and the imprint it is made in creating the community that we know and love is really indisputable. And one of the things that I appreciate the opportunity to do in my role is to go around and remind people that the character and the success that comes socially and economically and environmentally even, is in large part to the values that have been expressed and advocated by the historic preservation

[9:02] community, both the formal one that you're now a part of, and the and the other formal and informal ones in the community. Just a real quick note about myself. I am a cu undergraduate. So this has been a bit of a homecoming for me in this role. I've been with the city now about 2 and a half years. completed my graduate work in New York, and then have been working up and down the Front Range. Since then, most recently in Greeley, where I had a similar role overseeing a variety of divisions, including historic preservation, and in Boulder. The Planning and Development Services Department includes comprehensive planning of which historic preservation is one program. It also includes current planning projects. So that's new development both on the planning land use planning side and the engineering side.

[10:01] So that's within our department. So are all functions of building codes and inspections. So is code compliance. And then we have one wonderful support. Folks like Aubrey, with the business and sports services and and Ir, or information resources group and and and all that. So that's what our department has in general. I'd be happy to answer any questions, but it sounds like we're also going to go down the line here, so maybe I'll turn it over to Christopher. Thank you, Brad, for that, and good evening again, Michael. My name is Christopher Johnson. I am the senior manager for the comprehensive planning division within the department of Planning and Development services. Historic preservation is part of part of our team. I came to Boulder just a few months before, Brad. Actually so, I am almost 3 years into my role here, as the comprehensive planning manager.

[11:11] Most of my background is was in landscape, architecture and planning, and in the private sector. And then I moved over and worked for the city of Denver for 5 years before coming here about 3 years ago. So I appreciate, you know, the the expertise and the knowledge that I've been able to gain through my career, both understanding really the the private sector side, and of clients and their needs and and you know, designing to those and then navigating public processes. But then, of course. Now, my experience of actually creating those processes or updating them to achieve the the goals of the community and really working with our community members to define that vision and then work to implement that through our through our various tools that we have you will probably hear if you haven't already, but we are in the middle

[12:03] of updating the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan which really serves as the the guiding document for the city. Historic preservation and preservation policies will be part of that conversation, so there will be an opportunity for you to participate in our community events and and weigh in on any adjustments or refinements that we may need to make to those to those policies. and we will be getting to an update to the historic preservation plan at some point later before the end of the year that will roll into next year, that this board will also be very much involved in as well. So that's me in a nutshell. Anything that I missed that was great, and really thanks both to you and Brad for taking the time to come this evening. I really appreciate it. I'm Marcie Gerwing, principal historic preservation. Planner and I 1st started with the city in 2,007, 2,008 for a 1 year. Historic preservation internship. When I was finishing my undergraduate environmental design degree at Cu.

[13:09] and after a couple internships in Denver and Grad school in Virginia, I came back, and, you know, have been with the city since 2012, minus a brief study abroad. Career right! Turn to the city of Lafayette! That was all of 6 months. So I've been back here and in this position also for about 2 and a half years. So that was quite the big year in 2022 for our program in our department, and I like to be challenged to describe what I do for a living without using my job title, and I read on a historic preservation professionals, social media group, that historic preservationists are time traveling hall monitors.

[14:02] But but the way I see my job and my work is a storyteller for places. Every building tells a story, and sometimes that story is obvious, and sometimes it needs interpreting. And then I also help shape how buildings change over time. And then my 3rd kind of key piece, you know, in this role leading the preservation program is providing the information to the decision makers to make well informed decisions. And so that you'll see that through our our memos and our research and the recommendations that we that we that we make to you all. So I think that's me in a nutshell, and I'll pass it off to Claire. Hi, Michael, I'm Claire Brandt. I'm a historic preservation planner. So I work very closely with Marci and Aubrey. I also do a lot of the regulatory stuff that Marci does. So. A lot of the design review, and writing memos and things. But my real passion is to

[15:11] to look at our history through a different lens and find that they're, you know different stories out there, and to elevate the ones that haven't been told. And I think it's really fascinating that we do that through buildings that are still there that we can, that we can view history through. So I go off on a lot of tangents. Sometimes Mossy has to rein me in, because I get super excited about about Boulder's history. So very glad you're here, and and that you're excited about preservation, just like we are welcome. all right, really close to the mic. Hi, Michael. I'm Aubrey. I'm the historic preservation program coordinator. Which means I send the board a lot of emails. That's my running joke about my role. I help host the Ldrc. Meetings and these landmarks board meetings and do all of the administrative things that I can to help Marcy and Claire do their work better.

[16:19] The main reason I'm at the city is so I can learn more about the city being early in my career. I'm just like a sponge. I really want, like Marcy and Claire to tell me everything they know. Yeah, this is one of the many things I do in preservation. So welcome again, Michael. I'm Abby Daniels. The current soon to be former chair of the Landmarks board, and although I grew up in the great State of Kansas nearby, and used to come out here to escape the scorching heat. When I was older I learned to ski, so. Colorado has always been a second home to me. I did live for a decade, as I told you in Washington, DC. Which is beautiful by design, followed by a decade in San Francisco. That's beautiful, naturally, and what I love about Boulder it's both.

[17:14] It's beautiful by design, and people in this room do a lot to make sure that the soul of Boulder remains, and I will say we moved from San Francisco to Boulder because we thought it would be less expensive. We were wrong, but I love Boulder, and the quality of life is the highest tier for me. In San Francisco I worked in preservation. and I came to it from a sustainability aspect. Because, I thought, how can we literally build ourselves into a more sustainable world? We have to reuse a lot of the existing building stock. And I am someone, while not a design professional, thanks to my mother's love for all things, from Louis Sullivan and every architect she ever

[18:01] read about or learned about or walked in their hallowed buildings. The 2 things that really bring me to preservation are, as Marcy has mentioned, is the storytelling, and I had never even flown before. But when I was the same age as Anne, Frank took my 1st flight with my family to Europe, never flown, and walking through Anne Frank's house. I'm like that story is so much more real, so much more powerful. If it was gone, I never would have had an experience that stays with me to this day and the other thing. Although I studied art history, I took every history of architecture class I could get. and I believe in the Belgian Belgian architect at the beginning of the last century, Victor Horda's belief that better buildings build a better society, and the way I know that for the fact, and I think you'll understand when I say this is when I finally used that art history degree by working at the National Gallery of art in DC. I worked in the IM Pay East building, and every day I walked in there, and every day I go back to visit my heart skips a beat, and I think when a building can do that to you and elevate the discourse, elevate how you feel, and bring something to your life that I never would have thought the walls around me could do. I think that's why I believe so adamantly about preservation.

[19:32] I'm John Decker. This is my second term on this board, and I'm a design professional. It's really impossible to follow what you just did. So. I I was originally, I guess, brought to this board because I felt a need to do something for the city. and had applied through around to other boards which didn't really have openings for me at that point, and someone recommended that I apply for this.

[20:09] and I had always had an interest in preservation. I spent time as an academic in a planning and another architecture program. and served as a faculty liaison to preservation components of those programs. I had an interest in it. That kind of derived from the fact that when I grew up in Cincinnati, Ohio. I watched the process of urban renewal play out in the 60 S. And watched whole sections of the city vanish. and they were sections of the city that I had learned as a child because of just driving around them with my parents, and just they were gone.

[21:02] And it was a strange thing, because sections of the city were replaced with shining new things which now need preservation and other sections of the city. It was like they just went away and never came back. And so I knew there was an issue there. I didn't see that that was particularly relevant to boulder a new Western town until I got involved with it. So I find this to be one of the more rewarding things that I've done, and I'm consequently in my second term here. I'm Renee Globek, and I'm an architect in Boulder I do not have all the words that they have, so I'm usually short and sweet, and always fumble over my words.

[22:05] So I would just say that my best I just love old homes. There's such a soul in them, and I always have ever since, you know when I was little and I'm a Colorado native. So growing up in Colorado Springs and the old Wood Avenue, I always just love those homes and Broadmoor area and things like that. So, and then architecture and all those good things. And I would like to say that something interesting about me, because they all gave like historic stuff. I used to frame homes for like 3 years with bags and tools and all those things. So interesting fact. And maybe if we could go to Chelsea online, and then, Michael, you'll round us out.

[23:01] I'm actually not seeing Chelsea on zoom anymore. Wondering if she's having tech issues. I'll reach out to her. Okay, thanks. Michael, why don't you go? And then if Chelsea joins us Whenever she joins us, we'll have her chime in, too. I didn't come prepared to try to match any any of this. Well, what I don't have is executive summary function. So I apologize in advance for that lack of skill set. I'll keep it super brief, but I've been in Boulder since 2014, I think. When we were we were eating I shared my come to Boulder sort of moment with everybody, but I came specifically to be here for a year during the design and construction of the athletics expansion at Cu Boulder. My expertise as a design professional is in traditional and classical architecture.

[24:04] It's. you know, the newish cousin of historic preservation, really. But it's a belief in the academic traditions of classical design I teach at Cu Denver in that sort of world. I'm a full-time architect at a very corporate, not as well. I shouldn't say that there's been historic preservation opportunities that have come my way that have more to do with strange railroad yard sort of historic structures in North Dakota and Minneapolis or Minnesota. But I'm I'm also knock on. Would. By the end of the calendar year we'll be finished with a master of historic preservation from Cu. Denver. Yeah, please, let's keep going light at the end of the tunnel.

[25:00] and and just being encouraged to be on the board just seemed like a natural fit. I mean, I've been on the other side of of this process. mostly in historic in Washington, DC. Where I had my own practice and little small scale additions in historic districts. And I I again, because of the the commitment to classical and traditional design, I always felt like. just do the right thing, listen to the soul of the house, and it'll tell you what the right move is, and if you embrace it, everybody wins, and you extend the soul and the life of that house as a stage for its future life, and accommodate the ghosts. Maybe a little bit too like I said I could keep going. But I'm I'm really happy to be here. So thank you. Well, welcome. And Aubrey is is Chelsea online.

[26:03] She is not okay. Would you like me to let you know when she is. Yeah. Okay. Yes, thanks. Okay. Let's see. Let me share so welcome. That was great. I always I always learn something new about everybody, even if I worked with you for a while. So thank you. Let's go here. Share. Hmm. okay, so this is very brief. I really want to leave the majority of the time for a conversation. But you're here, each serving on the city of boulders, landmarks, board. There are dozens of landmarks board across Colorado and across the nation. But each one is a little different. So something that makes boulders program unique. We're celebrating our 51st year which makes it one of the oldest in Colorado, I think. Second to Denver.

[27:07] I would say top 5. We're a certified local government, which means we have professional staff. We meet reporting and training requirements each year, and that also gives us access to grants and kind of a professional network across the State. We have over 1,300 designated properties through 10 historic districts and 220 individual landmarks that represents about 4% of all the properties in boulder, which seems really low, but it is about average for programs across the country. We review about, I'd say, 320 to 370 applications each year. To put that into context. About half of the properties in boulder have a building over 50 years old. So 50% of the properties in boulder potentially fall under this program's review.

[28:07] And and that is a product of kind of the evolution of boulder and kind of a real boom in the post-war era, where there's a lot of older building stock in a tradition more of infill rather than expansion for many planning policy reasons. And then we are guided by the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan which Kj. Mentioned is going through its major tenure update now. But there are a couple of preservation specific policies that guide our work. One which is, I'm very glad that it's in the comprehensive plan is the preservation of historic and cultural resources, and that is a value that's shared from the the city and the county. In this document that guides preservation and development of the Boulder Valley leadership and preservation speaks to how the city and county should be a leader and model by example in their city and county, owned resources.

[29:10] eligible historic districts and landmarks encourages us to continue to evaluate and designate historic properties, and then preservation of archaeological sites and cultural landscapes encourages us to expand from, you know the tangible structures, and look at the significant archaeological and cultural landscapes which I would say we have very little of. We have, like 2 landmarks that are archaeological, and the vast majority are structures and buildings. The document that guides our program is the historic preservation plan, which was 1st adopted in 2013 and then went through a minor update in 2018. And then we'll be starting a major update later this year. And it divides or defines our program in 3 areas, historic resource protection which covers new designations, design, review and demolition, review.

[30:11] community engagement and collaboration, collaboration with property owners, residents and organizations, and encourages like public education through walking tours, our website and events. And then program operation talks about continually improving our process so that it's clear and accessible, and that it's streamlined. And then it also speaks to keeping our program up to date with current policies, current guidelines, and and policies. Oh, yep! And then the goals and objectives go through, you know, ensure the preservation or the protection of boulder. Significant, historic, architectural, and environmental resources actively engage the community, and historic preservation efforts make the review processes, clear, predictable, and objective.

[31:08] continue leadership in historic preservation and environmental sustainability and encourage the preservation of historic resources. So this board is the board that will get a chance to lead this update, to say, are these still our values? How much progress have we made over the last 10 years? And where do we want to go from here. so that'll be one of your main contributions and projects during your tenure on the board. And then the landmarks board. There's so much that this program does that you all don't see. So I wanted to focus on what you do see. And so that's the application review and applying standards and criteria. And then there's the other historic preservation policies which includes the preservation plan. This board can adopt administrative rules like design guidelines or process improvements.

[32:07] and you can make recommendations to council on code amendments. So I'd say, you dabble in the policy strategy piece, though you'll have a bigger hand with the preservation plan update. But the vast majority of these meetings in your time are making those decisions on individual cases. There's also an annual retreat to discuss the past year and future initiatives. There's certified local government training workshops and the ability to attend State and national conferences which we offer. You don't have to go, but you're welcome to go, and we have funding. There's a square nails award ceremony in May this year. It's on May 12, th and then there's an annual letter to City Council. But I put a star next to that, because it always changes with what they like and what they'd like to hear, and when and in what format. So

[33:05] I put a star next to that one. a very broad kind of like, how many cases are we talking about? So, looking at the last 5 years, there's an average of 170 landmark alteration certificate applications, so changes to designated properties each year, and 136 demolition applications, so buildings that are not designated but are over 50 years old. And that's the vast majority of our case review. And then we look at between 2 and 6 tax credit applications and 2 and 6 new designations each year, and then historic districts are are pretty rare with one every, I'd say 5 to 10 years. And then looking at the levels of review. This is the statistics from last year of where the where the levels of review break breakdown. So you'll see on the left hand side the vast majority, 63% were reviewed by the committee that meets each week. The landmarks design Review committee

[34:12] meeting. Only 9% of applications were reviewed in a public hearing by the full board. So while this will take up a significant amount of your time. your volunteer, you know, time commitment for the board. The vast majority of these cases are being reviewed and approved at the committee level which you'll serve on or at the staff level. And this is the area of our program that will change most dramatically since the Board in Council passed code amendments and administrative rule to shift the majority of lacs, to be able to be reviewed by staff rather than the committee. And just in this 1st 3 months of the year we're seeing that those committee meetings are being cut in half. which is great because it took a lot of a lot of volunteer time for sometimes cases that didn't need 3 people making making that decision.

[35:08] For the non designated demolition applications. The code is set up to recognize that there was a building boom in the post war era. And so the post 1940, Demos can be reviewed by staff. Those Pre. 1940. Demos are reviewed by the committee, and then the landmarks board sees about 7% of those. One common misconception is that if it's old it'll be designated over your objection. The reality is, the vast majority of these old buildings are not potentially eligible for designation. And it's those 7% that go to this full board for deeper consideration. and then we'll dive way farther into the details in the orientation. But kind of that was the kind of bigger picture, and then, looking ahead, some of our major work plan items are the 10 year update to the Historic Preservation Plan, which will kick off later this year. We are in this period of monitor and adjust with the

[36:12] recent process changes which are the biggest operational change in, I think the history of the program. And so we're being intentional about tracking those statistics, making adjustments where needed and trying to find our new baseline of kind of team capacity. We are also in the midst of a pretty intensive effort to move all of our applications from Pdf to direct, apply online. And because it comes on the heels of these process changes. It's almost like 2 projects in one where we get to reevaluate our application materials to make sure they're clear and simple and and give us everything we need for a good decision. but also transforming it, transferring it to this online application. So that's probably one of the projects that's taking the majority of our time and effort and brainpower that you won't see. But applicants will benefit from.

[37:15] Oh, the semi-sequicentennial! I think there's another. the America 250 Colorado, 150 is coming up in 2026, and as a certified local government, we've been invited to participate in the heritage for all initiative which looks to broaden the histories that are recognized on the State register of historic places. And so we've been working on a nomination for the Second Baptist Church here in Boulder, and we will update the board, depending on what the outcome of that is. But that's a 1 piece of the contribution there will be, I think, much bigger, broader celebrations for that.

[38:09] And then we, as staff, are core team members for various city projects, including civic area phase 2 and the downtown projects. There's a a litany of other ones, of code amendments and wildfire resiliency, and all of these that are also mostly not visible to the board. But focus on kind of the policy and operations, and we try and update the board over time, but could always use a reminder. If you're curious about the other work that's going on. So with that welcome any questions that you have, but also know that we have dedicated time to dive into the deep end about the program, and and we scheduled that orientation so that you have a little bit of time to get to know the board in this format and then start to shadow the landmarks. Design review committee meeting and meet before the 1st meeting with a public hearing.

[39:15] Great, we do, I'll make sure to invite you. Okay, great. Okay. All right. And let me just do a quick check here. okay. And so the next time. Let's see, it's about 6, 45. And these are optional questions. If board members are curious about other questions to ask each other, and you're welcome to ask Staff if you'd like. But these are some questions we'd offer as part of the discussion. And then at the end, we we only have a reminder that the square nails award ceremony is on May 12, th and you all have a calendar appointment, and if not, we'll make sure you do, and that your next meeting is on May 7.th But I don't want to end on that business note. I want to end on this

[40:13] conversation, so I just peeked ahead. And, Abby, I'll turn it back over to you. Thank you, Marcy, and just even that overview. There are things I learned. I know well, what's fascinating to hear about the project taking the Pdfs to. I have no idea what you just said, but that you know, I mean, it's a lot. I think there's a lot we don't see. And, Michael, one of the most rewarding things about serving on this board is the incredible staff, and I can't even fathom what you're doing, but I will dive into our. I think these are great proposed questions. And again, this conversation can evolve if we want it to. I know we're trying to end at 7 30. It would be nice to maybe leave while it's still light out. Since this will be the 1st meeting since the time change. Starting off with what do you wish you would have known as a new board member.

[41:07] I was in a unique position for 2 reasons. 1st of all, for almost 12 years I'd worked for the local nonprofit historic boulder that is primarily an advocacy group for preservation, and I also think they deserve an enormous amount of credit for things that are saved here from the Hotel Buldorado to when Chautauqua was threatened to be torn down in the seventies and turned into a conference center to, I mean to the sweet little minor houses that tell the story of Boulder's early start as a basically a mining supply town. So I had attended a few landmarks, board meetings since 2,006 before I was no longer at historic boulder, and someone who used to be on this board, and later on city council reached out to me and said you should apply for the landmarks. But I said, Are you kidding no way, and then I thought, you know what I think I will do that. So I was actually appointed

[42:07] on after midnight. It the City Council meeting started on a Tuesday, October 31st in 2018, and but they didn't vote till after midnight for the Positions Board positions that hadn't been filled, and that Wednesday night was a board meeting, and Marcy or James Hewitt, who used to work for this city, called me and said, Can you come? And I said. yeah, I guess. But so I didn't. I mean I had. I was fortunate to be, you know, in board meetings, maybe taking 3 min periodically, or a lot at the podium for years, and so it was so much different. Being on this side. I've been asked several times which side I like a lot better. And it's this side. Trust me, you know you're standing there for 3 min trying to convince people for something that mattered to a lot of people, and I have enjoyed being on this side as well, so I

[43:05] didn't. I think I was lucky. And Ldrc. I'd observed a few of those, so those weren't some mystery, you know, like secret society meeting or anything. However, I will say what I love about Ldrc. Is the collaborative nature of it that we can't quite do up here in a normal board meeting in a public hearing. The one thing one thing I did do immediately, and I asked Marcy about this, and she said it was okay. I immediately set up a separate email account. so that all my landmarks, board emails went there and we had a hearing on March 12, th at our last meeting, where we got a flood of really amazing letters. But it was a time I was really grateful that those letters were in my personal. And I'm just saying, for anyone who wants to do that. It really was beneficial to me to do that and separate the 2, but always able to get at it any time. The one thing I wish I had known

[44:04] is that I didn't really know or understand, although I'd hear little snippets about this. the thing about as a board member. not doing your own research and only really basing your vote. And you bring your own experience, your own expertise, your own passions about things, but we really have to look at what's before us in the staff memorandum. And I remember someone wisely saying, Don't ever telling me when I worked at historic boulder, don't individually email a landmarks board member in the sense that they should all get any question or information at once. even if they don't all read it at the same time you want them to hear that. So that was one thing I didn't really know. And then I got so paranoid about. There's a really easy line to cross in a conversation with a fellow board member that starts going into the

[45:00] merits of a pending hearing that like I was like, I don't call them. I don't email them. I don't text them only because I really wanted to separate those things because I can be at King Soopers and run into a member of the community, and they want to start talking about something in front of us, and it's just. you know, for me, it's really to just keep kind of that. I don't even want to say barrier. But to keep that separation really clear. I have gone kind of the opposite way of like, I think it's fabulous to email individually with board members or call them with questions or text. I just have been so careful so that it never kind of slowly slipped into those conversations. So I think that's the thing I most would have liked to have known when I started is kind of keeping it straight, that we really should not do our own Independent. We take the staff's memorandum, the public, and it is public testimony quasi-judicial. They are swearing to tell us the truth. So it's it's, you know, and it's hard sometimes not to just want to race to the Carnegie and start, you know, going through the files and everything. But I've tried to respect that, and it's hard. But that was one thing I don't even know if I'm a thousand percent clear on that.

[46:16] It it also that also has a connection to. You know, I once I was on the board I would reach out to City Council members when I worked for Strike Boulder as a board member. I've been very hesitant to do that, you know, because the conversations you want to discuss are not the decisions made in the past, but the ones ahead of you. And so that was a hard thing for me, you know, to really kind of understand on this, I think I kind of know, and we're very lucky to have a great. We've always had great city attorney staffing us who help us kind of maintain that thing. Now, I don't know if John or Rene have something they would like to share that they wish they'd known.

[47:03] And it's okay. It's I mean, you know, I mean, it's yeah, because I was the yeah. I guess I didn't know there was an orientation. I don't think I got one. They just threw me in to be honest with you. And then I was like, okay, let's see if I can stay above water, which I'm still trying to stay above water. I don't think they're something that I wish I would have known. I feel like looking to the other board members and looking to Marcy is super helpful, and knowing that you know the preparation for the meetings is really good and reviewing it, but it doesn't have to be something that you, you know. Take the whole day, prior or the day of to like like 8 h to read through it, because you know. So I I tend to think that a lot of the board meeting stuff that happens here. It's good to like, review it, and then have some notes or some questions to go over with Marcy. But I didn't think.

[48:12] Prior, I was like studying the material. thinking that I was going to get questioned on it. So it was good to know that, you know I could ask questions to mercy during the meeting, and I can kind of be not as prepared if I was going for an exam. you know, or being questioned on it. So I thought that was good, and usually our attorneys here right? And so he's really good at keeping us like on task and jumping in so and it's really interesting with him to. I didn't realize how much that plays into what we're discussing here. So that was really interesting. But for me it was just like. you know. At 1st I thought, Oh, my God! I have to spend.

[49:02] you know, 12 h on this packet that they gave me. And now to be prepared. And then I realized, Oh, well, I can, you know, read through it and make some notes, and then come to the meeting and also learn more and learn a lot more than just reading it. So and that would be what I would like to know. And then the most difficult part of the term. I don't really think there's that much difficult, and the most rewarding is that, like I get to see what's happening in my city that I live in. right like I get to see like, Oh, my gosh! This design team is working on this building, and they're renovating it like the really cool one that I'm going to mess up the name of the building. But that round porch that Smiley's working on like. So the Tierra House. There you go. Thank you. See, I've got to study better. No, no. But so you know, like I get to see what's happening in the in the city and learn. I mean being on the opposite side.

[50:09] like I have gained so much knowledge that I can now put into my practice that is really helpful and seeing it. And so not only have I grown in that respect, but as an architect, but also super excited about what's happening in our neighborhoods and what we're doing to preserve it, because I really enjoy preserving things rather than tearing down and building new. It's just not my in my nature. I hope to achieve during the time on the board. What did you call me. Rene Renani? I hope to live up to my you know I would have to think about that a little longer, because I just

[51:03] I feel like I'm getting so much from the board. I'd like to give back more and so I'd like to give back more than I'm achieving. But I'm right at the moment I'm having such a great time on it. So that's my 2 cents. Can I ask you a question, Renee? Prior to being on the board? You did attend some board meetings, and quite a few Ldrcs, right? As an architect, you mean on the opposite side? Right? Oh, yeah. Yeah. A lot of the times. Yeah. I mean, I worked on a lot of the projects, and I worked with former architects, and even when I was roughly out of school I worked on that the church on 28th Street. Oh, first, st Christian, yeah, and remodeling that whole area. And then I remember coming to the board as that, like, you know. you know, next to the architect that was working on it, you know, doing that. And the developer. So yeah, I was on that side a lot more

[52:06] so. And that's how I knew it was an open position. all right. I made notes. So I'm gonna refer to them because I thought these were 3 very interesting questions. So what I wished I would have known when I started when I came to this, when I started it. As an architect, I thought, yeah, I pretty much understand preservation. I understand buildings. Most architects. I would like to think, see a building as a kind of a extension of of life force there, something that humans do.

[53:02] That's kind of almost biologic. It's an outgrowth of our making shelter for ourselves. And so you kind of attribute that that life quality to a building, especially if you've experienced it, either lived in it or worked in it. And at the same time, since I was a very development oriented urban designer. You know that sometimes bulldozers are very effective design tools. And so you you kind of have a split kind of feeling about that. I had an opportunity to witness 2 high rises get imploded and photograph them for engineering purposes, one in Cincinnati and one in Pittsburgh, and it

[54:02] kind of affected me like watching an execution. especially since both of the buildings were buildings that I had had either an association with, or there was some artifact associated with one of them that I had personal knowledge of that watching it fall down was kind of a strange thing. And so that kind of fueled more of an interest in preservation and finding alternative ways. And then, of course, there's the ecological side. The fact that buildings are a big component of landfills all over North America. and the process of rebuilding can be a very environmentally destructive process. When it's an extensive area of territory. There's a whole shelf of Silt, off the coast of the end of the Mississippi River into the Gulf of something, and

[55:03] it is all the soil that washed off the Midwest during the huge building of suburban houses in the fifties. But when I came to the board I found out I didn't really know as much as I thought I did. and one of the things that I guess, speaking as an urban designer, one of the things that I learned working on these projects and visiting them and reviewing them and listening to Staff's amazing kind of historical and analytical input into it was how broadly important preservation is to the city's image ability, and to supporting the the community's sense of of its identity. These buildings

[56:04] play roles. They are like monuments to movement and other things that are very subtle and psychologically ingrained. and you don't really know it until they're gone sometimes. And so that was kind of a that was kind of a that's part of what we're doing. This is part of the bigger fabric of of what makes Boulder bolder, and why we all love it. So that's something I wish I'd known right from the outset. And then and, Rene, I think you started this conversation on the next question, what has been the most difficult part of your term. Well, I mean, that's the thing that what's fun about this meeting? It's a little more free form, and we can kind of do this, how we want to do it, and what has been the most rewarding? I want to answer what's been the most rewarding, because that's the easiest.

[57:12] you know. Boulder has had a very successful preservation program, both because of early citizens that were galvanized to save the things that were threatened with demolition that was happening all over the country. You know that urban renewal, urban sprawl that was not unique to Boulder, but there were citizens who stood up and fought to save the places that mattered to them, and told the stories not only of early people in Boulder, but the evolution of Boulder. And what makes it boulder some of those, some of the houses one of the houses landmarked in recent years, was. Oh, dear Marcy! On 19th Street I, Bartlett Al Bartlett's house. So what I mean is some of our thought leaders.

[58:01] partially because some of them have chosen stately homes or a lot of our scientists that flocked here commissioned some of the best mid-century gems anywhere in Colorado, and I dare say, anywhere in the country. You know they chose the great architects that were here working like Hartling or Papa Cristo or Hobie Wagner and stuff. So we have this rich wealth of things. But so we have this very healthy program that not only was a groundswell from citizens, but that the city was wise enough in 1974 to put in a preservation ordinance which I think historic boulder probably lobbied for at city council, and it was passed unanimously. And then the city has invested it. I mean, you know, I'd say, the majority of this time the city stands up for the preservation ordinance and puts their money where their mouth is. One of the things I love about our preservation program. And it's actually why we have have Marcy, and I think Claire and and so forth, is they started a paid internship in the planning department, and I don't know if that was a Ruth Mckaiser gift to the community, or whatever. But they they really

[59:17] they really have done, I mean. Sure would we love more staff, but they really have invested and put people in place, and they've put excellent people in place. And so I think we're lucky there. So when I think about what's been saved in Boulder, you know in this beautiful valley that if nothing had ever been built. we all would have flocked to, and our hearts still would have skipped a beat coming over Davidson Mesa. But I think there's a lot of cool stuff here that we still get to walk into or walk past. And but the point of all of that is that people made that happen. So the most rewarding thing to me has been the people I've met and served with. There was one time, and I don't remember if it was John or Ronnie, but I probably was only on the board 6 months when I said.

[60:05] and we were here meeting in Council chambers. This is kind of fun, and that was not a word. I thought I would have said when I filled out that application, and, you know submitted it online. But but I think what's most rewarding to me, besides, the mission of what has been accomplished, what's yet to be accomplished. The evolution of the thinking in the program which I kind of applaud that's definitely going on in this. This update to the preservation plan is another opportunity to weigh in on that. It's really the people. It's the people who who, you know, have whether they've come and spoken for 3 min on a winter's night, whether they've written a letter or an email that compels us to vote a certain way whether they volunteer their time on this. You know whether they apply for a job with the city of Boulder to work with the preservation. It's the people because it doesn't happen without the people. The history is here. Some of the buildings are standing proudly, but it's the people that I've met and worked with that have been the most rewarding part to me of this experience, you know. So

[61:18] what's the most difficult part? Oh, yeah, yeah, I do. I we my 1st landmarks board meeting I tended not that this is ingrained. August second, 2,006, you know. I came here at 6 o'clock on a Wednesday, and I got home, you know, Thursday morning at like one Am. And but but I think those meetings with the 5 or 6 public hearings were a reflection of the pressures on the historic resources here in Boulder, you know, that really was sort of the beginning of what I called the Mega mansion thing across the country. If there was so much pressure on our historic resources that those those hearings were in front of the landmarks board, then those hearings

[62:08] you know, were important, and it took some time. So I do think that that sometimes when the meetings go on it, it is harder to be as coherent, you know, and it gets it gets. you know, that can be an issue. But it really hasn't it? I also think, and Staff has really indulged the landmarks board, where we think we might end up one time, but I also don't think conversations should be stifled when it's necessary, but Know if I can think I, Renee, I'm having trouble with that. The most difficult part. Abby, would you? Do you mind if I chimed in about this one. Not that I'm a board member, and I'm over here. But I I don't want to shy away from the difficult part of

[63:03] you. All are deciding pretty big decisions about people's properties and often their homes and it's usually their biggest financial asset. It's usually their most like near and dear after their children, maybe. And so I think what can be really hard is listening to the, you know, personal stories and the compelling narratives of why a building needs to be torn down, or why, in addition or changes need to be made, and then making a criteria based decision and still being kind about it and clear about it. But this is tied to. What do I wish I would have known as a new staff member is that you have to make a criteria-based decision, because people can have the best intentions for what they are going to do, and then they can change their mind. And so I think there's been a few key cases over my time where I've heard like a really compelling story of oh, I want to save this building, you know. Just give us permission, and then they, you know, we want to raise our family here, etc, etc, and then they turn around and sell it right away, and that's completely within their right. And so I think

[64:23] those are tied together. But the you know, listening compassionately, and then being able to step back and say, Okay, my job is to make a criteria based decision decision. And here's the criteria can be really hard. All right. Thank you so much for bringing that up. I think I blocked that out personally. But it's an interesting thing. No, Marcy, that really is, that is the most difficult part, and I think, and I didn't mean to interrupt you, John, you know what's interesting is. There's a wonderful book called the Politics of Preservation, or Wait. Is it the preservation? No, the politics of preservation. And at the time the book was published

[65:05] the average someone owned a home in this country was 7 years, so sometimes I wrestle with that thing, you know. Do I need to think about this property past that? And you know the Iroquois tribe tries to make decisions that last 7 generations. So it is a very gut, wretching thing, and I think, Marcy, you brought up kind of what is definitely the most challenging for us. But if you look at the criteria, if you look at the ordinance, and the ordinance can change, the ordinance can involve. But if you look at what we are tasked with, and what the ordinance says. Sometimes it's not as hard of a decision as I would think. You know, if you follow the criteria. You know, Staff's recommendations are excellent. They're okay if we disagree with them and don't support it or support it with modifications or changes, because I don't believe it's worth any of our times to serve on a board. If we're always going to rubber, stamp everything for any department for any board. You know we're not here to rubber stamp, but we can take the expertise of the staff and and do that. But Staff has never made me feel

[66:21] the least bit uncomfortable, and I don't mind being a lone vote on an issue saying, You know, tonight I'm not going to support Staff's. If you have. If you're using the criteria to vote. No. I've I've found that very difficult. What Marcy was talking about. And particularly when the criteria kind of based decision puts what I feel like is an undue burden on a property owner.

[67:03] And that goes to property rights and all of those issues. But I think the other thing that I've found difficult is when you're in an instance where our criterion. our our criteria, leads you to one decision. But that decision is across purposes with the whole other sets of criterias, such as environmental performance goals or housing goals or issues like that, that we have found ourselves in collision with a couple of times, and these are very difficult, especially when you feel, I guess, a personal commitment to satisfy as many and all of those criteria as possible in anything that you decide to support. So

[68:04] they it's it's a difficult. It has been some difficult wrestling on a few of these and that's part of the challenge. No, and when we don't, when it is hard to make a decision, I don't think any of us applied to serve on the landmarks board for it all to be easy. Do you know what I mean? So, and it can be even challenging for me in Ldrc. When I see a property, you know, before us, and Ldrc. Is an excellent way to move things through, to give applicants a response in a expeditious manner. You know I love the collaborative nature of that. But but you know there are times when it is important to call something up, you know, and sometimes I think it's important to call something up for the benefit of the whole board, to have that opportunity to weigh in.

[69:06] you know, and and that I sometimes struggle more with that at a Ldrc. To say, you know, because I know you, you know, because it is so personal in the conversation. You know you're right there. I do think another challenge, Marcy, when you said that, because there's a lot of emotion with. we, people feel for their properties, and and I hear that. And I get that. I also think it's important for us that someone else who who was a prior preservation planner in the program once said, You know we're kind of doing customer service, and I do realize, and I mean, there are times when I think if someone standing before us or at Ldrc, you know, I think, that it's important to acknowledge, you know. that they may. They may be wrestling with A, B and C, or they really want to save it, but financially they can't, or you know they don't want to come up to the full landmarks board, and I think it's I think it's incumbent upon us to make it as friendly of a process as possible. The landmarks board person, who just finished his his years on the term had a wonderful way of like praising

[70:23] both an applicant and the design team for anything they submitted, maybe even if he voted not to approve it or something. And I think it's important for stories sort of be mindful because it is such a meaningful, important thing and such a financial investment here right now in Boulder for any property. You know that it's important for us to to really be kind of. You know. I just kind of cringe when I hear I don't want to have to go to a full landmarks board meeting. We can be friendly, we can be welcoming. We can praise the aspects we like and make, you know well, thought out suggestions for things that might then meet the criteria if it doesn't at 1st blush. But it is, it is. It is

[71:10] interesting. I thought like I just thought of something for the difficult part being an architect or a design, professional. redesigning what they brought to the board like like looking at it and like knowing in your brain like, Wait a minute. That's not well. that's what. Wait like, you know, and knowing how they I mean. we all know that when you design something you get to a point, there's a whole story backstory that happens with the client and this. And so we don't know that backstory. We don't know what the client said. Hey, I want this really awful thing on the back of this house right? I want it to look like this right? And the architect tried the opposite. But you know he's agreed to come to the board to give us this. so I think that part besides the emotional part which obviously, Marcy pointed out, which I didn't really think of. And there's been times where we've had to do that. But, like on a day to day in the Lodrc, and all those things like having a way of holding back

[72:13] your opinion, or how you would redesign it to like, hold that back because it's really it's not. We're not here to make the design decisions. We're here to talk about it. And there's a way to. you know, bridge that gap, and so we make it. We have to be subtle yet. They have to have their own story. But, Rene. you weren't on the board very long when I and I can think of the property. It's on Mountain View not going to mention the address no where. What you said during Ldrc. That I thought was perfect and pitch tone correct. You said, Oh, have you considered? You know this? And I think it was the pitch of the roof. But that doesn't matter. But you did. You did very.

[73:00] very. You just had this wonderful way of asking that question. If they considered something which actually might have been. not not necessarily made the project better, but made it more in line with the criteria. And you did it perfectly. And I remember thinking, Wow, that's impressive, you know, because you just asked the simple question and then have no idea how they responded. But in in some respects I think Ldrc is the appropriate Forum to do that in a board meeting. You really can't or shouldn't do that even though I think it's difficult as an architect, sometimes to have gone through review of one of these projects where they want to do something that the criterion disallows, and you understand exactly why they want to do it, and you kind of buy it. That's a difficult one, and that one's I have launched into those weeds a couple of times to quote

[74:09] someone. would you? Do you have a comment for us? I do have a comment and also an apology. I need to leave a little bit before you all wrap up, but always appreciate the chance to sit in on your meetings, and and again the work that you do. and and I'll just leave you with a personal observation of a challenge, and that this board and staff frankly also struggles with is who really is the customer in these applications. Because you know clearly there are applicants, property owners, that type of thing. But there's the broader public as well. And that's really what the criteria is reflecting is the community's values as codified in these criteria, and then supported by more general intent statements and in the comprehensive plan, and in the historic preservation plan.

[75:05] visions and aspirations. And so there's a broader community. There's immediate neighbors. There's the moment in time to one application seen this year may not have been seen the same 10 years ago or 10 years in the future, not because of its only because of its historic significance, but because of the broader patchwork and and environment in which it is sitting at that moment in time. And that's that's 1 of the unique things about historic preservation and land use in general, so we are always mindful that there are many quote unquote customers when applications come forward, including many whose voices will never be heard. And that's where your role really becomes important is to balance those and recognize those voices that aren't heard because they didn't understand their connection to the property. They didn't. They're not engaged, or they may not exist right? These are populations of unborn who will benefit from these decisions as well. So that's 1 thing I think, that's challenging to not to

[76:15] add to the burden of consideration that you're already identified. But again, just appreciate that so much, and and also wanted to apologize for heading out here. No, but thank you for that, because, you know. having been kind of on the other side with advocacy, and knowing that as a board member I really can't do. Advocacy is that there is a real need to think about future generations. What are the loss, what is the loss of a particular building or area, or something, you know. And so thank you. That kind of that's going to be a hard one to top what you just said, thank you so much. That really is is important because there's multiple stakeholders. Yeah.

[77:00] thank you again. And good evening. Sorry to head out on you. No, that that was awesome, I I do think, and I am watching the time, but I do think that because it'd be nice to leave you with a little time. If you have any questions for us, or, you know, like, who are these? No, but what the thing? I will say, what I do hope the program will achieve during the time on the board. And here's the deal, you guys, my my term is up. My 8 years is up next march. and I think there's still some time, maybe I can assist with this, but I think it's trying to make the preservation ordinance more relevant and more realistic for today, because I'm 1 of those real followers like Boy during Covid, or when I get on a plane, I go in airplane mode immediately, and whatever. And so I stick to what the preservation code is today. I don't know that that's what I should be

[78:01] sticking to. And there's this whole thing called the Relevancy Project from Preservation, Illinois, that really really resonated with me, and I know Marcy and other staff is very familiar with it, but it's like that need to boulder has evolved. I think our preservation ordinance needs to evolve when and where it can. It's not going to happen overnight. And that's okay. But instead of being so, you know I get, I feel caught in those confines. And one of the most interesting to me is like the new materials in a prized historic district like Mapleton Hill. That is more fire retardant. But we don't feel like we have gotten, whether locally here or from the Secretary of interior, the permission to say Yes, it is, you know, life, safety. We know that trumps everything. But to allow building materials in, say, Mapleton Hill, historic district that are are more

[79:03] fire retard is very important, but I don't feel like I've been given that hook to hang a vote on yet for that. But I think we're moving towards that, and I think we've had enough conversations over the time I've been on the board about the need for that. And so it's. And it's it's not relaxing the code. It's it's moving the code into 2025. So that's what I'd like to see. Can we give the floor to Michael. I think that that last comment I can dovetail into that, and I can be super brief. And I and I wish I remember the the and maybe you guys know the the woman who came from Illinois who who gave, I think she gave a keynote at Cpi 2 years ago, and I met her again this past October in New Orleans at the National Trust Conference. She's a breath of fresh air, honestly, and and she was part of a

[80:04] a session that I attended. It was an invitation only thing that I just fell into, but it was heavy hitters in the preservation community nationally, and they were wagging their finger at the Old Guard that were really getting in the way of of themselves, right, and of the the currency of preservation, mainly with a nod towards sustainability and and the sort of inherent weaving between sustainability and preservation, and how it's sort of a collective good ecologically, etc. Etc. So I mean, it sounds really super exciting. If that's on the table for the future development and and progression of the of the it has to be, and what better place than Boulder to look at that? And one of the things that still sticks with me, and I know, Marcy, I don't think she has it tattooed yet, but I think she knows this. It's to kind of let go of the culture of preciousness.

[81:07] you know, and that's the thing that I think, because you know, sometimes in preservation, and what that that relevancy handbook, which is about 250 pages, talks about. We're still operating on preservation organizations, whether volunteers or paid, or whatever, and and city preservation stuff, and whatever on sort of it really was, sort of based on affluent white people who were really only kind of preserving. Yes, and and so it's a whole new prism to look through the world, but it also could be the most exciting thing. you know, for this program, and I won't be here to see that completed. But I would do whatever I can to really help push that, because that's that's where we have to go.

[82:02] I do just have like. yeah. One last comment with a sub comment. I just wanted to be. I just want to say thanks, for I assume the question. These are great questions, and and to have the current board members sort of I mean. It's just eye-opening, in a way, in a really good way, and in a preparatory way. Right? I mean, it sort of sets a great tone to kind of hear about what what you're up to and what keeps you awake at night. Maybe a little bit. I do have a response, though, to Rene about looking to contribute back because I we 1st started with, who's going to be the chair? And who's going to be the the co-chair? And I think maybe that's if that's not already of interest to you. I'm I'm pointing that out that that could be an opportunity to fulfill your desire to give back. So I don't have to fumble.

[83:09] I speak from the heart a lot. So, but that's okay. That's the thing I love about this board. There's no right or wrong. You know I do need to ask if you tend to sketch fellow board members during board meeting. Okay, I would like to announce that I have taken on that role. Can I? Edit? Hey? You know the microphone adds 10 bells. Right? No, if you can do that, so questions for us. not not. I mean it's it's it's a Tad overwhelming. Yes, but but I think this kind of more discussion-based, conversation-based approach, for this meeting was really helpful, and I look forward to the orientation that Rene didn't get, so that I can know what's happening procedurally before the before the meeting in May. Well, and I don't think, Marcy, there's no reason Michael can't individually email a board member with questions or things, you know, because often you walk. I that is one thing that's a challenge on this board.

[84:19] I'm driving home. I get home, and if we have a late meeting you can't go to bed for hours. But I'm like I'm like. Oh, I wish I would have said that, but but I think that we are your resources, you know, and the the staff is amazing, and they can reach out. I mean, I email, Aubrey, so many times I'm afraid she's gonna block me like I didn't get this or can you help me with that. But the staff is amazing. But I would encourage you, you know, to reach out. I think, board members. They can go to lunch right? Yeah, I just can't discuss any pending upcoming. Right? Discuss business. Yeah, right? Yeah, yeah. And that's that's also where I'd like to to close and and end is that you know, the Board Dynamics really changed during Covid and Pre Covid. It was much more social, and I think, between Covid and how that impacted kind of social behavior, but then also kind of

[85:18] clear guidance from the city attorney's office. That kind of like was like, really don't meet. Don't talk about preservation, which is what you all have in common. But there is still room to have a bit more social interaction between board members. So yes, go out to lunch. Do not discuss an upcoming case and how you would vote. But go to lunch, go, you know, explore a historic district. reach out to staff. We can put something together as well. We'll go through all the the legal requirements about when we notice something versus when we don't. But, like, Abby, said.

[86:00] your fellow board members our resources. We're certainly here. And it's really it's really lovely to start the next chapter of this board with the wisdom and what's unique, and I don't think this has ever happened. But the 3 members up there with you, Michael, have all enjoyed this experience enough to re-up. you know all of you are on your second terms, which is pretty remarkable, because there is a time period where people were ending their terms early and resigning early, and now we're on the other end of that, where you all are signing up for more. You told me it was indentured servitude. I swear you told me that. But no, I it really is. And, John, you said it earlier about giving back to the city, and you know I I love Boulder so much. It's my favorite place I've ever lived, and it is a way to give back to the community. And as chair of the Landmarks board especially, but I do think there there is, and there's former Board members that you'd enjoy knowing, and you may know some of them where you know they.

[87:15] I know that when I sit here tonight, when I think of my 1st board meeting with people like like Leland Record and Tim Plass and I mean some of Boulder's greatest thought leaders and things. You know, we stand on their shoulders. And and it's it's it's a great group of people that have served before and will serve in the future as well. But I think you're going to fit right in. I think you're going to be a wonderful addition and asset to the board, and I think you're going to enjoy it. You know. I don't think we volunteer to be miserable. I don't. But, you know, is there anything else, you guys. Aubrey? Thank you again for a fabulous dinner. Oh, and if there's nothing else, the meeting's adjourned at 7 30. Can I hit this? No, you can