Special meeting on February 17th, 2026 ordered.

Will you please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Individual liberty and justice for our office.

All right.

Well, the town clerk, please take roll.

Mayor Pro Tem Bell.

Here.

Councilmember Mortalero.

Here.

Councilmember Hobak.

Here.

Councilmember Passamarelli.

President.

Councilmember O'Connor.

Present.

Councilmember Baer.

Present.

And Mayor Moore.

Here.

Mayor, you have a quorum.

All right, thanks.

Do we have a motion to approve the agenda?

So moved.

Second.

The motion and second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed say no.

All right, we have an agenda.

Um, before we go into public comment, I just wanted to pause for a moment.

Um, it was a tragic um weekend here in Erie with multiple um multiple car bike um incidents that led to the um led to two fatalities.

Um this hit me um in a way that you know I would expect it to hit me, but for some reason I think when the chief was um updating it, I started to really feel for our first responders, the folks that were out there that were dealing with this as well.

And so I just want to say that on Friday um the town has um help.

Um, if you need somebody to talk to, um please go down to the rec center.

Um, I think we've published that through multiple ways uh at this point.

Um take care of yourself.

Uh, this is never easy.

Okay, with that, I'm gonna move on to uh public comment.

Um please remember that public comment is not an interactive QA forum, but rather a time for you to state your comments on a particular item or issue.

Public comment provides the opportunity to discuss items that are not on the agenda or consent agenda items only.

If you are joining virtually and would like to speak, please use the raised hand feature in the webinar control panel.

If you're using uh telephone press um star nine.

If you're joining in person, please sign up on the in the back of the room.

Um or come to the podium when your name is called.

This is actually an older version.

There's a kiosk out there to sign up.

Um when called upon, please state your um full name and location for the record.

Um public comment is limited to three minutes uh per person, and you'll be given 20 seconds notice at the three-minute mark.

Um I'll ask you to wrap up your final sentence and uh just remember uh this is a place of business.

Um please no booing, cheering, clapping, or other disruptive uh behavior tonight.

All right, with that, I'll uh look to our town clerk to see who's signed up.

Okay, the first person is Dwayne Drummond, and he's online.

Uh Mr.

Drummond, I have um moved you to a panelist.

You should be able to unmute and speak.

Can you hear us, Dwayne?

Can you hear me now?

Yes, yes, there you go.

Okay, let me find my speech.

Okay, I'm Dwayne Drummond, an Erie resident.

I'd like to speak about the mayor's request to go in a new direction, i.e.

replace town manager Malcolm Flying.

Replacing a town manager is one of the most significant decisions a council can take.

It affects staff stability, strategic planning, public trust.

Mr.

Fleming brings more than 25 years of municipal leadership experience, including recognition as manager of the year by the Colorado City and County Management Association.

That level of experience is not easily replaced.

Last time Erie conducted a town manager search, it was lengthy and expensive.

Recruiting qualified candidates takes time and resources, and leadership transitions can create uncertainty during critical periods of growth.

In addition to the expense of finding a new town manager, it will cost those taxpayers over 121,000 and just severance payment payment alone.

Why?

If there are serious performance concerns, residents deserve clear, fact-based explanations, consistent with personnel law before such a major decision is considered, and not just because the mayor does not always agree with the town manager.

Erie deserves stability and thoughtful governance.

One last comment.

I know my councilperson O Neil will vote no.

And I'm asked my other councilperson, John, to use common sense and also vote no.

Of course, the mayor, as usual, will not call for a vote if he does not have a win.

And I believe the mayor's plan is ever since last June when he required a reduction of severance to half a year rather than full year.

This makes me believe his request of replacing Malcolm was all pre-meditated.

I believe the mayor is very conniving.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Um next we have Janice Kravitz Schlickman.

She says she's online, but I don't read where to take it.

Is anybody with that name?

Let me just look here again.

I don't see anybody, so I'll go to the next one.

Um next is Jennifer Barry.

She's also on a couple of J's, but I see Jennifer.

All right, so I'll go to Dan Malloy.

Where are we?

Uh right up here.

Hi Dan.

Members of the council, Mayor Moore.

I appreciate you guys taking the time to listen to me tonight.

Uh Dan Malloy, live here in Erie.

Um, I'm in District 2.

Um.

So I appreciate you guys taking the time to listen to residents tonight.

I am here to speak on the issue of uh potentially retaining or moving on from the current town manager into somebody new.

Uh you mentioned earlier that this is not an interactive process speaking at council.

Um takes a lot of effort for me to come in here now because last time I spoke at council ended up getting a death threat at my house.

So it became quite interactive for my family.

And I bring that up not just to reference the three uh council members who consider a friend and supporter the person that sent that threat, but to talk about the environment that allowed that to happen.

The environment within our town staff that allowed another police officer to go around talking about how we should murder federal agents.

And then to have a town that is so permissive to lawlessness.

We have a two-year-old get killed in a hit and run accident.

We have hordes of teenagers going around on bikes that have repeatedly been brought up to the police, but nothing's done.

In our neighborhood Erie Highlands, they're tearing up the field, they're tearing up the fields, they're driving around, cutting in front of vehicles, and it's been a ticking time bomb for one of them to get severely injured or killed.

Why does all this matter?

Because leadership matters, not just talking about it, not just managing it, but actually inculcating an environment of responsibility and personal accountability.

We can look back six years in this town to when we lost a million dollars in a fraudulent transfer, something that should have ended the career of several people in the town staff.

But no responsibility was accepted.

We moved on from it.

And that has continued to happen.

We've now had several roads redesigned and implemented in town that are a laughing stock.

Who's responsible for it?

Why is County Line Road nearly impossible to drive on?

Why do we have a roundabout that sits there unfinished after hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars?

Why are we pushing more dense housing into our town without thinking about the resource constraints that our town is under?

This comes back to leadership.

This comes back to personal accountability, and those tangible things lead into other less tangible things, like the amount of lawlessness, the lack of enforcement, and the lack of responsibility and accountability within town staff and within other members here on the council.

So I hope the council does the right thing and chooses to move on.

Find somebody that can accept responsibility and inculcate that level of environment where the rest of town staff also accepts responsibility.

Appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Dennis Buck.

Good evening.

Uh Dennis Buck 1558, Meet Chamoy.

Um, Mayor Moore, Council members, thank you for your time and your efforts and all the things you do for our town.

Um here to speak about the town manager.

Um I worked for the town in full disclosure for about three years.

And what an amazing place to work.

And that starts at the top.

The culture, the inclusion that I felt coming here.

It wasn't previous to Erie, I worked at the state.

And that was a difficult place to work because knowledge had power.

In Erie, knowledge is shared.

And that sharing develops into better outcomes.

And that starts with a person of Malcolm's caliber.

Previously, I've worked on boards and commissions and councils, and have gone through two city managers at a place that I was on elected board.

It's a difficult decision.

It's tough to do.

And I think that you're not going to do better than what you have in place right now.

Enough said there.

Thank you, Malcolm, for all you do.

Second issue, real quickly, the airport.

You have it on your agenda tonight about fees and opportunities and such like that.

And there's a consortium of cities saying that Jefferson County and Broomfield and Superior all need to do something to slow down and alleviate the noise coming out of the Broomfield Airport and the lead pollution and such like that by raising fees and asking the neighboring airport to do something to control the noise that is their airport.

I bought a house at 1558 Michał, knowing there was an airport, but not knowing that it would turn into what it is today of zooming and doing touch and goes.

And the board here with the letter signed by the mayor saying Jefferson County should implement higher fees and regulations to reduce the airport noise for their citizens.

And then I read the package tonight that says our general fund money, my funding of the Cown is supporting a losing operation in the airport, and that in fact the fees, if you approve them tonight, will still be $28,000 to the bad.

We need to reduce the zoomies as I call them.

And that's done by fees, landing fees, and you can do it through the navigation equipment that they have.

And the last two weeks have been strangely rather nice because I look on radar 24 and the planes are going to Boulder.

They're going to Longmont, they're going out east of Boulder, and they're not using the Erie Airport as much.

This last week's been wonderful.

I hope that continues.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Thank you.

Let's see.

Next is Tim Dernick.

L'Marry.

Town Council.

Name is Tim Dernick.

I live in the Erie Air Park, uh, 3040 Cherokees, Cherokee Court.

Um, I I don't know, this is my be uh a little out of the thing.

I think a lot of the people behind me are going to be here talking about the fee structure.

Um there's going to be a lot of repetition.

There's going to be a lot of perhaps misinformation.

I'm curious, is there any way that we could table for that particular thing?

We could table it until after the presentation, or is that just not how it works?

Yeah, it just doesn't work that way.

But we're just sort of a nose, we're not going to make decisions tonight.

Understood.

So I would say anybody who wants to speak on the airport topics, please sign up and uh and uh speak to us through this forum at this point.

Well, I'm gonna I'm gonna limit my uh uh my remarks to specifically to the uh fees uh uh pertaining to the air park and sort of there's two questions there.

There's the fees that we're talking about for the use of the airport uh through the fence fees, and there's the also the new proposed sort of um blanket uh eight hundred dollar fee, I think it's proposed $800 fee for uh just everyone in the air park who has uh access, who has anywhere, any deeded access to the airport.

Now these are some of these are uh long unused, some of them unusable uh deeded access that look good on the map, but they can't actually be done.

People are uh have been there for you know 20, 30 years that are not uh airport airplane people, they don't have hangers, they don't have planes.

This is uh this isn't we have a through the fence fee is a fee for going through the fence.

Everyone in the air park is a fan of the airport, that's why we're there.

Everyone is uh understands that the fees uh for using the airport.

Absolutely, you won't find anyone here that's uh arguing against that.

Watch the public um sector of the airport reach across the private line into private homes on private lots with private garages, and saying, ma'am, you don't have a you don't have an airport.

You're your husband died 20 years ago.

We're gonna charge you $800.

You know, and the the justification I've heard is that this is because the property is more uh is worth more because it's abutting the airport because it's the proximity to the airport.

But we have methods of 20 seconds of things.

We have methods of doing that.

We we that's property assessments, property assessments.

If the if the property is worth more, the property assessment is more, and the um and the property tax will would reflect that.

I wanted to stop there.

There's a lot more to say, but I'm sure people behind me will do that.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next is Sam Fogelman.

Sam Fogelman District 2.

And one of the more poignant moments of the Lord of the Rings, Frodo admits, I wish the ring had never come to me, I wish none of this had happened.

To which Gandalf replies, so do all who live to see such times, but it is not for them to decide.

It's a timeless, a human sentiment and a call to bravery for each of us.

I propose tonight to anyone who might be listening that in the face of fascism in modern America, our collective bravery is what's going to save us.

We're all living through social upheaval that none of us chose.

As public servants, you're in a position in which you are quite vulnerable personally with the opportunity for significant social impact.

I think you have historical power to take actions that set up future generations for success and protect the vulnerable in the present.

But you have to be brave.

Brave through policy, through empathy, and through true public service.

Unfortunately, it sounds like your courage is lacking.

Our mayor was recently quoted as saying he was elected for local challenges and is trying to stay out of state and federal politics.

With all due respect, those federal politics that you would like to stay out of are at your doorstep.

A brave citizen, Shannon, was right here last week expressing her fear of living here in Erie in the U.S.

because of a federal kidnapping ring nearby.

For people like her, people of color with no criminal convictions, friends, citizens, children.

Their doors have been kicked in.

They've been whisked away from their homes with no due process, thrown into warehouse cells where diseases like measles run rampant and dehumanized at every turn.

The federal politics that you would choose to avoid are real for all of us in the existence of a mass secret police, a techno surveillance state, and the economic policies of a failed casino owner whose petulant tantrums breed calculated psychological chaos on all of us every day.

Choosing to sit by and do business as usual, questioning the vision of your town manager, apparently, is a waste of time when the human costs of this world stack up every day.

This moment calls for bravery.

A brave town, a brave town would solve for social ills to lower crime rates instead of relying on big brother to chase down criminals after the fact and oppress us all by tracking our movements in real time.

A brave place is one like Lehigh County in Pennsylvania, who recently passed a resolution denouncing the rise of fascism in the United States and defending their residents' constitutional rights.

If you choose, again, to quote the mayor to stay out of federal politics, then you are culpable and complicit in the continued rooting of fascism in America and the application of boots to necks of our friends and neighbors of color, and then through sheer attrition, every single one of us who refuses to bend the knee to these tyrants.

I hold out hope that you're brave.

Because no one else is coming to save us from these tyrants but ourselves.

All right, thank you.

Next is Pat Miller.

How am I?

Pat Miller, 3015 Hyperdrive South Erie.

All day I tried to talk myself out of doing this.

My husband said, Are you gonna speak?

I said, Well, I guess so.

Anyway, I'm here about the airport fees.

And uh honestly, the word equitable is becoming a bad word to me because I don't see anything in life any anymore that's really equitable.

And I'm hearing that we have to be equitable with the commerce on the other side, what their hangers, 32 cents a square feet.

I don't know where they came up with that.

Probably you go around and ask other airports what they're doing.

But it isn't equitable for us on the other side.

We have hangers.

We have we don't fly anymore.

We don't use the access, we don't go across the runway with our airplane because we don't fly, and yet we're gonna pay $800.

And if the 32 cents a square foot doesn't add up to $800, you still pay $800.

That is not equitable to me.

Um our hangar is more than that, but um and also isn't a fee.

You have to pay a fee if you use a service.

And these are access fees and through the fence fees.

And if you use it, fine, you pay the fee.

But if you're not using it and you get charged, that to me is a tax.

I don't think the town of Erie has the right to tax us to use the airport.

So I'm not here.

I used to be on the HOA board, I'm not anymore, but I'm here representing my husband and me, because we live right along the runway.

Quite frankly, we love airplane noise, okay.

The fight they can zoom and do ever whatever they want because we enjoy the airport.

So um, I'm just here.

I hope that you'll consider where we're all coming from on our side.

We've lived out there almost 30 years, and uh we use the access fees, we cross the runway.

The the airport's a wonderful thing to have in the town of Erie.

And it seems like we're always fighting for it.

I know 20 years ago the mayor and I were at it with the uh 1987 agreement, which I think is still legal as far as I'm concerned.

I'd say you can just uh say it's not in use anymore.

But anyway, I just want to come and say, please, please determine um and be as you want, equitable.

Also, what you're not gonna answer the question, but I'd like to know what the other side, the 32 cents a square foot, what they're getting for their 32 square feet, 32 cents a foot square square foot in conjunction with what we pay for, because I know they get snow removal and all kinds of things, and on our side, we have to remove all the snow in order to get to the airport.

So to me that is not equitable.

So thank you.

Thank you all.

You know, I don't watch the programs and what all you're doing, but I have to say I've agreed with much of what you have accomplished this year.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next we have uh Don Frazier.

Something in the past.

Okay.

Uh Larry Earnshaw.

Hello, my name is Larry Earnshaw, and I live at 170 Cessna Drive.

And uh I'm a pilot.

I've been flying for 35, 40 years.

Um probably gonna cease flying in another year or two because I'm starting to get old.

78 is getting up there.

But anyway, I'm concerned about the the significant increase of the fees.

I'm also concerned about charging some of my neighbors who are not pilots who have never flown, ever will, don't have an airplane a fee just because they have um airport access.

Um I am concerned that there is quite a discrepancy between what the cost of the airport appears to be and the revenue.

I mean, it seems like it's out of bounds, so I sympathize with that.

I do think you have some options.

Um there's a lot of land north of the airport, south of the airport.

You can put a ton of hangers in there.

There's a long waiting list.

I'm also a former um vice president of EA chapter 43.

I get asked all the time.

You know, are the hangers for rent?

We need hangars.

So I think you could make a lot of your revenue uh by building more hangars.

You would outsource that.

You don't have to build them yourselves.

And then another thing, um anybody that's running a business has to manage two sides, the expense side and the revenue side.

And I just have a question for you.

Have you looked at the expense side?

Are there other things you could outsource or change uh suppliers, you know, ways that their cost might be cut to help narrow that gap.

So anyway, thanks for your time.

All right, thank you.

Next is Kent Davis.

Good morning or good afternoon, I should say evening.

Kent Davis 2350 Cessna Drive, Erie, Colorado, live in the airport.

Live in the airport.

I'm here just to voice my opinion against the fees.

I don't use the airport.

I have uh maybe in the future will, but I don't think it is appropriate to take a fee on to something that isn't uh being used.

It's uh rather uh concerning to me that uh you're asking for fees like the state of Colorado and increasing fees instead of going through another means of taxation.

Love the love the uh community, love this building.

I haven't been in here since uh we had our meetings down in the basement.

And to it's uh quite uh quite the place we have here.

Uh enjoy uh uh everybody that's uh been around in in the area.

I've been here for 20 years, but uh yeah, it just just seems like uh fees, taxations.

Uh it's uh it's not necessary.

I mean, you got you guys got to find something else to do to increase your uh levies to uh you know get your monies, but uh fees that for people that don't use things and uh maybe never will.

Uh I don't think that's uh I don't think that's right.

All right, thank you.

Um that's all that I have signed up.

I don't see any hands online.

All right, so I'll just ask if there's anybody else in the audience who would like to address us tonight.

Right.

Seeing none, then we will move on to general business.

Um, of which we have two items tonight.

The first is item 26129, and that is um the town at Erie Public Art Program.

Good evening, Council, Mayor Luke Bollinger, director of parks and recreation.

And I'm just gonna quickly introduce the what we're talking about here tonight, and then turn over to Taylor and Rachel.

But we are now approaching into year two of our public art and placemaking plan.

We've hired some amazing staff.

We've already accomplished some projects.

Uh so uh mayor met with staff a few months ago now and requested that we kind of give an update on public art.

So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Taylor and Rachel.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

I'm Rachel Weisseth, I'm the recreation division manager.

Um tonight we're gonna talk about the um introduction of our cultural art supervisor.

I'll give a smidge of a background, introduction to the public art and placemaking plan, the overall public art process, and recent and upcoming projects.

And again, we're just super excited to share this information with you this evening.

Um really it was kind of the result of the 2021 community survey that really was the catalyst for this position and for um the placemaking plan.

The results of that survey told us that 81% of respondents were in favor of adding more public art to the town of Erie.

And when we talked about the um the performing or the town center and the new civic space that would be there, 87 of response 87% of respondents were in support of a performing arts center.

So with that, we hired Taylor back in August of 2024.

And not only does she oversee our public art program, but she also oversees our cultural arts programming, such as Shakespeare in the parking lot that was this past summer, our art lecture series, African storytelling, culture caravan concerts, and so much more.

So with that, I will turn it over to Taylor.

Um yeah, so my name is Taylor Ingro.

I'm the cultural arts supervisor for the town of Erie.

Um so super excited to present to you and kind of just educate you on what public art looks like for the town of Erie.

Um so one of this was uh BTT before Taylor time.

We hired um local uh designing local and arts consultant firm to uh put together our public art and placemaking plan for the town of Erie.

They really focus and emphasis, put emphasis on site discovery and also on community engagement.

Um so they focus really on four key areas within Erie to really focus on public art.

So that was the town center, gateways to Erie, um, downtown Erie, and parks and trails.

And the art and placemaking plan was also uploaded to the agenda, and of course it's available on our last night.

So if you want to see the whole report, it's available to you at the outline.

Um so with that, uh, this year, oh well, my within my first year of uh being a cultural arts supervisor.

So with that, our goal for this year is publicizing public art.

So with that, we recently just revamped the cultural arts page, which we then added the placemaking plan for those who want to be curious and peruse and take a look at that.

We also added our current public art collection, which just has seven beautiful pieces.

And with that, one of our goals this summer is to actually have a public art GIS map.

So that's interactive for many people to be curious and explore.

We also are looking to, we're currently in the recruiting process for the Erie Public Art Collective, EPAC for short.

This is all based on best practice again throughout just Colorado but throughout the US to have some sort of group of residents for community engagement and for public art awareness and advocacy of some sort, and of course, buy-in.

So with that, we decided to form EPAC, which is our informal group of Erie residents.

Their goals will be to support and celebrate cultural arts, share ideas and community input, as well as connect artists, creatives, and residents with the town staff.

With also with public art, we are looking at different funding sources.

So within that placemaking plan, there was a lot of administrative recommendations.

Currently, public art is funded through the general fund, so that's you know, every year going through the budget process.

So we highlight at least one large project out of the year and then one smaller project, and then of course it goes to council for approval.

Within the placemaking plan, one of the recommendations was a sort of a percent for art fund.

Um that's usually based off of again, this is best practice throughout the nation.

That there's usually a percent for arts either ordinance or through sales tax or through CI uh CIP projects.

So there was that recommendation again through our placemaking plan.

And with that, um, for me, myself, as a you know, person who likes to stay organized and just best practice, um, I like to develop a five-year public art plan.

So I always I'm a very futuristic thinker, and I'm like, what can we do in the next five years?

And so with that, um, we like to look at a five-year plan that is in line with current CIP projects, um, as well as some like smaller projects, like I mentioned too, that's highlighted through our placemaking plan.

Um, this is just kind of the step-by-step process.

It's a it's a little bit more nitty-gritty than this, but this is just kind of the basic highlights of what the process does look like.

Um, so we identify projects based on uh upcoming CIP projects and what's within the placemaking plan.

Um then we put out Call for Artists, which is kind of like our procurement process.

Um we have many websites and resources that we use to reach artists, um, and depending on the budget, it can either go nationwide or just local.

Um then we form an art selection panel to select the artist.

And that panel can look like we have at least one or two EPAC members.

Um, so that's Erie residents, um, stakeholders such as like local businesses or residents of that in that area.

Like if we're at a park, for instance, we would select residents to participate on that panel in addition to the EPAC members.

And then lastly, um town staff.

So, for instance, one of our upcoming projects has a lot of transportation in it, so have transportation staff present on those art selection panels.

Um there's a there's a little bit more in between that, such as um once they select they select uh three to four artists, they go through this whole interview process, they receive an honorarium to do further research about the town of Erie and put on a presentation, and the panel have a really hard choice to make.

Um, so they once they select the artist, we are in contract with them, and they begin to design, make more tweaks to their design, and of course, do community engagement.

Um, those community engagements could look like inviting local residents to come hang out on a sofa and actually talk to the artists and interact with the artists and have some sort of informal interview.

It could be a claymaking workshop, which I will speak on a little bit later.

Um, so we let the artist get a little creative with that.

Once that happens, the design is finalized by staff and this artist selection panel.

And then the artist gets to do the fun stuff, which is fabricating, putting it all together, and of course, installing the artwork, and then my favorite part, which is then hosting the art dedication.

So it's a very nitty pretty nitty gritty process.

It's a lot of fun, but it takes a lot of time just to do one smaller project.

So with that, one of our biggest celebrations this past year was our Canary Loop sculptures by Gregory Fields.

He was a former Lafayette artist, and I like to say we stole him, and he is now an Erie resident.

And the project started before my time, so BTT.

And that was back in early summer of 2024.

We also had community engagement called Play with Clay, and that was over at the ECC.

That was back in March, and it had over 50 attendees of all ages.

I really thought it was just going to be kids showing up to that, but I even had like grandparents playing with clay.

And the outcome of that community engagement was we have tiles featured on the tail pieces of the canaries.

Those are all community member made tiles.

So if you ever take a nice stroll along that canary uh canary loop, you will maybe see some tiles.

And then the extra tiles, you know, the artist can only fit so many.

We had over 50, the tails are not that big.

The remaining tails are actually, or excuse me, the remaining tiles are up front in the lobby of town hall, so you can always take a peek at those.

It was a wonderful time and to get people together and just be a little messy with clay.

Then once that was done, of course, the artist had to go in and fabricate, and he did everything in house, and we also had an active adult field trip to his studio to check out the canaries being made.

So they were final uh they were finally installed in October 1st, and a few days later we had our art dedication.

Um, in addition to the sculptures, we wanted to do this really cool bread crumbing effect.

So between each sculpture, in order to help connect one another, we have these really cool sandblasted bird prints throughout the trail.

So you can always keep an eye out for that too.

So the play with clay was super fun.

I was there as well.

But the best part was that we didn't know which tiles got selected.

So once they were installed, a bunch of us did the you know, the two mile loop to try to find our tile.

I think a lot of the community members did the same thing.

My tiles in there, so I like to brag three of my tiles made on it.

And I did not, I was like, Gregory, why did you do that?

Um, but it just happened, it just happened.

Um yeah, there's also the Canary Loop Sculpture map that's uh in PDF form that's also on our cultural arts webpage so friends can explore and print it out if they choose and walk the trail.

Um, this project, sorry, before I move on, was also featured in our placemaking plan.

So that's check that off the list.

Woohoo, go us.

The fun part, um, upcoming 2026 projects will be uh doing some sort of sort of sculptural element within East County Line Road and Austin Avenue roundabout.

Um, this one I'm very excited about because once I brought it up to transportation, they were like, the bigger the better.

And I'm like, I love the sound of that.

Um, the benefit of having a sculptural element is um it helps improve public safety.

Um, usually if there's an art installation, people tend to slow naturally slow down and hopefully just glance at it and not just be mesmerized by it.

Um, but naturally people like to slow down at a sculptural element.

Um, and here's uh two examples of roundabout sculptures throughout the nation.

Um another great project, this is the smaller project for the year.

Uh so I identified up to eight traffic cabinets throughout Erie Parkway, and I made one exception.

Uh I added one of the traffic cabinets that's right in front of Erie High School.

Uh, this will be an open call to public artists, um, most likely local to design and actually hand paint these traffic cabinets.

Um, and they will also add an anti-graffiti coat to that, so there's a lot of benefits, again, more public safety, but also helping with anti-graffiti initiatives throughout the town.

Um I selected three of the cabinets, and my roots are actually in the classroom.

So I used to be a specials teacher.

I used to be a music teacher, and I was like, let's get back into the classroom.

Why not?

So um I have been at Meadowlark Elementary, um, Highlands Elementary and Erie High School to work with the students there to help me design three of the traffic cabinets.

And I tell you, some of these designs are so cute.

Um a lot of the students are actually go leaning towards a nature theme.

Um, so I love that they're, you know, we all came to an agreement um to embrace some nature.

And we're hoping to have these installed.

Um, and I'll disclaim the ones that the students are designing, they are not hand painting them.

Those will be vinyl ramp, uh vinyl wrapped.

And that's the same vinyl wrapping that you see on cars.

So it's the same material, so it's UV resistant, and they can last they say five years, but I've seen them last 10 to 15 years.

It's pretty wild what that material is made out of.

Um, and you see multiple municipalities implementing that traffic cabinet beautification.

And our goal is to have those completed by summertime.

Here's um just a few loc uh sorry, here's the traffic cabinet locations.

Um of the locations is actually in and ready to go, it's the Glacier Erie Parkway and Glacier.

Um that'll be one of the traffic cabinets that is wrapped.

And then the other one that's in the yellow circle, that one is um currently not built out because that's where the new fire station will be.

So once that's all set and done, we'll have a vinyl wrapped traffic cabinet, and that will be Meadowlarks uh traffic cabinet.

Lastly, um, with bringing on and commissioning more public art through the town, we also have to do maintenance of that.

We might have witnessed uh few weeks ago that our coal minor memorial sculpture had a little boo-boo.

Um it is up to me and a few other staff members to help make sure um everything is maintained.

So part of uh the placemaking plan, they suggested that we do walk yearly walkthroughs to so boots on the ground, making sure the art's physically doing okay, um, but also coming up with a maintenance plan.

So that's another goal to work on.

Um so one of the projects this uh year will be doing maintenance.

Um the coal minor sculpture needs a very, very, very deep cleaning and a rewaxing.

It's a little dry.

It hasn't been touched since it's been commissioned 26 years ago.

Um, so we're looking to get that rewax as well as um polish and repair some of the granite surround on that.

So hopefully it'll last many, many more years.

And with that, that's public art.

All right.

Well, first I want to say thank you for all you're doing.

Um I remember reaching out to Luke and just we had a conversation about art, and that led to uh the meeting that I think the four of us had.

Um I feel that music and art are two things that bring us together regardless of our political beliefs.

Uh, you know, so many things in society are are pulling us apart right now.

But art and music tend to bring us together.

And so this is an important um item for me for sure.

I have some questions, but I'm gonna bring it back to council and uh maybe they'll get answered on the way.

If not, I'll ask mine at the end.

Would anybody like to start?

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Um presentation.

Uh yeah, I think when we first started talking about some of these art projects, I'm trying to think I was back in 22, 23 somewhere near.

Um it's it's really been cool to see some of this come to fruition, and and I think that's one of the things that maybe has been a little bit lacking uh in town.

We have some stuff obviously down on on Brig Street that's been around a long time and obviously in front of the building here, but uh um getting some of these updated.

Interestingly enough, with um the traffic boxes and um I was just out with another resident who we did a walk along um Erie Parkway between Briggs and and uh uh and bonanza and we were saying, you know, there's a lot of graffiti on on those electrical boxes along there, and a lot of them are rusting out and just repair.

So I really like this idea of of creating that that anti-graffities um status on there, but also help, you know, freshening them up, you know, and um and then the maintenance part of it.

So you said you're starting out with three.

Um how how what what's I guess what does the the future look of that or or or what what you have any plans or thoughts on expand expanding that past three or um so we'll have uh three of them will actually be done by the local schools.

Okay, and then the remainder will actually have eight total along Erie Parkway that will be um either vinyl wrapped by um students' designs or hand painted by local artists.

Okay, and then quite a few.

Okay.

And then I guess the other part of that uh was some of those kind of being rusted out as there's like preliminary work you have to do before the artists can go in and yeah, okay certainly.

Yeah.

Um yeah, then I guess uh the other question um uh and it's it's funny with the minor sculptor was we we were walking how long ago was that the couple months ago.

Yeah.

Walking out, yeah, I saw one of the the plaques had broken.

So um yeah, I appreciate the uh the work on that.

I think you know, those are uh memorials that I know a lot of people look to in town, have a lot of historical significance.

So um really appreciate the attention to that.

Um last question, and this is just one of the things I worry about from my budget minded um perspective.

So you're uh you said here you recommend two percent up with public art fund um currently funded by the general fund.

So is that I guess I'm confused.

The two percent is this like another line item on the general fund, or is that a okay?

Yeah, if you don't mind, Taylor, I'll take that one.

Yeah.

Uh so yeah, so obviously out of the general fund, we have a couple lines within the general fund.

It's not its own standalone fund.

The two percent comes from a recommendation from the public art and placemaking plan.

So after discussions with our finance team, we decided that 2% was a good starting point based on eligible capital project.

So Taylor mentioned the South Roundabout project.

So we kind of looked at that total project budget and took a percentage off that total project budget and then budgeted that in our public art line.

So it's not a separate fund.

That the PowerPoint, sorry, we didn't catch that until uh just today.

It's not a separate fund, it lives within the general fund, it's its own line item.

That enables us to be a little bit more flexible if we're if we're asked to look at you know possible uh but uh you know our budget expenditures.

Okay.

Yep, yeah, absolutely.

And then just as a follow-up to that, uh if it's something that because I know when we renewed TNAC, we kind of expanded some some of the uses in that and also parks funds, so could potentially TNAC be used for this, or is that I well I would have to go back and look at the ballot language, but I think funding public art is probably a big stretch for for TNAC.

Uh, but you know that's why we budgeted in the general fund because it's it's pretty pretty well used.

Yeah, I think it's if I remember the even the revised ballot language, I think that'd be a bit of a stretch.

Okay, excellent.

Yep, thanks.

That's all I have.

All right.

Any other comments?

Uh thank for um you know keeping an eye on this and and helping uh to keep our our community you know uh functional and extend you know beautiful and and welcoming.

Right.

And and I you know, I read in in your plan about you know some of the functional art around town center.

I think that would be really great uh to enhance that and make that more uh you know community and you know bring folks together.

So thank you.

All right.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Thanks for the presentation.

I uh a question regarding another question regarding funding.

Um so we don't currently pay into the SCFD and have we oh no, Luke smiling.

No, Taylor's very answer this question because that was one of the first things she answered or she uh asked when when she started.

So go ahead, Taylor.

Yeah, so SCFD um only Boulder County is eligible for that, whereas Weld County unfortunately does not buy into that tax.

Um so with that, it only uh SCFD only works for program operations and putting on programs.

It does not work for um building of any sort, unfortunately, or for public art, unfortunately.

Um the other thing is that um you have to be established for a couple of years in order to be eligible for funding, and maybe we could be like from the Boulder County side.

So it was really important for us to start to like document um some of these processes so we could say you know that we have started a cultural arts program here in Erie and have that, you know, maybe her start date or even before that be our our kickoff date for those five years.

Five years, yeah.

So long answer short, we're just not eligible yet for to have access to those SCFD funds.

What about what about other grant opportunities?

Uh I'm sure Taylor's looked into plenty.

Oh, for sure.

Um, even like the NEA, which is the National Endowment Endowment for Arts, that's also a five year eligibility window.

program here in Erie and and have that you know maybe her start date or even before that be our our kickoff date for those like five years five years yeah so long answer short we're just not eligible yet for to have access to those SCFD funds what about what about other grant opportunities I'm sure Taylor's looked into plenty oh for sure um even like the NEA which is the national endowment endowment for arts that's also a five year eligibility window um I know there are some within Colorado some of those are a three year window so we're getting there um we have them tab I have them starred on my bookmarked on my uh Google Chrome just to be like okay waiting for the day uh but yeah certainly keeping an eye out on those things and we have an amazing grants team that um help us um when the time comes okay sounds good um one last comment I I had a number of residents reach out to me regarding the coal minor um memorial and they you know were concerned about it um and I think they'll be pleased to hear that uh it will be worked on and brought back to life brought back to former glory and um make those residents proud that raised those funds 26 years ago so thank you.

All right yeah councilmember hoback thank you um yeah just real quick uh thank you for this I love Canary Loop and the recenter art and um look forward to the roundabout and the and the cabinets um adds a lot of charm to the town and particular with the dramatic colors um Colorado is awfully dry up this time of year so thank you I'll just say thanks for the program we love it um I loved the Canary Loop art opening um getting to walk on the loop and um kind of the interactive uh way that we did that in the the I think you gave away bird seed and bird feeders bird houses that was so fun and I just appreciate all the energy and effort and of course creativity um I think it's great.

Love to see it.

Yeah thank you.

All right um I think it's back to me and some of my questions were answered.

I do have um I mean I I hesitate to ask the question do you have enough money for the time that you're able to do the projects right so we're talking about this two percent um I was speaking with somebody um in a different municipality and they had actually passed either a fee or a tax on storage units and that went directly into the arts.

So I'm not asking you to raise taxes or anything like that tonight.

I'm just trying to get a sense do you have enough um you know revenue or enough money to actually make the progress you want to make um Lucas told I okay during my interview process I disclaimed I'm fire you might have to spritz me a little bit and uh I'm all gun ho like let's go I have like a teacher brain where it's just let's go you know um and so there are times Luke's like we don't need this many projects so that's why I bring the five year plan to kind of stretch things out a bit um so there's really I can't fully answer that like in my perfect world be like yeah let's keep going um but also we have to be you know cognizant of where the funds go and how many projects we bring on per year.

Yeah I think there's I think there's future opportunity for that something and that's the that was a recommendation that came out of the public art play placemaking plan is a two percent dedicated funding where that funding source comes in I think as Taylor um and Rachel and her team you know really start going down this path they'll discover you know you know what that could look like for Erie and we can certainly bring that to council for a future consideration and I think Taylor nailed it on the head is yes we're in Parkshire rec we're go go go and then we often forget that like oh we only have one public art person on staff right now so we have to make sure that I don't want to we don't want to overwork Taylor and and and her team because she does a fantastic job.

So I think staff capacity is one of the major considerations.

I think I think we've been pretty fortunate the past couple years to be able to budget what we can for our public art projects but you know in the future we may have an opportunity to to bring sort of a a dedicated funding source for public art.

Yeah okay that would be ideal and in the meantime as funds can run over roll over and we can continue on the projects and yeah yeah and if you have creative ideas to generate that revenue right this person that was talking to me about storage units it was like okay I don't want new taxes but at the same time right is that one that's a small enough tax but generates enough revenue to keep us going um I think of the small town feel and I think art is part of that right we have it down in old town.

I think Councilmember Hoback with the um his comments about um you know eerie in the the middle of winter it could be a little drab and the vibrant colors it brings a life to Erie that um that's important.

Um so it's a yeah, as needed basis.

Um we haven't started yet because we're still a recruiting.

Um hopefully that'll be done by the end of this week.

Um but once yeah, uh they'll we'll just figure out a time when we get started and via Zoom or in person.

I'll you know, it'll be kind of a relaxed approach in a way.

Um so yeah, it'll be just as needed based on projects.

All right, and then you know, I'm wondering.

Um, you have artists, creatives, residents, town staff.

Um, we make appointments up here of elected officials to be on various boards, right?

The tree board, open space, the airport advisory board.

When when is it appropriate to get to the time where it's one of the elected officials maybe should be appointed to this effort in the well I I think you know, um if if if members of council want to be on ePAC, you know, I believe it's open to all Erie residents.

So there's that.

Um I think just because of the nature of this uh this group, you know, it's it's not formal, it's not appointed by council, it's very volunteer-based, it's more project-based.

Um, you know, we weren't we weren't actively seeking a council liaison.

Um if you want active updates from that group, we can certainly put that together.

We can ask Taylor to provide um updates, whether that's you know on a quarterly basis or something like that.

But yeah, council is more than welcome to to come on to that uh to come on to that committee.

Yeah, maybe to start with uh just send us you know the the process for a residents to be involved because maybe one or two people up here would like to do that.

And then uh the updates you send Luke, um, you know, and Parks and Rec in general, maybe just include included in there.

I don't know that we need a separate um document per se.

We can do that.

And then my last question is and this makes me uh appear old, though I am kind of getting old.

Uh the rec center, right?

It was a big deal.

My first go-around, and there are two big sidewalls that have lights on the side about they were set up for murals 20 years ago, and that never got off the ground.

Do you have thoughts?

Yeah, and I sorry, I failed to mention it earlier.

It was on my one of my earlier slides.

That within that five-year plan, um, that ECC mural is um on that plan.

And my goal is to hopefully implement that idea in next year 2027.

Okay.

So and I think in addition to that, as we're working through the process of what a possible expansion could look like, how do those new walls now play into this?

So I think also once we know where that project lands, we'll kind of know the canvas, if you will.

Yeah, so and if there is an expansion, that 2027 date might change just based on construction.

Um, so just make sure it's a safe space for the artist to work on.

Um, but yeah, uh right.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Appreciate uh you being here tonight.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Okay, we'll go on to our second general business item tonight.

Uh, and that is item 2026 119, the Erie Municipal Airport update welcome all.

And I think I'm just gonna ask that you all introduce yourselves.

And then we'll this will be a team effort tonight, Mayor.

Yeah.

Uh good evening, Mayor Mayor Moore Council members, appreciate your time this evening.

Uh I'm Julian Jack when I'm the town of structure of eco development, urban renewal.

We also have uh Lochlin Woods, the URA development and accounting analyst.

And then I'll introduce these guys up at the table as well.

We also have David Passick in the back.

There he is.

Uh there's limited shares up here, so we're trying to fight for real estate.

So we're gonna kind of musical chairs here as we go through tonight based off whatever the subject matter is at that time.

Um we are gonna start with the uh airport fee proposal by the airport acronym development advisory board.

Uh we have the chair Paul Huff Tailing on the far right or far left from you guys, and then Vice Chair Emma Dowling here as well, so they can speak to their proposal that's in tonight's presentation.

Um when we finish the fee proposal part, these guys will probably return to their seats and then Dave will come up to help out with the rest of it.

Um we also have one slide tonight uh for Malcolm, town manager on the regional efforts at the end of the presentation.

So we'll get to that.

A little bit later.

And I will also say we do have you for an hour and a half tonight, so buckle in should be a fun one.

Um breaks, please take them, but we'll get started from here.

All right, take it away.

Sure.

Let me say everything I said all over again.

Uh so tonight, briefly, we will be going through the fee proposal for from the advisory board.

Uh, as we all know, the general fund is currently uh subsidizing the airport fund for operating costs.

The advisory board has been working over the last six months or so to come up with a recommended proposal for how we might structure some fee changes to address that deficit.

We'll start with that one.

That'll probably be most of the meat and potatoes.

We also want to give an update on the efforts for new hangars at Erie Airport, the RFP process that we've been going through for the last few months.

And then a couple of other of other hot button topics unleaded fuel, the FBO agreement and then the Northwest Mayor's collision from Malcolm as well.

So with that we'll start with the fees and this is Lockheed's baby.

Thank you for the for the overview there Julian.

All right.

So as Julian spoke about we've uh we came into council on for an airport update uh previously in 2025 and part of that was uh the recommendation that the uh that staff in concert with the airport economic development advisory board uh pursue uh additional mechanisms for for generating revenue or increasing the uh the revenue generation uh at the airport to get to a point uh where the airport was more uh financially self-sustaining so that's kind of the process we've been on uh with the airport economic development advisory board for uh for probably six months now going through the existing fee schedule fee and rent schedule for the airport and trying to update that uh to a point where it's more in line uh with the market standards uh and in line uh with the the value that the airport provides and that financial sustainability so uh I'll run through the um the the current uh situation that we have right now uh with the fee and rent schedule uh and then the proposal uh so you can see here in this uh slide uh the left uh you've got the the items kind of listed here of of what is what and then the the current rate on the left and the proposed rate from the uh airport economic development advisory board on the right um plus the kind of unit just so you understand what we're talking about since these are all slightly different um so you'll see TTF that stands for through the fence uh that's a fee that is paid for by users that have access uh direct access to the airport you know through the fence there's not really you know a fence on the residential side but the idea is that you have access to the runway directly so you pay uh a fee on an annual basis generally speaking uh to uh account for that access that you have currently uh the airport uh charges through the fence fees to residences that have a plane uh and our airport manager uh jason uh he maintains you know he knows all the people on the in the air park he knows who has planes and who doesn't so he's able to uh manage that and so it's six hundred dollars annually for every residence that has a plane in the air park uh that is gener uh generally in 2025 I think was 33 uh 33 different residences that had a plane and paid the 600 fee um so I'm gonna skip the next two because those are part of the proposal and go down to through the fence commercial um so that is for the commercial businesses uh on the other side um not the air park side but the other side along airport drive that have through the fence access to the airport as well um that charge is currently 25 cents per square foot annually um so it's just the square footage of the uh aeronautical use of those commercial businesses and that's 25 cents annually for those businesses um skipping the base fee as well because that's part of the new proposal you have um we have two different types of uh portable hangars uh set up uh to the west uh of the FBO building um some are slightly larger than others uh and have electricity so those ones pay sixty dollars a month the ones that are slightly smaller um pay 50 dollars a month their tie down uh fees or not fees rent kind of charges um it's ten dollars uh per night for a nightly tie down and 50 dollars a month for a monthly tie down and that's just tying your plane down uh on um just off the runway and then there's a fuel flowage fee which is um basically just a a flat charge per gallon of gasoline that is dispensed by the FBO at the airport that is currently seven cents um per gallon all righty uh hopefully you're fought you're sticking with me here so moving to the proposal uh the proposal from the airport economic development advisory board uh has a a pretty substantial change on the uh residential through the fence side so currently again six hundred dollars um per residence that has you know a plane along the airport and use you know has a plane six hundred dollars uh the proposal is to move to um determining um so every uh every residence within the air park that has um access to has through the fence access independently of of whether they're utilizing or not um so it's there's there's definitely uh legal questions and title questions to to be kind of hashed out um in the future about who has access and what access they have uh to the airport that's something that would be determined you know in the future and in um figured out and and you know

Uh the proposal is to move to determining so every uh every residence within the air park that has access to pass through the fence access independently of whether they're utilizing or not.

Um so it's there's there's definitely uh legal questions and title questions to be kind of hashed out um in the future about who has access and what access they have uh to the airport.

That's something that would be determined you know in the future and in um figured out and and you know, locked in.

Um but right now this is just kind of a structural proposal, and the idea is that if you are a resident with access uh in the air park with access to the runway, and you have a hangar, um, and that hangar um exceeds um I don't remember the exact size, I think it's 2500 square feet.

Um basically you'd pay 32 cents per square foot for that hangar, just like the commercial um the commercial through the fence rate.

So you can see here through the fence commercial, um the proposal increases that from 25 cents to 32 cents.

Um so the idea is that there would be parity there between residences with access to the runway and a hangar, they would pay the same 32 cents per square foot as commercial tenants with hangars and runway access to the airport.

And then residences that don't have a hangar but do still have legal, you know, legally guaranteed access to the runway would pay a flat eight hundred dollars per year, and anyone, any residences in the air park with a small hangar, small enough that 32 cents times the square footage of the hangar would be less than $800, they would pay the $800 as a minimum uh through the fence fee.

Another addition as part of the proposal is a base fee.

Uh so the idea of the base fee is every plane.

So this would not be uh on a resident basis or on a square footage basis.

This would be a fee for every plane uh that is based at the airport.

So it would be for if your plane is in the portable hangars on the airport property.

If your plane is in a hangar in the air park, if your plane is in a hangar, uh, you know, one of the commercial hangars uh that exists off airport drive, you would pay $800 per year per plane.

So if you had a you know a large hangar and you had six planes in there, you'd pay you know, eight hundred dollars six times for each plane.

If you just had the one pay plane, you'd pay eight hundred dollars the one time.

So that's per plane per year.

That does not currently exist, so that'd be a brand new addition to the proposal.

And then there are some small increases.

Um depends on your definition of small, I guess.

You know, uh so there's some increases to to rents as well, um, doubling the the small port-a port uh rental rate from $50 um dollars a month to $100 a month, and uh slightly increase slightly more than doubling the large rate from $60 to $125 per month.

Um monthly tie-downs and nightly tie downs, those are rates doubling, and fuel flowage uh slightly more uh than doubling, going up from seven cents to fifteen cents.

Um and those numbers were informed by discussion at the airport economic development advisory board, discussion with uh Jason the airport manager, uh, and some looking at comparative airports and their rates in the region.

Oh, and then lastly, just the uh last item is the the ground lease rate.

Um so that is just would just be the airport economic development advisory board wanted to confirm, you know, kind of lock in that whatever the commercial uh through the fence square footage rate is and what we're you know, what they would theoretically be applying to residences with hangers, same rate for ground leases on the airport.

Um so if we had future hangers, you know, it'd be the same rate, or if um the FBO agreement, so those ground leases would be the same.

Do you want questions as we go or would you rather wait?

Since we have four different topics, then I think what's best is to start with the fee proposal, do discussion, move on to the next topic, and move on from there.

Okay.

So I think maybe get through his next slide and then we can take discussion from that.

Okay, that'd be great.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Um so next slide here.

I have here is a revenue breakdown.

I want to emphasize that this is very much in flux.

Uh a lot of this, the the numbers here, um, particularly the the unit numbers are not things that um we know for certain.

Um like I said, there are um uh questions to be answered about who exactly uh falls into which categories in the air park of who has access um to uh to the airport under the current proposed um structure.

Um but you can see here currently um rents and fees that are in the uh under the control of the airport uh generate 141,000 annually.

Um and there's no there's no base fee generating every any revenue uh under the new proposal um uh assuming things mostly you know stay the same.

So it's kind of the the assumption I've made about the the unit numbers.

Uh we'd be looking at 237,000 um from the fees um or rent, and um the the base fees would generate an additional 148,000 dollars.

Um again, the the base fees are are just an estimate of the number of planes.

We'd have to you know do more precise uh calculations and surveying of of who has what planes, um, but that would bring the the totals.

So currently 141,000 annual revenue um under the airport control, and that that would increase to 385,000 uh annually.

And finally, I'll just go to this last slide.

Um you can see those numbers there in the top column, fee and rent revenues.

Um, I broke out other revenues, uh, that's uh gas taxes and investment income.

Uh just broke those out because those are not under the control of the airport.

You can't do anything about those numbers, they just kind of come in as what they are.

Uh so those are flat and won't change with anything that changes here.

And so that um combined with an annual uh expense um based uh primarily on the 2026 budget of 422,000, basically 423,000 annually.

Um currently, the airport um has an annual net impact of negative 272,000, almost negative 273,000 dollars annually under this proposal.

Um that would you know substantially improve to about negative two 29 uh thousand dollars annually?

Um one thing to note is uh as we're gonna talk about later tonight, we do have the hangar RFP to look for a developer uh a development partner to develop new hangars on the airport that will generate additional revenue.

Um so this isn't the the be all end all of getting the the airport to um financial independence.

There are other you know things being considered.

Okay.

And I would like to give Paul and Emmett a chance to provide any extra comments before we kick into questions if that's all right.

I'll just throw on there.

Um so when you look at the net impact there, uh the RFP that uh Julian and staff have worked so hard on getting to uh uh happened um is not included on this.

So any new any future hangers that get added on to that uh would be a more positive impact on there.

Um then I think that's about it.

You have anything else.

The only thing I would add is we worked really, really hard to reach what we described as parity.

And when we talked about parity, which we talked about a lot, we tried to solve the parity or disparity that exists now between the residents in the air park and what they pay, which right now is 600, and the commercial side, which there's a lot of different stuff going on on that side, and we think it needs to be more uniform.

One of them is uh one of the commercial developments, it's a negotiated rate.

We don't believe there really should be negotiated rates because it's 32 cents, it's 32 cents, you're gonna pay, that's what you should pay, and everybody should support the airport.

So as a group, we decided that it's really not fair to even the residents or the other businesses that are paying the 32 cents based on their square footage to be able to negotiate a rate.

The other thing is um there are planes that are, I mean, businesses that operate at the airport, Odyssey would be one of them, quite frankly.

They have operate right now nine airplanes.

They don't pay a per plane fee.

Um they don't, I don't know how much they pay on a on a through the fence fee, but we try to get it to a point where we logically could separate out a structure from a base fee.

Uh I'm a pilot, I own an airplane.

I'm a really good example.

I operate my business out of the airport at one of NASA's developments.

I don't have a hangar, but I pay as part of that negotiated amount.

I pay a square footage price based on the footprint of my office, and I'm happy to pay it because I like to support the airport.

I don't keep my airplane at my office building or anywhere near it.

I keep it at one of the residents across the way who live at the airport.

I have a negotiated rental fee that I pay him, but I would continue to pay the square footage price.

And I would pay a base fee for my airport.

I mean for my airplane being based out of airie.

I'm happy to pay any any one of them or all of them, just because I think we need to all acknowledge that we all need to support the airport more.

If we don't, we're constantly going to be facing the subject of let's close it.

And obviously, as chair of the airport board, vehemently opposed to that.

Um we put a lot of thought into it.

These are just numbers that we plugged in.

It's really up to the council to determine where you want to want to be on this.

Um, that's my two cents.

All right.

Well, it's helpful.

Yeah, and we do also have Jason Heard in the back of the room, airport manager.

So if there's any airport specific questions on fee calculation or or management thereof, uh we can certainly bring Jason up.

Um after discussion, uh our request of you all is just direction from council if you support this overall structure, a poke approach that the advisory board has recommended, and then staff will then do additional due diligence, legal review, reviewing deeds from airpark property owners, um, and certainly extended community engagement with all those that would be impacted by this prior to then bringing back any kind of amended ordinance back to council down the road.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, I do have a couple questions.

I think I'll start off and then we'll go up and down the dice here.

Um first I want to thank you, Paul, for leading the airport um economic advisory board and making the statement that we've got to do something, right?

And this is something, and you guys have put a lot of work into trying to find that balance, knowing that not everybody will be happy with whatever that something is.

Um I think we all get questions from time to time.

You know, why are we subsidizing the airport?

Do we need to subsidize it?

Why can't it support itself?

And this is a giant step to get us at least closer, and then I know there'll be other items we'll talk about later tonight that uh may actually put it into a uh net positive um space.

Um having said that, um, the negotiated rates the way they are today, who negotiates those?

Um so somebody from the town must be involved with that.

Yeah, okay.

That might be a problem right there.

Back of the room.

Predates most of us.

Jason, yeah, you could just come in the middle here.

There we go.

Jason or airport manager.

Um there's only one negotiated fee, and that was the NASA project.

One of the previous contract that Vector Air Management had with uh management of the airport, we were allowed to negotiate some fees.

Um the issue we had with the NASA development, is the majority of the development was not used as hangars.

And so there was a difficult, it was difficult to um administer the fees because we couldn't go hanger to hanger and try to fit or building to building and try to figure out which buildings had them.

Under the current ordinance, it's a use fee.

So under the current ordinance, if the building doesn't have uh, it's not being used as an airplane uh airplane hanger, then it doesn't subject to the fee.

The problem we had was we got off in the weeds where some people had an airplane and then had their business in there and how much square footage were they using and so uh I worked with the HOA at the time uh under my previous contract to negotiate a flat fee for the NASA development.

That's the only one that was negotiated.

It's at the current rate, it's just the square footage we averaged the space that we were um anticipating being used as um hangar space.

All right, and in the future, if we were to adopt this down the road, then it would be set.

There's no more negotiations, it's X amount per square foot.

Yep.

Okay.

Seems like a good thing.

Um, I have one more, but it'll probably get answered as we go around.

So let me go around and then I'll ask it at the end.

Um councilman Bear, do you want to start us?

Sure.

Um thank you for all the work and the presentation.

Um when we talked about this last when I don't remember what what month that was.

16 years ago.

Last year.

I did mention some concerns about the member of people are residents who live in the air park who've lived there for years and years and haven't paid an $800 fee and suddenly requiring that of them, particularly some of the homes that live on a runway that don't use or utilize it, or maybe the runway isn't accessible anymore.

Would this fee apply to, for example, the crosswinds runway, the homes on that that aren't there that's not a usable runway, right?

To my knowledge.

I think under the current plan, if you do not have any access, potential or otherwise, to the runway, there is no fee.

It's never intended to apply to them.

I think it's important to realize that those who are paying, some of them refuse to pay, I think, but I'm not sure.

But those that are paying are paying 600.

The new rate, assuming you adopted this particular rate that's in the spreadsheet would be 800.

Um again, it's important also to recognize that in our effort to reach parity, that in part goes to the negotiated rate and trying to level it out in terms terms of 32 per 32 cents.

And there was a comment, a public comment earlier about I don't even use it, and some would argue that because I have a resident on the airport that I have runway access, that increases the value of my property.

Well, we applied that same thinking to the businesses because our view is if you have a property at the airport that has a hangar and you could put an airplane in that hangar, even though you don't, that property as a business is worth more because you have access to the runway.

So again, try to level it out between everybody and uh create that parity situation as best we could.

So it's not everybody.

It's those that would have access.

And there is a difficult part with the closed runway because it's closed, not by anything the town did.

It was the FAA closed it.

Um but yes, they would still be considered at that rate because they do have access to the runway.

So I guess I'm wanting to understand access by definition, then, because if the runway's closed, they don't have access.

No, they do because there's still taxiways from there.

Yeah.

You can't use the runway, but you can get to the one that's usable now.

Okay.

And also one thing to add on that.

Um some of our members of the advisory board live in the air park and they've cited um property deeds, recorded deeds from when properties were first conveyed 40 years ago that have granted access through their deeds.

So that's one tool we can use to designate whether or not a property has access is if the recorded deed provides that access.

Okay.

Um I appreciate the the focus on parity as well.

And um a public commenter brought up equity, um, equitable fees and and structure.

I think that's an important framing to keep in front of us.

Um while also recognizing that there are folks that have never used the airport or the hangars or or um, I'm sorry, the taxiways and never will.

And so I do have some heartburn about um charging a fee for them.

It's I I feel like there's a way for us to sort of be able to target the fees to the to the users um to be able to address the um the deficit by charging the people who actually use the airport.

I think that should be um something that we're really focused on.

A fee that I don't see mentioned that we did talk about before is touch and go fees or landing fees.

Um we discussed, I know those are controversial in the pilot world, and I'm sorry to say a bad word in front of you guys.

Um we discussed, is there a way to sort of utilize um the landing fee so that it disincentivizes touch and goes, but waiving it perhaps if people you you know are here for several hours and they maybe go into town and um or once we get an uh restaurant at the airport are able to stay for a little while and pump the economy a little bit.

Um did you guys talk about that?

Did you was that on the board?

And can you let us know what you thought about that?

We'll do that.

So um there was a discussion a while back about landing fees.

Um landing fees are generally associated with commercial airports and generating revenue for them.

Um of the downsides of landing fees is that it creates it's deincentivizes a pilot to practice uh and practice leads to proficiency and proficiency leads to safety.

So the landing fee has a possibility of reducing safety.

And and so that is a big you know reason why uh we came out against that.

Um we're trying to move the needle here, we're trying to move towards you know a cost neutral airport and reduce the investment the town has to make.

Um an investment that yields a significant economic impact.

Um but uh yeah, it was a unanimous vote seven to zero against landing fees.

Okay.

And I appreciate that.

But I also do hear probably the most we hear from residents outside of the airport um who feel impacted by air traffic overhead.

And so I think that also we have to look at disincentivizing touch and goes.

A lot of the traffic that we see um is coming from those.

I don't I don't know what that looks like because I'm not an expert, but um I hope that in the next year I think we've added that to the work plan to just sort of look at how we can support the broader community, connect them to the airport and help them feel um served by the airport rather than just impacted by air traffic.

Um so I I appreciate uh that perspective, but also like I think we need to bring everyone to the table to really talk about that.

Um let's see.

Oh, and then the future hangers that we talked about.

Um I I'm assuming that would be on segments one and two that are not it's there's no map, but I remember looking at that would be segments one and two.

So I assume would be a capital investment um and operations and maintenance associated with those.

And is that something the town is springing for, or what's the plan there?

So and about two slides.

Okay, we can talk about it in two slides then.

There you go.

I'll save I'll I'll retract that question and we'll bring it up later.

Okay.

You got it.

All right.

Sounds good.

And that's uh just a good reminder.

We're talking fees primarily, and then we'll have another bite at the apple for the other things.

Right.

Go ahead, John.

Um thanks for for working on this.

It I know it's it's a challenge, important to um you know, increase our our revenue and offset our our expenses.

I I appreciate the the work you guys are are doing to make that happen.

Uh question, so if a resident um with access but they don't have a hangar and they don't have a plane, they would pay they don't pay anything today, right?

Or is that correct?

Correct.

Okay.

And then in this new proposal, they would pay $800 a a year.

If the if they had access.

Okay, right.

There are some homes in the air park, do not have access, they're not gonna get it.

It's not gonna happen.

Yeah.

So do we know how many they are not intended to be charged anything?

Do we know how many um residents without hangars um and no plane uh with have access?

Do we know how what that number is?

Originally we thought there were 55 total that had access.

Um, but there's been some other numbers much higher that have been thrown out there.

It it's gonna ultimately be up to town staff and legal to vet out who has DT or legal access.

So in the but in the ballpark of 50, 55, some somewhere around there.

Fit 55 was a number thrown out uh by uh airport manager.

Okay.

And how does that compare with other airports?

Are there other airports that have uh residents with uh access but no hangar and and no plane?

There are no other comparable.

There's no comparable in this state.

Okay.

Um I think Payson, Arizona has one.

Um but I don't I don't know what their fee structure is.

Okay.

But that's a private airport.

It's all paid for by the residents.

You can't even land there without permission.

So that's even though it's in very different.

It's not apples to apples.

Thank you.

Right.

Uh thank you.

Uh a lot of my questions were about the access and fees.

Um that causes me some concern.

Um we don't know the number and we're letting leaving it to staff to hash out that calls into question the entire budget.

That's a very basic number.

I mean it's what maybe 40,000 if they're if it if if they're 500 50 units in question, but still.

Obviously, it would entail at some point.

It's gonna have to do an inventory to figure out exactly who has what.

Yeah.

Um if I had to guess, I would say that numbers are low.

Not high.

Okay.

So um I have concerns for a residents on that.

I have concerns on legal issues with that, whether I somebody claims that's a tax.

I don't use the VAM airport.

I never have.

Um I don't want to run up legal bills depending that.

Um flu fuel flowage.

That's a service fee.

That's obviously not the gas itself, right?

It's an addition to the price of the fuel that's pumped.

Okay.

Yeah.

I figured so, but I'm gonna bring my car down and fill it up if not.

Um you don't want to fill your car up with a spinning done.

Uh um, and so I mean, excellent job on bringing the net impact down.

Is there a reason we didn't try to tweak a little more and actually bring it to break-even?

I think you I think in in fair time, uh, you will not only break break even, but you will exceed.

Particularly if some of these uh hangar projects do come to fruition, which I believe they will uh incentive or the you know mindset is to make it happen.

You'll not only make up that 2829,000, but you're gonna exceed that.

And not only do we anticipate that the airport will be revenue neutral, but it will be revenue surplus to allow for additional projects and whatnot.

So I'll have to go to the town to ask for additional money to pay for whatever project it is.

It won't take a whole lot with ground leases to make up that 29,000.

Granted, it may not be 29,000, it may be something more, it may be something less, but as we fine-tune this, town fine-tunes it.

Then we'll know pretty pretty straightforward.

In all of these discussions in the last six months, uh Councilman Rubell can attest to it.

We never expected this to be a slant dunk.

It is not something we expect the town or the council to grapple with and come up with an answer in the next month.

It it's not going to be easy.

There's a lot of open-ended stuff like uh uh if the easements.

Um there's a couple of things that the 25 cents that needs to be changed by by ordinance, because it's part of the town ordinance.

Um there's a lot of things that need to come in line in order to get to the end of the road here.

We never expected this to be quick.

It's going to be controversial.

There's gonna take a lot of input from the folks behind me and the folks who are not even here.

Um that's all part of it.

It's a starting point.

It's kind of where we ended up based on all our discussions and the input that we had.

Okay.

Well, beating budget, that's music to my ears.

So speaking of breaking even, umce we have an RFP and no better defined costs of what new hangers would be.

I'd like to know what our break-even in years is expected to be on the on that.

If you can kind of estimate that at that time.

Yep.

We can talk more about that with the hangar slides as well.

That's all I have.

Thank you.

All right.

I'll come down to that end.

Thank you.

Uh thank you for all all the hard work.

I've been in many of the discussions and uh when I joined the advisory board as a liaison.

Uh thank you for all all the hard work I've been in many of the discussions and uh when I joined uh advisory borders alias on this was the first question I asked how can we get to um stop draining the money from general fund this is very excellent job and I I don't have any questions.

I totally agree with all the numbers here.

Thank you.

Councilmember O'Connor thank you.

The Erie Corvair hangar the the 6000 uh square feet equals 19,200 yes.

So the Erie Corvere hangar that's what we talked about with the negotiated rate.

That's the um yeah the the NASA development okay so it's actually um I didn't include it because it gets more complicated but I'm glad you're paying attention and doing the math.

So it would be under the proposal it would be treated as 120 as the full square footage of the building.

Okay.

And so that's how you get the increase um not just the rate increase but also the the square footage increase with removing that negotiated rate.

Okay.

That makes sense um I do have concerns um regards as other council members have mentioned about um the fee for uh uh residents in the air park who don't have planes um and are still required to pay that I I struggle with that so um maybe there's a creative solution maybe I would just like that looked at some more if you would um and then uh regarding the um in the public works department fees the tea hangers which I guess are also port a ports um I know there was a mention before that the um that those hangars there was only three airworthy airplanes in them when those leases renew can language be changed to make sure that they house airworthy airplanes since we are dealing with um hangar space issues on the front range yes that's absolutely something uh we're working on um part of uh completing that process is finishing the negotiations uh regarding the FBO building uh to to uh make sure the town has control um not the the FBO over that land and then the the town can enforce those provisions um and change the language of those leases so that's something that will be coming yes okay and uh let's see um and regarding uh is there a thought on revisiting these schedules or revisiting these fees every two years every five years so that it doesn't seem like such a large increase to the users of the airport yeah the the um board talked about adding like an inflationary um measure into the the fee structure so that the amounts would automatically uh increase each year alternatively it could be something that we revisit every year every two years uh but I think that was definitely a priority of the board uh and and Jason heard the airport manager that these don't just sit um we don't just you know finalize the new fee schedule and then let these sit uh untouched and I'll just add um to Lockheed's point most of these fees haven't been touched in 20 years um so we are well below market for these rates uh locky did his due diligence to check around with the different airports in the region longmont boulder rocky mountain centennial to check against their rates and nearly every single airport said they were about to do a major over overhaul of their own rates.

So we're kind of leading the way now instead of playing catch up.

Some of them and I know Emmett can attest to it that at like Rocky Mountain they're multiplying their rates exponentially right now just to get caught up.

So I think it's in our best interest to make sure this is not a one time update but a regular update.

Thank you.

Oh can I can I just add that part of our discussion uh we we too looked at what other airports were charging or in expecting to charge in the future and to be honest with you this spreadsheet started at 36 cents and we thought it was too high too soon.

So we came in at 32 cents reduced amount and still got to where we were but yeah we we figured after three years we would have a you know cost inc index increase but not every year possibly every three years but we essentially came down from where we were initially which is very competitive at 36 cents but we came down to 32 thank you.

Okay.

you know cost and index increase but not every year possibly every three years but we essentially came down from where we were initially which is very competitive at 36 cents but we came down to 32 thank you okay mayor for tin thank you mayor thank you everybody for um the presentation here I know there was a lot of effort behind this um want to think my colleague is on uh council member Pesromelli um and yeah that was certainly the focus was uh to try to bring the airport to um being revenue neutral so I think I owe my friend uh chair uh huff tailing here the uh an apology because I I always I am probably the world's worst skeptic because I I always say that yeah our airport will probably be somewhat you know subsidize the point but you know I like to try to get it in the right direction but looking at the direction of this I I really believe this is something that into the future and you look at you know possibility of uh additional hangar space uh those types of things that um our airport can become revenue neutral and this was a long process and just to let everyone know like there were kind of several parts to this and the the fee schedule was was one portion of that but prior to this a lot of work done on um you know redoing uh the contract for the airport manager and the the FPO uh contract and and that portion the way we were doing it before just not to get open a whole other can of worms but that made things in the town's budget not look realistic and when we redid those things that was when everyone said well how much money we're spending on the airport here and that was intentional and I remember uh uh former mayor Brooks and I uh in a car ride back from the airport uh when we were out at in Las Vegas we we had a long discussion about uh transparency of those fees to to the residents because uh you know we want to make sure that that people understand how much money is going uh into there and so that was purposeful and now this is the second part that's remedy and I realize there is um a certain amount of controversy this is a certain amount of strife and I and uh I think my colleagues have brought up uh some good points that we have to uh address and and one um uh Julian I think you addressed this a little bit before but to the to the 1987 uh fee agreements that were in there um that that is something our legal team has to go and review before this comes back so um just want to make sure everyone's aware of that so this is not yet finalized we're we're still going through this um and the other thing I wanted to bring up and and uh I just want to point out we we have other members of our airport board here uh Paul give you a minute just to in introduce everybody because I you finished and I'll okay well I just want to say that we have um members of the airport board that are residents in the airport so it was important from uh I think the airport board's perspective to to get everyone's input and um uh you know and I like the word parity and and not equity because that that is uh I I think sometimes equity can mean um uh equity of uh outcome and not necessarily uh you know equity of um of opportunity and so I I I think that that that's an important distinction uh to make here that this is this is trying to get parity um and I will say that yeah we we do need to I I think we do need to be respectful for the changes in fees here but uh you know hopefully we will as we continue to get input um uh we can we can work on that messaging um the last thing I just wanted to address here was um since the landing fees were brought up I just wanted to um address that uh and guess I'll direct this to the pilots here that that so touch and go landings that that is part of of aviation training correct that's that's a necessary maneuver that you have to perform to get your pilot's license so when I hear um things uh of discouraging activities and that's one thing that um again for the public to understand the town basically got the airport for free uh we received a large grant from the FAA uh to purchase uh the air the airport and so that did two things is one thing it basically requires that the the area of the airport we need to maintain that as an airport in perpetuity and as long as we receive grant funding from the FAA.

Uh we received a large grant from the FAA uh to purchase uh the air the airport, and so that did two things is one thing it basically requires that the the area of the airport, we need to maintain that as an airport in perpetuity, and as long as we receive grant funding from the FAA.

Um the other thing to keep in mind that since we received grant money from the FAA, that charging fees to discourage aviation activity is a that that's a red flag for the FAA, correct?

Yeah, so um I this is something, and I realize you know, everybody's got different opinions and um, you know, ever you know there was uh something just happened a few weeks ago where there was uh on the eerie social media page, somebody put up, you know, shut down the airport, and I think the social media term is ratioed.

The the that thread got pulled down because there was so much backlash to that.

So we we hear a lot of people complain about you know noise, and there's there's you know, oh, there's an airplane overhead, and and uh one it's important to understand jurisdictional control is that things in the air that we don't control that.

That that is under the the purview of the FAA.

Um and so I I think and I uh was uh talking to my uh council member Mortalaro um uh earlier, and and we were talking about how you know we need to have a regional approach to um things are happening in the airport, and I know Jason has very good relationships with the airport managers at all the airports around here, and so um I know we've uh Jason is the you know and invited some of those groups that have been you know complaining about airport noise and things like that, but when we go out and and try to extend that invitation, um we have trouble getting people show up, but they show up to a meeting and complain, and and I say we have a yeah, not that the airport economic advisory board is is the place for fielding complaints about the airport, but I said one of the things I think is great about this board is the educational value of of what you get out of it.

And I've learned so much just in in my uh five plus years uh being liaison on this board, and I said I would say the most I know about aviation is is I've I've played Microsoft flight simulator.

So um I I think gaining that insight into you know airport operations, how things work, how the airports in the area work together, and the importance, the importance of the Erie Airport.

And we add an economic impact study that I can't remember the exact number, but was something like uh the the total uh economic value to the airport was 30 million 30 million.

So it's um it's an important asset to the town, and we want to make sure that's protected both for residents, for the businesses, and also to ensure that the airport is is maintained to a standard because there's a lot of work that needs to be out done out there.

So um I'll probably said too much, but I'll leave it at that.

Well, we do have a few more topics, so we'll have another uh bite at the apple here.

Um, as I as I was listening, I think it's that that one fee in here that would be charged to people that don't have they don't use the airport, but then on the other side, when I think about that, if everybody just gave up their airplanes, I mean we'd creator, right?

So you'd have these homes that are in large lots, beautiful place to live.

And if nobody participated, you know, in the extreme, then we wouldn't have any money for the airport, right?

So we'd have another problem.

And so where should that balance lie?

It's almost like is there an $800 fee to have the benefit of living in that airport community?

And I understand if I didn't have an airport or airplane and I was out there, that could be a hard a hard thing to swallow.

But then there's this greater good thing going on for the greater good of the airport.

So I don't have an answer here, but uh Councilmember O'Connor's point.

Um I think we need to really understand that and see what if there are other options there to that.

Yeah.

I mean, in theory, you could grandfather them in.

The current owners don't pay it, the new owners do.

When it turns okay, well, there's ideas to think about.

I think with that, I'll turn it back over to you to go on.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

And I do want to say um our last request of you all tonight is if you all approve the general approach structure uh of this proposal from the advisory board.

Our next step is staff is to pursue those next steps.

The title research, legal review, community engagement, et cetera.

That'll take a significant period of this year to bring back an educated recommendation from staff to you all.

So we're just seeking that direction from you all tonight.

All right.

Does anybody disagree with allowing staff to move forward in that direction?

Okay.

I think you have what you need received.

All right.

Next up, we are going to move on to the hangers.

Uh Paul Emmett, you guys are free to just one comment real quick.

I just want to say thank you to everyone who was involved in this.

It wasn't just these two guys.

Julian and Lockheed were instrumental in us getting to where we needed to be.

Two council members were really, really good in helping us move forward.

And we have Jason Heard, Airport Manager.

He was instrumental.

And then we have two other board members here, Jennifer and Lyle.

It was a really good group effort, and we've come a long way in the five, six, five and a half years since this guy's been on the board with me since the beginning.

We never could have done it without everybody's help.

It was a really concerted group ever.

Everybody participated, and I would just like to thank every one of you publicly.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks.

All right.

Thanks, guys.

And we'll bring up Dave now to fill one of the seats.

I'll take the lead on this one.

Lockheed's doing a lot of the daily work on the RFP, but I put the slide together so I get to talk about it for you guys.

As you recall from that study session we had around the airport 16 years ago or eight months ago, um, back in August around all the various airport components that we've been talking about lately.

One of which has been the high demand for hangars.

Um the demand for our hangars far outweighs the current supply.

And there's been a lot of uh interest from the organic pilot community, airport community, um, and beyond to locate additional airplane hangers at Eerie Airport.

Um we have both a hangar interest form on the website that has been uh available on our website for about five years.

There's probably 200 plus uh submittals that have been submitted through the website to that form.

We've pushed out additional follow-on questionnaires led by the advisory board on additional information, rent, own, what size, what cost, what utilities, et cetera.

So we have really good information that says there's a really strong demand for hangers.

Our next step is where and how.

Um we've conducted back in August, we presented the same update, but we've uh completed various hangar market studies with consultants, uh, one of which including the BA group led by the advisory board that evaluated hangers across the region, how many there are, how many we need, and what structure there could be to locate hangers at this uh at Erie Airport.

The two recommend two recommended locations are what we call option one and option two.

That was from that study that we discussed back in March or in uh August.

Um those are shown on the graphics on the right.

So with that direction we received from the council back in August, um our next steps were to work with the advisory board, draft a competitive request for proposals, RFP, that would seek uh development partners, development interest uh from groups that have experience, qualifications, resources to ground lease land from the town on a long-term arrangement, um, and handle the full scope of service.

Design, construct, maintain, manage, lease or sell um during the the term of that ground lease.

Uh that was the direct that was the recommendation from the consultants.

That was the support uh strategy from the advisor board, and that's what we pursued with this RFP.

Uh the RFP also went through the advisor board.

We made some changes with them uh now a couple of months ago, probably back in uh October, November.

Uh this RFP has gone through our airport council um at Kaplan Kirsch.

It's gone through the legal council of the town and and several others therein.

So we we've definitely vetted this RFP several different um through several different groups.

The RFP that was posted, it was posted on January 9th.

Um so now nearly just over a month ago.

Uh we left it open for a month.

So it opened it posted on January 9th and closed on February 6th.

For that month that it was open, we received four total responses, uh, competitive responses from groups around the front range.

They're all local-ish, some in Denver, some in Erie, some somewhere in between.

Um, but they all have experience building airport-related hangars, industrial buildings working in areas such as this.

Um, our two requests of those groups were to pursue potential hangar locations and those two locations.

Option one being that area west of the terminal where the current port-a ports tea hangars are located, uh redeveloping that area to consider new hangars of different types, sizes, and locations within that existing footprint.

Um, and then also pursuing new hangers north of the airport, um, kind of north and adjacent to the crosswind, and also where the AWAS uh used to be located before it was moved east of the runway.

Um we also wanted to make sure that uh through the conversations that it had with council in the past, not putting hangers where maybe we might regret it in the future.

Bless you.

Um also allowing for the potential for that future roadway entrance that's been supported by the advisory board over the years to make sure that we can allow for that configuration if and when the time comes and the money's right, etc.

etc.

But to make sure we don't um mess that potential up by putting hangers in its place.

Uh so all that to say we uh have four four responses to the RFP.

Uh staff has already already reviewed them, scored them, and has notified uh some of those uh proposals that we are uh requesting that they interview with us as staff.

We're scheduling those interviews over the next couple of weeks.

Um I will clarify that right now we are seeking either a development partner or partners.

Um we're not really being too specific or restricting yet in do we want one part partner to do everything, or maybe there's different groups that specialize in different types.

You know, one group more for the T hanger uh nested uh system and one group for maybe the box hangers.

We'll see how that goes.

Um our next steps is interviewing those firms and then ultimately coming back to council, likely in an exec session, hopefully by April, to make a recommendation to you all of who we believe has the right experience qualifications to pursue uh this arrangement with the town.

Um the last thing I'll mention is we are not necessarily moving to a ground lease in very near future.

Uh while that is ultimately the end goal, there's a lot of work that has to take place before then.

The airport master plan, which was last updated in 2016, includes an airport layout plan that is a kind of an engineered map that is approved by the FAA that shows all of our future plan facilities at the airport over the next course of time.

That layout plan does not currently reflect this location of hangars.

So before we can actually move to ground leases, permits, construction, we need to work collectively as the town, the advisory board, and our selected group to make sure that that layout plan is updated prior to pursuing that arrangement.

Um forget anything.

All right.

Um so I this is more of an FYI for you all, just to give you an update on where we've been since August.

There's nothing we're asking for of you tonight, um, other than any feedback or questions about it to the question that council member member bear asked previously.

Our recommended approach uh is not that the town is the entity to invest the major capital investment in building these hangars or maintaining them or leasing them.

Our position in this recommended strategy is we are the landholder, we execute a ground lease long term with the selected group, and then that selected group does all the the soup to nuts of everything there in with the ground lease, the design, the permitting, the construction, the maintenance, the management over the course of that lease.

So our role is basically receive the lease payments annually that can then go towards the net bottom line that Lockheed talked about earlier.

Uh Dave, anything to add?

Not at this time, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

Bring it back.

Any questions?

Go ahead, Councilman Bear.

So just because I'm unfamiliar with how it works.

So there's a hangar that that Joe's company built, and then we own the land it's on.

They lease it out to Mike who owns an airplane.

Mike pays them for the airplane, and then Joe pays the town.

Okay.

So does Mike does Joe charge Mike a thousand dollars and to keep his plane there, but in 800, or I don't know, I forget the fee now, comes to us.

The amount that we receive is ultimately the ground lease rate, um, which I think it's at 25 cents per square foot.

So we draw a box around the area that would ultimately be leased to that entity.

Annually, that development partner uh has a ground lease with the town that sets up that payment to the town, and we receive for whatever the total acreage or square footage is, we get that annual payment therein.

Um it's ultimately up to that development partner and their tenants, whether they sell the hangar, lease the hangar, whatever the approaches that they all decide upon.

Um there will be terms in the ground lease of what happens when the ground lease expires and how we handle the improvements that are constructed, whether those become the ownership of the town, whether they're deconstructed or taken as personal property, that's not up to us.

Um but there are some questions that the advisory board is definitely discussed around the ground lease and what happens in the improvements after the lease expires.

Okay, so my other question was about the base fee is eight hundred dollars per plane annually.

Would that apply to these hangars?

Okay.

Yes.

And I'm also wondering does that disincentivize someone keeping an airplane in there if the if you only have to pay the per square foot?

Um not the eight hundred dollars per plane.

Are we accidentally disincentivizing do something else with the hangar space?

Part of the conditions will be a requirement that the hangars are occupied by an airworthy air.

Okay.

That makes sense.

Thank you.

Thanks for pulling this together.

So how many hangars approximately how many hangers are you looking at?

Uh it's it's varies uh from proposal to proposal, and it varies based on the types of hangers.

Um, but I think you're probably looking at somewhere in the range of uh 50 to 60 new hangers, but really it it could vary a lot based on the types of hangers.

T hangers are going to be nested, they're going to use space more efficiently, whereas box hangers could be could be much larger.

Um so in you know, so it really just it it kind of depends, unfortunately.

Um, but I think there's there's variations, and part of that's part of our evaluation is what's your proposal, what types of hangers are you looking to build and how many and yeah.

And just to have a rough ballpark, um, I know we don't have it in this deck, but from the August presentation, we included some exhibits from that hangar market study, and those did have some breakdown of how many hangers could fit on each of these areas.

So option one west of the airport was around 39 total, and option two north of the airport is around 44 total.

So it could be in the ballpark of 80 or so in total.

Option two was uh option two north of the airport is 44 total.

Okay, thank you.

Sure, thank you.

Okay, other questions?

Yeah, sorry.

Oops, sorry, go ahead and say um, thank you for answering my previous question.

Um I apologize if this was answered last year.

Um option one looks like it's perishly close, perilously close to infringing on the Cold Creek open space.

Is that not true?

Both of these areas are shown for um, I think discussion purpose only.

All of our responding groups have noticed and and we've identified that there's significant impacts of the floodplain in both locations.

So either group will have to do extended due diligence to figure out the impacts of Col Creek Open Space, the floodplain areas.

This is just the boundaries as identified by our hangar market study consultants without any extra um environmental.

Do you want to check?

Yep.

Thank you.

That's all.

Okay.

All right, I think we're good for now.

Next topic.

So I had sorry, I must put them I just had uh a couple quick quick questions here.

Um one uh because I think probably council member Professor Ramellian and I are the only ones that receive the hangar interest forms.

So just as a market demand, right?

Um, so uh it from the last report that got sent out, it seemed like you know uh in the in the surveys that we got, which was primarily I think it was 51 respondents that um uh were recreational use, six that were commercial, sorry, one that was commercial travel six were commercial travel and one that was commercial aviation related, but of those it seemed like the vast majority were in the uh uh between 34 foot and 37 foot wingspan somewhere in that vicinity.

So with that um uh with the demand, um so do we kind of have a calculation on what do we think maximum yield on these things potentially could be both with number of aircraft that might occupy these and side of the hangar?

At this point we have no idea.

Okay, we so we're all right.

R RFP is more of an RFQ where we're looking for the best group that has the right experience and qualifications to be our partner, and then through the term of our negotiations, we'll figure out all those details using this information.

Okay.

Right now we're keeping the options open.

We just want the right partner at the table.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Um so my second question, and this goes back to kind of some of the early discussions we had on the AEDAB.

Um with us ha owning the land and and uh the hangar owner leasing it to us.

One of the problems we've had with um use of say existing commercial hangers that are out there is that um there the the taxation for um the building ends up being a a cost burden to where it's like I really can't justify having an air uh putting an airplane in here.

So with us owning the ground lease and this just being so the owner would be paying the property tax to the town, they would calculate that in their lease fee.

So hopefully this would be a lesser charge to the the end user than then some of the existing commercial options.

Correct.

The county assessor calls it possessory interest where we own the land, but there's privately owned improvements on the publicly owned land.

So there's a I wouldn't call it prorated, but a reduced assessment just on the physical improvements themselves and not on the land.

So there's a very small minimal amount of property tax the town does receive on current airport property based off those private improvements.

So that would continue here as well.

Okay, excellent.

Yep, that's all I have.

Thank you.

All right.

All right.

Uh good evening, town council.

Um David Passick, public works director.

Um following up from our previous meeting, there were a couple of items that I just wanted to circle back on that um came up as part of the discussion at our previous meeting.

Uh one was the unleaded fuel transition plan.

Um, just making sure that we got that submitted to the state, filed, and had a plan in place moving forward for a UL fuel tank to be placed at the airport.

Um I just want to say thanks to Jason and his hard work um coordinating with C DOA and um all the other partners involved.

Uh we do have that UL fuel transition plan filed with the state, has been accepted.

Um state's been great partners with us um working through that.

So that is in place, and um through recommendation by Jason and concurrence with myself, um, we will be putting in uh or planning to put in a unleaded fuel tank at the airport in 2027 as part of our capital improvements plan.

So I know that that was a subject of uh quite a bit of discussion at the last meeting.

I just wanted to make sure we circled back and updated you on our plans for that.

So um the other thing that I wanted to circle back on is the FBO land lease and purchase agreements that um Todd has been working on, and I've also been helping working on uh since taking over the airport.

Um so we did receive um red line agreements from Vector Air and Jason in the last few weeks.

Todd and I are actively reviewing those currently, and we plan on meeting with Jason in the coming weeks and uh going over uh the red lines and some of the questions that we have through that process.

Um from there, we'll discuss any modifications that need to be made.

We'll bring that to our airport legal council, and then we plan on bringing that forward to you all for discussion in Q2 of this year.

So wanted to make sure that you knew that we had good traction on those agreements.

We are moving that forward and uh in great partnership with Jason as well.

So I appreciate that.

Let me see if there's any questions on those two items.

Go ahead, Councilmember Bear.

Thank you.

Thanks for the update.

Um, that's another thing we hear often about is on the unleaded uh fuel transition plan.

So appreciate that.

Um so the house bill that required that plan to be filed.

Um was a requirement so that we could be able to access grant funding going forward.

If we wouldn't have submitted that, we wouldn't be able to access grant funding.

So were there other requirements in that bill?

Yeah, so CDOA had a um full breakdown of what was required as part of the filing of the UL transition plan.

We worked uh Jason worked really closely with C DOA to make sure all of those items were addressed, and uh we got that filed in time and we did receive funding this year for our pavement management project, so we are able to move that forward.

Okay, good.

Well, I'm what I'm actually thinking about is that I think there were other um I just don't know if there were requirements or if they were like for grant funding or just requirements from the bill, but something I the noise mitigation plan, um, that kind of stuff.

I see Jason heard is is furiously waving in the back.

I'll let Jason weigh in too, but um, we do have requirements for the noise abate voluntary noise abatement plan and uh voluntary noise abandoned uh checklist.

Um we do have both of those on file with the state as well, and I'll just look to Jason to add anything else.

Yeah, those were the three requirements uh was the voluntary noise abatement plan, which we drafted and put in place was approved.

Uh that plan had to follow a checklist.

We submitted that checklist that goes along with that form and then the unleaded fuel plan.

The other ongoing part of this is educational uh meeting with the other airports.

So we have a what we call quarterly VNAP voluntary noise abatement procedure uh meeting with the other airports.

Uh the next one we have is Monday, and we meet with the five airports that are affected by the House bill, and we discuss and uh one of my efforts because I've dealt a lot with this stuff previously, and and this seems to be kind of a new topic for some of the people that are involved in the VNAP programs.

There's issues with the technology being used to do there's just a lot of the FAA is has not come around uh the the landing fees, so um but one of the things that I've been trying to influence the VNAP people or the the the meetings that we have is to bring the flight schools in the flight schools, managers of flight schools, and we started to do that from Rocky Mountain Metro and from Walmart and from Boulder and from Erie and talk to the managers of those airports so they recognize when they leave Rocky Mountain Metro, which is where a significant amount of the flight training activity comes from, and they go to the other airports and they do multiple touch and goes, how that impacts the neighborhood, uh neighborhoods and surrounding communities.

In my experience, the airport managers can all sit around and talk about this stuff, but at the end of the day, if you don't get the flight schools to buy in, and I know this because I have a flight school, you don't get the flight schools to buy in, you're really just kicking the can around the room and it's not really anywhere.

So I've been encouraging, and it's we're moving in that direction to bring those flight schools in.

The last meeting we had, we had three of the um owners of the flight schools there.

Um encouraging them to not just bring in the owners of the flight schools, but the chief pilots and the instructors and get more of them involved because we've had we had a lot of the success previously prior to COVID, um, where we would have meetings uh locally and we'd bring the flight schools in and try to let them know the challenge that we face as an airport and trying to be good neighbors and um so that's that's part of the the other part of the bill is to those quarterly meetings and uh try to keep the communication lines of communication open.

Yeah, I I appreciate that because um in our last Northwest Mayors and Commissioners meeting, we'll talk about that group in a minute, but um Mayor Lacis from Superior brought up that we needed meaningful relief for the residents, particularly in Superior Lewisville area.

And and so I just keep coming back to that phrase meaningful relief, and I think exactly what you're doing is is a way to realize meaningful relief um by bringing everyone to the table and ensure that everyone understands you know we don't want to sacrifice safety, but we also want to understand that folks are being impacted by air traffic noise and and what are some actual real things we can do by just bringing people to the table and saying, Did you know that there's people you know there's whole neighborhoods that are impacted by this?

And what if we did things differently?

I I really appreciate that approach.

I think that's meaningful relief.

So thank you.

Okay.

All right.

Carry on to the last topic.

Last one is Malcolm.

You're up, buddy.

I put this issue on the agenda because I wanted to find out if there's any particular direction council wants to give staff on this matter.

It came up at the Northwest Mayors and Commissioners Coalition last week.

Uh County Superior Mayor Lassus has proposed uh several FAA level reforms uh that are primarily addressed at noise-related issues, but safety as well.

Uh there's concern uh expressed by uh Mayor Lassus from Superior and other mayors in the region about noise impacts, safety impacts, the um number of uh I guess you'll call them close calls that are happening at uh Rocky Mountain National or Rocky Mountain Metro Airport, and he had asked the MCC to uh consider um amending their policy agenda to consider aviation issues.

Typically the the MCC focuses only on transportation issues, more surface transportation, transit, and those kind of things.

And uh he had been advocating for expanding that policy agenda to consider aviation issues.

Um in his words, uh his constituents are it's it's the most frequent issue that is raised to him uh regarding uh concerns from constituents and only being able to say, well, we don't have any control over that because that that's the FAA.

Uh he's frustrated with that and wants to be able to address it through the MCC.

One of the things the MCC is to is go to Washington every April.

Uh they call it the DC fly-in, and they advocate with the federal transportation administration, railroad administration, and others.

And uh he's uh asked if if uh MCC would support including um lobbyist coordination uh with the FAA in that meeting or uh in those meetings.

And uh at the uh last week's meeting, the DC lobbyists said they would coordinate meetings for anybody that wanted to attend uh for those who are participating in the DC fly in.

So I wanted to bring that to the council's attention and see if there was anything you wanted uh staff to uh advocate for or against uh based on that issue.

All right, good question.

Um I think we're all struggling with um what uh I think one member in uh public comments said were the zoomies, right?

And understanding that you've got to do touch and goes to learn.

Um for me, I I I just want to know whether we have balance in the region, right?

Or with what happened at Rocky Mountain, did that push all the planes to Erie or the majority of planes to Erie.

So our residents are taking more of the touch and goes.

Um outside of that, I don't have uh any big expectations uh to the mayor pro Dem's point.

We're not shutting down the airport, we've got obligations to the FAA.

Um so you know, that's the the macro, the big picture.

Look, I think this is about how to bring balance back.

Um and if this is balanced, then somebody um it would be helpful if somebody can explain it to us, right?

To say out of Boulder out of uh Longmont out of Erie um out of uh Rocky Mountain that it's roughly the same.

I don't know, what others think?

Um let's just go around the dice again.

Go ahead.

Okay, well, I just talked, I don't just hearing my own voice this much, but um I did attend that meeting that um that Malcolm is is talking about and they um there are concerns raised uh and as one of the communities, Longmont is also in that group, and um they're also named in the House bill that addresses um impacts to local residents from from airport noise.

I think that's the title of the bill.

I don't remember off the top of my head.

But anyway, um so we are unique in that we have the airport in our community, and um the airport that affects Superior and Louisville, Boulder and Lafayette is not in their community, so they don't have the same um jurisdiction, I guess.

Um so we're unique in that, and I appreciate it that Mr.

Hurd, you sent a letter um and and we were able to talk about that in the Northwest Mayors and Commissioners meeting.

Um raised concerns about safety and unintended consequences, pushing traffic to Erie or to non-towered, I believe you called it non-towered um airports versus towered airports, Rocky Mountain Metro is a towered airport.

Um so we raised that, and that and that was sort of my point um to Mayor Lacis's point about meaningful relief for residents.

Um instead of pushing traffic around, just and having an understanding of what the actual consequences of our enforcement or our requests would be.

Um and also the Northwest Mayors and Commissioners, we we have a roadmap that we are able to advocate for um meaningful safety enhancements through the NAM study, the northern area mobility study.

Mobility study.

Um yeah, so I I suggested that we need something like that to be able to advocate report, Mayor Pro Tempell, a regional um regional for regional in a regional approach to have a study of some kind so that we're all working towards the same goals, and we understand what those are and what the impacts will be, so we don't accidentally advocate for something that just has unintended consequences.

So those are my thoughts that we uh you know, and I shared all of those during the meeting, so um thanks.

All right.

So my feeling is that if we can uh based, you know, what was Jason was saying, working with the other regional uh managed uh uh airport managers, working with the flight schools and whatnot, uh do it at a at a regional basis.

Uh those are my thoughts that we uh you know and I shared all of those during the meeting so um thanks all right so um my feeling is that if we can uh based you know what Jason was saying working with the other regional uh managed uh uh airport managers working with the flight schools and whatnot uh do it at a at a regional basis I think the further you get away from Erie and and and you know toward Washington DC you've got a lot more bureaucracy that you're you've got to work around so I I feel that you know if we could keep a focus on this and have regular check-ins with the with the council is see on on the progress see where the the conference um where the resolutions are going uh is a more effective way uh you can always you know you know push it to you know a higher levels but I I think we'll be more effective if we can you know work with uh with our regional area and the airports around us that that will affect us so that's kind of where I'm at thank you yeah I I underate that uh this topic came up also in the consortium of cities meeting other towns brought it up and uh I agree with Jason with your uh approach of dealing it with the lake local airports and kind of come up with some solutions are you know ideas about local governments related to this local airports rather than extending it to that FAA limit okay anything I just I think it's important that Erie stays to the table with this one and uh um as the appreciate I appreciate the efforts that the airport manager has put forth to collaborate with the um with the other uh airport managers to try to come up with a solution to this um this issue thank you thank you um yeah I I uh concur with council member Morelaro that I think um the most effective way to deal with this um is through our uh our existing structure of the airport manager I know Jason worked closely with all of them in the region and um I appreciate that that comment that we're we're bringing in the flight schools uh into that because I think I think that's a big part of this and I I think that that is the best path forward.

Um one of the things that I I've not discussed this with Mayor Lysis but I I think one of my critiques of of you know his uh his his thinking in this is that um the the I I work less than a mile from the Rocky Mountain airport and I I have for the last uh uh 18 years so uh I have seen um all different kinds of changes through that uh I've got to go into work every day when they were building the new tower that was there um seeing it being constructed and um I think it was around like 2012 or something but uh anyway the the um it it's it's it's a very different airport denerie and certainly yeah there is an effect when um you know uh when those flight schools yeah if they're they're waved off at at you know Rocky Mountain the way that does affect here uh you know our airports um uh whether it's Erie or Longmont or Boulder um but I I do think that you know this has been in the news for some time and you look at what what uh uh Boulder went through you know trying to shut down their airport and um not to say that I I don't necessarily think that's Mare Lysis's position that but the the um you know with what they tried to go through there and you know the judge threw it out and basically said that that that airport needs to be there in perpetuity so I think through the existing structures that that that we have the existing airport managers that's um the best way to have this I I don't have any faith in these these house bills really having any effect um I think there are things to make few people feel good saying we passed a bill and then uh it does nothing I I think that this is really something we need to uh have hands-on approach and and get people in a room and and talk together and and uh um getting those flight schools involved in the discussions and I appreciate that that's that's already going on and I hope that that's something we'll we'll carry forward okay I don't have any of the further comments um anything else for counsel come back up Jason just to add to that discussion just one quick thing we recently implemented a system that is actually tracking uh operations at the airport that's a technology that is related to ADSB and the state has helped funded uh they funded 90% of that it's called airport monitoring system and we're in just in the beginning stages we got about four months worth of data but um that data will be real useful in this conversation in that um as we so what we have to do is we have to um put manually put into the database the aircraft that are based at the Earie airport but then as it

That's a technology that is related to ADSB and the state has helped funded uh they funded 90% of that.

It's called airport monitoring system.

And we're in just in the beginning stages, we got about four months worth of data.

But um that data will be real useful in this conversation in that um as we so what we have to do is we have to um put manually put into the database, the aircraft that are based at the airport, but then as it um council's aircraft and documents the aircraft that are coming in, we can then start to figure out how many airplanes are coming from other airports, and that data will be very useful in the discussion because when you go to these meetings and we can say this is actually the impact this airport is having on us directly versus and we're all impacting other airports, you know, at the end of the day, but um you know my general feeling is we the airport takes on quite a bit of the burden of Rocky Mountain Metro just because we're seven miles away, it's easy and they're a towered airport and sometimes due to air traffic control staffing, they do limit the amount of operations they have, and so those planes just naturally flow over to Erie.

But we will have that data here, and it'll be really good data, total operations, operations from Erie versus other airports, and that'll um we'll we'll be able to present that.

Uh once we've got that database fully built, um that'll be in my airport manager's report, you know, monthly operations, yearly operations, and then we'll start deciphering where those operations are coming from.

So um new system and the state's funding it's got things gonna be helpful in the conversation.

So all right, thank you.

All right, we have one item left.

I'll look to the mayor pro tem to make the motion to go into executive point of order, Mayor.

This executive session subject manager will start it in public session.

I believe it should continue in public session.

All right, we'll um we'll kind of make it a motion if we don't have enough support to go into executive session, then we won't.

All right.

Uh I move to go into executive concession.

Excuse me.

I move to go into executive session to consider personnel matters pursuant to CRS 2464024F and not involving any specific employees who have been requested discussion of the matter in open session, any member of this body of any elected official, the appointed the appointment of any person to fill an office of this body or of an elected official or personnel policies that do not require the discussion of matters personal to particular employees and to determine positions relative to matters that may be sought to that may be subject to negotiations, develop a strategy for negotiations and or instruct negotiators pursuant to CRX CRS 2464024E concerning the town manager's evaluation and contract.

All right, do we have a second?

Second all right, we have a motion and second, we'll do a roll call vote.

Should we confirm that so that would be okay?

Do we have to do that again?

We did last time.

Um I think we'll see if we can go into executive session to this.

Um Malcolm Mai spoke and um he said so long as um he was invited to the executive session, he was fine.

I'm assuming nothing has changed there.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Yeah.

All right, we have a motion and second.

Roll call vote, please.

Councilmember Mordellaro.

Yes, Councilmember Hobak?

No.

Councilmember Pessamarelli?

No.

Councilmember O'Connor?

Yes.

Councilmember Baer?

No.

Uh Mayor Pro Tembell.

Yes.

And Mayor Moore.

Yes.

Motion passes.

Passes, but I think for executive session, we actually need five, correct?

Correct.

It does not pass.

Uh it is it is a two-thirds majority.

Sorry.

Okay, Mayor, I move to terminate the case.

Let me let me recognize the mayor pro tem.

Mayor, I move to terminate the contract of the town manager effective immediately and to pay out remaining severance subject to the contract terms.

Second.

There's a motion and a second.

Um we'll have uh discussion.

Anyone would like to discuss the motion and the second.

Okay, see I would like to discuss it.

Okay.

Um this is probably inappropriately coordinated, but um I don't think there's grounds for termination.

Um this is uh simply a wish list and a number of items last week were severely misrepresented as reasons that Mr.

Fleming is not fulfilling his obligation to the town.

One was the scope of a road through the airport.

Two of which turned out to be less than desirable and probably unfeasible.

But it wasn't town staff's call to eliminate them.

They presented them to uh a point that the mayor made last week.

Um was a creative uh were creative options.

Uh similarly, the parks and rec facility as part of the villages at Col Creek was was presented.

Um that's been an ongoing need.

Uh early in the mayor's administration, he suggested that parks and rec people fill some of the space here at this new building.

Um perhaps not understanding that those are not office positions, they are field positions with tools, equipment, vehicles, and not suitable for town hall.

Um we were advised of the size of the need, the expense of the need, and they compared it to what appeared um, although without allowed detail, uh, a much more expensive and difficult to achieve option at the laws center.

And again, should not be uh criticized for bringing potential projects and ideas uh to council's attention.

Um what has been proved has has been phrased as misinformation about the use of ARPARPA funds was was nothing of the sort.

It was acknowledged by senior staff very early on that this was uncharted territory without precedence to rely on, and as news research was revealed, it was communicated to council.

He was criticized criticized for excluding council and mayor and boards and commissions from the staff holiday party when he was questioned about it by the mayor, Mr.

Fleming detailed the reasons and the process, and the bottom line is the staff celebration.

The staff did not feel comfortable having a celebration with boards and commissions who wanted to talk shop and who were and did not seem to respect them.

He was criticized for not having the funds to do all projects we want that dates back to several prior prior councils and town managers, including including the current mayor's first three terms.

Reflecting a very concerning lack of knowledge on the count on council about challenges presented by outside entities, such as other counties and the renaming of our Erie Park Parkway.

Town council priorities have changed over time, and we've given very unclear direction.

Is what has failed.

An immediate search resulting uh undoubtedly in a much higher salary, and worse staff turnover who are already fear for their job.

Further project delays as a new town manager comes up to speed rather than an abrupt abrupt decision made tonight discussing an we should be discussing an appropriate transition plan that will provide for getting the best solution possible and fairness to the town manager.

That's all I have to say.

All right.

Other comments?

Councilman Reber.

Thank you.

Um I originally pulled this from executive session last week because we did not have the the 360 review.

The council did not have it.

And it was not shared with council.

And so we have had some time to review it.

And as I've dug deeper under the section of opportunities for improvement or growth, more than half of the of the things that we could that Malcolm could improve upon include the council, helping council understand staff workload and tasks, holding a former boundary with the mayor.

Council meeting agendas are constantly changing.

As Councilmember Hoback just pointed out, that's just completely farcical.

And all of the reasons that were brought up last week, I think we discussed pretty openly.

And they didn't add up to termination.

And I I think that even the way this has turned out right here, this coordination between you and Mayor Pro Tembell, and perhaps Councilmember Mortalaro, to strong arm council.

Once again, and instead of um looking at a balanced approach that leads to good governance for the town, um, I think is exactly why I pulled it from executive session in the first place.

And um I I still think that perhaps you did not share the 360 review with council because it includes some very detailed um experiences of staff witnessing and experiencing your mistreatment of our town manager and staff and um disparaging staff as well as council members.

Um and I think we have heard from the community over this past week.

Um unfortunately it it's our email inboxes have filled with opinions about Malcolm's review.

Um but I just feel like this was yet again another example of strong arming um and pushing your agenda through.

Um it doesn't make sense for us to replace a wonderful town manager who has a respective staff with a glowing review review that Mayor Pro Tembell and Councilmember Mortalaro mentioned last week that they agree that he's a great leader.

Uh the only reason to terminate a contract would be to um push through your own agenda, and um that's not good governance.

Um you did not have consensus or a majority originally to bring this forward, and um I'm very hopeful to my fellow council members that that remains the case that you hold your ground that you're brave right now and um not strong armed um to do the mayor's bidding.

All right, I'll go to the end.

Councilmember Petra.

Uh I agree with uh whatever councilmember Hoback said, and Councilmember Bear said nothing I say will change any of your minds.

You came in prepared with an agenda, and this is not today.

It happened two or three times in the past, and that's the whole agenda of driving the town and remember everybody's watching here.

All the actions that you're doing with your four four man team is being watched, and you will see the results.

You will see the heat, and I know you're ready to take the heat, but this is not good governance, and it is not in the best interest of the town.

You can muscle us with 4-3 in any matters or how many other times you want to do, but it's going to cause damage to the town, and I don't know how you can go and sleep at home at night.

So I learned it there.

Thank you.

All right.

Councilman O'Connor.

You know, um I'll be honest.

This whole process is um, I think inappropriate.

I don't think a personnel review should have been in a public format.

Um it should have been discussed around a table.

I find it frustrating that the town manager agreed with um two council members to bear this to the public.

Um and it um I question the judgment of doing this, and this isn't how it's supposed to be done.

We should be in executive sessions discussing this instead of comment.

Go ahead.

After you're done.

So I don't know.

So I want to I want to make sure we each have a turn and then go on because we'll get into debates here, and this is more appropriate for an executive session.

Agreed, which is why I think we should have gone into executive session to discuss this.

We went into the excuse me, you don't have the floor.

Are you sure?

Yeah, okay.

Mayor Protema?

Uh thank you, Mayor.

This is uh extremely difficult, and I know we have several staff members out here, and I I hope you guys realize you may not agree or disagree with anything that's happening up here, but I hope you realize the weight of you know, sitting in these seats no matter what side we um sit on on this issue, that um this is a heavy burden, and I don't take this lightly.

Um I agree with everything that council member O'Connor said um coordination uh or I forgot what the term was uh coercion or coordination or um I I've been up here doing this for for six years, and not one single time have I ever gone in with another council member to the town manager's office and had a discussion with him about his review outside of the full group.

That was completely inappropriate, and there may not be a a rule for that, but but that is the that was the betrayal that that was made up here.

Point of order.

Um we didn't have yet you don't have to be able to do that.

360 at that point we didn't have the got it, thanks.

Mayor Pro Tim.

That was completely inappropriate, and then after that happened, and and I expressed my gratitude, and I sincerely mean it to Malcolm and his years of service, and I said at this time, this is not about in my opinion.

This is not about um having a good review or a bad review.

Um this this is about that I I and my opinion changed on this from December to now, where I I think we need a change um uh because I I think there's some things we're facing now that having a fresh perspective uh will help us moving forward.

And I I wish we could have had that discussion in exec because I wanted to see was was that we could we could have you know a mutual agreement to part ways, and when you two pulled that stunt that you did last Tuesday that um that I said you know, and I I knew it was going to get pulled off exec tonight, and um I I thank Malcolm that uh you know he he um he wanted to have that conversation.

I sincerely I I regret that we can't have that conversation right now because I feel like this would have been better, and that's due to three people up here wanting to make this a public show, and you had no problem running to Yellow Scene, you know, to get all the quotes out there, and I will just say that I'm not gonna say one single bad word about Malcolm Fleming.

I've enjoyed working with you.

I think you are a person of integrity.

You know, whether our we've had agreements or disagreements over the years that you are somebody that I consider a friend.

And I just feel that it's time to move in a different direction.

And I I'm apologize to the public.

This came out this way.

I was here in 2018 when AJ Krieger was removed.

And I didn't like the way that that looked.

And I was hoping that we didn't have to do that in this, but be because we never even got the chance to talk, and because three people up here decided to play politics, that unfortunately this is where we're at.

And I'll leave it at that.

All right.

I um I I want to make sure we don't go back and forth.

I'm gonna um call the vote and the cards fall where they may, and in all honesty, I don't know where it's and by rules of order, we're allowed to have discussion before the vote.

And I and we've all got us all point of order.

We've all had our chance to say something.

There is no there is nothing out of order here by us each having our chance to speak to this.

It's another step.

I believe I playing politics.

I believe theatrics.

I believe the personnel issues should be handled 100% in exec session.

I think that's the right thing to do.

Before our meeting last week, I met with Malcolm Fleming, and I sat down with him, man to man, person to person, and I just asked him how it was going.

And in that discussion, he told me if there's four votes, then I would rather just be able to negotiate a separation agreement.

Um I said, I don't know if I have the four votes, but I do know that I want to find out if I have the four votes.

And with the open um meeting requirements, I can't call each of you up and ask you how you're feeling about this.

That's that's illegal.

And so Malcolm, um that's what Malcolm left me with.

So I was also caught off guard last week when the the discussion was made, and um council member Baer said she was pulling it off exec session, which you can't do.

Um you can do that off of consent agenda, but not executive.

You need to do the vote.

Um, but likely the vote would have gone just the way it did tonight as well.

Um part of the exec session is on matters that the person that the discussion is on has not requested it to be in public.

And that's why I asked Malcolm that question last week, and that's why I asked him that question again today.

And it left me to believe um in this moment that Malcolm would have preferred that we would have been able to go and have this discussion um openly in exec session, where all of us probably feel more likely to be open with all of our thoughts.

We're not there, and so uh we have a motion um on the table.

To me, this is a strategic discussion, not a tactical one.

The three six year reviews, I think confirm what we all know.

Malcolm is one of the nicest people out there, he leads well, people want to work for him.

I get that.

This is about the strategy.

Where are we going, not just next year, but the next five years, the next 10 years.

We have huge um decisions to be made uh around water, whether we even have enough to meet our current obligations, future growth, traffic, things that have just been pounding and pounding.

And um I said what I felt was right last week, that sometimes you just need a little bit of a reboot.

And that's risky.

And so if this vote goes to terminate uh the town manager's contract, we will be taking on some risk.

And if it goes against and we don't terminate the contract, then I commit myself to rebooting myself and to working with Malcolm to figuring it out as we uh as we go forward.

All right, with that, I'll look to the uh town clerk to do a roll call vote.

Uh Mayor Pro Tem Bell.

Yes, Councilmember Mortalero?

Yes, Councilmember Hoback, a transparent no.

Councilmember Passamurelli?

No.

Councilmember O'Connor.