OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Golden City Council Regular Business Meeting, Study Session, and Noxious Weed Board - July 14, 2026

City Council & Boards — Tuesday, July 14, 2026
BodyGolden, Colorado
SessionCity Council & Boards
DateTuesday, July 14, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:59:02

Transcript — Verbatim
0:35

I have uh I have five o'clock and so we can get through everything happening tonight.

0:41

I guess we'd start right on time.

0:43

So my name is Gerhard Fowl, I'm city councilor representing Ward 2, and uh um coaching through this week's uh study session.

0:54

Uh the study session is pretty light in the butt um honestly there's a lot of meat around reviewing the legislative section session uh that we just finished up uh downtown at the state capital.

1:08

Yeah.

1:08

Uh Claire no walk is going to be walking us through.

1:13

Uh the key things that Claire would like comments on.

1:18

Um first off, the the session is mostly informational to the council and designed to provide a high-level summary of what happened uh through the legislative session and the legislative uh committee that the city has.

1:34

Um it would be helpful if the council wants to discuss any legislative policy areas and priorities that they would like to ensure the subcommittee uh pays close attention to next year.

1:47

Um any feedback the council has on the timeline, uh Claire, again, I will touch on that at the end, and operations of that subcommittee uh for next year would be helpful.

1:58

And finally, if the council is interested in discussing any specific bills that are listed in the summary, um now's a great time to bring that up.

2:08

Claire will is uh fully tuned on the details.

2:12

And um just for transparency, myself and Emily are on the subcommittee, so we're here as backup and provide any insights towards the end.

2:23

Yeah.

2:23

So take it away, Claire.

2:25

All right.

2:26

Um, I'm gonna try and keep this um quick so that we can go through um and have time to discuss the legislative session.

2:34

Um, but I'm excited to give you all kind of a recap.

2:37

Um counselors found Kacinski did a great job this um this session, and so it was enjoyable to work for with them in their first legislative session.

2:47

Um some 2026 highlights, we onboard boarded our new subcommittee.

2:52

Um we met bi-weekly throughout the legislative session, which has been a pattern for the subcommittee in the time that I've um worked with them the last two years.

3:02

Um as we do every year, we reviewed legislation using the legislative policy statement.

3:08

Um some key emergent themes that came from that conversation, um, were increasing state involvement um in local control.

3:17

Um so we saw a number of bills in that area, um housing and land use for hotbot and TEPEC topics.

3:23

We saw a number of bills that came forward, some that passed, some that didn't, so we'll get into that throughout the presentation.

3:29

Um the state budget pressures weighed heavy with the um 1.5 billion dollar deficit.

3:36

Um that was an emergent theme that we saw definitely impacted municipalities this year.

3:41

Um and then, of course, public safety, where we saw um kind of a slew of bills, again, some that passed and some that didn't.

3:48

Um overall, we tracked 51 bills.

3:51

Um there was a lot of tracking this year and just getting used to what the subcommittee operations were.

3:56

So publicly we only set with the subcommittee only supported four, um, but the subcommittee also opposed 10.

4:04

Um and those were bills that the subcommittee um submitted forms of testimony and um legislative letters on.

4:11

So we'll get a little bit into the details there.

4:15

Um so when the subcommittee determined that a bill aligned or conflicted with council's adopted legislative policy statement, uh, we used a variety of advocacy tools.

4:25

Um, depending on the issue, this could have been written testimony to a committee that was reviewing the bill, um, letters to legislature leaders directly.

4:34

Um, so reaching out with our connections um there to express concern or support um in a one-on-one basis.

4:43

Um in one case we did submit a letter to the governor this year, um, and then participation in the statewide budget advocacy efforts, and so we looked for areas where the subcommittee could get involved there.

4:56

Um and in one case, Mayor Weinberg, um, maybe a couple cases with giving in person testimony.

5:02

One stood out that we'll we'll talk about this bill because it was particularly important.

5:07

So overall, three of the bills that we that the legislative subcommittees supported did become law.

5:15

And then seven that were opposed did pass.

5:19

I'll mention that that includes a number of budget bills, and so those were kind of in one big package.

5:26

So they did all pass together.

5:28

And then one of the bills that the subcommittee initially opposed, it passed, but an amendment was made that removed any of our concerns.

5:37

So really on paper, it's not one that we're concerned about anymore.

5:43

So over the last few weeks I've been meeting with our partners at legal to try and understand some of the impacts of the bills that passed and have law or are going to become law.

5:57

So I wanted to give a high-level impact on that.

6:00

There are more bills than the ones we'll cover in this presentation.

6:04

Colorado Municipal League has put out a really robust materials about all of those bills, and so if you don't have access to it yet or you don't know where to find it, let me know, and I'm happy to send it over.

6:17

These are just the bills that Legal and I thought were probably most pertinent to talk about in this conversation.

6:24

But it is just a snapshot of all the different things happening at the legislature.

6:29

So the first one I wanted to touch on was HB 26101, the housing developments on qualifying properties.

6:38

You'll remember this from last year.

6:39

It was also the Yes and God's Backyard bill.

6:58

So this includes schools, housing nonprofits, really any public entity.

7:06

So the good thing is cities retain authority over issues like infrastructure, safety, and environmental standards.

7:14

But this legislation represents a significant shift in land use authority over local governments to the state.

7:28

It is given on qualifying properties versus a specified specified blanking on the word versus like a hearing.

7:41

So staff will be working toward code updates before the required compliance deadline, which is in December 2027.

7:50

And this is one that planning is going to be following really closely.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Urban Renewal███████████████████19%
Procedural████████████████16%
Affordable Housing█████████████13%
Fiscal Sustainability███████████11%
Wildlife Management███████7%
Public Engagement██████6%
Engineering And Infrastructure██████6%
Strategic Planning████4%
Public Safety████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Golden City Council Regular Business Meeting, Study Session, and Noxious Weed Board - July 14, 2026

On July 14, 2026, the Golden City Council held a study session starting at 5:00 p.m., convened as the Golden Noxious Weed Advisory Board at 5:30 p.m., and conducted its regular business meeting at 6:30 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. The meeting included a legislative update, approval of a noxious weed management plan, a proclamation for National Arts & Health Day, and action on two major development items: a tax increment revenue sharing agreement and urban renewal plan for the former Church of the Nazarene property (17455 West 16th Avenue), and a service plan for The Junction Metropolitan District. All votes were unanimous (6-0, with Councilor Evans absent).

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes of June 30, 2026 — Approved unanimously (6-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Regular Business Meeting (non-hearing): No in-person comments; emailed comments acknowledged and published on the website.
  • Public Hearing on Resolution 3330 (Urban Renewal Plan):
    • Casey Brown, resident of North Golden and member of Golden United’s Housing Task Force, spoke in favor, thanking the Church of the Nazarene for allowing the redevelopment and urging approval of both Resolution 3330 and 3336. He emphasized that the property currently generates zero property tax and that the plan creates 47 affordable for-sale townhomes at approximately $350,000 (42% below market), with permanent affordability via a community land trust.
  • Public Hearing on Resolution 3335 (Junction Metro District): No public comments other than the applicant’s presentation.

Study Session: Legislative Update (5:00 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.)

  • Presenter: Clare Nowalk, Management Analyst.
  • Summary: Staff provided a high-level recap of the 2026 legislative session. Key points include:
    • 51 bills tracked; subcommittee supported 4, opposed 10.
    • Major themes: increasing state involvement in local control, housing and land use, state budget deficit ($1.5 billion), and public safety.
    • Key bills:
      • HB 26-101 (housing developments on qualifying properties): Cities retain authority over infrastructure/safety but land use authority shifts to state. Compliance deadline December 2027. Potential tension with Colorado School of Mines.
      • HB 26-1313 (affordable housing fund requirements): Reduces Golden’s affordable housing commitment from 78 units to between 19 and 39 units for the 2027 cycle.
      • Digital publication for legal notices (increased transparency).
      • Expansion of extreme risk protection orders to co-responders (benefits Golden’s two co-responders).
      • SB 60: Mental health training for youth athletics coaches affects city recreation programming.
      • SB 152: Updated requirements for automated vehicle identification cameras (Golden has none currently).
    • State budget impacts: Multiple cuts include removal of $130M from Affordable Housing Financing Fund, elimination of retail delivery fee revenue share (reduced from 70-85% to 15-30% for local multimodal), elimination of general fund transfer from multimodal transportation fund ($10.5M), and elimination of marijuana tax cash fund distribution (3.5% share to local governments). Full fiscal impact on Golden not yet quantified.
    • Emerging trends: Growing state role in housing, land use, transportation, and municipal funding; need for ongoing monitoring and policy updates.
    • Subcommittee reflections: Councilors Kurzinski and Pfau noted the intensity of the session, frequent encroachment on home rule, and the value of the tracking spreadsheet. Councilors discussed future priorities including data security/FLOCK cameras, AVIS cameras, and policy on interactions with federal officials.

Discussion Items

  • Golden Noxious Weed Advisory Board (5:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.):
    • Election of Chair (Councilor Cameron) and Secretary (Councilor Knecht).
    • Resolution No. 26-01 — Noxious Weed Management Plan:
      • Parks and Recreation Director Jeremy Sweat presented the plan, noting it is budget-neutral, uses integrated pest management, and qualifies for state grants. Public education efforts include a full-page spread in the Informer.
      • Council discussed herbicide use (not expected to increase), enforcement on private lands (first step education), and integration of grazing (goats/sheep).
      • An amendment was approved (6-0) to add three plant species recommended in public comment (puncturevine, bur ragweed, and one other) to Appendix B (local noxious weed list).
      • The board voted to recommend council approval of the amended plan. The plan will be reviewed at least every three years.
  • Proclamation — National Arts & Health Day (July 25, 2026): Read by Councilor Knecht; acknowledged arts and culture’s impact on community well-being.
  • Resolution No. 3336 — Tax Increment Revenue Sharing Agreement (17455 West 16th Avenue Urban Renewal Area):
    • Community Development Director Rick Muriby presented. The agreement commits 100% of the property tax increment over 25 years to support affordable housing on the 2.4-acre Church of the Nazarene site. Four other taxing entities (Jefferson County, school district, library, Mile High Flood District) have already approved similar agreements.
    • Council questions clarified that the funding is contingent on the project being affordable housing (80% AMI target) and that the land will be held by a community land trust, so only improvements are taxed. Unanimously approved (6-0).
  • Resolution No. 3330 — 17455 West 16th Avenue Urban Renewal Plan (Public Hearing):
    • Rick Muriby and consultant Andy Arnold presented the plan. A condition survey found six of eleven statutory blight factors (dilapidation, deferred maintenance, lack of infrastructure, asbestos, etc.). The plan creates a one-parcel urban renewal area to allow tax increment financing (TIF) to fill a $1.59 million gap in a $22 million affordable housing project (47 for-sale townhomes). Estimated property tax generation over 25 years: $2.8 million (net present value ~$1.2 million, but with favorable lending valued at ~$1.6 million). The project’s fiscal impact on the city is 0.14% of budgeted property tax revenue.
    • Public comment in favor from Casey Brown (Golden United Housing Task Force).
    • Council discussion confirmed that a future TIF agreement with the developer and site plan review will follow. Unanimously approved (6-0).
  • Resolution No. 3335 — Service Plan for The Junction Metropolitan District (Public Hearing):
    • Senior City Planner Lauren Simmons presented the 51-acre commercial development north of Highway 93. The district will finance approximately $59 million in public improvements (roads, sewer lift station, water, stormwater, pedestrian overpass, intersection on Hwy 93). Proposed debt limit: $90 million; maximum mill levies: 50 mills debt service, 20 operations; proposed 40-year debt mill levy imposition term.
    • Applicant Tyler Carlson (Evergreen Development) and district attorney Megan Becher presented. They requested removal of the 40-year term limit to allow flexibility for future refinancing, noting that Dinosaur Ridge (a comparable commercial district) has no such limit.
    • Council discussed the term limit. Councilor Cameron moved to amend the service plan to remove the 40-year debt mill levy imposition term (open-ended), citing the burden of future service plan amendments. The amendment passed unanimously (6-0).
    • Other discussion included fire district annexation (still under Arvada Fire, future negotiation), power constraints from Xcel Energy (limiting development), and concern about data centers (not allowed under current zoning but could be permitted via special use; applicant stated data centers are not feasible due to power limitations).
    • The amended resolution was approved unanimously (6-0).

Key Outcomes

  • Golden Noxious Weed Advisory Board: Approved (6-0) Resolution 26-01 recommending council adoption of the Noxious Weed Management Plan, as amended to add three plant species to the local list. The board elected Don Cameron as Chair and Emily Kurzinski as Secretary.
  • Consent Matters: Approved minutes of June 30, 2026 (6-0).
  • Proclamation: Declared July 25, 2026 as National Arts & Health Day.
  • Resolution 3336: Approved (6-0) the tax increment revenue sharing agreement with GURA for the 17455 West 16th Avenue Urban Renewal Area.
  • Resolution 3330: Approved (6-0) the urban renewal plan for 17455 West 16th Avenue, finding the area blighted and designating it for urban renewal. Next steps: negotiate TIF agreement with developer, then site plan review.
  • Resolution 3335: Approved (6-0) as amended (removing the 40-year debt mill levy imposition term) the service plan for The Junction Metropolitan District. Next steps: voter election in November 2026, then intergovernmental agreement with city in early 2027.

Meeting Transcript

I have uh I have five o'clock and so we can get through everything happening tonight. I guess we'd start right on time. So my name is Gerhard Fowl, I'm city councilor representing Ward 2, and uh um coaching through this week's uh study session. Uh the study session is pretty light in the butt um honestly there's a lot of meat around reviewing the legislative section session uh that we just finished up uh downtown at the state capital. Yeah. Uh Claire no walk is going to be walking us through. Uh the key things that Claire would like comments on. Um first off, the the session is mostly informational to the council and designed to provide a high-level summary of what happened uh through the legislative session and the legislative uh committee that the city has. Um it would be helpful if the council wants to discuss any legislative policy areas and priorities that they would like to ensure the subcommittee uh pays close attention to next year. Um any feedback the council has on the timeline, uh Claire, again, I will touch on that at the end, and operations of that subcommittee uh for next year would be helpful. And finally, if the council is interested in discussing any specific bills that are listed in the summary, um now's a great time to bring that up. Claire will is uh fully tuned on the details. And um just for transparency, myself and Emily are on the subcommittee, so we're here as backup and provide any insights towards the end. Yeah. So take it away, Claire. All right. Um, I'm gonna try and keep this um quick so that we can go through um and have time to discuss the legislative session. Um, but I'm excited to give you all kind of a recap. Um counselors found Kacinski did a great job this um this session, and so it was enjoyable to work for with them in their first legislative session. Um some 2026 highlights, we onboard boarded our new subcommittee. Um we met bi-weekly throughout the legislative session, which has been a pattern for the subcommittee in the time that I've um worked with them the last two years. Um as we do every year, we reviewed legislation using the legislative policy statement. Um some key emergent themes that came from that conversation, um, were increasing state involvement um in local control. Um so we saw a number of bills in that area, um housing and land use for hotbot and TEPEC topics. We saw a number of bills that came forward, some that passed, some that didn't, so we'll get into that throughout the presentation. Um the state budget pressures weighed heavy with the um 1.5 billion dollar deficit. Um that was an emergent theme that we saw definitely impacted municipalities this year. Um and then, of course, public safety, where we saw um kind of a slew of bills, again, some that passed and some that didn't. Um overall, we tracked 51 bills. Um there was a lot of tracking this year and just getting used to what the subcommittee operations were. So publicly we only set with the subcommittee only supported four, um, but the subcommittee also opposed 10. Um and those were bills that the subcommittee um submitted forms of testimony and um legislative letters on. So we'll get a little bit into the details there. Um so when the subcommittee determined that a bill aligned or conflicted with council's adopted legislative policy statement, uh, we used a variety of advocacy tools. Um, depending on the issue, this could have been written testimony to a committee that was reviewing the bill, um, letters to legislature leaders directly. Um, so reaching out with our connections um there to express concern or support um in a one-on-one basis. Um in one case we did submit a letter to the governor this year, um, and then participation in the statewide budget advocacy efforts, and so we looked for areas where the subcommittee could get involved there. Um and in one case, Mayor Weinberg, um, maybe a couple cases with giving in person testimony. One stood out that we'll we'll talk about this bill because it was particularly important. So overall, three of the bills that we that the legislative subcommittees supported did become law. And then seven that were opposed did pass. I'll mention that that includes a number of budget bills, and so those were kind of in one big package. So they did all pass together. And then one of the bills that the subcommittee initially opposed, it passed, but an amendment was made that removed any of our concerns. So really on paper, it's not one that we're concerned about anymore. So over the last few weeks I've been meeting with our partners at legal to try and understand some of the impacts of the bills that passed and have law or are going to become law. So I wanted to give a high-level impact on that. There are more bills than the ones we'll cover in this presentation. Colorado Municipal League has put out a really robust materials about all of those bills, and so if you don't have access to it yet or you don't know where to find it, let me know, and I'm happy to send it over. These are just the bills that Legal and I thought were probably most pertinent to talk about in this conversation.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com