Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

I will call to order the city council meeting for October 28th, 2025, and we will begin with the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands under God and liberty and justice for all.

Um Clerk Beck, can we do a roll call, please?

Mayor Monget?

Here.

Mayor Pro Cham Wong.

Hello.

Hello.

Councilor Barnes.

Good evening.

Councilor Friedland.

Here.

Councilor Gallego.

Good evening.

Counselor Sampson.

Good evening.

And Councillor Tapia Vega.

Here.

Mayor, we have a quorum.

Thank you so much.

All right, we'll begin tonight's meeting with public input.

This is your opportunity to address the council on any topics.

Uh you'll have five minutes to speak.

Um, if you wish to speak, uh please make sure that you fill out one of these speaker forms uh that you can access through the glass doors in the back.

You can pass it over to Clerk Beck and we'll get you on the list.

Uh you may also call in as well.

Uh please state your name and address before you speak as well, so we have that for the record.

Tonight we'll begin with Thomas Glenn.

Uh good evening, everybody.

Thanks again for your time.

Uh I'm returning on the same topic as before, which is basically the uh flight school noise coming out of Rock Mountain Airport uh down in Jefferson County.

I wanted to kind of display something.

You probably can't see it well with the small piece of paper, but the yellow lines on this people piece of paper are basically flights over Lafayette.

Uh over a 10-minute period.

And this was on October 8th, uh, from 8 40 in the morning to 8 50 in the morning.

And essentially 10 flights flying over Lafayette uh based upon the FAA change in uh the flight path having all the return flights going over 287 down to uh Jefferson County Airport.

So I just want to let the rest of the audience take a quick look at this.

So this is the issue.

We got noise over Lafayette, we got flight schools uh bombarding our city, our county, our citizens uh with the flight noise, and essentially uh we need to take proactive measures to try to get this to stop.

We're affecting uh our children.

We got three schools right in that flight zone.

We got the elementary school, we got the middle school, and we got the high school uh that are getting hit with that.

We got the citizens, and we also have the wildlife.

Uh last time I was here, I submitted a picture of an eagle on a power pole with the plane right above it.

Uh we got uh Osprey, I've been over at Wanaka Lake.

They're hovering above trying to do some fishing, and the planes are coming through, and then the Osprey disperse when we got these airplanes coming overhead.

Um there's other wildlife that are impacted as well.

And that's not to mention the impact to the recreational and open space users when we have constant noise going over the city.

This is not a one-off picture.

This is happening, if not daily.

Very frequently, as far as we have getting hit with the noise.

So I know there's an election coming up, there'll be some new members, maybe some measures and other things that are going to be following in sequence.

Uh, as that goes, there's probably a few things going on after this time.

And so I'm again asking for action.

Don't let the subject fall off the radar.

We want to keep on top of it.

We gotta act now and not wait until further down the road because the longer this trend goes on, the harder it's gonna get to get adjusted, both with the FAA, Jefferson County, and the public entities uh involved in the situation.

Uh the other thing uh, if you haven't seen it already, there was uh a news story by CBS News where they had Boulder County is one of the most dangerous air spaces in the whole country.

Okay, and that's because we have all these airports within the county, flight schools, uh planes flying in between the flight schools and uh just last week uh crash at Erie during some of the heavy wind days.

Uh two people died.

They were practicing their touch and goes and the windy conditions, and so again, you know, it's just a matter of time before one of those ends up at the wrong place at the wrong time and hurts more people on the ground.

So that's all I have for now.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

And uh everybody, please speak up if you are concerned with the issue.

Uh more representation is welcome.

So thank you.

Of course, thank you so much.

Okay, next up we have Karen Norbeck.

Karen Norbeck, 800 East Geneseo.

Good evening.

In April of 2023, I stood here to speak about former city administrator Fritz Sprague at his last meeting.

Council Briggs was there on the dais, as were some of you.

I wanted to come back and talk about him again after learning of his passing.

I pulled out what I read back then and realized with a little editing it still applied.

So I'm going to read it again.

When former city administrator Gary Klopaki left after 20 years, I was worried.

A new city administrator for Lafayette, some totally new person running our city.

This was not good.

Then came the long wait as council hired a company to do a nationwide search and do all the behind the scenes work until there were two candidates that were introduced to the public during a QA with the council.

I sat in my usual seat at the back of the room as the first candidate came out.

I was not impressed.

Then Fritz walked out.

Halfway through the interview, I whispered to Vicky Euland, he's the one.

He's head and shoulders the better candidate.

I remember I made a heart with my hands to some of the counselors when we were leaving the building.

I went to the public meet and greet at the golf course clubhouse and got to chat with him for a while.

We were supposed to fill out some type of form and turn it in, giving our feedback on the candidates.

I didn't do that.

I just went to the council's in the room and said, it's Fritz.

That's my feedback.

Pick Fritz.

And luckily for Lafayette, that's what happened.

The city administrator has a complex job that covers all aspects of running a city.

They need to be able to manage people, understand finances, planning and land use.

They have to be tuned into the essence of the city they run.

Be prepared to have a new council every two years and respond to residents' concerns.

But beyond all of that, they must have the type of personality that fits the town.

Fritz had that in abundance.

Just talking to him for a short time, and it shone through.

Because he brought all those skills to the table along with his personal style.

He was able to change our relationship with Erie and craft a global agreement with them.

Something that didn't seem possible.

He finished what Gary started by adding the Wanaka Centennial Farm to our open space portfolio, along with acres of farmland and the Lowe's property.

He had to handle the pandemic and the cyber attack, all while working to make changes to the staff by hiring new department heads and creating new positions.

Let's not forget the discovery of what he called the smoking deal.

Developers had due to our cash and loo water rates and the work done to change that.

During all this, the comprehensive plan update was happening.

Early on, I knew I could contact Fritz with concerns and issues, and he would take the time to listen and discuss them with me.

That never wavered, and I was always so grateful for that.

I got some laughs when I said at that meeting that the best thing he did was to get new chairs for those of us who spent a lot of time sitting in this chamber.

All kidding aside, though, he was a perfect hire at the right time, and the council that made that decision still deserves our thanks.

Fritz brought our city many steps forward, and I still miss him.

I watched closely and saw the transformation in real time.

What he did made the Lafayette I love an even better place.

I finished speaking that night with one final request.

Could he please leave a note in his office telling the next person to just do whatever Karen wants?

And with a laugh, he said, okay.

I wasn't surprised to find out later.

He did exactly that.

Katie, we need to talk about this later.

We stayed in touch and he would send me updates on how he was doing and photographs.

I have one of him and his husband Scott at a Broadway performance of Chicago.

My last memory of seeing him in person is a great one.

Sitting in the Red Queen last year, drinking tea, talking about the city and the trips they were taking.

The world just lost a special person, and my heart goes out to Scott, his family, friends, and those on our city staff who work closely with him.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Ignacio Perez.

Hi everyone, my name is Ignacio Perez.

I live on 211 East Emma Street.

Good evening, Council members.

Thank you so much for the time to meet with us tonight and for allowing us to share this opportunity with you all.

Like I said, my name is Ignacio Perez, and I serve as a director for Lafayette Communities at Care, or as many people know it, Lafayette CTC.

Lafayette CTC was founded in 2016 when I first joined to empower community members to identify and implement strategies to prevent substance use among Lafayette youth and make every youth in our community have access access to resources, support, and advocacy needed for them to thrive.

What makes Lafayette CDC unique is that we don't identify solutions for youth, we identify solutions with youth.

And I have a few of those youth here tonight.

You can raise your hand.

Awesome.

And some of our coalition members as well.

We meet once a month, always over dinner, and through subcommittees as needed.

We have a key leader board, which includes uh trusted local partners, our previous chief of police, uh, Chief Basher, and hopefully our interim chief as well.

Uh, Cister Carmen CEO, Suzanne Crawford, and local school administrators.

Past members include former Mayor Pro Tem Gustavo Reina and Council members Chelsea Bayanna.

Uh, we who've helped guide our coalition systems level approach.

Since its inception, Boulder County Public Health has served as our backbone agency, employing our staff, managing our finances, and contracting with the state through the Colorado Department uh Department of Public Health and Environment, otherwise known as CDPHE.

However, the current structure is set to end June of 2026, uh, when the new Elevating Prevention in Colorado or EPIC program begins.

Um, why are we here tonight?

The Epic Grant is a five-year, 410,000 per year opportunity from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

It's designed to help communities like Lafayette build a coordinated prevention systems to address youth mental health, family connection, and substance use.

To be eligible, each community needs an administrative backbone, an organization or local government entity that can hold the grant in contact with the state.

We originally approached Sister Carmen Community Center to explore that role.

Sister Carmen strongly supported our coalition in applying this grant for this grant, but unfortunately we're unable to take on the opportunity because they were responding to SNAP funding cuts and the growing demand for direct relief services.

That is why we're here tonight to ask that City Council and City of Lafayette serve as our backbone and official applicant for this grant.

We understand that this is a last-minute request, but that's only because we have to pivot from Sister Connor's decision.

We're passionate about this work, and we simply need the city to give us a chance.

And for you to all to believe in the coalition and the youth and families who thrive in it.

So here's what this partnership looks like.

The City of Lafayette would be listed as the official applicant and backbone for this organization.

The city would complete a one-time financial risk assessment, sign the contract with City PHE if the grant were to be awarded, and received 50% of that indirect rate, roughly about $61,500 per year to cover any administrative overhead.

Bridges of opportunity, led by the director Andy McCullough, a trusted local nonprofit, would handle all day-to-day fiscal and administrative work, including reimbursements, payroll accounting, and compliance.

Lafayette CDC would continue to lead all uh programmatic work, building partnerships, running youth initiatives, and measuring outcomes.

In short, the Lafayette uh the city holds the grant, bridges of opportunity manages the work, and CTC, our coalition delivers the impact.

This structure ensures ensures full transparency and strong oversight while keeping the workload manageable and minimal for the city of Lafayette.

In order to make this happen, uh we would propose a light touch accountability plan.

30 to 45 minute monthly or bi-monthly check-ins with bridges of opportunity and I.

Quarterly one pager financial snapshots from Bridges of Opportunity summarizing funds and how they're spent and the reimbursement process, and then one annual review to present impact data, um financial updates and evaluation findings to city council.

This gives the city visibility without any administrative burden.

Through this grant, we implement we would implement two complementary programs that strengthen families and youth.

Number one, the strengthening families program, an evidence-based model that helps parents and youth build communication, trust, and resilience.

Number two, are locally created Espascious Badahobanis, a youth-driven program that builds belonging, leadership, and pro-social connection, especially for underrepresented and underserved underserved youth in our community.

Together, they will create a two-generation prevention approach that supports both young people and their families.

We will track outcomes using data from the Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, attendance metrics, and coalition designed surveys along with required programming tracking measures.

We're proud to work alongside trusted community partners.

I know I have one second left, but thank you all so much for your time.

Again, we are deeply rooted in Lafayette.

We want this to stay in Lafayette.

Thank you all so much for your consideration.

Of course.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

All right.

Um, that is all the speaker forms that I'm seeing for tonight.

I'm also not seeing any callers online.

Are there any other members in person that wish to speak during this time?

Okay.

All right, seeing none and seeing no callers online either.

I will close public input.

Um and just so you all are, those of you that are new to our city council meetings, um, although we don't do QA during public comment.

If you wish to hear a response um from your comments, you may wait till the very end of the meeting during council comments when we bring it up, or you may have a member of staff or the city council reach out to you at a later point.

Um, but um otherwise, you know, we we have other businesses to take care of tonight.

Um, so you're more than welcome to stick around for that or head out at any point that you wish.

Thank you.

All right, moving forward to the consent agenda.

Uh, we have several items, including October, uh, including item A, October 14th, 2025 City Council meeting minutes, October.

Uh item B, resolution number 2025-72, approving an intergovernment agreement with the Lafayette Urban Renewal Authority.

Item C, contract with Johnson Miriam and Thompson Incorporated Water and Wastewater, comprehensive plan update.

Item D, change order number six, OTEC uh incorporated uh South Builder Road Multimodal Improvement Project, construction management and inspection services.

Item E, motion to approve a cooperative agreement with Lafayette Urban Renewal Authority regarding the 7800 block of South Public Road, streetscape improvements.

Item F, motion to approve a cooperative agreement with Lafayette Urban Renewal Authority regarding the South Polder Road Revitalization Area.

And that's all.

Any items that council would like to poll, please.

No.

I move to approve the given agenda.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and second on that.

Any further discussion?

Are all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay, on to proclamations for tonight.

We have one proclamation.

This is item G, extra mile day for November 1st, 2025.

Counselor Gallegos.

Whereas the City of Lafayette is a community that acknowledges that a special vibrancy exists within the entire community when its individual residents collectively go the extra mile in personal effort, volunteerism, and service.

And whereas the City of Lafayette is a community that encourages its residents to maximize their personal contributions to the community by giving of themselves wholeheartedly and with total effort, commitment, and conviction to their individual ambitions, family, friends, and community.

And whereas the City of Lafayette is a community that chooses to shine a light on and celebrate individuals and organizations within its community who go the extra mile in order to make a difference and lift up fellow members of their community.

And whereas the City of Lafayette acknowledges the mission of Extra Mile America to create 550 extra mile cities in America and is proud to support Extra Mile Day on November 1st, 2025.

Now therefore the mayor and city council of the City of Lafayette, Colorado, to hereby proclaim November 1st, 2025 to be extra mile day and encourage individuals in the community to take the time to not only go the extra mile in their own lives, but to also acknowledge all those who are inspirational in their efforts and commitments to make their organizations, families, communities, countries, or worlds a better place.

So moved.

Second.

All right.

Motion and second on that proclamation.

Any comments or discussion?

Councilor Barnes.

Thank you, Mayor.

I can't help but recognize the people sitting in this room.

Thank you for the extra miles that you go.

I was trying to think of a list of names, and I can't name everybody, but the city's amazing.

The people who are here go the extra mile.

So I appreciate you coming in to tell council what you need to tell them.

Do the work you are doing and continuing to live.

I think what we would hope people would do in their lives and be participate in their community and take care of each other.

So I just like to thank the residents of Lafayette for going the extra mile.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

I ocho that.

Any other comments?

All right.

Well, we'll take a motion.

We do have a motion actually and a second, so we'll take a vote.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That proclamation passes unanimously.

Thank you.

All right, that brings us to presentations for tonight.

We just have one.

This is item H, this is introduction to the 2026 Lafayette Urban Renewal Authority budget and an amendment to the 2025 Lafayette Urban Renewal Authority budget.

We have our economic development director here to get the conversation started.

Great.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

I'm here tonight as the Laura Executive Director.

I'm wearing a couple hats tonight, so buckle up.

All right.

So tonight I'm gonna be introducing our 2026 budget and also amending our 2025 budget for Laura.

So an agenda for this evening, I'm gonna go through the budget process and then jump into the budget overview of both the revenue, expenses, and then key initiatives and open up for questions and feedback.

So before jumping in, I know that we've been talking about Laura windy down for a couple years now, but wanted to just remind everyone about where we are in this phase.

So Laura was established in October 1999 as the lead revitalization entity for our downtown.

And this past October, in uh October 2024, our tax increment financing expired.

And so with that, we went through the process of um electing or voting for approval of a downtown development authority to take over that position.

So we're really in our final operational phase of Laura, and that's what this budget reflects.

It's really winding down everything, expending funds, transferring projects over to the city or the DDA.

Um, and I also just found these really fun photos of what two buildings looked like in 1999, what they look like today.

And so a lot of really great work that has happened in our downtown and uh good to reflect for a moment.

So our 2025 and 2026 budget process.

So state statute governs um how special districts get their budgets approved.

And for our case with the Urban Renewal Authority, um Laura will actually approve those budgets through resolutions, but we present those to council for feedback.

And so on October 21st, I introduced the budget amendment and the draft budget for 2026 to Laura.

Tonight I'm presenting it for uh council feedback and discussion.

And then on November 13th, I'll present the final budget to Laura and have a public hearing approving two resolutions, one for the amendment and one for 2026.

So I'll start with the 2025.

Um state statute, you know, governs that if uh a special district is going to expend more funds than previously budgeted, then they need to do an amendment.

And for our 2025 budget, we collected additional property tax.

This is because property tax is collected in arrears.

And so when we did our original budget with our TIFF expiring in October, we weren't sure exactly how much um property tax we would collect this upcoming year.

And so this amendment just accurately reflects the additional property tax.

So we stopped collecting sales tax TIFF in October of last 2024, but um we collected an additional 900,000 for property tax.

So this amendment reflects those additional funds.

So for the expense budget, um, it's really meant to wind down a lot of initiatives, and so that's why we have the downtown development bucket as a majority of our budget.

Um, and so this just gives a summary of where those funds are within our amendment.

And then just reflecting a little bit about the key initiative.

So we're spending staff time for the wind down.

We're continuing some of our core functions while the DDA really gets up and running.

So that includes Old Town Marketing, our public parking lot program, and then we have um a couple of IGAs and cooperative agreements, which helps with this window.

So as you just approved tonight uh through the consent agenda, that includes the 700 and 800 block streetscape project.

This is design and construction of new um streetscape improvements, lighting, public art, uh uh zeroscape landscaping on the 700 and 800 block of uh South Public Road, and then also new alleyway improvements, including paving and then storm drainage, which will be really great because we're seeing a lot of revitalization on that block with some new businesses open now with peak to peak and CLIVA.

Um for 108 North Public Road, this is related to Laura providing funds for the Chase Bank parking lot.

Uh DDA started funds are related to $2 million for startup funds to help the DDA get up and running for the first five years.

And then the South Boulder Road Revitalization Project is also a cooperative agreement you approved in the consent agenda related to doing an area plan, small business support, and district implementation.

Um and so those are the big things that we are working towards this year, um, and this budget reflects that.

So for 2026, looking forward, uh, we have no new revenues.

Um, so our last um this is our last year of collecting property tax.

Um, the revenues reflected in the budget in your packet, does not show any additional revenues.

And then for the expenses, um, this is really meant to be the completion of Lura, hopefully.

Um, we still have two properties that we need to dispose of, and so this next coming year is really meant to wind down the transfer of remaining assets, selling those additional two properties.

And so um, you'll see that you know our budget really shrinks in 2026, just with hoping that um we'll be able to wrap everything up in the 2026.

So um short and sweet, but you know, tonight I'm here to present the budget and uh get any comments or get any feedback.

And then, like I said, I'll be presenting this budget um uh for final approval for two resolutions and a public hearing on November 13th with Laura.

So happy to turn it back to the mayor for any questions or feedback.

Great, thank you so much for that presentation.

Um, yeah, I'll look to council to see if anyone has questions, feedback, thoughts on the presentation, what's been presented.

Councillor Friedman.

So we have a healthy reserve every year.

Um which normally is great, right?

We should have a reserve.

Why do we have reserve for the end of 2026?

Why would we need that in the butt?

Am I reading this correctly?

Looking at the um so if we look at the budget, um, the available uh fund balance ending all the way over here would be zero.

So the 300 318,000 is just what we plan to spend.

So we wouldn't have any more fund balance.

Um, there is oh, the total reserves.

That is sorry, that is related to loans that Laura has um provided to different businesses and property owners in towns.

And so until those loans are forgiven or exhausted, we hold those on the books as a promise or indeed of trust.

Okay.

Yes, sorry about that.

Thank you.

Got it.

Is that all?

That's it.

Okay, thanks.

Um, other counselors, councilor Barnes.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh just like to say being on the the council representative on the downtown development authority and having heard this process uh start and some of the major concerns like parking issues, the fund balance, how do we get the DDA up and running?

Uh just like to say that this is what's happening is what we were hoping would happen as far as the handshakes between Laura and the DDA and uh that surprising 900K at the end.

Uh that was that's pleasant and unexpected.

Uh say no to it, yeah.

No, so uh I from my from what I see we're it's progressing just as we want it to progress, and hopefully we can um conclude with those last two what Laura needs to finish, and then uh we're on a good path.

Yep.

That's all I have.

Cool.

Thank you.

Any other comments or questions?

Um, just want to quickly recognize um the Laura board and thank you, um, Director Keating for all that you've done for Laura.

Um, I don't know if you'll be coming before council in regards to Laura, so I just wanted to acknowledge that and all that the um Laura has done um for our community.

Um so thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right.

Well I think that's all from us.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, um, so that brings us to now regular business.

Uh we have a few items here.

Um actually we're gonna begin with item I.

This is a public hearing uh for resolution number 2025-63, making certain findings of fact regarding the proposed annexation of property located at the southwest corner of Arapahoe Road in 287, uh located in Boulder County, Colorado.

Um for September, uh, as noticed in the daily camera, September 19th to 22nd, October 3rd and October 10th.

This resolution, um, just so the public is aware.

Um, this resolution, the resolution for this item was revised um on October 27th, 2025 at 232 p.m.

Uh, we had to make a slight adjustment to that, and so just wanted to um make that clear uh before we get started.

So we have our planning and building director here to get us started.

Thanks.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council.

Um, as stated, uh tonight's uh application is a range at Lafayette annexation number two, and it's an eligibility hearing.

Uh the resolution associated is 25 uh 63.

Um as a public hearing, um the agenda is as follows.

I'll have an introduction, the applicant is here, um, Kensington Development Partners will have their presentation, and then we'll come back for staff analysis, council questions, and then public input, public testimony before the public hearing portion of the meeting is closed, and then we'll move on to council discussion and then ask for a motion.

So the three basic um steps required by the state for an annexation process are substantial compliance, tonight's eligibility hearing and determination, and then a final action uh at some point in the future.

That substantial compliance uh meeting occurred after the petition was received on August 21st.

Uh that hearing occurred last month on September 16th, and then tonight's meeting is really to determine whether or not the parcel in question is eligible for annexation according to state statutes.

Uh so giving us a little context about where we are and how this relates, and then also kind of speaking to uh what the mayor noted in terms of the update.

So the update uh to the agenda item uh was just to kind of clarify that this is a series annexation.

We have the range at Lafayette Annexation number one, which has gone through uh eligibility hearing uh and substantial compliance already earlier this year.

Uh we are now looking at the range at Lafayette Annexation number two, and the reason that's a series annexation is that contiguity requirement.

Uh you can see silo and Westridge are in Lafayette.

Um those are contiguous with the range at Lafayette number one.

Once the range at Lafayette number one is annexed in, then the contiguity uh exists for the range at Lafayette number two.

And then the other clarification, uh, the reason that this isn't done all holistically was that uh the range at Lafayette used to be in Erie and that disconnected over the summer.

So until we knew that that was going to be able to be a part of that application, the other piece was moving forward.

Now we're kind of put a pause on it in order for that second piece to catch up.

So the map on the left is the land use map from our comprehensive plan.

The parcel in question is this rectangle here.

Uh, and that red uh designation clarifies that our land use uh comprehension and the land use land use designation map and the comprehensive plan from 2021 designated this as adaptable commercial.

So that just suggests that Lafayette was anticipating this coming into the city uh at that time, and then the global settlement agreement with Erie, uh, which was mentioned earlier tonight, uh, also reflects this property as being within Lafayette's influence area and uh reflects uh agreement that this property would also uh develop within Lafayette.

So this is the we're kind of building on uh the annexation process.

This is uh a little bit more substantial um clarification of what that process is.

It also includes an annexation impact report.

We're here at that eligibility hearing.

Uh we'll move on to a concurrent review by staff that includes outside referral agencies, and we'll get into uh and then eventually we get to the decision point, and that's when uh action on this is actually binding.

But that more complicated uh review process that involves zoning PUD plat and spar is outlined here.

We've gone over this in the past, so this is just to kind of indicate that this is how those all dovetail together, how we require a zoning application with annexation, and then how and when the PUD and PLAT application tie in.

The SPAR is not required as part of the annexation process, um, but we are anticipating that the applicant uh will uh fold that in at some point too, and then really the final binding decision occurs uh way at the end of the process.

Um and so just to summarize for tonight the annexation uh eligibility criteria are outlined in CRS uh 3112104, as well as the limitations that are outlined in the Colorado revised statutes 3112-105, and that's what will be presented tonight by the applicant, and then uh I'll give you an analysis at the end.

Uh but this again does not constitute final action by city council or it represent the council's position on the feasibility or desirability of the annexation.

Good afternoon, council members.

Good evening, I should say.

Um so, like Stephen said, this is specifically the range at Lafayette Annexation number two.

And do you mind?

I know we've met already.

Yes.

Do you mind introduce yourself?

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Uh so my name is Edgar Crockett with Kensington Development Partners.

I also have Lindsay Latte here with me.

She's our land use attorney, and she'll be going through some of the legal ease that's Stephen referenced on the actual annexation requirements and eligibility requirements.

So I'll hit the project overview, a little bit of process and schedule, and then Lindsay will come up and hit that eligibility requirements.

So like Stephen said, um, right at the corner of Arapahoe Road and Highway 287.

You can see the actual indicated parcel highlighted on the map.

Um and then again, Stephen did a great job of hitting the fact that that that large space to the southwest is the range at Lafayette annexation number one.

Um to that point, this is a serial annexation in conjunction with that uh annexation number one.

And so this parcel specifically is just under three and a half acres when you consider it as a whole between annexation number one and number two, um, it's just over 38 acres uh is what the prop project will be uh on the whole.

So as Stephen mentioned, uh September 16th, we had our annexation resolution to achieve substantial compliance.

Um tonight we'll have our uh annexation eligibility hearing, um, and then in conjunction with that, since we did have the two annexations, um, we did restart the actual sketch plan process um in order to have one cohesive project under the two annexation uh in conjunction with the two annexation petitions.

Um so the intent to develop period for the concept plan associated with this project is currently open now.

So if any um members of the public have comments, uh that that concept plan is posted online and is open for public comment at this time.

And so still still to come, obviously, is the sketch plan, which will be subsequent to that uh intent to develop period on the concept plan.

Obviously, there's neighborhood meetings, planning commission, and city council meetings associated with that step, as well as each subsequent step for the preliminary plat, the final plat PUD, and then ultimately the annexation final vote where it becomes a binding annexation, and then we will um also have the site plan and architectural review for a number of elements within the project uh as a whole once we get through those planning and entitlement phases as well.

So I'll invite Lindsay up to talk through the requirements.

Thank you.

Good evening, council, mayor.

Um, as Edgar said, my name is Lindsay Lyda.

I'm a land use attorney for Kensington helping with this annexation and entitlements.

Um staff report tonight had a very thorough analysis of the eligibility requirements and how this annexation satisfies those.

Um I'm just gonna quickly give a high level overview of how we're complying and why this annexation or this property is eligible for annexation.

Um so first, there is just one property owner here and they own the entire portion of the property.

Um, so we satisfy the Colorado Constitution requirement there.

Um then, as Stephen mentioned, as part of the serial annexation, um, once annexation number one is approved and annexed, we'll it'll then immediately after that we'll have the second annexation.

Um, and we will at that time be a hundred percent contiguous with Lafayette.

So we exceed this one sixth um requirement.

Um these requirements here relating to a community of interest, that the property will be urban or is urban or will be urbanized, and that the property is integrated or capable of being integrated with Lafayette under the annexation statute, just by by a finding that the property satisfies that one sixth contiguous requirement.

Um that provides the basis for finding compliance with these three criteria.

In addition, as Steven mentioned, um, this property has been planned to be annexed and developed within Lafayette.

Um it's um in the comprehensive plan, the infrastructure is available, so um it satisfies all three of these requirements.

Um property is divided as part of this annexation.

We're taking the entire parcel, again, one owner as part of this annexation.

And um, there are no other pending annexations for this property, and it's not a part of any other municipality.

Um finally, there's no impact to the school district.

Um the property, as I'm sure you pass often, it's certainly within you know near Lafayette, I guess not technically in yet, but um, so no issue with it being more than three miles away.

Um, and there's no right-of-way included in this annexation, so no issues with with that.

Um that is um our presentation this evening.

If there's any questions, um we're happy to answer them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So they've already gone through the 10 criteria that are outlined uh in those revised statutes 104 and 105.

Uh 104 is really the contiguity and kind of um ability to serve um criteria, and then one of 105 is what's considered limitations, um, and those are more like whether or not it it is all of the property owners, whether or not we're subdividing property, whether or not we're taking a portion of a road and not all of it.

Those are all restrictions that kind of prevent us from meeting those requirements.

But as outlined tonight and as uh summarized in the staff memo that you guys received, uh staff's also found that all of these criteria have been met.

Um the other pieces that are associated with the eligibility hearing, it's pretty involved because it's got state requirements.

Uh we had to have this meeting 30 to 60 days from the last meeting.

Uh tonight we're having it 41 days from the meeting in September.

So we meet that requirement.

We also have to have a public uh notification uh four consecutive weeks, and as the mayor stated earlier in uh tonight's meeting, uh we satisfied those with the dates that are outlined there.

Uh and then we do provide notice to all special districts, including the school district, and then we had to provide uh annexation impact report that was delivered to Boulder County as part of this application.

That's all been satisfied, and then written notice uh about the public hearing was mailed to property owners within 700 feet of the property, and signs were posted on all along all of the adjacent lights away.

So if resolution 2563 is passed tonight, uh you'll basically just be allowing the application to proceed through the process, um, and then other associated development applications as outlined in that slide earlier, uh, will come back to Planning Commission and City Council as they get to that stage.

Uh and the public also importantly, we'll have additional opportunities to comment on the annexation and those other applications.

And as mentioned, just so that things don't get confused.

We received uh intent uh to develop portion, so we don't fully have a sketch plan application yet.

This is a pre-application or pre-submental requirement.

We've had a uh pre-application meeting, and then it follows with the intent to develop.

That was received uh last week and posted online that 10-day period uh started yesterday.

So the the public, not you guys, gets more uh detail on what that application is, and we're expecting that that will advance the planning commission and city council for your consideration and feedback in the next couple of months.

So that's it for my presentation.

I'm here for questions if you guys have them.

Um yes, so we'll start with council questions now before we get to public testimony.

Um and just to point of clarification for members of the public or or members of council if need be.

Um, once again, this is a uh annexation eligibility hearing.

Um and so we're just you know double checking the criteria that's been uh that's uh been put forward by the state of Colorado under revised uh statutes 31-12-104 and 105.

Um, and seeing if this is eligible for annexation, we are not annexing any property tonight.

That'll come at a later date, depending on how the hearing goes tonight.

Um, but are there any questions from council about any of those eligibility requirements or what's been presented in front of us today?

Councilor Samson.

And the reason this was not a part of the range number one annexation was because it was owned by a separate it was currently within, so it wouldn't have met one of those um what are they called?

Um limitation requirements because it was technically within area, so it had to get disconnected before we could we could process it as an application.

So does that make sense?

Yes, thank you.

Any other questions?

Fine.

No questions for now.

Um all right.

This is a public hearing.

Um so if there are any members of the public that wish to speak regarding this topic, um you may come up and do so now.

All right.

Um not seeing any speaker forms in front of me.

Nor am I seeing any folks that want to speak in person.

I'm checking online now as well, and I do not see any callers.

Um, so with that, we will close public input.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um so now council has the opportunity to discuss um this pre-nexit pre-annexation application.

Um so, and then if not, we'll take a motion.

So I just want to see if there are any items that folks would like to bring up to discuss.

No, okay.

Uh then we'll take a motion if uh someone feels ready.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-63, making certain findings of fact regarding the proposed annexation of property located at the southwest corner of Rappo Road and US Highway 287, located in Boulder County, Colorado.

Do we have a second?

Second.

All right.

Um we have a motion second for the discussion.

All right, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

And thank you all for joining us this evening as well.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

Um, this is uh first reading of ordinance number 22, series 2025, amending chapter 86 of collective bargaining for firefighters, and chapter 87, collective bargaining for police officers, uh, to allow for collective bargaining agreements with terms of less than three years.

Our deputy city managers here to get us started.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council.

We're here to talk about the ordinance pertaining to police and fire collective bargaining and the terms of bargaining.

I'm gonna give you a little bit of background and go through some ordinance language and motion language.

Um I do want to recognize that we have Sergeant Tyler Maynard here.

He is um our lead for the FOP and um fire, the IAFF representative intended to come at the last meeting but was unable to make it this evening.

But we have um kind of support from both parties, all parties involved, and we worked on this um together with the city attorney.

So um in 2025, we engaged in collective bargaining with the fire department, um, represented by IAFF 4620 and with the Lafayette Police Department, the FOP Lodge 3.

Um, this lies in sections 86 and 87 of the code, and currently in the code, we require a three-year collective bargaining agreement.

Um so during the process, we had several conversations that led us to um really discuss the kind of terms that are in the code, and we all mutually agreed that an update to this section of code would be beneficial to our future collective bargaining efforts.

So the purpose of this change would be to change the language.

It's a pretty simple change in the code to up to three years, and so instead of requiring a three-year bargaining agreement, we would have up to three years.

So it could be a one-year or a two-year or a three-year agreement.

Um, we found that this that we had some challenges in addressing economic fluctuations, and this would give us some flexibility in kind of better understanding economic fluctuations, particularly over the past few years with collective bargaining um with the IAFF.

This has been a real challenge with the kind of economic conditions, and this will always this will also help us address the kind of lack of precision that we found in the market forecasting over the the longer time horizon of a three-year period.

Um we have had lots of conversations about reopeners and side letters and that type of thing, and um it's it's nice if we can have a collective bargaining agreement that we can flow follow through the terms without those types of um kind of side letters.

So we all agree to that.

So this is really also aligned with bargaining agreements that we looked at in almost all other communities in our area that are more two-year bargaining terms or that allow for flexibility.

We didn't see any other three-year terms.

So this is a pretty minor change as I mentioned.

It amends chapter 8615 and 8715 in the firefighter and police officer code respectively, and this basically changes it to a duration of duration of up to three years instead of a duration of three years.

So we have motion language before you for ordinance number 22 series 2025.

Awesome, thank you so much.

Are there any questions from council or for staff?

Or for our okay, we'll take a motion.

I move to approve on first reading ordinance number 22, series 2025, amending chapter 86, collective bargaining for firefighters, and chapter 87, collective bargaining for police officers of the code of ordinances to allow for collective bargaining agreements with terms of less than three years.

Second.

Motion and second, any further discussion.

All right, sounds good.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, that was quick one.

But now we're getting into the budget.

Once again, if folks folks are um folks are sticking around for items uh later on in the agenda, you're more than welcome to stay.

Uh you can also access the meetings at home through video and on TV, YouTube as well.

Um, so um otherwise you can hang out with us all night.

Um so next we're on to item K.

These are items uh pertaining to the City of Lafayette 2026 budget.

We have our CFO here.

Um there's several items um underneath here, um including second reading of series 2025 appropriating funds for the operation of the city for the fiscal year 2025, uh adoption of the 2026 pay plan, fe resolutions, and so I will let our CFO get us started.

Great.

Well, thanks for that was a great summary, all that we're doing tonight around our second reading of the ordinance, the pay plan, and the fee updates as well for people receiving on the 2026 recommended budget.

So our agenda, we're gonna talk about the process and overview, follow-up from first reading, uh, fee resolutions, and then motion language was also provided.

Budget process overview.

So you we consistently show this, and the uh circles have been moving, so we are in October, and uh this is our second hearing.

Uh council has to adopt the budget no later than the last Thursday in October.

Uh so the recommended budget for 2026 is 145 million, a little over 53 million of that as general fund and close to 92 million in dedicated funds.

So we have our 2026 revenue overview here by fund and by type.

So spending about 117.6 million, or excuse me, um, receiving 117.6 million in revenues.

Uh, that's slightly down from 2025, uh, largely due to um intergovernment intergovernmental revenue, uh, not doing as many, uh, didn't get as many grants um and still doing significant capital in 2026, but um didn't receive um as much grant funding um as you did uh South Boulder Road Improvements, uh Highway 719.

Um that's the slight uh reduction in revenue from last year.

We did predict um uh slight increase in sales and use tax two percent, four percent increase in property tax um for revenue.

So those are the highlights.

And then we have our expenditures for 2026, 145 million.

Um again, this is also slightly down from the anticipated budget from 2025.

Um personnel is up, capital again is slightly down due to uh less expenditure um due to less intergovernmental revenue.

Um, and then we also reduced operating slightly from 2025.

Uh oops, I'm going the wrong way.

Sorry about that.

And then our 2026 pay plan highlights.

We have a full-time and part-time pay plan, combination of market-based range adjustments and merit-based increases, general employees.

Our average increase is three percent.

Salary ranges are all above the 2026 state minimum wage, as well as all pay plans are also above the state minimum wage requirements.

Police are receiving a 4% increase per their collective bargaining agreement in 2026.

Fire is receiving a 3% increase per their collective bargaining agreement, and there is range movement uh happening in 2026 as well in alignment with the market.

So summary highlights again, rising costs seen across all categories of expenditures.

Uh review of actual versus budgeted expenditure alignment.

Took a really close look at what we've been spending in the past and our revenues coming in and how we make those work.

Um, so some reallocation of budget within funds, uh, and a focus on maintaining price progress made on compensation plan and philosophy, address and meeting rising operating costs, and proactively plan and address capital needs.

Uh the detail, your budget book, uh, and your second reading memo are all in your packet.

There's a lot of detail there, as well as responses to your first reading questions.

Um just wanted to and thank all the staff in the departments for the preparation of this document and for your uh review at our budget introduction introduction uh in August, as well as our first reading and this your final second reading.

Um we have the fee resolutions.

Um we have the golf enterprise, uh current um cost recovery and market analysis that happens.

Um solid waste, uh, which is your trash with Republic.

Uh our contract stipulates that increase is based on the Denver Aurora Liquid CPI, and then there's also an admin fee for cost recovery utility rates.

Uh recently did a RAFTELUS rate study for water, water reclamation and stormwater, and thus uh the 2022 increases that we discussed at the August 28th budget workshop are part of this 2026 budget.

So average monthly bill impact for utility fees, uh waste management uh is a dollar sixty-five bill increase that includes the admin fee as well as um the 2026 increase for um the uh typical single family residential customer water utility fees um the increase is seven dollars and fourteen cents.

That's uh estimate based on single family residential customer using three thousand gallons per month.

Uh water reclamation fees, additional three dollars and eighty-nine cents.

Um, again, based on a single family residential customer, and then stormwater fees and additional dollar six bill increasing 2026.

And then any questions.

So again, this is a real high overview.

You've got all the detail and uh happy to have any questions and lots of help from staff.

I'm just the messenger.

Of course.

Now thank you for taking the time to put all that together.

Uh council have questions on any of these items presented to us.

Um regarding the budget.

I know it's second reading, so uh, but it's still if there's anything else that you uh counselor Samson.

Yeah, um, can you talk a little bit more about the Indian Peaks golf course fees?

I I feel like we missed a whole presentation.

Yeah, so we are bringing uh information about our comprehensive fee study that's covering both golf and recreation fees at the next meeting.

Okay, with golf fees for this year because we knew this process and this project was gonna take a little bit longer.

We followed the same approach that we generally do with the golf course and have for many years.

So we look at um our operational costs, we're covering those costs, and then we're balancing also the competitiveness in the market.

So what you're seeing is a roughly three percent increase from last year, um, and it's pretty typical for our process.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um, other questions from council.

There's this really good reading.

Okay.

Okay, we'll take a motion if someone feels ready, please.

I move to approve on second rating ordinance number 21 series 2025, appropriating funds for the operation of the city for the fiscal year of 2026.

Second.

Motion and a second, any other discussion?

Are all those in favor say aye?

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That ordinance passes unanimously.

Uh let's move on to the pay plan.

All right.

I move to adopt the 2026 pay plan.

That's a great motion.

Second.

Motion and a second on the pay plan.

Any comments or discussion on this?

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Finally, the resolution.

Or multiple resolutions, never mind.

Multiple resolutions on the fees, each of the individual fees.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Never mind just this resolution.

Please, somebody is going to be able to do that.

I move to approve resolution number 20 2564 establishing the fees for the Indian Peaks golf course commencing January 1st, 2026.

Second.

Motion second, any further discussion.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, none opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Next motion, please.

I move to approve resolution number 2025 65, amending exhibit B.

Quote, City of Lafayette customer rates, unquote, of the comprehensive residential refuse recyclables and organics collection services contract between the City of Lafayette and Republic Services of Denver to establish refuse recycling and organics collection services rates and establishing the monthly administrative fee for residential customer accounts commencing January 1st, 2026.

Second.

Motion second, any further discussion?

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Next motion.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-66 establishing the stormwater utility rates, fees, and charges commencing on January 1st, 2026.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no.

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-6-7 establishing the water utility rates, fees, and charges commencing January 1, 2026.

Second.

Motion second, any further discussion.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

And finally.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-68 establishing the water reclamation utility rates, fees, and charges commencing January 1st, 2026.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no.

None opposed.

That passes unanimously as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So we got first reading, second reading, got it all.

We all the way through.

Congratulations to everyone.

We came through that.

All right.

That brings us to item L for tonight, resolution number 20, 25-69 adopting a budget and making appropriations for the fiscal year 2025 and the fiscal year 2026 for the Lafayette Downtown Development Authority.

Thanks, Mayor and Council.

I am here as the DDA executive director for this next presentation.

So as the mayor mentioned, I'm going to be presenting the 2025 and 2026 Lafayette and DDA budget, and you're going to be considering a resolution for approval.

This is different than Laura, and DDA's budget process is governed through state statute where the governing body actually approves the budget.

So the D'justing the second, the DDA is recommending a budget for you all to approve.

So I'm going to go through the budget process, revenue, expenses, including key outcomes and initiatives.

Next steps in discussion with some proposed motion language.

So we started our budget process earlier this summer where we held a workshop, and on August 11th, I brought forward a budget that aligned with our work plan on our early projects and initiatives that we want to accomplish.

And then on our September 8th meeting, we I brought forward a recommended budget, which they approved and are bringing forward to council.

So that is this evening, we'll I'll be going through that budget and you'll be considering approval of a resolution for both 2025 and 2026.

So in starting the presentation, I wanted to just reflect on how we are approaching our budget process.

So as you all are familiar with, the old town tomorrow is our action plan for the DDA.

It is both the legal requirement, it's the plan of development, but it also serves as a roadmap for our authority.

And it really has a strong foundation of partnering with the city and implementing the community's vision and strategic plans.

And we have six priority uh focus areas, which you can see on the screen here.

And within that, we looked at the entire plan and wanted to think what can we what do we want to prioritize for these first couple years?

And with that, we had that workshop, and we developed a great work plan that we think that will see a lot of success and uh implementing some really impactful things these first couple of years in the district, and with that, this budget complements that so wanted to kind of go through what we're hoping to accomplish.

So for revenue, um, as you're familiar with, um, our DDA is funded through tax increment financing, where a portion of the sales and property tax um above the base is reinvested within the district.

Um, we're also very lucky that our urban renewal authority has um transferred roughly two million dollars to the DDA for start funding for the first five years.

This is really important because um the increment these first years are is small while we generate that um fund balance, and so this allows us to really have an impact within the district and build on the momentum of Laura.

So those funds go to the administrative fee, the parking lot program, including maintenance and snow removal, um, and also providing buckets for small business support, such as capital grants, um, and district support, marketing, farmers market, and holiday lights, which are going up if you haven't noticed.

Um 2026, um, we have this is our first year of collecting TIFF, and so um you can see here that we're looking to get almost 150,000 for projected revenue.

And so our revenue for this uh first year is uh property tax, sales tax, interest, and then also miscellaneous revenue is related to loan repayments that Lura is getting is just going to be transferred over to the DPA.

So for property tax.

Um we're lucky that we have 25 years of a special district in old town where we could look at historical trends from urban renewal and use um a similar uh uh forecasting for what we think our property tax will be.

And so it assumes this uh same share of base present value of growth versus the tax increment growth.

Um the the property tax gets reassessed every year or the base gets reassessed, and so this just follows that same trend.

And then the base is gonna be set by the Boulder County Assessor's Office, and they'll be the ones that actually determine the TIFF amount.

But we're taking a conservative approach for this first year.

First sales tax.

Um we also looked at old town sales tax trends, but also citywide trends.

And our base for our area is uh 1.75 million, and that's based off a 12-month period prior to when the plan of development was approved.

Um, and so any increment above that 1.75 goes into the the DDA's reserves.

Um, we projected a really conservative approach of 2.5.

We are confident that we're gonna actually get more because there's some projects that have come online that will generate sales tax, but until we actually see how the district does, we want to take a conservative approach for these first couple of years.

So moving on to expenses.

Um, for 2025 with the Laura uh transferring over those funds.

We just have a small amount that um we're putting towards operational administrative repairs and maintenance for the parking lots, and then downtown development for um uh some small business support.

And then for 2026, this is when we really build on the momentum of Laura with this very colorful pie chart here where we're doing work in downtown development, advertising marketing, professional services, streetscapes, cultural arts, and community events.

And I'll go through some of the key things that are coming out of these buckets.

So for these first three, uh, the administrative fee.

Um, this is as you may be familiar with the IGA that we have, the DDA in the city um provides administrative support, so um staff time, IT legal finance.

So we have a budget in our uh aligned for that.

Um we have funds for printing, networking, paying the county treasurer, um, and then also our parking lot program, um, continuing the work that Laura has done and snow removal maintenance.

It's been a great asset in our downtown, and we've gotten good feedback.

So the DDA will be taking that program over.

Um for streetscape and professional services.

Um everyone will be happy that we're gonna continue the downtown holiday lights.

Uh, we also have some funding in here to explore the expansion of bike racks.

Um, you've probably noticed that there are a few bike racks in Old Town, and it's because we have narrow sidewalks and there's some site triangle um constraints that we're working with.

But the DDA is interested in piloting, uh, potentially taking a parking spot or maybe even looking in the Laura parking lots about converting um a parking spot into bike rack.

So we have funding to explore that initiative.

And then for professional services, um, we're we'll be looking to release a design RFP next year for a new wayfinding program, the design for that, which will be really exciting because right now we just have parking lot signs and monument signs, but we don't have wayfinding for pedestrians or cyclists.

So this will be a great initiative to rethink about how we bring people throughout the district.

And then we also have some funding related to special district consultants and support we might need.

Um for advertising and marketing and then the cultural arts and community events.

Um Laura has been doing uh marketing for the past uh four years for Old Town with our website and social media channel, so the DDA will be picking that up and actually looking to maybe even hiring a staff or a contractor to continue that work, and so they laid a really good foundation and they're excited to move this into a good direction where we engage with businesses more, and then um we'll be continuing uh the partnership with the farmers market helping pay for their traffic control, and then launching a new creativity and cultural arts microgrant program, which will be really exciting to be able to work with just our great artistic community with murals or festivals or workshops or programming, so that'll be a great way to engage with different community groups.

And then lastly, with downtown development, uh, we're looking to launch a small business support grant program, um, and then also laying the foundation for hopefully establishing a pathway to ownership program.

So, actually seeing how the DDA can help businesses when they're ready to purchase their property, how can we help with that?

Um, so some really exciting initiatives that we're looking to accomplish.

This is just a summary of all that um the DDA is excited to do.

Um with that, as a reminder, tonight I'm presenting this budget for um for you all to consider the resolution for approval and happy to answer any questions in my proposed motion language when one ready.

Awesome.

Well, thank you so much for putting that presentation together.

Um let's see if there are questions from council on this topic.

Councilor Barnes.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, don't have any questions, but I just wanted to say for council uh it might not be uh abundantly clear, but the the way the DDA is rolling out, it is poised to align with a lot of the city's initiatives as well and the concerns of um sustainability, transportation around town, culture.

Um, and I think it's a great outlet for uh if we want to see something in action, the DDA can act on some of the ideas that council may have moving forward, and I think it's a very well laid out and funded beginning to the next part of what AFIAT's going to be doing.

So I I do think it's a really fantastic transition into what will help with our business development and economic plan for the rest of the city and be very obvious as soon as we get the wayfinding in, that's gonna be great, and uh more fabulous branding stuff.

I like the colors.

Great.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Other questions or comments from council?

No.

Um can we get a motion, please?

I move to approve resolution number 2025 69, adopting a budget and making appropriations for this fiscal year 2025 and the fiscal year 2026 for the Lafayette Downtown Development Authority.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion?

Okay, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay, well whipping through this.

Okay, item M.

This is resolution number 2025-73 opting out of enacting gray water regulations and prohibiting the use of gray water and the installation of gray water treatment.

We have a public works director here to start it.

Good evening, Mayor and members of council.

So here tonight to speak to resolution number 2020 2025-73 regarding to gray water.

I will say up front we're not asking council tonight to adopt an ordinance or specific program.

So I'm gonna give you the short version, happy to answer any questions, but it's also something that we could talk about in much greater detail at a future meeting based on council's interests.

So I'm gonna start off just giving a brief overview of what gray water use is, talk a little bit about some of the applicable applicable federal, state, and local regulations, um, give you a quick overview of House Bill 2413-1362, um, review the resolution we have, and then again answer any questions you have, and we have a proposed motion.

So just to start things off, um, our typical order of events for our utility systems is that um we are fortunate to be a headwater state and we divert our source water from the Rocky Mountains.

So we're we're getting first dibs on fresh snow.

Um we then treat that water to state and federal standards, deliver it to homes and business and um conventional building plumbering delivers that to individual fixtures.

Once it's used, it goes down the drain, it goes back to our water reclamation facility on County Line Road, it goes back into Cole Creek, then the South Platinum, Mississippi, and um thousands of people reuse that water before it gets to the ocean.

Um you add the element of gray water reuse.

Basically, what that entails is adding a small treatment plant inside the home or business that takes water from certain plumbing fixtures, generally um things like showers, tubs, um, bathroom sinks, washing machines, treats that water to um a lesser standard than we would do at the treatment plant, and then that can be um plumbed back to toilets and for subsurface irrigation.

So basically it can go to places where there's you know minimal risk of human contact.

Umce it it goes to the toilet, it goes back to the um the sewer system, the water reclamation plant, and back to the river, like anything else.

So it's kind of a small piece of the the water is reused in additional time before it's returned to the river.

Um there are a broad variety of regulations that the city has to comply with related to how we provide water and wastewater services, and those are administered through the EPA, State Health Department, um, water rights are administered by the state engineer, and then the Boulder County Health Department has a role in that.

Um in 2013, uh the legislature enacted House Bill 131044, which basically teed up that local governments could adopt graywater regulations.

Um the caveat with that being that it became the responsibility of the local government to develop local regulations and programs and services to make sure you still met all of the federal, state, and local regulations.

In 2024, House Bill 24, 1362, sort of shifted that from an opt-in to an opt-out.

So local governments are required to either allow gray water or to opt out by the January 1st, 2026 deadline.

It does not remove the requirement that you would, if you're allowing gray water, that you have to develop those ordinances and programs and services to make sure that you still comply with all of the state and federal regulations.

So the city, like many other communities, has been closely monitoring developments in this.

But basically, this looks at implementation of gray water programs around the state.

Castle Rock is the biggest with 30, and there's a number of communities that have done programs that have zero.

So at this point, we don't have a great model of a successful program in which to look to replicate in Lafayette.

Conversely, the Colorado Municipal League went as far as doing a model ordinance for opting out based on broad communities' interest in opting out at this time.

So what we are recommending is that we opt out.

That doesn't mean we can't relook at this in the future, but but essentially at this point, um there doesn't seem to be a good framework out there to implement a successful program to ahead of that deadline.

So basically, um if council um approves this resolution tonight, we would continue to monitor progress in this field.

Um if at some point in the future there starts to be a framework for a successful program that we could replicate.

We could come back and give you analysis of the pros and cons and cost and consider repealing this resolution and adopting ordinances and funding programs and services at that time.

So with that, we have a resolution.

Again, I'm more than happy to answer any questions or happy to come back at a future date and get into the weeds on the details of some of the pros and cons.

All right, well, thank you so much for that presentation.

Um questions from council, Councillor Sampson.

It doesn't say in here how long you want this to be an opt-out for.

So it would be until such time as we repeal it.

So indefinitely potentially, yeah.

Um, I mean, the challenge is if we don't have this, then it is allowed, and if it is allowed, if we don't have the ordinances and programs we potentially in violation of our CDPHE permits or have issues with the state engineer around water rights.

So it really would need to stay in place until such time as we had other laws and and programs in place to stay compliant.

Okay.

Uh Council Friedman.

Um did CML do a model regulation in terms of a model opt opt-out.

They did not do a model how to comply.

Um can I answer some of this?

Because I sat in those discussions at the CML policy committee.

So basically, what happened is CML was one, it was a big pusher of trying to get to the opt-out program.

It came from the cities.

And the issue came up, and there was a lot of discussion, and it was split.

Split enough, there was enough to say, yes, let's move this forward through the state and get an opt-out program.

But there were probably 40, 45 percent of the cities in that discussion that said, Oh, we're not ready, oh, I don't know if we can handle it, we're too small.

And so what you're getting from this is CML saying we kind of need to help all of our communities.

So it wasn't something that was necessarily supportive.

What was supportive is CML going to the state.

So if I'm understanding correctly, there were a number of communities pushing CML to go after this opt-out model with the state bill, and those communities, I'm assuming were planning then to develop their own programs.

Okay.

And then for the ones that were hesitant, CML did this opt-out to make it easy to opt out.

Correct.

Got it.

I'm curious.

Did our sustainability group see this one have a conversation about this one?

We have talked to them briefly, yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Did they have any comments or um again at this point?

We're not ruling it out.

We're it's really more of a conclusion that being having something in place by the January 1st deadline is probably not it's probably not realistic to do it and do it well and have it be a successful program.

And keep us in compliance.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh good conversation.

Counselor Barnes.

Thank you.

Um I'm curious about the lack of adoption of these systems over time.

It's not I don't think it doesn't sound like it's a new concept, but it just doesn't taken up.

Is that because developers are not interested in having this as a feature or retrofitting some systems?

A little bit of data, and it's it's if you're curious, it's really worth checking out their website.

Um but so for example, their assumptions and estimates on this was that a system would cost another 4,500.

Um, they're estimating an average of $36 a year in annual maintenance, which I'm not totally sure what that's based on, but that actually seems relatively low for having a wastewater treatment plant in your house, and then estimating an annual savings between $69 and $138 with a ROI of 33 to 65 years, and that's based on a single family residential with four residents, and it looks like flushing the toilet roughly 24 times a day.

So, you know, even with relatively generous assumptions, it doesn't necessarily look like something that might pencil out well for most people.

And then as you all know, for Lafayette, a huge amount of our water use is outdoors.

We use five times more water in the summer than we do in the winter, and in terms of areas where we could probably move the ball, this might not be the area where we would get the most bang for our buck, and I would say that's probably true of many communities across Colorado.

So again, as technology changes as we get more data, and if other places are able to do successful programs, um we're open to stealing other people's ideas to that that leads me.

Thank you.

That leads me to my next question.

Uh when you come out with the technology, like I had a conversation with multiple conversations actually with people regarding heat pumps, and the industry doesn't seem to one of my one of the residents here has told me that he really had to educate the providers on what he was finding in order to move move the move the ball, if you will, along the along the lines, and uh heat pumps are kind of a remarkable physics experiment that works.

Is a gray water treatment plant that complex?

I mean, how much more does the technology have to advance to get water clean enough?

So right, so that the difference is is you're not treating to the same standard as a regular treatment plan or a water treatment plan, but it's it's in your house, so particularly if you have kids, you know that things go down the drain that you might never want to see again, or things go on the washing machine that you might not want to see again.

So you need something that's gonna remove those things before they end up in the little teeny hose that feeds your toilet tank.

Um that's presumably gonna have some level of maintenance.

Um it's probably gonna involve a pump, so it's gonna have an energy cost to move things back within your house.

It's gonna need protection to make sure you don't contaminate um the domestic water supply in your home or elsewhere, and you know, it also may not be for everybody, um, depending on um your your household and your pets and whoever might have contact with the toilet or what's going to be acceptable in terms of having water that's been previously used there.

Um the technology may evolve most treatment involves some sort of combination of chemicals and energy, right?

And thank you.

And that so this there's for the city to take on the production or offer the service of producing gray water, that's a whole nother discussion, I'm guessing.

Well, we we wouldn't be producing it, right?

Uh the facility in someone's home would be theirs and they would have to own and operate and maintain it.

So the city would need to have some enforcement mechanism to make sure that that didn't contaminate the city water supply and create a public health issue in the building.

So that's probably some form of inspection and monitoring.

So example, like commercial buildings have a backflow prevention device that requires an annual certification.

If people don't certify that, we have to turn the water off.

Um, so it's just adding a layer of complexity on a broad scale, um I think we've talked about this sum.

We have um ability to actually do reuse on a grand scale.

So we hope, subject to being able to get funding in the next decade or so to be able to take our treated effluent from the water reclamation plant, move it back to Goose Haven, and then treat it to a drinking water standard and reuse that, which is again a highly efficient centralized plant where we can treat it to a standard where we're you know very comfortable with with it being meeting health and safety requirements, um, but trying to do that on a individual homeowner scale, just it it has some challenges.

And is that is there a technology for doing that that we that exists, or are there places where they do that for residential areas on a grand scale that's efficient, or that that technology doesn't really exist?

I mean, that I think the technology exists, it's just interesting that in in Colorado it doesn't appear that it exists um in a way that has caused um areas where it's allowed for there to be a lot of uptake of that, right?

So, like I mean, if if city and county of Denver was seeing three homes, um just gives me pause that we could spend a lot of time and resources on that, and if people don't use it and it takes away from our ability to fund other things where we are seeing the ball move.

Like we've been we've been really focusing on turf removal and zeroscaping, and I think we've made actually some tangible progress in that area.

Um, and certainly my initial thought is that's probably given our resources, that's probably a better place to invest until we see this evolve to a point that either the the technology is is better or the acceptability of the customer is is better, or it it has a better environmental benefit or return on investment.

I guess one last question.

Um, and if we were to repeal that opt-out, that's a council decision.

Yeah, so it's we're we just are proposing it as a resolution.

So all you would need was a resolution to repeal the resolution.

Um, and again, I would assume it would be packaged as part of an item that would include ordinances or other resolutions to implement the regulations and programs and services to to make sure that we were not running afoul of anything with CDPHE or EPA.

Thank you.

That's all I have.

All right, thank you.

Um other comments or questions, Counselor Samson.

I have lots of comments.

I bet you know I've been asking for this for four years.

So here's the deal.

We talked about sustainability, and yet we heard last week from somebody from our sustainability committee that mountain snowpack is projected to decline five to 30 percent by 2050.

Um, that warmer conditions have already reduced soil moisture, and the atmosphere's drying power, evaporative demand has ridden five percent since 1980.

The by 2030, that's five years from now, the amount of drought days and extreme precipitation events will more than double.

So we've got a request from our community, and I felt like we couldn't really answer that last week, because we don't have a whole lot of money to be able to put to this.

Now I know you're surprised, but I read the regulation from the CDPHE on this.

I think it's called 86 regulation 86.

And what I got from it is two things.

Yes, we would have to give some time for staff to get something together because we'd have to give them at least they have to um put some information in to CDPHE.

I feel like I'm leaving you out, um, 60 days to do something of a plan, right?

So my first issue is in perpetuity.

We're not going to do this in perpetuity.

I feel like we have just authorized 458,000 for water and wastewater comprehensive plans because this is from the notes from this is because the demand is increasing in our community exponentially.

So we have to spend more money to do that.

We just voted to increase water rates for all of our residents.

And yet, by deciding not to do this, we are standing in the way of reducing water and making it easier on low and moderate income individuals and reducing water overall.

It's a sustainability issue.

So why are we not doing something that at least would have the opportunity to help in these situations?

I can't understand the amount of work that's going to be a problem when we're saying that in 10 years Denver has had three people do it.

Now we're gonna have more.

Why?

Because we have intelligent, capable population in Lafayette who are very wise on sustainability.

So they're going to do this.

$4,500 is no big deal to me.

I've been here almost 20 years waiting for this.

Waiting.

I have, you know, I know we have houses that could do this.

I'm not asking for much.

I'm asking for what Golden's doing.

I would rather have this motion be that we give six months for staff to get it together and propose something to the sustainability board that says we would like to do something that deals with allowing laundry to go out to the lawn to water our trees.

Now I don't understand a lot of the costs related to this because we the people, and we could do it for single family homes, and what you want to do in a lot of these things is start small and keep building your code, right?

That's what you want to do to grow it and find it.

And council, we sat here two years ago, and one of our goals was to be bold.

We didn't say, hey, let's wait for everybody else to do it, and then let's do it.

No, we said we want to be bold.

So let's do it.

Let's run a pilot program.

We put this out.

I don't think there's gonna be a lot immediately, but I think it's going to increase, and people are going to learn in Lafayette, and we are the right community to do it, and we're not asking for a whole lot.

Just start with a single family home and then move from there.

Get your data from us.

Thank you.

So, Councilor Samson, what I'm hearing from you is you'd like to postpone the motion for tonight and have staff or correct me if I'm wrong.

They they could postpone the motion and rewrite it for six months to say, hey, we're gonna postpone it, we're gonna take this back to our sustainability board, present thoughts to them, have them come back to council and give us input.

Um, and at that point in six months council could evaluate and decide what do you want to do from here?

But I think doing this in perpetuity, I mean, I've been hearing the same things.

We're gonna study the technology every year.

I keep hearing the same thing, and that I get promised by staff outside of this meeting that they're going to come back with better information.

And I'm sorry, but information from 2022.

I keep feeling like there needs to be more, and I get this.

There are so many, this regulation 86 has gone through CDPHE, it's gone through a water board, so they've made some really um thoughtful decisions on how you would do this.

Yes, a permit would be required, it's part of the regulation.

Yes, we could add in an inspection if we felt that was necessary.

So there's already in my mind, there are things I'm doing this to my phone because that's what I was reading.

Um, there's already information that we know that health officials have already made decisions on in order to guide us through this.

Okay.

Thank you, Councillor Sampson.

So um, I'm hearing from Councillor Sampson to uh we could postpone our table or whatever the right verbiages uh this item, uh, have staff look at it for you know, does you mention six months, but it'd be you know that can be flexible, right?

Um, to go back to our our local board, sustainability advisory committee and other boards, um, as well as do some uh deeper dive into figuring out how to kind of refine the program um and then bring it back to council um at a later date.

Um to go back to our our local board sustainability advisory committee and other boards um as well as do some uh uh deeper dive into figuring out how to kind of refine the program um and then bring it back to council um at a later date um and um and so i would just wanted to see if folks on council wanted to respond to that um agreed or disagreed um wanted to build on the conversation or add more to the discussion um that's been take that's being taking place right now how do we feel what are our thoughts um i'm highly supportive of that i i was gonna i was gonna vote no today on this um if as it's currently designed so i appreciate a compromise a plan an idea leaning on our boards that are eager eager to do stuff like this for us um and you know i i forget exactly what i said in the climate action plan video that we did recently but it was things like that be bold vision drive you know and this is a great example of a way that we're gonna have to figure it out but I think we're good at that uh so I'm very supportive of the plan I think it's a great plan thank you for proposing it can I ask a clarifying question so I I think our options and I could be mistaken would be that if we choose not to do the opt-out for some period we would need to have the ordinances and plans and programs and services in place by January 1st so I think our options would be I think you could amend this to have it sunset or staff could agree to come back with the next number of months with options or the direction I think would need to be to come back by the end of the year with the ordinances and services and programs for adoption so that we're okay on January 1st I don't could you do it by the end of the year.

I I mean I'll jump in so I think that there's a reason why Aurora Longmont Westminster Alvada Boulder Jefferson County have all gone this route to give them time and this is why we have waited to try to see if they have come up with a model structure that we could not reinvent the wheel so I would prefer that if we got some time and maybe sunset it or whatever the legal term is you know we're getting through the end of the year we're gonna be onboarding new SRA members come January so if we're looking at like six months really maybe like an eight month or nine months so we can get new members on board new council members on board so that you know this time in June we could come back and have a further conversation about what some of our options are that would be again my preference just knowing that piece of it just given the workload and the new council change we have basically two more meetings before a new council is on board basically to get that in place and even then it's three total meetings unless you want to just do kind of a fourth one in December so could we just throw out options to confirm sure can we do like a combination of both right we pass tonight with an amendment or with the expectation that it would come back to us that we could um at a later date whether that's six months eight to twelve months whenever um but that we could uh refine it make those edits after consulting with our boards after seeing what other cities do um and then make those amendments later on like is is that what sort of would that be like I'm just fine I'm trying to find a compromise so what they're what we have what they're saying is that we have to opt out as of January first and then give staff enough time.

So what we want to do is I can amend this right now and read it you know me I can think on the spot so I could read this with an amendment that at the end of that instead of the period it would say for nine months and so all we would be doing is opting out for nine months and staff have would have the direction just as we were saying come back with some options with to the sustainability board and then they can come back with staff to council.

Okay nine months would be what June or July that's what I heard I'm just thinking with getting everyone new on boarded and yeah getting to the new members so I would do I would appreciate that time does that seem like enough time I mean possible more would be better.

Well so we don't actually have a dedicated water conservation position even.

So this I think the trade-off is this will be diverting resources away from other things and if that's the priority we can certainly do that but it it um you know it it does mean that other things we do in the the water efficiency space will be deferred so but I think that's again for the new council on the um retreat we cannot talk about what that means kind of yeah because it at the end of the nine months as well right we could extend it for another six months if we need to we're not saying it has to be done if we run into the issues then we run into the issue.

Well, why wouldn't we keep the resolution as it is?

I mean, the resolution is going to the state, so all we're doing is complying with the state.

If we want to come back and actually have something in six months, nine months, we can just then switch back because I've been asking for that nothing from staff.

I hear you, but I'm hearing from staff that we don't have dedicated funds, we don't have the resources to do this.

I don't want them to put a clock on them on the resolution that we sent to the state.

I would rather keep the resolution as is and then uh instruct to maybe bring something forward at a later date.

Because if it is as is, I'm also voting no.

It's totally a fair point.

I I think it's just that it gives us that feedback mechanism, that time to say in nine months we have to come back, have another conversation, even if that conversation is we got too many priorities.

You know, we need to we need to extend this for another year.

Uh city attorney.

Thank you, Mayor.

I have a suggestion for council.

Um, before I make that suggestion, I just wanted to point out that nothing in this resolution or the state law that we are attempting to comply with by opting out prohibits the city from continuing to explore this or adopt regulations in the future.

So I just want to say that first.

There's nothing that this does not stop us from in the future adopting gray water treatment works regulations.

Um, my suggestion for council to consider is uh amending if this is the route you want to go, you could amend the resolution not to provide a sunset date on the resolution because I'm not really sure how that would work once we send it to the state.

I don't know that that would mean anything or do anything for purposes of compliance or or for the state's purposes.

Um, however, you could either as uh uh counselor Topia Vega suggested direct staff to come back, or you could add a add a provision to the resolution directing staff to continue to explore this and come back with recommendations and um options within nine months of the date that you pass this resolution.

So that would at least put it in the resolution.

It it memorializes the direction as opposed to only being memorialized in the minutes, for example.

So I I would if you want something in the resolution, I would recommend going that route of adding a fourth section at the bottom of page one.

Um I I have some proposed language if you're interested in that option.

Um, but I wanted to put that on the table for you to discuss.

Okay.

So we we could potentially put that put a date or a certain time frame, or we could keep it vague as well and say with the intention to uh you know direct staff to come back at a later date, you know, keep it open-ended.

Would you like to hear the language I guess came up with?

We'll see if this works, and we can change this if council wants.

So it would be a new section four, and it would say the city council further direct staff to explore gray water treatment works regulations if I'm using the right terminology, Director Arthur, and to report back to city council with options and recommendations within nine months of the date of this resolution.

Something along those lines.

You have, but you have in their nine months, okay.

All right, thank you.

Um, I'd like to hear from others.

Um, and and you know, remember the goal of the conversation.

We want to get to a consensus here.

So um, how do others feel about what's been discussed so far?

Can't be vegan.

Can I jump in?

Sorry, so fully in agreement.

I love that to our city attorney.

Great job.

I have a question that is completely unrelated.

Sorry to bring it back to the actual presentation.

Could you go back to the slide where you have uh the savings over and then the return on investment?

So I I see the top and I see that what I'm really interested in is the bottom.

So that bottom section, uh the actual gallons that are being saved for for a household is actually pretty substantial, but then I see the cost benefit in terms of dollar figures.

So that is not huge, and the 33 to 65 year return on investment.

Is that do you think the primary force for people not actually opting into this process?

And then, secondly, uh, second part of the question have you seen from all the the programs that do exist?

Is there any city that's or any municipality that's subsidizing that upfront cost for customers?

Um I am not aware of those details.

Again, this is third-party independent water efficiency nonprofit.

Um I do not know if any of these other communities have have done upfront subsidies.

Um, I think that the challenge with the the savings is um it's even in in this scenario, it's this is a decent amount of use.

This is a single family with with four users that are doing a decent number of flushes and the the actual cost per gallon in the gallon saved.

Um it is modest and it is a long ROI.

So I don't know if it's that the ROI doesn't pencil because frankly, water is still pretty cheap on a per gallon basis, or if it's people have different opinions about whether it's something they want to to manage in their home.

Counselor Tapia Vega, this would be something I would imagine we would bring back with that you know staff analysis once we were doing that in whatever time frame you guys direct staff to bring it back.

Is absolutely we would we would do more detailed analysis of other programs and and frankly, if if other communities do adopt programs ahead of the deadline, that'll be uh another thing we can look at as uh city manager Doling mentioned.

We haven't seen a lot of the neighbors move forward with that, so we would we'd have to look at what's out there in terms of people that either had previous programs or adopted them ahead of the deadline.

Appreciate it.

I had that question before the other discussion came up.

I just wanted to get it up back to you.

Thank you.

Yeah, no worries.

Okay, um I just want to make sure I give everyone an opportunity to speak if they'd like to.

Um are there any thoughts from other counselors on what's been discussed so far?

Or we're or I'm happy to to take entertain a motion as well, but I want to give folks an opportunity to speak if it like Councilor Barnes.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh I I can confirm the councillor Sampson has been asking for this for four years.

Um I was there and I heard you, and uh just wanted to say yes.

Um, and I appreciate all the background on this, and I I do feel like we we don't have enough um reason.

I don't have enough reason to accept the resolution as it is.

I would like to see it amended, and I would like to engage the experts that we have in our community, as RAB and any other groups.

Um because there are a lot of questions.

This this that bottom section is kind of mysterious to me.

That the data, yeah.

There's those those are data, but I don't I don't know that that's that's not convincing enough to me that we shouldn't do it, especially in the light of water resource use and it it also gets um an education to people to think about not flushing the toilet so many times, maybe.

Um so I would like to see I would like to see the uh something amended and then we come back definitely revisit this in nine months, and um I appreciate all my fuller counselors bringing all that forward to help me understand as well.

And when you say amend it, um are you in favor of what counselor Sampson brought up and putting or what the city attorney may have brought up by putting a specific timeline nine months, ten months, six months.

I like what the city attorney the the that language is.

The proposed language from the city attorney okay.

Can we can we use that as kind of the baseline right now?

Because everybody comfortable using what city attorney brought forward because if that's fine.

Um I think that's fine.

I think it gives um the next council the opportunity to make determinations going forward, so I'm perfectly fine with that.

Okay.

All right, um, any other questions, comments, stuff you'd like to bring up.

Okay.

Well, I'm hearing from a consensus of amending the motion.

It looks like based off of that uh proposed question.

That looks like folks are supportive of our city attorney's suggestion.

However, we still need to make a vote.

So make um we need a motion.

We need to make a motion and then do a vote on that.

And so does someone feel prepared to do that.

They call it I'm I'm sort of okay.

I'm not sure I'm gonna do all your words exact.

I'm happy to do it.

I just don't have it.

Do you mind rereading?

You can look to be your just date it after motion and now and I but I have it all typed out now.

Okay, so what you're saying is I can make the first part of the motion and then say with staff uh you could say so make the motion and then say with an amendment to add a new section four to read as follows per the city attorney, and then I'll read it.

Would that work?

Okay, okay.

Okay, I'm gonna try to do that.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-73, opting out of enacting gray water regulations and prohibiting the use of gray water and the installation of gray water treatment works with the amendment with a new section four that states that will state as follows.

So this it will say the city council further direct city staff to explore local gray water treatment works regulations and to report back to city council with options and recommendations within nine months of the date of passage of this resolution as stated in as stated uh by our city attorney, correct?

I don't know.

Correct.

Okay.

Second.

All right.

So that motion has been placed and has been seconded.

Any further comments or discussion?

Okay.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed saying no?

Okay.

None opposed.

That does pass unanimously unanimously.

Thank you for that discussion and for that compromise.

Appreciate that from both council and staff.

All right.

Last item under regular yes, under regular business is item N, resolution 2025-61 supporting the city of Lafayette ballot issue to see funding recreation center improvements and new civic center and service center improvements.

We have the assistant to our city manager.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

I have a very brief presentation for you tonight regarding resolution number 2025 61, considering a resolution of support for Lafayette Ballot Issue 2C.

So as mentioned, a brief presentation, I'll talk through the background of the Capital Bond Initiative as well as the campaign Fair Campaign Practices Act, and then turn it over for questions and proposed motion language.

So as you'll recall, throughout the year, staff and council have engaged engaging in discussions regarding a capital bond initiative, and that began in January at your workshop with initial discussions of this proposal and some projects that were being considered.

Staff returned at your February workshop to prioritize those projects with council, discuss financial analysis, and then scope polling and community engagement activities.

Staff and consultant team then conducted the engagement and polling and then reported findings to you at your May workshop.

And then over the summer, we came for a series of meetings to receive direction from council, report out and continue work on the community outreach and education.

Ultimately culminating in your meeting on August 19th, where council certified ballot language in anticipation of the election next week.

So as a reminder, the direction from council at that meeting was to move forward with three projects for this capital bond issue, which were the um construction of a new civic center, renovation of the portion of the Bob Burger Recreation Center, and then expansion and renovation of this parks and public works service center.

Supported by general obligation bond funded by temporary property tax increase over 20 years.

As you know, once that language was certified, the city is bold into the Fair Campaign Practices Act, which does place restrictions on the use of public funds and city resources to engage in campaigning for or against a ballot issue and dispensing information in connection with local or statewide ballot issues.

However, as the governing body, it does allow the city council to take a position on ballot issues through the passage of a resolution that would urge electors to vote for or against an issue.

So the resolution uh was included in your packet this evening supporting this ballot issue, and I'll turn it over for any uh questions, otherwise there's motion language on the screen.

Awesome.

Thank you so much.

Yeah, as as mentioned, uh this is a topic that we have been discussing for quite some time now, and now it's on the ballots, um, and which has already been issued.

So some folks have already voted, some have not.

Um, and so are there any comments, questions on this item?

Yes, yes.

I'm struggling with this one because I feel like what we did was we put this out on the ballot, and I very much value the right of voters to make their decision on this without any undue influence at all.

So I'm I'm hesitant to try to vote to sway for any reason, you know, because we support and I do know that council is not unanimous in whether or not these all three should be funded.

So I don't know.

I I mean we have to do what we have to do, but I just thought I'd say I'm a little uncomfortable with us as a council supporting doing a motion to support when really what I think we want is the public to decide on their own what works for them.

Sure, of course.

That's fair and understandable.

Um I'll just quickly say, you know, it's important to be educated and informed uh whether you are in support or against um this resolution or sorry, this ballot initiative.

Um, take please take the opportunity to reach out to folks um that that uh are directly impacted by these, and I would say all of Lafayette residents are uh when you if you you may not visit the service center every day or the city hall every day or the rec center every day, uh, but you do um receive tremendous amount of benefits from those um the those facilities.

Um, you know, as as we mentioned our service center, that's where we have, you know, if you ever need uh help from the fire department or an ambulance or our snow plows uh during the winter time, um, that's where those those vehicles uh our public works vehicles, our our parks and rec vehicles, our um all all those all those all those uh city fleet city vehicles are made maintained.

You know, as as we mentioned, our service center, that's where we have, you know, if you ever need uh help from the fire department or an ambulance or our snow plows uh during the winter time, um, that's where those those vehicles uh our public works vehicles, our our parks and rec vehicles, our um all those all those all those uh city fleet city vehicles are made maintained.

Um if you um you know need help from city staff that work here in this building.

Um, some folks haven't been past the main entry door, and so you haven't seen the whole thing.

Um, but it has you know, you know, it there's a lot to this building.

Um, and there could be opportunity for more.

Um, there's also you know, our rec center, our beloved rec center, Bob L.

Berger.

Uh shout out to the former mayor.

Um Bob L.

Burger Rec Center.

Um, we you know, folks have spent time there, have noticed the poll closure on several occasions, um, have noticed you know things going on, but at the same time as you know, I just wanted to you know bring these these items up because I want to make sure people are educated and informed on why um this city feels the needs to make these improvements.

It's also important as mentioned several meetings that these are large capital projects that have not had any updates, our significant updates in over 30 years, and in reality, projects like to this scale should be updated, you know, every 10 or so years.

So this council is just doing its best to um provide that opportunity for the residents to to make those necessarily updates necessary updates.

Um, and at the end of the day, as Miss Councillor Sampson mentioned, if you feel like you've looked into this and you disagree, that is totally okay.

And like as she also mentioned, this council is is not unanimous on this either, and so that's totally fair.

You know, the goal is just to make sure you are educated, informed before you make your vote.

Um, and and I know there's folks advocating against this, which is fair as well.

Make sure you reach out to them and hear their side as well.

Um, hear all perspectives before you make your vote on on any item.

Um, and so that being said, uh, does anyone feel comfortable making a motion on this?

Councilor Barnes.

I move to approve resolution number 2025 61 supporting city of Lafayette ballot issue 2C funding rec center improvements and sorry rec center improvements, a new civic center and service center improvements.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Okay, motion in the second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no?

No.

Just want to make sure click back.

You got that.

Okay, so that motion passes five to two.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, we have to switch hats now and move towards uh and recess uh to the board of directors for Lafayette City Center, the Lafayette Tech Center, exemplar, and Lafayette Corporate Campus General Improvement Districts, um, and do a roll call.

So we have to follow the same process as council.

Um I think we've all been through this at least once or twice already.

Um, and so um as council knows we have to uh go through the process of of roll call, calling to order, approving minutes, all that public hearing.

So we have uh four GIDs to get through tonight.

Um do we need to start with a roll call?

Clerk Beck.

Yes, yes, okay, director Barnes here, director Friedman, here Director Gaygos here, Chair Monget.

Here, Director Sampson here, Director Tapia Vega here, and Vice Chair Wong.

Here we have a call.

All right, thank you.

Um we have a CFO here to give us some background on some of these topics.

Yep, so we're here to approve uh the GIDs.

Um so I generally actually sorry, I don't I didn't mean to cut you up.

I'm wondering if I should call the meeting to order prior to your presentation.

Um, and I believe um yeah, I know you're giving back are you giving background to all of the GIDs or are you starting with the I'm giving a little bit of background and then talking about the call consul order and approval minutes and processes.

Thank you.

So I can do that and then you can that that works better.

Apologize.

No, no, no, you're great.

Thank you.

Um okay, so some background.

General improvement districts are created to finance infrastructure on land intended for development.

City administers four GIDs.

The GIDs are separate budgets from the city budget.

Uh and city council is the ex officio board of director for each GID and must convene sessions for each to approve their respective budgets, which is what we're doing this evening.

Um, so we're gonna call to order.

So for each GID, call to order, approval of minutes, budget presentation, and then a public hearing with the budget resolutions, and then we'll adjourn and then go to the next GID budget.

So um City Center is our first one, and I so I would say probably at this point.

Awesome, yes.

Um, I will call to order the meeting of the Lafayette City Center General Improvement District.

Okay, so City Center is our first one here.

Um so this is uh a motion to approve the minutes.

I move to approve the October 15th, 2024 minutes for the city center general improvement district meeting.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, none opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay, and then uh the 2026 budget for city center, which was established in 1998.

The debt was issued in 1999 and paid off in 2018.

Um the condition of improvements is currently being assessed to determine if the GID should continue to operate.

And the 2026 budget is a little mill levy of 0.458 mills, which generates an assessment of a little over $6,000.

And then we have the public hearing.

Okay, are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this project?

Okay, and let me just double check that there aren't any online.

Okay, seeing none hearing then, I'll close the public input.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-01, adopting a budget, making appropriations for the budget year 2026, and approving a mill levy for the city center general improvement district.

Second, all right.

Um motion and a second for the discussion.

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

That passes unanimously.

All right, so we're on to the tech center here.

That's the location.

Um, so I'll adjourn the meeting of the Lafayette City Center General Improvement District, and we and I will call to order um the uh meeting of the Lafayette Tech Center General Improvement District.

And we'll take a motion for minutes.

I move to approve the October 15th, 2024 minutes for the Tech Center General Improvement District meeting.

Second okay, motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, none opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Um so the tech center 2026 budget.

This was established in 1999.

The debt was issued in 2006, which is scheduled to be paid in full in 2036.

The balance remaining is a little over 1.2 million uh as of the end of this year, and then the 2026 budget, the mill levy is 15.697.

Um the debt service is 153,000, and the operating costs are uh 2,663.

So that's the budget for the tech center.

And then public hearing.

All right, this is a public hearing.

Are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?

Not seeing in person, not seeing any online, so I'll close public input.

And sorry, I just didn't know if someone's about to stay.

I'll close public input and we'll move on.

Um to council discussion and a motion.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-01, adopting a budget, making appropriations for the budget year 2026, and approving a mill levy for the tech center, general improvement district.

Second.

Sorry.

Um a motion and a second, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no, none opposed.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

And um, with that, I will adjourn uh the meeting of the Lafayette Tech Center, and I will call to order um the meeting of the exemplar general improvement district.

So this is exemplar.

There's the location.

I move to approve the October 15th, 2024 minutes for the exemplar general improvement district meeting.

Second.

Motion and second, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, none opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

So the exemplar 2026 budget established in 2002.

The debt was issued in 2002, and that's been paid off in 2019.

Uh, the condition of improvements again uh is being similar to the one previously that um completed their debt uh is being assessed to determine if the GID should continue to operate.

Uh the 2026 budget, the mill levy is 0.313 mills, which generates a little over $8,000 annually.

Okay, awesome.

This is a public hearing.

Are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?

Okay, seeing none in person and seeing none online.

I'll close public input.

We'll take a motion, please.

I move to I move to approve resolution number 2025, has 01 adopting a budget, making appropriations for the budget year 2026 and approving a mill levy for the exemplary general improvement district second.

All right, motion the second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no.

No closed.

That passes unanimously.

Great.

Um, so I will adjourn the meeting of the exemplary general improvement district, and I will open up final one here.

This is opening.

I'm calling to order the meeting of the Lafayette Corporate Campus General Improvement District.

Yep.

So this is corporate campus.

Um I move to approve the October 15th, 2024 minutes for the corporate campus general improvement district meeting.

Second motion and second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed saying no, none opposed.

Pass unanimously.

Corporate campus 2026 budget.

This was established in 2002, same year as the debt was issued, and that's scheduled to be paid in full in 2031.

The balance remaining is 895,000 by the end of this year.

Um this budget includes a mill levy of 12.230 mills and uh debt service is 227,000 and operating costs a little over 4,000 for corporate campus.

Okay, uh, this is a public hearing.

Um, are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this topic?

Not seeing any in person.

I'm also not seeing any callers online, so I'll close public input.

And we'll take a motion, please.

I move to approve resolution number 2025-01, adopting a budget, making appropriations for the budget year 2026 and approving a mill levy for the corporate campus general improvement district.

Second.

Right, motion and seconds.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

No, none opposed.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I will adjourn the meeting of the Lofty Public Campus uh General Improvement District, and we will reconvene as the Lafayette City Council.

Thank you.

All right.

Um that wraps up our um business um for tonight, and we will close with reports.

Uh beginning with the city attorney's report.

Thank you, Mayor.

I don't have any reports this evening.

Some thank you.

On to the city manager's report.

Thank you, Mayor.

Good evening, council.

So a few things to note um tonight.

So, as a reminder, our city facility um has a ballot box drop-off at the Lafayette Library.

It is open until 7 p.m.

in November 4th.

So please stop by if you need to mail or drop off your ballot, as I believe.

Mail in is probably too late at this point or iffy.

So definitely just drop it by.

It's nice and easy and go check out a book while you're there.

Um, also residents enrolled in the Republic's three-cart program.

Um, we have our annual leaf and branch pickups so they can set out leaves, grass clipping, weeds, bundled tree branches on the curbside on the following dates.

Um, as a reminder, each household may place up to 20 bags of leaves and five bundles of shrubbery or tree limbs securely tied.

So on November November 1st, the South and South Boulder, south of South Boulder Road and east and west of highway 287.

You can see the map.

Also go online if this is too small, but November 8th, north of South Boulder Road and east of Highway 2287, and then our last one on November 15th, which is west of 287 and north of South Boulder Road.

And then we are pleased to host our kind of internal third annual employee appreciation event.

Um, this will be on Wednesday, November 5th, and uh most if not all city facilities will be closed from 3 to 5 p.m.

and we'll be getting messaging out on our website about that as well.

This is where we um unveil kind of our core championships and our years of service award, and it's been really fun hosted at Mises every year.

So we're looking forward to that internally.

Um looking ahead, want to note that our next Tuesday meeting is scheduled for Monday in observance of election day, so Monday, November 3rd.

We're gonna be doing a presentation on the 2026 mental health and human services funding recommendations for the next year.

A presentation on the 701 concept park design, kind of updating where we've been over the past several months, a public hearing on the sketch plan process amendments, uh first reading of itings items pertaining to fees and purchasing.

This is the ordinance that we've been talking about that kind of removes all of the fees in various sections, re-establishes a new chapter.

Um that way we can have it all cleaned up moving in to 2026, and then a motion to accept uh Colorado 42 IGA with the city of Lewisville.

They are the funding agent of this larger project.

Our project is from Highway 42 from Pascal and Northward, and then November 18th, we'll have a presentation like we noted on the parks recreation and golf fee philosophy update.

First reading of our last and final 2025 budget supplemental, and then your um newly established kind of annual board commission and committee appointments.

That's all I have for tonight, Mayor.

Thank you.

Awesome.

Thank you so much.

All right, we'll wrap up tonight's meeting with council reports.

Start down here, Councilor Tombi Vegan.

Uh no reports tonight.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Councilor Samson.

The regional homeless working group for Boulder County met, and this is the first time I've had a chance to get back to you all.

They are uh looking at two different things.

First of all, we have an ADU financing round table that will happen this Friday, October 31st, from 10 until 11:30 at the community room in Willoughby Corner.

They're gonna have a variety of lenders, CDFIs, CHAFA, they're basically financial person people who are going to say, how are we going to help people understand how do you finance an ADU on your property?

Um the working group has also decided that in each one of the communities, there should be something that information we need to get out, and not just on a website.

Um there is um the request to do whether it's a a fair, an ADU fair or an informational event, maybe at a library or something to that effect.

This I I've told them this is not the time.

November's not the time to do this, that it should be moving forward on that, but I don't know who will take my place on that committee in another few months.

So I'm saying it out there to whomever is going to do that.

Um, another really interesting thing.

Um, if you're interested in ADUs and the promotion of ADUs, um, there is a website called Launch Longmont, and that's got some great information on it on ADUs.

The second thing I was gonna say is I don't know when we're gonna talk about the Epic.

Or yeah, because I was gonna say, I I I have just some general thoughts, so maybe you bring it up, but I I you know, as somebody who works in grants at the state, I'm you know, I'm going to say what's being requested is that we're a fiscal agent, which means we actually take on the liability.

So no matter what we do, we would have to be the ones that not only submit the application, we would be the ones that are in contact with the state because that's the way it works.

So we would receive it, we would be responsible for submitting reports ultimately.

We would be responsible should anything not meet up to what we sign in that agreement.

We the city would be responsible.

So if you if it you know, if it comes down, the granting agency gives to the grantee or the grant recipient, and then we sub-recei, we have a sub-recipient, and so in that whole process, just know that from the state's perspective, the city is responsible.

Um, so this there are usually fiscal agents.

There are groups that um can serve as fiscal agents.

Um, it is true that you can take a percentage off the top in order to fund your administration of that, but again, you also take on all the responsibility of that grant and all the activities of that grant.

So I think I I don't know if the city has a staff member or not, but I would say there's a lot of questions that I think we might need to delve into a little deeper.

Not familiar with this grant.

Um the CDPAG grant on this, but from a general perspective, just wanted to clarify what was being asked tonight.

Thank you, Councillor Freeman.

Yeah, well, let's start there.

Um okay, so my understanding of the request is um the group Lafayette communities that care.

Um they have a partnership with um Color Department.

Bridges of Opportunity Bridges, Bridges of Opportunity, and they've been doing lots of work generally, and previously had um you know really strong relationship with Boulder County Public Health.

That you know, some of that support fell away given what's going on with the county and their and their budget issues, challenges.

Um they were looking for a new uh fiscal agent to go to the state, and Sister Carmen was looking promising from what I understand, but because of what's going on right now with food support and SNAP, Sister Carmen had to really say we just need to be like hyper focused on what's right ahead of us right now, and so um that's why it's to us.

But sometimes the world doesn't go according to plan.

And I think we're in one of those moments.

And while I have a lot of hesitations and you know, concern about can we really do this?

How do we do this?

It seems like a really good group of folks that are doing really good work now and have a good idea of what they can do with this money.

And while yeah, all those things you said, Nicole, and I'm sure there's others too that are make me hesitate.

Um I would hate to I would hate to lose that level of support for our community that currently exists and could be amplified.

Um if we can step in and give them the framework so that they can go and do the good work.

Um so you know, I I'm interested in I think hearing the what the rest of council thinks in terms of this and what my kind of ask would be in terms of direction would be directing staff to um look at this more basically, right?

Um, and um not necessarily committing us to this now, but you know, saying, hey, like let's see if we can do this.

Um I know it's not ideal.

Um I'm sure they agree it's not ideal.

Um, but you know, sometimes we just need to step into the void that's been placed in front of us.

Great.

Thank you.

I'd like our city attorney to weigh in, please.

Uh thank you, Mayor, and certainly council you should continue our discussion, but I did want to share um just a couple of concerns.

So it's my understanding that staff received the proposal today.

Um we haven't had an opportunity to look at any of the background documents.

We don't know about the program, we don't know the requirements that will be attached to the grant uh grant funds, and just in general, in a situation like this, we've we've been in similar partnerships in the past where we've provided um where we've been an applicant or a backbone organization for a grant program, but we've had time to review the underlying grant agreements, and uh in the case of our recent one I can think of, I was able to have the opportunity to insert terms that would protect the city from liability if there was negligence or default by the co-applicant.

Um we're not being given that opportunity here, and so I I have concerns in terms of protecting the city that we would at least need time to uh look at everything, and it sounds like we haven't been given a very um uh long timeline here.

In fact, I I don't know for sure, but it sounds like they are looking for an answer this week.

Um, and just with workloads and how long these agreements tend to be and the program details, I am concerned about staff being able to take a diligent look uh at the very least at the underlying documents.

Um so I would just like you to consider that um uh I there just needs to be there needs to be legal review and there needs to be staff review to make sure that we have the resources to be the backbone organization.

There are just from looking at the email, there are a lot of obligations on the city, and I just want to make sure that we're protected, and I'm not confident in that right now without having an opportunity to look at what's involved.

So I'm I'm hearing um hesitancy from counselor Sampson and hearing um I want to clarify I wasn't trying to be hesitant other than I just feel like I you know, somebody give me five hours, and I could probably get through all of this and give you a good summary.

I feel bad because this is this is what I've been doing is you know, grants, but I can't even tell you it might have federal regulations in it.

If it does, that's a whole nother animal.

I don't know, I don't know enough.

So I just don't want to make the decision immediate without knowing more information.

Of course, and I apologize for having that not um I guess what I meant to say is like um I'm hearing that folks would like to look into this more thoroughly, however, at the same time, I'm also hearing that there is a sense of urgency um due to um uh you know do to the organization needing some uh fiscal agent to be established by the end of the week or by Monday.

Oh and so do Monday, and so yeah, because yeah, and and I do understand that the organization is in a bit of a bund because they did have previous commitments, as they mentioned at public comment with other organizations that fell through at the last minute, and that's why we're the situation cities sort of coming in as sort of a you know a last minute um potential support system is um and so but I at the same time I'm also hearing from Council Friedland that he would like at least stuff to take some time to explore this in the next day or two to see what's possible and what's not.

Yeah, and if could I ask a follow-up question to our city attorney?

Yeah, so in terms of I think I'm hearing you say I think two things that enough time to do our due diligence to review the uh the RFA detail and the the application detail, and also in whatever agreement we would have with the subcontractors, I don't know recipient sub recipients.

Definitely need to review that.

We would need to develop some sort of MOU or some sort of contract, some sort of agreement.

Yep, that's correct.

Yeah, usually usually you get we apply, we'd receive the funds, and then we'd write a contract with them.

And often, counsel, if I may add, uh we often approve, we have council consider and approve a resolution before the application goes in stating that we are partnering.

Um, so that it's clear that at least up front we understand the role we have in the application as a co-applicant if that's what it is.

Again, I don't know enough about this grant program to even say what would need to be in the resolution tonight, but um, we typically have council take action that you as the city are uh committing the city to move forward with this process in case the grant is awarded, in which case additional council action would be needed.

So this would just be a real departure from how we've handled uh partnerships like this in the past, and um, and you do have a meeting on Monday, uh you have a regular meeting on Monday due to the election on Tuesday, but it sounds like maybe that's still not a time enough time for council to take action.

And again, I'm only saying this from a um perspective of of ensuring that the city's adequately protected, and I just don't have enough information right now, and I haven't read the documents to be able to say for sure that um that it would be in the best interest of the city to take action this quickly on this program.

Understood, but just to clarify, in terms of the contract with a sub-recipient that could be done after an application was submitted.

Uh I don't know because I don't know all the details of how the grant program is set up and what the requirements for applying are, like if that already needed to be in place.

I I just don't know.

Understood, thank you.

So I in addition to what our attorney had just brought up, I think council needs to make uh a decision if this is something that they would like staff to prioritize in the next day or two, which means you know, uh work on that and dig into the background, dig into the details, look into those requirements as a as a priority due to the urgency of the situation, or at the same time, do we feel like this is something that we can want to come back at a later date and discuss for a uh opportunity in the future?

Um it's just a matter of that, and then in addition to that, we had do have the issue with a potential resolution that council would need to pass based off the timing of our meeting, which as mentioned our next meeting would be on Monday evening.

Yes, Council Barnes.

Thank you, Mayor.

I did we haven't talked about extension of the deadline, and my experience is that because we haven't asked for an extension to the deadline, we don't know that that's possible for the app applying for this grant, knowing that we could be potentially the fiscal partner in this group.

So I don't I don't know that we can make all the decisions yet until we talk to CDPHE and see if we can get a push an extension on when it needs to be application needs to be submitted.

I haven't heard anybody say that that's not a possibility yet.

So I'm just putting that out there that council needs to be considered.

And if staff looked into it, one of the things I'd like to look into is can we get an extension on when the deadline application supply?

Okay.

All right, so this is a a council priority discussion.

Is this something that council feels like they would like to prioritize over the next couple days, or is this something that we can wait on that you'd like to see us wait on?

It's it's up to really council at this point, but keep in mind you know, our what our attorneys um what our attorney mentioned as well, and then I want to make sure before we move forward with anything that staff and is aware of the direction of council, and we can clarify anything as well that's needed.

So would other members have heard from Councillor Samson, I've heard from Councillor Friedland.

Would other members of the council like to weigh in on this stuff?

Councilor Gallegos.

So if it is possible to move forward with the legal review and staff review in the time before the application is due, I would like to move forward.

They were backed by an established nonprofit organization, they were previously backed by the county, and Sister Carmen was also willing to back them up until um needing to redirect their resources to food assistance.

Okay.

Thank you, Councillor Gayos.

Um other members of council.

I would like to see this investigator, but I I also understand that we can't do diligence in uh proper review before the submission.

I think one of the things we need to do is put as Councillor Gay has said, this is uh long relationship with CTC.

So I think our length of relationship um the entities they've been working with.

I I really feel like we should request an extension if that's possible.

I mean, I don't I don't know that we haven't, but I would like to would like to have the staff look into what the landscape looks like to reply.

Okay.

Council, if I if I may respectfully suggest that perhaps a request for an extension be um directed to uh communities that care because again, we don't have enough information to even uh request an extension at this time.

So I I just think it would be a again.

This is perhaps an issue for the city manager, but it um I don't know that we have enough information to know how, whether or when we would need to submit that.

Just uh I'm working with little information tonight, but maybe they could if maybe they could give us head nods and let us know if that's something they can look into.

I'm wondering if it'd be appropriate to allow the group to just come up and clarify some of these things.

That's at council's discretion.

Okay, would would one of you mind coming up just so we have all the information we need so we don't feel unprepared?

Is it okay?

Sure.

Yeah, so I didn't introduce myself earlier.

I'm Andy McCullough.

I live at 1319 on your street.

So you just I think uh counselor Friedman mentioned I am the director of Bridges of Opportunity, which is fiscal sponsor, we do fiscal sponsors actually.

We've we've uh managed to grant through the city uh this year.

Um we're trying to figure out the best way to do this, you know, and the reason why the the language they use in this grant is backbone more than fiscal sponsor, and is they started to look at that.

We've been incorporated as a nonprofit less than the time frame they've given.

So this is a reimbursement-based grant.

I don't know if that has any factor, you know, so the the money is not up front where you have the money and you you have to give it back to the state or anything like that, it's based reimbursement based.

Yeah, but is we looked at it, we thought we need a backbone, we need an organization, more support, but also just the fidelity of that, uh, given the fact that we're we're a new fiscal sponsor organization.

So I don't know if that helps, but that's one of the reasons why.

And I totally get all the questions you have.

So I I don't know the right answer, but I think our thought was how can we make this easier for the city?

And so my role of having agreement as I guess you put it subcontractor.

I've never used those terms yet.

So uh, but just having a contract with the city where bridges of opportunity can take on usually what's the responsibility, you know, of staffing to manage the the grant that we would do that work, but in it in a sense the city would be like a pass through of this grant.

So I I do think there's a lot of valid questions about the the legality, what the city's taking on in that.

So I appreciate that.

So I don't know if we fully know the answer, but we're available.

I know it's very time, but whatever the time we can do is just sit down and look at the documents and talk it through.

Uh if that could be done, like I don't know everyone's schedule tomorrow with the city manager and the attorney and just go and then and then an answer be given.

Uh that could be an option, you know.

But did you understand?

I want me to ask a bunch of questions.

Thank you.

And cost reimbursement, that's really important.

Do you have enough money to pay what you need to do and then get cost reimbursed?

Right.

So the way there they actually we can request, was it 25%?

25% of the annual of the annual can be given first.

That's called an advanced pay.

So you're asking for a 25% advance pay of the grant.

Not from the city, but from the state.

No, that's the way it works.

This we'd have to ask.

It doesn't matter what you're saying, right?

We are the fiscal agent.

Right.

So we'd have to ask, we get the money, and then you'd have to, and then we could give that to you.

Right.

You take out the uh indirect on that, and then we we would make it.

Actually, that's not how it works.

You actually take the indirect out on your direct costs.

You have to charge it each time.

Right.

So are you expecting to pay people staffing on this?

Okay.

Have you done time and effort before?

Reports.

Um not to that extent.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um what are you not planning to grant this out as well?

No.

So you're gonna be the one that's gonna pay whatever goods and services that you're getting for this.

Right.

Okay.

And the actual deadline of the grant is you know a time.

Sounds like it's Monday, it's sometime Monday at 5 p.m.

5 p.m.

Okay.

Yeah.

It is, it's crazy.

Yeah.

I mean we appreciate the consideration.

Yes.

I think that's gonna be it is really tough situation to be in, and sorry to put you all into the situation as well.

Yeah.

Well, ultimately, we want to make this process, if considered by by council, um, as minimal of a burden to the city, because I as part of the work, I mean, I've been a part of the work since 2016, since I was a youth member.

Uh, now that I've been in this uh leadership role for the last two years, I've seen how the grant works.

I I've truly dealt with with every piece of the grant.

Uh so I feel very confident in my ability to execute these pieces in my role as a community mobilizer as the state calls it.

Uh, and then we've had this coalition since 2016.

A lot of the members, including Andy, and some of the members that you see here tonight have been a part of the coalition since 2016 as well.

So we fully understand what is being asked of us from the state.

Um so we're we're we're more than confident to be able to execute all these pieces with fidelity and and um and yeah, to the dot.

Yeah, go ahead.

And so the elements of the grant that you're looking for our support with are you've done previously with Boulder County as the backbone.

Yes.

And so this is sort of an evolution, right?

Epic is the new name and all this, yeah.

And they're focusing on are they focusing on different things in this next five-year cycle, or is it how it's very similar to what you've done before or different?

They are doing something different this year, um, or for the next five years, which is actually the coolest part of the whole thing, is they're actually wanting us to implement programming.

Um, and for the last 10 years, our coalition has been itching to do some programming.

Uh, because oftentimes, you know, just the theoretical work in the community.

Yes, it's good work, but as community members living and studying and in and working in Lafayette, we know what the needs are.

We want to be able to get to it.

So that is the biggest difference that we'll be able to do now.

And our structure lays out uh um a partnership between um uh uh special spider hobness and uh the family uh sorry spacing on the name.

Uh we have to follow certain guidelines so there's a strength in family and guidelines, they have to be like blueprint guidelines that they offer.

So species parahoveness, I think you might know that's the city focus that was funded, it's always been funded, and we've got another grant since, but through the city uh three years of running this program.

So what we want to do is take that evidence-based program and kind of actually beef it up and serve greater serve the city, uh the families and and youth that are in the program.

And the program is called strengthening families program, yeah.

And this is a vetted program by the state that we've uh selected as best fit with our coalition.

So mission and and values, and there's a there's a geographic component to it as well, right?

The state is considering things based on counties, yeah.

Have we been identified as a region that would be favored, prioritized?

So Boulder County wasn't identified, uh, but it is likely that there's gonna be an award given in this geographical area.

Um it's just not a priority area as they've noted for other regions.

And do we know of any other applications that are going in in our geographic area that might be competitive for us?

Yes, uh Boulder County Public Health will be applying as well.

So again, I mean the there's no guarantee.

I mean, this is gonna be a very competitive grant.

Uh there's no guarantee that that we would get it, but uh we do believe that with the decade almost of the work that we've done, uh we have a really good shot at this.

All we need is the support of a backbone.

Um the reality is that we have such a strong team.

I mean, everybody that you see here tonight and people that you don't see here tonight that are a part of this coalition, they all live, work, or go to school in Lafayette.

These are all youth, adult members that they care about this work.

That's why they're a part of it.

And that's what we've been able to run strong for the last 10 years.

Would even though the grants of five years, and I feel like that's a big commitment on the city, and to put to actually in our agreement, our agreement to have it a year-to-year re up.

And I I believe, based on other grants that I've even managed through the state, that fiscal sponsors can change.

Yes, I I actually had a change with with uh it was the disability fund with the state.

We were the fiscal sponsor for a grant and of a partner that our relationship mutually decided not to end.

And the state said yes, common practice to change fiscal sponsors.

So that's that was someone who offered the grant, the grantee from the state told me that.

So it it um, in a sense, we changed the fiscal sponsor originally for the city focused grant with someone else, and we changed working with with Katie on that uh reserve opportunity.

So I again we would have to research that, but my thought would be if that if the city did feel comfortable that if the state allows that that we could kind of research a different backbone if that if we came to that.

That was kind of my thought in some of the agreement down there, but again, it would have to be researched.

Okay, and to the indirect uh pieces, um, if the direct cost does get applied for the entire the entirety of the grant, it would be around $300,000 coming to the city for that administrative fee over the course of those five years.

Okay, so that's yes, it turned out.

Mayor, may I ask the um these folks a question?

And maybe counselor Sampson knows more about this for sure knows more about this than I do, so I'm gonna reveal what I don't know here.

But um, is there a reason why you all can't, why CTC and uh bridges bridges of opportunity cannot apply with for this grant without having the city as a co-application?

We could, I think the the point system that they give, because I I looked at the questions they asked for the backbone, we would score very low because of our our experience and in the finances we have on hand.

Uh, even though they give an advance, you know, we have in the bank like 70,000 dollars.

So there's um it's kind of that fiscal backing that they want to be assured of that we would score really low on that.

So I and our thinking was also as we looked at Sister Carmen and others, the backbone of being a trying not to create staff, but the support of saying, okay, we're we're we're gaining um just the credibility, you know, of saying, okay, we have this backing of a backbone with the work that we do, and my thinking is that we would without creating more work, but just kind of think through the what the city is wanting to do, and so we're we're so more closely connected than in another organization that you're kind of hoping they would align with city council's objectives.

That was kind of my our thinking, too.

But yeah, it's a good question.

And that's actually it's a great question because that's one of the key components to what we're asking of city council.

It is to be able to complete that financial risk assessment that CDPHE does require for this application.

Um, and again, as Andy mentioned, that that was a reason for us as a uh as a group realizing uh we would score pretty low on that assessment.

Um yeah, so unfortunately, we we were really banking on uh public health originally as our current fiscal sponsor.

Um, public health uh just unfortunately just told us that they had to drop us as a program due to their own funding insecurities.

Um later for us to find out that they're also applying for the same grant.

So yeah, um again, we we really hate putting you in this position, but we wouldn't be here if it wasn't if we didn't truly believe in this work.

I know that we can make this happen.

Thank you.

And we and I totally understand the what you all have to decide.

So I'm I don't want you to feel pressured.

I mean, I kind of believe in this program.

If we can't get this grant, even if we even if we had your backbone, then guarantee we'll get the grant.

We're gonna continue to look for other funding and other grants to continue the work.

Awesome.

Okay.

Um other comments, um, at least for for these guys here.

Okay, thank you guys.

All right, thank you.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Um great.

Um, all right.

So I do think we do we'd like to come to some sort of consensus on where to move forward from here.

Obviously, you know, this isn't an easy decision, lots of considerations to weigh.

Um would anyone like to bring anything up, their opinions, thoughts, and where to go from here.

Well, we have to identify more about this grant, especially if it has federal funds.

Based on the questions I've got, you know, that were answered tonight.

I'm gonna just tell you if you don't have somebody, if you don't have me, do it how who has the knowledge of doing the federal funds, it can get really um you can you can get in a lot of trouble, not just hey, you screwed up, so be it.

So I that's what I I'm trying to figure out in here is where are the where are the issues that you know we need to be aware of.

So um would you well we could, you know, potentially if we choose to move forward with this, uh we could it's tight.

I mean, obviously you don't want to like direct staff, hey, drop everything, focus on this now, right?

That's something we have to consider as well.

But if we do with with the timeline, right, if we do direct staff to prioritize this, you know, a member of council can also serve as a part of that, those discussions, but that's you know, you have a you have a job as well.

Um, and so um just to be a part of that, just to make sure we have all everyone in place uh that's that's needed uh uh to make sure we have we we understand all the requirements, whether that's federal level or state level, local level.

Yeah, um, but we do need to we still need to we still need a consensus and to give direction at the end of the day, the council is the decision making body, right?

And so we can give direction whether two priorities or to not prioritize this, um, but we do need um a consensus ultimately.

So I'm I like I said I've heard from a couple of counselors, I haven't heard from everybody on where they're at Mayor, if I may um just give council some advice.

I do think it's necessary that council, if it does wish to make a decision that it uh you do need to take formal action, and this isn't on our agenda tonight for formal action, but if you I do think you need to take formal action to decide whether this is a partnership and grant application you want to proceed with, which again in the past we've done by resolution, and we I'm you might need to call special meeting, and we would need time again for council to understand what the city is applying for and what would happen if it's awarded.

Could council give direction to explore it further with the group, um, understand all the requirements, and then I think staff would communicate back to us on those updates and where we are to determine if that's even needed that step of meeting and having resolution passed.

Like when we when we do a resolution, right?

We're not that's sort of like almost like it is a commitment, but is that is that like necessary?

Necessary prior to the application submission.

Say say that again.

That is the resolution necessary and is it necessary prior to the application submission?

Once you submit an application, you're committing the city to follow through if the grant is awarded.

And again, I I'm in a position just as your attorney that I don't know what those what you're gonna be required to follow through on.

So I'm uncomfortable with it, but it the resolution would express that we understand we're applying and that we are willing to accept um the responsibilities and obligations that may be placed on the city if the grant is awarded.

It's it's um if in any event I do think a decision by an informed decision by council would be needed in a public meeting, ideally with notice to the public.

Um I'm just I am a little bit concerned about this coming to council tonight for a very major commitment with uh no public notice on on whether you want to proceed with a major grant application.

That's not to say that you can't reach consensus on items during um a meeting without an item on the agenda, but um this would require us to make a legal commitment that we are going to follow through if the grant is awarded, and that's where we've used a resolution to document that in the past.

It could have been it could be a motion, it could be something else, but um yeah, that's uh I I do believe formal action on something of this scope just commitment is necessary.

Sorry to interrupt a special meeting needs to be noticed 24 hours in advance, right?

Correct.

And so don't do it on Halloween.

The timing seems um untenable.

I mean, without us jumping through a lot of hoops scheduling-wise, and staff, and that's even just assuming, right, that we get the application, you know, first thing tomorrow, staff reviews it over the day and then says, yeah, we could probably do it, and then we publicly notice on Thursday, Thursday, and have a meeting on Friday.

Uh on Halloween on Halloween.

I'd rather do Saturday.

We'll be trick-or-treating.

So just to provide my thinking as we're going through this.

I mean, you know, it this is a great community asset we have that will continue, and this is a great way to amplify them.

It's really unfortunate that um our partners at the county dropped this you know thing that would have really helped us as a community without any notice or um handoff or um partnership.

Um but uh you know the timing is hard, right?

Right.

Um so I you know I I I don't know.

I I want us to be able to, especially in times like we're in right now, I want us to be able to fill the gaps, right?

I know we all feel that way.

Um and but I think we need we need enough time to work together to do this in the right way.

Because I think we're also talking about some level of substance abuse work, right, through the grant, and you know, a lot can go wrong with that.

And um if we're the backbone, you know, at the end of the day, we would take that responsibility really seriously, as I know the you know, applicants would do.

So um I did have I did have a follow-up question.

Would you mind coming up again and maybe just one one final time just to clarify, and then I think that'll it'll give us easier direction for tonight.

Um so if this you this deadline, right?

Yeah, in this Monday, 5 p.m.

deadline that you need for this particular grant.

If if we're not able to come in because of the tight turnaround and support you on that, if in the future, well, are there other grant opportunities where we could reconsider this with given more time and preparation?

Like in the next, I mean it might doesn't have to be a year from now or less than a year.

Yeah, absolutely.

I think that's that's definitely a possibility.

In and you know, also at Councillor Barnes.

I mean, we could uh we could would that be a good option that we just ask tomorrow, CDPHE if there's a given our circumstances we can extend the deadline and give and we could even state a date based on what y'all said if y'all wanted to do that.

We actually have uh what they call a state coach, which I meet with regularly.

This is the person who oversees our specific grant allocated to our uh geographic area.

Uh as soon as I get home tonight, that's gonna be the first thing I do is send send them an email and say, hey, um we might need an extension.

So if that's the case, is that something that we might need an extension anyway?

If y'all didn't, I mean, because we're we're kind of in a sit in a tight situation ourselves.

So would that would that be something that we could address with y'all if we did get an extension from the state?

Continue to have discussions on it.

I mean, I think it's I'm not I'm not your business consultant or I think it's something that you should consider regardless is is looking to give yourself some more opportunity to find something stable and consistent.

It's because that's as you've as you've heard, it is is it is a tight situation for us, and it's not something that we're outright saying we're opposed to or against, but just based off the circumstances at the time, it doesn't seem like we won we we even have it's even possible for us to support something like this, but that doesn't mean that you know given more time, given more leeway, given more preparation, um it's that the city would be opposed to down the road.

Right.

Can I ask can I say this?

This is a little bit let's say we realize okay, we're just gonna put reasons of opportunity and we know we score low.

One of the things they asked for are letters of recommendation from the city.

So Sister Carmen, even though they can't be our backbone, Suzanne Crawford said I'll gladly write a letter of recommendation.

Could we have city council write a statement that we can put in our application of just the support that you have for it?

It's not your becoming a backbone, but you fully support this work, and maybe if you speak personally uh about it, and we said what we have.

I mean, that would go a long way too in in that situation.

Because I I kind of realize this timing and just seeing that that's not what we came hellmary, you know, passes is not is not gonna work.

So I I think that's that would be very beneficial to us in the process.

Right.

Is that I think that's a question for staff on time because a letter of support we'd still need to be by Monday, if unless we got an extra.

Well, right, that's what I was saying.

Yeah, I mean, I don't know if that's that's a question for staff on whether or not they could do a letter of support by that time frame.

I mean, there's some standard ones that I have for housing, but yeah, at your direction, we would make that a priority.

Okay, I think provided we get the grant application like as soon as possible, right?

Yeah, so they can see it, and so council can see it and make sure that we understand what you're what you're doing.

Yeah, yeah, that's a is a good point because even to recommend it, even if you're not a backbone to really understand.

Yes, we can do that.

Okay, so it sounds like uh as of now, I mean, I think you all should should consider uh that extending of the extension of that deadline.

I think you should um you know keep us in the loop on you know progress made with that.

Okay, and then um sounds like this council is supportive of of at least a letter of recommendation that supports your initiative and supports funding and support for your initiative.

But um outside of that, um, at this point, you know, it's something that you could come back to us at a later date with more, I guess in more of a runway so we can prepare for that.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Thank you all so much for your time tonight.

Seriously, it's been a pleasure to be here.

And we still have work going on so June 2026, so our coalition is still in Lafayette.

Um, I'll be reaching out to uh to all of you because our youth members wants to be able to chat about some initiatives, so I'll keep you posted on that.

But thank you so much for your time tonight.

Yeah, of course.

Thank you, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Okay, back to our regularly scheduled program.

Did you have any me talking about boards and commissions?

Okay, go ahead.

Um, I just wanted to, and I'm maybe counselor Barnes is gonna mention this too, but we had a really successful two sessions of talking to the chairs of our boards and commission commissions.

Um yeah, I there's more to come on that and all that, but I just wanted to say thank you to staff for making that happen.

It was a really good couple of sessions, um, and just really appreciate it.

And I'm I'm excited for those conversations to keep going and the things that came out of that in terms of next steps and all that.

So just want to say thanks and really appreciated that that hard work.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right, Mayor Protoum.

Um, just a quick update regarding minimum wage.

Um, because I know this is part of the consortium of cities.

So Boulder County um commissioners have moved to amend their minimum wage change to a one-time increase to match the city of Boulders.

Um, so that would make their minimum wage um January 1, 2026, 1682, and then it would be matched to the CPI um thereafter, and not going as far as the the increases to 2030.

So that is now going that was a two-to-one decision um to direct their staff to go ahead and make that change.

Um similarly, Longmont City Council is um thinks that there would be conversation at more at a regional level, and so they're not looking to make any moves in this year for 2026.

Um, but they'd be interested depending on what the county does move forward with um to have further conversations.

So I just want to bring that update to the um city council.

In addition, I've also sent out the last October board of directors information from Dr.

Cog.

Um we've concluded our in-person meetings, but we'll have November remote meetings, so that's going on there.

Um and I think that's it for tonight.

Thank you, Mayor.

So thank you.

Oh, one last thing.

Sorry, and I this is Northwest um Northwest 36th committee solutions.

Um, I am sending out a sponsorship form for the ability to either sponsor a number of commuting solutions events, or um, I know former counselor Walton had asked if we were interested in sponsoring a table, which is around a thousand dollars at the legislative update in January, but there's also the opportunity of being a platinum sponsor for four thousand dollars.

I've sent that out to all of you, and I'll look for bringing back at the next meeting to see what people's interest is, if any.

So that will be coming out as well.

Yes, so that that email has already been issued, so please respond to that if you have not um to see what kind of commitment, if any, we want to make to that um event.

And then do you mind just resending it to see if it's up to right now?

Thank you.

Okay.

Counselor Gallegos.

Nothing from me tonight.

Counselor Barnes.

Oh, wow.

Just like that moment of silence for the people in Jamaica and the rest of the Caribbean.

Thank you all.

One of the most powerful hurricanes in US history.

Just plowed across, there's plowing across the Caribbean coming in to the coast of Jamaica with 175, 150 to 175 mile an hour winds for three hours.

So I'm not sure what the impact of that is gonna be, but it is a humanitarian crisis already.

So thank you for noticing that happen and giving uh some time for that.

It's an odd transition, but um I'm wearing a shirt about Super Science Saturday.

So I I work with people who believe in science, uh they've done it for their lives, and they're continuing to provide the support necessary.

This is one of the groups that hopefully will make an impact on uh maybe better warnings.

But this is a free open house event, starts at 10 a.m.

goes until 4 p.m.

And it's at the N Carmesa Laboratory, right up table mason just get on table or South Boulder Road, just keep going until it ends.

You'll be in the parking lot, and there'll be lots of activities for the whole family, uh, food fun, and uh I'll be there.

So come ask me questions about Lafayette while you're there.

Um and uh you know, we did talk about the our proclamation tonight recognizing people who go the extra mile.

Uh our boards and commissions are going the extra mile, and as counselor Friedland said, it was an amazing meeting.

Uh, I think it was beneficial for not just David and I, but also for um the chairs of the boards, and I hope our deck deputy director also was really happy to be there because I know it's an awful lot of work, so thank you so much for for making that happen.

And I think what we're doing with the boards and commissions uh organizing it will daylight a lot of what the process is.

So more of our residents will uh be interested in joining the boards of commissions and you know are looking to provide more input for those boards and commissions so they can help us with what we need.

And I think a little bit of that bubbles up tonight.

Um so uh that's I think that's all something will hit me.

I know, but I think that's all I have right now.

Thank you, Mayor.

Of course, thank you.

Um and for me, just a few uh items.

Um, so um as you all know, um uh there is a um as required by our charter, the city council has to appoint three members of the council to conduct uh planning commission interviews and appoint um uh this year we have I believe two vacancies, so appoint two new members uh to the planning commission.

Um, and so I did speak reach out to you all independently, and I did hear back from counselors uh uh Tapia Vega, Friedland, and Gallegos that they are interested in conducting these interviews and then to come back to the full council at a later date uh to make um to make their recommendation.

Um so I just want to make sure that we're okay with those three counselors representing us or representing the council for these interviews and wanted to make sure that there wasn't anyone else that was really eager to be involved with this okay.

All right, so to confirm counselor Tapia Vega, Counselor uh Friedland and Councilor Gallegos will be conducting those planning commission interviews.

Great.

All right, um to the next item.

Um so we, as you've as you've heard and seen, uh you know, folks have come to us on various occasions requesting funding.

We had multiple discussions regarding our contingency fund.

Um we did allocate originally it was set 50,000.

We did allocate a good chunk of that towards travel budget for for conferences and things like that.

However, um we do still have a remaining, I believe, 20 um 20 21,000 left um for the year, and so we've had um a few groups uh that reach out to us um um to see if you know we'd be interested in supporting events like as you mentioned uh former counselor Walton with the table requests and um we did also receive um uh requests for funding to support um Centaurus' palms uh team for their um uh events, uh comp their competition in Florida this year, uh which is something we have supported in the past, and we have also um uh just like requests ongoing.

So I think the the process that we established was um there were certain programs, I think like Centaurus and people after prom that we would be supporting.

So those have already been earmarked.

However, the rest of it, um I think the process that we established is that we bring it up first here as a council member, and we give folks time to think about the request, and then at our next meeting, we make a decision on if we want to allocate those funds to that program or to that event that we're sponsoring.

So I believe that's the process we established.

Correct.

Yes.

I just want to make sure I don't remember that.

I remember talking about um some criteria for which we'd evaluate, such as um we need emergency was one.

Um how many Lafayette residents, what's the impact for Lafayette residents?

Maybe not how many, but what is the impact overall?

Are we serving five people?

Are we serving a greater group?

Like, is it open to all?

Right.

Um, and is it fair?

I remember we said we were going to establish that.

I think someone was supposed to like we were supposed to create like a form or an application in a way, and then for like for the public to allow it to identify that correct if that criteria is being met prior to us discussing it.

But I don't know if that ever took place.

I think what we had decided is that, and uh maybe city staff can weigh in here is we had decided that um it would be we would give council a heads up so that you are aware and that we could comment.

That's true.

That is true.

I do remember okay.

Yeah, when we looked back at the minute notes it uh you had a very robust conversation, so that is true about all of that, and I believe the notes reflected that at the end of the day, you're gonna follow just kind of a similar process where you each evaluated on kind of your own philosophy of what this Monday should be used for.

Um, and I would like to make a small correction if you could repeat the number.

You said 21,000.

That was your original budget with the plaque and um the RMMA attorney, I believe you're down to I can't read my small handwriting on your sticky.

Uh 6400.

6400.

I apologize.

Yes.

Well, and does that doesn't did we already do the after prompts?

Yes, that that is a separate bucket from the 21,000.

So we did move that out.

So 6400 left for the rest of the year, which we're in November now almost.

So that has not been dedicated.

Okay, and then we do have the consideration already on the table for commuting solutions.

Um, which was the range for that a thousand?

1,070 for the table at the legislative breakfast up to like 4,000.

So at our next meeting, um Mayor Pro Ten Wong is gonna bring that issue up on whether we want to commit that thousand dollars so that could potentially be um used.

I also wanted to at least for consideration, bring up the student group that did present to us, which was the Centaurs POMS team um to support their um their trip to Florida and just as a consideration, right?

And so that's and so I will bring that request for 1,000 to support them and their trip at our next meeting to give you a heads up, and so that would also give me and the rest of the council time to identify you know exactly where that money is going.

Um then the possibility of um using some of those remaining funds as well to further establish to fully establish our sister city program, which I will come back to council as well.

And and I know you know, and this this is just like this is not gonna be an annual thing, it's just I want to bring this up because I feel like um this is just for the uh initial process of fully um solidifying our sister city with the Kitos Peru, which by the way is voting on their resolution on November 4th, their next council meeting to officialize.

I know we already voted on our end, they're voting on it on their end.

Uh, and then there is sort of a um official signing ceremony, um, and just to make sure we have everything prepared and ready for that.

Um I may be coming back to council next week as well.

I know it's a lot, three things in one meeting, but we don't not we do not need to support all of these initiatives.

This is just something I'm giving council heads up on so that we can look at and bring back.

So I may request um or see if council is open to contributing some of those remaining 6400 to that established full um establishing the sister system sister city program.

Um so that even with those requests that will still leave us with some remaining contingency as well.

Um this could be the first time in and since I've been on council or council has used the full contingency.

So I'm not saying I'm just giving you all a heads up that I may be coming back with those items.

Yes, okay.

Um so for those, I think we have uh enough information on the first one, the commuting solutions of what that would be.

Will we get additional information on the other two of what?

I will send detailed emails and phone calls or whatever's needed over the next couple days.

And emails fine, thank you.

Okay, I'll I'll come here.

Good.

Let's get a trick to treat on Friday night.

Sit on your porch.

Okay.

Um and to wrap up tonight, I just wanted to uh make an announcement as well, as you all have seen or read in the paper or heard.

Um I'm not pursuing reelection here as mayor for the city of Lafayette.

Um lots of different reasons, but for some reason a lot of people fail to just call me directly and ask me.

I mean, you can totally just do that.

That's that's a lot easier than speculating and assuming things.

Um and in, and I don't need to get too much into it.

I still have three more meetings left after this, so I'm happy to um speak more.

Um, but it's you know, uh a lot of different reasons factored into that decision.

Um of those is my 30th birthday came in August, and I looked back and I was like, dang, I spent my entire 20s at City Hall, like at night on Tuesdays and stuff.

And and so it's just like I'm those people that actually know me, people that don't just watch these meetings and see me on the dais or watch from home, people that uh I like get to know me, my actual friends and family, they they know that I'm a very reflective person and very big picture thinker.

You know, I I take um I don't take uh I make sure that any time I am prioritizing something in my life, it's for a big reason, and I don't dwell on like little things.

I I I look at things like you know, um, from that big picture lens, and I I've realized you know there's a lot of things in life that like are more important uh to me that I want to spend more time on.

Um, my friends and family specifically.

I also realize that you know, we we talk about like we go to these some folks may go to like these no kings marches, right?

And we see a lot of folks in politics trying to consolidate power and take it from themselves, and I do feel like um it's important to give other people the opportunity.

Like chances are one of the people sitting next to me tonight will probably be the next mayor of the city, and I think that's great.

I don't think we should sit there and interfere, prevent that from happening.

There's no fault in someone sharing the same dream as you, and you shouldn't sit there and be an obstacle in their way.

And so, you know, I have a lot more to say, but uh just know it's primarily on good terms why I'm choose making that decision, and it's that big picture thinking of what's truly important in my life and what you know what can wait.

And so um, I love this job, it's a great job, but whoever is the next mayor will quickly realize you know it's it's not an easy job, and I'm sure a lot of you already know that, but regardless, I'm happy for whoever does fill that position.

I I genuinely am and I hope that you know you I'll I will do everything in my power to make sure you are you are set up for success and that you have all the information you need and that it is a smooth transition and and that we are there to support one another in these in these positions and not there to see each other fail.

So with that um meeting adjourned, actually, not meeting adjourned.

I will actually make a motion though uh to move to adjourn to executive session pursuant to sections 246-4024b of the call revised statutes for the purposes of receiving legal advice from the city attorney's office on specific legal questions regarding the terms and conditions of contracts pertaining to the operation and use of certain city facilities.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All right, motion and second, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, none opposed.

The city council will adjourn to executive session and will not return into an open meeting.

The time is now 8 40 p.m.

It's like church.