►
From YouTube: City of Boulder City Council Study Session 12-11-18
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
We
like
to
say
that
if
it
was
alive
in
your
lifetime,
it
can
be
composted.
So
that
means
all
food
waste,
including
meat,
bones
and
dairy.
The
heated
our
compost
site
has
the
power
to
break
down
a
pile
of
baby
back
rib
bones
and
the
mass
of
dirty
napkins
that
piled
up
while
you
eat
them.
But
plastic
is
another
story.
Keep
anything
plastic
lines
like
to
go
boxes
out
of
the
compost,
don't
be
conned
by
these
faux
compost
items
labeled,
biodegradable,
organic
or
natural.
A
Landfills
are
designed
to
keep
out
air
water
and
sunlight
while
trash
sits
there
without
breaking
down
for
a
long
long
time.
Only
a
fraction
of
what
you
throw
out
should
end
up
in
this
dark
sad
mountain
of
methane:
releasing
waste
for
chip
bags,
squeeze
tubes,
styrofoam,
anything
plastic,
lined
dog,
poop
and
candy
wrappers.
These
all
go
in
the
landfill.
A
B
C
D
Actually,
I
can
start
it
all
so
that
I
can
get
settled.
So
at
the
last
council
meeting
a
week
ago,
we
talked
about
the
large
homes
and
large
Lots
project,
and
the
scope
of
the
project
was
originally
to
include
four
zone
districts.
Those
were
RR
r
e
RL
and
RM
x,
one
and
the
council
asked
us
to
move
forward
with
that.
The
next
day
Lisa.
Thank
you
sent
out
a
hotline
saying
that
on
further
reflection,
perhaps
to
assist
with
the
work
plan,
we
couldn't
focus
on
just
the
r
r
and
r
e
zone
districts.
D
So
the
council
is
going
to
talk
about
that
briefly
tonight.
Staff
would
be
supportive
of
narrowing
the
scope
if
you
want
to
do
that
and
among
the
things
that
we're
thinking
is
that
the
largest
homes
in
the
city
are
actually
in
those
two
districts
are
R
and
R
E
and
then
because
the
Lots
in
those
districts
are
larger,
the
ability
to
have
innovative
solutions
with
the
land
is
a
little
bit
greater
in
those
areas
as
well.
D
E
Today,
we've
gotten
a
few
emails
asking
us
to
keep
the
LRS
and
then
I
don't
know
if
people
saw
Aaron's,
email
and
he's
at
home
with
a
migraine,
not
feeling
so
well,
and
he
said
one
thing
he
would
like
to
say
is
that
he
wanted
to
include
the
RL
zone
to
continue
to
be
included
in
the
first
phase
of
the
large
lots
project
now.
I
have
not
spoken
with
him,
but
it
was
Erin
and
I
who
have
been
kind
of
working
on
this
together
and,
from
my
perspective,
I
agree
what
I
said
to
Bob
Jane.
E
You
know
to
me
it's
two
different
processes
and
two
different
projects,
but
I
understand
some
of
the
people's
comments
that
you
know.
We
should
include
every
all
of
these
because
there
are
all
large
lots
but
I
think
the
solutions
or
what
we
can
do
on
the
artis
and
our
ours
are
very
different
than
what
we
could
do
on
most
RL
Lots.
So
I
think
and
Mary's
comment
was
something
to
the
effect
of.
E
F
F
Another
thing
we
could
do
based
on
your
concern
of
just
focus
and
making
sure
that
we
reach
some
conclusions
on
this
work
before
next
fall
is
we
could
prioritize
the
RR
and
Ari's
own
still
include
the
RL
zones
and
rmx
zones,
but
as
we
get
into
it,
if
it
starts
to
get
more
complex,
then
we
can
focus
on
our
R
and
re
first
and
I
think
you're
right.
The
solutions
are
going
to
be
different
for
those
different
zoning
districts,
so
we
can
also
do
a
bit
of
just
prioritisation.
C
We
could
almost
I
think
we're
gonna
run
out
of
time
on
this
counsel,
given
our
ambitious
agenda
but
we'll
be
discussing
at
the
retreat,
but
we
could
kind
of
tee
it
up
frame
it
and
end
up
addressing
it.
Sequentially,
knowing
this
council
may
run
out
of
time,
and
it
goes
to
the
next
one,
something
kind
of
like
that:
yeah.
G
One
person
wrote
was
about
the
AG
district
as
well.
Would
it
be
possible
to
do
I
know,
there's
not
much,
but
the
AVR
are
in
the
REE
as
one
kind
of
phased
in
cluster
of
issues,
because
I
agree,
the
solutions
will
be
different
between
them
and
I.
Think
it'll
get
complicated
about
the
RL
is
we'll
be
talking
about
lot
size
because
there's
a
huge
range
of
lot
size
in
RL
and
not
so
much
in
our
RN
re,
so
I
would
say
I'm
happy
with
the
prioritization
that
you
suggest
and
was
curious.
F
We
could
look
at
adding
the
agricultural
zoning
there's
actually
very
few
sites
in
the
city
that
have
agricultural
zoning,
so
I'm
not
sure
that
issue
exists
in
the
same
way,
and
so
my
preference
would
be
to
leave
the
agricultural
zoning
out
at
this
point.
But
then
we
can.
We
can
look
at
that
and
explore
that
further
in
the
future.
But
I
don't
see
the
same
issues
initially
that
we're
seeing
in
the
RR
and
RD
zones.
If
there
was
just
one.
G
E
And
and
I
think
you
know,
I
think
that
just
being
updated
and
briefed-
and
you
know-
have
an
honest
discussion
of
if
it's
getting
overwhelming
or
you
know
if
it's
way
too
much
so
I'm
happy
to
go
forward
with
what
you're
proposing
I
for
me,
I
would
like
to
look
at
a
timeline
of
end
of
August.
You
know
middle
of
September
at
the
latest,
so
but
I
also
don't
want
to
kill
staff
so
and
I'm,
not
gonna,
let's
cool.
Let's.
H
C
E
C
E
D
I
Good
evening,
Council
and
just
a
reference
that
Catherine
is
in
the
audience
today,
as
well
as
Vanessa
Keely
from
growing
gardens,
so
I
did
send
council
a
correspondence
a
few
days
ago.
That
summarizes
the
the
meeting
that
open
space
staff
had
with
Catherine
and
Vanessa.
A
good
part
of
it
was
just
to
reintroduce
open
space
staff
who
weren't
present
during
the
prior
negotiations
to
get
a
lay
of
the
land.
If
you
will
get
a
sense
of
the
buildings,
get
a
sense
from
the
family
as
I
need.
C
I
Would
say
several
of
the
next
steps
could
be
done
fairly
quickly.
So
first
quarter
sounds
reasonable
to
me
for
sure
the
question
on
how
we
want
to
revisit
valuation
if
it
is
determined
that
the
best
course
forward
would
be
either
a
revision,
an
update.
Unfortunately,
the
appraiser
that
appraised
it
in
2013
is
no
longer
in
the
business,
so
that
would
be
a
little
bit
of
a
bump
in
the
road
as
far
as
just
having
him
update
it.
I
E
C
J
C
C
D
K
K
So
the
plan,
as
perhaps
you
already
know,
is
that
the
prairie
dog
breeding
group
is
going
to
give
you
a
a
presentation
first
from
their
phase,
1
recommendations
and
we'll
pause
and
take
some
questions
about
that
first
phase
and
then
they'll
resume
their
presentation
and
catch
you
up
on
all
the
phase,
2
goodies
that
they
have
to
recommend
and
then
we'll
take
your
questions
and
do
more
discussion
at
the
end.
So
my
job
is
to
sit
here
quietly,
while
the
fine
people
do
the
presenting
just.
L
I
also
wanted
to
point
out
that
this
presentation
will
be
given
by
staff
and
by
some
community
members
from
the
working
group.
Will
each
and
introduce
ourselves
as
we're
up
to
talk.
But
I
wanted
to
point
out
some
community
members,
Deb
Jones
from
the
working
group
is
attending
behind
us
and
Kristin
cannon
from
Colorado,
Parks
and
Wildlife
is
also
a
beautiful.
C
L
So
I'm
Val
Matheson,
I'm,
the
urban
wildlife
conservation
coordinator
and
how
they
did
a
great
job
of
already
discussing
where
we're
headed
today
for
our
presentation.
As
she
mentioned
a
little
background
and
we'll
talk
about
the
early
work
of
the
working
group
that
we
refer
to
as
phase
1,
then
we'll
pause,
we'll
talk
about
phase
2
recommendations
and
that
would
be
from
our
community
members.
Initial
staff
analysis
on
phase
2,
what
we
heard
from
our
boards
and
then
the
initial
implementation
of
phase
2
and
then
ending
with
the
future
analysis.
L
So
a
bit
of
background,
the
prairie
dog
working
group
was
formed
after
the
August
16
2016
council
meeting,
where
council
members
suggested
the
city
form
a
working
group
that
could
suggest
prairie
dog
management
practices
based
on
a
broad
understanding
of
the
full
range
of
community
perspectives.
The
role
of
the
working
group
was
to
make
consensus
based
recommendations
to
the
city
manager.
L
L
So
I'm
gonna
list
out
the
six
recommendations
that
came
out
of
phase
one.
The
first
was
to
establish
the
criteria
for
prioritizing
relocation
sending
sites
or
where
the
prairie
dogs
were
going
to
come
from.
The
second
was
establishing
the
criteria
for
prioritizing
receiving
sites
are
where
the
prairie
dogs
were
going
to
go
to
ensure
adequate
accommodations
for
relocated,
prairie
dogs
to
find
what
success
is
for
prairie
dog
relocations
and
use
plague
vaccine
on
the
southern
grasslands
and
create
a
sub
group
to
develop.
L
L
This
was
a
change
from
prioritizing
relocations
within
city,
owned,
managed
lands
to
prioritizing
the
relocation
of
prairie
dogs
subject
to
lethal
control,
regardless
of
the
land
ownership
and
within
the
city
limits.
Of
course,
the
next
was
insuring
receiving
site
infrastructure,
so
this
was
ensuring
every
relocated.
Prairie
dog
was
released
into
either
a
natural
burrow
or
into
a
nest
box,
and
you
can
see
in
the
upper
the
left
hand
side,
the
photographs
are
at
the
top,
an
actual
nest
box
or
artificial
burrow,
and
then
the
series
of
implementation.
K
K
E
Well,
I
guess:
I
have
a
question
about
relocation
and
the
whole
lethal
control
and
using
the
vaccine
and
I
know
the
vaccine.
There's
kind
of
mixed
results
in
terms
of
if
it's
really
effective
or
not
I'm
glad
the
vaccine
is,
is
being
applied.
But
I
also
understand
that
in
this
southern
grasslands,
that
Delta
dust
is
not
being
applied
to
the
nesting
boxes
or
the
burrows,
and
so
what's
happening
when
the
prairie
dogs
are
relocated
from
like
foothills
or
other
place,
is
they
basic
they're
relocated,
but
then
they
die
when
they
get
there?
M
Sure
so,
on
the
relocation
Delta
dust
is
used
on
the
sending
site
and
Cindy
in
the
sending
site
prior
to
trapping
the
prairie
dogs
and
then
the
prairie
dogs,
some
are
sprayed
with
an
insecticide
after
they're,
captured
and
prior
to
release.
You're
right,
there
hasn't
been
Delta
dust
used
on
the
receiving
sites.
That
was
something
that
was
discussed
as
part
of
the
phase
1
recommendations
for
the
prairie
dog
working
group.
But
at
the
time
the
group
did
not
come
to
consensus
around
that,
so
it
wasn't
included
in
the
recommendations
so.
M
I
can
I
can
address
the
last
couple
of
years.
We
have
done
a
couple
of
relocations
to
the
same
site
to
the
damiana
vich
site
in
the
past.
At
the
wanaka
site
we
did
have
a
relocation
that
then
about
a
year
later
suspected
plague.
We
never
had
confirmation
of
that
did
move
through
the
whole
area
and
so
that
colony
was
reduced
substantially
in
size
on
the
dam
iana
colony
over
the
last
couple
of
years.
We've
had
what
appears
to
be
a
very
high
level
of
survival.
N
We
there's
several
of
us
on
the
prairie
dog
working
group,
who
have
tried
diligently
for
the
last
couple
of
years
to
really
move
this
forward
and
express
the
importance
of
getting
Delta
dust
out
there,
especially
to
the
southern
grasslands,
and
we've
been
really
concerned
that
really,
it
seems
like
it's
almost
a
lethal
process
to
take
the
prairie
dogs.
You
know
away
from
a
conflict
area
where
they
would
have
been
buried
or
or
poisoned
or
gassed
or
whatever,
and
take
them
out
and
release
them
to
the
southern
grasslands.
N
And
there
are
that's
sort
of
what
happens,
and
so
once
the
colonies
death
happens
from
the
plague,
then
that
opens
up
that
site
again
and
I
think
that
the
staff
has
been
sort
of
dependent
on
that
because
that
provides
receiving
sites.
And
so,
if
you
apply
the
plague,
if
you
have
a
plague
mitigation,
you'll
have
plague
resistant
period,
oxen
and
I
think
there's
concern.
There
was
concern
among
staff.
N
But
it
was,
it
was
important
to
to
get
some
plague
resistance
out
there,
and
that
means
then
the
prairie
dogs
will
continue
to
to
live
out
there
and
then
they
won't
vacate
those
sites
and
then
those
sites
won't
be
available.
So
then
the
whole
issue
we
discussed.
Then
it
was
that
well
then
we
need
more
sites
if
we're
going
to
have
plague
mitigation.
So.
C
Want
to
have
a
better
understanding
of
and
I
guess
this
will
be.
My
theme
tonight
is
the
trade
offs
and
my
understanding
is
that.
Well,
here's
a
question.
The
backlog
of
areas,
we're
trying
to
relocate
and
the
receiving
say
talk
about
how
the
how
those
things
line
up,
I,
I,
think
there's
AG
lands
that
have
conflicts,
and
anyhow
we
have
a
bunch
that
we
would
like
to
read
allocate
we
have
you
are
receiving
sites.
Did
we
get
behind?
You
could
speak
to
the
status
of
how
that's
working
sure.
M
So
in
2018
we
had
about
900
acres
on
city
owned
and
managed
lands
that
were
in
areas
that
had
been
designated
for
removal,
largely
on
open
space.
That's
due
to
irrigated
agriculture
on
park
sites,
it's
due
to
development
plans
on
the
sites,
and
there
are
a
couple
of
other
properties
in
the
city
utilities,
properties
and
such
where
there
are
conflicts
with
the
the
prevailing
land
use
so
they're
about
900
acres
of
those
we,
the
receiving
site
availability,
varies
dramatically
from
year
to
year.
M
So
it's
not
really
an
answer
that
always
holds
from
year
to
year
and
that
that
really
shifts
with
the
occupancy
levels
of
prairie
dogs.
What
plague
has
been
doing
on
the
landscape?
The
level
of
drought
that
we've
been
experiencing
because
prairie
dog
colonies
will
move
and
expand
and
densities
will
change
based
on
drought.
So
that's
really
a
shifting
Lance
I
guess
so
are.
M
So
I
get
I
think.
Certainly
there
was
a
backlog.
The
city
did
not
do
any
prairie
dog
relocations
from
about
and
II
might
remember,
2002,
possibly
until
probably
2012
when
we
moved
the
foothills,
prairie
dogs
and
in
that
time
again
the
you
know
the
acres
went
up
and
down,
and
so
it
wasn't
always
a
solid
increase.
But
right
now
we're
extremely
high
occupancy
levels
system-wide
on
both
the
conflict
areas
as
well
as
our
north
and
our
East
grassland
preserves
and
most
of
our
product
conservation
areas.
M
The
southern
grasslands
is
the
one
exception
to
that,
and
so
we
have
been
doing
relocations
and
the
numbers
of
relocations
that
have
been
done
over
the
last
several
years
are
largely
based
sort
of
on
capacity
as
far
as
cost
and
staff
capacity
to
oversee
the
relocation.
So
we
have
been
addressing
the
eminent
lethal
control
on
private
property
as
well
as
this
year,
we're
addressing
some
agricultural
properties
on
open
space
and
we're
hoping
next
year
to
address
some
parks
needs
for
their
future
development.
So
it's
a.
O
P
P
We
were
focusing
on
the
lack
of
prairie
dogs
on
southern
grasslands,
so
my
information
is
from
2016
granted
it's
now
2018.
So
if
I'm
incorrect
on
these,
please
feel
free
to
correct
my
numbers,
but
per
my
understanding.
We're
at
2%
of
population
for
prairie
dogs,
on
the
southern
grasslands,
and
so
I
think
my
goal
here
and
again,
I
understand
this
is
clarifying.
Is
that
we're
looking
at.
P
Previous,
but
because
again,
southern
grass
hands-only
is
filled
with
2%
I
mean
that's
a
lot
of
land
now
that
we
can
start
using
and
we
can
start
being
good
neighbors
to
some
of
the
AG
groups
and
taking
the
animals
that
have
been
being
killed
on
their
lands
and
hopefully
start
moving
them.
So
is
that
gonna
be
happening
here,
where
we're
gonna
start
opening
up
a
lot
of
lands
and
hoping.
K
M
That
is
largely
phase
two
one
of
the
recommendation
deals
with
the
relocation
criteria
and
phase
two,
so
we
will
get
to
that.
I
would
say
that
in
the
past,
southern
grasslands
has
had
occupancy
far
higher
than
it
does
now,
and
two
percent
is
about
accurate
still,
and
so
there
are
large
unoccupied,
prairie
dog
colonies
that
currently
could
could
qualify
as
receiving
sites,
which
is
why
we've
had
spots
to
be
relocating
prairie
dogs.
So
I
would
say
that
you
know
the
implementation
of
the
phase.
Two
recommendations
could
result
in
changes
to
those.
That's
that's.
M
Certainly,
a
change
to
a
plan,
that's
in
existence,
and
so
that's
part
of
what
we're
going
to
be
analyzing
is
how
to
move
forward
on
on
those
phase.
Two
recommendations
like
that,
but
I
would
say
that
currently
there
are
many
hundreds
of
acres
that
have
had
prairie
dogs
in
southern
grasslands
that
are
already
included
on
the
list
as
potential
receiving
sites.
Okay,.
M
C
M
On
your
map,
it's
essentially
this
area
south
of
us
36,
which
runs
diagonally
down
here,
sort
of
at
the
bottom
of
the
map.
You
can
see
us
36
and
east
of
Highway
93.
So
it's
essentially
this
big
chunk
of
green
down
here
and
you
can
see
the
sort
of
olive
colored
polygons
are
where
prairie
dogs
have
been
the
sort
of
reddish
brown
color
is
where
they
currently
are.
So
when
we
were
talking
about
what
what
sites
might
there
be
out
there
that
prairie
dogs
could
go
into
all
of
that?
M
E
In
doing
any
carrying
capacity,
I
would
think
down
here.
You
have
all
of
these
multiple
agencies
open
space,
or
you
know,
wildlife,
refuge
or
whatever,
and
so
it
comes
to
about
88,000
acres
and
so,
where
you
have
the
white
spot.
That's
Rocky,
Flats
in
the
refuge
and
I
know
they're
very
active
in
relocating
prairie
dogs
on
to
that
site,
as
well
as
black,
footed,
ferrets
and
so
I
would
think
that,
in
calculating
carrying
capacity,
you'd
have
to
look
at
the
area
that
they
might
go.
K
E
C
E
It's
just
before,
but
in
this
discussion,
I'd
like
to
keep
the
when
it
comes
to
acne
and
looking
at
keyed
lining
and
key
lining
and
which
is
basically
cutting
a
swath
or
a
large
line
of
it's
like
a
plow
that
it
goes
down
like
18
inches.
It
helps
with
water
conservation,
but
we
went
to
four
eco
cycles.
I,
don't
know
annual
thing.
E
We
went
to
a
farm
next
to
open
space
and
they're,
trying
this
right
out
right
now,
where
they
have
planned
two
different
kinds
of
plants
and
it's
their
co-locating
with
prairie
dogs,
and
it
looks
like
it's
a
pretty
successful
program,
so
I'd
like
to
know
in
this
whole
kind
of
larger
perspective.
If
that's
going
to
be
included
in
some
of
the
management
policies
and
trying
this
co-locating
of
prairie
dogs
and
Kili
vegetation.
So.
K
Q
Everybody
I'm
Pat
comer.
What
I'm
going
to
do
is
sort
of
lead
us
off
on
this
little
bit
of
discussion
and
we'll
share
among
several
of
us
from
the
working
group
discussing
these
phase
two
recommendations.
So
what
we
were
doing
in
Phase
two
was:
you
know
because
phase
one
was
it
was.
You
know
focusing
on
some
fairly
urgent
management
issues
we
had.
Q
We
were
able
to
then
in
Phase
two
sort
of
step
back
and
ask
some
basic
questions
about
what
a
sustainable
management
looked
like
as
a
release
of
prairie
dogs
in
this
landscape,
and-
and
so
we
started
to
lay
out
a
little
bit
of
a
vision
where
you
could
see.
I
think
we
all
agree
one.
We
absolutely
want
to
minimize
conflicts
associated
associated
with
prairie
dogs
and
conflicting
land
uses.
We
also
want
to
have
prairie
dogs
on
the
landscape.
Q
Prairie
dogs
are
a
natural
component
of
the
grasslands
that
are
there
right
here
and
in
the
foothills
and
right
on
this.
You
know
in
our
neighborhood
here
and
they
play
an
important
ecological
role.
Ideally
they're.
There
would
be
enough
space
for
for
prairie
dog
colonies
to
be
functioning
and
not
be
plagued
out
and
having
these
sort
of
up-and-down
population
cycles,
but
in
fact,
be
large
enough
to
be
kept
in
check
by
native
predators,
and
so
that's
really
our
ideal.
The
question
is:
how
do
you
get
there?
Q
It's
complicated
and
what
we
did
was
work
through
a
number
of
different
ecological,
social,
economic
goals,
objectives,
specific
kinds
of
things
that
we
would
view.
These
is
all
kind
of
equally
important.
A
lot
of
these
things
are
codependent
in
the
sense
of
you
got
it,
you
can't
you
can't
address
one
without
actually
addressing
the
other
things,
because
there's
a
lot
of
energy
dependencies
here.
So
so
what
we
did
was
was
start
to
lay
these
things
out
and
like
I,
say,
I'll
just
go
can
I
advance
this
just
advance
it
once
so.
Q
There's
sort
of
ecological
goals
and
objectives,
you're,
creating
and
maintaining
under
ecological
sort
of
creating
maintaining
at
least
one
or
one
or
more
large
landscapes
where
prairie
dog
prairie
dogs
can
occupy
that
the
grassland
ecosystems
they're
their
plague,
resistant
populations,
but
the
integrity
of
those
grassland
habitats
are
maintained
in
a
hi-hi
condition.
From
a
social
standpoint,
we
really
see
the
need
for
sort
of
innovative,
but
still
non-lethal
strategies
to
minimize
conflicts
and
increase
public
awareness,
as
it
relates
to
prairie
dogs
on
the
landscape
and
then
economically.
Q
You
know
we
need
to
provide
the
resources,
the
resources
and
capacity
to
really
secure
prairie
dog
conservation
in
an
in
a
real
sustainable
functioning
system.
On
this
on
this
larger
landscape-
and
you
know
bottom
line
for
a
part
of
this
and
we'll
get
into
these
recommendations
a
little
more
is
we
do
need
to
look
beyond
the
city
lands.
We
got
to
look
at
this
entire
landscape
and
we
we
have
the
great
fortune
actually
to
have
existing
investments
and
then
neighbors
who
have
compatible.
K
N
That
I'm
car
space,
Muller
and
I
am
an
animal
ecologist
and
behaviorist
and
been
really
involved
in
the
prairie
dog
issue
since
several
years
ago,
when
the
armory
thing
blew
up
so
I'm
happy
to
be
here
tonight.
So
really
the
southern
grasslands
was
our
focus
for
where
the
city
would
likely
create
these
large
blocks
of
occupied
by
viable
populations
of
plague,
resistant,
prairie
dogs
and
one
of
the
reasons
we
were
looking
down
there
is
that
it
is
adjacent
as
Lisa
was
talking
about,
that.
N
It
is,
and
also
Pat
that
is
adjacent
to
larger
other
properties
that
are
not
city-owned.
And
so,
if
you're
going
to
actually
have
colonies
limited
by
native
predators,
including
say
the
black
of
an
affair,
you
might
need
to
have
a
larger
area
than
the
city.
So
we
did
talk
about
that
cooperation
among
entities.
N
So
there
are
three
objectives
to
reach
this
goal
and
the
first
one
calls
for
quality
grasslands
that
contain
viable
populations
of
plague
resistant
prairie
dogs
that
are
naturally
limited
by
native
predators,
and
so
one
of
the
strategies
we
have
is
that
the
city
would
complete
and
implement
a
reintroduction
plan
for
the
federally
endangered
black
footed
ferret,
which
is
a
native
predator.
That
depends
on
prairie
dogs,
for
more
than
90%
of
its
diet
and
so
and
also
for
its
survival
to
other
strategies.
N
To
meet
this
first
objective,
one
was
to
complete
and
implement
a
plague
management
plan
that
uses
state-of-the-art
methods
that
have
already
proven
effective
in
protecting
prairie
dogs
against
the
plague.
Protected
prairie
dogs
would
have
a
chance
to
survive
and
thrive
and
to
secure
the
sustainable
and
plague
resistant
colonies
that
we
have
in
our
objective.
Limited
use
of
Delta
Mathurin,
also
known
as
Delta
dust,
which
we've
mentioned
earlier,
is
currently
recommended
as
the
best
tool
to
protect
prairie
dogs
against
the
plague.
N
The
sylvatic
plague
vaccine,
which
we've
mentioned
also
which
the
city
is
using
on
the
southern
grasslands,
is
unfortunately
proving
less
effective
than
previously
thought
as
you've.
Seen
from
some
of
Lindsay's
slides
that
she
sent
you
already,
another
strategy
is
to
update
and
implement
the
grassland
management
plan
that,
as
it
pertains
to
prairie
dog
goals,
and
to
amend
the
plan
in
a
way
that
will
increase
prairie
dog
occupancy
on
the
southern
grasslands
and
also
to
revise
the
criteria
that
qualify
a
receiving
site
which
Heather
mentioned
or
vow
to
release.
Prairie
dogs
there.
N
So
we
can
have
some
new
receiving
sites
that
can
be
established
and
utilized,
and
the
purpose
of
this
is
to
increase
the
number
of
available
receiving
sites
on
the
southern
grasslands.
Where
prairie
dogs
can
be
released
to
help
build
up
those
large
blocks
of
active
prairie
dog
habitat
that
we
have
on
our
objective.
N
So
this
really
shows
the
need
to
have
additional
receiving
sites
because
plague
resistant
colonies
will
not
be
dying
off
and
hopefully
they
will
be
thriving
and
so
their
site
won't
become
available
as
they
have,
as
has
been
the
case.
The
second
objective
which
we
had
to
reach
our
goal
number
one,
was
to
call
for
the
was
for
the
city
to
implement
non-lethal
methods
for
managing
populations
that
are
in
conflict
with
urban
and
agricultural
land
uses
such
as
implementing
non-lethal
relocations
are
doing
relocations
that
are
non-lethal
and
creating
buffer
zones.
N
The
working
group
agreed
that
implementing
this
objective
would
not
override
the
implementation
of
the
other
two
objectives
in
this
goal.
We
thought
that
the
other
two
objective,
one
and
three
were
really
would
overwrite,
will
be
more
important,
and
a
lot
of
these
and
objective
to
Dan
is
also
going
to
be
talking
about
when
he
talks
about
the
social
goal.
The
third
objective
is
to
make
amanda's
necessary
all
of
the
existing
prairie-dog
plans
and
policies
to
make
them
compatible
with
this
goal.
N
One
and
all
of
its
objectives
amending
the
grassland
management
plan,
as
it
pertains
to
prairie
dogs,
should
take
precedence,
however,
to
make
sure
that
additional
receiving
sites
can
be
created
in
the
southern
grasslands
and
the
prairie
dogs
be
look
relocated
and
into
unoccupied
suitable
habitat
there
as
soon
as
absolutely
possible.
So
that
was
our
first
goal
and
thank
you
and
now
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Dan
and
he's
going
to
talk
about
goal.
R
Hi
I'm
Dan
brand
Emil
and
when
it
came
to
coming
up
with
our
social
recommendations,
it
really
all
centers
around
the
conflicts
that
exist
between
prairie
dogs
and
the
people
that
are
the
neighbors
that
have
to
deal
with
them.
We
found
that
one
of
the
first
things
we
need
to
do
is
really
get
a
thorough
and
complete
list
of
all
the
different
types
of
conflicts
that
are
out
there,
so
we
can
actually
track
them
and
map
them
and
see.
You
know
where
are
the
AG
conflicts?
R
The
fourth
objective
is
really
to
do
more
of
a
outreach
campaign
to
the
citizens
of
Boulder
and
the
Boulder
area
residents
to
raise
their
appreciation
of
the
role
that
prairie
dogs
play
as
a
keystone
species
in
the
ecosystem.
A
lot
of
people
really
don't
appreciate
how
important
they
are
in
the
ecosystem.
Nor
do
they
recognize
how
complex
the
issue
is,
and
so
he
thinks
about
region,
education
or.
R
Number
five
is
really
sort
of
a
given
in
my
mind
that
there
have
to
be
feedback
mechanisms
so
that
if
new
techniques
or
new
mitigation,
things
come
up
that
are
more
successful,
that
policies
and
practices
are
adapted
to
take
advantage
of
those,
and
then
number
six
is
to
secure
some
modifications
to
the
state
regulations.
So
it's
easier
to
move
prairie
dogs
across
county
lines
or
into
places
like
federal
land,
on
Rocky,
Flats
and
right
now
there
are
some
regulations
that
limit
our
capability
to
do
that.
Q
So
yeah,
let
me
we
just
have
three
three
major
objectives
under
the
economic
economic
goals.
The
first
is
actually
what
we
recommend
is
it's
kind
of
an
approach,
and
that
is
some
of
you
may
be
familiar
I'm
involved
in
environmental
conservation,
a
lot
of
for
many
years,
and
you
see
these
days
the
term
net
positive
impact,
and
what
that's
about
is
is
really
when
you
have
conflicts,
you
have
inevitable
sort
of
environmental
conflicts.
You
you
first
try
to
avoid
those
conflicts,
if
at
all
possible,
but
sometimes
you
can't
avoid
them
entirely.
So
you
so.
Q
If
you're
going
to
have
a
conflict,
you
need
to
minimize
the
impact
of
that
flicked
and
if
you
can't
completely
minimize
the
the
conflicts
you're
going
to
mitigate
that
is
you're
going
to
find
some
alternative
investments
that
will
somehow
compensate
for
the
impacts
that
you've
had
and
really.
The
fourth
is
to
say
not
only
to
just
sort
of
compensate
for
what
you've
done,
but
really
seek
a
net
positive
gain
in
the
overall
approach
and
and
this
sort
of
situation
with
prairie
dogs.
The
kinds
of
conflicts
that
we
have
is
actually
an
ideal
sort
of
circumstance.
Q
Where
this
sort
of
model
of
approach
to
decision-making
really
applies
pretty
well,
and
so
we
recommend
that
we
think
hard
about
how
it
can
apply
in
this
particular
kind
of,
and
so
it
applies
to
to
really
making
decisions
about
relocation.
And
what
do
you
do
about
the
particular
circumstances
to
really
help
resolve
the
particular
conflict?
The
second
second
objective
is
really
to
to
establish
a
grassland
conservation
fund
that
you
should
be
augmenting
existing
operating
budgets
so
that
we
could
really
meet
the
needs
for
prairie
dog
management.
Q
It
could
be,
you
know,
using
expenditures
that
are
derived
from.
Let's
say
it
could
be
a
fee
that
is
part
of
the
relocation
fee,
but
they
would
it
would
help
pay
for
perhaps
land
acquisition
or
easements
and/or
land
stewardship,
as
it
relates
to
grassland
management.
An
example
of
that
is
a
milestone
sort
of
bulleted.
Under
these,
and
underneath
this
is,
you
know,
we
really
need
the
mechanism
to
clarify
the
inflows
and
outflows
of
that
fund.
Is
there
a
fee
structure
that
we
could
start
to
put
in
place?
Q
Q
You
know
a
consistent
kind
of
output,
other
sorts
of
sources
of
that
kind
of
funding
we've
explored
is,
you
know
there
is
public
funding
that
is
currently
utilized,
for
example,
under
the
farm
bill
that
private
landowners
currently
in
the
city,
I
think
with
leases
received,
can
receive
funding
to
do
conservation
practices
on
private
lands.
This
is
another
source
of
funding
to
actually
make
this
sort
of
thing
happen.
We
also
feel
like
if
we
can
put
together
a
functioning
system
here,
we
ought
to
be
able
to
attract
philanthropic
money
to
this
this
sort
of
activity.
Q
If
we
really
are
resolving
a
sustainability
problem
that
we
have
as
it
relates
to
grassland
management,
we
ought
to
be
able
to
attract
some
some
private
philanthropic
funds
to
the
to
this
sort
of
endeavor.
So
then,
our
third
objective
is
really
to
think
hard
about
making
sure
we
have
sufficient
budgets
for
city
staff
to
fulfill
their
roles
that
they
have
in
making.
M
Right
so
you're
not
intended
to
be
able
to
read
this,
but
the
periodic
working
group
members
just
went
through
sort
of
the
higher
level
objectives
with
a
couple
of
examples
of
the
finer
scale
milestones.
So
in
your
memo
packet
on
pages,
50
and
51,
as
well
as
printed
on
the
table,
are
tables
that
include
the
full
text
of
all
of
those
recommendations.
So,
if
you're
looking
for
that,
that's
where
you
can
find
that.
M
So
staff
did
some
initial
analysis
before
we
went
to
the
boards
for
feedback
and
current
expenditures
on
prairie.
Dog
conservation
and
management
are
somewhere
between
twenty
seven
thousand
and
three
hundred
thousand
dollars
annually
and
that
that
varies
a
lot
depending
on
what
the
relocation
projects
are
and
where
the
prairie
dogs
are
coming
from
city,
land
or
private
land
in
any
given
year,
and
we
use
about
2.5
FTEs
working
on
prairie
dog
management
that
spread
across
open
space
planning
and
Parks
and
Recreation.
M
And
so
the
initial
analysis
did
not
include
the
costs
or
the
time
estimates
either
for
the
implementation
of
phase
one
ongoing
current
prairie
dog
related
work.
That's
that
I
just
spoke
about
or
the
work
associated
with
the
prairie
dog
working
group
itself.
Just
looking
at
implementation
of
the
phase
two
recommendations,
maybe.
S
M
There
has
to
do
with
the
fact
that
a
lot
of
the
recommendations
are
not
specific
enough
that
we
can
put
dollar
amounts
to
them
right
now,
there's
sort
of
a
low
level
of
implementation
and
a
high
level
of
implementation,
which
require
very
different
funding
scenarios
and
then
an
additional
back
for
one
more
2.2
to
2.5
FTE
and
that
citywide
again
largely
over
those
three
departments,
planning
open
space
and
Parks
and
Rec
yes,
2.2
to
7.5.
In
addition,
yes
in,
in
addition
to
what
is
currently
being
used
for
product
management,.
M
We
also
looked
a
little
bit
at
the
potential
for
plague
management
using
insecticides
to
have
some
impacts
on
non-target
species
and
the
potential
for
higher
prairie
dog
populations,
as
we
implement
recommendations
to
potentially
have
additional
impact.
Agricultural
operations
or
plan
to
parks,
development
and
I
will
turn
it
over
to
Andy
poster
to
talk
a
little
bit
more
specifically
about
the
agricultural
trade-offs.
T
Thanks
Heather
I'm
Andy
pester,
the
AG
stewardship
supervisor.
Our
recent
mapping
in
2018
indicates
that
we
have
about
900
acres
of
irrigated
agricultural
land.
That's
currently
occupied
by
prairie
dogs
and,
as
you
can
imagine,
irrigation
become
very
difficult
in
these
situations
because
of
the
borrowing
activities,
the
clipping
and
feeding
activities,
certainly
reduced
yields
and
productivity
on
these
sites,
and
once
these
sites
become
occupied
on
city
property,
common
agricultural
practices
like
tillage
or
field
leveling
that
might
help
establish
crops
or
enhance
irrigation
practices
were
actually
prohibited
by
the
active
burro
provision
in
the
Wildlife
Protection
Ordinance.
T
In
our
experience,
these
sites
also
aren't
as
resilient
as
native
grasslands.
So
we
find
they
they
have
a
history
of
agricultural
tillage.
The
systems
have
been
simplified
by
planting
hay
crops,
for
example,
in
irrigation,
and
active
management
is
required
to
keep
these
sites
productive,
and
so
once
the
site's
become
occupied.
That
management
goes
away,
and
so
they
degrade
in
phase
one.
We
did
talk
about
prioritization
of
the
sending
sites.
T
Two,
the
working
group
is
primarily
suggesting
that,
in
the
long
term,
proactive
bearing
proactive,
providing
barriers
and
a
proactive
basis
and
then
more
resources
dedicated
to
lot
non-league
mitigation
activities
would
be
the
preferred
strategy.
However,
that
doesn't
help
us
with
the
current
challenge,
we're
because
barriers
aren't
effective
in
our
insights
that
are
already
occupied
and
also
the
scale
of
relocation
at
this
point
is
pretty
large,
so
I
did
provide
a
map
that
shows
a
couple
of
examples.
T
One
of
them
is
in
the
northern
part
of
the
system
on
the
top
map.
The
blue
gray
areas
are
irrigated
lands,
irrigated
open
space
land
and
the
hatched
area
is
our
sites
that
are
occupied
by
prairie
dogs.
So
you
can
see,
there's
quite
a
bit
of
overlap
up
there
and
that
these
sites
happen
to
be
next
to
large
grassland
blocks
of
habitat,
where
the
prairie
dogs
have
simply
moved
into
the
agricultural
sites
in
the
lower
map
that
shows
kind
of
an
East,
County
location.
M
Okay,
so
I
just
like
to
talk
very
briefly
in
August
in
September,
we
did
go
to
three
of
the
city's
boards,
the
environmental
and
Parks
and
Rec
advisory
boards,
as
well
as
the
open
space
board
of
trustees
to
present
these
recommendations
and
some
of
our
initial
analysis
to
them,
and
so
some
of
the
themes
of
their
feedback
were.
They
certainly
expressed
real
appreciation
for
the
thoughtful
recommendations
on
this
very
complex
topic
that
the
prairie
dog
working
group
put
together.
M
They
did
have
some
concerns
about
impacts
and
we're
interested
in
learning
more
about
the
financial
trade-offs
of
implementation,
some
of
the
ecological
impacts
to
high
integrity,
glass,
grasslands
and
overall
ecosystem
health,
especially
in
the
grassland
preserves
and
the
impacts
to
operations,
including
agriculture
and
the
development
of
Park
sites,
and
they
did
offer.
They
did
ask
for
additional
information
and
suggestions
as
far
as
identifying
what
the
relationship
of
the
period
of
working
group
recommendations
was
to
other
city
initiatives
and
they
suggested
further
analysis
to
better
help
them
discuss
the
recommendations.
M
So
we
are
implementing
some
of
the
phase
two
recommendations
now
or
will
be
in
the
near
future.
First
of
all,
as
we
said,
all
we
located
prairie
dogs
in
2018
did
receive
the
sylvatic
plague
vaccine
on
both
the
sending
site,
and
then
they
will
receive
it
on
their
receiving
site
for
their
second
dose.
We
increased
the
number
of
successful
relocations
over
the
last
couple
of
years.
These
were
all
from
conflict
areas.
We've
begun
the
process
of
evaluating
where
it
makes
sense
to
provide
barriers
or
other
exclusion
methods
on
agricultural
lands.
L
It
was
highlighted
during
our
conversations
of
the
working
group
that
it
was
confusing
generally
when
there's
a
birddog
violation.
Animal
control
is
called
when
there's
a
prairie
dog
violation
after
5:00
p.m.
say
or
when
they're
off
shift,
it
gets
deferred
to
police
officers,
and
so
there
was
a
need
for
making
sure
there
was
a
clarification
in
the
protocols
as
to
what
happens
when
someone
calls
about
illegal
activity
and
it's
after
5:00
who
would
be
responding.
E
M
After
the
feedback
from
the
boards,
we
did
present
our
recommendations
to
the
city
manager
and
she
has
given
us
direction
to
do
some
further
analysis,
and
so
the
first
step
in
this
that
we've
already
completed
is
to
divide
the
recommendation
into
four
buckets
so
that
we
sort
of
knew
how
to
approach
them.
The
first
bucket,
then,
is
those
recommendations
that
are
aligned
with
city
goals
and
policies
and
are
feasible
with
current
resources,
and
so
everything
that
went
in
that
bucket
will
be
part
of
our
2019
work
planning
conversations.
M
The
second
bucket,
then,
is
those
things
that
are
aligned
with
current
city
goals
and
policies,
but
are
not
currently
funded
and
so
for
items
that
that
are
in
that
bucket.
It
would
be
included
in
the
2020
for
more
short-term
items
or
in
future
longer
term
budget
requests,
and
then
the
third
bucket
is
those
things
that
do
have
either
resource
trade-offs
and
or
policy
or
plan
changes
associated
with
them,
but
are
possible
with
existing
resources.
M
The
next
step
is
to
analyze
those
further
provide
additional
information
on
those
with
recommended
implementation
and
action
plans,
and
so
the
timing
on
the
next
steps
would
be
that
between
in
March
of
next
year,
we
will
be
completing
our
2019
work
planning,
as
well
as
the
preliminary
steps
in
the
2020
budget,
and
that
will
be
addressing
those
items
in
buckets
one
and
two
and
to
look
at
further
analysis
of
buckets
three
and
four.
We
would
then
take
that
further
analysis
in
April
back
to
those
three
boards
we
previously
visited.
M
So
staff
has
identified
four
factors
to
be
included
in
the
analysis
of
those
bucket
three
and
four
recommendations.
The
first
is
to
further
analyze
funding
and
staffing
requirements.
The
second
is
to
look
at
the
work
planning
and
the
phasing
of
those
recommendations.
The
third
would
be
the
plan
and
policy
changes
and
what
process
needs
those
might
carry
with
them,
whether
there
would
be
additional
public
feedback
required
or
what
that
process
would
look
like
and
then
to
further
identify
the
trade-offs
with
other
city
priorities,
including
ecological,
sustainable
agriculture
and
parks
development.
K
You
Heather
I'm
gonna
leave
this
question
up,
so
y'all
can
have
it
for
reference,
but
I
just
want
you
to
see
the
really
cute
picture,
because
Vicky
pictures
are
darling.
Okay,
so
council,
we
have
some
time
left
here
for
your
questions
of
the
working
group
being
mindful
at
the
end
of
the
day,
staff
would
very
much
appreciate
your
clear
direction
on
this
question.
Is
this
the
right
stuff
for
them
to
be
looking
at
or
are
there
additional
considerations?
K
I
just
wanted
to
go
back
because
zan
and
Lisa
both
had
questions
related
to
the
AG
component,
and
did
you
want
to
take
a
stab
at
those
generally
about
how
we're
addressing
conflicts,
a
compass
with
and
trade-offs
on,
AG
lands
and
the
Lisa's
questions
about
that
special
method
that
I
actually
hadn't
heard?
Was
it
called
key
lining
key
lining?
Do
you
have
any
thoughts
about
either
one
of
those
sir.
T
Sure
I'll
talk
about
the
key
line
plowing
and
some
other
things
were
working
on.
So
we
had
several
hundred
acres
that
we
currently
don't
lease
agriculturally,
and
we
had
our
network
plan
this
year
to
try
various
methods
of
seating
irrigation
cover,
cropping
to
try
to
reclaim
these,
and
we
were
also
working
with
Brett
Brett
can
Karen
and
some
folks
from
the
county
and
a
Carbon
Farming
project
where
keyline
plowing
was
part
of
the
protocol
and
we
were
cooperating
on
one
of
our
properties
and
the
key
line
with
compost.
T
Amendment
was
very
effective
in
allowing
us
to
establish
some
vegetation
on
those
sites.
The
site
we
selected
there
did
have
a
low
level
of
occupation
to
prairie
dogs,
and
that
was
the
main
reason.
It
was
selected
because
we
could
implement
those
treatments
without
having
prairie
dogs
potentially
caused
a
complication.
T
K
J
T
C
That
was
helpful,
I.
Think
the
question
is
okay,
so
we
have
conflicts.
They're
real,
we
said
I
think
the
recommendation
was
to
chip
away
at
ten
a
year
and
I
guess
I
feel
like.
That
means.
We're
gonna
have
a
growing
backlog
of
conflicts,
I
guess
so
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
intend
to
kind
of
catch
up
on
that
and
whether
that's
awaiting
the
Phase
two
analysis
or
whether
that's
ongoing
now
to
try
to
catch
up
on
some
of
these.
M
M
So
it's
probably
going
to
have
to
be
a
combination
of
things
like
Andy's
talking
about
how
can
we
reclaim
sites
in
the
presence
of
prairie
dogs
in
a
way
that
they
can
still
fulfill
some
of
their
their
agricultural
productivity
goals
in
the
event
that
that
populations
are
reduced?
We
need
to
be
ready
to
move
into
those
sites
to
exclude
the
prairie
dogs
in
the
future
and
to
restore
them.
I.
M
C
Well,
we're
just
asking
questions:
I
just
feel.
Like
I
mean
we
have
a,
we
have
a
real
conflict
between
two
values
that
we
have
and
I
guess.
I
want
us
to
be
real
clear
about
addressing
that
head-on
and
I
feel
like
we're
losing
maybe
the
battle
unsustainable
egg
here.
So
I
guess
I
just
want
to
understand
how
we're
going
to
try
to
get
back
so.
G
T
So
we
at
least
15,000
acres
of
land
to
local
producers,
15
one
five,
one,
five
thousand
three
most
of
that
is
native
grasslands,
which
we
have
not
included
in
the
Coe
occupation
numbers
the
numbers
that
I'm
talking
where
the
conflict
is
on
the
irrigated
agriculture.
So
in
fact
I
would
guess
well
I,
don't
want
to
state
a
number,
but
a
large
amount
of
our
prairie
dogs
do
Co
occupy
with
leased
grazing
land.
T
G
I'm
just
trying
to
scope
the
problem.
This
sounds
like
about
15
percent
of
that
irrigated
AG
land
is
impacted
by
this
yeah.
So
then
it
seems
like,
if
there's
a
timeline
in
the
plan
that
might
be
five
years
long
or
you
know,
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
how
urgent
this
is,
but
a
combination
of
removal
from
the
sites
that
are
amenable
to
removal,
plus
this
key
lining,
which
sounds
like
a
really
interesting
way
to
maybe
coexist
depending
on
what
the
crop
is,
it
seems
like
I,
would
be
interested
in
the
staff.
G
Taking
a
look
at
how
you
could
paste
that
you
got
960
acres
to
address,
maybe
300
or
some
number
is
unaggressive,
all
right.
It's
just
not
worth
doing,
but
of
the
remaining
six.
Then
what
what
kind
of
timeline
and
plan
would
get
those
600
acres,
remediated
and
back
into
the
system
so
that
we
only
have
say
five
percent
of
the
overall
system
that
remains
in
a
degraded
condition
from
an
agricultural
standpoint.
G
K
G
More
questions,
and
one
is
related
also
to
this
conflict
appeal,
which
is
it
also
said
in
the
packet
that
there
were
four
and
a
half
miles
of
barrier
fence
that
had
been
erected.
I,
don't
know,
that's
probably
around
the
combination
of
our
fields
and
private
fields
or
something
but
anyway,
there's
four
and
a
half
miles
is
now
degraded
and
it
would
take
$650,000
or
so
to
replace.
All
of
that,
so
another
question
I
have
going
forward
is:
is
there
maintenance
protocol,
you
know?
G
M
Depends
on
the
type
of
barrier
most
of
that
fencing
was
put
up
prior
to
2000
and
by
the
time
I
started
in
2004.
Most
of
it
was
no
longer
effective
because
it
had
not
been
properly
maintained.
It
was
almost
exclusively
vinyl
fencing
which
is
pretty
susceptible
to
degradation.
Due
to
you
know,
solar
radiation
as
well
as
wind,
and
that
type
of
thing,
so
it
does
take
a
lot
of
ongoing
maintenance
patching
holes
and
that
kind
of
thing
it
can
be
done
if
you
stay
on
top
of
it,
but
it
does
take
a
lot
of
maintenance.
M
Since
then,
people
have
started
using
other
materials
that
are
a
lot
more
resilient,
so
metal
barriers,
like
you,
see
out
at
the
reservoir,
the
Fire
Training
Center,
are
one
of
the
most
popular
and
effective
that
don't
require
nearly
as
much
maintenance.
However,
they're
a
whole
lot
more
expensive
upon
initial
installation,
so
there
are
ways
to
keep
up
with
the
maintenance,
but
you
certainly
have
the
trade-off
of
either
a
high
initial
cost
or
the
cost
of
ongoing
maintenance,
which.
G
I
mean
I,
guess
my
my
for
the
future
is.
It
would
be
great
to
have
that
be
part
of
the
trade-off.
So
we
take
a
look
at
and
again
phasing,
so
it's
not
all
six
hundred,
fifty
thousand
or
two
million
dollars
in
one
year.
It's
like
how
can
we
phase
in
and
you'd
want
that
coordinated,
I
think
with
land
remediation
right.
G
So
if
you're,
removing
prairie
dogs
or
doing
some
kind
of
barrier
fencing,
you
want
to
do
those
together
at
the
same
time,
so
that
when
you
make
the
land
better,
you
protect
it
at
the
same
time.
So
those
two
things
were
my
thoughts
with
Ag
land.
The
one
other
question
I
have
is
this
dedicated
fund
concept
seemed
fairly
nebulous
to
me
from
what
I
had
seen
so
far
dedicated
funds
in
city.
G
Talk
are
usually
taxes
of
some
kind
that
are
dedicated
by
the
voters
to
go
into
a
particular
fund
and
then
there's
budget
line
items
right
which
are
different
because
they're
not
statutorily
dedicated.
They
can
change
from
year
to
year.
So
I'd
like
to
learn
a
lot
more
about
the
not
tonight
but
about
the
fund
structure,
the
management,
the
inputs.
You
know
what
the
expectations
are,
what
other
governments
participate.
You
know
it
just
seem
like
it's
a
nice
concept,
but
the
details
on
that
will
matter
quite
a
bit.
Wait.
C
Q
I,
don't
think.
As
a
group,
we
had
tried
to
nail
it
down
that,
precisely
because
we
don't
feel
like
we're
in
the
position
to
know
what
are
all
of
the
constraints
on
creating
a
fund
like
that.
What
we're
getting
at
is
that
I
think
we
would
all
agree
that
there
was
a
structure
in
place
that
can
allow
us
to
take
advantage
of
opportunities
to
bring
in
resources,
do
it
in
and
from
multiple
multiple
sources
and
create
more
clarity
about
how
our
resources
are
coming
in,
to
cover
the
costs
of
Management
and.
G
The
reason
I
bring
it
up
is
it's
one
thing
if
it
sits
in
the
city,
you
know,
and
that's
one
kind
of
ask
from
saying
the
working
group
to
the
city.
It's
another
thing
if
it
sits
outside
the
city
and
you're
asking
the
city
to
contribute
to
it,
that's
you
know
another
thing,
and
so
who
would
be
the
convener
who
would
manage
it?
So
if
it's
going
to
be
focused
around
the
southern
grasslands
and
there's
multiple
actors
involved,
would
that
go
and
so
I
think
a
little
more
clarity
from
the
working
group?
P
By
hit
it
okay,
so
I'm
gonna
go
for
what
I
think
I'd
like
to
see.
But
I
will
also
just
comment
here
that
we're
talking
about
nine
hundred
fifty
nine
anchors
of
colony
that
need
to
be
relocated.
There's
twenty
four
thousand
acres
right
now,
if
grasslands
per
our
packet
and
if
you
look
at
what's
actually
has
prairie
dogs
on
it,
we're
looking
at
13
percent
13
percent.
That's
nothing!
P
Think
it's
incredibly
important
to
be
good
neighbors
with
that
community,
because
they
have
a
valuable
side
on
this
and
so
I'm,
extremely
in
favor
of
finding
ways
that
we
can
start
loosening
this
receiving
site.
The
second
thing
that
I
would
like
to
see
implemented
right
away
is
having
Delta
dust
be
placed
on
the
receiving
sites.
This
is
something
that
Lindsey
Stirling
Krank
sent
to
all
of
us
and,
as
you
can
see,
there's
a
very,
very
little
problems
with
this
dust.
P
Its
you
know
said
to
be
a
pesticide,
but
if
you
go
look
at
the
studies,
a
spider
and
a
moth
died.
So
this
dust
is
4
ounces,
getting
put
6
to
8
inches
into
a
burrow,
and
it's
not
like
you're
having
pollinators
down
there,
and
it's
also
been
said
that
the
roots
of
the
plants
don't
suck
this
up.
So
it's
not
going
to
affect
the
pollinators.
So
if
we
want
prairie
dog
was
plague
resistant,
prairie
dogs,
I
think
implementing
this
Delta
dust
is
imperative.
P
J
You
have
a
question
I
do
concerned
about
Sam's
talking
about
speeding
up
and
mayor
bys,
getting
it
off
of
Ag
land
and
putting
it
in
the
southern
grasslands.
But
my
understanding
is
that
it's
one
of
the
last
largest
intact
special
areas,
and
so
before
we
start
moving
animals
from
AG
land
into
one
of
our
last
remaining
special
conservation
areas.
J
I
would
hope
that
we
really
do
some
stopping
and
assessing
first,
because
it
says
right
up
there
that
there
are
going
to
be
trade-offs,
ecological
other
species
and
communities
and
I'm,
assuming
that's
not
one
moth
and
one
spider,
but
a
whole
host
of
other
creatures,
as
you
mentioned
earlier
in
the
presentation.
So
my
concern
in
terms
of
trade-offs
I
recognize
that
this
is
a
keystone
species
and
how
important
it
is,
but
those
others
are
also
important,
particularly
as
the
pressures
of
population
are
impinging
on
them.
So
that's
what
I
would
ask.
G
J
K
U
K
E
I,
just
wanna
weigh
in
and
say
I
also
agree
with
each
one
of
Mira
pies
points.
I.
Think
Mary
also
had
those
same
four
points.
In
addition
to
that,
though,
I
would
assume
that
at
some
point
in
time,
I
do
want
us
the
application
of
Delta
dust
to
the
receiving
sites,
because
I
I
am
very
concerned
that
we
are
not
doing
non-lethal
control
and
that's
what
we're
doing.
That's.
Why
we're
here
is
to
try
to
do
non-lethal
control
and
find
acceptable
environmental
situations
for
these
animals.
E
But
my
assumption
would
be
with
using
that
Delta
dust
and
I
was
very
much
involved
in
no
neonicotinoids
and
no
pesticides
and
things
like
that.
But
it
does
seem
to
me
that
if
we
can
apply
this
Delta
dust
at
the
receiving
sites
for
a
period
of
a
year
or
two
and
I'm,
not
a
biologist
I'll
be
the
first
one
to
admit
that
we,
the
hope,
would
be
that
you'd
get
healthy
colonies,
now
thriving
and
then
you
could
suspend
or
pretty
much
eliminate
the
application
of
the
Delta
dust.
E
Establishing
healthy
prairie
dog
colonies,
I'd
also
point
out
that
and
I've
already
said
it,
but
that
we
have
the
federal
government
and
we
have
other
counties,
not
just
Boulder
County,
but
we
have
Jefferson
County
Westminster
has
their
open
space
and
superior.
So
we
have
all
these
different
agencies
and
that
we
should
work
with
all
of
them
to
come
up
with
a
more
comprehensive
plan,
because
I
know,
like
I,
said
with
the
Rocky
Flats
they're
they're
moving
forward
and
then
I'll
just
bring
up.
I
am
concerned
about
the
open
space.
E
Taxes,
expiring
and
I
would
like
to
bring
up
a
conversation
of
discussing
having
a
dedicated
tax
in
2019
for
open
space
for
the
express
purpose
of
management
and
some
acquisition,
I,
don't
think
we're
done
acquiring
I
know,
there's
very
important,
160
acres
out
in
that
88,000
acres
that
we
should
be
picking
up,
but
so
that's
something
I
will
bring
up
later,
probably
at
the
retreat,
because
I
think
not
having
a
dedicated
open
space
tax
is
not
a
good
way
to
go.
Okay.
K
Looking
forward
to
that
conversation
at
the
retreats,
I
have
ever
so
short
questions
or
comments
from
Cindy
a
nearby
and
then
zan,
and
then
we
got
to
get
out
of
your
hair,
how
their
response
and
heads-up
that
I'm
gonna
come
back
to
you
at
the
end.
To
reiterate
what
you
think
you
heard
from
council
in
terms
of
adding
to
your
analysis,
Cindy
quickly.
J
Continues
to
lead
this,
it
seems
that
she
has
some
long
history
with
the
prairie
dogs,
all
of
the
pros
and
cons
surrounding
them
and
with
regarding
the
Delta
dust.
I.
Don't
know
that
much
about
it,
but
I
would
leave
it
up
to
the
biologists
rather
than
the
council,
to
be
giving
direction
on
the
safety
of
that
kind
of
thing,
and
would
hope
that
we
would
have
more
answers
from
okay.
Everybody.
P
So
an
Aldus
task
that
the
four
items
that
Lisa
Mary
and
I
have
quested
be
fast-tracked
and
not
wait
until
May
of
2019
and
I'll
also
say
that
I,
don't
think
staff
should
be
wasting
their
time
on
the
study
of
Delta
dust
when
Dan
trip
has
already
done
a
very,
very
thorough
study
and
I
would
suggest
I'm
assuming
you're
working
with
him,
but
I
would
suggest
working
with
the
studies
that
already
exist
instead
of
taking
our
time
and
our
money
to
continue
doing
more.
Okay.
K
C
You
all
of
you
in
addition
to
okay,
it's
already
been
said.
The
thing
I
would
add
on
top
of
all
of
this
is,
and
developers
should
have
to
pay
a
lot
to
relocate
on
our
public
lands.
I
think
that's
an
important
part.
Well,
anybody
from
yes,
the
developers
in
particular
I
think
she
should
have
to
to
be
a
part
of
that
solution
and
help
us
deal
with
the
thumb.
The
cost
I
don't
think
our
lessees
should
have
to,
but
I
think
developers
should.
M
Let's
see
I
heard
at
looking
at
how
we
could
address
the
960
acres
of
overlap
with
with
irrigated
agriculture.
What
that
timeline
and
plan
would
look
like
looking
at
the
trade-offs
of
installation
and
maintenance
of
prairie
dog
barriers,
what
it
would
take,
how
long
it
would
take
and
how
that
would
be
phased.
M
Looking
at
how
the
fund
would
be
structured,
whether
it
be
a
dedicated
fund
or
what
exactly
the
best
way
to
move
forward
with
something
like
that
is
to
make
sure
that
our
IPM
specialists
are
involved
in
evaluating
the
use
of
Delta
dust
and
its
potential
impacts
on
other
species.
I
think
those
were
the
main
additions.
M
K
Those
the
items
that
I
had
as
well
Council
a
couple
things.
It
is
always
my
privilege
to
facilitate
working
groups
at
your
request.
Thank
you
very
much
for
letting
me
do
that.
This
is
a
fantastic
group
of
people
and
they
worked
their
buns
off
for
you
on
this
topic
and
pushed
each
other
to
find
an
agreement
and
really
did
a
great
job.
Staff
was
an
excellent
partner
in
their
conversation.
So
I
hope
that
you
appreciate
their
work
and
I
know
that
I
speak
for
all
of
them
when
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
present
to
you.
C
C
What
I
wanted
to
say
is
she's
available
to
give
tours
of
some
of
the
conflict
areas.
Just
so
folks
could
have
a
better
sense
and
I
did
that
with
her,
and
it
was
very
eye-opening
and
she's
anyhow,
so
over
the
next
few
months,
she's
very
shy,
so
I
am
letting
you
know
that
that
is
an
offer
Sam.
What's
her
name
again,
it's
L,
he
ll.
She
was
on
the
working
group
and
just
to
see
yeah
it's
an
easy
way
to
write
around
if
she
doesn't
get
a
sense
of
yeah
yep,
but.
P
C
J
C
D
D
Many
many
meetings
really
goes
into
the
intricacies
of
both
our
city
charter
and
our
city
code
and
constitutional
election
law
and
I
thank
them
for
the
great
work
that
they
did.
So
when
this
started,
we
had
a
charter
that
the
City
Council
approved
for
the
working
group
to
look
into
and
the
Charter
was
focused
on
promoting
the
integrity
of
Elections
in
Boulder
and
the
the
mission
that
was
given
to
the
group
with
regard
to
campaign
finance,
which
is
what
we're
talking
about
tonight,
was
to
figure
out
a
way
to
maximize
the
restrictions.
D
Is
that
a
lot
of
times
when
we
have
working
groups
for
the
city,
we
try
to
beat
people
I
try
to
pick
people
that
are
sometimes
not
that
knowledgeable
I
like
to
get
people
that
are
coming
with
new
eyes
to
the
issue?
That's
not
what
we
wanted
here
and
we
wanted
people
in
this
working
group
who
had
been
through
the
ringer
so
to
speak
of
Elections.
We
had
former
council
members
on.
We
had
folks
that
were
candidates
in
elections
we
had
a
representative
from
the
League
of
Women
Voters.
D
D
V
Thank
you
guys
for
having
us
Matt
Benjamin,
thanks
Jane
for
the
introduction
and
I'm
presenting
on
behalf
of
the
working
group,
and,
let's
just
say
it
was
a
wonderful
process.
I
think
I
can
speak
for
all
of
us.
It
was
a
lot
of
fun
to
get
together
and
start
to
riff
on
some
of
the
ideas,
but,
more
importantly,
sort
of
meet
your
charge
as
to
how
to
tackle
some
of
the
challenges
ahead
of
us
and
some
were
straightforward
and
others.
V
There
is
a
litany
of
potential
ideas
out
there
and
so
you'll
sort
of
see
that
in
some
of
the
recommendations
we
have
of,
we
they're
narrowing
it
down
or
said,
there's
just
too
many
to
choose
from
we
kind
of
leave
it
to
you
as
go
forth
and
find
the
one
that
you
think
works
best.
Given
the
parameters
that
you
see
fit.
First
off.
The
thing
we
tackled
was
looking
at
Express
advocacy
and
expanding
the
definition.
V
What
was
really
important
here
is
slide.
Yes,
thank
you
appreciate
that.
That's
why
they're
here
to
keep
me
in
line
so
Express
advocacy.
One
of
the
things
that
we
looked
at
is
some
of
them
were.
Are
we
gonna
look
at
other
communities
and
really
sort
of
see?
What
are
they
doing
and
are
they
doing
anything
innovative
that
we
want
to
emulate?
The
other
was:
were
there
specific
problems
that
have
occurred
either
in
the
last
election
or
in
past
elections
that
have
really
triggered
a
specific
thing
to
tackle.
V
That
was
certainly
the
case
with
some
our
campaign
of
campaign
finance
months
stuff,
like
dark
money,
but
in
this
case
there
was
a
specific
issue
of
an
advertisement
I
think
in
2017
we're
open
boulder
put
out
an
ad
with
checkboxes,
and
it
was
a
it
sort
of
brought
up
an
issue
as
to
what?
Where
does
that
fall?
How
was
that
defined?
V
How
do
we
add
that
so
that
something
like
checkboxes,
which
everyone
and
their
mother
knew
was
a
pretty
ringing
endorsement
for
candidates,
could
be
caught
up
and
then
be
defined
as
Express
advocacy
and
this
trigger
the
disclosure
requirements
accordingly?
So
that
was
one
of
the
first
things
we
came
out
because
it
was
poignant.
It
was
fresh
in
our
minds
and
it
certainly
demanded
that
we
help
define
that.
So
should
there
be
issues
down
the
road
that
it
can
be
tackled
cleanly.
W
X
Did
yes
legally
this?
This
reflects
the
evolution
of
a
campaign
finance
disclosure
in
a
lot
of
jurisdictions.
Everybody
focused
on
Express
advocacy
at
the
beginning,
including
the
US
Supreme
Court,
because
that's
what
the
language
was
of
the
federal
law.
They
were
construing,
but
that
wasn't
a
constitutional
parameter,
and
so
the
case
law
has
evolved
and
now
not
just
the
magic
words
can
be
regulated
in
terms
of
disclosure
but
functional
equivalent.
In
that
will
this
will
this
evolution
will
be
reflected
in
the
next
topic
as
well.
Okay,.
U
Have
a
process
question-
and
this
is
probably
as
much
for
the
cleric
as
anything
so
I
agree
with
the
broad
and
I
think
that's
great.
If,
if
a
group
wants
to
do
something
that
are
not
too
sure
if
it
crosses
the
line
of
the
Buckley
line,
is
there
a
potential
or
an
opportunity
for
kind
of
an
advisory
opinion
from
the
SI
attorney's
office?
A
clerk's
office
say
this
is
on
one
side
of
the
line
or
the
other.
C
V
Alright
next
slide
so
as
Jeff
mentioned,
Express
advocacy.
Clearly,
then
I
think
necessarily
goes
to
what
we're
gonna
talk
about.
Next
of
electioneering.
Communication
bless
you,
because
we
now
have
narrowly
defined
Express
advocacy.
It
now
leaves
a
void
for
all
other
forms
of
advocating
for
a
candidate
or
or
something
in
that
regard.
It's
the
left,
overs
that
aren't
defined,
and
so
what
electioneering
communication
does
is.
It
tries
to
then
catch
all
the
other
forms
of
communication.
That
would
happen
in
a
campaign
so
that
we
do
have
way
of
triggering
disclosure.
V
Should
any
individuals
or
group
participate
in
what
is
defined
as
electioneering
communication,
but
it
is
the
leftovers
or
what
is
sort
of
not
captured
and
Express
advocacy
and
so
I
think
what's
interesting
here
is
we
do
have
some
local
municipalities,
our
sister
cities,
I.
Think
Longmont
in
Denver
have
existing
rules
on
electioneering
communication,
as
do
a
lot
of
communities
around
the
country.
So
this
is
a
well-defined
thing
that
is
out
there
and
we
were
able
to
sort
of
pull
from
that.
V
A
really
good
set
of
how
do
we
justified
and
what
is
sort
of
the
right
definition
for
it,
and
therefore
how
do
we
trigger
disclosure
at
certain
levels
of
electioneering
communication?
So
it's
really
the
spillover
of
what
express
that,
but
because
he
doesn't
catch
and
it
allows
us
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
clean,
complete
net
for
all
forms
of
communication
during
a
campaign
season
can.
V
Did
we
pick
1,000
I
think
well,
Jeff
may
may
correct
me
here,
but
I
think
it
came
down
to
finding
what
is
a
defendable
amount
of
money
that
one
could
find
for
disclosure
as
I
think
it's
mentioned.
There
is
no
formula
to
determine
what
size
city
or
how
a
city
comes
up
at
that
number
and
as
such,
we
kind
of
had
to
find
what's
the
low
and
the
high
end
and
find
some
middle
ground
that
we
thought
was
legally
defensible
and
somewhat
conservative,
so
we
sort
of
pegged
it
but
I'll.
X
X
As
I
said
a
moment
ago,
this
is
the
ultimate
evolution
of
the
case
law,
away
from
the
Express
advocacy
notion.
Here
we
have
a
disclosure
requirements
applied
to
communication
that
involves
no
Express
advocacy
at
all
merely
mentions
a
candidate
within
a
certain
proximity
to
the
election.
The
one
thing
I
want
to
mention
here
is
that
the
group
also
recommended
requiring
disclosure
of
electioneering
communications
in
issue
elections.
That's
uncharted
territory,
legally,
electioneering
has
been
well
under.
X
It
was
legalized
by
the
US
Supreme
Court
in
2003
in
the
McConnell
case,
but
I'm
not
familiar
with
it
being
applied
in
the
context
of
issue
elections
and
the
applicable
court.
A
test
for
this
is
that
there
has
to
be
a
substantial
relation
between
the
regulation
and
an
important
governmental
interest
like
deterring
quid
pro
quo
corruption.
Well,
you
don't
have
that
with
an
issue
election
right,
so
any
kind
of
this
is
reflected
in
a
bunch
of
core
decisions
that
have
really
cut
the
pins
out
from
under
the
states
with
disclosure
regulations
relating
the
issue
committee.
C
X
G
G
I
think
that
would
be
one
thing
I'd
like
to
hear
an
answer
to
is
what
are
the
pier
cities,
because
I
know
Denver
just
went
through
within
the
last
couple
of
years,
a
big
rewrite
of
their
campaign
laws
and
so
I'd
love
to
see
if
we
land
somewhere
near
where
they
land
on
the
trigger,
then
we're
gonna
be
walking
hand
in
hand
if
we
do
amicus
briefs
or
anything
like
that
and
I
agree.
Just
a
brief
comment
about
separating
the
conversation
around
candidate
elections.
G
X
Well,
the
the
notorious
checklist
that
came
up
in
over
and
over
and
over
again
in
our
working
group,
apparently
I
didn't
I've,
never
seen
it
but
I.
Guess
it
didn't
it
didn't
use
any
of
the
magic
words
right
and
it
didn't.
It
didn't
have
other
language
and
it
would
that
was
the
functional
equivalent
of
Express
advocacy,
but
it
had
pictures
with
a
check
next,
but.
X
X
V
There
was
two
ways
to
sort
of
view
this.
If
we
didn't
had
the
functional
equivalent
and
we
took
things
as
were
as
was
in
the
2017
and
how
it
was
applied,
it
was
apply.
It
was
basically
considered
electioneering
communication,
but
what,
since
we
had
new
rules,
defining
what
it
was
or
any
way
to
trigger
disclosure,
that
sort
of
communication
could
just
happen
without
any
idea
of
how
who,
when
where
why
or
how
much
was
spent
so
to
Jeff's
point,
it
was
a
way
to
catch
it.
V
So
we
added
functional,
Clinton
to
further
refine
express
advocacy
and
then
still
to
sort
of
clean
up
the
backend.
If
you
write,
if
you,
if
you
did
an
ad
that
said,
man
Bob's
a
swell
guy
and
in
a
letter
or
in
an
ad-
and
you
didn't
use
the
words
and
you
were
using
the
functional
equivalent
but
you're
still
pretty
much
nudging
in
that,
you
needed
that.
This
is
where
a
lecture
in
communication
is
meant
to
encapsulate.
Z
J
W
You
wear
this
well
I,
just
because
I
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
this
particular
stuff
where
it
started
was
our
code
before
now.
What
we
started
with
does
not
even
define
express
advocacy.
It
only
has
a
line,
there's
one
line
in
some
part
of
the
code
that
says
expressly
advocate,
and
so
that
number
one
job
was
to
define
express
advocacy,
put
a
comprehensive
definition,
and
so
you
know
what
was
in
and
what
was
out.
That
was
the
first
job.
That
was
the
previous
thing.
W
Electioneering
communications
are,
if
you
were
to
take
open,
boulders
stuff,
the
box,
the
picture
with
the
checkbox
that
would
have
been
expressed
advocacy
under
the
new
rules,
but
all
the
other
stuff
that
wasn't
didn't.
Look
that
clear
was
would
fit
into
this.
An
electioneering
communications
is
simply.
If
what
is
it,
if
you
mention
the
name
of
the
person
during
the
two
months,
is
that
right,
I
think
it
was
from
when
they
can
first
be
certified
to
to
be
a
candidate?
C
G
C
V
Obviously
you
know
you
get
the
domino
effect
and
it's
a
slippery
slope,
so
just
keeping
in
mind
as
you
consider
that
where's
an
appreciable
threshold
to
catch
the
really
big
stuff,
that's
important
versus
letting
the
other
stuff.
That's
unimportant
fall
through
the
cracks
just
to
not
have
such
a
nightmare
and.
G
AA
C
V
Because
we're
a
corporation
stand
in
the
equivalence
of
people
and
speech
and
natural
persons,
this
is
really
kind
of
a
way
for
us
to
sort
of
say:
where
do
we
validate
the
trusted
faith
and
elections
by
people
knowing
where
and
who
and
what
the
money
is
doing
in
regards
to
influencing
our
lecture?
Sorry,
I.
AB
AB
V
Thanks
yeah
I
look
over
my
shoulder
identifying
the
natural
persons
who
are
making
contributions
and
expenditures.
Again.
This
was
sort
of
a
derivative
I.
Think
all
of
us
on
the
group
we're
understanding
sort
of
the
Citizens
United,
this
sort
of
corporation
identity
around
what
they
can
do
with
regards
to
contributions
to
elections
and
in
ours.
Looking
at
how
do
we
make
sure
that
people
have
a
better
understanding
of
where
the
money
comes
from
as
it
pertains
to
how
it
influences
our
elections,
and
so
we
wanted
to
look
at.
V
As
I
said
earlier,
some
of
these
things
we
did
not
have
a
specific
settlement
as
to
a
specific
recommendation,
but
there
are
a
multitude
of
ways
in
which
you
can
pierce
the
corporate
veil
and
find
ways
to
get
to
that
natural
person.
Some
examples
are
using
sort
of
the
aggregate
of
a
personal
contribution
and
if
they
have
a
over
fifty
percent
stake
in
a
company
that
then
contributes
that
accounts
against
their
50
percent
of
their
individual
I
mean
we
can
get
nasty
and
you
can
go
down
the
rabbit
hole
as
far
as
you
choose.
V
X
This
one
and
I
want
to
take
a
minute
here
to
to
again
point
to
the
test
that
these
disclosure
requirements
have
to
satisfy.
They
have.
There
has
to
be
a
substantial
relation
between
the
disclosure
regulation
and
the
accomplishment
of
a
important
governmental
interest,
and
the
court
has
said
the
courts
have
said
those
three
interests
are
avoiding
four
quid
pro
quo:
corruption
or
its
appearance,
getting
information
to
enforce
campaign,
finance
rules
or
providing
general
information
to
the
public.
X
Wait
that
lesson
it
is
it's
very
general.
That's
the
only
rationale
for
requiring
disclosure
in
issue
elections,
for
example.
The
first
two
don't
lie
in
this
cone
in
the
context
of
this
one
and
another
I'll
mention
in
a
moment
yeah,
they
have
to
be
considered
in
the
context
of
the
city's
$100
contribution
limit
and
in
the
context
of
such
a
low
contribution
limit
for
any
donor,
the
court
might
not
find
additional
disclosure
from
people
that
are
only
donating
$100,
substantially
serving
an
important
governmental
interest
in
that
context.
So
that's
something
I
want
to
highlight
so.
W
Okay,
it's
just
to
the
other
side
of
me,
which
is
what
we
did
discuss.
The
current
under
the
current
system.
Anybody's
owns
multiple
LLC's
and
donate
multiple
hundred-dollar
contributions.
They
know
it,
the
candidate
can
be
told,
and
nobody
else
knows
it-
that
one
of
the
points
of
this
disclosure
requirement
was
to
go.
But
that
was
to
reveal
that
for
two
reasons
one
so
people
know
who
it
is.
So
it
isn't.
W
You
know
ABC
LLC,
but
it's
actual
real
person,
then
the
other
was
because
there
are
people
that
own
multiple
LLC's
and
they
can
make
fairly
significant
contributions
under
the
current
system
and
nobody's
the
wiser.
This
would
not
allow
that
this
is
because
of
the
person
every
bution
down
to
some
level
would
be
attributed
to
a
real
human
being.
So.
X
I
did
this
is
another
one
where
the
proposal
is
to
also
extend
it
to
issue
elections,
and
so
you
they
may
be
more
defensible.
Actually,
these
sorts
of
requirements,
because
an
issue
elections,
you
don't
have
a
hundred
dollar
contribution
limit.
You
have
no
contribution
limit,
however.
The
courts
have
said,
as
I
indicated
earlier,
that
there's
a
very
limited
public
interest
in
any
kind
of
disclosure
relating
to
ballot
issue
elections.
The
courts
have
struck
down
reporting
regimes
where
small
amounts
of
money
were
involved
at
the
state
level,
at
least
in
the
what.
AC
X
U
G
Matching,
well
that's
another
hook.
We
have
right
because
it's
voluntary
is
that
right,
David,
it's
voluntary
and
they
do
a
pretty
big
match
and
their
new
thing.
It's
like
ten
to
one
nine
to
one
ten
to
one.
So
that's
a
very
strong
incentive
right.
So
if
you're
gonna
take
LLC
money,
your
private
corporation
money
and
all
of
a
sudden,
you
don't
get
the
ten
to
one
match
that
they're
talking
about
doing
so.
That
might
be
another
way
for
us
to
look
at.
C
Yeah,
but
that
was
your
question
well
but
then,
if
you
say,
okay,
I'm
not
gonna
play
that
game.
Then
what's
a
no
disclosure
I
mean
that
would
be
the
you
you'd
still
want,
even
if
you're
not
gonna,
do
campaign
finance
to
try
to
capture
the
disclosure
piece
as
well,
and
even
if
we
did
do
that,
yeah
yeah.
G
I
mean
I
would
imagine
so
say
that
you
with
the
I,
don't
need
your
money,
Denver
route
and
or
Boulder
whatever
it
was,
and
you
took
money
from
corporate
donors
at
that
point
they
could
still
be
limited
to
the
amount
and
you
would
still
have
to
disclose
who
they
were
right,
so
it
would
still
be.
You
know
the
same
deal.
You'd
know
who
that
LLC's
were,
but
you
might
not
get
behind
the
corporate
veil.
In
that
case,
I
have.
C
I'm
not
sure
if
this
is
well
formed,
but
you
know
you
donate
to
a
lot
of
groups.
Do
I
think.
Let's
say
you
donate
to
Sierra
Club.
You
know
you
denote
it
you're
donating
to
the
political
side
of
things,
but
you
know
you're
just
donating
to
them,
then
when
they
make
a
contribution,
they
have
to
go
back
and
specify
everybody.
That's
given
them
contributions
throughout
the
year,
because
a
portion
of
that
might
be
spent
on
a
ballot
measure.
Is
that
how
this
would
play
out.
W
C
No
I
mean
under
what's
being
proposed,
I'm
just
curious
as
a
nonprofit
involved
in
elections
if
they
have
to
keep
track
of
any
at
every
donation
that
might
end
up
funding
a
ballot
measure,
they
have
to
keep
track
of
what
portion
that
of
a
dollar
might
have
come
from
somebody.
You
get
my
question.
Yeah.
Z
And
we
did
try
to
parse
that
out
and
I'm,
not
sure
I
mean
you
guys
tell
me
whether
we
landed
on
something.
But
you
know
if
it
is
a
general
contribution,
part
of
membership
dues.
Now
you
don't
have
to
disclose.
But
if
you
do
a
fundraising
campaign
for
a
certain
election,
then
those
would
have
to
be
disclosed.
So
that's
generally
the
bright
line
that
we
talked
about,
I'm,
not
sure,
we've
got
that
super
defined.
Well,
that's
something
we'd
be
working
on.
If
you
direct
us
to
go
ahead.
W
Was
my
memory
of
this
conversation
and
I
couldn't
miss
something,
but
my
memory
of
it
was
that
the
way
we
intended
this
to
work
is
that,
if
you're
going
to,
if
a
group
is
going
to
do
advertising
in
a
campaign,
then
those
come
the
money,
then
the
money
that
they
spend
has
to
be
contributed
for
that
campaign,
and
it's
reported
just
like
anything
else.
So
in
other
words,
there
isn't
any.
What
you're
talking
about
general
contributions
that
then
get
spent
in
campaigns?
Well,
I
got
a
plenty
of
I
thought.
C
Do
you
know
if
you
do
if
you
contribute
to
the
political
arm
of
many
nonprofits,
you
don't
always
specify,
but
only
for
this
ballot
measure
you're,
like
hey
I,
believe
in
your
conservation
actions,
I
go
knock
them
dead,
and
so
anyhow,
I
just
don't
want
to
make
it
unduly
complicate
for
nonprofits
who
are
working
on
multiple
issues
in
an
election
yeah.
That's
just
something
to
think
about
is
how
to
make
it.
So
it's
not
onerous.
V
Of
the
things
we
certainly
touched
on
was
something
there
is
a
sometimes
an
expectation
of
anonymity.
If
you
give
to
a
contribution
that
you're
not
expected
to,
then
this
be
too
close
disclosed.
If
they
then
act
politically,
we
use
the
Real
Estate
Association
as
an
example.
If
you
you
give
to
them
and
then
they
support
something
like
do,
you
have
an
expectation
of
privacy
to
some
extent
and
so
I
think
there's
some
balancing
to
be
done
there,
but
it
is
worth
noting
that,
as
we
discussed,
the
LLC's
is
a
potential
problem.
V
We
have
not
seen
it
as
systemic
in
our
current
election,
so
it's
worth
noting
that
this
isn't
a
problem.
That's
well
defined
that
we
see
happening.
It's
certainly
more
of
a
preventative
issue
of
what
could
be
seen
as
an
issue
that
crops
up
down
the
road.
So
it
is
worth
sort
of
separating
that
out
that
we
don't
have
any
clear
evidence
that
it
is
something
that's
systemic
ly,
causing
our
elections
to
be
swayed
in
a
dramatic
way
based
looking
back
at
past
expenditure
reports,
so.
G
I
guess
I
would
say
that
I
agree
with
that.
Matt
I,
don't
think
it's
really
played
an
election.
There
LLC
contributions.
You
can
see
them
on
many
reporting
forms,
so
it
does
happen.
I
would
be
kind
of
interested
in
the
possibility
of
tying
having
to
take
contributions
from
real
persons
to
our
incentive
program
for
our
matching
program.
So
that
would
be
something
that
I
think
would
be
clearly
legal
right.
So
it
wouldn't
have
any
issues
around
that
and
it's
just
around
council
elections
right.
G
J
C
V
You
add
that
sort
of
requirement
to
the
campaign
finance
stuff,
keeping
in
mind
that
the
corporate
side
or
business
side
is
still
limited
to
a
hundred
dollars,
and
so,
where
Denver
does,
it
is
because
they're
contra
contribution
limits
are
higher.
It's
trying
to
allow
an
individual
to
be
closer
to
the
capacity
of
a
corporation
to
donate
at
that
higher
level.
So
it's
trying
to
bring
equity
by
having
that
match
at
that
nine
to
one.
If
everyone.
O
V
Is
already
at
$100,
and
then
you
elevate
and
added
under
more
weight
to
an
individual
comfort
comp
contribution
over
corporate.
Then
you
may
be
swayed
the
balance
the
other
way,
rather
than
trying
to
bring
equity
up
like
Denver's,
doing,
to
make
individuals
closer
to
that
of
a
corporate
ability
to
contribute
at
the
higher
end
of
those
numbers.
So
that's
the
subtlety
of
we're
already
so
low.
It's
not
undue
burden
on
an
individual
to
contribute
at
the
same
level
as
a
corporation.
E
Why
would
we
even
go
there?
I
thought
we
always
read
that
right
now
that
we
would
have
it
associated
with
the
natural
person,
not
an
LLC
and
the
problem.
As
said
the
boss
said
with
an
LLC,
you
don't
know
who
it
is,
and
so
I
just
think.
If
you're
gonna
take
matching
funds,
you
can
be
clean
and
you
can
take
matching
suits
with
real
people.
C
G
Problem
with
C's
it
could
be,
and
this
math
is
kind
of
a
counter-argument
to
what
you
were
saying.
The
same
person
could
own
all
10
LLC's,
each
and
now
you're,
allowing
the
corporation
to
multiply
the
influence
of
one
person
behind
it.
So
I
think
what
we're
trying
to
prevent
is
the
fact
that
we
can't
know
when
their
LLC's,
if
it's
one
person
or
if
it's
ten
people
behind
ten
LLC
and.
AA
So
I
just
want
to
say
it
so
I
really
studied
up
on
the
Denver
measure
whose
ballot
measure
we
it
won't
go
on
in
effect
until
2021,
because
it's
a
significant
they
have
to
fund
it.
It's
it's
a
it's
a
nine
to
one
match
what
they
really
the
key
element.
There
is
that
if
you
participate,
which
you
would
be
a
fool
to
be
a
candidate
and
not
participate
with
a
nine
to
one
match,
so
they
did
two
things:
they
limited
the
donation
to
natural
persons.
AA
If
you
participate
and
again
it's
a
voluntary
participation
so
that
you're
not
required
a
ninety
one
match
and
a
fifty
dollar
limit
and
natural
persons
only
so
I
go
out.
Matt
gives
me
50
bucks
from
my
campaign
that
results
in
a
total
of
five
hundred
dollars.
My
campaign.
The
way
I
can
spend
that
what
I
can
do
with
that
money,
so
in
the
advertising
or
whatever
they
don't
limit
expenditures,
they
limit
the
income
side.
AA
G
C
G
So
currently
that
change
wouldn't
affect
disclosure
so
you're
talking
about.
Do
we
want
to
try
and
pierce
the
corporate
veil,
yep
I,
think
for
candidates
if
we
make
it
natural
persons,
it's
a
good
question
and
then
it
just
goes
to
issue
elections
and
I
think
with
issue
elections.
It
might
be
dicey
er
to
do
because
of
citizens
united
I'd
be
willing
to
willing.
X
Actually,
the
exposure
in
the
issue-
elections
isn't
citizen
united,
it's
a
couple
of
federal
court
cases.
The
involving
Colorado's
law
and
Colorado
have
the
core.
The
federal
courts
have
not
given
us
the
kind
of
a
direction
that
we
would
like
to
have
so
I.
Didn't
this
caution:
I
keep
bringing
up
cuts
through
anything.
We
do
with
issue
disclosure
just
because
the
the
courts
at
the
state
level
pull
the
pins
out
from
every
effort.
The
state
is
made
to
try
and
secure
disclosure.
X
So
now
the
state
has
a
regime
where,
if
you
spend
under
two
thousand
dollars-
or
some
number
like
you
have
to
disclose
your
name
and
your
bank
account
that's
yet.
Then,
when
you
reach
a
trigger
amount
of
$5,000,
then
you
have
to
disclose
retro
actively
all
your
contributions,
but
up
until
then,
no
did
no
additional
disclosure
required.
W
Thought
on
that
I
read
carefully
the
case
that
was
used
to
justify
getting
rid
of
boulders,
remember
about
contractors
in
issue
elections
to
get
rid
of
that
and
that
I
have
to
say.
Reading
that
case
I
would
this
is
me
I'd
push
the
envelope
on
this
one,
because
the
justification
that
was
put
forward
was
oh
well.
There's
no
quid
pro
quo.
Give
me
a
break.
W
C
C
U
I
think
we
have
to
get
a
little.
Let's
have
to
tells
us,
otherwise
we
have
to
keep
a
little
bit
more
guidance
because
I
don't
think
we're
telling
them
what
they.
What
we
want
disclose
with
the
on
the
issue.
Side
of
things,
in
other
words,
is
that
that
the
owners
of
the
company
is
that
the
CEO
is
the
board
of
directors.
I
think
we
have
to
give
a
I
know.
U
J
V
Recommendation,
no
there's
so
many
different
ways
to
slice.
This
pie
of
how
you
find
a
definition
is
it
50%
stake?
Is
that
the
board
of
directors?
Is
it
just?
The
CEO?
Is
the
person
who
writes
the
check
I
mean
he
literally
could
slice
this
a
million
different
directions,
and
so
we
saw
that
just
bounty
of
opportunity
and
said
until
you
define
what
you
want.
C
W
C
G
C
I'll
just
know
that
if
we
say
if
you're
doing
matching
you
got
to
limit
to
natural
persons,
we
will
get
95%
of
what
we
want
very
quickly.
So
maybe
we
say:
hey
somebody
spent
a
little
time
figuring
out
controlling
interests
and
leave
it
at
that
and
if
it's
too
complicated,
then
it's
not
a
priority,
because
we
solve
our
problem.
V
G
G
Know
you
summed
up
all
right:
I
just
said
on
the
corporate
side,
when
we
know
that
corporations
donated
to
an
issue
campaign,
it
often
says
a
lot.
You
know.
So,
if
Anadarko
donates
against
you
some
kind
of
oil
and
gas
thing,
then
we
know
you
know
that
it's
being
opposed
by
a
particular
sector,
yeah.
U
Think
we've
seen
very
very
little
LLC
contributions
to
candidates,
but
we've
seen
multiple
millions
of
dollars
donated
by
companies
to
issues
campaigns
right
and
in
the
past
is
we
don't
have
to
speculate
about?
This
has
happened
already
right,
but
maybe
that's,
maybe
that's
that
in
and
of
itself
is
sufficient
to
tell
you
about
how
folks
are
lining
up
on
the
issue
right.
U
G
U
Some
things
up,
yeah
I,
think
one
thing
we
should
just
bear
in
mind
is:
if
we
do
it
on
that,
I'm
with
Sam
I'm,
not
sure
I
want
to
go
down
this
path.
But
if
we
do
go
down
this
path,
my
guess
is
the
pushback
will
get.
Is
okay,
then,
why
stop
it
for
profit?
Why
not
nonprofits,
let
us
find
out
it:
okay,
who's
on
the
board
of
the
nonprofit's
and
who
makes
well-
and
you
say
well-
don't
profit
some
nice
people
and
so
on
so
forth.
No.
U
C
C
V
Right
so
clarifying
the
regulations
for
committees
that
coordinate
advertising
similar
to
Express
advocacy.
This
was
something
that
kind
of
came
up
from
a
specific
kind
of
general
instance
in
the
2017
election.
This
was
where
there
was
a
plan
boulder
advertisement
that
had
both
their
unofficial
campaign
committee
and
their
issue
committee
have
a
joint
ad
and
so
thought
being
well.
Is
it
appropriate
to
have
joint
advertising
between
groups
that
should
generally
maybe
not
be
so
coordinated,
was
the
thought
what
we?
V
What
we
sort
of
came
on
is
that
you
were
sort
of
walking
a
very
fine,
if
not
a
dangerous
line
down
free
speech,
but
what
it
did
really
wake
us
up
to
a
freedom
association
is
well
thanks
mark,
but
it
also
led
us
to.
Maybe
we
should
just
be
clarifying
if
they
are
to
coordinate
what
that
coordination
or
collaboration
is,
and
so
because
the
thing
that
we
got
to
was
well
there's
no
campaign
limits
for
issue
committees,
unlike
unofficial
candidate
committees.
V
So
could
you
basically
be
having
unofficial
candidate
committees
riding
the
coattails
of
what
is
an
unlimited
set
of
donations
and
and
sort
of
coffers,
and
is
there
balance
there?
So
the
thought
being
here
is
an
na
and
appreciate
what
would
Alan
Stevens
they
already
operate
under
this
sort
of
proposed
to
proportional
allocation
of
spending
by
their
own
good
deeds.
But
we
thought
well.
Why
don't?
V
We
recommend
that
that
should
just
be
the
rule
that
you,
if
you
have
a
third
of
the
page,
that
that
group
covers
a
third
of
the
cost,
and
this
is
a
way
for
us
not
to
infringe
on
freedom
of
speech
or
freedom
of
association.
But
it
does
in
lay
that
there's
trust
and
faith
that
one
group
isn't
riding
the
coattails
of
one's
bigger
coffers
on
the
backside.
V
So
that's
where
we
sort
of
have
here
reporting
must
include
the
total
cost,
join
material
and
the
amount
of
committee
paid
for
its
portion,
and
you
know
obviously
prohibiting
contributions
from
one
committee
being
provided
to
another
back
and
forth.
So
that's
where
we're
at
it
was
a
thought
of
an
idea.
We
backtracked.
It
said:
let's
just
clarify
the
rules,
so
we
can
just
make
this
clean
on
the
back
end,
yeah.
U
Great
solution,
love
it
that's
fantastic.
The
only
thing
I
would
add
to
it
is,
as
I've
made
an
earlier
comment,
it
would
be
great
if
we
could
have
staff
trained
and
ready
to
provide
advisory
opinions
so
that
if
the
of
the
UCC
and
the
IC
some
sort
of
joint
thing
that
can
come
in
to
staff
and
say
we
think
this
is
lovely
6040.
But
we
want
your
ruling
on
this.
U
We
can
rely
on
it
and
the
staff
says
no,
it's
really
5050,
they
say:
okay,
fine,
we'll
go
with
whatever
you
say
and
then
that
so
we
don't
have
a
fight.
Somebody
comes
in
later
and
says:
well
you
miss
a
portion,
did
staff
can
say
if
they
see
kids,
they
don't
want
to
see
it,
they
don't
have
to
as
they
seek
it
and
that's
kind
of
binding
on
the
community.
That
staffs
opinion
is
objective
and
unbiased
and
they
can
rely
on
that
and.
C
C
V
This
sort
of
necessarily
rolls
to
the
next
there's
sort
of
order
to
this
ensure
proper
disclosure
of
various
types
of
media.
This
was
in
our
due
diligence
of
looking
at
other
communities
around
the
country
and
what
they're
doing
with
regards
to?
How
do
we
communicate
where
who
is
behind
various
ads
and
California
has
has
probably
perhaps
some
of
the
most
progressive
solutions
with
regards
to?
V
C
X
C
X
I
felt
this
ribbon
requirement
be
paid
for
by
Bob,
you
know,
or
the
top
contributors
were
Bob
Betty
and
so
on.
My
the
legal
sort
of
issues
spotting
on
this
one
is
the
same
as
earlier
in
the
context
of
the
$100
contribution
limit.
It
will.
Will
this
ribbon
substantially
serve
an
important
governmental
interest?
You
know
identifying
the
two,
the
three
top
contributors
in
the
context
of
an
election
where
nobody
can
contribute
more
than
$100
see.
X
So
that's
that's
an
issue
to
look
at
with
this
again
in
issue
elections,
where
you
have
no
contribution
limit,
the
it
makes
a
lot
more
sense.
It
might
well
satisfy
the
governmental
interest,
but
again
you
have
to
pay
attention
to
that
line
of
cases
here
in
Colorado
that
basically
don't
require
any
kind
of
disclosure
at
all
from
issue
committees
until
they're
spending
a
substantial
amount
of
money.
X
C
X
C
V
X
R
U
I'm
struggling
with
what
you
guys
are
recommending
here,
you
say
the
names
of
the
people
who
paid
for
the
ad.
If
a
candidate
had
a
hundred
donors,
you
don't
have
to
put
the
name
of
the
hundred
donors
on
there.
You
say
campaign
to
reelect
Sam
Weaver
period.
Right,
then
that's
good
enough!
Isn't
it
or
you
recommending
something
more
than
that
for
candidates.
C
U
There's
like
a
hundred
way
tie
for
first
place
right
right,
so
so
that
kind
of
is
not
relevant
I.
Don't
you
guys
aren't
recommending
that
we
have
top
contributor
disclosures?
Are
you
I
just
talked
about
candidates
just
stay
with
candidates
for
a
second,
so
four
official
candidates
committee?
Are
you
recommending
any
change
other
than
maybe
font
size?
We
can
talk
about
that,
but
you're
not
requiring
any.
You
need
listing
other
than
a
committee
to
really
like
Sam
Weaver
right.
That's
that's
all
you
guys
are
good
with
that.
I
would.
AA
U
Committee,
so
so
with
for
the
official
Kanaka
me,
the
only
thing
to
recommend
it
is
just
a
standardization
of
the
of
the
ribbon,
the
disclosure,
so
no
one
gets
away
with
it
a
little
teeny
correct,
but
other
than
that.
No
change
is
that
right
for
candidate,
correct,
okay,
so
move
on
to
an
official
candidate
committees,
same
thing:
they
are
you
guys
requiring
disclosure
of
names
of
natural
people
and,
if
so,
how
deep
into
the
stack
are
you
gonna
go
for
that
I
think.
V
How
deep
is
somewhat
dependent
on
the
previous
conversation
of
the
natural
persons
conversation,
whether
you
want
those
to
be
in
parity?
So
if
you
were
to
embark
on
that,
that
would
I
think
mean
that
you'd
want
to
have
a
similar
disclosure
here
as
well.
So
we
leave
that
open
based
on.
If
you
choose
option
a
you
therefore
choose
option
C
and.
V
G
But
it's
in
a
totally
different
scale:
I
mean
I
just
focus
on
candidates
for
a
moment,
because
it's
only
hundred
bucks
per
and
you
have
the
city
clerk
providing
a
website
where,
as
long
as
you
list
your
name
properly,
you
know
it's
the
committee
to
re-elect
the
Lisa
Moore's
l,
you
know
whoever
treasurer
right.
That's
what
we
put
on
all
our
materials.
G
Anybody
can
go
to
the
website
and
look
up
who
the
donors
are
so
I
feel
like
we're,
like
90%
of
the
way
there
for
official
candidates
and
even
for
unofficial
candidate
committees,
because
they
have
the
same
limits
and
the
same
kind
of
deal.
If
you
put
their
the
name
of
the
unofficial
candidate
committee
and
you
go
on
the
clerk's
website,
you
can
look
at
who
the
donors
are
and
there's
a
hundred
dollar
limit.
So
I
feel
like
our
risks
here
are
actually
more
like
Google,
Adwords
and
Facebook
ads,
and
things
like
that.
G
Where
I
think,
when
people
started
doing
this,
like
me
in
2015
and
more
in
2017,
it
wasn't
clear
at
all
how
that
ribbon
requirement
applied
to
a
Google
ad
right
there,
when
you
click
through
you're
gonna
be
at
their
website
and
their
website
is
gonna.
Be
able
to
you
know
it's
going
to
tell
you
on
the
website.
G
So
there's
a
lot
of
gray
area
that
I
don't
know
I'd
like
recommendations
from
somebody,
because
it's
non-trivial
to
do
the
full
tax
that
you
would
put
on
the
yard
sign
or
a
sticker
on
a
little
thing
that
runs
by
Twitter
or
Facebook
or
whatever
so
I.
Think
the
complexity
for
candidate
and
unofficial
candidate
committees
is
really
around.
Have
you
handled
the
electronic
advertising
component
of
it
and
I'm
going
to
issue
stuff?
Yet?
But
okay.
C
So
pause
and
let
us
think
about
that
to
me:
it's
just
important
that
you
have
paid
for,
because
everybody's
limit
to
a
hundred
bucks-
and
this
is
a
small
community-
you
just
go
on
the
website,
like
we
kind
of
know
the
the
groups
that
that's
a
it
feels
like
the
disclosure.
Is
there
me
it's
the
ballot
measures
that
I
think
are
more
important
but
candidates.
What
do
we
think
about
candidates?
I
mean.
E
C
AE
Currently
for
ads,
we
have
disclosure
that
says
paid
for
by
committee
to
elect
ABC,
but
if
you're
asking
for
donations
contributions,
then
you
have
to
add
the
treasurer
and
if
you're,
an
unofficial
candidate
committee
and
you're
asking
for
donations,
then
you
have
more
to
put
in
this,
has
been
authorized
by
the
candidate
or
not
authorized.
So
it
comes
in
when
you
asked
for
money.
I
see
very
few
ads
or
Flyers
that
ask
for
contributions.
So.
Z
C
AD
In
the
language
that
the
committee
came
up
with
I
think
effectively
with
candidates,
it
would
only
apply
to
independent
expenditures
because
it
only
applies
to
donations
over
a
thousand
dollars
and
that's
the
only
way
you
can
do.
A
donation
over
a
thousand
dollars
is
through
an
independent
expenditures.
Once
you
combine,
you
have
a
committee
and
then
so
that's
four
candidates.
Okay,.
W
AD
Through
in
terms
of
the
language,
then
that
thousand
dollars
also
applies
to
issue
committees.
So
with
issue
committees,
if
you
have
contributors
of
a
thousand
dollars
or
more,
then
you
have
to
list,
you
know
committing
to
s
to
B,
and
if
you
have
two
or
three,
it's
maximum
of
three
contributors
over
a
thousand
bucks
you're
supposed
to
list
the
names
of
the
three
top
people
wait.
C
AD
C
G
O
G
W
G
C
W
W
What
became
clear
to
a
lot
of
us
is
that
the
way
the
election
code
is
organized
right
now
is
so
complicated
and
we
frankly
could
Mike
certainly
couldn't
keep
track
of
which
piece
is
interacted
with
which
people
with
with
which
pieces,
which
is
why,
in
the
end,
we
recommended
that
this
whole
thing
get
rewritten
just
to
sort
all
this
kind
of
stuff
out.
You
know
where
we've
got
a
rule.
What
exactly
does
it
apply
to?
How
does
it
apply
to
that,
because
we
simply
didn't
have
time
to
do
all
of
that.
Yeah.
C
All
right,
so
we
are,
we,
we
have
to
keep
moving
so
I
think
we
say
yes
to
this
very
rare,
narrow
thing
on
Canada,
okay,
yes
and
then,
when
we
get
to
the
issue
part,
this
is
a
lot
more
complicated.
Let's
talk
about
that.
What's
being
proposed
is
very
clear:
I,
don't
know
what
the
whole
font
thing.
It
is
easier
to
read,
but
but
more
importantly,
it's
what
must
be
disclosed
right
which
in
you
are
promoted
you're,
proposing
the
names
of
natural
persons.
C
X
X
E
E
Y
C
So
I,
just
I'm
gonna,
be
les
convinced
on
that.
This
is
the
kind
of
stuff
that
makes
people
crazy,
you're,
trying
to
design
an
ad
you're
trying
to
jam
it
in
up
the
font
is
0.5
less
than
it's
supposed
to
be,
and
somebody's
gonna
file
a
violation,
that's
the
kind
of
stuff
that
makes
people
go,
I,
hate
politics,
so
I
guess
well,
there's
more
than
that,
but
that.
C
J
J
U
A
question
is
this:
three:
top
donors,
if
they're
over
a
thousand
or
three
top
donors,
no
matter
how
big
this
is
four
issues
over
a
thousand
over
time
and
the
second
is
we're
not
going
to
go
down
the
rabbit
hole
of
natural
persons
versus
donors.
So
if
Excel
wants
to
do
a
million
dollar
ad,
then
there
and
spend
a
million
dollars.
U
V
V
Don't
need
well,
though
cuz,
then
you
would
sort
of
retro
actively
kind
of
be
doing
that
anyway,
so
you
could
choose
not
to.
It
was
sort
of
the
assumptive
close
that
if
you're
gonna
do
the
natural
person
beast,
then
of
course
that
thus
would
want
to
be
included
here
as
well.
That
was
kind
of
the
combo
here,
presumably.
G
This
is
some
kind
of
political
action
committee.
That's
been
formed
right
and
so
they're
the
people
buying
the
ad
or
an
organization
and
the
top
donor,
or
only
donor,
is
Corporation
B.
Then
they
have
to
put
their
name
out
there.
So
I
think
this
is
perfectly
workable
without
piercing
the
corporate
veil,
because
if
they're,
you
know
some
kind
of
political
organization
and
we
get
to
know
who
their
top
three
corporate
donors
are,
that
still
tells
a
lot
of
information
about
who
cares
about
the
issue.
W
Well,
just
one
thing
on
this
whole
kind
of
stuff
is:
we
were
trying
to
at
least
start
to
look
preemptively
on
a
lot
of
this
stuff,
because
in
2017
there
was,
you
know
we
were
way
behind
the
eight
ball,
and
so
this
is,
you
know,
pushing
the
envelope,
so
you
don't
get
behind
the
eight
ball
and
if
you
don't
ask
who's
behind
the
ad
I
guarantee
you
there
will
be
a
whole
bunch
of
electioneering.
Communication
and
you'll
have
no
idea
where
the
money
is
coming.
Okay,.
C
V
Clarifying
the
role
of
the
city
clerk
in
sort
of
again
moving
through
doing
our
sort
of
general
housekeeping
I
think
we
sort
of
looked
at
there's
we
identified
through
three
issues:
complaints
about
potential
potential
election
violations
are
required
to
be
kept
competent
confidential
by
the
city
unless
a
hearing
is
scheduled.
Other
complaints
are
generally
thus
released
by
the
complaining
party
anyway,
this
whole
confidential
eye
thing
usually
gets
blown
up
by
an
ad
or
some
in
the
daily
camera
hearing
officer
perceived
unfairness.
V
O
V
So
with
regards
that
recommendations,
election
complaint
administrator
of
the
clerk,
rather
than
the
city
manager,
sort
of
gets
rid
of
any
of
that
issue
of
the
hired
individual,
making
a
passing
judgment
on
those
that
hire
them.
So
there's
an
issue
that
that
cleans
that
part
up
a
little
bit
and
then
the
administrator
complaint
practices
divergent
points
of
view
on
this
in
our
group.
How
do
we
disclose
some
wanted?
V
More
public
disclosure
from
the
get-go
that
you
don't
take
a
vow
of
silence
from
the
city's
position
and
you
just
come
out
and
say
what's
out
there,
because
it's
already
out
in
public
anyway,
because
the
complaint
is
done
it
so
you
might
as
well
meet
them
in
the
public
realm
and
then
some
of
us
also
said
maybe
just
leaves
it,
as
is
because
you
know,
unless
it
determines
a
higher
level
threshold
of
a
hearing,
everything
else.
That's
either
done
in
a
cure
or
is
handled
between
Diane
and
and
everybody.
V
Just
let
those
things
happen
and
you
don't
need
to
bring
that
up
to
public
record.
So
there
was
some
mix
on
that.
So
we
sort
of
interested
to
hear
your
thoughts
on
that
and
then
challenges
the
clerk
can
decisions
in
campaign
finance
positions
should
require
an
external
hearing
officer.
This
is
a
way
to
get
out
of
his
the
clerk,
a
passing
judgment
on
his
or
her
own
decisions
and
therefore
having
a,
perhaps
also
a
right
of
repeat,
a
right
of
appeal
in
that
and
in
that
instance
as
well.
W
B
C
The
idea
is
that
there
could
be
a
threshold
between
minor
and
potentially
more
serious.
Yes,
okay,
so
let's
just
pause
there
is
there
any.
This
is
our
business
right?
Were
you
giving
up
to
say
anything?
No,
okay,
all
right!
Let's,
let's
take
these
one
at
do
we
have
questions
I,
don't
say:
let's
tick
them
off
one
at
a
time,
but
good
questions.
First,.
U
It's
a
question
of
recommendation,
but
did
you
guys
consider
with
respect
to
those
that
dude
go
to
a
public
hearing?
Yeah
I
get
the
inherent
conflict,
you
know
with
the
city
manager
and
the
City
Attorney
and
the
city
clerk
involved,
and
you
guys
thought
about
a
mutual
age
arrangement
with
another
city
or
another
County,
because
we
with
the
City
Attorney's
office
does
that
already?
If
there's
an
ethics
complaint
against
one
of
us,
they
don't
handle
it.
U
E
C
AD
Just
want
to
add
one
thing,
though,
or
maybe
Lynette,
but
there
is
a
problem
with
that
model
in
that
during
election
season.
The
City
Clerk's
office
is
like
one
of
the
most
busy
departments
in
the
city
and
that's
not
unique
to
Boulder.
So
trying
to
get
somebody
from
another
city
during
an
election
season
is
not
an
easy
task,
and
some
of
the
indications
I
think
that
Lynette
has
had
is
yeah
we'll
be
there
if
we're
available.
But
good
luck
with
that.
AD
G
If
we
have
a
mutual
aid
with
another
County,
where,
if
this
happens,
it's
one
of
the
people
from
this
to
the
attorney's
office,
that
does
it
because
they
should
probably
not
be
as
busy
as
the
clerk,
and
they
would
be
good
at
interpreting
our
laws
and
that's
how
we
do
it
right
now,
when
we
need
to
have
an
investigation.
Well,.
AD
G
The
one
problem
might
have
was
the
municipal
court
judge,
though
generally
I
think
you
do
a
great
job?
Is
you
have
that
same
conflict
where
the
council
hires
that
personal
yeah,
so
I
wouldn't
want
that
person
to
have
to
make
it
judgment
about
their
employer?
So
I
like
the
hearing
officer,
because
then
we
could
use
them
for
the
shelter
when
there's
conflict,
so
everything.
C
Okay,
but
I
guess
one
thing
is
we
had
a
complaint
last
election
where
I
think
Fort
Collins
came
down
and
interviewed
us
all,
but
it
was.
It
was
a
complaint
that
alleged
something
that
wasn't
against
the
law,
so
we
had
to
go
through
and
they
asked
us
if
we
did
all
these
things-
and
we
said
yes
because
it's
not
against
the
law
and
they
agreed
yeah.
It's
not
against
a
lot.
So
it's
like
well,
why
do
we
have
to
have
the
hearing?
Because
the
law
is
that
was
not
in
questioned.
C
So
it's
means
to
me
that
there
should
be
some
thresholds,
which
is
if
the
fact,
if
the
facts
that
are
agreed
upon,
aren't
a
violation
of
the
law,
then
it
doesn't
meet
the
threshold
that
make
sense
so
I
guess
there
has
to
be
an
alleged
violation
of
law,
not
just
a
complaint
but
a
yeah
I
to
me:
that's
a
little
muddy.
What
is
the
threshold?
What
well.
AA
I
was
just
going
to
say,
however,
interpretation
of
the
law.
To
many
of
us,
the
law
is
quite
clear
right,
so
there
is
no
interpretation
of
the
law,
but
interpretation
of
the
law
or
a
violation
of
the
law
is
in
the
eye
of
the
beholder,
and
so
what
may
seem
incredibly
clear
to
you
that
was
not
a
violation
of
the
law
may
not
be.
C
G
Talked
about
the
process?
Okay,
because
Mark's
point
is
exactly
right
and
that
you
know
in
the
case,
in
2017,
there
was
very
strong
and
very
divergent
opinions
on
what
the
law
said
right
and
that's
what
needed
the
interpretation
and
so
now
we're
cleaning
up
for
something
that
didn't
have
enough
clarity
to
it.
But
I
mean
to
me:
wasn't
talking
about.
C
G
I
had
to
go
through
the
same
process
you
did,
but
the
so
when
there's
a
complaint
to
the
clerk,
if
it
doesn't
allege
a
violation
of
law,
if
it's
an
administrative
type
thing
where
it's
like
they
didn't
file,
you
know
on
time,
as
opposed
to
they
didn't
disclose
an
expenditure
as
the
expenditure
as
a
matter
of
law,
and
the
timing
of
the
reporting
is
more
administrative
in
nature.
But
if
anybody
alleges
a
real
violation
of
law,
I
think
it
should
be
disclosed
so
that
people
can
follow
the
process.
G
I
think
there
are
two
tiers
of
things
here,
and
one
thing
is
whether
you
know
as
an
employee
of
the
clerk.
Could
clear
it
is
maybe
one
test
point,
because
if
the
clerk
isn't
required
to
clear
it
or
it's
not
a
violation
of
law,
then
I
don't
think
it
should
be
disclosed.
But
I
really
do
think
that
if
there's
a
process
like
it's
just
about
transparency
and
during
the
election,
it's
most
important
that
the
candidates
not
be
involved,
but
that
the
civvie
process
have
definition.
G
C
That,
in
your
scenario,
there's
a
record
people
can
follow
it
and
then
that
conclusion
is
published,
because
that's
the
part
is
the
part
where
we
have
to
be
silent,
which
I
find
infuriating,
because
then
you're
never
really
cleared.
Nobody
ever
says.
If
you're
cleared
or
not
don't
it
seems
to
me
that
if
that's
what
you,
if
you're,
including
that
the
clerk
publishes
the
result
as
well,
okay.
W
U
Building
on
Sam's
I
think
two
things
one
is,
it
would
be.
Hopefully,
if
the
ordinance
could
give
I
know,
it's
not
gonna
be
exhaustive
David,
but
if
the
ordinance
can
give
examples
of
those
things
that
can
be
handled
administratively,
those
things
that
are
subject
to
a
public
hearing
so
I
wouldn't
want
there
to
be
fight
later
on
about.
U
Well,
that
was
just
administrative
and
in
the
complaint
says
no,
this
needs
to
be
a
hearing,
and
then
we
have
a
fight
about
a
fight
and
so
I
think,
to
the
extent
that
you
can
provide
a
non-exhaustive
list
of
examples
of
things
like.
Finally,
in
late,
it's
administrative
I'm,
failing
to
disclose
a
donor
or
an
expenditure,
maybe
a
public
hearing
or
the
whatever
you
come
with
the
list
and
put
it
on
one
of
two
sides
and
hopefully
you'll
be
able
to
come
other
relatively
comprehensive
list,
because
I
think
we've
probably
seen
most
things
yeah.
C
AD
AB
O
W
C
W
And
then
there
are
complaints
basically
is
and
a
complaint
is
Diane's
stuff
is
she
sees
something?
That's
not
right.
She
gets
hold
of
the
candidate
or
their
whatever
and
gets
it
straight
down.
But
then
there
are
complaints
which
are
third
party
issues.
I
complain
that
so-and-so
did
acts
that
goes
to
the
clerk
right
and
that's
like
that's
the
stuff
we're
talking
about
now.
She
could
say
you
don't
know
what
you're
talking
about
you've
completely
misread
the
law.
W
G
Think
that's
a
complaint
needs
to
allege
a
violation
of
law.
Exactly
so,
if
there's
a
complaint
that
comes
in
that
doesn't
allege
a
violation
of
laws
couldn't
be
improper,
I
think
it
should
still
follow
the
course
of
the
clerk
acknowledges
that
a
complaint
was
filed
and
says:
I
dismiss
it
because
it
doesn't
assert
a
violation
of
law,
and
then
that
can
be
appealed
right.
However,
if
she
says
I
think
that
there
may
have
been
a
violation
of
law
and
it
goes
to
a
public
hearing-
that's
not
the
distinction,
though,.
W
The
distinction
is
that
I
say
that
I
can't
file
a
complaint
without
having
a
piece
of
law
that
got
violated.
It's
not
a
complaint.
It's
just
I,
don't
like
what
you
did
David
your
ad
was
the
wrong
color
I
mean
there's
no
law.
That
says
it
has
to
be
blue
or
green.
So
what's
the
point
of
filing
anything
like
that,
I
say
it's.
C
W
G
And
so
I
guess
my
point
is
anything
that
alleges
a
violation
of
law
that
comes
to
the
clerk
should
be
public
and
followed
through,
and
the
clerk
has
every
right
to
dismiss.
You
know
the
frivolous
ones
and
exactly
so
I
guess
the
distinction
is,
if
there's
an
allegation
of
violation
of
law,
it
should
be
public
right.
That's
one
of
the
things
we're
talking
about
is
what
do
we
disclose?
G
So
if
there's
a
complaint
and
that
complaint
contains
which
I
think
you
should
have
to
an
allegation
of
a
violation
of
law,
then
you
you
make
that
public
and
you
determine
the
clerk
determines
and
then
beyond
that
it
goes
to,
and
so
that
really
puts
the
clerk
in
the
position
of
what
had
been
separated
before
right,
the
clerk
and
the
city
manager.
You
know
they
each
had
kind
of
different
roles.
W
Code,
previous
previous
to
2016,
did
have
the
clerk
in
this
position.
It
got
changed
where
every
place
had
said
clerk.
It
turned
into
the
city
manager,
so
we
said
we
said
we
messed
up
and
so
I'm
trying
to
so.
You
know
what
your
what
the
issue
is
here.
It
isn't
that
the
rules
changed.
It's
just
the
names
changed.
Okay,
we
got
it.
Okay,.
U
Y
Z
And
I
want
to
clarify
the
Cure
thing
at
least
the
way
the
code
is
now.
The
purpose
is
compliance,
so
if
somebody
can
cure
like
they,
they
do
miss
somebody
in
disclosure
or
some
column
doesn't
add
up
or
whatever,
and
they
can
cure
it
within
the
72
hours.
The
code
provides
for
that
and
says
it's
not
considered
a
violation
if
they
cure
it
in
72
hours,
it
only
becomes
a
violation.
If
mmm-hmm
they,
the
mistake,
is
there,
the
clerk
says
fix
it
and
they
don't
fix
it.
So.
C
G
U
That
can't
be
cured,
like
so
I
mean
the
classic
example,
would
be
the
failure
to
disclose
in
an
ad
right.
The
ads
already
been
run
and
there's
no
way.
I
can
fix
that
I'd
put
in
six
points
out
of
eight
point
right
then
what
happens?
Because
that's
not
a
curable
offense
and
you
could
say
man
culpa,
sorry
I
won't
do
that
again,
but
what's
the
admit,
what's
the
disposition
of
that?
U
Z
What's
weird
about
the
code
that
there
is
language
about
doing
remedial
things
are
doing
corrective
things.
It
doesn't
it's
not
really
clear
at
this
point?
Who
has
the
power
to
do
that
and
under
what
authority?
You
would
do
that.
So
that's
one
thing
that
and
redoing
chapter
13
for
is
what
we
call
it.
That's
the
important
provisions
that
you
fix
that
part
some.
Z
Write
and
the
reimbursement
agreements
have
specific
fines
attached
to
them
and
specific
amounts,
but
those
are
not
complaints.
That's
a
contract
enforcement,
so
we're
trying
to
make
I
think
that
there
are
hoes
in
this
that
need
to
be
worked
out.
Better
I
guess
for
the
for
the
two
cents,
I
mean
I,
understand
what
you're
saying
completely
about
the
cure
and
somebody
filing
a
complaint.
At
least
election
season
is
really
hard
for
staff,
because
we're
trying
very
hard
not
to
put
our
finger
on
the
scale
on
either
side
by
what
we
do.
Z
So
what
we
talked
about
is
when
the
clerk
makes
a
final
decision.
That's
public,
because
we're
controlling
what
the
city
does,
what
the
complaint
itself
is
comes
from
somebody
else,
and
if
we
make
it
public
before,
the
clerk
has
made
a
decision
that
also
couldn't
put
the
candidate
in
a
pretty
bad
I.
G
However,
we
want
to
do
it
so
that
there
was
a
complaint
and
it
was
cured
and
it
gets
announced,
but
not
necessarily
you
don't
call
up
everybody
and
say
I
want
you
to
know
this,
but
if
then
the
complainant
says
I
filed
this
complaint
and
I,
don't
agree
that
this
cure
happened
at
least
got
the
evidence
and
you've
said
it,
and
it's
out
there
in
public
I.
Just
think
this
is
all
good
for
the
candidate
to
either
cure
or
were
not
correctly
accused
and.
C
Some
of
this
some
of
this
detail
I
think
once
we
put
it
by,
we
I
mean
you
put
it
in
ordinance
form
and
we
put
it
out
there
then
we'll
be
like
you
know.
What
and
everybody
that's
run
in
an
election,
looks
at
it
and
goes
yeah,
but
what
about
then
we'll
think
through,
like
what
is
the
timing
of
when
everything
is
published
right,
because
I
think
those
are
important
details
Bob's.
G
Question
is
really
important,
I
mean
I.
Think
we
that's
the
whole
the
Cathy's
talking
about
is
so
you've
done
something
your
revocable
right.
You
can't
unprinted,
you
know
on.
Have
the
newspapers
delivered
so
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
set
of
fines,
which
are
probably
fairly
much.
You
know
if
they'd
slide
with
the
scale.
You
know
we.
U
You
do
it
I
thought.
There's
is,
let's
not
fall
into
the
trap
that
Longmont
did
cuz
long.
My
head
finds
the
word
cumulative
and
outrageous.
Remember
that
woman
had
a
sixteen
thousand
dollar
fine
and
it
was
an
innocent
mistake
and
suddenly
she's
faced
a
sixteen
thousand
dollar
fine.
They
couldn't
get
out
of
it.
So
I
I
think
I
think
the
embarrassment
of
having
a
complaint
against
you.
It's
probably
a
lot
more
damaging
than
any
amount
of
money
you
have
to
pay,
but
I
do
agree.
There
should
probably
be
irreversible.
U
C
AA
AA
Then
you
know
what
is
this?
What
other
steps
and
can
that
decision
be
appealed
or
can?
Even
if
it's,
if
it's
heard
first
by
an
external
hearing
officer,
can
that
be
appealed?
When
is
the
decision
final
and
under
what
circumstances
would
a
complaintant
be
granted
an
appeal
or
or
a
candidate
who
has
violate
in
theory
violated
law
be
allowed
an
appeal?
Isn't.
G
C
Z
Already
in
the
code,
it
says
you
cannot
appeal
to
City
Council,
so
that
has
been
interpreted
by
some
people
as
you
can't
appeal
at
all.
But
the
way
the
code
works
is,
if
somebody
doesn't
like
what
staff
does
they
have
a
right
to
a
cross,
a
judicial
hearing
under
Chapter
one
three
and
then,
if
they
don't
like
that
ruling
and
that's
where
the
hearing
officer
comes
in,
they
don't
like
that
ruling.
It
goes
to
the
district
court
on
a
106
which
is.
C
C
V
And
you
guys
sort
of
already
led
there
how
enforcement
is
administered
so
Bob
thanks
for
leading
us
in
that
direction.
This
is
not.
This
is
larger
and
more
comprehensive.
Is
its
I
mean
not
just
did
a
candidate
or
someone
make
a
violation
in
their
disclosure
or
law
or
their
complaint,
but
did
some
individual
break
some
campaign
finance
law
by
donating
five
thousand
dollars?
Okay,
I
mean
the
whole
nine
yards.
The
issue
is:
how
is
enforcement
administered?
Who
is
actually
the
watchdog
to
make
sure
that
all
rules
and
laws
are
being
followed?
V
Is
this
sort
of
citizenry
just
everyone
doing
their
due
diligence
as
good
contributing
citizens
to
our
society
or
does
staff
take
this
I
mean
this
was
a
question.
We
had
who's
really
in
charge
of
making
sure
all
this.
Everyone
follows
the
rules
and
then
therefore,
what's
the
process,
so
it
was
just.
There
was
some
ambiguity
as
to
who
and
what,
when,
where
why
that
all
occurred.
So
we
certainly
would
suggest
some
thoughts,
or
at
least
looking
at
that
from
you
guys,
because
this
is
an
application
of
election
rules
again,
this
was
just
looking
at.
V
How
do
we
again
stay
consistent
with
this
sort
of
multitude
of
laws
we
have
given
how
many
we've
now
applied
and
put
into
place?
Consistency
is
key
and
then
clearly
consequences
for
violations.
I
think
we're
bob
was
touching
on,
is
what's
appropriate
and
to
disincentivize
people
from
bus
braking
law.
So
I
think
he
kind
of
already
touched
on
that,
but
we
were
certainly
wanting
you
guys
to
focus
on
those
areas
as
well.
V
Revised
campaign
finance
charter
ins
entirety,
Steve
sort
of
touched
on
this,
as
we
looked
at
this
at
what
we
saw
was
very
included
that
over
the
years
has
just
been
a
patchwork
of
stuff
added
to
it,
and,
and
one
could
argue
that
the
campaign
finance
section
13-2
is
our
only
the
most
visible
part
of
the
BRC
that
the
public
is
aware
of
and
or
has
some
general
knowledge
of.
So
the
cleanliness
and
readability
of
that
is
probably
more
paramount
than
probably
any
other
section
of
the
BRC.
One
could
argue,
and
so
we
were
looking
at.
V
How
do
we
make
that
real,
clean
of
making
sure
anybody
can
read
that
and
certainly
probably
make
Diane's
life
a
whole
lot
easier
in
how
she
structures
or
Bluebook
the
way
forth
and
then,
as
I
says,
making
the
code
easier
understand
for
people
to
participate?
A
lot
of
the
recommendations
and
thoughts
and
I
heard
make
it
easy
to
book.
Put
it
into
place
for
ezbee.
That's
Blue,
Book,
so
unfortunate
that
Blue
Book
is
gonna,
get
a
little
thicker,
but
it
is
certainly
as
a
former
candidate,
the
the
gospel
of
how
to
do
all
things.
V
So
we
greatly
appreciate
that
and
that's
where
things
should
reside
in
our
book
and
then
streamline
and
clarify
any
redundant
provisions.
There
are
a
handful
in
there,
but
the
thought
is
to
revise
it
and
not
continue
to
do
a
patchwork.
Our
underlying
guiding
principle
at
the
very
end
of
this
was
as
a
working
group.
We
didn't
want
to
end
our
working
group
leaving
undo
work
for
someone
else
to
have
to
clean
up
later
on,
because
we've
just
added
more
rules
and
made
it
more
cumbersome
set
of
policies.
V
C
AD
We've
already
got
something
that
is
drafted
that
I
would
say
is
probably
about
a
90%
draft
of
the
work
of
the
working
group.
It's
pretty
it
I
think
it's
pretty
good.
It
could
probably
use
some
additional
work.
I
think
what
staff
would
like
to
do
is
perhaps
work
with
as
a
group
of
volunteers
from
the
working
group,
a
subcommittee,
if
you
will,
that
would
just
go
through
and
do
the
final
drafting.
AD
Our
objective
would
be
to
actually
wrap
up
the
drafting
in
the
first
quarter
of
next
year,
so
that
we
can
implement
some
of
the
items
that
our
working
group
recommendations
as
part
of
the
2019
election,
but,
most
importantly,
probably
the
electioneering
and
Express
advocacy
provisions
which
really
kind
of
gave
us
a
lot
of
the
heartache
that
we
had
during
the
2017
election
and
then
from
there.
We
would
move
forward
into
kind
of
the
next
phase
of
the
work
plan
for
elections
and
I.
E
AD
E
G
I
just
wanted
to
also
make
clear
from
what
you
had
sent
out,
that
there
isn't
a
real
chance
to
rewrite
those
two
code
sections
before
the
2019
elections.
So
your
suggestion
of
the
revising
the
campaign
finance
chapter
and
its
entirety,
I,
don't
think
that
can
happen.
So
that's
at
least
my
interpretation
of
what
staff
sent
yeah.
AD
And
just
to
beat
a
dead
horse,
you
know
so
we're
we're
moving
into
the
condemnation
with
Excel.
You
guys
have
proved
that
the
other
night
Kathy
haddock
is
gonna,
be
the
lead
interrelated
attorney
on
that.
I.
Think
that,
in
terms
of
what
our
plan
is,
is
that
she
is
going
to
finish
out
a
restructuring
of
13-4
Tom
car
city
attorney
has
authorized
us
to
we
hired
another
lawyer,
Louise
Toro,
who
is
an
elections
expert
as
well?
G
AD
AD
That
how
they're
organized
that
they've
been
scabbed
on
to,
as
we
have
amended
them
over
time
when
the
question
was
asked,
what's
wrong,
the
response
back
was
it's
bad,
so
at
this
point
nobody
has
really
kind
of
had
the
time
to
articulate
what's
bad
about
it.
Clearly
we
could
take
some
time
and
look
at
the
organizational
structure
of
it.
Now
it's
based
on
the
state
federal
campaign
or
the
state
campaign
Practices
Act,
so
it's
built
on
our
existing
codes
built
on
the
state
model.
AD
So
it's
familiar
and
there's
case
law
and
there's
a
lot
of
advantages
to
having
it
structured.
The
way
it
is.
Could
it
be
done
better?
Of
course
it
could
be
and
I
think
that
we
will
take
some
time
as
we
move
through
December
and
January,
to
look
at
some
of
that
and
if
we
can
improve
it,
we
will
that's.
Z
Z
To
do
remedial
type
things
also,
you
know.
What's
the
committee
talked
that
the
provisions
in
13
for
about
citizen
complaint
versus
what
the
city
does
as
a
criminal
or
civil
matter,
all
those
things
are
messed
up
and
make
it
very
confusing
for
all
of
us.
So
actually
I
have
rewritten
that
to
try
to
clear
that
up
and
Lynette
and
Diane
are
looking
at
that
now.
So
we
do
anticipate
having
that
for
thirteen.
C
U
Question-
and
maybe
this
is
for
Diane
as
much
as
anybody
listed,
we
pass
all
this
presumably
they'll,
be
then
some
regular
to
a
regulatory
work
below
the
ordinance
and
maybe
just
explanations
and
all
the
Bluebook
work
so
I.
Imagine
there's
a
fair
amount
of
work.
That's
gonna
have
to
happen
on
the
Blue.
Book
then
is
in
reaction
to
the
ordinance.
Is
that
a
fair
assumption.
Y
Yes,
it
is,
and
also
just
building
the
the
internal
infrastructure,
the
reporting
mechanism,
all
that
kind
of
stuff.
So
what
I
was
thinking
that
we
could
really
implement
for
the
2019
election
would
be
the
expanded
definition
of
Express
advocacy,
the
electioneering
definition
and
then,
based
on
the
fact
that
you
made
candidate
donors,
natural
persons.
We
could
probably
do
that
to
you.
You
reduced
the
contribution
scope
rather
than
enlarged
it,
so
I
think
we
could
make.
Y
V
Slide
for
for
the
working
group
going
forward,
ideas
to
consider
contribution
limits
for
candidates
and
can
be
unofficial,
candidate
committees
generally
should
be
attributed
to
national
persons
right.
We
sort
of
touched
on
that,
but
that
seems
to
be
a
writing
theme
going
forward,
review
and
adjust
adjust
the
matching
fund
approach.
This
is
I,
think
something
ideas
as
Sam
brought
up
earlier,
the
Denver
model.
This
is
also
looking
at
also
our
matching
funds.
20,000
has
been
capped.
E
V
V
So
we
recommend
me
bringing
back
whatever
formula
was
in
place
or
just
a
one,
but
a
cola
inflationary
one
seems
to
be
appropriate
and
then
enhancing
public
information
materials,
explaining
enforcement
procedures
and
related
Appeals.
We
kind
of
touched
on
that,
but
that's
we're
not
just
setting
an
ordinance
on
your
end,
but
then,
where
does
it
come
out
in
a
blue
book
or
something
where
the
public
has
easy
access
to
view?
It
is,
is
sort
of
vital
revisit
city
contractor
contribution
regulations.
V
Certainly
some
some
of
us
on
the
working
group
are
thinking
that
there
may
be
some
opportunity
to
relook
at
that
going
forward
and
establish
an
election
commission.
This
is
sort
of
this
future
proofing.
Some
of
those
looked
at
this
working
group
as
being
established
in
in
many
ways
a
reactionary
sense
to
problems
and
issues
that
arose,
and
then
how
can
we
come
fix?
The
things
that
went
wrong.
The
state
of
election
campaign,
finance
and
election
reform
is
so
dynamic
and
changing
so
rapidly.
V
These
days
and
case
law,
as
Jeff
points
out,
is
in
a
rapidly
changing
environment.
We've
been
thinking
that
establishing
commission
might
allow
us
to
provide
a
more
proactive
opportunity
to
be
suggesting
things
that
are
just
beyond
the
horizon
to
get
ahead
of
some
of
the
issues
that
may
arise
prior
to
us
needing
to
be
reactionary
to
them,
and
that
does
offer
some
other
ways.
V
Many
communities
throughout
the
Front
Range
and
around
the
country
have
Election
Commission's,
inherently
built
for
that
type
of
structure,
to
advise
Council
on
how
to
proactively
enhance,
strengthen
and
and
protect
their
local
democracy.
So
those
are
going
forward
ideas
and
thank
you
guys
for
the
opportunity
to
serve
and
work
with
staff,
David
and
everybody.
It
was
awesome
to
work
with,
and
their
leadership
was
great
herding
cats.
So
thank
you
guys
the
opportunity
and
we
appreciate
working
with
you,
everybody
so.
C
Y
C
I
guess
the
one
thing
is
the
cola
for
the
matching
things
I
think
we
might
want
to
add
that
back
and
I
would
just
like
it's
that's
the
questions
you
can
we
because
we
need
that
we
can
have
that.
We
need
that
to
be
robust,
an
option
that
people
keep
choosing
so
I
guess.
Can
we
add
that
without
much
work,
yeah.
Z
I
think
the
problem
with
that.
The
reason
why
we
did
is
because
it
got
so
confusing
because
it
was
accelerating
and
accelerating
and
accelerating
since
1999,
so
nobody
really
knew
what
the
number
was
and
trying
to
do
it
so
we
talked
about,
but
the
hundred
dollars
has
never
been
changed
since
99
yeah.
C
C
Okay,
so
other
than
that
I
think
that
was
a
good
body
of
work.
It
feels
like
the
most
important
work.
Is
it
okay?
If
we,
let
me
ask
a
question:
given
what
staff
just
told
us?
Is
anybody
wanting
to
bite
any
more
off
this
year?
Okay,
so
we'll
put
it
on
the
list
of
good
ideas
to
consider
sometime
by
another
council.
Z
Y
Just
real
quick
and
backing
up
a
little
bit
to
the
ballot
measures
that
were
passed.
This
is
kind
of
my
high-level
work
plan
for
next
year
in
2020
for
the
2019
election.
We
will
be
doing
the
signature,
verification
on
it
says
municipal
initiatives
up
here,
but
it's
actually
municipal
initiatives
and
charter
changes.
It's
all
of
the
initiative
petitions
so
that
will
be
for
2019.
We
will
make
the
changes
to
the
initiative
referendum
and
recall
process
changes.
Y
That's
the
timeline
for
your
municipal
initiatives
and
the
signature
requirement
number
that
changed
under
campaign
finance
phase
1
will
implement
some
of
those
recommendations
for
2019.
We
just
went
through
what
those
would
be
and
then
I'll
develop
the
plan
for
the
remainder
of
those
to
be
implemented
in
2020
electronic
signatures
and
online
petitioning
phase.
Y
Then
we
would
in
quarter
3
scope
the
online
petitioning
project
and
check
in
with
Council
in
quarter
4,
and
then
you
have
the
February
26
study
session,
with
the
HRC
recommendations
and
you're
going
to
be
looking
at
the
boat
16
and
the
non-resident
voting
so
I
anticipate
that
could
end
up
on
my
workplace
as
well.
It
did
not
pass
right.
Y
C
Y
J
C
Did
all
that
and
of
course
we're
not
done
with
you,
because
we
owe
a
couple
of
you
are
going
to
volunteer
to
help
with
the
drafting
and
then
carrying
understand
if
there's
anything
that
didn't
get
caught.
Presumably
your
help,
let's
catch
it,
but
yeah
it's
been
huge.
It
is
good
to
know.
We
specifically
said
pick
the
people
that
have
the
strongest
opinions
and
put
them
in
the
room.
C
U
Also
want
to
say
that
you
know
I
think
we
can
observe
that
you're,
pretty
diverse
group
of
folks
come
from
come
from
different,
have
different,
maybe
political,
to
use
and
I,
think
I,
think
and
and
I
think
it's
really
great
great
for
a
community
that
you
guys
demonstrated
the
leadership
and
the
ability
to
collaborate
and
cooperate
because
I
think
you
know
we
live
in
a
divisive
world.
It
device.