►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Study Session 01-23-18
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
View
and
have
come
to
the
conclusion
that
perhaps
the
applications
that
we
received
did
not
have
the
diversity
of
thought
that
we
were
hopeful
to
receive,
and
so
I'm
gonna
make
a
recommendation
that
we
actually
continue
to
leave
the
application
period
open
until
5
p.m.
next
Monday,
so
that
would
be
January
29th
and
that
I
would
consider
the
applications
that
I've
already
recommended
for
approval
along
with
any
new
ones,
and
then
recommend
appointments
at
that
point
in
time.
A
The
issue
that
so
you
will
need
to
decide
if
you
want
to
do
that
or
actually
just
deal
with
the
recommended
recommendations
this
evening.
But
if
you
do
want
me
to
extend
the
application
period,
the
important
thing
that
we
need
to
decide
is:
should
the
first
meeting
of
the
group
be
extended.
So
the
first
meeting
of
the
group
is
scheduled
for
next
Wednesday
January
31st
and
that
group
is
already
set
up.
If
we
extended
the
application
period,
you
would
not
have
a
chance
to
review
my
recommended
appointments
before
January
31st.
A
The
next
time,
you'd
have
an
opportunity
to
weigh
in
would
be
February
6th,
which
means
that
the
first
meeting
of
the
group
would
be
delayed
until
at
some
point
after
February
6th.
So
I
am
sort
of
seeking
your
direction
on.
Would
you
accept
my
recommendation
that
we
extend
the
application
period
to
January
29th
and,
if
so,
do
you
want
to
proceed
with
the
January
31st
date
or
well?
Should
I
find
another
date
so
that
you
can
review
the
recommendations
on
February
6th.
B
B
A
Think
so
the
the
point
of
trying
to
get
things
done
by
March
15th
was
so
that
if
there
were
going
to
be
changes
in
the
city
code
provisions
regarding
initiatives
that
those
would
be
in
effect
by
early
May,
so
I
don't
know
the
timing
as
well
as
perhaps
my
colleague
David
does.
What
do
you
think
I
think.
C
C
Think
that
there
are,
there
are
potentially
two
categories
of
ordinances
that
could
come
out
of
this,
the
first,
of
course,
being
revisions
to
our
election
code.
That
would
be
one,
the
other
would
be
changes
to
our
Charter
and
if
their
Charter
changes,
then
those
would
just
get
kicked
in
to
our
normal.
You
know
into
the
Charter
Committee
the
Charter
Committee,
making
a
recommendation
our
study
session
in
May
on
what
goes
on
the
ballot
or
what
you
want
to
consider
and
then
into
the
ballot
season
over
the
summer.
Thank
you.
D
And
just
a
follow
up
to
that
David.
That
was
helpful
with
with
respect
to
those
that
are
ordinance
changes.
It
appeared
from
Jane's
memo
that
there's
really
two
groups
of
things.
Those
are
some
more
time
sensitive
relating
to
referendums
and
initiatives,
which
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
decide
on
by
March
April
timeframe,
because,
typically,
those
are
submitted
in
the
June
July
timeframe
versus
those
that
relate
to
campaign
finance.
That
probably
don't
need
to
be
bottom
done
until
the
summertime.
That's
correct,
okay,
so.
E
I
have
a
thought.
One
is.
E
E
Don't
know
if
that
not
that
you
should
work
that
not
that
you
should
work
over
the
weekend,
but
anyhow
just
a
thought
and
I
guess
for
my
purposes,
what
I
just
want
to
see
is
a
diverse
group
of
people
that
have
something
to
offer
on
this
topic
that
are
reasonably
collaborative
and
I
trust
you
to
choose
that
and
I.
Don't
need
to
see
the
list
again.
F
G
A
It
seems
like
a
consensus
to
me
so
I
will
extend
it
to
5:00
p.m.
this
Friday
and
I'm
going
to
expect
that
there
won't
be
a
lot
of
new
applications.
You
know
maybe
five
or
six
so
I'll
have
plenty
of
time
to
review
them
and
make
a
decision
that
evening,
so
I'll
send
I'll,
send
that
out
either
Friday
night
or
Saturday
morning,
so
the
people
will
have
an
opportunity.
A
A
A
A
So
the
next
is
the
boulder
shelter
management
plan
and
sheltering
policies,
and
this
is
a
follow-up
to
our
discussion
in
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
and
January
4th,
as
well
as
conversations
with
regards
to
the
boulder
shelter
management
plan,
which
we
really
didn't
talk
about
on
January
4th
we
had
talked
about
in
December
and
so
Karen
Ron
has
been
listening
and
answering
questions.
You
have
a
memo
in
your
packet
and
she's
ready
to
make
that
presentation
right
now.
Karen.
J
Thank
you
so
I'm
going
to
go
through
just
some
of
the
highlights
that
are
in
the
memo,
because
there
was
a
lot
of
information
in
the
memo
in
response
to
all
of
the
questions
that
council
had
from
January
5th
and
then
also
some
follow-up
questions,
and
we
probably
have
a
little
more
specific
information,
in
particular
for
Lisa.
In
response
to
her
questions.
Also,
so
just
to
give
you
an
update
on
where
the
shelter
management
plan,
update
and
approval
is.
K
J
J
J
Is
that
one?
Not?
Yes,
that's
the
only
one
there
we
go:
okay,
okay,
so
just
to
quickly
recap:
the
shelter
management
plan
process
on
December
5th
council
provided
some
specific
direction
regarding
new
language
for
the
shelter
management
plan
revisions,
these
two
items
were
provided
to
the
shelter
staff
and
board
for
consideration.
One
in
particular
was
related
to
s
VPS
at
the
shelter
and
making
sure
that
that
language
was
consistent
with
council
direction.
Another
thing
that
council
wanted
us
to
take
a
look
at
was
including
in
the
management
plan
conflict
resolution
policies.
J
We
did
not
include
that
in
the
shelter
management
plan
revisions.
However,
those
processes
will
be
included
in
the
city
contracting
process
in
the
city
contract.
The
reason
for
that
is
because
there's
a
number
of
conflict
resolution,
nuances
and
policies
and
procedures
that,
if
they
were
in
the
management
plan,
would
require
the
shelter
to
come
back
with
all
of
those
changes
for
city
manager
of
consideration
and
review.
J
So
we
felt
that,
from
our
staff
perspective
that
incorporating
the
requirements
for
conflict
resolution,
which
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
later,
that
we
could
include
that
in
the
city
contracting
process
with
the
shelter
so
based
on
the
feedback.
The
shelter's
submitted
a
revised
management
plan
on
January
19.
The
revision
was
consistent
regarding
SPPs
with
council
direction
and
the
planning
review
team
completed
their
review
and
submitted
to
the
city
manager
for
decision
on
January
22nd.
J
So
the
specific
language
that
the
shelter
submitted
for
their
management
plan
approval
you
can
see
here.
The
shelter
will
not
serve
sexually
violent
predators
who
are
on
parole
and
the
shelter
will
discontinue
services
to
all
s
VP's.
If
an
alternative
sheltering
option
for
this
population
becomes
available
in
Boulder
County
through
attrition,
the
shelter
will
reduce
its
SVP
population
to
a
maximum
of
one
person.
B
B
One
last
question:
so
let's
say
those
guys
leave,
you
have
left
one.
So
what
is
the
shelter
supposed
to
do
when
they
get
another
SVP
say
no.
You
can't
come
here.
Yes,
that's
what
the
policy
states,
okay
and
so
I
assume.
In
that
case
they
would
maybe
refer
them
to
severe
welter,
weather,
shelter
or
some
other
venue.
Yes,.
J
F
J
L
L
J
M
L
Is
that
housing
focused
shelter,
it
is
and
did
they
come
in
through
coordinated
entry,
they
did
okay
and
then
another
question
is
we
saw
that
the
during
severe
weather
the
bed
count
that
the
shelter's
about
150
people
occupying
beds,
give
or
take
hundred
forty
150,
and
then
there
was
a
mention
of
a
lottery
system.
So
can
you
explain
to
me
the
distribution
of
housing
focused
shelter,
beds
versus
severe
weather,
shelter
at
the
boulder
shelter
for
the
homeless
and
how
that
works.
M
Yes,
so
we're
considering
everything
at
the
shelter
housing
focused
shelter,
the
severe
weather
shelter
is
at
a
separate
location,
run
run
by
the
bridge
house
organization.
So
two
two
separate
programs
are
our
numbers
at
the
shelter
have
bounced
around
from
the
130s
to
160.
The
lottery
that
you
mentioned
is
if
we
hit
160.
If
we
have
more
people
asking
for
housing
focused
shelter
than
we
have
room,
we
run
a
lottery
to
see
who
gets
in.
M
L
M
M
When
you,
when
you
go
through
coordinated
entry,
do
you
get
referred
to
housing
focus,
shelter,
that's
at
the
shelter.
You
have
the
option.
When
you
come
to
the
shelter
you
can
either
go
on
a
standby
basis,
which
means
you
just
show
up
and
and
if
there's
space
you
get
a
you
get
a
bed
or
you
can
sign
up
for
a
reserve
bed
which
is
a
guaranteed
bed
every
night.
So
it's
it's
up
to
the
client
to
choose
what
what
path
they
want
to
take.
So.
L
M
L
Reserved
that
can
you
stay
there
arbitrarily
long
and
leaving
commas
you
choose
versus
a
standby
bed.
Do
you
have
to
leave
at
8:00
in
the
morning
or
7:00
in
the
morning
right
now,
everyone
leaves
at
8:00
in
the
morning,
so
even
has
in
focus
shelters
still
living
at
8:00
in
the
morning.
Yes,
so
there's
no
vocational
training
or
programs
that
are
intended
for
day
services
for
people
who
are
read
we're.
M
E
L
J
Okay,
so
this
is
a
little
further
down
the
presentation.
But
yes,
when
the
management
plan
is
approved,
then
clients
would
be
eligible
to
stay
at
the
shelter.
One
of
the
things
we're
working
through
right
now
is
the
funding
for
Day
Services,
because
when
we
implemented
the
system
and
we're
looking
at
standing
up,
the
navigation,
Center
plus
program
Bay
year-round
sheltering
program
based
adding
case
management,
housing,
focused
shelter,
case
management
to
the
shelter
we've
been
looking
at.
All
of
these
costs.
J
B
M
J
Okay,
and
as
I
just
mentioned,
we
are
now
looking
at
how
to
fund
the
additional
day
services.
The
year-round
services
and
program
based
our
housing,
focused
shelter
are
funded.
The
shelter
is
going
to
be
adding
a
case
manager
to
really
focus
on
housing,
so
we
do
have
a
funding
gap
for
the
day
services
portion,
which
we
think
will
be
able
to
come
up
with
a
plan
for
very
soon
so
suspension
policy
and
procedures
was
another
area
that
council
was
very
interested
in,
so
we
talked
with
the
shelter
and
bridge
house
about
their
suspension
policies.
J
All
as
Gregg
said.
All
of
the
suspensions
prior
to
October
1st
have
expired,
with
the
exception
of
safety,
related
suspensions
and
the
shelter
currently
has
12
safety
related
suspensions,
Bridge
house
has
one
suspended,
individuals
can
go
to
severe
weather
sheltering
once
they
get
to
severe
weather
sheltering
they
would
have
to
comply
with
rules
and
behavioral
policies
there
as
well.
So
another
area
that
council
was
interested
in
was
transportation
options,
particularly
for
people
who
are
under
suspension
and
how
would
they
get
to
severe
weather
sheltering
on
those
days
that
they
needed
to
access
shelter?
J
So
we've
been
working
with
the
shelter
Umbridge
house
through
coordinated
entry
to
make
sure
that
the
information
that's
where
severe
weather
sheltering
is,
is
very
robustly
put
out
into
the
community.
So
people
know
that
and
we're
also
looking
at
transportation
options,
either
a
cab
to
get
to
severe
weather
sheltering
if
that's
someone's
only
option
or
bus
passes.
But
we
will
be
funding
some
option
for
that
group
of
clients
who
have
no
other
option
except
severe
weather
sheltering
so
that
they
can
get
there.
J
You're
also
interested
in
an
ombudsman,
Bubbe's
person
role
or
our
community
mediation
services
serving
in
some
conflict
resolution
capacity,
particularly
for
the
shelter.
So
currently,
the
our
community
mediation
program
does
work
with
the
shelter
in
resolving
post
grievance
issues.
So
if
a
client
who's
been
through
the
grievance
process
at
the
shelter
would
like
to
go
through
mediation
to
resolve
those
conflicts,
they
are
currently
using
mediation
and
we've
had
a
couple
of
clients
over
the
last
couple
of
years
that
have
used
that
service
to
resolve
conflicts
with
the
shelter.
J
Mediation
is
also
at
a
vixen
Court.
They
work
with
clients
who
are
being
evicted
or
about
to
be
evicted
either
to
extend
their
eviction
time.
So
they
have
more
time
to
find
alternative
housing.
Things
like
preventing
an
eviction
to
show
up
on
their
credit
report
and
to
connect
clients
with
support
services.
They
also
work
with
our
our
public
housing
agencies
across
in
Boulder
and
Boulder
County
to
prevent
evictions,
so
some
additional
services
that
we've
been
exploring
with
mediation
and
the
shelter
and
the
courts
would
be
providing
earlier
information
and
involvement
in
addiction.
J
Mediation
is
also
looking
at
youth
facing
housing
and
stability,
mediation
with
parents
for
younger
people,
training
for
homeless,
in
this
agency
staff
and
conflict
resolution.
So
this
has
been
an
area
that
there's
been
some
interest
expressed
in
to
help
staff
resolve
conflicts
with
clients
before
it
escalates
to
a
suspension.
J
This
would
be
under
suspension
prevention
assistance,
also
reentry
assistance
for
suspended
clients,
so
working
with
clients
who
are
no
longer
suspended,
and
then
how
can
they
get
back
into
services
and
increase
their
likelihood
of
success
and
not
being
evicted
or
suspended
again
from
the
shelter
or
or
from
bridge
house
or
another
service
they're?
Also
looking
at
expansion
of
the
services
that
are
we're
on
the
previous
slide
that
are
already
being
provided.
So
these
are
the
kinds
of
things
in
terms
of
conflict
resolution
and
support
for
clients
that
are
being
considered
care.
J
N
N
N
Unfortunately,
and
a
lot
of
instance,
tenants
don't
show
up
so
a
lot
of
those
will
get
default
judgments
and
you
might
be
looking
at
you
know,
maybe
four
or
five,
where
you
have
both
parties
present
and
unfortunately
tenants
just
sort
of
get
the
judgment
against
them.
But
I'd
say
twenty
is
a
good
average
and.
E
N
We
took
it
outside
of
the
court,
but
we
we
do
they're
very
much
on
the
fly.
There's
time
pressure
and
what
we're
really
trying
to
do
is
to
see
if
something
can
be
accomplished,
either
a
payment
plan
to
sort
of
prevent
the
eviction
from
going
through
or
in
summonses.
Just
simply
to
reduce
some
of
the
hardship
of
the
eviction.
Can
we
have
a
little
more
time
to
get
somebody
out,
but
it's
very
quick
very
on
the
fly.
K
N
But
in
typical
examples
where
you
have
what's
called
the
pro
se
parties,
where
they're
not
represented
by
attorneys,
what
a
judge
will
do
is
we'll
refer
them
say
we
have
some
mediators
in
the
back
room
before
we
move
forward
I'd
like
you
to
speak
with
them
and
see
if
something
can
be
worked
out.
Thank.
L
So
I
wanted
to
address
two
things
here.
One
was
appeals
to
the
mediation,
after
whom
a
service
provider
has
provided
some
kind
of
suspension
of
services
to
a
client,
and
then
the
others
are
we
introduced.
So
have
you
had
many
occasions
in
the
last
couple
of
years
to
work
with
clients
of
homeless
service
providers
who
have
been
suspended?
We've.
N
N
They
have
actually
there's
two
ways,
but
a
lot
of
them
have
actually
come
through
as
potential
discrimination,
complaints
to
the
office
of
Human,
Rights
and
typically
they've.
You
know
few
people
feel
that
they've
been
excluded
for
discriminatory
reasons,
and
what
we
would
do
in
that
instance
is.
We
would,
you
know,
do
intakes
essentially
both
with
the
client
and
the
agency
that
they're
dealing
with,
and
then
we
would
run
them
through
sort
of
a
table
mediated
process
with
the
hope
of
coming
up
with
some
sort
of
written
agreement.
N
L
N
In
some
instances
you
know
there
may
not
be
as
much
as
we
can
sort
of
do
with
that.
If
there's
like
a
you
know,
an
exact
violation
of
policy
and
the
violation
of
policy
is
a
violation
of
policy
and
if
there's
a
safety
issue,
there's
a
legitimate
safety
issue,
we
don't
want
to
override
that,
but
oftentimes
what
mediation
can
do
is
kind
of
around
the
margins.
N
Maybe
explore
a
path
for
both
the
client
and
the
agency
to
work
together
in
the
future,
for
example,
I'm
thinking
of
one
case-
and
you
know,
if
financially
peace,
that
I
can't
get
into
detail,
but
it
was
where
granted
there
was.
The
suspension
would
still
stand
for
a
while,
but
then
there
was
a
clearer
path
for
the
client
to
re-enter
than
there
might
have
been
absent,
mediated
conversation,
I.
L
Think
it's
one
of
the
concerns
here
generally,
is
when
people
want
to
make
an
appeal,
the
principal
would
be.
You
don't
have
the
same
agency
that
issued
the
suspension
here,
the
appeal,
because
there
could
be
conflict
of
interest
there.
So
what
are
your
thoughts
on
the
possibility
of
being
creating
some
kind
of
Appeals
process,
because
right
now
the
grievance
process,
some
suspension
occurs
and
then
the
grievance
process
goes
within
the
same
organization
and
then
perhaps
they
move
on
to
the
mediation
services
to
mitigate
the
judgment.
L
N
If
I
understand
the
question
correctly,
I
think
it's
really
almost.
Are
we
willing
to
take
on
more
of
a
quasi-judicial
role
and
maybe
having
more
decision-making
power
than
what
we
might
have
is
sort
of
a
mediator
which
it's
really
up
to
the
parties
to
come
up
with
that
and
I
think
you
know
there
would
need
to
be
some
sort
of
structural
and
philosophical
changes.
N
You
know
I
think
there's
specific
expectations
like
if
you're
looking
at
an
Ombuds
function,
where
a
person
is
a
decision
ultimately
may
be
binding
or
what
they
call
a
mediation
arbitration
model
where
we
try
to
mediate.
But
if
we
can't
do
it,
then
that
impasse
needs
to
be
broken
by
the
person
making
the
actual
decision.
Currently
we
don't
have
people
that
are
qualified,
that
within
the
team
and
those
qualifications
can
be
received
through
training
and
the
like,
but
right
now,
I,
don't
think
we
have
that
capability,
given
just
qualifications
of
our
staff.
So.
L
N
Some
of
those
trainings
aren't
terribly
difficult,
I
mean
you
know
if
they're
not
like
getting
a
master's
degree
or
anything
like
that.
You
know
they're,
relatively
brief.
I
think
some
can
be
done
in
a
week,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
if
one
were
to
undertake
such
a
thing
that
the
proper
credentials
you
know
be
part
of
it
all
and
you
know,
I
think
it
is
doable,
but
we
also
the
other
question
that
I
would
just
put
out.
There
is
a
you
know.
N
Fundamentally,
of
the
mediation
service
has
acted
as
a
neutral
since
the
80s-
and
this
is
a
pretty
significant
change
in
the
mission
and
scope
of
what
the
mediation
service
does
and
I
think
I
haven't
fully
thought
out.
You
know
what
are
the
implications
for
that?
What
are
some
of
the
concerns
that
that
may
bring,
because
it
really
is
changing
that
role,
not
what
you
say:
it's
not
doable,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
look
at
what
potential
downsides
might
be.
To
that
you
know.
N
Is
there
a
reluctance
for
people
to
bring
stuff
to
us?
If
there's
a
feeling
that
we're
also
you
know,
we
may
pass
judgment
on
them
later
on
I
mean
I,
don't
know
so
those
are
the
only
I
would
put
those
out
as
cautions
I
wouldn't
say
those
are
deal-breakers
but
I
think
there's
just
a
few
things.
We
need
to
be
aware
of
sure.
L
J
If
we
expand
its
severe
weather
sheltering
to
additional
days,
what
would
that
those
costs?
Look
like?
There
was
also
a
question
about
what
what
the
how
we
went
about
developing
those
options.
That's
in
the
packet
I'm
not
going
to
spend
much
detail
about
that,
so
that
we
can.
We
can
get
to
a
little
bit
more
about
if,
if
severe
weather
sheltering
days
were
expanded,
what
would
the
costs
and
the
upsides
and
downsides?
Would
that
be
so?
J
J
The
working
group
recommendations
and
the
homelessness
strategy
identified
about
20
additional
days
besides,
the
210
beds
that
were
available
in
the
new
system
for
severe
weather
sheltering
so
the
intent
of
that
was
to
provide
some
additional
sheltering
during
severe
weather
for
those
clients
who
were
not
in
shelter
programs
but
were
at
risk
on
the
streets
so
that
they
did
have
a
place
that
they
could
go
so
so
just
a
little
recap.
So
in
September
of
2017
council
requested
staff
to
explore
more
than
these
twenty
days.
We
did
the
research
on
the
hazards
to
human
health.
J
The
range
of
conditions
and
variables
were
very
broad
to
be
practical
for
establishing
really
specific
thresholds
for
severe
weather
sheltering
we've
talked
about
this
before
at
other
meetings.
We
wanted
to
include
be
sure
that
we
included
all
the
National
Weather
Service,
watches
and
warnings
in
addition
to
whatever
the
temperature
or
condition
thresholds
were,
and
we
did
this.
We
researched
also
weather
patterns
in
Boulder
County
for
the
last
three
years.
J
So
in
considering
this
balance
of
adding
additional
severe
weather
shelter
beds
with
what
the
goal
of
the
strategy
is,
there
was
definitely
a
desire
to
avoid
developing
a
parallel
system
sheltering
which
is
what
we
used
to
have
but
ensure
that
there
was
a
safety
net
for
those
people
who
are
at
risk
on
the
street.
We
also
looked
the
assessment
of
other
communities
criteria,
which
was
pretty
broad,
and
there
was
a
number
of
different
criteria
and
also
discovered.
There
was
no
standard
definition
of
what
severe
weather
is.
J
Folks
who
come
to
severe
weather
sheltering
they
are
encouraged
and
referred
to
coordinated
entry
following
their
stay
at
severe
weather
sheltering.
If
we
were
significantly
expanding
this.
There
may
be
many
more
people
being
referred
to
a
coordinated
entry
or
housing
focused
shelter
program,
and
so
there
may
be
some
staffing
implications
there
that
we
are
unaware
of
right
now.
J
So
we
also
looked
at
standing,
severe
weather
sheltering
to
the
entire
sheltering
season,
typical
sheltering
season,
which
is
October,
1st
May
1st,
which
is
about
212
days
and
that
cost
our
cost.
Estimates
are
two
hundred
and
thirty,
two
thousand
dollars,
plus
those
additional
potential
costs.
If
there's
impacts
on
coordinated
entry
or
housing,
focus,
shelter.
J
So
I
think
I've
already
mentioned
some
of
these
concerns
about
that
that
we
looked
at
and
concerns
that
came
up
regarding
expanding
severe
weather
sheltering.
So
it's
increasing
significant
additional
funding
requests
over
time
historically
for
services
not
connected
to
long
term
solutions.
So
we
would
have
to
really
guard
against
that.
It's
the
potential
for
creating
a
parallel
sheltering
system
in
severe
weather,
shelter
or
additional
sheltering
every
night
during
the
season.
It
may
make
it
a
little
more
difficult
to
meet
our
new
system
goals
if
those
clients
do
not
have
service
plans
and
exits
to
housing.
J
The
strategy
prioritizes
new
resources
to
exit
homelessness,
to
exit
rather
than
expand
emergency
sheltering,
and
it
could
also
potentially
expand
options
for
people
not
connected
to
the
community
without
any
service
entry
conditions
or
criteria.
Just
those
are
all
things
that
you've
heard
before
and
have
been
part
of
the
considerations
in
the
past,
and
so
this
church
just
a
recap
of
adult
shelter
utilization,
including
severe
weather,
shelter,
housing
focus,
shelter
and
Bridge
house
path
to
home.
J
So
you
can
see
a
peak
peak
two
nights
of
peak
capacity,
235
on
the
21st
of
December
and
248
on
the
26th
of
December.
So
these
two
nights
exceeded
the
and
you
will
see
there's
another
two
there's
a
220
up
there,
these
these
nights
and
a
212.
These
exceeded
that
210
capacity
of
the
existing
ongoing
programs
and
those
were
severe
weather,
shelter,
nights
people
could
access
severe
weather,
shelter
beds
at
those
sites
on
those
nights
kind.
D
O
So
usually
we
would
want
to
keep
it
to
just
a
hundred,
but
some
spaces
can
do
up
to
150
I'm.
So
on
severe
weather,
shelter
nights,
where
we
have
a
space,
they
can't
go
over
the
50
or
in
some
case
it's
at
60.
We
will
open
an
additional
site
to
account
for
severe
weather
shelter,
so
some
nights
we're
able
to
accommodate
it.
For
example,
Heart,
Hashem
or
Saint
Andrew
can
accommodate
you
know
well
over
50,
but
a
night
atonement
Lutheran.
D
O
Can,
yes
would
say
the
highest
number
that
we've
had
combined
past
the
home
and
severe
weather
shelter?
This
season
was
95
and
that
was
on
the
26.
So
we've
been
mindful
of
resources
to
make
sure
that
we
have
that
capacity,
but
we
haven't
seen
the
need
to
have
a
full
other
hundred
beds
where
we're
really
looking
at
the
50
beds
until
we
need
to,
but
we
have
contingency
plans
to
make
sure
that's
available.
It's.
H
O
I
looked
at
our
numbers
today,
our
average
for
severe
weather
shelter
nights
across
the
season
has
been
71
combined,
so
50
Pat,
the
home
plus
21,
severe
weather,
shelter,
folks
and
I.
Believe
last
night
we
had
50
folks
at
our
primary
atonement
location
and
then
another
35
at
saying.
Excuse
me
starfish
M,
so
we're
still
not
seeing
you
know
much
higher.
B
O
That's
a
that's
a
great
question.
So
what
we're
seeing
is
a
combination
of
people
who
are
brand
new
to
the
system
and
then
we
refer
to
coordinated
entry,
we're
seeing
a
combination
of
people
who
have
been
screened
for
housing,
focus,
shelter
or
path
to
home
that
are
not
currently
engaging
in
program
plans
who
are
coming
to
severe
weather
shelter,
and
then
we
make
every
effort
to
get
them
engaged
in
those
program
services
and
then
we're
seeing
a
portion
of
people
who
are
informed
of
you
know
the
additional
resources
who
just
choose
not
to
come
back.
O
L
O
L
O
I
mean
I
think
it
is
tough.
We
have
changed
the
whole
system
and
I
think
we're
seeing
some
really
really
positive
outcomes
from
the
perspective
of
engaging
folks
in
a
much
deeper
program,
opportunity
and
really
being
able
to
position
coordinated
entry,
not
as
a
punishment,
but
as
an
opportunity
to
get
more
services,
whether
that's
through
housing,
focus,
shelter
or
path
to
home.
But
that
doesn't
mean
that
there's
not
a
big
culture
shift,
particularly
for
folks
who
have
been
in
our
community
who
are
pretty
service
resistant.
O
O
I
do
still
think
that
there's
a
reality
that
there
are
going
to
be
folks
who
are
going
to
still
choose
to
be
outside
of
the
system,
because
this
is
a
very
significant
change
to
what
they're
used
to
so
I
think
we
have
to
work
diligently
on
the
housing
exits
and
we
to
work
diligently
on
making
our
programs
attractive
so
that
people
actually
take
advantage
of
them
and
that
we
have
the
assets
that
were
anticipated.
In
the
plan
I
mean
the
plan
anticipates
to
24/7
facilities.
O
E
O
That
I,
you
know
my
my
board
has
some.
You
know
strong
opinions
about
this
I
I
would
say
that,
given
what
we're
seeing
as
far
as
capacity,
we
have
capacity
to
do
more
around
severe
weather,
shelter,
I
think
that
you
know
they're.
The
21
degree
mark
does
feel
like
it
is
a
little
arbitrary
when
it's
22
degrees.
O
However,
I
think
we
should
not
look
at
a
complete
every
night
of
the
season.
I
think
we
could
maybe
look
to
our
sister
communities
to
see
whether
we
could
rise
that
temperature
a
little
bit
I'm
sure
city
staff
has
done
research
on
that,
but
we
absolutely
have
capacity
within
our
current
programs.
I
mean
we
are
not
having
to
open
faith
community
after
faith
community
after
faith
community
to
accommodate
the
need,
as
you
saw
in
that
chart,
we
do
have
some
additional
capacity.
B
O
Two
different
boho
criteria:
there
was
the
original
boho
criteria
and
then
there
was
there
was
the
boho
every
night
criteria.
I
think
what's
up
for
discussion
is
the
original
boho
criteria,
which
would
raise
the
temperature
to
the
32
degree
marks,
but
I'm
interested
yeah
I.
Think
if
we
did
that
we
would
be
open
more
nights,
but
I,
don't
anticipate
that
service
usage
would
be
that
different
I
still,
don't
think
we're
gonna
see
a
hundred
more
people
show
up.
I
think
it
would.
O
E
H
O
Anticipated
in
the
plan
was
that
you
know
again,
the
goal
is
housing,
so
we
know
in
this
community,
as
evidenced
by
the
homeless,
outreach
team
and
the
municipal
court.
Navigator
we've
put
resources
into
folks
who
we
know
don't
walk
through
the
doors
of
service
providers.
You
know
they
never
have
or
if
they
have,
it's
been
in
really
sporadic
ways
yet
they're
very
well
known
to
the
community.
G
P
O
I
mean
even
in
supportive
housing
housing
first,
as
a
model
was
developed
for
folks
to
basically
leapfrog
the
need
of
having
to
be
in
a
shelter
it
right
into
housing.
It
it's
a
it's
a
great
solution
for
someone
who,
maybe
you
know,
has
so
much
trauma
that
they
can't
be
in
a
shelter
environment
with
a
lot
of
people
or
their.
You
know,
high-level
needs
around
mental
health
and,
again
being
with
a
lot
of
people,
is
tough
or
you
know,
addictions.
You
know
kind
of
preclude
them
from
being
part
of
a
community
dynamic.
O
P
O
It's
it's
it's
a
combination
of.
First,
we
need
the
resource.
So
it's
it's.
You
know
it's
it's
a
scarce
resource,
but
when
someone
is
identifying
identified
as
being
eligible
for
a
housing
first
unit,
whether
that's
through
you
know
the
muni
court,
navigator
or
another
service
provider,
then
there's
quite
a
bit
of
work
to
do
around.
You
know
making
sure
that
they
have
identification
and
all
the
things
you
would
need
for
a
landlord.
O
So
the
concept
behind
putting
folks
into
the
housing
focus
shelter
program
if
they're
willing
to
do
that
and
to
have
an
environment
where
they
feel
comfortable
and
can
can
be
while
that
process
happens,
is
to
try
to
get
more
people
off
the
street,
because
that
takes
a
while
there's
a
bureaucratic
process
about
housing,
no
matter
how
low
barrier
the
housing
might
be
for
the
individual,
so
it
can
work,
but
it
takes
a
lot
of
resources
to
even
get
someone
ready
to
be.
You
know,
approved
by
landlord.
G
J
J
E
B
J
F
Well,
I'd
like
to
thank
the
shelter
for
being
responsive
to
some
of
the
feedback
that
we've
given
over
the
last
few
months
and
Karen.
Thank
you
also
for
being
responsive
to
the
concerns
and
issues
that
we've
raised
recently,
and
so
it
seems
like
we're
really
heading
in
the
right
direction.
Here.
I
just
wanted
to
zero
in
on
a
couple
things.
One
of
them
is
the
the
mediation
question.
So
clay
had
some
great
answers
about
that
programs
working
right
now,
which
I
appreciated,
but
it
sounded
like
it's
not
quite
clear
how
we
might
get
that
function.
F
That
I
think
we
were
interested
in
that
Sam
was
zeroing
in
on
about.
You
know.
If
there's
an
appeals
process
that
the
shelter
for
penalty,
how
there
could
be
someone
to
help
at
least
facilitate
you
know
that
being
a
an
advocate
or
something
like
that,
so
I
think
that
seems
like
it
needs
a
little
more
work.
It
seems
like
possibly
the
mediation
services
could
provide
that,
but
it's
not
a
slam
dunk.
So
it's.
J
Now,
because
it
is
voluntary
right
now
and
I
think
as
clay
suggested,
we
could
do
a
little
more
work
on
looking
at
arbitration,
which
is
more
of
a
quasi
judicial
function
and
I
think
you
know
that
would
have
to
be
explored
before
we
would
could
do
something
like
that
and
then
I
think
we
could
talk
with
the
shelter
a
little
bit
more
about
how
we
might
be
able
to
be
part
of
the
appeals
process,
because
this
these
are.
These-
are
policies
of
the
shelter
board
and
the
shelter
operation.
J
F
F
F
Not
what
I
was
hearing
from
yes,
so
what
I'm
talking
about
is
that
someone
who
felt
like
they'd
gone
through
the
whole
process
with
the
shelter,
but
they
felt
like
the
outcome-
was
not
fair
to
them,
that
they
would
have
people
that
they
come
to
at
the
city
or
some
other
third
party
who
could
say.
Let
us
help
mediate
that
buuuut
with
the
shelter
over
there,
and
we.
J
I,
so
the
appliance
could
come
and
use
our
community
mediation
services
if
they
didn't
like
the
outcome
of
the
grievance
process,
but
they
wouldn't
be
required
to
use
it.
You
know
it
would
be
voluntary
for
them
to
come,
I
think
in
Gregg.
You
can
add
to
this
every
time
a
client
has
come.
The
shelter
has
participated
in
that
process
voluntarily.
I
guess.
F
C
And
typically
arbitration,
when
you
get
into
that
realm,
it's
its
contractual
remedy,
so
you
usually
define
between
parties
what
you're,
what
you
want
to
dispute
and
then
how
you
want
to
dispute
it.
So
this
is
a
little
bit
different
in
that
you
don't
have
a
contract
necessarily
between
the
shelter
and
a
client
that
we're
involved
in.
So
it's
a
tricky
path
so.
C
E
F
L
Much
right
we're
in
is
on
this
I
feel
like
we
need
to
have
a
pathway,
that's
well-known
for
the
clients
of
any
service
provider.
It's
not
just
the
shelter
it
could
be
bridge
house
or
any
other
provider
as
well,
so
that
we
are
providing
them
with
funding
they're,
providing
services
to
a
community
that
we
think
is
important,
that
they
be
served
in
a
certain
way.
But
it's
also
important
that
there
be
a
pathway
to
resolution
for
grievances
that
isn't
just
moderated
by
the
people
who
made
the
original
decision,
and
so
I
heard
from
clay
mediation.
L
Arbitration
that
sounds
like
the
process
that
was
being
considered
would
start
with
an
attempt
to
mediate
to
try
and
get
both
parties
on
board.
And
then,
if
that
did
not
work,
then
some
kind
of
arbitration
in
which
its
quasi
judicial
and
a
third
party,
in
this
case
the
city,
would
make
a
decision
about
the
merits
of
the
cases
they
understood
them.
C
L
P
K
I'm
just
wondering
how
it's
going
to
play
out.
It
sounds
to
me
that
if
there
are
two
parties
who
are
willing
to
mediate
that-
and
there
isn't
resolution
that
is
there
for
the
client-
it
could
be
for
the
other
party
as
well,
and
if
one
enters
these
and
and
our
mediator
is
doing
the
job
dispassionately.
It
seems
that
that
kind
of
thing
could
be
resolved
at
that
level.
And
if
there
is
an
appeal
process
contractually
tied
to
this,
it
seems
and
then
it's
a
binding
resolution.
K
If
it's
something
it
seems
that
we
wouldn't
want
to
force
a
party
into
something
in
terms
of
taking
care
of
a
client.
If
it's
an
unwilling
thing
to
do,
I
mean
I,
just
don't
quite
see
where
this
is
heading
in
terms
of
getting
into
an
arbitration
situation,
and
if
it
were
to
go
that
way,
why
wouldn't
it
be
in
the
somewhere
within
the
municipal
courts?
Purview
again,
which
we
would
hope
would
be
a
dispassionate
listener
in
terms
of
the
mediation
well.
C
So,
in
terms
of
the
municipal
court,
that's
the
easy
one.
So
typically
the
Municipal
Court
is
they're
equipped
to
enforce
municipal
violations
and
the
prosecution
of
misdemeanors,
and
this
is
not
really
that
it's
not
that
this
is
more
of
a
dispute
resolution
between
two
parties,
so
that
in
and
of
itself
is
not
a
particularly
good
fit.
Our
Municipal
Court
also
serves
the
role
of
being
hearing
officers
for
city
administrative
actions.
So
a
lot
of
we
do
some
enforcement
through
administrative
actions
and
and
our
court
provides
services
through
there.
That's
something
that
could
be
considered.
C
C
Typically,
mediation,
it's
either
done
by
the
parties
without
the
benefit
of
somebody,
helping
them
it's
with
attorneys
or
through
something
like
community
mediation
services
and
a
lot
of
times.
If
there's
a
Reza,
you
know,
frankly,
a
lot
of
our
lawsuits
settled
through
a
mediation
process.
You
know
they
don't
take
a
lot
of
things
to
trial
and
I.
Think
that
you
know
mediation
services
are
often
quite
beneficial
from
that
regard.
But
then,
if
you
have
an
unsatisfactory
result
is
from
mediation.
C
C
This
may
be
more
appropriate
for
Karen
was
just
about
providing
services
to
people
who
have
problems
with
the
organization
and,
frankly,
I
think
that's
something
that,
as
we
look
further
into
this,
we're
just
going
to
have
to
figure
that
out,
because
I
know
that
that
we
will
have
to
figure
out
how
to
balance
the
interests
of
the
one
client.
Who
is
making
a
complaint
with
those
of
the
remaining
people
and
the
shelter
to
also
be
able
to
live
in
a
safe
environment?.
J
J
J
D
J
J
J
L
I
mean
I
would
start
with
now
for
sure
at
that
and
I
guess
I
feel
like
it
could
go
all
year.
I
mean
we
get
some
pretty
cold
nights
and
June
and
July
when
it's
rainy,
so
I
would
just
apply
that
through
the
year
generally
speaking,
it's
mostly
gonna
be
in
the
sheltering
season
and
revisit
next
year.
Yeah
agree.
D
E
J
L
E
C
Q
So
when
we
presented
this
to
you
on
December
5th,
it
was
a
little
bit
of
a
short
preparation
schedule
and
that
the
the
community
wasn't
really
tuned
into
that
topic
that
night,
so
we're
gonna
go
over
a
few
of
the
aspects
that
we
went
over
on
that
night
as
well,
for
the
benefits
of
bringing
everyone
up
to
speed.
Jeff
is
going
to
be
doing
the
presentation
tonight.
Jeff
has
done
the
bulk
share
of
the
work
in
preparation
for
this
study
session.
L
R
Gonna
just
spend
try
and
keep
it
to
about
15
minutes
of
an
overview
of
mostly
what
was
in
the
memo
for
the
benefit
of
those
watching
at
home
or
on
the
recorded
version
and
provide
a
few
updates
to
that
information
as
possible.
The
way
we
organized
the
information
and
the
thought
process
to
bring
you,
the
draft
ordinance
that
you
requested
is
up
on
the
screen.
R
We
have
prepared
a
draft
purpose
statement
to
describe
why
the
commute,
what
this
will
do
for
our
community
when
created
what
the
functions
of
it,
the
Housing
Advisory
Board,
could
and
should
be,
and
then
what
perspectives
experience,
expertise,
types
of
of
contributions?
You
want
people
to
be
able
to
make
that
are
appointed
to
the
board.
R
R
There
are
seven
that
we
outlined
here
and
in
the
memo
planning
board,
covers
development
projects,
land
use
policies
that
affect
the
production
of
housing
and
what
kinds
of
housing
policies
that
define
that
what
is
developed
and
you
you
have
also
relied
on
them
for
advice
on
a
number
of
uses
of
housing,
and
there
are
recommendations
on
things
like
the
co-op
ordinance
and
others.
The
technical
review
group
is
our
is
our
division
of
Housing
Committee
that
provides
recommendations
to
the
city
manager
on
funding,
applications
for
affordable
housing
projects
and
programs.
R
They
govern
the
affordable
housing
fund,
which
is
cash
in
lieu
and
other
sources,
as
well
as
the
chap
and
and
to
a
lesser
extent,
our
home
dollars
and
some
CDBG
funds.
The
home
consortium
is
a
regional
collaboration.
It
covers
all
of
Boulder
and
Broomfield
counties
that
is
organizes
the
distribution
and
uses
of
the
federal
home
program,
which
runs
about
one
and
a
quarter.
R
1.3
million
dollars
a
year,
Community
Development,
Advisory
Committee,
which
is
our
longest
standing
committee,
governs,
makes
recommendations
to
the
city
manager
on
the
use
of
Community
Development
Block
Grant
funds
for
housing
programs,
capital
needs
of
nonprofits
public
services.
Home
ownership
committee
is
a
division
of
Housing
Committee.
It
advises
staff
on
the
implementation
and
administration
of
our
home
ownership
program
with
about
eight
hundred
permanently
affordable
units
homeless
strategy
board.
R
L
R
We
rely
on
them
heavily,
they
are
a
bore,
a
committee
which
is
composed
of
people
primarily
with
specific
expertise
that
we
have
determined,
is
important
to
advise
the
city
on
making
funding
decisions,
specific
funding
decisions,
so
they
have
technical
ability
in
evaluating
the
feasibility
of
projects,
the
appropriateness
and
adequacy
of
the
subsidy.
That's
provided
and
the
benefit
that's
created
so
fairly
specific
technical
expertise
there,
and
so
they.
L
L
R
L
R
Activity
is
somewhat
different
in
that
they
review
and
help
develop
the
administrative
policies
for
the
programs,
and
they
hear
exceptions
to
exception,
requests
and
make
recommendations
to
the
deputy
director
of
housing
on
whether
there
should
be
an
exception
made
to
a
policy.
They
do
meet
regularly.
I,
don't
know
the
total
that
they
would
provide.
It
would
probably
be
in
between
the
TRG
and
the
c-dac.
R
L
Q
You
speaking
of
the
the
regional
okay,
so
that
that
board
is
actually
in
the
midst
of
being
created,
probably
over
the
next
quarter.
Well
with
possibly
within
this
quarter,
but
certainly
by
next
quarter
and
it's
looking
like
it
will
be
broadly
represented
by
some
of
the
means
to
some
of
the
cities
like
city,
boulder,
division
of
housing,
longmont
housing,
the
housing
authorities
and
then
others
within
the
community
that
are
stakeholders
which
could
represent
nonprofits.
It
could
represent
chambers.
Q
Q
L
Q
R
L
Of
course,
they're
totally
their
own
thing,
they're
our
Housing
Authority
I
was
just
curious.
When
you
say
strategic,
I
I
would
imagine
like
okay,
we
have
this
much
money
that
we
can
pool
and
these
opportunities
that
we
can
do
we're
on
the
ground.
Would
we
want
to
look
at
that,
but
you're
saying
it's
not
really
so
much
we're
on
the
ground.
It's
higher
level.
That's.
Q
P
R
R
Of
them
we
have
three,
but
it
would
be
within
the
purview
of
the
division
of
housing
and
we
do
periodically
assess
that
what
functions
they
fill
and
whether
there
are
opportunities
to
look
at
them
differently.
Each
time
we've
said
all
these
each
have
a
discrete
set
of
responsibilities,
a
discrete
set
of
expertise
that
we're
trying
to
use
community
volunteers
to
support
the
city's
efforts.
I
If
I
could
just
add
something
to
that
when
it
comes
to
the
home
consortium,
so
the
home
consortium
does
beyond
the
city
of
boulders
boundaries,
and
so
the
goes
beyond
the
city
of
boulders
boundaries,
and
so
we
are
pooling
home
funds
with
Longmont
Boulder
County,
as
well
as
Broomfield
the
home
consortium
members
which
are
made
up
of
city
staff
members
from
Longmont,
Boulder,
County
and
Broomfield
do
vet
projects
that
then
go
to
the
TRG.
So
there
is
cross
coordination
between
those
two
groups
when
it
comes
to
making
funding
decisions
using
those
home
dollars.
E
B
Yeah
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
none
of
these,
except
for
the
Planning
Board,
are
appointed
by
City
Council,
so
they're
all
answered
to
the
city
manager.
So
these
are
a
lot
of
groups.
So
are
these
public
meetings
and
are
these
lists
at
their
time
of
meeting
I've,
never
seen
them
I
know
Kristen.
Is
that
they're
in,
but
I've
never
seen
them
in
what
we
advertise
for
our
boards
and
commissions.
B
I
We
do
publicize
all
of
our
meetings,
can't
be
public
or
our
public
and
they're
publicized
on
the
city's
website,
as
well
as
we
put
public
notices
in
the
daily
camera.
We
have
a
listing
of
about
200
partners
that
have
either
received
funding
previously
or
just
have
contacted
us
with
an
interest
in
funding.
We
said
nope
last
me
emails,
letting
them
know
when
there's
a
fund
round
occurring
with
that
said
we
are,
we
just
entered
this
year.
I
We
are
reverting
or
we
are
moving
towards
a
quarterly
fund
round
in
order
to
provide
greater
transparency
and
predictability
to
our
partner
for
our
partners
and
the
community,
and
so
at
the
beginning
of
each
year,
we'll
send
out
a
funding
notice,
saying
hey.
These
are
the
deadlines
for
meeting
these
four
opportunities,
our
funding,
application
opportunities
and
then
all
they'll
be
public
on
our
website,
as
well
as
we're
gonna
start
and
we've
notified
our
partners
of
this
that
all
applications
will
be
posted
on
the
website.
I
So
whenever
we
receive
a
funding
application,
those
will
be
available
on
the
website
for
review
to
the
public
is
invited
to
attend
our
meetings
and
there
it
depends
on
the
size
of
the
meeting,
what
we're,
anticipating,
usually
they
are
held
in
our
near
our
offices
in
the
atrium.
However,
we
have
had
in
recent
situations
we
did
consider
holding
a
meeting
actually
here
in
the
chambers,
because
where
we
were
expecting
a
possible
turnout,
so
it
really
is
varies
depending
on
the
topic
to
be
discussed.
I
will
say
that
so
all
of
that
is
public.
E
J
I
I
F
F
I
Particularly
I
can
assert
that
the
federal
funding
applications
always
are
because
we're
required
to
do
that
where
I
would
like
to
go
with
the
conversation.
Is
there
are
times
where?
Because
of
the
nature
of
a
funding,
request,
confidentiality
and
agility
to
move
quickly
is
required
to
be
able
to
work
with
our
partners
to
be
able
to
provide
them
funding
and
circumstance
circumstances
and
those
situations.
We
do
not
post
them
on
our
website
because
of
confidentiality
issues
or
just
because
we
can't
meet
the
timing
requirements.
So
there
are.
I
B
Just
want
to
ask
and
I
think
you
alluded
you
could
do
that.
Could
those
these
meetings
I
mean
we
know
when
the
Planning
Board
meets.
We
know
and
BHP
meet
people
can
go
to
all
those
meetings
and
I
will
say
that
council
does
the
point
one
one
or
all
of
them
all
the
pH
piece
so
those
are
appointed
by,
but
it
would
be
really
helpful
if
those
were
in
the
section,
a
notice.
That's
not
a
question.
E
R
Way
we
prepared
the
draft
ordinance
was
to
review
the
research
we
did
a
couple
years
ago
on
housing
boards
around
the
country.
There
were
ten
of
them
that
are
detailed
in
the
attachment
to
the
memo
attachment
B,
but
we
found
pretty
significant
variation
in
their
functions.
They
advised
councils
and
commissions
elected
officials,
a
by
staff,
advise
mayor's.
R
So
there's
no
common.
You
know
predominant
way
that
they're
set
up,
we
did
find.
The
majority
of
them
are
mixed
with
experts
members,
as
well
as
at
large
or
lay
members.
Some
are
all
expert
and
some
are
non
expert
as
well.
So
while
most
have
experts
on
them,
not
all
have
specific
membership
qualifications,
we
also
did
a
little
bit
of
community
and
outreach
and
requests
for
input.
I
think
we
were
fairly
successful
in
reaching
interested
parties.
With
the
time
we
had.
R
We
had
two
public
meetings
attended
by
almost
50
people
between
them
and
then
received
over
a
hundred
responses
to
an
online
questionnaire.
I
hope
you
had
a
chance
to
click
through
to
see
those
all
those
responses
are
posted,
as
well
as
a
summary
of
the
commonalities.
To
the
extent
that
there
were
what
we
heard
from
those
and
a
few
conversations
that
reached
out
directly
and
emails
was
certainly,
there
was
no
I,
wouldn't
characterize
any
of
this
as
a
majority
opinion
of
the
community
feedback.
R
So
these
are
more
themes
and
had
enough
resonance
with
enough
people
to
stand
out,
and
in
this
case
you
have
listed
some
of
those
that
the
board
should
really
have
a
clear
purpose.
It
really
should
be
a
tool
and
a
resource
that
helps
us
do
more
faster,
that
it
should
be
a
higher
level
board
that
really
focuses
on
strategies,
policies,
priorities
and
that
the
membership
should
be
balanced.
There
needs
to
be
due
to
the
type
of
issues
and
the
complexity
of
some
of
the
policy
choices.
R
Housing
expertise
does
make
a
difference
in
those,
and
we
have
heard
that
from
former
participants
of
housing
task
force
from
several
years
ago.
If
you
remember
that
as
well
as
a
need
for
you
know,
general
perspective
at
large
people
who
care
about
our
community
and
are
willing
to
participate
with
others
in
that
furthering
our
efforts.
R
We
took
all
of
that
and
we
made
some
assumptions
in
order
to
craft
the
purpose,
functions
and
composition
of
proposal
that
you
have,
and
I've
mentioned
some
of
them
that
this
should
not
be
a
duplicative
or
gonna
board.
It
shouldn't
replace
anyone
else.
It
should
be
additive.
It
should
create
a
new
resource
for
us
to
further
our
efforts:
innovation,
creativity,
whether
it's
coming
from
the
community
or
from
national
research.
R
So
with
those
assumptions
we
drafted
a
purpose
statement
for
your
review
and
input.
If
you
wanted
to
formalize
something
along
these
lines,
it
would
be
probably
formalized
in
the
bylaws
rather
than
the
of
the
housing
advisory
board,
rather
than
in
the
ordinance
itself,
but
it
could
be
done
that
way.
I
believe
we'd
want
to
think
that
one
through
a
little
with
City
Attorney's
Office.
E
L
I
understand
that
affordability
is
one
big
challenge
with
housing,
maybe
the
biggest
it
seems
like
there
might
be
others
as
well,
which
include
diversity
and
diversity
of
housing,
types
and
so
on.
So
is
there
a
reason
you
focus
just
on
affordability
here,
rather
than
kind
of
a
full
spectrum
of
potential
challenges.
Yes,.
R
R
Overall,
land-use
patterns
and
decisions
are
really
already
covered
by
the
Planning
Board,
and
so
what
types
of
housing
can
be
created.
There's
certainly
some
overlap
there
when
you
get
into
things
like
the
current
discussion
around
ad
use
and
you'll
see
in
later
that,
we
acknowledge
that
there's
overlap
between
Planning
Board
and
the
housing
advisory
board
and
recommend
a
way
to
approach
that
there
could
be
other
issues
like
compatible
development,
smart
regs,
some
of
the
ones
that
you
mentioned,
so
it
could
certainly
be
may
have
a
broader
mandate.
R
So
that
the
list
of
functions
that
we
put
into
the
draft
ordinance
came
out
of
a
lot
of
the
input
that
we
had
from
the
community
from
the
research
we
did.
We
looked
at
what
functions
other
city
advisory
boards
have
what
other
housing
boards
around
the
country
do
and
took.
This
took
a
list
and
started
massaging
it
to
come
up
with
this
proposal
for
your
consideration,
and
we
look
forward
to
getting
your
advice
on
and
direction
on
how
you
would
like
to
shape
it.
R
In
looking
at
the
functions
of
the
board,
it's
clear
that
effort
to
avoid
duplication.
We
need
to
have
some
clear
divisions
of
responsibility
with
the
other
groups
in
the
city.
That's
important
the
city's
efforts,
but
that's
there
are
certain
key
relationships
between
a
housing,
advisory
board
and
other
committees
and
groups
that
need
more
than
just
some
words
that
describe
different
roles.
R
So
we
are
proposing
that
you
consider
for
the
three
housing
division
of
housing
committees,
the
technical
review
group,
meaning
development,
Advisory
Committee
and
the
homeownership
committee
that
you
sign
off
on
an
operating
approach
that
would
have
them
providing
information
and
really
updates
and
reports
on
their
activities
to
the
housing
advisory
board
and
in
return,
getting
advice
and
around
aligning
the
work
at
the
policy
level
and
the
recommendations
that
the
housing
board
is
making
with
the
decisions,
programmatic
decisions
that
the
three
committees
are
making.
So
that's
on
the
left
side.
R
On
the
right
side,
the
importance
of
having
coordination
between
the
efforts
and
discussions
at
the
Planning
Board
and
the
housing
advisory
board
led
us
to
propose
to
two
approaches.
One
would
be
parallel
to
what
is
done
with
landmarks
in
which
the
Planning
Board
have
points
a
non-voting
member
to
that
advisory
board
to
enable
collaboration
and
coordination.
R
Alternatively,
you,
if,
if
that
is
asking
perhaps
a
lot
of
added
responsibility
for
the
planning
board,
the
the
chair
of
the
committee
or
the
housing
advisory
board
could
regularly
report
to
and
request
you
know
any
kind
of
discussions
of
Planning
Board
were
the
two
ideas
that
we
had
around
how
to
help
that
relationship
be
strengthened.
So.
R
Moving
on
to
the
composition
of
the
board,
what
we
did
here
over
and
over
was
multiple
perspectives
are
very
important.
We
landed
on
a
starting
point
for
you
to
consider
to
community
members
at
large
with
no
specific
experience
or
requirements,
3
the
community
members
with
relevant
professional
experience
without
determining
exactly
which
kind
of
professional
experience
they
would
have
so
that
they
could
support
with
their
experience
and
expertise.
R
So
we
thought
that,
based
on
the
feedback
we've
been
getting,
that
this
would
provide
some
balance
and
provide
a
group
of
members
who
could
support
each
other
in
providing
the
best
possible
advice
and
recommendations
to
you.
And
we
did
include
that.
One
of
the
members
should
probably
at
least
one
should
probably
be
a
renter
based
on
the
community
feedback.
R
R
So
if
those
are
depending
on
the
answers
to
those,
we
believe
we
could
provide
you
with
a
slate
of
or
you
could
receive,
applications
and
review
them
and
interview
them
and
in
time
to
appoint
board
members
in
April.
It's
conceivable.
It
could
go
quicker
depending
on
your
availability
and
desires
there,
and
then
we're
projecting
that
we
could
get
started
with
meetings
in
May
and
June.
R
Lastly,
we
we
started:
we've
started
to
collect
suggestions
that
we've
heard
ideas
for
potential
work
plan
items.
If
you
see
a
board
in
April
or
around,
then
what
would
they
start
working
on
here
are
some
of
the
suggestions
that
we've
heard.
We
could
certainly
to
the
extent
you
want
us
to
bring
you
so
when
you
consider
an
ordinance,
that's
something
that
you
could
also
consider
if
you
want,
or
we
could
wait
until
the
board
is
seated
and
begin
working
on
them
in
the
early
days
with
a
work
plan
for
their
term
of
all
right.
R
R
B
B
If
we
go
back
to
your,
we
love
all
the
people
who
are
participating
currently
in
housing
decisions.
The
two
boards
that
Council
does
have
some
oversight
over
the
planning
board
and
BHP
are
do
the
TRG,
the
c-dac
and
homeownership
committee.
Do
they
weigh
in
do
they
ever
update
Planning,
Board
or
BHP.
R
R
R
All
of
these
are
are
really
supporting
the
staff
program
operations
efforts,
so
they
are
internal
to
the
city.
In
that
regard
we
have
at,
and
at
some
level
we
have
tried
to
preserve
some
of
objectivity.
So
building
a
relationship
between
the
members
of
the
TRG
and
the
BHP
commissioners
could
be
perceived
as
or
even
lead
to
certainly
would
lead
to
a
different
level
of
understanding
for
their
projects
when
they
come
forward.
R
B
Mean
what
I
was
asking
specifically
is
a
lot
of
times,
we'll
have
something
in
front
of
us
and
then
we'll
have
a
Planning
Board
recommendation
and
other
boards
recommendations
and
I'm
just
wondering
the
Planning
Board
makes
some
large
decisions.
Sometimes
they
might
be
well
served
by
having
input
from
these
other
boards.
Q
So
I
think
their
scope
is
a
little
bit
different.
Like
the
homeownership
committee
is
working
at
a
much
lower
level,
a
particular
homeowner
will
we'll
do
it
in
a
request
to
them.
So
they'll
look
at
sort
of
that
that
sort
of
micro
level
mm-hmm
and
then
they
were
they
look
at
sort
of
the
internal.
They
give
feedback
on
sort
of
the
internal
policies
within
the
division
of
housing
related
to
homeownership
I'm,
not
sure
that
that's
a
really
I'm,
not
sure
how
relevant
that
is,
the
Planning,
Board
or
bhp
the
home
consortium.
Q
Q
L
Follow
up
question
sorry,
so
I
think
I
understand
that
most
of
the
groups
wouldn't
have
much
to
say,
went
to
the
Planning
Board.
There
would
not
be
a
lot
there.
It
seems
to
me,
however,
just
following
up
on
Lisa's.
The
technical
review
group
has
a
really
interesting
role:
I
mean
it
advises,
I
think
on
a
quarterly
basis,
plus
opportunity
right
and
so
opportunities
obviously
have
to
move
fast,
but
you
know
I
serve
on
the
Planning
Board.
L
It
would
have
been
very
interesting
to
understand
how
all
the
funding
pieces
fit
together,
because
there's
the
tax
credit
piece,
there's
the
you
know
what
comes
from
the
housing
department
itself
for
the
opportunities
and
so
I
assume
that
for
things
like
Tantra
and
for
the
Osage
rehab,
that
the
technical
review
group
was
involved
with
those
decisions,
right
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
if
they
debriefed
somebody
about
those
decisions
outside
of
the
housing
department,
because
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
we're
hearing
is.
This
is
kind
of
a
murky
process.
L
But
it's
you
know
big
dollars
and
it
results
and
good
things
for
the
community.
I
mean
Tantra
is
a
great
success.
All
those
Osage
and
Thunderbird
work
is
great
success,
but
I
think
whatever
happens
with
the
board
that
we're
talking
about
now,
I
think
the
Planning
Board
would
benefit
from
understanding
that
a
little
better
I
didn't
understand
it
very
well
when
I
was
on
the
Planning
Board
and
that's
just
something
that
I
think,
generally
speaking,
increasing
the
literacy
of
our
community,
particularly
the
boards
that
work
on
this
couldn't
hurt.
A
thing.
I
think.
P
R
Model
we
started
with
was
landmarks.
We're
planning
board
appoints
a
non-voting
member
that
participates
in
all
the
landmarks
meetings.
That
makes
a
bunch
of
sense.
It's
also
a
significant
additional
responsibility
for
a
board
that
already
has
a
lot
of
work.
So
in
thinking
about
that,
we
thought
well,
what's
an
alternative.
R
If
that
were
to
be
something
that
Planning
Board
felt
like
was
a
little
much
or
council
a
you,
appoint
planning
board
as
well
and
set
their
work
program
to
some
extent
that
an
alternative
to
establish
a
stronger
relationship
between
these
two
boards
would
be
to
have
the
chair
of
the
housing
advisory
board
regularly
go
to
planning
board.
So
it's
a
question
of
where
the
work
is
and
what
direction
the
information
is
flowing
on.
R
Both
it
should
be
two-way,
but
in
the
first
it's
planning
board
participating
in
the
work
of
the
committee,
a
planning
board
member
in
the
second,
it's
more
an
agenda
item
on
planning
boards
meeting
and
then
discussion.
That's
how
I'd
characterize
the
difference
and
there
are
certainly
other
ways
to
do
it.
Those
are
the
two
that
we
thought
worthy
of
putting
up
for
you
to
consider,
but.
E
S
So
our
general
default
rule
in
the
Charter
is
five
voting
members.
One
option
would
be
to
have
the
five
and
then
have
a
ballot
item,
changing
the
Charter
to
be
able
to
have
more
that's
how
crab
has
seven
members
or
you
could
have
non-voting
members
like
the
Planning
Board
chair,
or
you
know,
bhp
representative,
and
expand
it
that
way.
Okay,.
E
R
B
So
I
appreciate
mine
pretty
much
with
this
except
I.
Don't
want
to
limit
it
just
to
affordability.
Certainly,
affordability
should
be
a
huge
chunk
of
the
discussion,
but
at
least
my
intention
of
this
board
is
to
get
the
community
talking
more
about
housing
in
housing
solutions,
housing
types,
so
there
is
better
understanding
of
housing,
better
understanding
of
what
our
challenges
are
and
dialogue
between
different
neighborhoods,
different
people
with
different
perspectives
and
so
I'm
fine
with
having
affordability
in
there.
But
it
cannot
be
just
affordability.
B
It
needs
to
also
include
housing
in
general
and
how
you
want
to
phrase
that
I
don't
have
a
strong
opinion.
I
like
how
you
have
your
little
circle,
functional
coordination
where
you
have
hab
or
you
have
TR
GC
deck
and
Hawk,
informing
and
reporting
to
have
and
then
have
advising
and
aligning
where
and
so
I
like
that
circle.
Just
so
that
the
housing
advisory
board
is
in
tune
with
the
funding,
challenges
and
opportunities
and
or
it
becomes
conversant
in
housing,
lingo
and
and
funding.
B
Because
it's
as
we
all
know,
it's
pretty
complicated
and
there's
all
different
types
of
housing,
so
I
think
I'm.
Fine
with
the
with
the
draft
purpose,
as
long
as
it
includes
this
functional
coordination
as
well
as
more
than
just
affordability,
so
I'm
not
going
to
wordsmith,
you
can
figure
that
out
all.
H
Yeah
I
actually
agree
with
Lisa
on
that
and
largely
because
I
think
that
affordability
could
be
interpreted
as
our
IH
program
and
our
T
to
restricted
homes,
and
we
have
so
many
housing
types
that
provide
affordable
options
that
that
are
not
in
that.
And
so
how
do
you?
You
know
categorize,
all
those
whether
it
be
a
mobile
home,
an
ad
you,
a
co-op,
even
the
conversation
we
had
about
split
lots.
You
know
some
people
saw
800
as
a
good,
missing
middle
range
and
some
people
thought
it
was.
H
You
know
totally
unaffordable,
so
I
think
she's
right.
We
need
to
broaden
that
I
I'm
really
concerned.
You
know
every
other
housing
board
or
the
plan
that
the
City
Council
votes
on
so
Planning,
Board
and
Boza,
and
anyone
touching
housing.
It's
really
rooted
in
some
kind
of
document
right,
like
planning
boards
interpreting
our
code,
so
I'm
concerned
that
this
is
a
little
bit
rootless
and
I.
You
know
the
comp
plan
really
is
the
guiding
document.
H
So
when
we
say
the
city's
housing
goals,
I'd
love
to
see
something
along
the
lines
of
rooted
in
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan.
Just
so
that,
there's
those
clear
guiding
principles
of
what
our
housing
goals
are
and
they're
not
making
up
new
housing
goals.
We
actually
have
really
clear
housing
goals.
There
they're
coming
up
with
ways
to
meet
those.
B
L
Guess
for
me,
I
like
the
way
it
reads,
but
I
would
take
affordability
out
so
that
it
would
say
responses
to
boulders
housing
challenges
and
accelerate
progress
towards
the
city's
housing
goals,
I'm
kind
of
ambivalent.
As
to
whether
we
call
out
the
comp
plan
here
or
not,
because
the
comp
plan
is
kind
of
our
guiding
overall
document.
If
we
want
to
that's
fine,
but
I
also
think
that
we
have
other,
like
housing
goals
that
we've
set
out
like
that,
the
10%
you
know
permanently
affordable
and
then
the
new
5%
goes
and
I.
L
Don't
think
those
are
necessarily
in
the
comp
plan
and
that
way
I,
don't
think
so.
But
I
could
be
wrong.
So
there's
also
other
places
that
we've
set
goals
and
as
a
city,
so
I
I
think
as
a
vision
statement.
This
might
be
just
good
enough,
but
I
would
take
affordability
out
of
it,
because
I'm
concerned
about
diversity
as
well
as
affordability,
and
that
people
have
good
equal
opportunities
and
that
we
are
developing
the
right
stock
with,
and
this
is
where
I
think
housing
can
inform
planning
right.
L
It's
like
if
housing
advisory
board
sees
a
challenge
with
some
kinds
of
zoning,
they
could
tell
that
to
Planning
Board
and
say.
Actually
it
would
help
us
if
there
were
a
land-use
fix
that
went
along
with
these
other
housing
goals.
So
I
think
there's
I
really
do
like
the
link
and
it's
going
far
I
feel
that
you've
created
with
Planning
Board.
F
Erin
so
I
think
you're
at
a
great
statement
and
he's
very
sharply
written
but
I'll
agree
with
different
pieces
of
what's
been
said
that
I
think
having
a
mandate
beyond
affordability,
I
think
makes
sense,
but
different
from
Sam
I
would
keep
the
word
in
there
because
I
think
that
is
our
most
critical
challenge
with
housing.
So
I
wouldn't
want
to
just
drop
it
and
say:
well,
we
have
lots
of
challenges
and
they're
all
you
know
so
I
would
keep
affordability
in
there,
so
it
makes
you'd
have.
F
E
Okay,
I'll
just
throw
in
there
I
I'm
agreeing
sort
of
trending
towards
where
Aaron's
heading
I
think
we
should
list.
If
we
want
to
expand,
we
should
but
I
think
taking
things
out,
makes
things
more
vague,
let's
add
stuff
in.
If
we
want
to
be
more
specific,
so
I
think
affordability
is
a
huge
one.
But
if
we
want
to
say
diversity
and
accessibility
is
kind
of
the
three
challenges,
then
I
would
say
them
because
I
think
that
clarifies
I
guess.
P
E
That's
a
good
question:
I
was
being
kind
of
loose
about
it,
I
mean
just
because
I
think
affordability
I
mean
we're
looking
at,
for
instance,
the
shared
equity
model,
which
doesn't
mean
the
house
is
affordable
but
you're
providing
accessibility
for
people
into
housing.
So
you
could
mean
it
that
way.
It's
tools
to
make
it
accessible.
Even
if
it's
really
expensive,
it
could
also
mean
literally
accessible
to
all
I
guess,
yeah.
E
E
P
E
F
R
So
the
full
statement
is
study,
prepare
and
recommend
to
the
council
long
and
short
range
priorities.
Specific
legislation,
probably
in
mostly
going
to
be
ordinances-
that
you
as
a
council
would
pass
finding
priorities
and
programs
to
alleviate
affordable
housing
problems.
So
that's
how
we
draft
it.
We
couldn't
fit
it.
We
didn't
want
to
fit
all
six
and
jam
them
in
a
small
fun.
So.
R
F
B
B
E
G
E
Meant
that
ok,
let
me
put
it
another
way,
some
people
when
they
think
they
see
this,
think
we're
only
talking
about
per
deed,
restricted
and
I.
Think
we're
talking
about
more
than
deed,
restricted,
so
I
just
meant
to
make
sure
that
we're
clear
this
board
is
gonna
advise
on
beyond
just
deed,
restricted.
Yes,
that's
what
I
meant
sure.
L
And
I
was
gonna,
make
a
concrete
suggestion,
just
following
up
on
this
on
number
four
similar
to
what
we
did
in
this
purpose
statement,
considering:
impacts
of
policies
on
housing,
affordability,
diversity
and
accessibility.
Something
like
that
to
make
it
clear
it's
beyond,
but
we
name
the
things
we
care
about.
Yep.
B
Q
So
there
could
be
overlap
and,
depending
on
how
its
implemented
I
think
the
the
point
here
was
to
advise
the
City
Council
I
mean
the
City.
Council
is
actually
like
a
key
stakeholder
in
the
regional
plan
in
the
regional
strategy
and
I
think
to
take
them
out
of
to
take
this
housing
advisory
board.
Out
of
that
discussion,
saying
you
don't
give
input
on
the
the
regional
approach?
It's
really
again.
It's
advising
the
City
Council
no.
E
L
L
F
To
advise-
and
you
know
so
that
I
think
that's
a
good
point.
Well,
one
thing
I
wanted
to
bring
up
is
at
the
retreat.
We
had
a
good
conversation
on
how
this
board
might
help
with
mobile
home
issues
and
maintaining
affordability
and
sustainability
of
mobile
home
parks
and
their
residents
and
I.
Wonder
if
that's
worth
getting
in
here
somewhere.
Do
we
want
to
call
that
out
explicitly
or
how
do
we
make
that
known
that
that's
something
we'd
like
them
to
work
on
well,.
P
F
H
R
B
No
I
like
this,
but
you
know
I'm,
hoping
that
and
I
just
have
written
down
some
things
that
they
could
advise
us
on.
Infill
programs,
so
like
coops
ad
use,
do
play
those
kinds
of
things
funding,
so
downpayment
assistance,
other
things,
types
of
housing.
You
know
that
might
work
in
various
neighborhoods
and
of
course
you
want
to
look
at
the
sub
community
and
the
neighborhood
to
see
if
that
can
be
some
be
supported.
I
think
other
function
should
be
review.
B
Our
affordable
housing
approaches,
review
our
middle-income
housing
programs
and
approaches,
and
what
are
other
communities
doing?
What
are
what
kind
of
innovations
are
other
communities
doing?
What
are
their
successes
would
have
been
their
downsides,
I'd
like
them
to
look
at
that
and
just
the
types
of
housing
and
maybe
looking
at
perhaps
zoning
not
not
actually
doing
Planning
Board
things,
but
looking
at
so
this,
this
area
anyway,
I
don't
want
to
belabor
the
point,
but
maybe
having
it,
having
the
opportunity
to
having
a
discussion
on
zoning
and
I'll
get
to
why
that
might
help.
E
R
R
Advisory
board
does
not
talk
about
all
the
different
strategies
and
tools
that
we
are
trying
to
use
in
part,
because
that
list
would
get
really
long
and
in
part,
because
we
can't
anticipate
all
the
emerging
issues
over
the
next
20
to
30
years
that
this
board
will
be
working
for
you,
so
I
would
say
based
to
be
consistent
with
how
most
of
the
boards
are
set
up.
You
take
a
more
general
approach,
such
as
these
I
think.
H
L
Priorities
are,
and
then
the
TRG
can
consider
that
with
everything
else,
I
need
to
when
they're
looking
at
funding,
so
I
I
almost
think
it
needs
to
be
here,
because
it's
coordinate
with
the
other
housing
technical
groups.
We
call
it
out
or
not
it
just
doesn't
seem
to
fit
into
any
of
the
buckets
that
are
there
well.
E
I,
don't
know
why
it's
just
those
three
though
shouldn't
they
be.
Why
would
they
only
coordinate
with
those
other
two?
Why
not
I
mean
it
we're
they're
coordinating
on
regional
stuff?
Are
they
not
at
they'd,
be
meeting
with
the
Planning
Board
anyhow?
Why
would
we
limit
it
just
to
the
technical
ones?
Well,.
L
E
Elevating
the
community
dialogue
and
adding
transparency
to
the
community
discussion
around
housing.
That
is
not
how
I
would
say
that,
but
any
of
that
concept
is
that
that
this
would
help
connect
the
dots
for
people
anyhow,
so
that
I
would
hope
by
appointing
this
board
and
then
holding
these
conversations,
that
that
would
be
a
result.
So
I
could
almost
list
it
as
a
function.
If
you
guys
agree.
L
E
T
F
I
had
a
question
about
it
less
about
this
piece,
but
the
in
terms
of
how
they
relate
to
other
boards,
as
what
is
your
thought
on
on
issues
where,
because
this
board
we're
talking
about
that,
they
would
recommend
ordinances,
for
example,
but
the
ordinances
might
well
be
under
title
9,
which
is
the
purview
of
Planning
Board
right,
which
has
to
make
recommendations
on
that.
Would
you
see
this?
Follow
it
like
recommendation
from
Housing
Board,
then
planning
board,
then
Council
or
do
see
another
sequence,
two
things
that
would
overlap
between
the
two
bodies.
R
In
the
event,
it
were
a
title,
nine
question:
it
would
need
to
go
to
planning
board
on
other
issues.
It's
really
a
question
of
how
you
want
advice
to
come
to
you
as
council.
If
you,
it
would
certainly
it
depending
on
the
issue.
If
you
go
sequentially,
you
have
a
certain
kind
of
advice.
It
was
made
here
and
then
modified
or
elaborated
on
here,
and
it
perhaps
creates
the
sense
of
hierarchy
or
you
could
get
it
parallel.
You
could
ask
both
boards
to
weigh
in
okay.
F
B
Okay,
so
I
would
like
to
just
propose
something
and
talk
through
it
first
and
then
get
some
legal
advice.
So
what
I
would
like
to
propose
is
that
we
have
a
nine-member
board
and
that
we
basically
have
five
members
that
are
that
serve
and
are
voting
members.
Each
one
of
them
gets
a
staggered
term.
So
one
gets
one
year
two
year:
three,
four
five.
B
B
If
we
go
if
it
passes
and
then
so
there's
there
would
be
seven
members,
the
eighth
member
would
be
I,
like
the
planning
board
ex
officio
being
on
there
and
I
I
want
to
discuss
your
idea.
I
think
that
could
be
helpful
and
then
I
would
like
to
get
somebody
from
TRG
to
be
an
ex
officio
on
this
board,
so
that
you
bring
that
kind
of
expertise.
B
Somebody
who's
dealing
with
TRG
I
mean
maybe
you'd
suggest
c-dac
I,
don't
know,
but
it
seems
like
TRG
kind
of
has
most
of
the
action
so,
and
so
that
brings
you
to
nine.
So
you
have
ultimately
seven
voting
members
and
two
ex
officios,
one
of
which
is
from
planning
board
and
when
we
just
from
TRG
or
some
kind
of
that,
that
kind
of
expertise
I
would
so.
Is
that
legal?
Yes,
okay,
so
thank
you
so
I
would
like
in
terms
of
requirements.
I
would
like
one
of
the
people
to
be
renter.
B
I
would
like
one
of
the
people
to
be
a
homeowner
and
the
rest
of
them.
I
think
and
the
rest
of
them
would
be
like
the
planning
board.
Your
say
they
would
apply
and
they
would
have
you
know
different
walks
of
expertise.
They
could
be
from
real
estate,
they
could
be
from
a
neighborhood,
they
could
be
from
section
eight
they
but
a
broad
section
of
people
and
let
the
City
Council
make
the
decision
in
terms
of
that
diversity
of
people.
B
Right
now
we
have
Planning
Board,
my
almost
my
entire
time
on
council
there.
We
have
never
had
assigned
position
for
a
Planning
Board,
but
we
almost
always
have
had
a
design
professional
on
the
Planning
Board
so
anyway,
I
envision
it
in
that
way.
Instead
of
saying
it
has
to
be
three
professionals
and
one
of
the
things
I
have
with
three
profession,
we
don't
have
three
professionals
on
any
other
board,
so
that
doesn't
seem
to
go
well.
The
council
could
apply,
it
could
appoint
and
people
are
open
to
a
body
at.
P
E
E
E
F
At
least
I
think
I
think
that's
a
great
proposal
thing.
It
takes
a
lot
of
things
into
account
if
I
could
just
offer
a
couple
suggested,
modifications
and
see
its
huge
thing
and
other
people
was
that
I
really
like
the
idea
of
getting
this
on
the
ballot
and
doing
a
charter
amendment
and
going
to
seven
people.
One
thing,
I
think
that's
gonna,
be
a
little
bit
of
a
logistical
challenges
of
pointing
a
large
board
from
scratch,
as
they're
starting
all
at
once.
F
So
I
wonder
if
we
might
start
with
the
five
and
then
the
Charter
change
would
then
give
us
an
opportunity
to
stagger
a
little
bit
and
bring
on
the
two
other
people
next
year.
If,
if
the
Charter
change
were
approved,
and
so
instead
of
having
two
point,
seven
people
all
at
once,
we
could
do
five
this
year
and
two
next
year,
but
they
would
still
get
to
that
seven
and
then
I,
really
like
we're
going
with
the
two
ex-officio
members
as
well.
F
In
terms
of
composition,
you
know
having
a
renter
and
a
homeowner
I
think
is
good.
You
know
you
know
we're
talking
about
how
there
was
feedback
from
the
community
about
people
who
had
you,
maybe
struggled
with
their
housing
and
I.
Think
that
is
an
important
perspective.
Having
renter
doesn't
necessarily
reflect
that
I
mean
there
are
plenty
of
renters
who
are
fairly
comfortable.
They
face
different
challenges
than
homeowners.
F
Do,
but
not
everybody
is
struggling,
so
I
think
it's
worth
considering
also
having
a
resident
of
affordable
housing
as
a
member
of
the
board
and
that
and
that
could
be
of
different
kinds
of
could
be
rental.
It
could
be
home
ownership
or
something
like
that,
but
that
might
get
more
to
that.
That
area
of
food
back
were
of
somebody
who
does
struggle
to
afford
market
rate
housing,
for
example.
So
those
are
my
thoughts
there.
D
Thank
you,
Lisa,
that's
a
great
start,
so
I'll
just
agree
with
a
couple
things:
I
was
gonna
actually
make
the
same
plate.
That
Mary
did,
which
is
I,
think
it
would
be
if
we
could
figure
out
a
way.
It
would
be
great
to
have
some
for
representation
of
people
who
don't
live
in
Boulder
because
keep
in
mind.
One
of
our
goals
is
to
allow
people
who
work
here
to
live
here
and
if
we
just
have
people
who
live
here
already,
we're
not
gonna
get
that
perspective.
D
So
I,
don't
know
how
we're
gonna
make
that
work,
but
I
think
would
I
think
it's
really
really
important.
I
agree
with
Aaron's
approach
on
that
on
the.
If
we
know
if
the
voters
allow
us
to
go
to
seven,
to
wait
on
I'm,
appointing
those
to
people
until
I
have
to
we
get
that
permission,
it's
otherwise.
It's
kind
of
awkward
there
ex-officio
and
if
the
voters
say
no,
then
I
guess
we
told
them
to
go
home
or
I'm
not
sexist.
D
Here,
I
think
it's
gonna
be
a
lot
of
work,
just
a
25,
so
we
do
five
this
year
and
two
next
year
and
I
like
the
ex-officio,
the
printed
ex
officios
from
from
Planning
Board
and
the
TRG
I,
think
that
was
all
good
I'd
like
to
throw
in
a
few
preferences.
So
we're
talking
about
requirements,
number
talked
about
preferences,
so
one
of
the
requirements
was
a
renter
and
I.
Think
that's
great.
We
can
talk
about
whether
one
is
a
sufficient
number
or
not,
but
I.
Think
I.
D
Think
you
also
in
your
materials,
also
talked
about
preferences,
and
this
doesn't
have
to
be
hardwired.
These
are
just
preferences,
you
know
we're
always
looking
for
you
know,
balances
gender
balance
and
so
on
so
forth,
a
couple
of
preferences
that
I
would
put
out
that
without
being
prescriptive
would
be
Geographic.
So
you
know
we
wouldn't
want
off
all
five
or
seven
of
them
to
come
from
the
same
sub
community.
D
We
would,
a
preference
would
be
to
have
them
spread
out
across
town
I
think
my
preference
would
be
to
have
more
than
one
renter,
maybe
with
Aaron's
amendment.
That
starts
to
get
a
little
closer
to
where
we
need
to
be
because
again,
that's
the
cohort.
To
some
extent,
we're
really
focused
on
people
who
already
own
homes
and
already
live
here,
are
probably
in
pretty
good
shape.
D
It's
the
folks
who
can't
afford
to
buy
homes
for
the
people
who
can't
afford
to
live
in
Boulder
folks
we're
trying
to
help
him,
so
they
are
the
best
situated
to
share
with
us
what
some
of
their
needs
are.
I
get
the
fact
that
we
also
want
a
neighborhood
input
because
per
Lisa's
laundry
list
of
innovative
things.
Some
of
those
could
affect
people
who
live
here
as
well,
so
I
think
we're
looking
for
a
balance
between
those
those
two
so
I
we
could
go
on
and
on
about,
but
about
cohorts.
H
You
know
it's
dead.
First
of
all,
I'm
fine
Lisa
with
your
proposal
that
sounds
great
either
whatever
we
choose
I,
don't
have
a
preference
so
much
on
the
number
right
now
as
much
as
this
cohort.
You
know
the
experience
of
people
who
rent
versus
own
is
vastly
different
in
in
this
community
and
54
percent
of
them
rent
and
in
46
own,
and
so,
if
we
were
gonna
do
a
truly
representational
board,
it
would
be.
If
there
are
seven
members,
four
would
be
renters
and,
and
they
are
neighborhood
people
to
renters
live
in
our
neighborhoods.
H
So
we
could
still
do
that
from
each
of
our
sub
communities.
And
you
know
we
know
that
about
10%
of
our
residents
live
in,
affordable
housing,
so
I
think
that's
a
really
important
demographic
and
then
that
could
fall
in
either
the
rent
or
own
category
cuz.
There's
those
who
rent
at
BHP,
those
who
own
through
Sol
or
whatnot
and
and
then
finally
I
think
a
mobile
home
owner
is
really
important.
We've
thousands
of
mobile
homes
and
that
experience
is
again
really
really
different
than
you
know,
either
renters
or
owners
in
real
property.
H
E
L
I'm
pretty
good
with
Aaron
and
lisas,
combined
suggestion
of
start
with
five
give
them
their
staggered
terms,
and
then,
if
charter
amendment
passes
that
we
get
to
seven,
then
we'll
figure
out
how
to
add
the
other.
Two
certainly
support
the
ex-officio
members
and
the
TRG.
If
there's
somebody
there
willing
to
sit
as
next
officio
on
this
and
a
planning
board,
I
know
it
is
a
little
more
for
Planning
Board,
but
I
expect
they'll
be
interested
to
be
honest.
L
With
you,
I
mean
we
usually
don't
have
when
I
was
on
buying
board,
we
didn't
have
much
trouble
filling
the
landmarks
and
I
think
this
will
be
even
more
interesting
I
for
sure
want
to
see
a
renter
and
a
homeowner.
But
beyond
that,
I
really
trust
Council.
To
kind
of
make
this
blend
I
agree.
I
would
support
having
as
broad
a
spectrum
of
experiences
on
the
board
as
possible,
but
also
I
would
like
to
have
some
people
who
know
something
about
housing,
regardless
of
where
they
live.
L
So,
in
other
words,
if
we
have
a
person
that
we
say
that
guy-girl
has
experience
in
housing
finance
and
they
previously
lived
as
a
renter
and
now
they
happen
to
be
a
homeowner
I
think
we
could
benefit
from
from
that
experience.
So
it's
really
hard
to
you
know,
make
a
bunch
of
prescriptive
slots,
because
you
get
people
who
have
really
interesting
combination
backgrounds.
So
I
guess
for
me:
I
feel
it's
important
that
we
have
a
renter
and
a
homeowner
and
beyond
that.
L
I'd
hope
that
we
look
really
at
the
people
and
their
experience
individually
and
try
and
build
a
diverse
board.
So
I'm
kind
of
more,
where
Bob
is
I.
Think
in
saying
that
I
have
preferences
that
we
had
people
with
this
broad
experience,
but
I
don't
want
to
prescriptively
say
you
have
to
have
this
and
that
and
the
other,
the
one
other
thing
that
I'll
point
out
is
I
believe
in
charter.
E
K
I,
like
like
Bob's
idea,
I
agree
with
what
everyone
said
about
the
numbers
and
I
like
Bob's
idea
of
the
geographic
diversity,
because
I
think
that
that
will
give
us
a
really
I,
see
this
as
a
community
board,
in
the
sense
that
it
really
represents
diverse
elements
of
the
community.
But
the
housing
issues
are
really
grounded
in
community
and
I.
Think
that
it's
important
that
they
are
well
represented.
K
Rather
that
would
be
fine
ex-officio,
but
I
would
rather
have
more
people
involved,
who
are
from
here
who
are
seeing
the
sort
of
radical
changes
and
challenges
that
we're
all
dealing
with
and
will
have
a
positive
say
in
in
evaluating
and
moving
us
forward.
That
way,
but
I
think
all
of
the
questions
and
responses
here
who
knew
there'd
be
so
much
enthusiasm
for
this
housing
board.
It's
really
great
I.
B
We
learned
at
council
meeting
last
month
that
count.
The
city
already
has
three
or
four
housing
advisory
committees
consisting
of
housing
developers,
real
estate
experts,
financial
experts
that
important
perspective
seems
well
represented.
Thus,
I
would
like
this
new
board
to
mainly
consist
of
lay
people
that
is
community
members
at
large.
It
is
important
that
our
advisory
boards
also
benefit
from
the
perspectives
and
ideas
of
everyday
citizens.
Boulder
has
smart,
talented
residents,
it's
a
resource,
we
shouldn't
overlook
and
then
three
her
last
point
is
one
of
the
things
she
heard
most
consistently
on.
B
The
campaign
trail
is
that
neighborhoods
feel
they
received
the
impacts
of
housing
decisions
and
policies
without
any
real
voice
in
the
decisions,
it's
not
to
say,
neighborhoods
won't
change,
but
they
should
have
an
active
role
in
shaping
that
change.
The
new
this
new
board
represents
an
opportunity
for
them
to
have
actual
seats
at
the
table.
Job
it's
from
Europe
I,.
F
Great
well
I
I
wonder
if
we
could
codify
some
of
our
intentions,
so
maybe
not
I
I
get
what
people
are
saying
about.
Prescriptive
is
tough,
like
you
want
to
be
able
to
tap
the
best
people
with
diverse
experiences,
and
if
you
put
on
too
many
rules,
then
you
lose
some
of
that
ability.
You
know
like
when
we
appoint
boards
we
for
each
one
of
them.
It
has
well.
F
You
have
to
have
at
least
one
man,
one
where
you
might
have
to
have
two
design,
professionals
or
whatever,
but
could
we
get
something
maybe
written
into
that
to
at
that
level?
That
says
we
look
for
in
this
board.
People
who
have
experienced
you
know
housing
challenges
who
come
from
diversity,
types
of
housing
who
perhaps
a
mobile
home
owner.
F
You
know,
like
some
I,
don't
know
exactly
what
it
is,
but
we've
had
this
discussion
about
some
of
the
things
that
we're
looking
for
in
people,
people
who
have
experience
with
housing
policy
so
like
something
like
a
little.
You
know
a
sentence
that
lists
some
of
the
qualities
that
we're
looking
for
in
board
members,
so
that
we're
reminded
of
that
in
future
councils
are
reminded
of
that.
As
they
point
future
board
members
I
tagged.
D
On
to
that,
and
so
and
following
on
that,
in
addition
to
to
expressing
our
desire
for
this
diversity,
I
would
suggest
that
when
you
form
the
application,
you
ask
those
specific
questions
or
you
render.
Are
you
own
or
how
long
have
you
lived
in
Boulder?
What
sub
community
do
you
live
in?
What's
your
experience,
in
other
words,
have
them
call
that
up
so
then
we
look
at
these
applications.
We
can
kind
of
put
them
in
piles
or
here's
the
renter
file.
D
E
I'm
gonna
jump
in
so
I
agree
with
all
of
this.
I
do
think
that
we
want
to-
and
it's
already
been
said
but
I
want
to
underscore
it.
We
want
diverse
people
who
have
a
profound
interest
in
the
housing
policy
and
problem-solving.
Our
solutions
and
I
think
that
that
should
be.
However,
whatever
the
right
words
to
say
you
can't
just
if
you've
never
thought
about
it,
you've
never
done
it,
but
you,
but
you
kind
of
thing,
no
I.
We
need
people
that
are
really
gonna.
E
Advise
us
one
of
our
biggest
challenges,
so
I
just
want
that.
That
would
be
the
kind
of
the
first
thing
and
then
we
look
for
all
these
different
types
of
experiences
around
that
and
I.
It
sounds
like
since
nobody's
mentioning
professional
experience
that
we're
kind
of
doing
away
with
that
and
I
would
suggest.
Maybe
we
replace
it
with
that.
The
this
interest
and
experience
with
housing
issues
and
policy
yeah.
B
And
can
this
be
I
would
just
hope
that
we
don't
scare
away
somebody
who
might
be
really
interested
and
has
not
had
housing
challenges,
but
has
a
lot
of
wealth
of
experience
in
real
estate
or
I
mean
I,
don't
want
to
get
into
these
professional
skills.
But
for
me
I'm
hoping
we
can
encourage
what
you
just
said.
Zann
and
maybe
you
guys
can
right
go
back
and
but
that
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
people
who
are
interested
in
advancing
our
housing
policies
and
our
programs
and
have
some
experience.
B
But
we
also
want
to
encourage
people
who
feel
like
they
want
to
apply
that
they
can
apply.
I
mean
we
don't
lay
out
for
Planning
Board.
Well,
you
have
to
have
this
experience
and
planning
and
stuff
like
that.
That
comes
out
in
the
planning
board
application
and
in
our
interview-
and
we
don't
take
somebody
for
planning
board
or
any
of
our
boards-
that
Harry.
E
L
To
be
a
bit
of
a
curmudgeon
here,
because
Matt's
no
longer
with
us,
I'll
be
mad
tonight
and
I
want
to
push
back
a
little
bit
on
the
idea
that
we're
gonna
list
a
bunch
of
things
and
people
on
piles
I
mean
in
particular.
The
piles
thing
really
rubs
me
the
wrong
way,
because
somebody
could
have
been
a
renter
before
and
now
there
are
a
homeowner,
they
could
have
been
a
renter
and
a
homeowner
and
now
they're
back
to
being
a
renter
for
something
that
changed
in
their
life.
L
L
Our
housing
policy
in
Boulder
here
are
some
of
the
things
that
we
think
that
we
want
to
have
is
experiences
from
the
applicants
and
and
then
just
list
them
in
no
particular
order,
because
I
think
it's
the
the
some
of
the
parts
in
the
applicants
that
are
going
to
make
them
the
most
appealing.
So
I
just
want
to
be
careful
that
we're
not
trying
to
just
take
a
bunch
of
boxes
and
that
we
look
at
the
whole
of
the
experience
of
the
people.
Can.
E
I
just
say
that
that
collectively
we
want
the
board
to
have
a
breadth
of
diversity
of
these
types,
and
that
way
it's
not
no
one
person,
it's
more,
that
we're
gonna
look
for
as
we
appoint
as
we
had
people
and
people
come
off.
That
will
be
looking
to
have
a
breadth
of
that
okay,
Mary
and
then
Jill.
So.
P
H
And
I
think
I
feel
like
Sam
does,
but
when
it
comes
to
the
professional
experience
that
sometimes
we
categorize
professionals
into
one
lump
and
they're
actually
we're
all
community
members
I
know
real
estate
professionals
that
are
young
and
renting
and
paying
off
student
loans
and
I
know
real
estate
professionals,
who
have
millions
of
dollars
and
owned
20
houses
in
Boulder.
It's
totally
different
same
with
developers.
Not
all
of
them
are
created.
Equal
we've
got
small-scale
incrementalist
developers
and
we
have
big.
H
R
H
B
I
would
leave
it
open
and
let
the
council
decide
if
we
get
too
prescriptive
and-
and
we
have
that
requirement,
then
we're
gonna
have
to
keep
opening
and
we
don't
get
somebody
of
that
requirement
to
apply
I
like
where
Sam's
going.
We
all
come
with
a
whole
host
of
different
experiences
in
life
and
just
like
you
said
you
know,
you
just
went
through
all
these
professionals.
B
You
can't
you
can't
categorize
those
people
so
I
for
me,
I'm
hoping
we
can
that
the
council
can
look
at
the
quality
of
the
applicants,
make
sure
we
have
a
renter
that
renter
might
might
be
an
affordable
housing
renter.
It
just
depends
on
the
quality
of
that
candidate
and
one
homeowner,
and
because,
if
we're
going
to
start
with
five
I
want
to
make
sure
we
get
the
best
people
on
here
as
possible
and
I
think
we
represent
broad
perspective
of
the
community.
Can.
L
I
can
I
follow
on
that.
Just
briefly,
I
think
when
there's
only
five,
it's
really
important
that
we'd
be
very
careful
on
just
specify
like
renter
and
how
murder,
when
we
go
to
seven,
maybe
we
can
revisit
this
because
when
you
go
to
seven
you
have,
if
it
happens,
if
those
people
vote
for
it,
then
you
have
more
latitude.
So
if
you
have
three
that
are
kind
of
prescriptive,
but
out
of
seven
anyway,
we
could
revisit
that
idea.
I.
E
R
T
S
D
S
T
R
D
Think
to
the
extent
possible
I
know
someone's
dependent
upon
us
I'd
like
to
suggest
that
the
application
deadline
be
the
same
because
if
we
stagger
it,
if
we
have
all
the
other
boards
and
commissions
and
then
housing,
we
put
people
in
a
very
difficult
position,
because
they
don't
should
I
wait
for
the
housing
board
or
should
I
apply
for
one
of
these
things
and
I
think
to
the
extent
we
can
have
the
same
February
16th
deadline.
I
know
that
puts
you
guys
under
the
gun.
D
F
D
E
R
B
R
B
E
P
B
L
Would
also
say
that
the
the
questionnaire
can't
possibly
be
perfect,
the
first
time
since
we're
giving
you
just
a
few
weeks
to
do
it.
It
means
that
we
have
to
ask
good
interview
questions
as
well,
because
the
questionnaires
are
very
important,
but
the
interviews
are
equally
important,
and
so,
if
we
have
time
to
think
about
it
and
there's
holes
in
the
questionnaire
because
we
haven't
given
you
enough
time
to
really
go
around
the
circle
on
it,
then
it's
up
to
us
I
think
consistent
questions.
During
the
interviews
that
fill
in
those
gaps
we.
D
Have
we
have
twenty
boards
and
commission
sets
of
applications
and
I?
Don't
know
what
councils
ever
waiting
on
those,
certainly
not
anytime
recently
so
I
would
just
tend
to
trust
the
staff.
You
heard
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we
care
about.
I
would
tend
to
trust.
You
guys
put
together
the
first
application.
If
we
think
it's,
you
did
a
really
really
bad
job.
You'll
probably
hear
hear
from
us
for
next
year's
round.
H
H
Gonna
be
a
contrarian
here
after
listening
to
this
conversation,
I
think
it's
really
fast.
You
know
when
I
applied
for
Planning
Board,
these
bigger
more
important
boards.
You
want
the
opportunity
to
sit
down
individually
with
council
members.
I
did
that
with
many
of
you
it
also
you
you
want
to
think
about
the
questions
even
meet
with
other.
You
know
people
in
the
the
field
it
just
doesn't
feel
like
this
gives
people
time
to
really
do
a
good
job
and
I
hear
what
you're
saying
Bob,
because
I've
had
other
people
like.
E
H
Coming
up
with
a
questionnaire
the
people
getting
noticed
that
this
is
happening
and
that
it's
open
and
that
you
know
what
it's,
what
the
function
is
I
mean
III,
spend
months
preparing
for
to
apply
for
a
Planning
Board.
You
know
well
before
the
applications
even
open
just
talking
to
the
people
in
this
field
and
I,
just
don't
we're
not
giving
people
any
real
chance
to
thinker.
B
Suggest
I
mean
I,
think
Heidi
told
us
there's
already
like
17
people
who
have
applied
for
this
board,
so
there
have
been
people
out
there.
Thinking
about
it,
I
like
Bob's
recommendation
with
Aaron's
caveat
of
giving
staff
two
more
weeks,
because
people
do
when
if
they're
gonna
go
to
the
effort
of
applying
for
a
board,
and
this
interview
isn't
going
to
happen
until
the
19th,
so
it's
even
longer
so
right
now
they
have
two
months.
They
have
two
months
to
prepare
I,
think
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
are
pretty
savvy.
B
B
H
B
R
Depending
on
the
amount
of
input
and
whether
it's
all
consistent
or
not
on
any
questions,
I
think
I've
talked
with
the
city
clerk
staff.
We
can
get
that
up
and
posted
by
the
end
of
next
week,
if
not
sooner,
which
would
give
and
if
we're
going
to
go
an
extra
two
weeks
that
gives
a
month
of
time
for
people
to
apply.
If
you
can
schedule
the
interviews
on
the
19th
I,
don't
see
why
you
can't
meet
that
20th
appointment
deadline.
R
B
R
R
As
I
look
at
this
schedule,
we
may
not
be
able
to
get
all
the
other
pieces
done
in
time
for
an
April
meeting
of
the
board.
If
we
could
try
but
you'll
have
to
I,
don't
know
Aaron
I'm
gonna
put
you
on
the
spot.
If
the
ordinance
is,
can
we
win?
Can
a
board
be
seated?
If
it's,
the
ordinance
has
to
be
passed
and
we
have
30
days
well.
S
B
T
R
B
B
So
if
you
start
with
12
months,
then
go
by
two
and
if
you
have
the
little
circle
where
TRG
comes
in
and
meets
with
them
four
times
a
year,
24
mine,
420,
then
there's
holidays,
there's
winter
holidays
there's
spring
holidays
in
there
summer,
then
I
would
take
another
six
or
seven
out
of
there
and
then
you're
down
to
twelve
thirteen,
so
maybe
have
it
monthly.
But
then
you
know
this
would
be
a
good
way
to
go.
S
D
L
So
this
is
outside
of
the
three
questions,
sorry,
that
those
were
great
if
we
could
go
to
slide
15
in
the
presentation,
potential
work
plan,
items
for
sure,
I
agree
with
orientation
fee
waivers
next,
but
IT
project
review
I
think
have
been
on
the
list
for
affordable
housing.
That's
on
the
wish
list
for
the
affordable
housing
developers
and
if
I
was
starting
with
those,
because
those
have
been
things
we've
talked
about
for
a
while
to
get
here.
L
The
n
goes
to
regional
housing,
coordination
and
mobile
strategy
and
I
mean
mobile
home
strategy
is
important
to
keep
here.
I
would
like
to
add
to
this
and
I,
don't
know
where
it
comes
around
regional
housing
coordination,
but
the
down
payment
assistance,
shared
equity
program
because
I,
that's
one
of
the
types
of
things
that
I
think
we
could
really
benefit
from
a
housing
advisory
board.
L
You
know
having
him
wrestle
some
details
to
the
ground
and
go
around
with
staff
and
really
kind
understand
how
it
would
work
and
and
in
the
context
of
a
pilot,
so
I
would
like
to
add
that
and
get
the
feedback
from
them
towards
the
fall
timeframe.
When
we
heard
that
you'll
actually
be
able
to
have
bandwidth
to
get
going
on
that
so
anyway,
I
just
thought
I'd
throw
that
in
there,
because
I
think
we
could
benefit
from
hearing
from
them
about
that.
Q
E
B
F
It
just
yeah
just
back
on
the
coordination
with
planning
board.
We
there's
a
lot
that
we've
worked
out
tonight
and
I.
Don't
want
to
try
to
pin
this
to
the
ground
right
now,
but
I
think
we
do
need
to
figure
out
how
they're
going
to
interact
with
the
Planning
Board
on
the
areas
of
common
interests
and
in
particularly
Planning
Board,
will
you
will
make
motions
on
particular
language
on
you
know
leading
up
to
ordinances
right.