►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Meeting 8-24-23
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
A
A
A
A
B
Everybody
Welcome
to
tonight's
study
session
of
the
Boulder
City
Council
I'm
council,
member
Matt
Benjamin,
and
thank
you
for
joining
us
first.
I
just
want
to
welcome
back
all
the
students
and
parents
throughout
our
community
from
K-12
to
college,
and
it's
really
important
that
we
offer
them
a
safe
and
successful
year
ahead
and
it's
those
students
who
are
indeed
our
future
Generations
from
which
we
strive
to
pay
it
forward.
So
many
of
the
conversations
we're
talking
about
tonight
are
indeed
an
attempt
to
pay
it
forward
for
those
Generations.
B
So
welcome
back
to
school
and
thank
you
guys
and
everybody
in
our
community.
So
we
have
an
action-packed
agenda
tonight
we
have
three
items.
The
our
first
item
will
be
discussing
Community
Broadband.
The
second
will
be
an
airport
Community
conversation
update
and
our
third
will
be
a
continuation
of
that
conversation
and
update
with
regards
to
minimum
wage.
B
So
they
go
away
with
this,
knowing
exactly
what
we're
trying
to
do
and
then
poor
Nuria,
our
city
manager,
doesn't
have
to
go
back
and
review
footage
from
eons
ago
in
order
to
clarify
what
we
did
or
did
not
say
we
respect
her
time.
So
we
will
do
good
and
better
going
forward
on
that
front
and
speaking
of
our
city
manager,
before
we
get
into
our
items,
we'll
introduce
our
city
manager,
Nuria
Rivera
vandermeid,
to
introduce
our
first
item.
Thank.
C
We
do
have
three
media
items
today
to
talk
about
and
I'll
I'll
send
it
to
Mike
Gian
Santi
to
kick
us
off,
but
I'll
say
that
this
last
airport
conversation
came
to
you
all
last
January
and
you
sent
staff
back
with
some
questions
and
a
request
for
some
further
analysis
and
the
team
I
will
say
led
by
Mike
and
as
always,
Jennifer
Douglas
is
leading
the
department
they
have
done.
Phenomenal
work
really
doing
heavy
analysis.
So
Mike
I
defer
to
you.
D
Thank
you
Nuria
and
councilmember
Benjamin
and
good
evening.
Council
Mike,
jansante,
deputy
chief
Innovation
and
Technology
officer
I'm
really
excited
to
be
here
with
you
this
afternoon
and
share
the
research
and
Analysis
that
staff
has
completed
this
year
per
your
guidance
at
our
January
study
session
on
the
matter.
So
before
I
begin.
D
I
do
want
to
remind
Council
that
the
intent
of
tonight's
study
session
is
not
to
make
a
decision
on
a
path
forward,
but
rather
provide
staff
with
any
feedback
on
additional
information
that
you
might
need
before
a
public
hearing
and
decision
on
our
recommended
path
forward.
As
council
member
Benjamin
pointed
out,
I
also
kindly
ask
that
you
hold
questions
until
we
run
through
the
materials
which
should
take
about
20
minutes.
D
B
D
And
we
can
move
into
the
next
slide
and
just
some
quick
introductions
on
the
call.
This
evening
we
have
Chief
Financial
Officer
Carl
Skinner,
who
will
assist
me
in
the
presentation,
Chief,
Innovation
and
Technology
Officer
Jennifer
Douglas
is
on
the
line
assistant,
City
attorney,
Andy,
frohart
and
City
attorney.
D
D
So
with
all
that
in
mind,
I'd
like
to
begin
by
re-grounding
us
in
the
community,
Broadband
Project's
intended
outcome
and
objectives,
these
were
first
developed
in
2017
and
reaffirmed
at
our
study
session
earlier
this
year.
The
ultimate
goal
or
outcome
of
this
work
is
really
to
achieve:
affordable,
high-speed
fiber-based
broadband
internet
access
for
the
entire
community.
D
How
we
achieve
that
goal
can
take
many
forms
and
making
that
decision
requires
careful
consideration
of
the
elements
of
cost
risk
level
of
City
control,
time
to
Market
and,
of
course,
How
likely.
We
are
to
achieve
these
six
objectives:
Citywide
access,
creating
a
more
competitive
Marketplace,
having
services
that
are
Equitable
and
inclusive,
having
infrastructure
in
a
business
model
that
are
future
oriented,
having
internet
delivery
for
the
entire
community
that
remains
net
neutral
and
places
the
highest
regard
on
consumer
privacy.
D
So,
with
those
objectives
in
mind,
in
2018,
Council
took
a
major
step
towards
our
intended
outcome
and
invested
20
million
dollars
in
a
fiber
backbone.
The
fiber
backbone
is
about
65
miles
of
fiber.
This
is
infrastructure
that
is
physically
in
the
ground.
Construction
on
that
backbone
will
be
completed
here
at
the
end
of
the
calendar
year.
That
backbone
runs
along
the
major
transportation
corridors
of
the
city,
think
of
it
as
the
interstates
of
the
fiber
Network
that
can
carry
massive
capacities
of
data.
D
So
I
want
to
come
back
to
this
graphic.
On
the
left
hand,
side
of
the
slide
here
and
I
want
to
be
very
clear
about
what
the
backbone
is
and
what
it
isn't.
If
we
carry
that
Transportation
analogy
through
I
mentioned
that
we
own
the
backbone,
it
is
like
the
interstates.
The
question
before
this
Council
in
2023
is
who
builds
the
interstate
off-ramps,
the
main
roads,
the
side,
roads,
the
driveways
and
then
ultimately,
who
drives
the
car
who
provides
service
along
the
network.
D
So
while
the
internet
highways
or
our
backbone
is,
is
absolutely
critical
for
the
network
to
be
viable,
it
alone
does
not
provide
our
constituents
with
internet
service.
For
that
we
require
additional
investment,
and
that's
what
this
conversation
tonight
in
this
entire
year
has
been
about
whether
that
investment
is
from
the
city
or
from
other
sources
both
to
to
build
the
network
and
serve
the
network,
all
the
way
to
homes
and
businesses
across
the
city.
D
The
other
question
highlighted
here
on
this
slide,
which
I
will
allude
back
to
when
discussing
the
benefits
and
challenges
of
each
potential
path
forward,
is
how
is
the
rest
of
the
network
physically
constructed?
It's
an
important
question
because
it
has
huge
impacts
on
the
prevalence
of
traffic
disruption
or
so-called
cone
zones.
If
you
will,
it
has
a
huge
impact
on
the
long-term
Road
surface
conditions,
and
it
has
obviously
a
huge
impact
on
the
overall
cost
and
time
to
Market
of
our
internet
services
that
we
would
be
trying
to
provide
over
that
Network.
D
So
the
point
in
bringing
this
up
now
is
is
definitely
not
to
Deep
dive
into
this
topic
tonight.
Happy
to
answer
questions
on
it,
but
we
want
to
be
transparent
that
this
will
have
an
impact
and
the
nuances
later
on
on
whatever
broad
path
is,
is
chosen
by
Council
next
slide,
please
so,
we've
broken
before
we
move
into
the
section
I
just
want
to
highlight:
we've
we've
broken
the
presentation
into
two
major
sections:
well,
I!
Guess
three:
there
was
that
intro
part
I
just
did
now
there'll
be
two
major
sections.
D
The
second
section
of
this
presentation
or
I
guess
the
third
will
provide
staff
analysis
of
the
three
potential
paths
forward
that
consider
all
of
this
research
in
a
decision
framework
that
considers
the
elements
that
I
mentioned
earlier:
cost
control
time
to
Market
risk
and
the
ability
to
achieve
our
objectives.
So
next
slide
please!
D
So.
At
the
January
study
session
we
had
a
lot
of
discussion
about
access
to
high-speed
internet
in
the
city.
What
we've
learned
through
a
detailed
analysis
of
FCC
data
and
discussions
with
several
property
owners
here
in
the
city,
is
that
over
99
of
households
in
the
city
of
Boulder
have
access
to
wired
Broadband,
which
should
be
celebrated.
This
is
this
is
really
great
and
well
above
the
state
average.
The
wired
Broadband
threshold
is
the
state
industry
Benchmark
for
quote
internet
accessibility.
D
So,
while
there
are
Wireless
options
pervasive
throughout
the
city,
we
really
look
at
wired
Internet
to
the
whole.
All
of
these
properties
have
access
via
Comcast,
Xfinity
and
remember.
Comcast
has
a
cable
franchise
agreement
with
the
city
that
requires
them
to
run
cable
infrastructure
to
nearly
all
the
homes
in
the
city,
and
this
is
the
same
infrastructure
that
they
provide
internet
services
over.
So
while
there
is
no
internet
franchise
agreement,
our
constituents
benefit
from
having
Comcast
infrastructure
running
to
their
homes,
to
access
Internet
services
as
well.
D
D
This
means
that
homes
here
in
CenturyLink's
coverage
area
actually
have
a
choice
between
CenturyLink
and
Comcast,
because
there
is
overlapping
in
those
zones.
It
also
means
that
the
64
percent
of
older
households
that
are
not
in
CenturyLink's
coverage
map
have
no
choice
when
receiving
wired
internet
access.
Comcast
is
their
only
option
and
then
for
the
half
a
percent.
D
This
is
about
200
or
250
residences
that
are
currently
unserved
by
wired
internet.
Our
research
found
that
all
of
these
premises
are
located
on
a
single
manufactured
home,
community
property
we've
spoken
to
both
the
property
owner
and
to
Comcast
to
understand
possibilities
of
closing
that
Gap
as
soon
as
possible.
Unfortunately,
I
don't
have
an
update
on
that
for
you
tonight,
but
I
I
hope
to
soon.
D
So
all
of
this
is
to
say
that
it
is
really
important
to
frame
the
discussion
that
we're
having
tonight
not
around
access
to
Internet,
as
that
is
largely
not
an
issue
in
the
city,
with,
of
course,
that
one
exception
that
I
just
mentioned
that
we
believe
can
be
remedied
outside
of
this
larger
discussion.
Instead
tonight
we
really
must
focus
on
access
to
Future
oriented
fiber-based
internet,
which
of
course,
according
to
this
data,
only
36
percent
of
homes
have
access.
D
D
So,
as
I
mentioned,
we
solicited
a
lot
of
feedback
from
the
community
over
the
last
eight
months.
We
did
this
via
statistically
valid
survey,
business
focus
groups
through
discussions
with
Community
connectors
manufactured
home,
community
members
and
and
other
stakeholders
throughout
the
community.
A
few
highlights
of
that
engagement
are
here
on
this
slide.
As
I
mentioned,
we
have
Kevin
and
Ernest
from
BBC
research
on
the
line
to
answer
any
specific
questions
that
Council
might
have
related
to
the
statistically
valid
resident
survey
or
the
business
focus
groups.
D
D
Luckily,
both
of
our
uncommon
providers,
Comcast
and
CenturyLink,
are
participants
in
this
program
and
both
offer
a
service
for
those
who
are
Income
qualified
at
thirty
dollars
a
month
which
effectively
makes
service
free
to
those
households.
There
are
about
250
households
or
5.3
percent
of
our
households
here
in
Boulder
that
are
currently
leveraging.
D
Acp
funding
also
outlined
here
on
this
slide
on
the
whole,
most
households
are
willing
to
pay
between
60
and
80
dollars
for
home
internet
today,
about
53
percent
are
actually
satisfied
with
their
current
service,
which
means
47
are
not
most
did
cite
reliability,
speed
and
cost
as
major
challenges,
and
those
three
elements
are
also
the
three
drivers
on
how
folks
are
making
internet
buying
decisions.
D
Lastly,
here,
as
I
mentioned
before
the
provider,
decisions
alluded
to
in
that
former
bullet
are
really
currently
only
limited
to
the
36
percent
of
households
who
have
service
provided
from
both
incumbent
providers,
and
so
this
lack
of
choice
was
echoed
not
only
by
residents
in
the
survey,
but
it
was
also
spoken
very
loudly
at
our
business
focus
groups
with
small
and
medium-sized
businesses
in
in
town
next
slide,
please.
D
So
this
past
spring,
we
also
issued
a
request
for
information
to
understand
Market
interest
in
a
partnership
with
the
city.
We
were
curious
to
understand,
Market
interest
in
operating
an
internet
service
on
city-owned
infrastructure
and
or
operating
an
internet
service
on
mostly
privately
owned
infrastructure.
D
We
received
information,
packets
from
eight
different
organizations
and
from
our
analysis
of
those
responses,
there
were
essentially
Three
core
partnership
models
that
emerged
as
potentially
viable
for
us.
Basically,
all
three
models
have
the
partner
operating
the
internet
service,
as
they
would
bring
the
economies
of
scale
operationally
and
the
Deep
expertise
and
how
to
run
operations.
The
the
differences
in
each
of
the
models
were
based
on
the
level
of
City
ownership
in
the
infrastructure,
so
sort
of
model
A
or
partnership.
A
here
represents
full
City
ownership
and
all
of
the
of
all
of
the
infrastructure.
D
So,
for
the
purposes
of
our
analysis
later
on
in
the
presentation
here,
we've
essentially
combined
partnership,
A
and
B
here
and
we've
termed
that
a
proper
public-private
partnership.
This
is
where
the
city
has
some
level
of
financial
involvement
in
the
full
Network
build,
and
then
we
term
model
C
here
as
a
right-of-way
agreement
and
a
backbone
lease.
D
So
the
idea
here
of
this
third
type
of
partnership
is
that
the
city
again
retains
ownership
of
the
backbone
we
charge
lease
fees
and
or
we
negotiate
other
policy
objectives
and
in
exchange,
the
the
potential
partner
or
Partners
receive
non-exclusive
use
of
the
backbone
and
non-exclusive
right-of-way
agreements
so
that
they
can
bring
private
capital
and
build
that
middle
and
last
mile
infrastructure.
D
Again
over
the
summer,
we
we
partnered
with
another
consulting
firm
CTC
energy
and
technology,
and
they
came
back
to
the
city
to
update
their
Municipal
internet
utility,
costing
model
and
financial
projections
that
they
originally
developed
for
Boulder
back
in
2018..
So
just
to
be
clear,
this
is
for
the
situation
not
with
a
partner
involved,
but
where
the
city
owns
and
operates,
it's
a
full
internet
utility.
So
this
is
the
the
Longmont
Loveland
Fort
Collins
model
that
many
of
you
are
familiar
with.
D
I
have
on
the
line
here
tonight
again:
David
Talbot
and
Matt
dehaven
from
CTC
they're
able
to
answer
questions
you
might
have
about
the
cost
estimates
and
and
the
financial
modeling
that
we're
about
to
walk
through
the
cost
projections
here
in
2023
were
much
more
informed
than
those
in
2018.
D
They
can
considered
specific
information
that
we
now
have
on
specifics
of
our
economy
and
our
geology
here
in
the
city
of
Boulder,
because
we've
actually
been
out
and
we've
been
constructing,
fiber
conduit
in
our
backbone,
and
so
we
now
have
a
much
better
understanding
of
the
level
of
rock
in
our
soil
that
we
learned
through
the
build
of
our
backbone
and
we
included
those
assumptions
in
the
new
modeling.
D
We
also
consider
the
nearly
25
base
inflation
that
we've
seen
since
2018
and
they
also
considered
a
major
major
research
resource
Crunch
and
cost
increases
related
to
the
materials
and
labor
in
this
in
this
Broadband
space.
Since
the
massive
Federal
funding
programs
for
Broadband
opened
a
couple
of
years
ago,
our
cost
estimate,
as
shown
here
on
the
slide
in
2023
dollars,
is
218
million.
D
This
is
about
a
hundred
million
dollars
more
than
what
the
estimate
was
in
2018
again
for
those
reasons,
I
just
stated,
then,
when
we
consider
inflation
during
a
five-year
bill
period,
cash
flow
of
shortfalls
during
construction
and
financing
fees
based
on
ctc's
analysis,
we
would
require
268
million
dollars
of
debt
to
complete
the
build.
I.
Do
want
to
note
that
there
is
a
slight
difference
between
what
is
here
and
what
was
in
the
memo.
D
A
couple
weeks
ago,
we
have
had
further
discussions
with
Bond
Council
financial
advisors
and
CTC,
and
that
has
resulted
in
solidifying
some
of
the
financing
assumptions,
probably
most
importantly,
that
we
would
not
need
to
fund
a
Debt
Service
Reserve
fund
for
from
debt
proceeds,
and
so
that
resulted
in
in
the
decreased
projected
total
cost
of
finance
that
you
see
here
from
what
was
in
the
memo.
It
does
have
a
small
impact
into
the
annual
subsidy
that
you'll
see
here
on
the
next
slide.
D
D
D
That
is
just
based
on
standard
industry
practice
and
you'll
see
because
of
that
you'll
see
these
projections
in
the
graph
on
the
slide
here
begin
in
2031.,
we've
assumed
a
retail
price
of
seventy
dollars,
which
is
right
in
the
middle
of
the
acceptable
range
indicated
in
the
community
survey,
and
we
also
included
a
thirty
dollar
product
for
those
that
are
Income
qualified
to
be
in
line
with
ACP
regulations
and
being
competitive
with
income
and
providers.
In
that
space.
D
We've
also
assumed
a
five
percent
interest
rate
on
a
25-year
bond
for
the
268
million
dollars
that
I
just
mentioned,
and
we
made
a
long
list
of
assumptions
based
on
industry
standards
and
what
we
know
about
our
city
operations
around
standing
up
the
business
to
run
an
internet
utility,
it
would
include
creating
a
whole
new
City
Department
with
dozens
of
head
count.
They
would
operate
everything
from
sales
and
marketing
to
field
maintenance
and
customer
service
all
the
way
to
Administration.
D
So
the
graph
on
the
slide
here,
I'll
kind
of
walk
through
one
of
these
bars
we'll
start
just
looking
at
2031
here.
The
green
bar
represents
Revenue
in
that,
given
year,
operating
expense,
Debt,
Service
and
the
other
expenses
are
shown
here
in
red,
and
then
the
black
bar
for
each
year
represents
the
shortfall
between
cash
inflow
and
cash
outflow.
E
Thanks
Mike
and
good
evening,
Council
car
Skinner.
So
yes,
so,
given
the
results
of
the
financial
model
and
the
need
to
potentially
raise
approximately
270
million
in
capital
and
to
come
up
with
a
funding
source
to
fund
the
average
annual
subsidy,
we
did
look
at
a
number
of
financing
options
and
you'll
see
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
this
slide.
These
were
options
that
we
explored,
that
we
determined
really
were
not
viable
I'll,
go
quickly
through
them.
E
The
first
I'm
sure
you're
familiar
with
communities
that
we're
able
to
leverage
their
Municipal
electric
utility
to
fund
internet
utility,
but
we
are
not
familiar
with
Nora
our
advisors,
communities
that
were
able
to
leverage
their
water
or
Wastewater
utility.
Even
though
we
contemplated
that
and
frankly,
our
the
city's
water
utilities
have
substantial
Capital
needs
and
a
need
to
issue
debt
for
those
projects.
E
Next,
we
considered
an
option
of
whether
the
general
fund
could
initially
issue
some
debt
to
fund
the
construction
of
the
internet
system
and
then,
when
internet
utility
was
up
and
running
and
operational,
possibly
it
could
support
its
own
debt
issue
and
then
refund
the
general
fund
on
its
debt
issue.
However,
given
the
results
of
the
financial
model,
there
is
not
sufficient
revenues
based
upon
the
projections
to
cover
both
operations
and
maintenance
and
Debt
Service,
and
so
it
as
we
showed
this
would
require
a
subsidy.
E
Enterprises
can't
have
a
subsidy
from
the
general
fund
more
than
10
percent,
so
we
will
not
be
able
to
form
an
Enterprise
fund
for
this
operation
and
then
last
we
did
consider
whether
we
could
issue
certificates
of
participation
and
to
do
that,
you
need
to
pledge
assets
and,
frankly,
the
city
does
not
have
assets
sufficient
to
generate
nearly
278
million
dollars.
So
that
was
not
an
option.
E
This
path,
based
upon
current
projections
of
the
budget,
that
Mark
wolf
shared
with
the
financial
strategy
committee,
and
then
we
shared
with
all
Council
last
week
in
a
question
and
answer
session
last
week
at
Council,
based
upon
current
projections,
we
are
really
forecasting
that,
in
the
time
frame
from
2025
to
2029
of
only
having
an
additional
average,
five
hundred
thousand
dollars
of
additional
general
fund
budget
to
go
toward
ongoing
needs.
So,
frankly,
there
is
not
anticipated
additional
Revenue
to
cover
some
new
service
or
subsidies
such
as
this
in
the
near
future.
E
So,
given
that,
in
order
to
fund
The,
Debt
Service
and
the
subsidy
needed,
we
would
need
to
either
re-prioritize
general
fund
programs
and
services
to
the
tune
of
approximately
14
million
dollars,
or
we
could
ask
voters
for
a
new
increment
of
tax
and
we
also
did
put
in
their
and
because
it
could
be.
A
combination
of
these
two
could
be
some
re-prioritization
and
some
new
increment
of
tax.
E
But
we
want
to
emphasize
that
this
is
extremely
challenging
from
a
budget
perspective
and
just
to
give
you
some
context.
14
million
is
7.5
percent
of
the
2023
general
fund
budget.
E
So
it
is
not
an
insubstantial
sum
when
compared
to
the
total,
also
through
the
2024
budget
process,
as
I
think
was
also
shared
by
Mark
Wolfe
last
week,
and
you
will
see
more
of
next
month
as
we
roll
out
the
recommended
2024
budget,
there
were
26
million
dollars
of
budget
requests
from
departments
and
that's
those
requests
were
to
meet
current
community
needs
program
needs.
E
We
were
only
able
to
accommodate
about
three
million
dollars
of
those
requests
and
just
to
give
you
a
flavor
for
some
of
those
requests,
they
really
were
for
core
service
needs.
Maintenance
needs
additions
to
basic
needs,
affordable
housing,
support
dollars
to
implement
some
strategies,
and
some
already
approved
Master
plans,
including
the
fire
master
plan
and
ALS
implementation,
Building
Maintenance
to
meet
guidelines
contained
in
the
facilities
master
plan.
E
E
I
guess
the
other
thing
too,
that
I
would
just
highlight
that
is
shared
on
this
slide
is
both
of
these
things
would
require
voter
approval,
the
authorization
to
issue
debt
and
then,
if
we
were
to
ask
voters
for
a
new
increment
of
tax,
that
would
also
require
voter
approval.
E
E
So,
in
addition
to
those
budget
considerations,
we
did
identify
risks
and
other
financing
considerations.
The
risks
are
outlined
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
this
Slide.
The
first
is
of
course,
interest
rate
risk.
We
did
put
an
assumption
into
the
model
on
the
advice
of
our
Municipal
advisor
of
five
percent,
but
certainly
interest
rates
move
and
there
it's
always
risk
that
interest
rates
will
move
between
now
and
when
we
might
issue
debt,
there's
costs
risk.
We
have
a
financial
model,
but
there
are
there's
certainly
risk
that
Capital
costs
could
be
higher
than
forecasts.
E
There
are
risks
that
our
operating
costs
could
exceed
forecast.
There's
Revenue
risk,
both
in
the
take
rate
of
40
percent,
that
my
Mike
highlighted
it
could
be
less
than
that
which
would
impact
the
subsidy
level
required
and
then
there's
risk
in
in
the
price.
And
while
we
say
we,
we
might
have
control
over
the
price
if
we
operate,
there's
still
competition
out
there,
and
so
we
would
have
to
have
a
competitive
price
and
then
last
credit
risk
and
and
I
appreciate.
E
Many
of
the
questions
from
council
member
Wallach
with
regard
to
debt
and
issuance
of
debt
and
the
impact
to
our
credit
rating
and
and
what
that
might
impact
might
have
on
our
other
credits
that
we
might
need
to
issue
and
and
increased
costs.
So
there
is
some
credit
risk
associated
with
this
potential
model.
E
Last
our
financing
considerations.
We
just
wanted
to
highlight
for
you
all
just
to
give
you
the
context
of
what
is
our
current
outstanding
debt,
and
currently
it
is
their
256
million.
I
will
note
that
that
does
include
our
debt
outstanding
for
the
utilities.
We
also
have
nearly
200
million
and
voter
authorized
debt
capacity.
E
That's
for
the
ccrs
and
climate
tax,
primarily
so
we
are
contemplating
that
we
will
be
needing
to
or
wanting
to
issue
debt
in
the
future
for
those
two
programs,
and
then
we
are
anticipating
potentially
to
have
to
issue
certificates
of
participation
for
Alpine
Balsam
or
some
other
financing
mechanism,
as
we
explore
that
with
our
facilities
team
again,
this
this
next
bullet
is
sort
of
reiterating
the
budget
considerations
that
I
highlighted
on
the
previous
slide,
but
the
other
community
needs
and
just
this
it
is
a
policy
decision
or
consideration.
E
If
this
is
the
highest
priority
need
regarding
Revenue
sources,
I
mentioned
on
the
previous
slide,
we
could
ask
for
a
new
tax
or
an
increment
of
tax,
and
really
that
is
either
a
sales
tax
or
a
property
tax.
So
just
wanted
to
share
some
contexts
and
facts
here
that
currently,
our
total
sales
tax
rate
is
just
over
nine
percent.
E
There
sort
of
is
a
perceived
ceiling
of
of
10
percent,
so
we're
already
sort
of
approaching
that
there
are
very
few
communities
in
Colorado
that
have
a
total
sales
tax
rate
approaching
10
or
over
10
percent
and
when
I
say
current
total
sales
tax
rate
I
want
to
be
clear
that
that
is
across
all
the
jurisdictions
in
the
city.
E
E
So
we're
already
sort
of
approaching
this
sort
of
perceived
limit
and
just
for
dollars
a
point.
One
percent
increase
around
4.6
million
I'll
note
that
that's
based
on
a
revised
2024
projection
that
we
received
just
recently
so
to
generate
14
million,
would
be
close
to
a
point.
Three
percent
increase
for
property
tax.
E
One
mill
based
upon
2024
projections
would
generate
around
five
million
dollars,
so
it
would
need
nearly
three
Mills
to
generate
approximately
14
million
a
little
under
that,
and
we
do
currently
have
a
mail
Levy
of
11.648.
There
is
a
charter
Mill
Levy
cap
of
13
mils,
and
there
is
a
charter
debt
limit.
E
So
if
we
were
to
go
down
the
property
tax
route,
if
that
was
the
direction
of
of
council,
there
are
some
careful
considerations
that
we
would
have
to
make
with
regard
to
the
tax
that
we
might
request
and
the
how
we
would
structure
the
debt
and
how
the
interplay
might
be
between
that
Charter
Mill,
Levy
cap
and
the
charter
debt
limit.
E
So
it
would
be
a
little
bit
complex
and
then
the
last
point
that
we
just
wanted
to
really
highlight
is
that
if
we
did
go
down
this
route
of
a
municipal
internet
utility,
given
the
financial
projections
that
the
total
cost
would
include
not
only
the
cost
of
the
internet
service
to
those
who
subscribe,
but
they
community
members
would
also
be
paying
through
attacks.
D
Hora
so
we'll
wrap
the
presentation
portion
of
this
this
90
minutes
by
outlining
the
three
potential
paths
forward
for
Council
to
consider
again
not
for
decision
tonight,
but
for
you
to
consider
for
a
future
public
hearing
number
one
is
establishing
the
municipal
internet
utility
number
two
is
to
create
a
public
private
partnership
and
number
three
is
to
execute
a
backbone
lease
and
right-of-way
agreement
with
a
new
internet
service
provider
for
Boulder
next
slide.
D
So
why
would
we
build
a
municipal
internet
utility?
Well
we're
really
fortunate
to
have
three
great
examples
and
and
mark
thank
you
for
the
questions
on
hotline
the
other
night
about
our
Envy
of
Longmont,
Loveland
and
Fort
Collins,
who
or
you
know,
were
quite
jealous
of
in
their
ability
to
execute
on
this
model
and
execute
really
well
on
this
model.
All
three
of
these
cities
have
reaped
the
benefits
of
of
control,
both
during
construction
and
now
operationally.
D
Also
all
three
of
those
cities,
as
is
true
with
our
projections
plan
to
ultimately
be
be
cash
flow.
Positive.
The
main
difference,
though,
between
those
three
cities
in
Boulder,
is
the
cost
to
build
of
those
three
cities.
The
most
recent
build
is
in
Fort
Collins
and
in
Fort
Collins
their
build
cost
about
nineteen
hundred
dollars
per
premise.
Our
estimates
from
CTC
are
at
thirty
seven
hundred
dollars
per
premise,
almost
double.
D
There
are
two
big
reasons
for
this.
This
difference
number
one
all
three
of
these
cities
already
own
their
electric
utilities,
which
provided
in
most
cases
over
50
percent
of
the
needed
conduit
to
run
fiber,
which
means
less
digging
and
lower
cost
and
number
two
they
executed
in
the
2010s.
They
were
lucky.
They
they
bonded.
They
bought
materials
and
executed
contracts
before
massive
inflation
that
we've
seen
since
the
pandemic
and
before
the
major
federal
investments
in
Broadband
that
I
mentioned
earlier
that
have
caused
this
huge
crunch
in
labor
material
resources
in
this
sector.
D
So
all
that
to
say,
and
based
on
what
car
I
just
Illustrated,
we
have
a
number
of
challenges
to
consider
here.
Number
one,
of
course
again,
as
Cara
just
said,
are
the
financial
risks.
D
We
will
absolutely
need
to
find
a
way
to
pay
14
million
on
average
annual
subsidy
for
for
upwards
of
25
years,
there's
also
unprecedented
risk,
in
addition
to
the
risk
that
Carr
outlined
with,
and
that
is
that
you
know,
with
the
exception
of
Recreation
services.
This
is
the
first
time
that
the
city
of
Boulder
will
venture
into
a
Service
Marketplace
that
has
incumbent
competition.
Both
of
these
incumbents
are
major
national
players
in
the
space
they
have
a
lot
of
power
and
a
lot
of
Leverage.
D
D
Next
slide,
please
so
the
so-called
middle
option,
if
you
will
creating
a
formal
public-private
partnership,
this
would
require
the
city
to
bring
some
level
of
capital
to
the
table
by
bringing
Capital.
We
realize
proportional
increases
in
potential
benefits.
However,
I
I
don't
want
to
oversell
these
right.
The
the
value
of
control
and,
of
course,
the
financial
returns
post
Debt
Service
are
limited
by
the
stake
that
we
have
in
the
equity
of
the
of
the
assets.
D
The
full
benefits
that
we
reap
in
the
in
the
municipal,
internet
utility
model
of
controlling
price
to
Consumer
or
the
priority
on
the
sequence
of
the
build
really
only
comes
with
majority
ownership,
which
of
course
create
many
of
the
same
Financial
risks.
D
Detailed
in
in
Municipal
internet
utility
model,
this
model
has
a
similar
but
likely
a
little
shorter
time
to
Market,
since
the
city
would
still
require
time
to
go
to
voters
for
bonding
Authority
and
potential
tax
increase,
but
the
private
partner
would
likely
bring
some
of
the
economies
of
scale
of
standing
up
the
operations
and
some
of
the
the
contractor
issues
that
I
outlined
for
for
the
municipal
model.
D
I'll
also
mention
here
that
partner,
Financial
involvement
will
require
the
city
to
use
a
combination
of
construction
techniques,
the
ones
that
I
outlined
at
the
top
of
the
presentation
which
do
present
a
potential
challenge
that
we
will
need
to
work
through
during
negotiations
with
a
potential
partner.
Again,
not
a
factor
and
not
a
major
factor
in
in
deciding
tonight
or
or
deciding
at
a
future
public
hearing
around
one
of
these
three
broad
here
options.
D
But
if
we
involve
a
partner
and
their
capital
in
any
way,
and
the
partner
stands
firm
on
construction
methods,
we
we
will
have
to
make
a
potential
change
in
the
design
and
construction
standard
for
our
right
away,
which
which
would,
of
course
be
brought
before
Council
before
before.
That
would
be
made
next
slide.
Please.
D
So,
lastly,
is
the
idea
of
creating
a
non-exclusive
backbone,
lease
and
right-of-way
agreement
with
the
third
party
to
bring
both
operational
expertise
and
private
Capital
to
Boulder.
There
is
very
strong
Market
interest
in
this
model.
We're
seeing
variations
of
this
model
used
all
over
the
country,
including
several
municipalities,
right
here
on
the
Front
Range.
D
D
D
The
model
largely
achieves
the
six
objectives,
not
by
City
control
or
direct
government
intervention,
but
rather
harnessing
the
power
of
of
Greater
price
competition,
consumer
choice
and
the
incentives
of
that
third
party
to
grow
their
market
share
to
see
a
return
on
on
their
capital
investment
in
the
city.
So,
in
short,
this
model
has
very
little
downside
to
the
city.
It
brings
private
investment
to
further
future
proof,
our
internet
infrastructure.
It
leverages
the
investment
the
city
has
already
made
in
our
backbone.
D
It
allows
for
competitive
market
forces
in
an
already
private
Marketplace
to
improve
price
and
service
to
our
constituents,
and
it
leaves
the
door
open
for
additional
future
action
if,
if
it
falls
short
in
any
of
our
any
of
our
objectives,
it
by
no
means
represents
a
government
subsidy
to
a
private
sector.
D
So
all
that
said
any
of
the
proposed
paths
that
that
car
and
I
have
presented
here
they
could
be
done
with
the
right
amount
of
money
and
the
prioritization
and
the
right
amount
of
time
they
could
be
done.
Staff
also
believes
that
all
three
of
these
models
have
a
good
likelihood
of
achieving
council's
objectives
for
Community
abroad,
then
and
I
I
do
want
to
just
State
before
I
close
here
that
I
am
a
boulder
resident
myself.
I
fall
into
that
64
without
Choice,
like
90
plus
percent
of
my
fellow
Boulder
rights.
D
According
to
our
community
survey,
I
want
to
see
the
city
take
action.
I
would
absolutely
love
for
the
city
to
offer
a
city-run
internet
service.
But
in
my
role
here
it's
it's
my
duty
with
all
of
you
to
be
objective
and
present
all
all
these
options
available.
That
we,
we
believe,
are
viable
and
do
it
in
a
way
that
that
demonstrates
fiscal
responsibility.
So
I
I,
as
as
well
as
my
colleagues
who
are
presented
here
and
are
available
for
questions,
see
a
path
that
can
greatly
move
the
needle
on
our
objectives.
D
D
So,
lastly,
before
we
go
into
discussion
and
questions
and
we
can
take
the
slides
down,
I
just
want
to
reiterate
that
our
question
of
counsel
tonight
is
not
to
choose
one
of
these
options,
but
rather
ask
the
question:
what
additional
information
do
you
need
before
voting
at
a
future
public
hearing
on
potential
proposed
motion
to
authorize
the
city
manager
to
begin
negotiations
on
a
backbone
lease
and
right
away
agreement
with
that,
I
will
pause
and
turn
it
back
to
you.
Matt.
B
B
It'd
be
good
to
also
welcome
our
colleague
Lauren
in
I
know
she
joined
a
little
bit
before
we
got
started.
So
thanks
for
joining
us
appreciate
that
and
I
appreciate,
also
the
fact
that
we
got
the
question
in
chat.
So
if
you
need
to
reference
this
question,
it's
there
in
chat.
So
let's
open
it
up
to
questions.
B
Let's
maybe
go
focus
more
on
some
of
that
additional
questions.
If
there
are
comments
on
kind
of
how
maybe
we're
having
a
little
bit
of
feelings
about
some
of
these
options,
it's
helpful,
obviously
we're
not
going
to
vote,
but
that's
okay,
to
sort
of
Express
how
you're
feeling
a
little
bit
now
that
we
have
some
greater
detail
than
we
did
previously
so
I
see
Bob,
Aaron
and
Nicole
go
for
it.
Bob.
G
Thanks
man,
I
just
have
a
handful
of
questions
that
really
to
clarify
some
of
the
things
that
that
R
and
Mark
Mike
just
talked
about.
One
of
my
questions
is
related
to
the
take
rate.
The
40
take
rate
is
that
a
take
rate
for
I?
Think
I
heard
you
say
Mike
it
was
limited
residential.
Is
there
an
assumption,
ontake
rate
for
businesses.
G
That's
fine
and
how
does
it
I'm
sure,
as
you
looked
at
the
other
three
cities
up
to
our
North,
who
have
run
the
successful
Network?
What
kind
of
take
rate
experiences
have
they
had.
D
Longmont
and
Loveland
are
in
the
30.
Excuse
me,
lot
been
in
Fort,
Collins
are
in
the
30
range
and
Longmont
is
around
60
percent.
G
G
So
almost
the
most
mature
Network
right
now,
that's
right
among
those
one
on
those
three
yeah,
okay
and
they're.
Sixty
percent
did
you
guys
do
kind
of
a
sensitivity,
model
and
I
know
that
you
talked
about
a
14
annual
subsidy
average
at
a
40
take
rate
due
to
a
sensitivity
model
to
see
what
that
would
look
like
at
50
or
60.
That's
something
closer
to
what
Longmont
is
actually
experiencing.
We.
D
Did
I
don't
have
the
table
up
in
front
of
me,
I
provided
them
in
the
hotline
response
to
Mark's
question
I
can
pull
them
up
here
and
respond
in
a
couple
minutes
unless
car
you
have
that
up
in
front
of
you,
foreign.
B
E
Sorry
I've
I
forgot
to
unmute.
He
did
provide
it
in
that
hotline
and
just
for
example,
at
50
steady
state
take
rate.
The
average
shortfall
is
10.4
million.
G
G
E
I
might
look
to
our
modelers,
who
might
be
on
the
call,
because
I
do
think,
there's
probably
some
o
m.
That
goes
up
with
with.
H
Sure
I
mean
we
can
certainly
run
it.
We
don't
have
we
we
did
do
what,
if
the
take
rate
is
lower
than
40
or
higher
and
50
was
one
of
those
we
did
include
in
our
report.
We'd
have
to
go,
run
the
model
to
get
it
to
60
I'm.
Sorry,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
that
right
on
the
spot,
but
we
could
get
that
out
tomorrow.
Okay,
I.
G
Would
add
that
too
I
know
you
guys
would
keep
a
running
list
of
maybe
follow-up
requests.
I'd
ask
ask
for
that
if
you
could,
if
you
could
do
that,
one
more
pricing
question
that
I
have
a
couple
of
technical
questions
and
I'll
yield
to
my
colleagues.
G
You
assumed
a
price
point
of
seventy
dollars,
which
sounds
about
right
to
me
and
I
think
that's
probably
consistent
with
what
our
sister
cities
to
the
north
are
doing.
Since
you
ran
this
model
out
from
an
expense
standpoint
and
a
bond
Debt
Service
sampling
for
25
years,
did
you
adjust
that
price
point
based
on
CPI?
Also,
or
did
you
assume
it
was
gonna,
be
70
for
the
next
25
years?
There's.
H
G
I
think
I
figure.
You
probably
did
that
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
just
a
couple.
Technical
questions
which
are
probably
for
the
experts,
I
I,
think
did
you
in
in
the
overall
build
cost
of
214
million
or
whatever
it
was
did
you
are,
is
loaded
into
that
the
the
drop
or
lateral
costs,
in
other
words,
are
you
assuming
that
this
is
the
network
plus
laterals
into
subscribing
business
or
subscribing
residents
and
businesses.
I
It
does
yeah,
it
includes
the
lateral
and
and
subscriber
drop
connections
at
the
take
rate
specified.
So
as
you
as
you
increase
that
take
rate,
those
particular
costs
go
up
as
well
right.
That's
a
variable
Integrity.
G
Yeah,
oh
yeah,
yeah,
no
I,
assume
that
and
I
I
also
notice
that
you,
you
included
CPE
customer
promises,
equipment
in
in
your
overall
assumption
again
at
the
take
rate.
Is
that
right
exactly
correct
one
question:
just
kind
of
a
just
kind
of
a
kind
of
a
marketing
question:
oftentimes
aren't
those
nrcs
the
non-recurring
costs
like
CPE
and
laterals?
G
Aren't
they
often
absorbed
by
subscribery,
there's
a
one-time
fee
or
or
if
they
want
to
finance
it
through
higher
pricing
they
pay
that,
in
other
words,
don't
you
have
rrc,
the
nrc's
NRC
is
usually
picked
up
by
the
by
the
customer.
I
The
non-recurring
costs
are
are
frequently
offset
generally
generally,
not
fully
covered.
You
will
typically
find
something
like
a
50
activation
charge.
You
probably
experience
that
type
of
thing
in
the
past.
That
certainly
doesn't
cover
the
cost
of
the
subscriber
drop
or
or
the
CPE
in
its
entire
entirety
and
in
a
lot
of
cases.
Those
are
way,
particularly
when
promotional
deals
are
involved.
So
our
model
does
not
incorporate
that
as
a
an
upfront,
Revenue
stream.
Okay,.
G
D
I'd
have
to
go
back
and
ask
them
that
specific
question.
I.
G
Can
do
okay?
This
is
again
a
follow-up
question,
maybe
for
your
next
memo,
yeah
and
then
my
final
question
I'll
yield
to
my
colleagues.
You
laid
out
very
nicely
options.
One
two
and
three
with
staff
recommendation
for
option
three
or
the
last
option
is
that
is
that
much
different
than
what
we're
doing
now?
In
other
words,
aren't
we
opportunistically
leasing,
condo
space,
you
know
through
irus
and
other
things
to
providers
like
Comcast
and
and
CenturyLink,
and
whatever
else
comes
along?
J
Yeah,
so
so
good
evening,
we
are
not
actively
doing
that
yet,
and
one
of
the
primary
reasons
is
because
we're
not
finished
construction,
the
the
backbone
fiber
the
432
fibers
was
certainly
built
with
the
purpose
that
it
could
do
that.
J
What
we
have
at
the
moment
is,
we
do
have
active
fiber
customers,
which
are
some
what
I
would
call
sort
of
community
anchor
institution
connections,
direct
connections
and
and
for
Public
Safety
and
there's
there's
a
small,
a
small
number
of
fibers
in
use
to
support
those
cases
on
areas
of
the
backbone
Network
that
are
completed
and
stable.
G
L
B
Bob,
it
was
a
fire
hose
of
acronyms.
It
was
that
was
fantastic.
B
Sorry,
oh
I
know
this.
That
was
your
sweet
spot.
Yeah
you
were,
you
were
on
a
roll
I
appreciate
that
Nicole
you're
up.
M
All
right,
thank
you.
Thanks
for
the
presentation
and
thanks
for
all
the
work,
that's
kindness
just
have
a
few
questions,
and,
and
it's
fine
if
this
these
are
answers
that
come
back
a
little
bit
later,
I'm
just
thinking
about
you
know
the
lease
option.
If
we
were
to
do
that,
what
are
we
talking
about
in
terms
of
Revenue?
What
kinds
of
things
might
we
spend
those
funds
on
and
kind
of
at
what
stage
would
we
start
getting
back
the
investment
that
we
put
into
building
the
backbone
in
the
first
place?
D
A
great
great
questions
Nicole,
so
we
can't
really
speak
to
what
those
rates
would
be
right
now.
Certainly
if
we
signed
a
lease
agreement
with
a
provider
with
the
intent
of
them
Distributing
for
residential
and
small
medium-sized
business
retail
internet,
we
would
establish
some
rate.
It
would
be
done
through
negotiations
with
them
to
Bob's
previous
question.
We
would
probably
also
have
some
generic
commercial
rate
for
for
other
leases.
D
It
may
or
may
not
be
similar
to
that
negotiated
rate.
How
we
would
spend
those
funds,
so
so
Nicole
I,
guess
to
that
first
question:
it
really
depends
when
we
get
to
the
negotiation
stage,
so
I
really
won't
be
able
to
have
a
specific
there.
We
can
have
some
some
general
idea
based
on
what
other
communities
are
doing
by
the
next
meeting
for
sure.
Okay,.
D
To
speak
to
how
we
would
spend
those
funds,
I
wouldn't
speak
on
that
ideal
to
maybe
Cara
or
Nuria
or
someone
else
on
the
on
the
line.
We
certainly
could
use
them
to
further
the
objectives
of
community
broadband
and
increase
access
through
additional
investments
in
the
community
or
use
them
as
a
as
some
sort
of
subsidy
for
income,
qualified
or
otherwise
qualified
homes
or
businesses
in
the
community.
But
certainly
we
could
use
that
revenue
for
for
other
City
needs
as
well.
M
And
I'm
not
looking
for
any
specifics
or
anything
that
you
know
we're
writing
in
stone
or
anything
like
that,
just
just
some
ideas:
what
are
the
possibilities
out
there
and
then
kind
of
another?
M
Another
question
I
think
this
isn't
going
to
Veer
into
comment
territory
Matt
keep
it
at
the
question,
so
you
know
part
of
the
part
of
the
problem
as
I'm
understanding
it
with
us,
not
not
it
not
being
financially
viable,
really
to
move
forward
with
a
a
completely
public
option
at
this
point
is
that
we
don't
have
our
own
electric
utility,
and
that
was
a
choice
right,
because
we
kind
of
had
the
opportunity
there
to
go
in
that
direction.
We
chose
not
to
and
so
I
guess.
M
You
know
that
that
decision
is
impacting
things
now.
So
what
are
the
things
we're
kind
of?
Not
seeing
you
know
when
when
we
decided
to
not
move
forward
with
our
own
electric
utility
I,
don't
know
that
this
was
on
our
radar
is
something
that
might
impact
so
I
understand.
You
may
not
have
an
answer
tonight,
but
what's
the
what's
the
last
opportunity
here?
How
might
this
decision
have
some
waves
that
Ripple
out
a
decade
or
two
into
the
future,
that
we
aren't
necessarily
thinking
about
right
now,.
D
Nicole,
let
me
just
clarify
that
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
question.
I,
don't
think
we
have
an
answer
for
you
tonight,
but
are
you
implying
what
are
we
not
seeing
if
we
don't
municipalize
an
internet
utility?
Not
what
are
we
missing
from
the
decision
not
to
I.
M
D
M
M
Thank
you
and
then
one
one
last
thing:
the
just
thinking
about
any
new
technology.
That's
out
there
on
the
horizon,
I
mean
I.
Imagine
that
this
kind
of
internet
provision
technology
is
growing
a
lot
there's
probably
new
technology
and
development
right
now.
Is
there
anything
on
the
horizon
that
would
make
building
out
a
public
utility
cheaper
easier
in
10
years.
Something
like
that.
D
I'll
star
and
then
Tim
I'll
yield
to
you
all
of
our
all
of
our
internet
options
say
whether
wired
or
Wireless,
or
largely
driven
especially
in
urban
and
Suburban
areas,
are
largely
driven
by
the
existence
of
fiber
in
the
ground.
In
terms
of
new
internet
Technologies,
we
hear
about
satellite
type,
internet
and
other
non-wired
means
those
are
largely
at
least
today
in
2023
I
had
to
check
my
date
on
what
what
year
it
was.
It's
2023..
D
Those
are
largely
only
successful
in
more
rural
areas,
where
there's
not
a
higher
density
of
folks,
trying
to
to
use
that
that's
somewhat
limited
bandwidth,
but
Tim
I'll
I'll
yield
to
you
as
sort
of
our
representative
of
Industry
expertise.
Here
anything
you
would
add
to
that.
J
Not
much
to
add
I
think
the
the
key
point
is
that
fiber
itself
is
an
enabler
for
a
lot
of
these
other
technologies
that
we
hear
about.
So
when
we
hear
about
5G
type,
even
you
know
cellular
type,
Services
they're
available
and
continuing
to
grow
by
the
fact
that
actually
fiber
Powers
those
services.
So
you
know
it's
it's
a
great
start
that
Boulder
has
the
backbone
footprint,
because
that
can
obviously
facilitate
newer
Technologies.
It
just
then
becomes
a
question
of
how
far
does
it
continue
to
expand
that
footprint?
J
Some
of
the
Tactical
little
things
we
touched
on
tonight,
such
as
different
Technologies
as
to
how
to
put
the
fiber
in
the
ground
that
was
called
reference
to
shallow
trenching.
They
have
minor
impacts
on
like
a
capital
budget,
but
but
really
most
of
these
newer
Technologies
really
are
are
reliant
on
on
fiber
powering
it
somewhere
in
in
the
grid
structure.
J
It
it
depends,
and
a
little
bit
of
it
depends
on
well
a
lot
of
depends
on
many
things.
So,
for
instance,
you
know,
Wireless
Technologies
is
often
a
shared
technology
as
opposed
to
sort
of
dedicated
bandwidth,
which
is
really
what
we're
talking
about
with
the
services
that
we've
been
focused
on
tonight.
J
You
know
powerful
Wireless
Services
require
aerial
assets
to
to
have
the
the
reach,
so
that
presents
a
whole
series
of
other
problems.
If
you
don't
again
own
polls
as
an
infrastructure.
When
you
talk
about
your
utility
there,
if
you
don't
own
the
polls,
it's
hard
to
have
the
aerial
assets
as
infrastructure,
you're
reliant
on
maybe
rooftops,
and
then
maybe
you
only
own
certain
rooftops
in
certain
areas.
J
O
So
I
understand
this
is
one
you
know.
I
am
really
interested
in
understanding
more
about
how
the
cost
the
long-term
costs
of
shallow
trenching
for
Road
quality
and
maintenance
I
just
I
have
some
concerns
that
digging
up
our
roads
might
have
some
big
cost
burdens
in
the
future.
Is
that
something
I
would
like
to
understand
in
more
detail
before
we
were
to
move
forward
with
that,
I
was
wondering:
are
there
examples
in
other
cities
of
leasing
the
backbone
to
multiple
private
parties
for
providing
internet
services?
D
Yeah,
there
are
several
examples
of
cities,
numerous
examples
of
cities
all
over
the
the
country
that
have
made
an
initial
investment
like
we
have
in
some
some
core
infrastructure
and
then
use
that
to
encourage
additional
investment
from
private
parties
and
in
many
cases
having
them.
Overbuild
is
sort
of
the
industry
term
build
on
top
of
each
other.
Try
to
compete
for
that
same
market
share
in
the
same
areas
of
different
cities.
D
Mesa
Arizona
is
a
really
good
example
of
of
sort
of
that
type
of
model,
and
there
are
numerous
others
that
I'm
happy
to
provide
everyone.
O
D
O
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
having
working
with
the
dairy
a
little
bit
on
their
lease.
I
was
just
wondering.
I
know
that
for
building
leases
we
have
a
20-year
maximum
before
there
is.
O
You
know
we
basically
can't
lease
things
for
more
than
a
certain
length
of
time.
It's
in
our
Charter,
I,
believe,
and
so
I
was
wondering
how
that
works.
You
know
if
private
companies
are
building
out
the
laterals.
Is
there
any
issue
there
with?
N
Good
evening
Council
Teresa
Taylor
Tate
City
attorney
Lauren
you're,
absolutely
right
that
we're
restricted
on
Real
Property
leases
to
20
years.
So
I
think
the
question
here
would
be
you
know,
is
it
a
real
property
lease
or
or
is
it
some
other
sort
of
lease,
and
we
haven't
had
an
opportunity
to
look
into
that,
but
we're
happy
to
do
so.
O
O
And
then
my
next
question
is
sort
of
back
to
the
cost
and
service,
so
in
in
the
survey
93
of
residents
said
that
they
wanted
Council
action
to
mitigate
cost,
customer
service,
reliability
and
lack
of
choice,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
if
the
city
doesn't
have
control
over
mid
or
last
mile
service.
How
can
we
ensure
that
this
asset
provides
the
benefits
that
we're
looking
for
and
doesn't
become?
Another
Comcast.
D
Yeah,
it's
a
great
question
Lauren
and,
as
I
outlined
in
the
presentation
we
we
in
that
model
we
would
not
have
the
specific
control
on
on
price
or
where
we
build.
We
would
largely
be
reliant
on
on
Market
factors
of
competitive
pricing
and
and
the
the
the
the
potential
partner
that
we
bring
in
and
and
trying
to
maximize
their
footprint
here
in
in
the
city
to
ensure
a
positive
Roi
on
their
investment.
D
So
it's
a
valid
point
and
our
impact
would
be
both
through
negotiations
and
potentially
indirectly,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
using
revenues
that
we
generate
from
from
a
police
agreement.
O
Okay,
thank
you
and
my
final
one
is
there
any
way
you
know
we
sort
of
looked
at
the
cost
as
a
whole,
and
is
there
any
way
that
we
could
potentially
build
out
the
network
slower,
like
potentially
look
at
you
know
section
by
section
and
try
and
get
Promises
of
leasing
up
on
areas
before
we
build
out
to
help,
try
and
control
costs
and
potentially
reduce
the
debt
burden
by
not
because
you
know,
we
clearly
can't
build
out
the
entire
system
all
at
once
anyway,.
D
F
D
J
Yeah
I
would
say
some
cities
have
usually
in
conjunction
with
a
partner
that
they've
selected,
where
they
agree
on
some
level
of
sort
of
co-marketing
the
initiative
to
get
to
indicated
take
rates
before
they.
You
know
disband
the
capital
dollars
to
to
build
in
that
particular
area.
J
I,
don't
see
it
very
often,
but
I
I
am
aware
of
a
couple
of
those
examples,
and
I
did
want
to
point
out
that
the
backbone
lease
model
that
you
one
of
your
first
questions,
is
exactly
what
the
city
of
Centennial
did
so
just
just
down
the
road
here
in
Colorado,
but
I'm
going
to
maybe
ask
Matt
if
he's
got
any
other
options
or
ideas
around
your
your
question,
specifically
for
building
it
more
in
a
six
sort
of
face.
J
I
Generally,
when
it's
phased,
it's
usually
I
think
the
goal
with
with
the
implementation
is
to
begin
Revenue
generation
as
soon
as
possible,
right
so
you're
you're,
building
out
certain
elements
of
the
backbone
which
you
already
have
in
place,
which
is
a
huge
advantage
in
terms
of
time
to
Market
and
then
generally
lighting
up
portions
of
the
total
service
area
in
segments
so
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
and
you're
trying
to
get
to
completion
one
neighborhood
at
a
time,
as
opposed
to
turning
on
a
switch
and
lighting
everything,
so
that
I
mean
that
is
inherent
to
pretty
much
every
project
I've
seen,
but
it's
not,
but
that
is
not
over
an
extended
period
of
time.
I
O
D
Now
Lauren
I
did
just
want
to
Circle
back
on
your
question
related
to
shallow
trenching,
real
quick.
We
would
absolutely
need
to
study
that
cross-functionally
in
the
city
between
Planning
and
Development,
Transportation
utilities
and
Technology,
and
that
will
take
some
time,
so
we
won't
have
specific
numbers
available
on
what
potential
future
indirect
impacts
would
be.
D
Oh
won't
have
an
answer
on
that,
certainly
not
if
we
don't
meet
on
this
again
and
if
we
do
meet
on
this
again
in
the
next
few
months.
We
won't
have
a
specific
answer
on
that
just
yet,
but
we
would,
before
we
signed
any
sort
of
agreement.
L
Thanks
Lauren
see
Rachel
Tara,
then
Bob.
P
It's
Matt
and
thanks
for
the
presentation,
everyone
you
know
this
is
a
fusion
of
or
intersection
of
finance
and
and
Tech
stuff,
so
I
I,
just
pre-apologize
if
I'm
asking
questions
that
were
already
answered
or
if
I'm,
just
not
following
or
understanding
but
first
is
I.
Think
for
Cara
in
terms
of
their
credit
rating
implications.
I
just
want
to
understand.
Is
it
from
the
memo
in
your
presentation?
Is
there
like
a
cliff
that
we
can
go
up
to,
but
we
can't
pass
and
and
like?
P
Is
there
some
amount
of
this
bond
that
is
okay
before
we
would
maybe
have
an
impact
on
our
credit
rating?
Or
can
you
be
concise
on
on
where
we
would
get
into
danger?
There.
E
I
think
it
just
depends
on
the
structure
and
on
the
pledge,
and
so
if
we
were
to
do
this
and
and
it
depends
on
what
type
of
Revenue
we
would
pledge,
we
might
get
a
lower
rating
and
it
might
just
be
for
that
issue,
and
so
it
would
increase
the
cost
for
that
issue.
E
Yes,
and
so
it's
really
just
unknown
I
mean
they
do
believe
that
there's
a
lot
of
likelihood
that
if
we
tried
to
issue
something
like
this,
it
would
result
in
a
little
bit
lower
rating
than
our
AAA.
Maybe
one
notch,
maybe
two
notches.
E
No
you
if
we
were
going
to
do
this
I
think
in
our
discussions
with
the
municipal
advisor.
We
would
maybe
do
it
in
two
tranches.
I
mean
there's
costs
of
issuances.
You
need
dollars
up
front
for
them
to
make
to
contract
with,
to
get
the
project
done,
I
believe
and
so
I
think
you
would.
You
would
need
bigger
tranches
than
just
20
million
at
a
time.
P
It's
a
subset
of
260
million,
maybe
okay,
yeah.
Thanks
for
that.
You
know:
I
understand
that
we're
and
Lauren
got
at
this
a
little
bit
with
one
of
her
questions
too.
So
apologies
again,
if
it's
duplicative,
but
one
of
the
primary
goals
here
as
I
understand
it
is
to
ensure
there's
competition
in
this
space
so
and
zero
disrespect
intended
I'm
a
fairly
happy
Comcast
customer
I.
Suppose
All
Things
Considered,
but
would
we
be
making
sure
that
Comcast
or
is
it
CenturyLink
would
not
be
getting
this
contract
from
the
city
to
be
blatant?
D
Yeah,
it's
a
great
question
Rachel,
so
Comcast
current
infrastructure
is,
is
cable
based,
so
the
the
upper
limits
on
what
they
can
provide
in
terms
of
service
are
are
lower
than
what
can
be
provided
through
fiber
infrastructure.
So
while
it
wouldn't
necessarily
create
direct
price
competition,
if
there
was
an
incumbent
provider
that
wanted
to
create
a
backbone
lease
with
us,
I
think
that
would
be
something
we
would
want
to
entertain
because
it
would
increase
the
investment
in
in
fiber
base
the
future.
D
What
we
believe
is
either
future
oriented
infrastructure
in
the
city.
However,
I
would
say
that
we
we
would
absolutely
want
to
consider
and
place
a
high
regard
on
potentially
introducing
additional
additional
companies
organizations
into
the
boulder
Market
to
create
that
price
competition
that
you're,
referring
to
so.
I
D
Answer
is
really
yes
to
all
the
above.
Yes,
we
would
prioritize
a
a
competitor.
We
would
also
be
very
willing
because
these
would
be
non-exclusive,
so
we
obviously
have
a
certain
capacity
in
in
the
backbone,
but
these
would
largely
be
non-exclusive
type
deals
and-
and
we
would
welcome
additional
investment
as
well.
P
Okay,
interesting
I,
guess
part
of
what's
been
I,
think
sort
of
sold
to
me
a
little
bit
is
like
you
know
somebody
else
to
come
in
and
then
maybe
Comcast
will
also
get
more
competitive
with
what
you
know
their
rates
and
stuff.
It's
Comcast
I,
don't
see
how
that
necessarily
works
out,
but
I,
don't
believe
I'll
be
on
Council
really
when
these
decisions
are
made.
P
So
just
flagging
that,
let's
see
in
in
the
other
cities
where
we
looked
tear
I'm
not
running
you
laugh
all
you
want,
but
I
won't
be
here
in
the
other
cities
where
we
have
looked
at
the
take
rates,
I'm
just
wondering
if
in
those
cities
they
also
heavily
subsidized
the
product
like
we're,
saying
that
we're
going
to
subsidize
it
out
of
the
general
fund,
because
I
would
think
if
I'm
a
city
Boulder
resident
and
I'm
already,
basically
paying
for
this
product
and
probably
buying
it
too.
P
D
So,
all
three,
so
when
we
speak
of
subsidy,
we're
really
speaking
on
the
subsidation
of
the
actual
business
of
doing
it,
not
subsidizing
to
the
the
retail
consumer,
and
so
for
the
three
cities
that
we
mentioned:
Longmont
Loveland
and
Fort
Collins.
They
they
all
had
debt
issued
from
their
electric
utility,
not
general
fund
debt,
because
they
had
that
existing
capability
with
their
electric
Enterprise
fund
they're,
their
their
amount
of
debt
was
significantly
lower.
D
Longmonts
was
47,
48
million
at
first
Fort
Collins
I
believe
was
the
highest
of
the
three
around
150
million,
and
so
they
were
able
to
make
the
the
finances
were
to
not
have
significant
subsidies,
certainly
not
subsidy
from
from
their
General
funds.
P
Okay
and
then
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
people
in
our
community
who
think
we're
doing
this
like
we're
going
to
have
a
municipal
provided
Broadband
in
the
near
future.
So
I
don't
feel
like
the
Outreach
that
we
had
got
to
that.
Yet,
like
just
the
I
understand,
we
did
a
survey
and
we
we
engaged
Community
connectors
and
in
the
business
community
and
some
focus
groups
but,
like
you
know,
I
always
default
to,
like
my
sister
I
doubt.
My
sister
knows
that
we're
having
this
discussion
tonight.
P
So
if
people
and
she
probably
thinks
we're
getting
Broadband
because
it
was
promised
like
five
years
ago.
So
what
what
is
the
Outreach
that
we've
done
to
sort
of
the
every
person
in
Boulder
on
this
that
that
might
indicate
we're
thinking
about
putting
the
brakes
on
this
and
like?
We
would
like
to
know
how
how
important
it
is
to
you-
and
you
might
want
to
spend
all
of
our
outstanding
credit
on
this,
because
it's
a
everybody
uses
Broadband.
So
just
wondering.
What's
the
Outreach
to
my
sister.
D
D
I
I
think
it's
important
to
state
that
this
is
not
putting
the
brakes
on
on
anything
right.
This
is
this.
Is
us
trying
to
further
the
objectives
that
Council
back
in
2017-2018,
laid
out
by
the
with
the
20
million
dollar
investment
in
the
backbone?
By
no
means
did
that
say
we
were
going
to
bring
municipalized
internet
service
to
every
resident
in
business
and
town
20
million
dollars
would
not
have
done
it.
D
Bob
Chris,
meschuck,
others
Aaron
others
on
Council
others
here
that
were
there
at
that
time
can
certainly
speak
to
that
in
terms
of
communication
with
with
with
the
public.
We
have
done
this
Outreach
as
a
way
to
better
understand
their
perspective
of
how
we
move
forward,
not
necessarily
to
sell
a
certain
type
of
message
around
what
we
are
doing.
D
I
I
do
agree
with
you,
I
think
there
are
some
false
expectation
in
the
community
today
that
that
the
city
is
bringing
this
municipalized
internet
service
and
we
will
need
to
tailor
Communications
Post
Council
decision
on
kind
of
where
we're
going
with
this,
to
inform
the
community
on
on
exactly
how
we
intend
to
move
the
needle
on
the
objectives
around
this
program.
P
Well,
I'll
I'll
reserve
the
rest
of
that
for
my
comment
and
then
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
for
a
previous
comment
like
this
was
very
much
on
our
radar
when
we
were
discussing
Excel
and
the
settlement
like
I
I
bet
four
of
us
maybe
on
this
call.
Five
of
us
can
remember
conversations
with
Alex
Alice
Jackson
of
excel
like
if
we
settle
this,
we're
still
going
to
use
your
trenches
to
put
in
the
fiber
cable
lines
right
like
we
don't
want
to
harm
our
position
on
community-wide
Broadband
by
settling
with
Excel.
P
So
just
want
a
flag
that
that
there
were
a
lot
of
considerations
on
how
that
would
ripple
effect
into
the
Broadband
space
and
I
think
that
we
we
worked
through
that
pretty
smartly
and
we
are
supposed
to
have
rights
and
and
Mike
and
I
talked
about
that
earlier
this
week,
but
that,
like
we're
supposed
to
be
burying
fiber
when
possible,
when
Excel
opens
up
Powerline
trenches
to
Barry,
cable
or
wires,
I
think
those
are
all
my
questions.
Thanks,
Rachel.
D
I
do
want
to
Circle
back
on
one
of
your
questions
as
well
the
one
around
inviting
competition
and
sort
of
a
bid
process
to
partner
with
us.
We
can't
stop
somebody
from
from
getting
a
contract
or
you're
putting
a
bid
in
with
the
city,
obviously,
but
we
absolutely
would
could
add
criteria
into
any
type
of
procurement
that
would
put
a
preference
on
increasing
competition.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
the
idea
is
obviously
to
increase
competition,
but
we
we
certainly
cannot
prevent
income
parties
from
from
submitting
a
bid.
L
Thanks
Rachel
I
see
Tara
Bob.
B
That
I'm
I've
got
a
couple
questions
just
for
acknowledging
time
we
sort
of
had
10
minutes
left
for
our
a
lot
of
time
on
this
subject.
So
once
we're
done
with
questions,
if
we
can
be
quite
brief
on
our
comments
on
the
back
end
and
we
can
hopefully
stay
on
track
so
Terry
Europe.
Q
So
Mike,
thanks
for
this,
this
is
great
I
am
going
to
tell
you
how
I
feel
and
then
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
tell
me
which
option
I
want.
So
my
question
is
here's
how
I
feel
about
this
subject?
What
should
I,
what
how
should
I
vote?
So
I?
Really
don't
like
monopolies.
They
are
not
good
for
society.
In
my
opinion,
I
am
thinking
that
the
whole
thing
with
Excel
right
now
is
the
problem
is:
is
they
are
Monopoly
so,
even
though
they
were
doing
pretty
good?
Q
Q
The
CCE
just
tell
me
what
that
means:
people
Community,
Choice,
Community,
Choice,
electricity,
energy
rather
and
so
we're
forced.
We
need
to
force
in
competition
because
we
don't
have
any
and
we
don't
have
any
leverage
any
real
leverage
with
Excel.
So
the
other
thing
is:
if
all
of
us
old
people
remember
Ma
Bell.
They
said
that
it
was
the
end
of
the
world.
If
we
brought
in
competition
literally
was
going
to
be
the
end
of
the
world,
phones
wouldn't
work.
Q
That
was
it
so
for
me,
the
most
important
thing
is
that
we
have
two
options:
I,
don't
like
it
Mike
that
you
don't
have
a
second
option.
I,
don't
even
think
it's
important
to
me
that
it's
this,
even
if
it
was
just
the
city
and
no
other
options,
that's
still
a
monopoly
and
I
still
wouldn't
like
that.
Even
though
I
know,
that's
not
the
things
that
we
discussed.
So
from
my
point
of
view
wanting
to
see,
everybody
have
two
options,
at
least
for
a
provider
which
option
do
I
like.
D
Well,
Tara
I
think
you
need
to
consider
sort
of
the
other
factors
right,
cost
time
to
Market.
These
other
factors
that
I
that
I
outline
I
absolutely
see
a
path
to
creating
that
level
of
competition
that
you're
describing
here
and
to
move
the
needles
on
all
all
six
of
our
objectives
and
to
really
create
this
ubiquitous
fiber-based
internet
option.
D
D
Q
D
I
I
said
that
in
the
in
the
context
of
the
envy
that
I
hear
from
a
lot
of
members
of
the
community
and
and
from
members
of
council
that
we
have
of
the
city
toward
North,
if
you
will
okay.
L
Thanks
Tara
Bob.
G
And
then
I'll
go
there's
two
more
questions
and
we've
we
started
to
touch
on
these
in
response
to
Rachel
and
Tara's
questions.
Mike
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
really
really
clear
on
this.
These
two
points
one
is:
if,
if
we
do
go
down
the
path
of
option
three
and
that
is
authorized
staff
to
start
leasing
or
selling
fiber
or
conduit
to
various
providers
that
are
out
there
either
either
existing
providers
or
maybe
new
new
entrants
to
the
market?
G
Are
we
permitted
because,
obviously
we
have
some
people
in
our
community
who
are
understandably
unhappy
with
the
level
of
service
for
various
reasons,
and
we
also
have
250
people
who
don't
have
any
service?
Can
we
can?
We
impose?
You
know,
there's
obviously
a
price
part
of
the
contract?
G
You
know
we're
going
to
charge
you
X
dollars
for
for
the
fiber,
but
but
can
we
also
impose
non-economic
conditions
on
our
leasing
of
fiber
or
conduit
to
like
achieve
some
of
the
the
goals
and
overcome
some
of
the
concerns
that
community
members
have
or
are
we
subject
to
kind
of
non-discriminatory
rules
where
we
have
to
kind
of
like
if
we,
if
you
offer
fiber
for
lease,
we
have
to
take
all
comers
and
we
can't
impose
non-economic
conditions.
You
understand
that
question
I.
D
Do
and
I'm
going
to
yield
on
that
Bob
to
my
my
colleagues
in
the
attorney's
office,
Teresa
or
Andy,
if
you
could
maybe
chime
in
on
that
or
if
we
need
to
get
back
to
Bob
on
that
question,.
R
Yeah
I
I
Andy
frohard,
a
assistant,
City
attorney.
Absolutely
that
would
be.
The
idea
is
that
we
would
lease
it
out
with
conditions,
and
those
conditions
could
include
things
like
must
be
required
to
participate
in
the
affordable
connectivity
program.
You
know
for
so
long
as
you're
participating
or
as
long
as
you're
leasing
the
infrastructure,
and
so
that
that
would
be.
The
idea
is
to
lease
it
with
conditions
that
would
allow
us
to
claw
back
if
they're
not
performing
adequately
and
and
that
could
include
service
level
terms
such
as
requirements
for
uptime.
R
It
could
include,
depending
upon
sort
of
what
the
market
would
tolerate.
It
could
include,
like
customer
satisfaction,
surveys
or
other
ways
to
sort
of
verify
adequacy
of
service
or
response
times.
So
we
have
to
again.
We
don't
know
what
the
market
will
tolerate,
but
that
would
be
the
idea
behind
that.
Yeah.
G
Let's
Help
lending
things,
and
then
my
second
question
I
think
we've
also
touched
on
this,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
we're
very,
very
clear
on
this
mic.
If
we
good
on
the
path
tonight
and
and
subsequently
when
we
approve
whatever
pricing
you
put
in
front
of
us
for
option
three,
that
is,
we
we
don't
operate
our
own
ISP,
we're
not
going
to
do
a
whole
lot
more
construction
or
spend
a
lot
more
money,
but
we're
going
to
lease
out
fiber
and
conduit
to
Providers,
either
existing
providers
or
new
entrants.
G
We
do.
We
are
not
foreclosing
ourselves.
This
is
this
is
a
statement,
affordable
question.
We
are
not
for
closing
option
one
or
two
for
the
future;
in
other
words,
we're
not
going
to
impose
upon
ourself
in
exclusivity
where
we
say
yeah,
we
will
lease
this
fiber
to
you,
Comcast
or
or
CenturyLink,
and
we
promise
never
ever
to
get
in
this
business.
We
still
preserve
option
one
and
option
two
for
the
future.
G
So
if
a
future
Council
or
a
city
with
more
money
has
has
the
ability
to
to
do
these
things
three
years,
five
years,
ten
years
from
now,
we
can
do
do
this,
because
it's
a
truism
that
in
the
Telecom
World
everyone's
editors,
also
their
customers
right.
The
biggest
customers
of
all
the
telecommunications
companies
are,
in
fact
their
competitors
as
well
right.
D
That's
right,
Bob
we
we
would
not.
We
would
not
do
any
deal
that
is
an
exclusive
type
deal
and
and
to
what
I
said
earlier
in
the
presentation.
We
would
want
it.
This
is
sort
of
the
option
of
flexibility.
D
If
you
will,
it
enables
that
future
Council
to
make
additional
decisions
around,
maybe
inviting
or
encouraging
another
another
potential
provider
to
come
to
the
city,
to
maybe
compete
directly
in
the
same
service
areas
or
to
fill
a
service
area
that
maybe
that
that
third
or
fourth
provider
didn't
didn't
sufficiently
meet
in
our
eyes
or
for
the
city
to
to
a
richer
city,
as
you
said,
to
invest
some
of
our
own
money
and
maybe
creating
some
sort
of
Internet,
a
municipal
internet
utility
as
well
great.
L
B
You
Bob,
you
actually
asked
my
question
about
preserving
our
right
to
have
a
nice
PE
in
the
future,
so
they
stress
in
that
my
I've
got
really
two
questions
and
we'll
get
into
comments
on
the
quick
side.
I
just
wanted
to
verify.
B
Mike
we've
been
in
discussion
about
annexing
the
San
Lazaro
neighborhood
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
in
our
calculations
about
who
gets
served,
that
should
we
Annex
them
in
that
they
are
already
connected
or
have
access
to
wired
internet
and
won't,
maybe
add
to
the
of
200
or
so
residents
that
don't
so
I
just
want
to
verify
where
they
stand
on
wired
internet
yeah.
B
Wonderful
thanks
for
thanks
for
verifying
that
my
other
question
had
to
do
with
kind
of
the
financing
slide.
Number
11.
B
and
I
noticed
that
the
the
revenues
seemed
to
outpace
expenses
over
time
and
revenue
seemed
to
grow
faster
than
the
expenses
grow
and
I
knew
Bob
asked
a
question
that
there's
sort
of
a
bacon
of
of
well,
you
know
rev,
you
know
the
revenues
are
just
going
to
kind
of
go
up
a
little
bit,
but
I'm
wondering
what's
driving
that
on
the
forecast.
Is
it
just
a
as
an
assumption
of
an
increased
take
rate?
B
B
Why
the
revenue
seems
to
outpace
the
expenses
on
that
long-term
20-year
projection,
so.
D
I'll
start
and
then
David
or
Matt
I'll.
Let
you
fill
in
the
gaps,
operating
expense
and
revenue
are
both
growing
at
that
inflation
rate
of
three
percent
starting
in
year
2031..
The
differences
are
changes
in
in
The,
Debt
Service,
just
based
on
financing
assumptions
and
and
then
other
expenses
which
include
replacement
capital
and
other
things
like
that.
That
would
happen
in
in
sort
of
different
years.
Throughout
the
the
25-year
Horizon
here,
David
or
math
did
I
miss
anything
or
would
you
add
anything.
H
I
No
I
think
I
think
I
think
that's
exactly
right.
B
All
right:
well,
that's
a
triple
stamp
of
approval
for
for
that
answer.
So
I
I
appreciate
that
all
right,
so
if
we
can
just
sort
of
circle
back
briefly,
if
there
are
any
comments
overall
on
this-
and
you
know
obviously
feel
free
to
comment
on
on
what
you
want-
I'm
also
curious.
B
If
there's,
if
there's
any
sense
of
a
lien
here
from
Council
in
terms
of,
is
there
any
option
here
that
we
kind
of
just
are
are
feeling
mostly
skeptical
of
being
able
to
achieve
and
and
I'm
not
we're,
not
making
a
formal
decision
on
which
one
we
choose,
but
if
we
kind
of
are
leaning
on
of
them
or
so
is
just
not
where
we
want
it
to
be,
it
might
be
worth
expressing
that
to
staff,
because
that
might
help
them,
as
they
further
procure
analysis
for
any
sort
of
remainder
options
going
forward.
B
S
S
My
lean
is
is
clearly
to
option
three
I'm
I'm,
very
persuaded
about
the
seriousness
of
the
risk
factors
involved
in
and
doing
it
by
ourselves.
I'm
not
sure,
I
see
a
whole
lot
of
advantage
of
doing
it.
50
50
with
someone
else,
there's
still
a
very
significant,
significant
commitment
of
capital
to
do
that,
and
there
are
risk
factors
there
as
well.
S
So
that
would
be
the
direction
for
me
just
given
the
magnitude
of
what's
involved
in
actually
building
this
out
and
financing
it
and
and
bringing
it
to
the
community
and
then
running
it
efficiently.
S
T
So
the
importance
of
this
discussion
was
brought
home
to
me
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
when
my
internet
went
out
which
I'm
one
of
the
people
that
doesn't
have
a
choice
in
in
high-speed
internet,
so
I've
been
Tethered
to
my
phone
as
a
backup
option,
so
I
definitely
need
some
more
competition
here
in
town,
I'll,
Echo,
councilmember,
wallach's
comments
appreciate
you
doing
the
detailed
Financial,
anal
analysis
I
think
we
would
all
in
a
perfect
world
love
to
have
a
municipal
internet,
a
la
Longmont.
T
But
of
course
we
have
the
name
Boulder
for
a
reason,
and
construction
expenses
are
much
higher
here,
so
the
staff,
the
direction
you're
going,
makes
sense
to
me
in
terms
of
what
information
we
might
need
before
moving
forward
there.
There's
one
thing:
I
wanted
to
call
out.
You
know
we
would
have
less
control.
Of
course,
with
this
option
three
approach,
one
thing
that's
I
feel
is
important.
T
Is
that
the
build
out
of
this
additional
internet
utility
reaches
many
households
as
possible,
and
so
I
would
I
would
want
that
to
be
a
high
priority
as
we're
thinking
about
how
we
approach
about
backbone,
lease
and
right-of-way
agreement
with
the
third
parties
is
to
what
extent
we
can
leverage
the
use
of
our
facilities
to
make
sure
that
we
get
a
commitment
for
people
to
reach
as
much
of
town
as
possible,
in
particular,
to
include
some
of
our
current
underserved
communities,
both
in
terms
of
income
location
and
such
like
that.
T
B
Things
are
in
a
great
point
on
sort
of
that
Equitable
conversation
making
sure
the
same
people
don't
get
the
same
overlap
service.
It's
a
it's
a
great
great
point,
so
Juni
then
Bob.
U
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
do
support
option
three
as
well,
and
I
have
been
sold
on
that
option
because,
again
of
the
low
risk,
the
low
cost
or
zero
debt,
and
also
the
how
quickly
it
will
get
also
the
time
to
Market
it's
between
1.5
years
and
the
full
build
is
four
years
I.
Just
think
this
is
great.
This
is
much
better
than
the
other
options,
which
is
three
years
and
then
eight
years,
that's
a
very,
very
long
time
to
wait
for
a
needed
service.
U
So
I
think
this
is
really
great
I
like
the
cd-wide
access
right,
which
we
get
and
all
the
options
and
also
the
equity
aspect
of
it
as
well.
I'm
sold
on
that.
It's
so
important
that
you
know.
Community
members
have
access
to
broadband,
not
just
people
who
can
afford
it
or
wealthy
people,
so
I
think
there's
a
massive
Equity
component
to
this
particular
project.
So
I
fully
support
option
number
three
thanks.
G
Yeah
I
had
the
same
problem
as
Aaron.
Did
it
took
me
forever
to
download
the
staff
memo
on
this,
so
my
my
Broadband
speed
is
not
very
fast
either
because
remember
it
wasn't
that
fat,
but
it
still
takes
a
long
time
to
download
console
packets.
G
I
agree
that
we
should,
as
Aaron
said,
we
should
make
sure
that
that
there
are
not
only
economic
terms
but
non-economic
terms
in
whatever
leases
or
irus.
We
do
with
providers.
I
know
that
we
can
Target
providers
encourage,
maybe
new
entrants
or
people
that
are
providing
more
competitive
services,
but
we
should
look
holistically
at
all
all
of
the
issues
and
problems
for
their
speed.
Reliability,
outages,
slas,
customer
service.
G
What
whatever
the
issues
are
that
the
90
of
people
who
said
they're
unhappy,
let's
focus
on
those
and
let's
make
sure
that,
if
we're
I'm
going
to
be
leasing
out
a
valuable
City
asset
which
we
spent
20
million
dollars
on
we're,
getting
solutions
to
the
problems
that
our
community
members
have
expressed,
not
just
not
just
money
and
then
I
I,
think
to
Rachel's
point
about
Communications
I.
Think
Communications
is
very
important.
The
voters
are
approved.
G
There's
a
state
law
requirement
that
voters
approve
a
city
is
getting
into
this
to
an
ISP
business
which
our
voters
waived
that
rule
back
gosh.
It
was
more
than
it
was
more
than
10
years
ago,
and
so
I
think
expectations
have
been
set
for
a
decade
that
the
city
might
someday.
Do
this
and
then,
when
we,
when
you
authorize
the
build
out
in
2018
I,
think
there
was
an
expectation
now
I
think
we
were
very
clear,
say
in
2018
that
we
didn't
know
if
we're
going
to
get
in
the
ISP
business.
G
It
was
a
no
regrets
decision
because
we
wanted
to
connect
traffic
lights
and
police
stations
and
fire
stations,
and
that
someday
we
might
actually
lease
the
fiber
or
the
conduit
out
that
someday
has
arrived.
It
sounds
like
the
bill
is
wrapping
up
and
so
option
three
is
is
no
more
than
what
we
said
no
more
or
no
less
than
what
we
said.
We
would
do
in
2018.
So
this
is
just
continuing
our
our
our
practice.
So
the
question
is
not
so
much
do
we
want
to
do
options
three,
because
that
was
always
Our
intention.
G
The
question
was
now
that
we've
kind
of
more
or
less
finished
the
bill.
Do
we
want
to
move
to
option
one
or
option
two
for
the
last
we've
been
working
on
this
for
eight
years,
nine
years
2014
and
all
along
the
price
has
been
very,
very
high.
I
think
eight
years
ago
was
140
million
dollars.
Now
that's
almost
doubled,
not
surprisingly
and
I.
Think
it's
very
important
that
you
know
the
headline
of
tomorrow's
paper
is
not
City
decides
not
to
to
provide
internet
service.
G
G
We've
been
toying
with
this
idea
for
for
going
on
10
years
and
we're
still
coming
with
idea
and
we're
not
going
to
stop
doing
with
the
idea,
but
in
the
meantime,
let's
go
ahead
and
monetize
the
20
million
investment
we
made
thanks.
L
Thank
you,
Bob
Rachel
Lauren,
then
Nicole.
P
Thanks
Matt
first
Bob
you
can
don't
you
can
download
your
packet
earlier.
You
don't
have
to
wait
till
you
get
on
the
meeting,
so
I'm
just
going
to
give
you
that
tip
it's
easier
when
you're,
not
also
on
Zoom
so
I.
As
someone
who
was
a
you
know,
a
Community
member
paying
decent
attention
in
in
the
lead
up
to
the
city's
votes
and
council
member,
then
who's
paid
a
lot
of
attention
in
the
last
couple
years.
I
it
has.
It
definitely
seemed
to
me
that
we
were
telegraphing
to
the
community.
P
We
are
looking
at
you
know,
being
a
provider
of
a
broadband
service,
so
I
I
don't
feel
that
I
have
heard
from
the
community
that
they
are
really
comfortable
with
us.
P
Not
doing
that
now
because
we're
saying
like
dang
it,
we
should
have
done
it
in
2010,
but
I
know
darn
well
in
2040,
people
would
be
like,
oh,
if
only
we've
done,
that
in
2023,
like
what
idiots
are
we
to
have
not
done
that
as
a
city,
so
I
I
feel
unfortunate
to
not
have
really
heard
from
you
know:
I
use
my
sister
just
you
know,
as
a
catch-all
for
all
Boulder
like
I
have
not
heard
from
literally
her
or
so
many
people
in
the
city
about
like
do
they
like,
where
we're
going
with
this
and
and
I'm
uncomfortable.
P
So
to
answer
the
question:
what
additional
information
do
I
need
before
voting
again?
I,
don't
think
I'm
here
for
it,
but
I
really
hope
that
we
have
have
really
communicated
to
the
community
hey.
We
are
we're
really
looking
at,
at
least
in
this,
this
backbone
out
and
you're.
Gonna
get
your
internet.
This
long-awaited
Broadband
from
someone
that
is
not
the
city
of
Boulder
and
I
just
want
that
to
be
clearly
communicated
and
evaluated
by
the
city,
because
this
is
a
big
deal.
It's
going
to
have.
P
You
know
100
years
worth
of
implications
and
at
some
point
it's
going
to
turn
profitable
and
we're
also
forfeiting
that
if
we
don't
get
in
the
game,
I
feel
like
early
and
then
other
other
people
take
over
the
space.
So
I
option
three.
Maybe
all
we
can
do
I
I
am
still
open
potentially
to
option
one,
but
I
really
want
the
community
to
have
that
chance
to
to
tell
us
loud
and
clear,
like
yeah,
we
get
it
like
the
finances
are
or
that
they
want
to
break
the
bank
on
this.
L
Thanks
Rachel
Lauren
Nicole,
then
I'll
finish
off.
O
I'm
gonna
I
think
Echo
a
fair
amount
of
what
Rachel
said.
Our
community
voted
overwhelmingly
for
this
backbone
and
they're
also
overwhelmingly
unhappy
with
their
existing
service.
O
We're
already
covered
at
relatively
high
speeds,
and
so
for
me,
I
really
want
to
make
sure
that
whatever
service
we
provide
is
meeting
the
needs
that
the
community
is
requesting.
So
I
would
like
to
know
what
we
could.
O
If
there's
anything,
we
can
do
in
terms
of
delaying
rollout
to
raise
tax
funds
for
longer
for
several
years
before,
starting
the
project,
reduce
project
costs
or
really
anything,
we
can
do
to
kind
of
tackle
the
costs
for
you
know
into
making
it
something
that
could
be
something
we
can
accomplish,
because
the
reality
is,
it
costs
a
lot
to
put
wires
in
the
ground,
no
matter
who
does
it,
so
our
community
is
going
to
pay
these
costs
either
through
their
bills
or
through
taxes
and
and
if
it's,
a
private
company
doing
it
they're
going
to
pay
more
than
just
the
costs,
because
the
company
has
to
make
money.
O
So,
while
I
realized
that
this
option,
one
presents
sort
of
nearly
insurmountable
costs
to
us,
I
would
like
to
see
us
figure
out.
If
there's
any
way,
we
can
break
those
down
and
make
them
more
capital
and
also
have
the
community
weigh
in
just
because
this.
This
is
a
long-term
commitment
and
we've
seen
how
that
went
with
Excel
and
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
us
make
the
same
mistake
here.
M
Thank
you,
and
thanks
Rachel
and
Lauren,
for
echoing
many
of
my
thoughts
as
well.
I
think
you
know
the
only
thing
that
I
would
maybe
add
to
what
what
Rachel
and
Lauren
said
is
that
it
doesn't
seem
to
be
an
issue
of
access.
So
it's
it's.
There
are
200
to
250
homes
who
need
access
and
I
really
hope
that
we
can
get
them
that
access
soon.
But
in
my
mind
that
because
they're,
because
most
people
do
have
access,
it
doesn't
add
the
urgency
that
I
might
otherwise
feel.
M
If
say,
half
the
city
did
not
have
access
to
Internet.
So
so
for
me,
it
feels
like
there
is
some
time
to
do
a
little
bit
to
get
a
better
read
on
the
community,
because
I
also
just
don't
have
a
sense
of
of
whether
this
is
something
the
community
would
like
to
invest
in,
because
there
could
certainly
be
some
long-term
impacts
here.
I
think
my
biggest
concerns
if
we
were
to
move
forward
with
option
three
are
issues
around
data
privacy,
net
neutrality,
customer
service
and
just
ultimately
the
cost
to
customers
too.
M
The
goal
of
Private
Industry
is
profit,
not
service,
not
privacy,
not
keeping
costs
low
and
not
really
our
community
either.
So
what
are
what
are
we
doing
if
we're
going
to
move
forward
with
leasing
out
this
backbone
that
we've
invested
20
million
dollars
in
to
make
sure
that
our
communities
needs
are
private
or
are
prioritized
as
much
as
possible?
Given
the
privatized
nature
of
what
we
will
be
moving
into?
B
I'll
finish
up
and
try
to
summarize
what
we've
heard
here,
hopefully
and
get
staff
what
they
want:
I
I
I
think
number
three
is
obviously
the
most
viable
thing
to
achieve,
but
I
think
what's
important
to
maybe
sort
of
address
where
Rachel
and
and
Lauren
and
Nicole
are
is
Nicole
is,
is
we're
preserving
our
right?
Unlike
the
municipalization,
we
had
to
make
a
decision
and
then
figure
out
where
we
were
getting
our
power
from
right.
So
that
was
a
choice.
Point
that
wasn't.
B
We
didn't
really
preserve
our
right
to
municipalize
tomorrow
or
the
next
week
like
we
could,
but
we
kind
of
foreclosed
on
that.
Whereas
this
is
different,
we
could
pursue
option
three
and
then
always
do
that
and
in
many
ways
that's
probably
the
option
that
is
best
because
we're
at
the
peak
of
cost
inflation's
super
high
everybody's
doing
internet
so
you're
gonna
have
to
pull
people
equipment
is
scarce,
I
mean
waiting
is
probably
the
ultimate
thing,
but
if
we're
waiting
to
do
our
own,
why
wouldn't
we
address
the
urgency
that
our
community
wants
more
choice?
B
Does
it
matter
more
that
they
have
a
city
a
boulder
sticker
on
there
invoice
or
or
does
that
really
matter
as
long
as
they're
getting
affordable
and
reliable
service,
so
I
I,
I
think
the
who
versus
the
what
is
an
important
piece
here.
So
you
know
so
that's
my
perspective
on
it.
But
but
in
terms
of
what
I've
heard
I
think
you
know
Mike
what
I've
been
sort
of
hearing
that
are
outstanding
questions.
B
Are
you
know,
models
of
different,
take
rates,
charge
rate
projections
of
the
private
of
the
private
sector,
option
option
three,
and
also
the
city
attorney's
office,
looking
at
those
20-year
leases
and
the
impacts
on
private
providers,
certainly
more
study
on
micro,
trenching
and
then
more
Outreach
for
public
option
and
where
that
is
just
to
make
sure
people
understand
where
we're
headed
and
then
sort
of
that
last
one
was
brought
up,
is
sort
of
how
we
and
if
we
can
sort
of
prioritize
in
a
partnership
who
is
getting
that
initial
build
out
of
service
to
make
sure
that
it's
not
the
people
who
already
have
Comcast
and
CenturyLink
overlap
that
they're
getting
now
a
third
option.
B
Meanwhile,
folks,
like
yourself,
Mike
and
others
are
still
stuck
with
one
for
a
long
time,
so
the
equity
conversation
there
as
well.
So
those
are
the
ones
I
heard
were
still
on
the
table
and
just
want
to
check
in
with
you
Mike.
Do
you
feel
like
you
and
staff
have
got
everything
you
needed
to
March
us
to
the
next
one.
D
I
do
I
appreciate
that
summary
man
I
appreciate
all
of
council's
questions
and
feedback
this
evening,
super
helpful
I
have
a
number
of
questions
jotted
down
here
in
front
of
me,
and
we'll
certainly
play
this
back
tomorrow
to
summarize
in
more
detail
with
you
next
week
and
we
will
start
working
on
those
outstanding
requests
and
and
look
forward
to
seeing
you
again,
hopefully
very
soon,
awesome.
B
I
appreciate
Mike,
Cara
and
then
also
Matthew,
Tim
and
well,
who
else
no
David?
Thank
you
guys
so
much
for
for
your
input
and
your
expertise
and
your
work
on
this.
We
greatly
appreciate
it.
I'm
sure
we'll
see
you
guys
again
soon
when
we
are
having
some
public
feedback
and
looking
to
make
this
decision
and
go
forth
with
an
option.
So
much
appreciated.
Thank
you
guys
and
you
guys
got
to
go
first,
you
get
to
call
it
a
night.
So,
thanks
again.
B
C
C
C
Most
recently,
we
have
heard
a
lot
and
I
know
that
you
have
received
a
lot
of
emails
from
what
I'll
say.
Are
people
really
passionate
either
about
the
airport
and
its
meaning
to
the
community
or,
frankly,
people
that
are
passionate
about
the
impact
that
the
airport
may
have
on
their
lives?
C
We
remind
folks
that
the
airport
is
a
land
use.
The
airport
is
a
land
use,
that's
included
in
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan.
To
that
end,
the
plan
reads
that,
at
the
time
of
the
next
airport
master
plan,
the
city
will
work
with
the
community
to
reassess
the
potential
for
developing
a
portion
of
the
airport
for
housing
and
neighborhood
uses.
C
I
say
that,
because
that's
a
little
bit
of
what
brought
us
here
today
in
2022
staff
was
assessing
the
need
for
an
airport,
Master
Plan
update,
so
that
we
could
actually
pursue
needed
Capital
Improvements
at
the
airport,
and
we
recognize
the
commitment
to
the
community
laid
out
in
the
Boulder
Valley
comp
plan
to
fulfill
that
commitment.
We
initiated
a
community
engagement
process
to
hear
from
a
broad
and
diverse
set
of
Community
Voices
about
the
desired
future
for
the
airport
site
and
in
turn,
develop
four
scenarios
to
respond
to
what
we
heard.
C
The
project
is
only
the
first
step
of
many
depending
on
the
community
and
council's
desire
as
we
move
forward.
The
first
step
enables
us
to
ascertain
if
there
is
an
appetite
for
considering
an
alternative
alternative
scenarios.
That
would
then
require
us
to
alter
the
FAA
required
master
plan
and
have
us
reconsider
the
breadth
of
future
Investments
at
the
site.
C
There's
significant
work
to
be
done
at
the
airport
and
we
really
rely
on
your
guidance
for
our
what
our
next
step
should
be
and
I'm
going
to
skip
over
Natalie
Stifler,
our
director
of
transportation
and
Mobility
is
certainly
here,
as
is
John
Kenney,
who
I
think
you
all
know
who
really
frankly
keeps
it
all
together
at
the
airport.
So
thank
you
John,
but
Allison
Moore
Farrell
has
been
really
at
the
Helm
of
the
engagement
and
so
I'll
send
it
to
her
to
kick
us
off.
B
You
get
started
I
just
want
to
allow
Lauren
to
to
mention
something
to
us
and
the
community
sure.
O
B
Hopefully,
pretty
soon
because
we
have
a
minimum
wage
conversation
to
happen
which
she
has
been
leading
so
we'll
see
in
a
little
bit
more
all
right,
sorry,
Allison,
take
it
away
all.
V
Right,
thank
you
and
I
think
this
city
clerk's
office
is
going
to
share
the
presentation
perfect.
Thank
you
so
much
all
right!
Wonderful!
Thank
you!
Nuria
hello!
Members
of
council.
My
name
is
Allison
Moore
Farrell
I
am
a
senior
Transportation
planner
here
at
the
city
of
Boulder.
Thank
you
for
having
us
this
evening.
I
look
forward
to
providing
an
update
on
the
boulder
Airport
Community
conversation.
V
V
All
right,
just
a
quick
presentation
outline
we
have
the
project
purpose
I'll,
be
sharing
the
community
engagement.
That's
occurred,
analysis
of
that
the
Matrix
of
community
visions
and
next
steps.
Next
slide.
Please
all
right.
So
what
is
the
purpose
of
this
project?
The
purpose
is
to
conduct
a
community
engagement
process
and
resulting
High
net
high-level
scenario.
Analysis.
We
last
came
to
you
in
January
2023,
sharing
about
the
process.
V
This
process
is
about
creating
an
aspirational
vision
for
the
airport
site.
It's
about
informing
Consulting
and
involving
the
Boulder
Community.
It
is
about
identifying
concerns
and
ideas
for
the
future.
It
is
not
about
closing
the
airport,
changing
airports,
site
land
uses
in
the
near
term,
and
developing
detailed
feasibility
analysis
and
I
want
to
share
a
little
bit
about
how
we've
Incorporated
your
feedback
from
when
we
came
to
you
in
January
Council
asks
clarifying
questions
regarding
the
difference
between
the
airport
master
plan
and
the
airport
Community
conversation.
V
We
shared
that
the
master
plan
process
is
prescribed
by
the
FAA,
and
this
is
focused
on
growth
and
operational
needs
at
the
airport.
The
community
conversation
is
to
help
understand
what
the
community's
vision
is
for.
The
airport
Council
also
asked
for
a
clear
introduction
of
History
issues
and
opportunities,
which
was
provided
at
both
open
houses
and
our
community
working
group
meetings.
Council
also
provided
project
team
suggestions
with
with
community
members
who
should
be
on
the
community
working
group,
which
I'll
share
a
little
bit
later
next
slide.
Please.
V
And
next
slide,
thank
you.
So
I
wanted
to
share
a
schedule
of
community
engagement
events
that
we
have
conducted
over
the
past
seven
or
eight
months
and
I
really
want
to
thank
many
of
you.
Council
members
have
attended
a
number
of
these
and
I
really
appreciate
that
involvement.
We've
conducted
a
wide
range
of
activities
from
December
to
August
and
we
have
more
coming
in
the
next
month.
V
The
aim
of
with
the
community
outreach
was
to
connect
with
those
most
impacted
by
the
airport,
as
well
as
the
broader
Boulder
Community
and
I'll
share
a
little
bit
more
about
those
next
slide.
Please
so
we
began
with
in-depth
interviews
with
which
really
helped
us
learn
about
key
issues
and
concerns
that
neighbors,
tenants,
pilots
and
community
members
have
this
helped,
provide
Baseline
information
and
shape
future
engagement
needs
and
helped
Identify
some
information
information
gaps.
We
had.
V
Moving
forward,
we
had
two
open
houses,
we
hosted
one
in
April
2023
and
in
July
at
the
first
open
house,
we
shared
information
about
the
airport,
shared
input
received
to
date
and
requested
issues
and
ideas
on
the
future
of
the
airport
site.
We
had
over
200
attendees
at
this
first
open
house.
The
second
open.
V
Ed
and
concerned
about
noise,
leaded
fuel,
economic
impact,
environmental
impact
rules
and
regulations
and
community
relations.
This
served
as
both
an
information
session
for
the
public
and
a
valuable
resource
for
the
project
team.
To
understand
the
concerns
our
second
open
house
was
just
last
month
we
shared
desired
near-term
action
items,
shared
draft,
long
scenarios,
long-term
scenarios
and
requested
feedback
on
both.
We
had
over
120
attendees
at
this
open
house
next
slide.
Please.
V
We
conducted
two
online
questionnaires
through
be
heard.
Boulder,
the
city's
questionnaire
platform.
We
received
a
large
number
of
respondents.
We
conducted
Outreach
for
the
questionnaires
via
City
channels,
in
line
with
City
best
practices.
We
also
reached
out
to
Neighborhood
HOAs
and
underserved
neighborhoods,
who
could
be
more
impacted,
given
their
proximity
to
the
airport
questionnaire
is
an
engagement
tool
for
collecting
feedback
from
the
public.
It
is
not
intended
to
express
a
scientific,
statistically
valid
representation
of
All
City
residents.
In
addition,
staff
is
not
interpreting
the
feedback
as
votes
for
or
against
certain
scenarios.
V
V
V
When
asked,
what
do
you
think
about
the
current
operations
or
services
at
the
airport,
16
of
folks
responded?
I,
don't
think
there
should
be
further
operations
or
Services
about
60
percent.
Recognize
the
need
for
minor
and
or
major
improvements
at
the
airport
remaining
folks
fell
into
the
other
category.
In
the
open-ended
question
about
the
vision
for
the
airport
folks
expressed
a
desire
for
improvement
and
around
safety,
unleaded
fuel
and
noise.
There's
a
wide
range
of
visions
and
I
encourage
you
to
see
what
community
members
shared
in
the
memo
appendices.
V
There
was
over
a
thousand
pages
in
there,
so
it
may
take
a
while.
But
if
you
have
the
opportunity
I
encourage
you
to
you
know
to
take
a
look
at
what
folks
shared
about
their
vision.
In
our
second
questionnaire,
we
had
over
900
respondents
in
the
city
of
Boulder
and
Boulder
County.
Our
aim
there
was
to
gather
feedback
on
the
identified,
near-term
action
items
and
draft
scenarios
when
asked
to
rank
the
preference
of
scenarios
scenario.
V
While
it
was
the
preference
there
was
doubt
that
some
of
these
elements
could
come
to
fruition,
but
there
is
a
desire
to
look
into
them
and
prioritize
that
vision,
focusing
on
people
and
community
and
increased
benefit
of
the
site.
No
matter
what
next
steps
were
taken
was
clear
from
this
questionnaire
next
slide.
Please.
V
V
They
were
not
only
at
the
inform
and
consult
realm
like
other
engagement
activities,
but
they
got
to
the
involved
level
of
participation.
We
worked
directly
with
cwj
members
to
ensure
that
concerns
and
aspirations
were
consistently
understood
and
considered
and
reflected
in
the
scenarios
the
cwg
was
intended
to
have
a
diverse
mix
of
stakeholders
who
are
impacted
by
the
airport
and
the
future
of
the
site.
We
included
many
folks
that
counsel
and
suggested
in
January,
which
we
really
appreciated.
V
Folks
from
the
scientific
Community,
the
Emergency
Services
Community,
those
engaged
with
the
East
Boulder
subcommunity
plan,
those
in
underserved
communities
who
live
near
the
site
and
many
others.
We
also
had
members
from
planning
board
tab
housing
board
and
we
also
involved
many
departments
within
the
city
such
as
planning
osmp
and
others
from
the
cwg
like
I,
said,
they're
very
instrumental
in
developing
scenarios
and
near-term
action
items.
V
They
helped
us
prioritize
those
action
items
and,
over
the
past
several
months,
we've
shared
Baseline
information
about
the
airport,
communicated
these
known
opportunities
and
constraints
provided
summaries
of
all
the
engagement
activities,
developed
Visions
for
the
airport
and
Airport
site,
developed
evaluations,
considerations
that
connected
the
scenario
to
City
goals,
and
throughout
this
process
we
often
assigned
homework
to
cwg
members
to
speak
to
their
neighbors
colleagues
and
acquaintances
about
the
airport
and
this
process
and
to
report
that
next
slide.
Please.
V
Another
piece
of
in
community
engagement
we
conducted
was
bilingual
community
means
these
meetings
were
held
at
San
loser
and
Vista.
Village
and
they've
been
very
valuable.
We
actually
have
our
final
set
of
meetings
next
week
at
San
Los
room
as
folks.
Who's
reside
right
next
to
the
airport.
Their
lived
experience
is
helpful
to
understand.
Many
folks
wanted
to
see
the
airport
as
more
of
a
Community
Asset
and
explore
opportunities
for
youth
engagement
such
as
summer
camps,
jobs
and
Technical
career
options.
V
Noise
was
a
major
issue
identified
in
these
communities
and
we
intended
Our
intention
with
these
Community
meetings
was
to
have
the
same
depth
and
detail
to
understand
the
concerns
and
desires
of
these
communities.
One
was
English
first
with
Spanish
translation
and
one
was
Spanish
first
with
English
translation
next
slide.
Please.
V
And
next
slide,
thank
you,
so
I'd
love
to
move
on
to
what
came
from
these
Community
engagement
events,
here's
how
we
organize
this
and
why
so?
First
we
have
the
initial
setup
input
and
that
was
in
the
earlier
part
of
this
year
in
March
April
May,
where
we
had
our
early
Community
working
group
meetings,
open
house
first
questionnaire
Sam
our
first
visit
with
San
Los
room,
Vista
Village,
and
we
created
this
space
for
our
impacted
community
members
in
the
Boulder
Community
at
large
to
share
their
issues
and
ideas.
This
was
the
initial
input
stage.
V
This
wealth
of
input
coupled
with
subject
matter,
experts
led
to
development
of
high-level
long-term
scenarios.
These
scenarios
reflect
what
we
heard
from
the
community.
This
is
the
scenario
feedback
stage
and
that's
where
we're
at
right
now.
Next
will
be
refining
those
scenarios
based
on
all
of
this
feedback
and
coming
back
to
you
and
it's
important
to
keep
in
mind
throughout
this
process.
The
desire
for
near-term
Action
items
emerged
from
a
number
of
different
groups.
V
Folks
really
wanted
to
see
improvements
in
the
near
term,
not
just
20,
plus
years
in
the
future,
regardless
of
what
future
a
scenario
was
chosen,
so
we
organized
these,
so
they
could
occur
in
the
next
one,
two
three
four
five
years,
so
we'll
share
those
as
well
as
they
were
developed
next
slide.
Please-
and
here
we
have
a
word
cloud
showing
all
of
the
feedback,
themes
and
interests
that
we
heard
throughout
this
engagement
process.
V
V
Next
slide,
all
right
and
next
I'd
like
to
share
the
four
Community
informed
scenarios.
So
scenario
one
is
existing
airport
with
enhanced
maintenance
scenario.
Two
is
airport
with
Aviation
improvements
scenario:
three
is
airport
with
neighborhoods
serving
uses
in
limited
housing
scenario.
Four
is
decommissioned
airport
and
create
new
neighborhood
next
slide,
please!
V
So,
with
each
of
these
scenarios,
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
describe
the
purpose
of
the
scenario
and
I'll
describe
what
remains
and
what
changes
from
today
and
then
I'll
share
the
feedback
we've
received
from
the
community
on
these.
What
do
they
like?
What
did
they
dislike?
What
further
information
were
they
requesting?
In
order
to
understand
it
further
so
scenario,
one
would
bring
the
current
facilities
up
to
a
state
of
good
repair.
No
new
facilities
would
be
built,
so
everything
would
remain
and
no
physical
changes
outside
of
enhanced
maintenance
of
existing
facilities
slide
please.
V
So
the
community
saw
a
number
of
opportunities
and
constraints
here.
Opportunities
was
improving
maintenance,
less
change,
continuing
to
accommodate
emergency
response,
supporting
training.
Some
of
the
constraints
that
were
identified
was
does
not
Advance
City
goals.
Lack
of
implementation
plans
seen
as
a
Band-Aid
on
current
issues
does
not
address
Boulders
housing
needs
does
not
address
flight
pattern
issues
and
furthers
perception
that
BDU
serves
select
groups.
Further
information
that
was
requested
is
economic
noise
and
Environmental
Studies
and
flight
pattern
review
next
slide.
Please.
V
Scenario
two
would
Foster
Aviation
development
that
is
responsive
to
Aviation
market
demand.
This
would
include
modernization
of
general
aviation
hanger
improvements
and
implementing
the
most
recent
airport
master
plan
from
2007,
which
would
add
facility
and
infrastructure
improvements,
enhancing
safety
and
capacity.
So
the
existing
elements
remain
would
be
the
runways,
taxiways,
Hangar
facilities,
support
buildings.
The
changes
would
be
upgrading
existing
hangers
development
of
new
hangers,
enhancing
Aviation
facilities,
preserving
options
to
accommodate
future
modes
of
travel
and
goods,
movement
and
upgrading
the
public
Aviation
viewing
area
next
slide.
Please.
V
Some
of
the
opportunities
community
members
saw
here
was
the
use
of
new
technology
and
Aviation
advancing
use
of
unleaded
fuel,
and
it
could
make
the
airport
more
inclusive.
Constraints
that
were
identified
were
may
lead
to
more
Aviation
traffic
concerns
about
environmental
impact,
noise
safety
and
Equity
concerns
about
source
of
funding
and
not
addressing
housing
needs.
V
Further
study
was
very
similar
to
scenario
one
looking
at
an
economic
noise
and
environmental
study,
flight
pattern,
review
and
review
of
funding
sources
for
BDU
and
I
apologize,
I'm,
calling
it
BDU
is
the
airport
code
for
Boulder
municipal
airport.
So
in
case
you
didn't
catch
that
I
apologize
I
didn't
clarify
that
all
right
next
slide.
Please.
V
Scenario:
three
would
Foster
Aviation
development
and
Community
Development
that
complements
each
other,
so
this
would
include
modernization
of
general
aviation
and
hanger
improvements
and
livework
Hangers.
It
would
also
include
a
wide
range
of
neighborhood
serving
uses
such
as
a
restaurant
or
Cafe,
a
stem
Learning
Center
vocational
opportunities
for
local
Youth
and
a
community
center
that
houses
meeting
spaces
for
both
Aviation
and
public
uses,
so
remaining
would
again
be
the
runways,
Hangar
facilities,
support
buildings.
V
The
changes
here
this
is
kind
of
where
we
get
to
more
changes
where
we
look
at
upgrading,
existing
hangers
developing,
live
work,
hangers,
building
a
restaurant
or
Cafe,
creating
a
stem
Learning,
Center
and
job
opportunities,
enhancing
Aviation
facilities
and
building
a
community
center
that
houses
meeting
spaces
next
slide.
Please
thank
you.
V
The
opportunities
have
seen
it
has
a
good
middle
ground.
Advancing
the
use
of
unloaded
fuel
inclusive
of
community
could
improve
community
relations.
Constraints
identified
were
may
lead
to
more
Aviation.
Traffic
may
be
too
extensive
to
implement
concerns
about
land,
use,
compatibility,
environmental
impact,
noise
safety
and
equity
and
does
not
provide
enough
housing
again.
Further
information
requested
was
an
aviation
land,
use
compatibility
study
with
special
consideration
for
housing
and
again,
like
the
previous
slides,
we
looked
at
economic
noise
and
environmental
study
and
a
flight
pattern
review
next
slide.
Please.
V
Scenario,
four
would
decommission
the
airport
and
create
a
new
mixed-use
neighborhood
that
may
include
housing
activity,
centers
employment
hubs
and
green
space.
A
portion
of
land
would
be
set
aside
for
helicopter
emergency
services.
That
would
support
the
resiliency
of
the
region,
so
remaining
here
from
Aviation
facilities
would
be
an
aircraft
landing
area
for
emergency
Support
Services.
V
Opportunities
the
community
members
saw
here
would
be
serving
a
larger
portion
of
the
community.
Reducing
leaded
fuel
impact
on
the
community
and
providing
additional
housing
constraints
identified.
Are
the
FAA
may
not
allow
this
may
not
provide
affordable
living
could
be
a
costly
option.
Aerospace
would
likely
be
utilized
by
other
airports,
does
not
provide
open
space.
Lack
of
airport
could
have
negative
economic
impacts.
V
V
So
the
four
scenarios
were
evaluated
based
on
how
they
align
with
City
values,
which
are
outlined
in
the
sustainability,
equity
and
resilience
framework
building
on
feedback
received
from
the
cwg
and
the
broader
Community.
The
project
team
expanded
upon
the
framework
to
create
evaluation
considerations
which
have
been
tailored
to
the
boulder
municipal
airport
site
next
slide.
Please.
V
The
project
team
is
comprised
of
subject
matter:
experts
in
transportation,
planning,
Community
planning,
Aviation
planning
and
engagement
professionals
to
utilize
their
expertise
locally
and
nationally,
to
conduct
a
preliminary
evaluation
of
the
scenarios
using
the
evaluation
considerations
developed
with
the
cwg.
Each
scenario
was
then
qualitatively
evaluated,
looking
at
impacts
of
unfavorable,
neutral
and
favorable
by
the
project
team
as
to
whether
each
scenario
actively
contributed
or
detracted
from
these
goals,
the
sustainability,
equity
and
resilience
framework
is
meant
to
provide
guiding
principles
and
goals.
They
are
not
quantitative,
metrics
and
should
not
be
utilized
as
such.
V
Here
they
are
not
votes
for
against
future
scenarios.
We
recognize
that
this
is
qualitative,
which
is
the
intention,
as
this
is
a
visioning
process,
it
is
subjective
and
only
meant
to
give
counsel
in
the
community
a
high
level
assessment
of
how
each
Vision
may
move
forward
towards
our
community
goals.
These
considerations
are
meant
to
be
one
tool
for
Council
to
understand
the
anticipated
impacts
of
each
scenario.
V
We
also
anticipate
feedback
from
the
cwg,
which
we've
already
requested
and
City
Council
on
these
evaluations,
so
I'm
going
to
identify
some
of
these
valuations
I
know
it's
really
small.
On
the
screen
here,
but
you
do
have
this
information
in
your
packet
if
you'd
like
to
review
each
of
them,
I'll
share
a
few
right.
V
Now
and
again,
these
evaluation
considerations
were
developed
by
the
community
working
group
to
really
hone
in
on
Airport
site
specific
so
that
it
could
be
applicable
to
any
of
the
scenarios
so,
for
example,
under
safety,
one
of
the
considerations
is
increasing
resiliency
through
mitigation
response
and
Recovery
for
the
accessible
and
connected
goal.
V
Some
of
the
considerations
are
increasing
current
and
future
multimodal
Transportation
options,
enhancing
open
space,
bicycle
and
Trail
connectivity
and
accommodating
Goods
movement
for
economically
vital
vital
another
one
is
Foster,
diverse
business
options,
so
these
are
a
num
of
the
considerations
that
were
pulled
together
by
the
cwg
and
then
the
alignment
was
identified
for
each
of
these.
So
as
you'll
see
the
elements
that
make
up
scenario,
three
and
four
bring
these
scenarios
closer
to
alignment
with
City
goals.
But
again
this
is
one
tool
to
kind
of
understand
this
alignment
next
slide.
Please.
V
All
right
so,
like
I
mentioned
earlier,
these
near-term
action
items
were
actually
identified
by
community
members
as
a
desire
to
really
look
into
as
as
something
we
can
do
in
one
two,
three
four
five
years
from
now
and
as
you'll
see
these,
so
all
of
these
action
items
came
directly
from
the
community
members
as
we
shared
in
the
memo.
They
have
not
been
evaluated
for
feasibility
just
yet.
We
wanted
to
communicate
with
you
what
the
community
has
shared
and
in
the
coming
months
they
will
be
going
through
a
feasibility
process.
V
Throughout
the
engagement
process,
we
heard
from
many
community
members
the
desire
for
these
actionable
short-term
items
that
they
could
see
come
to
fruition.
So
we
did
incorporate
that
into
our
Outreach,
and
these
ideas
really
complement
the
long-term
visions
and
again
the
majority
of
these
can
occur
no
matter
what
future
scenario
moves
forward.
V
The
intended
time
frame
for
these
like
I
mentioned,
is
about
zero
to
five
years
and
in
early
2024.
We
will
come
back
to
council
with
implementation
steps
for
each
of
these,
and
ideally
they
could
complement
any
of
the
scenarios.
V
So
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
go
through
each
of
these
and
again
there's
over
40
of
these,
so
I'm
not
going
to
read
through
each
one
of
them
here
you
have
all
of
this
information
in
your
packet
and
they
are
all
listed
in
the
memo.
I'll
highlight
a
few
of
them
as
we
go
through
and
all
of
these
all
of
this
information
we've
received
and
these
suggestions
from
community
members.
We
pull
together
into
five
topic
areas.
We
have
noise,
health
and
environmental
impact,
community
relations,
airport
economics
and
safety,
so
we'll
go
to
the
next
slide.
V
V
So,
under
the
first
topic,
area
of
Noise
We
have
a
suggestion
to
include
South,
Boulder
and
Boulder
Reservoir
and
the
voluntary
noise
abatement
program.
We
have
encouraged
voluntary
limits
on
start
and
end
times
of
flying,
investigating
ways
to
better
report.
Noise
explore
feasibility
of
quieter
planes
next
slide.
Please.
V
A
few
highlights
from
the
health
and
environmental
impact
near-term
oxygen
items.
We
have
expedite
the
delivery
of
unleaded
fuel
to
BDU
incentivize
the
use
use
of
electric
aircraft,
evaluate
proximity
and
impacts
to
natural
features
and
Wildlife
investigate
impacts
of
leaded
aviation
fuel
next
slide.
Please.
V
Under
the
community
relations
topic,
a
few
highlights
are
coordinating
airport
land
use,
planning
and
compatible
land
uses,
commit
to
ongoing
coordination
between
pilots,
tenants
and
Neighbors,
create
or
promote
community
events
and
programs
deliver
quarterly
noise
reports
to
boards
and
Council
host
family-friendly
activities
at
the
airport,
introduce
Community
programming
for
underserved
communities
next
slide.
Please.
V
V
Under
the
safety
topic
area,
a
few
highlights
are
mitigating
known
risks
or
hazards,
Monitor
and
enforce
compliance
with
airport
minimum
standards
and
FAA
compliance
standards.
Introduce
real-time
messaging
for
Pilots
next
slide,
please
so,
like
I
shared
before
we've
collected
all
of
these
from
the
community,
we
wanted
to
share
that
information
and
moving
forward.
V
We
will
be
assessing
them
for
feasibility
and
implementation,
possibility
of
next
steps
and
there's
clearly
a
strong
desire
from
the
community
to
determine
what
can
be
done
in
the
short
term,
and
some
highlights
that
we
received
about
feedback
on
these
from
the
second
open
house
and
the
final
two
Community
working
group
meetings
we
recognized
there
was
quite
a
bit
of
community
alignment
on
phasing
outleted
fuel.
There
was
a
desire
to
review
noise
payment
procedures
and
consider
changes.
There
was
a
desire
to
analyze
the
impacts
of
Aviation
or
Community
Development,
on
open
space
and
surrounding
environment.
V
V
V
Thank
you
and
now
I'd
like
to
share
the
project
Maps
next
steps
with
you.
So
the
next
steps
we
have
identified
are
addressing
city
council
questions
and
obtaining
additional
feedback
as
needed,
conduct
cwg
meeting
number
five
in
September
refine
the
scenarios
and
action
items,
including
high-level
costs
and
next
steps
for
each
scenario,
produce
and
share
the
final
report
and
present
the
refined
scenarios
in
near-term
action
items
and
seek
direction
from
City
Council
in
early
2024.
V
and
I'd,
also
like
to
point
out
where
we
are
in
the
engagement
process
in
our
city
of
Boulder
engagement
framework,
we
have
right
now,
we've
you
know,
identified
the
options.
We've
shared
this
Foundation
of
information
and
right
now
we
are
evaluating
the
issues.
So
we
appreciate
your
support
in
this
process
and
where
we
are
right
now
and
we
will
continue
to
refine
the
scenarios
and
action
items
based
upon
feedback
from
city
council,
the
cwg
and
the
recent
engagement
activities
all
right
next
slide.
Please.
V
V
Do
you
have
questions
about
the
community
input
or
the
community
feedback
that
informed
the
scenarios
and
action
items,
and
we
would
like
to
understand,
as
we
contemplate
coming
back
to
Council
in
early
2024,
what
additional
information
is
needed
to
provide
staff
Direction
on
next
steps
and
I
will
end
our
presentation.
There.
B
Thank
you.
Allison
really
appreciate
that
presentation.
Before
we
get
to
questions
I
wanted
to
ask
our
director
of
Transportation
Natalie
Stifler
a
question
on.
Do
you
have
on
update?
Do
you
have
any
update
for
us
on
a
recent
conversation
with
the
FAA
that
might
really
help
contextualize
some
more
of
what
we're
discussing
and
bring
some
more
information
to
Council
in
the
community.
W
Yes,
thanks,
Matt
and
good
evening
Council,
we
were
able
to
have
a
conversation
with
FAA
staff
earlier
this
week
and
just
some
initial
information
that
I
can
share
from
that
conversation.
Is
that
and
we
we
did
share
this
in
the
questions
that
went
to
on
hotline
as
well,
but
fa's
position
is
very
clear:
they.
W
Generally,
FAA
only
grants
such
requests
if
a
closure
would
protect
Advance
or
benefit
the
public
interest
in
civil
aviation
or
the
airport
no
longer
serves
its
intended
purpose.
So
this
was
just
an
initial
conversation.
A
lot
of
this
is
information
that
can
be
gathered
by
our
grant
assurances.
So
it's
information,
that's
been
kind
of
out
there,
certainly
more
conversation
with
fa
in
the
future.
If
that's
something
desired
by
Council
they've
offered
to
have
further
conversation
with
you
and
with
the
community
if
that's
desired,
hopefully
that's
helpful.
B
Very
helpful
as
they
are
a
partner
and
have
have
a
big
stake
in
what
we're
doing
at
the
airport.
So
thank
you
for
that.
Natalie.
Sorry,
let's,
let's
touch
off
with
some
questions
for
staff,
I
see
Bob,
Rachel
and
Juni
go
for
it.
G
Thanks
man,
Natalie
I,
want
to
pick
up
where
use
left
off
and
make
sure
I
understand
this
correctly.
As
I
understood
it
from
the
memo
and
from
some
other
materials.
There's
there's
actually
two
types:
it
sounds
like
there's.
G
Two
types
of
of
restrictions
of
the
FAA
poses
one
is
for
for
infrastructure
or
I,
guess
non-land
things
if
we
participate,
which
we
have
in
the
airport
Improvement
program,
the
AIP
that
there
are
covenants
that
we
may
not
close
the
airport
from
for
20
years
from
the
last
Grant
and
that's
different
from
a
separate
commitment
to
get
FAA
permission
in
perpetuity.
If,
if
the
FAA
helped
us
buy,
some
lands,
am
I,
understand,
there's
kind
of
really
two
different
things
here:
the
20-year
limitation
and
the
forever
limitation.
That's.
W
Correct
they
there's
a
distinction
between
what
was
used
to
purchase
land
versus
the
airport,
Improvement
Grants
for
Capital
Improvements.
G
Right
so
the
Capital
Improvements,
the
last
time
we,
the
city,
received
Capital
Improvement
money
from
the
the
FAA
that
starts
a
new
20-year
clock
ticking
was
two
years
ago
in
2021.
Is
that
right?
That's.
G
And
then
on
the
land
part
of
it,
if
the
if
the
AFAA
helped
us
purchase
some
of
the
land
out
of
the
airport,
that
restriction
on
the
that
the
FAA
prohibits
closure
unless
we
meet
their
criteria
that
goes
on
forever.
That's
not
a
20-year.
It's
a
perpetuity
thing
is
that
right.
W
Yes,
this
is
where
it
gets
a
little
bit
like.
We
would
need
additional
conversation
because
the
piece
around
the
land
and
how
that's
applied-
and
you
know
what
time
frame
and
all
of
that
is
just
requires
more
analysis
and
more
conversation.
I.
G
Understand
entirely
and
so
I
guess
one
of
the
questions
was:
what
more
information
do
we
want
so
I.
Add
that
add
that
to
as
the
first
item
on
the
list
is
it'd
be
great
to
have
more
information
on
that
from
from
analysis,
either
by
our
outside
experts
or
or
actually
just
hear
what
the
FAA
has
to
say.
Do
you
think
it's
possible
that
we
could
get
the
FAA
to
come
in
and
maybe
even
make
a
presentation,
a
council
at
some
point
in
time?
Would
that
be
appropriate.
G
That'd
be
great,
my
second
kind
of
set
of
questions
were
actually.
My
last
question
is
I
saw
something
in
first
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
you
and
your
staff
Natalie.
You
guys
did
a
fantastic
job.
We
peppered
you
before
this
meeting
with
all
sorts
of
questions.
I
mean
like
dozens
of
questions
that
we
sent
in,
and
you
guys
did
a
really
great
job
of
kind
of
bundling
all
those
together
and
answering
our
questions.
So
we'll
probably
have
a
few,
hopefully
we'll
have
fewer
tonight.
One
of
them
just
really
jumped
out
of
me.
G
G
If
BDU
the
boulder
airport
was
closed,
the
air
traffic
would
increase.
If
the
airport
was
closed,
the
resulting
increased
traffic
over
Boulder
would
be
a
combination
of
Jet
flights,
much
greater
than
we
see
today,
which
is
nearly
none
and
an
increase
in
train
flights
over
the
city.
Could
you
elaborate
like
if
we
closed
the
airport?
Why
would
there
be
more
traffic
over
the
city
rather
than
less
traffic.
X
Natalie
good
evening,
Council
John
Kennedy
Airport
Manager
Bob.
The
answer
to
that
is
airspace
is
such
an
incredibly
scarce
commodity.
X
The
airspace
above
Boulders
actually
influenced
by
Dia
Buckley
Air
National
Guard,
given
the
speeds
of
those
aircraft.
So
folks
usually
look
at
the
airspace,
disable
the
airport's
10
miles
away
or
15
miles
away.
It
is
absolutely
connected
with
very
few
voids
in
between
that
airspace.
X
So
if
the
boulder
airspace
suddenly
became
available
because
Boulder
airport
was
closed,
you
know
it's
just
my
professional
opinion:
I'm,
not
an
air
traffic
controller
but
I'm
a
pilot
that
airspace
would
be
gobbled
up
immediately
to
relieve
the
congestion
of
what
has
happened
over
at
Rocky
Mountain
Airport,
as
they
are
continuing
to
be
constrained,
and
it
could
even
have
a
ripple
effect
where
a
Centennial
Airport
would
hit
traffic
airspace
would
come
a
little
North
pushing.
Then
the
airspace
utilization
through
Rocky
Mountain
Airport
to
the
north
right
over
the
city
of
Boulder.
X
We
currently
have
some
Precision
approaches
over
the
city
of
Boulder
for
one
of
the
runways
into
Rocky,
Mountain,
Airport,
and
so
to
think.
If
this
air
Place
became
available
that
we
would
not
see
increased
traffic,
I
I
just
think
it's
almost
a
guarantee.
G
So
I
think
that
John,
that
was
very
helpful,
so
should
I.
Think
of
the
airspace
above
Boulder
is
kind
of
a
a
bit
of
a
box
and
that
we
kind
of
control
that
box,
or
at
least
we
can
exclude
traffic
from
other
municipal
or
or
the
DIA
airport,
because
we've
got
all
these
planes
flying
in
and
out
and
if
that
stopped,
then
those
planes
would
kind
of
swoop
in
but
pun
intended.
X
Yeah,
it's
almost
like
taking
your
hand
out
of
a
bucket
of
water
right
I
mean
it
would
just
immediately
close
up
it's
because
the
airspace
from
Rocky
Mountain
or
the
traffic
excuse
me
from
Rocky
Mountain
Airport
would
immediately
shift
over
the
top
of
Boulder,
possibly
Longmont
coming
down,
but
I
would
think
that
reserve
the
majority
of
the
airspace
that
is
up
became
available
at
Boulder
airport
closed
that
would
be
consumed
completely
by
Rocky
Mountain
airports
traffic.
They
have
pretty
aggressive
plans
to
expand
at
that
airport
in
just
about
every
category.
G
L
Thanks
Bob
Rachel,
then
Juni.
Y
Thanks
everyone,
Allison
Natalie,
John
good,
to
see
you
so
you.
P
Know
I
think
to
Natalie's
point
in
Bob's
questions
follow-up.
The
the
constraints
listed
under
a
category
four
which
I've
been
pretty
bullish
on
I,
would
say,
says:
FAA
may
not
allow
as
the
number
one
and
I
guess
I'm
I'm
a
little
bit
concerned
with
us.
P
P
I
I
would
be
reluctant
to
have
a
lot
more
Community,
engagement
and
and
people
getting
wrapped
up
in
this
issue.
If
there's
not
a
real,
viable
path,
so
I
am
wondering,
in
addition
to
having
conversations
with
the
FAA,
where
I
think
I
can
anticipate
what
that
you
know
with
the
outcomes
what
they
will
say
to
us.
What
are
our
next
steps
planned
for?
P
Fea
may
not
allow
because
again,
I
think
we
spent
a
lot
of
money
and
time
and-
and
there
are
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
energy,
for
you
know,
possibility
of
housing
there
and
if
that's,
not
a
a
realistic
or
legitimate
possibility
at
this
stage.
How
do
we
vet
that
and
move
forward
without
wasting
people's
time,
like
that
seems
threshold
or
like
a
a
gatekeeping
question?.
W
Right
I
think
this
is
something
that
we've
discussed
internally
to
just
given
the
the
position
that
fa
shared
with
us
this
week.
I
think
you
know
there
there's
always
two
sides
to
a
story,
and
so
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
to
hear
what
you
know.
Another
perspective
is
that
would
still
be
a
very
long,
difficult,
expensive
path.
W
So
there's
there's
that
piece
of
information
that
we
can
also
share
with
you
when
we,
if
we
come
back
to
share
the
the
additional
information
with
the
F
from
the
FAA
and
then
you
know,
I,
just
acknowledging
we
we
did
make
this
commitment
in
the
Boulder
Valley
con
plan,
so
I
think
I
I
just
want
to
say
that
that
this
work
was
not
was
for
not
for
nothing
right
like
we
did
make
that
commitment.
W
We
needed
to
hold
true
to
it
before
we
went
down
the
path
of
updating
our
airport
master
plan,
but
I
think
having
as
we
just
dig
into
it,
and
look
at
options
for
the
you
know,
a
vision
for
the
future.
This
was
something
that
we
knew
we
needed
to
eventually
get
to
and
understand.
P
And
my
question
may
be
more
for
Teresa
and
I,
don't
know
I
mean.
Obviously
we
can't
anticipate
future
litigation,
but
what?
What
are
the
steps
that
we
can
take
to
sort
of
get
an
answer
on
this
like?
Can
we
or
can't
we
do
this?
If
you
know
because
I
again,
I'm
someone
who
would
like
to
move
forward,
possibly
with
with
option
four
I,
also
don't
want
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
money
if
it's,
if
without
knowing
that
we
can
so
I,
don't
know
that
it
makes
sense
to
do
things
in
parallel.
P
If
there's
a
potential
dead
end,
what
are
what
are
what's
our
path
for
figuring
this
out
other
than
a
conversation
with
the
FAA
which
I
think
we
should
have?
But
you
know,
if
that's
a
you
know,
no
we're
not
going
to
be.
You
know
amenable
to
an
airport
closure.
It's
not
going
to
be
a
an
easy
path.
What
what?
What
are
we
looking
at.
N
Yeah
thanks
for
that
question,
certainly
I
do
think.
The
faa's
perspective
on
this
is
is
important
in
that
you
know
they
are
the
they're,
the
sort
of
gatekeeping
body
and
and
they
regulate.
We.
N
We
also
do
have
expertise
in
this
area
from
outside
Council
and-
and
you
know,
we
we
of
course
consult
with
them
and
ultimately
I
think
this
is
a
you
know.
We
need
to
get
a
lot
more
information,
but
I
think
it
may
be
a
decision
about
how
how
much
what
is
what
is
the
appetite
for
litigation,
because
that
I
think
that
that
may
be?
N
You
know
among
the
paths
forward
and
Lucas
Markley
from
my
office
who's,
an
assistant
City
attorney,
is
here:
Lucas
I
would
invite
you
to
join
the
conversation.
If
you
have
anything
additional
to
add.
K
At
the
airport
on
their
day-to-day
matters,
but
it
is
hard
to
put
a
sort
of
a
yes
or
a
no
answer
on
it.
I
know
it
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
do
that,
but,
as
Teresa
was
alluding
to,
it
is
more
of
an
appetite
for
litigation
and
maybe
getting
an
understanding
of
how
long
it
would
take
and
how
much
would
it
cost
not
just
an
attorney's
fees
and
things
like
that,
but
you
know
they're
having
questions
about
what?
K
How
much
money
are
we
looking
at
in
terms
of
paying
back
the
FAA
if
it
comes
if
it
is
approved
or
we
we
Outlast
our
grant
obligations
so
that
there
is
ultimately
probably
more
of
a
cost
benefit
and
risk
analysis
situation
rather
than
a
yes,
we
can
do
it
and
we'll
win
or
no.
We
can't
do
it
and
we
we
can't.
P
Yeah
I
understood
on
that
and
I
guess
part
of
what
is
you
know,
maybe
maybe
we
haven't
discussed
before
was
sort
of
the
second
box
that
that
Bob
was
talking
about,
which
is
there.
There's
there's
this
column,
that
that
is
that
there
will
be
no
conclusion
to
a
grant
obligation
if
I'm
understanding,
Natalie
and
Natalie's
point.
So
that
seems
like
something
that
you
have
to
have
an
end
point
on
to
carry
on
with
this
conversation
and
and
I'm
unclear
on
where
to
go
with
it.
W
Yeah
and
I
think
that
you
know
I'll
just
add
that
that
takes
often
times
that
takes
litigation
in
many
years
and
and
dollars
spent
to
even
get
to
that
answer,
and
so
you
know
we
John
has
a
lot
of
experience
working
in
communities
that
have
tried
to
go
down
a
closure,
a
path
to
closure,
we've
spoken
to
other
communities
about
their
experience
and
attempts
or
where
they
are
now
on
that
path
and
no
I.
You
know
I
said
no.
W
Two
cases
are
the
same,
like
that's
the
challenge
and
trying
to
kind
of
take
a
guess
of
what
this
is
going
to
look
like
or
what
it
could
look
like.
So
I
think
even
to
get
to
that
answer
around
just
the
the
land
question
and
is:
is
that
in
perpetuity
or
not?
Do
we
agree
on
that,
like
that
would
be
potentially
be
a
litigation,
so.
B
Rachel
I
don't
know
we
will
miss
you,
though
nonetheless,
so
we
would
welcome
you
being
here
for
that
all
right,
next
up,
I
see
Juni
and
Mark.
Then
Tara.
U
U
U
Yeah,
that's
yeah,
also
I.
Think
Bob
already
asked
my
question
as
well,
but
I
just
wanted
to
go
back
and
just
maybe
talk
about
it.
A
little
bit
more
about
the
the
airspace
and
I
was
looking
at
page
15,
which
is
scenario
number
four,
where
you
know,
which
is
decommission
and
create
new
neighborhoods
But.
Ultimately,
on
page
23,
if
air
space
in
the
land
are
like
two
separate
issues
really
and
I
think
it
was
mentioned
earlier,
that
closing
the
airport
doesn't
really
based
on
what
I'm
hearing
it
doesn't
really
Abate
the
noise.
U
Actually,
it
might
even
exacerbate
it,
which
to
me
is
like
wow,
that's
shocking
to
hear,
but
that's
what
I
heard
earlier
from
from
the
conversation
between
Bob
and
and
Kenny
yeah,
and
also
there
was
a
I,
was
looking
at
the
slide
where
you
were
talking
about
the
health
and
environmental
impact
and
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
I
did
work
on
the
bill
last
year,
which
is
House,
Bill,
1272
and
I
think
it
might
be
good
to
follow
up
with
the
Colorado
Energy
Office
to
find
out
more
about
sustainable
aviation
fuel,
because
you
were
talking
about
established
timeline
for
discontinued
use
of
Let,
It
fuel,
but
I
think
sustainable
aviation
fuel
is
also
part
of
that
conversation
in
order
to
reduce
greenhouse
gas
emission
for
decarbonization.
L
Thank
you,
Juni.
Let's
see,
Mark
Ventura.
S
Yeah
my
my
first
question
was
involves
these
allegedly
infinite
covenants
that
never
expire.
But
is
it
not
true
that
we
have
received
legal
advice
to
the
contrary,
with
respect
to
those
covenants
that
they
are
not
Eternal
and
in
fact
many
of
them
have
expired?.
N
So
respectfully
Council
mayor
Pro,
tem
Wallach
I
I'd.
Rather
we
not
discuss
confidential
legal
advice.
S
Then
I
would
I
would
respectfully
ask
that
the
community
be
given
the
information
they
need
to
make
an
app.
An
actual
decision
on
this
and
I
have
asked
for
the
staff
to
tell
us
exactly
what
it
would
cost
us
to
pay
back
the
FAA
with
respect
to
the
the
grants
that
we
entered
into
for
acquisition
of
land,
and
it
is
certainly
unfair
to
represent
that
there's
a
state
of
facts
out
there
that
may
not
be
supported
legally.
S
So,
if
you're
not
going
to
release
information
that
the
community
needs
and
ask
you
not
to
opine
on
the
the
Perpetual
nature
of
Grants
and
I
will
also
with
respect
to
this
I
I.
Don't
know
if
you're
familiar
with
FAA
order,
51
90.6
B,
which
describes
that
if
an
airport
is
released
early
from
its
obligations,
the
Improvement
Grants
have
to
be
paid
back
on
a
pro
rata
basis.
The
clear
implication
of
this
is
that
there's
a
process
for
early
closure.
S
The
fact
that
the
FAA
has
said
you
know
never
no
way
is
highly
predictable,
and
not
this
positive
to
me
so
I
I
am
suggesting
to
my
esteemed
corporate
Council
that
you
can't
simply
keep
this
kind
of
information
from
the
community
and
then
go
on
and
say,
but
look
we
can't
do
this
I
am
suggesting
without
going
into
specifics
that,
yes,
we
can
and
that
we
should
make
that
Community
decision
as
to
what
we
think
is
the
appropriate
use
of
that
land
in
light
of
full
information,
not
in
light
of
doctored
information.
S
S
Correct,
okay,
and
with
respect
to
the
phasing
out
of
leaded
fuel,
that
too
is
entirely
voluntary
on
the
part
of
plane
owners
and
in
fact,
if
you
read
my
hotline
of
a
couple
of
days
ago
recently,
the
FAA
wrote
a
letter
to
the
mayor
of
superior
telling
him.
He
doesn't
have
the
authority
to
get
rid
of
leaded
fuel.
Am
I
not
correct
there
as
well
correct.
S
And
I
will
I
be
correcting
saying
we
cannot
make
any
in
the
impact
on
the
key
environmental
issues
with
respect
to
the
airport.
We
can
request,
we
can
beg
the
pilots,
but
we
we
have
no
capacity
to
enforce
whatever
it
is.
We
would
like
to
enforce
and
am
I
wrong
there
or
correct
well.
X
I
would
I
would
frame
it
a
little
bit
differently.
You
raise
two
specific
questions:
one
noise
and
the
second,
the
unleaded
fuel.
There
actually
is
some
incredible
opportunities
for
for
the
city
of
Boulder
to
acquire,
lead
and
fuel
much
sooner
than
I.
Think
anyone
anticipated
it
requires
a
separate
infrastructure
from
our
existing
fuel
type
system,
as
well
as
a
fuel
truck
for
dispensing
directly
into
aircraft.
X
But
in
direct
conversations
that
I've
had
with
our
fuel
provider,
they
are
ready
to
provide
unleaded
fuel
to
Boulder
airport
if
the
infrastructure
was
in
place,
so
that
would
likely
take
an
RFP
process
to
put
out
to
see
who
would
like
to
we've
had
about
three
or
four
individuals
approaches
saying
they
would
like
to
provide
this
service,
including
our
existing
FBO
to
the
community.
The
this
fuel
provider
here
is
airserv,
apps,
AB
fuel.
Excuse
me
different
industry,
app
Fuel
and
you
could
go
to
their
website.
X
They
have
a
tremendous
amount
of
information
about
what's
available,
but
Centennial
Airport
just
started
providing
this
fuel
they're
doing
about
ten
thousand
gallons
a
month.
The
supplier
has
shared
with
us
that
they
could
provide
us
about
9,
000
gallons
every
60
days,
which
is
more
than
we
consume
now.
So
that's
good
news
that
there
is
an
opportunity
to
make
something
happen
there
sooner
than
later,
the
second
component
with
noise,
like
you
just
never,
you
never
solve.
As
you
probably
already
know,
noise
issues
at
airports.
X
It
is
a
Perpetual
management
issue
and
you
get
together
with
the
community
and
the
pilots,
and
this
has
been
a
process
that
a
lot
of
folks
described
as
being
paid
for
for
the
community
as
well
as
the
pilots,
because
it
is
so
emotionally
charged
as
nearly
framed
up
for
us
from
the
get-go
in
your
most
effective
tool
at
any
airport.
I've
ever
been
associated
with
since
for
41
years
is
get
two
sides
together.
Have
them
understand
one
another's
perspective?
X
We
formed
a
technical
noise
committee
here
at
the
airport,
and
just
yesterday
they
were
sharing
with
me
of
the
30
recommendations
that
they're
talking
about
one
of
those
is
to
not
do
more
than
three
touch
and
goes
after
5
PM
completely
voluntary.
On
the
Pilot's
perspective,
to
try
to
be
good
neighbors
unless
it's
absolutely
necessary
for
a
particular
certification,
so
I
I
think
people
are
getting
very
aware
of
the
need
to
play
nice
together
in
the
sandbox
to
understand
one
another's
perspectives.
X
We
got
a
long
way
to
go,
but
I
think
that
was
a
big
step
and
that's
just
one
of
30
of
the
recommendations
that
they're
proposing
so
I
think
there
is
I
think
there
is
more
of
a
optimistic
view
on
some
of
these
things.
But
it's
been
developing
because
of
this
process.
Four
months
ago,
I
would
have
agreed
with
you.
S
B
I'm
gonna
I
need
to
step
in
Mark
I
I
were
we're
approaching
on
some,
perhaps
inappropriate
territory.
With
with
ask
your
City
attorney
to
divulge
confidential
legal
advice,
while
also
then
chiding
her
for
not
doing
it.
R
B
Am
we're
pushing
that
a
bit
and
and
I'm
feeling
I
I'm
feeling
uncomfortable
that
we're
broached
that
territory
and
and
I
think
that
we
need
to
probably
end
that
line
of
inquiry?
That's
not
a
fair
accusation
to
make,
without
prop
evidence
of
our
city,
attorney's
office
and
so
I.
B
Just
I
I
would
like
us
to
to
move
on
to
a
different
line
of
inquiry,
but
to
even
a
slightly
insinuate
that
there's
some
sort
of
Nefarious
or
deliberate
act
to
hide
information
from
the
community
I
think
is
a
very,
very
risky
move,
so
I
just
I
I,
just
I
know
this
is
a
this
is
a
I
know.
You
care
a
lot
about
this
issue.
I
just
want
us
to
not
be
pointing
our
frustration
with
outcomes
on
staff.
If
you
could
please
and.
S
I
appreciate
your
perspective
Matt,
but
there
is
also
non
confidential
information
that
I've
requested
be
disclosed
I'm,
not
asking
for
information
on
legal
strategies
or
anything
of
the
kind,
but
there
is
information
contained
therein
that
I
think
it's
important
for
people
to
know
and
I
want
to
understand
and
I'm
prepared
to
understand
why
that
information
continues
to
be
under
relevant.
As
I
said
in
my
hotline
the
FAA
knows
the
answer.
Staff
knows
the
answer.
Council
knows
the
answer.
The
only
people
who
don't
know
the
answer
is
the
community.
S
I
I
just
don't
see
that
as
a
productive
and
appropriate
approach
to
take
with
respect
to
the
community,
that's
considering
not
deciding,
but
considering
various
approaches
to
this
property
and
and
when
my
colleague
Bob's
is
speaking
about
covenants
that
endure
eternally
I
want
to
understand.
If
that
is
in
fact
the
case.
P
P
We'll
say
that
I've
I've
been
cc'd
on
a
lot
of
Mark's
requests
to
staff
going
back.
You
know,
I,
think
to
your
previous
city
manager
or
previous
Transportation
director
and
I
do
empathize
with
the
frustration
that
that
I
think
Mark
has
been
trying
to
get
some
some
information
daylighted
for
quite
a
few
years
so
and
and
I
think
it
does
tie
into
my
question
like.
Where
do
we
go
from
here?
P
If
we,
you
know,
we,
including
the
public
who
are
working
hard
and
some
are
very
invested
in
in
moving
forward
in
One,
Direction
or
the
other.
That
includes
again,
like
I,
think
people
who
want
the
airport
to
stay
with
with,
like
some.
You
know,
confidence
in
that
and
then
people
who
would
like
to
repurpose.
It
would
like
to
to
move
forward
with
that.
P
So
just
I
don't
know
what
what
what
can
be
further
disclosed,
but
I
think
we
need
to
to
get
as
much
information
out
there
into
the
public
realm
as
we
can,
so
that
we
can,
as
a
community
move
forward
on
this.
So
I
think
you
know
just
maybe
gently
plus
wanting
the
the.
What
I
think
is
the
intent
of
that
like
so
that
we
all
have
the
same
facts
that
we're
operating
from
and
and
I.
P
Think
probably,
facts
are
going
to
be
subject
to
interpretation,
but
just
wanted
to
add
that
in
thanks.
N
So
I
I'm
happy
to
speak
to
this
a
bit,
which
is
to
say
that
we
are
giving
you
information
as
we
learn
it.
Our
transportation
and
Mobility
director
and
I
collaborated
to
figure
out
what
from
the
advice,
we
could
tease
out
that
wasn't
legal
advice,
but
was
factual
information
to
share,
and
so
you
know
we're
doing
our
best
to
share
information.
I'm
loath
to
share
litigation
strategy
in
a
public
sphere,
and
you
know
I
would
in
order
to
do
that.
Council
would
need
to
waive
the
privilege.
N
Council
holds
the
privilege
my
office
does
not
I
do
not
have
the
authority
to
release
confidential
legal
advice.
You
all
have
the
authority
to
waive
that
privilege
so
that
that
information
could
be
released.
If
we
were
looking
at
that,
I
would
welcome
the
opportunity
to
have
a
conversation
with
you
about
the
pros
and
cons
of
doing
something
like
that.
S
And
by
the
way,
Teresa
I'm,
not
asking
for
the
for
the
release
of
litigation
strategies
or
the
sort
of
thing
that
is
generally
withheld
I
was
simply
asking
for
factual
information
that
we
both
know
is
contained
in
a
memorandum
and
that
I
believe
the
community
has
a
right
to
know
and
I've
requested
that
release
on
several
occasions
and
have
never
really
gotten
a
response
and
it's
time
to
Daylight
just
the
facts,
not
not
the
strategies,
not
that
which
would
normally
be
considered
confidential.
Just
the
facts.
W
Yeah
and
and
I
think
you
know
we
as
I
said
we
will
follow
up
with
more
information.
We,
you
know
frankly,
just
needed
to
do
a
little
bit
more
homework
around
some
of
the
costs
and
and
we
can
share
more
about
just
the
purchased
land
and
the
differentiating
piece
between
the
grants
that
were
used
prior
to
a
certain
date
versus
some
of
the
grants
used
more
recently
for
the
construction
easement.
So
we
can
provide
some
of
that
just
factual
information
and
some
follow-up.
B
For
that
response,
and
that
in
that
clarification,
appreciate
that
and
thanks
Teresa
for
for
responding
to
that
with
regards
to
those
constraints
and
clarifying
privilege,
I
think
that
was
very
helpful
for
all
of
us
to
hear
and
the
community
as
a
whole
about
their
expectations
on
information
that
as
much
as
we
are
a
public
and
represent
them.
There
are
certain
things
that
that
we
need
to
maintain
in
order
to
protect
the
community
as
a
whole.
So
I
appreciate
that
Tara
then
Nicole.
Q
Okay,
first
of
all,
everything
I'm
going
to
ask
is
an
actual
question.
I
know.
Sometimes
they
ask
questions
just
to
make
a
point:
that's
not
now
so
nobody
get
offended.
Okay,
I
said
it
thanks
for
appreciating
that
Nicole
all
right
question
number
one
Juni
asked
a
question
about
the
community
and
you
said
I
think
Natalie.
You
said
that
or
could
have
been
Natalie
or
somebody
else
yeah
the
I
think
it
was
someone
else.
Q
Actually
who
cares
you'll
tell
me,
who
is
the
community
exactly
that
you're
referring
to
do
you
talking
about
the
the
working
group
Community
or
the
giant
Community,
all
of
Boulder,
which
Community
said
that
they
don't
want
to
close
the
airport.
V
I
can
answer
that
one
yeah
I
believe
what
Genie
was
referencing
was
in
the
memo.
I
think
you
shared
I'll,
look
back
at
the
pager
reference.
I.
Think
you
shared
on
page
13
is
what
you
were
referencing,
so
that's
the
engagement
that
has
occurred
thus
far
at
the
open
house
number
two,
the
community
working
group
and
the
questionnaire
number
two
so.
Q
V
It's
a
good
question.
We
do
have
some
of
that
information
for
the
questionnaire,
because
we
do
ask
that
question.
We
don't
have
that
information
at
the
open
house,
because
we
don't
ask
that
information
at
the
open
house.
So
so
it
can
be
partially
answered.
Q
V
Q
Fine,
that's
fine,
okay.
So
the
next
question
is
is
when
you
say
that
Vista
Village
in
San,
Lazaro
communities
thought
there
was
noise.
Do
you
did
you
go
door
to
door?
How
did
you
find
out
that
information
and
how
much
noise,
how
many
people
felt
it
was
too
noisy?
It
would
be
good
if
we
could
have
more
details,
so
we
know
how
it
affects
them.
Yeah.
V
Absolutely
that's
a
great
question.
We
actually
had
a
community
engagement
meeting
at
Vista
village,
this
past
Tuesday
night
a
couple
nights
ago,
so
we
had
another
touch
base
and
we've
had
over.
40
people
attend
the
three
meetings
we've
had
thus
far,
and
we
have
another
meeting
next
week.
I'd
say
a
large
majority
of
folks
have
shared
that
noise
is
a
significant
issue
for
them
there,
some
of
them
some
of
some
of
their
homes,
actually
have
older
windows
and
they
share
that
their
Windows
shake
from
especially
from
helicopters.
V
It
sounds
like
those
are
those
create
the
most
noise
nearby,
so
it
is.
It
is
a
significant
issue
that
I'd
say
of
the
folks
who
attended
the
community
meetings,
a
lot
of
them
Express
noises
and
as
a
major
issue.
Q
Okay,
next
question:
you
know
soaring
Skies:
do
you
know
how
many
runways
they
need
to
operate?
I
believe?
Are
they
the
one
quiet
user,
sorry
Skies
or
my
misunderstanding?
What
they
do.
X
I
effectively,
muted
myself,
apologies,
Tara,
I'm,
not
sure
who
that
is,
is
okay.
Q
F
Q
F
Q
Okay,
so
moving
on
from
soaring
whatever
your
second
name
is
no,
what
percentage
of
the
users
in
the
airport
are
from
Boulder
versus
outside
Boulder
by
users?
I
mean
Pilots.
Q
You
know
not
just
Pilots,
but
you
know
the
various
different
organizations,
the
eagle
this
Eagle,
the
scouts.
Do
you
know
how?
Many
of
because
we
have
a
lot
of
airports
in
the
series,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
necessary
this
report
is.
So
what
percentage
is
actually
from
the
city
of
Boulder?
We
got
a
lot
of
letters,
but
I
can't
I
couldn't
tell
how
many
of
them
were
from
the
city
of
Boulder.
X
Q
That's
good
last
question
I
think
I
have
is
actually
there's
one
more
so
if
AAA,
if
the
FAA
will
they
ever
be
able
to
do?
Do
you
think,
in
your
estimation,
since
noise
is
our
biggest
problem,
I
would
say
that
they
will
ever
help
us
in
this
lifetime
with
noise
abatement,
or
do
you
think
they
would
actually
be
a
partner
in
noise
abatement,
or
do
they
have
no
attention
to
do
that.
X
You
asking
my
professional
opinion:
yeah
I
I,
think
the
pendulum
over
the
last
20
years
has
continued
to
swing
towards
land.
Use
has
not
been
as
disciplined
as
it
could
have
been,
and
we're
continuing
to
create
the
conflict.
I'm
talking,
system-wide
and
I
think
as
legislation.
It
continues
more
frequently
to
be
proposed.
I
think
that
it's
headed
back
towards
local
municipalities
being
able
to
Institute
noise
or
flight
restrictions
on
airports,
but
I
I,
don't
think
it's
going
to
happen
in
the
next
two
years,
but
it's
definitely
maybe
momentum
national
scale.
Q
Okay,
all
right,
so
this
next
question
revolves
around
people
saying
well,
they
knew
they
were
moving
to
an
airport.
So
I've
heard
it
said
that
the
replacement
propellers
are
louder
than
the
original
ones
on
the
toe
planes,
and
that's
why
people
are
complaining
more
that
there's
more
noise
at
the
airport
than
ever.
Is
that
actually
true,
I.
X
Q
X
They
had
three
incidents
where
the
propellers
needed
to
be
changed
out
and
two
of
those
aircraft,
possibly
three
of
those
aircraft.
The
availability
of
those
quieter
four-bladed
prop
per
cup,
were
not
available,
and
so
they
put
on
three
bladed
prop,
but
it
is
discernably
noisier.
X
The
glider
operators
are
researching
the
ability
to
bring
in
different
aircraft
because
these
aircraft
are
getting
older,
they're
safe,
but
they
are
getting
older
and
that
might
be
one
to
two
years
out
where
they
get
some
new
technology
in
here.
But
that
is
not
a
an
imagination
of
the
noise
level
being
louder
the
last
year.
It
is
okay.
Q
X
So
option
4
would
virtually
eliminate
it
and
go
to
resiliency
in
terms
of
helicopters
responding
to
events.
Okay,.
X
Q
Okay,
I
just
want
to
say
a
quick
word
that
is
in
no
way
do
I.
Think
everybody
at
the
airport
isn't
great.
I
mean
I
met
a
lot
of
great
I've,
been
there
so
much
lately
and
I
met
a
lot
of
really
great
people.
These
are
just
honestly
questions
that
I
had
and
I
know.
A
lot
of
people
are
trying
really
hard
to
to
do
something
about
the
noise
and
I
want
to
acknowledge
all
those
people
that
are
trying
to
do
something.
So
these
are
just
questions
with
no
emotion.
L
Thank
you,
Tara
I'm
Nicole
and
then,
if
no
one
else
wants
a
crackle,
I'll
I'll
I
got
a
couple.
Questions
awesome.
M
Thank
you.
I
got
a
bunch
of
questions.
Sorry,
so,
with
regard
to
you
know,
thinking
about
the
airspace
and
kind
of
keeping
control
of
the
airspace.
If
we
were,
if
there
were
a
helicopter
pad
there,
would
that
still
keep
control
over
the
airspace
or
do
we
enter
into
the
same
same
issues?
There.
F
X
M
Basically,
so
what
I
heard
initially
right
is
that,
if
we
went
with
scenario,
four
we
may
lose,
control
of
the
airspace
and
I
was
wondering
if
there
were
still
a
helicopter.
If
a
helicopter
were
there,
would
we
still
lose
control
of
the
airspace.
X
Well,
very
likely
the
air
traffic
control
tower
located
at
Rocky
Mountain
Airport
would
be
either
controlling
entity
of
that
airspace,
so
they
would
just
sequence
in
those
helicopters
as
needed
like
they
would
day
to
day
the
Ebbs
and
flow
of
volumes.
M
Okay,
so
it
sounds
like
we
would
you're
saying
that
we
would
still
not
have
control
of
the
airspace,
even
if
there
were
a
helicopter
there.
M
F
X
M
And
then,
as
far
as
they
were
talking
about,
you
know,
there's
still
be
noise.
Potentially
it
feels
like
it
would
be
a
different
type
of
noise.
I
know
in
my
house,
if
there's
a
jet
from
DIA
flying
over
that's
a
very
different
type
of
noise
than
if
it's
a
small
plane,
that's
flying
over
and
I
just
kind
of
wanted
to
be
clear
about
what
what
type
of
noise
are
we
talking
about
would
change
their
under
a
scenario
for.
X
Well,
it's
very
hypothetical
right
but
guest
estimation
that
I
can
give
to
usually
will
be
a
combination
of
training
flights
and
jet
traffic
coming
into
and
out
of
the
airport.
So
you
know
you
really
have
three
types
of
operations,
two
of
them
Jets
and
training
as
we're
talking
about,
and
then
you
have
the
touch
and
goes
which
are
just
the
repetitive
ones:
I,
don't
think
you'd
see
the
repetitive
ones,
but
you
would
see
the
two
and
froms
flying
over
Boulder
without
a
doubt.
M
Awesome
and
then,
just
speaking
to
some
of
the
engagement,
that's
been
done,
I
think
Tara
Tara
touched
on
this
a
little
bit
too.
It
really
does
seem
like
it's
been
about
disproportionate
in
terms
of
people
who
are
connected
to
the
airport.
Somebody
wrote
us
about
doing
kind
of
statistically
valid
survey
of
the
community
to
get
some
feedback.
M
Is
that
anything
that's
an
option,
particularly
if
we,
as
we
were
talking,
you
know
if
there
were
some
information
that
Council
were
willing
to
release
to
the
community
so
that
we
could
provide
some
education
and
then
just
try
to
get
an
understanding
of
of
what
it
is.
The
community
is
interested
in.
V
I'll
start
with
that
and
I'll,
let
Natalie
add
anything
so
the
way
the
process
was
designed
is
how
we,
we
typically
design
a
lot
of
our
planning
and
visioning
processes
if
they
impact
a
certain
area.
So,
for
example,
with
the
East
Boulder
sub
community
plan,
you
over
sample
the
folks
who
are
most
impacted
by
a
project
or
the
North
Broadway
reconstruction
project,
so
so
this
was
very
in
line
with
that
practice
of
connecting
with
folks
neighbors
HOAs,
who
are
most
impacted
by
this.
V
You
know,
for
example,
with
open
house
number
one
we
sent
out
13
000
postcards.
We
didn't
send
out
108
000
postcards
to
every
resident
in
the
city
of
Boulder.
We
looked
at.
You
know
areas
around
the
city
who
are
most
impacted
by
those
flights.
So
that's
how
the
process
was
designed.
V
You
know
like
I
was
like
I
was
sharing
with
Tara
that
you
know,
Community
engagement
is,
is
not
statistically
significant,
so
and-
and
that
is
how
we
design
this
process
in
line
with
how
the
city
of
Boulder
does
it.
So
it
would
be
really
an
adjustment
in
that
process,
but
I'll,
let
I'll
let
Natalie
speak
to.
W
M
Well,
thank
you
I
appreciate
that
it's
you
know
it
is
I
understand
that
there
you
know
our
folks
around
in
the
immediate
vicinity,
the
people
who
are
using
the
airport
and,
as
we
start
thinking
about
something
like
scenario,
four,
the
impact
becomes
much
broader
than
just
the
people
who
are
living
in
the
immediate
vicinity.
Right
then,
it
expands
to
kind
of
a
broader
portion
of
the
community,
including
workers,
students
that
that
sort
of
thing
as
well
so
anyway,
so
I.
That
is
something
that
I
I've
I.
M
At
least
I'm
interested
in
can't
speak
for
my
seven
colleagues
who
are
here
and
then
I,
I,
guess
kind
of
a
related
question.
What
would
it
take
to
develop
a
housing
study
I
mean
that
it
feels
like
that's
sort
of
a
big
elephant
in
the
room
that
some
of
us
would
like
to
have
as
we're
considering
this
this
question,
you
know
that
you
have
about
coming
back
in
early
2024.
That
feels
like
a
big
part
of
what
would
be
of
interest,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
is
that
in
the
realm
of
possibility?
W
Don't
know
well
so
Brad
Brad
is
here
from
pnds.
His
team
has
he.
He
said
that
I
could
call
him
out
here,
because
his
team
has
been
instrumental
in
helping
us
with
this
project
and
and
they
definitely
have
contemplated
what
would
be
the
next
step
from
a
land
use
perspective
to
explore
related
to
scenario,
four
and
and
I'll
just
say.
W
Whatever
the
work
item
is,
it
would
be
significant
and
so
I
think
having
some
clarity
on
the
path
that
we're
headed
down
is
really
that
next
step,
and
then
we
could
think
about.
Okay,
what
are
those
other
work
plan
items
that
would
fall
after
that?
Because
there
would
be
I
think
it's
it's
beyond
just
a
housing
study
in
red.
You
can
that's
where
you
could
take
over
yeah.
Z
Thank
you,
Brad
Mueller,
director
of
planning
and
development
development
services.
Z
A
lot
depends
of
course,
decisions
and
discussion
after
tonight,
but
a
very
likely
tool
for
taking
next
steps
for
land
use
in
this
area,
especially
if
a
variety
of
land
uses
were
contemplated,
would
be
a
sub
community
plan
or
something
like
that.
We
wouldn't
want
to
go
and
do
it
with
any
presumptions
on
the
types
of
land
use
or
distribution
of
land
uses.
Z
That's
part
of
the
public
process
and
feedback
from
a
policy
standpoint,
more
refined.
That
really
comes
with
something
like
a
sub
community
plan
or
or
similar.
But
that's
that's
what
we
are
teed
up
to
do
if,
if
that
becomes
part
of
a
future
Council
priorities
and
part
of
the
overall
vision
and
work
plan
for
this
quadrant
of
the
city.
M
Great,
thank
you
and
I
think
one
other
thing
that
that
would
be
helpful
thinking
about
coming
back
in
early
2024
is
just
that
that
chart
with
the
different
scenarios
and
sort
of
showing
how
it
ties
into
some
of
the
city's
different
goals.
It'd
just
be
really
I
would
be
interested
in
kind
of
having
a
more
objective
kind
of
analysis
of
that.
That
kind
of
pulls
from
maybe
the
folks
in
the
working
group,
or
something
like
that.
M
Just
thinking
about
how
we're
how
we're
getting
to
that
chart
a
little
bit
more
clearly
because
I
think
that
is
still
just
a
little
just
a
little
confusing
if
there's
some
way
of
getting
ratings
or
something
out
of
that
I
think
it
might
be
helpful,
at
least
for
my
understanding
when
we
come
back
to
this
discussion
early
next
year
and
then
I
guess
Matt.
This
actually
may
be
a
question
for
you
as
facilitator.
M
B
I
would
certainly
maybe
ask
staff's
opinion
and
perhaps
also
our
City
attorney
on
on
that
front
if
they
feel
the
need
to
weigh
in
on
whether
we'd
be
picking
one
or
we
should
be
removing
some
options
for
further
refinement
to
consider
down
the
road.
So
I'm.
Okay
with
that,
if
we
want
to
spend
the
time
on
it,
but
I'll
defer
to
staff
and
maybe
Teresa
if
they
have
input
or
opinions
on
that.
W
Well,
I
can
start
and
Teresa.
If
you
have
more
to
add
we,
we
don't
need
that
tonight.
I
mean
I.
Think
we
really
wanted
to
get
a
sense
of
additional
information
at
this
point
that
you
would
be
needed.
We
we
really
do
need
that
at
the
beginning
of
2024,
because
there's
just
work
that
needs
to
be
done
as
Nuria
said
out
at
the
airport
and
we
kind
of
need
to
know
which
direction
we're
headed.
So
that's
not
necessary
tonight.
W
M
Rolling,
no,
it's
done
almost
done
I
one.
So
one
of
the
things
that
I
am
wondering
about
I
know
that
accepting
more
funds
from
the
FAA
is
kind
of
lengthening,
the
the
period
of
time
that
we
don't
maybe
have
a
lot
of
control
and
I'm.
M
What
I'm
wondering
is,
can
we
kind
of
decide
as
a
group
that,
while
we're
in
this
space
we're
not
going
to
commit
to
taking
any
new
funds
just
because
we're
sort
of
we're
in
a
place
where
we're
we
got
a
lot
of
questions
but
still
need
answered
so.
W
Well,
I
can
say
From
staff's
perspective.
We
haven't
accepted
an
additional
Grant
since
2021
as
I
think
we
mentioned
earlier,
and
we
do
that.
That
is
why
there's
some
urgency
to
getting
in
some
direction,
because
next
year
we
we
need
to
and
we
recognize
we
wanted
to
honor
this
process
and
so
accepting
grants
during
the
process
didn't
seem
like
the
right
thing
to
do,
but
but
we
do
need
to
do
that
start
doing
that
next
year.
So
that's
why
we're
looking
for
Direction.
M
Okay,
cool,
thank
you.
So
it
sounds
like
then.
We
won't
kind
of
go
in
a
step
of
taking
more
funds
until
we
would
have
a
council
conversation
about
it.
It's
all
right.
X
So
early
in
the
conversation
the
date
was
thrown
out
for
2021
was
the
last
time
that
we
accepted
a
federal
ground.
I
actually
found
just
yesterday
a
document
that
shows
in
early
22
a
covid
grant
was
accepted.
So
actually
it
was
19
years
left
on
the
20-year
amortization
schedule
that
you,
you
know
just
a
reminder,
we're
under
current
Grant
obligations
to
maintain
this
airport.
X
It's
rough
out
here
really
rough
and
I
I,
don't
know
if
this
is
over
out
of
my
bounds,
but
I
I
would
really
encourage
the
council
to
continue
to
accept
the
grants
that
have
a
sunset
clause
on
them
use
or
lose
because
there's
quite
a
bit
of
money
in
the
pipeline.
Right
now,
that's
been
in
limbo,
including
some
leases.
X
The
reason
is
that
we
could
not
bring
to
you
requests
for
longer
term
leases,
because
we
did
not
know
what
our
Capital
plan
was
going
to
be
what
the
feds
were
going
to
offer,
but
the
state
was
going
to
offer
and
what
the
true
condition
of
this
facility
is
now
that
we
have
that
Quantified.
We
were
very
interested
in
implementing
a
Capital
plan
for
next
year.
That
really
included
taking
care
of
the
roadway
systems
and
the
ramps
and
the
Pavements,
because
it
is,
it,
is
in
terrible
shape
out
here.
X
So
if
you're
asking
a
staff
perspective,
I
I
would
encourage
you
to
take
the
grants.
It
only
adds
one
year,
but
obviously
you
set
policy
staff
does
not.
P
And
can
I
calculate
on
that
from
the
2022
Grant
perspective
for
20
I
can't
remember
it
was
21
or
22,
but
there
were
some
22
well
I,
can't
remember,
which
one
but
I
think
councilmember
Wallach
and
I,
dug
into
something
that
was
in
the
the
general
budget
that
was
coming
from
I
think
some
covered
era,
stimulus
money
and
it
at
least
my
memory
of
it
is.
P
You
know
we
have
an
obligation
to
keep
up
those
runways
and
things
and
like
there
can
be
liability
if
we're
not
keeping
up
the
the
runways
to
the
degree
and
standards
that
they
need
to
be
so
I
would
not
be
comfortable,
saying
we're
not
taking
a
dollar
while
we're
working
through
this
portion
of
it,
because
I
don't
want
to
create
an
unsafe
situation
at
the
airport,
because
they're
waiting
on
Council
approval
like
I,
think
that
we're
not
extending
it
very
far
and
I,
don't
I,
don't
I,
don't
personally
have
like
the
expertise
in
airport
and
I
was
I
was
educated
at
that
time.
P
That
I
pushed
back
like
there's.
There's
really
good
reasons
that,
even
during
this
time
you
know
you're
not
extending
it
by
20
more
years,
you're,
just
extending
it
by
like
another
8
12
18
months
kind
of
thing.
So
I
think
there
are
strong
legal
liability
reasons
to
to
to
keep
up
what
we
are
obligated
to
keep
serving
for
20
years.
M
Just
along
those
lines
like
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
hearing
as
well
from
community
members,
is
that
one
of
the
runways
is
non-compliant
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
this
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
is
on
the
radar
for
being
addressed
or
you
know,
is
this
anything
kind
of
the
fa
is
overseeing.
X
Yeah,
it's
it's
somewhat
of
a
complicated
answer
in
that,
when
you
accept
federal
grants,
you
are
committing
to
design
those
areas
of
the
airport
to
all
the
standards
of
the
FAA.
Historically,
Boulder
has
done
so
on
the
main
Runway
Runway
826.,
just
as
gliders
has
evolved
over
periods
of
time,
they
decided.
You
know
we
could
operate
off
the
main
Runway
and
let
the
higher
speed
aircraft
do
their
things
with
landing
and
takeoffs,
and
we
could
start
Landing
in
the
grass
area
over
here
and
I'm
talking.
This
is
probably
30
years
ago.
X
It
might
even
be
longer
period
of
time,
so
the
FAA
allowed
that
to
take
place.
They
have
not
so
much
approved
the
design
of
that
air
of
that
grass
strip
because
it
does
not
meet
any
FAA
design
standards,
but
they've
approved
it
to
take
place,
and
since
that
time
we've
put
together
some
operational
procedures,
we're
gaining
momentum
with
that
there
was
a
part
13
complaint
regarding
that
it
just
came
out
today.
X
Favorable
for
the
city
of
the
airport,
sponsor
has
the
ability
to
create
operational
procedures,
so
we'll
consider
consider
continue
to
work
with
the
users
to
address
some
of
these
issues,
and
most
people
are
getting
on
board
with
them.
They're,
not
his
owner
onerous
as
I
think
people
saw,
but
there's
still
some
work
to
be
done,
but
that's
kind
of
a
detailed
answer,
but
there's
a
lot
of
variables
in
play
there.
But
there
are
some
issues
to
to
address
over
there
to
to
up
the
game
of
safety.
From
staff's
perspective.
B
B
All
right,
so
a
lot
of
good
questions
have
been
asked,
we'll
get
to
comments
here
in
just
a
quick.
Second,
the
only
question
I
have
and
I'm
gonna
apologize.
Bob
may
have
asked
this,
but
I
was
writing
down
info
on
his
question
before
that.
So
if
you
did
stop
me
Bob,
it's
really
a
question,
perhaps
for
John
or
Natalie,
with
his
with
regards
to
you
know
what
criteria
does
the
FAA
use
to
determine
if
it
will
support
an
airport
closure.
W
X
It's
two
things:
the
the
FAA
First
one
of
the
first
steps
is,
you
need
to
prove
to
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
that
civil
aviation
will
benefit
from
the
closure
of
your
Airport,
and
the
challenge
is:
what
do
you
do
with
200
base
aircraft
and
the
333
aircraft
waiting
to
come
to
Boulder
airport?
X
X
B
Sure
it's
a
fair
assumption.
The
answer
might
be
no
to
that,
given
what
we
know
about
the
airport
and
its
impact
and
then
sort
of
along
those
lines
and
was
there
and
then
there's
their
other
criteria.
X
You
know
I
if
you
get
through
step
one
and
step
two
and
step
three
and
as
Natalie
eloquently
put
in
that
question
and
answer
every
airport
is
completely
different,
so
everyone
always
says
Santa,
Monica,
Airport,
well,
Santa
Monica
Airport
was
transfer
of
land
from
another
Federal
agency.
So
it's
a
different
set
of
circumstances
and
it
truly.
B
No,
no
worries
no
and
I'm
glad
you
mentioned
Santa
Monica
Airport,
that's
actually
where
I
learned
to
fly,
that
was
my
home
airport
and
the
airport.
My
father
learned
to
fly
as
well,
so
I
know
that
place
well.
I
know
their
story.
They
are
the
most
the
highest
traffic
municipal
airport
in
the
country,
I
think
they
still
are
and
well
so
and
the
reason
I
asked
that
is
it's
from
what
I've
known
and
actually
I've
actually
reached
out
to
a
few
airports.
B
I've
flown
into
over
the
years
and
I
still
know
folks
there,
where
there's
actually
been
this
conversation
and
and
I've
sort
of
asked
them.
You
know
with
regards
to
that
context
and
Mark
pointed
out
the
sort
of
like
oh
there's,
a
path
to
closure,
and-
and
there
certainly
is-
and
they
always
said
that
it
was
always
within
the
context
that
that
path
was
there.
Should
you
be
meeting
those
criteria
that
that
triggers
then
a
legal
path
and
we
might
be
getting
into
illegal
stuff
and
I
don't
want
to?
B
But
but
it
seems
like
all
of
that
is
contained
and
I
guess
I'm
asking
is
within
the
purview
of
of
really
we
all
the
FAA
release
you
from
their
clutches
is
really
the
question
and
so
I
I.
If,
if
you
can
answer
that
fine,
but
that's
sort
of
why
I
ask
the
question,
because
that
seems
to
be
where,
where
I've
sensed
things
are,
that
that's
the
linchpin
here
is
what
the
FAA
wants
to
allow
and,
and
everything
else
comes
from,
that.
W
B
Awesome,
thank
you.
Natalie
I
see
we're
ready
to
move
to
some
comments.
I,
I
and
I
think
we're
sort
of
moving
we're
moving
in
a
good
direction.
We're
still
going
real
along
in
the
teeth
here
on
timing,
but
it's
a
helpful
discussion
for
ourselves
and
Community.
So,
let's
jump
into
comments.
Let's
mark
you've
got
another
question.
S
Actually,
just
just
two
quick
questions:
I
I,
do
you
know
how
Reed
Hillman
Justified
its
closure
in
terms
of
enhancing
you
know
the
growth
of
whatever
that
standard
is
Aviation.
W
Okay,
so
so
from
what
I
understand
in
an
initial
conversation
with
them
is-
and
this
is-
this
is
just
very
fresh
information
that
I
received
this
week,
so
they
haven't
actually
had
that
com
that
conversation
around.
W
Do
you
accept
our
our
request
for
closure,
because
they're
actually
pursuing
just
running
out
the
clock
on
their
grants
so
and
that's
why
I
was
making
that
clarifying
point
that
Matt
was
making?
Is
that
the
criteria
to
go
and
ask
them,
for
you
know,
would
they
be
open
to
this?
Does
it
benefit
Aviation,
or
is
it
no
longer
serving
the
purpose?
W
That
is
when
your
Grant
insurance
is
certain
play
from
what
I
understand
and
John
can
certainly
weigh
in
here
too,
is
that
and
read
hillview's
case
their
not
taking
that
approach
they're
not
going
and
asking
for
do
you
accept
our
request
for
closure
they're
instead,
just
running
down
the
clock
on
their
on
their
Grant
assurances
and
they've
been
doing
that
for
a
long
time
they
have
until
2031
they
have
2031
is
when
they're
done
and
they're
just
in
a
different
situation,
because
they
didn't
use
grants
to
purchase
land.
W
So
it's
not
a
you
know,
Apples
to
Apples.
Well,.
S
S
X
If,
if
history
is
any
indicator
for
us,
we've
accepted
approximately
12
million
dollars
in
the
last
20
years
to
maintain
the
airport,
we
probably
should
have
used
about
another
3
million
to
to
get
it
up
to
what
I
consider
standards
so
say:
15
million
dollars.
So
if
you
needed
15
million
dollars
during
that
period
of
time,
you
would
require
over
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
a
year
to
of
additional
revenues.
X
If
the
airport's
total
revenues,
which
they
are
approximately
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
a
year,
it's
almost
a
doubling.
What
makes
that
challenging
is
the
majority
of
your
revenues
come
from
leases
that
have
durations
to
them,
they're
fixed
until
2028?
So
you
don't
really
have
the
ability
to
capture
that
market
to
help
close
that
gap,
which
supports
more
of
a
smaller
population
at
the
tip
of
the
sphere
of
raising
fees
to
meet
that
Gap.
X
So
either
we
do
additional
developments
to
bring
in
additional
revenues
or
receive
general
fund
subsidies
to
to
address
that
Gap.
W
S
B
Well,
the
answer
is
my
comments.
I'm
going
to
turn
that
back
to
to
my
colleagues,
you
guys
have
some
comments
and
keeping
in
mind
we've
pretty
much
answered.
The
first
question,
which
was
you
know,
questions
about
Community
input,
Community
feedback,
informing
scenarios
we
those
are
those
have
been
asked
and
Natalie
I,
just
want
to
check
before
we
get
into
comments.
Do
you
feel
good
about
what
you've
gotten
with
regards
to
question?
One.
B
And
yeah
I
think
yeah.
That's
where
I
was
gonna,
go
I,
think
we've
already
kind
of
gotten
most
of
the
way
to
question
two,
if
not
all
the
way,
what
I
want
to
sort
of
pose
and-
and
you
know,
I
appreciate
Nicole
for
bringing
this
up.
We
have
four
scenarios
in
front
of
us
and
there's
been
sort
of
information
shared
and,
and
it's
and
in
many
ways
we've
had
information,
shared
and
re-shared
and
then
reaffirmed,
and
so
the
question
is
are
are:
is
that?
Is
there
some
information?
B
That's
sufficient,
for
you
know
a
majority
of
us
to
start
to
maybe
trim
these
down
and
I,
don't
know
which
they
are
I'm.
Just
asking
that
that
is
a
question,
because
again,
if
there's
fewer
options
for
staff
to
continue
to
work
on,
we
always
we.
We
totally
understand
the
benefits
that
that
creates.
So
if
your
comments
can
frame
that
as
well
awesome
but
I
see
Aaron
with
his
hand
up
so
go
for
it.
T
Yeah
man
I
mean,
if
you
don't
mind,
I,
just
I,
heard
from
Natalie
earlier
that
that
you
know
they're
not
looking
for,
like
necessarily
narrowing
them.
If
that's
what
they're
coming
back
in
January
I'm,
just
a
little
worried
with
the
lateness
of
the
hour
that
if
we
get
deep
into
analysis
of
this
scenario,
we'll
tackle
on
another
45
minutes
or
something
I
concerned,
yeah.
B
Now
a
fair,
fair
point
of
timing,
I
I,
see
Bob
is
that
on.
Is
that
on
this
sort
of
point
that
Aaron
brought
up.
G
It
is
I
agree
with
Aaron
I
I'm
not
prepared.
We
were
not
asked
to
and
I'm
not
prepared
to
start
voting
on
or
eliminating
scenarios.
I
think
all
staff
asked
us
is:
do
you?
What
more
information
do
you
need
for
us
to
come
back
with
with
a
decision
Point
early
next
year,
and
so
I
think
that's
when
we
was
on
Council
early
next
year
starts
to
weigh
in
on
the
scenarios,
maybe
eliminating
them.
G
B
I
am
but
that
that's
okay,
that's
just
me
all
right.
Nonetheless,
I
see
comments
so
have
at
comments
and
we'll
be
brief
and
we'll
release
John,
Allison
and
Natalie
and
move
on
to
our
third
thing
and
I
still
gotta
text
Lauren
to
let
her
know
to
come
back.
H
M
Awesome.
Thank
you
thanks
staff
for
this.
This
discussion
as
well
I
know
it's
been
a
long
one
I
would
like
I
would
really
like
to
advocate
for
us
to
do
some
education
of
the
community
to
think
about
what
what
information
can
we
give
to
the
community
that
is
more
than
we're
giving
now,
but
still
within
the
realm
of
kind
of
legal
possibility.
M
M
As
quick
as
we
move
anyway
on
what
the
community
is,
thinking
I
really
like
the
idea
of
a
financial
analysis
that
mayor
Pro,
tem
walek,
mentioned
I,
think
that
would
be
a
good
idea
and
I
kind
of
also
Keen
prepared
already
having
a
leaning
and
for
for
me
I'm,
very
intrigued
by
scenario
four,
so
just
out
there.
Thank
you.
L
Thank
you,
Nicole
Rachel,
you're
up.
P
Thanks
and
thanks
for
the
discussion,
it's
it's
been
a
long
time
coming
so
I'm
grateful
for
it.
I
guess
where
I'm
at,
which
is
a
little
different
than
where
I
thought
I
would
be
tonight,
is
I
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
how
much
we
spent
on
engagement,
but
I
heard
a
figure
and
it
was
not
an
insignificant
amount.
P
P
I,
don't
think
that's
the
final
answer,
though,
and
so
I
I
need
us
to
go
to
what
is
the
stage
after
that
before
we
spend
money
on
housing,
you
know
what
does
the
community
want,
because
if
we
get
the
community
all
hopped
up,
I'm
like
oh,
my
God
we're
going
to
get
this
great
housing
at
the
airport
and
we
can't
get
there
I
think
that
has
wasted
a
lot
of
time
and
money
and
I'm
not
and
a
lot
of
Staff
energy,
so
I'm
worried
about
the
community
members
who
are
you
know,
excited
or
on
the
other
side,
like
scared
of
what
might
happen
and
and
I
think
we
know
now
that
there
is
interest
in
this.
P
So
let's,
let's
do
the
next
phase
of
Is
it
feasible.
So
if
that's
I
think
I'm
I'm
hearing
you
know
possibly
that's
litigation,
Rose
I
would
want
to
know
you
know
again:
I'm
not
gonna,
be
here,
but
that,
like
somebody,
should
know
what
is
the
you
know,
case
law
and
precedent
on
X,
Y
and
Z
scenarios
and
and
I
assume
that
that
the
city
council
will
figure
out
the
next
one.
P
So
you
know
that
we
get
at
some
of
the
other
issues
if
we,
if
it
is
not
feasible
to
decommission
the
airport,
I,
don't
know
if
it
is
or
is
not,
but
I,
don't
I'm
I'm,
very
interested
in
scenario.
Four,
if
it's
viable
I,
don't
know
that
it
is
so
I,
don't
know
why
we
would
continue
going
down
that
path
until
we
have
some
clarity
on
whether
that
path
is
open
at
all.
W
Answers
yeah,
I
think
just
you
know
what
I
understand
is
we'll
try
to,
as
we've
kind
of
said
tonight,
we'll
try
to
bring
back
just
a
little
bit
more
information
to
be
able
to
help
Council
make
that
decision
in
early
2024
about
some
direction
that
they
want
us
to
continue
down
because
yeah
go
ahead.
You
go
no
go
ahead.
P
Probably
on
this
during
the
campaign,
it
might
be
like
we're
delivering
that
for
the
community
and
if
you
cannot
deliver
it
and
it's
going
to
maybe
take
a
little
while
I'm
looking
more
at
Teresa
for
that
like
there,
you
may
want
more
of
like
in
April
2024
Council
rather
than
in
January,
so
I
just
put
that
out.
There
I
think
that
if
it
you
know
it's,
this
is
gonna,
be
a
20-year
process.
I,
don't
think
waiting
a
couple
extra
months
to
really
give
people
time
to
breathe
and
Center
and
see
what
the
options
are.
W
No
that's:
okay.
I
was
just
mostly
trying
to
clarify
that.
There's
like
a
certain
Threshold
at
which,
like
we
can
bring
back
additional
information,
and
then
it
gets
so
significant
that
it
really
requires
just
you
know,
a
work
effort
that
that
is
kind
of
focused
on
a
certain
path.
If
that
makes
sense,
yeah.
P
L
Thanks
Rachel
Mark
Bob,
then
Aaron.
S
Yeah
first
Rachel:
please
please
stop
smiling
whenever
you
you
mentioned
you're
not
going
to
be
on
Council
in
a
couple
of
months.
It's
really
dispiriting
to
me.
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
what
Nicole
said.
I
think
we
really
do
need
to
at
some
point
reach
out
to
a
broader
Community.
That's
that's
not
engaged
I
I
know
there
are
neighbors
that
are
very
engaged.
S
There
are
pilots
that
are
very
engaged,
but
there
is
a
broad,
broad,
Community
out
there
and
and
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
wrong
with
with
trying
to
bring
them
into
the
conversation,
because
this
is
possibly
the
most
consequential
land
use
decision.
We
will
make
over
the
next
20
years
and
we
we
ought
to
have
input
from
other
members
of
the
community
and
I
agree
with
Rachel
comments
about.
S
You
know,
let's
explore
the
feasibility
of
option
four
before
hurtling
too
far
down
the
path,
but
I
would
suggest
that
we
can
certainly
afford
to
retain
specialized
counsel,
their
Aviation
Council
and
councils
in
in
Washington,
DC
I'm
sure
there
were
councils
used
by
Reed,
Hillman
airport
and
and
their
process
who
can
sit
with
us,
and
this
would
be
litigation
strategy,
perhaps
and
clearly
not
disclosable,
but
who
can
advise
us
as
to
the
possibilities
I
have
no
I
am
sure
that
the
the
odds
of
the
FAA
looking
at
us
and
saying
that's
a
great
idea
to
put
housing
there
you
know
go
forth
and
prosper
is:
is
approximately
zero
okay?
S
So
it's
not
going
to
happen.
They're
going
to
take
a
position
of
opposition
and
the
issue
is
what
is
our
position
and
how
do
we
proceed
if
that's
how
we
wish
to
proceed,
but
it
would
be
very
helpful
to
engage
some
of
that
specialized
expertise.
To
tell
us.
You
know
you
know
you
are
you
haven't,
got
a
prayer
and
which
mitigates
you
know
the
the
option,
four
or
says:
look,
here's
the
strategy,
and
this
could
succeed.
S
If
you
do
X,
Y
and
Z,
we
need
to
know
that,
and
you
know
I
think
that's
beyond
our
capabilities
here
and
and
I
would
really
urge
us
to
reach
out
and
get
that
kind
of
expertise
to
answer
the
questions
that
Rachel
has
raised.
Is
it
a
pipe
dream?
S
Is
it
possible
not
simply
to
take
an
answer
from
take
a
response
from
the
FAA
that
says
no
and
and
leave
it
there
unchallenged
unless
there's
nothing
further
to
be
done,
but
I
want
to
hear
that
from
somebody
else
not
from
us
not
from
members
of
this
Council,
because
we
just
don't
know
so
that
would
be
my
suggestion
as
we
go
into
the
next
Council
and
go
into
the
next
year.
Let's
clarify
where
we
are
and
not
presume
where
we
are
and
I
may
be
wrong.
S
Somebody
else
may
be
wrong,
but
let's
find
out
and
and
make
decisions
based
on
knowledge,
not
supposition.
S
G
Yeah
I'm
going
to
agree
with
with
both
both
Rachel
and
and
Mark.
Let's
go
find
out,
let's
get
some
extra
device
and,
let's
find
out
I
I,
think
I'm
doing
much
more
Community
engagement
on
on
this,
or
at
least
on
this
on
scenario.
Four,
it
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
because
we
we
could
get.
We
could
survey
people
and
get
their
expectations
up
and
then
say:
oh
yeah.
Well
then
we
found
out.
G
We
can't
really
do
what
we
just
asked
you
whether
you
want
us
to
do
it'd,
be
kind
of
like
surveying
people
on
whether
we
should
go
out
and
build
a
280
million
dollar
Broadband,
Network
and
and
service
and
ISP.
We
just
made
the
decision
not
to.
We
could
ask
the
community
I'm
going
to
guess.
Can
we
probably
say
sure
that
sounds
great,
but
we
thanks
to
our
staff,
we're
armed
with
information
to
advise
us
that
that
was
just
virtually
impossible
from
a
financial
standpoint,
and
so
we
made
the
decision.
G
We
didn't
go
out
and
Survey
the
community.
We
just
made
the
decision
that
we
can't
do
that
at
least
at
night
at
this
time
and
so
I
think.
Unfortunately,
with
the
airport
question,
we
don't
have
that
information
as
Mark
said,
and
so
let's
get
that
information
to
the
best
of
our
ability.
You
know
I'm
a
lawyer.
G
Lawyers
will
always
tell
you
that
the
answer
depends
and
on
the
one
hand,
the
other
hand
versus
a
gray
area
and
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
let's
get
the
best
information
advice
as
we
can
and
if
our
lawyers
are
telling
us
it's
highly
highly
improbable
that
we
could
close
the
airport
or
close
the
airport
anytime
soon,
then
this
Council
can
take
that
information
and
make
a
determination,
just
as
we
did
did
two
hours
ago,
with
respect
to
broadband.
Conversely,
if
they
say
no,
you
got
a
really
great
shot
at
it.
You
might
have
to
wait.
G
19
years,
you
got
a
great
shot
at
it.
Okay,
that
that,
then
we
might
want
to
do
a
little
Community
engagement.
We
then
might
want
Brad's
team
to
do
a
little
investigation
as
to
what
the
airport
could
be
19
years
from
now.
If
we
pay
our
own
Freight
I
guess
for
the
next
19
years,
and
so,
let's
find
out
and
before
we
start
asking
questions
of
the
community
that
will
set
expectations
that
may
be
a
wrong
place.
Thanks.
F
T
Yeah
I'm,
just
gonna
echo
my
colleagues
quickly
and
beneath
for
more
information
right,
so
appreciate
all
the
work
that
you
all
have
done
so
far,
and
we
just
need
to
figure
out
better.
The
chances
of
the
weather
decommissioning
is
possible
and,
if
so,
what
the
cost
might
be
and
if
there
would
be
litigation
involved
in
what
the
you
know
pros
and
cons
and
the
risks
and
the
possibilities
are
so
because
I
think
we.
T
We
owe
it
to
the
the
community
to
kind
of
figure
out
the
the
feasibility
of
a
different
future
for
the
airport
and
either
keep
it
on
the
table
or
take
it
off
depending
on
the
feasibility
level.
So
anyway,
so
I
look
forward
to
you
all
coming
back
next
year.
With
that
information
I
wanted
to
Echo
what
Rachel
said,
though
January
might
be
a
little
tough
for
the
people.
Who've
just
gotten
sworn
in
to
to
make
a
decision
a
month
later
about
the
permanent
future
of
the
airport.
T
So
I
I
understand
the
time
sensitivity
of
needing
to
to
zero
in
on
a
future
course
that
we
can
start
taking
whatever.
That
course
is,
but
I
you
might
want
to
give
it
a
couple
more
months
for
a
council
and
also
you
might
help
in
terms
of
gathering
more
information
thanks.
B
Aaron
just
want
to
check
in.
Are
there
any
comments
from
Tara
or
Juni
before
I
sort
of
offer
my
comments,
and
then
we
try
to
finish
this
up.
B
Thank
you,
yeah
I'll,
I'll,
close
up
by
saying
I,
think
yeah
I
mean
I
think
we
have
a
singular
next
step,
and
that
is
talking
to
the
FAA
and
getting
more
clarity.
Although
I
do
have
the
I
I'm
getting
the
Sensation
that
we're
we're
kind
of
acting
like
five-year-olds
trying
to
get
into
a
bar
and
the
bar
keeps
saying
no,
no,
you
can't
get
in
and
we
keep
saying
well
what
about
soda?
No,
no
did
you
did
you
hear
me.
B
B
So
I'm,
okay
with
that,
but
it
does
mean
we
should
stop
engagement
and
and
hold
off
until
we
just
get
that
answer
and
then
let
that
dictate
and
I'll
agree
with
Aaron
and
Rachel.
The
20
or
early
2024
is
I.
B
Think
an
unfair
decision
to
place
on
a
very
new
Council,
which
will
only
have
maybe
three
business
meetings
under
their
belt
and
so
I
I
think
we
would
definitely
want
to
push
that
back,
but
not
hold
up
up
the
ability
for
John
and
Natalie
and
the
team
to
start
to
figure
out
what
they
need
to
keep
the
airport
safe
and
what
those
core
maintenance
issues
are
I
think
that's
very
critical.
We
wouldn't
ask
them
to
do
that
with
streets
or
Bridges
just
hold
work
till
we
figure
out
what
to
do.
B
No
we'd
want
to
keep
them
up,
because
that's
a
safety
thing
so
I
think
we
should
focus
in
that
direction.
Just
as
we
close
it
up.
Natalie
you
got
everything
you
need
and
probably
a
whole
lot
more.
B
Awesome
I
see
you're,
smiling
and
nothing
great
well,
Natalie,
Allison
John.
Thank
you
so
much
for
presenting
being
patient
and
and
doing
your
work
engaging
with
community
on
this
issue,
and
hopefully
we'll
come
back
at
some
point
after
January
and
we'll
try
to
maybe
get
to
a
place
where
we
can
finish
this
off
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
guys.
Okay,.
B
All
right,
lastly,
not
that
we're
short
on
big
stuff
tonight,
so
I'm
gonna
turn
it
back
to
our
city
manager,
Nuria
Rivera
vandermeid,
to
lead
into
our
third
and
final
subject
and
if
Lauren
is
listening,
I'd
encourage
her
to
tune
back
in
otherwise
she's
going
to
get
a
text,
but
nonetheless
go
for
it.
Maria.
C
But
I
think
actually,
council
member
folkerch
was
good.
C
O
Yes,
thank
you
yep.
So
I
wanted
to
thank
Nicole
for
bringing
up
this
important
topic
for
discussion
tonight
and
start
off
with
a
brief
history
at
why
we're
looking
at
minimum
wage
at
the
municipal
and
Regional
level
and
the
origins
of
this
effort.
So,
as
you
know,
2019
the
state
legislature
passed
the
bill
that
gave
us
local
governments
the
right
to
set
our
own
minimum
wage
and
later
that
year
the
Boulder
County
Consortium
of
cities
began.
O
Discussions
on
that
topic,
covid-19
interrupted
those
efforts
and
since
then,
we've
seen
sharp
increases
in
inflation,
interest
rates
and
cost
of
living
in
general,
while
these
impacts
were
partially
covered
by
federal
increases
in
assistance
as
those
programs
sub
Sunset,
the
gaps
between
wages
and
costs
of
living
is
becoming
much
more
challenging
to
overcome,
and
an
increasing
number
of
community
members
are
failing
to
fill
those
gaps
everywhere.
We
look
our
food
banks,
financial
assistance
programs,
eviction
numbers
all
tell
the
same
story
of
rapidly
increasing
challenges
to
make
ends
meet
in
our
community.
O
O
Coordinating
with
a
number
of
independent
local
government
entities
has
been
challenging
and
the
progress
forward
has
been
slow,
but
we
are
making
progress.
Longmont,
Louisville,
Lafayette
and
Erie
have
all
chosen
to
join
with
us
with
an
eye
towards
implementing
implementing
a
minimum
wage
increase.
January
1st
2025..
O
As
you
all
know,
by
now,
Boulder
County
has
also
decided
to
move
forward
with
their
own
engagement
and
Outreach,
with
an
eye
towards
implementation.
January
1st
2024.,
before
we
jump
into
discussing
which
path
we
would
like
to
pursue
Taylor,
is
going
to
share
some
information
about
the
work
that's
going
on
at
the
regional
level
and
things
to
consider
as
we
weigh
implementing
a
minimum
wage
at
the
end
of
this
year.
Thank
you.
AA
Thanks
so
much
Lauren
good
evening,
Council
Taylor,
Ryman
assistant
to
city
council
I,
know
it's
late
I've.
My
comments
are
about
eight
minutes
long.
So,
if
you
bear
with
me,
we
can
we
can
dive
in
shortly,
but
I
wanted
to
just
bring
folks
to
sort
of
the
current
update
of
all
of
this
work
since
conversation
that
the
Consortium
started,
the
city
of
Boulder
has
played
a
primary
leadership
role
in
the
formation
and
advancement
of
working
group
efforts.
AA
Our
approach
has
been
very
collaborative
it's
taken
time
to
build
trust
and
confidence
and
that
time
has
created
a
thoughtful
process
that
has
brought
many
partners
to
the
table.
Since
the
beginning,
the
primary
goal
has
been
advancing
the
work
regionally
and
a
benefit
of
this
approach
is
that
other
communities
with
less
resources
can
join
when
they
might
not
have
otherwise
had
the
capacity
to
take
this.
AA
I'd
like
to
make
you
aware
of
how
this
could
impact
ongoing
work
and
the
resulting
trade-offs
in
our
ability
to
collaborate.
More
broadly,
a
few
months
ago
in
may,
we
presented
the
working
group's
proposal
to
this
Council
and
at
that
time
your
direction
was
to
engage
the
working
group
in
scoping,
Community
engagement
models
and
an
economic
analysis.
Since
that
conversation,
those
scoping
teams
have
formed
and
started
meeting
and,
in
the
meantime,
Lauren
and
I
have
had
a
bit
of
a
Road
Show
going
around
to
different
councils,
presenting
in
Longmont
Lewisville
Lafayette
Yuri.
AA
All
five
of
them,
including
this
one
so
making
five
altogether
have
chosen
to
join
the
working
group
and
feedback,
has
remained
consistent.
Councils
have
questions
about
benefits,
cliff
and
what
the
prevailing
wages,
or,
in
other
words,
what
businesses
are
actually
paying.
The
possibility
of
business
migration,
how
various
Industries
and
business
sizes
would
be
impacted
differently
and
other
questions
about
our
regional
economic
context.
AA
Oh,
we
could
embark
on
a
short
engagement
timeline
to
advance
2024
implementation.
Our
ability
to
be
robust
in
that
engagement
would
be
limited.
This
would
not
be
our
sort
of
standard
level
of
Engagement.
It
would
really
need
to
focus
more
so
on
meeting
the
engagement
requirements
mandated
by
the
legislation.
In
other
words,
tonight,
Council
would
need
to
be
comfortable
making
a
decision,
knowing
that
we
will
likely
not
have
answers
to
these
more
specific
questions
about
Boulder's
local
markets
and
economy.
AA
Going
back
to
the
ongoing
work
of
scoping
teams,
the
engagement,
scoping
team
and
economic
analysis.
Scoping
team
include
representatives
from
the
four
communities,
as
well
as
ex-officio
members
from
Chambers
of
Commerce,
the
self-sufficiency
wage,
Coalition
and
non-profits.
So
these
two
teams
include
about
seven
or
eight
members
each
and
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
questions
and
collaborative
process
we're
working
through
the
economic
analysis.
AA
Team
is
currently
outlining
discrete
research
questions
and
a
geographical
scope
for
set
analysis,
and
we
know
that
identifying
funding
for
the
unplanned
work
will
take
some
time
so
we're
using
an
RFI
process
to
understand
the
general
cost.
For
this
type
of
analysis,
longmont's
been
very
kind
to
Resource
the
solicitation
for
both
the
RFI
and
the
RFP.
An
initial
draft
of
the
scope
of
work
would
be
released
through
the
RFI
process,
which
is
intended
to
identify
the
later
budget
needs
for
the
RFP.
AA
This
waste
staff
can
work
through
identifying
funding,
while
also
scoping
teams
are
meeting
to
simultaneously
flesh
out
the
scope
of
work
enabling
us
to
post
the
RFP
as
soon
as
we're
ready
to
implement
on
the
engagement
side
of
it
things
that
scoping
team
is
working
to
understand
the
general
engagement
practices
in
each
of
our
cities
so
that
any
engagement
model
created
can
be
implemented
respectively
and
generate
comparable
data
and
we're
also
being
thoughtful
about
how
engagement
questions
are
worded.
AA
To
ensure
responses
address
the
questions
we've
received
from
our
councils,
as
I
mentioned,
the
city
of
Boulder
has
played,
played
a
key
role
in
leading
these
teams
and
defining
the
processes.
When
Boulder
County
chose
to
depart
for
a
quicker
timeline,
their
staff
had
to
step
back
from
the
working
group,
so
they
could
conserve
capacity
to
address
a
much
faster
timeline.
And
while
we
continue
to
update
the
county
on
working
group
efforts,
they
they
don't
play
a
role.
They're,
not
participants
in
scoping
teams.
AA
We
would
need
to
pause
our
work
with
the
engagement
scoping
team
at
the
very
least
because
the
current
timeline
between
engagement,
scoping
and
for
in
the
regional
context,
and
then
engagement
scoping
in
this
compressed
timeline,
would
shake
out
such
that
we'd
be
engaging
on
implementations
for
minimum
wage
in
2024
and
2025
at
the
same
time,
but
from
different
groups
of
different
cities
and
so
between
the
likely
confusing
nature
of
this
simultaneous
work
and
staff
capacity.
Our
collaboration
with
the
working
group
engagement
team
would
need
to
be
paused.
AA
AA
Moreover,
joining
the
county
might
undermine
our
regional
effort
as
a
whole
if
the
city
of
Boulder
departs
from
2025
commitments,
it's
made
to
other
cities
and
local
groups
for
the
other.
Four
cities
in
the
working
group.
Consistent
feedback
from
staff
and
Council
has
made
it
clear
that
their
ability
and
willingness
to
participate
has
been
really
driven
by
the
opportunity
to
share
the
work
and
undergoing
an
economic
evaluation
to
inform
decision
making.
AA
It's
unlikely
that
those
other
councils
would
move
forward
with
a
decision
without
that
study
and
without
a
strong
partner
and
Champion
like
the
city
of
Boulder,
it's
uncertain
if
the
regional
efforts
and
those
other
communities
will
carry
forward
with
this
work
at
all.
Moving
forward
on
a
compressed
timeline
with
an
initial
increase
still
leaves
an
outstanding
question
of
a
more
defined
Target
wage
and
escalation
schedule.
This
pathway
will,
of
course,
require
two
decisions
that
being
the
first
15
raise
and
then
the
larger,
more
defined,
Target
and
escalation
schedule.
AA
This
will
duplicate
much
of
the
work
needed.
It
could
lose.
The
support
and
collaboration
we've
gained
from
other
cities
thus
far
and
additionally,
additionally,
with
Boulder
and
Boulder
County,
moving
forward
on
a
quicker
timeline
and
assuming
collaboration
is
maintained
with
the
other
cities
with
a
later
implementation,
it
would
take
a
few
years
for
the
wages
between
those
two
groups
to
align
with
each
other
so
that
we
can
continue
on
a
path
forward
to
a
new
Target.
AA
In
other
words,
our
cities
would
have
different
wages
for
a
few
years
before
things
really
sync
up,
we
defer
to
Council
on
next
steps.
Right
now
we
are
continuing
to
pursue
the
regional
Partnerships
as
directed
by
this
Council,
and
because
preference
for
a
regional
approach
has
has
really
been
the
one
truly
consistent
piece
of
feedback
across
all
conversations,
we're
counseled
to
decide
to
change
course.
We
would,
as
mentioned,
need
to
pull
back
from
the
existing
Regional
collaborations
and
focus
solely
on
meeting
the
minimum
requirements
on
engagement
in
the
statute
and
deeper
epic.
B
Thank
you
so
much
Taylor
and
and
Lauren
for
your
extensive
work
on
this
and
really
showing
how
Boulder
can
lead
in
this
sphere
and
I.
Think
that's
just
really
critical.
So
thank
you
guys
for
not
just
doing
the
work
to
represent
Boulder
but
lifting
up
the
work
for
certainly
the
Consortium
and
and
all
that
that's
a
lot
of
work.
So
thank
you
guys
and
the
rest
of
staff
for
doing
it.
It's
important
we're
work
so
really
really
awesome
stuff.
B
Thank
you
guys
we'll
go
ahead
and
let
Rachel
and
then
Juni
ask
some
questions.
P
Thanks
thanks
Taylor
thanks
for
staying
up
late
with
us,
just
two
questions
you
mentioned
this,
but
just
wanted
to
clarify.
It
are
any
other
of
the
cities
that
we're
working
with
looking
at
fast
tracking
and
getting
this
done
by
January
2024
to
your
knowledge.
AA
No,
the
Boulder's,
the
only
Community
looking
at
this
right
now
and
it's
understood
in
the
community
that
sort
of
Boulder
might
have
be
the
only
city
with
enough
support
to
possibly
do
a
faster
implementation.
So
I
checked
in
with
other
communities,
I
checked
in
with
three
of
the
four
city
managers:
they're,
not
speaking
for
their
councils
in
any
way,
but
just
reflecting
on
the
feedback
that
we've
had
during
their
Council
presentations.
It's
unlikely,
like
I,
said
that
those
councils
would
move
forward
with
something
faster,
absent.
The
analysis
piece
and.
P
You
think
that's
true,
the
fourth
city
that
you
didn't
get
a
chance
to
check
in
with
too
that
seem
likely.
I
mean
any
it's
a
guess,
based
on
the
feedback,
yeah
and
then
second
I,
understand
that
you,
and
maybe
others
in
the
city
would
have
to
pull
back
from
the
collaborative
work.
P
AA
So
I
understand
that
engagement
has
already
made
clear
that
they
could
make
this
work
again.
It
wouldn't
be
our
sort
of
platinum
level
of
Engagement
that
we
always
try
to
do,
but
it
could
be
done
and
Theresa
I'm,
not
sure
if
you
wanted
to
speak
to
the
the
other
burden
that
it's
going
to
really
hit
is
Cao.
N
Yes,
you
know
if
it's
the
will
of
council,
that
we
move
forward
at
this
time.
We
will
rearrange
priorities
and
make
it
work
it
is.
It
is
certainly
not
something
that
we
had
scheduled
on
our
work
plan
for
this
year.
It
is
something
that
that
we
anticipated
having
quite
quite
a
lot
more
time
for,
and
you
know
frankly,
there
are,
there
is
only
one
other
ordinance
out
there.
N
The
law
is
pretty
prescriptive,
and
so
you
know
we
just
we
just
don't
know
quite
what
a
heavy
lift
it's
going
to
be
to
draft
an
ordinance.
AA
Okay,
the
other
thing
I'd
say
on
that
too
is
this-
will
require,
of
course,
a
second
decision
chunk
next
year
on
The,
more
defined
Target
and
escalation,
and
so
it
would
be
really
unfortunate
to
get
this
decision
out
of
the
way
and
for
some
reason
that
worked
not
to
be
carried
on
and
picked
up
next
year.
So
probably
in
terms
of
Shifting
work
plans,
I
imagine
next
year
this
this
would
need
to
be
a
priority.
P
Okay
and
in
terms
of
council
impact,
what
are
we
looking
at
public
hearing?
What
like
what
is
the
we
haven't
talked
about
this
happening
this
year,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
what
we're
looking
at,
because
there's
such
a
very
little
amount
of
time
left
for
this
Council
and
I
assume
to
be
done
for
a
January
first
implementation,
I,
don't
know
when
we
have
to
have
our
vote
and
such
but.
AA
The
really
what
drives
the
timeline
is:
the
need
to
give
businesses
notice
of
any
sort
of
change,
so
you'd
want
to
probably
not
do
things
in
the
last
meeting
of
the
council
term,
October
November,
probably
at
the
latest.
Probably
a
couple
of
public
hearings
would
be
involved
in
that,
so
that
we
would
have
the
ability
to
communicate
the
decision
out
to
the
community.
C
Taylor,
if,
if
I
just
ask
for
more
elaboration
right,
like
the
the
statute,
doesn't
really
require
a
whole
lot,
it
just
says:
You
must
confer
with
stakeholders
so
likely
some
kind
of
public
hearing
which
would
have
to
do
a
first
reading,
a
second
reading
kind
of
thing,
and
if
it
is
this
Council
body
that
would
like
to
do
that,
then
we
would
have
to
get
that
before
the
council
term.
So
we
would
have
to
do
that
before
probably
Thanksgiving.
U
Representation,
oh
my
God
you're
amazing,
like
eight
minutes
without
any
slides
that
was
pretty
awesome
you
mentioned
joining
the
county
would
undermine
or
Regional
approach.
That's
what
I
hear
and
if
that's
not
what
you
meant
to
say,
please
clarify
for
me,
but
the
county
is
only
15
percent.
U
So
I
just
don't
understand
why
it
is
not
seen
by
through
your
research
and
even
maybe
Lauren
Kennedy.
Why
is
it
not
seen
as
a
stepping
stone,
whereas
we
can
do
the
county
and
then
move
forward
with
our
own
plan?
So
maybe
that
could
also
be
a
question
for
or
on
a
City
attorney
but
I
just
to
me
in
my
head.
It
feels
like
a
stepping
stone,
15
and
then
continue
on
to
where
we
need
to
get
to.
AA
Thanks
for
the
question
Juni,
so
what
I
meant
by
undermining
the
regional
approach
is
that
the
city
of
Boulder,
in
playing
the
leadership
role
that
we
have
with
this
process,
would
need
to
step
back
from
the
regional
working
group
and
I'm
I'm,
not
sure
that
there
would
be
any
community
that
would
have
the
resources
to
step
up
and
really
lead
that
work
and
make
sure
that
all
of
the
the
organizations
are
being
coordinated
and
there's
the
sort
of
the
confusion
with
engagement
happening
on
sort
of
a
similar
thing,
but
with
different
outcomes
intended,
so
that
that
work
would
need
to
be
paused
and
it
has
taken
over
a
year
to
get
everybody
at
the
table
on
these
scoping
teams.
AA
AA
But
the
the
benefit
of
joining
this
and
really
what's
made
people
come
to
the
table
is
sharing
the
work
and
doing
the
study.
And
so,
if
we
were
to
move
forward
with
something
faster,
I'm
I'm,
not
entirely
sure
that
those
two
pieces
of
collaboration
would
be
enough
glue
to
stick
every
keep
everything
stuck
together.
U
Thank
you
for
that.
I
do
have
a
follow-up.
If
that's
okay,
my
understanding
as
of
today
the
county
has
not
had
its
first
public
hearing
concerning
this
issue.
Is
that.
AA
L
Thank
you,
Juni
Nicole,
then
Tara
then
Mark.
M
Thank
you
and
first
of
all,
Lauren
and
Taylor
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you.
This
has
been
so
much
work
over
so
much
time.
Getting
everybody
wrangled
and
together
and
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
and
appreciate
it.
M
AA
So
I
asked
this
question
earlier
today
to
the
county
just
to
see
how
many
employees
and
employers
they
have.
They
couldn't
didn't
have
estimates
at
this
time,
I
mean
we
can
assume
a
much
smaller
fraction
than
a
lot
of
other
cities.
Most
of
the
workforce,
centers
are
in
the
Incorporated
parts
of
the
county,
so
so
we're
talking
pretty
pretty
small
compared
to
us.
M
Oh
no
I'm,
sorry!
So
if
you
think
about
the
entire
County
Incorporated
and
unincorporated
like
Boulder
County
rights,
so
Boulder
Lafayette
Louisville,
all
the
places
together
plus
the
unincorporated
we've
got
a
pool
of
workers
and
I
guess
what
I'm
wondering
is
what
percentage
of
those
workers
are
we
talking
about
if
we
have
unincorporated
Boulder
County
and
the
city
of
Boulder
in
that
mix,.
AA
O
Approximately,
if
I
can
just
jump
in
for
a
second,
approximately
a
third
of
jobs,
are
in
the
city
of
Boulder
that
are
within
Boulder
County
and
then
another
third
are
in
Longmont.
F
O
M
Okay,
all
right
so
somewhere
between
a
third
and
two-thirds
were
probably
closer
to
a
third
and
to
two-thirds.
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
Taylor.
One
of
the
things
that
I
heard
you
mentioning
is
that
if
we
were
to
try
to
move
forward
with
something
sooner,
we
wouldn't
necessarily
do
any
kind
of
we
wouldn't
have
an
escalation
factor
in
there
did
I
interpret
that
correctly
and
is
that
what
the
county
is
moving
forward
with
as
well,
because
I
was
thinking
they
were,
they
were
going
to
have
a
wage
escalator
in
the
mix.
AA
Last
I
talked
to
the
county.
Their
plan
is
to
do
just
this
initial
initial
15
and
then
try
to
better
Define
a
Target
and
an
escalation
next
year.
Seeing
their
draft
survey
I
I
wonder
if
those
plans
have
changed.
There
is
also
possibly
some
concerns
about
trying
to
back
into
the
escalation
next
year
and
I
noticed
Teresa
just
went
off
camera,
but
if
she
wanted
to
speak
to
that,
I'd
invite
that.
M
Yeah,
my
question
was
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
if
we
were
to
try
to
move
forward
with
something
January
1st
2024,
some
sort
of
increase
for
that
start
date.
M
What
I
heard
Taylor
say
is
that
we
may
not
take
into
account
any
kind
of
escalation
factor
in
that,
like
the
state
minimum
wage
has
like
Denver
has
and
I
guess.
I'm
just
wondering
is
that
what
the
county
is
doing?
Are
they
taking
into
account
an
escalator
and
yeah,
and
if
so,
would
we
be
kind
of
moving
with
them
on
that.
N
Yeah
I
can't
I'm
afraid
I
can't
speak
to
what
the
county
is
doing.
I
I
look
to
Lauren
and
Taylor
for
that.
If
the
question
is,
could
we
do
we
have
to
do
an
escalator
now
or
could
we
do
it
later?
The
statute
is
ambiguous
as
to
this,
and
so
the
you
know,
the
more
conservative
approach
would
be
to
determine
to
determine
the
final
number
and
and
plan
accordingly.
N
M
B
You
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Nicole
appreciate
that
I'm
sorry,
my
internet
is
starting
to
get
choppy
irony
given
our
earlier
discussion,
but
there
we
have
it.
Maybe
it's
why
we're
moving
the
direction
we
are
but
I
digress.
Tara
then
Mark.
Q
Okay,
Taylor,
that
was
an
incredible
presentation
and
I
have
it
went
so
fast
that
I
missed
a
few
things?
So
if
you
can
go
back
to
your
facts
about
the
county,
can
you
exactly
wait?
Are
you
saying
that
that
who
exactly
is
going
to
get
this
minimum
wage
increase
in
the
county?
Did
you
did
you
say
it
was
just
not
not
hourly
work?
Who
exactly?
Was
it
not?
AA
Make
sense
minimum
wage
ordinance
passed
by
the
county
would
cover
anybody
in
the
count
unincorporated
parts
of
the
county,
so
not
our
Incorporated
cities
and
towns
and
the
man.
The
legislation
doesn't
allow
any
exemptions
for
small
businesses
or
or
anything
like
that.
It's
as
Teresa
said
pretty
prescriptive.
So
anybody
in
unincorporated
areas.
Q
AA
I
was
clarifying
that
it
would
would
not
impact
hourly
workers
of
the
Boulder
County
government
system
since
they're
located
in
the
city
of
Boulder.
Q
Q
The
next
question
is:
is
you
you
had
a
really
good
phrase,
something
about
90
percent
less
than
20
employees?
Can
you
repeat
repeat
that
one
more
time
went
so
fast.
AA
Yeah,
our
latest
estimates
are
in
the
city
of
Boulder.
We
have
about
8
400
businesses
and
of
those
businesses.
90
of
them
have
less
than
20
employees,
and
97
of
them
have
less
than
50
employees
just
to
illustrate
sort
of
the
amount
of
small
businesses
that
we
do
have
in
the
city
and
sort
of
the
engagement
lift
that
this
would
take
and
the
the
various
impacts
that
this
would
have.
Okay,
90
is.
Q
A
lot
okay,
I
have
one
more
question
and
for
this
question,
I'm
just
going
to
read
I've
been
confused
because
I
missed
the
May
meeting.
I
was
I,
wasn't
there
and
apparently
this
was
a
very
important
meeting,
because
this
one
person
just
wrote
to
us
he's
a
restaurant
owner
and
he
says
I
am
writing
today
to
urge
the
city
council
to
honor
its
commitment
to
a
year-long
stakeholder
process
before
enacting
an
increase
in
the
minimum
wage.
Did
we
make
this
commitment
in
May
to
the
people.
AA
We
briefly
talked
about
the
differences
in
the
timeline.
2024
was
discussed,
but
we
prioritized
at
that
time
working
together
rather
than
working
fast,
and
we
knew
that
doing
something
regionally
would
take
longer,
and
so
the
the
direction
from
that
meeting
was
to
do
the
collaboration
approach
with
the
longer
timeline
great.
So.
Q
We
said
2025
in
May
and
now
it's
almost
September
and
we're
saying
2024.
I
was
initially
going
to
push
for
this
2024,
but
now
I'm
very
concerned
about
this
particular
fact,
because
I
feel
like
we
have
these
commitment.
I
didn't
know
about
this
commitment,
but
apparently
we
had
this
commitment
and
so
I'm
just
confirming
we
did
in
detail.
People
2025
in
May
I
did
all
right.
That's
all
my
questions.
L
Thank
you,
Tara,
let's
see
Mark
then
Bob.
S
I
only
have
one
question,
but
I
want
to
preface
it
by
saying
Lauren
and
Taylor
I
want
to
thank
you
for
what
I
think
is
an
extraordinary
amount
of
work
that
you've
put
in
on
this
issue,
which
is
a
lot
more
complicated
and
I.
Think
than
most
people
recognize,
and
you
have
done
this
community
a
great
service
and
and
what
you
have
been
doing,
my
only
question
is
is
really
one
of
context,
because
I'm
I'm
a
little
confused.
S
How
long
was
the
did
the
county
work
with
us
in
a
Cooperative
basis
before
they
had
an
epiphany
and
and
decided
to
jump
ship.
AA
The
county
has
been
working
with
us
from
the
get-go.
We
started
around
April
of
last
year
and
it
hasn't
been
up
until
a
month
ago
about
that
we
received
word
that
they
would
change
direction.
It
wasn't
until
August,
14th
I.
Believe,
though,
that
the
press
release
went
out
and
sort
of
made
the
announcement
more
broadly
and.
S
And
and
what
I
mean
what
happened?
They
just
saw
the
light
on
the
road
to
Damascus
and
said
you
know.
We
need
to
change
everything
that
we're
doing
and
abandon
all
of
our
Cooperative
relationships
and
to
you
know
so,
sorry
guys.
That's
the
way
it
is
I
mean.
Is
that
what
happened
or
is
there
a
context?
I'm
missing.
AA
There
is
I
mean
there
are
strong
voices
in
the
community
that
are
urging
for
something
to
happen
sooner
and
you.
AA
These
have
been
backed
up
sort
of
by
the
prescriptive
nature
of
the
legislation
and
it
sort
of
laying
out
a
lot
of
decision
points
that
we
wouldn't
otherwise
have
to
make,
and
so
that
perhaps
making
it
less
of
a
lift.
There
are
still
pieces
of
the
legislation
that
we
need
to
to
meet
in
order
to
pass
this
and
I
believe
the
county
is
responding
to
the
urgency
of
the
requests
from
some
of
the
in
the
community
and
I.
Don't
know
if
Lauren
wants
to
speak
to
that.
O
Yeah
I
I
would
just
also
add
that
you
know
May
when
we
presented
in
May.
Boulder
was
the
first
count
city
council
that
we
presented
to,
and
so
it's
only
been
sort
of
more
recently
that
the
timeline
has
been
being
presented
to
different
councils
and
that
those
discussions
have
been
happening
and
so.
O
S
Okay
and
before
we
get
to
our
comments
and
preferences,
is
it
the
view
of
both
of
you
that
we
ought
to
continue
in
The,
Cooperative
relationship
and
and
do
this
thing
on
the
timeline
originally
envisioned?
C
Oh
I'm
happy
to
jump
in
for
staff,
so
I
don't
put
Taylor
on
the
on
the
hook,
but
I'll
say
for
staff.
Certainly
we
defer
to
Council
on
how
you
want
to
move
forward.
It
will
be,
it
will
be
less.
C
C
So
I
believe
that
it
is
status
press
in
terms
of
being
able
to
do
engagement
fully
to
pursue
and
to
continue
to
pursue
the
original
Direction.
But
I
will
also
say
that
we
defer
to
you
all
as
policy
makers
and
we
will
move
forward
and
adjust
our
schedules
on
this
instance.
This
is
a
different
instance
where
it
doesn't
involve
a
department
like
housing
or
pnds
and
we're
not
having
that
kind
of
trade-off.
Conversation
here
we're
having
a
trade-off
conversation
about
the
depth
of
Engagement
and
how
we
can
move
forward
or
not.
O
O
I
think
it's
worth
trying
to
pursue
the
faster
option,
while
also
trying
to
keep
our
keeping
Staffing
the
longer
term
Regional
effort,
to
the
extent
that
we're
able
thank
you.
L
B
Thanks
Mark
I
appreciate
that
Bob
yeah.
G
G
You
I
appreciate
that,
and
we
kind
of
took
a
pull
of
ourselves
and
I
think
that
the
majority
of
the
consensus
was
it
was
2025
for
the
change
and
so
I'm
trying
to
understand.
I
know
that
there's
voices
in
the
community
there's
been
places
in
the
community
on
both
sides
of
this,
for
for
as
long
as
I've
been
on
Council,
so
that's
kind
of
an
ongoing
thing,
but
other
than
the
County's
change
of
heart
that
was
announced
last
week.
Has
there
been
any
any
change?
That's
happened,
any
external
change.
G
That's
happened
between
when
we
made
our
decision
on
May
25th
and
now
it's
August
24th
three
months
later
for
halfway
to
the
end
of
the
year
from
there
has
there
been
any
like
any
any
new
new
things
that
have
happened.
I
know
that
you
base
have
been
making
the
rounds
with
us
with
the
cities
and
the
cities
sound
like
they're
all
saying
1125,
so
that
hasn't
changed
if
anything's
reinforced
or
made
a
decision.
So
has
there
been
any
other
than
the
County's
kind
of
change
of
heart
that
they
announced
last
week?
AA
The
reason
I
say
this
is
just
because
there
is
a
10
cap
that
the
legislation
outlines
only
10
of
municipality
or
groups
across
the
state
can
raise
the
minimum
wage
past
the
state
and
then
then
it
caps
and
so
the
Edgewater
joining
and
pursuing
it.
Of
course,
there's
conversations
across
Boulder,
County,
Fort
Collins
had
tried
to
do
something
and
it
failed
and
I
wouldn't
say
that
this
is
an
imminent
threat
in
any
way
shape
or
form.
But
it
is
just
something
to
be
mindful
of.
G
AA
I
don't
know
the
answer
that
question.
However,
the
legislation
also
says
if
you
come
together
in
an
IGA
on,
so
all
of
the
municipalities
in
that
IGA
would
only
count
as
one
in
that
calculation,
which
is
also
a
big
reason
why
the
the
collaborative
approach
made
this
more
advantageous
is.
G
Okay
so
10
272
is
27
and
Edgewater
is
one,
so
that
probably
doesn't
put
a
whole
lot
of
pressure
on
us.
Is
that
right?
It
sounds
like
there's,
no
one
else
in
Colorado
about
to
go
now.
So
it's
not
like
there's
26
people
ahead
of
us
online
that
are
going
to
do
something
next
week.
Okay,
so
so
other
than
Edgewater
sit
down.
I
think
down
near
Denver
right
but
died
in
the
Bridgewater.
Is
some
suburbs.
P
P
My
question
the
way
I
read
something
that
came
out
from
the
state
was
that
if
a
county
went
first,
all
the
cities
within
that
County
got
swept
up
and
counted,
as
one
of
you
know,
counted
as
the
same
one.
So
do
you
know
Taylor
if
Boulder
County
does
it?
Even
if
we
don't
do
it
simultaneously,
we
still
count
as
one
and
one
with
them.
Even.
AA
T
They
have
the
statute
up
if
you'd
like
me
to
read
the
few
sentences,
Rachel
sure,
no,
it
matters,
but
it
says
for
purposes
of
determining
whether
10
of
local
governments
in
the
state
have
enacted
the
local
minimum
wage
law
when
a
County
enacts
local
minimum
wage
law.
If
a
local
minimum
wage
law
is
enacted
by
any
local
government
located
within
that
County,
only
the
County's
minimum
wage
law
accounts
towards
the
calculation
of
the
10
percent.
P
G
Whole
I
was
I
was
done.
You
guys
answered
the
question.
It
sounds
like
other
than
Edgewater
acting,
which
is
maybe
127th
Statewide
limit.
There
has
been
no
external
factors
in
the
last
three
months
since
we
made
our
decision
to
cause
us
to
change,
to
make
our
decision.
B
All
right
any
other
questions
before
we
move
to
comments
and
ultimately
offering
a
direction
for
staff.
Any
other
questions
all
right.
Let's
transition
to
comments,
and-
and
of
course,
if
you
know
mindful
time,
is
10
20.,
you
can
keep
comments
brief,
but
ultimately
kind
of
provide
some
clarity,
love
to
see
a
a
majority
will
if
we
have
to
straw,
pull
at
the
end
because
it
looks
like
it
might
be
pretty
binary
here.
B
O
Thanks
so
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
I
did
struggle
with
this,
but
I
will
support
moving
forward
with
a
faster
timeline,
because
I
know
how
much
our
community
members
need
this,
but,
as
I
said,
I
also
have
significant
concerns,
I'm
concerned
about
potentially
undermining
this
work
that
I
and
others
have
put
into
this
larger
Regional
effort.
I
have
concerns
with
how
difficult
it
may
be
for
a
number
of
our
businesses
to
deal
with
changes
in
such
a
short
time
frame.
O
An
erosion
of
trust,
I
know
how
long
it
took
to
convene
this
working
group
and
that
the
burden
that
the
county
leaving
that
group
has
placed
on
the
remaining
members
but
and
Boulder
pausing
is
likely
to
cause.
O
You
know
more
instability,
but
you
know
I
I
just
feel
like
we
have
to
make
the
best
decision
with
the
information
we
have
I
hear
Representatives
that
work
every
day
with
people
in
our
community
struggling
to
make
ends,
meet
and
they're,
pushing
for
immediate
action
and
saying
that
that
is
a
higher
priority
to
them
than
this
Regional
effort
and
so
I
feel
like
I
have
to
take
them
at
their
word
and
but
also
hold
out
hope
that
we
can
do
both
efforts
that
we
can
continue
moving
forward
with
the
regional
effort
and
then
our
partners
in
the
business
community
and
other
municipalities
will
continue
to
engage
with
us
on
this
topic.
P
Thanks
Matt
thanks
Lauren
like
Lauren,
this
has
been
a
tough
one
for
me,
I
I
wrote
down
a
couple
things
I,
there's
a
saying
in
Al-Anon
say
what
you
mean
and
mean
what
you
say.
P
You
know
we
we
just
said
like
88
days
ago
that
we
were
going
to
do
January
2025
and
as
far
as
I
can
tell
you
know,
I
I
think
it
was
only
maybe
only
Aaron
said:
let's,
let's
try
and
do
it
in
2024,
and
so
you
know,
I
was
very
cognizant
at
that
time
of
of
the
difficulty
of
of
making
minimum
wage
in
Boulder.
P
We
were
assured
that
very
few
or
no
employers
at
that
time
were
actually
paying
minimum
wage
that
that
the
actual
going
rate
is
is
at
what
we're
looking
to
make
it
right
now,
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
been
anything
that
changed
in
that
time.
P
You
know,
I
I
think
we
all
knew
that
certain
programs
were
going
to
be
ending
and-
and
you
know
it's
it's
really
hard
to
get
by
in
Boulder
and
I.
Don't
think
any
of
us
are
dismissing
that,
and
yet
we
we
committed
to
everyone
less
than
three
months
ago
to
to
follow
this
path.
Taylor
said
a
couple
things
that
stood
out.
One
is
we
will
not
have
an
economic
analysis
and
we
will
be
going
based
on
speculation
and
as
a
very
data
driven
Council.
That
is
that's.
P
Why
I
voted
for
2025
in
the
first
place,
like
I,
wasn't
willing
to
to
not
know
the
answer
to
some
questions.
I
asked
about
how
it
would
ripple
effect
onto
employers
that
are
subject
to
Medicare
and
Medicaid
reimbursement
rates,
and
and
would
they
be
able
to
staff
based
on
those
federal
dollars
that
that
aren't
going
to
come
in
at
the
right
rate
next
year.
P
You
know
small
razor,
thin
margin,
non-profits
things
like
that,
that
sort
of
and
some
some
very
vulnerable
populations
and
and
again,
as
I
said
then
like
I,
the
last
time
I
was
involved
with
a
minimum
wage
hike.
I
was
in
Michigan
and
doing
a
job
where
we
were
Staffing
group
homes
where
it
was
really
hard.
P
Unforgiving
work
with
a
lot
of
body,
fluids
and
injuries
and
things
to
staff
and
and
it's
hard
to
get
people
to
work,
those
those
difficult
jobs,
and
you
have
to
stay
a
bit
above
above
minimum
wage
and
if
you
raise
minimum
wage
without
building
in
time
for
them
to
raise
it
two
dollars
above
minimum
wage
you're
not
going
to
have
people
who
are
willing
to
do
the
literal,
Dirty
Work
in
our
County.
So
that's
I
without
an
economic
analysis,
and
the
answer
to
my
questions.
P
I
find
this
very
troubling
that
we
with
a
couple
noticed
a
couple
months
noticed
two
employers
would
would
change
course
and
not
say
what
we
meant
and
meant
when
we
said
it
feels
a
little
bit
hypocritical
of
us
to
be
honest.
P
I
I
was
at
a
thing
this
week,
where
I
was
saying
that
we
might
do
this,
and
somebody
said
well
what
about
Taylor.
It
was
somebody
for
one
of
the
other
cities
like
she's
still
going
to
help
us,
and
you
know
whatever
we
say,
I
think
the
answer
is
probably
no
I.
P
Don't
think
that
we're
loaning
Taylor
out
who's
getting
a
second
job
within
the
city
to
to
help
these
other
cities
to
do
it
so
I
think
if
we're
pulling
the
lifeline
here
like,
we
need
to
know
that
there's
a
good
chance
that
Lafayette
Longmont,
Lewisville
and
Erie
have
been
abandoned
for
the
minimum
wage
efforts
and
I
I
know
that
my
job
is
a
city
but
I
think
as
a
region.
We
also
want
everyone
to
thrive
and
the
people
in
those
cities
not
making
minimum
wage
and
us
getting
out
of
step
and
I.
P
Don't
think
that
we're
gonna
somehow
round
back
and
say
well
next
year,
we're
not
going
to
raise
it,
because
we
want
to
wait
for
these
other
cities
to
pick
up
like
we're.
Gonna
get
the
same
pressure
next
year
or
you
all
will
that
we
got
this
year
like
we
need
more
money
right
now
and
so
raise
it.
We're
just
going
to
be
out
of
step.
The
the
whole
point
of
a
regional
effort
is
is
dead
to
me.
If
we
do
this,
so
it's
fine.
If
that
didn't
matter,
I
was
told
for
four
years.
P
It
was
really
critical
and
mattered,
so
it
is,
it
is
confusing
to
me
I,
don't
think
that
anything
will
be
different
in
a
year.
You
know
part
of
the
problem
was
in
may.
We
were
like
there's
just
not
enough
time
to
do
this
by
January
1st
it
sucks,
but
there's
not
enough
time.
We
should
have
done
faster
in
2022
and
early
2023,
but
here
we
are.
We
can't
do
it
in
time.
I,
don't
understand
how
three
months
closer
to
January
is
is
better
for
that.
P
So
you
know
there's
just
there's
less
time
and
you
know
I
think
we
are.
We
are
really
going
to
be
leaving
at
least
some
employers
in
a
really
tough
spot.
We
already
knew
that
the
struggle
is
real
for
people.
So
if
we
were
going
to
do
this,
May
25th
was
the
time
this
just
feels
ill
thought
out
and
and
unresponsive
as
As
Leaders
of
of
a
regional
effort
as
well
as
Regional
as
well
as
of
our
city
thanks
so
I'm,
unfortunately,
not
supportive
of
2024
I'll
be
looking
for
January
2025.
L
Thank
you,
Rachel
Nicole,
Aaron,
thentera,.
M
Thank
you,
I'm
just
gonna
Echo
everybody's
comments.
This
is
really
hard.
This
is
a
really
really
hard
place
to
be
to
be
looking
at
these
longer
term,
trade-offs
potential,
longer
term
trade-offs
with
shorter
term
benefits
to
people
I.
M
You
know,
I
know
that
we
are
closer
now
to
the
implementation
date,
but
I
think
that's
also
given
us
a
little
bit
more
time
to
see
just
how
dire
this
situation
is
for
people
in
our
community,
and
you
know
initially,
we
were
not
sure
if,
for
example,
the
numbers
that
effo
was
seeing,
which
were
completely
unprecedented
earlier
this
year
and
double
anything
that
they
had
ever
seen
in
terms
of
individuals
going
to
their
food
bank,
we
didn't
know
if
that
was
going
to
continue.
You
know
we
thought.
M
Well,
maybe
it's
just
because
of
the
end
of
some
of
the
federal
benefits
from
December
31st
2022,
but
it
has
continued
they're
still
seeing
over
600
people
a
week
in
their
food
bank,
and
it
feels
like
every
month
that
we're
waiting
is
just
pushing
that
that
difficulty
that
we're
putting
on
people's
lives
even
farther
into
the
future
we're
just
making
it
more
difficult
longer.
M
Some
of
the
folks
from
effa
did
a
little
survey
of
their
users
and
some
of
the
clients
and
some
of
the
things
that
they
said
were
an
increased
minimum
wage
alone
won't
fix
the
income
unequal
that
plagues
Boulder,
but
as
part
of
a
comprehensive
strategy.
It's
very
important
I'd
like
Council,
to
understand
that
nowhere
in
Boulder
County
can
someone
working
a
minimum
wage
job
for
a
single
person
to
afford
a
studio
apartment
life
has
gotten
really
hard.
A
higher
wage
will
help
feed
our
family
and
keep
our
homes
warm.
M
M
I
think
we
really
need
to
work
together
here
with
the
county
and
the
region
on
on
wages
and
what
people
are
being
paid.
It's
a
both
and
situation,
so
I'm
kind
of
feeling.
Similarly,
as
Lauren
while
I
would
love
to
spend
time
to
work
more
on
a
regional
wage
and
keep
going
with
those
Partnerships
and
I
hope
we
can.
People
are
telling
us
they
need
this
right
now,
even
knowing
that
the
consequences
may
be
that
the
regional
effort
falls
apart.
M
Nonprofits
are
telling
us
that
we
need
this,
even
as
they
themselves
may
be
impacted
by
higher
wages
and
they're,
telling
us
that
the
most
impacted
people
or
the
most
marginalized.
So
I
would
like
to
see
us
move
forward
with
the
county,
with
a
15
increase
on
January,
1st
2024
and
then
work
with
the
county
on
a
wage
escalator.
Thank
you.
T
Yes,
I'm
finding
myself
in
a
similar
places,
Lauren
Lauren
I
thought
you
articulated
well
the
potential
benefit
of
the
of
moving
forward,
while
also
you
know
being
concerned
about
some
of
the
trade-offs.
T
It
makes
it
a
difficult
choice
but
I'm
going
to
be
consistent
here,
because
I
was
the
person
earlier
this
year,
who
said
this
year
still
has
an
opportunity
for
us
to
move
forward,
and
the
participation
of
the
county
means
that
it
we
could
still
do
something
as
part
of
a
regional
effort,
because
I've
always
valued
the
regional
approach
throughout
this,
and
so
so
we
have
now.
We
have
two
Regional
choices.
T
The
the
county
now
are
potentially
other
cities
next
year,
but
I
do
say
that
the
advocacy
from
effa
and
other
folks
representing
low-income
workers
and
younger
workers
has
been
persuasive
to
me
about
the
possibility
of
moving
forward
sooner
rather
than
later
so
would
want
to
defer
decisions
about
what
a
final
number
is
or
an
escalator
or
anything
like
that
to
next
year,
when
we
can
do
the
full
engagement
and
I.
You
know,
because
the
economic
analysis
is
going
to
be
really
important
to
that.
T
The
detailed
Outreach,
the
year-long
plan
to
make
those
larger
decisions,
but
doing
a
smaller
increase
now
seems
doable
to
me.
So
thanks
for
the
consideration.
Q
Okay,
I
came
into
this
meeting,
actually
not
sure
I
was
going
to
vote
I
kept
going
back
and
forth
I.
Think
listening
to
the
last
council
meeting,
the
amount
of
people
that
are
struggling
and
also
students
was
just
intense.
Q
Also
I
came
into
this
meeting,
not
knowing
because
I
wasn't
at
that
meeting
that
we
actually
said
in
May
that
we
were
not
going
to
do
this
until
2025.
So
I
don't
see
how
this
is
a
good
idea
to
all
of
a
sudden
change.
I
I
should
have
known
that,
because
I
wasn't
at
that
meeting.
I'm,
not
you
know
taking
blame
off
of
me
for
not
knowing
that,
but
now
that
I
do
I,
just
I,
don't
see
how
we
can
change
the
2020
2024.
Q
Even
with
the
way
things
are
I'm
just
going
to
read
you
two
emails
like
Nicole
that
I'm
going
to
read
and
not-
and
the
problem
is-
is
we
all
can
see
both
sides
here
and
it's
hard
for
all
of
us.
Q
So
this
person
who
owns
a
restaurant
says,
like
I,
said
I'm
writing
today
to
urge
the
city
council
to
honor
its
commitment
to
a
year-long
stakeholder
process
before
enacting
an
increase
in
the
minimum
wage.
We
are
paying
far
more
than
the
minimum
wage
because
we
pull
tips
with
the
entire
team.
My
entry-level
employees
make
20
to
25
dollars
per
hour
after
tips.
I
would
like
to
have
my
voice
heard
on
an
exemption
for
tipped
workers.
We
are
struggling
with
very
high
food
prices
and
property
city,
state,
federal
taxes
and
I.
Q
Think
why
that
is
important
is
because
these
are
people
who
employ
people
who
we
need
to
keep
our
restaurants
healthy,
they're,
struggling
a
lot
because
they
employ
a
lot
of
lower
income
workers.
There's
there's
a
part
of
me:
that's
worried
that
if
they
close
it'll
have
the
opposite
effect,
I'm,
not
sure
it
will,
but
it
might,
but
also
we
promised
and
I
also
promised
to
some
people
that
I
would
do
whatever
Lauren
said,
but
actually
Lauren's
been
struggling
too
and
we're
both
instruct
we've
all
been
struggling.
Q
But
in
this
case,
at
this
last
minute,
I
said
I,
don't
know
how
we
can
promise
something
and
unpromise
it.
I
will
say
that
there
are
two
sides
to
everything
right
and
there
is
this
non-profit
that
wrote
to
somebody
and
said
if
you
change
the
minimum
wage.
Q
The
problem
is,
is
my
budgets
are
already
set
for
this
year
and
if
you
change
it
excuse
me
already
set
for
2024
and
my
grants
are
already
established
for
2024
and
if
you
change
it
now,
I'm
going
to
have
to
let
some
people
go
because
I
can't
do
this.
That's
how
close
her
margins
are
and
that's
how
close
some
of
the
restaurants
margins
are
and
I'm
only
saying
this
not
to
change
people's
minds.
Honestly,
it
was
because
this
was
my
struggle.
Q
It's
like
we
tailors
extremely
I
thought
emotional
plea
was
that
we
she
worked
so
hard
and
Lauren
worked
so
hard
and
if
we
lose
Longmont,
if
we
lose
these
cities
now,
because
we
did
this,
that
would
be
a
terrible
thing
and
it's
true
that
it's
a
maybe
and
a
maybe,
and
maybe-
and
maybe
it
won't.
But
there's
too
many
reasons
right
now.
Q
After
not
even
been
able
to
make
up
my
mind
until
just
now,
I
mean
just
like
a
half
hour
ago
for
us
not
to
wait
till
2025
for
me
between
Taylor
speech
and
these
restaurants
and
the
non-profits
that
have
their
rants
already
in
order
and
we'll
have
to
let
people
go
I.
Think
it's
a
big
enough
reason
to
just
wait:
one
more
a
year
till
20,
January
2025,
and
that's
what
I
think.
L
Thank
you,
Tara
mark
them
about.
S
I'm
going
to
agree
with
Tara
and
Rachel
on
this
having
gone
to
such
lengths
or
have
having
Taylor
gone
and
and
Lauren
having
gone
to
such
lengths
to
create
this
Regional
Cooperative
structure
to
Simply
abandon
it
is
going
to
have
some
very
far-reaching
consequences.
Other
cities
are
never
going
to
trust
us
again,
having
been
a
leader
of
putting
this
Coalition
together
and
then
simply
abandoning
it.
S
Why
would
any
of
these
cities
ever
trust
us
to
be
steadfast
in
our
approach
anytime,
going
forward?
Listen!
Everybody
on
this.
Council
is
desirous
of
seeing
wages
go
up
and
you
know
minimum
wages
increased.
There's
nobody
here,
who's
against
that,
but
it
to
do
the
economic
analysis
to
understand
exactly
what
it
is
we're
doing
to
bring
other
cities
along
with
us
in
doing
that
it
is
something
of
great
great
value
and
to
Simply,
say
you
know,
we're
out
Longmont.
Sorry,
Loveland!
S
Sorry,
you
know
we,
you
know,
don't
have
any
more
time
for
you.
It
is
to
me
a
a
strategic
mistake:
I
mean
we
are
leaders
here
and,
and
leaders
have
to
have
a
little
bit
of
consistency
in
how
they
approach
things
and
just
a
few
months
ago,
this
was
our
program.
Now,
three
months
later,
we
have
a
new
program
and
I
I
I.
Don't
think
that
makes
a
whole
lot
of
sense,
so
I'm
going
to
agree
with
them,
both
Tara
and
Rachel,
and
not
go
with
the
2020,
the
2024
increase.
G
Yeah
so
I'm
gonna
make
it
four
I'm
gonna
agree
with
Rachel
and
Tara
and
Mark.
For
all
the
reasons
they've
said
you
know,
maybe
Aaron
was
right
back
on
on
May
25th
when
he
was
the
the
sole
percent
Council
that
thought
we
should
do
it
by
in
2024,
but
that's
not
the
way
we
voted
and-
and
so
here
we
are
three
months
later
and
I
just
haven't
heard
any
change
and
circumstances
that
that
has
would
cause
us
to
suddenly
three
months
into
a
seven
month.
G
G
We
only
have
a
few
more
Council
meetings
left
on
this
Council
and
and
if
we
decide
to
do
this,
we're
gonna
have
to
jettison
some
of
the
things
that
you
all
I,
think
want
to
get
done
by
November
I,
don't
know
which
those
things
are
going
to
be
I
guess
CAC
would
have
to
decide
that
on
Monday
morning
you
know,
I
think
was
telling
to
hear
that
we
have
8
400
businesses,
90
of
which
have
fewer
than
what
was
it
20
employees
and
these
are
non-profits.
These
are
small
businesses.
G
These
are
minority-owned
businesses.
We've
heard
from
several
dozen
of
them
today
terrified
that
we
might
actually
do
this
and
we've
heard
from
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
we've
heard
from
the
Latino
Chamber
of
Commerce.
We
everybody
we've
heard
from
that,
actually
employs
folks.
That
said,
oh
my
God,
you
told
us
three
months
ago.
It
was
me
one
125
and
we
were
fine
with
that.
G
Now,
suddenly,
three
months
down
the
road,
and
only
four
months
before
the
end
of
the
year,
you're
telling
us
you
might
do
something
different
and
and
the
only
thing
that's
changed
in
the
last
three
months
is
two
or
three
County
Commissioners
changed
their
mind.
Last
week
last
week,
two
or
three
either
two
or
three
it
depends
on
who
you
talk
to
two
or
three
of
our
three
kind
of
Commissioners
decided
to
do
something
different
and
we
would
throw
it
blow
out
the
regional
approach.
G
We'd
alienate
our
sister
cities
that
we've
been
worked
so
hard
with
over
the
last
year.
We
would
do
significant
damage
to
many
of
those
8
400
businesses
and
and-
and
we
don't
even
know-
we
don't
even
know
how
many
employees
we'd
be
helping
here,
because
we
haven't
done
the
economic
analysis.
The
very
thing
we
said
in
May
that
we
need
to
do
before.
We
make
a
change.
We
don't
know
if
it's
a
thousand
employees,
100
employees
or
ten
employees.
We
have.
We
have
no
idea
how
many
people
were
helping
here.
G
Folks
I
mean
it's
just
we're
we're
jamming
this
we're
jamming
this
and
we're
gonna,
get
it
wrong
and
we're
going
to
piss
people
off
and
it's
just
not
the
right
way
to
govern
so
I
am
not
going
to
be
in
support
of
this
I
want
to
stick
with
the
decision
we
made
three
months
ago.
I
think
it
was
a
correct
decision
and,
quite
frankly,
it's
too
late
to
change.
U
You
did
say
that
you
need
to
hear
from
me
so
here
I
am.
This
has
been
a
very
tough
conversation
and
I
was
the
council
member
who
led
that
meeting
and
I
did
hear
the
echo
that
you
know
council
did
want
to
wait
until
2025,
but
as
of
today,
we've
received
a
lot
more
new
information.
U
We've
heard
from
Taylor
and
we've
also
heard
from
Lauren
who's
been
spearheading
this
particular
project
and
based
on
what
I
hear
from
her
today,
which
is
hey
I'm,
willing
to
support
the
15
As
I,
push
forward
to
increasing
or
minimum
wage
and
doing
the
regional
approach,
and
because
of
that
I'm
willing
to
support
where
she's
heading
I'm
willing
to
follow
the
county.
U
But
of
course
there
are
concerns,
and
the
thing
is
I
I
do
feel
that
this
is
a
little
bit
of
hypothetical
conversation,
we've
been
having
for
the
past
hour
or
hour
and
a
half,
because
the
county
has
not
done
its
public
hearing
on
this
particular
project.
So
we
don't
know
for
sure
100.
This
is
going
to
go
through.
That's
my
understanding
as
of
right
now,
but
ultimately
I
will
support
it.
U
But
I
would
ask
Nicole
Lauren
to
continue
to
push
to
get
us
to
join
the
regional
approach
in
getting
the
work
done
and
because
I
really
believe
honestly
as
I
was
thinking
through
this,
a
bird
in
the
hand,
is
much
better
than
a
bird
in
the
bush,
and
it's
it's
that
simple.
For
me.
U
We
need
to
increase
minimum
wage
or
wages
in
the
city
and
in
the
county
and
following
the
county,
actually
might
provide
us
some
best
practices
as
you're
doing
the
work
Lauren,
so
ultimately,
I
will
support
it
today
and
I
hope.
I
really
hope
that
you
will
continue
to
pursue
increasing
or
wages
because
again,
I
think
for
all
the
reasons
that
Nicole
mentioned
earlier.
Q
I
forgot
to
say
one
thing:
I
just
want
to
say:
I
have
a
slight
bit
of
aggravation
with
the
county,
even
though
I
love
the
Commissioners
dearly
they're,
not
taking
any
chance
because
they're
not
even
talking
about
their
own
workers
in
unincorporated,
Boulder
County.
So
it's
not
like
they're,
taking
a
risk
with
with
Community
engagement,
but
we're
taking
the
big
risk
and
that's
why
I'm
bothered
by
it.
Q
Q
It
pains
me
so
much
because
people
are
really
suffering,
but
I
have
to
say
that
the
argument
that
the
county
is
doing
it
they're,
really
not
unincorporated,
Boulder
County
is
doing
it
and
that
is
a
really
small
small
part
of
Boulder
County.
So
that's
what
I
forgot
to
say.
Sorry,
I
hope:
I
wasn't
too
impassioned.
B
No
you
weren't
Tara.
We
appreciate
that
I'll.
Try
to
close
this
out
I
mean
there's
certain
inalienable
truths
about
what's
going
on
here.
Right
I
mean
there's
folks
that
are
indeed
suffering
absolutely
have
needs,
and
this
is
these
are
these
are
the
things
we
see
we
see
the
impact
that
fa
has
has
is
seeing
on
a
daily
weekly
monthly
basis.
We
see
those
impacts.
B
We
also
see
the
fact
that
we
have
to
follow
the
data
that
we've
committed
ourselves
to
following
in
order
to
make
sound
decisions
and
I
I
struggle
with
the
with
being
fickle
about
when
we
hold
ourselves
to
those
truths
of
we
are
making
data-driven
decisions
to
when
we
are
not
or
we
are
willing
to
put
aside
information
or
or
not
have
it
at
all,
I
struggle
with
the
consistency
factor
with
that
there
there
is
no
doubt
this
council
is
gonna
act
in
2025..
B
If
the
Consortium
don't
have
their
act
together
and
other
folks
are
dragging
their
feet,
are
dropping
off
we're
gonna
have
we,
we
will
have
what
we
need
to
make
our
best
decision
for
ourselves
and
I'm
committed
to
that,
and
it
sounds
like
all
the
rest
of
the
eight
folks
here
are
willing
to
do
that
and
I
sure
hope.
The
candidates
running
for
Council
are
willing
to
do
that.
B
So
I
I,
I
I
think
that
there's
an
absolute
need
for
us
to
show
good
leadership
and
good
governance
and
pulling
the
rip
cord
with
three
months
to
make
a
decision
to
make
that
impact.
When
we
don't
know
really
who's
going
to
be
impacted,
I
I,
it's
not
good
governance.
It's
it's
poor
leadership
and
and
I
think
those
statements
earlier
about
our
reputation
is
absolutely
key.
I
mean
we
already
carry
a
reputation.
B
That
is
not
that
Pleasant
by
other
cities
in
the
community
I
sit
on
the
CML
policy
committee
and
I,
hear
it
all
the
time.
There's
a
righteousness
that
is
seen
about
us.
We
just
do
what
we
do
in
spite
of
others.
All
we
would
do
is
feed
that
narrative.
So,
the
next
time
we
go
to
sit
at
a
table
or
we
want
to
collaborate
on
something
as
important
or
bigger.
B
We've
just
made
it
harder
for
ourselves
to
have
our
voice
heard
and
I
think
that
that's
something
that
that
we
have
to
pay
forward
for
future
Council,
so
that
when
they're
at
that
table,
their
voice
will
be
heard,
because
we've
made
good
leadership
and
good
governance
decisions
on
on
really
critical
issues
where
we
say
we're
going
to
collaborate
and
we
follow
through
with
that,
we
can't
fall
into
do
as
we
say.
Not
as
we
do.
B
That's
that's
just
I.
Don't
think
that
flies
so
I'm
going
to
look
to
stay
the
course,
because
it's
it's
the
right
thing
to
do,
but
to
those
that
are
committed
to
to
wanting
to
see
minimum
wage.
We
will
get
that
done
and
we
will
chart
the
right
course
to
get
that
done
and
we'll
be
helping
our
community
along
the
way.
So
that
I
hope
that
sort
of
adds
some
clarity
for
staff,
I,
hope
staff
knows
it.
I
just
took
a
talent,
it
looks
like
you
know
those.
B
It
was
pretty
clear
as
when
you
first
dropple,
but
it
looks
like
you
know.
It
was
a
5-4
to
stay
the
course.
So
hopefully
that
gives
staff
clear
Direction
on
how
to
head
as
we
close
up
I
want
to
maybe
offer
any
any
final
Clarity
Taylor
Lauren.
Do
you
guys
have
what
you
need
to
move
forward
before
we
close
out
so
I
just
want
to
check
in
with
that
real
quick.
AA
Thanks
for
the
opportunity,
Matt
councilmember
Benjamin
I
do
have
what
I
need
to
move
forward
and
I
wanted
to
give
a
shout
out
to
Lauren.
Just
for
being
so
awesome
like
it's
been
she's
a
really
fantastic
person
to
work
with
and
she's
been
a
really
great
leader
of
of
this
project,
and
you
had
a
lot
to
wait
tonight.
So
thank
you
for
the
thoughtful
discussion
and
also
I'm
not
going
to
be
your
assistant
to
Council
in
like
two
days,
but.
C
C
The
cities
have
shared
that
on
how
you
have
been
critical
in
this
endeavor,
and
you
know
we're
just
so
proud
that
you
have
represented
us
so
well
throughout
the
Consortium
of
City's
work
and
I
just
want
to
assure
you
and
ashore
Council
and
Community.
We
will
continue
this
effort.
We
are
invested.
We
want
to
move
forward
on
minimum
wage,
we
want
to
support
our
community
and
we
will
continue
this
effort
with
our
partners
as
we
continue
to
to
move
forward
and
know
that
we
are
committed
as
well.
B
B
You've
done
an
admiral
job
taylor,
but
we
won't
not
see
you
because
you'll
be
over
in
climate
initiatives,
but
what
a
great
send-off
in
many
ways,
because
you've
helped
walk
us
through
and
lead
us
through
a
tremendously
important
and
Monumental
project,
and
so
couldn't
think
of
a
better
way
for
us
to
spend
time
with
you
with
you
sort
of
delivering
and
showing
great
leadership
on
an
important
issue
like
this.
So
thank
you.
So
much
Taylor
I
see
two
hands
up
for
some
final
thoughts
and
comments.
I
see
Aaron
and
Mark.
T
I
just
have
to
add
to
the
thanks
for
Taylor.
Taylor.
You've
worked
incredibly
hard
on
this
and
done
a
phenomenal
job
and
then
gave
a
wonderful,
succinct,
perfect
presentation
tonight
and
thanks
for
sticking
with
us
for
yet
another
late
night
and
just
deeply
appreciative
that
that
all
you've
done
in
this
role
with
minimum
wage
and
then,
as
the
council
assistant,
just
super
super
grateful.
Y
S
Yeah
Taylor,
it's
been
a
long
time
since
you
were
merely
a
an
assistant
to
the
council.
You
have
become
a
policy
maker
and
a
major
player
in
this
and
I
greatly
appreciate
all
the
work
that
you've
done
and
I
look
forward
to
the
work
that
you're
going
to
be
doing
going
forward.
So
thank
you
again.
AA
O
You
know
we
definitely
wouldn't
be
where
we're
at
with
this
work,
without
the
tremendous
amount
of
effort
and
help
that
you've
put
into
it
and
yeah
I,
look
forward
to
seeing
what
you
do
with
climate
initiatives
and
to
continue
to
work
together.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
U
U
Actually
I
appreciate
your
work
that
you've
done
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
you
grow
in
your
new
field
and
I
wish
you
the
best
and
I'm
still
here,
yeah
just
reach
out
anytime
and
I'll
certainly
will
reach
out
to
you,
because
I'm
definitely
going
to
need
help
when
I'm
doing
environmental
legislation,
so
I
look
forward
to
engaging
you
in
a
different
capacity.
Thank
you.
Taylor
awesome.
Q
The
ball
first
of
all
you're,
so
smart
and
I
learned
so
much
from
you,
especially
all
about
the
First
Amendment.
Remember
that
Taylor
yeah
but
I
want
to
say
it
pained
me
to
ask
you
for
business
cards.
I'm
like
Taylor,
is
so
smart
and
I'm
asking
her
to
get
me
business
cards.
It's
embarrassing,
so
I'm
very
exciting,
excited
sorry,
I'm,
tired
too
I'm
very
excited,
though,
because
climate
initiatives
is
really
the
future
and
you're
the
future,
and
so
I
know
it's
not
goodbye.
Q
You
know
it's
going
to
be
collaboration
in
just
a
new
and
better
level.
You
know
so.
P
Quick
gonna
add
that
I
mean
I
guess
it
has
turned
into
goodbye
Taylor,
even
though
you're
not
going
so
I
wanted
to
participate
and
say
that
this
is
not
Taylor's.
First
rodeo
like
tonight
is
minimum
wage,
but
I
I.
Think
of
our
first
rodeo
in
terms
of
regional
leadership
as
the
gun,
violence,
prevention,
Regional
initiative
and
I.
Don't
think
we
would
have
that
either
and
and
have
had
success
with
a
lot
of
cities
participating.
They
needed
Boulders
leadership
and
that
meant
Taylor
in
that
capacity
as
well.
So
thank
you.
L
G
Nicole
I'll
just
say
two
words:
Cindy
Carlisle,
your
council
member
Cindy
Carlisle
several
years
ago,
who
insisted
that
that
Council
needed
an
assistant-
and
we
were
all
kind
of
skeptical
about
that,
and
the
former
city
manager
said
well
I,
guess
we'll
give
it
a
try
and
Taylor
has
proven
her
worth
and
she's
proven
Cindy
Carlisle
right.
We
did
need
an
assistant
and
you've
been
more
than
an
assistant.
You've
been
you've,
been
our
friend,
you've
been
like
a
10th
member
of
council
and
we
are
going
to
seriously
miss
you.
Our
loss,
however,
is
Jonathan.
G
Cohen's
gain
damn
him,
and
we
look
forward
to
many
many
great
presentations
just
like
tonight
from
you
on
behalf
of
the
climate
team.
So
thank
you
for
for
growing
with
the
city
and
we
need
to
more
now
more
than
ever.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
Bob.
M
AA
Thank
you
guys
so
much
I'm
like
gonna
go
cry
and
drink
a
beer
now
I'm
gonna
have
more
words
to
say
to
to
each
of
you
later.
It's
been
a
lot
of
emotions.
AA
This
was
my
first
step
into
like
first
job
out
of
school
and
then
really
stepped
into
my
career,
and
this
has
really
set
the
tone
for
how
I'm
gonna
lead
myself
as
a
professional
for
really
the
rest
of
my
career.
So
thank
you
for
all
being
sort
of
comrades
in
that
and
I'll.
Let
you
all
get
to
sleep
now,
but
I
guess
Matt.
Take
it
away
and
close
ass.
Oh.
B
Thank
you,
but
yeah,
it's
not
just
leading
yourself,
you'll
be
leading
others
along
the
way
too,
all
right!
Well,
10
55!
B
We
we
got
through
a
lot
tonight,
we're
gonna
close
out
this
meeting.
Thank
you
all
have
a
wonderful
night
and
we
will
see
you
no
meeting
next
week,
so
we
all
get
a
little
bit
of
a
respite.
We'll
catch
up
on
the
first
week
of
September,
enjoy
a
Thursday
off
good
night.
See
you
later.