►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Meeting 10-27-22
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
Thank
you
so
good
evening,
everyone
good
evening,
everyone
and
welcome
to
tonight's
study
session
of
the
Boulder
City
Council
I'm
council,
member
Lauren
folkerts,
and
thank
you
for
joining
us
on
tonight's
agenda.
We
have
two
items.
Our
first
item
will
cover
a
discussion
on
the
council
priority
to
revise
the
existing
inclusionary
housing
program
to
focus
on
middle-income
housing,
and
next
we
will
have
a
discussion
on
the
boards
and
commissions
process.
B
So
we
have
our
covid-19
testing
and
vaccinations
for
testing
for
more
information
and
provide
our
locations
for
free
covid-19
testing.
Please
go
to
www.boko.org
covid
testing.
Our
Boulder
site
is
still
open.
2445
stazio
drive
seven
days
a
week
from
8
AM
to
6
p.m
and
for
vaccine
information
and
provider
locations.
Please
go
to
boco.org
covid
vaccine.
B
And
next
we
have
our
return
to
council
chambers
with
the
public
being
back
in
Chambers.
We
want
to
remind
you
that
we
are
offering
public
participation
both
virtually
and
in
person.
Advanced
Sign
up
is
required
and
no
in-person
signups
will
be
available.
During
the
meeting
you
will
be
asked
to
indicate
on
the
open
comment
and
public
hearing
sign
up
forms.
If
you
will
be
speaking
virtually
or
in
person,
in-person
speakers
will
speak
first
and
virtual
speakers
will
follow.
B
Okay,
thank
you
before
we
go
into
our
work
items
I'd
like
to
outline
how
the
meeting
will
be
conducted.
First,
we
will
review
staff's
presentation
for
each
item
and
then
we
will
have
time
for
questions.
At
the
end
of
the
presentation,
we
will
conduct
our
Council
discussion
with
staff.
If
you
have
questions,
please
wait
for
staff
to
complete
their
presentation.
B
D
Thanks
so
much
Lauren
and
I
believe
we've
got
a
full
Full
Slate
of
conversations
today,
so
I
won't
take
a
lot
of
time
talking,
but
we'll
say
that
inclusionary
housing
is
a
really
important
topic
and
one
that
Boulder
has
worked
hard
on
over
the
years
and
in
fact,
being
a
source
that
other
cities
turn
to
for
advice
as
that
moves
forward.
So
Kurt
I
think
I'll
start
with
you.
If
you
wanted
to
do
it
before,
we
send
it
over
to
Jay.
E
Good
evening,
Council
Kirk
for
an
hour
director
of
Housing
and
Human
Services
hold
on
for
one
second
we're
having
a
technical
issue
yeah
there
we
go
so
tonight,
I'll
be
joined
by
Jay,
sugnet
and
Michelle
Allen.
E
They
they
work
with
the
developers
within
our
community
and
they
work
around
how
housing
policies.
This
is
our
first
discussion
with
this
Council
for
a
study
session
on
affordable
housing.
So
we're
really
looking
forward
to
receiving
both
your
questions
and
feedback.
E
Looking
forward
to
handing
this
over
to
Jay,
who
will
be
doing
the
presentation
and
and
then
having
the
discussion
with
you,
where
we
will
come
back
to
you,
you
know,
based
on
the
feedback
that
we
hear
tonight
so
I'll
hand
it
over
to
Jay.
F
F
So
Council
identified
two
priorities
related
to
housing
that
are
squarely
in
the
domain
of
Housing
and
Human
Services,
as
Kurt
mentioned
the
first
one
we're
going
to
talk
about
it,
for
the
bulk
of
the
conversation
tonight
is
about
inclusionary
housing,
but
I
also
wanted
to
mention
the
down
payment
assistance
pilot.
F
So
just
a
quick
aside
that
is
moving
forward
and
we
hope
to
return
to
council
later
either
later
this
year
or
early
next.
But
basically
this
was
a
down
payment
assistance
pilot
that
was
approved
by
the
boulder
voters.
Back
in
2019.
I
was
put
on
hold
due
to
the
pandemic
and
the
since
then
the
market
really
has
changed
pretty
dramatically
and
there's
a
desire
to
re-look
at
some
of
the
assumptions.
F
So
we've
hired
a
consultant
with
the
the
goal
of
trying
to
better
understand
the
potential
financial
and
social
impacts
both
to
the
city,
but
also
to
the
Future
borrowers.
F
F
So
the
purpose
of
tonight
is
a
bit
of
an
update
of
primer
on
affordable
housing,
but
really
to
get
your
feedback
on
these
updates
that
were,
we've
identified
as
potential
topics
to
explore
and
also
get
your
feedback
on
the
overall
process
to
the
public
process
to
Implement.
These
updates
next
slide.
F
So
the
issue
I
think
everybody
knows
well,
but
this
is
a
good
illustration.
So
this
shows
that
area
median
income
for
a
three-person
household,
about
105,
000,
that's
annual
income,
and
you
can
see
half
of
people
in
Boulder
earn
more
half
of
people
earn
less,
but
the
single
family
owned
businesses
had
a
pretty
significant
increase
in
the
past
year,
so
1.25
million.
F
So
that
means
half
of
the
home
sold
for
more
and
half
of
the
homes
sold
for
Less,
so
that
differential
between
what
what
Boulder
households
are
earning
and
housing
costs
is
really
what's
driving
this
problem
next
slide
and
before
I
go
too
far.
I
wanted
to
just
be
really
clear
about
when
we
talk
about
affordable
housing,
we're
talking
about
deed,
restricted
in
perpetuity
permanent,
affordable,
permanently,
affordable
housing.
So
those
are
the
homes
that
are
in
our
program,
and
the
intention
is
with
both
rental
and
homeownership.
F
Is
that
no
one
pays
more
than
one-third
of
their
household
income
on
their
housing
costs
overall?
So
just
when
we
talk
about
affordable
housing,
we're
talking
about
the
permanently
affordable,
so,
as
Kurt
mentioned,
we
do
have
a
long
history
that
time
frame
that
I
gave
you
on.
The
last
slide
only
went
to
2010,
but
Boulder
recognized
that
affordability
was
a
challenge
going
over
a
half
century,
so
you
can
see
from
the
1960s
when
the
Housing
Authority
was
first
formed
and
there
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
this
point
by
point.
F
But
there
is
a
really
good
detailed
summary
of
each
of
these
in
your
packet.
F
F
So
in
all
that
hard
work
is
really
paid
off,
so
we
have
just
over
3
800
homes
in
our
program
that
are
from
the
affordable,
that's
8.1
percent
are
permanently
affordable
and
more
than
halfway
towards
our
15
goal,
and
this
graph
below
is
is
really
worth
spending
some
time
on
and
making
sure
everybody
understands
it.
So
out
of
every
100
units
that
were
built
in
the
five-year
period,
a
do
one
of
those
were
Market
rates,
and
this
is
new
construction
and
out
of
those
hundred
units,
19
were
permanently
affordable.
B
D
F
Unique
things
about
folder
is
that
in
that
time
period
we've
also
been
able
to
acquire
70
additional
units
through
preservation,
purchasing
existing
affordable
or
purchasing
existing
market
rate
housing
and
converting
it
to
deed,
restricted
permanently
reported
so
for
every
100
units
we're
technically
getting
36,
which
is
significantly
higher
than
25
percent
inclusionary
housing
requirement
that
we'll
talk
next
slide.
F
So
I
want
to
talk
about
the
three
major
tools
for
achieving
our
affordable
housing
goals.
The
first
one
is
annexation,
so
we're
both
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan
identifies
the
need
for
an
annexation,
particularly
or
residential,
to
provide
Community
benefit
to
ensure
that
that
growth
and
development
contribute
positively
to
the
community
and
for
residential,
that's
typically,
as
I
said,
permanently
affordable
housing.
So
we
have
slightly
different
thresholds,
so
small
developments
so
one
to
four
units.
We
typically
work
for
two
times
cash
for
large
developments.
F
So
if
it's
30
or
more
units,
typically,
the
requirement
is
40
to
50
percent.
Since
the
last
update
in
2018
for
Middle
income,
we've
really
focused
or
shifted
the
focus
from
moderate
income
household
ownership
to
Middle
income.
A
F
Then
mid-size
developments
was
that
area
in
between
that
have
been
a
bit
challenging
and
Council
has
wrestled
with
those
in
the
past
year
and
staff
intends
to
return
fairly
in
the
next
year
with
some
potential
solutions
for
that
as
well,
and
the
one
thing
I
want
to
be
clear
with
one
of
the
key
outcomes
is
that
annexation
has
been
a
great
tool
for
us
to
get
ownership
opportunities.
F
So
the
other.
You
know,
if
you
think,
of
a
holiday,
neighborhood
or
Northfield
Commons,
there's
pretty
significant
number
of
those
for
ownership,
and
that
will
become
really
important
later
in
the
conversation
next
slide.
F
Number
two
is
inclusionary
housing,
so
this
is
basically
a
tool
that
a
lot
of
jurisdictions
are
are
pursuing,
Boulder's
been
doing
it
for
quite
a
while.
It
basically
requires
all
new
development
to
contribute
a
percentage
of
housing
to
as
permanently
affordable,
and
this
in
Boulder
it's
25.
We
raised
it
in
2018
from
20
to
25
that
extra
five
percent
was
specifically
for
Middle
income
and
there
are
four
options,
so
they
can
provide
those
units
on
site
off-site.
F
They
can
make
a
cash
and
live
contribution
or
they
can
dedicate
land
for
affordable
housing
next
slide,
so
Kurt
called
it
the
Workhorse
absolutely
so
you
can
see
just
the
sheer
amount
of
cash
and
live
that
has
basically
come
to
the
city,
but
over
the
past
since
2013.,
and
it's
the
most
common
way
of
satisfying
our
inclusionary,
obviously
obligation
next
slide.
F
And
outcomes
so
between
2013
and
2021,
there
were
182
developments
in
the
city
that
were
subject
to
IH,
very
different,
the
outcomes
of
that,
as
you
can
see,
the
vast
majority
all
except
for
seven
paid
cash
and
that
brought
in
53.8
million
dollars.
And
but
we
have
gotten
some
on-site,
we've
gotten
three
affordable
ownership
projects,
four,
affordable
rental
projects
and.
F
Part
of
the
challenge
is
that
the
outcomes
we
aren't
getting
the
outside
on-site
outcomes
that
we
were
hoping
for,
particularly
with
the
update
back
in
2018.
next
slide.
F
So
the
third
tool
is
local
funding,
so
we
brought
in
over
85
million
dollars
over
the
past
six
years,
and
cash
in
there
is
definitely
the
most
significant
portion
of
that
in
almost
half
we
also
get
property
tax
and
that
basically
goes
into
our
obstacle.
F
The
community
housing
assistance
program,
the
child
program.
You
may
remember
from
your
budget
discussions:
we
also
get
federal
funds
and
we,
those
are
Community,
Development
block
grants
home
funding
and
we
also
have
commercial
linkage
fees,
so
that
is
similar
to
an
inclusionary
housing
requirement,
but
it
applies
to
non-residential
development.
F
So
all
new
office,
Hotel
other
things-
have
to
pay
at
first
worst
foot
fee
as
part
of
new
development
to
help
support,
affordable
housing
so
that
linkage
fee
has
been
11.
But
we
anticipate
that
that
portion
of
the
pie
will
continue
to
grow
in
the
coming
years
next
slide,
so
that
local
funding
is
really
key
to
this
conversation,
so
local
those
local
dollars
can
get
leveraged
with
outside
sources,
sometimes
too
three
and
sometimes
four
dollars
in
state
and
federal
funding.
F
It
also
provides
a
wide
variety
of
housing
types
that
are
geographically
dispersed
so
that
acquisition
comes
into
play.
If
we
were
relying
on
IH
and
on
sighting
outcomes
entirely.
This
map
would
look
very
different.
It
would
be
even
more
focused
on
areas
where
there's
new
construction
happening
and
it's
the
primary
source
of
magic
for
acquisition,
but
also
middle
income.
So
we
don't
have
the
same.
F
Those
ability
to
Leverage
outside
sources
for
Middle
income
as
well,
we'll
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
more
next
slide.
F
So
the
bottom
line,
so
IH
is
producing
very
few
affordable
units
directly,
but
it's
producing
significant
number
through
its
chemical
contributions.
F
So
we
want
to
strengthen
the
program.
Look
at
how
do
we
create
some
additional
incentives?
How
do
we
strengthen
the
current
incentives,
increase
the
overall
program
efficiencies
and
go
some
loopholes?
Talk
about
that?
A
little
bit,
but
we
also.
F
F
So
of
those
three
tools,
you
can
see
the
outcome,
so
the
annual
production
is
highly
variable.
It
depends
on
how
of
development
in
general,
which
is
also
highly
variable.
The
main
thing
take
away
from
this
slide
just
shows
look
at
the
amount
of
blue,
which
is
rental
versus
home
ownership,
so
you
can
see
very
early
in
the
program
up
to
2013
or
2012.
F
There
was
a
lot
more
homeownership
units
created
and,
after
that,
it
switched
to
rent
next
slide,
and
this
just
shows
that
in
a
pie
chart-
and
this
is
really
quite
significant-
because
when
we're
talking
about
middle
income,
we're
talking
about
ownership
right
so
for
the
2016
middle
incomes
strategy
and
the
market
analysis
showed
that
that
the
vast
majority
of
rentals
were
affordable
to
Boulder
households
and-
and
we
believe
that's
still
true
today.
So
this
ownership
piece
is
what's
really
challenging.
F
F
Definition,
so
middle
income.
What
we're
talking
about
typically,
is
80
to
120
percent
of
Boulders
area
median
income,
so
it
scaled
depending
on
the
household
size,
but
that
just
gives
you
a
sense
of
who
the
income
ranges
that
we're
talking
about
and
on
the
upper
end,
you
notice
they.
Those
are
six
figure.
Salvments
next
slide.
F
So
quite
a
few
challenges
that
we've
been
talking
about,
so
those
home
prices
increasing
greater
than
median
income,
but
also
the
housing
market
has
been
slow
to
recovered
from
the
2009
housing
crisis,
and
it's
no
longer
just
Bolder
talking
about
this
for
Mountain
communities,
it's
almost
every
Community
across
the
country
and
then
additional
challenges
are
creeping
up
on
us.
So
we
have
high
inflation
as
well
as
rising
interest
rates.
I
just
heard
today
that
the
average
interest
rate
is
over
seven
percent
for
the
first
time
in
over
a
decade.
F
And
one
thing
or
a
big
part
of
this
whole
puzzle
is
the
challenge
around.
How
do
we
get
ownership
and
they
typically
what
the
city
does
is
we
help
provide
Gap
financing
for
our
affordable
housing
partners,
and
this
graphic
just
illustrates
our
typical
subsidy
to
stakeholder
housing
Partners,
where
someone
else
is
roughly
80
to
120
or.
A
F
000
per
unit
and
that's
for
new
construction
for
rentals
ownership
acquisition,
we've
purchased
four
homes
on
the
open
market
just
just
this
year
and
that
average
subsidy
is.
F
110,
it
goes
up
with
larger
units,
but
this
the
big
challenge
with
ownership
is
new
construction.
That
Gap
is
is
quite
significant,
so
half
a
million
to
six
hundred
thousand.
So
these
are
very
rough
numbers.
This
is
just
basically
what
we've
experienced
over
the
past
year
and
these
numbers
keep
growing
every
year.
Next
slide.
F
So
we
have
some
existing
tools
and
new
tools
coming
along
down
the
the
pipeline
so
of
those
local
tools
that
acquisition
and
rehab
that
I
mentioned
those
four
units
that
we're
purchasing
annexation.
We
probably
won't
see
a
lot
of
new
units,
but
we
can
see
a
pretty
steady
stream
and
we
have
the
H2O,
which
is
home
to
ownership
down
payment
assistance
program.
F
There
is
also
the
middle
income
down
payment
pilot.
Is
that
what
I
meant
I
talked
about
very
briefly
at
the
beginning?
That's
also
coming
along,
and
then
the
state
has
also,
for
the
first
time
really
gotten
involved
in
Middle
income
as
well,
so
the
in
particular
they,
the
state,
has
created
a
middle-income,
Housing
Authority
with
special
powers
to
help
encourage
ownership
and
mental
income
and
they've.
F
Also,
the
state
legislature
has
allocated
a
half
a
billion
dollars
towards
affordable
housing
and
a
big
chunk
of
that
is
dedicated
specifically
to
Middle
income
and
ownership
ownership,
and
then
something
else
we're
very
excited
about.
The
state
has
a
down
payment
assistance
program
that
can
be
layered
on
top
of
local
programs
and
that's
25
000,
no
interest
loan
to
any
to
moderate
and
middle
income.
A
F
A
lot
of
it
is
basically
increasing
our
funding,
but
we
have
given
up
on
the
both
of
trying
to
incentivize
outcomes
and
particularly
for
sale,
but
we
want
to
explore
the
potential
of
increasing
cash
and
live
for
larger
homes.
So,
currently
a
home,
that's
1200
square
feet.
Okay,
is
the
same
cash
flow
amount
as
a
home,
that's
four
thousand
or
six
dollars
or
even
8
000.,
so
we're
exploring
a
way
to
capture
the
difference
in
charge
so
that
larger
homes
pay
in
a
fair
share
of
the
caption
there.
F
Also
currently,
if
you
are
demolishing
a
home
or
replacing
a
home,
you're
not
required
to
pay
cash
and,
as
we
know,
sometimes
very
modest-
comes
very
get
replaced
with
fairly
large
homes.
So
perhaps
there's
a
way
to
look
at
how
do
we
capture
the
difference
in
added
square
foot
so
that
they
do
pay
some
sort
of
cash
next
slide?.
F
And
then
overall,
strategies
to
improve
the
efficiency
and
the
outcomes,
so
we'd
like
to
modify
the
inclusionary
housing
rents
to
serve
a
wide
range
of
incomes
So.
Currently,
if
a
private
developer
comes
in
and
wants
to
provide
affordable
rental
housing,
they
are
just
simply
required
to
provide
60
Amis
and
there
is
definitely
a
need
in.
F
For
50
emis
and
lowered
to
really
provide
housing
to
people
in
our
community
that
need
it.
The
most
we'd
also
like
to
adjust
the
how
we
establish
the
methodology
for
cash
and
load.
That's
where
a
consultant
can
help
in
terms
of
looking
at
what
other
cities
are
doing,
and
then
another
code
name
a
clean
up
items
specifically
one
is
looking
at
land
the
land
dedication
option,
so
we've
had
two
recent
land
dedications
and
we've
have
some
lessons.
C
F
That
we'd
like
to
incorporate
into
an
update
next
slide
foreign
and
then
overall
proposed
project
schedule
and
Community
engagement.
So
this
is
our
basic
time
frame.
There's
an
attachment,
that's
specific
to
that,
and
also
there's
an
attachment
on
the
racial
Equity
assessment,
which
is
basically
an
ongoing
process
throughout
to
make
sure
that
what
we're
doing
helps
us
to
achieve
our
racial
Equity
goals,
and
it's
important
to
note
that
what
we
found
so
far
is
that
you
know
the
affordable,
housing
and
and
the
diversity
of
households
that
we
have
in
our
affordable
housing.
F
F
So
that's
it
so
questions
for
Council,
but
we
would
have
be
more.
C
I
I
do
want
to
start
off
with
one
question
in
the
packet
there's
a
paragraph
that
reads:
missing:
middle
versus
middle
income
and
I'll
just
read
it
out
loud,
because
not
everybody
watching
will
have
probably
seen
it.
This
is
missing:
middle
housing
and
middle
income.
Housing
households
are
often
conflated
but
are
two
different
concepts.
I
Missing
middle
refers
to
a
building
type
like
duplexes,
fourplexes
and
Bungalow
courts.
In
contrast
to
what
the
housing
market
has
mostly
provided.
Post
World,
War,
II,
I.E,
single-family,
housing,
larger
Apartments,
condo
buildings,
missing
metal,
housing
and
Boulder,
particularly
new
construction,
is
not
affordable
to
Middle
income,
households
and
I'm,
going
to
pair
that
with
something
that
was
presented
in
the
slide.
I
I
According
to
the
slide,
it
has
even
doubled
since
2010
and
I
think
the
missing
middle
by
the
what
was
presented
in
the
packet
would
count
like
a
duplex
I
think
would
count
as
a
an
attached
home
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand.
Why
does
the
packet
say
missing?
Middle
housing
in
Boulder
is
not
affordable
to
Middle
income.
Households
is
my
first
question.
F
Sure
I
mean
that's
a
great
question:
it
and
I
experience
with
discussions
with
planning
board
and
also
the
housing
Advisory
Board.
That
seems
to
confuse
things
so
and
also
these
folder.
F
F
F
Hundred
thousand
dollar
town
home
or
a
1.2
million
dollar
town.
So
for
me
it's
just
helpful
to
to
have
that
distinction.
As
part
of
the
conversation
does
that
make
sense,
it.
I
I
I
do
hear
what
you're
saying
I
I
I
may
agree
to
disagree
and
come
back
during
during
comments
with
it.
But
I
appreciate
that
the
explanation
and
then
let's
see
also
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
timeline
that
was
presented.
You're
looking
for
stakeholder
feedback,
March
and
April,
and
then
a
new
code
section,
May
June,
and
then
we
would
vote
in
july-ish.
Would
that
be
the
expectation
on
something
new.
L
Thanks
Lauren
I
will
I
will
join
and
follow
up
with
where
Rachel's
line
of
inquiry
was
on
missing
middle
and
middle
later.
But
just
so
there's
a
two
of
us
interested
in
that
my
question
is
I,
don't
think
I
saw
it.
Maybe
you
alluded
to
while
I
was
taking
notes.
So
if
it's
redundant,
my
apologies,
how
what
is
our
progress
on
reaching
our
15
of
inventory
by
2035.,
where,
where
are
we
on
that
trajectory,
so
I'm
kind
of
wondering
if
you
have?
F
F
C
F
Staff
realized
that
we
were
getting
fairly
close
to
the
10
goal,
and
so
we
went
through
a
process
and
raised
it
to
15,
and
so
the
part
of
that
conversation,
as
I
recall,
was
wanting
to
create
something
that
was
ambitious
but
at
the
same
time
realistic
but
yeah,
it's
really
challenging
to
say
yes
we're
on
track,
nor
not
on
track
it
really.
A
lot
of
it
depends
on
the
market
and
a
lot
of
other
factors.
F
E
Thank
you
Matt,
so
just
a
little
more
information
on
that.
We
have
I
think
it's
about
12,
12
or
1300
units
that
are
in
the
the
pipeline
right
now,
which
are
either
under
construction
or
are
in
the
planning
or
development
entitlement
process.
E
E
E
We
also
had
about
a
thousand
units
in
the
pipeline
at
that
time,
so
I'm
encouraged
that
that
pipeline
has
not
gone
down.
It's
actually
gone
up
a
bit.
We've
also
seen
over
this
last
year
that
the
amount
of
Gap
funding
required
to
implement,
affordable
housing
is
going
up
and
so
not
not
sure,
if
we'll
be
able
to
maintain
the
pace
that
we've
had
over
the
last
two
and
a
half
years,
which
has
been
a
very
good
pace.
E
So
there's
a
lot
of
factors
that
come
in
the
Market's
changing
prices,
the
price
of
developing
housing
is
changing,
but
we
have
continued
to
keep
a
good
pipeline
of
housing
units
moving
forward.
L
M
When
what
can
you
tell
me
what
caused
the
shift
from
the
39
ownership
level
to
the
eight
percent
ownership
level
that
we're
experiencing
today.
F
Yeah
I
wish
I
could
point
to
one
single
Factor
as
to
why
that
happened.
As
we
tried
to
explain
in
the
moment,
I
think
it's
it's.
A
combination
of
different
market
dynamics
was
the
big
one.
F
So
when
that
burst-
and
you
know
the
fact
that
subprime
mortgages
exploded-
and
there
was
a
serious
clampdown
in
terms
of
who
the
federal
government
would
actually
provide
back
alone,
there's
also
construction
defects,
there's
also
a
shifting
in
Federal
Financing,
so
I,
don't
think
we
can
point
to
one
thing
in
particular:
I
think
it's
a
combination
of
all
those
different
factors-
okay
and
and
the
thing
that
that
well
I
feel
like
I,
have
confidence
in
saying
that
is
because
it's
not
unique
to
Boulder.
M
But
by
the
way,
when
you
do
estimates
of
the
cost
to
produce
middle
income
housing,
what
do
you
use
as
a
as
a
hard
cost
of
construction.
N
So
what
we've
been
focusing
on
is
using
our
local
funds
for
acquisition.
So
does
that
make
sense.
M
F
No,
it
does
not.
So
that's
just
that's
purely
money
that
came
into
the
city
that
money
went
back
out
to
our
housing,
Partners,
okay
and
they
were
used
able
to
use
that
money
to
leverage
it.
M
E
M
A
look
at
at
one
of
these
rent-to-own
programs
that
might
be
useful
for
people
in
affordable
housing.
E
I'll
answer
that
if
I
can
so
we
we
haven't,
we
haven't
done
that
and
there's
a
few
factors
involved
with
that:
the
rent
to
own,
with,
with
a
rent
to
own
approach,
you're,
not
able
to
Leverage
The
the
tax
credit
dollars
that
you
just
spoke
about
or
requested
information
on,
so
it
it
makes
the
creation
of
that
affordable
unit
very
expensive,
okay.
E
So
it's
a
model
that
can
work
for
the
for
the
residents,
but
it's
it's
very
difficult
to
put
the
get
the
financing
resources
to
to
make
that
approach,
particularly
with
the
high
cost
of
of
development.
Okay,.
M
My
last
question
is:
promise
is
my
last
when
we
look
at
cash
and
Lou
for
demolition
or
replacement
of
an
existing
home.
I
I
assume
that's
going
to
be
on
some
form
of
press
graphic
basis,
so
that
we
treat
a
2
000
square
foot
replacement
differently
than
a
mcmansion.
F
Correct
yeah,
so
we
don't
know
if
it
would
be
per
square
foot
or
if
it
could
be
ranges
of
square
footage
that
would
basically
escalate
as
it
gets,
bigger
and
bigger.
O
You
I
have
a
similar
question
to
Matt
and
I
feel
like
I,
didn't
really
hear
an
answer
or
if
there
is
even
an
answer
to
that,
and
my
question
is
since
we're
at
8.1
and
the
hope
is
to
get
to
15
by
2030,
so
I'm
wondering,
are
we
growing?
What
is
there
a?
How
do
I
put
it?
Do
we
know
how
how
much
we're
growing
each
year?
Is
there
such
a
goal?
Is
there
such
a
metrics
or
is
it
more?
Are
we
just
doing
it
every
five
years?
F
So
I
mean
when
I
started
with
the
city
about
nine
years
ago.
We
were
I,
think
about
6.8
or
I'm,
sorry
6.1,
so
we
are
for
we
are
making
progress
and
it's
something
that
we
measure
annually.
So
we
will
know
at
the
end
of
December
31st.
We
know
exactly
how
many
market
rate
units
were,
and
we
know
how
many
affordable
units
were
permitted,
so
our
affordable
housing
dashboard
really
does
try
to
reflect
that
information,
at
least
on
an
annual
basis.
Does
that
help.
O
Yeah
it
it
does.
Thank
you
so
much
and
from
what
I'm
hearing
from
you
it's
more
of
a
reactive
approach,
I
I,
suppose
the
city
is
not
in
in
the
business
of
creating
housing
in
itself,
so
you're
waiting
to
see
at
the
end
of
the
year
to
see
how
much
you've
created
and
then
you
somehow
update
the
metrics
as
opposed
to
say.
O
O
A
O
F
Yeah,
it's
a
six
year
period,
the
85
million,
but
yeah
the
there
were.
We
don't
get
stage
funding.
B
Thanks
Junie
Nicole
and
then
Bob.
G
Thank
you
and
thanks
thanks
for
this
great
memo
in
the
presentation.
I
have
a
question:
that's
probably
going
to
sound,
really
stupid,
but
it's
really
just
me
trying
to
kind
of
take
us
way
back
to
a
really
really
high
level.
Do
we
know
why
people
want
home
ownership?
G
F
I
mean
it's
been,
the
American
dream,
for
quite
some
time
is
owning
your
own
home.
It's
it's
seen
as
the
pathway
of
Building
Wealth
intergenerational
wealth
and
the
US
is
kind
of
unique
in
that
way.
Most
most
other
countries,
I,
would
argue,
there's
there's
much
more
acceptance
of
of
renting
so
yeah
I'm
sure
others
have
different
opinions
and
thoughts
on
that
as
well.
But
that's
what
I
would
say.
G
And
I
I
mean
the
the
reason
that
I
ask
is
because
what
people's
motivations
are
in
getting
into
the
program
like
fundamentally,
this
is
a
program
for
the
people
in
our
community
who
wish
to
live
in
our
community
and
I.
Think
the
way
that
we
are
the
suggestions
around
how
to
modify
some
of
this
really
depends
for
me
on
why
people
want
home
ownership.
Do
they
want
it
because
they
build
wealth?
Do
they
want
it
because
it
can
potentially
stabilize
housing
costs
when
they're
kind
of
skyrocketing?
G
In
other
ways
do
they
want
it
just
because
they
like
to
Tinker
and
they
want
to
be
able
to
you
know,
put
in
bookshelves
or
whatever
it
is
that
they
want
to
do
to
me
that
that
really
feels
like
a
critical
piece
of
information,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
if
the
engagement
process
will
maybe
involve
some
of
those
kinds
of
questions
to
understand
the
people
who
are
looking
at
this.
Why?
G
Because
I
think
that
there
are
some
anyway
I'll
wait
for
discussion
for
the
rest
of
that,
but
the
other
question
that
I
had
so
I'm
just
going
to
summarize.
That
is
that
we
don't
totally
know
we
can
guess,
but
we
don't.
We
don't
really
know
why
people
in
our
community
want
home
ownership
and
the
other
question
that
I
had
was
I
was
just
trying
to
understand
the
engagement
plan
a
little
bit
and
I
talked
about
the
primary
stakeholders.
G
G
F
So
my
understanding
is
that's
really
from
the
our
our
community
engagement
framework
is
to
be
super
clear
with
the
public
and
who
our
stakeholders
are
and
what
the
level
of
involvement
is
is
to
be
expected,
so
I
mean.
So
that's
the
purpose
of.
A
F
To
articulate
that
early
on
in
the
process,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
that's
exactly
what's
going
to
happen,
I
mean
I.
Think
processes
evolve
one
group
to
get
moved
from
one
box
to
another
fairly
easily.
So
does
that
help
answer?
Yes,.
G
Yeah
yeah,
no,
it
does
I
was
just
because
to
me
that
the
people
who
want
homeowners
feel
like
they're
the
primary
group
in
there
and
they
were
listed
as
sort
of
a
secondary
audience,
and
so
I,
just
I
wasn't
sure
what
that
meant
in
terms
of
how
they
fit
into
the
engagement
process.
Thank
you.
H
Thanks
Lauren,
so
it
sounds
like
we're
doing
pretty
well
with
respect
to
our
low-income
targets
and
goals.
I
know
that
the
denominator
increases,
but
it
sounds
like
the
numerator
is
increasing
at
roughly
the
same
Pace
seems
like
we've
been
at
eight
percent
for
a
while,
but
I
was
encouraged
to
hear
Kurt
say
that
we've
got
1200
units
in
the
pipeline,
so
maybe
that'll
nudge
up
closer
to
10
soon.
But
of
course,
tonight's
discussion
is
not
about
low
income.
H
Affordable
housing
is
by
middle-income,
affordable
housing,
which
of
course,
as
as
this
Council
and
prior
councils
have
found,
is
a
much
tougher
nut
to
crack.
One
word
I
didn't
see
in
in
the
memo
or
here
tonight
was
was
was
Regional
and
I
know.
This
is
a
somewhat
a
controversial
topic,
but
let
me
try
to
frame
it
in
the
form
of
a
question.
What
is
our
regional
approach
to
Middle
income
attainable
housing
because
we
do
have
communities
that
surround
us
who
do
have
middle
income
housing?
That
is
attainable.
H
Are
we?
Are
we
just
kind
of
drawing
the
lines
at
the
Boulder
City
Limits
and
saying
we
have
to
get
some
middle
income
housing
here
in
the
city
of
Boulder,
or
are
we
looking
at
this
more
holistically
and
regionally?
I
know
that
there
was
a
regional
Consortium
put
together
back
in
2007,
there
was
a
big
confab.
What
was
that
about
2008
during
2019,
when
we
all
got
in
the
big
Auditorium,
with
Longmont
and
Louisville,
Lafayette
and
Erie,
and
so
on
and
so
forth
and
talked
about
affordable
housing?
H
I
haven't
heard
much
about
a
Regional
middle-income
Housing
recently,
what's
what's
going
on
with
that
guys.
E
E
So
the
the
Regional
Housing
Partnership
have
have
been
working
with
the
surrounding
communities
around
various
strategies
and
policies.
If
you
remember
when
you
were
up
in
that
in
that
room
up
in
Longmont
for
that
kickoff
of
the
of
the
strategy,
there
was
a
list
of
various
policy
approaches
that
different
communities
could
Implement
to
make
progress
both
on
affordable
housing
as
well
as
middle
income
housing.
E
So
we've
been
working
with
the
surrounding
communities
and
I'm,
pretty
excited
to
say,
since
that
kickoff
there's
been
several
communities
that
have
actually
implemented
inclusionary
housing,
so
we're
the
Regional
Housing
Partnership
is
working
with
Superior
Lewisville
Lafayette
in
Erie
and
through
the
arpa
conversations
over
this
past
summer,
the
county
arpa
funds
they've
decided
to
allocate
resources
to
help
support
middle
income
housing
and
particularly
increasing
and
duplicating
some
of
the
approaches
that
we've
taken
over
the
last
year,
which
is
actually
purchasing
market
rate
units,
updating
them
and
then
reselling
them
at
a
lower
price.
E
And,
as
you've
rightly
said,
some
of
those
types
of
units
are
actually
more
affordable
in
the
communities
that
I
that
I
just
listed.
E
So
the
arpa
funds
are,
we
will
be
bringing
in
IGA
to
council
it's
an
IGA
between
Boulder
County
and
the
city
of
Boulder,
for
our
city
program
to
hire
additional
staff
to
support
the
expansion
of
that
approach
in
other
communities
and
for
us
to
provide
additional
capacity
for
those
communities
to
begin
to
take
on
that
work
themselves.
E
H
Thanks,
that's
real
helpful,
Kurt
and
I
would
hope
that
I
know
you
can
have
your
planning
according
to
the
timeline,
to
have
three
or
four
touches
with
us
over
the
next
six
or
eight
months
on
this
topic.
H
If
in
one
of
those
touches,
you
could
bring
back
some
of
the
some
really
great
facts
and
figures
tonight,
around
low
income
afford
affordable
housing
here
in
Boulder,
I
would
love
to
see
some
stats
around
middle
income
housing,
especially
intentional
middle-income
housing
in
the
region,
and
what
we're
doing
with
our
regional
Partners,
so
kind
of
expanding
those
limits
to
to
Boulder
County
or
whatever
you
think
is
appropriate,
but
outside
of
the
boulder
State
limits
and
what
we
can
do
because
I
mean
this
is
a
really
really
tough
thing
right,
as
you
guys
pointed
out,
there's
just
not
the
aid
that
there
is
for
low
income,
stuff
and
so
it'd
be
really
nice
to
to
learn
what
we
can
do
with
our
our
sister
cities
in
the
area
around
middle
income,
housing
not
to
to
kick
the
problem
over
to
them,
but
because
their
land
values
are
lower
and
their
their
costs
are
lower.
H
B
Thanks
Bob
I
had
a
couple
questions
I
wanted
to
bring
up
too.
So
my
first
one
is
it's
a
little
bit
hard
to
tell
but
I
think
from
some
of
the
slides.
It
looks
like
the
acquisition
and
Rehab
funding
has
by
the
city's.
Partners
has
primarily
targeted
rental
properties
versus
ownership
properties
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
clarify,
if
that's
true,
and
is
that
mainly
to
take
advantage
of
matching
funds
that
are
available
or
are
there
other
dynamics
that
impact
that.
F
F
But
as
I
mentioned,
we
we
have
been
trying
to
acquire
ownership
and
we
did
purchase
those
four
units
just
this
year
and
we'll
be
looking
to
purchase
more,
but
it
really
has
to
do
with
that.
The
the
Gap
so
those
concentric
circles,
so
that
the
cost
escalates
when
you
go
from
rental
to
ownership,
to
new
construction.
B
Yes,
I
was
also
wondering
if
we
have
any
details
yet
about
the
state's
transformational
grant
program
and
whether
any
of
the
funding
for
that
might
apply
to
Middle
income
housing.
F
Absolutely
so
we
as
staff
have
been
providing
comments
to
Department
of
local
Affairs
on
how
they're
going
to
structure
those
specific
programs
and,
as
I
mentioned,
the
the
creation
of
the
middle
income,
housing
authority
I
think
presents
some
significant
opportunities
as
well,
but
I
think
we
once
those
rules
are
published.
We.
P
B
Thank
you
and
then
a
couple,
just
more
technical
questions,
so
the
inclusionary
housing
fee
scaling
that
you
talked
about
considering,
for
you
know,
different
sized
housing
units,
but
also
for
demo
and
replacement
homes.
Could
that
also
be
applied
to
additions
potentially.
N
Yeah
and
then
you
can
do
housing
and
IH
is
specific
to
new
housing.
So
additions
are
a
little
bit
of
a
outlier,
but
we'll
definitely
look
into.
B
B
Is
that
true
and
sort
of
what
kind
of
lift
or
how
you
know?
How
would
trying
to
consider
some
of
those
things
affect
this
process
going
forward.
F
Yeah
I
appreciate
the
comment
and
your
written
question
as
well.
F
So
planning
and
development
services
will
be
coming
to
council
for
a
study
session,
November
10th,
to
talk
about
the
specific
Council
priorities
related
to
zoning
changes,
but
we
are
as
housing
and
Human
Services.
Our
domain
is,
is
inclusionary
housing
and
so
we'll
be
focused
on
those
updates.
But
we
will
be
coordinating
closely
with
Planning
Development
service
and
staff
all
along
the
way.
B
Thank
you,
Matt.
Is
it
okay
if
I
let
Aaron
go
first,
since
he
hasn't
had
a
chance
to
ask
questions
yet.
Thank
you.
K
Thanks
Lauren,
this
is
actually
colically
with
what
you
were
asking.
So
it's
a
well-timed
I
just
want
to
mention
that
I
have
been
in
touch
with
some
of
the
organizers
of
the
middle
income
housing
authority
and
we're
working
on
setting
up
a
meeting
to
talk
about
what
they're
up
to
and
how
the
speed
might
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
that.
So
I
will
report
back.
K
B
Thank
you,
Aaron.
Do
you
have
any
questions
or
just
another
question
thanks,
thank
you,
okay,
Matt
and
then
I
think
would
be
great
to
after
this
start
going
into
comments.
Yes,.
L
This
is
a
question
just
following
up:
Mark's
line
of
inquiry
about
sort
of
ownership
versus
rental
and
worrisome
ratio
that
is
sort
of
arisen
recently,
I,
don't
like
that
ratio
where
it's
at
so
I'll
just
stick
with
myself
on
that,
but
so
the
really
question
centers
on
and
I
can't
this
isn't
original.
L
So
why
can't
we
just
mandate
a
floor
to
that
ownership
to
keep
some
level
of
parity
throughout
our
community.
N
Do
you
mean
Matt,
are
you
talking
about
for
for
Market
projects.
L
I,
muted
sorry
I
was
referring
to
well,
it
could
be
Market
or
in
our
inclusionary
housing
program.
It
could
be
either
way
really
just
where
we
have
control,
because
seeing
that
we're
in
a
runaway
of
rental,
how
do
we
claw
that
back
and
so
really
it's
either
or
is
there
a
vehicle
in
either
of
those
institutions
or
or
areas
that
we
can
mandate
ownership
to
bring
back
some
parity
to
those
numbers.
N
Well,
the
the
place
that
that
we
know
that
we
can
mandate,
it
is
through
annexations,
because
it's
a
negotiated
agreement
and-
and
we
can
and
do
require
that
all
new
housing
that
is
constructed
through
annexations
is
for
sale
housing
as
far
as
like
imposing
that
on
the
market.
I
think
that's
problematic,
because
you
can,
while
you
can
impose
it
that
doesn't
mean
somebody's
going
to
do
it.
There's
a
reason:
they're
not
doing
ownership
right
now
and
that's
not
going
to
make
that
go
away.
N
Oh
and
I'm.
Sorry,
I,
I
I've
been
reminded
to
make
sure
you
know
who
I
am
I'm:
Michelle
Allen
with
HHS
I'm,
the
inclusionary
housing
program
manager,
so
I
work
with
developers,
that's
pretty
much
talking
with
them
day
in
day
out
and,
like
I
said,
you
know,
I
think
that
there
there
is
an
issue
with
trying
to
mandate
something
like
that:
they're
not
doing
it
for
a
reason
and
mandating
isn't
going
to
take
that
away.
N
For
example,
if
they're
very
of
adverse
to
the
construction
defect
law,
if
we
mandated,
they
simply
won't
build
them,
so
I
think
it's
problematic
Matt,
but
we
can
certainly
look
at
it.
I'll.
L
Just
suggest
if
we
don't
get
the
housing
we
want,
we
don't
want
the
housing
right.
I
mean
I,
think
there's
some
value
question
of
it.
It's
not
what
we
want.
We
shouldn't
just
accept
it
because
it's
just
housing.
So
it's
a
value,
question
I
think
to
pose
for
the
rest
of
my
colleagues,
but
unless
it's
the
exact
housing,
the
right
housing
that
we
want,
do
we
do
we
mandate
and
if
they
say
it's
not
working.
L
First,
fine,
we'll
wait
until
we
get
the
right
housing
that
we
want
in
our
community,
so
I
had
I,
don't
know
it.
It's
not
fully
baked
but
I'm
curious
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
Force
the
hand
if
possible.
So
anyway,
there's
other
thought:
I'd
appreciate
that
down
the
road.
Thanks
for
answering
that
question.
E
Well,
Matt,
if
I
could
just
add
one
thing
to
that
and
with
all
these
policy
decisions,
there's
there's
trade-offs.
You
know
that
have
to
be
made
and
and
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
we
know
whether
it's
mandated
or
not.
E
There
isn't
the
same
funding
for
ownership
that
there
is
for
rental.
The
financing
mechanisms
are
very
different.
E
We'll
see
how
that
changes
with
the
state
funding
there,
there
could
be
some
changes
there,
but
in
reality
the
through
that
approach,
we
would
certainly
see
a
significant
reduction
in
in
the
overall
development
of
rental,
affordable
housing,
and
you
know
so
that's
sort
of
the
tough
trade-offs
that
we
would
have
to
think
about.
E
E
But
if
that's
a
direction
the
council
wanted
us
to
go
in,
you
know
we.
We
could
certainly
do
that
and
then
we'd
have
to
come
back
with
sort
of
a
an
understanding
of
the
of
the
capacity.
It
would
take
to
look
at
those
questions.
B
Thank
you,
Matt
Juni,
are
you,
do
you
have
a
additional
question,
or
are
you
going
to
kick
us
off
on
comments.
O
Number
one
and
I
thought
to
myself
well
and
I,
read
in
the
memo
that
section
as
well,
and
it
talks
about
how
to
date
almost
113
middle
income
prize
homes,
and
this
inventory
has
been
re
a
result
of
annexation
requirements,
so
I
and
since
I've
been
on
Council
I've
been
a
huge
proponent
of
the
Baseline
studies
for
area
three
and
I'm
wondering
if
that
part
of
that
comment
is
to
kind
of
like
move
counsel,
to
think
more
more
closely,
I
guess
I
suppose
at
the
next
Retreat.
O
Hopefully,
I
am
not
gonna,
be
there.
If
elected
but
I,
wonder
if
that's
the
thought
to
get
Council
to
be
thinking
closer
on
the
importance
of
annexation,.
E
One
of
the
advantages
to
that
Judy
is
that
in
area
three,
the
city
in
HHS
in
part
would
be
a
landowner
of
some
of
the
development
and
as
a
land
owner,
it
makes
it
easier
for
us
to
go
in
a
particular
direction,
just
like
Matt
described
so
the
other
opportunity
to
to
go
in
that
direction
is
is
by
actually
being
the
landowner
for
the
development
so
area.
E
G
I'm
gonna
jump
in
because
I'm
getting
increasingly
tired,
so
I'm
hoping
I'll
be
a
little
more
coherent
if
I
go
first.
I
really
just
want
to
come
back
to
this
issue
of
why
people
want
affordable,
homeownership
I.
G
Think
it's
just
so
critical
for
us
to
understand
that
when
we
go
into
it
we
can,
if
we
think
that
it's
because
people
want
to
accumulate
wealth,
I
mean
frankly,
I
would
not
tell
anybody
who
wants
to
get
wealth
out
of
a
home
to
enter
into
this
program,
because
the
the
wealth
that
they
will
accumulate
over
time
is
a
lot
less
than
what
they
would
get
with
a
market
rate
home
elsewhere.
G
So
I
think
it's
really
critical
right
if
we
know
that,
if
somebody's
coming
in
to
get
wealth
out
of
their
home,
that
feels
like
something
important
that
that
we
want
to
know
because
I'm
not
sure
this
is
the
right
mechanism
to
do
that.
If
it's
for
cost
stabilization,
I,
think
some
of
the
points
Lauren
brought
up
in
her
hotline
post
addressed
that
the
nice
thing
about
you
know,
buying
a
new
home
is
that
you
do
have
some
cost
stabilization.
G
But
if
your
HOA
fees
are
increasing
really
quickly,
if
you
are
having
maintenance
costs,
not
just
regular
maintenance
but
kind
of
what
I
think
of
as
like
Capital
maintenance
costs
on
a
home
like
your
hot
water
heater
goes
out,
or
maybe
you
need
a
new
roof
or
something
like
that.
That's
not
really
going
to
stabilize
your
costs
and
if
you
don't
have
the
as
much
Equity
as
the
market
rate
home
would
you
may
actually
end
up
paying
more
than
than
You're
Expecting
over
time
and
even
more
than
you're
accumulating
in
your
home.
G
So
it
seems
really
important
for
us
to
understand
that
and
if
there's
some
other
reason
that
people
are
wanting
home
ownership,
then
you
know
how
can
we
tailor
the
program
to
meet
those
needs
but
I
feel
like
without
knowing
that
there's
some
different
directions
and
we
may
not
be
solving
for
the
right
constraints
as
we're
thinking
about
this
program.
So
in
the
engagement
process,
I
would
love
for
us
to
spend
some
time
understanding
why?
Why
do
you
want
this?
G
What
is
it
going
to
get
get
for
you
to
step
into
this
affordable
home
ownership
program
program
and
then
I
think
a
separate
question
that
all
of
us
should
think
about
is
why
do
we,
as
a
city,
want
this?
Why
do
we
want
affordable,
homeownership?
Because
we've
been
talking
about
you
know
this
is
the
the
housing
we
want
or
the
housing
we
don't
want.
Fundamentally,
it's
the
housing
for
our
residents
and
our
workers
right.
So
what?
What
is
it
that
we
are
looking
for
there?
G
If,
for
example,
we
are
trying
to
address
racial
Equity
through
home
ownership,
I
actually
worry
that
this
is
going
to
exacerbate
the
wealth
Gap.
If
we
continue
with
a
program
like
this
because
of
that
accumulation
and
and
not
being
able
to
sort
of
accumulate
Equity
the
same
way
that
you
would
in
a
market
rate
right.
So
if
we
have
more
people
of
color
entering
into
the
homeownership
program,
affordable
homeownership
program,
for
example,
they're
capped
in
in
what
their
Equity
is
in
their
home.
G
But
if
we've
got
more
people
who
are
not
people
of
color
in
market
rate
homes,
their
wealth
can
kind
of
keep
going
right.
So
I
really
worry
that
if
we're
not
crystal
clear
about
what
we
want
as
a
city
and
what
we're
trying
to
do
and
how
the
ways
that
we're
going
about
it
may
exacerbate
some
of
the
issues
that
are
there.
G
We
may
end
up
in
a
well,
not
we,
but
our
future
Council
people
in
20
or
30
years
are
going
to
be
in
a
much
harder
spot
even
than
we're
in
right
now
and
let's
see
Philly
I
think
that
is
all
of
my
comments.
Thank
you.
B
And
I
just
wanted
to
jump
in
and
kind
of
I
know
the
staff
memo
had
some
specific
things.
So
the
questions
about
the
existing,
affordable
housing
program
and
its
Evolution
I
think
we
mostly
got
through
in
the
questions
section.
But
if
you
have
any
of
those
left
over,
please
make
sure
to
bring
them
forward.
B
And
then
you
know,
as
we
give
General
comments,
I
feel
like
people
could
kind
of
address
both
if
there
are
any
inclusionary
housing
updates,
they
wish
to
add
and
if
they
agree
or
want
to
see
a
different
approach
taken
with
the
community
engagement
and
formal
hearing
process,
as
it
has
been
laid
out
in
our
packet.
G
And
just
to
clarify
on
that,
my
mine
were
getting
more
kind
of
at
the
engagement
process,
something
that
I
hope
to
see
come
out
of
the
engagement
process.
Some
clarity
there
and
I
just
want
to
say
Lauren
I,
really
like
the
ideas
that
you
put
in
your
hotline
post
about
inclusionary
housing
to
sorry
to
a
Joy's
question
too.
In
the
memo.
H
Thanks
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
I
really
agree
with
Nicole
I
think
you
know
this
conversation
tonight
sounds
a
lot
like
a
conversation
that
Aaron
you'll
remember.
We
had
in
2016,
and
here
we
are
six
years
later
and
I,
don't
think.
We've
made
a
whole
lot
of
progress.
That's
not
the
first
from
lack
of
trying
a
lot
of
councils
and
a
lot
of
Staff
have
really
tried,
but
this
is
a
really
really
tough
nut
to
crack
and
we've
kind
of
assumed
all
along
that
folks
want
to
buy
and
own
houses.
H
But
then
we've
done
it
in
such
a
way
that
their
appreciation
is
limited
and
it's
not
really
been
scalable
in
any
event,
and
so
I
think
Nikola
is
actually
asking
the
right
question,
which
is
what
do
people
really
want?
That's
the
engagement
question.
Then.
What
do
we
really
want?
What's
what
benefit
are
we
seeking?
Because
as
right
as
Nicole
said,
the
you
know
we're
looking
at
the
people
who
live
and
work
in
Boulder
and
about
half
the
people
who
work
in
Boulder?
Actually
don't
live
here?
H
It
may
be
okay
with
not
living
here
that
it's
a
little
I'm
going
to
say
arrogant
for
us
to
assume
that
everyone
who
works
in
Boulder
wants
to
live
here.
They
may
love
living
in
Erie
or
Lafayette
or
Lucifer
Longmont,
or
some
of
those
other
lovely
cities,
and
so
I
think
I.
Think
it's
it's
great
that
we're
looking
for
opportunities
to
give
people
who
work
here
who
want
to
live
here
a
chance.
H
We
have
a
really
really
tough
Hill
to
climb
and
we've
been
climbing
it
for
six
years
and
we
have
made
no
progress
and
I'm
afraid
that
Weber
City
United
Council
in
2028
is
going
to
have
the
same
problem
six
years
from
now
and
that's
why
I
really
urge
us
to
take
a
regional
approach
to
this,
especially
when
it
comes
to
Middle
income,
low
income,
we're
doing
a
really
great
job
on.
We
got
a
lot
of
tools.
H
You
know,
as
Nuria
said,
the
beginning,
we're
we're
kind
of
like
the
poster
child
for
inclusionary
housing
programs
for
for
low-income
cities
copy
us
all
the
time
on
that
we
should
keep
doing
what
we're
doing
and
the
great
work
we're
doing.
H
But
the
middle
income,
stuff
I,
think
we
really
really
need
to
partner
with
our
our
our
sister
cities
in
the
region
and
look
at
this
more
holistically
because
that's
where
they
live
and
and
they
they
may
work
here,
they
may
work
someplace
else
and
I'd
really
like
to
see
this
approach
be
a
much
much
more
Regional
than
it
is.
You
know,
and
as
Nicole
said,
you
know
that
we
we
should
test
this
to
see.
H
If
this
is
what
people
really
want
and
I
think
the
middle
income
down
payment
assistance
program
which
we
put
together
in
2019
and
the
voters
approved,
then
they
got
put
on
the
shelf
for
a
little
while
will
be
kind
of
the
ultimate
test
of
that
I
have
no
idea.
If
that
program
is
going
to
work
or
not,
it
may
fall
complete.
H
We
may
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
it
this
year
or
next
year
it
may
fall
completely
flat,
but
this
will
be
like
the
really
in
my
mind,
the
ultimate
test
of
whether
people
really
do
want
home
ownership
subject
to
these
limitations,
around
deed
restrictions
and
caps.
And
if
and
if
we
put
this
program
together,
then
we
get
nothing
but
crickets,
then
I
guess
the
answer
is
no
and
we
really
do
need
to
focus
on
on
Regional
things,
but
Let's
do
let's
do
both
those
in
parallel.
H
I
Good
luck,
herding,
the
cats
councilmember
folkerts-
they
broke
me
all
over
the
place
in
this
okay,
so
I
understand
that
on
November
10th,
we're
gonna
have
another
discussion,
sort
of
about
code
changes
but
I
think
that's
just
preliminary
scoping
and
like
what
do
we
want
to
prioritize
and
it's
been
almost
a
year
since
the
retreat,
I,
don't
know
nine
ten
months
and
at
this
pace
I.
Don't
think
that
our
council
is
going
to
get
the
things
across
the
finish
line.
I
That
I
would
like
to
see
across
the
Finish
Line
during
my
tenure
and
I'm
worried
that
on
this
front
on
on
creating
more
middle
income,
housing
through
inclusionary
housing
program
that
we
are
a
little
bit
nibbling
at
the
edges
and
not
going
to
make
the
kind
of
Dent
that
I
would
like
to
see
as
we
seek
to
sort
of
solve
the
middle
income
housing
crisis.
I
Frankly,
I
I've
heard
from
a
lot
of
people
and
I,
don't
I
don't
mean
to
to
disagree
with
Bob
exactly
but
I
I
know
personally
a
lot
of
people
who
would
like
to
live
here.
Who
work
here
and
I
think
we
need
to
make
that
possible
and
be
it
through
ownership
or
rental
and
I?
Don't
think
we
get
there
without
tacking
on
middle
missing
middle
to
this
discussion,
I
think
that
that
is
what's
missing.
I
I,
don't
think
we
have
to
make
it
perfect,
but
I
I
think
that,
as
we
are
doing,
engagement
on
the
timeline
that
I
last
that
I
asked
about
so
we're
getting
stakeholder
feedback
March
in
April
and
we'll
bring
code
sections
back,
May
and
June
I
think
that
should
include
not
you
know,
perhaps
stuff
that
we
were
going
to
talk
about
on
November
10th,
but
we're
gearing
up
to
this
engagement
and
I
think
that
it
should
include
some
of
the
missing
middle
pieces.
I
So
I
would
like
to
see
us
look
at
certainly
duplexes
by
right.
Lauren
mentioned
parking
minimum
relaxation
and
a
couple
other
things
I
think
are
a
good
idea,
but
I
would
like
us
to
to
really
consider
before
we
leave
this
study
session
and
not
a
five
to
expand,
what
we're
already
going
to
be
doing
engagement,
what
we
are
going
to
engage
on
and
what
we're
going
to
vote
on
in
this
middle
income.
I
I
I
think
it
would
be
fortunate
for
us
to
to
leave
it
at
sort
of,
and
it's
not
that
I'm
I'm,
not
appreciative
of
of
the
annexation
and
other
ways
that
we
are
getting
some
some
of
this
housing
in,
but
I,
don't
see
how
how
it's
not
going
to
help
us
solve
the
problems
to
get
more
of
the
units
that
are
worth
that
cost
480
000
versus
1.25
million
into
our
housing
stock.
I
I
think
we
need
to
move
on
that
and
be
decisive
and
add
it
in
and
I
think
this
discussion
is,
is
an
appropriate
place
to
add
it.
That's
all
I
got
for
now,
thanks.
B
B
Is
there
anything
you
would
want
to?
Let
us
know
about
that
before
we
take
that
on
well,.
E
I
think
I
think
Brad's
here
tonight
to
actually
answer
that
question
or
respond
to
it.
The
best
he
can
and
I
I
also
appreciate
the
hotline
that
you
sent
Lauren
and
those
are
some
some
some
pretty
good
ideas
that
we
could
explore,
but
I'll
I'll
hand
that
over
to
Brad,
because
that
would
a
lot
of
that
work
would
be
led
by
by
his
Department.
Q
Yeah
I
appreciate
that
the
question
council
members
and
and
that
handoff
Curt
I
think
first
of
all.
Yes,
we
we
do
have
teed
up
a
discussion
about
Zoning
for
affordable
housing
as
one
of
the
projects
for
discussion
on
November
10th
I
also
appreciate
the
observation
that
that
is
very
accurate,
that
the
missing
middle,
the
middle
income,
housing,
is
integral
to
zoning
and
land
use,
and
these
are
all
interrelated
topics
being
here
only
five
months.
Q
One
of
the
things
that's
been
very
impressive
is
the
amount
of
collaboration
between
all
the
Departments
and
certainly
none
less
than
between
HHS
and
planning,
and
that's
that's
critical
that
we
have
that
connection
on
an
ongoing
basis.
Q
I'm
going
to
have
to
see
as
we
explore
these
questions
with
Jane,
Kurt
and
folks
on
my
team,
and
especially
our
engagement
Professor
professionals,
about
just
how
much
inner
weaving
of
these
various
topics.
We
can
be
successful
and
bring
you
forward
to
the
public
and
still
get
meaningful
impact,
yeah
input
both
because
they
are
so
interrelated,
but
also
recognizing
that
we
are
looking
for
discrete
movements
on
on
each
of
them,
whether
we're
talking
about
inclusionary,
housing
or
adus.
Q
The
other
types
of
zoning
changes
code
changes
for
affordable
housing
occupancy,
so
we'll
we'll
want
to
be
sure
that
we're
being
very
clear
in
our
in
our
messaging
and
engagement
with
the
community,
so
that
we
get
the
results
that
you
want
and
reflect
the
interest
of
the
community.
But
we
we
absolutely
appreciate
the
interconnectivity-ness
of
it
and
and
I
know
that
we
all
look
forward
to
a
full
discussion
around
those
points.
Further
on
the
10th.
B
Thank
you,
Brad
Rachel,
I,
think
that
you
know
I,
like
your
idea
of
bringing
that
forward,
is
something
that,
at
four
and
out
of
five
I,
think
if
you're,
okay
with
it
I'd
like
to
keep
going
with
the
discussion,
and
then
we
could
maybe
come
back
to
it
in
a
little
bit.
M
Yeah
I
think
Nicole
raised
a
very
interesting
point
of
of
sort
of
why
ownership
versus
renting
and
I
think
to
some
extent
it's
a
stability
issue
and
it's
also
a
regional
issue
in
a
place
like
New
York
people
commonly
rent
for
their
entire
lives,
and
you
know
they're
comfortable
doing
it
in
part
because
they
have
rent
stabilization,
which
we
do
not
have
here
but
other
than
than
the
stability
and
the
wealth
generation
aspects
of
it.
M
It's
an
interesting
question
of
of
why
go
to
the
ownership
room
and
as
part
of
that
I
I'm,
very
interested
in
getting
some
kind
of
documentation
as
to
whether
our
middle
income
Community
is
going
to
be
responsive
to
deed,
restricted
housing.
Before
we
go
too
far
down
the
road
in
these
programs,
we
ought
to
know
what
kind
of
demand
is
out
there
for
a
600,
000
or
650
000
townhouse.
If
you
can't
realize
a
market
rate
of
appreciation,
will
people
want
to
do
that?
M
I'm
sure
there'll
be
some,
but
is
the
market
very
deep
for
that?
Or
will
people
simply
say,
I'd
rather
have
a
townhouse
in
Lafayette
and
I
can
make
whatever
money
I?
Can
make
on
that
over
a
course
of
years,
rather
than
do
it
in
Boulder
and
and
be
restricted,
so
I
I
I.
M
Think
for
me
that
that's
a
really
core
issue,
as
we
move
forward
on
this
I'd
like
to
get
some
better
assurance
that
there's
a
deep
market
for
that
kind
of
property,
because
otherwise
some
of
these
proposals
and
programs
are
not
going
to
work
very
well.
I,
don't
mind.
Trying
it
I
think
Bob's
program
is
is
very
worthy
of
of
experimenting
with,
let's
see
if
let's
see
what
the
demand
is
and
if
they're
lined
up
around
the
block
to
participate.
M
Okay
but
I'm,
not
sure
if
that's
the
case,
and
so
you
know
I'd
like
to
get
a
little
further
detail
on
that.
Thank
you.
L
Thanks
Lauren
yeah,
so
there's
been
a
so
there's
a
line
of
inquiry
that
sort
of
Rachel
I
think
posed
in
a
sort
of
the
beginning,
inquiry
here
and
I
think
Nicole
expanded
on
and
certainly
Bob
did
and
I.
Think
sort
of
we're.
We're
heading
towards
a
conversation.
I
think
some
extent
might
necessitate
a
policy
shift
for
us
and
it's
certainly
not
from
a
lack
of
trying.
L
I
mean
Bob
and
Aaron
have
been
chasing
this
for
for
six
years
to
little
to
no
avail,
and
it's
certainly
not
from
a
lack
of
great
effort
and
creativity
to
try
to
address
it.
But
I
wonder
at
some
point:
are
we
just
chasing
Sasquatch
and
you
know,
do
we
need
to
really
re-pivot
our
messaging
or
our
our
priorities
to
really
be
focusing
on
missing
middle
and
saying?
L
And
so,
if
we
consider
that
we
can
still
close
the
gap
on
middle
income,
we're
not
hitting
it
directly,
but
we
can
at
least
lower
the
price
for
floor
and
gain
greater
entry
into
our
Market
than
otherwise
exists
right,
I.
Think
of
the
difficulty
we
have,
certainly
in
South
Boulder
with
regards
to
enrollment
in
our
schools.
Well
lowering
the
price
floor.
Maybe
it
doesn't
address
middle
income
housing,
but
it
certainly
would
create
greater
opportunity
for
young
Working
Families
to
still
gain
access
to
this
community
and
replenish
the
enrollment
that's
necessary
to
keep
our
schools
open.
L
L
B
Thank
you,
Matt
Mark
I
think
maybe
your
hand
is
still
up
from
earlier
and
then,
if
that's
true
Tara.
R
Be
cool
thanks
for
that
great
question.
It
seems
to
have
really
given
this
conversation,
really
a
great
Direction.
So
when
I
say
what
do
I
want
personally
and
why
do
I
want
middle
income
slash?
R
R
And
how
can
this
be
a
good
place
to
bring
up
kids
now
I'm
only
telling
that
story
I'm,
not
blaming
anybody
for
having
a
private
plane
or
anything
I'm
telling
that
story,
because
for
our
you
know
our
Stu,
you
know
our
schools
and
for
students
and
for
families
too
I
feel
to
to
thrive.
There
should
be
some
sort
of
income
diversity,
not
just
porn
I,
don't
like
to
say
porn
rich,
but
of
all
different
incomes,
so
that
people
grow
up
knowing
people
that
aren't
like
them.
R
So
in
that
sense,
I
really
want
to
somehow
make
this
work,
and
you
all
are
way
smarter
than
me
in
in
this
field,
which
is
a
new
field
for
me.
But
it
would
be
my
dream
to
have
income
diversity
in
this
city
and
even
for
that
reason,
I
think
we
should
keep
pushing
for
it
so
that
our
kids
grow
up
with
with
people
that
aren't
like
them
and
also
as
far
as
what
Matt
said,
to
fill
the
schools
up
with
all
different
types
of
people
of
all
ethnic
groups
and
all
incomes.
R
It's
the
same
thing
as
I
remember
before
we
had
Medicare
and
Medicaid
the
market
wasn't
giving
us
what
we
wanted.
So
we
had
to
create
Medicare
and
Medicaid,
which
wound
up
being
great
programs,
so
in
that
sense,
I'm
really
hoping
we
can
do
something
great
whatever
it
is
and
whatever
we
decide
I
feel
like.
We
need
to
just
nudge
this
forward
in
a
strong
way.
K
K
But
I
want
to
Echo
the
the
comments
of
some
of
my
colleagues
about
the
the
need
to
move
forward
aggressively
here
you
know
we
did
our
last
IH
update
in
2018
and
I
think
that
I,
the
five
percent
of
additional
middle
income
requirement
has
has
been
successful
in
terms
of
getting
us
some
additional
units
and
some
progress.
But
it
seems
like
some
of
the
other
tweaks
to
the
program
that
we
made
you
know
haven't,
had
an
enormous
effect.
K
I
think
that
was
in
the
memo
and
that's
certainly
my
understanding
and
so
I'm
a
little
bit
where,
like
I
I,
see
that
the
proposals
that
are
coming
this
time
around
they
all
look
good,
so
I
support
them,
but
I
worry
that
they
might
be
a
kind
of
a
small
incremental
change
that
may
may
not
make
a
huge
amount
of
difference
and,
of
course,
with
this
really
substantial
problem
of
missing
middle
income
housing
for
for
our
community-
and
you
know
we-
we
did
our
middle
income
housing
strategy.
K
This
was
early
and
bottom
of
my
time
on
comes
2016.
Was
it
Kirk
that
we
did
that
and
and
it
has
ambitious
goals
and
and
gosh?
We
are
so
far
away
from
those
goals
from
from
six
years
ago
and
so
wondering
just
how
we
can
we
can
push
the
needle
further,
and
you
know
people
have
talked
about
the
demand
for
this
type
of
housing.
I
I'm,
guessing
that,
just
about
anything
that
we
can
accomplish.
K
You
know
that
there
will
be
need,
for
you
know,
I,
don't
think
any
of
our
affordable
housing
production
in
the
past
has
ever
lacked
for
interest
and
I
know
we
have
a
waiting
list
in
both
the
middle
income
and
the
moderate
and
lower
income
areas,
and
so
I
think
to
I
think
we're
limited
much
more
by
our
ability
to
produce
these
things
than
than
we
are
by
demand
for
for
these
kinds
of
units.
K
I'd
encourage
us
to
to
keep
at
it
and
do
as
much
as
we
can
I
thought
that
Lauren's
list
of
ideas
was
a
really
really
good
list.
Lauren
I
was
really
impressed
by
that.
Thank
you
so
much
for
putting
that
out.
K
That
was
a
a
pleasant
surprise
to
have
those
great
proposals
come
into
the
inbox
yesterday,
and
you
know-
and
a
number
of
my
colleagues
have
echoed
that
and
appreciate
Rachel
saying
hey,
you
know:
can
we
can
we
fit
more
in
here,
I
mean:
can
we
get
some
consensus,
or
some
majority
agreement
on
this
now
I
get
that
that
a
fair
amount
of
what
Lauren's
talking
about
fits
a
bit
more
in
the
planning
departments
area
but
we'll?
K
Let
you
talk
about
how
the
the
Departments,
you
know
work
hand
in
hand
which
I
really
appreciate,
but
some
of
these
seem
like
they're
IH
related,
even
though
they
might
involve
kind
of
planning
code
changes
like
I.
Think
about
like
one
of
Lauren's
ideas.
How
that
was
a
really
good
one,
which
was
in
projects
of
under
a
certain
size
could
be
approved
by
right
if
they
had
their
inclusionary
housing
needs
met
on
site.
K
You
know
so
that
they
could
get
come
come
to
the
front
of
the
line
for
approval
not
have
to
deal
with
the
discretionary
review
process.
That
could
be
at
a
phenomenal
incentive
for
people
to
do
their
inclusionary
housing
on
site.
Right,
so
that's
probably
more
of
a
planning
code
change,
but
but
it's
IH
related
right,
so
I
I'd
love
to
see
how
we
could
take
this
process
that
you
all
are
going
to
start
to
work
on
and
you're
talking
about
doing,
public
engagement,
which
is
important
right.
It's
a
pretty
substantial
one.
K
I'd,
really
love
to
see
this
process.
You
know
include
some
more
things
under
its
umbrella
so
that
we
can
get
more
accomplished
in
this
in
the
same
sort
of
time
frame.
You
know
if
we
can
have
the
same
kind
of
Outreach,
but
include
you
know,
maybe
you
know
three
additional
ideas
as
part
of
this,
you
know
like
buy
right
approvals
for
for
projects
that
include
on-site,
affordable
or
like
the
ability
for
people
to
do
a
deed,
restricted
unit
on
on
an
existing
lot.
K
You
know
there's
a
deep
restriction,
something
like
that
things
that
that
we
could
fit
into
this
existing
effort,
but
they
could
move
the
needle
further
than
we've
been
thinking
about
so
far,
so
I
I'm
glad
we're
going
to
come
back
to
Rachel's
thought
here,
because
I
think
we
we
do
need
to
keep
doing
more
and
so
I'd
love
to
see
us
broaden
this
effort
to
include
some
additional
ideas
that
can
accomplish
some:
some
more
housing
middle
middle
income,
housing
production,
that's
what
I
got
absolutely.
B
Thanks
Aaron
Juni.
O
Thank
you,
I
have
a
question.
I
have
comments,
but
I
also
have
a
question,
because
it
relates
to
my
comment
and
as
I
was
thinking
and
hearing
the
discussion
on
page
11
of
her
Memo.
It
talks
about
how,
since
2013
more
than
90
of
these
permanently
affordable
homes
have
been
created
as
rental
units,
so
I'm
thinking.
If
90
are
rental
units,
that
means
only
about
10
percent
were
for
sale.
Is
that
correct.
O
I
might
as
well
just
continue
to
rent
at
this
time,
but
if
you
have
any
type
of
I
suppose
how
do
I
put
it
if
only
10
percent
of
our
housing
stocks
or
for
sale,
it's
either.
We
have
an
issue
with
Demand
right,
but
it's
90
or
just
rental.
So
there
is
an
issue
that
people
may
not
find
these.
How
do
I
put
it?
They
might
not
think
it's
the
best
way
to
get
into
a
house
in
Boulder
and
I.
O
Think
part
of
it
as
well
part
of
the
answer,
I
that
Nicole
mentioned
by
the
way
I
have
several
screens
open.
So
that's
why
I'm
looking
the
other
way?
O
Is
there
a
way
to
talk?
How
do
we
know
how
satisfied
people
who
have
been
living
in
these
and
these
sold
homes,
affordable,
sold
homes?
Have
we
we
do?
We
have
a
way
of
have
we
reached
out
to
them.
F
Yeah
I
can
answer
that,
so
we,
the
homeownership
program,
does
a
periodic
surveys
of
all
affordable
homeowners.
We
just
did
one
I
believe
it
was
2019
the
one
before
that
was
in
2012.,
and
we
have
the
nice
thing
about
the
2019
is
we
were
able
to
show
basically
track
how
we're
doing
in
terms
of
progress.
I
can
share
the
full
report
with
you,
but
you
know.
F
The
Highlight
that
jumps
out
at
me
is
that
nine
out
of
10
people
said
that
they
would
make
that
decision
again
to
purchase
a
home
in
the
program
wow.
So
so,
and
we
also
asked
questions
about
okay.
F
Well,
how
is
your
financial
situation
Financial
Security
from
when
you
bought
the
home
to
now
that
you've
been
living
in
it
for
a
period
of
time
and
again
overwhelmingly
people
felt
that
they
were
more
financially
secure
after
owning
a
home
ownership
owning
a
home
in
the
program,
and
it's
also
just
keep
them
it's
important
to
keep
in
mind
that
it's
it's
for
most
people,
it's
not
a
permanent
solution,
but
the
average
tenure
of
an
affordable
home
is
about
seven
years
so
people
a
lot
of
people
are
still
able
to
build
equity
in
their
home
and
they
see
it
as
a
stepping
stone
so
to
enter
into
the
real
into
the
market.
O
Wow,
thank
you
for
sharing
those
points.
It's
it's
very
welcome
to
hear
that
that
people
feel
satisfied
nine
out
of
ten.
That's
pretty
good!
Well,
thank
you
for
that
and
I
welcome
the
comments
made
by
Tara
the
important
of
diversification
of
income
and
ensuring
that
you
know
that
people
live
in
a
community
that
is
diverse.
It's
not
good
to
have
a
community.
We,
where
you
have
uber
wealthy
and
just
Working
Class
People,
which
I
consider
myself.
O
One
are
people
who
are
just
struggling
in
the
community
and
that's
all
you
have,
and
you
have
nothing
in
the
middle,
so
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
ensure
that
you
know
people
who
are
middle
income
have
access
and
when
we
think
of
middle
income,
you
know
it's
your
teachers
right.
It's
your
I
mean
I'm
a
lawyer,
but
it's
not
people
who
are
extremely
wealthy,
so
I
think
it's
so
important
that
we
do
all
parts
to
ensure
that
those
who
are
working
in
the
community
they
can
live
here
as
well
and
I.
B
Thank
you,
Junie.
Let's
see,
I
was
gonna
jump
in
with
some
of
my
comments
before
we
go
back
around
for
seconds.
B
I
I
really
appreciated
what
Nicole
brought
up
and
and
that
sort
of
brings
the
greater
question
of
like.
Why
are
we
working
so
hard
to
expand
this
particular
program?
B
When
you
know
the
affordable
rental
program
is
doing
quite
well
and
is
meeting
a
really
important
need
in
our
community
and
in
some
ways
I
think
that
they're
there
are
trade-offs
right.
If
we
try
to
incentivize
home
ownership
units
really
heavily,
it
ends
up,
at
least
from
some
of
the
information.
The
memo
sounding
like
we
might
be
doing
that
at
the
expense
of
either
cash
and
lieu
or
more
affordable,
rentals,
and
so
for
me,
I
I
would
prefer
not
to
make
that
decision.
B
No
I
I
would
like
us
to
look
at
other
options
for
creating
those
things
to
try
and
do
both
and
to
the
extent
that
we
are
capable
of
that.
And
that's
why
so
much
so.
Many
of
my
sort
of
comments
and
suggestions
focused
around
in
the
hotline
that
I
sent
out
focused
on
zoning
related
issues,
because
I
would
really
I
see
the
amazing
work
that
we're
doing
through
the
affordable
housing
program
and
I
think
that
that
is
really
vital.
B
We've
sort
of
agreed
that
there's
more
need
in
our
community
than
we
could
possibly
outstrip
with
the
programs
we
can
provide,
but
so,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
I
would
like
to
see
us
looking
for.
How
can
we
expand
those
programs
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
we're
providing
options
that
allow
the
widest
range
of
people
to
call
our
community
home
so
kind
of,
like
the
quick
summary
from
the
hotline
for
people
listening
in
the
public?
B
Who
didn't
get
that
you
know
I'm
really
interested
in
seeing
our
inclusionary
housing
fee
be
based
on
a
per
square
foot
Unit
A
per
square
foot
unit,
so
that,
instead
of
looking
at
a
housing
unit
and
assessing
a
developer
a
fee
based
on
that
unit?
We're
looking
at
sort
of
the
number
of
square
feet
of
development,
allowing
us
to
charge
more
for
larger
units
and
also
potentially
taking
advantage
of
other
things
in
our
community,
like
the
expansion
of
existing
homes,
from
small
to
large
that
are
changing
the
affordability
landscape
in
our
community.
I.
B
B
I'd
also
like
to
see
allowing
the
additional
deed
restricted
for
sale
units
to
be
added
to
Residential
Properties,
even
if
those
push
it
above.
The
allowed
Union
count
in
our
zoning
code
and
adjust
requirements
for
projects
with
a
high
level.
Affordability
to
allow
additional
units
by
right
if
the
project
is
under
a
certain
size
and
also
consider
looking
at
parking
reductions
and
reducing
open
space
requirements.
B
So
you
know
I
I,
understand
that
those
things
would
take
more
work
from
Planning
and
Development
staff
and
that
that
wasn't
initially
conceived
as
part
of
this
program,
but
I
think
that
it's
important
to
look
at
those
things,
because
they
they
will
really
impact
the
kinds
of
projects
that
can
be
built
in
our
community
and
I.
Think
that
the
adjustments
that
we're
talking
about
to
this
program
and
that
staff
has
brought
forward
are
great.
But
I
really
would
encourage
us
to
be
more
bold
and
I.
B
G
G
It
seems
that
well
one
one
question
I
think
just
for
staff
is
that
the
developers
aren't
producing
the
kind
of
affordable
homes
for
ownership
they're
producing
more
rental
units,
or
is
it
that
that's
what
kind
of
the
market
like
people
are
wanting,
because
I
think
I
lost,
which
which
one
it
was
it's
contributing
to?
That.
F
You
know
it's
a
fantastic
question
and
I
should
have
covered
that
in
the
presentation,
but
so
in
the
early
years
of
the
program
back
in
2000
up
until
about
2012.
a
lot
of
what
was
getting
developed
Market
in
the
market
was
ownership,
and
so
it's
really
easy
to
get
a
deed,
restricted,
permanent,
affordable
unit
because
they
just
set
aside
one
of
those
one
or
two
or
whatever
percentage
it
is
as
permanently
affordable.
So.
E
F
F
G
Okay,
great
thank
you
and
then
then
my
understanding
is
that
what
it
is
you're
proposing
kind
of
what
we
said
as
a
work
plan,
priority
back
in
January
was
really
around
trying
to
incentivize
developers
to
build
more
affordable
units
right,
and
so
what
we're
I
mean.
G
I
think
the
things
that
you've
laid
out
I
think
Lauren's
editions
in
my
mind,
that's
going
to
be
moving
Us
in
that
direction
of
what
what
we
said
as
a
the
work
plan,
priority
and
I'm
not
saying
that's
going
to
fix
it
all,
but
as
I
mean,
we
were
very
intentional
back
in
January
that
we
recognized
that
Planning
and
Development
had
undergone
a
lot
of
Staffing
transitions.
G
They
were
really
in
a
rebuilding
phase
and
needed
a
little
bit
of
time,
and
you
know
what
what
I
would
be
really
curious
to
hear
about
Miss,
maybe
for
our
I
think
you
said,
November
11th,
discussion
or
10th.
G
What
I
would
be
really
curious
to
hear
is:
are
there
things
where,
if
we,
as
counsel
were
to
aside
we're
just
going
to
take
the
heat
from
the
community
on
whatever
changes
is
being
made,
would
that
help
things
move
faster
right?
Is
there?
Is
there
anything
there?
So
I
would
just
be
curious.
L
Oh
thanks,
Lauren,
I,
I'm,
hoping
to
maybe
play
put
out
a
suggestion
to
sort
of
maybe
either
action,
oriented
and
sort
of
maybe
pivot
us
in
a
particular
way.
L
If
you,
if
you
don't
mind
to
maybe
help
sum
up
some
of
this,
so
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
just
maybe
toss
out
to
my
colleagues
is
really
thinking
about
perhaps
and
I
know
we're
touching
on
missing
middle
a
little
bit
with
regards
to
our
conversation
on
the
10th
and
I,
recognize
that
we're
doing
middle
income
discussions
with
regards
to
inclusionary
housing
here
and
you
know,
sort
of
they're
they're
related,
but
not,
and
so
I
I
think
one
of
the
challenges
that
we
almost
many
of
us
campaigned
on
on
a
lot
of
this.
L
Without
putting
tucking
our
tail
between
our
legs,
there's
I
think
maybe
a
capitulation
that
needs
to
kind
of
occur
with
regards
to
the
aspirations
to
meet
the
the
our
desires
for
Middle
income,
housing
and,
and
maybe
just
pivot,
our
overall
policy
objective
away
from
that
a
little
bit
to
really
lay
true
to
the
true
fabric.
L
That's
in
front
of
us,
which
is
we
just
really
don't,
have
the
real
Tools
in
front
of
us
to
to
substantively
tackle
middle
income,
housing
and
so
to
set
the
expectations
up
in
the
community
that
that's
not
a
really
a
deliverable,
we're
going
to
meet
substantively.
Whereas
if
we
pivot
our
overall
policy
strategy
to
missing
middle
housing,
that's
a
different
set
of
tools
and
strategies
that
I'm
confident
will
help
lower
the
price
floor
of
Housing
and
get
us
some
of
the
way
there.
L
So
I
want
to
just
throw
out
if
we
need
to
have
a
straw
poll
or
if
we
not
have
a
not
a
five
to
really
kind
of
pivot.
The
general
strategy
in
this
sphere
of
missing
middle
middle
income,
which
kind
of
get
conflated
with
each
other,
certainly
out
in
the
community,
and
whether
we
need
to
make
that
pivot
in
a
formal
Direction,
because
I'm
a
little
worried
that
we're
putting
we
think
we're
putting
eggs
in
that.
L
This
is
where,
where
everything's
going
to
happen,
is
in
this
Sphere
for
Middle
income
and
I
think
we're
hearing
that
it's
not
not
from
a
lack
of
great
effort
and
creativity,
but
I
think
we
might
need
to
Pivot
our
Direction
and
just
be
more
clear
year
that
we're
going
to
do
so.
So,
hopefully,
that's
not
too
ambiguous,
but
I
wanted
to
maybe
pose
that
to
my
colleagues
and
I
I,
see
Bob's
hand
up
so
I,
don't
know!
If
he's
going
to
call
a
Quee
or
say
it
more
succinctly
than
I
could.
B
Thanks
Matt
I
think
you
know
I'm
thinking
about
this
too
and
have
been
thinking
about
it
in
the
framing
of
this
meeting
and
I
also
kind
of
want
to
throw
out
an
alternative
way.
We
might
look
at
this,
which
I
guess
I'm
less
sure
that
we
need
to
change
direction
from
Kurt's
team
and
what
they've
been
doing.
B
But
what
I
really
am
interested
in
is
maybe
bringing
forward
at
the
November
10th
meeting
staff's
Arguments,
for
why
this
some
of
the
things
that
I
brought
up
in
my
hotline
might
make
sense
as
part
of
these,
the
overall
zoning
adjustments
or
if
we
could
do
those
as
part
of
this
work
plan
item
to
me,
I'm
not
really
clear
yet
on
what
those
trade-offs
are
or
what
they
might
look
like
in
terms
of
timelines
for
both
of
these
projects
and
that's
something.
B
I
would
be
really
interested
in
having
more
information
on
before
finalizing
a
decision
either
way.
H
Only
agree
with
both
of
you,
I
I,
think
this
I
think
I
think
you're,
saying
similar
things
I
think
Advanced.
This
is
not
a
capitulation,
but
we
we
did
set
for
ourselves
a
goal
of
creating
3
500
units
of
Bill
income
housing
in
2016,
and
my
guess
is
I
didn't
see
the
number
the
memo.
But
my
guess
is
it's:
it's
a
fraction
of
that
and
at
the
current
Pace
it's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
decades,
if
not
centuries
before
we
get
there.
H
So,
let's,
let's
say:
let's
acknowledge
that:
there's
a
big
difference
between
missing
middle
and
middle
income
housing
and
look
at
all
the
tools
that
we're
about
to
talk
about
on
November
10th
around
adus
run
occupancy
around
duplexes
and
triplexes.
We
got
a
lot
a
lot
of
things
that
we
need
to
talk
about
and
prioritize
for
staff.
H
We
talked
about
these
at
The,
Retreat
and
and
staff
want
some
prioritization
out
of
us
in
a
couple
weeks
and
that's
great
and
and
let's
let's
kind
of
acknowledge
where
we
can
move
the
needle
as
Matt
said
and
and
and
really
help
people
that
are
are
in
Middle
income
in
regardless
of
whether
it's
their
rentals,
whether
their
ownership,
whatever
they
are
to
be
and
stay
in
Boulder
I,
mean
I.
Think
we
have
a
common
goal
of
that.
H
I
think
whether
or
not
they're
owners
or
not
owners
is
almost
a
secondary
question.
I
mean
yeah.
It
would
be
great
if
they're
owners,
but
but
the
economics
of
that
are
really
really
challenging.
So,
let's
make
sure
that
people
who
want
to
be
in
Boulder
who
work
here
who
happen
to
be
in
the
middle
middle
income
group
have
opportunities
whatever
those
are
to
live
here
and
and
I.
Think
that's
really
what
we're
going
to
talk
about
November
10th.
H
D
This
has
been
a
fascinating
conversation,
actually
I
I,
find
it
really
intriguing
and
I
would
just
say
tooth.
D
I
would
offer
first
of
all,
I
wanted
to
invite
Brad
to
just
make
sure
and
affirm
I
I
think
we're
hearing
you
right
that
at
the
next
meeting
in
November,
10th
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
involve
pnds,
but
this
is
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
make
sure
that
by
that
meeting
we
have
thought
of
and
that
we're
bringing
forward
and
when
to
affirm
with
Brad
that
that
is
something
that
he
and
his
team
is
prepared
to
do.
But
I'll
also
say
this:
one
of
the
things
I
find
really
intriguing
about.
D
The
conversation
is,
rather
than
a
capitulation,
I
find
it
more
of
a
as
we
have
more
data.
As
we
see
where
we're
going.
We
may
see
that
this
is
not
having
the
impact
or
achieving
the
outcomes
we
want,
and
maybe
it's
time
to
think
about
additional
items
or
different
items
or
switching
gear.
So
I
I
think
it
has
been
an
entirely
fascinating
conversation
and
not
one
of
defeat
as
much
as
we
are
trying
and
actually
making
really
good
Headway
here.
D
But
we
actually
want
to
see
if
there
are
other
tools
in
the
toolbox
that
may
get
us
into
different
directions
and
I.
Think
that's
the
ask
and
the
conversation
we've
been
hearing
as
well
as
as
long
as
we're
having
a
conversation
about
engagement
and
conversation
of
things
that
are
interrelated.
Can
we
take
advantage
and
leverage
some
of
those
at
the
same
time?
D
So
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that,
but
mostly
I
just
wanted
to
allow
Brad
an
opportunity
to
make
sure
that
we're
affirming
what
you're
hearing
and
and
what
you're
saying
so
that
we're
prepared
to
bring
that
forward
in
November
into
the
next,
which
is
two
weeks
away.
I
think
that
meeting
to
talk
about
all
of
this,
in
conjunction
with
the
work
that
you're
doing.
Q
Yeah
pink
scenario:
I'll
Echo,
that
this
is
very
helpful,
conversation
and
I-
think
you
will
find
that
it
is
a
good
lead
into
a
inclusive
conversation
on
the
10th
about
zoning
changes
for
affordability,
but
also,
you
know
acknowledging
the
interconnectedness,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
between
related
priorities
of
adus
and
occupancies
and
some
of
those
things.
So
we
we
definitely
hear
and
and
very
much
share
the
desire
to
to
move
these
forward.
Q
Framing
it
in
terms
of
missing
metal
and
middle
income
is
useful
and
I
think
you
know
one
of
the
ways
we
will
have
this
conversation
with
the
community,
so
very
much
appreciate
the
discussion
and
and
look
forward
to
more
of
that
on
the
10th.
Hopefully,
in
the
memo,
as
we've
been
putting
that
together,
we've
given
you
various
choices
you
can
make
and-
and
you
know,
we're
we're
ready
to
continue
to
run
fast
and
whatever
whatever
Direction
makes
sense.
B
Thank
you,
Brad
Rachel
I
want
to
make
sure
and
get
back
to
you
and
I'm
glad
you
raised
your
hand,
so
I
wanted
to
kind
of
see
how
this
is
fitting.
In
with
what
you
were
thinking,
we
might,
you
might
request
in
terms
of
a
not
of
five
thanks.
I
For
that,
so
I
I
continue
to
have
concerns
like
I'm,
looking
at
the
the
meeting
for
November
10th
and
it's
we're
planning
relating
to
site
review
criteria,
use
tables
and
standards,
adus,
affordable
housing,
occupancy,
Boulder,
Junction,
phase,
two
and
area
police,
three
planning,
Reserve,
Urban,
Services
study.
There's
a
lot
in
that
meeting
and
tonight
what's
up
is
Middle
income
and
I
I.
I
It's
not
really
going
to
matter
what
what
I
hear
next
week
like
I
I,
know
that
I
would
like
us
to
do
Outreach
as
part
of
middle
income
on
missing
middle
I
would
like
to
include
that
in
the
engagement
that's
being
planned
for
this
topic
tonight
and
so
pushing
it
off
to
November
10th
in
terms
of
another
five
asking.
If
we
want
this
to
be
part
of
that,
engagement,
I
don't
think
moves
the
needle
forward
in
the
way
that
I
I
think
again.
I
If
we
want
to,
if
we
really
want
to
make
a
difference
for
our
community
and
to
help
people
who
need
help
with
housing,
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
why
we
delay
weeks
and
then
months
and
and
and
the
reason
I
brought
up
like
this
isn't
going
to
happen
on
my
tenure.
If
we
continue
at
this
pace
is
because
you
don't
know
what
the
next
council
is
going
to
want
to
do
and
how
long
they're
you
know
they're
going
to
want
to
re-look
at
things.
I
So
I
think
it
is
important
to
to
have
work
plan
items
that
are
to
your
work
plan
and
that
you
get
them
done,
and
so
I
will
again
request
that
that
we
do
a
notify
to
see
who's
interested
in
adding
for
this
engagement
that
we're
talking
about
tonight,
some
specific
missing
middle
while
we're,
while
we're
doing
Outreach
to
the
community
on
the
timeline
that
was
expressed
in
that
memo,
do
we
want
to
include
some
specific
asks,
as
Lauren
suggested
in
her
Memo
as
Aaron
alluded
to
I
think
that
Matt's
getting
at
and
that
that
I
would
request
like
do
we
want
to
do
duplexes
by
right
everywhere,
maybe
maybe
deed
restricted,
maybe
not
I
would
think.
I
That's
part
of
the
engagement.
Do
we
want
the
parking
minimums?
Do
we
want
the
square
footage
that
Lauren's
talking
about
and
I'm
going
to
forget
the
other
one
to
two
I'm?
Sorry,
I
didn't
memorize
the
list.
They
were
all
really
good,
so
yeah
I
would
love
a
not
a
five
as
part
of
this
Outreach.
Do
we
want
to
include
a
couple
of
things
that
we're
very
confident
whatever
else
comes
forward
on
November
10th?
We
would
like
to
lift
up
to
the
community
and
be
on
schedule
to
to
accomplish
that
in
this
Council.
I
Answer
for
my
part,
Judy,
it
was
whoever's
being
gonna
already
be
receiving
Outreach
on
the
the
middle
income
housing
that
staff
said
that
they
were
going
to
reach
out
to
in
March
and
April
they're,
already
planning
that
Outreach.
So
I'm
saying.
Let's
stick
this
rest
of
this
part
of
middle
and
come
into
that
Outreach
and
reach
out
as
you're
saying
to
all
the
right
people,
everybody
who
we
would
need
to
engage
with.
B
G
So
I
think
I'm
still
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
how
this
is
sort
of
sort
of
right.
So
we've
got,
we
had
a
work
plan
priority
around
updating,
affordable
housing
requirements,
and
then
we
also
have
one
about
changing
codes
to
incentivize,
smaller
and
more
affordable
units
and
I.
Think
this
this
is
that
I
guess
that's
the
question
for
Steph
is
what
we're
doing
around
engagement
for
that
second
part
about
changing
codes
like
is
that
a
separate
process?
Is
that
part
of
this
like
how?
G
How
does
it
all
kind
of
fit
together
and
I
guess
the
reason
that
I'm
asking
is
because
it's
not
because
I
mean
there's
a
reason
that
I
keep
saying,
let's
in
single-family
zoning,
every
chance,
I
can't
right,
but
it's
not
because
I'm
against
it,
it's
more!
Where
are
we?
G
G
D
So
I
think
that's
a
question
for
Brad,
unfortunately
again
as
you're
doing
it
and
I
don't
know
Brad
If
part
of
that
question
is
it
kind
of
depends
on
where
the
prioritization
comes
from
in
two
weeks
in
terms
of
the
timing,
although
I
also
understand
Rachel's
request
of
as
long
as
you're
going
to
do
some
engagement?
Q
No,
if,
if
that's
that's,
fundamentally
correct
the
engagement
process,
around
Zoning
for
affordability
is
not
laid
out
in
terms
of
a
time
frame
yet
because
it
encounter,
you
know,
plays
with
some
of
the
other
priorities.
Q
But
but
of
course
the
question
on
the
table
could
be
one
and
then
we
could
back
into
that
on
on
the
10th.
But
but
it
does
relate
to
that
as
you
as
you
ask
durian.
B
Thank
you,
Brad
Matt
and
then
Aaron
and
then
I'd
like
to
see
us
look
forward
to
voting
on
some
of
these
things
or
giving
nods
of
five
or
not.
L
Thanks
Lauren
lots
of
nods
so
stretch
your
neck
in
the
preceding
few
minutes,
I'll
lower
my
hand,
so
it's
not
distracting
so
Rachel's
points
Rings,
true
and
it
sums
up
with
one
word
urgency:
it's
not
our
necessarily
our
political
urgency.
It's
Community
urgency
six
years
in
running
and
move
the
needle
much
so
it's
you
know
doing
mostly
the
same
stuff
and
expecting
a
different
result.
L
We've
we
know
what
that
alludes
to
so
I
think
really
it
I
think
we
have
to
lean
into
not
being
held
hostage
to
some
extent
by
copious
engagement
when
we
need
to
act
urgently
on
some
things
and
I
think
we
should
consider
moving
faster
on
some
of
these
things
that
are
Urgent
needs
for
our
community
to
unlock
the
potential
and,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
the
nine
of
us
that
own
the
consequences
of
the
decisions
we
make
regarding
engagement
feel
confident
that
moving
towards
some
of
these
zoning
and
ordinance
changes
for
missing
middle
are
going
to
do
well
for
our
community,
and
we
have
to
face
that.
L
You
know
at
the
time
of
election
and
face
our
our
public
comments
and
all
that.
So,
let's
face
that,
let's
lean
into
the
decisions
we've
been
elected
to
make
and
make
them
and
and
not
be.
Oh,
we
gotta
do
all
this
engagement
to
figure
out
whatever
it
wants.
We
can
do
some
of
the
engagement
while
we're
acting
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
walk
and
chew
gum
more
than
we
have
and
and
so
I
I
like
to
sort
of
lean
in
where
Rachel's
going
and
say.
L
Let's
start,
let's
just
decide
where
we're
going
to
go,
and
some
of
those
may
not
work.
But
let's
engage.
Let's
do
the
engagement
while
we're
looking
to
implement
those
things
and
get
those
balls,
rolling
and
and
I
think
that's
what
the
community
has
it
needs
for
us
to
do
because
we're
not
helping
anybody,
just
sort
of
slow
doing
the
Slow
Roll
here
so
and
so
I
really
want
to
push
the
urgency
here.
L
K
Yeah,
just
from
a
process,
standpoint
I,
think
to
Rachel's
point
I
think
we
could
make
a
commitment
tonight
to
include
some
additional
pieces
in
this
process.
But
maybe
we
have
you
know,
maybe
have
a
detailed
discussion
on
November
10th
about
what
items
to
include,
because
I
think
that
I
think
we
might
benefit
from
some
additional
time
in
a
larger
context,
about
talking
about
what
things,
but
so
just
suggest
that
we
make
the
commitment
tonight
for
Rachel's
request,
but
not
have
a
limited
list
that
that
we're
confined
to
that.
K
We
decide
on
tonight
when
maybe
we
haven't
had
time
to
fully
vet
that
up
to
this
point,.
M
Yeah
I
just
want
to
make
a
brief
comment
to
the
extent
that
we
tend
to.
We
seem
to
have
a
very
variable
cut.
Excuse
me
concept
of
community
engagement.
M
We
like
it
very
much
when
we
want
to
be
engaged
with
the
community
and
when
it's
not
suitable
for
our
purposes.
We
are
now
looking
to
shorten
engagement.
I
have
no
problem
with
with
Rachel's
request,
to
put
more
things
into
the
engagement
process
and
to
ask
other
questions
of
the
community,
but
I
I
do
have
a
problem
with
the
concept
that
engagement
is
only
important
when
we
want
it
to
be
and
is
less
important
when
we
don't
want
it
to
be
I.
M
Think
a
more
consistent
approach
would
be
preferable,
and
if
we
are
going
to
Value
Community
engagement,
we
ought
to
Value
Community
engagement.
That's
just
my
view
on
it.
Obviously
I
I,
don't
think
that's
going
to
be
a
prevailing
view
here,
but
I
think
we're
displaying
a
certain
inconsistency
in
the
way
we
deal
with
something
as
important
as
Community
engagement.
B
Thanks
Mark,
okay,
so
with
our
nods
of
five
I'd
like
to
propose
Rachel,
will
you
let
me
know
if
you're,
okay,
with
this
sort
of
incorporating
that
idea
that
Aaron
brought
forward
into
your
proposal
that
we
ask
staff
to
incorporate
more
of
you
know,
take
a
take.
A
bigger
swing
incorporate
some
of
these
Bolder
more
zoning
related
things
into
this
work
plan
item.
B
But
let
us
know
on
the
10th
sort
of
a
little
bit
more
detail
of
what
that
means,
or
just
kind
of
clarify
that
we're
on
the
same
page
around
what
that
could
include.
I
That
I
would
love
to
phrase
it.
If
I
could
that's
right,
I've
followed
it
precisely.
It
is
the
concept
that
we
would
take
a.
We
would
have
an
unofficial
vote,
not
a
five
tonight
to
say
we
want
to
expand
engagement
on
what
we're
doing
on
middle
income.
Inclusionary
housing
to
also
include
some
planning
questions
and
code
questions
that
could
include
things
like
duplex,
because
I
wanted
to
say
it
10
more
times
tonight
and
parking
minimums
and
in
the
lower
enlist
and
other
things
as
staff
may
or
may
not
suggest
is.
I
That
is
that
the
the
concept,
if
so
I
will
I,
will
do
a
disco
dance
in
in
in
Celebration
yeah.
B
L
Right
sounds
good,
so
clarifying
question
is,
does
would
would
adding
this
to
the
Outreach
allow
for
us
to,
like
I,
said,
walk
and
chew
gum
where,
where
staff
can
start
to
actually
scope
these
issues
out
like
let's,
while
we're
engagement,
actually
start
to
formulate
these
things
rather
than
waiting
for
the
engagement
to
finish
before
we
start
the
work,
I
I
think
if
we
can
do
both,
we
can
ex
get
our
time
frame
in
a
better
spot.
L
The
the
Outreach
May
inform
us,
which
ones
we
jettison
perhaps
but
I
I
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that
we're
starting
some
of
the
work
on
these.
While
we
are
engaging
not
in
chronological
order
but
working
side
by
side.
D
So
Brad
and
and
others
if
they
want
to
comment
I'll
I'll,
let
you
do
that
and
I
think
what
we
hear
you
right
like.
How
do
we
do
things
concurrently
instead
of
consecutively?
D
I
think
that's
that's
important,
I
think
for
at
least
my
point
of
view
it
it's
certainly
we
can,
but
it'll
depend
on
which
of
those
things
we're
doing,
and
that's
the
conversation
we're
about
to
have
in
November,
because
in
November,
hopefully
we
have
that
prioritization
and
which
things
come
first,
and
that
will
help
us
really
figure
out
what
type
of
Engagement
actually
can
be
leveraged
and
layered
and
done
at
the
same
time
and
that's
why
that
conversation
is
critical.
That.
L
That
may
be
fine,
that's
two
weeks
away.
I
won't
be
here
for
that
conversation,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
when
we
embark
on
the
engagement,
we're
not
waiting
on
engagement
to
start
the
work,
so
once
we
Define
the
list
of
five
at
the
10th
that
that's
great,
but
let's
start
working
on
them.
While
we
engage
I
just
want
to
know
that
we
can
do
this
in
parallel,
Brad
versus,
if
we're
doing
it.
L
Concurrently,
I
just
want
to
set
up
the
expectations
of
what
we're
actually
going
to
give
a,
not
a
5-2
here.
Yeah,
maybe.
Q
Another
way
I
can
kind
of
describe
in
any
project
is
it's
made
up
of
component
parts,
and
engagement
is
one
research
might
be
another
actual
writing
of
code
and
vetting
it
with
the
attorney's
office
might
be
another
mapping
might
be
another.
So
we
with
all
projects,
kind
of,
can
move
bits
and
pieces,
those
those
forward
on
different
timelines
and
and
typically
are
doing
many
parts
of
those
concurrently,
but
but
at
the
same
time,
there'll
be
some
discussion,
as
we've
alluded
to
on
the
10th
about
about
those.
Q
You
know
again
Council
Council
preferences
on
some
of
those
elements,
but
we
we
definitely
have
a
mindset
of
moving
all
the
pieces
forward.
You
know
concurrently,
as
opposed
to
necessarily
consecutively.
G
Yeah
I'm
sorry
I
think
my
my
brain
is
really
slow
tonight,
so
I'm
still
just
trying
to
understand.
Are
we
trying
to
expedite
the
the
part
of
our
work
plan
that
was
about
changing
the
codes?
Is
that
is
that?
What
we're
trying
to
do
to
sort
of
move
that
move
that
up
so
that,
rather
than
kind
of
waiting
on
some
more
discussion
and
then
engagement
plan
and
everything
we're
talking
about
just
taking
some
of
that
and
putting
it
into
this
engagement
for
the
affordable
housing
requirement
updates.
I
Is
that,
if
that's
a
question
to
me,
I
would
say
in
terms
of
the
middle
income
and
the
missing
middle
that
was
sort
of
described
as
as
not
relevant
to
this
discussion.
I
I
I
believe
it
is
relevant
and
and
should
be,
should
be
included
in
the
Outreach,
that's
already
scheduled.
So
that's
what
I'm
suggesting
is
that
we
take
the
pieces
that
are
gonna,
add
to
the
middle
income,
housing
stock
and
the
types
of
housing
that
are
missing
metal
and
can
have
benefits
for
Middle
income
and
diversify
the
housing
tax.
I
It's
I
think
a
little
bit
different
than
some
of
the
other
components
of
affordable
housing,
but
as
relevant
to
this
discussion,
I'm,
suggesting
that
we
we
just
Loop
that
into
the
engagement,
that's
already
being
planned.
Okay,.
G
And
I
think,
where
I'm,
where
I'm
struggling
is
just
in
the
I
feel
like
I,
only
have
part
of
the
information
of
thinking
about
what
we're
going
to
line
up
as
being
the
most
important
thing
to
try
to
move
forward
with
sooner
than
later,
I
think
for
me,
like
waiting
those
two
weeks
to
have
a
little
bit
more
information
and
then
prioritizing
feels
feels
a
little
more
comfortable.
Just
because
then
I
feel
like
I've,
got
a
full
set
of
information
and
what
are
all
the
different
things.
K
Yeah
we
appreciate
that
Nicole
I
believe
the
proposal
that's
on
the
table
is
to
make
a
commitment
tonight
to
include
additional
items
as
part
of
this
Outreach,
but
without
making
a
commitment
to
what
those
items
are
exactly,
but
with
the
things
on
the
table
that
Rachel
had
already
mentioned,
like
duplexes
and
other
events
that
could
help
with
the
missing
middle
housing.
So
we're
not
limiting
ourselves
and
we'll
still
have
the
discussion
a
couple
weeks
about
prioritization
as
I
understand.
B
I
think
that
was
a
great
clarification
and
on
that
note,
I
would
like
to
see
if
we
can
take
see
how
much
support
we
have
for
that
idea.
So,
if
you
are
in
support
of
that,
please
raise
your
hand.
B
L
I,
don't
know
if
that's
here
or
not,
we
could
do
a
not
a
five
I'm,
not
sure
what
purpose
it's
going
to
serve,
but
I
don't
think
we
have
the
right
policy
direction
for
the
goals
and
the
needs
of
our
community
with
regards
to
missing
middle
middle
income.
So
the
problem
persists.
Unless
someone
has
a
different
way
of
framing
it.
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
D
And
I'll
actually
send
it
to
staff,
because
I
know
that
we
are
running
tight
on
time
today,
but
I'll
say
again,
there's
been
tremendous
work
in
this
area,
not
just
by
staff
but
frankly
from
our
community
connectors
from
our
Community
Partners
dialogue.
Boulder
who's
been
providing
us
some
recommendations,
so
Pam
and
Sarah
and
Brenda
are
all
here
to
talk
about
it.
So
I
will
send
it
to
them
to
kick
it
off.
S
S
We've
been
working
with
a
wide
team
of
employees
from
across
the
city
and
I.
Just
briefly
want
to
thank
our
staff
core
team,
some
of
whom
will
be
presenting
this
evening.
We've
been
working
closely
with
Amy
Kane,
our
Equity
officer,
Elisha
Johnson,
our
city
clerk,
John,
Morse,
the
elections,
administrator,
Sarah,
Huntley
directors
of
communication
engagement,
our
engagement
managers,
Ryan
Hanson
and
Brenda
rittenauer
and,
of
course,
Taylor
Ryman,
our
assistant
to
city
council.
We're
also
really
thankful
to
the
dozens
of
Borden
commission,
Liaisons
and
secretaries
that
support
the
operations
of
each
individual
board.
S
So
this
evening's
flow,
we
hope
that
you
had
a
chance
to
kind
of
Thoroughly
review
the
memo
and
attachments,
because
what
became
clear
to
us,
as
we
were
putting
this
together
is
the
universe
of
Boulders
boards
and
commissions
have
a
considerable
number
of
interrelated
Parts.
A
large
number
of
stakeholders
within
the
city
organization
in
the
community
and
so
tonight's
study
session
alone
cannot
possibly
Encompass
every
great
idea
and
opportunity
related
to
our
boards
and
commissions.
S
So,
as
a
result,
our
core
team
worked
with
our
subcommittee
on
boards
and
commissions,
big
thanks
to
council
members,
folkerts
and
Weiner
for
your
assistance
as
we've
worked
through.
These
we've
prioritized
six
specific
opportunities
for
sort
of
immediate
board
and
commission
Improvement
and
experimentation,
and
then
we
also
want
to
bring
to
you
a
proposal
for
a
longer
term
approach
for
a
more
comprehensive
strategy
that
would
address
the
additional
body
of
work
that
has
sort
of
come
to
light
over
the
last
several
months.
S
So
in
this
presentation
we
intend
to
share
a
summary
of
our
work
to
date
that
supports
the
recommendations
we
have.
That
will
help
to
evolve
our
system
and
then
to
provide
some
context
for
where
we
think
we
can
go
next
next
slide,
please,
before
we
dive
into
our
material
I,
always
think
it's
fitting
to
preview
the
questions
ahead
of
time
and
then
kind
of
go
through
our
materials,
so
they're
fresh
in
your
minds,
you
will
see
more
questions
than
you
normally
receive
in
a
study
session,
and
part
of
that
is.
S
We
have
kind
of
a
balance
again
between
some
acute
improvements.
We
think
we
can
make
with
your
support,
along
with
kind
of
a
longer
term
strategy
consideration.
So
you
will
see
before
you.
The
questions
have
been
really
grouped,
based
on
sort
of
the
the
framing
of
the
topics,
and
so
this
first
set
of
questions
that
you'll
receive
really
relate
to
immediate
process.
Considerations
that
having
your
direction
tonight
will
help
us
ensure
a
smooth
and
continually
improved
recruitment
selection
for
the
2023
board
and
commission
process.
S
Addressing
kind
of
the
question
that
has
come
up
a
couple
of
times
this
year
about
how
Council
addresses
the
one
candidate
for
one
vacancy
issue
when
there's
sort
of
a
lack
of
competition
for
a
board
or
commission
seat
and
then
a
requirement
that,
given
our
kind
of
post,
covid
world
and
expectations
around
both
in-person
and
digital
engagement,
that
to
ask
you
whether
you'd
like
to
extend
your
own
decision
to
hold
hybrid
meetings
to
boards
and
commissions,
with
an
expectation
that
they
do
so
next
slide.
Please.
S
The
next
set
of
three
questions,
sort
of
deals
with
substantive
kind
of
experiments,
I'll,
say
in
terms
of
how
boards
and
commissions
connect
with
both
Council
and
the
community,
and
so
these
three
questions
deal
with
one
slowly,
stepping
into
the
concept
of
council
Liaisons
to
boards
and
commissions
we're
going
to
recommend,
starting
that
with
kind
of
a
pilot
approach
with
a
council
member
to
understand
kind
of
the
scope.
S
The
value
add
of
the
the
liaison
relationship
and
also
kind
of
keep
in
mind
what
additional
work
expectation
that
would
place
on
all
of
you
as
council
members
to
try
to
serve
as
individual
Liaisons
to
all
of
our
boards
and
commissions,
we'll
have
a
conversation
around
boards
and
commissions
and
their
relationship
to
how
the
community
is
engaged
on
a
variety
of
issues.
And
then,
finally,
we
have
a
procedural
question
for
you,
as
it
relates
to
formalizing
how
boards
and
commission
represented
are
invited
to
consult
with
you
during
your
meetings.
S
Currently,
procedures
address
that
in
the
context
of
regular
meetings,
but
not
study
sessions,
and
so
we
offer
an
opportunity
to
sort
of
formalize
that
procedure
and
then
finally,
as
I
stated,
we'd
like
to
have
a
conversation
about
exploring
a
longer
term
strategy
for
a
comprehensive
assessment
by
a
third
party
of
our
boards
and
commission
system
to
learn
from
what's
happening
around
the
country
and
to
deal
with
some
of
the
additional
proposals
that
we've
received
as
sort
of
a
holistic
approach
versus
trying
to
do
these
kind
of
one-off
incremental
idea.
Explorations
every
few
months
with
you.
S
So
with
that,
that's
kind
of
the
question
preview
next
slide.
Please.
S
Put
one
more
slide,
thank
you
so,
just
to
ground
you
all
again
in
the
background
of
this
kind
of
recent
18
months
or
so
of
work
around
boards
and
commissions
from
a
staff
perspective.
S
Well,
over
the
last
couple
of
years,
we
have
received
a
great
variety
of
inputs
and
events
that
have
fueled
the
ongoing
conversation
around
boards
and
commissions.
We
really
see
the
impetus
for
the
initial
formation
of
our
staff,
core
team
and
a
lot
of
the
work
that
we'll
talk
about
tonight
comes
from
the
adoption
of
our
racial
Equity
plan
in
February
of
2021.
S
goal
number
five,
as
you
see
on
the
slide
called
for
us
as
a
city
to
examine
the
barriers
and
opportunities
available
to
service
on
boards
and
commissions,
and
really
explore
how
we
enhance
the
inclusiveness
and
provide
Equitable
access
to
service,
and
so,
while,
while
that
goal
language
is
fairly
simple.
What
is
behind
that
and
the
conversation
that
has
been
occurring
on
our
team
is
that
to
successfully
enhance
these
opportunities
and
to
increase
diversity
among
board
and
commission
members,
we
have
to
really
examine
all
of
the
practices
and
structures
in
place.
S
So
this
ranges
from
how
we
recruit
how
we
create
inclusive
environments
and
a
spirit
of
belonging
on
individual
boards
and
commissions
and
ensuring
the
service
to
our
city
is
not
dependent
on
one's
identity
or
ability
or
economic
means
issues
around
enhancing
the
direct
impact
of
boards
and
commission
service
on
the
overall
progress
of
the
city.
So
essentially,
what's
the
value
proposition
of
being
a
border
commission
member
for
Boulder
in
the
first
place,
and
so
so
again.
S
Behind
that
simply
stated
goal
in
our
racial
Equity
plan
is,
is
sort
of
a
vast
range
of
effort
that
our
team
has
been
working
through
next
slide.
Please.
S
So
with
that,
as
as
sort
of
a
grounding
again,
we've
had
significant
effort
underway
from
engagement
with
different
groups
on
boards
and
commissions
process.
Improvements
on
how
we
select
boards
and
commission
members
how
we
conduct
meetings
and
internal
development
work
on
internal
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
principles
in
how
our
business
is
conducted.
S
Going
to
now
invite
a
couple
of
members
of
our
core
team
to
sort
of
highlight
the
work
within
our
umbrella
that
they
have
really
spearheaded
around
boards
and
commissions,
and
so
the
first
team
member
I'd
like
to
turn
to
to
sort
of
address
those
first.
Three
components
that
you
see
is
Sarah
Huntley,
our
communications
director,
foreign.
T
Good
evening
Council,
my
name
is
Sarah
Huntley
I'm,
the
director
of
communication
and
engagement
for
the
city
and
I'm
pleased
to
be
able
to
share
with
you
tonight
a
little
bit
of
information
and
background
on
some
of
the
sources
of
feedback
that
we
have
received
on
board
and
commission
improvements
beyond
the
staff
effort
that
has
occurred.
T
This
has
really
been
a
area
of
focus
for
many
folks
in
our
community,
as
well
as
some
folks,
specifically
on
Council
and
staff
and
I
want
to
just
summarize
a
little
bit
of
where
some
of
the
feedback
has
come
from.
So,
as
you
all
know,
you
created
a
council
subcommittee
on
engagement.
That
is
actually
the
shorthand
for
the
full
Council
subcommittee's
name,
which
is
the
Council
subcommittee
on
engagement
and
creating
welcoming
spaces
Council
spaces
or
something
to
that
effect.
T
But
we
call
it
the
engagement
subcommittee,
because
it's
a
lot
shorter
and
for
the
the
last
couple
of
years,
council
members,
Bob
Yates
and
mayor
Pro,
tem
Rachel
friend,
have
served
on
that
subcommittee
and
we've
talked
about
a
whole
lot
of
improvements,
and
some
of
them
have
been
related
to
boards
and
commissions
and
I.
Want
to
just
sort
of
frame
up
a
little
bit
how
my
team
views
boards
and
commissions
so
really
boards
and
commissions
are
a
form
we
consider
it
to
be
a
form
of
engagement
right.
T
These
are
volunteer
community
members
who
are
choosing
to
engage
with
the
city
around
specific
topics
with
a
whole
lot
of
time,
energy
and
granularity.
So
it
is
really
an
ultimate
form
of
Engagement.
So
that
is
why
various
points
in
time
the
Council
subcommittee
on
engagement
has
has
talked
about
boards
and
commissions.
They've
tried
to
because
there
is
also
a
council
subcommittee
on
boards
and
commissions.
T
I
think
it
is
fair
to
say
that
we
have
tried
to
sort
of
distinguish
between
Logistics
process,
Improvement
and
consistency
of
how
boards
are
run
and
leave
that
to
the
boards
and
commission
subcommittee
and
instill,
because
Dad
talk
about
ways
in
which
community
members
might
wish
to
be
engaging
at
boards
and
commissions.
So
there's
been
some
conversation
at
that
level
and
if
you
have
questions
about
that,
I'm
sure
that
Bob
and
Rachel
could
give
you
a
sense
of
the
types
of
conversations
we've
had.
T
The
second
group
of
a
source
of
feedback
has
come
from
a
group
in
Boulder
called
dialogue.
Boulder,
and
this
is
a
group
of
interested
community
members-
they've
been
meeting
virtually
since
January
2021
to
to
and
they
started
like
themselves.
This
wasn't
a
city
started
group,
there's
a
passionate
community
members
who
came
together
to
discuss,
frame
problems
and
suggest
directions
for
possible
solutions
concerning
boards
and
commissions,
and
public
engagement
and
sort
of
a
mix
of
both
those
things.
T
They
asked
me
to
share
with
you
tonight
that
participants
in
dialogue
Boulder
represent
a
cross-section
of
the
public,
reflecting
A
diversity
of
age,
gender,
ethnicity
and
economic
resources.
It's
especially
varied
in
its.
The
group
is
especially
varied
in
its
views
on
local
issues
but
unified
in
a
desire
for
better
communication
among
city
council
staff
boards
and
commissions,
and
the
community
dialogue
Boulders
members,
many
of
who
had
Nev,
whom
had
never
spoken
to
each
other
before
and
are
often
across
the
aisle
on
different
political
work,
together
with
mutual
respect.
T
The
recommendations
they
made,
which
were
numerous,
were
reached
with
full
consensus
and
were
only
made
after
full
consensus,
was
retained.
The
problem-solving
mode
utilized
by
dialogue
Boulder
could
serve
as
a
successful
model
to
address
other
city
and
local
issues.
I
will
note
that
Judy
nog
who's
been
a
significant
leader
of
this
work
is
in
the
audience
tonight,
as
an
attendee
and
as
available
should
there
be
questions
about
dialogue,
Boulders
work,
the
other
important
area
where
we've
been
able
to
gain
feedback
is
from
our
community
connectors
and
residents.
T
So
I
know
you're
familiar
very
familiar
with
this
program,
and
I
would
want
to
say
that
they've
only
begun
to
scratch
the
surface
of
their
feedback
in
this
area.
But
in
some
initial
preliminary
conversations
they
were
able
to
really
lift
some
suggestions
for
process
improvements
that
are
designed
to
address
some
of
those
barriers,
and
so
you
will
note
in
the
appendix
that's
attached
to
this
memo,
there's
a
very
comprehensive
list
of
all
of
the
great
recommendations
that
have
come
to
our
attention
and
as
well
as
a
little
indicator
of
where
they
came
from.
T
That's
not
to
suggest
that
any
recommendation
is
any
more
valued
than
others.
We
just
wanted
you
to
get
a
sense
of
where,
where
these
are
originating
from
and
as
we
talked
about
tonight
already,
the
ones
we're
lifting
today
are
either
the
ones
the
staff
thinks
are
most
actionable
right
away
or
in
some
cases,
particularly
in
dialogue.
Boulder
represents
at
least
one
or
two
of
their
highest
priority
items,
as
they've
identified
to
us.
T
They
were
things
that
staff
had
within
its
purview
and
capacity
to
make
immediate
changes
on
so
I
want
to
personally
thank
all
of
these
folks
who
are
participating,
particularly
from
the
community
for
their
time
and
energy
on
this
issue,
and
if
we
do
move
in
the
direction
of
having
a
more
comprehensive,
independent
study,
I
would
love
to
continue
to
involve
them.
Also
want
to
point
out
that,
in
terms
of
community
connectors
and
residents,
we
do
have
Lenora
Cooper
here,
she's
one
of
the
community
connectors
to
answer
questions
as
well
and
I.
T
Think
both
Judy
and
and
Lenora
have
been
waiting
very
patiently
through
the
rest
of
the
previous
conversation
and
would
welcome
an
opportunity
to
answer
any
questions
you
you
might
have
and
with
that
I'm
going
to
stop
talking
and
pass
over
to
my
colleague,
Alicia
Johnson.
C
I
wanted
to
just
give
a
basic
outline
on
the
work
and
accomplishments
that
we
have
obtained
in
regards
to
the
Recruitment
and
selection
process
improvements
and
also
the
evolution
of
the
boards
and
commissions
meeting
Logistics
at
the
start,
and
during
this
year's
recruitment
period,
this
team
that
Pam
outlined
began
the
review
of
the
steps
and
the
approach
that
was
related
to
recruitment
that
we
could
actually
improve.
On
and
again,
we
had
already
talked
being
excuse.
C
Me
have
been
wanting
to
work
with
the
community
connectors
and
the
other
groups
that
were
noted
to
get
their
input
so
based
on
the
subcommittee
and
thank
you
again,
Council
subcommittee
for
your
input
and
patience
with
us
as
we
work
through
through
that
and
also
various
counsel
feedback
that
we
gain
through
meetings
and
and
exchanges.
The
city
began
a
test
for
a
new
method
to
the
boards
and
commissions
interview
and
selection
process.
C
You
know
to
the
board
or
commission
they
were
applying
for,
and
they
had
the
opportunity
again
to
ask
those
questions
to
staff
and
at
least
one
Council
liaison,
and
that
proven
to
be
very
important
to
the
applicants
as
they
were,
trying
to
obtain
obtain
information
on.
You
know
what
exactly
that
service
included.
C
Those
interviews
were
then
recorded
and
provided
to
the
full
Council
to
view
at
their
Leisure,
and
we
also
posted
the
interview
with
the
links
and
the
passwords
on
the
website.
So
the
public
could
also
be
aware
of
who
was
applying
and
have
access
to
those
interviews,
so
that
proven
again
to
be
a
good
first
step
in
making
those
changes
to
align
with
our
goals
for
racial
equity
and
inclusion.
C
So
at
this
point,
I
would
like
to
turn
it
over
to
my
elections,
administrator
John
Morris,
to
go
over
the
steps
he
and
I
have
been
working
on
on
the
evolution
of
the
boards
and
commissions
meeting
Logistics,
because
we're
trying
to
bring
the
boards
and
commissions
into
a
hybrid
environment.
Thank
you.
J
Thanks
Alicia,
yes,
as
she
said,
John
Morse,
here,
elections
administrator
for
the
city
of
Boulder
I'm,
going
to
walk
through
where
we're
at
in
our
hybrid
meetings.
J
So
our
boards
and
commissions
have
followed
the
lead
of
City
Council
on
moving
into
this
new
format
of
in-person
and
virtual
meetings.
It
was
a
big
group
effort
among
a
lot
of
our
departments
and
planning
this
started
back
in
March
and
we
were
making
a
lot
of
Headway
and
then,
of
course,
as
we
all
know,
kovid
through
a
wrenching
things
and
kind
of
made
us
hit
the
brakes
a
little
bit.
But
we
got
back
on
the
horse.
We've
been
working
on
this
at
the
end
of
the
summer.
J
Up
until
now,
and
so
we
currently
have
three
rooms
right
now
that
are
available
for
our
boards
and
commissions.
To
start
their
meetings,
things
we
were
taking
into
considerations
with
these
rooms
were
our
technology,
public,
accessibility,
parking
and
comfort
for
our
members,
and
then
the
expectation
too,
is
to
have
a
few
more
spaces,
become
available
to
meet
as
we
get
some
equipment
in
and
and
are
able
to
set
that
up.
J
When
we
went
about
this
planning
process
for
our
hybrid
meetings,
we
thought
it
would
be
best
or
most
prudent
to
have
two
pilots
begin
the
process
to
kind
of
have
some
lessons
learned
and
takeaways,
and
so
our
Arts
commission
met
in
their
first
hybrid
meeting
in
September
and
then
we've
had
our
open
space.
Board
of
Trustees
meet
this
month
had
some
great
feedback
from
them.
U
Thank
you,
John
I'm
excited
to
get
to
join
you
tonight
to
talk
about
the
Dei
workshops
that
we
have
have
collaborated
with
all
of
our
staff
members
who
are
working
directly
with
boards
and
commissions.
So
those
are
our
staff
Liaisons,
many
of
whom
are
directors
and
high-level
managers
in
the
organization
and
also
those
who
sit
in
the
role
of
board
secretary,
who
are
really
the
folks
who
handle
all
the
logistics
to
make
those
meetings
happen
so
starting
in
March
of
2022.
U
This
board
and
commission's
project
team
members
that
you're
meeting
tonight
and
the
others
on
our
Core
group,
as
well
as
those
folks
I
just
mentioned,
who
support
boards
and
commissions,
worked
with
a
Consulting
team,
called
a
consultant
from
iproject
LLC
to
create
a
series
of
workshops
and
participate
in
those
workshops
to
enhance
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
and
belonging.
U
The
word
cloud
that
you're,
seeing
before
you
offers
a
peek
at
the
many
terms
that
we
explored
through
that
process,
our
leading
consultant
Angela
Davis,
who
really
has
a
just
a
ton
of
experience
and
knowledge
in
this
area
and
worked
with
the
city
on
our
bias
and
microaggression
training
curriculum.
U
She
worked
with
this
core
team
to
plan
and
host
three
two-part
workshops
across
the
course
of
the
year,
a
total
of
24
hours
of
training
toward
the
goal
of
creating
a
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
blueprint
for
boards
and
commissions,
as
Pam
mentioned
in
looking
at
the
racial
Equity
plan
goals
related
to
boards
and
commissions
diversity.
U
The
goal
really
is
to
encourage
full-hearted
participation
from
everyone
who
is
in
these
spaces,
including
the
members
staff
and
the
community
attendees.
We
walked
through
the
full
life
cycle
of
being
a
board
or
commission
member
and
talked
about
how
to
bring
inclusion
and
belonging
to
each
step
from
recruitment,
which
you
all
have
taken.
Helped
us
take
a
huge
step
forward
on
this
year
to
onboarding
and
throughout
the
phases
of
the
service
term,
which,
for
those
members
often
includes
increasing
leadership
roles
in
July
sessions.
U
Three
and
four
focused
on
creating
a
diversity
blueprint
for
each
boarding.
Commission,
the
workshop
participants
explored
their
own
intersectional
identities
and
what
they
knew
of
the
identities
of
their
current
members
and
worked
in
small
groups
to
understand
what
qualities
in
a
candidate
would
add
to
their
culture
rather
than
the
traditional
culture
fit
model
that
can
lead
to
a
less
diverse
group.
U
The
final
two
sessions
in
September
illuminated
past
and
present
inequities
in
America
particularly
related
to
political
structures
and
policies.
The
recent
pilot
process,
improvements
of
the
human
relations
commission,
who
are
in
the
process
of
fully
supporting
a
primarily
Spanish-speaking
commission
member
those
pilot,
those
pilots
and
and
process
improvements,
were
lifted
to
help
folks
really
understand
what
walking
the
Walk
of
equity
means
in
this.
These
situations
and
staff
teams
work
together
to
continue
to
finalize
their
own
plans
for
innovation.
U
So,
in
addition
to
the
pilot
actions
of
the
human
relations
commission,
other
Innovations
have
already
started
to
become
implemented,
including
co-creating
group
agreements
with
the
landmarks
board
and
then
a
new
intentional
introduction
space
for
incoming
members
of
The,
Parks
and
Recreation
Advisory
board
we're
eager
to
learn
more
about
other
innovations
that
are
happening
across
the
system,
as
our
fellow
co-workers
bring
them
to
us,
and
we're
also
eager
to
hear
the
barriers
that
they
are
encountering
as
they
try
to
bring
on
board
these
new
Innovations.
U
One
item
we
spent
time
on
during
the
workshops
that
is
of
particular
interest
to
you
all
is
how
to
bring
you
into
this
work
as
the
folks
who
do
the
appointment,
part
of
that
life
cycle,
and
so
we
are
considering
that
as
part
of
our
next
steps
in
this
work.
U
S
Thanks
Brenda
and
all,
and
can
we
have
the
next
slide
please
just
to
round
out
our
work
to
date?
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I
know
that
part
of
what
brought
us
here
tonight
and
the
first
place
for
this
study
session
was
that
in
the
July
14th
Council
process
discussion.
As
we
solicited
items
of
interest
from
all
of
you,
what
emerged
were
nearly
10
different
recommendations
and
ideas
that
do
relate
to
boards
and
commissions
and
do
the
the
scope
and
time
of
that
particular
meeting.
S
The
decision
was
made
to
go
ahead
and
schedule
this
study
session
to
really
focus
in
on
boards
and
commissions.
What
we
have
done
with
those
suggestions
at
this
point
are:
we've
sort
of
filtered
them
into
the
larger
body
of
recommended
improvements,
and
so
you'll
see
that
comprehensive
list
that
others
have
referred
to
tonight.
That,
within
that
those
items
from
your
recommendations
have
been
captured,
a
couple
of
which
are
being
addressed
here
tonight,
a
couple
of
which
were
able
to
be
implemented
is
sort
of
a
just.
S
Do
it
with
staff
and
then
a
few
that
we
have
proposed
sort
of
rolled
into
a
more
comprehensive
assessment,
moving
forward
of
our
board
and
commission
system,
so
those
have
have
not
been
lost
and
we
just
wanted
to
be
thoughtful
about
the
ways
in
which
some
of
those
recommendations
from
you
all
are
connected
to
other
work
in
progress
and
make
sure
that
we
address
those
things
systemically
rather
than
individually
next
slide.
Please.
S
S
So
based
on
the
the
structure
we've
outlined
tonight
when
it
comes
to
those
questions,
one
through
three,
so
those
kind
of
immediately
implementable
type
improvements,
we'd
like
to
First,
establish
Clarity
from
you
on
your
desire
for
conducting
the
interviews
and
selection
process
for
the
2023
board
in
commission
vacancies.
S
You
heard
a
great
description
from
Elisha
related
to
sort
of
how
the
process
went
in
2022
and
while
we
believe
we
achieved
a
considerable
success
in
sort
of
the
applicant
experience
of
that,
we
also
recognized
that
it
was
an
incredible
burden
on
some
of
you
from
a
Time
perspective
to
proceed.
So
we
just
want
to
hear
from
you
directly
your
experience
of
those
trade-offs
and
whether
you
would
like
to
proceed
in
a
fashion
or
make
modifications
to
that
2022
process.
S
We
also
will
then
recommend
in
question
number
two,
just
clarifying
your
will
and
what
to
do
in
the
event
that
we
ultimately
have
one
applicant
for
one
vacancy
in
the
boarding
commission.
The
way
that
that
happened
last
year
was
it
was
sort
of
brought
up
in
the
moment
that
there
was
a
desire
among
Council
to
see
some
competition
for
a
board
and
commission
seat,
and
so
we
made
the
decision
to
hold
a
handful
of
positions
that
only
received
one
applicant.
What
we
discovered
by
doing
that
was
by
the
midterm
round
of
filling
those
vacancies.
S
In
some
cases
we
were
successful
in
soliciting
additional
applicants.
In
some
cases
we
actually
lost
our
one
applicant
just
due
to
the
delays
that
were
incurred
by
not
filling
the
seat
and
then
in
other
cases
we
ultimately
decided
as
a
city
to
go
ahead
and
appoint
that
one
candidate
for
that
seat,
because
the
priority
of
making
the
board
whole
became
more
important
than
that
kind
of
competitiveness.
S
So
we'd,
like
some
clarity
on
whether
that
that
is
still
an
important
consideration
for
you
all
and
whether
you'd
like
us
to
proceed
in
a
similar
process
of
sort
of
holding
those
positions
of
vacant
to
try
to
establish
more
competition.
That
third
question
is
really
related
to
the
hybrid
environment
of
boards
and
conditions.
You
as
a
council
have
determined
that
you
will
be
hybrid
indefinitely,
so
that
there's
always
that
virtual
participation
option,
but
that
you
are
are
allowing
for
in
person
as
well.
S
We
have
a
sentiment
among
our
boards
and
commissions
generally
to
follow
suit
with
that,
but
would
like
to
explicitly
clarify
that
for
all
boards
and
commissions
that
the
expectation
of
hybrid
or
virtual,
at
the
very
least,
be
intact
for
them
as
well.
The
second
set
of
recommendations
around
sort
of
piloting,
some
ideas
around
the
connection
between
boards
and
commissions,
Council
and
Community.
S
We
we
have
some
loose
sort
of
recommendations
to
consider
improving
those
various
dimensions
of
relationships
by
taking
kind
of
a
year-long
study
of
what
a
council
liaison
role
could
look
like
with
a
boarding
commission
by
having
one
council
member
leverage,
the
existing
relationship
with
a
board
to
sort
of
think
about
what
would
be
a
meaningful
expectation
and
sort
of
job
description.
So
to
speak
of
a
council
liaison
program.
S
We
then
want
to
move
on
to
discussing
kind
of
the
board
and
commission's
relationship
to
the
community.
So,
as
boards
and
commissions
are
provi
are
advising
the
city
on
various
issues.
S
Finally,
question
seven
is
sort
of
the
big
one
and
so
I
want
to
kind
of
take
some
time
to
describe
a
little
bit
of
our
thought
process
around
this.
This
is
this
is
sort
of
not
an
example
of
just
wanting
to
throw
a
consultant
at
a
hard
problem,
but
really
we
think
that
there's
a
strong
justification
for
leveraging
an
outside
resource.
In
the
case
of
looking
at
this
larger
universe
of
more
complicated
changes
to
our
Warden
commission
system,
the
part
of
the
justification
is,
we
know
from
talking
to
peers
across
the
country.
S
The
board
and
commission
model
is
one
that
is
has
been
around
for
a
very
long
time
and
folks
are
really
starting
to
rethink
how
the
kind
of
Pathway
to
public
service
in
that
realm
Works
in
an
environment
where
we
have
much
wider,
open
eyes
about
barriers
to
service
in
that
regard,
and
so
we'd
like
to
have
a
third
party
that
has
experience
in
this
conversation
broadly
to
to
leverage
their
knowledge
to
help
kind
of
inform
what
Boulder
might
consider
and
try
on
as
a
fit
for
our
community.
S
We
also
think
that
a
consultant
really
would
have
an
opportunity
to
look
at
our
system
with
fresh
eyes
and
sort
of
an
objective
approach
to
stakeholder
engagement.
What
the
groups
that
you
heard
reference
in
our
presentation
tonight
really
scratched
the
surface
of
all
of
the
different
people,
who
sort
of
have
a
stake
in
the
work
of
boards
and
commissions,
people
who
have
served
previously.
S
People
who
you
know
are
not
considering
board
service
because
of
a
barrier
we
don't
yet
know
fully
about,
and
so
we
think
that,
having
that
kind
of
objective
third-party
approach
to
engaging
those
stakeholders
to
putting
fresh
eyes
on
our
system
and
not
have
that
work
driven
by
sort
of
the
same
folks
that
have
been
enmeshed
in
our
system
for
so
long
would
be
incredibly
helpful
to
us.
Finally,
a
very
kind
of
tactical
concern
around
staff
capacity.
S
You've
seen
all
of
us
present
here
tonight
and
I
will
note
that,
while
all
of
us
have
a
role
to
play
in
boards
and
commissions,
there's
another
20
plus
folks
in
the
city
that
also
touch
boards
and
commissions
and
there's
really
no
one
fully
staffed
position
whose
job
it
is
to
do
this
work.
And
so
from
a
capacity
perspective.
S
You
know
we
can
certainly
continue
to
do
incremental
improvements
as
a
cross-departmental
staff
team,
but
we
think
going
ahead
and
resourcing
an
assessment
from
a
third
party
would
give
us
the
opportunity
to
move
more
quickly
and
more
comprehensively
in
this
effort.
So
those
are
sort
of
the
three
key
justifications
for.
Why
we're
suggesting
this?
S
As
we've
sort
of
thought
about,
what
would
this
start
to
look
like
you
know?
Certainly,
we
would
have
to
refine
a
scope
and
kind
of
ensure
that
it
covers
what
we
need,
but
generally,
what
we're
thinking
talking
about
is
that
embarking
on
a
project
this
way
would
the
expectation
would
be
that
the
third
party
would
engage
board
and
commission
stakeholders
to
compile
additional
feedback.
S
Excuse
me
that
should
consider
that
this
person
would
or
or
this
firm
would
help
to
refine
the
understanding
of
existing
barriers
to
service
and
recommend
Solutions
based
on
the
feedback
we
have.
We
know
things
like
time
and
money
and
child
care
and
transportation
and
other
issues
can
be
barriers
to
service,
but
we'd
like
to
kind
of
fully
unpack
the
root
causes
of
those
challenges
and
and
would
appreciate
the
help
to
do
so.
S
We'd
like
to
more
formally
Define
the
Cur,
the
current
culture
of
our
boards
and
commissions,
each
has
its
own
character
to
it
and
to
create
a
cohesive
experience
across
the
city,
while
also
sort
of
preserving
the
needs
of
individual
boards
and
commissions.
S
You
know
we'd
like
to
undergo
a
a
deeper
process
to
sort
of
Define
what
that
desired.
Future
state
is
and
then
ultimately
to
make
recommendations
so
that
we
can
sustainably
enhance
inclusion
and
belonging
across
all
of
our
boards
and
commissions
and
Equity
to
accessing
those
roles
in
the
first
place
and
you'll
know
in
the
memo
and
for
those
listening
at
home,
who
maybe
didn't
get
as
thorough
of
a
look
at
it.
We
anticipate
the
third
that
a
third
party
assessment
would
include
sort
of
structural
recommendations.
S
So
do
we
have
the
right
number
of
boards
with
the
right
Scopes
that
are
serving
necessary
purpose
that
do
we
have
the
the
role
Clarity
recommendations
of
what
do
boards
and
commissions
do
versus
what
does
council
do
versus
sort
of
General
Community
engagement,
any
any
remaining
kind
of
logistics
and
process
recommendations
as
well,
so
with
all
that
and
I
think
the
slide
got
ahead
of
me
a
little
bit.
S
That's
totally
fine
council
member
folkerts
I
would
turn
to
you
for
kind
of
the
facilitation
of
these
questions
and
Elisha
has
placed
the
questions
also
in
the
chat,
so
if
you'd
prefer
to
take
the
slide
down
to
see
each
other,
while
you
discuss
your
more
more
than
welcome
to
do
so,.
B
Thank
you
Pam
and
Sarah,
and
Alicia
and
John
and
Brendan
Brenda
I,
think
you
know
you
guys
did
a
really
good
great
job
of
showing
us
a
brief
overview
of
sort
of
the
tip
of
the
iceberg
and
all
of
the
complicated
things
that
go
on
behind
the
scenes
and
making
our
boards
and
commissions
work
and
work
better.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
I
did
want
to
give
maybe
start
with
any
questions.
Council
might
have
for
our
community
connectors
or
dialogue.
Boulder
representative,
it
is
late
and
I
I
appreciate
them.
Sticking
with
us.
I
also
wanted
to
maybe
give
them
an
opportunity
to
share
with
us
anything
they
would
like
to
highlight,
or
let
us
know,
as
we
consider
the
questions
that
staff
has
laid
out
for
us.
So
let
us
start
with
questions
from
Council
Rachel.
I
I
do
have
a
couple:
I
was
going
to
ask
the
community
connectors
and
it
I
think
is
Lenora
the
connector
who's
on
the
line
and
I
want
to
think.
Yes,
yes,
I've
got
the
right
name
and
Judy
for
being
here.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
meeting.
Thank
you
both
but
I.
I
Don't
my
questions
are
sort
of
questions
about
the
questions
for
Lenora,
so
I
don't
know
if
she's
got
answers
to
sort
of
how
the
community
connectors
feel
about
each
of
these
questions,
I'm
happy
to
just
tee
that
up,
I
was
I,
have
some
thoughts
on
on
how
I
want
to
answer
a
couple
and
and
kind
of
wanted.
Your
feedback
from
the
connectors
perspective
before
I
answered
so
I
understood
that
so
maybe
an
open
imitation
and
if
you
don't
hit
on
the
two
that
I
was
specifically
wondering
about
I'm
happy
to
ask
a
follow-up.
V
V
I
That's
a
fine
one
to
answer.
Yes,
we
and
and
the
in
the
chat
there's
there's
seven
questions
that
are
teed
up
for
Council
to
answer
tonight
and
as
an
example,
one
is
do:
do
we
support
sort
of
carrying
on
with
the
way
that
we
did
boards
and
commissions
recruitment
last
year
and
I
have
some
some
concerns
around
it?
But
I
was
wondering,
do
do
the
community
connectors
have
concerns?
Did
you
all
talk
through
that
process
or
for
the
questions
that
are
teed
up
for
us?
V
V
Just
to
know
about
it
frequently,
this
information
does
not
filter
down
to
the
communities
that
are
being
sought
and
then,
once
that
knowledge
is
disseminated
and
received,
there
are
so
many
barriers
to
participation,
many
of
which
have
already
been
mentioned,
such
as
Child,
Care,
Transportation,
the
technology
Gap
and
more
and
equally
important
with
that.
Are
the
barriers
to
outcome
and
to
feeling
like
the
contribution
is
Meaningful,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
avoid
is
the
feeling
of
tokenism.
V
Because
they're
there's
the
covert
and
the
overt
barriers
to
access
to
participation
for
the
for
the
all
of
the
communities
that
Community
connectors
represent,
and
we
just
want
to
highlight
and
I
know
that
you're
aware
but
I'm
going
to
say
it
again
for
the
people
in
the
back
that
the
city
is
missing
out
on
a
tremendous
amount
of
wisdom,
knowledge
and
perspective.
I
Super
helpful,
thank
you
so
much
and
if
there's
anything
you'd
like
to
add
that
you
want
us
to
take
into
account
as
we're
having
this
discussion,
I
would
also
just
an
invite
you
to
share
whatever
else
you
might
be
prepared
for.
Thank.
V
You
I
do
have
a
list
I
promise
not
to
read
the
whole
thing,
but
some
of
the
things
that
that
we
wanted
to
really
highlight
was
the
critical
need
for
interpretation
not
only
for
non-native
English
speakers,
but
also
for
community
members
who
are
deaf.
Frequently,
people
who
have
adult
onset
hard
of
hearing
do
not
know
ASL
and
so
for
them
to
participate.
They're
either
need
so
closed.
V
Captioning
or
other
accessibility
is
imperative
and
another
one
that
we
really
wanted
to
highlight
is
the
necessity
for
the
city
and
Council
to
prioritize
this
and
to
fund
it,
so
that
this
isn't
just
some
a
nice
idea
that
we
talk
about
the
ideas
that
we
have
proposed
again
in
this
sheet,
that
I
am
not
reading
to
you.
Its
entirety
all
require
capital
investment,
and
so
this
is
a
really
strong
call
to
action
for
the
city
in
their
budget
to
put
their
money
where
their
mouth
is.
I
V
Understanding
is
that
it's
in
a
different
form,
it's
in
your
packet
and
then
I
can
ask
Ryan
to
send
out
this
particular
form,
because
it's
condensed-
and
it's
it's
really
accessible.
It's
like
this!
This
this
this
this
this,
oh
and
by
the
way
this
so
yes,
we
will
get
that
to.
S
Pleasure,
yes
and
I'd
love
to
draw
your
attention,
so
the
attachment
a
in
your
packet
is
the
sort
of
comprehensive
list
of
all
suggestions
that
Sarah
referred
to.
That's
denoted
by
source,
so
you'll
see
a
small
CC
behind
anything
that
was
recommended
by
our
community
connectors
and
residents,
and
they
have
been
sort
of
filtered
in
those
categories
of
we've
already
started
working
on
it,
we'd
sort
of
like
to
start
working
on
it
or
we'd
like
this
to
be
a
part
of
a
greater
assessment
package.
S
I
think,
particularly
the
budget
implications
of
resourcing.
All
of
these
great
ideas
is
something
that
we'd
like
to
bring
back
to
you
holistically.
Following
that
assessment.
V
Oh
just
one
final
thing
that
I
do
want
to
put
in
is
that
we
are.
We
are
certainly
not
opposed
to
having
a
third
party
outside
consultant
come
in.
We
do
want
to
emphasize
the
the
additional
importance
of
the
weight
of
the
people
that
are
living
this
experience
every
day
and
that
that
continue
to
be
included
and
valued
and
prioritized.
B
All
I
got
learned.
Thank
you,
Rachel
does
anyone
else
have
any
other
questions
for
either
Lenora
with
our
community
connectors
or
Judy
with
dialogue?
Boulder,
yes,
Junie.
O
Just
have
a
question
about
number
six,
the
part
about
allowing
board
members
who
participate
at
the
discretion
of
city
of
the
CAC
and
I
wonder:
did
you
stakehold
the
portion
of
maybe
also,
if
a
board
chair
with
the
discretion
of
the
board,
they
wanted
to
weigh
in
on
certain
issues
like,
for
instance,
housing
and
have.
S
So
my
understanding
would
be
in
in
this
sort
of
procedural
change
would
be.
If
that
interest
were
there,
it
would
be
surfaced
to
the
saf
liaison,
which
would
then
be
brought
to
CAC
as
part
of
the
package
for
that
item,
to
sort
of
make
that
final
determination,
but
if
there
are
others
who
would
also
like
to
chime
in
to
make
sure
I
was
right
on
that.
Please
feel
free
foreign.
B
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that
we
give
Judy
the
time
to
address
sort
of
the
same
question
that
Lenora
got
to
address,
for
if
there's
anything
you'd
like
to
share
that
to
highlight,
or
let
us
know
as
we
consider
these
questions,
that
staff
has
laid
out
sure.
P
Hi
I'm
Judy
nag,
but
I
love,
Boulder,
and
thank
you
so
much
for
doing
this.
It's
it's
a
it's
an
issue.
That's
I,
think
Really
Gonna
help
all
the
way
around,
but
I
first
want
to
address
what
Juni
mentioned
hurt
number
six,
and
that
was
something
we
discussed
a
lot
and
what
we
had
in
mind
was
broader.
P
It's
that
it
was
more
of
any
topic
that
that
touches
on
something
that
a
border
commission
has
a
lot
of
information
on
that
they
be
invited,
but
we're
happy
enough
as
a
starting
point
with
what
you
have
we're,
not
taking
issue
with
any
of
these.
We
think
it's
great
and
you've
done
so
much.
What
I
wanted
to
say
is
this
is
a
group
of
people
that
I
would
say
a
good
sixty
percent
of
the
people
in
dialogue.
P
Boulder
did
not
like
each
other
before
we
started
getting
together
and
then,
when
they
were
questioned
about
it
they
never
had
actually
talked
to
each
other.
They
just
had
different
opposing
views
and
had
decided
they
didn't
like
each
other.
So
actually
people
talking
can
make
such
a
big
difference.
So
that
was
the
first
point.
I
wanted
to
make.
The
second
point
is
I
think
all
of
these
are
great
and
we
do
not
have
an
opinion
on
whether
or
not
you
should
go
to
outside
consultation
or
not,
but
we're
fine
with
that.
P
The
one
other
thing
I'd
like
to
say
is
when
we
first
started.
Our
interest
was
in
really
making
life
easier
for
city
council
for
staff,
although
this
process
of
getting
there
does
take
a
lot
of
time,
but
we
felt
that
the
staff
was
getting
a
lot
of
criticism
that
could
have
been
mitigated
and
never
gotten
to
that
point
by
changing
policies
and
procedures
and
make
a
difference
for
board
and
commissions,
more
access,
more
people
getting
on
boards
and
commissions,
but
also
the
work
being
more
meaningful.
P
So
you
really
are
more
invested
in
what
you're
doing
and
then
for
the
community
of
course,
so
the
one
we
were
most
interested
in
one
of
these
number
three.
We
spent
a
lot
of
time
really
wanting
the
hybrid
possibility
or
all
Virtual
Office.
That's
how
it
goes,
because
we
really
felt
that
provided
more
access
to
more
people
and
again
when
I
say
100
percent
it
was
consensus,
was
a
hundred
percent.
It
wasn't
just
what
the
majority
agreed
on.
P
B
Thank
thank
you
both
for
coming
and
sharing
your
thoughts
with
us
and
for
participating
in
this
process
and
helping
us
improve
these
boards
and
commissions
I
personally,
just
yeah
feedback
is
amazing
and
we
will
do
our
best
to
incorporate
it
as
well
as
we
can.
B
You
are,
of
course,
welcome
to
stay
on
for
the
rest
of
the
meeting
in
case
Nicole.
Do
you
have
a
question
specifically
well
for
okay,
so
you're
welcome
to
stay
on,
but
it's
late
and
you're
also
welcomed
to
take
off.
Thank
you
so
much
for
joining
us.
G
Nicole,
thank
you.
I
just
had
a
follow-up
to
Lenora
in
the
community
connectors
feedback.
For
us.
This
is
a
question
for
staff.
Before
we
get
into
discussion
of
the
questions
with
the
consultant,
would
we
also
have
a
process
there
for
paying
some
of
the
people
who
are
on
our
boards
and
commissions,
who
are
in
I,
know
I,
believe
the
community
connectors
are
already
getting
a
stipend
but
I'm
thinking
about
people
on
the
boards
and
commissions
who
whose
lived
experience
is
going
to
be
really
valuable
for
us
to
think
about
this.
G
To
are
we
thinking
about
that
because
I
think
oftentimes,
you
know
we
we
are
paying
Consultants,
so
we're
paying
people
to
kind
of
do
the
work
but
they're,
using
the
guidance
and
feedback
from
the
folks
who
have
lived
experience
right
and
we're
not
reimbursing
them
in
the
same
way.
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
we
have
something
like
that
in
mind,.
S
Yeah
Nicole,
we
haven't
exactly
scoped
it
that
said,
and
and
I
can
speak
to
some
processes
I'm
a
part
of
right
now
in
the
city,
the
police
department,
reimagining
policing
plan,
for
example,
we've
started,
making
that
a
pretty
common
practice
of
really
being
thoughtful
about,
depending
on
sort
of
the
the
level
of
Engagement
we're
asking
for
who
and
how
we're
sort
of
soliciting
that
engagement.
S
We
are
looking
at
a
variety
of
kind
of
compensation
models,
so
I
would
anticipate.
We
would
follow
suit
with
that.
So
if
we
had
focus
groups,
if
you
know
depending
on
what
direction
this
goes,
it
would
definitely
be
top
of
mind.
Thank
you.
B
So
yeah
we
like
to
start
a
discussion.
I
think
I'd
like
to
encourage,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
maybe
having
a
strong,
like
maybe
we
start
with
the
in
favor
argument
and
then
go
to
the
you
know,
not
in
favor
argument
and
then
vote
to
try
and
move
through
this
more
quickly.
So
any
chance,
Aaron
and
Nicole
you're
both
going
to
try
and
make
an
argument
in
favor
or
no
yes,
okay,
Aaron.
G
It's
fine
Aaron,
we
tied.
If
you
want
to
go
first,
please
do
okay,
yeah
I,
actually
I
liked
it
I
liked
being
able
to
watch
from
offline
okay.
That
was
that
was
nice.
I
know
the
sketch.
B
G
All
right,
okay,
let
me
try
again
so
I
liked
the
one-on-one
format
of
the
interviews,
I
liked
the
aspect
of
being
able
to
watch
them
on
my
own
time.
That
was
a
little
bit
easier
for
the
ones
that
I
wasn't
a
part
of,
and
what
I
was
curious
about
is:
did
we
get
any
feedback
from
the
applicants
on
what
they
thought
of
the
process,
because
I'd
be
I'd,
be
curious
about
that
that
as
well,
but
in
general
I'm,
supportive
of
trying
in
again
for
for
another
year.
B
Thank
you.
Does
anyone
want
to
try
and
field
the
if
we
had
support
from
the
applicant
question,
that
was.
S
A
part
yes
at
a
high
level,
I
think
from
our
perspective,
it
was
the
applicant
experience,
was
sort
of
the
the
thing
that
was
most
improved
by
the
new
process.
I
would
invite
whether
it's
Brenda
or
John,
who
were
sort
of
right
in
the
room
for
a
lot
of
those
interviews.
If
you
have
some
anecdotal
feedback
from
that
experience,
foreign.
U
Yeah
I
mean
I
will
share
that
I
I
feel
like
the
attendees.
It
made
a
world
of
difference
to
have
one-on-one
time
with
you,
as
opposed
to
the
previous
model
of
being
in
a
group
interview.
U
I
also
think
that
it
that
there
was
a
lot
more
opportunity
to
get
to
know
them
as
individuals
potentially
and
I
was
very
impressed
with
Taylor
Ryman,
who
I
know
is,
is
listening
in
on
this
meeting,
went
the
extra
mile
to
make
sure
that
accessibility,
particularly
technology
accessibility,
was
not
an
issue.
She
was
hosting
folks
in
her
office
who
might
have
needed
a
device
and
helping
folks
get
logged
on
who
were
having
trouble.
U
So
so
I
think
that
that
we
made
a
huge
leap
forward
and
I
know
that
it
was
a
lot
of
work
on
your
part,
so
I
think
there's
a
balance
to
be
struck
there.
J
Oh
Brenda,
you
hit
the
nail
on
the
head
there.
There's
really
only
one
point,
I
would
add.
Instead
we
heard
positive
feedback
of
flexibility
to
be
able
to
sign
up
for
interview
times
and
make
things
fit
into
people's
schedule
rather
than
having
to
be
in
council
chambers
for
one
night
for
a
couple
hours,
so
I
think
we
heard
a
lot
of
good
things
in
that
regard.
B
Thank
you
John
and
Brenda
Aaron
too.
K
Yeah
no
I
in
general
I
support
doing
a
similar
approach.
It's
great
to
hear
that
the
applicants
liked
it
that
I
think
that's
really
really
important.
So
it's
really
great
to
hear
the
the
one
piece
of
feedback
I
would
get.
Is
that
I
just
feel
like
we
need
to
streamline
the
video
recordings
like
substantially
like
it
was
so
overwhelming
to
listen
to
all
of
those
and
a
lot
of
it
was
repeat
filler
material.
So
the
my
one
really
big
request
is
like
that.
We
start
the
video
after
we've
already
got.
B
Thank
you,
Aaron
Rachel,
I,.
I
I
think
Aaron
maybe
had
a
bit
of
both
positive
and
negative.
So
if
I
can
continue
in
that
vein,
otherwise
I'll
I'll
wait
to
the
negative
or
half
and
half
train
starts
just
go
for
it
great,
so
I
liked
the
for
applicants,
flexibility
and
the
online
format
and
getting
the
questions
in
advance.
What
I
would
do
away
with
is
council's
involvement.
I
It
felt
to
me
like
some
of
us.
You
know
if
you
were
in
the
room
for
certain
candidates,
and
there
was
some
hodgepodge
of
like
you
know.
I
did
I
did
some
of
osbt,
maybe,
but
then
Lauren
did
some
and
there
was
like
makeups,
and
so
we
weren't
all
even
interviewing
the
same
groups
and
in
interviewing
with
multiple
different
people.
I
The
the
interview
experience
felt
inconsistent
based
on
which
council
members
you
had
I
think
that
staff
was
were
the
people
who
were
doing
a
good
job
of
answering
questions
and
and
sort
of
running
it.
So
I
felt
like
council
members
were
Superfluous
I
I,
like
meeting
with
members
of
the
public
I
like
office
hours,
and
things
like
that.
I
But
I
don't
know
that
this
was
the
right
place
for
us
to
be
interacting
in
small
groups,
and
then
all
of
us
were
supposed
to
come
together
and
vote
and
there's
just
this
weird
dynamic
with
we
met
some
of
them.
We
might
have
preferences
for
some,
but
then
we
were
watching
others
and
to
Aaron's
Point
like
there
was
also
more
chit
chat
with
some
people,
and
that
made
the
interviews
go
longer.
I
I
would
have
really
strict
like
your
two
minute
clock
starts
now
and
then
it's
cut
off
like
I
think
that
that
is
more
Equitable
and
fair
to
everybody
interviewing,
because
if
you've
got
a
council
member
who
lets
you
run
on
in
one
room
and
then
somebody
else
has
one
who
cuts
you
off
at
two
minutes,
as
I
was
more
likely
to
do.
Bob
may
remember,
then:
that's
not
a
fair
experience
and
it's
not
Apples
to
Apples.
I
O
Thank
you,
Lauren
and
I.
Think
the
leakness
is
getting
to
me
right
about
now,
but
the
comment
I
want
to
make
is
I.
Don't
remember
everything
that
happened
during
the
the
process,
this
new
piloted
process
with
the
new
Council,
but
I
can
say
that
I
was
not
a
huge
fan
and
I
do
I
did
like
the
panel
that
we
used
to
have
I
felt
that
it
was
more
personable.
O
Have
you
somehow
talked
to
returning
members
who
were
part
of
this
process,
meaning
that
they
were
on
a
board
on
a
commission
before?
Have
you
surveyed
them
and
asked
them
hey?
What
do
you
think
of
this
new
process?
Do
you
find
it
a
little
bit
friendlier
because
I
think
when
it's
brand
new
people
they
don't
have
anything
to
compare
it
to?
But
if
it's
people
who've
already
been
to
through
the
process
once
and
now,
they're
going
through
this
new
process,
do
they
find
it
enjoyable.
S
Foreign
council
member
Joseph,
we
did
not
do
a
formal
survey
of
any
kind.
So,
given
that
this
was
a
an
initial
pilot,
that
sort
of
comparative
analysis
was
not
conducted.
Okay,
well,.
O
Thank
you
and
I
think
at
this
point,
I'll
go
with
whatever
the
rest
of
this
Council
wants
to
do.
Thank
you.
L
Thanks
Lawrence
highlight
for
me
is
that
there
was
sort
of
positive
feedback
from
those
engaging
I
think
that's
that's
always.
A
great
metric
is
to
make
sure
they're
enjoying
the
process,
because
I
think
that
snowballs
that,
if
they're
enjoying
the
process,
others
may
be
more
likely
to
participate
themselves.
If
it's
there's
good
word
of
mouth
but
with
that
being
said,
the
points
that
Aaron
and
Rachel
brought
up
resonate
with
me
as
well.
L
It
was
just
a
slog
for
Council
to
get
through
that
and
and
furthermore,
I
think,
if
we're
not
going
to
make
too
many
changes
about
council's
participation-
and
it's
just
going
to
be
a
slog,
then
I
think
one
thing
I
would
like
us
to
do
is
be
really
intentional
about
the
that
council
meeting
study
sessions
that
we
do
in
the
weeks
around
boards
and
commissions,
and
we
go
really
light.
L
We
go
super
light
because
the
lift
to
do
this
and
to
prep
for
the
Council
meetings,
I
I,
think
something's
going
to
give
and
something's
not
going
to
get
done
with
the
quality
that
the
community
demands
of
us
either
the
prep
for
the
council
meetings
or
the
attention
we
give
appointee
boards
and
commission
so
we're
gonna
have
to
give
and
take
there.
If
we're
going
to
keep
up
the
slog
and
it's
going
to
be
a
just
a
marathon
for
Council,
then
we
go
hyper
light
on
Council
and
study
sessions
for
those
few
weeks.
B
B
S
You
mind
if
I
just
interject
with
one
comment,
which
I
think
was
relevant
to
say
earlier,
which
is
by
virtue
of
having
this
conversation.
Now
we
have
more
time
also.
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
are
looking
at
is
if
the
decision
is
to
generally
use
a
similar
process
with
some
of
the
tweaks
that
we've
already
taken
down.
We
now
know
that
in
October,
if
you
recall
the
decision
to
sort
of
transform
our
process
like
happened
in
early
January
at
like
we
were
building
the
plane
while
we
were
flying
it.
S
Knowing
this
now
will
allow
us
to
start
those
interview
recordings
earlier,
give
you
a
longer
run
away
to
watch
those
videos
so
hearing
that
feedback
and
receiving
it
really
well.
It
was
very
expected
to
hear
that
from
you,
but
want
to
let
you
know
that
that
that
will
also
be
a
consideration.
Is
that
timeline.
R
Well,
I
was
glad
I'm
glad
it
was
a
pilot
program
because
that
means
we
can
feel
free
to
change,
not
change
I'm,
not
emotionally
involved
in
it.
Although
I
was
exhausted,
I
had
a
big
lift,
but
at
least
I
had
less
to
listen
to,
but
I
will
say:
I
only
have
one
comment,
you
know
there's
something
called
the
fast
forward
button
and
when
I
listened
to
the
interviews
I
just
fast
forwarded,
it
took
me
like
one
minute,
because
the
last
question
wasn't
important
is
that
they
were
asking.
I
R
Got
it
I
was
fast
forward
again
double
timing,
but
I
another
option
would
be
the
staff
somebody
mentioned
and
I
don't
know
if
it
was
Pam
that
they
liked
at
the
council,
some
the
council
people
were
there.
R
We
definitely
don't
need
two
people,
but
I
definitely
see
your
point.
Rachel
and
I
never
thought
of
that
before,
because
we
had
our
because
when
they
were
chit
chatting
I
just
you
know
fast
forwarded
right
through
it.
So
I
didn't
notice.
It.
B
I
think
you
know
the
comments
that
Aaron
made
about
make.
You
know
making
sure
that
we're
removing
filling
fill
material
and
like
really
that
the
video
is
only
the
heart
of
it
does
feel
like
good
feedback
sticking
to
a
strict
timeline.
B
I
think
you
know,
one
of
the
issues
that
came
up
was
that,
because
we
were
kind
of
building
the
plane
and
flying
it
at
the
same
time,
the
the
script
wasn't
necessarily
like
clear
or
the
same
for
everyone
when
people
followed
it
to
more
or
less
greater
extents,
depending
and
so
I
think
that,
given
that
we
have
a
little
bit
more
time,
there
could
also
be
more
Clarity
around.
What's
expected
on
that
front.
B
Feeling
like
they
had
the
opportunity
to
ask
us
direct
questions
as
part
of
that
process,
and
given
that
there
aren't
a
lot
of
other
direct
touch
points
between
boards
and
commissions
and
Council
to
me,
it
feels
like
important
that
there's
at
least
at
some
point,
where
we're
having
direct
interaction
with
individuals
that
are
going
to
serve
on
our
boards
and
commissions.
R
Lauren
can
I
just
interrupt
for
one
second
I
think
you
guys
misunderstood
when
I
said
fast
forward.
What
I
fast
forwarded
was
every
time
I
talked
or
every
time
a
council
person
asked
a
question
because
I
already
knew
those
questions.
I
only
listened
to
the
community,
the
people
that
were
speaking
so
I
it
was
took
half
the
time,
because
I
didn't
need
to
listen
to
myself
right,
ask
the
same
questions
over
and
over
I
had
to
memorize
So
I
listened
to
every
single
Community
member,
but
not
the
individual
Council
people
asking
the
questions.
B
Thank
you
for
clarifying
Tara,
okay,
Erin.
K
You
what
you
said
reminded
me:
it
was
the
questions
for
us
that
that
was
the
things
that
the
there'd
be
several
minutes
of
us
answering
questions
that
we
all
know.
The
answer
to
and
I
was
like.
Do
I
need
to
listen
to
this,
just
to
see
how
they
asked
the
question
and
learn
something
about
them,
or
it
was
a
that
was
the
one
I'd
like
just
to
think
about
how
we
do
that,
because
that
there
were
many,
many
many
minutes
of
council
members
answering
questions
that
wasn't
directly
relevant
to
who
we
should
appoint.
B
Let's
see
so
thank
you,
Aaron
I've
heard
a
couple
of
different
ways
for
how
we
might
go
forward
with
this,
so
in
general
does
councils.
Do
you
please
raise
your
hand
if
you
support
the
continuation
of
the
application
and
consideration
process
that
was
adopted
with
modifications,
and
then
we
can
discuss
what
we
can
vote
on
modifications.
B
Seven,
eight,
okay-
that
was
eight
in
terms
of
modifications
to
the
process.
I
didn't
really
hear
any
objection,
but
the
only
one
that
felt
like
it
had
difference
of
opinion
on
to
me
was
the
council
involvement
piece.
G
What
I
heard
what
the
council
involvement
piece
was
around
I
mean
because
I
heard
a
concern
and
then
I
heard
staff
kind
of
address
it.
So
I
was
just
wondering
where
we're
at,
because
what
I
heard
staff
saying
was
this
woman
who've
got
a
much
bigger
Runway,
so
it
may
be
a
little
bit
different
there
and
I
didn't
know
if
that
concern
was
still
there
after
Pam's
response
well.
L
Since
that
was
my
question,
the
concern
is
still
there,
because
all
right,
we
may
expect
to
have
a
longer
Runway,
but
if
we're
still
throwing
20
hours
a
week
into
watching
interviews
and
still
have
a
heavy
Council
load,
I
just
want
us
to
be
mindful
that,
if
that's
the
time-
and
we
see
us
heading
towards
heavy
loading-
a
council
schedule
and
it's
the
week
and
we're
just
full
of
those
those
things,
then
we
need
to
figure
out.
B
Thank
you
Matt
and
Rachel
that
was
originally
I,
think
I
believe
a
concern
that
you
brought
up.
Yeah.
I
I
Were
staff
lead
I,
appreciate
your
your
Point
Lauren
that
we
want
to
have
interactions
with
board
members,
and
you
know,
hopefully
the
the
board
liaison
and
other
things
can
give
us
that
opportunity,
but
at
the
applicant
stage,
I
I
think
what
would
be
more
optimal
to
allow
the
applicants
to
still
have
a
good
process
with
the
application
into
Matt's
point
of
having
it
be,
not
not
a
huge
time.
Commitment
would
be.
You
know,
staff
there
to
help
applicants.
You
know
answer
a
question
in
two
minutes.
I
Another
question
in
two
minutes,
those
you
know,
10
applicants
of
answering
those
two
minutes
are
all
compiled
and
given
to
us
with
the
question
in
writing,
and
we
watch
that
and
then
we
get
the
next
set
of
questions
and
we
watch
those
two
minutes
and
I
just
think
it
will.
It
will
take
a
lot
less
time
and
I.
Don't
think
that
we
add
value
I
think
that
we
create
sort
of
an
inequitable
inconsistent
experience
by
being
involved
in
it.
I
So
I
just
have
the
the
direct
staff
member
who's
who's
involved
with
that
board,
be
the
person
asking
the
questions
and
there
to
answer
questions.
K
Yeah
I
I
did
hear
from
the
feedback
that
we
got
was
that
applicants
appreciated
some
time
with
Council
as
part
of
the
process
like
I
said,
I
did
get
that
feedback
and
I
I
perceived
that
myself
as
well.
That
introduced
our
participated
again
so
I
I
would
still
have
a
council
involvement.
I
think
Rachel
to
your
point,
which
is
a
good
one
about
inconsistencies.
I
think
with
this
additional
Runway
I
think.
K
Maybe
we
could
have
some
more
solid
expectations
for
council
members
in
terms
of
cutting
people
off
and
how
we
ask
questions
and
things
like
that,
so
that
we
all
have
something
that
we
agree
to
ahead
of
time
to
get
that
consistency
in
there,
but
then,
and
then
in
terms
of
kind
of
Burden
for
for
Council
I.
K
Think
we
should
consider
having
one
council
member
at
each
interview,
rather
than
two
so
I'd
like
folks
to
consider
that
as
a
possibility,
I
don't
know
that
it
helped
to
have
two
of
us
and
and
it
added
time
so
I
think.
Maybe
we
could
get
that
benefit
to
the
applicants
of
having
Council
involved
with
one
council
member,
and
that
might
be
a
better
balance.
R
O
Yes,
I
think
that
I
remember.
Excuse
me
a
little
bit
of
what
happened
back
when
we
had
those
meetings.
I
understand
the
idea
of
if
we
were
to
remove
council
members,
but
we
would
be
voting
on
these
community
members,
so
it
takes
away
the
personal
part
aspect
of
it.
So
I
think
if
we
have
to
do
it
the
way
that
we
are
currently
doing
it,
having
I
mean
meeting
community
members
is
a
good
thing,
but
I
do
remember.
Actually
in
some
of
my
engagements
with
the
applicants
there
were
times.
O
I
was
the
only
person
because
it
didn't
work
out
with
my
schedule
with
another
council
member,
so
that
was
done.
I
thought
it
was
okay,
I
didn't
feel
any
particularly
negative
way
about
it.
It
felt
fine,
but
I
do
know
that
it
was
a
challenge
to
match
my
schedule
with
other
council
members,
so
maybe
that
might
help
in
a
way
but
having
I
do
think,
because
we
were
the
one
voting
on
these
things.
Having
some
some
you
know,
some
engagement
is
a
good
thing.
O
I
really
do
it
makes
you
feel
closer
to
the
process
than
if
you
just
voting
on
It,
ultimately,
just
by
watching
the
person
it
just
takes
away
from
the
human
element
of
this
particular
process.
If
it's
just
you
watch
a
video
and
there's
no
real
engagement
with
the
person,
so.
B
Thank
you,
Juni
I,
think,
given
all
of
that,
I
would
like
to
propose
that
we
please
raise
your
hand
if
you
support
a
single
council
member,
doing
the
interviews.
B
S
Can
I
just
ask
a
quick
follow-up
because
it
will
inevitably
happen
when
we
get
into
the
details?
Are
you
comfortable
delegating
which
council
members
interview
which
board
vacancies
to
the
board
and
commission
subcommittee,
because
we
ran
into
that
a
little
bit
of
the
the
Slate
of
who
gets
to
interview
who
issue
so.
L
B
L
R
Know
I'll
tell
you,
though,
that
everybody's
schedule
was
so
crazy
that
it
was
a
lot
more
complicated
and
that
might
I'm
not
sure
we
can
do
that.
Because
of
that
reason
and.
C
Let
me
put
the
headset
back
on
we.
What
we
did
one
year
would
seem
to
work
well
was
that
they
allowed
me
to
put
everyone's
name
in
a
hat
and
draw
the
names
and
assign
the
boards
and
commissions
to
those
particular
council
members.
So
that's
always
an
option
as
well.
That
way,
you
have
time
to
schedule
it
once
we
put
the
schedule
together,
you'll
know
what
that
schedule
will
look
like,
or
we
can
work
with
you,
because
we
can
schedule
the
interviews
around
when
you
are
available
for
those
in
boards
and
commissions.
C
So
you
could
leave
it
up
to
me
and
I
can
just
randomly
like
I,
said
names
in
a
hat,
pull
them
out
and
assign
each
council
member
two
boards.
B
I
B
L
B
H
I
have
a
I
do.
Have
a
question
clarifying
question.
Can
I
ask
that
Matt?
Yes,
because
one
of
these
instances
we
had
last
year,
we
had
one
woman
and
several
men
apply
and
it
needed
to
be
a
woman
and
the
way
the
staff
memo
was
written
is
if
there
was
only
one
applicant.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
Are
we
talking
about
one
applicant
or
one
qualified
applicant,
because
that's
two
different
things.
H
The
memo
said
something
different
because
I
look
for
the
word
qualified.
It
wasn't
in
the
memo.
So
if
the
straw
poll
is
on
qualified
applicant,
that's
fine,
I,
don't
know
an
opinion
one
way
or
the
other
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
clear
on
what
we're
voting
on
so
one
qualified
applicant.
So
if
there's
a
gender
requirement
and
there's
only
one
of
that
gender
and
there's
many
of
another
gender,
then
the
rule
would
apply
and
that
position
would
not
be
appointed
right
away.
Is
that
what
were
those
that
was
daft's
proposing?
H
I
I,
like
I,
would
just
I
would
appoint
the
one
person
I
think
it's
been
so
so
clunky
the
last
couple
years
to
you
know
we
open
it
up
and
then
often
we
don't
get
another
person
and
we've
heard
people's
feelings
like
I
think
we're.
These
are
volunteer
positions
and
you
know
if
if
people
don't
want
to
do
them
and
one
person
does
I
am
supportive
of
appointing
that
person
who
has
kindly
volunteered
to
be
honest,
like
we
have,
we
have
a
lot
of
boards
that
have
a
lot
of
applications.
I
B
Thank
you,
Rachel
Matt,
Mark
and
then
Aaron.
M
Yeah
we
had
a
peculiar
situation.
Last
year,
I
suggest
we
take
a
mulligan
on
that
and
and
simply
move
forward.
I
agree
with
Rachel
if
you've
only
got
one
qualified
applicant
for
the
position
appoint
them.
M
It's
a
little
disrespectful
to
somebody
who's
put
themselves
up
for
to
serve
the
community
to
say
you
know
we're
not
going
to
appoint
you
because
it
wasn't
a
contested
election.
We
don't
know
how
long
it's
going
to
take
to
get
somebody
to
contest
it.
M
We
don't
know
if
we're
going
to
get
somebody
to
contest
it
and,
as
I
said,
let's
put
aside
what
happened
last
year
and
simply
look
forward
on
this
and
I
think
it's
it's
not
inappropriate,
as
as
Rachel
said,
to
appoint
somebody
who's
put
themselves
out
to
serve
our
community,
even
if
they're,
the
only
one
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
to
go
through
the
creation
of
an
entire
protocol
to
deal
with
the
situation
that
we
ought
to
just
deal
with
easily.
M
It's
one
person
appoint
them,
especially
on
these
boards,
where
it's
hard
to
find
applicants
to
serve
if
you've
got
one
take
advantage
of
it.
Thank.
K
Yeah
I
didn't
agree
with
Rachel
and
Mark
here
you
know
we
we
put
this
together
at
the
beginning
of
the
last
session,
so
we
stuck
to
the
hey
there's
only
one
one
person
will
will
reopen
it,
but
I
don't
think
it
worked
out.
Well,
I
think
we
ended
up
offending
people
and
we
had
qualified
applicants
for
the
one
position
and
we
lost
people
and
so
I
I,
don't
think
it
worked
out.
Well
so
I
I
I'm,
as
people
have
said,
I'm
fine.
If
there's
one
qualified
applicant,
let's,
let's
just
point
them.
K
One
thing
I
would
say
is
that
it
would
be
to
just
if,
at
the
end
of
the
application
period,
we
only
have
zero
or
one
to
extend
the
period
for
accepting
applications
for
another
two
or
three
weeks
with
some
additional.
You
know
Outreach
on
social
media
and
such,
but
if,
if
we're
still
only
at
one
once
we
get
to
the
appointment
process,
I
would
just
deploy
them.
Assumingly
qualified
foreign.
B
B
Can
we
just
vote
on
this,
or
does
anyone?
Okay,
great
all
in
favor
one,
two,
three,
four:
five,
six,
seven,
eight
nine
great
does
council
support
a
pilot
program
through
November
2023,
in
which
one
council
member
serves
as
a
liaison
to
a
board
or
commission
with
a
goal
of
bringing
back
Lessons
Learned
before
the
2024
retreat.
I
Rachel,
do
you
have
a
comment
that
you
had
a
question
on
this
one
and
I'm
just
trying
to
find
it?
Sorry,
I
can't
get.
My
question
was
sort
of
what
what
does
the
like?
What
is
the
pilot?
Look
like
my
my
vision
like
it
sounds
like
this
has
sort
of
already
been
happening
and
my
vision
of
liaison
would
be
like
you
know
you.
I
Obviously
you
can't
speak
for
counsel,
but
you're
going
there
and
maybe
bringing
the
stuff
back
to
council,
but
I
I,
don't
know
that
we've
gotten
update,
so
I
just
want
to
know
what's
happening.
What
are
we
green
lighting
as
a
pilot?
What
are
like
the
the
boundaries?
What
are
we
talking
about
foreign.
S
Wanted
to
invite
Sarah,
Brenda,
and
maybe
even
Nicole
yourself
for
this
one,
because
I
know
that
there's
been
some
work
between
council
member,
Spear
and
tab
that
that's
sort
of
regarding
this
model.
I.
Think,
broadly
speaking,
one
of
the
reasons
we're
proposing
this
approach
is
in
just
anecdotally
talking
to
a
handful
of
other
cities.
We
know
of
cities
that
scope
what
it
means
to
be
a
council
liaison
very
differently,
so
some
cities,
the
expectation
is
you
attend
every
one
of
those
board
and
commission
meetings.
S
You
are,
you
are
sort
of
a
present
person
for
some.
It's
just
you're
the
designated
point
of
contact
for
that
board
and
commission
so
that
they
know
they
have
someone
to
go
to.
So
we
wanted
to
understand
a
little
bit
of
of
council
member
Spears
experience
with
Tab
and
then
I
invite
Sarah
and
Brenda
as
well
to
chime
in.
If
you
have
more
to
add
on
that.
D
D
Nicole
I'll
defer
to
you
your
experience,
but
the
experience
in
tab
hasn't
been
certainly
that
councilmember
spear
jumps
in
and
gets
involved
in
the
substantive
role
of
the
conversation.
That
would
not
be
necessarily
what
a
council
liaison
would
be
because
they
don't
speak
for
Council
right,
but
there
have
been
times
when
it's
been
a
good
perspective
about
what's
in
work
plan.
What
is
not
in
work
plan
answering
perhaps
some
process
questions
as
that
moves
forward,
and
hopefully
I
think
as
we're
learning
about
some
of
this
work.
D
How
to
bring
that
back
to
account
to
the
council
body
I.
Think
would
be
really
interesting,
but
there
are
times
when
there
have
been
Dynamics
about
what
should
we
be
planning?
Who
do
we
report
to,
and
what
does
that
look
like
for
Council
and
members
that
it
has
been
interesting
to
have
the
perspective?
A
council
member,
even
though
they're
not
in
the
moment,
interceding
or
interacting
with
the
with
the
actual
body,
so
we'd,
be
curious
to
continue
those
learnings
and
happy
to
do
those
in
a
variety
of
different
ways.
G
And
I'm
happy
to
speak
as
well
and
I
think
this
kind
of
came
out
for
me
just
trying
to
learn
initially
just
to
learn
a
little
bit
more
about
some
of
the
stuff.
That
tab
was
discussing
and
watched
some
of
the
staff
presentations
before
some
of
the
doctor
Cog
meetings
as
I
was
trying
to
just
kind
of
get
up
to
speed
on
on
where
things
were
at
and
I.
G
Think
in
the
course
of
of
sort
of
me
just
being
there,
it
became
apparent
that
it
was
really
appreciated
to
have
somebody
from
Council
present
at
the
meeting
and
that
the
board
board
members
really
just
just
seemed
happy
that
somebody
was
there
paying
attention
to
to
what
it
was
that
they
were
doing
and
I'm
trying
to
think
of
just
even
you
know
times
when
they've
had
a
question
for
me
in
the
course
of
that
I
think
it's
largely
just
been
around.
You
know
well,
where,
where
is
this
coming
up?
G
Or
you
know,
on
the
council
agenda
I've
sometimes
been
able
to
provide
some
information
on
on
things
like
that,
but
I
think
it's
it's
really
just
what
it
seems
to
be
helpful
for
is
building
some
relationships
between
somebody
on
Council
and
board.
Member
and
I
think
that
was
the
the
original
recommendation
where
that
sort
of
came
from
was
really
to
have
a
a
council
member
being
present
getting
to
know
some
of
the
boards
board
and
commission
members,
but
largely
for
me.
G
It's
just
been
a
really
interesting
learning
experience
and
getting
at
sort
of
a
deeper
dive
into
some
of
these
topics
and
just
getting
getting
to
know
folks
a
little
bit
better
too
so
I
I
think
part
of
the
part
of
the
pilot
like
this,
where
I
sort
of
tentatively
raised
my
hands,
I
I,
don't
quite
know
what
the
pilot
is.
G
Gonna,
be
I'm,
sort
of
just
going
and
listening
to
the
job
meetings
for
now
to
get
some
information
from
them,
so
I
I
think
you
know
it
would
be
helpful
to
have
a
little
bit
of
clarity
on
you
know.
What
is
it
we're
trying
to
understand
about
this,
and,
and
what
is
this
role
but
I
think
we're
still
in
a
stage
where
just
even
trying
to
figure
out?
How
is
it?
How
is
it
helpful
and
where
is
it
fitting
into
this
relationship?
Building.
B
Yeah,
it
seems
like
sorry.
This
question
is
ex
specifically
asking
if
we
sort
of
support
you
continuing
with
what
you're
doing
with
tab,
but
I
think
that
maybe
Rachel's
question
is
getting
at.
There
might
be
another
question
of.
Do
we
want
to
expand
that
to
include
more
council
members
trying
being
Council
Liaisons
in
other
ways
with
others
I.
I
Think
that's
right
and
and
I
think
it's
it's
like.
It
sounds
to
me
like
what
Nicole's
doing
is
not
like
an
authorized.
I
don't
mean,
like
it's
unauthorized,
I,
think
it's
awesome,
but
it's
not
an
authorized
pilot
with,
like
you
know,
some
boundaries
demarcated.
That
would
be
important
to
me
because
I
think
that
this
could
be
and
again
not
not
in
this
situation.
I
But
you
know
with
the
longer
lens
of
some
Council
history,
it's
something
that
could
be
abused
if,
if
a
council
member
is
a
is
considered
a
liaison
with
with
you
know,
ill-defined
boundaries
and
they're
asked
like
well
what's
on
the
council's
work
plan,
I
might
answer
that
differently
than
than
some
people
on
past
council's
night.
If
I
wanted
a
certain
outcome
from
that
board,
so
I
think
it's.
It
does
need
safeguarding
in
some
ways
and
I.
Think
part
of
it
should
be
if
it's
a
formal
thing
reporting
back
to
us.
I
So
you
know
the
the
benefits
that
Nicole's
getting
I
would
think
should
be.
You
know
there
should
be
time
and
Council
meetings
for
liaison
updates
or
something
so
I
I.
Think
personally,
I
would
say
Nicole
by
all
all
means
should
continue
to
build
those
relationships
and
stuff,
but
in
terms
of
a
formal
pilot,
I
think
I
would
want
to
maybe
have
another
check
in
and
understand
what
that
looks
like
before.
I'd
want
to
support
it.
B
U
I
was
gonna
sort
of
share
some
value
that
that
I've
been
able
to
witness
of
Nicole
in
the
room,
but
I
think
it
maybe
is
a
little
more
granular
than
we
need
in
this
conversation
right
now.
I
do
want
to
just
take
the
opportunity
to
say
out
loud
that
tab
is
the
transportation
Advisory
board
for
those
who
might
not
be
as
up
to
speed
on
acronyms,
as
others.
L
Nope
yeah
I,
just
handed
it
down,
then
muted,
a
different
order,
so
so
I
talked
to
a
couple
of
folks
on
on
different
boards,
about
this
sort
of
liaison
thing
to
kind
of
get
a
sense
of
what
what's
welcome.
L
What's
not,
and
so
I
think
that
it's
certainly
from
what
I've
gathered
it's
welcome,
but
to
Rachel's
point
guard
rails,
there's,
certainly
a
concern
about
Candor
within
the
boards
in
terms
of
sort
of
having
more,
you
know,
metaphorically,
their
parents,
looking
in
on
the
conversation,
IES,
sort
of
sort
of,
and
so
I
think
not
there's
a
desire
to
sort
of
have
those
candid
conversations
they
might
not
otherwise
have
if
we're
present
in
the
moment
and
so
I
think
wanting
to
preserve.
L
Some
of
that
is
helpful,
letting
also
boards
develop
their
own
relationship
and
working
environment
with
staff
without
us
sort
of
being
present
so
guardrails
I
would
put
on
there
are
we
we
don't
go
to
Every
meeting,
we
we
go
to
every
other
or
maybe
once
a
quarter,
so
I
would
start
light.
I'd
have
a
light
touch
to
start
with
and
see
where
that
goes
before.
L
We
maybe
over
insert
ourselves
checking
in
with
the
chair
regularly,
is
probably
a
reasonable
place
to
have
regular
contact,
but
I
would
maybe
avoid
the
sort
of
let's
just
go
in
Beyond
every
meeting
and
be
sort
of
a
tsunami
of
presence
that
reduces
our
workload.
But
I
think
also
might
be
a
better
way
not
to
create
too
much
shock
to
the
boards
and
the
working
environments
they've
already
created
with
staff.
R
Lauren
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
what
we
were
thinking
about
when
we
first
talked
about
this
and
I'll
just
remind
people
as
I
was
thinking.
We
were
thinking,
I,
don't
think
more
than
once
or
twice
a
year,
but
we
wanted
the
opportunity
for
the
people
on
the
boards
to
have
a
person
to
go
to
on
Council
if
they
wanted
to
discuss
something
also
to
have
a
relationship
with
whoever
wanted
to
or
with
the
chair,
and
so
my
thinking
originally
was.
R
They're
great
I'm,
just
saying
that
we
also
we
don't
get
a
chance
to
meet
with
or
get
to
know
our
people
on
the
boards
and
commissions.
So
that's
where
we
were
coming
from
correct
Lauren.
Yes,.
B
Okay,
so
I'd
like
to
propose
that
we
first
I'm
going
to
break
this
into
a
couple
votes.
So
if
you
support
Nicole
continuing
in
the
work
that
she
is
doing
with
tab,
please
until
from
now
until
2024.
B
A
L
L
Okay,
well,
can
I
speak
to
so
I
I
won't
support
that
because
I
don't
think
that's
a
fair
shot,
because
I'd
like
to
rep
I'd
like
to
be
the
liaison
for
tab,
so
I
think
I,
don't
know
why
we
would
be
doing
that
here
in
this
moment,
rather
than
having
the
conversation
about
that
for
everybody
else.
B
So
my
other
question
is:
do
we
want
to
expand
this
and
have
more
council
members
run
this
as
a
larger
pilot,
because
it
seems
like
there
is
some
interest
in
more
people
getting
involved
sooner
rather
than
later.
B
B
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
about
that
or
can
I
sort
of
like
take
the
temperature
to
see?
Are
people
interested
in
instead
of
just
having
one
person
go
forward
with
this
pilot
project
trying
to
expand
this
pilot
project
sooner
rather
than
later?
Please
raise
your
hand
if
you
are
in
support
of
that.
L
Nuria
has
a
question,
but
I
still
don't
know
what
we're
asking
here.
I
think
there's
I'm,
just
not
sure
what
we're
really
doing
in
this
moment.
I
don't
know
if
I'm,
the
only
one
that
seems
a
little
confused
but
I
just
don't
know
what
we're
really
going
at
I
thought.
So
anyway,
I
don't
know
I'm
really
confused
with
what
we're
doing.
D
I
I
was
just
going
to
suggest,
maybe
because
what
I'm
hearing
is
that
there
is
interest
in
perhaps
developing
a
liaison
and
that
maybe
the
question
is
more:
do
we
have
the
not
to
go
more
formally
develop
a
liaison
that
has
those
guard
rails
that
has
some
guidelines
and
then
come
back
to
council,
and
then
we
can
figure
out
how
many
folks
have
time
and
interest
in
what?
What?
D
What
are
those
boards
and
commissions
that
that
would
serve
us.
But
let
us
first
come
with
the
rubric
for
you
to
approve,
but
to
get
the
nod
that
a
liaison
program
and
a
pilot
would
be
would
be
something
that
you're
interested
in
and
then
we
can
come
back.
B
Thank
you
for
saying
that
much
more
eloquently
than
I
was
it's
getting
late,
so
words
are
failing
me
so
Rachel
do
you
have
a
question
when.
B
We're
like
halfway
through
guys
does
council
support
the
encouragement
of
boards
and
commissions
to
experiment
with
new
methods
of
public
participation
for
a
select
number
of
items
each
year.
A
chosen
item
must
already
be
on
staff's
work
plan
fall
under
the
purview
of
that
board
or
commission
and
be
categorized
by
staff
as
a
topic
appropriate
at
and
sorry
at
an
involve
or
collaborate
level
on
the
city's
engagement,
Spectrum.
B
B
H
Well,
I
I'm,
not
sure
if
this
is
a
change
or
not
I,
I
think
for
many
many
years.
This
has
always
been
the
discretion
of
the
council
agenda
committee,
both
for
study
sessions
and
for
regular
Council
meetings
and
so
I
I
know
this
is
supposed
to
be
a
codification.
I
wouldn't
want
to
tie
the
hands
of
the
council
agenda
committee.
H
The
council
agenda
committee
has
done
a
good
job
this
one
in
in
Prior
ones
of
of
inviting
boards
and
commissions,
and
so,
if
it's
just
a
reaffirmation
of
a
policy,
that's
existed
for
a
long
long
time.
I
would
support
it,
but
I
wouldn't
direct
CAC
that
they
must
must
always
have
a
board
of
commission,
because
that
would
take
away
their
discretion
and
I
trust.
Cac.
B
G
I'm
agreeing
with
what
Bob
just
said
and
then
I'm
also
just
adding
that
I
think
it's
helpful.
If
there's
a
really
clear
ask
as
to
you
know
what
it
is,
we're
looking
for
for
feedback
in
that
in
that
discussion,
if
we
have
some
sense
of
that
in
advance,
then
hopefully
CAC
would
have
a
good
sense
of
that.
I
think
it's
just
helpful
for
folks.
B
Thank
you.
Nicole
I'd
also
like
to
add
that
I
agree
with
both
what
Nicole
and
Bob
just
said,
but
additionally
like
in
clarifying
the
ask.
It
should
also
be
clear
whether
we're
going
to
give
presentation
time
or
not
or
if
someone
is
just
there
to
answer
questions
if
they
come
out.
B
Said
are
we
ready
to
vote
on
this
one
all
in
favor
of
what
we've
just
talked
about?
No
okay,
one,
two,
three,
four,
five,
six,
seven,
eight,
nine
perfect!
Thank
you
guys
and
then
our
last
question.
We.
B
The
final
question
does
council
agree
with
the
approach
to
address
the
remainder
of
the
ideas
in
attachment
a
through
a
comprehensive
evaluation
by
a
third
party
to
assess
our
current
systems
and
make
recommendations
for
broader
structural
and
role
Clarity
improvements?
Does
anyone
have
questions
or
comments
related
to
this
mat.
L
So
in
general,
I
I
support
this,
but
my
concern
is
we've
in
other
work
we
have
been.
We
have
felt
the
sting
of
not
prioritizing
things
and
so
I'm
worried
that
if
we
don't
provide
at
least
some
scope
of
a
handful
of
these,
that
we
want
to
elevate
to
being
a
higher
priority
for
us.
L
I
I'm
worried
that
it
just
kind
of
becomes
a
soup
of
analysis.
So
I,
don't
know
if
that's
here
and
now,
but
I
do
think
that's
a
big
list,
and
so,
unless
we
Elevate
some
things,
I
don't
know.
If
we're
going
to
get
the
outcomes,
we're
looking
for
on
certain
things,
I
think
there's
I
could
identify
four
or
five
that
I
think
are
far
more
important
than
the
rest
that
might
be
subjective
to
among
other
of
us,
but
I.
S
Yeah,
please
Pam.
Okay,
great!
Thank
you!
So
a
couple
things
as
we
approach
both
the
kind
of
procurement
of
this
support
and
then
sort
of
following
that,
through
with
counsel
the
way
I
think
the
team
envisions.
That
process
would
be
to
work
closely
with
the
boards
and
commission
subcommittee
on
sort
of
what
does
that
RFQ
or
RFP
look
like
in
terms
of
that
solicitation?
How
is
the
scope
of
work
framed
in
a
way
that
does
reflect
those
priorities
that
you're
referring
to
Matt?
In
addition
sort
of
on
the
back
end?
S
As
the
body
of
work
is
completed,
we
would
anticipate
and
we
had
included
just
one
example
of
another
City's
assessment.
You
would
be
sort
of
presented
with
a
suite
of
options
that
then
all
of
the
decisions
of
what
to
do
with
that
would
still
come
back
to
council
and
so
prioritizing
those
recommendations.
S
Considering
you
know,
timelines
of
being
able
to
fund
implementation
of
whatever
those
changes
might
be.
Those
things
would
still
be
at
your
discretion,
so
I'd
like
to
think
that
both
kind
of
the
checkpoint
and
how
we
set
up
the
work
but
then
also
kind
of
on
the
back
end.
The
how
we
proceed
with
the
recommendations
would
be
both
based
on
your
key
priorities
and
then
also
there
would
be
timelines
associated
with
certain
things
might
require
Charter
changes.
Certain
things
might
require.
S
B
B
Rachel
I
saw
your
hand,
go
up
and
then
come
down
nope.
Okay,
in
that
case,
are
we
ready
to
vote
on
this
one?
Please
raise
your
hand
and
sorry.
We
are
not
voting.
Please,
let's
draw
a
poll
if
there
is
support
for
this
agenda
items
of
this
number,
seven
one,
two,
three,
four:
five,
six,
seven,
eight
nine!
B
All
right
that
brings
us
to
the
end
of
the
questions
laid
out
by
staff
in
our
memo.
Are
there
anything
anything
else,
Pam
that
you
for
any
reason
we
would
like
to
keep
going
on
this
topic.
S
No
I
appreciate
the
direction.
Thank
you
thank.
K
I,
don't
know
that
they're
still
here,
but
I
just
wanted
to
thank
Lenora
and
Judy
for
their
for
coming
tonight
and
for
all
the
work
that
they've
done
in
the
community
in
their
respective
roles.
So
I
appreciate
about
that.
Thank
you.
Aaron.
G
G
Think
with
the
election
ramping
up
just
folks
in
the
community
are
getting
heated,
but
what
I'm
seeing
is
stuff,
that's
disparaging
staff
and
really
kind
of
calling
into
question
their
integrity,
their
kind
of
commitment
to
their
work
for
the
city
and
I
just
wanted
to
take
a
moment
for
any
staff
who
are
still
here
with
us
just
to
let
you
know,
I'm,
sorry
that
that's
happening,
it's
not
fun
when
it
happens
to
us
as
electives,
but
it's
I
don't
really
feel
like
it's
appropriate
to
be
happening
to
staff,
so
I
just
wanted.
G
You
know
for
for
those
of
us
here.
You
know
where,
where
we
see
it
directly,
if
anybody
feels
comfortable
just
stepping
in
and
commenting
for
staff
and
standing
up
form
that
may
be
appreciated,
maybe
not,
but
just
wanted
to
to.
Let
you
all
know
that
I
see
it
and
I'm
really
sorry
that
it's
happening,
and
hopefully
our
temperatures
can
go
down
a
little
bit
after
the
election.
D
I'll
just
say
on
behalf
of
staff
that
we
certainly
appreciate
you
saying
so
out
loud,
and
we
know
that
so
many
of
you
council,
member
support
staff
as
well
so
appreciate
that.
Certainly
it's
something
that
we
take
in
stride.
It
is
unfortunate,
but
we
appreciate
the
support
that
you
give
us.