Home
Contribute Contact Us Browse all meetings
Home Contribute Contact Us Browse all meetings
City of Boulder, CO / OSMP Meetings / 24 Feb 2021
City of Boulder, CO / OSMP Meetings / 24 Feb 2021
Previous Meeting Next Meeting
⏯
Add meeting Rate page Subscribe
youtube image
►
From YouTube: 2-24-21 City of Boulder OSBT Meeting

Description

2-24-21 City of Boulder OSBT Meeting

A

Curt brown, osbt: wait till the clock at six o'clock on my computer.

A

Curt brown, osbt: okay,. I am calling to order the open space board of trustees, study session of february 24 2021 welcome to all who have joined us either to watch or to listen,. I will start as always with the roll call how halston.

A

Here. curt brown,, osbt: kurt whole leg.

B

Here.

A

Curt brown, osbt: take codes., here., curt, brown,, osbt: and caroline miller yeah, and I'm kurt brown and so allison. That means we have a full house all board members here, tonight.

A

Curt brown, osbt: of just to let the public know this is an ospf study session and not a regular meeting, therefore,. While we welcome anyone to watch and listen.

A

Curt brown, osbt: during the board's discussion. There is not a public comment period, tonight, however, as always,. We welcome your comments by email to the board and you're also welcome to make public comments at any of our upcoming regular meetings,. The next,, which is march 10.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, and with that I will turn the gavel over device share, how hall stein to give the overview of the meeting agenda, and also to moderate the study session, as he and karen have organized the agenda and the topics for tonight so over to you. How.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, thank you very much,, kurt.

C

hal hallstein osbt: yes,. So we have a couple of different stages in the meeting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, as people can see in the study session, we're going to start by having dan give us an overview of the latest update on.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, bt and smp timeline and work plan. That's largely a verbal update,, although some notes were included out of the recent subcommittee meeting notes,, which were published online by the city.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I thought we'd,. Then you know,, according to the agenda, review our historical motions as a board and the summary that's included,, which is also in the packet.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. We also have the sea south briefing book and term sheet,, which we want to make sure you know we're getting people's thoughts and ideas on then.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: there's also included the specific documents related to the granite disposal, primarily as learning information about what form and shape disposal decisions have taken in the past, and the type of specific legal language is surrounded. Them.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and then there's going to be some discussion about what,. If anything,, maybe important for action in our official meeting in march.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and then yeah, hopefully we'll be wrapping up in about two hours around eight o'clock. So if that sounds good to everyone.,.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, truthfully, I think karen will be well situated to lead us,, particularly on the granite disposal documents and some other materials included in the package. On that so I'll hand it off to her.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know later in the meeting,, but to get us going dan. Do you want to begin by giving us the latest and greatest on the timeline and the new information from the subcommittee meeting.

D

Cob, dan burke:, her thanks hell, and I think john yeah john, is on the call as well and,, as most of you know, john is tracking this project,, probably even a little bit more closely than I am, on a day to day basis,. So I welcome him to chime in at any point.

D

Cob, dan burke:, during this overview of what 2021.

D

Cob, dan burke:, you know, right now,, it's always fluid,, but how it's setting up to be in terms of discussion. So I'm, as I alluded to, at the last meeting.

D

Cob, dan burke: staff over the past,, you know coming back off the holidays, one one of the things that we heard from this board and from others, and the process subcommittee and from each other, was the need to sort of make sure we.

D

Cob, dan burke: that the project team has sequenced out what 2021 looks like as best as as as.

D

Cob, dan burke:, you know that can be estimated at this time and so there's a few weeks that was spent trying to develop that milestone. Schedule.

D

Cob, dan burke:, and that was then communicated to project subcommittee on last friday and really without a lot of any tweaking. There was some questions from the process subcommittee council members on a few of the I.

D

Cob, dan burke:, none of them had directly and.

D

Cob, dan burke: impacted the what has been sort of penciled in for all spt potential meetings and subject: matter.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so we walked out of there with that unchanged,. I would just like to note that we staff originally had some of this first two months, a little bit differently,, but with the.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the scheduling of this study session and then also estimating that the board is going to want to come back in march and do some other things,. We took off one of the placeholders we put in for.

D

Cob, dan burke:, this type of discussion and and put the 24th in its place, so.

D

Cob, dan burke: recognize the 24th that went out as part of this schedule next month. We realized that there's probably going to be a desire for the board to return from studies session discussion to have another discussion.

D

Cob, dan burke:. We would also still invite a conversation about this 2021 timeline and upcoming.

D

Cob, dan burke: milestones, and again I already had invited joe and phil to see if they could attend to answer any questions about the timeline.

D

Cob, dan burke: there, the project, really the project sponsors and if you have any more sort of detailed questions about the overall timeline that would be great for them to address. But tonight might suffice for what you guys want to know, and if that's the case.

D

Cob, dan burke:- we probably won't repeat this conversation next march or this coming march, so march 10 is obviously on there and then.

D

Cob, dan burke:. The next item that we thought was going to be significant import to the for the board and staff to have a discussion on is tentatively scheduled, for.

D

Cob, dan burke: q2 late middle of q2 and june late q2, and that has to do with flood project impacts and environmental mitigation, and I'm just going to summarize this and if john, if you want to fill in any details that you feel is pertinent to the subject. Matters feel free.

D

Cob, dan burke: and then going into august. We felt like that would be a great time that we might have the information.

D

Cob, dan burke: pretty much in hand to have a good discussion on the groundwater report and to provide and have a discussion on what the current conditions are. Saying.

D

Cob, dan burke:, and about some of the considerations that those current conditions are informing future design work that is going to have to be done to keep conditions.

D

Cob, dan burke:, as they are so that's an august timeframe and then based on prior motions,. I believe this one might have come out from a 2018 motion from this board is that at certain critical milestone.

D

Cob, dan burke: design stages to come back and report to the board,, and so this is that first one, as we move into.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the preliminary design and that's the 30% design phase and so we're envisioning coming back to the board.

D

Cob, dan burke: at once, that's completed and and that team is ready to present we're guessing, would be in the middle of q4 and which will have a great discussion on 30% design.

D

Cob, dan burke: and then we just wanted to put this tbd out there, of course,, it's consulting with you all on the best timing for this,, but somewhere, I'm assuming that something doesn't.

D

Cob, dan burke: appear to trip, the project up, which could be a number of different things,, but for this scheduling, sake,, assuming that it doesn't there will be,, will need to land on what the. If there's a disposal request. What that timing might be preferred for, for this particular group to have.

D

Cob, dan burke: disposal conversation and leading up to disposal what type of support, what type of.

D

Cob, dan burke: information: do you want to roll out? So we expect a conversation about not only the timing for that, but.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the rollout leading up to that, and what that might look like, for you all,, and how staff could support that so.

D

Cob, dan burke:- I don't know john, if you have anything to add to that overview, but that's sort of what is looking like from the staff perspective. For.

D

Cob, dan burke: communicating out to the board.

E

John potter, cob: no, no,, nothing really to add dan. That was a good overview,. There are some key dates in there,, maybe for the board to at least focus on one is the april 20 city council meeting,, which is tentative, and then the 30% design.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah about that april 20. I I attend the cic meetings,, the scheduling meetings and.

D

Cob, dan burke: there's two big items on for april 20 and the cac is recommending that staff look at splitting those two out and one of them's this item so just keep an eye on that, one that might change.

D

Cob, dan burke: it might it's going to stay within the same couple of weeks timeframe,, but it may stay on the 20th or may go out a week or two from that,, depending on what happens at cac scheduling.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, maybe just one other thing to add dan- is it's really the? What we'll be looking to the board for feedback on in march 10, or that was the plan.

E

John potter, cob: was it. Is this because there's a lot of dates in here that are tentative still, there is some uncertainty around the schedule,, but is this the right order of things.

E

John potter, cob:, so that would be one thing for you all to get be: considering.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think, with that overview yeah. Well, why don't we open it up to questions comments concerns? Why don't we start with you, kurt.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. I think we get a real, clear understanding during the discussion. Of.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. What decision is being put to city council at the 20th or is that principally more council guidance into the.

A

Curt brown, osbt: annexation agreement process. I know we've got a bunch of to be determined dates for the cu, boulder advisors, application, draft annexation, agreement release those are all to be determined. So what's your sense? Dan is what's going to be taken up during the april 20 meeting.

D

Cob, dan burke:- and this is the initial touch about the.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the term aware,, the term sheet exists and station. I don't believe this is a decision making meeting.

D

Cob, dan burke:, I think it's to sort of get the policy of well to update all the council on where annexation lies to get a sense. Of.

D

Cob, dan burke:, where the term sheet is that,, where agreements may have been reached where there's still work to be done.

D

Cob, dan burke: and to get councils feedback in and pulse of how they're seeing things at this update a little gianna five.

E

Cob, dan burke: correct. john potter, cob: yeah, so the briefing book was in your materials and that's that's the basis for drafting an agreement which will get focus down on certain. It's sort of refers to the key agreement points there.

E

John potter, cob: and so,, though that's when council will be taking under advisement that information they've received from boards at that point and be giving some direction to staff on.

E

John potter, cob: negotiating that that annexation, agreement.

A

Curt brown, osbt: thanks guys.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: will there be an update on the term sheet before april 20.

E

John potter, cob:, I'm not that I'm aware of there will. There will certainly be information in that city council package for april 20.

E

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but nothing's version,, the version that we got was as old as october. 2020.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I know staff has been working on that.

F

Hal hallstein osbt: in taking delivery to create the study session packet karen from phil there,. There was not suggested there's an immediate, revised version.

E

John potter, cob: know, and I think.

E

john potter, cob:. That would be a good question. For. john potter, cob: phil at your march meeting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:: if do you have any um yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, we can't hear you did.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: that that's probably good,, but now you can.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. Thank you for that. Hell.

G

dave, kuntz,, osbt: yeah. I was, I I'm a little perplexed to dan and john about the schedule, and I don't want this to be kind of a parochial perception, but it,. It strikes me that you know the the potential disposal discussion is put off well into the future.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: after a lot of potential decisions get made, and I know that you know we've. We've tried to at least to this point kind of divorce, the annexation process from the flood mitigation process. But.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. I guess I'm just a little concerned that will be well down the road that the disposal question and discussion.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: will start to be rendered moot.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, and so I'm wondering if you can shed any further light. I'm.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: kind of the reason that that is later on in the whole process. Schedule.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah, thanks dave, we were basing some of the scheduling based on the I believe it might have been the.

D

Cob, dan burke: motion that was adopted by the board about when they felt like they would be prepared to talk in detail about disposal and from that indication, it seemed to point towards the 30% design,. I know, kurt, and I have personally talked about this, a number of times over the past two years..

D

Cob, dan burke:, so we've been trying to sort of not honor but sort of adhere to that timeline that we are hearing through the.

D

Cob, dan burke: day without the details,, how much property are you actually talking about, is going to be needed for the floodwall project,? How did they, how were they able to mitigate impacts,? What is the groundwater.

D

Cob, dan burke: risk,, as we see it, now,, not just that the study is in how is the land between the open space of property boundary in the hallway, going to be utilized for the project.

D

Cob, dan burke:, what is the,, what are the feds saying about it in terms of mitigation requirements on there and.

D

Cob, dan burke:, all those things,. What we heard from past board motion was those are important details that this board wants to know.

D

Cob, dan burke: before they really could entertain a direct disposal decision, and so that's why staff been.

D

Cob, dan burke: has put it after the 30% design, because we felt like that was the type of information,. The body was interested in knowing the details done. Is it five acres or is it three? Is you know, out of that three? How much is actually.

D

Cob, dan burke: permanent versus just a temporary access easement, those are pretty key issues, and so we've been trying to follow that guidance from what we heard in that in that motion, and I don't know kurt, I think you could chime in here,, because you and I.

D

Cob, dan burke: talked a lot about timing for that so., curt, brown,, osbt: yeah. I think that's right and maybe what we didn't perceive you know going back. A ways was that.

A

Curt brown, osbt: there's two aspects to this: one is providing early inputs to what our interests are, and I think we've done. That.

A

Curt brown, osbt: considerably in the previous motions to say you know,, groundwater is important, and,, therefore, etc,. We need these things and.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, the land is important, and therefore we really need this, much of it for mitigation. That's sort of different from reaching a decision on disposal which,. I think.

A

Curt brown, osbt: dan you're, absolutely right,. We wouldn't want to entertain that final decision until we had a lot more hard information.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, but I don't think it precludes the sort of discussion we're having right now. About.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: refining statements of what our interests are that should be considered in these discussions and dave,. I suspect, one of the things you're focusing on is what what decisions are going to get baked in pretty soon on the annexation and how will that affect our options.

A

Dave kuntz, osbt: yeah, that's exactly right, and so so dan and john. I guess it would be helpful for us to get. You know, get your sense of the relationship now between the annexation process and the flood mitigation. Process.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: in in so that we, as a board kind of get a better feel,. For you know what that is currently and what that's going to look like in the future.

D

Cob, dan burke: well, and going back over the past motions from the past two years from the from this board, where staff is basically saying this is the guidance we have definitely received from this board is the.

D

Cob, dan burke:, originally it was 82. It's now. The full 119, based on the june 2020 motion recommendation that this body put forward. So.

D

Cob, dan burke:, what we, our staff, our staff, is passing on to the negotiators that it's, the 119 is critical for this, the water that goes along.

D

Cob, dan burke: that would support restoration,, so the water rights is a critical component. That would often be an item that just negotiated during annexation.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so the oh so, and the water, as we see it,, are the two main annexation ties most and all the other elements we could tie back to the project.

D

Cob, dan burke:, which would be our sort of quote unquote, negotiations with the utility department or our demands of the utility department.

D

Cob, dan burke: and the essence of the final disposal decision, and that has to do with mitigating impact direct impacts from the project,. What type of restoration needs to be done in order to provide ample mitigation.

D

Cob, dan burke:, if the. cob, dan burke:, is not going to come forward to the city.

D

Cob, dan burke: free of charge,, then that would be the responsibility of the project,, because I think emotion that this body had is that that 119 would come up come up to us, without always mp funds being put forward. So those are sort of the main.

D

Cob, dan burke:, what we see as the tie into the annexation term seats that are that are being negotiated.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. I don't want to dominate this conversation, so thanks for that, the one I guess the basis of my discomfort is in looking at the term sheets in the briefing package.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. I was discomforted by the the lack of specificity or commitment. I guess by see you on a number of these points,, and so my concern is that, as the annexation proceeds we're not going to well,. The question is whether we're going to actually get.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: some agreement and closure on some of these issues that we've raised previously.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: they can. I can I ask you to hold that thought. We do have a specific time slated for a real in depth. Look at the term sheet,, you know I'm caroline or does anyone else have anything that specifically timeline really.

H

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay me right now., karen hollweg, osbt:. Could I ask.

F

Karen hollweg,, osbt:, dan and john, will buy what data, do we need to have to home I'm.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: additional items that need to be part of the annexation, agreement.

E

John potter, cob:, if, if there are things other than have already been in your your emotions, today.

E

John potter, cob: that april 20 tentative date is, is the time, by which additional feedback or recommendations might might be timely. Karen.

H

So.

D

Cob, dan burke:- I might I might just add to that- it also depends on what the item is. If it's an item that would demand a good deal of negotiation,, then the sooner the better.

D

Cob, dan burke: okay, go stations are ongoing, and I think on that april, 20th date, it's a chance for the negotiation team, to.

D

Cob, dan burke: sort of let them know the status and, hopefully,, where that status is nearing some agreements and on on all the issues,. So if we're going to be introducing a brand new issue that has never been brought forward to either the city team or the cu team sooner, the better.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and,, and I presume because of our role, those comments need to go to counsel and thereby from counsel to staff.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah,, so I would say, that's probably, would be in the form of a recommendation,. You know. Annexation is governed a pretty specifically about you know who the.

D

Cob, dan burke:, who the players are for annexation in general and who's, got authority over what? Because the os, because there is no so impact.

D

Cob, dan burke: aspect to this particular annexation, application,, just like 311, in which we were asked to provide some feedback and input on the so there that sort of obviously brings in a direct tied for this board. To.

D

Cob, dan burke: provide feedback, so.

D

Cob, dan burke:, if it fits feedback or recommendation to the council, that's going to be just as good in terms of staffs going to see that right, getting team will see that okay well.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: carolina see your ruler.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: anyone can answer this,. I just want to be clear,. The recommendations that we are meeting to give regarding annexation was that requested.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: of us by any member of the annexation process of that they wanted that from us. Or.

H

Caroline miller,, osbt: or know., caroline miller,, osbt:, like during this before april, have dave. I know that we've given feedback regarding ios so and various things, but did anyone from the annexation process, specifically want recommendations on that prior to april.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah,- and this would be a good conversation with fill in the room, because he's aware of all the governance- governance around annexation- so,, for instance, I'm right now under the transportation advisory that board, they typically would not. In fact, it's in their.

D

Cob, dan burke: governance body that they would not be a body that would come in on a station unless requested.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, not so I remember that, from the meeting.

H

cob, dan burke:, but I just like right so on that question, it's a little bit more ambiguous for this board,, but because of the oh, so aspect.

D

Cob, dan burke: it does. It has traditionally brought in, or.

D

Cob, dan burke: at least,, certainly at the staff level, a request of hey,. What do you think about this? So so what interests, does he have on the rsl.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, so they are more interested in that,. Then, are our recommendations for disposal or maybe not.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, no, it's not my impression,, so I mean my understanding of why we're here in the study session.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: was the sense. That march was a very important meeting,, because if we did have any business,, we felt was critical related to annexation.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: were wise to have that discussed in march, and hence the sense of a pressing need to have this study session. So I'm actually hoping that this study session itself will answer that very question to some degree,. If we do or do not have any interests in what is.

C

Called the annexation.

B

Yep that fair.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, we are getting a little past the amount of time on timeline. I do have one question myself: dan.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: in reading the location of second reading on annexation and then the disposal request location has anyone said to you, or are you aware, is there? Would any annexation be contingent upon a successful disposal.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I do think it's important to remember. Within the charter, there is the possibility of a referendum on disposal which would take a meaningful amount, more time.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so I'm wondering, is there a way is any. Is there any possibility that there would be annexation without a flood project,, because in the way that it's set up,, it seems to open that possible.

D

Cob, dan burke: again,. I think that would be better directly answered by phil next month,, my understanding, know is that.

D

Cob, dan burke: it would that any final annexation agreement. If it's agreed before the flood project is known to exist,, that there would need to be some sort. Of.

D

Cob, dan burke: tool to link link the approval of the project to the annexation.

D

Cob, dan burke: to what degree and how that would work. I don't but.

D

Cob, dan burke: phil might be able to comment more specifically on that, but.

D

Cob, dan burke: there's an end that brings back a related point,. As you know, there's three quote: unquote landowners involved, here,, see that, being one see you being one.

D

Cob, dan burke:, all of them.

D

cob, dan burke:, could take action that would prevent the flood project from moving forward.

D

Cob, dan burke:, which is another reason why you know, a disposal decision.

D

Cob, dan burke:, you know,, we would. We would want to make sure before we we put ourselves through that discussion, and we asked the community to have that type. Of.

D

Cob, dan burke: final discussion,, we would want to be pretty sure that it was needed, rather than going first, for instance, and then finding out that one of the other landowners.

D

Cob, dan burke: took action that made the whole thing mute in there, wasn't a project and and and dispose the request, wasn't even needed.

D

Cob, dan burke:- that's sort of another reason why to have it a little bit lower in the schedule is to make sure that, indeed, a request is, is going to be coming forward, but doesn't goes a little bit off script from what your question was, though hell,, but my my understanding is that.

D

Cob, dan burke:, an agreement that would be reached there would be some tie in a contingencies, with the flood project being able to go forward.

D

Hal hallstein osbt: and care.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, and that goes to one last question on the timeline. I don't see anywhere.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: approval from si dot showing up on the timeline.

B

Now yeah.

D

Cob, dan burke: you're right, it's a.

D

cob, dan burke:. You know, I don't know this. This timeline isn't capturing all the day to day work. That's going on in the project. It's it's really trying to capture.

D

Cob, dan burke:. What I think the process subcommittee would be interested in is where, where are those meetings with the boards and the communities and the console is going to happen and in what order? And yes, there's a there's a day to day work happening, a number of different issues.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: but,, as you pointed out,, there are three landowners. Yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt: yeah. I think it would be surprising to get an agreement with si.us for the 30% design.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, that's just my guess.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: excellent point karen at this point,. I think we should maybe turn away from timeline. I'd like to introduce the discussion of the motions in summary, quickly.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I've done a little thinking about about how maybe to structure, this discussion,. I think we agreed on a number of things number one is. This board has made a number of substantive and material requests related to environmental mitigation related to any potential disposal. Request.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and I think that there's also been a.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know, staff has done a good job of pointing out to me, and hopefully in your reading of this, to you'll, see that there has been.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: changes to those motions resulting from the project, potentially moving from c dot roll into our property now within. Within that context, I think there's a lot of room to get into details and specifics of those, but for our purposes of this study session in the march.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm curious.

C

hal hallstein osbt: basically,, to ask various board members what,. If any problems in these proceedings, motions that are material and serious might exist for them.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, if they think anything really substantial, has been overlooked, to try and bring that forward as soon as possible. And, last but not least,, as we get into the next leg of the discussion, which is about the term sheet for us to.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: make a determination of what, if anything related to the annexation. Process.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is important for us to discuss or might show up in any march action sort of related to that,. So I guess rather than reading,, you know going motion by motion.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I wanted to sort of start it from the standpoint of. Does anyone see any material problems along the way, that should be, you know, address sooner than later, and why don't we start again with you, kurt.

A

Curt brown, osbt: know and thank you how.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so I think one thing you're trying to point out is that the september 11 2019 motions.

A

Curt brown, osbt: were an updating based on the movement of the project.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I don't know that they completely replace, I think, there's something's probably stated in.

A

Curt brown, osbt: that we're not changed for 2019,, but I think it's a fair question.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. So no, I don't have anything that I would propose that needs to be added to this list,, but I do think that.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, the list karen has put together is interesting because she's gone into more detail about you know what sort of agreement would we need to underlie mitigation plan and monitoring, and things like that that I think, are really worth considering and.

A

Curt brown, osbt: because it's not specifically called out in the agenda,. What are your thoughts,, how and karen about when we might consider her list? It says the very end of the packet.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I think that will be there at you know after we look at the granite documents,, because that list really came about as through the research of the history of granted.

A

Curt brown, osbt: okay, thanks so. curt brown, osbt: so,, so we may, in some ways revisit the question of motions and their sufficiency,. When we get to looking at the list that karen's put together, yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt: thank you.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, if I were to describe some of the differences karen's list, takes some general principles.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and tries to harden expectations around principles, which I think largely exists in the emotions, currently,, which is a really important step of the process.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, but you know,, and I guess karen will talk about it,. There may be some racing have some new principles,, but it doesn't read to me necessarily like a lot of.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt:, okay, does anybody else you know, within the context of the previously existing motions.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: have any.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: questions or concerns.

C

Okay.

G

Hal hallstein osbt:, I have one so dave. I see you.

G

dave, kuntz, osbt: I'll just say that I echo kurt's comments, and I think they're very well considered and.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. We should just move on, so.

G

hal hallstein, osbt: okay,. I have one, and I think it's the right time to raise it before we look to review the term sheet.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and that is that.

C

hal hallstein osbt:. In our motion, language.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, we discussed the appropriate time for a philosophical discussion of disposal being once the flood mitigation plans had been decided upon. It wasn't actually a request to wait until there was 30% completion.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: I,, and I guess the reason why. I think that that is interesting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and why? I also think this study session is really important.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and I actually went ahead and I wrote something about this, because I wanted to say it just right, basically,. I think it's really important. We look at this process through a realistic historical lens.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the fact that there is some uncertainty among some trustees about the disposal meeting, the both the letter and the spirit of the charter.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is really an indicator that there's a decent likelihood or probability that there could be a citizens referendum.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, if trustees are doubting that they're fulfilling their duty under the charter, that that will be something that citizens perceived.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and, basically,. I think it will ultimately be borne by this board to attempt to convince the public that we've arrived at an agreement.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: that fundamentally makes sense for the open space department has a brighter vision of the future for this wetland area, and if we don't succeed in that, there's a pretty high likelihood that a referendum would would come forward, given that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I think that is where the question of do. We have business within the annexation process itself becomes important.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, because., hal hallstein osbt:, in in the series of motions that we have made,. While there has been.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think a reasonable acknowledgement of the additional environmental damage that building this floodwall in open space habitat with endangered species, causes.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: that it is largely the proposed mitigation of all. This is largely going to be potentially borne by the the project costs itself.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that's not lost on the citizens at all who, ultimately, I guess one way of looking at it will be due to their empowerment under the referendum, plus. They will be the final principle in that negotiation.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and that's why I think it's a good moment to talk about what, if any business, we do have in the annexation.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, because we, if we are going to try to put together a deal that can achieve this life and safety benefits and provide environmental mitigation, ultimately,. The community has to be convinced that it's fair.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so that's how I see these things time to go. Does anyone have any want to riff on that.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, kurt., curt, brown, osbt: it all I'm going to try to do is state what I think the.

A

Curt brown, osbt: process is related to a referendum and a disposal, mostly just a prompt someone to correct me.

A

Curt brown, osbt: if the board votes.

A

curt brown, osbt: against the disposal.

A

curt brown, osbt: that I don't think there's any opportunity for a citizen, referendum.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, but I don't know what recourse that gives council it's my understanding that if the board voted for a disposal,, then it could go to the citizens as a referendum.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, probably there have to be a petition process and so who actually understands this process, and would like to correct what I've said,, maybe john, can be dan.

D

John potter, cob: dan. Well, it's a two body: approval.

D

cob, dan burke:, so the board must approve by majority vote three person vote.

D

Cob, dan burke: to to approve and recommend to city council dispose of opens. Then city council has to affirmatively vote in favor of that.

D

Cob, dan burke: and then, whatever what that decision cannot be acted upon for a 60 day period. I think it's a 60 day period in which there is a.

D

Cob, dan burke: petition period, in which there's a threshold amount of signatures that have to have to be made by the electorate. If that threshold is met,, then it does go on the ballot per se, and it would be up for a community boats, so.

D

Cob, dan burke:, I don't believe that third step is ever been put in place. Somebody who's listening, may correct me, and please do be loved to know that.

D

Cob, dan burke:, but for the most part it's the two bodies approval and then we do,, no matter what you wait for that 60 days,, and then you can act on implementing that disposal in this case of, if how, if you're right- and we end up having all three act- that's sort of how it would work.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah, I see your hand caroline.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, so I think, from what you said,. The part that sticks out to me immediately is when we do or don't decide to enter into the process of annexation.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, and if that does lead to land mitigation,, I think,. For me the part that is very complex. That's going to require a lot of creative thinking is that.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:: it's what we all know that the value of environmental goods and services goes largely unmeasured and leads to inaccurate accounting,. It does not reflect the whole of our system and the values for the services provided by the species and those ecosystems.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, so I tried to get to an understanding of the full economic value of the resources.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: is, is the part that will, for me, be difficult.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, when it comes down to numbers unless numbers are doing something to try and account for what happens to our species and our ecosystems, when we decide that they can go away. So I'm just wanted to say that.

D

Cob, dan burke: and that's the challenge with every disposal decision that this body and staff has had to work. With.

D

Cob, dan burke: a quite quite a large one, three years ago,, then that was needed for to support the carter. Pipeline.

D

Cob, dan burke: project, and so we've had challenging ones before the granite. One came about from a from one that was a another tough.

D

Cob, dan burke: tough decision to make of whether or not, what we're what the open space department is receiving in exchange for that is, is satisfactory to the board,. I mean: that's, that's where your that's, where a hard decision for you all is. Is that and.

H

Cob, dan burke: yeah., caroline miller, osbt:, I just,. I would like, for.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: other bodies that are invested in the project, you know, and, of course I might not get my way,, but you know, to show conservation, awareness and and understand what the ecosystem has and what it means for boulder as a whole, and what it means for us. Moving forward with climate change.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, you know whether that happens, or not we'll see, but that that's kind of where I stand with that it just it has such an impact on future states of the system,. You know for our next generations what we decide, now.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, especially on big projects like this, so as open space board of trustees and because of our charter. That's that's where we stand,, you know with that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: in any case,. My feeling is, is that if we can provide any helpful or beneficial.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: advice to city council that would help enhance the probability that this process would survive. This whole thing that that is beneficial and is helpful.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah. I think that the wreck, I agree with you,. I think that for osb t as a body,, you know our recommendation is just that and I think that as a whole,, we look at the benefits. We look at the risks.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and we make our recommendation, based on what would be more beneficial for open space and, of course,. That has a lot of moving parts to it. But.

H

That.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I mean, my understanding, too, is that the results of a referendum there isn't really another shot at that. What once that? That's a very serious thing to occur and good for everyone to acknowledge that that is a very serious thing to occur, so, in any case,. I guess that's my view of how.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. We should open up next the briefing book in the term sheet and share what we have heard and know about some of the points that we know are driving.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: a sense, a sense of trouble that could jeopardize a holistic outcome for all parties,. This is that does that make sense.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so I guess, if everybody's feeling good about their understanding on the summary and the motions, why don't we turn our attention, then, to the term sheet.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: luckily, for us,, even though it's a complex document, those those items that touch directly on our business are somewhat.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: limited, so should I do think,? Maybe it would be a good use of our time to go through those items, one by one,. How do people feel about that.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and there's a summary version is that what you're? Thinking of starting with on page six.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, so the.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well,, I was actually thinking on the assuming everybody did their homework. There's a bookmark in the study packet that takes you directly to the term sheet,, which is basically.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, a dialogue between the city and see you is that people want to cover things higher in the briefing book if, if so, that's.

B

Hal hallstein, osbt:, wonderful, but.,.

A

Curt brown, osbt: well,, you have a summary of the topics and whether or not we're aligned with the parties on page six but you're right, there's a lot more detail down below the back and forth, and it's entirely up to you. How, where you want to start.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay, um.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I agree with you how that that working through the term sheet would be best,. I have one question on the front: matter, though.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: okay,. If I could ask that um in the in the text and the diagrams in the first part of the briefing book.

A

Curt brown, osbt: page.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well, several pages, I'm I'm concerned about having solid numbers as opposed to changing numbers for the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, um I know that's the you thinks that 80 acres is an important number.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I we have received documents that show that there are 10 acres under the levy. That's never mentioned in this document.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so I'm wondering if, between now and march, 10 staff can just solidify the number of acres in or so and where those acres are.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the number of acres under the levy than other number of acres, ethan, east and south of the levee, and the number of acres western north of the levy.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I don't think we need to go into a lot of detail about that tonight. If that's an assignment that staff can take on,, we can deal with that on march 10.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, because there must be absolute numbers somewhere, that.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: could be reflected in the annexation agreement.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: al. dave, kuntz,, osbt: yes,. I have a quick general question before we go into the detail in that is throughout the the key issues in the in the term material that there's see you keeps referencing the resolution of six key issues in for my reading, they're. Actually, the 50 key issues in turn, book.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, and so I'm going to ask staff,. Do we know what the cu reference to the six key issues is or are.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it's from a previous, see you letter, but I don't think we've ever gotten that letter or the list of the six.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. So do we know what those things are.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: out is that what I sent you is those.

H

Hal hallstein osbt:, I don't know if you had a chat, I do not believe no, it's different,. I think.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, it's just that you know, in response to some of the open space issues. It's like well,. This is dependent upon resolution of the six key issues, and I have no concept of what those are. So it's hard to say what that means.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I believe there see us six issues.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and I would argue our business tonight- is to discuss what our own key issues are and so as much as it would be nice to have better transparency,. I also found the same problem of wondering what was being referred to,, but I do think we can proceed without that.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: yeah, I agree,. I just think it would be nice to know in our proceeding.

C

Okay.

C

hal hallstein osbt: well,, barring those bubbling to the surface. Do people agree that key issue, 15 wetland, habitat mitigation for project direct impacts, seems to be the starting point in the term sheet that becomes highly interesting to us.

C

Curt brown, osbt: what page hell., hal hallstein osbt:, that's page, nine of the term sheet or page 89 of the pdf.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I'll be glad to start there., hal hallstein, osbt:, great karen. Do you wanna? You want to start off on this.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: know why don't you start because I I haven't clustered with several other things: okay, I'm not sure where you want to start.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: basically,. You know, as you read into this discussion about permitting and mitigation for the projects. Direct environmental impacts.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know the ceo has made a statement, essentially, that it is the responsibility of the city entirely to secure these wetland permits and mitigate staffs response came back and said, yes, that that that seems to be it comments, noted, and then the final response date october, 5.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah. Basically, I don't have any specific feeling that we have additional business here,, but I wanted to find out if anybody else does.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that's that's the goal.

A

Curt brown, osbt: now sorry, but what's the number of the key issue again 1515 okay, thank you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: to me number.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: pointed out the fact that part of the annexation agreement needs to clearly state.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that see you can mitigate their impacts on the pb lands by doing mitigation by doing and paying for mitigation in the oh, so lens.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: it karen sorry to jump into you, have to pdf print out in front of you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I have the hard copy and it's on the bottom of page number, nine of the term sheet and the top of page 10 of the term sheet.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay,, I just feel like I'm not seeing..

H

I don't know why.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, in the left hand margin on at the bottom of page nine.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I'm looking at page nine, but I'll figure it out,. Thank you. For.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, this is on the microscopic print part of the packet.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: gotcha okay, thank you.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, my essentially my reading of this key issue is that, obviously, we as a board, and also because of regulatory requirements, will need to create new wetlands that are greater extent that those that unfortunately, will be displaced by concrete.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: of course, that that mitigation,, we have decided through previous motions needs to be a budding those threatened species, because we think that's the only likelihood that it could succeed.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: see. You is also saying that it's possible that their own actions on the development part of the land could also require mitigation of their own,, which they they are hoping would be conducted. Also on oh so.,.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think that's interesting and something that's going to have to be resolved related to the boards request related to.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and I guess also comes back karen to your desire to just find them to finally sharpen up the pencil on where the acres are,, how much they are.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, in which one's reasonably can be turned into well and again..

A

Curt brown, osbt: and, as you point out how we don't have any sense of how big that mitigation obligation will be on the part of the university but you're identifying, potentially some competition over the same mitigation. Yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so there's no direct business here, but it's good for this board to be aware. Of.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the other point to be aware of, is that it's likelihood, maybe decades before see you.

D

Curt brown,, osbt:, to. cob, dan burke: put anything out there, that would require mitigation.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so the. cob, dan burke: question would be is in that whole floodplain area,, including the rsl.

D

Cob, dan burke: would there be any anticipated mitigation areas left, let's say: in.

D

Cob, dan burke:, in which to do more onsite, mitigation.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, yeah., curt brown, osbt:. Where would the university want to reserve some part.

F

Dave kuntz, osbt:, oh that's a hell and other concern I have is. This is the first indication that see you seize the open space, other designation as part of their possible development of recreational opportunities or or solar.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: fields, or they listed several potential uses of the oh, so in that kind of continues throughout the term sheet. As far whenever the oh, so issue is raised,, and so I just want to make sure that we earmark that, from my perspective.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, the oh, so area,. It is not suitable for any kind. Of.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: ancillary activity, other than restoration.

D

Cob, dan burke: and the june third 2020 emotion that this body past.

D

Cob, dan burke: basically, stated that and that's been.

D

Cob, dan burke: heavily conveyed to the new.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the guiding principles, state quote no habitable structures or academic buildings will be built on the property within the fema 500 year. Flood plain so that also excludes uses of oh so.

D

Cob, dan burke:, but it is right, that, yes,, but dave is right in terms of their definition of open space and our charter purposes. Definition of open space is different,, and that is a very important nuance to this department.

D

Cob, dan burke: and making that clear in negotiations is is, is one of the things that we are making clear.

D

Dave kuntz,, osbt: yeah thanks carrie, just is a comment to that. I didn't find much comfort in in that assertion because again this solar.

G

Dave kuntz,, osbt: fields, and you know, recreation stuff is kind of always appears,, and so there may not be building structures per se but see you seems to think that there are other activities that are appropriate in in that area.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I agree with that and I'm I'm very concerned about some of the wording. That's used by see you and and think that we ought to make clear what wording is acceptable to us,, as opposed to what's acceptable to see you, because I, in my mind, there are significant differences.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, so I would just respond by saying I think any reference to any other activity for for the oh, so area is not something that we support.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm dan, just as a fact check. Wasn't the os oh and total acreage reduced in the recent boulder valley, comprehensive plan update are already.

D

Yes. cob, dan burke:, I believe, before the guiding principles as john or don you may correct me, but I'm guessing 2016 2017 is when we was under, undertook a more detailed study of of where the.

D

Cob, dan burke: greatest environmental potential light on the property and that's how the 119.

D

Cob, dan burke: got to where it was. It was larger in scope, prior to this folder valley, calm and latest latest edition, yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, that does mean, at least for for those directly negotiating. This feels like a relevant piece of history.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, interesting okay.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: another thing that goes along with what dave and others have just mentioned, is.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on page 1200 number 22, there's language that calls out features and appurtenances they're on, and that requires that says it's subject to the approval of their regions.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I don't think we should allow anything in the annexation agreement to be subject to approval of the regions,. After counsel agrees on an annexation agreement, it's either agreed to or it's not.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, karen, are you taking some some notes on these things? For yourself, that's an interesting point.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I am trying to okay.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and, and karen maybe you could just say a little bit more about what you're looking at and what language is particularly concerning. I think the rest of us are squinting and trying to follow along.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on page 12.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, where it says number 22.,.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it's talking about conveyance of the land inside the levee.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:- and it says it's not just conveyance of the land inside the levee. It's also quote features and apartments. Is there on.

A

Curt brown, osbt:: are you in one of the colored areas or not.

A

Curt brown, osbt: what what date goes with those texts that you're reading.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm going to my micro print,. Let me see if my.

F

eyes.

A

Curt brown, osbt: good luck.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: at some point we're going to start getting things.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: horizontal instead of vertical, so that the typeface can be a little bit longer,, but so I'll ask staff to do that again. Next time, but.

F

Dave kuntz, osbt: didn't have karen,. Can I just jump in? Maybe I can help clarify,? I think.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: you're kind of combining both the staff response in the ceo response.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is see response in the second row says it's subject to at the very end, subject to approval by the region,, so the university.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: of colorado and- and we can't, we can't as a city, have an agreed upon annexation document that then can go back to the regions and say oh,. We don't agree with that,. If the regions have something to say they need to say it before it's an agreed and annexation. Agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, just like we have to say something before.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it's an anti taxation agreement at the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: last line of the next item,, which is staffs response february 2.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it says, include features in material there on eg the existing see you levy as real pop property appurtenances. So it's not only conveyance of the uso land,, but it also includes the features and material there. On.

A

Curt brown, osbt: the left and that's it. I think they call that out in several places,, partly because.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. They want us to pay for the lead. The material.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, that's correct, right.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so I think that's a very interesting point. Karen, I feel like that's not maybe directly something this board would take action on,, but I think very helpful observation for everybody. Who's following this project.

B

Hal hallstein osbt:, I perhaps around. Perhaps you visualize, something that would make sense for us.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: well,. I think this brings up our where the levy is. The status of the levy is concerned,, because if it's an important part of any mitigation, a restoration effort than its status is definitely material to the decision.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well,, I guess, with that. Why don't we turn our attention to item 16 we're at.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that's the natural segue.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: for some time, this this topic has been of interest to me personally,, and I think one thing that feels very relevant to me on this is that there's two actually two pieces of it that are important history and so give me a moment to to to offer a brief retrospective.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, there were two important moments were see. You made active decisions.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, that that were somewhat not environment and and those included during the original acquisition of the property.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the approved approved the acquisition was approved, by.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the cca g, the colorado.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is a commission of higher education., hal hallstein osbt:, and it was required in that approval that he is.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, an environmental impact study under nepa would be conducted. That study was never conducted and it's unfortunate because that study.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, when this burn was reinforced, there is significant, significant long term ecosystem, valued lost.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and the study that would have described what was lost was was not conducted, and yet here we are faced. With.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yes,. We are going to have impacts on five new acres related to this damn construction, but we're also going to be doing a very large amount of new wetland creation and mitigation to try and regain.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the environmental value- that's there, and it just strikes me as difficult that the moment when the ecosystem value was lost, didn't have a study.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and yet it's likely that the city will be saddled with pretty significant expense of doing a study to explain how we're going to try and put that ecosystem value. Back.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so that's that's one,. I think, very important thing to consider about how costs over the history of this decision. Making.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, where we're sort of out that laid out the other piece that feels very important to me is that city council, boulder city council on multiple occasions.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: advise the university against reinforcing and adding permanence to the levy itself on both the basis of environmental reasons, and because they predicted, it could interfere with future flood mitigation.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: now see you,, despite the advice of the city. Just you know proceeded with a significant reinforcement, which led to a lot of the dryness and d watering that will now have to be considered for mitigation,, etc.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so I guess from my standpoint, I find it surprising their posturing on the costs related to this.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, because for me it's a somewhat cut and dry clean up your own mess. Problem, combined with the fact of you are advised not to do it all along the way we said,. This is going to interfere with these projects. Lo and behold, it is.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: and now,, there is a desire to not be accountable for that decision. Making,. If there is one point here, where I thought we had a business in the annexation, this would be the one that feels that way to me. What are other people's thoughts.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, and how is one of your concerns is that, because of their previous actions,, the project is going to be a lot more expensive and there's a potential that cost may be pushed on to all smp. That might be more expensive. Is that sort of your the way you're connecting it to our interests.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well,, at least on to the city.

A

Curt brown, osbt: well, ultimately,. I could be us potentially but yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: um yeah, I mean it's my understanding, any yeah yes, would be a project costs and it's all project costs,, but this is,. This is the difficult part, kurt that comes back to the rub of the referendum and our duties to the charter.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, we kind of matters, how we perceive it and how council perceive it,, but ultimately it's really important how the citizens proceed.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know what I mean because they.

C

hal hallstein osbt: do require charter,. They are the final principle here so anyway,. I understand that convoluted. I get why people think that these things should be kept separate,. I just feel like that belief is unrealistic, compared to what I hear so consistently for members.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: yeah. I agree how, and I think that's why in you know I asked staff or if there was an estimate for the berm removal or burn you know, status.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: because I do think it's a it's an important cause. That's going to have to be under written by some entity and especially as it relates to potential mitigation of environmental impacts and so.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: for me, the other thing is,, whether in fact, cu was in violation of the land reclamation permit that flat irons, gravel had initially. As far as the berm was concerned, and.

G

Dave kuntz,, osbt: and so, all of that kind of conspires to put the responsibility for taking care of the berm not on the city,. But on on to see you.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. That's an interesting point because had that original plan been followed, there'd be five bodies of water out there, presently.

C

Right.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so is there an agreement on the board that the responsibility to take care of the berm we see us.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. If, if I was going to make a statement from the board,, I think it would be a concern and house,. I think, lay this out pretty well that.

A

Curt brown, osbt: actions, the university is taken.

A

Curt brown, osbt: are going to have an effect on the total project cost which,, because we always have limited resources, may reduce resources available for mitigation and potentially might even impose cost on smp. That would not have been imposed if those actions had taken.

A

Curt brown, osbt: again I'm just trying to stay at in terms of our interest, rather than saying. We think the city shouldn't agree to this, and this.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, if they're not very specific to our interest. So that's all I'm trying to do.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I also wonder kurt without telling anyone what they should do. We could just comment that perceptions of ecosystem cost transference have the possibility to derail.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, this plan.

A

Curt brown, osbt: yeah. curt, brown, osbt:. That's that's a pretty good. Let's just leave it there.

A

curt, brown, osbt:, yeah yeah. I like that approach. Well.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: anyway,, it's an idea.

E

John potter, cob: health. I could just.

E

John potter, cob: do the way staff have been looking at. The levy is as an asset,, not a liability, and that's why we've made the case that it should be treated as in a pertinent to the land.

E

John potter, cob:, we don't, we haven't as dave mentioned,. We have not done the mitigation planning yet so we don't know how that phil might come into play there,, but the truck in.

E

John potter, cob: substantial material to do the restoration could be an additional cost. If you were to remove that berm head of the project.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: have you guys been able to do any sort of measuring to know if that burn could be used it,? How much? How much could be used.

E

John potter, cob:. We suspect that a good portion of it could be used,, caroline yeah,, but we have not done any geophysical assessments of it.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay,, because I thought that as well, I mean it's, it's there and there's also a whole,, and that would require less trucks,. But you know I don't have any background to know what that truly would work where you guys are saying that that that would work.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, so what I found very interesting, john in the in the term material is that see you asserts that it should be the recipient of the material if the berm is in fact removed,. So I think you know there's.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: certainly, a. dave, kuntz,, osbt:, co, shading situation there and I.

G

Curt brown,, osbt: think the. dave, kuntz, osbt: board certainly doesn't necessarily think that that's suitable use of the berm material unless it's determined it's a suitable use.

E

John potter, cob: yeah and that's that's- that was sort of our take of your prior direction,, which was to acquire the with everything on it and use that to our best..

E

John potter, cob: our best possibility for mitigation.

E

John potter, cob:, so not not letting see you remove the material ahead of the annexation or,. You know as part of the agreement, so that I think we're on the same page with that,, but I'm not 100%..

C

Hal hallstein osbt: john, is in the 30% moment. Will there be significant clarity about what's going on with that feature.

E

John potter, cob: yeah,, we will have.

E

john potter, cob: at the 30% design,. We should have a good sense of what the mitigation will look like at that point,. How and we'll know whether we'll we'll need all or some of that material.

E

John potter, cob:, for whatever we would be able to get done under the project.

D

Cob, dan burke: another opportunity to have a more discussion on this would be in the june timeframe in which we're going to be talking more specifically about environmental mitigation. Is.

D

Cob, dan burke: don would probably have more of an opportunity to look a little bit more specifically,, and so that could be another opportunity for us to talk and spit more specifics about it.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but then extension agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: will be negotiated by that time.

D

Cob, dan burke: correct, so if we've got it wrong, that.

D

Cob, dan burke:, how we're proceeding with negotiation is the 119 and the end. The berm as part of the.

D

Cob, dan burke: comes over and be and gets conveyed to the city and so,. If we've got that wrong, yes, knowing about that now would be super helpful, but we're assuming sense that we do believe that the berm is going to be an important.

D

Cob, dan burke: aspect of restoration that it's beneficial for the berm to remain as part of the land.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, will you paint that picture? I think that's. What's confusing people nolan's painted any picture of how this rip rat burn is going to become part of a beautiful weapon.

E

John potter, cob: to., karen hollweg, osbt: hell and as you're.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: doing that. Can you out by talking about elevations.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and different sins surface height, typography.

E

John potter, cob:, so as dan mentioned this,, this was the.

E

John potter, cob: type of. john potter, cob: concept that we wanted to bring forward to the board in june, when we have a little bit more sense of how we're going to do. That.

E

John potter, cob: right now,, you know even to have the you know, it's really going to be more than 30% design when we're going to know exactly what what.

E

John potter, cob: earthmoving is going to be helpful for wetlands creation and general restoration throughout the oh, so but,, but essentially,. We need to make sure that.

E

John potter, cob: that the hydrology works there, and so,. In order to do that, it may mean raising up the elevations in some areas and taking it down and others.

A

Curt brown, osbt: karen I mentioned, there's also some more study to be done on what the characters the characteristics are of the berm.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think some of the material may be quite useful for the embankment damn, whereas other parts that may be more useful to us than that sorting needs to be based on a lot of the core sampling and things like that, which I don't think have been done. Yet.

E

John potter, cob: no and that's a good point, kurt there,. There could well be very important uses of that. Some of that burn material for the project. Itself,, not the mitigation.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: or it may ask you a question,: do you know from your experience, if.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, you know,, we just put a notice up this city and said,. Whoever wants to burn can can can take it, who who would know how much the the elements within the berm could be value that you know who would be good to just decide. That.

E

John potter, cob: well.

E

john potter,, cob: yeah, I mean well, first of all,. The thing that we're trying to avoid caroline is: is the city having to go out.

E

John potter, cob: and purchase material and truck it to the site,. So if there is a resin reservoir of material on site that we can use to reduce the cost of the overall project.

E

John potter, cob:, that's that's what we want to do. First of all, then,, I suppose,. If there was some of that leftover than the city could surplus, it put it out to bid and.

E

John potter, cob: and determine a the highest bid for the remaining material that wasn't necessary,, but that would depend a lot on the buyers distance. It's it's all in the it's all in the trucking. The cost of material is all in the trucking.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah, I just wasn't sure within the various layers of it and the different like sampling. That would need to be done,. How much of it would actually be useful versus some expert,. That would be able to say half of it when it be appropriate for what we were thinking.

E

John potter, cob: yeah and that's that's really what will be determined through the preliminary design, and we should. We should know better around the 30% towards the end of the year.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay,, so you feel like that.

H

john potter, cob: will be in the 30%. Most likely I'd have to confirm that, with the project. Manager, but.

E

Cob, dan burke: john I've got that question down as well. Go back and get some clarification. On.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, well, and and the problem that I see.

F

curt, brown, osbt: with everything that's been. karen hollweg, osbt: said just now- is that that's too late.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and some kind of of a.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: of wording will have been agreed to with see you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: months before that.

E

John potter, cob:, I'm not following hot, why it would be too late. Karen.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, because council is has a second reading on annexation agreement on august 24.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the 30% design is only.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: going to be finished in october and brought me public in november so.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm all there,, although all the micro wording.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: establishes who's going to pay who.

F

Caroline miller, osbt: the., karen hollweg, osbt: kit, will be. approved august 24.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and caroline miller, osbt: can that shift.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: once it's that the 30% portion, that is a contract, if you will, or once that, is put out there, as now we're at a point to read,. I thought that the 30%, without a point to review.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and it could possibly I mean. Obviously you would kind of wanted to stay, what it was,, but it could ship left or right. You understand that to be different.

D

Cob, dan burke:, because the 30% design for the flood mitigation project and then there's the annexation agreement, so.

D

Karen hollweg, osbt:, we will see they're not totally separate.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: their commitments about the cereal and what happens to it.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: oh. cob, dan burke: phase for it or document yeah. so.

D

Cob, dan burke: the question the question regarding the annexation in the materials is,. If we want see you to take the materials off site, as part of annexation, that is a reversal of what we are currently understanding our negotiation position, so for us to flip flop, that we would have to come to to.

D

Cob, dan burke: complete one- is this materials, no good for restoration and to it's no good for the project design, flood mitigation project as well.

D

Cob, dan burke:, if, if we add up a plus b, that would equal boy, this berms a liability, I think that's the concern I'm hearing from the trustees is that if it can't be used.

D

Cob, dan burke: for restoration,, or if it's not going to be used for the project,, then we're setting with a liability for the expensive needing to get rid of it. Is that what I'm hearing.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah, I mean I again,. I think it goes back to our in person tours of the property when a beautiful picture was created about how the this acreage was going to be reward and ultimately returned to wetland habitat that pebbles and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: you,, ladies trust, could eventually rehab it and that that that vision included the thing gone.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, it didn't include where it was going to be,, nor was there case made that rap rap that was brought in from some external source would be used to recreate a natural environment,. So I guess, there is just a little natural confusion seems like you. Guys are further ahead than the warden.

D

Cob, dan burke: well,, I think we're done done- was communicating to you as part of that.

D

Cob, dan burke: is as part of that mitigation. It actually requires you know, filling things. Up.

D

Cob, dan burke:, because it actually does console too much water for the type of environment, we're looking to create out there and so.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so far,, it's been a very reactive situation, where, if there's phil material available, we'll take it in order to help.

D

Cob, dan burke: raise some of those wetland levels to have more more seasonal pounding than lakes,. If you will,, and so we we do view the opportunity to have.

D

Cob, dan burke: material right there is another opportunity to create those those water bodies were looking for don. I see your microphones off, I don't know if you want to chime in at this point, but.

I

Don d'amico:, I yeah just real briefly.

I

Don d'amico: quickly, you don't know final grades, have a mitigation site until.

I

Don d'amico:, you know 50 60% design, because after that presumably you've done a fair amount of groundwater monitoring,. So you know.

I

Don d'amico: generally,, the elevations you want to establish that will create those wetland conditions. So after that you'll know whether you need to import, fill or you'll need to fulfill, but like dan said, you know,, there are some open bodies of water out there. That.

I

Don d'amico: could accept some bill to create more medical conditions,, rather than kind of abandoned, gravel pits. But, again,, I think the important thing to keep in mind is that.

I

Don d'amico:, whether we need the film material from the levee for the final mitigation to be successful, won't be determined until the mitigation plan is fairly well developed,. But, having said that, you know, phil is, is pretty valuable.

I

Don d'amico: and so,, whether we needed for the mitigation or whether utilities eats its for the property of the flood, project.

I

Don d'amico:, you know that's determined, and then you know I think, like yeah carolyn was asking about the you know what the material is, what the levees it actually composed of. Obviously we know that there's.

I

Don d'amico: a rap rap on the face,, which isn't you know,, a negative thing. You can,, if you need to raise the elevation.

I

Don d'amico: of an area to meet some mitigation requirements.

I

Don d'amico: that can be accomplished by using you know.

I

Don d'amico: rap rap like exists on the on the face of the levee, but you know: what's what's what the levees, composed of what type of mirror material was used to build that can be determined just with geotechnical analysis doing some borings and I believe that some borings we're done at the berm.

I

Don d'amico:, when the initial initial geo tech project was done by rj ah,, so there might be some there,, but it would require a lot of supplemental information to determine,. You know just exactly what that levy material, consistent.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah. I think it would be a good time to do some type of soil sampling and really understanding, like the chemistry within the soil and if it is going to grow things, or if it won't, and I would assume that that wouldn't be that wouldn't be that difficult.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: like if you were boring down and taking dirt from each level that we could then sample each level and ensure that you know nitrogen existed.

I

Don d'amico: yeah and that's a pretty standard process,, not necessarily the chemical makeup of the soil,, its ph and you know, nutrient.

I

Don d'amico: components,, but certainly the you know the the size of material, whether it's kind of sandy silty clay, all the different kind of mineral components. That's a pretty standard process to determine that just with general.

I

Don d'amico: boring of the material and having an engineer law,, you know, love the boring, and he or she could say you know zero to 30 inches. Is this material 30 to 90 inches? Is this material and you do that enough across the surface, and you have a pretty good idea what's under there, yeah.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: I mean I wouldn't expect it to come back, as you know, high value. I wouldn't call it soil,, but you know I don't expect that, but to know what it could, if we needed it to offset the environmental impacts. Of.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: things being brought in from other places, and the dump trucks, and things like that. You know.

I

Don d'amico:, I think, john mentioned,, you know trucking is a big cost,, so the farther you move it obviously the more costs, and you know moving it around on site,. You can do with.

I

Don d'amico: earth moving equipment,, but once you start importing or exporting it off site or onto the site,, you know that's what you have to take the material put it in trucks or somewhere dump it move it and it gets pretty expensive.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: right,, but if it if it had no value to us,, then of course there's going to be our financial problem as well.

H

Exactly.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, so how I. dave kuntz, osbt: how I want, I just want to make sure we don't lose sight of what I think is the real key issue.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: here, that is, the cost of mitigation and who actually underwrites that, and my concern is that in the in the briefing book materials,, it looks like the city is accepting the entire cost.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: of mitigation of the project impacts, and I'm going back to what you initially said is that if actions were taken by cpu that in fact make the mitigation costs higher for the city,, then in fact.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, it's my belief that see you ought to underwrite correcting those costs that they for the impacts that they caused,, and so I I'm okay, with all of the discussion of the berm status. But I'm very concerned that the overall mitigation class aren't really appreciated. By.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, either the the proponent project proponents or the public,, and they are going to be substantial,, and if the city agrees to underwrite all of them,, I think that will be an extremely high cost.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: okay,, I think,, having heard all that, what seems really clear is that for both the staff and this board.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, we have progress,. We need to make clarifying how this stuff does not represent ecosystem transference and to convince the public that that has all been thought. Through.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, because the perception is out there, right now, that there is a there, is a transference of ecosystem costs.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt:, and essentially the berm, is a tool by which see you tried to extend its development potential on this property in the city would now be coming.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: to clean, clean that up how that occurs. I don't know it's very complex project, but I'm glad we got to talk about what those perceptions are and how we're going to have to make a good case about the fact that this this actually does benefit us.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, should we talk next? Perhaps the the other thing that's really struck me as important here is discussion of water rights.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so in my reading of the current status of that situation, is that understandably see you, is doing research about the value of the water rights. We know it's impossible to create wetland without reintroducing water and basically.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I mean, I guess,. We can start with just asking you john or dan.

C

Curt brown, osbt: you. hal hallstein osbt:. Do we have a very clear view of exactly how much water is going to be needed and basically saying it's a deal breaker not to have the water to submit again.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, I think I think, you're right,. It is a it's a deal breaker not to have the water again looking at that as kind of an pertinence to the land,, because it's important not only to do the restoration.

E

John potter, cob:, but also to to be able to manage the property on into the future, so.

E

John potter, cob: that the request that we've been the staff has been making is to have the water rights associated with a property transfer with 119 acres, and that was our sort of our understanding of what the board had instructed us to be. Asking for.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: okay,, so it just feels style but,, but you feel strong that our needs are being communicated with the gravitas require.

C

Cob, dan burke: yep.

D

Cob, dan burke: yes,, sir quite.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, quite often., curt brown, osbt:. Do we have any sense of what the university is doing with those water rights, right now,? Are they leasing them to other people,, and if we, if we acquired all of them? Where would that water not go? Do we have a sense of that.

E

John potter, cob: yeah- this is difficult stuff to talk about but.

A

Curt brown, osbt: well,, if you can't that's okay, I just I was just curious.

E

John potter, cob: so.

E

john potter, cob:. I understand that see. You, has done some irrigation on the property.

E

John potter, cob:, whether they've drawn all of their.

E

John potter, cob: their use all the time. I don't know that.

E

John potter, cob: but. john potter, cob:. We know there are approximately 30 shares of dry creek, ditch number two associated with the.

E

John potter, cob: way the property and all of the hundred and 19 acres is within the service area of that ditch and.

E

John potter, cob: that that,, hence our interest and and that all that water, all that water right could be used on the 119 or in other areas that that ditch services, okay.

E

Curt brown, osbt: thanks sean.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and can it be used on.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: for instance,, the p ub area.

E

John potter, cob: some, I believe I believe all there may be a small amount of the pb. That's not in the ditch service area, because it's it just. You can't get the water there,, but I believe some of the p o b is in the ditch service area. Yep.

E

John potter, cob: and they and they and that hands, they do have an interest potentially for irrigation of recreation fields or other things,. To use that but.

B

Yeah.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay.

B

Curt brown, osbt: and how this is number 24 key issue: right.

A

Curt brown, osbt: this in case you're, trying to follow.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it's page 13 number 20, yes for two okay.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, page 12 and 13 yeah.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and I'm sorry, john, I know it,, you said it was uncomfortable,, but I just want to make sure that I either did or didn't hear you right.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, were you saying that there, because they own it, so we don't know that there is a possibility that that they have used up their water. Is that what I heard you say? Or did I not hear that right.

E

John potter, cob: yeah we. john potter, cob: caroline, we just were not sure what the use bye see you have. Those water rights has been over time and that could get into questions of.

E

John potter, cob: of the validity of the rights, so we're not aware of what their history has been.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay,, so that is not like public information. That.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I see it does know, caroline, that the university has a consultant reviewing those rights.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay,. I read that as well, I just I'm will check thank you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I. karen hollweg, osbt: think what you said: john. karen hollweg, osbt: is that to., karen hollweg, osbt: mitigate and manage the.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: acres. All 30 shares would be needed. Is that correct.

E

John potter, cob:. No, that wasn't exactly what I meant.

E

John potter, cob:- I I believe we could. We could use all of those 30 shares on the service area for the ditch,, which includes the.

E

John potter, cob:, as well as other properties, that we own.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: off site.

E

John potter, cob:, potentially we will want to do this restoration looking at all of our jason property and how the water is managed throughout the area really running from the fancher property,. All the way up, to.

E

John potter, cob: van vliet, north so.

E

John potter, cob: and don might have.

E

karen hollweg, osbt: an other perspective perspectives on that as well,, but you're not saying past south boulder road.

E

John potter, cob:, I don't know.

I

Don d'amico:, I believe in the service area and said about south hold the road.

E

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay, john one other thing that I would be interested to know as you're working on the.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the conveyance of groundwater,, whether or not this discussion of water rights either enhance, enhances the possibility of that working or not so I'll. Just be interesting to know when you get to presenting that. If this is two distinct issues are actually.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, together.

E

John potter, cob:, okay, yeah yeah and basically the wetlands that we have in the state natural area are all driven by irrigation. Now so.

I

Don d'amico:, I think that that's really important,, I think, having that water opens up the possibilities and the the options for doing different types of mitigation,. As you know.

I

Don d'amico:, the the weapons and the spire and these habitat and the tall grass they're all they're, all supported by a combination of groundwater and surface irrigation,. So if we're expecting to replicate or restore those types of habitats on the lso.

I

Don d'amico: irrigation water would be key to having successful mitigation.

B

Hal hallstein osbt:, so so.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, just digging into that deeper. Are there upstream risks on these water rights that could undermine the success of mitigating for these endangered species.

I

Don d'amico:, a stream risks of.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, like like this, like, for example, the seniority of this right,, is it possible that our work to mitigate for these threatened species could be ended or or undermined by an unknown party that is not being discussed.

I

Don d'amico: well,, the the priority of the water rights, wouldn't change. Necessarily, we wouldn't my my knowledge of water laws, about.

I

Don d'amico:, I don't think we would have to go to water court for any type of change. Case.

I

Don d'amico: or any you know any adjudication because we're changing, we wouldn't be changing the service area and we wouldn't be changing the the use, necessarily,. It would still be agricultural use, so.

I

Don d'amico:, we wouldn't fall out of priority, we wouldn't we wouldn't be. We wouldn't have a junior water right as a result, of.

I

Don d'amico:, taking ownership from see you and then using the water on site, or in the service area to medicate for the environmental impact.

C

Okay. hal hallstein osbt:, unless I see buddy else,, maybe we'll just leave it at an understanding that there can be no mitigation of these threatened species, without water.

I

Hal hallstein osbt: and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, another topic, here.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: that caught my eye is the discussion of lands outside the levee and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm curious. You know,, within the context of what we call high hazard zone to those lands, have any real economic value to any developer.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, can you tell us where you are in the term sheet.

F

hal hallstein osbt: on the number of forgive me.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. This is about south and east of the levee point. Number.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:: well, it's easy to get lost in this document.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, that's the point.

C

Curt brown, osbt: 2121.

E

John potter, cob: hell,, are you talking about the area outside the levee? That's in the hundred year, flood plain.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah that the pre existing wetland you know that's hard to differentiate from existing actual acquired, open space out there.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, so you're asking the value of that to.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: it basically, in short, to be direct. It's presented is like this amazing gift over and over again in the term sheet, and my point is: isn't it a high hazard flood way that has no value to any developer and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, perhaps isn't as an amazing invaluable as a gift as its referred to so consistently it won't it won't. It basically remain wetland,, no matter what.

E

John potter, cob: yeah.

E

john potter, cob: yes,, it will, I mean ideally, would be part of our comprehensive flood flood plain restoration project and suck so some of those wetlands there I'm sure don will want to.

E

John potter, cob: look at whether we can enhance them, so they may actually be slight liability. How? Because it will take some restoration,, but we kind of know that that about the whole so property, it's it's all going to take some work.

E

John potter, cob:, but yeah that,, so I would not say that.

E

John potter, cob:, you know that is extremely valuable, area, either from.

E

John potter, cob:, you know,, certainly not from a development standpoint and it's it's in a great landscape position for future restoration and future.

E

John potter, cob: beneficial benefits to conservation,, but right now it's going to take some work.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and some of that land have existing you, ladies trust and pebbles in it. Now.

E

John potter, cob:, some of the oh, so does have you, ladies tresses, on it.

E

John potter, cob: is our understanding the been told it with respect to pebbles. I am not aware of any trapping to confirm any pebbles on the 119.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I guess my point and asking the question is just just this: is there any ongoing requirement of private landowners that requires investment for them.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: to to manage or steward lands that has that kind of character. Is it is, it? Is it beneficial to see you to have osm p doing that meeting,, whatever regulatory requirements might exist.

E

John potter, cob: no,, I don't, I don't think so.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah, if you own it, it's kind of you can't harm it, but you're not required to report on it or great..

A

Curt brown, osbt:, but hell,. I think your point,, if I understand, is that.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, whoever does the appraisal on that property outside of the levy shouldn't be coming back with a really high number, because it's within the hundred year flood plain it can't be developed.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so that should be bounding. What the appraised value is, I would think is that is that sort of where you're going.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, yeah yeah and then combined with john's point that, in order for it to reach its highest potential for us, it may actually take additional cash investment.

A

Right.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay., hal, hallstein, osbt:, um., hal, hallstein osbt:. I you know those are the ones that I sort of highlighted that seemed to have. You know nexus to the open space department, did I miss anything, is there.

F

Hal hallstein osbt:, any other. karen hollweg, osbt:, I have,. I have a bunch of others. Okay.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, all right, karen lead us away.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I'm.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: on page the briefing book page, 32 and 36.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, when they talk about view shed.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, they make a big deal. About.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the trees will.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: make it not possible to see buildings.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: or.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, or what else.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: 32.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so this is this, is prior to the term sheet. Is that what you're saying.

A

Karen hollweg, osbt: yes,, where the pictures are I and I'll go to the term sheet in a minute,, because there are two sets of term sheet.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: items related to this,, but I want you to for context. I want you to see the pictures.

A

Curt brown, osbt:- this is on page 36 or the briefing book.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: 32 right at the bottom of the page. It says looking east, but it's really looking west.

A

Yes.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: there's several major errors, where they say east and they really mean west because they don't.

A

Curt brown, osbt: yet.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: know what direction they're looking.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, but it says, proposed elevated access, road future, south loop drive and you can see the the ramp which represents the road there and then on page 36..

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: at the top of the page.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, you can see the height ceiling for buildings.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and then the arrow on the right side says see you south. Behind the trees.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: okay,, so I'm talking about both the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, elevated access, road and the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: height of the structures, themselves.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: my question is,, I I believe just based on the trees that are in the square cat tail ponds at the south.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I believe that at least some.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, perhaps a majority of those trees, are crack willow.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and if we were going to do, restoration on that site.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, we might get into some heavy elimination of crack willow.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, and so I think we need language in the annexation agreement that says see. You must landscape to screen the elevated road and the buildings and therefore preserve the view shed to the west, from the south, boulder creek trail.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, why repeat: that, for the public again just good to hear that one twice.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I would propose that we., karen hollweg, osbt: asked for language to be added to the annexation. Agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, that requires see you to landscape.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, both the elevated road.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the buildings.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that those parts of the site in a way that will preserve the views, view shed.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: from south boulder creek trail to the west.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, because if we start taking out crack willow.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: there's not going to be what is shown on these photographs on page 32 and 36, there's going to be the view shed to the west, with the flat irons and a lovely, elevated road that traffic is going back and forth and buildings that see you has built.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, unless they're required., karen hollweg, osbt: to landscape, the site in a way that screens those built elements.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so that when one is standing or hiking on the south, boulder creek trail.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, you see.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: trees like native trees,. I would require cotton woods, for instance, that would normally grow in that kind of area, from the open space users.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and, and to be clear karen, the trees that you're referring to in this picture are probably right along dry, creek dish, number two and the levee, not not the south boulder creek, where we've been removing crack willow pretty actively. But you think.

A

Curt brown, osbt: a lot of the. If you look at.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, if you look at the trees that are that are growing in the square cat tail ponds, their crack willow based on.

F

Curt brown, osbt: that side on the rough side summer, russian all.

F

yeah.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, and I think, if we're you know, if we're in the process of doing a restoration to reconnect habitat, we're not going to leave a bunch of rushing out all ivan crack. Willow are we.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well,. That strikes me as a really interesting port kurt. I mean for our march meeting, that is, that is business in the annexation and is new information do,. How do we leave this appropriately.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well,, I think we're going to come out of this meeting with a list of items that were concerned. About.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and that's in my mind, one of them.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so karen just to follow your thought there. I think what you're suggesting is that, ideally,. If the university develops the area above the 500 year, flood plain that they would.

A

Curt brown, osbt: landscape, the area to the east of those buildings to screen them as much as possible,. So that's sort of what you're thinking.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, that's right.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it would still be you know above the hundred year, flood playing,, because that would be in to do so, but.

A

Curt brown, osbt: to screen those buildings.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and to screen and to screen the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, elevated road., karen hollweg, osbt:, because part of the value of open space is good. It's a natural area.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: right,, not an not a human built area.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, the elevated road is on the existing. What is it public? It's obviously way outside of the oh, so but you're concerned that.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, neither of these areas are oh, so there are areas where there will be built structures that will be visible from the south, boulder creek trail and therefore impact the smp state. Natural area.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know, I think karen same kurt- is that the that the view shed that's being touted in the briefing report is actually.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: will be in the restoration area and will presumably disappear or be eliminated as part of that restoration,. So you can't really assign a value to review shed that will no longer be there,. Correct.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, and so that takes me to term sheet page 16.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: get out your magnifying glasses.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: page 16 issue 32,, which is all about view sheds.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and if you read that first.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: row under the word view sheds you can see what I'm talking about.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and I'm sorry,. Do you have the number of the issue also.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: 32 key issues, 32.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. Thank you very much..

A

Curt brown, osbt: got a few sheds.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: read the first row under the word view sheds right.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: in my opinion, that needs to be revised.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm having trouble states specifically what you're saying sorry here.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, you want some suggested language., hal, hallstein, osbt: or or just I'm actually just having trouble understanding. What you're pointing.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm looking at section 32.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, are you talking about the city's policies or council direction or see you statement,? The staff response.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well, near the bottom of that of the item, 32 key issue, 32.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:: it's it talks about that that see. You agrees to the ceiling concept of buildings, no higher than blah blah blah.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but that's not going to solve the problem,. The view shed, is destroyed. If.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: in the restoration process, we remove crack willows and russian olives.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, and so there needs to be compensation. From.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on the see you site to screen those built structures from the view that you get from the south boulder creek trail.

F

Karen hollweg,, osbt: and otherwise,, otherwise the value love of the view shed from the open space mountain park, state natural area, trail.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is decreased.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and so, at a at a minimum karen, I think you're saying.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, the analysis of the view shed and the impacts on the blue shirt is based on screening by trees that may be invasive and may need to be removed and without those trees. There.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, what they're saying here about it won't be visible, may no longer be the case.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, correct okay.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: yeah, the language here,, it seems to be more building height, related, and I think that.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the topic is view shed right.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. What we're trying to introduce is the fact that there are some natural.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: issues associated with you shed says,, as well as the height of buildings.,.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah, I think when we're discussing it, they say,. You know this is under our guiding principles and they talk about different approaches,, but if.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, everyone working on the annexation could agree to the goal of an ecosystem based approach to manage those natural resources and maintain the biological diversity.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, it you know, recognizes the value of protecting an array of those biological communities within the larger landscape context,. So, if if, in the guiding principles for those specific points, if everyone.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: anyone is listening and they like the the idea of an ecosystem based approach that might drive consensus.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah,, but this is strictly about protecting views and contributing positively to the character of the city's gateway. It's specifically about viewership, it's not ecological functions or biological communities. It's just about view. Should.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I still I would still argue that that would be an ecosystem based approach.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: to managing this type of thing I mean you could argue that either way,, but I I was trying to suggest, something that.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: might perhaps lead to consensus.

H

karen hollweg, osbt: yeah it's,, not that I disagree with you. It's that, it's that the point in the term sheet, has to do with the oceans.

A

Curt brown, osbt: because they say here,- and this is the see his statement on february 2.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it says preliminary view shattered analysis,. The mountain backdrop demonstrates the buildings up to 110. Feet will not impede the views of the mountain backdrop.

A

Curt brown, osbt: etc, etc,, and I think what we're doing is we're just suggesting that that analysis may be based on an assumption that all the trees that are there today will stay there,. Even if we go through restoration of the levee area.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well,. This sounds like a really important note and really good analysis. Karen.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:: that's it takes a community member with really excellent, detailed observation skills that will have a big impact and it's between the lines.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah., karen hollweg, osbt: you'll, I mean once we get the restoration done.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I haven't gone out there and mapped every tree,, but my assumption is once the restoration is done. Everybody from the turnpike to the south, boulder creek trail will be able to see the mass of see you south buildings.

A

Curt brown, osbt: interesting point: yeah, we'll find.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: see you amenable to that. I've been kind of waiting.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah, there are a lot of a lot of things that see is not going to be amenable to that's clear. By reading the term sheet.

F

Hal hallstein osbt: but,, but I guess on this particular point, and I some you know related to the history that sometimes is is seems relevant to the community. At least I've been waiting for a moment to recount an important piece of history,, which was when n car originally developed at their location.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: seems natural area committee was leading the charge that ultimately resulted in car. Only developing 10% out of 500 acres in that location on the hill.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and that was very related to their desire to maintain a viewership to the mountains, impacting other people's projects.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, putting forward their environmental knowledge, convincing the national science foundation,, as well as the director of anchor walter roberts, that the right approach was to preserve 90%.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: of that parcel, and it was interesting too because, ultimately, a waiver in the blue line not too dissimilar to the possibility of referendum on this project.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: was required to do that in boulder. I saw that it was a good deal and they voted 79 to 21 to approve that resolution.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and I think, there's a lot, I mean I know that's high level, but there's a lot in there, because it suggests boulder. I do know what a good deal looks like for the environment.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and,, more importantly,, see you knows what a good environmental solution is on other people's projects.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, which kind of ties your point to caroline's, which is my. I still have a secret hope that at some point during the actual annexation discussion, see, will bring some of their own environmental knowledge and skills to the table,. So this feels less adversarial and more partnership. Based.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: anyway, off my high horse, there.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:. Now that's a that's a good point,. I think that those high levels of discussion.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: are the way to drive consensus,, because when you get down to these, these point frames. That's where you know things get stuck.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, but if we can look at the larger context of what we're doing,, I think that that is a better means of moving forward.

B

Curt brown, osbt:, interesting history.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: karen,, you said you had to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, let me go on,. Let me go on as long as we're on page 16 of the term sheet lighting,, as mentioned several times.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: there's a clear statement from the city staff.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: in at the bottom of the box that stated february 2.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: about outdoor lighting.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and karen hollweg, osbt:, I believe outdoor lighting is another one of those things that could.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: affect the osm p state natural area land in a significant way and would advocate for including the wording about outdoor lighting, in.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the annexation agreement.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I see that see his responses that do shades will be negotiated after the six key issues have been resolved.

F

Right.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: we're not too worried about this. Let's move on.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I think it's like, I think it's an important value of rcmp state natural area, lands.

A

Curt brown, osbt: well,. I think you make a good point that today,, if you were out there and the dusk there, wouldn't be a lot of light. Coming from that area.

A

Curt brown, osbt: in so that's the present condition.

A

To good point.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and there are out there- are city outdoor lighting standards and there's also a black light. Code.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I think all those things need to be built into the annexation agreement so that we don't end up with a.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: chunk of state natural area, that's well lighted.,.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I think this is all going to be really helpful to be on the table and talked about early as they as they decide. What this agreement looks like well or does not look like.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, um my next chunk of comments have to do with what are called the rec fields.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and they're, either 30 acres worth or 18 acres worth, depending on whether you look at the term sheet on page 257 or nine..

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, um because they're mentioned repeatedly the rec fields, and there are several issues about the rec fields that I'd like to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: see if the board is concerned, about.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, which key issue, do you want us to start at.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, let's try page two.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: of the term sheet.

A

Curt brown, osbt:- I also am noticing it.

A

Curt brown,, osbt:, ah., curt, brown,, osbt: restoration and other uses allowed no so.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yes, and page 18 number 37, okay, well.

A

Curt brown, osbt: you've learned this just start with number one but key issue. Number.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on page two at the bottom of the page, it says the 30 acres to be used for recreation, fields.

A

Karen hollweg, osbt: okay, and.

F

Curt brown, osbt:: this is under initial zoning., karen hollweg, osbt: yeah and I'm not so concerned about the zoning. I'm just concerned about how many acres we're talking about.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah, I'm on page number, five.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: under the february 2 statement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: again it's subject to region approval. I don't know how we can have region approval if things are nailed down in an annexation, agreement.

A

Curt brown, osbt: my cast, and I'm not an expert on this- is that this the university of won't bring to a final discussion.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and anything that has not been reviewed by the region,. So I mean both the city's going to have to have all its reviews and the university will have to have all the bits reviews,, because otherwise you're right, the region's could undercut a final.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah and I somewhere somebody's, got to answer that question and make it clear.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but again, the last sentence in the first paragraph under february, 2 it says, if the recreation fields are not able to be accommodated within the flood mitigation project. Footprint.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, that's up by the highway 36 table mesa interchange.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the university will retain the right to an easement to allow sufficient access and use of recreation fields in an area that is mutually agreed. Upon.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and then, on page seven.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and eight.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: it says, and if the area is not in the pku oh.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, then it needs to be in also with ingress and egress, and concessions and storage and restrooms and all sorts of other appurtenances.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and in the maps on the stuff with the beginning of the briefing book,, it shows these wreck fields in two different places,. So I don't know where they're going to be.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: um.

F

I.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm reluctant,, I mean,. I think there are enough statements in here that say they can't be in 119 acres but see you keeps bringing up in their statements,. Oh yeah. They can be in 119 acres, so at some place in the annexation agreement, it needs to clearly say.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, where they are.

F

Hal hallstein osbt: well,, not my.,.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: feeling,, at least from what I've heard from most of these board members is the oh, so is, is going to be due to the last lives of threatened species. It's not going to be about playing football playing soccer, playing.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I feel like that's built into the core.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: request on 119.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so fair job.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the board all agrees with that. karen hollweg, osbt:. Well then,. We better than better request wording in the annexation agreement that makes that perfectly clear,, as opposed to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the statements about well, we'll put it in 119 acres.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: because. karen hollweg, osbt:. It may not go elsewhere, and.

A

Curt brown, osbt: my reading of this is that that's an area that there has not been agreement reached on yeah so.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but it's clearly an area that we all feel strongly about his way. I'm reading this yeah.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, okay, here's another component of that.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, um I have to think that dawn and john would cringe if, on the p you be land,. We had run off going to the east into the hundred and 19 acres.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the term sheet on page 23 number 49.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: get out your magnifying glass.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: page 23 number 49.

A

Curt brown, osbt: stormwater.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yep says,, this will be addressed prior to commencement of construction.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but I have to think that we have an interest in this, and that in the annexation, agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, we have to somehow put down a stake in the ground and say run off from see us. Developable land will not go into the hundred and 19 acres.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and my question is yes or no.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah, I think that's critically, important.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I would assume karen. I love to hear what staff think that if we own the hundred and 19 acres, it see us responsibility to ensure that there's no new development that creates new stormwater runoff on our property. I think that's a city provision,, but I don't know that for certain.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, I think.

E

john potter, cob:. I think the understanding here, is, or you know what's being negotiated, is, is compliance with all the city's stormwater requirements and my understanding curve would be that that would be the case that they couldn't overload our property.

E

John potter, cob: they need to address stormwater management on their property, yeah.

I

Don d'amico:, it seems like that issue should be addressed. During.

I

Don d'amico: some. don d'amico: some stage of development review.

I

Don d'amico: prior tech, commencement of construction, that's a pretty broad window, pretty there's something happens before construction like it,. It should be during.

I

Don d'amico: the development review process,, whatever step normally, is taken to address kind of stormwater and in drainage issues about to happen. Then.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I agree,, I think it's too late.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: is there an example that anyone in this meeting noser when they say.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: in the second box, still in 49, subject to building permit application and works regularly and in good faith with the city on water, discharge.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: does anyone know.

H

to to. what they're speaking of.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, my reading is, is that the university being a state level body has some special authorities that allow it to avoid some permitting. Hence karen's concern about why the annexation agreement include language so that we don't have any surprises.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: on waterfall.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I just wasn't sure if.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: anyone could verify that that that they do work regularly and in good faith and have a good relationship with the city in that respect.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: people have repeatedly mentioned that the annexation agreement is the only time that the city can require things of see you. If it's not written in the annexation agreement, the city will not have a leg to stand. On.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:- I just wanted to know a little bit more about the veracity of that statement.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think, is a really valid concern. Karen, I mean, as I researched the history of the property, there's enough instances where things that were written down, we're not followed that it's a very legitimate concern to paper. This appropriately.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and my reading of this section is that.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, the city is proposing that the university will have a stormwater plan, and that will be part of the review. Process.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: very helpful to be highlighted,. I guess, as we go through this. We do see. There is business that is in the annexation, that's fundamental to our goals for these species plants and mitigation.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and curt brown, osbt:, the next I think dave.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think dave's talking but he's muted.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: thank you, if I could just add on real quickly to like karen's, been talking about.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: actually see you is identified, three uses potential uses of the oh, so property and I think we ought to make sure that we identify those in.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, whatever statement we make, and those are in addition to recreation fields, solar arrays and community gardens,, so those three activities so see you, is proposing for that 30 or 35 acre section of the.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, 119 acres.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: just lost the reference.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, but anyway,. It's referred to several times in the.

H

Yep.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I agree.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: um.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: another concern that I have with these rec fields.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and both this and the lighting are based on the fact that I live near the fairview high school recreation, fields.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I know what's happened with those recreation fields over the years and they've had lighting at it, and they've had amplification sound systems added and pretty soon they're, pretty a pretty invasive.

F

Component of the neighborhood., caroline miller, osbt:, they add bleachers yup.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, and so my question, is.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is preserving the sound shed as well as the view shed.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, something that we care about on open space, lands.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is it okay to have an amplified sound system next door to open space state natural areas.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, really good question.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: feels like that relates to your points on stormwater, where I'm sure the university is not bound by the city of boulders. Municipal sounds yet.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. What one question I have and it's it's tangentially related our interest. Is.

A

Curt brown, osbt: these have been described as recreation fields. I'm curious if the city has ascertain that the university does not have plans to have competition.

A

Curt brown, osbt: at these fields we're not going to move the soccer team, ncaa competitions or lacrosse competitions to these fields and then need the stands, and this concessions and all the things go with it. My guest has always been,. This is just recreation fields and it's not a place,. They would hold.

A

Curt brown, osbt: enter university competitions.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah. I feel like the way that most universities do design. These sayings asphalt could very well be a part of it, as well as parky I've.

H

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I've never have, they have specifically said they're planning for parking ingress and egress grass maintenance vehicles, concession stands: restrooms storage, yep, so they're planning on appurtenances.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: what the rec fields.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and that's a question in my mind karen I bench the jc more about what the university is proposing,. I think some of what you described has been associated by the university, with the tennis courts with the cross country competitions. There. Things like that.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. It would be interesting if the university plans to add competitions beyond tennis and cross country.

A

Curt brown, osbt: in this area. curt brown, osbt:. Every day long ago, we we agreed the city in the university that wouldn't put a football stadium there, that are they going to hold competitions beyond what are currently held in that area in the future.

A

Dave kuntz, osbt:, my sense kurt, is that they may not be doing intercollegiate competitions,, but intramural.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: activities will definitely be part of that yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think you're right dave. I think that's.

A

Curt brown, osbt: probably more what they intend,, but I would love to have some clarity in the annexation agreement about if there's intended to be future.

A

Curt brown, osbt: nc double a competitions.

A

Curt brown, osbt: beyond cross country.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: here at the fairview, a high field, there are a track meets that are boulder high fairview high.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: full blown sound system all day long that plays rock music and announces now we're ready for team number. Five team number five come to the finish: line.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and it goes on all day long. Do we want that, in a state natural area.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: or adjacent to it, yeah.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, all right, jason to it.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think it's a fair question.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: in my opinion,, this comes back to dan and john's point about the understanding of what open space means to the charter,, which is non human development,. Certainly know.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt:, a preferences and other you know concrete etc,. I think the sound is interesting,. Maybe we would focus in on that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, but it feels like in that discussion, we could find ourselves a long way from our open space piece,. So I, my personal feeling, is that if we're going down that path to focus in on what's important, which seems to be the sound related piece.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, combined with the understanding that open space means non developed.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm sorry how means non what.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, non developed and developing that I mean for them opens for them. A soccer field is open, space.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that's that's a different view.

B

Yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, all right,, I'm karen. I think those are all really good ideas. Do you have anything further in the term sheet.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: um yeah.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I'm.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on page six number nine.

A

Curt brown, osbt: groundwater monitoring.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, oh yeah, that's okay, there's they're, allowing the city to go on their property for additional groundwater monitoring and I think that's okay..

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I'm.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, okay, and then the interest in it unless you've got more material business in the interest of time. We're about 23 minutes, past.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, where we hope we'd be in. I know, we've got this granite thing ahead,, which we need. Your insight on is there? Are we getting near the end of the term sheet, or do you have some more material stuff there.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, no I'm near the end.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: we've talked about the wetlands impact.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and how, while karen's reviewing your notes,, might I suggest when we're done with this,, we have a five minute recess before we get into granite and the additional thoughts that karen's put together.

A

Hal hallstein osbt: that sounds great.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm on the term sheet page 14.,.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: number 27.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: key issue, 27.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, multimodal access.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yep, I'm repeatedly refers to a trail link to south boulder creek trail and in coordination with osm p.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and that is diametrically opposed to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the city's wording.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, and it's not I mean,, I believe the way I read number 27 is that this has not been resolved.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I think os bt needs to take a stand.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: on this item.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: I'm., karen hollweg, osbt:, reiterating what city staff- and I presume this is john and dan- have already said.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, which is.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, it's not up to city, see you coordination as see you puts it.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:- and this is a direct quote from number 27- any roads or trails on land conveyed to the city,, including any potential connectors to adjacent city, open space.,.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: will either be designated by the city and become part of the city's open space system or abandoned by restoring the underlying land at the city's expense.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and then it goes on to say that this is all at the city's sole discretion and I believe that osb team needs to say.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, this has to be resolved in the annexation agreement before it is brought to counsel.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: what,. What is the what would you say that resolution looks like.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that that language needs to be in the annexation agreement and that see us comment. That.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the city's comments are not relevant to a multimodal system, are totally irrelevant.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the osb t supports the city staff comments that I just read.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: because I think they're critical to underscoring and they they are part of the guiding principles.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the guiding principles say: trails connecting to open space trails would follow a typical city, public process.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and it's totally at the city's sole discretion,. It has nothing to do with see you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: city coordination., karen hollweg, osbt:, and from the first public process meeting, three, four years ago that ceo you held at at east campus.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: see you has been publishing maps with trails going from see you across the state natural area over to south boulder creek trail,, and we must take a stand on this in the annexation agreement,. I believe.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it is too important.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. So do we really think that the university is saying that we,, the university will determine where the trails go outside of their property.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I believe, they're, saying trust us we're good negotiators and will coordinate with oh smp because they keep using the land coordinating with osm p, in coordination with the snp. And it is not a matter of coordination.

A

Curt brown, osbt: okay.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, this is. hal hallstein osbt:. My recommendation on this karen would be. It seems like we have a number of points that are going to return in march at our meeting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and those are going to take the point of bullets,. I think we have to get some specific actionable language for the board to review at that time.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think it's an interesting one,. I think that could be. I see some complexity in that one where you may not have everybody's exact support on it will need to feel that out,. But let's put that on the list that is presented and cross that bridge at that time.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I feel like it, is important because we are not to allow the use of open space plans for the financial benefit of private convenience, of the individual residents or private businesses or corporate landowners, and as karen states, if maps are being put out and students are.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: in the process of deciding what university to go through. They realize that their university, they can just from school.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: of these trails that lead out to open space,. It creates a lot of impacts in maintenance areas for us,, while providing them profit, and I don't see any language, where they're willing to take responsibility for that, but.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, whether they are not either way.- caroline miller, osbt:, it's a private convenience in a financial benefit.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. The counter argument to that would be when a private land owner is going to create gifts of land that they previously own fee, simple, that they have a somewhat legitimate claim to recreation. Access to the system.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, but it seems like they're already showing that, when they, when they don't. Is that correct? What I'm saying that karen or know.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: from what you.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: know what what hasn't been done. I'm not sure I just.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:- this is one where I just I understand where some of my co board members are going to be, and maybe I'll be in the minority. But.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, when I think of beautiful campuses that are integrated with nature, for example, the bread loaf campus at middlebury in vermont.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: part and parcel to,, that is to be able to access and experience those lands,. We cannot credibly ask see you to do a beautiful job.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: of integrating their new campus or whatever, with these lands,, while at the same time saying we're going to try and remove your ability,. That is not practical, and.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, but there is a process for establishing.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: trails.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, but I agree with what house said, and I think that I think that he uses a perfect example and that campus.

H

Caroline miller,, osbt: may or may not, but probably uses again for the term that I enjoyed tonight, an ecosystem based approach where it's not just something that is benefiting them.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, there are other things that we need to come to terms with that you know, may not give them a direct benefit,, but for the whole of the entire system of their students. Enjoying.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: what it's like to live in boulder of the maintenance and preservation of open space of the city and its residents. It's a given. Take it's not just take.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I just feel like we'll need to debate some specific language on on that you know.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: there's a lot packed in that discussion.

A

Curt brown, osbt: karen. I certainly agree that this would have to go through a process,. The city and open space, would.

A

Curt brown, osbt: agree. To,, I mean see us not going to dictate where trails on our lands go. We're also not going to tell them where trails on their lands can go. So.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it's the intersections that are going to have to be. curt brown, osbt: done through mutual agreement, and I'm I'm still trying to figure out.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, if this says anything different than that I, but it's it. I agree. It's it's worth stating clearly that this has to be an agreement between open space and the other city departments and the university.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: okay,, with with knowing will return to that. Are we ready to move into granted and a break and then granted or.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, may I just asked john and dan. Is there a joint wetlands delineation study? That's been completed, since it's, it will be done before the first reading of the annexation agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: do you know anything about a giant wetlands, delineation, study.

E

John potter, cob: study yeah. There was when we did the guiding principles,. There was a study of the wetlands. That might be what is referring to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it says it will be done, prior to the first reading of the annexation, ordinance.

B

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so I don't think it's. I don't think it's the brown map.

E

John potter, cob: then.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, it's referred to on page 17 of the term sheet.

E

Curt brown, osbt: yeah. john potter, cob:, I guess that.

E

john potter, cob: yeah we can we can. I can get information and update you about that in march..

E

Karen hollweg, osbt: great thanks, yep.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, okay, ready for a break yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: great with that. Why don't we take a break for five minutes to come back 838.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: thank you,, everybody good.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: okay,, it looks like there's caroline great.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: hurt. You know. I heard your comment about not enough time to do. The driveway and one of my neighbors knows that I'm.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: busy with my nurse practitioner program and I just picked outside and.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, my driveway is nice and clear: they everyone knows,, they keep not saying anything and just doing it for me right now,. So when I leave to drive to denver in the morning, as are so nice and so.,.

H

Karen hollweg, osbt:, lucky kid.

B

Curt brown, osbt: yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I know,, can we all get in that program.

A

yeah.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: right., caroline miller, osbt:. Here I'm going to keep this neighbor for myself.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: okay, everybody, I'm given the given time, constraints, etc,. I want to try my best to tee this up and karen I'm going to hand it over to you after I do that so tell me where I'm wrong,, but let me take a shot at this.

B

Hal hallstein, osbt: here,. The reason we've included the documents related to the granite disposal in this study session is because it shows you what the actual specific.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: legal requirements were on these deals and points, ultimately, to the fact that this board will have to come to some sort of resolution.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: about what the final terms that would have to be met in order for there to be an executable. You know, transference of property or disposal.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so we thought it would be good to inventory these things first,. So there are many surprises,. We know what's traditionally been done.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so what we can actually do is really look at the top five documents. It's the meeting, packets and memos from to specific meetings.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, as well as the actual granted contract itself and basically fast forward to the final page. In this document, which karen has kindly produce.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: that basically takes what those requirements were begins to suggest what they you know contain and entail, and so.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: in the interest of time, that's sort of the big picture of how those top documents reference down. To.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, the bulleted list,, which is called spc mitigation disposal conditions. Initial draft of ideas were very much initial draft and it's not about any decisions being made,, but more an inventory of what's been done in the past, what's been required and what did that look? Like.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so karen do you want to take it from there.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah- I because I do visual things better than words.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: I'm going to suggest that people go back in their packet to the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: osm p board of trustees agenda item for the meeting date july 10,, which is a quarter inch down in the packet.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I love, my friends.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, if you n, and,, by the way the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: meeting date july 10 2013, is on the backside of a sheet of paper,, not on the front side,. But if you go from that to page seven.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, you can see a colored.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: picture of the widening of 36,, which is what provoked this and the red.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: highlights on the sides of highway 36 show the expansion area.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and to compensate osm, p for.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the land that would that was disposed of, to allow that expansion.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, the next page page nine.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: shows the granite and opal properties.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, which were acquired for.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: mitigation., karen hollweg, osbt: for the taking of the red highlighted parts on the sides of highway 36.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: any questions about that.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. I thought this is very interesting,. I was surprised looking at attachment, be which has the red mark areas that some of the land, we disposed is pretty darn close to where the floodwall is going to go..

A

Curt brown, osbt: for variant one. I just thought that was interesting. I I had forgotten that.

F

Curt brown, osbt: yeah., karen hollweg, osbt:, and the reason why I went into the bowels of osm p documents to get. This is because there's been a total turnover senior staff, since this happened, and obviously a total turnover of the board.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and I thought it would be instructive for everybody to see what happened and the sequence of events and the legal documents required to carry that out,. So the first document that you have.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is the contract.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm between si dot.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, which is the party that wanted the open space land for the expansion of highway 36.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and as a contract, it's a legal document.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that, in the end, was signed by the mayor and includes everything from as well as being signed by the governor.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the city manager.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and contains all sorts of maps and contractual attachments.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and as how said I'm not going to go through that tonight.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and then next in this packet.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is the open space board of trustees, packets for march 13.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, as well as the minutes for the march 13 meeting and the actions that the board took.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: the packet for the july 10 2013 meeting and the minutes showing the actions that the open space board took.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: at that time., karen hollweg, osbt: and karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm just going to point out one of the things that.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: was really a surprise to me.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, there are some.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, what 20 pages worth.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: of exhibits.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: right before the minutes of the board meeting.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that that our attachments that talk about every inch of temporary easement that the project would use in the survey delineation of those areas.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that were used for construction and as well as the parts that were disposed of and all the legal descriptions of.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: every square inch of land, that's involved.,.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, unless there are questions, I don't have anything else, I mean as as hell said.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I found it instructive to go through and read those documents. I hope at least some of you have read through them and.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: have a clearer picture of what this.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: entails.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so karen I'm looking at what how described as the bc mitigation of just social conditions. That is this list. Of.

A

Curt brown, osbt: ideas for disposal.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: condition: stop you for a minute.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: yeah before before you go on to that page., karen hollweg, osbt: does okay. Does anyone have any questions about any of the opal and granted property documents.

B

Hal hallstein osbt: or questions we're just happy that you pull that together for us karen thank you.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: was there anything in it, karen that you found.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: that could have been done better like when, when you looked at the document, was there anything that jumped out at you now that it's this far into the future, that could have been done. Differently.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: no, and I think the detail of all the documents is what was most.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah important. karen hollweg, osbt: important to me. caroline miller,, osbt: yeah. I know that that is the.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: the clear in the clear time that it took right right,. You know when you look at the time horizon for each of these it's months and months and months.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, if not years.,.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, it feels to me karen, like the big takeaway here for me, is that such big decisions are not done. Nebulously they're done with very specific legal language, which is driven by the board,, which states requirements that are mandatory to be met.

A

Curt brown, osbt: karen. I want to put that question to you a different way, though, of I think what you're saying is that all of these documents and details really have to be worked out,, but from a higher level.

A

Curt brown, osbt: to we think the granite restoration with success.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: yeah, so that's kind of a big deal,. I mean we had a lot of detail,, but the basic idea of the restoration to mitigate for those dispose lands.

A

Curt brown, osbt: at least there's some question about it: success and certainly don and others could chime in. But it's something we have to think about.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, that's right.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: would they be willing to chime in and give their input for someone new to town to understand the history,, a little better.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: don, are you still with us.

D

Cob, dan burke: I think, yes. don d'amico: of course.

I

Don d'amico: yeah,, as I said, before.

I

Don d'amico:, we felt like the the design and construction of the mitigation for for pebbles and.

I

Don d'amico: fork, it impacts, was really well done,. We had a lot of input on that.

I

Don d'amico:, you know,, we had a lot of information on the existing hydrology of the the granite site and.

I

Don d'amico:, they use some innovative techniques to transplant.

I

Don d'amico: saw in areas that contain orchids. Don't say that we actually, you know, go for kits and move them,, but they were you know, in that,, in that general area, and.

I

Don d'amico:, we thought that again, the plan was really well laid out and.

I

Don d'amico: unfortunately, the in the years that we've monitored,, while we see some of the associated species that typically occur, with.

I

Don d'amico: you, ladies classes,, or could we just haven't, found any orchids growing there.

I

Don d'amico:, you know,. Having said that, you know they're.

I

Don d'amico: they're kind of a tricky plan to propagate there hasn't really been any methods of intentional methods,. I will say doing that, where.

I

Don d'amico: that's been successful,, but you know time will tell we're continuing butter.

I

Don d'amico: has,, I believe, they've completed their last monetary report, but we're gonna. You know we're going to continue to keep an eye on it, both for you know, the success of pebbles, habitat creation,, but also.

I

Don d'amico:, you play these tresses orchids so.

I

don d'amico:, but you know but bottom line yeah. We, you know the intent was to recreate habitat for orchids, which you know technically was done, but there haven't been any that have shown up there, since the since the project was completed.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and I'm just curious from and, of course,. It could be wrong from my understanding,. It was like eight by four pieces. Atlanta were just like moved.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, but if there was more cuz I heard you say that you guys were doing some new techniques or it was innovative in the way that you were doing that. Relocation.

I

Don d'amico: yeah yeah was and I, and I,. I would say that you know, I think the hydrology, which is really key, was matched real. Well, you know it's not, unlike you know, soldering your lawn basically.

I

Don d'amico:, you take live plants and you put them down in the water on this, you know, in this case, water,. You know subsurface groundwater,, but.,.

I

Don d'amico:, you know,, I think that him bless everything that was done right. They did a really good job of we control,. They did a good job of you. Know, teaching and planting.

I

Don d'amico:- and I think that you know the general composition of the vegetation.

I

Don d'amico: turned out really well the one missing component and, of course, a key component was you know the the the orchid itself, so.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, if you say, that., curt, brown, osbt:. This is our last year for doing the., caroline miller,, osbt: monitoring,. We all know that they can go years and years between looms.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: was the project design in that timeframe due to financial constraints,, as opposed to like a longer timeframe,, or is there a way that we're still going to continue to monitor that specific area where the transplant was done.

I

Don d'amico: yeah, so the regulatory. don d'amico: requirements required a certain number of years of monitoring, and so the that that was completed and the fish and wildlife service signed off on that.

I

Don d'amico:, we will continue to monitor that site,, I would say informally. We won't use the same rigorous methods they did, but there's there's the possibility that will include some pebbles trapping out there in the future.

I

Don d'amico:, but certainly you know it, doesn't it's not a huge effort to visit the site during you know the late summer, when spire grantees, typically bloom and.

I

Don d'amico:, you know, walk around the areas because you know that the areas that we transplanted the solder, are marked and well known,. So you know it's not like it will take days to do any you know, to determine whether.

I

Don d'amico:, you know the orchids are blooming there,, but it will take some effort, year after year to just go out there and kind of check to see if we see anything blooming.

I

Don d'amico: we're also.

I

don d'amico:, you know, part of the.

I

Don d'amico: guess the habitat requirements for orchids include some level of disturbance and in the south, otter creek floodplain we've relied on grazing, mostly for that disturbance.

I

Don d'amico:, if you allow the you know, associated vegetation to grow up and crowd out spire, and these they really don't do well,. So one of the provisions was to use grazing prescriptive lee.

I

Don d'amico: to you know, create that disturbance that the orchids typically need to grow, so we're going to will be looking into that. We want to make sure that's compatible with you know, the.

I

Don d'amico:, maintaining pebbles habitat, maintaining wetlands,, but it's also a way to you know, manage undesirable weeds and also manage that stature that that the height of the vegetation necessary for spare entities.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and in a completely natural habitat, would that natural disturbance be the flood water.

I

Don d'amico: exactly a combination of you, know,, first and foremost, flooding and the disturbance associated with flooding, but also,. You know grazing ungulates. Now in the past it wasn't.

I

Don d'amico: cows, you know, is elk and bison and other you know big wild animals,, but then also fire, to a certain extent,. So you know disturbed.

H

Smiley.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: thank you.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: diane. How much was a per acre class for the restoration I granted.

I

Don d'amico:, I don't know off top my head.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, so do you think.

G

dave, kuntz, osbt:, it's comparable to what we would expect on the cu south on the oh. So when 90 acres.

I

Don d'amico: um.

I

don d'amico:, it would probably be.

I

Don d'amico: require mitigation on the sea of property would probably require more money,. The grading that we had to do on granite was pretty minimal.

I

Don d'amico:, but creating some contours, we hauled remember how many cubic yards we called off site,, but it wasn't a lot and compared to the earth work that we anticipate being necessary on the cu property,. It would probably be more expensive to do.

I

Don d'amico: you, ladies tresses orchid mitigation and just wetland mitigation in general on the sea of property.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: you're off the top my head, I'm thinking, 100 hundred and $30,000 per acre- is that something that you think is reasonable.

G

Curt brown, osbt: chance going up.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well,, but I dave, are you.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: about the granite property are you.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: knowing grant and the granite property.

F

Karen hollweg,, osbt: and john: are you disagreeing about granite? Are you talking about see you.

E

John potter, cob:, I think we were correct me if I'm wrong don,, but I think we were estimating more closely closer to 200,000 an acre for the kind of earth moving that will be necessary to restore the the.

E

See you property.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. Thank you, john. At this point.

I

Don d'amico: yeah, no, I think that's right. I I took dave's question is, is if, if we added up all the receipts for granted,, what would it cost per acre to.

I

Don d'amico: to do the mitigation there and we we can find that we can find that out, certainly,, but I but you're right john. You know we were. We were looking at.

I

Don d'amico:, you know,, we use comps for granite and for colorado, open lands. The wetland mitigation that was done there.

I

Don d'amico: and other restoration projects we've done on boulder creek, just to get an average per acre costs, and it was. It was up a couple hundred thousand dollars per acre.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: and, did you have water rights for those projects.

I

Don d'amico:, we did not rely on.

I

Don d'amico: directly applied irrigation water on the granite property,. Having said that, all of the properties surrounding granite are flooded, irrigated.

I

Don d'amico:, so you know every turn on on. You know the adjacent property, the groundwater comes up on granite, so which is pretty typical and also louisville soil.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know what I found interesting as a takeaway from the granite contract or two things. One is that the ratio of.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know affected or dispose land to what was mitigated was a 321. It looks like about a three to one ratio of of you know: mitigation to impact.

G

Dave kuntz,, osbt: and the other thing so that was that was interesting,. I think we given the quality of the wetlands that we're anticipating they're, going to be disturbed that.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, we might we,, as the board might think of a higher ratio, is, is more suitable,, but the other thing that I found very interesting is in the granite contract. You're. Also we're looking at a prairie community restoration component as well, and so,. When we say wetlands mitigation.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I think, in a lot of people's mindsets, you know, a very particular kind of.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: notion what that means, and in the granite property is,. As I think, a lot of us are trying to say that the associated.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: plant communities that you know are associated with wetlands are equally important. The wet meadows, tall grass, prairie, etc.

G

Dave kuntz,, osbt: and so, in the granite property. There was like you, know, over six acres of associated.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know plant communities that were also part of the mitigation package,, and so I think, as we look at what's appropriate for mitigation on see you south or well on, see you south,. But as far as the flood mitigation project, that.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, there's some basis for us attributing value to those associated plant communities.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and dawn you seated for all those native grasses right.

I

Don d'amico:, I'm brandon.

F

Don d'amico: yeah it was a combination of sod, transplants, seeding and planting. Basically, you know pot nursery stock.

I

Karen hollweg, osbt: okay.

I

don d'amico: a lot of shrubs when in doubt, they're.

D

Cob, dan burke: done,. I would you mind just coming,, because I think timing, the length of time that was referenced and could you aboard a sense of.

D

Cob, dan burke:, when these contracts were actually put in place and the timing of the overall project from when you know, we first learned to the doubles, a request and we entered in the disposal request. And when was the timing of these actual detailed contracts put in, in relative to the whole project.

I

Don d'amico: know john and I and mark gershman we're digging back through the granite files. Last couple of days and.

I

Don d'amico: john did you did you kind of stitch together a timeline for that.

E

John potter, cob:, so it was a really complicated project.

E

John potter, cob: and it.

E

john potter, cob:, you know,. It involves several several layers of mitigation,, which some of which won't even apply and in the present case.

E

John potter, cob:, but essentially the the detail and everything that's in that contract that you see there that was kind of worked out over a long period of time and really couldn't be completed. Until.

E

John potter, cob:, you know the at least the 90% design stage of the project because didn't even have the area survey that where the footprint was going to be.

E

John potter, cob:, so you know it was., it's quite an interesting.

E

john potter, cob: process, and you know, like this one,. It takes. It takes a considerable amount of time and increasing levels of certainty around what the project is before you can finalize your your plans.

A

Curt brown, osbt: it john. I just want to make sure I understand what you just said,. Did you were you saying that the disposal by the open space for didn't happen until the 90% design.

E

John potter, cob: after that, I mean it was really. karen hollweg, osbt: after interacted and happen to 90% right yeah.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, the the project started in about 2005 or slightly before that.

E

Don d'amico:, it wasn't until the.

E

john potter,, cob:, 30% stage,, probably until 20, 2011 or 2012, something like that, and then..

E

John potter, cob: and then,, it was 2013 that things got finalized, and they were able to do that. That's when they made the request for the disposal and all of the work that had been going on for years and years got packaged into a final disposal document and and also an agreement with si dot.

A

Curt brown, osbt: interesting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, um the natural question for me,. There is a given this project scope of magnitude,. It seems like where this.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt:, discussion and piece of the study is going is perhaps to an interim step that doesn't qualify as a legal contract,, but which takes more of the shape of a resolution to provide clarity to all the actors of what the basic. What you know.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, right now,, we have a list of the motions which does not communicate clearly what would be an or will be required,, so an interim step, that's not fully a contract,, but something of much more clarity and specificity about these are,. These are the the deal breaking items.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah, and how the reason why I think that's important is when I sit in on process committee meetings or engage in discussions. With.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: residents, who want to know, what's going to happen next or engage in conversations with council members about the timeline.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I don't think, there's understanding.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm going to say broad brush anywhere in the community, about the complexity and the level of detail and the amount of work that's needed to get from.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: this idea that there's going to be a flood project and mitigation to getting down to a contractual agreement and board votes,, and I think it's really important to have a way to convey the substance of that process to the entire community.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, because I you know the fraser meadows folks, think that this is,, you know you decide on flood mitigation and you build the dam and it's over and.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and there's a lot of steps and and the engineers have repeatedly and cautiously appropriately.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: said on it's going to take a bit more than that,, but I think the whole. The detail of the whole thing is important to sketch out so that everybody in the community has a better understanding of what would be next.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: for pat, perhaps also to make clear that there's limits to what the the trust me trust me element is yeah and making a clear statement about that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I mean included like I know you make notes about escrow funds, different small requirements that do need lead time and significant planning.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, these are not insignificant amounts of money where you know how are they being temporarily funded before their permanent long term funding through various cities, apparatus.

C

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so I go.

C

hal hallstein osbt: through I see where you're leading with this project and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I think it's an interim step toward us to consider.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and the other things that don priests aged in his comments just now are the kind of monitoring and determination of what success.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: curtis are you're in.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. Well, I'm just trying to sort of summarize what I'm hearing, I karen. I think one of the main things you're saying is that we need to provide additional clarity about some of our interests in the project and and mitigation, much like you've done here on this. This page you've put together.

A

Curt brown, osbt: so that that can be communicated as early as possible,, but that we also need to convey to the public, and anyone else, that, if the granite property and the si dot, enlargement is any model. For us. The finalization of the disposal.

A

Curt brown, osbt: may not occur until we've done a 90% design, and so we're really trying to address two.

A

Curt brown, osbt: different poles of this process, one is get the rest of our needs and interests.

A

Curt brown, osbt: to the decision makers, as soon as we can,, but also help people understand what we learned from the granite process. I,. I have to admit I.

A

Curt brown, osbt: I've been wondering well how far along with see before we did disposal,, but I was even surprised to hear john say 90% level. That's I don't think that's the sort of thing. That's being.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I don't think that's the expectation in the public's mind, or maybe in council's mind right now. So that's it's really good. That you've walked through all this detail. I know it was a fun.

A

Know.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: and, and the other thing is.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that it appears it's going to be a long way from the annexation agreement to this, and that's why I'm pretty adamant about the detail that needs to be built into the annexation agreement,, because if it's not nailed down there, it's going to be probably after see, you starts building.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that anything else comes down. The pike.

B

Yeah.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:- and this might be more for kurt as the chair to say than me,, but you know,, whatever members of the public that are listening,. If there are any components from see you that are listening.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: correct me: if I'm wrong, but.

H

caroline miller, osbt:, we are here to serve open space and to serve the public here in boulder, and I think what everyone is saying is the public would.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: benefit from more clarity,. So if there is anyone listening that would like to do that, any.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: representative from cmu, I feel like it would be fair, I'm speaking for everyone,, so you can correct me if I'm wrong to say that we would always be open to any discussion that would help clarify move things along. Dr consensus.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, with this project, so.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: currently,- I don't know again no that's kind of speaking for you, sorry about that,. If it is right.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think, you're speaking for yourself,, and I think you probably have a lot of agreement on the board.

A

Curt brown, osbt: I'll. Let how moderate.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: sort of you're wrestling with all this,. I mean I I I see.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, going back to our prior meeting,, the more that takes place on the project and the more various checklist come down.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: the less scope for having an honest discussion of whether such a disposal actually meets our charter requirements is actually likely to happen.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and when you hear don talk about somewhat mixed results in previous mitigation for these species.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you got to really balance off a couple ideas of well,. I can see that benefit for open space in a well constructed agreement on this.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, but that could come at the cost of significant lives of threatened species which are unlikely to be recovered. This, that's really the interesting part of this topic, um so I guess, I would ask done,. Do you recall along the way in the granite process when and how did that happen? There.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, or was everyone believing that the purposes for that disposal were.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: were well conceived.

I

Don d'amico: think we're pretty confident that the the plans that.

I

Don d'amico: that we worked on with see dod and their consultants,, you know we're well conceived and well, designed or- or you know, I guess in hindsight.

I

Don d'amico:, you know,, we wouldn't have staff, wouldn't have recommended disposal of open space and that very critical and valuable habitat,. So now we were confident that we had a pretty good chance of successful mitigation.

I

Don d'amico: now, again, we couldn't really think of anything that.

I

Don d'amico:, you know that some kind of well thought out, or maybe didn't go well, a lot of times. You know, during construction, there.

I

Don d'amico:, you know miscommunication, and you know somebody digs up the wrong piece of sod or something like that, but sit in the wrong place,. But it was pretty well orchestrated, so.

I

Don d'amico: you know, again, I don't think we would have.

I

Don d'amico:, you recommend it to the board at that time that we go,, you know, move through with disposal if we weren't confident that we had a good plan to mitigate for those impact.

E

John potter, cob: yeah, and it it isn't. I don't think in that project, or at least my understanding of it was it wasn't. Just I mean the mitigation was, was important, but, for you, know,, a nine nine acre disposal and five acres of construction easements.

E

John potter, cob:, the city got a 24 acre property, a significant restoration on that property.

E

John potter, cob: and then, an additional 22 acres of mitigation on the colorado, open lands property,. So you know you yet up those numbers, and you know you have.

E

John potter, cob:, an area,, the granite property had been a long term goal of the city to acquire that and fill in protected areas along south boulder creek, and you know that was a $1.3 million.

E

John potter, cob: benefit to the city that seed money paid for.

E

Don d'amico:, so there was a lot of.

E

john potter, cob:, that's that's gonna be. john potter, cob: protected now and, and you know, I think, there's a lot of benefit to that and we have time to hopefully get even sprint these to to to come back in that area.

A

Hal hallstein osbt:, or., curt, brown,, osbt:, I've always assumed,, or at least based on. What's staff, have told us about grant and other places, that the mitigation packages staff puts together as the proposal for mitigation for this project, may incorporate quite a lot of what we might call out of kind mitigation rather than.

A

Curt brown, osbt: a plan that says every square foot of spy ramses that we eliminate we're going to recreate it somewhere.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, but I'd be interested to hear what don has to say,. I mean.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. I think it's going to be a mixture in kind,, but with a lot of out of kind but valuable restoration.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. What what would you say: don and you're muted.

I

Don d'amico: yeah, I think that's that's becoming more and more apparent when you know when we do mitigation, is that it's kind of the you know the whole package,, the big picture. It's not.

I

Don d'amico:, you know we're going to mitigate for 1.63 acres and x to one mitigation ratio, and you know it's all about. You know the numbers,. You know the acreage and years ago when we were doing.

I

Don d'amico: working with si.on the weapon medication for the 36 project on the colorado, open lands property that the core started. Shifting to this ecosystem.

I

Don d'amico: based approach to mitigation and looking at ecosystem services,, rather than just acre per acre mitigation, and that was a little a little confusing.

I

Don d'amico: for folks at first,, because you know when you when you live in that mitigation ratio, world.

I

Don d'amico:, for so long and and then the regulatory agencies starts talking and more kind, of.

I

Don d'amico: flower flowery or you know less quantitative.

I

Don d'amico: terms than you know it was, it was a learning curve for everybody,, but you know in hindsight, and you know even moving forward it,. It is a good approach, because then you get.

I

Don d'amico:, you know, this,, you get the core mitigation habitat,, but then you get the enhancements that go along with. That are the buffers that you know. I think, like dave mentioned on the granite property there was.

I

Don d'amico:, I think it was- was it 12 acres of pebbles habitat in almost two acres of spire and these habitat,. But then there were six acres of this.

I

Don d'amico: upland native grassland buffer habitat that was created,, so it,, you know it,. It really met those those ecosystem services goals,, where you're looking at the whole picture,, rather than just you know, the individual parts.

B

Cob, dan burke: x, I just add that an unknown at the time that ended up being a benefit is that we acquired. We brought full blown granite into the fold that allowed the acquisition of coleman and suits.

D

Curt brown, osbt: to follow. cob, dan burke:, because those are now connected,. We probably wouldn't have pursued those. If there.

D

Cob, dan burke: was going to be that hole between our connectivity to the east,, so sort of a side benefit of. We are able to continue that acquisition of nearly now the whole floodplain.

D

Cob, dan burke: run into the west.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: I.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: could only get people to stop building in the floodplain.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, just the small, I think, in difficult counterpoint. There is that, from the perspective of.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: threatened species,, no matter how beautiful of an engineered vision we have for repaired landscape using our best human knowledge.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:: let's not diminish the fact that existing natural life gets lost and and that that's that's the really uncomfortable thing about this whole project, because it seems like life and safety for human beings..

C

Dave kuntz, osbt: gets served., hal hallstein, osbt: development rights get served. All these people loom really large at the table,, and yet this piece,, which we, as the open space for supposed to look after, which is the unique and rare species, ends up totally underserved and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that's what you can front, reading the charter. It's not it's not really on us. To.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: be thinking about life and safety and develop as much as these other interests.

B

Yep.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, so karen did you want to walk us through your document,. But what are your plans you and how? For this.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: well,. I think it would be useful to to know whether people perceive these items. As.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: important considerations.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, can I can I interject on that I, I think, to preempt. I think, there's a lot of important considerations. I feel like what would be helpful, is if we decide that some sort of an interim document, that's more authoritative.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: makes sense for us to basically demonstrate with more clarity, where this is going earlier. In the time oh, I mean was that not sort of.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, where we're hoping to kind of had.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah I. karen hollweg, osbt: agree, I mean is that that would be useful.

F

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah. I think the clarity needs to be had my my hope is that.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, if see you is listening,. They would like to engage in some sort of conversation that allows us to give you good, concise clarity,. But if not,, I think that your.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: choice of words is accurate and that it would what we would produce would need to have some really hard lines.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: in order to communicate because it's it's kind of just a one way, discussion right, now.

D

Cob, dan burke: by and looking at this,, I think that there's.

D

Cob, dan burke:, some a lot of this is speaking to the utility department,, and so what is what would be? What would be those aspects that would be speaking to annexation? And, more to the see you city, conversation.,.

D

Cob, dan burke: and then, what and then and then there's a lot of elements that are speaking directly to the project,, which is speaking to another city department and unless to see you.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so there's that consideration to have two separate documents at this point,, one, that's informing the annexation conversation and then one that's sort of more concentrated on the flood mitigation. Project,. Are you looking to combine it all or.

F

Curt brown, osbt: well,, you know. karen hollweg, osbt:. My my personal opinion is that osb t is responsible for making recommendations to counsel.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm wearing we're, not our job is not to make recommendations to see you or to staff in other departments, or so. I think the document has to be addressed to see you and then used by other parties as part of the process.

F

Curt brown, osbt:, you should see you,. I think you mean.

A

Curt brown, osbt: council address to come in.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I mean council, yes, thank you., caroline miller, osbt:. That is a good point. Karen.

A

Curt brown, osbt: up,, so I I see some value,, though, in in what dan is raising here.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it might be helpful, just to keep the forest visible for all the trees, or vice versa,, to produce something.

A

Curt brown, osbt: really soon like at the march meeting that specifically addresses annexation and says: hey. We've got three years of motions here: we're going to continue to add to those karen's listed some things that may need to be added.

A

Curt brown, osbt: to the project of motions,, but for right now we're going to highlight, in case it's not clear things that we think, need to be considered in the annexation.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and some of those we've already gotten motion,, some of them karen you've identified things like lighting and noise and the view shed, and things like that that may be, need to be put on the table. Sooner, is that is that what you're thinking dan to sorta feed it out when it's most needed.

D

Cob, dan burke: well,, I was um yeah. That's that's one approach of what I was saying,, but I think regardless.

D

Cob, dan burke: communicating out which ones may be the annexation topics,, and I know you all are thinking it's all blended and I understand that,, but I think from communicating out form.

D

Cob, dan burke: from the first order of business that councils next going to see an annexation update how to how to communicate that out. From.

D

Cob, dan burke: a whole list of things that are this is, and the rest of this is assuming that see that soundboard annexation happens and that the flood project continues and then.

D

Cob, dan burke: there's all these other elements that have to do more with a future disposal situation, and I know they're intertwined kurt, and I think what you were saying is a lot in line with what I was saying,, but I think there's other ways to go at that.

D

Curt brown, osbt:, okay, thanks.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, carolyn.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I think this question would be directed towards you how or at least I'll throw it at you and see who you throw it out, if we are discussing.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: mitigation, knowing what didn't work in the past.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: are we trying to provide the clarity of what I would think would need like an expert opinion on what would give us the best chance of creating a successful mitigation moving forward,, knowing what didn't work or are we, like talking about that level of detail by march or just.

B

Hal hallstein osbt: in my opinion, I don't think so. First off,. I think that our department knows more about this mitigation than anyone else on earth,. I don't think anyone else on earth has tried to conduct it.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, they might be the only people who have lived experience on it. So so I guess that's that's one. Just practical element.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I mean,. This is just my personal opinion,, but in in march I feel like there is some consensus coming here, kurt tell me if I, if you feel like I've, got this right, that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: there,, there might be potentially a motion that listed a few things that are annexation related to that we'd come to some unanimous agreement, need to be on the table sooner than later, and would be helpful and informative to city council.-.

C

Yeah. hal hallstein osbt:. I also think that there's something to be said, of course,, it's my own idea,, so I think it's something to be said,, but another brief missive that says.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: perceptions of ecosystem cost transference, while difficult to put your finger on on do loon in in the discussion, because this this particular decision could go bigger than our board. Anyone who forgets that does that at their own peril.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and so we basically say that that that looms large in in our own commentators minds in our own minds and because we can't just say, well,. We don't understand. What's going on with the rip wrapping the burn forever and we can't paint a picture that there that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: long term, under investment in the ecosystem, health at sea south has the potential to become a cost to boulder rights, and all this, and that that should be on the table and annexation.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, as it leaves context for and annexation negotiations.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt:, great and it'll take sense of wording,, but something like that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, and then I guess going from there,, then the way I see it, is you've got our series of motions that are about medication. You've got some that are annexation, related business.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and then we start working towards putting together a document that puts a little bit more meat on the bone item by item that includes all of them..

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so cuz everybody else in this thing as a term sheet, yet work critical landowner at some point, they're going to need a concise resource better than our summary of motions to understand what the current had said on these requirements.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: so., caroline miller, osbt: in the wording,. If there was something I would just be concerned that we make sure we communicate appropriately that again what worked in the past,, what was tried in the past didn't work and moving forward,. I don't know if that's something.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, you know, obviously,. You could write 100 pages on how it could look or say something that you know all basis for mitigation efforts would be based evidence based. You know scientific data.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: from., caroline miller, osbt:, present moving forward with certain type of like land management in mind. I'm just concerned that it would be construed like you said, acre per acre or the cost would only be in hard dollars, as opposed to something..

H

Caroline miller, osbt: a bit broader and perspective,. I just want to make really sure that we were that we word that appropriately, so that everyone's aware of what we're talking, about.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, you know,, caroline, I think you're drawing a good connection to so. Our previous motions that really.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I think the logic, maybe needs to be laid out more clearly,. If we do a near term presentation about our interest,, let it annexation and that that is that one of the reasons we have.

A

Curt brown, osbt: insisted on the hundred 19 anchors. All do so is because of the uncertainty about mitigation and because of the uncertainty, about.

A

Curt brown, osbt: groundwater transport and what will happen to the wet metal areas, and so maybe drawing some of those connections will be helpful when we package up our interests related to annexation, which tends to focus particularly on the.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: dave, we haven't heard from you, for a long time.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: yeah, I agree.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I think that.

G

dave, kuntz, osbt: violent. A couple of us probably need to volunteer to you know craft, the draft to have in the packet so that we can.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know,, have a focus discussion. A march 10 meeting.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I mean I, I think you know,, based on the conversation tonight and what you know. We've talked about previously.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I think, there's enough knowledge.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: between or among the board members that we don't have to belabor this much anymore,. What we need to do is basically get it focused as clearly as we can, as comprehensively as we can and take some kind of action.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: yeah. I agree if others aren't driving towards hard commitments, makes sense for us to as a critical landowner in the project.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: and I think,, given the timeline.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, the council seems you know in intentional on moving ahead and at least first reading and then in the next few months, and it would behoove us to you, know kind of have our concerns on the table.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know, as that process moves ahead.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: fully agree with that, because of the timing of the decisions that are going to start rolling out.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and my. curt brown, osbt:. My memory of the subcommittee meeting is that dan, basically previewed that I don't remember exactly the words you use,, but you said you would be able to come. Back.

A

Curt brown, osbt: or that after our study session and our march meeting, we might have more detailed input. I forget, I forget exactly. It was in response to rachel's question about well, what's open space say this point.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah, I think the question was, is you know I think stack, but this together, did the boards kind of feel like their areas represented here, and I think that's.

D

Cob, dan burke: a little bit of where they're, where we're going and what I, my response was well.

D

Cob, dan burke: we had on the agenda for march to to walk through this, which we've already done so,. That would be one of my questions before we leave tonight. Is.

D

Cob, dan burke:: what is what is the discussion left in terms of the camera and green.

D

Cob, dan burke:, if you all, are thinking of a little bit more detail annexation type of thing right now. That does beg the question of how you continue to work on some of these other things,, and so is there still a march conversation about the calendar.

D

Cob, dan burke: would be a question. I'd want to just grow with you all before we left tonight.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: dan,, can you tell all of us when items would be needed to put in the packet as dave suggested.

F

Cob, dan burke: um. karen hollweg, osbt: for for a march 10 meeting.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah, I mean we from a courtesy standpoint,. We try to get everything out to you that you know that wednesday before so we before, but we've had.

D

Cob, dan burke: lots of examples where it's notified on the agenda. So everybody knows we're speaking of it,, but a material isn't ready,. So it might go out that friday or might even go out that monday before the board meeting so.

D

Cob, dan burke: there's no sort of requirement. We try to get into that rhythm of getting you guys, everything a week ahead of time,, but if you're, if you're the ones developing it.

D

Cob, dan burke: is a little if you need all in next week to do it and we we and you get. We put everything out on wednesday,, but then we add this and say,. This is an addition, on friday. That's a perfectly fine way to go. To.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: that's helpful. I just picked up my calendar and realize we're talking about.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: next week. yeah.

D

Cob, dan burke:, yeah, and and even if we got it out monday before of the fall of the week of the board of the happy,, I think.

D

Cob, dan burke:, even your fellow.

D

hours.

D

cob, dan burke:, I will be- would be sufficient, but.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, so it could be posted on the web, so that the public had access to it..

D

Cob, dan burke:, it would be that might go, it might get posted later than everything else. I guess yeah.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah.

D

Cob, dan burke: I'm going to post everything else on a on that wednesday before.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, thank you. That's helpful.,.

D

Cob, dan burke:, but we'll put those the agenda yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, there's certainly argues. I think in favor of a.

A

Curt brown, osbt: very clear focus on annexation issues for the march meeting, because I think we can probably.

A

Curt brown, osbt: get those packaged up in the time frame that we have recognizing that the next big lift the excuse. Me, will be to revisit the flood project motions and get those brought up to date and up to speed.

A

Curt brown, osbt: so anyway, that's that's my argument.

D

Cob, dan burke:, yeah and I'll just throw this out, based on our conversation tonight you know done, and done,, and I can huddle up to and.

D

Cob, dan burke: and if we have any suggestions on this calendar or anything else to offer and as input, you know, we can do that before the meeting as well,. We have any thoughts in march to offer in terms of 2021 and topics and station,. We can.

D

Cob, dan burke: put that out there to.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know.

C

hal hallstein osbt:, I mean, for me, dan and it probably just understand it wrong,, but the real heartburn for me comes in the fact that the way the timeline setup it sounds like an annexation could occur before disposal.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and it seems like a desire to create a predetermined outcome and- and I think I would I would imagine most board members- would agree.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: we're and we're not participating in a predetermined outcome, and if they want to invest, tons and tons of money to build an annexation and agreement and think that we're going to be.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: ultimately, forced into an outcome to communicate very early. Think about your timeline. However, you want,, but we're we're not going to enter a pre, determined decision,, no matter where, in the timeline it's put.

B

Cob, dan burke: yeah. No, I think it's a great point how I I can't speak for every council member,, but the ones that I've worked with are fully aware, that of the open space matter,, and I would also just throw in that they may be negotiating antics before see. Dots.

D

Cob, dan burke:, the other land owner,, so you may have two or the three land owners that still have a loud voice.

D

Cob, dan burke:, even after the main terms of the annexation or agreement or are put in place.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, my art teacher, used to always say failure to prepare is preparing to fail.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, karen one other benefit I see of this project is that it could allow some back of the envelope math to actually start to take place.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I'm fearful that certain for certain people,, the desire and rush to build this flood mitigation well is kind of within the context of whatever it costs to the city of boulder..

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and that that's a little non actionable in the real world,, and I think we owe it to people to at least if we're going to have requirements that have steep cost to start to. Let them see what those costs look like: it's not fair,. Otherwise, it's non fiduciary.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: no,. I definitely agree with that. Hell, you know, and I've been kind of quiet is karen fight. It out, because I, you know.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I'm greatly saddened by what's going to happen,. I think we can do all the mitigation we want in you know.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: focus on all the efforts to make sure that things remain as they are,, but the fact the matter is is that they aren't.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: and it's going to be a completely different area, and you know wildlife are going to be,, you know very highly impacted and, and it's just going to be different,- and I think we ought to you know we ought to at least pay attention to the fact that it's it's not going to be the same.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: and it's unfortunate.

G

dave kuntz, osbt:, but it's it's that's happening all along the front range and.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, you know that's just the way it's going to be. I guess.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. I feel that way to dave. I guess the way that I rationalize it is that, as people with the details on this trying to drive a really good deal and decision at the os bt, level.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is our is our primary goal,, because it's what we can do right and I rest a little easy,, knowing that. If, if there's a huge mistake being made, the citizens ultimately have a very clear voice. Too.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: and so,, so progress is made on two fronts, that makes sense,. I mean I'll, be the first to say,. It would be humiliating to have any disposal overturned by the citizens,, because that's a total referendum on the quality of our work and understanding of our own chart.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: nonetheless, somebody has to be in there, trying to drive a somewhat.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: hopeful mitigation, outcome.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you know.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: no,. I agree. That's basically what we have to do. I'm just saying: that.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:: it's just going to be different.

A

Curt brown,, osbt:, okay, I'm thinking ahead. Now I'm happy to have karen and how try to draft this amazing statement, but I'm also willing to volunteer to be one of two people to do that for the march meeting,. So I leave it to you to decide how you guys want to proceed with the drafting.

F

Hal hallstein osbt:, so so., karen hollweg, osbt: title wondering I'm wondering whether there could be two subcommittees.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, you're thinking about annexation of related items from motion and then you're thinking about a draft of a more formal document that actually expressly defines what has been in all prior motions.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is that correct.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I'm not just prior motions.

F

hal, hallstein osbt:, but but yeah yeah.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: but,, but a more formalized. karen hollweg, osbt: that yeah we're robust.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: statement about the all the considerations that we as one of the three landowners think are important.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: and so,. If I understand you're, saying we're going to sort of separate annexation, needs and flood project needs and get a subcommittee for each one of those..

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah, I think that's what's separating those two is what's been suggested and I'm saying to myself: if we only have a week.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, maybe we need to divide and conquer and have two subcommittees. One working on the annexation part one working on the as as dan suggested, one working on the flood mitigation part.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: see where we can get.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, your initial draft of ideas.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, your one through 10. Would it be difficult for you to look a do you think that, from what you drafted? It's it's pretty half and half between annexation and in flood.

H

Karen hollweg, osbt: no,, I think that's more flood.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I think the station or the items that we went through in the beginning, when we were going through the term sheet. Okay.

F

So.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, all of the considerations on your id on the initial draft, is, is offline for you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I think so.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: okay., curt brown, osbt:. I just wanted to. caroline miller, osbt: share that I'm really just you know. So.

H

Karen hollweg, osbt: there's there's some there's some overlap.

A

Curt brown,, osbt: yeah, there's gonna, be overlap, between., curt, brown, osbt:. These two things and.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, I guess what I'm wondering about karen is a march meeting. I'm.

A

Curt brown, osbt: should it be our goal to try to have.

A

Curt brown, osbt: motions that cover both annexation and variant, one I'm I'm concerned.

A

Karen hollweg, osbt:, we try it's only a week, though, as we've just.

A

Now.

A

curt brown, osbt:, I guess my gut feel is,. It would be really valuable to have a good statement coming out of the march 25. I'm sorry march 10.

A

Curt brown, osbt: oh, the annexation issues that are time critical for negotiations.

D

Cob, dan burke: I just might throw in the political reality of it is that councils headspace is,, as you know.

D

Cob, dan burke: on so many issues and what they're going to carve out their headspace for for this whole project is annexation. Yeah. I have a feeling like if we put something more on their lap about the flood project at this time, it.

D

Cob, dan burke:, I'm just it, may not get the booth and the attention it deserves.

D

Cob, dan burke: and I'm not if you want to go for it, do it I'm not trying to delay you in any form, or fashion. I'm just trying to think of the headspace of work council is going to be at in the next two or three months and and what might have an impact at what time.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, so I tend to really agree with dan and kurt on this one.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, maybe karen,. What do you think about a way forward of you working directly with kurt related to annexation, specific issues for the march meeting.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: and then we look towards april to basically combine what comes out of those motions and meet the muster of the board.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, with these other items, that kind of have either already met the muster with perhaps some additional tweaks.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, I know one thing of large concern is thinking about what can be done to disavow people have the idea that open spaces, a land bank,, so they they think twice about going down. Some of these roads, earlier.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, but does that? Does that seem reasonable for the timeline? Because I know a lot of this stuff other than annexation? We can pop up pretty quickly.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, and it occurs to me how one of the things we could say with our annexation motions is simply the the observation that came out of the granite, which is it's the board's expectation that disposal will not occur in all of its details. Until.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, maybe I don't we say the 90% design,, but we convey that that's the timeline this is on just so. We start adjusting people's expectations. That.

A

Curt brown, osbt: they're not going to get a disposal decision in october and that carves out a little space for the board to keep working on fleshing out the variant. One motions.

A

Curt brown, osbt: we could take care of. I could take a whack at that. It would be sort of a context thing.

A

Curt brown, osbt: that would be added to the annexation needs.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:. It seems to make sense to me because you're talking about in march, giving council what they need, that will be a benefit related to their direct discussions with see you.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well, as many of the flood things are actually negotiations with the city and utilities right and and are not as time pressing, and we can combine those as time passes, so that the whole world has a clear view of where open spaces on the holistic, for.

B

Yeah.

D

Cob, dan, burke: and and john and don's work on creating some of these whole placeholders for discussions of 2021 is basically saying. Are these the type of meetings and discussions you all, are going to need.

D

Cob, dan burke: to move into 2022 or whatever that timeframe, to start having putting meat to the bones on a specific level and.

D

Cob, dan burke:, so that's something for also you all to consider and you can give us your observation on that more in march, as well as far as are these the right subject: matters.

D

Cob, dan burke: and generally the right time frame and sequence,. So this kind of bringing it back to the schedule, you know, is this supportive of what you all feel like moving forward.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:. If you need a head nod kurt on your suggestion.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt:, I think that's fine.,.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and then I wonder if we should.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, maybe name the standing committee that karen alluded to, to work on variant, one because I would add to their tasks, looking at the timeline.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, and so maybe how and one other board member could start looking at the timeline and come to the march meeting with any suggested changes for that. That's the longer term view,, but we might as well get a committee established and get them started. Thinking.

A

Curt brown, osbt: because I think dan., curt, brown, osbt: dan's point is really good. Let staff know as early as we can, what information you're going to want when, like say a briefing on groundwater.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, I appreciate all the work that you guys have done,, knowing the last eight weeks for me has just been a little bit. More.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: a lot going: on.

H

caroline miller, osbt:, but in the interest of making sure that this is done, properly, my schedule in a week will substantially decline and current hours,. But as it stands for another week, I'm still.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: doing about a 60 hour week,, so I would actually really like to be on this and doing it,, but I I don't think that I would be able to do a good job for another seven to 10 days,. So I just wanted to.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, maybe just for the march meeting,. We should have hal and dave look hard at the at the timeline and come with suggestions. That doesn't mean that the committee can.

A

Curt brown, osbt: be a little fluid and others could join it and, as we get further down the road,, but maybe as a starting point for right now for the march meeting.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: yeah, I'm totally open to a handoff.

A

Curt brown,, osbt:, okay,, great., curt, brown, osbt: sounds all right. Yeah go ahead, dave. What were you gonna say it.

A

Dave kuntz, osbt: sounds good to me., curt brown,, osbt: okay.

C

Hal hallstein, osbt: sorry,. So what what I'm hearing is dave and I think about the timeline and kurt you and karen work on annexation, related item language.

C

Hal hallstein osbt:, yeah and.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: is there anything else for for media planning for march that we've missed.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, hey, I do have some prior work.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: that I can share with.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: karen, regarding what you guys are doing so so maybe that can be helpful or or whatever, but I'll. Let you take a look at it,, so I can contribute somewhat to that from from prior stuff done.

H

Karen hollweg, osbt: right., karen hollweg, osbt:, shoot it to me.

G

Dave kuntz, osbt: we'll have a chance to look at dan's work plan to so that's always great.

A

Curt brown, osbt: dan. I know we have other things on the march meeting. Does this seem to fit.

D

Cob, dan burke: yeah, I did some minor adjustments that all go over with you and how an order, I just expecting that you all were going to come up with something for march,. I made a little bit of a shift to clear up some space, so great.

A

Curt brown, osbt: great thank you., curt, brown,, osbt: well,, I gotta say it's been a fascinating discussion I.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. I was skeptical about what additional issues we had at least touched on,. But when you turn karen loose on these documents, things happen so.

A

Curt brown, osbt:. Do you raise a really good issues, thank you.

F

Hal hallstein osbt:, all right., karen hollweg, osbt: dave, I'm really concerned about how much things are going to change.

A

Curt brown, osbt: yeah well, and it is how said, and I think it's a really important point- to keep coming back. To.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and, of course,. This is long after I'll be off the board,, but the board's going to have to have a mitigation plan from staff that they really understand.

A

Curt brown, osbt: and, in spite of the fact that there will be limitations on the exact type of mitigation,, we might be able to do successfully. It's going to have to be a plan that the board is ready to try to sell to the citizenry that we feel that good about it, that it could be.

A

Curt brown, osbt: seen as a real advancement in certain environmental functions in that area,, even though mitigating each square foot may be really difficult,. So I I keep coming back to house point about convincing the community and being ready to do that.

A

Curt brown, osbt: that we have a plan that's,. We think that much of, and, of course it's all going to come down initially to what staff recommends, and they feel can be accomplished and and then it gets to the issue of what funds will be available for that so.

A

Curt brown, osbt: a lot of steps, between now and then.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: yeah my my biggest concern about the separating things off we've been talking about for the last 15 or 20 minutes.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: is. karen hollweg, osbt: the need to be clear in the annexation agreement.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: about. karen hollweg, osbt:, the costs.

F

karen hollweg, osbt: and,, and how they're picked up, and we have all said to each other- there's not enough money in the open space, fund.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: to do this work. It there's there's no well to go to.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt: um.

F

karen hollweg, osbt:, and maybe that's maybe given kurt your description of some kind of preface for this. That can still be included and conveyed to counsel,. But I I'm really concerned about that.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: well, I. hal hallstein osbt:. That is part of what I'm planning to bring to march,, which is some very subtle language. That tells council.-.

C

Hal hallstein osbt: that a part of telling a story that's convincing to the community, includes of perception of ecosystem cost responsibility and partnership,, and that you know I don't think we'll ever sell a story that doesn't include that.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, it's just a fact worth mentioning in case there is anyone listening, that is,, like you know all of this for five acres. Obviously, we have endangered.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: species and habitat there,, which makes it very high priority,, but it is our five acres however,. According to the united states forest service,, an estimated 6000 acres of open space or last each day. So it's at a rate of four acres per minute.

H

Caroline miller, osbt:, you know,, we are only so big, so it will run out eventually. So it's just worth noting that the new concepts and ideas for really strategic land management, along with.

H

Caroline miller, osbt: known climate change,, and what that will bring is what we,, as a board are trying to do in you know in pushing boulder and- and you know our whole open space system forward in a way, where you know we're exemplary, and you know,, maybe influence others to do the same as well.

B

Curt brown, osbt: I'll put.

A

Curt brown, osbt: okay, any other things that particularly how and karen want to.

A

Curt brown, osbt: cover in this study, session.

A

Curt brown, osbt: can I really appreciate all the work that was put into this.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it's really valuable.

G

Curt brown, osbt: yeah, I think me.

G

dave, kuntz, osbt: and karen a lot. You guys did a nice job, and it was a good conversation. Yeah.

A

Curt brown, osbt: thank you.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, I really appreciate everybody agreeing to have a study session because I.

F

Karen hollweg, osbt:, as how said at the beginning,, we never get a chance to just talk to each other.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, it's a lot easier when other people do all the work.

A

Curt brown, osbt:, okay! Well with that again, thanks to everybody, and thanks to staff, we really appreciate all your efforts and thanks to the public, to listen in on this, so to important, discussion, and with that,. I think we are adjourned until our next meeting march 10.

D

Cob, dan burke: and we don't have to say, drive, drive safe.

A

Curt brown, osbt: isn't that great right and go.

A

Curt brown, osbt: live with.