►
From YouTube: Boulder Open Space Board of Trustees Meeting 1-8-20
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
B
B
With
that
the
way
of
a
motion-
second,
second,
all
in
favor-
that's
unanimous.
The
next
item
is
public
comment
for
items
not
identified
for
a
public
hearing.
The
only
public
hearing
is
on
the
get
hard
integrated
site
project.
So
if
you
want
to
speak
to
us
about
any
other
topic,
this
would
be
the
time
to
do
it.
We
currently
have
six
people
signed
up
we'll
follow
our
usual
procedure,
call
out
several
names,
and
you
know
please
be
ready
to
come
on
down
when
when
it's
your
turn,
give
us
your
name
and
address.
B
You'll
have
three
minutes,
and
if
you're
pooling
you'll
have
five
minutes,
the
yellow
light
will
come
on
when
you
have
30
seconds
left
and
the
red
light,
and
our
buzzer
will
come
on
when
your
time
is
up,
and
if
you
reach
that
point,
please,
you
know
wrap
up
quickly.
We
appreciate
it.
First
is
Alya
House
knee
followed
by
Andre
House
knee
and
Miss
Michelle
Shu
Chuck.
D
The
standard
way
to
graze
animals
is
to
put
them
in
a
lot
in
a
large
pan
and
keep
them
there
until
most
of
the
ground
shook
up
what
happens
to
the
grass?
Isn't
it
the
cows
pick
their
favorite
type
of
grass
and
eat
all
that
type
of
fats?
Then
the
grass
uses
up
its
energy
stores
matter.
We
grow
when
we
grow
the
cows
come
by
and
eat
it
again
and
again
until
the
plants
don't
have
any
more
energy
and
then
the
cows
move
on
to
their
second
favorite
type
of
dress
and
so
on.
D
Even
every
day
that
simulates
that
moving
away
from
that
way,
the
cows
have
to
eat
all
the
grass
instead
of
to
get
full
instead
of
just
eating
their
favorite
table
once
they
move
on
the
grass
and
we
grow,
and
it
actually
helps
this
little
set
of
rational.
We
help
the
grass
by
traveling
and
pooping
on
which
also
puts
track
carbon
into
the
soil
from
there.
So
I
think
we
need
to
change
the
way
we
farm
and
switch
to
regenerative
fit
thanks
for
watching.
D
E
So
set
up
by
my
son
I
want
to
just
talk
about
some
of
the
properties
that
are
coming
up
for
bid
this
cycle
and
it
continued
to
be
really
encouraged
by
changes
in
the
process,
with
a
small
request
at
the
end
of
the
presentation.
So
the
main
property
I
wanted
to
talk
about
is
the
Lewis
baseline
complex
and
it's
an
ideal
property
for
regenerative
grazing.
So,
as
you
saw
in
the
video
that
Italy
s
made,
thank
you.
Regenerative
grazing
relies
on
moving
animals,
frequently
keeping
them
bunched
in
small
areas.
E
The
way
we
do
it
is
carbon
sequestration,
as
we
increase
soil
fertility
by
moving
the
animals
across
the
field,
biodiversity
increases
as
pastures,
become
healthy,
become
regenerated,
and
that
can
support
a
broader
diversity
of
mammals
and
birds
as
well
regenerative
food
is,
you
know,
that's
that's
healthy
to
consume,
coming
from
healthy
soils
and
profits,
and
then
for
our
farm.
Also,
it's
documenting.
We
really
want
to
tell
the
story.
E
We
want
to
show
that
it's
possible
and
document
also
the
carbon
story
that
goes
along
with
it,
so
the
Loess
property,
that's
up
for
bid
in
this
coming
season,
is
right
at
the
corner
of
baseline
and
75th
Street,
and
it's
most
of
what's
in
the
green
on
in
this
image.
Just
east
northeast
of
based
on
lake
and
the
property
is
ideal
for
regenerative
grazing.
E
It
actually
leaks
more
than
it
ever
did,
and
so
now,
based
on
light,
keeps
that
Creek
full
all
the
time.
So
that's
a
great
amount
of
water
all
throughout
the
property,
which
is
really
important
for
subdividing
fields.
You've
got
to
have
access
to
water
so
for
best
success
for
regenerative
properties,
you
need
content,
uest
properties,
it's
really
really
hard,
which
is
what
I
do
is
to
truck
animals
from
property
to
property
on
the
trailer,
and
it
really
reduces
the
incentive
to
move
them
as
frequently,
and
so
this
property
is
contiguous.
It's
excellent
for
regenerative
crazy.
E
There
are
many
points
of
water
access,
it
has
housing,
there's
a
house
on
this
property
and
it
also
has
an
excellent
hay
barn
and
an
excellent
old-fashioned,
milking
parlor
and
good
fencing.
So
this
is
a
property.
That's
well
set
up
for
a
regenerative
grazing
operation,
especially
a
dairy,
because
those
dairy
parlors
are
necessary
to
have
adjacent
to
the
fields.
You
can't
just
have
the
dairy
parlor
on
one
place
and
have
the
cows
on
another
place
because
they
have
to
move
to
and
from
it
sometimes
multiple
times
a
day.
E
So
this
property
is
really
set
up
well
for
regenerative
grazing
and
I
would
like
to
kind
of
urge
you
to
particularly
with
the
baseline
Lewis
complex,
but
also
with
the
heart
Negro
Warner
and
Biddle
properties,
which
are
adjacent
to
another
regenerative
farm,
which
is
the
golden
hoof
farm
of
Allison.
Carl
starak
is
keep
these
properties
together
and
contiguous
wherever
possible
and
totally
different
from.
E
If
you
have
a
vegetable
operation,
I
would
say:
divide
divide
divide
so
that
more
farmers
and
operations
can
utilize
that
land,
but
where
it
comes
to
grazing,
keep
them
continuous,
contiguous
and
together
for
these
properties,
favor
regenerative
grazing.
So
please
direct
the
staff
to
for
these
properties,
in
particular
to
favor
operations
which
have
regenerative
grazing
this
to
say,
rotational
and
holistic
management,
with
possibly
other
diversified
uses,
which
is
part
of
the
AG
management
plan,
and
also
for
this
particular
property.
E
F
F
That
then
goes
up,
I
think
an
undesignated
trail,
our
backyard
faces
an
undesignated
trail
called
fern
meadow,
or
something
like
that,
and
you
know
and
I
think
that's
falls
under
the
TSA
West
Trail,
studiers,
Shanahan,
Ridge
and
I
guess
I'm
here
today,
because
we've
been
in
the
house
about
six
months
and
on
four
different
of
occasions.
We've
witnessed
dogs
chasing
wildlife
and
I.
Didn't
know
anything
about
this
and
I
just
recently
learned
that
we
actually
have
laws
against
dogs
chasing
wildlife.
F
F
It
was
so
mean
gee
and
starving,
and
it
didn't
even
look
like
a
coyote,
but
we
knew
it
was
a
coyote
and
then
about
20
minutes
later
we
saw
a
dog
chase
it
across
the
meadow,
probably
at
least
a
mile,
so
or
half
a
mile,
I
I,
don't
know
something
like
that,
so
that
so
so,
then
that
got
me
thinking.
I'm
like
hey,
maybe
I
should
call
someone
so
I
called
open
space
and
they
dispatched
me
through
to
an
officer
and
I.
F
You
know
again:
I
learned
a
little
bit
more
about
the
laws
against
this
and
I
thought.
Well,
you
know.
Is
this
a
freak
like
what's
four
times
four
times
in
six
seven
months?
That's
probably
not
that
much,
but
then
I
went
back
to
our
logs
of
like
keeping
track
of
wildlife
and
we've
seen
wildlife
16
times
so
you're
saying
now.
It's
like
four
out
of
sixteen
I
have
no
idea
again.
F
If
that
that
is
a
high
frequency
rate,
but
I
thought
I
would
start,
you
know
bringing
it
to
people's
attention
and,
let's
see
what
else
do
I
want
to
say.
Oh
I
think
it's
pretty
unrealistic
to
assume
that
we
and
you
know,
dogs
off
leash,
Azhar,
not
gonna,
be
attracted
by
wildlife.
I!
Think
it's!
You
know
we
do
our
best,
but
you
know
dogs
are
just
having
fun
and
I
I
mean
I,
love
dogs,
but
I
love
wildlife
and
it
feels
like
the
wildlife
needs
a
voice
as
well.
F
So
that's
why
I'm
here
and
again,
I,
don't
know
much
about
any
of
this,
but
I
would
like
to
you
know,
maybe
throw
out
the
idea
of
dogs
remaining
on
leashes
between
the
time
of,
say,
6
p.m.
to
call
it
7:30
a.m.
because
that
is
actually
the
period
that
we've
seen
the
wildlife
was.
You
know
at
dusk
and
early
morning.
G
H
B
H
H
H
J
K
K
L
Paula
Schuler,
Boulder,
County,
I
I,
believe
you
all
received
my
email
last
week
with
the
photos
and
everything
and
that's
how
I
feel
about
things.
But
I
got
the
draft
and
I've
read
it
once
I
need
to
review
it
more
I'm
gonna
send
another
email
to
you,
but
I
wanted
to
address
a
situation
that
still
bothers
me.
It
continues
to
bother
me
it's
a
couple
things
one
I
was.
We
were
all
at
that
open
house.
L
A
lot
of
us
were,
and
the
summary
of
that
open
house
I
feel
like
I,
was
at
a
different,
open
house,
because
I
heard
countless
neighbors
of
open
space
and
tenants
all
talk
about
the
damage
of
problems
they
experienced
because
of
the
city's
unmanaged
prairie
dog
populations
on
irrigated
parcels.
The
city
really
didn't
talk
about
lethal
control.
At
that
meeting
they
had
a
jar
you
could
put
a
coin
in,
but
it
wasn't
even
talked
about.
They
are.
L
The
summary
to
me
was
a
fluff
summary
of
that
open
house
and
I
think
there
were
80
people
there
and
I.
Think
77
of
them
were
pro
agriculture,
sustainable
agriculture,
finding
a
way
to
really
remove
the
prairie
dogs
from
the
AG
lands.
But
anyway
the
talking
points
that
open-space
describes
is
not
what
the
majority
of
the
citizens
who
took
time
to
show
up
at
the
open
house
talked
about.
I
also
found
it
really
rude
and
disrespectful
that
the
moderator
got
up
and
said
we
will
not
be
dealing
with
neighbor
issues
at
this
open
house.
L
I
had
written
that
email
the
week
before
talking
about
how
they
were
ignoring
neighbor
issues
in
all
the
materials.
Then
she
says
it
at
the
open
house.
I
had
invited
I,
probably
had
20
neighbors
there.
So
and
no
one
told
me,
don't
have
your
neighbors
come.
You
know
so.
I
found
that
really
wrong,
and
additionally,
in
this
draft
58
pages,
there's
no
mention
of
the
private
property
damage
that
occurs
because
of
the
migration
from
irrigated
open
space.
L
You
know
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
money
defending
our
property
because
of
the
prairie
dog
overpopulation
on
irrigated
AG,
and
all
of
my
neighbors
do
so.
The
new
this
new
document
cites
3%
growth,
John
I,
find
that
laughable
John
was
up
here
a
couple
months
ago
and
said
8%
and
I
thought
that
was
low
regardless
open
space
is
not
at
15
or
20
percent,
because
your
neighbors
are
taking
care
of
part
of
your
problem.
We
mitigated
over
a
thousand
prairie
dogs
last
year.
L
If
there
are
3,000
prairie
dogs,
four
thousand
I'm,
Brubaker
and
Stratton.
We
took
care
of
a
whole
lot
of
your
problem,
so
the
neighbor
conflict
is
a
big
part
of
the
equation
and
I'll
ask
again
cuz.
This
is
what
I
asked.
Is
it
open
spaces
intention
to
ignore
the
damage,
the
private
that
prairie
dogs
caused
on
private
parcels,
or
does
the
city
just
not
care,
because
that's
something
I
really
want
answered?
L
B
L
B
L
L
J
Gone
this
time,
I
think
there
is
a
little
bit
of
confusion
about
this
statement
and
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
where
the
statement
came
from
about
how
we're
not
going
to
address
neighbor
issues.
I
think
some
people
interpret
that
are
saying.
We
don't
care
about
neighbor
issues,
I,
don't
think
that's
what
was
intended.
I
don't
know.
If
anyone
can
speak
more
clearly
to
what
the
intent
was
I
mean,
perhaps
it
was
meant
that
we're
not
gonna
be
looking
to
control
prairie
dogs
on
neighboring
property
or
something
like
that.
But
I
don't
know
John
do
you?
N
John
Potter
resources,
stewardship
manager,
so
the
issue
with
neighbors
was
addressed
in
the
prairie
dog
working
group,
recommendations
which
were
accepted
by
you
and
council,
and
we're
trying
to
move
forward
with
those
recommendations
in
the
way
that
we
had
presented
and
you
guys
had
had
accepted
in
there
are
a
bunch
of
issues
for
how
do
we
deal
with
the
mitigation
efforts
around
neighbors
the
we
were
proceeding
to
do
that
in
and
then
last
year,
when
you
said,
wait
this.
We
have
this.
Also
this
conflict
on
the
irrigated
AG
properties.
N
We
see
those
as
related,
but
the
neighbors.
She
was
much
larger
than
just
the
irrigated
AG
properties,
so
I
think,
possibly
through
our
current
process,
which
I'll
talk
to
you
about
in
a
little
bit
later,
we'll
get
to
some
solutions
that
could
help
all
the
way
around.
Hopefully
that
would
be
the
hope,
but
so
it's
not
that
we
aren't
interested
in
addressing
the
the
neighbor
conflicts.
It's
just
that
it.
We
didn't
see
it
as
part
of
this
current
effort
that
we're
doing
to
address
the
the
AG
properties.
That
was
their
reasoning.
A
J
G
Hi,
my
name
is
dawn,
enjoy
a
live
at
four
six:
six
one
Tallyho
court
I'm
here
to
talk
about
the
gun
barrel,
Hill,
ISP
and
part
of
it
I
wanted
to
talk
about
is
the
community
outreach.
I
went
to
the
first
meeting,
which
was
very
convenient,
was
Heather
woods
school
and
at
that
meeting
they
just
kind
of
said.
Well,
we
just
want
to
hear
from
the
citizens
on
what
they
want
for
the
area
they
didn't
have
any
plan.
I
couldn't
make
the
June
meeting
and
it
was.
G
It
was
like
five
or
six
months
later
before
they
had
a
second
meeting
in
June
in
the
summertime
and
I
guess.
At
that
point
they
gave
two
possible
plans
and
then
I
was
waiting
to
hear
when
the
next
meeting
was
going
to
be
planned.
So
I
mean
these.
Are
these
things
from
the
newspaper
I
want
to
explain
to
you?
I
only
found
out
about
the
third
meeting
on
December
9th
right
around
Christmas
time
by
accident.
I
got
an
email,
saying
field
notes,
shear
input
on
the
Wunderland
Lake
ISP
in
December.
G
Now
I
am
is
kind
of
interested
in
the
wondering
lake.
So
I
happened
to
look
down
and
it
wasn't
a
tool
down
further.
If
I
hadn't,
then
I
found
out
about
the
gun
barrel.
Hill
ISP
I
did
not
get
an
email
specifically
on
the
gun
barrel
hill
ISP
at
all.
Also
our
community
newspaper,
the
lefthand
carrier
on
that
December
4th,
which
would
have
been
the
article
to
go
through.
G
There
was
a
thing
from
Boulder
I
mean
city
of
Boulder,
open
space
about
Raptor
volunteers
meeting,
but
nothing
about
the
December
9th
meaning
about
important
changes
on
an
open
space
area.
In
our
area
there
was
something
on
the
December
8th
the
day
before
the
meeting
in
the
Daily
Camera
and
it's
a
gun
barrel
hill
integrated.
So
a
lot
of
people.
Don't
look
at
that.
You
know
so
they're
supposed
to
be
really
good
outreach
to
the
citizens.
Now
the
December
9th
meeting
they
actually
came
with
the
preferred
alternative.
G
They
had
two
alternatives
that
came
with
a
preferred
alternative.
So
then
on
just
around
12
19
right
before
Christmas
I
get
another
email
field
notes
celebrate
the
holidays
with
winter
hikes,
normally
I
wouldn't
even
look
at
this.
You
go
all
the
way
down
and
there's
something
about
share
input
on
Gunbarrel
Hill
area.
There
was
not
a
specific
email
about
Gunbarrel,
Hill
ISP,
also
natural
selections.
I
got
this
the
next
day,
Gunbarrel
hill
grassland.
G
Well,
normally
that's
about
going
for
a
hike,
I
normally
wouldn't
looked
at
it,
but
I
happened
to
look
at
it
and
there
was
sheer
input
on
governor's
Hill.
Not
only
that
this
is
the
very
busy
time
of
the
year
everyone's
busy
and
they
they
had
a
deadline
for
input
for
January.
First
I
was
astounded,
so
I
think
that
you
have
to
go
back
and
you
have
to
get
more
citizen
input
before
you
go
and
have
a
vote
on
what's
happening
at
Gunbarrel
Hill.
G
The
other
thing
I
want
to
mention
is
I'm,
actually
pretty
okay
with
most
of
the
changes,
but
I
do
have
a
real
concern
and
here's
my
concern.
It's
about
the
biking
on
this
thing
is
his
proposed
management
action.
It
says,
provide
approximately
2.6
miles,
bicycle
commuting
opportunities
to
connect
to
regional
trails,
not
bicycling,
not
hiking,
not
horseback
riding
and
all
the
others.
Now
I
walk
to
work
before
when
I
was
young
and
didn't
have
a
car
I
read
a
book
where
somebody
rode
their
horses
to
work,
but
only
on
the
bicycle
thing.
G
So
I
am
very
highly
suspicious
that
this
whole
thing
is
about
connecting
these
trails
for
a
commuter
biking
trail,
and
that
was
not
discussed
at
all
to
the
citizens.
During
this
time
it
was
all
about
the
grasshopper
sparrows
and
all
about
Shakeel,
closing
done
designated
trails
and
also
in
when
I
was
there
and
it
looked
like.
Actually.
Maybe
a
staff
member
wrote
a
note
here,
because
they
had
these
suspicious
specific
arrows.
It
said:
consider
option
to
designate
internal
UDT,
which
I
guess
is
undesignated
trail
and
decommission
Road
section.
So
what
does
decommission
Road
section
mean?
G
Does
that
mean
they're
gonna?
Take
those
trails
out
of
open
space
and
put
them
in
transportation,
because
the
other
information
that
I
sent
you
is
that
since
they're
trying
to
get
people
to
bike
to
work
more
they're
trying
to
get
the
the
trails
to
be
able
to
do
that.
But
none
of
this
was
discussed
to
the
people
during
that
time,
and
you
have
some
information
there
about
how
they
I
can't
find
it
here,
but
how
they
were
there.
G
Looking
at
regional
trails
with
open
space,
I
talked
to
the
county,
the
county
open
space
is
talking
to
Transportation
Department,
but
none
of
this
none
of
this
was
mentioned
to
the
people.
During
this
thing
and
I
also
went
to
a
meeting
and
Aaron
Brackett
said
we're
no
longer
doing
trail
studies
we're
doing
ISPs.
So
I
look
at
this
as
a
way
to
sneak
this
end
so
that
Boulder
bicycle
commuting.
This
is
not
what
they're
for
it's
not
for
commuting.
G
B
B
It
just
did
make
a
point
to
staff
that
if
there
was
sort
of
a
hiccup
that
someone
who
signed
put
their
email
address
on
a
list
didn't
get
an
email,
then
there
was
something
to
be.
You
know
try
to
figure
out
what
what
went
wrong
there.
You
know
I,
wouldn't
speculate
and
just
for
the
public
at
large.
You
may
want
to
know
where
we
stand
on
this.
So
next
month's
meeting
on
well
it'd
be
actually
February
13th,
not
the
12th
of
February
13th.
We
will
be
taking
up
the
gun
barrel,
Hill
ISP.
B
I
G
Right
if
you've,
if
you
signed
up
for
the
gun,
but
it
should
say
gun
barrel,
Hill,
ISP
update,
you
know,
put
in
your
information
like
I
said:
I
got
high
sensing.
These
things
Garda
Barrel,
Hill
grassland,
you
know
come
for
a
winter
hike
was
nothing
about
and
there
was
nothing
on
next
door.
I
asked
people.
If
they
heard
on
next
door,
I
mean
it
was
not
and
in
to
have
a
January
1st
deadline.
You
find
out
December
19th
turned
a
very
busy
time
to
have
January
1st.
You
know.
B
O
O
We're
good
yeah,
alright,
awesome,
sorry
yeah!
No!
This
is
great.
My
first
time
here.
Thank
you
guys
for
letting
me
take
the
time
so
I
came
tonight
to
talk
about
an
overarching
thing.
I
really
came
with
an
offer,
an
offer
to
help
you
accomplish
your
2019
goal
and
that
is
to
combat
climate
change.
I
read
through
your
master
plan,
absolutely
loved
it.
O
Not
many
of
us
can
do
something.
We
can
all
vote
with
our
fork
every
day
when
we
eat
something.
But
what
can
we
really
do
well?
This
is
why
I
came
to
this
meeting.
I
look
at
an
area
like
the
Lewes
property
because
of
one
major
thing:
we
talk
about
food
and
we
know
the
relationship
with
food
and
the
climate.
What
we
don't
talk
about
enough
when
we
have
this
conversation
is.
It
starts
like
this
I
care
about
what
I,
eat
and
I
care
about
the
environment,
fantastic.
O
This
is
where
our
food
comes
from,
and
this
is
what's
in
it
and
what
we
are
not
discussing
enough
is
food
waste
and
I'm,
not
talking
just
about
the
40%
in
our
country.
That
goes
straight
from
fields
into
the
landfill.
So
our
discussion
about
methane
shouldn't
be
about
cows.
It
should
be
about
food
rotting
in
landfills,
which
produces
methane
by
the
way,
the
difference
between
both
those
two
things,
methane
and
just
co2
being
released
in
the
air
oxygen.
O
This
is
the
most
brilliant
part,
all
that
food,
that's
going
to
landfills
right
now,
producing
methane
could
be
changed,
and
how
do
we
do
that
properties
like
the
Lewes
property?
First
things
we
already
talked
about
rotational
grazing
and
the
impact
on
the
environment,
how
it
sequester
co2.
Second,
part
of
this
is
creating
really
what
food
production
should
be
again
today,
which
is
going
back
to
you:
a
balanced
ecosystem
and
farming,
and
by
this
I
mean
we
have
a
thousand
cows
over
here,
and
we
have
a
thousand
acres
of
wheat
over
here
problem.
O
Is
this
farmer
over
here
wants
to
get
rid
of
a
bunch
of
cow
manure?
It's
gonna
produce
methane.
This
guy
over
here
needs
nitrogen
for
his
soil.
So
what
does
he
do
this
guy
over
here?
First
thing
he
does,
is
he
puts
kaleipus
eight
in
the
soil
to
kill
everything?
Then
he
plants
seed
for
his
cows
right,
so
we've
already
got
roundup
in
soil.
We've
already
got
something
for
cows
to
graze,
on
which
it's
not
really
good.
For
him.
You
keep
going
down
the
road
right
now.
We
have
a
field
over
here.
O
This
manure
should
be
over
here
in
a
real,
true
sustainable
farm,
something
like
what
the
Lewes
property
could
be.
We
can
bring
back
that
balance
of
nature
at
one
time
that
was
Buffalo
being
chased
by
Wolf's
and
that's
how
they
rotationally
raised.
It's
not
us
today
to
think
we're.
Gonna
go
back
to
that
is
a
very
short-sighted
way
of
looking
at
it.
We're
not
been
in
creating
in
ecosystems
that
once
was
because
we
weren't
there.
O
What
we're
doing
is
to
create
that
ecosystem
with
us
in
it
basically
recreate
a
new
balance
to
nature
three
things
like
a
lose
property.
How
could
we
do
that
number
one?
We
can
take
food
waste
from
the
community,
we
can
do
things
like
vermiculture
permaculture
brings
oxygen
and
beneficial
bacteria.
We
can
create
enough
compost
from
the
food
waste
in
Boulder
to
provide
organic
matter
for
every
garden
in
the
city
just
by
taking
that
food
waste
right
now
so
number
one.
That
means
the
last
chemicals
in
the
soil.
That
alone
is
one
step
into
it.
O
O
Guess
what
you
don't
get
it
buy
a
building
in
the
middle
of
Iowa
that
pumps
ammonia
out,
because
the
concentration
of
stench
is
so
high
if
you
want,
instead
of
using
glyphosate
to
reel
in
that
soil
before
you
plant
your
first
crop
of
alfalfa,
let
pigs
go
on
it
and
guess
what
pigs
do?
Pigs
eat
food
waste?
O
We
could
start
a
program
using
of
what
we're
doing
is
we're
saving
methane
from
a
landfill,
we're
making
better
food
for
people
to
eat
and
we're
actually
increasing
the
benefit
for
the
environment.
These
are
things
that
places
like
the
Lewes
property
can
do.
If
you
want
understand
more
about
them,
please
talk
to
hundred
who
just
need
talk
myself,
I'd
love!
Do
you
discuss
this
further?
Thank
you
guys.
Thank.
P
I
also
saw
Joaquin
Phoenix
a
little
clip
of
him
talking
at
the
I,
think
it
was
a
Golden
Globe,
Awards
I,
don't
usually
watch
those,
but
what
he
talked
about
was
how
animal-based
our
animal
based
agriculture
industry
contributes
to
climate
change.
I
think
we
all
know
that
I
think
that
scientific
fact,
what
bothers
me
is
we
have
these
discussions
and
I've
seen
this
in
on
Boulder
County
properties
over
by
McIntosh
Lake.
P
There's
this
holding
on
you
know
like
grim
death
to
irrigated
cropland,
so
we're
diverting
water,
our
rivers,
don't
even
make
it
to
the
oceans
any
longer
or
diverting
water
to
grow
forage
for
cattle
and
it
stays
in
this
system
forever,
and
it
seems
like
correct
me
if
I'm
mistaken,
but
when
these
agriculture,
when
these
leases
go
out
and
I,
have
a
lease
with
long
line,
I
get
to
sign
up
for
it
every
year.
It
doesn't
go
up
for
a
bid,
it's
not
open
to
anyone
else.
I
can
just
say
heck.
P
Yeah
I
want
to
keep
getting
this
sweetheart
deal
because
they
are
sweetheart
deals.
I
know,
I
have
one
incredibly
cheap
prices
for
these
lands
that
we
continue
to
just
insist
that
they
stay
in
this
irrigated
system,
at
the
expense
of
our
wildlife
and
we've
already
lost
60%
of
our
wildlife,
and
if
we
don't
start
doing
something
different,
we
can't
keep
doing
this
people
I
mean
we
just
can't.
We
have
to
do
something
different.
There's
got
to
be
an
answer.
P
I
don't
claim
to
have
the
whole
answer,
but
murdering
prairie
dogs
are
killing
prairie
dogs
in
order
to
sustain
this
old-fashioned
kind
of
antiquated
system
to
me
is
not
right.
We
used
to
treat
people
with
leeches.
We
don't
do
that
anymore.
We
need
to
look
outside
of
that
box.
I
think
I'm
a
bare
minimum
and
the
notes
that
I
wrote
on
the
survey
and
we
give
the
option
of
other
types
of
leases.
P
You
know
why
can't
I
purchase
the
lease
to
have
the
prairie
dogs
there
and
perhaps
I
would
be
responsible
for
trying
to
keep
them
on
the
property.
The
other
thing
I
would
point
out.
Is
my
family
owns
some
land
down
by
11
mile
reservoir,
there's
cattle
walking
on
our
property.
You
know
pooping
everywhere,
I
have
to
fence
them
out.
This
is
a
fence
out
state.
Anyone
can
run
their
cattle
and
it's
up
to
me
to
keep
them
out.
You
know
people
stand
up
here
and
say:
keep
the
wildlife
off
of
my
property.
P
B
Q
Hi,
my
name
is
Tom
Wanek
I'm,
actually
in
Adams
County,
but
the
reason
I'm
speaking,
is
because
I
work
a
lot
in
the
city
for
actually
over
15
years
and
I
work
on
all
kinds
of
projects
involving
prairie
dogs
and
non-lethal
control.
So
there
was
a
couple
things
that
I
looked
at
on
your
draft,
that
just
kind
of
really
stood
out
to
me,
and
the
first
thing
is
on
page
11,
where
you
have
the
costume
of
furry
dogs.
You
have
136,000
to
move
28
acres
of
prairie
dogs,
I,
think
that
needs
to
be
struck.
Q
That's
a
very
biased
amount
that
you
have
in
there
and
I'm
pretty
sure
you
guys
moved
more
than
28
acres
of
prairie
dogs
in
2019,
so
I
just
think
that
putting
that
kind
of
figure
out
there
people
look
at
that
like
wow,
that's
a
lot
of
money
as
a
relocator
yeah.
That
is
a
lot
of
money.
So
I
don't
know
who's
charging
you
that
for
that
amount
of
prairie
dogs,
but
I,
just
think
that
needs
to
be
moved
removed.
Q
It's
very
biased,
and
the
second
thing
I
want
to
bring
up
is
that
the
black-tailed
prairie
dog
has
been
recognized
under
the
state
wildlife
action
plan,
as
a
tier
two
species,
species
of
greatest
conservation
need
and
I'm,
just
not
seeing
that
I'm.
What
I'm
reading
through
a
lot
of
these
documents
is
that
I
am
seeing
the
that
you
are
supporting
that
prairie
dogs
do
have
an
ecological
function,
but
I'm
seeing
this
is
a
very
Pest,
biased
document,
and
so
that
concerns
me.
Q
So
I
would
like
to
see
that
as
well
that
the
state
wildlife
action
plan
is
the
most
critical
document
in
the
state
of
Colorado.
In
fact,
I'm
going
statewide
to
have
all
local
governments
adopt
that
plan,
because
these
are
the
the
animals
that
are
in
critical
path
right
now.
We
need
to
protect
them
so
and
that's
it.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and.
J
C
Q
Q
Yeah
I
just
think
I
think
just
need
to
be
fair.
That's
what
that
contractor
charged,
because
that's
what
that
contractor
charge
for
whatever
reason,
given
the
amount
of
circumstances,
but
to
say
that
is
a
guideline
that
everybody
should
be
looking
at
in
the
public
is
very
alarming.
Actually
it's
very
expensive
is
that,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
N
I
Thank
you
Tom.
You
can
probably
guess
Dan
isn't
here
tonight.
His
flights
been
delayed,
so
I'm
standing
in
for
Dan
tonight.
First
up
is
Janelle
Freeston
and
Alison
Eklund
they're
going
to
be
talking
about
partnership
and
sponsorship
efforts
and
in
just
a
slight
change
to
the
agenda.
The
genelva
also
provided
a
read
and
update
on
the
ready
to
work
program
and
based
upon
a
couple.
Questions
for
ball
from
the
board
after
Janelle's
and
Austin's
presentation
should
provide
a
little
bit
update
on
that.
R
Great
good
evening
and
thank
you,
Alison,
Eklund
and
I
are
here
tonight
to
give
an
update
on
how
OSP
has
been
building
upon
the
many
decades
of
successful
partnerships
in
our
community,
as
well
as
some
of
the
more
recent
efforts
with
the
city
of
Boulder
and
our
department
to
work
on
spot
sponsorship.
Efforts.
R
So
tonight
a
few
highlights
from
the
presentation.
We
will
explain
a
little
bit
more
in
detail
about
those
citywide
initiatives
in
the
context
that
has
that
has
helped
OSP
develop
and
further
develop.
Our
partnership
and
sponsorship
efforts
the
goals
of
those
efforts,
plans
for
2020
and
then
time
for
questions.
R
Efforts
is
to
create
consistency
among
staff
at
OSP,
we're
working
with
partners
in
our
community
and
to
give
us
tools
to
be
able
to
assess
when
and
how
and
why
to
say.
You
know
to
make
decisions
about
these
partnerships
and
sponsorship
opportunities
and
to
align
those
with
our
city
charter
and
now
with
our
master
plan,
and
so
the
goals
that
we've
identified
I'll
be
going
through
each
of
them
one
at
a
time.
So
we'll
take
a
look
here
so
the
first
goal
again
along
those
lines.
R
It's
really
internal
based,
creating
guidelines,
creating
tools
for
staff,
and
so
we
went
on
a
road
show
with
Oh
SMP
met
with
many
of
the
workgroups.
We
still
have
a
few
more
to
meet
with
in
2020
and
really
to
share
these
citywide
tools
that
have
been
created,
because
you
know
it's
one
thing
to
read
something
on
a
website.
It
means
more
when
we
can
have
a
discussion
with
these
work
groups
and
say
here's
what
we
have
we're
here
to
help
you
and
support
you
through
that
Oh
SMP
is
developing
a
decision-making
tool
and
model.
R
R
So
it's
kind
of
setting
up
these
these
guidelines
again
for
staff
to
go
through
and
think
about,
and
then
if
they
have
questions
and
they
need
support,
they
can
run
some
of
their
situations
through
the
partnership
sponsorship,
core
team
and
we're
happy
to
again
look
at
that
citywide
approach
as
well
and
say:
yes,
you
know
a
similar
department
has
worked
on
an
issue
like
this.
This
is
how
we
can
handle
you
know
and
work
through
the
situation
and
also
Alison
will
be
talking
about
some
guidelines
for
sponsorship
that
we
have
worked
on.
R
Our
second
goal
is
in
2016.
Staff
was
asked
to
put
together.
You
know
just
to
get
an
idea
like
how
many
partners
are,
you
know
are
out
there
that
OSP
is
working
with
in
the
community,
and
so
we
have
an
inventory
where
you
know
we
had
all
the
information
in
there
and
particularly
we
wanted
to
know
what
kind
of
partnership
is
that
is
there
a
written
agreement?
Is
it
a
handshake?
Is
it
a
programming,
operational
partnership?
So
we
can
have
one
place
for
retracting
that
we
know
the
staff
contact.
R
What
this
is
not
this
is
not
a
stakeholder
database,
so
we
don't
have
contact
information
for
these
partner
groups.
It's
really
who
is,
though,
I
said
these
staff
liaison
for
these
groups
and
really
the
idea
again
is
to
improve
communication.
So
if
I'm
gonna
go
out
and
have
a
meeting
with
a
certain
partner
group,
I
can
let
that
other
staff
person
know
if
they're
working
with
this
partner
as
well
on
something
else.
So
we
can
improve
communication
and
have
this
this
resource
in
this
repository
available
for
us.
So
it's
a
good
question.
R
As
far
as
how
many
lines
in
the
spreadsheet
hundreds,
however,
we
have
broken
out
so,
for
example,
Boulder
County
many
staff
with
work
with
Boulder
County
in
different
ways,
so
Boulder
County
might
take
up.
You
know
1012
lines
in
this
spreadsheet,
so
that's
what
we'll
be
doing
this
year
is
refining
that
spreadsheet
and
really
getting
that
number.
What
is
that
number
cuz
right
now?
You
know
it's
it's
a
little
more
fist,
because
there's.
R
I
Fair
to
say,
Janelle,
that
was
the
initial
run
at
it,
and
the
goal
was
then
to
go
back
out
and
analyze
it,
because
we
haven't
sort
of
done
a
count
before
so
that
you
know,
when
you
do
a
first
count.
You've
got
to
see
it
when
you
wait
out,
is,
is
this
really
a
partnership,
or
was
this
just
a
one-time
thing
that
occurred.
R
It
really
hasn't
been
updated
since
2016,
so
by
the
end
of
q1,
we've
presented
again
to
staff.
You
know
it's
their
homework
assignment
to
go
in
there
and
update
this.
Let
us
know
again
if
if
these
are
still
active
partners
now,
and
so
after
q1
we'll
have
an
idea
of
that
and
then
we'll
again
start
to
look
for
gaps
and
and
really
do
some
more
analysis
and
then
for
goal.
Three
I'm
gonna
pass
it
over
to
Allison
to
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
the
sponsorship
guideline
efforts
have
we
been
working
on.
S
We
can
start
tracking
it
and
making
sure
that
we're
building
these
relationships
with
them,
but
in
a
very
professional
way,
and
then
it
also
talks
about
tracking
for
the
department
so
that
we're
keeping
track
of
our
relationships
with
these
local
businesses
and
how
much
we're
bringing
in
if
any
and
who
the
contacts
are
and
things
like
that,
and
then
it
also
references
the
citywide
naming
policy
and
then
our
own
memorial
bench
policy.
So
it
doesn't
change
any
of
those
existing
policies.
S
Also
part
of
that
third
goal
is
the
creation
of
a
sponsorship
deck,
and
so,
when
I
say
sponsorship
deck.
This
is
an
example
of
parks
and
recs
deck
that
they
have
up
on
their
website
right
now,
and
it's
a
list
of
things
that
they
could
use
additional
outside
funding
for
the
year
and
they
they
kind
of
have
it
easy
because
they
have
a
lot
of
events.
So
it's
an
easy
thing
to
sponsor.
S
But
since
we
don't
do
events
we'll
be
a
lot
smaller
and
we'll
start,
maybe
with
three
or
four
things
for
the
year
and
see
what
sort
of
interest
there
is
the
reason
we're
doing.
This
is
because
we
already
have
a
lot
of
requests
coming
in
and
it's
usually
through
businesses
that
we
already
have
relationships
with,
and
we
really
want
to
make
this
fair
and
transparent,
and
so
we
want
to
put
it
up
to
the
public
at
large.
S
So
if
anyone
else
was
interested
in
contributing
and
partnering
with
us,
they
everybody
has
an
equal
chance
to
see
what
our
needs
might
be
for
the
year.
So
that's
the
reason
of
putting
something
like
this
up
website
in
advance
and
it's
all
items
that
are
in
the
work
plan
and
we
just
might
need
additional
outside
funding
to
expand
or
enhance.
It
doesn't
mean
that
things
would
be
canceled
or
people
yeah
wouldn't
be
doing
what
they
have
in
the
plan.
S
K
S
C
S
C
C
R
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Yes,
so
again,
this
this
OS
MP
team
is
modeling
and
emulating
the
citywide
team,
that's
working
on
partnership
and
sponsorship,
models
and
ideas,
and
how
can
we,
you
know,
be
consistent
and
innovative.
So
thank
you.
So
that's
our
third
goal
from
the
team
and
then
and
then
the
fourth
goal
is
to
identify
gaps
and
future
opportunities
for
partnerships
and
sponsorships
and
again
that
goes
kind
of
it's
tied
back
to
the
inventory.
You
know
our
community
is
growing.
There's
other
groups
out
there.
R
You
know
maybe
we're
working
with
certain
groups
and
we're
not
over
forgetting
about
others
and
or
maybe
there's
you
know
again
with
creating
best
practices.
Are
we
meeting
with
our
partners?
Are
we
communicating
with
them
throughout
the
year?
Are
we
getting
feedback
from
them
on
what
it's
like
to
partner
with
OS
NP?
You
know
again
just
creating
those
those
guidelines
and
that
consistency,
so
that
we
can.
We
can
be
the
best
partners
we
can
be
in
the
community
and
so
our
plans
for
2020.
So
it's
going
to
be
continued
to
progress
on
those
four
goals.
R
We'll
continue
to
meet
as
a
core
team
for
OS
NP
will
continue
to
meet
with
our
citywide
team
and
then,
in
addition
to
that,
we
do
have.
As
you
know,
some
of
our
partnerships
do
you
have
those
written
agreements,
some
of
many
in
the
form
of
mo
use,
memorandums
of
understanding
and
some
of
those
are
ready
for
renewal
in
2021.
R
B
Does
it
occur
that
someone
either
wants
to
sponsor
something
or
wants
to
partner
with
us,
and
we
decline
that
offer
I'm
trying
to
understand
whether
that
is
part
of
the
problem
you're
trying
to
solve
here?
Is
that
we're
getting
some
unhelpful
requests
or
is
it
more
about
just
embracing
the
the
helpful
ones
right.
R
Well,
I'd
say
what
it
is:
is
it's
again
creating
that
transparency
with
the
community
and
with
us
so
that
we
every
set
person
can
have
the
tools
to
be
able
to
say.
Like
you
know,
we
can't
entertain
your
your
requests
or
we
can't
and
here's
why
so
yeah
and
we
have
gotten
a
few
this
year
that
we
have
said
no
to.
R
K
I
K
I
Typically,
the
MOU
is
something
that
we
work
with
with
a
partner
that
will
go
through.
Like
you
know,
city
manager's,
signature,
I,
don't
believe.
That's
been
a
the
weeper
said:
hey
we're
working
on
this
MOU
like
a
good
example,
would
be
bosque
right.
Technically,
the
board
isn't
like
approving
it
out
doing
an
action
on
it.
It
gets
to
see
the
MOU
provide
comment,
and
but
it's
the
city
manager
who's
ultimately
signing
off
on
it.
So.
I
R
And
the
reason
we
brought
particularly
boss
to
the
board
is
because
it
was
a
new
partnership.
You
know
a
new
model
of
its
kind
where
you
know
they
are.
You
know,
there's
gonna
be
fundraising
for
us
they're
gonna,
be
you
know
doing
something
that
our
other
mo
years
weren't
doing
our
other
em
are
use
in
general,
are
addressing
maintenance
issues
or
like
thinking
of
like
the
boulder
start
with
a
boulder
chamber.
You
know
they
manage
the
boulder
star
it's
on
our
land,
so
those
em
are
you
use
our?
R
I
Is
an
intent
to
start?
You
know,
we've
been-
and
this
is
part
of
this,
as
you
know,
beginning
in
especially
last
year,
but
in
the
last
two
years
we
kind
of
initially
you
can
imagine
back
in
the
day,
had
a
folder
full
of
em
who
use
what
we're
saying
is.
How
do
we
approve
this
process?
Make
it
more
transparent
help
decision
making
so
part
of
it
is
to
say
yes
manually.
We
can
do
a
partnership
update,
which
includes
all
the
mo
use
we
might
have
been
working
on
during
that
year
for
the
Porta
C
yeah.
K
I
R
K
You
thank
you.
The
other
thing
I
was
going
to
say
is
on
the
inventory.
Is
there
a
budget
or
financial
line
so
that
there's
a
you
know,
there's
a
way
to
indicate
you
know
kind
of
the
funding
situation
either
how
much
the
department
has
to
contribute
or
kind
of
what
the
funding
arrangement
is
for
those
partners
or
sponsors
as.
K
Think,
from
my
perspective,
that
would
be
very
helpful
to
have
that
information.
So
again,
especially
the
board
has
some
sense
of
okay.
What
what
is
it
that
we're
looking
at
financially
as
far
as
the
department's
contribution,
or
what
other
you
know,
contributions
are
coming
from.
You
know
the
partner
response.
R
K
I
It
is
good
plaintiff,
is
you
know
it's
some
of
the
less
formal
partnerships
which
are
more
just.
Let's
Janelle
talk
about
sometimes
a
handshake
based
upon
a
discussion
with
someone
as
we
get
more
formal-
and
this
is
the
new
city
guidance
that
emerged
mm-hmm.
It
said,
let's
start
formalized
what
the
goals
are
on
both
sides
and
that
the
joint
goals-
and
then
it's
also
kind
of
you're
getting
at
the
consumptive
site,
but
what's
also
the
non
comes,
some
differ
fits
it.
I
K
R
M
M
You
know,
within
the
Charter
we
focus
on
the
idea
of
non-exclusive
license
and
part
of
what
this
system
does
is
protect
us
from
experiencing
commercialization
at
every
turn
and
I
do
think
the
criteria
that
we're
looking
at,
particularly
in
sponsorship
where
there
is
exchange
of
value,
we
run
the
risk
of
creating
people
with
a
sense
of
ownership.
They
truly
don't
have
the
ownership
lying
and
the
taxpayers
of
the
city
of
Boulder
only
and
exclusively,
and
so
I
think
it's
wonderful
to
look
at
it.
M
Explore
it
and
I
think
it
is
a
community-wide
question
to
what
extent
we
are
going
to
let
commercial
visibility
exist
on
this
system
because
fundamentally
I
know
not
just
as
a
board
member,
but
as
a
community
member.
The
reason
I
go
out.
There
is
to
get
away
from
the
logos
and
feeling
like
I'm
being
sold.
Something
so
I
offer
that
I.
C
Totally
agree
with
hell
and
the
thing
that
I
marked
on
this
agenda
item
is
the
when
to
say
yes
or
no
creating
guidelines
which
several
others
have
mentioned
mm-hmm.
Can
we
get
a
chance
to
see
those
because
I
I
see
that
as
a
board
function
to
be
able
to
know
about
and
review
that
kind
of
policy
grounded
information,
yeah.
I
I
R
And
some
of
those
to
give
an
example
of
what
some
of
those
would
be
is,
for
example,
so,
like
citywide,
there
they're
saying
you
know,
think
about
think
about
the
risk
involved.
Think
about
the
you
know,
pay
to
play
ours.
We
would
say
similar
things.
We'd
also
say:
look
at
the
Charter.
Does
it
does
it?
You
know,
support
a
charter
purpose.
Does
it
support
a
master-planned
purpose?
Does
it
fit
within
the
work
plan,
so
we
would
be
adding
more
elements
to
that.
It's
really.
R
J
J
B
R
Great,
so
the
next
item
that
I
was
going
to
share
is
in
response
to
a
written
update,
that's
in
the
packet,
but
everyone
can
take
a
peek
out
if
they
haven't
already-
and
this
is
to
highlight
this-
some
of
the
successes
and
results
from
our
2019
relationship
and
work
with
the
bridge
house
ready
to
work
program,
and
this
is
a
program
that
OSP
has
been
working
with
the
bridge
house
program
since
2014
and
many
of
our
workgroups.
Do
you
work
with
ready
to
work
and
I'll
fast
forward
to
the
next
slide,
and
it's
pretty
impressive.
R
This
program
has
been
growing
over
the
last
seven
years
now
and
with
it.
What
we're
finding
is
that
our
workgroups,
this
group
is
in
high
demand.
Our
groups
are
really
asking
to
work
with
ready
to
work,
they
can
really
depend
on
and
they
know
what
to
expect
from
the
work
product
from
ready
to
work,
and
so
they
have
a
very
full
calendar
from
February
through
October
and
again.
These
are
the
workgroups
that
they
are
working
with.
R
The
most
days
in
2019
was
with
Water
Resources,
and
this
is
something
that
the
Water
Resources
Group,
the
work
that
they're
doing
is
opening
the
ditches.
You
know
getting
the
debris
removed
from
the
ditches
so
that
water
can
start
to
flow
and
it's
a
really
tight
timeframe
and
in
the
spring,
as
we
know,
we
get
really
strong
wind
days.
We
get
bad
weather
days
and
these
crews
are
out
there.
You
know,
of
course,
safety
is
number
one
concern.
R
So
if
the
weather
is
terrible,
we're
not
gonna
have
them
out
there,
but
they're
doing
really
hard
work
day
in
and
day
out
to
get
that
water
running
for
our
farmers,
as
well
as
our
vegetation
management
group,
you
can
see
agriculture,
trailheads
forestry
and
then
also
some
work
with
trails
rangers
and
wildlife.
So
every
year
we
found
that
this
has
grown
in
success
and
grown
in
demand,
and
we're
just
really
proud
to
be
able
to
share
that
with
you
tonight.
R
Here's
again
looking
at
some
of
the
metrics
that
they
helped
with
Hovis
impede
again
the
numbers
speak
for
themselves,
but
this
is
work
that
is
really
really
needed
and
they
get
a
lot
done
in
the
days
that
they
work
and
I
should
say.
These
are
just
for
the
ready
to
work,
full
crew
that
ready
to
work
light
crew
that
is
outlined
in
the
memo
as
well.
R
We
just
didn't
get
to
pull
all
of
the
information
together
into
one
for
this
slide,
if
they're
also
doing
things
their
work
is
more
geared
towards
those
lighter
tasks
so
more
like
the
trailheads
picking
up
litter,
and
actually
some
of
the
trash
removed
was
probably
from
some
of
their
work.
But
again
impressive
numbers
they're
worth
ready
to
work
and
we've
been
receiving
a
lot
again
of
feedback
from
the
work
groups
that
they
appreciate
this
relationship
with
ready
to
work.
R
We
do
have
some
days
where
we
invite
volunteers
to
work
alongside
them,
because
we
figure
we're
out
there
anyway,
we're
doing
we're
working
on
a
project.
Let's
get
the
community
involved
as
well
and
we're
looking
forward
to
working
with
them
in
2020
and
so
I'm.
Happy
to
answer
any
questions
in
regards
to
this
or
anything
that
was
in
the
written
memo.
R
R
Point
so
so
again,
starting
in
2014,
we
started
with
just
the
ready
to
work.
We
call
it
the
full
crew,
because
they're
working
the
longest
they're
working
February
through
October
and
then
we
started
piloting
in
20-
was
2016
they're
ready
to
work
light
program.
So
in
that
case
the
contract
changed
because
we
added
a
new
element
to
it.
R
Really,
since
we
started
that
pilot,
the
contract
hasn't
changed
that
much,
we
will
change
the
rates
so
we'll
do
an
amendment
to
the
rates.
But
otherwise
you
know
it's
it's
building
the
capacity
within
staff
and
yeah.
We
have
them
first
set
amount
of
days
and
the
work
groups
that
we
we
plan
with
them.
R
Now
our
staff
is
planning
with
them
now
and
I
should
mention
it's
Kristin
Weinberger,
who
manages
this
program
she's
been
doing
this
for
many
years
and
does
a
really
great
job,
so
she's
meeting
with
the
work
groups
and
trying
to
figure
out
you
know
what
weeks
ready
work
which
you
know
we're.
Where
can
we
fit
them
in
and
then
actually
Parks
and
Rec?
They
share
they're
ready
to
work
light
crew
with
us,
so
they
they
we
get
them.
R
K
K
R
Thank
you.
So
in
2019
the
cost
of
the
contract
was
one
hundred
and
thirteen
thousand
three
hundred
and
forty
two
dollars
with
that.
We
do
have
two
so
I
should
say
with
that.
They're
ready
to
work
programs
provides
the
crews,
the
crew
leaders,
the
vehicle,
the
uniforms
and
then
the
training
on
there
and
the
insurance.
R
All
of
that
that
goes
into
that,
as
well
as
with
the
program
what
those
members
are
getting
is
they're
getting
that
the
bridge
house
support
to
get
them
to
self-sufficiency,
so
that's
all
part
of
the
contract
and
then
on
our
n
for
o
SMP.
We
have
two
volunteer
service,
learning
partnerships,
temp
staff,
and
so
they
are
out
there
in
the
field,
making
sure
that
you
know
the
works,
getting
coordinating
and
they're
working
shoulder-to-shoulder
with
them
out
there
throughout
the
day
as
well,
and
then
the
field
experts
from
Water
Resources
AG.
R
You
know
ideally
they're
out
there
as
well
to
be
able
to
really
you
know,
set
the
parameters
of
the
project
because
a
lot
of
the
things
we're
working
around
sensitive
species.
We
want
to
make
sure,
especially
with
any
kind
of
invasive
species,
removal
or
work
in
the
ditches
that
you
know
the
things
that
need
to
be
removed
of
being
removed
and
we're
that
they're
working
really
carefully
around
the
sensitive
habitats.
A
R
That
right,
correct
that
is
correct
and
because
of
our
long-standing
relationship
with
Bridge
house
they,
so
this
crew
for
ready
to
work
is,
is
one
that
you
know
they're
you
they're
sending
members
to
us
that
are
in
the
ready
to
work
program.
So
I
mean
this
is
a
you
know.
This
is
a
coveted
job.
You
know
this
is
a
coveted
role
to
work
with
the
Oh
SMP
program,
and
so
bridge
houses
has
really
helped.
Both
of
us
together
has
helped
cultivate
that,
on.
M
R
M
R
Can
find
out
for
you
yeah,
not
the
total
number
of
days
that
they've
worked
February
to
the
end
of
October,
but
again
there
was
some
weather
cancellation
days
there
and
I
will
say
to
our
staff
every
year.
They
continue
to
advance
this
program
and
so
in
the
last
couple
years,
because
the
goal
is
when
the
when
folks
graduate
from
this
program
they'll
go
out
and
get
a
job
and
hopefully
in
water,
you
know
and
land
resources
and
what
we've
been
doing
is
giving
certificates
so
once
they've
completed
so
much
work
and
some
of
them
really.
R
You
know,
skills
with
equipment.
They've
worked
so
many
hours
with
a
brush
saw
or
they've
worked
so
many
hours
on
trails
or
so
many
hours
with
IPM.
We
give
them
a
certificate
that
we
make
itto
SMP
and
they
sign,
and
we
sign-
and
you
know
that
gives
them
so
much
pride,
but
then
they
can
take
into
their
job
interviews
share
with
their
future
employers
and
say,
look
what
I've
accomplished
here.
So
it's
really
been
gratifying
to
see
the
progression
in.
R
N
Hello
I'm
here,
to
give
you
a
brief
update
on
the
review
process
around
irrigated
AG
lands
and
prairie
dogs
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
our
team.
That's
been
working
very
hard
on
this
issue
and
great
thanks
to
mark
Gershman,
heather,
swanson,
andy
palster,
Val,
Matheson,
Allison,
Eklund,
Phil,
Yates,
and
probably
forgetting
somebody,
but
this
group,
as
really
I,
think
stepped
up
and
done
a
great
great
job
on
starting
to
pull
this
expedited
review
together.
N
I
also
wanted
to
express
the
staff
teams
appreciation
to
Karen
whole
wig
and
Dave
Koontz,
who
have
been
helping
us
with
process
related
questions,
and
we
really
appreciate
the
guidance
that
they've
been
giving
us.
So
to
recap.
Last
year
the
open
space
board
of
trustees
and
the
City
Council
identified
that
conflicts
between
the
cities,
prairie
dog
management
policy
and
the
viability
of
agricultural
operations,
was
threatening
us
to
deliver
on
all
of
the
Charter
purposes,
particularly
around
agriculture,
and
so
they,
you
also
identified
that
we
had
issues
with
soil
degradation
and
soil
loss.
N
Working
with
Karen
and
Dave,
we
developed
a
process
that
had
has
three
windows
of
engagement
following
the
city's
guidance
on
public
engagement
and
the
first
of
these
was
October
in
November,
and
that
was
the
first
window
of
engagement
and
the
information
regarding
that
is
summarized
in
the
packet
that
we
provided
with
you
with
today.
We
will
go
into
much
more
detail
on
that
at
the
study
session
on
February
12th,
using
the
community
input
from
that
first
engagement
staff
developed
and
has
initially
evaluated
a
set
of
potential
rec
actions.
N
Those
were
put
together
in
a
report
that
looks
like
this
and
got
posted
up
on
the
website
and
sent
out
through
social
media
and
emails
on
Monday
this
Monday
and
that
opened
the
second
engagement
window,
which
started
January
6th
and
will
run
through
February
16th
in
some
of
the
materials
you'll
see
that
that
window
was
initially
February
12th.
But
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
provided
enough
time
for
people
after
your
study
session
to
weigh
in
with
any
further
thoughts
that
they
they
might
have.
So
we
ran
it
through
that
Sunday.
N
So
that
went
out
on
Monday
staff
is
seeking
public
feedback
on
this
on
this
packet.
On
this
information,
that's
in
here
and
we're
doing
that
by
using
the
be
hold,
be
heard,
Boulder
tool,
which
is
an
online
tool
which
is
all
links
to
that,
have
also
been
sent
out
in
all
the
social
media
and
the
emails,
and
all
that,
and
it's
also
up
on
the
website.
We're
also
planning
to
hold
two
open
office
hours,
one
of
them
on
Monday
January
27th
from
5
to
7
p.m.
N
and
the
other
Tuesday
February
4th
from
2
to
4
p.m.
at
the
OS
MP
office
at
25,
2015
3
and
those
open
office
hours
will
be
for
assistance
with
the
be
heard
alder
online
tool
input
that
we
receive
through
February
4th
during
that
period,
we'll
be
able
to
summarize
and
provide
for
the
open
space
board.
At
the
study
session
on
February
12th.
N
So,
with
regards
to
the
process,
there
will
be
a
public
comment
opportunity
on
February
12th
when
we
have
the
study
session
and
by
the
way
we
are
recommending
that
we
split
out
the
study
session
from
the
regular
meeting
and
I
think
Tom.
You
alluded
to
this
a
little
bit
earlier
and
maybe
we'll
go
into
that
later.
When
we
talk
about
upcoming
public
meetings,
but
the
idea
there
was,
we
could
dedicate
all
of
the
evening
of
the
12
pretty
much
to
the
prairie
dog
study
session
really
get
into
the
detail
there
and
then.
B
To
elaborate
on
that,
so
on
the
12th
that
will
be
among
that
would
be
a
regularly
notice.
You
know
second
Wednesday
of
the
month
meeting.
It
will
include
a
study
session
and
there's
no
public
comment
during
the
study
session.
But
before
we
break
into
the
study
session,
there'll
be
the
usual
opportunity
for
public
comment
on
anything
of
it,
which
would
certainly
include
anyone
who
wants
to
speak
to
us
in
advance
of
the
study
session
on
prairie
dog.
B
B
So
if
you
want
to
speak
sort
of
retrospective
lead
to
something
you
heard
of
the
study
session,
that's
an
opportunity
to
do
that
and
then
I'll
just
to
remind
everyone
that
the
email
windows
that
John
is
describing
are
four
emails,
that
sort
of
get
formally
sort
of
tabulated
by
staff
and
put
into
you
know
sort
of
compiled
in
a
more
formal
way,
you're,
always
free
on
any
subject
to
email.
The
board,
whenever
you
want
to,
and
so
something
occurs
to
you
outside
of
that
window
or
you.
A
N
A
lot
appreciate
that
so
at
the
study
session
and
on
the
12th,
our
plan
would
be
to
discuss
the
results
of
the
first
engagement
window
and
how
we,
how
we
looked
at
that
and
considered
that
and
then
how
it
related
it
related
and
developed
and
and
turned
into
the
potential
actions
that
we've
now
put
out
in
this
document.
And
then
once
we
get
following
the
board's
input.
N
The
night
of
the
study
session,
as
well
as
input
from
the
public
and
either
of
those
public
comment
sessions
that
you
described
Tom
as
well
as
information
that
we
get
through
the
be
heard
boulder
online
tool.
We
will
then
put
that,
together
into
a
recommendation
that
we
would
plan
to
bring
to
you
at
your
March
meeting
your
March
11th
meeting
the
third
engagement
window.
So
I've
talked
about
the
first
two.
The
third
one
would
begin
on
February
26
when
we
distribute
the
materials
for
that
meeting.
N
So
we
will
do
all
that
thinking
and
tweaking
and
put
that
together
following
the
study
session
by
February
26th.
Put
that
out
ahead
of
your
March
11th
meeting,
and
then
there
will
also
be
a
public
hearing
at
your
March
11th
meeting,
where
people
would
again
be
able
to
comment
on
that
recommendation
that
we
would
be
putting
together
for
that
meeting
following
following
that,
if
you
care
to
make
a
recommendation
at
that
meeting,
we
would
plan
to
take
that
in
some
form
to
Council
later
on
in
April
or
so
when
we
can
get
on
their
agenda.
N
B
Well,
thanks
thanks,
John
I
might
add
a
couple
things
and
others
I'm
sure
do
as
well
or
perhaps
do
the
first
is
I
just
wanted
to
express.
My
thanks
to
staff.
I
did
have
a
chance
to
read
carefully
what
was
prepared
a
draft
and
evaluation
of
potential
actions,
and
you
know
we're,
as
always
mindful
of
the
fact
that
this
was
an
issue
was
initiated
by
the
board
and
supported
by
counsels.
Not.
J
B
I
think
we
hear,
if
at
all
possible,
are
two
if
there's
anything
that
someone
feels
they're
going
to
want
at
the
study
session.
This
would
be
a
good
time
to
say
that
or
if
it
occurs
to
you
later,
you
can
obviously
email
staff
directly.
But
the
one
thing
we
obviously
want
to
avoid
is
a
lot
of
questions
at
the
study
session
that
were
sort
of
unexpected
require
further
analysis,
further
work,
and
it's
like
alright
well
now
we're
kind
of
endangering
our
own
schedule.
So
that's
all
you
know
either
now
or
two
separately.
B
B
Those
lines
one
I
was
gonna
suggest
this
to
make
sure
it
could
probably
just
go
into
the
packet
in
advance
of
the
12th
would
be.
We
ought
to
have
all
of
the
ordinances.
They
may
not
be
a
lot
of
them,
but
I
think
there
are
some
potentially
complicated
issues
here
of
what
sort
of
is
within
the
scope
of
an
existing
ordinance
and
as
just
an
action
within
an
existing
ordinance
versus
what
requires
changing
an
ordinance
and
it'd
be
helpful.
You
know
just
regular
did
have
you
know
copies
of
all
that
great.
C
C
T
We
can
certainly
include
more
detail,
but
in
general,
the
management
designations
were
placed
on
each
colony,
based
on
a
series
of
criteria,
and
so
the
difference
between
a
transition
and
a
removal
area
is
not
just
a
name
it's
in
the
number
of
criteria
that
it
met
as
far
as
level
of
conflict.
So
in
general,
removal
errors
are
those
areas
where
there
was
conflict
with
prairie
dogs
and
other
land
management,
which
usually
is
is
agriculture.
T
Although
there
are
a
couple
of
exceptions
to
that,
and
we
also
didn't
really
have
other
values
like
associated
species
associated
with
the
prairie
dogs
in
the
transition
areas,
which
is
the
vast
majority
of
our
irrigated
agricultural
areas.
Those
conflicts
with
the
prairie
dogs
exist,
but
we
also
have
associated
species,
so
something
like
Golden
Eagles
have
been
observed,
hunting
the
colony
or
so
there
is
a
natural
resource
value
of
that
colony.
T
That
goes
above
and
beyond
just
the
prairie
dogs
selves,
but
the
idea
of
transition
is
to
transition
from
prairie
dogs
to
the
other,
determined
land
management.
So
the
main
explain
to
the
main
difference
between
them
is
that
the
grassland
plan
on
the
point
of
lethal
control
does
not
have
limits
on
lethal
control
and
removal
areas
on
transition
areas.
The
intention
was
that
that
transition
would
happen
through
relocation
or
natural
or
plague
related
population
declines
and
then
may
be
minimal
lethal
control
for
remaining
animals.
T
T
M
We've
saved
a
lot
of
time
to
get
into
the
details.
I
wanted
to
step
back
I'm,
not
even
myself,
having
trouble
following
the
venues
in
the
meetings
for
the
public's
benefit.
Will
you
just
help
clarify
on
the
13th
off-site
we're
holding
an
official
business
right?
There
will
not
be
prairie
dog
business
at
that
yeah.
B
So
the
February
13th
will
be
a
continuation
of
the
business
meeting.
There
will
be
at
the
beginning.
Public
comment
on
item
there'll
be
some
other
agenda
items
at
that
meeting,
including
the
gun
barrel
ISP.
But
so
anyone
who
wants
to
talk
about
prairie
dogs
on
the
13th
we'd
be
talking
during
open
comment
on
items
not
set
for
a
public
hearing
and
the
13th
will
be
at
the
open
space
hub
at
our
usual
usual
six
o'clock
time.
So
they
can
speak
sort
of.
B
B
But
at
this
point
there
is
no
plan
to
have
any
other
prairie
dog
discussion
on
the
agenda.
I
mean
you
know
under
matter,
so
I
can't
promise
that
no
one
will
say
something,
but
it
is
not
plan
to
have
any
formal
time
set
aside
for
the
board
and
staff
to
be
discussing
prairie
dogs,
but
we
will
receive
whatever
comments
people
choose
to
make
at
that
time.
Yeah.
Well,
the
next
time
we
discuss
it
as
a
board
would
be
at
the
March
11th
meeting
and.
M
B
And
I
one
thing
that
we
haven't
decided
yet
is
whether
or
not-
and
it's
probably
this
is
a
good
time
as
any
since
you've
raised.
It
is
whether
or
not
to
have
two
meetings
in
March
the
concern.
There
is
not
the
few
minutes
to
say
goodbye
to
me.
The
issue
is
that
the
South
Boulder
Creek
flood
mitigation
is
a
fairly
complicated
issue,
even
just
the
part
of
it
about
upstream
that
we've
chosen
to
identify
for
that
meeting.
B
The
concern
is
that
you
know:
are
we
by
doing
prairie
dogs
and
south
boulder
creek
in
the
same
meeting?
Are
we
putting
too
much
on
there?
I
think
it's
probably
fair
to
say
that
we
are
uncertain,
but
if
people
have
a
clear
opinion
on
that
issue,
please
speak
up
I
mean
to
say
the
obvious,
but
there's
value
in
trying
to
limit
to
one
meeting
a
month,
because
people
don't
plan
on
a
second
meeting.
They
have
other
events
scheduled
where
it's
those
who
follow
us
have
the
second
wednesday
set
aside
and
adding
additional
meetings.
B
B
G
J
B
B
B
A
N
G
B
M
I
B
B
A
K
And
so
John
I
had
a
couple
of
requests.
Actually,
okay,
so
I
think.
Given
the
concern.
The
recent
concern
expressed
to
Boulder
County
on
the
relationship
between
Raptor
nests
and
prairie
dog
removal
sites,
my
request
would
be-
and
it's
kind
of
a
question
because
I:
don't
if
you
don't
have
the
information
or
it's
gonna,
be
too
difficult
to
generate,
then
I
hesitate
to
suggest
that
we
move
ahead.
K
The
other
thing
is:
I
somewhat
hesitate
this,
because
I
know
a
couple.
People
have
already
copied
it,
but
I
think
it
would
the
the
drafts
approach
an
evaluation
of
potential
actions,
I
think
that
would
be
worth
formally
delivering
to
board
members
because
of
the
breadth
of
the
information
and
the
need
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
that
as
part
of
our
material.
So
I
would
ask
that
hard
copies,
be
provided
to
board
members
for
their
review
and
consideration.
K
B
Yeah
I
think
we
may
have
punted
to
this
discussion.
The
question
that
Paula
Schuler
was
asking
about
your
understanding
and
our
understanding
of
the
scope
of
this
issue
with
respect
neighbor
concerns,
yep
I
think
it's
probably
you
know,
you
know
articulate
that
now,
rather
than
have
potentially
members
of
the
public
speaking
at
the
study
session,
based
on
a
misunderstanding
of
that
issue,
so
it
was
okay,
it's
okay,
but
if
you
want
to
articulate
your
understanding
of
that
and
we'll
see
where,
if
we're
all
on
the
same
page
and.
C
And
may
I
just
ask
a
follow
on
question
before
you
begin
for
me.
Much
of
the
input
that
we've
gotten
over
the
years
is
from
neighbors
who
know
from
watching
out
their
windows.
What's
going
on
with
the
prairie
dog
colonies
in
the
northern
area,
up
there
and
and
I
think
that's
been
an
important
input
for
us
to
learn
about
the
situation.
B
And
maybe
I
could
follow
up
on
that
to
maybe
crystallize
it
one
step
further.
If
the
situation
is
that
on
a
particular
piece
of
property,
the
prairie
dogs
are
both
presenting
the
potential
conflict
to
irrigated
AG
on
that
property
and
are
also
going
on
to
neighboring
lands.
I
would
think
we
would
all
agree.
Well,
that's
in
what's
the
understanding
that
the
neighbors
are
observing
that
do
the
prairie
dogs
are
so
numerous
on
this
property
that
they're
leaving
the
property.
B
That's
in
to
me
is
in
scope,
maybe
I,
don't
anyone
who
disagrees
with
that,
but
that
to
me
would
be
in
scope.
The
hard
question
is
what,
if
you
have
an
irrigated
AG
land
north
of
Jay
Road,
which
does
not
appear
to
experience
a
conflict
on
the
land
but
is
causing
prairie
dogs
to
go
on
to
a
neighbor's
land
I,
don't
know
whether
Stratton
and
Brubaker
fit
that
description
or
not,
but
in
that
situation,
where
it's
really
not
about
an
Ag
conflict,
but
really
it's
the
neighbor
conflict
would
be
the
driver.
C
G
N
Yes
very
complicated,
it
would
be
great
stuff
to
get
into
at
the
study
session
on
February
12th
I
will
maybe
just
speak
to
like
how
neighbors
might
feel
they
might
want
to
weigh
in
in
terms
of
commenting
on
this,
and
so
largely
our
focus
and
our
direction
in
the
way
we
heard
it
was.
This
is
about
the
hardship
on
our
ranchers
in
the
area
north
of
Jay
Road,
so
that
has
been
our
primary
focus
and
that's.
N
J
It
would
seem
reasonable
to
you,
then,
that
this
document
would
try
to
capture
what
the
impacts
are
on
neighbors
as
well
as
on
our
less
sees,
because
we
might
also
have
benefits
to
lessees
and
neighbors
through
various
types
of
policy
actions
and
we'd
like
to
capture
those
benefits,
I
think
in
the
policy
analysis,
but
maybe
you're
feeling
like
that.
Just
takes
us
too
far
out
of
scope.
Well,
what's
your
thinking.
N
That
that
would
be,
in
addition
from
the
standpoint
of
the
staff
team,
how
we
took
the
direction,
but
we
can.
We
can
do
that
if
we
have
not
that
that
has
not
been
a
part
of
the
process,
the
whole
time
so
and
that's
what
hence
the
some
of
the
feedback
that
you've
heard.
We
could
figure
out
how
to
address
that,
the
best
that
we
can
in
the
time
that
we
have
between
now
and
the
February
12
study
session.
J
Appreciate
we
may
have
a
better
handle
on
that,
but
I'm
I
think
I'm
with
others
here
that
it's
such
an
important
motivation
for
this
whole
effort.
That
I
think
we
would
try
to
capture
those
external
out
those
externalities
of
our
current
policy
if
we
can
but
then
also
the
benefits
that
will
accrue
through
various
things
like
barriers
or
whatever.
So
anyway,
that's
my
general
view
on
I
agree.
M
B
N
And
I
will,
I
alluded
earlier
during
the
public
comment
period
to
the
prairie-dog
working
group
recommendations
and
if
you'll
recall,
there
were
a
number
of
complex
strategies
addressed
in
there
towards
the
neighbor
conflict
issue,
and
we
have
kind
of
put
that
to
the
side.
While
we
took
on
this
this
other
whole
effort
here
we
it's
all
the
same
staff
that
are
working
on
these
issues
and
also
trying
to
move
500-600
prairie
dogs
this
year.
N
So
we've
we've
been
doing
the
best
we
can
and
kind
of
all
these
different
fronts
and
well
I
think
that
this
expedited
review
could
result
in
some
benefits
to
neighbors
in
this
area.
Our
our
full
effort
for
that
is
more
in
the
prairie
dog
working
group
recommendations
which
we
will
get
to
as
soon
as
we
can
get
through
this
other
stuff
so
and.
J
Just
to
be
clear,
I
certainly
agree:
it's
not
a
goal
of
this
effort
to
figure
out
new
ways
to
prevent
impacts
on
neighbors
you're
right.
That
was
the
prairie
dog
working
rule.
I,
just
think,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
acknowledge
and
understand
those
impacts
and
then
also
benefits
that
would
accrue
I
I
can
appreciate.
You
can
only
do
so
much
it's
just.
J
K
I
agree
with
with
both
I
think
there
is
a
cautionary
tale
in
here
on.
You
know,
focusing
the
effort,
but
I
also
think
that
you
know
a
good
compromise
might
just
be
to
at
least
identify
and
acknowledge
that
yeah
there's
there
are
some
ancillary
issues
that
may
be
associated
with
specific
properties
that
will
need
to
be
addressed
and
not
the
intent
is
not
to
address
it
in
this
particular
effort.
Okay,.
C
C
Concerns
about
and
I
wanted
to
recognize
that
and
thank
staff
both
for
the
maps,
the
clarity
of
which
properties
we're
talking
about,
as
opposed
to
the
lingo
of
the
former
owner
of
some
property
that
somewhere
and
and
the
approach
of
removing
and
relocating
prairie
dogs
from
a
property.
As
long
as
it's
economically
wise
to
do
that
and
then
finishing
off
the
job,
with
the
the
other
strategies
that
are
lower
cost
and
I.
C
J
Just
to
mention
and
I
know,
heather
was
at
the
meeting
last
night
with
the
county,
and
so
was
Dave
and
Karen.
I
was
just
struck
by
the
fact
that
the
kind
in
controlling
prairie
dogs
for
a
long
time,
and
yet
they
had
sort
of
come
to
this
epiphany
that
whatever
method
you're
using
for
control,
it
was
really
critical
to
do
them
on
contiguous
properties.
J
C
K
B
I
A
U
You
and
I
also
appreciate
that
mark
and
also
just
want
to
recognize
mark
rushman.
He
is
taking
a
well-deserved
break
this
month
and
I
do
happen
to
know
he's
watching
from
afar
and
getting
some
text
from
him.
But
a
lot
of
what
we'll
talk
about
tonight
is
the
culmination
of
some
great
work
he's
done
on
this
project
as
well.
I
I
guess
I'm
introducing
myself
here
tonight:
I
am
yeah
I'll,
do
a
quick
intro.
As
you
know,
open
space
has
for
many
decades
worked
on
riparian
Creek
wetland
restoration,
work
hand-in-hand
with
the
community
and
the
Gebhardt
integrated
side
project
is
an
example
of
us
working
along
the
similar,
so
a
small
portion
of
a
you
know,
obviously
riparian
Creek
corridor,
I
think
as
staff.
We
really
do
want
to
thank
angly
the
board,
the
community
for
what
has
been
over
the
last
six
to
nine
months,
a
really
productive
dialogue
in
a
very
respectful
dialogue.
I
We
feel
what
I
will
be
presenting
tonight
is
sort
of
the
product
of
what
you
get
from
for
full
consultation
and
the
ISPs
integrative
side
projects
where
we're
looking
at
you
know
on
the
ground
closer.
How
do
we
deal
with
some
tricky
issues
that
have
been
around
for
a
bunch
of
years?
How
do
you
do
the
best
restoration?
How
do
you
work
with
the
community
to
ensure
we
meet?
I
You
know
passive
recreation
charter
purposes,
so
it
is
part
of
those
community
members,
as
well
as
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
the
green
belt
meadows,
HOA
and
the
south
pooled
Neighborhood,
Association
and
I.
Think
a
critical
piece
of
the
integrated
site
plan
that
Darren
will
present
tonight
along
with
staff,
is
that
this
is
a
point
where
based
upon,
hopefully
a
recommendation
from
the
board.
I
It
allows
the
department
to
have
the
sort
of
conference
and
the
level
of
knowledge
as
it
were,
to
move
into
the
next
stage,
which
would
be
the
implementation
of
this
project,
which
would
cover
stewardship,
Jim
readers,
service
area
in
terms
of
trails
and
then
obviously
John
service
area,
doing
various
restoration
monitoring
projects
and
also
putting
together
things
like
the
design
detail.
Better
cost
estimates
figuring
out
exactly
thing
and
that
1104
words.
A
recommendation
for
the
ball
tonight
allows
us
when
you're
approving,
for
instance,
the
CIP
next
year
or
the
year
after
people
say:
oh
yeah.
I
U
You
mark
and
I
also
do
want
to
recognize
the
team,
many
of
whom
are
sitting
near
the
front
here
in
particular,
one
I
recognize
Maki
Boyle.
She
is,
she
has
done
so
much
of
the
work
on
this
project
and
all
the
while
is
an
exciting
time
in
her
life.
So
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
for
everything.
You're
juggling,
John
and
Heather
have
been
critical
members
on
the
team
and
are
here
to
answer
any
questions
that
may
come
up
as
well
as
Megan
Bo's.
U
Our
restoration
plant
ecologist
she's,
not
here
tonight,
but
has
been
a
critical
player
in
the
in
the
project
as
well.
Burton
stoner,
as
well
as
Jasmine
sim
from
our
Ranger
team,
Hilary
DS
tonight
here
to
answer
any
questions
that
may
come
up
with
in
respect
to
trails
and
we
have
also
from
afar
Lynne
Sullivan
as
well
as
other
folks
who
have
contributed
so
I
just
want
to
thank
everybody
for
that.
U
So
I
do
want
to
just
go
over.
Why
we're
here
mark
introduced
this,
but,
as
we
said,
we
do
want
to
try
and
see
this
as
a
way
of
building
on
the
engagement
process
and
really
from
the
beginning
of
of
that
engagement
process.
When
we
first
reached
out
to
the
Green
Meadows
HOA,
it's
really
been
over
18
months,
and
so
it's
been
it's
a
long
and
careful
process
and
working
with
local
residents,
as
well
as
the
broader
community
and
visitors.
U
And
so
we
want
to
take
the
opportunity
tonight
to
describe
the
integrated
approach
that
mark
talked
about
as
we
look
at
the
sort
of
site
approach
that
we've
taken
with
the
integrated
site
project
and
then
ask
for
your
recommendation
to
proceed
just
for
orientation.
I
think
you
all
know
the
site,
but
for
any
of
members
of
the
audience
or
those
watching
at
home.
U
We
are
looking
in
an
area
of
South
Boulder
near
the
East
Boulder
Recreation
Center
and
the
and
55th
that
curves
around
there,
the
wetlands
that
are
just
to
the
east
of
the
Recreation
Center,
those
are
owned
by
the
Parks
and
Recreation
Department
within
the
city,
but
incredibly
important
from
an
ecological
standpoint.
In
the
context
of
this
work,
the
Greenbelt
meadows
neighborhood
is
down
there
to
the
bottom
left
of
the
diagram
and
then
south
Boulder
road
is
sort
of
abound
on
the
south
side,
so
just
for
orientation
sake.
U
It's
also
as
a
riparian
area,
an
important
movement
quarter
for
other
species
and
really,
as
it
relates
to
the
Parks
and
Recreation
Department
wetlands.
That
I
just
mentioned.
It's
considered
their
most
ecologically
valued
area
as
well,
and
so,
when
you
look
at
this
from
all
different
scales,
it
really
emphasizes
the
importance
of
conservation
and
restoration
in
this
area.
U
We
also
know
that
we
have
strong
associations
and
connections
with
this
part
of
the
open
space
system
and
whether
that
is
walking
your
dog
on
your
own
or
enjoying
company
of
others.
We
have
heard
from
both
residents
nearby
and
the
larger
community
about
the
values
that
these
pedestrian
experiences
offer.
U
We
also
know
that
it's
a
corridor
for
biking
and
if
this
may
be
a
picture
of
my
daughter,
but
there
are
lots
of
other
children
and
families
that
enjoy
this
area
as
well.
She's,
helping
clear
the
teasel
here
and
and
really
the
these
connections
with
open
space
are
facilitated
by
you
know
some
pretty
subtle,
visitor
infrastructure,
whether
it's
a
sign
like
this
with
you
know
a
sandblasted
image
of
Bobolink
or
whether
it's
you
know
some
of
the
signs
and
some
of
the
fencing
that
we
have
out
there.
U
We
also
know
that,
within
that,
within
the
ecosystem,
health
and
resilience
focus
area
that
there
were
other
related
strategies
that
guide
this
project,
as
it
relates
to
reducing
on
designated
trails
and
sensitive
habitat
areas.
The
work,
though,
as
we
as
we've
done
with
this
integrated
approach
to
these
site
projects,
is
to
then
look
across
the
other
focus
areas
and
to
see
what
what
guidance
and
lenses
we
need
to
incorporate
and
so,
for
example,
another
example
of
that
is
the
strategy
and
responsible
recreation
to
provide
inspiring
and
welcoming
facilities.
U
We
also
fast
forwarding
to
the
grassland
ecosystem
management
plan,
gave
ourselves
the
target
of
having
made
significant
progress
by
2019
on
improving
riparian
hydrology,
as
well
as
aquatic
habitat
and
wetland
condition
and
other
measures,
and
really
along
these
decades.
Our
science
staff
has
have
really
been
requesting
that
we
follow
through
on
these
commitments
and
make
some
progress
toward
towards
this.
These
broad
objectives
and
we
have
as
staff
we
have
been
making
a
substantial
amount
of
progress
in
the
larger
area
so
in
the
red
dotted
line
there.
U
That's
the
project
area,
but
as
you
look
at
this
being
a
part
of
the
larger
South
Boulder
Creek
corridor,
the
work
that
we've
been
doing
over
the
decades
include
modifications
to
support
better
fish
fish
passage,
as
well
as
removing
non-native
trees,
ongoing
removal
of
other
invasives,
as
well
as
receding
replanting
with
native
species.
And
so
we
really
see
this
project
as
fitting
into
that
larger
mosaic
of
both
ecosystem
services,
as
well
as
restoration
efforts.
And
so
within
the
context
of
this
particular
project.
U
From
that
a
series
of
excuse
me.
Three
alternatives
were
developed
and
advanced
those
that
really
best
met
the
goal
objectives
of
the
project,
and
then
we
came
back
to
the
community.
This
most
recent
fall
to
develop.
What
we're
now
calling
the
preferred
alternative.
That's
before
the
board
tonight,
and
so
in
both
in
the
packet
that
was
provided
to
the
board
as
well
as
available
online,
is
the
project
area
map
that
summarizes
the
management
actions
that
we
are
asking
the
board
to
consider
tonight.
J
J
I
J
V
V
J
U
Great
question
Kurt,
so
absolutely
the
feedback
is
represented
in
in
what
you're,
seeing
and
so
really
the
the
cornerstone
of
the
project
is
focusing
on
restoration
opportunities
on
the
west
side
of
the
creek.
And
so,
as
you
look
at
the
diagram,
the
areas
in
green
are
those
that
we
would
seek
to
close
to
public
access,
and
that
does
include
the
undesignated
trail
on
the
west
side,
as
well
as
the
undesignated
creek.
Access
on
that
side
of
the
creek
and
then
work
aggressively
at
when
the
timing
and
phasing
is
correct
to
then
continue.
U
What
we
also
worked
with
the
community
on
is
developing
a
set
of
proposals
that
again
would
help
us
meet
the
full
suite
of
project
objectives.
And
so,
while
we
would
be
closing,
for
example,
undesignated
creek
access
on
the
west
side,
we'd
look
to
opportunities
for
enhancing
that,
on
the
east
side
near
the
existing
trail
corridor
with
the
South
Boulder
Creek
Trail.
U
We
would
also
explore
the
potential
of
a
connection
255th
a
trail
connection
out
to
55th,
and
that
would
be
in
partnership
with
the
Parks
and
Recreation
Department.
We
in
in
early
consultation
have
understood
from
them
that,
because
much
of
that
would
happen
on
their
land,
it's
not
an
immediate
priority
or
need
for
them,
and
so
that
would
be
a
kind
of
a
longer-term
phase
that
we
would
look
at
for
future
improvements,
as
relates
to
community
connections,
education
and
inclusion.
U
That
was
definitely
a
theme
that
we
heard
in
the
third
public
engagement
window,
where
residents
and
and
and
community
members
were
interested
in
in
helping
steward
the
resources
in
that
area,
and
then
I
also
just
want
to
point
out
Jazmin
Sam
again
in
the
audience
here.
She
is
a
ranger
with
our
team
and
is
considered
a
community
ranger
for
this
particular
part
of
the
open
space
system,
and
so
it's
an
opportunity
for
Rangers
to
continue
building
relationships
with
the
residents
and
so
just
wanted.
U
The
board
and
members
of
the
public
to
have
a
face
to
the
name
has
Jazmin
seeks
to
do
that
this
year.
So
just
by
way
of
starting
to
summarize
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
more
explanation
of
what
this
integrated
approach
looks
like.
So
this
first
picture
you're,
seeing
there
is
the
undesignated
trail
on
the
west
side
as
well
as
someone
designated
creek
access
there,
that's
effecting
erosion
along
the
stream
bank,
and
while
we
would
look
to
close
and
restore
that
area,
we
would
seek
to
complement
that
with
improvements
on
the
east
side.
U
Similarly,
as
we
think
about
enhanced
the
creek
access
points,
this
is
a
picture
a
little
bit
further
north
closer
to
the
Bobolink
trailhead,
where
this
is
a
designated
Creek
access
point
where
we've
thought
through
the
mechanics
of
what
the
grading
and
drainage
needs
to
be.
We
would
seek
opportunities,
perhaps
to
do
that,
where
appropriate
within
this
project
area
and
then
again
improve
the
fencing
so
that
visitors
have
a
better
understanding
of
what
is
and
isn't
expected
so
that
they
feel
successful
and
help
us
achieve
the
objectives.
U
The
work
we'd
also
look
to
updating
that
approach
to
on-site
education
and
presence
there,
as
well
as
continuing
or
ecological
monitoring.
We
do
think
at
this
time
rough
order
of
magnitude
costs
that,
within
this
first
days,
that
would
total
about
four
to
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
as
we
move
into
the
next.
U
As
with
everything
we
work
in
an
adaptive
management
framework,
and
so
if
our
ecological
monitoring
tells
us,
for
example,
we
need
to
move
the
fence
or
adjust
a
sign
to.
You
know
better
improve
restoration
of
those
undesignated
trails
that
we
would
be
looking
for.
Those
minor
modifications
down
the
road
so
again
tonight
we
are
asking
the
board's
consideration
of
that
preferred
alternative
and
recommendation
to
proceed
with
that
support.
U
We
will
continue
and
enhance
our
coordination
around
our
work
plans
for
the
next
several
years,
which
will
involve
developing
deep
design
and
construction
documents,
more
detailed
cost
estimates
and
phasing,
as
well
as
finalizing
the
funding
request
that
you'll
consider,
for
example,
with
the
21
CIP
later
this
year.
We
do
anticipate
finalizing
permitting
in
2021
and
beginning
implementation
that
same
year
as
funding
and
staff
capacity
allows.
M
M
U
In
an
initial
assessment
of
what
the
we
think,
the
resources
can
sustain
out
there,
knowing
that
it's
winter
time
we're
not
seeing
the
full
the
full
picture.
We've
anticipated
trying
to
hold
the
western
edge
of
the
existing
trail
corridor
to
the
extent
we
can
and
any
modifications
to
the
width
of
the
trail
corridor
should,
where
possible,
extend
to
the
east
away
from
the
creek
one
sort
of
caveat
to
that
would
be
where
there
is
existing
creek
access
right
now.
U
J
U
U
It's
going
to
vary
so
just
based
on,
let's
see
if
I
can
actually
reverse
yeah,
so
that
picture
there,
where
the
two
women
are
running,
you
can
tell
that
that's
getting
to
a
little
bit
of
a
pinch
point
where
there's
not
a
lot
of
room
between
the
creek
and
the
existing
fence
line
there,
which
borders
our
agricultural
lands.
So
in
that
case
there
you
know
the
buffer
between
the
two
is
narrow
and
that
limits
our
use
of
materials
and
what
we
can
do
further
south
of
this
area,
where
it
closer
to
the
barn.
U
There
is
more
room
there,
in
which
case
we
can
expand
beyond,
say,
maybe
a
you
know
at
least
a
three
foot
buffer
between
the
two
paths
and
Explorer
use
of
different
materials.
So
we
have
examples
else
around
the
site
where
boulders
have
been
used,
but
we'll
get
into
those
details
as
we
get
into
further
design.
C
Okay,
and
is
it,
is
it
too
early
in
the
planning
process
for
this
question,
which
is,
would
it
be
possible
to
realign
and
rebuild
or
whatever
the
right
verbs
are
the
Eastern
Trail
in
advance
of
the
work
on
the
restoration
and
the
close
on
the
Westside?
Could
could
those
be
done?
Sequentially,
I,
guess
is
my
question.
You.
J
U
It's
not
off
the
table.
We've
tried
to
consider,
though
you
know
in
these
final
stages
of
refining
the
preferred
alternative
wanting
to
respect.
We
haven't
done
direct
outreach
with
the
lessees
in
that
area
and
so
and
also
wanting
to
make
minimize
the
area
of
disturbance
that
we
haven't
gone
there,
but
I,
don't
John.
Do
you
wanna
yeah.
N
I
Yeah
they've
great
point,
I
think
they're
very
supportive
I
think,
as
we
spoke
to
them,
they're
happy
to
partner
with
us
on
this
I
think
we
definitely
see
it
as
a
Phase
two
just
because
this
also
came
up
a
little
bit
later
in
the
process,
and
we
know
the
other
aspects
of
the
project
are
the
priority.
But
yeah
we've
had
conversations
with
Parks
and
Rec
they're,
supportive
and
we'll
work
with
them,
as
we
start
to
think
about
it.
In.
T
C
Can
any
of
you
describe
for
us
the
thinking
about
that
connection
and
why
it's
important
and
who
might
use
it
in
connection
255th,
yeah,
I'm
I'm,
totally
lost
on
why
you
would
want
a
connection
from
the
dog
park
to
the
creek
and
all
the
management
problems
that
I
foresee
that
leading
to
sure
no
parking
along
that
Street
at
all.
So
there's
no
way
for
people
to
use
that
connection.
C
J
V
C
J
M
U
M
M
More
time,
the
putting
a
more
prominent
bridge
in
that
zone
strikes
me
as
likely
to
attract
markers
to
Ontario
place
on
net
and
also
to
attract
hikers
and
other
people
who
are
seeing
it
coming
down.
The
main
trail
to
end
up
thinking
they're
going
somewhere,
but
really
actually
ending
up
sort
of
dead
ended
at
a
private
neighborhood
I.
U
Think
one
of
the
one
of
the
responses
to
that
would
be
that
as
we
get
into
design,
and
we
have
clear
cost
estimates
and
funding
approvals,
we'll
be
looking
at
different
options
for
the
bridge
that
may
result
in
something
that
looks
different
than
the
one.
That's
there
now
on
the
on
the
northern
side,
and
so
it
much
it
might
be
a
much
smaller
bridge.
It
might
be
all
wooden.
U
M
J
B
Thank
you
to
the
public
for
bearing
with
us.
We
currently
have
eight
people
signed
up
each
for
three
minutes
called
three
at
a
time
and
please
be
ready.
I
know
some
of
you
have
come
since
I
went
through
this
with
the
earlier
group.
So
I'll
briefly
repeat
myself
call
two
or
three
names
come
down
so
that
you
ready
when
the
next
person
is
finished.
Please
begin
by
stating
your
name
and
your
address.
You'll
get
three
minutes
when
the
yellow
light
comes
on,
you've
got
30
seconds
when
the
red
light
and
the
beep
occur.
B
W
As
I
speak
before
you
originally
I
planned
to
wax
poetic
about
what
this
little
scrap
of
trail
means
to
our
neighborhood
I
thought
of
a
chair,
how
it
became
the
venue
for
neighbors
to
get
to
know
one
another
and
how
it
contributed
to
the
cohesiveness
of
our
community
go
and
assume
that
all
of
you
already
recognized
that
and
have
some
sense
of
the
loss
that
we're
feeling
as
we
come
to
accept.
The
trail
will
be
closed.
Some
of
us
reluctantly
admit
the
closure
soon
to
be
a
done
deal.
I'll
use
my
remaining
time.
W
Instead
urged
you
to
prove
the
other
half
of
other
half
of
staffs
proposal,
specifically
the
creation
of
an
East
Side
pedestrian
only
trail
as
a
good-faith
compromise
offered
by
staff.
Not
only
do
I
ask
you
to
approve
the
proposal.
I
urge
you
to
insist
that
the
closure
of
one
trial
be
contingent
upon
the
concurrent
opening
of
the
proposed
trail.
I
understand
the
legitimate
delays
may
result
from
permeating
problems.
W
Budget
constraints
staff
is
spread
thin,
regardless
to
close
one
trail,
while
delaying
the
opening
of
the
other,
no
matter
how
legitimate
the
cause
will
seem
very
disingenuous
to
the
people
most
affected
by
the
closure.
It
will
seem
as
if
a
hollow
promise
was
dangled
before
us
only
to
appease
us
and
make
us
go
away
quietly.
Closing
the
existing
trail
is
the
culmination
of
what
was
decided
upon
20
years
ago,
I'm,
referring
to
attachment
age
and
item
for
page
nine
of
your
packets.
That
paragraph
talks
about
this
process
started
20
years
ago.
W
This
closure
could
wait
20
years.
Surely
it
can
wait
until
an
East,
Side
pedestrian
trail
only
pedestrian
only
trail
is
opened
again.
I
urge
you
to
insist
that
the
closure
of
one
trail
be
contingent
upon
the
concurrent
opening
of
the
proposed
trail.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
That's
the
end
of
my
remarks
and
I'll
just
say
that
as
someone
who's
walked
the
trail
pretty
much
every
day
at
least
once
a
day
for
nine
years
there
were
questions
ever
asked
here
tonight
that
I
really
felt
like
I
or
neighbors.
W
Could
have
answered
so,
please
don't
hesitate
to
reach
out
to
us.
I've
walked
the
trail
with
Tom,
and
there
are
things
that
residents
can
tell
you
about
the
trail
like
the
cement
bridge
and
why
the
vehicles
come
in
from
the
direction
they
do
and
not
through
Greenbelt
meadows.
Things
like
that
about
the
sewers
that
are
back
there
that
need
to
be
maintained,
there's
actually
a
fair
bit
of
vehicle
traffic
back
there
and
that's
not
going
to
go
away.
Okay.
Thank
you.
X
Robinson
1
2
3
Mineola
court,
my
mom
is
89
Illini
court
same
neighborhood,
I
grew
up
actually
at
103
Mineola
court
I
was
fortunate
enough
to
be
able
to
return
to
the
neighborhood
about
two
years
ago.
Now,
so
I
grew
up
on
that
trail
and
that's
just
kind
of
a
lament
that
it's
leaving.
But
I
also
would
like
to
echo
his
comments,
which
is
that
you
know
when
the
when
the
east
side
gets
done,
that
that
the
west
side
is
not
closed
until
the
east
side
is
done.
X
It
really
kind
of
feels
like
we're
losing
a
part
of
the
neighborhood
by
losing
that
trail
and
open
space
has
been
great
in
working
with
us
and
hearing
our
proposals
and
and
coming
to
a
compromise.
I
would
also
urge
that
the
bridge
I
don't
know
who
was
asking
about
the
bridge
of
the
bridge
we
kind
of
when
meeting
with
open
space.
X
We
really
wanted
it
to
be
kind
of
as
unobtrusive
as
possible
and
I
think
that
you
know
access,
especially
in
winter
and
the
stepping
stones
icing
over
and
that
sort
of
thing-
and
you
know
older
generation
not
being
able
to
maybe
navigate
those
stepping
stones
but
to
do
a
bridge.
But
if
that
bridge
was
done
to
make
it
you
know
pretty
small
and
low-key
yeah.
That's
it
I
appreciate
your
time.
Thanks.
Y
Y
Gephardt's
property
is
my
kind
of
nearest
open
space
I've
been
on
there,
probably
four
or
five
times
a
week
for
the
past,
15
or
so
years,
and
so
I
have
won
a
couple
of
points
to
make
the
first
one's
not
quite
related
to
this,
but
I've
been
watching
the
process
for
the
gephardt's,
the
gun
barrel
and
the
Wunderland
lake
ISPs
and
I'm
not
sure
that
the
public
perception
of
the
process
is
as
smooth
as
you
may
be
led
to
believe.
There
seems
to
be
some
issues.
Y
Apparently
the
first
woman
who
was
here
also
had
something
about
the
gun
barrel
area
that
she
was
unhappy
about.
So
that
was
just
a
general
comment.
The
other
comment
was
Jim.
As
addressed,
I
was
gonna,
bring
up
about
the
opening
one
side
and
before
you
close
the
other
side.
I
am
concerned,
though,
that
in
my
time
I've
there's
a
lot
of
wildlife
over
there.
I
did
a
project
personal
project
on
the
I
natural
list
website
are
going
up
and
down
the
trek.
Y
The
bobbling
trail
is
the
exact
area
we're
talking
about
and
I
doubt
it's
wide
enough
to
put
two
trails:
a
leave,
the
existing
bike
trail
and
the
pedestrian
trail
on
the
east
side
of
that
of
east
side
of
the
stream.
I
can't
believe
it
we
without
disturbing
a
lot
of
wildlife.
That's
there
already,
and
the
other
point
I
wanted
to
make
as
well
is
that
putting
the
pedestrians
on
the
bubble.
Bobbling
trail
is
one
of
the
busiest
trails
in
bicycle
trails.
Y
In
Boulder,
the
2013
map
bicycle
map
of
the
city
indicated
it
was
one
of
the
busiest
and
when
I
used
to
go
there
with
the
dog,
it
wasn't
such
a
problem
because
I
was
with
the
dog.
I
was
watching
out,
for
the
I
knew
what
was
coming
behind
me.
I
knew
what
was
in
front
and
bicycles
were
whizzed
past
and
everything
was
fine.
The
dog
died,
I
walked
there
on
my
own
I've
been
hit
twice
in
the
past
two
years
by
bicycles,
coming
along
much
too
fast
on
that
trail.
Y
Z
Z
There
are
a
lot
of
people
that
use
that
trail
that
aren't
in
Greenville,
Meadows
event,
I
have
a
three-year-old
and
a
dog,
and
we
use
that
trail
every
weekend
and
we
have
run
into
about
ten
different
kids
in
the
last
three
months,
even
in
the
winter.
So
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
use
the
existing
trail
because
they
don't
want
to
interact
with
those
bikes,
so
I
understand
the
complexity
and
the
issues,
but
where
it
is
possible
to
move
that
fence
to
provide
a
better
buffer.
Z
So
the
erosion
you
see
on
that
picture
before
actually
wasn't
from
the
walkers,
it
was
actually
just
from
the
natural
paths
of
the
creek,
but
there's
been
a
lot
of
destruction
a
year
ago
from
have
you
equipment.
So
please
understand
that
people
have
access
that
aren't
pedestrians
and
they
aren't
just
Greenbelt
Meadows
residents.
So
it's
not
just
a
NIMBY
issue,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
people
in
the
neighborhood
that
used
this
area.
So
thank
you.
Thank.
AA
Hey
first
of
all,
I
just
wanted
to
say
thanks
to
the
staff
to
getting
this
to
this
point,
I
attended
all
of
the
meetings
and
I
have
to
say
that
the
first
bunch
of
meetings
we
didn't
seem
like
we
were
getting
to
a
place
where
the
residents
were
being
heard
and
just
to
echo
what
others
have
said.
The
really
critical
piece
here
is
the
separation.
AA
If
you
go
north
of
that
bridge,
its
separated
and
I
can
tell
you
that,
as
a
person
with
a
small
child,
you're
never
going
to
see
people
over
on
that
section
and
the
reason
you're
not
going
to
see
people
in
that
section
is
I,
don't
want
to
be
melodramatic,
but
it's
dangerous
people
come
flying
through
there.
They
don't
care,
they're,
training
they're
doing
whatever,
and
it's
just
a
matter
of
time
before
you
know,
if
you
do
that,
so
that
trail
on
the
south
side,
that's
been
there
for
35
years.
AA
I
know
because
I
have
residents
that
I've.
That
I
talked
to
every
day
that
have
been
using.
That
trail
and
the
reason
why
it's
there
is
because
of
the
enjoyment
that
it
brings
to
people.
So
again,
I'd
like
to
echo
what
other
people
have
to
say
is
that
it's
really
critical
to
have
a
separated
trail
and
that
trail
really
needs
to
be
open
before
that.
Other
section
is
closed
and
in
addition
to
that,
I
would
just
point
out
that.
AA
Some
just
for
staff,
you
know
it's
someone
who
hikes
there
every
day.
They
should
be
prepared
to
realize
that
a
lot
of
that
erosion
and
those
things
are,
they
don't
have
anything
to
do
with
with
people
hiking,
so
I
I'm,
a
NOAA
scientist,
so
maybe
I
have
access
to
satellite
images
that
others
don't.
But
it's
pretty
clear
if
you
look
before
and
after
flood
events,
those
sections
where
the
erosion
is
occurring
in
particularly
after
the
2013
flood,
you
can
just
I
mean
you
just
look
in
Google
Earth.
AA
You
can
just
see
where
it's
jumped
the
banks
and
it's
River
Rock,
and
it's
just
in
every
year
when
we
get
flooding,
it
rips
a
hole
in
that,
and
so,
if
you
guys
are
looking
to
maintain
the
integrity
of
the
Eastside,
it's
gonna
go
beyond
just
removing
hikers
and
things
from
there.
AA
AB
So
that
really
I
can't
imagine
what's
gonna
happen
when
we're
gonna
have
be
having
you
know,
50
people
at
a
time
coming
in
and
also
the
East
Side
trail
I've
lived
at
my
house
for
26
years
and
I've
raised
my
kids
there
and
had
dogs,
and
that
trail
has
elderly,
very
elderly
people
going
on
it
as
well
as
little
kids
and
the
bicycles
and
with
all
the
walkers.
It's
I've
seen
accidents
happen
already.
AB
I
can't
imagine
if
you're
gonna
push
all
those
people
on
the
west
side
to
the
east,
it's
just
gonna
I,
don't
know
how
that's
gonna
be
managed,
but
I
urge
you
to
make
sure
that
it's
all
done
at
the
same
time,
because
there's
gonna
it.
If
it's
not
it's
just
a
problem,
that's
gonna
happen.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
B
U
B
H
Supervisor
I
think
you've
heard
a
lot
of
experience
from
people
that
use
er
a
lot,
and
so
there
are
perceptions
of
of
the
encounters
are
quite
valid
and
so
I
think
anything
that
we
can
think
about.
Design
wise
and
sign
wise
as
we
go
through.
This
project
would
be
probably
helpful
to
to
make
that
east
side
of
the
birdie
trail.
What.
H
H
H
So
it's
in
multiple
sections,
so
from
the
from
bobbling
trailhead
to
the
bridge
that
connects
to
the
East
Boulder
Community
Center.
There
are
two
paths
that
one
is
voice
and
site
control
by
the
creek
and
then
the
paved
multi-use
path
is
a
dogs
on
leash
section
on
that
until
you
get
to
that
to
where
the
trails
all
merge
and
then
it
becomes
a
voice
inside
control,
section
south
to
south
boulder
road.
H
U
If
I
can
offer
just
sorry,
just
one
clarification
to
an
answer
to
some
of
the
comments,
I
wanted
to
just
emphasize
that
in
both
the
cover
memo
as
well
as
attachment
a,
we
have
tried
to
clarify
that
we
would,
as
the
public
has
asked,
not
closed
the
exert
rail
until
the
new
opportunity
is
open
and
available.
So
we,
we
might
not
have
said
that
clearly
enough,
but
I
just
want
to
can.
B
B
I
wanted,
to
just
add
a
general
point,
which
is
that
some
of
the
issue
here
is
actually
sort
of
unrelated
to
the
path
on
the
west
side.
That
is,
we
know
that
north
of
the
rec
center
we
essentially
have
separated
paths,
one
of
which
is
a
is
not
our
path,
but
regardless
they're
separated
paths,
and
once
you
get
south
of
the
bridge,
it's
essentially
all
the
traffic's
on
one
path
and
I
agree
with
them.
I
use
that
path
very
frequently.
The
public
is
right.
One
of
the
reasons
that
trail
is
more
dangerous.
B
I
think
that
a
lot
of
the
other
ones,
something
like
the
teller
trail
or
even
the
portion
of
that
trail
south
of
36-
is
that
it's
just
bullet
hard.
It's
not
a
gravel
path
to
speak
of
it's
practically
like
riding
on
pavement,
and
so
it's
on
probably
not
a
shock
that
bikes
go
fairly
quickly
through
that
section
and
they
just
come
from
a
section
that
is
literally
paved.
B
My
also,
my
impression
is
a
fair
amount
of
he
bike.
Use
on
that
trail,
which
you
know
may
contribute
to
the
problem
as
well.
So
I
think
part
of
the
problem
were
the
ancillary
benefit
of
this
is
that
we
may
actually
end
up
solving
a
problem
that
wasn't
the
original
motivation
for
this.
That
is,
by
creating
a
separated
path
on
the
east
side.
B
That's
bike
accessible
can
stay
on
a
portion,
that's
not
bike
accessible
and
you
know
I
think
that's
a
decent-sized
gain
to
safety
and
user
experience
unrelated
to
the
original
motivation
for
the
project,
and
my
guess
is
that
as
usage
grows,
probably
as
ebike
usage
grows,
the
magnitude
of
that
benefit
is
probably
going
to
grow.
I
totally
take
the
point
that,
unfortunately,
we're
squeezing
a
lot
into
a
narrow
area,
and
this
isn't
gonna
be
something
where
you've
got
a
nice
wide.
You
know
aesthetic
median
separating
you.
B
There
may
be
places
where
the
separation
is
little
more
than,
as
you
say,
some
stones
or
a
fence
line,
but
from
a
safe.
You
know
which
isn't
great
for
aesthetics,
but
from
a
safety
perspective
it
should
achieve
what
people
are
looking
for.
So
I
just
wanted
to
begin
by
observing
that
I
think
there's
actually
been
some
change
and
we
may
end
up
solving
a
bigger
objective
than
what
was
actually
part
of
the
original
motivation.
For
this.
J
Tom
I
would
agree.
I
think
this
will
be
a
benefit
for
all.
The
reasons
you
describe
I
do
worry
that
we
may
be
promising
more
than
we
can
deliver
within
the
constraints
we've
set
ourselves.
I
I'm
gonna
keep
bringing,
but
it's
a
potential
for
moving
the
fence
line,
something
because
it
is
a
really
narrow
spot
through
there
and
again
there's
this
larger
issue
of
this
becoming
more
and
more
of
a
commuter
route,
more
of
an
e-bike
route.
J
I
think,
ultimately,
we're
going
to
need
to
separate
uses
all
the
way
to
south
Boulder
Road
and
that's
going
to
be
very
difficult
along
riparian
corridor
and
so
I
think
we're
gonna
keep
needing
to
come
back
to
maybe
dedicating
some
slice
of
agricultural
land
to
have
more
of
a
multi-use
path
that
is
actually
separated
from
a
pedestrian
path,
but
I
think
it's
an
incremental
benefit.
I
agree
with
everything
you
said
and.
B
B
B
Weighing
against
we're
gaining
the
high
valued
habitat
on
the
west
side,
we're
expecting
that
that
will
be
closed,
stay
closed
and
with
our
Ranger
quarter,
who
are
nodding
say
that
we
will
be
successful
by
creating
a
good
opportunity
on
the
east
side
and
successfully
closing
the
west
side
and
the
you
know
net
will
be.
You
know
a
good
bit
better
off
on
the
ecological
side,
and
you
know,
hopefully
somewhat
better
off
on
the
overall
user
experience
as
well.
I.
M
Have
a
few
observations,
I'd
like
to
share
first
off
I,
really
congratulate
the
staff
in
the
community.
I'm
surprised
to
hear
people
are
as
pleased
as
they
are.
With
this
plan.
I
originally
got
involved
in
politics
in
Boulder,
because
I
also
experienced
a
trail
loss
near
me.
It
was
to
development
not
so
much
to
department
policy
making,
but
I
really
understand
what
that
feels.
M
Like
I
went
out
there
and
walked
this
property,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
noticed
straight
away
was
a
very
special
spot,
just
north
of
where
the
proposed
bridges
that
provides
a
view
of
long's
peak
in
Mount
Meager
across
the
recently
preserved
Hogan
Pancoast.
It
is
indeed
a
special
place
when
I
look
at
this
overall
proposal.
I
have
some
mixed
feelings
and
those
are
largely
encapsulated
in
the
fact
that
there's
got
to
be
at
least
three-quarters
of
a
mile
of
proposed
additional
fencing.
There
has
got
to
be
on
the
idea
of
the
dual
pass.
M
I
think
it's
wonderful,
that
that
is
a
potential
solution
to
this,
but
if
they
are
not
a
dog's
leash
length
away
from
one
another,
I
wonder
how
many
problems
that
really
does
solve
relative
to
the
aesthetic
impairment
that
we
receive.
I
also
agree
in
hope
that
we
can
at
least
make
that
path
far
enough
away,
that
it
does
function
in
the
way
that
it
is
supposed
to
and
last
on,
just
a
more
philosophical
level.
M
Why,
as
I
said,
I'm
primarily
happy
that
the
community
and
the
Department
have
found
a
way
forward
on
this.
We
have
opted
here
for
one
of
the
higher
cost
solutions
that
will
most
certainly
including
the
fence
in
the
bridge,
also
be
the
highest
cost.
Maintenance
profile
going
forward
and
I
just
have
to
add
a
high
level.
U
So
what
I
can
say
and
Mackie
others
feel
free
to
jump
in
I,
so
Karen
we
do
have
with
the
ditch
and
rights
and
John.
You
could
clarify
this
as
well,
but
with
the
easements
there
that
there
are
requirements
for
them
to
access
the
ditch
to
you
know,
for
annual
maintenance
and
and
so
on,
and
so
there
are
saying
can.
U
I
I
Karen
one
thing
I'd
say:
bein,
you
know
we
notice
in
the
memo
we've
got
2023
and
be
on
phase
to
consider
this
you'll
note.
The
other
concepts
are
to
move
forward
with
implementation,
as
in
design
come
back
to
the
board
for
costing
and
approval
of
funding.
Whereas
what
we're
saying
for
this
one
is:
can
we
can
the
board
recommend
basically
that
we
look
at
it
from
a
conceptual
level
and
the
feasibility
of
what
that
entails,
and
so
at
some
point
would
be
bringing
it
back
to
you
and
saying
here's
what
we
found
out,
here's!
I
What
we
think
is
the
best
way
to
proceed,
which
is
why
it
is
it's
at
that
higher
level.
At
this
point
it
needs
more
investigation
and
you're
trying
to
recognize
that,
and
the
memo
is
a
later
phase.
So
what
you're
recommending
is
there
are
things
to
move
ahead
and
get
going
on
that
this
thing
hey?
Can
we
take
more
time
you're.
B
U
N
Potentially
potentially,
although,
as
you
know,
we're
working
more
and
more
collaboratively
with
utilities
Department-
and
there
is
not
necessarily
the
need
to
be
driving
vehicles
in
to
access
those
manhole
covers,
and
we
will
continue
to
have
conversations
about
how
to
minimize
the
impacts
in
that
area.
I.
B
Wanted
to
speak
to
one
detail
that
we've
got
briefly
mentioned,
which
is,
if
there's
two
trails
who
gets
which
I
think
that
the
wide
sort
of
trail,
which
would
be
then
more
East,
more
westerly
of
the
two-
should
be
the
pedestrian
one,
both
because
pedestrians
are
much
more.
The
creeks
access
is
much
more
likely
to
be
a
pedestrian
issue.
People
are
very
unlikely
to
be
riding
their
bikes
and
want
to
stop
and
go
to
the
creek.
B
So
for
that
reason,
the
other
is
that
the
pedestrians
with
dogs,
often
with
strollers,
just
need
a
lot
more
width.
They
are
far
more
allow
people
don't
ride
generally
side
by
side,
and
but
people
frequently
like
to
walk
side
by
side
and
so
to
the
extent
there
is
a
severe
limitation
on
width,
the
the
bike
portion.
Of
that
what
you
mean
we
can
call
a
multi-use,
but
the
reality
is
that's
gonna
be
where
the
bikes
go
and
everybody
else
is
gonna,
be
on
the
other
part.
These
don't
be
my
prediction
that
can
be
relatively
narrow.
B
If
it's
you
know,
essentially
only
bikes
I
mean
yeah.
They
need
room
to
pass
each
other,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
be
six
eight
feet
wide.
It's
not
least
that
wouldn't
be
my
vision
of
what
we're
doing
here,
removing
all
of
the
usages
that
require
a
lot
of
width
and
keeping
them
on
the
existing
trail.
You
might
suggest
on
how
to
play
that.
B
B
But
my
suggestion
me:
if
we
proceed
to
emotion
on
what
is
the
substance
issue,
then
there
may
be
some
discussion
of
just
I
would
suggest
we
have
some
discussion
about
sort
of
process
learning,
since
this
is
the
first
completed
ISP.
Are
there
things
that
you
know,
people
see
that
worked
well
or
maybe
didn't
work
well,
but
to
put
that
off
until
we've
resolved
the
issue
of
the
substantive
recommendation
and.
U
Just
on
the
note,
I
would
offer
that
if
we
think
back
to
the
master
plan,
where
we
staff
committed
to
come
back
to
the
board,
to
discuss
any
updates
to
our
planning
framework
leading
up
to
that
discussion
with
the
board,
we
are
gonna,
be
doing
a
staff
after-action
review
of
the
isp's
that
we're
working
through,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
can
at
least
see
that
conversation
with
the
board.
I.
J
Would
just
suggest
and
I
don't
think
this
will
have
anything
to
be
the
recommendation
that,
and
maybe
it's
in
here
and
I
just
haven't
seen
it
but
I,
think
incorporating
Curren
concern
about
rationalization
and
consolidation
of
easements
is
an
important
thing
going
forward,
particularly
as
they
affect
the
area
that
we're
gonna
be
restoring.
So
that
would
be
my
suggestion.
C
A
U
U
Essentially
what
we,
as
staff
had
to
do
is
with
your
input,
we
would
update,
essentially
attachment
a
which
is
the
project
summary,
with
your
input
and
post,
that
back
onto
the
web
make
sure
the
community
saw
that
final
version,
and-
and
so
if,
if
the
board
is
okay,
with
our
taking
the
feedback
that
we've
heard
tonight,
we
we
will
have
minutes
and
and
Leah's
help
to
reflect
on
that
and
make
sure
we
got.
That
accurately
does.
U
And
just
to
make
sure
I
capture
that
that
was
in
relation
to
the
width
of
the
buffer
between
the
two
wanting
to
make
sure
Tom,
I,
think
and
I'm
guessing
I'm,
hoping
that
the
board
is
in
agreement
that
looking
to
have
the
pedestrian
experience
on
the
west
side
closer
to
the
creek
and
looking
at
any
potential
to
move
the
fence
line
where
it
is
potential,
so
that
we
maximize
the
buffer.
Where
we
can
between
the
two
paths.
M
K
C
C
K
So
I'd
like
to
make
just
a
brief
observation
when
I
was
hired
by
the
open
space
department
in
1992,
the
this
area
was
actually
part
of
my
interview
process.
As
far
as
what
would
you
do
to
deal
with
the
concerns
and
management
issues
in
this
stretch
of
south
polar
treatment,
I'm
gonna
take
responsibility
for
the
1998
south
Boulder
Creek
management
plan
as
well
and
I
do
want
to
say
that
I'm
pleased,
even
though
it's
20
years
later.
K
K
You
know
the
Hardin
bike
path
is
something
that
I
personally
in
in
fine,
very
unfortunate
I.
Don't
think
it
goes
in
this
area
and
the
it
was
paved
it.
It
became
a
transportation
route
and
I
think
that
it's
devalued
the
natural
values
that
that
are
there.
So
I.
That's
a
bit
of
a
lament
for
me
personally.
I'm
saddened
by
that
I'm
very
saddened
by
the
fact
that
the
bike
use
seems
to
be
a
major
conflict
and
that
we
are,
we
don't
seem
to
be
able
to
adequately
deal
with
that.
K
Having
said
that,
I
do
think
that
this
is
probably
as
good
a
compromise
as
as
we
can
get
in
echo,
Hal
and
Karen
and
Curtin
Tom's.
Congratulations
on
the
staff
work.
That's
been
done
because
I
do
think
that
it's
it's
been
a
very
good
process.
However
it
the
decision
is
going
to
be
a
sad
one
for
me
and
I
just
thought
that
you
might
want
to
know
that
anyway,.
K
C
Just
want
to
take
a
minute
to
echo
the
comments
of
David
and
how,
because
I
know
what
it's
like
to
lose.
Your
favourite
trail,
where
you
go
for
peace
and
quiet,
I
lost
that
kind
of
trail
when
the
Touhey
trail
was
reroute
'add
and
it
was
my
favourite
place
in
the
whole
system.
Yeah
and
I.
Don't
have
access
to
that
anymore.
So
I
fully
understand
that
and
as
Dave
said
it's
where
we're
headed
with
the
open
space
system.
B
You
know
that's
at
least
some
good
bit
of
consolation
and
that
those
who
watch
this
process
will
recognize
that
that
will,
you
know,
continue
to
be
true
for
a
future
process.
Is
that
stay
tuned
stay
involved,
we
do
listen
and
we
do
take
suggestions
into
account
to
hopefully
reach
a
better
result.
Well
put
thanks.
Everybody
thank.
I
B
All
right
with
that
I
think
it
takes
us
to
matters
from
the
board,
the
first
of
which
is
notification
of
upcoming
public
participation.
Events
I
believe
there
are
none,
because
both
the
February
February
meeting,
February
13th,
will
be
noticed
as
a
board
meeting
in
the
course
of
events.
Anyhow,
I,
don't
unless
someone
has
something
for
between
now
and
then
okay,
nothing
there.
Then.
The
next
item
is
planning
for
the
retreat,
so
I
spend
a
few
minutes
moving
this
along
I.
Think
the
first
issue
is
timing.
B
I
think
it
probably
makes
some
sense
to
be
thinking
in
the
subject
of
people's
schedules.
You
know
a
month
or
two
after
the
new
trustee
has
joined,
which
would
be
their
first
meeting
would
be
in
early
April,
give
them
a
month,
or
so
at
least
you
know,
get
oriented,
and
that
would
suggest
meeting
you
know
in
the
May
June
timeframe.
I,
don't
know
if
there's
any
strong
support
or
objections
feeling
on
that.
B
So
my
second
suggestion
is
a
process
suggestion,
one
that
we
seem
to
be
using
a
lot
and
fairly
successfully,
which
is
that
to
appoint
a
two-person
retreat
committee,
whose
principal
responsibility
is
to
just
develop
the
agenda
for
the
retreat,
rather
than
burden
the
public
and
staff,
with
a
potentially
lengthy
discussion
as
a
full
board.
Maybe
have
two
people
put
that
together.
B
People
who
have
suggestions
could
certainly
send
them
to
Leo,
who
could
then
send
them
to
that
group
for
inclusion
and
those
two
people
could
meet
with
staffed.
You
know
gain
any
suggestions
from
staff
and
what
they'd
like
to
see
included
in
the
retreat,
and
then
you
know
at
the
appropriate
time
sort
of
formalize
the
agenda.
So
that
would
be
a
it's.
B
Actually,
the
ones
I've
been
involved
in
have
been
somewhat
varied.
They're
all
they're
always
off-site,
usually
around
some
kind
of
table
to
facilitate
its
intended
to
facilitate
discussion,
they're
open
to
the
public
and
usually
two
or
three
members
of
the
public
show
up,
but
it's
a
fairly
intimate
setting
that
facilitates
that
discussion.
B
Some
have
had
a
relatively
free-flowing
discussion
of
sort
of
board
process
in
this
case.
If
there
are
particular
issues,
people
want
to
raise
is
probably
some
value
and
identifying
them
ahead
of
time,
rather
than
just
having
an
open-ended
discussion.
I
think
one
had
a
facilitator
I'm,
remembering
that
correctly,
the
Wonder,
alfalfa's
and
others
have
not
I.
Think,
probably
after
you
decide
on
the
agenda,
you
can
decide
whether
there's
enough
to
warrant
having
a
facilitator.
B
B
C
B
A
I
B
One
thing
I
would
suggest
is
something
we
don't
tend
to
discuss
accepted.
It
came
up.
It
comes
up
in
the
context
of
the
master
plan,
but
is
for
the
board
to
do
what
counsel
typically?
Does
it
just
sort
of
to
define
your
priorities
on
you
know
what
you'd
like
to
achieve
over
some.
You
know
sensible
timeframe.
You
know
I
think
that's
a
world
worthy
discussion
to
have
you
know
we
are
somewhat
reactive
to
the
needs
of
the
moment,
but
not
totally.
B
We
do
some
good,
long-term
planning,
but
I
think
there's
value
and
having
the
board
just
discuss.
Well,
you
know
what
what
do
you
all
see
is
the
priorities
that
you
know
you'd
like
to
get
done
over
some
time
frame.
So
my
guess,
is
there
isn't
a
lot
of
need
for
a
retreat
where
we
are
four
or
five
substantive
topics
that
you
need?
B
Staff
presentation
I
feel
like
the
board's
pretty
up-to-date
on
most
of
those
kinds
of
issues,
but
you
know
something
may
come
up
for
these
everybody
to
spend
an
hour
talking
about
something
that,
for
some
reason,
is
better
discussed
in
a
retreat
setting
than
in
a
public
meeting.
I
think
in
general,
if
you
want
to
talk
about
a
substantive
issue
of
open
space
management,
it
ought
to
be
at
a
public
meeting.
The
the
public
is
invited
to
that.
They
can
comment
on
that.
B
J
B
K
We
do
that
can
I
just
jump
in
real
quickly.
You
know
one
thing
that
I
I
think
would
be
helpful
or
I
found
helpful
in
the
past.
Retreats
has
said:
if
there's,
if
we
can
do
it
at
a
place
where
you
know
you
can
maybe
for
a
part
of
the
time,
get
out
on
the
ground
and
kind
of
look
at
or
discuss,
you
know
kind
of
certain
things
and
I'm
thinking.
I
had,
and
you
know
we
one
year
we
had
the
department
had
a
treat
a
retreat
at
El,
Dorado,
Canyon,
State,
Park
and
I'm.
K
Thinking
that
you
know,
for
example,
it
might
be
worth
like
that.
You
know
some
of
the
pending
trail
issues
future.
So
that's
just
an
ideal
suggestion
that
we
don't
have
to
do
that
or
that
at
that
place,
but
it
it
just
strikes
me
it
might
be
nice
to
kind
of
get
out
on
the
ground
for
a
little
while,
as
a
group-
and
you
know
talk
about
some.
B
A
I
I
B
Know
it's
just
latter.
Half
of
May
gives
them
to
meeting
yes
to
attend
yeah,
well,
the
if
they're,
otherwise
new
to
this
they'll
at
least
have
the
gist
of
it
by
then,
and
frankly,
most
trustees
or
not
all
right,
the
city
tribal
consultation.
The
issue
here
is
that
on
March
17th
and
March
18th
there's
a
two-day
meeting
with
tribal
representatives
to
be
the
follow-on
to
the
meeting
that
occurred.
A
year
ago
at
last
year's
meeting,
Karen
and
I
were
responsible
for
covering
it.
It's
critical
that
we
have
trusty
representation
there.
B
There
is,
as
you
probably
know,
but
there's
we
didn't
say
there
was
no
substantive
participation,
but
there
is
a
important
ceremonial.
If
you
know
aspect
to
this
and
each
you
know,
the
council
was
for
the
much
of
the
time
represented
by
the
mayor,
the
City
Attorney's
Office
by
Tom
Carr,
the
city
manager's
office
by
Jayne
Brautigan.
B
You
know
the
department
was
represented
by
Dan
and
Phil
and
a
Christian,
and
maybe
others
as
well,
but
you
know
there
was
very
much
an
effort
to
have
you
know
strong
high-level
representation,
so
I
think
critical
that
we
have
representation
I,
don't
think
it
necessarily
has
to
be.
You
know
one
person
who
covers
both
days,
I
think
there's
actually
value
it's
an
interesting
experience
and
I'd
encourage
people
to
you
know
if
you
have
the
time
to
you
know.
We
only
have
two
at
once,
but
there's
value
in
observing
it.
M
B
AC
It
will
be
just
like
last
year
in
which
the
first
about
two
hours
of
the
meeting
will
be
and
open
to
the
public,
and
then
it
will
be
going
into
a
closed
session
and
moving
into
the
agenda
portion
of
the
retreat
and
the
first
day
from
about
right
now.
The
proposed
agenda
and
I'll
say
proposed
from
about
10
o'clock
to
3
o'clock
is
a
field
trip
portion
and
depending
on
the
weather,
if
the
weather
works
out,
fine,
it
looks
like
Jewell.
Mountain
will
be
the
focus
for
that
field
trip.
AC
But
you
know
that
will
we'll
be
looking
at
the
weather
and
have
a
couple
of
backups
and
we
may
actually
be
inside
if
it's
a
really
inclement
day,
but
you're
right.
The
first
day
will
be
focused
on
Jewell
mountain
as
a
field
trip
for
that
middle
part
of
the
agenda,
which
will
be
within
the
closed
session
of
the
of
the
meeting.
So.
B
And
Dan,
were
you
able
to
get
an
answer
to
the
question
of
when
my
term
ends
the
reason
I
ask
that
is
that
March
17th
so
there's
a
meeting
the
tribal
consultation
day?
One
is
March
7
during
the
day,
then
there's
the
council
meeting
to
appoint
new
board
members
that
night
and
then
there's
a
obviously
there's
day
two.
So
the
the
appointments
are
at
the
evening
in
between
the
two
days,
yeah
I.
AC
It's
it's
city
of
Boulder
I.
Would
there's
really
no
quote-unquote
sponsorship,
but
I
would
say
the
city
manager
is
and
city
council
is,
is
leading
the
effort
and
there'll
be
other
department.
Heads
represented
curved
Kirk
will
be
there
from
Human,
Services,
Jayne
and
Tanya
will
be
there
and
myself
and
Tom
car
will
probably
the
leading
staff
folks
that
will
be
there
as
well
as
at
least
two
council
members.
There.
B
B
B
B
AC
Yeah
and
I
think
council
probably
will
formalize
what
you
are
doing
tonight.
I
think
February,
11th,
they're
gonna
take
a
little
bit
of
time
at
a
study
session
which
is
dedicated
toward
the
transportation
master
plan,
but
they're
gonna
set
aside
some
minutes
ahead
of
that
at
that
study
session,
to
look
out
the
logistics
for
them
and
to
talk
about
protocol
and
what
it's
all
about
and
do
some
region.
So
if
every
eleventh
is
when
Council
will
be
sort
of
having
this
type
of
discussion,
I
guess.
B
This
does
occur
during
the
daytime,
and
so
maybe
the
initial
question
is
there?
Anyone
who
either
for
personal
preference
or
for
work
or
for
whatever
reasons
they
don't
need
to
disclose,
doesn't
want
to
attend,
because
if
all,
if
all
five
of
us
wish
to
have
be
involved
in
it's
just
sort
of
splitting
it
up,
but
there
anyone
who
doesn't
want
to
is.
B
I
think
the
chair
ought
to
be
there
at
the
beginning,
as
they
sort
of
do
the
initial
introductions
and
for
some
meaningful
part
of
it.
I.
Don't
think
people
are
standing
that
much
on
ceremony,
but
then
I
frankly,
we're
not
the
ones
who
are
the
focus
of
the
discussion
anyhow
and
so
some
coming
and
going
is
not
and.
B
Last
year,
I
don't
know
if
this
is
going
to
be
repeated.
Last
year
there
was
a
meeting
that
everyone
who
was
planning
to
attend
was
supposed
to
attend
hosted
by
earnest
house
who
was
some
of
it
was
walking
through
just
sort
of
here's
what's
gonna
happen,
but
some
of
it
was
more
in
the
nature
sort
of
sensitivity,
training
about
you
know
how
to
behave
and
what
you
know
be
aware
of
this.
Be
aware
of
that,
and
it's
not
you
know
those
are
the
do's
and
don'ts
that
it
might
not
be
obvious
to
some.
That's.
AC
Right-
it's
not
formalized
yet,
but
they
get
in
that
February
11
study
session.
They
may
use
some
of
that
time
for
exactly
that
or
they
may
want
to
do
something
separate
like
they
did
last
year.
So
once
I
get
final
clarification,
if
February
11th
turns
into
that
sort
of
do's
and
don'ts,
then
I
certainly
want
to
get
that
word
out
to
you
all
to
attend
that
study
session.
AC
B
B
Representatives
were
very
actively
using
their
cell
phones
and
so
I
would
say
if
I
think
general,
we
ought
to.
You
know
not
be
staring
at
your
cell
phone,
but
if
someone
were
saying
geez
I'm
not
sure
I
can
attend,
because
I
really
do
need
to
check
email
once
or
twice.
I
would
not
let
that
okay,
stop
you.
You
know
obviously
step
out
if
you
need
to
take
a
call,
but
I
wouldn't
be
too
I
wouldn't
be
overly
strict
about,
but
you
know
no
electronics,
the.
K
B
I
believe
that's
a
it's
the
same.
It's
just
a
Sunshine
Law
that
this
is
a
public
meeting
of
the
city
of
Boulder.
But
you
know
you
can
only
have
two
council
members.
There
are
two
board
members
there,
otherwise
its
public
in
the
sense
that
it's
an
official
city
meeting
but
the
it
is
closed
to
the
public,
the
public
can't
the
public.
Isn't
there.
The
room
has
caught
physically
close
to
the
public.
So
if
you
had
three
trustees
attending
a
a
city
sponsored
meeting
that,
by
definition
the
public
yeah.
AC
I
think,
though,
I
think
it
is,
unless
things
get
changed
to
proposed
agenda
is
for
day
two
to
be
the
MOU
focus
and
day
one
is
we
heard
expressions
last
year
that
they
would
like
to
get
and
learn
the
system
learn
more
about
the
system
and
in
some
of
the
cultural
aspects
of
our
system,
and
so
that's
why
day
one
is
more
field
trip
orientated
and
wrapping
up
the
settlers,
Park,
so
I
would
I
would
feel
fairly
confident
that
that
that's
going
to
hold
in
spirit
as
day
two
is
gonna,
be
more.
The
MOU
focus.
AC
B
Don't
we
each
email
Leah
with
our
you
know,
you've
got
two
days
morning
and
afternoon
of
each
day,
you're,
you
know
what
you
want,
what
you
don't
want
and
that
Willy's
generates
a
you
know
a
proposal,
and
you
know
we
can
it's
two
months
from
now.
There's
opportunity
just
switch
around
if
somebody
has
to
make
a
change,
but
rather
than
take
it
more
public
time,
just
email
Lia
and
put
that
together
right
does
anyone
else
have
another
topic
under
matters
from
the
board.
I.
C
Do
and
I
want
to
let
the
board
know
that
in
the
last
week,
I've
talked
about
the
sea,
south
flood
mitigation
to
staff
in
planning,
board
utilities
and
open
space
and
mountain
parks.
The
reason
why
is
I
have
repeatedly
heard
descriptions
of
the
February
council
meeting
as
one
that
will
discuss
the
100-year
option,
the
500-year
option
and
something
in
between
and
I
didn't
hear
anybody
mentioning.
C
So
I
was
asking
staff
about
the
degree
to
which
the
February
council
study
session
would
address
those
items
that
were
important
for
OS
BT
and
in
a
conversation
today
with
John
and
and
Joe
Joe
said
that
that
the
the
format
for
the
meeting,
that
is,
that
he
has
been
just
cussing
with
Sam
Weaver.
The
current
mayor
is
to
actually
be
discussing
those.
C
I,
don't
know
that
there's
been
any
discussion
on
what
is
included
in
those
trade-offs,
but
I
I
expressed
to
Joe.
That
I
was
concerned
that
we
not
get
in
another
situation
where
we're
in
a
ditch,
because
CDOT
had
not
been
consulted
for
years
and
we
not
get
in
a
ditch
because
OSB
t's
concerns
were
left
out
of
the
picture.
So.
C
B
B
K
By
hearing
what
Karen
said
it
doesn't
sound
to
me,
like
utilities,
is
really
looking
at
the
specific
recommendations
or
requests
that
we
made
and
particularly
I
guess
it
was
the
one
on
looking
at
the
comparing
up
street
Oh
alternative
and
upstream
alternative
to
variant
one.
So
I
guess
I
have
a
question
and
then
a
suggestion.
The
question
is:
has
staff
been
involved
in
any
subsequent
conversations
with
utilities,
and
then
the
suggestion
is
is
that
if
so,
can
we
be
assured
that
there's
going
to
be
some
focus
on?
N
We
we've
been
meeting
with
utility
staff
routinely
on
this
project.
As
you
know,
every
every
other
week,
every
several
times
a
month
and
we've
communicated
what
the
board
has
recommended
to
to
staff,
and
they
are
very
aware
of
it.
They
are
trying
to
understand
in
the
weather,
with
the
current
with
a
new
council.
It's
just
come
on
they're,
trying
to
understand
direction
around
process
and
there's
a
process
committee
on
Friday,
where
some
of
these
issues
will
be
addressed
and
that's
where
they're
primarily
taking
their
direction
from.
N
They
are
also
very
cognizant
of
the
need
for
the
Utilities
Department
to
have
a
long-term
positive
relationship
with
the
OSB
T&O
SMP,
and
so
they
have
assured
us
that
when
we
talk
with
the
board,
we
will
be
able
to
address
in
at
our
at
our
February
meeting
the
at
the
March
meeting.
Excuse
me
the
issues
that
the
board
has
raised
last
September,
so
that's
been
the
commitment
and
the
conversation
that
we've
had
with
the
with
utility
staff.
So.
K
N
And
a
lot
of
I
think
a
lot
of
the
the
issues
that
you
raised
in
in
September.
It's
still
it's
premature
to
even
get
to
too
much
of
a
conversation
around
those
before
we
even
land
on
the
concept
that
we're
going
to
move
forward
with
who
that
the
team
would
move
forward
to
preliminary
design.
We
still
have
questions
with
CDOT
and
with
I
mean
there
are
still
a
lot
of
things
that
are
unknown
that
are
gonna
have
to
be
resolved
over
the
course
of
the
next.
Doesn't
this.
K
John,
doesn't
that
take
the
upslope,
an
upslope
alternative
or
option
basically
off
the
table
because
it
focuses
on
whatever
you
know
the
variations
of
variant
one
they'd
have
to
be
considered.
That's
what
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
what
we
asked
for
as
far
as
a
side-by-side
comparison,
we're
not
gonna
get
we're
gonna
just
get
here's
more
of
detail
on
variant,
yeah.
B
Am
I
understanding
not
just
understanding
a
kind
of
front-row
seat
on
it?
So
you
know
there
was
a
desire
to
have
our
meeting
prior
to
February
25th
so
that
whatever
we
thought
about
the
upstream
options
positively
negatively
and
whatever
the
outcome
was
counsel
would
have
the
benefit
of
that.
My
understanding
is
that
that
just
the
timing,
just
wasn't
going
to
work
that
we
weren't
going
to
be
able
to
have
a
fully
informed
good
discussion
of
the
upstream
options
prior
to
February
25th,
in
other
words,
basically
is
already
taking
up
two
days
in
February.
B
We're
going
to
be
able
to
do
that,
and
so
it
was
just
unfortunate
reality
that
our
discussion
of
upstream
options
wouldn't
take
place
until
after
council
study
session
I.
Don't
think,
there's
a
reconsideration
of
that
assumption.
But
if
I'm
wrong
about
that
but
I'm.
My
assumption
is
that
we
have
to
do
it
in
March.
N
That's
what
staff
is
recommending
that
we
do
it
in
March?
It's
a
study
session
they're,
not
making
decisions
in
a
study
session,
they're
not
making
direction
in
the
study
session.
So
I
think
that
whatever
you
might
come
in
with
in
in
March
additionally
to
what
you've
already
provided
for
recommendations
would
still
factor
into
decision-making
around
this
project
and.
K
But
it
strikes
me
that
a
study
session
is
that's
what
it's
for
is
for
discussing.
You
know
the
various
aspects
of
whatever
the
issue
is
and
I'm
just
saying
that
part
of
the
issue
may
not
be
on
the
table
for
discussion
into
February
25th
study
session.
So
either
we
get
another
study
session
or
the
request
is
not
on
the.
J
Problem
we
have
right
now
and
please
correct
me
and
I'm
sort
of
reading.
The
tea
leaves
is
that
we
had
a
change
in
counsel
and
I.
Don't
think
there
was
a
lot
of
attention
being
paid
to
our
recommendations
at
this
point,
but
someone,
the
council,
don't
want
further
assessment
of
an
upstream
option
or
not
willing
to
ask
staff
to
spend
more
money
and
time
on
it.
B
If
we,
if
people
said-
and
this
is
just
a
hypothetical
hypothetical,
but
if
people
said
they
would
not
want
to
support
a
disposal
without
further
analysis
of
upstream
issues,
my
belief
is
that
would
get
people's
full
attention.
They'd
say:
alright,
our
you
know
our
board
is
telling
us
this
and
probably
ask
what
exactly
we
all
right
if
we
be
incumbent
upon
us
to
specify.
Well,
what
do
you
mean?
You
know
what
kind
of
a
particular
upstream
alternative
that
we're,
especially
interested
in
what
kinds
of
analyses
I
mean.
B
Maybe
a
narrower
set
of
upstream
options
or
a
narrower
set
of
issues
that
were
particularly
interested
in
so
that
you
know.
Then
council
has
to
make
a
decision.
We
can
authorize
utilities
staff
to
spend
additional
resources
evaluating
that,
but
we
will
have
spoken
in
a
more
direct
way
and
in
a
way
that
answers
the
concern
that
some
on
council
have
that
there
may
be
information
already
out
there,
that
we
haven't
fully
considered
the.
B
M
A
somewhat
different
view
on
this
I
I
feel
that
this
board
has
used
the
formal
channels
of
communication
totally
appropriately
on
this
issue.
I
presumed
that
city
council
is
is
interested
in
what
we
discuss
as
we
are
in
what
they
discuss
and
I.
Don't
see
how
we
can
steer
engineering
projects
as
OS
BT
members,
and
you
know
they
will
they
will
perceive
what
we
do
within
that
context,
and
we
all
move
forward.
I
I'm,
just
not
worried
about
it.
I
John.
C
N
C
N
C
I'm
wondering
if
the
things
that
are
closer
to
the
decisions
that
are
being
made
now
could
in
some
way
be
incorporated
into
the
trade-off
discussions
that
council
will
be
having
so
that
council,
so
that
OS
BT
issues
are
at
least
as
appropriate,
represented
in
the
discussions
at
the
study
session.
I.
J
My
discussion
from
the
last
process
committee
meeting
with
Joe
suggested
that
they
were
looking
quite
seriously
at
number
5,
for
example.
Five
is
where
we
said
hey.
If
you
could
consider
these
things,
each
of
them
might
reduce
the
footprint
of
the
flood
wall,
and
so
I
do
think
you
know
they're
there
looking
at
this,
but
I
think.
Basically
they
don't
have
direction
from
Council
to
spend
more
money
on
an
upstream
analysis.
That's
my
sense.
J
C
B
Hal
said
is
exactly
right
and
much
more
concise
them
way.
I
put
it
that
if
we
conclude
more
work
needs
to
be
done
on
upstream
issues,
then
we'll
communicate
that
to
Council,
and
can
you
know
in
the
statement
that
we
draft
at
that
March
meeting
and
the
trust
that
in
time
will
you
know
we'll
get
the
analysis
that
we
asked
for
the
DOE
respond
appropriately
to
it.
So.