►
From YouTube: City Council Study Session - 08 Aug 2022
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143089?handle=29C5449C63BA4C2BB7BA055FF12DE74A
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143088?handle=74EE8997000E43458AADAD11EF114207
I. 5G Telecommunications Regulation 6:00pm - 7:00pm
City Attorney Tamara Niles and outside counsel Colleen McCroskey of Kissinger & Fellman will be p resent to discuss 5G telecommunications regulation and limitations on a City's authority under app...
II. Break 7:00pm - 7:10pm
III. Reports from Board and Commission Council Liaisons
IV. Council Member’s Choice
V. City Manager’s Choice
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143089?handle=29C5449C63BA4C2BB7BA055FF12DE74A
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/143088?handle=74EE8997000E43458AADAD11EF114207
A
B
C
C
Oh,
I
do
indeed
there
we
go
all
right,
so
our
agenda
we're
going
to
go
over
some
fcc
terminology
just
to
make
sure
everyone's
on
the
same
page,
with
some
of
the
terms
of
art
that
get
used.
I'm
going
to
talk
about
colorado,
state
law,
then
federal
on
fcc
regulations,
we're
going
to
touch
on
towers,
we're
going
to
talk
about
notification
requirements.
C
C
The
next
is,
I
want
to
talk
about
what
a
small
cell
facility
means,
even
though
it
says
small
in
the
name,
that
is
arguable
under
colorado
state
law.
A
small
cell
facility
is
something
that
is
inside
an
enclosure,
no
more
than
three
cubic
feet
in
volume.
It
can
also
include
an
equipment
enclosure
of
up
to
17
cubic
feet
in
volume
and
unfortunately,
that
definition
does
not
include
things
like
boxes,
ground-based
equipment
and
power
systems.
So
those
things
are
all
allowed
to
be
with
the
small
cell,
but
are
not
included
in
that
size.
Calculation.
C
An
eligible
facilities
request
is
something
that's
important
because
it
has
to
do
with
modifications
of
existing
wireless
infrastructure.
So
if
there
are
towers
poles
that
are
already
in
the
city
under
some
fairly
recent
fcc
rules,
providers
now
have
the
right
and
local
governments
have
an
obligation
to
approve
these
modifications
if
they
meet
certain
standards.
C
I've
seen
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
regarding
this
at
t
facility
on
galapagos
street,
and
I
keep
seeing
the
phrase
5g
tower
being
tossed
around
and
we
want
to
be
a
little
bit
careful
with
that.
Because
tower
is
a
term
of
art
used
by
the
fcc.
It
has
a
very
specific
meaning,
and
even
though
poles
are
a
lot
of
times
the
same
height
as
towers,
maybe
a
little
bit
smaller,
we
might
think
of
it
as
a
tower.
C
Those
are
not
the
same
thing
so
that
terminology
can
be
pretty
important
because
towers
have
specific
rules
and
polls
have
other
rules
basically
and
again.
4G
3g,
4g
and
5g
are
all
different
things.
They
all
use
different
types
of
infrastructure,
some
5g
networks
probably
use
towers,
but
most
of
them
again
are
predicated
on
small
cells.
So
the
term
5g
tower
is
a
little
bit
of
a
misnomer.
C
Another
part
of
the
cls
excuse
me
crs
notes
that
any
of
the
fees
levied
by
the
political
subdivision
must
be
reasonably
related
to
the
costs
incurred
in
granting
a
permit,
and
it
must
be
competitively
neutral.
So,
unfortunately,
local
governments
cannot
charge
for
the
use
of
their
right-of-way
when
it
comes
to
wireless
and
broadband,
that's
different
from
cable.
C
E
C
This
47
usc
253.
I
will
likely
reference
throughout
the
rest
of
this
presentation,
because
this
is
some
of
the
more
most
important
language
when
it
comes
to
local
government
authority
over
wireless
siting,
no
state
or
local
regulations.
So
this
is
a
preempted
on
the
state
of
colorado
as
well
may
have
any
regulations,
requirements
that
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
the
ability
of
any
wireless
provider
or
any
entity
really
to
provide
telecommunications
service.
C
So
that's
really
the
magic
words
you
cannot
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
again
as
colorado.
State
law
requires
competitive
neutrality
in
terms
of
right-of-way
fees,
so
does
federal
law
that's
very
important.
We
don't
want
to
be
choosing
winners
and
losers
in
terms
of
who's,
providing
our
internet
service
and
to
go
back
to
the
prohibit
or
have
effect
of
prohibiting.
C
C
So
if
at
t
comes
in
and
wants
to
modify
an
existing
poll
or
I'm
trying
to
think
of
a
better
example,
if
englewood
has
a
regulation
that
would
bar
a
provider
from
deploying
new
equipment,
unless
there
is
a
gap
in
coverage
that
is
prohibited
because
a
provider
has
the
right
to
densify
and
improve
their
networks
under
this
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
language,
they
don't
just
need
to
fill
a
coverage
gap.
They
don't
just
need
to
show
that
we
don't
get
internet
in
this
quadrant
and
we
have
to
put
a
tower
here.
A
C
That
is
a
little
bit
of
an
extreme
situation
and
it
would
probably
depend
local
governments
do
have
authority
over
aesthetics.
I
have
to
imagine
that
maybe
a
small
cell
on
every
other
block
might
be
an
aesthetic
issue,
and
I
think
that
would
probably
hold
up
in
court.
But
again
a
lot
of
this
is
in
a
gray
area.
A
lot
of
this
language
is
very
broad,
may
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting.
C
C
It
is
indeed
at
least
from
how
I
understand
this
language,
and
this
is
something
I
have
not
seen
come
up
yet
in
a
court.
I
can
maybe
do
a
little
bit
more
research
into
that.
If
you
guys
would
like
to
see
if
there's
ever
excuse
me,
a
court
has
ever
answered
that
question
in
colorado.
I'm
quite
sure
that
they
have
not.
We
have
very
little
case
law
here
in
terms
of
that,
so
unfortunately,
I
really
can't
give
you
a
definitive.
The
city
would
not
be
liable
answer
it.
C
Very
welcome
all
right
and
because
we've
got
even
more
federal
law
on
fcc
regulations,
so
we
have
in
section
253.
Local
regulations
may
not
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
the
provision
of
wireless
services
and
local
governments
also
may
not
unreasonably
discriminate
among
providers
of
functionally
equivalent
services.
That's
maybe
not
hugely
important
to
what
we're
talking
about
right
now,
but
it's
still
a
limitation
that
you
guys
should
be
aware
of
the
next
provision
of
section.
332
is
probably
the
most
important,
at
least
for
our
purposes.
C
What
that
means
is
that
if
a
provider
has
a
piece
of
infrastructure
that
meets
the
commission's
standards
for
radio
frequency
emissions,
the
city
cannot
regulate
that
any
further.
They
cannot
deny
that
site
on
the
basis
of
rf.
They
cannot
say
these
residents
are
concerned
about
radio
frequency.
We
can't
put
this
site
here.
That
is
preempted.
That
is
prohibited.
Excuse
me
prohibited.
If
a
provider
takes
that
to
court,
you
will
likely
lose.
C
That
is
one
of
the
more
brightline
rules
when
it
comes
to
telecommunication.
I
know
I've
mentioned
that
a
lot
of
it's
broad
that
one's
pretty
brightline.
I
also
want
to
touch
on
the
national
environmental
policy
act.
This
is
something
that
I've
seen
come
up
in
other
communities
with
residents
who
are
concerned
about
wireless
infrastructure,
nepa
review
the
national
environmental
policy
act.
C
That's
what
we
I
see
with
nepa
a
lot
right.
People
come
in
and
they
say
no,
no.
You
can't
do
that.
I
think
that
needs
an
environmental
assessment
in
almost
every
situation.
That
is
probably
not
going
to
be
true.
Environmental
assessments
are
only
required
and
again
a
very
narrow
set
of
circumstances,
one
of
which
are
on
tribal
religious
sites,
environmentally
protected
areas,
wilderness
sites
for
the
most
part.
That
is
unlikely
to
apply
to
englewood,
and
I
wanted
to
touch
on
this
again,
because
this
is
also
something
where
you
might
see.
Residents
say:
okay,.
D
C
Section
332
says
that
you
can't
regulate
radio
frequency
emissions,
but
what
about
the
environmental
policy
act?
What
does
that
say
about
radio
frequency?
Again,
you
only
have
to
conduct
an
environmental
assessment
if
a
single
source
of
radio
frequency
would
cause
exposure
in
excess
of
the
statutorily
mandated
levels
that
have
been
promulgated
by
the
fcc.
C
I
would
pull
those
up.
They
are
very
long
and
dense
and
boring
I
and
but
just
know
that
they
are
there
and
again
cool
locations.
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
a
term
that
I've
discussed
yet,
but
a
co-location
is
when
you
would
place
a
wireless
site
on
an
existing
piece
of
infrastructure.
So
when
we're
placing
a
small
cell
on,
let's
say
a
street
light
or
a
traffic
pole,
that
would
be
a
co-location
and
those
co-locations
are
also
exempt
under
what
are
called
national
programmatic
agreements.
C
C
We
see
a
lot
of
communities,
for
example
bar
towers
in
residential
districts.
As
a
reminder
in
colorado,
we
cannot
prohibit
small
cells,
but
we
have
seen
communities
successfully,
prohibit
towers
in
residential
districts
and
relegate
them
to
either
industrial
or
commercial
zones.
That
is
not
unusual
at
all
and,
as
a
general
matter,
a
lot
of
local
governments.
C
So
a
lot
of
these
rules
that
have
come
out
recently,
almost
kind
of
ignore
towers
they've,
really
been
focused
on
those
small
cells
which
are
what
is
critical
to
the
operation
and
maintenance
of
a
5g
network
towers,
get
the
longest
review
period
under
fcc
rules.
I'm
not
sure
if
anyone
has
ever
discussed
the
fcc
shot
clocks,
but
different
types
of
wireless
infrastructure
are
statutally
mandated
to
be
reviewed
within
a
certain
time.
Period
towers
get
the
longest
time
period
and
they
are
as
150
days.
A
lot
of
communities
again
will
prohibit
them
in
residential
zones.
D
D
C
That
is
something
that
would
be
evaluated
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
but
for
the
most
part
I
want
to
say
yes
in
a
lot
of
situations,
it
would
depend
on
whether
or
not
there's
already
other
facilities
on
the
pole.
It
would
depend
on
an
agreement
between
the
poll
owner
and
the
provider,
all
sorts
of
different
things,
but
yes,
for
the
most
part.
G
E
C
G
G
C
All
right
notification
requirements.
I
know
that
this
has
been
a
substantial
topic
of
discussion
in
englewood
recently
and
there
are
no
federal
or
state
notification
requirements
for
deployment
of
wireless
infrastructure.
The
fcc
does
not
require
providers
to
notify
residents,
it
does
not
require
providers
to
notify
anyone.
C
Really
many
municipalities
do
require
notice
to
property
owners
a
lot
of
times
within
a
certain
distance,
from
a
site
deployment
generally
up
to
three
to
five
hundred
feet,
something
we
see
typically,
but
the
issue
is
that
infrastructure
that
is
a
use
by
right,
like
small
cells
under
colorado
law,
or
that
receives
administrative
review
with
little
or
no
authority
to
deny
or
modify
the
request,
which
would
be
an
eligible
facilities
request.
Remember,
cities
must
approve
those
applications
if
they
meet
certain
standards.
C
I'd
be
quite
upset
if
they
couldn't
do
anything
on
the
basis
of
my
comment,
and
so
this
is
really
going
to
be
a
policy
decision
for
the
city
to
make
some
again.
Larimer
county
still
requires
notification
in
order
for
transparency,
but
other
communities
have
chosen
to
not
require
notification
because
of
the
issues
that
arise
when
you
do
allow
public
comment
on
an
application
that
either
must
be
approved
under
federal
statute,
or
that
is
a
use
by
right
under
state
statute.
C
So
I
talked
about
how
under
47
usc
section
253
local
governments
may
not
no
excuse
me.
Local
government
rules
and
regulations
may
not
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
the
provision
of
wireless
service,
and
that
means
that
you
may
not
materially
inhibit
wireless
service,
and
so
I
wanted
to
discuss.
We've
touched
on
this
a
little
bit,
but
outright
prohibitions
in
certain
zones
can
sometimes
run
afoul
of
this
effect
of
prohibiting
material
inhibition
standard.
C
Because,
again
in
colorado,
we
cannot
prohibit
small
cell
facilities
in
any
zoning
district,
but
many
communities
do
prohibit
towers
in
zoning
district.
Other
excuse
me
residential
zoning
districts,
but
when
you
look
at
that
regulation
in
concert
with
any
other
rule
or
regulation
that
the
city
may
have,
you
have
to
analyze
them
together
and
say,
this
might
be
considered
to
be
an
effect
of
prohibiting.
Let
me
give
you
an
example:
does
everyone
know
what
a
setback
is?
Okay?
C
So
if
we
are
prohibiting
towers
in
residential
zones,
but
in
the
commercial
zone,
providers
have
to
adhere
to
a
let's
say,
thousand
foot
setback
that
might
effectively
prohibit
wireless
service.
I'm
I'm
not
even
sure,
if
that
it
would
be
possible
for
them
to
adhere
to
a
thousand
foot
setback
in
a
commercial
district
here,
but
so
you
have
to
look
at
those
two
things
together:
it's
not
just
one
or
the
other,
our
setbacks
here
are
this
number,
but
we
don't
prohibit
wireless
infrastructure
here
we
want
to
look
at
them
both
and
again.
C
C
I'll
explain
how
those
two
things
fit
together
under
47
usc,
which
again
says,
cannot
regulate
on
the
basis
of
environmental
or
health
effects
of
rf
emissions.
That
includes
indirect
regulation,
so
something
you
can
a
city
cannot
regulate
radio
frequency
emissions
under
the
guise
of
a
concern
about
something
else.
C
C
It's
really
about
radio
frequency.
That
is
not
going
to
be
not
good
and
how
that
ties
into
the
provision
that
a
denial
of
a
citing
request
must
be
supported
by
substantial
evidence
and
contained
in
a
written
record
is
because
that
concern
over
property
value
depreciation
based
on
the
fear
of
radio
frequency
emissions
does
not
constitute
a
legitimate
basis
for
denial
of
a
wireless
site.
C
So
if
we
have
this
prohibition
on
considering
radio
frequency
emissions-
and
we
also
need
substantial
evidence
on
the
record
to
deny
a
wireless
site,
local
governments
need
to
be
very
careful
about
how
frequently
they
discuss
radio
frequency
emissions.
Basically,
how
much
of
their
time
it
takes
up.
How
much
has
it
influenced
that
siding
decision?
C
There
may
well
be
a
lot
of
situations
where
residents
are
concerned
about
rf,
but
city
wants
to
deny
the
infrastructure
entirely
on
a
different
basis,
and
there
is
substantial
evidence
on
the
record
to
support
the
proper
basis
for
denial.
That's
fine!
What
we're
worried
about
is,
if
there's
going
to
be
a
substantial
amount,
for
instance,
of
comment
about
radio
frequency
emission,
and
there
is
no
other
substantial
evidence
in
it
contained
in
a
record
written
record
to
demonstrate
why
the
city
denied
that
site
outside
of
radio
frequency
concerns
get
into
that
a
little
further.
F
C
H
C
C
C
What's
the
most
important
is
the
extent
to
which
any
comments
regarding
radio
frequency
emissions
are
reflected
in
a
citing
decision,
so
something
that
we've
been
trying
to
advise
clients
to
do
as
of
late
is
that
it
is
very
important
for
council
to
acknowledge
this
preemption,
both
at
the
outset
of
the
meeting
and
probably
during
comment
period.
It
could
also
be
helpful
to
include
it
in
the
staff
report.
C
We
just
want
to
get
ahead
of
any
accusation
from
a
provider
that
a
site
may
have
been
denied
for
improper
reasons
right.
So
if
you
are
holding
a
city
council
meeting-
and
there
is
a
period
of
public
comment
and
a
lot
of
those
comments
are
regarding
radio
frequency
emissions,
it's
going
to
be
very
helpful
for
council
to
continually
speak
up
when
needed
and
say
we
really
appreciate
these
comments.
We
understand
your
frustration.
C
C
We
reached
out
to
lakewood
westminster
and
boulder
with
the
understanding
that
at
least
one
or
two
council
members
had
requested
those
specific
municipalities,
and
I
think
I
mentioned
earlier
that
I
spoke
with
boulder's
public
works
department.
We
checked
in
with
westminster
and
lakewood's
city
attorneys
as
well,
so
for
all
three
of
those
communities.
Each
of
the
communities
has
developed
small
style
design
guidelines
to
dictate
what
small
cell
facilities
should
look
like
and
where
they
should
be
placed.
C
Interestingly
enough,
lakewood,
westminster
and
boulder,
all
three
of
them
have
a
city
webpage
that
is
devoted
to
small
cells
and
small
cell
questions.
Each
of
those
web
pages
for
each
community
notes
explicitly
that
local
government
does
not
have
the
authority
to
prohibit
small
cell
facilities
from
being
placed
in
the
right
of
way.
C
F
C
A
lot
of
them
will
have
to
do
with
aesthetic
standards.
Again,
it's
not
the
only
one.
It's
the
biggest
one
off
the
top
of
my
head.
Setbacks
are
also
an
issue
that
come
up,
especially
if
they're
appropriate
setbacks
that
we
can
say
fairly
definitively,
are
not
going
to
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
wireless
service.
G
C
G
C
C
We've
gotten
used
to
towers
that
are
fairly
far
apart
again.
That's
because
those
towers
use
low
frequencies
that
can
travel
very
long
distances
higher
frequencies,
which
give
us
the
speed
and
latency
requirements
that
we
want.
Those
cannot
travel
very
far
distances
and,
as
a
result,
those
facilities
need
to
be
placed
closer
together
so
that
they
can,
for
lack
of
a
better
word,
talk
to
each
other.
C
Absolutely
I,
especially
if
the
city
is
interested
in
updating
its
wireless
code.
It
is
absolutely
a
good
idea
to
do
it.
In
one
fell
swoop.
I've
worked
with
a
few
communities
that
have
wanted
to
have
separate
small
cell
ordinances,
tacked
onto
a
very
out
of
date,
wireless
code,
and
it
doesn't
make
a
ton
of
sense.
C
C
I
Thank
you
mayor.
My
question
is
about
this:
the
kinds
of
aesthetic
standards
that
we
could
require,
because
I'm
understanding
that,
with
small
cell
facilities,
you
can't
we
can't
like
the
volume
or
the
bulk
of
the
tower,
is
not
something
we
could
regulate
because
that's
preempted
already.
So
are
we
just
talking
color
and
what
is
there
anything
like?
What
else
is
there.
C
C
They
used
to
be
used
interchangeably
and
then
the
fcc
changed
it
in
a
way
that
narrowed
local
government
authority,
of
course,
so
for
a
site
to
be
camouflaged,
it
means
that
it
is
blended
in
the
surrounding
area.
It's
more
aesthetically
pleasing
than
otherwise
for
a
site
to
be
concealed.
That
means
it
looks
like
something
other
than
a
wireless
facility.
I
I
C
B
Well,
there
was
a
can
you
hear
me
now:
okay,
there,
there
was
an
underlying
contract
in
this
case
with
at
t,
that's
the
only
one
that
I'm
aware
of
they.
If
there
are
any,
they
have
predated
my
tenure
as
the
city
attorney,
but
I
would
be
happy
to
reach
out
to
public
works
and
get
a
a
complete
list
of
of
what
we
have
out
there
and
then
review
those
contracts
to
determine
what
they
may
bind
us
or
prohibit
us
from
doing
in
the
future.
Okay,.
A
F
Okay,
I
have
a
couple
more
questions
here
around
especially
site
selection
and
the
setback
process.
So
for
a
site
selection,
there's
been
the
conversation
about
what
about
you
know,
preferred
sites
or
those
kinds
of
things
you
mentioned.
Some
other
folks
are
doing
that.
Can
you
walk
through
what
that
would
look
like
and
then
ultimately
what
if
the
provider
says?
Well,
we
don't
like
your
preferred
sites
what
options
we
have.
C
C
There's
a
lot
of
steps
that
englewood
can
go
through
a
lot
of
negotiations
and
discussions
that
we
can
have
until
we
end
up
with
a
provider
saying
no.
I
want
to
go
ask
a
judge
about
this
and
again.
I
know
this
is
a
very
unsatisfactory
answer
and
I'm
sorry
there
are
no
bright
line
rules
for
a
lot
of
these
things
and
they
really
are
evaluated
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
C
A
thousand
foot
setbacks
will
probably
work
in
a
rural
community,
probably
not
going
to
work
in
inglewood,
so
it
really
is
different
for
not
just
every
community
but
even
every
zone
within
every
community,
and
I
am
unfortunately
not
too
familiar
with
the
layout
of
englewood
zoning
district.
So
I'm
not
quite
sure.
C
F
F
I
C
C
A
Thank
you,
miss
mccroskey,
I'll,
ask
a
question
just
to
follow
to
remember
woodward's
from
earlier
in
the
meeting
about
using
existing
infrastructure,
existing
utility
from
your
experience,
work,
working
or
looking
at
other
municipalities.
Have
these
wireless
providers
use
existing
technology?
How
open
are
they
to
it?
Just
trying
to
get
an
idea.
C
Absolutely
my
response,
at
least
for
the
most
part,
is
that
I
candidly
started
this
job
during
covid
when
there
was
not
a
lot
going
on
in
the
world,
and
so
I
haven't
yet
had
a
ton
of
experience
with
that.
For
the
most
part,
providers
are
incentivized
to
co-locate
on
existing
facilities.
Because
of
that
term
we
discussed
in
eligible
facilities
request.
C
And
so
because
of
that
providers
are
incentivized
to
make
those
modifications
instead
of
deploying
new
infrastructure.
So
if
there
is
an
existing
piece
of
infrastructure
that
a
provider
can
modify
within
those
standards
to
receive
that
automatic
granting
of
the
application,
they're
heavily
incentivized
to
do
that
again,
because
those
the
city
must
approve
those
applications.
A
Actually
one
other
question:
people
are
passing
a
member
russell,
but
I
know
we've
been
talking
about
at
t,
but
I'm
guessing
also
verizon,
maybe
t-mobile
sprint.
Whoever
owns
the
company
are
those
the
three
5g
wireless
who
would
be
putting
up
small
cells
within
our
city.
I'm
just
trying
to
get
an
idea.
All
of
them.
H
J
C
C
This
is
a
situation
I
have
not
yet
been
confronted
with,
but
generally
when
you
grant
a
permit
for
a
wireless
site,
one
of
the
conditions
of
that
siting
is
that
the
provider
has
to
comply
with
federal
state
and
local
law,
including
radio
frequency
emission
standards,
if
they
are
not
complying
with
that,
I
believe
the
city
may
have
a
basis,
then,
to
potentially
start
a
process
of
repealing
the
permit
again.
This
is
not
a
situation
that
I
have
experienced
yet,
and
I
would
want
to
look
into
the
details
of
that.
D
H
C
C
I
would
be
hesitant
to
about
the
cost
prohibition
only
because
under
state
law,
local
governments
are
preempted
from
charging
above
cost
for
permit
applications,
and
if
you
recall,
those
fees
have
to
be
competitively
neutral,
you
cannot
charge
higher
fees
for
a
provider
that
you
want
to
kick
out.
I
understand
the
inclination.
C
That
would
be,
I'm
quite
sure,
a
contractual
dispute
on
the
basis
of
that
permit,
and
so
that
would
come
down
to
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
permit
itself,
something
I
did
spend
a
little
bit
time
a
little
bit
of
time.
Looking
into
is
that
when
permits
are
granted
in
the
state
of
colorado
for
the
most
part,
that
is
a
vested
property
right,
and
so,
if,
if
the
city
grants
a
permit
and
then
repeals
that
that
could
potentially
present
an
issue,
so
that's
something
to
consider.
D
C
So,
in
terms
of
the
property
right
that
mostly
comes
up
prior
to
let's
say
the
completion
of
construction
for
whatever
is
happening,
whether
it
is
a
hotel,
whether
it
is
a
house
whether
it
is
a
ugly
ugly
4g
tower
if
the
city
grants
a
permit
and
the
provider
or
contractor
builder.
What
have
you
takes
steps
and
expends
money
to
fulfill
the
terms
of
that
permit
that,
for
the
most
part,
is
when
it
becomes
a
vested
property
right
in
colorado.
C
But
once
the
site
has
been
deployed,
I
believe
then
it
would
be
a
purely
contractual
dispute
on
the
basis
of
the
permit.
A
lot
of
master
license
agreements
that
I've
worked
on
in
the
past
have
abandonment
and
removal
requirements,
so
that
would
be
something
for
the
city
to
consider.
Okay,
thank
you.
You're
welcome.
C
Excellent
question,
and
they
do
not
some
of
these
terms
get
a
little
bit
confusing.
The
small
cell
facility
includes
that
kind
of
pizza
box
looking
thing,
but
it
also
includes
the
poll
that
it's
mounted
on.
For
the
most
part,
those
polls
are
going
to
be
shared
as
a
general
matter,
not
always,
but
as
a
general
matter.
C
I
Is
there
anything
at
the
state
level
that
we
could?
We
could?
You
know,
talk
to
our
representatives
about
getting
changed
that
wouldn't
also
be
prohibited
at
a
federal
level.
I
mean,
as
I
know,
you
talked
about
both
state
and
federal
laws,
but
it
sounded
as
though
the
federal
laws
were
almost
more
restrictive
in
some
cases
when.
I
C
If
we
look
at
that
radio
frequency
language,
the
fcc
actually
also
preempts
colorado
from
doing
anything
about
radio
frequency,
there's
no
state
or
local
laws
may
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting,
although
I
will
say
at
least
in
my
own
personal
experience,
colorado
is
a
very
telecommunications
forward
state.
A
lot
of
elected
officials
here
really
understand
telecommunications.
C
It's
something
that
they're
passionate
about
and
senator
bennett,
for
instance,
is
someone
who
telecommunications
is
one
of
his
issues,
I'm
not
quite
sure
about
the
house,
but
attorney
general
wiser
as
well,
championed
the
silicon
flatirons
program
at
the
university
of
colorado
law
school
that
I
graduated
from
and
they're
very
telecom
oriented,
and
so
I
would
encourage
you
to
reach
out
to
your
local
elected
officials,
send
senator
bennett
a
message.
These
are
people
who
really
know
telecom
better
than.
I
C
The
main
restrictions
are
all
at
the
federal
level
that
prohibit
or
have
effect
of
prohibiting
language,
which
again
is
one
of
the
more
important
pieces
when
it
comes
to
local
government
authority.
Over
wireless
citing,
I
took
the
language
out
because
this
presentation
was
focusing
on
local
government,
but
the
provision
actually
states,
no
state
or
local
government
may
have
laws
that
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
the
provision
of
wireless
service.
C
I
C
Candidly,
this
is
not
a
question
that
an
elected
official
has
ever
asked
me
asked
me
before,
but
I
don't
see
why
not?
It
really
is
the
state.
You
are
correct.
The
state
with
that
prohibition
on
local
government
authority
has
effectively
preempted
your
ability
to
prohibit
those
sites
in
different
zones.
Yeah.
I
C
A
H
Russell
thank
you
mayor
just
one
other
question
for
just
your
professional
opinions.
It's
been
suggested
by
some
of
the
residents
that
perhaps
we
could
go
to
a
t
and
just
ask
them
to
consider
a
different
location.
I
mean
if,
if
there's
a
location
suggestion,
do
you
think
that's
a
waste
of
time
or
is
that
a
possibility
that
they
might
agree
to
do
it.
C
C
A
D
A
You
go,
though
I
did
want
to
kind
of
piggyback
on
member
russell
where
you
asked
what
type
of
you
know
you
talk
about
aesthetics,
you
talked
about
setbacks.
Are
we
able
to
get
a
full
list?
I'm
gonna
be
gonna.
Get
I'm
only
going
to
ask
you
for
that
list
that
members
of
council
also
agree,
but
I'm
trying
to
understand
what
is
under
the
purview
of
of
the
city
of
england
in
terms
of
what
we
can
define
as
part
of
the
wireless
code.
So.
A
That
is
around
concealment,
because
I'm
also
thinking
about
the
fact-
let's
say
that
does
concealment
also
apply
to
let's
say
you're
now
in
a
new
part
of
a
new
neighborhood
or
part
of
a
way
wayfinding,
you
know
if
we
were
able
to
put
wayfinding
over
that
pole
or
over
that
cell
tower.
I
guess
I
should
say:
is
that
possible,
or
actually
I'm
confusing
my
definitions
here,
but
anyway,
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
what
falls
under
concealment
and
what
we're
able
to
do
as
a
city.
If
we
were
able
to
go
down
that
route.
C
So
one
of
the
more
important
provisions
in
47,
usc,
section
332,
which
we
have
discussed
at
length,
is
that
it
does
nominally
preserve
local
government
authority.
That
says
nothing
except
for
in
this
paragraph
shall
affect
the
ability
of
local
governments
to
regulate
the
citing
and
placement
of
wireless
telecommunications.
C
Those
aren't
the
exact
words,
but
that's
mostly
it
even
though
that
language
is
in
the
statute.
There
are
so
many
fcc
rules
and
regulations
that
a
lot
of
government
local
government
authority
has
been
preempted
not
entirely
not
completely,
but
it
has
design.
Standards
are
not
the
only
area
again,
but
they
are
one
of
the
more
significant
areas
where
local
authorities
retain
authority
and
again
a
lot
of
these
types
of
infrastructure,
not
all
but
small
cells
and
again
eligible
facilities.
C
Requests,
which
is
a
modification,
are
statutorily
mandated
to
be
reviewed
and
within
a
certain
amount
of
time,
and
so,
if
the
city
we
I've
had
communities
ask,
should
we
institute
a
special
use
permit?
Should
we
institute
a
conditional
use
permit
when
it
comes
to
one
of
those
pieces
of
infrastructure
that
has
a
very
narrow,
narrow
review
period?
C
It's
probably
not
a
great
idea,
because
I
I
am
just
not
I
don't
know
if
I
have
ever
experienced
a
community
that
would
be
able
to
put
together,
hold
and
then
make
a
conditional
use
hearing
decision
within
60
days,
and
so
yes,
design
standards
setbacks
a
lot
of
times.
Remember.
None
in
camp
had
asked
about
priority
of
citing
preferences.
C
That's
not
again,
that's
something
that
the
provider
can
sometimes
get
out
of
with
that
prohibit
effect
of
prohibiting
language,
but
we've
been
fairly
successful
in
a
lot
of
communities
with
with
listing
preferences.
Even
if
we
can't
always
make
a
provider
adhere
to
those
siding
preferences
a
lot
of
times
they
will,
and
if
it's
something
that
the
city
is
very
serious
about,
then
I
I
would
recommend
taking
a
look
at
your
wireless
code.
A
A
A
K
Good
evening,
mayor
and
council
staff
are
present
in
person
or
virtually
to
discuss
the
proposed
2023
operating
and
capital
budget
with
you
tonight,
a
council
is
asked
to
consider
and
refine
the
2023
budget
enhancements
identified
by
departments
and
recommend
recommended
by
city
manager's
office.
The
definition
enhancements
is
any
request
above
the
2022
amended
budget.
Without
the
one-time
items.
K
So
city
council
previously
reviewed
the
original
enhancement
request
for
the
operating
budgets
and
the
capital
priority
list
on
the
work
at
the
workshops
held
on
june
20th
and
27th.
The
original
enhancements
prepared
by
departments
are
included
in
the
appendix
any
revisions
are
highlighted
in
red
font.
K
K
So
let's
take
a
look
at
tonight's
presentation.
Our
goal
is
to
provide
a
balanced
budget
to
council,
maintaining
an
enhancing
service
level.
We
also
want
to
revisit
the
revenue
expenditure
assumptions
because
assumptions
have
changed
since
we
review
the
2023
operating
budget
with
council
in
april
and
in
june.
We
also
want
to
share
with
council.
How
are
we
going
to
fund
the
5.9
million
enhancement
requests
and
what
what
does
this
do
to
do
our
operating
surplus
or
shortfall
or
what
kind
of
adjustment
we
have
made
to
ensure
a
balanced
budget?
K
K
K
K
and
property.
Tax
revenue
will
stay
flat
and
other
revenue
sources
decreased
by
3.7.
The
reason
is,
if
you
recall,
we
received
a
large
plan
review
fee
one
and
a
permit
fee,
1.2
million.
We
just
cannot
maintain
at
the
same
level.
That's
one
time
for
2023
and
expenditures
initially
were
thinking
a
four
percent
increase.
After
reviewing
the
presentation,
the
request
from
the
council
and
also
coupling
the
inflation
factors,
the
total
expenditure
increase
currently
is
estimated
by
14.9
percent
and
also
we're
thinking
about
sales
tax,
relative
transfer
to
dda,
approximately
170
97
000.
K
So
this
is
our
revenue
assumptions
for
2023
and
here's
a
line
item
showing
our
revenue
sources.
You
can
see
sales
use
taxes
in
2022.
We
thought
our
sales
use.
Tax
was
33.8
million.
You
can
see
amended
of
37
million
that
has
increased
by
probably
3.2
million.
Then
we
proposed
an
additional
4.5
increase
from
the
2022
amended
sales.
K
Include
administrative
study,
we'll
talk
more
later,
recreation
program
fees
increased
by
half
million
contribution
for
component
units
that
include
emerf
the
rental
fee.
So
you
can
see
from
between
2020
to
amend
the
budget
to
2023
proposed
budget.
The
revenue
line,
the
net
increase-
is
only
1
million.
K
So,
let's
take
take
a
look
at
the
expenditures
expenditures.
The
salary
wage
increases
are
estimated
at
five
percent
across
all
the
classifications,
but
for
the
inglewood,
employee,
association,
members
and
inglewood
police
benefits
association
members,
they
will
get
of
the
five
percent
increase.
They
will
get
a
70
cash
proceeds
in
august
22.
K
the
remainder
by
balance.
They
will
receive
the
1.5
percent
as
of
1
1
2023,
but
for
the
other
classification
they
will
increase,
they
will
receive
the
entire
5
increase
in
january
2023,
so
for
expenditures,
assumption
for
salaries,
probably
five
percent,
the
numbers,
non-personnel
expenditures,
9.4
medical
insurance.
In
our
budget.
K
We
assume
15,
but
our
hope
is
to
decrease
that
to
10
percent,
but
I
feel
that
could
be
very
challenging
because
with
kaiser
they
we
signed
a
three-year
agreement
with
them.
They
decreased
our
health
care
insurance
premiums
in
the
past
three
years,
so
with
inflation,
it's
hard
for
them,
probably
to
increase
for
only
10
percent,
but
we
sent
out
an
rfp
with
five
major
health
insurance
providers.
We're
supposed
to
receive
the
result
by
the
end
of
this
week.
L
And
if
I
could
jackie
thank
you,
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
this
is
proposed.
The
salary
wages
expenditures
is
the
assumption
that
we've
been
working
under.
You
have
already
approved
the
eea,
the
inglewood
employees
association
agreement,
which
is
outlined
here
you,
but
but
we
are
working
on
that
the
rest
of
personnel,
including
the
epba
contract,
which
is
scheduled
to
come
before
you
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks.
L
K
K
Findings-
and
this
is
the
expenditures
by
department
you
can
see
most.
This
presentation
include
a
five
percent
increase
across
all
the
classes,
but
only
by
1.5
for
the
eea
and
e
pba.
You
can
see
the
major
department
has
the
large
increase
public
works,
police
parks,
they
have
personnel
and
inflation.
K
K
Total
increase
for
20
from
2022
to
2023
in
terms
of
expenditures
is
8.8
million.
So
just
want
to
point
out.
The
total
revenue
increase
is
1
million,
total
expenditures,
8.8
million.
If
we
implement
the
entire
5.9
million
enhancement
requests.
So
how
are
we
going
to
bridge
the
gap?
It
takes
some
creativity,
a
lot
of
discipline
and
resilience,
so
I
also
want
to
dive
into
the
expenditures
in
terms
of
salary
and
wage,
because
this
has
compound
effect
in
the
future.
So
we
don't
want
to
take
this
too
lightly.
K
Our
goal
is
to
offer
competitive
compensation
and
benefits
to
our
staff.
As
we
mentioned,
we
all
the
classification
will
receive
five
percent
increase
cola
adjustment,
but
the
timing
will
be
a
little
bit
different,
also
want
to
provide
a
reference
point
to
council.
The
state
colorado
state,
salary,
wage
increase
for
the
fiscal
year
from
this
year
next
year
is
only
three
percent
and
there's
no
merit
increase.
We'll
also
want
to
list
the
colorado
economic
indicators
to
show
the
cpi
increase.
K
K
K
As
I
mentioned,
the
total
revenue
is
estimated
at
61
million
total
expenditures.
We
fund
the
entire
5.9
million
enhancements,
we're
going
to
have
a
operating
shortfall
of
7.3
million.
So
how
are
we
going
to
bridge
the
gap?
What
we
can
do
so
here's
a
proposed
the
flint
plan.
We
want
to
bridge
the
funding
gap,
so
we
assume,
if
we
do
not
fund
any
2023
enhancements,
we
back
out
the
entire
5.9
million.
We
also
want
to
implement
a
line,
negative
line
items
for
vacancy
savings
and
nine
percent
now
savings.
K
It's
not
a
small
lift,
so
finance
team
is
going
to
work
with
directors
very
closely
to
identify
these
savings
based
on
the
spending
plan.
In
the
past,
we
also
the
contingency
reduction.
Currently
we'll
have
2
million
we're
thinking.
We
can
back
out
300
000
for
health
care
insurance
premiums
that
we
counted
twice.
So
we
want
to
back
that
out
and
also
health
care
savings
if
we
could
really
really
reduce
increase
from
15
to
10
percent.
K
Also,
with
the
building
permit
fees,
we're
thinking,
we
probably
could
add
additional
50
150
000.
If
you
read
the
denver
post
article
about
our
downtown
redevelopment
plan
and
how
many
plans
have
submitted
to
our
community
development
for
review,
we
feel
safely,
we
could
add
150,
000,
also
administrative
fee
study.
This
is
the
inter-departmental
charges
we
are
conducting
now
and
see
how
much
on
if
we
could
allocate
some
of
our
expenditures
to
enterprise
funds.
K
Currently
there
are
six
enterprise
funds
that
include
south
flat
renew
and
three
component
units
like
dda,
emerv
and
eea,
we'll
see
if
if,
if,
if
there's
a
possibility
to
allocate
more
expenditures
to
these
enterprise
funds,
another
thing
is
investment
incomes
as
a
fed
is
tightening
up
the
monetary
policy
increased
interest
rate.
We
feel
we
probably
can
get
more
interest
income
as
a
result.
So
we
added
150,
we
could
add
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
balance
the
budget.
Also,
the
waste
transfer
surcharge.
K
We
are
proposing
to
increase
10
10
cents
now,
but
we
feel
with
the
cpi.
We
could
increase
the
charge
by
13
cents,
but
that
will
only
give
us
probably
57
000.
So
then
we'll
also
added
back.
We
we
decided
to
fund,
probably
2.59
million
enhancements
instead
of
a
total
5.9
million.
I
will
explain
to
you
our
criteria,
why
we
made
a
decision
and
also,
as
council's
directive,
we
are
going
to
transfer
1
million
from
unassigned
fund
balance
to
from
the
funding
gap
for
cip.
K
From
7.3
to
4.93
million,
then
we
broke
down
the
enhancements
into
two
buckets.
One
is
one
time
we
have
legal
financial
system
feasibility
study.
One
time
also
ongoing
expenditures
were
identified
by
2.38
million.
Some
some
requests
are
required
by
law
like
weekend
hearing
for
the
court.
They
budgeted
twenty
thousand
dollars,
inflation,
adjustments
for
parks,
rec
and
public
works,
and
police
amount
to
867
000
and
three
police
positions
approved
by
council
that
added
up
to
325
000,
also,
software
application.
K
L
L
So
these
would
be
the
two
officers
and
one
desk
officer
that
we've
talked
about
throughout
the
budgeting
process-
that
that's
what
we're
aiming
to
put
those
in
the
budget
should
we
get
the?
Should
the
taxpayers
see
fit
to
approve
the
public
safety
tax
for
alternative
policing?
We
could
then
fund
a
portion
of
that
amount
with
the
tax,
because
again
it
would
free
up
money
within
the
police
budget.
L
Obviously
you
know
we're
being
aggressive
this
year
with
salary
adjustments,
but
we're
also
being
very
conservative
with
adding
staff.
So
beyond
those
police
officers
we're
adding
a
0.2
staff
member,
that's
being
paid
for
potentially
if
councils
in
both
cities
have
proven
iga
and
iga
to
make
our
sustainability
coordinator
full-time,
but
with
funding
from
the
city
of
sheridan
to
have
a
shared
position
between
the
two
cities.
So
that
is
just
about
as
hold
the
line
on
new
staffing
increases,
as
we've
been
in
the
last
several
years.
K
Yeah,
thank
you
city
manager,
lewis.
Last
year
we
funded
probably
closely
20
fte
this
year.
We
are
not
funding
any
new
ftes
except
the
three
police
positions
directed
by
council
and
a
point
to
fte
for
sustainability
will
be
funded
by
city
of
sheridan.
So,
with
this
presentation
the
2023
proposed
budget,
this
does
not
include
any
new
fte.
K
I
also
want
to
mention
with
police
department.
There
are
some
equipment
cars
vehicles
are
not
funded.
However,
the
police
department
still
has
the
bond
proceeds
from
the
2017
ngo
bond.
We
call
the
pd
building
construction
fund.
They
still
have
balance
so
one
week
we
could
use
the
money
in
the
bond
proceeds
to
pay
for
equipment
and
vehicles
related
to
public
safety.
K
H
K
L
E
Thank
you,
mayor
director,
lo,
you
mentioned
that
for
these
additional
expenses
for
the
police
department,
vehicles,
etc
that
the
the
2017
funds
could
be
used
to
pay.
For
that
correct
is
that
ideal
usage
I
detect
from
your
inflection
in
your
voice
that
maybe
that's
not
the
ideal
application
of
funds
for
the
for
those
items
or
is
there
a
better
alternative.
K
E
F
L
It
was
six
patrol
two
desk
officers
and
one
dispatch
supervisor,
and
so
in
the
budget
supplemental
you
funded
the
one
desk
officer,
so
we've
got
that
one
already
in
the
positions
and
so
we're
proposing
that
just
in
case
the
budget,
doesn't
I
mean,
excuse
me,
the
ballot
initiative
doesn't
pass.
We
can
still
add
two
officers
plus
the
desk
officer,
which
command
staff
noted
as
a
really
a
force
multiplier,
but
we
we're
not
currently
putting
the
other
positions
in
this
budget,
but
will
do
so
if
the
tax
measure
passes
and
that.
L
Well,
in
the
original
presentation
that
we
did
on
march
28th
that
police
command
staff
gave
we
estimated
each
new
officer
at
155
000
after
we
went
back
and
worked
with
finance
in
hr
to
refine
that
number
it's
about
120
thousand
for
new
officers,
so
it
went
from
nine
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
for
six
new
officers
to
seven
hundred
and
twenty
thousand.
So
we've
had,
you
know,
realized
some
savings
there.
L
H
L
We
are
in
a
constant
search
to
hire
those
for
officers,
our
folks
in
our
professional
services
bureau.
If
that's
the
right
division,
I
think
it
is,
are
constantly
going
to
job
fairs,
we're
doing
recruitments.
We
are
testing.
We
have
testing
as
often
as
we
can
possibly
have
it
to
try
to
get
all
of
our
positions
filled.
But
with
you
know
about
80
sworn
officers,
there's
a
constant
churn
just
like
in
all
organizations,
and
so
it's
we're
always
trying
to
get
to
100
percent.
H
K
And
there
are
additional
consideration,
for
example,
higher
highway
user
tax.
We
had
a
one
huge
increase
for
2022,
but
we
are
not
sure
if
we
are
going
to
receive
the
same
increase
for
2023.
So
that's
one
possibility
for
additional
revenue,
also
administrative
study.
Currently
we
plugged
in
241
thousand
dollars
as
revenue
that
would
be
paid
by
enterprise
funds.
This
number
could
increase
or
might
decrease
another
revenue
source
is
sales
use,
tax
ballot
measures
supporting
alternative
policing.
So
these
are
additional
revenues.
K
We
could
consider
an
expense
side
see
if
we
could
find
a
potential
savings
from
health
care
insurance,
property
liability
insurance
currently
will
assume
10
increase.
We
will
know
the
final
number
by
the
end
of
august
and
contingency.
We
have
some
cushion
there
just
for
uncertainty
and
the
last
one
is
depending
upon
council
decision
about
honors
restricted
reserve
level,
but
from
12
percent
to
21.4
percent.
K
So
this
is
want
to
show
council
how
we
are
going
to
submit
a
balance,
the
budget
for
2023.
Initially
we
have
7.2
million
operating
shortfall,
we're
able
to
find
additional
adjustment
savings,
4.9
million,
so
the
current
shortfall
is
only
2.3
million.
Just
remember
of
the
2.3
million
1
million
is
a
transfer
from
unsigned
a
fund
balance
to
pay
the
funding
gap
for
cip.
So
the
true
operating
shortfall
to
balance
2023
budget
is
1.3
million
and
there's
a
transfer
in
and
out
for
dda.
K
So
this
will
show
you
how
we
arrive
at
the
2023
estimate
estimated
year
and
fund
balance,
14.7
million
our
estimated
beginning
fund
balance
for
2023
17.1,
plus
the
revenue
expenditure,
including
5.9
million
enhancements.
Then
we
do
some
adjustment
and
then
transfer
in
money
from
pif
to
pay
the
energy
project
for
this
building
also
transfer
out
197
000
for
dda.
K
K
So
then,
let's
talk
about
what's
the
ideal
or
optimal
unresearched
reserve
for
the
14.7
million,
as
we
discussed
it
last
week
we
have
three
scenario:
currently
16.7
percent,
based
on
the
recommendation
from
gfoa
and
council,
has
directed
staff
to
implement
a
range
between
12
to
21.4
percent.
The
unrestricted
reserve
is,
as
is
assessed,
based
on
the
revenue
or
expenditures,
whichever
is
more
predictable
in
this
case
we're
using
operating
revenue.
K
So
you
can
see
of
the
14.7
million.
What's
a
composition,
we
have
to
reserve
three
percent
total
revenue
for
tabor,
that's
1.8
million
our
reserve.
We
still
have
over
three
hundred
thousand
and
we
have
committed
later
by
council
for
long-term
assets
reserve.
Probably
ninety
seven
thousand
on
research
reserves
is
based
on
the
twelve
12
16.7
percent
and
21.4.
K
So
you
can
see
if
we
apply
these
percentages
to
the
total
revenue,
we
will
have
the
revenue
reserved
for
our
reserve
policy
that
will
leave
the
city
with
on
a
sign
fund,
balance
of
5.2
million,
2.3
million
or
zero.
Because,
based
on
our
presentation
proposal
to
council,
we
cannot
afford
to
use
21.4
percent.
In
order
to
have
arrived
at
a
zero
unrested
fund
balance.
K
You
can
see,
we
have
a
calculated
unrestricted
reserve,
so
we
cannot
use
21.4
percent
in
order
to
arrive
at
on
zero
on
assigned
fund
balance,
we'll
have
to
use
twenty
point
five
percent.
So
if
we
maintain
the
unrestricted
reserve
at
a
sixteen
point-
seven
percent:
after
funding,
1
million
for
capital
project,
1.4
million
for
operating
shortfall,
we
still
have
2.3
million.
So
if
we
use
12.0,
we
still
have
5.2
million.
K
Additional
information
for
council
consideration.
We
talk
about
what
the.
If
we
choose
16.7
what
2.3
million
can
fund.
We
just
receive
information
for
the
285
exchange
project.
The
initial
cost
of
1.5
million
c
dot
will
fund
80
percent
and
cities
match
is
only
300
000..
We
did
a
budget
trans
budget
budget,
supplemental
number
one
to
transfer
2.5
million
to
fund
this
project.
We
also
receive
the
newest
information.
We
need
additional
6.4
million
to
continue
the
same
projects.
So
that's
what
we're
talking
about.
What's
the
purpose
of
unassigned
fund
balance
and
unrestricted
reserve?
K
K
This
impacted
november
ballot
measures
we
could.
If
we
the
ballot
passes,
we
would
have
a
dedicated
million
for
public
safety
and
alternative
policing.
You
can
see
one
more
dispatch
supervisor
position
of
four
additional
police
officer.
If
we
receive
additional
2
million
for
street
maintenance,
we
can
probably
repurpose
the
current
project
identified
in
piv
for
some
other
purposes.
F
K
A
I
K
The
next
step
is
we're
going
to
submit
a
proposed
2023
budget
to
council
before
september
6
that
we're
going
to
have
a
proposed
public
hearing
on
september
19th
and
potential
workshop.
Then
we
have
two
ordinance
first
reading
and
second
reading
in
october
and
we're
going
to
finalize
2023
operating
and
capital
budgets.
F
F
K
And
also
enterprise
fund
budgets,
I
want
to
mention
verbally,
the
water
fund
proposed
a
4.5
rate
increase
plus
a
capital
investment
fee
increase
of
one
dollar
per
month.
Sewer
fund
proposed
a
four
point:
five
percent
rate
increase
and
also
storm
water
fund
proposed
a
14
increase
to
residential
quarterly
bills,
so
don't
want
to.
We
want
to
mention
the
enterprise
fund.
K
This
is
the
slide.
We
incorporate
council's
recommendation
from
last
time,
so
council's
request
now
is
listed
under
2023
requests.
They
will
also
list
the
following
four
years:
funding
requests
for
your
reference
before
you
finalize
any
of
these
requests
so
for
the
public
improvement
fund,
the
total
project
is
probably
8.7
million.
K
Then,
for
the
capital
project
fund
and
council
decided
to
delay
the
fiber
network
project
for
one
year,
then
we
have
1.1
million
for
capital
project
fund.
So
you
can
see
this
schedule.
The
bottom,
the
public
improvement
fund
and
capital
project
fund
we're
planning
to
use
a
8.74
million
for
public,
improved
fund,
that's
net
capital
project
request
and
for
capital
project
funds,
1.1
million.
If
you
see
the
table
the
first
table,
we
have
public
improvement
fund,
30
capital
project
fund,
31
police
building
construction
fund
34..
K
F
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
for
staff
and
this
might
be
for
the
city
manager
as
well.
It's
not
a
lot
of
money,
but
on
it's
page
42
in
the
packet,
I'm
not
sure
what
it
is,
but
the
feasibility
study
for
the
single
entry
exit
to
the
east
side
of
the
library
it's
listed
as
a
one
project
and
it's
a
study
for
fifteen
thousand
dollars
in
the
current
cip.
I
just
would
like
to
understand
how
is
staff
thinking
about
improvements
to
this
building?
F
L
L
I
would
I
would
say
that
I
think,
as
a
leadership
team
and
a
facilities
maintenance
team,
we
are
very
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
we
don't
want
to
be
pouring
money
into
a
building
that
potentially
we
could
be
moving
out
of,
and
so
we're
looking
at
that
very
carefully
and
we
we
would
certainly
understand
if
council
sees
fit
to
remove
this,
but
director
underhill.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add.
J
I
would
just
say
you're
correct:
we
don't
want
to
do
anything.
That's
going
to
cost
a
lot
of
money
so
to
find
out
exactly
how
much
it
would
cost
to
install
the
single
entry
is
really
the
goal.
So
if
it,
if
the
feasibility
study
it
may
not
cost
15
000
comes
back
and
says
it's
gonna
cost
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
install
a
single
entry.
We
wouldn't
move
forward
with
that
project
due
to
cost.
L
Now,
the
one
exception
to
that
was
the
carpet
in
the
library,
but
I'm
told
that
the
carpet
can
be
relocated,
it's
the
square
type,
so
we
could
use
it
elsewhere,
but
we've
really
tried
to
focus
all
of
our
improvements
to
the
physical
campus
on
safety
related
items.
This
one
per
library
stuff,
I
think
in
the
library
board-
would
say
this
is
something
that
they
consider
a
safety
item,
but
again
we're
ready
to
take
your
direction
on
this.
F
F
Okay,
cause,
I
know
that
we
were
concerned
about
as
a
liaison
to
the
public
library
board
the
emergency
exit,
especially
out
of
the
children's
area,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
this
building
is
safe
for
the
duration
that
we're
here
and
that's
an
incredibly
important
investment
of
our
resources.
But
I
also
want
us
to
be
hyper
vigilant
about
spending
money
to
think
about
the
future
future
in
this
building.
F
If
we're
not,
if
that's
potentially
not
an
option
or
is
it
something
that
we
could
delay,
maybe
one
more
year
until
we
have
more
clarity
around
the
future
of
the
building?
I
understand
it's
not
a
huge
line
item.
I'm
not
sure
my
colleagues
sit
on
this,
but-
and
I
know
I'm
the
squeaky
wheel
here-
but
this
continues
to
be
like
a
pretty
simple
one.
For
me.
K
A
So,
director,
lo,
my
question
is
actually
for
director
deandre
regarding
the
old,
hampton
complete
streets
as
well
as
south
broadway
streetscape
project.
Obviously
we
received
paperball
news
last
week
or
two
weeks
ago.
I
can't
remember
when
it
was
about
the
next
step,
so
it
is
becoming
likelier
that
we
receive
this.
From
my
recollection,
it
looked
like
we
were
going
to
get
the
full
request,
so
director
d'andrea.
Can
you
take
us
into
what
that
full
request
would
be
for
next
year's
budget,
including
future
years
as
well.
M
Certainly
so,
for
the
old
hampton
project,
we,
as
you
can
see
there
on
the
screen,
we
requested
7.3
million
with
a
matching
dollar
amount
of.
I
believe
it
was
20
of
1.825
and,
as
you
mentioned,
that
full
amount,
so
the
full
9.1
is
located
right
now
or
excuse
me,
7.3,
assuming
the
match
from
the
city
is
included
in
that
recommendation
from
the
arapahoe
county
transportation
forum.
Similarly,
the
south
broadway
was
planned
for
a
6.6
million
dollar
grant
with
a
match
of
approximately
12
percent,
and
that
611
reflects
some
cost
savings
in
2022.
M
A
M
F
Yeah
on
the
complete
streets
on
the
south
broadway,
this
is
just
a
no.
I
think
it
would
be
really
helpful
to
this
council.
I
know
this
is
the
cost
of
the
project,
but
to
know
what
is
the
request
from
the
capital
improvement
fund
versus
what
the
grant
maybe
a
breakdown
just
so
we
had
some
clarity
on
the
12
versus
the
full
project
cost.
That's
just
a
note.
Maybe
for
going
forward.
F
But
my
question
is
on
the
street
maintenance,
which
I
know
we
went
back
and
forth
the
payment
maintenance
by
area
it's
at
3
million.
Now
I
believe
we
find
it
at
2
million
last
year
and
the
if
the
ballot
measure
passes
it
would
be
2
million
in
revenue,
so
director
lo,
can
you
walk
us
through
or
or
whatever
staff
member
wants
to
take
lead
here?
If
the
ballot
measure
passes
what
happens
to
this
money
that
has
been
allocated
for
this
purpose.
M
So
our
intent
we'd
be
looking
forward
for
2023,
assuming
that
we
have
3
million
dollars
for
2023,
whether
that
comes
from
the
public
improvement
fund
or
a
combination
thereof
of
public
improvement
and
the
the
new
revenue
from
that
sales.
Tax
we'd
still
try
and
fund
it
at
that
three
million
dollar
level.
F
M
A
A
Well,
yeah!
So
if
we're
sitting
aside
three
million
now,
not
knowing
what
the
vote's
going
to
be
in
november,
it
was
successful
and
passed.
Then
technically
we
could
fund
five
million
dollars
towards
payment.
Does
that
make
any?
Is
it
is
that
feasible?
Does
it
make
sense
to
do
something
like
that,
but
is
that
on
the
table.
M
It
is,
I
think,
the
limitation
then
becomes
staff
resources
to
manage
those
projects,
so
we'd
probably
be
looking
at
some
contract,
either
contract
staff
or
through
a
consultant-
to
do-
let's
say
a
larger
project
on
probably
some
of
our
arterials
and
collectors,
which
will
go
through
that
money.
Much
faster.
K
A
It's
really
close
to
that
date,
yeah,
and
I
guess
just
as
a
question
for
you
director,
lo
if
we
are
to
find
out
so
the
the
but
the
public
hearing
will
have
these
two
items
potentially
based
off
of
the
discussion
we
have
on
the
sixth.
We
will
have
this,
the
12
and
the
10
or
20
for
those
two
projects
within
the
budget.
A
K
N
K
G
L
L
One
thing
that
if
I
could
go
ahead,
city
manager,
thank
you
if
I
could
just
for
some
perspective
on
you
know
the
city's
performance
we
have
over
the
last
three
years
on
two
times
use
the
unassigned
fund
balance
to
balance
the
budget.
It's
never
our
preferred
method,
but
just
to
give
you
some
idea
of
kind
of
what
our
year-end
operating
surplus
or
deficit
has
been
over
the
last
three
years
in
2020,
we
returned
in
operating
funds,
2.8
million
back
to
the
unassigned
fund
balance.
L
At
the
end
of
the
year
in
2021,
we
returned
2.83
million
back
to
the
unassigned
fund
balance
this
year.
We
don't
expect
that
kind
of
return,
but
we
are
anticipating
a
surplus
of
about
480
000
that
we
have
in
our
budget
review
committees
with
all
the
departments.
That's
what
we're
currently
estimating
will
be
our
balance
at
the
end
of
the
year.
L
So,
even
though
I
realize
it's,
you
know
not
a
fun,
it's
certainly
not
fun
for
staff
to
stand
here
and
say
in
order
to
balance
the
budget,
we
need
to
use
the
unassigned
fund
balance.
What
I
can
tell
you
is
that
we
have
outperformed
both
revenue
estimates
as
well
as
controlled
spending
to
the
point
that
we
have
always
had
surpluses
at
the
end
of
the
year.
D
I
see
that
on
an
operating
level,
we
did
operate
at
a
surplus,
but
in
2021
council
authorized
a
significant
budget
supplemental
to
fund
capital
expenses,
so
we
actually
for
the
year
end
operated
at
technically
a
deficit
level.
When
you
come
by
capital,
we
spent
7.89
million
dollars
more
than
we
took
in
in
2021,
almost
all
of
the
preceding
years.
K
I
K
K
We
with
this
proposal,
we
cannot
afford
a
21.4
percent
on
residual
reserve
policy,
but
if
we
choose
16.7,
we
can
cover
the
2.3
million
operating
shortfall
plus
1
million,
including
transfer
one
million
transfer
cip.
We
still
have
2.3
million
on
assigned
fund
balance
for
potential
budget,
supplementals
or
cip
project.
I
Balance
and
so
okay,
so
we
have,
we
still
have
some
money
to
work,
so
we
could
ratchet
up
to
17
or
something
like
that
18
to
stay
within
our
or
our
policy
that
we
have
yet
to
pass.
But
you
know
anticipating
passing
that,
because
I
think
the
process
here
is
we
want
to.
We
would,
in
the
future
we're
kind
of
doing
all
this
in
the
middle
of
the
budget
cycle,
but
in
the
future
we
want
to
decide.
Okay
are
our
operating
surplus.
I
D
I
guess
we
could
technically
say
that
we're
ratcheting
up,
because
the
target
that
we're
shooting
for
right
now
is
16.7.
We're
well
ahead
of
that,
but
we're
still
drawing
down
off
of
the
unassigned
fund
balance
that
we
currently
have
based
on
this
budget.
It
still
leaves
us
with
2.3
million
dollars
above
the
current
16.7
million
dollar
target,
which
would
I
suppose,
if
we
approve
this
budget,
be
what
we
would
ratchet
to
is
that,
whatever
percentage
that
calculates
out
to
16?
What
is
what
do
you
have
their
director
low
16.7
of
the
new
budget.
D
So
because
we're
growing
the
operating
revenue
projection,
it
would
be
neutral
on
the
percentage
change,
but
we
would
still
effectively
be
growing.
The
size
of
the
unassigned
fund
balance
the
number
of
dollars
in
the
unassigned
fund
balance
increases,
but
the
percentage
related
to
revenue
does
not
change.
I
B
K
Yeah,
so
this
is
an
estimated
14.7
million
ending
phone
balance.
What
does
this
14.7
consist
of
use
so
14
points
on
your
minus
1.8
table
arpa
committed
and
minus
the
60.9
million
revenue
times,
16.7
percent
that
give
you
10.2
so
2.3
is
the
residual
of
14.7
minus
r.
The
restricted
committed
a
dollar
amount.
A
N
I
Member
anderson
see
tim
that,
okay,
that
to
me
that
tells
tells
me
we
should
be
ratcheting
up
from
16.7
now
granted.
You
know
we
were
at
a
higher
percentage,
but
we're
we're
not
starting
from
a
baseline
this
year,
so
we're
trying
to
find
our
feet
under
us,
but
I
would
want
to
look
at
that
2.3
and
and
take
some
portion
of
it
to
get
us
up
to.
You,
know
18
or
something
like
that
and
utilize
those
funds
this
year,
because
I
think
that
follows
our
policy.
F
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
about
unassigned
fund
balance
versus
the
contingency.
How
does
staff
think
about
those
differently,
and
you
know
you
have
an
example
here.
The
20.5
would
put
us
at
a
zero
on
a
signed
fund
balance.
Is
that
a
concern
for
you
to
not
have
that
and
when
would
you
dip
into
contingency
and
just
walk
me
through
the
different
purposes
of
those.
K
Yeah,
thank
you.
The
current
2.7
million
contingency
consists
of
1.7
million
to
implement
the
com
study
result
and
also
we
have
staff
pay
out
payout
leave
for
the
people
who
are
separating
from
the
city.
That's
unfunded
balance.
We
have
to
pay
them
and
also
at
the
ear
and
some
the
current
staff
they
can
convert
their
some
of
the
unused
pto
to
cash
or
invest
in
their
457
plan.
So
these
are
all
included
in
contingency
and
we
have
centralized
some
of
the
expenditures
like
internships.
L
And
I
would
add
to
that
that
in
years
past
I
think
we've
used
contingency
as
kind
of
a
backup
plan
this
year.
All
of
our
contingencies
are
essentially
spoken
for
the
unknown
remains
our
comp
and
class
study,
which
we
don't
have.
The
results
back
and
I've
been
mentioning
to
council
that
I
expect
that
to
be
a
two
million
dollar
figure,
because
we're
being
relatively
aggressive
with
the
cost
of
living
adjustment,
which
doesn't
actually
keep
up
with
the
the
actual
inflationary
rate
that
we're
seeing
for
the
year
but
we're
being
aggressive,
we
can
lower.
L
F
F
K
K
K
That's
why
the
percentage
is
important,
but
what
are
we
going
to
do
with
the
amount
is
equally
or
even
more
important,
so
is
it
the
priority
for
council
to
fund
the
285
exchange
project
or
versus
we
need
additional
funding
to
implement
a
com
study
result
to
keep
our
staff?
Would
that
be
a
priority
for
a
council.
G
I
thought
our
discussion
was
that
we
were
going
to
use
something
like
the
caphra
from
the
prior
year
as
our
starting
point
and
then
come
up
with
a
number
from
there
of
what
we
were
going
to
shoot
at
us
for
a
reserve
for
year
end
and
I'm
not
understanding
how
this
is
happening
within
that.
So
evidently
I
have
misunderstood
or
am
not
understanding.
What's
going
on
right
now,.
G
Yeah,
the
ratcheting
and
sliding
I
was
thinking
based
on
where
we
were
last
year
that
we
would
be
probably
funding
more
in
ratcheting
down,
at
least
from
the
seven
sixteen
point:
seven
percent
more
toward
the
twelve
percent
as
a
reserve
not
to
twelve
percent.
But
maybe
it
was
14
or
something
like
that.
D
I
think
maybe
councilman
woodward's
revealed
sort
of
a
lack
of
clarity
that
we
have
over
ratcheting
and
sliding.
But
my
my
understanding
of
the
ratcheting
and
sliding
concept
is
the
start
is
where
we
are
in
our
unassigned
fund
balance
as
a
percentage
of
the
total
revenue.
So
right
now
we
have
money
in
our
unassigned
fund
balance
or
our
unrestricted
yeah
or
unassigned
fund
balance
in
excess
of
the
16.7
target
that
we've
set.
D
A
It's
a
good
question
member
woodwork
because,
obviously
that's
not
part
of
the
well.
We
we
stated
a
policy
that
in
profitable
years
I
guess
in
a
sense
when
we're
able
to
put
more
dollars
towards
the
unassigned
fund
balance
we
would
we
would
use.
I
know
one
of
the
arguments
early
on
during
the
sliding
and
ratcheting
was
that
in
years
where
there
is
a
deficit
or
revenues
aren't
increasing.
A
We
want
to
use
the
unassigned
bum
balance
to
not
disrupt
the
level
of
service
within
the
city,
correct.
That
was
one
of
the
comments
which
I
truthfully
may
not
agree
with.
I'm
still
having
a
hard
time
kind
of
digesting
that
I
would
prefer
to
use
our
dollars
in
those
lean
years
towards
grant
dollars
for
infrastructure
things
along
those
natures.
A
H
The
discussion
really
shouldn't
be
changing
that
baseline.
The
discussion
should
be.
What
are
we
doing
with
what
we
have
over
that
baseline?
I
mean
I
feel,
like
16.7
percent,
is
our
rainy
day
fund
that
we
don't
touch
that
16.7
percent,
but
anything
over
it?
Yes,
I
agree
we
need
to
spend
it.
I
don't
think
we
should
leaving
it
sit
there,
but
if
we
ratchet
up
now-
and
I
think,
what's
probably
more
difficult
for
staff
than
anyone
is
we've
been
making
these
decisions
all
along
and
and
now
the
sudden
we're
changing.
H
I
After
that.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
convinced
that
an
operating
surplus
is
the
best
proxy
or
that
we
you
know,
sometimes
a
downturn
happens
immediately
and
we're
talking
about
having
a
year
a
year
gap
in
here.
You
know,
I
think,
maybe
we're
actually
in
that
situation,
where,
where
it
would
make
sense
to
to
to
kind
of
maintain
a
baseline
or
something
like
that,
I
could
be
convinced
to
maybe
stick
to
16.7,
seeing
that
we
maybe
have
already
gone
into
an
economic
down
here.
A
K
I
think
first,
the
the
fund
balance
policy.
Remember,
council,
member
nunca
asked:
should
we
change
the
word
from
made
to
shell?
We
still
want
to
have
give
counsel
the
flexibility.
So
if
we
keep
using
the
word,
may
that
probably
can
solve
a
lot
of
the
questions
we're
talking
about
just
keep
it
made.
K
Another
thing
is,
I
agree
with
mayor
protim
said
the
structurally
balanced
budget,
we're
talking
about
recurring
expenditures
exceeding
recurrent
revenue.
If
we
we
use
on
the
cyber
fund
balance
to
fund
a
project,
so
we
have
a
operating,
we
have
a
deficit,
that's
not
the
definition
structurally
balanced.
So
I
will
use
recurring
expenditures
recurrent
revenue
to
see
if
we
have
an
operating
surplus
and
deficit.
K
If
that's
the
definition
22.1,
yes,
we
have
operating
surplus,
but
I
can
also,
I
understand,
council
member
anderson,
the
mayor
pro
tem
talk
about,
should
we
use
and
also
mayor
council,
member
woodwork,
you're
thinking
about
2021
auditor
financial
as
a
baseline
and
council
member
anderson
mayor
pro
10
was
talking
about
2022
estimated
surplus,
so
we
need
to
decide.
Do
we
want
to
use
estimate
or
audit
of
financial?
D
What
I'm
nervous
about
when
I
read
this
budget
is
that
we
are
projecting
an
operating
deficit
this
year,
and
that
makes
me
very
nervous.
Even
if
we
didn't
make
the
transfers
to
capital,
we
would
still
be
projecting
growth
of
government
and
an
operating
deficit
at
a
time
when
revenue
is
potentially
preparing
to
decline
depending
on
what
the
economy
does.
D
So,
I
think
that's
where
my
nerves
are
a
little
shaky
on
on
this
budget.
Even
though
we
have
money
in
reserve,
we
are
expanding
government
we're
spending
more
than
we're
taking
in
in
a
year
when
we
took
in
more
than
we
spent
the
previous
year.
But
we
don't
know
what
next
year
is
going
to
look
like,
and
that's
that's
concerning
to
me
I'd
be
in
a
better
place
with
this
budget.
I
think
if
we
could
match
what
we
intend
to
take
in
with
what
we
intend
to
spend
absent
the
capital
transfers.
A
L
L
City
manager,
thank
you.
I
I
think
we
all
share
your
concerns,
and
we
talked
about
this
pretty
extensively
at
the
leadership
team
meeting
about
the
need
to
do
just
that.
I
think,
what's
what's
interesting
to
note
about
covid
and
the
kind
of
the
long-term
effects
of
it
on,
particularly
our
economy
is
when
we
were
in
the
throes
of
covid.
You
may
remember:
we
were
fearing
much
better
than
our
neighboring
cities,
the
difference
now
in
a
very
hot
economy,
where
sales
taxes
through
the
roof
in
many
of
our
surrounding
communities.
L
We
don't
see
that
increase
that
are
surrounding
communities
that
are
more
retail
kind
of
dependent,
but
we
also
don't
see
the
down
times
as
bad
either.
What
we
are
now
seeing
is
that,
if
you
look
at
our
deficit,
it
would
be
almost
completely
wiped
out.
Had
we
not
seen
the
supply
chain
issues
and
and
lots
of
government
spending
drive
up
the
inflation
rate
to
the
point
that
we're
now
facing
a
million
dollars
or
more
in
inflationary
costs.
L
Really,
not
even
counting
the
salary
in
you
know
increases
that
the
job
market
has
been
affected
by
covid
to
the
point
that
we're
looking
at
millions
of
dollars
in
new
spending
that
are
are
a
direct
result
of
covid.
So
we
fared
well
during
the
covid
crisis,
but
the
after
effects
with
you
know
the
the
the
job
market
and
with
the
supply
chain
are
causing
our
budget
to
be
out
of
whack,
and
we
aren't
seeing
the
same
increases
that
many
cities
are
that
are
keeping
up
with
that
pace.
L
L
F
Thank
you
mayor.
I
want
to
reiterate
something
that
the
city
manager
said
in
response
to
the
mayor
pro
tem,
because
I
too
am
not
highly
comfortable
with
balancing
the
budget
through
unassigned
fund
balance.
It's
never.
I
think
what
any
of
us
want
to
be
doing
here,
but
as
he
just
mentioned,
we
have
a
million
dollars
approximately
of
just
inflationary
costs.
F
So
it's
not
even
that
we're
expanding
the
size
of
the
government,
but
to
maintain
even
current
levels,
then
that
million,
which
is
about
what
we're
transferring
from
unassigned
fund
balance
just
to
keep
us
where
we're
at
the
only
thing
we're
seeing
significant
expansion
in
and
even
then
as
modest,
is
in
police,
which
was
our
number
one
priority
in
strategic
planning
for
the
year.
So
that
makes
me
like.
Okay,
if
we're
going
to
make
some
hard
decisions.
That
seems
like
what
we've
already
decided.
We
were
going
to
prioritize
and
then
we're
accommodating
the
inflation.
D
You
pointed
out
something
andrew
lewis,
which
is
the
inflationary
pressure
on
capital,
and
it
makes
me
wonder
if
we
should
consider
doing
something
that
I
never
would
have
supported.
You
know
two
or
three
years
ago,
which
is
deferring
some
of
our
capital
projects
until
we
face
less
inflationary
pressure
if
we're
buying
at
a
premium
right
now
because
of
the
market.
Does
that
deliver
the
best
value
and
does
that
accomplish
what
we're
actually
trying
to
accomplish
by
doing
the
projects
in
the
first
place?.
L
It's
a
it's
a
great
question,
mayor
pro
tim
and
I
think
probably
director
d'andrea
could
answer
this
better.
It
certainly
is
an
option.
What
I
think
we
will
see
in
the
next
12
months
is
that
we'll
level
off
in
terms
of
those
capital
expenses,
the
unknown,
is
the
infrastructure
bill,
because
the
infrastructure
bill
from
congress
is
pouring
money
into
water
utilities,
wastewater
utilities,
infrastructure,
surface
infrastructure.
L
So
we
don't
yet
know
the
impact
of
that
additional
funding
to
keep
prices
high,
even
as
the
economy
cools,
which
I
think
anyone
will
tell
you,
we
think
the
economy
is
going
to
cool.
So
I
would
I
would
it's
it's.
It's
kind
of
a
crap
shoot
for
a
lack
of
a
better
term
on
whether
or
not
you
know
I.
I
will
say
that
c
dot
according
to
some
sources
that
both
public
works
and
finance
has
within
cdot
is
seeing
40
percent
increases,
and
you
know
one
of
our
big
projects.
L
285
in
hampden
is
significantly
over
budget.
When
we
put
that
out
to
bid
the
question
is,
is
it
going
to
go
down
significantly
enough
to
offset
you
know
the
job
creation,
the
sales
tax
generation
in
the
community
that
those
construction
projects
will
bring
to
us
during
a
downturn?
And
so
you
know
you
kind
of
have
to
think
of
it
from
multiple
angles.
A
L
That's
a
great
question-
and
I
have
talked
to
director
d'andrea
about
that.
You
may
remember
that
we
did
a
number
of
enhancements
what
I
would
call
enhancements
to
that
project,
the
some
of
the
wayfinding
items
that
we've
put
some
of
the
landscaping
that
we've
put
so,
I
think,
we're
taking
a
hard
look
at
value
engineering
to
try
to
bring
the
cost
down,
but
it
will
certainly
have
an
impact
on
the
project
and
I'd
like
director
d'andrea
to
finish
that.
M
Yeah,
so
we've
already
done
some
of
that
already
looked
at
how
we
could
possibly
phase
that
project
we
have
actually
requested.
Also
through
back
through
doctor
cog
is,
could
we
basically
get
additional
funds
now
that
our
pricing
has
come
in?
You
may
remember:
we've.
I
believe
city
manager,
lewis
has
shared
as
well
that
the
oxford
ped
bridge
came
in
quite
a
bit
higher
as
well.
M
So
the
pricing
that
we
saw
for
really
there's
no
way
to
phase
that
project
the
interchange
project
it
really
is
and
kind
of
an
all
or
nothing.
Because
of
the
bridge
elements.
The
ramps
are
all
very
integral
together.
What
we
could
potentially
defer
is
some
of
the
enhancements,
like
the
pedestrian
lighting,
some
of
the
landscaping
that
sort
of
thing
which
we're
still
putting
the
dollars
to
of
what
that
dollar
amount
is
the
other
thing
that
we're
pursuing.
F
F
I
know
this
took
a
lot
of
thoughtfulness
and
a
lot
of
time
from
the
leadership
team,
and
these
are
hard
decisions
and-
and
this
is
part
of
it,
and
so
thank
you
for
the
dedication
and
being
willing
to
pursue
what's
best
for
the
city
and
to
manage
taxpayer
resources
as
wisely
as
we
possibly
can.
So
I
appreciate
it.
A
A
A
I
believe
it
was
like
about
the
23rd
or
so,
and
actually
my
notes
are
over
here,
but
we
did
go.
We
did
talk
about
the
budget.
The
preliminary
budget
was
approved,
so
there's
gonna
be
a
public
hearing
at
the
end
of
this
month,
which
I
believe
is
the
second
to
last
wednesday
of
the
month,
which
would
be
about
the
23rd
or
so
so
that
was
one
of
the
topics
that
was
brought
up
and
again
my
notes
aren't
in
this
one
either,
but
so
that
was
one
of
the
discussion
points.
A
Hillary
portal
went
through
possible
uses
as
part
of
the
downtown
redevelopment
how
to
how
to
rejuvenate
our
blacktop
and
basically
parking
areas.
She
came
up
with
ideas
in
terms
like
pop-ups,
as
well
as
providing
temporary
space
for
maybe
an
inglewood
history
museum.
So
a
lot
of
those
comments
came
up
during
that
time.
It
was
a
really
good
discussion
by
by
hillary
to
kind
of
talk
about
what
what
we
could
potentially
do.
A
Similar
things
have
been
done
in
colorado,
springs
and
some
other
cities,
so
that
was
one
of
the
discussion
points
director
power,
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
here,
but
I
believe
during
that
meeting
as
well.
Mr
parumba
also
also
talked
about
potential
skb
and
like
the
realignment
during
the
redevelopment,
and
one
of
the
items
that
came
up
was
potentially
where
city
council
will
hold
their
meetings.
A
If
this
happened-
and
if
I
remember
correctly,
it
was
going
to
be
the
current
or
what
was
the
the
fitness,
what
was
the
24-hour
fitness
that
could
be
repurposed
while
construction
occurs
here
for
the
city
center
or
for
city
council
meetings,
so
there
was
just
a
lot
of
dialogue.
Obviously,
these
are
things
that
are
going
to
be
coming
up
in
the
future,
but
there
was
just
a
lot
of
discussion
regarding
the
dda
about
these
items
as
well
as
some
others
director
power
did.
A
I
have
that
correct
in
terms
of
what
some
of
the
placement
there
okay,
so
that
was
part
of
the
dda
meeting
so
again,
the
public
hearing
for
the
budget
is
going
to
be
on
the
23rd
or
so
whatever
that
wednesday
is
second
to
last
wednesday
of
this
month.
That's
all!
I
have
for
origin.
Commission
update
anybody
else,
director
power
you
may
leave
now.
If
you
like
mayor
protem,.
D
D
F
Yeah,
the
cultural
arts
commission
met
this
last
week
and
they
are
finalizing
their
plans
for
interactive
art
at
the
block
party.
So
please
stop
by
there's
going
to
be
space
for
the
cultural
arts
commission.
They
just
approved
some
logos
and
branding
so
the
commission's
kind
of
taking
on
a
life
of
its
own,
which
is
really
exciting
to
see
it
so
vibrant
and
please
stop
by
the
interactive
art
booth
at
the
block
party
they're,
putting
a
lot
of
work
into
it.
A
Thank
you,
member
noon,
camp.
Anyone
else,
if
not,
I
can
move
on
to
mayor's
choice
and
then
council
members
choice,
so
everyone,
I
believe
you
guys,
may
have
received
an
email
from
the
city
attorney
tonight.
Remember
russell.
I
know
you
were
near
me
when,
during
neighborhood
nights
out,
we
spoke
to
a
citizen
that
stated
that
that
made
us
aware
that
planning
and
zoning
were
holding
meetings
virtually
and
we
received
an
email
tonight
that
that's
true
and
part
of
the
reason
behind
that
is
budget.
A
If
they
were
to
hold
a
meeting
in
person,
there
would
be
a
higher
cost
associated
with
streaming.
Those
live
as
well
as
hiring
police
to
get
them
through
the
metal
detectors.
The
reason
why
I'm
bringing
this
up
is
because
I
was
speaking
to
the
city
manager
about
potential
ways
that
we
can
save
on
expenses.
A
I'm
not
sure
if
anybody
wants
to
discuss
this
at
this
point
or
if
we
should
marinate
on
this
and
then
talk
about
it
again
in
a
week
or
two,
so
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
up,
and
I
there
was
something
that
was
just
said.
Oh,
I
did
want
to
bring
up
neighborhood
nights
out
this
past
tuesday.
I
do
want
to
thank
tracy
jones
for
escorting
me
during
that
evening
got
to
meet
about
six
or
seven
different
parties
that
night
it
was
a
great
event.
A
I
got
to
speak
to
a
lot
of
citizens,
so
it's
always
a
great
night
to
go
out
there
and
just
pick
the
brains
of
citizens
and
just
tell
us
what
what's
on
their
mind,
but
I
was
really
thankful
for
everybody
and
their
hospitality
and
just
yeah
just
letting
us
how
happy
they
are
being
part
of
bingo
as
well
as
what
it
is
that
we
need
to
fix.
So,
but
thank
you
for
everyone
else.
I
saw
many
of
you
that
night
so
just
wanted
to
thank
you
for
that.
H
Thank
you,
and
I
too
had
a
great
time
at
neighborhood
or
national
night
out
and
people.
There
were
a
lot
of
people
there.
They
were
excited
about
opening
the
city
and-
and
I
got
to
speak
to
a
lot
of
citizens
and
I
actually
have
a
couple
council
requests
as
a
result
of
of
that,
but
I
do
appreciate
the
citizens
and
their
hospitality.
H
H
F
Yeah
I'll
concur
with
my
colleagues.
National
night
out
was
a
really
fantastic
event,
as
was
neighborhood
nights
on
saturday
night
in
bellevue
park
before
the
rain,
but
thanks
to
the
staff
who
put
in
so
much
work
into
that
event,
it
was
a
great
great
time.
I
also
wanted
to
let
folks
in
the
community
know
that
I'm
hosting
community
coffee
on
wednesday,
from
8
to
9
30
at
growing
gather
so
come
by
and
chat
about
anything
that
you
want
to
talk
about
in
the
city
and
grab
a
cup
of
coffee
with
me
and
then.
F
F
Yeah,
it
looks
like
we're
a
little
behind
from
where
we
need
to
be
so.
I
would
support
us
moving
forward
to
see
an
update
for
this
in
the
city
or
at
least
exploring
what
it
would
look
like
to
pursue
an
update
and
maybe
a
bigger
project
than
then
we
can
do
quickly,
but
I
it
does
seem
like
there
is
opportunity
for
additional
local
control
that
we're
not
currently
utilizing.
I
did
spend
some
time
looking
at
the
resources
that
were
provided
to
us
from
other
municipalities
and
was
particularly
impressed
with
westminster's.
F
F
I
know
that
there
was
some
different
options
around
citizen
notification
that
were
presented
to
us
tonight,
but
I'm
of
the
opinion
that
we
should
be
requiring
notification
that
if
someone
is
working
in
someone's
front
yard,
even
if
it's
in
the
public
public
right-of-way
that
can
feel
really
frustrating
or
surprising
to
a
resident
and
requiring
some
notification
for
them
to
at
least
know.
What's
going
on
versus
them
being
frustrated
and
then
having
to
reach
out
on
their
own
to
the
city,
I
think
would
go
a
long
way
in
building
trust
with
our
citizens.
F
I
I'm
in
agreement
with
councilmember
noonan
camp
I'd
like
to
see
some.
You
know
some
revision
to
the
wireless
code
and,
and
specifically
I
like
the
idea
of
you
know
of
colok.
You
know
if
we
could
do
the
co-location,
stuff,
aesthetic
standards
and
setbacks
whatever
is
possible
there.
Let's
do
it
all
you
know,
do
it
all
to
just
gain
whatever,
whatever
little
levers
we
can
use
to
to
to
exert
control
on
this,
I
think,
would
be
really
good
and
then
I'm
I
was
curious
about
like
she.
I
I
don't
remember
the
attorney's
name,
but
she
talked
about
are
measuring
the
the
rf
and
it
sounded
like.
Maybe
that
was
a
costly
thing,
but
I
didn't
I
would
I
would
want
to
know
like
what
would
it?
What
would
it
cost
did?
You
know
you
get
like
a
geiger
counter.
I
don't
think
it's
radiation,
but
what
do
you
do
to
go
out
there
and
actually
measure
the
the
radio
frequency
and
whether
it's
meeting
fcc
requirements
is
what
is
that
equipment
expensive?
I
Is
it
cost
prohibitive,
or
is
it
something
we
could
consider
doing
just
to
make
sure,
even
if
we
do
require
them
to
have
an
engine?
You
know
third
party
engineer
sign
off
on
it.
I'd
be
curious
to
know
if
it's
cost
prohibitive
or
not,
and
then
finally,
I
think
the
thinking
long
contr
long
in
terms
of
like
long-term
local
control.
Over
this,
I
like
the
idea
of
seeing
if
we
can,
I
don't
know
what
I
don't
know
if
it's
feasible
to
use
zone
districts
if
the
state
law
was
to
change.
I
But
if
you
know,
I
think,
maybe
it's
possible
that
we
could.
We
could
talk
to
some
some
state
legislators
and
say
hey.
This
seems
like
something
that
is
an
unnecessary
requirement.
If,
if
the
fcc
already
requires
that
that
these
that
that
we
do
not
prohibit
or
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
these,
then
the
additional
requirement
of
we
can't
prohibit
them
in
any
zone.
District
at
the
state
level
seems
like
a
supe,
superfluous
requirement,
and
if
we
could
use
zoning
to
somehow
direct
where
these
could
land,
I
don't
know.
I
D
I
D
A
H
Thank
you.
I
I
would
like
to
to
move
forward
with
the
things
that
have
already
been
talked
about
and
and
those
things
earlier.
The
other
thing
I
would
like
to
visit
is
perhaps
looking
at
some
alternative
locations
for
the
the
one
that's
going
up
right
now
and
perhaps
dealing
with
a
t
to
see
if
they
would
be
willing
to
perhaps
put
it
in
an
alternate
location.
I
mean
because
that
would
resolve
the
current
issue.
H
G
Thank
you.
I
would
like
to
move
forward
with
it
as
a
policy
question
for
us
for
an
item,
and
one
of
the
main
things
I
would
like
to
see
is
that
we
require
in
that
policy
that
any
any
carrier
has
to
share
their
pole,
so
we
don't
have
three
or
four
different
poles
in
the
same
block
for
three
or
four
different
carriers,
and
from
what
I
understood,
we
can
do
that.
So
I
want
to
have
that
on
our
list
and
also
just
continue
council
members.
A
Thank
you,
member
woodward
forgot
about
that,
but
I'll
try
to
make
it
tomorrow
night
as
well,
so
going
back
to
the
wireless
code.
I
agree
with
everything
that's
been
stated
tonight,
both
the
short
term
and
the
long
term
that
member
anderson
stated.
I
would
be
happy
to
whether
it's
just
something
written
from
council
to
our
state
legislators
about
a
potential
change,
because
I
don't
want
this
council
or
future
councils
to
have
the
same
issue
pop
up.
A
I
was
really
interested
about
the
concealed
aspect.
The
fact
that
we
have
a
wayfinding
project
plus
a
new
neighborhood
map,
whether
or
not
we
can
incorporate
those
as
part
of
these
small-
are
these
small
cell
towers,
something
along
those
lines,
but
I
think
everything
else
was
covered
so
I'll
be
happy
to
have
the
discussion
regarding
mayor
pro
temps
I'll,
be
happy
to
have
that
discussion
again
with
within
a
study
session
to
just
talk
about
right-of-way
usage,
so
I'll
be
happy
to
have
that
anyone
else.
Anyone
disagree
with
that
point.
F
A
I
thought
it
was
wednesday
perfect,
so,
regarding
mayor
pro
temps
statement
as
well
as
actually
remember
russell,
you
brought
up
a
statement
as
well
in
terms
of
just
working
with
att
to
re
find
another
location
for
that.
But
we'll
start
with
mayor
pro
tem.
Does
anybody
disagree
with
having
a
study
session
on
right
away?
A
No
disagreement,
I
think
we're
good
there
and
then,
regarding
remember
russell.
Is
that
something
I
guess
my
question
there
is
that
is
that
something
that
we
would
direct
staff
to
be
doing?
I
know
public
works
is
working
with
att,
but
I
guess
my
concern
there
is
that
if
we
were
to
move
it
to
another
location,
we're
just
going
to
have
a
different
set
of
neighbors
upset
about
that.
So
I
I'd
like
to
have
the
discussion
just
to
find
out
what's
possible,
but
I
guess
that's
the
way.
A
I
Just
I
think
the
you
know:
if
we
could,
I
don't.
I
don't
know
how
we
you
know,
we
would
decide
on
a
location
or
decide
with
him
on
a
location.
Maybe
it's
possible
there's
some
close
by
location.
That
would
be
amenable
to
him.
I
don't
know,
but
I
think
if
we
could
appeal
to
them
and
say
you
know
we're
trying
to
work
this
out,
we're
a
little
bit.
You
know
we're
catching
up
and
we
didn't
quite
know
how
this
is
going
to
impact
our
neighbors.
I
We
want
to
work
with
you,
you
know
like
we're
not
like.
We
know
we're,
not.
We
have
to
work
with
them,
so
you
know,
but
can
we
you
know?
Can
we
delay
it
enough
to
have
a
couple
more
just
you
know
see
if
they
would
be
willing
to.
You
know
we
might
consider
an
alternative
location
or
just
delayed
enough
to
have
a
couple
of
conversations
so
that
we
can.
We
can
make
sure
our
community
has
been
well
heard
and
we
have
some
alternatives
in
place.
H
L
Well,
the
interesting
thing
remember
russell
is
that
with
this
one,
the
the
goal
was
to
use
an
existing
pole
that
was
partially
obscured
by
a
tree.
So
you
may
remember
that
this
was
originally
an
unpermitted
tower
that
was
going
in
a
front
yard.
We
encourage
them
to
go
to
broadway.
We
encourage
them
to
go
to
the
greenway.
L
We
encourage
them
to
go
to
a
park.
This
was
we
were
given
a
two
block
area,
not
a
radius,
just
two
blocks.
They
said
this
is
the
only
place
we
can
put
it.
So
essentially,
we
said
we
please
find
a
pole,
that's
partially
obscured
in
this
case
it
was
by
a
tree
that
happened
to
be.
You
know
an
existing
pole
so
that
they
wouldn't
be.
H
B
Yes,
I
I
just
wanted
to
let
council
know
that
I
have
taken
note
of
all
of
your
comments
tonight
and
what
I
would
propose
is
sending
them
to
colleen
and
her
firm
to
look
at
and
to
look
at
our
current
municipal
code.
I've
tried
to
quote
some
of
your
comments
that
we
can
do.
We
should
look
at
doing
whatever
we
can
to
assert
local
control,
provide
maximum
protection
for
our
citizens
and
look
at
our
code
and
proposed
revisions
that
are
likely
enforceable.
B
I
D
D
D
L
L
We
were
digging
the
our
cast
iron
pipe
that
was
connecting
it
has
collapsed,
so
we're
out
there
it's
become
a
much
bigger
project,
long
story
short:
we
are
out
of
water
at
the
restaurant,
but
not
at
the
golf
course
in
its
entirety
and
of
course
we
just
got
a
great
restaurateur
that
has
moved
in
there
and
is
doing
really
good
job,
but
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
we
do
have
that
issue
at
one
of
our
facilities
and
then
also
just
echoing
the
great
work
for
national
night
out.
That's
continued.
L
We
have
a
couple
of
straggler
neighborhoods,
my
own
included,
that
was
over
the
weekend
that
did
their
national
night
out,
but
I
want
to
give
props
to
our
new
community
relations
person
in
pd
crystal
usman,
who's
really
taken
that
over
and
run
with
it,
and
thank
you
to
madeline,
who
has
done
a
great
job
of
kind
of
handing
the
ropes
as
tony
did
to
madeleine.
So
I
think
we
had
more
this
year
than
we've
had
in
a
year
in
the
last
three
so
hope
to
keep
growing
that.
Thank
you.