►
From YouTube: 10.20.2020 Planning and Zoning Commission - Pt. 2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
B
A
Let
me
make
sure
we
have
a
cord
chair.
Do
you
wish
to
take
roll
call
again.
B
I
believe
we
yeah,
I
believe
we
should
just
as
a
matter
of
that
way.
We
have
a
recorded
meeting.
It's
not
like
people
just
left
the
meeting.
We
continued
without
a
quorum.
So,
okay,
as
soon
as
you
think
we
have
everybody
on
then
then,
let's
take
roll
okay.
C
D
C
A
Okay,
great,
we
have
a
quorum
present.
A
D
A
B
Excellent,
so
at
this
point
in
time,
let's
turn
it
over
to-
I
guess,
wade
at
this
point.
Carry
on.
B
E
That's
all
right,
michelle,
it's
okay!
I
guess
we
were
just
at
this
point
at
questions
for
staff.
G
Are
we
seeing
mr
fasting's
screen
or
is
this
a
wade
screen
right
now.
A
G
B
Were
there
any
other
questions
from
commissioners
at
this
point?
Okay,
I
don't
see
anybody
with
her
hand
up
mr
fasting.
What
I'm
going
to
ask
for
you
to
do
is
I
I
know
I
received
an
email
and
said
I
have
a
30
minute
presentation.
H
Floor,
okay,
great,
you
know
I'll
try
to
go
like
10
minutes
or
something
like
that.
Okay,
so
this
is
the
block
that
we're
talking
about.
This
is
the
blocking
question
right
here.
Can
you
guys
see
my
mouse
okay,
so
this
is
east
jefferson
drive
right
here
and
if
you're
looking
at
the
map
of
this,
you
may
be
wondering
why,
in
the
world,
is
this
diagonal
street
bisecting,
this
residential
block,
there's
no
other
block
in
the
entire
city
of
englewood?
H
It
looks
like
this,
and
I've
spelled
this
out
very
clearly
in
the
application,
because
in
1950
the
people
that
owned
this
portion
of
this
block
decided
they
should
build
a
parkway
that
traveled
from
city
park,
which
is
northwest
they're.
That's
northwest
of
here
all
the
way
down
to
clarkson
street
a
long
little
dry
creek.
Well,
as
we
can
see
that
parkway
never
was
built
okay,
but
the
city
decided
to
pave
this
road
anyways
because
they
had
the
space
and
what
what
else
would
they
do?
They
said
pave
a
road.
I
guess.
H
So,
if
you
look
at
this
map,
what
in
the
world
is
this
street
doing
here?
Is
this
actually
necessary?
Any
logical
person
can
see
if
you
want
to
get
from
point
a
here
at
sherman,
285
to
point
b
right
here
at
logan,
east
jefferson.
You
could
take
this
route
right
here
or
this
route
or
any
other
route.
Why
would
you
transect
this
neighborhood?
Just
like
this
on
a
100
foot
wide
right
away?
It
makes
no
sense.
I'd
also
like
to
show
you
this
portion
right
here.
H
This
is
the
property
line
of
the
neighbor
across
the
alley.
3630
south
sherman,
which
I've
also
explained
very
clearly
in
the
application.
If
you
read
it,
city
cannot
actually
build
any
right-of-way
south
of
this
portion
because
they
would
run
into
this
property
right
here.
So
there's
nothing
they
could
do.
This
is
the
only
little
sliver
of
road
that
they
have
right
here.
This
is
going
to
be
closed
as
I'll
show
you
it
shortly
and
we
do
have
preliminary
plans
and
that
wade
just
may
not
know
about
him.
H
H
So
let
me
try
to.
I
won't
even
get
into
the
legal
aspects.
There's
significant
legal
challenges
to
this.
The
city
may
not
even
have
a
dedicated
right-of-way,
which
I've
also
spelled
out
in
the
application,
and
I've
asked
the
city
attorney
mr
comer,
to
comment
on
it
which
he
hasn't,
but
we'll
save
that
for
later
here's
some
property
records.
This
is
cdot
property.
They
they
show
right
here
that
there's
never
actually
a
dedicated
right-of-way.
H
That's
another
concern.
Here's
just
more
proof
of
that.
This
is
straight
from
c
dot.
So
here's
another
map
right
here,
this
red
line,
shows
you
where
the
c
dot
right
of
way
line
is
so
the
city
of
englewood
doesn't
even
own
this
area
north
of
this
red
line.
This
is
all
colorado
department
of
transportation
property
that
was
dedicated
in
1956
to
to
run
state
highway.
70
down
this
road,
which
is
now
u.s
285,
so
the
city
of
englewood
can't
even
build
any
property
here.
H
This
is
all
colorado,
cdot,
owned,
right-of-way
and
they've
told
me
through
open
communications
with
cdot
that
they
absolutely
will
not
approve
any
project.
That's
that's
east
of
south
sherman
street.
Why?
Because
there's
a
giant
bridge
here.
It
costs
literally
millions
of
dollars
to
alter
this
area
that
this
this
that
c
dot
wouldn't
want
to
spend,
because
why
would
we
want
to
widen
this
highway
right
here?
There's
a
bridge
here
that
costs
millions
of
dollars
that
nobody
has
to
spend
and
again
here's
my
house
right
here.
H
H
H
H
All
of
these
other
houses
in
the
in
the
in
the
yellow.
This
is
how
many
lots,
how
many
units
are
currently
on
it.
The
pink
is
how
many
they
could
be,
so
this
property
over
here
across
grant
street
is
essentially
the
same
size.
Well,
why
is
this
a
triplex
when
mine
is
a
single
family
house
that
doesn't
make
any
sense,
because
it's
the
front?
This
is
the
front
of
my
house,
and
the
long
side
of
the
triangle
is
the
back
of
the
house
that
doesn't
make
any
sense.
H
So
here's
what
I
told
you
guys
earlier
this
this
whole
reason
I
got
this
24.22
feet
is
because
I
went
to
the
city
months
ago
and
asked:
why
is
it
that
this
neighbor
has
a
property
line,
that's
different
than
mine,
and
they
said
we
don't
know
so
I
researched
it,
and
I
found
that
in
1956
the
city
vacated
this
area
right
here
to
3630,
south
sherman
street
and
they've
re.
The
reason
they
vacated,
that
was
to
make
room
for
state
highway
70,
which
is
c
dot
owned
right
away
right
here.
H
So
all
I'm
asking
the
city
for
is
to
give
me
the
same
amount
of
space
24.22
feet
that
was
given
to
this
property
in
1956
and
they
should
have
been
given
to
my
to
the
rest
of
these
properties.
So
in
1956
the
city
demonstrated
very
clearly
that
they
no
longer
needed
this
right-of-way.
They
knew
right
away.
We're
not
going
to
we're
not
going
to
build
this
street
100
feet
wide.
Let's
give
some
of
this
land
back
to
these
property
owners,
so
they
can
use
it
well.
H
They
only
did
it
to
this
house
and
not
the
rest
of
them.
For
some
reason
so,
like
we
said,
here's
the
improvement
plus
survey-
this
is
what
I
paid
for
certified
by
john
doty
he's
the
guy
who
did
the
right-of-way
vacation
down
the
street
in
another.
The
synergy
medical
buildings
he's
he's
the
guy
who
worked
on
this
project
he's
still
working.
H
H
H
Here's
another
picture
from
the
front:
that's
the
land.
I
would
ask
the
city
to
dedic
to
vacate
back
to
me
and
you
may
look
at
this
and
say:
what
do
you
mean?
That's
your
front
yard.
I
planted
all
these
pretty
native
shrubs
for
pollinators.
Well,
it's
actually
east
jefferson
drive
right
away.
Here's
another
picture.
This
is
all
included
in
the
application.
H
Those
arrows
would
be
the
end
of
the
right-of-way
vacation
that
I'm
asking
there's
a
picture
of
the
alley.
Another
shot
right
there
and
this
project
so
clearly
aligns
with
the
goals
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
specifically
reducing
the
cost
of
housing,
increasing
the
availability
of
housing
for
families
like
me
to
live
here
in
the
city
of
england,
and
this
is
all
in
the
application
there's
about
30
different
objectives
that
this
clearly
aligns
with
improve
neighborhood
identity.
Allow
for
housing
that
meets
the
needs
of
all
income
groups,
allow
for
housing,
investments
that
improve
the
housing
mix.
H
I
like
this
one,
especially
capitalize
on
opportunities
for
redevelopment
associated
with
obsolescent
land
uses.
This
is
by
definition,
this
land
is
by
definition,
obsolescent.
It's
never
been
used
ever
it's
completely
obsolete.
It
has
to
be
given
back
to
the
community,
and-
and
this
is
a
this-
is
a
slide
from
from
the
urban
land
institute
study
a
couple
months
ago
or
a
couple
years
ago.
H
They
every
community
is
dying
for
this.
For
resident-led
connectivity
improvements,
resident-led
development,
resident-led
improvements
to
the
community,
not
just
billionaires,
and
the
hospital
who
use
who
we
everybody
unanimously
agreed,
should
give
whatever
land
they
want.
The
community.
The
residents
should
lead
these
projects.
H
So
let
me
just
summarize
the
application
timeline
for
you
guys
december
2019
is
when
I
first
described
this
to
paul
weller
who's
with
public
works,
because
at
the
time
in
2019,
I
was
told
that
this
is
a
public
works
issue.
This
is
a
streets
issue,
so
go
to
paul
weller.
He
said
yeah,
we've
done
it
just
give
us
a
survey
january
said:
email,
your
email
me
your
proposal
and
we'll
we'll
talk
about
it
january
31st.
After
discussing
this
is
my
email
to
paul.
H
No
longer
works
for
the
city
after
discussing
with
the
director
of
public
works.
Please
advise
me.
Your
survey
requirements
and
the
specific
criteria
the
city
will
use
to
to
process
my
application.
Those
questions
are
very
important.
Give
me
your
survey
requirements
and
the
specific
criteria
of
the
application,
because
the
city
doesn't
even
have
any
criteria
for
this
application.
In
fact,
if
you
look
at
the
municipal
code,
there
is
not
even
a
mention
of
a
vacation
of
right-of-way,
unlike
every
other
city
and
county
in
the
metro
area.
H
The
city
of
englewood
does
not
have
any
protocol
to
follow
through
this
process.
So,
two
weeks
later
he
didn't
respond.
I
said
hi
paul.
What
did
you
decide
for
the
survey
requirements
next
day?
I've
reviewed
your
request.
The
director
of
public
works
in
conjunction
with
the
colorado
department
of
transportation.
We've
started
a
project
that
will
widen
u.s
285.
So
at
this
time
it's
premature
to
consider
any
right-of-way
vacations
in
this
area.
You
didn't
even
look.
There
was
no
survey,
there
was
no
title
work.
There
was
no
deeds,
there's
no
utilities
locations
february
14th.
H
He
made
up
his
mind.
No
we're
not
even
going
to
consider
it
so
since
february
14th,
that's
the
position
that
the
city
has
maintained,
despite
all
the
new
information
that
I've
presented,
they
don't
care
february,
14th,
that's
the
thing.
They're
sticking
with
february
25th
I
met
with
paul
and
brooke.
The
city
will
be
widening
it.
I
said,
that's
impossible:
how
could
you
widen
the
highway
across
little
dry
creek?
H
Well,
they
said
we
don't
know
the
extent
of
the
project
it's
too
early,
so
we
can't
provide
you
any
information
this
time.
Okay,
fair
enough.
Well,
it
took
a
few
months
to
get
the
survey
done
and
there's
a
little
thing
called
covid.
I
was
furloughed,
it's
still
existing,
so
things
got
kind
of
slowed
down.
August
23rd
is
kind
of
when
I
completed
the
my
the
whole
process,
the
whole
project.
H
I
did
all
the
title-
research,
it's
all
in
the
application.
I
said,
hey
wade
for
some
reason.
Wade
is
now
the
lead
on
this
project.
Even
though
it's
a
public
works
issue,
it's
a
right-of-way
issue.
Wait
we've
completed
the
survey.
Can
we
meet
to
discuss
it
kevin?
I
took
a
couple
emails
to
get
a
response.
Kevin.
No
in
previous
email
correspondence,
we've
already
stated
our
response.
I
don't
believe
this
has
changed.
H
Well,
don't
you
want
to
see
the
new
information
that
I
found
the
property
lines,
the
survey,
the
rights
of
way,
all
the
information
he
didn't
even
care.
He
said
we've
already
made
up
our
mind,
so
here's
all
the
time
I
spent
on
it.
We
don't
need
to
go
through
that.
We
won't.
We
won't
need
to
go
through
this
for
now
do
that
somewhere
something
else,
but
so
staff
has
essentially
said
that
they
want
to
use
this
land
my
front
yard
for
cars
and
not
for
human
beings
to
be
housed
in
okay.
H
I
find
that
kind
of
unacceptable
in
2020
when
families
are
dying
for
affordable
housing
and
our
air
is
the
most
polluted.
It's
ever
been
in
the
history
of
this
entire
state,
but
city
staff
say
nope
cars,
the
other
issue,
economic
crisis.
It
costs
the
city
money
to
maintain
this
street
to
maintain
these
streets.
Why
are
we
continuing
to
to
use
these
streets?
I've
already
shown
you
guys
on
the
map
that
it's
a
completely
worthless
piece
of
land
to
this
to
the
city.
Why
not
give
it
back
to
the
community
to
generate
revenue
for
the
city?
H
H
So
some
specific
responses
to
city
staff
wade
told
you
guys
that
the
applicant
requests,
a
portion
of
east
jefferson
drive
approximately
four
thousand
square
feet,
be
vacated
from
public
use.
How
is
this
in
public
use?
Has
it
ever
been
in
public
use?
Of
course,
not
it's.
My
front
yard
there's
zero
use
that
the
public
has
ever
gotten
out
of
this
next.
H
We
don't
even
need
to
go
over
that
because
he
didn't
put,
he
didn't,
say
anything
about
it,
but
wade
did
say
he
had
some
concerns
about
soils,
wade's,
not
an
engineer.
If
anybody
was
concerned
about
the
soils,
it
would
have
been
the
building
department,
they
had
no
objections.
B
I
H
B
So,
with
regard
to
whether
a
particular
member
of
staff,
you
agree
with
them
or
don't
agree
with
them
or
you
don't
know
whether
they're
qualified
don't
make
the
assumption.
They
haven't
spoken
to
somebody
who
is-
and
they
are
simply
speaking
for
the
community
or
for
the
city
at
this
point
in
time,
relative
to
their
position.
H
Gotcha,
okay,
that
point
is
well
taken.
Okay,
but
again
the
building
department
had
no
objections.
Utilities.
The
city
needs
to
maintain
access
to
the
sanitary
sewer.
So
this
is
an
issue
that
was
brought
up
by.
I
think,
let's
see
colin
had
mentioned
it.
The
city
still
has
access
to
the
sanitary
sewer
and
there's
already
an
easement
there.
It's
a
it's
a
prescriptive
easement,
there's
already
laws
that
regulate
building
codes.
This
is
that's
a
different
problem
aside
from
the
right-of-way
vacation,
so
here's
where
it
is,
we've
already
been
through
it.
H
H
I
will
skip
through
that
one
okay,
so
public
works
has
said
that
they
might
use
this
land.
Cdot
has
said:
there's
nothing
east
of
south
sherman.
The
intersection
is
closed.
C
dot
owns
that
right
of
way.
This
is
the
legal
problem.
The
city
doesn't
actually
have
a
dedicated
right-of-way
here.
So,
despite
what
wade
said
that
they
don't
have
any
preliminary
plans,
this
is
the
preliminary
plans
from
from
atkins
global
this.
H
This
is
the
group
that
was
just
approved
for
the
contract,
and
this
is
dated
august
21st,
and
so,
let's
zoom
in
on
their
preliminary
plans.
As
you
can
see,
this
is
this:
is
south
sherman
right
here
they're
going
to
close
that
off?
There
is
no
plan
to
widen
this
road
east
of
south
sherman,
as
c-dot
has
confirmed,
because
that's
c-dots
land
they've
also
said
this
is
more
plans
existing
that
we're
going
to
use
this
existing
area
for
bicycle
access,
and
it
says
right
here-
this
is
copied
straight
from
the
application.
H
It's
all
public
record
you'll
avoid
the
right-of-way
for
all
potentially
historic
properties
along
the
southern
side
streets,
and
this
was
emailed-
I
even
communicated
with
staff
today
they're
not
going
to
touch
any
of
this
right
away.
Now
they
don't
want
to
anyways.
They
may
because
the
lawyers
told
them
they
have
to.
They
can't
tell
me
that
they
won't
do
it
for
sure,
because
it's
city
owned,
so
they
may
want
to
build
a
zoo
there
or
an
airport.
Who
knows:
okay,
we
can
go
through
that
stuff,
so
that
is.
J
H
B
Okay,
certainly
appreciate
that
sir
and
appreciate
your
dedication
to
trying
to
do
what
you
believe
is
right
for
the
city.
So
thank
you
very
much.
Would
there
be
any
additional
comments
or
questions
from
from
commissioners.
K
I
just
have
a
couple
quick
questions,
so
you
reference
your
neighbors
a
lot
and
I
was
wondering
what
your
neighbors
think
of
this
project
and
I
was
also
curious
why
they
didn't
want
to
kind
of
jump
in
and
also
vacate
their
properties.
Like
you
mentioned,
that
also
could
be
extended.
H
Yeah
great
question,
so
the
neighbor
directly
to
the
what
to
the
south
of
me
he
actually
passed
away
about
a
year
ago
and
his
house
has
been
vacant.
The
other
houses
out
across
the
street
are
rental
properties,
so
I'm
surrounded
by
rental
properties
and
then
the
other
house
3630
south
sherman,
that's
a
commercial
business.
K
Okay,
cool,
that's
really
awesome
to
know
good
details
and
then
the
other
question
I
have
was:
how
are
you
defining
affordable
pricing
or
housing?
And
I
guess
what
is
your
anticipated
rent
price
for
a
family
and
like
how
many
rooms
would
that
be.
H
Yeah,
that's
a
great
question.
I
mean
the
the
physical
structure,
I
would
think
is
like
a
thousand
square
feet.
One
free
bed,
one
bath,
something
like
that.
That's
kind
of
the
missing
middle
that
everybody
has
been
talking
about,
and
I
think
that
the
definition
of
what
people
should
be
able
to
afford
is
less
than
30
of
their
income,
and
that
is
gone.
My
wife
and
I
make
actually
quite
a
pretty
good
salary,
but
we
can't
afford
to
live
here
because
of
that.
According
to
that
30
percent
definition.
K
D
H
K
I
live
pretty
close
to
the
property,
so
I
was
curious.
I
live
camden
and
yeah
just
up
the
up
hampden,
but
those
were
the
only
questions.
Oh
yeah,
those
are
the
only
questions
I
had.
H
Okay,
can
I
let
me
also
respond
that
it's
very
well
known,
it's
unequivocal
in
economic
and
city
planning,
literature
that
the
number
one
cause
of
housing
costs
the
number
one
determinant
of
the
increase
in
housing
costs
is
irresponsible.
Land
use
and
land
use
regulations,
land
costs
too
much
money
because
the
number
one
you
know
what,
because
the
people
that
own
all
the
land
are
cities,
and
these
giant,
you
know
organizations.
G
Maybe
I
needed
a
little
bit
of
a
clarification
on
on
the
request.
Obviously
it's
a
right-of-way
request
tonight.
G
I
appreciate
that
some
of
the
discussion
that
was
going
through
was
the
required
width
for
duplexes
and
and
wade
also
noted
that,
even
if
it
was
a
new
single-family
house
that
you
would
have
to
have
new
zoning
or
you
would
have
to
go
through
the
same
processes
as
we're
talking
about
right
now,
wait
can
you
can
confirm
that,
like
even
aside
from
the
right-of-way
request,
if
they
were
to
build
a
new
house
on
this,
that
was
a
single
family
house,
but
they
still
have
to
go
through
the
same
process
as
they're
doing
right
now.
G
Is
there
not
enough
with
for
that.
E
B
G
L
L
No,
so
with
regard
actually
the
soils,
one
was
something
that
I
did
note
in
the
in
the
document
that
wasn't
brought
up
and
then
you
kind
of
went
through
that
quickly.
Could
you
please
speak
a
little
bit
more
to
the
soils
I
noted
in
the
document.
It
said
that
your
existing
structure
is
probably
settled
somewhat
due
to
the
soils
I
just
kind
of
want
to
hear
a
little
bit
more
from
you
about
the
the
conditions
that
are
there
and
the
potential
for
development.
On
top
of
it.
H
Yeah
so
yeah
I
mean
my
this.
The
structure
that
we
currently
inhabit
is
is
totally
it's.
The
the
foundation
is
made
of
cinder
blocks
and
it's
significantly
deteriorated.
So
I
would
hope
that
now
building
codes
have
better
foundational
requirements
and
again
that's
a
separate
issue
from
the
right-of-way.
That
would
be
a
building
issue
but
and
again
like
wait
said
there
would
have
to
be
a
soils
test
and
something
like
that.
That
would
be
a
separate
application
that
would
go
through
building
department.
All
that
stuff,
I
don't
know
I
haven't,
done
the
soils
test.
H
B
I
Yeah,
that's
okay.
I
just
had
a
couple
things.
A
couple
comments
I
just
wanted
to
say
you
know.
I
appreciate
you
know
trying
your
persistence,
trying
to
go
through
the
process
and
trying
to
do
what
you
know
seems
logical
and
also
your
policy,
your
passion
for
housing,
but
I
do
want
to
ask
you
know
with
your
reaching
out
to
see
that
and
the
fact
that
they
say
they
have
no
plans
for
it
at
this
point.
I
Is
there
any
way
to
establish
sooner
that
they
don't
have
any
plans
for
it?
And
I
guess
maybe
this
question,
for
you
know,
city
staff
as
well,
I
mean
because
it
just
seems
like
it.
You
know
it
makes
a
tremendous
amount
of
sense,
and
you
know
if
we
could
establish
sooner
that
what
you
were
told
by
see
that
is
true.
It
seems
like
we
could
continually
move
the
process
forward
sooner.
H
D
H
To
alter
that
landscape
would
be
kind
of
crazy
to
spend
on
it
right
now,
so
in
the
future,
if
they
wanted
to
widen
highways,
they
could
potentially
do
that.
But
I
think
now
that
people
that
work
in
public
works
understand
that
widening
roads
is
not
what
we
should
be
doing
right
now.
It's
not
a
responsible
transportation
decision,
so
I
don't
think
that
cdot
has
any
plans
in
the
future
to
widening
these
rows.
I
I
just
you
know
I
yeah,
I
guess
we'll
we'll
find
out
what
makes
sense,
but
I
I
just
appreciate
you
know
what
he's
trying
to
do
and,
like
I
said,
I'd
like
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
move
the
process
forward.
Thank
you.
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
make
a
few
comments,
but
I
do
want
to
keep
in
mind.
Staff
has
asked
us
to
pass
along
a
recommendation
to
the
council.
We
always
preface
everything
in
the
positive,
so
there'll
be
a
motion
to
approve
in
a
second
any
final
discussion.
Then
a
vote,
but
before
we
get
to
that,
I'd
like
to
just
mention
a
couple
things.
B
74
years
ago,
apparently,
the
decision
was
made
on
a
different
property,
and
I
have
no
idea
why
they
made
it
none,
okay,
nor
do
I
think
we
need
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
figuring
that
out.
It's
a
decision
74
years
ago
well
before
any
of
us
on
this
call
on
this
in
this
meeting
were
born.
B
It's
a
non-conforming
urban
lot,
which,
by
definition,
brings
to
mind
a
bigger
question
relative
to
development
of
otherwise
previously,
not
undeveloped,
non-conforming
urban
lots.
That
has
absolutely
nothing
to
do
with
this
property.
It
has
everything
to
do
with
this
property
and
it's
something
that
the
city
is
addressing
as
we
review
the
title
16
or
chapter
16
of
the
municipal
code
with
consideration
to
utilities,
I
have
a
great
deal
of
respect
for
our
city
staff
and
they
work
diligently
to
make
sure
that
they
do
their
best
to
be
able
to.
B
You
know,
do
what's
in
the
public
good
for
the
vast
majority
of
people,
if
not
every
single
person
in
the
community.
Regarding
every
single
time,
I
can
just
tell
you
that
I'm
comfortable,
if
they
tell
me
that
the
plan
showed
that
the
city
sewer
was
somewhere
else,
but
now
in
fact
it's
right
next
to
this
property
right
on
this
property.
I've
got
a
problem
with
that.
Okay,
I've
got
a
problem
with
saying:
okay,
so
we're
going
to
give
this
up
and
what
benefit?
What
economic
benefit?
B
B
Frankly,
I
think
it
resolves
itself,
maybe
in
the
75th
year,
so
maybe
there,
whatever
that
anniversary,
is
at
75
years,
maybe
that
resolves
itself,
but
it
would
seem
to
me
that
we're
not
going
to
fix
the
greatest
greatest
mover
of
prices
in
the
economy,
regardless
of
commodity
service
or
product,
which
is
the
availability
of
supply
and
the
amount
of
demand
relative
to
the
price
curve
and
the
price
elasticity
of
demand
thereof.
There
are
economic
equations
for
that.
I
remember
studying
them
at
nausea
and
continue
to
do
it
every
day,
as
we
look
at
particular
securities.
B
But
that
being
the
case,
if
there's
any
other
comments
before
we
would
entertain
a
motion,
would
any
other
commissioners
have
a
comment
before
we
have
a
motion?
B
B
Okay-
and
would
there
be
a
second
a
second,
we
have
motion
a
second
again
city
staff
has
as
as
recommended
to
this
body
that
we
would
recommend
to
the
city
council
to
not
approve
that
as
as
written
at
this
time.
Okay,
so
a
motion
or
a
vote
of
saying
yes,
is
in
fact
saying
no
to
the
applicant
and
the
petitioner,
okay
and
yes
to
the
city
staff.
Is
there
any
question
regarding
that?
G
I
moved
to
or
I
yes
towards
what
city
staff
has
recommended,
with
the
understanding
of
revisiting
this
as
soon
as
humanly
possible
that
we
can.
K
I
agree
with
colin
and
michelle.
I
think
that
this
is
a
great
idea,
but
I
do
think
that
it
needs
to
be
revisited.
It
seems
like
it's
not
quite
black
and
white,
yet
so
I'm
gonna
vote.
Yes,
diane.
L
D
L
Burden
on
his
property,
both
soils
and
the
configuration
of
the
lot
makes
it
significantly
difficult
to
do
anything
on.
It
definitely
would
like
to
revisit.
A
C
Down
down
the
line,
but
if
there's
some
criteria
to
determine
when
we
revisit
it,
you
know
the
plans.
The
two
big
pieces
that
I
I
see
in
staff's
presentation
are
are
both
about
the
you
know.
The
big
transportation
projects
that
are
that
are
just
starting.
So
I'd
like
to
see
that
we,
you
know
we
talk
about.
When
are
we
going
to
revisit
this
or
when
is
it
suitable
to
revisit
it?
And
you
know,
is
it
once
plans
come
out?
C
J
D
I
I
I
will
I'm
gonna
vote
no
on
this.
You
know.
Obviously
I
have
the
same
considerations
that
the
other
people
had
and
I
you
know
I've
been
involved
in
a
lot
of
things
like
this
and
I
appreciate
staff's
position,
but
I
feel
like-
and
I
think
they're
constrained
you
know,
but
I
think
what
the
applicant
says
makes
a
heck
of
a
lot
of
sense,
and
I
think
this
should
be
looked
at
as
quickly
as
possible.
I
I
would
consider
you
know,
maybe
making
an
amendment,
maybe
that
for
for
a
certain
time
frame,
so
it
does
not
get
delayed,
but
I'm
voting
no.
B
L
B
Motion
carries
and
mr
faizing,
we
certainly
appreciate
your
diligence
and,
frankly,
a
great
deal
of
history
and
a
great
deal
of
work.
This
will
go
before
the
city
council
with
the
recommendation,
as
you
just
heard,
and
we'll
wish
you
all
the
best
and
I'm
sure
we'll
see
you
here
shortly.
Thank
you
very
much,
sir.
B
All
right
next
item
on
the
agenda.
Mr
vobro,
we
have
the
city
center
redevelopment.
J
And
then
we
also
have
I've
been
dealing
with
lnr
partners,
which
is
a
representative
of
the
bondholders
of
the
former
miller,
weingarten
realty
commercial
realty
properties.
J
And
in
the
last
few
months
we
have
been
diligently
having
dialogues
with
these
different
outfits,
trying
to
see
if
there's
some
kind
of
deal
to
be
had-
and
we
have.
We
are
pleased
to
announce
that
dan
premba
and
the
city
have
come
into
agreements
with
the
dip,
with
both
skb
and
l
r
partners
in
a
series
of
financial
transactions
and
land
swaps.
That
would
make
altogether
these.
Both
these
these
agreement
would
make
a
much
more
compelling
redevelopment
of
city
center
inglewood.
J
Actually
with
that,
so
we
will
be
we're
planning
on
starting
a
rezoning
process
with
you.
J
We
have
reserved
a
couple
of
different
nights
for
this
in
november
and
december
and
potentially
in
january,
to
work
on
the
potential
re-zoning
of
city
center
from
pud
to
mub1
for
tonight,
because
of
short
shortness
of
time,
we've
also
decided
to
bring
on
dan
paremba
again
to
give
you
the
same
presentation
that
he
just
gave
to
council
about
eight
days
ago
and
which
the
council
did
give
us
a
green
light
to
go
ahead.
To
try
to
make
this
deal
work
and
to
proceed
with
the
rezoning.
J
N
We
thought
before
you
guys
started
getting
into
some
of
the
details
of
this
anticipated
rezoning
of
city
center.
We
wanted
to
give
you
the
the
overall
back
background
of
the
overall
redevelopment
plan
and
the
anticipated
transactions
that
we've
been
working
on,
with
both
skb
and
with
lnr,
and
so
I'll
try
to
shorten
up
by
what
we
presented
to
city
council,
but
I
think
it's
really
important
that
you
see
some
of
this
and
because
it's
a
good
recap
of
some
of
the
background,
john,
I
can
try
to
do
hit
my
share
screen.
D
N
Yes,
okay,
we'll
move
forward,
then.
So
this
is
this
first
part
of
the
presentation
which
I'll
do
is
really
a
recap
of
what
we
presented
at
city
council
last
week
at
study
session,
and
it
followed
up.
As
you
know,
as
we've
done
with
you,
we've
had
a
number
of
briefing
sessions
with
them
over
the
past
two
years,
starting
really
around
the
time
of
the
of
the
foreclosure
on
the
former
weingarten
property
in
august
of
2018..
N
N
C3
was
the
special
servicer
who
represented,
who
originally
represented
the
foreclosing
bondholders
in
red
and
then
the
city,
property
city
control
property,
either
the
city
or
eve
controlled
or
owned
in
blue
and
ironically,
each
of
those
properties
is
roughly
11
acres.
So
between
the
two
properties,
there's
a
control
through
the
city
of
about
22
acres
or
about
half
of
the
original
project
and
indirectly
the
city.
You
may
remember
controlled
the
former
weingartz
property
by
virtue
of
a
land
lease
a
ground
lease
below
that
property.
N
With
a
term
of
75
years,
and
now
approximately
55
years
remain
so
in
in
big
picture
terms.
Here
was
the
overall
deal
that
we're
anticipating
coming
together
under
a
framework
agreement
and
the
four
parcels
or
blocks
of
the
overall
property
are
called
out.
You'll
see
there
a
b
c
d,
as
well
as
a
subpartial
bb,
which
is
the
retail
that
fronts
on
to
the
plaza
area
around
the
station
and
the
fountain
area.
N
J
N
I
mentioned
that
bb
partial
would
be
conveyed
to
skb,
then
on
block
c.
The
southern
half
would
be
conveyed
to
a
multi-family
developer
for
a
multi-family
project,
and
the
north
half
of
block
c
would
also
be
conveyed
to
skb,
and
they
envision
some
redevelopment
on
that
block.
But
importantly,
also
a
new
shared
parking
structure,
parcel
d
or
block
d,
then
to
the
east
would
be
conveyed
to
a
long-term
passive
investor
selected
by
lnr,
and
it
would
be
held
by
them
without
any
short-term
redevelopment.
N
N
It's
also
ironic
that
the
thing
that
allowed
this
deal
to
kind
of
come
back
together
was
really
the
impacts
of
coved,
which
tremendously
hit
the
retail
sector,
their
retail
tenants
here,
some
of
which
have
gone
out
of
business
and
really
the
overall
short-term
value
of
the
property.
So
all
of
a
sudden,
they
were
motivated
to
work
hand-in-hand
with
the
city
in
a
way
that
prior
to
coved,
was
not
their
intention.
N
So
here
is
the
basic
idea
of
the
framework
agreement.
It's
it
falls
under
something:
we've
called
the
redevelopment
approach
which
really
we
asked
for
council
direction
and
early
consent
on
this
framework
agreement
and
the
redevelopment
approach,
and
it
had
three
keys
to
it.
One
is
terminate
the
ground
lease
and
facilitate
the
transfer
of
the
fee.
Simple
interest
on
that
property
to
three
separate
parties,
including
skb
in
separate
transactions,
number
two
is
to
initiate
the
city-sponsored
rezoning
from
pud
to
muv1.
N
As
john
mentioned,
this
will
be
a
process
that
will
be
largely
under
your
control
here
for
the
next
few
months
and
then
number
three
was
really
to
endorse
the
concept
of
a
350
plus
or
minus
unit
multi-unit
multi-unit
project
on
the
south,
half
of
block
c,
and
what
we
said
to
council
is
without
council
approval.
This
direction.
N
The
problem
with
that
approach
is
that
by
by
renewing
the
leases
extending
the
leases
effectively,
they
take
the
weingarten
property
out
of
play
for
redevelopment
for
the
next
10
to
25
years.
During
that
time,
the
city
would
have
very
little
control
over
that
property
and
very
likely
continue
to
observe
it
decline
in
a
very
in
various
ways.
N
N
N
So
we
reminded
council
that
they
had
consistently
voiced
a
preference
to.
J
N
I
won't
go
in
great
detail
on
these
plans,
but
in
the
status
quo
approach,
which
is
which
is
here
sorry
this
this
one
wasn't
re-labeled
correctly.
This
is
the
status
quo
site
plan
and
it
refers
really
strictly
to
that
city
property
on
the
west,
so
the
colored
portion
and
you'll
see
the
civic
center
building
outline
there
too.
So
the
total
amount
of
redevelopment
is
actually
quite
limited
without
including
the
lnr
property.
N
N
So
we
outlined
for
council
really
the
significant
benefits
of
the
redevelopment
approach.
It
produces
much
more
revenue
for
the
city
over
time.
Skb
will
be
providing
based
on
that
additional
development
opportunity,
much
more
development,
related
revenue
to
the
city,
as
defined
in
the
master
development
agreement.
N
We
went
through
an
analysis
on
property
and
sales
taxes.
Basically,
I
can
tell
you
that,
in
on
an
apples-to-apple
basis,
we
kind
of
started
out
at
the
same
point,
but
going
into
the
future.
The
redevelopment
approach
creates
much
more
upside
opportunity
for
the
city,
both
on
property
and
sales
taxes,
and
we
reminded
council
that,
on
block
b
and
c
sales
taxes
have
been
declining
over
the
past
four
years
and
assessed
property
values
have
been
flat,
and
so
our
redevelopment
creates
a
significant
opportunity
to
change
that.
N
We
again
mentioned
that
the
plaza
adjacent
retail
has
been
a
long.
You
know
has
been
a
long
sticking
point
for
the
city
in
terms
of
being
able
to
fill
that
space,
activate,
that
area
being
able
to
bring
that
under
skb's
control
is
really
a
big
plus
and
then,
of
course,
being
able
to
redevelop.
The
north
half
of
block
c
also
brings
a
lot
of
additional
value,
a
long-term
value
to
the
city
and
the
you
know.
The
successful
redevelopment
of
city
center
will
have
a
strong
impact
on
the
surrounding
areas
as
well.
N
N
Staff
is
concerned
that
if
the
redevelopment
approach
does
not
move
forward
in
the
framework
agreement
that
we
potentially
risk
skb
as
our
long-term
redevelopment
partner,
so
council
agreed,
they
basically
pulled
their
positions
and
identified
kind
of
a
consent
tally.
If
you
will
of
five
to
two
in
favor
of
the
direction
we
were
recommending,
they
also
agreed
with
directing
staff
to
initiate
the
rezoning,
and
so
we
we
went
forward.
N
We've
notified
eleanor
of
this
direction
and
have
begun
process
of
drafting
the
the
framework
agreement,
and
so
with
that,
let
me
just
turn
it
back
to
john
and
kind
of
get
into
really
the
purpose
of
the
discussion
with
you,
which
is
the
rezoning
effort
and
john
I'm
happy
to
keep
going
with
the
slides
or
stop
share
and
try
to
let
you
do
it.
J
Actually,
at
this
point,
I
think
it
might
be
good
to
just
as
you
had
questions
ask
questio
asked.
If
anyone
had
questions
or
discussions,
I
believe
that
you
should
go
ahead,
probably
and
and
do
that
the
time
is
kind
of
late.
At
this
point,
I
think
this
is
a
good
stopping
point
and
that
we
I
can
pick
up
with
this
in
november,
so
I
think
I
I
think
I
would
rather
just
let
let
the
commissioners
if
they
have
any
questions
or
discussions
on
this
to
opine.
D
F
I
can
never
figure
out
which
way
is
the
right
way
to
hold
my
hand
with
this,
but
mirror
images
are
confusing
to
me.
As
we
all
know,
kovit
has
had
a
huge
impact
on
real
estate,
and
so
my
question
is,
is
what
is
the
timing
of
this
and
because
some
of
the
retail
and
other
things
may
look
a
lot
different
going
down
the
road
because
of
covid?
F
N
I
would
say
our
overall
agreement
with
skb
as
the
master
developer
has
probably
been
slowed.
Ultimately,
you
know,
let's,
let's
say
conservatively
three
to
six
months,
but
the
good
news
is
that
they're
fully
on
board
they're
fully
engaged,
and
they
see
that
it's
probably
brought
some
opportunities,
their
way
that
wouldn't
have
existed
without
govit,
namely
the
opportunity
to
really
bring
portions
of
the
lnr
property
into
the
overall
redevelopment
plan.
N
You
guys
may
remember
that
when
we
briefed
you
a
couple
times
previously,
we
had
mentioned
the
fact
that
skb
was
actually
one
of
the
finalists
to
purchase
the
for
the
weingarten
property
and
they
had
maintained
their
interest
in
acquiring
portions,
if
not
all,
of
that
property,
and
that
was
one
of
the
criteria
that
that
caused
the
city
to
select
them
as
the
master
developer.
The
other
thing,
I'll
just
mention
quickly
is,
I
think,
coved
makes
some
of
the
retail
on
the
former
weingarten
property,
the
big
box
parking
lot
kind
of
old
style.
N
You
know,
retail
that
was
popular
20
years
ago,
even
more
outdated.
Now,
especially,
as
you
know,
people
have
gotten
more
used
to
online
retailing
and
ordering
it.
You
know
you
just
watch
those
businesses
and
it
it
just
appears
through
observation
that
they
become
even
even
less
popular,
probably
even
more
dated
more
quickly,
and
so
that
has,
I
think,
accelerated
the
opportunity
to
redevelop
that
property
into
other
uses
more
density,
more
mixed
use,
which
is
really
what
we
should
have
in
close
proximity
to
the
station.
F
N
Yeah
walmart
has
done
well
through
the
pandemic.
They'll
continue
to
do
well.
They've
been
I'll,
just
mention
a
very
good
participant
in
our
downtown
development
authority
efforts.
They
have
a
great
manager
of
the
store,
and
ultimately,
we
hope
that
we
can
work
collaboratively
with
them
on
some
ideas
to
better
integrate
them
into
the
city
center
redevelopment,
maybe
even
recapture
some
of
their
large
parking
lot
on
the
south
half
of
their
property.
F
Yeah,
I
would
say
so
and
also
of
course,
walmart
has
done.
Another
great
thing
is
they've
got
this
and
I've
used
it
before
too,
where
you
log
in
and
then
you
just
they
tell
you
when
it's
at
the
store
for
you
to
pick
up.
I
mean
yeah,
so
they've
really
I
so.
I
just
want
to
be
cautioned
that
we
don't
want
to
hinder
walmart's
efforts
because
they're
busy.
F
Yeah
and
I
agree,
the
southern
half
is
a
little
bit,
not
not
as
well
used,
but
I
think
there's
isn't
that,
where
harbor
freight
to
and
ross
and
there's.
N
N
Harbor
freight
and
office
depot
are
the
large
retail
tenants
on
the
block.
That's
identified
for
redevelopment.
N
Yes
and
then
ross
and
petco,
who
have
long
term
leases
and
are
probably
the
most
viable
two
tenants
in
that
whole
project
would
stay
in
place.
F
D
B
Thanks
colin,
I
see
your
hand
up.
G
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
this
presentation
and
the
update
on
on
where
things
are
going
and
definitely
don't
want
to.
Second
guess
what
council
has
moved
forward
with,
I
did
have
just
a
question
about
the
city's
building
as
we
currently
have
it.
Do
they
pay
rent,
do
they
own
that
building,
and
that
is
there?
N
N
However,
if
you
look
at
how
that
building
sits
in
the
middle
of
that
whole
site,
particularly
at
an
angle
and
a
size,
it's
it's
tremendously
inefficient.
It's
very
dated
it's
very
expensive
to
operate,
and
so
the
general
plan-
and
we've
mentioned
the
city
council.
This
would
obviously
all
be
subject
to
future
review
and
comment.
Is
that
there's
probably
a
better
location
for
the
city
and
a
better
fitting,
more
efficient
civic
center
building?
That
would
then
allow
the
balance
of
that
site
to
be
better
redeveloped
and
unlock
the
occupy.
N
You
know
the
opportunity
cost
that's
locked
up
in
that
site
today,
and
so
what
we've
outlined
for
council
and
what
we've
outlined
for
skb.
Is
that
we'd
like
to
see
a
couple
of
alternatives
with
the
understanding
that
the
long-term
occupancy
costs
for
the
city
need
to
be
equal
to
or
lower
than
staying
in
the
building,
as
is
going
forward.
G
And
then
one
more
quick
question,
obviously
you
know
things
change
things
slow
down.
What
are
the
guarantees
for
redevelopment,
or
is
there
a
certain
minimum
square
footage
that
they
have
to
put
in
anything
like
that
as
part
of
this
agreement
with
for
for
these
properties
or
in
the
timelines,
then,
for
those.
N
Good
question:
as
part
of
the
transition
from
the
ground
lease
to
fee
simple
ownership,
there
would
be
a
number
of
agreements
both
with
lnr
and
with
their
buyers,
if
you
will
their
successors,
and
so
the
plan
is
that
we
would
gain
for
the
city,
some
approval
rights
and
some
protections,
for
example.
The
hope
is
that
we'll
have
some
approval
right
over
the
multi-family
developer
on
the
south
half
of
the
sea.
N
N
B
Okay,
any
other
final
questions
before
we
move
on,
so
that
we
can
end
on
time.
Yes,
stay
in.
L
I
just
had
a
question
dan.
Could
you
remind
me
kind
of
tell
me
again
what
the
what
the
plan
for
the
kind
of
connectivity
to
this
to
this
area
would
be,
especially
in
terms
of
this
redevelopment
approach.
L
I
I
just
have
always
felt
that
the
city
center
is
is
sort
of
oddly
nestled,
and
you
know
if
you're
coming
on
hampden,
you
can't
really
see
it
if
you're
coming
from
you
know,
dartmouth
or
floyd
or
something
you
kind
of
can't
see
it.
Walmart's
parking
lot
makes
it
almost
like
a
weird
horizontal
wall,
so
I'm
just
curious
how
how
you
envision
other
than
really
jamming
that
full
of
residential
that
will
just
activate
it
all
the
time
how
you
would
imagine
people
from
the
rest
of
englewood
would
really
kind
of
be
drawn.
There.
N
I
think
a
couple
of
thoughts
on
that
front
is,
I
think
the
overall
redevelopment
would
really
put
a
lot
of
focus
on
the
area
there
would
be.
Signage
would
be
a
big
part
of
that.
You
know.
The
irony
at
this
location
is
between
the
multimodal
transportation
and
the
surface
roadway
network.
This
is
probably
one
of
the
most
accessible
sites
in
the
entire
metro
area,
but
to
your
point,
no
one
is
really
aware
of
it.
So,
and
one
of
the
reasons
for
that
is,
the
density
and
heights
have
always
been
too
low.
N
So
if
you
increase
the
density,
the
uses
the
height-
and
I
think
some
of
the
access
ways
can
be
improved
too.
All
of
the
consultants,
as
well
as
the
developers
working
on
this
project,
have
looked
at
englewood
parkway
and
talked
about
how
it
needs
to
it
needs
to
be
strained
out
in
ways
it's
a
very
confusing
kind
of
route
to
get
to
the
station.
N
The
station
is
not
even
visible
from
areas
to
the
east
of
city
center.
So
there's
the
thought
about
making
inglewood
parkway
much
straighter
and
increasing
the
visibility
to
directly
to
the
station,
and
then,
of
course,
one
of
one
of
my
favorites
is
under
the
downtown
development
authority.
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
to
really
make
the
inguinal
trolley
a
much
more
functional
and
convenient
transit
connector
that
connects
city
center
to
south
broadway
to
the
medical
district
in
a
way
that
people
would
actually
use
it.
You
know
not
just
look
at
it
and
go.
N
Oh
isn't
that
quaint,
you
know,
but
would
actually
hop
on
it
and
use
it
to
connect
these
three
areas,
and
I
think
the
dda
could
potentially
support
improvements
to
the
trolley
improvements
not
only
to
the
vehicles
but
also
to
the
schedules
and,
and
the
developers
too
could
potentially
contribute
to
that.
So,
if
you
put
all
those
things
together,
I
think
it
becomes
a
much
more
accessible
area
that
people
are
much
more
aware
of.
C
C
Here
and
you
know
at
the
same
time
a
lot
of
changes
to
285
to
improve
the
flow,
but
just
from
the
little
portion
of
the
map
on
the
screen,
you
know
there's
a
number
of
traffic
lights
leading
out
of
this
area.
You
know.
Is
there
a
part
in
the
process
where
that's
considered.
N
Yeah
I
I
would
generally
say
that
that's
considered,
probably
during
both
the
rezoning
stage,
the
overall
replanting
stage,
that
kind
of
goes
hand
in
hand
with
that
and
then
or
specific
projects
too,
it
would
be
looked
at.
I
would
say
generally
a
couple
of
things
on
your
observation.
N
I
think
there's
a
general
goal
to
take
a
lot
of
that
surface
parking
and
put
it
into
a
parking
structure
or
potentially
long-term
two
and
make
it
much
more
efficient
and
sustainable
by
making
it
shared
parking
that
serves
multiple
uses
there
was
there
was
another
thought
I
had
too
about
parking.
Oh,
that
a
major
goal
is
you
know
we
have
an
obligation
to
provide
910
spaces
to
our
rtd
and
yeah
there's
a
lot.
N
B
So
with
that
in
mind,
I'd
like
to
bring
this
particular
part
of
the
conversation
to
a
close,
seeing
no
objections
to
that
and
let's
move
on
to
the
next
item
of
the
agenda.
Thank
you
so
much
for
bringing
this
forward
really
appreciate
it.
Sorry
for
the
abbreviated
timeline,
but
obviously
you
were
in
attendance
earlier
in
the
meeting.
You
knew
what
happened
so
now.
N
B
Thank
you
absolutely
appreciate
it
dan
john.
Thank
you
very
much
staff's
choice
at
this
point.
A
B
Okay,
does
anybody
have
a
specific
objection
if
we
cancel
the
meeting
for
the
third
understanding,
there's
no
specific
and
pressing
business
that
needs
to
be
taken
care
of
at
that
time
and
we
would
barely
and
we
would
just
have
a
quorum
any
objection
to
canceling
the
meeting
we'll
cancel
the
meeting
for
november.
Third,
please
all
right
anything
else
from
staff
all
right,
seeing
seeing
none
we'll
go
to
dugan.
How
are
you,
sir,.
D
B
Certainly
appreciate
that
dugan
and
once
again,
you've
you've
added
a
great
deal
to
the
the
meeting
and
we're
glad
you're
here
every
time.
So
thank
you.
B
Absolutely-
and
you
know
your
photo
is
awesome.
It
looks
just
like
it
looks
just
like
your
name.
Well,
that
keeps
me
young.
Absolutely.
You
haven't
aged
a
bit
in
months,
so
it's
incredible.
I
haven't
covered.
It's
been
good
to
me,
oh
yeah.
I
can
see
that
I
can
see
that
so
I'll
tell
you
what
let's
go
to
commissioner's
choice
at
this
point,
I'm
going
to
go
around
the
horn,
as
I
see
them
on
my
screen,
carl
I'm
going
to
go
to
you.
First.
M
I
have
nothing
here,
but
I'd
like
to
talk
more
about
the
redevelopment
and
the
status
quo,
but
I'll
be
later
on.
B
K
I
don't
have
anything
to
add,
except
for
thank
you
to
staff
for
for
getting
through
that
technology
issue
that
came
up,
that's
never
fun
and
you
guys
did
it
was
such
great.
So
thank
you.
I
Daryl
yeah,
I
had
a
couple
things.
Actually
I
you
know
some
legal
problems
were
mentioned
with
our
first
presentation,
and
I'd
like
to
you
know,
hear
the
the
experience
for
dugan
to
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
that.
I'd
like
to
get
a
little
more
information.
She
wants
to
provide
that
offline.
That's
fine,
but
I
I
think
we
didn't
go
into
that
in
depth
that
we
should
thank
you.
B
F
Oh,
I
was
thinking
you're
going
to
talk
to
dugan.
I
have
nothing
further
to
add.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
No.
C
B
Further,
that
brings
me
to
me-
and
I
have
nothing
to
add,
but
to
wish
everybody
a
wonderful
month
until
we
meet
again
or
thereabouts.
I
would
encourage
everybody
to
vote.
It's
a
great
opportunity
to
do
something.
So
few
people
in
the
world
have
the
opportunity
to
do
and
also
to
anybody,
who's.
Listening
regardless
of
the
outcome,
we
are
all
still
americans.
B
We
are
all
still
entitled
to
our
own
opinions,
and
we
all
would
hope
that,
regardless
of
the
outcome,
whether
it's
your
person
or
not,
that
we'd
all
hope
and
pray
that
they
would
be
tremendously
successful.
It's
in
our
best
interest.
So
with
that
I'll
wish
everybody
nothing,
but
nothing,
but
the
best
we'll
see
in
about
a
month
and
thank
you
so
much
for
attending
this
evening.
Thank
you.