Transcript

0:00:02And we are recording. Good morning. Today is June 30th, 2026. This is a meeting of the Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County. We have all three commissioners present. And I'm looking at our images on the screen before we get started. And we have someone who is a proud supporter of the Ecuador and soccer team. We have someone wearing something that looks like an American flag, but not totally. We have me in plain white. But I'm gonna just take a moment of personal privilege. And if somebody wants to get mad at me about it, they can do that. I just opened up the New York Times app and saw that the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship. And I think we've all been sitting on the edge of our chair on this question for quite a while. And I'm just incredibly relieved. And wanted to say that. So thank you for allowing me that. Thank you.

0:01:07We will, oh, I'm all emotional. We will now move into our consent agenda. And I believe we are pulling 4F from consent to discussion. And other than that, we have a motion to approve the consent to content. And I'll just move to approve the consent agenda, removing 4F and striking for G. And I want to know if I pass the test. Second. All in favor. Aye. I wondered what 4G was. And that then we only have one item on our discussion agenda. And that will be the resolution 2026 - 038 to ratify the expenditures from the Medal and Behavioral Sales tax. Good morning, Armando. Good morning, commissioners. And I'm happy to jump in just with the question I had, if that helps, staff. And it's really not an OFM question necessarily, but I appreciate you being here at Armando. It was just on this list, because this is one of those like thin staffs going to work with this document. My understanding of the competitive funding, the last three line items of equitable access grants peer services, community - based prevention services and training. My understanding was those were all grants. And so it was just a clarification for one for public who is watching and listening. And then two for us to make sure that because we've been given staff direction that it's clear

0:02:46what that is. So for us, it may be in, yeah, we know that, but one is title grants and the other two are not. So I just wanted to make sure that that's what everybody was understanding. And I would suggest that we add grants to both of those line items for the final product. I'm going to defer that to Jana. I don't know exactly. I know it's under competitive funding, which tends to be funding that goes out. But I don't want to say the incorrect information is regards to if it is a grant. Well, I would just, no, I mean, we're voting on a resolution 2026 - 038 that I don't just a quick look at it. I don't think the reference one way or another to how much of it is competitive and how much isn't and whether it's grants or not grants. But here's our County Administrator. I just don't think we got Armando's name on the record. Oh Armando Adelai CFO. Thank you. And Jana Peterson County Administrator. Yes, Commissioners, all three of those line items would be competitive request for application processes where we would be awarding grants to the successful applicants. They could be grants or contracts depending on how the RFA proceeds, but just want to make sure to clarify that they are intended to be the same type

0:04:07of process for all three of those line items. Yeah. Thanks. But what we're doing here today is amending the budget to appropriate 8, 875, 000 dollars That is correct. Well, thank you. And I am looking at the resolution. And in some of the tax taxes that we do or that we've done that I've been a part of. We've broken down like it's a set percent for this or it's a set percent or it's going to be that amount. And so we talked about, and I'm just thinking like over the last year or a half or so we've talked about potentially grant fun and potentially allocations. And so if what's in here in the resolution is clear and the questions. That's totally fine. I just want to look at this document with the resolution with the ballot language. I know the conversations I've been in, but it's more for clarity for public. In my mind. And so if I just want to at least bring it up and if everybody feels like it's sufficient, then that's great. And we've also got a few more items on the record, which I think is helpful. Okay. Any other.

0:05:17Just one other comment just to just because we're discussing it. Just this is this will appropriate the 8. 875 million and that is from the June 18th meeting, but it doesn't address the additional appropriation decisions we gave direction on the subsequent meeting. So like the school district funding, the other grant funding, the other direct funding that we had discussion about will come back at a future agenda. Um, to appropriate that funding. Correct. Okay. Good. All right. If we're all ready, then we have a motion on resolution 2026 - 038. Move approval of resolution 2026 038. Second. All in favor. Aye. Thank you for the conversation. Thank you. No, always happy to have a discussion. We now have authorization for executions. Good morning, commissioners. Natalie Springett, commissioners deputy for the record. Um, I'll request your authorization on three separate executive session items. If you could vote on each one. For item 5A, I'm requesting authorization for the Board of County Commissioners to go into Executive Session on Wednesday, July 1st, 2026 at 11 20 a. m.

0:06:30pursuant to CRS 24 - 6 - 402 subsection 4F. Personnel matters to discuss the annual performance review of carry Inoshita, Director of the Office of Racial Equity. And Paul Janipore, Director of Information Technology. Move approval. Second. All in favor. Aye. Thank you, commissioners. And for item 5B, I'm here to request authorization for the Board of County Commissioners to go into Executive Session on Wednesday, July 1st, 2026 at 1 p. m. pursuant to CRS 24 - 6 - 402 subsection 4E. Instructions to negotiators regarding the collective bargaining agreement with the Boulder County Employees Union. Move approval. Second. All in favor. Aye. Thank you, Commissioners. And for item 5C, I'm here to request authorization for the Board of County Commissioners to go into Executive Session on Wednesday, July 1st, 2026 at 2. 30 p. m. pursuant to CRS 24 - 6 - 402 subsection 4f. Personnel matters to discuss the annual performance reviews of Yvette Bowden, Deputy County Administrator, Susan Kaski, Human Services Directors, Susanna Lopez Baker, Housing Director Steve Durian Public Works Director. And Jason Soup Parks and Open Space Director. A note for the record on Mr. Sook is that it wouldn't be his annual performance review. Um, since he is a new director with us. Move approval. Second. All in favor. Aye. Alright, thank you. So, uh, that concludes our business meeting. And we

0:08:07now have our monthly meeting sitting as the Board of the Boulder County Housing Authority. And. I think. Yeah, looks like we have our presentation available. So, Kelly. Morning, Commissioners. Oh, okay. Sorry, Susanna. I didn't see you up there on the screen. Thank you. Thanks for joining us. Of course. Good morning. Thank you for having us. Um, we're prepared for Presentation, but I think we need to open it up for comment first. Yeah. So the first item always is, excuse me, an opportunity for public comment. It looks like nobody has, uh, indicated an interest in speaking to us this morning. So we can move into your executive director update. Great. So commissioners in the board packet, uh, there was a written briefing of my director update. So if there's anything that you would like me to elaborate on, please feel free to interrupt me. And happy to do that. Um, but we'll go ahead and just, uh, if you can go to the next slide, please.

0:09:25So just as a, um, sort of a reminder for everyone, we do have a session scheduled for July 7th. And that is two topics. The Deute restriction that will happen with our first home ownership project in Lafayette will be corner phase three. And we're also going to talk about rent increases or potential rate increases and really looking at the methodology that we've taken this year. As you know, last year we agreed to change our approach to doing run increases. And so we have done that. And so on that work session date, we'll have a chance to get feedback in your input before any changes or recommendations are brought forward to the board. So just a quick update on HUD thing. So hot mile implementation continues to move forward towards January 1st, 2027 implementation. So staff is really kind of laser focused on that. Um, and then a few voucher program guidelines. As previously reported HUD had temporarily paused the use of the two year tool, um, but they're still maintaining a strong focus on, um, public housing authorities maintaining, uh, short fall prevention strategies. And so BCHA is not anticipated to be in short ball.

0:10:41Although the one thing that we are watching really closely is the EHV, the emergency housing voucher and strategy that we have taking, because if we were to, uh, absorb all the vouchers at once, we would immediately be in shortfall. So we're kind of trying to pace that timing a bit to avoid any shortfall because there are penalties, um, that HUD is now imposing on housing authorities who enter short ball. So we do believe we have a strong strategy in place, um, around the timing that could potentially push the absorption into January, but should have no impact on any of those emergency housing voucher holders. Uh, the income verification and a compliance work that we're doing, um, you may remember this commissioners for mixed families living in one household with mixed statuses. Uh, we are now required to track them in a separate. Sort of like portal, if you will. And we've just never had to do that before. And so it feels a little bit strange. Um, we know we have been told that the information will be shared with DHS. And we have to agree to do that. And so we have been working pretty closely with legal, um, and I think we have a good plan in place, but we will have to comply most likely in that deadline is August 3rd. So

0:12:00the work that the staff has been doing is to make sure those families that HUD had on their list actually match our list. We found several mistakes. So, but we do believe we have a, an accurate list now. And staff is, um, just triple checking that. Um, Susanna, let me stop you there for a minute. Uh, I know we've, we've talked about this federal policy now. But I'm wondering, um, I mean, they're very, very potentially onerous consequences of what we may put into that database with respect to, you know, in sharing that with DHS, you know, and so the consequences would go much beyond losing housing, which in and of itself is quite draconian. But that makes it just even more essential to be accurate in this, um, status. You're housing authority. We're a board of a housing authority. We're not experts on legal status.

0:13:07And, you know, documentation of legal status. I'm wondering how, you know, what instructions you have to actually implement this. Yeah. That's a good question. It's self - reported to us. And so we, but we do have verification. We do believe that all the families on our list are accurate now. But when we first started, they were misspelled names or incorrect. Identification numbers, but we have now verified our list to be accurate. I don't know the specific eyeline staff does. And I can get you that information easily. Uh, no, it's not necessary to provide the documentation and the criteria. I just, um, I wouldn't want any, any, you know, errors innocent errors to fall back on us. And, you know, have the consequences of somebody losing their housing and potentially being deported. When, you know, we're not, we're not an immigration enforcement agency. We're not law enforcement. We're not. You know, we're not citizenship experts here.

0:14:20That's all. Just sort of, the hazard involved here. And I know you're going to do the best you can, but I just want to make sure that we're doing everything we can to make sure whatever we report is accurate. I appreciate that commissioner. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. Uh, the next thing I do want to talk about is will it be corner. So we have continued with the design work in the entitlement work with the City this last month. We are looking at potential shifts between the phases, um, and coordination with partners and lenders. And so all that means is parts of phase three. You're going really quickly. And that's great. And we do believe we can get through the entitlements process faster. And so things are kind of shifting around. Um, and then also pursuing a non - competitive tax credit round. And so we're preparing for that for a September date, likely. Uh, and then finally, just another note, we did close on will it be corner phase one from the construction loan into a permanent loan. And that was a really, really big milestone for BCHA and our finance team, our compliance team, our operations team worked tirelessly to Guinness across the finish line with Hudson. So we're really excited about that to finally be in a permanent phase fully on that site. On

0:15:45the operations at portfolio management, side, the staff is really, really engaged with the Yardi systems transition. In fact, we had our first go lives over the last several weeks. Um, and that is a huge lift for staff. It's a lot of training. It's working on a two systems. And I just see so much positive energy around that. I just want it to note that for the board i've gotten positive feedback from all of our trainers on just how incredible our staff is. Not a surprise to me at all. Um, but I just want to emphasize how important this is for a BCHA to improve our data to make rent calculations easier to make our reporting easier and to just really see staff take it on. It's a lot of work. Yeah. Thanks. Susanna, I'm following along in your directory report memo. And you did skip the SLP section. I don't know if you meant to come back to that or whether you were just going to skip it and wait for questions. Not mean to skip it. So let me go back to it. Thank you for that. Yeah. That's a big one for us.

0:16:50So as you may remember commissioners, we, um, supported the spine road project, which is in gun barrel in partnership with the City of Boulder and that SLP has officially closed as of two weeks ago. And we did receive all of the funding, um, for the housing authority, which totaled about 163, 000 dollars in which we are investing in our development work at the housing authority. So excited about that. Um, the partnership did come along with the City of Boulder, um, and it seems as if all parties are excited to start building that project. And then the second thing I wanted to talk about is we do have a new request for an SLP partnership in Lafayette. And we at our next meeting in July will bring you all of the details, including a presentation by that team. That project is known as the Helios Rehabilitation Project, the City of Lafayette is strongly supporting this project.

0:17:50Um, they did give PABs last year to the project as well. So I have supplied several letters of support. All of our financial analysis has been turned over to S. B. Clark. I've received all of the necessary application funds thus far from helios and their parent company is called Related Affordable. Um, they're a pretty big developer. Um, on the East Coast that has recently started doing some work here in Colorado. Uh, so we will, uh, be back in July with a lot more details for you, but I wanted to put that on your radar. I did not want it to be a surprise. Um, but the application has been received and is currently being processed. Okay. Back on pace with number four, our regional policy and landscape. So, um, as you may know, HUD is, um, really shifting into that emphasis, emphasis self - sufficiency, an employment outcomes. I always did see that with some major changes to the COC funding, um, which impacts, um, about a million dollars of funding that we receive here in Boulder County. So we are working really closely with our partners to ensure, uh, that we are able to make some shifts, um, into different funding buckets per their recommendation. And so we're feeling pretty confident about that. Um, and, and then the other thing I wanted to mention

0:19:18is, um, you may have heard of the work in dignity coalition. That's Secretary Turner is promoting across the country and essentially asking public housing authorities to commit to having work requirements, uh, as a part of their programming within the housing authority. Um, we meet the public housing authorities across Colorado Monthly and it's our understanding that nobody from Colorado has signed on. And we have recently been approached by our regional director, Tim Geidner to meet and talk about the dignity coalition. And so we are going to schedule time with him. We want to hear him out. But, but BCHA has not made any equipment to that, nor would we without having further discussion with the board. But I just wanted to make you aware that those things are. Kind of maybe having some additional emphasis on joining the coalition. Yeah. Susan, I'm going to stop you again here. Just, I appreciate what you just said about it wouldn't make any decisions without checking with the board.

0:20:20I would see this as a very significant change in policy and something that, you know, I would hope that we'd have a pretty thorough discussion on before signing on. Absolutely. Thanks. Uh, and then there are, there have some changes out of the office of management budget, which impacts actually a lot of different departments across Boulder County. So we're working directly with Boulder County in various departments as well as legal to ensure that we're providing public comment on some of those financial rural changes and different standards that, that hut, well, that the federal government is proposing that would impact all departments receiving federal funds essentially. So tracking that really closely. So Sana, if I may, thank you for, um, just a comment regards to OMVD. Those changes, um, we had a meeting. The board yesterday just to talk about that as well. And if the board specifically wants to do some public comment that's requested by July 13th, for me, it would be helpful if you wouldn't mind, and I'm looking at other board members that folks also want whatever it is that you submit, I would be very interested in just, um, so that I'm aware of what, what pieces of those potential changes that you're flagging. Thank you. I can provide that, yeah. Finally, just wanted to make you aware that the Colorado Department

0:21:45of Housing has reached out to schedule times with PHAs throughout Colorado. Um, just to learn more about goals, some of our shared goals with the state, um, had a better work together. Um, as the state essentially operates a housing authority as well though, um, doesn't engage in the same way as the public housing authorities across Colorado. So we have accepted time to meet with them in August, uh, and I'll keep you updated on any agenda or discussion topics that we come up with, um, at our next meeting. And then number five for events, I just wanted to know the infraday conference I was able to attend with one of our staff members. You'll see pictured here. And it was a, it was a fun day for us, but we participated in a panel discussion on, um, infrastructure and the impacts of cost it has on, uh, affordable housing. So it was a nice time shared with City of Aurora and the Denver housing authority. Uh, let's see the power ahead. The doctor Cog Affordable Housing Michelle Alexander, our Deputy Director attended the surroundable discussion, um, in partnership with several other jurisdictions to provide feedback on sustainability policy changes. And, uh, this is a great topic for us at BCHA as we have pretty high sustainability standards when it comes to building, um, including our geothermal

0:23:11work, which no other public housing authority is doing in Colorado. Uh, big one was the home ownership classes. So we've just restarted those in May and we couldn't be more thrilled about the attendance that we had at our first couple of classes. And we had 30 families attend our May 30th class at Willoughby Corner and an additional nine Spanish team families at Gas of the La Spena or 10 registered. I'm sorry. And that was a just a really exciting time. And so on the picture on the screen on the right, those are our trainers and it's a really great partnership with CRHDC. And those are scheduled for the rest of the year as well. So Sana can ask you a question on the home ownership classes. It used to be that the, uh, there was an age requirement to be able to attend. And I was curious if that still existed. And if that's who that requirement is, who holds the requirement or their ability to change that age requirement if it still exists. Uh, that's a good question, Commissioner. I'm actually not sure, but my guess would be is a chaffer, uh, standard or regulation. And we follow this is a chaffa approved training.

0:24:27So, but I can look into that for you. Okay. Thank you. And then there's some, uh, upcoming events, uh, July 16th, that will be Corner. We're having a community outreach event to talk about the next phases of the project. Um, and similar event happening on August 6th. And that is the official legal event that we hold per our entitlements process with the city. The July 16th is just an extra event to continue to bring awareness to the community. So we do have those two events coming up. Um, as well as some community outreach work in lions for the sewered project as we're just gathering information about that project. Um, I did some written documentation about an instant that occurred at the sewer property, uh, about a week and a half ago. And I don't know if there's any discussion on that. Or if there's any direction you'd like to provide me as the housing commissioners.

0:25:25Yeah. Thank you. I think one of the questions I had on the seward project, it looks like those are July 10th and a July 15th event if it would be helpful for board member. If there was interest to go and just kind of hear what people are, um, talking about in regards to that particular project, I'm happy to offer, um, the 15th doesn't work just based on, um, a conference I'll be at. But the other one might eat. And certainly doesn't have to be me. But just wanted to offer that if it would be supportive to staff to understand what's going on with that project. Yeah. I, um, as I had mentioned, I whenever I elected officials are present from the town that I would love to have are elected officials included in attendance or anti. We're going to obviously track that a lot more closely as we didn't know that they were elected. So especially so many elects of officials at the last event and there may not be now since somebody came to the last event. We had three total, but I can keep, um, Gustavo updated on the scheduling if that's helpful.

0:26:26Yeah. That's great. Thank you. I just, I did have a question about, uh, property acquisition or disposition in the Lions area, but I was planning to wait till the end and just make a motion to go and executive session about a negotiation strategy on that. But really did to housing and lion. Is there a more appropriate time in the agenda for that, um, or should I, I mean, I can do it whenever it pleases the group. Yeah. Well, I think there's a, maybe when we get to matters from the board, that's what I was suggesting. Okay. Perfect. Uh, and then the last thing is just a budget process. I just want the boards now that we have completed the priority based budgeting activities, uh, that the, uh, that Boulder County has recommended as a whole BCHA is participating. And so we are currently in that ranking right now. Um, we have started the very in - depth and involved work of the 2027 budget. And so it's well underway. We will likely have some one time request to Boulder County and we're sort of preparing what exactly that would look like now. Likely those requests will be tied to water. The water side of the new development. And that is it for me. I think I got everything else really excited to welcome our guests

0:27:54today. We have, uh, from Ayd Bailey, Aaron Ness, our longtime auditor, uh, he is on live now. So I will turn it over to Aaron. Good morning, everybody. And thanks Susana. Uh, my name is Aaron Ness for my Bailey partner. And I will be, uh, sharing my screen here. It could be, uh, given the presentation of the 2025 audit and management letter. Jeremy Smith, Commissioner staff. I wasn't aware we were going to do screen sharing. Can you stop screen sharing for just a moment? I just need to make an announcement. About our captioning. Thank you. Uh, for the upcoming presentation, share it through Zoom. Anyone participating in Zoom who needs her desires captions should turn on captions in the Zoom app at this time and leave them on until the presentation is over. All right.

0:28:48Go ahead, Aaron. Thank you. You bet. Uh. Is my screen now visible. Yes. Okay. Awesome. All right. Well, good morning. Um, as I mentioned, Aaroness Auto partner with Bailey here to present the 2025, um, audit results. Um, feel free to stop me at any time. Going to go through at a really high level, um, and hip highlights, um, but again, feel free to stop me anytime. And then also we'll open it up at the end for any discussions. Um, so I'm sharing the audit audited financial statements. Um, which I believe you guys have, uh, seen copies of, um, so this page I'm sharing right here is our audit opinion. Um, and it says that we've audited the financial statements of Boulder County Housing Authority as of and for the year ended 2025 and the second paragraph here says in our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly in all material respect. So it is a clean, uh, audit opinion this year. Uh, and this is an audit opinion over the financial statements. We also issue an opinion on the compliance.

0:30:11Um, and that will be a little bit later, um, as I go through, uh, the financial statement section first. Um, the section talks about how we've conducted our audit. It's in accordance with audit standards generally accept the United States of America and also government auditing standards. A couple of new things this year, um, change two or within the financial reporting entity. Josephine Commons, um, is one of the late tech properties. And prior to January one of 2025, this was reported as a discreetly presented component unit. So on a side - by - side basis with the other tax credit projects, uh, but given that there was a change in ownership, BCHA became essentially a hundred percent owner of the tax credit project in the past that only had a 0. 01 percent. Um, So now it becomes a blended component unit. So it rolls up within the entirety of the primary government's financial statements. So it's essentially moving over from one column in the financial statements to within, um, the primary government's financial statements. This next section, correction of an air. We'll go through this in a little bit more detail when we get to note 18, but there was a change, um, in the prior year balances. And so, um, that, uh, highlights, uh, in our opinion that there was a correction of an

0:31:39air that impacted previous years. Um, responsibility for the financial statements, does belong to management, um, its management's financial statements. Um, our responsibility as auditors is to issue an opinion on those financial statements. They're not our financial statements, but they are BCHA's financial statements. Uh, there's some required supplementary information. Um, that's included in the Audi report. This is not anything different than what has been presented in the past. Um, some additional supplementary information that's required because the Hausen Authority has to have a single audit as well as some information, um, relating to that. Okay. This next section is management discussion analysis. This is information that, uh, basically gives a good overview of the housing authority, um, as well as gives, um, you know, financial highlights for the year. Very good information for the non - accountants in the room. Uh, so basically just gives a narrative, uh, summary of how the year went. So we won't go, uh, I won't go into any detail here, but I do recommend that you take some time and read through that and just gives you a good picture. Um, of the year. And I'm going to skip to the financial statements.

0:33:20So this is a statement in that position or the balance sheet. So you'll see in the left hand column is the primary government. And the right hand side is a discreetly presented component units. Um, so as I mentioned, these are the light tech projects. Um, the one change as I mentioned, Josephine Commons, used to be reported in this column, but is now reported in the primary government column because of the change in ownership. So total assets for BCHA as of the end of 2025 is 166. 7 million dollars The total assets for the light tech projects almost 219 million dollars. There's a little bit more information on the discretely presented component units and all I'll go through that here in a second. On the liability side total current liabilities of 5. 5 million for the primary government 47. 6 for the discreetly presenting component units.

0:34:21Total long - term liabilities of 21 million for the primary government and 133 million for the discreetly presenting Coppone units. For total liabilities of 26. 7 million for the primary government and 180. 6 million for the discretity presented Coponing units. The total net position or equity for the primary government is 141 million six hundred fifty two thousand. And for the discreetly presented component units 38 million 342 Again that discreetly presented Capone units BCHA only has a small ownership of 0. 01 percent There is a tax credit investor. That has 99. 99 percent in those projects And so that's why it's been reborded as a discreetly presented component unit Uh, no one in the financial statements gives more background information on what entities are considered blended Capone units versus what entities are considered discreetly presented component units. Uh, total operating revenues for the primary government just under 31 million dollars Uh total operating expenses of 33.

0:35:328 million for an operating loss of 2. 9 million. Other non - operating revenues totaled 6. 7 million dollars. There was transfers from Boulder County of just under 8 million dollars to bring the change in that position or net income to be 11 million 830, 000 for fiscal year 2025. Um, as I mentioned There was a change in how Josephine commons is reported So that increased net assets by 5. 6 million dollars And there was a correction of an air. Which reduced net position by 4. 5 million dollars. So total net position end of the year is 141, 652, 935 dollars for the primary government. Any questions so far. I don't see anything you Okay, so I'm gonna skip through the cash flow statement and, um. Here are the combining financial statements for the discreetly presented component units So you see here Josephine Commons, we show it here as being zero Because that became a blending component unit Uh, so the remaining tax credit projects Aspen wall, Kestrel Tungsten village Coffin place, and the two Willoughby's makeup The tax credit projects, which are the discreetly presented component units. And so this is the asset section.

0:37:12Next page is the liabilities and equity for the tax credit projects. And this is the combining statement of revenue and expenses and changes in that position are income statement For those projects And again here you'll see in the Josephine Commons Column that net position at the beginning of the year was 6, 442, 000, and that was transferred over to the primary government column And so that is now being reported as 0 Um, it is my understanding now that Aspen Wall in 2026 Uh, will become a blended component unit as well So that you'll see that in 26 is financial statements Um, just like Josephine Commons. Alright, getting into the footnotes here, gonna get to go pretty quickly Um, note one again talks about the reporting entity. Talks about the blending pony units. MFPH acquisitions Josephine Commons, and then some holy owned entities with very little activity. And then again the discreetly presenting Coponey units, which we talked about, and you can see a description of each one of those. Okay. So as I jump through here to the next footnote.

0:38:57Alright. Note eight is on long - term debt. Uh, this table here shows the activity for the year. Um, so at the beginning of the year 17 Uh. 8 million dollars, which includes increase of 2. 6 million dollars from the Josephine commons. As well as an increase of 4. 5 million dollars. Relating to the correction of the air that's disgusted 18, which I'll talk about here Uh, in a second So just small increase 14, 000 that related to accrued interest That was added to one of the loans Um, but during the year there were 6. 5 million dollars. In principal payments on the debt. Uh, so the total debt at the end of the year 11. 4 million dollars of only which 250, 168 is actually due Uh, within the next year So most of the debt is gonna be due in the following years, which I'll show you here Uh, in a second. Uh, this is description of the various notes under the primary government. Again, no new debt.

0:40:17And again, this table right here shows how the principal payments and interests with payments will be coming due Uh, over the next few years So again, very small portion do in 2026. But a big chunk 7 million dollars that's coming to in 2027 So I did want to highlight that. Alright, I'm gonna be jumping now to the last note 18 on the prior period adjustment. Or the correction of an air. Alright. Um So in 2023, the authority received some ARPA funds, totally 5, 338, 000 from the City of Lafayette. Um, the agreement Um, was very confusing, it was written, it referred to it as a grant Um, but when you got into the minutiae of the agreement, it talked about it being a forgivable loan. Um, and thus based on the accounting, it should have been recorded as a loan right away And as the conditions of being, as of the conditions of the agreement are met, then you will recognize an income. Um, that grant Um, and so Sean and his team caught that air this year Um, and so we had to restate Um, the financials to move that, um, from revenue that was recorded in previous years Uh, to now being recorded as, um, debt That's forgivable over the course of that agreement. Um, and so the

0:42:10current balance of that Um, loan, so there has been some conditions met, so there has been some income recognized And I believe that's about 1. 7 million dollars of that 5. 3 million if my memory serves me correctly on that. Okay, any questions on that. Air correction? Nope, I don't see anything. Okay. Alright. So. Just want to get to the single audit portion or the compliance portion of the audit Uh, so this is a schedule of federal expenditures Uh, so this is the authority receives federal grants, some directly from the federal government Some indirectly through Uh, various, uh, state and local organizations Uh, so for the year ended 2025. Um, the BCHA had federal expenditures of 25 million dollars because that amount exceeds a million dollars than the authority has to have what's called a single audit or compliance audit. Cave jumping into the section now, container Auditors reports for the compliance section There's two reports. Um, this first one is our report on internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Um, based on an audit performed in courts with government audit standards So government audit standards require that Uh, as we go through the financial statement audit, if we identify any deficiencies in intracontroller, financial reporting Uh, then we're required to report those to the board and to management Um, and we

0:44:04did have one finding this year. Um, which we referred to as 2025 - 001 And we consider that finding to be a material weakness. Um, and we'll go through that here in a second. Um, this report right here is the Autors Report on compliance for the major federal program Um, and again, this first section talks about how we've performed our audit, it's over the authorities Major Federal Program for 2025, the Section Paragraph In our opinion, the authority complied in all material respects So again, it's a clean audit opinion Overcompliance. Again, similar format as the financial statement report Again, it talks about how we've conducted our audit, what standards we have to follow Um, again Management is responsible for maintaining compliance. And our responsibility is to issue an opinion on compliance. Uh, this is a nice little summary table. Again, it has the financial statements, we issued a clean audit opinion. Uh, we identified one material weakness We did not identify any significant deficiencies We did not identify any noncompliance That's material to the financial statements.

0:45:31Overcompliance section, we had no material weaknesses, no deficiencies. We had a clean audit opinion, and no audit findings. That were required to be reported Uh, the federal program that we audited was the Moving to Work Demonstration Program, which is 14. 881. Uh, the audit qualified as a low risk Oddity, so that impacts among intestine that we have to do So if you're a low risk out of T, we only have to test 25 percent coverage of all federal expenditures Where if you're a high - risk Oddty, then we have to get 40 percent coverage So we'd have to test more if you were a low risk If you're a high - risk on a T versus a low Risk got a T. Alright, now jumping into the finding that we had this year, again It's a financial statement finding, not a compliance finding Um, there's three pieces to the finding, um, one is relating to that restatement That correction of error that we talked about in Note 18, again, because there was an air in the prior year financial statements that the BCHA Management Sean and his team did find Um, that has to be reported as a finding, because the prior year financial statements Um, we're misstated Again, that was related to that grant agreement That was very complex Um, and again very unusual

0:46:56wording that referred to as a grand agreement, but had provisions of it being a forgivable loan. Um, the second piece of the finding relates to the preparation of the schedule of federal expenditures Um, the schedule was prepared Um, and the total dollar amount was Prepared correctly Um, but one of the programs was misidentified It was reported as housing choice voucher program, and it was the moving to work Demonstration program, and it was because there was a... It had the program had changed, and that was something that wasn't caught until we came in to do the audit So again, none of the amounts change, it was just the program was reported Um, as under the wrong Um... Uh, uh, program number and name. And then there was a couple audit adjustments Uh, that we had to make Related into the financial statements Uh, so the combination of those three items Uh, cause us conclude that there was a material weakness Um, for the financial statements, and again, a financial Uh, finding. We've had numerous discussions with Shaun, his team have already put a corrective action plan in place. And again, very unusual situations that we typically Uh, don't see very often So again, I don't feel like the alarmed about Again, these things do happen We're dealing with a very complex reporting organization, complex standards, complex

0:48:34agreements Um, so these things tend to happen on occasion, obviously Everybody wants to, you know, do things perfectly, um, just due to the nature of You know, this industry, again One of the most complex industries when you're dealing with all the different HUD programs Um, the fact that the light tech projects are different Accounting... Um, uh, reporting model, then the government is, the Housing Authority, so again, just very complex nature. So you'll see here, of the responsibles, and I won't read through that But again, I think we got working with Sean and his team, a good game plan Um, so that, uh, we identify these situations Uh, earlier, and so we don't have any findings, um, going forward Um, so this is the end of the financial statements, and I do have the management letter To go through yet Um, but again, we'll just open it up right now for any questions relating to the finding or anything else related to the compliance audit or the financial statement audit. Okay, thank you, Aaron Commissioners, any questions for Aaron. Well, I'm trying to thank you Thanks, Aaron, for that Presentation I'm just trying to determine if it's a question for our staff versus for Aaron, I think is, so I'll just ask, and there was a...

0:49:59Well, maybe what I'll do is I'll find There was an item that had caught my intention that I didn't hear you speak to, so maybe I'm Maybe it was under an umbrella of a topic versus an actual number. And I Of course I'm in the full packet version, and not just this one. That was in. I feel like it was maybe 150, 000 dollars, and I'm looking at stuff, if that rings about And if not, I'll keep scrolling, and then I will come back to my question. There might be in the management or two. But you might be seeing that. Yeah, I think that could be, it was in that letter that you... Yes, right here, yep. Yeah, thank you So I was just trying to understand if I didn't hear you speak about that number, so maybe That statement wasn't a factor in what I heard you talk about in some other list of items that did create a material. Correct Yeah, that was not, but yeah, I will go through the management here in a second, and that matter, that 150, 000 dollars Okay, perfect, thank you. That was the only question I had Thanksgiving I don't have any questions, thank you. No, I don't either, but thank you for reviewing the So thoroughly. Yeah, and again, so here's the manager letter This

0:51:17is Boilerplate Management that presented in the past Again, kind of regurgitates some of the stuff Again, how we, what our responsibility is relating to the financial statements, and compliance. Some key things that I like that will point out every year in this. Um, significant difficulties encounter during the audit, so we're required That if we had any issues, any difficulties in dealing with management Uh, we would require to report those, uh, to you, the board Um, and I'm glad to say we aid encountered No significant difficulties and dealing with management, really no difficulties at all Obviously we have the issues that we had to work through relating to the correction of the air, the CIFO reporting, but again Um, don't consider those to be, you know, difficulties in dealing with management Shauna and his team are absolutely phenomenal to work with, very transparent Uh, wanna do things the right way, you know, they're reaching out to us Multiple times during the year to ask us questions to make sure that we're in the loop, and that, you know, that they are doing things right Um, and so, you know, very responsible when we ask questions very timely Um, so we just really appreciate You know that making the audit goes as smoothly as possible So, you know, we have to be independent, we have to be

0:52:48professional Um, but we want to have a good working relationship, you know, with the finance team, and they make it easy to work with them So, you know, we appreciate their cooperation. Uncorrected, incorrected miss statements Again, so as we go through the audit, as I mentioned, we had a couple adjustments that we did make Um, and that talks about that in this section Um, and that was part of the finding Um, we did have one adjustment that we passed on We didn't think was material 150, 000 dollars, but when you look at the organization as a whole 166 million dollars 150, 000 dollars is not, you know, we don't consider that to be material and management Uh, didn't either So this past adjustment related to... Really more of just a timing deal Um, so there's a grant from the City of Louisville for 150, 000 dollars And when you get into the provisions of the grant agreement again Um, you know, you have to read those grant agreements very closely This was one where, um, you, they had to be provisions met in the agreement in order to recognize it as raven, similar to kind of that Um, the other one with 4. 5 million dollar when we talked about earlier And so I believe that the revenue now has been earned in 2026 So

0:54:17it's just really a matter of it being recorded as revenue Um, just one year too early, so in reality deferred revenue or liabilities were understated by 150, 000 in revenue was overstated by 150, 000, and that will self - correct in 2026. Thank you for that explanation. Again reading through these grant agreements You know, I've been doing it for a long time, and, uh, there's a grant agreements where I need to get, you know, I need to reach out to others in the firm just to get second opinions, third opinion sometimes Because of the complex nature of these agreements, and so. Uh disagreements with management, again, if we are required to, we're required to report that if we had any disagreements with management over any accounting reporting, or audity manager would be required to report that, and I'm glad to say we did not have any disagreements. Uh, we've already talked about these circumstances that affected the auditors report this year again was the correction of the air. Reporting entity for Josephing Thomas That's not considered an heir. But it does require that emphasis of matter to tell the readers that there was a change because of the significance of it becoming, you know, changing from a discreetly presented to a blended component unit. And that's the end of the management letter, so again any

0:55:52questions on the management letter or any other part of the presentation. Okay, I don't think we have any, Aaron, thank you. Alright, thank you Alright, thank you so much Sean already finance director for the housing authority. Go on, I'm sorry Sean, I just, for me, if you could move that a little bit closer Oh, for sure, for sure, yep Sean already, finance director for the housing authority I just want to commend Aaron and his staff, as he mentioned several times, the complexity of the organization is daunting. And Illness staff at the same time that they were doing this audit, and especially being a new move to work agency Um, the additional testing that that requires in the midst of all of that Um, again, and other members of his firm were working intensely on trying to get us to the permanent closing of the, will it be corner loan, uh, to convert, and that involved lots of fire drills tend to do with lots of complex things as well So they kind of got the devil whammy this spring and delivered a final audit Uh, uh, I think earlier than in recent memory, so very grateful for their efforts. Great, thank you, and I know that took a lot of work by you and your staff as well So thank you for all that effort.

0:57:23And Aaron again, thank you for being so thorough and going through the entire audit with us It's always helpful Uh, for us as board, so we do our job properly. Susanna, I think we're still, I think Aaron, thank you, and you don't need to stay on, although you're welcome to join us for the rest of the meeting If you'd like to. - Great, thank you, yep, thank you I don't know if it's necessary, but I'm happy to make a motion to accept the audit. I think that's usually done, so yeah, would welcome that motion I move that we accept the audit. Okay, we have a motion and a second all in favor say Aye, so we have accepted the audit, and I don't think there was a request that we do that, but that is the appropriate thing to do, things for catching that. Uh, okay Thank you, I think we're gonna move on to an operations update Yes, you are correct, and i'm handy and over now to Steph in the Room finally, so thank you for your patience with those of us who are online today Okay, thank you Susanna. Good morning, commissioners Michelle Alexander BCHA Deputy Director Thank you Susanna for joining us from Vacation, we appreciate your support Uh, first up is our Operations Update You can see here that we

0:58:53are keeping Study with our Occupy rates This is not where we would like to be, and we do acknowledge some challenges So 67 percent of our vacancies right now So that's proving to be more competitive with the market than we ever intended on seeing, and we are looking at recommendations on how to address that We also have eight units that are in remediation right now, and hopefully we'll get back online within four to six months when they're being remediated against the large costs and a lot of work to get them back online Any questions on those two items. Just what percentage of the vacancy rate is attributable to those remediation units. It's fairly low, so right now I would have to say it's about percent of those units Okay, thanks. Staffing, okay, rent increases, we've got the work session scheduled for July 7th to discuss rent increases, and how we're approaching that this year to get your feedback on how we're going to accomplish the increases Lapping updates, we have two new hourly landscapers that have joined our team We have posted to refill a program property manager, and I believe that's it for those ones. Next slide, Kelly. Development Updates, as Susanna mentioned, we continue to have community meetings for the sewer mobile home Um, we haven't had a large attendance at those, we've

1:00:31had a few of them, mostly we're hearing feedback from the community that they want to see low - income housing going in and to keep the current residents in place So that's really a lot of the feedback we're getting, oddly, we get a lot of comments that they don't want to see any flat roofs on the property, not sure why that one's coming up, but we've noted it If you would like to join any of those, we would welcome you any of the open houses It did seem that our attendance was more, we had a higher attendance when we were actually at sewered mobile home rather than when we were at the community Center, the coffee shop, and this next one will be at the library So we're hoping for a good turnout there also.

1:01:15Castro updates, we continue to move through the process with the City of Louisville, and that one's moving pretty smoothly Capital improvements, we are currently working on the rehab at Cottonwood, and we are wrapping up building one So that one's pacing at the same rate that our other two hillside and cat court, where we had actually planned for those, we're Cottonwood was a little bit more of a surprise for us this year. And I know there's been some emails to the board about Cottonwood, is there any questions about progress there. I don't see anything. Next slide. Oh I did actually, I wanted to speak a little bit about meeting our Prop 12 3 goals, we've signed an IGA with the City of Lafayette, which will enable us to capture all the overages from Josephine Commons Rehab, the Willoughby Corner, Neo Development, and the acquisition of Flalmunna Mobile Home Park So next year we are hopeful that the legislation will make it, that we don't have to have an IGA, that we can actually capture the units that we have participated in. Willoughby Corner, I will give a shout out also to this team for the loan conversion, because that was a huge lift Does everybody keep saying for all of our teams? I don't think we've mentioned our development team at Tanya Jimenez, who actually played

1:02:44a huge part in that, along with compliance, finance, and property managers to make that happen So that's a big one. An update on our city Council meeting, we continue to move through the PUD with that, and a few updates from that meeting I felt went really well, we had some great feedback from the community members and from the Council themselves I'll share what a Council member shared from a Erie town member says hi there My perspective is that I can't afford to live in Lafayette, at least not currently My opinion is that Lafayette needs to focus on higher density around more desirable neighborhoods such as single - family neighborhoods like Old Town, keeping the new development in line with current looking in line with the neighborhood character to avoid blowback from residents However, I feel like creating new developments around Arapaho and 287 whenever we can find them, and I'm open to height and density as I cannot afford to live there So it's a really nice refreshing - candid perspective, but we also heard from other community members that felt surprised and feel that it's less than desirable neighborhood, and we acknowledge that and we're continuing to do better outreach to them, and we'll have an event to hear their feedback in a couple of weeks. The city Council Feedback, they actually were really

1:04:05supportive and acknowledged that if it was a decision between our height increase and the loss of 28 units, they would rather see the height increase. Um, they've acknowledged that the dense v - simple townhomes are basically a Rubik's Cube of a development for sanitary and waterlines, and it complicates the work more, so they are supportive of our detached single - family homes They had a lot of curiosity and discussion about our setbacks, and staff acknowledge that applying for the PUD at this time is not out of the norm for this stage. The last was that the mayor noted, the massing didn't bother them either, and they would rather have affordable homes than no homes at all. So it was really great meeting, I lastedly into the evening, and it was good to hear everybody's feedback on that Any questions from the Council Feedback or community.

1:05:01No questions, thank you I just have one in terms of just there is a next step with Council, that was not a final decision No, sorry, there was no final decisions, we were there just to receive feedback and hear from the community and the Council And when do you expect to finalize this? We will be going back for PUD amendment, I want to say two weeks, I will get you that date. Okay, I just raise it just to say that, you know, I think you should continue to be mindful of, you know, that tension, that community sentiment about the three stories, and the sort of how do you blend with the surrounding area, and I know, you know, this happens to us, it happens to every elected body, that people wake up and start emailing before the final final And so I just, you know, just be aware and stay on top of those touch points with Council and staff. Yes, we agree We've been working on heat maps to show the difference in height, so it won't be as. I don't feel, that it will be as significant as everybody's envisioning And so working on some architectural renderings to show that difference in height, that our highest point will be our elevator stairwell in quarters, but I think the more, um... architectural plans will

1:06:25help identify that for everybody. I Think finances up next. Budget. A fun budget slide, look at how much fun that is Especially because we have so much fun Yeah. Lots of money, I see. Good morning. Commissioners John Dirty, finance structure. BCHA We are. Delving deep to the 2027 budget, we did as Suzanne mentioned, continued to participate in the priority - based budgeting project with the county Um, and although I don't think that that really makes it on the radar front and center with the County itself It's a very good exercise for BCHA to be involved in its own right Um... And I mean our focus is consistently last couple years continues to be in finding additional efficiencies Um... Identification of cost reductions were possible We do have... Great faith and hope in our new Enterprise software over time to add those types of efficiencies, even some of the things that... Front and center, that on the very surface look like there'll be some significant efficiencies and time saving. And, you know, we've always got an eye towards striving towards You know the goal of operational self - sustainability, front and center at our budget as it was last year Um... As it is this year is striving to reduce our reliance on the counties operating subsidy to the housing authority, and I know this year

1:08:27Um, as much as ever That is a priority, it's a priority for us And I've been... You know talking with OFM, I've been talking with Armando about You know getting closer to that goal So we're really just in the midst right now of, you know, gathering the data, you know. To me I think There's no light bulbs going off yet in terms of... We're 2027 Come down in terms of projections Um... I hope to have a much clearer perspective by the end of July to be ready for the counties budgeting process. Any questions. I don't see anything, Q. Thank you. The K. Here. Do we want to do the KPIs? I didn't know if that was. Kind of a... Can you speak into the microphone? Excuse me, I'm sorry Kelly Stapleton BCHA pulled up, we were gonna do monthly financial review Um, the past couple times we have not particularly reviewed the KPIs, so we can stay in that... vein or not, it's up to the commissioner It's great having them in the packet, and I think this is a good time if we have questions. Yeah, I mean I think if any of us have particular things that we want to call out I think that's fine I don't think we need to go through them in detail. Yeah. I just sort

1:10:14of focus on Tungsten Village, here are quite a bit given, you know, I mean the Occupancy rate is, I think above 90, is it? 92. You know. But... And it's a small, it's not in terms of dollar amount, it's not a big part of our budget But it has struggled from the beginning, and I... do just wonder whether there is anything, any unused tools in the toolbox here that we might do to get that Occupancy up, I realize, you know, with such a small unit, you know, just one unit vacancy can cause a big fluctuation So I get that, but... Yeah, and we have had real struggle up there with a 3 - bedroom voucher unit that we have been enabled to fulfill for an extended amount of time And so we do do a lot of outreach, I mean we've posted in all the restaurants, we are now to handing out... Um... Mealings wherever we can... Any feedback on that one, but that 3 - bedroom unit at Tungsen is really a challenge for us. Well I guess we just know that people don't...

1:11:31Family people, I guess aren't looking for Affordable Housing in Netherland That is not consistent with what we hear at Town Halls and in our inboxes, but... Yeah, I'm not sure if it's that families aren't or if they're not able to meet the income requirements on that unit, a light tax always are a little bit harder to fill Because of the AMI levels. We have started looking to see if we can move the voucher to a smaller unit if it can be moved to a different property So we are starting to look at things like that because it's sitting for much too long. Commissioners, any other questions about the financial specifically. I don't think so, okay great. And in future months we will be bringing on Wolby Corner Multifamily since it's now converted to permanent financing.

1:12:26So I believe Matters from the board is next And I just got a little update that... Because my matter's not time sensitive, I'm gonna take it offline, then Determinative it needs to be scheduled for future day, just so people have more advanced notice Okay. Alright. I'll just... I don't have questions. But I just wanted to thank you all. I heard, and somebody said, the big lift that this Department has been doing has continued. Um, but moving to Permanent Financing on phase one is really important And so just congratulations, BCHA folks, and hopefully I'll share that with the rest of the teams. I did have one, just, it's more of a curiosity, and if it feels like I'm looking for endosysanas online, social here, if it's a different conversation It's fine, I just... Nicole Monsor with First Bank has been a partner, we've been in some meetings, you know, a year ago, just trying to make sure things kept moving on Willoughby Corner, the significant change obviously with that bank Um... And I don't know to what degree we're partners, I just know, on the personal, like the personal account, piece, their fees went up dramatically And I have no idea what the impacts otherwise, but for BCHA specifically, I was just curious if y'all are having any of those conversations, if there's anything, and it

1:13:51may just be something later, because it's a very new... A transition with that acquisition. But it did catch my attention knowing that First Bank has been a partner with BCHA, so I don't know if you have any thoughts or if it's something that may come to the board later if we need to know anything more. Yeah, because the changes are so... They're so new and fresh has been awesome. I did talk with... A person at PNC about, you know, when am I going to get to have coffee with my new relationship manager? I mean that role is so pivotal for housing authority Um... And they said, yeah, that guy will be contacting you, we know he is, but he's just, you know, I'm drinking from a fire hose as well So more to follow That's kind of... It's kind of disturbing that personal fees went up a lot I would think that they would have waited a minute before that. Um... We have not seen that on the commercial side yet, so... Okay, thank you for that And then just in general I will be really interested in the conversation about earlier in regards to the work and dignity coalitions, which is to know that y'all are going to be at the table and learn, and then bring that back to the board is great.

1:15:07I think that was the only other piece that I had just notes that I didn't want to interrupt in the beginning, thanks. Okay. Just one quick comment, just, it's really delightful to get to read the information that gets sent over and look at the Presentation and just see the progress that the team is making, and we also get really nice comments from people who live on the property Center noticing really significant improvements in maintenance, and just the care that Inservant resident services, and that the team has providing, so just want to pass on that appreciation from Community members, and my thanks to you all for what you're doing Thank you, we appreciate it. Okay, well thank you for everything that you've presented today, and all the work that went into the audit. No, that's significant.

1:15:57And I don't have anything as a matter from the board So I think we can excuse you, and we do have one last Item this morning, which is a work session on the Affordable and Attainable Housing Tax Innovation Fund, I'm going to suggest a break here Five minutes. 10, what do we need? Five is okay, I think... We'll have a five minute break We will be back at 10. 55, which actually will be a seven minute break. Thank you. And we are recording. All right, we are back from recess. We are now going to move into a work session on the Affordable and Attainable Housing Tax. And I will turn it over to our County Administrator, Jana Peterson for that. Good morning, Commissioners. Jana Peterson Boulder County Administrator. I'm here with Housing Department team today to talk about the Affordable and Attainable Housing Tax. We have two areas where we're seeking your direction today. The first is related to the Innovation Fund, which you've had some prior conversations about. And then the second is responsive to your request to revisit the funding allocation for 2027 to see if you would like to pursue any changes for future funding years. So with that, I'm looking for Susanna. Are you the presenter of these slides. Good morning, Commissioner. I am not the presenter of the slides. Actually, Gwen Mossman will

1:17:46be presenting on the innovation fund. Michelle Alexander will present on the second topic of how to proceed with AHT funding. That sounds great. So I am in charge of moving the slides forward, Glenn, if you just want to tell me when you want to go. And you'll need to pull the microphone closer and introduce yourself. Good morning. Commissioners. Gwen Mossman, I am the support of housing division manager for the Boulder County Housing Department. And so thank you for your time this morning. Well, I guess we can go to the next slide. So as you're aware, we have been discussing how to implement the innovation fund for several months and maybe several iterations now. With home prices and Boulder County remaining extremely high. And including for essential workers such as our teachers first responders, healthcare staff, nonprofit service providers, our own County staff. Traditional programs we're finding do not fully bridge the affordability gap.

1:19:10And we're exploring using the county's innovation fund to pilot solutions that are bold, data driven, and equity focused in helping our public sector employees achieve affordable home ownership. Next slide. So. What this proposal recommends is that it is a last gap funding that would offer 75, 000 up to 75, 000 per household for eligible public service workers, earning up to 130 percent AMI. The assistance would be, it's designed to be flexible. And Taylor to what that specific household might need the most in order to achieve home ownership. So it could be used for lowering interest rates. Down payment support closing cost help, or even post purchase kind of critical health and safety repairs that might come up during inspection. We'd also like to mention that that 75, 000 would be tiered based on AMI levels. So maybe households that are coming in at a lower AMI would be eligible for the full 75, 000 and a household at the upper level. For a reduced rate for maybe closing cost help. So that peace we're hoping to make scalable so that we can help more lower income households attain home ownership. This approach actually goes a little bit beyond typical national programs, but it also does follow best practice. And we also believe that it is designed specifically to meet Boulder County's. Boulder

1:21:21County's market. Next slide. So why this matters? Supporting Public Sector Workers Strengthens the Community Stability, improves workforce retention and advances equity goals by helping more residential access. Residence Access Long - Term Home Ownership Opportunities. We're really hoping that. Most of our conversations center around our staff being able to maybe, and other public sector, um, workers being able to afford the mortgage, the actual mortgage payments. It's actually getting over that hurdle of getting into the housing in the first place. That is their primary concern. And a lot of the reason why, you know, they just can't make that jump. And so we're really, um. We're really hoping that this last gap financing helps more families in our community. Take that final step. Uh, next slide. So really the big decision is, do we have Commissioner support, uh, to explore moving forward with a flexible home ownership program for public sector employees and also before we get there, do you have more questions about our intent with this program? Thank you. Commissioners will now turn to your discussion. And based on our rotation, Commissioner Loachumi in Europe first on this topic. Great, thank you. Good morning. Thanks for being here. Thanks for presenting, Gwyn. Um, I think, I mean, I'm super interested. I'm very excited.

1:23:19I love what you've brought here. I think I have a few questions, but also, um, if you just, I mean, I'm kind of, do we just want to find out what appetite there is from the board and then maybe go into some questions and or is the question today just, um, should be CHA start looking at, um, or should the county start looking at this type of a program and then come back with other more specifics. So that, and I can tell you what those questions might be, but I don't want to go too far down a road if the question is really just, could you bring something back versus do we want to talk about what that might look like? Yeah. The purpose today is really to talk about what that might look like if the board support for this concept. So if you have questions or guidance that you would like to get on the table for, um, in response to the staff memo and what you heard today about the flexible design of this program, that would be helpful for us to hear. Okay. Thanks. I didn't want to go into too much details if that wasn't needed, but I appreciate that.

1:24:22Um, what I appreciated in your presentation here is looking at could be several different items. It wasn't just funding for one item. So I think that's, that's smart because it's going to just depend on the particular person and their needs. I was curious if you all are going to be thinking about any ties of, um, and I'm thinking about Boulder County staff right now, like any ties to time of employment, um, and thinking about some of the, like what are the programs does the county have that are, they can have like tuition reimbursement intuition up front tuition. That's something we worked on several years ago. So are there some other lessons? Are there other programs here at the county that we could, um, just evaluate and consider that might be either tied a time of employment. It might be, um, repayment at a certain amount of time. And so I didn't want to misinterpret your topic of tears, Gwyn, but I also wondered if just thinking about some of the dumb payment assistance programs, CHAFA funding some of the different programs that have come out over the years. They do have some type of recapture tax or something like that. I was curious about inspection, um, not of the home by our inspection. Buyers have an option to do a home inspection, but we also

1:25:41have, I would think the County would have the ability to require that the same way that a, like BHP does. Um, and that inspection becomes part of the process. But I'm also thinking about, would there be any type of inspection later on. Um, similar to my other question about buyer class. I would assume that everybody would have to go to homebuyer class. And, um, some of the banks and some of the lenders in the past have done like a second step. So it's a requirement that a year after being in the home, you go to a second class just to talk about maintenance. And did you really start saving for that emergency that's going to happen in your home. So something like that. And then was also interested in, is this just for staff. Or is this for anyone that's in, I think the way, oops, and I touched something on my screen. So now I'm not saying that, um, Presentation, but I think it's a public service employees. So that was just a curiosity.

1:26:37It might be something to talk about what the board. But those are a few of my initial questions, but yes, I'm supportive of, um, doing some type of program that you've brought up. Thank you, Commissioner Ludgeman. So I heard four questions there and maybe we'll just take them in order if that's okay. Um, the first one was about whether there would been any, um, ties to length of employment associated with this program. So that is, um, that will be a consideration. Um, we have been looking at some equity sharing models. This is not a quite, uh, this is not quite a long inequity sharing model, but looking at, um, typically those models require, well, we can set those requirements, right? But best practice is that usually it's a, um, you're eligible after five years of employment. So it is for staff or other, um, public sector workers who have been in a committed position for quite a while and are wanting to stay, um, connected.

1:27:44To connected or close to their source of work. Um, as far as being forgivable, I think that's also a consideration. Typically these loans sit as a silent second and that they're forgivable either, um, typically after 10 years or they become, if they refinance before a five year period, they might be repayable when the loan is refinanced. So the pieces that we can do there to either recoup funds, if it doesn't turn into a long - term, um, home ownership situation or to forgive those funds, if it does move into long - term stability. And you got into one of the other answers, um, as well. This is not just for Boulder County staff. Um, do you want to talk a little bit about how you, how you would identify public sector workers. Yeah. So I know that's a little bit, it's fairly broad. But our thought here is because of the nature of the affordable and attainable housing tax that it would be probably most appropriate if it was available to public sector workers Countywide.

1:29:08And that would be looking for other county or local government employees. We're talking about, um, nonprofit staff that are working to fill community needs. Um, I think that, uh, educators in first responders could also be moved, could also be grouped into eligible, um, community members. So that's my, my thought process. I'd be interested to hear, you know, people's, your feedback on whether we want, would want to narrow the scope there or kind of continue along this broader approach. Of eligibility. Commissioner Lochiman had also asked about inspection requirements both as part of the process. And then later on, perhaps to make sure that the improvements have been made, if that's part of the agreement. That piece I'd have to, I'd say I'd have to note and then go back and see how that we could implement that into the process. And then the last one was the, um, uh, education requirements for, uh, home buyer class up front and then maybe after a year or so, a maintenance class or something like that. Yeah. So, um, home buyer education, um, would be a requirement. We probably would not be working with anybody who would not have to take a home buyer education class to qualify for their primary loan. Um, given our AMI limits. And then as far as the home ownership program that or home

1:30:47ownership education piece after the fact that is something that my staff is starting to explore, um, because we realize that now that we are moving into specifically BCHA moving into the for sale arena, that that is, um, peace, a service piece that we're not providing is actually helping folks actually stay in the homes that they own now. So. Great. Thank you. Yeah. Anything else commissioner Luchman, did you want to weigh in on the public service eligibility criteria. Well, I think, I mean, I'd love to have some discussion with the board too. And I can, I can see the need that it's like, I feel like we could do all the things or we could, I think I appreciate what you're saying about the reminder that it's, you know, it's tax funds for the entire county.

1:31:45And so, and I also work in the, you know, focus on some of the workforce pieces as well and know that that is a major issue around our entire state. Um, I was just talking to some small business owners on Sunday about the reality. Unedest is park. Um, it's connected to so many different things. So, and my belief is still at housing is the answer to everything. So outside of that, to be able to maintain your home, if we can get you in a home, you have to have a job that you can work and get to and, you know, whether it's transportation issues or whatever else it is. So I, I have a little interest in workforce housing, meaning maybe that the explore that government workers as kind of that narrowing, so it's just, I would love to see a proposal. And it doesn't mean that educators aren't important. I've also, that's also my previous life. And certainly I first responders are critical. And so I think for me, what would be helpful is an exploration of what would work force housing for government employees for all of our towns and cities, et cetera.

1:32:57And what programs already exist for the different sectors that you talked about Gwyn, which I heard first responders, educators, nonprofit workers is what I, the way I heard it. And then for government staff. And there might be some additional, I'm more familiar with programs that do focus on first responder and educator, but not profit, I'm not as familiar with. And government workers, I know the areas around the state who've done a really fantastic job, but it's all about the financing and the way that they were able to create workforce housing. So I would be interested in that if there's additional board member that would want some more. Information on, you know, how do we make that decision. Thank you. All right. Turning to Commissioner Levy. Yeah. Thanks. Um, so I have, I guess a number of questions and some comments as well. I guess maybe I'll just put them all out there, uh, all at once. So I think I just want to start by acknowledging that we've had, you know, we've had some struggles with what to do with this fund that we decided to call an innovation fund. And I, um, this is not a criticism of your work at all. And I, and I'm sorry if it comes across this way. But these kinds of programs are pretty common. There aren't enough

1:34:34of them, but it's not innovative. And I think we need to. You know, if we want to just say we're going to put aside a certain amount of money for home ownership, let's just do that and take this whole notion of innovation off the table because I'm, I am a little, uh, I guess disappointed that we're not thinking bigger. Here. And the references in the memo, uh, comprehensive research and stakeholder interviews and in - depth analysis, et cetera. You know, I do think, I do think there are other opportunities. You know, if this is perceived as the biggest need that we have to help people in this income bracket with home ownership, um, you know, I think that's a decision that the board can make. But I was really hoping we were going to see something different. Having said that, um, you know, I, I guess I do have some questions. Well, I guess another kind of related comment is that when we opened this up for grant applications, uh, we received a lot of requests for funding, um, we looked at those requests and we concluded that they didn't really rise to what we were looking for. And one of my takeaways from that, and, you know, when we announced that the board heard a lot in response to that, of course people want

1:36:19funding. And, you know, they've worked hard on their applications. But one of the takeaways for me on that was that there is need for those kinds of housing supports that people were requesting. You know, the, the modular home factory that is operated, you know, the partnership with the city and the school district in habitat, uh, which is, you know, housing people in lovely homes. I don't remember all of them. And I felt that what the board really needed to do was pull back and decide whether that those responses to the request for proposals or requests for applications really reflected that we should have put this money out for services or for some other need that we were not meeting. So I think when I look at this, I wonder, I mean just to then go into the questions that, and it's not a fully fleshed out proposal. I understand you're sort of wanting to take our temperature. But I wonder, um, about sort of, well, how many households do we think we can serve with this? Uh, given the income qualification, the availability of, of product in the market that could be attainable with, um, 70, 000, uh, maximum, you know, and, you know, how many people we serve this way relative to how many we could serve with some other kind of services. So

1:38:15for me, it's always, you know, how, how much can we move the needle? And I didn't see anything in here about, you know, an analysis of, um, available homes in the price range and the number of people that might be served. So I'm just curious about that. Um, I, um, you were speaking this morning in terms of, I think alone. And I couldn't glean from the write up whether this is just a grant or whether it is alone. So some clarification on that would be helpful. And the reference to partnership with, uh, an established housing organization. So I presume we would, we would not manage this program ourselves. We would contract with some third party to do all the qualifications and monitor the money and all that stuff. So that just wanted to confirm that and whether there was an organization you already had in mind. Let's see.

1:39:36So and then I guess in general with programs such as this, I think when you may have referenced a silent second, I didn't see anything fleshed out in here. That would address like recapture. Like what would be the conditions? How long do they have to stay in the home. Um, and if and when they sell, you know, I mean, I've seen these things structured in various ways of if you stay in the home for 10 years, uh, you get all the upside, you know, the shared equity. If it's, you know, just all those terms, that stuff's going to matter a lot to me, to know how, how we're protecting the funds and making sure that, um, that it doesn't become, you know, an opportunity to flip a home and not really do what we're hoping it'll do. So that, uh, just what are those actual details. Let's see what else did I have there. I mean, this goes a little bit to Commissioner Lashame's questions about maintenance kind of the long - term burden of maintenance. And, um, in terms of, you know, eligibility. So we're going to look at an income level. And I guess for, you know, as part of like how many people are we going to be able to serve, um, I think I asked this question when we, when we

1:41:14met, I think it was April 7th on these concepts as well. That, you know, looking at how much debt they carried. Do they have a car loan? The other things that one or two income family, et cetera, et cetera. And their ability to really afford and maintain a home over the long term. And if this is just a grant and we say, you know, you own this home for X amount of time, um, it's yours. That's, that's one thing. But depending on how you structure it, we're in this together. And we have an interest in that home being maintained for the long term because it's, we have an investment in it. So I'm, you know, I think it's the ability to truly own a Fort the home is going to be very, very important for this success. I've had a comment kind of wanting a little bit more modeling.

1:42:27On. An example of how this amount of. Down payment assistance or as I understand. I guess you're sort of saying 70, 000 tops and it could go for a number of different things. But just. All my questions go to, is that enough to move the needle. On ability to afford. And make the payments, the monthly payments over the long term. Uh, for people in these AMIs. So just really modeling out. Like what is the, the, um, PITI. And what income level do you need. In order to support that and how much does 70, 000 really help. Um, because I mean, this is, I think the conundrum in a high cost market like ours. And I know we have condos and attached units that are, you know, the gopher under 500, 000, um, I know there are a lot of them. But, you know, it's just really like, what is the long - term viability for a household. A little. More definition. On who is. A public service employee. And. That was a little too loose for me. Healthcare workers. Like they're, you know, the continuum and there are, you know.

1:44:05We often think of. Uh. Rn's, we may think of. CNAs. But do we consider chiropractors and acupuncturism physical therapists? You know, I think, I think we really need to work on this definition of, of the target population. And I think that, I don't know. I'm not sure. How to, how to do this, but I think the easiest way to maybe. Break this down or at least define the eligible population of what B. Somebody and a public sector job. You know. I'm not going to include people. Working for the school district for, you know, any of the police fire. You know, of course City, uh. County. Probably more. Um, and I'm. Open to other categories, but it's like, you know, it's, you got to be able to actually draw a hard line. And know who's in and out. And with the list, it seemed like that.

1:45:15Would ultimately. Perhaps be a problem. To have that hard line. That fixed bright line that we need. So often, um, I wonder. Um. If. They initially qualify, then they. Get a bump up. You know, they get a nice new shiny job. Like, what do we do then? I've always wondered about this. In like some of the programs that the ski resorts have for workforce housing of, you know, you get into the housing, into the home. And, you know, then you have a. Horrible snow season and you go get a different. Job. Because you have to. And then do you lose your home because of that? Like what, you know, what are we thinking in terms of how long they have to be. Employed. What happens. If they leave. That job. And then, um, make. More money. Do we make them move? I think. Yeah, I mean, I think those are my questions. And a lot of it, I mean, some of it is just, you know, they all gets fleshed out. When some, you know, if we move forward, any contract with some organization that's done this and they have lots of experience in making, you know, kind of developing those criteria. And, you know, so I'm sure that can be done very easily. I think it's more, um. About. From me still going back

1:46:52to. Yeah, are we going to actually be able to use these funds? How many, how many households do. We believe? We'll actually be able to benefit from this. Given, you know, the housing market and the cost of home. Ownership. And I just want to make sure that we're, that this particular use is the best use of these funds. Thank you, Commissioner Levy. So I captured about seven questions. There are some of them were, as you said, still to be sort of fleshed out in a formal proposal. But I would like to start at the top and where you sort of rounded it out here, which is about how many, um, applicants do we think this program could support. As you commissioners are aware, um, you did not award any funds for 2025 did not yet award funds for 2026. It was a 500, 000 dollar allocation per year. So currently your innovation fund has approximately a million dollars in it. This is also subject to your discretion. And so, um, you know, given that roughly 500, I'm going to turn to Gwen and see if we could talk about, um, how many, uh, applicants this program potentially could support. Yes. So I mean. Math shows that if everyone got the 75, 000 dollar allocation, we would be able to support about six, um, households into

1:48:23home ownership a year. I don't, we will not 75, 000 is going to be working with maybe our lowest income, um, qualifiers. And so my projection is that we'd be serving approximately 10 to 12. Households per year. Um, with the 500, 000 dollar, so that's my projection. So the lower, what would be. The price point of the home. That somebody with lower income? That would be determined by, um, a mortgage broker. Anyone who participates in this program was first would have to qualify for the home and for a mortgage through a broker. And the lender is going to determine how much, um, how much home they qualify for. These funds are not intended to come in and help someone qualify, then turn around and qualify for a bigger purchase, right? They're intended to make it easier for them and more affordable for them to get into a home that they would have qualified for already. Right. But that maybe it's just, it's just too tight, right? It just wipes out all of their savings and everything to get to that point. So it is not intended to help them bump up into a bigger mortgage than maybe they could, that, that they could handle.

1:49:59Long term. And then commissioner levy had also asked about, um, potentially partnering with outside party to administer the program and qualify applicants and just wondered if you could share the initial staff thoughts around that. Yeah. And so we're, we're kind of, we're exploring both avenues, right? So if we're projecting 10 to 12, um. Approvals, obviously there will be more applicants. So we're trying to that piece we haven't fleshed out is how whether we'd have a lottery for the funds or first come first serve. Those are pieces that really we need to put some more thought into. And then the other part of it is, you know, we've talked as some providers that have managed programs like this before. But we're also trying to weigh like how much it's only 500, 000 dollars, not only, but I mean, it's 500, 000 dollars and so we're trying to make sure that we consider that we don't want a court of it, a quarter of those funds going to an admin fee, right? And so given how many applications we think we might get in, we're exploring, can we, is there staffing that can handle this program in house as well. Um, because the eligibility criteria, once we set is okay, it is not as, um. It's not at the same level as a lender, right? Cause we

1:51:30would be coming in support of a decision that a lender had already made. And I wondered, Gwen, if you wanted to comment on income changes, um, people in the program, if their income goes up or if their income goes down, does that, uh, impact the program participation? I don't see that impacting the program. I think, you know, best practice is typically you have one income qualifying event. You get into the house. And then you move forward like that. Um, and if you do, hopefully, you know, move forward economically as you get older. Are you been in that house for longer. There's not an annual requalifying event. To keep those funds. And then commissioner Levy, you had talked, you had asked a little bit about length of term for, is it a grant? Is it alone?

1:52:28Um, you had mentioned 10 years, which is, I think, um, what Gwenhead said it earlier is a typical way these programs are designed, um, where, uh, loan forgiveness would happen after 10 years. I think I heard you also ask about what in the program design could prevent an applicant from turning around and flipping the property for profit and just wonder if staff had contemplated that. I think that's, sorry. So as far as whether it's a grant or a loan, I'm actually in favor of sitting as a silent second, um, just to have a little bit more control in some of the exit criteria. I'll call it, I guess. But I think, um, as, as I think I noted earlier, kind of most programs, uh, especially around equity sharing. Do you have a five year participation?

1:53:29And if you refinance before that five years, then the full amount that we have loaned you is recaptured at either the resale or the refinance. Um, and so that kind of, um, takes care of the people who maybe are trying, do try to come in and, and flip the home. We'll recapture those funds fully. If you choose to stay in the, in the home long term, I think there's a, there is a formula where, you know, it goes down every year. And by the time you get to year 10, it's forgiven. Commissioner Levy, I heard you weigh in a little bit on participation similar to the feedback from Commissioner Lochimin. I heard you focusing on public, um, public sector employment in particular. She had leaned a little bit maybe towards local government, um, it felt like yours was a little bit broader than that and just wondered if there was any other guidance or comments that you wanted to make specific to participation definition? Not at this stage here. Uh, yeah, I mean, my main concern is that we do have a bright line of your either eligible or not. And that, you know, and not get into the, oh, what kind of human service is nonprofit? Is it? Is this what all that stuff that makes things messy? So yeah, not

1:54:58at this time. Other questions or comments. Um, I. Yeah. I mean, along the lines of who are we targeting here, you know, in the intro, you mentioned, you know, four core funding priorities. Address racial disparities. In access to housing, uh, community led solutions, et cetera. And I, and I just wondered on that racial disparities element here. What is that how would this program be designed to address that. I think that piece is accomplished by, um, outreach and marketing, right? And so, um, as we know, or it's pretty common knowledge that the disparity and home ownership between demographics is enormous in this community. And so, um, I don't think we're going to, I don't recommend that we set the program to just target one specific demographic, but I do think that there's a lot of outreach and education that we can do. Um, around equity and equitably accessing these funding and learning about the process of, yes, I actually could move into home ownership. So I think that piece is best handled in our, in our outreach and education efforts versus actually. Putting it in, you know, having it being a programming element. Does that make sense? Oh, it does make sense. I mean, I think, um. I think there probably would be legal issues if we try, you know, try to do this in a

1:57:00way that provided a preference, sadly. So. Other questions. Um, no, I mean, I think I would want to see, you know, we'll, we'll have more opportunities if this moves forward to dive into the exact design of the program. I mean, just really the big question for me. And we have to make this decision. This is what being an elected official and being responsible for funding is all about is this the best use of these funds. And I am fully aware of how transformational home ownership can be. In some respects. And yet it's a fairly small number of people to surf relative to what might be done, um, if we reconsider it some of the grant requests. I was looking in my files to see if I had saved any of that. And I couldn't find it quickly. But that's, you know, for me, that's the trade - off. It's, you know, at best maybe 10 to 12 families a year. And if we're successfully do that over the 15 year life of this, um, of this tax, you know, that's a lot of people. I think that's optimistic though, that while actually be able to, to place that many people in homes. So for me, it's, it's still about the kind of the trade - off. Thank you, Commissioner Levy. Commissioner Stolzman. Thank you. Um,

1:58:39so every housing campaign I've ever watched has pictures of teachers and firefighters in it. And I have never seen anything done for teachers in firefighters. And this would. So I'm excited about it. And it seems like Real Action. And I think we should move it forward. I agree there needs to be a bright line. I think it should be for public service employees, which would include state federal municipal County employees, public school employees, fire district employees and water district employees and library district employees. And then I would put a period. And I understand that the people that I drew out of that line are going to be mad and the people drew in the line are going to be happy. But I think there are different programs for different things. And I think this would be for public service employees. I support that there would be some AMI limit. Um, I think it would be really great if we could see if the jurisdictions that we end up agreeing on that are employers would all want to participate adding a 500, 000 each. Like it seems like if we asked, um, other, like if we ask the state, if we asked CEU, if we asked City of Boulder, if we asked Longwat, they might want to contribute, um, because they have a lot of employees

1:59:46as well and see the issues that are created when employees don't have access to housing. So I think we have an opportunity to grow the 500, 000 by just asking other people to give us money for this program. And I think they would. And in that spirit, I think asking the community foundation, if they would consider fundraising to match our 500, 000 with 500, 000 in philanthropic giving would be a good idea too. And then we can serve more people. That's all I have to say. Thank you, Commissioner Stolzman. Um, so having heard from all three of you, it sounds like the, um, general support among the board to continue to flesh out a program. For public service employees to assist with home ownership. I'm hearing two commissioners really define that as government employees. I heard all three of you define it as government employees.

2:00:38I think Commissioner Lo Chamine, you're thinking more about local government employees, but I heard the other two commissioners talking about as long as it's a government employee, but excluding, um, employees of nonprofit organizations or other, you know, other, other, uh, helpers. Thank you. Thank you for giving me that word. So with that, I think I would ask, uh, I think Commissioner Stoltzman introduced the concept of partnership that I didn't hear the other two commissioners weighing in on. I wonder if you could just talk amongst yourselves about, you know, a listening partnerships in the funding pool for this type of a program. And whether you would like staff to put some effort towards that. Yeah. Thanks. And I, I, I think this is an innovative way to address the workforce issues that we have as one local government agency. And asking for, you know, 500, 000 or maybe staff wants to look at it and trying to figure that out. And I'm totally in support of that. Um, that to me is exactly what we could be doing is influencing some of our partners. I've had conversations with some of our partners that are also, you know, St. Brian and others who, and when I ask, what are you doing about workforce housing front range in the, you know, first and main transit and all the

2:01:55things that are happening. It's like, Oh, now we didn't, we haven't, like, we're not thinking about that yet. And so I think this is absolutely the way to start influencing. And I think the partnership, whether it's community foundation or if this is going to include state, I mean, you know, all municipality, um, then there might be some other foundation partners that we're going to state level that would be, you know, we could consider as well. But I think that would be great to see a proposal from stuff connected to that idea. Commissioner Lee, would you care to win on that partnership idea? Oh, I think a great idea. More money. Serve more people. All right. I'm going to turn to staff. Any other direction that you feel like we need at this point, Gwyn. Just trying to look over all the questions that came in here. No, provided that we have, uh, general approval to kind of move down this path. Um, I think I have what I need to start, um, building out a program outline that you could, um, that would have, you know, obviously quite a bit more details. And I think could answer a lot of the questions that came up today and then bring that back for, um, your consideration. I do have one more

2:03:26question. I think actually, um. It, I don't, you know, I don't know what the board's intent was when we decided in our allocations that we were going to do 500, 000 dollars a year for innovation funds. And, you know, we said this allocation is for three years. And then we'll revisit. And that's the next topic or two years. And that's the next topic. Um, I think as we've been talking, it sounds like there's an assumption that we've made a decision on how we would use 500, 000 dollars a year for the duration of the tax. And if that's, that question was and put to us, uh, so I think there is still a question of how long do we want to do this? I think, and because there may be some other ideas and opportunities that might come along, I'm still, I'm going to try to do my own work, I guess, on, on, on, uh, figuring out how to work with a community land trust to do a shared equity model since nobody else wants to do it. Um, but I will say, Claire, well, just not that nobody else wants to do it.

2:04:43I don't think we have the internal resources to do it right now. Cause I actually, it is a really intriguing idea. So I just want, I don't want to think that we discounted your idea because we do feel it's very intriguing. Okay. No, I will work. I will work on it. And what I, and I don't, I'm not saying, Oh, it wasn't my idea. So I don't like it. But I'm just saying there may be other opportunities to do something else. And so I think we should decide at some point along the way here, like how long we want to run this program. And, you know, we'll get results, you know, every year of what we've done with the program and go that way. Just that, you know, 500, 000 dollars isn't enough to do the shared equity type of housing. But what I do hope and what I'd like, I'm just going to try to explore on my own if I can manage to do that is that that could fund like a feasibility study. Because the financing models are just horrendously complex. And we've never, we've not done this. But I think like the urban land conservancy, uh, with Aaron Maripal. And the people that we could partner with that we could do a feasibility study. And we could, um, and that's what

2:06:08we would use that 500, 000 dollars for, and then I assume that in order to move it forward, uh, in entity, you'd have to sell some bonds. You know, I know we don't have the money to do that now. But that was like, let's figure out what would it take to actually do this? Because I think through that kind of a model, we could provide home ownership opportunities for way more people than this. So, um, so that's just way too much time to say, I think we ought to be considering how, you know, with the duration of this program and can keep the door open on considering other things. Well, and just to say what I've said about that topic, I look at that as different than a 500, 000 innovation fund program and think we should be talking about doing things like that instead of continuing to use Lytech funding on these projects, which creates a whole separate set of issues. So for my perspective, what I'm looking at the whole portfolio saying we should be moving toward a different funding model with our base funding and how we serve the community and how we consider our approach to financing project. So I also have, I also, when you said no one supports me feel like there has been a lot of interest and

2:07:25support. I just think it's about whether that's this pool of money or how we would transition the way we approach financing affordable housing projects as the housing authority. And then as the housing department. So I'm super interested in what you're saying as well. I was just going to, I got back to my notes from, well, my fellow commissioners were speaking. And so I am kind of curious, and if you're already thinking this, let me know. I just didn't hear the word. So I just wanted to ask on the, you talked about as a silent second, which I agree. And I'm wondering about if we were going to do this in - house, like how could it be created for as an employment employee benefit. Like part of that program and used to have a different name, but I'm just like, use this a conversation to have with HR and some other folks about how would we, you know, how would, how would it be part of that? Again, it wouldn't be only four employees, but is there an avenue there? I'm just trying to think about the capacity. So it was just, um, a note that I had. And then, um, just, and now I don't know whose question it was, but it was, um, just in regards to what I, the way I speak,

2:08:31that language is owner occupancy affidavit, um, and so I can forward like Fannie Mae's example of what they used after the mortgage crisis as just something. And we could change the terms just based on, you know, whatever that proposal that comes back. So just a couple notes that I have written down, my folks are talking. Thank you, Commissioners. I would like to move us to our other conversation today. And I'm, I'm recognizing, I believe you have a hard stop in about 10 minutes. So there's not a lot of time to talk about, um, affordable and attainable housing tax funding for next year. Um, Michelle is here to support that conversation. And what I might suggest is rather than going through the slides. We just cut to the chase and get some initial thoughts from the three of you. Um, into the mix so that this could come back to you for decision making in the 2027 budget process. So I'm going to click on through the slides. If that's all right, Michelle, go right ahead, Michelle Alexander, Deputy Director of Housing. I'll get right to just a reminder of what our current, our current funding structure is for the 2025, 2026. I said on the slide. Okay. Um, we have a five percent going to reserves.

2:09:57And this is allocated for 38 percent to Boulder. City of Boulder Boulder, sorry, Boulder County's 38 percent. City of Boulders 32 percent. So the question that we are trying to get to jumping through all the slides is if we would like, if you would like to maintain the current AHT funding structure beyond 2026, or if you would like us to explore different options, I'm hearing commissioner Levy say there might be possible exploration of different funding structures. Well, how did you want us to get through this quickly? I would like each of you to give us like two minutes a piece. And Commissioner Levy, this is, you know, in our rotation, this topic is yours to start. So if you want to kick us off. Oh, okay. I thought this was still the same topic. But yeah, I can be very, very brief. Um, I, I, um, I mean, I think the basic breakdown is the right breakdown. You know, do we want to fiddle a little bit with it? Yeah, maybe I like the reserves.

2:11:09We set that aside. That's a one - time set aside. Right. So, um, so that, that 835 K can be added somewhere. And so, um, I don't know where the greatest need is. My only question I think we're at the board landed, um, at least two commissioners very strongly and me a little bit more reluctantly of, you know, keeping that 500K. But my only real question on the support of services, you know, there was some disappointment when we opted to spend that money in - house. And I know we tried to make sure we were serving all the community by serving people on vouchers regardless of who issued those vouchers. But I wonder if we could examine whether sharing some of that with the other two housing authorities for any of their residents services program supportive services programs, you know, just whether there's some room to do that. I think that would maybe help smooth over some, uh, ruffled feathers. Thank you, Commissioner Lee. Commissioner Stolzman. I think we have to revisit it in the context of the budget. So as we all know, we're facing a structural deficit and there's general fund money that goes into housing. And so I think we have to understand the reality of the situation and like what dedicated funding is for and what general funding is for and

2:12:47with the federal changes that we've seen and more coming on changes in human services and housing and all of these areas, we've got some tough conversations ahead. So I think inevitably we're going to need to look at dedicated revenue funds, um, picking up things that may have previously been supported by general funds to address some of that structural issue. Um, so I think if there are changes in that space, that would then necessitate us looking at how we've divided the funds. I also think we've seen some, um, like with the targeted grants to the larger jurisdictions, uh, Boulder and Longmont. We've seen some delays in Execution of projects and like basically just sitting on money. So I'm not sure that's the most efficient. And perhaps if we pooled the grant targeted funding in a different way, we could make sure the dollars are going into projects when they're needed and that people are able to plan effectively and not just sit on money in the bank. So I think the conversation to be had about, you know, the cash flow issue that comes. It's not that the projects don't ever get done. It's just that if you're sitting on the money for five years, somebody else could have used it and we could have used different money for that. So I think there's a conversation

2:13:56to be had. And I think it necessitates looking at the whole division of funds. And so I'm, I'm hearing you talk somewhat about services in the context of where there might be federal funding gaps or other things to address. And also wanting to revisit the Capitol, in my understanding. Yes. I think we have to. Yes. Thank you, Commissioner Sultan. Commissioner Lee? Lord, Germaine. That's okay. Yeah. Thanks for the bringing the topic. Sorry that we're short on time, but I think just giving some direction. I would like to have a larger conversation. I agree with that piece. I, what I'm interested in, I'll be looking for is what staff, and I'm also looking at Jana, because you have been as a county manager. And like, what is it that you all heard in this first period of time that couldn't be funded or wasn't funded. And I'm thinking for me, my recollection of one of the delays of funding was, and I might, this might not have been exactly how it was presented, but my interpretation was land banking. And I don't think that was completely, um, not allowed, but we maybe the criteria hadn't set up, but I, so I, I would be interested in that and maybe considering, cause I think we did a 12 month. Like the money has to be set in

2:15:1112 months. And so whatever those conversations were, do we need to think about extending that time? I'm not saying yes or no, but just to have a good understanding of what people were confronting, um, in regards to the use of funds. It seemed like there was an issue with the way, um, negotiations happen with land or parcels that was making it hard for one of our partners to be able to like apply because we wanted more information than they felt like they could publicly give. So are there any of those learnings that we need to consider that we could potentially change our process, not changing the balance language, obviously, but anything in our criteria. So that's what I would be looking for to be able to make a decision. I do agree with what Commissioner Salisman said about like, we also have this major budget piece that, so I think understanding what, what we may need to, um, consider for this funding. And a reminder, the taxes Boulder County. And so we are trying to do all this regional work and take care of all of the different supports services for, for our partners and residents around. So I do think we'll need more than 10 minutes, but hopefully that gives you a little bit of, of what my perspective is and determining if we

2:16:23need to make any changes now. Yes. I appreciate the feedback. And one clarification, commissioners in the capital allocations, the timing to spend is 24 months, not 12. So I just wanted to make sure, um, if that's something, I mean, that's something that you could revisit in the context of wanting to get the dollars out the door quicker. But in our current agreements, it's 24 months. Thank you for that. And it's 24 months from when they sign. Okay. Okay. Well, so just to understand, like, was that a barrier for somebody? Or was it more time than, you know, we're, were other folks able to get the money out in 12 months, as an example, just to help us a little analysis would be great. Sure. Thank you. Anything else on this topic, commissioners? Just quickly on the timeline of when, if we were going to make changes, when would stuff say here's kind of when we need to know, thinking about the budget and everything else that could be impacted. I think if you're seriously considering changes for capital allocation, um, next year, it actually would be good to know that in the next month or so, the advisory committee typically meets, um, second half of August, typically being the last two years, right? So we could change that timing. But I think that's the one

2:17:46timing consideration that I really have is that annual advisory committee meeting and getting that feedback back to you in time for your decision making in October. Um, so that's, that's the one timing piece. Okay. And I think for me, because on the HT, originally we talked about a million dollars for the innovation fund, like then both of the 500 and the million. And I feel like every time we have a conversation my aged, somebody in the room says 500, 000 dollars is not enough to make the impact that we're really wanting to. And so I am interested in understanding that as well if we need to change that number. And that might not be the number, but somewhere, um, and just even in this conversation today, I was like, Oh yeah, I agree. Maybe we need to think about a higher number than 500, 000.

2:18:34So it's all connected. And so in the analysis from previous topic today, um, it would be helpful. Like when I just quick look at online and Appleder County properties, everything from mobile home from war to superior to Louisville, the 230 properties right now under 500, 000. So when you're talking about like how much impact could we make? Um, I think we have a great opportunity and would be interested in what that number could be or might need to be. Okay. Commissioners, um, those were our housing topics for you this morning. Thank you. So we will be in recessed until one o'clock. And we are recording. All right, we have returned from our recess. We are still the Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County. We still have three commissioners present in the hearing room. And we're ready to take up our afternoon agenda, which is a work session on the alternate trails pilot project that Baldin is here to kick it off. Thanks. Thank you, Commissioners Yvette Bowden, Deputy County Administrator.

2:20:02Happy to be with you this afternoon and joined by my colleagues. We're going to jump right into it by me turning it over to Parkstopin Space Director, Jason. Great, good afternoon. Jason Sook. Director Parks and Open Space. We are here just to discuss one thing today, and that's the alternate use pilots. Survey results an options. Before we begin, I just wanted to say a big thank you to our team. We put a lot of thought and effort into this and I'm really excited to be here with you today to discuss it. And with that, I'll pass it over to Jarrett Roberts. Thank you. Thanks. Christian. Jarrett Roberts, Deputy Director of Community Amenities. Pleasure to be here. I'm also joined behind me by Bevan, our lead Ranger and a Resource Protection Division Manager. And Michelle and Education Outreach Specialist with the Department. We're going to jump right into it. So we're here to talk about the Alternate Use Pilot and the Objectives Today we want to recap some of the findings from the Community Engagement. And then we want to present the pilot options, our alternatives that staff have come up with as ideas for you.

2:21:05And then we're looking for board direction, your direction on the next steps. So really quickly to go back in time, committee engagement. We launched a while ago, a community engagement process that included an online survey and two open houses. We got amazing community input, including over 5, 000 or 7, 500 survey responses, and then 300 participants at the open houses. Super strong participation from all across all user groups. And then great community input and feedback. And just as a reminder, this is not statistically representative of the Community or even the visitors at the park. It's just the feedback from the community through this process. What we heard, the respondents were frequent users. So a lot of people using the parks, at least 79 to 80 percent of the time. The primary activity was 55 percent biking And there were a lot of perceptions of other users using the park in a safe way. And at the same time, our open ended questions, we heard a lot of concerns about speed, closed passing and crowded segments.

2:22:14We also heard a lot of opinions and ideas about the, I'm sorry, can you all hear me, okay? It feels like it's cutting it out. Okay. Um, we also heard a lot of opinions and ideas about the pilot itself. Um, a majority of respondents preferred no pilot location or opposed the pilot. Uh, those that did support it preferred fixed days. Uh, even an odd schedules, something that was simple and easy to understand. There was a strong interest in education. Um, and then a desire for clear communication on what the pilot would be. Um, there was support for some other ideas, including sight lines and trail design. And then we heard a lot about, um, equitable access. So making sure if we're doing something for one user group, we consider it for other user groups at the same time. So as we looked into developing alternatives, this community input was one big piece of it, but we also took into account, um, opportunity cost. So everything we do means we can't do something else. Um, how easy it is to understand the consistency for both staff and the public. And then how measurable these would be.

2:23:09And so we took all this and we came up with these alternative options that I'm excited to present to you. Um, these are just for you to think about as options. So alternative one, we came up with is directional loops at Heil. These would be monthly rotating directional loops for the ponderos and wild turkey trails at Hyle. And we'll show, show you in a map in a second. And at the same time, we would promote the hiker and equestrian use on the current unnamed access road. So the accessory that already exists there. It already allows equestrian and hiker use. We just haven't promoted it. Um, but it is allowed to use a lot of people do use it already. Um, just as some background, we're already doing some directional loops that do rotate monthly on the Overland Trail. So this is something both our staff, our Rangers go at this. They're in change of this.

2:23:50Kevin actually was going out to change this recently and took this picture. Kevin Grady, our ranger at, at Heil. And then the public is used to it as well. This is a map of Hyle. You can see in the upper left - hand corner where we are at Higher. And if you zoom in, the Ponderous loop is on the left on your screen. And the Wild Turkey is on the right. And then where they intersect in the middle, they both share that and share that center segment, which is actually the Westernmost part of the Ponderosa Loop. Um, so what we would have is we would have these, uh, these two trails be directional loops. And they have to be counter directional because they share that center section. And Jason and I were trying to figure out how to show you this. And we decided we would plop some little hikers and bikers into Equestrians down there. And then have them move around. So as you can see, one month we would have one, one of the loops go clockwise and the other one go Counterclockwise.

2:24:39That allows those users to share that center. Um, that center section. And then at some point they would switch, um, we would switch the monthly arranges go out there and switch the signs. And it would be directional the other way. The directional use would only be for bikes. So Equestrians and hikers could go whatever direction they want. The concept here is that you would know which way bikes, which are typically the fastest moving user group are coming. And so you could choose whether you want to go with that or see those, those users coming. Some advantages, it maintains full access for all user groups. Um, the directional loops are consistent with what we already have at that part reduces those head on encounters as we talked about low opportunity cost. So this one isn't a big, we don't have to cut other things to do this as much. Um, and it keeps the trails open everyone as we already mentioned. Um, it may not fully address the concerns about speeder crowding is one of the considerations. Option two, this is entirely at higher ranch. So this is our option where we keep everything at one location. In this option, um, we would make the Wipidi and loop drills, um, hiking in equestrian only in addition to some trails like the Lycan Loop that are already,

2:25:47um, hiking equestrian only. And at the same time we would make wild turkey and picture rock in the overland loop. And the schoolhouse loop and the skills loop all bike only. And this would happen on Thursdays and Thursdays was chosen because we already have Batasso on Wednesday. So we heard some feedback that's spreading the days out would be a good idea. So here's higher value ranch again. If we zoom into that northern section, which is the picture rock section, again, this, this loop coming in, which is kind of a lollipop would become, uh, biker only. It does share that center section. So that would remain multi - use. Um, so anyone could go on that. Again, we can plop some bikers down there and see them go around. They can go any direction they want.

2:26:25And, but they're, they will remain in the northern part of the park on the picture rock trail and the wild turkey loop. At the same time, if we go to this other insection, we can see the Overland Schoolhouse and Skills Loop. The proposal here would be to make these bike only. This way, if bikers show up to this other and part of the park, they have a place to go that is solely for bikers as hikers would have a place we'll talk about in a second. So again, we can plop some bikers down and they can do these loops. For hikers then, the center section, the Wipidi Trail would become hiking only. Um, it would go up and become a loop with theosa loop. Again, we would share that center section with bikers and hikers.

2:27:04You could potentially do the out and back where you reach the top of the ponderosa loop and then turn back around. And then you could have an entirely hiking experience. Uh, the trails like the Lycan loop would also remain hiking only. Some advantages of this option number two. It's simple clear and predictable. It's one location. So people know this is only occurring at one park. Makes it easier to communicate. It aligns with some of the trails mentioned through the community feedback process. Um, bikes still have a place to ride from both ends of the trailhead from both trailheads at Hyatt. Consideration, it limits travel through the park. So we did hear some feedback through community input about, um, long distance runners, people that are going long distance that they wouldn't be able to go through the park potentially. They would have to stop and turn around part way. Um, not all trails are open to all users all the time. There's less ranger presence on Thursday when, Wednesdays of the day when we have the most Rangers on, um, so that's a consideration for timing. And then it's not completely separated loop use because we do have that center part of the loop that we would share. Alternative three takes things to look at two different parks. So here we're going to

2:28:10have changes at both higher and hall. We would make the Wipidian ponderous trails just like we looked at at higher valley ranch. Um, on Wednesdays only, these would become hiking in equestrian only. And then we would look at Hall where we get a significant amount of bike use. And we would make bitter brush Nelson loop and antelope trails at Hall biking only on Wednesdays. So here, the two parks with hall being the northern and Hyal being the southern park. If we zoom into Hall, we can see Holo and we can see the Nelson loop and the interloop trail and the bitter brush trail. And these would all become bike only. We can pop our bikers on there. That one's going really fast. Guy setting a stravit record. And then if we zoom into the center section on Hile Valley Ranch, um, this would PD trail and there is a loop, at least the eastern portion of it would become hiking only. Um, we can plop our hikers down. The Lycan Loop would remain hiking only.

2:29:04This gives a significant experience for hikers to have a hiking. Hikers at an equestrians to have an experience without bikers. Advantages for, um, option three. It's a fairly simple structure for visitors. It is two parks, but they're close together. Um, if you show up to one, it's not like you have to drive across the county to get to the other. You just have to drive a short distance. Um, survey responses showed bitter brush was one of the higher selected trails for, for this pilot at Hall Ranch. Um, considerations it is two properties. So it does require more time to change and do a lot of the work and more infrastructure. Um, and then there were some concerns that showed up in the community feedback about fairness across locations. So those are the three options we wanted to present to you. And then in addition to those, we had, um, we, we threw the feedback and through what our staff discussions, things came about education and sight lines and outreach. And so no matter what option, um, is on the table. These are things we think we should consider as well, which include share the trail campaign. We already have this going, but we would put more effort into that and grow that. That's a campaign that talks a lot about how to be considerate to

2:30:10other users. Um, we have some new videos, social media and signage that could go out with that. Uh, we have an ambassador training program where we actually have staff and volunteers out at trailheads to talk to visitors that they're showing up and talk to them about how to be considerate to each other. Um, we are, we want to, um, begin a process to update our accessible trail information. And this aligns very closely with the, uh, the goals here because a lot of the accessible trails are trails where they're hiking only or they're separated use. And then we're doing a better job promoting and talking about those. So if someone is looking for a hiking only experience, that's one of the tools, um, provide to them to be able to find those experiences. And then we did through all this process talk a lot about, um, some of the concerns we heard were about sight lines.

2:30:54And so going on looking at where we think there are some of the biggest sightline concerns. That's where you can't see other users coming behind or in front of you and working on improving those. Then as we look at these options, um, some things that we at least considered when we were putting them together. And I hope to get on your radar as you consider them all is, is the simplicity for visitors. Um, if we make this too complex, it's going to be hard for people to follow and understand. And we might actually get more concerns where people are upset that they can't follow the rules or someone doesn't understand the rules. Um, infrastructure needs all of these are likely going to need at least signage and maybe some work on the ground. Um, we're trying to stay within existing designation. So not creating neutrals and things like that, uh, what are the impacts on the visitor experience, the opportunity cost. So when we do this, we're pulling staff and cyanid and other things from other projects. So keeping that in mind. Um, we did hear a lot about the equity of if we do one thing for one user group doing it for the other. And then the timing. So when and how long do we do this. So with that staff's recommendation was

2:31:50to move forward with alternative one, which is the direction of loops at Heil. We're recommending we do this in late August, October. This gives time from the implementation, but allows us to capture, um, use while it's still in the high use mode. Um, this is a clear, meaningful change on the ground. It's low opportunity cost. So it does require work, but it's not pulling the resources away from too many other projects. And it's consistent with our existing practices there. And with that, I'll turn it back to a vet for some questions. Thank you. Thank you, Jared and Jason and full team. We really appreciate the communities input in helping us bring forward these thoughtful considerations for you. We have a couple. Maybe move the either street clouder or move the microphone. Sure. Thank you. Um, so we have a couple of questions for you today.

2:32:40First, um, whether or not the commissioner support staff recommendations around alternative one. The second question would be whether or not you support evaluation with any pilot. We wanted to have an evaluation mechanism. We're recommending visitor experience and the time frame from late August to October. And with that and looking at your earlier session this morning looks like we're starting with commissioner Stoltzman. So if that's okay with you, Commissioner Levy will do that. In these work sessions, the County Administrator Deputy County Administrator, you run the show. Great. I just happen to sit in the middle. Thank you so much for that. So we'll start with you, Commissioner Seltzer. Thanks so much. I really appreciate the community feedback that we've received a lot of different perspectives, um, from people and the thing that brings them all together is love and appreciation of our open space and nature.

2:33:38And so I'm really grateful to live in a community that values that and has chosen to tax themselves to preserve and protect that and to have access to nature and biking and hiking in equestrian and all the things. Um, I also am really proud of people for writing letters to the editor and talking to each other and resolving a lot of conflicts amongst yourselves. I think the letters to the editor have been great. I would encourage them to continue on. Um, for me, a lot of times on every topic, it's not just this topic, but people will say like, well, what are you going to do to protect us or to save us or this, that or the other. And the thing that I think is really important for people to understand is that the government is not going to save anyone or protect anyone or do those things. We as a community are going to do that with each other. And so engaging with your neighbors and being kind and considerate and doing selfless things for one another and leaving things better than you found them is how we're going to do that. Um, so I do think the dialogue among user groups and the communication, um, around the community is really important and seems to have been really valuable through this process. So

2:34:41I'm glad that that discussion has started. And I would invite more discussion in the community. But at this time I wouldn't proceed with any of the alternatives. Thank you. Commissioner Loch. Thank you. Thanks a bit. Thanks Jason and team for being here and for providing just an update. I wanted to go a step backwards if we may and just have some conversation. This is just our work session. Um, I would like to hear just a really brief articulation of what are we trying to solve. And stuff is working really hard and they're doing amazing work. It's, it's really a question for me to understand like what are we what are we trying to tackle? Um, I don't, I don't, um, disagree with the fact that Boulder County voters are very generous in the way that they choose to spend their money and taxes. And we have this huge opportunity to Boulder County Open space. But it's a genuine question of just because that'll help me frame kind of where I'm going. And so that's my first question, please. Thank you. Um, would you like to go forward or would you like me to post that to staff. I would love to hear from staff. And if, and I will also accept the responsibility as a board, if we haven't been clear about what we're trying

2:36:01to accomplish with open space and the questions around use, I'm open to that too, but it would be great to hear what you all are working on. Thank you. Jason. Go ahead. Sure. Thanks Mart and good question. Um, when we started, we, we were given, we were asked to explore this. And as we started to explore it, I think it was a little vague what we were exploring at first. But one thing that's come through in this is that the voices that are not being heard, um, and then that came through in the open houses and the surveys that there are people that may have a perception that they don't want to show up to a trail for certain reasons. And so I think through this process, we've, we've actually engaged with a community that we haven't had a chance to talk with. And those voices came through. And so I guess when we were asked to explore this, the idea was to get the community input to hear from you all as to what a pilot could and might look like. It wasn't a go do this right away. But to start this conversation with our community and rather than us as an agency, just go make a decision, have a dialogue, um, and I think that's what we've done. And I'm very proud

2:37:03of that. And I'm, I'm proud of our staff for showing up and being part of that dialogue. And I'm super proud of our community for showing up, um, with an amazing amount of passion and sharing that with as a staff. So I think what we were asked to do is to explore it. And I think we've done a really good job at doing that. Thanks, Chair. Sure. Thank you so much for the question. Jason Surks and OpenSpace to add to Jarrett's great response there. What has come through, I think, from our ability to engage with community, have different ways to provide, um, information and feedback to us is, you know, there's a lot of different stories out there. And I think our job is to try to collect that information and, you know, and try to find the right balance that makes sense for, um, the different users. So we've heard a lot of feedback, you know, from biking communities about, um, the uses that we have, you know, the, the, the, the interest in, you know, in trying to maintain and to preserve that use as well as others who aren't coming to the trails for certain reasons and how they would like to access the properties and how to balance that, you know, perhaps they're younger with children, perhaps the, um, other folks

2:38:15who are worried about coming or a perceptions that may be untrue. And so trying to think about these different things and balance it so that we're, you know, doing our best to, to provide, uh, recreational access for, for all the different users. Yeah. Thanks for that. And part of the reason why I'm asking is because like the why, why, and that can help us with the what. And maybe the how. Um. And some of the open space folks have heard me say this, um, and I don't know if I've shared it with you, Jason, as a new director, but I didn't know Boulder County Open Space Trails until I started this job. And I've lived in Boulder County since 1996 off and on. So it's not that I don't know. It just was not my experience. I didn't feel invited. I wasn't clear to me.

2:39:01And it never occurred to me. And it will never occur to me to go on someone else's land and destroy. And take like chop down trees and make your own trails. So that is just so far away from my personal experience that it just raises all these questions for me. And I'm a runner. And I'm becoming a hiker. And so in 2026, that was really part of this work was like, let me go figure out like I'm getting all kinds of emails about this wapiti. What does that mean? And so I have been out on these trails walking. And, and so I, and I was out in what Mount Sunnythus this morning and hiked up there. And I had more issues with dogs in my trail and my way. Um, on that rocky path, then I did with, with other conflict per se. But my interpretation is that we're trying to address potential conflict. And I just haven't experienced it. And so Memorial day early in the morning, I went up to Wapiti. And I did see three bikers and everybody was like super friendly.

2:40:07And so I just haven't experienced what my email box tells me maybe the perception you were talking to, Jason, about what we're trying to do. And for me, I'm still consistently concerned about who has access to Boulder County Parks and OpenSpace. And I feel like our team has done a really great job of figuring out who is that and how do we create this relationship and build trust and maintain in all other projects that we do in land use and some of our management plans. And I'm still going to be, I'm still going to favor people to go out to open space, no matter the age of the stage of life. Because my belief is a lot of the folks out there and I had a meeting with somebody earlier this morning on this topic.

2:40:54I think most Boulder County Residents have the same value of conservation. And I still through work with no co - places in 2050 over the last five years. I'm still interested in who doesn't have that access and who doesn't understand what the opportunity is. And so if it's biking, that's going to get a young person to like go learn about open space. I'm interested. If it's hiking, I'm interested. If it's rolling, I'm interested. And so for me, the opportunity here is, what do we provide? And we've got some great emails. We've got some great ideas. I think the bells are the, whatever the, like different mechanisms would be really helpful. Um, so I'm more interested in how do we make sure that people have the opportunity to conserve and protect our wildlife and the habitat and all those pieces of it, but also I want to see people have access to use. So given that in these different alternatives, do you feel like there's an alternative there that meets that. And this is just one person on the dais. Or do you think that we need to spend some more time thinking about other alternatives?

2:42:11And I also want to just clarify in a separate question is, are we only focusing on Boulder County Parks and OpenSpace? I kind of heard it. Like what we have right now, you talked about it as existing use versus extension or expansion. And would that be a separate conversation. Or work plan or something else. Uh. Thank you so much, Jason Sook, Director Parks Offense. Thanks so much for sharing your perspective. I think that's really valuable. And I really appreciate it. Um, in terms of, I guess your second question, and you know, new, we're focused on existing use now. That's what we were directed and asked to do. We're doing that. Um, I think as a broader perspective, you know, we want to think about how best to manage open space, uh, in the future now and in the future. So I think we're, you know, very open into, you know, continuing dialogue and understanding, you know, what can meet those goals that you've outlined that you've outlined commissioner Stolzman today and continuing that thought process moving forward. So this is one piece asking to explore a specific pilot in one area. But very open for discussion and thought down the road. To your, to your, uh, your other question, your first question. I think we are, um, as staff, uh, recommending alternative one at this

2:43:38point. And that was, we thought the balance of the, um, responses that we received, the information that we got, um, you know, the way that we felt that we could, um, balance the information and input that we receive from the community. Um, for the reasons that I think Jared so well outlined earlier. Did you have any other, um, follow up you'd like to add? Yeah. The only thing I would add is, um, Jarrett Roberts, Parks and Open Space. The only other thing I would add is we, those pieces at the end I talked about with the education and the sight line. Like those were consistent enough that we're not an option. So we want to do explore those regardless of the options. Like whatever option, if we do nothing, if we do something, we think that those are things we should probably look into because those start to get into the education and how to get people to talk and work together. And that's like all trails. It's not a specific use. It's creating a culture of sharing and helping each other out on the trails. Thanks for that. The other question I had was just around, like how are we, whatever alternative is chosen or if it's an alternative yet to be discussed. How are we working with the different mountain bike groups. And

2:44:49different other user groups. And are you anticipating anything different in a masking that just because again, in the emails, there are some, a lot of suggestions about how we can work with groups. And my belief is there probably is some conversation and communication. And it seems like the ask for stronger, um, either relationship or collaboration maybe. One of the groups, uh, one of the, one of the emails suggested specifically some different area groups and doing some research. And so I've done that and talked with some folks out in Salida. Um, are you using volunteers for a lot of different work? And it sounds like there's a lot of interest, which all things Boulder County. There's a lot of interest in people volunteering and getting involved. And some just curious, maybe Jarrett for the education and that list of, I think there's my four items on the slide. If you're thinking about that. And I also want to ask about there was, um, ask about additional enforcement. Kind of, I think the way I interpret it was the question of how will we know? So if we were to go with alternative one, um, like how will we know if that's working and what would that mean from a capacity standpoint since we are doing budget cuts and layoffs, like how would we do that? And

2:46:00I don't know if that's something that you would come back with later or if you've thought about that. So I know that we are, thank you, Commissioner. I know that we already are working with so many groups and have heard from more through this process, but I will turn it over to Jared to just refine how we, that's specific to this work. Thanks to that, Jarrett Roberts. Yeah. One of the amazing things that came out of this is the dialect with the, we have an open to conversation like this with the community in a while, I think. And the passion and feedback that came out, we got those suggestions and ideas from the community and those requests for further, um, for the collaboration. We have amazing, strong relationships with a number of groups, including, I think Boulder Mountain bike alliances in the room. And we collaborate on having volunteer bike patrols that are out there educating people, um, we collaborate on volunteer projects. So the foundation of that exists. And then through this process, we heard that desire for, for more collaboration and more interactions.

2:46:57One of the best things that came out of this is that groups that we hadn't talked to reached out. And now that's the potential for us to explore different collaboration and further collaboration, which is great. Great. Thank you. Thank you. That's the questions I have right now. Thank you. Commissioner, did you have a position on the staff's proposal? Or are you satisfied by just those questions right now. Well, I was going to go back through my notes on alternative one and look at the advantages. And I think it was written as advantages and cons, but I don't know that I actually have that slideshow. We can pull that back up. If we could maybe look at that and I'm happy to let Commissioner, maybe go ahead as I'm just reading and then I can come back to your question if that's okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Levy. Yeah. Thanks. Um, I guess I want to, well, I'll start in a number of ways. One by thinking, uh, our staff in the community for all their interests in this issue. Um, it's, you know, obviously it sparked a nerve. And a lot of people got very interested in very excited. And I think as Commissioner Stolzman was saying, you know, that reflects a tremendous amount of really love and commitment to the resources we have

2:48:20in Boulder County, the open space. We have absolutely unparalleled land. And Vistas and Turain and diversity of wildlife and plant communities. And it's just like hard to imagine another place that has these resources under local ownership. Um, so, you know, we're, we are blessed beyond all measure here. And we have a lot of very, very passionate users of open space. And that's what I think we saw. I guess I'll sort of preface my remarks just with the fact that I've been a user at Boulder County open space. For many, many, many years. And, um, it's, and I've had the good fortune to be in the kind of health and shape that has allowed me to hike these trails for so many years. And I still hike them. Uh, I was on POSAC in 1994 when we purchased the hall in Hyle ranches and watched them go through the management plan process. And, you know, the excitement in the community for these resources was just amazing because they are amazing. And, you know, they, they hile a range, has all the elk calving areas. There's a wild turkey flock up there, um, you know, it's just in whole with, you know, it's got a, I'm just going to say more of a ranching history, maybe not really more of a ranching history. But they're both beautiful

2:50:07pieces of property, all of our properties are beautiful. And, um, and this, I mean, there have been some perceptions in the community reflected in letters of the editor letters to the County Commissioners that this is just a personal mission of mine based on my needs and desires. And it is not, um, I do bring my experience. We all bring our own background and experience to things. And I can say that over the many years since we added, um, hall and high to our open space. Um, there has been a decline in hiker use. And that's reflected in our visitor use. And, um, and people asked me over and over again, why can we not do at one of these two open space properties, what we did at Batasso. And, um, you know, create an opportunity for, uh, for some high coronally days. And because hiker access, I didn't look at the data for Hall, but at least at Heil, you know, it really has been declining. So, so that was, and I felt, you know, there are various things that I brought to the table as I got elected. And that was, that was something that a community asked me to bring forward. And it took a while to, um, get Parks and OpenSpace to put this on your very, very heavy agenda, but you

2:51:49did. And so that's, you know, that's just a little bit of the impetus, the background for it. So, and I think, you know, one of the things I've learned through this process and through the input that we've gotten from the Mountainbike community, Boulder Mountain Bike Alliance, um, you know, has been the question, which I think is a fair question of shouldn't there be some biker only days, because what was done at Potasso was hiker only, but bikers have to share the trail a hundred percent of the time. And, you know, I thought about that. And I thought, you know, I think that's a reasonable request. I know, I mean, I just, you know, as much as I appreciate when a mountain biker, when I meet one on the trail and they yield as they're supposed to, I realize that that's an interruption of what was, you know, a very enjoyable run down a trail or like a serious head down grind up a trail, um, and that is, you know, as much as for a hiker where I feel like, um, because of the speed and weight and whatnot that I and other hikers don't like to have to look over our shoulder and step off the trail. Bikers don't like to have to constantly stop and yield. So I thought, you know, that's, that

2:53:27was a, that was something I really took away from all that input. Um, I like that you've, uh, that you've incorporated that into both alternatives too and alternative three. I think that, uh, the idea of directional travel also can address a lot of problems. Um, different people have different preferences here. I know for me, I'd rather know that everybody's going one direction and I can go the opposite direction. So I can see that somebody's coming rather than, you know, kind of hear it over my shoulder and go, Oh, you know, how fast are they going? Are they going to, you know, what's going to happen. So I think directional makes sense. Um, I also, um, wonder, and I know we have very, very valid, legitimate concerns about Habitat Fragmentation. And, um, and, and that's, I mean, we bought these lands to preserve the habitat and to preserve the open space and to provide recreational access when it's compatible. But I, you know, I do wonder whether there are opportunities, you know, totally independent of this, um, of this project to look at, um, where places where we could separate users without harming, um, the habitat and encroaching onto a wildlife habitat. I mean, you know, it doesn't have to be huge spacing. It's not like you don't want to see one another. It's just, you

2:55:10know, separation on the trail. So I think the issue of directional travel, I'd like to understand a little bit better as to whether that's sort of maybe something that would be broadly desirable among Mountain bikers, regardless of, you know, days of the week or any of that stuff. Just because I did hear from some mountain bikers that like, it's, it's not good for them either to, you know, to meet on a, on a single track trail, um, because, you know, that's its own issue of that. So, um, so, you know, just a sort of, you know, a couple of questions that aren't alternative one, two, or three would be, should we explore whether on more of our trails we just ought to institute directional travel, you know, just for safety purposes. And, um, do we have opportunities to create some, um, some separated dedicated trails that, you know, would obviate the need to do some of these maybe hiker only biker only opportunities. Or, you know, I mean, that would be its own totally separate project. And you may tell me that you have so much on your plate. And that is a big job that that may not be possible, but we do have, um, I think a room full of people that would love to roll up their sleeves and volunteer to help

2:56:45on things like that. Um, uh, so those are some general thoughts and observations. I, oh, just a note about the access road at Hyle. I think it's very ambiguous the way it signed. I know it says, um, bikes prohibited or no bike access or something on that rail fence thing. But I have never known whether God are hikers in equestrians allowed here or not. I don't know. But I think, I think some signage there would help. Um, that's, that's just a totally, by the way. Um, so, you know, as far as what, what you've proposed, what you've presented to us, um, I mean, I do think it's important to start with the water we're trying to achieve. And what I heard most, um, was, I mean, most was. Don't do anything. We want everything we have and more. Um, but also, I mean, from, from, um, from hikers, it's, I want to be able to go back to these places I've abandoned. I mean, people mention walker ranch that they've abandoned, you know, hall and high all that they've abandoned. And, you know, and these are the opportunities in Boulder County where we can take longer hikes. You know, we have, we have a ton of great places for, you know, a three to five mile hike. But, um, you know, but so, you know,

2:58:38I think what was the goal? It's, it's to welcome back people who really feel like one user group has dominated and made it uncomfortable for others. Uh, so I think that is what we, what the goal was, I don't know from what you've presented, actually how you think you will determine if we go forward here, how you will determine that this has been successful. I have not heard and I did not read in the memo exactly how you would determine that the user experience has been improved. Um, so I think that needs some more work. Um, for me, um, I thought that what you presented in, um, alternative two, I believe it is. Yeah. Um, you know, leave, leave Hall Ranch alone. Um, you know, Hikers already have Nighthawk as dedicated hiking. And I think, I mean, I think that's that kind of solves that problem. Um, and, um, and it's a lovely trail. And, you know, so I, and I thought just doing a bidirectional, yeah, the designated direction in alternative one, um, you know, it, it addresses some issues, but I think if we want to try something out and see if it works, uh, I think we ought to try something just a little more, um, that might be a little more impactful. And I thought you did a really, really nice

3:00:31job with alternative number two of. Continuing, you know, creating that bike only experience on the wild turkey loop, which is gorgeous trail. And having an opportunity for, for, um, pad only on a portion of ponderosa and then having the shared use and then having the dedicated, um, uh, down on Overland and schoolhouse. So I thought, I thought that did a really nice job of balancing everybody's interest and giving everybody access and an opportunity to enjoy this open space. So I think that I answer all your questions. I believe so. Um, are you, to your favoring alternative two as proposed by staff? But in large part, I'm hearing you be in favor of more access and continuing to explore alternatives. Um, for interests and access of different groups. Is that correct. Yeah. I mean, that's not really part of what this project was about, but I, but I think that, you know, what we've surfaced is, um, some sort of pent up need here that, you know, we might do a better job of looking at, um, you know, I think so. Boulder County Parks open space has, you know, we, we control what we control.

3:02:09And I know, you know, there's an ongoing big discussion involving open space mountain parks. And a desire from the biking community to have more access to city of Boulderland. And I think that, you know, the kind of community - wide perception of very, very limited access is, you know, that perception is fed by people, like most people don't distinguish, like whose open space am I on here? And it's just sort of a general, like where are we allowed to ride or bring our horses or do whatever we do. But, um, so yes, I mean, I think we, on our lands, can't look at that, um, I recognize you have a whole lot of, uh, things on Parksanos race has a whole lot of things on their plate. Thank you, Commissioner. Just for point of clarification, I am hearing continued interest from all of you. And thanks for Community Input and a desire to continue to explore access, um, and conservation and all these interests that are there. I am also hearing that some of this may not be related to this project specifically. And Commissioner Levium, just curious, are you not in favor of the staff's alternative one and just in favor of these larger, um, thoughts and visions or are you specifically in favor of alternative two. I think I said that, that I'm

3:03:43unfavorable too. Okay. I think I also said that I think that, uh, I think I would like to hear more from Mountain bikers about whether directional loops in general might be helpful for a whole other reasons. I don't, I didn't from reading all the emails. I wasn't, I wasn't sure about that. So, um, I think directional travel could be helpful. Because of conflicts between mountain bikers going different directions. Thank you. Yeah. I, I also just wanted to, you had, um, in the memo about, you know, things you want to do regardless around, um, you know, increase, uh, education, et cetera. And I do think, you know, we have science posted with the kind of the triangle about yield and they made more, maybe some additional, um, explanation. And, you know, maybe some more trailhead reminders here that, um, signaling, ringing a bell on your left, whatever. Um, that is heard. As, um, here I am.

3:05:08It's not always, I think, I think it's not always understood exactly what that, that, uh, triangle of, you know, who yields to whom, um, is supposed to mean. Thank you, Commissioner. And I believe Commissioner Loachman, you had an additional point you would make. Oh, thanks. Well, and I just wondered, um, we board, we received an email from Wendy Suite, who's also here, but we referenced Mike Mountain Alliance a few times. This, or I guess it was this morning. Around 1130 and I didn't know folks had gotten a chance to read it. Yeah. I hadn't seen it until we were sitting here. And the reason I wanted to ask and I just forwarded it to you all too. Um. Is because, let's see if I can find it in here. I was talking about alternate, well, alternative zero, which was an option, which I think maybe Commissioner Sosman, you were, I heard you say alternative CR without saying alternative zero and really focusing in on the way this email describes. Education, which stuff brought that in like, what else could that look like? Um. Investing in solutions that the community broadly supports, which is education, improved child design, which would be kind of separate. The better sidelines, which you values. And I'm looking at Jarrett discussed that piece, etiquette campaigns, and that's come up. I've heard

3:06:35us talking about that a little bit to board expanded stewardship. And then also in the email is talking about the volunteers and getting folks involved in different ways. What I'm curious about on here, it's talking in this email. It's talking about, uh, simpler, maybe like a different version of alternative one, but a little of alternative one. And the way I'm interpreting this, it says rather than implementing mandatory directions that reverse every month, um, doing that a little bit different. So it just made me wonder from a user perspective. And I didn't know if there was a reason that you were thinking about changing the directions every month, if that was a habitat issue or if that was just a practice that Boulder County open space does on other areas. I didn't, I didn't know the reason why it was suggested for every month versus six months as a pilot. And what do we learn and what do we know? And then coming back. Thank you, Commissioner. So I'm hearing a question, Jared and Jason about, um, the directional consideration on option one. Do you have more to offer the. And if you don't, I'm so sorry, Jarrett. Would you go back to the slide right before? I think it's the one that's right before here, but that's still about one. Thank you. This one. I'll

3:07:44turn it over one. Yeah. Thanks. Okay, great. We'll make them dot snot moves. They don't, uh, Jarrett Roberts. That's a great question. We explored a couple of different options. Originally, we were thinking we had alternate weeks or days. There are a lot of different talks. Um, and what we decided was when we did this with the Overland Trail, our Rangers, um, Kevin Grady was in the room said, we initially settle, are we eventually settled on monthly because of the simplicity of it. And so we decided to follow that same suit here where the overland row, which is a little lower off the map here in the same area. Kevin goes out and changes that every month. Um, and he would do the same thing here. And that would being simple for everyone in the public to understand all these trails change directions on the same day. Um, in the same park. So it was a simplicity of implementation and simplicity of understanding. Okay. Thanks. And so it's a curiosity around for me simplicity is like, this is that direction that you go. Like I'm thinking about like a track. I don't think they change it every week or like it's, you just know you're going this way when you're at whatever facility in my mind.

3:08:50Is there a reason why it wouldn't just be one direction. Period. You certainly could express it as a desire for us to explore. But there's no, I'm just trying to understand if the erosion issue or something else that you all were trying to get to. Okay. Thank you. I see a nodding. Yeah. And the staff discussions there, we've gotten feedback in the past that when we would do direction one way, people that someone sometimes want to ride it the other way. And like we're never going to make everyone happy. But we heard that some people do like writing it one way versus the other way. Okay. Thanks. And I was just curious since I asked a question to the board too. I didn't. It looked like a commissioner. I saw you say yes, you had read that email and I didn't know if the conversation about it that you wanted to have together. Now that staff has it as well. Nope. Thank you. Thank you commissioner. So with that, Commissioner Loachman, did you have a preference there or an idea. I mean, if I, if I had to choose between the three that were presented, I would do alternative one and I would, instead of doing it monthly, I would just do it one, one direction. And the other piece, I think is if I've

3:10:10heard a couple perspectives on what the goal of this work is, I've heard access and I've also heard to address a perception of either conflict and or one group having more user access than another. And so I still feel like that's a little bit of a question. Um. And so if we're just trying to like get better user experience, cause that's another one I heard. The education campaigns and some of these other pieces of, you know, how do we incorporate volunteers to make sure that people know and address some of the conservation? Like that seems to me like that could be the pilot and then have a better understanding of, you know, what do we know from the survey that was done to a survey that's done after we've invested in some of these broader supports of the trail system in general. And again, I don't know if that would give you the information that you're hoping to get to determine if we really need to do directional or something different. With the commissioner, Loch Schumann. It appears that that is a similar recommendation as Commissioner Stoltzman had that perhaps we just explore, um, these improvements in the interim and maybe not implement a pilot, um, as proposed by staff or commissioner Levy at this time. Is that what you're saying? I think so. I'm

3:11:38part of, I mean, yes, I guess that's what I'm saying. And, and part of it, I feel like there's always, there's never one thing that's happening at the county. And the other piece that's happening with open space in our separate conversations is around this potential districting and this planning. And so that's kind of a piece on my mind, like the town of Netherland and like what's happening in all these other areas of our region of access and things like that. For me is also, those are all happening. And so what could we do to, what could we do as Boulder County open space to really bring more people in like you were talking about Jarrett? Like it sounds like there were some learnings in this process. And so how do we build on that. And get more information and get more, you know, I don't know exactly what those metrics are going to be for you all to be able to come back. But that seems like the most recent piece at this time. Thank you for that reminder, Commissioner, just as a reminder for all of you that is tentatively scheduled for July 21st, in which case the board would have an opportunity to think about our whole system and how you prioritize the different uses, values and access that you have all leaned

3:12:46into today and that we know is important to community. Um, with that, it does appear that we have two that are not recommending a pilot at this point, but I do see Commissioner Levy your hand. Yeah. Thanks. Um, I mean, I do, I guess I do wonder whether my fellow commissioners would just add a, at a minimum, um, embrace, uh, alternative one. Um, just to, I mean, I think it's the least impactful way to try to reduce, uh, the sort of the potential for the, you know, the head - on conflict or, you know, give folks an opportunity to decide hikers, bikers, what I rather meet someone, well, I guess not bikers. They'd have to go to the direction on the sign. But, you know, what I rather meet someone had on or would I rather be overtaken by a fast - moving bike. Um, I mean, I think that's, this is a question of putting in some signs. It's quite minimal. I mean, it's.

3:14:00Very little expense. And I think it at least gets something out of, out of this whole process. So I guess that's a question to you, Commissioner Loachuman. You seem to be leaning towards, uh, alternative one initially. Well, for me, what I heard and what staff would be doing anyway and I'm thinking about the slide with the different items. Like the reason for me, to me that signage couldn't be part of that and just making the user experience as clear and you kind of talking about that, um, earlier. So I, I wouldn't need an alternative one to support staff getting more signage up and doing more education, doing some of this etiquette. And I'll just like even this morning when I was up on Mouse Hanitas, I'm like, I don't know. Am I supposed to be stopping? I'm not supposed to stop being like, I'm running up. I'm running down. Now I'm walking. So I tend, you know, and I got the feeling that there was a lot of people that didn't know, like, are you supposed to be stopping? Are you, you know, who's, who is, so for me, there it is. An opportunity with, um, etiquette. I think the question I had, um, that maybe you'll have to think about a little bit later and come back to us is like, what kind of

3:15:09enforcement support or education or volunteers going out there to just kind of help people understand. Especially with the season already. In motion? I don't know. But I don't feel like we need to choose an alternative to accomplish some of that education pieces that I heard stuff talking about. No doubt, no question about that. I mean, additional sign edge and education. Um, does not, if that can be the case across all the alternatives and no alternative, I was, I guess, specifically, um, asking whether you would support posting some directional travel, which is proposed in alternative one. Staff can help if there's, if there's, if, if that feels like the way to, again, I still have this question about, do we, is that what we need. That would be helpful to me. But just based on where I'm the conversation is I want to have heard from staff and even in our dialogue. I, I don't feel like we need to choose any alternatives to choose an alternative today. Thank you, commissioner. And thank you Commissioner Levy for asking of your colleagues. I'd love to hear from Commissioner Stoltzman on that. Answer to Commissioner Lee. He is also no. Thank you. And I just want to say, I'm not saying choose alternative one just to choose an alternative. I'm suggesting that alternative one, I think would be

3:16:49an effective measure as a minimal measure. To address some of the conflict that we did here about in our many emails. And in the surveys and open houses. So it's not just because we've got three and we need to choose one, two, or three. It's because we did hear about conflict staff took that, um, took that into account and proposed this as the least intrusive. It doesn't limit anybody's access. Everybody gets to go everywhere every day of the week, all, you know, anytime sunn up to sundown, that is, um, but it just, it does address some of that sort of, you know, people are coming behind me. They're coming in front of me where are they coming from? Oh my goodness. I don't know. You know, it addresses that. I'm happy to reiterate my perspective just to elaborate on my nose to both of you.

3:17:52I mean, but I tried to say it in my remarks weighing in on this. I think what we need in the community is, um, community engagement with one another and collaboration with one another. And so that was why I was inviting discussion and encouraging, um, people to go out of their way to, um, communicate with each other and do things that are considerate and kind. And it would be things like posting positive messages on next door about positive interactions that you've had or giving thanks for something that you've noticed and seen and being intentional and deliberate about the way we communicate with each other and the way we agree and disagree with each other. So I think the first thing we need is to have, um, with one another, um, before we make any other changes. And that seemed like there were some good signs of that happening through this process that we're very encouraging to me. Um, and I think we need more of that. And, you know, people learned about the share the campaign, share the trail campaign. That's great. And maybe we'll get some more ambassadors signing up. That's great. I think it's critical that people take time to talk to each other so that there can be more time where people are entertaining ideas that they don't accept. And just sitting

3:19:09and thinking in that. And it's not really unique to this particular conversation. I think we need to do more of that. Um, in our community. And I think this presents an opportunity to elevate that. And those are, that's the step I would push, put forward is providing opportunities for community members to have dialogue with one another and advance these conversations amongst themselves further. And I think that will go a long way. Thank you, Commissioner. We have been benefited a lot from the community feedback. And I think I'm hearing some common themes around things that we can do in the short term to improve the experience like signage and the ambassador program and volunteers all in the respect of each other and the open space values that you've put this team in charge of. I want to thank you for your time and attention. I think we have direction this afternoon on how to proceed. We look forward to, um, bringing you more information. Do the district work and the other work that's coming forward, thanks to the parks and open space team for being here today and to community for input. Thank you. Commissioner Levy.

3:20:19Yeah. So this is our last agenda item for the day. So we are adjourned.