Transcript

0:00:15Commissioners, are you ready? I believe we are, thank you. Thank you so much. And we're recording. Okay, good morning. Today is August 25th, 2026. This is a meeting of the Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County. We have commissioners loan and Stolzman in the Herring Room. And Commissioner Levy joining remotely. And just a note for the record that I will be tearing the meeting for the businessmeeting portion of this and then leave the meeting when we get to the monthly Boulder County Housing Authority meeting. So we will start by sitting as the Eldorado Springs Public Improvement District Board of Directors, and we have a discussion item on our agenda. And it looks like Olivia Lucas is at the table. Thanks, Olivia. Yes, good morning, Commissioners. I'm Olivia Lucas with the County Attorney's Office. And today I will be presenting you the question of approving Resolution 2026 - 003 for the ESP ID, or I've never actually said out loud, so I'm going to say SPId board to put, seek debt authority from the electors of the public improvement district. So some decisions today that all culminate in an approval of resolution 2026 - 003 as amended, hopefully. And that is to send the question of district debt to the voters, including the amount of the debt sought and the payback mechanism, which will be proposed

0:01:58as a special assessment. A proven certified ballot language regarding debt authorization, that's exhibit A to resolution 2026 - 003. And then. I have moved slides to the need for the debt, so we'll start there. So we're here before you, because back in November of 2025 about the Ldorado Springs Wastewater treatment plant got a notice of violation from CDPHE, which required improvements at the plant. Resident, we saw it resident input into different alternatives for how to come back into compliance. And they saw it, what was then called option three, which was to pursue improvements at the wastewater treatment facility. Those improvements were estimated to cost about a million dollars. The SPID does not have this amount of capital reserve. And raising rates or imposing fees alone would be insufficient to meet the timing requirements for CDPHE.

0:02:59We have negotiated that work would start in the spring of 2027, and hopefully be finished in November 27. After that public input, we also spoke this board and the Boulder County Board of Commissioners entered into an intergovernmental agreement whereby the SPID board agreed to seek this state revolving fund loan to finance the required improvements at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. Because the PID is a district, a government district, Tabor applies, and so requires that voter authorization be sought to incur a multiple fiscal year debt. Here, the SRF loan term is 20 years. And so we're requesting the SPID board send this question to the electors. Talking about the debt and the loan amount. So we have cost estimates from our outside consultant JBA for the work at the Wastewater Treatment Facility, and that, including contingency is currently estimated around 850, 000 dollars. At this point, they have 60 percent design finished and they're hiring a contractor to help finalize the design and do the construction. So these costs are not final project costs, but they're what are considered a pretty good estimate with a contingency in there. Originally, the staff, and you'll see in your materials that came with this item, staff was recommending for debt authorization, so under Tabor, looking not to exceed 1. 2 million, and that was really sort of contingency upon contingency

0:04:38upon contingency. So gave an enormous cushion of authorization undertaver so that should the issue pass, and we did need more. We would have room, so to speak. Then we had been speaking to the advisory committee along the way since November of 25, and had been talking about the million dollar amount. We had a public meeting on August 11th, and then another advisory committee meeting where members of the public attended on the 20th, and there was strong feeling among the advisory committee members and members of the public, they really, we needed to tailor the taber authorization question closely to the amount of the loan amount that we were looking for, which has always been, you know, not to exceed a million. And so with that strong feeling from the advisory committee, um, we've changed our recommendation much of the content of the memo and the resolution remain the same. However, we are now seeking debt authorization of a million dollars rather than the 1. 2 that's in the materials. We've confirmed with JVA that this would be sufficient for the project, um, and still gives a fair amount of cushion, um, in projected costs. Another area of input that we saw it from the advisory committee and the public was how the loan would be paid back. Um, so as a public improvement district, the SPID

0:06:16has statutory authority to levy a property tax, um, it also has statutory to impose special assessments. Um, the advisory committee and the members of the public expressed unanimous support for a special assessment method rather than a property tax to pay back this loan. Um, the A, you'll recall as commissioners over time, um, the Ldorado Springs Wastewater treatment plant was originally financed with a local improvement district that imposes a special assessment. And so folks are used to that mechanism. There's a weight already set up that, um, portions that money would be, you know, a different apportion amen amount based on the loan amount, but still a mechanism that, um, people remain comfortable with. For a PID, which we are, the special assessment mechanism is creation of an LID, um, which is what we've used in the past. So you will see in the materials and the, um, resolution language and the ballot language reference to local improvement district number three. And that would be created in order to set up the special assessment payback method. The PID though, in this case, is taking that action. So under CRS, uh, 30, 25, 12 point five, the way that a PID special assesses is to use the LID mechanism. So it's somewhat cumbersome, but gets the job done.

0:07:46Um, and is sort of one more, um, public meeting that will have, um, our business meeting, I should say, that will have, um, in November, probably after the election just to make sure that the ballot measure passes. Um. So just a quick visual, as you'll recall, this is the L'Arata Springs. PID Boundaries, which was the same as the original LID boundaries LID number three will have the same boundaries. So it's all the same parcels, um, and the same property affected by this action. Um, so the ballot language that is on the screen now is, um, from exhibit A to the proposed resolution 2026, 003. And the highlighted areas are what would need to be changed in order to, um, reflect the one million dollar debt authority. Tabor requires that we recite both the principal amount and the maximum payback amount and a maximum effective net interest rate. So one million dollars is the effect not to exceed principal amount. One, four, four, one, four hundred forty thousand is the not to exceed maximum payback amount.

0:09:08And we've put in here a net interest rate of 4. 0, which we don't expect to actually ever reach the SRF materials and the state interest rate is 3. 25. But again, this, if we sort of get it wrong, then we would be in, it would be a problem. So, um, we've had council advised that we seek a higher authorization for the higher interest rate, even though we expect a three point two five interest rate. Um, so the highlighted is the million, the one four, four. And then, um, we'll be asking you to approve resolution 2026 003 as amended. So that as amended language would be new from what's currently in your materials. Oh, yes or no. Um, so Board Action that we're looking for today, um, we are looking for the ESP ID board to approve resolution 2026 003 as amended and just wanted these next slides go through what is amended from what's in your materials and all the highlighted terms are what's amended. So all of the regular language is the same as what's in the materials. The highlights reflect the money essentially that we just talked about, the change from proposal of a 1. 2 million dollar not to exceed amount to the one million dollar. Totally payment cost. So recital E spoke to those numbers. Uh, recital G. And recital

0:10:41M. So again, all the highlights are the things that would be the amendments to the resolution and the non - highlighted languages, what's currently in the materials. Also we have resolving paragraph two, which talks again about the million dollars. Here we've changed and indicated the maximum net effective interest rate not to exceed 4. 0. So that reflects what's in the ballot. Again. And the not to exceed repayment amount. And then again, just, um, for completeness sake, we would also seek resolution 2026 003 that's in your, um, materials include this ballot language. That. Has, um, has the amended numbers a million and one, 440, 000. So, um, that is the, oh yes, no. So that's the end of my presentation on this. And again, the request is that you approve resolution 2026 003 as amended via the information in this slideshow. Any questions. Okay. Thank you, Olivia. Commissioners, any questions. Thank you. Thanks, Olivia, for the presentation and for the updates. Thank you. I just, the only question I had right now, I think was in regards to what I heard you talking about the presentation work has been finished. So it sounds like somebody's working on this. And that's part of that same total amount.

0:12:19That's correct. Yes. Okay. Yes. JVA engineering. We hired them. Early on. If you have specific questions, I think Taylor Leydenberg from Public Works is, is on the, um, is online. But we hired JVA and they've been working towards, um, this, these improvements. So yes. And so the SRF loan, the application date is October, um, but we wouldn't finalize, obviously, until, um, we had voter authorization and the work that JV has already done would be something that we could seek reimbursement four under the loan. Okay. Thank you. I have no questions. Okay. Great. Okay. Um, I think I just have one question maybe. And that's just in terms of going forward if the voters, uh, in the district approve this. So then we will have an LID in place that will levee that special assessment. And that LID will remain in existence for how long, how over how many years I think you may have said that, but just to remind me. Sure. Yes. The loan is a 20 year term. And so they would, the LID remains in existence as long as needed to pay back the loan so that the assessments go. All right.

0:13:41So then once the loan is paid back then we then the Board of County Committee or the Board of the Public Improvement District or is there no board of the LID. Well, yes, actually you have yet a third hat and you would be the PID board sitting as the LID board. But the LID would dissolve, um, once the loan is paid back. But the PM that would take an ancient of the, that would take an action of the LID board. That's correct. Cortisol. Yes. And, and we'll be back, um, like I said, in November to establish the LID. It's something that can be done at a business meeting. So, um, you'll see me again on that. Okay. Always a pleasure. All right. So I think we, uh, don't have any further questions. And I think we're ready for a motion on item four A. Move approval of item four A as amended. Second. All right.

0:14:36We have a motion in a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. So thank you very much, Olivia. That has been approved. Uh, Nick, we will, uh, turn to our consent agenda, which is 5a through E. And I have a motion. Move approval. Second. All right. We have a motion in a second on favor. Aye. Aye. So we have approved our consent agenda. Now we are to our discussion agenda. And the first is an appointment to the community action board. Programs administrative board. Boarding Robin. Thank you, Madam Chair Commissioners. Uh, Robin Valdez with the Commissioner's office. And, uh, this item number is the appointment to the Community Action Programs Administering Board. Uh, this board currently has five vacancies. And, um, we only received one application from Mark Lester who applied for a private sector seat. And the Border liaison is recommending appointment of this applicant following her review. And so this is now for your consideration. If you have any questions. Thank you, Robin.

0:15:55Any questions. And from me, thank you. I have no questions either. More aye. So we'll need a motion on four A. Move approval. Just to clarify. I thought I heard for A, but that would be six A. I'm sorry. Six day. Yeah. Thank you. Second. All right. We have a motion in a second one favor. Say aye. Aye aye. So thank you so much. Uh, you're not going to go far because six B is Board of Health appointment. That is correct. Uh, thank you. Um, this board has, uh, one soon to be vacant position at the end of this month. And we received two new applications for the at large position for this board from Megan Lane and Alex Cart Mitchell Pfeiffer. We also received one reappointment request from Lendy Hinmand. And you, Commissioners, had the opportunity to interview all applicants and, uh, now I bring this applicants to you, uh, for your consideration at this time. Okay. Thank you, Robin. Commissioners, has any questions?

0:17:05I just make some comments. I just think that the Lindy are current president of the Board is doing such an amazing job and worked through priority - based budgeting and a number of really significant challenges. And while all the candidates were absolutely fantastic, I think, um, with Lindy's leadership position at current, I think it's important to continue with Lindy in this role and just really thankful for the other people for coming out. They were also amazing and hope they apply in the future. Hey, thank you for that. Commissioner Luchimin, anything? I don't have any comments, but appreciate all the work in bringing the interviews. Great. And, uh, I completely endorsed the comments of Commissioner Stolzman. So we're ready for a motion on 6B. Move to a point, Lindy Hinman. Second. All in favor? Aye. So we have made that appointment. Yes. Thank you Robin. And next we will make an appointment to the workforce development board. Actually, several appointments. Um, this board currently, uh, this board currently has seven vacancies and we receive several applications for these positions. Um, I also want to take a moment to thank neurance science, who is the Borlie A son. And she really did a terrific additional work to, um, supplement some of the recruitment efforts that we do from this office. And, uh, as a result, uh, we

0:18:40received an application from Darien Finley for the vocational rehabilitation seat, which is required seed by the state. Timothy Kirk for labor representative seat. And the following applicants applied for several private sector representative seats. The applicants are baroniese algarantison. Daniela Carvajalino candle read Tam Lawal and Maria Pensky. The Border liaison is recommending for appointment Darium Finley who works for the state at the vocational rehabilitation to be seated as the representative of that of the vocational rehabilitation. Um, and the following applicants for the private sector seats. Berenice Elgara Monti, Sarah Engel, Carly. Abrahamson, uh, Kendall Reed, Tim Loal and Maria Ebensky for your consideration. Okay. Thank you, Robin. Any questions or comments. I just want, thanks Robin for the work and want to appreciate the workforce Board in regards to their review. And we did have a meeting, just maybe sharing with the board. We did have a meeting. Just talk about how they came to these recommendations. And I'm happy to support staff's expertise. Okay. And I don't see any other, uh, comment. So we're ready for a motion move to approve the recommended positions. Second. All in favor. Aye. So we have now approved those appointments. Thank you so much.

0:20:33And next we have the, uh, item 6D, which is the worthy cause funding agreement amendment, which we continued from, I believe it was last week. And I saw there's Mika on. Mika, maybe you want to give us a little background on this and introduce the topic. Sure. Nicode Elgato, Boulder County Community Services Department. Good morning, Commissioners. This agenda item is to request approval for the substitution of collateral for the YMCA Worthy Cost Funding Agreement on their Longmont property located at 950 Lashley in Longmont with a lean against the real property located at 2850 Mapleton Avenue in Boulder. The YMCA will continue operating the early childhood education program for children ages two to six at the Longmont Property. And the county's interests will be secured through a new deed of trust documents. Staff recommends approval of the YMCA's request because it's sufficiently protects Boulder County's worthy cause investment while enabling uninterrupted childcare services at the Longmont YMCA location. Uh, I can answer any questions. And April Gatesman is also here to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you, Mika. Commissioners, any questions. I'm just making comment. Thank you, Mika, for putting together the memo and providing the additional detail that clears things up for me. Awesome. Wonderful.

0:22:11Uh, Commissioner Lochimin, any questions, concerns, comments. I did get a chance to read through the memo. I think Mika, thanks for being here this morning. The only question I had is just to understand the way it read this memo. It created a question for me about the. Initial goal of, or maybe the initial approval of where they caused funds with this particular, the original location in relation to where the funds will be going. And so that child care or daycare service, however it was termed originally and approved by that goes away with this funding. Or, I mean, this is more about protecting the lien and protecting Boulder County interest period versus the initial intent of the worthy cause approval. Just to clarify, please. Yeah. Um, and April, if you want to jump on too, um, you're more than welcome. But, um, yes, we are securing the human services that was the original investment of the worthy cause dollars at in Longmont for our childcare and early childhood education services to continue in long mind. Just the investment in the deed of trust will be moved to their Boulder location, um, to continue securing the financial investment of Boulder County at the Longmont location. And thank you. And I think what I'm trying to understand is, um. Once we release the lien and I'm looking at

0:23:54the summary on here, I don't think, I don't think Boulder County can say that we're going to enable an uninterrupted childcare service of the Longmot YMCA location. Just also reading in the moment that entity will then make its own decisity of long mot as a new owner if that deal goes through will then make that decision, correct? Yes, April. Why MCA's obligation to continue providing childcare in Longmont remains a contractual obligation under the funding agreements, the worthy cost fund the agreements related to the long lump property. It is the YMCA's responsibility. To secure whatever documentation it needs to secure with the city of Longmont so that it can continue to provide child care and long month. That's. So their contractual obligation to the county does not go away. They need to quote unquote figure it out. With the City of Longmont. Thanks, Heypal. So what I'm hearing you say is that the contract and the child care work that's part of that contract. Goes on. After the lien is released. Yes. Okay.

0:25:29So I think, well, I was just going to say this was exactly the point that I had a bunch of questions about and the new documents made this be my understanding is that basically the new lien that's on a different property requiring a service at a different property. So theoretically, if they stopped providing childcare service in Longmont, they would be in their, their, they would be required to pay us back or they would be violating the contract over at Mapleton now from a practical standpoint. I think it would be sort of challenging to recover the funding, but we could go down that course with the way that it's written. But I think practically it would be sort of challenging. It's just so it's requiring on the maple on that mapleton lean that we're adding in.

0:26:08It requires that services provided at another facility. So it's not perfect, but it does, it does give us a path to go forward on. It's just if they go completely bankrupt, for example, and don't exist, I think it would be pretty challenging to recover the funds, but maybe not impossible. Well, I think it's also challenging to have a contractual requirement with a different owner. On a separate property than where the proposal is to go to Mapleton. So I would just say that that needs to be very clear. And I think if we're trying to address Boulder County's interests and also be a good partner in regards to where the cause I see the intent, I just wanted to make sure that I was understanding the complexity of what this proposal, the unintended impact here. Thank you. If I could just jump in, the contractual requirement is not on the city of Longmont, correct? It's on the YMC of Northern Colorado. Right. So it's not, so the contractual obligation is on the owner of the property on which we all have a lien. So if the YMCA does not operate childcare at the facility and long month, then they would be able to get it to repay the lien. Right. It's not the scenario, I think, that I thought I heard Commissioner Luchiewin positing, which was

0:27:40that different entity has the obligation than the owner of the property. But the property owner is the why. And that's where the lien is. Thank you. That's, that's not exactly what I said. So I appreciate you. Just having the opportunity to talk about it. And I also see the letter in the, uh, memo from Chris Coker, the CEO of the YMCA where he's saying he would, the why will continue to run preschool and after school programs in the City of Longmont, not with the City of Longmonder, not with that facility, even if the city does not wish to partner with the why. So, um, that, that seems like the pieces I was wondering, or sorry about RN the record. Okay. Any other questions for Mika or April. Okay. I don't see any. So then it looks like we're ready for a motion on item 6D.

0:28:35Move approval of 60. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Thank you so much. Uh, we now come to 6E regarding. Whether we are willing. To a point of board member to the Mountain Geo Fire Protection District. Olivia, thanks for joining us again. Sure. Good morning commissioners. Um, yes, this, this came into me from Council for the Metro, sorry, I said the wrong word, mountain view, fire protected, fire protection district. Um, so they're a Title 32 Special District. You guys are not sitting as their board or anything like that. But the county commissioners have a role or can continue to have a role once the fire protection district is set up in certain circumstances. One of those circumstances could be if the fire protection district board, um, has a vacancy that the Board itself can't fill.

0:29:32We are, I think several steps earlier than asking you to decide yes or no, whether you will make the appointment because the fire protection district board has to ask you to make the appointment. But as they are considering whether to ask you to do that, they ask me what the procedure would, if you would be willing in the first place and what the procedure would be if you guys were to, um, take up the request to, um, fill their vacant board seat. Apparently the situation is that they have a five member board, four members on the board, one vacancy. There are two candidates and they're split on who to appoint to the board. So why you want odd numbers, I guess on voting bodies. But, um, so the question before you, um, is sort of A, whether you be willing to do it, if asked to, to fill the seat. And then if yes, would you choose between the two people that they have sort of in play or would you want to open it up? Um, to other people to apply and sort of start the process sort of following your own process, um, that you normally use to, to fill vacancies in boards.

0:30:51And I'm, I'm just seeking direction, something I can say back to their counsel. We don't have a resolution or any decisions yet at this point other than that question about what, you know, yes or no, if you'd be willing and then what process. So I guess two questions. Okay. Thank you, Olivia Commissioner's questions. Just some discussion. Um, so, um, I think that we should take this up. Um, mountain view serves a significant portion of district three. So I've been in the mix in a lot of conversations around what's going on, um, mountain view and North Metro are considering a merger. And so they have a lot of business at their conducting right now. And the conflict I think is in good nature between the two, two lock. It's just a different perspective of what to be seeking, um, in qualifications and characteristics of a candidate at this time. Um, so I think what we ought to do is, um, say that we would break the gridlock essentially and consider the two people that they are considering and a point one of the two, um, that would be what I would like to respond with and hope we could respond with there on the, on the Mountain View side negotiating contract with their union and looking at this merger and taking on a number of things.

0:32:07And at the same time Nywat has put forward this consideration of a ballot measure this fall, which significantly affects the finances of mountain view. So I think having an even number of board members in an ongoing basis creates some difficulty for the, um, functioning of a, of a special district. So I think it would be in order for us to consider appointing. And I would encourage us to consider their two applicants and to choose one of them. And just one other comment is that in the past, we have appointed, um, a fire district board member when they didn't have a quorum, um, to meet, um, we actually appointed an applicant in the past. So we have done this in the past as well. That's right. Thanks, Olivia. And I appreciated the statute, um, section here on this memo too, just to understand what the wording in there about what, what our opportunity is, as commissioners and this type of situation. I think for me, um, and I agree. It would be helpful for them to have five members instead of for. The question here I had was just to understand what their process has been.

0:33:17You spoke to it a little bit, but I'm trying to figure out how did they get to those two candidates? Because in, in the document that you center the memo, an option in that list of here's your options was the Board of County Commissioners could go out and start a new process. And I don't, I don't have enough information to know if we need to do that. So if you could just speak to, if you know what the process so far to get to those two candidates would be, that would be, that would help me inform. And I'm thinking about Robin Valdez, who was just speaking on some other board and advisory committees, um, and having been involved with some of our other boards over the last several years. I've seen that process, but I don't know what this process has been. Understand the question.

0:34:04Absolutely. And, um, I actually don't know what their process has been, um, that's a great question. That probably should have asked their council before I brought this to you, but I had not, I don't know if, um, he might be on, we haven't really, I told him that I'd reviewing this question to you. His name is John C - H - I - M - L. Is there. Anyone sees online. I don't know how to check that. They're looking right there. Okay. Thanks. They've got the attendee list. This is John A's lost with the records team. I do not see anyone by that name in our virtual attendees list. Okay. Well, John, can you flip back over to the attendee list just so I can see if I see any other board chairs or the chief on. Maybe I'll jump in with a question at this point as well. Just, um, also process. I mean, I, I think it's very desirable. Of course to go ahead and have complete the board. But I wonder whether, uh, they, they would consider bringing in a facilitator or a mediator of some sort, you know, ideally for me since the statute, the first, the default is that the board itself would make that appointment. Um, you know, I maybe, I mean, based on the information I have, um,

0:35:30about the board and the two applicants, like I don't feel like I would be well enough informed to pick between the two of them. Ideally they could resolve whatever their differences are and make that appointment themselves. So I just wonder whether they would consider or maybe they already have, um, having a mediator or some sort of facilitator help them get to resolution. And then thanks for letting me jump in. Did you, I can't tell from my view whether that attendance attendee list is up there. And John, could you scroll down just to the final person. Certainly we have 11 attendees in here. And the person's name that starting with the letter M is the last name. Thank you. Thank you, John. Yeah. Just, I mean, in spirit of conversation with the Board, I, I agree Commissioner Olivia would be great if, um, any district.

0:36:41Could come to some type of an agreement on their own, but it seems like, and I don't know all the dynamics. I don't know what's happening in the background. I suppose for me, I'm thinking they must have exhausted all options. And mediator or facilitator seems like for a public body that some of those pieces would have already gone through, but maybe I was making assumptions about the professionalism and processes that exist outside with other boards. So I would, I would guess for them to come to the attorneys at the county and ask if they would ask the Board of County Commissioners to resolve an issue of, um, I can't remember what the wording was in here. Of not being able to choose someone to help lead their group that they must have exhausted all sources.

0:37:24Is there a timeline on this? What could, you know, could we give questions on process or Board could we agree that yes, we want to participate based on state statute. And we need a little bit more information to understand what process we would go forward with. Yeah. Thank you for opening the conversation. I think that they have worked to try to resolve it and they're considering this as perhaps an option that would satisfy them. I think why they're asking us what process we would do. So it's because if we say we're going to open it up, then they will not ask for our help. I think that they have to really qualify candidates and they're just gridlocked between them and like the candidates are both good choices. I think this board isn't going to be able to resolve necessarily which of them, um, I think if we said, Oh, we're going to open it and start all over. They may come up with something else like a CoinFlip to determine or, you know, they may come up with some other process. So I think they're asking us, would you do this? And would you just consider these two candidates? Because they like the candidates they have. They just are really stuck. That's my, my understanding of where they are. So that's why I was recommending

0:38:26that we go ahead and take this on and consider the candidates. They have given how important the work that they're doing is for the community at this time. So, um. I mean, I think if we do take it on, if we, if we Olivia goes back to them and said, yes, we will take this on. I would not want to open it up to a full recruitment process. Um, but Commissioner Stolzman, what you just said about what you think they might do, you know, if we, you know, if we don't take it on or if we say we're going to open it up, it's, it sounds like, it sounds like maybe they could work this out. I'm just feeling like I don't know how I would make a difference, make a decision. I think I would want to interview both of the candidates, uh, because otherwise for me it would just be a coin toss as well. I think if you, so I know who I've been following this, I guess more closely than the board. And I think if you look, they're really significant, they're really qualified candidates and there are significant differences that I think we could look at them and make a decision. Okay. All right. Well, you obviously know a great deal more than I, than I know about it, uh,

0:39:44so, um, I'm a little concerned about this board if they, if they can't figure out how to compromise. I don't think that this is like allowed. I just view it very, very differently. They are, their gridlocked. They have a really good choices and they're looking at their options to resolve it. And one of them that's allowed in state statute is to have the county commissioners weigh in. And that could be a harmonious way of resolving this, um, with all the different important issues that are at hand. I think it's just a mutual respect and understanding of how things work. And so this is a potential path forward. They're exploring. Is my understanding based on our conversation today they made decide not to explore this option and take other options. But I think they were just looking for a professional, respectful path forward. Okay. So, um, Olivia, you are just seeking direction or guidance as you've put it about whether we would take this on. Uh, I hear Commissioner Stolzman's strong recommendation that we do that, uh, I hear Commissioner Luchamin may be agreeing with that.

0:40:51At least not thinking that there's a, well, I don't know. Maybe Commissioner Lucumin can just free state her position. I'm happy to, uh, of all of that suggestion and indicate that we would take this on. I'm just looking at them. It looks like the option one would allow you Olivia to go back to that group and say that the Border County Commissioners would get involved. And the 30 day process and the couple of different pieces that use the two existing candidates they already have. And that I would be happy to support option one. Okay. Okay. So I don't, do you need us to take formal action? You're just thinking guidance. Just seeking guidance. So I think I hear all three of you are supportive of option one. Thank you for drawing us back to the options. Commissioner Lojamin. I should have clarified those from the beginning. Um, and I can get back to, um, Council for the fire protection district. We'll see what they do with that information. So thank you for your discussion today.

0:41:54Thank you. All right. Thank you, Olivia. Uh, we next have 6f and this is the resolution on the name change request 26 - 001. This was originally, this is for the Tonurui. This was on the consent attendance. But I, I did not support that. Um, following the public hearing. And so, uh, I asked to have it removed from the consent agenda and put on the discussion agenda purely for purposes of being able to register my vote. Erica, I see you there at the microphone. Commissioners, I don't, I don't think we need any additional information about it, but I'm happy to give Erica an opportunity to explain this if either you feel you need it. Move approval of resolution 2026 054. Second. Hey, we have a motion and a second. I was in favor say aye.

0:42:54Aye. Aye. And a post, nay, that would be me. So that is approved two to one, which now brings us to the human resources, executive recruitment, uh, with Christine Scarlett. In person. Where are we? All I can see on my screw. Just wait one second. Commissioner Lee, she's on her way up. Oh, okay. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks for that. Cause the view you get here remotely is just a podium. You're. On the other side. Thanks. Commissione. I'm Christine Scarlett Human Resources Director for Boulder County and with me is. Verace Mikhail. And I'm the talent acquisition manager with Boulder County. Am I close enough. Thanks. Thank you. With the Departure of our County Administrator on August 11th, we have an opening for a new County administrator. And with that, we would like to kick off our recruitment for that, uh, replacement. I've been appointed as a search lead, our hiring manager is Natalie Springett assigned by the Board. And the recruiter assigned as Marissa McHale, who's with me today or talent acquisition manager. I've submitted two documents from human resources. And please know that there is plenty of opportunity for them to be revised. Um, I'm looking for discussion to move forward with posting or position profile on or applicant page. And application page as well as to modify if necessary or timeline that we

0:45:05have established for this recruitment. So I'm open to any questions or further discussion. Okay. Thank you, Christine. So, um, uh, I, I would, I do have just a couple of things that I would seek changed. I don't believe they're substantive. But, um, but I, I'm happy as chair to go last. Like I usually do. I just want to just say that I, you know, and I can walk through them. There wasn't a way for me to submit those to you, uh, during the process of developing these materials. So, um, well, unfortunately it might be a little bit messy, but we'll have to do that, uh, on the screen here. Uh, but first I'll turn to Commissioner Linor Commissioner Stolzman to see if you had any concerns about the materials as presented. I'm happy to start.

0:46:06Thank you. Thank you both for being here. I think for me, just to have a little bit of understanding, I just wrote some notes down around the process today. So what I'm hearing is you'll be looking for approval for both of these two documents basically as materials. And I think my questions I'm looking at late as the hiring manager, I have like some process questions. I don't know if they're appropriate for this or not. I'll ask them. And if they are not applicable, y'all just let me know. And that's totally fine. First of all, I was reading through this. Let's see here. It's the ministrator position, position profile. I'm reading through this and I was thinking, who would not want to come and work in Boulder County as an organization whose collaborative and is looking for an emotionally intelligent, professional bringing resilience and focus on equity. And like, this is very exciting. So I felt like y'all captured Boulder County info who we are as an organization. It moved into the strategic priorities. I also felt like, um, because we had a conversation last week, I'm trying to think of it with EODH or DH just to get feedback about what our department heads are looking for, um, in a leadership, um, as a county administrator. I feel like y'all capture that really well. So

0:47:24I appreciate that. Um, and then the second document was just the timeline. And I just want to ask on the record. It seems as though this has been put together with several different folks, including attorneys. So I just want to make sure. And all three of you. And I'm looking all three of you that are on the, on the memo just to understand if that's a realistic timeline. And if you feel like we could work with that or if, you know, if you have any other input, uh, based on, um, or suggestions maybe in regards to the timeline, uh, based on the different conversations that you've had. But if you feel like this is an attainable, um, to me, it's very helpful. It is a tight timeline, but we do believe it's attainable because, um, I met with our talent acquisition team a couple of months ago to ensure that this was something we could take on. And as long as we got what we required at the time lines that we need them, then yes. Um, we have had county attorney review yesterday. And there are some items on there that do need some revision in our timeline, especially how we're putting together panels.

0:48:38And there may be some indication in our document that we are expecting the entire BOCC to be, um, a panel. And that would create a public meeting. So there are some changes we do need to make in the timeline that we're brought to our attention by the attorney's office. So that is what we're here to discuss today just to make sure that the timeline meets your approval because we can do it. And that if there are items in the timeline that you wish to change, we can also do that. But this is our layout for what we believe is attainable. And also, um, we do know that right now the few applicants available based on some current recruitments that are going on around in Colorado. So we know that there are people who are primed to apply for this position. We also didn't want to get into the holidays because if we did that, then we're looking at probably February before we hold their interviews.

0:49:30So though it does feel a little rushed. I do know that applicants would appreciate how quickly we move. Thank you for that. A new, Christine, you moved in a little bit, alluded to the question I had in regards to the role of the Board of County Commissioners. And in some of our, this is a different hiring position, even though we over the last almost six years, we've hired other executive leadership, department heads, uh, this one's a little bit different as a county administrator, my understanding is the county is never hired. There was an appointment previously versus a hiring process. So I know it's a little bit different. In the past, we've had a lead commissioner on some of those hiring processes for the exact part of the reason is scheduling. And the second one is public meeting. Right. Um, and we want to continue to be transparent and do those processes will sometimes add time when we're looking at the calendar. So that was one of my processing questions. If we are going to be having a lead commissioner participate or if we're going to have all three of us be, um, part of the process. And then that says one question. And if that's processed for later, you can tell me that too. And then the second one was assuming that the board was

0:50:42to approve the timeline that you've got in here if those holds will be put on calendar than later. Okay. Yes. Those are, that's our immediate action to start identifying panelists and getting these on their calendars. And, um, one other area that would need some attention once we've had this discussion is the qualifications just based on some information we've discovered through other counties. And we can have that discussion in a bit when you're ready. Okay. But that would be a separate conversation regards in regards to the qualification. The qualifications that we are planning to post are outside significantly outside of what the general ask is of other counties as well as it doesn't align with the classification that we have established with the county, our county. So we can change the classification all I need is approval for what we want moving forward. And I can change the classification to match that. But that it stands today. The position, um, description does not match our classification.

0:51:49Okay. But that section of criteria qualifications would be a separate conversation with the board. No, we could have it today. I'm just saying it's just another piece of the conversation if the things you want to discuss first. Okay. Thank you. Well, and the other piece, just again, might be more process. Is I believe stuff is going to have a lot of curiosities and interest in participating. And so it was that piece happening. If you could just talk about how staff would be. So as we proposed for the panels, we're looking at for about four different panels and, uh, a lunch with, um, are elected. And so one panel would be however the Board decides the lead from the commission would, I don't know what that structure would look like, but it needs to be one that you have constructed that represents your interests on that panel. Then there will be a panel with our department heads who are direct reports to the county administrator. Uh, the other one we would like is some significant external partners that Boulder County has, um, important relationships with. And we would identify those. What I'm saying is that these panels, who the people are not identified today. We have 30 days to do that until it closes. But it's to give you the general idea that that's what we're

0:53:09hoping to accomplish. And then the fourth is our proposal that it would be an employee panel based on a selection, um, however, we decide we were thinking a lottery of some kind among HR staff. That was our idea. But if there's a more efficient way to select staff, we would be happy to do that. But we do think the staff should have an opportunity to be a part of this and or, um, or labor relations partners. Great. Thank you. That's some of my questions right now. So Commissioner Levy, if you could facilitate us through one topic at a time, about a dozen topics that were just covered. And I have perspective on each one that I'd like to share. But I think we need to have a conversation about one topic at a time. Well, thank you, Commissioner Stolzman. Um, I didn't want to interrupt controller communion. So we have, well, we have two documents.

0:54:01We have a timeline document and we have the recruiting recruitment material document. Out Commissioner Stolzman, were you looking to just separate those, those two? Yeah. That's a start. And then within each one, there are about, you know, 20 topics. And then we should talk about one topic at a time in each document if that's possible. Oh, I'll do my best on that. Um, I hate to interrupt a fellow commissioner. So, uh, so what Commissioner Stolzman, let's take, why don't we take the process first and that timeline, uh, and I'm going to get that document open. In Commissioner Levy, apologies for my interruption, Natalie Spring at Commissioners Deputy for the Record. Um, based on our county attorneys review of the timeline, uh, we would, uh, suggest that the Commissioners start with the position profile today to allow the attorney's office to come back with additional recommendations on the timeline. And we have Carrie Doyle present. Okay.

0:55:10Oh, well, thank, thank you for that guidance Natalie. So, um, so we, yeah. Hi, Carrie. We'll just, so we'll then we'll focus today on the recruitment document and both of these have to happen at a public meeting. So then what you're suggesting is that there's still some work to be done on the timeline in the process, which would come back to us. And we're not going to take action on that today. Am I understanding correctly? Yes, correct. This is Carrie Doyle for the County Attorney's Office. And as Commissioner Stülsman points out, there's a lot to talk about here. So my recommendation would be you focus on the job posting so that that can get posted on September 1st. My only suggested change to that document would be to, at the timeline portion of that document.

0:56:08Just make sure it says that these are estimates. And otherwise, I don't have a concern about the process listed in the job description. But I also hear that there's an interest in posting the job on September 1st. As far as the timeline document, I would recommend we push that to a later board. Business meeting, um. Which can happen. Sometime in September. Okay. Thanks for that guidance. Then let's do, uh, confine ourselves to the physician profile, which includes, uh, that, that issue of, uh, minimum qualifications as a component. Just if I may on the, I completely agree with what you've laid out. Everybody, I just commissioner Lochim and wait in on a number of things on the timeline. And I just want the public who may be watching to get to hear my perspective that I think it's important when we come back and review this and talk about that there's an option that we can discuss about once we identify finalists that the public should have a chance to meet any candidates and give feedback to the board as part of the process, which is pretty typical in these, um, hiring processes. And that seems to be missing. And then I, I just don't agree with the rest of the timeline. And so I look forward to seeing what comes back. Okay. So we will

0:57:30have that conversation at a future meeting. Thank you, Carrie. Don't go far because we may need you again. Um, so, uh, Commissioner Stolzman since you had the floor here where, um, if we go through the document, uh, any concerns that you have about it. Well, I had a question. I have a question that will maybe take away some of my concerns is just, um, how, how does this position profile relate to the, we had a, um, I have way too many tabs open on my screen. Sorry about that because we have so many documents. But how does this relate to the job description that was a draft, um, that board members worked on in June. The job description. Gives us the basic information that we need to create the position profile that gets posted. It's not the job description that gets posted. It's the position profile. So this is what would be on like a job board, for example. Correct. Or sent to different people.

0:58:39Correct. Okay. So. That's helpful. I mean, the meat of what this person is expected to do seems to be missing from the position profile. So I guess we can go through section by section if that's what you're proposing commissioner Levy. And we can add it back in or we could just try again. I'm not sure how you would like me to provide my comments. Well, I was, but I was going to suggest that each of us just provide our comments in full. I'd like to understand a little bit more from our HR director, Christine. I think what Commissioner Stolzman is referring to is that that job description that had all the duties and responsibilities of the office, which is not in here. So when, at what point will we finalize that and at what point will that be salient in this process. If at all.

0:59:41Our plan is to post on next week Tuesday. So if there are changes that need to be made to the profile, we can make them all the way up until next week Tuesday. But you're saying that that document that we worked on together that identifies the responsibilities and the duties of the office. Is that never posted. Is that, did we do that work basically for nothing? Okay. Um. What we're, once they click on the link within the position profile, it'll take them to our NIOGA, which is our applicant tracking system. And within that applicant tracking system, once they get to the application, that position will be posted there. And that would have all of the job duties and responsibilities. Correct. Okay. So that was not in the materials that we were provided. I don't believe.

1:00:49I mean, we've seen it, but they're not in the public meeting materials. We were instructed to provide the timeline and the position profile. So just, I mean, from my perspective, I would be more comfortable just using this draft drop description as the position profile and moving forward with that. It's very complete and has what the duties and responsibilities are, what the qualifications are, the experience and the knowledge abilities and skills. So that is how I would move forward. Oh, excuse me. Commissioner B. I, what's in here in the position profile to me is aligned with other job descriptions. Like when I, for an executive recruitment, yes. Yeah. It is exactly what is done. And we've seen that something similar just in regard, like this is Huboulder County is. And we looks very similar to me. And so I don't know. It sounds like the job description piece is, well, I'm seeing part of it in here in the minimum qualifications, but it sounds like when someone gets in yoga, that's where it will give you the specifics of that description. As well as the section within a position profile that describes the position and we could also fill that more if you'd like with more of the detail from the job description. But the, the position profile, which is standard in a recruitment

1:02:16at this level is to attract. And then when they apply, they'll get to see the real meat of the position once they start filling out the application. Okay. I agree that a position profile is nice. It's just that it is in conflict with what's in the draft drop description. And so rather than go through and rewrite the entire thing, I think we could just move forward with the job description. All right. I appreciate that perspective. Um, I, um, I think I'm happy to move, um, to work on the position profile here this morning in this public meeting. And move forward on that basis. And, uh, and this will be posted, I think you were saying September 1st. That job description that they, that the applicant would get to when they, when they click apply or whatever it is they click, uh, that's where those, those details would be. Yes. And, um, now this is going to be a carry doyle question. If we want to address those basic duties and responsibilities and Commissioners told us, I don't remember what else was in there. Cause again, I'm working remotely and I don't have all my documents with me, but do we, can we, do we also have to approve all of that minutia in a public meeting. I don't think

1:04:00so. I think, um, since the, since you're all familiar with the job description. And so long as you think the job description is consistent with the brochure or position description that you've seen. But I'm seeing Commissioner Stolzman shaking her head. So. Um, perhaps could someone pull that job description up onto the screen? Do we have it. And we could walk through it. Um, so that you could all see it. And we could have, you could debate whether the position, and I think to say it more clearly, Commissioner Stillsman could explain why she thinks the job description differeds from the position posting. Well, and I can follow what Commissioner Lee's asked us to do. We can go paragraph by paragraph and insert the job description into the position profile so that the contents included. But like things like emergency managing during an emergency and some of the really important critical things about day - to - day administration and coordination and responsibility for communicating and implementing, it's just, it's, it's missing. Sure. So. What I was going to suggest, I'm sorry to interrupt. Carrie is, is that we do just go through the position profile. And when we get to the places where we think the inconsistency, we're where we might want to add that list.

1:05:30I don't think we had any disagreement or concern about the last generation of that document among us. Um, I think we do need to have some more discussion about the basic minimum qualifications. And I'm guessing it has to do with the number of years of experience that we're asking for. You know, then we can talk about that at that time. So, but I, I, I think I'm a little reluctant to follow your suggestion, Carrie, that we put that document up on the screen and go through it because, uh, we think we'll get to it by just going through this profile. It's, it's entirely up to you. I might recommend that document get added in some way to this meeting. Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. Thank you. Okay. Um, well, let's, uh, let's actually do take this in chunks. I was going to have thought we would just go each of us go through our comments separately, but let's, let's just do this in chunk. So the, the opening paragraph, what's called what's labeled opening. Commissioner's questions, concerns. I have a proposal in the last sentence of the opening paragraph. To where it says grounded in to replace it to say grounded in our, so to strike inclusion engagement service and innovation and add grounded in our strategic priorities of economic security and social

1:07:10stability. Climate action and environmental stewardship and good governance. I apologize. I don't see where that is, but I'm working off of the document that was sent me, uh, sent to me. So I'm just the first run on sentence paragraph is ending in this role offers the chance to help shape and elevate a progressive nationally respected organization grounded in and then at lists four things. And I'm just suggesting we should say grounded in our strategic priorities and then list what they are. Okay. Got it. I see where you are now. Thanks. I wouldn't do that because the second paragraph, which I know we're not there yet, has strategic priorities noted in it. And for me, the Boulder County values posters that are all around our facilities. That's, that's where I thought that was from and my belief is that there's, um, staff who are also in agreement that this is an organization that focuses and grounds in inclusion engagement service and innovation. Yeah. I find myself in agreement with that approach also that we've got the strategic priorities. It looks like there's going to be a live link to it. And I think we do have, um, we I think that first paragraph does capture what our, um, what our values are. I had changes to the second paragraph that would address the repeating of strategic

1:08:43priorities. It just doesn't list what they are anywhere. So I'll have to think on the fly of how to re - amend the second paragraph. And I don't, I don't know that I would put specificaries. The best case scenario for me is that we get to a timeline that the attorneys have reviewed and we have a hiring. In 2026. And if we were in a situation that we didn't have the right candidate, um, there wasn't recommendation to move forward or the board didn't agree on a candidate. We could move into 2027 and we are working on, um, our new strategic priorities. So I, if it wasn't so close to the end of the year, just in a timeline standpoint, I would be more interested, but I think because strategic priorities would change with boards, I think it's fine. The strategic parators are there without a being listed and someone, I think anybody at this level who's doing savvy research is going to have found the strategic priorities that are current for the board at the time. Yeah. I agree. Um, you know, what's important is that you are guided by advancing the strategic priorities, whatever they may be. And they may, they will change probably with, with a future board. So, um, I, I, the only, the only edit I had on this, um, section

1:10:06and it would, it would carry throughout the document was where we say we're looking for if you're inspired and later on, it's, you know, there are numerous other sort of contractions like that. You all do this. I think in a, in a formal recruitment document, I would prefer to see that spelled out without the contraction. So we are, you are, you will, et cetera. I think I'm looking for a nod from another commissioner so that you're not taking direction just from one commission or on this. Sure. If the formality feels like it's appropriate in the language, I'm happy to support that. I don't. We can do that. That doesn't concern me. Thank you. Okay. Appreciate that. Yeah. Okay. Um, anything else on that, uh, paragraph that's labeled opening. Okay. I don't hear anything. And then we get two community, a description of our community. And I also just want to say that I think you've done a wonderful job of like capturing our community. It makes it sound like a place I sure love to come live in and work. So thank you for that. Commissioners, um, what, uh, any comments or edits to this section. I don't have edits for this document. In the list of Communities, I think since you've listed every incorporated area except for Jamestown, we need to

1:11:52include Jamestown. And then I think they either need to be an order of population or alphabetized. I can support that. Um, I assume it's going to be a final edit. Somebody added superior and there should be a comment after superior, which wasn't there. Um. Okay. Then I think we're ready to move on to your description of the county. One of the recent changes where you will see we have, um. 20 departments and then 14. We actually, um, we did a thorough looking and it's 14 departments and eight elected offices. And we have made that adjustment. That's great. Thank you. That's great. Um, so it will read 14 dedicated departments and eight elected offices is what you're saying? Correct. Thank you. Yes. Okay. Well, we're actually not supported by those elected officers. I get it. It depends how you use the wet support. I understand we would make sure the language reflects correctly. But I just wanted to make sure that I was trying to help you understand why it said 20 and then a dramatic drop to 14. It's actually, we can just put the 14 departments and leave out the eight or we can find a way to show that there are another eight areas within that area in the county. That we partner with.

1:13:44Yeah. I think I would just indicate, you know, just say something like in addition, eight elected offices. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. Um. Commissioners, anything else here. Yeah. So in the next section, I don't know what star at the star burst of three items budget FTE population means. It's a, it's a graphic. We mean to insert. It shouldn't have shown up like that. There is a particular graphic we want to include that just shows three star bursts that show the population the FTE and the size of the budget. That's what that meant. That we put those in italics. It's like an infographic. Yes. In this section. Yes. We just kept seeing starburst internally. And then the work chart will show there or that'll be just a hyperlink. Hyperlink to the orc chart. It's too big. And it will just say org chart and then actually have that be the hyperlink, not some crazy hyperlink. Now the, the hyperlink will say Boulder County or chart, organizational chart. And it'll take to the current organizational chart because we've made no changes to the current organizational chart. Great. On the FTE Count. Do you propose to include the FTE that are under the elected official, the other elected officials. We are open. Our plan was to the entire population of our, everybody we see Abno

1:15:26Paycheck too. Yes. Okay. Just to be clear, because we always, we always see different numbers. Sometimes it doesn't include seasonals and hourly. Um, which technically are not FTE. I don't think although now we also know that we use FTE differently the way many other human resources people use FTE. So it's just to be clear on what we are going to include here as FTE. We are going to include the entire Boulder County employee Count. Okay. So including hourly in seasonal. Well, we will include 2, 400 FTE and an additional blank in seasonal and hourly employees. Okay. That helps. Commissioners? Well, I just, I'm not overly concerned about this particular point, but I think if we're putting FTE the whole rest of the world just looks at that as full - time equivalent. So we could calculate the full - time equivalence.

1:16:34Including in those hourly in seasonals into that full - time equivalent number and just have one number with an FTE. That's the HR way, yes. That would be lovely if we will do it how you wish to do it. I wish we would always call FTE full - time equivalence and move to that. That would be a full - time equivalent means if we have eight people and four or have time, it's four people. So yeah, six people. So yes. That would be amazing. We can do that. Okay. Sounds good. Um, moving on to the department, which, uh, and I'm a little, so that title, um, confused me. Here, you're talking about the office of County Administrator or what is the department refer to here? OCA. I think I would say the office. Okay. Yeah. I'm, I guess I want to understand what this particular paragraph is trying to describe. Like it seems like at this point we could get into the duties and responsibility section. Because the Office of County Administrator is one department that does a few things that could change over time. But the person is responsible for. Many departments and different things. So I don't, I don't know that changing it to the office or the department is. Clear to me on what we're trying to accomplish with this section

1:18:08of the profile. For me, it was just to indicate that there is another body of staff that are assigned to the central duties of the administrator. It is not. Required. So this doesn't really describe the office. I mean, the office being, it's got BOE. It's got language access. It's got, uh, disaster and resilience recovery. So it reads to me like an introduction. To. Well. Yeah, I think, I mean, this would be maybe logically where that, that whole thing that Commissioner Stolzman was referring to would go of, you know, these are the duties of the office. The extraction from the job description, the actual hardcore job duties assigned. Yeah. Okay. I'll just share with you. We're starting. Yeah. Thanks. For me again, if I'm looking at this, is the position profile. I see it as kind of like this is the high level. It is.

1:19:28And it's, it's a profile. It's not the job description. Correct. So I think it actually is additive. If I'm looking at this as a profile, I'm thinking like if I'm the person applying, I'm just trying to get an understanding like what is this, who is this organization? What does the department look like? I think it's helpful. It doesn't take away the ability to have the job work description as part of this. But if I think high level, somebody who's applying and looking at a county administrator position Boulder County comparative to private sector or public sector all around the state of Colorado, more information, I think is going to be helpful to the applicant pool that we're hoping we get some fabulous candidates for. So. Could we just one of the time, please don't speak until the Commissioner has finished. I was just sharing my perspective hoping maybe the board could have a little conversation about that. Paragraph. And to me, it makes sense in the department versus the office at that. It seems like that doesn't feel like an issue. If I'm a reader as an applicant. So I hear you saying maybe that's two in the weeds to put that whole list of responsibilities.

1:20:47And I wonder if a way to address that would be to, to just have a link, you know, just have a simple sentence that says for a full list of duties and responsibilities. Click here, something like that. So for me, that I'm just still confused. Like the department heading doesn't really make sense for this particular person. This person manages a number of department heads that manage departments and their office, you know, may or may not be structured in the way that it is now in the future. So for me retitling that something like position summary. That said, this position working at the pleasure of the Boulder County Commissioner serves as the main administrative officer for the county and liaison between the Board of County Commissioners and the County Department Directors. The County Administrator is responsible for implementing BFCC's policy decisions to County staff and coordinating the flow of information advice to the Board. The purpose of the role is to manage and coordinate County Resources and Applish the Objectives of the BOCC. So for my perspective, that sort of is the high level summary. The having the title, the department and then sort of listing the position summary there, but it's very brief. And then it lists some departments, but not others. Like it doesn't list public works. It's just, it's confusing to me the

1:22:05way it's written. I'm open to other things too, but I just, I think that what we came up with in the draft for position summary is better than what's there now. Okay. That's what I was going to ask is what you are reading from. And I think that, that is a very nice succinct description of the position, just a summary of the position. Um, if you, um, uh, Christine, I'd be interested in your thoughts on, on just swapping that language out for here. Um, I had wanted to expand this language a little bit to indicate some other departments as well, uh, but I think the way I think again, the way Commissioner Stolzman read that just that summary does a nice job so that we don't feel like we've listed some and not others. Agreed.

1:22:58No concerns. Okay. Um, Commissioner Luchiman, any concerns with putting that other language in. Instead. I'm just trying to understand. I heard that us to go paragraph by paragraph. So are you all commissioners, board members, are you to asking to remove the paragraph that starts with currently the department. And moving just to the position. So I don't feel strongly about what the title is. I don't understand what the department means. So I do think it needs a new title. And so I would be open to the idea that the title was positioned summary, but it could also just say county administrator or something else. I'm not wed to position summary. That's just what was in the draft document that we had reviewed. So that's why I said that. And then I was just suggesting replacing that paragraph that the paragraph that we had previously reviewed. And it's just, or I mean, if we would rather go through word by word and rewrite that paragraph, we can.

1:24:02I just, it doesn't include all of the departments. It doesn't, and then I think you get two into the weed. So I think what we had already written is fine. And when you're talking about a hero referring back to the job description document, yep. In the beginning, the high level position summary. That I'm suggesting that paragraph could just replace this paragraph. I think they seek to accomplish the same task. That, uh, just to jump in, that works for me. And likewise, I don't really care what we call this parent. I mean, I do care actually because I think the department doesn't, uh, doesn't say what it is. I think maybe, maybe something just position summary. Or because we're now moving into. Well, no, I think, I think a position summary might be a good title for that paragraph. And when you say that paragraph, what you're talking about, the paragraph in the document that we're reviewing today that's currently titled as the department or the paragraph that we're doing today that is entitled, the position.

1:25:23I am talking about the paragraph that Commissioner Stolzman read that I earlier indicated I would support substituting for the language that was posted. Is that clear or is there was there something confusing about that. The only reason it feels confusing on this site is because we're all preferencing different documents and different paragraphs. So, um, and I was thinking you were reading, I thought you were reading Commissioner Stolzman from the document that we were looking at together with just changes that you had made. So, but it sounds like you were reading from the position summary. Paragraph in the previous document that isn't in part of the packet today. Yes. Natalie Spring at Commissioners Deputy for the record. John is assisting me in bringing up that position summary on the screen. Um, so that all the commissioners can review that text together. John, are we good to go? Thank you. Hey, now I can make one of my windows smaller. So I apologize, um, for asking the question again. So this one that we're on the screen or this position summary paragraph from the previous job description work. You're asking if that could replace which paragraph? The paragraph that's currently titled the department.

1:26:57Thank you. And would you, and that ask would you then be. Asking for this for the other paragraph in the document that we're looking at today that's currently underneath the department paragraph. B struck or just combined? I was just replacing it for simplicity. I didn't think about how to combine them. But I could try to think about that. I just was trying to understand the point of this, the department paragraph. And it seems that the point is to try to sort of say this is the type of thing that you do. And I think it's better captured in the other document. But if there's something in that, that's really important to move in. We can think about how to meld them together. I think it reads very well if we title instead of the department position summary.

1:28:00Just take this exact language that is grayed out on the screen and swap it for that one paragraph that says the department. And, and we don't have to do this in real time. This is how things get completely messed up. So and then, um, Commissioner Lochimin still questions about this. Or are you okay to move. On? I think what I'll be looking for. Like, I don't think the language of what's in there currently under department as high level kind of who is this department. For me, I saw the word ranging and it was like, you're doing this to this. And there's a whole lot of pieces and I didn't read it as a, it has to be a full checklist, but heard some interest in maybe being very clear about exactly which departments or which services are provided. I think this, what's, what was in the paragraph that was previously named as the department is just additive. I don't think it hurts anything. And if you want to have the what's on the screen now, the position summary as part of that, I think. I just don't see how that other piece is again, if we're trying to get applicants, more information in this position profile is going to be helpful. And if you two feel like the current department paragraph just needs to be

1:29:28struck, um, I think that's where we're at right now for the, for going through the line by line. I think, um, I, of course there is some language. From the draft that was presented in the packet that could be added, but I, I'm a little reluctant to try to do that because it may not read well. And we're going to approve this. And I, I think this captures it. And then, um, uh, now I, there's, there's Christine little tiny thing down at the bottom of my screen. Um, I think if we then say, uh, the duties and responsibilities of this office are listed here with a link to all of the things that are under duties and responsibilities. Then that flushes it out without cluttering up the position profile recruiting brochure. That works for me.

1:30:28And so that would replace the position section. It would just say the duties and responsibilities are listed here and link. I think I would, I think Commissioner Stolzman, if I could, um, I think what I would do is, is take out that title, the position. Have that be the second paragraph of, of, um, overview. Um. Uh, and then have that sentence that I said of the full list of duties and responsibilities is located here. I think I would leave this in because, you know, it is nice language about navigating meaningful change guide policy implementation. And show resources. And people are aligned. It's, you know, it's a nice description. Rather than just a kind of cold list of bullet points. I guess I don't see the navigating meaningful change. I might be in a different place than you. Where it says position. Not what's on the shared screen, but in the document that's in the packet. Yeah. I don't see the words meaningful change anywhere in my document. It says Boulder County is a proud unionized organization built on teamwork and shared purpose. It's County Administrator. You'll take the lead and I would like that to say you will take the lead and navigating beautiful change by partner and closely with the Board of County County. I just have, I have a different document.

1:32:08Up. Sorry. That's just not what I have. That if you're on this section that's currently titled in the document that was brought to us this morning, the position paragraph. That might be a different version because I also don't have that. My first line says Boulder County is a unionized organization period. Commissioner. Okay. Yes. Somebody has changed that. Okay. Uh, Natalie Spring Commissioners Deputy for the record after a high level review, um, a few edits were made. So Commissioner Levy, I apologize. I think you're looking at the one that was emailed to the board earlier in the day. Oh, okay. So that language I was referring to isn't in there. It just says it's a proud unionized organization. It doesn't say proud. Okay. Okay. So I don't have that. Okay. I can read what I currently have. Natalie's trying to put it on the screen. It just, I think the reason I would suggesting replacing it with what you've had with what you were suggesting with the link to the duties and responsibilities here is that we've covered some of the material that's in these bullets in other places now by inserting that other language. So for example, it says the position works at the pleasure of the board. Well, we will have just said that in the previous sentence. So then it kind of is

1:33:32duplicative. Um, and then so it just because we're inserting that other language, I think it creates some grammar issues. So that's why when you suggested, just saying the duties and responsibilities can be found here. Um, I think it fixes it. That's fine. No, that, that, that works. Um, now I see that what I was reviewing, uh, yesterday and this morning is not what you all had in the packet. So okay. I think that works. So I'm just wondering, I agree this, the two bullet point two and bullet point three seem like they're captured in the other with this change that's being proposed. Is there somewhere else that Boulder County is a unionite organization is addressed or covered in the position profile. Cause I do think that's important for an applicant to know in the profile versus digging down into too far into the document. I don't think it is. So I do think we should try to include that also. And I wonder if our experts who are here with us might have a suggestion about where we could put that. Um, I'm not familiar with the changes that are on the screen. Okay. I haven't seen that before. Okay. These changes were made after we submitted. Okay. Thank you. Christine. Matalie, I'm going to, I'm going to ask you to explain what is on

1:35:02the screen? What is this document. It's what's in the packet. And so, so what's in the packet has changes that did not come from our director of human resources. Uh, Natalie Spring, Commissioner's deputy for the record. Thank you for the opportunity to address the question. Uh, the document we received had two different renditions in this section. And so in order to submit it to the record, um, we selected what I was taking as HR's recommendation in the comments section of the original version. Um, as the final language for you all to review today, um, so that we weren't bringing forward a red line version that included separate comments. Um, so that is where these edits came from before we submitted it for the final consideration of the board. Okay. That comment you're referring to was added by Marissa. I think I understand now. This is Christine Scarlet again. Between Marissa and I, she had comments.

1:36:15And it looks like those comments were incorporated. There were meant to be a part of document. There were just her comments asking me, what do you think. And I see what's happened. Well, in any case, I think we have decided we're going to this, um, I think we're now maybe on the same page, but we are going to take that language from the job description that we had worked on and substitute in here. The substitute that in here. So Commissioner Levi just so I understand. We're taking out the department. We're creating position summary and the position summary will be that extraction from the job description at the top talking about the board's authority. And then the second part or reverse is Boulder County is a proud unionized organization. And then the third piece or third bullet would be a link to the duties and responsibilities.

1:37:18I think it would just be the simple statement. Um, Boulder County is a unionized organization. And, um, Commissioners, if it pleases the board, I'm going to take my screen down so I can continue tracking the changes that you're providing. That would be great. Thank you. Okay. Would it make for better reading if we put, um, Boulder County Z United organization right before the last sentence in the position summary. So it would read the County Administrator's responsible for implementing BFCC's policy directions to County staff and coordinating the flow of information and advice to the Board period. Boulder Boulder County's a unionized organization period. The purpose of the role is to manage and coordinate county resources to accomplish the objectives of the BOCC period. And I just wonder that because I think if we don't do it that way, then we have one bullet. And that I don't think is great to have A hanging bullet alone. That's, that's fine for me. I apologize, which I was reading in a different area trying to find another place in the document that was brought to us this morning to fit this line. Yeah. I was just trying to with respect to the suggestion that you had to make sure that it was still included that Boulder County Unionicin, that that's important. I was just

1:38:48trying to fit it in between the second to last sentence and the last sentence in that position summary. Cause that's sort of where it describes the nature of the position. And so I think it fits there and reads nicely in front of the purpose of the role. Yes. To just say right before that sentence to say Boulder County is unionized organization period. What I was trying to figure out, like I said, I'm also happy for HR experts to weigh in here. But I was just curious about if maybe fits in the under the county paragraph of the document that we were working on today, the position profile. Maybe in paragraph one, two or. Maybe one or two under the county. The 14 dedicated departments and elected offices that deliver essential services Boulder County is. That.

1:39:55Unionized organization. Either there were. I think that might make the most sense. Or even as the first sentence of the third paragraph. Boulder County is a unionized organization. Visit the County's website to learn more about our county. And then it's going to have. Just seems like it's more around the description of the county as an organization. That works for me. Yeah. I don't think, I mean, for me, it doesn't really matter that much. Um, so either place. And I, um, yeah, I mean, if you prefer to have it under the county, that's fine. Okay. So, so we've got that. We've got the changes to the section that in the posted document says the department and the changes to, um, basically we've eliminated the section that says the position and are we ready to move on to upcoming priorities? I am. Yes. Okay. Um.

1:41:12So I have a comment in this section. So under, um, you'll also be expected. I would replace that sentence. With the following sentence. So I would write. Sorry. You will be expected to present proposals for reorganization. To the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. I think that supposes an outcome that we've not agreed to in this sentence currently. Commissioner Stolzman, would you be. Open to instead of reorganization, maybe restructuring county departments? Yes. Okay. I can support that. I just, I feel like, do we need, and I get the paragraph says upcoming priorities, but I wonder if putting some type of timeframe around that because I don't believe that's an ongoing County administrator. Project of restructuring. If they're, I think restructuring works better than reorganization, but I just want to make sure it's clear that, and I'm thinking about staff too. It's one item. Versus a wide priority of the work that county administrator that we're looking for, kind of administrator to do ongoing. And it might just be the way I'm interpreting the language. Yeah. And I'm fine with a couple, I'm fine with that approach. I just will make an aside for any staff that are watching. This particular sentence is around having a new person come in and describe how offices should be organized. And so nothing has been decided

1:43:02and it's not in any way related to layoffs or anything like that. It's just that like currently we have transportation in two areas. The new person might think that that does or doesn't make sense. Currently we have, um, different services offered in, you know, different departments that may or may not make sense. And so I think the expectation here is that the person will come in and make a proposal to the Board of how we should structure. And this has a really prescriptive outcome, which may or may not be what the proposal is. So I just wanted to say that as an aside so everyone doesn't start to get worth. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I'm fine with that. I thought I heard embedded in Commissioner Luchmin's comments or suggestion that there'll be a timeline for doing that, which I wouldn't put in a job description.

1:43:45I don't or a position profile. Uh, I don't know what a reasonable amount of time would be to do that. So I think it's just indicating as, you know, as we've discussed that, that there is a structure that we will invite this person to, um, to examine and give them the opportunity to restructure. To make a proposal to restructure. Yeah. Could we, I'm fine. I mean, I didn't mean like a date. I was thinking of language that would articulate that it's not, that's not like what the county minister is going to do. County wide forever. Like that's not as much as I was interpreting as there is one project that would be, um, that would fulfill that. The way it's written in here is an expectation. Could we talk about language again. And you've read something, but I think it was just your own. Yeah.

1:44:48I had just written something ahead of time. So I just had written, um, you will be expected to present proposals for reorganization, which I heard maybe having that be a different word, which I'm totally supportive of. To the board of County Commissioners. I think that communicates that this is a one time project. What was the new word I was supposed to pick instead of reorganization? It was restructure. Yeah. Restructure. Just in case I have to read it again. How would you feel about, we present a proposal of restriction. Yeah. That's great. I just feel like somehow that makes it feel like it's just a project. I think this part is important to keep in here to indicate to the person that they're coming into an organization that's, you know, functioning well and people are doing well, but we're open to them coming in and saying, this is how it could be structured and how we would manage it differently together. I think it's an important piece to include. I like how we've changed it. I was going to just note in the sentence that comes before that with the, you'll step into this role out of a little moment with the potential expansion of the Board of County Commissioners. I would just add, uh, from three to five commissioners. So Expansion of the Board of

1:46:26County Commissioners, comma from three to five commissioners, comma on the horizon or on the horizon. Uh, from three commissioners to five commissioners pending voter decision, something in there at any right, you know, just so they know, because if they're from outside Colorado, they're not going to know just Expansion. Is this going to be a big body? You know, what am I dealing with? So just indicating that, that the proposal is to expand it to the five. I guess that one I could go here or there with just because I'm thinking about the County Administrator's role. And the role that the Board will have, I'm guessing the deputy, but like, I don't, we haven't spent a lot of time in that because it's a has noted in here pinning a voter decision. Well, I think the reason I suggest that is, is just, just so they know what this might look like, that they're not going to come in and have 11 commissioners that they're, whose direction they're supposed to implement, which, um, that, that this, that this is what it is, just not to have it so, um, open and vague. Yeah. I didn't mean I wasn't speaking to your changes or suggestions. It was just the full sentence. Period. So I think if you two are an agreement. Okay. Let me, does anybody object

1:48:00to putting in that the expansion would be to five commissioners. No. I don't. Okay. Trying to. Get a little more. Okay. Um, okay. Any, uh, then we move into opportunities. Could I request just a five minute break if that would be possible from the board just real quick. Sure. Thank you so much. It is, what is it? 119. Why don't we reconvene at 1125? Thank you so much. Okay. I looked like we had a hearing room. Could you go ahead and resume the reporting. Thank you so much. Commissioners, are you ready? Yes, thanks. Thank you so much. We are recording. All right, thank you. So we're back. I think we're ready to jump into the next section, I believe, Commissioners. Titled Opportunities. That sounds right. Okay. Okay. So. Were there. A, I hope I didn't just close. That. No, I didn't. Okay, opening the floor for comments are edits on opportunities. So I just don't exactly understand what this section. Is for, because it's not a complete list of opportunities. So am I meant to like go through and add all of the other opportunities. I just don't know what it's for. So I feel good since we've added in the duties and responsibilities that it's more complete now, but this seems like an incomplete list of things. Christine, I think I'm going to invite you

1:50:16to just talk about what you're trying to convey with this section. Well, we knew we only had so much space. So it's not intended to be an exhaustive list of everything, but to highlight what we believe are the top priorities or opportunities. If again, if those are different, we are welcome to the change. I'm wondering if. I'm wondering two things. If this could be part of the upcoming priority section, or we just change the title to. And I'm not going to come up with the necessarily better title for that paragraph right now, but if we just change the title to. Some opportunities, Boulder County. Is to work with the structure. I mean, I'm just, I'm trying to join in your conversation, Commissioners. I agree. It's not, I didn't take it as an exhaustive list, but the few things in here that I wasn't interpreting as exhaustive lists. And I think it gives people, again, from that profile standpoint, it gives people an idea of what are some of the things I want to know about for this particular organization, because those applicants will be looking at other organizations, other workplaces. And so anything that we can give to give an better idea about who we are, what we're looking for, what our work is, I think is going to give us a better opportunity.

1:52:03But what I heard is just, I think we could address what I heard as concerns on this program, just changing that title a little bit. I would say that perhaps it would help explain why these five points are here. If it says maybe near termities or, you know, near term something, you know, just to indicate, I think for me, when I read this, what you're trying to communicate here is, these are some things that need immediate attention. And I think it is appropriate to call out that we are newly in an environment, uh, operating under a collective bargaining agreement that we will be. Still potentially working through budget constraints. Um, you know, and that there are some, the need for support. Through that process, you know, the, the impact of the budget constraints on workforce morale and team engagement. So I think it is important to indicate that these are some, some very near term.

1:53:33I don't know. You know, it's like situational awareness. So, you know, what you're getting into. And I don't know what the, exactly the proper title is, but I think it is important to indicate that this is the, this is the environment that a person would be coming into. I did have one very small question about this navigate relationships with two newly recognized unions. This is Boulder County employees Union and the Fraternal Order of Police. Is that what that is referring to? It is correct. Okay. And I see a nod. And so, and I don't think so really the county administrator does not navigate that relationship with the FOP. That is the sheriff's job. Um, you know, we, we approve the budget and we have maybe we set like the total compensation package that we all fund. But I don't think we actually do anything more, um, I could be wrong in terms of the, you know, the OCA having any relationship there between the sheriff and the FOP. I mean, I do think like from a technical standpoint there at the end of the day negotiating with Boulder County, not the, not the sheriff individually.

1:54:46So that's where I think the administrator and the Boarda County Commissioners ends up getting involved just like we did this year when we are in the middle of renegotiating it. Yeah, I, but I think, I mean, what we did was, so we said this is how much we would offer for compensation. And that was the only thing being negotiated. But that's because that's all we were negotiating over. Yeah. You're, you're right. I don't disagree on that. Um, I, I don't want to, I think the OCA, now that they have a CBA in place doesn't have a lot of involvement with the FOP. And I wouldn't want it to sound like ag, you know, I've got two different unions on the same workplace and, you know, they're being pitted one off the other, whatever, you know, whatever a person may think. From, from that. Um, and maybe, maybe it's the word navigate that, and maybe it's not the number, um, just a moment, Commissioner Lochiman, if I could just finish here. That, you know, that maybe it's just, um, uh, operate in an environment with two newly recognized unions, something that just doesn't read to me as if we have a challenge on our hands. Cause, you know, we're hoping everything goes smoothly. So thanks for letting me finish Commissioner Achievement. Sure, yeah, I was just

1:56:16going to try and add in to, um, give some options. What I heard you talking about was maybe that word navigate. And I was thinking just for the conversations, that's we're making, we're doing words with thing at the dais on that bullet point under the paragraph currently labeled as opportunities to put either understand relationships with two newly and leave the rest of it or take out the navigate relationships with and put recognize to newly recognized unions. Da da da da da. So just an offering for the conversation. And then otherwise, I think, I think everything else in that paragraph is great. Did that option address what you were thinking, Commissioner Levy. Um. Uh, not exactly. I mean, well, not understanding doesn't. Um, I had a word and I didn't write it down. Um, I think, you know, it could just say manage. Relationships or work in an environment with two newly recognized unions. I don't think I need to. I am not trying to wordsmith for the sake of wordsmithing. I'm just trying to make sure that we're portraying this position. Accurately. So. I think that's not, yeah, I, I think I heard Commissioner Lo Chamine, you were saying that worked with what Commissioner Levy described. Oh yeah. I mean, I think we are wordsmithing.

1:58:03And we're trying to get to an agreement so that we can meet this timeline that HRs is working on. And I think that's totally fine. So it wasn't, I didn't say that in a negative context at all. I was just trying to offer some words, but I think that if work with, that's great. I agree that Navigate isn't the right word. And I'm happy to support whatever you were like. Okay. Well, that works for me. And I think then maybe instead of opportunities, it would be something to indicate that this is that this is the environment, you know, the current environment or near term. I don't know what, you know, I don't want to say challenge because that's so negative. I thought that near when you proposed near term opportunities that actually made the whole section make more sense to me. As to what it was trying to accomplish here. So I think that would be a really positive change to say near term opportunities.

1:59:01And then, because I made a whole list of opportunities for consideration today when I read that section, I was like, what about all these other opportunities? And I think maybe a few, um, to consider if we would want to add or swap in here, um, capital project completion. And then the description would be significant number of important capital projects. Need to be completed within the time frames and budget set just because we do have so many outstanding capital projects that have been caring from year to year. That was one that I thought we might want to include is not a hill. I'm going to die on, but that came up for me when I was reviewing this. And then, um, I know we just settled on the recommend structural changes for consideration to the board in the previous paragraph, but that was another one that came up for me of like, well, maybe that belongs here. Well, you say the title that one again, I apologize. On my notes to myself and I'm not trying to relitigate what we just agreed to in the last section, but what I had written to myself was recommend structural changes to the departments for board consideration. But I'm not in any way trying to go back on what we had just agreed to in the previous section. I'm

2:00:10just reading you the notes I made myself. I think that's actually a great suggestion in terms of, uh, the, the organization of this section and this document, uh, because it's. Um, I mean, I think it is, I wouldn't call that out as like its own priority, like, like in and of itself. Like the other things. So, um, so I think that does make sense. So then like in the upcoming priorities, maybe, maybe that's all, all it is. So get ready to jump in Boulder County has high impact projects waiting for you from day one. You will, and then that's not a separate paragraph. You'll step into this role at a pivotal moment, et cetera, you know, at the end of the, you know, five commissioners, tending voter approval. And then, um, and then don't say restructure like we were just working on a minute ago have, you know, near term opportunities. I'm fine with adding, you know, complete, uh, capital projects with the language that you suggested and include that restructuring with the language that you suggested. I think it makes for a more holistic list that's, you know, it's not complete. It's not exhaustive, but it may be a little bit more representative of, of the near term opportunities. I was fine with the near term opportunities that you mentioned a while ago, Consuelvie.

2:01:59And I don't think it has to be an Exesist of List. I wouldn't put capital projects in there just because I feel like there's like another team that I think we need to work on as the Board with in regards to the capital projects. I'm not saying that that's not something that we need to continue to talk about. But I don't in this piece, I don't know that it fits there. Um, on the Recommend plus you recommend structural piece. I could go with it either, either place. I think what you said, we already made that addition. So I swear I heard the comment, but I don't know that we need to have in both places. I think moving it into the list makes sense. And using the language we previously arrived at makes sense. And I just don't have that on my screen to read it aloud. Um, I, I was agreeing to the language you read. So I have the capital project language, but the, the language about the structural change, I was just saying like Natalie could read it to us. Our deputy could read it to us whatever we agreed in the previous section. I don't have what our consensus landed on there. Oh, okay. I thought you had some language, but, but I think, can we agree that that actually belongs

2:03:22in this list. Of near term opportunities? Yeah. And I, that's what I was agreeing to. Sorry for the confusion. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner lotion, Min, do you have concerns with that approach. No. Okay. Is everybody clear about that direction? I don't want to move on if there's confusion. Natalie Spring Ant Commissioners deputy for the record. I'm tracking your edits in real time. Um, so I don't have any questions for you at this time. Okay. All right. Then I think the next section is the ideal candidate. I just want to ask a quick question on this paragraph before we finish. On the, under the section of near term opportunities. The first bullet point is racial equity action plan alignment. And I'm, and you have to forgive me because I'm on language teacher also in my past life. This doesn't align with the rest of these.

2:04:23And I'm wondering for my candidate standpoint, would it be helpful to know? What does like what is the task that is the opportunity. And or folks read it and felt like that was a broad enough statement that it would give enough information. So Board, I'm asking you if you feel like it's good how it is. Or if you think it would be helpful to have more information in there. Would you be happier if it said alignment of racial equity action plans. I get that it's not parallel construction. So and that doesn't fully solve the problem. But, um, I'm, I'm open to other suggestions. So in my notes, I had down the racial equity action plans actually haven't been presented to or approved by the board. And so I had a lot of curiosity about what alignment meant actually and like how that was going to be incorporated and replicated. Um, but I just was happy to live with it and drop it. I was like, well, I guess alignment could mean presentation and elevation. It could mean budgeting for implement. Like I actually took the vagueness of it as a positive opportunity that a person could come in and really elevate and implement. But I think if we want to have a discussion about what that means and how they should be presented and how

2:05:48the board should be included when there are policy decisions that are being made, like I, I would welcome that. I think that would be exciting and a great idea. So are you saying you could go either way? Either leave it as it is or add some language that would give more of a specific task. Yeah. I could go. Exactly. And the leaving it as it is leaves that for a future discussion. I think the Board hasn't had a discussion about that. So we, if we want to flesh out what that means and what we want to see, the bit more of that policy discussion we need to have like real time right now, which is exciting. And I'm open to that. And I don't know if we have time right now. And so if we want to say this is something that we want the new administrator to take seriously, then they can come in and do that work too. And that works for me too. Either way works for me. Commissioner respond to that one. I'm somewhere. Did you respond to that question. No, I haven't, um, I was, I was looking at your concern about the language, but I think, um, uh, I mean, rather than really get into a long discussion about what we're doing here with our racial equity action plans,

2:07:10because I, I've been waiting for a presentation on, on this, um, I think, you know, we can leave it in and maybe it would just say, uh, racial equity action plan alignment and implementation. Um, because I mean, I don't know what we're doing with these plans. I don't know if they're calling for additional resources. I'm quite in the dark about it. Um, but I think we can leave it in and just, and just say that alignment and implementation. The only thing is I like you as I've already said, I don't know if what they align meant, I sort of liked because it implies like a lineup with something policy direction, board vision, resources funding budget. And I don't know what's being proposed. So I don't know if they'll be implemented or not. Fair enough. I'm kind of in the same place. If I didn't, I didn't know what was in what it is. I don't know what it takes. I don't know what we're aligning, but I didn't want to open it up. So I'm wondering, I mean, and again, I'm just looking at the other sections of opportunities. And so, and also just listening to the conversation today, uh, support county leadership in implementation and alignment of policy 1. 06 could be one. Or just supporting county leadership. Through, you could say racial equity.

2:08:47Like racial equity dash, support county leadership through implementation. And something of racial equity action plans. Go ahead. Thank you, Christine. Um, we could say bring the racial liquidity action plan in alignment with policy, the policy number and put a link to the policy. I think. Bringing the racial equity action plans forward to the board for presentation and discussion and the lining resources with whatever's decided would make sense. So I'm, I think my problem here is that I'm unclear the status of this project. I know that, uh, the departments were each creating racial equity action plans. I know that Jana was leading an effort. To align all of those plans so that we have, I believe maybe a single racial equity action plan for Boulder County that I believe, but I'm not sure about that. So I don't know. I don't know whether alignment meant to work on a lining those plans or aligning the plan with our budget. I just, it's the alignment word in there. I guess because I don't know where this project is. I know this was something Janet was intimately involved.

2:10:21And I think Commissioner Stolzman was going to those meetings as well. I was Jenna actually asked that the Boardnot go to the meeting. She specifically asked me to not participate. So. I think so we're trying to just describe some neuroterm opportunities. So maybe, maybe it is something as simple as resume work on a Boulder County, Racial Equity Action plan. Something like that. I think the staff have been working on it. I think that the missing piece is presenting it to the Board of County Commissioners and getting policy direction from the board. So that would suggest completion. Of. And I'm again, if we're trying to. Use this as opportunity and have it a little succinct with other line or not line items, they're bullet points in this paragraph. Then racial equity work. Hyphen support County leadership. Through presentation, um, and implementation of racial equity action plans. Could be one, like that's the near opportunity. And if you two feel like just leaving the alignment in there as it is. And then working with that new County administrator to, you know, for them to understand the work that is being done, where the different racial equity work is happening, their role with our Office of Racial Equity and then the action plans, et cetera.

2:12:20I think I liked that first sentence that you suggested. I'm just uncomfortable with implementation because it hasn't been presented to the Board. And so we don't know what budget implications there are. I just actually, the only issue I have is with the word implementation. It could be an implementation with what the Board approves. Then I could go along with it. I just don't, like I do think that there are plans floating around that I've never been presented to the board. And I don't know what the policy implications are. Okay. So that's, um, I hear that. And I, and what we've got is, is a list of the things that we know this County Administrator will address when they take office. So let's, um, let's take that entire, the bullet point out because we actually don't know. I mean, there are a lot of projects that Jenna really strived mightily to finish up, uh, so and we, we don't have a full list of the things that she was working on that she hadn't been able to complete. Uh, so why don't we take that out?

2:13:29Uh, I actually think it's, it may be one of those ones that is not like the others in that, you know, this is, it's not the overall sort of environment in which, um, the person will be working. It is just a one among many projects that needs to be finished. So, uh, rather than try to figure out how to write this in a way that's consistent with the other ones, um, I'm going to suggest we take it out. I wouldn't support taking it out. And I'm happy to leave it as presented by our HR team. Or take the time that we've taken on other bullet points and other sections of the document to, um, maybe be broader. I didn't hear Commissioner Salzman that you had issue with the idea of putting something in there for an opportunity. And I heard the implementation word was the problem. And so I think we can, somebody else mentioned completion of those plans and presentation. I think that would be, I think that's going to be very helpful to the county administrator to understand all of the different departments and work that's happening. Yeah. Just as I said before, I can leaving it as it is, I can live with, I do think it leaves some question. It's like, well, what does that mean? But then that would be

2:14:48the thing to explore together, which I think is okay. I think it does not have parallel construction, which was your original criticism, but I think maybe we can live with that. And so that's fine. And I can also live with taking it out. So I am sort of flexible on this one. We did start the document, you know, with, um, equity centered leadership, like each paragraph has had something about equity or racial equity. And so, um, I do think it'll be clear that the candidate that that's a priority to the board. But I do think it's nice to have it first in this bulleted list. So I guess I was just probably leave it as it was written, even though that does create some question. I think so my, my only problem with this was that word alignment because I don't think, I don't know what that means in this context or in this, yeah, I don't know what that means here. So if we could say completion and just leave it at that, racial equity action plan completion. Maybe could we try. Bring racial equity plans forward to the policy makers for discussion. And then that could lead to other things in the future.

2:16:02I just don't know in the context of completion, I think different people have different impressions of what they can and cannot do with these plans that have been created. And there are fiscal considerations. There are union considerations. There are community considerations that the board needs to discuss. Yeah. Oh, I hear all that. So then maybe, uh, bring racial equity action plans forward. To the Board of County Commission or whatever you said, but just not policy makers because I think we're just talking about us rather than be elusive about it. So whatever that sentence was. Uh, just say, I feel like that is a task. And we're not making a list of tasks. So that just doesn't, that doesn't get to my initial concern. I based on the conversation. I would just leave it as is.

2:17:06And this conversation has been super helpful. I think. That was why I originally I proposed a leading up because it is a task. It's not an environment in which the person will be working. Um, so you know what let's just leave it the way it is and the person can make their own sense out of it. Um, so then I think, uh, if, if that's fine, uh, I think I heard Commissioner Stolzman say just leave it the way it is. I think I heard Commissioner Ellery say that. I think we can move on to the ideal candidate. I thought this was a great summary. And it feels very similar to language that we've used in other executive hirings. And I'm looking at this first section. Oops, ideal candidate. Down to minimum qualifications. And I'm, I think just a curiosity. I was thinking at the minute I'm qualifications.

2:18:17Maybe we're already addressed, but I might be now looking at different. Okay. And I'll, I mean, we had differences of opinions in regards to the minimum. Qualifications on years of experience. Um, and, and I think this is where the board had maybe landed. In our previous job description. So and that's just coming from the world of skill - based hiring. And what my belief is that skills can be gained outside of just local government experience to be able to lead. And hang on before we get to that. Okay. And on this section. Thank you. In the ideal candidate section, um, you know, it starts with the racially conscious public sector leader. I think that paragraph is great emotional intelligence paragraph is great. Professional commitment to equity driven work, again, really focusing on equity and racial equity throughout the document. I think that paragraph is great.

2:19:26And I would delete the bulleted list that is sort of just our way of describing the courageous conversations on race, the cultural capital work. I think we've seen that that leads to confusion and applicants and people not understanding what we're trying to communicate. So I would delete the all executive leaders to the end of that section. I wouldn't support removing that section. Yeah. And we, we discussed this in the context of that job description that we all worked on earlier. Um, I, I would support deleting it. It does, uh, the, the ideal candidate text does include, um, bring forth humility authenticity and cultural competence. To advance an inclusive organizational culture. Uh, I think that communicates all of this. What I have had trouble with in this list in the past. And I think it is, I think, I think it's a little bit clearer to me than it has been in the past, but, um, this is there's a lot of context around this. That comes out of the, uh, the courageous conversations about race.

2:20:52Um, materials. And if you're not already familiar with it, I, I think that you would really not know whether, whether you're a person that would be aligned with Boulder County, um, I've, I've always thought that the linguistic capital section as read or as written may suggest that we want somebody who is bilingual. I know it says and or style. But I, I just think this is, um, where it says all executive leaders are expected to possess the following attributes. I think a person would say what. On this. So we had arrived at a place where we had deleted this from that job description. I think we've got a lot of this stuff already embedded in the document and other language. I'll just share for me that the line in there that talks about, uh, all executive leaders in the county expected. And then it says known as cultural capital used by when we were originally worked on this piece of, um, cultural capital, it came from some of the CK work that creatious conversation about race. Um, sessions of work that is part of the curriculum that Boulder County has chose to use and has been using for many years now and cultural capital isn't just, um, it's just, it's not just C car practitioners or C car. Knowledgeable folks who know what cultural capital

2:22:41is. So I just want to clarify that. Because, um, cultural capital does give people the opportunity to think about lived experience, um, life history, work history and other countries and other places and other spaces that give them an opportunity to express that in their ability to, um, apply for a position. So I just want to clarify for me that is cultural capital is not solely from courageous conversations about race. Originally, I think there was another word in there that it was like, this was an example of C car practitioner where we CC car practitioners providing information for our job descriptions. Um, I think we've got two commissioners in favor of, um, just deleting that, that last part. That starts with all executive leaders in the County are expected. Was that your position? Commissioner Stolzman? Yeah. I think it's esoteric beyond readability for a person outside of our organization. And as I stated in my position, it starts out the paragraph again with a racially conscious public sector leader. The second paragraph embodies emotional intelligence. The third paragraph talks about equity driven work and cultural competence. So I don't think that it's, it's removing some of the intent of that section.

2:24:15I think it just makes it, um, actually more inclusive and approachable. I know in other organizations, they really focus on, um, also having characteristics that are consistent with not just minority populations, but majority population. So being able to communicate with people from Colorado, having experiences in the West, those are often included in brochures in our area. And we don't have any language like that in our. So I still think it gets at the point that's intended, but in a way that's much less esoteric and readable to the man on the street. Okay. Um. So yeah, I, I think you've got two commissioners that would like to delete that, uh, starting with all executive leaders. I think I just want to ask on that, because this is not part of what would be then in the neof as far as, and you're right on this conversation we had originally, this was in the job description, requirements and or qualifications or abilities. I'm wondering about, um, because this to me again is kind of the high level instead of having expected to use a different term or if, if, if either of you'd be open to that and having conversation about that, or if you both come to an agreement about it, I just wanted to ask before we continue to move on in such an important

2:25:40position for Boulder County. Your question is if the issue I'm taking with it is about the word expected because that is not the issue that I have. Okay. Is that a math? I'm asking. Is that what you're that wasn't exactly my question I was asking would you be open to changing a word in here. And expected was one. I thought maybe would be an option. To be able to acknowledge the importance of cultural capital, but not make it a requirement. I guess that's the word expected made me think maybe that. Makes it feel more like a requirement than. For me. I mean, if we just, if we want to have more of a debate on this, I do feel like we had two board direction not to include this and it got included anyway, which is sort of interesting. But like for me, like the deeper conversation around it is like in the previous paragraph, I think it makes it clear with a demonstrated personal and professional commitment to equity driven work. The ideal candidate brings humility authenticity and cultural competence to advance advance and inclusive organizational culture. I think the last section like really does take some specific training and understanding to understand what's meant by the words in the section. And I think, um, people with different backgrounds would approach those words differently.

2:27:02I notice employees with all different cultural capital bringing value to the county. So for example, with the anti - Semitic attack on June 1st, um, I think that there were people with cultural competencies in that space and there were people that definitely did not. And so that, you know, doesn't necessarily fall into some of our training at Boulder County about linguistic capital, but there were certainly ways of speaking and practices and behaviors that were driven by people's culturals and experience. I also see that, um, in other areas where there can be people, uh, that communicate differently from regional communication styles, um, that are just within Colorado, um, that are from different backgrounds, uh, political backgrounds and the ability to interact with different types of people. So I see a lot of different types of cultural capital that's maybe different than how our county is training our employees to view cultural capital. And I think it's more appropriately captured in that paragraph above talking about an ideal candidate bringing humility, authenticity and cultural competence. Um, so that we can have an inclusive organization that's truly inclusive of everyone. So I'm not going to go on at length about taking it out, but I do think we should take it out. I think it was, uh, some of this, well, the familial capital and the social capital

2:28:40might cause a person who is not from Colorado and doesn't have social networks. Here, you know, to think that they're not eligible. I just think there's a lot about this that a person who is not familiar. And I understand you have said several times that the cultural capital is a well - known concept. But these particular words in this particular phrasal is drawn from the C car training. And I think what I'm concerned about as a person who thinks they're not eligible because they reading these words and the common understanding of these words would make them think they're not eligible. And I do, I do believe, uh, if you read the entire brochure in particularly the language above on the ideal candidate, I think it's very, very clear that we're looking for somebody who has a great deal of, uh, of awareness regarding racial equity.

2:29:41And the desire for, for equity more broadly and Boulder County, um, so I think, I think we've provided direction on this. And, um, and I think we should move on. Great. Thank you. I would invite Christine on the minimum qualifications. You started with some concerns about how this is currently phrased. If you could elaborate on that. And if you have, if you have a proposal in mind, um, I'd invite you to express that as well. Uh, the, each position at the county has a classification attached to it. And that's what determines the pay range. And the classification for our county administrator requires a bachelor's degree in eight years of experience. And that is the current pay range. We have almost doubled the expectation, um, which would move our pay range as well as we did some. Ask, asking around of other counties what their minimum requirements are for their county executives. And none was higher than a bachelor's in 10 years. Most were eight. I'll just say looking at like liquid, um, which I forwarded, did the board just did an executive recruitment for a city manager, which is a different job, but a similar job. And all five finalists have over 20 years of experience, 25, 24, 20, 20, 25. So I don't think it's, um, going to be particularly hard. We also have

2:31:25a number of internal candidates that have more experience than this. So I have heard that criticism that it's a lot of years, but I think a different way of approaching it is to just change the classification to meet the needs of our organization. Like if we can give that, we would also need to change the pay range. Yeah. Yeah. I think at this point from my perspective, like what we really need is not someone just starting out. And this is their first County Administrator role I think we need somebody with different experiences. They can draw on to face the challenging times that we're currently facing. So I'm very comfortable with the years. I just think we would address it with the pay and the classification. Okay. Thank you. Um, we, we had discussed and I apologize I don't have the drafts in the red lines available to me with the job description. I thought we had discussed some, some combination of was, well, some language that would make it clear. And I think maybe this does now that I read it again. That it that you don't, we're not looking for 15 years as a county executive or a city manager. We're looking for 15 years in the field. Where you have progressively responsible experience in public sector administration and executive management. So I'm not

2:32:52reading that as requiring. Is this, are you Christine saying. That eight years of experience in the public sector, you know, as you've been moving up in positions is all that you're recommending. I prefer into our classification or classification for the job that you want to post has a bachelor's degree requirement and eight years of experience. If you wish to change that, we would need to change the classification and the pay range. But it's what I'm focusing on is eight years of experience as what? Like years of experience, uh, an executive in a local government. Eight years of public sector experience, correct? Minimum of administration of a minimum of eight years of experience leading in a public sector organization. We may have left out the word progressively, but we could also include that. There are changes we could make to show that we're looking for you.

2:34:08You've made, um, you have actually moved up in the organization, I guess, or increased your responsibility or now you've started with a certain budget management. Now you're at a different level of management of budget, but we would like to see that you have progressed in your career to this level. So the eight years of experience could be progressive experience, but we have been, it's clear it's public sector experience. It doesn't have to be commissioners. Natalie Spring at Commissioner Deputy for the record just to read specifically what director Scarlet is referencing on the record. Your current job classification is posted for the County Administrator under experience. It lists eight years of progressively responsible experience in public sector administration and executive management experience working in Boulder County government preferred additional related education may count towards required experience.

2:35:11And so that is what was posted for the, um, job classification and not what we had worked on in the update of job description. Can you just explain who posted it? Like we, like you're saying the board posted erroneously and we just need to correct that today. Um, Commissioners, that would be something that you are welcome to direct Director Scarlett to update, to align with the updated job description if that's your pleasure. This previous job description was posted by a previous Board of County Commissioners just for clarification for the record. Okay. Um, well, I'm happy to accept the recommendation that we reduce 15 to eight. The second part of that experience working within Colorado government preferred. I read that. I think it could be read to think we're looking for somebody who worked in Colorado state government. So I wanted to, I wanted to address that language a little bit. Okay. But I think the real, the real nub of this is how many years if progressively responsible experience in public sector administration and executive management. I just need to go back to what we had already agreed on.

2:37:01Commissioners. What'd it be helpful for me to display the experience listed in the draft job description for the board to reference on the record. Yeah. That would be helpful. And I don't think we had finalized that. I think we were trying to come up with some language. So it's we shouldn't take that for final. No, I totally agree. I just, I'm trying to look at what we've already. Talked over. Yeah. I think it'd be great to get it on the screen. Thank you. And, um, John, if you're wonderful. Oh, I like this. I picked this. So I, I mean, a couple of things that are missing, I think local governments really different than state government, just like you're saying commissioner, Levy and County government actually is preferred probably, um, but I think local government is fine. Um, I think this description of the experience makes a lot of sense. I'm really uncomfortable with eight years that can be one, um, that can basically be one round of elected officials in a position of power. And so that doesn't show the ability to work with different elected officials over time. And we know like regardless of what happens this fall with three to five or not three to five, we know we'll have, uh, two new County Commissioners in a couple of years and a half. So I think

2:38:22the ability to work with different types of elected officials when boards change over is important. And I don't think you'll be able to demonstrate that you have that experience in eight particularly if we have this progressively responsible experience, um, like if you started as in a front office or in a different position and worked your way up to a management position, you might not have any experience in the first part of your career with elected offices. And this, um, position will need to not only be able to navigate boards of county commissioners, but also working with elected offices across sheriff and DA and Coroner and assessor and treasurer. So I think understanding that part of it is really important and having that experience, um, I'm really comfortable with 15 particularly given the number of hires that are happening right now and how many very experienced candidates there are that are applying for these jobs around Colorado right now. And then also in conjunction with how many internal staff that we have that are really fantastic that I hope apply for this job that also, um, meet these thresholds. So I think it's fine. I do think it's important to pay people and classify them properly.

2:39:29And so we should adjust that. Pistor Stolzman, um, I wasn't sure whether you were reacting to the language that's now on the screen. And whether you're comfortable with the 15 years of progressively responsible supervisory experience, but only require five or more years of recent experience as an executive. Yes. So exactly what's on the screen I've comfortable with for education experience and knowledgeabilities and skills. Which is different than what was drafted. In the profile. But I am comfortable with what's on the screen now. Okay. Um, I think going back to the process of creating this language, I had added, I would, I wasn't clear that exact for me executive means a county manager or a county administrator, city manager. And I thought if you had experience as the director of a, you know, of a large department, um, that, that that could substitute. But I didn't know how to, I didn't know how to say that qualitatively. So I had written that substantial responsibilities budgetary oversight or staff. And I, I know when we left this, I was inviting somebody to change that if there was a better way to say it. I think the department directors are executives. So that's why I'm not concerned with it. I think a department director, cause it says an executive that has substantial responsibilities for budgetary oversight and staff.

2:41:06So if you don't think that that's clear, we should probably clear it up. But I do think that an executive and local government includes the department directors. Okay. Well, I don't think it's clear in our recent, uh, legal guidance that we don't need to do all this painful work on the record with our department directors, but we do with this because Colorado statute refers to executives. Uh, and you'll recall that I disagree with that interpretation and I'm happy to sue us so we can find out for sure if that would make it more clear. Okay. I don't want you to do that. So, um, so, you know, we did work on this language. And I think we did this. Well, again, I think we're not necessarily united on that. Entirely. But, um, but I, this was the language that we were more comfortable. With. Um, yeah, yeah, cause there was, there was stuff like that.

2:42:12Let's see Executive Or no, don't do that. In local government. No, I mean, it already says or director of a local government department was substantial responsibilities. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. This was, yeah. I mean, this was the language I was expecting to see in here. I was, um, I just wanted to jump in here. With the, if we go back to the draft job description and add in these additional pieces around local government or director of, I would, but still allow that five years of recent experience. Oh, yeah. So I would still, and this is where it was before, um, I hear what you're saying about the eight years in that particular situation of maybe only having the opportunity to work with one board. And I don't think it needs to be 15. Um, I think if you're wanting to capture just to somebody, understand how to transition with the new leadership team, could it be 10. Years of progressively responsible supervisor experience, uh, instead of 15. And just thinking about where. The different opportunities could be versus having somebody who has. 15 and wondered if either board member would be interested in 10 years instead of 15. S hand up. Let's hear from Christine before I weigh in. Thank you. I want to make sure I'm, I'm clear that a classification, the way a

2:43:59position is classified that determines the title, it determines the pay. That is a policy. If we are changing a classification, then we need to go through the process of a classification change. That is an absolute, that's a necessary step. We have a policy that says the highest paid person at the county cannot make more than six times the pay of the lowest paid person. Currently the lowest paid person is in the low 50s. If we change the current classification, we need to change that policy because we're going to go beyond six times the lowest paid person. Or we could raise people's pay. You would have to do it before we post it. I mean, we wouldn't have anyone employed. I mean, there's more than one way to accomplish it. You don't have to lower the top pay. You could raise the bottom page. Um, Christine, a question, what do you, what is your reference point for what that pay would have to be if, if we were? Because the. Current pay range for this position is up to six times the salary of the lowest paid person, the current pay range for this classification. Takes us to the top of the pay range. We would essentially be changing the top pay offered at the county if we increase the paid, then we have to look

2:45:36at some policy changes. I understand the math. But when you're, you're saying that if we use the language that's on the screen and we hire somebody with five or more years of recent experience, uh, as an executive and local government, you're making a, drawing a conclusion that the appropriate salary range for that is going to be more than six times the pay of our lowest paid person. And my question is, what is your reference point for what that salary range would be. If you are changing the minimum qualifications of the classification from a bachelor's degree in eight years to a bachelor's degree and 15, you're essentially changing the minimum qualifications and have now changed the pay range. Commissioner Olivia, I think I may have this in question as you because we can, this is, uh, County Administrator job, which just serves at the pleasure of the Board and is a bit different than the other jobs we post. And I think we need to post the job at something. But if people apply within the range that we've posted, then someone wants to work for that price. I mean, so I think I have a similar question to what you have. It's like, what's the basis for the number. If I can try, then do my commissioner. Oh, what, what I'm understanding is I'm trying

2:46:59to like listen to all the different needs and try and try and figure out somewhere in the middle. But what I'm hearing is that if we don't use the eight years of progressively responsible experience, then we create a different issue of what the policy in regards to. You've created a new job. Yes. It's not the job that our previous administrator held. It's a new job. Okay. I mean, I think our admit, our previous administrator would qualify for this job description. Yes. Many people would qualify, but we have to declare a minimum, minimum that allows you to be qualified. We could hire somebody who has 30 years of experience. But to be minimally qualified for you to be able to do the job, you need a bachelor's and X amount of years. And we are hopeful we will get people who have 15, 20, 25. They may end up in our preferred list as we go through the process. But it doesn't mean that we're only looking at people who have eight years of experience. It just means if you wish to apply for the position, the very, very minimum we ask for you to be able to do this job is this. And then as we go through the process, we may find some highly talented people with some exceptional years of experience. And those

2:48:22are the ones you may want to be looking at. That's helpful to me. I'm happy to take what I'm hearing as a recommendation of leaving the minimum experiences eight years of progressively response. As our current classification says yes. Yes. I'm happy to support that. I support what's on the screen. I mean, I could go in a direction that's less than 15. However, I would not be interested in anybody who has not. Recently been an executive in local government, uh, for, you know, for fewer than five years. Uh, so, um, I think it's very important if we're talking about you've been working your way up in local government, um, for eight years. So you've worked in the, in the public sector and the local government environment for eight years, um, I think you for an organization of the size of our organization, uh, I think you have got to have been the leader, uh, for at least five years in that organization. I just, I can't actually agree to lowering it to eight. It doesn't make any sense. We say in our experience additional related education may count toward required experience. So like let's say you have four years of education. And then you have the five years as an executive. Like you didn't become an executive write out of college. And so you're already at

2:49:54nine. So you're just adding an additional six years of some type of progressively responsible experience. I think it's incredibly reasonable. And it's far lower than what we're seeing from applicants in other areas. So I actually think 15 is a minimum. So I think what I'm trying to get to is this issue of the classification that our human resources director is concerned with and that we not introduce an element that requires us to reconsider the classification and the upper salary level and then change our entire pay scale simply. And so we can say this is these are minimum qualifications. Perhaps we could go into executive session for legal advice because I have some questions that I would feel comfortable asking for legal advice on, around this pay issue. Um. I can offer a suggestion that we do the minimum, but we can add a preferred. So the minimum is a bachelor's in eight, but our preference is a bachelor's in 10, 12. So we can do minimum. And we have to list the minimum. If the minimum qualification for every position, but we can say our preferences and we can screen according to our preference. Well, we also knowledge skills and abilities. We also are asking for extensive knowledge of management principles, organizational skills, ability to apply these to public administration. Um, I mean, I can

2:51:36take, I can take your suggestion as well, Christine, but I heard a request that we go into executive session. So Commissioner Stolzman, do you feel you need that with, with this additional, uh, proposal that our HR director has made? Yes. Okay. All right. Then, um, what you make the appropriate motion. I move to go into executive session for the purpose of legal advice on our county administrator job description, um, pursuant to Colorado Revised statute 24 - 6 - 402 subsection for B. Mailed it. Legal advice. Just a clarification of the Executive session that you're requesting is based on the job description or if it's on the position profile. Um, I apologize. The position profile and the job posting. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Second. Okay. So we have a motion and a second. Is there any objection to the motion. Hearing none? We will be an executive session until further notice. Commissioner Levy will call you in. Okay. Oh shoot. I wait. Can you guys still hear me. Um, I don't know that I have teams ability to go into teams. Let me, well, I'll do my best. If not, then I'll just be on the phone. Great. Back.

2:53:12Thank you all very much. Commissioners are you ready. Yes we are thank you very much Thank you so much. And we're recording All right, so we are back from executive session. And We when we left off we were trying to resolve the number of years of experience that we are going to require at a minimum. And Who was was that your screen Natalie that was being shared that had the minimum qualifications from the job description that we all worked on I think it might be helpful to put that back up on the screen. She is working on it. Oh, okay. So I am well we had we had a recommendation from our HR director that we state as a minimum qualification eight years of progressively responsible supervised very experience. Based on our current job classification. Commissioner Stolzman you you felt 15 years was the right amount I think I heard.

2:54:41Also from our HR director. Suggestion or an offer of that if we can have the eight years to maintain our current consistency But then indicate some additional number of years is preferred. Did I say where we were when we went into Executive session accurately. That sounds familiar to me. Sounds good. Okay good enough for that. Purpose now Let's let's try to move forward. And I can I can I can be flexible on that 15 years I think it is important for me the important thing is five or more years of recent Experience experience as an executive and local government. Or you know the language or director blah blah blah. And for me thinking of this is the minimum qualifications. I would encourage us to go at a lower number and if it's eight or if it's ten I think ten seems like it would get to some of the concerns that I heard shared here today. I feel really strongly that this section that we have on the screen is What we should go forward with. So I'm going to join Commissioner Elsherien with 10 years so that we and not not just so we can finish this But I do think 10 years is a good amount of time to have spent in local government and to give you a really broad Range of

2:56:34knowledge and experience about the workings of local government. And You know in a in the County Context Commissioner seats are staggered and you have elections Essentially every two years you may not have complete turnover, but there's an opportunity for turnover So I think that's a good thing to have experienced You're screenish. We don't want to see that. New ordered food. And I'm sorry to staff who's who's going over it's it's 245 for me But anyway I think I would I can move forward with 10 with with the language that's up on the screen now. Just to clarify are you saying 10 years of a progressively responsible survivor, but you're keeping the including five. Yes, yeah, because I don't think the progressively responsible supervisory experience necessarily Communicates that you have to have been an executive and I think we do need somebody who has been an executive. I Think we have gotten to some at least agreement on this section for today So what I'm hearing is everything in this qualification section is going to replace everything in the other document except that you're changing 15 to 10 over my objection. I think that's correct. Are you talking just to clarify what you're saying are you asking about this just the line about experience?

2:58:23Nope, I'm saying from the word qualifications to the period after required is all being put in the other document. Because the language is substantially different and more complete in this document. I so the the document that was posted has a section called education I believe that's the same as what's here the experience we would sub in what's on the what's on the screen being shared for what was in the document that was posted. I Think I mean I think this knowledge skill is an abilities. I would put that into the end of the document. And then We have we have the residents to requirement and special requirement. In the post - it document. That. Ll probably be in there Agreed with how you just summarized it. Okay. Okay and your objection is noted. Thank you so just a quick question on that because the position profile that we were looking at earlier under this section that's titled minimum qualifications doesn't have a knowledge skills and abilities. Section on that So it would basically be an adding in based on that. Last sentence in the knowledge skills and abilities. Section of ability to effectively motivate employees and to work effectively with employees other agencies in the public for me. Is Not a strong sentence. And so if you two would like to keep or add that

3:00:18Knowledge skills and abilities to sentences into the profile I would like us to talk about that. I'm not sure I'm trying to figure out what it is that one what we're asking but to how would we know that. And what kind of supplemental questions and or interview questions. Would help us get to that if those are the priority skills and abilities. I think an example question would be give an example of how you've affected effectively motivated employees that work for you give an example of how you have worked with the public. Effectively. And then we could describe that. Taking Commissioner Oakerman's point that these are minimum qualifications that are HR department will screen in or out of whether you meet that I mean we'd not going to be able to screen in or out on Extensive knowledge of management principles, etc. But I think I mean, I think we this is what we want and this is what we heard from our department heads in that meeting and and we will be asking for that and this I think we've said that elsewhere in the document I I don't object to taking the second sentence out I think the first sentence is very very important.

3:01:38I think that would get it get it with my concern is and I was thinking this job description if I heard you right Commissioner Lee B that this was worked on previous to the meeting last week So I I'm not saying input incorporated in the draft job description. I did see input in the what was presented from the profile. This is what the three of us worked on together. Some some time ago. Correct. I thought I heard you say that it incorporates the input that we got from department heads and I was thinking this was a different timing. Okay, no, I just what it says here about a motivate employee, et cetera is consistent with what we heard, but I was just noting that we will I'm sure we will have interview questions that get at this because this is really essential to the job.

3:02:38I think that there were two in agreement of deleting the last sentence and knowledge skills and ability and two in agreement to leaving the first sentence I think we can move along. I think we can move on. Okay, and then just so it's clear that we are keeping the residency requirement and the special requirement. From the other document those are remaining in the other document yes that sounds correct. And committed Commissioners that really spring at Commissioners deputy for the record. I'm just gonna stop sharing my screen so I can include these edits. Thank you. That's fine. I think you're good with that we're gonna now move on to the section on Salary and benefits. Really quickly the and maybe you just said it, but I missed a portion in the Profile that was presented. Under the residency requirement in that same paragraph that was listed as minimum qualifications There's a section about special requirement. And then position contingency. Are we leaving those two. Yeah, I I'm sorry I didn't mention that but I assume that would stay in agree. I think those are all under residency requirements But that's what I was taking them to be because that's a bolded header But if not then we should probably reformat it to be. Formatted Okay, I just want to thank you. Okay salary and benefits. Are

3:04:13we being asked to determine a salary range right now or that would come from HR later just process question Thank you, ksine Based on the minimum qualifications you just listed. We have a range for that. So we left it blank depending on where we landed Okay, thank you, but we do have arranged for bachelors in 10. So I think that salary range is actually a matter for the board to determine And I'm comfortable having commissioner LVA work with HR to determine that range or Commissioner Loachman working with AIDA But I like it's actually a matter for the board. Well. Thanks I and this is a little different because this is the first time Boulder County's done a hiring process for a county administrator So I'm looking to maybe just attorney advisement on. In the past we've had like conversations with HR and they've done their studies or regionally And it sounds like some of that homework's been done So do we need to talk about that salary range right now Or is that something that the Board or one of us as a lead on salary could take up separately with HR There's no requirement that you make that decision today. You can Well, we do have to post publicly the salary range That's a legal requirement That wasn't my question. Well I think Commissioner

3:05:38Levy was bringing that up because we would like to post this next week And so we need to be able if we want to be able I think Commissioner Levy was saying if we want to be able to meet our timeline to post it next week We need to have determined the salary range before we can post it Correct. That is all true and what I'm asking is and it sounds like the attorney's saying We don't have to do that right now And that one Commissioner could be the lead with HR to determine the range Or we could have a separate meeting Um, to focus on that piece I don't think we should do salary range right now. Well we so I'll ask Carrie Um, so we do have to, you know, we've been having this conversation in public per Colorado Statute Uh, salary range is part of it What we have to bring it back to another business meeting in order to approve it with a salary range. No the statute doesn't require that the salary range is determined at this meeting. Okay, so I just, you know for awareness I'm leaving the country on Saturday So I'm not going to be part of that conversation Um, I'm happy to have you all work on that. I Think I'm I'm curious about maybe having

3:06:54a meeting on Thursday morning because we had a shift in schedules So that time may still be available on the calendar I don't know. And my job isn't to matter calendars, but I just wanted to ask that question. Uh, Natalie Spring Commissioner's Deputy for the record Commissioners We would be happy to have a two commissioner meeting on Thursday morning Um, to finalize that Um, conversation with the Board, just noting that Commissioner Levy would be Excuse from that for her previously scheduled engagement. Do you support the plan. And I if I'm available I will try to join that. Just wanting to make sure we don't deadlock. Um, I'm just sort of in a contingent. Condition right now as far as what I have to do. Okay, so we cannot settle on the solver range at this time We will try to address that. Uh, muting on Thursday, and that does not have to be in a public meeting. Um, I think that's what we heard That is correct Commissioner Levy. Okay, thank you Excellent. Um, alright then on to the benefits portion of this. Would we want to talk about salary and benefits as one piece Understanding that compensation includes benefits. Well, I think we can I would think we can address the rest of this before we've settled on the salary range I mean regardless

3:08:33of the salary range, all of these things are included in a benefit package Well, and I think if you're not, I don't object to the way the benefit section is written because it's describes that the following highlights just a few of the robust benefits offered to Boulder Boulder County employees And I think through if we do write a contract for our administrator Which I think we ought to, then we can, we likely will expect to have to negotiate over some of the additional details in the contract So I think because it's sort of written flexibly Like that we can, I don't have any concern with how this is written up for the benefits section. Commissioner Lutzerman. I'm looking at this section in the profile under salary and benefits So if I start with the Boulder County is deeply committed That section all the way to stop before How to apply Section, I'm fine with the HR's recommendation. Okay, I do think that Uh the very first point here on flexible and hybrid work schedule Uh, I would like that to be revised slightly in that Um... Uh. Uh. Uh, it requires on - site presence for onboarding activities. After which employees may utilize the county's flexible hybrid and remote work option as Business needs allow.

3:10:03Um, I think it needs to be clear in here that this is Um... A position that does require much more in - person work And I would read this to be Oh great after I get on board - ed Then, you know I can as remote as I want to be And so what I had just written as a note is state of preference for a minimum of three days a week in person. Uh in - person as business needs require. You know I don't want anyone thinking, great This is a remote position I think you gotta be in the office face - to - face with the people you're working with I understand the sentiment and agree with the sentiment It's just that as it reads right now It is just a statement of benefits offered to Boulder County employees. At large And so that's why it's as business needs allow So for this position I don't believe that business needs allow This flexible hybrid remote work option So I think the problem with just making the amendment that you've proposed is Then we have to amend the sentence above it or create some caveat to that This isn't... What is offered? I just think it creates some more... It requires some more changes to the language. Well, it does, I take your point

3:11:35However, it does say this position requires On - site presence for onboarding After which, et cetera I see. Um So that's where I think it could mislead someone Shall we just delete the first bullet. Because it says. The following highlights A few of the benefits. And then just delete the whole first bullet. What that'd be fine too And I think, you know, that would be a subject of negotiation or expectation setting. But yeah, I'd be okay with that Commissioner Lo Shmin I'd invite you away. In... I feel like that's gonna be a major question. For anybody who's looking at this job Posting compared to all the other job postings. That they're considering. So I feel like if we don't address it It's just gonna create. Questions for HR. On the other side I think to be clear about what the policy is. Kind of in a broader sense, all of these pieces are gonna be up for negotiation I would assume. I would think, I mean for me If somebody is gonna decide whether they're gonna apply to Boulder County You're not based on whether they can work remotely than... I'm not sure if they're right for the job But I mean I think we could just say on that first rather than just completely delete it. It could just say flexible and hybrid work

3:13:09schedules are available is a hybrid work schedule is available Subject to negotiation or something. But I'm not interested in someone that is screening out for O - do I have to actually be there in - person. Did you two - So again something. I was just wondering Maybe you two already agreed on. I Don't believe so. I mean I - Well, we did... I did agree with taking it out But if you're concerned that that's just gonna be an open question Then my suggestion was to re - word that to just say Um, a hybrid work schedule. Is available. I Mean we could do it similar to the retirement underneath Where it says click here for more Retirement details. Um... Click here for... Read the county flexible hybrid and remote work options as business leads allow. I don't know if there is a click here to... Place, but just looking at the rest of the document. I think what I'm trying to say.

3:14:33Uh... I don't think this is just a matter of what do we offer to all the other 2, 400 FTE that we have in Boulder County This is a rather unique and very important position So... So I wouldn't have a click here. Okay If you don't care for the language that I proposed Then we should just... I think we ought to just delete it. Or I'm open to some other suggestion But I... I Just... I think that... I don't think that it is reasonable for a person to be applying for the job And think that they'll be able to be remote Even two days a week for the foreseeable future in a new position Like I just don't So that was my hesitation with what you proposed I think it was overly optimistic of how much remote Flexible time there really is So I... And I don't think the expectation of anyone applying for this Is that they'll be remote for the foreseeable. Near - term? I don't both not Yeah No I would hope not But if we want if somebody wants to know that there's flexibility We could just say that a hybrid work schedule is available Subject to negotiation. I wonder if you look further down Like medical dental and vision plans It doesn't give any information about what that is or

3:15:59isn't. We could just leave that as a bullet point without the description. And if you too want to delete it. And have it show up in a different way. Let's just given the time Um... In my initial question about looking at this with the salary. That didn't look forward. I'm fine with just deleting it It will be negotiated And I just didn't like the expectation That was set by the language that was here. I support the plan. The only other change I heard you both say The reason I'm jumping in without deferring to the two of you first Is that you both said you didn't have any other changes Um The other change that I was going to suggest is where it says the pay schedule is once per month The last day of the month I was going to say after month comma with bi - monthly pay currently under exploration Period I agree.

3:17:04Is it bi - monthly or bi - weekly Sorry I always get confused I think it's bi - monthly I think both are actually true But I think we've been calling it bi - weekly Like I think by monthly means that And I think by monthly also means every other month And then I think bi - weekly I know So my monthly but I think it's not It's going to be twice a month It's not going to be... I would not even put that in there. Just well we're Well the last briefing we had on this was that we are moving forward We did direct HR to move forward with it or payroll Uh... To move forward with it And we were told that they are moving forward And it would be implemented January 1st 2028 that it can't be implemented in 27 So I think since that is the plan And a lot of people really appreciate getting a paycheck twice a month I think a lot of put that in Christine. Um we're in We're still in the discovery. Phase And we need to bring to you the executive Sosa Bonsored this project We need to bring you the recommendation. So That should be happening in September. But it is bi - weekly that we are proposing. Okay so then What I had

3:18:31suggested And but I'll accept the amendment is with bi - weekly pay currently under Exploration. I support that. Okay. And it Any anything else here I had nothing else in the document. Christine. Thanks I just want to make sure that we show that all the dates that we've shown in the timeline are tentative We don't want to give a guarantee of the date So the everyday we've listed says tentatively scheduled for That's great. Thank you. Alright so we'll come back with the timeline at a future conversation. Natalie Springent Commissioner's Deputy for the record Yes Commissioners We will bring back the timeline with some additional edits at the next business meeting of the Board And then Um, our request today is your approval Um, to go to approve the position profile Uh, with the included edits shared today. And subject to a determination of the pay range. Yes, thank you. So you're asking for a motion to advance that direction Or you're saying you've received that direction. Um, asking for a motion I make a motion In accordance with our deputy and our chair's comments.

3:20:18Second. Okay Alright We have a motion on the table all in favor say aye. Alright thank you Thanks for the very good work. Uh If I make Mission Leaver I just want to make sure the direction is clear about how the piece around salary is going to happen. We're talking Thursday morning to set it That was okay And we don't need to say here that's a Okay Date certain time anything like that on the record Okay great. Okay, so we've concluded that We're going to confirm our executive session topics. Uh Commissioner Natalie Spring at Commissioners Deputy here for the record I'm here to confirm that the executive session topics that were noticed at the August 18 2026 Regular business meeting of the Board were discussed as scheduled And this is simply a note for the record So I'm happy to move us to item 8 Commissioners for item 8 I'm here to request authorization for the Board of County Commissioners to go into Executive Session on Wednesday August 26 2026 at 1 p. m. Pursuant to CRS 24 - 6 - 402 subsection 4E Instructions to negotiators to discuss the topic of the Collective bargaining agreement with the Boulder County employees Union. Move approval. Second.

3:21:49All in favor say aye Aye. I just have a - I just have a question Do we need to make a friendly amendment to that? I know we just voted But to make it 10 Yeah, sorry So just Just to reconsider that I'll move approval of Executive session on Wednesday August 26 This is stated by Natalie Under CRS - 246402 4E Instructions to negotiators at 111 PM. Second. Okay all in favor Aye Okay we have done that. Excellent work and I am now going to take leave Um... Natalie You'll probably and turn the gavel over to Commissioner Stolzman as vice chair And you all will work out the rest of the agenda here without me Thank you So we're now sitting as the Boulder County Housing Authority And I'll ask the Authority members if we would like to take a recess or how we would like to proceed this afternoon before. I Just want to find out how long of a recess we want to take if it's five minutes half an hour two hours Four hours before we make a motion. So what pleases the Board I would like to eat So let's how about We come back at two. I think that is I mean I can even do and I don't know what everybody else needs to do to get food Prepare

3:23:17food cook food or go buy food So maybe like a half an hour might be okay I don't want to put the other hearings back more than they already Well so I think I think what I was hoping we would have this conversation here So I think it's almost 1 15 So and like people need to go buy food Come up with a plan So I think 2 is a reasonable time to come back It's because it just gives barely enough time for lunch Um, and so then we probably have 1 and a half hours of content Even if we just focus on the action items today for BC HA. I mean maybe could do it in an hour But it's still like the important conversations that we need to have So that would put us at 3 or 330 So if we know that it's already going to be that late We could actually move out the other items to a future date and let people know that we're not going to discuss them today.

3:24:41Commissioners, are you ready? Yes, we are. Thank you so much. Let me just hit record. And we're recording. Thank you. We are now sitting as the Boulder County Housing Authority and returning from recess. Commissioner Lutzman and Stoltzman are President Commissioner Levy is excused. And we are going to go through our agenda the first topic that we have today's public comment. And so we will turn to our signups. There's no one in the room and we will just see if there's anyone signed up virtually. We don't have any. So that concludes our public comment portion of the agenda. We may abbreviate some of the matters just because we're running a little bit behind today. And I am not sure if Susanna is back from her other appointment. And so I will just turn it over to the rest of the team to start us off on the presentation where they would like to. Good afternoon, Commissioners.

3:25:32Michelle Alexander, Deputy Director BCHA. I do know that Susanna Lopez Baker is out of her appointment and trying to join now. Okay, so she will be on in just a moment for her director's updates. And just to the folks in the back, do you see Susana Lopez Baker joining virtually. Natalie Springett Commissioner's Deputy for the Record. And I apologize. Records team. It wasn't clear to me that Susana was joining virtually. So I think she's in the morning Zoom call. Do you have a public link you could send Susana for the afternoon Zoom call? And then we can promote her as panelists. Hi Natalie, this is Brianna Barber, Commissioner's Office staff. We did send Susanna a link for this afternoon session, but I'll go ahead and send it to our BA team so she has it ready. Thank you so much. Thank you. And of course you did. Thank you.

3:26:42Good afternoon. We were just getting started. And if you would like to tell us anything about the executive director's update, that would be fantastic. Yes, thank you. I just have a huge. Sorry, Susanna. I feel just start by saying your name. I know it's kind of funny. Yeah. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you for the reminder. Good afternoon, Commissioner Susana Lopez Baker, executive director of the Boulder County Housing Authority. Thank you for having us today. Um, I do just want to go through a couple of quick things. Um, with the HUD shortfall, which was mentioned in my memo, um, I just want to, the Board Snow, we had two meetings last week with HUD staff. Um, they were productive meetings, um, it did result in the encouragement to apply for our reserve funding, which we did, uh, we were notified yesterday that we were awarded 457, 000 dollars of our reserve funds. And later on, uh, Kelly will talk you through a few more details of that. We do expect that funding to arrive in the next two business days. Um, quickly on the card on RO, I did mention the QAP for CHAFA. So that does give some preferential points to public housing authorities, um, noted because public causing authorities are so involved in the development work that, um, is done across the state through

3:27:59CHAFA. And I just wanted to update the board that CHEF actually worked really closely with Naro Leadership. And they have made the adjustments requested. So we were able to successfully negotiate and that will actually not go before legislation this year. Um, and then I have two quick things. I want to know if any commissioners are interested in joining a monthly virtual commissioner network meeting through Naro and that would be, um, either a regional or national narrow call. Commissioner, would you mind any discussion on this topic. Um, I was just going to answer the question between, um, thank you. Thanks everybody. Good afternoon. Thanks for your patience today. Um, so Susanna, I'm thinking that might have been some follow - up. I was just trying to think of the conference that we were at, there was some, and I mentioned it in one of the lead updates. There was just some conversation about how could housing commissioners have a place to gather and or a platform to kind of talk about. So it feels like that might be some follow - up. And I think I would be interested and it would also require to have some conversations with the housing directors here at Boulder County, if we were going to carry positions or anything like that, I would want to have some time to be

3:29:14able to talk about it before, if I went to that meeting and I'd be very interested, but also happy to have somebody else attend that call or meeting. Um, I'm supportive of you attending and I think just understanding what information you would need or if we would like, if we have time to have that additional discussion, you were saying in one of these in a future meeting or if thy, I don't know the schedule of the call you're describing Susanna. Okay. Yeah. I don't know the details yet, but um, when I get them, I will provide them to the board and you all can decide. Yeah. That's great. I think what I'll say is there's interest and it's not, it would be coming together and developing as this kind of opportunity for housing commissioners to get together. So just to respond to the question, what we would be taking that meeting, I don't know yet, but I think that's what the intent is, is to form that. That's great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We're in, um, just in the for the sake of time, we're going to skip a couple of the updates, but happy to provide any additional information should the board have any questions on the already conversion. Will it be corner?

3:30:24And that is a type of, it's actually not an AHT update. It's a prop one, two, three update. And Michelle will actually talk about that in detail in just a minute. Susanne, I do think it's worth just describing some sort of, um, update to the board on Yardi just because we have had such an increase in numbers of resident interest and every technological transition always has a lot of challenges, but I think it would be nice to hear some sort of optimistic hope for the future just for the residents and the staff that have been working so hard on that. Yes. And, um, a couple of things on that. Thank you, Commissioners, for giving us some time here because they already conversion as well underway. And we have now shifted to allowing or opening up, if you will, but digital world of rent cafe, which really does give for the first time our residents a front facing, um, opportunity to engage with the housing authority.

3:31:13So they can, uh, log in. They can see their accounts, um, both the financial side. They can request work orders on their own. So this is a new feature. Um, this is a lot of resident community engagement happening right now. And so we are holding open office hours. Our property managers are doing a wonderful job of that. Fielding a lot of questions and calls. Um, the real critical piece here is that we do need residents who had, uh, their ACH payments being withdrawn from our old system update and confirm the new system. And so the transition right now. This is, um, big conversion and people have, thankfully lived in our buildings for 20 years. And so this is a big shift for them. But the team is doing a fantastic job. Um, I will, Kelly, if you have anything to add that I didn't cover, please let me know because we did have a detailed presentation from Kelly. Sure. I can jump in real quick.

3:32:08This is Kelly Schulz. I'm a housing division manager. And I've been working with Sean Doherty on, um, kind of, uh, organizing the transition on this. And so we, while we have had some, um, hiccups and some of them seemed more just the nature of what they were, it seemed more escalated. Overall, we are extremely pleased with this transition. We're only in month two and haven't completed even the full official two months of the transition. And a lot of the things that we were seeing were actually problems that were hidden in our old software system and staff had just learned work arounds to get around it. And in the conversion, all of these issues got highlighted. And it was a way for us to reset and really look at all the workflow processes and how we could improve efficiencies and put in some checks and balances.

3:32:59Um, overall, I mean, if you think about it, we have, uh, 985 voucher holders. And then we have an additional close to 1200 residents. And so that's almost, that's over 2000 households that we're serving just on BCHA side, not including the temporary rental assistance households we're serving. And out of that, what we had identified is 13 utility reimbursement payments. Whereas one of the issues, but 13 out of over 2000 households, the 10 payments that were issued to landlords incorrectly. But again, out of 785 voucher or 985 voucher households, that's such a small amount. And this has been a big learning lesson for staff. And initially, I'm sure that's part of what you might have heard is some grumbling from staff. Um, myself would be one of those. I've been with the county for 20 years.

3:33:57We've had the same software system for 20 years. There's a lot of us that feel really experts in that system. But again, cause we've learned workarounds and how to navigate it. And the biggest thing was making sure that the staff got the time and the training on this one. Um, and to learn the new steps and the new workflows and understand how the checks and balances actually help them, especially when it comes time for audits. And one of the biggest shifts is when we had a manager supervisor meeting last week, um, maintenance staff actually, or this came up in our all staff meeting, the maintenance staff actually started applauding Yardy. They were very happy with the shift over to it. Now that a lot of the kinks have been worked out, they could see the benefits in items that they have never been able to do with the old software system that they wanted. And we are also really excited, as Susanna talked about, um, roll out reach well, because that is something that we hear a lot from tenants about is the ability to pay rent online. And with debit card and not just ACH withdrawal that we have to set up for them.

3:35:04And this will allow them to do that. It gives our landlords more ability to see their upcoming inspection schedules. Detailed information about their payments they receive from us, which they hadn't received before. Um, and it also allows us to exchange paperwork back and forth, which a lot of that we do now through email and email to a front desk box that's kind of cumbersome and kind of, it adds extra time and delay and getting it sorted to staff, which this will eliminate all of that. So we, we do recognize there's been pain points and we do recognize that we've had some issues to work through. And some of them took a while to figure out where the actual issue is located. But we feel very confident that this was the right decision. We don't have any regrets about moving forward. Uh, we've been working really well with the consultants, the wise group that's been helping us navigate this transition. And the fact that we're only just under two months, um, and seeing a lot of improvement already gives us hope that we are on the right track in the next two to three months to feel even more confident and not have any more issues that cause its complaints to come up to staff. So.

3:36:23Thanks for that. I want to just acknowledge what you said about systems can be hard when we have to change. And so appreciate just the transparency and the honesty of like me too. Uh, I think it's important for all of us to understand that. And we're just changes just part of local government right now. And so I just appreciate that. And hear all of the work, but it does sound like we're getting, we will be in a better place with the system and that will really help staff do their job to be able to communicate, et cetera. So I think it's going to be exciting, but I want to acknowledge that the change happening. Yeah. Thank you very much for the update. And, you know, a system like this touches every single person that either uses it on the staff side or uses it on the, on the customer side, on the resident side. And so just thanks for sticking with it and keep working with everybody, um, till we resolve the issues and getting it started up. But thank you for the update. And there certainly have been a lot of challenges. So, um, much, much. Thanks for working through it. Sure. Thank you commissioners. Um, we will come back to you on the Willoughby Corner update. We just have progressed the design work.

3:37:26And so we want to give you eyes on that. We don't have any upcoming meetings with Council in September. So I don't, the real impact in coming back to that next month. Great. Um, and then we did have a site visit with the DOH leadership staff, um, which included the director, Tyler Jackel and his team of Deputy Directors. Um, that was a really good meeting. We, um, particularly focused on EHV and shortfall. The state is in the same situation that we are. So we kind of strategize what our next steps would be. Um, we also were able to talk about much needed funding for mobile home parks, um, particularly two parks in our County, um, that are either for sale or facing infrastructure challenges. And then we just talked about general overall funding opportunities. This team in particular has not been out to Willoughby Corner.

3:38:16So they came out and, uh, did a tour. It was a really productive hour and a half that we spent with the state. Um, and they're just trying to do more PHA tours throughout the state. So that's great for that team to kind of get out in the community. Um, it's definitely a new experience for us. The old team didn't really engage in that sense. So that was, it was a really nice and refreshing meeting. And then the next thing I have on my list are just upcoming events. So we have the BCHA retreat, uh, and we talked about that already. And I have some good objectives to focus on. My question is, um, whether or not we should hire a facilitator, uh, I, the reason I bring this to you is cause I worry about if I have to facilitate, then I can't participate.

3:39:01And I do. I want to participate. So I don't know. This is our first one. So I also want to hear from the board what's important to you. Thanks for, thanks for that question. I agree that you should be able to participate as the expert and the, um, ED work and all the relationships you've been working on and understanding those different pieces. I think that is important. Um, I wonder, I'm just trying to think of for the board retreat. We've leaned on County staff, whether it's been our deputy administrator or county administrator that we don't have right now or our deputy, um, understanding BCH a little bit different, but I wonder if we have somebody in house is kind of my interest versus needing to get a consultant or contracting out somebody to facilitate. Because if my memory is correct, it's a four hour retreat.

3:39:57Is that right? Susana. Correct. Okay. In my experience with her treats typically the administrator facilitates the work and that is a really active role to play, um, it requires a lot of preparation and planning and material put together. So I actually feel like that would help you be able to participate in the highest level. So I'm, I'm just not exactly understanding the question. Um, like I think if we were to say Natalie would facilitate, then I think Natalie would be participating at the highest level. And I think she would be great at it. So if we need her to do that, I mean, she's got great skills in our deputies. It's fantastic and would be the obvious person to pick. I don't know that she has capacity right now, but I think she would be my obvious second choice behind you facilitating Susana. Okay. No, that's helpful. And I can think of it on it.

3:40:42I've started to create the agenda already. So I, um, and I see your point commissioner. I mean, I kind of want to facilitate. So I get to do that. But I figure you all won't let me do that. Thank you. Um, I did want to also note that on 921, we, um, are slated to present to the lion's city town Council. And that at that meeting, we are going to update where we are in the sewer project, uh, specifically. So we did a series of engagements and we, uh, we will brief the board on how those engagements went and then also let them know what our next steps are just to make sure we're on the right track with the trustees. Great. Any comments or questions on this word. Yeah. Thank you. It was more of a scheduling. We have a city Council Joint meeting that later in the evening. But I know sometimes lions meetings are earlier. What time does that meeting start. I don't, I have not confirmed what time they need us.

3:41:42Cause that's been my experience to you. I can, um, ask and make sure we have a virtual option available if your schedule allows. Okay. Thank you. Be interested. I'm just, I'm guessing it would be a short amount of time, but just to listen in, I'd be very interested to hear the account with their conversations are in regards to supporting the housing. I agree. I think it would be important to try to have a board member there and then just, um, the more we can get a clear direction from the board of trustees and lance as the board position. I know there's maybe a few different perspectives on how to move forward. All excited, all interested in moving forward, but just different, different tactics from a couple of different members. So the more we can encourage clarity from them, I think the better will be in the long run, just getting clear, like, what's the Board of Trustees position. Thank you. And then the last thing and actually left this off my memo by mistake, but I did get a flyer in the PowerPoint. Um, we are having our all staff retreat. I believe it is on your calendars for anybody that can attend. Um, and this is an annual event for, um, BCHA. And I'm sorry. It's in the attachments, Kelly. And if you're looking

3:42:53for it, I smoke. It's not in the PowerPoint. It is in the attachment. Um, but it's we are having, um, we're meeting at Willby Corner doing a staff event giving out County Awards having lunch. Um, and then BCHA and the housing department are both closed for the rest of the day. Um, and many of us are going to attend a Rockies game. And so of course we want to extend that invitation to the board. And again, that's September 2nd. So for us, it's all day, but there are different parts that you can join in. So the morning session begins at 10 30 a. m. Thank you. And with that, I am handing it off. I believe it is some more information on the short flaw. So Kelly will come back to this. Hi, Kelly Schulz again, housing division manager. Um, so this, this slide is just meant to do a little bit of a timeline just to kind of give some context because this is not something we were anticipating this year. In fact, this was a pretty shocking thing that we learned about just two weeks ago. Um, and it comes from a cumulation of several different things that happen. So in early May, we started out by receiving, uh, I believe it came first, our HUD funding noticed that our HUD funding had

3:44:13actually been decreased quite a bit from 2025, which is a little bit of a shock. However, for 2026. However, we still figured we were still on track. We had been holding on voucher issuance to avoid shortfall and also to have some space for the emergency housing vouchers, the EHVs that we knew that the funding was slated to end early, uh, in 2026. Um, we also then also received an email to the executive director on May 28th. That's in your actual packet. It's like page 27. And it came from HUD just saying you're not in shortfall. Thank you for not being in shortfall. However, you should just monitored these cost saving measures, which we were already doing, one of those included being careful with your voucher issuance. We were only focusing on our special purpose vouchers, the ones that are our bash and our family unification program, the foster youth initiative, all of those ones is what we were focusing on and holding on everybody else.

3:45:18Um, so we felt confident that we were doing what we were supposed to be doing. Then it was, uh, in late May, well, and also I guess in January, we had noticed that they had, uh, not released their full funds to us. They took quite a bit from us in January. At that time we were contributing, we were thinking it was due to the HUD shutdown and the cut of all the staff. And also HUD head started or that was actually in the fall of 2025 had started to refuse to meet with us and pull the two - year tool, which we were not able to pull ourselves and go over. And the two - year tool is a forecasting tool. It uses your current spending projected to your awards based on your attrition rate and based on your lease up rate to kind of give you an idea of how many vouchers you could continue issuing throughout the year if you need to pull back. So we had been without this tool since about September of 2025 and unable to really plan HUD staff had been given the directive from their administration that they were not allowed to provide the tool to housing authorities anymore, but we were all supposed to continue using it.

3:46:29Um, so it was like we were shorted in January. And then at the end of May, when June's payment was supposed to be released, we got a notification that they were going to hold back. I can't remember now if this is the one where they held back 600, 000 or 900, 000 900, 000 from our, what we normally get is about 1. 3 million a month to pay hap. Um, and without much explanation about what was going on. So we were doing internal audits like double checking numbers, trying to figure out like where this came from, especially because we had seen multiple emails and PIH announcements from HUD to the move to work agencies, particularly the original 39 that started in the 90s and before 2016 that overall everybody in the country was experiencing major shortfalls. And the original agencies were holding on to several million dollars of HAP reserves. And so there's a line in the reporting, I'm maybe getting way too in the weeds for you, but the line in the reporting where you can specify how you plan on using those future funds so they don't recapture it. And they really started saying that everybody needed to start using this line or they were going to recapture funds. Even though we're not one of the original MTW agencies, in fact, we're the

3:47:51last one to be added on. Um, this is where that those short payments came from. They looked at some of our 2025 reporting and assumed that we had 1. 4 million sitting in our own reserves and they took it from us over a course of six months. Um, because they thought we had that cash. And then after they did that, they sent out, it came in August. They sent out the notice that, oh, by the way, now we're, we're estimating the shortfall for 727, 000 dollars So that started this whole process of trying to figure out like, where did that come from? Because they had some confusing notices saying that they were only going to hold 727, 000, but they actually took 1. 4 million. So as Susanna stated, we had two meetings, uh, last week, one with the HUD headquarters in Washington to try and understand the history of where this came from. And then she, um, couldn't go into full details without including the financial analysts from the Denver office, our direct HUD reps. So we schedule the follow - up meeting the very next day to go over with them. And we were really trying to pinpoint some of the audit issues, some of the reporting issues, because since we have done our own internal audits, we've gone back and corrected numbers

3:49:09from 2025, which they do allow you to do on a monthly basis, but they were not going to look back for several months to re - benchmark us. And I allocate for our, um, spending in 2025 to give us another award. At the same time, they were holding on to 457, 000 dollars for us. And so that's the funds that's being released, which would bring our shortfall amount down to just under 300, 000, um, they are encouraging us to apply for shortfall funding, uh, to get into the category one. However, while we're in shortfall status, a couple things happen. We have to continue pausing on all of our voucher issuance except for Vash, which we do have all of our Vash out either issued or out searching for housing. Um, and our newest award for the foster youth initiative. And I think we do have like seven of those available. All other programs are on pause. The transition plan we had in place for the EHVs. We are no longer allowed to do until they release us from shortfall. So what we're looking at for that is we're looking at what other, the currently right around 29. There's either 25 or 29. I think some are out searching households that this would affect, meaning at the end of the year, if we are not released

3:50:34from shortfall status, we would have to terminate these households for insufficient funding. So the things that we're looking at is I've been working with communications first to draft up a response for these households. We've connected all of them to resident services to kind of look at a deeper dive. What other programs might they be eligible for? What other housing options might be more a folatable for them going forward. And then we had already in preparation for absorbing them. We had already updated our administrative plan to give them extra preference points on our wait lists. Um, we do have a clause in our plan about terminating households for insufficient funding. They're the first ones you can bring back. So the overall plan is hopefully will be able to get excused from shortfall based on this additional funds and the fact that we're applying early for the remaining 280, 000 dollars And if we do, then this will be a nonssue. But if we don't, then the next step will be to end their voucher assistance and see if we can transition them onto another program. And then when we're released from shortfall funding are monitoring do have the space for them. And so at that time we're going to look at bringing them back or what that kind of looks like, which is one of the

3:51:56things when we were discussing with DOH, because they have, I can't remember how many households, but they have somewhere between 10 and 15 households that live in Boulder County that are going to face the same issue. They have to exit them at the end of the year, but they were able to secure outside funding to continue their assistance at least through next July. And then at that point they'll have to make a secondary plan too. But what we expect for the next couple months is that we will have regular monitoring calls with HUD. We'll have to do these shortfall questionnaires just kind of giving an update of the things that we have done and house for savings. And one of those that I need, one of the items that I'm coming here today to request from the Board is that we need to make sure that we have demonstrated our termination policy to you for cases of insufficient funding. The levels that we go through, if we get to that point, our hope is that we're not going to have to terminate households outside of the EHVs. Um, due to insufficient funding based on doing things that we're currently doing, which is we're being more prudent with, um, voucher expiration dates. We also are negotiating with landlords on rent amounts to see where we can

3:53:22get rent amounts reduced. Some of our move to work initiatives, then activities that we're proposing are hopefully going to generate some savings as well. And then in the worst case scenario, we would go to the admin plans policy for terminations, which that's included in your packet on page 24 to 26, but it's just a level of, we start with, if you have to go to the terminations to households, you start looking at households that are in repayment agreements because they owe us money from unreported income. And if they've defaulted on those agreements, those are the household you focus on. Then any household that's committed some sort of program fraud within the last six months that we did not propose to terminate would be the next level. Then it would be, if we had to keep going, it would be households that committed some sort of, uh, program related fraud or violation in the last 12 months. And then if you still have to keep going, you look at the first in the last set of new admissions that don't fall into a special purpose voucher that don't have, um, young children that are not elderly.

3:54:36Like the whole set of tears. Let's just pause for a second. Yes. And see if there are any questions to this point. Let's see here. I did have a question. Hang on. Well, it might be part of the same piece. I think I heard you ask a question. And I was. And maybe you're still working on formally, which is fine. I just, I saw something on the slide that made me think or in the packet that made me think there was two items that you were going to be asking. So if you want to finish, I just clarify when you're done. I don't mean to finish right now, but just when you're done, just state what you need input from us. And if you're going to be asking for that today or if you're going to be asking for a separate conversation or something in the packet that made me think there was another BCH discussion. Yeah. I think that's their slides too. I think we do need to take action on a couple of things today. And so I just there and so I was trying to set us up to have discrete conversations.

3:55:37So I was just hoping to any questions to what we've heard so far. Really appreciate how much detail you're providing us to understand, you know, we heard just a few months ago where we were financially and now we're having this discussion about shortfall. So there was a lot of good background there. Really wonderful to hear how much you're caring about the families and the individuals that it'll actually affect should we have to, um, actually execute terminations. And then maybe you will just move us into first. Let's make sure we all understand and acknowledge, um, the work and say that we hope that we can get out of shortfall status. And then the first thing I think maybe we take up is just explaining to the board the termination process. And then it sounds like the board needs to accept the termination process today. Maybe we take that topic up first before moving to the second topic. Sure. Um, so in the packet, I think it's on page 27. Do you have patrons to the. Six.

3:56:36Maybe. That's it. Actually. 202. Okay. So there's two things. Um, one of them is just reviewing or making sure that you've are aware of our termination policies for insufficient funding and how we handle them. And then the actual start with that one. Okay. So that is on that go to page 24. So this comes directly from our administrative plan that governs the voucher program. And this is our methodology and process for terminating in case of, um, insufficient funding. So the first step is determining that we are in insufficient funding. And that has already been done. Um, scroll down. Let's see. I think it's the next page. Then. So here, um. Keep going down. This goes to first, we will do all reasonable costs cutting measures, which are things like adjusting the payment standard, uh, looking at our utility lounge schedule, which our utility lounge schedule actually went down already for move to work. Uh, we adopted a streamlined one, which means that households are potentially paying more in their out - of - pocket cost.

3:57:54So it reduces our HAP costs. This was the first year we put that into place for the move - to - work program. The other thing we would look at is things like if people are in larger units, then they're allotted. We would look at what that looks like. And if we're paying out HAP that we shouldn't be for that. One of them's not issuing doctors, which we're already not issuing. One of them would be looking at the timeline for vouchers out searching. And then finally, this is where it goes into, um, we would be terminating the households based on categories. So category one would be all the families that, Oh, BCHA money for repayment agreements that are delinquent in their repayment agreements. Um, actually, I'm sorry. The first one would be terminating anybody that is in a re, or that has, it's been determined that they owe money to BCHA, but they're not actually in a repayment agreement. And then the second one would be anybody that's in a repayment agreement that's delinquent on their repayment agreement. And, um, finally after that, uh, we would go into terminating households based on program violations. Anybody that's committed program fraud or abuse within six to 12 months, we start with six months. And then we look at the last 12 months. And then we start looking

3:59:15at households based on first end that we're brand new admitted that we're not a special purpose voucher. And if we have to continue going, which our shortfall amount is so small, I don't anticipate us needing to get through like any of these to be honest, but it would be we'd start doing the non elderly non - disabled single households and then non elderly non - disabled with children that are above the, or no minor children, just a household members that are over the age of 18. And finally anyone that has children and at the very last, the elderly and disabled families, but that, that's a really significant, uh, I think you'd have to be in several million dollars in shortfall before you'd hit something like that. Thank you. So just summarizing, um, we first are hoping to get out of shortfall. But if we aren't, then this is the process we'll use to terminate, um, people from the program to get to compliance, to get to eliminate the shortfall. Are there questions for this or do we want to make a motion to acknowledge that we understand the policy. Just to clarify, I've heard you use the word process and the word policy. And this looks like it's the policy. So I just want to make sure. And the process that we're going to use

4:00:29is going to follow the policy. Okay. Like later this year, we may have to start this process. And the process that we would use would follow this policy. I think that's what we're being asked to acknowledge today. I am trying to, I got cut off by you, Commissioner Schuszman and like, I'm trying to remember where I was headed with that. Um, so we'll use policy and process for this particular document as interchangeable word. And that's totally fine. The way I'm interpreting this is, and I just want to make sure there's not additional categories. The document looks like just has category one and category two and the way you are describing it would be in those one, two, three, four. That would be the order of like tiers of, if the policy had to be enacted because of the short, Paul couldn't be remitted. Is that correct? Yes. That's correct. Yep. And then do you have an idea of how many households would be impacted in category one or category two or we wouldn't at what point would you have to even start looking at that?

4:01:41Um, we have, so if we're in short poll, roughly 280, 000 and this would be by the end of December. Our average per unit cost is about 1, 500 dollarshold. I can't do the math. I don't know that if anybody can do the math of what that looks like for total households, uh, the ones that are in repayment agreements, we have roughly 50 households that are currently in repayment agreements. To my knowledge, unless staff is generating them right now, we don't have any households that are not in repayment agreements. So we'd be looking at, if we had to go all the way, if we had to go to this level, the category one, we'd be looking at at least starting with those 50 households first before having to go into a category two. Correct. That's fine. I was just trying to get an idea. Sure.

4:02:41What that number of households might be impacted. Um, it doesn't change the fact that we have to have an order and you have to give some kind of recommendation in regards to which categories would happen first. I was just trying to have an understanding of what that may be. And I, so that, that was the only question that I had, thanks. So it sounds like today for this topic, we need to make a motion to acknowledge that we understand the procedure. Yes, please. And so while I will move, uh, that the Board of, that the county housing authority board acknowledges that we understand the procedure. Thank you. Just one second. We have to give a second and see if there's any discussion. No discussion. I'll second your emotion the way you said it. Thank you.

4:03:28All those in favor. Aye. Thank you, the motion carries. Going back to you for the second topic. Thank you. Uh, the second piece I think was page 22. Yes. Okay. The second piece is as part of the shortfall monitoring with HUD. We have to submit this letter that comes from the board where you're formaling acknowledging an item one that we have gone over the, that we're in shortfall risk and, um, that we've reviewed the policy for termination due to insufficient funding. Idem two is our statement of the items that we're working on as far as, um, financial oversight and correction and our implementation timeline to take a look at some at how we can get ourselves out of shortfall. So one of them was going back through 2025 HUD reporting to look at the numbers that were reported compared to what we have on our books. And this is where I forgot to mention it in the Yardi software part. This is where Yarty comes into play that's actually really helpful. So our previous software system, we had to pull two and three different reports and match them up to reconcile the number of like voucher holders out searching the actual payments we made along with voucher holders that were under HAP contracts. It was a very tedious process and took a lot of manual

4:04:56data entries, some codes written and formulas in Excel. And a lot of back and forth between multiple staff members. The really nice thing about Yardie and one of the huge selling points is this report is all integrated into the system. And there is no polling of three different reports. There is no creating formulas. It literally spits out that what you need to look at with hyperlinks, taking you to the backup of what it's including in its reports. So you can just do some quick spot checking. And it's a lot quicker, a lot more efficient. And especially since we're not able to meet with HUD to go over the two - year tool, this new report also populates directly into the two - year tool. Um, and they have a prediction tool as well. Stuff that we have never had before. And so, um, wish it would have come maybe a year ago. But this, it's a great time right now for us to be able to capitalize on this. And so in part, that's one of the things that we were looking at is doing a full audit of our 2025 spending to make sure that we have the correct numbers with HUD. That has been completed. And our, uh, accounting department on some of the reserves that there's a discrepancy in the amount of

4:06:17reserves they think we have versus the amount of reserves we actually have. Um, next is we're just monitoring our leasing, which we've, uh, updated all of the staff. And it's just monitoring the vouchers that are out there issuing that are out searching. And I, as far as voucher extensions go. And then, uh, this other option talks about the integration of the software and the new reporting. And how we're reporting it back into, uh, HUD's to your tools. And so all of this stuff, the implementation timeline for all of this stuff is we've either done it or we've started doing it. And we expect it to be completed within the next 30 days. Um, so the ask of the board today after this meeting is to sign off on this letter so we can submit it with our first shortfall action plan. Um, this is also required for us to be able to, we already applied for our HUD reserves and received those. But this letter is required for us to be able to submit for shortfall funding to see if we can get a coverage for the next 280, 000. And our HUD rep felt pretty confident that as long as we got it in before September 15th, I think was the deadline. Um, we would be prioritized and in the first round. We may

4:07:34not actually get the funds until December because that's, that's the month that we're actually looking at running out of funds. We are fine right now, uh, through the rest of the year, but December is the actual month that they're forecasting we won't be okay for. And that's, they may make us wait until at least December before they release the payment. So sorry, the second piece is just to, uh, have approval on this, this letter and signature. Great. Any questions on that section or any motions to approve the letter. Thank you. And this is going to be at the risk of another wording in terminology conversation. I might be confusing the memo that we got Susanna in regards to the short vulnera. It says a formal letter from the Board of County Commissioners will be required.

4:08:29To acknowledge a shortfall. This letter talks about Board of Commissioners. And then versus directors of housing authority versus, just like a lot of interchange language. And so I'm just wanting to make sure that. The ask that what you need from us is that from housing directors or is it from the Board of County Commissioners. And then I also want to ask because the chair is the signer on this letter if you're needing that today. I saw the date for today since director Leavy's not here. Yeah. And just thinking about if, if I was a one signing it, I'd probably want to see that letter. So I just want to, the couple of questions in there. Yeah. So, um, this wording is correct. We are seeking approval from the Boulder County Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, not BOCC. Um, so my memo terminology was incorrect. So I apologize. But this letter language is correct. Um, and then if we can seek approval from the board, yeah, that's a, that's a tricky one. Susana, we can jump in. We have a process we use. So maybe we turn over to our deputy for how we sign. Perfect.

4:09:44Natalie Spring Commissioners Deputy for the record given the timeliness of the request and for housing director Leevy being excused from this meeting. We could reroute that, um, housing director Stoltzman who's acting vice sharing acting as chair for this particular meeting. Um, so happy to do the direction of the board. That's great. Thanks Susana. I just want to make sure that we are walking away with what you need and they're not going to have an issue later. Um, so appreciate that. And I understand that the voice chair can fit in or, you know, move in and win that chair is gone. So I just want to call attention before it gets routed and docusing and make sure, um, if we agree on this, then we can procedure. Great. Any other questions or emotions. I don't have any additional questions. And I would even need a formal motion. I just, I don't know that we need a formal motion. I think we just need to give direction to use the letter and change to the vice chair for a routing of signature. I'll second that.

4:10:59So it's clear that we've both given direction to send the letter and that we've approved it. With that change on the routing. Any other points on this topic. Not for me, unless you have any other questions. Any other questions or discussion on this topic? No, just acknowledging that y'all have, I don't have an additional questions. Just acknowledged in the happening for y'all and appreciate the work. Yeah. Thank you very much for the detailed update. It was really helpful to hear your description of everything that's been going on and how you're addressing it. It's very complete. I like the multi pronged approach try to prevent if we can. And then this is what we do if we can't and the communications thought that's gone into it as very good. And then, and then also incorporating the folks that are outside of the BCHA, but that are also going to potentially be impacted. Just you've been very thoughtful and considerate about how you've gone about this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you commissioners. And if we can turn to, um, PowerPoint slide 11, Kelly, we are on to the next topic, which is rent increases for, um, next year. So 2027 increases. Mr. As you may remember that we have already come to you, um, at a previous board meeting and a work session on July 7th.

4:12:15We received direction from the board to continue our analysis. Um, and come back with a recommendation during the work session or modeling three, four, and five percent increases based on the feedback and some additional staff work stuff is now, um, making a formal recommendation to increase, um, the rent up to four percent. And that is for units that are below current rent standards only. So it does impact us to a small amount of our units, um, however, it will yield an additional 255, Um, for the housing authority. I'm happy to take questions, commissioners. Questions on rent increases. Thank you. And if I miss that, I apologize. I saw in the document the way I'm reading this. It looks like no individual increase will exceed 100 dollars. And there's somewhere that gives an idea of what that means. A significant amount that wouldn't exactly work because of the four percent, just trying to understand what numbers when we get the emails that we know what that is. And is it Erie in the packet. I don't think we put the actual rents that people are paying in the packet. However, Commissioner, we do have that information and I am happy to send it to you via email. Okay. Thank you. Um, I guess Susana, your answer kind of confused me. I thought you were looking to

4:13:46the board to approve this proposal for rent increases today. Is that not what you're doing? We are. Yes, please. I mean, that's what, that's what I would like. And I can provide that level of detail. Commissioners, we do track that data and we can provide it to you. Um, but it would be post this decision. Is that do you need the information before we can make the decision or not, I guess is my question. No, that's fine. I mean, with given out the explanation, I know we've had a conversation previously and I appreciate coming back to look at what can be done in regards to the entire portfolio, et cetera. So my understanding is we're trying to address an issue with a budget in the Sustainability of BCHA. So I'm, I'm fine, but I would like to see the data just so that I know when emails come in, if it lights up with reality.

4:14:34Thank you. So we'll get that information and I'll just make a motion to approve the rent increases as described. Second. All those in favor. Aye. Thank you. I will also just say the picture choice on this slide seemed really strange to me, but I know you have bigger things that you're working on. I don't know anybody who makes that smiley face when they get a rent increase. Noted, Commissioner, thank you. Uh, the next slide, please, um, I did want to just quickly talk about, uh, Colorado proposition 123. As you know, at the state level, we had metrics and benchmarks to make during a three year period. And I did just want to go ahead and note that a lot of our partner cities were able to meet their goals because of BCHA. So, um, I want to acknowledge BCHA for Boulder County, our unit commitment was 125 units and BCHA did provide all 125 units.

4:15:26And we did that via recapture from other units throughout Boulder County, um, most of the 125 came from Lafayette. Not only did we do Willoughby Corner with 192 units. We also did significant rehab that also qualified us to use those units in the city, both at Josephine Commons and Aspenwall. Um, we also did significant repair work in the other towns. And so we were able to help both lions and Louisville and Netherland achieve their goals in addition to the City of Lafayette. Um, well, I'm sorry, not in Nutterland. Netherland did not. We did not help them, but they did meet their goal. So I'm happy to say that all of our partners are compliant with Prop123. And then just in recent meetings with the state, they did encourage us and we want to encourage Boulder County to continue their commitment and reconfirm, um, their commitment to Prop 123 for the next set of years. Um, mostly, and I know we don't do a lot of development. BCHA in particular, we, we did one project in Uncorporate Boulder County actually, uh, significant rehab work. Um, but, um, this could be useful to some of our mobile home parks that are outside of or that are, are in unincorporated Boulder County. Um, so that was it. Just happy to answer any questions, no decision. I just wanted

4:16:40it to put that out there for you. Thank you, anyone, two, three questions? No questions. Thank you. None here either. Thanks Susana. Yes. Thank you. And I will turn it over to Sean and Kelly for budget and financials. And that will wrap us up. From Commissioner Sean already, the finance director for the housing authority. Um, just want to give a brief overview of where we're at with the 2026 budget. It's historically the subsidy has been, uh, you know, a great, um, either in helping with our operation historically, um, and going forward, you know, probably the Capitol needs that we see every, every year, um, and so that's, you know, that's been our commitment as the housing authority and the county has been very generous in supporting that mission. Um, in terms of the 2027 budget, we, we are, which is exciting news. We are actually projected to be materially self - sustaining on a pure operational basis. Um, and, uh, staff has done a ton of work with that over the last months in a couple of years. Um, and especially through our restructuring last year, um, and with the purchase of a couple strategic investments have all kind of culminated in our, you know, for our basic core operations, uh, having our income cover our costs. And, you know, we look ahead to 27

4:18:19is BCH is constantly involved in various capital projects. And sometimes there's dedicated funding for that. Other times is not. It comes out of our checking account. And so as we look forward in 27, um, in, in looking at the potential, uh, requests for subsidy from the county, it's really with those items in mind. We've got, we've got kind of big unfunded mission based projects that were involved in where those funds will allow us to continue on without delay. Um, and we've been working closely with our Mondo and with OFM regarding the subsidy, you know, kind of trying to determine the, um, the dollar amounts. We are positioned for and have, um, come to terms with gratitude that, um, we would be looking to reduce our subsidy to the tune of probably 25 percent or so from roughly 2. 1 million down to 1. 5 million.

4:19:30And those are conversations that we're still having in terms of the actual funding sources a little bit more technical. And there's other, um, issues that the, uh, the commissioners would be, um, at their direction, uh, we'd be determining those source, whether the general fund or AHT and all of those types of issues that we've touched on, but have not firmed up in any way. Um, and we are going to, um, be putting in a one - time request, not to be confused with, um, the historical subsidy. At one time request for the water purchase at willow be, um, and I can get into as much or as little detail is needed on that. But basically when, um, we entered into the will be project, City of Lafayette used about 10. 6 million plus in our profound state. They'd received that year to purchase water for that project with the understanding that half of it would be, um, uh, in the form of a forgivable loan to BCHA. And based on performance metrics, that would be forgiven over time. Um, and, um, that was collateralized by property. And then when we sold property, we actually cashed collateralized that. And that's sitting in an escort account. Uh, as we speak, um, and, but now we're going, we're getting to the second half of the money. And so

4:21:01the minute the first permit needs to be pulled associated with the residential development, uh, for phases two and or three, the moment that first permit, uh, gets applied for, we have to come up with the additional 5. 3 million dollars And so that is the, um, the basis of the, um, the one time ask that we'll be submitting this week in open gov. Are there any questions on that. Any questions? Thank you. Thank you, Sean. Maybe I didn't hear you correctly on this. I thought I heard you say there was money sitting in the escrow account. And what I also heard or thought I heard was that there will be a 5. 3 million dollar. One time request coming separate to the Board of County Commissioners. From General Fund. Is that correct? Yes. And believe me, it was very, very confusing for me. The money that's sitting in an escrow account is cash that BCHA put up when, um, when, cause originally that first 5.

4:22:093 under this kind of forgivable promise that we note, um, arrangement with the City of Lafayette. Was collateralized by real estate. Okay. So the cash, you know, it was just basically the promise to pay Meach benchmarks and the collateral would ultimately be released. We sold like one of the major portions of property that were collateralizing that, which was the head start building, um, over on Cimaron. And so when we went to seek the release, they asked for cash collateral. Okay. So now we've got this, um, cash sitting. And some of it has been forgiven as we reach benchmarks on the phase one. But there's roughly about 1. 7 million sitting there right now. Um, and that is not to be released until the entire project, the entire development phases two and three are complete and everything is blast. Um, and so, you know, we're looking out probably three years or so for that type of release. Um, so those funds by legal arrangement, we can't touch at this point without, uh, Lafayette, you know, agreeing to do that. Um, that's something that we originally had discussed, you know, but we just realized that it's been, you know, Lafayette has its processes and some things. We get the sense that they're more amenable too than others.

4:23:36And so, um, we have not pursued a request to them. Hey, how about release it up front? Um, maybe we can give you some more collateral. Or maybe you just go on our word like we'd still be on the hook for the performance that needs to be completed in order to, um, to, to, to realize release of those funds, um, or in this case, it would be the release of the capital, twin lakes, also collateralizes. That, um, that forgivable loan. Um, and so that's, that's potentially an option, you know, that we could, we could, you know, make that request to them, which would reduce the 5. 3 by roughly 1. 7 million dollars It's an option that we, um, will go towards as we realize how much or how little, if any funds might be available from, uh, this one time request, then we're starting to kind of go into those, those types of, um, alternative scenarios. Okay. And then so the. Amount that will come as a one time or go to as a one time request to the Board of County Commissioners will be an offsicle request or it'll be part of the regular budget. Part of the budget, yeah. Okay. Thank you.

4:24:57Thank you. And so in the budget process, did you say what date you would bring that to us? Yes. You're going to see our budget at our regularly scheduled board meeting at the end of September, the September meeting. Okay. Thank you. And no other questions on this that I'm seeing here today. Very good. And just briefly, I'll go over our results to date, um, which are positive. And, um, and ahead of budget. And I'll point out, uh, just briefly the main reasons why the positive reasons that were ahead on our income, um, largely in part due to SLP fees, which we were very conservative. If we budget at all, we're incredibly conservative. We look at those as kind of one - off transactions where we can be helpful. And everyone is on board. So, um, we've, um, uh, got significant SLP fees, uh, in 26.

4:25:52Um, and, uh, our investment interest is, is ahead of budget as well. Our payroll expenses are well under budget. And, um, that's in large part due to, we were able to kind of restructure and remodel. And I've talked about this before, but the, the kind of the fair share allocation with LYTX historically BCH, very generously subsidized a lot of those when, when, you know, we were really sensitive around debt service coverage for properties. And as, um, as operations have been very positive, um, the light techs are taken more and more of their fair share. So that, that goes, um, that speaks for the material part of that, uh, positive variance of, um, uh, payroll expense being under budget. No questions or comments. All right. Thank you. And hi Kelly Step to BCHA. I'm just going to quickly touch on the KPIs in terms of our debt service coverage ratio. We all of our lay techs, um, and we have added the Willoughby Corner Multifamily on there. Are above their requirements. So that's great, including, um, tungsten village that we kind of keep a close eye on. Tungston Village has had some occupancy with one of their units. And it looks like it has been filled because the occupancy is much higher this month. So that's great to see. The only other thing I would point

4:27:29out is on that 2012 Bond Group, The Occupancy is low. Um, there is, um, one of the units Cottonwood, which is going through a major rehab right now, which is, um, contributing to some of that, um, occupancy there or vacancy rate, I would say. And other than that, I think we're, we're pretty consistent how we've been for the last six months. Thank you for that. Commissioner Lutzman. Thank you. I was going to ask on the Occupy. So on the first you already spoke to 2012 Bond Group, but then the Kaufman place, are you just saying that one is just consistent over the last six months of having a low. So yes, Coffman, we have been keeping our eye on in terms of, um, occupancy. And I think we had had a conversation a couple of months ago about just focusing on the reason as to the why, like why are we not able to get more folks in there. It's a newer development. It's downtown Longmont. I don't know if something is here if he wants to maybe speak about. I can just say one quick thing about that. Commissioner, we are closely watching and prioritizing two properties. Coffin being one of them and will it be corner being the other. Um, so we have recently shifted some staffing and personnel to give more attention

4:28:44to those projects. We've increased our, um, like marketing and branding and outreach on several different levels. Um, and we have seen increased traffic, but those properties are definitely something that is concerning to be CJ. Thank you. Kelly. Did you have anything else you wanted to tell us? Thank you. Thanks for that update. Commissioner is the last slide is matters from the board. And we're recording. We are back from our recess, Commissioner Luchamine Installment are still on the dice. Commissioner Levy is still excused. We're sitting as the Boulder County Commissioners, and we're here for a work session with our Parks and Open Space Department, and we are going to be talking about drought and water rights to other alternatives. Good afternoon, Commissioners. We're happy to be with you. We're just going to take a couple minutes and remind everyone that following the governor's declaration of a drought emergency phase three activation on June 4th, 2026. Staff provided some informational materials about Boulder County's action in drought response. In this initiated a larger conversation and just some updating of information on drought, Detroit's and what we do here in Boulder County. We're looking forward to Supplementing the memo that you received previously and try and answer some of the additional questions that were provided by the Board. And with that, I'll turn

4:30:57it over to Jason. Good afternoon, Commissioners Jason Sook, Parks and Open Space Director. We thank you so much for your time today. We were pleased to be here and talk about this really important topic. I wanted to first thank our team. We've got a big one, but here today we've got Vanessa McCracken, Darren Beck, and David Garcia, as well as Stefan Reynold. And together, they and their team have been busy. It's been a complicated time, and I've been impressed with their efforts to tackle emerging issues, think strategically and work with our tenants and leaseholders as we navigate some of the complicated issues around water and agriculture and ditch management. With that, I'll turn it over to Vanessa. Thank you so much. Thanks, Jason Vanessa McCracken. Aganwater Division Manager. We're going to begin the presentation here in Darren Beck is going to get us started. Hi, thanks for having us. We understand that it's been a busy day, so we're going to really try to get through these slides as quickly as we can, understanding that there is supplemental information in the memo that we provided.

4:32:07But please stop me if you have any questions. And some of this might be review, but we'll just kind of, like I said, get through as quickly as we can. So I'm going to just discuss very brief overview of water rights in Colorado. Boulder counties ownership of water rights and how we manage our wand rights. Some of the community outreach that we do to the public, as well as to our tenants, and then touch on the drought response from 2026. And also touch on the ditch wildfire mitigation program. So again, this could be a lot of review, but the Colorado water rights are governed by the prior appropriation doctrine, which is first in time, first and right. So senior or the oldest water rights receive their water first. Water commissioners in each basin make the determination on which water rights are the calling or the water rights that are going to receive water. Um, the next senior water rights will then receive theirs and down the line to the most junior or most recent water rights. Um, the water rights generally have decreed conditions, which are the amount, the timing of deliveries, the location of deliveries. And then the place of use for those deliveries.

4:33:29So a very structured, um, conditions that water rights need to, um, most of the county's water rights are direct flow water rights, meaning that when the water is available in the river and the water commissioner states that that water rights is the calling right, you take it then when it's available, um, rather than storage water, which could be released at whatever date you'd like. So those direct flow rights are really meaningful and that you have to take it when it's available legally and physically. Really quickly on ditch companies, uh, the ditch company or the manager. You can kind of think of it as the manager of water right, um, typically are incorporated or unincorporated. Um, that may sound confusing, but basically what it is, is formal organization of a ditch company and that they have shareholders that hold stock certificates, which essentially are a proud amount of the water right that that water user owns.

4:34:32Um, and so those incorporated ditch companies are governed by boards. Shareholders, um, the unincorporated ditch companies are more informal. So it could just be a group of water users that own a water right that they communicate together on it daily basis on, Hey, I want my water here at this location at this time and some mount, things like that. So it's, it's a different management of water rights. Um, basically I think the takeaway point there. There could be staff that are hired by ditch companies, like a ditch writer. Um, but sometimes it's also just the water users that are responsible for taking delivery when they can. Um, so ditches irrigation ditches are all throughout our county. She'll be here in the light blue colors. This is just kind of where, where we have irrigation ditches, um, from Boulder up to long mind. So these run through private property. They run through cities. They run through a county ground farms. All the ditches that you see here have a prescriptive easement to for the ditch company, uh, or the water users to clean the ditch for the purpose of water conveyonce. So whether or not that ditch is running through private ground through a city through County Open Space, the dish companies or their representatives can go in clear trees, leave those trees on the adjacent

4:36:06ground. Because what they're doing is just preserving the right to convey water through the ditch company or through the ditch. Um, so yeah, you could see a few of the reservoirs as well on the front range, but this is just a depiction of the amount of ditches that we're talking about. Just a part of the county. So we have about a hundred leases that we, where we include most of our water rights. Those hundred leases are managed by about 60 tenant farmers. Um, they irrigate over 15, 000 acres. The county's water rights portfolio, uh, includes over 160 different types of water. So that would be that direct flow of water, but also storage water wells seeps and sloughs and other types of water sources. Uh, but it is an extension extensive amount of water that we include in our leases, uh, for irrigation only. So a little bit on the responsibilities. So we authorize meaning that we allow the tenets to communicate directly with the managers of the water rights, the ditch companies. On a daily basis so that they can operate their water, their farms as they, as they see fit. So, um, the tenants authorized a call ditch Copity representatives say, Hey, I want my water on this day at this location and this amount. Um, that's a, that's the way it needs

4:37:38to be in terms of just operating in a farm on a daily basis. The county's management of our water lies more in our representation with ditch companies. Um, so we have board representation on over 37 different ditches. Um, and so there's a, the heavy lift when it comes to the amount of involvement that we are, we currently have with managing those ditch companies. Some of the things that we do as board members would be, um, diversion, reconstruction projects. We're looking to expand the water rights under that, under that ditch. Some of the strategies that we, um, include and how we manage our water rate. So this is now stepping back as Boulder County staff. Um, we looked for new water rights to purchase that we could apply to our farms. Um, looking for additional storage, um, opportunities as well as, um, reallocating water that we do have in leases that we can under drought conditions like this year, make available to other tenets, um, so that we could really wisely manage our water and use water effectively. Um, shown here is just an example of a ditch. Blue line is the Holland ditch of a left hand creek. Red points indicate, um, head gates off of the main ditch, which would then feed the green areas, which are the irrigated land under that ditch. So

4:39:06just a kind of a quick visual. Some of the things that the county does in terms of public outreach, um, to make, um, the general public as well. And it's aware of the ag program. So we do, um, offer an ag tour, um, there was an article written in the, um, not what paper about that ag tour. We've had a couple of either, um, newspaper articles featured recently. We present a POS Act. We do have state representation on, um, the South Platt Basin Roundtable as well as local water user groups. Um, and also meet with our tenants in the water commissioners regularly just to kind of touch in and see how things are going and see how the years playing out. So I'm going to pass it back to Vanessa. A little more information about some of our tenant communications and the AG division are priority number one really is our relationships and our partnership with our tenants. And so recently, the AG division has moved to a structure where each tenant has a specific point of contact in the Activision. So they know exactly who they need to call when they have questions. Um, or things they want to talk about. So our lands and LASES team, um, those five people in myself serve as the point of context, uh, for our leases, lease

4:40:30holders. And through that work, you know, we've made contact or initiated contact with 85 percent over tenants and are working right now to make sure that we have a touch point with all of our, our tenants. Moving into some drought impacts, I think. Some of this is known, but as a, as a reminder, Colorado had the lowest snowpack on record. Um, since it's been recorded. At this point in the season, the Snowpack really is depleted. Many of the junior ditches like Darren mentioned opposed to the senior ditches had no water at all this season. There just wasn't enough water in the river for those more junior ditches to have water. Or they had as little as one day for the whole season, um, a couple of examples there. The South Boulder Canyon Ditch. This year had seven days of water compared to 33 days, which would be more normal, um, in 2025. And similar story on the David's hindage. These are both off of Boulder Creek, uh, four days this year compared to a normal season, which in 2025 was 34 days of water. So the drought is extreme. So what are our tenants doing?

4:41:47Um, everyone is really an extreme survival mode this year. We've seen a reduction in planted acres at really every scale of farm. Uh, the small grain crops had a very tough year. Most of it was not harvested for grain due to drought and late freeze. Most of it has been cut and bailed for silage grazed off or just tilled under. Hey crops were not spared. Alfalfa and grass, um, our tenants reported 30 to 40 percent yield. On average. Second and third cuttings were much reduced if they happened at all and the quality is just not as good as typical. Um, Corn and Sugar beets are hanging in there a little bit, but ditches really are turning off much earlier than usual, like in the next week. They will probably all be done. So we'll see if we get some rains. Those crops might be okay.

4:42:40Um, but only time will tell. And market farms are not spared from the drought by any means either. Um, they have had tough year getting water in many places as well. Livestock producers dairy's horse operations. There's not enough forage really anywhere in the county. Um, we've had many, many calls on people looking for additional forage. No pastures to be found. Equally is difficult is reliable stock water has been no longer reliable. So like wells and seeps and some springs and ponds and creeks that have been relied on for stock water aren't available this year. And it's not just here in Boulder County. It's not just in Colorado. It's really a regional impact. So all our neighboring states and all of the Western US is really affected. So to bring forage in from other places is an extremely expensive proposition. Uh, and it's not just ag, we think about, but also the wildlife and ecological impacts to the other animals are hungry as well. And, you know, we recognize that the low flows in the creeks.

4:43:44So moving on a little bit to ditch wildfire mitigation. This is year two of our ditch wildfire mitigation program. David Garcia, our program manager is here too. If you have additional questions, um, in the inaugural year, 2025, the program was able to remove, um, 200, 2, 800 cubic yards of material removed from digit corridors. And in 2026, there's David has 31 separate projects in the works right now. Uh, designated in the Community Wildfire Protection Plan. And the woody debris and slash piles have been removed from about 12 miles of ditches at this point, uh, totaling over 232 tons at a cost of 50, 000 dollars. So this slide just depicts all those projects that, uh, David has in the, in the queue right now, different ditches and communities and neighborhoods, um, that are being worked on or in the planning phases at this point. Here's, it's a little hard to say. It's small on the screen, but a map of the wildfire mitigation projects and some of the other larger to medium scale water projects we have going on around the county as well that Darren and his staff are working on daily. Just a couple before and after pictures of the ditch wildfire mitigation, you can see the woody material being removed the dead and down woodie material being removed, um, from some of

4:45:17those ditch corridors. So with that, thank you. Thank you for your time and attention. And we are looking forward to any questions you have for us. Thank you commissioners and thanks Vanessa. Thanks team. We brought several folks with us today because we weren't sure if you had additional questions. I'd love to open up with any questions or direction from Commissioner Ocheme. Great. Thank you. Thank you all for being here. Thanks for being patient with our schedule today. I don't, I mean, one thing the really important information. And I think it's great. It's in a work session because, um, I think you maybe said some of this could be review. And I think it just gives a really good baseline for folks that are tuning in for the first time trying to understand what we are doing in regards to water even though you have been working on it for a long time. I think my question is really around understanding what you're hearing about the need, what is the ask of the county? What do you all as experts out on the field feel like the role for the County given this new piece of drought. And so that I think that's really more what I'm interested. It feels like we've got some management. We've got projects going on. Thank you, David. Like so weird

4:46:35responding to some of the things that have come up and that we've been working on for several years. But now what and given where we're at. So I think that's my curiosity. Yeah, I guess three things came to mind. Um, one of the things, you know, we're hearing is our tenant farmers looking for additional water supplies. Um, as I kind of mentioned, but we do have water that we own that is not included in a lease for these types of situations. So we can allocate that on an as needed basis. Um, not pulling it away from an existing lease. So I think we've had, so we've, we've, we've tried to do the best we can with the water that we own. We've also, um, I think the latest Count was even today updated, but over a thousand units of Colorado Big Thompson water, which is Colorado River Water, um, delivered through, uh, underneath the Council divide owned by Northern water conservancy district. Um, so we've, we've looked for additional supplies as well that we've bought or rented. Um, so, um, you know, we're, we're, we're able to use the water supply as we have. To get water to our tenant farmers. And we've also been able to find additional supplies, which has been tough. The city of Boulder typically has a rental program that we

4:48:05can take advantage of. And this year they didn't have any. Mobile, which was a really hard for, for us as well as the other, just the egg community. So that's one of the things that I think we're hearing is just looking, people looking for water. Um, I think hand in hand with the situation brings, um, fire risk. And so, um, David's been busy clearing witty debris and trying to really get on top of that. Maintenance part of his program, um, while water's not running. So, you know, the ditches are dry. It's a little easier to get in. Maybe the fields aren't planted. You can get in easier. So it's, it's been that, um, it's important to recognize that, you know, with the condition, the drought conditions and wire are concerns. It comes the fire hazard.

4:48:54So we've been hearing a lot of that as well. And thank God we haven't had a big fire in town or near, but others I know have been impacted. So, um, but I think on top of that too, um, the ag community, we just, you know, hearing from the newspapers and other media about, Hey, what's happening with, with agriculture, Boulder County, what can we do under these circumstances? Why is this pond completely dry? What happens to the fish when the pond is dry? So we have been answering a lot of questions from the public as well as the media when it comes to the current conditions. Thank you. I think for me, one of my interests is with the funding that we do have that comes through specific tax funding. For use in maintenance of property that might be the agricultural piece that might be the HP, you know, all of these different items if there is, maybe not today, but if there is some kind of ask, if it, you know, to me, it sounds like it could be a lot of things, whether it's, um, crediting leases for tenancy showed in this document or the presentation 30 to 40 percent of productivity. I'm not looking at right now, but, um, I captured some of it, but, um, you know, is that an ask?

4:50:22Is it, I mean, even if we could find water, there's a cost to it. Um, I'm very interested in how we show up as a partner, um, in such extenuating circumstances to allow for agricultural to agricultural to continue because it also, and this is, I'm not a farmer by trade. I've studied a lot of things. I was not one of them. Is your land also, it creates issues for your land and just not be able to produce the way that it would or could or should. And so I'm just thinking in my mind there, there's some other impacts. Later on the row two, even not what's urgent feeling urgent for somebody who's trying to have a livelihood on their, um, as a tenant on Boulder County Parks Open Space. So those are some of the curiosities. And like I said, it might not be for today, but I do think, what do we have available in maintenance funding that we can really look at that could be brought back to the Board if the interests from the Board members. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Stoltzman. Thank you. Thank you very much for coming and talking to us today. This is a really important topic for so many of our residents at crosses from our Ag tenants to Community Members that just love the bucolic nature of

4:51:39Boulder County because of the ag we have, but also to people concern about wildfire risk and other things. So what an important and timely topic. And thank you for bringing it. Um, some of the, I don't know if you want me to ask like a question at a time and get an answer or just put all my questions out. I think we'd love to hear from you on your questions. Okay. And then if you have specific requests or suggestions that would be beneficial as well. So I'll just sort of say them all. Um, and some of these won't have answers today. And that it's not my expectation that they have answers today. They're conversation starters. Thank you. Um, so, uh, one question that I get from Community Members is really about, you know, as we think about our water portfolio and our agricultural portfolio and the future and recognize where we are with regard to climate change and like the likelihood that drought is going to continue and uncertain and variable water is going to continue. We may have a very wet season and then a very dry season. So it's just going to change the risk around, um, farming in our area and the ability to predict water. So if we've started any plans or if we would think about starting plans on refielding

4:52:48any of our agricultural portfolio, as leases come up, um, at the end of life. And if we were to start that conversation and think about where we might refield and then reallocate water to other parts of our act portfolio to provide more certainty, um, to the farmers on those properties, uh, about what the likelihood of their ability to get water in any year would be. So that's sort of my first question. Um, and if we were doing that, if we would really look at it from a carbon sequestration perspective of like, what are portfolios that we could rewild? And also, um, have more cover over a course of a year and also would be proximate to areas where we could reallocate their water in some sort of reasonable fashion given, um, just how water moves around our county. And you can't just reallocate water from here over here if the conveyance or something like that.

4:53:37So it would take some interdisciplinary planning and also thought for wildfire risk of like how would that increase or decrease risk to any particular area. So that's one area. The next is just around, um, what process could be used to elevate to the Board of Commissioners, um, opportunities to grant ditch companies or grant ourselves in open space depending which was more appropriate, um, either wildfire mitigation funding or open space funding for improving conveyance either from a perspective of improving the conveyance of our water rights to their ultimate destinations or from reducing wildfire risk. So that could be like piping ditches. That could be, um, if there are important capital projects that a ditch company that we sit on is looking at, but they can't do it for 10 years. Maybe we can find a partnership and do it in two or one or five, um, so just how those types of capital projects could be elevated to the board so that we could consider using reserves, um, to elevate those projects that are important, uh, and change the timeline on when they might get done.

4:54:49Next is just what opportunities we have as a board to improve communication to private property owners around ditch projects. And this is probably most in regard to water and wildfire. But it's a little bit also for agriculture. I think people move, I think, the number I've heard from real estate agents is that people move approximately once every seven years. You could probably feel, Oh, I got a thumbs up. So that's right. And so we get all these new people that maybe don't understand their responsibilities and rights when they have a ditch that crosses their property. And I think that can lead to issues of flow for our farmers. And it can lead to wildfire risk for community members and habitat issues and concerns too. So maybe if there's an opportunity to have some sort of cadence where we communicate and what that might be and how the board could participate in that. And then I think the last one that I have is just around projects that we may want to coordinate with our municipal partners, um, one that I bring up from time to time. And I'm sure Darren's tired of me talking about is just on Mayhoffer, for example, but I have probably 35 of these projects that I could rattle off. But the one I'll use today is Mayhoffer where there's, um,

4:56:03the ditch route that really doesn't convey water in the way that it had historically been designed. And there's probably an alternative route to take. And if we were to pursue getting the alternative route secured, we could then, um, through the ditch company dispose of the easement. So that then we would have no requirement to clear it. We would have no requirement to do the wildfire mitigation and the property owners, um, would then be responsible for the private property owners would be responsible for their property. So if there are places where we can dispose of property so that it's easier and more efficient to operate, um, within our requirements as a ditch company, I'm interested in understanding how the board could help with those intergovernmental conversations that need to be had to secure those agreements because it is complicated. It's like the ditch company. There's usually a city. There's usually a private property. And then there's usually a county. So how we can advance some of those intergovernmental conversations. And again, just like I said at the start, I'm not actually expecting like answers on all of these, but you may have ideas. That's great to hear Commissioner because I'm not sure we have answers to that today. Um, I am interested, however, and riffing off that a little bit if I can. And perhaps asking

4:57:15for you all to speak amongst yourselves on that. As those are prioritized, I'm hearing a lot of things about opportunities where things are not currently performing. I just want to hold there for a second and see, is that a primary focus you'd like us to consider? Is it based on existing properties or more based on maybe where things are not performing as they could be? And we see another possibility. And I just wanted to hear a little bit, if you wanted to speak amongst yourselves about prioritization there? Or do you see it as a broader analysis with our colleagues. I'm happy to just start it because I think it was in response to my comments. Yes. From, for my perspective, um, the theme behind all there are two themes behind all of my comments and they are good governance and sustainability. And so I think that there are some things like we are property owners, um, and we own the property and trust for the entire community. And so as the stewards on behalf of the entire Community, I think we have some responsibilities that we could, the level in which we're performing. So that's the good governance piece underlying it. The Sustainability Pieces, we know that when these stitches were set up 100 years ago, things were different. And we know that human cause

4:58:37climate change is impacting our wildfire risk, the risk to our farmers of not having access to water to be able to perform in the way that they need to. And so from a sustainability perspective, what are modern solutions to that that could still contribute to our agriculture values and goals, but bolster, I guess, reduced the risk. Bolster, the likelihood of productivity and then also, is there some way of, um, having a double benefit. Like instead of looking at as a negative, like maybe you would have, like we saw in the pictures that Vanessa presented, we saw farmers shrink down the amount of land that they were firming. Okay. Instead of maybe having each farmer shrink it down, what if we had targeted that we're going to have maybe fewer farms that we lease because we don't have water for the number of farms we originally did. And I don't know if that's true or not, but that's the question I'm asking. It's like, if we look at this from a sustainability perspective and we know where it's going into the future, which is more uncertainty and variability from year to year, what should we be planning for and how would we think about doing that?

4:59:46So that's kind of where I'm coming from on it. Thank you. Commissioner Loach Mean Additional thoughts on that. Sure. I mean, the couple of different pieces in there, but what I'm interested, if I heard what you're saying would be to come back together in some type of a brainstorm generative discussion about how might we be as Boulder County part of the solution to the climate change that exists and trying to help farms be sustainable. It makes me think of some of the partner. They know that are out there that are working in this space of drought resistant farming. It also, instead of just shrinking down the way you were describing, um, and what was presented each farm, the conversations that are out there around co - op helping, you know, 10 people come and do some farms. How do we incorporate youth? Because they really are going to be left with what adults now have created and all the systems and all those pieces as well. But I think the answers. I'm hearing a lot.

5:00:52We've all heard, I think a lot from, um, 4 H and CSU extension. Um, dry land agriculture, the young farmers. There is a lot of interests about how we all come together. And so when I hear you asking Commissioner Soulsman about some of the, what could we do? I think there is a big opportunity. To, um, kind of add on to what you've been doing. I should, I'm looking at Vanessa in the new role, but I know you all have been part of the conversations and work together and others who aren't here at the dais. That could be an additional piece for several years people have been asking farmers in Boulder County have been asking, like, how can we come back to some type of, um, solution focus, uh, roundtable, um, so I just think, I think the program haven't done it now before now.

5:01:47This is a great opportunity for us to, and to do that. And I do think there's additional people that would be very interested in helping here. And I'm looking at Commissioner Salzman because we hear all the time we meet with folks who are wanting to volunteer at Boulder County and all the different ways, not just formally as commission and advisory board folks, but in other capacities as well. So I think it could be a really great opportunity. And I also am recognizing that what I'm saying sounds like a project. It sounds like work and we're also in a sexual deficit and we're reducing FTE in general funded pieces. But this to me, some of this work. Is a prioritization given the tax funds that we do have if the board says, yes, we want to prioritize ag in Boulder County. For all the reasons that we're described and what you shared as well in the wildfire pieces too. Thank you, Commissioners. I'm hearing an opportunity for us to do a little bit more homework, revisiting some of our existing collaborations, maybe looking again at some of our strategies to see where partnership and recalibration make sense. I know this team is working hard every day, not only with wildfire partners, without our friends in Oscar and Communications. There's a lot of pieces to this. But

5:03:00we would look forward to putting a little more homework on this and maybe, uh, coming back in another forum to kind of give you some ideas as well as potentially what that might mean in setting up a project or some one - time funding to explore some of these conversations. This is a really beneficial conversation. Um, are there any other points you would like to share with the team this afternoon. Hearing none, we are thankful for your time and input and look forward to updating maybe some information on the website or in one of our Countywide Communications to let people know what's happening in this important area. Um, we're hoping everybody stays fire aware doing all we can together. Um, to treat water as precious as these lands. Thank you so much for your time.

5:03:52Thank you very much. And so that takes us to our next topic for the work session today, which is the state legislative wrap up. I just want to turn to Commissioner Lucheman and see if we want to just accept that as it's presented in the packet and community members can read it and see it. Or if we want to reschedule that for a future date. I guess I'm curious if that team is planning to walk in right now or their virtual, just an update on, sorry about that. I jumped ahead. So I heard, uh, we would reschedule that for a later date that we're planning to not do that today. Okay. And so I was just checking in with you to see, do we want to reschedule that or do we want to accept the presentation as it is here and not reschedule? Yeah. Thank you. I've gotten an opportunity to go through the legislative wrap up document because I use that for the CAT conference that I represented the board at maybe three weeks ago or so. So I'm fine accepting it. I think if you had questions or things you want to discuss about it, then I'm happy to set it for a different time. But I feel satisfied with what's been, um, reported. I'm also fine accepting it. We'll turn to our

5:04:54deputy and see if she's fine with accepting it or if we need to take that as a presentation for other partners that might be interested.