Transcript

0:00:29Commissioners. Are you ready? Yes, we are. Thank you. And we are recording. One of the answers. We're here for a meeting of the board of county Commissioners in Boulder county. Today is Tuesday, October 21, 2025. We are here in downtown Boulder at 1325. Pearl street for a hybrid. Business meeting. I'm going to go ahead and call our meeting to order. And move us to item number two. We've got a business meeting and head start division. Public meeting this morning. And then move us to item number three, which is the business meeting, and then item number four. Looks like it starts on page five of the packet for commissioner's consent items. Excuse me. Move. Approval of the consent agenda? Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposition. Okay. I didn't hear a third. Thank you. And then let's see here. So that took us through four j.

0:01:28So now we're, at commissioner's discussion items number five. So five a. This is a conversation that we had last week, and I don't have the date in front of me. But. We've got a now commissioner discussion deliberation of local minimum wage proposals for 2026. So last week we had a public hearing. So had public comment, both here in the room and virtually, and so we've closed that. Portion. Of that hearing, and this is just. Kind of the finality of that conversation due to timing, maybe. That was last Tuesday. I'm trying to remember. So we do have action requested at this time. I do want to just confirm with staff. I can see the deputy over here. I just want. To confirm that there's no additional or new information that would change anything, that would require us to open the public comment again. Natalie Swinger, Commissioner's deputy for the record, good morning, commissioners. There is no new or additional information that staff is planning to present to you today. Following the public hearing that was held on October 14 last week. I do have the five options that staff presented and if it would be helpful for the commissioner's. Discussion and deliberation. I'd be happy to share those five options briefly. But I'll do whatever is the pleasure of the board this morning. Thank you. I'm

0:02:52happy to have you. Go through the five. That piece as I get into my notes. From a week ago. So is that fine for one of another? Thank you, commissioners. And, John, if I could present that. Would be helpful. Thank you. So, commissioners, just as a quick refresher of what staff presented last week. We have option one, which would pause. The local minimum wage in 2026 to 1657, which is what it's currently set. At, and then this would not set a schedule moving forward. So the goal of that would be to hold an additional public hearing in 2026 to determine the ongoing schedule. Option number two. Would pause the minimum wage at 1657. Until 2030, which is when? Our local minimum wage would align with the Colorado minimum wage. Option three would be. Pausing the wage in 2026 at 1657 an hour and then increasing by CPI to set the wage schedule each year. And just as a reminder, the CPI is assumed at 3% in all of our charts. Option four. Would set the wage for 2026 at 1682 an hour, which would align the local minimum wage. With the city of Boulders. And then we would align our schedule with their wage schedule that they set previously. And then for option number five.

0:04:36It would also align with the city of Boulder's wage in 2026, which would be 1682 an hour and then. Setting it at CPI at the schedule moving forward. And those were the five wages. And schedules that staff had presented last week, and we're here to take your direction on what wage the commissioners would like included in the first reading of an ordinance. Thank you for that. So commissioners. I'm under the belief we don't have any additional questions because we had that. Opportunity with staff. So we're really just now entering into discussion and deliberation. Thank you, Natalie, for getting us back to where we were last week when we ended. Commission. Yeah, I'm happy to just kick off the discussion. And we can see. Where we land. And I'll just start by saying that. I do believe we need to adjust. The minimum wage schedule that we adopted in 2023, so for me, that's a given.

0:05:47That when we made that decision. We. Did it with the premise. That other municipalities in Boulder County. Would adopt a similar schedule and that we could have a regional minimum wage. We haven't seen that happen. And so we've got the city of Boulder. That adopted. I believe it's. Three 8% increases. The first of which went into effect this year, 2025. So two more scheduled. And other municipalities. Have not taken similar action. And so now we've got the statement on wage, we've got the Boulder county minimum wage, which our staff believes applies. To approximately 20,000 workers. I mean, that's the number of workers. How many of those are actually at minimum wage jobs. We don't know. And then we've got the city's minimum wage. And since then we've been hearing. From Nylot businesses primarily, although I believe Alan's park and some of the other unincorporated areas are feeling the same way. As well as. The organic farmers. In unincorporated Boulder county who. Are indicating to us that. It's not competitive. It's not something that they can sustain. We've been hearing this for some time, and I do believe. We need to take action on this. And I think. We have. A better chance. Of getting other municipalities to come along and do something regionally. And as I see it, we have two options. One would be.

0:07:50To go with. I guess it's option four. That would. Do 1.5% increase in 2026. An 8% increase in 2027. Which. We'd be aligned with the city of Boulder for 26 and 27 and then CPI thereafter. That's, I guess, where I was gravitating towards. Because that would continue. To be a higher wage scale than the state of Colorado. And voters got a very large workforce and kind of provide some sort of. I don't know, center of gravity or whatever. That kind of gives a group of workers. I know we've heard kind of different factions. Of the nylon folks saying. Just pause. This is not sustainable. I do think. I don't favor either option one or two simply because. That provides no increase. In 2026 or 2027. And I guess option one would be we'd be back here again in a year doing the same thing, which. Isn't very appealing, and I think it's too much uncertainty. For both workers and the business community.

0:09:24I'm. Option four. Option five, as it's presented, doesn't say CPI thereafter, but it would be option five. That would go up 1.5% in 26 and then CPI thereafter for me, I do want to just address. I know we have some people here who are saying that. We should not change our minimum wage based on the cost of living in Boulder County. And all of the challenges that people are facing financially. Yes, that is the case. However. The gap between affordability. And wages. Is so wide. That for me. And I guess the work that I brought to this job. From my prior work in the nonprofit advocacy sector. Leads me to believe what we really need to focus on to address that affordability gap is the cost of housing, it's the cost of childcare, it's the things. That the cost of transportation, it's the things that. Are making. Affordability, so out of reach for people. That. The small businesses in unicorporate Boulder County. Simply. Are structured to fit. It's not their job to make housing affordable, to make child care affordable, to make transportation. Affordable. So we have structural problems in our economy that are the product of lots and lots of complex economic forces and the tax system and all kinds of things. Which we need to work on. The federal

0:11:26government needs to work on, the state government needs to work on. It's not the work of small business people. To make housing affordable. So this is where. Just kind of the philosophical approach, I guess I'm taking to the conversation. Thanks for getting us started, commissioner. Stolen. Did you have any comments? Sure. Thank you. Several years ago. There was a stakeholder process to discuss what the wages should be. There was a compromise that was set. The workers didn't get everything that they wanted and business interest didn't. Get everything that they wanted. But there was a compromise to set wages. Now, fast forward. To this year, and there has been no meaningful stakeholdering process regarding a wage change. Wages for Denver, Edgewater, Boulder county and Boulder and the state of Colorado have been posted on the state's website since around July. People that are in the minimum wage are counting on that. Increase. In Boulder county, there are over 21,000 people that receive Snap benefits in nove.

0:12:23November, they're set to lose access to this life saving safety net. Almost. 63,000 people are on Medicaid or Colorado Health plan Plus, which are programs that we know are planned to shrink substantially in 2026 at a time when so many people in our community are struggling. We cannot lower workers wages. Every single proposal brought forward is a pay decrease. You can try to sugarcoat it, but a pay cut is a pay cut. We continue to hear from business owners that the market. Rate for minimum wage is well above the county minimum wage. We heard it again last week in the public comment session while we hear this from business owners, the market minimum that the market minimum is above the minimum wage. We still have workers all across our county that are earning minimum wage.

0:13:02People providing critical services for our community, people that we called heroes during the pandemic. Now is not the time to lower wages. With the federal cuts to safety net programs and the cost of living continuing to increase. The most responsible response is to increase local workers wages. There were a number of innovative suggestions at the hearing last week. Different tax structures, different wage structures, different groups. That different wages would apply to. Unfortunately, the Boulder county commissioners, as we heard from. Staff is bound by the state laws that don't allow us to pursue many of those. Options without state law changes. However, I have talked with our state representatives and passed those suggestions and ideas will belong to them for consideration. I do think state changes could make a lot things more equitable for regional wage.

0:13:43If our community takes a bold stand and agrees that workers who provide critical services like child. Childcare and janitorial services, and farmers who do the hard work in fields they deserve. To make $25 an hour by 2030 will have a stronger community. As I've stated many times, I'm more than open to amending and extending the business support program. I've proposed solutions that range from tax rebates to direct assistance to businesses. We should be looking for solutions to help businesses without lowering wages. Even during the hearing. We heard about a boulder call for circularity in our economy, which we dearly need. To pursue. None of the proposals that were presented for consideration today. Included business supports. Lowering workers wages will not address the myriad market issues that many of the businesses we've heard from both in the hearing last week and by email have raised we need to more seriously address the business support program. In addition to the lack of a business support program being discussed, there's been no concerted effort to make a regional wage. The commissioners did not even attend the fishbowl exercise.

0:14:40In Longmont, and we've been taking a wait and see approach with the other communities. If we want to see a regional wage, we must convene a regional process to discuss wages. We continue to hear that businesses support increased wages. They simply need a more regional approach. During the pandemic, people lined the streets with signs calling workers who earn minimum wage heroes. We have to stop letting down the people we call heroes of the community. Post pandemic inflation has soared even one year, with inflation over 8% and the inflationary measures for food. Are even higher in the double digits. Actions be louder than words. Rather than talk about how valuable farm workers are, how valuable child care workers are. Let's pay them. As we continue to hear from businesses and farms, let's. Also address the concerns by building a meaningful support program and convening a process to set regional wage. Paying people a wage of 1657 is not a fair wage in our market. Area, and we've heard from businesses that they are by. And large, already paying higher wages than that. We must continue with modest wage increases that the commissioners have previously approved. There are two actions that we should direct staff to take at this time. Convene a regional committee to work on regional wages and develop a business and farm assistance program.

0:15:48For the commissioners to consider. Thank you. And I'll just weigh in a little bit on where I am at, and then we can have some discussion. As we're being asked to make a decision. Because I got an opportunity in work with consortium of cities to hear and bring this conversation back. Because it had been on the table and in discussions as a minimum wage, not a sustainable wage. Not a living wage, not a self sufficiency wage, but truly a minimum wage. Meaning what? Is the floor of. What government is interested in getting involved in, in, regarding. To mandating a wage for businesses. That conversation had previously happened, as some of you know, in 2018, which is before I was sitting here at the dais and. The ask in 2021 was. To return to that conversation, but really look at it from a regional wage in the consortium of cities. Some of our regional work has been very successful with that group, and so that is how I got involved with the initial conversation, and I want to reiterate that at that time, was really about the floor. In a minimum wage. If you remember prior to that, there was a lot of conversation around Colorado.

0:17:06About. Could we just pay people $15 an hour? And that seemed like, could we get there? So I just want to put a little bit of context. And also, of course, that was during the Covid pandemic. What we were hearing from a lot of business folks is. And if you remember some of the signs up at that time, we weren't in person, but people were being. Lobbied for hire at $18 an hour or $19 an hour. And so some of that conversation was. That that time could have been a good time to get everybody from a regional standpoint in agreement because people didn't feel like anybody was able to hire less than that higher wage. At that point anyway. There was a lot of energy. There was a lot of. Agreement about that. And then.

0:17:55We know the result that. Other elected officials around our county in the region. Opted to not move forward in that action. To create a minimum wage. So. I believe that the goal from Boulder county commissioners was to have a regional minimum wage. And it is true. In our business program, the small business program that we set up here at Boulder county. We had feedback from some of our local unincorporated businesses. Who asked us to change the wage that was actually that people could apply and qualify to get. That support because people told us they weren't paying that low of a wage at $15 an hour. So I do believe that. There is an opportunity. To continue in the regional wage work. I really appreciate. Your repeat of directive of how do we be the convener?

0:18:53Boulder county. How does Boulder. County really be a convener of moving forward in this work. Because. I haven't been the lead on that work over the last couple of years. And I do think, as I mentioned in the last epodias, last time we had this conversation. And in the previous public meeting, the board of county commissioners needs to make a decision about how we move forward in this work if the goal is still to have. A regional local minimum wage. So that was something I had offered doing talk about that in administrative meeting. Do we talk about that together? Do we talk about that at the dais to be really clear. For workers and for business owners about what our commitment is to get to that regional minimum wage. Just looking through the options. And I want to appreciate. The different ideas that have come from community members, from previous elected officials. From some of the organizations. And when I look at. The options here.

0:19:58Similarly, I'm not interested in doing option one. That's just not interesting for me. The second one of. Pausing for such a significant amount of time doesn't work for me either. Option three has what I heard connected to. From again, unincorporated Boulder County. And business owners and farmers and others who've been very engaged this year. Asking the commissioners to bring this conversation back to the dais was the pause. And so I appreciate. Some of the additional emails and suggestions about what pause and what. And I think we received some of those pieces. So somewhere between. The option three. I do believe Boulder county commissioners and our staff and whoever is going to be partners in that work. We do need to. Be able. To look at the business support. Services. Look at commercial taxes or mill levies or whatever the different solutions are going to be.

0:21:06I do believe it's true. That businesses. Pay just based factually. Businesses pay more to have a brick and mortar than residences do or ag property or other land uses, and that has been some of the conversations since Covid that I have heard from small business owners, especially smaller business owners, restaurant owners, who have more than one restaurant here in Boulder county in our different. Cities and towns. It's a significant amount of property tax that's being paid and. We don't have a solution at this moment. In regards to some s pieces, I do. Think there are some really innovative pieces. I will share that the policy team has made a commitment. To come back. We had a meeting earlier this morning. I was hoping that that would have been. Done earlier this year, but here we are. To bring some folks together, including. The Nawat Local Improvement District, the Nywat Business association and some other folks to really address. Some of the suggestions that I had brought up at the Dias a couple of years ago.

0:22:06When we were working on this same topic. So in regards to the other options that are there for me, With all due respect, I just do not sit in here and talk with folks who ever say, to me. What we want to do is be like the city of Boulder. I don't believe that would put us in a place where. We could. Get the support of the other towns around our region just from having conversations with folks. And so, in my mind, for us to get again to the minimum wage from a regional standpoint. We need to make that wage accessible. For other cities and towns to move their elected officials, their community members, their small businesses, et cetera. Into a wage that's regional. And so. To jump up significantly and then expect folks to be ready and be there, I think. Is going to be problematic. And so for me. I'm really. In the.

0:23:07And I don't know that. The actual what I'm thinking is not actually. In one of these. It would have to be somewhere between. Maybe it is option. Three that has. The and I heard you, Commissioner Solzman, about the I think it was cdle maybe that you mentioned that has the wages posted up there, and there's a lot of things posted. Everywhere about what the plan is or. What policy is at that moment. Policies change, unfortunately, both for good and for bad. But if we do hear and listen to our unincorporated Boulder county residents and business owners who are asking for a pause with the intent of. The county commissioners and policy team, or again, whoever is going to be those partners to come together. And bring whoever else we can in our region so that workers and residents know what that floor is in Boulder county, then that would give us an amount of time.

0:24:10I'm not as comfortable to do that plus 0%. And I'm pointing to the table for 26 and 27. I believe we should be able to make that commitment and get that work done in 26 and then go to a CPI so that, if that's helpful, I guess. As I'm looking at that, it would be. Option three is more where I'm leaning. As far as, again, from a minimum wage. The last thing I'll just say in regards to the minimum wage for me does not mean that someone's stuck at minimum wage because people are working coming into entry at certain times. We've talked a lot about. The desire to allow people of all ages to come in in entry places for different types of work to we heard people talking about, just to know if that's the career that they want? We heard people talking about.

0:25:11Different examples, and some of them were related to youth who just want a summer job to check. It out and see and want to be part of their, we heard family businesses and some of the emails we heard, like the Nightwalk market and other local businesses, but certainly that doesn't. Mean to me. My perception is of. This table. It doesn't mean that a business owner. Has to keep that person at the minimum wage just because. The chart doesn't show a minimum wage. So that's just not how I received the table. In what I heard described as reducing people's wages. And I've also heard. From our businesses that a lot of our businesses are not paying minimum wage, but it just does provide in my mind some security to workers to know if they make a commitment to be in Boulder county that they won't be working for less than this amount. So that's just kind of looking through the options, catching us up in regards to the conversation, giving a little bit of context for people. Who may not have been around the conversation. In the same way that I have been over the last several years. So that's where I'm at. Commissioner Lashima I wonder if we could talk about an option that actually was not in the materials that was presented. Which. It's

0:26:35option five. With, except instead of tbd, For. 27 and beyond it would be CPI, and that was one that in a previous administrative hearing, we had had some conversation around. Where? It would go up. Just the one and a half percent. For 26, so. Wages wouldn't be stagnant for a year. But it would go up. 1.5% and then go forward. Based on cpi. So. That was. What I had heard you previously. Express an interest. In, and so I just wondered what your thoughts would be on that. It's not exactly option five. It's kind of. Modified. Option five. Modified. Okay, well, and I was pulling up the option five in here and. The description. Where the word description versus the number says that wages increasing by CPI beginning in 2027. Yeah, okay. So you're just asking about doing the 1.5 and 27 versus the pause. 1.5.

0:27:59It would go into effect in 2026. The 1.5%. I heard you say 27. Well, this is the way I'm reading it, is that it would be then the 1.5. In 2026 versus what was asked from unincorporated Boulder county folks of leaving that at 0% in 2026. That's the difference. Is that correct? And I think for me, The detriment. I feel like. That I'm faced with right now is that. I have no new information in. 2025. For these first nine months of the year. To know which of our regional partners. If we had some information from our regional partners that would say, you know what, if you all would pause and we would jump in on 2027 as an example. Or we could handle 1.5% so that's what I'm kind of like. I feel like. Because we haven't done the stakeholding or the engagement to have more information. And so my ask is going to be, does anybody have a pulse on that? But I haven't heard anything. Well, we've heard a lot of different things.

0:29:21And I think it's safe to say that even the same people have asked for different things on different occasions. I think we've all received. Email from a coalition of farmers actually saying that. Aligning with the city of Boulder would be okay. I think they were doing that. Kind of. Feeling that that was more likely for us to do. Than going with a freeze. So. I don't think we've got enough information. To know for sure. Who would come along and align with it, I think. It's more about. What would be a fair way to address the concerns. Of the small and independent business people and unincorporated Boulder County. Including the farmers. And still offer some wage increase, and so. That's what made me. Uncomfortable with option three, which would hold wages steady at 1657, which is what it is, right? Now in unincorporated Boulder county, and it would still. Be. In 2026. I'm not comfortable with no wage increase. Year over year 25 to 26, I would be comfortable with that smaller wage increase and then going with CPI thereafter. John. If I could get the slides just up on the screen, it might be easier for the public to follow along with the discussion. Yeah.

0:31:05And I'm looking at, I'm looking on my screen at a memo that. Was dated October 14. To us to support this hearing. Option number five. Okay, so. That's exactly what I'm talking about. And I do want to just say the discussion about the small business support and property taxes and all the other things that. Are causing pressures. On our business community. Yes. Their assessment rate is 29%, whereas. Residential is down around six and a quarter or whatever. I don't know what the exact number is right now. That's unfortunately not something that. We can change. The legislature can change that. The small business support? Yes. That's important. It's not a comprehensive solution. We wanted to do that. In a one time manner. If there were things that. People that small businesses could use. To maybe increase automation or improve their business processes or. To develop a business plan, a thing that could set them on a more sustainable course and a little bit of funding from Boulder county would be helpful for that. But as an ongoing. Expenditure. First of all, it's not consistent and universal.

0:32:49And I don't believe it's sustainable on our part. To do that. And. We set it up. Structured it and set up criteria. That emphasized. Making structural changes to the business that would. Make these wages more affordable, but not to subsidize wages. I am completely open to the conversation about is there more we can do to support. Business processes and things like that. But. Not. To subsidizing wages, because I just don't think that's the way. The market should work. So, yeah. It was option five. But I guess we revised what was in the memo as option five. Thank you. What I'm looking at, and so I'm just trying to do some calculation. And again, my hope is that we are able to. Work with our regional partners so that we end up with original wage. That really was my interpretation. Of the goal from the board of county commissioners over the last several years. And so when I look at. This, and I'm actually looking at.

0:34:11A different calculation. If you could put option three up there, just because. The example that we were just looking at a moment ago doesn't have the Colorado minimum. Wage. So I'm thinking about our local regional partners who are at that 1481 and so the difference in there right now for us is a dollar difference. So that's what I'm just trying to, like, how far is far? Too far for us to. Be able to get some of our partners to be able to make that commitment. To join us to provide that security for workers, because I think that's really, like, what we're actually all trying to get to. And so that's what I'm looking at. Then if we go to the option, five. I think the option five just doesn't have the Colorado one in there.

0:35:01It's the 1440. So. That would be. Let's see here. The 2026 Colorado minimum wage would be $15.16. So that's what, a dollar 60 something? Which is just a little bit different or a little bit less per hour difference. Than where we are currently. And I hear what you're saying. I'm just calculating out loud so that I can have an idea of what. I don't know that. We can't speculate definitively. Which option? Louisville. Might find more feasible for them. I don't have a crystal ball. And I know that what we did was completely off the table. So I'm not really looking so much at what? Might Longmont do with the change of leadership? I'm really looking at. What? Just not having static wages from 25 to 26. And I think, in any event, I'd have to do the math as well. That?

0:36:31Because state law says. You can't increase more than 15% over the state minimum wage in any one year. I think it may take multiple years anyway. For municipality to be able to align with us. I don't know those numbers off the top of my head. Yeah, that's a great reminder. I'll just finish really quick. What I was going to say. What I was saying is it's helpful for me to. Take a calculation and understand what the difference is in our minimum wage and our proposal relative to where we are right now. With the state minimum wage and what we're anticipating from that standpoint. And I'm fine with option five. I think it gets us closer to what we're being asked. And again, for me, this is a minimum wage, and I think. There's some real, there's some opportunity for us to advocate, but also do some work. At a county level as well. In regards to some of the other concerns that we're hearing from businesses and small businesses, specifically. Commissioner Spillsman, I did want to ask. You had asked. For the board of county commissioners to give direction today on two items. And so I wanted to know if you wanted to discuss those two again. One of them. I just don't want to mischaracterize them. One of them was specific around the business

0:37:47support. So certainly the two actions that I think we should do regard convening a regional committee. To work on regional wages and develop a business and farm assistance program for the commissioners to consider. Thank you. And I would be in support of both of those items. I think we've talked about them in a couple of different ways, but I think if we could ask. I'm happy to support those and have staff come back to us with some specific scopes. And for me. The understanding who, what teams at the county, whether it's our office, policy team or office. Of county minister. Whoever it is that's going to be responsible. To do that. And I think my ask will just be to provide quarterly updates at a minimum so that we have some ability to understand what the asks are, where it is in process, and bring in any other partners or suggest any other folks that need to be part of. That opportunity. As us being the convener. So thank you for that. And I didn't know. Commissioner Levy, I didn't know if you had any comments. Additional comments that haven't already been said around the two asks and the direction. If there was anything else you wanted to receive back from staff? So the ask around the business support. The second one being. One was

0:39:13around convening is Boulder county being the convener for a community group? And then the other one was in regards to the business part, yeah. I can support both of those, okay? That's why I just want to give you an opportunity. If there was anything additional you wanted to hear back from staff about on that topic, okay? Thank you. We've had some folks. Question whether we actually have met the stakeholder process required in statute, and I haven't. Gone back and looked at that language again. But I think it would be helpful. We did hear from our deputy in the hearing at the public hearing last week. That our staff is comfortable, that the process that we've had. That opening up the form stack online, that having a public hearing. Accepting emails. All of that meets the requirement. The statute doesn't say exactly what a stakeholder process.

0:40:12Looks like we did go through a very extensive stakeholder process. In 2023. Before. We adopted that. So we did go through that very extensive process. And I think I would view what we've done since then. Is really just supplementing that, but. If our deputy has a different interpretation, it might be good to put that on the record. Natalie Springt, commissioner, is deputy for the record. Just as Commissioner Levi had stated the statute language. Doesn't specifically line out exactly what a stakeholding process is. It does line out exactly. Which types of organizations locally to receive input from prior to moving forward with a proposed wage and based on the over 1200 responses and 100. Minutes of public comment. I comfortably consider that we have met those requirements. I also do consider this as a supplemental to our previous. Larger engagement process we undertook in 2023, and we also have. Continued opportunities for public comment, as this is just the first step in this local minimum wage process. So there'll be more opportunities to hear from community groups and the public on this. Thank you. And I'll just add in my I did read the statute, and we absolutely have. Not met the requirements.

0:41:48It doesn't say take thousands of public comments. There's very specific groups that were required to reach out to. And the testimony today demonstrates that we have not reached. Out to those groups. I think that the other thing I was going to say about that process is that. The statute speaks in terms of adopting what is needed to adopt a local minimum wage, which we did. And we did. And we did that process. It's silent as to. Modifying your local minimum wage after that. I think. There's enough flexibility in there and ambiguity in there that what we've done. Meets the statute, and that seems to be the advice that we've gotten. If that's a concern, we could certainly proactively file a question with Cdle. And find that out if they consider not reaching out to anyone doing the process. I'm not concerned about it. Yeah, I didn't hear and ask about concerns in regards to the process itself. So. Thank you, I think. We've got some good discussion and we've heard from everybody about where they are. In regards to the different options. Thank you for staff putting all of the comments together and presenting us with some options. And. I think we're in a spot.

0:43:10I don't know if you have a motion. Or if there was any other additional discussion. And we also gave direction on two really specific pieces. Of work to bring back to the commissioners in an administrative meeting. Yeah. So if it's a motion that we're looking for at this point, and this would be direction. For. Drafting an ordinance that would modify. The previously adopted local minimum wage to bring forward for first reading. At a date. That our deputy will share with the public. And so I move that. We direct staff. To draft an ordinance that. Would be consistent with what was option five displayed on the screen. So I'll wait for a second, and then I do have some additional comments. A second? And just for discussion on the motion. Previously. I guess. Talked about the cost of living, and it is out of reach, and we are losing families in Boulder County. We're losing just the richness. And the diversity. That any community. Wants and needs. In order to thrive and be a complete community.

0:44:33We are working hard. And thanks to the leadership of Commissioner Loachman on expanding our affordable housing opportunities. I continue to work with childcare providers. To look for creative opportunities. To expand the availability of childcare as well as make that more affordable. Boulder county supports our Family resource centers, which help meet other unmet needs for families that are struggling financially in Boulder County. We advocate. At state legislature, with state administrative agencies for support of CCAP, for support of Snap, for support of Medicaid enrollment processes. For multimodal transportation options. That brings down the cost of transportation. We advocate with our congressional delegation on all of. Those issues as well. And so I think it's a multiponged approach. And as I know, I have said, you have said, commissioner loan, a minimum wage is a regulatory floor. And this is what businesses need to pay in order to pay. A fair wage to their workers. There's nothing empirical about it. I would note that it is that on an annualized basis, The wage is above the federal poverty level. I don't view staying out of poverty as being the goal. But. There's a regulatory floor and then there are all. The other work support systems that can help families. Meet the high cost of living, not just in Boulder county, but all across the country. So I think

0:46:29we have a motion in a second, and I just wanted to make some more. Comments, any additional comments or discussion on the motion and the second. I have none. Thank you. I don't have additional comments, so all in favor? Aye. In opposition. No, thank you. And so we will have that. I did just want to, for the record, if you don't. Mind. Deputy. We have a first reading. And do you have a date for that? Not yet. Okay. I had a date in my mind, but I don't want to say it. Then it sounds like we don't have that. So we will hear that how? Thank you, commissioners. We do have a public noticing requirement that staff will start undertaking. So we wouldn't want to issue a first reading date just to make sure that we meet the deadlines for publishing in the local newspapers.

0:47:19So that's the main reason why. I'm not offering a first reading date yet. We do have the November 20 public hearing already scheduled, which would be a second reading option for members of the public to attend and provide public comment at that time. Okay, thank you. That's. The date that was in my mind. So we have direction on that item. Thank you so. Let's go. That takes us in in our business meeting. Item. Six, which is confirmation of executive session topics. Good morning, commissioners. Confirmation of executive session topics. I'm here to confirm that the executive session topics that were noticed at the October 14, 2025 regular business meeting of the board were discussed as scheduled and this is simply a note for the record, so I'm happy to take us down to item seven. Thank you. I'm here to request authorization for the board of county Commissioners to. Go into executive. Session on Thursday, October 23, 2025 at 01:00 p.m. pursuant to CRS 24. 6402, subsection four f. And this is personnel matters regarding the annual performance evaluation of Susie Stripe. Your director of Oscar so moved. A second. All in favor? Aye. Thank you.

0:48:36And then we'll go down to item eight, which is our head start division meeting that. Takes us to page 196 in the packet for today's business meeting, and we'll give stuff just a moment to shift to the front computer, and then the screen will show the presentation here in a moment and then I let a cone know, but I have to leave. At 1030 to make travel time for my next meeting. So if I just stand up and leave. That's why. Okay. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Akanya Ogren, division manager for Boulder county, head start. And I'm ready to move forward with the presentation. Great. Thank you. Okay, I'll start with meal service. We are now in October. Presentation of meal data is from August and September. Total meals delivered in September. 6084. Meals served based on attendance of children. Is 4506. The invoice from the Boulder Valley School District food service team is 17,491.

0:49:4950 with the CACFP reimbursement at 13,375 80. So the cost of meals to Boulder county had start was 4000. 155 70 and the average between the first two months of data. At 3375. The attendance data that is related to food costs. There were 20 days of school in September. And so attendance for Dagney site and Lafayette was 79%, Woodlands, 81%, and Mapleton y Boulder at 93%. And the average program attendance across both those months and all sites at 85%. Going down to enrollment. We are currently. At 109 out of 110 slots, and that is just. This time of year, we'll have a student drop and then another student coming in, so. We've had some back and forth on those numbers. We do have a child. Ready to enroll and start school, and that will bring our number up to 110. Hopefully we will hold there.

0:51:08In the next for the rest of the school year. And so this is the graph that goes along with those enrollment numbers. Again, just holding steady right now at 109, which meets our enrollment requirement. For our head start, Grant. I'll pause there if there are any questions so far. No questions. Thank you, Connor. Okay, great. News around the budget. The projected total at the end of the fiscal year is now 19,795. We are continuing to monitor payroll and operating costs and adjust where needed to ensure that we remain within budget to maintain positive financial standings. So we're in a good place right now. And. Again. Actuals. We have actual numbers up through September, and we will. Have more actual numbers for October, but everything else going forward is projected. The biggest section of my report.

0:52:12This month is really related to the ongoing shutdown. So beginning October 20, yesterday, we were informed. I attend twice weekly meetings with the National Head start Association. And they are predicting programs will start, begin to face closure across the country. The head start programs based on their funding cycle. So our funding starts July 1, goes through June 30 of the next. Year. So there are other programs. That their funding starts August, September, October. And so the programs that are in that October cycle. There are six programs that serve 6525 children in four states that are facing closure at the end of October due to the shutdown. And then the projected numbers for November. There are an additional 134 programs that serve 58,000. 627 children that face possible closure at the end of November. If they don't, as a program, individually have supplemental funding. In order to keep those programs in operation. Not all will close, but. They are already predicting and receiving confirmation that programs will begin to close this week and then moving forward, the longer the shutdown continues. Looks like you have a question. Just wanting to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying, which is because our grant cycle began in July.

0:53:43We are fully funded, correct? Yes. Our funding is secure through June 2026. Additionally, due to the shutdown, Our regional partners are the regional training and assistant team that we've been working with for the last two and a half years, they were issued a stop work order. They are a contracted entity, and so our coaching and recurring meetings are canceled on a week to week basis, depending on the status of the shutdown. However, because we did have plans of work already in place at the time that the government shut down, that work continues. We just don't have those ongoing. And regular support meetings to continue the work. Everything is right now internal. So we look forward to when they will be able to return to support the program again. I could ask just a question on.

0:54:40The regional coaching. Is there any attachment between that coaching, those sessions, the meetings that you're talking about? That are canceled because of the government shut down, that are connected with our ability to get grants. Or requirements for any of the funding that we receive. Whether there was some of the follow up in relation to violation that was required. So I just wanted to be aware if there's something there that could then create an issue for us. Later in an application process or otherwise. Yeah. So. We successfully corrected all of the notices that we received. We don't have any current. Notices, deficiencies or non compliances. They were assigned to us to help support the program. With attending to those notices and helping us, correct? They actually. Are not allowed to help us at all with respect to the competition, Grant. So. They do or they don't, because, of course, all of the systems and leadership coaching does. Help us create a stronger program. That then can justify our request for the grant. But as far as the actual application is concerned, They are not allowed to work with us on the competition grant at all because it's a competition. And so I think, I hope that answered your question. That doesn't really have anything to do with our ability to get the grant that they are

0:56:11not actively working with us right now. Okay? And to be able to get the ground wasn't the question. It was more of, is there any coaching? From this regional training and technical assistance team. That our staff is required to receive to maintain any funding. Or maintain any status that would allow us to then qualify for head start funding. The system specialist was mandated to our program. We were mandated to work with the system specialist. And. If we weren't actively working with that system specialist. We could receive another non compliance or deficiency for not engaging in that mandated coaching and training. Based on what I am learning at the head start association meetings with respect to the shutdown. As long as I continue to show up, even if they don't show up and I document that I'm showing up for those meetings. So, for example, this morning there was a meeting on the calendar. I showed up, there was nobody there. I sent a follow up message through. The system and said, I am here at this meeting. I will wait 15 minutes and then. Log off in case you all are able to show up, which I know they can't. I immediately received a notice saying the staff were on furlough as long as I continue. To do those things and document that I am

0:57:43showing up or that our staff are showing up. To meetings on the calendar. I believe, based on what the head start association is saying, that we will be okay. We'll? Be in compliance. Okay. Thank you. That's exactly what I was just wanted to make. Sure. I didn't understand. No, that's okay. There were several different ways that it could affect potentially. So I just want to make sure we had something record for you and our program here in Boulder county. Thank you. Okay. There is one. I'm realizing that. I omitted. An update that is related to the shutdown. And I can add this as a note later. The one office that appears to continue to operate. As an essential office within the office of head start. Is their risk assessment office, and that is where you would file report of an incident, and they would determine whether there is a finding based off of an incident.

0:58:43I did submit. An injury to a child. A child was on the playground and had fallen off the play structure. And it resulted in a broken arm. I did file the report on that particular incident, submitted it. To the office of head start. I have not received follow up. From that incident report. But that is the office that is open currently. And again through the NHS HSA meetings. I'm hearing that other programs are also doing the same thing. Filing incident reports as required, and they are receiving notifications. Of meetings that are resulting of those incident report submissions. So I am waiting. I expect to hear. About that particular incident. And that office, again, just continues to remain open. The Iran office, which is the risk assessment notification office. I will move on to the final bullet point, which is the competition grant that you had mentioned. Before and due to the shutdown. The competition. Grant itself has not opened. We had anticipated an opening at the beginning of October. There have been no new notice of funding opportunities since. The end of September. So. We're prepared to proceed as soon as that application opens, but I do not anticipate. It opening until the government returns.

1:00:08From the shutdown. Thank you. And. I did have one other question to ensure it looks like that might be the end of the presentation. No, you're fine. Just in regards to the funding piece and just curious around, there's a lot of unknowns right now. And. I do just want to offer, and I think the board would be in support. Of just clarifying what I believe is our intent. If our program was to be affected. And I heard you say because of our July cycle, Boulder county's head Start program would most likely. I'll just say most likely not be. Affected because of what I heard you say. And I do believe that the way that the federal administration is performing. By indicating in so many different ways. That kids and families. And folks in need are not a priority of this current administration. And I do believe that because we have some one time funding that it might be helpful to just create that assurance that in Boulder County. We are prepared to make sure that our program does stay intact. So I just wondered at what point. You want to have that type of a conversation. I know we had it previously, and then. It sounded like maybe things were okay. And now our government is currently shut down, so I just want to offer

1:01:29that in the conversation. I am ready to have those discussions at any time. I believe our staff would definitely and our families would appreciate. Knowing what are the options? Are beyond June 30, 2026. We're all sort of holding our breath waiting for this application to open to determine what the next five years might look like for the program. Yeah. Thank you. And I don't know. Commission Levy don't want to put you. On the spot, but I know we've talked about it some and just, it feels like we're in these kind of moving events. And that assurance because we're almost at the end of the year. And so, just from a teacher standpoint, 2026 is already on people's mind and calendars from an educator standpoint, but also for, as you said, families and kiddos would love to know there's some security. Yeah. I think we have indicated that if there's a lapse in funding that we want to keep the program going. I'm not hearing that we need to do anything. Soon. So I think we need to make sure that the families are aware that this will not affect the program. We have the funds.

1:02:39They are in Boulder County's bank account, I presume. So it might be a little premature to be offering. Assurances for this would be the 2026 27 school year. But if you're hearing that people are questioning and wondering, then I would say, sure, let's have that conversation. Thank you so much. And then you had. I think you had indicated that the competitive grant that we're hoping will reopen. Is still just a one year grant and not the usual five year. It is a five year. That's the priority. Is to secure that five year grant, okay? When would we be hearing the results? Typically. The results if it had opened in October. They give 90 days to submit the application. This is my experience in the past. And that would have meant about March April notification. In order to prepare the program. For securing the funds and then signing contracts to start the program again. In July 1, 2026. Okay, so it might be a little delayed.

1:03:58They'll have a backlog of work. Yeah, month by month is my assumption. Okay, well, if you could maybe just keep this as an ongoing agenda item when you come and. Do your monthly updates of what the status of that application. And anything you're hearing back so that we can, we'll do communicate on a timely basis. We had talked about. One year of funding while we make longer term plans. And so I want to make sure we're being careful about what? We might be talking about. Yes, understood. Thank you. Great. Looks like that was it for the presentation. Thanks, Connie. And I am. Let's see here. Let me get to the beginning of my thanks for your work and thanks. For getting us to full enrollment. Yes, I know. It's nice to have full classrooms and children. And happy teachers. And this lively school sites. Actually, before we do close out this update, At the Mapleton y. So that's all been taken care of? That has all been. Resolved? Yes. I'm kind of giggling because then there was a power outage at the other YMCA. Site which required me send all children home another day at different sites. It's been a fun year so far. You've been busy. Thank you. Thank you team, too, for the work that you're all doing. We appreciate it. So that

1:05:34ends item number eight here for us. And there's nothing additional on our business meeting schedule, so I will go ahead and adjourn our business. Meeting for today. Thank you. Thank you.