Transcript

0:00:28Commissioners, are you ready? Yes, John, thank you. Thank you so much. And we're recording. Good morning. Today is May 21st, 2026. This is a meeting of the Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County. All three commissioners are present, and we are here for a public meeting on the Integrated Weed Management Plan. And we are going to hear some additional information in response to questions that the commissioners had at our previous meeting. And then we had one outstanding item that we need to resolve, and that is on the pause on drone application of Intasoflamet Red Hill. So we, well, after we hear from staff, we will have a discussion and deliberation among ourselves and make a decision. So Stefan, Jason, who's Jason? Okay, thank you. Welcome morning, Commissioners. I'm Jason Souk, Parks and Open Space here at Boulder County. I'm honored to be at my first public meeting, and it's a pleasure to be here. Today we're here, as you stated, to continue prior discussions regarding the Integrated Weed Management Plan, and its implementation. And I'm joined today by my colleague, Stefan Reynold, who will be presenting today. We look forward to the discussion, and thank you for the opportunity. Great. Good morning, Commissioners, Stefan Reynold, Deputy Director of Land Stewardship. And we actually have a really short presentation because we wanted to have the time

0:02:09for you to do the conversation. So. Okay, so yeah, make sure I advance the slide. So I just want to put this up on the slide. This is from the memo, and this is actually what we're hoping you all will be discussing today. Does the board authorize staff to proceed with the drone spray treatment of cheat grass as outlined in gold two of the Integrate Weed Management Plan? As supplemented by the mitigation efforts that we've discussed during the February 26, 2026 public meeting. And as a reminder, here is the adjusted boundary map that we had discussed during that timeframe and the mitigation measures that we discussed. We're going to maintain the 660 - foot buffer to dwellings. We were going to increase the perimeter buffer from 50 feet to 100 feet on property lines with no dwellings. We are going to increase the buffer on dry drainages to 100 feet. We actually adjusted the map to cpw's Previl's Meadow jumping mouse species activities map. And that actually is more, is closer to a 300 foot buffer from the dry drainages on either side, so a total of 600 excluded from the areas. Use of drift cards to demonstrate the drone safety and how the herbicide is being sprayed. Use of an organic drift retardant to reduce drift potential. Um, and then we would be doing

0:03:41pre and post soil sampling in the buffered areas to test for the chemical movement. So, um, just going to go right to the next slide here, which is just repeat the initial question and then turn it over to the commissioners. Pause for a cough. Um, thank you. Okay. Thank you for that. Um, so commissioners. We are being asked to resolve this outstanding question that we have. Maybe I guess I'll start by inviting any questions that, uh, we may have of our staff here. Yeah, Commissioner Stolzman. Thanks. I sent some questions ahead. The first was, what is the organic drift retardant that you're proposing using. And it just was unanswered. Yeah. So, um, the, we worked with the, um, it depends on who the contractor hired to do the work is. So when we talk to, um, the contract that was under contract previously, um, they, they didn't tell us the exact drift retardant, but there's actually six different drift retardants that can be utilized. Uh, one's called natural oil. One's called CNI transcend. The other one's called Brant A Plus. There's one called PhD ad here. And then, um, in folium EA. So these are different, um, drift retardants that are organic in nature that can be utilized to, uh, again, the drifer tardin increases the droplet size. Um, and makes the drops go down.

0:05:20So, um, we, it depends on the contractor and which drift return they utilize or have. So whatever they would want to use would have to go through our decision matrix to ensure that it follows what we have approved for chemical use on the property. Certainly. Just because something's organic doesn't mean it's not harmful. It doesn't mean that it means I love the expectations from the decision matrix. Yeah. All those all those, uh, need to be EPA approved. Um, they also, I'm not sure how they fall on the, I don't know if they're tested at the who level. I don't, I don't know. Um, these different ones. But, um, there are safety data sheets for all these different chemicals. So they're things that we can look at. Okay. My next question. I mean, that's just, that's not a particularly satisfying answer. We don't know what we're proposing that we're spraying and we don't know if it meets that we'd management plan, but we're going to do it. Um, my next question that I sent ahead of time, um, that went unanswered was just if we had gotten the information I requested the last meeting about Oscar's perspective on the plan and the use of in Dazaflam.

0:06:35In commissioners Natalie Spanian Commissioner's deputy for the record, thank you Commissioner Stolzman for sending that question in advance. Um, in addition to that question, you had also requested the city of Boulder study on the use of in Dazaflam. Um, and so prior to today's public meeting, staff did attempt to coordinate a responses on both of those items. Um, and I, uh, I, and we did not receive the study from the city of Boulder, um, on Daza Flam use. They're not prepared to release that publicly yet. Um, but they have noted that they'll share it with us once it's available. And we also today do not have Oscars perspective on the pilot suggestions or the integrated weed management plan. So I did want to note for the record and for the board to discuss in this public meeting that Commissioner Stolzman requested a delay on this decision. Um, and she shared that with staff via email last night. Yeah. I just, I set my questions ahead of time. So they wouldn't be surprising from here. And it just, it seems that it would be useful to have the information before we make any decision today. So I would request that we delay if we can't get answers to the questions that were asked last time. Just last, just reiterating. There's some questions around our progress on

0:07:52the list A species. I'm just trying to make the entire list so that it is on the record again. Um, and just whether the board would be interested in pursuing endangered species take permit, um, voluntarily. And our progress map going species by species on what we've tried and what pilot programs we've tried in each of the list A species. Thank you. Those are my questions. Just. Trying to get those down. Um, okay. Thank you Commissioner Floyd. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you Jason and Stefan for being here for the presentation for the information. Just one question on this slide that is up on the treatment area. I was thinking that there was conversation and I think you said February 26th. I don't remember the day. But in one of the last conversations, while we were talking about like what else could we do, meaning maybe it's wider buffers and adding some pieces. I thought there was a mapping process. It's something that I had talked about.

0:09:02I just don't know if it didn't seem like it was captured in here with the additional map it is. But I didn't see it in here listed as kind of a process standpoint. And what I mean by that is if you remember originally, we had asked for additional communication and how our residents going to know when, you know, any drone would be any drone process would be used with, um, chemicals. And it was like a large map and that was kind of the first piece that I saw when people were calling in and emailing in. And so one of the pieces we had talked about in that conversation was, what does the contracture do? How do we know? It seems as though there's more than just one map process. And so I wanted to just ask in this list if that is something that you are considering if that's something that we need to talk about in regards to treatment area. And then the other question I had is I was thinking that we were just talking about one question today. And it sounded like there was potentially a couple of additions just to the plan in general. And so I just want to ask, I'm kind of looking at staff in regards to what, how much are we doing today versus, um. What I

0:10:15thought was the question about the pause on spring. So I just want some clarification. It would be great. Thanks for that question, commissioner Lucha May. Natalie Swing at Commissioners Deputy for the Record. Um, the intention of staff's presentation, um, and this public meeting today was twofold. One was to, um, answer questions that were received, um, in regards to the annual report on the Integrated Weed Management Plan. And then the direction requested from the board if you so choose is regarding, um, the pause on the Red Hell Sprain. Um, so those are the two pieces that we're here to discuss today. And the one action item or requesting. Okay. Thank you. And maybe I'll go back to my first question in regards to the mapping for stuff. Yeah, sure. So, um, real quick. And this might provide some clarity around the map. So typically what we do is we identify an area that we know in this case had, um, cheat grass infestation. And the initial plan, the reason we had a project area is, um, was to allow the individuals that we're going to do the spring to what they do is they put a drone up in the air and they fly the site and they identify, um, drainages that they want to avoid, um, they identify areas that they think, Oh, this area

0:11:45does not have a ton of cheek grass. So there's no need to be spraying this location. And so they're going to identify all that in the process. And so this, uh, this change and this map that's here was in response directly to the prebles jumping mouse. And so we altered this boundary to, to make sure that it was out of the, uh, shallow drainages and was tied to the CPW's, um, species activity map. So, um, there still could be further refinement of these areas. Um, and it's, it's under one contract. Um, a lot of that information is also, uh, in the memo, um, so, uh, but I think that might help answer the question there. Thank you. It was what I think what I'm asking for that's helpful to understand what pieces you've gone through in a process. When I'm looking at this slide, this looks to me like kind of a compilation of some of the pieces that we've talked about to address community concerns to address some of the conversation around runoff to address some of the, just the different pieces, right? And so for me, what I would like to see in this list would also be what you just talked about because it sounded like, um, from comments previously that there was some questions about statements that sounded like you're going

0:13:07to just, you're going to spray this entire mapped area, which wasn't accurate. So I'm just trying to make sure that we have something and process so that we can be clearer with the community. And so it seems like to have that in a process would just be helpful so that whoever takes on the next project will have just listed out what the expectation is. But I would also just ask if that's something that another board member is interested in, because otherwise, you know, I don't want to give you a unilateral ask. Which would sound something like the redefined mapping after the initial drone that goes out there and determines which areas are, one I heard was needed areas that, or I'm sorry, not needed, um, and also specific drain areas. That wouldn't be seen necessarily from on the ground. So I think what, what I'm hearing is, so Stefan indicated what the standard procedure, not just here, but I think anywhere that we're contemplating the use of herbicides is to, this, the map that we see is, for lack of a better word, maybe a regulatory map that, you know, we have the increased buffers, we have the jumping mouse, uh, buffer areas. And so this is the like largest possible area in which, um, herbicides could be applied. And then, but this would be

0:14:44refined before the application actually occurs. With more precise mapping. And I think what I'm hearing, you request Commissioner Luchamin is that map. Is that right? Yeah. Again, what I'm trying to, um, support is how do we communicate. What it is that we're doing? How do we have a record? Because in my mind any treatment is trying to educate our department and are to be able to, our department and the work to be able to understand what was effective, what was not effective. Was there, you know, drift, um, was there a runoff? Was or whatever the different pieces are so that we can do better as we are trying to get over time closer to use the minimal use of herbicides. And so that's what I'm looking for. And I, again, I also feel like what community members are asking about is please tell us exactly where. And I know we can't do the exact, but I do think even this map that we're looking at here is looks different than what was initially published. And so that's what I'm trying to make sure we've captured in some type of a process. So I think the question then is does that, that. Fly over, actually produce a map. That could be made available to the commissioners, the public, whoever would find it interesting. Is there an

0:16:21actual map that results from that process. So. It is definitely something that we can do and we can, we can start off with, Hey, this is, this is the first map. And we can kind of put in a procedure that says here's the first map. Here's it adjusted for these pieces. And then yes, I think it does produce a map. That's how that's exactly how the drone flies. Now how quickly we can get that up on the website from, from that piece. That's, that's something that we can figure out. But it's certainly something that we can have a finalized map for and explain that process. If I could just, um, on that. My, my impression is that that flyover would occur pretty close to the time you're actually going to spray because you don't want to, you don't want to do your, uh, application based on something that's out of date that may no longer be accurate. Right. So this wouldn't be a static thing where, you know, you would fly the 3000 acres that we've identified in Boulder County and put that up and say, here, here's the area. You know, when we have, I forget how many years that we're going to face this out. It would be something that would be, uh, we're going to do the application. Probably the window of

0:17:46time when we think conditions are right. We've done the flyover. Here are, here's a more precise representation of that. And that, that could be posted them before the application occurs. So yeah, that, that's correct. We would have to be pretty darn close to, um, the time of the spring because things do change. Um, so, um, but yes, that is something we can do. Okay. Is that what you're looking for Commissioner Luchimin? Yeah. I think that that's helpful. And I also am thinking like for any of the weed areas, whether it's in the plains, wherever it is. And the other items in this project or in this, um, memo. And I don't, we're not going to go through all of them today. But what I'm looking for, and this is just one of them is how do we know. How do we know if it's addressing the weeds from a management perspective as landowners that we're saying so that we have something? So this group can come back in a year with you on. Okay. Now we know something more about whichever method it is. And so for me, the map is another tool for us to be able to evaluate. Otherwise, I don't know how we did outside of just being able to let people know here's a more precise map. And yes, there's going

0:19:01to be a short timeframe. And I think all of them, all of the maps and all of the communication is this is, you know, it's an estimate. But I think just providing more clarity for people is going to be helpful. Thank you. I mean, it sounds like that's feasible. And, um, so I would support doing that. I don't want to put sort of, you know, hurdles and roadblocks in the way that would make it infeasible. But I'm not hearing any concern from you in doing that. No, that's correct. And we can definitely incorporate that into our process. Okay. Great. Yeah. Did you have other, other questions. Um, let's see here. Just in regards, not, I don't think I do. I, I wanted to ask Commissioner Stolzman. I heard you ask a couple of questions. I don't know at what point we went when I dressed that, but I don't have additional, um, questions right now for staff on the item. Okay. I want to thank you for the additional work. Um, and, uh, that we did receive a memo from our assistant County Attorney, Liana Lamore about the application, how the endangered species act does or does not apply. And, um, just to clarify, that wasn't the question that I asked at the last meeting.

0:20:27It wasn't whether it does or does not apply. The question I asked is if the board would want to pursue an incidental take permit, which is a different question. And I asked the attorney's office and they said that we could voluntarily do that. And I asked if the board could get that same information that was sent to me since my question was on to answered to the board. Well, that's fine. I'm asking a question that I have. Okay. I wasn't trying to. Well, I felt like you were saying about the information that was sent to my question. I just wanted you to know they were non - responsive. Maybe I didn't phrase it as well as I should have. But, um, what I, what I wanted to know, the memo states that, um, controlling noxious weeds is an exemption to the take, um, what the permit requirement under the ESA, but there are several conditions that have to be complied with or several criteria that federal law, including EPA label restrictions, any state laws for noxious weed control applicable County bulletins, herbicide manufacturer guidelines is prescribed by the manufacturer in any future revisions to the authorities listed above. And those were the criteria that if you meet those, um, as you're pursuing control of noxious weeds, then you don't need to get a take permit.

0:21:49And I just wanted to, you know, just get verbal, uh, confirmation that we will be in compliance with these conditions. Yeah. I mean, we follow all the, um, the laws that are stated, um, specifically, of course, the label on the herbicides and where they can and cannot be sprayed. Um, and then additionally, um, we also, the time frame for when we were going to spray isn't the dormant season for the previl's meadow jumping mouse. And dormant meaning it's the winter season when they are underground. And that's, that's one of the recommendations made. Okay. Thank you. So just I have a question based on the response. Oh, okay. Well, you were letting Commissioner Luchoman and you dialogue. So I feel okay dialoguing is fine. Um, except the win. I just, I'm not clear how you're cheering the meeting. So it seemed like we were dialoguing. But when it's my turn, I don't feel like I'm being allowed to. So my question previously, this staff have been using, um, different chemicals off label. So what policies and procedures have changed that'll ensure that you stop using the different chemicals off label. Um, we don't follow things off label. So I'm not, I'm not. So we've, we've gotten hundreds of emails and like some that are very specific in detail about experimental use that's off - label that

0:23:10we've done with Indazaflam and other chemicals. So I don't understand what we have done that would change that and what we have in place that would ensure that we'll stop using different chemicals off - label. Again, we're not using chemicals off - label. I just, I don't really know how to resolve this in this setting. Well, it sounds to me like maybe the factual premise of the emails about off - label use was just inaccurate. I'm not, I mean, unless you want to, you know, I'm going to take Stefan at his word that he's, you know, that he's giving an accurate response. It's possible that the people were misinformed. Well, I'm happy to resend the specific examples to staff again. And we can like have some sort of factual determination. I think that would be an appropriate avenue. I think just saying we always use everything on label. It seems like a pretty broad, um, statement. Well, I, okay, I can only express my own opinion on that, which is that we put in our integrated weed management plan that, you know, the decision matrix that, you know, the decision process. That we do follow EPA requirements and the manufacturer's labeling requirements. I'm going to take that as, you know, the thing that we are doing and not assume that we say we're doing something

0:24:43and not doing it. So I'm - So what course would we take if we did find out that we weren't, if this was not, uh, credible information, what steps would the board take? If I demonstrate that offline. I mean, I don't know, but to say something might happen and we don't know if it will happen and staff has set up, that's not their practice and to not do something in case somebody does something that they said they don't do. I don't really know how to resolve that. I think it's the flip of what I'm bringing up is that the practice has occurred and we have evidence of it. So I'm asking if I demonstrate that to the board that satisfactory to you what the board would do about that. Just so we're not speaking in such hypotheticals. What are you under the impression has occurred?

0:25:38If we take a five minute recess and I go get my whole packet of notes that has culminated over two years, I can give specific examples where we've practiced experimental use off label for some of the different chemicals that we have applied. Okay. I just, I don't have them in front of me today, but I'm happy to, if we take a five minute recess, get that information out of my office. Okay. Well. I think we, you know, there are any number of questions that we can raise that are what ifs and what ifs and what ifs. And, um, I don't want to squelch a full exploration of this, but I feel that we have really fully explored this issue and had many, many opportunities to, to, uh, interact with staff, to hear public testimony during the adoption of the integrated weed management plan. I, you know, at some point we have to call the question.

0:26:34And get this resolved. Um, Commissioner Lone, you know, how are you feeling about that? Thank you. Sometimes it's hard to see me over here. Um, raising my hand, I think for me, what I'm interested in, uh, is what do we do with the current management plan and how do we move forward as an organization in regards to as landowners managing the land with our staff. We have a new Perks based director. And so I, I, I don't know that it's for me part of this conversation and in adding language to a treatment area, you know, piece that we're talking about. But I think it's important and I'm glad that you're both here to hear the concerns of the board. For me, this is like a staff management, performance management issue for any policy that we have if somebody is doing something they are not supposed to be doing. And in this particular topic for this particular department, if somebody is using a chemical off, what do you call it? Office. Off level. Well, thank you.

0:27:41Um, then that's inappropriate use the same way that if somebody was, you know, using a heavy equipment in a way that they're not supposed to, so for me, it's a management, it's like a staff management piece. And I am optimistic that with all of the work that, and I can just say, you know, the time that I've been here at the dais talking about, we management and this huge responsibility and the thousands of acres that we have that when staff tells me there are areas in Boulder County and we are so lucky, um, and we call ourselves landowners and don't always talk about the history of the land. But if staff tells me that there are areas of Boulder County Parks and Open Space land that are too dangerous to carry a heavy backpack, I believe you. And that is what I am trying to make sure that we move forward in a way that we're going to be able to get to a place where we can, um, reduce the chemical use. But I want to make sure that we're, um, what is it that we're being asked to do today? So I hear the concerns and they're concerning to me about what may have happened here in the past and what's been documented, et cetera. And I'm also a person who's ready to

0:28:57move forward and really wants to support staff to be able to do the work that we all need to have done in Boulder County. Okay. So I think we've got a very strong statement that we want full compliance with all EPA requirements all labeling requirements, uh, requirements, any additional non regulatory requirements that we have in the integrated Weed Manager Plan. And that's everything from buffers from drainages to notices to, you know, just the full plan. And I think, um, you've heard missioners express the expectation that that will be done. Um, I think at this time the purpose of this here meeting, um, is not to do a look back examination of whether things may have occurred in the past. So I think with the assurances that we've received, I'm satisfied that we, you know, we can get to the question. Um, Commissioner Lochman, I sell your hand go up again. Thank you. And I just wanted to offer some of our dais conversations. There's like a separate direction that's, you know, that we'll ask staff to, Hey, could you bring us together for a discussion about X, Y, or Z. And so I do want to offer that Commissioner Stolzman, if you want to have that as a separate conversation, if you heard kind of what I was thinking about performance management or some other

0:30:27way. So I just. Yeah, thank you. I put a note down when you said that and I'll bring it up in our personal conversation. I think that's a great idea. Okay. Okay. So, um, do we have any other questions that we, uh, would like staff to address before we, um, move forward and make a decision. I just some discussion from the board perhaps. I had so city of Boulder has been studying. And Azaflam so that there's actually some understanding of the effect of the seed bank and the effect of some of the co - chemicals that are in and the carcinogens that are in the mix. And so it seems since that will be released shortly to their city council that it would be prudent to have the information from that study to make this decision before we decide that we want to broadcast spray this from the air. Um, I just wonder if there's any interest in reading the information that's been prepared before we make a decision. Thank you. I think for me, um, I feel like we have put a hold on a management plan that we have put a lot of work into. And so using that information when it's available as a resource for, I don't, I don't know when we're going to get that. I don't know when they're

0:31:41going to be able to get it, go through their ADA pieces. Maybe they're plain language pieces and then make a public document. Um, that's my understanding when we would be able to look at it. So I don't want to have us and our stuff be contingent on another entity. But I like the idea of looking at what they do complete, um, just with the plan, but not, not put our work on halt for the city of Boulders plan that's not public yet. Yeah. And I agree with that. Um, you know, the purpose of having a review every three years is to see what may have changed. That we didn't know when we approved the plan. And, um, and so, you know, there will always be new information, new studies, new evidence. And in my opinion, the time to consider that is when we do, um, a review of the plan in the future, I think we can, you know, there's always one more thing and one more thing and one more thing we can wait for and wait for and wait for. And, um, and that's just the nature of science that it's, it's evolving.

0:32:54Um, new evidence comes forward hypotheses are always being tested and challenged. And we have to make the best decision that we can make with the information that we have. And we made that decision when we approve the integrated weed management plan. And so, you know, we do have this opportunity to revisit it next year. So, um, so I appreciate the request. And I think there are two commissioners that are not interested in delaying for that. Uh, so we do have the question in front of us. Whether we authorized after proceed with drones, spray treatment of cheat grasses outlined in goal two of the integrated weed management plan, um, supplemented by the mitigation efforts that we, um, discussed and directed be applied at the February 26, 2026 meeting. That is the question in front of us.

0:33:54And I think it, I'll just stay that because it is May 21st, the opportunity to, uh, act on this direction. Well, not occur until, um, sometime in the fall or winter of 2026, 2027 given the life cycle of cheat grass. So, um, this decision that we may make this morning will, you know, will not have a practical effect immediately. Maybe that was unnecessary to say, but, um, that was something I just wanted to get out. So, um, I think this is a question that calls for a yes or no. And I do want to, um, I guess make an opportunity, maybe let's, let's do this in the form of a motion, um, of what's on the screen. And then we can have discussion on the motion. Commissioner, let you win, would you like to make that motion? I'm happy to make the motion. I'm just, I don't know how to make a motion with what this long sentence on her. Was it does the board.

0:35:11Move to authorize staff to perceive a drone spray treatment of cheat costs, outlining goal two of the integrated weed management planning supplemented by the mitigation efforts discussed during the February 26, 26 public meeting. Okay. So we'll, that's been phrased in the form of emotion that we do authorized after proceed. I will second that motion. And then I will call for discussion on the motion. I'm happy to, I think what I would just want to clarify, and the different pieces in the plan, but I just want to re - iterate and also because we have a, or new Parks Nova Space Director here, um, to just provide some clarity from my perspective that the other piece of this full management plan is Boulder County Parks and Open Space using resources to be able to move us towards the reduction of, um, chemical use. And so I'm not going to ask those questions today, but I do want to see in the next update what those different pilot projects, what the different research is showing because we've gotten some different emails. And I don't want to get into all of your work. Um, in a way that might feel like micromanaging or something. That's not my intent.

0:36:25I just want, I will need to see what is being done in that area. Um, because I feel like there's, I still have interest in figuring out how one, what we can learn with this treatment because I had some real concerns around drones from a lot of different areas that I shared in our public hearing over a year ago. So I'm going to be looking to understand really what the analysis is, not just that something's done or not done. So I just want to share that in regards to, um, some of the pieces that I'm still concerned about. Great. Okay. Um, Commissioner Stolzman, any discussion. I'm happy to go last. You go ahead, Commissioner Levy. Okay. Yeah. I, I actually don't need to say much more. There's, um, uh, I've said a lot over the years on this issue. And, um, you know, we did take the time to, um, I have a further exploration of something that we had already very thoroughly explored and discussed. We've lost a season of, uh, control of, uh, of a weed that spreads very aggressively. And, uh, and I feel and have felt throughout this process that, um, that on balance, um, recognizing, um, herbicides do have a level of toxicity. Otherwise, they would not be effective. Um, but that on balance, um, in the work that's been

0:38:04done to understand how and as a plan works, that it's a pre - emergent control of the, I forget the process, but what the roots uptake to start growing. That, uh, that it is, does not result in widespread damage. In fact, it is, in my opinion, necessary for these high areas of high biodiversity to actually flourish in the way that they flourished before this invasive weed was, was introduced. And in terms of habitat, um, for pollinators, for other insects, for birds, for, um, the browsers, the animals, the prows in the area, uh, for all those reasons, uh, I am very, very strongly supportive of, um, of restoring native ecosystems. And so I'm, um, I do support motion. Thank you. I'll speak against the motion this morning. I care very deeply about invasive species. The environment and the special place that we live is, it's very important that we managed the land that we steward. As Boulder County, we have failed to really address any alternatives to using chemicals on addressing our weed management. Um, we have a community that would love to be part of a forestry core, a weed core that would be happy to participate last year. We were told there would be goat browsing. We failed to procure goats, um, to do the project in time for them to be effective to

0:39:48control the seed bank. So there's just this huge opportunity with the resources that we have to address invasive species in a different kind of way, in a regenerative way where we're not spraying known carcinogens from the sky over our community in a Broadway. Um, the information we have available to make this decision really can only lead to one conclusion is that we should continue to not treat in this way on Red Hill. And we should address it with alternatives. Um, I'm going to be sending some information to the director after the meeting just to demonstrate that by staff zone attestation and publication that we're using chemicals off label. So I hope that there's management action that's taken responsive to that since the board has been misled at this hearing this morning. And I just, um, I know that as a community, we can come up with a solution and work to address invasive species and restore our ecosystem all around us. And I look forward to the community continuing to put pressure on us so that we can work on that together in a more environmentally conscious way. What we're doing today is just, it's not consistent with Boulder County values. And it's not healthy and it's not responsible. And so I'll be voting now.

0:41:01Okay. Thank you. So I think we've, we've, um, had a motion and a second and discussion on the motion. And I will now call for a vote. All of those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Those opposed, nay. No. So we have resolved this issue, a vote of two to one. And that is the only, uh, item that we had on our agenda for this morning. And so we are adjourned.