August 17, 2020 Video Board Meeting
Transcript
Describer:
AGENDA
Board of Directors Meeting
7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108
1. Call to order the regular meeting/pledge of allegiance.
2. Roll call/announcement of quorum/disclosure of potential conflicts.
3. Consider approving August 17, 2020 board meeting agenda.
4. Consider July 20, 2020 board meeting minutes.
5. Opening public comment period (3-minute maximum per person).
6. Project updates and insights from the City of Castle Pines.
7. Open Space Manager’s report.
8. Finance Director’s report.
9. Consider approving financial report and items from Finance Director.10. Consider approving and/or ratifying check numbers 25356–25450 (July 9, 2020 through August 5, 2020).
1. General fund and Debt Service Approve $102,124.55, Ratify $80,327.95 Totals $182,452.50.
2. Enterprise Funds Approve $46,147.37 Ratify $289,248.91 Totals $335,396. 28.
3. Electronic Payments Ratify $103,744.13.
4. Total Expenditures $621,592.91.
11. Legal Counsel’s report.
○ a) Proposed Amendments to CPNMD’s Rules & Regulations.
12. District Manager’sreport.
13. Directors’ matters.
○ a) The unprecedented volume of costly graffiti, vandalism, and trash plaguing Coyote Ridge Park and facilities, prompt directors to further discuss the possibility of permanently removing the skate park from Coyote Ridge Park and replacing it with one or more amenities that would appeal to a more responsible, less destructive demographic, while appropriately activating and enhancing the park experience for all residents.
○ b) Consider renewing CPNMD’s membership in the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce.
14. Closing public comment period (3-minute maximum per person).
15. Adjourn.
Describer:
The video starts on graphic with a white background and forest green letters which says “Castle Pines North Metropolitan District August 17, 2020”. The meeting opens on a shot of all board members present.
Board President David McEntire:
Welcome everyone to the meeting of the Castle Pines North Metro District this Monday, August 17th, 2020. Welcome to everybody that is in attendance and those that are viewing online. Thank you for that. Before I call roll, if I could ask my colleagues and those participating tonight to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance, please.
Describer:
The board members and the audience rise from their seats and recite the Pledge of Allegiance, as the camera pans from left to right from the board to management staff to the audience and back to the board. When they are done, they sit down again.
All Speak:
David:
Thank you for that and again, thank you for coming, thank you for signing on line. Roll call tonight. If you would acknowledge your presence and announce, or disclose any potential conflicts when called upon that would be appreciated.
Board Member Director Chris Lewis:
Director Lewis. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Chuck Lowen:
Director Lowen. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Denise Crew:
Director Crew. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Robert Merritt:
And Director Merritt. Present. No conflicts.
David:
Very good. Item number three on our agenda this evening is the consideration of the August 17th board meeting agenda. My colleagues and I have had it now for some time. It has been posted online and I think we've captured it all. Are there any other comments, questions or concerns that we should take into consideration before hearing a motion to approve the agenda for tonight? Hearing none. Do I have a motion?
Chris:
I make a motion to approve the agenda for August 17th, along with the minutes for our July 20th board meeting.
David:
I appreciate that motion. However, while I, I have some issues with the board meeting minutes. Could we separate those tonight, please?
Chris:
I will correct that and make a motion to consider approving the agenda for August 17th.
David:
Is there a second?
Chuck:
Second it.
Board Voting All Speak:
Have a motion by Director Lewis or a motion by Director Lewis, and a second by Director Lowen to approve the agenda of August 17th, 2020 board meeting. All those in favor indicate by saying I, I. I. I. Any of those opposed a nay. Hearing none. The motion carries unanimously.
David:
Item number four is the consideration of July 20th, 2020 board meeting minutes. I might as well go first. Having revealed that I have a couple issues, I see that. I see that, in the audience we have, Councilwoman Mulvey, and ironically and conveniently.
Thank you for coming, by the way. The issues that I had, really questions that I had, on our report, had to do with her report. And so I was hoping that I could get some clarification. We can either save that for item number six when we get the project update and insight from the city through Miss Mulvey or we can address it now. And I'm going to defer to her to answer her druthers. In that regard.
Describer:
City Council Member Deborah Mulvey, rises and comes to podium facing the board to the right of audience seating and to the left side of the board, near staff seating which is adjacent 90 degrees to the board and to the audience.
Deborah Mulvey, City Council Member:
I always push the wrong button. Thank you. I'm happy to address whatever you need to at your in accordance with your agenda.
David:
Okay. Specifically in your report, and I honestly don't know who writes the minutes.
Deborah:
I don't have a copy of your minutes either, so.
David:
In in those minutes, it it says she talking about you discussed the Covid 19 mask order last month. Yes. Comma the availability of free Covid 19 testing, comma the meeting regarding the dissolution of the Master Association, comma, vandalism, comma, city rec center project, comma, fire mitigation, comma, fiber optic cables and the city conduit, comma, and the fence along Castle Pines Parkway. I need some help from my colleagues and or you to, share with me again or remind me again before approving these minutes what the conversation was about related to fire mitigation and the fence along Castle Pines Parkway. Do you mind?
Deborah:
Of course, the fire mitigation issue was that we had a study session where we had somebody in from the county with an expert to discuss how folks might do their part in mitigating wildfires and what the nature of wildfire risk is here. And so, it involved the county person who's in charge of that risk assessment and risk mitigation telling us, more or less how we are subject to wildfire or that might come up quickly from 85 and brush through the canyons, especially in the western and north side of town.
And then how a homeowner can mitigate that by ensuring that the perimeter of their property doesn't have too much vegetation, as well as how around the house itself, there isn't too much combustibles in that mulch is less, less good than grass, I mean, than, stone. I'm not sure if I mentioned the efforts of the metro district. But there was a concern about your fire mitigation plan since signage, and I still don't have I didn't, and I still don't have this official written response of the city to whatever communication there was on behalf of the metro district. Does that refresh?
David:
Sure. That, I don't recall that and I'm not going to ask my colleagues if they do, but ask my colleagues if if, given Miss Mulvey’s explanation there, if there's any other questions on that subject before we jump into the parkway and then finish up on the minutes. Anybody on the fire mitigation?
Robert:
I want to compliment you on that. That's exactly the understanding that I had at the time. I would just ask, has there been any update or any talk on our signage or, where is that talk at this moment? As of today.
Deborah:
It has. It has not been brought to the attention of City Council as a body, nor been placed on any agenda.
David:
All right. Anyone else? Hearing none. Could you speak to the what you recall? And again, I apologize for the selective hearing apparently. Fence along Castle Pines Parkway.
Deborah:
Yeah, that was a very brief comment because there was a statement made, I believe, on social media or some other place where somebody had the understanding that a portion of the land on which the fence along Castle Pines Parkway sits might be owned by the city. And I clarified that it wasn't in that we have no ownership interest or dog in that fight.
David:
And again, if I heard you correctly, there was something on social media that suggested that some of that fence was on city property, and you wanted to address that and just claim that. Correct.
Deborah:
Just to clarify it. Okay. Because I know it's a matter of concern that you're dealing with, and I wouldn't want there to be any confusion on the part of the residents or this party. I know that you guys pretty much well know that, but I thought it would be since it was out there on social media. I thought it was worth discussing an mentioning.
David:
Totally agree with you. Communication is of the utmost important. Probably more in these situations is better than less. With that, I again apologize for having you, having the need for you to repeat that, but I just. No worries. Was unclear. Anybody?
Robert:
Excellent. Thank you.
David:
With that, I'm satisfied with the minutes of July 20th, 2020. Is there a motion from one of my colleagues here to approve those minutes?
Robert:
I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes for July 20th, 2020 board meeting minutes.
David:
Is there a second?
Chris:
I second it.
David.
Got a motion from Director Merritt and a second from Director Lewis to approve the 20 July 20th, 2020 board meeting minutes as written. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye, aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Item number five is the open public comment period. We don't have anyone that is in attendance that is signed in and asked to be heard. So I'm going to ask that we close the public comment period and move to item six with your approval. Item number six, please.
Deborah:
Thank you, Mr. President. There's one very large looming issue that's going on with the city right now, and that is the subject of whether or not we're going to have a measure on the ballot in November to increase the mill levy. In other words, raise taxes for any one of a number of projects.
So, I've been answering quite a bit of inquiries in person, town halls and, and whatnot and on social media. So I'm just going to summarize quickly and then answer any questions you all have. The City Hall project, as you recall, is a matter where an opportunity arose. We did, investigation as to other options. And there's a $4.5 million or so profit that's anticipated from the sale of some other property, and the city hall plot would be donated.
The rec center plot would be donated as long as we build something on that within five years. So again, the city hall project plot would be outright and the cash is outright with no conditions. And so the question that's arisen is, can you use the that profit money for something else? And the answer is yes, but it doesn't go far enough to do what we have to do with other projects.
The second question is why are we building this? Why are we building a rec center? And what's that all about? So we did a number of studies because obviously you have to get specifications and figure out what you want before you build something. And then we did a survey to ask residents, are they willing to build the item that they answered in the surveys they wanted and to pay for it.
And that was about eight mills, around almost $300 and a $500,000 house. And the responses to that survey were an overwhelming yes, we want it. Yes, we'll pay for it. But then what we thought was important is for residents to see what would how that would impact them if there were other measures on the ballot. And that was really the main point of the survey.
So that turns me now to the third issue, and that is the roads. So as you know, it's been kicking around for a long time. The cost to repave Monarch and Castle Pines Parkway is in the $30 million range estimated likely less. And that includes subgrade work that's necessary because of how the road was constructed, constructed and how old it is.
That amount of money cannot be raised solely by the sale of the land, and the sale of the land at $4.5 million is really a drop in the bucket. So the concern that we have is we definitely have to ask the residents to contribute, and it is a painful matter, and we do wish to do it. But we needed to ask in the survey how the residents feel if we were asking for both.
You want a rec center, but here's how much it's going to cost. You want to fix road here so as much as it's going to cost. And so we crunched the result numbers of that survey and we'll be voting on that on the 25th. Another related issue is whether or not builders developers should be taxed much in the same way that you have raised your tap fees.
We would like to raise the amount that they contribute through an excise tax, which was never a part of the city's model, but it's a part of almost every other municipality's model. And so we'd like to charge the developers through this tax, or the builders, rather through the excise tax on building materials to offset the cost of maintenance, because we will take over the roads and parks that they're building.
And to offset the cost of having more people in town. Some of that affects roads, a little bit of that affects the city hall. And so we postponed a decision on whether or not to do a vote on proceeding with the city hall and whether or not to limit the budget for that. Because we found that we might be able to use some of the excise tax for that, and we're waiting for actual justification for that.
So the bottom line is we are looking at the potential for a tax measure for the roads that would be dedicated solely to that purpose and not to boost. And then add a tax measure that would be an excise tax paid by developers, and that money would be required by statute to only go to the cost associated with increased development.
So it could be roads, bike lanes, things like that. And the in the survey, since we had such an overwhelmingly negative response to having all three ballot measures, we decided it makes sense to put off the rec center collectively. And then also, the issue of whether or not the rec center could be done cheaper or other options for the operations maintenance costs could be done is still being looked into.
So we have five years to make that decision under the contract, so it doesn't have to be done. We, as soon as we have the numbers on how much the City Hall building is anticipated to cost and, whether or not we can use any excise tax money for it will then move that matter to say, should we proceed with it or not.
So just to clarify, there hasn't been any decision. All we did was give the manager and staff direction to please draft the ballot measure so we can then vote on the 25th, which is next Tuesday on whether or not to have the excise tax and whether or not to have the roads tax.
Those are the big issues. So if you have any questions on those, I'm happy to answer.
David:
The excise tax that you're talking about with developers, is separate and in addition to the sales tax that is already collected by the city on materials for all new builds?
Deborah:
Yes, it's the tax on the materials is called a use tax. The excise tax would be quantified differently and collected differently.
David:
Same rate?
Deborah:
No and we don't have the numbers yet on how much would be raised. We're going to get that on Tuesday. Well on Friday for a packet.
David:
And while I don't have the information that you have with regard to how that compares to, the Front Range, Denver, Douglas County, our neighbors, etc. As a builder and, and, recent builder here in the city, the tax, on my new build, was very preemptive. I it was, it was, it's onerous to say the least, as it is compared to other places in the state that I built.
That's just my opinion. And, and, but more important than my opinion, I wonder how much money it would really raise, given the fact that from a district point of view, at least on this side of, of the highway, there's very few opportunities to collect it that remain. This would certainly be shouldered by the folks on, in the canyons and not so much here. Whether that helps or not, just some initial thoughts from your presentation.
Deborah:
Well, I will definitely look into the rate and the cost and the relative cost. The idea about the excise tax is that it's those who are building and reaping the profit from the build, help pay for the infrastructure. That's the concept behind it.
David:
Sure it sounds good, until you're one of them but yeah.
Deborah.
Yes it does.
David:
That's good. I understand.
Deborah:
But it's not paid by any resident that's living here and so the use tax you might pay.
David:
Just in the sales price of their house.
Deborah:
Right. And the reason why our municipality finds value in it, other than increasing the ordinary sales tax on items, or the use tax for building materials is because we have very few retail establishments. And so about four years ago, the idea of raising the sales tax, the retail sales tax by 1% came up and we would only yield about $1 million from that.
And it wasn't sufficient. Residents were very upset because it would come out of their pocket. And so we explore this because the residents are telling us, why can't the developers or whoever's building over there pay for it? I can tell you that I've also looked into the metro district mill levies for the new neighborhoods. And so I'm.
David:
See i'm sorry say that again.
Deborah:
I've also looked into the figures for the mill levies that are charged by the metro districts that are charged with the oversight and building in those neighborhoods. And so, for example, North Pine Vista's metro district, which covers the entire Legae new development, is almost double your mill levy.
David:
But, you know, that's not our metro district.
Deborah:
Oh, no, not at all.
David:
Well, your inference.
Deborah:
I'm trying to make the point.
David:
Your inference. I object to okay.
Deborah:
No, I'm trying to make the point that it's more.
David:
We were talking about clarity when we get into conversations like this. And it reminds me of the conversation that you just had with one of our neighbors online with next door. And, and specifically. Specifically, it was talking about the fire restrictions or excuse me, I'm sorry not the fire restrictions, but it was talking about the maintenance of the trails and the open space and, and, the curb lines in the city. And and, this was, this was a gentleman that, or gal one of our, one of our constituents that, talked about the fact that they had no appetite whatsoever for electing any one of you guys again, at the city level.
Because, on both the East and the west side, the north of CPP, the weeds and other foliage and undercut, like, are undercut like it's never happened before. On Monarch there's gravel on the sidewalks and limbs overhanging some of the bush, and it goes on and on to talk about their disliking the way these areas are maintained. Your response? If I may. What specifically walking trails, comma, medians and roadside landscape are maintained by the Metro district, not the city. That's why the tax levy for the metro is four times that of the city. Now, how many times are you going to hang us out there for having a multitude or multiple of your tax?
Is it that you misquoted the fact that we're collecting tax in Legae where we're not? No. Or is it that we're not taking care of our responsibilities but are garnering four times what you guys are? What what is your point?
Deborah:
I meant neither.
Can we be more clear when we communicate?
Deborah:
Absolutely. And I'll be happy to clarify that to the residents in that posting. By no means did I attempt to disparage the metro district. Perhaps what I should have done.
David:
No explanation. It's not a matter of embarrassment. Either it's there or it's not. But complete communication is as important to us as it is to you and that's all I'm bringing to your attention. By no means am my criticizing you, and I don't want you to take it personally. I just want to agree with you that clear communication is imperative when we're talking about such an important issue as our tax, with, with our constituents so.
Deborah:
Well, I agree with you wholeheartedly. And as you read that back to me, sometimes, you know, when you hear something back, you realize that could be clarified more. What I didn't clarify was that the entirety of your mill levy is not spent on open space. And so, number one, that needs to be clarified. And the only reason for mentioning it was really more defensive on behalf of the city, because we have so much that we're asked to do for so much less.
So it was not intended to, you know, say anything bad about the metro district at all. And so I can certainly clarify that as well. The writer of the post that I responded to seemed to think that the city was responsible for that. And my point was to mention that we wouldn't have near the money to do that.
David:
Perception is really important when we have these conversations. It is. Because I can't tell you how many times, and you've heard more than anyone, at least in the from the audience point, vantage point, how many times we have been clocked for what the city has or has not done as well. And and while we could not be more proud to be a part of what happens within the city, and working with you all at the city, the fact is for us to garner, traction through transparent and honest measures, it's imperative that we take the extra step in my opinion, to explain fully, the responsibilities and the authority that we each have and where the moneys that the taxpayers are paying go to.
Attempt nothing more than that and sometimes it takes a little more time and effort, as you already mentioned, than that and I would agree with you, but, I, just wanted to make sure that where it comes to the excise tax that everyone knows, that very little of that would come from the west side of the highway, given we only have a few hundred left to be built.
Maybe, maybe 600, 5-600, you know, houses yet to be built, a few off pieces, etc. the most of that would be, borne by those in the canyons that already have new roads. Yeah. Already have new roads and so, again, to be clear and transparent with the folks on that side and this side, I. However you guys decide to do that, I just want to make sure there's, there's, there's clarity and the explanation and, and, as it relates to there being any part on our the only thing we do in Legae is provide water and sewer.
And those are the only rates and fees that we collect. We don't collect anything else. You guys do stormwater, you guys do parks, you do trails, you do open space. We don't do that, okay.
Deborah:
You mean for Legae yeah you're correct. Correct. So there it is tough sometimes as you know to know exactly how something is being interpreted until it's read back to you and I appreciate that you brought it up and your concern because that's the only way that I can really appreciate it and correct it. But your point about the excise tax being borne by home is very well taken, because what we saw in the survey results was actually an anomaly, in my view, in that we saw an overwhelming support for the rec center at eight mills and an overwhelming support for the roads at eight mills.
And I'm rounding the numbers. And then the excise tax didn't have mills attached to it. It was described to be something that's borne by developers. But then when residents were asked, do you want rec center and excise? You want, city hall? I mean, roads and excise or do you want all three? The responses went down to 20%, which to me reflected lack of clarity on our part in explaining really what the excise tax, who would be bearing that, that it wouldn't be an additional tax to be paid by our residents.
And so one of the reasons I'm actually having all these town halls individually is to answer these questions. Because the communications aren't always optimal, and the explanation sometimes is sound like government speak. And, you know, we don't really want the residents to feel that they're just getting nickel and dime to death. So, I will definitely clarify that post.
David:
That, that survey, by the way was, was was lengthy, was laborious. And, and, and, so I, I don't doubt the findings i'm just wondering how well it represents the residents, given the nature and the and the again, the length and the time that it took to fill it out if anyone was willing to do it from beginning to end.
But, I commend you and the city for all of your continued efforts and, and commend you for always being here. As, as, an envoy from the city and our go between. Thank you so much.
Deborah:
You're welcome. But you raise a good point about the survey and it being onerous it's sort of a catch 22. And again, another reason why I'm doing the town hall is some leaders have this perception that, you know, it's okay to just do what the staff or somebody tells you or the expert tells you is best. But we have a population that really cares about things and thinks things through.
And then there's another comment that I sometimes hear, well, you know, we have very educated residents and so they understand these things, and that doesn't really explain somebody's right to know and right to understand and right to talk about it and to say, why? Why did you vote for that? So just along the same lines that I have insisted on getting square foot requirements and explanations why the manager needs this many offices and the clerk needs that many offices, they are entitled residents to hearing that from me too.
You know they can, ask they have the right to ask me those same questions because that's what the representative government's about. So I appreciate that and I'm glad you do too. My next town halls on I just set it up because I think we need another one before the vote. And that's going to be on Wednesday evening.
I'm still trying to secure the room, but it's at 6:00 it's a call in on zoom. So I'll be sending that to Mr. Smith, recording. I just set it up this afternoon. So if I may take a moment, I really appreciate you addressing the situation of the golf cart driving. That's been a concern of mine for some time.
And I just want to thank you for addressing it. We had a near miss accident last Friday and of what we've tried to do in our part since the public roads are in effect is there's actually a one of those speed limit mobile signs on Serena right now going down the hill. Because we do get people speeding down the hill.
David:
Thank you.
Chris:
Can I have some clarifying questions? Of course. So thanks for being here again today. Speaker Chris. Can you not hear me?
Deborah:
You may have to remove your mask. Public speaking is permitted for mask removal according to CPHE.
Chris:
Okay thanks. Who else is is everyone on the city council having these town halls?
Deborah:
No.
Chris:
Okay.
Deborah:
I invite council members, and those that you see with me are able to join me and willing to join me. Mr. Hudson, has a scheduling issue, and that he works from, like 3 a.m. to 2 p.m., so he can't always do a nighttime one. So he's been having separate communications.
Chris:
Okay, not necessarily with you. I was just wondering if other folks were getting feedback from the residents about whatever issues or concerns or, you know, both from your side and from their side. After the meeting last month, I did talk to my folks who are some folks over in Stone Craft. So you may have had a couple of people reach out to you and ask when your town halls were and they wanted to attend.
But, clarifying on the the roads, how many did you how much million did you say was that 21 to 31 million?
Deborah:
It's approximately 30. It's actually just below 30. I don't have the exact quote in the top of my head. There there's been a lot of discussion over concrete versus asphalt and so a deep dive was done on that and is looking at concrete better because the maintenance. So that's what I can tell you about that. And we cannot it's not I asked if it could be divisible between Monarch and Castle Pines Parkway, because I wanted to evaluate whether or not that profit from the land could be used for one or the other.
If it can be divided up and choose one first. But it is not possible because of the way the contracts go.
Chris:
Okay. And then on the what's in plan, in that plan for the $30 million, or how much of it is around that? Is there like a scope of work that's out there on the on your site or somewhere so we can see what roads those are including?
Deborah:
There's no scope of work yet because there's no RFP yet. However, the plan for that money is most definitely Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch.
Chris:
Okay. Because the. So the main to our affair is versus in inside of the subdivisions.
Deborah:
Yeah. So one of the things I asked for recently and got was the amount of money we spent on all roads and I've already talked to you about why. The additional work that you're seeing this year and last year, that budget went up to amount nearly amount the whole amount of our budget was over $5 million.
And that was because we evaluated the pavement in anything below a certain PCI pavement condition index was needed to be rectified immediately. And we did a road test with water and heavy equipment to determine if subgrade needed to be done on those two. So while one road might look fine, a subgrade might be poor. Now, while one road, my you know look poor it might be okay to repair it in a certain way.
And so we took our capital improvement funds and used it for that because it qualifies as capital improvement. And so the road spending, you know, when I started on city council, it was in a couple hundred thousand for repairs. Then for another year or so, it was a couple hundred thousand because you can only holler so much. And now it's finally up.
And we did the million the year before, and then we used our capital improvement fund this year.
Chris:
Okay. And then the last question was on the survey. So what was the feedback you said on the city hall? I didn't hear that. Was the residents in in favor of the city hall? And then then I think I heard you say that there's going to be a further vote pack in your package.
Deborah:
Yeah, well, you hit the nail on the head. So, few of us in City Council are a little bit dismayed that we have to go through this process of determining whether or not to build something and whether or not residents are going to be asked about it. And one of the reasons why I wanted to address all this stuff in town halls is because sometimes you can fund something, for example, with this profit and never have to legally ask the voters, and we can appropriate funds to go through the appropriate exploration process with design and never begin the process of building.
But it kind of looks like we're doing that because we have to do that groundwork. But the bottom line is that we haven't voted to actually do it. And that's a communication issue. So and we actually don't have a budget for it either.
And we don't want to raise taxes for that the majority of us. So we actually had on our agenda to have a vote on whether or not to actually proceed with this city hall project, even though it wouldn't be a tax ballot measure right now. But because there was the view on the part of some leaders that you can use some of the excise tax money for that, we put that vote off, because I want to see what you're really allowed to use the excise tax money for.
I'm not in favor of a shell game of moving money around and making it look good. The building has to suit the needs and no more, and it has to be within budget. It doesn't have to be beautiful. It has to look nice but it we need to know how much certain materials are going to cost, not just flash them up on the screen and say, well, it looks pretty.
Chris:
I kind of had the question answer kind of didn't mine, my question was, did you get any feedback from the residents? No. Okay.
Deborah:
No, no, because, well, I guess I, I didn't mean to gloss it over, but, no, the city, the the survey was about the ballot measure, so the city hall wasn't on it. And that's why I kind of launched into the whole issue of where do the residents have their say in that process. So that unless we need by law, money from the residents to build the city hall, we technically don't have to ask them. But that doesn't satisfy some of us.
Chris:
Thank you. Okay. Appreciate that.
Robert:
Deborah just first of all, just want to reiterate what David said, and everybody feels here. Thank you so much for coming out each and individual time that you spend your time with us. We mean that sincerely. Number two, thank you for being a conduit and keeping the communication open with the city as much as possible.
I had a couple of things. Just so the residents know in general the numbers you stated. So everybody kind of knows about it. It's 30 million, for the roads, give or take. Yes. 4.5 million for the city hall. What was the expense for the rec center? What was the number?
Deborah:
Oh that was in the $31 million range and that cost just.
Robert:
$31 million.
Deborah:
Yes. That was that cost was derived by looking at the comp plan, which was the result of an old survey from 2016. Plus a refinement to that based on current residents views and a recent survey for what amenities are preferred. And then the persons who consult with us on how much it cost to build these things, then gave us a big spreadsheet and have us work through, well, what if we this and what have we that and what have we this, what if we that?
And cutting down that square footage and some of the amenities brought it down to the 20 million or the $17 million range, but it's still rather high. And the majority of council felt that the survey language should accompany should match what the residents asked for, the facility they asked for, and how much it would cost to build what they asked for.
And then, and only after that, we might decide to pare the thing down. That's not to say that some of us aren't working very hard to find other means for operations costs. Such as the way, you know, private operator, or to find other solutions, or to build a smaller building such as the Washington Park Rec Center is a little bit better sized for what we have and in the same kind of environment. So I hope that answers your question, because the number is quite high, and it does seem like an alarming figure.
Robert:
That does thank you very much for that. And, back to the number one issue that the residents seem as important as what we're hearing are the roads. Yes. And, to make the roads cohesive. So I have two suggestions for the survey. Is, in the building of the roads in a survey ask the residents that if they would prefer to have a cohesive community, like in Highlands Ranch, a continued asphalt throughout. When you get in there, you know that you're in there, you're on asphalt, and then you get back to concrete and like, oh, let's not be in Highlands Ranch.
That's pretty important, I think, because as you drive through Castle Pines, we do not have that as of now. And, number two, the question on the survey would be specifically, would you rather the $30 million figure just on the roads alone be $25 million? Yeah. And, instead of and maybe break it down to the mills that it would cost with that $5 million, $4.55 million going towards the roads. So everything is transparent and not going around. Yes. Yeah. Instead of the city hall. The 5 million instead of the city hall. Oh, yeah. The 30 million off of the roads. Yeah. 30 million for the roads. Deduct 5 million, the city hall funds to put that towards so it'd only be how many mills less that would be. And that would be two specific questions I would put on the next survey if.
Deborah:
Well we we have to decide the ballot next week legally. The idea you have about, you know, would you pay less for something did come up in many of our discussions and, the view and the vote of the majority was asked for the whole. So I lost that. Sorry. I thought that, the idea of whether or not we can use other funds or will we use other funds besides the proposed 30 million, whether it be from the city hall funds or the excise tax?
That's so we're going to be debating on Tuesday. And there isn't currently a lot of favor for taking the profit from the land sale away from the City Hall project and moving it to the roads project. And the reason for that is because then we wouldn't have any money to build the building that we need within the next five years.
So that's the rationale for that. But that is what we're going to be discussing. The difference that, you know, it would. Five mills is, you know, under $100 a year. So, let me let me do some quick math here. So the $30 million is eight mills, and that yields about $250 to $275 per year on a $500,000 house. So my math just now is poor and that's why I'm not an accountant.
David:
Do that math one more time.
Deborah:
Those are the facts. The math I'm leaving out. I'm sorry. I can tell you that 30 million equates to about eight mills.
David:
Got it.
Deborah:
And eight mills equates to about 250 thou, $250,000, a $250 on a $500,000 home. Annually. Annually. Right. And one of the other issues, by the way, is going to be whether or not this tax sunsets. Because ostensibly, part of this is my personal view. Ostensibly, if we have the excise tax and continued revenue, especially from the commercial development in the canyons, that's anticipated we would have money for road maintenance.
We really only need to do this big project once. So a tax should ostensibly sunset and could. And so that's another thing that we'll be talking about.
Robert:
We understand that the city does not have to ask, or, put a question on a survey if people would like the $5 million put towards the roads. Right. But not the residents, might have a different opinion and just want to be asked that. Yes, the city can do it without asking. Through transparency, the residents might want to be asked that question and and you might be surprised on their answer.
Deborah:
Well, that's exactly why we've been having these discussions. And, so I started the town halls a couple of months ago and that's one of the very big reasons why. Because people didn't understand why we're doing this and where we're getting the money from, why we're not using it for roads. So I have been listening. Not every resident is comfortable speaking their mind.
So just as much as I might get only ten people telling me something that doesn't, it's like a survey, you know. It doesn't mean that only ten people feel that way. So I do take that into account.
Robert:
Well, thank you very much. And thank you for all your time.
Deborah:
Thank you. Are we good? Thank you for allowing us to share the information.
David:
Did you have anything, Chuck?
Deborah:
Deborah, I had a quick, quick question very quick. Yes. I know that quite a while ago on another mayor's watch, he tried to slow down or stop heavy trucks on these roads. Yes. Which are not helping maintain them. Today I noticed one of those large half can semis coming up Daniels Parkway, turn at the west end of Castle Pines Parkway and drove pretty much over the roundabout, not around it, and then headed on Castle Pines Parkway, crossed over onto Hess.
I think they were going to the canyons, but I don't know, it wasn't full. I turned off. My question is, is there anything the city can do to signage or slow down that to help protect our roads in the future, especially if we're going to spend $30 million to fix them? I don't think we should spend any money for them until we get an answer to protecting them.
Deborah:
Yeah. Excellent question. So we do have an ordinance that mandate that requires, a truck with more than one axle or 30,000 gross vehicle weight to have actually, I think the thresholds more like 18, but, to only be using our thoroughfares if they have business within the city limits. The constructors, the builders in the canyons and in the Legae area have been given routes to use that do not include Daniels Park Road and Castle Pines Parkway.
And they're instructed to only use those routes when absolutely no other means is available. So, for example, if they're going from, you know, the very bottom and that's specific area of 85 and then coming up. We, that we cannot prohibit interstate truck traffic generally. But what we can do and what we have done is ask for increased patrols.
So, having had a little transportation background, what you can do is you can ask the Colorado State Patrol and D.O.T. to do more roadside inspections. They usually only do them at the port of entries, but we can ask them to keep in mind and do that so that truckers get the knowledge that you're going to get a roadside if you come in to Castle Pines and that's a deterrent.
The statute, if it's being violated, it's kind of like the golf carts. If you see it, take a picture and we'll find them and we'll get them. We also they so if they're if they're coming up from Daniels Park to do the work at the King Soopers, that's legal. But once the project's over, it's not.
Chuck:
That wasn't the case here but thank you very much for your expert.
Deborah:
Yeah, send us pictures because we can totally we've done stuff about it. I take pictures all the time. Okay.
Describer:
Deborah takes her seat.
David:
All right. Hearing no other comments, questions, concern going to close item number six. And ask our district manager who is taken Craig's place given his recent back surgery make a presentation on the open space report. Jim.
District Manager Jim Worley:
Good evening. The report certainly is in front of if there's any questions on it, the one that I want to address pretty heavily and I'll be happy to wait until later in your agenda. And that is the tagging issue of which is absolutely out of control. I sent you some pictures this afternoon from this weekend of just trashing it, just absolutely no regard for property whatsoever.
And that's happening pretty much every weekend. So we can wait until we get to that point on the agenda if you want to. That's the main thing I wanted to talk to you about. Other than probably more important, at least when it comes to human beings. Craig, we went through a surgery absolutely fine, he had it a week ago tomorrow, he actually called the office late in the afternoon when he was home and it was an outpatient surgery.
Said he's doing fine, but he says if I sound loopy, I am. So if there's any particular questions, I'll try to address them. If not, I'll get back to you on on the the answers. But I want to hold off the discussion on graffiti later if I could.
Chris:
One question Jim. I was walking on, Castle Pines Parkway where the folks did the lawns on this side, almost in the middle. Looks like they they cut one of these the hoses and the sprinklers. So I don't know, you know, you guys can keep an eye on that and, and see if there's flooding or something, and then you'll know for sure.
Jim:
Where did you say it was, Chris?
Chris:
Almost halfway between our road here and on Monarch. On this side. On this side. So it looks like they went mowing and maybe the hose was a little high and.
Jim:
Oh, could have clipped off a head?
Chris:
Yeah. Not a head. It cut the hose in half.
Jim:
Oh the hose itself. Okay. We'll take a look at it and see. Thank you.
Chuck:
Jim, quick question. Last month I asked Craig about getting reimbursed for all of the work Metro District did in repairing the sod along Monarch from Castle Pines intersection. I'm still trying to get some money from that same contractor. I've had no success. Are you doing better than I am?
Jim:
Which means I don't have the check yet. So we're on we're on the same level right now. I did make contact immediately the next morning with Larry Nimmo, with the with the city. Who they told me a year ago or whenever that was looking terrible. He said, were retain, we have retainage and before we release that, we'll make sure it's right. So I contacted Larry. I'll get back with him to see where we stand on. I haven't seen a check either.
Chuck:
I got the same story. And I'm checking the mailbox every day.
Jim:
They tell you the checks in the mail.
Chuck:
But I think that we should somehow, collectively but I don't think I can, as a private citizen, help you. But you should keep the heat on them, because I'm going to.
Jim:
I will too thank you.
David:
Jim, it sounds like to me of if I may and if and if Craig were there, ask him to do it and that would be to memorialize, the ask of the city. Monetize it with a specific dollar amount in the back up, get it to the city and and provide this board with a copy of that request. So that should the bus come around, it doesn't get lost if you're with me on that, please.
Jim:
I got it. Okay. Thank you. Sir.
David:
Also, we will take you up on your offer to talk about the horrendous tagging, that that we're dealing with, and, actions of a few. But, under parks and open space you're aware that Sheriff Spurlock move from stage one to stage two fire restrictions today?
Jim:
I am.
David:
It's been mentioned by my colleagues and and by Councilwoman Mulvey that the district has, for ever since this board has been elected, has been pursuing a void within the district's operating, policies and procedures, specifically related to drought. Finding that there is a direct correlation between drought and fire risk. It's no surprise to the city, as we have discovered through conversation with people outside of the city, that the city is, not, in favor of our drought plan.
We continue to pursue it, believing that our plan has, an incredible, and numerous, upside and, and, benefits to the residents directly. Compared to what they don't have. But don't get me started. The the, the question is, does any of these new fire restrictions inhibit the actions of our maintenance people and or the operation of the district at all? Just curious.
Jim:
I don't know. No, I don't I don't think it does. I read over that this morning when I saw it come across my phone just to try to see specifics of it. I'll look at that a little bit closer, but I don't think outside of, you know, using a chainsaw, you know, which is always of a concern with the spark.
Let me look into that a little bit closer. I haven't looked at that with a set eyes, that I do. If there's some questions on it or issues I'll reach out to the board and let you know my findings.
David:
It and and it, believe me, it's an issue of, the risk associated with living in the Black Forest, of which Castle Pines North is a part of the Black Forest. It's, it, stands to reason that people are using saws and whatnot to maintain their individual homes and property, and and we are as well.
And and again, give me the opportunity to belabor the issue of, of the district's, desire to put together in a transparent and honest drought plan that includes fire risk mitigation, versus, what does not exist within the city. And, and, but. When, when, we are implicated by others, that we're not taking care of our responsibilities as it relates to maintenance. I wanted to make sure that this implication isn't duplicated next month. Because we weren't able to run our saws or our lawn mowers or something of that nature as a byproduct of the fire.
It's true, it's true that, when Miss Mulvey indicated that the metro district has a four times multiple on the tax levy. One of the things that she didn't say, and we talked about that and I appreciate her willingness to accept that, constructive, conversation. But, what was not described, in, in her response was the fact that the metro district not only maintains a multiple of four as it relates to parks, but a multiple of a substantial, more, given the open space of which the city has very, very little and the district has hundreds of acres, as well as trails, the same, same situation. And so a
multiple of four, to do all of that, job well done. That's all I have.
Jim:
Thank you. Sir.
David:
Anyone else on the Open Space report? Hearing none, I'm going to close item number seven. Thank you Jim. Item eight is the finance or finance ear finance director's report. Eric, welcome, sir.
Financial Director Eric Harris:
Good evening, Board. Thank you. I today or this evening, I present to you the report dated August 12th of 2020. First things first to report on property taxes. The district is approximately 99% collected on its property taxes for the year. This is in line with historical collections. Realizing that, the second payment of property taxes is due, in June, payable to the tax authorities and local, local tax jurisdictions in July.
So we recognize that revenue in June. So not anticipating impacts related to House Bill 201421, that I've communicated to you before. So that's good news all all around. Second, just wanted to highlight our billable usage, which you see in the graph late on my finance report. The district has, 360 million of bill, 360 million gallons, excuse me, of billable usage for this year.
This is the highest on record that I have dating back to 2013. So you can take that, obviously higher. You know, it's been a hot summer, more users on the system, but just wanted to highlight that for you as well. Coupled with that is we have higher water service revenue as well. So you will see that increase of approximately $420,000 on our projections for this year.
Additionally, we, we updated the district's projections, and all funds in conjunction with conversations that I have had with District Manager Worley. Namely, updates to salaries and wages, employee overhead, resulting in, you know, of an employee leaving, and a few other things. In addition to that, updated updates for the park IGA that we have with Parker for contract for services.
In addition to what you may notice tonight, new air conditioner units that are in this building right now. So I wanted to update you on that. Additionally, as I've reported in prior months, you see consistent decreases in investment earnings. We were projecting, obviously, pre-COVID, investment results on T-bills in the, in the finance market.
So 1.5% in investment earnings. Now we're at approximately 0.18, of a percentage point. So drastic usage, drastic decreases in investment earnings. On that note, what you will see is you had high investment earnings for prior months, for prior years, even. The districts if you look at the cash position report, including unrestricted and restricted cash balances, are approximately $48.4 million.
So just wanted to bring that to your attention as well. Additionally, the district was approved for funding related to the Covid, Coronavirus Relief Fund granted by the state. We had approximately unanticipated expenses related to ten, $10,000. So we were approved for that and we'll get that ball rolling on that as well.
A couple other things that were not in the budget that did happen this year to date. We sold a fleet vehicle so that was noted as well including those items I listed before. We're currently in the midst of our budget session right now, so we're working through numerous and preparing the 2021 budget, for your review here in a few weeks.
And so we'll get that in front of you towards the end of September, first part of October, for an October, hopefully in October work session or board meeting, one of the two. And the calendar has us to consider that for the, adoption in November. Are there any questions so far? Wonderful I'll continue. One of the items I did want to bring to your attention is the closing process.
I wanted to give an overview of, finance and accountings closing process for the district. I as of today, we are presenting current month financial statements for your view. When I say current month, we're sitting here in August i'm bringing forth July financial statements. I want to highlight the process to get those financial statements closed.
The general ledger closed and get that in front of you, as well as, getting you the information you need. Because the important thing, that I recognize as well as the rest of the, the consultants and staff is we want to make sure that the board packet is in front of you plenty of time in advance. So that you can make the appropriate decisions for this district. So I just wanted to highlight that and that was on page, page two of my financial report. Of course. Can I continue for just a little bit?
David:
Were you going to include item C 3 or 6C?
Eric:
Yes, I was, so. I. I. So. Go ahead. One of the important things to recognize is we have our board meetings on the third Monday of each month. Months like these, it comes relatively early. And so in our financial statements, we have a number of accruals as well as a number of invoices that the district has not yet received from vendors. One of my important jobs as a consultant and in the role of finance director for you, is to make sure that you have the most accurate financial statements possible.
We do have a number not only we track budget, the actual, but we also begin to recognize the budget to accrual variance based upon estimates that are booked within the accounting system. Of course, rehearsed out when I say an accrual and actualized as well. The impact that we had, since the last board meeting on the June financial statements was approximately a $50,000 actual to accrual variance.
So that means that invoices that came in the door that we did not have in our financial statements due to the timing of our closing process. So I just wanted to highlight that to you as well. And I had a proposal to make sure that we can always make sure we get the most accurate financial statement, financial statements to in front of you, as well as a, a more concise financial report and more or less a refinement of our financial closing processes.
So a proposal I'm bringing not only in 6A I highlighted the process that we go through each and every month prior to board meetings. And also things that we've changed as a result of that. For instance, our utility bill closing has been bumped up by one workday. However, this last month, we had two and a half workdays of doing all of these items, including staff time consult time, and other time, other items to make sure we always get the board packet to you by midday Wednesday to turn around to this Monday's board meeting.
A change that is proposed, by me this evening for your consideration, is to create financial statements one month in arrears with, of course, an updated, financial report to account for everything that has happened to date. Which is in line with many of the clients that my firm has, as well as many municipalities as well, because there's a lot of things that change, and information that is not readily available.
For instance, we didn't know our property tax distribution until the Friday, before the Wednesday. So pretty late in the, pretty late in the time frame that we have to actually create financial statements. And so that's one item I just want to bring to your attention. And for instance, this month's board packet, we only had a we process, accounts payable every two weeks and at the district.
And so the last round we have is at August 5th. And that's assuming that we received all invoices for July activity. So I guarantee you that there is we did go through and book a series of accruals, but there are actual invoices that we did not receive obviously at that time frame. So I just want to bring that to your attention.
But I think that highlights the most of, most of everything that I want to bring to you this evening is just to allow for financial statements for being prepared one month in arrears, expand our financial memo to account for financial information provided by the district manager and other staff. To provide a more, more analysis to you as well as to allow for IT downtime that has occurred over the last couple of months and our closing process as well.
And so that we can consistently make sure that we always meet the deadline of getting financial statements to you on that, by noon or 12:30 on the Wednesday before. So the board packing could go out on Wednesday. Any questions?
David:
You have to know that the, and thank you for, the time and effort you put in this report, the time and effort to remind us all of how complex a process is, truly is how time sensitive it is. And, again, thank you for that. Equally, it is, it is, the business of the board and I'm sure staff, who, I've not heard from, as it relates to having weighed in on this, approved it or disapproved it or had thoughts about it, I'm sure they do.
Because we're all under a tight timeframe, and this is all time sensitive information. This board, from, at which time they were seated, opted to get as close to actual information as possible. Has has provided that consideration as a part of setting their annual calendar and monthly meetings. And unless my colleagues want to change that, we want to continue that.
But we also want to again acknowledge how difficult this is for you and offer a compromise. Keeping in mind that that, as you pointed out in 6B, there's already, enough opportunity for delayed information, but know for a fact that that we do not, as a board would, we, we don't act on reports, or monthly numbers, to put it specifically, as much as, we typically have the opportunity to act on a substantially longer period of time. Whether it be forecasting or we're looking back at history, etcetera.
Not that the numbers on a monthly basis are, irrelevant or not important. They're incredibly important. But I think we can capture the essence of what's going on with your talent, via the write up. And I have to believe that you're able to do that maybe as a part of the compromise. That by 12:30 Wednesday, giving my colleagues and I, the two extra days to study and work on the package as a whole and then provide the numbers as we have all along.
It it it was incredibly fruitful and beneficial to me. I don't know if the other consultants and my colleagues feel the same way to have that extra time. And your report is definitely important, but we'll get the vibe from the report, get the numbers, and have just that one standalone item to crunch over the weekend. As it always has been. Would that possibly work as a compromise?
Eric:
It does. And certainly what we would do is we will expand our board meeting calendar to account for what deliverables are for what board meetings for this upcoming year and for the remainder of the year. So that you realize, say, for this board meeting, you will receive this set of financial statements. And if there's any conflicts, we can certainly address those head on, because there's only a couple times during the year that we have that conflict.
But obviously the main concern is what I spoke to right now. And the most important factor is to make sure that you have the most readily available information to you so you can make those decisions. I will take that analysis back as well and certainly grant that, that item you gave me for consideration for this next month's report.
I really do appreciate that for the staff and other consultants. But I will also in return, bring that calendar back to you for the next board meeting so you can see the deliverables that we have. But the main objective is to make sure we meet that deadline without qualification.
Chuck:
Eric, quick question. Just so I can get it, in my head. Right now, for instance, we get July's financial, on or before August 15th somewhere in there. Is that correct?
Eric:
That is correct.
Chuck:
So that's roughly two weeks after the end of the month after the cutoff.
Eric:
From the in the month correct.
Chuck:
Yeah. And now, your request is to have a month in arrears, which means we may not receive if if it were July and we use this month as a typical, we wouldn't receive the July report until September?
Eric:
That is correct.
Chuck:
That's 45 days.
Eric:
That is correct.
Denise:
I have a quick question to Eric. When you're talking about, our return on investment ceased to be one and a quarter, we would budget and generate. How how do you do that now with Covid in there only generating point eight? Is that just you have to go with where you're at now.? You don't make any projections until that changes?
Eric:
Correct. We go through a, a calculation that looks like it looks at our projecting cash towards the end of the year and hit the around the roughly the midpoint of what that would be for investment earnings between now and the end of the year. And factor in the trend that we had to date through the year. Because obviously, you know, pre-COVID we had about a quarter, less than a quarter of higher investment earnings that was tricking up, trickling up over time.
We're definitely and of course, going to factor that into next year's budget. The forecast that I've seen, I've not seen, you know, different much change in rate of return for the local government investment pools right now. So we do factor that in.
Denise:
Thank you.
Eric:
You're welcome.
David:
All right. Thank you very much. Any other comments, questions, concerns of the board? As it relates to the director's report, finance directors report. If not, we'll move to item nine, where we consider the financial report approval. And the items presented by the finance director, specifically, those that have already been memorialized as a part of his presentation, but also items ten and ten, ten and ten. Any others? Before I make a motion?
With that, again, Eric, thank you very much. Thank you for the consideration, moving forward for keeping the board up to date. Within will be at mock speed, approximately two weeks on your on your, financials and 12.5 days or thereabouts on the report. Thank you for that and then we'll work through calendars as a part of the budget process. Right. All right.
I'd ask I'd like to make a motion to approve the financial report given tonight by Eric from pinnacle. And those items, from which he or for which he has presented also, approving and or ratifying the check numbers 25356 through 25450 dated July 9th through August 5th, 2020, and specifically approving from the General fund $102,124.55, ratifying $80,327.95, for a total of $182,452.50 from the General Fund and our debt service.
The enterprise funds, which is our water and sewer, enterprise $46,147.37 to approve tonight and ratify 289 that's $289,248.91, for a total of $335,396. 28. And lastly, to ratify from electronic payments. These are all funds 103, or from all funds $103,744.13 for a grand total of expenditures during that period of $621,592.91. Do I have a second?
Robert:
I second that motion.
Board Voting All Speak:
We have a motion, and a second by director, a motion by Director McEntire, a second by Director Merritt. Any further conversation? Comments, questions, concerns, staff any? Hearing none. Colleagues none. I'll call for the vote. For all of those in favor, signify by saying I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries unanimously. Thank you again, Eric. Great job.
David:
With that we will move to item 11. Council's report. Welcome, Mr. Seter.
Legal Counsel Kim Seter:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You have a copy of the legal report in your packet. I wanted to advise you that I did this morning add to the end of that legal report the Castle Pines North Foundation matter that I have been forgetting about. So next month, we'll have that addressed. There is one action item in the memo, and that's the very last item on page four.
Mr. Worley had identified an inconsistency or ambiguity in the rules and regulations. You asked me to find the source of that and suggest a resolution to correct it. The resolution is attached to the memo, and it's there for you to address. Now or at your pleasure.
David:
Very good. And again, just to clarify, this these recitals, and this resolution, is a, more of a clarification of what the district currently has in its rules and regulations, as opposed to a change. Is that correct?
Kim:
That is correct. And, the difficulty arose because the rules and regulations defined the water service line, and they also defined the sewer service line, but then through different parts of the rules and regs, it just talked about service line. And the two are very different. So I just broke them out and dealt with them separately.
David:
Very good. Thank you. Before I make a motion, or ask for a motion on this matter, are there any other questions of council about the report or the resolution?
Hearing none. I'd like to is there a motion that wants to be made, or may I? I'd like to make a motion this evening to approve the rules and regulations, a resolution of this board of directors to amend the district's rules and regulations to clarify ownership of the sewer and water service lines as presented by council.
Chuck:
I second that motion.
Board Voting All Speak:
We have a motion on the floor and a second by Director Lowen. Are there any other comments, questions, concerns about this before taking a vote? Seeing and hearing none. When called upon, signify your approval and or your denial. All those in favor signify by saying yay. Yay. Yay. Yay. Are there any opposed? Seeing and hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Council.
David:
Item number 12 is a district manager's report. Mr. Worley.
Jim:
Thank you very much. The clarification or an update I'll call it the second, which is Chatfield reallocation the amount of water that was stored when I put this report together last week. Gina Burke was out of it, out of pocket, so I couldn't talk with her. So the actual total amount of acre feet of water that is in our 1006 acre foot storage of Chatfield is now 75.88 acre feet as of yesterday, actually. 75.188, 75.88 acre feet.
But the thing I want to talk with you more about is the first item that I put on this agenda. And as you know, back in February, actually we probably made the decision in March, when when the pandemic was really ramping up. And one of the things that I did is, is I told staff to do two things.
One, don't charge a late fee of $60 bucks, I mean of $25 bucks after 60 days, which is our normal procedure. Don't charge that anymore. We got a lot of issues to deal with. And number two, and probably more important don't shut anybody's water off. We're not going to do that. The worst thing we do is to be forced to shut off someone's water.
And we don't like to do that. And so the board was comfortable with waiving that, so to speak. Those two requirements I'd like to reconstitute them. I believe that we're in a position now to where things are better, you know, compared to what. But I'd like to reinstitute the late fees, which is, like I say, is $25 after 60 days and then continue with the potential of shut offs.
And that is we send a letter when they're over 60 days with their bill saying there's a potential shut off. We've got to date all the information on it. But then before we actually do that, which is uncomfortable, but before we actually do that, we tag their door with an orange tag. And so it's pretty obvious, hopefully, that they know that's going to happen.
We have always worked with and I see absolutely no reason to change that and maybe even strengthen it with anybody that needs help. And what I mean by that is if you contact us and say, here's the reason why I'm having some struggles, let's work it out. We get those calls on on a pretty regular basis. And so we're very good I believe in working with people.
And again our worst job is to shut off somebody's water. We don't like to do that. And so we work with them as best we can. So I'd like to re-T those back up. We didn't send information out. I'll work with Kim if we think we need to, you know, submit something for discussion or just to let people know that. But I think we should reinstitute that. I'm hearing other entities are doing that too at this point. So that's my request.
David:
Just looking at the calendar, what was your proposed, start date of reinstituting what is already a policy and procedure within the district, right?
Jim:
Yes, it is already there. We just suspended it for a while. I'd like to do it at the end of next month. The bills just went out this past week. So you've probably already received some bills and certainly not a reason to do that. We will read meters again at the end of this month. And so I would like to start at that process to to continue what we used to do. But still always working with people if they've got an issue. Pick up the phone, call us, come into the office and we'll work with you. We don't want to shut anybody off.
Robert:
Manager Worley. Yes, sir. How many people fall into that category of posts 60 days? And secondly, how many people are chronic late, more than 60 days? Those two.
Jim:
I knew you're going to ask me that, but I didn't get the answer for you yet. I don't think Eric knows that. Eric, you don't know those numbers, do you? Or do you see any of that numbers? If he does, I can get that number for you tomorrow. But I just didn't get it.
Eric:
On page 26, we did used to expand this age receivables report under a prior tenure of the person that used to do this. And, and overall though, what you see is just our collections report by charge type and by accounts. So you'll see you know, people that are perpetually late, you'll see in that 300, 320, 328 accounts, that are greater than but more importantly, it's 120 day amount that I'm concerned with, and that is substantially lower.
I did have, CRS, Don, who has the person who creates the utility bills and runs that billings process. Throughout this analysis, she's gone through over the last couple months in accordance with direction by Director McEntire or President McEntire. She identified a couple of accounts that are essentially old accounts. It amounts to a couple hundred dollars that will bring it back for a proposed write off.
We haven't done that before, but this is this stems back almost a decade. Some of this activity is just cleaning up some old accounts. But other than that, trends are about the same. We're seeing, some accounts may trend a little bit higher with transitioning between builders and residents and developers or some things of that nature. We haven't quantified that. But we can certainly look at an updated analysis for your view, if that's something you would like to see.
Robert:
No just asking in general, and, you would know if there's a major spike and we're still at the top of that spike, and no one can afford it or so. But if you're saying the trends are similar to that, that's fine. Just wondering, a ballpark number, 300 homes. Thank you.
Chris:
So follow up. 300 that's about 10% a little bit less than 10%.
Jim:
Yeah. We send out about 3300. Roughly 3200-3300 total invoices.
Chris:
Is that is that good comparable to other areas? Is that bad? What do we stand?
Eric:
That I don't know what I will do before this next board meeting is I will look at the actual accounts, whether it's residents or businesses or developers or homebuilders, and look at that and see what is a quantifiable amount. If if it is 10%, 10% of residents, I would definitely be concerned. If we, if it's a developer or a builder, we'll certainly capture that cash at closing.
And so I'm not too concerned about that. I would be more concerned about the actual, you know, practices of home builders and developers and their business practices. But we will capture that revenue. But I will look at that and report back.
Jim:
If I could add to that. As I mentioned, the next time we read bills, obviously it'll be at the end of this month. If you're okay with it, because I want to give you some numbers and get you some of this information. Let's hold off on saying, yeah, go for it Jim. But let me send you some information kind of individually if I can.
I don't want to have a board meeting outside of the board meeting, but individually I'll send it and I'll accept individual responses back to give me a good gut feel if we do this now or if we hold off a month.
Chris:
Okay, so my last comment would be, you know, I do think we need to just let them know if we're going to do it. And. I agree. And I'm okay with going forward. It's a rule. It's a rule.
Denise:
One quick question. During, when Covid started, did you see a pretty large increase in later later pay slow pay?
Jim:
I don't think I did, Denise, to be honest with you. Nothing that was alarming. Obviously this is something this first time we've any of us have ever gone through this. So it it's kind of hard to tell what trends are when it's when we're still wondering how I'm going to get out of our house. I'll look back on the last couple of months, see if it's increased over the last few months, and report to you on that. You bet.
Kim:
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Worley, to to clarify, at the end of this month, customers who are in arrears will then have 60 days to catch up and after 60 days, the penalty will begin to to be charged, the late fee?
Jim:
I didn't think of it that way, Kim, but I think that's a good way to do it. It gives somebody a little bit of a chance to to kind of get caught.
Kim:
I just wanted to clarify what it meant to lift the suspension.
Jim:
That's a good point. My thought was the next utility billing that we do at the end of this month and send out those. I was going to tag it on that one, but I think we can delay that a little bit if that's a better way to do it. I agree that we ought to have some conversation or let people know that. Again, the most important thing, at least in my opinion, I'm not concerned about the money, I'm concerned about someone getting in a real terrible situation and we’d be forced to to shut them off, and that is not what we want to do. So let me get some of these numbers a little bit better for you. Does that help?
Kim:
Yeah, I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page as to what it meant to lift the suspension.
Jim:
Exactly. You bet
Robert:
300 homes at $25 is what, $7,500 is what we're talking about. Yeah.
Jim:
That's all I have. Unless there's any other questions. Thank you.
David:
Jim. On the heels of your report of the Chatfield storage, which, again, just tickles me to no end. The prospective of using that storage and possibly being a purchaser of more, given the assets that we have on this side, the divide, if you will, is just impressive. And and, job well done. The memo, update from, Castle Pines Metro and ourselves for the, providing the vehicle for a application to make those old for water rights absolute. Did we get that back?
Jim:
I have not seen it. I'll contact Austin tomorrow and see if we got that back.
David:
The. Could I also ask you, please, right along with that memorandum, that Craig, through you or you through Greg, how we say that is going to write to the city about the landscaping receivable. Could could we, write a second one, to the city, that articulates what we've been talking about over the course of the last, at least handful of months, relating to any up zoning actions, needing, to be, pre-approved by the district.
Or at least a, another request of an of an additional will serve submitted. But I think that our conversation is is, been, understood. And I think everybody's on board and likes the idea of making sure we're not overcommitting the residents to something, without their prior approval. That being said, if we can just reduce it to writing, that would be great.
And I'd appreciate that. Is there also, and this may have been to council I'm not sure, but between you, is there an update on the on the recording of the licenses along Castle Pines Parkway?
Kim:
For the fences? Yes. That's completed.
David:
All recordings are done? Yes. And and, that's great. Okay. And lastly, any update from anyone, including our ambassador director on the Master Association dissolution? Anyone have, have have, fire, well, we can't set off fireworks. So, anyone have any good news along those lines?
David:
Did you just get an email today? Tonight? Just now? Yes. How about that. Approach the podium, would you please? Director. Director Lewis has been busy.
Deborah:
Now I have to pull it up to tell you exactly what it says. Yeah, I mean, you've obviously been occupied. They basically say that they've taken care of the paperwork. It's all been signed, and they issue checks to the the actual checks to reimburse the HOA’s went out last week at the end of last week and to the property managers. And that amount, they gave the total. $259,833 has been refunded.
David:
Say that one more time, please. Did you say 259 or 359?
Denise:
Sorry I spoke in jersey again.
David:
Yeah. You have the same, same. Reaction. Yeah.
David:
Did you say 259?
Deborah:
I said $259,833. And that would mean that it costs approximately $100,000 to do this thing. Which a few of us you anticipated with frustration. And that they're going to, once those checks get cashed, then we'll make the filings with the secretary of state and close the accounts.
David:
100 grand to dissolve it.
Robert:
So to reiterate, it took $100,000 for them to send out 12 checks?
Deborah:
Well, they had a lot of meetings and a lot of discussion, and they used their lawyer, mighty seriously. I suspect that the large amount was the administrative costs.
Robert:
Well, that accentuates the reason for the demise. Thank you.
Deborah:
It doesn't it, though. Yes.
David:
Thank you Deborah. Thank you Chris. Thank you everybody. I don't have any more for Manager Worley. Go Ahead.
Chuck:
I have a real quick question. Jim, on your, your report dated August 17th, you kind of held out a carrot for the Parker Water Joint study. Boots on the ground effort has been completed. Will there come a time where we are informed as to what it says?
Jim:
Yes.
Chuck:
Thank you for that explanation.
Jim:
You want me to go in depth? No, no, there will be. Yeah, we're actually reviewing it internally right now. So at some point you bet. It's pretty important.
David:
With with your permission, Mr. Worley, I, for my colleague's benefit, we have had the opportunity to see, some draft, results, and, and while, the monetizing of that report, I think would be, the way to put it has not been completed we don't have anything more to say. But what the draft report indicates is that the condition of our assets are in very good shape
And and that is a, a reflection of of those that steward those forests, Jim and his staff and and so, great job in that regard. Pass it on to the staff and. And we're we're not we're not months away from being in a position to begin those negotiations. And in fact, there's an effort by, the, the committee to query the terms and conditions and begin to formalize those in, in a draft agreement, should it be the will of the board to move forward. But in an effort to flush out anything that this trailblazing effort might present, every every cylinder is firing, every ball is in the air and, and, it won't be long and, and, we'll have some real action figures to work on, so rest up my friend. I think that's fair. Would you say so, Jim?
Jim:
Yes, sir. I sure would.
David:
Very good that. Saving the best for last. Considering your news of your membership. You want to handle, well, I'm going to close item number 12, if that's all right. And, moved, expeditiously, expeditiously into item 13 directors matter and immediately give the floor to, Mr. Worley, to pick up where he left off in fury under outdoor or open space report, Jim.
Jim:
As I mentioned a little while ago, I sent all of you, I think it was 4 or 5 pictures today of of tagging that was done at our skate park this past weekend. It it's it's embarrassing and very, very frustrating. We've had numerous conversations with the sheriff's department on that issue. And then also on the golf cart issue.
And they're well aware of it. But outside of putting someone out there to, to monitor what's going on, which could happen at any time during the night or day, I guess, it's very frustrating. It's terrible how this group, it's not one person I don't believe. This group has just tried to do their best to demoralize that skate park up there.
A very nice facility, and it's happening in other areas, too. It's not unique to Castle Pines. There's some other areas that that it's happening to. A lot of that could be just frustration related to what we've all been dealing with the last 6 or 8 months. Still no excuse for it in my opinion. It's absolutely disrespectful for this community.
And I think a disrespect to the individual that does it, to be honest with you. So, there's a discussion item that I want the board to have a little discussion on.
But but the frustration level is, is way up there when it comes to trying to stop this, or at least minimize it. And you'll see by those pictures, if you haven't seen them yet, they're they're pretty ugly. So, I'll say one other thing. The other thing that we mentioned, and Councilwoman Mulvey referred to it too, because she's just as cognizant of it as we are and that's these golf carts on our on our trails. Our rules and regs are very clear. No motorized vehicles whatsoever. We have had situations to where we have found individuals doing that and called the sheriff's department. The sheriff's department did a very good job of saying you will not drive, that, you will park it, you will walk home and an adult will come and drive that back golf cart at our Coyote Ridge.
And if I see it again, it's going to be confiscated. So there have been some some direction along that with with the sheriff's department and those who patrol our area, although there has been significant kickback, at least to me. And that's in the form of phone calls to me, threatening me and basically saying, you have no right to to to fight this issue related to the golf cart because you put someone's picture in there, you shouldn't have. So while that's another way to look at it, and, and I try to be as respectful as I could for the two co two calls that I got on that, it's very important to know that that as a parent, you gotta teach your kids, right.
And if they mess up, you got to tell them they messed up. So the calls that I got were for focused on me and our organization about doing this. No comment whatsoever from the two that I got that says, you know, I know it's not right and you're not supposed to do that and I'm going to talk to my kids.
It was heavily lobbed at me and our organization. So no complaints I got bit shoulders I can take that. But I want you to know that that some of the issues I'm getting. I don't know if the city's been getting any Councilwoman Mulvey can address that. But I think the lion's share of the comments that I've been getting from people is they're dangerous.
As she mentioned a few minutes ago, there was almost a pretty major wreck. I think it was last Friday, when it was when this red golf cart darted out in front of another car, and if that car driver was not paying attention, we'd have another issue to talk about. Which would be very unpleasant. And so it's become a major issue, at least in my opinion, of our community. And I'll hush and listen to what you have to say.
Chuck:
Jim, since I haven't been privy to the pictures you've sent on the graffiti, what is being damaged and specifically?
Jim:
It's pretty much the the skate park itself and the restroom near it. And there's also a little shelter, little picnic shelter there that they sprayed down.
Chuck:
When you say skate park, is that the concrete?
Jim:
Well, that's actually well that level is concrete. But what the ramps are, those are wood. Those are made out of wood, I believe. And so while they tag them, we go out there quick as we can and try to get rid of that.
Chuck:
Is it appropriate? And this is just thinking out loud that if this continues, we'll just remove the equipment to the detriment of the those that use it and enjoy it, but maybe that will help curb it.
Jim:
Something's got to happen, Chuck, to be honest with you. And whether it's that.
Chuck:
That's my point.
Jim:
Yeah. You bet somethings got to happen this is not getting better.
Chuck:
We can continue to paint over it until we're out of paint.
Jim:
I'll try to be optimistic, of which I try to be most of the time. I think school will start it back this week or today or soon, if I'm not mistaken. So maybe some of those activities and and what goes along with being a student in school and what have you hopefully will curtail some of that. I really think it's worse this year because of what we've all been going through.
And so I'm hopeful that other activities that school takes up will take up some of these issues. I'm I'm not 100% optimistic that'll happen. I'm hoping it does.
Chris:
Jim, is this a the same picture from last month or is it a new one?
Jim:
No, that's a that's the same picture. And that's the picture that I got some kick back on.
Chris:
Okay. And and we had the conversation last month that the sheriff was involved last month. And they did talk to the the family involved. Right.
Jim:
Absolutely. Sure did. And then it happened again.
Chris:
And it happened again?
Jim:
Yeah. And there's and there's actually a couple cards and maybe Debra can help me, but there's a red one and a white one, if I'm not mistaken.
Deborah:
I actually have new pictures.
Jim:
Oh, well, is it okay for her to come up and address some of this? So maybe you can show it.
Describer:
Deborah approaches the podium.
Deborah:
May I speak as a board member for the North Lynx HOA, which covers this area and Serena road? We find the, there's two golf carts that appear frequently with kids. I have pictures of one from last week that I didn't share. It's gray, but they're both they're both driven by minors. The one that one in your photo in your notice is the one that was involved in the near miss accident, and it followed the report with the sheriff was Friday night.
And then the other thing that I might add, is an observation from my community is that we see, it's wonderful to see people using the park. It really is. And we know from when Denise and I were on the Parks Authority that there's a strong interest in the equipment there by even adults who like that older equipment, because it's like legacy stuff it's really neat.
What we're seeing is more activity at night and it one resident said, why don't they close the gate at night? So then people don't drive in. So that's the only thing I have to offer. There is a white cart, there is a white golf cart. That's the white golf cart is on your other trails, not in Coyote Ridge Park. And that was driven by an adult with kids and that's the one that crossed in front of me on Castle Pines Parkway against the light.
Jim:
We actually have a gate. We spent $3,000 on a gate this summer to hopefully block people from going up there and this is when everything was really shut down. Within a week, that gate was all torn up bent no they tore it up. That's a disgrace. And then they went up and tagged. I know it. Ha! That's what's so frustrating.
Deborah:
We've had our own vandalism on city property, and I've asked for the dollar amount for that that I can share with you. Hopefully next time. So my feedback on this is more because it's in my neighborhood. But it's not to say at all that we don't experience it citywide.
Denise:
David and I were talking earlier this week and just throwing around an idea, I think. I think we have a couple options. Obviously, we can remove equipment. Might help. Probably would help, maybe but I don't know that it would solve the problem. We talked about lighting and or cameras, but the cost of that is going to be upwards of 150,000, my understanding.
So we threw around the, the just the the thought of what what if we created a graffiti wall and have an outlet for taggers? And I'm sure there's plenty of pros and cons both ways with that. And there's a lot of, a lot more discussion. It's become a bit more popular in urban areas in other cities, and there's even artists that come out and teach you how to use your your talents and your spray painting.
I'm not suggesting that's even something we want to have in our community. I don't know, but just maybe something to float out there and consider. That's all.
Robert:
I would like to comment on that. And I don't think Castle Pines is a place for a graffiti wall or any. No. And but, most of the vulgar graffiti is done at late night with the late night gatherings is that what? And are we having a step up in police presence, going through their late night, or do we have a patrol and Councilwoman?
Jim:
Okay. Yeah, we we have requested that we be honest with you, especially in the last couple of weeks. That, you know, if there is patrols that's running around there 12 midnight, two in the morning, whatever it is, I'm not sure what their schedule is, to be honest with you, what the city does. But yes, they said they would.
Robert:
Have they arrested anyone to date?
Jim:
Not to my knowledge. Not to my knowledge. Craig has a very good working relationship. I think there's two officers that work, mainly here in Castle Pines. But at least he has his, you know, at least a couple. But Craig has a good working relationship with these officers because we had an incident a couple of weeks ago. I'll share one more with you.
Sitting in my office, Craig calls me. He says, I'm giving you a heads up. He says, some kids and golf carts were just coming through our Daniels Gate Road the the park. And he says, I stopped them in the parking lot. I said, kids, you're not supposed to be doing that. You shouldn't be riding these on here, blah, blah, blah.
And so he called the sheriff's department. Takes a while to get there, certainly not an emergency. But it took them a while to get there, and and about an hour after all that happened, they were already gone. Craig had already talked with the officer. I get a call from one of the moms. She was not pleasant. She was was chastising me and Craig for stopping someone who is doing this.
I proceeded to tell her that first of all, was it in our parking lot? Yeah. That's ours we own that we have rules and regs against that. She started getting pretty nasty when it comes to Craig, to be honest with you. She was attacking him verbally to me over the phone. And so I don't get in arguments with people like that over the phone.
I'll let them vent and then I move on, but that the whole story was all handled exactly right and nobody was held against their will. Craig asked them where they live they gave it to them. And so when they had left and the officer came up, Craig said, here's what I said, here's what I asked for, did I do anything wrong whatsoever?
And the guy said, no, they don't have to give you the information of where they live. You weren't holding them against their will. I wish the lady that called me said we were. So it's those kind of incidences which makes it very difficult. She was telling me we can't control it on our roads. I said, we don't have anything to do with the roads.
It's all our parks, trails and open space. And so it's that kind of feedback which is concerning to me. But we still need to move forward and take care of it I believe. Otherwise we could have an incident unfortunately, like Deborah talked about.
Denise:
I just completely agree. I can't imagine parents allowing that. I mean, I grew up in small town Iowa. Yeah, you can do that there the speed limit is 20 miles an hour there's no stop sign, you know, whatever. But you live in a community like this where you have a good amount of traffic, you're minors, you're not in a licensed vehicle. Come on.
Robert:
The golf and golf carts are probably a problem. But the major problem, I think, is the vulgar graffiti that we're seeing pictures of.
Denise:
I think the golf carts are a problem, absolutely. Not to diminish one or the other. They're both a problem.
Robert:
There's recourse with the golf cart. You know, they can be confiscated. Like to work on solutions for the graffiti and, if we're not being able to see arrests or.
David:
Jim thank you for those comments. And, be careful out there and make sure the staff is as well, and, and we'll, we'll, you know, I, I have all the confidence, all the confidence in the world of, of this board and the staff, to, potentially marry the two issues, whether it's golf carts and, and, a new cultural, attraction within the city called a, graffiti wall.
I'm absolutely confident that this board and this staff can come up with something and, and and, if there is an immediate need, it would be my recommendation that we continue to exercise the laws that are intended to protect us and our property rights. And, and, but, for staff and this board to immediately pursue a recommendation, even in draft form, by this time next month.
For, a way and a means to, affect a significant difference in, Coyote Ridge and the conduct, and and, the enjoyment that it was, was put there, intended to provide. And so, I'm not suggesting that we shove it under the rug. I'm suggesting that it's reached a fever pitch. The city is involved the city is well aware of it the city is is, we're on the same side.
Douglas County Sheriff's Department is on the same side. We find ourselves a little bit outnumbered, but I know we're smarter. And so, with my colleagues, patience and indulgence. We'll we'll we'll put together some recommendations and bring them to the forefront, in the October meeting. Comments?
Jim:
How about the September meeting? Think we can do it in a month? We'll try. Let's say we'll try to get it done sooner. And if we have to continue and discuss it, then we'll do.
David:
I meant September. Okay. But, yes thank you. Let's shoot for September. Okay? Okay. Thank you. I love the thought of a graffiti wall. I love the culture that we see existing in other urban areas that have been a success to mitigate such activity and become a again, maybe the first and only for the moment, cultural effort, within the city of Castle Pines North. But again, you got to remember who's talking. He loves Smokey Bear, too, but.
Chuck:
I'm afraid President David, that if you like graffiti, you should drive downtown to the city and county building and tell me what you think about it. You'll probably see words on a graffiti wall you didn't know that existed in the Navy.
David:
And and I am totally, I would not argue that for a moment. But here's the difference. Those words, and and maybe something we can do to massage the words, but but, those walls and that artwork is not only, on a place that has been deemed acceptable, which I think was Denise's, point and my point as well, but also they charge for it.
They create revenue from it. But, again, we've got 30 days to, to, beat this thing up and, and decide, what we might be able to do to, bring some, some calm back to the community. Given the actions of a few again and, and, anyone else? Hearing no one else and having no other.
Directive, director's matters other than, item 13B. Thank you, Director Lowen. This is, the, a consideration by this board to renew the district's membership in the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce. I am familiar with, your collective thoughts and direction being, memorialized in a letter to, that young lady at, chamber, has has, been authored and ready to mail.
I just wanted to make sure there was no further comments, questions, concerns about it before it is directed to the chamber. I think it specifically calls for continuing patronage at a high level. And with, specific condition that, the moneys be used within the district, to, aid to on the development of business and, the activity that business, brings and the benefit to our community as well as, extenuating circumstance this year anyway, call it for lack of anything, worse Covid 19.
So, any other comments, questions or concerns about that? We're all on the same page authorizing that stamp to be looked in the mail to be deposited. Okay. Very good. Thank you for that. Is there any other directors matters before we close item 13. Take the opportunity to ask staff, are you good?
Jim:
Yes, sir. Thank you.
David:
Finance director, communications director, council?
Kim:
It's all good.
David:
Very good. Thank you again, everyone, for tuning in. Thank you, Councilwoman Mulvey, for attending. Thank you, everyone, for being in attendance tonight. There is no closing comment, public comment period this evening. I'll accept a motion to adjourn.
Chuck:
So moved.
David:
Seconded by.
Chris:
All.
David:
Director Lewis. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. The adjournment motion passes unanimously. Good night. Thank you very much. Again.
Describer:
Meeting adjourned. Thank you for watching.