July 19, 2021 Video Board Meeting
Transcript
Describer:
AGENDA
Board of Directors Meeting
Monday, July 19, 2021, at 6:00 p.m.
7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108
- Welcome / Call meeting to order / Pledge of Allegiance.
- Roll call / Determination of quorum / Disclosure of potential conflicts.
- Consider approving July 19, 2021 board meeting agenda.
- Consider approving June 28, 2021 board meeting minutes.
- Opening public comment period (three-minute maximum per person).
- Open Space Manager’s report.
- Finance Director’s report.
A. Review and consider approving CPNMD’s 2020 Financial Audit performed by the outside, independent CPA firm of RubinBrown, LLP.
B. Consider approving financial report, payables, and claims for payment, including check numbers 26163–26222 (June 12, 2021–July 9, 2021).
General Fund & Debt Service Approve $47,482.89 Ratify $9,056.07 Totals $56,538.96
Enterprise Funds Approve $37,956.07 Ratify $209,827.31 Totals $247,783.38
Electronic Payments (all funds) Approve $0.00 Ratify $59,109.25 Totals $59,109.25
Total Expenditures $363,431.59
- Legal Counsel’s report.
A. Update on the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between CPNMD and City of Castle Pines regarding replacing CPNMD’s water main.
B. Status of the recent voter-approved Inclusion of CPNMD’s water and wastewater utilities with the Parker Water & Sanitation District (PWSD) and the remaining five-month transition period through Monday, January 3, 2022. - District Manager’s report.
- Directors’ matters.
A. Policy and enforcement regarding the growing problem of irresponsible dog owners who fail to properly dispose of dog waste. - Closing public comment period (three-minute maximum per person).
- Adjourn.
Describer:
The video starts on graphic with a white background and forest green letters which says “Castle Pines North Metro District Board Meeting July 19, 2021”. The meeting opens on a shot of all board members present.
Board President David McEntire:
Good evening, everyone. I'd like to welcome those online. However, today we're having technical difficulties. We don't have internet connectivity sufficiently to Zoom our consultants and some of the other participants in and online.
Nonetheless, we're going to go ahead and call the meeting to order. I am going to ask that everyone join the rest of us in saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
Describer:
The board members and the audience rise from their seats and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. When they are done, they sit down again.
All Speak:
I Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
David:
Thank you for that. I'd like to call roll. Along with that roll call if you would share with us.
When called upon, of course in your presence, if there are any conflicts of interest.
Board President Chuck Lowen:
Director Lowen. Present, no conflicts.
Board Member Director Chris Lewis:
Director Lewis. Present, no conflicts.
Board Member Director Denise Crew:
Director Crew. Present, no conflicts.
Board Member Director Robert Merritt:
Director Merritt. Present, no conflicts.
David:
And Director McEntire is here. We have a quorum. No conflicts of interest. Item number. three and four are both consideration and approving of the July 19, 2021 board meeting agenda. Also ask that in the same motion the approval of the June 28, 2021 board of director minutes can I have a motion?
Chris:
I make a motion to approve the minutes from the last board meeting. Of, of the 28th, I’m sorry, I can’t see. Yeah, the 28th of June. And the agenda for July 19th.
Robert:
I second that motion.
David:
We have a motion and a second to approve tonight's agenda, and last month's meeting minutes. Is there any further discussion from the board? Hearing none,
Board Voting All Speak:
I'll call for the vote. Director Merritt. Aye. Director Crew. Aye. Director Lewis. Aye. And Director Lowen. Aye. McEntire is a yea as well. Motion carries unanimously.
David:
We will open the meeting to public comment. Three minute maximum per person. I have not received any indication that we have anyone in the audience yet that would like to speak.
Describer:
Jim Worley walks up to the front of the board meeting where David is, and hands him a piece of paper to inform him of the people that want to publicly speak.
David:
It is coming to the front. Three, two, one. Thank you very much. Sure, this makes sense. Tina Hanson. Yep. Tina Hanson is with us this evening from the City of Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce. Tina, welcome.
Describer:
Tina is physically at the board meeting and she is at the podium speaking.
Tina Hansen, Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce Executive Director:
Yes. Thank you. Yes as you mentioned I am the executive director of the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce and I came here tonight, I come here tonight just to offer an apology to the board. We had a wonderful summer event at Coyote Ridge Park. And we're very thankful to use that park, and our dumpster vendor that we use was inadequate to say the least. Didn't get the dumpster there on time when we needed it and didn't pick it up when we needed it to be picked up.
And Whitney, my co-worker and I were probably I would say at least 40 calls to that company to get the dumpster issue fixed, and it was just not acceptable the way that vendor. We will not be using the vendor again. But I came really just to apologize to you all about that. Because we don't operate that way.
And the chamber is thankful to use our beautiful parks, and and, and Craig is wonderful. And everyone at the parks to help us with those events. So my apology is first and foremost. Secondly, I was here one year ago actually. Asking for support from the Castle Pines Metro District. And I'm not asking tonight I'm just here to thank you for your patron membership.
You are so generous to give you give us $10,000 as a patron member last year. And that made it possible for me to bring staff on again to do small events like ribbon cuttings, networking business after hours. To partner with the city to do COVID,really true COVID activities to help small businesses stay in business. And get the grant information out that they needed, and work with my chamber peers.
And so when I was here last year, I was by myself. I had to furlough my staff, but now we are fully staffed and we are back in business. But very much because you helped us in our time of need. So I just wanted to offer my thanks to you for that.
David:
Tina, thank you. Your apology is very kind, and humble to say the least. And we really appreciate that. Goes a long ways and, and. So again thank you. One quick question for you however, and I may be recalling incorrectly. But when I saw the collateral material for that event, am I recalling correctly that, that the district's logo was, was, was not the same size as the other folks that gave an alike $10,000.
Tina:
I don't recall that. I wouldn't have been on a purposeful sizing situation. So let me go back to our, our, public, our collateral. To see you know kind of what you're referring to. I we usually try to size them all the same ratio. But I will go back and look at that.
David:
And it might not have been just sizing. It could have been.
Tina:
Like maybe the.
David:
Maybe co-sponsoring, nomenclature, words. Whatever it might have been but it seemed, it didn't seem to be level.
Tina:
Okay.
David:
If you will, with as an example with the city. Which I was under the impression gave you a conditional ten thousand dollars.
Tina:
Incorrect the city. Sorry to interrupt, I'm so sorry.
David:
No, go ahead.
Tina:
The city actually gives, gives us five thousand dollars per event. So we actually gain about well seventeen thousand dollars total throughout the year so they do have a little bit more of a. Okay. Kind of stance on that so just a little more financially, but I just want to be clear about that. But I still will go back and take a look and see for future events too, to make sure we're, we're doing it the correct way.
David:
I would bet that's the answer I was looking for. I, as I, as I recall getting the conditional commitment in writing from the city, it specifically said ten thousand dollars.
Tina:
And that was in addition to their $17,000. So last year they gave us an additional $10,000. So $27,000 total.
David:
Inside of last year? Yes sir. $27,000. Correct sir.
David:
That's fantastic.
Tina:
It was a nice gift, yes.
David:
Okay well thank you for that.
Tina:
Thank you sir and I thank you as well any other questions for the chamber?
Chris:
No questions, but I do want to comment that we do appreciate that the chamber has definitely taken up the, the baton here and scheduling some of these events. I think we had the Masters Association at one point.
That we're scheduling some of these. Yes. So it's actually good to see that you guys have picked that up and you know, are, are sharing that and going forward making sure that the community is coming together and celebrating.
Tina:
Thank you. We are, and we did have a nice paint drive event actually. Which was kind of a nice community event for people to help clean up their, their paint and things, as a fundraiser for the chamber. But we're trying to do some of those community events that the Masters Association did do. And we're going to work those in as much as we can as now we are opening up more so yeah. All right.
Robert:
Just again, a quick note. We heard there was one person primarily responsible for
helping fill those dumpsters, and they went out there by.
Tina:
Whitney. Whitney. Whitney Shank, my coworker.
Robert:
Yes, we would like to extend a volley back of a thank you instead of an apology to Whitney, for helping with that. You heard she was instrumental in covering for the 40 phone calls and everything. She was.
Robert:
For the dumpster.
Tina:
And she went out there and did it with her own two bare hands to get that cleaned up, and put into the dumpster and things.
And I was out of town. I would have been there too but, good timing but no, no, no I. She did, she's a wonderful hard worker, and she went out and made sure it was, it was where it was what needed to be done.
Robert:
So we're saying thank you.
Tina:
I will let her know tonight or tomorrow when I see her for a meeting. Thank you. Yeah all right Thank you very much.
David:
Thank you again.
Tina:
Have a good one.
David:
Have a good evening.
Tina:
You too.
David:
Having no one else signed up. I'm going to close item number five, public comment period. First part of this agenda, and move rapidly into item number six, which is the Open Space Manager's Report. Everyone has had a copy of this in your packets, had the opportunity to review it. If there are any additional comments, questions, or concerns about that report. Now would be a good time to share them. Colleagues. Hearing.
Denise:
Sorry, I just wanted to make a quick comment about the pictures that Craig provided on the west side of the library, and how nice that looks. Pretty amazing it's come a long way in five-ish years and I think that's where we have the example of the Dog Tuff, or dog turf grass it's called. And Dog Tuff. And I just want to say it looks great. Good job.
David:
Thank you, Director Crew. So noted. I would second that, and I think. I think we'll.
Accept that report as written in the comments that we've heard. Close item number five at this point. And, or excuse me, item six. And move into the finance director's report. Keep in mind the finance director is not able to join us online as I mentioned earlier in the meeting. We're having the technical difficulties of connectivity.
So I am going to try to lead that discussion if I may. Everyone has had a copy of, again as a byproduct of your package this month's financials, and in this month's financials they've Pinnacle has provided us with some highlights. Everyone's had a chance to read through them, ask questions of staff and.
Yeah, of Pinnacle as they occurred, and as a part of the review. I will make one comment that was a byproduct of some conversation that we had last month and pleasant to report and highlight the fact that when asked about the budget and the expenses associated with the inclusion ballot. This is what the response was from Pinnacle.
It's a part of, of item 3B, quote, in 2021, the district budgeted three hundred and twenty five thousand dollars for costs related to the inclusion with parker water and sanitation you may recall that we had bumped three areas finance legal and probably some consultants were the three major line items without the detail this evening they reported that to date the district has recognized substantial cost savings relative to the inclusion. Expending under 88 000 in total.
So it's with that that they will continue to monitor the cost relative to the inclusion, but would anticipate that they, that they will fall far well under budget. And, and want to make sure that everyone saw that comment.
In addition to that, we have a, a financial report that calls out for the payables, and the claims for
payment inside of this year, or excuse me, this month.
Those include checks number 26163 - 26222. The funds coming from the general fund and debt service are total $56,538.96. From the enterprise fund, $247,783.38. And all electronic payments, $59,109.25. For total expenditures for June 12th through July 9th of $363. $363,431.59. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns from the board?
Chuck:
David, a quick question, and this may not be valid, may be my misunderstanding, but. On page two of the independent auditor's report, towards the end of the initial. Castle Pines North Metropolitan District financial statement for December 31. Do you want to hold off on that for a minute? Or do you want to clear up what you've got on board?
David:
No, I apologize. I'm sorry. I skipped over item A, which was consideration of approving the 2020 financial audit performed by our outside independent CPA firm, Rubin Brown. Please, go ahead. I was going to bring that up next. I just got it in the wrong order. Go ahead.
Chuck:
This is just a simple question. On page 2, under the required supplemental information. It indicated that such missing information in this report has not been included. And although they do say that, in their opinion, the basic financial statement is not affected by this missing information. Anytime I see verbiage as missing information, I'm wondering, is it going to be corrected? Do they bring it back? Do they leave it alone? I'm just curious more than anything else. And maybe that's something we can save for Amanda when she returns.
David:
I see that in addition to.
Chuck:
That's, that’s not Amanda. Right.
Legal Counsel Kim Seter, Esq.:
That's for sure.
David:
Counsel, would you like to weigh in on. Yes.
David:
Director Lowen’s request?
Kim:
The page that you're looking at there, Chuck, is part of the opinion of the auditor.
And the real key paragraph is the one above that, that says that it's an unqualified opinion, which is the best opinion you can get. But over the last several years, there's been laws passed that require them to make a bunch of disclosures in a separate little booklet. And that's one of those disclosures. So, typically, they come in and they're just spot-checking for information. If something's missing, they have to comment on it. They won't come back and correct that. What they're telling you is it's not significant, but something was missing. Okay. Thank you.
David:
I would echo that as well. At the top of the page, it's somewhat of a contradiction of covering
one's basis. When they talk about the fact they believe that the audit evidence that they had
obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for their audit opinions.
And, and so council you're spot on again regard to them covering their basis on, on these disclosures and these guarantees. But moreover than not I was happy to read in the independent auditor's report that the financial position, including the cash flows for the year ending, had ended in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
It's as good as a that-a-boy as we're going to get. And it's for that reason I would,
if they were online, I would offer that-a-boy to them and to staff. For, again, answering all the questions correctly and filling in the boxes and providing the information for the auditors at their request. I know that a lot of us go through that Q&A throughout the year and, and they query it, put it in this report.
And the fact that we passed without any concerns whatsoever is exactly the way we want it on an annual basis. So great job, staff. Thank you for your help. Council, colleagues, any other comments, questions, or concerns about the audit or this month's financial before I
solicit a motion. To approve both. None? Okay. Is there a motion to approve the audit? We'll take them individually.
Chuck:
Mr. President, I'll make the motion that the audit that was ending December 31st,
2020 for the Castle Pines North Metropolitan District be approved as presented.
David:
Is there a second?
Denise:
I'll second.
Denise:
We have a motion and a second to approve the 2020 audit as presented this evening dated December 31st 2020.
Are there, is there any other discussion from staff or the board on this matter before I call for the vote? Hearing none, I'm going to call for a vote for approval.
Board Voting All Speak:
Or for support, if I may. Director Lewis. Aye. Director Crew. Aye. Director Merritt. Aye. And Director Lowen. Aye. Director McEntire is at aye as well.
David:
Motion carries unanimously. The Castle Pines North Metropolitan District financial statements dated. Through December 31st, 2020 in the form of our annual audit is approved unanimously. Could I get a, a motion from my colleagues on the financial update through seven? Well, it would be through June, the month of June as presented this evening.
Describer:
Chuck and Robert are briefly talking off mic.
Chuck:
July 9th 2021. This one?
David:
No, it would be through. Right here?
David:
June, June 3rd. No, those are checks. I'm, I’m talking about the financial report and then, and you can include the checks as well. So through June 30 financial report, and then the checks through July 9.
Robert:
I'd like to make a motion to approve the financial reports through June 30th and also consider
approving the financial reports payable and claims for payment including check numbers 26163-26222. And that's from June 12, 2021 to July 9, 2021.
Describer:
Robert says off mic “Is that what you need?” Yep. Is there a second?
Denise:
I'll second.
David:
We have a motion and a second to approve the financial reports through June 30, 2021. And at the same time, those claims for payment. Check numbers 26163-26222, dated June 12, 2021 through July 9, 2021. Are there any other comments, questions, or concerns from staff directors? Hearing none.
Board Voting All Speak:
Call for the vote. Director Lowen. Aye. Director Merritt. Aye. Director Denise Crew. Aye. And Director Lewis. Aye. Director McEntire is an aye as well. Motion carries unanimously.
David:
Thank you very much. Going to close item 7, and move into item 8. Everyone's had their opportunity again to see report by council. This report dated July 15th. It has no actions within it. For this evening. Is there any comments, questions, or concerns of council as he approaches the podium?
Kim:
That's the way I like it.
David:
Council, we appreciate that report. We appreciate all the things that we see have fallen. That's the wrong word. Have, have, have been completed and removed from the report. You have been busy the first half of this year, and we really appreciate you. Appreciate the correspondence, even through the last few hours of this day on the immediate matters important to the district.
So thank you for coming. Thank you for all the hard work. And again, thank you for the report. It is with that update report comments that I'm going to close the legal portion of the agenda, item number eight, and open up item number nine. Again, directors, reflecting on the report given to us by our district manager and the accompanying report by Kennedy Jenks. Of whom he oversees. Are there any comments, questions, or concerns about that report or any items therein or any omissions, directors?
Chris:
I do have a question on the risk and resiliency report. And I'm probably might get some of this wrong. But I was looking at some of the charts and then identify some of the areas where we might have some issues. And I know we have to do an environmental study or something like that. That's one.
District Manager Jim Worley:
We have to do an emergency response plan. I'll talk about that in a minute.
Chris:
Sorry, emergency response. And then the, the other part was something to do with the water treatment plan.
Could you expand a little bit more on that? I wasn't sure. It was one of those dark colors, and I was trying to understand the report.
Jim:
I'm surprised you even understood some of it, to be honest with you, because I went through it. Let me just try to address your questions on that. The R&RA, RRA. What was, turned out to be four about two or two and a half hour phone calls with the representatives of Kennedy Jenks that do this basically for the living risk and resiliency.
So there's a lot of questions that were asked about cyber what you know, what are the problem, potential problems with someone getting into the plant and start flipping switches and what have you. So I'm not smart enough to tell you the specifics of each one of those, but the bottom line is their, their assessment is, okay, we have some areas that you probably need to work on, and that's where the emergency response plan comes in, which is due at the end of this year.
So I was very surprised when, when I said to the gentleman who was really kind of running this for Kennedy Jenks, I said, okay, so where do we send this report? And he said, you don't send a report. I said, so then how do I report June 30th that we did this? He says, I'm going to give you the connection.
And you go online and you fill out a couple of little dots. Basically, that says we've completed it by June 30th. Thank you very much. I have the same type of process I'll go through December 31 when we complete the emergency response plan. So cyber attacks was one of the biggest concerns. Which, according to these individuals that are doing this work, that's about the same concern of almost any organization, is the cyber attacks.
What's going on? He says, if you hadn't been hit yet, you're going to be. Because it's every day. So that was a big focus on it. We had some issues with the water plant that we need to correct, which we've been doing, especially since this issue we had a few weeks ago. That information, well, it didn't go to anybody other than just ourselves.
And I sent it to you, and I sent it to Parker, because Parker will work with Parker on the ERP, the Emergency Response Plan. Because everything continues like it is right now, which is all positive, they'll be responsible for following through on that. So they have a copy of this. They know what's going on. We're communicating with them through Greg Sekera.
Our Kennedy Jenks gentleman, to focus on getting the ERP done. So I might not have got any specific. If maybe you wanted, we can sure dive into that with someone who could explain it a lot better than I can, Chris.
Chris:
Right so maybe you weren't you didn't answer the specific question. But generally I'm getting a better feeling that, you know, the response or the results were evaluated. And you guys went over and then you guys came up with a I guess the emergency response plan which we'll address the type of items that I thought I saw. Exactly.
Chris:
And like you, I'm looking at all these bars. I know.
Chris:
Is it going red through yellow? And I'm going, so which one is the one that I need to really focus in on here?
Jim:
Well, they used a numbering system. They used a one being absolutely no problem, a four being a higher risk. Yeah.
Jim:
And so as we went through each one of those meticulously items that we went through. We'd talk about it. And he'd say, what are your answers? Here's what it is. And, and I had Nathan Travis with me of the plant. And so he'd answer. question and the gentleman will talk about it and say okay that that sounds like a two to me no big deal everything's fine or it's a three or whatever it may be. So that's how that got put in that matrix is what I think it's called.
And if I was colorblind I'd have trouble figuring it out. But we take all of that information and those that are higher risk like a four or something. That's what I believe we'll focus on the emergency response plan when it's put together. This is how we'll take care of it. Hopefully that helped you Chris. Thank you. You bet.
Robert:
I have one question as well. Jim, if you could put some clarity of detail. We have sent a letter of damages to the city. And the city had a response saying that they would like to get a community together, and figure out how they could go forward in not producing the substandard soil through the snow removal process.
However, there was an outlay of cash, and incurred damages. And the restitution of that and who's going to write the check and how much that check is. Can you put details to that on if the city is accepting that there was damages, and elaborate on that a little bit?
Jim:
There's a couple of issues that I'm hearing. One is the information. We went to the city and told them that our estimated cost is, I forgot the dollar amount. Yeah, a lot of money to maintain all the right-of-way throughout the city. Craig did a very thorough job of identifying exact right-of-ways, and then he has a per square foot cost of water, fertilizing, mowing, all of those items.
That's where that total number came up. We didn't have really any response from the city. Other than we got it, I think, and then Michael had mentioned something to me. But last week, Larry Nimmo was sent over here to sit with Craig and I, to try to dissect those numbers and see kind of what they included. That's all that we've had from the city at this point.
Is that discussion and, and according to Larry, says okay well I see how you did it sounds logical to me. So now I'll go back to the city and see where we go from there. So that's all that I've had conversations with them on at this point.
Denise:
And Larry is who?
Jim:
Larry Nimmo is public works. I'm sorry. Yeah, he's head of public work. So he, he called me and he says, can I come over and talk with you and Craig about this email you sent to Michael with X dollars in it? I said, sure. So he came over here and he says, I really don't know what's going on. So tell me how you got these numbers. I was asked to look at this. And we did. And that's all we've had at this point.
Robert:
Well, maybe Michael himself can get back to you. Next week or so, and discuss the incurred damages and the restitution costs that. Sure.
Robert:
Should be discussed, and not just a letter. Thanks. You bet.
David:
Director Merritt, in that claim to the city from the district. We ask that they acknowledge and commit to that expenditure for what we call phase one by the end of last month. And, and we haven't got that. We're behind. This is going to become a critical issue of contention with residents who had. At our request, been patient with the response that they've been asking of us. As the party to the license agreement with the city to provide maintenance. Jim, I would just say that.
We need a date certain that we cannot bypass. And be able to complete phase one as we have hoped to inside of this year. Would you please ascertain what that date is and work with, with Craig and, and utilizing your other tools to communicate that with the city. So that it is and, and, and in such a way that we can convey that in the same way that we have on our website. A copy of that claim, a copy of that letter demonstrating to all the residents that are waiting on the acknowledgement from the city and, and subsequently the district to pull the trigger to fix that damage.
And, and so that we're completely on record and with all the advanced notice that we can possibly give them. Again a do or die date for being able to complete that or fix that damage inside this year please for phase one. And then, and then notify the board if you will of, of with a copy of that letter as well. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
Chuck:
David in that, in that regard and with all due respect to Jim. Now that we're Trying to establish dates and demands, would it be appropriate to have Kim review the letter, legalize the letter? Are we at that point right now where we want to step up our notice. And make it more official? Not to say Jim's not official as the manager of the Metro District. But when it's also coming from an attorney, it's saying a little bit more, but are we there yet?
David:
I, I would say, were passed there. Simply because what we've done to this moment is adhere to the license agreement that they forged between us. And there aren't any other pieces of information that they've asked for, or that we apparently have left out.
And so I'm, I'm asserting that there's, there's no more due diligence to be done on this subject. As much as to give notice of the time frame that remains in order to get that commitment from the city. We promised an assundry of residents that that was our course of action to be patient with that arrangement.And the parties that are party to that arrangement to get that done.
And I want to keep them in the loop with that communication. And, and so I'm advocating that it is a follow-up letter with a do or die date for execution or an execution date. Forget the do or die. Concept but it's, it's a do or did it did or do date for this year. That's, that’s how we garnered the residents' willingness to be patient and cooperate with us.
And once we get there, I don't think that we have, I honestly don't believe we have legal recourse to really answer your question, short of terminating the agreement. And I would be, I would ask counsel to, counsel already reviewed the claim letter. And, and I believe when that was put together, he was also copied, okay?
So he's up to speed with where we're at in the process. But I think our only recourse is, is not so much legal, threatening, or else, because either party has a 30-day termination clause available to them.
Chuck:
So based on what you're telling me then, the reaction we're getting from the city is somewhat of a brush off.
David:
Well, I'm not going to say that I'm, I'm going to say that. We, we hadn't heard from them by the time that we asked. But we did with a commitment. We did hear from them with the need for some additional information as Jim reported last Friday, that meeting took place. And so now we're operating under the impression that they have all the tools needed to, to respond to us.
But I'm concerned about it being a timely response.
Chuck:
Well what is timely because you want Jim to send out a letter before we allow them to chew the details they just got. So do we give them another 10 days, another month. What, what is your.
David:
Well we, we have.
Chuck:
What do you think, Jim? What do you.
David:
Well we have the information from Craig.
We just, we just we, we have that date. And, and I just can't recall it in this conversation. So we've been prepared to follow up with that date. But the sooner we give them that date because they didn't meet the June 30 date the better. And I believe that it is some Three, four, five weeks, possibly. Remember when Craig gave us a presentation, it was, it was a fall exercise or project, and so.
Chuck:
Well, I'm still confused. They didn’t give us. They didn't meet the first date.Right.
Chuck:
We're going to give them another date, correct? Correct.
Chuck:
And then silence resorts in no action.
David:
Well, I would, I would, I. In conversation with staff.
Chuck:
Did you say it yourself we, we don't have any recourse.
David:
Well in convers. Yeah we do. In conversation with staff. Jim, correct me if I'm wrong. It's my understanding that staff's recommendation at that point is to terminate the agreement. Jim, you want to elaborate on that?
Jim:
I don't think there's much to elaborate on. We're trying to work with them on this issue, period, in the Senate. And, and if there's no response, I believe, at least to the satisfaction of the district. Because we're the ones maintaining that for them. What else do we have? So that. What is. That.
Chuck:
Terminating the agreement. What's the, what's the end result of that? Other than damage to the common are, and median strips and the, and the damage to the community. Because two public entities aren't getting together. Isn't that right? So it doesn't, that doesn't feel good to me.
Jim:
Doesn't feel good to me either. I, I agree with you. So I'm not sure. I guess Kim can answer the legal side of that, but if it's, if it’s. Correct me if I'm wrong, Kim, but if we say we're out of this, give us 30 days, we're out of this. Then they're responsible for it. I'm assuming, assuming they do anything. I don't know the answer, so maybe you ought to address that a lot better than I could, Kim.
Describer:
Kim goes up to the podium and starts speaking..
Kim:
I don't recall what the agreement says. I'd have to review it. But, you know, if it does have a 30-day provision for termination, and these are right-of-ways that the city owns. Right, so if we step out of the maintenance responsibility by terminating the agreement, then they'll have to deal with it.
Robert:
Yeah I apologize for. I apologize for opening up a can of worms. I was just looking forward to expediting the response from the city. And putting a name on it, the head of the city. And then, and we'll, further communication that way. Is what we need to do at this point. And Jim has been addressed to do so. So I think we're good. We'll wait to hear, right? I yield.
Chris:
So why not jump into the fray? But, you know, it would be good if we had our, our city representative here so we can get that back to them. Is it the only means is for you now to go take back the conversation back to the city.
Jim? So that would be the one comment I'd have. Hopefully, maybe the city's online. But I would say from the community perspective, I agree we need to resolve this and we need to work together, right? That's the whole item of us reducing the number of government entities out there. Is so that we serve our community better. And that pretends that the government entities that exist need to work together.
So let's figure this out and win-win for everybody. And, and get it fixed. But I totally agree it would be nice if we can communicate this to them. Perfect.
Jim:
I'll add one. I'm sorry Robert. Go ahead. I was just going to say I'll add one more piece of this puzzle. You remember the, the Daniels Gate wall that a gentleman ran into and pretty well demolished it. And we went back and forth on that, too.
You know, it's in the right-of-way, blah, blah, blah. We spent $200 having someone physically remove that, and put it down below the hill so it doesn't look like garbage. Of which that was addressed in my meeting the other day, Mr. President, and they said, Do we owe you $200? And I said, yes, you do. Small bills, please.
So I think we're going to get that back. But what they also told me the other day, Larry told me, is you might recall. On the other side of the road where that wall was knocked down is another wall, a Daniel's Gate monument wall. He told me they're tearing that down too. The city is tearing that down. So they've, they've gone into the right-of-way of which they own. And done two things, pretty significant. Whether that means they're going to do landscaping, or any of that stuff.
That's a different animal. But there seems to be some consensus over there that yeah we got issues within the right of way we need to address that. So I just want to let you know that for what it's worth.
David:
And I appreciate that and, and Robert, you didn't open a can of worms. The, the, the issue, has been a long-standing issue. But it is and, a but. And it's one in a series that this board has accepted the responsibility to Stewart.
And in doing so we've, Chris we've given the city every opportunity. Continue to provide those opportunities. Including a weekly meeting between district manager, and city manager. A ongoing fluid line of communication between district manager and development director. We don't have a communication breakdown anywhere. This is not something that is not known and understood by our partner in that license agreement.
And the, the fact that this is the fix for this first phase. Is required or is best served in the fall. Gives us time between now and that date whatever that date certain is and again, our open space manager has given us that. I believe in, in by, by virtue of a month.
We need to know by, and I believe it was August. Because this work was going to take place in September. He has all of the contractors that have bid. That were part of the backup in the correspondence that was given to the city. There's been one chosen. There's been one given notice that they would be utilized if the city were to give us the commitment for the funds. But that we weren't going to move forward with district funds, our only obligation in that license agreement as the one that provide the maintenance.
And, and this isn't maintenance, this is damage. The, so the recourse again, no communication have problems. But I would agree with you more is better. And, and that is where I'm coming from. I don't care if we write the same letter every single week changing the date on the top. I have no problem with making sure that they get one or all of them.
To show that there is a real appetite. What I'm most concerned about are the residents that we've asked for over the course of the last two or three months to please be patient with that issue. Because we were addressing it. And at a level of detail that left no questions.
But maybe one of complete understanding that only a verbal meeting could, could, could, could resolve.
And we've had that. So I don't want to backpedal on this. I want to make sure that all the correspondence as numerous as we need to. I don't care if it's redundant, gets out there and, and that the residents who've asked us to fix this fence. No, I meant, I meant, I meant to, you know, eliminate, eliminate that redundant governmental entity called the park authority. And, and do something with the money.
No, I didn't mean that. I meant the master, you know, don't get me started here. Okay. We need to be responsible to the residents in form and in an, in an action, and, and, so I'm. All in favor, Chris, of making sure that the communication is fluid, that it is succinct, that it is something that they can act on, and that we are ready when asked to perform. Doggone it, perform. Because this is a real hot button, and it's only getting hotter. So, Jim, any questions about this?
Jim:
No, sir. Thank you. You bet.
Robert:
And let me finish that by saying we just look forward to the city's commitment. So we can go ahead and restore this for our community. Thank you.
Describer:
Chuck turns on his mic, and David says to Chuck “You're already past your 30 minutes.”
Chuck:
I'm concerned. Are we talking about the fence?
David:
No, because that was fixed. Oh okay.
David:
Once and for all.
Chuck:
Okay, I'm with you. I'm awake, I, I agree with you, David. I think throwing a little bit of patience and sugar after it is okay. But it's like telling your kids they've got to be home at, at, at a certain hour.
And if they come in late after the curfew, and you shake your finger at them and say don't do that again. And they come in the next time after curfew and say I told you, you're going to get grounded, don't do it again. There's got to be a stop. And so, I'm not sure I like the stoppage that we, we might be forced with. Because I think that's a direct negative impact to the community. But it's only, the only thing we have. So I, I appreciate your continued conversation with some oomph to it.
Jim:
No sir, thank you.
David:
I'm going to close item nine, and immediately jump into directors matters. Item number 10 on our agenda. Best I know we have addressed all the items this evening that were on anyone's list. Except for the pile. Except for the growing problem, not pile. I'm sorry, the growing problem of the irresponsible dog owners who failed to pick up and properly dispose of their dog's poop.
Chuck:
David I do have a couple minor B and C items that I'd like to add before we close out. So I, I know that you're under a time constraint tonight, but bear with me.
David:
Not a problem, let me just bring everyone up to speed. Through this afternoon's efforts by the district staff. Everyone over the course of the last 30-60 days, have been working on trying to rectify this. And it is my understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong Jim. If, if we've been able to find a entity, a neighboring entity that had. Or a statewide agency that has a ordinance or a law on the books. More importantly, were you able to confirm from the city that we do or do not have such a law on the books having to do with this, the excrement issue with the dogs?
Jim:
I did not talk to the city this afternoon, so I don't know the answer to that one. Sorry.
David:
Short of having their, it's my understanding having done some studying on this subject. That what we talked about last month where I was kind of piggybacking on the idea of, of the success we had with the tagging and the, and the graffiti. where we upped our reward for information leading to the conviction of perpetrator to a thousand dollars.
It made a difference. For all intents and purposes, that activity ceased. And, and, and certainly dwindled from the height that we were experiencing. Or the volume of activity in that regard that we were experiencing. So I, I, I said that last meeting, you may recall that we should just offer $1,000 to these folks that are, are failing to pick up. what would be considered by most not just an eyesore but a health hazard.
And, and, but without that law or ordinance being in place, it may be something that we have to work with the city. In, in, in establishing and getting adopted. So I don't think that that remedy is really one that we can take as a first step. But I would implore this board to take into consideration the first step of a remedy.
Tonight, we have an estimate of between $2,000 and $2,500 to immediately develop. Excuse me, to immediately. Yep, to immediately produce an incendiary of messages that have been given to us by neighboring entities. And by our communications folks, and by the folks that have contacted the district with, with ideas, and examples of some of the signage specifically. I'm talking about signage.
That is, is not only specific to the issue but adds some humor at the same time. And, and we have, as I said, that's going to require about 20 some signs. Plus or minus to cover all the trails according to our open space director. And, and I would submit that we could roll out a number of these that get the message across. And add some humor to it, and install them.
Inside of, of this season and, and again, to the immediate expense to the district of about $2,500. Of course, there's going to be some vandalism, and, and some maintenance associated with that. But until which time we know what that is. We can't speak to it as much as we can speak to the initial cost, and the initial effort to try to address this. Does anybody else have anything more they would like to add or another option that the district might have this evening?
Robert:
I have one note would be, I think we can make it much more effective if we have a dispensary of the bags. Which we've been assured that we have plenty. I still think we need more. And that the signs are attached to the dispensary where there's a bag available. Not just humor on the, on the side. But allow and initiate the dispensary and then a sign. Together would be much more effective than just putting up a bunch of humorous signs around. But we have to be able to enable the person to effectively clean up the feces.
David:
And that's a good point. It's my understanding that. Well, I haven't taken a survey or no one has told me how many of the bags that they come across.
Robert:
As long as we put the signs on the ones that are existing and the more signs that we get, half of that money should be used towards more.
Just to compliment the, the signs that we, the dispensaries we have out there existing, Craig has said that we have enough. We can put a sign on those, and then we can take what's left over from the $2,000 to $2,500 would be my suggestion. Half that, half for the dispensary, and with a sign. Would be my suggestion.
David:
Be assured that the $2,500 is the absolute minimum amount that we're going to expend to put up 20 signs and pulls for, to roll out this program. That being said, to add, if what you're saying to add canisters with bags in them, again, albeit. It's my understanding that the bags that are full, that are being left behind, are an equal problem.
As the piles without the bags. Nonetheless, without belaboring the issue, I would submit that those canisters are in the hundreds of dollars each. And would require some additional installation effort. I would say that we're talking about a rollout. If we're marrying with the signs, these dispensers. No less than $7,500 as opposed to the signs for 25, council.
Describer:
Kim is at the podium and he is speaking. When he is done, he sits back down.
Kim:
Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to remind you in light of your discussion about not being able to offer rewards. Because there isn't a law in place prohibiting the, leaving the dog excrement around. You have within your own powers, the power to adopt rules and regulations to impose a penalty the same way that the city does. So you could do that yourself and then have the, the reward if you want to do that. Just wanted to remind you of that.
Jim:
Now that's a good point, but one other thing to follow up on Robert if I could. I, I gave you in front of you I put a, some photographs basically of some signs. Some of them Kim found, they're pretty humorous.
I had a conversation with the people in Highlands Ranch last week. You know they have a lot of, of trails and what have you. They also have park rangers which are sworn in park rangers that can actually give citations. But only in the worst case scenario. And so some of those pictures that I, I make copies for you include what their signage is now.
And one of them is exactly what I think you're talking about Robert, and that's a sign on the dispensary. The bag dispensary thing, and take a look at that and see. But that's, that's exactly what we're talking about that type of signage. And, and based on what I'm hearing, we can sure follow a direction. And, and if you want to end up with it. I don't know if it's an ordinance or a rule in ray Kim.
Whatever that terminology is correct. But you could do that. Along with some suggestions that we could give to you. Related to what the signs would say. Including what you just talked about, Robert.
Robert:
Okay, yeah, if we could just include the signs on the dispensaries that we have. And then the additional monies would be for additional.
Just so they are married up together. And maybe a couple additional signs along the way where they're having a problem, I guess. I just want to be able to have them be able to take care of the problem as well.
Danise:
I, I tend to agree with you on that. The signs and the canisters and the bags are super important. Do we have any data from Highlands Ranch Metro District? How effective signage, et cetera, has helped their situation?
Jim:
I didn't ask that specific question, whether they document every communication. What, what I was told is as, like when you lived in Highlands Ranch, you remember they're park rangers. And they're out looking at all the trails, open space, and a lot of different things.
And so if they see something going on, like someone not cleaning up after their dog. They don’t run right over there, and handcuff them, and write up a ticket. They say, let's talk about what's going on. And how important it is to do what you need to do. And so I said, so how far will you let it go before you get you back up and say, now you've irritated me. The park ranger saying that. Only if they're extremely belligerent, or if they just don't want to listen to you, or they're just telling you to go pound sand. Then they have the ability, from what I understand, I don't know the ordinance behind it.
But they have the ability to write a citation. Only because, really, there were horses' tales about it. But the lion's share of what they told me, any communication they had with people on trails or by phone, it's an education process. Here's what we'd like for you to do. We've got bags all over the place. It's important, is it not? You know, keep your community cleaned up. So that's how they kind of handle it. I could try to find out if they have data. I'd be happy to do that.
Denise:
Yeah. And I understand, but we're not in a position or wanting to hire park rangers to police our areas. Yeah. I don't know that that's necessary. And they're a much bigger community. They've got a lot more say here.
I mean, I understand and I did live there, and I know there's park rangers. And they do educate, and they do a great job. But I'm just wondering. I think it's a small amount, say $2,500, to get signage up at a minimum. And I can't imagine that wouldn't help the problem at least somewhat. I just wonder how much. That's kind of what I'm wondering, but maybe nobody has an answer to that.
Chuck:
Robert, when you, when you mentioned canisters, are you talking about like a trash container that takes the bag? Yeah.
Robert:
I was more thinking about the bags, but maybe the canisters we should speak to as well. But as long as the signs are large enough that you can see them from a distance, the humor. And then I had residents that were concerned about it, and they said that Boulder has a solution. Which I don't think it's a solution.
And we're never going to go that far. But they chipped their dogs, and have DNA samples that they can track it back to in Boulder. So to alleviate that I think Castle Pines would rather go with humor bigger signs easy to read for us older folk. And, and then respect for each other.
Chuck:
Yeah, my only concern is if you have, if you distribute bags, allow people to pick up bags while they're on the trail. Now you're not going to have poopy all over. You're going to have bags all over. And we had a huge problem with that with the apartments down in Village Square. We had trash containers with your trash container inside the, the brick wall.
Every time you pick up a container, you pull it out, there's probably 30 little green bags in there people just toss it over there they're throwing it away. So you create another problem so i'm just saying if we, if we do bags we should do trash containers otherwise a sign might be the initial beginning of what we start to do.
Robert:
As far as I know, that everybody keeps the little green bag until they get home. But maybe that's an issue as well. Is that we'd have to talk to Craig, and oh there's green bags being left around okay. Well then we just, a little more shaming and a little more humor and maybe we'll get to the bottom of something that works.
David:
You know I, I had the pleasure of speaking to a dog owner. Friday morning and their biggest concern as it relates to pets was an entity like ours who have that stewardship responsibility placing one of those cans too close to their home. Yes.
Told me of a very unpleasant story and, and, and, and how all that ended and it wasn't pretty. I mean and, and so you know I would lean on Craig to of course place that where it wasn't going to be offensive to anyone. And then add that to the list of chores for our folks to add to the list they already have.
Not that they're going to be paid a premium like a park ranger. But again, more is more, is more, is more. And, and, and boy, I really like what council had to say. And, and would not hesitate whatsoever inside of this season to pursue a rule or a regulation, whatever it is properly entitled. To allow us then to engage the residents in problem solving.
It really worked with the tagging. It really worked with the, with the spray painting when we upped the reward for information leading to. And I think we even talked about the wall of shame. You know and, and no one wants to go there. But no one wants it can, and no one wants to pay for the ongoing maintenance and the repair and the replacement of all of this stuff.
But we do have a problem and, and I would be in favor of, of rolling out immediately the signs as recommended by our open space manager. Utilizing one or all of the examples that we have here to add information as well as humor to, to, to the subject what do you guys think?
Chris:
So, I'd like to say I agree with, you know we need both the signs, and the garbage cans. But I think we need to have the rules before we roll out any signs. Because it's okay we've been talking about this for a couple months now. And if I remember correctly last month when we had this conversation. Craig actually had a conversation with one of the residents and the residents accosted him or threatened him.
Right? So this is not new and we're all adults. We all live in a community. We're responsible for taking care of that community. We have both the carrot and the stick. I like the fact that we can do our old ruins of regulations. Let's have that, and then roll out the signs. That would be my position.
Chuck:
I second, I second that.
Jim:
Yeah, I just asked legal counsel on a sidebar. I said, could you have a rule and reg? I think that's really probably what it would be next month for your consideration. So we get that done. And if you're okay with moving forward, we can start getting the signs done too. And maybe have a big rollout, I think is what I'm hearing you say, Chris.
So you could have some teeth behind whatever rule and reg you, you change. Or adjust based on, on legal counsel's recommendation. Between now, and next month we can identify the signs, and where we put them. And really get down to the nitty-gritty of it. And then be ready to roll that out.
David:
Point of clarification would be if we had the teeth, how do we use those teeth?
How are we going to enforce those teeth, and utilize them to the benefit of the community?
Chris:
I think we need pickleball courts, and we need tennis courts. And we can put more signs up for and improve our trails. So we'll use the fines to either, you know, essentially improve the whole process for our dog walkers. It's an education process. Or we use it for the rest of what we do, but.
David:
Why would we need, why would we need a rule to roll out an information system, or an information program this month. Now we can always, these, these are I'm being told these are. Could be six by six type, eight-foot poles that could shoulder or saddle additional apparatus on it. Dispensers, cans if that's the way we go.
But first and foremost it's, it's letting people know that all the ones that don't know, or that are not party to this discussion. That we have a problem and, and, and, but what are we, what are we really doing about it if we, if we adopt a rule or reg. And it says you can't do that.
Are we going to then adopt a process for potentially a hearing on a first offense if we were to receive information sufficient enough to identify the perpetrator. Just thinking it out loud for what we got to do between now, and at the end of next month. But I would love to take a first step, establish the locations of these, this information. And the, and the, and the facilities that we're going to roll out potentially, to get a head start on it if, if, if, if that's of interest. Because the signs don't have to say either or remember, we had the signs at the, at the skate park, there's.
You know, protocol and manners and ethics for everyone that utilizes those kind of common amenities. What we ended up doing was offering a reward for information leading to the conviction of what? Property damage. So we have to create, we're going to have to create an ordinance, or a rule that if they cross that, this is what happens.
And, and boy, I don't want to be in a, in a conducting court. I'd rather just get the message across and have it help sufficiently to, to make it work. So I think time is of essence as we think through the rest of it.
Chris:
Fine, I’ll be the judge of that.
Chuck:
I think you can do the same thing we did with the graffiti and everything. We, we can put out these signs and maybe there's another sign that says violations of this. No pooping ordinance is a $500 fine. Just make that statement. I think from peer pressure, and from people reading that there's a potential for a fine. I still think in order to enforce a fine, correct me if I'm wrong, Kim, but you need, you need a rule.
And, and enacting a rule that says there's going to be a $500 fine for violators, we will get peer pressure. They'll call up and say, I saw Chris out there at 5 o'clock in the morning. He just let his dog poop all over the street and then left. Yeah.
Chuck:
Okay, then we got him. Yep. And so peer pressure does. Goes a long way. Sure.
Chuck:
But we need a rule. If we don't have a rule, it's, it’s like talking to the city.
David:
Which being our neighbors
Describer:
The sound has been briefly cut out.
David:
Are you, are you amenable to kick-starting this program with at least a sign that could house potentially that, that, that rule in text as a, as a stick-on thereafter so that we're not having to remake the signs? Or do you want to wait?
Chuck:
You know, it really doesn't matter. I don't know how serious this problem is.
If this is just the beginning, and it's only a few I think these signs are great if it continues and then we start seeing our signs get vandalized, and we get more complaints. Then, then we need to take another step, but we ought to have a rule in place. And it doesn't matter when the rule is in place. If we're going to make a fine we need a rule in place. Do we want to do that now, later next week next year. I don't care.
David:
These, these, these signs, these signs don't have any reference to there being a.
Chuck:
Not, not initially. So what I'm saying, David. Okay.
Chuck:
Let’s, let's, lets do this initially. Let's see what Kim comes up next month with a potential for us to consider a fine.
But in the meantime, we get some of these signs up, and test the waters. Let's see how bad this problem really is.
Robert:
So if I could clarify, and what I'm thinking, if it's rolled out properly and in the right way, it'll be a compelling deterrent. peer pressure that'll make this works, and we don't have to go to the stick. And but we're agreeing that a large sign should go with the dispensary, and maybe a few cans placed in strategic places. And that's it, and then we're done with this. Does that make sense?
David:
Well it's, it's above, it's above what we were talking about when we introduced the subject. And the recommendations, or the numbers provided to us by our open space manager.
It did not include dispensaries, additional as you put it, it didn't include additional dispensaries or additional cans. But I'm hearing that you would be in favor of immediately adding additional dispensaries, and additional cans. And if that's the case, do you have.
Robert:
I think we need to have a conversation on how many dispensaries we currently have. That is a number of signs. Making the signs large enough so they can be read at a distance.
Then once that's established, we can ask Craig if that has had an impact. And then if we need additional dispensaries at that time, we can talk about that with a periodic can. So those would be two separate items. And then the third would be the stick, which we should probably kick that can down the road a little ways.
Describer:
The audio is cut, and the video is sped up briefly.
David:
How big are these signs?
Robert:
Readable.
David:
Same kind of size that we used on the playgrounds during the pandemic. Would that be right
sizing the sign that you're talking about? In the.
Robert:
Just something you don't have to walk up to the dispensary and say, what does the sign say?
Jim:
Yeah, it has to kind of put your glasses on to read. The information that Craig gave me this afternoon on the numbers that Dave is talking about, he talks about an 18 by 24 inch. So that's a pretty good sized sign.
You sure don't, doesn't need to rewrite the E on oue, when we're in the eye doctor, but something that can be seen clearly. And again, that was the size sign that he referenced, to give you an idea. I think that's a decent sized sign.
Denise:
I think that's plenty large, personally. I mean, I've seen the signs are generally not enormous. But they do need attention, so I don't have a problem with a little bigger, but we don't need a billboard either, so.
Chris:
So I, I, I'm with the phased approach, but I think the sign needs to have enough space to add the rules when we do come up with it. Because, you know, it definitely is a phased approach.
I'm not just in favor of being, okay, please, pretty please. How many more months am I going to give you to respond to me here? I'm not in favor like that. I think we need to maybe use the phased approach. We shame them. It's an education process. We use peer pressure. And then if you're not in compliance we all live in this community. Sorry, I'm on an HOA, too. We all live in a community. I get the first warning letter, and right after that, 30 days, you know, the HOAs are billing me for something, so.
David:
Well, yeah, 18 by 24 is too much airspace. It becomes a sale for, for wind and, and for passersby. It, it, it’s, but a linear sign that has enough space for the message, the humor, and a place to house the rule and reg. That if we choose to move forward, we'll be able to accept that as well without having to remake the signs. We're talking about 20-some signs for a total of $2,500. We're talking about.
Robert:
The phased approach.
David:
The phased approach. And, and, and, and by next month we'll have the ordinance rule to act on. As well as a quote for one or more of the dispensaries as well as the cans if that's the direction the board wants to take. Does that work? Excellent.
David:
That was my motion. Do I have a second?
Chris:
I second it.
David:
I have a motion on the floor and a second to direct staff to immediately produce, and install the 20 signs recommended by our open space manager. That effectively convey the message, the humor around the message, and a place for subsequent ordinance or, or rule should the board of directors of the district so choose to adopt same one month from now. For a, an approximate price of twenty five hundred dollars. Any further discussion on the item?
Board Voting All Speak:
Hearing none call for a vote. Director Lowen. Aye. Director Merritt. Aye. Director, Denise Crew. Aye. Director Chris Lewis. Aye. Director McEntire’s an aye as well. Motion passes unanimously.
David:
Any questions, Jim?
Jim:
I just didn't catch you seconded it. I took it. Chris made the motion. I didn't, unless you were seconded.
David:
I made the motion.
Jim:
David, okay. Thank you.
Describer:
The audio of the video is cut out and it is sped up.
David:
Item 10B, Mr. Lowen.
Chuck:
Thank you, Mr. President. Real quickly, I live in an aging community. The homes are over 30-some years old. And everybody's obviously trying to take care of their property like we, we expect. A couple of the homeowners received a letter last week from a company called American Water Resources.
You may have gotten a letter, you may not have. It's called, it is also entitled AMAC, Association of Mature American Citizens. A lot of the homeowners, several of the homeowners got this and they called me, is this a scam or what should we be worried about? What this letter states is that the homeowner should ensure their line from the home, from their home to the street.
And I think that's probably appropriate because we don't take care of the main line in the street. But we should be responsible for the line, coming out of our home on our property line that goes to the, the main in the street.
David:
As a, as a resident.
Chuck:
It was a resident, yes. A lot of the homeowners don't understand that. And all I'm suggesting with this letter, because it got people pretty excited. In my community, we don't know where our lines coming out of our house go. My neighbor's goes to the middle of my driveway. That's where his access is. Mine is under the other neighbor's fitzer. So if it ever breaks, we're tearing out the fitzer. I mean, it is, it is really odd the way Douglas County approved this.
Nevertheless, it does raise some homeowners concerns. Particularly the elderly, should they ensure this water line was it down about six feet, eight feet? Jim and I'm just curious is this something that maybe Jim I mean Kim could put a little blurb in the connection when we send out our, and a monthly newsletter. And, and say you know this is legitimate. Maybe we should be concerned about our waterline and maybe if you feel that it's insurable and its cost is going to be expensive to repair. That's up to you.
It's certainly not a requirement. It's certainly not ours. It's the homeowners. I don't know if we want to enter this little fray or not. But there's a lot of confusion in my particular associate. There's only 62 homes. They're very small compared to the rest in Castle Pines. But nevertheless, there have been some concerns and they wanted to know if this is a scam or should they do it? And I personally think it's up to the homeowner, obviously, but any kind of comments?
Jim:
This is the first I've heard of it, Chuck, and I'll just give you my personal opinion. I personally don't think we ought to get involved in that, and recommending for or against something like that. Our rules and regs are very clear, especially now. When we ran into that issue of. Are, are, they were not real clear.
And we have clarified though so that's just my gut feeling if, if we get into that then are we recommending that company, are we recommending another company? So that, that's the, the slippery slope that I think we go down if someone calls us, and says hey should we do this? I'll tell them that's your you know that's up to you it's your, if your insurance will cover it okay.
Chuck:
You're absolutely right, and it is a slippery slope. And we do not want to get into that fray. Especially with this company, or any other company offering the insurance. But I didn't know if we wanted to have an informational piece that just reminds the homeowners that their line coming out of their house going to the main, wherever that may be, is their responsibility.
Jim:
And I don't have a problem with that at all, to be honest with you. As long as we don't carry it the next step, and that is you might want to get insurance or talk to your, you know, those kinds of things. But we can say, hey, FYI, just so you know, this is your responsibility.
Chuck:
I'll show you this and I'll let you deal with it.
Jim:
Yeah, okay. I appreciate that.
Robert:
And my two thoughts on that, I concur with Jim. But I think that Castle Pines Connection would be a good avenue for any company. that wishes to provide insurance for the residents, which do know that is duly stated in the regulations that we as homeowners are responsible from the main line to our homes. But for us to address that, maybe that's better off. Advertisement and the connection.
Chuck:
Just, just something to think about. The second item, David, is, is it could be a little political, and I'm not right now. I want to make sure that this is, this is rumor, although there is some validity.
There is a huge concern, particularly from the homeowners that border Daniels Parkway.
The horse property.
As you all know, that used to be owned by Catherine Gross, and her husband, is now sold. It's under contract, pending. To Colbe, Colble, I mean Colble. And the concern is that the developer has gone to Douglas County to override the open space requirement for one home per 11 acres, or whatever the initial requirement was.
And he wants to put in 90 homes down there. But the Douglas County Planning Department indicated that they had spoken with Castle Pines Metro District, the village, who denied providing them any water. I don't think they have enough for their own homes. There's a comment that they are, they have discussed water coming from Castle Pines North Metro District.
And they are also talking with somebody over in Parker. Now, all rumors, but Jim, I don't know if you've heard anything about this, or had any discussions, but I know that it's going to. Right now it's not in our mesquite. I don't think we need to get involved other than if there's some bad information out there that says Castle Pines North Metro District is going to be providing the water. I think we better think long and hard before we start offering that, that zoning change.
Jim:
I am aware of the property you're talking about. This district, through me, has not issued any letter, document, or anything that says we will serve this area. The only conversations that I have had, and it was along with Parker, is the potential for sewer to go down our Daniels Park sewer line. That's the only discussion that I've had on this property. It did not include any discussion related to water. Only is there capacity to go down that line and that's it. We haven't committed to anything so I'm not sure where all that other.
Chuck:
Okay well I know that the village has already declined offering any water to that, that development. This is a 20-year comprehensive management plan that sets out any development at five to nine acres for only 11 homes on there.
I think it's about 50 acres which that rents property sits on. And to put 90 home, a 90 home subdivision plan in there would probably, if the county approved it, destroy that comprehensive master plan. And then allow all the homes to the west to do the same thing. Potentially all the way down to Santa Fe. So there's a sort of a swelling in the underground that is starting to occur. And I just want to make sure we keep our hands clean until we know more about it.
Jim:
And our hands are very clean on this. There's been no commitment whatsoever.
Chuck:
Mr. President, that's all I have. Thank you.
David:
Director Lowen, I, I would, would echo what Jim has said, with regard to the district's role to this moment. Not only very limited, but exploratory at the most. It had everything to do with the agreement that was forged in the 80s between ourselves and the village. As well as Plum Creek water reclamation district being a recipient to and a party to that agreement as well.
So, and the fact that Parker is, is, is been asked to extend their service area by the residents. It makes perfect sense that they would initiate a look-see to investigate the plausibility of that. But I too am familiar with no more than that request, and that action to this very moment.
I've not been privy to or know of any conversation with Parker or the Metro District North about water. Certainly the Metro District, but not Castle Pines North, nor Parker. And so appreciate you bringing that information forward and sharing with us what may or may not be happening in the future. Anybody else want to comment on that?
Hearing none, I'm going to close Directors Matters, Item 10, and open up the closing public comment period. We still don't have connectivity, so we'll close that, forgo that tonight. And encourage anyone that does have comments to direct them by and through our website. And as always we will promptly respond to them.
If there's nothing more I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
Robert:
I'll second that motion.
Describer:
Denise is saying something off mic to Robert.
David:
Got a motion from Chris Lewis to adjourn, the second one from a, a second by Robert Lewis.
Describer:
David meant to say Robert Merritt, he said Robert Lewis by mistake.
Board Voting All Speak:
All those in favor are unanimously and in unity say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Meeting adjourned.