July 20, 2020 Video Board Meeting

Transcript

AGENDA

Board of Directors Meeting
Monday, July 20, 2020, at 6:00 p.m.
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 July 20, 2020 board meeting agenda.
4. Consider June 15, 2020 board meeting minutes.
5. Opening public comment period (3-minute maximum per person).
6. Project updates and insights from the Castle Pines City Council’s designated liaison to CPNMD, Councilwoman Deborah Mulvey.
7. Open Space Manager’s report.
8. Finance Director’s report.
9. Consider approving 2019 financial audit prepared by the CPA firm of Rubin Brown.
10. Consider approving financial report and items from Finance Director.
11. Consider approving and/or ratifying June 2020 payables (check numbers 25260 – 25355 (June 5th through July 8th).
12. Legal Counsel’s report. A. Master Association seeks CPNMD’s consent for waiver of claims related to dissolution of the Master Association.
13. District Manager’s report. A. Status of joint PWSD/CPNMD Water & Wastewater Service- Integration Study B. Meetings with City Manager Michael Penny and Public Works Director Larry Nimmo.
14. Directors’ matters.
15. Closing public comment period (3-minute maximum per person).
16. 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 20, 2020”. The meeting opens on a shot of board members David McEntire, present.

Board President David McEntire: Good evening, everyone in attendance this evening. Good evening to those on line. Thank you for tuning in.

If everyone is ready to get started. I'd like to call to order the regular meeting of Castle Pines North Metro District of Monday, July 20th, 2020. It is now a few minutes past 6 p.m., and I would like to ask all of you if you'll join me and us in the Pledge of Allegiance before we get started.

All-Speak: I Pledge of 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 joining us.

Conduct roll call with that. If my colleagues would be so kind as to acknowledge your presence and also disclose any potential conflicts at that time. It will expedite the meeting.

Board Member Director Chris Lewis: Director Lewis. Present no conflicts.

Board Member Director Robert Merritt: Director Merritt. Present no conflicts.

Board President Chuck Lowen: And Director Lowen. Present. No conflict.

David: Director McEntire is president. And I have no conflicts. Item number three is the approval of July 20th, 2020 board meeting agenda. The one that is before us. The one that has been in the hands of my colleagues and myself now for some time. Also item number four, which is consideration and potential approving of the June 15th, 2020 board meeting minutes.

I think that we have worked them over sufficiently. And if you feel the same emotion to approve would be appreciated. Anyone?

Board-Voting All Speak: I make a motion to approve the July 20th, 2020 board meeting agenda and the minutes from June 15th, 2020.

I'll second that.

We have a motion on the floor and a second to approve the agenda and the minutes from last meeting. Any other comments, questions, concerns? Having heard none, those that would approve the motion signify by saying I when called upon, Director Lewis. I. Director Merritt. I. And Director Lowen. I. McEntire is an I and the motion passes unanimously. Item five is the open public period.

David: Unfortunately, we don't have anyone that has signed in from the public and would like to speak this evening. So I'm going to close that and move right into item number six. This is an item that was added to get project updates and insights from the city through our designated liaison, Councilwoman Deborah Mulvey. Welcome, Deborah. Welcome back. Good to see you standing. Good to see you or hear you. Just hit that red button. There you go.

Describer: Deborah Mulvey, a frequent attendee and City Councilwoman, walks to the podium to discuss with the board.

Deborah Mulvey, City Council Member: Thank you. I always push the wrong button. Thank you very much. I'm going to jump around probably a little bit, because I know you all had a lot of questions, and we have quite a few issues of concern in our community. I've been having a bunch of town halls, because I happen to notice that our constituents want a little bit more engagement, and I've made myself available for that on a regular basis now.

And my next one is just constituents to council members. I invite another council member with me each time. Next time is going to be traces Tracy Engerman, and my next one is going to be on August 3rd. That's distinguished from the city's open house minus up on Daniels Gate Parkway. It's both virtual and in person. Everybody can see and hear everybody else.

We have figured out a way to do that. And the city has an open house where residents can come in and physically talk to different staff members and different council members. Those are on August 6th and August 24th at 6 p.m. at the Exchange Coffee House in the canyons. And that's pretty much both. Both events are free for all.

No agenda. You can ask anything you want. And I'm going to start with the biggest concern on everybody's mind. And that's the mask orders. And there was a tremendous amount of concern on several people's part, including my own, that the communication that initially came out from the city seemed to indicate that the city was already deciding to opt out of the Tri-County Health department's mandate, which would go into effect on the 24th of this month if we were not to opt out.

I can answer a lot of detail questions when we get down to it. The essential piece that I want to clarify is that there was never a predetermined decision. And in fact, most council members have spent the better part of the past week and a half collecting a tremendous amount of information, speaking to constituents, speaking to physicians and collecting information and reading the actual reports and data and studying the sources.

So the the vote that in the meeting on the subject of masks will be the 22nd and it will be virtual, and people can call in and submit questions, and they can either speak their questions or email their questions or submit them on the chat, or they can speak to any council member. And as you all know, I'll give your point of view whether I agree with it or not, to the question of exactly what will be deciding, because that is the big order of the day.

There have been many orders in many places. The order that requires us to wear masks that we must all adhere to, that's in place currently as the governor's order. That is the one that's been summarized in various locations. It requires masks indoors, and it's in effect for about a month. Again, that's a summary. The tri county health department also issued an order that is intended to go into effect on the 24th if a municipality or unincorporated areas of Douglas County do not opt out, our vote is on the 22nd.

That order is more restrictive and therefore if we do not opt out, we are bound by it. The differences include that under the state order, a person who violates by not wearing a mask at the time when they're supposed to is the one who is subject to a penalty.

That person would then be subjected to a trespass violation. If somebody were to call the sheriff and get them issued a ticket or citation under the tri county health order, they have pretty much legislated. The executive director has specified that the the penalty would be against the business owner, who fails to balance the offending person, and that business owner could lose his license no matter what kind of license it is, whether it's a regular business to operate or a license to practice one's trade, the the other the individual who might be prosecuted would then also be subject to a $500 penalty, or six months in jail, or both at the absolute minimum.

And then there can also be an appeal process in which the city has to be a necessary party, whether or not we're involved in the process. And so there are quite a few differences. That's the biggest one. Another very big one is that the tri county health order requires the use of masks outdoors. When one is unable to maintain a distance of six feet.

It also requires that it is in effect for 90 days, unless it is amended, extended, or rescinded by the executive director himself. So those are the large things that we will be considering. There are other nuances in specifics that I won't get into unless you ask, but those are the things that folks seem to have the most interest in right now on that subject.

The next thing I want to emphasize is that we do have free COVID testing. The city applied for CARES act funding, which is federal dollars, and it does have to go through a process with the state. But we are going to do COVID swab testing, which is whether or not you actively have the virus. There is not going to be a lot of screening, you know, do this and do that.

It's free. It's at 9 a.m. at American Academy on the 22nd until supplies run out. The next item I want to identify is that the there is a master association dissolution concern as well. And I know that this body has the concern as well. And I must specify that I personally have to recuse myself from the city's vote because I have a conflict of interest by virtue of my profession and what I have done in my profession.

However, I can tell you what the vote will be, and it will be on the 28th at 6:30 p.m. it's on the agenda already, and it will be on the subject of the Master HOA's request that there be certain conditions to dissolution that the city would have to agree or disagree to. I can say factually that the city does not have any contracts or IDAs, intergovernmental agreements with the Master HOA.

There's been no decision one way or other, yet obviously it will be under consideration and subject to a vote at that time, and I would not be taking a position personally. The next subject I wanted to raise was that at the last meeting, there was a question about pickleball being an interest. Pickleball is actually on the slate for what the city wants to install.

There were back in 2009, I believe, when the Legae plot was platted, tennis courts were planned, and little known fact tennis courts were planned up at the south westernmost portion, where the trail ends in at the border of Elk Ridge Park, and we made sure to secure that location further to make sure and put nothing else there, despite everything else that we're planning.

So the plan is to use the Parks Authority funds to put the pickleball courts there. So I hope that addresses that. Another item of consideration that you mentioned was the concern about collaboration between the bodies. And it was I'm speaking of it generally. I know that there were some there's always an issue. And what I'm glad to report is that following your last meeting, I did immediately report to the city manager the concerns.

And I understand that there have been communication and progress. And, you know, I my view is that that's how we take care of things. You know, when a subject comes up. Yes, of course, you need to address it to let your constituents know that it's a concern that bothers you and you're dealing with it. But we do the same, and I'm glad to report that that's happened.

And thank you, Mr. Worley. If there's anything else, obviously we go through those processes and we're here, and the next thing I wanted to address is vandalism. We two on the city properties have experienced some vandalism. You know, in my personal view, it's part and parcel of the fact that our kids don't have as many places to go now that school is out.

And also we don't really have a rec center. We're kind of trying to work on that to be discussed later. And but we have not had the opportunity to do the kind of enforcement that you may have had. But we are fixing what gets broken and cleaning up paint and the like. And I want to personally thank this body and his staff for dealing with the golf carts, because it has come up at our city meetings because there were some proposals for mechanized vehicles on paths and in other areas, and I'm personally have an issue with it because of the safety considerations I had for the past two years.

Men seeing some people drive golf carts. And I had, you know, in the past three months, somebody drive a golf cart right in front of me across the light of Castle Pines Parkway, and I see vandalism occur. I recently reported an event to this body and to your staff, and I'm. I know you're going to address it later, but it disturbs me quite greatly because the individual who is driving the cart that I saw about a week and a half ago took the cart in view of me knowing I was photographing him, knowing I was looking at him and parked right there, drove right by me up to the baseball field, attached what it looked like the grooming device, but some device onto the back of the golf cart and did donuts on the baseball field with dust coming up.

And that's just plain old disregard for public property. And this is an individual who I had previously passed on three prior occasions driving up Buffalo Trail, a 35 mile an hour road in a golf cart, not zoned, not properly outfitted and registered for street use.

And this person is underage for regular driving. So I thank you for addressing this concern. The next item is fire safety. I want to thank this body for again this year paying attention to it. I know you guys are going to deal with that on your own. Concerns are city council also had a study session on wildfire mitigation, and we posted a video of the presentation that was given by the Douglas County representative.

And it primarily focuses on what the nature of the danger is and how one can protect one's own home. The city doesn't have a ton of open space, so we didn't focus a lot on that. I know that your concerns are a little bit different, but I applaud you for dealing with the wildfire danger issue. The next issue is the City Hall project and the concept of the Rec Center project.

To summarize, nothing's happening until we deal with our priorities. And if it were up to me and I am one of seven votes, the roads come first and it's time to stop dancing around it and being afraid of how to pay for it. It's painful to pay for something, and you have to save your money, and you have to pay for it somehow, and it has to be done.

And it's time to stop dancing around that. That's my view. And I've spoken that publicly, and I think there are others who feel that way. That being said, it will also be a matter that will come to the public eye for input by way of survey and potentially, depending on that survey, a ballot measure. And then aside from that, there was an opportunity through the course of the city's participation in seeing who who is interested in developing land that's available within our boundaries and how it is zoned to develop a piece of property on the corner of Legae and Castle Pines Parkway that's catty corner to the Walgreen's lot, and the opportunity that presented by by virtue of the owner not being able to develop the land in a way that they were comfortable in, in a way that the residents wanted because it is zoned for business, and five story, the opportunity was to do some transactions, to move around some plots of land and dedications to the city, such that if somebody were to purchase this property that I just referred to, then the city would be able to have a piece of it for free, and then also have the cash value.

Those two items being compensation for the dedication that was no longer needed, and the southern end of Leg Road. And if we were to do that, then we would have a sufficient amount of funds to build a modest city hall, combined with the capital funds that were already reserved for such purpose. And so we began the process of exploring whether or not that's possible.

And we did so during the pandemic because we had the reserved funds to begin the process, and it was necessary to begin the process in order to determine if it was feasible. And what we did was we had a city council member who's got a strong background in project management and who works for the state of Colorado, participate in the project selection and contractor selection process, and that's a contractor for the project, marshaling the project through.

I know I'm not using the right terms. He's going to kill me, but it's the person who helps us marshal the project through and determine whether or not it's feasible and to go through these stages. And so we haven't begun construction, we haven't committed to construction, we don't have construction plans. And we have an even hired the contractor.

It's the beginning of the process. And in fact, the property isn't even closed yet. It's doing the due diligence, and the fruits of that labor of that contract are available to us, whether we go through with the project or not. And the value of that contract goes through the entire end of the project. And so we felt that overall there was value to that as a body.

And so that's what's going on with that. Whether or not there's a rec center involved in that plot is another consideration. The agreement for the plot of land and the deal that I spoke of allows us to develop within five years. That means if we find the way to do a rec center or a community center, that is sufficient to meet our community needs, that's desired by the community, that's within our budget, then we can do it, and we have land to do it on.

It doesn't mean we're doing it. It doesn't mean it's taking a priority over something else. And so in a survey coming up, you may see something else coming out about whether or not you want a rec center and what might interest you. That's the process we feel of doing due diligence, making sure that this is what the residents really want.

And if we're going to go down that road, it's the right road in the right way. So there's as I mentioned earlier, when I first stood up, there's some concerns about, you know, what are people receiving as information and is it all that they want in terms of information. And so you will see some of us getting out there a little bit more.

And that's why I'm doing the town halls, so that when people do have questions, they can be answered. And we'll be continuing to do that. And so I hope that helps. The next area of concern was why are we replacing poles into a fiber optic wire? We are doing that because, again, the opportunity presented itself to bring us into a new age of broadband and fiber optic communications that would enhance our residents experience and also to replace the old light poles.

And if we were to do that at the time when the utilities also wanted to do it and the private fiber optic entity wanted to do it, we would gain cost savings. And so we did participate in those costs, but we did not pay the whole thing. And that was why we did those things.

Let's see. Oh, I think I got everything. I'm happy to answer any questions. Oh, I didn't mention the fence. I apologize. There was a concern whether or not the city might own some of the property on which this fence bordering Castle Pines Parkway, and one that whether or not that might be on city owned property in some respect. And I've confirmed that it is not.

David: Thank you for that report. It is timely and much appreciated. Colleagues, any questions for Councilwoman Mulvey?

Chris: Thank you. Deborah, appreciate you coming in. Thank you for being here. Thank you for all that you've updated us on. Quite interesting. I do have a question on the fiber up. I have many questions. Well, I'm going to start with the fiber optic portion of it. Can you explain a little bit more on what what that is. I mean, I know what fiber optics are, what I'm wondering what's the project and what is going to be the, I guess, the benefit to the community and what's the expansion in the capabilities that we're going to get now?

Who's doing that too?

Deborah: Yeah. So for some reason there's a little bit of quietness about that, and I'm not really sure why. My understanding is that it's similar to what some of the East Coast might know is Fios and fiber optic line. That gives you a greater bandwidth when you're watching TV and the like. So it used to be called Fios, but I don't know if it's going to bring you, you know, 5G or one gig like you get in Sterling Ranch or something like that, but it is intended to be the next phase, and I believe it's Verizon, but I'm not certain the city's interest is as long as they're digging stuff up and is in the district to bore, we're going to lay our conduit, because there's a lot of things that could be done on monarch down the road, and that could be, you know, public broadband. It could be underground lighting, it could be traffic control devices. And so it really didn't hurt us to lay that conduit now.

Chris: So that process is called joint trench. And that's actually a good thing. So I'm actually I think it's actually good for the city to actually participate in that too. I work for Charter Communications so we do this type of thing. But definitely I would say as a good thing for the city. Yeah. Why is that secret or not not public? Like more information should be put out so that one the city gets the benefit of the good PR, but then the residents gets an opportunity to be updated in what's going to be coming. So that's a good thing.

Deborah: I'll pass that along.

Chris: So let's go to the let's go to the fire mitigation. So you guys have so Jim and and the city manager, you guys have talked and have we come to resolution okay. Because the last I heard was that a a permit was essentially denied. So we we submitted, we wanted to place a, a sign, you know, and then a permit was design denied.

Sorry. And normally when a permit is denied there is a something that says here is why it's denied. And here's what you need to do to mitigate or to come up to code or whatever it is that you have to do. So I was just wondering as that being provided at that level, and if not, what do we need to do to further that process along?

Deborah: I am going to pass that along, and I can only say that it would reiterate my numerous request for the same documentation.

Chris: Okay. Thank you. Okay, I'm going to take a break and let someone else ask a question and then come back.

Robert: I just want to go with the Tri-County health order. What's the downside of obviously opting out of that when the businesses could be held liable and to the detriment of our small little businesses we have here, of maybe possibly an overreaching if it's going beyond the state, what's the downside of and why would we not opt out?

Deborah: Yes, I just as we were just about to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, received Council's report and my quick read of it was there was none. My personal view, having done a fair amount of research on the subject, was that once the mandate was issued by the governor, and there was confirmed by the tri county health department of 80% mask wearing compliance in Douglas County, that the rationale for the tri county order being a study that said you must strive for 80% compliance, was no longer a basis for the order.

I can further say that there is a fair, it seems, penalty that one might perceive to be under the governor's order. Some have differences about that, that the social message and the public health message have been delivered, that the executive director of Tri-County health has three times reported in my presence in the past ten days to elected officials and others that he feels that the slight increase in cases in our county are due to the increase in testing and that he is, quote, not worried about it and that it should be followed and just watched.

And so I see no reason why not to go with the more conservative and effective mandate that's in place, whether when agrees with there being a mandate or not there. The city Council did have a discussion back in April, at the very beginning of this crisis, about whether or not a mandate was was warranted, and because we felt it was appropriate to address it head on.

And what we did at that time was have a robust discussion. And we felt as a group that encouraging mask wearing and supporting our businesses and our public in every way possible on every element of prevention, distancing, hygiene, testing, supplies, surface surface hygiene and, you know, not touch sanitation, that we could support the process of preventing the spread in conjunction with watching the statistics, because at that time, I think we only had a couple of cases in Castle Pines, and even so, we still have less than ten, I think.

So I think without belaboring you, the additional statistics that are swimming in my head that are relevant and other facts, that's that's what I can share.

Robert: Thank you for the update. Thank you for everything. I guess we'll leave it there, but there's obviously a lot more and there's people on both sides. But if they're approaching any conservatively and putting our businesses in jeopardy, that might be. But we'll leave that for other people. Thank you for expounding upon that.

Deborah: That is a grave concern for our business owners.

Chuck: Deborah, thank you for sharing the city's information with the board. I appreciate that, and it's nice to get some clarification and hopefully eliminate rumors and innuendos are out flying around. I have one question, and it's really a clarification primarily for me, because I don't think I wrote it down fast enough as you said it, but you mentioned something about in moving property around and assembling the parcels that there was, I can't even find it. Compensation for dedication of land. Explain that to me. I'm not sure I understood what what you really meant by that.

Deborah: Sure. To be specific. In the southeastern portion of Legae Road, there are several portions there referred to by PA numbers for planning area, so PA 12 and PA 13 were previously dedicated as parkland or city land, and they were moved around once before, and I say moved around in the most casual sense. There was thoroughly that had public process and a double lotus in city hearings and whatnot through planning Commission as well as city council.

The the decision that was recommended and accepted by city Council was that the park dedication on the east side of Legae for PA 12. So that would be the strip between I-25 and Legae Road, was not as much of a utility to the community when considering the other park dedications that we had most specifically there, there is Elk Ridge Park, which is nearby and in close proximity.

There's a pocket park dedication in the two neighborhoods, which are on either side of Chase Lane. And also there was a very large.

There was a very large debt, not a dedication, but a rezone, and more or less a grant by the canyons owner to the city of a parcel that's on the very northeast north eastern side of the canyons by the reservoir for a large public reserve, which we hope to have more or less as a nature, natural or nature preserve.

And that's in addition to all of the other open space preserves in that area, as well as the trail dedications and open space dedications that we normally require in which are required in the Castle Valley and the other areas within legacy. And so our trails plan, which you'll see in a couple of months, would connect all the trails throughout and then also make sure that people can go to every other park.

And so the other component of this casual use in my term, moving about of the parcels, came from the owner of the other part, parcel near 12, that had a difficulty with developing that as a commercial property. And when he received or that party received an opportunity to develop it with a fair amount of low density but multi multi-unit housing, not a big condo complex, but a smaller size, then that would fit more within the residential preferences that the preferences for residential development in our community, while still allowing us to have some commercial development in this parcel that we would have up here and thus allow us to keep the business area in the same general vicinity, so that once everything is completed, one would have a more or less contiguous business zone from this beginning area by leg, all the way through in the canyons, because that's where this own business theory is there to it's mixed use. So six lots were created out of what used to be fewer, and one of them is somewhat unusual developable because of the power lines.

And that would more or less probably become parking of some sort, or just nature developed a natural developed looking area, but the rest of it would be commercial. And of course, we would want to make we're very cognizant of making sure that the traffic flow is appropriate and that it's safe, but we also want it to make sure that we didn't have somebody come in and buy the whole thing and build like A 6, 5 story office building, which, to be quite honest with you, was permitted on that parcel for decades and is zoned for that.

So sometimes when an opportunity comes forward, it should be looked at seriously. And when a applicant comes forward in requests a zoning change, that sometimes is an opportunity for the city to say, maybe there can be an adjustment that suits what our residents need and what our residents are asking for. So I hope that fairly answers your question.

Chuck: Great detail. I did understand that I don't want to prolong it, but I'd like to circle back around. You stated that through these dedications, the city received compensation.

Deborah: Oh yes, sorry about that. So because the property was dedicated to the city, this gets a little complicated because the the property, the properties and parcels in question were not always owned by the same entity. And so there were some transactions between them. But essentially when the property is dedicated to the city, it would be city owned. And so when the city gives it up, we're not going to give it up for free. So more or less, that's how it happened then.

Chuck: Is it the city's plan to use those funds to help construct the municipal building that you're hoping to approve and develop on the same ground? Yes. Yes.

So I guess as a taxpayer, you would tell me that no taxpayer money was used to build the municipal building?

Deborah: That's a very broad question because, you know, any any taxpayer you're asking a lawyer to if it's a taxpayer money, you paid the taxes at some point somewhere once it's in our budget. Right. And then at some point somewhere there, money got reserved. I know I can. So I'm going to be perfectly frank with you that we're cognizant of that it's always taxpayer money.

We we care about that. But is there new tax dollars. No. And what we're doing now and the reason why we wanted to move forward with the design professionals is to make sure that if we're going to do this, we can do it within our budget. And so what we have to do is figure out, okay, if we need a city hall, what do we need?

What needs to be secure, etc., and what offices do we need and allow for public meeting space, etc. And nothing out of the ordinary and nothing too fancy. And then how much is it going to cost? And then the finance guy goes and figures out, do we have enough money for that? And if we don't, then we make some adjustments.

But I can share with you that there is a strong view that we use funds that are available already.

Chuck: Thank you. I do understand it better. Now, the proverbial question I'm sure you're going to hear the mayor is going to hear, we're going to hear with the funds that are now there, why don't we use them to fix our roads?

Deborah: Two reasons. Without getting into, you know, pointing fingers. There was never an opportunity to repave Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch on our current city budget, no matter how you sliced and diced it. And the idea of waiting to make a painful decision, or being afraid of what the public thought of that, I think that time has passed, and the public really feels strongly about this being a priority, and there are others who feel the same.

And so we are moving forward with that. We have staff who knows how to get it done. We're in a good financial position to be able to get the best rates, and the market is suited for that, for whatever financing would be necessary. Is it difficult to ask the taxpayers on a ballot for something at this time? We are really cognizant of that, and it's painful, and we're going to be asking our citizens what they think of that before we take the undertake the cost of doing it.

Chuck: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Robert: Just like to follow up on that. First off, there's maybe other things that could be considered. There's other options out there that might be looked at such as this building is used once a month by us and it's maybe should be looked at as well as we proceed to the future with what is going on as well. And if I understood you correctly, there was probably 2 or 3 parcels on that Legae property, which was split into six properties, so three of them could be sold off to give the city money. Is that am I reading that correct?

Deborah: That's generalizing it a bit, but essentially. Right. So.

Robert: In a nutshell, it was 2 or 3. Two. It was two made into six. Let's sell off 4.

Deborah: Oh 3 to 6. It was 3 to 6 and then two to the city okay.

Robert: But that's generally what happened. And they just split it so they could okay. Yeah. Excellent.

Deborah: But to answer your question about the considerations for other options for city council. So the lease is up in several years. And so it behooves us to look at things in advance. And so was the footprint and structure of this facility that we're in now considered. It most certainly was. But as it sits now and I don't know what the detail of the discussions were, and I know that you're undergoing your own transaction and preparation as well.

But the the specific structure of this facility is doesn't meet the needs of the city hall for the growing city that we wish to accommodate. In other words, there aren't enough actual offices. There are. The actual physical number of offices is fewer than what we have over in our current facility, and we had to rent space to accommodate the offices that we need for permitting and building inspections and the like.

And we have some sharing going on in what used to be our reception area. So we need more offices than you have here. In addition, there's a very strong desire to have a proper courtroom and our and to have a proper bench and a secure bench and a secure facility for a judge. So that's a fact factor as well.

So there's a number of other things. But those are the biggies.

Robert: Okay. Understanding that. But maybe for less than 5 million they could do a nice little addition to what they need on this property again. But there's other options that might be explored.

Deborah: They they were other properties, other buildings rent and the like. Without getting into detail, I think of a board member who might share with you the rent figures that are available. But as far as whether or not this building is available, it's unclear whether or not this building would be available, and I think I'd have to leave that to the managers. Whether or not that sort of thing has been discussed.

Robert: Okay. Excellent. Thank you.

Chris: I'm sorry. More questions. Deborah, you're doing a fine job.

Deborah: Well. I'm a question asker, so it behooves me to stand here and answer them. It's like payback extraordinaire so.

Chris: Good job. First, you mentioned the masses, the Masters Association, the disillusion. You guys are having a vote on something. And my question is, I thought the only thing that was left over from both the city Council and from the metro district was for us to not have any claim to the assets so that they can, or the money so that the Masters Association could essentially just go ahead and finish up their transaction.

Deborah: As a strict it's not a concern as a strictly factual matter. The city council did indeed vote on that concern of the master association, that monies needed to be expressly rejected by the city in order, as a condition for the master association to dissolve. And we made that vote almost the months and months ago, and many thought that was it.

However, at a meeting of the Master Association board, they approved a plan of dissolution, and that plan of dissolution included an additional condition on the part of the two public entities in town, that being this entity in the city requesting as a condition a hold harmless agreement. And that's about all I can summarize it as, and that a condition was presented to the city with the other condition of rejecting payment, and a formal request was made, and the product of that will be voted on on the 28th.

Chris: Thank you very much,

David: Deborah, just as a follow up to that, and I may have the cart before the horse, but the district, as you mentioned, was presented with the same type of document where we have and Council is prepared to bring this entity up to speed and report on that during this meeting.

But it still dumbfounded me, and it may you as well why we would be asked, without there being any formal relationship with this entity, to waive any of these potential claims and and whether during or after the possibility of disillusion. But what comes to mind and the question is, is does your waiver contemplate the $75,000 that you guys took from the master association before this issue came before us jointly? Is is that part of the holdup? Is that why how this whole thing. Maybe got started? You're aware of that $75,000 payment?

Deborah: If I understand. Yeah. I understand you correctly. It was not a payment. It was a promise. A what? It was. Well, it wasn't even a promise. It was not a payment. If you're referring to the $75,000 which the Master HOA board approved in I believe 2017 as a, as a contribution to the city for signage and wayfinding and gardens and the like.

David: Don't know much about it. Rather, when the conversation begun and and there was some inference made to the district of their desire to or their unwillingness to accept the money, as if we were asking to take the money and be stewards of it. Let me be perfectly clear. We look to abolish what had run its course and albeit in, in, in and in fine fashion, did they deliver their products and services early on.

It just they had run their course and thereby ability had diminished significantly in the city. And the district agreed to that. But.

The district, different than the city, also pursued the return of all of those levy dollars from the residents back to the property owners. And so this issue of of those dollars being given or distributed to the sub association was, was the second best alternative, I guess, that came to the forefront and, and was discussed. And while I don't understand how the master association can remove themselves from, from being out of compliance with state statute in that regard and putting the sub in a likewise situation, wanting or not wanting again, the $75,000 was something that had not been received by the city.

May have been an action, as you were stating sometime earlier, but it seemed to be a mess of of the entire conversation of a clear, transparent and honest accounting of all of that money. Have you is your waiver contemplate that payment? And is that one of the conditions that you guys have had to acknowledge?

Deborah: To my understanding, I did well. I did request and review the initial request that was made by the master association to the city. That figure was not mentioned.

It is not mentioned as well in anything I've seen since, but our package and counsel, legal counsel analysis has not yet been presented. I will ask the question, of course, what I can tell you from my review of materials and being present at certain meetings of the Master Association, was that the there was $75,000, which was which the board voted to give to the city for that purpose.

And there were two there was some signage and a project to make new entryway and a small pocket park over by the fire station, and that money was never provided. It fell off the budget of the master association. In subsequent years, a request was made by me as to whether or not that was still under contemplation, and I did not receive an answer.

The city also made a request and did not receive an answer, and the plan for the small pocket park and that it was based upon, was abandoned because it was done under a prior administration. And the city council, which approved it, apparently didn't realize that it was not fully planned out. It was done by like a landscaper or something like that.

And then when the city decided to have a broader view of how the city might be portrayed at its entryways and to have a consistent look at its entryways, a different plan was developed and conceived. And while there is no funds expended other than to plan that so that developers and anyone coming in to do work in the city is aware of that design and must comply with those general design concepts, there's no plan to use money and go do something with it. And so as far as the city was concerned, over a year ago, that money was not coming to the city's way. That was just an abandoned resolution. I'm not sure how the master association dealt with it, and I'm going to refrain from my my personal perspective on that.

But again, it was those that resolution and intention stated by virtue of that resolution never materialized into a payment and has not been made a part of what's been asked of the city at this time.

But I will mention it to make sure that there isn't a concern about it. I don't think that anybody envisions that money coming our way to the city. It was forgoing foregone well over a year ago, well over a year ago. And I can say there are no contracts between the master association and no intergovernmental agreement, which is a contract between the master association.

David: It just seemed like the totals used in the correspondence from the master association may have been light that promise to the city or that commitment, that action by their board. And if it was great, if it was a part of of this waiver that they're asking you as they asked us for, I'm here to tell you it wasn't a part of our waiver.

And council has worked that with their council to a point where I think the action this evening will reflect that we're in in in concert with their proposal to dissolve completely with that one condition. And I think we're in a position to meet that. And I'm hoping that come the 28th is at the 28th, that you'll act on that, that you will be in the same position and we can once and for all put this behind us.

Deborah: But it's my understanding that the City Council majority would be in favor of dissolution. I cannot speak to the content of the nature of the whole harmless agreement and request because of my conflict of interest, nor to my knowledge of anything in that regard. I can only speak to the fact of what was requested and what will be on the table, and there are no figures in it.

We may our entities may have been asked different things, so I'm quite interested as a few others and what this entity was asked to do and would vote to do. But I think in terms of supporting the dissolution and not accepting the balance of the funds which are in the cash account, cash accounts of the master association, I think our bodies are in agreement.

David: Well, that's good to know.

Deborah: I'm sorry I have to be legal about that. And I know Mr. Seter understands.

David: That's fine. I, just wanted to make sure there were no impediments, no hurdles that were too large before which time. That final action has taken on both the district and the city's part. We both worked long and hard on what I think is very fruitful, as we all strive to find funds to, to dedicate to our priorities. So job well done. Chris, anything else?

Chris: The the city is providing testing for the COVID 19 on the 20th, 22nd?

Deborah: 22nd Wednesday morning. At 9:00? Yes.

Chris: How do we how did we put that out to the community? This is good stuff. I'm just I haven't heard this. And normally I have some folks in my neighborhood that likes to I hear all the good stuff and the bad stuff.

So yeah, there's several there's several mechanisms by which it was distributed. And what I can suggest is if you go to the city website, to the place where it says sign up for updates, it might be a matter of putting in a new email address or, you know, regarding on whatever list there is now to whatever list serve it is.

But it was put out through the normal mechanisms by which we put out our news and notes in the mayor's message and the like.

Chris: Well, I appreciate that, and I want to thank you guys for doing that.

Deborah: We're happy to do it. And it's because of the CARES act funding. So thank your legislators.

Describer: Deborah walks away from the podium and takes her seat. The camera pans to the board.

David: Thank you again. Appreciate the report. Appreciate taking our questions comments and taking them back to your colleagues as warranted. Thank you. All right. We will close item number six. Open up the open space Managers report. Everyone has got a copy of that. Craig is in attendance. Are there any. Craig.

Describer: The camera pans to Open Space Manager Craig Miller.

Craig Miller, Supervisor, Parks, Trails, and Open Space, CPNMD: If I could report first a little bit further golf cart situation because it was my employee Natalio, that caught them dragging the ball diamond with our equipment and he held them as they started to leave the ball diamond leave Coyote Ridge Park. He held them by the basketball court, called me and says, call the sheriff. I did so, met him out there, helped hold the kids until they were there. One of the kids says he doesn't even live there.

The kid who drives the golf cart and he changed his story. Of course, once the deputy showed up because he is a resident there. By the way, it is illegal in Douglas County per the sheriff. Deputy Chad Davey is the gentleman I dealt with. It's illegal to use any kind of motor vehicle on our trails or sidewalks. Period.

End of story. Even these motorized bikes that you see out there, they are illegal for the Douglas County Sheriff's website. But that's the least of our problems. The golf course is a real problem. This has been bedeviling me for two years. That red golf cart just drive me absolutely BS crazy, I'll tell you. And it's like basically gnat saw them dragging it, saw the call to dust, got pissed.

He had warned them two times before. He was very nice about it. I wouldn't have even given him two warnings, but this time he held him. The sheriff's deputy showed up, actually got Ahold of the kid's mom. The kid's mom said, oh yeah, I called the Metro district two years ago and they said it was fine, which is why we bought the golf course.

No, they didn't talk to me. They didn't talk to anybody here, Jim Worley or Jim Nickel. So that was crap right there. The mom got a little bit uppity with the sheriff, and the sheriff said, look, ma'am, you're going to leave. Your kids are going to leave the golf cart here in the parking lot at Cody Ridge. They will take the keys with them.

You will rent a trailer or find a trailer and a truck to haul it back home with you. If I know where you live now, I have your contact info. If I ever see this thing out on the roads again, it will be impounded. That stopped it right there. So it's been what, three weeks now I think. All quiet.

So very thrilled with with Nat taking the initiative to grab the kid kids. And I mean, they were a little bit smart mouthed initially, but once the sheriff showed up, they were still smart mouths. They just didn't care. But the sheriff basically was very kind to them and very polite and professional and and I think put a little fear of losing that vehicle in the mom.

So that was that was one thing. Did you need me to go over my report in any detail, any questions that you have? I mean, one of the things that I really want to give props to Natalio about was removing the 38 trees saved us, actually did some calculations, say it was closer to $7,000? I just got my bid from my tree contractor on the remaining large trees and stubs and stumps, and that's about $10,000.

So it almost cut our budget. You know, half of our tree budget was saved by his work there. He hired a couple of Broken Arrow landscapes guys to be his ground men, because I won't let him operate a chainsaw without people on the ground around him and worked out really well, along with a rented stump chipper. But, you know, Nat and David both took the initiative and said, hey, why don't we do this?

I said, Nat, you up for it? He goes, yep. And he's got brand new climbing equipment that he's been itching to use. So we've got him up in the trees and he did very, very well. So I was very pleased with that.

David: I have just a couple items if you would. Sure. The board and and Jim have talked about at length and you've prepared an incredibly detailed memorandum and, and plan, if you will, for transferring the entryways to the sub dissociation or the association hose, individual hose articulating how many of those that are currently being taken care of by, i.e. the power and the water and the maintenance by the district versus the majority of them by the the individual hose.

That being said, there's 21 HOAs that fall under our budget, if you will. And and while we are ever so close to pulling the trigger on capturing that missing revenue to the district, for the water that is is utilized at those entryways.

Are there any additional concerns, as you recall, that well, detailed plan, a memorandum that we should be concerned about?

Craig: You do recall that it's not just the entryway that's hooked up to our irrigation, but it's all the turf fronting Monarch and Castle Pines Parkway. I mean, if you want to just turn the entryways over to the HOAs, as I noted in that report, we're going to have to break apart a lot of the irrigation and the electrical, which is going to be a major expense.

But, I mean, it's not just a simple thing as saying, hey, here's the entryway, you guys take it. It's the entryway, plus all this turf that goes to the next neighborhood entry on either side. So that's a consideration that you need to take into account.

David: And appreciate that as we get our arms fully around that and begin to pursue some equitable resolution within the city. For both the district and those hose, it has been a concern to the tune of 11.5% of the revenue that was not realized last year, in 2019 alone, for the water that was developed and never delivered. So it it's an issue that we need to bring to some resolution.

And if you'll be so kind as to review that information, I, I remember it was a million for that. The sub hose were the hose would have to be prepared to to commit to splitting their individual obligations, but again creating parity with all hose and not just some. The districts was significant. We're coming on to budget season, and I'd like to be in a position where you're making a recommendation for the upcoming budget to include work along those lines.

Craig: Okay. So in other words, you would be looking at us separating the irrigation systems or paying for a separating the irrigation systems from the entryways.

David: I'd be looking for your recommendations. And and in concert with Jim's guidance and direction as well. Okay. Also. I don't know if anyone else, any of my colleagues are. You had gotten a postcard in the mail recently. This is a postcard that reads Protection and Peace of Mind. It's a it's a firefighter and fighting that looks like to be a wildfire. Well, this is from State Farm Insurance and they're talking about a wildfire defense system.

Inclusion now for all homeowners. And I'm guessing that they blanketed this, this area for what transpired here a few weeks ago. And thank God Almighty that it did not include any loss of life. But it brings to mind, Craig, what we had talked about last year, and that was House Bill 19-1050, where the state was gone and played some significant legislation to support some of the xeriscaping and drought tolerant.

Craig: The xeriscaping. Yep, yep. And basically all that is, is that's a refinement of the bill that was passed back in 2005. I believe that clarified some of the language. It's pretty much the same as as it has been. In other words, that HOAs cannot prevent you from doing water efficient landscaping, and they actually encourage it from that standpoint.

So I think that the wording in that bill a lot stronger than what the original bill was, which I've been hanging on my head on since 2005, and I've actually got a lot of hose to see the light and approved people's xeriscapes, you know, in their front yards. I make it clear to all the residents that are interested in this, and we have quite a few in this community.

Contact me all the time. You must submit a plan to your HOA and it must be a professional plan, not something drawn up on a napkin. And so far I haven't heard any complaints from HOAs on some of these things that have been approved. And I've I've actually visited with a few residents that have done these xeriscapes or changed their front yard in the blue grama, for instance, which is the state grass.

Colorado. My backyard is blue grama and I water it three times a year it stays emerald green. I went once a year. It doesn't take foot traffic, but it's green and it covers the ground. It keeps the weeds down. So. But yeah, I was very pleased with with that new bill because it did. The old bill had some wiggle room in it where basically it said your cannot require you to to use more than 50% turf.

That's what the original wording was. And so Hoa said, oh, we're going to use 49. We're going to require you to use 49% turf. But the language right after that on the original bill said, nor can they prevent you from doing any kind of water conserving landscapes. So this bill just clarified that and upped it a little bit, you know, to make it very clear that you can't really legislate against that.

David: Thank you for bringing us up to date. And I guess, first of all, I was not aware that it had actually passed. Last version I had gotten that we talked about was a red line version. And I think you were in, in, in, in, in agreement with what was being proposed. I just didn't have on benefit of a copy of that bill.

Craig: You know, I'm 99% convinced that it did pass because I pulled it up. I must have been a couple of months ago just to see what. And I didn't see anything that it was still under consideration. So I think it was passed last year.

David: Well, if you would, that would be great, because I think that it'd be important to contemplate, as we're considering this parody, that I'm advocating on the entryways, to have an option X.

Craig: Well, I mean, every single median island and every entryway that we maintain has been turned into a zero entryway. And in fact, we've lost a lot of plant material, as you well know. And that was a direct result of hard freeze in October, severe drought, January February, and a hard freeze in April. Those two hard freezes had 70 degree temperature drops.

It not only took out trees, but it took out tremendous amounts of our perennials. So my contractor this year, instead of doing new landscaping, he's replacing old plant material. As you can see on Castle Pines Parkway. I'm getting a lot of positive feedback, by the way, on next door, as well as residents calling in, saying, love what you're doing on the Parkway. You know, it's very colorful in that regard so.

David: Any opportunity to connect those dots, protect our community, protect the residents, save them. Money is what we're all about. We want to make sure that everybody is playing on a level playing field, and that it's equitable distribution of the assets within the district to all fairly. So those are the only two comments questions. Again, gear up. Remind yourself of that memo.

It was well done. Yep. Connect the dots with a copy of that bill for fear we have another opportunity to add some of your intellect in to the entryways of those landscapes as well, colleagues.

Chuck: Craig, it was nice to notice that the area along Monarch At Castle Parkway was finally finished.

Craig: Finally sorted. And we have tried that. We tried sorting it once, we tried seeding it twice, and every time we did it, some contractor drove up and just tore it up again.

Chuck: I'm breathlessly waiting for the next contractor to drive right down the middle of it. Is that next week or the week after?

Craig: If I if I catch him.

Chuck: Do we know?

Craig: He'll get an earful if I catch him.

Chuck: The serious question is who paid for it?

Craig: I believe we did. We didn't have any choice.

Chuck: I, I thought.

Craig: I was going to pay for it to.

District Manager Jim Worley: Yeah, well I didn't know that. And we'll talk to the city because I was told you're talking about monarch and. But yeah, I was told implicitly by Larry Nimmo.

Craig: That it was city was going to pay?

Jim: For it. Yeah. So I didn't realize it.

Craig: To the best of my knowledge, Jim, I think that it came out.

Jim: Well, we'll find out.

Craig: But it would be nice to be reimbursed because that was not our problem.

Jim: Well, he told me he's holding retainers until it's all done.

Craig: And Larry basically made the same commitment to me. He said, don't worry about it. We're going to take care of it in the spring. But it was actually our contractor that we had to get out there to do the siding because nothing was happening.

Jim: Give me the bill.

Chuck: Well, I think I think we needed to do it because nothing was happening. But I wanted to make sure that the contractor that messed it up, either the fiber optic or the street repair guys, are held accountable. Yep, you can put that on your list, Jim.

Jim: We will get the money back.

Craig: On my list as well.

Jim: Deborah was going to pay us in cash, but I'd rather get a check if that's okay.

Craig: Oh, one other comment I'd like to make here. Item six. Our Slow the Flow program, which ties in with what you're saying, is president regarding watching our our our water and and trying to get people to conserve this irrigation thing. It's the oddest thing. As of June 29th, our contract was 33% filled with 103 spots to left. The two weeks before, we had something like something like 97 slots.

So people have obviously canceled because they're concerned about the COVID thing or whatever. But now, as of last Friday, we are 90 spots left, 42% filled, and our guys out in the field bringing the fliers with them to try and push the program I'm posting on Next Door weekly. We're getting some feedback from that, but Resource Central and Boulder ministers of the program says, hey, your marketing is at par or better than most of the other communities that they're working with.

So we're getting there. I think that the real when the rubber meets the road is going to be when we start putting up water bills for June and July, when people realize, Holy crap, I'm spending way too much money to keep my lawn green, because this program generally saves people 30% on their irrigation costs in the summer. So any of you that haven't signed up, go for it. It's pretty educational. It's all I've got.

Jim: I just want to add one personal thing to to Craig. I know he hasn't been here lately, and some of the board meetings we talked about that COVID was part of it. He's about to go under the knife with some pretty serious surgery.

Craig: Only I've got cervical stenosis, which means that the area that your spinal cord is supposed to go through. It's pinching the spinal cord and it's causing considerable pain. It's like a nine out of ten.

Jim: So I bring it up to you because he's going to be going under the knife pretty soon. He's trying. August 11th. You've already got it set August 11th okay. And so he'll be working from home for a little while. But I just wanted you to know that. And so probably next month he won't physically be here. But but we'll be working together.

Craig: Yeah my surgeons telling me a two week recovery time. But from what I've heard with cervical fusion, which is basically what I'm getting done, it can run 4 to 6 weeks. I can't be out of work that long. So Jim, you and I need to talk about working from home or something like that.

David: The good news is you can see now. So.

Craig: Oh man, my people are great. That's right. An excellent shape. Both of those. And in fact, what was interesting, just a side story on that, I had the one I done in March and I was scheduled for two weeks later. Surgery center shut down. Six weeks later, I got a phone call saying, hey, would you like to be the first patient back to get your other eye fixed?

I'm going. Hell yes. Because I was tired of having one eye working in one eye. Not. And I figured the surgical center is going to be clean as a whistle. My surgeon's well-rested and 15 minute surgery. It's just amazing, you know, under a light and relatively painless. And it takes about a month, six weeks for your brain to figure it out. But I can see pretty much 20/20 on distance. I just need readers. Basically it. So.

David: Very good. Thank you for the report. Our thoughts and prayers with you. Thank you. During this upcoming surgery and recovery, look forward to your return. Thanks, Jim for that update. Anybody else for Craig? Hearing nothing. We'll close item seven and move on to the finance director's report. Eric, you have the floor.

Financial Director Eric Harris: Yes. Good evening. In front of you. Starting on page. Let's see page one of our standard packet. We have the June 30th financials. In my memo I just want to highlight a couple of different things. One, as many people know, the middle of June is the property tax deadline for commercial and residential property taxes. We are trending in line with prior years.

So with our distribution that we, the district received in July from June revenues. So we were 97.16 collected. So just on par like every other year in the past. So commercial payments didn't come in. Residential payments come in and we'll continue to see a little bit more of those trickle until they go to tax lean sale in the future. But we will receive all those revenues.

The district build a $592,000 in water service revenue, as well as the usage at the Ridge Golf Course. And looking at the graph below, under 2A, you can see usage. Billable usage for June was a 102 million gallons. So pretty high year. Pretty high month. Excuse me. In addition to more users on the system, because of all the development that's that has occurred, but it is significantly higher than June 2019.

So I just want to bring that to your attention. Continuing to monitor all the things we mentioned before, Jim and I were continually refining a lot of the projections that are in. We made updates from last, last month to this month. In addition, we are continuing to monitor financial impacts related to COVID. Nothing to report. After what I reported last month, the district did apply for funds through the Coronavirus Relief fund administered by DOLA.

So additional cleaning things of that nature. And so we'll get hopefully here in the next month or so. We should hear the results of that and see what allocation portion we are able to receive out of that. Continued projects and follow ups from the prior meeting. Continue to work on numerous different items. Some of these are carryover from prior year prior month.

Excuse me. We're continuing to work with CRS on billing and payroll there. There was some refinement that had to occur due to director McEntire. Thank you for raising that point on that AR report last month. There was some limitations with the report versus how it was ran, and how the closing process and the billings process is pretty detailed in nature, but overall it's getting rectified.

So that will continue to be resolved. So there's some support issues with the district utility system that Dawn with CRS is taken care of. So you'll see that update here. We have started our budget process a little bit of amendment on 4F. We started distributing budget worksheets today, and the rest of them to other departments should be distributed by tomorrow or the next day.

So we'll get underway with having those interviews and requests for appropriations for the 2021 calendar year. It's a few other updates we're getting. We're on well water for the summer. So we got we're off our interconnect delivery. So now what we're seeing is a high tick up of those utilities coming in. So we'll continue to monitor those as the guys in the field, continue to optimize those and only use pull well water when necessary to fill up the system.

And so they're in charge with optimizing that. But we'll, and Jim I'll work with him on that just to make sure our projections are still dialed in as we look towards fund balance towards the end of this year. Let's see on page 21 you'll see a cash position report. And on that report there is roughly a one moment.

You roughly have 921, $920,000 of restricted funds, out of a total cash balance of $47.6 million of utility and general fund cash. That's in the district's bank account as of July 8th, 2020.

Are there any questions? Detailed questions of the financial report? I'll certainly entertain those and answer those now, and I'm always available as well after this meeting.

David: Eric, did you say you were going to distribute a budget calendar?

Eric: I did since the last board meeting, but I will certainly recirculate that to you. So you have it.

David: You already sent it out? Yes. One of those nice color coded ones. Yes, sir. I'll be darned. I wonder if I threw that away today thinking it was the old one.

Eric: I will send it to your way.

David: Do you mind? Golly, thank you so much. Colleagues. Eric, you were going to, and you may have passed a ball to. to both council and and Jim, but I guess confirmed that you had finished your investigation and came up with nothing as it related to Castle Pines Foundation. That was something that you guys were following up on. Okay, good. And point of clarification in the financials, we have some lottery funds. What is a total amount of those that can be spent on open space parks and trails only? How much is that?

Eric: That is correct. So if looking on your cash position report as of today, we received the second quarter distribution. Good. And we have $282,000 in funds related to those CTF funds, conservation trust funds. Those are distributed by the state. It is a mix of state and federal dollars, watery as well as fishing license proceeds, hunting licenses and those have to be specifically for parks and open space, playground equipment, things of that nature.

The last project that the Metro district undertook was the recent two basketball courts and and some storm drainage improvements that occurred around that. That was the last major project that's occurred out of these funds. And so, yes, we do have to report on them annually. But yes, the district has been eligible for quite some time and just keeps those in a restriction restricted bank account.

And annually, what we do is we we appropriate to spend those as products come up in needs arise for the community.

David: The, is the conservation trust on trust fund on our spreadsheet sheet page six one and the same? Those quarterly revenues is that I mean is that what we're seeing?

Eric: Correct on the balance sheet? Yes, that is correct.

David: And and when it talks about the approach, the appropriation of same of those expenses, that appropriation is solely from those sources you've already itemized? Correct. Nothing we have to do internally?

Eric: Correct. Those are on page 11. You'll see a separate fund conservation trust fund. What you have simple revenues coming in which is a quarterly distribution investment earnings and then just the expense. So the only thing that the district or this board would have to do to utilize those funds is just contract and award bids associated with those.

David: Very good. Thank you. You may continue. Do you want to? Well, while considering the the financial audit, are you going to give us an audit presentation. Go ahead.

Eric: In front of you. You have the final 2019 financial audit prepared by RubinBrown. This is the same report that was presented last month, but this one's finalized. The opinion has been issued by the auditors. There might have been just a couple extremely minor things. And actually, I can't even recall what changed, if anything, from the draft. It's been reviewed several times by myself, other stakeholders involved.

And that was the draft was distributed to you all for review since the last board meeting. And so of this, what I'm doing is just bring this forward to to you as the board to approve, and we'll get this filed with the state and with the districts banks.

David: I'm glad you made that clarification because I could not find any changes either. And. What a what a piece of art it was again this year. Great job to you guys coordinating that RubinBrown. Awesome job. It was just their third year?

Eric: Yes I believe so.

David: So we're in for we're in for a new organization next year. And and maybe they'll come back three years after that. But in any case they did an outstanding job. Jim, great job staff wise CRS kudos to them as well. Couldn't be happier with the results. Couldn't be happier with with being given the opportunity to post these to our website, and, the commentary along with it. That commentary that we we still need to update that make sure that it's ready to go before posting given this final results. Is that true?

Eric: I am not aware of any other commentary. The district we have elected not to prepare what we call MD&A or management discussion or analysis that's not included in this draft. That's often the commentary that's bound by this. We don't currently have a narrative that we publish with our audit. We do do a couple narratives that I work in, in concert with, with one with Ken Smith on, and that's with the budget that we do.

David: With the state? Correct. Okay. That's the one I was referring to. Okay.

Eric: Nothing with this one though.

David: And while we make mention of that in that. I guess I guess until we file. Is that on the schedule as well when that's due?

Eric: This, this audit or the or the filing?

David: The filing with the state.

Eric: The filing is with the office of the State Auditor. It is at the end of July that it's due. And then what we call is the continuum disclosures are due to the bank 270 days after the end of the calendar year. So.

The what we can certainly do is provide a narrative for the website. But there's the document has to go to the office of the State Auditor as it stands and approves today.

David: Yeah. No, no, not asking for any more. Just commingling. The two filings and remembering the hard work that we put into or what was a lot of detailed work with all the things that were transpiring during the period we were working on that narrative for the website and for the state. So, okay, just wanted to make sure no one was holding you up. Okay.

Eric: Additionally, they have finalized their report to governance, which is a requirement for governments. And so what you will have is a document also with appendices attached to it, which have all their documentation, their analysis, as well as the representation letter signed by Jim and myself. And so with that, would just like to ask the board for its approval this evening.

David: Before anyone makes a motion in regard to approving the financial report. And the items from the finance director is given tonight, as well as the approving and ratification of the June 2020 payables and the financials or the audit itself. Are there any comments, questions or concerns of Eric while we have him on the line here?

Board-Voting All Speak: Okay. Hearing none, is there a motion or would you like for me to make that motion? Let me let me jump in and make that motion. We're going to talk about items nine and I make a motion nine, ten and 11. So I would like to make a motion to approve the 2019 financial audit prepared by the CPA firm of RubinBrown, presented in final format tonight, approved the financial report and the items from the finance director delivered from Eric this evening and in individual packages, and approving and ratifying the June 20th payables checks, number 25260 – 25355.

Those are dated June 5th through July 8th. You may recall there was a timing issue in our last report specifically to approve $76,956.79 and ratified $239,295.51, for a total of $316,252.30 from the General Fund and Debt Service enterprise funds approved $89,287.45, ratifying $510,677.59, for a total of $599,965.67(04). Those are enterprise funds and for electronic payments, all funds, excuse me, ratifying an additional $81,832.67 for total expenditures of $998,050.01.

Do I have a second? I'll second that motion.

I have a motion on the floor to approve items nine, ten and 11. We have a second. Is there any comments, questions or concerns? Further discussion from the board.

From the Finance Director, Council or district manager hearing? None from the group. When called upon, please indicate your affirmation with a yay, your dissent with a nay. Director Lowen. Yay! Director Merritt. Yay! And Director Lewis. Yay! Director McEntire is a yay. Items nine, ten, and 11 passed unanimously. Item number 12 is the Legal Council's report. Counsel, would you please bless us with your report tonight?

Legal Counsel Kim Seter, Esq.: I will do.

David: My good news is what that means.

Kim: It is all good news. Sorry, I'm losing my voice with this mask on. In your packet, you have the status report. There's only two items I wanted to point out. The first one is the second item, the fence resolution. I included a copy of the what we've been referring to as an easement attached to the report. The only reason I did that is because of the clarification that we had at the last board meeting.

That document can no longer be an easement. It needs to be a license. The only difference between an easement and a license is that an easement is a property interest. So before we were having them sign that they were taking accepting an easement, if they're not accepting it, it has to be a license. The license basically says you have the right to come onto our property for this one purpose, to fix the fence.

And if you don't do so, and then it goes on and has the same language as the easement, I brought that for execution tonight. But I wanted you to see it because it's a little different than what we talked about before.

The second item is at the top of page two, the Castle Pines Master Association dissolution, and you have a copy of the agreement in your packet. Miss Mulvaney had mentioned the contingencies that were in the resolution that the master association adopted. If you look at the first page of that agreement, items A through is a recital of those contingencies.

Item D states the first contingency with regard to the metropolitan district requires it to provide written confirmation that it will refuse to accept funds, proceeds and assets of the master association. The document then goes on to do that. Then item E, this was in their resolution. The second contingency in the proposal to dissolve is for the district to waive and hold the master Association and all of its related workers and entities harmless.

That one. I went back to them and said, we can't do that. We aren't going to hold anyone harmless under the Colorado Constitution. We don't even have the authority to hold a private corporation. Harmless. So when you look at the actual document on the second page, where in the top paragraph it says now that nothing in this document shall be deemed to be a holding harmless or an indemnification by the metropolitan district.

So those were the changes they made for us. I'm not sure if that's what the city is also seeking, but I'm satisfied with the document at this point.

David: Counsel, and not in order, of course, but in regard to this matter specifically, and not to belabor the point. Either specifically in the in the agreement in that second line, where the district is confirming the refusal to accept any distributions from the Master Association.

Again, it well, none was ever offered. Correct. And so I'm wondering, why is it such a big issue when, when when you know.

Could you elaborate add a little color to to that? It's just intriguing to me why we're affirming that we've refused to do it when none was offered. Is it just standard protocol?

Kim: It is. And it's more they're more interested in the waiver that you're not going to come back at some point and say, you have all these funds, we want our share or our cut of that. So you're just waiving any claim you have or had or may have in the future.

David: Okay. And we made that perfectly clear in our two point resolution that that was to go back to the property tax or the property owners. But yes, very fine. Back to that first item under the fence resolution. I knew you would figure that whole easement thing out and, and nice. Nice job. And it reads so good. But I have just a concern specifically in a couple of places as it relates to construction.

As you recall, the vast majority of that fence sits on the metro district property, and we wanted to make sure, as it is articulated in the resolution, if there was ever going to be reconstruction or excuse me, if there was ever going to be construction, not reconstruction, but construction of a new fence, that that would not be that would not be tolerated.

It would not be acceptable to the district to construct any more fencing on its property than what's already there to maintain it. Or as you've articulated and described in here, the reconstruction as well, to keep it in conformance with the design guidelines and health and safety aspects of of that whole fence. Can we strike in, in well, can we just strike the word construction, install and construction in that first paragraph that talks about the five feet?

Kim: Yeah, absolutely. It's your resolution or your easement or your license at this point.

David: You know, just if we can do that before we sign installing construct, take those out. And then in the following one sentence where it says, but only so long as the fence is and it would say reconstructed, then as opposed to constructed, it'd be reconstructed and not installed, but and maintained. So taking out or modifying, constructed into, reconstructed and taking out, installed and then at the very bottom, very, very bottom that word construction again reconstruction is is great.

And we advocate that the homeowners continue to take care of that fence. But those were the only things that I saw otherwise. Again, it was the answer we've been waiting for. And it's something that we can probably inside of July. Even so, record you have all the information from Jim that you needed.

Kim: Yep. Okay. It's all attached here.

David: Fantastic. Nice. Nice job. And Jim, you're good with, you're still comfortable with the matters associated with the Legae improvements and and those pumps and the timeliness of that and the fact that the warranty period has not started yet. And by the time we get that all done, we should probably memorialize what was and what is, so that I have to believe they're going to ask for, as a byproduct of all of that, something to be memorial memorialized as well, that the board to period begins. So when it does, it does. But let's make sure that that document has enough information in it to expound on what we've been through and what they did and where we're at and where we're going and.

Jim: Absolutely, we will. Thank you for your support in that. Appreciate it.

David: I don't have any other comments. Kim. Great report. And again, it was laced with good news. Thank you so much colleagues. Anything for Kim? We'll close item 12 and.

Kim: Mr. Chairman, I think you've got a motion to approve the agreement with regarding the master association.

Describer: Chris asks a question off-mic.

Kim: No, it's the license that only needs to be signed.

David: So we want to make a motion on. Item three, if you will. And that is a motion to approve the agreement waiving claims against the master association concerning its dissolution. Correct.

That's my motion. Is there a second? We have a second on the floor to sign an agreement, waving the claims against master association and consenting to its dissolution. Any further discussion, comments, concerns, questions by anyone.

Good job. I thought you were going to just make sure Councilwoman Mulvey was was still here. There she is. You heard that, didn't you?

And we're looking forward the same good news from the city as well. Thanks to everyone in that regard. And and truly thank you to the board of directors of the Master Association, current and past. They did an outstanding job in in the early days and and as we wind things up, I just want to make sure that there's no misunderstanding, that there's never been anything personal. It's all been a professional effort. And in the spirit of of being fiduciary, responsible to the residents of Castle Pines. And we appreciate the opportunity to do your business. Thank you again for job well done. Directors and district finance director, Council and Miss Mulvey.

Right. Item number 13, district manager report. Jim.

Jim: I'll start with one that I forgot to put on the agenda. You recall last month that the Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce was here to discuss, and she followed up with some information I forwarded on to you. So I would ask that the board address, that particular request. You might recall, the budget amount is $10,000. They're wanting it all, obviously.

And so if you're ready to make that motion or to move forward or have a discussion on it, I'll leave it up to you.

David: You know, I she did get back to us as we requested, but it was it was packaged or canned information that she got back to us on things that they had worked on, which didn't make any of them wrong, but they weren't specific as I thought our request was. So I'm thinking that we might borrow a page out of the the city's handbook and and create a resolution that helps guide and direct the use of our funds. If we were going to be inclined to, to make that distribution to them or contribution, I know they need the funds sooner than later. We know that the use of those funds are constructive to all of our businesses. We just want to make sure that they are.

And I have been in receipt for the last two years of the resolution that the city has passed, and I thought they were both done very, very well. So let's work on that. Jim, over the course of the next 30 days, albeit he's going to be on vacation, extended vacation, not because of his injury.

As he it started out because of that, but we called him on it just for everyone's edification here. Jim's going to be off starting Friday, July 24th through Monday, August 3rd. He's going to take vacation. And it's with that that a little bit before, a little bit after. We can address that chamber issue and see if we can't bring it to a vote this next August. If you'll convey that to that young lady, that would be great. I think my colleagues and I would will be able to be prepared for that, if that's okay. Okay.

Jim: Well, thank you. And alluding to my vacation. I know this is going to sound weird, but I'm going to Florida. I'm not going to Texas where I have family. I'm not going to Arizona, I'm not going to California, but I am going to Florida. And for what it's worth, Mr. President came back when I had sent in the email requesting it. It came back and he says, you know, that's okay with me, but you're going to have to talk to your employees, especially when you come back, which was the appropriate thing to say.

And so at my staff meeting this past week, I did I said, here's what I'm doing, here's where I'm going. I'm going to be staying in a in a time chair we have right on the beach in a small community. So I'm not going to Miami or any of those while I am flying down, so I did I posed that question to to my staff.

I says I can do one of two things when I come back. I said, number one, I can self-quarantine myself and stay at home and I can work with our IT people, you know, to try to get access to that. And I was serious when I was saying this. I'd be happy to do that. But then, then they actually said, you know what, Jim?

We are not on top of each other in this office. You know, we've been open the whole time, except we had the door locked. And so they said, if you would be good when you come back and during the first two weeks that you're back and I'll be back in the office August 3rd, you quarantine yourself in the office.

In your office, in there. If you come out to do something, you wear your mask, you self clean, whatever I may touch. And I says I'm absolutely fine with that. And if anybody and I'm serious when I tell them that if anybody is uncomfortable with it, I'll figure out a way to stay home. So you don't have to be subjected to that.

But it was a serious conversation that I had with them, and they were okay with me self-quarantining in my office. And so if you want to come see me, you'll have to have your temperature.

Chuck: Jim, have you have you invested in a complete hazmat suit? Just just. Just asking.

Jim: That's a good point, Councilman. I'll be happy to do that.

But thank you for allowing me to take a little time off. This is every year at the port and time with my family. And it's the most important thing personally to me is my family and my faith. But but we'll be down there wallowing on the beach in an area that is pretty small. And actually it's Volusia County, which is south of Daytona Beach, and I have been checking their health department website pretty close to every day just to see.

And they're very similar to what we have, where you mask six foot and everything else. So thank you for allowing me, I appreciate that.

Robert: I hope you have fun on that trip and hope you're taking Southwest Airlines, which is the only airline that has the center seats open still for social distancing, but have a good trip.

Jim: I wish I would have known that because I've already paid for the. Is that right? I want to follow up on on the communication between us and the city. And and it's interesting. The day after last month's board meeting, as I was driving in Castle Pines Parkway, I get a call from Larry Nimmo. He says, Jim, what went on at your board meeting last night? And I said, well, you tell me, what do you.

He said, we need to communicate more. I said, absolutely, great idea. And so I actually pulled off and set outside the library with Larry and visit with him a little while. But I now have a meeting set up every month with Michael Penny and I. We had one week before last, I believe it was, and I also have a meeting every month with Larry Nimmo, Public Works director, and so we're keeping that communication.

I'll bring Craig with me on probably a number of those meetings that I have with Larry. But but that communication is is very important and I appreciate your comments. And so we're moving forward to have those on a regular basis more often if we need to. If there's some issues going on, then we'll we'll make more of those meetings.

So the last item that I want to just kind of share with you is the current status of the Parker study. In my report, I indicated to you that the boots on the ground effort, the information that's being handled through Jacobs Engineering, was supposed to actually have been presented to Parker on the on the 13th, which was a week ago today.

I got an email late Friday after I'd already sent this out to you and and that hadn't been sent out yet. I fully anticipate it's going to be this week. They just needed an extra week. So that would be the next step. And we'll we'll continue to talk. So there's really nothing else other than I told you that they have allowed us to have one of their employees to help take, take the effort that Marty had before he moved.

And that is working out just absolutely great. The young man is named Wayne Smith. Very sharp individual, a young guy, probably in his lower 30s, really young as far as I'm concerned. But according to my conversations I've had with Corey and Nathan periodically, he has picked up things and done an excellent job. He's already working on call by himself, but of course they're available if they need anything.

So my personal thanks to Parker for for giving us the good man to to work with us on that did a good job. So I'll, let's see if there's anything else I'll address. Any questions you may have.

Couple follow ups, Jim. What's a status of that MOU that we were working on between Castle Pines Metro and ourselves in an effort to confirm that the 2004 Chatfield H2O rights making them absolute now that we're storing. You touched on that last week, and I know that we sent a memo their direction. Have we gotten there? There is.

Jim: No we haven't we haven't gotten that. And actually this year I just talked with Gina Burke, who accounts for all of our water rights. And she said this year, because of the drought and what have you. We don't have any 04 water rights going down and getting to Chatfield. So we have our Hawk Hocking, which is constant and it's absolutely a top priority.

And then the other is what effluent continues to go down the river once it passes the golf course that we pump up to. So I don't have that other information.

David: Yeah, at some point, given the opportunity to cut off the the funding for the conditional rights and make them absolute, I know that you and Austin were in favor of that, and I was just wanting to follow up. So if if we could get comments back, I thought it was well vetted when when it went over there.

Hate to lose that momentum. The other thing was the CP Foundation. Before you and Kim get out of here, Eric, through you under the bus. Where we at on that?

Jim: I'm going to, throw council, I mean, our legal council under the bus. I know nothing about it either. And I'll pass it on to Kim because he's the one that's really been doing more research from a legal standpoint.

Kim: And I'll confess, I haven't done anything. But we'll get there. I know it needs to be done.

David: Just to clean up item. Right. You know, if it got on the report that that would be enough.

Kim: I'll add it on there.

David: That's it. Thank you so much. Appreciate that. I'm sure that it's something that we can address later. But that's all I had. I think that's it. Again, if there is anything that myself or my colleagues can do in your absence, feel free to call on us and we'll help out when, if and where we can. Otherwise, I think that given the staff that you've surrounded yourself with and our stable of consultants, go have a good time and relax.

Jim: I appreciate that. And like I said last year, and I tell my staff every time, while I love not to have to do any work, you know, my position is important enough to where I do need to be able to be reached if I do have an issue going on. So so you guys know it too. I certainly have my cell phone with me, except I don't walk up and down the beach with my cell phone.

It's in my condo. I check it a couple of times a day. If there is a need to reach me, please don't hesitate. I'd much rather you do that than say, well, I didn't want to bug you, but outside of that, then I'll be fine. Not having to look at my phone at all. But I do check it every day a couple of times, just in case there is an issue that I need to address and be happy to do that.

Same thing with all of you. If you have a question for me, don't hesitate to shoot me a text. Probably the easiest thing, to be honest with you, because I can see the text pop up on my phone. Thank you.

David: I misspoke. I have one more thing in your meetings with Penny. Would you be so kind as to broach the subject, discuss the process, if any, where when the city contemplates any type of amendments to the zoning that are currently in place, or any parcel within the district service area that has not already been zoned, that you guys speak of that before, which time they take action on it. You know what I'm getting at?

We have certain situations, and I'm prayerful that the amendment to the Legae ranch plan development that was approved to allow additional single family attached homes, this was done at the end of last year, and that amendment allowed for an addition of up to 187 single family attached homes. I just want to make sure that we're we together. The city and the district aren't promising something that we can't deliver, right.

And I think that there's a void there. I think there's an opportunity to to miss something. And I would hate to to be a party to that. So we talked about already no more will serves without some additional or at least board sign off on that. And and of course a board. And you would not do that without consultation with our engineer group and council because they are finite in nature. Same thing with these reasons, right?

Do not I have not seen to this moment an application come before the district that contemplates a up zoning, and I think we've got to make sure it just doesn't happen. Remember that just to give you a a line if you will.

While Deborah was talking about some of the transactions going on in this area, you may recall that as a byproduct of the work that we've done for budgeting with Bartles and Wells, the work that we've done with Nathan and our GSI work, GIS work, I mean, a lot of activity. It's the only part that we have really that is ambiguous yet.

But the number that we the number that we passed on to our colleagues in the study was 812. Okay. If it's going to change again, let's just make sure we can do it before we tell somebody that we can. So enough said. Okay. Thank you for that. And let us know how that conversation goes. And and if there was a process I'm unaware of, wouldn't shock me, but I'd sure like to know.

And if not, if we could establish one fairly quickly so we don't get caught flat footed. Thanks, Jim.

I'm going to close the director's items. Number 14 would open it up for public comment, but the only participant that we have tonight on, fortunately for us is Councilwoman Mulvey. And she used up all of those three minutes lot.

Thank you again, Councilwoman, for being here. We really appreciate your report today. I have no further business if anyone else does. Hearing none. A motion to adjourn.

Board-Voting All Speak: Second. Chris has a motion on the floor to adjourn. Lauren jumps ahead of the hearts with a further curt with a second. All those in favor signify by saying I jointly.

I.

Any opposed hearing? None. Motion carries unanimously. The meeting adjourned. Thank you.

Describer: Meeting adjourned. Thank you for watching.