Board Meeting
September 22, 2025
Transcript
Describer:
Board Meeting Agenda Monday September 22nd, 2025, at 6:00p.m. 7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108
I. Welcome. Call meeting to order. Pledge of Allegiance.
II. Roll call. Determination of quorum. Disclosure of potential conflicts.
III. Public comment period. (Three-minute maximum per person).
IV. Consent Agenda: The items listed below are a group of items to be acted on with a single motion, second and vote by the Board to expedite the handling of limited routine matters. The Board has previously received information on these matters and/or discussed them at a prior study session. Any board member may move an item from the consent agenda to the meeting agenda at this time.
A. Ratify claims for payment including check numbers 29317 – 29356and electronic payments issued from August 14th, 2025 to September 9th, 2025 totaling $1,246,538.25
B. Consider: approve Deputy District Manager Position
C. Consider: approve PCWRA Bond Repayment Intergovernmental Agreement
Proposed Motion: I move to approve the items as presented in the consent agenda dated September 22nd, 2025.
V. Consider: Approve Monday September 22nd, 2025, board meeting agenda Proposed Motion: I move to approve the board meeting agenda dated September22nd, 2025
VI. Finance Director's report. Molly Janzen
A. Finance Report Overview
VII. Legal Counsel's Report.
VIII. District Manager’s Report
A. Discussion: Well failure updates.
B. Discussion: Board Work Session format.
C. Discuss and Consider: Kennedy Jenks Castle Pines Parkway Waterline Replacement Phase 2 Proposal for Engineering Services. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Kennedy Jenks Waterline CastlePines Parkway Phase 2 waterline replacement proposal for engineering services.
IX. Director’s Matters.
X. Adjourn.
Board President Jason Blankaert:
Good evening and welcome to the Castle Pines North Metropolitan District. This is Monday, September 22nd for our board meeting at 6 p.m. We'll begin the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
All:
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.
Jason:
Thank you. Yeah.
We're getting that echo.
Jason:
While they're working on that, we'll go ahead and close out item number one and move on to item number two. Roll call.
Board Member Director James Mulvey:
Jim. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Tera Radloff:
Tera. Are we sharing one? Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
Jana. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Leah Enquist:
Leah. Present. No conflicts.
Jason:
And I'm Jason Blankaert or present with no conflicts. We'll go ahead and close out. item two and move on to item number three. The public comment period. Looks like we have Steve Dawes. Who'd like to speak? Steve, could you please give your name and address.
Steve Dawes, Castle Pines Resident:
Steve Dawes
5703 Jasper Point circle. Just wanted to comment on a couple things. I know that the financial reports have been much better than they have in the past, and they seem to be very thorough. And Eric and team are doing an excellent job on that. The one issue that I struggle with is understanding the presentation. For example, I listen watch the video of your study session last week and Eric will be talking about a number, and there'd be a page up there and it might not be the right page, you know, right page came up.
There would be a thousand numbers on there would be difficult to follow. So I'm wondering if it could be done. Maybe you could highlight the numbers when you point to them or use a, laser pointer or something like that. Just as a I think the average person would have a pretty hard time following that. In the attorney's report for this meeting, in earlier ones, there's a discussion about some unpaid fees by Castle Pound Pines Town Center.
MD number one, due on the April 20th anniversary for four years. And I'm wondering why that $354,000 is overdue. Is I don't do we bill them every four years or is it something that hasn't been billed? I wonder if they could clarify that. Third point is, the attorney's report mentions, looking into a recourse for the, well, failures, waiting for reports on cause of the failure so that a liability can be assessed.
And I see that we've got some reports now for wells A1 and 2 indicating shaft fractures and whatever else was a little bit hard to follow for me because I don't know anything about it. But I just like to see if there's going to be follow up on that. And some of it hasn't slipped through on the liability issue, particularly if there's contracts with notice provisions in it.
Fourth point, there's a contract for Kennedy Jenks in the packet today. And in the standard conditions, there's a paragraph 16 that says in the in that in a dispute the applicable law would be that of California. I don't know why you'd like California law to apply to a dispute in Colorado. It just makes it more expensive for lawyers to get up to speed on whatever a California law says when the witnesses and everything else would be in Colorado.
Last point is, in the district manager's report, there's a line item that talks about the format for study sessions and the line item on the agenda, but the request really is (a loud noise, a cup was dropped) I hope it wasn't anything I said.
But it's really not a format issue. The request is to stop broadcasting live streaming study sessions. And I urge you not to do that. I'm sure citizens can come down here to go to the meetings if they want to attend, but for many people, that's very inconvenient, in the evenings. And if it's saved as it is, people can watch it later on, as I've done many times.
And, it seems to me not a great idea to do that, particularly since the motivation for it appears to be to save $20,000. Well, that seems like a lot of money, but as I read your budgets in a range of $50 million. So if that's true, then $20,000 is 0.0004 of the district budget, in other words, 0.04%.
So when you get to that part in the meeting today, there's at least one vote here for not canceling the live streaming of the study sessions. Thank you.
Jason:
Thank you Steve.
Okay. We will go ahead and close out the public comment period and we'll move. I'll move on to item number four. The consent agenda. I'll go ahead. And making a motion that the items listed below are a group of items to be acted on with a single motion. Second, and a vote by the board to expedite the handling of limited routine matters.
The board has previously received information on these matters and or discuss the matter prior. So prior study session.
Board Voting All Speak:
So and I've made a motion I second great having a second. We'll go to vote Jim. I Tera I Jen I Leah approve and it's an eye from me as well. So we will the motion was passed.
Jason:
We'll go ahead and close out section four and we'll move on to item number five, which is consider approving tonight's Monday, September 22nd, 2025 board meeting agenda.
Board Voting All Speak:
I moved to approve the agenda as presented. I second having a second one moved to vote. Jim I Tera I Jana I Leah approve I approve it as well.
Jason:
We'll go ahead and closeout Item five the board board meeting agenda, and we'll open up item number six, the finance director's report with Molly Jensen. Good evening Molly.
Molly Janzen, Accountant:
Good evening.
Board.
James:
One thing before we start are you going to display on the screen?
Jason:
We lost the laptop.
District Manager Nathan Travis:
I just spilled coffee on it.
James:
Oh is that what that was? Okay. All right. Yeah, I know that's not a problem. I was just reacting to your comment.
All:
Yeah. so,
Terrence Lovett, VIP Video:
Is it gone?
Nathan:
It's not gone, I turned it off so I can dry it off. Okay.
It's gone for the evening.
Jana:
All right. Could we try to use one of our volunteer mine?
James:
Yeah, maybe we can do it that way.
Leah:
Or if it's easier to use mine since I'm here.
James:
Yeah, because I think to make this kind of kind of, proper. We need to display this stuff.
Leah:
So I'm sharing the board packet, right? Yeah.
James:
Yeah, yeah. And maybe just walk us through it and or if you want to do it on your PC over there.
Jana:
That's a no from Molly.
Molly:
I can't talk and do that at the same time. Okay.
Leah:
There we go. Okay. Perfect. Let me make it bigger. Let's.
If you want to tell me, it's super helpful when you call out page numbers. Page numbers, I can just automatically go to those.
Molly:
Yes. Yeah. Sounds great. Okay. So starting off with our written, memo on packet, page 14, I actually was not going to go into a lot of detail with the memo. however, I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Describer:
On screen.
TO: Board of Directors – Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
FROM: Eric Harris, Elevated Clarity (EC)
DATE: September 22, 2025
RE: Financial Report – September 2025 Board of Directors Meeting
General Fund Activity
As of July 2025, the District recognized $978,222 in property tax revenues received from Douglas County and $44,154 in specific ownership tax revenues. This includes $13,207 in delinquent property taxes collected. This represents 98.96% of the budgeted property taxes from the District’s mill levy year-to-date. This is a slightly lower percentage than compared to-date in 2024 (99.88%).
Enterprise Fund Activity
Billed water usage in the month of July 2025 was 116,398,000 gallons, a 4.1% increase from water usage
in July 2024. Cumulatively for the calendar year at the end of August 2025, the District has billed 3.48%
more in gallons than in 2024.
Molly:
My intent this evening was to go through the financials. So I appreciate the comments. We've incorporated changes into those financials and describe them to you. But what I'd like to do is just walk you through them so that you can follow where the numbers roll up into the summaries and understand what each of the columns is, and kind of focus on the format and make sure that you're comfortable with the changes that we've made and answer any questions related to that.
Next month is when we will be talking about the budget. So we will be really focusing in on what we're projecting for 2025, because that leads into what we'll have to start 2026. So we'll focus on the details next month. But this month is July budget to actual. And you might remember that on a quarterly basis, we incorporate annual projections into our financials as well as now, at this time of the year, the next year's budget.
These are July, so projected actuals are not incorporated in the 2026 budget is not. So we can kind of just focus in on what you will see every month. And then in addition to what you will see this month, at the end of each quarter you will see projected actuals and next year's budget.
Tera:
So remind me why it's through July and not through August?
Molly:
So when we came on board, we looked at how your payables come in and there are some vendors that bill later that essentially meet every month or so. We're just trying to make sure that we give you the most up to date information and incorporate all those payables. And so we're in arrears. But that means that we are not going back in time and changing those.
So that's why we do that. Thank you. Okay. So let's dive right into the financials. So packet page 19 is where they begin. So one of the things we've added is summary pages. And the rationale for adding these is so that you can get a simpler version of what your financials are reflecting. The detailed pages after these summary pages contain more detail.
Describer:
On screen. Packet page 19
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
SUMMARY (ALL FUNDS)
Molly describes.
Molly:
So for example on this page, the first fund that is displayed is general fund. You can see that we have one line for revenues. The actual through July 31st is 1,964,671. So that's the total revenues for the district's general fund. In order to find out more information on those revenues, you would move to the detailed general fund financials, which start on packet page 21.
Describer:
On screen. Packet page 21
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
General Fund
Molly describes title of columns in the general fund, see packet page 21.
Molly:
And so if you look at the revenues, so you're going to see the beginning fund balance than the revenues. You can see that the total revenues 1,964,671 equals that total revenue amount in the summary. So you can see what individual line items make up that amount. And again we're just trying to give you more of a snapshot initially and then provide the detail behind it.
Sometimes it's easier to reflect on what the financials are actually telling you. If you look at it more on a summary level, rather than the detailed pages, which are going to give a lot of detail. And sometimes it's hard to see the big picture that way. So just kind of walking through that, so you would see that with the general fund as well as the Conservation Trust fund, the combined water and wastewater funds.
So all of those detailed pages, those those amounts roll up into that summary. Again, the columns that you're seeing for this month are the 12/31/2024 audited actuals. So those are your audited numbers from last year, 2025 adopted budget. So this was the budget that you adopted last fall. We have not revised the 2025 budget at this point.
However, if you look at the financials, you will see that we will indeed be proposing a revised budget. A lot of that has to do with us reclassifying those general administrative costs from water and wastewater into the general fund so that their combined and then just charging the water and wastewater funds a percentage of their direct costs in order to cover some of those general administrative costs.
So we will be bringing to a revised 2025 budget later this fall. Then you're going to see actual through July 31st. And that is just what it is. It's the numbers spread out of the system, for the revenues and expenditures that the district has incurred year to date. So January through July, then you're going to see budget through 7/31.
This is where we try to incorporate our assumptions on where we are in the year, and whether we think the timing, whether the budget is gone or there's still budget to be spent. So some things are annual. So for example, if you look at the water fund, which is going to be on into it.
Describer:
On screen. Packet Page 25
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
Water Enterprise Fund (Continued)
Molly describes.
Molly:
Page packet page 25. Towards the bottom of the page you will see annual charges and assessments in that fund. So you will see that the budget equals the actual because we we believe we are done with that line item for this year. So that's what that column represents. So costs that are incurred on a monthly basis like utilities professional services, those kinds of things you're going to see that come in cyclically throughout the entire year.
But that's what that column is. And the variance is just the difference between the budget and the actual. And what that column will do is highlight any line items that are significantly different than what was budgeted. So, for example, the one that we keep mentioning, when we look at these financials is in the water fund, the water distribution repairs, which is on packet page 26, you will see that the adopted budget reflected 180,000.
Describer:
On screen. Packet Page 26
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
Water Enterprise Fund (Continued)
Molly describes.
Molly:
And at this point through July, we are at 694,938. So you can see at this point we are over budget. However, the other thing that stands out when you look at this line item is we incurred over 500,000 last year in 2024. So what that tells us is that this budget was not assessed accurately at the time it was adopted.
And again, we will we'll be coming back and revisiting those numbers. But hopefully just walking through some of that is helpful. The other thing I would like to point out is we incorporated the different components of the reserves that Eric talked about at the work session. So this was really based on having a significant cash balance and knowing that that balance represents, not accumulations of customer payments that you've built up over time, but rather connect fees and that renewable water feed those fees that are coming in for specific purposes.
so what I'd like to do is walk you through how that works. On the water fund, if you look at.
Describer:
On screen. Packet Page 27
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
Water Enterprise Fund (Continued)
Molly describes.
Molly:
Packet page 27, you will see that first column. So your 1231 2024 audited actuals. You will see the water ending funds available $43,714,236. And you can see that that consists of 15 million, little over 15 million for renewable water, restricted for capital, a little over 20 million, and then unrestricted 7.4 million. So that kind of gives you an idea of why your cash balance is so large.
And that will also help as we move forward with not only the 2026 budget, but also future years, so that we can see how the inflows for for capital resource. So the capital charge that you have in the water fund and the outflows for capital and what you have in savings, basically how all those fit together to make up a long term financial plan.
Describer:
On screen. Packet Page 24
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
Water Enterprise Fund (Continued)
Molly describes.
Molly:
So those numbers that you see reflected on this page carry forward to the beginning numbers on page. 24 of your packet. So you can see that the actual for 2025 again year to date through December matches those same dollar amounts that you saw at the end of 2024. That's another change that we've developed into these financials, is to show the beginning funds at the start.
It makes more sense to me rather than having them down at the bottom and then just adding in that net change, I think it makes sense to say, here's our starting point, here's what we brought in, here's what we've spent, here's where we're at at the end.
And so I guess I won't go into a lot more detail unless you have questions. But the things, that we're interested in is making sure that you're comfortable with the new format, that you don't have questions about it. And by new format, I mean moving those general administrative costs up into the general fund and then also the different reserve components, those are kind of the two big things that we've incorporated into these financials.
So I'd be happy to answer any questions anybody has.
Describer:
On screen. Packet Page 26
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
STATEMENTS OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGETS
BUDGETARY (NON-GAAP) BASIS
December 31, 2024 Actuals
Actuals, Budget and Variance through July 31, 2025
Water Enterprise Fund (Continued)
James describes.
James:
Going back to sheet 26 or packet page 26 to 180 versus I think the 694 938 you know, that's a little bit over a half $1 million. And I just want to understand. Yeah, I understood exactly what you said. I guess it's just the magnitude of that. We can describe it as an overage or an error or failure to predict.
And that's okay. A lot of stuff happened in that year, so obviously we didn't plan on that. We thought we did. right. But the question goes to on a going forward basis, I would like to understand if we can somehow, some way, take credit for the repairs that we've made. And, the second thing was, is I want to make sure that the money is properly characterized, like it wasn't for an actual replacement.
It was actually just pure repairs. And it goes to kind of what we talked about with Eric is. Somehow developing a charging system that accurately characterizes. So we have high confidence that that big number there's nothing else buried in there like when you look at receipts. And we understand that it's truly for repairs and it's not for some other purpose, color or money type of issue.
So I don't know if you can kind of it wasn't really a good question there, but I'm just concerned that we're properly characterizing and accounting for things in the right bucket. Yeah. And we understand. And then second part of that is can we take credit for repairs to valves, waterlines what have you, and make a better estimate going forward for next year?
Molly:
Right. Great questions. Related to specifically if repair line items are difficult to predict. However, based on even what we spent last year, I think it was just a miss. Overall, what I'm seeing with the budget is in total, things are lining up pretty well. It's just some certain line items stand out. One of the things that we do with Nathan when we get ready to do the audit is really scrutinize those repair expenditures and make sure that they truly were repairs and maintenance, meaning they did not add value to an asset versus a capital expenditure that actually adds useful life to the asset asset, in which case you would get credit
basically for that repair. So we we tend to do that just on an annual basis because on a budgetary basis, whether it's listed as capital outlay or up in expenditures, it just comes out of your budget. But at the end of the year, when we get to that full accrual basis, that's when that is taken into consideration.
Does that answer your question?
James:
Mostly. I'm still kind of concerned. I mean, even if it doesn't add value, if it's just replacing and removing and replacing, you know, a portion of a system, We should account for that as a different kind of, for a different bucket of money, because we shouldn't be repairing that thing or replacing it for x number of years in the future.
And my only concern is, okay, we we had a big overage, but I also don't want to if we go next year and we we put a lot of money into those types of things, quote unquote. Can we take credit for what we've already repaired kind of thing? So, you know, overshooting and undershooting is the same problem when we're trying to do a good estimate.
So I was still kind of questioning going forward next year in the years afterwards. So are we tracking those expenditures and whether or not they, you know, there's a obviously there's a finite life to some of these things that we repair. I'd like to understand if we if we know what that life is on the things that we repaired and whether or not we can take credit for that and adjust our budget better.
That's all. It's just trying to try to get a better estimate going forward for things that were repaired, and they should last X number of years. So we we don't continually put more and more money in there. When you are overestimate or underestimate that's that's really all I'm digging at. Yeah.
Molly:
And Nathan, you might have something to add.
I know you've been working on a lot of projections related to repairs.
Nathan:
Yeah. So especially with this line item specifically on the distribution system, that's one area that we need to get a more complete condition assessment. And, we're planning to do that next year. Right now we're trying to really identify what the best modality is for that.
And it drives to the point that you're making. And so one of the things that we'll be tracking is basically, how much are we spending per lineal linear foot to maintain or repair this line to keep it in service. And then we'll have some sort of break point or we'll push this into a capital project so one will drive the other.
And then if we do have a repair that does, you know, like Molly mentioned, significantly, significantly, increase the lifespan of one of those assets, whether that's a valve or a segment of water line. We'll capture that and update it in our capital capital plan, and they'll track it that way. So we're going to come at that from, two different directions.
One of the one of the struggles, with a lot of that, for lack of a better term, kind of like lost money. For this line item specifically, one repair was almost $300,000, and a lot of that cost was just in downtime. That was the waterline break expense Parkway, and monarch just south of monarch.
We had to sit on it for 4 or 5 days, and all the traffic control and equipment rentals and time that came with watching that. And so a lot of those costs inside of that repair line do yet do get lost and don't significantly add value to an asset. But we we are going to make sure that we track those, to help us as a trigger point for our capital planning.
James:
Thanks. I think that goes a long way to sort of answering what I was digging at, you know, again, just categorizing if it's just traffic control and, you know, whatever, buying water from another, you know, something like that that doesn't add value or, or, you know, falls into sort of preventative maintenance, even though it was a failure, you still should take credit for fixing that thing.
So it's theory shouldn't break for a few more years or ten years or 15 years kind of thing. Thanks.
Molly:
Great. Any other questions or comments?
Tera:
Really nice and thanks for walking through. I think that will be easy for anyone who's catching up with us online later. And really, I have such confidence in the way that we're tracking and that we have that we will be able to use the data to do better budgeting and estimating of that type of thing and classification of costs.
So it looks really, really nice. So remind me, I think along with these changes, we used to divide, the general like the administrative or overhead between water and wastewater at a certain percentage. And we would that would be a board decision every year. And so with this, we're not we're no longer doing that because it's going to be reflected in total.
Molly:
Correct. So it will those costs will be reflected in total in the general fund. And then resources from water and wastewater will come into the general fund to help offset those costs. However, in the general fund your primary revenue is property taxes. So that's the bulk of what covers those costs. But then there is some additional money coming in.
Tera:
Great. Thank you.
Jason:
Thank you Molly. Does anybody else have any questions. All right. Hearing none. We'll go ahead and close out the finance director's report. Thanks again for all your hard work. And we'll open up item number seven, which is the legal counsel's report. And I understand legal counsel will not be joining us tonight. So does anybody have any questions to relay to the legal counsel.
James:
Sorry. It's, and it's just, a meeting thing. Do we have to read that into the record, or is it just written is fine. I'm not sure. Written is fine Okay.
Jason:
Okay. Hearing no questions, we'll go ahead and close out the legal counsel's report, and we'll move on to item number seven. The district manager report. Good evening Nathan.
Describer:
On screen. Packer Page 52
Memorandum
From: Nathan J. Travis
To: CPNMD Board of Directors
Date: 9/22/25
Re: District Manager’s Report
AGENDA ITEMS
Well Failure Updates (Agenda Item VIII.A)
• We have received the failure reports for wells A-1 and A-2. They have been included in the board packet.
The initial recommendations:
1. Change type of bearings used.
2. Change Shaft Material.
• Layne is still committed to providing warranty coverage, it remains to be seen what the manufacturer is willing to do.
• A finalized plan for reinstallation and repair is expected this week.
Board Work Session Format (Agenda Item VIII.B)
• I propose that we stop broadcasting our Work Sessions. We would still post the agendas, and packets, the meetings would still be open for the public to attend in-in person, and we would still generate meeting minutes for approval. This would allow both the Board and Staff to "table up" and provide an environment that is more discussion focused. This would also save roughly $20,000 annually. Currently we get around
1,600 combined views of our meetings over the course of a month, roughly 25% of those are for the Work Sessions. This change would not require a motion and a vote, a simple consensus and instruction to staff would suffice.
Castle Pines Parkway Phase 2 Kennedy Jenks Engineering Proposal (Agenda Item VIII.C)
• Kennedy Jenks Consultants has submitted a proposal to provide engineering services for the Castle Pines Parkway Water Line Replacement Phase 2 project. This effort will replace approximately 2,900 linear feet of existing 14-inch ductile iron pipe with 16-inch PVC, coordinated with the City’s upcoming roadway improvements. Services include project management, design, bidding assistance, and part-time construction observation, with an estimated total fee of $156,580 on a time-and-materials basis.
Nathan:
Good evening guys. first thing I have up on, the agenda is a brief discussion and update on the, well, failures. So specifically Wells A1 and A2, we did get the failure reports for those.
We don't yet have a plan of action. Layne was going to be, meeting with the manufacturer today to discuss what the next steps are. Primarily, they're looking at, different kind of bushing or different kinds of bearings that they could change out. And then they're also looking at the drive shaft materials. I'm looking at the, cause for failure.
They don't really have a solid answer on either one of them. One thing that I did think was interesting, that was noted in the third party report, is that the drive shafts which are having which have been having the failures on if they are taken out of service and put back in inventory, they're not tracked as new or used inside of those inventories.
So we could have very well been sold a drive shaft that had been used for quite a long period of time somewhere else. And then there's kind of this amorphous, almost like black box. They don't really tell you. They tell you, hey, we I think Baker Hughes, whoever it is, tells you, hey, we have a process to monitor and check these things before we decide if they're going to move into our inventory.
Is new, used. And, no, you can't know what that process is.
Jason:
How many of these, drive shafts do we have in our district?
Nathan:
That, I don't know. I can get that answer for you, though.
Jana:
Is, is Layne a person or a company?
Layne, is a company.
Jana:
Okay. Yeah. And so they're that's the company that's working to make the repairs or not.
And, and then in regards to the warranty, we don't know what, what we're eligible for?
Nathan:
Correct. Yeah. So Layne has indicated that they are going to do whatever they need to do to make it right. And they don't know what the participation for the manufacturer. And that is going to be. but I don't have a solid answer.
So we we just got those reports, on or I just got those reports on Friday. And so we will make sure that those get forwarded to council, as well to make, to see if we have any continued recourse there. But it didn't seem like we do.
Jana:
Was Layne the contractor that installed them initially? Yes. Okay.
Tera:
Do you have a feel for what make it right means in their eyes and means that we'll we'll meet you and we still want you to have some financial participation in or what?
What is your based on the conversations or the back and forth or whatever. But that sounds very, very undefined to me.
Nathan:
I agree with that assessment. It does feel it does feel very undefined. working in our favor, we do have an extremely long standing relationship with Layne. They have done our wells almost exclusively for 20 years, something like that.
So they do have, a vested interest to make sure that we come away with this from this happy. I've known, Mike, who is their installer for a very long time. He's incredibly worried about it, and I know that he'll push as much as he can to get us. I our account rep Nathan, will do the same thing where I lose a little bit of faith is above them, and kind of moves in to international executives, where we're not going to have as much favor.
So my hope is that it we get through this, get those back in, with little or no cost to us. But time will tell.
James:
So, I mean, in reading this, I mean. To me, it's ridiculous that this company puts a used shaft back in stock and doesn't listed it in track, and as such, completely agree. I mean, every mechanical part has a finite fatigue life. And that's exactly what the report talks did. And it was a torsional failure. Like we kind of initially told you, almost like a shaft failure is going to be torsional.
I could go into a lot of details about this, but, in the future, is there any did they offer any mitigations like magnetic particle inspection or dye penetrant testing on anything that they should us in the future to ensure that we don't have crack initiation sites up and down this shaft? I mean, this is this is, you know, this is infrastructure.
And it's ridiculous to think that they potentially shipped us a shaft that some significant portion of its life since it failed so quickly. One could honestly make the assumption that it was fairly used as far as its life.
Nathan:
They haven't offered anything, proactively, but I can I can definitely talk to them about it.
Leah:
Oh, no, I meant to have that on. Jim.
I wanted to ask a clarifying question to make sure I'm tracking. Are you talking about the manufacture for the parts?
James:
We're talking about basically the People who supplied the shaft. Okay.
There's no way if you have this type of failure, a lot of these things, the initiation sites are microscopic, and the only way you can do them is, magnetic particle inspection or diagpenetractive testing, eddy currents. There's lots of ways you can expect you can inspect this kind of thing, but most of them, especially something big and heavy like this, it's going to have surface irregularities just from handling get bumped around and shipped.
But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a fracture that again, when you look at these things under a microscope and I'm talking about a scanning electron microscope, you actually shock fronts as they move around the shaft. And the torsional failures are always on a 45. Because when you when you look at stress and you do, you're close to a 45, depending on how the initiation starts.
But you can predict these things. It's I got a degree in this. I know how to do this. And it's cyclic loading. I mean, it's it's a space thing that was invented for shuttles and things like that. But oil companies use it now. Any kind, you know, downhole rigs and stuff like that, and also motion on offshore rigs with waves and things like that going down a dirt path here.
But the point is, there's 3 or 4 different ways you can ensure that the product is shipped, is in a new condition, or at least has cracks below a certain size. Because once you know the crack size, you can determine how long it's going to take to fill through to a point where it ruptures. What do they have
They said anything about their inspection or the way they ensure that they ship product to us that's good?
Nathan:
It is mentioned in the failure report. I don't remember it well enough to speak confidently to it. I do remember thinking that it was not a lot of information. and so I'll bring I'll bring that to the manufacturers attention, through Layne or directly, realistically, my preference there might even be to, and this is I'm working with Kennedy Jenks, but start exploring other manufacturers and a male priority list or black list
this particular manufacturer, if they're going to continue to put potentially use parts on the, on the new line. That's that's a problem.
James:
I think next step would be have Paul or Kim compel them to provide that data. Okay. And I think we have a pretty good standing to do that at this point.
Nathan:
It's a good point.
Tera:
So my question is the manufacturer provided to Layne and Layne installed it. So is that inspection that Jim is asking for. Is that on Layne or is that on us. And so that's something we need to write into the contract with Layne. I mean, it sounds like that type of inspection should be done by Layne for the, the from the manufacturer.
Yeah. That right there is that responsibility. And the way that I'm hearing it doesn't sound like that responsibility is on us.
Nathan:
Yeah it would be the for that testing, the responsibility would be on the manufacturer to provide that to Layne. I'm sure that we can there's and I can talk to Paul and Kim about it, when I'm, when I get the opportunity.
But I'm sure that we can do something contractually that either requires Layne to get that information or ensure that we're using truly new parts. Something like that.
Tera:
Thank you.
Nathan:
All right. if there are no other questions on that, I will move down to item B. This is the board work session format. This is a conversation that actually started between Eric and I. It is relatively unusual for boards and city councils to or similar to have their work sessions broadcast to this degree. Typically it's more of a, informal discussion based forum, that allows people to speak more freely, a little bit more candidly.
Of course they're still open to the public. And, you know, all of the requirements that come with that. I would recommend that we move that direction, but I thought it was worth bringing to the direction of the board, or to the attention of the board as a whole. There's also some cost savings involved, with not broadcasting these meetings.
I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
Tera:
Well, I'll go first. thank you for bringing this forward. And I do appreciate our citizens comments because when I read this in the packet, my my first answer was I because we discussed so much in the work session. And we don't always like those things, especially financial and costs and the checks that were paid.
And everything gets brought forth as a consent agenda item. And we don't talk about it specifically. I like what we're doing, and I would propose that we we keep it as is. I know the city also records their and makes their study sessions available. I think what you are getting at is we could have more of a, a different format that somehow our, our broadcasting defines this, horseshoe shape and that we could actually be more of a work session.
So I don't know if there's a different type of recording device like an owl or whatever, that works better. I mean, I do think that our recording is much better than the city's and others. It is easy to follow. It is easy, but I understand I think the spirit of it is to get in, get us in a more collaborative of, configuration.
So maybe, maybe there's different options. But that's those are my thoughts.
Leah:
You know I have a question? A couple I don't remember when it was, a couple border study sessions ago. You talked about some, like, tech package that you were exploring. Is that something that could be leveraged to record and share out? Like, does it have those capabilities?
Nathan:
Is, it does through its zoom meeting functionality. So we could definitely integrate that with something like the Owl system. I briefly I did get some answers to the questions the board has. I've still got one outstanding one. They do not use information, board information or individual meetings to train their AI models. it does not impact, zoom meeting for the public to join.
So there's there's no issue with that. They'll join in. They just see the the screen that they see. The biggest hang up that I have. And I'm waiting for a response to see if we can extend this is they only offer a five day trial. And so I'm hoping to see if we can at least get a couple months out of them before we commit to
Spend 5 or 6 grand on a packet. But that is something that ultimately we could leverage in this format. We already have some meeting owls, and we could, you know, kind of do a split format, I guess a way to put it.
Jana:
So to weigh in on this from a different perspective. Steve, I hear you, I get it.
But I'm going to say that there's a level of discomfort that comes from having to turn a microphone on and stare into a camera, and so I'm getting better at answer or asking questions. But, I mean, I had questions about who is Layne, you know, is that, you know, stuff like that, that I think you don't always want to ask those kind of questions by turning your microphone on and asking.
And last week it was who was sand, you know, there's stuff like that that I think it would be nice for it to be more comfortable, more learning, more, collaborative and less formal for it to actually be a study session style.
Nathan:
And one of the things that Eric and I, him and Paul actually also discussed with that change in format is especially if we have something with that shift, if we do bring a presentation or something to a work session to at least do maybe a truncated version of that or a recap in the actual board meeting.
So we have something that it points back to. and then the consent agenda is also, you know, the items that go ultimately go on there at the board's direction too. So if we wanted to bring, the finance packet either at the work session, then again at the board meeting and move that off the consent agenda so that it forces discussion, there are some other things that we can do there to make sure that we're maintaining a level of transparency.
Jana:
And then one more thing. There was a meeting and Steve, you were in attendance of it. we adjourn the meeting, cameras down, microphones off. We started asking so many questions, and they and it showed that we had things we wanted to know, but we didn't want to ask them on the microphone. They weren't on the agenda. We wanted more information.
And that's when Mr. Dawes asked us to turn the meeting back on. But that's to me an example of when you take the formality out, our guard goes down and we allow conversations to happen where we do want to know more things. We just don't want to formally ask them, I think. So just my $0.02.
Tera:
I'm not advocating that we don't.
I like the spirit and the configuration. I'm just saying we should probably still record them because they are still public's business. And but I don't think the city does everything as formally as we do. But for a study session. But I would hate to lose the, you know, continuity because there may be some questions that we do discuss, that that we aren't unless we just totally cut out the study sessions and try to go back to doing all our business once a month.
Leah:
I would be supportive of, not broadcasting our work sessions. I think for me, it's a cost benefit. I mean, for the most part, we don't get in-person attendance at our study sessions. This is a pretty sophisticated. It's a great setup, but it's a pretty sophisticated setup for what I think is a pretty informal session.
But I am curious because I wanted to try to make more of, like a data driven decision. I am curious about the 1600 combined views. So is that I'm assuming when you say combined views, that is study sessions and board meetings.
Nathan:
Yeah, so that's study sessions, board meetings, total clicks, including watching the meeting live. And people that watch one or both meetings in between or following.
Leah:
And that was just for one month.
Nathan:
I think so. One month on the 1600, because that's higher than I would have expected it to be.
Jana:
I kind of have trouble believing that 1600 people watch, right?
Leah:
So for me, this would be my ask. I would want to understand. And I would look at it maybe over a three month period.
How many like unique clicks do we have for our study session meetings? And I would just look at just study session. I would look at like unique clicks. If we have the ability to do that.
Jana:
Do we have the ability to find that out?
Leah:
Okay. and then yes, I would want to understand that 1600 combined views, because I would believe that for the past year potentially, but not the past
Jana:
For the full year.
Leah:
Yeah, yeah, but not but not a month. Like, I mean, how many residents are in Castle Pines?
Nathan:
In our on our, on our side about. We are just shy of 15,000 men women and children.
Terrence:
So for the past three months, we had 941 clicks.
Leah:
So last three months for study sessions only?
Terrence:
No that's for all the videos.
Jana:
So what did he say? It's 900?
Leah:
900 and something?
Terrence:
941 clicks since June first for everything.
Leah:
So where did the 1600 come from then? Because if that's one month and that's more than the three months,
Nathan:
That is what I got from Terrence. But my guess is I misunderstood something.
Terrence:
Yeah. So. So I think were talking about unique viewers over a year. Yeah.
So. But just to give you something to direct I’m looking at it right now, I, if you removed my usage, I would say its 41 clicks for me and the rest is audience usage.
Nathan:
Okay. That makes a lot more sense to me too, then. Okay.
Jason:
Steve, are you 1000 clicks? How many?
Jana:
Steve's Click Click Click Click.
Steve:
Yes. I think that what you saying should still be on the record. I don't really know but from now on I guess I'll clicking a lot more.
Leah:
Steve's gonna have those clicks. I think the other thing to consider, too, is let's say we go that route.
And then we get a lot of feedback from the city, and they're like, you know, where is it? I want to watch it, or I want to have the option. We're not baked into this decision like, we, I like we can, I would be surprised if that happens on, like, a large scale, but but if it did, then I would really be open to adjusting based on that feedback in those preferences.
Tera:
I'm curious to hear what Jim and, Jason, think.
Jason:
You know, to be honest, I can go either way. So, I see how people would like it, but I also get the impression that the girls are making that there probably aren't a lot of people paying attention. I had no idea would be close to a thousand people. A quarter are watching this. That's, Thank you, everybody, for paying attention.
But, yeah. So I really I could go either way. I haven't made up. I haven't made up my mind. Jim.
James:
Not discounting anything you're saying live because I kind of really try to. I tend to trust your perspective here most of the time. The only caveat to that would be that, you know, we went to the heroes gallon and I, you know, I was surprised because several people walked up to me and say, oh, I know who you are.
I watch you on the meetings. And, you know, I, you know, because my wife would introduce me to 50 people and, and I and like, you know, it wasn't just 1 or 2 or several people that go, oh, yeah, I know I watch you on, you know, online. So I mean, when I look at that in counterpoint, I kind of, with Jason, I kind of don't know what the right answer is.
But again, I don't think anything. We make a decision, we pick a path, and it doesn't mean that we're locked into it. We can always adjust later on based on feedback. And I think that's a reasonable approach. Try some stuff that's new. If it works great and people give you positive feedback, that's that's awesome. If it doesn't work or people complain that they can't find you or would like to watch those meetings, and we can always revert back or try a new format.
So I'm flexible here. But I know that people do watch this stuff and they do care, so
Leah:
Thanks, Jim. Hey, I'm flexible too. I don't feel super, super strongly either way. I am curious though. Like of of course, of course our attorney is going to have one perspective and I get it. Of course, our accounting gentleman is going to want to save money like that
Makes sense where their guidance is coming from. I am curious, what are the feedback and guidance from our comms team is?
Jana:
There is a question? Oh sorry. So yeah, normally our, public comments period is closed, but, we'll go ahead and allow this comment online. Who is it?...
Oh, sorry. Oh. You want to give a comment? Okay. Yeah. Please come up to the podium.
Leah:
But after that comment, I would like to know. Oh, it's okay.
James:
I've just just to make it legal. I was actually surprised. Did you get anybody? Give me any feedback. You were there as well. But you know, you were kind of a big deal there.
Leah:
I don't know, just take pictures or it didn't happen.
Terrence:
We can offer some alternative ways to make the your, meetings more interactive.
but still not lose the quality or not have to use systems that are not as, clear, easy to follow. One of the things that this style brings is the ability of the audience to follow what's happening. Keep up. Who's talking? If you watch certain types of productions from others, sometimes people aren't watching the camera or the cameras.
You know, looking at the back of their face or the back of their, you know, they're not quite adjusted properly. It's almost like we we have this camera here, but we don't really care that you're watching, whereas this is, no, we care you're watching. So that's what we bring to the table. But we can also bring that to the table in a new, more interactive format.
And just to follow your comment, to say, sometimes I don't want to ask a question, or I feel a little bit embarrassed that I don't know, something that's the truth. That's what people want to know, that they elected you knowing you're not an expert at this, but that you ask those questions. And when you do, then they learn too.
So I would encourage you, but not to being embarrassed by that. But that's the truth about all your audience too. You guys use a lot of acronyms. Oh my God. So it's already tough to understand what's going on if you're not in the industry. When you say, I don't know, you're saying that for the rest of everybody who's watching.
So I, I would encourage, say, I don't know and ask the question, you've helped 200 people go, oh! so that's that's our comment. We can definitely help you, with other setups. This is not our only setup. We can do better.
Leah:
That was gonna, that was going to be my follow up question. So I mean, the way it was presented makes it seem like it's an all or nothing.
And so what I'm hearing from you is there's potential other setups that maybe could meet our needs for the study session, but that maybe aren't as expensive or as sophisticated. Is that what you're. Absolutely. Because I think that would be worth, looking into.
Tera:
Yeah. And that's the same thing. I'm just going to ask the district manager if you could explore the options more, because I would implore the board to consider we have made great strides in being transparent.
And to me, that's a step back from the transparency that we've gained. I mean, whatever that quote is about sunlight being the best thing, but but. I think at the beginning of the year, one of the things that we had said is that we do think our community deserves transparency. And I think having, every session available to everyone to view on their own time frame is meeting that, meeting that commitment.
Nathan:
Yeah. I think I think that that approach makes a lot of sense. So I will before the next meeting, I'll touch base with the rest of our consultants. Also talk to Corby and Terrence more about some alternatives, and then I'll also bring it in front of to our communications team to see if they have any recommendations there as well.
I like that approach.
Jason:
Thank you Terrence. So I appreciate you standing up and telling us about this. Me too.
Nathan:
And sorry, we're terrible at charades.
Leah:
Yeah. from the website ADA compliance. Like, are we are there limitations around, like, how many videos and for how long and anything like that?
Nathan:
No. Not really. we've got, Corby and Terrence were all so keep us right on track with all the video ADA compliant stuff like texting and all the things they do.
Jason:
Okay. I think we can move on to the next motion. all right, so
Jana:
Do we need to vote for anything on that?
Nathan:
Nope. Staff direction's perfect on that one. so the last thing that I have to bring before the board is the, Kennedy Jenks proposal, I apologize, I'm not sure which packet page number is on.
I'm trying to scroll to it.
If you ever from from here on out, if anybody ever is worried about asking a question, you can just remember the time that I wore an entire cup of coffee on my lap.
Jana:
I just want to clarify. It's not out of embarrassment, though. Got it? Not embarrassment. It's just there's a level of comfort and our guards go down. And that was a good example at the end of that one meeting. I get it, I'm the minority, though.
Nathan:
So this is packet page, 100 and. Yep, yep. Well.
Describer:
On screen.
September 3, 2025
Mr. Nathan Travis, Manager
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
7404 Yorkshire Drive
Castle Pines, CO 80108
Subject: Proposal for Professional Services
Castle Pines Pkwy Water Line Replacement Phase 2
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District (District)
K/J Project 2546076*00
Dear Nathan:
Kennedy Jenks Consultants is pleased to submit this proposal to provide engineering services for the Castle Pines Pkwy Water Line Replacement Phase 2 project. The purpose of the project is to replace the existing 14-inch ductile iron (DI) pipe located in Castle Pines Pkwy from
Monarch Blvd to Forest Park Drive. Approximately 2,900 linear feet of existing water line will be replaced with 16-inch PVC. The replacement will be completed as part of the City’s roadway improvement project on Castle Pines Pkwy.
The design of the water line replacement project will coincide with the City’s roadway improvement project and our water line plans will be incorporated into the road project bid package. Construction of the water line will be performed with the road project by the general
contractor for the City. The City’s current schedule is to bid the project in January 2026 and start construction in Spring 2026. We will utilize CAD survey files from the City’s roadway improvement project and from a 2017 survey performed by True North for the District. CAD
line work will include existing topo, as well as existing and proposed utilities, and final grades of Castle Pines Pkwy. In addition, KJ will review current utility information and compare it to the survey information to determine if additional survey is needed.
The new water line will be 16-inch PVC and the method of construction will be open-cut. The new water line will parallel the existing water line within the right-of-way limits. The intent will be to keep the existing pipeline active as much as possible during construction. The existing DI pipe will be abandoned in-place, or removed in places where necessary, for other utilities and tie-ins.
Nathan:
and so this, this proposal is for Castle Pines Parkway waterline replacement phase two. So we've got two capital projects, for water line replacement identified next year. It's really two different parts of the same project. So the other one is, monarch Water line phase three. The reason that they're broken into two different into two different capital projects is, primarily because we're this one will go in conjunction with the city again, monarch Water line phase three will be a separate bid package or a separate project
that'll be accounted for. we'll be responsible for 100% of the cost. This one will be a shared cost. this gets us through the remainder of design, which is partially already underway. All the way through, construction from an engineering standpoint. So this doesn't include any of the actual construction costs. The total, proposed amount is $156,580.
If anybody has any other questions beyond that, I'll.
Jason:
Nathan, since we're, lacking visual aids, can you remind everybody where these are located?
Nathan:
So this is, for this section would be from Castle Pines Park. The intersection of Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch. So we'll, have work to do in the intersection. from there west to, Forest Park Drive along Castle Pines Parkway and for waterline replacement.
Jana:
South side, South side of the road?
Nathan:
North side of the road.
Westbound. Castle Pines Parkway, not. Yeah.
Tera:
So I don't have any questions, but I do want to bring up the comment by Mr. Dawes earlier. So I don't know if this is the contract where it says it will be. It's governed by the laws of California versus Colorado.
Nathan:
It, it it would. Yeah, it should be Colorado anyway. But I can if the board approves that, we can approve it pending that change because I don't know why it would.
Tera:
I mean, I'm totally missed that. So, thank you.
Jana:
Okay. I'll go. Hold on just second. Okay, so I have my Google Earth up. You're saying Forest Park to the west bound side? Yes. But I mean, from the median because the the part that was done by Forest Park previously was on the south side. So then the south lanes closed. And so that's why I was asking this now flips the line now runs on the north side for the next portion.
Nathan:
The line has only run on the north side. So the reason that the city only did the south lanes is that we hadn't. They they added that to their capital program, early this year, and we hadn't completed our design work on the water line. So the water line currently runs behind curve on the north side. I feel right.
Tera:
Jim, that's a.
Jason:
Any other questions? I'll go ahead and make a motion. I move to approve the Kennedy Jenks water letting. Castle Pines Parkway phase two waterline replacement proposal for engineering services with the, Colorado being... How am I going to say this, with Colorado being, corrected instead of California.
Board Voting All Speak:
I'll second, having a second. We'll go. Good vote. Jim.
Approve with the amended text. Tera I Jana I Leah approve. I approve as well. The motion passes.
Nathan:
Thanks guys. Any other question about the, manager's report before we move to directors matters?
James:
Just take a minute and just walk me through the IGA and just give me a status in your own words kind of thing for the transfer of properties.
Nathan:
We have already transferred a significant number of the properties we are currently focused on, primarily working through the, subdivision process with the city of Castle Pines. So there was a number of identified parcels that we needed to, split for various utilities.
And we're working through some final easement language as well. But we're we're well on our way.
James:
So completion date.
Nathan:
I need Kim here for that one, but I can, I can follow up and get a new projected completion date. That's been a moving target. We did have, Kim talked to the city's legal counsel to see if there was any feeling that they needed to, amend the current IGA since we are outside of the targeted deadline.
Both counts. Both city council, as well as Kim Seter's office, agreed that we had completed it substantially enough to effectively, meet the requirements. And since there was no real potential negative blowback from not amending the IGA again, that we just continue status quo.
James:
Okay. Follow up. We had some original cost associated with doing some of these plots and, and subdivisions and things like that.
I want to make sure that that part of it hasn't grown or expanded based on what you just said. And the timeline is stretched out in an additional year, if not longer at this point. So I want to understand what the delta there might be.
Nathan:
I will get a formal kind of accounting update and see where we're at.
I don't have that with me, but I can get that information to the board, separately, as far as I know, we're still under the original contract amount. we broken it up into, I think, five. Now, separate. tasks or task orders, but I think we're still under the original projection.
James:
Okay. Can we make sure we look at that contract?
And since we're outside that timeline, most likely, whether or not we need a new contract with them or an amended contract to sort of protect things.
Nathan:
Yep we'll do.
Jason:
Great. Any other questions? Hearing none. We'll go ahead and close out. Director's manager's report.
Leah:
Oh, wait. Oh. Sorry....
Jason:
And then we'll move on to director's matters. Okay. Leah.
Leah:
I did have an ask for consideration. I don't think this happens a ton, but at our last board meeting, when we when we were asked to vote on the, deputy district manager position, I personally was taken off guard.
And for me, it would be helpful, like, especially if we're voting on something that's consequential where we might have differing opinions. I would love to see that included in this study session, before the board meeting. And if I'm you as a district manager, I don't know if I want to bring something to the board if, there's a lot of questions, concerns, or we've got people voting
No. I think it'd be great to have, like, a pulse. and I would, you know, appreciate understanding, like, questions and concerns from other board members again before we're asked to formally vote on it.
Tera:
I think he realizes that. But in all fairness, we had already discussed it in May or June.
Leah:
Well, it looks like a lot of things changed since then. Since we overhauled the job description and since, a majority voted no. So I think it is still worthwhile to have the discussion before we vote on it. Because I think to me there's a recently effect and things happen that could change the information.
So I appreciate you pointing that out. I just don't think it adds any value to the point that I was trying to make.
Tera:
No, I mean, I'm agreeing with you. I'm just saying, in all fairness, we have we haven't seen it. But, yes, I think he understands the the timing issue and will do that going forward. Yeah.
Nathan:
Yeah, I absolutely, for what it's worth, I agree that it would have, had value to have that bring back at the study session before I brought it to the board again for further discussion. So I'll make sure that we do that moving forward or that I do that moving forward.
Leah:
Thank you. Nathan, it was your feedback I was looking for not having a board member speak for you.
Jason:
All right. Any other questions? Hearing none. We'll go ahead and close out director's matters. And we will go to item number 11 or 10 and adjourn the meeting. Thank you everyone.