Study Session
March 16, 2026
Transcript
Describer:
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District Work Session
Monday, March 16, 2026 at 5:30 PM MDT to Monday, March 16, 2026 at 6:30 PM
Agenda
I. Call Work Session to order
A. Roll call & disclosure of potential conflicts
II. Finance Items
A. Review monthly claims for payments made from February 12, 2026 to March 11, 2026
Presenter: Eric Harris
Guest: Molly Janzen
III. Legal Items
A. Review February 16, 2026 Work Session Minutes
B. Review February 23, 2026 Board Meeting Minutes
C. Review Rules and Regulations
IV. District Manager Items
A. Discussion: EPA Security Evaluation
V. Adjourn
Board President Jason Blankaert:
Right. Okay. Welcome to the Castle Pines North Metropolitan District work session, March 16th, 2026, at approximately 530pm.
We're going to call the work session to order, and we'll begin with roll call. Let's see.
Board Member Director Tera Radloff:
Tera. Here.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
Jana. Here.
Board Member Director Leah Enquist:
Leah. Present.
Jason:
We're missing Jim at this point, but he may join later. And I’m Jason. Present with no conflicts. We'll, move to item number two, the finance items. We'll review the monthly claims for payments made from February 12th, 2026 to March 11th, 2026. Eric.
Describer:
On screen: On-Board Meeting Link Section. II
TO: Board of Directors – Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
FROM: Eric Harris, Elevated Clarity (EC)
DATE: March 16, 2026
RE: Work Session Report – March 2026
Claims Submitted for Review
District Finance is submitting $1,859,339.06 in Payment Claims for review at the work session, consisting of $1,756,207.95 in checks and $103,131.11 in electronic payments.
Report Format Follow-Up
As introduced in February 2026, included in your packet are the simplified reports for Payment Claims Presented for Review and the Check Detail Report. At the Board Work Session held on February 16, 2026, the Board asked questions about how transactions are assessed and monitored to ensure compliance with the Financial Controls Policy/Matrix. After an internal discussion among District staff and Elevated Clarity, it was determined that for now we will incorporate an additional step into our review process for Accounts Payable to ensure
compliance. The process is as follows:
-District staff enter vendor invoices into the financial accounting system Blackbaud Financial Edge NXT.
o During this process, actual vendor invoices are included as an attachment to the invoice record in the system providing the information necessary for Elevated Clarity to perform a complete review.
-Prior to posting the invoices or cutting checks, Elevated Clarity reviews the invoices for:
o Coding
o Accounting Period Timing (Dates)
o Amounts
o Compliance With Financial Controls Policy/Matrix
-If a transaction requires Board approval prior to releasing the payment, Elevated Clarity will inform District staff to hold the check until the approval is obtained.
-All the invoices included in this month’s Payment Claims Presented for Review were evaluated and are in compliance with the Financial Controls Policy/Matrix.
o Notable payment claims include a total of $1,188,658.40 for pay applications related to capital projects:
*City of Castle Pines – Monarch Project: $243,451.41
*Myers & Sons Construction LLC – Filter Beds Rehab: $364,184.71
*T Lowell Construction Inc – Lift Stations Upgrades:$581,022.28
Financial Overview
A comprehensive financial report will be provided at the March Board Meeting, which will include an analysis of financial activity through
January 31, 2026.
Anticipated Upcoming Schedule (subject to change)
March 23, 2026 – Monthly Board Meeting
April 20, 2026 – Monthly Board Work Session
April 27, 2026 – Monthly Board Meeting
May 11, 2026 – Start Date for Audit Testing Procedures
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District Payment Claims
For the Period February 12, 2025 - March 11, 2026
PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
CHECKS - 29524 through 29607 (Refer to Check Detail Report) Amount
Voucher Checks $ 1,753,937.63
One-Time Checks (Customer Refunds) 2,270.32
TOTAL CHECKS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW $ 1,756,207.95
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS
TOTAL ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW $ 103,131.11
Total Payments Presented for Review $ 1,859,339.06
Financial Director Eric Harris:
Yes good evening board. On page two of your packet. You have a brief memo, just, disclosing the amount of claims for the last month totaling, $1,756,207.95. This is always a mouthful to say. And the electronic payments of $180,131.11. I'll get into that just a moment. We wanted to give a brief follow up on a procedural change that we referred to in the last meeting.
We're actually in, this week as we are, issuing a couple of claims this week. So we've initiated, to to review those tomorrow, with, along with Susan, I know Nathan. The reason why overall, these claims are pretty large is punt is you have a couple of projects going on so you can see the three big ones, down at the bottom, you have, City of Castle Pines for $243,000 Myers and Sons for the filter bed rehab project, $364,000 and then $581,000 for the lift station upgrade, T Lowell Construction incorporated.
And if you go on, follow up pages, you'll just have the detailed report of what the electronic payments are. The breakouts that I mentioned before, so far, those are the ones that we just wanted to mention. Everything else will stand up within the parameters of the budget as well. And again, we are in the middle of rolling our financial statements.
We'll wrap those up by mid-week this week for the January 1st, financial. So we should have that budget. The actual available for you in next week's, board meeting. Are there any questions?
Jason:
Okay. Hearing no questions, I'll assume that, everybody is good with this information, and we can, go ahead. Go ahead and, close finance items.
Eric:
Perfect. Thank you board. And please reach out if you have any questions.
Jason:
Thanks again. All right. We'll open up item number three. Legal items. first on the agenda is to review January 16th, 2026, 2026 work session minutes.
Describer:
On screen: On-Board Meeting Link Section. IIIA
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT WORK SESSION MINUTES
February 16, 2026 – 5:30 p.m.
HELD: Monday, February 16, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. at 7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108.
ATTENDEES: Directors Jason Blanckaert, Leah Enquist, James Mulvey, Tera Radloff, and Jana Krell were present. Also present were: Molly Janzen, Elevated Clarity; Nathan Travis, District Manager; Rene Santini, Deputy District Manager; and Paul Polito, Seter, Vander Wall & Mielke, P.C. (via Zoom).
CONFLICTS: None.
QUORUM: Present.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER: The Work Session was called to order at approximately 5:30 p.m.
INTRODUCTION OF DEPUTY DISTRICT MANAGER
District Manager Nathan Travis introduced Rene Santini as the incoming Deputy District Manager. Mr. Travis noted that Mr. Santini has experience with CH2M Hill, Jacobs, and several smaller engineering firms. Mr. Santini resides within the District on Whitby Court and most recently worked with Respec, an engineering firm based in South Dakota with a Colorado Springs office. The Board welcomed Mr. Santini.
Paul will review later.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
FROM: Seter, Vander Wall & Mielke, P.C., Paul Polito, Esq. and Kim J. Seter, Esq.
DATE: March 13, 2026
RE: Legal Status Report for the March 16, 2026 Board Meeting
MATTERS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION
MATTER: RULES AND REGULATIONS UPDATE
Status: The Board requested the District’s rules and regulations be updated to account for limited district functions regarding parks, trails, and open spaces. Legal counsel has revised the District’s rules to account for the City’s assumption of Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces, as well CPNMD’s former Stormwater system. Counsel has added a new Section 15 to the rules to satisfy CDPHE’s requirement for back flow and cross connection regulations. Counsel has also updated the rules to account for all rule resolutions enacted since 2015, and has inserted new language re maintenance of sewer service lines.
Action: Consider draft rule updates and provide comments.
Legal Counsel Paul Polito, Esq.:
Hello, board. Before before we jump into that, if I do want to just, call it a couple items in the legal status report that's on page six of the packet. The only matter that requires board action at the next meeting is a rules and regulations update, which I'll talk about in a little bit. We I need some changes to account for some resolutions that have been passed for more limited functions.
For park RECs, Parks, Rec and Open Space, as well as, the district stormwater system. And those, those are in track changes, within the packet as well as a clean copy because the track changes got a little crazy.
Describer:
On screen: On-Board Meeting Link Section. IIIA
MATTERS IN PROGRESS
MATTER: SERVICE PLAN AMENDMENT
Status: The intergovernmental agreements with the City of Castle Pines require CPNMD to amend its Service Plan to eliminate Park and Recreation and Stormwater services. The board approved the second amendment at its February 23, 2026 board meeting. The amendment specifically removes the District's authority to provide, own, or maintain parks, trails, open space, and stormwater systems to reflect the
property transfers to the City of Castle Pines. Additionally, it establishes a maximum operations mill levy cap of 7 mills, as required in the IGA regarding Park and Recreation services. Staff is scheduled to meet with the Douglas County Planning Department on March 18, 2026, for a pre-application meeting to discuss the logistics and procedure of the amendment filing.
Action: Nothing required at this time
Paul:
Other than that, the service plan amendment, we have a meeting. I sent the service plan amendment and the petition, to the planning division over at Douglas County.
We have a meeting set for this Wednesday. It's a pre-application meeting. It's to discuss the process for the amendment. And my guess is we're going to be talking about a lot of, a lot of items to waive, because this is a very simple amendment. It's only reducing services. So I don't think this is going to be any crazy process.
But we'll be talking with the planning division on, on Wednesday.
Describer:
On screen: On-Board Meeting Link Section. IIIA
MATTER: HIDDEN POINTE METRO DISTRICT INCLUSION
Status: Hidden Point Metropolitan District (HPMD) Board had originally advised Mr. Travis that it wants to move forward with an election regarding inclusion at its regular election in May, 2025. A preliminary inclusion agreement was drafted and counsel revised the preliminary inclusion agreement based on discussions with HPMD’s district manager. Counsel provided the draft agreement to HPMD’s district manager for review. HPMD responded on February 16, 2025, with proposed revisions. Counsel discussed inclusion terms with Hidden Point representatives on March 11, 2025. Hidden Pointe’s new attorney responded with redline edits on February 23, 2026. Counsel accepted the edits on March 6 and requested a conference to discuss election timing and next steps. The parties will be discussing the inclusion during the week of March 16.
Action: None required at this time. Counsel may present a final inclusion agreement for vote during the Board’s March 23, 2026 board meeting, pending the conference
with HPMD.
Paul:
And then we also have a meeting with the Hidden Point staff, tomorrow at 3:00, to discuss the inclusion and go through, just the process and look at the election calendar and, see what we have to do to get everything finalized this year.
Yeah, we have to account for a long tail with the with the district court. So better to get everything done early. Okay. I think that covers everything in the status report. for now, does anybody have any questions about those items or any other items within the status report?
Jason:
Hearing none, I think we can move on.
Paul:
All right. So this brings us to this February 16th work session minutes. have you make any changes? If anybody has any suggested edits to them? otherwise, move on to the 23rd.
Jason:
There are no questions, let's move on.
Paul:
Okay. So those 23rd minutes now, I will I will admit these were these were the ones done when I was, doing this on my phone without power.
So they're a little bit lacking for the typical detail I would usually have in them. And, and for whatever reason, this is the only one missing the transcript. So, I did my best here. There may be a little bit of detail missing if anybody has any suggested edits. Again, you know, happy to make them.
Alright, you're taking it easy on me. I appreciate that.
Describer:
On screen: On-Board Meeting Link Section. IIIA
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
DOUGLAS COUNTY, COLORADORULES & REGULATIONS
This presentation although on screen is a redlined version of a 2015 document. Paul is explaining all his changes in the document but he does not go into a great detail. He jumps back and forth within the document giving an overview.
Paul:
All right, well, that brings us to the rules and regs. This is on page 18 of the packet. Page 18 is the track changes version. If that starts to hurt your eyes a bit page 80 or page 84 is the clean copy. So again the the changes that we made here.
And feel free to interrupt in any time. But the changes we made were first and foremost it again, just limit the services. So we eliminated a couple chapters. If you look at page.
Just have been a table of contents. I'm sorry. Just jumped around on these. If you look in page 22, you can see me deleted. couple of chapters. Stormwater system, parks, trails and open space. Article 11 and 12 are gone. We've added a new chapter crawl. chapter 15. This is called cross connection and control and back flow prevention.
So I didn't do to this just because I feel like the district should have more rules. This was a CDPHE requirement that districts enact rules relating to cross connection control and back flow prevention. They want to they want to see the districts have the enforcement power, against its constituents for any sort of violations regarding this cross connection and control and back flow prevention.
And again, just to make sure that contaminants, don't, flow back into the, into the system. And other than that, I have made a number of changes that have just enacted, resolutions that that the board it's made the changes that the board said to the board has enacted a resolution since 2015. There's about three that haven't been done.
Those are all called out within the comments as to what resolution number it is. And that covers it. And I was a little bit, but, if anybody has any questions at this point, I, happy to answer them. This is a work session, so there's no action being taken today. So you'll have a week, you know, to sit on this and think about it.
If you don't have any questions today. I will say the hearing and appeal procedures, now I'm looking at it. We left those the same. We had, if you'll remember, we had an a hearing. I think it went pretty smoothly. I think the procedure went well. There's nothing to really change. But if anybody has any suggestions for any of this, you know, happy to hear them.
Either even today or next Monday. Okay, so that about covers the rules and regs.
Jason:
Paul, did you see Leah’s comments about the many on the title page? And Metropolitan District, it looks a little funky.
Paul:
Yeah. This was an artifact from hearing this over from a PDF. It's there's spaces and all sorts of wonky formatting to this.
Not to worry. All the formatting and all the little details like this will be cleaned up for the final version. I just want to at least give you the rough track changes version to make sure that we're looking at the substance before I went ahead and finalized everything. But I agree, it does feel very weird.
Jason:
Okay, great.
Yeah. All right. Does anybody else have any questions for Paul?
Hearing none that will, go ahead and close out, the legal items. Thanks, Paul, for working so hard when you're, not in the district or even in the state at this point.
Paul:
Happy to report I'm back in the States, but, also, also happy to get these updates. So thanks everyone.
Jason:
Thank you. All right.
We'll close out, item three legal items, and we'll move on to item item number four, the district manager items. We'll start the discussion of the EPA security evaluation.
District Manager Nathan Travis:
Yeah. Good evening guys. We are setting land speed records on this meeting. So I do have one other update outside of that, related to the, bid process for scope B for the lift station project.
We did our bid opening, late last Wednesday. We had four bidders put in. They all hit qualifications. So, we are currently working through the process of calling, just like various referrals. The low bid contractor that we have right now doesn't appear to have any projects of this scope or scale in their history.
At least not that we were presented with. And so that's kind of a a little bit of a red flag with us. So before I brought anything to the board, I wanted to do a little bit more due diligence. Kennedy Jenks is working on getting those, getting those referrals in. And I should know more to present that to the board at the board meeting.
So, if there aren't any questions about that, from the EPA evaluation, we got notification also last week, or thing early last week that the EPA is actually going to be doing a, cybersecurity, audit for us. This is something that I have never been through before. I didn't even know it was a thing that happened.
So there's an initial meeting scheduled for the 23rd, same day as board meeting, and then there's a follow up on site visit that comes and looks at that. So there is a component for some risk and resiliency assessments is something we're going to be looking at. Those we completed I think in 2019 or 2020. So we're good there. And then we've also got Greystone and our integration firm, our SCADA firm, Mountain Peak, going through our system and just making sure that everything's up to snuff.
Mountain Peak has done a couple of these before. So I do expect I'm not necessarily expecting, you know, any violations or anything, but I am. I don't know if they can issue violations on these. But I do anticipate that we'll have at least some best practices or some recommendations.
Jason:
Would you loop me in on that, Nathan?
Nathan:
Yeah, absolutely. I'll bring you. I'll add you to the meetings.p
Jason:
Please. Thank you. Yep.
Jason:
And that. What, framework are they looking at did they say?
I’ll forwarded the, email. It's a lot of they're looking at everything from, like, hardware components from different SCADA systems, making sure we have different policies in place, from, like, the, treatment plant ... side. And then they're also going to be looking at some of the office stuff that we have here.
But I'll, I'll send you everything that I've got. I don't want to speak a language I don't fully understand.
Jason:
Okay very good.
Tera:
Which is why I'm glad Jason wanted to insert himself. He does the interpretive dance.
Jason:
I know, 1 or 2 things about this not much.
Nathan:
Yeah. In a kind of a sort of in that same vein, we did, pull all of the access, access control and security camera stuff from the scope of both lift stations projects.
Kennedy Jenks is going to be working on, putting together a scope for a system wide site security audit. And so that'll be, right now, it'll be separate from the cyber security side of it, but they they may merge at some point.
Jason:
I would expect they will.
Leah:
I was going to ask, I think I have two questions related to that.
One, what was the cost for Kennedy Jenks to do that assessment and put together the scope and then two, like, is our goal to primarily use that scope to work with the vendor who came to the board meeting? Or is the goal to use that scope to solicit other bids as well?
Nathan:
So the risk and resilience assessment, I could probably find out how much we paid for that.
I don't know offhand. It was a little over four, four years ago now. So I don't have that one directly offhand. And then the security scope is really to create a, or the scope they're developing for the site security and access control systems is to get us to a point where we basically have a separate project that we can do and bid out.
So they're going to be identifying like equipment kind of getting together like an actual project scope, not specifically for one vendor, but to kind of run it through the same process that we do with any other project. So there hasn't been a spend there yet, and they're just like developing a scope for proposal. And so that would come to the board for approval then move forward on.
Leah:
Okay. Yeah, it was the latter that I was, asking about. But I wasn't sure how to like the best way to differentiate the two. And do we think, because if I recall correctly, like nobody else really responded to that bid or, you know, we just had that one vendor, do we think having the scope will increase a response from other vendors?
Nathan:
Yeah. And part of it that's part of the motivation is to move away from that piecemeal, like try and get somebody to do this, work on this building and work on this building and put together an actual project for a firm that's geared toward these large security projects.
Leah:
Cool okay, thanks Nate.
Jason:
Great questions.
Nathan:
And that is all I had for that.
Jason:
Okay. Anybody else have any questions regarding this evaluation. Okay. Hearing none I guess we can close up ahead on number four and, make this probably the quickest meeting we've ever had. And we can adjourn the meeting.
Paul:
It's got to be record.