I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the you you you you you I'm going to give frankly glad to have a good We'll go down to Creeps and she was like dreading me. I said, Listen, tell me what you want. You want me to go back and over friends tell us it's so bad. You know, it's like here. It's not that one is like that. You know, you know, you don't get everything. That's in the bottom. She does this group do another round for me. Two creeks out Kess Kater. Yeah, it's great. Until you start to see it. Yeah, we use something. And a lot of people don't know. Well, but I waxed. I waxed. I waxed my back. I waxed my back. I was a man husband. I put the pink stuff on. I wore them every day to set. So she didn't the only color she gets probably I got all of it But I thought she only comes out when it's warm She only comes out when it's warm So she only comes out when it's warm Because she didn't put the time in up front So how was it this morning? You know, today's the first morning I didn't go up at too much stuff Today to be down at the office is 7 So, if you go up early and I've been up early this If you get on row and I've been up on this if you get on the It's a little noisy, but it's good Yeah, I'll stay on the knob. I yesterday I stayed on the knob But we thought it was a good I never know about Pine Well without I came back down The pony blade chair and did two more runs off the knob and then I've been under half. Vander off. Yeah. So that's a lot. It's halfway. I think I forgot. I've sent so many proposals. That's not quite halfway there. It's not as good to be seen. I'm saying. So It's not quite halfway. It's not as good to be seen. It depends on where you're being seen as well. It depends on where you're being seen. It depends on where you're being seen. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going sure if you're interested in the slide slide. That's true. I'm not sure if you're interested in the slide slide. And that's what I'm saying. I'm not sure if you're interested in the slide slide. I'm not sure if you're interested in the slide slide. I'm not sure if you're interested in the slide slide. They kind of look like they're very interested in all the questions that I have to ask you. And I think that's the other three of them. And I think that's the answer. They come every year to all the national teams. They come every year to all the national teams. They come every year to all the national teams. They come every year to all the national teams. They come every year to all the national teams. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So, I think that's the end of the video. So This is the first time I've ever seen a person who is a man of art, and I've never seen him. He's a man of art, and I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never seen him. I've never more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. I'm going to be to the next slide. It's okay if I sit here and share it out. I just want to let some of the words down. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'll take the out. I'll take the out. Thank you. Thank you. I'll go to the next slide. I'll go to the next slide. I'll go to you're here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, you're here, listen. Is the kids on the screen? Yes. Very. Thank you. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. Very interesting. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the and so on. You're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not allowed to come here because you're not I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do it. I'm not sure if I can do slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It's 4.06 and it's a beautiful day here in Snowman's Village. It is, can you believe March the 13th? It's open for just about another month. This evening on our work session, we have the ITSP for all of you listening. It's integrated transportation system, plan stage two, there are four stages to this program, right? Ralph? and stage two, their four stages to this program, right? Ralph? And Ralph is here, Ralph, a tripanny from Parsons. And Jason might. Hey Jason, good to see you. He's from Raptop. Yes. Huh? I said thank you. You're most welcome. You got the slideshow, so. So Jason and Ralph will be presenting and discussing. And then John Dresser is going to lead us to a conversation. So Jason and Ralph will be presenting and discussing. And then John Dresser is going to lead us to a conversation. It's a begin review overview discussion of potential marijuana regulatory framework. And for those of you who are interested in this, this is just the beginning of a conversation about marijuana and Snowmass Village. Then we'll move into our goals discussion. And this is a cancer council document and second draft that Clint really worked on. And thank you very much, Clint. With that, anything else we want to, this is very informal, this is a discussion, it's a work session. Clint, anything? Do these guys go? Ralph, you're up. Great. Well, thank you. I'm Ralph Tripani with Parsons, and I'm assisting Ralph to our company Parsons as assisting Ralph to with the Integrated Transportation Systems Plan. For those of you that attend the EOTC meetings, and Markey, I know for you on the raft aboard, some of this may be a repeat. For I apologize but it'll give you an opportunity to ask some better questions so let me jump right in. I'm going to quickly go through the ITSP process that stands for Integrated Transportation Systems Plan. I'll present our ridership estimation tool, talk about our forecasting for 2036 and alternatives and give you all an idea of our next steps. So this is the RAPTA plan. We started out about a year ago now and went through the red items boxes. That was stage one where we defined the vision. Then we moved into stage two, which is what we're wrapping up right now, which is to forecast transportation and ridership demand. And we actually kicked off stage three with Raffta on Friday. So stage three is where we're going to be going right now literally and that's going to analyze the options and start getting us into phase four then stage four which is developing the financing and the revenue sources and the completion of this in late 2017 or early 2018 will result in an implementation plan for RAPTA and again our vision that we're working towards as a 20 year vision 2036. And I'll review this at the end again to to forecast the transit ridership for RAPTA. This is also the basis for potentially a larger forecasting tool that can be used for highways and so on. But what we're doing here is just doing ridership forecasting for RAPTA. It does utilize the cellular data. You've probably heard it read about it. It's the company we bought the data from his air sage, and I'll get into that in a little more detail. So we are using what we believe to be the best available data. The format and the approach allows a lot of transparency. We're using a spreadsheet-based forecast model here, so it's not some black box that you got to have two or three mathematical PhDs to talk to the black box. This is a spreadsheet-based tool, and I'll show you what it looks like. Any of you that have used spreadsheets knows it. It's a pretty universal tool for planners to use. We can calibrate it for actual conditions, and then of course we can update it as new information data emerges. Then because it's an Excel spreadsheet, it's easy to move between other planning tools, other tools that transit planners would use to talk about future ridership, future rides here, transit rides here and so on. So to generate the origin and destination data, we busted up the raft to travel shed into about 44 individual zones. David Peckler and your planners here actually helped us. Snowmass was a pretty challenging area because of the way we drew our weird and wonderful lines. But what we ended up with were about 43 internal zones. Then we've got external zones also. So to enter the raftta travel area, there's my cursor. One of the ways in is from I-70 out and coming out of Mesa County. So that's an external travel zone. Another way in is north coming from the north. Oops, this happens. On highway 13, of course out there on I-70 coming through Glenwood Canyon, that's an external zone. Highway 82, up over Independence Pass. When you go over Independence Pass, you go external. Then, then, less but not least, of course, is 133 coming in from the Gunnison area. So those are external zones, and then there's 43 internal zones. I think we divvied up snowmess into like five or six zones, didn't we, David? Well, down to the brush creek. Yeah, down to brush creek. Or to highway 82. So what we did to make this understandable was took our 43 zones and in the travel shed that raft serves and then rolled it up into Aspen, Snowmass Village, Woody Creek and so on as you can see. But this thing is actually broken down on a stop by stop basis, and I'll get to that in a minute. So what we did was we collected data, again, from the air sage company for three seasons, fall, winter, and summer. And essentially, fall was October. Winter tended to be March, summer tended to be July. And we tried to pick time periods that were outside of events. We tried to, we missed the X games, we missed the fourth of July, we missed Christmas vacation. Trying to get a more representative idea of the travel shares at those times. Hey Ralph, can you, you know, all this air sage data, et cetera. Now can you just refresh us? Fresh all of all of us How does that work that technology work at works off of iPhones? Doesn't it? Yes? Yes? Sure I can bet how do you know if I'm going to work? Well, let me let me let me give you a quick primer Let me give you a quick primer in in the air sage data What air sage does is they buy data off of Verizon because Verizon is the predominant provider up here. So when you have your phone going and this is very interesting to me, when your phone is on just because you're in a shadow and you don't have service doesn't mean you're not getting tracked. So your location is still known to those cellular towers even though you can't make service, doesn't mean you're not getting tracked. So your location is still known to those cellular towers, even though you can't make a phone call or pull up your data. So Verizon is tracking you constantly, even though you may not appear to be within the network. What AirSage does is they buy that data off of Verizon, and they anonymize it. That's the first thing they do is take your phone number off of it. So what happens is, so let's just pretend when I leave this meeting today, I'm going to start what they call an activity. We call it the transportation people call it a trip. Air sage calls in an activity. So I've been sitting here for five minutes. So as soon as my phone starts moving, it sets an endpoint. My endpoint was Snowmast town hall. Next time I'm going to stop is when I drop Jason off at Raffa, we carpooled up. So if I stop for more than five minutes, that's going to log as one trip. It's going to go from snowmast town hall to Raffa. That's one trip. It shows its origin, which is own X in its destination, which is own Y. Then you get that one trip. If Jason had his phone on that trip would also count. But if we don't stop for five minutes, in other words I roll through and tell Jason I got to get home and feed the kid and he just jumps out of the car and I'm not stopped for five minutes. It won't register that as a trip until I get home and park the car and go into the house. Then a five minute stop. That's an interesting problem because if you don't stop for five minutes, it doesn't end the trip. And we discovered that they might have been undercounting a little bit up here for people to just get dropped off at the school. I mean, any of you that drop off kids at school, that's never a five minute stop. And anyway, five minutes stop, you get a trip. And it just accounts for all these trips. But then the next question is, well, what if you don't have a rise in phone? There's a few team-oable users and so on. Okay, well, what if you don't have a cell phone, amazingly enough, there's a population that doesn't? AirSage has got an algorithm that builds it all up to 100% of the population using census data and also demographic data about the numbers of people that have phones and don't have phones. So they take the rise in data set and analyze it through their algorithms to 100 percent data. They do sort this stuff by time period. So we got it not only in terms of the seasons, but in terms of times, the weekday or weekend. And the way they classify into trip purposes is, you know, basically they can tell in your home and I honestly don't know how they can tell in your home. It has to do something with your subscription to Verizon. But again, it's all anonymized so we can't see that. But they can tell when you're doing a trip to home or a trip to work and I'll get into this in a little more detail and when I say work it could mean school also. But anyway, that's the data set that we're using. And it is the gold standard these days. And if you remember the last time we did this was in the in 93 and 94 we did what we call the catch and release study where we had the state patrol with our transportation planners and we'd stop a car with our clipboard and go okay you got three people now where you going again okay where you coming from you can imagine how that went you don't do those sorts of things anymore and my recollection was I was with a DOT when we did that in 93, 94. I think we spent more money on law enforcement than we did on actual data collection. And we don't do that anymore. The option to the air sage cellular data would be license plate surveys and things like that. And those are not, I'm told, is accurate. So, as I present this, we can get into some more detail if you've got questions. So we do identify the traveler types, and again, that's some pretty straightforward. Again, that's based on your addresses, but somebody that, oops, I'm not doing too well with these curses, somebody that lives and works within the study area would be somebody, for example, that lives in Newcastle and works in Glenwood, lives in Aspen, works in Aspen, would be a home worker, and so on. That's the predominant, I think, number of commuters we end up having here. Then we have people that live outside the study area, somebody that might live in Pauña, commute up here, somebody that works at lives in Grand Junction, maybe, and commutes to Rifle, somebody like that. Then there's somebody that's outside the study area and this is unusual to have somebody that would live in rifle and commute to grand junction. But again, these are types that we have to pick up. And then last but not least is the visitor, the single day visitor, and the multi day visitor. So this is what the ridership table looks like. So you can go into this table. And if you want to see how many people go from woody creek to Aspen, there we go. So you go across on woody creek and you go over there to Aspen and whatever is in that cell would be the number of people going from woody creek to Aspen simple enough. What's complicated about this is we rolled up all the transit stops. The actual spreadsheets got every raft to stop on it. And then we rolled it up for all the stops or an asp and all the stops and an OMS village. The raw data set with all the spreadsheets for all the stops for all the months and all the various trips, there's 2.8 million pieces of data here and I'm not going to show you any more of that. You've seen enough. How is that done on a daily basis? It's done for every period that we showed you earlier. So it would be a weekday in the winter, weekend winter, weekday summer, weekend summer and so on. And then we've got AM, midday and PM. So that's how you get 2.8 million. For any of you mathematicians, it's 10 factorial or something like that. Each of those boxes would be broken down by all those different groupings, right? The individual stops, yes. In the year the time of day and the time of week. Exactly. And we are able to make that data set available to all the communities that are members of the EOTC or RAPTA. So David and his staff have, we'll be getting this data set. And you can use it and we had to sign an agreement can it come to be used for transportation because air sage sells their data for marketing they sell it for all kinds of things to real itters but we're only allowed to use it for transportation planning so what this ridership tool gets looks like basically is the blue box is the raft of data that raft it has really good data for you know just basically how many people get on how many people get off. So we've developed a transit trip table using the raft of data so we we know exactly how many get on how many get off at each stop. Then we take the air sage data and we build the person trip data table that I just described. But the air sage data does not distinguish by modes. It doesn't know whether you're walking, driving, riding a bike, or whatever. So their person trip table is what we call all modes. So then what we need to do is basically mathematically combine these tables, pull off the non-rafted trips, and that ends up in step four, which is the transit trips, which is a percent of all trips made by transit. Then we can take those transit shares, for example, in 2016, add in our population and employment data here in step five, and that's based on the land use analysis we did, and we can come up with a future ridership table. But what that does is that assumes exactly what we've got right now. It assumes the existing raft of service. It assumes the existing raft of rideshare and I'll give you the results for that in just a second. So let me finish that this off. So from the transit ridership we can start developing service plan alternatives both for the bus rapid transit and also for the can start developing service plan alternatives, both for the bus rapid transit and also for the local and express service. For example, one of the things we've been hearing, we've been doing outreach now almost constantly in the last year plus. One of the things we're learning is that in the middle of the day, BRT possibly has too many trips because when Raffta worked out the $25 million federal grant from the FTA, the FTA said we want 15-minute headways, we're not going to give you the money, that's a condition of the service plan. So Raffta has to run 15-minute headways all day long on the BRT, well that expired about a year ago. So now Raffta using the ITS peak and go in and reanalyze their service plans. So that's what we'll be doing in the next step is working with RAAFDA using this data to look and see what what happens when you start maybe dropping out some of those midday BRT trips, maybe replacing them with some express buses, maybe looking at more service to snowmass for example. Those are the sorts of things that Rafft is going to be doing. So Raff is the money gone, so that's why it has expired. You said Rafft received 25 million? Oh, no, no. That was just a condition of the FTA grant, and I probably wasn't making myself clear. But I think it was a two-year period after the opening day of BRT that they needed to run on that service plan. And then after that, the FTA strings get cut and you're allowed to manage your service plan. Maybe the money was gone and you don't have to do it anyway. No, sir. No, I'm sorry. I misspoke. Okay. And the lot of the money was capital investment in bus stop design, rolling stock, IT systems, Fairbucks collection, variable message, Fairbox collection, variable message, headboards, and things like that. And you know, that was pretty impressive. I mean, we matched it basically. The local community matched that 25 million with 25 million of their own. So anyway, that's going to be an important step in stage three is working with Raff to look at some modified service plans. So let me just give you some results of the forecast. But again, I want to lay the groundwork. What I'm going to give you are high level summaries just for winter and summer, so I don't have to present the 2.8 billion trips, I'm sorry. And we'll show it as 2016 current in 2036, which is a planning horizon. What I'm presenting to you is what we did off the raft of data. We're still processing, as you can imagine, the air sage data. But one thing I want to make sure of, the increases in transit and ridership that you're going to see over the next 20 years are strictly due to population and employment growth. Again, remember, we're modeling at the moment the raft system that we've got now, which is a current service, the current rideshare, that's all of the assumptions that we use. We basically did not include any new developments. We are not finding any big new developments on the books. There's a lot of developments down valley that are in the planning stages. But we did make an allowance for the airport development in right now, about 3% of the people that are getting on and off planes at Sardeefield are using transit. So that's the amount we use for 2030. Is that, Ralph, is that this 3500 annual trips? Yes, sir. Exactly. Exactly. That's only 3% of the total. That's 3% of the total implements. Yeah. Yeah. Which is about 100,000 this year. OK. And I think it's projected to grow another 200,000 trips out to 2036. Yeah. Yeah. So let me go ahead and present this data. So this is for winner, average weekday trips, and we rolled it up a little bit. So system wide, in 2036, if there's no change in service, if there's no change in ride share, if people, this is assuming the exact situation we've got now, system wide, raft is going to increase 27% in the winter. But you can see as we scroll down just in the state highway 82 quarter we're looking at a 36% increase. We broke that out in local and express in BRT. You can see that's those all roll up to 36%. The grand hogback route goes from rifle to glenwood. That's the I-70 route. That's going to increase dramatically 71%. That's not surprising. Our population data is showing that's the I-70 route, that's going to increase dramatically, 71%. That's not surprising, our population data is showing that's where all the growth is going to be. And the raft of travel shed is out in West Garfield County. But what's very interesting, the snow mass, that bottom line is snow mass, the down valley and down valley to snow mass, that's going to pick up about a 47% increase. Again, it's not a lot of riders. It's like 368 riders, but that represents almost doubling what you've got now between now and 23rd and 6th. And Ralph, when you made that statement of 47%, which to me was when you first presented that, it's a staggering number, thinking back to the fact that it does not include new development. It basically is population growth. It's just population employment, that's all. And I don't think, I think I asked you this before, I don't think within those calculations, we anticipated base village coming online in 2019. That would be based on the employment, Marky, and I, that the employment came from the state demographer so if it's probably isn't included. Yeah, to me it wasn't included when you describe what the definition is. So that 47% where I okay this is an assumption. So we know what that is. A 47% increase I think that for me it says to me, that's probably the minimum, that's probably understated because I would think many of our employees over here, given our issue around employee housing, if we don't accommodate that, are coming from down valley. We're not gonna be asked about folks. Well, let me keep going. You're gonna have to run more buses up here, Ralph. Well, that here is going to be one of the service plans. But let me explain how this kind of pointy-headed ridership stuff turns into alternatives. Because what we'll do next is we'll take, I'm going to pick on the Grand Hog Back Route. We're showing a 71% increase. So some of the alternatives we're gonna start looking at to address that is making public transit more intuitive. That might help manage that ridership a little bit. Obviously expanding the I-70 Grand Hog Back Service, it's gonna be necessary, we're looking at a 71% increase. One thing that it doesn't point out though is there's no need for BRT out in West Garfield County. When we did our outreach out there, no need for BRT out in West Garfield County. When we did our outreach out there everybody wanted BRT you know they heard how great it was in the Rowing Fork Valley well it turns out they don't need it they don't have that much ridership so it so kind of an express service on steroids would probably do the job for them out there. Obviously bus stop improvements will be helpful out there. They're looking at some substantial parking ride improvements and silt and rifle and parachute. So those are the sorts of alternatives that we'd be pulling in to talk about the increases in the Grand Hog Back. Let me talk about summer for a moment. The increases are a little less system wide in the summer. We're looking at a 21% increase in summer. Again, the snow mass roots are still up there at 45%. Again, just a few less roots in the summer. But let me pick on the State Highway 82 corridor there because again, we're looking at over 2,000 additional transit users. So what would summer options be? Obviously, optimize a BRT system. That's what I talked about a moment ago. Start looking at really optimizing those service plans and maybe doing some more express service at midday and dropping off some of the BRT, maybe getting even more BRT during the peak hour. Better transit connections up here in Snowmass Village at Brush Creek Road. That's important. The Brush Creek Parking Watt is kind of getting to be the center of the universe here. Just as a little side, I was the C. Dot person that negotiated to buy that property from Wally Mills. One of the best pieces of land I think I was ever involved in purchasing but it was tough to convince my bosses to buy that ranch, but looking back it was a darn good idea now. The Wii cycle bike share expansion is going to be a possibility to help the micro transit first and last mile connections and micro transit is of course talking about the Uber and Lyft. We keep hearing about Uber and Lyft. I don't know that it's a panacea. You take a ride in Uber. It's still another car on the road, whether it's your car or an Uber car. Transportation to man management is important. Some of you are sure are aware of what they do in Aspen with a parking. You want to screw down the congestion and Aspen raise a parking. It's pretty much cause and effect. We've seen that for the last 20 years. Again, looking at Park and Ride expansion in Glenwood, Carbondale, and Bissalt. Park and Ride expansion at Brush Creek. We did a loud at Brush Creek. You can actually cram over 2,000 people, vehicles there, not in an X Games environment with actual parking spaces and things. You can get 2,000 spaces there. We'd be looking at bus stop improvements, of course. Couple of pedestrian crossings, one at 27th Street and Glenwood, one here at the rear, down in Carbondale. So that'll give you an idea again of how this ridership starts talking to the various alternatives. You know, I have a question. I'm sorry, Dave. Good. I'll clarify in question, or the snowmmast down valley, down valley snowmass I believe is the direct service only. Okay. So there are a lot of snowmass trips that are in the state highway 82 quarter. So it's just a bit of clarification that you're seeing there as a real specific part of the service. That's a direct service. That's very helpful. It's not the locals the service. That's a direct service. That's very helpful. It's not the locals that direct. Right. Okay. I'll write that down here shortly. But Ralph, I want to go back to question relative to going into Aspen. What type of increase are we anticipating on raft where that trip coming out of the intercept or coming out of snowmass or coming out of? When will it spring? Marky, I don't have that broken down at this point, but I would be guessing that it's probably higher than the increases that we're seeing here. I imagine that tends to be a little bit higher going in and out of Aspen because the AM ride share is at 40% right now for raft going into town in the mornings. We can get that answer though. I don't have all 2.8 million pieces of data at my disposal. In fact, my recollection was we're developing that data specifically for the EOTC meeting. It's going to ask because EOTC is coming and we know that's going to be a very crucial meeting. Yeah, because we will be comparing the LR to the light rail ridership to the bus rapid transit ridership. So we will have that answer for you at the EOTC. Any other questions? I'll keep moving here. I do want to go back. Most of us don't recognize that the nature of the gray and hug back route. Could you go back? That's one slide back. It was what a 70-some-odd percent increase. 71 percent. And within that, do most of those commuters stop at Glimwood Springs or do they make the turn? Do we know what percentage comes this way? They are coming, there's some of them are coming this way, but what we're finding is the travel patterns from West Garfield County generally tend to terminate in Glenwood or Carbondale. Some people are going past Glenwood and Carbondale, but the majority of the I-70 people are commuting to Glenwood. And again, Glenwood's importing almost as much labor as Aspen at this point. Aspen's importing 69%, Glenwood's importing 60%. So- That's an interesting statistic. Well, I had a meeting like this with the Garfield County commissioners last Tuesday morning. And frankly, I lived down there, and I know most of those commissioners personally. And they said, if Aspen would just build some affordable housing, we wouldn't need to be doing all this. And when I pointed out the Glenwood imported almost as much labor as Aspen, they wanted to change the subject pretty quickly. You know, after you know what snowmass is importing? I don't have that number of you guys probably do though. No, we don't. You don't? I don't think so. Because the travel pattern study that I'm using for this is the study that Raffda did in 2014. That was the number and I don't recall a number broken out for snowmast just by itself. I wouldn't even want a hazard of gas. It's probably in the 60 to 70% range though. Is that going to say Dave, do you know from some of those studies we've done about- Well, I think it's talked about in the Charleer study that was that travel pattern study that the UTC helped fund. I don't know the number off the top of my head. I can get that for you. I think that for me, that would be an interesting number as we have, having discussions about affordable housing and where we are. I can give that to you. I mean, could be a good number. And it was in one of the studies we did looking at employee housing and what people wanted and if they wanted to deliver in snow mass. This was back in 2010, 2010. Yeah, so. Remember it was nice. Remember it as part of a community survey. Carest was part of this Yeah 2008 it's all that's what it was a great study That one was it was something like 49% Rehounds 49% of the people that work year round in the village in 2007 or eight I think what we're finding from what little we know of the air sage data at this point in 2007 or 2008, whatever you got that one. I think what we're finding from what little we know of the air sage data at this point is that some of the reality check, if you will, on it, it seemed to corroborate that travel pattern study data to a certain extent. So that was one of the, do we feel confident about about what we're looking at? I can send the summary page for Sonoma. Do you have? That would be great. Thank you. And Ralph. It's all of us. How are we going to get at the number of people coming to Sonoma's village from the 82 corridor? We're not going to get that from air sage, right? Yes, we will get that that. Brush Creek is in a brush creek intercept is in a different travel zone and for example if you could say look at the trip tables for all the trips that end in snowmass, let me go back. So if you just took all the trips that ended in snowmass across the board, if you totaled all those up that would give you a total number the trips that ended in snow mass across the board. If you totaled all those up that would give you a total number of trips that are coming and going from snow mass. Again once this spreadsheet gets developed you can do all kinds of wild things with it. Probably more than I even know about it this point. As a clarification though you should know that the travel air sage data that's being looked at now is solely a transit-related trip. So if you want to know travel pattern, total mobility study, that's something different. So I just think there's just a bit of clarification there that you don't see the other moves. Yeah, thank you, David. And I want to make sure that we all understand that this data second be used for all kinds of transportation analysis. In the big cities, this is used for a total regional travel demand model, which I sure hope we get to someday in these two corridors, because it doesn't work to have asked been doing TDM and Glen would not do TDM. It doesn't work to have snowmast paid, doing paid parking and Glen would not doing paidM. It doesn't work, they have snowmast, paid, doing paid parking, and Glenwood not doing paid parking. It doesn't work to not have good transit service out in West Garfield County, and then complain when there's a traffic jam and Glenwood Springs. We hear all the time about how Glenwood doesn't get their monies worth out of Raffta. Well, turn off Raffta for one day and Glenwood Springs and see what happens. And David, I'm going to back up a second. So the data that near process that will track brush creek road, but that doesn't say that they're coming from Aspen to intercept lot in the snowmast or Glenwood at the intercept lot. Does it make a distinction of where the in the matrix? Yeah, it will see the stop at the intercept lot. It's more than five minutes so the trip ends in a trip, correct? As about that. If the delay was longer than five minutes, then it would end up in if you could look in the 47 zones and you would see, okay, and that was when Ralph was saying five zones for snow mass, well the intercept lot was one of those zones, quasi snow mass, quasi picking county, but it's isolated. So, but I think my point is, so the trip ends in intercept lot. So, aspen to intercept lot. So, now there's a new trip from the intercept lot to snowmats. Correct. So, I think that's what it Lincoln. Let's just, here is just the direct service, not the local service. Right. So I think my point is that I'm trying to figure out if it's coming down. Pointing out from down. Pointing out from down. Or if they're coming from asking the snowman. I mean, the distinction between the two different directions. Generally, the timing of the transfer should not predominantly exceed five minutes. So I don't think it's, they're dwell time there. So that stays one trip. It's gonna stay as one trip. There are sometimes where yeah, they miss the connection. Things fall apart, that happens. But I think generally, and some of the daily data is gonna give you an overall feeling that it's moving along. Okay. Well, let me keep moving through here. We talked about alternatives. Let me talk about what we're going to be doing in stage three, but I want to emphasize what we heard in stages one and two. I'm not going to read this whole slide, but this is important. Nobody we talked to anywhere from parachute to assman said there is too much transit. Everybody wanted more transit. Everybody. I mean, parachute wanted service, rifle wanted more service, Glenwood wanted more service, Carmandale wants more of a circulator, Missult wants a circulator, Glenwood's got a circulator, they want a bigger circulator. Everybody wants more when it comes to transit. And that's going to be a challenge to Raffta because they're operating off of sales tax revenues and so on. People want more trail development. People want more on-demand bike share, things like that. So what this all comes to is it looks to me as a transportation planner that the demand for raft of service is only going to be increasing. Perhaps even beyond the numbers I showed you because the numbers I showed you assume current travel just like it is now on raft and it also assumes current ride share. So if we're moving 40 40% of the Commuters into Aspen on Raffta in the morning and gas goes to four bucks a gallon What do you think that 40% is gonna look like again? As a transit ride share goes up our Forecasting model is gonna have to be modified to capture that transit ride share where forecasting model is going to have to be modified to capture that transit ride share. Because we know it's affected by gas prices seem to really drive the ridership with Raffta. We can't input weather conditions, however. So, at a snowy day, Raffta's ride share peaks too. But I wanted to show you that just so you can hear. We're continuing our outreach and if anybody says we have too much transit service, they're gonna stick out like a sore thumb because they'll be the only ones. So is this a wish list, essentially? It's a wish list from the community. I guess it's a wish list. Yeah, it is a wish list. And trying to put revenue sources to this wish list is going to be a challenge. So as we move into stage three, we'll be working with Rafft to develop service plan alternatives based on the outreach efforts and the needs we developed in stage two. We'll be creating capital and O&M costs, looking at comparing alternatives using the estimation tool. We'll have an evaluation matrix and criteria to help the Rafft aboard because the Raff raft aboard is going to take this then and make decisions about do they, is there a need to go to a 2018 ballot, you know, those sorts of things. And then of course, we'll, I'm raft will assist raft in completing a service alternatives plan and of course draft the report and continue with more outreach and you recall then when we got, I'm going to blast through these alternatives. I want to get to stage four here. So then stage four is where the excitement really happens when we try to put financing to these various things. One of the things that I'm quite concerned about right now is the 2016 Republican platform and this is down in black and white says no federal funding for transit. I'm predicting that more dependence on state and local funding is going to be absolutely necessary as we move ahead. So that's going to get to be pretty exciting as we get into the next stage. But I did want to mention the Upper Valley Mobility Study because your community is an active member of that. The purpose of the upper mobility study is stated to be to provide, improve mobility between brush creek and Ruby park. But what it really is intended to do is give the upper valley communities an opportunity to tell Raff to what they want in the integrated transportation systems plan. Raff did didn't have the funding to go and look at things like light rail versus enhanced BRT from brush creek gone in. So we've, at the request of the EOTC, done a separate study and in the next few months, you all that are members of the EOTC are going to need to make a decision about light rail versus enhanced BRT. And then that decision system will be put into the ITSP for 20 years additional planning. So that's the purpose of the UVMS and the EOTC meeting here coming up in a few weeks. So we're going to be presenting ridership data between the two options and also costs. So it's going to be a pretty exciting year. So Ralph, I have a question for you. I see we're in a real interesting dilemma. We hear from Mr. Scadrin, he wants no more buses coming than what he already has in the Asmond. Did I state that correctly? That's what triggered this study, I believe. I believe, Markey. Okay, so whatever that number is, it's 72 or how many buses go in there a day? I think it's closer to 1,000. There's 1,000 trips in and out. 1,000 trips? Yeah. OK. So having said that in terms of number of buses, and now we're looking at BRT being the other option. In our meeting on Friday, we heard that a mile of BRT is about 100 million. the other option. In our meeting on Friday we heard that a mile of BRT is about 100 million. So and I was sitting next to George, this was a meeting at Dave, you were there at the Aspen Institute, this transportation thing we've got going there as well. Light rail, yeah, light rail. What does it say BRT? You know, when we were talking about when I brought the whole issue, just run the rail, the entire loop or the entire distance, which is 42 million, there's already, it appears to me there's already statements being made, well, we can't afford it. So if that is, I hate to get to a conclusion before we see what the numbers are and what it can do for us, but it seems as though there are individuals already starting to form their opinion. What is our alternative? Is it the straight shot? Well, first of all, the straight, what everybody calls a straight shot is actually called the preferred alternative with a modified direct alignment, but straight shots easier to talk about. When I started working here, what the straight shot was was a 70 mile straight alignment in a 7th and main. That's the straight shot, but I personally designed the preferred alternative across the Merold easement, and we induced curvature, so it wasn't straight. But I know what you're talking about. The straight shot is included in both the LRT and the BRT solutions, because we were directed to work from the record of decision, which includes the construction of the transportation facility across the Merold easement. That transaction's been conducted. The easement exists. That was done in year 2000. So we went through court case and everything. That's a done deal to get across. Well, the straight shot that we were referring to is really just going to be a single lane each way. So it's not going to be the total alternative. That is the total alternative. It's a single unrestricted lane in each direction with a busway in each direction. So it'll be like it is when you go on the right side of the roundabout. Yes, that's right. There was no way that Aspen would accept an unrestricted four lane going into town when we did that. But Mark, one point. I just wanna be real clear about where we are. Well, the March 23rd meeting is gonna be a very interesting meeting. And we're working on the estimating right now and the young man from Ferran Pierce that asked that question, I think he said 75 to 100 million. That's a pretty good rule of thumb for light rail. 175 to 100 million a mile. Pretty good rule of thumb. And light rail doesn't allow you a lot of opportunities to phase. It's kind of like a train. You got to build it from point A to point B. It's not like, well, let's just build it to the airport or something like that. It's not going to work unless it goes all the way. But I do want to say that I think the issue in Aspen was started out being the buses, but when you start talking about, well, buses, okay, they're big, but a train is really big. You take a train into town. It's noise and pollution that I think our neighbors and aspirin are concerned about. And we're looking at electric buses now, which make no noise and they don't emit any emissions at this source at least. So that might present a reasonable option. And you all get a chance to hear that on the 23rd. It's going to be an exciting meeting. So when you did the BRT, when you're looking, not BRT, the light rail option, did we put the forecast for 2036 within the consideration of number of trains? Yes, yes we did. And you may recall, Markey, at the last DOTC meeting, we presented how a BRT operates versus an LRT and an LRT has a lot more capacity than a BRT just because of the four trains set and so on. The question that will be answered is whether we do we need that much capacity. That's one of the questions we have for us. I was growing at those numbers, or staggering numbers, at 27 percent. Well we will be comparing BRT ridership against LRT ridership at that meeting. But again, this is a really exciting time around here. I mean, I started working up here in 1992 after we cut the ribbon in Glenwood Canyon. And this is pretty exciting because you all are willing to work in a test tube environment. Nobody in America has 40% of their commuters coming into town on transit. New York City doesn't have that kind of percentage. If it wasn't for BRT, that line going into Aspen in the mornings would be stretching down to the brush creek light, probably, literally. I mean, I was involved in all of the process getting us there. And I'm quite impressed at the way that system works. It works a lot better than I would have ever believed. So anyway, we've kept this pretty informal. If you have any more questions or discussion, we can cover it here. But I appreciate everyone's attention. And this is pretty exciting time for transportation in the valleys. Well, on a slightly different subject, yes sir, as a transportation planner. How much of the traffic going through the S curve is affected by and created by the traffic light at Cemetery Lane? Well, I can't give you an exact number, but system-wide, the traffic signal at Cemetery Lane, and they ask curves, really create a lot of congestion. We've laid the highway engineers like to put what we call a template on a curve, and we can look at that template and say, oh, well, that's a 30 mile an hour curve, which means you can safely navigate into 30 miles an hour. That which means you can safely navigate it to 30 miles an hour. That's, you see the curve advisory signs. You can't even put a number on the S curves. The S curves are so tight that they're not even in the highway engineers curve table, it's something less than 20 miles an hour. So between that and the cemetery lane light, the preferred alternative was intended to eliminate those two things and go with a traffic signal at seventh and main and then run the traffic outbound out of town through a mile 35 mile an hour designed curves so that they tend to calm traffic a little bit but not slow it down just keep people from wanting to go 70 miles an hour. But that's the system isn't done until that's completed until then the system's interrupted. And also the buses are in mixed traffic which is a problem because from the roundabout to 7th and May and the raft of buses are sitting in traffic just like everybody else. So getting rid of the cemetery lane light which is certainly easier than straightening out the road would help, but it wouldn't necessarily fix the problem. No, the S curves, I mean I can't throw any numbers against this, but based on my professional judgment I'd say the S curves are causing 80 to 90% of the problem there, because the cemetery lights been modified. We watched the S been police run the problem there. Because the cemetery light's been modified. We watched the Aspen Police run the traffic there. And you still have a backup, because again, you've got very incredibly low speed curves at the S curves. Thanks. And obviously this is a pretty political conversation we're having here. But frankly, when I get asked like at the Institute, I'm on the committee with David and Markey, and I get asked all the time, you know, what's the one thing that we can do? I say, why don't you complete the system? That would be one thing you can do because the system isn't finished yet. Anything else? Well, if what's a major drawback to the split shot? The split shot. Good question. The split shot is basically the inbound traffic running on the new preferred alternative and the outbound traffic staying through the S curves and Cemetery Lane light. Well, first of all, the outbound traffic doesn't clear, so you still get the backups on Main Street. So it'll be really easy to get into town and really hard to get out of town. And then you don't get the benefit of being able to abandon that section of Highway 82 between basically Cemetery Lane and the Roundabout, because the preferred alternative includes a short land bridge, it's about 300 feet long. So when you build the land bridge over the new transportation alignment, and you eliminate the old highway 82 between Cemetery Lane and Mount About. You have an open space. You have continuous open space from the Aspen Golf Course across Old Highway 82, across the top of New Highway 82, tying into the upper end of the Merolt, the landing zone for the paragliders, and so on. That is actually a pretty important issue because one of the ways we justified taking the open space across Marolt was by being able to give back a few of those acres there between the roundabout and the cemetery lane light. So I know the split shot's been studied. Unfortunately, it does violate the preferred alternative and it can't be implemented without a lot of additional NEPA work. So talk a little bit about that, the NEPA work. Well, we've got a record of decision that was hammered out, and I can say hammered out, I was in the middle of that one. And when you prepare a federal NEPA action like that, National Environmental Protection Act, action, you do something called federalizing a corridor, for example the Castle Creek Bridge. That was a pretty bad day I heard when they replaced that expansion joint last week. Well, you can't build a new bridge there because the corridor has been federalized and the preferred alternative says you're going to build a new bridge across a new alignment at 7th and main. That's what the federal government and the state government is obligated to do. So by federalizing the corridor, all you can do is continue to put band-aids on the old Castle Creek bridge because it's far as a preferred alternative is concerned. It's not intended to be a state highway bridge anymore. It's intended to be a local bridge to carry the traffic from cemetery lane to the new light at 7th and main. And we could still put band-aids on the Castle Creek Bridge to if it was a local bridge? If it was a local, one of the constraints of the record of decision is when the new bridge gets built, C.DOTs obligated to go back in and bring the old bridge up to a certain standard of Structural efficiency which they're not nobody's doing right now because we can't get the traffic off of it and get it on the new bridge So that we could go in and do the kind of rehab that would be necessary for the city of Aspen to take that bridge over Because the city will get that bridge when the new alignment gets built that'll become the new highway 82 when the new alignment gets built, that'll become the new highway 82. What's the, what are the buses currently running at? What's the capacity? Are you talking about like current like BRT, RAPTA? I mean, since we're talking about, you know, transportation from, I mean, particularly for us from here to Aspen. Here's the ridership. I'm for transistors. So there is capacity within the system to grow though, right? My understanding at the A MP is it's getting it's getting they're pretty full. They're standing room. Yeah. Yeah and you could consider that maybe 60 passengers. Yeah. Is it ballpark? Seating is 46 or something. Yeah. Standing room only. MPG. We're sitting all the way down. I think we're up. It's like for a certain section, like maybe it clears off in the salt. But for all teams, I'm not a phone one. I'm not putting it to the end. Yeah, I just want to know. Sorry. Jason White with Raffta. So the question was, are they a capacity? And some of this is anecdotal. I can get you the exact passenger counter data, you know, after this meeting. anecdotally in the AM and PM peak, so for three hours in the morning and the afternoon, there's a lot of standing room only, but it may not be people standing all the way down Valley or up Valley. It might be like from basalt to upper Valley and then it clears out. That's anecdotal because our projections are we are surprised all the time at the BRRT ridership. So Jason. Very popular. Just a build on what Bill is asking. build on what Bill is asking. What time do the parking lots of BRT or the parking rides fill up in Carbondale in Glimwood Springs? Five out seven a.m. Especially 27th Street in Glimwood and then we've doubled the capacity at Carbondale and that's pretty much full on a snow day. It's definitely by seven, maybe even six thirty. I mean, people are, they know they need to get there. West Glenwood Springs Park and Ride still has a fair amount of capacity because we expanded it recently. Twenty-seven Street is very tight all the time and we can't park up on Blake and in the glimmer springs right away So we're already looking at some kind of expansion or other kind of creative solution at 27th Street And so what is the option those people drive through in the parking lots full and then they just keep driving? unfortunately, yes or You know the best trip for us is someone that does it by foot or by bike, or they get dropped off. That's like a perfect transit trip for us. There is still a lot of car pooling that happens, and we're not squelching that in our parking rides. So it's a little difficult to tell how much of those cars parked there are ride share or are they directly transit. And it totally, as you move down valley, like out into the I-70 corridor, more of the parking is at capacity with ride share than it is transit. In the upper valley, it's predominantly transit. So the circulator, I mean, that's one of the reasons you guys are getting such pressure for more circulators, I would imagine. Takes some pressure off of the park and ride and gets people to those bus stops. Yes. And it's a cost-benefit analysis of what those circulators cost versus say, expanding we cycle and some other, at first and last mile solutions. But in general, yes, that's why basalt, Nell Jabell and Willits and Carbondale, we are running the circulator and Carbondale looking at expanding it around town more. So yes, that is a fairly seamless transit system where you get to the main trunk with BRT, of course, and then you get there with a circulator or your own means of transport. Right, which seems to be, I mean, we can't just keep building parking lots, right? So we gotta come up with some other alternatives. Yes. Well, concerning the parking lots, right? So we got to come up with some other alternatives. Yes. Well, concerning the parking lots, when we, I was involved in the BRT project development and the initial estimates to actually match the track parking demand we needed, um, it was like $150 million system because we ended up building parking garages everywhere. And at that point, the raft aboard, as I recall, snapped and said, no, we're not building parking lots here. Let's get us down to a $50 million system and that got us what you see. When I first came on board on the Highway 82 corridor, we were looking at parking, needing to park like 6,000 cars up and down the corridor. My story is the basalt parking ride. That was one of the first projects I did is the C.Guy in Highway 82. We predicted. It would fit. We cut the ribbon in that parking ride in 1996. We predicted it would be full by 2012. It was full the next week after we opened it. That's how much demand there was. We can't keep building parking rides around here. I agree. The key here is leaving the car in the driveway and managing that first and last mile somehow. Getting people from their home to the bus stop without driving their car and having to park it. That's where we talk about the Wii cycle. We talk about transit circulators. Those are the sorts of things we're looking at or walking or riding your bike. Yeah, on the first and second, it's the first and last mile. That was a big discussion the other day. There's some other creative solutions coming out on that conversation as well. So it sounds like what we really need to focus on is being more efficient with the times that the buses are running. So if we have people standing, we have more buses at that time and then back off when we don't have the need. Yeah. And as I said earlier, I think that now that Rafft is out from under the FTA demands for the service plan, they've got a lot more flexibility to look at managing their schedules more around the demand rather than what the FTA made them pick. Okay. Any other questions because we have two more topics yet to go. Pat, did you have a question? I saw your hand up before. This is Ferranda, Pat Keifer-Base Village. I was looking at your list of capital alternatives, starting at about page 23, and there are a number of things that focus on transit centers. I represent base village and our neighborhood is solely responsible for the funding of the transit center over here. That transit center we know on an operational basis. There's a $4 million construction of it that the neighborhood itself is paying for. And then there's another $200,000 that we lose every year by operating the transit center. Are these transit centers normally funded by a single neighborhood? Are you looking for town funding or state funding or municipal funding? What page could you turn your screen towards me? Thank you. Capitol alternative is parking right and board. I just looked at those as examples. We're another example of that if we ever have to look at expansion from a base village viewpoint. We're wondering if you're expecting that funding to come from us. Well, I'm not familiar with how you all worked out the funding at the base village. He's his study, he's from Parsons, so how the whole funding worked out. But I can say that it is, it's not unusual for a local community to get involved in a transit center based on my experience in other places. For example, this is a small scale example, but if the down valley governments wanted certain amenities at the bus stops, they had to pay for them. So it's not completely unique that you all up here having to kick in on the neighborhood basis there. But at this point in time, there is nothing that I know of as part of this plan that would include going out to a private party asking for anything. But it's possible like the BRT, if somebody wanted a restroom at a bus stop, they had to pay for it. So. Yeah, there is no planned expansion down at Bayes Village for transit. It's another whole plan, perhaps. Okay. Thank you. I was just curious as to how that worked in the rest of the world. Okay. Can we move on to any other questions for Ralph? I'm sensitive to the time. Well, thank you all. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you Jason. Jason, thank you. Jason, thanks. And I'll see you all at the standing room only tonight. I see it the EOTC meeting on the 23rd. Thank you for the attention. Can you look clear of that screen, David? I can't seem to get it cleared. So. We're going to move on. Yeah, we're going to move on to the marijuana discussion. John, do you want to lead? Lead us through this discussion. The, do you want to lead this through this discussion? It's a framework for how we might look at it. Pass the ball in there. Yeah, we're going to make it a very focused discussion here. Funny. That's why I brought the cookie. It's a joke. It's a joke. Everybody has no idea what's going to kick in on the red. You guys did it. Ralph, thank you so very much for your tune. Thanks, Ralph. The red test is in my account. A way for a cookie to start. Just thought everybody could get a good laugh. They were normal cookies. Well, I started my memo kind of with a brief history of how it marijuana got legalized here in Colorado. I just wanted to go back and let you know that the vote in snowmass village was $9.89 to $385. for marijuana legalization. Now, people like to bring that vote up for the reason of saying we voted for this. Okay, go on. Sorry. A lot of people would use that to say that they voted for that in Snowmass Village, but that was a very different question. It was, shall Colorado decriminalize it, didn't say, did you want it in your community? So I just wanted to point that out. Before the deadline imposed by that constitutional amendment, snowman of the town of Snowmass Village did enact a moratorium on marijuana, and that was something that was revisited about a year later in 2014. And at that time the town council decided to extend that moratorium to see what the next federal administration did. And to understand that, the Obama administration went in in 2008. And the holder memo, which was the prior Attorney General memo to the coal memo, which I just emailed that off to you. I'm sorry that did not get in the packet. I thought it was attached. Anyway, that's basically a federal memorandum that says there's really not a good return on enforcing marijuana laws, federal marijuana laws in states that have passed marijuana regulation schemes. And you'll see in my memo I used the language a couple of times that states that have legalized marijuana as well as enacted and implemented strong and effective regulatory enforcement systems of control distribution, sale, et cetera. And so those are the buzzwords in the coal memorandum. So that basically was the enabling decision by the executive branch of the federal government to allow states to go into this test, I guess, is what you'll call it. It were a millions illegal. That was entirely a product of the Obama administration. So one of the things that Snowmass Village was concerned about, and rightfully so, in my opinion, how was this going to be when we went into a new administration? We're there now. In my memo, I said that so far this administration hasn't changed anything. Of course, over the course of when this memo was written and we meet here today, the attorney general has let go a sizable amount of the senior U.S. attorneys across the country. So is that a cursor through action by the attorney general in terms of another memo is going to come out? I can't tell you that. That was one of the big concerns at the time of the implementation of the moratorium and another one of the big ones that that council considered was at that time snowmast tourism was engaging in branding and how would that affect. So at the direction Council, the marketing board discussed it amongst their constituency and made a recommendation that to council at that time that it could negatively affect the branding efforts. To that end, I gave you a list of questions really to consider. And I'm just going to briefly maybe broaden some of that discussion and then answer questions. First of all, the big one is whether or not to allow marijuana to establishments to exist at all. And I put in italics there. This is the loaded question, but it's the be all in the end all question. And it's labeled number one because that's if you say no right then and there. That's the framework right there. We can go on to council goals. I get the inclination from your deliberations on the last moratorium and your direction to staff that you're not ready to answer that question right now without understanding. And I guess discussion and education were the words you used at that meeting what is this really all about. So I tried to pick questions that would help you understand a lot of the variety of the issues that you're going to hopefully look at over the course of at least this moratorium and you know you may decide that it's a longer period. But there's four different real kinds of establishments, establishments, considered and permitted under the law. And what kind you want or don't want in your community is up to you as a council with community input, obviously. Retail marijuana stores. We don't call those dispensaries anymore. That's medical marijuana. It's a different thing. Cultivation facilities, I think everybody here It's medical marijuana. It's a different thing. Cultivation facilities, I think everybody here is probably driven by the one on 82, down near the Rory 4 Club, and you probably found in the newspaper how they had some problems with odor. Oater is one of the big things that needs to be considered. Retail marijuana manufacturing, which is your edibles and your vape supplies and all those things that go with it. And then there's testing facilities. So those you can pick and choose, that's kind of a schmorgasbord. Now go ahead. A quick question for you on two and B. In terms of a growing facility, can we do a sub underneath that and that's the impact on water resources? Absolutely. Because that's one of the big issues that I see in terms of cultivation. Well, and you do know that that was a question that went to the Colorado water park and It was very interesting question because there were federal Water rights that were being used for that and so in other words that water came out of Rooda and so And the state upheld that that that was a valid legal use there hasn't been any challenge from the feds today So that is a valid legal use, there hasn't been any challenge from the feds today. So that is a consideration. We, you, you, is this body, don't really have any control over our water resources. Our code says, if water in sand gives them a letter that says the ability to serve, that's really the end of it as far as your concern. Thank you very much. They are the potentates of water here in the village. So, but as we get down further, you can add that back in that whatever number of EQRs you're going to allow, because you are in kind of a symbiotic relationship with the water industry, and if a facility were to overuse that that could put strain on other potential development, potential redevelopment scenarios, and you could protect it and prohibit or regulate it in that way. So not straight up but through kind of your build-up plan and your zone as you go forward. The next one is you know to limit the numbers. Some communities in Colorado have said we're only going to have X number of each type of licensee. That's one that you could you could certainly consider. The next number four is establish a separate and local licensing requirement. The way it's set up it is a akin to alcohol and that there will always be a state license and then you you when I say you I mean you the town council can establish a local licensing authority like we have with with alcohol the big difference is in the alcohol scenario we give approval and then the state basically rubber stamps in this one the predicate is is that the state issues that license first, and then the local body gets to act on it. So that question says, do you want that local authority, or do you want to depend entirely on your other police power and regulatory, which we time place in manor, zoning, land use, those kinds of things, or combination of both. So those are things when you go on to number five. There are any number of local regulations and you know your zoning code is probably the easiest example to grasp, but there are other ones too. But there are a lot of time place in man manner, which have all been found legal and are specifically provided by the state on how to do it. And I just listed three, but there's a lot more. There's a lot more. There's pages of zoning. I've got a list, but it would have taken a lot more of your time. But I'll go through the, you can have rule making licenses and registration so you can have what kind of licenses are required, the issuance fees display, transferability, criminal background checks, you can have standards of operation, hours, odors, lighting, water, that kind of stuff. And then you can have location, science, civil enforcement, public nuisance, criminal enforcement, confidentiality, and an overall emergency clause. So those are examples of what you can do. Are you ready for question, Bob? Or I thought, so your hand getting ready to go. And then, you know, as part of that, if you do elect, if the determination is that we would have a local authority overseeing that, what kind of hearing procedures are you going to do, what kind of criteria for new ones, background checks, you know, all those kind of things, there's sub-listings. One of the things when you talk about time place and manner restrictions, there's a lot of good examples of different ways out there amongst the various municipalities. And I didn't mention it at the beginning, but that was one of the concerns is snowmass village when at the time the moratorium, the big one, the long one, was enacted. Didn't want to be on the cutting edge of establishing these regulations and then having them challenged. We were fine to wait for those regulations to be implemented and litigated. And that litigation resolved so we knew what worked, didn't work, what was not going to get us into a situation where we would be expending your legal budget to defend on a regulation that may not have been reasonable. So that's happened a little bit around the state. There's actually been some communities that my favorite example is because I think it is analogous to ski towns is Breckenridge. They allowed the marijuana establishments to be up in down Main Street. And then after a while they decided they didn't like that. So they changed the zoning and put a time frame in and they had to move from the main street out to a specifically identified zone district. Now they're all right out there by the roundabout as you come in from the Frisco side. So that I thought was a good example of, okay, we're going to allow it, but we're going to keep it in an area where it may not be quite as resort serving in more of a community serving area. So another thing is there is spacing requirements. This also holds the time place in manner. Certain places didn't want them all right next to each other like the air and the brecourage, but they also wanted them spread out, so you didn't have all four corners, and there's four dispensaries, kitty corner from each one, so that's one. Then we talk about signs and advertising. Certainly snowmass already has a fairly restrictive sign code in terms of lighting, et cetera, and size and locations. Fees, what kind of fee schedule you'd want to talk about. And then whether you wanted to have criminal penalties or civil penalties, a kind of fee schedule you'd want to talk about. And then whether you wanted to have criminal penalties or civil penalties akin to alcohol and what kind of regulatory enforcement were you gonna have? Is it going to be through the zoning? There's gonna be through the criminal, through the police. And then we get to the big questions of taxing. This is, number 13 is number 13 for a reason. Requiring marijuana establishments to post a bond to make sure they pay their taxes. I can just find that to be kind of esoteric. But then number, and so I numbered at number 13. Number 14 is, you know, those are the big questions that attract a lot of attention in terms of local sales taxes, excise taxes. One of the other ways they're going, which isn't in this one, is an occupation tax as well. So at what rate, you know, what are the revenues for? They refined their purpose, they just go into the general fund, and that goes in conjunction with operating fees. So I really gave you this quick question there to get you to start thinking about all the topics that can go into a regulatory scheme. And I don't want you to make decisions yet. I'm not going to ask you how do you feel about 1, 2, 3, 4, or 14? What I do want to know is where do you want to go next? I have a question for you, John. You've talked to many attorneys and many of the municipalities, particularly the ski towns. In terms of start, starting the process for understanding what this really means until they were able to get through the regulatory scheme and tax issues, et cetera. What's the normal timeline and how many hours of deliberation? Do you have a sense of, oh, this is not one of those you have one hearing and you're done. You know, actually it's completely and utterly across the board. Okay. If there's a council and five or seven are saying, we want this and we want it now, usually the attorneys come in with the standard kind of thing and they don't do it and I will say that's when they go back and they change things. This town councilor and the prior town council opted for and more measured or posed let's get it right because there is there are issues of you know if you allow this and then you don't like it and you try and take it back You have you've taken away rights and people have enjoyed and that that can get cumbersome so Getting it right is is the way to go now as I say This book right here is the most recent marijuana, state marijuana regulations. It started off about that thing and the state has changed it and changed it and changed it. It has new things arise. One of the things is, and I didn't really mention it in here, but it comes under the police powers, although some of them are the fire department powers, but it's all public health safety and welfare. At first there were a lot of problems with residential gross in terms of safety, odors, and numbers. And a lot of communities now have reduced the number of plants that are allowed or put a square foot of restriction. And it still has to be, it still has to comply with all the nuisance you know the law in terms of odors, et cetera, et cetera. And I can't remember the jurisdiction, but there's been a couple of district level, district court level cases that have said odor is a violation and odor is a reason for valid search warrant to go in. Count the number of plans, figure out that they're in compliance. Back to your question. Depending on the complexity of the regulatory scheme you want to go into. It can be, I think with for thought, and the experience of other communities that could be a shorter period than it might have been previously. Now, how do you measure that period? Okay, we slammed in the regulatory scheme out of the box end to our community, and then we spent untold hours amending it to make it apply to exactly what our community wants. Then I had one other question. You know this is kind of the debtor superb job just listing all the questions and issues that we need to think through and I'm sure there's a lot of other issues. But where within this document and probably I didn't see it is a balance against the vision statement for Snowmass Village? That's, you know, I'm not going to go there. I'm your attorney. No, I'm just saying that's not the only thing that's going to happen. I think that's a subject to talk about. Right. But it's really for you to talk about. I mean, you, you know, division statement is, I don't know if you're talking about the inspiration, aspiration statement, and then the marketing plan and on and on and on. And see, I brought that up. Yeah. And that's for you to decide how to resolve. That's really not a legal matter. And you'll find out if your judgment's right, I guess I should backtrack. There are other ways besides this council adopting a regulatory scheme. You can put it up to a public vote. Or you couldn't at first. Now we're past November 14. the regulatory scheme. You can put it up to a public vote. You couldn't at first. Now we're past November 14, so you can put this up to a public vote. And I should say any matter of taxation would have to go to a public vote. So if you're going to increase that. And I will, I didn't provide it in the memo when I have looked across the information across the state. It seems like a 5% local sales tax is pretty common. Okay. Aspen is 2.4. They had about $10 million worth of sales last year and with their state share, that ended up being about $350,000. Yeah. Well, the question is, you know, are we doing this because we want to get more revenue? Are we doing this? Well, that's one of the questions. Yeah. That's one of the questions. I don't know that that's the be all in the end all. And the regulatory scheme that you adopt can very much affect what kind of revenue you will see. Any other questions that you all might have for John? The book of regulations that you should show there. How much of that book is really directed at the owners of these four different types of a lot operations a lot it's like liquor license it's it's it's convoluted in complex and the general public and which includes the council you don't need to know most of it right I only bring it up as an example of how that it has constantly turned over in basically less than the five years since the start. So if we were to decide to implement a regulatory approach to marijuana in town. As new regulations come out, I presume it would fall on you to actually look at them and see what really applies to us and what doesn't, right? Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. What I'm looking for you is for you all to say, here concerns we have, we'll bring you back information and from that we'll get a sense of, do you want to pursue, we'll get it in the forming of your desire to staff and then we will come back to you with that and you'll say, okay, that gets it but I have this begs this change and we'll mark it. I think if you all said we absolutely want to implement something, it could be done in less than six months. If you want to take your time and do it over a greater period of time, your next election to do the taxing question is November of 18. So you're in six, seven months out. Well, you know, throughout this entire process, we need to invite the public and have a lot of community discussions. And the question that we might even want to raise even tonight, but this is a lot of work. Yeah. I mean, if I'm going to support any type of change within a law, which is pretty significant for this community, we need to be, I need to be very well educated so I can speak to the rationale and the direction and what does this really mean? Yada yada yada. Right. So one of the questions I was going to ask, I'm looking at our time, should we even consider having a public discussion before we engage in learning about, I mean, what are each one of these? Retail marijuana stores, how do they operate? I mean, what's the usual issues? I don't know. Well, I think from my perspective, that's, you know, John just asked us, what would we like to know? And then he would go out and, you know, and staff would go out and they would find the information provided back to us. So one question is how does a retail store operate? What are the issues that they have in other jurisdictions? What do they like about the way Aspen versus Carbondale regulates their marijuana operations. What was before that? Does our community want our town council to be spending our time on this issue? Well, I think we're the elected official that we, for the most part, are supposed to choose and determine what it is we should be spending time with. Yeah, but I think we need to make the public aware that we're going to have to give them an opportunity and give them to put their two things in. Sure, absolutely. Just like I wanted, I wanted to have somebody make a statement, but tonight's not because it's a work session. I think we need to hear from our community and what the feelings are. Let's just take the presumption. The community is as uneducated about this as the rest of us. And if that were the case, how does the community then decide? Well, you guys should talk about it and get educated. And I want to get educated too. And we'll all make an informed decision together. Or you know, why not? Well, I'm just asking a fundamental question. Yeah. As we look at what's on our platter, the big comp plan, you know, we're going to have more PUDs coming through the pipeline. Is this a top priority? Is this a top priority for our community that they want us to spend our time, precious council time, doing this? And I don't know the answer. I've heard some people say, well, I'm not interested. I've heard other people say, well, I'm someone interested. I've heard other people say, well, I'm someone interested. So I'm just... How would you think we would go about doing that? I have a community conversation. And I agree with that because I don't believe that what the way John's trying to educate us and whether we're going to make the right decision for the community because we think what he's saying is one direction. Meanwhile, we need to hear what the community, the community, I know, but the community might just get a different understanding. They might look forward to what the revenues are going to do for the town and what you do with those revenues. Tom, that's true. But where you are differing, at least my interpretation, where you're differing from marking, is that you're saying, yeah, we need to provide information to the community. That's not what I'm saying at all. Not at all. I think the information was just thrown out there here at the work session. Now, we just need to hear if the community, whether it's just public hearing at the next council meeting, if they have an interest in us pursuing this any further. No? Am I not? No, it's fine. I mean, I'm not, I'm not, I'm just giving the opportunity for the community to come forward and give them the two sets. That's all I'm saying. I'm not, I'm just giving the opportunity for the community to come forward and give them the two sets. That's all I'm saying. I'm not, I'm not, I mean, I just can't create the community on what John just tried to educate us. I feel like it's like a can of worms. I mean, I feel like, I don't think we as this body can make this decision for the community and respect to the community. I don't think I want to make that decision for them. Even though, even me personally, how I feel about it, I don't want it. But that's not my decision as an individual. You see, I don't think you're making a decision for it. I think what you're doing is saying, I wanna get educated, and at the same time, I want you the community to get educated, and then together we're gonna make this decision, but we're all gonna make it from a position of understanding what it is we're gonna be. You're assuming they wanna be educated? Yeah, I don't think they wanna be educated. I agree with Martha. I don't know. I mean there's so many assumptions here And Alyssa is this is a can of worms, but at the You know, we're not trying to reinvent the wheel here. No, I just think I feel like we have so many very important things going on and I just to me this is like not a priority and Regardless of how I feel about marijuana in general, like, I mean, I don't like Tom, like I don't necessarily know that I wanted here or that we needed here. Now if someone said, look, like if you look at the, you know, monetary aspect and look all this money that it could bring in and look all these things that we could do on our wish list of things that we've identified in the comp plan, then maybe I'd be like, okay, but I mean, I don't know. I just feel like it's so long. Let me put this in a slightly different perspective. So did you all get the email from CML today? It is very likely, it's very likely that the state sales tax is gonna go up 6.10 per percent. Right. Okay. What, you know, what are we, is going to go up 6.5 percent. Right. Okay. What, you know, what are we, snowman's village, going to do, when that happens? And if it gets approved by the voters. So we're going to do, we're going to end up with an 11 percent sales tax. Now, how much, if we think that having marijuana sales in town might affect our brand and affect our marketing, what do we think 11% sales tax is going to do? Okay? So? I think that's a poor excuse to... No, no, it's not an excuse to do this. No, it's not an excuse. It's educating people about the big picture and what's going on. Because if we're uncomfortable with an 11% sales tax, you could offset some of that with a local sales tax on a matter of. Maybe we cut some of our taxes. And maybe we have to cut our taxes. Maybe we have to cut other things. Yeah. But this is definitely a big picture. And if we're going to do this and we ought to put it into our next statement when we get into goals. I think, and listen, I know we have a lot of big things going on, but this is an issue. And quite frankly, every single night on the local news, I'm really tired of looking at what, you know, the marijuana stories in regards to whether it's crime or whatever it is. Now, I have to find, for me, individually to approve something of this and to be on board with it. Again, I am not in favor of it for this town, but I can't make that decision for the community. In the same token, are we going to invite crime into the town by doing this? So we have to look at the big picture here. You've got to look at the big picture, but do you want to spend your time on it if the community doesn't want to even talk? No, I don't want it to commit but I think I think it's I think it's it an opportunity to listen to the community. The thing is even if people come I think you're going to get the people that are very pro marijuana that want to see it and then the people that are adamantly against it and it it it's not productive right well the other thing you could do a survey. Yes I mean that to me might be more productive. I just don't... I just feel like people are very stuck in their opinions about it and so I don't know that how productive it is. And, you know, I mean, the other thing is they could go get it and bring it to town. So it's not like it's illegal in this town. It's just we're just talking about selling it in the town. Okay. So there are places they can get on the raft of us. They can get on the raft of us and then hop on a recycle and go to a pot shop and come back and not even be driving. And they have their cell phone on they could get, they could get, you know, surveyed and how many trips they take. You know, I am not opposed to being educated at all because the more I know, the better. I'm just looking at our goals and objectives, which is our next item on the agenda or the big piece of that. And this is large enough that I would add another goal. What's our next opportunity is November 18 the next election cycle? Right. Yeah. Protectors. So I mean if we wanted to put it to a vote that would be our opportunity. You could do the vote out in two years later too. Well, all right, but that's our next opportunity. If we wanted to just say do you or don't you want marijuana and snowmass village, right? Before we ever went to a taxing question. We don't have to wait till 18. You could do that in an odd year. Table needs to be in an even year, which means the taxing question. So you could do it a advisory ballot question non-binding. And we've done those before. May left. Just because they're non-binding. There's a lot of money to spend to be non-binding. Put the panel on the other side. It's a will of the group. It's a difficult thing. I feel like Tom does. I don't want to make this decision for the town. It's a lot of work. Yeah, it's a lot. It definitely is a lot of work. It's a lot of work. It's a lot of work. It definitely is a lot of work. And in the same token, public comment before every single council meeting is open to the public. If they want to come and talk about it, it's open to here. We're open to listen to them. So that's where we probably need to leave it. Let's see. If the public wants to come in and make a standing and have a bag given to them for making a public comment. Thank you, Tom. You know, something like that. And it's not going to be a bag of marijuana. It's just going to be the shopping. So let them come in and let's hear. That's how I feel. Let's between now and then, let's just see if anybody comes in and make public on it. Between now and when? Any time they want to. And then we do. Well, we could make a date that we could put it on the agenda and have John to kind of go through the framework of tonight, which I think has been very helpful. It really did advise me. Well, it asks more questions than it provided the answer. Yeah, that's exactly right. I think it's important for us to continue the education about it, because we don't know at this point if we want medical retail, we want to have cultivation. I mean, what is that even in tail? So I think it's worth our time to at least get the education to understand what we do and don't want. I wouldn't mind doing an educational session just on those four. What are these four? And then have the community know we're going to be educated on those four and then yeah, I think it's yeah see who shows up and what they and what they say and Let me help you know use that to kind of gain some concept of where the community falls And and I think one thing that isn't listed here is Where is this industry going? I mean, what's the holistic approach? I mean, they're learning so many things about marijuana now and what it can do for different illnesses. And I think that's an important part of the process. Because I was going to, when we get into that whole issue of medical, it's going to say, now we have to get down into the type of marijuana. If you're gonna do medical, you're gonna do all this mortgage board or you're gonna limit it to certain types. I mean, it's all over the game. So you guys wanna know at least the answer to those four questions during a public education. And I think so. Conference for third time. I. That's worth our time. I think it's worth our time. I don't think we're going to spend as much time on ordinance for base village or anything like that. I don't think it's going to be as bad as we think it's going to be, but I think we need to. I see. Let's do those four questions. Yeah. Oh, probably a good place to start. I wouldn't mind giving you like a shopping list of time place and manner kind of things so you can understand zoning. I mean, I know some of our neighbors and castles have gone and visited shops and stuff and they've done some field trips and they've done some studies and they've made some decisions. Whether the rights decisions are not, I don't know. But we need to make our own. You're just talking about establishments. And I think one of the things you really need to consider in terms of time, place, and manner is that a lot of the communities are prohibiting any kind of cultivation, residential, personal cultivation, and multifamily. And that's purely a safety issue. Well, that's, that's their right now, without trying to be a bias, but that's one thing that's, can't have. Right, well, there you go. I mean, that's something that we have, a pretty, we, the town of Snowmass Village, has a large percentage of multi-family residences compared to towns of like size. the San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis San Luis something that somebody can do. We already kind of fire as a result of a here. You know it's happening. Well, we've already had one pretty sizable incident because of that too. Mm-hmm. So. Cultivation in snow mass? Yeah. Or are we talking? Yeah, we have. Yeah, this was prior to. Yeah. This is completely an utterly illegal cultivation. Oh, yes. Right. Well, I guess the person in question there was convictive arson. Yeah. Okay. She's not picking up Bob. She's not picking up Bob. Oh. This? Yes. It doesn't really go on. I think what I mean, one of the other things we have to consider is what the landlords philosophies are right like we know base village doesn't allow or won't allow any advertising or sponsorships right so they're not going, I would assume, they're not gonna allow marijuana facilities in base village. Maybe that will change, but I mean, the landlord can set their own restrictions, right? Well, I didn't bring that up in the history because it's, I don't, yes, very much so, but at the time that the long extension of the moratorium was considered virtually all the commercial space in the village was owned by one landlord and they made it very clear that they would not allow it anywhere. So it kind of edged along, nudged the council towards the moratorium at that time. But yes, you know, the landlord doesn't have to allow it anywhere. And of course, it's another consideration because the town is a very big landlord in terms of the number of employee units that are in our rental pool versus the sales pool. So as a landlord, absolutely absolutely you can set reasonable rules Very good question Okay to move this along So what I'm hearing we'd be interested in looking at the four four different types of establishments John has raised and the question you just raised on Landlords particularly in commercial spaces, we still have the same one in Snowmass Mall, correct? I have a new guy here, or over there Jordan. And I don't know what East West position might be, East West Geek. Well, it's, yeah, snowmass ventures. Yeah. The name of the new company. There's one other factor that snowmass villages, Colonel Ray's his eyebrows when I say unique, but it is unique in that we have annexed quite a bit of land that's owned by the federal government. And that doesn't happen in many communities but the federal government so the entire skewer. The biggest and the unknown in town is the federal government. So. Well, maybe commercials already related, that name came out of my mouth. Related, this already said, no way up on snowmass mall. East was and ski co-or snowmass ventures says no. And the only other. But we haven't heard from them yet. Let's, unless you're introducing, we haven't heard clearly them yet. Let's, unless you're introducing, we haven't clearly like we had heard from related. And just as a side note, the mall is being actively marketed. And so, we haven't, to my knowledge, heard any plans from the new ownership Eastwood partners over at the center. Well, I could argue with my own question because I could say, well, no, just wait a minute. from the new ownership eastwood partners over at the center. Well, I could argue with my own question because I could say, well, no, just wait a minute. That's not our problem. It's not our problem, but if you're concerned about spending an inordinate amount of time on marijuana, if the majority of the commercial ownership says, we're not allowing it, is that a good return on your time investment. No. It's good to know. I don't know. I mentioned it, but I didn't hear much discussion from you with regard to maybe a checking with your tourism, your marketing board, your group sales, and your special events. It's not a bad place to start because you've got a lot of commercial people right there. And to expand also on what Bill said is that the plaza agreement and the event, the event won are both subject to pretty strict, no promotion of marijuana. Those are already in agreement. We should invite our major landlords in town to our education sessions. So as we're getting up to speed, they are as well. And hopefully we can come to a consensus as to how we want to move forward. Well they may already say forget it we're not doing that on our place. Well then they will come. They will come and they've already made their decision. Well I think we should at least invite them to be educated before they make it. I mean Marky that's why I like that's why I like your original thought of starting with the four like your original thought of starting with the four types of operations, invite marketing. I mean, they would come anyway, but get marketing here to hear it. Get the landlords here to hear it as many as you can. And we all start working from, if you will, a basis. We all start building a basis that's similar and making decisions from a similar knowledge base I agree I thought the marketing has already made recommendations as far as the branding they did two years ago Yeah, but they changed their branding last year. Yeah, but I mean they based upon don't they got it? It's not a day. It's a we it's a Advisory Board use. So you yes, thank you. It's nice. It's a we changed the branding. Okay, we need to move on. Okay, do we have a clue? Are you? I'm not having to look at the four different types of things. I understand. I'll probably throw medical in there as well. I'll give you an idea of what the landscape is out there. And probably throwing some timeplace in manner stuff to you. You know, as much that we have on our agenda coming forward, I would suggest we each one of each session we do one of these, not all four of them at the same time and then do a summary. They're pretty um I want to read something. You're twined. Oh okay then you can do them but I want to see the regs on them too. I'm I'm going to try and go much longer in terms of a discussion than what I gave you today. Okay. I don't think you're going to see 50 page packet items. I'll try and keep it as short and we can have those discussions here. I can relate. Thanks, Joe. Okay, let's move on to the next item. This is item number three, a little computer warm back up. And this gets onto our goals. Clamped. So I'll, I know you're short on time. The council's looked at this in January, looked at it in February. This will be, I think, at least your third shot of looking at the goal statement. We went through a number of processes to kind of come up with it. The last time we got into some detailed edits, I think I got, if not all, certainly most of them in here in some shape or manner. And really, what this is, it's a work session, so this is an informal look at it. If I'm close, as there's changes we need to make, we'll make those changes, of course, if it's close, we can get it on a regular meeting for adoption. I would like to shoot for meeting where all five of you are here. So it's adopted by the unanimous like we've been doing. Everyone's been at all these meetings, so whatever next meeting would be. But this is the shot to say, hey, is there anything missing? Is there something that got worded differently than you expected? Those kind of things. I had, okay, Quartz Muthing. Page two of three under, it's in the second paragraph. And it goes down fundamentally the council aims to stay true to the values of the village and create positive momentum going forward. With the understanding that if an initiative is good for the local residents, this is where I paused. Should we consider residents in guest? Well, and this was the, and I don't I don't have or part time home owners or so it doesn't really that's how I was like we're focused only the People who are here full time It's up to you guys the thought behind this was trying to determine it was kind of as I recall it was the community versus resort discussion Hey, if it's good for if it's good for some of the lives here, whether you're full time or hard time or whatever, it's going to be good for the guest as well. That was that's what I remember the discussion being about. If that is, whether it's capturing or not, I'll leave that to you, but that was the thought process. I don't think there's any care. I don't care. If Pat really it's a work session, we don't care. Pat, really, it's a work session. We usually don't take comments during a work session. I appreciate that. I would say that sentence in particular is a concern to these old geners, because 92% of us not local residents. So I would encourage you to expand that because we've found over time that that statement does not always work for us. Okay. The lightest way to begin. Thank you. We will take that public comment. So as it does say local residents. So I think of local residents as anyone who's spending time here significant time yeah or the fail in property here I've considered a new residents because they don't have a warning. Hey taxes. Well we're probably are you can you just like put both full and part-time residents you take out the word local and then you're covered you could You can just like put both full and part time residents. Take out the word local and then you're covered. You could also do full and part time. You could take out the word local. You could put in taxpayers. You could, you know, lots of weight, lots of wording you could use to. Can you make sure we're inclusive? That's all. I think our local is good for residents, whether you can fill in the adjectives, it's part time full time. OK. If you think if yourself as a resident, you're a resident, and it's clear what the difference is. Oh. I guess the resident is. I'm going to debate on this issue tonight at 6. You could restructure this sentence where you still get the main things without getting into that distinction. So you could fundamentally counsel aim to promote initiatives that stay true to the values of the village and create positive moment I'm going forward period. That's good. What? Maybe we should be a part of our trip. Fundamentally, the council aims to promote initiatives that stay true to the values of the village and create positive momentum going forward. Period. I like that. That sounds really good. That's great. And I can do that. Yeah. That gets away from the aim. Yeah. I know where you're getting to. So you just need to let me know that distinction if you want to remain or not. But isn't that, doesn't that underlie every initiative? Is it good for the resort, or is it good for the community? And your job is always to balance. And you could go there instead of a period after the way I read it going forward. And you could say that balances the needs of the community and the resort. That's probably a good ad. It's just a nice, it's a's a ring wording so you're not identifying residents because we actually have a code definition of what a part-time resident is right and we don't have one of a full-time resident so rather than get but of course that's for a very specific purpose that's for a qualification to sit on the part-time residence advisory board but it is there. I do like your addition to that statement you put. I didn't add I just rearranged. Oh okay. Well, but you also suggest that out the rest of that. I'm getting away with it. It's good for the local residents because I think we've heard from Pat and I think if there were more people here, they would have. So, right. So, I mean, fundamentally the Council aims to, John's, well, I'll just read the Council aims to stay true to the values of the village and create a positive momentum going forward with the understanding that if it's good, if the initiative is good for the residents, it's good for everyone. Johns would be fundamentally the council lands to promote initiatives that stay true to the values of the village and create positive momentum, period. Right. Now going forward, here. Going forward, period. Yeah, and then. No, his suggestion is, period. Right. No, no suggestion is period. Right. No, then he just came up with another sentence after that. While striving to balance the needs of the community and the resort. And that, because you? That's up to you guys. I mean, if we're balancing great, this was saying, and again, I'm just trying to record what you said. This was, hey, we're looking for people to live here a lot versus people to visit here. It doesn't matter. I just want to make sure it's reflective of what you're looking for. Another way you could take out the go, you could create positive momentum for the community and the resort. For the community and the resort. That's, yeah. That last is the best. That's, I agree. Yeah, that lasts is the best. I agree. Yeah, that lasts is the best. Positive momentum for the community. And the resort. It's just making it more difficult. Okay, any other, I have a few things. Oh, go for a list. They're not so bad. And I've got another one too, but. So do I. You want to just take them,'ve got another one too, but. So do I. You want to just take them piece, you know, one piece by piece per section. Okay. Yeah, section by section. That's a good idea. Anything else in section one? Well, what section one? Affordable housing? The first two paragraphs. Oh. Okay, let's go under affordable housing. Yeah, I had affordable housing. I have affordable housing. I have as well. You go ahead and I have one, too. Well, okay. So just for a little background here, for those of the council who haven't been on the planning board and have not been involved with this determining the question of how much affordable housing is enough. The affordable housing requirement has been based on full-time employees has changed substantially over the years from a low of 36% to a high of 100% and is now 60%. And that there was a study done, I'm going to say between 5 and 8 years ago. That concluded that roughly 50% of all full-time employees wanted were interested in living in the town. So you might ask, well why only 50%? Why wasn't that number higher? Well, at the time, what we found out was that there are reasons that people's lifestyle didn't fit with the requirement of living in affordable housing in snowmass as an example. People want pets. Well, we don't allow pets in our rental properties. And many of our single family home properties don't have particularly yards for pets to run around in. And that was one area. The other is there are a lot of people who don't like the restriction that's placed on, for appreciation, that's placed on affordable housing units. So, so the Planning Commission and the town council at that time, felt going forward. It was likely that full-time employees, the number of full-time employees that would like to live here, was likely that that was going to increase. Because the cost differential between the mid-valley and snowmass was getting smaller. So free market in mid-valley was kind of creeping up, and it was starting to get, it was anticipated to start to get that it would be unaffordable. So there might be more people interested in living in snowmess. That's how we got to 60%. We added that extra 10%. Part of it. There was two other reasons. One was they were couples and the wife or the husband might work in the limits of the spring or rifle. That was another big thing that people's totals in that survey. Okay. And another big one was, there was one more. And that was people wanted to be able to have a single family home in the employee housing stock so they could have a pick at fence basically. And didn't want to live in multi dwelling units. Well, multi units. Yes, that was another part of the reason. Oh, that's where I wanted to work. So we made it, it was 50 at that time. We added five and then we did what I, this was purpose, purpose nine. We did what was called the scoge to take it up to 60%. Without really a rational nexus on that 60%. So that was, so that was the 60 percent. Yes. The study you're talking about is the 2009 RRC. Yes, it's our RC. 2009. I think so. Yes, 2009 RRC. I think so. So rather than specify a percentage in our goal. I think what we could do is, we could look at statistics that we have and develop a baseline. A baseline of the demand that we currently would have, which is all the different job classifications that currently exist in SNOMES as including all the properties that are operating and anything that has been approved. So it would include the base village. And we would then get a requirement, if you will, of square footage, which is, because that, all right, let me back up. So in order to get this mitigation for employee housing, affordable housing, you look at the job classifications within, I think it's a national, there's a national chart. You look at job classifications and each job classification requires a certain amount of square footage. Right. So you take all the jobs in town, you find all the classifications, you add up all that square footage. And that's our demand factor today. Then we look at the supply factor, which would be what we have today in all of our affordable housing. And we look at what percentage that supply factor is of the demand. And that gives us a baseline of where we are. And from there, I believe we can then have a better idea of how much additional we need or not, how we might be able to get that additional, whether it be through redevelopment and mitigation for PUD and development work, or is it going to be from investment by the town. And I think with having that base having that baseline will just give us a better ability to understand where we need to what we need to do going forward. Well, there's another part of that though. Go ahead. And that is it was brought up during one of the discussions. I think it was a Sunday night discussion with the consultants. Thank you, we're here then. And it got into in terms of affordable housing or employee housing, was it has been, you haven't addressed the real policy in the room. And that is people retiring within the affordable housing. So back to your, and this gets into that whole throughput. That's right. That's right. So if you're going to look at the existing and who's in the existing, then the question becomes one, if we're going to honor that policy of allowing people to continue to stay with those units at retirement, what's your age? What's that curve look like? Because that's been an influence, a curve that you're going to need in terms of demand. But again, that's a policy conversation before we get entered in demand. Well no, we can get the mitigation demand and then we can have a policy discussion about aging, and then change that mitigation demand based on the policy on aging. But I think you need the mitigation demand for a baseline, in my opinion. Okay, here, okay. Have to think about it? The fundamental thing that I think you're missing. It's not study and I need to make sure that I'm not reading a different study than you are. Yeah, well, I'm not re, I don't remember the name of the study. I just remember being on planning commission and this is how we kind of got to this. So if we're referring to the same one, I'm going to make that assumption for a second. The one that I'm familiar with didn't talk about desire at all, it talked about how much we currently are housing. And you said 50% of the people desire to have housing. The study, I'm looking at it, it says 50, we currently house 50, or I'm sorry, 49% of those year round employees. It was a study done that indicated that- It was a big survey done. Or it was a survey. It was a survey done. It was a survey that there were- Yes. There were enough additional people who felt they would be interested if the opportunity presented itself to live in town that created roughly a 50% interest of all employees. I think that survey was done in order to inform the results. That result. Well, look, but the goal really comes back to, and if I'm hearing you right, Councillor Circus, is your concern that 60% might be too high? No, I don't think it's, I don't think as a goal. Goals should be pretty 30,000 feet. I don't think that a goal should specify that 60%. Not until, not until we know where we are. Right? Because let's just say, let's just say that right now we can only get 30%. And we go through this survey, you know, that this supply and demand comparison. Let's say that we only have 30% currently, only 30% of our affordable housing versus our employment demand. So we don't have the development capability. You know, outside from any outside developer to build anything like an additional to double our affordable housing. So we're going to have to, the town is going to, if they want to, if we, the town, want to continue along that line, then we, the town, will have to come up with money to build the, and do a bond or something to build those other units. And we would be committing to basically agreeing for a much more potentially more substantial bond than we would even want to do because it's in the goal. So I don't think we should have any percentage in the goal until we know what our baseline is. So basically,'t think we should have any percentage in the goal until we know what our baseline is. So basically it's more than that. You almost need to go back and repeat the work of our RSE and that host survey work of your existing workforce as well as looking at the future workforce and we have that in the development plans of how many employee housing units that's going to create. I agree with you that we could do that. I guess I was thinking about doing it on a more like a pencil on a back of an app. I knew that's very your goal. But we could absolutely do that. We could absolutely do that. Yeah, we could absolutely do that. Because that was a study that I thought was very, very informative and really provided the planning commission and council with direction. Well, and the hard part, I mean, so the measure that the demand, right now when we sell a unit or we rent a unit, we've got, I mean, we've got 99% occupancy plus in our rental units. When we sell a unit depending on the size, we've got a lottery anywhere between eight and 22 people in the lottery. So you can estimate demand? How often? And that's just folks that meet the village requirements. And if we open it up more regionally than it is open. If it is open, the priority fillings are first. Well, I'm going to disagree slightly with the statement that that is the demand. Because I want to ask, how often do we have people Requalified themselves or do we require people to re-qualify? To be in there How's it every two years? It's every two years for ownership. It's every year for rental rental Okay, so when you sign a new lease you you require. So people why? So, if we don't, if we were to use, if we were to use the, yeah, do people why? If we were to use the job classification concept for demand, right? And then look at, you know, supply, and and see that percentage, we may find that it doesn't relate to the fact that we have more, we're totally booked up and we have multiple people every time there's an opening. So there's got to be something, there's another factor in there that's causing it. Maybe it's the aging in place thing. Maybe it's the retirees. Maybe it's people who aren't being truthful when they go and re-qualified themselves. John? And maybe there was not an affordable housing program when we've been playing catch-up ever since it was initiated. So in other words the first 20 years there was nothing and that's true still you're still catching you've been playing catch up ever since the program began and if you go to another other unnamed resort they look at us as the model because we're so far ahead of them. So how many employee units do we have? I don't know if they have any randomness. One, she's 247 rentals and the 148 did restricted something like that. Just sort of 450 total. I should know it by heart. If you would ask me last time. 247 rentals in Ozea Lairn number, 146. 176, T restricted yes. And those are town, can those are town. You basically 500. Sort of that. That's sort of 500. So what Bob's looking for is the number of employees, right? To go against that. The number that what I'm looking for is for all the jobs, the full time jobs that we have now currently in snowmess. How many square feet- I just thought I'd look at the hour. How many square feet of employee units would we need? According to our, you know, how many, what percentage are, how many would we need and then what percentage are we? Are those numbers accessible? Yeah, employees. We can do something. I mean, again, but that kind of goes back to me. The way I kind of interpret this was there is we need more. Go find a way to do more. I think what I hear Councillor Circus saying is let's find out. Do we really need more? Let's find out how much. And that's a shift that I want to, that's where we're having these discussions. Let's find out. Well I think how much if we, you know, number one. What are your assumptions going into it? Well. You're not going to deal with your housing policy? No. Oh, OK. No, my assumptions aren't that at all. OK. My assumptions are I want to know how much is necessary before we make a commitment, okay, that we may not like because we may not be able to afford the commitment. But okay, so when you do your demand analysis using the suggestion of we know who's here, we know what we have and now we know that we need to add 200 more jobs. Okay. For more jobs. No, 200 more jobs are coming within our community for which we want to be able to provide housing for all full time employees. Are we going to assume all those full time employees are going to want to live here? Cute. Are we going to apply some factor? No, no, we're going to apply a factor. 60%. 50 or 60. But I wouldn't put the 60 in here Are we going to apply some factor? No, no, we're going to apply a factor. 60 percent? 50 or 60. But I wouldn't put the 60 in here until we know how many. So until we know how many we're talking about. So what we're talking about then is to modify the sentence to say, hold on. Come on, computer, come back on. Yes. and computer, come back on. I don't know if this would keep me, but we can. Yes, we were active for soo, the longstanding goal of housing our full time work force that desire to live within the community. That's right. Okay. That's right. In addition to meeting this goal or in order to derive what the mitigation should be, council will conduct a study. We need to get carries back and forth a study regarding the percentage and the variety of options and opportunities that need to be explored. Then, period. Council will also review the entire housing program and policies thereof to include looking at options for opportunities and options for seniors and young professionals. That's fine. Or something like that. That's fine. And the first sentence, as far as I'm concerned, I would not say increasing the amount of affordable housing is critical. I would say balancing the amount of affordable housing is critical, I would say balancing the amount of employee housing is critical. I mean, we don't maximize our bedrooms. Like you have people, single people whose kids are grown that are living in four bedroom houses that should be living in a two bedroom apartment. Okay. So, I mean, I know you can't kick people out of their houses. I'm just saying, it just seems. We just don't have a mechanism for those people to move out of that. Right, that's a problem. That's why we got to have the balance approach. Whether it be senior housing, a CCRC, or retirement housing, or independent, but saying downsize, we don't have that system. So that's the balance. That's the balance. I mean like when rodeo, where you guys live, a lot of you, when it was started, I mean, I'm sure there was like a lot of people with young kids, I mean, not rodeo, but crossings. And now rodeo is becoming like that and crossings becoming older with people who have no kids at home and are close to having no kids at home. That's right. But there's no options for them. Right, no options. But you get to say something different than Bob's in. Yes. I mean, you get to say I think almost completely. I like to. I think Marky said I think Marky included what I was saying. Yes. We need to do a study to confirm what we've got in terms of supply with what our anticipated needs are in terms of demand. Demand. To include. So it seems to me your goal could be one sense. We need to evaluate our housing program from top to bottom. You know your point. Which is different than what you started off with, which was kind of, you need more and it's do something. Well, well, I'm only listening to what they said here. We're going to need more employee housing. I mean, there's no. We know that. I mean, that's a given. And that's, I think, what we're trying to get at at our goals here. And whether how we get there with we want to take out a percentage or do some more studies or figure out, you know, the best way to get there, I think that's what we're talking about. So we so a balanced approach as to how we at, you know, ultimately, you know, most effectively use the employee housing that we have and create more to use it to its full potential. So we have two units on the market right now that are going through lottery, correct? And that lottery is I know it's also to Pitt and County, they're in it too. And I think we can look at what we have going on right now and bring that part of the equation into how we want this housing goal to look. I mean, right now, do you have any idea how many people are in the lottery for these two years? How we want to how we want this housing goal to look? I mean right now do you have any idea how many people are in the lottery for these two years? No, not these two because we did it's not done qualifying you I mean Thursday Thursday is the qualifying date Just the last date I believe For the first They're a week apart depending on the and these are expensive ones and depending on the cost and all that kind of stuff, we would get between 10 and 20 people going in the lottery. That's not, I mean, a good average. And those 10 and 20, like in this circumstance, you have one lottery, one week, and you have the next, they will roll over to the next one, correct, John? If they want, I mean, they've got to reapply and they've got to make sure that they want to be in it all that kind of stuff. I mean, because sizes are different, locations are different. But then again, this is a lottery for affordable housing. This is not for rental. We have over 100 people on the rental market that are on the list for Joe. Okay? Yeah, right now. No, I know, because I know several people will check every two weeks. Okay, it's close. Yeah, but let me speak for a second. Everybody else has been Bob's talk for 25 minutes. Okay, okay, please. Oh, I just don't rush me. I'm just saying we have a hundred people in the rental market. Okay, that are waiting and waiting and they hardly ever move up the line. So we have to look at the rental market besides the affordable. I have to look at both. We have to look at both. Yeah. So I don't think we have any way to judge the rental, when you put the rental people in the people that want to buy. A lot of those people fall away. They put their $25 in and then they've moved down Valley because they didn't hear from the housing authority in two years three years and So I don't I don't know if we're gonna get an accurate survey. That's I'm done. So what? No, the whole issue is the balancing This is a heavy part of the balance. Well, this is a heavy weight Well, see once you once we do the entire survey, and you look at demand analysis, and look at your existing policy, for example, the ability is going back to the crossings as an example. How many of those individuals would be willing to look at moving that? And that's part of the whole study. I mean, if none of them are willing to move out of their houses to look at moving that. That's part of your story. Right. I mean, if none of them are willing to move out of their houses if there was an option available, then why build the option? You know what I'm saying? Then you just need to build more houses for families with three or four. Exactly. I mean, I think that the whole, I think what everyone's trying to say is that we need to, like John said, we need to evaluate the whole affordable housing which also include the rentals in order to decide you know how we're going to increase it. I mean you don't just want to build it blindly. When we don't know what we need. I would just add that I think everyone would agree we need more. Yeah. I mean that's a good thing. We need more. And then you need to evaluate the program, but that is your goal on how to get more. Right. And maybe it's more and appropriate. Right. So that you're. But we also have to, we also have to learn from a study as to how much more. Because I don't, what, I don't think we know that today. I don't think we know how much more we need. We know that there are people on wait lists. Right? We know that. We know that there are people who are in perhaps larger units than they need because their families have grown. We need, we know these kinds of things, but I don't think we know how many more units, even before we get to what kind of units. I don't think we know how many more units. Yeah. So we're talking about a study. This is only the first part. I think Clint has some other ideas. I mean, we can spend studies, money on studies all day long, and what is going to show you is you need more. I mean, I can spend as much, or as little as you want, housing. Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? Of what? I can fill deed restricted. I can feel seasonal. I can fill whatever it is. The demand is absolutely there. And we've only got, we've got about a million bucks a year. Remember we just paid our bonds off. And so whatever those dollars are, we can bomb that out for just call it for simple math, $12 million project. I can give you, I can assure you that every unit we build can be filled. And so if you say, hey, we want to know that 30-year timeline, we can do those studies. But I guess my takeaway when I thought we were, and this is what I missed, is let's say, let's keep it simple. Let's do some more. Let's figure out what we can get that momentum going and figure out where that demand is going forward. But in the short term, let's do something and get the ball cranking. And if the shift is now, we want to study before we construct and do sticks and bricks, we can do that too. But that's where I think. What are you thinking that we need? You say you can fill everything. Whatever whatever that is. It would be rentals, would it be? Honestly, politically, I think some of the stuff, some of the ownership is probably the easiest to go because once you build it, the subsidy is set per unit and you can get the mortgage back and you can get its money back. And I think that would be the easiest way to get momentum going. And then we could modify policy to talk about ongoing ownership within modification of policy. Yeah, okay. And I think the other thing that's not policy is, I mean, this is what I've talked to you guys about a number of times, is, you know, we have a lot of town staff going to be retired in the next five or eight years, and it's going to be very hard to recruit without some kind of housing program for town staff. And, you know, as far as policy goes, those kind of things will have to factor in there. There's no doubt the policy can be looked at, but in my mind, this was kind of that, just keeping it simple, more, and we can fill it in the short term, whatever we can afford, we can fill. And then, yeah, the long term of the 60%, the comp plan says 70%, the code says 60%. What's that right number? I wouldn't dare to guess for you today, but I know it's more. The code is a different number than how 60 comp 70, I think. You could take out the sentence, we'll actively pursue the same. The developer has to provide 60. It's not the code. Yeah, what is going on with this paragraph? I think the likewise. We could say council will explore a wide variety of other opportunities to house all generations including seniors and young professionals and dedicate themselves to reviewing a strategic plan for the future needs of housing while at the same time committing towards proceeding and housing project in the near term. I don't know something like that. You want to commit to being able to get something started because we know we need it. At the same time you want to look at the entire policy. And the pro. But are you leaving that first part? Well, you know, I'm just trying to, I think the affordable housing and the village is critical. That's true. Affordable places. Right. Well, just the next line just makes sense. It just needs to change a little bit. Yeah. 60% of bit. Yeah. 60% of what? No, where it says, I think it should say something like, portable places for community members to live. It should say not only contributes, it should be not only contributes, it should be contributes to the local economy but helps it build a strong well-connected and engaged community because affordable housing can't do an act. It's not a real person. It just doesn't make sense. It's dramatically not. I mean, we can change that. Yeah, I'm just saying. It doesn't make sense. So, I guess the question for Council has clearly identified and needed a short term. So you've got a long term and a short term goal. Kind of mixed together within this overarching statement. So if you can accomplish both within a statement statement there to me it would be helpful. Or is it sitting here in words, Smithing? Are y'all comfortable with that? And I think that accommodates. I think so. Bob's. Demand analysis, future study, and the whole housing program. I'm comfortable with that. Okay. You can hold it. Don't you love us? This is what we do. It's not supposed to be easy. This is only the second draft. Community engagement. Do we have... We all agree. We need more. We just need to figure out how we get to more. Yeah. And we make it a community engaging. If that's understood. That's agreed on that we really everyone does agree on that's easy. Can we agree? No, we all agree. I agree. I agree. I'm not just saying that. I don't agree we need more until I know where we are. I mean, that's my, that's just where I am. We always need more. Yeah, I mean more is more, right? So, you know, you're going to need more custody. Look at the lottery. But eat but simply Bob, if you just go off of what Clint statement is that all these people that are in town, you know, positions that are going to be retiring in order to recruit people, that tells you right there you need more regardless of anything else. I mean, you need some sort of high. We got to have a through-part, you know, it anticipates, it anticipates that all the people who are retiring are not going to leave. They're all going to, it presumes they're all going to stay. Now, maybe that's a good presumption. I think you're missing some. I'm talking people directly to me. Yeah, yeah. I would say those, the half that I'm talking about that are within 10 years we time and don't live in the village Oh, okay, I'm doing this off top of my head some you but I don't think But the replacements might want to or might not want to you got to be able to recruit I guess you give my number one issue is employee housing. You got to be able to give me a You asked me how I felt, right? That was my state. Oh, I think you volunteered. No, no, no, somebody said, I think everybody agrees that we need a lot of work. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, so you got four. So I'm going to go ahead and say, I'm the community engagement. The only, just the last line of the first paragraph, make sure that council has good and beneficial communication with town staff. I would suggest we add commissions and boards. Good, that's good. Pretty simple. Okay, community building section. Oh wait we skipped engagement that was. We're on community that was commuting engagement. Oh sorry. How were I? I had my note pop-up side Quincy community building. Okay community building. On that second sentence proactive in I would just say proactive in utilizing existing community spaces, creating more spaces. I would just get rid of that utilizing existing infrastructure. Did you see what I'm saying? Yes. I have people. No, I don't. I mean, utilizing existing community spaces went. I would just say be proactive in utilizing the existing community spaces, creating more spaces instead of utilizing existing infrastructure. It's like repetitive. Any other nets within community building? No. Safety? No. Safety. I continue commitment to resiliency. Oh, this is what I was going to say. In our last goal setting thing, you know, we specifically identified the preserving and sustaining the towns iconic treasures. And a lot of the stuff from the old goal setting is in here, just maybe reformatted in different ways. But I feel like, I mean, it is one of our assets, but I don't know. I feel like we sort of don't bring those up again. I just I feel like we sort of don't bring those up again. You mean specifically? It's a protecting its assets. It requires addressing environmental fiscal safety, transportation, economic development topics, whatever. I'm just saying to me in this whole statement, the one thing missing from the old statement is that we don't really talk about those things anymore. Well, and if I remember, I don't have that in front of me, but that says pragmatically examine the importance. Right. And really what that was, it was the council at the time, which you were on. There were some issues about, hey, how much do we want to support Cribloon? How much do you want to support? The RCA, yes. I, but I don't think those things have gone away. Well, and so if you want to put them back. I mean, in my opinion, I mean, snowmass discovery is still the big question mark of what's happening with that. And- Can't be called snowmass discovery. In my opinion, if it's in here as an iconic trader, it's not snowmass discovery. It's the discovery at the same time. I know, I'm just going off with the old one. But I'm just saying those things, I mean, things like trails and those things are covered in that. But you know, I don't know. That was just the one thing I noticed. When I went back and compared the old one to this one, that was the only kind of thing that was the same. But if no one else wants to put in, it's fine. I'm just throwing it out there. Well, in that same paragraph, it does say continue to work with existing cornerstones, such as Anderson Ranch and his key company, if they broaden that list to maybe get in some of the iconic ones that you've pragmatically examined and want to continue with. Yeah. I mean, I just think those things are still existing. The road is still existing. I'm OK. OK. That's fine. Just not. You don't want snowmess. I just don't want snowmess. What do you want it to say, ice age discovery? I think I want it to say, Ziegler Pond Discovery. That's what it is. Because that's what it is. It's on discovery. Well, it's an ice age discovery. That's what it is. I say discovery center. I think that is iconic to snowmast. We got caught up when we called it snowm discovery because it was a discovery in snowmass. But the organization got confused with the discovery. Ice age discovery is gonna be the same thing. The organization, the Ice Age Discovery Center will become confused with Ice Age discovery. We could just say the bones in the ground. That's good. I'm just kidding. That's good. I was joking. The fossil discovery. The fossil discovery. Fine. Well that's climate change too. It's climate change as well. I'm just saying I felt like it should be in there. I don't care what we call it. Just as long as we know what it is. Well fossil discovery is perfectly done. You know what it is. Let's just call it a fossil discovery. Well, fossil discovery is perfectly done. Let's get on with it. Okay, moving on. So are we going to list all five of those organizations or just the fossil discovery? Well, no, no, no, no. So put the ones back in that we just got. Well, the only things that really are missing are jazz, essence, snow, mass, the fossils, Crablunic, the rodeo. I mean, I feel like you have trails in here because you're talking about connectivity and all that stuff. That's a lot of things to mention within a paragraph. Do we, well, then we should either. You want to take on such as, the interesting reaction of this key company, just say existing cornerstones. Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Let's just do that. Because then we get into the hole. My name's not there. We left someone out. Yeah. We forgot the thing. I think we're going to become iconic pretty. I mean, all right. Arcade? What? Oh, I currently go. OK. Sorry. You guys are too much fun. OK. I mean, Anne. We don't get this big. OK Okay, regionalization, anything there? Oh, regionalism. Regionalization. I'm going on. Okay, any other thing to come forward to the work session tonight? Well, I think I will postpone what I wanted to talk about it till our... It's regularly. That's next week. Yeah. I think I will postpone where I want to talk about it till our regga meeting. That's next week. Yeah. I can wait a week I believe. You're postponing? And I know everybody's tired. I ain't in ready for that. Well, I'll attack that up. I know you gotta go. Yeah. The other thing that's extra- She's gotta go. I gotta go. Are you gonna be any place where? Steve Boen