We are on the record. All right, everybody. Good morning. It is Tuesday, October 15th, 2024, and I'm calling the Park County Board of County Commissioners meeting to order. For all of you so inclined, please stand for the invocation and the pledge. Dear Heavenly Father, our higher power, we thank you for today and we thank you for this awesome place we call Park County. We today ask you for discernment while we are making decisions on behalf of the people and we lift up those who are having health, financial and other challenges. We ask for you to comfort them and give them guidance. We pray that you protect us and deliver us from evil. We pray in your name, amen. I pledge allegiance. Do the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. All right, the agenda. I'm not sure I do have one question in our attorney is down there to be able to answer the question. On the abatement hearings, do we do that as Board of Equalization or do we do that as the County Commissioners? That was my question as well. County Commissioners. County Commissioners. Cool. Thank you. I move to approve the agenda as written. Second. All in favor. Hi. Hi. written. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. All right. We have items on the consent agenda, approval of minutes and approval of vouchers. I would move to approve the consent agenda. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. I just for no madam chair, we're having a relatively light week, only 630,000 this week. Not too bad, you can tell that public works is winding down their construction activity for the year. We are now going to open a bait man hearing, we have one, and it is Fair Play Colorado East Subdivision Block 09, New Lot 1, plus vacated Alley address 801 Main Street Fair Play Colorado 80440. And the owner is TBKBANK SSB. Accessor Jones. Good morning, commissioners. Today we do have the abatement hearing for TBK bank. I believe that the petitioner is on the line. They were going to do a Zoom call in. After that, my contract, my commercial contract, John Zimmerman, will be presenting our side of the case. Okay, if you, TBK bank, if you are on, please raise your hand and I will unmute you. You see Madam Chair anything from Stevens and Associates? That's who the agent looks like is on the form. I do not see anything under. We've got a cell phone. It's a 303. Stevens and associates, if you are on the Zoom call, please raise your hand. Not seeing them. It appears that they are not here. One more call. I'll do last call. I'll do last call. Stephens in Associate, TBK Bank. If you are online for your abatement hearing, please raise your hand and I will unmute you. They are not showing present. They are not showing present. I did speak with a representative from their office this morning. What my name is John Zimmerman, by the way. So one of you knows me. Anyway, I did speak with them and they did say that somebody would be joining the meeting. But what was their name? We just had a Reynolds login. Oh, okay. I know Stevens and associates and it was their analyst was what I was told. Okay, it looks like we just had another cell phone. Come on. So if TBK bank is on the Zoom call. Raise your hand please. Here's not. Go ahead. Okay, may I distribute my support for me? Yes sir. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. My name is John Zimmerman. I'm a certified general appraiser. I worked for Value S Incorporated. We are going to contract with the Countyustard's Office to value the commercial properties and to defend those values throughout the process, up through the CBOE. I have presented to you here a packet which basically supports our valuation. This is not their paperwork, this is ours. I'll just go over it just briefly, especially since the petitioner's not here. The first portion of this presentation goes through kind of the merits of our case versus their case, our cost approach. It discusses the burden of proof for requirement for petitioners in the abatement process for Colorado. I would be glad to read this word for word if you'd like or I can spare you that level of detail. The second page continues with that and concludes that we feel like our cost approach is more complete and appropriate for the subject property, which is the TVK bank that's just down here on Main Street. We have physically visited this property. We have included some photos at the back of our presentation to show you the property if you're not familiar with it. It is a good quality bank building with extensive site improvements in landscaping. We feel like the petitioner has failed to meet their burn-in-proof requirement for a petition. And therefore, we are recommending to the board that you deny the abatement petition. For your information, there's also an appeal to the Board of Assessment Appeals for the 2024 value. We are talking about a 2023 value at this point for this abatement. So these, those two issues will eventually line up and go to the board of assessment appeals most likely anyway. So we wouldn't be accomplishing anything by approving this abatement that our, in our opinion, lacks the burden of proof. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have or if you want more detail of our case, I would be glad to go through that. Why don't you give us a couple minutes to go through your document. Okay. Well, yeah, and we'll get back to you in a minute. Okay. Meeting. Well, yeah, and we'll get back to you in a minute. Okay. Excuse me, commissioners. Do you have all the documents that were sent over from Stevens and Associates? The their cost approach? No? I just want to make sure that you have these documents. With your permission, I'll pass the petitioner case out. Yes, please. The petitioner has arrived. All right. Daniel Gano. All right. Thank you. So it looks like the petitioner is here. We will give them a chance to. All right. The petitioner has been given my case that I handed to you a few minutes ago. Okay. All right, Daniel. I'm going to ask you to unmute and you can present your case. Hello, Daniel Stevens. So, yeah, I was in the call right on time and the host had me muted. I couldn't unmute. I was trying to do on the dial in actively. So I think you guys had to actively unmute me. Can you guys hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Yeah, I didn't see your hand raised. So I apologize. I think while we're originally calling in on my on the office phone, and I don't know if I could have necessarily raised my hand on the office phone, but I was trying to somehow get a contact with Susan from Park County, but it looks like we got to figure that out here. All right. Will you just hold hold one minute, Daniel? Hold one minute. Our attorney would like to speak. Aaron. So Madam Chair just for the record and given the technical difficulties. I'm not sure if Daniel heard what was said by Mr. Zimmerman or not. And we should ask to see if he was able to hear that. Daniel, I'm asking you to unmute again. It looks like it's meeting you on itself. Did you hear what Mr. Zimmerman said? Yes. OK. I was present. I could hear. I think I was the other phone in the office and I'm on my personal cell. But I could hear everything just couldn't speak. So yeah. Good. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you. Well, you have the floor. So please provide your case. I think it was said earlier, but everyone have our packet of kind of less from students and associates. Hello. Yeah, you just cut out, but go ahead. Okay. I was saying, do you guys have our packet in front of us? Hello. Yeah, you just cut out, but go ahead. Oh, okay. I was saying you guys have our packing in front of us in front of you guys. Yes, we do. Okay, sweet. So yeah, this is the TVK bank on 801 Main Street in fair play. It's sitting on about 1.26 acres of land and has an improvement of 7175 square feet. This is a pretty standard branch bank. This was constructed in 2014, so about 10 years old today and about eight years old from the data value. And we also use the cost approach here for the special use purpose of this property to reconciled to $215 per square foot. Good our next page, we have the cost approach that we listed. So we did this as class C average and applied the standard marshmallows with a base square cost of $217 and as well as some miscellaneous cost of 250 per square foot. After our multipliers, we come to and the love sum of replacement costs of 1.65, 692 million. And we use a straight line depreciation method of eight years of age across the 50-year life expectancy for class-y average bank qualities and have our improvement total of 1.39, sorry, 1 million 399,176 dollars. Adding in the land value, we come to our total value of 1,545,290. So I do want to say that we took a second look at this property recently and also seeing Josh Zimmerman's report. I think we can agree with some of the difference that we have there with the canopy as well as his additional yard improvements and the light fixtures. So kind of revisiting that and using our standard straight line depreciation as well as making this actually the same class and quality of classic good as the assessor did. We have kind of come to a new reconcil value and I'm authorized to stipulate at $300 per square foot. If that's something that's doable, that's it for my report. Okay, thank you. Go ahead, John. If I can reduce the revot if you think. It's not really a revot, I just want to point out that first of all, our cost approach is based on the inventory and the facts of the property. It's not a negotiation. It's what the value of the property is indicated to be. So I would recommend that the same stipulation offer was made to me this morning of $300 a square foot. I do not think that's appropriate for the valuation of the property. I think that our cost approach takes into account all the features of the property and should be considered, especially understanding the burden of proof aspect of the abatement process in the state of Colorado. If you would just specifically look at item on page two of my report. Item number one kind of goes through the strengths of our appraisal, our of our cost approach. And item number two goes through the inadequacies of the Stevens cost approach. I think those remain part of the problem with our discrepancy and value between us and their tax agent. All right, and Daniel has his hand up. Is it appropriate for him to? We're going to have a back and forth dialogue here. The, typically, would present right. So, this is why we would have all the opportunities to ask him for the questions. Okay. If you have any questions for Mr. Zimmerman? No, I don't. Mr. Whistle. Yes, Madam Chair. Thank you. Welcome both sides. I'm looking at two cost approaches by far different conclusions, which is not unusual. It's not unusual at all. So how you build that cake into those value conclusions are what we're looking at. Both of them appear to be using Marshall Swift valuation service, which is a standard for the cost approach. What this is doing is taking the replacement cost to new less depreciation. And that structure is seasoned. Don't remember, I'm sure you'll show me what year of construction it was. It was in the ought, I think. But anyhow, so with that, one of my questions for both sides is as a non-active but practicing appraisal in doing all kinds of assignments, what is the market indication, and this is one of my curiosities, if you look at post-COVID a bank building Bank buildings are very virtually empty TbK bank in fair place no no exception Instead of having everybody in all kinds of offices we have very few and usually those are tellers and a supervisor So are there any economic impacts that should be taken into account for a building in this Special use because it really was built as a bank building, it could be converted. But with a vault in there, it's a little bit difficult. A distillery has a vault in its place here on on front street. So, there's some questions about the lack of utility of the building from where it was built to where it is today. Either side. Okay. So Matt and Chair given the commissioner has questions for both. The assessor and Mr. Zennerman and the additionant, I think it would be appropriate for the board chair to allow for a response from Mr. Zennerman, that in the petitioner. And then any further Zimmerman, please. Well, if I understand Mr. Whistler's question, I'm not trying to diminish that question, that's a valid question. This is an abatement petition hearing. That was not brought up by the petitioner. We are in a burden of proof situation. The petitioner is supposed to meet the burden of proof. They're supposed to give us things to consider They have not given us any obsolescence arguments on this property They certainly can retroactively when we go to the BAA assuming Board of assessment appeals a state level and at that point we We will do a full market valuation. We will do a full cost. Valuation will update this. And there will be a narrative or appraisal report presented. That will consider everything including economic obsolescence or functional obsolescence as property. So Mr. Wisslaz valid point. I would say that the purposes hearing is to determine whether the petitioner is about the burden of proof. Mr. Ellsman? I just want to say something. You said it was a construction wasn't odd, which I'm assuming would be prior to 2010. Actually, the construction date was 2014 and that is in the document. All right, Mr. Gano, I'm going to ask you to unmute. Yeah, I mean, you know, I think that the economic factors of how banks are performing today should definitely be considered. It's not something that was explicitly laid out in our report. We do have a line in our description at the bottom of our cost statement, cost approach, that does say banks typically sell with going concern on value as far as for specialized properties there. So, you know, it's, but at the end of the day, the, the Fraser and myself, we both use the cost approach here, which is really looking at the fundamental of the building. And, you know, I agree that we can, that there's, there's room to move here. There's, and, and the cost approach essentially follows some, you know, pretty standard guidelines for Marshall and Swift, for both using Marshall and Swift valuation services here. And there's some things that are left up to, you know, choice by car or statutes in the ARL. One of those is how we calculate that depreciation. So I think that there is a standard age, I think one of the biggest discrepancies between our four is our straight line depreciation versus the county's age life. But even looking at that, we did run that, as we said, when we touched back on this valuation earlier. There's certain things such as, for the yard improvements on the county's packet, there's a lump sum for the yard and the light fixtures, and that's getting essentially depreciated by 5%, by Marshall Swift's assessment. They actually have standard depreciation schedules for the light fixture separate from the yard, which might have a little difference in the value that's being presented there. But again, we looked at this. We think that there's definitely room for us to get closer. And like I said, I'm authorized to stipulate up $300 a foot. But I think that there's some things to check out there just in how Marshall and Social should be specifically calculated for those yard improvements. Okay, thank you, Daniel. And then Mr. Zimmerman, Madam Chair, should have the opportunity to. Yeah, Mr. Zimmerman, if you'd like to to rebut any of that. I think the only rebuttal I would have to that is that their valuation didn't even include the yard improvements or anything. Now I detected a bit of criticism of my valuation of the side improvements. So they didn't even include them at all. So. Manager. Yeah, Mr. Eilsner. I've just. In looking at it, looking at the assessor, you do put a value on the paid parking lot, which as you say, I don't see anything like that in their cost form that they gave us. Isn't it normal to, you know, you got a square foot for the cost of the building. Well, that's great. That's the building. And when you look at things like painting that large of a parking lot and all of that, isn't that something you would typically then add on to the score footage cost of the building? Yes sir. The subject property is the entire property. It's all the all the Real estate and by definition though those physical attributes the landscaping Part of the real estate so they aren't it is property include those in the brazil the reason they may not see those in every appraisal is because in many cases they don't add value They're fully depreciated in this case. we have a very high-end landscaping and parking design and we've got curb, we've got extensive concrete parking, not just asphalt. It's in relatively, it's in very good condition for a stage. The landscaping is above what is standard for park county for a commercial property. I think I'm safe at saying that. That's maybe a generalization to some extent, but this building is well landscaped relatively speaking. So it's appropriate to add value for those items in an appraisal. No more questions. Okay, thank you. Madam Chair, are there any just to clarify, we at the point where the board has any more questions? You do not. Then it will be appropriate then to get closing remarks from Mr. Zimmerman and then from the petitioner. And then they should be able to sit down and then the board can deliver it. Okay, thank you. Mr. Zimmerman, we will let you make your closing remarks. I would just reiterate that we are recommending denial. We're not pounding our fists and insisting on it. This is your decision. We feel like we've presented evidence to support our value even though that isn't necessary in an abatement hearing. The petitioner has not met their burden approved and that's what we think you should make your basis, your decision should be made on that basis. The support that we've given for the value is to aid you in understanding that our value is reasonable and can be supported at the next level of appeal which I we already have one case at the BAA for the 2024 value on this property. So it's inevitable, we're going to go forward with that, at least through the process of trading information with the tax agent. And that might be a year or more from now, the way things are going. But in the meantime, please consider denying this abatement petition. Thank you. All right, Mr. Gano, I will ask you to unmute and you can provide your closing remarks. Yeah, so I guess just overall again, you know, the fact that they are seeing presented by us in front of us is not what's reflective of how we are coming to terms with this parcel today at this hearing. Again, I'd like to reiterate the fact that we are authorized to stipulate at $300 per spare foot here. And really just one thing I'd be curious to know maybe for discussion down the road on the county's report, the life years that's being applied for the pavement. I know that we just established earlier in the hearing that this was built in 2014, but I think I only see four years of depreciation getting added. So you know, seeing what the difference in that would be compared to the eight years, that's the pavement and the light-fictions have obviously been there. You know, I think that's maybe a discussion for later on, but we don't necessarily agree with the current value that's being recommended discussion for later on, but we don't necessarily agree with the current value that's being recommended in place or the signed value. And again, we are authorized to stipulate that $300 per square foot. Okay, thank you for your closing remarks. All right, we will begin our conversation. Commissioner Elzner. Yeah, looking at the documentation they provided. When they came up with their square footage, they took the cost or their value on the building, the land, and everything else. And divided it out to come up with a square footage, which I don't think is a really good idea when you're talking about a building. You need to look at square footage of the building, the cost of the building. When I look at what the assessor did, their actual cost on the building per square foot is very close to what Stevens just offered as a stipulation, which is, well, that's kind of interesting. We still don't have the land. By the province of evidence, I see absolutely no evidence that they gave us that make sense on why we should change this because it doesn't break out the costs on all of the parts that are there. It doesn't give us that information. The idea that you know someone would come and say, hey, we'll stipulate at $300 a square foot. I have a lot of problem with that. To me, that is something that, okay, it then becomes a very arbitrary decision on our part as to whether we would want to accept that or not, because we don't have any evidence to say that makes sense. I look at what the assessor provided through our staff and their contractor. And to me, very detailed, very good. I can't sit there and say, well, this is wrong at any point and Stevens and Associate just hasn't provided me any information. It says that, you know, given the preponderance of evidence, we're wrong. I think the preponderance of evidence says that we are right because we do break it down to building canopy, all of the components of that building. So I'm kind of in the mode of a last minute G, we'll do it for this for you. I'm not too sure that really protects taxpayers of park county. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Whistle. Well, this is this is certainly an interesting case takes me back to the old days and abatements values cost approach. This will be the first of several lab to catch up with our abatements that we have not had in front of us. What I found curious about this is when we had this handled in the county board, the two parties that were continuing to negotiate. I think the value is probably somewhere between what the assessor says and what the taxpayer says. Just my gut tells me that. If we approve this, I don't know what number, I'm not comfortable putting a number on from the taxpayer representative, I don't think that's adequate. So if we approve it at whatever number is, that would be in my mind, probably likely arbitrary, which we have the authority to do, but as I make good public sense. If we deny it, we can basically allow them to continue in the administrative process and Determine whether or not they can find some common ground or they'll go to another hearing Having the case already scheduled at the Board of Anatomy alterations is good in the fact that it's in the it's in their docket Board of assessment appeals you can get your anatomy read read range there on occasion, but That allows the parties to move on with their administrative remedies intact. And those are my thoughts of it right now. Right, thank you. And, you know, in looking at this first, I'd like to respectfully ask to be able to get these documents ahead of time, because I would have my calculator out to try it at least. It's really hard to look at this while we're running a meeting. There is statute that you do not get it beforehand and you are doing the hearing. Isn't that correct, Erin? That's correct. Okay. Well, it's correct. Well, then I'd probably want to pause the meeting and get my calculator out. But I do not see that the applicant or that the DBK did provide a really clear path to their request stipulate at 300. I don't see that it is really justified and proven in the documents and they are lacking some specific specifics. And it is, I think they are lacking there. So I lean to that side, Commissioner Elzner. Yeah, I think Commissioner Wissle said it best when he said that this is a step along a process that for us to sit here and arbitrarily pick a number doesn't really make a lot of sense. So I would make a motion that we deny this abatement request and then let the process run its course. I would second that to put it on the table. And I agree with that because I just don't see any proof to take us at the lower 300. I just don't see that it's supported with the documentation. So digital comments from Commissioner Wizzle. When I look at this case and the components of it, I would ask the petitioners representative, your evidence that we just saw today is lacking compared to what the county had. And in his responsibility, and I understand the gambit, we go back to an outfit we've had discussions with at Eagle County continues to follow with tax agent firm with the beginning of Duff and the ending of Phelps, who are notorious in the Central Mountain Regions. And part of the asset of a property tax agent is the willingness to negotiate. They will offer a flat rate or whatever they can agree to with the county and if they can get the county to agree to. So that is part of this process. To stop going down the administrative remedy path, it costs everybody time and money. So the whole goal here is to get to the right value. We have a pretty, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, So I'm in support. Okay, thank you. We've got a motion and a second on the table. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Gano and thank you, Mr. Zimmerman. We appreciate your time today. Next item on the agenda is the Board of County Commissioners shall consider and establish the job search goals, including the writing of the job description, deadlines for the applications, requirements for applicants, the salary and the range of the salary, and general description of the benefits and other compensation applicable to the job opportunity, more particularly a description of any bonuses or other forms of compensation, selection procedures, including publication of names of all finalists, no later than 14 days prior to appointing a finalist to fill the position and the time frame for appointing the county manager. So Cindy? Cindy Garst, Assistant County Manager. At your meeting in late September, there was discussion about the county manager position. And at that time, it was the meeting concluded with a direction to set up interviews. And after reviewing the statute regarding job announcements for leadership positions in the process, it was determined that we really needed to. We had a search that concluded and we need to start a new search. So what I've got today for you is I've updated the documents that were presented to you regarding the less spring for the search that we initiated then. And we've got the job description draft. And it's, we've got the job description draft. And in it, it's the same job description presented last spring, other than I updated and included the benefits portion in the job description itself, as well as you have the document before you that summarizes the search committee and the selection process, as well as the statute for reference. And let me pull up the documents. I can see more. So the search committee documents. I'm almost there one sec. So the statute provides that there's, you know, we established the job description which we have. Our search method instead of using a recruiting firm, I think it was determined that we'll use internal staff. Options for posting the job announcement would be obviously on the county website. As well as Colorado CCMA, that's city and county managers association, NACO and potentially CML, CCI, Colorado County's Inc. They don't have a job board per se on the refer to other resources. Oh, sorry, look at it closer. So those are job posting location options. Review the job description which I've just commented on. We have to establish a deadline for applications to receive them. At a minimum, we would post a 14-day period with the deadline being five o'clock at the end of the day on that 14th day, or you could do it longer, but a minimum of 14 days. The application would be, the applications would be reviewed by the Review Committee, and then there's a time frame to determine the appointment for the County Manager. So then this selection procedures, we would have an initial review committee and we had a committee last in the spring so I just have for today to be determined who the members would be. Then the initial review committee would evaluate the submitted applications to make sure they met the qualification requirements, et cetera. Knowledge skills abilities, job experience, and minimum education. The initial review committee would present the potential candidates to be interviewed. The candidates would be interviewed by the initial review committee, which would include county commissioners. They can be conducted in an executive session of the regular or special meeting of the board. And then the county commissioners shall make public the finalist or finalist under consideration for the county manager's position, which includes publication of names of all finalists and the later than 14 days prior to appointing a finalist to fill the position. So these are the procedures for consideration and to get the search going again. Thank you, Cindy. Commissioner Elzer. Yeah, I've got a question going through your time frame. We posted internally first. Isn't that a requirement or is that? I'm gonna defer to the county attorney in terms of just an internal posting or a posting. I know I think our policy has always been, we posted in house for 14 days and then, not having applicants that we would want to hire at that point if that is the case or if we want to broaden our pool, at that point we would then go out and post it. I don't know what the past practice was, but currently statute requires that you have, and this posted internally to every employee, and they all get it at the same time. That is not, I will check the statute, but I do not believe that there is a sequencing issue. I don't believe that that has to happen, and that that 14 days has to run its course before you publish on other outside, before you publish on other outside, sort of, sides. Yeah. But I do need to check that. But I do believe that that is not necessarily, that those 14 day postings can run concurrently. And then I would ask also that, Cindy, you check our procedures. Yes. Because we do, I know we have policies in place to handle any type of hiring that we do. I know the state legislature changed some things for us to make it a little easier for us to promote for more than. But that's easier to promote for men and within that make it harder. So if you could- I will verify. Verify that for me, that would be great. Mr. Whistle. Thank you, Madam Chair. My wish in all of this was just to get the process started and we discovered trying, well, let me back up even further. This has been a great learning experience to go through this level of executive management recruiting and interviewing and trying to select. It's different, it's a different position because it's very similar to what we do, but yet it's not. It's completely different, too. But in that realm of executive leadership and all the facets of A to Z that we deal with. So in that process, when we were trying to figure out our interim county manager, two of the four finalists that we looked at before were still available to how to go forward with that process. I think we've discovered in that time in our learning experience that we needed to start this process at the beginning again and I think that's what this intent is, is to get the ball rolling so that when the 31st comes around, which is when Mr. Smith is still under our agreement and or before or after that, we have some options to deal with that, not permanent position at this point. And that requires the hoops. And I know Councillor Eusein has something, and I don't remember exactly what it was, because it was some time ago about changes that were effective in 2024 in the statute regarding county manager. Would you just review that or whatever is different? It's the issue we just spoke about. It's three requirements that that be posted before you fill a position on a county website or in a way that every single county employee sees it. I think that was effective in August. If I remember your communication right? Anyhow, it was a legislative team. So with that, that's the purpose of trying to get the ball off dead center and in the air again. Mr. Ellsworth. Yeah, and I, you know, to me the whole process, it seems a little rushed, and I don't think it has enough public involvement. If you look at the way school districts hire their administrators, they're superintendent of schools. What they do is they have a search committee, they come up and they come up and end up with, okay, we think these three or four would be very good. And then they have an evening with the community where the community can meet them. And I know Plac Canyon, one year they just had each one, well, they had tables grouped, they had four people, so they had four sets of citizens. And then each one would go and they'd talk to them and they just moved the candidates in a round robin. So everybody in the community that was interested in this position would have a chance to weigh in. And, you know, the ultimate decision was the school board with recommendations from staff, and then they also would take in the recommendations from the community. And I think to make this open and to make sure everybody feels good about the process, I think we need to look at some method to get community involvement because the county manager is a position that typically outlasts individual commissioners and they also have a lot more impact in talking with the community because they hear all of the problems where commissioner may not get quite all of the problems because people in park county sometimes think they can only talk to their commissioner that's in their district. So I would like to see the process include that but I am one vote. Mr. Whistle. I just think we need to level check everything and get the process started. Right. And I've pulled up the statute and I haven't gone through the whole thing yet. So I think what we should do is Aaron let us know exactly what that timing kind of our calendar of what we have to hoops we have to jump through on timing and all of that. But I think one of the things that we can discuss now is the, let me pull up, the selection committee. I know Commissioner Ellsson are just stated that he wants to broaden it to the public and we'd have to discuss how that would work. I don't really want to make a big monument out of this. We've been through this round once. And I think it's important that we do ping CML and two bad CCI doesn't have a job posting board and the County Managers Association as well as NACO just to go out there and cast our net again. I think that's important. But I figure out what kind of, how big this is gonna get, especially during budget season. Mr. Whistle? I think what we've seen is in this exercise in learning what we learned, we could have done things differently. Perhaps you could argue we should have, but we didn't. So we're in this phase in the fall when we started this in the spring. And I think it's worthwhile to go through again because I'm certainly better prepared individually to look at all of our options that are available to us in this very, and very important position. And I think it's, certainty is what we need. We need to give some certainty to all the people that are relying on our manager, that we rely on, and someone that can fill that bill. And so how we proceed in that, we have to start somewhere. And so I appreciate Adam Cheri putting it on there for us to get started on it. And that's what I would like to see us do. And as we get into this, we know we have a two week window for internal posting. We will meet again in two weeks and see what, if any, feedback we get and then address that on the 29th. Madame Chair. Yes, Erin, please are county attorneys if I could give actually on that question. They can run concurrently. I'm sorry they can run concurrently and the statute at issue does not specify the number of days the practice among most municipal council and and county councils has been that you run that posting for 14 days. And the requirement of the statute is that you can't make your selection. Prior to that, 14 days having run. So there is absolutely the ability to run those concurrently. Thank you, that's very helpful. Because the way I envision it, we want to cast our net. Of course, we want to post it internally here. And then we have to schedule, we have to go through the screening of what came in and, you know, look at qualifications and then set up interviews. So of course, this isn't going to happen overnight. But I think running concurrently is just a good idea because we don't have to draw this out any longer than necessary either, at least for the first step of posting. So Cindy. So I do have a couple questions just to confirm. First of all, making sure the job description as it was in your file with no changes to what was previously posted other than I included the benefits specifically in the job description itself, is that still, you know, are there any changes you wanted to make or is that still the job description to move forward? Secondly, determining who the members will be on that initial review committee, I think we need to get that established as well. And then just confirming the 14 day period. I think those are kind of the housekeeping items to make sure we've got figured out. Right, thank you. Yeah, I would suggest that the first thing we do would be to establish the review committee on who's going to look at them and then try to figure out, you know, are we going to set up a meeting with the community to also look at them? Because we need to come up with a structure of this is how we're going to do it. I think before we start the 14-day period, because I don't think we can come up with a structure not having a meeting within, well, today I would like to have some time to put some more thoughts on how I would like to put it together. Commissioner Whistle would have his thoughts on how he would like to be put it together. You could have your thoughts how you want to put it together and we get them all to Cindy and let her go through them and try to see if she can come up with something and she can communicate with each one of us individually so she could send off. This is what I think. Once we have that, yep, that that sounds good. At that point then, she would be authorized to go ahead and post it. But I think we need to know how we're gonna handle it before we post it. Okay, so you wanna set up our process. Okay. Right, I wanna set up the process first. Cindy? Just one more comment that maybe our county attorney could also clarify as you're thinking through the process. It's only the finalists names that get published so depending on how you see the process, the non-finalists we wouldn't make public. And so I guess I just want to factor that into whether there's a community meeting where people meet them that would just be for the finalists. Yes, any community meeting. That's the way school districts work when they get down and the board has said these are our finalists. Yeah. Then they seek community input and let the community each meet each potential superintendent and provide their input. Okay, great. Thank you. Madam Chair. Yes, Erin. Members of the Board. I would also add just for clarification that this discussion of the process needs to be finalized in a formal board meeting with emotion. So it's great to send those ideas to Cindy, but ultimately, your process has to be determined by you in a public meeting. So, okay. So we could do that last meeting in October, which is the 29th. The 29th, because I think I'm not ready to sit here and say, hey, this is going to be the process. You know this showed up on the agenda Thursday and there are a lot of other things going on with meetings so I didn't get a chance to sit down and look at it and try to figure out what we're doing. I think this is a great discussion that we've had. I think we can all get what we would like to see to send it to Cindy. She can put something together, send it to all of us, and then at that meeting we could then sit down and figure out what process we're going to use. We would have a better understanding or a thought about who we want on the various committees. Last time we did this, we spent a couple of weeks coming up with, well, what do you think the selection committee should be? I would like to be able to say in two weeks we could come up with, this is a process, this is going to be our committee, this is how we're going to look at the community involved and post it. Commissioner Whistle? Well, I have a pretty good idea, what I want to write up and submit that we followed last time that I think was germane and what I think was not. And so I don't know that a process last time wore fruit for us. And so I'm not really concerned at this point. I mean, I understand that concerns the commissioner, Elzner, I don't want to discount that. I'm not concerned about the posting of it if we have to wait until the 29th. All I was trying to do was to try and get us around firm footing if that's the 29th. I'm good with it, but I will be happy to send it what I think the process should be and how it should go and do that and then get back what the grant product would then be after all that discussion. All right. And we also do need to make any comments regarding the job description as it is written and provided to us. There's salary, compensation and then just all of the duties and all of that. So you believe that it is best to comment on both of these documents, the process and the job description. Yes. And what I would suggest is that we kind of set our own internal deadline and say that by the 22nd, which we don't have a meeting, but by the 22nd we would have all of our thoughts into Cindy. So then that gives her plenty of time to put everything together. So when we have our meeting on the 29th, the proposed process could be something that is published that our community could also see to make sure it's clear how we're going to approach the matter. And then on the 29th, I think we would be prepared to be able to say this is a process we're going to use and now let's get it started. Okay, I do have one comment. We're very different from a school board because we are a huge county. And so that is something that we need to keep in mind having community meetings across the county. Don't know Madam Chair, you would only have one meeting. It'd be in this building. You don't drag your applicants throughout the county. Just clarify. You have one day where, and that's part of what we would talk about, is you have one day here and anybody that's interested would come here to have that. And no, a never envisioned dragging applicants to Guffy or some of the other places in the county. They could get to know Guffy whoever would be hired would love it. Thank you. I was hoping that was the case, but you know, this is our only chance to talk to each other about this. And so I'm going to bring up anything that I think is important to discuss. So we will, I think we're, we've got our list of questions from last time. I think we should also review those list of questions and make sure that we, luckily and hopefully we don't do this too often. Yeah, well, it is, Tom was a county manager for a very long time, like since the beginning of county managers in Park County. Yeah. And I would also like to have us discuss those questions. Again, we'd have to do it in public. And if our would be applicants might be listening before we ever even send it out. But I would like to discuss those questions to make sure they do match. And then I think we as a committee, whoever's doing that final interview to come up with the finalists, needs to be able to coordinate a little bit better than we did last time, because it got a little bizarre with everybody having their own questions with the written questions. Yeah, but you know, I've hired a lot of people over my years as a vice president of a company. And sometimes when you're interviewing someone, a comment they make brings up something else. Well, you and we should be able to get clarification. You can if it's got nexus. Yeah, if it's Well, you can. And we should be able to get clarification. You can if it's got nexus. Yeah, if it's clarification, you can. I've interviewed candidates for our service academies for the last seven years. And it always is with a committee of three. So, you know, it's a little easier there because we aren't under any requirements of having our discussion before the meeting as to what questions we're going to ask or how we're going to approach it. We can do that right before the meeting or a few days before we can get together. We don't have that ability, but I think we need to have a decent plan set up because when we're interviewing candidates, we have to be fair to all candidates and make sure every candidate gets basically the same question. And that's what we would need to do here. Now, if there's a little bit of a side trip because something was said that you don't comfortable with or you won a little more, that's fine, but we need to be able to say in the end, we asked all candidates basically the same question. So Cindy, will you also send us that list? Yes. But I wanna make sure that it's the last list because we added to it. Oh yeah, and we kept track of all those questions, but it was all hand keeping track. So yes, I will make sure that that's all I said over to you for review. Madam chair, just a point of order to was regard to fairness of the process. The not only do you need to have consistency with the questions, but you need to have reasonably the same amount of time in advance for every candidate. So you can't be discussing the questions in a public meeting where you have some folks who have are hearing the questions and hearing your thoughts on the questions and then have others who don't get all of that benefit. So, you know, my suggestion is you decide who your committee is and your committee develops those questions. Because otherwise you're in a situation where you are perhaps making an unfair advantage for someone not for others. So the committee that you envision would be the preliminary committee. Because, you know, the commissioners are also going to want to interview so that that would be more of a. We'll try to stay on script with sort of questions that we think about because you've got you know last time we did this we had two committees We have the committee that did the initial screening which took I don't know how many applications quite a few and narrowed it down to to some and then we had the Commissioners with For other people or three other four other people Do that second interview where then that was where we would we find we tried to get it down to a finalist. Right and you know we can just all review the list of questions and tell Cindy yes no add this I mean I don't think we have to have that. We might agree with the list that we already have that we use last time. And so, and if you think that that's not the right way to go, not everything has to be hashed out because we already have the list that we used in the past. Mr. Whistle. It depends who your selection committee is. Right. Mr. Whistle. We've done this before. It's not reinventing the wheel. We can do this. It's not going to be that difficult. I'm anxiously looking forward to the opportunity for new or old applicants and what that brings us. Okay, good. I think we have a plan. Okay, we've got a plan. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Cindy. We appreciate you. All right at this point we are This this point we are at public comments So if anyone interested in making a public comment come up to the podium make sure the green light is on and give us your name and please sign in and Online please raise your hand and we will get you. I'm a garage sheriff of Park County. Just real short statement. I had met with several of the county officials. County elected officials. The assessor, the clerk and the county corner. Amy Flitt is out of town and I absolutely forgot the county court and the county I'd like to hope that this would be a fair and impartial process to hire a county manager. We would like to have Mike Smith, the current interim county manager, to be included in the selection process, or rather to be as a candidate. We think that he's been doing an excellent job for the past several months. And if we as the other elected officials from Yall can assist in any way, we'd be more to glad to to step up and help. We think that the county manager's position is extremely important. We also feel that the elected officials that I just quoted or stated that we work much closer with the county manager than a pretty much daily basis. So this position is very important to us that we hope that it's going to be a good process done and include Mike Smith into that process as a candidate and that like said if we can help out in any way we'd be more glad to step up and help out. That was my statement. Thank you for your comment and I'll just reiterate we're casting the net and anyone who wants to apply may apply So thank you for your comment John I'll get to you guys online in a minute I'm my name is John Mack and I'm a concerned citizen and it's been said that all it takes for evil to exist is that enough good people do nothing. So in that vein I would like to stream my objection to what Donald Trump has been doing with the people in this Southeast part of our country. You've been deluged and afflicted. He has been doing nothing but creating lies and fabrications against our government and what they've been doing. And I think that's wrong and un-Christianissle and the treatment of our county assessor, I think he's fabricating things and making things up and that also is uncivil, disrespectful and un-Christian. And finally, he made a lie of making up lies about Mr. Rob Green. I think that is out of order and that is out of place and that he ought to apologize for that and that also is on Christian. And what great things that David Wistle you said about the League of Women voters. I think that's uncalled for also on question. Their organization is the mission is nothing but to educate inform and to do good. And I tell that I've got to say. Thank you for your comment. All right, I will go with Kimberly online and you can be signing in. So Kimberly, I will ask you to unmute. Yes, hi there. Can you hear me okay? Yes, we can hear you. Yes, so a couple comments from the last few weeks. One, I want to go back to the carrying a firearm in the building. Comment more on that is that that policy has been in place for a very long time. And up until the last meeting two weeks ago, Not anyone had heard that any of these county employees had ever felt unsafe without occurring. Not one complaint was made. I've never heard it. I don't think any of you had ever heard that. So it's just something to consider that all of a sudden that that just occurred two weeks ago when we're talking about our second amendment right and carrying a firearm in that building. I'm not talking about election time. I understand the laws involved with that. Second, it's interesting, the kind that Tom McGrod just made, is that he wants a fair and partial, you know, decision process in this county manager yet in the same sentence saying that all of the current county elected officials are the ones that he has spoken to want Mike Smith in the position. That to me is not parcel and an affair. And in that, there are many things that we don't know as the public, as to what has actually occurred in the, as Mike, as an interim county manager, and I would ask that that very much be taken into consideration any time that things have not gone right, that we are actually unaware of out here. I do not think that the public should be involved in the decision in any way. I don't, me, if I was involved in the decision, I don't have the background in making decisions about county managers. I think you're going to get a million opinions. I think it's going to be cause even more of a delay. I think I also believe that a delay has been purposely caused in this matter for multiple reasons. As I stated last time, I stated a couple what what I think, and I still believe that to be true. And I know you guys are redoing this whole process. Great people can apply again, I suppose. And what I would ask, though, is on this selection committee that you make, that you really look at the people who are on the selection committee, and that whatever happened last time, that you guys were in a people who are on the selection committee and that whatever happened last time that you guys were in a deadlock on two candidates that it came down to, Mike Smith not being one of those candidates, that that is the process that you approve in two weeks at your VOCC meeting, that has somehow been taken away, that can't happen again. If there are 50 candidates that qualify and you interview six of them and it comes down to two, that a decision is made between those two people, you know, and there can't be like a tie or whatever happened. So, um, and, um, in so far, is what the other gentleman just said about Donald Trump because he mentioned it, I'm going to mention it. FEMA is completely broken out of money because they have given over a billion dollars to illegal immigrants coming into this country. And we cannot take care of our own people down in North Carolina. All private organizations are having to take care of our people. We have to have America first. We have to have Park County first. We have to treat our people first before anyone else that is not legally in this country and committing a crime. And that is all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Marianne. Thank you very much. Well, I'm going to change what I was going to say. Please, please give us your name. Oh, I'm sorry. Marie Ann was a law ski from Bailey, I signed in. First of all, I wanted to just say I feel that this process going back from two weeks ago, what we heard from the staff and other people in the community, this process feels rushed in 20 days, 21 days were voting and at least one seat will be different up there. And so I just wonder if while I respect the experience that you guys have, because you just went through this, I think it's good that you lend that experience to the process and whatever procedures you're going to be doing for this. I also hope that if you go through this before the next B.O.C.C. that you do include some of the public. First of all, you won't get a million responses because there aren't a million people in our county. But I haven't gone through a school process that Commissioner Ellsmer described. I was actually on one of the committees for that when we were doing both a principal and a superintendent as a staff member. And we just had representatives. So like maybe a representative from some of the different communities in our county, no more than seven or eight people at a wrong table. That person went to that table. Each candidate had the same questions. Then another room had staff like parents, another room had other principals. So you can make it happen when you have that kind of input. We didn't have a vote, but we could give some input back to the people who are eventually hiring and voting. And you can do it in a small setting where you're not bringing in a whole bunch of people but representatives of different aspects of our county or the citizens staff are like did officials in the commissioners So I would recommend that if you do go forward with this election coming up, that you do find a way to include some of the public and staff and critical pieces of our county that would be involved in that process to make it as transparent and as fair as possible. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Heather Lynn online, I'm gonna to ask you you are unmuted Okay, hi, this is Heather Lynn and I'm just chiming in this morning to say that if in fact this process and decision is going to be done by the current County Commissioner Board then I would like to be done by the current County Commissioner Board, then I would like to be on the selection committee for the candidates for the job. I have a background in this sort of thing. I've been on a lot of boards. I've been on a lot of collective decision-making teams, worked in the schools, worked for seniors. I have a lot of observation skills, so I just like to put that in, and if you could please post how we can put an application in for that, I would appreciate it. All right, thank you. Thank you for your comment. All right, and we have one more in the room. Yes, hi, good morning, Lucas Meyer. I understand over the last few weeks there were some, there was an article and some other things that were brought up in regards to me talking with David Whistle and Amy. You know, after one of the meetings, I just wanted to put some of that to rest. It was purely about Dave as the Republican Chair and Amy as the candidate that's running for reflection. some concerns that I had, especially in regards to her candidate. On June 18th, after the 9 a.m. meeting, before the 11 o'clock meeting, Mr. Rob Green approached me and he was the one that talked about the having some sort of deal with Dick to push in him and as the next county manager. So, and I just wanted to confirm also, that I think that D.Q. handled it. Overall fairly well last time, when it was brought up, he said, when he asked me that, I absolutely refused. Which I think is the correct answer, especially in regards to Colorado Revised Statute, 18-2-201 Conspiracy. So... Madam, be careful. Thank you. Madam Chair, one, I want to make this really clear. Rob Green never asked me to be a county manager. I never would have said that. If he said it, it could have been joking. I also want to be very unequivocally clear. In this meeting, in every meeting I have been at, I do not want to be a county manager in Park County. I'm going to be 74 years old when I'm done being a commissioner. The thought of having to drive to park, to fair play every day because a county manager needs to be here. No, I don't want to do that. I want to do fishing. I've got some consulting work that I'll do. None of it has to do with government. I do not want that position. I want it to be perfectly clear. We never, ever talked about that. Never. And I'm tired of accusations being placed against a gentleman who I do have a lot of respect for. And it's just ludicrous that you guys continue to do that. You know, it was about four years ago or two years ago when they were trying to run against me to get Mr. Whistle. I was accused of taking seven million dollars of money so I could build a house in Belize. I don't own any property in Belize and if you do a look at the audit, there is nothing there. You guys are making up stories to try to make a political point and you have had your chance to speak sir. Alright we're gonna go online and whoever wants to speak next can come up to the podium and sign in. I will ask business connection to unmute. Oh, and I also want to add one more thing. Talking politics in this room with two members, one of those Republican. You know, Mike Kaufman got in a lot of trouble because he made 32 copies, using county facilities. Be careful. If you're gonna have conversations about political things and candidate things, I would suggest you take a look at the law and be very careful because you've got two people using a county paid for facility for a political purpose which is against the law. All right, business connection. I think you're unmuted. So I don't know if I want to follow that. Please give us your name. No. This is Pas-Dowinsky. And Dick, I'm glad, you know, you're going to be retiring and enjoying your retirement. You work hard. So anyway, I just, my two sentences that I feel like this has been dragging on, you know, I feel like this has been dragging on. You know, I feel like this should have already been accomplished this goal. I know that you guys have tried to do it. Get it done. You know, for me, it's like I hope you guys just move forward. You know, like by the end of the month that you have an all set in place. Because I think it should have been set in place today if you guys had to redo it. Oh, you know what I mean? I know there's things to do or whatever to decide, but hopefully you guys can, you know, run this like a business, make decisions, and if you're gonna have a board, get it pulled together, put in some overtime or whatever to get this going and get it done. Because it's just been dragging on. I think it should have been done a long time ago. That's just my two cents on that. And you know, and Mike, I have nothing against you at all. But my understanding is that you put in an application, you withdrew an application, and then I don't know if you re-put it in or whatever, but to me, that doesn't set really good. It's like, oh, so that I don't know if you re-put it in or whatever, but to me that doesn't set really good. It's like, oh, so I should, and I, what do I want to do or whatever. I've had good experiences with you. I've also had confusing things where I've left you three different messages and never have had a call return, which does bother me. Tom always returned my calls, maybe not the same day, but I deal a lot with the building department and I feel like the building department is gone very much sideways. Some things are good, some things are still a challenge in whatever. So I don't know, you know what I mean? Me as a person that has to deal with the county on a business level and a personal level, you know, I just, I need to have things moving forward. You know, I thought that the billing department was going to get all, you know, things where you can get plans out in a couple of weeks. I think they're all over thought. It's like it's, it's, I don't know. I mean, that's a whole different can of worms, but you know, I just think we need to just move forward and get things done. So. Thank you for your comment. Thank you for your comment. All right. My name is Susan Esmond. I'm making a comment regarding the sensitive spaces ordinance. I would like to respond to a previous comment that was made today and let her know that the, I can't speak for all employees. However, the employees opposition to that ordinance, which would allow weapons to be carried specifically in this county building at 856 Castella Avenue and Fair Play wasn't out of the blue or contrived as was implied. It was because the Colorado State legislature had passed legislation making us see for yet our commissioners passed a resolution opposing that back in June. I don't think a lot of people realize that. And they seriously considered passing a resolution doing the exact same thing last month, which was only tapelled because of employee outcry. Thank you. And I'll just to clarify, it was the second of two readings that were required for that resolution. And that was the second reading that happened, I believe on the September 27th. Thank you. Hi, please give us your name and. Sean, I'm. I'm. Please speak in the mic. Shawna. The only thing I'd really kind of like to say, there's lots of things that I'd like to say, but the one important thing is, is that you know, you discussed about the process of going around having meetings around the county for the county manager. And I think that that's a great idea. I think the public should be involved, and I think also staff should be involved. We should be asked and be able to give our opinion on how we feel because we're the ones that are gonna be working for that person and working with you guys as well. So you know, they do the SDR. We've been doing the SDR meetings all over the county and you too, Commissioner Mitchell and Commissioner Whistle, go to all the meetings because I'm there as well and have no problem doing that and haven't voiced your opinion about going around the county for the STR review and meetings, but yet you don't want to do it for a county manager. It's kind of, you know, listen, that was unacceptable. I don't know what you were trying to prove. It's on my business. Adam Chair, Adam Chair, at this point, the comments need to be directed not at personal individuals. Okay. Sorry, you know, elected officials are an exception to that under First Amendment law. But yes, let's please not direct comments toward it. Personal comments toward it. And lastly, I mean, I just think that it's trying to be rushed. And I don't think that that process should be rushed. Because we all have to work for that person. And that short amount of time is not enough time to figure out whatever you guys want to do in the process. It's just my opinion. Thanks. Thank you for your comment. Good afternoon. My name is Meet Hopkins. Thank you for your time. I think it was October 8th meeting, but I'm not sure, but I gave public testimony or public opinion about a matter of a meeting in this facility between, I believe it was the commissioner, Mitchell commissioner whistle. In fact, it wasn't disputed in conversations. Commissar Mitchell provided an explanation of the meeting. So I think the meeting happened and I do believe that two commissioners in the same room, if they're not, and one of these meetings creates problems in our county, and that's the sunshine laws. So I agree, I really believe that the county is owed an explanation as to what that meeting was about and provide the notes from the meeting so we understand it because I only see two options. And if there's a third, I'd like to hear it. One, it was a political meeting or two, it was a personal meeting. Either which they shouldn't be in this room. So the county really is owed an explanation for what that was about. In regards to the management position, the manager's position, I think, Commissioner Mitchell, you're actually right, comparing us to a school board is wrong, or a school group, however, because we're much larger, there's many more people involved in the county, and all those people probably have a stake with the county manager. And I do believe public input is vital to that process, and that's where I would encourage you to focus and take some time, is in the development of the process that you're gonna select a county manager. The previous process didn't work, it failed, or not, but it didn't work because you're still talking about doing this again. So I don't think taking what you did before and trying to redo it again is the right approach. So I think you can get input from the public during the process development. Things of what are the questions? Who are the people on the board? How is that all going to happen? Is where you can bring in the public to help you guide you to making those decisions and developing that process? Once you have a process that has input, that's going to tell you that down the road, the solution, the answer that comes out of that will be supported by the public. So I think that's where you want to put it and I agree. If we can make it to meetings, to guffy, to talk about planning, we can certainly take that time to hear about the county manager position. And then, oh, I think that's my last comment. Thank you. All right. Thank you for your comment. Anyone else online or in the room? I'm chair sitting no one in the room jump up and run over to the podium and no one online raising their hand. I move we close public comment. Second. All in favor. All right. Aye. All right. At this point, we are going to go into an executive session. I move to go into executive session. Executive session pursuant to CRS 24-6-402 for B for a discussion with legal counsel on specific legal questions on pending litigation. I'm going to leave the Zoom meeting open. I'm going to mute the room and we will be back to close out the meeting after our session. Madam Chair, we need a second vote on that motion, please. I'll second. Hold on. Okay. Will you hit pound? Dave will you hit pound on them? Okay. We are at meeting. So Madam Chair, you made the motion to go into executive session and what I requested was that there needs to be a second for that and vote before you can go into executive session. And I'll second that. All in favor. Aye. Aye. All right. Now I'm going to mute the room and we will be back. Thank you. We are back on the record. Thank you. The time is now 1243. I think you're muted. Oh, yes. Where is the? Were you hit pound? All right. Thank you. The time is now 1244 PM and the executive session has been concluded. The participants in the executive session were Mike Smith, Cindy Garst, Aaron Smith, Dick Elzner, Dave Whistle, and Amy Mitchell. If any person who participated in the executive session believes that any substantial discussion of any matters not included in the motion to go into the executive session occurred during the executive session or that any improper action occurred during the executive session in violation of the open meetings law, I ask that you state your concerns now. Hearing none. Move to a year. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. All right. Meeting is concluded. Thank you very much everyone. Have a great afternoon. Get ready for the cold weather coming.