We have our Monday. We are at our Monday work session, August 26th. It is 930 and our first order of business is the county manager report. Great. Good morning. Start out with the biggest local news item. Waitley and that's on Casey's pond. We have not been provided any detailed information on this new path forward, but it sounds like there's something moving in a positive way. The Community Foundation did send in a request to the BCC on whether or not we would contribute $100,000 towards that effort. If in fact, it will be Northwest Colorado Health acquiring the building that would be the easy one to donate the funds for or contribute towards the efforts if the had some people involved in that approach me on Sunday, saying, you know that building the facility pays property tax to the county. And we wanted to give you a heads up that we may be asking you to weigh property taxes and give you time to reach out to the assessor and I respond it back to them. I said I think my first spot would be to speak to legal because I said this comes down from the state and I'm not even sure there's even any possibility of that being a possibility. Please don't ask me for it. We need to. We'll need to dig into that. Waving property tax. Well, it'll depend on the owner. I mean, if it's not for proper preparation, with the North-West all over the health, is the owner in the future? Well, constitutionally, it sounds like a problem because the whole concept behind property taxation is equalization. Right. And how do you wave property tax for a set of property owners and not everybody? Exactly. We can't. That's a complete not-scarred. We've never done it. We never will. Even if we wanted to. Is the ask for us to waive property taxes? Are they saying to you that if it changes to an entity that does not pay property taxes, therefore you will lose those property taxes are they saying to you that if it changes to an entity that does not pay property taxes therefore you will lose those property taxes. It was a feeling to see where we were at and with the request that this would be give you enough time to give you a heads up to talk to the assessor was exactly how it was phrased to me. My advice is we just stay as far away from that as we possibly can. Let them talk to the assessor and do whatever. Well, I did my best to throw as much cold water on it as possible. You know, pleading ignorance is always a, I find that works for me quite a bit because it's believable. I said, well, I don't know for me quite a bit because it's believable. And I said, well, I don't know. I mean, we need to ask. So back to the $100,000 Jay, we saw this request and my feeling on this was that the context of the ask was kind of well, if route county stepped forward and made this kind of a commitment, this would help encourage private donors to jump on board. Well, it appears that the private board donors have already jumped on board without waiting for a hundred thousand dollars commitment from the county. And I mean, not that I don't want to help out in any way we can. I'm not sure that I could justify to our taxpayers spending this $100,000 to help out something that's already cured. I have not had any direct discussions with the community foundation on this. The request came directly to your e-mail. So I wasn't in the loop on that. I think just responding back to Tim and asking for some clarification on things would be a good good next step. He know and I thought it was interesting that he said that that email was a former request. And you know, how do you make a request without somebody really seeing a proposal? So who would like to be in charge of the follow-up on this? I'm happy to breach out to Tim. If you want me to call him and just let him know that we were, we had a brief discussion and you know we're unclear as to the status and wanted to check in on it so that sound like a plan or somebody else want to reach out. I'm busy. Someone else take care of it. Okay I'll just give him a call over this asking for some clarification and would you folks like for me to see if he wants to come and talk to us on an agenda? I'm not sure if the plans are that ready, but if they are, would you like to hear from him? Or do we want to just get something else and write him? It might be nice to have something review before we sat down and talk to him. Okay. I'll just get a check in on the red. Great. Thanks, Dave. Okay, moving down on the PAV allocation, we have the carry forward scheduled for tomorrow afternoon. We've sent you some clarifying information and the amount, which is closer to 3 million. There's 3 million, not 1.5 after this carry board. And just wanted to check what other questions we may need to answer, we currently don't have Cory's schedule to attend the meeting tomorrow, but we could ask him if he is available if you wanted him. Jason, I believe, has been invited to the meeting to answer questions from whose most familiar with PABs. So just checking on the path forward on that. Well, I feel I have the information that I need. Yeah, I don't feel as though I have the information I need specifically the question about, you know, Jason has basically said that they've traditionally been used for live tech programs. Does that mean they have to be used for live tech programs. Yeah, that's the remains. Yeah, that's a question. I don't know if you did or not. I don't believe so. Okay. He has a night of our morning on the agenda as well. He's got his budget presentation in the afternoon too. Well, based on Eric's email, it looks like we don't have, we don't have to assign or carry forward until September 15th at that time it would have ripped back to the state so if we don't have enough information to move we can. Is that the only question? I think we can get that from him today. We should be able to get an answer to that. It would be functionally then walking it out you know would this be a situation in which we could use this binding capacity to help with a situation of the Milner level on park if we want to be. Jason has not returned my email with that question so let's just make sure we ask him when we see him. I think the issue with the Milner, the mobile home park would be if they are qualified for that use is a timing side. There would have to be someone putting up the money in the time to be able to issue the bonds. And basically now we're down to a 90 day, it's 120 to 90 day period on that. I do have a detailed report on his meeting that he shared with the members of the Housing Authority Board, which I'll take a look at like it would be an easy thing to do, but it doesn't sound like it would be impossible. So that's where I'm at is I'm just trying to understand if we, I mean, it's clear from what Eric sent to us that if we carry them forward. You know, we have the capacity to use them. I'm looking at this report that he set back to the housing authority and it does sound like the housing authority staff is deeply involved with the Miller residents. Yes. Meeting with them and helping them navigate the process and working on local philanthropic resources and he met with a donor this week and so I think we should wait and hear more from him before we make any decisions. Sounds good. Okay. We'll try to answer those two questions and then Jason will be with us tomorrow for the follow-up questions. What's the second question? The second question is whether it would work for resident purchase of a mobile home park. Help finance. That's the walking walk that through. Yeah, part. So. Okay. On County Road 56, we provided, believe Tuesday, a restoration agreement to Smith Rancho. Haven't heard back from them. Zach's reaching out to Derek Smith today and will also be up there. Seeing how things are going with the recent rains with county staff on both Thursday and Friday, cleaning and monitoring our erosion control efforts up there. Mike actually comment to me was he thought it looked much better than it did post work when it was really dry. So in that rain is probably help settle some things too. It's all packed in. If we had gully washers, that's the issue. And then Thursday or Wednesday night was a pretty heavy one. Yeah, it was. Then on the fair, we talked about this a little bit yesterday. So far reports are on positive. Some good feedback from folks involved in the event. And as I mentioned last week our fairgrounds manager and our facilities crew blogged a lot of hours that 70 to 80 hour weeks for our staff out there. On the gravel race we have a deep brief on Monday, the third or Tuesday, the third, excuse me, right after Labor Day. We have an hour and 25 minutes on the agenda set aside for this. We want to make sure we had enough time to get feedback. You know, in general, I'm talking with the sheriff and others more directly on the county side. You know, it seems that the size and scale of the event continues to be an issue. I think the organizers have worked on trying to mitigate things, but it's just, it's a lot of people racing on open roads, continues to have its challenges. So I expect some good community feedback on the third and then we can take an objective look at where we're going on this in the future. On the historic certified local government, our historic preservation board has time for you again on the ninth to talk about CLG and whether it's would be good for the county to move in that direction. My plan is if we move forward with the CLG to have a house and staff in the planning office as most CLGs are, and our new plan or one starts today, and it would probably be in his job duties. So there's some work to do to get him up to speed and get ready to have a really good discussion of whether this is good for the county or not and what the benefits are. I mean, when you're a CLG, your board can do the local certifications for tax credits, which could be important for those who are looking at moving forward on historic projects. There's some work associated with it and some obligations and how you operate as a CLG. So we need to make sure it's the right direction for the county. I would also mention with our current planning issues and other things we're working on. It's gonna be a very busy next year. So we also have to look at internal capacity. Right. Yes, I mean, I'm hoping obviously if the group is coming to present to us, they will be lobbying first to participate just as they did before. And selling us on all the benefits and et cetera, which is great, good for them. But I would love that if we had something from you or planning or whoever to really evaluate the capacity that we have to take that's on right now. Because I mean, I think it does sound like a good program on a lot of levels, but I'm concerned about just operationally, you know, are we ready for that? Is this something the planning department would like to take on? Do they see the value? I mean, I think it's consistent with the master plan, but you know, being able to do everything in the master plan at once is not exactly reality. So hopefully we'll get something from you guys as well as the lobby that we're going to get in the historic preservation board, you know, this is their focus and desire to move forward. They'll volunteer to have aspects of it just house within the board and I don't think long term that really leads to a strong sustainable setup for supporting an initiative like this that needs to have dedicated staff working on it. That's the direction we go. So do you anticipate a staff recommendation on this topic? Or I think it's still at the discussion level. This is the start preservation board moving it forward where to be honest, I, they want me to personally handle it. And I don't have the capacity right now with what we're working on to deal with. So I've got to spend some time with Christie on it. Since I've worked on CLGs in the past, I've been the person they'd like to shepherd it for and it's just don't have the capacity right now. No, I just think you know when people come to us asking us to make operational changes that are really your pervue. I mean we can only look back to you to tell us whether or not it's appropriate to be honest. Yeah, I mean, I think we're in a role where we can evaluate and see what the staff capacity is. And then it's broader like, is this direction that the county wants to go in this time too? Because it's a real step forward on historic preservation. Yeah. So wanted to bring that forward. Also wanted to mention that the special session starts today on property tax and what type of limitations and how, whether or not the two initiatives or propositions maybe pulled off the ballot or not. We'll see where this goes, Dan set in on the CCI session this morning and came away with more questions and answers on things. It does seem that the one potential bill which would require local governments to approve anything that the state passes in terms of tax reform probably isn't going anywhere at this point. I can't imagine that getting through the state legislators at this point, but a lot more to come on that, and we're not quite sure. We haven't seen the actual bill. We've just seen descriptions of it, but it sounds like a lot of the leadership in the state hasn't seen it either. So we'll see how it comes for the the sun had a really good right up on it today. Oh, good. So it's the best description of what may be in the bill whereas in the sun's article this morning, but it's also sounds like a lot of negotiations in private and not a lot of knowledge among the decision makers or what's involved in it. And then the last thing I just want to mention, we have our joint meeting today with evil county out at the Appa Town Hall. So looking forward to that. The agenda is there. I'm not sure if we'll be able to have commissioner Corgan zoom in or not. Have you figured that out? She's not able to make it. He's not able to. Yeah, I'm going to be at the hospital at that time. Okay. Good luck with that. And that's all I have for you. You know, we're having any questions for Jay. All right. Sounds like we're moving on to Melina. We don't have any questions for Jay. Sounds like we're moving on to Malina. Malina, what do you have for us today? Good morning. So solar project, the YPEA application as an energy provider will be completed this week for submission. I'm going to lean pretty heavily on NV5 to get that done. I've sent them a couple of things on a punch list. I CCG on it and I think I will move forward everything that I communicate with them just to make sure that I'm tracked. The microgrid grants application will be hitting the grants committee for review probably by the end of this week. And that's actually it for this little project right now. Any questions on that? No, but I appreciate you copying me and on that and I do think that I'm. Julie with her regular reviews that might be a good thing for us to follow up on so we'll talk later. Yep, absolutely. Worker housing and childcare centers. So the STR application from the city to the city for $10 million on this project was submitted plus addendums that we worked through throughout the week. The city will be invoicing the remaining $150,000 of our $200,000 commitment for the construction design of the project. And then we will also be infressing the city for the $50,000 that they have agreed to provide in-match and grant revisions when you requested this before the end of 2024 to get that budget all balanced out before end of year. And I think also before she leaves in October. And then one additional on that here this week we are reviewing with just updated numbers and a little bit of a finer toothed comb. What potential operational budgets for that child care center are going to look like just so that there are no terrifying surprises that we've over committed to something. So that will be done this week as well. This is gonna be interesting to see how the allocation of the short-term mental tax funds play out. I actually happened to be cruising the agenda of the city for a different reason. And it looks like that housing task force is going to be meeting tomorrow, the 28th at 3.30 p.m. and this is where we see the city request for the joint project that we're working on come into competition with the 10 million dollars that I think ski corps has requested to save cases time so I'm still puzzling over what happened to make them able to save Casey's time if there's some sort of tacit commitment to that money that might be in competition with our request. So stay tuned. Can I ask is there a succession plan for Miss Delacquari? I think that there's a preliminary one. I think that she does probably four people's work in the sense of how much she's able to accomplish. And so I know construction projects are going to Eric with the city and then beyond that, there's not been much discussion. Okay. So next safety plan, safety committee is going to meet tomorrow, finalize the plan and then we will provide a summary to BCC for approval. Evie readiness, resources been selected as the winning bid. This has been posted waiting for any consecutive responses. So who is East George? I mean, they were one of three top vendors. They're actually local. The primary person that operates it is locally based. So that was attractive in the sense of having a good understanding of this area. But it was a pretty close competition. So we were able, the committee was pretty thorough in our reasoning behind selecting Esports. So if there is any, I guess pushback from the other vendors, we feel pretty confident. We worked with Julie on that. So beyond that, I mean, their work with the state came back with some pretty glowing reviews when we checked all their references. So. And this is for our internal project? Yes. Okay. Okay. The second point is related to the other one. Yes. Okay. Yeah. And that is confusing. I should have Labelled those differently so separate from our own EV readiness plan. The northwest cog is submitting the grant application For the CFI grant monies and so that letter of support was sent and will need to be ratified. I think that's on the agenda. 14 more right? What? Ratification of the letter of support. Thank you for that. Okay. Last thing. The course planner program we have identified the top software vendor and we're moving forward with those required reviews and approvals. We have selected a consultant as well and so similarly moving forward with required reviews and approvals and co-response program costs were placed in the budget for the sheriff's office for 2025. And that's it. What's someone has questions? Any questions from Elena? All right. Thanks so much for that. Looks like we're moving on to legal. And we have not just legal. We have our special guest. Dan, would you mind just saying your name for our new minute taker? We're getting her used to everybody names and titles. Dan should have finance director. Special guest. Oh thank you. I was not appropriate for public comment. So I only have one item to remind you of today and that's the. Severance tax issue. Mesa County has asked route county to join in a lawsuit. And a complaint against the state for training the $25 million local severance tax fund to balance its own budget, although it's not clear. What exactly the money was going to be spent and or backfelling? And so the reason I asked Dan here, he had shared some numbers with us that were forwarded to you on what does this mean to Rao County and the numbers to me we're not small they were they're not insignificant. Again though does that does that equally mean that Rao County should join this lawsuit I still believe that ultimately if the if, if the plaintiffs prevailed, which quite frankly, I don't think will, there's still, Ralph County would still be a beneficiary of that of a reversal of the fund or some negotiated value that might be the end result here. So I don't think all the numbers pretty, they're not insignificant. I don't want to say significant, but they're not insignificant. I don't think that necessarily means we should join the lawsuit that's still option. Did you have any numbers you wanted to? Well, there's a one time, $25 million. So it's one time, it's just this year, okay? And that basically, you know, the service tax was started in 1977 and then it's basically giving up 50% to natural resources, 50% to Dola and then the Dola side, 70% goes to the grant side of Dola and then the other 30% goes to local governments and that 30% is what the 25 million goes along with and Based on what I did with the numbers that you looked at as I look at the Colorado governor's office forecast on severance tax and so they're Basically the 25 million for on tents and purposes will basically to plead that 30% or the amount going to local governments. There may be a little bit left over and that we would see our portion is somewhere around 1% so that might be maybe around $30,000 or something like that. And so we were anticipating $265,000 and given what the legislative numbers are to be maybe like more like 240 after we got said and done and then the other thing we've done out here is going out into the future. We're ending the service tax of the source of revenues because of the closure of the mine and the power we stop in 2029. So our budget has 265 in it. It is a state revenue. It's not a federal revenue. So it doesn't get backfilled or anything like that as far as like how federalment at least gets backfilled with the pill farming way out with the pill payment. So there's still could be the possibility if they don't do it again. The state doesn't do it again. that we could still see that revenue stream out until the mine closes. But then there's a possibility that the mine still might have contracts to provide coal to say internationally or something like that. So there's still possibility that revenue stream there for a while just don't know exactly what that might be. But that's the, I mean, that's the best guess that's until we actually get those. And you know, you can't really, But that's the, I mean, that's the best guess that's until we actually get those. And you know, you can't really, it is proprietary information, proprietary confidential. I should say that proprietary is not really maybe the right word, because it is coming from various different companies and that kind of stuff. And they don't, at a state never shares that information to the public or myself or anything like that. So you really can't tell how that's all going to work out. That kind of thing. So Dan, we would be taking a hit on this. But then we also had an unexpected backfill from the state of a little over a million dollars, you know, 1.1 million. 1.1 million. So it's kind of like we've, we're losing one pot of funds, but we were provided a backfill that we didn't expect. So from a budgetary standpoint, we're still on the positive side on from the state for 2024 revenues. Correct. Yeah. I think that's important to rise. We weren't expecting a backfill or not expecting. We didn't anticipate a backfill for a table limited county and we did qualify for it. You said it was a one-time $25 million. Where did it come from? The bill or? No, you said at one time, 25 million coming from the disbursement formula for municipalities and. Full government. Right. Yeah, that 25 million, you know, they must have been looking at their forecast because it's very close to that forecast. I mean, they've got a little bit more in seven stacks in and they've planned. And they should in sevens tax in when they plan. And they should probably, you know, typically we get their distribution in August. I haven't, I've talked to the Treasury, I've not seen that and they have not sent any, the state hasn't sent anything out. Like I said, I was using a forecast for the state. It made me less more, but that was what I was using. So there's the 25 million looks like I'm being, you know, speculative to a certain extent, but it looks like they were trying to use an old, the whole thing. The whole thing. Yeah. Now, the like Oak Creek and Hayden also get a disbursement as well, right? Yes. And so they're not going to get see their money either. And I would think Hayden is a little First, I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. I think it's a lot of money. what they're doing. All right. I actually see this as the state breaking its own law. They're rewriting their law. Yeah. That's that goes to why I think the chances of success for plaintiff are minimal simply because they went to the length of changing legislation, changing the statute. They covered CY. They changed the rules for one year. For one year. Yeah. So Dan, that's not good government. Okay. So in some cases, it was up to maybe 60 some 60 some thousand or something like that. Historically it depends on, you know, it's whenever immunally severed from the earth and that's when the tax gets paid. Yeah. And you're saying that 30,000 is what we're anticipating for this year. The right yeah, I mean that's a really rough rough number. I mean I'm using the governor's estimate of what their forecast is for seven stacks and then going down the chain to say this is what we're getting from you know get from that based on what we've historically received in that kind of that's that's my best guess is $30,000 and it may not be that either it could be less. It be more maybe significant It would be more. Maybe significant. No. Okay. Commissioner Corrigan, do you have any thoughts on this item? I'm fairly well persuaded by Eric's assertion that the chances of success are unlikely and it's hard for me to imagine why we would invest money in legal fees for a potential low return with a low potential for success. On that I apologize I should have mentioned that basic county has basically taken that we'll be doing the heavy lift here. The participation of Ralph County would be by name only. I can't imagine that they would ask me to argue or change any sort of brief, maybe participate in briefing on the issue. It's declaratory relief, so it's a fairly simplified process under state law rules, but I should have been more clear about that. I mean, setting aside the fact that we generally dislike it when the state rips off local governments for other purposes, you know, the question I see is whether or not $30,000 of potential revenue is worth the potential ill will and black guy that we might gain from having our name on it, especially given the fact that Eric's point is if they prevail, we prevail also. Yeah, that makes total sense. You know, it's almost like letting somebody else do your dirty work. Did this come off at Club 20 because it would seem to be a Club 20 platform? I don't think they are informed enough to know this. I hate to say that, but I will be the one that will inform them of this. Yeah, I mean, I agree with you that, you know, it is, it is letting someone else do you dirty work. If that is the direction that we choose to go, which is not to sign on. And I would also say that I would think Mesa County may be more aggressive than I would be comfortable with too. Yeah, and I think the other piece of it is, I mean, let's face it, like how much of this mineral resource funding, are we going to see over time as certain industries phase out? I mean, do we really expect new ones to come in? If you're going to try to come up gauntlet on this one. I think what I'd like to do is respond to Mesa County and say that at this time, we're out county is disinclined to join, but that may change is the facts or interest develop differently than we're out right now. I like it. Thanks for your time, I appreciate you joining me. differently than where we're at right now. I like it. Thanks for your time, I appreciate, don't you? Thank you, Stan. Thank you guys. Have a good rest of your day. Moving right along, Eric, yet other things for us? I do not. Thank you. I think we have any questions for Eric before we let him leave the room. I may have one. I'm not sure if it's for Eric or for commissioners, but we did receive a request from Gary Peterson, our sister. We revisit a decision that was made in that statement decision. I think Leneo was specifically copied on this, but it went to the BCC and I'm just wondering if anybody has had a chance to look at that. Think about that and is there any time sensitivity for responding or you know putting this on an agenda or not. It's on the agenda for tomorrow. But is on the agenda as your kind of regular reviewing hearing officer decisions. Okay. So I think it's worth digging into in a brief discussion with Jen this morning. It sounded like some of the issues raised by the assessor or legitimate. Okay, so that being said, do we need to have Eric participate in that hearing tomorrow? Let me, what's the, I wasn't copied on that was I yeah, it says BCC and then I don't get those Oh, you don't you don't Linnea just asked about it in an email and you're copied on the email so tomorrow at 320 Okay, so let me let me take into that a little bit more and see what's going on do you want it forwarded to? Sure Thank you a little bit more and see what's going on. Do you want it forwarded to? Sure. I understand it. Thank you. Chikoku. OK, so that was my only question for you, and sounds like we will deal with that tomorrow. OK, thank you. Thanks. All right, commissioners, anybody have any items of note for the good of the cause? Well, I will share with you that Friday, actually it was Thursday, Club 20 went through the ballot measures and took our positions and on the issue of drawing a blank here. Oh, on the issue of the trophy cat hunting, the Phelian Club 20 is a ballot box is not the way to do animal biology work that we have. Scientific means to do that. So they took an opposed position to that. The other one was the vet tech bill that would allow veterinary techs to do more work out in the field. We took a position of a neutral position on that one. And then there was, there were two others. I left, I left and I had to leave when they got down to the rank choice ballot measure. And I don't know where they came down on that although I suspect they took an opposed position, but it was very interesting to hear the members of Club 20 not be able to show their understanding of how right voting worked, which was somewhat disappointing. Okay, interesting. Anything else? Was there a discussion whether our current election systems could handle? I think choice one. Well, there there was one member of club 20 that was a past county clerk. And she spoke up with with that being her concern with the work that it would put on our overstretched clerks office as it is. And that was her concern. Great. And that's what I have. Okay. Mr. Corrigan, do you have anything? No, frankly, no. As you guys know, I've been pretty well consumed with this family medical emergency back east here. So I've not been engaged to the level that maybe I normally would be. I do I'm still highly hopeful that I will be flying home on Friday and be back in person on Monday. We'll say, I'd say the chances are good that's gonna happen, but the way things are changing here from hour to hour and day to day, I feel it's difficult to make really good predictions, but that's that's the current plan and I'll let you know if that's not happening. As you know, we all support you doing what's right for yourself and your family and many of us have been in your same shoes and understand the nature of that business. So please do make sure to let us know if there is anything you'd like for us to cover meeting wise or if there's anything that needs to happen. as well so we can get that done. And we'll look forward to seeing you next Friday, except for the fact that I have been using your parking spot quite a bit with my non-American vehicle. Real happy to do that. Thank you. Yeah, I don't want to go unused. I did have a couple of things for you folks. Really just, I think probably just one to be honest. I was really troubled by our meeting last week when we looked at the CR-14 traffic study. That just really struck me as seriously concerning. And I don't know if anybody else felt the same way, but I just want to make sure we don't lose sight of the request that I made for some information as to, you know, what are the either numbers or volume or counts or whatever the measure is that trigger the different grade levels to move us down towards an F for those places where we were going to get to F if all of these projects were approved. I think it's important for us as we're taking these projects into consideration to have some understanding of what we're doing. And I have a bit of an unpleasant history with local governments that have not considered the cumulative impacts of traffic and not report not and have approved projects without C.Dot access and I'm specifically thinking about our west side of town which is now a disaster situation based on the cumulative impacts of a number of developments so maybe I'm a little bit burned on this issue but I don't want to get burned again and I would like for us to have that information before we start approving projects if that's possible. Well, Sonya, I mean, I agree with you. I mean, as elected officials, when we receive an impact report that includes grade levels of F, even after mitigations are applied. That's a really big question that we need to come to grips with. It's interesting. I guess the question I would have for you is what information do you feel like you don't have? Well, the information I don't have is, you know, they basically presented, you know, item by item and there were like three or four right that got to ask. And what I was asking was, you've taken into consideration if all of the developments were to go forward, you know, then we get to F. But they didn't take into consideration if one development, let's just say 200 units of residential and three commercial, then we get to see over B, right? If 2000, then we get to D. I mean, so how did they evaluate those triggers? And they kind of didn't. They just looked at this one lump sum number and said this is gonna get us to F. And so I asked them to bring back that information. Part of the reason for that is my second thought on this is that, and this is just a question to you folks to consider, is would we want to consider putting into place some standard for the acceptable level of road? So as we're thinking forward to these cumulative impacts that we anticipate, would it be strategic for us to have in hand a policy that indicates that an acceptable standard of road for route county is and whether that's BCD? From my perspective, it's not F like that is not okay. So I'm just wondering if we want to dig into a discussion like that as we consider, you know, what are our standards and how have we operationalize those standards so that any development that comes forward understands, you know, that if you're in a shrigring event, it's going to put us into an F category for our roadways. It's just not going to work. So Sonya, given your experience with the city, and I'm thinking back to the downhill drive intersection, which still to this day has never been signalized, yet the city has been collecting money from anybody that's doing any kind of development for years and years now. And my assumption is is when they finally collected all the money necessary from all the various developments, then they'll do the improvement. Unfortunately, the examples I'm thinking of really are more Third and Lincoln when the natural brochures came in and replaced the sweepie There was a real opportunity to do intersection improvements there That was just walked away from and also I'm looking specifically at $129. So when base camp gets approved, when the housing authorities project over there gets approved with no access plan and there's no change to that intersection. So those are the kind of the more things I'm, I don't exactly recall the downhill drive. I feel like that might have been a prioritization of the TPR also, but a little vague on our election of what happened there. So for example, we did in fact, when we built the cleft, the city with the project, the city and the county, or whatever the entity was, the project did have to contribute money to the downhill drive intersection. And I'm just, maybe this is a question for Jay, having had some experience in these matters of development. Isn't that kind of how it works? As each development comes online, you don't jump to the improvement. You just collect some money and save it up and charge everybody. Whoever the developer is, the same amount of money. Then at a certain point, you have enough money to do the improvement. Was that right? That's one model. You can, the other model is you're the first one in to do the work and pay them back for it as capacity issues. So there's a couple different approaches to it. I think one of the challenges on 14 and we touched on that a little bit last week and can have a further discussion on this is that you can have a level F at the intersections with the highway and the solution would be to signalize it and we can put money aside to signalize it. But we can't put in the traffic light until we actually meet the warrant. So the levels service F doesn't mean that you're going to meet the warrants for the state to allow you to build a traffic light there. So that's the challenges that F doesn't mean that the improvements can actually be put in. That doesn't mean we can't be collecting funds to be able to do that when it's actually meets the warrants. You know, the CDOT is going to respond to not what the study shows, but what the actual use and warrants at the intersection are. That's the that's part of the challenge on an existing roadway. So we've got some work to do with them on that, but the F's at the intersection of the highway are different than F's within our actual road network where we have the ability to do the right improvements on our own. I mean for example that intersection is 16 and 14. At some points going to require the bridge to be replaced because you're going to need multiple lanes there if in fact the projects move forward is proposed at this point. Well Jay I think that's all helpful context and I think that would all be a really good part of a discussion about, you know, should route county want to establish a standard for roads. I mean, because, you know, what you're pointing out is that standard may be different from for roads that we have the capacity to improve on our own and those that we do not. But I guess where I'm at is, you know, flatly under no circumstance, do I want to authorize something that's going to trigger us into an F category when we know that we already have congestion problems and issues. So, here's another thing, Sonya. You know, the grading system, ABCDE and F that the consultant provided that's their grading system right that doesn't correspond to some national or state level standard of grading. Doesn't I actually think Tim it's tied to an ashto standard of of road. It's not our standard, it's a national engineering standard. Okay. Yeah. Well, then it's just hard to argue with commission remaces that an F-grade is something that it seems hard to believe that we would accept that as a result of development. And how do we go about making sure that doesn't happen? Big competition. And I think that's why we did the studies to have discussion where we're in control of the data and not just a developer provided studies. So I did email Mike and we'll put on a further discussion on this. And just also the, you know, not only the F grades, but just really shocking to me, but I guess after further thought, the idea that traffic on County Road 14 could actually increase by factors of 500 to 1,000% is just shocking enough itself. Mine, Bob, Lynn. Yeah. And I would say that's based on their traffic projections. Not us arguing their traffic projections. You could say their projections might be low based on occupancy rates and whether a project is actually occupied performs as designed or morphs into something else over time. So I would just say I would use cautious caution moving forward on what's being proposed in the sense that part of these are their numbers, the developers numbers. Okay well it sounds to me like there's general agreement that it would be healthy for us to have a subsequent policy discussion with day and mic regarding, you know, standards for route county roads and other roads that are within proximity to any developments we might see. And, you know, the risk of lighting fire, I would love to see that before we get more development proposals officially as the BCC. I know there are applications underway with the planning department, but it's possible to schedule out such a way that we can get in front of those. That would be great. All right, looks like Jay is saying yes to that. Commissioners, before we conclude, I do see that we have Kevin Booth online and he has his hand raised. I suspect he wouldn't be here if it wasn't important. We don't typically have kind of staff reports at this point in time, but are you folks good with us hearing what Kevin has to say? Oh, yeah. All right. Thanks, Kevin. All right, thank you very much. Can you guys hear me okay? Yes. I just wanted to check with Commissioner Corrigan to he should be receiving some emails from Marissa Flour with Wolpert And this is DocuSign Task orders that you guys approved week or so ago. I know he's out of town, but She's sent it now twice. We didn't hear back. She sent it on the 20th and then again this morning. So I just wanted to check and make sure you're receiving those. So, Kevin, I see here at 11, I guess would be my time, which would be 9.35 your time. I received two emails from Marissa Flore. I might understand that they're both ready to be signed. Yeah, I'm not sure why you received two, but yeah, there should be a task order number one from Woolpert. Yeah, I'm seeing that one. For about $42,000 for our storm water management plan to get them moving on that, which has a due date, not to. That's why I'm kind of anxious to get it going. Uh, yeah, the second email looks identical to the first one. So, um, I'll send. Yeah, just just one of them just just bond or sign one of them and She didn't send them to us so I can't I can't tell if it needs to be attested or not And I assume that Eric's okay with this yeah So you know what I've got this thing opened up Kevin and uh it's kind of a different kind of a docu-side document. It's actually leaving blanks that I need to fill in. This task order made and entered into this, I guess I should fill in 26 of of 26th day of August, 2024. Okay. And then it just wants me to sign. Very good. Got it. I will send I will do do this complete this and send it out shortly. Okay, and I'll extend the time a little bit if I'm allowed to. I noticed you guys are meeting with Eagle County later today to talk about one of your topics is sustainable aviation fuel. I just wanted to make sure that everybody is aware that Atlantic aviation buys their fuel from F fuel and they are buying sustainable aviation fuel and mixing it in with the fuel that they're selling on a daily basis. So it's not a high percentage yet because there's a limited supply but we are doing that already just for your background as you go into this discussion Thank you for that clarification Kevin You know, I think one of the things they want to talk to us about is that they have some form of Because they operate their own landfill. They have some form of recaptured process by which they can converge Land-filled items into sustainable aviation fuels I think that's going to be the topic of discussion. It sounds very interesting, but it's good to have that reminder from Atlantic aviation. So thank you. Very good. Anything else for Kevin before we. Hey Kevin, that document assigned and completed. Very good. Thanks for sure. All right. So it sounds like we are concluding. I can assure Redmond. I would just ask if you don't mind passing along my regrets to the headwaters of the Colorado folks. I did go ahead and cancel my participation in that. I kind of feel like there are signatures needed and stuff like that. It's probably better for me to be here than rocking around all those awesome sites, but enjoy the tour and sorry sorry I can't make it maybe next time. Sounds good I will let them know. There is nothing else everybody's gonna get 34 minutes of their life back. I can use free. I think I'm owed a few days so.