BOARD of TRUSTEES Tuesday, August 18, 2020 @ 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting - Webex

The Town of Nederland Agenda BOARD OF TRUSTEES Tuesday, August 18, 2020 @ 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting - WebEx

Website: https://townclerk.my.webex.com/townclerk.my/j.php?MTID=m324414660b9f45a15020617 363cb700d Meeting number: 126 461 0630 Password: VWe9dBPYP87 Join by phone: +1-415-655-0001 US Toll Access code: 126 461 0630 Password: 89393279 from phones and video systems Page

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. CONSENT AGENDA

3.1. Approval of August 18, 2020 Warrants 5 - 15 3.1 August 18, 2020 Warrants

3.2. Approval of August 4, 2020 BOT Meeting Minutes 16 - 21 3.2 Draft August 4, 2020 BOT Meeting Minutes

3.3. Approval of August 11, 2020 BOT Special Meeting Minutes 22 - 23 3.3 Draft 8.11.2020 BOT Special Meeting Minutes

3.4. Approval of Brian Curtis to the Parks, Recreation, Open Space Advisory Board 24 - 27 Vacancy 3.4 Approval of Brian Curtis to the Parks, Recreation, Open Space Advisory Board Vacancy 3.4 PROSAB Application - Brian Curtis 3.4 Brian Curtis Resume

3.5. Approval to Apply for Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) 28 - 47 to Upgrade Police Department Reporting Software 3.5 AIM - Approval to Apply for Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) to Upgrade Police Department Reporting Software 3.5 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program 3.5 EForce Pricing for Products

4. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Public comment is limited to 3 minutes per person. Prior to providing comment, the speaker must state their name and indicate whether or not they are a Nederland resident. If not a resident, the speaker should indicate their affiliation with Town.

4.1. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items 48 - 50 4.1 Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items - Scot Gorbet 4.1 Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items - Atashnaa Medicineshield Werner

5. ACTION ITEMS BOT Packet - 08/18/2020 - Page 1 of 176

Public comment may be given for each "Action Item" when called for by the Mayor. Public comment is limited to 3 minutes per person. Prior to providing comment, the speaker must state their name and indicate whether or not they are a Nederland resident. If not a resident, the speaker should indicate their affiliation with Town.

5.1. Appointment of David Thrower as Judge 51 - 53 5.1 AIM - Appointment of David Thrower as Judge 5.1 Resolution 2020 - 29 Appointment of David Thrower as Judge 5.1 Oath of Office - Municipal Court Judge

5.2. Approval of Development Improvement Agreement for Peakview Summit 54 - 124 Subdivision 5.2 AIM - Development Improvement Agreement for Peakview Summit Subdivision. 5.2 Peakview Summit Clarification Request 5.2 Resolution 2020 - 30 Approval of Development Improvement Agreement 5.2 Development Improvement Agreement Peakview Summit Subdivision 5.2 Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat 5.2 Peakview Summit Dead of Conservation Easement 5.2 Public Comment - Susan Wagner 5.2 Public Comment - Susan Wagner (2) 5.2 Public Comment Attachment - Abstract from 9.1.2004 Planning Commission 5.2 Public Comment Attachment - Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 9.1.2004 5.2 Public Comment Attachment - BOT Meeting Minutes 9.21.2004 5.2 Public Comment Attachment - IGA-19-0001-Nederland-Primary-Planning- Area-Resources-Map-20190803

5.3. Suspension of Water and Sewer Base Fees 125 - 131 5.3 AIM - Suspension of Water and Sewer Base Fees 5.3 Ordinance 811 - Suspending Sewer and Water Base Fees (Emergency) 5.3 Ordinance 812 - Suspending Sewer and Water Base Fees (Non- Emergency)

6. DISCUSSION ITEMS Public comment may be given for each "Discussion Item" when called for by the Mayor. Public comment is limited to 3 minutes per person. Prior to providing comment, the speaker must state their name and indicate whether or not they are a Nederland resident. If not a resident, the speaker should indicate their affiliation with Town.

6.1. Long Term Rental Regulations 132 - 142 6.1 AIM - Long-Term Rental Regulations 6.1 City of Edgewater – Rental Property Registration Code 6.1 City of Boulder – Long Term Rental License Application 6.1 Public Comment - Karen Cobble

6.2. Marijuana Moratorium Municipal Code Update Proposed Timeline 143 - 144 6.2 AIM - Marijuana Moratorium Municipal Code Update Proposed Timeline

7. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

7.1. Training on Motions 145 - 151 7.1 AIM - Training on Motions 7.1 Excerpt Rules of Procedure Motions

BOT Packet - 08/18/2020 - Page 2 of 176

8. STAFF REPORTS

8.1. Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator 152 - 157 8.1 Town Administrator Staff Report 8.1 July 2019 Activity Report 8.1 July 2020 Activity Report

8.2. Rita Six, Town Accountant 158 (Report Given by Karen Gerrity, Acting Town Treasurer) 8.2 Town Treasurer Staff Report

8.3. Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk 159 - 160 8.3 Town Clerk Staff Report

8.4. Larry Johns, Town Marshal 161 - 164 8.4 Town Marshal Staff Report 8.4 July 2020 Nederland Police Department Statistics

8.5. Chris Pelletier, Public Works Manager 165 - 167 8.5 Public Works Staff Report

8.6. Dawn Baumhover, Community Center Manager 168 - 169 8.6 Community Center Staff Report

9. BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORTS

9.1. Mayor's Report

Mayor Larsen 170 9.1 Board of Trustee Report - Mayor Larsen

9.2. Trustees' Reports

Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover 171 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover

Trustee Apt 172 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Trustee Apt

Trustee Coombs-Esmail 173 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Trustee Coombs-Esmail

Trustee Corvalan 174 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Trustee Corvalan

Trustee Danforth 175 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Trustee Danforth

Trustee Taylor 176 9.2 Board of Trustee Report - Trustee Taylor

10. OTHER BUSINESS

11. ADJOURNMENT

MEETING INFORMATION The Board of Trustees encourages citizen participation. Should you need assistance with an interpreter or hearing devices, please contact the Town Clerk at [email protected].

BOT Packet - 08/18/2020 - Page 3 of 176

The Board of Trustees may take action on any item included on this agenda, regardless of the heading under which such item appears. Discussion items may become action items if the Board determines that deferring final action on an item to a subsequent meeting is unnecessary or unwarranted and that taking immediate action does not compromise any third-party's rights.

The Board of Trustees meeting packets are prepared by Friday before the Tuesday meetings and are available for inspection at Town Hall during normal business hours. The information is reviewed and studied by the Board of Trustee members, eliminating lengthy discussions to gain basic understanding. Short discussion on agenda items does not reflect lack of thought or analysis. The agendas are posted at Town Hall, the post office, and on the Town's website on the Friday prior to the meeting. Copies of the agenda and meeting packet are available at no cost via email from the Town Clerk or from the Town website at www.nederlandco.org.

BOT Packet - 08/18/2020 - Page 4 of 176 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 1 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance General Fund 2 Indian Peaks Ace Hardware, PO BOX 1450, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-06 06/30/20 2020 DDA Beautification (steam weed) 07/30/20$9.16 $9.16 10-00-1200 Accounts Receivable $0.00 ($16,766.57) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$69.47 $69.47 10-13-5205 Building Maintenance $750.00 $517.28 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$6.57 $6.57 10-13-5410 Office Supplies $250.00 $255.54 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$31.99 $31.99 10-18-5410 Office Supplies $2,700.00 $1,839.70 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$218.12 $218.12 10-18-5550 Safety Equipment $1,500.00 $522.72 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$191.14 $191.14 10-20-5210 Parks Maintenance $15,000.00 $11,491.33 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$29.98 $29.98 10-20-5250 Janitorial Supplies $1,000.00 $140.43 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$13.58 $13.58 10-20-5505 Vehicle Maintenance & R $15,000.00 $8,897.86 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$62.93 $62.93 10-20-5520 Minor Supplies (tools) $7,500.00 $4,278.27 Beautification) 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$8.37 $8.37 10-20-5530 Minor Supplies (infrastruc $5,000.00 $3,385.55 Beautification) Page 5of176

$641.31 Cornerstone Homes/Caribou Ridge LLC, 1105 S 120th St, Unit 201, Lafayette, CO, 80026 2020-07-30Corners 07/30/20 refund overcharge for C&D - 2 Ridge View Rd 07/30/20$3,200.25 $3,200.25 10-00-2210 Deposits Held in Escrow $0.00 ($2,130.63)

$3,200.25 Dana Brenick, PO Box 3396, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-07-30Brenick 07/30/20 refund of overcharge for C&D - 650 W 07/30/20$478.50 $478.50 10-00-2210 Deposits Held in Escrow $0.00 ($2,130.63) Rollinsville St

$478.50 Davis Creative Inc, PO Box 1987, Boulder, CO, 80306 2020-07-27Davis 07/27/20 website development 07/27/20$100.00 $100.00 10-99-9400 Boulder County Economi $0.00 ($1,958.00)

$100.00 George & Ruth Friend, PO Box 3116, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-07-29Friend 07/29/20 refund ROW security deposit: 79 Wildewood Dr 07/29/20$1,000.00 $1,000.00 10-00-2200 Deposits held in Escrow $0.00 ($81,432.54) water line repair

$1,000.00 Walden Hyde, 713 Pearl St, Boulder, CO, 80302 2020-07-27Hyde 07/27/20 website development 07/27/20$100.00 $100.00 10-99-9400 Boulder County Economi $0.00 ($1,958.00)

$100.00 6 Alpenet, LLC, Randall D. Lee, PO BOX 3240, Nederland, CO, 80466 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 2 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 00008486 07/22/20 All 08/21/20$135.50 $135.50 10-12-5110 IT $8,500.00 $4,193.57 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$457.70 $457.70 10-12-5110 IT $8,500.00 $4,193.57 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$473.18 $473.18 10-18-5110 IT $6,000.00 $2,298.42 00008464 07/22/20 2 Acer monitors (J F-L) 08/21/20$247.22 $247.22 10-18-5430 Computer $2,500.00 $1,807.83 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$13.35 $13.35 10-20-5110 IT $1,815.00 $924.05

$1,326.95 11 Boulder County, PO BOX 471, Boulder, CO, 80306 423040 07/30/20 Aug 2020 patrol contract 08/29/20$11,109.16 $11,109.16 10-18-5128 Boulder County Sherriff C $133,310.00 $44,436.69 394041 07/15/20 June 2020 fuel 08/14/20$328.30 $328.30 10-18-5515 Fuel $10,000.00 $7,033.94 394041 07/15/20 June 2020 fuel 08/14/20$417.92 $417.92 10-20-5515 Fuel $15,000.00 $7,577.53

$11,855.38 13 Canon Financial Services, Inc., 14904 Collections Center Drive, Chicago, IL, 60693-0149 21704931 07/25/20 copier contract - TH & PD August 2020 08/04/20$164.00 $164.00 10-12-5470 Leased Equipment $2,500.00 $1,188.00 21704931 07/25/20 copier contract - TH & PD August 2020 08/04/20$68.00 $68.00 10-18-5470 Leased Equipment $900.00 $356.00

$232.00 14 Canon Solutions America, Inc., 15004 Collections Center Drive, Chicago, IL, 60693 4033483745 07/23/20 TH copier maintenance contract - 7/23- 08/02/20$55.66 $55.66 10-12-5471 Office Equipment Mainte $600.00 $159.78

Page 6of176 8/22/2020 4033482474 07/23/20 PD copier usage - 6/23-7/22/20 08/02/20$47.41 $47.41 10-18-5770 Printing/Copying $650.00 $272.04

$103.07 17 Century Link, PO Box 91155, Seattle, WA, 98111-9255 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$115.53 $115.53 10-12-5232 Phone $1,980.00 ($335.58) 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$82.29 $82.29 10-12-5233 Internet $2,974.34 ($10,305.91) 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$67.60 $67.60 10-13-5232 Phone $750.00 $271.45 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$139.93 $139.93 10-18-5232 Phone $1,907.28 ($424.83) 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$40.41 $40.41 10-20-5232 Phone $1,121.52 $229.00

$445.76 24 East Street Garage, PO BOX 203, Nederland, CO, 80466 I002442 07/15/20 '10 Chevy Tahoe: transmission repair 07/25/20$125.00 $125.00 10-18-5505 Vehicle Maintenance & R $8,000.00 $3,015.92

$125.00 33 Interwest Safety Supply, PO BOX 31, Provo, UT, 84603 52578 07/22/20 4 signs: 2 no bikes, 2 no scooters 08/11/20$91.76 $91.76 10-20-5535 Minor Supplies (signs) $3,500.00 $1,956.34

$91.76 34 JVA, Inc., 1319 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO, 80302 85580 06/30/20 1840.72c: 171 Conger St - 20NED-00037 - site 07/10/20$248.00 $248.00 10-00-2200 Deposits held in Escrow $0.00 ($81,432.54) review 85581 06/30/20 1840.69c: 740 W 4th St - site plan review 07/10/20$372.00 $372.00 10-00-2200 Deposits held in Escrow $0.00 ($81,432.54) 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 3 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance

$620.00 41 University Auto Parts, dba NAPA Auto Parts, 3550 Arapahoe Ave., #6, Boulder, CO, 80303 104894 07/02/20 '00 Chevy Tahoe: oil filter, air filter, sensor, 08/01/20$132.38 $132.38 10-18-5505 Vehicle Maintenance & R $8,000.00 $3,015.92 drain plug, oil 109950 07/21/20 fluid 08/20/20$13.98 $13.98 10-18-5505 Vehicle Maintenance & R $8,000.00 $3,015.92 097889 06/09/20 '98 GMC C2500: battery, core deposit 07/09/20$127.15 $127.15 10-20-5505 Vehicle Maintenance & R $15,000.00 $8,897.86

$273.51 44 Gall's Parent Holdings, LLC, dba Neve's Uniforms, PO Box 71628, Chicago, IL, 60694 016135703 07/27/20 uniforms 08/26/20$513.61 $513.61 10-18-5560 Uniforms $4,750.00 $3,648.82

$513.61 58 Timberline Mechanical, 3195 Sterling Circle, Suite 150, Boulder, CO, 80301 SV41558 06/24/20 labor & material - ionization system 07/09/20$3,729.40 $3,729.40 10-99-9490 Grant Other $300,000.00 $296,270.60

$3,729.40 59 The Mountain Ear, PO BOX 99, Nederland, CO, 80466 1259 08/01/20 Public Notice Ord 809 (6/11) 08/11/20$4.84 $4.84 10-14-5780 Publications $200.00 $26.25 1259 08/01/20 display ads: 575 N P2P Hwy (7/2), McMullen 08/11/20$37.84 $37.84 10-15-5780 Publications $100.00 ($57.96) trust (7/2 & 7/9)

Page 7of176 1261 08/01/20 noxious weed ads 08/11/20$595.00 $595.00 10-20-5210 Parks Maintenance $15,000.00 $11,491.33 1280 08/01/20 Town Clean Up advertising 08/11/20$355.00 $355.00 10-20-5750 Advertising $0.00 ($405.00)

$992.68 68 Utility Notification Center of Colorado, 16361 Table Mountain Parkway, Golden, CO, 80403 220070844 07/31/20 locates 08/10/20$52.15 $52.15 10-20-5188 Excavation Services $500.00 $277.99

$52.15 83 MFCP Inc., 8433 Solution Center, Chicago, IL, 60677-8004 7648997 07/16/20 steel elbows, hose 07/26/20$109.50 $109.50 10-20-5510 Equipment Maintenance $17,000.00 $5,108.99

$109.50 94 Wagner Equipment Co., PO BOX 919000, Denver, CO, 80291-9000 P00C2277733 07/13/20 freight charge 07/23/20$8.91 $8.91 10-20-5510 Equipment Maintenance $17,000.00 $5,108.99 P00C2281832 07/27/20 hydraulic cylinder 08/06/20$812.12 $812.12 10-20-5510 Equipment Maintenance $17,000.00 $5,108.99 P00C2281835 07/27/20 90-degree elbow 08/06/20$38.24 $38.24 10-20-5510 Equipment Maintenance $17,000.00 $5,108.99

$859.27 237 Air-O-Pure LLC, PO BOX 1828, Nederland, CO, 80466 173057 07/06/20 to be reimbursed by DDA 08/05/20$160.00 $160.00 10-00-1200 Accounts Receivable $0.00 ($16,766.57) 173344 07/16/20 to be reimbursed by DDA 08/15/20$390.00 $390.00 10-00-1200 Accounts Receivable $0.00 ($16,766.57) 173361 07/22/20 to be reimbursed by DDA 08/21/20$420.00 $420.00 10-00-1200 Accounts Receivable $0.00 ($16,766.57) 173054 07/05/20 port-o-potty (283 Alpine) 08/04/20$160.00 $160.00 10-18-5190 Other $200.00 $40.00

$1,130.00 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 4 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 306 MNT GROUP LLC, dba Intermountain Safety Shoe Store, 15400 W 44th Ave Suite D, Golden, CO, 80403 27906 07/10/20 boots (ND) 08/09/20$144.76 $144.76 10-20-5550 Safety Equipment $2,500.00 $220.49

$144.76 321 Occupational Health Centers of the SouthWest, PO Box 9008, Broomfield, CO, 80021-9008 14216438 07/16/20 BAT random (CP) 07/26/20$45.00 $45.00 10-20-5184 Drug Testing $1,000.00 $666.00

$45.00 352 McDonald Farms Enterprises, Inc., 7440 East I-25 Frontage Rd, Frederick, CO, 80516 322706-1012 07/31/20 trash services (7/31) 08/30/20$2,320.00 $2,320.00 10-20-5220 Trash Services $5,750.00 $2,497.00

$2,320.00 375 LATITUDE 40 , INC, PO BOX 189, NEDERLAND, CO, 80466 7-70-230 07/22/20 maps: BoCo trails, Boulder-Nederland trails, 08/01/20$83.70 $83.70 10-13-5670 Supplies for Resale $40,000.00 $31,536.19 CO front range topo

$83.70 384 Nedernet, Inc., P.O. Box 1244, Nederland, CO, 80466 68423 08/03/20 Visitor Center internet - 8/15/20 - 9/14/20 09/02/20$19.99 $19.99 10-13-5233 Internet $300.00 $140.08

$19.99

Page 8of176 395 FDGD LLC., 3875 Arbol Ct., Boulder, CO, 80301 2020-07 07/31/20 70% of July FDGD merch sales 08/15/20$17.50 $17.50 10-13-5670 Supplies for Resale $40,000.00 $31,536.19

$17.50 415 Maris, LLC, 4920 Atlanta Highway, #330, Alpharetta, GA, 30004 53056 07/31/20 Rita S. = 6 tests, Julie E. = 5 tests 08/30/20$220.00 $220.00 10-12-5182 Background Checks $150.00 ($70.00) 53056 07/31/20 Amanda S. = 3 tests 08/30/20$60.00 $60.00 10-14-5182 Background Checks $50.00 ($15.00) 53056 07/31/20 Grant C. = personality test 08/30/20$20.00 $20.00 10-20-5190 Other $150.00 $130.00

$300.00 446 Hartco Inc., dba CAM Services, 2525 W. 64th Avenue, Denver, CO, 80221 W255064 07/15/20 sweeping 08/14/20$460.00 $460.00 10-20-5215 Streets Maintenance $4,000.00 $2,355.00

$460.00 451 Law Office of Avi S. Rocklin, LLC, 1437 N. Denver Avenue #330, Loveland, CO, 80538 2042 08/01/20 prosecution services - July 2020 08/31/20$850.00 $850.00 10-17-5105 Court Services $25,200.00 $11,498.50

$850.00 495 Loveland Ready Mix Concrete, Inc., PO Box 299, Loveland, CO, 80539 20-12122 07/24/20 to be reimbursed by DDA (sidewalk 08/23/20$1,347.20 $1,347.20 10-00-1200 Accounts Receivable $0.00 ($16,766.57) improvements)

$1,347.20 518 Century Link - Business Services, PO Box 52187, Phoenix, AZ, 85072-2187 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$90.46 $90.46 10-12-5233 Internet $2,974.34 ($10,305.91) 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 5 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$132.76 $132.76 10-18-5233 Internet $4,365.10 $3,435.78 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$94.83 $94.83 10-20-5233 Internet $3,117.93 $2,454.12

$318.05 524 AT&T Mobility II LLC, dba FirstNet, PO Box 6463, Carol Stream, IL, 60197-6463 287288581014X07 07/20/20 police cell phones - 7/21 - 8/20/2020 08/19/20$176.38 $176.38 10-18-5234 Cell Phone $2,400.00 $1,169.00

$176.38 543 Mared Industries Inc, dba Detroit Industrial Tool, PO Box 7916, Van Nuys, CA, 91409-7916 579683 07/21/20 masks 08/20/20$1,518.00 $1,518.00 10-99-9400 Boulder County Economi $0.00 ($1,958.00)

$1,518.00 566 Colorado CSG II LLC, PO Box 15007, Portland, ME, 04112 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$78.22 $78.22 10-12-5230 Electric $1,800.00 $1,171.02 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$127.66 $127.66 10-13-5230 Electric $1,700.00 $776.70 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$107.09 $107.09 10-18-5230 Electric $1,400.00 $635.97 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$497.59 $497.59 10-20-5230 Electric $5,000.00 $1,591.24 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$100.14 $100.14 10-99-5230 Electric $1,500.00 $630.35

$910.70

Page 9of176 585 G W I S Corp, dba Golden West Industrial Supply, Inc., 2180 Agate Court, Simi Valley, CA, 93065 2103915 06/02/20 flashlights - 350LMS rechargeable 07/02/20$258.95 $258.95 10-18-5550 Safety Equipment $1,500.00 $522.72

$258.95 590 Patricia Graves, 3065 Hwy 46, Black Hawk, CO, 80422 114 08/02/20 TH monthly cleaning - July 2020 09/01/20$100.00 $100.00 10-12-5250 Janitorial Supplies $650.00 $204.28 113 08/02/20 PD monthly cleaning - July 2020 09/01/20$100.00 $100.00 10-18-5205 Building Maintenance $4,700.00 $3,746.77 115 08/02/20 PW facility - deep clean 09/01/20$125.00 $125.00 10-20-5205 Building Maintenance $4,000.00 $1,782.83

$325.00 594 Pitney Bowes Global Financial Services LLC, dba Purchase Power, PO Box 371874, Pittsburgh, PA, 15250-7874 2020-07 07/20/20 7/2 postage: $300 08/19/20$301.50 $301.50 10-12-5710 Postage/Shipping $4,000.00 $140.27

$301.50 620 Garrett McDaniel, 712 S Longmont Ave, Lafayette, CO, 80026 6 07/31/20 Sustainability Coordinator - July 2020 08/30/20$1,250.00 $1,250.00 10-99-9401 Boulder County Sustaina $0.00 ($6,680.00)

$1,250.00 632 Steamworks LLC, 517 22nd Street, Boulder, CO, 80302 2020-07-17 07/17/20 weed steaming (6/29 & 7/15) 08/16/20$172.50 $172.50 10-20-5210 Parks Maintenance $15,000.00 $11,491.33

$172.50 636 Union Medical, P.C., dba Occupational Medicine of the Rockies, PO BOX 271068, Littleton, CO, 80127 2020-06 07/15/20 physical examination for new hire (Peter G.) 08/14/20$251.00 $251.00 10-18-5185 Lab Tests $500.00 $249.00

$251.00 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 6 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 637 Stanley M. Slowik, dba Stanley M. Slowik, Inc, 28164 Tresine Dr, Evergreen, CO, 80439 2020-06-09 06/09/20 pre-employment polygraph exam (Peter G.) 07/09/20$161.45 $161.45 10-18-5182 Background Checks $1,000.00 $832.34

$161.45 639 David Jay Thrower, 1532 E Riverbend Street, Superior, CO, 80027 NED2020-1 08/03/20 Aug. 2020 - municipal judge/clerk services 09/02/20$1,250.00 $1,250.00 10-17-5105 Court Services $25,200.00 $11,498.50

$1,250.00

Total General Fund $40,461.78

Community Center Fund 2 Indian Peaks Ace Hardware, PO BOX 1450, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$3.59 $3.59 20-25-5250 Janitorial Supplies $3,100.00 $1,275.40 Beautification)

$3.59 Jane Curtis Gazit, 7578 Magnolia Dr, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-07-30Curtis 07/30/20 refund - Fitness Place Membership 07/30/20$289.00 $289.00 20-25-4920 Fitness Center Fees ($31,500.00) ($39,696.50)

Page 10of176 $289.00 6 Alpenet, LLC, Randall D. Lee, PO BOX 3240, Nederland, CO, 80466 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$195.40 $195.40 20-25-5110 IT $2,700.00 $897.20

$195.40 7 AT&T Mobility, PO BOX 6463, Carol Stream, IL, 60197-6463 827619565X07202 07/12/20 827619565 mobile phone 7/13/20 - 8/12/20 07/27/20$42.55 $42.55 20-25-5232 Phone $1,181.52 ($1,575.84)

$42.55 17 Century Link, PO Box 91155, Seattle, WA, 98111-9255 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$234.58 $234.58 20-25-5232 Phone $1,181.52 ($1,575.84)

$234.58 50 Schindler Elevator Corporation, PO BOX 93050, Chicago, IL, 60673-3050 8105395845 08/01/20 contract - inspection services (8/1/20 - 08/11/20$1,349.81 $1,349.81 20-25-5160 Building Services $9,150.00 $5,049.61 7/31/2021)

$1,349.81 58 Timberline Mechanical, 3195 Sterling Circle, Suite 150, Boulder, CO, 80301 SV41736 06/30/20 June 2020 quarterly preventive maintenance 07/15/20$1,081.25 $1,081.25 20-25-5160 Building Services $9,150.00 $5,049.61

$1,081.25 416 Kay L Turnbaugh, PO Box 931, Nederland, CO, 80466 232 07/20/20 Q3 2020 - CC website maintenance 08/19/20$75.00 $75.00 20-25-5115 Website $300.00 $225.00

$75.00 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 7 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 518 Century Link - Business Services, PO Box 52187, Phoenix, AZ, 85072-2187 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$94.83 $94.83 20-25-5233 Internet $3,117.93 $2,454.12

$94.83 566 Colorado CSG II LLC, PO Box 15007, Portland, ME, 04112 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$1,337.18 $1,337.18 20-25-5230 Electric $15,000.00 $5,988.81

$1,337.18

Total Community Center Fund $4,703.19

Sewer Fund 2 Indian Peaks Ace Hardware, PO BOX 1450, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$48.62 $48.62 40-45-5510 Equipment Maintenance $9,000.00 $6,482.53 Beautification)

$48.62 6 Alpenet, LLC, Randall D. Lee, PO BOX 3240, Nederland, CO, 80466 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$76.72 $76.72 40-45-5110 IT $2,000.00 $142.17

Page 11 of176 $76.72 7 AT&T Mobility, PO BOX 6463, Carol Stream, IL, 60197-6463 827619565X07202 07/12/20 827619565 mobile phone 7/13/20 - 8/12/20 07/27/20$15.64 $15.64 40-45-5234 Cell Phone $200.00 $91.33

$15.64 11 Boulder County, PO BOX 471, Boulder, CO, 80306 394041 07/15/20 June 2020 fuel 08/14/20$278.38 $278.38 40-45-5515 Fuel $6,000.00 $4,368.19

$278.38 17 Century Link, PO Box 91155, Seattle, WA, 98111-9255 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$41.03 $41.03 40-45-5232 Phone $456.00 ($600.70)

$41.03 61 HD Supply Facilities Maintenance LTD, dba USABlueBoook, P.O. Box 9004, Gurnee, IL, 60031-9004 286346 07/06/20 solution (ORP Standard 200 mV) 08/05/20$55.80 $55.80 40-45-5665 Lab Supplies/Chemicals $5,000.00 ($2,039.64)

$55.80 93 Colorado Analytical Lab, PO BOX 507, Brighton, CO, 80601-0507 200714130 07/20/20 WW chemicals 07/30/20$77.00 $77.00 40-45-5185 Lab Tests $5,000.00 $2,673.00 200714131 07/20/20 WW testing - BOD-5 07/30/20$35.00 $35.00 40-45-5185 Lab Tests $5,000.00 $2,673.00 200714132 07/16/20 E-Coli testing 07/26/20$26.00 $26.00 40-45-5185 Lab Tests $5,000.00 $2,673.00 200714133 07/21/20 WW chemicals 07/31/20$184.00 $184.00 40-45-5185 Lab Tests $5,000.00 $2,673.00

$322.00 175 CDPHE, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive, Mail Code ASD-AR-B1, Denver, CO, 80246-1530 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 8 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance WU211109157 07/15/20 WWTP annual permit 7/1/20 - 6/30/21 07/25/20$2,733.00 $2,733.00 40-45-5100 Legal $0.00 ($2,733.00) CO0020222

$2,733.00 355 Veris Environmental, LLC, 53036 Hwy 71, Limon, CO, 80828 J010816 07/28/20 sludge hauling 08/27/20$930.00 $930.00 40-45-5189 Sludge Removal $10,000.00 $4,420.00

$930.00 403 LMK Technologies, LLC, 1779 Chessie Lane, Ottawa, IL, 61350 946872 07/14/20 will be billed to customer as they are installed 08/13/20$977.40 $977.40 40-45-4815 Sale of Supplies/Parts $0.00 $851.40

$977.40 489 Mallory Safety and Supply LLC, PO Box 2068, Longview, WA, 98632 4883333 07/24/20 calibration 08/23/20$89.64 $89.64 40-45-5510 Equipment Maintenance $9,000.00 $6,482.53

$89.64 518 Century Link - Business Services, PO Box 52187, Phoenix, AZ, 85072-2187 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$56.90 $56.90 40-45-5233 Internet $1,870.76 $1,472.46

$56.90 566 Colorado CSG II LLC, PO Box 15007, Portland, ME, 04112 Page 12of176 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$3,521.85 $3,521.85 40-45-5230 Electric $48,000.00 $19,792.72

$3,521.85 570 Solenis Holdings 1 LLC, dba Solenis LLC, PO Box 116232, Atlanta, GA, 30368-6232 131663486 07/22/20 drums (4) 08/21/20$3,150.00 $3,150.00 40-45-5665 Lab Supplies/Chemicals $5,000.00 ($2,039.64)

$3,150.00 627 Slade Glass Co., 1770 38th St, Boulder, CO, 80301 128497-1 07/13/20 2nd half of workorder# 128497 - WWP window 08/12/20$368.11 $368.11 40-45-5205 Building Maintenance $1,500.00 ($279.05) repair

$368.11 640 Matthew Tarpill, dba Mountain Contracting LLC, 107 Gap Road, Black Hawk, CO, 80422 8046 07/29/20 I&I work 08/28/20$4,534.95 $4,534.95 40-45-6550 Infrastructure Improveme $104,093.05 $42,861.78

$4,534.95

Total Sewer Fund $17,200.04

Water Fund 2 Indian Peaks Ace Hardware, PO BOX 1450, Nederland, CO, 80466 2020-06 06/30/20 ACE Hardware - June 2020 (incl. 2020 DDA 07/30/20$17.17 $17.17 50-45-5510 Equipment Maintenance $15,000.00 $11,050.65 Beautification)

$17.17 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 9 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance 6 Alpenet, LLC, Randall D. Lee, PO BOX 3240, Nederland, CO, 80466 00008486 07/22/20 IT services: 6/21/20 - 7/22/20 08/21/20$76.73 $76.73 50-45-5110 IT $2,000.00 $142.13

$76.73 7 AT&T Mobility, PO BOX 6463, Carol Stream, IL, 60197-6463 827619565X07202 07/12/20 827619565 mobile phone 7/13/20 - 8/12/20 07/27/20$15.63 $15.63 50-45-5234 Cell Phone $200.00 $91.34

$15.63 11 Boulder County, PO BOX 471, Boulder, CO, 80306 394041 07/15/20 June 2020 fuel 08/14/20$278.38 $278.38 50-45-5515 Fuel $6,000.00 $4,264.91

$278.38 17 Century Link, PO Box 91155, Seattle, WA, 98111-9255 2020-07 06/28/20 phone bill - 6/28/20 - 7/27/20 07/08/20$60.36 $60.36 50-45-5232 Phone $456.00 ($469.40)

$60.36 30 Hach Company, 2207 Collections Center Drive, Chicago, IL, 60693 12049849 07/24/20 lamp 08/03/20$166.59 $166.59 50-45-5510 Equipment Maintenance $15,000.00 $11,050.65

$166.59

Page 13of176 34 JVA, Inc., 1319 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO, 80302 85544 06/30/20 1009.2e: Water Distribution System Model 07/10/20$4,347.00 $4,347.00 50-45-5150 Planning $44,500.00 $40,153.00

$4,347.00 61 HD Supply Facilities Maintenance LTD, dba USABlueBoook, P.O. Box 9004, Gurnee, IL, 60031-9004 311375 07/29/20 misc supplies - solution, nozzle, cuvettes, 08/28/20$456.47 $456.47 50-45-5520 Minor Supplies (tools) $4,000.00 $2,839.40 wrench, filter 294027 07/13/20 credit on standard 200 mV (2) - orig. inv# = 08/12/20($55.80) ($55.80) 50-45-5665 Lab Supplies/Chemicals $5,000.00 $733.85 277853

$400.67 93 Colorado Analytical Lab, PO BOX 507, Brighton, CO, 80601-0507 200714126 07/20/20 testing - TSS 07/30/20$15.00 $15.00 50-45-5185 Lab Tests $4,550.00 $1,968.92 200714129 07/16/20 Total Coliform P/A Compl 07/26/20$69.00 $69.00 50-45-5185 Lab Tests $4,550.00 $1,968.92

$84.00 175 CDPHE, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive, Mail Code ASD-AR-B1, Denver, CO, 80246-1530 WU211109902 07/15/20 WTP annual permit 7/1/20 - 6/30/21 07/25/20$872.00 $872.00 50-45-5100 Legal $10,000.00 $6,858.50 COG641190 FGD20200251 07/29/20 drinking water fee 7/2020 - 6/2021 08/08/20$465.00 $465.00 50-45-5190 Other $0.00 ($480.00)

$1,337.00 295 Zenner Performance, 15280 Addison Road #100, Addison, TX, 75001 0053818-IN 07/14/20 water stealth readers, mounting boxes, Zenner 07/24/20$2,477.84 $2,477.84 50-45-5530 Minor Supplies (infrastruc $16,000.00 $6,472.24 MTK meters 0053930-IN 07/20/20 water stealth readers & mounting boxes 07/30/20$5,530.16 $5,530.16 50-45-5670 Supplies for Resale $0.00 ($10,534.18) 8/5/2020 2:55pm Town of Nederland Page 10 Council Approval Report (Council Approval Report)

Vendor InvoiceNumber Date Description Due Date Invoice Amt Approved Amt Account Number Account Description Budgeted $ YTD Balance

$8,008.00 518 Century Link - Business Services, PO Box 52187, Phoenix, AZ, 85072-2187 131170786 07/20/20 Internet 30 Mbps 6/20/20 - 7/19/20 08/19/20$56.91 $56.91 50-45-5233 Internet $1,870.76 $1,472.39

$56.91 566 Colorado CSG II LLC, PO Box 15007, Portland, ME, 04112 892CEB86 07/23/20 solar electric charges - June 2020 08/22/20$1,153.63 $1,153.63 50-45-5230 Electric $20,000.00 $10,088.69

$1,153.63

Total Water Fund $16,002.07

Total Bills To Pay: $78,367.08 Page 14of176 DDA Warrants

Account Budget Date Payee Amount Description Number Account Description Budgeted Remaining 7/7/2020 Michael Reichert 770.00Inv #4 Beautification 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 23,000.00 $ 19,539.00 7/7/2020 Oriental Healing Clinic Inc 905.39Covid Relief ‐ Stop Gap Grant 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 100,000.00 $ 16,049.33 7/14/2020 Michael Reichert 730.00Inv #5 Beautification 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 23,000.00 $ 18,809.00 7/21/2020 Steamworks LLC 1,100.00Beautification 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 23,000.00 $ 17,709.00 7/21/2020 Stephanie Andelman 1,000.00Econ Dev Grant 70‐75‐9400 Boulder County Economic Dev Grant$ ‐ $ (1,000.00) 7/28/2020 Amanda L. Vink 2,500.00Public Art Inv. 20‐01 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 5,500.00 $ 3,000.00 7/30/2020 Michael Reichert 365.00Beautification Inv #6 70‐75‐6500 Infrastructure$ 23,000.00 $ 17,344.00 8/6/2020 Paul C Benedetti 690.00Legal ‐ June 70‐75‐5100 Legal$ ‐ $ (1,530.00) Page 15of176

The Town of Nederland

Meeting Minutes BOARD OF TRUSTEES Tuesday, August 4, 2020 @ 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting - WebEx

1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Larsen called the meeting to order at 7:02pm.

2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Larsen, Trustee Apt, Trustee Coombs Esmail, Trustee Corvalan, Trustee Danforth, Trustee Taylor.

Also Present: Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator; Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk; Chris Pelletier, Public Works Manager; Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney

3. CONSENT AGENDA 3.1 Approval of August 4, 2020 Warrants 3.1 August 4, 2020 Warrants

3.2 Approval of July 21, 2020 BOT Meeting Minutes 3.2 July 21, 2020 BOT Meeting Minutes

3.3 Resolution 2020 - 27 BOT Appointments to External Boards 3.3 AIM - Resolution 2020 - 27 BOT Appointments to External Boards 3.3 Draft Resolution 2020 - 27 BOT Appointments to External Boards

3.4 Resolution 2020 - 28 Colorado Communities for Climate Action Policy Statement 3.4 AIM - Resolution 2020 – 28 Colorado Communities for Climate Action Policy Statement 3.4 Resolution 2020 – 28 Colorado Communities for Climate Action Policy Statement 3.4 CC4CA 2020-2021 Policy Statement 3.4 CC4CA 2020-2021 Policy Statement Tracked Changes

3.5 Memorandum of Understanding for Collaboration and Coordination to Improve Forest Health and Reduce Wildfire Risk 3.5 AIM - Memorandum of Understanding for Collaboration and Coordination to Improve Forest Health and Reduce Wildfire Risk 3.5 Memorandum of Understanding for Collaboration and Coordination to Improve Forest Health and Reduce Wildfire Risk 3.5 Responses to the Parks, Recreation, Open Space Advisory Board (PROSAB) Recommendation 3.5 Public Comment – Betina Mattesen

Trustee Danforth made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Trustee Taylor seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously approved.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA 4.1 Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items 4.1 Public Comment on Non-Agenda Item - Karen Cobble 4.1 Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items – John Dyet

Page 16 of 176

5. ACTION ITEMS 5.1 Approval of JVA Proposal for Design of Transportation Improvement Project 5.1 AIM - Approval of JVA Proposal for Design of Transportation Improvement Project 5.1 JVA - Nederland - Downtown Sidewalk Proposal

Chris Pelletier, Public Work Manager, reviewed with the BOT the JVA Proposal for Design of the Transportation Improvement Project.

Mayor Larsen asked if the $225k for the JVA proposal is alignment with the $1.5 million budget. Pelletier stated that it is under what was budgeted. Larsen asked for confirmation that JVA is familiar with the CDOT requirements for this type of project. Pelletier stated that they were.

Trustee Danforth made a motion to approve the JVA Proposal for Design of the Transportation Improvement Project. Trustee Taylor seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously approved.

6. DISCUSSION ITEMS 6.1 Approving Town to Apply for the Safer Streets Initiative Grant 6.1 AIM - Approving Town to Apply for the Safer Streets Initiative Grant 6.1 Safer Streets Initiative Application 6.1 Safer Streets Initiative Rules and Selection

Chris Pelletier, Public Work Manager, reviewed with the BOT the Safer Streets Initiative Grant.

Mayor Larsen asked if CDOT would allow for the Town to decide what type of materials or signals would be a good fit for the project. Pelletier stated that he believes so.

Trustee Corvalan asked if the Town and the Nederland Downtown Development Authority (NDDA) could afford the $70k match, stating that she did not feel that $350k for improving sidewalks is an appropriate use of the funds.

Trustee Apt asked if additional sidewalks through Town could be improved through the grant or would that make the scope of the project too big. Pelletier stated that there has to be good connectivity between the sidewalks and that he is not sure if this grant can be used to work on projects that were funded by other grants.

Trustee Danforth spoke to the calming components of the grant to help with reducing speed, asking if there could be a signal before the dam indicating that there was an upcoming crosswalk. Pelletier stated that he was looking more at a signal on Highway 72 going out of Town. Danforth stated that she would like to see signals at all the crosswalks in Town. Pelletier added that he is considering adding into the grant that Public Works could handle repainting the crosswalks and take that task off of CDOTs plate.

Trustee Taylor stated that he is concerned it is a lot of money that won’t address the overall crosswalk/sidewalk issue, which is a universal problem throughout the western slope. Taylor stated that in the future, he would be interested in looking into the root cause of why crosswalks are so horrible.

Trustee Coombs-Esmail stated that he would think that the Town could get more out of the $350k then just sidewalks. Pelletier stated that sidewalks are very expensive and that that amount is appropriate. Coombs-Esmail stated that he would be interested in Town securing alternative funding rather than going through the NDDA.

The BOT requested that Pelletier look into things like raised sidewalks, if that would be possible through this grant and if so, what the maintenance would be for those types of sidewalks

PUBLIC COMMENT: Ron Mitchell stated that he is interested in pedestrian safety and looks forward to learning more about this grant.

Trustee Corvalan asked for examples of the calming components. Pelletier shared that sidewalks, changes to color and materials and adding a median are ways to calm traffic.

Page 17 of 176

The BOT unanimously agreed to support staff pursuing the grant and working with the NDDA on co-funding.

Pelletier asked for clarification on whether or not the BOT wanted to remove improvement of the sidewalks from the grant and just focus on the crosswalk. Mayor Larsen asked if removing the sidewalks would hinder the likelihood of funding. Pelletier stated that the sidewalks do help strengthen the grant. The BOT was in agreement to keep the sidewalks as a part of the grant.

Pelletier concluded with stating that this is a federal grant that requires a 20% match and that DRCOG may be able to move funds around so that there were state funds that could be used for that match.

6.2 Owner's Project Requirement for the Transportation Improvement Project 6.2 AIM - Owner's Project Requirement for the Transportation Improvement Project 6.2 Draft Owner's Project Requirement for the Transportation Improvement Project

Chris Pelletier, Public Work Manager, reviewed with the BOT the Owner's Project Requirement for the Transportation Improvement Project.

Trustee Corvalan stated that she was confused how the OPR differs from the JVA proposal. Pelletier stated that the OPR helps establish Nederland’s values in a project. Pelletier explained that the TIPs project will be constrained to follow CDOTs rules but that there is some flexibility regarding things like materials, color, rain gardens, and storm water mitigation.

Trustee Coombs-Esmail asked for clarification on the Planning Commission’s (PC) recommendations regarding parking. Pelletier stated that the PC recommended eliminating the two-way traffic on Jefferson which would allow more room for parking. Pelletier explained that the PC also recommended adding parking to the south side of First Street which could be possible if Town reclaimed their right-of-way. Pelletier stated that the PC did not want to see any loss of parking with the TIPs project.

Trustee Apt asked if Town needed NDDA approval or if the OPR could be approved tonight. Pelletier stated that he would need to present to the NDDA and that he would then incorporate their feedback and bring the final draft back to the BOT for final approval.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Ron Mitchell stated that he is recommending that back-in parking be considered for this project as it increases safety. Mitchell stated that he has studied parking for years and that he recommends the Town try it and see if it works.

6.3 Continued Discussion Regarding Recommended Revisions to Section 13-28-1(b) and Section 16-6 of the Nederland Municipal Code 6.3 AIM - Continued Discussion Regarding Recommended Revisions to Section 13-28-1(b) and Section 16-6 of the Nederland Municipal Code 6.3 Residential Single Family Home 6.3 Residential Multi-Family Dwelling 6.3 Commercial Multi-Use Accounts 6.3 Summary 6.3 Public Comment - Shara Johnson 6.3 Town Staff Presentation – Equity in Utility Billing

Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator, presented to the BOT the information the BOT requested from staff regarding assessing the financial impact of eliminating or suspending additional utilities base fees as required in Chapter 13 of the Nederland Municipal Code. The BOT also requested that staff research the process required to change the code and/or 2020 Fee Schedule.

Trustee Coombs-Esmail stated that he is interested in the idea of passing an emergency ordinance that would suspend the collection of the secondary use fee for single-family residences and asked if losing the $11k would adversely impact the Town’s ability to provide water to Town or would put the Town in significant debt. Gerrity stated that with COVID-19,

Page 18 of 176 it is not the best time to cut back on revenue, and that despite this, staff felt they could weather this loss in the short-term. Gerrity explained that if the BOT passed an ordinance suspending the fees, the ordinance would go into effect 30 days later and the wording could provide that the Town would not bill for the third and fourth quarter and hopefully by the first quarter of 2021, the rate study will be completed and the BOT will have more information to make a comprehensive revision of the fee structure. Coombs-Esmail stated that his concern is with equity and fairness, adding that there are issues with the way the code is currently written in that some people are being charged appropriately while others are not.

Trustee Apt asked if there could be an appeal process that individuals who started being charged this year could go through. Gerrity stated that the Town is aware of three residents who are not happy with the fee changes and that there could be an appeal process but staff would need direction from the BOT since the criteria for charging additional base fees for secondary use is still in the code. Apt stated that he thinks it is important to determine which housing type uses the most water. Gerrity stated that Town staff would ask Raftelis if the rate study could include that information.

Mayor Larsen stated that the $11k would not be absorbed by Town but rather passed on to all the users in Town and that that needs to be taken into consideration when looking at fairness and equity.

Trustee Corvalan stated that she would like to see that the rate study shows who is using the most water so those homes could be charged more. Corvalan stated that the code is poorly written and that she would be in favor of suspending additional base fee charges until the rate study is completed.

Trustee Taylor asked what the likelihood would be that the rate study would require Town to change the code. Gerrity stated that the rate study will provide the BOT scenarios to consider that may result in code changes. Taylor stated that his biggest issue is that the base fees continue to be associated with the use fee and that the issue is around the meaning of use. Mayor Larsen stated that the base fees are like vehicle registration that is paid to access the roads and that the use fee is what is paid for gasoline. The BOT engaged in a discussion regarding the data presented by staff as there was some disagreement regarding the accuracy of the data provided and how the secondary use fee differentiated between residential and commercial locations. The discussion led to the conclusion that the data staff provided was correct.

Mayor Larsen stated that he was interested in the appeals process, noting that the secondary use was a decision made by a previous board and has been in place longer than he has been on any Town board.

Trustee Danforth stated that she would want to give people an opportunity to appeal rather than automatically wiping out the fees for all accounts.

Following further consideration of this discussion item, the BOT was in agreement that they wanted to move forward with Trustee Taylor’s proposal that he made at the July 21, 2020 BOT meeting which is to change the first sentence of 13-28 (a) (1) to: “Sewer user fees shall consist of a monthly available service fee ("base fee") which shall be assessed for each building or portion of a building unambiguously identified by an address (a "unit") and fed by a tap as well as for each additional tap which may be feeding that unit on the property with a three-fourths-inch tap.”

PUBLIC COMMENT: Ron Mitchell stated that many years ago people paid PIF fees and that today they are being penalized for payment of the PIF fees and that he would like those to be considered as a part of the water/sewer fee discussion.

Kim Goho stated that the rate study is an examination of use and that suspension of the base fees should not be tied to the study. Goho stated that code didn’t change but that the interpretation changed and that no one is talking about recovering the fees from the last two quarters. Goho added that she disagrees with Gerrity’s statement that now is not a good time to be making financial changes because of COVID, adding that the fees are hurting the residents who are also struggling because of COVID. Goho added that that statement was concerning seeing how the Town paid $24k for flowers during COVID.

Laura King stated that the code has not been applied fairly or consistently and that she appreciates that the board is trying to correct this to make it more understandable, well-defined and enforceable. King stated if there is one tap and one address, there should be one fee. King shared that her family is paying an extra $150+ every bill and that dividing that amount amongst all the users right now is fairer than what is currently happening.

Page 19 of 176

Mayor Larsen said he would work with Trustee Taylor and Town staff on integrating the proposed language by Trustee Taylor into the code as well as work on a code change related to the elimination of the 22 problematic secondary use cases which will then be sent to the Town Attorney for review. The BOT agreed that that the suspension of the additional base fees for single-family residences should be handled through an emergency ordinance so any changes agreed upon could go into effect immediately.

6.4 Marijuana Moratorium 6.4 AIM - Marijuana Moratorium

Mayor Larsen reviewed with the BOT the recommendations regarding a marijuana moratorium including limiting the number of licenses or the distance between licensed establishments.

Trustees Corvalan, Apt, Danforth and Coombs-Email shared that they were in support of a moratorium.

Trustee Taylor stated that he is on the fence on this matter, adding that Nederland has positioned itself to be the marijuana capital.

Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk, stated that it is important that BOT be aware that a public hearing for a new retail marijuana license has been scheduled for August 18, 2020. Fisher explained that if a moratorium ordinance is adopted, it would go into effect 30 days after adoption and since the public hearing would occur prior to the moratorium going into effect, the application would still have to be considered. Fisher stated that the BOT could adopt an emergency ordinance though that would then take effect immediately.

Trustee Taylor asked if the BOT can reject an application on principle. Fisher explained that BOT would need to review to confirm that the application meets code and that they cannot deny the application just because they don’t like it. Fisher shared that the application is from The Kind Castle and that the location would be off of 5th Street and Stinky Gulch.

The BOT asked how they could move forward on the moratorium prior to the hearing. Fisher suggested that Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney, join the meeting. Upon entering the meeting, Madsen stated that an emergency ordinance could be adopted prior to the hearing on August 18, 2020 but that it would be better if an emergency meeting was called next week to adopt a moratorium.

The BOT agreed to hold a special meeting to discuss a marijuana licensing moratorium on August 11, 2020.

7. OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Larsen stated that there will be a signing ceremony on August 13, 2020 at 10am for the Memorandum of Understanding for Collaboration and Coordination to Improve Forest Health and Reduce Wildfire Risk.

Mayor Larsen thanked Town staff for all the work that went into the Town Clean Up on August 1, 2020.

8. ADJOURNMENT Trustee Apt made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Trustee Taylor seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 9:47pm.

______Kristopher Larsen, Mayor

ATTEST:

______

Page 20 of 176

Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk

The Board of Trustees encourages citizen participation. Public hearings and the "unscheduled citizens" agenda item allow an opportunity to address the Board. Discussion is limited to 3 minutes and please address your comments to the Board. Thank you for your cooperation. The Board of Trustees may take action on any item included on this agenda, regardless of the heading under which such item appears. Discussion items may become action items if the Board determines that deferring final action on an item to a subsequent meeting is unnecessary or unwarranted and that taking immediate action does not compromise any third-party's rights. The Board of Trustees meeting packets are prepared by Friday before the Tuesday meetings and are available for inspection at Town Hall during normal business hours. The information is reviewed and studied by the Board of Trustee members, eliminating lengthy discussions to gain basic understanding. Short discussion on agenda items does not reflect lack of thought or analysis. The agendas are posted at Town Hall, the post office, and on the Town's website on the Friday prior to the meeting. Copies of the agenda and meeting packet are available at no cost via email from the Town Clerk or from the Town website at www.nederlandco.org.

Page 21 of 176

The Town of Nederland Meeting Minutes BOARD OF TRUSTEES SPECIAL EMERGENCY MEETING Tuesday, August 11, 2020 @ 7:00 PM Virtual Meeting - WebEx

1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Larsen called the meeting to order at 7:06pm.

2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Larsen, Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover, Trustee Apt, Trustee Coombs Esmail, Trustee Corvalan, Trustee Danforth, Trustee Taylor.

Also Present: Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator; Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk; Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney

3. ACTION ITEMS 3.1 Draft Emergency Ordinance 810 Marijuana Licensing Moratorium AIM - Emergency Ordinance 810 Marijuana Licensing Moratorium 3.1 Draft Emergency Ordinance 810 Marijuana Licensing Moratorium

Town Attorney, Jennifer Madsen, reviewed the Emergency Ordinance 810 Marijuana Licensing Moratorium AIM with the BOT.

Mayor Larsen stated that the Town has previously had a marijuana moratorium and that the previous board opted to lift it without any ordinance changes. Larsen explained that during that time, Town staff had completed research on some possible code changes which could be considered during this moratorium.

Trustee Apt stated that he does have concerns about the number of establishments in the Town and is concerned about hospitality establishments where people are using and then getting behind the wheel of a car. Apt stated that is a concern because marijuana is much stronger today.

Trustee Coombs-Esmail shared that he is also concerned with how many establishments are in Town, adding that these are high cost industries that drive up the cost of living and the cost of operating a business in Town.

Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover stated that he wants to be sure that the BOT addresses code changes within the next three months and not let the time elapse without making the necessary changes. Baumhover shared that he’d like to see the number of establishments in Town be limited.

Trustee Taylor stated that he is in favor of the moratorium and shared there needs to be a timeline on how the code will be changed during the moratorium. Taylor asked Madsen if this is in violation with ex post facto law. Madsen stated that the ordinance would not be causing any issues, adding that it will just stop the application review process.

Trustee Danforth stated that she is in favor of the moratorium and that she is concerned about the marijuana establishments coming into Town and displacing other local businesses. Danforth stated that she’d like the BOT to look at the number of establishments in reference to density. Danforth added that she wants to understand the state level changes and how Nederland opts in or out of those changes.

Trustee Corvalan stated that she thinks that Nederland has enough marijuana establishments right now.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Sue Churches Teens Inc. Development Director, read a letter from the Teens Inc. Board of Directors. Public Comment –

Page 22 of 176

Teens Inc.

John Dyet, owner of The Kind Castle, reviewed with the BOT components of the email he has previously sent to the Board. Public Comment – John Dyet

Allison Bailey, Community Substance Abuse Prevention & Inspire Youth Connections Program Manager, reviewed Boulder County Public Health’s recommendations on this matter. Public Comment – Boulder County Public Health

Mayor Larsen stated that he wants to see that during the moratorium, the BOT works on municipal code changes and looks into whether or not the Town wants to allow for hospitality establishments.

Trustee Taylor stated that he’d like to work with Town staff on the proposed code changes and requested that the previous research done be sent to him for review.

Trustee Taylor stated that he is interested in developing code that helps guide any new businesses in a direction that are safe for the community such as limiting the strength of marijuana. Trustee Corvalan and Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover were in support of limiting the strength of marijuana.

Mayor Pro Tem Baumhover stated that he’d like to see marijuana industry leaders be involved in these future discussions. Trustee Taylor requested that Allison Bailey with Boulder County Public Health also be involved.

Trustee Taylor made a motion to approve Emergency Ordinance No. 810 imposing a temporary moratorium on the submission, acceptance, processing, and approval of any license application for all retail and medical marijuana establishments. Trustee Coombs-Esmail seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously approved.

8. ADJOURNMENT Trustee Taylor made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Trustee Apt seconded the motion. Motion was unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 7:47pm.

______Kristopher Larsen, Mayor

ATTEST:

______Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk

Page 23 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk Dept: Administration Consent ☒ Information ☐ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

AGENDA ITEM: Appointment of Brian Curtis to the Parks, Recreation, Open Space Advisory Board (PROSAB) vacancy.

SUMMARY: Deb D’Andrea resigned from PROSAB on July 16, 2020. The vacancy was posted on July 17, 2020 with a deadline of August 8, 2020 for applications. Brian Curtis’s application was the only one received prior to the deadline.

ATTACHMENTS: • PROSAB Application – Brian Curtis • Brian Curtis Resume

QUESTION FOR THE BOARD: Does the BOT approve Brian Curtis to be on the PROSAB Advisory Board to serve a term ending June 1, 2023?

Page 24 of 176 TOWN OF NEDERLAND STANDARD APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OR REAPPOINTMENT TO TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

This is an application for appointment or reappointment

Applicant Name:

Board or Commission for which (re)appointment is sought:

______

If a NEW APPOINTMENT, please describe any special knowledge, abilities, background or interests which you feel will provide a positive contribution to the goals and purposes of the board or commission for which you are seeking appointment. (Attach resume if desired or use an extra sheet of paper if necessary.) If a RE-APPOINTMENT, please describe previous board(s) experience and contributions. Please plan on attending the BOT meeting at which your appointment will be considered.

______

Applicant Signature Date

Page 25 of 176 Nederland, Colorado BRIAN CURTIS

A BOUT M E

Community | Culture | Connection | Communication

I’m an award-winning leader with a global outlook and a proven track-record of launching innovative solutions that improve people’s lives. My professional focus has been on connecting people with information, on bridging online and physical worlds, and on creating more inclusive products and workplaces. Personally, I have aimed to make a positive social impact in the community. My new objective is to bring these professional and personal goals together to change the world for the better.

E XPERIENCE

COMCAST | Denver, Colorado 2018–2020 Senior Director, Product Management — Video Advertising Oversaw dynamic ad-insertion product management for $2B+ video advertising business. Collaborated with engineering leadership and stakeholders to define and execute on product strategy for legacy and next-gen DAI platforms. Led geographically dispersed team of subject-matter experts on advertising technology, including ad targeting and measurability. Engaged with digital ad-industry community to shape standards and best practices on privacy, interactivity, and attribution. • Established and implemented product roadmap to make television advertising more relevant for consumers, more effective for advertisers, and more profitable for programming and distribution partners. • Delivered industry-first addressable advertising platform for live linear TV.

ADVANCED DIGITAL BROADCAST | Remote 2016–2018 Vice President, Product Management Directed product efforts for ADB, leading provider of connected-entertainment software and services for pay-TV operators worldwide. Had end-to-end responsibility for vuTyme product line, leading globally distributed user experience (UX) and technical teams to design and deliver solutions used by 250K+ visitors daily and generating $10M+ in revenue annually. • Expanded vuTyme’s total addressable market 10x by shipping new cloud-hosted interactive TV platform built in HTML5 on top of AWS. • Doubled product’s install base by leading vuTyme’s first 2 international customer deployments.

COMCAST | Washington, DC 2010–2016 Senior Director, Product Management — Personalization Led product management for multiple Xfinity product lines. Founding member of Xfinity Mobile startup team, tasked with envisioning wireless industry’s most user-centric customer experience. Served on team that built next-generation X1 platform from ground up, growing to reach 20M+ active users within 4 years. Product leader for personalization, usage analytics, applied artificial intelligence (AI), and targeting platforms. • Launched WiFi-first mobile network to compete against incumbent wireless network operators. • Deployed Emmy-winning video recommendations system for cable TV, web, and mobile devices. • Led team of data scientists, product managers, and engineers through transition to agile development methodology. • Pioneered new reporting platforms to enable performance measurement and multivariate testing for decision-making. • Received 3 patents for advances in semantic search, recommender systems, and machine learning technologies. • Represented Comcast as invited speaker and panelist at industry conferences.

1 of 2

Page 26 of 176 BRIAN CURTIS 202-459-3925 | [email protected]

A DDITIONAL E XPERIENCE

TELSTRA | Melbourne, Australia 2004–2010 Senior Product Manager — Product Innovation. Oversaw online and mobile product launches, including Australia’s first mobile search and location-based ad platforms. Coordinated industry-first advertising product trials with top-tier agencies and partners (Nike, Toyota, Visa). Spearheaded digital product development and ad-sales strategy transformation. Struck licensing and revenue share deals with major partners (Google, Microsoft). Managed and mentored team of junior product managers.

AGENTARTS (STARTUP ACQUIRED BY MICROSOFT) | Melbourne, Australia 2000–2002 Content Product Manager. Developed content-discovery engine for emusic.com. Launched mobile apps and games recommendations service for Verizon Wireless. Introduced video recommendations products for BigPond Movies (Australia’s leading video-on-demand provider).

MICROSOFT | Redmond, Washington 1996–1999 Content Manager. Contributed to release of major product updates and version 1.0 products (Encarta Encyclopedia 2000, MS MapPoint).

O UTDOOR I NDUSTRY E XPERIENCE

CRESTED BUTTE MOUNTAIN RESORT, Rental Tech (seasonal) | Crested Butte, Colorado 1999–2000 REI, Sales Associate (part time) | Seattle, Washington 1996–1999

KEYSTONE RESORT, Rental Tech (seasonal) | Keystone, Colorado 1995–1996

THREE RIVERS OUTFITTERS, Raft Guide (seasonal) | Almont, Colorado 1995

E DUCATION

LEEDS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO | Boulder, Colorado 2019 Certificate in Corporate Social Responsibility (CCSR)

MELBOURNE BUSINESS SCHOOL | Melbourne, Australia 2009 Master of Business Administration (MBA)

BOWDOIN COLLEGE | Brunswick, Maine 1996 Bachelor of Arts (BA), Sociology & Economics

N ONPROFIT B OARD M EMBERSHIPS

WILD BEAR NATURE CENTER | Nederland, Colorado 2018–present Board Member. Co-chair, Community Engagement and Capital Campaign Committees

ARCTIC AND MOUNTAIN REGIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE | Denver, Colorado 20016–2018 Board Member. Chair, Events Committee

2 of 2

Page 27 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator Dept: Admin Consent ☒ Information ☐ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

AGENDA ITEM: Approval for Nederland Police Department to apply for up to $50,000 in grant funding from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program

SUMMARY: On June 19, 2020 Colorado signed the Law Enforcement Integrity & Accountability Act into law, which included revised reporting requirements. The Nederland Police Department lacks a reporting software program designed specifically for police reporting and it will be difficult to get into compliance with the reporting requirements because of that. NPD staff researched software options and would like to purchase E Force reporting software.

Staff recently identified a funding opportunity through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program. The grant application is due August 19, 2020 and there is no matching funding required.

Grant details may be found here https://bja.ojp.gov/funding/opportunities/bja-2020- 17276

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: Do you approve of the NPD applying for these funds?

RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval.

ANY CONSEQUENCES OF INACTION? PROS/CONS OF EACH ALTERNATIVE? NPD may not be able to meet the requirements of the new state law.

ATTACHMENTS: • Pricing for the Product

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The total cost for the project is $47,154.50 and the grant would cover the entire amount. Matching funds are not required.

Page 28 of 176 OMB No. 1121-0329 Approval Expires 11/30/2020

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance

Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program Fiscal Year 2020 Local Formula Solicitation

CFDA #16.738

Solicitation Release Date: July 9, 2020

Application Deadline: 11:59 p.m. eastern time on August 19, 2020

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is seeking applications for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. This program furthers the Department’s mission by assisting state, local, and tribal law enforcement efforts to prevent or reduce crime and violence.

This solicitation incorporates the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide by reference. The OJP Grant Application Resource Guide provides guidance to applicants on how to prepare and submit applications for funding to OJP. If this solicitation expressly modifies any provision in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide, the applicant is to follow the guidelines in this solicitation as to that provision.

This solicitation expressly modifies the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide by not incorporating the “Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver” provision in the “Financial Information” section of the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

Eligibility The following entities are eligible to apply:

• Units of local government

By law, for purposes of the JAG Program, the term “units of local government” includes a town, township, village, parish, city, county, borough, or other general purpose political subdivision of a state; or, it may be a federally recognized Indian tribal government that performs law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior). A unit of local government also may be any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district established under applicable state law with authority to independently establish a budget and impose taxes; for example, in Louisiana, a unit of local government means a district attorney or parish sheriff.

Eligible allocations under JAG are posted annually on the JAG web page. See the allocation determination and Units of Local Government requirements section for more information. Applicants with eligible allocation amounts of less than $25,000 will apply to Category 1,

Page 29 of 176 and applicants with eligible allocation amounts of $25,000 or more will apply to Category 2.

All recipients and subrecipients (including any for-profit organization) must forgo any profit or management fee.

Contact Information For technical assistance with submitting an application, contact the Grants Management System (GMS) Support Hotline at 888–549–9901, option 3, or via email at [email protected]. The GMS Support Hotline operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including on federal holidays.

An applicant that experiences unforeseen GMS technical issues beyond its control that prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline must email the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Response Center at [email protected] within 24 hours after the application deadline in order to request approval to submit its application after the deadline. For information on reporting technical issues, see “Experiencing Unforeseen GMS Technical Issues” under How to Apply (GMS) in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

For assistance with any other requirement of this solicitation, applicants may contact the NCJRS Response Center by telephone at 1–800–851–3420; via TTY at 301–240–6310 (hearing impaired only); by email at [email protected]; by fax to 301–240–5830, or by web chat at https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. The NCJRS Response Center hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. eastern time on the solicitation close date. Applicants also may contact the appropriate BJA State Policy Advisor.

Deadline details Applicants must register in the OJP Grants Management System (GMS) at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov/ prior to submitting an application under this solicitation. All applicants must register, even those that previously registered in GMS. Select the “Apply Online” button associated with the solicitation title. All registrations and applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time August 19, 2020.

For additional information, see the “How to Apply (GMS)” section in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

2 BJA-2020-17276

Page 30 of 176 Contents Eligibility ...... 1 Contact Information ...... 2 A. Program Description ...... 4 Overview ...... 4 Program-specific Information ...... 4 Objectives ...... 8 Evidence-based Programs or Practices ...... 8 Information Regarding Potential Evaluation of Programs and Activities ...... 8 B. Federal Award Information ...... 8 Type of Award ...... 9 Financial Management and System of Internal Controls ...... 9 Budget Information ...... 9 Cost Sharing or Match Requirement ...... 9 Pre-agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs) ...... 9 Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...... 9 Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) ...... 9 C. Eligibility Information ...... 9 D. Application and Submission Information ...... 10 What an Application Should Include ...... 10 How to Apply ...... 13 E. Application Review Information ...... 13 Review Process ...... 13 F. Federal Award Administration Information ...... 13 Federal Award Notices ...... 13 Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements ...... 13 Information Technology (IT) Security Clauses ...... 14 General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements...... 14 G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...... 15 H. Other Information ...... 15 Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) ...... 15 Application Checklist ...... 16

3 BJA-2020-17276

Page 31 of 176 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program FY 2020 Local Solicitation CFDA #16.738 A. Program Description

Overview The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program is the primary provider of federal criminal justice funding to states and units of local government. BJA will award JAG Program funds to eligible units of local government as described in this FY 2020 JAG Program Local Solicitation (BJA will issue a separate solicitation for states).

Statutory Authority: The JAG Program is authorized by Title I of Pub. L. No. 90-351 (generally codified at 34 U.S.C. 10151-10726), including subpart 1 of part E (codified at 34 U.S.C. 10151 - 10158); see also 28 U.S.C. 530C(a).

Program-specific Information

Permissible uses of JAG Funds In general, JAG funds awarded to a unit of local government under this FY 2020 solicitation may be used to provide additional personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, training, technical assistance, and information systems for criminal justice, including any one or more of the following:

• Law enforcement programs • Prosecution and court programs • Prevention and education programs • Corrections and community corrections programs • Drug treatment and enforcement programs • Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs • Crime victim and witness programs (other than compensation) • Mental health programs and related law enforcement and corrections programs, including behavioral programs and crisis intervention teams

Additionally, JAG funds awarded to a unit of local government under this FY 2020 solicitation may be used to enforce state and local laws that establish offenses similar to offenses established in 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. and/or to improve the functioning of the criminal justice system, with emphasis on violent crime and serious offenders, by providing additional personnel, equipment, training, technical assistance, and information systems for the more widespread apprehension, prosecution, adjudication, detention, and rehabilitation of persons who violate these laws and to assist the victims of such crimes (other than compensation). Additional details can be found on the JAG Resource Page.

4 BJA-2020-17276

Page 32 of 176 Note that the statute defines “criminal justice” as “activities pertaining to crime prevention, control, or reduction, or the enforcement of the criminal law, including, but not limited to, police efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or to apprehend criminals, including juveniles, activities of courts having criminal jurisdiction, and related agencies (including but not limited to prosecutorial and defender services, juvenile delinquency agencies and pretrial service or release agencies), activities of corrections, probation, or parole authorities and related agencies assisting in the rehabilitation, supervision, and care of criminal offenders, and programs relating to the prevention, control, or reduction of narcotic addiction and juvenile delinquency.”

BJA Areas of Emphasis BJA recognizes that many state and local criminal justice systems currently face challenging fiscal environments and that an important, cost-effective way to relieve those pressures is to share or leverage resources through cooperation among federal, state, and local law enforcement. BJA intends to focus much of its work on addressing violent crime, enforcing firearms laws, officer safety and wellness, safe policing for safe communities, and fentanyl detection. BJA encourages each recipient of a FY 2020 JAG award to join federal law enforcement agencies across the board in addressing these challenges. Additional details on the BJA areas of emphasis can be found on the JAG Resource Page.

Limitations on the Use of JAG Funds Prohibited uses of funds – JAG funds may not be used (whether directly or indirectly) for any purpose prohibited by federal statute or regulation, including those purposes specifically prohibited by the JAG Program statute as set out in 34 U.S.C. § 10152.

JAG funds may not be used (directly or indirectly) for security enhancements or equipment for nongovernmental entities not engaged in criminal justice or public safety. Additionally, JAG funds may not be used (directly or indirectly) to pay for any of the following items unless the BJA Director certifies that extraordinary and exigent circumstances exist making them essential to the maintenance of public safety and good order:

• Vehicles, vessels, or aircraft* • Luxury items • Real estate • Construction projects (other than penal or correctional institutions) • Any similar matters

*Police cruisers, police boats, and police helicopters are allowable vehicles under JAG and do not require BJA certification.

For a list of prohibited expenditures under JAG and information about requesting BJA certification for a prohibited item (including unmanned aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and/or unmanned aerial systems purchases) or for examples of allowable vehicles that do not require BJA certification, refer to the JAG Prohibited Guidance section of the JAG Resource Page or the JAG FAQs.

Cap on use of JAG award funds for administrative costs – Up to 10 percent of a JAG award, including up to 10 percent of any earned interest, may be used for costs associated with administering the award, which can include indirect costs.

5 BJA-2020-17276

Page 33 of 176

Prohibition of supplanting; prohibition on use of JAG funds as match – JAG funds may not be used to supplant state or local funds but must be used to increase the amounts of such funds that would, in the absence of federal funds, be made available. See the JAG FAQs for examples of supplanting.

Although supplanting is prohibited, the leveraging of federal funding is encouraged.

Absent specific federal statutory authority to do so, JAG award funds may not be used as a match for other federal awards.

Other restrictions on use of JAG funds that require compliance, certification, and/or prior approval – If a unit of local government chooses to use its FY 2020 JAG funds for particular, defined types of expenditures, it must satisfy certain preconditions. Examples of items that require compliance, certification, and/or prior approval by BJA before purchase include: body-worn cameras, body armor, interoperable communications, DNA testing of evidentiary materials, uploading DNA profiles to a database, and entry of records into state repositories. Additional information, including the process to obtain prior approval and as well as a body armor and/or body-worn camera certification form, can be found on the JAG Resource Page.

Allocation determination and Units of Local Government requirements regarding use of JAG funds Eligible allocations under JAG are posted annually on the JAG web page. Award allocations are determined by a four-step statutory formula. Additional information can be found on the JAG Resource Page or the JAG Technical Report.

According to the JAG program statute, a “disparity” may exist between the funding eligibility of a county and its associated municipalities. See 34 U.S.C. § 10156(d)(4). Units of local government identified by BJA as disparate must select a fiscal agent that will submit a joint application for the allocation to include all disparate municipalities. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) that identifies which jurisdiction will serve as the applicant or fiscal agent for joint funds must be completed and signed by the authorized representative for each participating jurisdiction. Once an award is made, the fiscal agent will be responsible for distributing award funds to the other jurisdictions in the disparate group through subawards that include all appropriate award conditions. To verify eligibility on the JAG web page, an applicant should click on its respective state and note the following regarding the state’s allocation table: (1) Disparate units of local government are listed in shaded groups, in alphabetic order by county. Units of local government identified as disparate must select one unit of local government to submit an application on behalf of the disparate group. (2) Counties that have an asterisk (*) under the “Direct Allocation" column did not submit the level of violent crime data to qualify for a direct award from BJA, but are in the disparate grouping indicated by the shaded area. The JAG legislation requires these counties to remain a partner with the local jurisdictions receiving funds and must be a signatory on the required MOU; and (3) Direct allocations are listed alphabetically below the shaded, disparate groupings.

Please note that disparate jurisdictions do not need to abide by the listed individual allocations, which are provided for information only. Jurisdictions in a funding disparity are

6 BJA-2020-17276

Page 34 of 176 responsible for determining individual amounts within the Eligible Joint Allocation and for documenting individual allocations in the MOU.

A unit of local government that applies for and receives a FY 2020 JAG award must note the following:

• Trust Fund – Units of local government may draw down JAG funds either in advance or on a reimbursement basis. To draw down in advance, a trust fund must be established in which to deposit the funds. The trust fund must be in an interest-bearing account, unless one of the exceptions in 2 C.F.R. § 200.305(b)(8) apply. If subrecipients draw down JAG funds in advance, they also must establish a trust fund in which to deposit the funds. For additional information, see 2 C.F.R. § 200.305.

• Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government (which incorporates the 30-day governing body review requirement) – A JAG application is not complete, and a unit of local government may not access award funds, unless the chief executive of the applicant unit of local government (e.g., the mayor) properly executes, and the submits, the “Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government.” The most up-to-date version of this certification can be found at https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/fy-20-local-jag-ce- certification.pdf.

Please note that this certification takes the place of the review narrative attachment and contains assurances that the governing body notification and public comment requirements, which are required under the JAG statute (at 34 U.S.C. § 10153(a)(2)), have been satisfied.

OJP will not deny an application for a FY 2020 award for failure to submit these “Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government” by the application deadline, but a unit of local government will not be able to access award funds (and its award will include a condition that withholds funds) until it submits these certifications and assurances, properly executed by the chief executive of the unit of local government (e.g., the mayor).

• National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) 3 Percent Set-aside – In preparation for the FBI’s 2021 NIBRS compliance deadline, BJA requires, through the application of a special condition, JAG award recipients not certified by the FBI as NIBRS compliant to dedicate 3 percent of their JAG award toward achieving full compliance with the FBI’s NIBRS data submission requirements under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Additional information can be found on the JAG Resource Page.

Required compliance with applicable federal laws All applicants should understand that OJP awards, including certifications provided in connection with such awards, are subject to review by DOJ, including by OJP and by the DOJ Office of the Inspector General. Applicants also should understand that a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement (or concealment or omission of a material fact) in a certification submitted to OJP in support of an application may be the subject of criminal prosecution, and also may result in civil penalties and administrative remedies for false claims or otherwise. Administrative remedies that may be available to OJP with respect to a FY 2020

7 BJA-2020-17276

Page 35 of 176 award include suspension or termination of the award, placement on the DOJ high-risk grantee list, disallowance of costs, and suspension or debarment of the recipient.

Objectives In general, the FY 2020 JAG Program is designed to provide additional personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, training, technical assistance, and information systems for criminal justice. Although the JAG Program provides assistance directly to states, through pass-through (and similar) requirements, the JAG Program also is designed to assist units of local government with respect to their criminal justice needs.

As discussed in more detail in the General Information about Post-federal Award Reporting Requirements discussion, a unit of local government that receives a FY 2020 JAG award will be required to produce various types of reports and to submit data related to performance measurement and accountability.

The objectives are directly related to the JAG Program performance measures described at https://bjapmt.ojp.gov/help/jagdocs.html and demonstrate the results of the work completed, as discussed under What an Application Should Include.

Evidence-based Programs or Practices OJP strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program development for criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. For additional information and resources on evidence-based programs or practices, see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

A useful matrix of evidence-based policing programs and strategies is available through the BJA-supported Matrix Demonstration Project. It offers a number of program models designed to effectively implement promising and evidence-based strategies through the BJA Innovation Suite of programs, including Innovations in Policing, Prosecution, Supervision, Reentry, and others (see https://www.bja.gov/Programs/CRPPE/innovationssuite.html). BJA encourages units of local government to use JAG funds to develop and implement these crime innovation strategies, including effective partnerships with universities and research partners and with nontraditional criminal justice partners.

Information Regarding Potential Evaluation of Programs and Activities Applicants should note OJP may conduct or support an evaluation of the programs and activities funded under the JAG Program. For additional information, see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide section, entitled, “Information Regarding Potential Evaluation of Programs and Activities.”

B. Federal Award Information

Maximum number of awards BJA expects to make 1,058 Period of performance start date October 1, 2019 Period of performance duration 2 or 4 years

Category 1 – Eligible Allocation Amounts of Less than $25,000 (Competition ID BJA-2020- 18275) – Units of local government that are listed on the JAG web page as eligible for an allocation amount of less than $25,000 should apply under Category 1. This includes direct and joint

8 BJA-2020-17276

Page 36 of 176 (disparate) allocations. Category 1 awards of less than $25,000 are 2 years in length, and performance periods will be from October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2021. Extensions of up to two years can be requested for these awards via GMS no fewer than 30 days prior to the grant end date, and will be automatically granted upon request.

Category 2 – Eligible Allocation Amounts $25,000 or More (Competition ID BJA-2020-18276) – Units of local government that are listed on the JAG web page as eligible for an allocation amount of $25,000 or more should apply under Category 2. This includes direct and joint (disparate) allocations. Category 2 awards of at least $25,000 are 4 years in length, and performance periods will be from October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2023. Extensions beyond this period may be made on a case- by-case basis at the discretion of BJA and must be requested via GMS no fewer than 30 days prior to the grant end date.

All awards are subject to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements that may be imposed by statute.

Type of Award BJA expects to make awards under this solicitation as grants. See the “Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements” section of the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Award recipients and subrecipients (including recipients or subrecipients that are pass-through entities) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements1 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.303, comply with standards for financial and program management. See OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information.

Budget Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement The JAG Program does not require a match.

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

Pre-agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs) Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

C. Eligibility Information

For information on eligibility, see the title page.

For information on cost sharing or match requirements, see Section B. Federal Award Information.

1 The "Part 200 Uniform Requirements” means the DOJ regulation at 2 C.F.R Part 2800, which adopts (with certain modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200. 9 BJA-2020-17276

Page 37 of 176 D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include See the “Application Elements and Formatting Instructions” section of the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on what happens to an application that does not contain all the specified elements. (This solicitation expressly modifies the “Application Elements and Formatting Instructions” section of the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide by not incorporating paragraph two of that section (referring to nonresponsive applications or applications missing critical elements not “[proceeding] to peer review”).)

1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form (SF)-424) The SF-424 is a required standard form used as a cover sheet for submission of pre- applications, applications, and related information. See the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information on completing the SF-424.

Intergovernmental Review: This solicitation ("funding opportunity") is subject to Executive Order 12372. An applicant may find the names and addresses of State Single Points of Contact (SPOCs) at the following website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/spoc_1_16_2020.pdf. If the applicant’s state appears on the SPOC list, the applicant must contact the State SPOC to find out about, and comply with, the state’s process under E.O. 12372. In completing the SF-424, an applicant whose state appears on the SPOC list is to make the appropriate selection in response to question 19, once the applicant has complied with its State E.O. 12372 process. (An applicant whose state does not appear on the SPOC list should answer question 19 by selecting the response that the: “Program is subject to E.O. 12372, but has not been selected by the State for review.”).

2. Project Identifiers Applications should identify at least three project identifiers that would be associated with the proposed project activities. The list of identifiers can be found at www.bja.gov/funding/JAGIdentifiers.pdf.

3. Program Narrative

Category 1 – Eligible Allocation Amounts of Less than $25,000 The program narrative for Category 1 applications should include a description of the project(s), including subawards, if applicable, to be funded with JAG funds over the 2 year grant period.

Category 2 – Eligible Allocation Amounts of $25,000 or More The program narrative for Category 2 applications should include:

(a) Description of the Issue – Identify the unit of local government’s strategy/funding priorities for the FY 2020 JAG funds, the subgrant award process (if applicable, including disparates) and timeline, any progress or challenges, and a description of the programs to be funded over the 2 to 4 year grant period.

(b) Project Design and Implementation – Describe the unit of local government’s strategic planning process, if any, that guides its priorities and funding strategy. This should include a description of how the local community is engaged in the planning process and the data and analysis utilized to support the plan. It should identify the stakeholders 10 BJA-2020-17276

Page 38 of 176 currently participating in the strategic planning process, the gaps in the needed resources for criminal justice purposes, and how JAG funds will be coordinated with state and related justice funds.

(c) Capabilities and Competencies – Describe any additional strategic planning/coordination efforts in which the units of local government participate with other criminal justice juvenile justice agencies in the state.

(d) Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures – OJP will require each successful applicant to submit specific performance data that demonstrate the results of the work carried out under the award. The performance data directly relate to the objectives identified under " Objectives" in Section A. Program Description.

Applicants should visit OJP’s performance measurement page at www.ojp.gov/performance for an overview of performance measurement activities at OJP.

The application should demonstrate the applicant’s understanding of the performance data reporting requirements for this grant program and detail how the applicant will gather the required data should it receive funding. Please note that applicants are not required to submit performance data with the application. Rather, performance measures information is included as an alert that successful applicants will be required to submit performance data as part of the reporting requirements under an award.

Post award, recipients will be required to submit quarterly performance measures through BJA’s PMT, located at https://bjapmt.ojp.gov. The application should describe the applicant's plan for collection of all of the performance measurement data listed in the JAG performance measures at https://bjapmt.ojp.gov/help/jagdocs.html.

Note on Project Evaluations An applicant that proposes to use award funds through this solicitation to conduct project evaluations should follow the guidance under Note on Project Evaluations in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

4. Budget Information and Associated Documentation Please note that the budget narrative should include a full description of all costs, including funds set aside for the NIBRS project(s) and administrative costs (if applicable).

General requirement for federal authorization of any subaward; statutory authorization of subawards under the JAG Program statute. Generally, a recipient of an OJP award may not make subawards (“subgrants”) unless the recipient has specific federal authorization to do so. Unless an applicable statute or DOJ regulation specifically authorizes (or requires) particular subawards, a recipient must have authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward.

11 BJA-2020-17276

Page 39 of 176 However, JAG subawards that are required or specifically authorized by statute (see 34 U.S.C. § 10152(a) and 34 U.S.C. § 10156) do not require prior approval. This includes subawards made by states and unites of local government under the JAG Program. For additional information regarding subawards and authorizations, please refer to the subaward section in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) This rule does not eliminate or alter the JAG-specific restriction in federal law that states charges for administrative costs may not exceed 10 percent of the award amount, regardless of the approved indirect cost rate.

6. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (including applicant disclosure of high risk status)

7. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

8. Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications

9. Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High Risk Grantees2 (if applicable)

10. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

11. Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government A JAG application is not complete, and a unit of local government may not access award funds, unless the chief executive of the applicant unit of local government (e.g., the mayor) properly executes, and then submits, the “Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government.” The most up-to-date version of this certification can be found at https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/fy-20-local-jag-ce- certification.pdf.

12. Information regarding Communication with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and/or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Each applicant must provide responses to the following questions as an attachment to the application: (1) Does your jurisdiction have any laws, policies, or practices related to whether, when, or how employees may communicate with DHS or ICE? (2) Is your jurisdiction subject to any laws from a superior political entity (e.g., a state law that binds a city) that meet the description in question 1? (3) If yes to either: • Please provide a copy of each law or policy. • Please describe each practice. • Please explain how the law, policy, or practice complies with 8 U.S.C. § 1373. Note: Responses to these questions must be provided by the applicant as part of the application. Further, the requirement to provide this information applies to all tiers of funding

2 A “DOJ High Risk Grantee” is a recipient that has received a DOJ High Risk designation based on a documented history of unsatisfactory performance, financial instability, management system or other internal control deficiencies, or noncompliance with award terms and conditions on prior awards, or that is otherwise not responsible.

12 BJA-2020-17276

Page 40 of 176 and for all subawards made to state or local government entities, including public institutions of higher education. All subrecipient responses must be collected and maintained by the direct recipient of funding and must be made available to DOJ upon request. Responses to these questions are not required from subrecipients that are either a tribal government/organization, a nonprofit organization, or a private institution of higher education.

OJP will not deny an application for a FY 2020 award for failure to submit these required responses by the application deadline, but a recipient will not receive award funds (and its award will include a condition that withholds funds) until it submits these responses.

How to Apply An applicant must submit its application through the Grants Management System (GMS), which provides support for the application, award, and management of awards at OJP. Find information, registration and submission steps on how to apply in GMS in response to this solicitation in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

E. Application Review Information

Review Process BJA reviews the application to make sure that the information presented is reasonable, understandable, measurable, achievable, and consistent with the solicitation. See the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the application.

Pursuant to the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before award decisions are made, OJP also reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by the applicant. Among other things to help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award.

In addition, if OJP anticipates that an award will exceed $250,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and consider any information about the applicant that appears in the nonpublic segment of the integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System, FAPIIS).

Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by the applicant.

Absent explicit statutory authorization or written delegation of authority to the contrary, the Assistant Attorney General will make all final award decisions.

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

Federal Award Notices

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements

13 BJA-2020-17276

Page 41 of 176 OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information on post-award legal requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an application. For additional information on these legal requirements, see the “Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements” section in OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

Information Technology (IT) Security Clauses

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements In addition to addressing the objectives described in Section A. Program Description, any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the following reports and data: Category 1 – Eligible Allocation Amounts of Less than $25,000 Recipients must submit: • Quarterly financial status reports (and one final financial report after all funds have been obligated and expended) through OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS) • Quarterly performance measures report and final performance measures report through BJA’s Performance Measurement Tool (PMT). Please note that as soon as all project activity has concluded, that report may be marked final • An annual progress report and final progress report through OJP’s GMS. If all project activity has concluded at the time the first annual progress report is submitted, that report may be marked final • If applicable, an annual audit report in accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions should also be submitted

Category 2 – Eligible Allocation Amounts of $25,000 or More Recipients must submit: • Quarterly financial status reports (and one final financial report after all funds have been obligated and expended) through OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS) • Quarterly performance measures reports and a final performance measures report (at any time once all project activity has concluded) through BJA’s Performance Measurement Tool (PMT) • Semi-annual progress reports and a final progress report (at any time once all project activity has concluded) through OJP’s GMS • If applicable, an annual audit report in accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions

Future awards and/or fund draw-downs may be withheld if a recipient of an OJP award fails to report the required reports in a timely manner.

See the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information on specific post- award reporting requirements, including performance measurement data.

14 BJA-2020-17276

Page 42 of 176 Performance measurement data must be submitted through BJA’s Performance Measurement Tool (PMT). The performance measures are available at: https://bjapmt.ojp.gov/help/jagdocs.html. (Note that if a unit of local government provides funding to a law enforcement agency, the unit of local government must submit quarterly performance measurement data on training that officers have received on use of force, racial and ethnic bias, de-escalation of conflict, and constructive engagement with the public.)

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

For OJP contact(s), see page 2 of this solicitation.

For contact information for GMS, see page 2.

H. Other Information

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following: Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) Provide Feedback to OJP

Certain Relevant Federal Laws, as in Effect on February 26, 2020 See the JAG Resource Page for more information.

15 BJA-2020-17276

Page 43 of 176 Application Checklist

Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program: FY 2020 Local Solicitation

This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application.

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in GMS: Acquire a DUNS Number (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

To Register with GMS: For new users, acquire a GMS username and password* (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) For existing users, check GMS username and password* to ensure account access (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Verify SAM registration in GMS (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Search for and select correct funding opportunity in GMS (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Register by selecting the “Apply Online” button associated with the funding opportunity title (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Read OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting available at ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) If experiencing technical difficulties in GMS, contact contact the NCJRS Response Center (see page 2) *Password Reset Notice – GMS users are reminded that while password reset capabilities exist, this function is only associated with points of contact designated within GMS at the time the account was established. Neither OJP nor the GMS Help Desk will initiate a password reset unless requested by the authorized official or a designated point of contact associated with an award or application.

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements: Review the “the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2020 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Scope Requirement: The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s) of the FY 2020 JAG Allocations List as listed on BJA’s JAG web page.

16 BJA-2020-17276

Page 44 of 176 Eligibility Requirement: Only units of local government may apply under this solicitation. By law, for purposes of the JAG Program, the term “units of local government” includes a town, township, village, parish, city, county, borough, or other general purpose political subdivision of a state; or, it may be a federally recognized Indian tribal government that performs law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior). A unit of local government also may be any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district established under applicable state law with authority to independently establish a budget and impose taxes; for example, in Louisiana, a unit of local government means a district attorney or parish sheriff.

What an Application Should Include: Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Intergovernmental Review (see page 10) Program Narrative (see page 10) Budget Detail Worksheet (including Budget Narrative (see page 11) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High Risk Grantees (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) (if applicable) Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (if applicable) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide) Certifications and Assurances by Chief Executive (see page 12) Information regarding Communication with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and/or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (see page 12)

17 BJA-2020-17276

Page 45 of 176 1047 S. 100 W., STE 130, Logan, UT www.eforcesoftware.com

Nederland Police Department Date: 06/24/2020

To: Jennifer Fine-Loven 20 Lakeview Drive Nederland, CO 80466

Summary

. RMS/COURT/E-CITATIONS Total: $47,154.50

Quantity Product

RMS Implementation 1-20 Users 1 Includes several services necessary for contract fulllment. RMS Onsite: 1-5 users 1 This onsite session educates end users on how to operate the system to perform their daily duties relevant to the software. RMS Server License 1 License for server hosting RMS software. Please click here to view the RMS product brochure. RMS User License User license for the eFORCE RMS application. Features include: report 5 writing, Dynamic Names Association (DNA), vehicles, property, graphics, IBR or UCR reporting (specic state reporting is also available), graphs and charts, ocer log, crime analysis. $34,538.46

0 Mobile Implementation 1 Includes several services necessary for contract fulllment.

iOS eCitations User 5 eCitations User license for the eFORCE iOS Mobile application. Includes: reports and rolodex. $9,970.00

06/24/2020 Prepared by: Michon Covington 1

Page 46 of 176 1047 S. 100 W., STE 130, Logan, UT www.eforcesoftware.com

Court Implementation 1-20 Users 1 Includes several services necessary for contract fulllment.

Court Onsite 1-5 users 1 This onsite session educates end users on how to operate the system to perform their daily duties relevant to the software. Court Server License 1 License for server hosting software. Please click here to view the Court product brochure. Court User License 1 User license for the eFORCE court application. $17,184.50

Discount -$14,538.46 Total $47,154.50

4th Year Forward: Annual License and Support Fee Base $4,000.00

Terms and Conditions

All upgrades and feature releases for purchased licenses are included in the annual license and support fees Annual license and support fees are due on the 13 month from contract date and are recurring annually Pricing valid for 90 days from quote date above No other services, applications or hardware are included Third party products and hardware warrantees are the sole responsibility of the manufacturer eFORCE® Does not warrantee third party products or services

Accepted By: ______Date: ______

06/24/2020 Prepared by: Michon Covington 2

Page 47 of 176 [email protected]

From: BOT on behalf of Scot Gorbet Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 9:31 AM To: Armstrong, Katherine R -FS; [email protected]; BOT/Mayor Kristopher Larson Subject: Re: [BOT] Forest Service officials announce plans to restructure camping near Nederland Attachments: Untitled attachment 00110.txt

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Hi-

Thank you all for the hard work and consideration for all of the planned improvements to the West Mag area. I know there are a lot of difficult decisions to make. I like the idea of all of these improvements, and I feel like it will make the area cleaner (no hidden feces to be discovered, and random trashed campsites), safer from wildfires, and more attractive to families that would like to camp in the area, there are so many great recreational offerings from there, as well as increased income and tax to town.

In the email it is mentioned the partnership with Town for toilets and trash. Is there a plan in place or a partnership agreement that is available to view. I'm a little concerned that these will end up being a mess, with trash overflowing and then being dumped in to the vault toilets Toilets not being cleaned, and things going bad real fast. Will there be a fee for camping? How about a day use fee for parking? I know that other areas such as Buffalo Cree, Staunton, Golden Gate and I'm sure there are more , have successfully implemented a day use fee, and their facilities show that.

Where will the vault toilets go? Are there multiple locations planned? Near camping? Near Parking/trailheads? Will the 2 week camping limit be more strictly enforced? There has been a big camper trailer just east of the Re-route/Hobbit 1 trailhead that has been there for at least a month now. Without enforcement of current rules and a regular maintenance schedule this will all be a waste of money.

Thanks for reading my dribble, I really do appreciate all of your hard work and planning on this. I would also like to volunteer my time to help work on this project if there are any opportunities for this.

Thanks.. Scot

On Tuesday, August 11, 2020, 03:49:52 PM MDT, Armstrong, Katherine R -FS wrote:

Roosevelt National Forest Boulder Ranger District

Forest Service officials announce plans to restructure camping near Nederland Camping restrictions, day-use rules will be implemented after Labor Day to protect health and safety

BOULDER, Colo., (Aug. 11, 2020) – Working in close collaboration with local officials and community leaders, the Roosevelt National Forest is announcing plans to reconfigure West Magnolia’s designated campsites into better organized loops with services and amenities, such as metal fire rings, pit toilets and trash receptacles. The plan includes improving signs and maps in the designated camping area, clarifying where camping is allowed and clarifying that campfires are allowed within metal fire rings at designated campsites only.

West Magnolia serves as a gateway to recreation opportunities around Nederland. The area’s proximity to Nederland makes it attractive for visitors interested in enjoying the restaurants, services and activities in town. The Forest has been

Page 48 of 176 working in shared stewardship with partners over the past few years to enhance the extensive network of mountain biking and hiking trails around West Magnolia. Yet, there is growing public concern over health and safety issues caused by people camping outside of the designated campsites in the area.

“This is a heavily populated area with thousands of private residences, in addition to the high school and town, bordering the national forest,” said Boulder District Ranger Angela Gee. “Escaped campfires have caused on average, between five and 10 small wildfires per year in this small and densely populated area. In addition, this area serves as a critical drinking water supply for millions of Colorado residents.”

In August 2018, in response to public concerns, Forest staff conducted a collaborative review of the site with a team of law enforcement, fire officials and community stakeholders. The team proposed improving the placement and definition of the 22 designated existing campsites, adding metal fire rings to the campsites, partnering with the town to provide restrooms and trash facilities, improving signs and maps specifying where camping is allowed, continuing educational efforts by existing community outreach groups, and implementing stricter regulations outside of the designated dispersed campsites.

To support the team’s proposal, the Forest is enacting temporary restrictions across approximately 3,800 acres of National Forest System land immediately south of the West Magnolia dispersed camping area from the Gilpin County line north to the Town of Nederland and east to the Front Range Trailhead [see map]. The order will go into effect after Labor Day and will require camping in designated sites only, restrict campfires outside of metal rings in designated sites and allow day use only. By keeping use to the hours between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., law enforcement can better educate the public about where camping is appropriate. Licensed hunting and fishing will be exempted from the day use only restriction.

“Our hope is that reconfiguring the campground will improve the user experience and that strengthening existing restrictions outside of designated campsites will improve the health and safety of the area for all users and neighboring residents,” Gee said.

The Forest will implement the review team’s recommendation in phases through community stewardship and partnership over the next few summers. Learn more about the site review, efforts to improve the area and provide comments and input at www.fs.usda.gov/goto/arp/westmag.

K. “Reid” Armstrong Public Affairs Specialist Forest Service

Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests

Pawnee National Grassland p: 303-541-2532 c: 970-222-7607 [email protected] 2140 Yarmouth Ave Boulder, CO 80301 www.fs.usda.gov/arp

Caring for the land and serving people

Page 49 of 176 [email protected]

From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 8:10 AM To: '[email protected]' Subject: Public Comment from Atashnaa Medicineshield Werner

From Atashnaa Medicineshield Werner To. Nederland Board of Trustees Re- Traffic backups in town

Through a decade of my addressing this issue to CDOT, 2 town administrations, and the DDA, the perfect time is here to take action on the major traffic problem area in Nederland which is the junction of Lakeview and highway 119, as we all know. Since CDOT is doing major improvements work on highway 119, now is the long overdue perfect time to... Put a north and south facing STOP sign at the junction of highway 119 and Lakeview Dr, And, put a north facing STOP sign at the junction of highway 119 and Big Springs Dr.

The newly installed pedestrian signs at this crosswalks should not be in lieu of because they do not stop vehicles from blocking the egresses.

Miranda Fisher Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk Town of Nederland P.O. Box 396 Nederland, CO 80466 Office Phone: 303-258-3266 ext. 1030 Cell Phone: 303-350-7192 Fax: 303-258-1240 Website: www.nederlandco.org

Under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA), all messages sent by or to me on this town-owned e-mail account may be subject to public disclosure.

Page 50 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator Dept: Admin Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☒ Discussion ☐

______

AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Resolution 2020 - 29 Appointing the Town Judge

SUMMARY: David Thrower has been the Town Judge since August 2018 and it is now time to re-appoint him.

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: Will the Board of Trustees approve Resolution 2020-29 Appointing David Thrower as Town Judge?

RECOMMENDATIONS: Town staff recommends the appointment.

ANY CONSEQUENCES OF INACTION? PROS/CONS OF EACH ALTERNATIVE? The town will need to operate the municipal court with substitute judges. This makes it difficult for the clerk of courts and town prosecutor.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2020-29 2. Oath of Office

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The town will continue to pay a monthly fee of $1,000 for these services.

Page 51 of 176

TOWN OF NEDERLAND Boulder County, Colorado

RESOLUTION 2020 - 29 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND APPOINTING THE TOWN JUDGE WHEREAS, pursuant to C.R.S. § 31-4-304, the Board of Trustees (“Board”) of the Town of Nederland (“Town”) possesses the authority to appoint such Town officers as it deems necessary for the good government of the Town; and

WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is necessary and desirable to appoint a Town Judge; and

WHEREAS, David Thrower has acted as the Town Judge since August, 2018; and

WHEREAS, Section 2-171 of the Nederland Town Code requires that such appointment be accomplished by resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO:

The Board of Trustees hereby re-appoints David Thrower as the Town Judge for the Town of Nederland, effective immediately. The person so appointed shall perform those duties of the Town Judge as set forth in state law and the Nederland Municipal Code and as directed from time to time by the Town Administrator and Board of Trustees.

RESOLVED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 18rd day of August, 2020. TOWN OF NEDERLAND

By: ______

Kris Larsen, Mayor

ATTEST:

______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

Page 52 of 176

OATH OF OFFICE

Municipal Court Judge

I, David Thrower, do solemnly affirm

that I will support and uphold the Constitution of the United States,

the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado,

and the ordinances of the Town of Nederland,

and that I will faithfully, and to the best of my skill and ability,

perform the duties of the office of Municipal Court Judge

of the Town of Nederland, upon which I am about to enter.

By: David Thrower, Town Judge

ATTEST:

By: Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

Page 53 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney Dept: Legal Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☒ Discussion ☐

______

AGENDA ITEM: Development Improvement Agreement for Peakview Summit Subdivision.

SUMMARY: Property owners, Thomas Nicholson and Nancy L. Nicholson, requested an amendment to an approved subdivision plat for the Peakview Summit Subdivision to remove the restrictions of conveyance. The Development Improvements Agreement removes the restrictions of conveyance while maintaining the requirements to construct improvements prior to obtain building permits.

HISTORY AND PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: On September 21, 2004, the Town of Nederland Board of Trustees approved a subdivision plat for the Peakview Summit Subdivision.

DISCUSSION: By email dated July 2, 2020, property owners, Thomas Nicholson and Nancy L. Nicholson, (“Nicholsons”) submitted a written request to the Town Board of Trustees for an amendment to an approved subdivision plat for the Peakview Summit Subdivision to remove the restrictions of conveyance. The Subdivision Plat provides as follows:

There shall be no conveyance, sale, or transfer of title of any resulting released land, lot, or tract of land within the PEAKVIEW SUMMIT SUBDIVISION nor will the town issue building permits for any lots until all of the following conditions have been completed:

1. All public improvements within the Peakview Summit Subdivision including but not limited to all streets, curb, gutter, sidewalks, pans, drainage, facilities, water and sewer improvements, landscaping and street fixtures.

Page 54 of 176

2. Each lot must have access to and is connected to the Town’s municipal sewer system.

3. Separate driveways that are in compliance with code for the lots. water and gas underground service.

The Nicholsons requested that the Town remove the restriction that conveyances, sales, or transfers are not allowed unless all of the improvements have been completed. This Peakview Summit Subdivision is a minor subdivision. Four lots were created by the subdivision. The subdivision is located in the mountain residential zone in the Big Springs neighborhood.

A conveyance restriction is not a typical condition for approval of a subdivision. Depending on the public improvements that are necessary for the subdivision, municipalities may require the property owner to provide a monetary guarantee and/or enter into a development improvement agreement to complete the improvements. The requirements typically vary depending on the size of the subdivision and the required improvements. At the time of the approval of the subdivision, the Board of Trustees did not require a guarantee or require that the Nicholsons agree to a development improvement agreement.

To accommodate the request to eliminate the conveyance restriction, a development improvement agreement has been drafted at the expense of the Nicholsons. The development improvement agreement requires that the owners of the property complete the improvements before the owners are able to obtain a building permit to construct a structure on the lots, maintaining the condition that is required on the subdivision plat. The development improvement agreement removes the conveyance restriction. The development improvement agreement seeks to memorialize the agreement of the property owners to complete the improvements without mandating that the Nicholsons are the ones that must complete the improvements. Once finalized, the development improvement agreement will be filed in the property records with the Boulder County Clerk & Recorder.

As an aside, on December 29, 2004, the Nicholsons granted to the Town a deed of conservation easement on Lot 3 in the Peakview Subdivision. This conservation easement restricts the future use of Lot 3 to forestry, environmental conservation, and other compatible uses. The Town may enforce the terms of the conservation easement.

Page 55 of 176

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: Does the Board of Trustees wish to approve the development improvement agreement with the Nicholsons and waive the requirement that there are no conveyances of lots within the subdivision until all improvements are completed?

ATTACHMENTS:

• Peakview Summit Clarification request attached to July 2, 2020, email • Resolution 2020-30 approving the development improvement agreement for the Peakview Summit Subdivision • Draft Development Improvement Agreement • Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat • Deed of Conservation Easement

SUGGESTED MOTIONS:

APPROVE: I move to approve Resolution 2020-30 approving the development improvement agreement for the Peakview Summit Subdivision.

REJECT Resolution: I move to reject Resolution 2020-30 as presented.

Page 56 of 176 June 29, 2020

To: Town of Nederland

From: Thomas W. Nicholson 90 Peakview Drive Nederland, CO 80466

Subject: Peakview Summit request for Restriction of Conveyance correction or waiver.

Town of Nederland Trustees, This letter serves as a written request for the Town of Nederland Trustees to correct, or grant a waiver from, a restrictive phrase that was included on the 2004 Peakview Summit minor subdivision approved plat (Boulder County Recorder reception #02667618) There is a phrase on the approved plat that places conveyance restrictions on sale of properties created by the minor subdivision. The same paragraph further stipulates no building permits will be issued unless the same list of conditions are met. The two phrases require the same actions but at different times, with only the second phrase referring to a standard Town approval procedure. No record of the first restriction was found in town code; however, published standard verbiage for the second restriction resides in General Ordinance 17.5.e. The initial verbiage placed on the plat was exactly as was requested, and Town Ordinance required; the highlighted phrase was added at the last minute by one Trustee, and seems unduly onerous.

Page 57 of 176 Thank you for considering issuance of a letter of correction/clarification, or waiver, the conveyance/sale restriction placed on the Peakview Summit Minor Subdivision. It is understood that Trustee action to waive or rescind the conveyance restriction maintains the obligation to comply with conditions stated on the plat prior to granting of building permit and occupancy. Should you agree, we would value a letter from the Town acknowledging the correction or waiver to the conveyance restriction. Please feel free to contact me at any time at (719)551-8228.

Best regards,

THOMAS W. NICHOLSON [email protected]

Page 58 of 176

TOWN OF NEDERLAND Boulder County, Colorado

RESOLUTION 2020 – 30

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PEAKVIEW SUMMIT SUBDIVISION

WHEREAS, the Town of Nederland (“Town”) has the authority to enter into agreements for any lawful municipal purpose pursuant to C.R.S. § 31-15-101; and

WHEREAS, Thomas Nicholson and Nancy L. Nicholson (“Owners/Developers”), own certain real property in the Peakview Summit Subdivision (the “Project”), located at 90 Peak View, within the Town of Nederland, Boulder County, Colorado;

WHEREAS, the Owners/Developers represent that they are the sole owners of the project property located in the Town of Nederland, County of Boulder, State of Colorado; and

WHEREAS, on September 21, 2004, the Town of Nederland Board of Trustees approved a subdivision plat for the Peakview Summit Subdivision; and

WHEREAS, as a condition of approval, the Board of Trustees required that the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat include language of Restrictions of Conveyance and Building Permits; and

WHEREAS, by email dated July 2, 2020, Owners/Developers requested correction to the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat to remove the restrictions of conveyance; and

WHEREAS, Owners/Developers have not completed the improvements that are identified in the Peakview Summit Subdivision plat; and

WHEREAS, Owners/Developers’ request to amend the subdivision plat is based on the desire to sell one or more of the lots in the Peakview Summit Subdivision; and

WHEREAS, the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat provides that the Board of Trustees may fully or partially waive conditions on the Plat; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees agrees to waive one of the conditions identified on the plat in exchange for the Owner/Developers agreement to enter into the Development Improvement Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board of Trustees desires to approve the Development Improvement Agreement substantially in the form of the attached Exhibit A.

Page 59 of 176

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO:

Section 1. The above recitals are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 2. The Board of Trustees hereby approves the proposed Development Improvement Agreement attached as Exhibit A is hereby approved.

Section 3. The Board of Trustees authorizes the Town Administrator and the Town Attorney, in consultation with the Mayor, to make any such changes as may be necessary to correct any non-material errors or language in the Development Improvement Agreement.

Section 4. The Board of Trustees authorizes the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem to execute the Conservation Declaration.

Section 5. The Board of Trustees requires the Owners/Developers to record on the Property this Resolution with the executed Development Improvement Agreement with the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder.

RESOLVED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this __ day of August, 2020.

TOWN OF NEDERLAND

By: ______Mayor Kristopher Larsen ATTEST: ______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

Page 60 of 176

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT This Development Agreement is entered into as of the ___ day of ______, 20__ by and between the Town of Nederland, Colorado (“Town”) and Thomas Nicholson and Nancy L. Nicholson (“Owners/Developers”), as developers of the Peakview Summit Subdivision (the “Project”), located at 90 Peak View, within the Town of Nederland, Boulder County, Colorado. The legal description of the Project property is attached hereto as Exhibit A and fully incorporated by this reference. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the obligations of the Owners/Developers to construct and warrant the quality of certain public subdivision or development improvements (the “Improvements”) which were required as conditions of subdivision approval by the Board of Trustees on September 21, 2004. RECITALS AND REPRESENTATIONS: WHEREAS, the Owners/Developers represent that they are the sole owners of the project property located in the Town of Nederland, County of Boulder, State of Colorado and described on Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on September 21, 2004, the Town of Nederland Board of Trustees approved a subdivision plat for the Peakview Summit Subdivision; and WHEREAS, as a condition of approval, the Board of Trustees required that the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat include language of Restrictions of Conveyance and Building Permits; and WHEREAS, as a condition of approval, the Board of Trustees required a conservation easement on Lot 3 of the Peakview Summit Subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat identifies necessary improvements for the subdivision and development of the Project property; and WHEREAS, on December 29, 2004, Owners/Developers filed a Deed of Conservation Easement in Gross with the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder; and WHEREAS, the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat was filed with the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder on February 25, 2005; and WHEREAS, by email dated July 2, 2020, Owners/Developers requested an amendment to the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat to remove the restrictions of conveyance; and WHEREAS, Owners/Developers have not completed the improvements that are identified in the Peakview Summit Subdivision plat; and WHEREAS, Owners/Developers’ request to amend the subdivision plat is based on the desire to sell one or more of the lots in the Peakview Summit Subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat provides that the Board of Trustees may fully or partially waive conditions on the Plat; and

Page 61 of 176

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees agrees to waive one of the conditions identified on the plat. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and agreements of the Parties, the Parties agree as follows: A. In exchange for Owners/Developers’ consent to be bound by this Development Improvement Agreement, the Board of Trustees agree to waive the requirement that “there shall be no conveyance, sale, or transfer of title of any resulting released land, lot, or tract of land within the Peakview Summit Subdivision . . . until all of following conditions have been completed” as stated on the Peakview Summit Subdivision Plat filed on February 24, 2005. B. Construction of Improvements. The Owners/Developers, at its sole expense, shall design, purchase, and install all elements of all public and other necessary Improvements, whether such Improvements are located within the subdivision or development property (on-site) or outside of the subdivision or development property (off-site). The Improvements shall be designed and built in conformance with the Town of Nederland Master Infrastructure Plan in effect as of the date of this Agreement, unless otherwise provided in the approved plans and specifications. All Improvements shall be designed and approved by a registered professional engineer retained by the Owners/Developers. All drawings and plans for the Improvements shall be stamped by the Director of Public Works. Prior to the commencement of construction of the Improvements, the Director of Public Works shall review and approve the drawings and plans. C. Improvements required prior to issuance of building permit. Unless otherwise set forth in this Agreement, no building permit for construction of any residential structure or building within the Project shall be issued until the following Improvements have been installed and approved by the Director of Public Works: 1. Public improvements within the Peakview Summit Subdivision including but not limited to all streets, curb, gutter, sidewalks, pans, drainage, facilities, water, landscaping and street fixtures are fully completed and accepted by the Town of Nederland. 2. Driveway(s) that comply with the Nederland Municipal Code for each lot for which a building permit is sought. 3. Water and gas underground service that complies with the Nederland Municipal Code for each lot for which a building permit is sought. D. Warranty. The Owners/Developers shall warrant any and all public Improvements constructed by the Owners/Developers which are conveyed or dedicated to the Town pursuant to this Agreement for a period of twelve (12) months from the date the Director of Public Works certifies that the same conform to the approved specifications. Specifically, but not by way of limitation, the Owners/Developers hereby warrants the following: 1. That the title conveyed shall be good and its transfer rightful.

Page 62 of 176

2. Any and all facilities conveyed shall be free from any security interest or other lien or encumbrance. 3. Any and all facilities so conveyed shall be free of any and all defects in materials or workmanship. E. Town Inspections. The Town shall have the right to make engineering inspections and require testing during construction of the Improvements in such reasonable intervals as the Director of Public Works may request. Inspection, acquiescence and approval of any engineering inspector of the construction of physical facilities, at any particular time, shall not constitute the approval by the Town of any phase of the construction of the Improvements. Such approvals shall be made by the Town only after completion of construction and in the manner hereinafter set forth. Owners/Developers agree to pay for the cost of any inspections. F. Approval by Director of Public Works. Upon completion of construction by the Owners/Developers of the Improvements, the Director of Public Works shall inspect the Improvements and certify with specificity its conformity or lack thereof to the approved plans and specifications. The Owners/Developers shall make all corrections necessary to bring the Improvements into conformity with applicable Town standards and the construction plans, as approved. The Town shall be under no obligation to provide any water service, irrigation service, or wastewater collection service until all such facilities are brought into conformance with the applicable plans and specifications and approved by the Director of Public Works. G. “As-Built” Drawings. The Owners/Developers shall provide all necessary engineering designs, surveys, field surveys, and “as-built” drawings for all Improvements which shall be approved by the Director of Public Works, and any incidental services related to the construction of the Improvements, at its sole cost and expense. The legal description of all utility service lines shall be prepared by a registered land surveyor at the Owners/Developers’ sole expense. In addition, all expenses incurred by the Town in updating the Town’s base maps shall be paid by the Owners/Developers, to the Town. H. Binding Effect; Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Town and the Owners/Developers and their respective successors and assigns. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. Jurisdiction and venue for any action arising hereunder shall be proper and exclusive in the district court for Boulder County, Colorado. I. Effective Date, Recording. This Agreement shall be effective as of the day and year first appearing above. This Agreement shall be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Boulder County, Colorado and shall run with the land. Owners/Developers shall pay the associated recording fee imposed by Boulder County. Upon satisfaction of the Owners/Developers’ performance of the obligations and requirements of this Agreement, following written request by Owner/Developer, the Town of Nederland agrees to execute a release and termination of this Agreement that shall be recorded in the Boulder County records.

Page 63 of 176

J. Governing Law, Venue and Enforcement. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action arising from this Agreement shall lie with any appropriate court within Boulder County, Colorado. The Parties agree and acknowledge that this Agreement may be enforced at law or in equity, including an action for damages or specific performance. K. Vested Rights and Subsequent Legislative Enactment. The Parties acknowledge and understand that the approval of the Development Plan was not processed or approved in accordance with or pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-68-101 et seq. or any regulations implementing such statutory provisions and the approval of the Development Plan does not constitute approval of a site specific development plan as that phrase is defined in C.R.S. § 24-68-101 et seq. or any regulations implementing such statutory provisions. The approval of the Development Plan shall not therefore create or grant a “vested property right” as defined by C.R.S. § 24-68-101 et seq. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit, prevent or preclude the later adoption by the Board of Trustees of a legislative enactment which is general in nature and which may be applicable to the Property as well as other similarly situated property; subject, however, to rights which may accrue to the Developer by virtue of the vesting of property rights acquired in accordance with common law. L. Authorization of Parties’ Representative. The undersigned hereby represent that they serve as representatives of the Party for which they have executed this Agreement and are fully authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of such party. M. Compliance with Law. Owners/Developers, in developing the Property and constructing the Improvements herein described, shall fully comply with all applicable rules, regulations, standards, and ordinances of Nederland and other governmental agencies and bodies having jurisdiction over the Project in effect at the time of construction. N. Attorney Fees. If either party breaches this Agreement, the breaching party shall pay the non-breaching party its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in the enforcement of the terms, conditions and obligations of this Agreement. DATED THIS ______DAY OF ______, 2020.

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

By______Attest: ______

Page 64 of 176

OWNERS/DEVELOPERS

By: ______Thomas Nicholson

By: ______Nancy L. Nicholson

ATTEST:

By: ______

STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ______)

Acknowledged before me this ______day of ______, 2020, by ______.

My Commission Expires: ______.

______Notary

[SEAL]

Page 65 of 176

Exhibit A Property Description

Page 66 of 176 Page 67 of 176 Page 68 of 176 Page 69 of 176 Page 70 of 176 Page 71 of 176 Page 72 of 176 Page 73 of 176 Page 74 of 176 Page 75 of 176 Page 76 of 176 Page 77 of 176 Page 78 of 176 Page 79 of 176 Page 80 of 176 Page 81 of 176 Page 82 of 176 Page 83 of 176 Page 84 of 176 Page 85 of 176 Page 86 of 176 Page 87 of 176 Page 88 of 176 Page 89 of 176 Page 90 of 176 Page 91 of 176 Page 92 of 176 Page 93 of 176 Page 94 of 176 Page 95 of 176 Page 96 of 176 Page 97 of 176 [email protected]

From: Susan Wagner Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2020 12:56 AM To: Karen Gerrity; Miranda Fisher Cc: [email protected] Subject: BOT 8/18 Agenda Item on Peakview Summit Minor Subdivision

Hi Karen and Miranda,

I have the following concerns about the way in which agenda item 5.1 concerning the Peakview Summit Subdivision's owners' request for a waiver of restrictions on sale of their property is presented for the Board of Trustees' meeting this Tuesday:

1. This is supposed to be a public hearing on whether the restrictions should be waived, but Item 5.1 is titled, "Development Improvement Agreement for Peakview Summit Subdivision", and there is no mention.of its being a "public hearing" on anything. The "Development Improvement Agreement" attached was apparently drafted by the owners' lawyer. This presentation skips over the essential question of whether the restrictions should be waived and if so, why, and jumps right to the Agreement as though approval of this agreement is the recommended option for the Board.

2. There is no mention of the Town's original reasons for the restrictions--just the comment that "A conveyance restriction is not a typical condition for approval of a subdivision." The fact that it's not typical does not alter the legal standing of these restrictions, which were applied by Town officials in accordance with the Town's Code, signed by the property owners and reiterated at the BOT's 9/21/2004 meeting by the Planning Commission's recommendation to "retain restrictions A and B as noted on the site plan.".

3. There is also no mention of the Board's option to refer the subdivision back to the Planning Commission for review, as provided for in Sec. 17-94 "Review of previously approved plats" when "no subdivision agreement has been executed, no construction of required improvements initiated or no building permits issued within twelve (12 months after final approval of the subdivision plat..." This subdivision plat was approved 16 years ago, with several restrictions that were discussed and agreed to. It's clear the Planning Commission had serious doubts about the accessibility of Lots 3 and 4 and therefore included in their report to the BOT under "Issues Discussed to be Addressed by the Applicant:" "Work with Planning to show how the lots can be accessible without going against the Code" and "Show in a plat restriction on Item C that any buildings requested on Lots 3 and 4...have a valid driveway plan." There is no indication in the record, the plat or on the physical property that the problem of driveway access to either Lot 3 or Lot 4 was ever resolved, There are simply no driveways shown, and written documents are contradictory. Without driveway access, I assume these lots (3 and 4) cannot be considered buildable.

4. Thomas Nicholson stated at the Planning Commission Hearing of 9/1/04 that he could not obtain a conservation easement on Lot 3, unless it was found to be a buildable lot. If there has been no determination that the lot is buildable, the legitimacy of the conservation easement agreement with the Town is in question.

5. The value of the easement is also in question, not only in terms of dollars, but in terms of practical effect. Studying the plat, it can be seen that Lot 3 has the driveway to Lot 2 crossing it to the east, then turning back west to Lot 2 in order to meet grade requirements. The records show this "hammerhead" driveway design was recommended by the Technical Review Committee to ensure the driveway met grade requirements. Lot 3 is also crossed by the 35' "access easement," in which the current driveway to Lot 1 runs, and the conservation easement agreement explicitly permits the construction of another driveway or road across Lot 3 in order to reach Lot 4. If that were to occur, this "conservation easement" would be a succession of driveways and lose most of its conservation value. [You will also see on the plat that

Page 98 of 176 this easement/driveway/road is labeled "Shaman Way," and there are also contradictory statements in the record about whether a road is required and whether this Shaman Way is to be considered a road or a driveway.

6. Another problem is that neither my husband and I, nor the one remaining neighbor who lived within 300', were notified in 2004 of the application for--or hearing on--the subdivision. Mr. Nicholson's application has a footnote stating that the Town will identify neighbors and their addresses, and there are four identical paragraphs of standard language in the record that appear to have been drafted to send out. But they're not dated or addressed. A page at the end of the application has a blank line to note "Mailing of Public Notice to Neighbors," but nothing has been noted. Since our property is immediately adjacent to the Nicholsons' property, and our gas, electric, and telephone lines are laid in the utility easement shown on the east side of the subdivision, it's clear we should have been notified. I would appreciate a legal opinion on whether this failure in itself voids the original approval.

I plan to submit written comments and to come to the virtual meeting, but I wanted to first express my concerns about the item's presentation and raise some problems I've found that might warrant legal attention before presenting this agreement to the Board.

Sincerely,

Susan Wagner

Page 99 of 176 [email protected]

From: Susan Wagner Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 3:55 PM To: Miranda Fisher Cc: [email protected]; Karen Gerrity Subject: Comments on 8/18 BOT Agenda Item 5.1 Attachments: Abstract from 9.1.2004 Planning Commission.pdf; PC Meeting Minutes 9.21.2004.pdf; BOT Meeting Minutes 9.21.2004.pdf; Peak View Summit Conservation Easement 02654295.pdf; IGA-19-0001-Nederland-Primary-Planning-Area-Resources- Map-20190803.pdf

Dear Mayor and Trustees,

I urge you to refer the Peakview Summit Minor Subdivision Plat to the Planning Commission for review before making any decision on whether or not to waive the current restriction on sale of the property before certain improvements are made, including sewer hookup.

I understand you can refer the subdivision to the Planning Commission under the provisions of Municipal Code Sec. 17- 94 "Review of previously approved plats," which provides for such referral when "no subdivision agreement has been executed, no construction of required improvements initiated or no building permits issued within twelve (12) months after final approval of the subdivision plat..." This subdivision plat was approved 16 years ago, and no building permits have been applied for or improvements made, other than the apparent beginning of a driveway, perhaps to Lot 2. I would also assume the Board can refer complicated planning and permitting issues to other town departments for expert opinion..

The subdivision was approved with several restrictions that were discussed and agreed to by the owners and reiterated when the BOT approved the subdivision at its 9/21/2004 meeting. It's clear Planning Commission members had serious doubts about the accessibility of Lots 3 and 4 and therefore included in their report to the 9/21 BOT meeting under "Issues Discussed to be Addressed by the Applicant:" "Work with Planning to show how the lots can be accessible without going against the Code" and "Show in a plat restriction on Item C that any buildings requested on Lots 3 and 4...have a valid driveway plan." There is no indication in the record, on the plat or on the physical property itself that the problem of driveway access to either Lot 3 or Lot 4 was ever resolved, There are simply no driveways shown, and written documents are contradictory, so it would appear the applicant didn't fulfill this condition. Without driveway access, I assume these lots (3 and 4) are not buildable.

I laid out some of the problems briefly in an email to Town staff requesting a review of the way in which this Agenda Item was presented in the AIM, and a legal opinion on one issue. This email is included in this packet, so I won't repeat its arguments here. I would like the Board to review the way in which this AIM was prepared and the role of the landowners' $500 escrow account to cover legal fees may have had in its preparation.

There are other issues, which I would hope will be discussed when/if the Planning Commission holds a public meeting on this subdivision.

None of us needs reminding at this smoky time of the increased wildfire threat to our community since 2004 or the emergency egress problems previous planning decisions have led to, including having only one main road through town and no emergency egress route for Big Springs residents in the eastern portion of the neighborhood. This subdivision is at the end of one of only two evacuation routes for all the Big Springs residents. Wildfire and evacuation issues need to be considered when this subdivision is reviewed.

Page 100 of 176 In addition, since 2004, wildlife corridors have become increasingly restricted because of development and logging. The location of this property is an area where private lands form a bridge between national forest to the west and east. Unfortunately, my own property, as well as my neighbors' and the Sundance Lodge's, were torn out of national forest lands because of staked mining claims. County restrictions on development have meant large parts of our properties have remained open for wildlife travel. The southern portions of properties along Peakview form part of this private- property land bridge. In the Wildlife Report included in the Forsythe II report, you will find the southern edge of Big Springs specifically listed as one of two spots where the east-west wildlife corridor has been pinched by development and logging:

"The combination of habitat changes to date has created narrow areas where elk move between barriers to and from production areas and winter range. Examples of this include a narrow east-west forested area south of the Big Springs subdivision and north of Magnolia Road and several clearcuts, and a small area south of Eldora Road/County Road 130 between Nederland High School and the proposed Evans Annexation. "

I've also attached a Boulder County map that shows the wildlife corridor includes the southern area of Big Springs.

So preserving this wildlife corridor must also be a goal of land planning regarding this subdivision.

I hope you will agree there is much to be determined before you can vote knowledgeably on the landowners' request for a waiver of restrictions of sale.

Thank you for your consideration.

Susan Wagner

For your convenience, I'm attaching:

August 2004 Planning Commission Abstract September 1, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 21, 2004 BOT Meeting Minutes Peakview Summit Conservation Easement Agreement with the Town of Nederland Boulder County Map Showing Wildlife Corridor on southern edge of Big Springs

(My apologies: I wasn't careful in titling these downloads, so ignore the dates given in the titles; they're all wrong.)

Page 101 of 176 ABSTRACT

T O W N O F N E D E R L A N D PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: August 4, 2004

AGENDA ITEM NO.: A RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Planning and Zoning CONTACT STAFF MEMBER: Ron Trzepacz & Judy Richardson

ITEM AND ISSUE: Thomas Nicholson – Minor Subdivision

Application covers the four (4) plus acre property located at 90 Peakview Drive. This property is zoned Mountain Residential. Applicant wishes the PC to consider a Minor Subdivision of this property into four (4), one acre building sites. There is currently one single family residence located on Lot 1. The Applicant has met with the guidelines set down by the NMC. All lots equal or exceed one (1) acre in size. All lots have at least 50 feet of road frontage. All lots have access to a main street, no additional road or culdesac needs to be constructed to give access to all of these lots. The two center lots will share a single driveway which is allowed under the NMC. Lot 3 is slated to go under a conservation easement. For a lot to be considered for a conservation easement it must meet with underlying NMC building code and be considered a buildable lot by the Town. The Town currently has plans to extend their sewer main up Big Springs Drive to a point that can make it accessible to residents on Peakview. The Staff considers this property to be in a position to access two arterial streets. Due to the creation of additional lots, the Applicant may be required to install additional fire hydrants.

Recommendation:

Page 102 of 176 TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION September 1, 2004 Regular Meeting

Call to Order and Roll Call

The Town of Nederland Planning Commission met in a Regular Session at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, September 1, 2004, at the Nederland Community Center, 750 Highway 72 North, Room 106. Upon call of the roll, the following Commissioners were found to be:

PRESENT: Bill Martin, Chairman Doug Radandt Aimé Fournier Sue Leto Sean Smith Steve Williams

ABSENT: Kevin Mueller R. Trzepacz, Director of Operations

Also Present: J. Richardson, Planning and Zoning

THERE WAS A QUORUM OF THE COMMISSION AND CHAIRMAN BILL MARTIN PRESIDED:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 18, 2004 Aimé Fournier moves to approve the minutes as amended, Steve Williams to second, Sean Smith and Doug Radandt abstains, none oppose

1) PUBLIC COMMENT, PETITIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS

2) SCHEDULED BUSINESS

A. Tom Nicholson – Minor Subdivision Application

Tom Nicholson, 90 Peakview, here to present his proposal for a minor subdivision. The address he gives, 90 Peakview Drive, is a tract of land in the Big Springs subdivision, that is a little over 4 acres. The thought of splitting this property started when he and his wife decided that they wanted to build another house sometime in the future. They would like to build on the proposed Lot 2. They recognized that they had enough property for

Page 103 of 176 4 lots. They will actively seek doing a Conservation Easement on one of the lots, Lot 3. He really does not have plans for building on Lot 4 at this time. But felt it foolish not to address the full potential of the property under a single application to the Town. The second structure they would Like to build for themselves is not something they plan to do for 8 to 10 Years. If they are successful in getting the subdivision, they will be going forward with the Conservation Easement.

Bill Martin, knows that this is pretty steep. He looks at Lot 4 and asks if the Applicant was envisioning something at the bottom of that lot. Mr. Nicholson has not considered how a building would fit on Lot 4. As it stands now, with the 50 foot access off of Peakview and the dog leg structuring of the lot, he realizes that the lot is steep. He knows that not more than two structures are allowed off of a single driveway.

Aimé Fournier, is reassured that there currently is a single family home on Lot 1 and is the only housing structure on the 4 plus acre property.

Steve Williams asks how steep is the existing driveway? Mr. Nicholson thinks about a 10 percent grade. The steepest part is about 20 feet in from the road. This does get drifts in the winter. It does wash some and would need the ditch to be re-graded. But the driveway widens at the intersection with the road. There is a ditch there currently for drainage.

Doug Radandt asks if he has considered the County standards for steep lots. Mr. Nicholson tells him that the only regulations he is aware of is the Town’s, at no more than a 12% grade.

Aimé Fournier asks if this lot is bordered on the west side by Forestry Property. Yes it is.

Sue Leto asks about the buried utility lines, from the current power line, and is reassured that Mr. Nicholson understands that the new service will have to be buried.

Aimé Fournier, referring to letter of application, for Lot 3 going under Conservation Easement. Is he wrong in thinking that other applicants had the easement designation already completed in conjunction with their application. It is explained that the lot must be declared a buildable lot before it can go under this Federal process.

From Lot 3, an access easement of 20 feet will be granted to Lot 2 for access.

Aimé Fournier asks about the driveway. The engineer has shown this in order to even the grade because of the contour of the property. Concern is

Page 104 of 176 over how deep the cut would be to allow for the driveway to not exceed Town standards.

Bill Martin , asks if code covers how deep a cut can be in a driveway. Staff does not believe we have anything outside of road design standards but that deepness of an embankment cut is not covered.

Aimé Fournier is concerned about the driveway being an eyesore from the street. But the cut will be in an area where it is felt it can not be seen from the road. There are a lot of trees. Very forested area.

Fire hydrants in the area, will they be sufficient? Staff feels that the property is compliant with the code, measuring from where the existing fire hydrant is located to the closest corner of Lot 1.

Aimé Fournier asks if the drainage plan and erosion is something the Town or the County addresses. It is explained that this is the Town’s to address.

Mr. Nicholson states that his Engineer’s suggestion for the cut of the driveway was such that the driveway could meet a 10 percent grade.

Sean Smith, where the proposed house is, what is that grade? Mr. Nicholson believes the current rise of the run is about a 14 percent grade. From the beginning of the bottom part of the house is about 14 feet. The design of the additional lots are done so as not to cause any building to be above the existing house.

Mr. Nicholson does not plan to remove trees that will not be necessary for anything more than fire mitigation. No plans to clear trees for views. There is one semi-trail, that people use to walk through there, but it is not used as a regular recreational trail like so many others are in the area.

Sean Smith asks about sewer and water lines. Mr. Nicholson tells him that there is no sewer line in this area at this time. When full utilities become available they will start at Peakview and come up the driveway line of Lot 2. He would like to underground the existing lines to the existing house.

Staff explains that there are current plans to bring the sewer up to the end of Peakview. Mr. Nicholson has done testing for septic systems on all lots but he felt that it would not be in good faith to the town to show leach field areas in this presentation.

Staff assures the PC that the driveway showing from Peakview through Lots 2 & 3 may not ever be built if Lot 3 is successful in being granted a

Page 105 of 176 Conservation Easement. This driveway may never be built into Lot 3.

Mr. Nicholson said he did have designers draw a direct driveway, but it was closer to a 12 percent grade where it is under 9 percent as drawn. Utilities will go into this driveway. Current driveway being shown on the site plan is actually access to Lot 1. He feels that a more direct drive from Lot 1 would be more evasive to that lot. This drawing does not encroach on Lot 1 the way it is presented here. The “s” design of this shared driveway has advantages. He feels that this will be less noticeable from the town than if it had a more straight, direct cut to the back properties.

Staff explains driveway verses road standards. Under the NMC, a driveway that does not exceed a 12 percent grade can be used to access up to two properties. With regard to Town utilities, the water main is currently servicing the property. Under the changes made to the NMC last year, before a property can be considered under a Subdivision or PUD, the sewer main must be extended to the property so as to enable it to run service lines from the nearest corner of the lot to the main. Without benefit of the sewer to a building site, no building permits can be issued under the Subdivision or PUD application. Existing lots do not have this requirement.

Mr. Nicholson wants to do the Conservation Easement. But, if it becomes unobtainable, they would like to be released from that obligation. For instance, the Federal funding for this type of project is discontinued or funds are just not available. He plans to pursue a Conservation Easement request in January.

Bill Schwartz, 450 Bridge Street, questions access to these 4 lots. Grade looks to him to be 20 percent plus. Questions using the existing driveway, concerned about turn around for fire truck access. Staff explains that with this driveway only accessing two properties, that the site plan review at the time of a building permit will address this issue.

Sean Smith is concerned about the driveway steepness and the grade the house would be built on. Other than that, as long as Lot 3 can go under easement, he finds the application to be acceptable.

Steve Williams, likes idea in principle. Is concerned with cuts; lot of earth being removed. How deep will the cuts end up being? He is concerned that the cut to the existing house, is not under 12 percent. Mr. Nicholson reassures the PC that he specifically asked the engineers to look at this and they assure him that the driveway design does not exceed 10 percent.

Bill Martin, the burying of the power and phone lines, as well as, Town

Page 106 of 176 utilities is a requirement. There will be improvement to the existing driveway. It comes down to the location of the driveway to Lot 2, the switch back verses straight up the hill. The utilities will all be buried along this driveway to the back lot if it should ever be developed. There would be less impact with this road if Lot 3 goes under conservation easement. Lot 4 looks really steep. Establishing easement on Lot 3 is a benefit to the town and solutes people who try to come forward with this type of application. He feels that the applicant is trying to design the site so that the drive is less visible. Wants to be sure that this drive is done right and does not effect the house on Lot 1.

Aimé Fournier concurs with other commissioners. He has serious doubt that he will get a 12 percent grade out of the driveway. Mr. Nicholson defends a switchback driveway instead of a straight driveway. It seemed that going the direct route was much steeper.

Aimé Fournier, with the property being so sloped do you have any idea how visible the house would be from Highway 119? Mr. Nicholson replies that it is difficult to say as the house he would like to build for himself has not yet been designed. They have chosen the location for the house because of the mountain view to the west.

Doug Radandt is really impressed with the forethought and presentation from this Applicant. Asks if all of these questions will get revisited in the site plan review. Staff answers, yes.

Bill Martin can’t decide on a driveway issue having not walked it. It is critical to see the sun angles and where things will go. Overall feels positive about this.

IT IS MOVED by Sean Smith to recommend the approval of this Minor Subdivision to the BOT with the amended items. Aimé Fournier to second, all in favor, none opposed, Doug Radandt abstains.

1. TRC review needs to be done 2. Verify fire hydrant issue with staff 3. Retain restrictions A and B as noted on the site plan 4. Property is compliant with Town Code for access to two arterial streets 5. PC understands that the Applicant, in his best effort, will actively seek a Conservation Easement for Lot 3. As long as there is an ability to do that, the Applicant considers this a requirement. If a Conservation Easement is not attainable for Lot 3, then Lot 3 reverts to a buildable lot. 6. PC recommends this for approval as long as Applicant

Page 107 of 176 seeks the approval for a Conservation Easement as soon as practical.

B. Mark Maricle – Mixed Use Application, Continued Mark Maricle comes back with answers to the concerns left to him by the PC at that last meeting. There are changes to the original plan, showing wood trim and wood hand railings around the deck areas. He brings examples of the Core-ten roofing and siding material. The metal looks shiny for the first year then will begin to rust. This will go on the pop out portion of the upper level of the building, as well as, the roof. It is not mirror shiny or metallic shiny. The example piece that he brings has been laying in the sun all summer. It will rust pretty quickly. Windows were changed to look more like a store front. He has included pictures of possible light fixtures. Mutton bars decorate the top and bottom of windows. Above these will be the long windows which will have operable small awning windows at top or bottom for circulation. As far as the height of the building, the floor construction between levels will be thicker than normal in order to accommodate the in-floor heating system. This makes for better heat retention. With regard to the third floor plate height, the overall structure can come down 1.5 feet. The eve starts at 27 feet in height and then curves gradually to the peak of the roof, topping out at 35 feet.

Brad Tomecek, PFE, Architect for Mr. Maricle, 2441 Broadway Street, Suite 108, Denver, CO, wants PC to understand that this is a schematic approach. He is open to lowering the height. He is in favor of the barrel roof design more than a flat roof. In regard to the Core-ten, it will oxidize with the winter. Core-ten seals itself so that it will stop rusting after a point.

Bill Martin asks about Core-ten being used anywhere else in town. The only example of a like type material being used in the town is Snyder’s garage. But that is a galvanized material.

Mr. Tomecek’s intent, is to give character to this building by trimming the structure in wood and steel. In his mind, this captures a mining theme prevalent in the town.

Mr. Maricle, entry trellis will be wood with light fixtures above, shining down. The spiral stair case rear of structure would have a stone wall at it’s base. There would be a stone wall accent on first floor. Changes being shown tonight were created after obtaining a historic guideline book from the town. The changes here are in direct correlation to this document.

Mr. Tomecek, looking at comments with regard to the hand rails, he is happy to make the wood run vertically rather than horizontally in more of

Page 108 of 176 a craftsman style in wood. The windows shown in the guidelines were more square or vertically rectangular. What the Applicant heard at the last meeting was that the windows proposed before these changes were maybe not in line with architecture of the town. The mutton design on the top of the windows gives this the old time character, while allowing the air flow. The overhead garage doors seemed to be an issue. But this seems to be an issue as to the commercial use that may include the garage doors. They will further address this area. There are brackets at the front of the building and the column above it that carries the “glue-lam” beam that supports the roof. There is more of a shaped rafter at the top. Roof material should be an earth tone in color. In reviewing the historic standards and guidelines document, it talked about the maximum height limit as being something that is wanted. The application is within the limits of the yard and bulk requirements of the Town, but they are very willing to address any concerns that might arise. By recessing the entry, it sets off the secondary use of the residential above, while giving it a more vertical use. The guide lines ask for less than 4 windows but they have a little more than that. The stone will be used as an accent material on the lower walls. Parking has been reduced to 3 spaces in order to accommodate snow storage and the emergency access to the building which was a concern of the Fire Chief. Floor plans have not changed.

Mr. Maricle responds to items 5-11 listed below, as was charged to him at the meeting prior to this one. With regard to the potential noise issue in the commercial space and keeping the doors closed; after speaking to business owners, for instance, furniture making, good advertising for them when the doors are open. Owners often sit in chairs out in front of the business and it actually draws people into the business. Maybe he can consider keeping any windows or doors closed on the east and west sides of the building but keep everything closed. If there are overhead doors installed, he would like for them to have the ability to be open during business hours, and after that, fall under the Town’s Noise Ordinance. He would like to put this option in his lease with the occupants more than making that a stipulation against this option for his rental agreement. Under the issue of odors, just make stipulations for the type of use that might go there. He would like to keep this as flexible as possible. He has actually worked on sites where there have been garage doors that would actually roll up where they installed windows over the garage doors. With regard to ventilation, they will require the most stringently enforced code covering a use of this type so as not to have to be concerned at a later date that there could be a potential problem. This way, they will be prepared for what ever should locate in the commercial use.

Mr. Martin makes a point that the use needs to remain under a commercial definition, not an industrial one.

Page 109 of 176 Steve Williams, not just the amount, but the type of use needing ventilation.

Mr. Maricle, there was mention of the back yard being used primarily by the resident. He spoke to staff with regard to placement of a shed back there for resident use only. He assures the PC that any shed at the rear of this building will be for residential use only and will not be slated for storage of any commercial use.

Steve Williams, with regard to the drainage of the property, he identifies a swale in the lot, what would happen to the drainage at that point. Mr. Maricle, when he spoke to Ron Trzepacz, they talked about digging a trench, install gutter and down spouts that drain into a graveled area. He thinks they can use the French drain technique, to allow drainage into the creek at the south of the lot, about 45 or 50 feet.

Mr. Maricle, with regard to hours of operation, after talking with business people, his thoughts of setting hours of between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. was a little too limiting. Their thoughts were more in line with 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Noise can be contained inside the building if a tenant/business wanted to work in the shop later in the evening because of the cement exterior wall construction being very sound resistant.

It is PC’s understanding is that if the property were to be sold in two pieces, commercial use verses residential use, that the property will have to come back to the PC for a SRU approval.

Snow storage will be on the west side of the building.

Bill Schwartz, 450 Bridge Street, hands a copy of Boulder County standards for measuring a building height. He is concerned over the looks of this building as he will have a view of it from his home. His question is on the height bench mark of this building. Does it start at existing grade or street level?

Bill Martin quotes from the yard and bulk requirements, height is measured to the upper point of the roof. Staff further explains that it is measured from the center of the building when a slope is 15% or greater. The street can be considered as the bench mark if the lot does not slope to this extent. So technically, the building could be measured from the street level.

Bill Schwartz, the property slopes at least 10 feet to the south. He fears that the building will be much taller than anything else in the area.

Page 110 of 176

Mr. Maricle, really hasn’t measured the lot to see if the grade change is that great. When he is standing on the back corner of the lot, it is not like looking up at the road. He felt it was fairly level. He didn’t think it dropped off more than 6 feet.

Bill Schwartz does like the plan, but the height of the buiding is his concern.

Mr. Martin, to reiterate, that building would be 35 feet from the foundation, not built up from the grade of the road.

Paul Turnburke, 3259 Ridge Road. Says this is a nice building. Just cautions the PC that this is not a historic building. He think this plan is getting into good stuff and would be good for the town. Maybe use two different types of material on the side elevations would be good too. Right now the sides would be stucco. Mr. Miracle would like to do stone but it is not cost effect.

Chris Perret, 224 West Pine Street, the times of operation for his business was rigidly enforced. He thinks there will be a lot of annoyed people if the doors are allowed to be open. The other stipulation was that it had to remain under a single ownership. Under a split ownership the building would have to have two completely different utility meters, etc. Staff inserts the fact that Mr. Perret’s business resides on property zoned Neighborhood Commercial, whereas, this applicant’s property is zoned Central Business District. There are different rules covering these zoning districts. NC is predominantly a residentially zoned area rather than commercial.

Aimé Fournier feels that two good points have been raised. Do you think that the noise issue would be addressed by bringing it back to the PC? Do you think the single ownership can be addressed by a new SRU? He feels that both issues can be readdressed under bringing the Applicant back to the PC under both of these scenarios.

Bill Martin, really likes the way Mr. Maricle addressed the standards. Within business district, we want to stay with commercial and not industrial. Make sure it is consistent and successful. In terms of design standards, he likes the way it is addressed in the write up. He fully thinks that there is a spirit of the historic guidelines that should be read. His conflict is with page 21 of town document with regard to overpowering similar buildings in the CBD. His thinking is guided towards building a 35 foot building in town as currently there are none. But then this application is allowed under the Code. He has to acknowledge the fact that this will overpower the surrounding area. Form and mass on page 23

Page 111 of 176 is actually something that the Applicant, did. Thought about the façade and curve of the roof. That is something that Sally Grahn brought up at the first meeting. But it does hearken back to any other historic building in town. He does not think it is consistent. But thinks. if it is done and done well, it can be good. He likes that people spoke in favor of the Core- ten. He tried to think of another example in town of that material type. Only buildings that come to mind would be Snyder’s garage or the Wolf Tongue Mill, but not exactly this same material. Looking at how the Applicant solved some of those problems where he adopted to what the PC’s charges. He is cautious about going through with this, but it does meet with underlying Code. Last time, many people spoke favorably for this type of building and the change and use in the town. This will be a keystone project. He likes this design much more than the original submittal.

Doug Radant, asks Mr. Tomecek if he can tell him the origin of the roof design. He would also like to echo what Mr. Martin was saying with regard to the design standards as he is concerned with Nederland’s growth in the next 20 years. Looking at the town from the point that the town’s foot print will not change, the building is going to go up in height. It will raise new challenges especially as new buildings move toward spaces in the commercial district. He feels that this should be recommended for approval to the BOT. He feels this is a top shelf presentation.

Mr. Tomecek, when he and Mr. Maricle started talking about this project they looked to the mining museum for ideas regarding the design.

Sean Smith, our CBD is very small and the only progression for developing this area is to build up. Looking at George Town’s information in the building design guidelines, the present buildings are two story, but there is a false front as well making it a higher elevation. His feeling is that this is a natural progression of Nederland and the rest of this country with population growth the way it is. Going up is better than building out. He does still have concerns with snow sliding off roof, but we did talk about an apparatus to control that situation at last meeting. As far as setting a precedent, he hopes that this building will lead the way. He is also concerned with the look of the sides of the building that face east and west. Mr. Maricle states that the stucco will be two colors. Stone is just too expensive for him, but reiterates his intentions on making this a green building.

Aimé Fournier has two comments. He appreciates the design, this has more details than the previous presentation. Applicant has addressed concerns raised at the last meeting. As others have said this, project will set a precedent. That raises the bar as to opening up the possibilities of new projects coming up in the future. There are two sides of how

Page 112 of 176 Nederland is changing. Preserving Nederland’s character is important. We are moving into the future, we try to be proactive in foreseeing growth, but at this point in time we do have these standards and guidelines. He feels that they need to make sure that the standards are met and the guidelines are just that. The fact is that it will be higher than any other building in the town. Anything we can do to mitigate that would be a good thing.

Mr. Tomecek, expands on the design and materials to be used. It will either be wood fascia or have wood fascia with a beam below it. You are not actually seeing a wood beam curve there, but it will give the appearance of being curved. Glue-lam beams will be used for this.

Aimé Fournier, had comments at the last meeting about the windows and these are definitely improved. Still does not like the narrowness of the upper windows. Looking at examples of the guidelines, page 30, windows tend to be very rhythmic, space is the same between as you go along. These windows seem staggered. A feature of the design that looks very modern. Is the design minimal compared to having a more ridged design?

Mr. Tomecek, the windows are punched in the wall with a rhythm in the example you have given. His assumption is that one room has one window and one room may have two windows. What he has proposed is actually how the bathrooms and other rooms are set up on the inside of the building. Looking at this barrel in a half view, you will have a tall piece that maybe does not have the double window. But that was a decision based on the use of the space behind.

Mr. Fournier is still concerned that the architecture is too modern. He still is not in complete agreement with the windows on the top floor. He understands the explanation that different rooms are the argument for the windows being so far apart. That there are interior walls that separate the bathrooms and the bedrooms. Three things say modern, barrel roof is one, thinks it is neat and feels it does connect to mining museum and has potential. The other thing is the spacing of the windows, being so closed to the edges. Third is the deck being off on one side and not across the entire front of the building. Mr. Tomecek explains that the portico is only 3 feet in depth and really is just an opening that one can step out on. Not really functional deck. The lines could not be carried across the front of the building because of the interior design. Mr. Fournier then asks if Mr. Tomecek has considered designing the deck in the middle? Mr. Tomecek answers that the interior lay out is what actually drives the placement of this deck. Windows are placed for this reason as well. Pages 18, 21 and 35 are being scrutinized in conjunction with this application of the guidelines.

Page 113 of 176 Mr. Tomecek remarks that the trimming out the of the windows with wood is not really represented here. Trim is a detailed piece and they really have not gotten to that point. There will be wood trim around the windows and doors. Page 23 shows trim accent on a building in George Town.

Aimé Fournier, also questions the vertical wood slats for the deck instead of horizontal. He also questions the trellis. Mr. Tomecek explains that the trellis is designed to provide a clear entrance to the residential entry. The trellis will have wood columns on a stone wall with down lighting above it. This design will help to bring more of a look of wood and warmth while help in breaking up the wall. He comments that the trellis is designed to help in keeping snow off of the walk way and gives shade. The design of the building is detailed to show the delineation between the commercial use and the pedestrian level.

Aimé Fournier, is looking at the stucco against a traditional material. Page 27, although not historically used, consider limiting stone materials to an accent material. Mr. Maricle is using recycled material, it is Styrofoam finished with stucco. This product is really not designed to use wood or other siding products.

Steve Williams wants to compliment them on the redesign. World of difference between the first submittal and the second. What he particularly likes most about this design is it has the components of the old while looking modern, and encompasses the old with the new. He thinks it is a given, that someone, will not like it. Appreciates the effort the Applicant has put in to this design. Page 24 is a model of inconsistency. The buildings look lined up in the picture but they really are not. He went back and looked at all of the standards and this design fits. Other than it is set back off of the street rather than built on the line. He does not see that as a major problem. Little things like trim are things that can be worked on. Biggest problem will be the discrepancy in the height. People will look at that and feel it does not fit here. But we really do not have a choice but to build up. Does like this concept and feels we should proceed.

IT IS MOVED by Sean Smith to recommend that the BOT approve the Mixed Use Application proposed for Third Street. Steve Williams to second. All in favor, none opposed, Doug Radandt abstains.

1 Give consideration to the Nederland Historic Design Standards and Guidelines in conjunction with the new IBC, Fire Codes and Green standards. 2 Windows and doors to be trimmed 3 Enclosure of trash receptacles

Page 114 of 176 4 Explanation of deck materials to be used, metal verses wood 5 Down lighting in any and all areas that are lit 6 Building to remain in single ownership unless benefited by an additional SRU Application 7 Any commercial use shall be consistent with Section 16-32 of the NMC for CBD zoning district 8 Commercial use to come back to the PC for actions, if needed, for approval 9 Finalize drainage plan 10 We recommend at least the level of vegetation shown in the plan. Where ever possible, use native materials. 11 Elevation to be measured from the south edge of street 12 Rear yard may contain a storage shed for use by the residential use Not designed for long term storage. 13 Statement and design changes presented in the Aug 25 response to questions is what the PC has based this recommendation.

ATTEST:

Judy Richardson Planning & Zoning Technical Coordinator

Page 115 of 176 TOWN OF NEDERLANDBOARD OF TRUSTEES Tuesday, September 21, 2004 Multi urpose Roam Nederlan Communil Center 750 Highway 72 orth MEETINGAGENDA l. 7:00 PM Public Meeting Call to Order and RollCall

*********'k*******'k'k**********'k*‘k‘k**‘k**CoNsENTA *1:*************************************** **** By a Roll Call vote of the Board of Trustees 0 Reading of the Warrants and Approval of the Minutes of September 7, 2004 ynvau-vent”:«ml.-kw~k*~n-w1r~x-~nv:Mm4:in:~I¢~I:1rvevev:m~~n4n\-kyett1-1-anew*~n-xmrtrvm-arHa+:««9mw~nxaorQamt-amtmrxt-kurvmnwn- kxmewvtnanrwManner . Petitions, Communicationsand Public Comments — 30 minutes (NMC 2-57.) 0 Beaver activity near Town water intake 0 Biomass Plant not functional

Town Clerk's Report —SheridanGarcia

Town Attorney's Report — Scott P. Krob Town Treasurer's Report —PhilipD. Onofrio Zoning Administrator'sRepo rt Committee Reports: Administration—BettyPorter CivicAffairs—VickySama Community Center—LauraFarris Economic Development—MikeTorpie

Finance — Vicky Sama

Planning — vacant Public Safety—RogerCornell Public Works—MikeTorpie

Water & Sewer — Laura Farris Mayor's Report—Chris Perret Scheduled Business . PUBLICHEARINGwhereby the Board shall order the Notice of Further Considerationof an Ordinance Granting a Gas and Electric Franchise to Public Service Company of Colorado . CONSIDERATIONOF A RECOMMENDATIONfrom the Nederland Planning Commission regarding the application of Mr.Tom Nicholsonfor a minor subdivision. . DISCUSSIONAND CONSIDERATIONOF A REQUEST to reserve the Guercio MemorialBal Field for a weekend in August 2005, exact dates to be determined, for NedFest ‘O5 l . DISCUSSIONAND CONSIDERATIONOF A MOTIONto set on a future agenda resolutions supporting all town staff Other Business 0 Outdoor special event action o August 12, 2004 meeting “special” or “emergency” Executive Session Adjournment S0 U o m

Page 116 of 176 TOWN OF NEDERLANDBOARD OF TRUSTEE Tuesday, September 21, 2004 S Multi urpose Room Nederlan Comn vunit Center 750 Highway 72 orth MEETINGAGENDA I. 7:00 PM Pub Ilc Meeting Call to Order and Roll Call PRES ENT: Roger CornelI Laura Farris Chris Perret Betty Porter Mike Torpie ABSENT: Vicky Sama Also present: Sheridan Garcia, Town Clerk Scotty P. Krob, Town Attorney Joyce Westbrook, Town Accountant

'k***'k*****'k***********coNSENTA *'k***********'k*******'k'k*'k*******'k**' k**'k****'k'k By a Roll Call vote of the Board of Trustees o Reading of the Warrants and Approval of the Minutes of September 7, 2004 and August 12, 2004 WAS DULY MOVED,SECONDEDANDPASSED BYA ROLL CALL VOTE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES to approve the Consent Agenda; Trustee Sama was absent.

a.*yrgun“;H«acorv.a*a.*at-*«m.-mmma.nn*a.nwmame*mna*»numawamu.u.we.-nnw.»:u«u««*~:.«*mr4m«n 1. Petitions, Communicationsand PublicComments — 30 minutes (NMC 2-57) o Bea ver activ ity near Town water intake Ms. Kayla Eva ns of Arapahoe Ranch in Eldora aske d about the beavers that are currently damming the river near the Town's intake structure. She understands that the Divisionof Wildlifehas been contacted by PublicWorks and she doesn’t want the beavers relocated, live trapped, or killed. She doesn’t know what kind of impact the beavers are having on the Town’s water quality but willwork to resolve any problems or issues. Mayor Pro Tem Cornell suggested that she work with the Water/Sewer liaison, Chris Perret.

o Biomass Plant not functional In res ponse to why the Community Center is not being heated by the Biomass Plant, Trustee Farris sa id that she too was surprised to find 0 ut thatthe planti s not operational. She expIained that the chip delivery system is not oper at ionaI so the Town was not abl e to operate the plant at the beginning of its heating season (September 20, 2004 ). The Town was forced to use the existing boiler heating

1 Minutesof September 21, 2004

Page 117 of 176 system and believes that the correction of this system failure and all costs assoc iated with its remed y shall be the s ole resp onsib ilityof Delta Dynamics. Given that the Tow n now has a contract and warranty, we willbe a ble to take action.

2. Town Clerk's Report —SheridanGarcia reported that Fox Channel 31 visited Town Hallto do a news piece on what a great place Nederland is to visit. Ms Serene Carplus of the Nederland Chamber of Commerce met with the . reporters as well as owners of First Street businesses. The new sound syste m and recording equipm entdonate d to the Town by Citizens for Open Government was in use for the first time and heartfelt’:hanks were extended to Messrs. Keith Cabaniss and John Diggoryfor making her job more efficient an d easier. Staff is working with their respective boa rd liaisons to streamline da ilyactivities, specificallyt he day to day request to Trustees. 3. Town Attorney's Report — Scott P. Krob had nothing to report. 4. Town Treasurer's Report —PhilipD. 0 nofrio was not present. Town Accountant Joyce Westbrook provide d financials and said that Mr. Mike Torpie was responsible in paying the required sales tax for NEDFEST;he submitted it directly to her and she then submitted the funds to State of Colorado. 5. Zoning Administrator’sReport 6. Committee Reports: A. Administration—BettyPorter reported thatshe had spen ttime in Town Hall to learn the daily busi ness routine; Judy Richardson wilI be med ical leave for a month and Trustee’ Porter willtry to fillin as her schedule permits; performance reviews needs to be streamlined. B. Civic Affairs—VickySama was not present. C. Community Center—Laura Farris reported on the Community Center Advisory Board meetings:

o September 2, 2004: Election of Of?cers — Laura Farris, Chair; Emmy Slocume, Co-Chair; Dale Porter, Secret ary; Mary Kottenstette , Back up. The board reviewed Resolution 2004-6 regarding the LEED Standards and discussed several topics e.g. budget; remodeling/demoliti on; community input regarding uses for the building and tenants needs; Bio Mass Plant and heat/energy reliability.

0 September 16, 2004: Joh n Varsos appointed as finance officer pro tern. Discussion of decision-making rules and proced ures and itwas agreed that;

(a) Committee should advise Pat Whited on building rents, tenants and major expenses; (b) Committee should decide on planning, design and reconstruction exp ense s up to $50, 0O0,inclu ding items put out to bid; any expense over $50 ,000 needs BOT approval. Committee willseek BOT pre-approval of

2 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 118 of 176 Cont ractor’s s pecifications and expense estimates.with a proviso that Com mittee wilI negotiate firm price to avoid excess change orders; (c) Committee willseek bids from a nd interview architects, contractors and project managers for recommendation to BOT; (d) Committee willseek additionalfunds that do not commit the Town to matching funds or in-kindcontributions; (e) Committee willorganize public hearings on CC designs, hosted by BOT to avoid duplication of hearings. The Committee offered its appreciation to Ms. Pat Whited, Community Center Manager on the reconditioning and re-opening the Multipurpose Room.

She reported on the recent Board retreat benefits, specifically the use of study sessions, which willbe posted and open to the public. She suggested these sessions be scheduled on the Thursdays prior to the board meetings. The Board willset the agenda for the study session.

D. Economic Development—MikeTorpie provided a brief report on sales tax revenue numbers.

E. Finance — Vicky Sama was not present

F. Plann ing — va cant G. Public Safety—RogerCornell reported that he is trying to put the police committee together. H. Public Works—MikeTorpie reported that Public Works is grading roads and working on Big Springs ditches a nd cuIverts. Work is starting along School Road.cutting trees and grl Jbbing forthet rail that willbe built from Shosho ni to Indian Peaks Driveto the Mud Lake open space. I. Water & Sewer — Chris Perret reported that he has been working with Director of Operations Ron Trzpacz on cost proposals for sewer lines in Big S prings. I 7. Mayor's Report—Chris Perret reported his attendance at the 11-week Citizens Police Academy. He thanked Citizens for Open Government for the much needed sound system.

8. Scheduled Business

A. PUBLIC HEARINGwhereby the Board shall order the Noticeof Further Consideration of an Ordinance Granting a Gas and Electric Franchise to Public Service Company of Colorado

Mr. Tod d Anderson of Xcel Energy was not present to addres s the Board. Trustee Farris provided chang es to Article 11- Municipalization in regard to Operation and Net Metering. This document willbe provided to Mr. Anderson.

Upon recommendation of the Town Attorney, who willspeak with Mr.Anderson about the changes to Article 11, ITWAS MOVEDBYTRUSTEE PORTER

3 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 119 of 176 seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Cornell to continue the public hear ing tot he regularly scheduled board meeting of October 5, 2004. By a un animo us show of hands, Mayor Perret declared the motion carried.

B. CONSIDERATIONOF A RECOMMENDATIONfrom the Nederland Planning Commission regarding the application of Mr. Tom Nicholsonfor a minor subd ivision

Mr. Tom Nicholsonof 90 Peakview Drive was present to address the board about the 4 acre property that he wants to subdividefor the purpose of creating four 1-acre residentiallots. Two lots willbe accessed by the original driveway. the remaining two lots willdirectly access Peakview Drive. Allfour lots willbe zoned mountain residentiaI;there are no plans to build a ny structures as this time. One of the 1-acre lots (Lot 3) willbecome a conservation easement as soon as practical followingapproval of the proposed minor subdivision and assu ming easements remain obtainable.

He went before the Planning Commissionon August 4, 2004 and those recommendations are: retain restrictions A and B as noted on the site plan; property compliant with Town code for access of two arterial streets; applicant, in his best effort willseek a conservation easement (CE) for Lot 3; if a CE is not attainable for Lot 3, it reverts to a buildable lot. The Technical Review Committee (TRC) also provided recommendations: applicant create a 40-foot hamme r head or cul-de-sac at the end of the driveway for Lot 2; hammerhead must be located at least 50 feet from the house or garage for fire fighting purposes; pullout areas be oreated at the bend s in the driveway; there should be two bends that are large enough to accommodate twocars pass ing one anotherorfor fire equipme nt; no additional fire hydra nt is required by code; property lines are welIwithinthe 400 feet requir ement.

Issues discussed to be addressed by the applicant:

0 2 lots on one driveway; applicant must meet the criteria with one additional building on that driveway. The other lots are down Peakview Drive and could not have access from that driveway. 0 Work with Planning to show how the lots can be accessible without going against the Code. o The Lot 3 driveway cannot cross another driveway. 0 Bring the street up to town standards. 0 Any road or driveway cut needs to be 45 degrees so it can be reclaimed. o Show in a plat restrictionon Item C that any building requested on Lots 3 &4 to have a valid driveway plan.

0 Town Attorney Krobadvised the followinglanguage on the plat note: requires a separate driveway in compliance with Town Code; approval

4 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 120 of 176 byt he Board of Trustees, in advance, for lots 3 and 4. In this way, you are putting the burden on the subsequent buyer of 3 and 4, so you nee d to put notice on the plat ITWAS MOVEDBY TRUSTEEPORTER, seco nded by Mayor Pro Tern to approve Cornell the minor subdivisionwith a building on lot 2; a conservation easement applied for and paid by the applicant on Lot 3, but should Lot 3 be buil on, the buiIding application willcome back to the board of trustees for approvalt before issuance of a building permit; driveways comply with the Town code on al lots; approve all Planning Commissiona nd TRC recommendations; and add a l plat note stating that separate driveways are in compliance with code for the lots, that the board of trustees must appro ve building ap plicat ion(s) prior to issuance of buildingpermlt(s) for lots 3 and 4. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Cornell Perret Porter Torpie ABSTAIN: Farris ABSENT: Sama Mayor Perret declared the motion carried. C. DISCUSSIONANDCONSIDERATIONOF A REQUEST to reserve the Guercio MemorialBall Fieldfor a weekend in August 2005, exact dates to be determined, for NedFest ‘05 Mr. Mike orp T ie, who step ped down from the Board ofTrustees, addressed the board as a citize n and organizer oft he NED FEST event. There was discussion about: 0 timing with other local events 0 revenue generation payment of sales taxes by vendors 0 payment of police officers by NED FEST

ITWAS MOVEDBY MAYORPRO TEMCORNELL,seconded by Trustee to Porter accept the request to reserve the Guer cio Ball Field for a wee kend in August 2005 and that Mr. Torpie notify the Town Clerk as soon as possi ble with the exact date. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Cornell Farris Perret Porter ABSENT: Sama ABSTAIN: Torpie (wh0 had stepp ed down) Mayor Perret decla red the motion ca rried.

5 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 121 of 176 D. DISCUSSIONAND CONSIDERATIONOF A MOTIONto set on a future agenda resolutions supporting all town staff Trustee Torpie introduced the item requesting that the Board support alI town staff as everyone has done a good job and their efforts should be rec09nized. The resolutions willbe drafted by Torpie, Mayor Perret and Staff. By consensus the board determinedthat the item willbe set on a future agenda when the resolutions are ready.

9. Other Business

0 Outdoor special event action

This is the outcome of a meet ing of Town Staff, Board members and citizens in May 2004 in an effort to sta ndardize the Chipeta Park rental agreem ent, fees and bond amount , if required . Myayor Pro Tern Cornell asked that Staff work on the document to address at a future study session.

- August 12, 2004 meeting Town Attorney Krob was directed to determine ifthe meeting called was “special” or “emergency” and reflect it accurately in the final version of the minutes.

ll. Executive Session

ITWAS MOVEDBY MAYOR PRO TEM CORNELL,seconded Trustee Torpi to adjourn to executive session pursuant to CRS 24-6—402(4)(b r the purpose of receiving legal advice on speci?c legal issues and (d) details investigations A rollcall vote resulted in the following: AYES : Cornell Farris Perret Porter Torpie ABSENT: Sama Mayor Perret declared the motion carried. Upon reconvening the Board of Trustees, Town Attorney Krob said “Notefor the record that I am the Town Attorney and was present throughout the executive sess ion and the subject matter of that executive sessi on was approprlate under the state statute and the subject matter is subject to the attorney-client privilege.”

6 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 122 of 176 Upon reconvening the Board of Trustees, Town Attorney Krobsaid “Note for the record that I am the Town Attorney and was present throughout the executive session and the subject matter of that executive session was appropriate under the state statute and the subject matter is subject to the attorney-client privilege. ” III.Adjournment

Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Nederland Board of Trustees adjourned the public meeting at 9:50 PM.

Town of Nederland

ris B. Perret, Mayor A EST:

ridan Garcia, Town erk

7 Minutes of September 21, 2004

Page 123 of 176 NEDERLAND PRIMARY PLANNING AREA: RESOURCES

CR CR 126 Legend 109J 6J CR 126N 12 BON R ANZ C A DR Primary Planning Y Area (PPA) 3 E od Creek R 10 L herwo C L D S A R Town of Nederland V H 1 U 128W IN D R Rare Plant County Open CR D GE R R IAN RID IC Areas Space PEA A 7 KS D N R E Wildlife County LRD Migration Conservation O HILL 2 D O 6 R Corridors Easement H 7 C ARD C INA S H T Significant Other Open L C U R S D R N Natural Space G Communities 1 S USFS Land 2 R T 6 D E Riparian S N Areas Private Conservation URD IBO 2 oir Wetlands Easements AR eserv C ow R Mead Critical R rker Page 124 of 176 VE 9 Ba Wildlife BEA DR 11 Habitats North k EEK SH Beaver Cree CR

reek Boulder C Mi ddle

*PPA numbers designate areas for parcel specific provisions 3b Adopted: __/__/2019 3c 0 1,000 2,000 3a ft N 1 inch = 2,000 feet D R A Area of Detail R 5 O 4 "DOT Trails" LD E 3d System Lyons MA GNO Longmont LIA DR Jamestown "West Mag" Ward Erie Trail System Boulder Nederland Louisville HAU L RD The user agrees to all Terms of Use set forth by Boulder County. For Terms of Use, please visit: www.bouldercounty.org/mapdisclaimer

Doc Path: V:\prjlu\2017\GIS-17-0148NederlandIGA\MXDs\NederlandERE_20190822.mxd AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney Dept: Legal Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☒ Discussion ☐

______

AGENDA ITEM: Emergency Ordinance No. 811 suspending the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences and declaring an emergency

Alternative Ordinance No. 812 suspending the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences (non-emergency)

SUMMARY: During the discussion at the August 4, 2020, regular meeting, the Board of Trustees directed staff to draft a suspension on the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences.

HISTORY AND PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: The Board of Trustees has discussed the assessment of water and sewer base fees at the following meetings: August 4, 2020, Regular Meeting, and July 21, 2020, Regular Meeting, Staff also presented on base and usage fees at the June 16, 2020, Work Session.

DISCUSSION: Based on direction from the Board of Trustees at the August 4, 2020, meeting, the Town Attorney drafted an ordinance temporarily suspending the assessment of water and sewer base fees for single-family residences. This is a temporary suspension with no specified end. The Board of Trustees may lift the suspension by resolution, and, in that event, the existing fee structure would resume. The Board of Trustees could also lift the suspension by adopting an ordinance to amend the existing code language and revise the fee structure.

There are two ordinances included in this packet. Ordinance No. 811 is an emergency ordinance. To pass an emergency ordinance, 6 out of 7 members of the Board of Trustees must approve the ordinance and, once approved, it takes effect immediately. Ordinance No. 812 is a non-emergency ordinance and only needs to be approved by a majority of the quorum present. The suspension would take effect thirty (30) days after the publication of the title.

Page 125 of 176

FINANCIAL IMPACT The financial impact for the suspension of the additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences is $11,352, annually.

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: Does the board want to adopt a suspension on the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences?

ATTACHMENTS:

• Draft Emergency Ordinance Number 811 temporary suspension of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences • [Alternate] Draft Ordinance Number 812 temporary suspension of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences

SUGGESTED MOTIONS:

Emergency Ordinance

APPROVE Ordinance: I move to approve Ordinance Number 811 suspending the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences, declaring an emergency, and providing an immediate effective date.

REJECT Ordinance: I move to reject Ordinance Number 811 as presented.

Alternate Non-Emergency Ordinance

APPROVE Ordinance: I move to approve Ordinance Number 812 suspending the assessment of additional water and sewer base fees for single-family residences.

REJECT Ordinance: I move to reject Ordinance Number 812 as presented.

Page 126 of 176

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

ORDINANCE NUMBER 811

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO, SUSPENDING THE COLLECTION OF ADDITIONALWATER BASE FEES AND SEWER BASE FEES FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, AND PROVIDING AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE

WHEREAS, the Town of Nederland, Colorado (“Town”) is a statutory municipality, duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Colorado; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 31-35-402(1)(f), C.R.S., the Town possesses the authority to prescribe, revise and collect fees for providing water and sewer service; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 13-28(a)(1) and § 13-58(a)(1) of the Nederland Municipal Code, the Town assesses sewer and water user fees as a base fee charge and a usage fee charge; and

WHEREAS, for buildings with multiple uses, the Town charges a sewer base fee rate and water base fee rate for each separate use on the property pursuant to § 13-28(a)(1)(b) and § 13- 58(a)(1)(b) of the Nederland Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees desires to evaluate and study the base rate fees assessed to single-family residences with multiple uses; and

WHEREAS, the imposition of a temporary suspension on the assessment of multiple water and sewer base rate fees to single-family residences will allow the Board of Trustees to study these water and sewer charges;

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper to provide for the safety, preserve the health, promote the prosperity, and improve the order, comfort and convenience of the Town of Nederland and its residents.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Nederland, Colorado, as follows:

Section 1. Findings and Intent. The above recitals are incorporated herein by reference and adopted as findings of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Nederland.

Section 2. Imposition of Temporary Suspension. A temporary suspension is hereby imposed on the assessment of multiple sewer and water base rate fees assessed on single-family residences pursuant to § 13-28(a)(1)(b) and § 13-58(a)(1)(b) of the Nederland Municipal Code. This temporary suspension does not suspend the assessment of one (1) water and (1) sewer base

Page 127 of 176

rate fee for single-family residences.

Section 3. Study of Assessment of Multiple Base Fees. During the pendency of the temporary assessment, the Board of Trustees will study the assessment of multiple base fees on single family residences and may adopt amendments to the municipal code related to the assessment of these fees.

Section 4. Lifting of the Temporary Suspension. The Board of Trustees acting by resolution or by ordinance may lift the temporary suspension of the assessment of multiple water and sewer base rate fees on single-family residences.

Section 5. Emergency declaration; immediate effective date. Pursuant to § 31-16-105, C.R.S., the Board of Trustees hereby finds, determines, and declares that an emergency exists and that this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare and of the Town and its residents. Upon passage by a ¾ affirmative vote of the members of the Board of Trustees, this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption.

INTRODUCED, READ, AND PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED THIS 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2020, BY A VOTE OF _____ IN FAVOR AND ______AGAINST.

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

______Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem

ATTEST:

______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney

I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Nederland at its meeting of August 18, 2020, and ordered published by title only by ______newspaper on ______, 2020.

Page 128 of 176

______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

Page 129 of 176

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

ORDINANCE NUMBER 812

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO, SUSPENDING THE COLLECTION OF ADDITIONALWATER BASE FEES AND SEWER BASE FEES FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES

WHEREAS, the Town of Nederland, Colorado (“Town”) is a statutory municipality, duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Colorado; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 31-35-402(1)(f), C.R.S., the Town possesses the authority to prescribe, revise and collect fees for providing water and sewer service; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 13-28(a)(1) and § 13-58(a)(1) of the Nederland Municipal Code, the Town assesses sewer and water user fees as a base fee charge and a usage fee charge; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees desires to evaluate and study the base rate fees assessed to single-family residences with multiple uses; and

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Nederland, Colorado, as follows:

Section 1. Findings and Intent. The above recitals are incorporated herein by reference and adopted as findings of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Nederland.

Page 130 of 176

Section 5. Effective Date. After adoption by the Board of Trustees, this ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication of the title. .

INTRODUCED, READ, AND PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED THIS 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2020, BY A VOTE OF _____ IN FAVOR AND ______AGAINST.

TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

______Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem

ATTEST:

______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney

______Miranda Fisher, Town Clerk

Page 131 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk Department: Administration Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☐ Discussion ☒

______

AGENDA ITEM: Long-Term Rental Regulations

SUMMARY: At the July 16, 2020 meeting the BOT engaged in a brief a discussion about rental safety, landlord accountability and long-term rental regulations. The BOT was in agreement that they wanted to look into registering long-term rentals similar to how short-term rentals have to register with Town. The BOT directed Town staff to research how other municipalities handle long-term registration.

In order to require long term rental owners to register their property with the Town of Nederland, the Town will need to adopt a municipal code related to rental property registration. The City of Edgewater shared with Town their “Rental Property Registration Code” which is attached.

Town staff can develop a registration form and request that long-term rental owners complete it, however without the municipal code change, long-term rental owners would not be required to comply. Should the BOT decide to pursue the registrations of long-term rentals, Town staff is recommending that the City of Boulder’s “Long Term Rental License Application” be modified to meet Nederland’s needs (see attached).

ATTACHMENTS: • City of Edgewater – Rental Property Registration Code • City of Boulder – Long Term Rental License Application

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: • Does the BOT want to pursue making changes to the municipal code that would require long-term rental owners to register their property with Town? • Does the BOT want Town staff to develop a long-term rental registration form? If so, should Town staff wait to do so until after the municipal code is adopted (assuming that is the desire of the BOT)?

Page 132 of 176 ARTICLE 13 - Rental Property Registration Code[1]

Sec. 6-13-10. - Title, purpose and intent.

(a) Title. These regulations shall be known as the Rental Property Registration Code of the City of Edgewater, herein referred to as the "Registration Code." (b) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this Article is to provide certain information to the City in order to ensure compliance with, and facilitate enforcement by the City of, the City's Rental Property Maintenance Code ("Rental Code") set forth as [in] Chapter 7, Article 7, which Rental Code establishes minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the use, occupancy, and maintenance of all residential structures available for rent within the City of Edgewater.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-20. - Application of this article.

Effective January 1, 2016, it shall be unlawful for any owner to lease for occupancy any rental dwelling or portion thereof without first registering the rental dwelling pursuant to this Article.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-30. - Definitions.

When not inconsistent with the content, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the singular number include the plural number, words in the plural number include the singular number, and the masculine includes the feminine. For purposes of this Article, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Agent shall mean a manager or operator, or any person, agent, firm or corporation who is designated in writing by the owner to act as the representative of the owner on issues related to a rental dwelling and for receipt of notices and legal service of process related to a rental dwelling. Building shall mean any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy. Income restricted property shall mean a unit of rental property over which the owner, whether a nonprofit or a for-profit entity, lacks the sole discretion to increase rent due to state or federal law. By way of example, and not limitation, units within a Section 8 housing project, as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 1437(f), as amended, as well as properties for which the owner takes an income tax credit pursuant to Sections 38 and 42 of the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26, U.S.C.), as amended, qualify as income restricted properties. However, units not within a Section 8 housing project that are rented with tenant-based Section 8 vouchers, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1437(f), as amended, do not qualify as income restricted properties. Lease shall mean: (1 An agreement by which an owner gives up to a tenant, for valuable consideration, possession and use of his property or a portion thereof for a definite term, at the end of which term the owner has an absolute right to retake control and use of the property; or (2 The act of an owner giving to a tenant, for valuable consideration, possession and use of his property or a portion thereof for a definite term, at the end of which term the owner has an absolute right to retake control and use of the property. Occupancy shall mean the purpose for which a building or portion thereof is utilized or occupied.

Page 133 of 176 Owner shall mean any person, agent, firm or corporation, or a designated representative of the same, having a legal or equitable interest in a rental dwelling; or otherwise having control of such property, including the guardian of an estate and an executor or administrator of an estate when ordered to take possession of real property by a court. Person shall mean any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other type of entity capable of owning or managing property, or an agent, servant, or employee of any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity capable of owning or managing property. Property shall mean one (1) lot or parcel of real property or adjacent lots or parcels of real property under common ownership upon which one (1) or more rental dwellings is located. Rental dwelling shall mean any property, building or buildings, or portion thereof, that provide shelter for human habitation or residential purpose, any portion of which is leased by the owner for occupation by a tenant. "Rental dwelling" shall not mean hotels, motels, hospitals, State licensed residential care facilities, assisted living facilities or nursing homes, or income restricted property, nor shall it mean a property in which both the owner and tenant reside in a single structure, provided that such structure does not contain more than four (4) rental units. Structure shall mean that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-40. - Registration required; rental dwellings.

On or before January 1, 2016, every owner of a rental dwelling(s) shall register the rental dwelling(s) with the City Manager or his or her designee, according to the application process set forth in Section 6- 13-50.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-50. - Registration application; term of registration; renewal of registration.

(a) Application for registration. Applications for rental dwelling registration shall be submitted to the City Clerk on a form provided by the City, and the City Clerk shall accept no incomplete applications. Applications shall provide the following information: (1) The full name, mailing address, residential address (if different than mailing address) and telephone number for the property owner, if the property owner is an individual. (2) The full names, mailing addresses, residential addresses (if different than mailing address) and telephone numbers for the property owner(s), if the property is owned by more than one (1) individual. (3) The full name, mailing address, business address (if different than mailing address) and telephone number of at least one (1) officer, manager or director, if the property owner is a business entity. (4) If no owner of the property has a residential address within fifty (50) miles of the City of Edgewater, or if no officer, manager or director of the business entity that owns the property has a business address within fifty (50) miles of the City of Edgewater, then there shall be provided to the City the full name, mailing address, residential or business address (if different than mailing address) and telephone number of the agent for the property who shall have either a residential or business address within fifty (50) miles of the City of Edgewater, along with a copy of the writing designating the agent to act as the representative of the owner on issues related to a rental dwelling and for receipt of notices and legal service of process related to a rental dwelling.

Page 134 of 176 (5) An affirmation that the application is complete and contains no false, misleading or fraudulent statements. (6) The address of each rental dwelling within the City of Edgewater, including individual unit numbers, along with disclosure of the number and location of the rental dwellings, if any, that constitute income restricted property and proof, satisfactory to the City, of such status. (b) It is the duty of each owner to ensure that all of the information provided in a rental dwelling registration is kept up to date at all times, and it shall be unlawful for an owner to fail to provide updated information to the City within ten (10) days after the date upon which any information provided is no longer accurate.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-60. - Application fee.

Applicants for a new or renewed registration of a rental dwelling shall pay no fee to the City for purposes of the application for registration.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Sec. 6-13-70. - Owner's option for inspection of rental dwelling.

If an owner requests an inspection of his rental dwelling(s) for compliance with the limitations and requirements of the City's Rental Property Maintenance Code that is set forth as Chapter 7, Article 7, then the City shall conduct an inspection of the rental dwelling(s), pursuant to Section 7-7-120. Prior to any such inspection(s), the owner shall pay a fee or fees as established in the fee schedule adopted by the City Council from time to time. If the result of any such inspection is a finding by the City Manager or his or her designee of full compliance of the rental dwelling with the Rental Property Maintenance Code, then the City shall issue a letter to the owner stating the date of inspection and the finding of full compliance. At the owner's request, a copy of the letter shall be placed on the City's website for a period of one (1) year from the date of its issuance; provided, however, that any such letter shall be removed from the City's website in the event that the City later discovers a violation of the City's Rental Property Maintenance Code that is set forth as Chapter 7, Article 7. Any other provision of this Article notwithstanding, for purposes of this Section, a rental dwelling shall be deemed to include income restricted property.

( Ord. 2015-08 §2, 7-16-2015 )

Page 135 of 176 APPLY FOR A STANDARD LONG-TERM RENTAL LICENSE

Please email application Quick Notes Email: [email protected] Standard Long-Term Website: BoulderRentalHousingLicensing.com Rentals of 30 consecutive days or more Customer Self Service: energovcss.bouldercolorado.gov Applying for a Rental License:

SmartRegs Compliance must be reached before a rental application can be submitted.

A rental inspection is required for all license applications. Change of ownership requires a new rental application.

Submit the following as a complete packet to apply for rental license: (Complete one application per single dwelling unit OR per each multi-unit building).

 Affidavit of Legal Residency signed by property owner  Please submit a copy of the ID checked on the affidavit (Driver's License, Military ID, U.S. Passport, etc.) State Law requires the City of Boulder to verify applicants obtaining certain public benefits are lawfully present in the United States.  Completed Rental Housing License Application (2 Pages) Note: Property owners not residing in Boulder County must appoint a person who is capable of responding to the property within 60 minutes to serve as the local agent.

 Rental Inspection Compliance Verification Form Note: Must be signed by a licensed rental inspector. Lighting certification form required for Multi Unit Property with more than one dwelling unit. A passing Smart Regs** inspection is required for rental license issuance. A list of private inspection contractors can be found at BoulderRentalHousingLicensing.com

 Fees Payable to City of Boulder: $105.00 Application Fee – required for all applications

*Please make copies of all forms for your records*

**Properties that have not met SmartRegs compliance at the time of application will not be issued a valid rental license until the property has reached compliance. For more information of SmartRegs visit: https://bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop/smartregs *A copy of the rental license certificate will be available electronically once issued and is valid until expiration or the property is sold. *A new application is not required in situations where a rental property is transferred from ownership by one or more individuals into a limited liability company form of ownership if: 1.) At least one transferring owner is a member of the LLC 2.) No exchange of consideration takes place as a condition of the transfer 3.) Transferring owners certify there is no significant change in the persons who are responsible for managing the property.

Planning and Development Services - Rental Licensing PO Box 791 Boulder, CO 80306 Phone: 303-441-3152 Standard Long-Term Rental License Application mail checks : payable to City of Boulder and include rental address Updated June 2020

Page 136 of 176 City of Boulder Affidavit of Legal Residency

**Provide a clear copy of document you are relying upon to show your lawful presence in the United States.

Section 1: Identification Documents

I, [print name], currently lawfully possess, and am providing a copy of, the following identification document as evidence of my lawful presence in the United States (check one):

Valid Colorado driver’s license or a Colorado identification card issued by the Department of Revenue

United States military card or a military dependent’s identification card

United States Coast Guard Merchant Mariner card

Native American tribal document

Other documents allowed by the Colorado Department of Revenue Rules for Lawful Presence, which include a valid driver’s license from another state. (1 CCR 201-17)

(Rule 5 - Rules for Evidence of Lawful Presence available at http://www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/GenerateRulePdf.do?ruleVersionId=6599)

Section 2: Citizenship Affidavit

I, [print name], swear or affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Colorado that (check one):

I am a United States citizen, or

I am not a United States resident but I am a Permanent Resident of the United States, or

I am not a United States citizen but I am lawfully present in the United States pursuant to Federal law.

I understand that this sworn statement is required by law because I have applied for a public benefit. I understand that state law requires me to provide proof that I am lawfully present in the United States prior to receipt of this public benefit. I further acknowledge that making a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation in this sworn affidavit is punishable under the criminal laws of Colorado as perjury in the second degree under Colorado Revised Statute 18-8-503 and it shall constitute a separate criminal offense each time a public benefit is fraudulently received.

Signature Date

Page 137 of 176 Rental Housing License Standard Long-Term Application

email complete applications to: [email protected] online payment instructions will be sent by email after application processing $105.00 Application Fee – required for all applications

 New Rental License  Renewal Rental License

Rental Property Address Unit/Apt. #

Building Type (Check One):

 Single Family Dwelling  Condominium  Apartment Building  Manufactured/Mobile Home  Co-Op lighting

 Duplex  Tri-Plex  Four-Plex  Fraternity  Sorority  Bed & Breakfast  Townhome

 Single Family Dwelling with Accessory (ADUs established under affordable guidelines must meet affordability standards as defined in B.R.C 1981 section 9-16-1)

Complex Name (if applicable)

Room for sleeping, which may include a separate entrance and bath, but shares Number of Dwelling Units Number of Rooming Units kitchen facilities - similar to a dorm room. (Not Common)

Licenses with more than 1 dwelling unit are required to submit an outdoor lighting certification. For more information on outdoor lighting requirements, visit bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop/outdoor-lighting-ordinance lighting-ordinance

Unit (ADUs established as defined in B.R.C. 1981 PROPERTY OWNER: *please complete all fields Section

First Name Middle Initial Last Name

Company or Partnership (If Property Owned by LLC, LLLP, etc.)

Address City/State Zip Code

E-mail Address Primary Phone Secondary Phone

LOCAL AGENT: A property owner who does not reside in Boulder County shall appoint a person who is capable of responding to the property within 60 minutes to serve as the local agent of the owner. B.R.C. 1981, Section 10-3-14.

First Name Middle Initial Last Name

Address City/State Zip Code

E-mail Address Primary Phone Secondary Phone

Correspondence concerning this property should be sent to:  Owner  Agent

Updated June 2020

Page 138 of 176 The owner/agent must meet requirements and certify compliance by signing below.

Waste Removal Verification:

The City of Boulder requires all rental property owners to have a current and valid contract with a commercial waste hauler for removal of accumulated waste. The owner certifies that the operator has a current and valid contract with a commercial waste hauler for trash removal for the rental property meeting the requirements of Subsection 6-3-3(b), B.R.C. 1981.

➢ Commercial Waste Hauler:

...

 By signing this form, the owner/agent certifies this property has received a passing SmartRegs inspection demonstrating compliance with the requirement of B.R.C. 1981, 10-2, Appendix C, “Energy Efficiency Requirements"

 By signing this form, the owner/agent certifies that he/she will maintain safety compliance consistent with level of final inspection for the duration of the rental license at the property listed on the attached rental inspection report meeting the requirements of B.R.C. 1981, Section 10-3-6(a)(1) and (2) and 10-3-7(a)(1) and (2).

 By signing this form, the owner/agent certifies that information submitted to acquire a rental license is correct.

 By signing this form, the owner/agent agrees to post the required occupancy limit sign, per B.R.C. 1981, Section 10-3-20.

 By providing an email address, the owner/agent is giving consent to receiving electronic communication regarding this rental license and city programs/policies at the provided email address.

 By signing this form, the owner/agent understands the acceptance of an application packet and fees by the city does not constitute the issuance of a rental license. Application and fee submittal are subject to review and verification.

Owner/Agent Signature Print Name Date

Updated June 2020

Page 139 of 176 Rental Inspection Compliance Verification Form PROVIDE ONE FORM FOR EACH UNIT OR ATTACH MULTI-UNIT SPREADSHEET

ALL SECTIONS OF THIS INSPECTION ARE REQUIRED

Part 1 - General Requirements Part 2 - Plumbing Requirements Compliant Compliant

1. Maintained Exterior 1. Privacy I. Toilet Rooms 2. Floodplain Signage 2. Access from a hall or passageway 3. Address Numbers Visible from Street II. Plumbing 1. Maintained, Safe, Sanitary & Functional 4. Structural Members Functioning Systems and Fixtures 2. Fixture Clearance Adequate for Usage and Cleaning 5. Foundation Walls Free from Open Cracks III. Water 1. Supplied with Hot/Tempered and Cold Running Water 6. Sound Roofs Systems I. E xterior S tructure 7. Window, Skylight, Door Frames Weather Tight; Glazing Free from Loose/Broken Glass

8. Maintained Exterior Handrails/Guards

9. Maintained Stairs, Decks, Porches & Balconies

1. Interior Maintained & Sanitary Owner/Agent:

2. Equipment, Systems, Devices and Safeguards Maintained and in Working Order

3. Interior Structural Members Functioning Property Address: Unit #

Page 140 of 176 4. Maintained Interior Handrails/Guards II. I nterior S tructure 5. Maintained Interior Stairs, Decks, Porches & Balconies

1. Habitable Spaces have Light by Window or Artificial Comments and List of Non-Compliant Items on Initial Inspection

2. Common Halls & Stairways

3. Bulb Requirement Met (Lighting code per 9-9-16 “Outdoor Lighting B.R.C. 1981) III. L ight Single Unit Inspection 4. Fixture Requirements Met (Lighting code per 9-9-16 “Outdoor Lighting B.R.C. 1981) Single Unit Inspection

1. Habitable Spaces have Ventilation by Window or Mechanical IV. 2. Bathrooms and Toilet Rooms Ventilation

1. Water Closet Accessibility

2. Prohibited Occupancy

Limitations 3. Food Preparation, Store and Serve in a Sanitary Manner

4. Dwelling Units Occupancy

V. 5. Rooming Houses

Initial Inspection Date:______Inspector Initials:______PART 3 - Mechanical and Electrical Requirements PART 4 - Fire Safety Requirements

1. Mechanical Appliances in Safe Working Condition 1. Safe, Unobstructed Path of Travel

2. Checked Fireplaces and Kitchen Appliances for Safe Installation 2. Locked Doors Readily Openable

3. Clothes Dryer Exhaust Systems 3. Emergency Escape Openings

4. Heating Facilities 4. Fire Resistance-Rated Assemblies

5. Gas Piping Materials S afety G eneral I. 5. Barbeque Safety

6. Shutoff Valves 6. Portable Fire Extinguishers

7. Furnace Location

8. Venting II. Smoke Alarms III. Carbon Monoxide Alarms M echanical G eneral I.

9. Combustion Air # In Sleeping Rooms # Outside Bedooms

10. Clearances

11. Piping Identification # Outside Sleeping Rooms Total # in Unit(s)

12. Service Requirement

Fuel Burning Appliances in Boilers serving six or more dwelling units must maintain a valid certificate of inspection from the Total # in Unit(s) Page 141 of 176 oilers State of Colorado Building

B II. ☐

1. Access through Bathrooms and Bedrooms Smoke Alarm on Each Level ☐ Attached Garage ☐ 2. Required Features W ater III. Heaters 1. All Electrical Installed and Maintained Safely By signing this form, the licensed Inspector certifies that he/she performed the housing

2. Electrical Faceplates inspection for the rental property indicated and found it complied with all the requirements included in the checklist at the time of inspection. The inspector also certifies that he/she 3. Extension Cords has no financial interest in the property and is not related in any way to the Owner/Agent or

4. Electrical Circuits Tenant.

5. Electrical Panelboards X 6. Receptacles

7. Non-grounding Electrical Receptacles Inspector Signature Print Name

8. Luminaires E quipment E lectrical G eneral IV. Company Name City of Boulder Contractor License #

[email protected] Telephone # Date of Final Inspection Compliance updated 06/2020 (Must be within 12 Months) [email protected]

From: BOT on behalf of Karen Nicholson Cobble Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 9:50 AM To: Nederland Subject: [BOT] For public record and next BoT agenda packet Attachments: Untitled attachment 00263.txt

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed

Hello,

At the last BoT meeting July 21, 2020, Lindsey Danforth presented research about long term rental regulations. The discussion is intended to be continued.

How is it possible that as a long term rental owner, Danforth is not (yet) required to recuse herself as former board member James Rawsthorne, was required to recuse himself because he was a short term rental owner? Rawsthorne was even reprimanded and forbidden from continuing to speak when he commented about long term rentals at a board meeting. He was silenced. By this logic, both Kris Larsen and Lindsey Danforth must immediately recuse themselves from any and all discussion about short and especially long tern rentals, given they own a long term rental in town.

Be reminded that Kris should have recused himself from the vote on ordinance 798 but did not. The ordinance should not be on the books. Kris was married to Lindsey Danforth at about the same time as he voted to remove all regulations for long term rentals while imposing extreme regulations on short term rentals. Given that his fiancée or wife at the time owned a long term rental property in town, it was entirely wrong and unethical for Larsen to vote to remove regulations for long term rentals. This is patently obvious and it is shameful that Larsen behaved this way. It is shameful that the town lawyer said nothing.

I expect the BoT and the town’s lawyer to properly and equally require recusals to prevent such self-dealing to happen again. I expect the lawyer to communicate formally as to why she allowed this to happen for ordinance 798 and why she has not yet advised that the married Trustees who own a long term rental must recuse themselves on discussions of rental property regulation, whether short term or long term. I expect the lawyer to tell the Larsens they may no longer participate in or in anyway influence the discussion on any rentals, but especially long term rentals.

Thank you,

Karen Cobble

Page 142 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk Department: Administration Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☐ Discussion ☒

______

AGENDA ITEM: Marijuana Moratorium Update

SUMMARY: At the special BOT meeting on August 11, 2020 the BOT unanimously approved Emergency Ordinance No. 810 imposing a temporary moratorium on the submission, acceptance, processing, and approval of any license application for all retail and medical marijuana establishments.

Before the expiration of the temporary suspension imposed by this Ordinance, Town Staff, working with the Town Attorney and Trustee Taylor, shall investigate, review and analyze potential new Town regulations for marijuana-related businesses that are designed to limit the concentration and/or number of marijuana businesses within the Town.

Town staff are proposing the following timeline for ensuring that any amendments to the municipal code related to marijuana occurs prior to the expiration of the moratorium.

September 2020: Town staff, Town Attorney and Trustee Taylor will study and review regulations to determine whether amendments are necessary.

October 2020: Town staff, Town Attorney and Trustee Taylor will present as a discussion item, their findings and recommended municipal code changes. Based on the feedback received from the BOT, staff will work with the Town Attorney on an ordinance outlining the proposed code changes.

November 2020: Under Action Item, the Town Attorney will present the proposed ordinance changes to the BOT. Depending on the recommendations made by the BOT, additional changes may be made to the ordinance.

Page 143 of 176 December 2020: The ordinance is ideally adopted by the second meeting in December, allowing for the 30 days noticing period to take place prior to the expiration of the marijuana moratorium.

QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD: • Does the BOT have any questions or recommendations related to the timeframe proposed?

Page 144 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Jennifer Madsen, Town Attorney Dept: Legal Consent ☐ Information ☐ Action ☐ Discussion ☒

______

AGENDA ITEM: Discussion on tips for proper parliamentary procedure to make a motion.

SUMMARY: The Nederland Board of Trustees Rules of Procedure (“Rules of Procedure”) require that the Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure are followed during Board of Trustee meeting. Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure

DISCUSSION: The Rules of Procedure require that the Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure are followed during Board of Trustee meeting. By following parliamentary procedure meetings are more efficient and reduces the chances of the actions from being declared illegal or challenged for procedural deficiencies.

Parliamentary rules require a motion to bring business before the governing body. A motion is a formal procedure for taking action. To make a motion, a board member must first be recognized by the mayor. After the board member has made a motion (and after the motion is seconded), the mayor must then restate the motion or rule it out of order, then call for discussion.

Exact wording of motions and amendments is important for clarity and recording in the minutes. If it is a complex motion, the motion should be written down and then read.

The Rules of Procedure provide the following steps for presentation and disposition of motions:

(1) The presiding officer recognizes a Board member.

(2) The Board member proposes a motion.

(3) Another Board member seconds the motion.

Page 145 of 176 (4) The presiding officer may cause the motion to be restated.

(5) The Board debates/discusses the motion (amendments to the motion or other substitute motions may be made during the debate/discussion).

(6) At the conclusion of the debate/discussion, the presiding officer may cause the motion to be restated.

(7) The vote is taken, and the presiding officer announces the result of the vote.

The available types of motions are listed in the excerpt of the Rules of Procedure which is provided as an attachment.

SUMMARY OF COMMON MOTIONS:

• “Reconsidering” a vote: Under Robert’s Rules, reconsideration has very specific meaning and it is sometimes at odds with the word’s meaning in general usable. Under the Rules of Procedure, the Board may only reconsider with respect to a decision made in the current meeting or at the next following regular meeting. The motion must be made by the Board member who voted on the prevailing side of the motion and that person must so state in the motion to reconsider.

Example: “I move to reconsider the vote on Ordinance No. 25. I voted on the prevailing side of the motion.”

• Motions to amend: A Motion to Amend (a Main Motion) is applicable only to a Main motion on the floor. The motion must provide specificity as to the intended amendment. The motion is debatable. A motion to amend may take the form of inserting, striking out or striking out and inserting words, sentences, or paragraphs. A motion to amend must be pertinent to the main motion and may be used to “fine tune” a motion. When an amendment is on the floor only the amendment may be debated.

As an example of a Motion to Amend a Main Motion, such motion might be stated as:

Member Smith: I move to Approve Ordinance No. 6 as presented to us tonight.”

Member Jackson: “Second.”

Page 146 of 176 Chairperson: “We have a proper Motion on the floor that has received a second to approve Ordinance No. 6. Any discussion?”

Chairperson: “Yes, the Chair recognizes Mr. James. Mr. James, you have the floor.”

Member James: “Thank you. I move to amend the motion offered by Ms. Smith to change the amount of the penalty for the first violation stated in Section 1-1-3 on page 3 of Ordinance No. 6 from the stated $100 for the first offense to $200 for the first offense.”

Member Samuel: “Second.’

Chairperson: “We have a Motion to Amend before us to change the penalty in Section 1-1-3 of Ordinance No. 6 from $100 to $200 for the first offense. We will take up the Motion to Amend first and decide that Motion before we consider the Main Motion. It is debatable and requires a simple majority vote. I see no one wishing to comment or debate the offered amendment to Ordinance No. 6. Would the clerk call for the vote on the Motion to Amend only?”

[Motion receives majority vote of approval.]

Chairperson: ”The Motion to Amend is approved so Ordinance No. 6 is now amended to change the penalty for a first offense to $200. We next turn to the Main Motion to approve Ordinance 6, now as amended. Any debate on Ordinance No. 6 as amended? Seeing none, would the clerk please call for the vote of Ordinance No. 6 as it was amended.”

• Offering friendly amendments: The Moving Party may accept a proposed amendment (a “Friendly Amendment”) unless an objection is raised by Point of Order. An objection to a Friendly Amendment will summarily defeat the Moving Party’s privilege to accept a Friendly Amendment and, in such case, a formal Motion to Amend would be in order.

Page 147 of 176

• Confusing the record with “I so move”: When the Mayor says, "I will entertain a motion to take a recess," say, "I move we take a recess for 10 minutes." If you just say, "I so move, "then you ha When the presiding officer says, "The chair will entertain a motion to take a recess," say, "I move we take a recess for 10 minutes." If you just say, "I so move, "then you have not actually made a motion. You may have confused other Board members and the public and there is no clear record.

Think of it like this: The Mayor says, “Ms. Smith moves 'so.' All those in favor of 'so' say 'aye.' Opposed, 'no.' The ayes have it, and we will 'so.’” Obviously, this does not make any sense because you need to know what “so” stands for, but this is what happens when you say, “I so move.”

There may come a time that a future Board needs to review the action taken by the current Board. Without a clear record of the process, and the motion presented, the future Board may be confused as to what action was taken.

ATTACHMENT:

• Excerpt of Nederland Board of Trustees Rules of Procedure

Page 148 of 176 C. Making Motions

Any Board of Trustees action, which requires a Vote, must be preceded by a motion by a Trustee. All motions presented by any Trustee require a second. The Mayor shall be entitled to participate in the discussion of motions, and may make or second a motion. Motions are generally introduced by voice. However, if the motion is long or involved, motions may be put into writing. Any Trustee may demand that a motion be put into writing.

D. Presentation and Disposition of Motions

The following steps shall be taken for the presentation and disposition of motions:

1. The presiding of?cer recognizes a Board member.

2. The Board member proposes a motion.

3. Another Board member seconds the motion.

4. The presiding officer may cause the motion to be restated.

5. The Board debates/discusses the motion (amendments to the motion or other substitute motions may be made during the debate/discussion).

6. At the conclusion of the debate/discussion, the presiding officer may cause the motion to be restated.

7. Vote is taken and the presiding officer announces the result of the vote.

E. Types of Motions

The following motions are the most commonly used:

1. Motion to amend: A motion to amend may take the form of inserting, striking out or striking out and inserting words, sentences, or paragraphs. A motion to amend must be pertinent to the main motion. It is proper to make a motion to amend an amendment. Motions shall be discussed in the reverse order from which they were proposed.

A motion to amend an amendment shall be in order, but one to amend an amendment to an amendment shall not be heard unless otherwise agreed by the member making the first amendment. An amendment modifying the intention of a motion shall be in order, but an amendment relating to a different matter shall not be in order.

2. Motion to continue: A motion to continue has the effect of moving an item to a future agenda. The motion shall include the date to which the item is being continued.

3. Motion to lay on the table: This motion is used to set aside an item currently under discussion for a more pressing matter. It is not used to “kill” an item. Once the more

Nederland Board of Trustees Rules of Procedure, Amended May 2014. Page 12

Page 149 of 176 pressing matter has been disposed with, a motion to take from the table is in order. This motion shall be made at the same Board meeting or at the next Regular Board meeting.

4. Motion to postpone to a de?nite time or inde?nitely: Approval of this motion effectively “kills” the item. If the motion fails, discussion on the motion and a vote can be had. All motions to postpone, excepting a motion to postpone indefinitely, may be amended as to time. If a motion to postpone indefinitely is carried, the principal questions shall be declared lost. Reconsideration of a Motion postponed indefinitely shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the Board.

5. Motion to move the previous question: This motion is used to cut off debate and to bring an immediate vote on the pending motion. This motion cannot be made while a Board member has the floor. The motion requires a second, cannot be debated, and requires a two-thirds vote to approve. A vote is first taken on the motion; if successful, debate is halted and a vote on the main motion is made. If the vote on the motion to move the previous question fails, debate on the main motion may continue.

6. Motion to reconsider: Any action taken by the Board may be reconsidered. A motion to reconsider must be made at the same meeting at which the action occurred or at the next following regular meeting. The motion must he made by a Board member who voted on the prevailing side and he shall so state that in his motion. A vote is then taken on the motion to reconsider. The passage of a motion to reconsider suspends all action on the original motion. The original question is then placed before the Board in the exact form it was in when previously adopted. Once the vote is taken and the results determined, no further reconsideration can be granted without unanimous consent of the Board.

In the event a contract has been signed by the Mayor or other legal obligations made or entered into with Board of Trustees approval, a motion to reconsider may be made at any time before the final adoption.

In the event a quasi-judicial matter is to be reconsidered, the applicable notice requirements shall be followed and the reconsideration of the original question shall be postponed to a future business or special meeting. The notice shall inform the public when the original question is to be reconsidered. In the event the reason supporting the reconsideration motion is based upon new information or evidence, the Board of Trustees shall reopen the public hearing to take evidence on the narrow issue of the new information or evidence. In such circumstance, staff shall be directed to make a good faith effort to notify, in writing, all persons who testified at the original public hearing of the date and time for the continued public hearing.

In the absence of new or additional evidence or information, the Board of Trustees shall not reopen the public hearing for purposes of additional public testimony. The matter shall be scheduled for a future business or special meeting.

7. Motion to refer: If a Board member believes more information is needed before a decision can be made, such member may move to refer the item to a board or commission for further study. The motion should identify the board or commission as Well as instructions regarding actions to be taken by that body and when a report should be made

Nederland Board of Trustees Rules of Procedure, Amended May 2014. Page 13

Page 150 of 176 to the Board. This motion should not be used to receive further information from staff. In that case, a motion to continue should be made.

8. Motion to adjourn: A motion to adjourn shall be in order at any time, except as follows: a) When repeated without intervening business or discussion; b) When made as an interruption of a member while speaking; c) When the previous question has been ordered; and d) While a vote is being taken. A motion to adjourn is debatable only as to the time to which the meeting is adjourned.

F. Precedence of Motions

When a main motion is before Board of Trustees, no subsidiary motion shall be entertained except: (a) to fix the hour of adjournment, (b) to adjourn, (c) to lay on the table, (d) for the previous question (which is essentially a demand that the vote be taken on the motion at hand), (e) to postpone to a certain day, (f) to refer, (g) to amend, and (h) to postpone indefinitely. These motions shall have precedence in the order indicated. Any such motion, except a motion to amend and a motion to postpone indefinitely, shall be put to vote without debate.

G. Withdrawal of Motion

Any motion may be withdrawn by the mover with the consent of the Board of Trustees.

H. Division of Question

If the question contains two or more divisible propositions, the Mayor may divide the motion.

I. Motions Out of Order

The Mayor may at any time, unless overridden by a majority vote of the member's present, permit a Trustee to introduce an ordinance, resolution, or motion out of the regular order of the agenda.

J. Procedure in Absence of Rule

In the absence of a rule to govern a point of procedure, reference shall be to Robertis Rules 01"01'de1: The principles and provisions of R0bert’s Rules 0fO1'de1'shall apply only to the extent that they are appropriate to a governing assembly such as Board of Trustees, with consideration being given to the size of Board of Trustees, as well as its political and legal status.

Nederland Board of Trustees Rules of Procedure,/lmended May 2014. Page 14

Page 151 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Karen Gerrity, Town Administrator

Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

TOWN STAFF REPORT

STAFF ACCOLADES

Big shout-out to Nicki Dunn for the amazing job she did in leading the Town Clean Up Day team of fellow staff members, volunteers and representatives from partner organizations. Despite the pandemic, Nicki and her team found a way to hold the event while maintaining social distancing and other safety protocols. One Hundred and Nineteen households participated with their vehicles full of recyclables and waste in a very successful effort to clean up the Town. Honorable mention goes to Miranda Fisher for providing administrative support and Mayor Larsen for volunteering and representing the Board of Trustees at this annual event.

BLACK LIVES MATTER UPDATE

The Nederland Community Presbyterian Church in partnership with St. Rita’s and Calvary Chapel, are sponsoring a series of racial awakening trainings. The first offering was called Anti-Racist Allyship and was held virtually on July 30 at 6pm. Led by Denver consultant Regan Byrd, it was an exploration of racial oppression and how we can bring empathy and equity to bear on compassion and justice.

Regan Byrd began the presentation by asking the question “how do we stop identity-based harm?” She suggested that a form of radical humanism is the answer and the creation of true systems of justice. She spent the first half of the training providing historical examples of how our nation’s justice system has failed people of

Page 152 of 176 color for centuries and in many cases created systemic oppression. She also encouraged us to challenge people who don’t understand or misrepresent the historical facts regarding racism in our country.

She also shared with us the four different types of racism which she identified as Ideological, Institutional, Interpersonal and Internalized. She described the differences between the four types and how to recognize these forms of racism in other people, institutions, and ourselves.

Regan warned us against seeking “inoculation credentials” and encouraged us to get out of our “identity mindset” and into an “action mindset”. It will take years of practice to unlearn the way we’ve been taught and conditioned to look at the world in order to see things through an anti-racist lens.

Regan suggested that we begin our allyship efforts by working with groups we belong to already such as our places of worship, professional networking associations, and extended families.

One of the topics shared was the Pitfalls of Allyship and what white people should be aware of when engaging as an ally. The pitfalls include the following:

1. Defensiveness-White Fragility and Racial Stress 2. Self-Centeredness-White seen as “audience” 3. Speaking for or Dictating to Oppressed 4. Virtue Signaling 5. Validation Seeking 6. Expecting Kudos 7. Favoring visible work instead of invisible work (marching vs fundraising) 8. Avoidance of the difficult conversations 9. No system of feedback from people of color 10. Tokenization 11. Appropriation

She ended the presentation by encouraging us to seek deeper training as we move forward in allyship.

Any board members interested in getting a copy of the training recording may contact Town Administrator Gerrity.

RTD UPDATE

RTD has communicated that they have no plans at this time to make major changes to the NB route for 2021. It is likely that the NB route will remain on its current

Page 153 of 176 Saturday schedule for Mon.-Sat. in 2021 (meaning 10 daily week day round trips instead of the 13). Related to NB ridership/demand, BVSD will be starting the school year with all-online learning. At this time, CU will be starting out this fall with a hybrid model. Assuming CU is able to maintain that model, that potentially leaves Eldora Ski Resort as the biggest ridership question mark for the time being. Nothing is certain with this upcoming ski season, and Eldora has been meeting with RTD, and as of now it looks like if Eldora opens this winter RTD would still be providing service (albeit 20 people/bus at a time, instead of 55).

CORONAVIRUS MONITORING AND TRACKING

Town Staff continues to interface with the Boulder County Public Health Department (BCPHD) and the Office of Emergency Management in monitoring and tracking the pandemic. Boulder County is currently under the Safer at Home order. Due to a recent uptick in cases, it is not anticipated that the county will apply for certification to shift into the Protect Our Neighbor order with less restrictions at this time. The health and executive orders related to Protect Your Neighbor can be found at these links: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WQi5_Cgcjqe8W1nJsOqoHoshtAXMjRV1/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/11F0Gd7DfVONN4p4yNa5h6_00xJB34SZm/view

There are currently over 5 million cases in the US and over 160,000 deaths. There have been over 19 million confirmed cases worldwide and almost 75,000 deaths. The Governor stated in a press conference recently that case numbers are starting to plateau in Colorado and speculation is that we are beginning to see the results from the state mask and last call orders. The state is focused on increasing testing capacity and turn around times for test results. Boulder County volunteers tracked facial covering compliance and found that compliance was high in indoor public places. Compliance numbers drop when people are recreating outdoors. Boulder Valley School District will start the fall semester on August 26 and will be completely virtual to start. Nederland has had only 2 confirmed cases as of the writing of this report.

The Recovery and Resiliency Team continues to monitor and track the spread of the pandemic along with the state and county public health orders. The team works with Town Departments and businesses as they modify their spaces and services to be in compliance. The Nederland Community Center recently reopened some of their fitness spaces and services on a part-time, reservation only basis. Find more information here: https://nederlandco.org/nederland-fitness-center-opening-august- 4-2020/

Area nonprofits are going strong in providing much needed services to those in need during the pandemic. Canyon Cares and Emergency Family Assistance continue to provide financial aid for rental assistance and utilities fees, the Nederland Area

Page 154 of 176 Seniors is delivering 1,500-1,600 meals per month, the Food Pantry is serving three times the normal number of households, and Boulder County Area Agency on the Aging is partnering with Boulder County Housing Authority to provide older adults who will move into Tungsten Village with computer tablets. NICHE continues to provide outreach services to people living with homelessness who are camping in the Nederland area and they have seen a significant drop in need this year.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Attached to this document is the July 2020 Building Performance Report from SAFEbuilt and a comparative report from June 2019. There has been a 50% increase in inspections compared to this time last year, permit activity, and a 25% decrease in plan reviews when compared to last year. The planning department staff remains busy processing applications and offering both virtual and in-person meetings.

Page 155 of 176 Jurisdiction Building Performance Report NED - Nederland Date Range: 07/01/2019 - 07/31/2019

One Stop Other Engineering Fire Land Use Misc Planning Public Works Subdivision Zoning Total

Residential Commercial

Residential Residential Residential One Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Residential New Alteration Miscellaneous Stop New Alteration Miscellaneous One Stop

Inspection Activity

Number of Inspections 25 25 0 0 5 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61

Number Passed 13 14 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32

Inspection Passed % 52.00 % 56.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 40.00 % 25.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 100.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 52.46 %

% Completed on Sched Date 98.85 %

Permit Activity

Applications Filed 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

Valuation - Applications 1,922,000.00 2,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 75,468.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,009,968.00

Permits Issued 0 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

Valuation - Issued 0.00 63,359.00 0.00 0.00 6,125,531.00 25,500.00 0.00 0.00 74,868.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,289,258.00

Avg wk days submit to issue 0 68 0 0 146 122 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

Total fees billed 9,028.00 48.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 98.34 0.00 0.00 1,092.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,266.86

Avg fees/permit (billed) 9,028.00 16.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.17 0.00 0.00 68.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 466.68

Total fees paid 0.00 1,431.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 968.49 0.00 0.00 1,940.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,340.42

Avg fees/permit (all fees) 0.00 477.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 484.25 0.00 0.00 121.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 197.29

Voided Permits

Number of Voided permits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 156 of 176 Plan Reviews - Submittals

Initial Submittals Received 2 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Resubmittals Received 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Submittals Received 2 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Approved Submittals 1 4 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Plan Reviews - Reviews

Total Plan Reviews Completed 1 4 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Total Plan Reviews Created 2 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Total Approved Plan Reviews 1 4 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Jurisdiction Building Performance Report NED - Nederland Date Range: 07/01/2020 - 07/31/2020

One Stop Other Engineering Fire Land Use Misc Planning Public Works Subdivision Zoning Total

Residential Commercial

Residential Residential Residential One Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Residential New Alteration Miscellaneous Stop New Alteration Miscellaneous One Stop

Inspection Activity

Number of Inspections 14 37 0 3 10 13 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89

Number Passed 12 29 0 3 4 9 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61

Inspection Passed % 85.71 % 78.38 % 0.00 % 100.00 % 40.00 % 69.23 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 33.33 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 68.54 %

% Completed on Sched Date 100.00 %

Permit Activity

Applications Filed 2 4 0 9 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18

Valuation - Applications 607,900.00 190,000.00 0.00 73,570.47 0.00 9,100.00 0.00 0.00 1,700.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 882,270.47

Permits Issued 2 1 0 6 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

Valuation - Issued 687,756.00 42,125.00 0.00 55,248.90 0.00 950,000.00 0.00 0.00 5,400.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,740,529.90

Avg wk days submit to issue 93 31 0 2 0 73 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34

Total fees billed 3,287.81 1,224.32 0.00 480.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 552.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,544.13

Avg fees/permit (billed) 1,643.91 1,224.32 0.00 80.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 369.61

Total fees paid 57,169.16 2,173.13 0.00 1,700.85 0.00 38,583.73 0.00 0.00 28,725.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 128,352.78

Avg fees/permit (all fees) 28,584.58 2,173.13 0.00 283.48 0.00 38,583.73 0.00 0.00 5,745.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,556.85

Voided Permits

Number of Voided permits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Plan Reviews - Submittals

Initial Submittals Received 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

Resubmittals Received 2 3 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

Total Submittals Received 4 6 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

Approved Submittals 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Page 157 of 176 Plan Reviews - Reviews

Total Plan Reviews Completed 4 5 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

Total Plan Reviews Created 5 6 0 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

Total Approved Plan Reviews 2 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 MEMORANDUM

To: Nederland Board of Trustees From: Karen Gerrity, Acting Treasurer Date: August 18, 2020 Re: Treasurer’s Report

2019 AUDIT

The 2019 Town of Nederland Audited Financial Statement is complete and was posted to the state’s website by the July 31, 2020 due date. An electronic copy was sent to the Board of Trustees on July 31, 2020. The public is invited to review the document on the website at this link https://nederlandco.org/government/town- departments/finance/. John Cutler & Associates completed the audit and Mr. Cutler is available to make a presentation to the Board of Trustees should this be desired.

2021 BUDGET PROCESS

The 2021 Budget preparation is well underway and prior to former Town Treasurer Jen Hagey’s departure from her fulltime position, she was able to meet with department heads and discuss potential revisions. Once Rita Six, the new Town Accountant, has been trained on the fundamental financial reporting processes, she and the Town Administrator will work together to create the DRAFT 2021 Budget. Due to COVID 19, town staff will not host a Budget Charette this year on September 15 as originally planned. The Budget Calendar was shared with the Board of Trustees and the first work session is scheduled for Tuesday, September 8.

2020 JULY FINANCIALS

Town Accountant Rita Six is working on producing the July Financial Report and if complete in time, this will be added to the Town Treasurer’s Staff Report this month.

Treasurer’s Report

Page 158 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 13, 2020 Prepared By: Miranda Fisher, Deputy Town Administrator/Town Clerk Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

Updates from July 17, 2020 – August 13, 2020

TOWN HALL UPDATES The Visitors Center has been temporarily moved into Town Hall. Due to this, Town Hall is open to the public Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 10am – 2pm while the Visitor Center Representatives are present.

Town staff are available Monday – Friday 9am – 5pm by appointment. To make an appointment, call 303-258-3266. Please leave a message and someone will get back to you.

LICENSING • Business Licenses: Within the past 30 days, 11 new and renewed business licenses have been issued.

• Liquor Licenses: No new updates.

• Marijuana Licenses: No new updates. Marijuana Moratorium went into effect August 12, 2020.

• Supplies for Businesses o We have received masks and additional hand sanitizer that businesses can pick up at Town Hall.

SPECIAL EVENTS • Exercise Classes: Monday – Friday Chipeta Park is reserved for: o Strength Training with Allison Powers o Yoga in the Park with Tadasana Mountain Yoga • Bike Clinic: Allison Powers will be holding a Bike Clinic at Guercio

Page 159 of 176 ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS SUSTAINABILITY ADVISORY BOARD Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Grants Awarded to Town Please join us in congratulating Garrett McDaniel, Nederland’s Sustainability Coordinator, and the Sustainability Advisory Board, on being awarded $50,000 in grant funds for a Fast Charging Station by the Regional Air Quality Council. This grant will allow Nederland to increase electric vehicle infrastructure in the region. In addition, Nederland received a separate grant, funded by Xcel Energy, to pay for the necessary electrical required to run the charging station.

PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE ADVISORY BOARD GOCO Resilient Communities Grant The Nederland Parks, Recreation and Open-Space Advisory Board (PROSAB) is seeking community input on Barker Meadows Park 2020.

PROSAB plans on applying for funding through GOCO’s Resilient Communities Program. Great Outdoors Colorado is offering grants for needs that have emerged in response to the pandemic within the context of their five program values: resource conservation, outdoor stewardship, community vitality, equitable access, and youth connections.

Nederland parks have seen a dramatic increase in visitors and the resulting impacts this year. The PROSAB goal is to reduce damaging impacts by providing more options for park visitors to spread out and to restore the natural area along Barker Reservoir shoreline into a usable recreation space. Funding will also be sought to refit the bathrooms at Chipeta Park in order to meet COVID requirements and reopen. The PROSAB and Teens, Inc. are working together to involve and hire youth throughout the process from input to construction. An emphasis on multi-use, shared community space and equitable access means that the PROSAB is focusing on achieving the priority improvements from the 2013

Community involvement and resident stewardship is vital! We encourage you to join the monthly online PROSAB meetings and community input sessions over the next couple of months. For more information email the Board at [email protected] or visit the PROSAB webpage at: www.nederlandco.org/government/town-boards/prosab/

DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDING CORA Requests: Over the past 30 days, the Town has received three CORA requests: • July 28, 2020: Communications and complaints about fireworks email sent to STR owners (Completed: July 30, 2020). • July 28, 2020: Information and documentation regarding The Kind Castle’s parking (Completed: July 30, 2020) • August 12, 2020: Documentation regarding Conservation Easement for Peakview Minor Subvision (Completed: August 13, 2020)

Page 160 of 176 Nederland Police Department 20 Lakeview Drive, P.O. Box 396 Nederland CO 80466 Office: 303-258-3250  Dispatch: 303-441-4444  Fax: 303-258-7519

POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT, June 01-August 10th.

I wanted to bring the Board of Trustee’s up to date with the most serious cases or incidents that have occurred in Town, or in the immediate area. Nederland Officers either investigated the entire case or responded to assist between June and mid-August.

STAFF ACCOLADES

I would like to recognize staff for the excessive hours put in by your NPD Officers, Public works staff, and the Town hall staff, to work through the Alpine explosion case. Special thanks to Sergeant Fine-Loven for writing, submitting and helping execute several warrants. As of 08/13/2020 she was submitting another warrant to search the electronics that were seized.

STAFFING UPDATE

The police department has a new hire, Officer Peter Gillen started on July 1st. He is eager to work in Nederland and is showing a lot of desire and initiative. I hope soon a live meeting can be held where his family can attend and he can be properly sworn in by Mayor Larson.

TRAINING UPDATE

We will be resuming our firearms training with The Boulder Sheriff’s Office starting August 27th. We completed some in-house firearms qualifications and training in early June.

SB 217 Update

We have started our mandatory demographic collection from people we have contacted. Starting in late June, officers have to collect the following information about everyone they contact, if that contact is more than just a hello how are you today.

Date, time, duration of contact. If it’s a traffic stop, drivers name, DOB, address, phone #. The following is mandatory for every contact. Race, sex, ethnicity, approximate age, reason for contact, suspected crime/violation. The result of that contact, no action, warning, summons, property seizure, or arrest. The criminal statute, if there was a warning, summons or arrest. Was there a search conducted? Was consent given, was consent asked, type of evidence or contraband recovered. Was a weapon unholstered, was the officer’s firearm discharged.

A mandatory discussion / training of SB 217 was conducted with the legal advisor for BCSO and with a Deputy District Attorney on 08/13/2020. The demographic information is required to be reported starting 2023. However, SB 217 says we need to start collecting it now. There is no guidance on what format it will need to be submitted in.

Page 161 of 176 CRIME REPORT, NOTE WORTHY INCIDETNS:

Alpine house explosion, Marijuana grow and Butane Hash Oil operation. This event took up 17 consecutive days on site, 10-14 hours a day. Many more hours have been spent beyond that, and many hours are still to come (arrest made).

Attempted vehicle theft from the parking lot at W 3rd and N Jefferson. One suspect was arrested, the other fled on foot and was not located.

Four DUI arrests, one involved a head on crash at Hwy 72 and W 4th, another resulting in a single car crash at Hwy 72 and Caribou Rd. and one for intoxication from excessive prescribe Rx, and high levels of TCH in the suspects blood.

Two severe, Motor Cycle crashes at Coal Creek Canyon and Peak to Peak Hwy, both resulted in the riders being air lifted. Motorcycle crash at 29,500 Boulder Canyon Dr. Rider tumbled down to the creek resulting in major injuries. Single car crash at 26,800 Boulder Canyon Dr. Car flew off the north side of the road down-hill. The female passenger sustained seriously bodily injuries. The crash was found the following morning. The driver and passenger were still in the car.

Near the end of last year, NPD took a report of a lost or stolen handgun. The handgun was recently recovered in the city of Thornton. The person possessing the gun, was charged as a felon, being a previous offender, violation of a protection order, violation of bond, and possession of meth with the intent to distribute.

Auto theft from the Post Office, which resulted in a short chase in the Canyon. The chase was ended for public safety. The suspect was on parole. He was arrested for the auto theft in Westminster while returning to his temp labor job.

False reporting of an auto theft, with felony insurance fraud. The suspect crashed his high-end sports car near Boulder Falls then false reported the theft (arrest made). Reported stolen trailer, the complainant could not provide ownership, no official report taken at this time.

Felony assault near the foot bridge. Felony menacing with a cross bow at the Covered Wagon (arrest made). Cold reported road rage, that turned into a Felony Menacing with a firearm somewhere around the traffic circle.

NPD responded to a fight in progress near the Steam Shovel around 10pm. The victim was located and refused to cooperate with charges. He reported going into Neds, being asked to leave, then being chased out by four males sitting at the bar. They chased him from Neds, across Hwy 72 where the four of them assaulted him. At the time he refused medical treatment / evaluation. Approximately one hour later he called and was transported to the ER.

Kayakers were summonsed at Barker Reservoir for being out on the water. In another incident, another Kayaker’s tipped over on Barker while drinking (summons issued). NFD rescue was called out, and ultimately cancelled.

NFD rescue called out for dog and the dog’s owner in the water. The dog was chasing Geese, and swam out approximately 500 -800 yards out from shore. NFD launched a rescue boat, as the dog swam back to shore. The dog was in the water for and estimated 30 minutes. The dog owner turned around after swimming out 50 yards.

Page 162 of 176 An unattended death of an adult male, cause of death was heart attack. Nederland Officer Gerthe performed CPR on the male. This was the third time he has performed CPR with in the last year. Unattended death at 4th of July campground.

A small child was brought into town after an ATV crash with suspected head injury. The child was air lifted to the hospital.

Several HHS referrals, one based upon an intoxicated mother picking up her child. The mother was not driving, she was on foot. Another adult was called to pick them both up.

NPD signed the 2020 MOA with USFS. The agreement provides the ability NPD to do some proactive patrols on USFS lands, that will be paid for by USFS money.

(Photo of head on DUI crash)

Page 163 of 176 Nederland Police Department July 2020 Calls-For-Service

2020 Calls for

Service Stat's

Traffic Tickets Traffic AssistMedical Theft/Shoplighting Burglary Tresspass Dog Barkinig / DAL Fire&Rescure Shoplifting MischiefCriminal Vehicle Accident/Assist Civil Issue Person/Veh Susp SexAssault Follow-upCase Traffic Warnings Traffic Monthly Day Totals: 3 3 5 2 0 5 6 1 1 0 7 3 1 0 42 Monthly Night Totals: 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 Shift Totals: 3 3 8 2 0 6 7 2 1 1 7 3 3 0 42

Welfare Check Welfare Disturbance Code Enforcement Lockout Assist Agency Assist Harassment SexOffender Duties (Warrant) Arrest (Felony) Arrest (Misd) Arrest Summons Criminal (Misd) Code Black Assault / Camping Transient Person/Runaway Missing ChildAbuse PO/ROViolations Walk-in's Totals Daily Alarm 2 5 1 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 104 0 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 2 7 3 4 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 47 168

Page 164 of 176

MEMORANDUM

To: Board of Trustees From: Chris Pelletier, Public Works Manager Date: August 18, 2020 Re: Staff Report

Public works has been understaffed most of the summer with our Utilities Supervisor on maternity leave and the Streets division short three employees, the department has been operating with a skeleton crew. With that in mind Staff is still making progress on multiple projects and goals. This month Public Works has added a new employee to work with the Streets Division and the Department is looking to add one more person as soon as practical.

Town clean-up was on Saturday August 1st and was a well-organized event. Public Works has been organizing this event for the past several years with much of the credit going to Nicki Dunn and Miranda Fisher for a smoothly run event. There were lots of volunteers who participated and helped Nederland divert as much trash from the landfill as possible. Every year the Department tries to improve its diversion rate by expanding recycling services. One of the new services provided this year was Shred-it, a paper shredding and recycling service for private documents. A service to recycle mattresses was added a couple of years ago and this year’s mattress haul was the largest yet.

Page 165 of 176 Public Works received some valuable training in paving machine operations and techniques that the Department is anxious to put to use. The paving machine was purchased earlier this year and Staff has spent some time rehabilitating and familiarizing itself with it. Asphalt operations for the department is in a beginning phase with the hopes of being able to perform much of the needed repairs of the roads in town. Nederland Public Works is unique in its ability to perform all forms of maintenance and has developed a department that has a wide variety of skills and tools. Performing this work in-house will be more efficient, cost effective, and ensure that the Department develops the necessary skills for proper maintenance in the future as roads get replaced and repaved. The Streets division is scheduled to pave Conger Street at the end of August which will signify the first road Nederland’s Public Works Department has paved. This is a huge milestone for Nederland and the Department looks forward to future development of these new skills.

There is a bus shelter that is currently being constructed near the corner of Big Springs Drive and Hwy 119/72. This has been a work in progress for over a year and is finally coming to a close. The shelter itself is not a conventional RTD shelter but a shelter that was donated by Lumos Solar, a local business that specializes in solar shelters. This business offered to donate their shelter in recognition of Nederland’s goals of 100% renewable energy. The shelter will produce enough energy to display RTD info and charge cell phones. RTD has approved the design and installation of the shelter.

The Department has also resurfaced another sidewalk in town. The DDA provided funding to improve some of the Ned Ped sidewalks that have been difficult to maintain because of the unstable surface material and the various slopes and locations. Public Works has focused on the sidewalks that have the greatest propensity to wash out because of storms or get damaged because of excess traffic.

Page 166 of 176 The Utilities Division is in a constant state of motion with the various moving parts of the treatment facilities and the constant needs of the distribution and collection systems. A pump had to be removed and replaced at the Wastewater Treatment Facility this month. These pumps are in excess of 300 pounds and require multiple staff to manage safely. A replacement for this pump can cost as much as $15,000 and is an important example of the cost to maintain the Town’s infrastructure. It is significant to note that the Wastewater Treatment Facility is running whether someone is using water or not and that there is not a direct correlation between those residents that use more water or less, the facility must run no matter the difference in individual consumption.

Town Staff is continually working to improve efficiency of operations and make repairs. Grit removal is going to be the next priority for improvements at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. Grit contained in the waste stream must be intercepted and removed prior to entering the treatment process. Grit will prematurely wear out critical pumps necessary to the process and increase the cost of operations. Staff sees grit removal as an essential next step to improve operations at the facility.

Utilities Staff is also working in the distribution system to repair and replace fire hydrants. Some hydrants can be repaired when they are of a standard specification that is acceptable to the Fire Department, while others must be replaced. The 1974 hydrant staff will be repairing will likely cost around $1000 to fix. Staff scheduled to replace a hydrant in September that is not repairable. Staff budgets $15,000 a year to replace hydrants with a goal of three a year and the cost of parts are continuing to increase. For perspective, there are 160 fire hydrants in Nederland’s distribution system.

Page 167 of 176

MEMORANDUM

To: Board of Trustees

From: Dawn Baumhover Community Center Manager

Date: 8/12/2020

Re: Community Center staff report

The Fitness Place has opened! Currently hours are Tuesday /Thursday 8am-12pm and 4pm to 8pm as planned. The time from 12pm-4pm is used by staff to clean and ventilate the workout areas. Each space has large windows that are opened as the weather permits. Large fans have been purchased and placed in the weight room, studio and on the cardio deck for additional ventilation. Though we are using the reservation system and giving preference to those with reserved times, we changed policy to allow for drop-ins. This change immediately increased the usership. So far, all patrons have been accommodated and social distance has been maintained. Everyone has been compliant with the mask order and expressed their gratitude for being able to come and work out. It is important to distinguish that the Community Center is not open to the public at this time. The doors remain locked and Fitness Place patrons ring the doorbell for entry.

Both Mountain Movers (Kid’s Dance) and Ned Kung Fu (for Kids) are brain- storming safe ways to have activities with no plans or solutions at this time. All

Page 168 of 176 classes and group activities and sports at the Community Center continue to be on hold. All fall/ winter events have now been officially cancelled. The annual Holiday Mountain Market has officially been cancelled for 2020 as has the annual Community Thanksgiving Dinner. It is hoped these activities and events can resume in 2021.

Art at The Center has gone online! The virtual show opened on July 23rd. It can be seen at www.nederlandcommunitycenter.org/art-at-the-center and more thoroughly viewed on the host website R Gallery. It is yet TBD if the fall show scheduled for October 1st will take place.

Mountain Forum for Peace will hold a one -day events on 3 Sundays: August 30th September 6th and September 13th from 9am -4pm in the upper parking lot. There will be no public drop off, the outdoor sale will consist of items already stored by MFP. The Nederland Area Seniors continue to serve the Peak to Peak with chef- prepared meals delivered by volunteers and were recognized by the Boulder Community Foundation last month for their service. The numbers are holding steady and an increase in participants is expected. Nederland Food Pantry also received special recognition. Community Food Share featured the Nederland Food Pantry on the front page of their summer newsletter in an article titled Resilience in Our Mountain Communities. www.communityfoodshare.org

Page 169 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Kristopher Larsen, Mayor Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT Attended the Forest Health and wildfire risk reduction MOU signing event. Commissioner's Gardner and Jones (Matt) attended along with representatives of county governments, watershed protection districts, the Forest Service, and mountain region fire departments. The MOU has set the stage for a collaborative environment between all organizations to move forward with work across the County forests to reduce risk, improve water quality, and forest health.

Examined a potential alternate route for the Big Springs' egress route in advance of next steps in that long awaited project!

Page 170 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Jonathan Baumhover, Mayor Pro Tem Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT Returning from a month hiatus due to person reasons.

Attended the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) meeting on August 12, 2020. The DDA voted to create their own EIN and pending a discussion with the Town Administrator and Auditor, voted to diversify their funds into multiple bank accounts to ensure all liquidity is FDIC insured.

Continuing to work with Public Works to bring the electrical shed to completion. Still on schedule to complete within the project timeline.

Page 171 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Kristopher Larsen, Mayor Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORTS

Sustainability Advisory Board Sustainability Coordinator Garrett McDaniel and SAB secured a $50K grant for a high-speed charging station, complementing the grant that Chris P. obtained for modern infrastructure.

Garrett and SAB and the BOT have submitted an application for a Zero Waste grant that will fund an overall plan with strategies for Nederland.

Miranda Fisher will be distributing Energy Efficiency (EE) kits to the Food Coop for free distribution to residents. The kits contain LED light bulbs. Garrett distributed over 70 EE kits at the town cleanup event. The EE kits are also being distributed at the Town Hall visitor center. 22 were distributed there. Partners in Energy created a colorful EE flyer for residents and businesses that will be distributed ASAP with EE kits and for business outreach. The kits are also being distributed at the Farmer's Market by Melody Baumhover.

Garrett and the SAB continue to monitor the potential Boulder County solar garden for up to 40 Nederland low income residents who are receiving energy costs assistance.

Colorado Communities for Climate Action (CC4CA) I attended a policy review session to discuss the policies adopted by the BOT. We also discussed potential legislation in the next state legislature such as a study regarding allowing towns and cities to initiate renewable energy purchases.

The organization made a major impact on lobbying the state on an aggressive plan for state wide reduction of Green House Gas Emissions.

CC4CA is advocating for a smooth transition away from fossil fuels with the retraining of workers and major renewable energy employment. Eryka Thorley attended the meeting on Thursday.

Page 172 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Eric Coombs-Esmail, Trustee Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT PROSAB had a successful Parks cleanup day with a dozen or so volunteers, who focused on trash removal and pulling noxious weeds.

Boulder County Consortium of Cities was given presentations on County-wide COVD19 health measures, most of which are familiar to us, but also shared information on the economic impacts. Boulder is doing better than Colorado and the nation as a whole, but there is a massive gap between White and Latinx communities.

Page 173 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Tania Corvalan, Trustee Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT Good news for the RTD in Nederland - They have no plans to eliminate the route even though that was being considered. The Nederland route will most likely remain on the Saturday schedule through 2021.

Community that Cares developed their mission statement - "Empowering youth to reach their full potential through positive relationships with the goal to promote healthy behaviors and well-being".

Forsythe 2 completed the field trips for the prescription on 72 near South Beaver Creek and Pactolus and discussed the implementation plan. Unit 73/74 discussions will be next, with a field trip planned for end of August.

Page 174 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Lindsey Danforth, Trustee Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT No report as the Board of Zoning Adjustment meets quarterly and therefore will not meet again until October 2020 if necessary.

Page 175 of 176 AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Meeting Date: August 18, 2020 Prepared By: Julian Taylor, Trustee Department: Administrative Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______

BOARD OF TRUSTEE REPORT No report as all matters before the Planning Commission at this time are quasi- judicial.

Page 176 of 176