Thread by @shayshinecastle

First, another quick break. When we come back, council will discuss what non-COVID business it wants to handle during this crisis.

Crap we're back. Brautigam going over programs/projects council has indicated are NOT that important
E-scooters: Will revisit in July
Prairie dogs: Coming to council in third quarter

Really wish I had whatever presentation they're referring to

Library district discussion remains unscheduled

Initiative petitions: Tentatively scheduled for April 14

So OK this is not a discussion about what council has said aren't important; it's just stuff they've given guidance on already.

Also, these criminal code changes are going to be put on the consent agenda EXCEPT for the one about obstructing and officers, which was controversial: boulderbeat.news/2020/02/17/naa…

And Carr adds the parking change (the other one that ppl were concerned about) are being taken out as well.

Both those will be revisited later.

Tentatively for May 5: Marpa House historic designation and Hill Hotel.

But that is subject to change, as a result of this discussion.

Brockett: On the library, I don't think it's something we should be taking up in the next couple months, but I want to reserve the option to take it back up, in the summer perhaps.

Council going to go meeting-by-meeting to pick what stays on the schedule and what goes.

Young: There might be quite a bit of community input on the Hill hotel and Marpa House, so we may want to have time to correct public process based on April 7 meeting

Weaver: If council has concerns about library district or prairie dogs, speak now bc they're not coming up again in this discussion.

Young: We're trying to get that done this year, right?
Brautigam: We're looking at third quarter, which would give staff time to start the work in 2021.

Which was the plan anyway. boulderbeat.news/2020/03/14/ope…

Council has to decide: Do open comment (or not) at the April 7 meeting?

I'm sorry, fading a bit. There WILL be a public hearing April 7, on a non-controversial historic landmark. Just to test out the capability.

Moving onto the April 14 meeting, which has been turned into a *special* meeting rather than a study session. This is so council can vote on stuff if they need to.

Scheduled now: Update on the city services/programs/rebates eligibility calculator boulderbeat.news/2019/11/17/goo…

Also for April 14 was a look at Community Benefit: Phase 2
How much does council want to do on that, Brautigam asks?

Brockett weighs in first: I would go on the shorter side.

I'm not sure how much I'm gonna tweet about this. Honestly I'll just pay attention, take notes and then let you all know in a story... How does that sound? Or maybe tweet all the highlights at the end?

This is partly bc I'm confused: Council has a presentation that I don't, and they're referring to everything in letters and numbers.

Some discussion now about when to schedule public participation, bc apparently the city pays by the hour for the company that is going to host call-in commentators

Young: How expensive is that service?
Carr: It's in the hundreds of dollars, per hour

Sarah Huntley, engagement manager: Cost for our contract depends on the services we execute. But an inbound phone number with moderator.

Minimum cost of $750/meeting

If we add video capabilities, it will be "significantly more expensive," Huntley says.

So $750 for 60 minutes.

Not a full $750 difference for the second hour.... she doesn't recall what that is.

Young: It goes up after the first hour?
Huntley: There are additional costs after the first hour, but it's not $750 per hour after the first hour.

Those costs can be lowered if/once staff takes over moderating, but Huntley doesn't say by how much.

It looks like council's workplan discussion will be continual and ongoing. They're going to revisit upcoming meetings at each meeting.

But maybe not. I still don't have whatever presentation they're referring to. Going off notes from the agenda committee (which I also missed this week). Kicking myself now.

Coming back with this from Young: I’m wondering about Hill hotel bc it is a hotel. I’m wondering what the state of things will be and financing for hotels. I’m just wondering, do we want to just monitor this one and maybe put it off.

Brautigam: It needs to be the applicant who withdraws and says we don't have financing anymore. They've submitted an application; we've called it up. We have an obligation to move forward.

Young: I'm just wondering how doing a concept plan in a virtual meeting may play out. It's just such a kind of interactive visual kind of thing.

Wallach agrees with Young: Should we be thinking about hotels now? (Weaver read that, so it's a paraphrase of a secondhand quote. We're in muddy waters now.)

Yates: Let's ask the applicant. This problem could go away.

There's no COVID briefing on the schedule for May 5 (which could change) bc staff is "hoping" by then, an update every meeting won't be necessary.

That seems *wildly* optimistic.

Library district was supposed to be on May 5, too.
Yates: I feel a little uncomfortable having library district discussion just disappear.

Young: Why don't we ask Library Champions how they feel about this? It may be very dependent on the financial reality due to COVID. A tax "may not be the most brilliant thing to do in November."

Yates, Friend, Brockett agree.

CU South, originally scheduled for May 19, has been moved out one month to June 19, per Brautigam

Not June 19; just out one month. Apologies; I'm *exhausted*

Weaver: That delay is bc staff hasn't been able to do the work but they WILL be able to do it, and then it has to get run by 3 boards.

Friend concurs that it was a staff request for more time to do engagement/board stuff.

Swetlik: I'm not seeing a couple things here that I brought up.
A new funding source, a head tax on companies that are publicly traded
A two-year prohibition on home sizes over 4,500 sq ft to avoid ppl buying houses in the downturn

Long council silence after that.

Also gotta say... it sounds like he got help on those. Does not sound like Swetlik at all. The ideas, yes. The language? No.

Young: Are we sure a tax at this point in time would be something we'd want to bring forward?

Swetlik: The reason it's publicly traded co is they tend to be large and they have work-from-home policies so they have avoided the revenue pitfalls that other companies are facing right now.

Joseph agrees with Young. "We need to reconsider the economics of taxes." (Read by Mayor Weaver)

Brockett: We're going to want to be nimble in how we respond to COVID and our workplan. We need to let go of initiatives that don't make sense and be willing to take up new things.

"Not to say I endorse Adam's particular ideas," but to say we should be open to rearranging things, Brockett says.

Wallach: "I'm happy to have that conversation (about Swetlik's proposals) but this climate is so negative and antithetical to tax increases that it's not really a practical proposal for now."

Ditto for the home size cap suggestion.

Swetlik: I want to "look at the whole thing rather than make a rash judgement. We are going to be lacking funding sources deeply in the future."

If we say not to all taxes, he says, we're going to continue to have shortfalls.

Young: We're all in this together. What I see happening out there is everybody is trying to work together and come together.

"There's not really winners in this situation," Young says.

Friend: I agree we're not in usual biz-as-usual mode. "I do wonder if we can take this time to listen more. We're hearing a lot from the community ... Some ppl want a broader audience."

"Could we be listening more while we're all at home and available?"

She and Yates are the community engagement committee. They're gonna meet with Huntley on Friday to discuss this.

Nagle asks if Friend wants more meetings. LOL

Friend doesn't necessarily want that, but she wants *something*

Still here. There are some agenda items left: Maybe more board/commission appointments (UGH!)

Dear god let's call it a night.

Maybe more COVID stuff, too. Which Friend wants to do.

These meetings feel 1,000% longer over the phone

So we're moving into more COVID stuff. Should I do another thread? I'mma do another thread.

Nah nvm I'll just stay here.

Up first: Enforcement

Brautigam: When person has a complaint about others violating the stay-at-home order, go to bouldercounty.org; they have a form that goes to BoCo Public Health, which "triages" those and figures out to refer to law enforcement (or not)

Carey Weinheimer, interim police chief, fielding this.

County handled over 470 calls this week(end)?, Weinheimer says.

Police dept is responding to calls about public gatherings. 20 such calls since Thursday morning, when stay-at-home went into effect.

Complaints about construction/landscaping (which are allowed) and some about ppl playing basketball, soccer, etc. Weinheimer says.

Weaver: What about ppl playing on playgrounds? Is that something parks will handle, the police or health department?

Brautigam: That's a really difficult question. Calling the police... the police have other things they're doing. They're going to prioritize emergent issues rather than ppl on playgrounds.

"People are violating them. It puts the city in a difficult position. We don't really know how to get somebody out there in the moment to enforce these things."

"Police dept can't be in charge of enforcing playground social distancing."

That will be the headline for my story.

Wallach: Aren't violations punishable by fines?
Yes, Brautigam says. But we're trying to educate ppl at this point. We're not issuing tickets.

Weinheimer: The first approach is to get compliance. Health dept has civil process they can do. Last resort will be a misdemeanor.

Wallach: "I don't think anybody wants to see a criminal prosecution, but if ppl are knowingly and repeatedly violating" we may have to make that call for ppl "jeopardizing public health."

Who else could issue tickets? Wallach asks. Obviously we don't want police to be doing this.

Brautigam: Police are the ones who would issue tickets. If they've got nothing else going on, I guess they could show up. But we can't guarantee there won't be more important things to do.

Wallach: What was rationale behind making landscaping/construction an essential business?
Brautigam: You'd have to ask the governor.
Weaver: We can address that later, when we talk about changes to the state order.

Weaver asking more qs about how to report/share violations.

Ali Rhodes, from parks: We have teams out making observations. We are seeing changes in how ppl are using parks. The teams are removing equipment, where we can, placing signs.

Of 15ish playgrounds I went to today, I saw one kid on a swing. I don't think it's a widespread issue, Rhodes says.

I got an email today, she said, about a crowded tennis court. Tomorrow, a team will go out to take down the net, put up signs, etc.

Weaver reads a comment from Joseph: It may be inappropriate to take pictures of children.

LOL. I did. So did Weaver.

Joseph: To me, it's more about behavioral change. Let's not penalize ppl who are already suffering with financial penalties.

Friend: I also have concerns, bc if you're at a playground it probably means you don't have a fenced-in backyard with a swing and a trampoline, etc. So there's a socioeconomic consideration.

Let's figure out another way besides ticketing.

Reminder (and as Friend acknowledged) Boulder isn't doing ticketing anyway.

Dan Burke, open space: Our ranger reports show a reversal of the past couple weeks. Low visitation today. "So what we think we might be seeing is a few things coming together: Spring break may have created a spike." That's over; online schooling has started.

"I think education is staring to take hold as well. Idk if I can call it a trend yet," but the last couple days, social distancing is getting better and visitation is going down, Burke says.

Trail counters at 11 highest-use trails will reveal some data. Didn't know we had those but that's cool.

Open space dept is going to use that and other data and step up education/enforcement at trouble spots. Including uniformed rangers.

Did you know that open space rangers are armed? I found that out when the Boulder Gun Club was renegotiating with Boulder to allow police officers to practice there.

Open space rangers were in that agreement.

Apparently there were a ton of ppl along Boulder Creek at the mouth of the canyon today, Nagle reports.

Normally I would make some narc jokes throughout this whole discussion, but this shit serious, ya'll

I mean, I'm not gonna narc on anyone. But I *did* decline a handshake today! The midwesterner in me found it very difficult, but the rest of me was very pleased with myself.

I got in a nice, friendly reminder that we shouldn't be shaking hands. Did an elbow bump instead.

Brautigam addressing why landscaping is permitted: It fits into maintenance of residences.
Wallach: We can make our order more restrictive, if we so desired, correct?
Brautigam: Yes

Wallach: "I'm failing to see the essential nature of lawn mowing."

Swetlik: I have similar concerns about construction that isn't affordable housing or practicing social distancing.

Weaver: Let's first ask if we want to have that discussion, about doing a stricter order than the state's. If yes, let's move on with specifics. If no.. that's that.

Nagle: The more we restrict, the more ppl are out of work.

Brockett: There's value to having alignment with the state. I would probably stick with the governor's level of protection, but we might consider adding in that we as a city expect that all essential activities done with maximum practical social distancing.

He said practicable, not practical. Apologies.

Friend agrees, plus "there would be some equity concerns with industries we'd be targeting."

Yates concurs, too.

If we depart from state, "it better be medically indicated." We're not experts; "if Jeff Zayach was telling us governor was missing the mark, I'm going to listen to that, but I don't think 9 of us should be substituting" our opinions for those of experts.

Wallach: it's got to be deeply frustrating for a lot of biz who are deemed non-essential when ppl who are planting trees and mowing lawns are deemed essential. I don't really have a good explanation.

Young: I think construction and landscaping are like what happened with open space. People are becoming educated; we'll see more distancing.

Swetlik suggests "community policing" — take pictures and then officials know where to go to enforce social distancing.

Weaver also not in favor of tightening restrictions.

But also concerned about construction workers who are working closely together. "There's obviously unsafe practices going on."

"The point is education," not issuing tickets, Weaver says.

In construction and commercial kitchens, social distancing isn't happening bc the jobs aren't set up for that, Weaver says.

"This is a big change in a week."

Suggests partnering with Chamber to develop new best practices for industries, then helping to educate companies/workers

Friend: Somebody mentioned community policing. That's a big red flag for me; that can lead to profiling and incidents of racism, so I'm really leery of sending out that message.

Particularly for industries in which many of the workers are brown....

That was my add-in, not Friend's

Swetlik: Obviously I don't want racial profiling, but I think it's important community members point out situations where people's lives are being put at risk.

OK so we're leaving that at: Boulder following state order and will rely on partners (Chamber, etc.) to educate industries/workers on safe social distancing

omg we're not done yet. BLRRRGGG

Taking a bit about reaffirming Boulder's sanctuary city status. Joseph asks about communication with non-U.S. citizens so they know they can safely go to hospitals.

That work is ongoing, according to Young and Brautigam

Council generally in favor of that

Weaver: Denver just did a declaration about the rise in hate crime against Asian Americans, to stand in solidarity with those residents. Maybe we should do that here.

Council interested in doing that, too, with the sanctuary city one.

Brockett introducing the idea of ciclovias: Taking a street and closing it to cars but opening it to bikes.

Might be a good idea now that car traffic is so reduced to help ppl get around town better, Brockett says.

I myself have been biking on roads I would *never* bike ordinarily. Went up/down Pearl and Arapahoe the other night. Biked up 30th the other day. It was GLORIOUS.

My sister biked on the Pearl Street Mall today. She's also been riding her fixie up all sorts of climbs, like Sunshine Canyon and Baseline and Flagstaff.

Back to ciclovias: When we did it a couple of years ago, "it was abandoned bc of all the effort it took." Lots of staff time.

That was Brautigam.

"It is more time-consuming than putting up a few barricades bc it can be dangerous if cars don't follow the rules. This is less easy than it sounds, by far" and is not a priority right now.

Also Brautigam.

Young: That project was also to "attract" ppl to an area. That's counter to what we're supposed to be doing.

Brockett: That was a one-day event, with vendors and stuff. This would be to repurpose space for pedestrians and cyclists to give them *more* space, bc it's a road, not a sidewalk or path.

But he "totally get(s)" Brautigam's point, but still would look at it "if these measures are going to stretch on for months."

Other cities are doing it, he says.

Weaver: Those cities probably don't have our path network or bike lanes.

Everyone on council is sounding distinctly beleaguered at this point.

Weaver: "I think there would be a whole sense of loss if we took it away" after this is over.

That was ciclovia related, btw.

Friend brings up the idea of getting rid of "beg buttons" — that is, having to push a button to get a ped symbol at a crosswalk.

It would be safer if it could be automatic, she and Joseph say.

Would take considerable staff time, Brautigam says. We'd have to go to every signal and change them.

Apparently interim director Bill Cowern says it's not feasible or recommended (per a few council members)

Brockett: Is it possible to pick 5-10 of the busiest intersections and do it there?

Yates: Those buttons work perfectly fine if you use your elbow, or a glove. Maybe instead of reprogramming lights, we make up some signs for the busiest crosswalks.

Young: There's just not enough traffic to warrant this right now.

OMG WE STILL MIGHT DO MORE BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.

My Mac is making a really bad noise.

We're doing Transportation Advisory Board. Let me find my notes again...

Nagle nominated Brian Dolan, who ran for council in November

He and Lauren Lambert said they had watched TAB meetings online and .... there are no video of TAB meetings

Perhaps they were confused and meant that they listened to meetings, but they explicitly said they WATCHED meetings.

Yates nominated Lambert, who does community affairs for Google.

Young nominated David Martus

There are two TAB seats, btw

Marcus suggested a head tax in his interview

Friend nominated Brent Halsey

He served on the pedestrian advisory board or committee or whatever that is to help inform that plan

He suggested higher parking fees

in his interview

Wallach nominated Robert Hutchinson, from Rocky Mountain Institute

Joseph nominates Stephen Haydel, who also suggested a head tax and/or parking fee. He wanted to make transit free.

I'm gonna restate something I said during the interviews, before they vote:

If anyone who ran for council last time gets a seat on any board, they will not deserve it. With the possible exception of Susan Peterson, who literally told council to pick the other applicant for EAB

They were NOT impressive compared to other candidates

Council voting on 5-yr term first

What I *actually* said after the interviews is that if anyone who ran for council gets a spot on any board, it was absolutely partisan. Bc they were not impressive.

OK, back to the business at hand.

5-yr term between Hutchinson and Lambert

Lambert gets it

She was good enough during interviews, but she still said she watched videos of TAB meetings when that's physically impossible

council now voting for the 2-yr term
Hutchinson gets it

The 10 remaining boards will be handled another time.

Hey, we're done! I'm going to eat some dinner, take a shower and then come back for my Wednesday morning recap.

It will actually be Wednesday morning by then.

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you :)