Good evening, everyone. Tonight, welcome to tonight's Tuesday, April 22nd study session. First on tonight's study session is the update on Temporary Moratorium Ordinance 25-05. And it is brought to us by Community Development Director, Dr. Ferguson. So I will turn it over to you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor. If it wasn't turned on, it'll take a minute. Go ahead and start talking. Okay. Well, thank you. I will talk loudly. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Does the City Council... Are we on here? Okay. Okay, we're good. Great. Our policy question tonight... is does the City Council support the Planning Commission's recommended plan of action for how to address the temporary moratorium uses? Okay, so City Council approved a temporary moratorium on February 25th of 2025, which suspended the acceptance and approval of land use applications and business licenses for eight different uses. Those uses are body art services, car washes, junkyards, pawn shops, payday loan services, vehicle services major, vehicle services minor, and vape shops. The moratorium was put in place to allow time for the Planning Commission and staff to work through our Unified Land Development Code process and to study these uses and their potential fit within our community. The Planning Commission completed its study, and I'm here tonight to discuss Planning Commission's process, analysis, and recommendations. The Planning Commission discussed the uses at three study sessions, one of which was an open-door study session, which included discussion and feedback from public. The Planning Commission considered these uses in relation to their alignment with the Comprehensive Plan's vision for the commercial area, and also to three tenets of the Comprehensive Master Plan, which are, number one, land use, growth, and management. That's the land use mix that we want to live and do business in, the physical look. of our commercial area in terms of site design and high quality architecture, walkability and pedestrian connectivity and function that we need for both daytime and nighttime business activity. Number two is development, or economic development. This is retail sales that's tax generating, job generation, restaurants, overall business diversity, And then third is public health, welfare, and safety, which we considered potential negative impact of these uses, and also the ability to mitigate any negative impacts with any extra standards or regulations. We did also do additional research. We reached out to our surrounding communities to ask them about their experience with these uses in economic development, and also their experience with these uses with regard to public health, welfare, and safety in terms of crime and service calls. So planning commission and staff then distilled and analyzed all this information to determine a recommended plan of action for each of these uses. which I'll review with you now. And I will ask for your support, Bonnie. Next slide. Okay, so for each of these uses, I will provide a summary of the analysis that speaks to the tenets of land use and growth management, economic development, public health, welfare, and safety. Okay, for our first use, Body Arts Services, The recommendation is to allow this use with an extra layer of standards and regulation to limit the use. Our rationale is this. And as I read this rationale, the first will, again, address land use, the second, economic development, the third, public health, welfare, and safety. And this will be the theme throughout. So body arts services is a common business in surrounding communities. It would add to the business variety of the city. It does offer jobs, daytime and nighttime business activity, but little retail sales tax. Crime analysis data does not show heightened crime rates or service calls. Again, our recommendation is to allow this use with an extra layer of standards and regulations to limit the use. Madam Mayor, do I have a council support for this recommendation? So can you, I think we might need a little bit more clarity. So this was the recommendation that planning is giving us. Correct. Okay. Planning commissions. Okay. And so then you're wanting to go through each one of these and give us the recommendation in the background. And then do we have buy-in from us? Yes, what you're asking. Yes. Okay. So council before. We say yay or nay. Do you have questions on the first one for the body? And you've never done this process this way. Is there a reason you're doing it this way? You're literally checking them off one by one instead of asking at the very end, do you have some sort of recommendation? First of all, we can't take action in the study session. But second of all, you've never asked each one, check them off. And you've never split the baby up in eight different ways before. Why are you doing that? So, I mean, there are eight different uses, and you may agree with the recommendation for one use but not another. We've never done it that way. Okay. All right. I guess we can. Usually you give us a heads up that you're going to do that. It was very shocking for you to go, Madam Mayor. Sorry. Am I the only one? Okay. Certainly got my attention. Yeah, it did me too. It got my attention. So extra standards? Yes. You're going to have one standard for building A and a building B. That doesn't quite sound it. So it would be a building standard for body ARP services, something to control and limit its use. The feedback that we got about body ARP services was that You know, we didn't want a lot of them. We wanted them a certain distance away from schools, from residential. So those are the types of standards above and beyond what a normal standard would be for any like a permitted use. That's what we need. Okay. Hello. Hello. Excellent. Thank you so much. I didn't want to speak out of turn. I couldn't see if you could see my hands. For each of these, I do want to say that it's a little difficult to not have the rationale provided in writing or the limitations provided in writing. So I really need to have that caveat. And then. Additionally, which I think will apply to this one and the others as well, I'm wondering whether or not we should reach out to our community in some fashion because some of these uses may be supported by our community in ways that we don't know right now. For example, we may have thought lots of people wanted a skate park and now we don't. We might think that lots of people want a vape shop or a tattoo place, and maybe they don't. So keeping the standard of our residential community might be a factor for them. So that would be the comment I have for those three things for all of them. Thank you. So I will add that we did have an open-door study session on these uses. There were approximately 18 people in attendance. We did have members of the resident community. We also had property managers attend, as well as developers of residential and some commercial on the east side. So we did, again, we sent out an email blast. you know, put the information up on our website. We did do some reach out, and many of the, and again, we don't have the specific standards yet. You know, those will have to be worked out at a later time, a little bit more research, but we generally know what feedback we got regarding the uses. Go ahead, Jeff. Did we, but we don't know what that was. Like, do we know how many of the group, I mean, what a property manager thinks of a tattoo parlor in Castle Pines means nothing to me if they live in Westminster. Sort of like if the manager lives in Littleton, what does he know about the kids in Castle Pines and what their parents want? So that's kind of where I'd be looking when we come to a vote on this to have that data. So again, we... They attended the meeting. We didn't hear much comment or feedback either way. The comments that we did hear a lot from were residents and, again, what they perceived the impacts to be and would like to be mitigated. And there was really no hard, we don't want this – well, I should say, for this body of art services, there was no hard – opposition to it. It's just they wanted it mitigated. They wanted it done right. Thank you. I'll be looking for that more data. Thank you. Two questions. So I apologize. Let me split them up. First of all, this is for the west side of the highway only. Is that right? That is correct. So we're talking about this very small business area and possibly having a tattoo parlor in it or a pawn shop in it. Yes. Or a baby loan in it. Correct. And actually, let me clarify. So these uses still may go on the east side? I don't know. My question was, we are only talking about the west side right now. Correct. Correct, well, yes and no. No, no. Well, because, so we will, we are creating, at the same time, we are creating use-specific standards. So if we're going to, so yes, it's twofold. We're looking at, do we want these uses on the west side? And if we want these uses, what standards do we want applied to them? And then if we're applying standards to those uses on this side, those standards are going to be applied to the uses on the east side. But the east side is a whole different question. when that comes up in the future, correct? With regard to... Well, let me just... But the bottom line is, we're talking about putting this kind of stuff over here on the west side. Yes. Okay, I can tell you right now, I don't want body art services, I don't want pawn shops, I don't want vending loan services, I don't want vape shops, and I don't want junkyards. I can tell you that right now, none of that stuff should be in this area on the west. the west side like it just seems just does not seem to fit with what we're trying to accomplish in our community um we could talk about the car washes and vehicle service uses major minor but that's my personal opinion i guess my question would be i think i may go back to councilmember mobi's point is allow with extra standard regulations so what what are they Yes, those have not been ironed out yet, but we know they're going to be related to site design or to distance requirements or location, like not on a corner lot. So there's lots of different standards that we are looking at in order to accomplish and mitigate the perceived impacts. Okay, so I don't think I'm prepared to say to give it a nod yes or no with the extra standards and regulations TBD. So if we said yes to one of these or no to one of these, are we going to see it again then with further descriptions and information? Yes. Okay. And just to give us a nod on, you know, because it's going to take a lot of work going forward. Gotcha. Okay. We want to know are you comfortable with doing the next step work? Or not. Or is this not the direction you want to go? Because we knew we didn't want to unbuy or we don't want you to go through the work of creating a stamp. Yes. Gotcha. Okay. I'm on the same page. Sorry, I'm going to drop this. So over the past decade, how many applications for any of those eight networks? So one for fake shops. Yeah. You sort of remember that. We're fighting an issue that could be just a shadow box. And we're trying to be proactive because we don't know what will happen in the future. I agree with that. And then I also don't understand, like I said on my first comment, is that the way of a set of rules here that don't apply to our friends across the street? So any use-specific standards would apply to our friends across the street. It's whether the use would be allowed here or not. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Chris. Getting into this conversation has been really difficult, just as I would have liked to kind of set this table a little bit better from the start. Very difficult to understand what the expectation was and where we're going with this, whether we're going to see it again, whatever. Very confusing to figure out what you wanted, what you needed. Pardon me? And I do have questions for the attorney because this looks fraught to me. It looks like a problem. And I'm going to agree with Ron and also Chris here and Jeff too, asking us to make a determination without seeing what the extra layers are. It would be like saying we want rules for driving but not knowing what those rules are or any kinds of rules as a governing body without knowing what policies we may be putting into action. I think we've given staff direction on these eight that we wanted some sort of restriction or none of them at all. So if you came back with some sort of restrictions that were somehow palatable to us, maybe, but I'm with Jeff. I don't want a junkyard next to my house or next to Elk Ridge Park. I mean, those are pretty easy to understand. We don't want those. on either side of the freeway. We don't want them in our city. So I don't know what kind of layer there would be that would be acceptable for that. And I don't know what kind of layer you would put into, I hear what you're saying about some sort of architectural something for tattoo parlors, but we don't really have the ability to do that here. I also don't like the idea that we would somehow turn this side of the freeway into bait shops, junkyards, tattoo parlors, and not the other side. That's so counter to everything we've talked about, about unifying our city. So even the proposal bothers me. Does any of that make any sense? Yes, I understand. And I apologize for the abrupt opening. That was not my intention. Correct, right. So city council, task planning commission, and staff to look at these moratorium uses and see if they will fit into our community based on their alignment with our comp plan, which the comp plan has references to like land use, economic development, and public health and safety. So we really looked at it objectively from that stance. So I want to just kind of give you an idea. So when we were considering a body art services, when you think of that use from a land use perspective, it is much like a place where you get your hair done. You drive up You park in a parking space. You go into the business, you get your service, and you come out. Are you trying to convince us? No, no, not at all. I'm just giving you an idea of how we were looking at it from a land use perspective. We also looked at the economic development perspective. Is there any, you know, we know that what's important to us from the comp plan is sales tax generating revenue. We want a walkable community. We want jobs. So then we look at it like, well, it provides a couple jobs, not a lot of retail. And it can be made walkable, right? It's not like a... It's just a purely automotive business. So these are kind of the things that we were going through. And then we looked at the crime data. And there was really nothing in the crime data to indicate that this would be a public health welfare and safety issue. So we took those things, that analysis, and this is how we came up with the recommendation. I'm sorry, Donna, to clarify, when you say you, you mean the Planning Commission? The Planning Commission and staff, right, because we work together. I'm just curious kind of what the conversation's been going and even back to when I interviewed for the position, the whole, my whole focus was wanting to help establish more business in place and what we want that place to look like. And I don't feel that we want that place to look like bodyguard services, junkyards, pawn shops, payday loans, that looks like where you used to live, right, in Sheridan, right? Like, that's all you saw, and that's why I left that area. So I think we want, like, a higher caliber, we want to attract higher caliber businesses. I don't know if this is, you know, prohibiting these is the right direction or not, but I think that's what we need to, I want to keep in mind when we're evaluating this. Okay. Yes. Thank you, Mel. So, so I understand. So, these, would ultimately become an approved use? They would be a permitted use. Permitted use. Correct. With extra standards. We don't know. So would that be a special use? It would be a limited use. I have to be honest. I feel like I'm, there's like a preamble that's missing that I'm just not getting. Michael. Thank you, Mayor. So I think this is pretty standard, actually, to how maybe it didn't come out of the gate that way on how we work on things. Because the question right now, and I think it goes to Council Member Blue's comment, was fairly, if I may, fairly visceral around I don't want to see X, Y, and Z. That is the direction that we're looking for tonight. If the council is interested in... hey, I might be interested in body art services, but it does depend upon what the additional criteria are. Then we would go work on that with the Planning Commission and then respond back, just like we would develop an ordinance. If you wanted to see X, Y, and Z, we don't spend that time until we have the direction. And I think we've heard a couple of comments. I don't want to really read into Council Member Salazar's, whether that would be an opposition, but if the majority of council says no to body art, no to junkyards, no to pawn shops, no to payday loan services, no to major vehicle services and no to vape shops, we can cross those off the list and we'll go work on the other ones. And that's really all the level we're looking for tonight. And then council member Eubanks, like anything, I'm not sure, maybe you're getting wrapped around the axle on what the terminology for the next layer is, but the next level of use would be if council said, we want to allow the car washes with those extra standards, then those standards get written into the code, and when a car wash applies, they say, hey, we have to do this, but there's extra architectural requirements, there's higher landscape requirements, greater setbacks, whatever that is, and then it runs through that process, just like any other process. Most of these are, well, not most of them, two or three of them are, four of them are internal uses, right? They're probably not gonna go build a building for a new babe shop, it's gonna be a tenant finish type of situation. So just in conclusion, what we're looking for tonight is that thumbs up or thumbs down on body art. And if it's a question of, well, it matters on the criteria, then give us a thumbs up on that and you can make that determination later. Does that help? So if I may simplify it even further, you're looking for kind of a head nod to say, these are the ones we're asking you to pursue? Absolutely. Can I ask a legal question? May I be heard, please? Yeah, I'm going to ask a legal question first, and then you can jump in. Thank you. Sure. So can we pick and choose on just we don't like? I mean, that seems like the basis for a lawsuit to me. It's like somebody just says, like a pay loan business says, a corporate pay loan, I want to be in Castle Pines just because. And we just say, we don't like that. We don't want it. Is that enough for us to make a determination that we just don't want those businesses? We want to tie it to something, to concepts and policies in your comprehensive plan. There would have to be some sort of public policy related to that. I will say that. I will see that in that list. Yeah. That's why I didn't like we were doing it one at a time like that. Because it, again, separates things out. In, for example, body part services, tattoo parlors. In some federal courts, that has been determined to be a First Amendment exercise, and we can't ban them completely. That's a 10th survey. They're not 10th survey. Excuse me, I think they're a 9th survey decision. So there's some of those things we have to look at. But also, I know we're turned because of safety issues, too, especially during... HIV, hepatitis, outbreaks. So you could limit your health codes. And Douglas County does regulate. Douglas County does regulate. So I'm OK with you didn't mention that. But I'm OK with that. But something like a payday loan that's corporate, a business, that I don't know what we would hang our hat on with something like that, other than we just don't like it. You know what I mean? You couldn't just blanketly say all pawn shops are going to crunch. I don't think you can do that without being sued. Do you see it differently? I guess I don't know that yet. Neither do I. That's why I have trouble with the extra layer, and that's why this has been brought to us this way. Yeah, payday loans, I mean, that's regulated. Pawn shops can be regulated locally and at the county level. Because there have been incidents of pride going to pawn shops in particular. So there's reporting requirements, and that's already in place. So we'd have to decide what, in addition to that, do we think we need to regulate here in the city? And maybe it's, we don't want to exclude them, but we want to create something different in this business district. And I think that's what we need to focus on. We're being asked to decide if that's what we want to do or not. So back to my original question. Can we say no? And do we have something to hang our hat on if we do say no? Maybe, because the canyons is a different animal, because it's under a planned development. And those uses... uses here don't control them canyons pd so i think if we said no to pawn shops here in the business district they may still be allowed in the canyons and so therefore court would say we're not outright banning them we're limiting them to geographic areas in the zone of districts I am ready to weigh in if I may. Yeah, go ahead. Thank you. I have read the comprehensive plan quite a few times, and I believe there were criteria in residential land use housing and not necessarily transportation, though, but in those other four areas where there are points in the plan. that would militate against allowing these uses. The only one that I can struggle with finding something in a comp plan that would prohibit it, it would be the payday loan services. I'm happy to point to those and submit them separately. I'm sure you don't want me to read them off, nor does anybody else that's on the road with me right now. Thanks. Yeah, and let me too clarify. I do want to clarify one thing that pawn shops, Payday loan services, those are just businesses, right? You don't have a first, you don't have a constitutional right to operate a specific business. You might have a constitutional right to a sexual oriented business, right? Because that's protected under the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, freedom of expression. So too with tattoo services, but that's not true of all of these uses. Car washes don't have a constitutional right. Thank you, yes. I appreciate that. I've considered this also in the context of the Supreme Court decisions related to Masterpiece Cake Shop and the rest because I've talked to them as well in terms of what is needed. So I'm more than happy to provide my rationale. And so the only one, again, that I would be in favor of proceeding with is the payday check loan one. Thank you. Just for clarification, so is it because they're already not allowed in Douglas County that sexually oriented businesses and marijuana shops are not on this list? So we have an ordinance that prohibits marijuana use in the city of Hasselbein, so we've already went through that. Okay. And then your sexual oriented businesses, those are permitted in the business district. OK. It's not giving many interviews. The market is just not, it's kept them out. Let's do a tattoo program. That'll change that. So again, this is all of these things, if we allow, if we were to allow all of them, it's again, the market's going to demand what's going to go there as well, beyond just what we are allowing or not allowing. Correct. So there's market forces that are also in play. There's a consideration of private property rights. The Planning Commission and staff did not take this job lightly. We did approach it in a very objective manner. As Councilmember Hudson was saying, do we have something to hang our hats on? The research that we have done so far Not a lot of things in the comp plan to hang our hats on to say no to something like a pawn shop. But again, there's only one in Douglas County market that's likely to take care of it. There is crime related to pawn shops. It's mostly related to people pawning stolen items. It's a place where you drive up, you park, you go in, and you come out. I have another question. Isn't this also up to the property owner, right? Yes. I mean, we can't say no. It's their property, private property. And I would imagine they probably maybe wouldn't want some of these businesses in their property as well because it might damage their property value. Right. So I'm just looking for brief answers on this question, if we could. Car washes. We have two already. The idea is no more? We have three. Yes, there are three. The idea is not to prohibit them, but to put these set their layers and standards, to locate them, to control the density. Okay, so the idea is, we're asking them about that in another one. Vehicle services uses major, what is that? That's like an auto body shop, paint shop. And what's minor? That would be an oil change shop, which would get your tires changed. So basically minor is service street, and we don't have major. Correct. Okay. Well, Euro, is that major? No, she said it's like body shop. Body shop, paint shop. So like O'Reilly's, that would be a major? O'Reilly's is a part shop. Correct. Part shop. So that's not... Okay. I mean, I think my, frankly, my personal opinion is, again, I don't think, I don't see any need to allow any of those other ones again on the west side. I understand the legal risk. And if something comes up where we have to deal with it, we can always pass an emergency ordinance to allow something to come in that's currently not allowed if we find that our risk is too high. But it's always in my mind on something like the vape shops and those kinds of things and the tattoo firms. We're better off starting with a no. And then if we need to... Because something changes in the market or whatever, 15 years from now, we'll deal with it. We can address it again then. But that's my personal opinion. And policy decisions are in your wheelhouse. This is not in the Planning Commission's wheelhouse, right? So they look at it very differently. May I ask a clarifying question about that? So Planning Commission looks at it objectively. by roles and criterias, but we set policy such as strategic plan and vision and what kind of community the residents might be asking us to promote. Is that another way to say it? Correct. My decision remains the same. So do you, Donna, want to go through the, Any of the others, or counsel, do you have questions on the rest of them before we actually go one line by line? So I think we didn't, maybe I need from you guys some direction on, I'm like, I stand where Jeff is. I would be happy to just not allow any of these. And then, again, come back if we have a special situation where then we can change our policies because this works. That's exactly what we're looking for. It's that minimal direction. Okay. Well, and that's why I asked the question I did, Linda. No, that's a great question. If we could do that, will it open us up to something? And what I'm hearing is maybe. Right. And maybe scares me. Maybe scares me. Maybe sounds costly. Does it hurt us to have some standards about some businesses that we know may be problematic? I don't know that that's bad. I mean, especially businesses that are, if they're broad enough, that we know that we are concerned about, that are permanent body name companies. or the selling of baby goods or tobacco products. I think we're pretty clear about how we feel about that. Or junkyards, which are abandoned vehicles. I think having clear policy about that without being specific, that's why these extra layers are important to me, having policy about that, I think is a good thing. And if we don't have that, I think we should, without them addressing these specific hate I would be in favor of that, because I think that's necessary, and then not deal with these subtitles specifically. Can we do that? And that would help Guide Planning Commission, too. So can we do that? And what does that look like? I don't know. I'm just... I don't know. I have another question. So, yes, I would recommend that... Let's come up with a policy, a clear policy that we amend our comp plan with so that now we can speak to the comp plan with regards to the policy that we're making for the types of uses. Now, Michael. I think, again, it's an up or down. we either have criteria that allows car washes under certain circumstances where you prohibit them. And again, if council is interested in having additional car washes under certain circumstances, then give us a thumbs up on what that is. Because if you have the conditions for approval in code, as long as the applicant meets those conditions, you're going to have that particular use. And so I've heard... two to three council members who are saying not supportive of a majority of these in there. And so if that is the direction that you truly don't want to see them. And part of, I think, Council Member Hudson's question is, we have not done the analysis on each one. We would do our best to connect those dots to prohibit it in a way that minimizes the risk to the city. But as Linda said, again, we're not going down that road until we do exactly what your... direction it was on these particular uses. So I think if we could, it would help us move forward either with a no or a yes with conditions, and then we'll go work on that and we'll return with what those conditions are. As Council Member Hutt said, I may have not- If I could answer that. If I could answer that comment. It's interesting that you had mentioned car washes because we've been sued over a car wash. And so I think being specific about a policy issue, especially about a business in which we were discussing, which I think is a legitimate legal conversation to be having. I think to be clear, and clarity, again, is kind, I think in policy is a good idea. So I think you're being very dismissive by saying car washes. Again, over a car wash. So on these topics, I think we're clear, but I also think having a policy issue, I don't think it's a bad thing. I guess I'm not clear on what policy. Well, we talk tobacco. I mean, I think sales and saying we want to live it to some extent. Again, I'm asking. This is an ask question. An up and down symbol. I don't know that that is just as simple. We want a big shot. Obviously not. We voted it down. But we do have tobacco sales in the city. You know, so to say a moratorium on it, no, there's not. So we already have created a policy. So having policy positions on these things, I think is something we need to do. So that would be a yes move forward with the- I'm posing the question. Okay, so you bring up a point, Roger, about tobacco. Don, how do you define a vape shop? Exactly. Because if we're saying like, is there a certain percentage of products are sold that are vape related or if not, then King Soopers and the 7-Elevens and liquor stores shouldn't be there. So I know we're getting into the weed, but we're asking for generic answers, but I have more questions. Is there a definition of vape shop? Yes. I wasn't being sarcastic. I just didn't know. Yeah. Yes, we defined definitions for all of these moratorium uses. I'm just going to pull up that. Oh, gosh. The ordinance. Vape shop means a business whose sales of vape juice, vape-related products, or both constitute at least 25% of the business's aggregate retail sales. This use includes the sale of these cigarettes. So 27%. Okay, cheers. So what policy would you make? So I guess I'm not understanding what Roger's, like how we can do what you're talking about. And again, I'm not proposing one way or the other. I'm just saying I don't want to get sued. And so we've already made a policy is what I'm saying. So Do we make more policy? But I don't think we can just say... But we don't have a policy on vape shops except that we currently have a moratorium and it's going to go away. But we have made a policy on tobacco, right? Because we sell tobacco. So you couldn't just say, if we say we're not going to do anything with vape shops, we sell tobacco. We're selling tobacco. So we have made a policy position. We've made a policy, a decision on vape shops. We've also disallowed a vape shop already in the city. So legally, you would have some sort of grant. We have not disallowed the vape shop. We did. You put another moratorium on it. They're licensed. They're licensed. So we just ordered it with some moratorium. Whatever the action we took... it prevented them to move forward. You've got to make a policy decision. That's what we're here to say. Do you want a policy? Are temporary policy affected their business? Okay. All right. I'll go with that. May I please make a suggestion? Clearly, we all want a policy, right? And clearly we all have to look at the comp plan to see if it needs an amendment to reflect the policy that we're struggling with articulating. Can we have some time to think about it and for each of us to actually look at the comp plan and consider what kind of policy we want to have so that it can be articulated in a resolution or something firm that is legally cognizable and legally upholdable, sustainable? because I think we're struggling for a reason and perhaps some reflections in order. I disagree. I don't need a policy. I don't need to look at the comp plan. I know what I want to do here. My answer is no on all of them. And I can make that decision tonight. feedback earlier, would you say no to these two? I would say maybe, because I feel like I don't, as a private business owner, it should be made their decision. We should provide guidance, but if we speak to private business owners, not the governor of the city. I didn't give you any answer. What about you, Ron? I'm going to go with all of them, as long as we don't First of all, I'm being sued every other week. Somebody dropped me off down at 45's and sued me. Now you're getting it from the terminal. But right now, what I would say on the suing issue is what I said before. The chance of us getting sued is slim. If it happens, we can always come back and do an emergency thing to allow a tattoo parlor because we got sued. And then the lawsuit goes away. So, So yes, there's a fear of getting sued, but you can always fix it on the back end in these situations. Where are you currently? I'm currently, I still think we're missing some information, but I still think we're missing some information, but at a high level, I would say I'll be for disallowing all of them. So I would agree that I would be okay with disallowing all of these, but I also respect what you're talking about, Corey, with the landowner's rights, but I also recognize that it's not necessarily in the vision of the community, but I also don't believe that these uses generally are going to be a desire of the landowner either. And there always is recourse where they could come back and ask for an exception if there's just some crazy reason why this amazing tattoo parlor needs to come to housing finds and they want a space. Being a tattoo parlor in a barn. Right. So it's not precluding them from being able to do that. The council answer could simply be no. It would be a reason. But there is a process in which an individual could go through to still possibly have one of these things left in the property. You can make them conditional uses too. So what would that mean? Could I ask one more question? Let me get my question answered about the conditional uses piece. Sure. Sorry, I didn't hear. So the conditional uses would give them an extra layer of approval by the city, whether you determine that to be the planning commission or the city council, and it would be when they meet certain additional standards. They create no adverse impacts, and they meet setback requirements. So that's your layer. That would be a conditional use. John, if you want to add to that. Sure. So this is designed to be a limited use that would be reviewed and decided upon by planning commission. So it's not administrative at all. It's just saying, you want to bring this business to the city, you have these additional layers, We're going to review them and decide upon them. Go ahead, Debbie. Yeah. So when folks said they were for property rights about the McDonald's and they didn't see things in the comp plan that would be a policy against the McDonald's, the discussion and the result was different. But the people's position that we're hearing today, is kind of not consistent with that. And I think that those who are hard knows on a policy basis. Everyone's individual opinions and positions on this. I'd really like to finish, please. I really appreciate the opportunity to finish. I'd really appreciate the opportunity to finish. I'm not saying that we're not having this type of discussion as part of our protocols and policies for council. I think it might be misunderstanding and perhaps I'm not being super clear. What I said is a reflection of what I'm hearing and perhaps I'm right or wrong. But the issue that I'm presenting is that there seems to be, to me, that a little bit of inconsistency and we need to reflect on whether or not what we're doing here today is consistent with other positions we've taken either individually or as a body. The basis for our votes really matters. And we have this other issue as sort of a prior experience, if you will. And so thank you for finally letting me say that. Sorry if I'm not as articulate as you wish me to be. I'm going to agree with Corey that I think property rights are really important and that allowing a property owner to make those decisions I do believe that we have responsibility to zone our city as well. I think it's a partnership. I like the idea of having remedies to move forward. As long as those are in place and we're open to make accommodations, if we are going to be challenged to a lawsuit, I am okay with disallow. So I think you've got a great family that you've got, Jordan. I just thought one last thing to say that The Planning Commission recommended three prohibits, and we're going against what the Planning Commission recommended and saying we won't prohibit E. But we're looking at it from a perspective of policy, and they're looking at it from the perspective of the planning board and their responsibility. So we're looking at it from different perspectives. So it's okay if we're not exactly in alignment. Okay, so we're looking at it for different reasons. Why are we looking at what the Planning Commission recommended if we're disregarding what they say and we're looking at it from a different way? Because they're still making a recommendation off of what they're – responsibilities are as the planning board. I think that we have the number of supports to move forward with this to prohibit all options that are on this plan of action group. Thank you very much. We will move forward with prohibiting these uses. Mayor, given the time, we'll reschedule the micro-trenching presentation because you do have, we've got the sheriff coming in at 6.30. They're probably out there, so just be respectful of that. Yeah, I told you to mark her out. No, I'm sorry. It's actually white. Ron has one more question. We just said we're going to build a service station right across Australia over there. Odds are he's going to want a car worth. He's not. Okay. We're setting ourselves up. We're setting a rule over here that says no, car worth would have been over there. Yeah, because that's a plan into development over there. And so it's got listed uses allowed as customized as part of the annexation agreement that you cannot prohibit those uses in the PD. So that's why the... I think it was Councilmember Liu or maybe Hudson was clarifying it's only for this zoning area that we're in right now. And it's also what allows you to prohibit them here and most likely not have a legal opening because we'd have to confirm that those uses are probably allowed on the other side and so you're not precluding them, as the city attorney stated, on a citywide basis, just in this geographic area. If that helps. It doesn't make sense when I agree with you, but... I hear what you're saying, but it seems to me we're running down a road to have City A and City B, which is, you know how I feel about that. But it is, that's how it was decided back in 2009 or 10 when that annexation happened. I just want to clarify. So this involves two pieces. Number one, deciding do we want these uses on this side? The other piece is if they are allowed somewhere, like the east side, do we want them to look a certain way? Do we? Disallow them all. Doesn't it negate the second? Nope, nope. We're not disallowing people. No, it's not. It's not. Okay. Sorry, there's captions. Okay. Thank you, everybody, for your attention on this one. And thank you, Jay and Dole, for being here. And I'm sorry that we have to postpone the conversation. We were very excited to hear about it. Microtrenching. I am real. I actually am. It'll be back on the agenda. We will come back for our regular general business meeting at 630. Good evening, council, citizens, and staff. I call the April 22nd, 2025 city council meeting to be formed at 6.30 p.m. For W, please call the roll. Mayor Ingram. Here. Mayor Franson-Eubanks. Here. Councilmember Wally. Here. Councilmember Cole. Here. Councilmember Salazar. Here. Councilmember Bloom. Present. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. We'll move on to the approval of the agenda. If there's no objections, the agenda will be approved. Hearing none, the agenda is approved as presented. Next, we have our public comment, which is designed for you to share your thoughts and concerns with city council, but it's not an interactive discussion. If you would like to give public comment regarding any of the public hearings, we don't have any public hearings this evening. If you're attending tonight's meeting virtually and would like to give general public comment, please sign up by typing your name and address into the chat feature. If you're attending in person, please sign up on the clipboard in the back of the room. If you've called in to tonight's meeting, the clerk will recognize you with the last word and adjust on your phone. Dr. Duffy, do we have anyone signed up this evening? We do not have anyone signed up in person or online, and we have no one that has called in. We'll move on to the presentation of our minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes from the April 8th, 2025 City Council meeting? Hearing none, the minutes are approved as presented. Next is our consent agenda. Tonight we have Ordinance 25-07, which repeals and reenacts Article 2 of Chapter 6 of the Castle Pines Municipal Code to update the City Liquor Code on first reading. We have a motion for the items on consent, please. So move. Second. I have a motion and a second for WU. Please hold up. Council Member Toll. Yeah. Council Member Mulvey. Yes. Council Member Hudson. Yes. Mayor Pritchett-Eubanks. Aye. Council Member Salazar. Yes. Council Member Bloom. Aye. Mayor Ingram. Aye. The motion passes. Thank you. All right. We're moving on to our general business tonight on... Our only item for general business is the Douglas County Sheriff's Office update, and we are joined by Chief White and Captain Stanton, and we also have our traffic, but now I forgot your name. That's right. It's Deputy Dugan. Deputy Duke. Thank you. So go ahead and proceed up to the podium, and I'll hand it over to you. Well, thank you for having us. Again, you have an entourage today, so I hope you don't mind. So we're going to break this up. We have a quick presentation. We have the mayor and the council, so thank you for having us. We kind of changed how we did the format, and it sounds like you're okay with that. That fits just a little better. We were looking at ways that we could kind of show the stats in a palatable way that you could kind of see month-by-month changes that were either positive or to the other degree, and maybe... crime increases, so we think that's a little bit better for the council to kind of look at that and say, okay, that makes more sense. Then our thought process, we want to do that on a quarterly basis for you, so that way we can digest that and pick specific areas that maybe we can talk about or areas you may have concerns. And so if Aubrey White's going to present a quick PowerPoint, that's okay. And then Chief White's going to get up and talk about the incident that happened at the Kine Bar and Grill, so we can give you some update on that. Okay? Okay. So I guess it's not retinal scan, we joked. Next slide, please. So next one, just a copy of the county. And Castle Pines is District 5, Sector 2, so 52 on that map. Next slide. So again, a change in how we do stats here for Castle Pines to make it a better function. We broke that down into quarters. So this is gonna be the first quarter of 2025. That's January, February, and March through the 31st. And again, the way that shows is the, you know, January, if you use the first one where it says a large thing, which is basically theft, it shows that January was seven incidents that occurred. You show in February there were four, and in March there were two. So it shows in March there was a decrease. But because of certain offenses that we're seeing rise in the county as a whole, and Castle Pines is part of that, Theft and frauds are kind of a big deal right now. We're seeing a lot of that. So there's increases. Now in Castle Pines, your numbers are clearly lower. So when I say that there's increases, you could have an increase in one to two or changes in that matter, which is good. But I think that's a positive thing to point out, that when we look at crime in general in Colorado, look at crime in Douglas County, Castle Pines is extremely low when it comes to criminal activity. That's a good thing for us. The Sheriff's Office's ultimate goal would be no crime in Castle Pines. That is always our goal, but there's always going to be some crime. And so we try to mitigate that and do the best we can to find ways to combat crime or things that happen in the community. And so I think meetings like this help. So when citizens say, hey, what are the kind of things we can do that can help the sheriff's office or things that we're seeing not to get involved in with frauds and thefts? Again, it's a lot lately. Again, I think the biggest one, everybody's probably got a text on their phone that said, hey, you didn't pay your tolls. Please click on this and you need to take care of that. That is fraud. And that's just one of many. And so we always want to point that out to make sure that that helps. So we can go to the next slide, please. And I'll leave this real quick. So to show real quick, there were 84 incidents or calls for service that happened within that three-month timeframe for Castle Pines. All right, so the very next one is a map that shows the thefts and frauds. And again, these are ones that we're trying to point out because countywide, statewide, these are increasing as a state. And so... One thing I want to point out, these are heat maps. So when people see the big blobs, they're concerned, like, oh, that must mean there's a lot of crime there. No. It just shows the concentration. So if I only have 10 items, those 10 items may look like 500, but it really is only 10 items. So I want to make sure we're clear on that. So on this specific one, for all thefts and frauds, during that three-month time frame, there were 31 total incidents. The areas that are darker in color, those are the ones where you have the higher... density of those crimes occurring. And that makes sense because that's where we're going to be in kind of your business center category. That info, either colors, the yellow, that's less, green's the next version. So I kind of give you that idea. So we go to the next one. So DUIs, this is another one that kind of hit the heat map. Again, we're always looking to make sure that we don't have individuals that are on the road. Danger to your citizens and to our community. Again, Those are the areas that those concentrations of the DUIs are occurring. We, as Douglas County Sheriff's Office, are always concerned when people get behind the wheel, whether it's alcohol, drugs, or both. Those are concerns. We want to make sure the citizens are safe from those individuals. There are only 10 calls for 10 DUIs. So again, that looks like a lot from EMAP, but it's only 10. Again, 10 too many, so I don't want to minimize that, but it is 10. Next slide, please. So the next one is kind of an important thing that we look at as crashes or accidents. Now, the way the study we have for you guys, we hope you like it, it shows the areas that were the concerns that caused those traffic accidents. So you can see in that three-month period, there were 13 total accidents that happened at Castle Pines. If there were serious injuries, SPI, we call that serious bodily injury or death, those categories were populated. Because they're not there, that means that that did not occur. Of these accidents, the majority were non-injuries. 11 of those. One was suspected minor injury and one were possible injuries. So that tells us most of the damage. The level one here, sorry, I'm not giving a little bit of feedback here, so I apologize. The next section we have here is basically citations or traffic citations. In Castle Pines, in that three-month period, you had a total of 699 citations that were written. It shows you the highlight of the offense, or the main offense, or the traffic offense that was written under those citations. And to put it in perspective, because it is important to kind of show you the difference of the state violation versus county versus Castle Pines, of the 699, 450, or sorry, 507 of those were Castle Pines-specific citations. So those were written under Castle Pines traffic ordinance. there were 699 total. And of those for Castle Pines, 456, the main violation was speeding. So it's kind of good to let you know that because you actually have your assigned traffic deputy that's here, which is Deputy Cordell Dugan. He takes traffic as a passion. I happen to supervise, I'm the commander of traffic. There are sergeants, but he takes traffic very serious. And I know as citizens of Castle Pines, traffic is a big issue here. And we want to make sure that people driving a roadway, whether you live here or you don't, that you're making sure the roadways are safe. So Deputy Duke is your official traffic officer. She can't say a lot. Next, please. And we get the next slide. Now this one has a video, so we'll see if it works. We can thank Chief Joel White for this one. So the county is always looking for ways with technology to be able to find ways to apprehend the suspects. In this case, it could be a motor vehicle theft. It could be, you name it, somebody who's committed a serious felony and need to apprehend that person because there is safety danger to the community. This item is called the grappler. And what it does, it actually, I guess you'd say it nets the vehicle and actually helps us to stop the vehicle in a safe manner. We have other means to do that, but they're a little more invasive, the TBI, where we actually get behind the vehicle and methodically spin the vehicle and then pin that vehicle. Hip and Hooper. Yeah, that's the old term now, TBI, Tactical Vehicle Intervention. But the same thing. And so this is another tool we have on stop sticks, but this is the grappler. We will have, and I want to quote our own chief, five units, four units, five units total, that will actually be set into the fleet that will have this. And so that will be another avenue that Castle Pines will have that. If there's something that will be available, then we would use that at Castle Pines. Okay. Next slide, please. Here's the cool thing we want to give for you guys tonight. If I can get the next slide. So our intent was to bring this here for show and tell for you tonight. It was close. This is actually Debbie Dugan's assigned vehicle. It's a 2025, this is Castle Pines vehicle, 2025 Ford Explorer Ghost Graphics. There's a reason for that. And so traffic, we have the ones that have the billboards with all the nice shiny stuff on it. Sometimes we want to be covert. We want people to not see us and change behavior just because they see us. There's a time and place for everything. And this vehicle specifically was built for Castle Pines to deal with more of a covert type traffic circumstance or areas that could need that. You can see the graphics there. Again, I apologize on the pictures because we thought we were getting the car to get you better pictures. They're still getting that ready for service. So we think maybe in the next week or so, we have a nice Castle Pines along the fender well. we have the Castle Pines graphics along the back with the flag. We also have Castle Pines in the windows, nice ghost graphics. So when lights hit those, it reflects back. And so once we get that vehicle in service, we'll get that down here so you can see that. And I think that is the end of my presentation, which it is. So any questions from the presentation? Go ahead, Blue, and then Grace. Yeah. I want to go back to the crime statistics that you had. And I'm concerned for the first time I see a rape in there. The first time I've seen that, it looks like it was a forcible rape plus a statutory. So I assume this is a rape of a minor. Am I right? And what can you tell me about it? Because I know you can't tell us everything. But if you know something. Let's see if we're live. Now we're live. So I will actually have to look at that. I actually did not see that. I will see, again, I'd have to look at the circumstances, but I'd get back to the board on that. The titles sometimes look atrocious, but that's sometimes the initial offense, and it could be anything from a familiar type thing, from a family, it could be a lot of things. And so we'll have to look at that, but I'll get back to the board. Thank you. Any other questions on the stats? I apologize, I didn't see that. Yes, maybe actually a question for Debbie Dugan. So thank you for all the speeding violations you have. Would you say that they are more on Monarch or Castle Pines Parkway or elsewhere? I mean, I'd say it's probably a good 50-50. I think a lot of my citations are coming from school zones, which we have the two on Castle Pines Parkway and we have the one on Monarch. Typically, Castle Pines Parkway and Max Drive for Montessori, that's where most of my school loan violations occur. Outside of River Trail and outside of Buffalo Ridge Elementary, I think the parents there know that I'm there. So everything's been slow, I would say, in the grand scheme of things. And so they've been doing speed limits to the schools in those areas. That's perfect. Thank you, sir. Absolutely. Councilman Cole, I have a question over your new vehicle. Sure. Communication suite, does that allow you to communicate with other law enforcement agencies in the area? I know one time, Company A had a radio, Company B had a different radio, and they couldn't talk. Has that been remedied, if you're possible? Can you talk to people outside of Sheriff's Office? Yeah. So we, on our radio systems, we have different channels that we can switch to to talk to Castle Rock or PPD Dispatch, which has part of the Ripple Treaty. We can talk to Denver. They have their own channels. They've got like 50 channels that we can all go to if needed. So we're not just limited to Douglas County for the gas supplies. Glad to hear that. Got to lose the chief. Yeah, Alan just went to look up that crime. Oh, good, because I had one too, so it's too bad I missed it before. That's okay. I may or may not be able to answer it. Because I also saw something disturbing. It was a new high number. Don't go too far. I saw some prostitution numbers that kind of surprised me. I think I saw 17 at least alerts for prostitution. Either they were calls out or arrests. That seems unusual for... Us. I've got to look at it. Do you have it up there? It's in the second column. There's prostitution. There's one. 1917. Even one is bad. The home scene is for all offenses except traffic. But it was the side number. Oh, you went left. You've got to go right. Okay, good job. It's still the one. That seems... I don't ever remember seeing any prostitution in Cassidy. There's one prostitution in Cassidy. Some of that may be... I can easily get back to you on this. Sure. He had an incident in Douglas County, I'm just not sure, where a gentleman hired him to come over to his house, and there was a disturbance caused by that with his wife. That would have been my guess. That was not expected. I can tell stories. Wow. I'm not sure if that happened in Castle Pines. We'll definitely get back to you on that. That sounds like a cautionary tale. It's usually very explainable. Yeah. That would do it. Now I'm just curious. So, Deputy, last time you were... Thank you, by the way. So, Debbie, last time you were here, you gave us a lot of information about the school zones and about things that the city could do to improve our safety around the schools. And I think we proactively did a lot of them. And I really appreciated all the insights because you've got boots on a ramp right there. Have you seen somebody who patrols those areas? Have you seen an impact in what the city has done? We've obviously decreased the speeds on Mount Ark. I think we've done some different signage. I hear from parents, I'm not going to say daily, but a lot, that still have concerns about our crossing zones and so forth. Have you seen a difference? So I have. With this speed limit reduced to 30 on Monarch, and then with outside of Timber Trail Elementary, it was signed for 40 going westbound. We got that reduced to match the eastbound lanes and match it at 35. So that has helped that. I don't see too many crosswalk violations. Most people are pretty good about stopping as soon as somebody's up there at the light, if it's an RFP signal, which is just the one where you push the button and it kicks off flashers. Do you have any other secret sauce things for us? I don't. No? Do you think it's something where you contact us? Yeah. And I mean, honestly, things have been, I've noticed a slight difference. It's mainly with residents on how they drive here. because they see me all the time. It's the people that are not living in Castle Vines and they're just passing through or they're working here that are the ones that are committing the violations. I don't see a whole lot of increase from people that live here. When we've had issues, this is my last question, when we've had issues around the American Academy with the parking issue, I think we've done better there. When we've originally started ticketing and talking to those drivers, the reaction was almost, why are you bothering us? And there's no issue. There's certainly no safety issues. So I'm really curious as you're now ticketing new people or new cars, new parents, are you seeing, and they're now recognizing you, what are you hearing when you're giving these individuals, these drivers tickets around school cells? Are you hearing, oh, shoot, I made a mistake. I'm going to correct this behavior or leave me alone. I'm not from the city. What is the response? It's usually, I should have known better. Because that's the typical thing, especially if they're picking up kids there. Usually they're distracted by stuff, whether that's something that happened to them throughout their day or unfortunately their cell phones, which I've gone over. So a new cell phone, if it's in your hand, you might be ready to take it for it. It's just bad to see it. So it's kind of hard whenever people are doing this down here, right there by their side. And I can't see their phone in their hand. But usually it's just parents that have something else going on. They're just not paying attention to their speed. Right. Well, I'm going to say this. I'm going to say it. I said it to Sheriff Weekly. I'm going to say it to you. I'm assuming higher command in front of you. This is exactly what we want to see. I want to see these kind of explanations to parents and to drivers in our city and say exactly those kinds of things where we educate parents and where we discuss, you know, the importance we want for drivers to understand the dangers. It's not about tickets or revenue. It's truly about society. And once you have to live with that, you know, if you do. So I so appreciate you doing that. And this is the kind of deputy we love seeing in our city. So thank you once again. Obviously, you do have a traffic as a passion. So for sure. Thank you. Thank you. I do have a question. I have had two different reports, one being my daughter and two of her friends. They were trying to go through the crosswalks at one of the roundabouts and the cars weren't stopping for them. And then I had another resident email me having the same issue. Can they be ticketed for that if you see them do it? Yeah, absolutely. If there are people within the crosswalk, In the roundabouts. As long as they're within that crosswalk, cars have to yield to them. So absolutely. Do you know which roundabout it was? It's the one for both incidents was the one on Legay and Mirvista. Yeah, I've seen some people fail to yield there. I think I've had two in like six months that I've seen personally. They just happened right at the same time. I was like, my daughter... she could have been accountable for some of it. I don't know. I wasn't there. But the other adult that emailed me, I don't think that's probably the case. So I just thought it was in him. It was exactly the same cult, roundabout. Yeah, no, I know. I mean, it's kind of hard with roundabouts just because of why a site, even coming around the bend, that's whenever, in terms of fairness, not that last second where you're like, okay, do I have time to stop? Or... If I stop as the car behind me got over and I have to slam on my brakes because I don't know if this person is going to just immediately go across the crosswalk or if they're going to wait for traffic to stop. Because it's also on a pedestrian to confirm that traffic is going to stop before they step out of the traffic. Gotcha. Just kind of like a... Is there anything that you've seen in the county that helps with just the visibility? I mean, we have the signs that are there saying, is there anything else that we can do to help with the visibility for the pedestrians? The RFBs help a lot. We can't control to push the button. But if it's there, they're more likely than not to actually hit the signal to alert drivers. And those all on roundabouts. Absolutely. Roundabouts, straightways, they all bother time because it's just another thing that flashes and catches your attention. Okay, great. Thank you. Absolutely. Council Member Blue and then we'll go to Council Member Mulvey. I'm just going to follow up real fast on that. When are they technically in the crosswalk? When they're standing on the edge of the walk, ready to go through it, or when they step onto the road? When they step out onto the road, that is what they're always doing. That is correct. That's why I figured that people should stop before they take that step. Yeah. People should stop to confirm the car is at least going to stop, but a car should say, this person's about to cross, I should start slowing down, in case they just block out in traffic. So, thank you. Council Member Mulvey? Hi, hello, sorry for being remote, Captain and Deputy, or Chief Rother. My question is whether or not with the patrol experience, can we learn at some point where additional signalization or crossing control might be appropriate? Because when we had an application, near the circle between Caspines Parkway and Leg A intersection in that circle, it was a really big concern for me to make sure it's safe to cross there. And now I'm hearing from the mayor that she's had an experience and other parents had an experience. So to me, it sounds like maybe it was a good thing to think about back when we had that application, Can we think about and receive data about where we see instances that would warrant a new signal or an additional RFP or some kind of safer crossing opportunity? And I say that council member colleagues, because we do have a policy that we wanna have a more walkable community. And I really would hate to see somebody like the mayor's daughter get hurt or anybody's daughter. So that particular area seems rife and needs attention. Thanks. I just want to ask a clarifying question. By a new signal, are you referring to like a traffic control signal with like an actual light at that intersection instead of a roundabout being built? Well, so it's not for me to say what is appropriate. But I think what happened when we had that application and I was concerned that, oh, maybe people will have trouble crossing there, especially if there's certain businesses and they wanna come back and forth from the neighborhoods to our shopping center. And my concern was that how can we make it safe? Because if that business were there or something else was there, there would be more people interested in crossing. And so now I'm hearing, in that same region that there is somebody who's trying to cross and it's more than one person and it's actually children. So it's not for me to say what's appropriate. The question I asked back at that other application was, can we do something with this applicant to make it safer for people who want to use that business and go back and forth cross? And so now I'm hearing that by the circle, it's kind of the same way. So I'd like to know, are there other places in the city where this happens or how frequently does this happen? And what would the deputies want to see as something that they could enforce to keep traffic down and to make it safer for people to cross? I don't know what it would be, but how does that feedback and data collection work so that we can make those decisions either in advance or in response to something like what the mayor has said? I want to hand that question off to Mitch. He's going to answer that for you. Hi. So I think the short answer to that is that we have a partnership with the city and the engineers, the traffic engineers that work. So we usually, we meet, we just met just a little over a month ago, and we discuss locations of interest and locations where we're having problems. And we're going to continue to do that. On a pretty regular basis, we work with Larry as a traffic engineer and Michael in the mayor. We just met. We'll continue those conversations, and they bring areas of concerns. We bring areas of concerns, and we collaborate together and really try to meet those goals for everybody. Thank you so much. That's really good to know. It's just a process I wasn't familiar with. Thank you. It's a great process, and we really do. Love our relationship with Larry and the traffic he shares. It seems like it's working well. On a side note, I do want to talk about Debbie Dugan, a good friend of mine who lives in Castle Pines up here. He's like, hey, what's the deal with all the cops up here? Right? Traffic Dugan's my bro. Voluntary compliance. And if Debbie Dugan's out, you're getting a ticket. So if you might want to slow down, give me a hard time. I'm on Joel. I'm the division chief over patrol. And I want to just address a few things tonight, but I think the main event would be the filming that occurred over at the Pine Bar Grill. Friday night, about 7 p.m., just after 7 p.m., I think that's when the call came in, it was about 9 p.m., two gentlemen, and they had longstanding beef with each other. They got into an argument, trying to kind of resolve the argument. Did not go well. And then continued this argument. All parties involved in this were drinking, to include a lot of witnesses. And so we were dealing with a lot of degraded people. The argument continued with the pollution and shoving, in which the suspect, Mel, the defendant in the 60 days, pulled out a gun from his waistband and pointed it in the face of the second. Again, everybody in the bar tried to separate things. The defendant got back and left the bar and went, what witnesses described, into the cake supers. We had a robust patrol response, and I think it's pretty interesting. Normally, I have to apologize to Michael a little bit, but normally they're supposed to call and wake me up and tell me we got some big going on. We had a sergeant who was a fairly young sergeant working based on the fact that a guy pulled a gun in a crowded bar in Castle Pines, that our patrol division took it very seriously. Right in the middle between Islander Ranch, Castle Rock, he did ask for cars to come up from Castle Rock to assist. So what we didn't know was there was a lot of Castle Rock cars just down the road at the outlet mall. And so we got a robust number of Castle Rock cops. I think the number was 12. And so the 4th Sergeant was overran rather quick. So we had our deputies that got on the scene rather quick. And then what we wanted to do with a robust response like that, we want to take it seriously. We want to make sure the assistants are protected. When somebody walks into a store clearly intoxicated, we definitely want to take all appropriate actions. Some phone conversations ensued about they did not locate the suspect in the King Soopers or in the area. So some phone conversations ensued. And I was like, we need to get somebody in custody right away on this. So they continued the investigation into the night, located the male suspect through his credit card receipt at the bar. And, of course, he lived in the apartment complex just on the other side of the King Soopers. A food delivery service was delivered to his house. Our detectives and deputies took advantage of that. When he opened the door for the food service, he was taken out of custody. He was fully cooperative, was charged with felony menacing and prohibited use of the weapon, which is basically having a weapon wire intoxicated. He was booked into the Douglas County Jail. And he just wanted to... You can get overran with police very quick. And so you... We have, obviously, this ever-evolving situation. I don't think we needed 16 cops up here, but as the young sergeant learned real quick that it's hard to control, and when you call for cover, you can get everybody. So I apologize for the robust response the other side of that. I think that the city understands that we took this very seriously, and we will. We always will. And when somebody pulls a gun out of the place, we're going to respond appropriately. And we're working to get a better response plan. So sorry about the 15, 16 cops, the news. That was fun. But we can't control all those things. And we did. It was not a news story event, but it turned into one for a day or two online. And I apologize for that. We're going to get better control of that. But no, then we take somebody brandishing a gun in a public place in Castle Pines. Extremely serious. It doesn't happen up here. So when it happens up here, it's like, what's going on? He was a resident, as you know. And so he's going to be held accountable for his crimes. I did that in court on Monday. And I stopped over and made sure that district attorney's office is going to treat him appropriately. That's just one added thing I do outside. Does anybody have any questions? Just a comment. I'd rather have too many than not enough. So did your son. And he did a great job. He's like, boss, I'm sorry, man. I called for help. I got everybody. I said, it's fine, man. It's good. But yeah. Yeah, we're here to protect the guys. It's nice to know that you have a great cooperative cooperation with Castle Rock at 80, too. So it's pretty scary. Yeah, it's a little bit too under the foot. We don't normally call for help a lot. So when somebody calls for help in the county, we get a good response. So it was good thinking. We locked down the area quick. So there was a large river set up throughout this whole area to locate that male. So we're working on it. It's good. It got handled quick, and the male got custody. That's my expectation as a chief. We don't just take her to walk away. I worked extremely hard with 15 years of investigation to get to the end zone and get somebody accustomed quickly for these things, especially as I will follow that. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. Thank you for all of you for being here this evening. And if you have follow, okay. So I can thank you. Okay. So, um, I know it's been short. Michael, I want to, Michael does not know. I got accepted. Yeah. Yeah. So I am going in July. It's an absolute honor. It's kind of a lifelong dream. So Alan's going to be your main contact where I'm going. I'll be there next month, but I apologize for kind of coming on, but it's going to be real important to the future. So thank you. Thank you, guys. It's an honor to be here. Thank you very much. All right. So quick updates for you. I walked out because there's another one. So these are always, so it's probably always good to let you guys know. So what the title sometimes shows, not necessarily the end result. So that's obviously the initial call for service. But to give you an idea, the one, I'll be generic, was on the sex offense that you mentioned. It's actually one of the elementary schools. It was a safe to tell. Elementary school students are the suspect and victim. and that went to our investigations unit, so I'll leave it generic like that. The other case, it's always those odd ones. It's not related to prostitution, and again, that's the title of this. The FBI, or in this case, NIBRS, they use certain coding for certain types of offenses, so it really, it's categorized under sex offense, but under specific reporting, they put it under prostitution. I'll be generic on this one too. A resident in Castle Plains was on the internet, and went on a site, it was on a site, I'll be generic, and they then received phone calls back soliciting certain types of things. And so that's all. Again, that goes to our investigation unit. They look into that. Again, we don't want those things to occur, but that was the circumstances on that call. Thank you very much. And these are the questions I can help you with. Any more questions? Thank God. Oh, I think that covers it. You guys have been buried around the same nation. I appreciate that. Thank you so much. Have a great rest of your evening. We appreciate you guys coming. Thanks. Full force in the car. Yeah. All right. We are moving on to our next item on our agenda, which is our comments and reports. City Manager Penny, do you have anything to report this evening? I do not, Tara. Thank you. Great. We will move on to our Councilmember reports. Councilmember Stiles, do you have anything to report this evening? I just want to do a couple of things. I went to the state of Lone Tree and it was fun to see Stephen Sauer, who was our newest commission board volunteer, was on their promotion. So it's kind of fun to see him talking about what he's doing with the Park Meadows Retail Resort. And also went to the resident welcome, not welcome, resident Charlie chat with... Mayor, sorry. And the same thing came up that we, that came up in this conversation tonight, that one of the residents was concerned about maybe getting those flashing lights around some of the school crossings so that the students that are crossing it are safely crossing. And then also I met with the Mayor Parker to talk more about the Cherry Creek Water Quality Board, if I said that correctly. Close it out. So that's what you understand and good to get to know more of what's happening in Parker as well as in the counties and other groups. Thank you. Council Member Cole? Well, please. Mayor Pro Tem, do you please? Thank you, Mayor. Just a reminder that the Outstanding Youth Awards are this coming Monday, 4.30 at the Miller Building. I say this every year. I'll say it again. Typically there's not a dry eye in the room. We get to see outstanding youth who have overcome adversity. And there are a ton of candidates and nominations, and we usually have 10, but we couldn't agree on the final 10, so we have 11 this year. So again, if you happen to be here, if you're listening, it's a wonderful experience to see these kids that really have overcome very adverse conditions at home. Well, I guess technically not even at home because some of them don't have homes. Not to be sad, but anyway, 4.30 p.m. Miller Building, Castle Rock, Outstanding Youth Awards, Monday night. I will be there. Thank you. Tell us if I'm over blue. Not a lot to report. I was at the Water Quality Board. I wanted to be good. Cherry Creek Water Basin. Cherry Creek Water Basin Water Quality Board. Or something along those lines. And just, we continue to work on the, you know, maintain the standards, meeting the standards, doing work throughout the basin to improve the water quality. One of the things that I thought was interesting, and I'll be brief, is typically what they do is they try to take out the vegetation, like a bunch of the vegetation, because that will degrade into phosphorus. and which is something we want out of the water. And what they typically do is just cut it and drop it. Now they're actually pulling it out, and they're doing a test on pulling it out and how that impacts it. It looks like it could be a very positive thing. They still have three more years of this kind of program to see how it goes, but it looks like they may have an opportunity to do something a little different and have a better result. So we'll see. But that's it. Thanks. Council member, that's it. I'm going to be super, super quick. I do want to say I am going to receive a plaque. I don't get enough plaques from the Cherry Creek Water Basin Board. I get a plug, three plugs, don't I, for my service there. I'm going to miss being on that board. They've been great. I think they'll come visit us at the Douglas County Water Commission a lot, so I guess I'll see them. I love Joshua. Joshua Rivera. I just love him. He's just the best. CML, they're doing God's work. I got to tell you, you got to say prayers for the legislators that are at the Capitol. They're in their last final days. May 8th is the closing session. The lawmakers that serve our community here, I hear from them daily. They're in tears. Just trying to defend local control and trying to do work for us. I would love to have some of them come visit us. and talk about what they've done. I went to John Carson's update. It's his first time, I guess, giving a legislative update because he was just appointed to the Senate. Him talking about what... he's working on and so forth. Very exciting. Lisa Rizzo, Randy Bradley, those individuals who are just going every single day and fighting for us here in Douglas County. It's just really amazing. So God bless them for all that they do. Last thing, putting in a plug for my new favorite restaurant because it's our latest one, the Empanadas. Atlas, oh no, Alta, excuse me, Alta. Seems like Atlas because of the Argentine version of it, right? But Alta, you're right. Just a really nice couple. They're divorced now, but they're just really nice people. All the employees are really nice. If you haven't visited them, go visit them. Just shake their hands. I will tell you, I was so thrilled that as they told me about other businesses that they've opened in Colorado in Aspen and Parker, there was one other one, I don't remember where it was, They said that they had the best experience in their permitting and starting a company here or a business in Castle Pines than anywhere else, including Markham. And I told Joshua. But they literally had nothing but a good experience. And any time they had a question, the city answered any question and made it easy. So I would let it be known that opening a business in Castle Pines is not only easy but convenient. and that we open to business. And I love it. Yeah. I mean, I've been brought up here. I just, I think they're the best. So, you know what, that's all good. Councilor Mulvey. Yeah, thank you. I have had the opportunity recently, yesterday, for the first time in a while, to listen to a Tassel-Pence North Metro District meeting. And I wanted to ask the manager just sort of a clarifying question. So I hadn't looked at a lot of the Metro District stuff in a long time. And so what I was wondering is when we did our IGAs and such, and we're looking to get the amount of stormwater money we're supposed to get and the amount of parks money we were supposed to get, did that process involve looking into how much they've collected over the years, what they have in the bank, and then getting our fair share. It just came to mind again, and I really would like to have that reassurance. The short answer is yes. Our finance director worked with their finance to ensure that the fund balances that they had were appropriately transferred over along with our... the, I believe it was two years now, it might've been one year track of additional revenue that they were receiving under the IGA also came to the city. So we're very comfortable that we received all the appropriate funds that were due under the IGA. Okay, thanks. So we didn't really do an audit of their funds. We just worked with them to say, okay, what do you have? And then what do we deserve or what is appropriate to give us? Is that kind of the way it happened? Yeah, that's correct, because how they spent the funds previously was up to that board. So what we were dealing with was what was in their bank accounts at that time as they had broken it out into the stormwater fund and into the parks fund, et cetera. So, no, we did not go back. Those funds were expended. And so we just started with fund balances, and then the revenues kept moving forward. How did, did we look at all their fund balances or did we just say, give us those particular ones? Just those particular ones. Okay. Thank you. And then additionally, fellow colleagues, I am approaching the darkness in Kansas and I'm not sure that I'll be able to participate in the executive session with appropriate level of confidentiality. And so I may not be able to call in. So I do apologize for that. And we'll have to trust y'all to bring up everything that needs to be brought up. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I want to give big kudos to our event staff for this weekend. An event that usually lasts 11 seconds lasted two hours. And we had a line around the ridge. parking lot for two hours. We had so many people that were so appreciative that we still held the egg scramble event. And we're just over the moon, happy to stand in line in the snow. So it was just a testament to the public and their need and want and enjoyment of our events. And that they were patient and the kids had a blast. And Jolene anticipated the need. She had enough eggs and everything else for the entire amount of people that participated and that were there. And so it's just she did a great job and the volunteers did a great job and the help from the chamber. It was a great event and it could have been very... trying and it wasn't it went really well so i just want to tell her thank you she did such a good job at anticipating the need for this because it's very different than what was anticipated with just doing this on the field like we could have run out of pizza like that's never happened right exactly so this was this is great it was a huge success um we also had a really nice email from a resident or actually a business owner and resident on Happy Canyon talking, just thanking us for all the work that we did on the Happy Canyon Roundabout. And he's been there for over 40 years and talked about how many accidents were in that location before we did the changes and was just really thankful for us doing that work. He talked about in snow, in some cases, he put on like... snowshoes with the spikes in them to help push cars because they couldn't get up the hill. So he had quite the story and was just really thankful, and I wanted to pass on that because I think just another impact of that roundabout has been really helpful within the community. And then the state of the loan tree was great. They did a wonderful job, and they have a lot of things going on, and it's wonderful that we get to benefit from all the things that are happening in the loan tree because some of that trickles down to Castle Pines. So it's exciting to hear what they're doing. And with that, that's all I have for my report this evening. We are going to go ahead and move into executive session pursuant to CRS 24-6-402. For F, for personnel matters regarding the city manager's performance review, I move to enter into the executive session pursuant to CR. Personnel matter moving into it. pursuant to personnel matters and for which the employee has consented to the discussion and executive session regarding the city manager's performance review. And we're going to adjourn this regular meeting and move into the executive session. May I have a motion? We're actually slight detailed. We are adjourning after the conclusion. We are adjourning regular meeting after the completion of the executive session. Thank you for that. Matt, why sometimes we adjourn before executive? We never adjourn a regular meeting. No. We agreed to adjourn after executive session. So can I have a second? So moved. Thank you. Second. So Mayor, you moved and then Council Member Booth seconded it. All right. Mayor Ingerman. Yes. Council Member Bloom. Yes. Council Member Henson. Yes. Council Member Salazar. Yes. Mayor Prince-Henry Binks. Yes. Council Member Cole. Yes. Council Member Mulvey. She's gone. All right. So we're going to take five minutes. Yeah, let's take five minutes. And then just a reminder, we're not using the mics, but. Oh, we don't even need to use that now either.