2026-09-23 - Open Space Board of Trustees

00:01Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Yes, and we should… we're recording now, so all set.

00:04Jon Carroll (he/him): Awesome. Well, I will call to order the September 23rd, 2026, special Meeting of the Open Space Board of Trustees. We'll start with a roll call.

00:19Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Lommele.

00:22Morgan Lommele: Here.

00:23Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Glynn.

00:25Sarah Glynn: Here.

00:26Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Zuckerman.

00:28Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Right here.

00:29Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Robinson.

00:30BradyRobinson: Here.

00:31Jon Carroll (he/him): And Trustee Carroll is here presiding, so everyone is present.

00:38Jon Carroll (he/him): With that, do we want to do the rules and procedure today… before we move on, or we save that for later, right?

00:47Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, that'll be after the topic.

00:51Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay, alright, I'll turn it over to Dan and staff to… For the first topic.

00:57Dan Burke, COB: Yeah, our one and only topic tonight is the OSBT's consideration of the City Manager 2027 recommended budget. This item will also be supported by a public hearing opportunity, which John will navigate us through. So with that, John, we'll turn it back over to you.

01:21Jon Carroll (he/him): All right, so, are we doing the public hearing first? Y'all don't have any presentation other than the package?

01:28Dan Burke, COB: Oh, yes, oh, I see what you're saying. Let's… yep, okay. We do have a short presentation for you. Okay. our major… my, major presentation was delivered at the, earlier September meeting, so we have a very brief presentation, but we do have a memo that you all should have, received on Monday.

01:47Dan Burke, COB: Supported by a number of attachments, including some responses to questions that we got.

01:53Dan Burke, COB: In between the meetings. So, but to kick us off with our presentation, Lauren, are you going to be delivering presentation tonight? And then, after our brief presentation, we'll be, we'll have clarifying questions. So, with that, we'll turn it over to Deputy Director Lauren Kilcoyne.

02:11Lauren Kilcoyne: Great. How's this looking on your screen?

02:14Dan Burke, COB: It's not full screen.

02:16Leah Russell: Lauren, you might just want to escape out of it, and then redo that with SharePresenter.

02:21Lauren Kilcoyne: Give me one moment.

02:24Lauren Kilcoyne: We tested this before we started and everything.

02:27Leah Russell: I think it's cause you still had it up.

02:29Lauren Kilcoyne: Yeah.

02:31Lauren Kilcoyne: Let's try this again.

02:34Lauren Kilcoyne: Hmm…

02:54Lauren Kilcoyne: How about now? Good? Yep. Okay, this might be the shortest presentation that I have given at the Open Space Board of Trustees meeting, but really the intention today is to make sure that you all have time, to ask us clarifying questions, hear from any public comment, and then deliberate, and be able to make your recommendation this evening about the 2027 budget.

03:14Lauren Kilcoyne: We are in our final touch on the draft 2027 budget before it goes to Council. We've had 5 touches this year with y'all at a different time of year than usual, but we were able to hit a lot of those same things we're normally talking about. We're bringing revenue, adjustment to base, our CIP, and then eventually our operating budget. So, tonight we're hoping for our final budget review and recommendation from you all.

03:39Lauren Kilcoyne: And this will be very brief. I just want to give a high-level, very high-level overview of the structure of our budget.

03:45Lauren Kilcoyne: and shift into your deliberation here. So, just as a reminder, and all this is in your packet, the total operating budget is here presented on the slide, so we talked about each of these categories more in-depth a couple of weeks ago, but the biggest share of our operating budget at about 64% is our personnel, and that does include our standard positions and our seasonal intent program.

04:09Lauren Kilcoyne: Our non-personnel budget sits around 21%, and that's our contracted work, our interdepartmental transfers for things like our computers and fleet, and all of the work that we need to, or the savings mechanisms we need to save for annually to be able to make major purchases.

04:24Lauren Kilcoyne: Cost allocation is about 13% of our operating budget. I know that was a big follow-up topic in written questions that we received from board members since the September 9th meeting. And then our debt service sits around 3%.

04:37Lauren Kilcoyne: When we bring in our total uses of funds, that includes our CIP and, something outside of the Open Space Department, which is charged to the Open Space Fund, which is the Station 8… 90% of the Station 8 wildfire unit. So, you see that added to the chart here, and our CIP, as we've talked about in previous meetings, is, predominantly funded by the Open Space Fund, but we do expect to receive $350,000

05:02Lauren Kilcoyne: from the lottery fund for next year.

05:05Lauren Kilcoyne: And so since September 9th, hopefully we've been able to address your questions that you asked during the meeting, and then in follow-up to the meeting, and we've attached some responses to the packet tonight. And the conversation, I think, covered a lot of really great ground a couple of weeks ago, but certainly there was an emphasis on cost allocation and wildfire as major budget topics that you were all wanting to dig more into.

05:28Lauren Kilcoyne: What happens from here after tonight, so we'll have your discussion, public comment, and recommendation this evening, and then we move on to Council review, and so the first hearing that City Council is scheduled for is on October 1st, with a second reading on the 15th.

05:43Lauren Kilcoyne: And because we talked about wildfire, I did just also want to point out that we're not done talking about wildfire once the budget is done.

05:49Lauren Kilcoyne: We know that this has been something we've brought to the OSPT 12, 13 times, something like that, over the last couple of years, and we'll continue to do that to make sure that you have updates on wildfire moving forward, but there is a milestone coming up. We've been working with partners across the city on our prioritization, our program areas, and that's going to be presented to Council in a study session on October 22nd.

06:12Lauren Kilcoyne: And so I promise, short and sweet.

06:14Lauren Kilcoyne: And here we are at the end, and so we have time now, the way that this will go, the way all of your recommendations go, we have time for clarifying questions first, we'll open public comment, and then move on to discussion and recommendations. So I believe that is all from me, and happy to take any clarifying questions.

06:32Jon Carroll (he/him): Thanks so much, Lauren. Do any board members have clarifying questions? Again, we're…

06:38Jon Carroll (he/him): Just asking clarifying questions on the information that was provided, or any other clarifying questions about the budget will save, kind of.

06:45Jon Carroll (he/him): Pontificating and discussion and deliberation for after, the, the, public hearing on this, so…

06:55Jon Carroll (he/him): Would anyone like… Any… does anyone have questions?

07:02Jon Carroll (he/him): No? No clarifying questions? Morgan, any clarifying questions?

07:09Morgan Lommele: No, thank you. I was looking at my notes to see if any were clarifying questions. I'm all set. Thank you, John.

07:16Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay.

07:16Jon Carroll (he/him): Awesome. Well, I'm not hearing any clarifying questions from the board, so I think we can move to the public hearing.

07:33Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: And hopefully you are seeing my screen now. Here we go.

07:37Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Okay, so I'll read through the meeting rules. The City has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members.

07:50Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: staff and OSBT, as well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives. For more information about this vision and the community engagement processes, please visit this link.

08:03Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: The City will enforce the rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code, including participants are required to sign up to speak by using the name they are commonly known by.

08:12Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: And individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted online.

08:19Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: No attendee shall disrupt, disturb, or otherwise impede the orderly conduct of any city meeting in a manner that obstructs the business of the meeting. This also includes failing to obey any lawful order of the presiding officer to leave the meeting room or refrain from addressing the board.

08:33Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business.

08:37Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obscenity, other epithets based on race, gender, or religion, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the meeting will not be tolerated.

08:51Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: And if you're joining online and haven't signed up to speak in advance, you can raise your hand to speak during public comment, or items identified for public hearing, like this one. You'll do that by clicking the raise hand icon, or by clicking the participants icon, three dots to the bottom right, and then select raise hand. We don't have anyone joining by phone, but I can go through those instructions if we do.

09:12Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: So those should be, we're okay on the meeting rules now.

09:17Jon Carroll (he/him): Alright, with that, let's open the public hearing.

09:23Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Thank you. So, signed up first to speak, we have Jan Burton, followed by Alan Feinberg.

09:29Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Jan, you should be able to unmute yourself now.

09:32Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: And we will get the timer going as well.

09:38Jan Burton: Good evening, board and staff, and thanks for your work on our behalf.

09:41Jan Burton: I'm Jan Burton, Boulder resident and avid open space user. As an open space advocate, I fully support OSBT's efforts to get more transparency on the 12.6% allocated tax on our open space fund.

09:55Jan Burton: Allocations are a common methodology in government and corporations. However, a normal allocation is 3-5%, maybe up to 7%. Anything over that is excessive and shows total inefficiency in overhead operations, like Harmon pointed out last week.

10:13Jan Burton: This is not what Boulder taxpayers signed up for when we voted for dedicated taxes.

10:18Jan Burton: If you do not get this clarified, or better yet, reduced, I would encourage you as trustees to vote down the budget. Secondly, I'd like to question the 2027 budget. The citizens have weighed in with city-sponsored surveys. Wildfire risk reduction is our greatest priority.

10:34Jan Burton: Many of us have been speaking to you for more than a year about the risk of ignition on open space property. I believe OSMP needs to have more dedicated dollars for doing mitigation. You've made progress with the livestock and grasslands, but there's much more to do in thinning, preventative burning, and all operations. What's the right number?

10:53Jan Burton: Councilmember Benjamin has asked for $2 million, but I believe twice that is the minimum that should be spent to ramp up.

11:00Jan Burton: And what can you delay? Here are some ideas. $900K, $900,000 to redo the Chautauqua Visitor Cottage.

11:08Jan Burton: Gun Barrel Trail Management and Wood Brothers Interpretive Media for $600,000. Any major CIP trail enhancement, like signage, versus trail maintenance and fire mitigation should be delayed.

11:20Jan Burton: Again, this is only until we've mitigated the land to what experts say is necessary.

11:25Jan Burton: And what about personnel? We need more fire mitigation specialists, rangers to guard our lands, and probably fewer people in GIS property sales project management.

11:37Jan Burton: We could delay community connections, education inclusion, and concentrate on fuel mitigation, trail maintenance, and existing infrastructure. These are not easy conversations, but either is the thought of our city burning down. Thank you very much for your time.

11:54Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you so much, Jan.

11:56Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Okay, next we have Alan Feinberg.

12:00Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Alan, you should be able to unmute yourself now. Just before we start the timer, you'll see the timer in the top of your window, and you'll also see it in Leah Russell's camera as soon as you get started.

12:12feinberga: You started before I did. What's the timing on this? How much time do I have?

12:16Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: 3 minutes.

12:17feinberga: Okay, I'm good.

12:20feinberga: Okay. Alan Feinberg for Plan Boulder County.

12:24feinberga: Plan Boulder's been following the recent efforts of the trustees to determine what services are being provided at what cost to OSMP through cost allocation.

12:34feinberga: With no clarifying information forthcoming so far. The 2024 cost allocation plan by Wilden Financial Services is completely impenetrable.

12:44feinberga: Although I did learn something from examining it.

12:47feinberga: The city's cost allocation program is not about payment for specific services provided to the restricted funds. It's a way to distribute and extract the costs of general fund government from the restricted funds. It's based on applying complex criteria and percentages that could probably be defended legally in a court challenge, but do not relate to actual services provided.

13:10feinberga: This form of cost allocation for most of the restricted funds is a council policy matter. However, by charter, the open space fund can only be used for open space purposes, as they are defined in the charter.

13:24feinberga: That means that specific services that OSMP requires to function are appropriate to be reimbursed through cost allocation.

13:32feinberga: However, the increasing allocation percentages each year means that some funds extracted this way are unrelated to open space purposes, and this reduces the ability of OSMP to fund management of things like increased visitor use, address trail maintenance, and wildfire mitigation.

13:51feinberga: And this is not sustainable. Plan Boulder recommends that the trustees not approve the open space budget until this situation can be clarified.

14:00feinberga: It would require a forensic-type accounting of exactly what services and their costs are being provided, and the result of this analysis compared to current cost allocation extractions would determine if the open space cost allocations are in conformance with the charter limitations.

14:18feinberga: This might prove that the City's cost allocation model will require revision for the open space restricted funds. Thank you very much for letting me talk to you about cost allocation.

14:31Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you, Alan.

14:33Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: If you're joining online tonight and would like to speak, you can go ahead and raise your hand now. First we have Lynn Siegel.

14:42Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: Lynn, you should be able to unmute yourself now.

14:44lynn segal: Exactly, Alan, exactly what she said. And… and these funds should not be fluid between the general fund and dedicated OS funds. And, you know, I'm concerned about things like CU South, which

15:01lynn segal: Rachel Friend and Sam Weaver met about 7 years ago with an OSBT member, I believe it was Hal Halstein, and about

15:13lynn segal: land use.

15:15lynn segal: concessions for CU South. We don't know what happened there, but they were caught, because you have to have 3 council members to meet with, a board member, and they only had 2.

15:29lynn segal: And so, what dirty deal was made behind the scenes in that meeting? We will never know. But I'll tell ya, CU South's going forward, isn't it?

15:39lynn segal: And against many odds, from the mouths of Ben Binder and the whole CU South group that is opposed to this development. And that's very concerning to me. CU has more than enough impact on this town already. Along with Sundance, it's gonna…

15:58lynn segal: destroy this place. And the other thing is, really, part of all this is growth.

16:05lynn segal: The impact of growth per person on all the things that Alan and the other person said before. More… more rangers, more time, more expenses, more maintenance and operations for more quantity of humans inhabiting the space. And the more you go up.

16:25lynn segal: Like New York City, the more they want the open space to get out of their little compartments. And so what are you doing, really, with a liaison between other groups

16:36lynn segal: other, you know, boards in this town to really solve this problem. And the community members, and organizing the community to have debates about this.

16:45lynn segal: Rather than making these decisions and doing these funds shifting behind the public eye. It's just not okay, and I won't sit and watch it.

16:58lynn segal: What we need to do is get people organized, have community discussions, bring the public in. They're upset about things.

17:08lynn segal: But they're upset about the things that are indirectly affecting them. And it's happening here, in that meeting with Sam Weaver and Rachel Friend and Hal Halstein, that we didn't know about.

17:20lynn segal: That was very insidious for that development at CU South, no doubt, and executive sessions.

17:28lynn segal: There should not be executive sessions about this stuff.

17:33lynn segal: This is very impactful on people in Boulder, and I'm sorry, it's impactful on people like Carmen Zuckerman, a developer, you know, that… or formerly a developer, at least. He did my next-door neighbor's house, and these are the folks

17:48lynn segal: Why the updates.

17:56Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you for your comments, Lynn.

18:01Jon Carroll (he/him): Do we have anyone else?

18:04Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: If you're running online and would like to speak, you can go ahead and raise your hand now.

18:13Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: We don't have any other hands.

18:19Jon Carroll (he/him): I'm muted, sorry. With that, we'll close the public hearing, on this topic, and move on to, deliberation.

18:30Jon Carroll (he/him): So… All… I'll start it off,

18:39Jon Carroll (he/him): I've… I've been putting a lot of thought into the budget. I have a lot of the same concerns

18:44Jon Carroll (he/him): other folks have. I do want to say thanks to staff.

18:48Jon Carroll (he/him): For pulling this budget together, for answering all the questions. Y'all have done a wonderful job on this. Y'all have made a lot of tough decisions around areas we need to make cuts. You've responded to us in the community.

19:02Jon Carroll (he/him): you know, asking to put more resources into Wildfire. I particularly liked in the packet where y'all talked about KPIs for Wildfire.

19:13Jon Carroll (he/him): I don't personally think that amount of money spent is a valid KPI for how we're handling wildfire. I would love that at work if, you know, my boss's KPI for me was how much money I spend on something. That would be awesome, right? But that's not a great way to measure success of any program, so I really loved what was in the packet around,

19:36Jon Carroll (he/him): you know, having, like, miles of WUI treated, miles of, you know, ditch fuels treated, and seeing that we had goals and targets for that for the future. So, that was wonderful, incredibly encouraging.

19:50Jon Carroll (he/him): I was disappointed in the information we got back on cost allocation. I still don't think we have the level of transparency we need to understand

20:00Jon Carroll (he/him): how much of this 12% is… is going to wear. It may be…

20:06Jon Carroll (he/him): you know, a fair amount, right? Based on, you know, changing conditions. You know, looking through it, one of the major things, right, was, like, you know, liability insurance and hazard insurance, right? And some of that was based on, like, how much land you have, and…

20:23Jon Carroll (he/him): And maybe it makes sense for it to be allocated this way, but without, transparency there, it's really concerning.

20:30Jon Carroll (he/him): To me,

20:32Jon Carroll (he/him): that… that that is not available to us to see or understand in some way, so… that's given me hesitation on kind of recommending the budget, but I've put a lot of thought into it, and ultimately.

20:45Jon Carroll (he/him): I feel like we are being asked to recommend whether or not the way the Open Space Department is spending its money and allocating its funds, is in line with what we expect. And in that regard.

20:59Jon Carroll (he/him): I think the department has done a great job pulling this budget together, has responded in a lot of the ways that we need to, in terms of cuts and reallocating funds.

21:09Jon Carroll (he/him): To new areas where we're asking them to spend them.

21:14Jon Carroll (he/him): And in that regard, I think I'm inclined to, recommend the budget to Council?

21:20Jon Carroll (he/him): That being said, I'm very concerned about just how the budget process worked this year in general, as well as the lack of transparency around cost allocation. So, I'm also supportive of making some sort of motion to Council to express our concerns more formally.

21:40Jon Carroll (he/him): Around these things, and the lack of transparency around…

21:43Jon Carroll (he/him): both just the budget process this year and the changes that have been made, as well as, the lack of transparency around cost allocation. So,

21:52Jon Carroll (he/him): That's… that's kind of where I'm sitting,

21:56Jon Carroll (he/him): And would be curious to hear how the rest of the board's feeling.

22:06Jon Carroll (he/him): Would anyone else like to share?

22:10Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Sure, John. I can go. And I'm gonna be really brief. I think you summed that up exactly the way I would have, and

22:19Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): You know, there's the… that old, expression in political circles.

22:24Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): everything's been said, but not everybody's had a chance to say it yet, so to… to avoid, wasting everyone's time, I'm just gonna echo what you said, and, and agree with it. That's… that's what I saw.

22:38Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And also, just to correct the record, you know, one of the members of the public said that I'm a developer, I'm not a developer, I didn't develop her neighbor's house, so…

22:48Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Just get that in there.

22:52Jon Carroll (he/him): Thanks, Harmon.

22:54Jon Carroll (he/him): Morgan? Oh, Brady raised his hand. Here we go.

22:59BradyRobinson: Sure, yeah, I don't want to restate everything either. I want to thank

23:04BradyRobinson: Lauren, Sam, Dan, and staff for putting together a very difficult budget. You know, I largely agree with John and

23:11BradyRobinson: Harmon's comments…

23:13BradyRobinson: And I appreciate that the staff, city staff, and, you know, Central City staff, and you all.

23:19BradyRobinson: Work to answer my extensive questions, and

23:24BradyRobinson: particularly the wildfire section, I thought was… was compelling. I thought you did a really good job with that, and came up with

23:31BradyRobinson: with measurables

23:33BradyRobinson: John's money spent notwithstanding. I thought it was good. I agree with you, John. Wouldn't that be nice to be measured on that metric? But I am going to vote against approving this budget, and here's why.

23:48BradyRobinson: I, I think Attachment B is… is helpful, where they… where they answered our explicit questions.

23:55BradyRobinson: And it got into some of the mechanics.

23:57BradyRobinson: And, it mentioned a phase-out of a subsidy, but there's no… with no baseline.

24:03BradyRobinson: understanding of what the subsidy was based on. We can't verify That,

24:11BradyRobinson: It talked about a 3-5% out-year growth assumption and other factors used in the allocation, but it doesn't give us a clear dollar breakdown.

24:19BradyRobinson: of what the OSMP is paying for in terms of shared services, how our share of those

24:27BradyRobinson: Are projected to change over time as a function of FTE or other things.

24:33BradyRobinson: You know, we don't have…

24:36BradyRobinson: We have a little bit more understanding of their formula, but we don't have enough information to determine whether they're reasonable for the services that we're actually using. I'm sorry, there's some background noise in the public space right now.

24:49BradyRobinson: Also, I'm concerned that it certainly seems like transparency has been going down over time. We've got very direct evidence of that, and some anecdotal evidence of that.

25:00BradyRobinson: I think there's been some staff who've wanted to share things with us and haven't been able to do so. We've been asking for this. We did not get a response.

25:07BradyRobinson: to Council to this. They didn't answer us. We had no response. It was like a total nothing burger.

25:13BradyRobinson: Clearly there's… there's a lot of, Pressure to centralize control.

25:20BradyRobinson: Of the city, staffing, you know, more functions, more control.

25:25BradyRobinson: I still believe that the public realm tax will be very unpopular. This cost allocation is, again, like I said last time, the slow-motion kind of public realm tax.

25:39BradyRobinson: I don't think there's accountability in what services OSMP is getting. Like, if costs are going up, and supposedly the department's getting all these services, is there a way for them to provide feedback on how those are going?

25:51BradyRobinson: I don't think so. So, I'm concerned about that.

25:54BradyRobinson: And again, these are dedicated tax dollars. I agree with what Alan Feinberg's concerns. I don't think people have been taking it seriously.

26:03BradyRobinson: On this, and and I told… I said at the last meeting that if we didn't get adequate answers to my questions, I was going to be in my vote, and I was going to encourage

26:11BradyRobinson: the other board members to join me, and that's what I'm going to be doing right now. And if you're… if you other board members, if you're kind of on the button on this one.

26:19BradyRobinson: And, you know, reasonable minds can disagree. I'm not going to throw a fit if I'm in the minority on this, but I just… I just would encourage you to reflect back on the level of response or lack thereof we've gotten to our concerns.

26:31BradyRobinson: To this point.

26:33BradyRobinson: And, if we really think anybody's gonna pay any more attention to us unless we vote no and send a very clear message, I think the answer is probably not. So I am a no, and I would encourage you to join me.

26:48Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you, Brady.

26:52Jon Carroll (he/him): Morgan?

26:55Morgan Lommele: Yeah, I… I want to convey

27:01Morgan Lommele: Well, I agree with what fellow trustees shared.

27:06Morgan Lommele: And I read an article today that trust in government is at 17%.

27:10Morgan Lommele: in the 60s or 70s, it was at 70%. I am a… I'm one of the,

27:17Morgan Lommele: few who still deeply trust in government, because I see government in action in this forum and many others, and so I want to convey

27:27Morgan Lommele: above anything else I share that I… I deeply trust and respect and see city staff and OSMP staff.

27:37Morgan Lommele: And I see the amount of work that goes into this, and the diligence, and I actually… if I had to guess.

27:44Morgan Lommele: I won't speak for anyone here, but I bet the amount of time…

27:49Morgan Lommele: you OSMP staff put into trying to get accurate answers to our questions, is immeasurable.

27:59Morgan Lommele: and if anything, you know, due to the time it took to get us our packet, I don't follow OSMP staff for that. I deeply trust in OSMP staff, and I deeply trust in

28:11Morgan Lommele: The commitment you have to the… to this board.

28:14Morgan Lommele: I'm not… I'm not inclined… To… to vote in support of the budget,

28:21Morgan Lommele: Because I, you know, it's more than dollars and cents.

28:25Morgan Lommele: In the spirit of government efficiency, you know, Alan and Jan spoke to this.

28:30Morgan Lommele: we're seeing deep cuts to valuable city services, valuable OSMP services, ranger programs, staff who had a defensible and meaningful role, in service to the city, and I don't get the sense that

28:46Morgan Lommele: Jeopardizing that.

28:48Morgan Lommele: In service to cost allocation to the city, to the city general operating budget.

28:54Morgan Lommele: is fair. I have a real problem with the lack of transparency.

29:03Morgan Lommele: in, you know, for example, why the rate of cost allocation is growing at three times the rate as the OSMP budget.

29:10Morgan Lommele: And I feel like… OSMP is having to make really hard, really consequential Cuts to its services.

29:22Morgan Lommele: to,

29:24Morgan Lommele: I think the best way to describe it is to, you know, compensate the city for its inefficiency. And maybe for me, this is a stand-in in the face of

29:34Morgan Lommele: many other valuable services from the city that are not within this department being cut.

29:40Morgan Lommele: But if this is how I can express…

29:43Morgan Lommele: the, the disappointment that I feel in the way that our city at large is being managed, not OSMP, not staff here. This is how I may do that.

29:55Morgan Lommele: I certainly don't mean that to come off.

29:58Morgan Lommele: as a threat, I feel very dissatisfied with the way the city at large is managing its budget, and I feel that OSMP is having to pay the price for that, and I don't think that's fair, and I think it's more visible than almost anything else to the community. I do have questions.

30:11Morgan Lommele: I have just a couple questions about cost allocation. I don't know that we, you know, Lauren or Dan or others can answer this right now, but I do want to ask…

30:20Morgan Lommele: Why is cost allocating… cost allocation trending?

30:24Morgan Lommele: 3 times higher… than the increase to the OSMP budget over the next 5 years.

30:30Morgan Lommele: And if you don't know, that's okay. I won't fault you for it. You've done as good of a job as I think you can in answering the questions we had, but is there an answer to that question?

30:44Lauren Kilcoyne: It's funny looking at Dan on Zoom, we normally just look at each other and go, who wants to start? I can try, and you know, I think Charlotte… I think this was one of Brady's direct questions, and I think Charlotte tried to answer that. I think, from what I… from the best I can articulate it, and I would have to defer to her.

31:03Lauren Kilcoyne: A lot of that projected growth, that 3-5% and the 5% growth assumption, seems to be rooted in, salary growth, the increase in salary expense with most of the things in the cost allocation plan.

31:17Lauren Kilcoyne: related to salary costs. So, as I was looking through, some of that line item detail in Attachment B, a lot of that's charged on an FTE basis, and a lot of it just on,

31:28Lauren Kilcoyne: what your operating budget is as a department, and sort of a presumption that that relates to the complexity of service that you receive, and so I believe it was because most of what is in that plan is paying for staff, that there is an assumption that the cost of staff increases over time.

31:44Morgan Lommele: non-OSMP staff.

31:46Lauren Kilcoyne: Correct.

31:48Dan Burke, COB: Well, with that, Lauren and Sam, I mean, our staff resources, in terms of the projections of the modeling for benefits and salary,

31:59Dan Burke, COB: our… ours aren't decreasing or increasing more or less than other city staff. I mean, it's… the modeling projections are done across the organization, so…

32:10Dan Burke, COB: For instance, they don't model OSMP staff at only growing at 1%, but IT, for instance, gets an 8% bump. It's uniform across the board as far as those modeling projections.

32:23Lauren Kilcoyne: Yes, and within the cost allocation line, you see the 5% growth assumption based on non-open space staff. Where you would see that show up within the open space operating budget would be in the division budgets, the community connections, which includes the rangers.

32:37Lauren Kilcoyne: the trails, all of that stuff, and the reason that it doesn't grow as fast is we're assuming that we're cutting FTE, so yes, the staff that are here, we assume a growth rate, but we assume that we're cutting FTE as well as contracted budgets, and so the sort of end result of that is less than a 3% growth per year on our operating costs.

32:59Morgan Lommele: Okay, thank you. And what I'm seeing, if we compare 2026 for 7 budget to 2032, OSMP budget increases by 17%, cost allocation in that same period increases by 53%.

33:13Morgan Lommele: So that… You somewhat answered that, just the way that… With salaries and whatnot, but…

33:21Morgan Lommele: that's stark. And my… I guess the bigger question is, what do we get for it?

33:29Morgan Lommele: And are services moving away from OSMP to general city operating costs? Like, is that relieving any burden on OSMP to free up funds to do other, things in the community? You know, wildfire, water ag, whatever? What do we get for that?

33:46Lauren Kilcoyne: Yeah, there are, the making of the plan is quite complicated, where all of the internal services are outlining the services they provide to the broader city, and so…

33:58Lauren Kilcoyne: I like to use City Attorney's Office as an example of a great service that we get, where it's really based on the number of matters. We have an extremely complex, legally difficult environment in managing land, and land access, and land rights, and easements, and whatever.

34:13Lauren Kilcoyne: And so the city attorney that's assigned to us is, like, an extension of our staff team in some ways, and so we bring matters to her all the time.

34:21Lauren Kilcoyne: And they're tracking that allocated cost, I think based on… it's in Attachment B, and I don't have that… I'm not looking at it right now, but I believe it's, like, number of matters and some sort of FTE assumption. And then each department is sort of listing what services they provide, but yeah, I mean, there's a…

34:37Lauren Kilcoyne: over a dozen, I believe, internal service departments that are charging us, for services, and I… unfortunately, I don't have the entire plan in front of me where I can tell you exactly what those are, but we do partner, of course, with

34:50Lauren Kilcoyne: finance on budget, and IT on enterprise software that we pay for through the interdepartmental transfer and etc. So I'm sure I could keep going, but I'm not sure if I'm directly answering your question.

35:02Morgan Lommele: Is that the 500-plus page plan that Brady mentions sometimes? Is that what you're talking about?

35:07Lauren Kilcoyne: The full cost allocation plan, yes.

35:09Morgan Lommele: Yeah.

35:09BradyRobinson: 540.

35:11Morgan Lommele: Yeah, thank you. Well…

35:14Morgan Lommele: I… I mean, there's a spirit… I mean, we asked this question, or, you know, made a motion, I can't remember what, in April, to be informed of these discussions and deliberations earlier on in the budget cycle. I want to just reflect that for the record, that OSMP desires to be more informed.

35:32Morgan Lommele: I have a big outstanding question of whether, you know, we can reduce that cost allocation. I want it to be a discussion with OSMP, and as department leadership.

35:43Morgan Lommele: If there's ever space for that. And my final question, maybe for Dan, and Dan, I bet the answer is, depends, and you probably don't want to answer this, but in your… in your opinion, do you feel like the city's cutting department budgets more quickly than general city operating budgets?

36:00Dan Burke, COB: No, I would say that, being on the leadership team and being part of, director conversations in the first couple of weeks of August, where we meet with the executive budget teams, sometimes jointly, cross-collaboratively, with a number of different, city leadership or department leaderships, as well as one-on-one.

36:20Dan Burke, COB: With EBT, this was a very tough budget year for every single department. There isn't a department that's, walking away with this budget.

36:29Dan Burke, COB: With,

36:32Dan Burke, COB: shiny increases, or their staff was treated differently on cost allocation, or modeling, or anything else. There was, layoffs from other city department staff.

36:42Dan Burke, COB: all around, it was a very tough budget year, and OSMP notwithstanding. So…

36:49Dan Burke, COB: If there is a perception that open space, either through a mechanism like cost allocation or other mechanisms in the budget, that we're being singled out and treated differently, either in the model or in decision making.

37:05Dan Burke, COB: I guess I would disagree with that perception. I think that every single department

37:12Dan Burke, COB: leadership was walking around with some, you know, chins held low this year. It was… it was a tough year, all around.

37:21Dan Burke, COB: Nope.

37:21Morgan Lommele: It sounds… it sounds really tough.

37:24Morgan Lommele: And sometimes… I'm sure everyone gets…

37:29Morgan Lommele: sad to see colleagues go and to see the department changing in the face of fiscal constraints. I want to reflect that. We know there's an emotional component.

37:40Morgan Lommele: John, I think that's it for now. Thanks for the chance to ask some questions and talk about it.

37:48Jon Carroll (he/him): Thanks, Morgan.

37:49Jon Carroll (he/him): Sarah?

37:55Sarah Glynn: All right, well, I think we have incredible programs at Boulder Open Space, and I know, Jeff, Heather, Janelle, you guys are on here, and I want to thank each of you individually for the

38:09Sarah Glynn: divisions that you run within the Open Space Department. I don't know if we call them divisions, so excuse me if I'm using the wrong language there. I know I'm using the wrong language. But we do have incredible programs. Our conservation efforts, our youth and community engagement programs, Junior Rangers, you guys know, is one of my favorites.

38:30Sarah Glynn: And then all of the infrastructure that we're maintaining, and the visitors, the way that we're receiving visitors, 6 million visitors to our open space annually, and every… all of the work that you guys are doing day-to-day is… is incredible, and I am so proud of open space, and so proud of our program, so thank you guys.

38:49Sarah Glynn: Sam and Lauren, and Leah, I'm gonna throw you in there, as well. I just… you guys are, really professional, and you're exceptional. So when I look at this budget.

39:03Sarah Glynn: all told, and I see how much we're spending on our personnel. I don't think a single dollar of that is being wasted, at least on the personnel that I've had the privilege to interact with over the past two and a half years. Each month, we have several different staff people coming in, and I see the other trustees, I see a few of you nodding your heads as well. I mean, it's really incredible.

39:26Sarah Glynn: And I think it's easy to take for granted how much it actually costs to build a strong team and to run, programs with competent staff and personnel. And so, the bulk of our budget here actually does go to that, and one of the things that I…

39:40Sarah Glynn: had the hardest time hearing about this year with this budget cycle is that we're letting people go, and that we're still in a freeze. We're not able to hire or maintain some of the positions that we had hoped in years past that we would be able to hire more full-time or maintain.

39:59Sarah Glynn: I think it was Jan Burton during public comment, mentioned a need for more rangers. I know there are varying degrees of responsibilities that rangers have, but I… I do believe we need especially more boots on the ground, people out there, and I, I'm, I'm…

40:17Sarah Glynn: frustrated that we are not able to, expand our Rangers. I also am frustrated that we have hundreds of young people applying to become junior Rangers, and we're not able to support that. So there's a lot, just really in terms of the people. I love our people.

40:35Sarah Glynn: I love our programs, and I wish that we were able to bring on more people, and that we were using our growth for that purpose, and it's unfortunate that we're making cuts instead.

40:47Sarah Glynn: I also, we haven't talked a lot about it in our meetings, but I want to acknowledge that we

40:53Sarah Glynn: are in our budget-focused meetings, but I want to acknowledge that we have an enormous backlog of maintenance, and buildings that need attention and repair, not just our trails, but our buildings. It's sitting at a hefty number that's almost $10 million.

41:10Sarah Glynn: So, I recognize that we are… and when I look at the budget and the work that you guys put in this year, I see that you made tough decisions. I believe that you have, been,

41:22Sarah Glynn: doing everything you can, to maintain the things that we need to maintain and make as few cuts as possible, and I see all of that effort and all of that work.

41:31Sarah Glynn: So if it were just about… and we don't get to approve a budget here, we get to recommend a budget.

41:38Sarah Glynn: So if all that I were doing were recommending the budget for staff, seeing what I see, knowing what I know about the tough decisions you've had to make, and the team that you are, and how you're operating on the day-to-day, I'm just… I'm a green light on approving that, even though I am saddened that we can't expand our staff, and that we've had to make cuts.

41:59Sarah Glynn: The 20% that we're spending, that is, what do we call that? We're spending on the hard costs, and I'm looking at all of you on the screen instead of looking at the line items on the sheet, so excuse me for not using the proper, language.

42:15BradyRobinson: Are you talking about cost allocation?

42:16Sarah Glynn: not… I'm not there yet, not that slice of the pie, it's the 20% that goes to…

42:22Sarah Glynn: It's the hard cost, Dan.

42:23Lauren Kilcoyne: Non-personnel budget, so.

42:25Dan Burke, COB: Oh, non-personnel.

42:26Sarah Glynn: Thank you, non-personnel. I don't have… I don't have much to say about that. I do think it would be nice if we had more, to spend there, but that's all that I'll say there. I do think that this cost allocation, spending over 12% of our total budget, given that we have such an enormous backlog on maintenance.

42:48Sarah Glynn: Given that we're cutting our staff.

42:51Sarah Glynn: And given that we just don't know what the heck it's going towards.

42:56Sarah Glynn: I might be singing a different tune if I knew where it was going. I can't say… I just can't recommend… I cannot recommend that 12%, 12.6% of the budget, because I can't see it.

43:10Sarah Glynn: I need the dummy sheet. I need the quick breakdown, anything, not hundreds of pages or multiple rounds of sit-downs and questions. And, so because I can't… because that's 12

43:25Sarah Glynn: 0.6% of the overall budget. I personally cannot recommend the entire budget. I cannot recommend the budget this year as a trustee. I had questions about it last year. I don't feel that anything has changed over the past year, and Brady, I agree with what you said. I feel that if we don't…

43:44Sarah Glynn: Make a statement here, then it will… we'll go on with business as usual.

43:50Sarah Glynn: And I would like to make a statement, and my personal statement is I want to be able to see, I just want a line of sight in. I want to know what's happening with that 12.6% in a way that I can read it, I can understand it, I can communicate it to other members of the community. I love to be a spokesperson for open space, but right now I'm put in a position where

44:13Sarah Glynn: I can't say. I don't know, and… and it puts me in a really tough bind, because when people can't see things, it erodes trust. So what we are creating is mistrust in the community due to that… that…

44:28Sarah Glynn: clarity. And I… I want to be a stand for building trust with the community, so I am going to be voting no. I… I will be voting to not, approve, to not recommend the budget, this year.

44:43Sarah Glynn: That's gonna… that's where I stand.

44:47Jon Carroll (he/him): Thanks, Sarah.

44:48Dan Burke, COB: And thanks, Sarah. Could I just clarify two quick things? It's not going to change the tenor or anything I hear. Yeah. It's, the cost allocation and transfers is 10% of the total budget.

44:59Sarah Glynn: Wow.

45:00Dan Burke, COB: the 12.6% is, the portion of the operating budget. So, just a clarification there, I just want to make sure…

45:08Dan Burke, COB: the facts up.

45:09Sarah Glynn: Always guess, please correct me there. Okay, so 10% is the cost allocation, and it's, it's too much. I also, it was Jan Burton that said earlier, I feel that this should be somewhere around 3-5% of our total budget, especially without any clarity on where it's being spent. If indeed we need more, inter… any… if we need more of those services, then

45:33Sarah Glynn: other departments.

45:34Sarah Glynn: That's fine. I would just like to know

45:38Sarah Glynn: what we're using and where it's going. And it's not to say that we've received nothing, it's just not at the caliber of what I would need to

45:49Sarah Glynn: receive, to feel that I understand it well enough, to, recommend it, and also, most importantly, to communicate it to the public in a way that I can stand behind.

46:01Sarah Glynn: So, so, yeah.

46:03Sarah Glynn: I think so.

46:05Sarah Glynn: So, yeah.

46:05Dan Burke, COB: And one more clarification, the city is not under a formal hiring freeze right now. Obviously, the department, anytime we have a vacancy, our leadership team meets on every vacancy and looks at the prioritization of whether it should be filled.

46:19Dan Burke, COB: Whether perhaps that vacancy is better used in a different position than what is currently vacant.

46:26Dan Burke, COB: But we, after going through that iteration, and then, we do have the ability to fill, vacancies, so I just wanted to clarify that as well.

46:38Sarah Glynn: That's great. Thank you.

46:41Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you, Sarah. Thank you, Dan. I see Harmon has his hand up.

46:50Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): I had my real hand and my virtual hand up.

46:54Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): So, seeing that we may be… the yes votes on the budget recommendation may be in the minority, I want to take a couple of minutes just to explain my position a little bit more thoroughly than I did the first time around. And so, what I'll start by saying is.

47:10Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): I read the packet with interest, and I found that the answers about the increase in allocation to Brady's pointed questions were pretty unsatisfactory.

47:22Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Especially because…

47:24Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): when, you know, one of the key points about why the cost allocation keeps going up is based in salary. When…

47:34Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): we're programming to lower the number of FTEs within OSMP, and besides, salaries are sort of the only thing that generally couldn't be allocated because you're paying your own employees within the department.

47:49Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): So if you're just using salaries as sort of a barometer, or as a coefficient.

47:57Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): to… as a multiplier, then it's the wrong measure. And what we've been asking for, what Brady and I were asking for over a year ago, was not a formula. It was…

48:09Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): specificity on what the money is paying for. What are we paying for? What exactly are we getting? Which is Sarah's concern.

48:17Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): So, I still don't have a clue as to why allocation is going up on that regular basis that it is in the out years. So, I am not satisfied with that.

48:31Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Another piece that I'm disappointed in is the process, because I think that as an advisory board, one of the things that we do is we channel

48:41Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): public conversation into the department.

48:46Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And if there are things that are becoming a real priority for the public.

48:51Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): If we look at the budget earlier.

48:54Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And we see a need that isn't being addressed as much as it should be, in our opinion, or we see an issue that we think is becoming more important, like wildfire resiliency, we can talk about that in the context of the budget, and maybe staff looks and sees, oh, wow, you know, there's this accounting trick, or there's this money pool that we can reshift, or that we can reallocate, and we can focus it on this area that's important to the

49:18Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): or important to the public, or important to people today. And it's harder for us to be in that conversation

49:25Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): In the new budget procedure that… where we're getting Less information later.

49:32Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): So that's… that's also difficult for me. But, all of that said, this year's budget, to me, with the exception of the transparency issue around allocation, it's satisfactory.

49:45Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And…

49:47Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): If Council heeds our pleas and provides more transparency in the future, we can fix the problem with the out years in future budgets, just having that escalator of allocation going up and up and up.

50:01Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And those out years are just estimates at this point. They're not set. We're not agreeing to those at this point. So I'm gonna vote yes.

50:09Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): But I think it's really important that we reiterate our demand or our request for transparency. I think it's really becoming… at this level, it's really becoming important that we see

50:23Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): What services we're getting for the allocation dollars that we're putting out.

50:30Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you, Harmon. And I'll…

50:34Jon Carroll (he/him): say that I feel very much the same way, and will be voting the same way for the same reasons as you.

50:41Jon Carroll (he/him): Brady, so you have your hand up.

50:44BradyRobinson: Yeah, thanks. I just wanted to underscore…

50:47BradyRobinson: something Sarah said, which is… she can't explain For the 10%.

50:53BradyRobinson: is going. And… and I think that's…

50:56BradyRobinson: You know, we need more than vibes.

50:58BradyRobinson: To reallocate dedicated funds that the taxpayers have levied on themselves.

51:04BradyRobinson: and we all have, like, gut instincts, oh, 3 would have been fine, or 5, or maybe 7, but that's not the point. You know, there's… there's university settings in which grants get eaten up at almost 50%, right? And so, the number…

51:19BradyRobinson: what we got… well, our gut instinct on the number isn't the issue. The issue is, what is it going for? What's the process? Is there transparency? Is this inspiring confidence and trust in the public or not? And I think Sarah stated it really well.

51:31BradyRobinson: And I think it matters. And, I think we're… we're… to recommend this budget is, recommending

51:40BradyRobinson: Yeah, there's… there's some… there's some, there's some dark spaces on the map that we don't have

51:45BradyRobinson: And then when you look at the out… the out-year projections, it's even more consumers.

51:50BradyRobinson: I just wanted to reiterate what Sarah said, and I mean a no.

51:55BradyRobinson: At least for the reasons that we've all stated.

51:59Jon Carroll (he/him): Yep.

52:00Jon Carroll (he/him): Thanks, Brady.

52:03Jon Carroll (he/him): Well, it sounds like we might be ready to hear a motion?

52:15BradyRobinson: John, do you have a motion for us?

52:18Jon Carroll (he/him): Oh, Leah pull it up here…

52:22Jon Carroll (he/him): I'll move that the Open Space Board of Trustees recommend that City Council approve an appropriation of $5,500,438 in 2027.

52:34Jon Carroll (he/him): from the Open Space Fund's CIP as outlined in this memorandum, and recommend that $350,000 be appropriated from the City's Lottery Fund CIP in 2027.

52:46Jon Carroll (he/him): I think we need to do these separately, right? So I'll stop there.

52:51Jon Carroll (he/him): Or do we do them both at once?

52:55Morgan Lommele: Wait, what's the diff- oh, I see, never mind. Yep.

52:58Jon Carroll (he/him): PR.

53:00Dan Burke, COB: Sam, could you clarify whether this can be all in one motion, or they have to be separate?

53:05Sam McQueen (she/her), City of Boulder OSMP: I think it's… I think it's the 2?

53:07Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, I believe we've done it separately in the past, I was looking at…

53:10Dan Burke, COB: Thank you.

53:11Jon Carroll (he/him): budgets, so… I'll leave it there then.

53:13Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): motion.

53:14Jon Carroll (he/him): Motion. Okay. Alright.

53:15Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): I'll second the first motion.

53:19Jon Carroll (he/him): Harmon seconded.

53:21Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay, I think we've… Unless anyone has any commentary, I'll open it up for a roll call vote.

53:29Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Robinson?

53:35BradyRobinson: No.

53:37Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Zuckerman?

53:39Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Yes.

53:40Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Lommele?

53:42Morgan Lommele: Yes.

53:45Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Glynn?

53:46Sarah Glynn: No.

53:50Jon Carroll (he/him): And I will vote yes.

53:55Jon Carroll (he/him): I believe that was 3-4?

53:59Jon Carroll (he/him): Correct.

54:01Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): 3 to 2.

54:02Jon Carroll (he/him): We do too.

54:07Jon Carroll (he/him): Alright, I… happy to hear a motion for the second one.

54:15Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): All right, I'll move that the Open Space Board of Trustees recommend that City Council approve an appropriation of $37,337,922 in 2027 for the Open Space and Mountain Parks operating budget from the Open Space Fund as outlined in this memorandum and related attachments.

54:33Jon Carroll (he/him): Hold on a second.

54:34Morgan Lommele: motion.

54:35Jon Carroll (he/him): Oh, nope, we can save.

54:37Jon Carroll (he/him): Morgan got it, gets it.

54:45Jon Carroll (he/him): Alright, with that, I'll open it up for a vote.

54:52Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Robinson?

54:55BradyRobinson: Is there any opportunity for discussion at this point, Sean? Sure, sure.

54:59Jon Carroll (he/him): Go for it.

55:00BradyRobinson: Morgan, did something change? Did I mishear you from before?

55:04Morgan Lommele: Yeah, something changed for me when Harmon distilled, kind of, what we're here to do, and I'm happy to talk about it,

55:13Morgan Lommele: I…

55:17Morgan Lommele: I have real problems with the cost allocation. I'm just… I'm just bummed out about it. The lack of transparency, the lack of answers to our questions, even in my 6 months on the board.

55:29Morgan Lommele: we've asked these questions over and over again, and so I have real problems with that. We've gone through it all. And I'd like to ask that if there's space on the agenda at our retreat on the 30th, we talk about this, or we carve outside… we carve out time, talk about it in the future.

55:45Morgan Lommele: But the… the… given fiscal constraints, given what the department needs to do, I support the budget as it's written. So for me, it's two separate issues, and…

55:56Morgan Lommele: that was distilled in my mind when I heard Harmon speak up about

56:02Morgan Lommele: Speak up about the budget versus our procedural questions and concerns.

56:09Jon Carroll (he/him): And I'll add, you know, I feel very much the same way, and my concern is, is that…

56:16Jon Carroll (he/him): I feel like we're here to approve, you know, how the Open Space Department is spending their money, and not necessarily how the City is allocating, costs. I do have serious concerns around it, and I'm happy to entertain a motion after this expressing our concerns, but, in

56:34Jon Carroll (he/him): I'm not…

56:36Jon Carroll (he/him): convinced that us rejecting the budget is going to be interpreted as an indictment of cost allocation, and instead would be interpreted as an indictment of how the Open Space Department has chosen to allocate funds in this budget.

56:48Jon Carroll (he/him): And I think they've done a great job, so that's why I'm voting, yes.

56:53BradyRobinson: I think we have every opportunity, John, to clarify why we would be voting no.

56:58BradyRobinson: on this, so I disagree with you on that last point.

57:01BradyRobinson: And I'm a little bit disappointed in that, Morgan, you changed your position, but I respect your ability to do so.

57:07Morgan Lommele: Well, I never… I came into this meeting not knowing how I would vote. I've been spending all day thinking about it.

57:14Morgan Lommele: I've never committed to my position. I don't feel like voting no.

57:20Morgan Lommele: will be heard. You know, the mayor and other council members have admitted to all of us individually, they don't… they don't really see what we say. It's buried in memos and council packets.

57:33Morgan Lommele: I…

57:35Morgan Lommele: I'd like to send them a message, and I'd like to be really clear and concise about our concerns.

57:41Morgan Lommele: to me, voting no isn't the mechanism to do that. I could still be convinced, I don't know, I'm…

57:47Morgan Lommele: I don't think there's a cut and dry answer here.

57:53BradyRobinson: Well, I met with.

57:53Morgan Lommele: Robbing Peter to pay Paul here, I mean, and kind of doing as we're told, not as the city does, doesn't feel great.

58:00BradyRobinson: Yeah, I mean, I guess at the top of this, reasonable minds can disagree, and…

58:05BradyRobinson: No hard feelings if we decided on this. It's actually kind of refreshing to have a real debate and a vote. It's something we don't do all the time. That being said.

58:16BradyRobinson: And I apologize for the background noise. That being said, we've been asking.

58:22BradyRobinson: I've been asking for 2 years, over 2 years, we've gotten nothing.

58:26BradyRobinson: And, I think it's time to send a different message, and that's why…

58:30BradyRobinson: You know, I've been working, haven't been here for all that, and so, you know, my kind of compounded frustration. When I first got here, I felt like the only way to get any clarity on using the budget was to hire McKenzie.

58:42BradyRobinson: Have somebody do forensic accounting on the damn thing.

58:46BradyRobinson: And so…

58:49BradyRobinson: At the very least, having more transparency in cost allocation seems like a minor thing to ask for. We've gotten absolutely nothing. In fact, every indication that the city staff would prefer less transparency

59:01BradyRobinson: Not more, as evidenced by the change in the budget process, as evidenced by the staff apparently being directed not to share drafts with us. You know, technically, we're supposed to approve the city manager's budget, and therefore, the only budget we can see is the one that the city manager issues, which means we get… we give a month.

59:21BradyRobinson: to review it. That is not how things have been working for years here.

59:24BradyRobinson: And the staff are in a difficult position of having to defend.

59:27BradyRobinson: Central City, decisions. And so, you know, Dan and others were waiting as they will. I'm here to tell you it's very different this year. I don't like it. I don't think anyone really cares, and I think a way to send a clear message is to say, no, we don't approve this. We don't approve the way it happened. We don't approve the lack of transparency and cost allocation.

59:47BradyRobinson: And again, we're not… we're not throwing a spoke in the mechanism of the entire budget process. The Council has the authority. We're just making recommendations. So anyway, I'm not going to drag this out anymore. Again, respect to everyone for conscience on this.

1:00:03BradyRobinson: I think I've set my piece.

1:00:08Sarah Glynn: I think, I believe that…

1:00:12Sarah Glynn: We are saying essentially the same thing, and the way that we're voting is more representative of how each of us orients towards, you know, what does it mean to say no here?

1:00:27Sarah Glynn: and…

1:00:30Sarah Glynn: I don't know if it's worth deliberating further on that. I'm more than happy to show up and say… and to be dissenting on both of these items, even if it's only me, and then to take the time to explain why, in conversations

1:00:48Sarah Glynn: If… if and when asked about that, and or to include… also, I… is it possible for us to include a motion here? John, you had mentioned that. Can we add a motion that might explain

1:01:03Sarah Glynn: Where we agree as trustees, or, what the sticking points were that had us, you know, not be unanimously a resounding yes to this, so that there is more, being said than just a yay-nay.

1:01:20Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah. I think there's a lot the board agrees on here, and so what I would like to do is take a vote on this motion, and then talk about potentially making a motion around what the board does agree on, and what we might want to communicate to Council.

1:01:38Sarah Glynn: Yeah, great.

1:01:40Morgan Lommele: I just… I want to caution against… Sarah, you… you've done this a couple times, you've…

1:01:46Morgan Lommele: said we all agree on something. We all have the same interest in transparency. I don't…

1:01:52Morgan Lommele: I think we're all saying the same thing.

1:01:55Morgan Lommele: We're not all saying the same thing. Our shared interest is transparency.

1:02:01Morgan Lommele: early information, space to ask questions, the substantive issue of cost allocation, what are we getting, why is it increasing? Why does it, you know, appear the way it does on the budget? If we can memorialize that and send a message to Council.

1:02:16Morgan Lommele: Great, I… I… I'm speaking for myself and saying I will vote yes on the budget,

1:02:24Morgan Lommele: In the interest of supporting staff, and providing staff.

1:02:29Morgan Lommele: direction from OSBT, and maybe we have a shared interest around that transparency and the cost allocation piece.

1:02:37Sarah Glynn: Yeah.

1:02:38Sarah Glynn: I'm not sure how what I said is different than what you just said there, Morgan. I don't disagree with you on… what I was trying to get at there is, can there be another statement that we're making that

1:02:52Sarah Glynn: Digs a little bit deeper into why… what we're yes to, what we're no to, or where we might agree.

1:02:59Sarah Glynn: Together as a group, as trustees, Through a motion.

1:03:06Jon Carroll (he/him): I would love to take that up after we take a vote on this.

1:03:10Sarah Glynn: Great. Yeah.

1:03:11Jon Carroll (he/him): Can I…

1:03:12Sarah Glynn: Can I ask a question, Dan? Can I put you on the spot for a minute here? Does… does my voting no… am I signaling that I… does this jeopardize the work that you guys are doing in any way?

1:03:27Sarah Glynn: I don't know exactly how to ask this question, but,

1:03:31Sarah Glynn: Is it clear? I would hate to have it come across with my no vote that I…

1:03:38Sarah Glynn: Again, I really… there's a big portion of this budget that I completely understand and agree to, and the reason I'm a no is because that 10%, I can't see what it is, and I don't know how to… that's a significant enough portion of the budget that I just don't feel that I can

1:03:57Sarah Glynn: say yes right now to the whole thing. Is my voting no? I'm not asking you to tell me how to vote, I understand, but I would love to just hear any thoughts or reactions that you would be willing to share before we move on with this.

1:04:15Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): I just want to say, before you answer, if you answer, Dan, this line of questioning makes me really uncomfortable. I think, you know.

1:04:22Sarah Glynn: Okay.

1:04:23Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): board member, I just vote my conscience, and, you know, I put my reasons on the record, and I don't… you can take it for what you will.

1:04:33Jon Carroll (he/him): I also… at this point, we're deliberating and not… the questions portion has passed, I feel like, so…

1:04:39Sarah Glynn: Okay, I'm hearing that, for the other board members, I'm hearing you say that you feel that a no vote is a vote against the staff, and I'm just wondering if I'm totally missing something. But I'll just stick with my no vote.

1:04:54Sarah Glynn: And I'll go for it. It's fine. I just wanted… I'm trying to, dig a little deeper and understand.

1:05:01Sarah Glynn: if there's something I'm unintentionally doing, I don't know if one of you of my fellow… if any of the other trustees want to speak more to that, or if…

1:05:10Sarah Glynn: It's okay. I'm fine. I'm good. I can just do my… do my thing.

1:05:15Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, I…

1:05:16Sarah Glynn: Okay.

1:05:17Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, let's, let's, go for a vote.

1:05:22Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Can I say one more thing, please? Yeah.

1:05:24Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Well, I just want to say, Sarah, for what it's worth, you know, this board is… has voiced significant concerns with this budget, and also significant support for this budget, and I think a 3-2 vote might send that message as well, so…

1:05:39Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): You know.

1:05:40Sarah Glynn: Okay.

1:05:40Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): might… might express the ambivalence of this board well. I, I, you know, your vote's still your vote, but I just wanted to make that observation.

1:05:48Sarah Glynn: Very good. I'm trained in consensus, so consensus is, like, if there's one objection, then we stay with it longer, but this idea that you can… we have multiple things, it's a little uncomfortable for me, but I'm… I'm happy to just put my no vote in. I'll… I think I'm next on the voting there, so you can put my…

1:06:06Jon Carroll (he/him): So, yeah, I was up… I was up till 1AM last night, just, you know, going back and forth on this, so I… I totally understand everyone voting on both sides of this, so…

1:06:17Sarah Glynn: Thanks, John.

1:06:17Jon Carroll (he/him): Alright. Well, let's move to a vote. Trustee Lommele.

1:06:25Morgan Lommele: Yes.

1:06:26Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Robinson.

1:06:28BradyRobinson: No.

1:06:30Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Zuckerman.

1:06:31Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Yes.

1:06:33Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Glynn.

1:06:35Sarah Glynn: No.

1:06:36Jon Carroll (he/him): And I will vote yes as well.

1:06:40Jon Carroll (he/him): So the motion passes 3-2.

1:06:43Jon Carroll (he/him): with Sarah and Brady dissenting.

1:06:50Dan Burke, COB: John, before we go to the… I'm anticipating there's a next section here with some more deliberations, but before we get off of this topic, the one thing I am interested in, and in future conversations, is the process.

1:07:05Dan Burke, COB: As you know, this was a year of change in terms of the process. I actually personally am in supportive of the new process, and the reason being is that

1:07:18Dan Burke, COB: 4, 5, 6 years ago. It was very department-specific, and the budgets was…

1:07:25Dan Burke, COB: was somewhat done in isolation, especially if you had dedicated funding. It was done in isolations, and now there's a uniform, consistent way in which all departments come together and develop a budget. And so, a lot of the conversations that are happening in August

1:07:40Dan Burke, COB: are… are these collaborative, cross-departmental discussions. For instance, Wildfire. We have a whole separate budget discussion with all 10 departments coming together around wildfire, not just open space, and out of those conversations.

1:07:55Dan Burke, COB: we could change what one department may be thinking in terms of the budget based on these cross-collaborated decisions. This board used to act on a budget in July before all those discussions happened.

1:08:09Dan Burke, COB: Four or five years ago, that was primarily okay, because there wasn't as much robust cross-collaboration discussions as there is now. With this new process in place in which departments are expected to collaborate and discuss among each other, and subsequently, there's changes based on that.

1:08:28Dan Burke, COB: There's… there would be so many micro,

1:08:31Dan Burke, COB: possibilities of micro-changes from that, that what you saw from July and what you may have approved or recommended in July would look different coming out of August. So I think… I think I would like to challenge all of us, saying, under this new paradigm, what discussions do we need to have throughout the year

1:08:48Dan Burke, COB: That could send a signal to the open space staff of.

1:08:53Dan Burke, COB: for instance, here's the trend data over the next 5 years regarding… or over the last 5 years regarding certain programs and the amount of investments we're making in them. Are we happy with that? Are there concerns with that level? Do we want to make a different switch with that level? And I think we have opportunities to have those discussions

1:09:12Dan Burke, COB: outside of, seeing a very specific 2027 budget number, because if we do that homework ahead of time, then when it comes down to early, late August, when you do see the numbers.

1:09:23Dan Burke, COB: you're able to compare, sort of, that trend data, what we were talking about, and where you thought… where you think you want us to be on that with what the actual number is. So…

1:09:32Dan Burke, COB: I understand that this was a difficult year, but I also think we could do some adjustments and some… add in some future conversations to allow us to send the signal to the department level

1:09:45Dan Burke, COB: of where we might want to look at investments, either upwards or downwards, based on what we've been doing, in the past year. So, just want to put that out there.

1:09:56Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, thanks, Dan. I… I hear you, and I, you know, I would be totally open to, you know, discussing how we could see more stuff earlier, but what I recall hearing from you and staff has been, you know, an inability to kind of

1:10:13Jon Carroll (he/him): Share that information with us in advance of.

1:10:16Dan Burke, COB: Yeah, it's not an… it's an inability. It's in the spirit of how all boards and commissions and how the whole city is going to do it.

1:10:23Dan Burke, COB: one board isn't going to see it in May, another board sees it in August, and another season in September. The planning board, who actually has approval authority, doesn't act until after the city manager's budget. So, in the spirit of, can we all align on how it's done.

1:10:40Dan Burke, COB: having it be done according to charter language is that we will consider… this board will consider the city manager's recommended budget, not Dan Burke's recommendation to the city manager's budget.

1:10:53Dan Burke, COB: I'm okay with that, and I think that level of consistency, Is… is a valid point.

1:11:02Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, and I don't think any of us are opposed to approving the city manager's budget, right? And I don't think that's what any of us are concerned about, and we should continue to do that going forward, right? But just given the amount of time we've had to ask questions.

1:11:18Jon Carroll (he/him): interact with the staff around it has been really short, right? And if there's ways

1:11:23Jon Carroll (he/him): we can get creative around, you know, looking at forecasts for certain areas, departments, right, you know, over 5 years, like you suggested. I certainly think that helps, right? Just the, kind of, the signaling we got around doing that previously was that that wasn't feasible or possible.

1:11:44Jon Carroll (he/him): So, definitely appreciate the… putting that out there as an option. Brady, you had your hand up?

1:11:50BradyRobinson: Yeah, I think, Dan, just to put a little correction, I mean, we're recommending the city manager's budget. We can consider whatever we want.

1:11:58BradyRobinson: And so, we can consider your best effort draft. And I think, you know, I think it's great that the… I mean, you know, consistency is one thing, and sometimes it's a good thing, sometimes it's not. We do have a mandate, we do have a budget mandate. It may be a recommendation as opposed to approval.

1:12:14BradyRobinson: But I think there's a reason for us, you know, there's justification for us to have more time than a month

1:12:19BradyRobinson: to consider an incredibly complex budget. There's other ways, you know, I think you're getting at other ways to… to solve for this. You know, a two-year budget cycle is the way to solve for this, because there's different ways to solve for this, but I think the fact that your departments are doing all this negotiation, it's going well, the public has no idea. That does not solve the transparency problem.

1:12:38BradyRobinson: And that doesn't give us enough time.

1:12:40BradyRobinson: To consider it. So, well, on the one hand, I appreciate that things internally feel better. Externally, it feels like less information.

1:12:49BradyRobinson: Less transparency, more obfuscation, and more centralized control. And I'm concerned about that.

1:12:57Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah.

1:12:59Jon Carroll (he/him): With that, I did…

1:13:03Jon Carroll (he/him): write some language for a motion. I wanted the board to consider, to kind of express our concerns around the budgeting process this year, and, around cost allocation.

1:13:17Jon Carroll (he/him): Leah, maybe you could pull it up and…

1:13:20Jon Carroll (he/him): We could share it with the board. I think this is gonna be… Option 1…

1:13:26Jon Carroll (he/him): I wrote two different versions, depending on if we recommended the budget or not.

1:13:39Jon Carroll (he/him): So,

1:13:41Jon Carroll (he/him): I've… I've tried to kind of encapsulate what I've heard from all of the other board members, over the year.

1:13:48Jon Carroll (he/him): with… and years, in some cases, from Brady around cost allocation, into a motion. I… our previous motions have been very short and sweet.

1:13:59Jon Carroll (he/him): And they were not effective. So I've intentionally written a motion that is a lot longer and a lot more detailed, attempting to capture and express our concerns.

1:14:10Jon Carroll (he/him): Around the process, because I feel like the… the short and sweet motions we have made, did not have an impact.

1:14:19Jon Carroll (he/him): And were not heard or listened to. So, I'm… I'm happy to… to read this out loud, and then see if, the board has any feedback. So,

1:14:33Jon Carroll (he/him): I move that the… that OSBT further resolves and conveys to City Council the following recommendation. The Open Space Board of Trustees wishes to make clear that it… that its separate vote to recommend approval of the 2027 Open Space Mountain Parks

1:14:47Jon Carroll (he/him): Department operating and capital budgets reflects our confidence in the difficult choices that OSMP has made in response to significant financial constraints, including by making substantial reductions in its workforce and programs.

1:14:58Jon Carroll (he/him): while continuing to invest in important priorities such as wildfire resilience. That recommendation should not be interpreted as approval of the process by which the board was asked to review the budget.

1:15:08Jon Carroll (he/him): The concerns expressed in this recommendation are directed at the broader city budgeting process, not at the budget developed by the department.

1:15:16Jon Carroll (he/him): The Board has serious concerns about the new city budget process. The City Charter requires OSPT to review the City Manager's proposed budget as it relates to OSMP and make a recommendation to Council. In prior years, the Board received draft budget information over a period of several months and had multiple opportunities to understand assumptions.

1:15:32Jon Carroll (he/him): ask questions, and provide feedback before making that recommendation. This year, we were given less than a month to review the recommended budget, and staff informed us that the new process prevented them from sharing

1:15:44Jon Carroll (he/him): draft budget information with the board, as had been done in prior years. We do not believe this provided adequate time or transparency. The process hampered our ability to perform our charter mandate related to review and recommendation of the budget. The board unanimously raised this concern in its April 8th, 2026 resolution.

1:16:02Jon Carroll (he/him): And we are disappointed that we have received no substantive response from Council or the City Manager's office. We again asked Council and the City Manager to change the process before the next

1:16:12Jon Carroll (he/him): budget cycle so that OSBT can participate earlier and more meaningfully in the budget process.

1:16:18Jon Carroll (he/him): The board also remains deeply concerned about transparency around cost allocation. The department has faced repeated significant increases in the amount of open space funding directed to citywide cost allocation at the same time the department has been reducing staffing

1:16:32Jon Carroll (he/him): programs and other expenses. We recognize that cost allocation is a legitimate way to pay for shared services, and are not concluding that these charges are inappropriate. Our concern is that the board has not been given information in a form

1:16:45Jon Carroll (he/him): That allows us to determine what is driving these increases, what services OSMP is paying for, or whether the resulting charges are reasonable.

1:16:53Jon Carroll (he/him): We raised substantially the same concern in a motion alongside our 2026 budget recommendation on July 9th, 2025, and that request has also not resulted in the level of transparency we sought. We asked Council to direct the City Manager to provide OSBT with a clear, accessible explanation of the cost allocation methodology, the major drivers of OSMP's allocation, the services being funded, and the reasons for material year-over-year changes.

1:17:18Jon Carroll (he/him): Finally.

1:17:20Jon Carroll (he/him): Because the board has now formally raised concerns about both the budget review process and cost allocation without receiving a substantive response, this motion authorizes the OSBT chair or their delegate to present this recommendation to City Council and discuss the Board's concerns on behalf of the Board at the next appropriate Council meeting during open comment.

1:17:45BradyRobinson: Great job.

1:17:48Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you.

1:17:49Jon Carroll (he/him): So, John was…

1:17:50Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Is that presented for discussion, or since you began it with iMove, is that your motion?

1:17:54Jon Carroll (he/him): I made it a motion so I don't have to read the whole thing again.

1:17:59Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): then I'll second it.

1:18:01Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay, thank you, Harmon.

1:18:08Jon Carroll (he/him): But also, open to feedback, and, you know,

1:18:14Jon Carroll (he/him): Friendly, amendments, if anyone has any thoughts.

1:18:21Morgan Lommele: I like what's in there, I think it's long, I hope people read it, and John, I do like the…

1:18:26Morgan Lommele: option of you, if you're willing to make time for it, to go to a council? A council meeting, and…

1:18:34Morgan Lommele: Say this out loud?

1:18:36Morgan Lommele: Adversely.

1:18:38Jon Carroll (he/him): And I'm happy to go read it. If there's someone else on the board who is really eager to do this, I'm also happy to.

1:18:44Morgan Lommele: Yeah.

1:18:44Jon Carroll (he/him): So, let someone else go read it, but,

1:18:50Morgan Lommele: Leah, can you scroll up, please? Just to… yeah, up.

1:18:55Morgan Lommele: The other.

1:19:04Morgan Lommele: I, yeah, I think everything on here is factual, and I concur with it.

1:19:09Morgan Lommele: Support this.

1:19:14Jon Carroll (he/him): Brady, Sarah, would be curious to get…

1:19:18Jon Carroll (he/him): Your thoughts on it? Thumbs up!

1:19:21Jon Carroll (he/him): No notes from Brady.

1:19:23Sarah Glynn: Yeah, good.

1:19:26Dan Burke, COB: John, as a staff, whether this… you all want to entertain us or not, the words that I had troubles with is, staff were prevented from sharing.

1:19:37Dan Burke, COB: I think there's… there's connotations in that versus…

1:19:42Dan Burke, COB: That all department leaders were in support of providing consistency over how it's done.

1:19:48Dan Burke, COB: And it almost sounds like I was shackled and prevented from sharing something that I wanted to share with you. I was in support of the citywide

1:20:00Dan Burke, COB: Move towards a consistent, uniform approach of

1:20:05Dan Burke, COB: of reviewing the City Manager's recommended budget. If you all want to describe it as that I, you know, that we were prevented from that.

1:20:14Dan Burke, COB: that's fine, it's just wordsmithing, but I just wanted to, put that on record that You know, that…

1:20:20Dan Burke, COB: That word, prevented, just… Sounds a little draconian to me, but…

1:20:26BradyRobinson: I would… I don't wanna… I don't wanna… I would like to keep that in there.

1:20:30BradyRobinson: I think there's re… I think… I think there's reason to keep it empty.

1:20:35BradyRobinson: Your comments notwithstanding that. I'm not saying I disagree with what you just said, but I think there's reason to believe that there's reason to keep that in mind.

1:20:46Jon Carroll (he/him): Yeah, I… I… We could…

1:20:49Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): We could maybe wordsmith it to say… The new process… prevented,

1:21:00Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): The sharing of draft budget information with the board, or prevented, you know, yeah.

1:21:08Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Yeah, budget.

1:21:09Jon Carroll (he/him): them from…

1:21:10Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Shared earlier with the board, as had been done in prior years.

1:21:15BradyRobinson: There's more to it, though, than that, Harmon.

1:21:17Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Okay, no, I'm just… I'm just suggesting a wordsmith. If you want the word staff still in there, that's… I'm not.

1:21:23BradyRobinson: It wasn't, it wasn't just… it wasn't just… I, I, anyway.

1:21:28BradyRobinson: I'd like to think it's written, but sort of… Loom stuff.

1:21:40Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay.

1:21:41Jon Carroll (he/him): If no one else has any other comments, I'm happy to move it to a vote.

1:21:53Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Robinson.

1:21:56BradyRobinson: Yes.

1:21:57Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Lommele.

1:21:59Morgan Lommele: Yes.

1:22:00Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Glynn.

1:22:01Sarah Glynn: Yes.

1:22:02Jon Carroll (he/him): Trustee Zuckerman.

1:22:03Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Yes.

1:22:05Jon Carroll (he/him): And I will vote yes as well.

1:22:09Jon Carroll (he/him): And I will, look up when the next, council meeting is, and…

1:22:16Morgan Lommele: Is there a public hearing at their October 1st?

1:22:19Morgan Lommele: Meeting, or is that a study session?

1:22:23Dan Burke, COB: Yep.

1:22:25Dan Burke, COB: I believe, first reading, public hearing.

1:22:28Dan Burke, COB: And, we'll work with Leah on getting this, a full body of work over to…

1:22:36Dan Burke, COB: Tomorrow morning. That's what boards and commissions are now doing, is they all meet at various times in the month, and so these recommendations are coming in at different times, but tomorrow morning, we'll get on that first thing to make sure it gets submitted.

1:22:52Jon Carroll (he/him): Okay, and yeah, it looks like the next in-person one is, Thursday, October 1st.

1:22:58Jon Carroll (he/him): So, I'll conf… yeah, it does include a public hearing, so I'll plan on taking it to that one.

1:23:04Morgan Lommele: Thank you, John.

1:23:05Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): Thanks, John.

1:23:07Harmon Zuckerman (OSBT): And thanks for all the work on that.

1:23:12BradyRobinson: John, you did your home… you did your homework before you finish your vision.

1:23:16Jon Carroll (he/him): Thank you. That was… that was the other thing I was up until 1AM writing, so…

1:23:21Jon Carroll (he/him): Alright, with that, we'll… I'll,

1:23:26Jon Carroll (he/him): adjourn the September 23rd, 2026, Open Space Board of Trustees Special Meeting. Thanks, everyone.

1:23:33BradyRobinson: Thanks, everybody.

1:23:35Dan Burke, COB: kiana.

1:23:36BradyRobinson: Bye-bye.

1:23:37Jon Carroll (he/him): It hit the imaginary gavel.