Loading...
08.14.13 Draft minutes July 10, 2013 OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes Meeting Date July10, 2013 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Allyn FeinbergTom IsaacsonShelley DunbarFrances HartoghMolly Davis STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT Mike PattonJim ReederDean PaschallEric StoneMike Orosel Jim SchmidtDoug NewcombHeather SwansonDon D’AmicoSteve Armstead Mark GershmanLeah CaseMichele GonzalesDeonne VanderWoude GUESTS Clay Douglas, Senior Assistant City Attorney Nancy Hibbert,Right-of-way Agent for Xcel Energy CALL TO ORDER . The meeting was called to order at 6:03p.m AGENDA ITEM 1 –Approval of the Minutes TomIsaacsonsaid on page 2,the second to last paragraphshould have the word“with” instead of “on” in regards to trail conditions. He said on page 3,in the last line of thesecond paragraph,“the Board” should be added after “questions being answered.”Allyn Feinberg said on page 3,the fourth line from the bottomin the second paragraphshould have the word “council” instead of “it.” Tom Isaacson moved to approvethe minutes from June12, 2013 as amended.Shelley Dunbar seconded. Themotion passed unanimously;Frances Hartogh, who was absent last meeting,abstained. AGENDA ITEM 2 –Public Participationfor Items not on the Agenda None. AGENDA ITEM 3 –Director’s Updates Dean Paschall, Communication and Public Process Manager,gave a follow upupdate on accessible restrooms near Chautauqua.He said staff is working with the Colorado ChautauquaAssociation (CCA)to come up with the best location(s).Dean highlighted a few of the ways the public will be notifiedabout this project:aSurvey Monkeywill be sent out to all e-mail list-serves; staff in conjunction with the CCA is holding an openhouse on July 29; postcards will be sent out to all people within a two block radius.He said improvementswill start onSep.3andthe projectwill cause significantdisruptiontothearea. Allyn asked if restroomusewould be limited to patrons, or if they would be open to the public. Dean said as there are other restroomsavailable for public use,it is still being decided.He noted that if the restroom is inside of the auditorium it will be for patrons onlyand would be managed solely by the CCA. Allyn asked how long the construction is anticipated to last. Dean said three weeks. He said staff will send a heads up to the Board whenthepublic notice gets sent out. Shelley Dunbar asked if the restroomwould be restricted if it was built outsideof the auditorium.Dean said if they are outside they would be open to public, but they might not be open year round. AGENDA ITEM 4 –Matters from the Board Molly Davis said Eben G. Fine Parkis getting a lot of heavy usewhichis causing large amounts of food waste. She said the trash does not get cleared out quickly enough,and itis attracting animals. She also AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 1 noted seeing several open firesas well as people camping. Mikecommentedthat closing onearea to camping/loitering seems like it simply displaces people to other areas. Mike said he will touch base with the appropriate staff in other departmentsasthispark is not managed by Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP), but a fire and/or camping does affect Open Space.Frances Hartogh said if food wastefrom the park is attracting bears.thenitisan Open Space issue. Shelley thanked Jim Reeder for putting a closure sign on the fence betweenthe National Institute of Standardsand Technology (NIST)and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)properties. She said her one recommendation would be to putasign lower down so that those curious about the closure could see itwithout having to climb upto the fence. Frances asked how staff handles dog heat-related issues. EricStonesaidthis is something that staff deals with in the warmer months. He said there are permanent signs up at the Ranger Cottagereminding people to take precautions when walking with their dogs. Shelley asked if the Voice and Sight(V&S)e-mail list could be usedto sendpeople tips onpreventing these issues. Dean said that is a list that staff tries to use very limitedly.Staff proposed putting information on the OSMP website. AGENDA ITEM 5 –Review of the 2014 OSMPBudget and recommend approval of the 2014 OSMP Department Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget and a portion of the Lottery Fund CIPBudget. Mike Orosel, Financial Services Manager, gave a presentationon the 2014 budget. The memorandum is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Tom Isaacson asked if the cost for the ERTLpropertyand potential obligations would come out of the acquisitiondollars.Mike Oroselsaid no,staff does not take cash flow for Boulder Municipal Property Authority (BMPA)payments out of acquisitions. Tom asked if the V&S cost (listed in the budget outline) was the net cost. Mike Orosel said no, thecost is what is anticipated, and any generated revenue would be in addition. Tom asked whether the dollars for the North Trail Study Area (TSA)are large enough to complete theproject. Jim Reedersaid staff feels likethisamount is adequate, but until the plan is done staff will not know the cost. MikePattonsaid the money shown is for preliminarywork only which will be completed next year;the project itself willstart in 2015 or 2016and will be appropriated more money. Shelley asked if sales taxes have been assessed to include online purchases, and if the budget office is using these numbers in their projections. Mike said not currently. Shelley asked if the number shown for research grants is just a place holder. Mike said staff does not have specifics to back up this number, but the number shown isthe limit of what willbe spent. Shelley askedif all purchases nowinclude buying water and mineral rights.Mike said these are included in the budget, even if itdoes not end up being attached to purchase. Frances asked if the city is in recovery.Mike said yes, but numbers are above last year. Frances asked when water rights are purchased when the use changes. Doug Newcomb, Property Agent, saidthe use rarely changes.Molly askedwhy the position of Conservation Coordinator was listed in the budget document. Mike said OSMP pays aportion of this positions salary; they deal with a lot of animals on Open Space land.Shelley asked about the Affordable Health Care Act and if OSMP funds insurancefor staff.Mike said each departmentpays26percentof salary associated with each person. He said the overall personnelcost includesthis. Public Comment None. Return to the Board No further discussion. AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 2 Motion Shelley Dunbar movedthe Open Space Board of Trustees approve and recommend that the Planning Board approve an appropriation of $7,010,000 in 2014 from the Open Space Fund CIP as outlined in this memorandum and related attachments; and recommend that $343,000 be appropriated from the city's Lottery Fund CIP in 2014 as outlined in this memorandum and related attachments.Frances Hartogh seconded.This motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 6–Consideration of a motion to approve the purchase of the ERTL property consisting of 685 acres of land, the oil and gas mineral estate and water rights located at 8323 Valmont Road, Boulder, CO from ERTL, Inc. for $7,500,000 for Open Space and Mountain Parks purposes.* Jim Schmidt, Property Agent, and Heather Swanson, Wildlife Ecologist, gave a presentationregarding the ERTL property. The ERTL, Inc. (Energy Resource Technology Land) property is a large holding in eastern Boulder County on which the city acquired conservation easements/developments rights in 1982 and 1984. These agreements essentially stripped the land of its former development potential and sought to preserve and protect the natural resources found on the property, but did not prohibit the drilling of new oil and gas wells. This presentation is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Tom asked if the ERTL’s will continue to own the wells.Jim said they will own the bore holes, but once the wells stop producing they have to be capped pursuant to state. Allyn asked if they can re-frack those wells to get them to produce longer.Jim said they only own the 40 acre spacing, so they would not be able to do a horizontal drill(makes re-fracking very difficult).Shelley askedif Noble Energy will be able to access the property for maintenance. Jim saidyes. Tom asked if the fuel is removed by trucksor a pipeline. Jim said the gas will be removed by apipeline, and the oil is removed by a truck. Tom asked what the royalty interestisreferring to. Jim said theprice includesthe potentialroyalties the ERTL’s may obtain if they were to lease out any mineral rights. Tom asked how water was valued on the property. Jim said awater evaluation engineering firm analyzed different ditch shares and figured out how much of each share everyone would be getting.Allyn asked if seniorityof appropriation is included in the analysis. Jim said yes, not every ditch is valued the same. Tom asked who hiredthe appraiser. Jim said in this case staff and the ERTL’sjointly appointedanappraiser; each party paid50percent. Tom asked if the decrease in theproperty price was due to water sold off, orif there was a reductionin value. Jim said there was an undeveloped building lot that was appraised at 1.5 million; as OSMP did notneed to spend this much on threeacresthey took thissection out of the purchase. Shelley asked if the trail will be affected by this purchase. Jim said trail will be unaffected. Tom asked ifthe long range vision is to leave the gravel ponds as is.Don said yes; it has artificial features, but significanthabitat values. Shelley asked if the railroad is currently used. Staff said no. Shelley asked for alease termination explanation. Jim said OSMP ownstheland, but leasesit back to ERTL. Shelley askedhow much was paid originally. Jim said $1,488,000. Shelley asked if people in the Heatherwood neighborhood have access to this property. Jim said the ERTL’s have granted permission for them to be on the property so, staff’s concern is those neighborsmay claim rightsto continued use of the property. Shelley asked about theseasonal bald eagle closureand how they will be affected from people accessing the road. Heather said cars on the roaddo notseem to affect raptors as much as peopleoutside of acar; she said most access roads are in line of sight,but once aperson needs to get out of car,they are no longer in the raptors view. Frances asked if production,in regards to drilling,is defined. Jim said there are probably rules to define whethera well is still in production, but he doesnot knowthespecifics. Molly asked where the nests for bald eagles are. Heather said there is one nesting pairon the Weiser Property. Molly asked if the rookery still existson the culvers land;Heather said yes. Molly asked if the observation toweris still there; Heather said she is unaware of one. Molly asked about the Conservation Easement (CE) language now and what might have changed. Jim said CEare more sophisticated now than in the past. Molly asked if Open Space ever has to honor social trails.Jim saidthefirst round of the CE is limiting who can be in the AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 3 area and under what circumstance. Molly asked what the plan is forthe 29 acres that aredried out. Jim saidthis willmost likely be devotedto dry land grasses. Molly asked if staffknowsabout seniorityfor the water.Jim said ERTL has some of oldest water rights withinBoulder Valley. Molly said this is one of the most unique places to buy in Boulder, and hopes that there is lot done with cultural resources. Public Comment None. Return to the Board No further Discussion. Motion Tom Isaacson moved the Open Space Board of Trustees approve a motion recommending that the Boulder City Council approve the purchase of 685 acres of land, the oil and gas mineral estate and water rights located at 8323 Valmont Road, Boulder, CO from ERTL, Inc. for $7,500,000 for Open Space and Mountain Parks purposes. Molly Davis seconded.This motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 7 -Consideration of a motion to approve disposal of Open Space and Mountain Parks land described as two permanent easements on 6,405 square feet (.15 acres) and four temporary construction easements on 18,500 square feet (.42 acres) toPublic Service Company of Colorado(PSCo)for a natural gas pipeline and valve set on the Jewel Mountain Open Space land at the immediate northwest corner of State Highways 72 and 93. This is a disposal of Open Space land under City Charter Section 177.* Jim Schmidt, Property Agent, gave a presentation regarding Jewel Mountain Open Space. The granting of two new easements toPSCofor a valve set and a buried gas pipeline covering 6,405 square feet and the associated temporary construction easements necessary for the project, will enable PSCo to abandon in place its existing gas pipeline that traverses the Jewel Mountain Open Space property. The existing gas line is in need of being replaced. However, if the new line were to be buried within the existing easement, construction activity would cause serious surface disturbances on the Open Space parcel, which is characterized by its extremely rare xeric tall grassprairie. It would also cause impacts to the Coal Creek drainage lying immediately west of the Jewel Mountain property on land that is owned by Jefferson County Open Space. Thispresentation is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Allyn asked if therehas been discussion about hiding the valve set,for aesthetics. Jimsaid there couldbe some fencingput up. Shelley said landscaping could also be used. Jim said staff will look into this.Nancy Hibbert, Right-of-way Agent for Xcel Energy,offered some ideas for screeningthe valve set. Public Comment None. Return to the Board No further discussion. Motion Tom Isaacson moved the Open Space Board of Trustees approve and recommend that council approve the disposal of Open Space land described as two permanent easements on 6,405 square feet (.15 acres) and four temporary construction easements on 18,500 square feet (.42 acres) to PSCo for a natural gas pipeline and valve set on the Jewel Mountain Open Space land, conditioned upon PSCo quit claiming its existing gas line easement back to the City of Boulder. Shelley Dunbar seconded. This motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 4 AGENDA ITEM 8 -Consideration of a motion approving the disposal to the State of Colorado, the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT), of OSMP land and temporary easements, including a land exchange, to accommodate the U.S. 36 Managed Lanes Project Phase 2. The proposed disposal is generally described as 8.753 acres of land adjacent to U.S. Highway 36 between Table Mesa Drive and Louisville and 0.173 acres of temporary construction easement also adjacent to U.S. Highway 36 in the same area and one 4.9-acre temporary construction easement on the Opal OSMP property at 5770 Baseline Road. Approximately one acre of the 8.753 acres of land proposed for disposal would be exchanged for an equal amount of land owned by the State of Colorado adjacent to the east side of U.S. Highway 36 near South Boulder Creek, instead of receiving monetary compensation for that one acre. The total compensation to the city for the proposed disposals and land exchange is $256,377 plus title to approximately one acre of new OSMP land. This is a disposal of Open Space land under City Charter Section 177.* Doug Newcomb, Property Agent, gave a presentation regarding a land exchange.To accommodate CDOT U.S. 36 Managed Lanes Project Phase 2, between Table Mesa Drive and Louisville, CDOT has requested land for right-of-way (ROW) purposes and temporary easements for construction purposes from the city. This presentation is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Shelley asked if temporary easements aretypically open endedas far as the time frame. Doug said staff will control the termination date,but do not have that currently. Public Comment None. Return to the Board No further discussion. Motion Tom Isaacson moved the Open Space Board of Trustees approve and recommend that City Council approve the disposal to the State of Colorado, CDOT, of Open Space and Mountain Parks real estate described as 16 parcels of land totaling approximately 8.753 acres and 11 temporary easements totaling approximately 0.173 acres for construction purposes and one approximately 4.9- acre temporary easement for a staging area on the Opal property located generally at 5770 Baseline Road, in the locations described by the legal descriptions in Attachment D in exchange for $256,377 plus title to approximately one acre of new Open Space and Mountain Parks land. Shelley Dunbar seconded. This motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 9 -Consideration of a motion to recommend to City Council the elements of the monitoring component of the Voice and Sight Tag Program* Mark Gershman, Environmental Planning Supervisor, and Steve Armstead, Environmental Planner, gave apresentation regardingthe Voice and Sight Tag Program monitoring. This presentation is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Shelley askedif the $170,000 shown for monitoring wasthe total cost. Mark said yes, for three years. Frances asked if thisprogram was described as “too restrictive”when itfirst began.Mark said he is unsure, but he believesthere were some who voiced thatconcern.Frances asked if interest groups were included in the development process. Steve Armstead said yes. Frances asked if there are specifics attached to keeping dogswithin sight.Steve Armstead said it is situational; the constraints were set up for monitoring.but not necessarily used for enforcement. Frances said what sheseesis people who have their dog off leash,are more likely to be in violation of excrement removal. Mark saidstaff wanted to address the community concerns andtokeep the focus on V&S; this meansnot linking program to excrement removal. Frances said protection of wildlifeshould have been included in monitoring. Shelley said this AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 5 was observed lasttime and compliance was very high. Frances said the impact on wildlife before and after the implementation of Spring BrookLoopshould be recorded. Public Comment Lori Fuller,Boulder, on behalf of Friends Interested in Dogs on Open Space (FIDOS), said theirinput was dismissed regarding this study. She said OSMP refuses to recognize the flaws in this study, which leads them to believe their concernswerenotheard.She said the purpose of the V&S monitoring study was to generalize behavior of the V&S user group. The sample that OSMPused can be skewed different ways depending on how one looks at the numbers. OSMPdid not use a sample from a random selection which indicates it istime to get a neutral third party involved; the only way to achieve credibility isfor it to be peer reviewed.FIDOS was involved intheoriginal study, but they did not discuss what conflictis in depth.She said play chasing shouldnot be a part of conflictive behavior. She said it is time to focus on the health of wildlife and species in the area,and the correlation to why dog restrictions are necessary. She said they would like to see the bibliography Mark Gershmanis working on andwould like to include FIDOS studies in it.She said impacts from dogs before and after a trail is implemented should be looked at. Return to the Board Tom asked ifstaff measured the compliance ofhow many dogs were on-leash,onleash-only trails.Mark said this is something that could be measured, and if the Board has intereststaff will lookintoit. Tom said a V&S education program would help to increasethiscompliance. Allyn agreed; she said there is not a lot of recognition oflimitations on some trails. Tom asked staffwhat theirreaction to the conversation council had regarding the V&S definition.Mark saidstaff has weighed different options for this, but council did not provide their specific objections. He said the monitors are objective and reliable when deciding if the dog responded to their guardians command. He said staff is not going to approach a guardian while they are out hiking to gain more information about verbal intent,as this could make for a negative experience. He noted thatstaff could not bring anything different to the Board as they did not have anything better. Mike said MayorAppelbaum’s primary concern isone talking to their dog could be perceived as giving a command. Mike said the language was changed to saythedog responds to the guardians command versesthe dog returnsto the guardian; as long as the dog shows some indication they responded,they would be in compliance. He said he trusts the monitor’sjudgment. Shelley saida flaw that was mentioned was regarding the sample set, as the only dogs counted were those who were given a command. She said dogs that are well behaved do not require a command to be given and therefore were not included in the results. Mark said the sample was of all dog parties. He said the only dogs that can be reported on are the ones who were actually called upon. Shelley said the best behaved dogs do notneed commands; therefore omitting them from study. Mark said just because someone’s dog is out of control does not mean the guardian is going to call it. Mike said Mayor Appelbaum’s concern was out of 100 dogs only 10 were called, and of those a certain percentage was out of compliance; too small of a group to have accurate results.Shelley provided someideas for solutions: compare number of dog visits per day compared to dog violations per day; make it clear in the V&S video that staff will be measuring behavior(be more transparent); have a third party do the monitoring due to perceivedbias. Frances said OSMP has trained scientists and data they come up with isbeing perceived asbiased;staff should not need to bring in outside people. Tom saidfocus should be on percentage of dogs chasing wildlife. Allyn agreed; she said the reasons for recall would be a dog impacting others or wildlife. The goal of monitoring is to visualize and analyzetrends; if staff is unable to get information then they will not be able to monitor. Tom said less importance should be places on trends;simply look at thebefore program and then afterto see if things improved. Molly said this program feels like a vortex when trying to define human versesanimal behavior. She said dogs have their own behavioral traits and it isdifficult to putahuman monitoringsystem on animal behavior. She said it istoo hard to start getting into all these rules,and becomes more difficult when trying to re-define so much. AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 6 Motion Allyn Feinberg moved the Open Space Board of Trustees recommend that the success of the Tag Program be assessed by the elements in the staff recommendation as amended: Retaining the following elements of the monitoring conducted from 2006-2010: Inclusion of questions regarding awareness of the Tag Program in the OSMP resident o survey (2015). Interviews with dog guardians to measure degree of compliance with the leash o possession requirement.(The decision to repeat interviews implementation will depend upon the level of compliance measured in the baseline.) Observation: o Visible Display of Voice and Sight Tag Dog in Sight of Guardian No more than two dogs off leash Dogs respond appropriately to guardian's command Frances Hartogh moved to add: guardian commands non-compliant dog to comply and dog responds appropriately to guardian command. Molly Davis seconded. This motion does not pass. Allyn Feinberg, Tom Isaacson and Shelley Dunbar dissented. Omitting the following elements of the previous monitoring: Observational monitoring of conflictive behaviors o Excrement removal (as part of Tag Program monitoring) o Adding thefollowing information: A tally of: o Voice and Sight summonses, convictions and incidents Related summonses, convictions and incidents Modifications of future resident and visitor surveys to collect a broader range of o information about the perceived benefits and downsides of recreating with dogs Compliance with on leash requirements (passed unanimously) o Tom Isaacson moved to add: dogs harassing wildlife or causing wildlife to flee. Allyn o Feinberg seconded. This motion passed unanimously. Tom Isaacson moved to add: unwanted physical contact with a person not initiated by o visitor. Shelley Dunbar seconded.This motion passed unanimously. Ranger observations o Tom Isaacson seconded. This motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 10 –Consideration of recommendationsto the City Manager on matters related to the 2014 USA Pro Cycling Challenge Race.* Mike Patton, gave a presentation on the USA Pro Cycling Challenge (USAPCC). The city manager has asked the OSBT to provide input on Open Space interests associated with a finish of the USAPCC bicycle race on Flagstaff Mountain. The city is anticipated to submit a proposal for Boulder to again serve as a host venue of a 2014 USAPCC. While the final race course will be determined by the race sponsor in coordination with host venues, it is anticipated that a 2014 proposal for a Boulder leg of the race will include essentially the same format and location as in 2012 -ascending Flagstaff Road and finishing at the summit of Flagstaff Mountain. Board input is sought regarding (a) environmental and visitor management/protection measures recommended by staff, (b) the prospect for the sale of water and beer by the race organizers, and (c) OSMP expenses associated with the race. Francesasked if staff was fully reimbursedfor the race in 2012 and all planning leading up to the race. Mike said yes. Allyn asked if the race organizers estimate of 30,000 people on the mountain was accurate. Mike said he is unsure; staff tried to get acount as well and it was very rough. Allynsaidknowing this AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 7 number would be beneficial forplanning purposes.Molly asked about the Open Space value. Mike said it brings attention to the community and advertizes thebeauty of the system.Tom said economic health of Boulder is what funds Open Space. Shelley said it should also be looked at,what an event like this brings tothecommunity in terms of tourism not on the day. Molly said this puts too many people on the land at one time. Mike said the majority of spectators were on the road; access to Open Space was controlled. Public Comment Edie Stevens, Boulder, on behalf of Friends of Boulder Open Space (FOBOS), said she urges OSMP to close the trailsleading to the route of the race. She believesthese closures are necessary for the preservation of native plants and integrity of established trails. She said she urges the OSBTto oppose use of any Open Space tax revenueor budget transfers for race costs. She said all costs of this race should be reimbursedas was done last year. FOBOS believes that using Open Space funds to fund this race would be inconstantwith the Open Space charter.She said until 2012,Boulder historically prohibited competitive eventson Open Space. She said while there might be arguments to use theroadfor the race, the additionaland extraordinaryprotection of Open Space necessitated by the race,which is clearly competitive,cannot be considered a legitimate expense. Return to the Board Management/Protection Shelley said opening Chapman Drive asan access point could help with congestion. Frances said Gregory Canyon Trail was closed last year and people still usedit; she said everyone should stay solely on the road.Tom said he would keep things the same as last year and open up ChapmanDrive,if the county is in agreement. Allyn said things worked well last year. She said staff could have more volunteers at the top of the Gregory CanyonTrail. Water and Beer TheBoard agreed thesale of water is okay.The Board agreedthat beer sales should be limited, if allowed at all. OSMP Expenses Frances saidOpen Space needs to be reimbursed as this is notan intended use of Open Space. Shelley said if the city decides that this race needs to happen,it is OSMP’sresponsibility to protect Open Space, and should not be reimbursed. Tom said if this is not an Open Spacepurpose,then this race should not be held at all.He said if the race is going to happen.then Open Space should not bereimbursed. Molly said OSMP should be reimbursed; this is not an Open Space project. Allyn said spending Open Space money, from Open Space fundsis not an Open Space purpose in the charter.She said City Council can determine that it is important for the community,but they cannotmake decisionsabout the charter; whether this should be held on Open Space is the question. She said the race should be held elsewhere, and she does not support paying those costs. Further Discussion Allyn said this discussion happened really late in the process last yearwhich made it hard to change details. She said it still needs to be decided whether Summit Drive is owned by Open Space.If it is on Open Space,then it goes against the charter;the OSBT isresponsible to the Open Space program to determine this. Tom said it would be worth taking up as agenda item in August to decide if that is worth pursuing. Motion Allyn Feinberg moved the Open Space Board of Trustees make a recommendation to the city manager and City Council regarding: AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 8 (a) Management to remain effectively the sameas last year with inclusion of Chapman Drive and other modifications as may be appropriate. This motion passed three to two. Frances Hartogh and Molly Davis dissented. (b) Allow sale of water. To allow sale of beer with aone beer restriction. This motion passed three to two. AllynFeinbergand MollyDavis dissented. (c) Request reimbursement of OSMP expenses associated with the race. Passed three to two. Shelley Dunbar and TomIsaacson dissented. AGENDA ITEM 11 -Recommendation to enter into a nonexclusive license pursuant to Boulder City Charter Section 171(a) and Section 175(h) between OSMP andPSCoto place power poles on the East Rudd property for the purpose of facilitating the construction of the planned Community Ditch Trail Underpass at State Highway(SH)93.* Jim Reeder, Land and Visitor Services Division Manager, gave a presentation onthe Community Ditch Trail Underpass at SH93.Currently thePSCohas an electric power line and supporting poles that cross the area where the planned Community Ditch Trail underpass at SH 93 will be constructed. There are three poles that need to be relocated onto OSMP property known as East Rudd. The poles could not be relocated within CDOT ROWdue to the grade differences and tight layout that will exist between the ditch, trail and retaining walls. PSCois willing to effect the relocation,but will require an easement to legally place them on OSMP lands and to maintain them and the line in the future. The map displayed is saved in S:OSMP\admin\OSBT\Minutes\Minutes 2013\July. Allyn asked ifthis is a disposal. Jim saidtheeasement will be, but the non-exclusive licenseis not. Tom asked iftheCity Attorney’s Office (CAO)is comfortablewith this being a non-exclusive item. Clay Douglas,Senior Assistant City Attorney, said yes. Public Comment None. Return to the Board No further discussion. Motion Tom Isaacson movedthe OSBT recommend that the department grant a nonexclusive license to Public Service Company of Colorado to allow it to place a portion of a power line including installation of up to five poles across the East Rudd property for the purpose of facilitating the construction of the planned Community Ditch Trail underpass at State Highway 93. Shelley Dunbar seconded. This motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT –The meeting adjourned at11:59p.m. These draft minutes were prepared by Leah Case. AGENDA ITEM 1 PAGE 9