Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.201910221 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Mayor Torre opened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Mayor Torre, Councilwoman Richards, Councilman Mesirow, Councilman Hauenstein and Councilwoman Mullins. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk James R true, City Attorney Scott Miller, Public Works Director PUBLIC COMMENT: Janice Voss-Caudill, Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder: Ms. Voss-Caudill said shecame to give the logistics of the upcoming election on Nov 5th, next Tuesday. She said ballots dropped last week on the 14th and if you have not your seen ballot in mail, go online to pitkinvotes.com into your registration record and look and see where you told us to mail your ballot. You have until next Monday the 28th, which is the last day to mail out a ballot and early voting starts that day as well. This will be Monday through Friday and starts at 8:30 in the morning. Election day, we are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The drop boxes available are on Main Street, Snowmass Town Hall and in Basalt at the Town Hall. She continued to explain the election process. Ms. Richards thanked her. She asked if someone is on the inactive list, if they would have been mailed a ballot and Ms. Voss-Caudill said, more than likely, it came back undeliverable, so they wouldn’t have been sent one. Those persons will need to update their address. Dr. Tom Lankering: Dr. Lankering said he came to address the 5G issue. Please consider the process that’s going on. He is co-author of a bestselling book on Amazon called, Wake Up To A Happy Brain, written by a group of neuroscientists about what is happening to our brains. He also brought a book on the 5G crisis, which speaks about all concerns and dangers. He brought a list of all the safety studies that have been done, but the paper was blank because there haven’t been any studies done thus far. He asked what Aspen is going to do. HB17-1193 passed in 1997, initiated by the Telecom industry saying they have the right to do whatever they want. This is mis-information. There is a huge movement to repeal this bill. He is not saying no to 5G but is just asking for the studies to be done. Mr. True asked him to send the white paper to himself and Ms. Bryan. Mr. Hauenstein asked Mr. Lankering to cite the studies to them. He said we currently feel under control by the FCC. Dorothy Thaw: Ms. Thaw said she has been in the health field for most of her life. We are unique, but in this area, a bit slower. 5G has been implemented in Asia and Europe for a while. A lot of people in Geneva came down with alarming symptoms after the 5G rollout. Because of this, many European countries wanted out due to cancer concerns. Aspen is the innovator of so many things, she trusts that the mayor and city council will make the best decision for the city of Aspen. Mr. True stated that HB17-1193 did address small cell facilities permitting and installation and we are happy to look at this information moving forward. 83 2 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Andrew Sandler: Mr. Sandler said that we used 5G in WWII to kill people as a direct energy weapon. 5G is a concentrated frequency and it alters your DNA. They are installing these things in hazmat suits under the cloak of darkness. This is where cancers come from. He said he can feel the 4G frequencies along the I70 corridor. He said you can feel it in your frontal lobe and feel the torment in your head. This is horrible and deadly. Maggie Silvers: Ms. Silvers referenced Mill Valley, California enacting an emergency ordinance after it received hundreds of letters from concerned citizens. It allows the city council to immediately enact regulations for the health and safety of its community. Other areas in Marin County that have also passed these emergency ordinances, so our hands are not tied. She would love to have the freedom to step outside and not be constantly exposed to these things that are killing us. Ms. Silvers asked how many towers we will need, and Mr. Hauenstein said every 150 feet. Ms. Silvers said it’s not progressive when our health is put at risk. Lee Mulcahy: Mr. Mulcahy brought a bible and gas mask in solidarity with the Hong Kongers protesting. He is grateful for his many friends here supporting the constitution. He said his mother is an inspiration to all of us. He said he is supported by his neighbors in Burlingame and he apologized to them. Father John Hilton is leaving our community and is a great loss. It’s really important to note that of the 2000 signatures he brought into council, both rabbis signed, and Father John Hilton signed. The way forward is compromise and peace. He said the Aspen Times reported fake news. He said he is grateful Torre is the new mayor and thinks he will lead the way in peace and love. Ruth Kruger: Ms. Kruger said she is here in support of educating ourselves on the dangers of 5G. She is encouraging them to do everything they can to learn about it before making a decision. It’s your responsibility to protect the community. Thank you for moving the council meetings to the new building. She would like it to be moved to something more friendly than the big moat that takes up half the room. Toni Kronberg: Ms. Kronberg she said ordinance 25 wasn’t in the advertisement. She wanted to make comment on concealed carry and how it pertains to the new city offices. She left a meeting over by the library on the Galena plaza and the topic was “Galena Plaza reconsidered”. She thanked Mayor Torre for this and finally have what we wanted. We have to honor the open space. She thinks the plaza 3 rd floor should be warm, open and welcoming. It’s inevitable in her mind that they will need to install metal detectors if they continue with the gun ban and that takes away from the warm, open and welcoming. She went on to talk to about the airport. Torre closed public comment. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:Ms. Mullins there’s a new tot lot park at Cemetery lane grand opening. We’ve got a great new playground out there for the kids. Financial aid applications are due November 1st. Your councilperson has been published. She said Ms. Sackariason has a byline. It talks about the tobacco ban in Aspen giving the history and ultimate success, so she agrees with the people talking about 5G and there is something we can do, we just have to keep pushing and doing the research. Mr. Mesirow said its election day on Tuesday. It’s not a big sexy presidential election, but it’s an important one. We will have a better community if everyone is voting. There are issues on the ballot regarding funding healthcare at the hospital to how we educate our kids, so please get out and vote. 84 3 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Torre said this evening at the Wheeler, Aspen Strong is putting on “Changing Brains, Changing Lives” from 5:30 to 7:30. He also mentioned the carpool kiosk is moving to the Brush Creek park n ride on November 1 st. Alley cleanup day is on the 24 th, this Thursday to the core. Help us clean up the alleys; we need your help. Lastly, during the off season, the weather is changing, and people can feel differently. Recently our community has suffered many losses to suicide. This is the time of year to ask your friends how they are and reach out to people. AGENDA AMENDMENTS: Mr. Miller said there are none. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Mr. Miller said Jeanette Whitcomb will speak about air quality and monitoring. Ms. Whitcomb said she is introducing the new 2018 air quality summary report. Ms. Whitcomb said she is the Air Quality Specialist with the City of Aspen. Aspen in 2018, had 290 of good days of healthy air. 180 tons of dirt were removed from our streets by street sweeping and over 1.4 million passengers took advantage of Aspen’s free bus service. She encourages people to continue learning by checking out our report on our website. Torre asked about the other 75 days. We had 69 days of moderate levels, but the air is still good. 6 days were impacted by wildfires and were unhealthy levels which would impact individuals with cardiac or respiratory issues. BOARD REPORTS: Mr. Hauenstein said its budget season and RFTA had a presentation on policies for RFTA up and down the valley. We had an update on the BEB battery electric buses and got to ride around Carbondale on one. They are quiet and nice and will be going into service this winter. Core went over the work plan for next year and had a wonderful 25 th anniversary gala. CCLC discussed alley clean up and Sister Cities discussed a memorial plaque for Don Sheeley and bylaws. Ms. Mullins said that POD, the health and human services group, talked about the Helen Klanderud award for exceptional community service. They had a presentation to the nonprofits in the group about effective communication with employees. RFTA tooka look at challenges at the use and sales tax change, staffing and increase of fuel costs. CML reviewed recommendations from various municipalities and almost 30 action items. In December, staff will bring back any legislation. RWAPA -Reudi Water and Power Authority, contribute to the aquatic nuisance program which controls the mussels that grow on boats, mostly in Lake Powell. They are a great threat. On November 19 th, there will be another meeting held in Basalt to address this growing threat. There were six boats affected this summer and only two last summer. Mr. Mesirow said he has an APCHA report from the meeting on the 16 th. We asked for staff to put some specific language around communication and time line for infraction and notice of violation for enforcement issues. We pushed the new schedule forward but added an additional 15-day period to cure, so that someone has an extra two weeks to respond to an inquiry before a punitive fine goes into place. We added in a code of ethics to the guidelines for the new hearing officer, so that individual is doing that work with that approach. This should be reflected in the job description around compassion going forward. We will be doing public outreach around the guideline changes. It’s not yet finalized but will be happening. Ms. Richards said APCHA will be holding additional work sessions to get the guidelines as good as they can be and then take them out to the public. 85 4 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Ms. Richards said she went to Washington DC to speak with the Wilderness Society. We spent our time on Capitol Hill Wednesday and Thursday and the key issues were bonding requirements on fracking regulations and permits. There are a growing number of orphan wells throughout the country. They heard from a number of ranchers in Wyoming whose property has been destroyed. They also looked at equitable lease rates for the lands given up. The Bureau of Land Management is now required to hold a land lease every three months, four times a year. The parcels to be leased are nominated anonymously, so you don’t know whose asked for them to be nominated. If there are no bidders, it will be sold at a lower price than 250 an acre to non-bidders the next day. Torre said he had a Board of Health meeting last week. We are also in budget season, so that was the majority of presentations. They also discussed the childcare facilities inspection program back to the county. We had issues with the state previously but have negotiated to pay the county to take the inspections back up. We were asked for our support on the county tobacco tax coming up and encouraged his fellow councilmembers to support it. CAST meetings are here and we are hosting the Colorado Association of Ski Towns here in Aspen and the meetings start on Thursday at 2:30 p.m., but the real meetings and sessions starton Friday morning starting at 8 am, which contain the real meat. CONSENT CALENDAR: Torre said there are a number of items including the minutes. He asked if anyone wants to pull any items for discussion. Mr. Hauenstein pulled resolutions #106 and #107. Ms. Mullins pulled resolution #112. Mr. Mesirow pulled resolution #114 and #115. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to approve resolution #101, #113 and the minutes of October 8th, Mr. Mesirow seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Torre thanked Linda for the minutes of October 8th and all of the vignettes included without the mention of pineapples. RESOLUTION #112 – Consultant assistance with Aspen’s Water Integrative Resource Plan Phase 1. Margaret Magdelin and Tyler Christoff of the city utility department presented. Ms. Mullins asked for an explanation of the scope of work and why we need to hire a consultant to do it. Ms. Magdelin said this project will take a long-range look into the future and a driver is to look at conditional storage rights and sites to store water, but we haven’t identified the site which is the best fit. We broke the project up into two phases. The first phase is a scoping project, so the consulting team comes to Aspen and meets with them and work with them on putting a scope of work together. We have a drought response committee and have come up with appropriate phase 1 measures. Mr. Christoff said they will be coming to council when we bring title 25 on October 28 th when we present our budget as well. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to approve resolution #112, Ms. Mullins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #106 & #107 – Authorization of the City of Aspen to Financial and Legal Obligations Associated with the Receipt of Financial Assistant Award for Aspen Intelligent Meter and Water Replacement Grant. Mr. Hauenstein said he would like cliff’s notes for a baseline understanding of what this delivers to the community. He said he fully supports 106 and 107. Mr. Christoff said the AIM project is intended to update all of the water and electric meters within the Aspen’s water and electric service territory. This brings the utility department into the future in terms of the availability of data to utilities and customers. The utility will be more accurate and reliable. Ms. 86 5 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Magdelin said we have a page on the website: cityofaspen/AIM, which puts data out there and an example portal for customers to look at the data. It’s a way for people to be in touch with their water use. MOTION: Mr. Hauensteinmoved to approve resolution #106 and #107, Ms. Mullins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #114 – Support of the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act. Mr. Mesirow thanked Ms. Mullins and Mr. Hauenstein for staring this process back in 2016. It’s wonderful that we’re supporting this effort to move to a greener future. Our intention in the future is to not just speak towards things but take action as well. Mr. Hauenstein said the second whereas is a bit over the top. He doesn’t like a blanket statement like “human activity” as the primary cause of climate change. It has been part of earth’s evolution and to him, looks argumentative and inflammatory to make a blanket statement that it’s due to human activity. He wants to strike the second line. Ms. Mullins does not support striking it. Torre asked if Mr. Hauenstein wants to strike the entire whereas or just remove “human activity”. Mr. Hauenstein suggested striking, “the primary cause of climate change is human activity”. Ms. Richards suggested adding “forced climate change” to differentiate. Mr. Hauenstein said he would accept that as a friendly amendment. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to amend the resolution to read, “whereas the primary cause of forced climate change is human activity especially the production and consumption of fossil fuels”. Mr. Hauenstein said he would like to strike “human activity”. Ms. Mullins said we shouldn’t separate the two, but she will support whatever gets this passed. The bottom line is to support this legislation. She supports the resolution as is. Ms. Mullins seconded the amendment. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Ms. Richards moved to approve resolution #114 as amended, Mr. Hauenstein seconded. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #115 – Ashley Pearl introduced Mona Newton, Executive Director of CORE. Ms. Newton said she is here to talk about the programs and grant support. We request funding annually from REMP to support the programs that CORE provides in the Roaring Fork Valley. Our work includes outreach and engagement, we offer grants, we provide assessment advising and action and encourage businesses to take action. We offer technical assistance and forced development. Mr. Mesirow said he asked to pull this because they have done some amazing work and kind of wanted to give you the opportunity to brag on yourself. We don’t need the whole presentation, just a chance to tell us what you’re going to do next. Ms. Newton proceeded with her presentation. MOTION: Mr. Mesirow moved to approve resolution #115, Ms. Mullins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #26: MOTION: Ms. Mullins motioned to read, Ms. Richards seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Ms. Henning read Ordinance #26. 87 6 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Ms. Richards asked for the proposed square footage. Mr. Larimer said he can provide that at second reading. Garrett Larimer and Jennifer Phelan of the planning department with the City of Aspen presented. Mr. Larimer said the application is to develop a single-family residence on the subject’s site. They are requesting two land use reviews as part of the application. The first is a minor planned development amendment to a project review approval and the second is a residential design standard variation. The subject site is approximately a two-acre site, which is vacant. It is in the rural residential zone district and has a planned development overlay on the property. The city annexed the subdivision and planned development into the city in 1996 and during the planned development approval process, the county established building and development envelopes on some of the single-family development lots. The applicant is requesting, in order to accommodate the proposed design of the single-family residence, to amend the shape of the building envelope with no change in size and amend and enlarge the development envelope. They are also requesting the residential design standard variation for the garage dimension standard. They are proposing a four-car garage that measures 40 feet. Staff is recommending city council approve ordinance #26 on the first reading and set the date of second reading for November 12th, 2019. Ms. Richards said in the county, you’re not allowed to disturb any native vegetation outside of the building envelope and asked if that is true for the city as well. Mr. Larimer said the development envelope was established to provide a buffer between the native vegetation and areas where development is appropriate in order to reduce the disturbance to it, so the increased size would affect the native vegetation. Ms. Richards asked what other activities are allowed inside the envelope besides the house and its driveway. Mr. Larimer said he can provide a comprehensive list at second reading. The activity envelope is a reduced amount of development that has a lesser impact. Ms. Richards said she feels that council and the public need to have this information at first reading. Ms. Phelan said there was a bulleted list of items that are allowed in the development or not that was included, but maybe it was not as clear as it should be. Mr. Hauenstein said he would like to see a better graphic of the envelope. Ms. Mullins said at second reading, she’d like them to distinguish more of the development envelope versus the building envelope. Ms. Richards said she wants to know for second reading, how much closer to the lot line would this put activity or development to the neighbors and why wasn’t the house designed to the lot and the existing envelope as opposed to designing something that would require a large increase. The applicants, Charlie Eckert and Kim Raymond approached council. Ms. Raymond said there are a couple of things on application she wants to clarify. As far as the FAR, they are under what is allowed. When the PUD was created along with the building activity envelope, there wasn’t a lot of regard given to the topography. The access provided for this lot, was straight off the end of the cul-de-sac and down as ski slope for their driveway. We had to move the access to work with the topography. There are things we can probably adjust and make it so we’re not tearing up the land, etc. We didn’t use the depth of the building envelope, we used the width. 88 7 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Mr. Hauenstein asked if the lot is marked and Mr. Eckert said it’s at the end of the cul-de-sac. It’s the very last lot up there. Ms. Richards asked how much FAR is not being built and Mr. Eckert said their allowable FAR is 10,000 and it’s around 9,000. She asked if they are willing to eliminate the excess FAR with this design and Ms. Raymond said they have not discussed that, but they can speak with the owner. Ms. Richards said it’s important to know for future owners. Mr. Mesirow said he would like an offline meeting with Ms. Phelan regarding the allowable square footage. MOTION: Mr. Hauenstein moved to approve ordinance #26, Ms. Mullins seconded. Roll call vote: Mullins, yes; Mesirow, yes; Richards, yes; Hauenstein,yes, Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. Mr. True said the next items are public hearings and one of them had a noticing glitch and he is recommending that the second reading of this ordinance be continued to November 12th. It was published inappropriately for tonight. MOTION: Ms. Mullins motioned to continue ordinance #26 to November 12 th, Mr. Hauenstein seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Torre announced the break at 7:00 p.m. and will reconvene at 7:25 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ORDINANCE #22 –Establishment of transferrable development rights at 616 ½ W. Main St. Sarah Yoon of the city of Aspen planning department presented the 2 nd reading. Ms. Yoon said the public notice was completed for this property as required. This property is a historically designated landmark. It’s on a 3000 square foot lot and has two units; A and B and is in the MU zone district. The applicant is the owner of unit B, which is the residential unit located at the rear of the property. There are two processes for TDR’s; one for the establishment and one for extinguishment. This application is reviewed by staff and then goes to HPC for approval as a recommending body. The final authority is with city council and before the issuance of the certificates, the calculations will be verified by the zoning department. The allowable floor area for this 3000 square foot lot, is 2,400 square feet for the purposes of establishing TDR’s. Unit A is at 915 square feet and unit B is at 601 square feet and the total between the two is 1,516 square feet, so there is a remaining 884 square feet available for development. This can be converted into 3 TDR’s, which are done in increments of 250 square feet, which would leave 134 square feet on the property. This application went before HPC on Aug 14th and voted unanimously in support and staff is also. They meet all criteria as determined in the guidelines, so we are recommending approval. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Patrick Rawley of Stan Clauson and Associates along with Alex Halperin, one of the owners of unit B. Mr. Rawley said that Ms. Yoon covered most of the points. This allows unit B to utilize extra floor area and unit A to remain as is. He showed the calculations done by True Dimensions, per city code, on the overhead. It reflected 915 square feet in unit A and 601 square feet in unit B. He showed a plan of both units on screen. In closing, the establishment of the TDR’s is to support this sort of preservation in the city and these three TDR’s will lock down future development on this site. Essentially, what is out there at 616, will remain as is in the future. 89 8 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Mr. Hauenstein said unit B was an old carriage house. He asked if there are any additional HPC benefits in play on this property and he’s wondering if this extinguishes all incentives for unit B. Ms. Yoon said the establishment of TDR’s does not extinguish HPC benefits. Ms. Phelan said it will take any floor area off the table so no further development can occur. Mr. Hauenstein wanted to know if in the future, it can receive the 500 square foot bonus on a development. Ms. Yoon said they would have to meet all criteria to be granted a bonus. Mr. Rawley said there have been no requests made, it’s just for the establishment of TDR’s. Ms. Richards finds Mr. Hauenstein’ s questions interesting and is wondering if it might be possible to amend the ordinance to state that the additional floor area bonuses are now foreclosed. Mr. Hauenstein asked if it’s one or two lots and Ms. Phelan said it’s one lot. Mr. True said if the owner is willing to accept an amendment limiting any further action, then it would be appropriate. Unfortunately, the criteria for the TDR’s is very clear and if it meets the criteria, and you find that it meets the criteria, the TDR’s can be granted. To request a further encumbrance on the property is only appropriate if the owner is willing to agree. The board discussed the uses of both units. Mr. True said they need to determine if the applicant has met all the criteria. Ms. Mullins said the other benefit to granting the TDR’s, is that these are small structures which are left in town on Main Street and have been well kept. This is a way to keep them that way. Ms. Richards said she likes this and it’s a good project and has no issue with the TDR request, but her concern is the future. Maybe we need a code change in the HPC guidelines, so they are no longer qualified to receive an FAR bonus. Ms. Mullins said she’d rather see us go back to change the HPC incentives and change that. Mr. Hauenstein asked if the applicant would be willing to forgo these rights and Mr. Rawley said he feels it’s most appropriate to go back and change the guidelines, but the owner would be amenable to no future bonuses. There are issues on the site, which would make future development very difficult, as a side note. Ms. Mullins said we shouldn’t customize per individual, we should go by what is in the code and shouldn’t ask the applicant to do this. Mr. Rawley said he does have issue with it because it’s highly theoretical and it’s looking into a future that we don’t know along with HPC review. Ms. Yoon noted that HPC has recently gone through a code amendment recently, which touched the benefits and it has become extremely difficult to qualify for a 500 square foot bonus on a project anyway. This is something to consider. Mr. Hauenstein said that if additional square footage is granted, HPC is the final authority and he doesn’t feel comfortable with that. Without the owner agreeing not to seek anymore HPC bonuses, he won’t support this. Ms. Richards said she’s parting ways with Mr. Hauenstein and she feels that her questions have been answered and satisfied. She’s willing to move this forward. 90 9 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Mr. Mesirow said this is his first TDR review and asked what the primary goal of the TDR program is and Ms. Yoon explained it to him. Mr. Mesirow thinks we need a better tool going forward to accomplish preservation and keeping these structures under specific limits. He lives in a tiny miner’s cabin and feels we should have more in the city, with only a few left. He’s in support of moving this forward and is in agreement with Ms. Mullins, but said he prefers Mr. Hauenstein’ s suggestion. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to approve ordinance #22, Ms. Mullins seconded. Ms. Mullin said, on council, we frequently run into these problems. A previous council made a decision as an exception to some previous code and it’s a real struggle to figure out their intent and how to move forward and be fair to the applicant. If we make an exception again, at some point it will be sold, and it will become a problem for another council down the road. It’s extremely important that we stick to the code with this applicant and this case. This does meet all the criteriaand we should move forward with this. Torre asked Ms. Mullins if the applicant came back in the future and received a bonus and build out of the remaining square footage, would she be supportive. Ms. Mullins said if they came back next year, they’d have 350 square feet to deal with. If HPC ok’d it, in the end, they’re basically getting one and half parking spaces. That won’t significantly impact that site or what you’re seeing from Main Street. The risk of them coming back, is not as great as us approving something that’s not in the land use code. Ms. Richards apologized to the applicant for being a guinea pig for other issues. She said they are presenting us with a good thing to do and said she’s not worried about this hypothetical situation happening. The cleanup needs to happen within the code. Mr. Hauenstein offered an amendment to Ms. Richards motion that no further bonuses land on this lot, and we will approve the TDR’s to the property. Mr. True asked to clarify to remind everyone that we cannot affect unit A, only unit B. He suggested that it be paragraph 5 of section 1. Mr. Mesirow seconded Mr. Hauenstein’s amendment. Torre addressed the applicant table one last time and Mr. Rawley said he the process should be followed instead of picking out a particular applicant, but we’ve acquiesced and is not an issue on our end. Torre called for a voice vote on the amendment. 3-2 motion carried. Roll call vote to approve the amended ordinance: Richards, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Mullins, no; Mesirow, yes; Torre, yes. 4-1, motion carried. ORDINANCE #25 –Mr. True said the memo was drafted by himself and Sara Ott and there is one change to note for the second reading. This was brought to staff by the direction of city council to raise awareness of safety issues that are happening in our country. At this time, the proposed ordinance would prohibit possession of deadly weapons within council chambers during meetings and within city buildings that are posted. The change that exists is something that came about after his attendance at 91 10 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 the CML attorneys conference. They discussed CRS SEC 18-12201, which concerns possession of weapons by individuals who have been obtained a concealed weapons permit. He wants to make clear to everyone that it would not be deemed a violation if a person brought in a concealed weapon into this building, if they have a concealed carry permit until or unless that law is changed, or we provide for metal detectors. It’s an appropriate change for this ordinance. It would be a violation to bring an open carry weapon into this building or other buildings with the posting prohibiting deadly weapons. Mr. Hauenstein asked which buildings this would apply to andMr. True said it would be up to the city manager to post the buildings. We could include city hall, the yellow brick, red brick, police station, new city offices, the ARC, power plant, the Wheeler, the golf course. We have not written this to Ruby Park or other parks, but all city buildings would be subject. It would be posted that deadly weapons aren’t allowed. Mr. Mesirow asked how deadly weapon is defined and Mr. True read him the description from the state statute. Mr. Mesirow asked how this is enforced in other places and Mr. True said he doesn’t know, but he knows a number of jurisdictions have these rules. It would fall to the police department and then the courts to determine a deadly weapon. Mr. Hauenstein said there are a lot of reciprocating states and he would like clarification if this is limited to concealed carry in Colorado. Mr. Truedeferred to the state statute and said if the state has a reciprocity concept in it, we have to honor that. PUBLIC COMMENT: Steve Burke: Mr. Burke reminded everyone that Mr. Mesirow was nervous or fearful in the last meeting by seeing guns in the room and said everyone has a fear of something. Mayor Torre said when the new offices are complete, he wants to feel safe and he appreciates that. For this new office building, we’re spending millions of dollars on, city tax dollars and it is a building by the people; for the people. The parks are owned by the city for the people; by the people. So, what’s next? I won’t be able to walk my dog in the park without a firearm? I can’t walk down the mall without a firearm? I’m scared of the next, the next, the next. At the end of the last meeting, Ms. Richards listed some private companies where public places don’t allow firearms and Walmart was on the list, but he said that Walmart has a sign that says they respectfully request you don’t bring in your firearm. You can, but they respectfully request that you don’t. It’s like the days of Tombstone where you checked your gun at the door. He’s asking that Aspen follow suit. There is a guarantee more people won’t bring in because they will respect it and just don’t want to be told no. Sherronna Bishop: Ms. Bishop said she lives in Garfield county and they are always in the wake of other districts around us. She said we need to be accountable to those around us. This is a right that is protected, not granted by the constitution. She cited bear attacks in town and said all citizens should always have the ability to have the right to protect themselves in the city. She agreed with Mr. Burke and said it always starts as one thing here and one thing there and pretty soon, it will be no concealed carry in the city at all. She cited Chicago where Mr. Mesirow is from and said concealed carry was just allowed in 2013. She said there are many well educated and professional people getting gun permits and the largest population are amongst judges, lawyers and the wealthy. A good guy carrying a gun will always stop a bad guy carrying a gun. Aspen has something special here, don’t let archaic ideas ruin it. Don’t forfeit your rights. Your gun is the great equalizer. 92 11 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 Lauren Bobert: Ms. Bobert said she is from Rifle. She appreciates the change to the ordinanceand thanked council for listening. In the US, we have the constitution. She quoted the constitution. She said there is a major decline in items quoted from constitution and the freedoms of people are shackled. Our rights are unable to be taken away. Governments are instituted by “we the people”. She said it’s the right of people to alter or abolish and she wants to abolish ordinance 25. This proposal would restrict adults from their right of defense. John Miller: Mr. Miller asked why and why is this necessary. He said he fears the slippery slope of a law-abiding citizen like himself having his rights taken away. What will be accomplished? Ask yourselves that. He pointed out that law enforcement is in the room too and said plenty of people are here with guns tonight and he’s never felt safer. We all have fears like Mr. Burke said. Maybe you should think about that. He is against having his rights taken away. He feels that he’s much more vigilant because he carries a gun. Andrew Sandler: Mr. Sandler showed his gun on his hip. Then he brought out inanimate objects from a backpack which he said could be used as weapons. We hope we never have to use the guns. We ‘ve become so reactionary, we’ve forgotten how to critically think. He said most of the incidents in the media that have happened recently, are in gun free zones. Let’s ask ourselves why our founders put this amendment here. We’ve never had an incident in municipal buildings, so why take it away? Mr. Sandler offered to take council members to the Basalt gun range and shoot with him. Linda Manning: Ms. Manning said on a normal night at a nightclub in town, she sees many officers on duty walking through. She said she has worked in city hall for ten years and in that time, she has never seen a cop walk through just to make sure we are safe. We are going to the most aggressive measure. She is uncomfortable being threatened by members of the public and not being able to defend herself in council chambers during a city council meeting. She feels better having an officer in the room who is armed. Tonight, she feels safe in the room, but when she sits in the room as an employee, she can’t be armed. She’s armed tonight as a member of the public and feels she is much more aware. She would much rather have a few armed people in the room to protect her. Tracy Terry: Ms. Terry thanked Mr. Hauenstein for having a conversation with her about what she deals with in the front window of city hall on a daily basis. He sought her out because of where she is located in the building and asked for her opinion. She appreciates the amendment to the ordinance, but it makes her wonder why we’re doing this at all. She said these ladies present in the room tonight, are the only ones she’s seen open carry in this building since she’s worked here, so we would just be keeping them out. She can’t carry because it’s part of her job. She said that most people that do harm, don’t have a concealed carry permit. She’s had to call the cops multiple times due to people screaming at her and she is alone with no protection. It doesn’t affect you guys as much as it does us. Jill Leeder: Ms. Leeder said she is a resident of Aspen. This is the first time she’s ever spoken publicly about anything and she’s 70 years old. She said she is so wholly against what is proposed. It is the first step to other things being taken away. She’s seen so many things in the last 60 years be taken away; she can’t imagine this being taken away too. She doesn’t carry or own at this time, but she feels safer with people sitting behind her who are. She hopes council listens and prays you make a good decision. Phyllis Bronson: Ms. Bronson said she feels like the lone wolf or alien in the room. She has listened respectfully to everyone and said she felt incredibly uncomfortable sitting behind the ladies in front of 93 12 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 her who were carrying guns. She felt better that the police were here. She said she feels that people going to shooting ranges with permits, still don’t have the skills to handle critical situations. When the common denominator, are guns and most of the violent things that have happened, are because of guns, she thinks the country shouldn’t be allowing most people to carry. She doesn’t think the ordinance goes far enough. She feels we need metal detectors. We don’t want a culture based on violence. It was standard practice to leave your guns at the door in the old west. Many parents in Aspen are terrified of having guns near their children. She said the second amendment is being used in a way that it was never intended. The constitution didn’t mean to arm the whole community. She’s a highly educated woman and said she doesn’t get it. L J Erspamer: Mr. Erspamer said he feels very comfortable in this room and what they are missing is one more word ... safety. Our society is differentnowadays. When you come into a public building, he’s more scared of the FBI (cited FBI agent’s gun going off while dancing at a bar). If you have someone carrying and there is an active shooter and Mr. Pryor comes in, he doesn’t know who to shoot. He said when he was in Vietnam, his weapon went off and he shot someone by accident. He agrees with what council is doing but agrees with the fear of how far does it go? He said he trusts council and knows many of them. He said you guys need to assure them that you won’t go after the second amendment. Mick Ireland: Mr. Ireland told a story of a woman who walked out of Walmart with a gun in her purse and her child pulled the gun out and killed her. The second argument is there and is a slippery slope. The constitution was written by people, it’s not a sacred document written by God. These down valley people are coming to our city saying we will result in tyrannical means when we should trust our elected officials. The constitution itself is a living document and is always changing and evolving. If it were set in stone, women couldn’t vote, black people would still be in chains. The constitution evolves. We have the right to reshape the constitution as civilization progresses. He’s speaking for some who feared to be here, and he’s been on the wrong end of a gun. He feels uncomfortable with the angry people sitting behind him with guns. Toni Booth: Ms. Booth said she doesn’t agree with the ban. She agrees with people speaking for others and the feeling of passion for whatever it is you believe in. it’s hard to sit here and feel like something is being taken. Lee Mulcahy: Mr. Mulcahy said it’s important that America’s Constitution has been in use the longest. We are a nation of laws, not men. He said he worries about the weaponization of this law. Shawna Bentz: Ms. Bentz said she is from Garfield county and is against this ordinance. She cited a local weapons case from 1999 and proceeded to talk about the details of the case. Ms. Richards thanked her for bringing up the story about her son. Torre closed the public comment and said this is not an easy decision. Mr. Hauenstein said our freedom of speech is protected for all of you. There shouldn’t be hate speech here. He agrees with a lot of what was said. He doesn’t think limiting weapons in a city office is a stretch and he also has no intentions of taking anyone’s rights away, but these city people have a right to feel safe at work. It’s within his responsibility to support this ordinance. He said he prayed the same as Ms. Leeder did on the issue that they make a great decision. He has a lot of angst over this and has listened patiently to everyone. He really cares for Ms. Terry, who sits at the front door. We have a duty 94 13 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 to listen to each other with respect. Tonight, there was rudeness and snickering, etc. He said in his opinion, more guns make for a less safe environment. He is in support of this ordinance. Ms. Mullins asked if Mr. Pryor or Ms. Manning have anything to add to this conversation. Mr. Pryor, Chief of Police, said that in 2016, we brought in a security consultant to look at steps council could choose to take, including weapons bans, cameras, trainings, etc. In 2018, there have been some trainings and steps taken to reinforce some critical functions around city hall. There is a lot of perception, reality and feeling behind this and said this code will not guarantee anyone’s safety. By enacting this code, you have to look at what you are bringing to the people of Aspen. It’s also impossible for him to guarantee safety even with metal detectors at every entrance. Our community may be different than other communities in Garfield county. He cannot give anything concrete. Ms. Mullins said it’s a very difficult conversation and there’s a lot of data supporting both sides. This is maybe a little different than Garfield county. In this community I’ve heard a lot of support for this ordinance and we have to make sure we are keeping our staff safe. She doesn’t feel that if we have more guns, it’s a safer environment. She would rather depend on someone who is trained and it’s their job to protect and serve and maybe we need additional protection. While these people here from other communities are well spoken and passionate, you are also quite aggressive in your arguments and that doesn’t necessarily pair well with making good decisions. It’s not taking away your right to own a gun. This is one ordinance regarding public buildings in town, many of which house our kids. She is in support of the ordinance. Mr. Mesirow said there are no perfect solutions. There is information and passion on both sides. There are two conversations going on and one is between rights versus public safety and the other on values. Most of us are willing to accept these tradeoffs in certain scenarios. It’s about taking something from one group and giving to another group. He wants to know that what they are doing will have a positive effect. He addressed Mr. Pryor and asked if they enact this law, will it help prevent a violent action from happening in this building and Mr. Pryor said he said it would probably help, if nothing else, in providing for half of the people, a sense of security. Mr. Mesirow asked a hypothetical question and Mr. Pryor said it’s so risky to hypothesize all of these scenarios. He’s not going to get into the guessing game about who feels best doing what. We spend tons of time training on active shooter situations. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to extend to 10:30 p.m., Mr. Mesirow seconded. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Ms. Richards motioned to approve ordinance #25, Ms. Mullins seconded. Ms. Richards said she hasn’t entirely appreciated all the commentary or the general disrespect and snickering that has taken place. There is a right to free speech, but it should be respectful on both sides and that hasn’t been what’s happened tonight. A good guy with a gun is a theory and there are a lot of stories on both sides. Accidental gun deaths happen all the time. A lot of people made the case for metal detectors, but frankly, sometimes people aren’t criminals until the moment they are. It happens very often. People aren’t marked and it’s believed that non-criminals never snap. It’s really odd that some people are saying, they will always feel safer in a meeting in a room with a gun, when others feel safer without. There is no homogenous group of people, so some people do carry for safety and some open carry to intimidate. Guns do intimidate, but it doesn’t guarantee safety either. She was mayor in 95 14 REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 22, 2019 1999 and it was clever of Ms. Bentz to bring up the story about her son and a 20-year-old Aspen crime spree. Laws didn’t stop it then and laws haven’t stopped the crime report in Garfield county over the past month either. it’s quite clear. I would like to acknowledge your research, but the timelines and facts you were citing started to get skewed, but overall, we had a lot of youth involved to impress each other. It is a very personal story and they have all risen above this and made restitution. The attempt to smear me was too clever by half. She fully intends to support the motion and the ordinance. Torre said he agrees with a lot that has been said at the table and from public comment. He intends to support this tonight. Since you all came to the first reading, he’s had a lot to think about. He’s learned a lot during this process and has done a lot of research. He has a couple of reasons for supporting the issue and the first is because we have an employee no carry policy here. I would feel uncomfortable allowing someone to open carry when our employees cannot. This ordinance only affects city facilities and gives the ability to post on city buildings only. It’s a safe move. As an elected representative, I have no prejudiced against weapons and hunting and gun ranges, etc. The majority of people who I have spoken to in our community, have asked for me to support this. Mr. Mesirow thanked everyone for being here late. I am a supporter of second amendment. He saw active listening and applauding for people who had a different point of view. He really appreciates everyone coming forward. The goal is public safety and reducing harm, however. It was many of your comments that solidified my decision. Training is important, it’s not just about a good person with a gun. For this reason, he will support the ordinance, as well. Having an open mind and learning is very important to him and he is open to getting to know them. Roll call vote: Mullins, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Richards, yes; Mesirow, yes; Torre, yes. MOTION: Mr. Hauenstein motioned to adjourn, Ms. Richards seconded. Ms. Richards noted that she has used guns, shot guns and is a pretty good shot as well. All in favor, motion carried. ______________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk 96