HomeMy WebLinkAbout20203503.tiffBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO
1150 0 Street, Greeley, Colorado 80634
TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING
RE: A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND BY SPECIAL
REVIEW PERMIT, USR18-0130, FOR A GREATER THAN 16 -INCH
DOMESTIC WATER PIPELINE (PERMANENT 48 -INCH PIPELINE AND
ASSOCIATED APPURTENANCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO: BURIED VALVE ASSEMBLIES, ACCESS MANWAYS, FIBER
OPTIC CABLE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS) IN
THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - CITY OF THORNTON
(10:13 A.M. TO 10:20 A.M.)
The above -entitled matter came for public meeting before the Weld
County Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday, August 26, 2020,
at 1150 0 Street, Greeley, Colorado, before Jan Warwick, Deputy Clerk to
the Board.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that upon listening to the audio record, the
attached transcript, as prepared by Rebecca J. Collings, DausterlMurphy,
www.daustermurphy.com, 303.522.1604, is a complete and accurate
account of the above -mentioned public hearing.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
l� d'�'►M.u,rt i ���
i2/07/2O
2020-3503
PLa4,s7
1 APPEARANCES:
2 ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS:
3 COMMISSIONER MIKE FREEMAN, CHAIR
4 COMMISSIONER STEVE MORENO, PRO-TEM
5 COMMISSIONER SCOTT K. JAMES
6 COMMISSIONER BARBARA KIRKMEYER
7 COMMISSIONER KEVIN D. ROSS
8 ALSO PRESENT:
9
10
11
12
13
ACTING CLERK TO THE BOARD, JAN WARWICK
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY, BOB CHOATE
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, DIANA AUNGST
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, MIKE McROBERTS
HEALTH DEPARTMENT, LAUREN LIGHT
14 APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE:
15 MARK KOLEBER, CITY OF THORNTON
16
17
1 (Beginning of audio recording.)
2
CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Well go ahead
3 and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners.
4 Let the record reflect all five county
5 commissioners are present. Call up the first land
6 use case, Docket 2019-48, a Site Specific
7 Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit,
8 USR18-0130.
9 MR. CHOATE: Case 18-0130. The
10 applicant is the City of Thornton. The request is
11 a Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review
12 Permit for a greater than 16 -inch raw domestic
13 water pipeline, in this case, a permanent 42 -inch
14 pipeline and associated appurtenances, including
15 but not limited to 1 million -gallon water tank, two
16 pump stations, buried valve assemblies, access
17 manways, and fiber optic cable, temporary
18 construction easements in the Estate Zone District,
19 the Agricultural Zone District, and the Regional
20 Urbanized Area Zone District.
21 This is in Sections 4, 5, 8, 9, 16,
22 17, 20, 21, 22, 29, 32, and 33 of Township 1 North,
23 Range 67 West; Sections 4, 8, 9, 16, 17, 20, 29,
24 32, and 33 of Township 2 North, Range 67 West;
2
1 Sections 5, 8, 17, 20, 28, 29, and 33 of Township 3
2 North, Range 67 West; Sections 6, 19, 20, 29, and
3 32 of Township 4 North, Range 67 West; Sections 6,
4 7, 18, 19, 30, and 31 of Township 5 North, Range
5 67 West; Sections 6, 7, and 18 of Township 6 North,
6 Range 67 West; and Sections 6, 7, 18, and 19,
7 Township 7 North, Range 67 West; and Sections 19,
8 30, and 31 of Township 8 North, Range 67 West, all
9 located in the Sixth Principal Meridian in
10 Weld County.
11 Generally, it's located north of
12 County Road 2, south of County Road 94, east of
13 County Road 13, and west of County Road 19.
14 Notice of today's hearing was
15 published July 1, 2020, in the Greeley Tribune. I
16 have the submitted request for continuance. I'm
17 sure Ms. Aungst can explain.
18 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
19 MS. AUNGST: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
20 Diana Aungst with Department of Planning Services.
21 Per a letter received on August 12th
22 and August 20th, Exhibits F and I, respectively,
23 the applicant is requesting continuance of this USR
24 to December 16, 2020. The applicant would like to
3
1 have additional time to acquire more easements.
2 The letter states that Thornton is
3 confident they can meet the expectations of the
4 board, having acquired nearly all the easements
5 necessary to construct the pipeline in Weld County.
6 And the applicant is present.
7 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. If the
8 applicant wants to please come up and state your
9 name and address, and tell us about your request
10 for a continuance.
11 MR. KOLEBER: Good morning,
12 Commissioners. My name is Mark Koleber. I'm the
13 Thornton water project director. My address is
14 12450 Washington Street, Thornton, Colorado.
15 Just to provide some context per our
16 request and I thank you for your consideration
17 of our request for a continuance. I think it would
18 be good to provide some context for you and the
19 residents that are here why we were asking for this
20 continuance.
21 We came before the Board in July of
22 2019, to discuss our permit request for a segment
23 of the Thornton water project in Weld County.
24 Before we had a chance to make our presentation,
4
1 the Commissioners had some discussion and really
2 gave us three points of guidance that we've been
3 working on over the last year.
4 One, was show everything in Weld
5 County. Two, was try to stay out of right-of-way.
6 And three, was try to acquire more of the
7 easements.
8 And there was some discussion about
9 that. There was not a specific number, but we
10 picked up generally more than 80 percent, is kind
11 of what we picked up as the criteria for the amount
12 of easements that you would like us to get. Again,
13 didn't have anything specific we were shooting for,
14 but that was a general criteria.
15 So we've been working on that. We
16 submitted a supplemental permit application that
17 now shows all of the portions of our project in
18 unincorporated Weld County, and our proposal
19 currently does not use, or does not propose to use,
20 any county right-of-way.
21 There is some specific segments where
22 we're working with some of the property owners and
23 may bring a proposal as an option for the county to
24 approve some use in the right-of-way, but at this
5
1 point, our proposal does not include any of that.
2
So the USR maps included in the permit
3 application show precisely everywhere we're going
4 to be, and we're working to acquire the easements
5 for that, for those -- for those pipeline
6 alignments shown in the permit application.
7 Just to provide some scope about what
8 we're trying to accomplish, we need to acquire 143
9 easements from 170 property owners across 35 miles
10 in unincorporated Weld County. So far, we've
11 acquired 94 easements, totaling about 23 of those
12 35 miles in the county.
13 That's a good increase from the
14 Planning Commission. We had about 80. We've now
15 got about 94, so we're making good progress, but
16 we're not quite there yet from what we heard from
17 the Commissioners in July of last year, and what we
18 heard from the Planning Commission as well.
19 We've had 30 -- three to four land
20 agents working almost full time on this project,
21 trying to acquire these easements over the last 30
22 months. The property owners are contacted multiple
23 times by our land agents by phone, letter, in
24 person, knocking on doors, those kind of things, to
6
1 make sure we get good contact and good
2 communication with the property owners trying to
3 acquire those easements.
4 And I want to emphasize that we use
5 eminent domain only as a last resort, only after
6 all the reasonable efforts have been exhausted -
7 (audience murmurs).
8 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay, please.
9 MR. KOLEBER: -- and negotiations
10 reach an impasse. And so far, we've paid property
11 owners over a million -and -a -half dollars to acquire
12 these easements.
13 It's our full intent to show that
14 we've listened carefully to what you told us last
15 July and what we heard from the Planning
16 Commission, and we've worked diligently and
17 professionally with your staff, getting our
18 applications together, getting feedback on the
19 application to modify it, to address their concerns
20 as well.
21 We have our initial and our
22 supplemental permit applications.
Weld County
23 staff has looked over that and has provided
24 Conditions of Approval with a recommendation for
7
1 approval of that permit application, and we've been
2 working with them closely on those Conditions of
3 Approval.
4 We also value the importance of
5 further meeting the guidance that you provided us.
6 And so we'd like this continuance to continue
7 working with the landowners until December 16th, to
8 try to get the last of these easements wrapped up
9 so that when we bring the application before the
10 Board, that we have most, if not all, of those
11 easements in our possession as part of our permit
12 application.
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
14 MR. KOLEBER: So that's a summary of
15 our rationale for why we've requested this
16 continuance.
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
18 Questions from the Board?
19
20 t ime .
21
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Not at this
CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Okay. So -- so
22 we'll go ahead and have a -- go ahead and have a
23 seat for a second.
24 So I'm going to open it up to public
8
1 input just -- just on the discussion of a
2 continuance, to begin with. So we want to
3 hear -- we want to -- we want public input just on
4 their -- on Thornton's request for the continuance
5 of this item today.
6 And after the determination is made
7 whether to continue, if we go forward with the
8 case, then we would take comment or we'll
9 meet -- reconvene in December, if that's the
10 decision that's made, then we'll take comments
11 about the actual project itself.
12 But for today, at this point, because
13 of the request for the continuance from the
14 applicant, which is perfectly fine, we will
15 take -- we will take public input on the
16 continuance only.
17 So do -- if anybody wants to have a
18 conversation about the continuance, please come on
19 up to the mic, and just state your name and address
20 for the record.
21 UNKNOWN AUDIENCE FEMALE: Can you just
22 elaborate a little bit on your definition of
23 "continuance"? Because I have no way
24 (indecipherable) what that is.
9
1 CHAIR FREEMAN: Well, it's -- so we're
2 going to have a conversation about their request
3 for a continuance, whether the board would continue
4 this item or not continue the item, this
5 application, until December 16th. That's the
6 request from the applicant. So that's -- that's
7 the scope of the -- that's the scope of the public
8 input, just on the continuance.
9 Yes.
10 MR. SAUER: Abe Sauer, 6715 County
11 Road 50, Johnstown, Colorado 80534.
12 My question would be on a continuance,
13 knowing that they have taken us to court, and
14 presumably many other landowners and the
15 commissioners themselves, are they looking to
16 continue that as well, or are they looking to
17 condemn stuff before a December 16th continuance so
18 that they would have that in play, is my question.
19 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay.
20 So -- again, back to the scope of what we're
21 looking at, so are you in support or against the
22 continuance of this hearing, or --
23 MR. SAUER: It depends on whether
24 they're continuing their legal cases. I would be
10
1 against it if they're continuing their legal cases
2 to be heard before that continuance.
3 CHAIR FREEMAN: You're talk -- go
4 ahead.
5
6
7
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, go ahead.
MR. SAUER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay. That
8 helps. Thank you.
9 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
10 MR. OLIVE: Hello. My name is Stewart
11 Olive. I'm an attorney in Fort Collins. I
12 represent the Eugene F. Snyder Trust and the
13 Margaret Snyder Trust.
14 And as with the previous gentleman, we
15 actually had a court hearing for immediate
16 possession on August 14. The Thornton's
17 brief -- the judge has not decided. Thornton has a
18 closing argument due on the 28th, on Friday. Ours
19 is due two weeks after that.
20 If you have the continuance granted,
21 we oppose it because if this continuance goes
22 through, then the court case is going to go through
23 and we have a fait accompli. And the problem with
24 my clients is they don't object to the -- to the
11
1 pipeline. They object to where it's located on
2 their property.
3 And it will just be -- the easement
4 will then go through, the court cases will be done,
5 and basically that's what Thornton's doing.
6 They're just going to present this Board with a
7 fait accompli. So we do oppose that, because if
8 this -- if the Board turns down the application,
9 then the court case would be moot.
10 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
11 MR. OLIVE: You bet.
12 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Can I ask a
13 clarifying question, Mr. Chair?
14 CHAIR FREEMAN: Sure.
15 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Who was it you're
16 representing again?
17 MR. OLIVE: The Eugene F. Snyder
18 Family Trust and Margaret Snyder.
19 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Thank you.
20 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And I'm
21 sorry. Can I ask you a question?
22 MR. OLIVE: Sure.
23 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: If that's
24 okay. And again, it was because you're objecting
12
1 to the location on the property?
2 MR. OLIVE: Correct. We want --
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And so the
4 court case is dealing with eminent domain and
5 immediate possession as well?
6 MR. OLIVE: Oh, yeah, it's eminent
7 domain and immediate possession.
8 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Huh.
9 MR. OLIVE: So it's -- we already had
10 the hearing. The question is -- like I said, the
11 closing arguments are due in written form as
12 of -- from Thornton as of Friday, and then we've
13 got two weeks to respond, and then the Court rules.
14 So it's a question of where is it
15 going to go and do they get immediate possession of
16 the property, which is what is happening to a lot
17 of the cases. I had it happen to another client.
18 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay.
19 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
20 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Thank you.
21 MR. OLIVE: You bet.
22 MS. HICKS: My name is Rebecca Hicks.
23 I live in Evergreen, Colorado, and I'm here
24 representing my daughter, who has a farm in
13
1 Johnstown.
2 I'm concerned, like the other people.
3 My daughter has been served with immediate
4 possession, which our court case -- her court case
5 is for September 16th.
6 Everything that Thornton has done,
7 they say they try to work with you, it is wrong.
8 They have been zigzagging, they talk to one
9 neighbor, they go to the next neighbor, and they do
10 whatever they can to steal our land.
11 This is a question of eminent domain,
12 and the fact that they are taking us all to court,
13 making us pay tremendous legal fees to try to
14 defend our property.
15 At the County Commissioner's meeting,
16 they made it very clear that there are
17 alternatives, that there are roads that you have
18 here, public right-of-way roads, that you have that
19 have utility easements already in place.
20 So why is our private property being
21 taken? Why are they picking and choosing? Why are
22 they trying to knock us off? They're threatening
23 us. They're bullying us in every way imaginable to
24 sign these things.
14
1 People don't have the money to keep
2 fighting for this. It's expensive to go to court.
3 And they made it very clear in a 7 -to -0 decision
4 that they felt that what they were doing by taking
5 private property was wrong when public utility
6 easements are in place, and that this needed to be
7 revisited. But they are proceeding. They actually
8 put my daughter's case after they -- they filed all
9 the paperwork on us after the Commissioners denied
10 their application.
11 So they're just trying to go, and they
12 don't care what anybody else says. They don't care
13 about the law. They don't care about what it's
14 doing to private citizens and ruining our property.
15 And if they're making us go to court --
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: So --
17 MS. HICKS: -- so they can prove to
18 you that they have these easements, it's wrong.
19 CHAIR FREEMAN: So are you in favor or
20 opposed to a continuance today?
21 MS. HICKS: I'm against the
22 continuance. Every one of us are having to go to
23 court.
24 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
15
1 MS. HICKS: Thank you.
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
3 MR. BINDER: My name is Tom Binder,
4 representing Binder Family Farms, 9783 Weld County
5 Road 46.5, Milliken.
6 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
7 MR. BINDER: We got served with
8 condemnation. They want an extension. Why did
9 they serve condemnation? We've been in
10 negotiations with them and we were trying to
11 finalize this, and we get served with condemnation.
12 I don't see why -- if they're going to have a
13 continuance, why did they condemn us?
14 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
15 MR. GARNER: Thank you for taking the
16 time for this hearing. I don't want to see them
17 continue.
18 CHAIR FREEMAN: Please state your name
19 and address.
20 MR. GARNER: I'm Don Garner. My
21 property is located at the corner of County Road 13
22 and 80. It's got a long legal.
23 Thornton contacted me and said that
24 they wanted to go through my property. It's being
16
1 reviewed by the county for development purposes.
2 They want to go ahead and condemn it so that they
3 can come back here
4 because the land's
5 the court process,
and you guys will easily agree
already been condemned through
which I don't understand how the
6 Court can condemn property when you guys haven't
7 even given them the right-of-way. It's my
8 understanding, it's been voted down once 9 -to -0
9 already.
10 You have taken this stance before on
11 gas and oil pipelines that you made the companies
12 go back and negotiate in good faith. They're in a
13 grievous use of power. They're coming through. We
14 give them options where to go. They said, Nope.
15 This is where we're going, take it or leave it.
16 They're cutting right through the middle of our
17 development. I don't know how you can stop the
18 court cases from proceeding.
19 CHAIR FREEMAN: You can't.
20
MR. GARNER: But the only way to stop
21 them is either put them on denial at this time,
22 which would stop them. But once they get
23 everything set up through the courts, you guys are
24 just going to rubber stamp it and go, The courts
17
1 have already condemned your property, and let them
2 go through. I don't -- I don't see the continuance
3 is going to do anything but help their case and
4 hurt our case.
5 CHAIR FREEMAN: So you're opposed to a
6 continuance?
7 MR. GARNER: I'm opposed to a
8 continuance on those grounds.
9 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
10 MS. ROSS: My name is Janet Ross. I'm
11 at 6248 CR 56, Loveland, 80534.
12 I'm against the continuance. The
13 reason being, I had received notification on
14 July 14th at the office of Western States that we
15 were under condemnation. I had not received
16 anything prior to that. They had a return receipt
17 unsigned, said that was proof of delivery of
18 notice, which it is not. And right now, I have
19 received notice that the city has determined that
20 9/11/2020 will be the cutoff for any further
21 negotiations they have ongoing with property
22 owners.
23 I have less than two months to try to
24 put together an appraisal, which I've already lined
18
1 up, but now he's got to rush it through. I have an
2 attorney. I have to redline the contract,
3 everything before September 11th.
4 I'm against the continuance. I'd like
5 to see this get resolved. I know they're going to
6 get their way, but the way they are treating the
7 property owners is abhorrent.
8 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
9
10
11 you.
12
MS. ROSS: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, thank
CHAIR FREEMAN: Thanks. Okay.
13 Any -- any other -- yes. Good morning.
14 MR. VARRA: Good morning. I am in
15 favor of --
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: Go ahead and state
17 your name and address.
18 MR. VARRA: Garrett Varra, Varra
19 Companies, 8120 Gage Street, Frederick, Colorado
20 80516.
21 I'm in favor of the continuance in the
22 hopes that, you know, at least for the area between
23 Highway 66 and County Road 26 that we are able to
24 work with Thornton and the County in order to put
19
1 the pipeline within the county right-of-way.
2 We stand to lose millions of dollars
3 in reserve in an un-permitted farm field that does
4 have sand and gravel reserves in it. And we'd just
5 like to continue working -- working to see if
6 that's possible. We have been working with
7 Thornton for right around two years on this, and we
8 are not under condemnation at this point, but I
9 suspect that it could be -- could be at any point.
10 So you know, we're hoping to work our
11 way through it, but I am in favor of it and, you
12 know, would like to continue working with them and
13 the County to see if we can get the pipeline in the
14 county road right-of-way.
15 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
16
MR. VARRA: Thank you.
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: Any other public
18 input? Yes.
19 MR. MALLORY: Morning. My name is
20 Dave Mallory. I live at 7543 County Road 16. I've
21 lived there for 38 years.
I've got 160 acres on
22 the northwest corner of Roads 16 and 17. The
23 Thornton waterline is traversing my property west
24 and parallel to Road 17.,
20
1 I am against the continuance because
2 there is an existing three-inch gas line right
3 along Road 17 that they would be able to co -locate
4 their line within that easement and within the
5 ten -foot boundary.
6 Instead, they have moved their
7 line 80 feet out into my field. The -- when the
8 land agent began talking with me, he told me it
9 would be ten feet away from the existing gas line.
10 Then when we got the drawings back, it showed it
11 80 feet out into the field. I asked him why that
12 was moved, why it was moved out, and he related to
13 me he asked the same question of the engineers, and
14 the engineers said, It's just easier to put it
15 there.
16 I would like -- I have heard the
17 planning -- the testimony at the Planning
18 Commission meeting that they were paying attention
19 to landowners' preferences and that they were
20 placing it within ten feet. I'm --
21 CHAIR FREEMAN: So but in the
22 mean -- but just so you're -- you're opposed to the
23 continuance?
24 MR. MALLORY: I am opposed to the
21
1 continuance.
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
3 MR. MALLORY: Because they're not
4 doing what they say they're doing, and I don't
5 think they can be trusted, apparently, to do what
6 they say they're doing.
7 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. All right.
8 Thank you.
9 MR. MALLORY: All right. Thank you.
10 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Any other
11 public input?
12 MR. McCLAY: My name is Steve McClay,
13 9173 County Road 26, Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621.
14 I'm opposed to the continuance simply
15 because they're just trying to condemn more
16 properties. Mine is under condemnation right now.
17 Most of these people here, all of them, none of
18 them are lying to you. They do not deal with you.
19 They give you an offer, a final offer, and then
20 they condemn you. We're being condemned.
21 It would be much easier for them to go
22 through the right-of-way around us, because I'm
23 right on the other side of our company's, and real
24 expensive place for them to go through, hazards,
22
1 everything else.
2 They're not dealing with us. There
3 are no good faith negotiations. It's take it or
4 leave it. And they don't deserve the time to
5 condemn all of us so they can come back to you and
6 say, Hey, we've got 98 percent of the easements in
7 place now. Can we have our permit?
8 They don't deserve it, because they're
9 not going to deal with us. That's their attitude.
10 That's this gentleman's attitude right here. I've
11 tried to talk to him before, and there's nothing to
12 it.
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
14 MR. McCLAY: And he won't even listen
15 to his civil engineers.
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: Thank you. Okay. Any
17 other public input on the continuance?
18 Okay. Seeing no further public input
19 on the continuance, I'll close that and bring it
20 back to the applicant.
21 So you've heard what the neighbors
22 have had to say, Mr. Koleber. Can you enlighten
23 us?
24 MR. KOLEBER: Sure. I could probably
23
1 go through some specifics here, but I just want to
2 emphasize, we are not taking the "take it or leave
3 it" approach. We have been working with folks -
4 (audience murmurs)
5 CHAIR FREEMAN: Hey, hey, guys,
6 please.
7 MR. KOLEBER: -- working with folks.
8 We are moving alignments around. We have proposed
9 a number of different areas where we work with the
10 property owners. If they say, I need to move it
11 over here because of X, Y & Z, we'll do that.
12 There are certain times where we
13 can't. For instance, Mr. Sauer, you would like us
14 to relocate our pipeline to a diagonal where it
15 goes underneath a bridge abutment of a Weld County
16 bridge. We worked with the Public Works Department
17 up here. They don't like that solution either.
18 That's one of the reasons why we couldn't come to a
19 solution with Mr. Sauer. We had to proceed to
20 eminent domain because we exhausted the reasonable
21 approach to how we could get that one done.
22 Mr. Mallory, I don't have my maps here
23 with me, but my guess is we had to move that
24 farther into his field because that gap between
24
1 where the gas line is and where we're proposing is
2 future Weld County right-of-way. And we're trying
3 to stay, per your guidance, outside of that Weld
4 County right-of-way. So that's one of the things
5 that we're -- we've been looking at, to make sure
6 we try to meet that guidance from you.
7 With Mr. Varra and Mr. McClay, we're
8 trying to work out an option agreement where we can
9 say we'll acquire these easements and we'll put the
10 money in an escrow, and if the county approves use
11 of the right-of-way around their areas, we don't
12 have to proceed with getting those easements and
13 recording them. We'll just use the right-of-way,
14 if that's approved by Weld County and Firestone.
15 But we can't come in to you and
16 propose use of the right-of-way because that's
17 potentially contrary to what you told us last July,
18 and we want to bring in something that we believe
19 meets your criteria and that you can approve.
20 For Mrs. Ross, there was a lot of
21 contact that tried to be made. We couldn't make
22 that connection, leaving voice messages, emails,
23 and things for what numbers or what addresses,
24 phone numbers and those kind of things, that we had
25
1 for trying to contact them.
2 Not her fault. She didn't check
3 messages or whatever until late in the game. She
4 came in, she talked to our land agents. They let
5 her know that we're up against a timeline for that
6 eminent domain.
7 We backed off of that to give more
8 time there. But we can't just continue pushing off
9 time at infinitum. We want to try to work with
10 these folks. But at some point, we reach an
11 impasse and we do, unfortunately, needed to go to
12 eminent domain in those cases to make sure our
13 project can move forward and we can get that done
14 as planned by 2025.
15 We are working in good faith,
16 regardless of what you might hear today. We are
17 trying as much as we can to get solutions that work
18 for people. Most of the cases that we've had to go
19 to eminent domain on are associated with value,
20 because people want to see the value that they got
21 for oil and gas easements, from private companies,
22 for-profit companies that don't have condemnation
23 power. They had to pay more.
24 We don't. We need to keep -- be good
26
1 stewards of our rate payer's money, so we're trying
2 to meet the statute as far as the values, plus we
3 are paying incentives for people to sign up with us
4 voluntarily. We're working for damages, crop
5 damages, replacing structures, those kind of
6 things. Again, I believe we are going above and
7 beyond really to try to get these deals to work.
8 Most of the condemnations have
9 stipulated to immediate possession, and that's how
10 we got to that -- some of those numbers. Most of
11 them that we have currently in our possession were
12 actually done voluntarily. But for those that we
13 had to go to eminent domain, most of those have
14 stipulated to immediate possession. And we still
15 have the value to work out, and we continue to work
16 with them.
17 For the folks like Mr. Binder, we want
18 to continue working with him. Just because this
19 filing condemnation, doesn't mean that we're not
20 stopping trying to get a deal done. And we will do
21 that. We'll continue to work with them as much as
22 we can.
23 But with that, we still believe that a
24 continuance is the right approach to give us more
27
1 time to try to work these things out and come to
2 you with a higher percentage of easements in our
3 possession so that when you look at the -- when you
4 look at our maps, you know that that is where we're
5 going, because we've got those easements in our
6 possession.
7 Thank you. I'd be happy to answer any
8 questions.
9 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Does the Board
10 have any questions? Go ahead, Commissioner.
11 COMMISSIONER MORENO: It was also
12 pointed out by one of the -- I can't remember the
13 name of the gentleman -- about the court case
14 coming up. Is that going to continue? Is that --
15 MR. KOLEBER: Yes, those will
16 continue.
17 COMMISSIONER MORENO: Those are set
18 already?
19 MR. KOLEBER: Yes, even during the
20 continuance, or if you want to hear it today, those
21 will continue on. We need to acquire those
22 easements into our pipeline project.
23 CHAIR FREEMAN: Yeah. Commissioner
24 Kirkmeyer?
28
1 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I want to
2 know what happens if you lose in Larimer County.
3 And when is that court deal up?
4
MR. KOLEBER: In Larimer County, we
5 have oral arguments in front of the Court on
6 September 9th. I don't know when they're going to
7 rule on that. If we lose at that level, we'll
8 appeal that. We believe we have a constitutional
9 right to build a pipeline. We're pushing that
10 forward. And we believe we'll eventually be
11 successful in that regard and get a -- get a permit
12 or permission to build through Larimer County.
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner?
14 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I guess I'm
15 trying to figure out what constitutional right do
16 you believe the City of Thornton has to build a
17 pipeline?
18 MR. KOLEBER: I'm going to call on our
19 city attorney to come up and help me here, but
20 there is a provision in the state constitution
21 where holders of water rights have the authority to
22 put pipelines across private property subject to
23 reasonable regulation. And I think that's what the
24 1041 process is about, is that reasonable
29
1 regulation.
2 And we believe that we can reasonably
3 build a pipeline in Larimer County. But when it
4 comes down to it, the statutes can't override our
5 constitutional right to have a pipeline built at
6 some point.
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Huh. So
8 what -- what does happen, though, if you lose? I
9 know you think you're going to win. Everybody
10 thinks they're going to win when they go to court.
11 But what happens if you actually lose
12 MR. KOLEBER: Then we --
13 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: -- and you
14 can't build a pipeline in Larimer County?
15 MR. KOLEBER: Then we figure out some
16 other way to get our water out of Larimer County to
17 the pipeline that we're asking for here.
18 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: But you still
19 have to go through Larimer County someplace.
20 MR. KOLEBER: The water already goes
21 through Larimer County, so we'd follow existing
22 paths and those kind of things and try to figure
23 out where to pick our water up farther down the
24 ditch if we have to. Again, we believe we'll get
30
1 the pipeline built, and we'll be able to pipe that
2 water from Larimer County over into Weld and then
3 south.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay. Thank
5 you.
6 CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner Ross.
7 COMMISSIONER ROSS: A couple
8 questions. I appreciate it, Mr. Chair.
9 What percentage or what portion of the
10 94 agreements that you're stating to us earlier
11 have been due to true negotiations and agreements
12 by landowners, versus condemnation powers?
13 MR. KOLEBER: I don't have that
14 number.
15 COMMISSIONER ROSS: That would be
16 pretty nice to know.
17 MR. KOLEBER: Okay.
18 COMMISSIONER ROSS: You say you're
19 acting and negotiating in good faith, but you made
20 a comment today, you don't have to pay the higher
21 rates that landowners are accustomed to due to oil
22 and gas.
23 Could you elaborate on that?
24 MR. KOLEBER: Sure. Oil and gas
31
1 companies that are for-profit companies that are
2 trying to get a product to market are willing to
3 pay a higher price for an easement as compared to
4 what the statutory process is for valuing an
5 easement for a public utility like this.
6 And so we are looking at appraisals,
7 valuations of those easements, plus incentives to
8 get the folks a fair market value for those
9 easements that we're acquiring. So we are paying
10 fair market value plus for these easements.
11 COMMISSIONER ROSS: One more
12 question --
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Go ahead,
14 Commissioner.
15
COMMISSIONER ROSS: -- for our
16 counsel. It's been brought up, and I've asked this
17 question, but if you could provide me maybe a
18 little more clarification, because I'm hearing
19 different things, and from community members that
20 have testified this morning.
21 What's our policy on using county
22 right-of-way for these types of pipelines or other
23 events? Do we allow that to happen, or what have
24 we historically done as a board?
32
1 MR. CHOATE: It has been allowed in
2 some circumstances, although the Department of
3 Public Works has expressed their preference that
4 they not go into there because they may need to be
5 relocated for road projects in the future.
6
7
8 Kirkmeyer.
9
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Mike?
CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yes, I'd like
10 to take a stab at that.
11 MR. CHOATE: Sure, please.
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So we have a
13 policy with regard to like natural gas or petroleum
14 or, you know, fossil fuels in pipelines, oil lines
15 in our right-of-way because of a safety issue. I
16 don't believe we actually have a policy with regard
17 to waterlines.
18 So utility lines can automatically,
19 statutorily be in our right-of-ways. That's the
20 way it's set up. This is not actually a utility
21 line. It's really more of a transmission line. So
22 I think part of the issue is that even if
23 Thornton's pipeline, water transmission pipeline,
24 was in our right-of-way, we would still charge a
33
1 price for that easement, essentially, and we're not
2 opposed to that.
3 So I was kind of wondering too where
4 they said they got guidance from the Board, I think
5 maybe they were talking about guidance from Public
6 Works staff, because I don't recall the Board ever
7 getting guidance that a waterline couldn't be in
8 our right-of-way, transmission or utility
9 waterline.
10 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Because I was -- I
11 was concerned on that where I wasn't here back in
12 '19 when this was initially brought forth, I
13 believe, and so I was wanting to know maybe what
14 guidance the Board gives. Thank you, Commissioner.
15 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And I do know
16 that in other cases, even like backdated in the
17 1990s -- not 1890 -- but 1990s, that Weld County
18 actually had granted easements across some of our
19 property, but we did make them pay the going rate.
20 The going rate as in the going rate of what a
21 for-profit would pay, because it's still property
22 that we have to be accountable to our taxpayers
23 for.
24 So anyways, there you go.
34
1 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Thank you,
2 Commissioner.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Sure.
4 CHAIR FREEMAN: So and -- and the main
5 guidance that I recall from 2019 was that we didn't
6 consider it a complete project if it was in
7 segments. We needed to see the entire length of
8 what was in Weld County, because otherwise -- and I
9 think I might have said it at the time -- it's a
10 pipeline to nowhere if it's just from here to here.
11 We needed to see the application that went the
12 entire part that was in Weld County.
13 And that -- so your application today
14 is all the pipeline that would ever be in Weld
15 County? Irregardless of what happens in Larimer
16 County or where you take the water out of Larimer
17 County or any of that, this would be the extent of
18 the entire pipeline in Weld County?
19 MR. KOLEBER: That's correct,
20 Commissioner Freeman.
21 CHAIR FREEMAN: Thank you.
22 MR. CHOATE: Mr. Chair?
23 CHAIR FREEMAN: Yes.
24 MR. CHOATE: I just want to also
35
1 provide some extra. If -- if there were a change
2 in realignment of the pipeline from what is being
3 proposed, right-of-way or otherwise, we would need
4 to look and make sure that everyone who is required
5 to receive notice of the potential project receives
6 notice prior. So you'd need to continue it if you
7 were going to consider that.
8 You know, if it's just moving over
9 from next to the right-of-way to in the right -of -
10 way, maybe that doesn't change who would otherwise
11 receive notice. But we need to have an opportunity
12 to look at that to make sure everybody does.
13 And I know, for example, the proposal
14 that Mr. Varra has described would move it out of
15 that, and we'd definitely have to send notice to
16 additional landowners.
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay. Other
18 questions, comments?
19 COMMISSIONER JAMES: Just --
20 CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner.
21 COMMISSIONER JAMES: A comment, if I
22 could. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
23 I'm endeavoring to form my words
24 because I have sat on local governments for 20
36
1 years, and eminent domain is the absolute worst
2 form of government possible. It makes my head want
3 to explode. It's a taking. And to hear about
4 these people, just -- I'm furious about it.
5 If there is a way that we can direct
6 them into public right-of-way, if there's a way
7 that we can work, not to allow your court cases to
8 continue -- and again, I'm so frustrated because we
9 are statutorily tied. It is -- it
10 is -- statutorily, you have the right to enact
11 eminent domain.
12 And even though I personally believe
13 it's wrong, it exists in statutes, and so
14 therefore, we must consider it, and this Board must
15 consider it in an unbiased fashion, which is
16 just -- it's almost too much for me to swallow.
17
With that being said, if we can move
18 forward neighborly, which is not what I've heard
19 today -- and I know -- I believe that you operate
20 in good faith, but I am not going to call these
21 citizens who have their everything tied up in this
22 land liars.
23 So I believe that perception is
24 reality. I believe that you perceive you're moving
37
1 forward fairly, and I believe that these people
2 perceive that they are being treated unfairly. And
3 I would like to think that there is a more
4 competent resolution than this. And if that
5 resolution involves the county's right-of-way, then
6 so be it.
7 I would like, Mr. Chair, to be able to
8 empower our staff to have conversations about how
9 we adequately locate this, making sure that the
10 Weld County taxpayer is properly compensated this
11 in public right-of-way, because even though there's
12 nothing I can do to stop eminent domain, I find it
13 abhorrent.
14 CHAIR FREEMAN: Thank you.
15 COMMISSIONER JAMES: And that's how I
16 feel about that.
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: Thank you,
18 Commissioner.
19 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I think we're
20 all on the same page. And it's not like the
21 residents of Weld County, property owners in Weld
22 County, aren't savvy about pipelines, right? I
23 mean, waterlines, oil and gas lines, whatever. I
24 mean, we're all pretty savvy about it, and I find
38
1 it abhorrent as well.
2 I mean, I had a utility thought they
3 could go on my private property and give me three
4 bucks a linear foot. I don't care if I'm a member
5 of that utility. That isn't right. And, you know,
6 you can pretty much take your eminent domain and
7 stick it, is how I thought at the time. And I
8 still think that way.
9 So I'm with you. And the county has
10 built many a road project here. The county only
11 has the ability for eminent domain with regard to
12 road projects. And I don't believe we've had to go
13 to this extent of eminent domain. In fact, we try
14 to avoid eminent domain at all costs.
15
16 yes. Yeah.
17
COMMISSIONER JAMES: I've never voted
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: We go back
18 and -- I mean, on our Weld County 49 project, we
19 would go back and actually increase our
20 compensation to people if we found a different
21 appraiser who came in and said things have changed
22 or this is really actually worth more funds.
23 We went back and worked with
24 everybody. That's what's called working it out.
39
1 We didn't try to get them to court. We gave
2 bonuses for people who signed early, all sorts of
3 things to encourage people to come in, let's work
4 it out, let's just get it worked out without going
5 to court. I'm not hearing that today either. So I
6 think we're all just as upset over this as you are.
7 CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner Ross.
8 COMMISSIONER ROSS: You know, I'm
9 going to elaborate on that a little bit more. I
10 hear this deadline you set forth. The City of
11 Thornton has had these water rights that they've
12 had every intention of bringing up to the City of
13 Thornton for -- well, nearly as long as I've been
14 alive. And the opportunity has been there to --
15 CHAIR FREEMAN: That's a long time.
16 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Not as long as
17 you, Commissioner.
18 You've had opportunity to purchase
19 land. You've had opportunity to purchase right -of -
20 way. This sudden rush, and rush to get into
21 condemnation, really bothers me. And Mr. James
22 speaks much more eloquently than I do.
23 Commissioner Kirkmeyer speaks much more
24 passionately than I'm able to.
40
1 I don't believe every option is being
2 exhausted here, to work with landowners, and it's
3 frustrating. And I look at condemnation as the
4 absolute last step. And I would concur with what
5 you said, Commissioner James, and we need to find
6 every way to use county right-of-way.
7 But to hear that a pipeline just
8 because it's from a municipality, versus a
9 for-profit organization is worth less, that's
10 bologna to me, because ground is worth what that
11 ground is worth. And you are taking and utilizing
12 an individual's personal property for your gain,
13 and it has a value. And I'm deeply concerned about
14 some of the things I've heard today.
15 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
17 COMMISSIONER MORENO: Mr. Chair, I
18 don't think there's anything I can add to it. I
19 mean, there's been a time period here that a lot of
20 things could have been worked out over time, and
21 now we're in a mad rush to try to get this done
22 here, and we're waiting for court decisions to be
23 made.
24 So I -- this is just -- you know,
41
1 eminent domain, Commissioner Kirkmeyer, you said
2 that too, coming on board in 2015 as a commissioner
3 when we were working that Parkway 49, I remember
4 very clearly. And when we got to those positions
5 there, that it was a struggle for the Board to move
6 in that direction, but we worked as close as we
7 could for a time period. It wasn't just a rush to
8 get things done with our constituents out there
9 with their property.
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No. Come
11 back and settle out.
12 CHAIR FREEMAN: So I know that -- I
13 know that there's a lot of people here today that
14 are opposed to the continuance. I'm not sure that
15 maybe -- maybe we shouldn't be looking at a
16 continuance and figure out a way that instead of in
17 these areas where it's completely unworkable, to be
18 able to work out a way that these landowners are
19 satisfied, that we can look at a way that in those
20 areas we actually can look at our public right -of -
21 way and look at something like that with -- I
22 guess --
23 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Sure. I want
24 to be clear, though. We're not going to
42
1 shortchange our constituents just because it's in
2 our right-of-way.
3 CHAIR FREEMAN: No, I understand.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Do you know
5 what I'm saying? No, I want to make sure that
6 Thornton understands that, because for some
7 reason -- you know, I understand about utilities,
8 but this is Thornton's water transmission line that
9 they're taking water and moving it, you know, away
10 from agricultural down to the City of Thornton for
11 their needs.
12 And I'm with Commissioner Ross. I
13 mean, I wasn't a Commissioner then, but I remember
14 in the late '80s when all this was going through.
15 And, you know, quite frankly, you've had plenty of
16 time to do exactly what you said, plenty of time to
17 get this worked out with folks.
18 And in fact, they're in a position
19 right now where, you know what, if they lose in
20 Larimer County, their project's pretty much
21 dead -- I was going to say dead in the water but
22 dead, you know, kind of thing.
23 And so I agree. You know, I'm all for
24 trying to get this figured out so that our
43
1 constituents -- because you've heard me all speak
2 about eminent domain. I know everybody else here
3 has, except for maybe the Howards, but you've heard
4 me speak about eminent domain and how I feel about
5 it, and how we -- and how it -- it's not used
6 unless you absolutely need to use it kind of thing,
7 right? And that's where we're at.
8 But, you know, if we can work on
9 getting things moved to our right-of-way which
10 assists -- I mean, because, you know, honestly, I'm
11 looking through the criteria, and I think we all
12 have a pretty good understanding of the criteria.
13 But, you know, to assist with getting
14 it off prime irrigated land to assist it with
15 disrupting people's personal property. Because
16 here's the other issue: That pipeline gets moved
17 out 80 feet into that gentleman's field, the next
18 pipeline, which we know there will be another
19 pipeline -- not water, it will be a gas or oil line
20 of some sort -- and it gets moved out farther into
21 the field. And a couple of us here farm and have
22 farmed, and we understand what that means to that
23 field and that prime irrigated farmland.
24 So I'm -- again, you know, I
44
1 understand there's a lot to do here, and I'm
2 willing to work on it with -- seeing what we can
3 get with regard to our road system, but we're not
4 shortchanging the people of Weld County just to
5 make sure that the people who pay taxes in Thornton
6 feel good about it. That's where I'm at. I'm not
7 happy about some of the things we've heard today
8 here either.
9 COMMISSIONER JAMES: A continued
10 comment if I could, Commissioner.
11 CHAIR FREEMAN: Go ahead,
12 Commissioner.
13 COMMISSIONER JAMES: Thank you.
14 I if we subtract the emotion that revolves
15 around what happened in the '80s with you, we're
16 rightfully in the free market acquiring the
17 property of those people via their water rights.
18 I mean, I -- in principal, I don't
19 agree with drying up farms, but I agree with the
20 property that exists, and I think that's why so
21 many of us are so torn about that. But
22 that's -- we're rehashing things from the 1980s
23 here.
24 Thornton has the property that is the
45
1 water, and you do have a right to convey it to
2 your -- your citizens and your taxpayers. We've
3 got to build a pipeline. I think -- and I in
4 principal agree and understand that. I just -- I
5 don't like what I've heard, sir, about negotiations
6 with Weld County property owners.
7 There's enough emotion in it already.
8 And, you know, I needed to do my best, we all need
9 to do our best to put that emotion aside, because
10 you have a property that you have a right to use
11 and convey it to your citizens. I cannot disagree
12 with that. You must do so via a pipeline.
13 If you had been confused by our
14 instructions from the past, I just want to -- would
15 like to see you actively work with the Weld
16 Department of Public Works and find a way that you
17 can convey that properly using, as Commissioner
18 Kirkmeyer stated, our right-of-way without
19 shortchanging our citizens that are openminded to
20 you taking pipelines through their fields.
21 I know we're -- we're giving you a
22 tall order, but the pipeline's going to go. Can we
23 work together better than what we've heard here
24 today? If we issue this continuance, my point
46
1 being is will it be used in a nefarious matter as
2 we've heard allegations of today? Would it be used
3 just to kick the ball down the road in the court
4 and just to take these people's property from them?
5 That would infuriate me, although there's nothing I
6 can do about it. But it infuriates me.
7 If we issue this continuance, can we
8 ask that you in good measure work with the
9 Department of Public Works and with these people to
10 stay out of the courts and get them a fair offer?
11 MR. KOLEBER: I want to make sure I
12 understand your question. So if there are places
13 where it doesn't work in the right-of-way and they
14 still don't want it on their property, how do I
15 answer your question in that regard?
16 COMMISSIONER JAMES: There are times
17 that you -- I personally would never vote yes on a
18 condemnation, but that is a tool that exists in
19 your toolkit, and statutorily, you have the right
20 to do so. But can we make it not necessarily a
21 measure of convenience, but a measure of absolute
22 last resort? And I haven't heard that here today.
23 MR. KOLEBER: That's our philosophy.
24 So I'm unfortunate that doesn't come across. When
47
1 we get to a certain point where we believe we've
2 exhausted reasonable alternatives, that's when we
3 move to eminent domain.
4 With regard to the use of the right-
5 of -way, that was something that we were proposing
6 last July, and maybe we misunderstand the guidance,
7 but I thought we heard pretty loud and clear that
8 your preference was it not be in Weld County right -
9 of -way. So that's --
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I think that
11 came from the Department of Public Works. I don't
12 think that came from the Board, because I don't
13 remember saying that in the hearing last July.
14 CHAIR FREEMAN: Well, so I might
15 have --
16 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Do you?
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: I might have said
18 something along well, I might have said
19 something along those lines that said as somebody
20 who has farmed and know that we farm clear up past
21 the county right-of-way, and I was going to be
22 impacted just as much on my farm whether it was in
23 the county right-of-way or on my property, I felt
24 that I should be the one that gets paid for the
48
1 pipeline if it's in my property.
2 And so that was the reason for the
3 saying, you know, we'd rather you didn't go in the
4 county right-of-way, because it still impacts these
5 guys just as much with their farm ground. They
6 just don't get paid for it. And I would rather
7 that they got paid for it if that's something that
8 was reasonable.
9 I may have misled to the spot that
10 said absolutely you can't go on a right-of-way, and
11 if I did, I apologize for that. I was just -- my
12 preference would be that the landowner get paid,
13 not Weld County get paid, for the impact of your
14 pipeline. So that might have been on me.
15 MR. KOLEBER: So with that
16 clarification, I think what we would be looking for
17 is some -- and I know you probably can't do
18 this -- but some assurance that if we work with
19 Public Works and find a way to move it into the
20 right-of-way --
21 CHAIR FREEMAN: In the places where
22 you don't have the ability to get a voluntary
23 negotiation.
24 MR. KOLEBER: Right, right, that
49
1 that's something where we come back here, it's not
2 then, Well, you didn't listen to our preference to
3 be out of the right-of-way.
4 Hopefully you can understand that
5 we're kind of -- I feel like I'm between a rock and
6 a hard place here, trying to figure out how we get
7 a permit in front of the Board that you feel is
8 reasonable, justifiable, we did what we could to
9 get it to the point where you look at it and say,
10 That's a good project. We want to approve that.
11 I want to get there. I want to work
12 with Weld County to do that. I think, you know,
13 we've worked with the county on conditions of
14 approval. There's a lot of things I want to
15 continue working with the county on. We feel
16 that's our best approach.
17 I just don't want to go down the
18 road -- because we are in a deadline. Whether or
19 not we didn't move quick enough, I think that
20 really goes back to, again, good municipal
21 planning. You don't put a pipeline in the ground
22 20 years before you need it. We need it in 2025.
23 We started on this in 2014. We've been working
24 with folks for over two years on trying to get
50
1 these.
2 So it's not that we haven't been
3 trying lately. It's just we're getting up against
4 some timelines to get design, construction done in
5 time for 2025. That's really what's driving us is
6 municipal water supply. We can do that by working
7 with Public Works and finding areas where if we
8 don't have easements, we can go over onto the
9 right-of-way. We're happy to do that.
10 I would also ask for a little bit of
11 clarification on those areas where we've
12 got -- we've stipulated to immediate possession, or
13 the property owner has stipulated to that, the
14 value is just a question. What's your position on
15 how we should treat those property owners where we
16 don't yet have everything wrapped up as far as
17 value compensation paid and those kinds of things?
18 Anything you can help us with on those kinds of
19 situations, so as we sit down with Public Works and
20 try to work this out, we know kind of where that
21 should go?
22 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, the
23 only -- we can't do that, because then we start
24 prejudicing ourselves with regard to the hearing
51
1 process.
2
3
UNKNOWN MALE: I concur.
COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So no, I
4 can't do that. I mean, and I just need to be very
5 clear here, even if you were to have walked in here
6 today with all of your easements in place, there's
7 still no guarantee. I mean, if you walk in here in
8 December and have all easements in place, there's
9 still no guarantee of an approval of the pipeline,
10 right? I just want to make sure everybody else
11 understands that as well.
12 MR. KOLEBER: Yeah.
13 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So I mean,
14 you know, we have to look at it, again, on the
15 merits of the project itself. Part of the issue
16 with requiring that you have your easements in
17 place prior to us hearing it is because, again, if
18 you come in here and you don't have all your
19 easements in place and I don't know where it's at,
20 I can't make a ruling on it. So that's why the
21 issue with regard to easements. How you work to
22 get those easements in place, it's -- quite
23 frankly, it's on you.
24 With regard to the ones that could
52
1 possibly be within our public road right-of-way
2 and, you know, I guess if guidance was misguided, I
3 guess, then, you know, we can work on that. But I
4 think a few months ago and I don't know if it
5 was you that was in the audience -- but we had
6 several people who got up and spoke about the
7 issues they were having on County Road 17. Was
8 that more closer to Frederick than Johnstown? Do
9 you remember that? And even at that
10 point -- because they brought up about why can't it
11 go in the county right-of-way? And that's when we
12 first started hearing about this issue.
13 So I think we made comments that day
14 about what we were willing to look at it going into
15 our right-of-way. But again, we would expect fair
16 compensation kind of thing.
17 So to me, I think, at least this is
18 where I'm at, I'm willing to maybe continue it for
19 a couple of weeks or so, but -- and give them
20 some -- give the City of Thornton the opportunity
21 to work with Public Works and see if there's a way
22 to, you know, utilize the right-of-ways in
23 different ways so that we don't have so many of our
24 constituents so upset over this.
53
1 I mean, quite frankly, I know you're
2 working on behalf of your constituents. Well,
3 those aren't my constituents. I'm more concerned
4 about the people who are in this room and the
5 people whose property that you're crossing with
6 that pipeline, so -- that may not be in this room.
7 So my suggestion is maybe we continue
8 it for a couple weeks and see what can occur with
9 the Public Works and trying to facilitate getting
10 through some of these sticky points and see if
11 there's something that can be worked out. But I'm
12 not going to sit here and say how I'm going to rule
13 on a project or a USR in front of us until I
14 see -- hear the whole case.
15 MR. CHOATE: Well, I just want to
16 point out that Public Works has indicated that
17 they -- you know, before they would say yes, you
18 can put a pipeline in this part of the right -of -
19 way, there needs to be some engineering done,
20 potholing to see what's there.
21 So not saying don't come back in
22 three weeks. I'm saying that that level of review
23 will not be done in three weeks.
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, I
54
1 understand that completely. The reason I'm saying
2 two to three weeks is because I don't like it that
3 you took people to court either. And having been
4 the person who's received some of those what I call
5 "nasty grams," you know, and threatening of eminent
6 domain, they are threatening.
7 You know, I'm a County commissioner,
8 and when I get those letters, they just tick me
9 off, but I at least understand what's in there and
10 I understand the process. But there are a lot of
11 people who get those letters and they just feel
12 totally threatened by it that you're trying to take
13 their property.
14 And it's like, Hey, you do what we say
15 or we're just going to take your property anyways,
16 and that's how it comes across to a lot of people.
17 So you know, I'm with Commissioner James on, you
18 know, I don't understand why you're in court
19 either.
20 But anyways, to me the reason why I'm
21 saying maybe a two- or three-week continuance is to
22 see if there's some opportunity at least for
23 working out some of the issues using county road
24 right-of-way.
55
1 CHAIR FREEMAN: So I don't --
2 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: But I'm not
3 willing to continue forever.
4 CHAIR FREEMAN: Well, I don't disagree
5 with you, but -- but once again, I'm going to have
6 a hard time approving it if I don't know exactly
7 where that pipeline is.
8 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Well, maybe
9 we need to know where they're at. You know, again,
10 that's our issue. Maybe this is a premature
11 application then.
12 CHAIR FREEMAN: Well, okay. I'm
13 just -- my only point was I don't think that we're
14 going to know in three weeks whether it can go here
15 or here or here in the public right-of-way.
16 COMMISSIONER ROSS: I'm afraid if it's
17 three weeks -- sorry, Mr. Chair.
18 CHAIR FREEMAN: Go ahead.
19 COMMISSIONER ROSS: -- there won't
20 actually be the ample time to negotiate in good
21 faith like I'm wanting them to do.
22 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yeah. So the
23 reason I was saying a three-week continuance is to
24 keep everybody's feet to the fire here kind of
56
1 thing, and try to avoid court as much as possible.
2 I'm not looking for total resolve.
3 We don't know today if there's an
4 opportunity for use of public road right-of-way, of
5 county right-of-way, to fix the issue. And we're
6 not -- and I don't know if everybody does. I mean,
7 maybe they could come back in a week and tell us if
8 that's even a possibility. I mean, I think we need
9 to know that, if that's even a possibility. And I
10 don't think we should be waiting a long time to
11 find out if that's even just a remote possibility
12 that it could be moved into our right-of-way.
13 That's all I'm saying.
14 Because maybe, you know, after we hear
15 this information, maybe we decide not to continue
16 or maybe we're like, Okay, at this point we need to
17 continue to give them -- there's an opportunity
18 here to give them the time to work it through and
19 possibly move things into our right-of-way.
20 That's all I'm thinking, is trying to
21 get -- so we can get some more information, because
22 I'm not willing to continue to December at this
23 point.
24 CHAIR FREEMAN: Commissioner Ross.
57
1 COMMISSIONER ROSS: So can I just
2 clarify what I'm hearing from you?
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yeah, yeah,
4 sure. Maybe help me explain it better.
5 COMMISSIONER ROSS: You're -
6 essentially what I'm hearing from you,
7 Commissioner, is you're asking for a continuance to
8 really see if we have a further continuance to
9 bring the application
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yeah.
11 COMMISSIONER ROSS: -- in front of us
12 for full consideration. What you're not asking for
13 in three weeks is the full consideration of the
14 application.
15 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No. I don't
16 think we -- yes, that's it exactly. I'm just
17 trying to get more information.
18 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Is that even
19 possible?
20 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Because --
21 COMMISSIONER JAMES: Yeah, how would
22 we do that in parlance? My understanding -- and I
23 appreciate when you're saying, Commissioner
24 Kirkmeyer -- is can we find out if what we're
58
1 proposing is even feasible from the people's
2 standpoint?
3 Engineering standpoint will take
4 significantly longer, so we know exactly where it's
5 going. But a three-week check -in would be good to
6 understand from the people's standpoint whether
7 this is going to be realistic or not.
8 I -- so I turn to the County Attorney
9 to ask the proper parlance of doing something like
10 that. I put you in a hard spot there, Bob.
11 MR. CHOATE: If you decide to continue
12 it for two or three weeks, then when it comes back
13 up in two or three weeks, it's up to you on what
14 action you would take at that point regardless.
15 You're not going to -- there's nothing you can do
16 today to bind your hands as far as what you can do
17 in two or three weeks.
18 I think what you can do is tell the
19 applicant and the public and staff what your
20 expectations are, and if the discussion -- we've
21 got it loud and clear, we're going to go have a
22 conversation about how we can fit this in the
23 right-of-way in appropriate places, and we're going
24 to report back to you. Staff is going to provide
59
1 that evidence into the record for your review, and
2 then you can decide what to do with it.
3 If staff comes back and says, Yeah, we
4 think we can do this in certain spots subject to
5 engineering, potholing, and such --
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Then we can
7 continue it.
8 MR. CHOATE: -- you can continue it.
9 If staff's recommendation is, We don't see this as
10 a possibility in this area because of whatever,
11 then you can decide to hear the case or continue it
12 or whatever at that time. It's absolutely within
13 your discretion.
14 COMMISSIONER JAMES: Okay.
15 CHAIR FREEMAN: So let me ask the
16 applicant a question. So how many -- how many
17 miles of this thing would you be -- would you think
18 would be something that you would be in
19 conversation with Public Works about seeing if it's
20 an option to move into the public right-of-way?
21 MR. KOLEBER: CHAIR FREEMAN, I can't
22 answer that right now because I don't know
23 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
24 MR. KOLEBER: -- out of what we have
60
1 not acquired yet --
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: How about a ballpark,
3 just a rough estimate? If not, Mark, that's okay
4 too. I just --
5 MR. KOLEBER: My guess is maybe 25 to
6 50 percent. I don't know.
7 CHAIR FREEMAN: 25 percent of the
8 total pipeline? Okay. All right. I was just
9 curious.
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No, no, I get
11 it. Well, that's kind of why I think we need to
12 continue it --
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Yeah.
14 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: -- because I
15 don't even know what all our options are, right?
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: I don't either. I
17 don't know what they are.
18 MR. CHOATE: I was asked -- if I could
19 just ask you, I mean, I don't know -- based on the
20 public comment today related to the continuance,
21 if -- how many of the people who spoke today think
22 that this can fix their problem, because that may
23 be relevant to whether you continue and when.
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Actually, for
61
1 me, at this point -- so I heard from them. I
2 understand what their -- I understand the process
3 and understand what's going on. But for me it's
4 like I need to know if there are options even
5 available, because right now I'm at the point of
6 saying no to a continuance. That's where I'm at,
7 you know. I mean, we've been here, did that, done
8 that kind of thing, and we're still working on it,
9 you know, whatever.
10 You know, I've been in government a
11 while too. So you know, the thing is, I -- that's
12 where I'm at. So -- but I'm willing to see if
13 there are some options possible to try and find a
14 win -win, or at least a compromise, that works for
15 folks, but I don't have that information today, and
16 I don't believe our staff has that information
17 today.
18 So to me we'd have to continue it
19 anyways. But I'm not willing to continue it for a
20 really long time if I can find out that information
21 in a couple weeks.
22 CHAIR FREEMAN: And then we find out
23 the information in person.
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Then we have
62
1 the option to continue or not.
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: Right.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: By then we'd
4 know what our options are. That's where I'm at.
5 CHAIR FREEMAN: I would agree. And I
6 would agree with that, and I would hope that there
7 are some options that some of this can be moved
8 into public right-of-way. I would -- so I would be
9 hopeful that that's where we'd be, and then we'd be
10 able to --
11 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And it would
12 take care of most of these issues.
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: It might. It might
14 take care of a lot of them if it was in our right -
15 of -way, in certain circumstances.
16 Commissioner Ross.
17 COMMISSIONER ROSS: My only
18 concern -- and I would like this on the
19 record -- is this two -pronged approach that we're
20 potentially looking at. The added legal cost for
21 Weld County citizens bringing representation to
22 potentially two additional meetings. And I just
23 think it needs to be out there for consideration,
24 because we need to be, I think, mindful and
63
1 courteous of that as well.
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And I
4 understand. So -- and I get that, and maybe it's
5 to -- maybe there's a way to make it as clear as
6 possible today, is I need to -- I need it for it to
7 be continued for me so I can get the information to
8 make a determination on to whether or not we should
9 allow an even further continuance.
10 COMMISSIONER ROSS: And I respect
11 that.
12 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Right? And
13 so that's where I'm trying to get to. It's like,
14 because otherwise, I mean, I'm prepared to hear the
15 case today. But, you know, I don't know where
16 everybody else is at that juncture. And, you know,
17 I'm just trying to get to something that maybe
18 works for everybody. But that's all. I appreciate
19 what you're saying.
20 So for me in all likelihood, if we
21 continue it in three weeks, we get information. It
22 may be favorable, it may not be favorable
23 information. We probably are still going to have
24 to continue on that day to a date certain to have
64
1 the whole hearing, right? That's what I'm
2 thinking, but I'm -- but to me I can't say, Oh, I'm
3 going to -- just willing to continue to December,
4 because I don't know. I mean, if --
5 CHAIR FREEMAN: I don't disagree with
6 you.
7 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yeah, I'm
8 open to other ideas, though.
9 CHAIR FREEMAN: Well, and where I'm at
10 is I'm really not supportive of going forward with
11 it today because I would like to explore the option
12 of being able to get some of this into our public
13 right-of-way. So I think that is what's in the
14 best interest of our citizens out there, that we
15 look at that.
16 So I don't think it's a good idea to
17 continue today. I think we need to take the
18 opportunity to see if we can get some of this in
19 our public right-of-way. And if that's a
20 three-week extension to find out if that's
21 possible, and if it is, then we can continue it and
22 allow Public Works to be able to get everywhere
23 that it can go that doesn't work with the -- with
24 our citizens out there.
65
1 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Can I suggest
2 something, and maybe Bob can weigh in? Because I
3 get what both of you guys are saying, and
4 everybody's saying, quite frankly.
5 We would like to know whether this
6 even goes forward, hence the continuance for this
7 short time. So could I suggest, so that we bring
8 some certainty to the table, what we're looking at
9 is a continuance possibly for that three-week
10 timeframe that Commissioner Kirkmeyer is
11 suggesting, but yet put a date certain on should we
12 decide to continue, that we then bring it forth at
13 that December 16, I believe, date, so that we can
14 tie that in today? Is that easily feasible to do
15 that?
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: So here's why I
17 wouldn't be supportive of that, is because
18 we -- that's setting a timeframe for Public Works
19 to be able to do all of their engineering and
20 whatever to see if it's in -- if it can go in the
21 right-of-way, and I think we need to hear from them
22 in three weeks what kind of a timeframe they're
23 looking at to be able to determine all of those --
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: First of all,
66
1 to see if it can even occur, and then if it can,
2 then what kind of timeframe are they talking about,
3 right?
4 CHAIR FREEMAN: Exactly.
5 UNKNOWN MALE: That's fair. I'm just
6 trying to also responsibly not set this forth so
7 it's, you know, infinite as to when this actually
8 comes in front of the Board of County
9 Commissioners.
10 CHAIR FREEMAN: And I think we need
11 more information to be able to determine if we need
12 to continue it at all next time or if we do, what
13 timeframe that is for our Public Works staff to be
14 able to work it out.
15 MR. CHOATE: So here would be a
16 suggestion, take it or leave it, as you always do.
17 CHAIR FREEMAN: As we always do.
18 MR. CHOATE: Go ahead and continue it
19 to the date certain what you planned to in two or
20 three weeks, and then make a plan that you're going
21 to continue it thereafter.
22 You're going to continue it to a date
23 in the near term, if it doesn't look like the
24 application needs to be changed because it's not
67
1 going in the right-of-way and you can hear it
2 substantively, or you can continue it in a further
3 term depending upon what you hear back from Public
4 Works.
5 That way, you know, Mr. Stewart, as an
6 attorney representing a landowner, doesn't have to
7 bill his client for the date to come in, unless
8 they want to hear what the plan is on the right -of -
9 way.
10 CHAIR FREEMAN: That's --
11 MR. CHOATE: And everybody can show up
12 to hear what the -- what the response is from
13 Public Works, but they know that if you -- you
14 won't substantially hear the conversation -- to
15 hear the presentation until some time after that
16 date .
17 And we can -- we've got everybody's
18 contact information. We can provide every single
19 person in the room with notice, via email or
20 however they like it, of what that date is when you
21 determine in case they don't show up.
22 COMMISSIONER ROSS: (Indecipherable)
23 came up with an idea per COVID.
24 COMMISSIONER MORENO: Mr. Chair, I
68
1 have another -- to make. Another concern that, you
2 know, we go out to December, Commissioner Ross, and
3 they come back and say, Well, we're still working
4 on this and continue it to next year, we know for
5 sure we're getting two new board members here,
6 which would disqualify them from hearing the
7 hearing. In hopes that you would still be here, we
8 could end -- you know, we could end up with three
9 new commissioners that leaves at least two of us
10 behind here.
11 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: And there's
12 provisions that can take care of that.
13 COMMISSIONER ROSS: If we don't
14 substantially hear it, though, all five would still
15 be eligible.
16 CHAIR FREEMAN: Yeah, because we
17 haven't heard any of it yet. We've continued.
18 We've not heard the case at all yet. So
19 there's -- there's nobody -- there's nobody that
20 can't -- I mean, Commissioner Ross wasn't here when
21 we continued it in the very beginning, but we
22 didn't hear any of the case, so I mean, that's why
23 it's not -- it's not an issue.
24 So you had another --
69
1 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: No.
2 CHAIR FREEMAN: Oh.
3 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I'm willing
4 to continue for three weeks and see if there are
5 options out there that are available to do and see
6 what our Public Works can come back and tell us.
7 CHAIR FREEMAN: And did you also want
8 to include in that that irregardless one way or the
9 other, you won't hear the case in three weeks?
10 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I probably
11 won't use the word "irregardless," but
12 regardless --
13 COMMISSIONER JAMES: She just was the
14 grammar police on you there, Mr. Chair.
15 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: I
16 would -- basically I'd already said that, that at
17 that time, we could make a determination as to when
18 would be an appropriate time to continue.
19 COMMISSIONER ROSS: Okay. So that
20 would be September 16th.
21 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Okay.
22 Everybody good with the September 16 date?
23 CHAIR FREEMAN: Are we all here?
24 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Yes. We have
70
1 one hearing that day, or two hearings that day.
2 But again, we'll just be basically getting
3 information.
4 CHAIR FREEMAN: That's all we're
5 doing, is getting information.
6 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: So -- one of
7 them I don't have to be at. September 16th work?
8 MR. KOLEBER: I was hoping for a
9 little bit longer. I understand that you want to
10 kind of condense this time period here, but I need
11 to work with Public Works and identify what we even
12 need to explore, and that's a pretty short
13 timeframe for figuring out exactly what kind of
14 surveying, potholing, everything else we'd need.
15 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: We just need
16 to know if it's viable possibility to move that
17 pipeline into the -- into the county right-of-way
18 at certain points. That's all we need to know.
19 That's what I'm looking for in three weeks,
20 not -- not all the potholing, not all the
21 surveying, not all the information. I just need to
22 know, because we can't know today. Need to know if
23 it's even a viable option.
24 And then on September 16th, the
71
1 direction will be is at that time we can make a
2 determination on what would be an appropriate
3 length of time for a continuance to hear the case.
4 So --
5 MR. KOLEBER: Commissioner Kirkmeyer,
6 I believe we need to do some of that potholing to
7 identify whether that is a feasible alternative, to
8 identify what's in the road to see if our pipeline
9 can fit there.
10 CHAIR FREEMAN: So -- and I don't
11 disagree with that, but I think that we're
12 not -- we're not at the spot where we're saying
13 specifically, Here, here, or here, or here it will
14 work, because that's going to be something that's
15 going to take Public Works much longer.
16 I think what we're wanting to hear
17 back in three weeks, is it feasible in any stretch
18 of this to move any of it into public right-of-way?
19 And if we know that, that will give us the
20 determination of how far out we need to continue it
21 to allow all those things and determine exactly
22 where it can go in in our public right-of-way.
23 MR. KOLEBER: Okay.
24 CHAIR FREEMAN: Does that make sense?
72
1 Did I explain that right?
2 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Uh-huh.
3 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
4 COMMISSIONER KIRKMEYER: Mr. Chairman,
5 with that, I would move that we continue this case,
6 Docket Number 2019-48.C, Permit USR18-0130, to
7 September 16th at 10:00 a.m., again, to have that
8 discussion and give direction that at that time
9 we'll make a determination on how long the next
10 continuance will be.
11 CHAIR FREEMAN: Okay.
12 COMMISSIONER JAMES: Second.
13 CHAIR FREEMAN: Been moved by
14 Commissioner Kirkmeyer, seconded by Commissioner
15 James, to continue USR18-0130 until September 16th
16 at 10:00 a.m.
17 Any further discussion? Okay. All in
18 favor?
19 MULTIPLE SPEAKERS: Aye.
20 CHAIR FREEMAN: Opposed? Motion
21 carries. Thank you.
22 MR. KOLEBER: Thank you very much,
23 Commissioners. I appreciate your time this
24 morning.
73
1 CHAIR FREEMAN: And seeing no further
2 business, we are adjourned.
3 (End of audio recording.)
74
TRANSCRIBER' S CERTIFICATE
I, Rebecca J. Collings, a Colorado Realtime
Certified Reporter, Registered Professional Reporter and
Notary Public within and for the State of Colorado, do hereby
certify that I prepared the foregoing transcript from an
audio recording of the proceedings.
I further certify that the transcript is
accurate to the best of my ability to hear and understand
the proceedings.
I further certify that I am not an attorney,
nor counsel, nor in any way connected with any attorney or
counsel for any of the parties to said action, nor otherwise
interested in the outcome of this action.
My commission expires September 14, 2021.
VC. C.\ 7- --
REBECCA/J. COLLI GS
Registered Rilofessional Reporter
Colorado Realtime Certified Reporter
Notary Public
REBECCA J. COLLINGS
Notary Public
State of Colorado
Notary ID 420014028792
My Commission Expires 09-14-2021
CERTIFICATE
STATE OF COLORADO)
ss
COUNTY OF WELD )
I, Esther E. Gesick, Clerk to the Board of Weld County
Commissioners and Notary Public within and for the State of Colorado,
certify the foregoing transcript of the digitally recorded proceedings, In re:
A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL
REVIEW PERMIT, USR18-0130, FOR A GREATER THAN 16 -INCH
DOMESTIC WATER PIPELINE (PERMANENT 48 -INCH PIPELINE AND
ASSOCIATED APPURTENANCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
BURIED VALVE ASSEMBLIES, ACCESS MANWAYS, FIBER OPTIC
CABLE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS) IN THE A
(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT — CITY OF THORNTON, before the
Weld County Board of County Commissioners, on Wednesday, August 26,
2020, and as further set forth on page one. The transcription, dependent
upon recording clarity, is true and accurate with special exceptions(s) of
any or all precise identification of speakers, and/or correct spelling or any
given/spoken proper name or acronym.
Dated this 4th day of November, 2020.
(Z.a/„Y..-r,4„
Esther E. Gesick, Notary
Weld County Clerk to the Board
ORIGINAL ( )
CERTIFIED COPY (X)
ESTHER E. GESICK
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 19974016478
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT. 29, 2021
O
November 16, 2020
a
O
0
Ui
Terri Dunnington, Paralegal
City of Thornton
9500 Civic Center Drive
Thornton, CO 80229
N
a
N
CLERK TO THE BOARD
PHONE: (970) 400-4226
FAX: (970) 336-7233
1150 O STREET
P. O. BOX 758
Y, COLORADO 80632
www.weldgov.com
U.S. Postal Service'
CERTIFIED MAIL® RECEIPT
Domestic Mail Only
For delivery information, visit our website at www.usps.com t.
sxuaa
ross
}
Certified Mail Fee
Extra Services & Fees (check box, add fee as appropriate)
❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy) $
❑ Return Receipt (electronic)
❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery
❑ Adult Signature Required
❑ Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $
Postage
$
Total Postage and Fees
Postmark
Here
l(11712020
711bYlitbh ` tlCr:tehClt7
Street MI d A&i42
No., or PO Box No.
"1-.X.11
City, State, ZIP+4®
a
1II:`. & • •
PS Form 3800, April 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9047
RE: Partial Refund of Transcript Deposit (USR18-0130)
Hello Terri:
See Reverse for Instructions
Per our conversation last week, the City of Thornton submitted a deposit in the amount of
$1,065.00 as payment towards an estimated cost to produce a certified transcript. The final cost
came to $795.00, therefore, I have enclosed a refund in the amount of $270.00.
If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(S70) 400-4226.
Very truly yours,
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
egesick@weldgov.com
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
hr r( t'O-inn1:n51-criel
Crtil erC -11\araft5n
qsoo QtrcLrbnvci
Thornistnn Co $oaag
i
i
m
II
m
i
i
i
9590 9402 4445 8248 1205 85
i
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
A. Signature
X .q///v
B. ?ce'ved by (Printed Name)
C&Agent
O Addressee
C. D t "'very
if
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? D Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: gi No
2. Article Number (Transfer from service label)
7017 1450 0000 9675 2804
3. Service Type
❑ Adult Signature
Adult Signature Restricted Delivery
Certified Mail®
❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery
❑ Collect on Delivery
❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery
❑ Insured Mail
❑ Insured Mail Restricted Delivery
(over $500)
❑ Priority Mall Express®
❑ Registered Mail",
❑ Registered Mail Restricted
Delivery
❑ Return Receipt for
Merchandise
❑ Signature ConfirmationTM
❑ Signature Confirmation
Restricted Delivery
PS Form 3811, July 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9053
Domestic Return Receipt
FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, THE BORDER OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS MICROPRINTING
WELD COUNTY GOVERNMENT REVOLVING FUND
1150 O Street Room 107
Greeley, CO 80631
AY
TO THE
ORDER OF
(1;11 ist .<livorlot1/4)
1 v Ortcs�
w v✓1 Se v�Po(trn
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
GRAND JUNCTION, CO
MEMO: t4tposii- R&€u.a (askii-0/SoTranstiript)
cb/co
23-7/1020
DATE (< II lt /VW
'
S
16966
DETAILS ON BACK.
Dousiis
0
J
U)
W
CC
CC -
W
PAP U
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE t
Transcript and Certification Invoice
Esther E. Gesick, Clerk to the Board
1150 0 Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631
(970) 400-4226 / egesick@weldgov.com
July 15, 2020, Hearing Transcript HE19-48.B, re: USR18-0130 — City of Thornton (prepared
by Dauster/Murphy and certified by Esther E. Gesick, Weld County Clerk to the Board)
Transcript preparation
+Transcript Certification 0.5 hrs X $60.00
SUBTOTAL:
$ 40.00
$ 30.00
$ 70.00
August 26, 2020, Hearing Transcript HE19-48.C re: USR18-0130 — City of Thornton
(prepared by Dauster/Murphy and certified by Esther E. Gesick, Weld County Clerk to the
Board)
Transcript preparation
+Transcript Certification 2.0 hrs X $60.00
SUBTOTAL:
$ 325.00
$ 120.00
$ 445.00
September 16, 2020, Hearing Transcript HE19-48.D, re: USR18-0130 — City of Thornton
(prepared by Dauster/Murphy and certified by Esther E. Gesick, Weld County Clerk to the
Board)
HE19-48.B (7/15/20)
Transcript preparation
+Transcript Certification 1.0 hrs X $60.00
SUBTOTAL:
GRAND TOTAL:
Deposit
$ 220.00
$ 60.00
$ 280.00
$ 795.00
($1,065.00)
Credit Due to City
$ 270.00
Time
Date
Logged
HE 19-48.C (8/26/20)
10:30 — 11:00 p.m.
Time
10/29/20
Date
0.50 hrs
Logged
HE19-48.D (9/16/20)
11:00 - 12:00 p.m.
5:35 — 5:50 p.m.
4:15 — 5:00 p.m.
Time
10/29/20
10/29/20
11/02/20
Date
1.00 hrs
0.25 hr
0.75 hr
Logged
5:20 — 6:20 a.m.
TOTAL:
11/06/20
1.00 hrs
3.50 HRS
Murphy Court Reporting, LLC
PO Box 753
Broomfield, Colorado
80038
Bill To
is
Esther Gesick
egesick@weldgov.com
Description
3 hearings - writing time
7/15/2020 Hearing
8/26/2020 Hearing
9/16/2020 Hearing
Thank you for your business.
82-1347267 - Reporter Beckie Collings
Invoice
Date Invoice #
10/30/2020
212
106.25
40.00
325.00
220.00
ITY OF THORNTON, 9500 Civic Center Dr., Thornton, CO 80229
791850
I
DESCRIPTION
1 P.O. NUMBER I INVOICE NUMBER
NET AMOUNT
Check No. - 791850
Check Date -10/29/2020
10/13/2020
Stub 1 of 1
P.O. Number
TRANSCRIPT FEES CR140969 1,065.00
RECEIVE:
NOV 0 4 2n"g
WELD uuuiv i r
COMMISSIONERS
1,065.00
2
- -
82-91
WELLS
FARGO BANK GRAND
City
of
-1
JUNCTION
10Z, 7
91.8
5 0
At
1� CHECK DATE -\/
CHECK NO.
AMOUNT
Thornton
V9500
Thornton,
Civic Center
Colorado
Drive
80229-4326
10/29/20..
; 0079185i:
$*****1, ' 065.0
(303)
538-7229
DOLLARS
i \
Or a
ONE THOUSAND SIXTY FIVE AND 00/100********************V DAETJE,R*18(ikDArYS******************
PAY
-. A IA)
TO THE WELD COUNTY CLERK
ORDER 1150 0 ST
OF GREELEY CO 80632 4.7-:-.;:-.--,----% _71
I
*.00.N
.
000?9 L8 50Ei' I: L0 2 L009 La': 606 0035 ?OL"
PO Box 758
co
c0
0
co
O
U
C)
C�
RECEIPT
DATE 11--q- .2020
No 91208
RECEIVED FROM 1.� 04 I keterthmA
ADDRESS
�raTAscirid Si ,G Uoh oo $ I,O(O5'
FOR hr 3 TrensritgA (us/aa.oa Cr -lb s, 1/46, 4/b)
HOW
PAID
CASH
CHECK
1,065
MONEY
ORDER
� 7R/ c'33
BY g)di
11/9/2020
FedEx Ship Manager - Print Your Label(s)
Shipment Receipt
Address Information
Ship to:
TERRI DUNNINGTON,
PARALEGAL
CITY OF THORNTON
9500 CIVIC CENTER
DRIVE
THORNTON, CO
80229
US
303-538-7521
Ship from:
ESTHER GESICK
1150 O STREET RM 165
GREELEY, CO
80631
US
9704004225
Shipment Information:
Tracking no.: 772034346989
Ship date: 11/10/2020
Estimated shipping charges: 6.66 USD
Package Information
Pricing option: FedEx Standard Rate
Service type: Standard Overnight
Package type: FedEx Envelope
Number of packages: 1
Total weight: 0.60 LBS
Declared Value: 0.00 USD
Special Services:
Pickup/Drop-off: Drop off package at FedEx location
Billing Information:
Bill transportation to: COUNTYOFWELD-483
DEPARTMENT NAME: CLERK TO THE BOARD
SENDER NAME: ESTHER GESICK
ADDITIONAL INFO:
DEPARTMENT FUND: 10400
Thank you for shipping online with FedEx ShipManager at fedex.com.
Please Note
FedEx will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage, delay, non -delivery, misdelivery, or misinformation, unless you declare a higher value,
pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and file a timely claim. Limitations found in the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, including
intrinsic value of the package, loss of sales, income interest, profit, attorney's fees, costs, and other forms of damage whether direct, incidental, consequential, or special is limited to the greater of
$100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented loss. Maximum for items of extraordinary value is $1000, e.g., jewelry, precious metals, negotiable instruments
and other items listed in our Service Guide. Written claims must be filed within strict time limits; Consult the applicable FedEx Service Guide for details.
The estimated shipping charge may be different than the actual charges for your shipment. Differences may occur based on actual weight, dimensions, and other factors. Consult the applicable
FedEx Service Guide or the FedEx Rate Sheets for details on how shipping charges are calculated.
https://www.fedex.com/shipping/shipAction.handle?method=doContinue 2/2
Esther Gesick
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Hello Terri,
Esther Gesick
Tuesday, October 13, 2020 10:54 AM
Terri Dunnington
Esther Gesick; Bob Choate
RE: CORA - USR18-0130, City of Thornton (July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld
County BOCC Hearings)
TRLOG2020_1009_CITY OF THONTON USR18-0130_COST ESTIMATE.pdf
Follow up
Flagged
One final step. I've attached the cost estimate for your review. I would request the City pay the estimated amount,
payable to 'Weld County' as a deposit to complete the work. We don't have a really good way to determine how long
the transcript will take to produce because it often depends on the speed and clarity of the speakers for effort spent to
transcribe and number of pages used to capture the content. The check will be deposited and then either credited
toward the final invoice, or a partial refund will be issued if the work takes less time than expected. Please let me know
if you have any questions. The check may be sent to my attention at the address below.
Thank you,
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758/ Greeley, CO 80632
tel: (970) 400-4226
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents
of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: Terri Dunnington <Terri.Dunnington@thorntonco.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 10:04 AM
To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Cc: Joanne Herlihy <Joanne.Herlihy@thorntonco.gov>; Bob Choate <bchoate@weldgov.com>
Subject: RE: CORA - USR18-0130, City of Thornton (July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld County BOCC Hearings)
Thank you Esther.
We are okay with getting the transcripts the first week in November.
Much appreciated.
1
Terri
From: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 5:14 PM
To: Terri Dunnington <Terri.Dunnington@thorntonco.gov>
Cc: Joanne Herlihy<Joanne.Herlihy@thorntonco.gov>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>; Bob Choate
<bchoate@weldgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: CORA - USR18-0130, City of Thornton (July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld County
BOCC Hearings)
Hello Terri,
The requested audio files are available for download via the ShareFile link below:
https://weldcounty.sharefile.com/d-sffd0f3070034f058 [weldcounty.sharefile.coml
Once you download the file, click on the green arrow bookmark. If a yellow notification bar opens at the top of your
screen, click on the Options button and select 'Trust this document one time only' and then click the green arrow
bookmark again and the media wave file audio should begin to play.
Additionally, I have forwarded the raw audio files to the transcriptionist firm and they have indicated their team will be
available to start this project in the middle of next week and anticipate it will be completed no later than
10/30/2020. Upon receipt, I will need to listen to the audio and make any necessary corrections in order to certify the
transcript, which should only take a couple of days, so I would expect to deliver certified copies the first week of
November. Will this timeline work for you?
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758/Greeley, CO 80632
tel: (970) 400-4226
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents
of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: Terri Dunnington <Terri.Dunnington@thorntonco.gov>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 12:12 PM
To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Cc: Joanne Herlihy <Joanne.Herlihy@thorntonco.gov>
Subject: RE: July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld County BOCC Hearings
We will need word for word transcripts please. In the meantime, would you also send the audio/summary minutes.
Thank you.
2
From: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 12:09 PM
To: Terri Dunnington <Terri.Dunnington@thorntonco.gov>
Cc: Joanne Herlihy <Joanne.Herlihy@thorntonco.gov>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld County BOCC Hearings
Hello Terri,
As a point of clarification, are you simply needing the audio/summary minutes for these hearings, or are you asking me
to order formal word-for-word transcripts? I just need to know because the timing and costs will be more for formal
transcripts, whereas there is no cost for the audio/summary minutes.
Please advise.
Esther E. Gesick
Clerk to the Board
1150 O Street'P.O. Box 758'Greeley, CO 80632
tel: (970) 400-4226
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents
of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: Terri Dunnington <Terri.Dunnington@thorntonco.gov>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 11:46 AM
To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>
Cc: Joanne Herlihy <Joanne.Herlihy@thorntonco.gov>
Subject: July 15, August 26 and September 16 Weld County BOCC Hearings
Ms. Gesick,
Good morning. The City of Thornton wants to order the hearing recordings/transcripts for the July 15, August 26 and
September 16, 2020 Weld County Board of County Commissioner's meetings (DOCKET #2019-48, PL2657, CITY OF
THORNTON (USR18-0130). Would you let me know when we can expect this or if I need to go through a separate
channel?
Thank you very much.
Terri Dunnington, Paralegal
City of Thornton
9500 Civic Center Drive
Thornton, CO 80229
303.538.7521
terri.dunninciton a(�thorntonco.gov
3
Clty of
Thornton
Hello