Tag: composting

DELAYED: City Council Meeting: Distel-Tull Land Swap

Due to negotiations with Holcim, City Council voted to delay the vote on the land swap until further notice. 

City Council will be reviewing and voting on whether or not to approve the Distel-Tull land swap on Tuesday, August 12th at 7pm.

Please consider attending for the public invited to be heard portion of the meeting (at the beginning of the meeting) and wearing green to show support for our Open Spaces.

If you are unable to attend, or would like to take action in addition to attending the City Council meeting, please contact our City Council members and tell them your thoughts. This only takes 5 minutes. You can be short and sweet. https://longmontcityxm.gov1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4PEnCSjZVVwit8i

Letters: Remove Distel from any/all future development plans

Published in the Times Call July 29, 2025

In January Longmont City Council directed staff to pursue a partnership with Boulder County who wants to build a large-scale composting operation, but use [Longmont] land. Longmont Public Works staff proposed a land exchange where land purchased by Open Space tax dollars (Distel) would be exchanged for land owned by Public Works (Tull). The proposal at Distel carves out just 8 acres for
Boulder County’s compost infrastructure and 57 acres for City of Longmont infrastructure.

Public Works staff has been merchandising this proposal as a solution for the real need for compost infrastructure. Only 12% of the Distel Open Space property is appropriated for compost and 88% for city infrastructure; including relocating the fire training center and building a driving range for city vehicles. This proposal presents as a bait and switch for the City to build industrial infrastructure on
land designated as Open Space.

I’m a member of Longmont Friends of Open Space (standwithourstvraincreek.com) We are residents committed to preserving St. Vrain Creek and all our Open Spaces. We initiated and campaigned for the extension of our Open Space tax ballot measure last November (passed with 74% approval). Voters supported taxing ourselves in perpetuity because we want our Open Space lands respected, protected and not developed. That includes not being bartered or traded for development. If you’re one of those voters, please contact City Council and suggest they remove Distel open space property from any/all development considerations of any kind.

We support partnering with Boulder County for regional compost infrastructure. I personally have advocated for decades for regional compost infrastructure. City Council’s initial direction was well intentioned. It’s unfortunate city staff opportunistically used green washing sales tactics and used Open Space as a commodity. Council has lost a lot of public trust. Removing Distel from this hot mess
would help repair some of that.

Shari Malloy, Longmont

Letters: Longmont Distel-Tull swap

Published in the Times Call on July 31, 2025

I have been recycling and composting for many decades. I am firmly in favor of a community-based composting facility, but the proposed Distel-Tull property swap is not the right location for one.

Swapping open space land in this manner sets a very bad precedent. As a member of the public whose taxes help pay for open space purchases, I would consider such a land swap to be a huge violation of my trust!

Bald eagles nest along the confluence of St. Vrain and Boulder creeks, just west of the proposed composting site. The area is also a winter roosting spot for both bald and golden eagles, and it provides rare wintertime open water feeding grounds for migratory waterfowl, including trumpeter and tundra swans and many species of ducks. The presence of a big composting operation nearby would be disruptive to these birds and other wildlife.

Then, there is the risk of flooding. Years ago, my son’s Boy Scout troop planned a weekend camping trip close to the Distell and Tull properties. The boys packed up their gear, excited about a big group camp. This was July, monsoon season. On first morning of this camping trip, there were three funnel clouds over Longmont. We parents got an emergency call that we needed to go pick up our kids. Everyone woke up with 2 inches of water in their tents!

It was just a normal monsoon rain. Now, imagine that site during the floods of 2013! Imagine if it flooded again with a big composting facility on it. The risk of water contamination is unacceptable.

Again, I’m in favor of a community composting facility, but not at the risk of losing bird habitat, of disrupting birds and wildlife, of setting bad land use precedents, and not on a site prone to flooding.

Kat Bradley-Bennett, Longmont

Letters: Distel property not suitable for city uses

Published in the Times Call on 7/25/25

It is very short sighted to see the currently blighted east Longmont Distel property as simply an industrial zone. While significant remediation of this site is needed, it will remain an unsuitable site for compost, fire training and other city maintenance facilities.

Rock gravel and sand deposits desired by quarry companies occur as deposits of ancient river beds. They are thus generally near groundwater aquifers and modern day floodways. This property is located between the St Vrain River and Boulder Creek and close to their confluence. The Boulder County floodplain map, which extends out into Weld County (where this property is located), seems to indicate that at least part of this property is in the actual FEMA floodway. Extra effort would need to be made to isolate the compost piles such that, during processing, potential contaminants did not spread into the local environment. Contaminants could include microbiota, microplastics, heavy metals, persistent pesticides, herbicides and their potentially toxic breakdown products. The compost leachate could also be carriers of any unremediated pollutants from past industrial use of this property.

If the Distel property is properly restored, it can join our premium local open space portfolio along with Golden Ponds, Walden Pond and Pella Crossing, which were originally quarries and are now highly regarded assets for both wildlife and human activities.

Of special concern is the difficulty many such facilities are having in keeping inappropriate materials out of the compost stream and then in distributing the finished compost. For example, online reports indicate that Chula Vista, California, one of the places visited by Longmont officials and touted as a shining example of composting, is not able to distribute the bulk of the compost materials produced.

Composting is a great idea, but one that requires much careful planning.

Gaythia Weis, Longmont

Letters: Criteria are clear on how open space should be used

Published in the Times Call on 7/24/25

At the April 9, 2024 regular session meeting, City Council approved a motion by Mayor Peck, directing staff “to engage in conversations Boulder County is having on a regional composting facility.” It was an ambiguously worded motion, but it would have far reaching consequences for our open space program, because it set the stage for an unprecedented proposal of disposing open space property for development.

Six months prior to the mayor’s motion, in a Oct. 12, 2023 email (Subject: Open Space Parcel for Composting Facility), the mayor and Public Works staff discussed requirements outlined in the municipal code “to remove the Distel property out from the Open Space program (and move the Tull property in) for the purpose of building a compost facility.” There was no mention in the email that Distel would be difficult to ecologically restore, an excuse that the city would later conjure up to justify the land swap. There was also no discussion in the email about the potential environmental risks of a composting facility on bald eagles and people living near Distel. The focus was finding a location for Boulder County’s composting facility.

In January 2025, the city publicly revealed the Distel Tull land swap plan, which included the composting facility and multiple city development projects at Distel.

It’s a violation of the public trust for the city to manipulate our open space program to serve its development aspirations. Our open space goals and criteria are clear on how our open space should be used. It unquestionably doesn’t include siting a composting facility on these properties. For the sake of defending the integrity of our open space program, City Council should strongly and soundly reject the land swap deal.

Ruby Bowman, Longmont

Letters: Longmont City Council should say no to Tull/Distel plan

Published in the Times Call 7/23/25

The Longmont City Council should say no to the Tull/Distel land exchange and the idea of locating a compost facility in the Tull/Distel area. Some of the reasons:

• As a resident of Longmont since 1997, I have voted for every open space tax. The land exchange would violate the spirit of the open space program, and I might not have voted for 3A last fall if I had known this was coming.

• Neither the county nor the city have made a serious attempt to address concerns raised by wildlife advocates about the impact of a compost facility and other development on the nearby confluence bald eagle roost. My assumption is that they do not want to undertake a formal impact assessment because they expect it to be unfavorable to development in the area.

• The Tull property may be a “Plan B” location for proponents of the composting facility and other development. The only advantage to this idea is that it does not involve a land exchange with open space. There is still the same potential for harm to bald eagles and other wildlife. Add to that the fact that Tull is in the floodway and it becomes even more unsuitable.

• Boulder County’s compost facility feasibility study update of 7/7/2025 contains the following statements: “Phase 2 of the study includes site exploration … The feasibility study will primarily focus on the Distel site.” Clearly they have already decided that Distel is a feasible site, even though they have not completed the feasibility study and have not disclosed other sites under consideration. If Distel is taken off the table, I expect they will focus on Tull. So much for transparency.

We should give our neighbors in Weld County a break and find a composting site in Boulder County.

Chris Boardman, Longmont

Letter: Open Space Should Stay Open Indefinitely

PUBLISHED: July 10, 2025 at 6:02 AM MDT

Open space is of high value to the citizens of Longmont as demonstrated by the passage of Ballot Issue 3A last year that extends indefinitely the open space tax paid by Longmont citizens. That demonstrates the importance of open space to Longmont residents.

When open space has been acquired in the past, location is of primary consideration. To that point, once a location has been established, it is meant to be permanent and not a future candidate for relocation.

My opinion is that any consideration of moving or exchanging existing open space property is not what the voters of Longmont want. Longmont voters share a belief that existing open space should be left alone and not be a candidate for any future property exchange. I am one of those voters.

Roger Lange, Longmont

Opinion: Gordon Pedrow “The Longmont City Council’s Open Space Dilemma”

If you care about keeping our Open Space lands from development (even for a good cause…) please contact our City Council members and tell them your thoughts at: https://longmontcityxm.gov1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4PEnCSjZVVwit8i

 

Warning! Longmont’s open space program is under attack from Longmont Public Works and Utilities. Public Works has proposed a land exchange where land purchased by open space tax dollars would be converted to an intense industrial development involving composting with Boulder County, the fire training center and warehouse space. The exact size of the industrial development has not been revealed by Public Works.This proposal is commonly referred to as the Distel-Tull land exchange.

The Longmont City Council faces a huge dilemma since the Parks and Recreation Board (PRAB) did the right thing and recommended the council reject the conversion of open space to industry. Earlier this year per the city code, the City Council referred the proposed land exchange to PRAB to conduct a public hearing, analyze the proposal and advise the council. Chapter 14.52 of the code is titled Open Space Disposition.

Section 14.52.030B1 reads as follows: Before taking final action on any request to dispose of open space land, the City Council shall refer the request to the parks and recreation advisory board (PRAB), and other advisory boards the city council feels necessary, for their recommendation. Apparently the council only wanted a recommendation from PRAB since it was the only board to which it referred the matter. Part of the council’s dilemma comes from the fact PRAB recommended denial of the land exchange.

Section 14.52 clearly gives the City Council final authority to determine whether the exchange is appropriate. However, by ignoring the recommendation of the only advisory body given a specific role in the city code and the fact the council only asked for a recommendation from PRAB, the City Council’s rejection of PRAB’s recommendation will appear arrogant and condescending and will make a sham out of the open space disposition process outlined in the city code.

During PRAB’s public hearing on the proposed land exchange, numerous speakers had questions and comments particularly regarding issues covered by Section 14.52.0302 which reads as follows: the disposal should be sensitive to the integrity of the property features, including sensitive habitat and cultural and historical features, and generally should not adversely affect the remainder of the property. Members of PRAB had many similar questions regarding the application of the code. Approval of the land exchange would fragment the Distel open space. Members of PRAB, like the public, did not receive satisfactory answers from Pubic Works staff.

Another part of the City Council’s open space dilemma is the irony that last November the council referred ballot language to Longmont voters for approval to extend in perpetuity the open sales tax. It passed with 74% approval because Longmont residents value open space. I do not think most voters expect open space tax dollars to be used to purchase land for Public Works to convert to industry, even if Boulder County is dangling big dollars to get a partner for composting. Most residents expect open space purchases to be properly vetted before purchase and then remain open space. If the council thinks dissing the recommendation from PRAB will come only at a small price, the cost of the loss of public trust of 74% of voters should be carefully calculated, especially for any council candidates running for election next November.

The final part of the council’s open space dilemma stems from Section 4.04.130J of the city code which reads in part, once acquired, open space may be used only for purposes set forth in 4.04.130i. These purposes include preservation of natural areas, trails, conservation of natural resources, low-impact district parks and urban shaping buffers. Conversion to an industrial development is not listed. Stretching normal definitions beyond recognition by most residents is one way Public Works staff may try to spin the issue. But if the city council chooses to ignore PRAB’s recommendation it will make a precedent-setting, slippery slope decision that could threaten our open space program. What will be the next piece of open space to be stolen?

Gordon Pedrow served as Longmont city manager from 1993 until 2012.