Ken‑Caryl board debates timing of community survey; residents urge open‑space protections and park spending; board approves meeting schedule, CPC appointments,

Ken‑Caryl Metropolitan District board members debated whether to delay the district’s community survey so an incoming district manager could participate in drafting questions, while other board members and CPC volunteers argued the survey should proceed to meet budget and planning timelines.

At the meeting, some board members said postponing the survey briefly — a few weeks to a couple of months — would let a newly hired manager “be involved while it is still being formulated.” They framed the request as a short delay to allow the manager to learn the organization and contribute. Other board members and Community Planning Committee volunteers opposed delaying: they said the survey work was largely complete and that survey results are used to inform budgeting and multi‑year planning. One committee member said the survey was “about 70 to 80% done” and ready to proceed to consultants.

Members of the public used the meeting’s public‑comment period to urge stronger open‑space protections and to challenge proposed spending on a community‑park redesign. One resident asked the boards to include nighttime closures and a formal conservation designation for the South Hogback Open Space that would prohibit mechanical means of transportation, including bicycles, in designated portions. Another resident said the community did not want a broad redesign of the community park and suggested prioritizing smaller improvements such as additional restroom fixtures or splash‑pad and field upgrades. Speakers referenced past surveys (2017 and 2021) and task‑force work on trails and preservation; commenters also asserted certain legal or purchase restrictions on development in portions of South Hogback.

The Community Planning Committee (CPC) representatives said the committee has distilled survey data and uses consensus topics to advise the board on items such as perimeter fences, fire mitigation, special events, crosswalks and picnic/shade structures. CPC members said their role extends beyond providing one‑year budget input and can inform two‑year and five‑year planning.

While the board did not adopt a formal delay at this meeting, members agreed to continue consulting with the Master Association (MA) — a co‑funding partner for the survey — and to keep the new manager’s involvement in mind; several board members said a brief delay of a few weeks or months could be acceptable but warned that delaying into the next budget cycle would reduce the survey’s usefulness for the 2025 budget.

Votes at a glance

• Resolution to establish the 2025 meeting schedule and posting location: motion made and seconded; roll‑call recorded and the resolution passed 5–0.

• Motion to approve Community Planning Committee appointments as submitted: motion made and seconded; roll‑call recorded and the motion passed 5–0.

• Motion to move into executive session pursuant to CRS 24‑6‑402(4)(b) to receive legal advice regarding the pickleball lawsuit: motion made and seconded; voice vote reported 5–0 in favor. Board chair certified for the record that the executive session would be privileged attorney‑client communications and would not be recorded.

Ending

Board members asked staff to continue coordinating with the Master Association and the CPC on survey timing and to notify candidates for district manager about the timeline. No formal change to the survey schedule was adopted at the meeting. The board moved into a closed executive session on legal counsel regarding the pickleball lawsuit and indicated no public action was expected when public session resumed.