Jacki Marsh Running For Mayor

McWhinney pawns who pushed Jacki Marsh out of a bid for Ward II may need to explain how their plan backfired.

Marsh, a downtown business and property owner, was buoyed by the number of people who were upset she decided not to seek a council seat for Ward II.  She filed the paperwork today to be added to the ballot for mayor joining Loveland Mayor Pro Tem John Fogle and former Councilman Larry Heckelhttp://lovelandpolitics.com/harvestgoldlawsuit.html on November’s ballot.

Marsh says she wants to represent all of Loveland while limiting the enormous power special interests have enjoyed in recent years over Loveland’s largely staff directed council.

This will be a more interesting and less predictable race.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Jacki Marsh Running For Mayor

  1. I think your information about Larry is outdated. He isn’t the mean and angry man anymore in that horrible movie clip from his past life. Larry Heckel found our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ or really our Lord found him when his wife abandoned him and his business partners cheated him. Larry walks with Jesus Christ now and is building all of our sets for theater at Crossroads Church in Loveland. He will make a wonderful mayor for our town and make it real for the unbelievers sitting in judgement on the city council. Please reconsider this story and interview Larry to see what a giving and charitable soul he has. You need to come to Crossroads Church and maybe you can find eternal salvation for your family.
    Jesus Christ died for everyones sins even John Fogle as difficult as that is to believe. Until you except His Love he cannot change your life for eternity. We are all praying for Larry to win.

    • Admin says:

      Angelina,

      Thank you for commenting. Mr. Heckel is welcome to comment here on his political campaign or life changes to the extent they reflect on his ability to responsibly hold public office again. As you know, any act of contrition requires one is “contrite of heart, confess with the lips” and seeks penance through reconciliation with their victims. Unfortunately, that will not be possible with the late Councilman Walt Skowron.

      Quite frankly, the city is full of residents who never held public office and never violated the city’s charter or Colorado open meetings laws which makes them more qualified than Mr. Heckel to seek public office in our view. We know then Councilman Larry Heckel, for example, conspired to participate in an illegal council meeting over a phone call with former colleagues and city manager Don Williams to buy the 402 property.

      On your second point which appears to say Christ died even for the sins of car dealers (John Fogle) as well as everyone else, we agree. We are not aware of any theological exclusion for car dealers from salvation but again perhaps some Christian modesty and contrition would help!

      • John Fogle says:

        Admin —
        Thanks for the mention. I jokingly introduce myself as a recovering car dealer when the subject comes up.
        This Mayoral race will absolutely be interesting — and despite all the history and comments — I still like Larry Heckel. I’ve known him for years and from my stand point — he is a good man.
        I also enjoy Jackie Marsh — but quite frankly I do have a serious issue with her history in the Downtown Area.
        In 2015, Jackie made it known she wanted to get involved with the DDA. As a DDA board member I let her know when an opening came up, and she applied. After much discussion, I gave my support to her application and she was recommended by the board, and appointed by City Council. After a discussion in Council one night that didn’t go as she wished — she quit the DDA board — less than two months after be appointed.
        Jackie opening and vocally opposed the 1st DDA election and in my opinion was partially responsible for that issue being defeated.
        I was disappointed with Jackie’s actions regarding the DDA, and will not support her on subsequent endeavors.
        Everything I have listed here is public record and I can provide it on request.

        • Admin says:

          Quick question, since the DDA vote failed twice doesn’t that put her position with the majority of the electorate?
          Our understanding was her opposition centered on refusing to accept Larimer County locating/expanding the probation office in downtown.
          While you might call that a NIMBY position, most people don’t want to live or run a business in close proximity to jails, probation offices or halfway houses.

        • Jacki Marsh says:

          John – thank you for raising this issue. You are quite correct, I accepted a position on the DDA after I was certain that we had defeated the efforts to bring a large Probation Department into Downtown Loveland. There was even special meeting of which I was tipped off to and which I attended. During my questioning of Probation Personnel, we learned that approximately 1800 criminals would be processed. But we should not to worry as 900 would be DUI convictions. It would only be the other 900 sexual predators, armed robbers, pedophiles, violent criminals, shoplifters and every other type of criminal that we should be concerned with.
          The night the issue came to City Council it was scheduled late on the agenda, likely in the hope that people would leave as the meeting went past midnight.
          We defeated bringing Probation into Downtown Loveland.
          Funny how you whispered to me after that City Council meeting that you were always opposed to bringing Probation into Downtown Loveland, but that the County had fooled all of you by sneaking it in. I guess you forgot that I attended the DDA meeting in which you convinced the DDA to support it, despite their concerns. You left the DDA Committee no time to consider the ramifications of a large Probation Department in Downtown Loveland. You made them vote that very night. The next day you reported to City Council that the DDA was on board.
          That’s kind of like you stating that the School Board supports the Foundry Project, despite the schools losing property tax funding. I guess you didn’t realize that the School Board can’t endorse a project that could cost them revenue or the State may not back-fill that lost revenue.
          But back to the topic at hand; yes I agreed to be on the DDA after it was clear that a large Probation Department was not coming to Downtown Loveland.
          And yes, I resigned when it was clear that there was a new effort to bring the building back and no way to guarantee that Probation would not come with it. I needed to be free fight it rather than be a rubber stamp of approval.
          Rather than Probation, we will now have a movie theater, a hotel, shops, restaurants, apartments, a parking garage and a public plaza.
          In regards to the DDA funding; I believe that ALL of Loveland’s residents should weigh in on the plans for Downtown by voting for or by defeating a 1% sales tax increase to fund the projects.
          I believe Downtown belongs to all the people of Loveland and that it is unfair to let 1,200 or so voters determine it’s destiny.
          These are the very reasons that I am running for Mayor, to shed light on the issues and to allow Loveland residents an opportunity to voice their opinions BEFORE decisions are made.

          As the issue was dead, I agreed to

          • John Fogle says:

            Jackie —
            The County building in downtown was dead before it got any traction, as I told you. The math simply didn’t work. The City couldn’t build a free parking structure and dedicate 150 spots to a tax free entity that couldn’t contribute back to the project. Also, the size didn’t work. The probation services will now be adjacent to the Police and Courts building where they belong, and the New Larimer County building is underway at 1st and Denver, where they have extra land and plenty of room for expansion when needed.

        • Eric Sutherland says:

          An election to increase city debt must be voted by the entire city electorate. Neither you or your attorneys understand why the DDA statutes were set up the way they are over a decade before TABOR. One might say that you, John Fogle, are perpetrating precisely the sort of scam that induced the Colorado electorate to adopt TABOR.

          That said, I hope that the URA obligations are transferred to the DDA anyway … this will result in a situation where the City of Loveland will be left with COPs to pay off … but no tax increment coming in. That would be poetic justice considering the injurious graft that City of Loveland has participated in for over a decade now.

          PS. You can thank me for the return of hundreds of students back to TSD accompanied by the increase in state funding that comes from higher student enrollment numbers. PSD’s long range plan was predicated on the idea that new schools could be built, (one of them in Loveland) and thereafter open with full enrollment buoyed by TSD refugess. This would do nothing good for anyone.

          • John Fogle says:

            Eric —
            Did the entire population of Ft Collins vote for the passage of the Ft Collins DDA? Has this occurred in any other Colorado cities that have instituted DDA’s in their downtown’s?

          • John Fogle says:

            Carol,
            Your right — I purchased Loveland Pawn. I moved that licensing into my existing business – 99 Technology, and am learning the pawn business slowly.
            As for the Car dealership, I haven’t been active in the dealership in 16 years. My partners are the majority owners and do an excellent job serving the community.

          • Admin says:

            When the Reporter-Herald first reported you bought a pawn shop we received half a dozen emails asking for a story about this “scandalous” development.

            In an effort to keep this blog about substance and not gossip, here is a response for our readers of why we didn’t see this as newsworthy from a political perspective.

            There are good and bad pawn shops. Friendly Pawn, for example, is a longtime family run business in Loveland that is an old fashion pawn shop. They sell and buy many different types of goods beyond what your average franchise does and from everything we know Friendly Pawn is a very reputable local business.

            Mister Money and many of these types of franchise pawn shops focus on the few most profitable items and rely on people’s ignorance about money to make a profit. Not to be confused with https://www.mrmoneymustache.com which is a fantastic operation in Longmont that helps people to understand money management.

            As a Councilwoman Leah Johnson attempts to amp-up more government subsidized housing in Loveland along with your efforts, Mayor Pro Tem Fogle, to increase subsidized housing we are seeing another increase in liquor stores, franchise pawn shops and check cashing stores. In other words, your tireless support for your wife’s employer, the housing authority, is responsible for bringing more pawn shops to Loveland than anyone else.

            Whether Loveland Pawn, the one you purchased, is a good or bad pawn shop we really can’t say. That will depend entirely on how it is managed. Pawn shops like car dealerships, we believe, are not inherently good or evil; it really depends on the way they are managed.

          • John Fogle says:

            Eric —
            The Downtown URA doesn’t have any debt.

          • Eric Sutherland says:

            The 2006 election allowed something like 186 people to authorize the creation of $250,000,000 in City of Fort Collins debt. This was not lawful. It is only one of a half dozen reasons that the Fort Collins DDA is operating afoul of the law.

            The language in statute (from 1978) that defines DDA as debt of the municipality was an end run around Artl XI section 6. The intent was to avoid the proscription on creating debt. This is one of the reasons why it was prudent for the Colorado electorate to adopt the TABOR amendment.

            If the downtown URA has no debt, then it should not receive TIF.

        • John Fogle says:

          Admin —
          You are absolutely right. Friendly Pawn is the model to ascribe to. The Steele’s do an excellent job serving the community — and are not only good friends and supporters – but represent the model that Loveland Pawn will strive to follow.
          As far as the liquor stores — I haven’t been counting, but when it comes to Pawn shops — there won’t be many more due to the 1 mile exclusion that is part of Pawn licensing. We purchased Loveland Pawn who still had their grandfather move rights, or Hwy 402 would have never had a pawn shop near the city.

  2. Carol says:

    I don’t think he is a car dealer anymore but I read he owns Loveland Pawn. Please no more comments about salvation. It isn’t relevant to running for public office and it sounds like you are really mocking people. Whether a car dealer or pawn shop owner can get to heaven does sound like the beginning of a good joke.

  3. Carrie says:

    Jacki will bring some much needed openness to Loveland governance. She will represent all of the people of Loveland with passion and integrity.

  4. Heather says:

    I am glad to see that Jacki Marsh has entered the race. She’s the most informed outsider ever. She is up on the issues, a tireless researcher and dedicated crusader.

  5. Silence Dogood says:

    Let’s leave religion out of politics, can we?

  6. Greg Snyder says:

    As a purchaser of a home in a Heckel development and a neighbor to a Heckel owned property I think Jesus may have some problems with Larry’s business operations. Somehow insuring yourself as a landscaper while you are developing a neighborhood is probably not what Jesus wants. You may believe what you want but I will believe what my lying eyes tell me…….

  7. Admin says:

    Greg, in all fairness I think the point she is making is the religious awakening happened after he developed your subdivision and his family and business partners abandoned him.

    I suppose the the question is whether he righted any of those wrongs from the past or was it more like a jailhouse conversion where he just wants to wipe the slate clean and now be considered a moral and upstanding member of the community?

    In addition, that post is from someone we don’t know and not the candidate. Angelina, are you working on his campaign or just making some independent observations?

  8. Al says:

    John Fogle, you have a strange way of interpreting events. Not surprised coming from a car dealer, not saying that you use questionable tactics to fullfill your goal. But i’ve had very bad experience with car dealers who will lie,cheat,misinform a customer. Your actions, and other members on city council give the impression that all of you are rubber stamp happy when it comes to a vote regarding big business such as Centerra/McWhinney. I prefer a candidate with character, Jacki Marsh. She will put the citizens of Loveland first. Nothing like that horrible night the council kicked around the broadband issue most of the night, essential forcing citizens to leave before they had a chance to speak because it got to be very late. That is down and dirty politics.

    • John Fogle says:

      Al,
      The night you are speaking of was largely dominated by citizen comment and citizens removing items from the consent agenda for added comment. These issues are important to the citizens and I certainly would’t approve curtailing citizen comment, even if it disrupts the schedule. We are discussing moving items that are removed from the consent agenda to follow scheduled items to allow people that have specifically come for a scheduled item to speak earlier.
      This can also save money. Many of the scheduled items include experts and lawyers that are on the clock. Forcing them to wait for non-scheduled items to be completed merely runs up the bill.

    • John Fogle says:

      Al,
      Rubber Stamp Happy — hardly. For those Councilors that choose to dedicate the time and energy to serve on Commissions and Boards — most topics have been discussed multiple times by those commissioners/directors prior to the item making it to council. Next, comes our information packets (that would be 3 ” thick weekly if printed and bound) that provide us with all the information that staff and the commissions have accumulated on the topic.
      Note: the commission/board meetings, the information packets and everything we receive (including our emails) are public record and easily obtained through the City website. The meetings are open to the public and the schedules can be found on the City website.
      So if it appears that much of what council does is approve staff recommendations — you are right — most (95%) of the issues that are questioned are corrected at the staff/commission level and only the items worthy of approval makes it to Council meetings for ongoing discussion. Many items never make it past the Commissions, so they become non-issues. Council relies heavily on our Commissioners/Directors/Staff — and I would encourage anyone with interest to get involved.
      Also note: my personal cell phone is listed on the City website and has been since I was elected. (970-679-7649)

      • Jacki Marsh says:

        John – I am curious, how does it work? Does city staff wait for City Council’s approval before taking action? Or is City Staff running the show?
        I ask because the new Visitor Guide, that goes out to all Visitor Centers throughout Colorado and beyond, lists Winter Wonderlights as the Signature Event in November, 2017.
        The Visitor Guide was approved for printing by City Staff on June 20th. The Visitor Guide (I assume approx 100,000 copies of them) was printed and ready to ship on July 5th.
        The first reading by City Council to approve or decline Winter Wonderlights was also on July 5th; literally after the Visitor Guide was printed.
        The Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem and the City Manager set the Agenda schedule for City Council Meetings.
        The first reading of Winter Wonderlights by City Council was on July 5th, it was on the Consent Agenda rather than the Regular Agenda. Why was that?
        Did City Council merely “rubber-stamp” their approval of Winter Wonderlights? Or did members of City Council consider and approve Winter Wonderlights before the First Reading?

        • John Fogle says:

          Jackie,
          I hadn’t heard of the ‘Winter Wonder Lights’ program prior to seeing it at an agenda meeting. It was such a great idea for the community that I didn’t think there would be as much comment as there was.
          Staff prepares the agenda based on timing, urgency and available speakers — the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem meet bi-weekly with the City Manager and City Attorney to approve the order of items and give any input we have or have heard from fellow councilors. We do not add items to the agenda. Adding items to the agenda is done through council by the ‘rule of 4’, which requires the assent of 4 councilors to bring an agenda item to council or request it be added as a study session item.

        • John Fogle says:

          Jackie –
          One issue that will come up IF you should win will be your ownership of a store in Downtown.
          A few years ago, the Admin of this site called into question my Liaison position with the Affordable Housing Commission, and upon further reflection and discussion with the City Attorney – I exited that position to remove any ‘conflicts of interest’ since my wife works for the Loveland Housing Authority. To this day, I recuse myself on matters that involve LHS.
          In my opinion — your store/property ownership in downtown will certainly represent a similar pecuniary interest in all matters that serve to benefit downtown retail stores, and require you to ‘recuse’ yourself prior to discussion/voting on any of these items. I am no lawyer — but I might recommend checking this with the City Attorney.

          • Jacki Marsh says:

            John – I understood before entering the Mayoral race that I would need to recuse myself from issues related to Downtown that might present a conflict of interest. Do you have any pecuniary interests with properties or businesses in Downtown Loveland?

      • John Fogle says:

        Jackie —
        I only wish I had bought property in Downtown Loveland — the growth is incredible!
        My property is located in South Loveland in Ward 3 — so I don’t have any property interests in Downtown — except wanting to see it do well!

        • Jacki says:

          John – that answers was one question, the other is, do you have any pecuniary interests in Downtown Loveland?

          • John Fogle says:

            Pecuniary means that I stand to gain either monetarily or through property enrichment. I don’t have any business interests or property in Downtown Loveland. I server the Downtown area because I want to see it do well — simple as that.

  9. I do not speak for Larry but he can speak for himself.

  10. John Fogle says:

    Admin —
    Probably worth noting is that I retired from the car business in 2001, and while I still enjoy an ownership interest in the dealership I formerly owned — I haven’t been involved since I retired – 16 years ago.

  11. LindaRosaRN says:

    We Lovelanders need someone who will not rubber stamp every mega-million-dollar deal that developers pass by the Council with no thought for Loveland’s future.

    Anyone who watches City Council meetings cannot fail to be impressed with Jacki Marsh’s breadth of knowledge about City workings and the deals Council has been fomenting. Acting as a concerned citizens, she has already done more to bring more light to issues than any of the current Councilors have.

    Marsh is that practical, hard working, and fair-minded citizen candidate we think of as an ideal public servant. In my opinion, we are very fortunate that she threw her hat into the ring.

    I also very much look forward to a debate between Marsh and Fogle.

    • Tony Benjamin says:

      Me too (on the debate).
      We are lucky here in Loveland to have a couple of candidates running for mayor who are articulate, informed — and with very different views on our city’s present and future.
      While that is the main issue, I’m also interested in how the two of them look at City Council’s increased propensity to go into executive session. Understand that there are reasons via state law to take the public’s business behind closed doors. My belief is that the allowance should be used sparingly. And only in extreme, strict cases. Most of the public’s business should be out in the sunshine of openness and public scrutiny. Those private discussions do not let me, as a voter, know what my representatives are thinking. We deserve to be in on those discussions, where points are made — or refuted. tb

      • John Fogle says:

        Tony — the only new reasons that have arisen for executive sessions are the review. Council in early 2016 started doing quarterly reviews of our three employees — City Manager, City Attorney, City Judge. The hope is to have closer managerial relationships with each and improve communication and performance. One side issue that arose is that the City charter allows the employee to receive all reviews in private executive session. We therefore — were adding one executive session per month for these reviews. Recently I have started asking the employee if they wish to have the review in Exec session rather than council assuming that is what they want. The exception will be our attorney — since most everything he may share would be work product and covered under attorney client privilege.
        Other than these reviews, I feel we should stick to HR matters, negotiations for property/services or legal matters for Exec sessions.

      • Jacki Marsh says:

        Tony – I do not support Executive Sessions, one exception would be for employee reviews – if an Executive Session is requested by the employee. I believe confidential information contained in proposals and negotiations can be blacked out. Without going through old agendas, I believe there were numerous Executive Sessions over the past couple of years, that were not employee related. One fairly recent one was the negotiations between the City & the County regarding the County building on 6th and the parking lot behind the Pulliam building. Public assets, governing bodies that report to us, and we are kept in the dark. Does the County do the same? Again, we could go back through old agendas, I think we would find several.

  12. Greg Snyder says:

    I also look forward to that debate. Mr. Fogle may learn that smooth professional politicians have fallen from favor among the electorate despite what the press and the political class regurgitate among themselves….. This election should be fun for some of us.

    • John Fogle says:

      Greg — thank you – I think!
      Smooth — God help us all if local politics starts mirroring National politics. I have no intention of having that happen on my watch. Those that know me — would rarely call me smooth. Abrasive comes up once in a while.
      Professional Politician — if I was going to attempt to live on the $800/mo I receive – I would have to move to some place much less expensive (oops, then I would violate the residency clause). City Council in Loveland is basically a volunteer job with a small expense reimbursement.
      Your are right — the debates will be a lot of fun. Hopefully, they will exemplify why it is important to properly prepare for the Mayors position — not just sign up.. I told my friends on council two years ago that I planned to run when the Mayor retired — and sitting as Mayor Pro tem for 2 years has certainly prepared me for the challenges of the job. The work I have done as Mayor Pro Tem, combined with sitting in for the Mayor for three months this year (while he had foot surgery) – has been wonderful, enlightening and challenging — and the Mayor’s endorsement speaks to his thoughts about my abilities to keep Loveland on a steady course.

      • Shannon says:

        What a smooth answer. Your mouth says “keep Loveland on a steady course”, but your money is invested in a business that relies on low income customers having financial difficulties. You’re either a wise business man who sees, and hopes for more desperate Lovelanders in the future, or a fool who shouldn’t be involved in city financial decisions.

  13. Laura Alier says:

    I would like to find out more from Jacki about her stance on some key community issues. What is her ideas about Affordable Housing in Loveland? Programs like The Edge for example. What would she like to see in the future for affordable housing? Another important issue in Loveland, what should City Council do to support City staff with handling homelessness in Loveland? What is her perspective on historic preservation? Should the City be incentivizing or assisting with the Pulliam Building restoration for example? Lastly what about the City supporting projects like the Arcadia Building for instance (SW corner of 4th & Cleveland, now The Flipside) or The Artspace Project (and Feed & Grain Preservation) Should the City give incentives to projects like these? Thank you in advance!

    • Tony Benjamin says:

      Great questions, Laura. Thank goodness for this site. It has already provided a wealth of information/insight from both John and Jacki. (that’s a shout-out to you, Admin, for the effort it takes to make it happen). There is something about the written word, directly from the candidates, that newspapers used to provide. This forum provides a lively back-and-forth in the way it should be. tb

    • John Fogle says:

      Laura —
      I think my opinions on these issues are well know — but if not — ask away.

    • Jacki Marsh says:

      Hi Laura – good questions and all worthy of in depth conversations, please stop by my shop to discuss in detail. Short answers would be:
      Affordable Housing: a must, it is a frequent complaint I hear from residents and those seeking to be residents. We do not have enough housing options, which drives up prices. We need more employment options, better paying employment options and more small businesses. Which gets us into balanced growth and quality of life. Too long of a discussion for this venue.
      The Edge – a great development; a homeless family who stayed in my front apartment last summer, by virtue of their having a roof over their heads and by their having an address, were able to get back on their feet and are now living at the Edge.
      Homelessness in Loveland: A humanitarian crisis here and around the country. I support our local efforts and am very impressed with 137 on Lincoln and with Alison Hade at the City, among others. One of the things 137 is looking into is finding mentors to help individuals reconnect. I support giving chores / work to those seeking aid who are capable of contributing. People need food and shelter but we human beings also need a purpose. Picking up litter, pulling weeds, sweeping, even assisting in stuffing and stamping envelopes could be reentry work. But again, the homeless issue is a big issue; tiny homes should be looked into (love that we have a high school building some) and I would like to know more about what is working in other communities around the country. I agree with the concept that people living on the streets are not in a position to help themselves without a hand up. Finding a place to live typically means making a living; it is virtually impossible to find work when a person is homeless.
      Historic Preservation: I support protecting our heritage through identifying and registering historic properties in Loveland and through Federal and State grants.
      Pulliam: the Pulliam is a City owned asset and it should have been maintained throughout the years. The ADA was passed in 1990, it’s about time we bring the Pulliam up to code and start using it as the community gathering place it was intended to be. I look forward to events, concerts and dancing in the Pulliam. With good event management, there is no reason why the Pulliam can’t pull it’s weight financially.
      Arcadia: I do not know the details of the deal between the City and the owners of the Arcadia. What I believe to be true is that the City has a Facade Grant program that matches funds up to $25,000 – meaning the City’s maximum portion is $12,500. Yet, I believe the City spent $400,000 in assistance on the Arcadia renovation. I love the results, especially when remembering what that corner looked like, but I have a problem with tax-payer funds being used for private property investment. Could the City work with banks to offer low interest loans that would put a lien on the property should the property be sold? The Flipside is a great addition to Downtown, we need more entertainment and I would love to see a Children’s Museum somewhere in Loveland.
      The Feed and Grain, Artspace: I believe that Artspace is a State funded project in coordination with our Loveland Housing Authority. One of the things that makes Loveland unique and which adds to our quality of life, is our art community. For me, supporting and promoting our art community is a must. I would like to see art and small businesses play a bigger role in the future of Loveland. One thing we lack is a venue to sell and therefore attract buyers of our amazing bronze work. The only location I can think of is Columbine, which is a beautiful venue, however we need more venues. We have amazing, locally created art and art seekers from around the world should be visiting Loveland on a regular basis to buy our art. Increased tourism traffic would be a boon to our local economy. Could the Feed and Grain be turned into such a venue?
      Short answers to big questions, please stop by to discuss in more detail. Thanks for asking!

      • Laura Alier says:

        Thank you so much Jacki! I appreciate hearing those answers. You’re right, all of these merit much more in-depth conversations, but it helps a lot to know your general ideas and answers to some of these topics. I greatly appreciate you taking the time to answer. And I have to give a shout-out as I completely agree about 137 Connect as well as Alison at the City. Great things they are doing and working on for our community. Thank you!

Comments are closed.