Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 06/20/2007MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Regular Meeting 200 W. Mountain, Suite A June 20, 2007 For Reference: Ryan Staychock, NRAB Chair - 481-1801 Ben Manvel, Council Liaison - 217-1932 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Alan Apt, Amy Dean, Linda Knowlton, Rob Petterson, Liz Pruessner, Clint Skutchan Board Members Absent Glen Colton, Joseph Piesman, Ryan Staychock Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: John Stokes, Judi Vos Guests Ann Hutchinson, Chamber of Commerce The meeting was called to order at 6:09 p.m. Agenda Review • Apt said he would like to hear an update on green building on a future agenda. • Petterson said he would like to discuss the Boards support for trash districting under new business. Public Comments No public comments Review and Approval of Minutes The minutes for May 16, 2007 were not available for approval. Northern Integrated Supply Project — Discussion • Apt explained that the Board talked at the last meeting about making a recommendation. • Knowlton asked what the board would urge council to do. • Apt said he thought Ryan's position was to get on the record as opposition. • Knowlton asked if they would do that as a resolution. • Skutchan explained that they have 90 days. • Stokes explained that the City staff said it would be December. He has been told that the EIS won't be out until the end of the year; September or October at the earliest. • Apt thought Staychock's concern was that the board weigh-in before the statement. • Petterson asked if they could be out too early. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 2 of 10 • Knowlton thinks that they have a better case to make, as the Natural Resources Board, if they make the recommendation when the EIS is out. It would be difficult to comment from a Natural Resources standpoint without it. • Apt commented that Stokes said Council has directed staff to do some analysis and research on the project. The Board could agree with council that it become a key priority. • Petterson agreed. He asked if the Board shows opposition now, how that would interact with department activity. • Knowlton also agreed. • Pruessner asked what would be gained or lost and how bad it would be if one recommendation was made now and another after the EIS comes out. She wondered if it would dilute the board's efforts. She commented that it would be bad if they came out with a different statement once the EIS comes out. • Dean asked what staff deadline is for their project is. • Stokes said there is direction from Council to look at the ecological impact, recreational impact, etc. He will meet with the City Manager to follow up and to get more direction about the scope of the project. The meeting will determine how it will be financed, which staff needs to be responsible, and how it needs to be approached. He explained that the department won't have good analysis or information until later this fall and that a consultants will be hired for this. When the EIS comes out, the district will already have done a large amount of analysis that will be reviewed very closely and compared for staff comments. • Skutchan said he would like to see the EIS and statements from staff before he can assess any of the information. • Petterson asked if it would be worthwhile to make a motion or resolution to council now emphasizing the importance of staff being involved. • Stokes said that would support the direction from Council. • Skutchan said he would abstain from any votes until afterwards. • Knowlton agreed. • Stokes said they could give the Board more information later. • Apt said he didn't think it would hurt to tell Council that the Board supports the analysis. • Dean commented it could be very important to get the staff analysis out a few months ahead of the EIS. • Stokes said it makes a difference to the COE and to the district that City Council listen to the presentation and then have some feed back. They were listening to the feedback from Council because they want to be sure they are addressing concerns in the EIS. • Apt said UniverCity connections feel the river is central to the downtown economics health. • Stokes said one question from Council was directed at the economic value of the river. He has been talking with John Loomis from CSU who does a lot of work in valuing natural resources and asked him how they would approach that issue. The City may engage him or someone like him to help with that analysis. • Apt asked what the consensus opinion is. • Knowlton wants to hold off. • Pruessner likes the idea. • Dean said it reiterates the importance of it. Pruessner made the following motion: Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 3 of 10 I move that the board draft a memo to City Council stressing the importance of City staff looking into all the impacts to the City. Petterson seconded the motion. There were four board members in favor of the motion with Skutchan and Knowlton abstaining. Apt said they can't send something to council with 2 people abstaining. He agreed to draft a memo. It was agreed that further action will be taken in the fall when staff has done their analysis. Budgeting for Outcomes — John Stokes Stokes explained the offers submitted by the Natural Resources Department and that there were no changes to Environmental Services. Solid Waste: Proposing to increase staff, but it doesn't look that way from the budget. The number goes down a little because half of John Armstrong's time was reassigned to ClimateWise. The other item is that they are proposing to increase Susie Gordon to full time which constitutes a small increase of staffing to the program. Propose to do the same kinds of service/work that has been doing in solid waste. • Petterson asked about trash districting. • Stokes said there is no budget for that and we wouldn't proceed without Council direction. • Rivendell goes down slightly and could possibly go down a little more if the attempt to maintenance and management of the facility to a private contractor is successful. The City might have to continue to subsidize because the return on materials that are sold doesn't completely pay for the services provided. Although the overhead isn't huge, staff is trying to keep the same level of service and reduce outlay. The City is looking at Waste Not Want Not Recycling. • Skutchan said he would be interested in hearing follow-up on this. • Apt wanted to know about the trash districting numbers from a few years ago on costs to get it done and if those numbers could be dug out. • Stokes said Gordon could come and talk to the board. He said there is a lot of interest in this right now; citizens groups had a forum last week being broadcast on channel 14 that would have good information. There was a study done in 98 looking at the cost of implementation and how much it would save the city on road maintenance. • Apt said it was actually a savings when they looked at it before. • Stokes agreed. The consultant hired conveyed that information as well. Air Quality: Essentially will have the same number of people and the same budget. Plan to continue working on ozone, radon, indoor air quality, Energy Management Team, and the Sustainability Team. Lucinda Smith is the primary person for Climate Task Force Committee. Could be implementation measures coming out of that which will require additional staff time in 2008/2009 ZILCH: Loan program with utilities for wood stove remediation and radon mitigation. It is a no interest loan for 2 years on a first come, first serve basis. Although money is budgeted, we get it back; it is fully utilized. The $30K lump sum is allocated at the beginning of every calendar Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 4 of 10 year. Following a suggestions from Apt about using the program for solar, Stokes said there has been discussion about expanding the program. Climate Wise: Stokes explained that there is funding from both the general fund and utilities. The department is proposing an additional $91K in 08 and $130K in 09 from the general fund to pay for this program. The program is up to 70 businesses now and will be up to 100 next year. Cannot keep up the workload without more staff and without the enhancements, the program can't continue to grow. It currently costs $1.81 per ton to mitigate CO2e. The cheapest it gets on Chicago Climate Exchange is $4-5. This is more expensive in Europe (about 10E) because there is a real market for it. Stokes thanked Ann Hutchinson and Chamber for nominating the program for an innovational award form IBM --Ashland Fund Harvard School of Public Policy. Sustainability: Put in an enhancement offer to the High Performing Government Team to fund the city's internal Sustainability Action Plan. He said the department feels they could make a lot more progress on the initiatives in the plan if staff has another person working on it. It is currently being done on an ad hoc basis. With another person to devote their time to working with other city departments on the elements of the plan then a lot more progress would be made. • Stokes said that in the context of the City's overall budget situation, he's not very optimistic that enhancements will be funded because money is tight. It will be a stretch for the City to make it through the next budget cycle. • Petterson asked if sustainability could result in savings. • Stokes said irrigation with Parks dept could save money. Smith could probably speak to that better. • Petterson suggested putting it in the justification. • Stokes answered Apts question about what can be done about energy efficiency for buildings. He explained that Energy Management Team has been looking at how to make buildings more efficient to save money. The consultant has come back with a series of recommendations that will be implemented this year; most have 5-6 year payback. Some of it is just changing out lights, controls on AC equipment. • Skutchan asked what Stoke's overview of and confidence level in managing the new budgeting processes and moving forward. • Stokes said he likes the theory of the process. He explained that the tool has been a problem, but we need to keep in mind this it's a complicated business enterprise that includes 1,400 employees, different monies flowing in, and people of all different business units all over the city. Trying to make it work cohesively is a challenge from a programming perspective. Stokes said things should be done in time for the City Manager to give Council a budget in September to be approved in November. • Skutchan asked Stokes what are his overall feelings. • Stokes said the NRD budget will go up $150K, which is a substantial increase percentage wise. For a small program, the department delivers a lot of results and influences a lot of people with the innovative ideas presented to the rest of the City. Stokes gave examples of Energy Management Team and Climate Wise partners. The City is a Climate Wise Partner and now Larimer County wants to be a partner. • Apt asked when citizens are expected to weigh in and when can the Board weigh in. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 5of10 • Stokes said the most critical time will be September when the council is getting this. • Apt said they should put it on the agenda in September because we will know what cuts may have occurred etc. • Stokes asked Petterson if this is what he wanted to see or if there was another way to describe the budget. • Petterson said he will be interested to see what happens when it goes to City Manager. He asked if the Board can offer input before September. • Stokes said he would ask that the Board not do that and follow advice of Council. • Skutchan commented he would like an update regardless of the change. Update on RTA — Clint Skutchan Skutchan gave a brief update on the RTA. He said council formally cast a 4-3 vote saying not to go forward. They completed work a month ago as a full board and came forward with a report. An executive committee was formed as work ended for the primary body of the citizen's group to keep folks abreast of the work that had been done. They wanted to take their information and be engaged in the three stage process of citizens, government, and voters to make sure it was keeping with what the majority of the Steering Committee had agreed to. There has been a positive response from Loveland and smaller communities saying they may move forward with the projects even if the larger communities drop off. Skutchan said the Steering Committee agreed they were working toward one proposal and one proposal only. It was put into the record that those who had a different point of view have taken their work off line so it's not part of the citizen Steering Committee. Update on RTA — Tim Johnson Tim Johnson said he has served on NRAB and Transportation Board in the past. Said because the Steering Committee was in a hurry to come to a consensus proposal for this November, that it wasn't possible for those with different views to come to that consensus which is why the Minority Report was developed. Johnson said the budget is divided up: tax 1%, vehicle registration fee would be the same with no sunset on those taxes. Sales tax would be .5% of which a major part would be for transit to connect the core community from Fort Collins to Berthoud and Longmont. A significant portion of share back would go to the community and the transit would serve the regional system and not be a standalone. He said the second part of the proposal deals with maintenance. The Principals Committee had representatives from Fort Collins, Greeley, Windsor, and Berthoud; also from the Chamber of Commerce of different communities. Any use taxes and vehicle registration fees would be taken and applied to road maintenance. Local communities have identified about S65M over the next 10 years for maintenance of local roads not state and federal roads. He explained the third part of the proposal is about safety on the road. They propose taking the .15% sales tax to safety on the road for Larimer County only, Latimer and Weld Counties are significantly different. He said Weld may create they're own RTA. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 6 of 10 Johnson pointed out the major difference is how regional road capacity expansion is funded. If you look at the growth pattern for the next 25 years and how the roads are used, there will be a system that has a poor level of service. The cost needs to be identified for adding capacity to the system. He said the Road Capacity Growth Fund is generated from user fees, Governor's initiative for transportation funding, gas taxes, vehicle registration fees. The second part of the revenue pool would come from impact fees, special improvement districts, and new malls on the freeway would pay an additional user tax. 80% of road capacity and expansion money would be received in that manner. The Fort Collins model was used where 82% comes from development in the form of impact fees and 18% from general fund. They also asked that this proposal not go to the ballot this year because there is outstanding information that will help fill in the picture. The Front Range Rail Study will be done sometime this year with information coming out next year and the North EIS study ties into that. • Dean asked if there will be two different plans on the ballot. • Johnson said there will be no ballot in Fort Collins. There may be other communities such as Loveland and parts of Larimer and Weld Counties who are looking at it over the next 6 weeks. If the 12 communities can come to an IGA with the County, then they may see something on the ballot. • Skutchan said there were 11 of the 12 entities addressing the 16 major points of the IGA last week. Two had concerns about distribution of local share back. He said they believe 6 weeks is more than doable; there is a draft IGA that has been put together by Ted Eisel who has been working in conjunction with what we have come up with. Greeley needs to get their infrastructure addressed through the local share back portion so they need something on the ballot this year. He said it sounds like Fort Collins will be one of the original 13 that won't be doing that. He said a large portion is based on the local share back — which has had changes in the way it's been distributed; we're looking at the numbers off of the citizens committee last week. • Apt asked which citizens committee this was. • Skutchan said everyone was invited, but there were some folks that pulled away from the process. Executive Leadership Team elected toward the end of those who didn't have time to commit vs. those who did. • Tim said they did not leave the process but didn't receive emails telling them when the meetings were; they did submit their Minority Report. • Knowlton asked if the current status of the IGA included an opt out. • Skutchan said it's still being discussed and nothing has been decided. He explained that the inclination was to go with a non -opt out clause. If larger communities don't pass it, then it won't pass. • Pruessner asked about the Minority Report and if a presentation was given to Council. • Johnson said that out of the many partial proposals that were developed,�eople took ownership of only two: the one that was presented to the Council June Von the "larger minority group" and the one from their group which they took ownership of. The other 4-5 that were created didn't go any further. • Pruessner asked if they only presented to the Fort Collins City Council. • Johnson said they went before the Latimer County Commissioners as well. • Petterson asked about the composition of the original committee. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 7of10 • Johnson said the MPO chose the committee of 34 original people. Four from Fort Collins/Loveland who are active in the environmental community, one from Greeley, plus three other folks interested in transit. Each Chamber of Commerce and the NTLA (Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance) were represented. They had enough people on the group to have a voice even though it was a minority and they continued to participate through the whole process. They felt it was important that, in the long run, if you are going to do regional transportation and where there are large differences between communities you need to understand where all of the differences are. Four to five years ago, people didn't understand where all the differences were because discussion didn't get carried on far enough. They have been able to show in the areas of emphasis of transit, road improvement should be paid for. • Petterson said the bottom line is that the MPO won't be on it. • Skutchan said the MPO is partially responsible for bringing folks on board. Moreover certain members of the MPO and Council (Kurt Kastein) called others to be on the board. Daggett invited Skutchan personally. • Petterson asked who blessed the final list. • Skutchan said the bottom line is there are many people that are representing an association; average citizens who have expressed interest and who have volunteered. They have been getting lambasted as citizen and there have been attacks on the business community. He said he is bothered by the attacks on the process, folks dropped out because they didn't want to put themselves through that. • Petterson said he finds it interesting that there is no clear story how people were selected. • Skutchan said to call Daggett and Kastein and that the idea of minority/majority is false. He said they had a facilitator and minority voices were given a venue to speak out. Tim Johnson and Roger Hoffinan had as much time to make a presentation. He thinks the process was fair and they always worked toward a consensus. • Johnson feels they agreed on the problem set that they had to work with. New Business Petterson said there was a public forum on trash districting with a panel of a several trash haulers, citizens, Gordon and Steven Gillett from Larimer County. Each person gave their thoughts on recycling and the idea of districting; the public was then invited to comment and ask questions. He said another action taken in parallel is that the Air Quality Advisory Board (AQAB) passed a resolution May 29`s. The AQAB recommends that Council adopt an implementation plan for a public trash collection utility which is a step above districting. Petterson said he would like the Board to come out in favor of either trash districting or a utility. He personally feels that districting would be a better solution because it still involves the private sector. • Apt asked if the Board feels they have enough information to vote or would they rather wait for a presentation from Gordon. There was a show of four hands. Skutchan and Dean did not raise hands. • Pruessner said she thinks it would be useful to have Gordon speak to the Board. • Skutchan said he would like to see a presentation from trash haulers that don't feel it is a good idea. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 8of10 Pruessner said the forum was good as the haulers made good comments. There is a momentum in town and the haulers feel more included or are more willing to include themselves in the process now. There was wide spread community support for doing something. Following some discussion regarding the possibility of having folks speak in opposition of the district along with staff, Stokes commented that would put staff in an awkward position. He said that was what the forum was for where everyone could participate. He said Gordon would present what has happened to date in exploration around districting and what the legal and financial issues are related to hauling; not pro/con. She would explain what districting is, how it would be enacted to be legal, and how it would be done. Apt said we should just stick with staff and view the tape. Petterson said there were other interesting perspectives. He proposed to get it on the agenda for next month; have Susie do a presentation on what districting is and how it would be enacted. In preparation, each person would view the forum then someone could make a motion if they so choose. He said he would like to see action at the next meeting. Stokes indicated that the board would have to make a recommendation to council to get the thing going. Skutchan said he had a new business item: He was asked by Staychock as the head of the Board to give an update on the RTA. The fact that Knowlton wrote what she did; and being judged on whether we are advocates in one way or another, needs to be put on record once again. He feels he is being singled out because he holds a minority position and speaks out on certain issues, and it makes him uncomfortable. He said he doesn't like coming to the meeting when he is singled out because of his opinions. He said the last time this happened he almost didn't return. Others that come into this situation should not be judged, especially in emails. He was asked to simply give an update. Skutchan said he hopes at some point during his tenure on the NRAB, that he is viewed as a member with a different opinion. He feels a precedent was set here tonight. He doesn't think it's fair if the board is going to open that dialog; when it is okay in one instance and not another. • Apt didn't feel his role on the Board was being questioned. It was more informational. • Skutchan asked that they show him the precedent where another member on a committee was countered by someone else; it has never happened on this Board. • Apt said it was a controversial issue and he suggested that the Board get the full perspective in terms of information. • Skutchan said in his reply that he was just giving an update, not a presentation which he could have done if he had been asked to. • Apt apologized. He said Johnson was not asked to do a presentation and asked Skutchan if he would like the opportunity to do a presentation. • Skutchan said it was not about the presentation. He said the RTA issue is dead in Fort Collins. • Pruessner was also uncomfortable with the email and would have felt personally attacked for holding an opinion that was different. She hopes the Board can communicate in another way when there are differences of opinion; it enriches the discussion to have different ideas and perspectives. She said the tone was disturbing. • Knowlton thought it was inappropriate to have it on the agenda since the RTA is not something the Board had not sent a representative. Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 9 of 10 • Petterson said the question should have been why we didn't remove it from the agenda. There was clearly an imbalance in the meeting room. They didn't have an advocacy on the other side which felt wrong. They had what Skutchan said he would do and we had a presentation advocating a particular side. • Apt said there must have been miscommunication as to the purpose of the item. He explained that he feels it is important that Skutchan's opinion has a place and his participation is valued; no disrespect was intended. • Stokes said the conversation goes partly back to the debate about how the Board gets information. The Board created a policy on how to get both sides of the argument in. It clarifies the expectations of the Board about receiving information on an item. If the issue is controversial, representatives from each side can come in but they have to follow the same formula; talk for 20 minutes and they are done. Maybe in the future we can be really clear and can work with the Chair to get clarity on what the Board wants in terms of information sharing and presentations on certain issues • Skutchan said that is why he and Staychock crafted the rules in a way that was formulated and fair. • Knowlton suggested that Staychock may need guidance from Stokes as to what is an appropriate agenda idea. • Skutchan said had the Council passed it last night, it would have been. • Knowlton commented that it should be more than an update from a board member. • Apt feels it was clearly a miscommunication. • Skutchan wanted to make a statement for other board members. He said it is hard to be an advocate for the Board when it is like that. He feels his presence on the Board and integrity on a personal issue was questioned. • Apt told Skutchan that he appreciates his being there. Six Month Planning Calendar - July Green Building - Brian Woodruff Trash Districting — Susie Gordon Climate Wise — Kathy Collier • Skutchan asked about a co -meeting with the LCSB board. • Since a number of Board members would not make the July 18th meeting, the Board agreed to move the meeting to July 25s' which is Skutchan's birthday. • Apt commented that the ZILCH program would be very well funded if we used renewable energy to fund it. Spend the money locally and support local jobs • Skutchan said he would like to have that conversation. He said he would like to see that on the planning calendar. Announcements Pruessner said there will be an open house for Climate Change on June 26th. Also, the task force is asking for ideas to help the City reach the 2010 goal to get rid of I million tons of carbon. Members of the Board can send an email to Lucinda Smith or Pruessner. Committee Meetings — Solid Waste Reduction Committee Petterson gave a brief summary on the meeting. The topics discussed were: 0 Trash Districting Natural Resources Advisory Board June 20, 2007 Page 10 of 10 • Rivendell contract • E-waste campaign is starting website on www.fegov.com/ewaste • Ban on waste oil and batteries in landfills will go into effect July I' for all of CO. • Brown glass recycling initiative with businesses in old town is expanding. • The National Recycling Coalition Conference in Denver; September 2007. The City may sponsor a field trip for this. Pruessner said it is the same weekend of the Sustainability Fair. The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 Submitted by Judi Vos Admin Support Supervisor