HomeMy WebLinkAboutEconomic Advisory Commission - Minutes - 05/18/2016MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION
Date: Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Location: CIC Room, City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave.
Time: 11:00am–1:30pm
For Reference
Wade Troxell, Mayor & Council Liaison
Josh Birks, Staff Liaison 221-6324
Dianne Tjalkens, Minutes 221-6734
Commission Members Present Commission Members Absent
Sam Solt, Chair Kristin Owens
Denny Otsuga
Ted Settle
Glen Colton
Linda Stanley
Alan Curtis
Ann Hutchison
Craig Mueller
Staff Present Staff Absent
Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support Josh Birks, Economic Health Director
SeonAh Kendall, Economic Health Manager
Seth Lorson, City Planner
Mayor Wade Troxell (11:56)
Meeting called to order at 11:04am
Review and Approval of Minutes:
April minutes approved as amended. Approved unanimously, 7-0-0. Ann arrived after vote.
Changes: Date and attendees. Not in attendance—Dianne, Mike Beckstead, Tiana Smith.
Agenda Review—No changes.
Public Comment—None.
Commission Member/Staff Updates—
1. Welcome to new member Craig Mueller.
a. Craig was design engineer for HP, worked for startup in Longmont, Celestica, and others.
Has moved into telecom, and is currently Century Link project manager in Fort Collins.
2. Glen: Company with 600 employees is coming here and was not discussed with EAC.
3. Denny: 1. Rockies Venture Club received grant funding from the cluster. June 1 RVC will start
deploying educational programs in Fort Collins at discounted price. 2. BizGirls—leadership skills
program for high school girls—is starting mid-June. Currently recruiting participants. Offering
partial and full scholarships.
4. Alan: 1. RMI is bringing in second 2016 cohort—healthcare and innovation startups. 2. Last year
had accelerator program with Turkey. Second iteration starts next week.
1 | Page
5. SeonAh: Filling in for Josh Birks.
6. Sam: Visited Madison, WI. Has many similarities to Fort Collins. Visited with Josh’s counterpart
there to discuss economics. GMA is about the same as Fort Collins. Have population similar to
projected build out. Asked how accomplished successes—grew 100K in less than 20 years and
have organization and tranquility. Once they tried density, they liked what it brought.
a. Have hard line GMA?
i. Yes. Very distinct urban area. Madison Economic Development Plan is concise,
specific, and manageable.
b. Businesses?
i. University, high tech, food technology cluster
c. Open space preservation
7. Ted: Gets sustainability newsletter—recognized Josh’s trip to International Economic
Development Council’s first Congressional Forum on Economic Development. Helped CSU
finish application for innovation and economic prosperity. Saw Smithsonian exhibit on Fort
Collins. Would like it to have more exposure.
8. SeonAh: Coloradoan pre-released that Comcast is bringing 600 jobs to Fort Collins. City staff
was involved early on, but they did not meet City business assistance requirements. Comcast was
looking at 5 different sites at the time. Got $8.1M from state. Will be a technical/customer service
call center. Get 100-150 inquiries annually. When cannot offer business assistance, can offer
other resources. Will locate at building 5 of HP.
a. Can the City say whether they want this business or not?
i. City learned more about jobs when were first approached, and declined to give
business assistance/incentive. Let them know other benefits of Fort Collins.
b. No say in state decision? No say in TBL for state’s decision?
i. State wanted company to locate in Colorado.
c. Are these jobs moving from somewhere else, or brand new?
i. They have 60 employees in service center already.
ii. New call center. Most will be new jobs. Have good benefits to employees. Will
be managerial positions, but mainly call center.
d. $44K salary includes benefits?
i. Yes.
e. Some of these people will be from outside Fort Collins and is difficult with our housing
market. Would be interesting to track where employees come from.
i. Because did not provide incentive, harder for City to track that. Comcast will
have to report annually to state. State has not historically shared that info with the
City.
f. Violates basic tenants the City is promoting.
i. Which is why City did not provide incentives. Neighboring communities were
offering them incentives. Space availability was a factor.
g. Recently heard announcement of $14M incentives for affordable housing. Now we bring
in more people. Why wouldn’t City government tell state to not provide incentive since
have greater understanding of implications? Why does state have to offer any incentives
when have large growth? Have companies go to places that need employment. Overrun
with growth.
i. Will have to talk to leadership about communication with state. City staff was
unaware that Comcast was getting incentive from state until recently.
h. Not ideal type of jobs for Fort Collins, but what happened reinforces that just saying no
will not work. People who want to come will do so anyway. There is a limit to what the
City can do. There are larger forces that identify Fort Collins as a great place. We can
promote things we want.
i. State gave big incentive package and Fort Collins bear impacts.
Ted moved that the EAC suggest to City Council that the board thinks this is a mistake and in the future
Council needs to engage with the State more aggressively to let our wishes be known. Linda seconded.
Motion withdrawn.
a) Suggest the board prepare a statement.
2 | Page
a. Out of our purview as a board. Comfortable sending message through SeonAh to
City leadership.
b. Advisory responsibility to Council
b) Ted withdrew motion. He will draft a memo and send through email to EAC for edits. Will
vote in next meeting.
c) Get metrics on what happened to community post-call center. Did salaries stay up or go
down, what happened to housing?
a. Haven’t done economic impact analysis yet.
d) Why do we still have Enterprise Zones in Fort Collins? If we continue to compete with other
states for jobs, we don’t have sustainability. Don’t have money for teachers, need new
schools, need I-25 widened, but state keeps giving tax breaks.
ACTION ITEMS: SeonAh will scan Madison plan and distribute to EAC.
Ted will draft a memo and send through email to EAC for edits. Will vote in next meeting.
SeonAh will follow up with OEDIT, determine impacts on other communities, and send to Josh.
AGENDA ITEM 1— Downtown Parking Community Dialogue—Seth Lorson
Considering on-street paid parking system. Over last year staff has been talking to stakeholders including
public and business. Looked at case studies, and determined recommendations. Key issues and objectives:
Perceived lack of adequate parking and turnover—objective to increase availability. Addressing
neighborhood concerns. Would like to move away from punitive funding model. Extensive public
engagement. Asking how to encourage people to park in the location most appropriate for type of trip. Ex:
on-street parking targets shoppers. Parking garages are for long-term such as for a workday. Feedback is
that there is lack of parking, need better communication of parking locations/availability, flexibility and
length of stay (2-hr not always appropriate), reduce parking demand with pedestrian/bike/transit; more
parking garages. Stakeholders are divided on paid parking (don’t shock system with overnight change).
Recommendations:
• On-street paid parking system
o Encourages people to move to spaces based on length of stay. Will cost more than
parking garage for longer-term parking.
o Creates sustainable revenue source. Currently no funds to service garages.
• System to collect parking utilization data
o In-space technology to tell when arrive, how long stay, when leave. Currently have to
count cars.
o Can link to app to show drivers where there are available spaces.
o Will link to system for enforcement, variable pricing, etc.
o Will show where greatest needs are.
o Extend stay by paying through phone. Technology exists and is in use.
• Adjust enforcement
o Interim relief measures—6:00 is worst time to find parking—same time stop
enforcement.
o Explore weekend and evening enforcement
o Expand 2-hour parking limits by zone to create better turnover.
• Transportation demand management program
o Reduce parking demand and congestions
o Help employers with parking and transit passes
o Incentivize other modes of travel
o Enhance communication about transportation options
Timeline—Going to Finance Committee and Council Work Session to request funds to implement
adjusted enforcement and TDM, then create on-street paid parking sometime in 2018. Need time to
research technology, communicate changes, etc. Smooth transition. Will have pay kiosks, not individual
meters.
Right now parking garages are less convenient than on-street and have a cost (which is very low). Seeing
a lot of congestion from people circling to find spaces. Creates idling, ozone, pollution, etc.
3 | Page
Discussion/Q & A:
• Any other community our size that has free parking downtown?
o Not in any peer communities staff looked at. Consultant found Sarasota, FL identified need
for on-street paid parking and they just put it in. Public outcry led to pulling them out. Less
than a year later, businesses are asking to put them back in.
• What app?
o Parkify is one. Would like customized app to help with all transportation options—transit,
parking, etc.
• Plans to build additional parking garage in downtown?
o City is in partnership with developer of new hotel and DDA to build new garage. ~200 public
spaces. Parking Plan has identified need for 5 additional garages in spaces around downtown.
o Disappointed that fund to encourage a garage is not in the list of options. Could be used for
public-private partnerships.
Covered in Downtown Plan.
In financial windfall at City at this time. Designate some of those dollars to be
available for garage partnerships.
Employers locate in downtown, cannot create garages on their own.
• Parking prices? Should cost a lot more in downtown. Have very low prices and is a poor way to
manage demand. People are used to paying more elsewhere. Support on-street parking cost and our
system is upside down—have scarce resource that is free and less scarce resource that costs a little.
On-street parking—can change price based on use?
o Many things can be done with technology. Can have variable pricing system based on
demand or occupancy at that time. Data collection would inform that.
• Garages for employers—if want to locate in downtown, don’t want negative impact on existing
businesses.
• Shared parking is working well in Madison.
o Also expensive.
• Assuming funding comes through, opportunity to be entrepreneurial in combining services. Develop
in-house or resource with consultant?
o Consultant. Denver is doing this now—bringing in all systems.
• Glad moving ahead. Don’t wait for ultimate app to get started.
o Tech focus is on parking spot, but there are other services like Uber and Lyft. Use these
services to get to the door. Tech already exists in Japan to have credit card and plate
registered. Don’t have to stop to pay at garages. Eliminates psychological barrier of payment.
o Only suggestion is that the project is not moving fast enough.
AGENDA ITEM 2—Growth Dialogue Next Steps & Deliverables—Sam Solt & Ted Settle
Ted provided handout as example. Determining how to frame comments to Council. How to bring closure
to growth conversation that is constructive. Worked for Kettering Foundation. Have National Issues
Forum—helps communities resolve contentious issues. Desire is to find common ground during
discussion. Trained facilitators will make sure all voices are heard. Suggesting creating a document
similar to handout provided. Sample identifies various perspectives and options/choices, discusses the
rationale behind various perspectives, potential actions, and tradeoffs. Possibility to partner with CSU’s
Center for Public Deliberation.
Discussion/Q & A:
• Ultimately see a written document as the goal?
o Yes. And of this length.
o Best contribution this board makes is when states positions in tangible formats, rather than
rehashing same ideas and worries.
• Is this an appropriate role for us? Is anyone else addressing these issues in the way we are
considering? Have had conversations with seniors, transportation, etc. We should have a voice to
discuss the levers the City has to manage growth.
• Is the document meant to be EAC member perspectives or is the EAC the funnel for community
voices?
o Both.
4 | Page
o If proceed, would like community to see that we’ve reflected their views. Representative of
wider population.
o May be very difficult to execute and could slow down the project. Let members create the
document, then seek input from the community.
• This is phenomenal framework which would enhance credibility of this group. Could take to level of
consultative group that could be elevated. But is this in current mission statement?
• Like framing distinct choices from rapid subsidized growth to no growth. Current choices seem to be
between rapid dumb growth and rapid smart growth. Would like to see all options, including limited
growth. Starting to recognize implications of growth. Show positive and negative impacts.
• Envision defining three options, and members draft sections, then bring back to group for feedback?
o Would be helpful to have outside guidance. Each member needs to determine how much time
can invest in process.
• Fundamental question is what does EAC give up from time perspective if do this project?
o Sacrificing or not paying attention to Council agenda items? Parking and affordable housing
are examples of where we need to weigh in. Used to only listen to presentations and not all
were relevant. Should spend some time discussing policy.
• Suggest framing as thought-leader document. Deliverable for his office. Budget?
ACTION ITEMS: Ted will work with Josh to ask Center for Public Deliberation for assistance. Members
are requested to review handout and give feedback on format.
AGENDA ITEM 3—2015 Revenue Review/City Forecasting Philosophy—Mike Beckstead & Tiana
Smith
Item postponed.
Meeting Adjourned: 1:11pm (early adjournment as final speaker cancelled)
Next Meeting: June 15
5 | Page