Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/16/2021 - RESOLUTION 2021-024 AMENDING RESOLUTION 2020-105 T Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY February 16, 2021 City Council STAFF Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk Carrie Daggett, City Attorney John Duval, Legal SUBJECT Resolution 2021-024 Amending Resolution 2020-105 to Revise, as Ordered by the Larimer County District Court, the Citizen-Initiated Ordinance and Its Ballot Title and Submission Clause Concerning the Hughes Stadium Property and to Submit them to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City at the Regular Municipal Election on April 6, 2021. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to amend Resolution 2020 -105, adopted by Council on November 17, 2020 (Resolution 105), to revise, as recently ordered by the Larimer County District Court (District Court), the citizen-initiated ordinance (Initiated Ordinance) and its ballot title and submission clause (Ballot Measure) the Council provisionally and conditionally submitted in Resolution 105 to the City’s registered electors concerning the Hughes Stadium Property at the April 6, 2021 election. Resolution 105 provisionally and conditionally submitted the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure so that some of the provisions in them could be reviewed by the District Court for its determination whether some of the provisions were administrative matte rs not properly subject to a citizen initiative under the Colorado Constitution and City Charter. On February 3, 2021, the District Court issued its order determining some of the Initiated Ordinance’s provisions are administrative and must be severed from the Ordinance. On February 7, 2021, the District Court issued its second order setting the wording of the Ballot Measure to be consistent with the Court’s February 3rd order. This Resolution 2021-024 amends Resolution 105 by revising the Initiated Ord inance and Ballot Measure as ordered by the District Court and submits them as so revised to a vote of the City’s registered electors at the regular municipal election on April 6, 2021. Any protest of the proposed ballot language must be submitted on the Notice of Protest form located at https://www.fcgov.com/elections/ballot-title-protest and received no later than Tuesday, February 16, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. (due to the President’s Day holiday). The protest(s) shall be heard, considered, and resolved by Council prior to adoption of any Resolution that is the subject of a protest. If protests are received, copies will be included in Council’s “Read-before” packet provided the day of the meeting. However, since the District Court has ordered the specific wording to be used for the Ballot Measure, the Ballot Measure cannot be further revised without the District Court’s consent. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council adopted Resolution 105 submitting the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure to the City’s electors at the City’s April 6, 2021, election. However, it did so provisionally and conditionally so that the content of th e Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure could be subject to later modification as needed, based on a judicial Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 2 determination regarding whether the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure contained administrative matters that are not the proper subject for a citizen-initiated ordinance under the Colorado Constitution and City Charter. The purpose of the Initiated Ordinance, as described in the petitioner’s General Statement of Purpose on the petition, is to require Council to rezone the Hughes Stadium proper ty in the Public Open Lands zone district and to require the City to use best efforts in good faith to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlif e rescue and education. The text of Initiated Ordinance as proposed by the citizens is as follows: WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have shown strong support to preserve and provide open space, natural areas, community separators, wildlife habitat, and trails for today and for the future; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins citizens currently enjoy their open spaces and natural areas; the recreation they provide, such as walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing; the educational opportunities and programs provided to people of all ages and backgrounds; and the beautiful landscapes and views they provide; and WHEREAS, open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, community separators, agricultural lands, and trails benefit all members of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, conserved open space and natural areas help make Fort Collins a highly desirable place to live, work, and visit; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins values sustainability in policies, plans, strategies and projects that align with its Triple Bottom Line decision-making philosophy of social, economic and environmental well-being to meet its citizens’ present needs and the needs of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we all depend ; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have provided continuous funding for open space and natural areas acquisition and maintenance since first voting for a capital improvement sales tax in 1973 and approving extensions or new revenue sources in eve ry election such a question has appeared on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins has conserved over 40,000 acres of open space and natural areas since 1973; and WHEREAS, the property formerly home to the Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium is a currently undeveloped 164.56-acre parcel of land that was recently annexed into the city of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has many distinct zoning districts in its land use code; and WHEREAS, one zoning classification in the Fort Collins land use code is “Public Open Lands,” which currently allows for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education centers, subject to administrative or Planning and Zoning Board review; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property is currently zoned as Transition District (T) pursuant to Division 4.12 of its land use code, which is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property occupies an area in b etween the current Maxwell Natural Area and Pineridge Natural Area; and Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 3 WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into a public open lands area would build upon the City’s significant history of preserving open spaces and woul d provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space; and WHEREAS, absent acquisition and conservation efforts under this ordinance, the Hughes Stadium property would forever be lost to residential and/or commercial development; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property by the City of Fort Collins should occur using existing voter-approved open space sales tax revenue and other funds currently available to the City, financing agreements, grants, partnerships with other local governments, or other available fiscally responsible mechanisms; and WHEREAS, publicly available information indicates Colorado State University values the Hughes Stadium property at $10 million, and the City should use that figure as a starting point in its negotiations to acquire the property at its fair market value; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium property into the Public Open Lands (P -O-L) zoning district pursuant to Article 1, Division 1.3 and Article 4, Division 4.13 of the land use code would be necessary to convert the property into an area for parks, recr eation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56-acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Colli ns land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. That to acquire the Hughes Stadium property, the City shall seek funding from existing sources or future partnerships, including but not limited to the Fort Collins Open Space Yes! sales tax fund, Certificates of Participation, the City’s general fund, Great Outdoors Colorado and other third party organizations providing open space or other types of recreational or land conservation grants, and/or partnerships with other entiti es such as Larimer County. Section 6. That the City Council may refer ballot measures to the voters for the purpose of seeking additional funding only if existing sources of funding or future partnerships are Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 4 insufficient for the preservation of the Hughes Stadium property as described in this Ordinance. Section 7. That the City shall expeditiously, but no later than two years from the passage of this Ordinance, use best efforts in good faith to acquire the Hughes Stadium property utilizing the financial mechanisms described in Sections 5 and 6. Section 8. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. On February 3, 2021, the District Court issued its order (Attachment 1) determining that the requirement in the Initiated Ordinance that the City acquire the Hughes Stadium property “at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education” was a legislative matter appropriate for a citizen initiative, but the Court has determined that Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance (shown above) are administrative matters not appropriate for a citizen initiative. The Court has therefore ordered that Sections 5, 6 and 7 be severed from the Initiated Ordinance. On February 7, 2021, the District Court issued a second order (Attachment 2) requiring the Ballot Measure to be similarly revised to be consistent with the Court’s revisions to the Initiated Ordinance. The text of the Initiated Ordinance as revised by the District Court is as follows: WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have shown strong support to preserve and provide open space, natural areas, community separators, wildlife habitat, and trails for today and for the future; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins citizens currently enjoy their open spaces and natural areas; the recreation they provide, such as walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing; the educational opportunities and programs provided to peopl e of all ages and backgrounds; and the beautiful landscapes and views they provide; and WHEREAS, open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, community separators, agricultural lands, and trails benefit all members of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, conserved open space and natural areas help make Fort Collins a highly desirable place to live, work, and visit; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins values sustainability in policies, plans, strategies and projects that align with its Triple Bottom Line decision-making philosophy of social, economic and environmental well-being to meet its citizens’ present needs and the needs of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we all depend; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have provided continuous funding for open space and natural areas acquisition and maintenance since first voting for a capital improvement sales tax in 1973 and approving extensions or new revenue sources in every election such a question has appeared on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins has conserved over 40,000 acres of open space and natural areas since 1973; and WHEREAS, the property formerly home to the Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium is a currently undeveloped 164.56-acre parcel of land that was recently annexed into the city of Fort Collins; and Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 5 WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has many distinct zoning districts in its land use code; and WHEREAS, one zoning classification in the Fort Collins land use code is “Public Open Lands ,” which currently allows for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education centers, subject to administrative or Planning and Zoning Board review; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property is currently zoned as Transition District (T ) pursuant to Division 4.12 of its land use code, which is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property occupies an area in between the current Maxwell Natural Area and Pineridge Natural Area; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into a public open lands area would build upon the City’s significant history of preserving open spaces and would provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space; and WHEREAS, absent acquisition and conservation efforts under this ordinance, the Hughes Stadium property would forever be lost to residential and/or commercial development; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property by the City of Fort Collins should occur using existing voter-approved open space sales tax revenue and other funds currently available to the City, financing agreements, grants, partnerships with other local governments, or other available fiscally responsible mechanisms; and WHEREAS, publicly available information indicates Colorado State University values the Hughes Stadium property at $10 million, and the City should use that figure as a starting point in its negotiations to acquire the property at its fair market value; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium property into the Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Article 1, Division 1.3 and Article 4, Division 4.13 of the land use code would be necessary to convert the property into an area for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property , a 164.56-acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 6 Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. The text of the Ballot Measure as revised and ordered by the District Court reads: PROPOSED CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance. YES/FOR _____ NO/AGAINST _____ This Resolution 2021-024 amends Resolution 105 to revise the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure to reflect the changes the District Court has ordered. Resolution 105 and related documents are attached. (Attachments 3-6) Under Section 7-156 of the City Code, any registered elector desiring to protest the Ballot Measure, which is the proposed ballot title and submission clause for Initiated Ordinance, mus t file such protest with the City Clerk, using the Notice of Protest form located at https://www.fcgov.com/elections/ballot-title-protest, no later than Tuesday, February 16, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. (due to the President’s Day holiday). If a protest is filed, a hearing on the protest is added to the agenda item and must take place before Council adopts Resolution 2021-024 setting the ballot title and submission clause. Although this protest p rocess may be required, given that the District Court has ordered the specific language for the Ballot Measure, there is little room to deviate from what is being presented. ATTACHMENTS 1. District Court Order, February 3, 2021 (PDF) 2. District Court Amended Order, February 7, 2021 (PDF) 3. Resolution 2020-105 (PDF) 4. Certification of Sufficient Petition (PDF) 5. Public comments received (prior to November 17 Council Meeting) (PDF) 6. Update to Council, October 13, 2020 (PDF) 7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) District Court, Larimer County, State of Colorado 201 LaPorte Avenue, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80521-2761 (970) 494-3500 ▲ COURT USE ONLY ▲ THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule city and municipal corporation, Plaintiff, v. PLANNING ACTION TO TRANSFORM HUGHES STADIUM SUSTAINABLY CORP., a Colorado nonprofit corporation; and ELENA M. LOPEZ; MELISSA ROSAS; and PAUL PATTERSON, each in their official capacity as a petition representative of the persons signing the petition for a citizen-initiated ordinance relating to the City of Fort Collins rezoning and acquiring certain real property, Defendants. Case No.: 2020 CV 30833 Courtroom: 3B ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff City of Fort Collins (“City”) filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief against Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (“PATHS”) and other individuals, seeking to exclude certain provisions of a citizens’ initiative submitted to the City Council. Generally, the City seeks declarations that the citizen initiative at issue contains provisions that are administrative rather than legislative and, as such, shouldn’t be placed on a ballot to go before the City’s electors. The City has moved for summary judgment under Colo. R. Civ. P. 56 requesting that the Court rule, as a matter of law, that certain provisions in Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative and not legislative matters and, as such, under the Colorado Constitution and the City of Fort Collins Charter, are not proper subjects of a citizen-initiated DATE FILED: February 3, 2021 12:32 PM CASE NUMBER: 2020CV30833 ATTACHMENT 1 2 ordinance. PATHS opposes Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, contending that the entire Initiated Ordinance is legislative. The Court held a hearing regarding this matter on February 2, 2021. At the hearing, PATHS also made an oral motion for summary judgment, asking the Court to enter judgment that all matters on the Initiated Ordinance are legislative. The City didn’t oppose the timing or form of the motion. The Court will construe defendants’ response to the City’s motion as its brief in support of the oral motion, and will construe the City’s motion, conversely, also as its response in opposition to the same. As more fully explained below, the Court concludes that Sections 1 through 4 and 8 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative in nature and thus are proper subjects of the reserved powers by the people under Article V, § 1 of the Colorado Constitution and its counterpart in the City Charter. The Court also concludes that Sections 5 through 7 are administrative in nature and thus fall outside the people’s reserved power. Lastly, exercising its discretion, the Court will sever Sections 5 through 7 and allow the City’s electors to vote on Sections 1 through 4, and 8. I. INTRODUCTION. PATHS, a nonprofit corporation, is organized “for the purpose of organizing and representing Fort Collins area residents who are aligned in the objective of conserving as open space and for other similar uses the property on which Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium was formerly located (the ‘Hughes Stadium Property’).” Compl. ¶ 1. As readers of this Order may know, Colorado State University (“CSU”) owns the property where Hughes Stadium used to be; that land is presently vacant. The City has annexed the Hughes Stadium Property and neither CSU nor the City agrees on how the property should be zoned. So, PATHS decided to take advantage of their rights under Colo. Const. art. V § 1, and under the City’s Charter, art. X § 1(a), and submitted a proposed ordinance to the City Council. The City Council chose to refer PATHS’ initiated 3 ordinance to the City’s voters. In general, the initiated ordinance seeks to mandate rezoning of the Hughes Stadium Property and to require the City to make “good faith” attempts to purchase it. The City doesn’t believe that several of the above provisions are “legislative” and thus it argues that they’re inappropriate for inclusion on the initiated ordinance. In particular, the City asserts that sections 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and “the next-to-last recital” of the initiated ordinance “are in fact administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers of the registered electors of home rule cities under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Compl. ¶ 51. It, however, agrees that section 3 and 4 of the initiated ordinance “are properly characterized as legislative matters subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Id. ¶ 57. The City seeks very specific relief. As to sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and in the next-to-last recital, it seeks a declaration that those provisions “are administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Compl., Prayer for Relief ¶ A. Then, it requests injunctive relief, in the form of an order directing that the “Ballot Initiative and Ballot Measure to exclude and sever from them the provisions in Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and in the next-to-last recital….” Id. ¶ C. (The Court notes that, at oral argument, the City modified its request for relief because now it believes that Section 4 is legislative and because it doesn’t object to the recitals being part of the Initiated Ordinance subject to their having no legal effect. Defendants’ didn’t object to such a declaration either.) Conversely, as to sections 3 and 4, the City seeks a declaration that “the provisions in Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance requiring the City Council, immediately upon passage of the Initiated Ordinance, to rezone the Hughes Stadium Property to the Public Open Lands District 4 pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City’s Land Use Code and prohibiting the City from de-annexing or subsequently rezoning the Hughes Stadium Property “to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council,” are legislative matters ….” Id. ¶ B. I. UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS. The following facts are undisputed, unless the Court notes otherwise. On August 27, 2020, the Petition Representatives submitted to the City Clerk a “Notice of Intent to Circulate an Initiative Petition related to the Hughes Stadium Property.” Ex. 3. To Plaintiff’s Motion. They also submitted to the Clerk the form of the petition for the Initiated Ordinance to be circulated for signing by the City’s register’s electors. Ex. 4. The Clerk approved the form of the petition. Ex. 5. On November 2, 2020, Petition Representative Melissa Rosas submitted the signed Petition to the City Clerk. Ex. 6. Three days later, the City Clerk issued a Statement of Initiative Petition Sufficiency, certifying that the Petition contained more than the 3,280 valid signatures required for the initiated Ordinance to be placed on the ballot of the City’s April 6, 2021, regular election. Ex. J. The Initiated Ordinance consists of eight sections and provides as follows: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56- acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or 5 subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. That to acquire the Hughes Stadium property, the City shall seek funding from existing sources or future partnerships, including but not limited to the Fort Collins Open Space -3- Yes! sales tax fund, Certificates of Participation, the City’s general fund, Great Outdoors Colorado and other third party organizations providing open space or other types of recreational or land conservation grants, and/or partnerships with other entities such as Larimer County. Section 6. That the City Council may refer ballot measures to the voters for the purpose of seeking additional funding only if existing sources of funding or future partnerships are insufficient for the preservation of the Hughes Stadium property as described in this Ordinance. Section 7. That the City shall expeditiously, but no later than two years from the passage of this Ordinance, use best efforts in good faith to acquire the Hughes Stadium property utilizing the financial mechanisms described in Sections 5 and 6. Section 8. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. Ex. 8. To Plaintiff’s Motion. On November 17, 2020, the City Clerk presented the Statement of Sufficiency to the Council at its regular meeting. The City Council adopted Resolution 2020-105, which provisionally and conditionally submitted in Section 2 and Section 3 of the Resolution 2020-105, subject to this declaratory action, the Initiated Ordinance to a vote of the City’s registered electors at the City’s April 6, 2021, regular election. Ex. 9. The City is a home-rule municipality under Article XX of the Colorado Constitution. The Hughes Stadium Property, which is a 164.554-acre parcel, was annexed by the City in 2018. Ex. 10. When the City Council annexed the Hughes Stadium Property, it also adopted Ordinance No. 124, 2018, to zone the Hughes Stadium Property in the City’s Transition District. Ex. 11 (“Zoning Ordinance”). 6 The Hughes Stadium Property is owned by the Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System (“CSU Board”). On October 9, 2020, the CSU Board adopted a written motion, with an attached “Site Plan,” expressing and detailing its intended future use of the Hughes Stadium Property. Ex. 12 (“CSU Board Motion”). Acquiring real property by the City requires carrying out certain due diligence and possessing expertise on the subject matter. The City details what that due diligence entails and the expertise required to acquire real property. Ex. 2, Ernst Aff. ¶¶ 17 and 18. It’s also undisputed that the Colorado General Assembly has passed legislative acts regarding the acquisition, conveyance, and appropriation for real property. Def.’s Resp. To Pl.’s Summ. J. Mot. 5. Likewise, the City Council has passed legislative ordinances and resolutions regarding the acquisition and conveyance of real property. Id. II. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS. Under Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c), summary judgment is proper only where “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and … the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” A factual dispute is “material” if it is one that would affect the outcome of the case. W. Innovations, Inc. v. Sonitrol Corp., 187 P.3d 1155, 1158 (Colo. App. 2008). A party seeking summary judgment bears the initial burden of establishing that there’s no dispute regarding material facts. Pueblo W. Metro. Dist. v. Se. Colo. Water Conservancy Dist., 689 P.2d 594, 600 (Colo. 1984). To meet that burden, the moving party may rely on “pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, … admissions on file, [and] affidavits.” Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c). While “the form of the evidence, such as an affidavit, need not be admissible at trial, the content or substance of the evidence must be admissible.” People ex rel S.N. v. S.N., 329 P.3d 276, 282 (Colo. 2014). Further, evidence introduced to defeat or support a motion for summary judgment must be sworn, competent, based on personal knowledge, and set forth facts that would be admissible at trial. Colo. 7 R. Civ. P. 56(e). “[T]he trial court may not assess the weight of the evidence or credibility of witnesses in determining a motion for summary judgment ....” Kaiser Found. Health Plan v. Sharp, 741 P.2d 714, 718 (Colo. 1987). The moving party may satisfy its burden by showing the absence of evidence in the record to support the nonmoving party’s case. Id. If the moving party demonstrates no disputed material facts exist, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to demonstrate the existence of a disputed material fact. Id. The Court must give the nonmoving party all favorable inferences that reasonably may be drawn from the evidence. Id. But the nonmoving party can’t use “pretense, or apparent formal controversy,” to avoid summary judgment. Id. Nor may a “genuine issue” be raised “simply by means of argument.” Sullivan v. Davis, 347 P.3d 606, 611 (Colo. 2015). III. DISCUSSION. The City seeks summary judgment and declarations that Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative and not legislative matters and aren’t a proper subject of a citizen-initiated ordinance to be submitted to the electorate on April 6, 2021.1 The Court concludes that Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 are legislative in nature and thus may properly be included on the Initiated Ordinance submitted to the electorate. On the other hand, the Court holds that Sections 5, 6, and 7 are administrative matters, which can’t be included in the Initiated Ordinance. The Court further concludes that Sections 5 through 7 will be severed from the Initiated Ordinance. 1 The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction to consider this pre-election declaratory judgment action to determine whether the proposed initiative covers legislative matters subject to Article V, § 1. City of Idaho Springs v. Blackwell, 731 P.2d 1250, 1253 (Colo. 1987). 8 A. The Colorado Constitution and the City Charter Preserve the Right of the People to Legislate through an Initiative Process. The Court begins with first principles, which in this case lie at the heart of our representative democracy. “‘All political power is vested in and derived from the people,’ and all government originates from the people.” McKee v. City of Louisville, 616 P.2d 969, 972 (Colo. 1980) (citing COLO. CONST. art. II, § 1). As the Supreme Court has noted, the people reserved for themselves the right to legislate. Id. “This is of first order; is it not a grant to the people but a reservation by them for themselves.” Id. Specifically, the people’s fundamental referendum and initiative powers at issue in this case emanate from Article V, Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution. That provision states, in relevant part, that the legislative power of the state is vested in the general assembly, but the people reserved to themselves the power to initiate, reform, or reject any act of the general assembly. COLO. CONST. art. V, § 1. This reservation of power in the people has become to be known as the initiative and referendum powers. Like the right to vote, the power of initiative is a fundamental right at the very core of our republican form of government. McKee, 616 P.2d at 972. The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people under article V extend “to every registered elector of every city, town, and municipality as to all local, special, and municipal legislation of every character.” Vagneur v. City of Aspen, 295 P.3d 493, 504 (Colo. 2013) (citing COLO. CONST. art. V. § 1(9)). The people’s reservation of power, however, isn’t absolute. The Supreme Court has construed the above constitutional provision solely to extend to legislative matters: “only those acts of a city council which are legislative in character are subject to the referendum and initiative powers.” Margolis v. District Court, 638 P.2d 297, 303 (Colo. 1981). The City’s Charter also reserves the referendum and initiative power to the people. Article X, § 1 provides that the registered electors of the city shall have the power to initiate any ordinance or 9 resolution to the Council or at the polls. City Charter, art. X § 1(a). The Court also must examine the terms of the City’s referendum and initiative provision found in its Charter because rights granted under it are independent of those in the Constitution. City of Aurora v. Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d 1074, 1076 (Colo. 1977). The Charter can’t limit powers reserved by the Constitution, but it may grant broader powers to its electors. The Constitution, thus, provides a floor, not a ceiling. Here, the City Charter parallels and doesn’t grant more rights than those reserved by the Colorado Constitution. While the Charter uses the language “any ordinance,” the Supreme Court has interpreted an identical phrase, almost universally, to extend solely to ordinances that are legislative in character. Id. (citing the general rule and policy underlying this determination). One of the unquestioned purposes of the referendum and initiative powers is to expeditiously permit the total and free exercise of legislative powers by the people, except in rare circumstances. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303. Thus, the power to call referendum and initiative elections is a direct check on the exercise or non-exercise of legislative power by elected officials. Id. “Indeed, a heightened community sensitivity to the quality of the living environment and an increased skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’ execution” of these reserved powers. Id. With that purpose in mind, the Colorado Supreme Court has held that the retained powers of initiative and referendum are fundamental rights reserved in the people and must be liberally construed. McKee, 616 P.2d at 972. The Court views any governmental action that has the effect of curtailing the fundamental right to legislate “with the closest scrutiny.” Id. Therefore, in conducting the following analysis the Court liberally construed the Initiated Ordinance and closely scrutinized the City’s request to restrict PATHS’ right to place the Initiated Ordinance before Fort Collins’ electors. 10 B. Separation of Powers Doctrine and Relevant Precedent. As just noted, the foundation behind the reservation of power in the people solely for legislative matters rests on the separation of powers doctrine. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 503–04. Article III of the Colorado Constitution creates three separate branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and prevents each branch from exercising power belonging to the other two. COLO. CONST. art. III. While the separation of powers doctrine is clear, sometimes, especially in the present context, it proves difficult to determine whether an initiative referred to the voters deals with legislative matters. Indeed, as the Supreme Court has previously observed, “[t]he dividing lines between the respective powers [of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches] are often in crepuscular zones, and, therefore, delineation thereof usually should be on a case-by-case basis.” MacManus v. Love, 179 Colo. 218, 499 P.2d 609 (Colo. 1972). Thus, the Court must begin by discussing the basic powers reserved to the legislative and executive branches. In general, the “[l]egislative power is the authority to make laws and to appropriate state funds.” Id. at 610. The enforcement of statutes and administration thereunder are executive, not legislative, functions. Id. To fulfill its duty to faithfully execute the laws, the executive branch has the authority to administer the funds appropriated by the legislature for programs enacted by the legislature. Anderson v. Lamm, 579 P.2d 620, 623 (Colo. 1978). But the legislature “cannot administer the appropriation once it has been made.” Id. “When the appropriation is made, its work is complete and the executive authority takes over to administer the appropriation to accomplish its purpose, subject to the limitations imposed.” Id. (internal quotations omitted). Thus, it follows that the legislature isn’t permitted to interfere with the executive’s power to make specific resource-allocation decisions. Id. 11 With the separations-of-power doctrine in mind, the Supreme Court has developed two principal formalistic tests to determine whether a citizen-initiated referendum is legislative or executive.2 City of Idaho Springs v. Blackwell, 731 P.2d 1250, 1254 (Colo. 1987). It, however, has never explained which test should be applied in a particular scenario or why one test is better suited to one type of citizen-initiated referendum over another. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506 (the Supreme Court has “never explained … the interrelation between the tests or articulated whether a particular matter must be examined under more than one test to reach a determination”). It appears that this Court must apply both tests. See Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 1254 (“Two ‘tests’ or guidelines are used to resolve the [executive versus legislative] issue in most cases”). Because—in the Supreme Court’s candid admission—the classification of an ordinance “as legislative or administrative is largely an ad hoc determination,” id., the Court later noted that the two tests “are somewhat elusive.”3 Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506. The first test provides that actions that relate to subjects of a permanent or general character are legislative, while those that are temporary in operation and effect are not. Witcher v. Canon City, 716 P.2d 445, 449 (Colo. 1986). “In this connection an ordinance which shows an intent to form a permanent rule of government until replaced is one of permanent operation.” Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 2 A third test exists in appropriate cases. See Witcher v. Canon City, 716 P.2d 445 (Colo. 1986) (citing Margolis, 638 P.2d at 304). That test is inapplicable here. 3 It’s unclear what this Court must do with such a unique deck of precedential cards. While, of course, the Court must follow the Supreme Court’s precedent, it shares the concerns raised by former Chief Justice Coats in his Vagneur dissent. There, he observed that the ad hoc determinations developed by the Court are designed “primarily for the purpose of limiting the initiative power reserved to the voters by article V, section 1 of the state constitution.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 511–12 (Coats, J., dissenting). He also noted, with due concern, that while the tests developed had a narrow original purpose—“ensure that popular democracy not interfere with day-to-day administrative functions of municipalities”—“the discretionary power of the judiciary” under the tests developed to determine whether a citizen-initiated initiative is legislative “is by no means so limited. In fact, the standards guiding judicial discretion in this context, such as they are, have become so elastic as to make any point-by-point refutation of [a determination] virtually pointless.” Id. at 512 (Coats, J., dissenting). 12 1254. So, in Margolis, the Supreme Court held that zoning or rezoning decisions involve a general rule or policy regarding the city’s land-use, which is of a general and permanent nature, and thus legislative in nature. 638 P.2d at 304. As the Court noted, the term “permanent” signifies a declaration of public policy of general applicability because a permanent enactment is more likely to involve policy considerations. Id. By contrast, on the issue of “permanence,” the Supreme Court determined that the proposed ordinance in opposition of the city’s selection of the site and structure for a new city hall was not a permanent nor general act because the ordinances only excluded one parcel and one type of structure “from the range of choices available … to implement the previously declared policy of securing a city hall.” Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 1254. Similarly, in Witcher, the Court concluded that the Cañon City council’s act of amending a lease between the city and the operators of the Royal Gorge bridge was administrative, even though the lease amendment extended the useful life of the bridge until 2032. 716 P.2d at 450. The Court explained that the effect of the amendment is the “same as any other spending decision by the Council;” it is the administrative task of elected municipal officials to collect and expend monies for the protection and enhancement of public properties. Id. The second test provides “acts that are necessary to carry out [or implement] existing legislative policies and purposes or which are properly characterized as executive are deemed to be administrative, while acts constituting a declaration of public policy are deemed to be legislative.” Id. at 449–50. So, in Blackwell, the Supreme Court held that the choice of location and structure for a new city hall is an act “necessary to carry out” the existing legislative policy to build a new city hall using tax revenue and is thus administrative. 731 P.2d at 1255. Along the same lines, “while the establishment of the city-owned water-system may have been in pursuance of a broad public policy and, therefore, a legislative matter, the receipts and expenses incidental to its maintenance and management are executive or administrative matters.” Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d at 1077. The Supreme 13 Court later explained that as it ruled in Zwerdlinger, it’d be “impractical, if not impossible, for the general public to appraise [utility rates] in the absence of specific data, facts and information necessary to arrive at a fair and accurate judgment upon the subject.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 505. The Supreme Court has further explained that legislative power is defined by the work product it generates—namely, the promulgation of laws of general applicability: “when the government legislative, it establishes a generally applicable rule that sets the governing standard for all cases coming within its terms. Id. at 506–07. By contrast, executive acts typically aren’t based on broad policy grounds, but rather on “individualized, case-specific considerations.” Id. at 507. In Vagneur, the proposed ordinance was deemed to be administrative because it sought to replace the highway design already approved by the state and federal agencies through specific negotiated contractual agreements with the city of Aspen, and mandated construction of a different design not contemplated by the city, the state, or federal agencies. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 507 (“in other words, the initiatives are an attempt to reverse administrative decisions of city officials and dictate the future course of such decisions”). Following this precedent, City of Colorado Springs v. Bull, 143 P.3d 1127 (Colo. App. 2006), provides a good example of an initiative in which there were both executive and legislative matters in a single initiative. There, the Court of Appeals was faced with four initiatives, three of which are guiding here. The court held that the first initiative, the Multi-Year Contracts provision requiring all multi-fiscal year contracts to be fully funded in cash at the outset or submitted to the voters, was legislative because it created a general and permanent policy. Id. at 1136–37. It reasoned that the provision included virtually all contracts with a government entity, and that this broad scope is indicative of a general policy matter. Id. The court further explained that “[w]hile these contracting practices may be, or have been, administrative, the initiative at issue creates a new permanent and general policy limiting or eliminating the City’s ability to enter into a certain class of contracts. Id. at 14 1137. The court was also swayed by the fact that the provisions addressed some matters that have been “historically viewed” as legislative, such as the issuance of general obligation bonds or leasing of real property. Id. at 1137. On the other hand, the Court of Appeals held that the Revenue Initiative, which required the refund of street lighting fees, regulated administrative matters. Id. at 1134–35. It reasoned that, under Zwerdlinger, an initiative that is retrospective in nature and calls for a refund of revenue collected by a utility in prior fiscal years isn’t a declaration of public policy of general applicability.4 Id. at 1135. It also held that a provision requiring all current outstanding certificates of participation be paid off in no more than five equal yearly payments is administrative because it didn’t create new permanent policy, but instead merely required the council to act in a certain manner even if the alternative would be in the City’s best interest or in accordance with policy. Id. at 1137. As a remedy, the Court of Appeals severed the administrative matters from the balance of the initiatives. Id. at 1138. Lastly, in a “close case,” a court’s decision may be informed by historical examples. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 507–09. That is, “an initiative that finds longstanding parallels in statutes enacted by legislative bodies, for example, may be deemed legislative on that basis, while initiatives that seem more like traditional executive acts may be deemed to fall on that side of the line.” Id. It’s unclear, however, what classifies as a “close case” under the Supreme Court’s precedents. As an initial matter, the parties agree—as they told the Court during oral argument—that Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative and that judgment should enter accordingly. While that has narrowed the issues, the Court must ensure that both parties are entitled 4 As the Court noted during oral argument, the dialectical nature of these holdings is hard to ignore. An argument can easily be made that the retrospective refund of revenue to the citizens from a utility is very much a declaration of new public policy, of general applicability, and permanent in nature. 15 to judgment as a matter of law given the procedural posture in which they request entry of that judgment. Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c) (movant must establish no material factual dispute and that it’s “entitled to judgment as a matter of law”). The Court agrees that the movants are so entitled as to Sections 3 and 4. That leaves a determination of whether Sections 1, 2, and 5 through 8 are legislative or administrative. Applying the above precedent to the Initiated Ordinance, the Court concludes that Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative in character and thus a proper exercise of the people’s reserved powers, while Sections 5 through 7 are not. C. Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative. Sections 1 through 4 and Section 85 announce new public policy for the acquisition and use of the Hughes Stadium Property and are therefore legislative matters. The Court concludes that Sections 3 and 4 involve pre-eminent legislative matters that are an appropriate exercise of the people’s initiative power under Article V, § 1 of the Colorado Constitution. McKee, 616 P.2d at 672. Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance “establish or amend … zoning laws.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 510. Section 3 provides that, if approved by the electors, the Hughes Stadium Property will be re- zoned as Public Open Lands under the City’s land use code. In turn, Section 4 provides that the City can’t de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or rezone the Hughes Stadium Property without voter approval. As part of a rezoning initiative, Sections 3 and 4 are “general and permanent in character,” involving the promulgation and effectuation of a new land-use policy for the Hughes Stadium 5 Section 8, which provides an effective date for the Initiated Ordinance, is also legislative and it’s a provision that’s found in every piece of legislation. Similarly, Section 1, which incorporates the “whereas” clauses as findings and resolutions to justify the change in policy, is also legislative. The Court agrees with the parties that Section 1 doesn’t have any legal effect other than incorporating legislative findings. Nor does it direct the City to take any concrete action based on those findings. 16 Property. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 304. And Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance makes it crystal clear that the rezoning can’t be undone, except by another voter-approved ordinance, further cementing the permanent nature of the policy. The Court also concludes that Section 2 is legislative in nature and a proper exercise of the people’s reserved power. Section 2 takes the new policy to the next step, ensuring the Initiative Ordinance’s vision is actualized: purchasing the Hughes Stadium Property for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Acts that deed or acquire land are pre-eminently legislative. For example, historically, the General Assembly has enacted laws to purchase or acquire real property, to convey real property, and to appropriate funds to accomplish those acts. PATHS’ response to the motion for summary judgment describes multiple bills that do exactly that. Critically, the City itself has passed many resolutions that do the same thing: acquire or convey real property. Few would question that those resolutions or ordinances aren’t an appropriate exercise of legislative power. Similarly, in the federal context, a state may consent, via legislation, to sell land to the United States (or to let the United States condemn such land) “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8 cl. 17. Such laws are known as general-consent statutes. See, e.g., United States v. State Tax Commission of Miss., 412 U.S. 363, 372 n.15 (1973) (“General consent statutes are not uncommon.”); Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. 245, 265 n.31 (1963) (California’s general-consent statute). And such legislative acts (to sell or to purchase land) are unquestionably appropriate exercises of legislative power, enshrined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which covers the Congress. When construed together, Sections 2 and 4 further the same general land-use policy for the Hugues Stadium Property: Section 4 prevents the City from de-annexing or ceasing acquisition efforts without voter approval, while Section 2 solidifies the permanent nature of that policy by 17 requiring the City to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. Cf. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303 (observing that “heightened community sensitivity to” quality of life and “an increased skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’” exercise of their reserved powers). The City, however, contends that the acquisition of land isn’t a legislative matter for purposes of the reserved initiative powers. Reply to Mot. for Summ. J. at 14–15. The City relies on Vagneur’s statement that “the sale, exchange, conveyance, disposition, or change in use of a particular parcel of city-owned property cannot be analogized to the development of a city-wide zoning plan of general applicability.” 295 P.3d at 510 (emphasis added). The City’s argument misses the mark. To begin with, that statement in Vagneur doesn’t help the City because the proposed initiative there dealt with disposition of property that was already city- owned. Moreover, and unlike the Initiated Ordinance here, in Vagneur the “proposed initiatives at issue … do not establish or amend any zoning laws.” Id. The Initiated Ordinance here was carefully crafted to include a rezoning provision, likely to avoid this potential issue. Nor is the Court persuaded by the City’s contention that the Initiated Ordinance is like the one in Blackwell, which the City says involved an ordinance “to purchase one specific parcel of land.” Mot. for Summ. J. at 11. This case isn’t like Blackwell at all. There, the Supreme Court concluded that an ordinance dealing with “the selection of the site and structure for the city hall is not a permanent or general act within the meaning of Witcher or Zwedlinger.” 731 P.2d at 1254. Selection of the particular site for city hall, the Supreme Court observed, doesn’t involve policy considerations, especially when the proposed ordinance there only excluded one parcel of property and one type of structure from being acquired. Id. By contrast, Section 2 of the Initiated Ordinance doesn’t deal with such granular minutiae. Instead, Section 2 declares and requires acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property, a key implementation of public policy furthered by the Initiated Ordinance. 18 While the Initiated Ordinance here may, as a result, necessitate the City to negotiate contracts for the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and to conduct other studies and actions, that alone doesn’t transform Sections 2, 3, and 4 into administrative matters. “The mere prospect that a proposed initiative will have administrative consequences or require post-adoption administrative action is not, by itself, dispositive of whether the measure is administrative or legislative.” Vagneur, 295 P.2d at 509. Indeed, it’s not uncommon for legislative acts to require subsequent administrative action for implementation. Id. Thus, while Sections 2 through 4 may implicate later administrative actions, the heart of those provisions is, as noted above, to create a new permanent and general policy. Naturally, that new policy requires execution by the City to effect the will of the people. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1137. In sum, Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative in nature, and they’re proper subjects under the initiative and referendum powers reserved to the Fort Collins electors by both the Colorado Constitution and the City Charter. Accordingly, the parties’ motion for summary judgment will be granted and judgment will enter accordingly. D. Sections 5 through 7 are executive or administrative. The Court doesn’t reach the same conclusion as to Sections 5 through 7 of the Initiated Ordinance. In the Court’s view, those sections are administrative in nature and fall outside the reservation of power by the people under Article V of the Constitution. Blackwwell, 713 P.2d at 1253. As the Supreme Court has noted, administrative matters are generally confined to government officials’ discretion to carry out broad policy goals. Thus, decisions that an official makes on a day-to-day basis, like purchasing city vehicles, setting various fees, and maintaining city- owned lands and buildings are administrative. Witcher, 716 P.2d at 449. To subject each such executive decision to a vote by the electorate would result in chaos and bring the machinery of government to a halt. Id. (citing Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d at 1076). 19 Still, the limitation on the initiative and referendum power doesn’t leave the people without recourse. Citizens who disagree with the way their government operates or administers its stated policy goals may elect new officials who more closely share their values. Id. Here, Sections 5, 6, and 7 don’t meet the first test because they don’t concern permanent policy declarations of general applicability. See Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506. For instance, Section 5 seeks to dictate the City’s decisions on the process for how and from whom to seek revenue to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. As in Vagneur, Zwerdliner, and Blackwell, those decisions require the exercise of wide discretion, including weighing of factors that are both fluctuating and temporary, like the fiscal position of the City and potential funding sources. Thus, Section 5 doesn’t promulgate permanent policy of general applicability; instead, it micromanages the process to effectuate the policy goal by telling the City from whom and in what order to seek funding to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. That’s akin to a law that appropriated funds for a certain purpose and then dictated the administration of that appropriation, which a legislative enactment can’t do. Anderson, 579 P.2d at 623 (legislature can’t administer an appropriation of funds once made). In the same vein, Sections 6 and 7 invade and micromanage the discretion reserved for administrative matters. Section 7, for instance, would require the City to “use best efforts in good faith” to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property, and to do so “utilizing the financial mechanisms described in Sections 5 and 6.” Ex. 8, § 7. The quoted phrases are loaded with discretionary authority, which is reserved for the executive branch of government. Indeed, Section 7 interferes with the executive’s prerogative to make specific resource allocation decisions. Anderson, 579 P.2d at 623. Further, giving a hard deadline of two years to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property is administrative in nature and ill-suited for a citizen-proposed initiative. There’s no policy of general applicability in setting a time limit of two years for this land acquisition, nor is it permanent. (To the 20 contrary, it’s ephemeral.) Moreover, the impracticalities aren’t hard to fathom with such a provision: what happens if, despite “best efforts in good faith”—terms that are completely undefined—the City can’t acquire the Hughes Stadium Property in two years? Perhaps the economy crashes, the pandemic rages on, or some other unforeseen circumstance arises. The Initiated Ordinance doesn’t answer those questions—it can’t and shouldn’t because those matters are best left to the discretion of the City Council and City administrators. The two-year deadline in Section 7, with no room for flexibility, is akin to an impermissible close supervision of administrative functions by the legislative branch. While in a different context, the Supreme Court has cautioned that a legislative appropriation can’t interfere with the executive power’s authority to allocate staff and resources; the legislative power to appropriate funds doesn’t give the legislature the power “of close supervision” that’s essentially executive. Colo. General Assembly v. Owens, 136 P.3d 262, 268 (Colo. 2006) (detailing how prior case he legislative provision that made appropriations contingent upon presentation of cost-benefit reports and five-year plans to the General Assembly to be constitutionally impermissible). Section 6 also contains an incredible amount of discretion making it administrative. Under Section 6, too many eventualities must occur before the City may have to return to the voters to seek “additional funding” for the purchase, but as just noted, it’s unclear when that point could ever be reached. The discretionary decisions don’t involve policy considerations beyond those inherent in carrying out the fiscal policies of the City. The Supreme Court has struck down provisions like that as violating the separation of powers doctrine. In Owens, for instance, the Court held that “it would be a legislative infringement on executive power to mandate diversion of limited executive resources to a particular revenue-producing activity.” 136 P.3d at 268 (citing Colorado General Assembly v. Lamm, 704 P.2d 1371, 1381 (Colo. 1985)). Therefore, the Court concludes that limiting the City’s ability to 21 seek funding through a ballot measure until certain other sources are pursued and requiring that the City conduct such efforts in no less than two years, isn’t a permanent rule of general applicability. The Court further concludes that Sections 5 through 7 must be classified as administrative under the second test because those provisions, which deal with how the City should generate funds and pay for the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property, are acts “necessary to carry out” the concurrent legislative policy—to acquire such property and turn it into open space for City residents. Id. Like the Retirement of Current Certificates of Participation initiative in Bull, Section 5 merely requires the City to act in a certain manner in carrying out the policy of re-zoning and acquiring the Hughes Stadium Property. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1137. Likewise, the limitations of Sections 6 and 7 implicate actions necessary to carry out the to be existing legislative policy of acquiring the Hughes Stadium Property. Those sections don’t propose new laws or rules of general applicability that set a governing standard for all cases coming within their terms. Rather, they seek to mandate a specific proposal on how to fund the purchase of the Hughes Stadium Property. Because Sections 5 through 7 seek to modify or replace essentially administrative decisions, they’re likewise administrative in character. Naturally, PATHS disagrees. It contends that Section 5 is legislative because there’s reluctance to trust the City, and the citizens are thus looking for ways to close loopholes, such as the City intentionally failing to raise enough money to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property. Thus, it argues, because the City has been reluctant to purchase open lands, the Initiated Ordinance must be as specific as possible. The Court is not persuaded. While a general “skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’ exercise of” these reserved powers, Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303, that skepticism doesn’t provide legal grounds for the electorate to include administrative matters in the Initiated Ordinance. 22 Besides, Sections 1 through 4 of the Initiative provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that the City carries out Initiated Ordinance’s policy goals. Indeed, sound city administrators may be naturally inclined to seek funding from the sources identified in Section 5. But they need not do so. In the end, such matters are pre-eminently administrative and best left in the City’s hands. In sum, since Sections 5 through 7 are administrative in nature, they are not subject to the referendum powers reserved to the City’s electors by either the Colorado Constitution or the City Charter. IV. REMEDY BY SEVERANCE. Because the Court holds that the Initiated Ordinance contains provisions that are legislative—and thus proper subjects for an initiative—and provisions that are not, it must address whether severance of the Initiated Ordinance is an appropriate remedy. The Court concludes that severance is, indeed, an appropriate remedy and that the administrative matters may be severed from the balance of the initiative. Judicial exercise of the power to sever impermissible portions of a proposed ordinance promotes the people’s right to enact laws through the initiative process. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1138. As the Court of Appeals explained, initiatives are largely a product of grassroots activists with limited resources, and striking an entire initiative based on flawed provisions would cost significant time and money on the part of proponents and thereby impede the people’s ability to initiate laws. Id. Thus, a court may sever an impermissible portion of an initiative if the following conditions are met: (1) standing alone, the remainder of the proposed bill can be given legal effect; (2) deleting the impermissible portion wouldn’t substantially change the spirit of the measure; and (3) it’s evident from the content of the measure and the circumstances surrounding its proposal that the sponsors 23 and subscribers would prefer the measure to stand as altered, rather than to be invalidated in its entirety. Id. Application of the above factors leads to the conclusion that severance of Sections 5 through 7 is appropriate. First, Sections 1 through 4, which deal with legislative matters, will have legal effect and will effectuate the heart of policy matter at issue here. As discussed above, Sections 1 through 4, standing alone, propose the new policy of acquiring Hughes Stadium Property for the purpose of transforming it into public open-space. Regardless of specific decisions regarding from where and how to obtain funding proposed in Sections 5 through 7, Sections 1 through 4 and 8 will still have legal effect. Second, deleting Sections 5,6 and 7 wouldn’t substantially change the spirit of the measure— principally, to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property and rezone the property. Third, given the content of the Initiated Ordinance, the circumstances surrounding its proposal, and defendants’ counsel’s statement during argument that they wish to have at least Sections 3 and 4 reach the electorate, the third prong is satisfied. It’s evident, too, that defendants don’t wish the altered Initiated Ordinance to be invalidated in its entirety, further satisfying the last prong. Therefore, the Court concludes that severance is appropriate and that the impermissible portions—Sections 5, 6, and 7—be severed from the remainder of the Initiated Ordinance. In an appendix below, the Court includes the severed version of the Initiated Ordinance. V. CONCLUSION. For the reasons set forth above, the cross motions for summary judgement are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows. The cross motions are GRANTED as to Sections 3 and 4. The City’s motion is also GRANTED as to Sections 5, 6, and 7; defendants’ motion is DENIED as to Sections 5, 6, and 7. Defendants’ motion is also GRANTED as to 24 Sections 1 and 2, and 8, and the City’s motion is DENIED as to those sections. Therefore, in accordance with Colo. R. Civ. P. 57(a), it is ORDERED and DECLARED that: (a) Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative matters subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a). (b) Sections 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a). (c) Sections 5, 6, and 7 are SEVERED from the Initiated Ordinance. (d) The City shall submit to the electors the Severed Initiated Ordinance reproduced below. The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment. SO ORDERED on this 3rd day of February, 2021. BY THE COURT: _________________________ JUAN G. VILLASEÑOR District Court Judge 25 Appendix — Severed Initiated Ordinance WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have shown strong support to preserve and provide open space, natural areas, community separators, wildlife habitat, and trails for today and for the future; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins citizens currently enjoy their open spaces and natural areas; the recreation they provide, such as walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing; the educational opportunities and programs provided to people of all ages and backgrounds; and the beautiful landscapes and views they provide; and WHEREAS, open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, community separators, agricultural lands, and trails benefit all members of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, conserved open space and natural areas help make Fort Collins a highly desirable place to live, work, and visit; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins values sustainability in policies, plans, strategies and projects that align with its Triple Bottom Line decision-making philosophy of social, economic and environmental well-being to meet its citizens’ present needs and the needs of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we all depend; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have provided continuous funding for open space and natural areas acquisition and maintenance since first voting for a capital improvement sales tax in 1973 and approving extensions or new revenue sources in every election such a question has appeared on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins has conserved over 40,000 acres of open space and natural areas since 1973; and WHEREAS, the property formerly home to the Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium is a currently undeveloped 164.56-acre parcel of land that was recently annexed into the city of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has many distinct zoning districts in its land use code; and WHEREAS, one zoning classification in the Fort Collins land use code is “Public Open Lands,” which currently allows for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education centers, subject to administrative or Planning and Zoning Board review; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property is currently zoned as Transition District (T) pursuant to Division 4.12 of its land use code, which is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property occupies an area in between the current Maxwell Natural Area and Pineridge Natural Area; and 26 WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into a public open lands area would build upon the City’s significant history of preserving open spaces and would provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space; and WHEREAS, absent acquisition and conservation efforts under this ordinance, the Hughes Stadium property would forever be lost to residential and/or commercial development; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property by the City of Fort Collins should occur using existing voter-approved open space sales tax revenue and other funds currently available to the City, financing agreements, grants, partnerships with other local governments, or other available fiscally responsible mechanisms; and WHEREAS, publicly available information indicates Colorado State University values the Hughes Stadium property at $10 million, and the City should use that figure as a starting point in its negotiations to acquire the property at its fair market value; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium property into the Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Article 1, Division 1.3 and Article 4, Division 4.13 of the land use code would be necessary to convert the property into an area for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56-acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. [Severed]. 27 Section 6. [Severed]. Section 7. [Severed]. Section 8. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. District Court, Larimer County, State of Colorado 201 LaPorte Avenue, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80521-2761 (970) 494-3500 ▲ COURT USE ONLY ▲ THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule city and municipal corporation, Plaintiff, v. PLANNING ACTION TO TRANSFORM HUGHES STADIUM SUSTAINABLY CORP., a Colorado nonprofit corporation; and ELENA M. LOPEZ; MELISSA ROSAS; and PAUL PATTERSON, each in their official capacity as a petition representative of the persons signing the petition for a citizen-initiated ordinance relating to the City of Fort Collins rezoning and acquiring certain real property, Defendants. Case No.: 2020 CV 30833 Courtroom: 3B ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO AMEND FINAL JUDGMENT The parties have filed a joint motion to amend the final judgment under Colo. R. Civ. P. 59. The motion covers two items: it seeks (1) amendment of the Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motions for Summary Judgment to reflect that plaintiff City of Fort Collins (“City”) didn’t concede that a clause in Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance was legislative; and (2) revision of the ballot measure to correctly reflect the Court’s rulings in the prior Order and here. The motion is granted as to item 1. The Order is amended to reflect that the City doesn’t concede that the clause “cease acquisition efforts” in Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance is legislative. As the City notes, it never has conceded that given its pleadings and arguments. The Court thought that the City was, in fact, conceding that the entirety of Section 4 was legislative, but it should’ve clarified that point with counsel. In any event, since the motion is joint, it’s granted. The DATE FILED: February 7, 2021 9:51 AM CASE NUMBER: 2020CV30833 ATTACHMENT 2 2 Court again thanks counsel for both parties for their professionalism and presentations during argument. On item two, the motion is denied to the extent the City seeks amendment of the judgment to reflect that the clause “cease acquisition efforts” is administrative. The Court already ruled—with or without the City’s concession—that all of Section 4 is legislative, including the objectionable clause: In turn, Section 4 provides that the City can’t de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or rezone the Hughes Stadium Property without voter approval. As part of a rezoning initiative, Sections 3 and 4 are “general and permanent in character,” involving the promulgation and effectuation of a new land-use policy for the Hughes Stadium Property. And Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance makes it crystal clear that the rezoning can’t be undone, except by another voter-approved ordinance, further cementing the permanent nature of the policy. Order at 15–16 (citation omitted); see also id. at 16 (“Section 4 prevents the City from de-annexing or ceasing acquisition efforts without voter approval.”). The motion, however, is granted to the extent the parties request that the ballot measure that’ll be submitted to the electors be amended to correctly reflect the Court’s rulings. It is, therefore, ordered that the City submit the following ballot measure to the electors: PROPOSED CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting 3 legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance. YES/FOR _____ NO/AGAINST _____ The Clerk is directed to enter an amended final judgment. SO ORDERED this 7th day of February, 2021. BY THE COURT: ______________________________ JUAN G. VILLASEÑOR District Court Judge ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4 From:Melanie Clark To:Delynn Coldiron Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium comments for Nov. 17th 2020 City Council meeting Date:Tuesday, November 10, 2020 2:18:23 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Delynn, I believe I am supposed to forward all emails regarding Hughes to you. Is that correct? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melanie Clark Executive Administrative Assistant City Manager’s Office 970-416-4312 COVID19 Resources For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus For businesses: https://www.fcgov.com/business/ Want to help: https://www.fcgov.com/volunteer/ From: fitz <beckafitz@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:15 AM To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com> Cc: Kathryn Dubiel <k.i.dubiel@hotmail.com>; bheffington@me.com Subject: [EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium comments for Nov. 17th 2020 City Council meeting Please consider my comments in your discussion regarding Hughes Stadium Open Space acquisition. The city of Fort Collins should purchase at fair market value the Hughes Stadium area from CSU as an open space area. The land where Hughes stadium stood for years is a place of good spirit that deserves to be preserved. It's fun to play Frisbee Golf or ride my mountain bike through the area and remember happy people gathered for football games. All the while enjoying this now beautiful open space. If this becomes another 600+ development of homes, Hughes open space is gone forever to us and our future generations. The resulting noise, traffic and lighting will harm the environment of the foothills. CSU owns other areas of land on the eastern side of Fort Collins that would allow for a housing development without such a negative impact. Don't they still hold land on East Drake and on the Frontage road along the interstate? Please save this wonderful open space for its esthetic and recreational value. Sincerely ATTACHMENT 5 Becka Fitzgerald (Fort Collins resident since 1975) From:Kevin Krause To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Next steps with former Hughes site based on ballot initiative Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 8:30:22 PM City leaders - With the context that I don't claim to have full background on all aspects of this topic, I wanted to reach out to express my interest in the city pursuing the former Hughes site as a key open space opportunity. Particularly, in the context of the recent signature gathering effort which, as I understand, will give citizens a more direct voice on the matter in the next election cycle. I sincerely hope with the recognition of the great citizen interest and initiative taken. that there is a great desire for this additional close to-the-population-centers "in nature" opportunity. Frankly, a need based on the increase in the use of outdoor facilities. This is especially pertinent for this site in the case of the adjoining properties and the greater picture of the foothills area. If you can take advantage of your roles and available tools, perhaps something can be done in a more timely fashion, based on the clear signals received from citizens. Perhaps in conjunction with the county, there is a way to make this a reality and satisfy the funding requirements. Appreciate your efforts. Best, Kevin Krause 813 E Elizabeth St. From:Megan Dyer To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] What to do Date:Thursday, November 12, 2020 11:06:54 AM Hey Everyone! If there truly is a possibility of the city purchasing the Hughes property I am asking that you represent me in the affirmative to do it. I am unclear how this could all play out considering the property is owned by CSU. But, yes, please vote in favor of the purchasing it. If this goes through and is successful I'd like to be part of the planning process for things like signage, etc.My home backs up to the property on the north side and any change will be impactful. Thank you, Megan Dyer From:Nancy Baker To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] HUGHES STADIUM AS OPEN SPACE!!!! Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 8:25:59 AM Hello...I am a woman of few words..I leave the more eloquent, insightful authors to elaborate on the importance of keeping Hughes Stadium grounds as Open Space. I signed petition and spread the word as much as possible. I am now addressing the City Leaders..short..but passionate...USE HUGHES STADIUM GROUNDS AS OPEN SPACE. Thank you Nancy Baker From:Nancy Sherrill To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Open space Date:Tuesday, November 10, 2020 9:44:59 PM Dear Council Members and Mayor Please let the voters have a chance to decide the issue of the city purchasing the Hughes Stadium area for Open Space. This land is such a valuable asset to our city, so many of us would like to opportunity to purchase it from CSU. Please do not make this decision without voter input. Thank you for your consideration. Kindly, Nancy Sherrill -- Nancy Sherrill, RDH MSDH From:Priya Prince To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please keep Hughes Open Space Open!! Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 9:22:08 AM Thanks for all your hard work! Sent from my iPhone From:Simmons To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] [WARNING: SUSPECTED SPAM] Hughes Open Space Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 1:33:43 PM Dear City Leaders, I am writing to ask you to approve the purchase of the Hughes Stadium land by the City of Fort Collins and designate it as an Open Space. I am a citizen of Fort Collins, I am paying attention and I vote. thank you, Dr. Ronda Simmons From:Wasson, Sarah A To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes please save as an open space Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 5:43:43 AM What a year – racial inequity, pandemic, election, and economic challenges. And what a beacon of light Hughes could be if maintained as an open space. Please consider how important Hughes Open Space is to our neighbors and to the City. Hughes is ‘one of a kind’… and once developed, we will never get it back. I realize the future of Hughes is a difficult decision with many aspects, please keep Fort Collins quality of life as part of the equation. Thank you for all you do for our city, Sarah Wasson     From:Tgarns To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Land Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 3:41:00 PM Dear Council Leaders: I am writing to ask that you support putting the Hughs area on the ballot so the people of this fine city have a say in any development of the property. It is a beautiful area and should be kept as open space or a park. Once it is filled with buildings, it will be gone forever. I have been here in Fort Collins since 1987. There were corn fields, cows and horses, open space and fresh air. Now all I see and hear is traffic. At a minimum, protect our lovely foothills. There are some things far more important than money! Regards, Tammara Garner Sent from my iPad From:terry henderson To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Save Hughes Stadium open space Date:Tuesday, November 10, 2020 10:32:18 PM Sent from my iPhone From:Aaron Provencio To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 3:47:31 PM The area formerly taken up by Hughes Stadium is a very special location to many of us who grew up in Fort Collins. By keeping this space open and dedicating it to environmental protection and wildlife conservation you help to continue to build on our city’s legacy of sustainability and continue to demonstrate the value that your citizens place on our access to natural areas. Don’t let this legacy space fall into the hands of those who won’t appreciate what it means. Keep it a place for the people of Fort Collins and the nature that makes our city so special. -Aaron Provencio Citizen CSU Grad From:Melanie Clark To:Delynn Coldiron Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Hughes open space/development conversation Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:24:17 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Delynn, Please see the below email regarding Hughes. Thank you! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melanie Clark Executive Administrative Assistant City Manager’s Office 970-416-4312 COVID19 Resources For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus For businesses: https://www.fcgov.com/business/ Want to help: https://www.fcgov.com/volunteer/ From: Amy Hahn <mesror@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:22 PM To: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Hughes open space/development conversation Dear City Managers and City Council, You have in front of you tonight a citizen initiative with ~8000 signatures asking that you act in the best interest of us, the citizens you represent. There is a growing feeling among citizens of Fort Collins that CSU, once a partner worth bragging about, has turned into an 800-lb gorilla with a drug problem hell bent on stealing from the family who have supported it all these years. This doesn't wash. The Hughes stadium property should be maintained and enhanced in its entirety as open space for the use, enjoyment and overall benefit of the citizens of the City of Fort Collins. The reasons are many and listed below. It is time for CSU to stop managing its financial issues on the backs of this town. The City Council and Management need to understand and act in the interest of the citizen majority, NOT in the interest of the 800-lb gorilla. Why preserve Hughes as open space? Value as a wildlife corridor and buffer Value as a (relatively) un-fragmented ecosystem Proximity to a viable prairie dog colony Value as a recreational space Value as a mental health resource to the people of Ft. Collins and visitors to this town (there is much research supporting this) Value as an aesthetic draw Value as ecosystem services such as mitigation of carbon and airborne chemicals. Air pollution & traffic problems from the proposed Lennar development as residents will not have robust access to public transportation Potential as a nature education space that can be used by all Potential as a showcase for the City Natural Areas department Opportunity for Fort Collins to "walk the walk" on several fronts: quality of life, understanding of the value of open space, carbon sequestration, all that good stuff that you like to talk about when courting businesses to come to this town... Thank you, Amy Hahn 1 Heather Walls From:Sarah Kane Sent:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:26 PM To:Heather Walls Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Hughes open space/development conversation For your files.      From: Amy Hahn <mesror@gmail.com>   Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:22 PM  To: Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>  Subject: [EXTERNAL] Hughes open space/development conversation    Dear City Managers and City Council, You have in front of you tonight a citizen initiative with ~8000 signatures asking that you act in the best interest of us, the citizens you represent. There is a growing feeling among citizens of Fort Collins that CSU, once a partner worth bragging about, has turned into an 800-lb gorilla with a drug problem hell bent on stealing from the family who have supported it all these years. This doesn't wash. The Hughes stadium property should be maintained and enhanced in its entirety as open space for the use, enjoyment and overall benefit of the citizens of the City of Fort Collins. The reasons are many and listed below. It is time for CSU to stop managing its financial issues on the backs of this town. The City Council and Management need to understand and act in the interest of the citizen majority, NOT in the interest of the 800-lb gorilla. Why preserve Hughes as open space?  Value as a wildlife corridor and buffer  Value as a (relatively) un-fragmented ecosystem  Proximity to a viable prairie dog colony  Value as a recreational space  Value as a mental health resource to the people of Ft. Collins and visitors to this town (there is much research supporting this)  Value as an aesthetic draw  Value as ecosystem services such as mitigation of carbon and airborne chemicals.  Air pollution & traffic problems from the proposed Lennar development as residents will not have robust access to public transportation  Potential as a nature education space that can be used by all  Potential as a showcase for the City Natural Areas department 2  Opportunity for Fort Collins to "walk the walk" on several fronts: quality of life, understanding of the value of open space, carbon sequestration, all that good stuff that you like to talk about when courting businesses to come to this town... Thank you, Amy Hahn From:brndnann@aol.com To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 2:10:37 PM Hello, I am aware of an item on Tuesday's agenda regarding the Hughes Stadium site. I am pleased, as a citizen of Fort Collins, that this item is before you for consideration. I am hopeful that the council will adopt the proposed ordinance without alteration. Thank you, Ann Brandon 601 Agape Way Fort Collins 80524 601-259-4190 brndnann@aol.com From:Wagner,Ann To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please keep Hughes stadium site as Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:47:42 PM As a resident of Fort Collins since 1977, and an avid user of local hiking trails and natural areas, I strongly urge the City of Fort Collins to do everything possible to keep the former site of Hughes Stadium as a natural area / open space. During the COVID crisis, we have seen how many people utilize the local trails and natural areas for exercise and recharging. The Hughes site is ideal, as it is very accessible to Fort Collins residents, and adjacent to Horsetooth Reservoir. It would be a tragedy to see this piece of foothills property turned into a housing development. Ann Wagner Turner 604 Garfield St., Fort Collins 80524 aewagner@colostate.edu From:Annie Krieg To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please Adopt Zoning Measures for Hughes to Make It An Open Space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:40:10 AM Dear City Council and City Leaders of Fort Collins, You have worked tirelessly for our amazing community throughout this challenging year. I appreciate your service and dedication and feel grateful to live in Fort Collins. I know you will continue to fight for all Fort Collins residents. Thus, I am writing to urge you to listen to the mandate of the residents of Fort Collins and zone Hughes Open Space immediately. Honor the legacy of both the original native inhabitants of this land and the Maxwell family farmland. Honor the irreplaceable wildlife in our beautiful foothills ecosystem by protecting their habitat. Create an open space that will be there for all residents of Fort Collins now and in the future. Thank you for considering this request. I eagerly await an update after today's meeting. Warmly, Dr. Annie Krieg 520 N Sherwod St Unit 7 Fort Collins, CO 80521 From:Anya Davies To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Keep Hughes Stadium an Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 1:28:52 PM To Whom it May Concern, My name is Anya Davies and I'd like to make an argument for keeping Hughes Stadium zoned as an open space. This would also allow for a wildlife rehabilitation center, Nothern Colorado Wildlife Center, to be built on a small portion of that land. This would allow them to expand their care beyond reptiles and amphibians, and include mammals small to medium, as well as birds and waterfowl. I volunteered in WildKind the wildlife rehabilitation center in Larimer Humane Society back before 2012. I also interned at Greenwood, the center in Longmont. What I've noticed is that we get such a discrepancy in the numbers of wildlife brought in from Fort Collins at Greenwood, than we had every year in WildKind. This means a lot of injured or orphaned wildlife, from Fort Collins and surrounding areas aren't getting the care and rehabilitation they could, just because people don't have the time to drive to Longmont, and Greenwood doesn't have the resources to send someone out. As far as just the prospect of having a proper wildlife rehabilitation center, it would provide more education to the community on wildlife and some amazing opportunities. Voulenterring with wildlife as a child helped me develop a passion that I still pursue into adulthood as a career. Ultimately, keeping Hughes Stadium zoned as a open space would benefit both the wildlife, and community of the area. From:Ardith Johnson To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes stadium land Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:35:21 AM As a longtime citizen of this wonderful city of Fort Collins, I am begging you to leave the Hughes Stadium land as open space for the present and future citizens of Fort Collins to enjoy. Nothing sets Fort Collins apart from other cities like its open space and trail system. Once the land is developed, there is no going back to wild and natural. And this space against the foothills is especially unique. Please consider the reputation of Fort Collins as a gemstone of a city because of its open spaces when you make your decisions. Thank you, Ardith Johnson From:Barbara Denny To:City Leaders Cc:OEM; Darin Atteberry; Jacy Marmaduke Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Zoning Initiative (For 11/17/20 City Council Meeting Agenda) Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 3:46:48 PM To: City Council Members I am writing to you, in heartfelt earnest, to encourage you to listen to the Fort Collins Citizens’ repeated, steadfast request to keep the Hughes property as Open Space. I know some of you have been consistently supporting this, yet some of you have not. I hope you will listen to us this Tuesday eve and open your minds and hearts to our hopes for the future. Some 25% of the electorate have already signed this petition that you will consider to adopt. Isn’t it evident what your constituents are asking you to do? Are you not elected to represent them? This parcel has the highest conservation value of any land in town. As the already planned developments all over town come to fruition, we will need this open space. Already, our other Natural Areas are under strain of overcrowding. We need this Open Space that is easily accessible by bicycle, walking, or short transport, and borders our beautiful foothills. It is the scenic entryway to Horsetooth Reservoir. It is so special. I do not understand why this particular place needs to be developed, when there are so many other areas already under consideration, and proceeding. So much development, happening so fast. Please take a breath, and recognize that this is momentous, of the moment. And you can stand up to the moment, and make the historic choice, your citizens are asking you to do…. Preserving the Hughes property for all posterity. It’s a Legacy decision. If we were not in a Pandemic, the Council Chambers would be overflowing with testimony. I will attempt to use the ZOOM vehicle to participate, but it’s tricky for me and drops out suddenly. I know many Seniors who can’t navigate it, and find it overwhelming. It’s all been said before, hasn’t it? How many times? Isn’t it time to Vote YES? Vote to Zone as Open Space. Respectfully, Barbara Denny 80521 From:Gotshall,Barbara To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space ordinance Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 11:07:50 AM Dear City Leaders: Please adopt the Hughes Open Space Ordinance on November 17 – to serve Fort Collins citizens and to keep this special land for all to enjoy! Thank you, Barbara Gotshall 2509 Tucker Court 80526 From:Barbette Santistevan To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Thursday, November 12, 2020 1:05:22 PM Dear Mayor Troxell and Fort Collilns City Council members. I understand there is a council meeting next week and on the agenda is the proposed us of the Hughes Open Space. As a neighbor who lives directly east of the old Hughes Stadium site, I am STRONGLY opposed to development of this land for anything other than open space/recreational use. We have already seen a huge increase in traffic in our neighborhood with the development on the corner of Overland and Drake and recognize that the development of the Hughes site would only add to this problem. In addition, we have enjoyed access to the Hughes site for walking, sledding and frisbee golf over the years when Hughes Stadium was still operating. As a resident of Fort Collins since 1985 and a CSU alumni, I have seen an incredible amount of growth in and around our City and feel that this space is one of the City’s last opportunities to keep recreational space on the west side. We have enjoyed the views of the Front Range from the City for the past 35 years and we are seriously considering relocating if this area is developed, as planned, into a large residential area. It feels that further residential development on the west side is taking away from what makes Fort Collins so unique and beautiful. I hope you will seriosly take into consideration keeping Hughes as an open space for our citizens to enjoy the natural beauty of this land. Barbette Santistevan bl.santistevan@gmail.com From:bobnightwalker@aol.com To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes area Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:28:30 PM Dear city council members, My hope is that you give serious consideration to the old Hughes stadium area and keeping it as open as possible. The number of signatures collected to put it on the April ballot keeping it open space and allowing a wildlife rehabilitation center to be built exceeded all expectations. This is an area that your constituents do not want to see developed and turned into high density housing. The area is a huge wildlife corridor, something that needs to be preserved, when we are already seeing so much habitat loss and destruction of ecosystems. Also allowing a wildlife hospital and education center to establish itself there brings so much to the community. It brings a place where our neighbors can bring injured, sick, and orphaned wildlife. It would provide a place of education with it’s school programs, internships, and volunteer programs. Wildlife rehabs provides public safety by having highly qualified staff that recognize and has the ability to diagnose potentially harmful zoonotic diseases. They work closely with local and state health departments, and again provides a place that people can take the animals to rather than try to help them themselves, potentially exposing their household to various diseases or parasites. Lastly, a rehab center helps our community with humane solutions to nuisance wildlife problems. It is my belief that this is what the community wants to see happen with the old Hughes stadium area. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bob Nightwalker Sent from AOL Mobile Mail Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com From:brooke schneider To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:57:15 PM Hello, Please zone Hughes land as open space at the council meeting on Nov 17th. Thank you, Brooke Schneider From:MerryRun To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: saving the Hughes Stadium property to become a Natural Area Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 4:24:39 PM Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I have resided in Fort Collins for sixteen years and have always appreciated the City of Fort Collins' Natural Areas. Friends from other places are always impressed with the City of Fort Collins' foresight in the creation of Natural Areas for the health and aesthetic appreciation of its residents. We residents are very appreciative of your realization of the importance of Natural Areas. So much so, that in only several months, 8300 signatures were gathered to ask you to purchase and transform the Hughes Stadium property/land, into a Natural Area, not housing. The nearby Pineridge Natural Area has become increasingly busy as more housing has been built near that area. Traffic congestion and air pollution would inevitably increase if the Hughes Stadium land also becomes residential. Making the Hughes Stadium property/land into a Natural Area would create a swath of open natural land along the foothills that would benefit both nature and residents, rather than packing yet more density into the area. People as well as wildlife need open space to relax and breathe in.You have a unique opportunity to save for posterity a large area of irreplaceable open space near the foothills. Current and future generations will thank you for preserving the Hughes Property as open space. Please honor this unique opportunity. Sincerely, Carole Hossan 504 Edwards Street Fort Collins, CO 80524-3812 970 416-7414 From:Cathy VerStraeten To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 2:44:24 PM We are George and Cathy VerStraeten and live at 2801 W Lake Street. We respectfully request that you as our representatives designate the Hughes Stadium property as Open Space this Tuesday November 17, 2020. Thank you. Sent from my iPad From:Celeste To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes stadium area Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 1:03:41 PM Hello council people! I just wanted to express my interest in purchasing Hughes stadium to use as open space. It’s a great location and could be the perfect spot for a bike park, frisbee golf or any other wonderful outdoors options. Thanks! Celeste Cannon Typed one key at a time from my iPhone. From:Celeste To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes stadium area Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 12:59:27 PM Hello council people! I just wanted to express my interest in purchasing Hughes stadium to use as open space. It’s a great location and could be the perfect spot for a bike park, frisbee golf or any other wonderful outdoors options. Thanks! Celeste Cannon Typed one key at a time from my iPhone. From:CHARLES KOPP Owner To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Use of Hughes Stadium site Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:20:04 PM Dear City Leaders, I've seen a T-shirt around town that describes Fort Collins as "Fort Construction," which I chuckle at but also find the point it makes pretty sad, considering the huge amount of development going on and planned for the community. And currently very alarming is the possibility of the former Hughes Stadium site becoming a sprawling residential development by a big profit-driven developer. Therefore, I strongly urge the Council to adopt the citizen-initiated ordinance to zone the property for public open land, and for the City to purchase it at fair market value. Since the recent petition for the initiative far exceeded the required number of signatures in only 60 days, it seems to approach a mandate that many people in the community do not want to see the property developed as proposed, and that it's far beyond just the people who live along and near Overland Trail who are against it. I understand that the City has collected more than enough money through its Open Space Tax in recent years to afford the purchase, and I even suggest possibly using crowd-sourcing from concerned members of the community to voluntarily make donations as a supplement to the City's purchase. Even though I don't live that close to the property site and wouldn't be directly affected by a big development there, I would still be willing to make a contribution according to my means to have it become public land. It's location adjacent to the Maxwell and Pine Ridge Natural Areas certainly make it a perfect fit for expanding those areas, which are already often crowded from the amount of present development. I am very bothered to hear about the arrogance and self-serving interests of Tony Frank in his efforts to get CSU to bypass what appear to be the legally required City reviews for a commercial development on the property. And likewise disappointed to hear that our City Manager, Darin Atteberry, cut short any real negotiations with CSU and favored the Lennar company's purchase proposal. If Mr. Atteberry is so pro- development where it is inappropriate and lacks regard for citizen input on such important matters, perhaps he's served long enough in his position. The many of us who really care about better preserving our local environment and quality of life have had some real recent disappointments with the approval of the heavily Green-washed Montava monstrosity---which will essentially create a new town within the boundaries of Fort Collins----and the decision of two of the outgoing lame-duck County Commissioners to approve NISP---making the fight to save the Poudre River more difficult. So it would be very heartening if we could at least save the Hughes site from another big development. Though it seems very likely that if the issue goes to ballot next spring, the ordinance would easily win, judging by its support from the petition drive; it would still be much better if the Council approved the ordinance now and established the zoning----standing up to CSU's bullying tactics, which is very disappointing for an institution that's long been an integral part of and heavily dependent on the Fort Collins community. Let's make Fort Collins less "Fort Construction,", and more "Fort Conservation." Sincerely, Charles Kopp Fort Collins From:Christine To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 10:44:59 AM Members of The Fort Collins City Council, I am writing you to respectfully request that you listen to the community you serve. On November 17, 2020 please vote to adopt the proposed ballot measure to zone Hughes as open space. This open space will be sure to become a treasured jewel in the City of Fort Collins. Your efforts to keep this land open for the great benefit of the citizens you serve will be a lasting legacy. Not unlike Teddy Rosevelt and his national parks, the decision to keep Hughes as open space could be one of the greatest things this council will be remembered for. Preserving this land will ensure the health and diversity of animal and plant communities, prevent increased flooding caused by additional impervious landcover, provide defensible land when the next forrest fire erupts, help lessen pollution by absorbing contaminants from our air and water, maintain Fort Collins’ thriving out- door lifestyle, avoid some costs associated with development and the subsequent maintenance of developed land, provide a tranquil, noise-free island right at the base of our foothills amid the rush and bustle of life. This is all especially important given how the citizens of Fort Collins leaned heavily on open space to maintain their mental health during this year’s COVID-19 pandemic. All open spaces where consistently overflowing this summer with the Hughes space itself being greatly utilized for this purpose. We also saw the importance of keeping this land open as it became a very strategic camp for firefighters during this year’s historic wild fires. Having this space open allowed for better protection of our great city. If this opportunity is not seized upon now, the legacy you leave behind will be forever marred, and Fort Collins will be a poorer city on many levels for it. As a proud citizen of this city, I implore you on November 17, 2020 to vote to keep the precious parcel of land known as “Hughes” as open space. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Christine From:McFadden, Craig To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 4:48:00 PM Please, please, PLEASE! use our open space money for land in Fort Collins and PLEASE use it for the open space gem Hughes Stadium open space!! It’s such a special place and gets a lot of use. We don’t need the opposite there – lots of extra people/traffic pressure on the area along with the poor aesthetics this would create. PRESERVE THIS FORT COLLINS OPEN SPACE GEM!!! Sincerely, Craig McFadden Fort Collins resident since 1998 From:Dan McCurdy To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughs Open Space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:29:22 AM RE: An ordinance to expand Public Open Lands in FC by requiring the City to acquire the Hughs Stadium Property and use it for open space, natural areas, parks, recreation, and wildlife rescue, and a migration corridor. I strongly encourage the City Leaders to preserve the Hughs' Green Space - an essential part of the of the City's conservation connectivity plans. The residents have repeatedly expressed their conservation wishes as witnessed by the quarter cent Open Space tax - a self-imposed tax approved by local voters repeatedly over the last 30 years. Please spend those essential dedicated funds the way voters intended and expand the needed open space within city limits. In its own way, this property has similarities to the former Soderberg property which i voted for while a resident and student. Each parcel represents an irreplaceable piece of the Front's conservation green-space puzzle. Now that the city has this resource within their grasp, don't flounder and squander this conservation opportunity and lose this piece forever based on faulty, short-sighted thinking. For example, a few detractors try to divert from the issue by mentioning that a portion of the site was once used as a gravel pit as far back as 1950. That argument is unaware, self-serving, and shallow. What was the land for millennia before a brief flash in time? Fact - gravel pit restoration has long been a significant part of the City's public open space preservation strategy. Where have these detractors been? Obviously out-of-touch and uneducated with the reality of today's conservation. Their dim excuse should be regarded as the ignorance that it is. Gayla Maxwell Martinez - a descendent of the family that originally settled on the Hugh's site - said it quite succinctly, "we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to restore some of what has been lost." The Citizens and wildlife are depending on you. Please do the right thing by permanently conserving the irreplaceable Hugh's Open Space. Thank you for your community service! Sincerely, Dan McCurdy From:Schrom, Daniel - LIN To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Keep Hughes Space OPEN! Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:55:34 AM Dear City Leaders, You have an opportunity to save a prime piece of open space for future generations to enjoy! Instead of buying up land outside of city limits, it would be nice to save land within city limits that should remain open. Please do whatever it takes to keep as much of this land open as possible! Thanks, Daniel Schrom From:Daniel Wendland To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes land Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 8:46:57 PM You hold the beauty of our city in your hands on Tuesday night as you consider the citizens’ request to zone the Hughes land as open space. Please don’t let CSU have free rein to crowd the land with housing, an irreversible aesthetic and environmental calamity. Not only the 8000 petition signers but all the people of Fort Collins are counting on your wisdom and foresight. Thank you! Kathleen Wendland and Dr. Daniel Wendland, 2706 Willow Fern Way, Fort Collins From:Wickwar, Denise - FS To:City Leaders Cc:Wickwar, Denise - FS; dwickwar Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please Make The old Hughes site into Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 9:09:59 PM Attachments:image002.png image003.png image004.png I have lived in the neighborhood just south of Bauder Elementary school for 21 years. My family friends and neighbors and I have used the open spaces near the Hughes site to sled with our children, hike, walk and play frisbee golf on the course. We want that space left as open space and we are counting on you to make that happen as representatives of the citizens of the city. CSU has pressured the city, our representatives and the citizens into many decisions and choices that have not been beneficial. This one is very important. Please do not let CSU pressure you into making a decision that citizens clearly do not support. The collection of 8,300+ signatures in support of this plan for Hughes is a demonstration of its preference among Fort Collins voters to CSU’s plan for residential development. That petition alone captured 25% of the voter turnout in an average Fort Collins municipal election (e.g., voter turnout in the 2019 municipal elections was 32,800). This petition serves as a reliable representative sample that the conservation of Hughes as open space has an abundance of support in the community, and is extremely likely to pass as a ballot measure in April 2021. Tony Frank and CSU have convinced the University Board of Governors to unanimously approve a course of action that will attempt to circumvent the City of Fort Collins’ right to review and approve development within its boundaries. Tony Frank’s claim that the BOG can do this under the Site Plan Advisory Review Process is legally indefensible, in our reading of the Colorado Revised Statutes and the City’s Land Use Code. We request that before the City Council decides whether or not to enact the citizen initiated ordinance, every member has a complete understanding of how the SPAR process would work in this situation and if it has applicability. If Council members decline to adopt the ordinance, then they must be prepared to share with voters how they plan to assert the City’s right to enact zoning for this property and how a private, for profit development will be reviewed consistent with similar development proposals. The Site Plan Advisory Review process is what CSU is using to circumvent the normal review processes for similar development projects. Looking at both our Land Use Code and the Colorado Revised Statutes, the SPAR process is not applicable when the development plan being proposed is not a public building. It is clearly stated in Land Use Code Section 2.1.3 (E) (2): “ Applicability. A Site Plan Advisory Review shall be applied to any public building or structure.” The development plan for the Hughes site is not for a public building or structure. It is for residential and mixed use (commercial) development. Therefore, the City would be violating its own Land Use Code by allowing this application to proceed under SPAR. The most important responsibility of any council member is to act as extension of their constituents by facilitating and enabling citizen participation, and by representing their collective voice and interests in city government. We have lost so much of the open space that is close to town. We as the citizens of Fort Collins have paid a lot in taxes along with the other local citizens. Our natural areas, trails, and parks like Spring Canyon and City Park are being “loved to death”. They are suffering from excessive use and overcrowding, which is particularly evident on any given weekend at trailheads and parks around town. We need MORE large parks and natural areas in town to absorb the overcrowding that is driven by increased development and growth. Hughes open space offers the perfect opportunity to balance recreation and preservation as the City’s population and recreational tourism grows. This parcel has the highest conservation value of any land in town. It is extremely rare that a local government has the chance to expand open space and natural areas in this way, and preserve miles of wildlife migration corridors that exist at the base of our foothills. We need to jump on this opportunity or it will be lost forever, as our city continues to grow and expand with an ever-increasing population and land development. In EACH of the previous 5 YEARS, the quarter cent dedicated Open Space tax has collected over 8 million dollars. That’s over 40 million dollars in just 5 years! The total collected in the last 10 years, from 2010 to 2019 was just under 74 million dollars. This is a citizen initiated, self-imposed tax approved by Fort Collins voters repeatedly over the last 30 years. The money is there. Spend it the way the voters intended and expand open space within our city limits. In Cameron Gloss’ original presentation to Council (during the first reading of Hughes), he tried to give a history of the parcel. Gloss tried to paint a picture of a worthless piece of land, being used as a gravel pit in 1950. But what was that land before the qravel pit? How about when the land belonged to the natives? Like Gayla Maxwell Martinez said, “we have an opportunity to restore some of what has been lost, an amazing resource for wildlife and the migration of wildlife. Gayla Maxwell Martinez, a descendant of the family that settled upon the land we now call the Hughes Stadium site, said it best in a letter to the Council in May 2020: “The discussion regarding future use of the land recently occupied by Hughes Stadium is not a question of whether or not to build homes, but rather of whose homes are to be built? That is, will this land be used to construct houses for an expanding human population or will we consider the equally urgent need to provide homes for a diminishing population of meadowlarks, native pollinators, yucca and prairie sage and scarlet globemallow, killdeer and red-tailed hawks? The choice we make will impact all of us for generations to come.” Thank you in advance for your consideration, Denise Denise Wickwar, PMP, CSM Supervisory Project Manager And On Detail as NFS Branch Manager, NRRC Forest Service Chief Information Office/Natural Resource Manager Project Management Office, PMO Government cell 970631-7604 Personal cell 970-556-2719 denise.wickwar@usda.gov 2150 Centre Ave. Building A, Suite 300 Fort Collins, CO 80526 www.fs.fed.us Caring for the land and serving people This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately. From:Dolores Williams To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:29:56 AM Would be wonderful if some GOCO funds could be used to buy this space. The trails and sledding hill are such neat uses for “quiet mid our noisy life” can’t be evaluated against money. Dolores williams From:Donna Mahler To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:20:08 AM To our city leaders, Please preserve the beauty of the Horsetooth area and foothills by voting against development. I lived in Las Vegas for 30 years and saw the city grow and expand to become a sprawling area. The development had a negative impact in terms of water supply, traffic, crime, sense of community, and desert creatures. Please don’t let Fort Collins become another Las Vegas. Limit the development and help it remain a special place! Donna and Jud Brown Fort Collins residents Sent from my iPhone From:Donovan Golding To:Julie Pignataro; Ross Cunniff; Emily Gorgol; Susan Gutowsky Cc:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Nov 17th Hughes Agenda item Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 5:09:12 PM I am not in favor of this development. I chose to live on the west side specifically for this open space. The more power CSU seems to get the more they disrespect the City of Fort Collins, it's residents, and the natural environment. CSU needs a wake up call in working towards and together with what the residents of Fort Collins. Denying this development will be an emphatic check on their growing influence over our city. Cosidering what we have gone through during the pandemic this space has been invaluable to my mental health. As a combat veteran with PTSD the ability to be able to settle my mind by enjoying this space has helped me tremendously. I do not want this space developed. Please add these comments to the public record for the November 17th Hughes agenda item! Respectfully, Donovan Golding From:Doug Henderson To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] please conserve the Hughes Stadium site Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:33:22 PM Mayor Troxell and City Council, I urge you to act to conserve the Hughes Stadium site for the benefit of all Fort Collins, now and for the future, by taking action to protect the site as part of the City's open space, also thereby ensuring the continuity of natural area along the first foothill on the City's west side. Hughes is the last of the city's large undeveloped green spaces. It is used by Ft Collins residents for a variety of recreational and outdoor activities, and is important and unique in the City's landscape. It would be a sad but permanent mistake for the site to become just more surburbia sprawling into the foothills, encroaching and reducing green space, cluttering the view of first foothill, and causing more traffic congestion everywhere east of there and negatively impacting the whole rest of the city. The city's natural areas and trails are already used heavily, with many areas suffering from high use and overcrowding, which is harming natural values and users' experience. With foreseeable continued population growth, the city needs more open space and natural areas. The best and highest use of the unique Hughes site is for open space, outdoor recreation, and natural habitat that benefits all Fort Collins residents -- and not for suburbia that benefits only a few. Over 8000 local residents from all parts of the city signed the petition to protect the Hughes site as open space, in only 60 days when COVID constrained signature gathering. This is strong evidence that Ft Collins residents support protecting the Hughes site as open space, and don't want it to become more suburban sprawl into the foothills. Please act to conserve the Hughes site as part of the City's open space, which will benefit Fort Collins now and especially in the future as open space and natural areas become ever-more important and valuable to the City's quality of life. Respectfully, Doug Henderson Conservation Chair, Sierra Club Poudre Canyon Group From:Ellen Halsey To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes zoning Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 5:04:41 AM I am asking you to zone Hughes Open Space now for the community, for future generations, and for wildlife preservation, for recreation, and appreciation and enjoyment of nature. Fort Collins does not need to put housing on every inch of property in the city. Please adopt the Hughes zoning measure within 30 days, rather than waiting to put it on the ballot in April 2021. Give Hughes the proper zoning designation it deserves, one that honors its history and legacy as native tribal land, and later Maxwell family farmland, long before CSU took the helm just 50 years ago. That property is already surrounded by open spaces. It's part of the natural areas. I cannot imagine that much, if anything, needs to be done to make it usable space for our community. Thank you Ellen Halsey 851 Campfire Dr FC From:Emily Olivo To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Decision Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:46:01 PM Please make this email a part of the public record for the November 17th Hughes agenda item: Good evening Councilmembers, I am writing you tonight in support of the City of Fort Collins acquiring the Hughes Stadium site as preserved open space, with a portion of the land dedicated to a wildlife rehabilitation and education center. This site is culturally and ecologically valuable. When speaking with community members about the open space, people shared numerous memories and family stories with me about games they attended at the old stadium and how it is used currently for running with their pets or recreating with friends. The word I so often heard when referring to the potential for it to be a housing site was “shame.” What is so incredible about this, too, is in a moment of deep polarization we have an issue that brings together people from both sides of the aisle. I helped collect signatures for this petition, and the very first one that I collected was from a staunch Trump supporter, not a tree- hugging liberal (though they signed too!) In addition, trails and open space are what the Fort Collins community loves about living here. It is one of the top 3 strongest traits of the city according to the 2019 Community Survey. In that survey it was also found that “53% of residents wanted additional effort for the environment” and “60% of community members identified environment as one of the three top priorities for City leadership in the next five years.” This is your moment to fulfill that demand from your constituents. Keeping this site as open space assists the city in reaching its Climate Action Plan goals; supports the health of our soil, water, and air; and provides habitat connectivity for our wildlife. Turning this site into housing will not only fail to meet these environmental needs, it will exacerbate the issues. Additional housing so close to natural areas will provide more opportunities for human-wildlife conflict, less flood and fire protection, fewer recreational opportunities, and more traffic congestion on a 2-lane road. Furthermore, the provision that a portion of the land is designated to a wildlife rehabilitation and education center is incredibly important. Without a wildlife rehabilitation center in Northern Colorado, there are thousands of sick, orphaned, or injured animals that go untreated each year. With our human population increasing every year, the number of animals needing care is expected to increase. Connecting people with the outdoors and protecting wildlife- What could be more Fort Collins than that? This week, you can choose to acquire the property right away. Or, you can let it go to the ballot in April, when we are confident that the people will choose yes. Every month that goes by there are more animals in need that go without care. Every month that goes by, more people are recreating at that space and building memories. You can choose to kick the can down the road, or you can make this happen now and give your constituents some brightness in a dark year. Thank you for your time and service, Emily OlivoPronouns: she/her What’s this? Education & Outreach Chair Northern Colorado Wildlife Center 908-892-9761 From:Erin Forster To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 4:27:56 PM I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space. Thank you for your time and consideration! All the best, Erin Forster -- --*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- *--* Erin R. Forster Fort Collins, Colorado "Let yourself be seen. Love with your whole heart. Practice gratitude. Lean into joy. Believe you are enough.” - Brene Brown From:Francoise Carpenter To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:30:13 PM Dear City Leaders I moved here in 2014 and had been running in the old Hughes stadium land until it was demolished 2-3 years ago. This is next to the Maxwell Natural area which connects to the Foothills trail. I have participated in the Horsetooth Half-Marathon since the 90s. We used to start and finish at the Hughes Stadium. I fell in love with Fort Collins at that time. The number of acres per person to recreate is decreasing badly so the quality of life in Fort Collins is also decreasing. The trails are crowded daily and even more so this year due to the pandemic. I am considering myself to leave the area because of the decreased quality of life. I can't imagine this land being turned in another dense Development like the development across Overland. Hughes Old Stadium land: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------- That piece of land is an iconic piece of Fort Collins, like City Park, Old Town, The Poudre, The Oval, The Foothills, and Horsetooth. It’s even connected to Horsetooth and the Foothills. As voiced BY THE PEOPLE, they want this piece of land to remain as open space for their recreation. 1. a. Hughes is the last of the large undeveloped green spaces. It has always been used for a variety of recreational and outdoor activities, including running, walking, bird watching, dog walking, frisbee golf, and winter sledding, to name a few. b. During the pandemic, open space has proven to be a physical and mental lifesaver, quite literally; allowing citizens open space to recreate at, while maintaining social distancing among open air. The city has the money to purchase the property, and as a citizen and your constituent, I am directing you to use the money set aside for this very purpose, the Open Space Tax, to purchase this iconic piece of Fort Collins land. From 2015 to present, the city has collected 8 million dollars in taxes EACH YEAR. There is more than enough money in the Open Space Fund to purchase this land. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------- Françoise Carpenter From:Gary Faris To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 7:08:16 AM Dear Council Members, I would ask all of you to vote to designate the Hughes Open Space Area as Public Open Lands. Thank You. Gary Faris From:Gary Faris To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] hughes ballot initiative Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 12:10:22 PM Fort Collins City Council Members: I urge all of you to adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative outright. Thank you, Gary Faris From:Gloria Katers To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] The Future of So Much: The Importance of the Hughes Land... Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 2:50:02 PM Of all of the paths you take make sure a few of them are dirt - John Muir Leaders, You know it's in your hands, the most priceless land in our city. We can grow East and North to our hearts content, but this land... this land to the west, that's all that's left. The space between. The very special spot where nature and the community collide. Where our neighbors from the west, those with fur and feathers, have found safe haven from the fires and now flourish. What purpose could there be in taking this priceless property and diminishing it to nothing, because that's what it will be in the end. More pavement. There are no homes there, we are not taking away anything from anyone, but should the path become pavement we certainly are. Make your path, our path, be dirt. 1 Heather Walls From:Gregory Loftin <gloftin@comcast.net> Sent:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 2:36 PM To:Sarah Kane Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hi Wade ‐     Understand there may be an upcoming ballot initiative on future development. My understanding is CSU owns the space  and will sell to the highest bidder. Seems this land was funded by taxpayer $’s . If that’s the case, I’d hope the local  citizens would have a say in any future development plans ‐ personally, I like the idea of more open space.     Just wanted to reach out and make my concerns known.     Thanks    Greg Loftin  Mountain Ridge Farms      From:Harry Rose To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Item # 13 relating to Hughes Stadium Petition Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 8:53:09 PM Council Members, I'm writing to support the adoption of the Citizens Petition Regarding the Rezoning and Acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Annexation Property. Fort Collins should rise above the temptation to allow the development of this property and should instead look to the future of our community by supporting more open space for our citizens to enjoy. There isn't much undeveloped land left along the foothills that's as easily accessed as the Hughes property. The property itself is a good fit with Pineridge and Maxwell and a great site help provide a sustainable environment for wildlife and recreation for citizens. I would also caution Council on the negative effects further development in the Hughes location would have on the transportation infrastructure, particularly Prospect and Drake. Both of these streets have multiple intersections that are already at service level D much of the day. Development of the Hughes property will only serve to cause those service levels to further deteriorate. I urge you to do the right thing and support the purchase of this property at fair market value for public use. -- Harry Rose504 Edwards St 80524970.430.6731Ubuntu Linux 20.04 LTS(\__/)(O.o )(> < ) From:Jake Knebgl To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] nov 17th 2020 council meeting Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:32:56 AM mr mayor and council members.. Again long time resident of resident of district 6...i am writing today in reguards to two items on todays (nov 17th 2020) city council meeting agenda and hat my comments be inculded in the record item 1 Regurding the rate increase on water and power utilites .. less then a year ago this council apporved a time of day increase in power rates ..the infromation provided to the residents of ft collin stated clearly that this increase was needed to cover the expansion of new infrastructure ..now you are adding another 2-3 % increase on our reidents lessn the 12 months later could you please explain how the time of day increase was not enough to cover what the city utilites needed? ..may of your constituents are suffering hardships due to covid 19 and yet the city feels its a good time to raise fees on it residents ..this matter shows clearly that ft collin needs to follow colorados lead and make it so fee increases must be voted on by the citizens ..you council members countine to collect a paycheck from the tax payers of ft collins while your constituents can not work to make ends meet ..perhaps this council could forfit you city paychecks during this pandemic and put that money towards our utilite system as you all suppport the fast paced buliding of more high priced homes that are putting an unessercery strain on our utilite systems ..and it ssems very convinet that all these increases are coming in mayor toxells last 6 months in office item2 Huges stadium property Recenty this council voted to deny CSU and tony franks bid to rezone the huges stadium land parcel..Despite the overwheming outcry and opposition by the resdents of both districts 5 and 6 who whould be directly impacted by development mr frank and csu have stated that they intend to bypass the will and vote of the city of ft collins and it citizens abd move ahead with the devlopment ,,this once again show the compleate lack if respect or care that mr frank and csu have for our town and it residnets...i remind this council that you do not work for mr frank or cuu you are elected by the citizens of ft collins ..in 6 months time your constituents will be headed to the ballot box to decide if you all keep your jobs and elect a new mayor .it will not be mr frank and csu voting it will be the citizens who you repersent who mr frank and csu are saying dont matter ...your constituents spoke cleaerly on the matter of huges staduim open your ears and listen ..we will remember your actions in 6 months when we vote thank you for you time From:Janie Arndt To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 5:13:18 PM First, thank you all for serving. I know it’s a tough job. Would it be nice for Hughes to be open space? Sure it would. Does CSU have the right to sell to whoever they want? Of course they do. I oppose this issue being on the ballot. I oppose any attempts to coerce the university into selling to the city. I do support private property rights. I also support more affordable housing options in Fort Collins. I have lived here for 46 years and have no financial interest in CSU or the housing industry. Thank you for all the work you and the city staff have put into this issue. Sincerely, Mary Jane Arndt 1027 Pinnacle Pl Fort Collins From:jean darcy To:City Leaders Cc:pathsfoco@gmail.com Subject:[EXTERNAL] ...that you don"t know what you"ve got "til it"s gone... Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:29:38 PM Dear city leaders, Please consider zoning the Hughes property as Open Space! Let's preserve some of what Fort Collins has lost over the years - don't pave paradise and put up a parking lot! (or a bundle of houses) Please, Jean Darcy From:Jeff Allison To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes stadium Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:33:10 PM Good evening community leaders, I would like to take this opportunity to express my support for the zoning of Hughes stadium as open space. Fort Collins has the wonderful opportunity to preserve a beautiful landscape and a valuable resource for future generations to enjoy. Thank you for your time and consideration. From:jennifer litzau To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Keep hughes space open with a wildlife rehabilitation and education center Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 11:50:06 AM Hello city leaders of Fort Collins, You are all well aware of the majority of residents who want hughes stadium space to stay open. Our community would benefit greatly if the city purchased the space from CSU at fair market value ( or donate it back to the Arapaho, Cheyenne, Núu-agha-tʉvʉ-pʉ̱ (Ute), and Oceti Šakówiŋ (Sioux) who the land was stolen from) and preserve it as open space. Taking care of the land is what CSU says they are reliable for being a land grant university. The city has allocated funds and a majority of residents that wish to see it stay open space. Please do the right thing and side with your constituents. Wildlife preservation is much needed especially after our devastating fires. While preserving this space we can also allocate 5 acres to wildlife rehabilitation and education center. Expanding Northern Colorado Wildlife Centers rehabilitation services to birds and mammals! Something our area desperately needs and our citizens would benefit from by offering education, jobs, volunteer opportunities and rescue and rehabilitation of more wildlife in our area. Please vote to keep hughes stadium space open with a wildlife rehabilitation center to preserve land and wildlife. Showing we, the city of Fort Collins care about preservation of our natural world. Best, Jennifer litzau From:Jessica Cunningham To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Wildlife Rehabilitation Center Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 7:35:57 PM Hello, I just wanted to say that as a resident of Larimer county and Fort Collins since 2008 I was completely shocked to hear that we do not have a wildlife rehabilitation center here. The wild spaces are looked after, but the wonderful wildlife that call these spaces home have no advocates or care available to them. These creatures share this beautiful area with us and deserve to be as well cared for as the humans and wild lands they reside with/in. Please add a wildlife rehabilitation center to the old Hughes Stadium area so that we can do our part to care for wildlife. Thank you for your time, consideration, and all you do. Jessica Cunningham 970.237.9345 From:Jill Livengood To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] hughes open space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:57:12 AM I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space." Our citizens' foresight and dedication to Open Space have allowed us to collect over $8 million each year for the last 5 years for this restricted purpose. Tell the Council we want our Open Space tax used to preserve Hughes for its present and future citizens, for wildlife, for climate action, for posterity as one of the city's iconic places. Thank you for your activism Jill Livengood 970-219-1011 From:Holcombe, John - SSC To:Sarah Kane Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Wednesday, November 11, 2020 7:53:35 AM I am writing in regards to the proposed open space at the former Hughes Stadium. This is a critical decision by the City as I feel this space needs to be preserved for many reasons. The area is a natural easement for wildlife along the foothills and filling that area with homes would significantly impact wildlife roaming through that area. This area is also a gateway to the Rocky Mountains, Horsetooth Reservoir, etc. Do we really want 600 plus homes built that close to the foothills populating the already over used trails and destroying the wildlife corridor that exists currently. This area is a major recreational area for hiking, biking, walking, etc. People come from all over the area to walk, bike and hike. Leave it open for all to enjoy. Please pass this information to those that are the decision makers for the City’s open space. I believe this is the most important space in this City and needs to be protected and remain as open space/recreation for all to enjoy. Thanks John Holcombe From:John McCurdy To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes should be preserved as a Open Space Natural area Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:45:12 AM     To the Council: Coloradoans are insisting Hughes should be preserved as a Open Space Natural area. The City Council should listen to the mandate of the residents of FT. Collins and zone Hughes Open Space IMMEDIATELY for our community now, for future generations and for our wildlife neighbors. It would be incredibly selfish and unconscionable if the Hughes Natural Area was not preserved for future generations. It is clear Tony Frank, CSU and certain City Council members have no idea of the anger seething in the Ft. Collins community as more and more citizens continue to discover that CSU and certain City Council members are attempting to develop this incredibly beautiful and unique natural area. A development in the Hughes area changes everything -- the ambience of Ft. Collins -- it's charm -- and what makes Ft. Collins such a wonderful and memorable place is centered and captured right there at Hughes, right below the reservoir. There is no place like it! Never ever have I heard of communities being in any way disappointed in preserving natural areas. In fact, just the opposite. In my view, natural areas provide the community better healthcare than all the hospitals combined. I am simply stunned at CSU's proposal. CSU should be ashamed of itself for being so disconnected from their community. CSU is posturing in a condescending and arrogant fashion. CSU seems to adamantly despise and resent the community's initiative and desire to preserve the Hughes natural area. It is clear Tony Frank and CSU does not care what the community thinks and has no desire in wanting to work with the community to get this done in the manner the citizens of Ft. Collins prefer. We can all speculate on the motives underlying CSU’s push for development of Hughes. Let’s look at some facts and try to put CSU’s motives into perspective: CSU is attempting to defend their singularly focused development of Hughes by saying: 1). CSU wants to provide “affordable housing” 2). CSU says that they cannot afford not to monetize Hughes. Let’s first look at Tony Frank and CSU’s “affordable housing” ruse that is being bandied about as one of the main reasons the CSU “needs” to develop Hughes. CSU has demonstrated by their new construction of expensive and extravagant dorm complexes on campus that CSU has no concern whatsoever with providing students with affordable housing. These newly built “Taj Mahal” dorms such as Academic Village, which replaced the modest Ellis Hall, are significantly more expensive than the dorms CSU replaced and the “mortgages” on these new complexes are paid for by the students with significantly ever increasing housing costs. Again, CSU has demonstrated they have no concern for students housing costs. In fact, CSU is clearly taking advantage of the vulnerability of students and their easy access to student loans to live in such “Club Med lifestyle” complexes. And here is the kicker, disgustingly, historically CSU required new students to live in the dorms their first two consecutive terms! CSU is hoping there are a few carp out there that will bite onto the “affordable housing” hook. We know a few council members already have. Are those council members dim-witted or just wanting to exploit the community? There are obviously ulterior motives at play in CSU’s decision making. Now let us address CSU’s need to “monetize” the Hughes property. The funding is already in place for preservation of this precious land. The residents have repeatedly expressed their conservation wishes as witnessed by the quarter cent Open Space tax - a self-imposed tax approved by local voters repeatedly over the last 30 years. Please spend those essential dedicated funds the way voters intended and expand the needed open space within city limits. Secondly, money was clearly not an issue when CSU blew $230 million irresponsibly on the 42,000 seat football stadium. To so many of us, it is surprising and perplexing that Tony Frank and CSU seems to adamantly despise and resent the community's initiative and desire to preserve the Hughes natural area. However, when we consider just how big of a mistake the $230 million 42,000 seat football stadium is, just how big of a risky financial debacle that unnecessary new stadium is and will become, we can see how CSU would prefer extensive development on the Hughes site because housing and buildings “hide” CSU’s indefensible and asinine stadium decision much better than an open space natural area will. One thing is a fact: CSU has irresponsibly entered the development business – and CSU has shown their decision making in that regard to be inconsiderate, irresponsible, and reckless in that regard -- and with potentially catastrophic financial consequences. CSU should have their feet held to the fire for that ridiculous, irresponsible, and indefensibly risky financial decision that will haunt the university and Colorado taxpayers for decades to come. It is important to note CSU assures us that students will not be responsible for any of the new stadium’s costs. Forbes had a detailed article on how universities hide the athletic fees the students are paying by including those fees in the “student fee” category: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2014/12/12/who- actually-funds-intercollegiate-athletic-programs/#4914e79617af The future may soon reveal CSU’s conduct has been deceptive and reckless at best regarding student financial responsibilities to athletics. One thing is for certain: Coloradoans are insisting Hughes should be preserved as a Open Space Natural area. The City Council should listen to the mandate of the residents of FT. Collins and zone Hughes Open Space IMMEDIATELY for our community now, for future generations and for our wildlife neighbors. Sincerely, John McCurdy       Sent from Mail for Windows 10   From:Joyce DeVaney To:City Leaders Cc:Sarah Kane Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please support Hughes Stadium citizens" petition Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:55:06 PM I strongly support the citizens’ petition, requesting that the City zone the Hughes Stadium property in the Public Open Lands zone district and that the City use its best efforts to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. The acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into public open lands would build upon the City’s significant history of preserving open spaces and would provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents. It would honor its history and legacy, all the way back to Native tribal land. The Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space. Please listen to the thousands of Fort Collins residents (petition signed by over 8,000 people) who are passionate about establishing something lasting, meaningful, and beneficial. Don’t let CSU turn this “jewel” of our beloved City into bulldozers, dust, and concrete! I am really offended by Tony Frank and the CSU Board of Governors blatantly disavowing any partnership with the City and negating the concerns of Fort Collins citizens. It is greed, pure and simple! Let’s live up to our reputation of being a “Choice City” and do the right thing – purchase the land and turn it into Public Open Lands for all to enjoy! Thank you for your consideration of my recommendation. Joyce DeVaney 2842 McKeag Drive Fort Collins, CO From:Julia Robinson To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:25:15 AM Dear Fort Collins city leaders: I am writing to you to express my deep concern for the Hughes open space and to express my opposition for CSU's proposed development of the land. Ten years ago, I moved to Fort Collins, Colorado to attend CSU. After a few short months, I knew this city would be my forever home. I loved how the city and its people valued the outdoors, sustainability, and the numerous open space locations throughout the city. After graduating from CSU and now teaching in the city as a high school teacher, I still felt that Fort Collins was the place I was meant to be. However, as I have slowly watched the city become over-developed and have watched CSU slowly take over by destroying homes and neighborhoods for their own personal gain without listening to the public, I began to question if this was the same city that values the outdoors and sustainability that I once thought it did. When I was made aware of the Lennar CSU agreement, I was deeply saddened. The past ten years I have played on that open space and enjoyed the features it has to offer. I could not help but to question how CSU is known for sustainability. First the new stadium being built and now this? This is not the definition of sustainability and saddens me that CSU broadcasts such falsehoods. In addition, when I talked to others and heard their disgust in CSU, I found that my views were validated with the majority of the city. This was also validated when a petition that circulated to place this issue on the ballot was signed by over 8000 people. CSU is a part of Fort Collins, not the opposite so I believe it is immensely important for them to realize their role. If the overwhelming majority of people do not want the land to be developed, shouldn't they have a say? Shouldn't we be heard? When I look at this issue in the long term, it is apparent that keeping the land as open space will be far more beneficial to the city and its people than developing it. The city is being developed from all around-- Timnath, the north side close to Loveland, Wellington, and then the pockets of developments appearing throughout the city, so why can't we have an untouched area that will provide a place for the people to enjoy nature and escape the busy workday? I know that you all are exceedingly busy, and I know that pressure is being placed on you from CSU and from the constituents. However, I want you to think about what the people of Fort Collins want instead of what the money-hungry university wants. I also ask you to think of any children, grandchildren, nieces, or nephews you may have. Do you want them to visit or live in a city that is over-developed with limited places for them to play and experience nature or do you want them to live or visit a city that values the outdoors and sustainability as much as I once thought it did? Thank you for taking the time to read this and I hope you understand the great importance of this issue to the people who care and love this city as much as I do. Thanks, Julia Robinson From:Karen Dana To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zone Hughes public open lands Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 10:01:28 PM Please listen to the people of Fort Collins and vote to zone Hughes open space now for all of our community, for future generations and for the benefit of our wildlife friends. This land is a buffer for the foothills and Horsetooth Reservoir that preserves our diminishing open space and lets us remember and enjoy the vistas that past generations were able to see. Once lost to development this area is lost forever as a scenic space honoring the history of its past and preserving the enjoyment of its future for all the people. Thank you. Karen Dana 1 Heather Walls From:Sarah Kane Sent:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:25 AM To:Heather Walls Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Nov. 17 council Meeting/Hughes Stadium Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged FYI  From: Karen Hart <karenlynnhart@comcast.net>   Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 7:29 PM  To: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>  Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Nov. 17 council Meeting/Hughes Stadium      Sent from my iPhone    Begin forwarded message:  From: Karen Hart <karenlynnhart@icloud.com>  Date: November 16, 2020 at 7:23:51 PM MST  To: skane@fcgov.com  Cc: Karen Hart Cell <karenlynnhart@comcast.net>, Bill cell <w.hart@comcast.net>  Subject: Nov. 17 council Meeting/Hughes Stadium  Dear Sarah,  Please forward my comments to my council members:        Dear Council,  Thanks so much for all you do, and have done, to make our wonderful town even better.    One of the biggest improvements we can make in Fort Collins would be the purchase of Hughes  Stadium for recreational use! The west end of town at the low foothills is uniquely beautiful. It helps  define our city and gives us all precious breathing space ‐ especially since we are now expected to live  on even more condensed residential properties.    I have lived on the west side of Fort Collins for 25 years, and know many who live in other parts of town  who regularly come to hike the trails near Hughes and to sled.    Please do not allow this precious open space to become developed for residential use.  Please, please  purchase it rather than invest in far away Red Mountain or Soapstone open space.     As evidenced by the additional excess use of City Park and other areas, we are becoming too crowded.  And in the face of expected, continued growth we very much need the Hughes Stadium as blessed open  space.     Thank you,    Karen Hart  970‐420‐1737  2   Sent from my iPhone  From:Kate Forgach To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium property Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:02:41 PM I strongly urge you to vote for zoning the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands. The massive development of recent years has left us with far too much cement and not enough open space. In addition, this property is a terrible place on which to build a tightly packed housing development. Ecologically and safety wise, we need to give this property back to the people. CSU (read: Tony Frank) has made it clear they care NOTHING about Fort Collins citizens. We can’t let them sell off these former public lands simply so they can pay down their useless- stadium debt. Thank you Kate Forgach Fort Collins -- Kate Forgach Unicorn Hunter at Large From:Kathryn Dubiel To:City Clerk Office; Melanie Clark Subject:[EXTERNAL] For the record of Agenda Item #13 Nov 17, 2020 City Council meeting : Why is CSU invoking the use of SPAR? Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 2:21:42 PM Attachments:SPAR comments to Council.docx Please add this letter to the record of tonight's meeting - AIS for Item #13. Thank you, Kathryn Dubiel From: Kathryn Dubiel <k.i.dubiel@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 12:31 PM To: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <wtroxell@fcgov.com> Cc: Kathryn Dubiel <k.i.dubiel@hotmail.com> Subject: Why is CSU invoking the use of SPAR? Please add this email to the record for Agenda Item #13 Nov 17, 2020 Council meeting. Dear Councilors and Mayor, I respectfully submit these comments to present an interpretation of SPAR, Site Plan Advisory Review. It has been applied to public entity projects many times and now is being suggested by the Chancellor of the CSU System as applying to the development project proposed for the Hughes Stadium site. My comments are lengthy but I respectfully ask for your attention and thorough reading. I am offering this background information since this process is being set in motion on Thursday, November 19, 2020. Your complete understanding and awareness of how this project proposal is being promoted as eligible for SPAR is urgently needed. One can easily be led to believe it applies when it does not, in my researched opinion. I ask that you consider what steps will be taken if the citizen-initiated ordinance is not adopted by the Council. What outcome awaits our City? That is why I'm asking for your attention to this pressing matter which may not be apparent to many and not yet associated with the decisions being made tonight. Thank you for your service to the community and representing the interest of the citizens of Fort Collins. Respectfully submitted, Kathryn Dubiel Fort Collins resident and Elector in District 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three requirements for SPAR to apply to a project: Ownership or operation by public entities Public building or structure Aligns with zoning Why is CSU invoking the use of the SPAR? To avoid oversight and local control of their development plans. CSU seeks to expedite approval for their plan by using the SPAR provisions, limiting local review to just 60 days, while also holding the power to overturn a vote of disapproval by the P&Z Board, while the City Council is left entirely powerless and out of the process. Chancellor Tony Frank knows he has unanimous consent of the BOG to pursue this development, so meeting the required 2/3 majority vote to overturn the local planning commission decision is a certainty. Clearly, this is a maneuver to exclude citizen participation in this process, as well as keep an obvious groundswell of public outrage from reaching the ballot in April 2021. This is what we would call “voter suppression” in other circles. When proposed by a private developer such as Lennar, any project the size and complexity of the Hughes property proposal would take more than 6 months to go through the City’s development review and approval process, and be closely scrutinized for its alignment with our Land Use Codes. SPAR circumvents this. If other CSU projects have used the SPAR process, why is it not applicable in this case? The Land Use Code is unambiguous in stating that a Site Plan Advisory Review’s “purpose and effect” is meant for “improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities.” (LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (1)) Furthermore, its applicability is similarly unambiguous: “A Site Plan Advisory Review shall be applied to any public building or structure.” (LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (2) ) As an example, the SPAR for CSU’s proposed surface parking lot at 2400 Research Boulevard (SPA #150002) was approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board. Why? It fit the criteria for Site Plan Advisory Review. The project created improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities (Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System) and involved a public building or structure. (LUC §5.1.2 Definitions: Structure shall mean a combination of materials to form a construction for use, occupancy or ornamentation whether installed on, above or below the surface of land or water.) The very important thing is that SPA #150002 aligned with permitted uses for the zone district in which it is located. In this case, District E has parking lots and parking garages, as principal uses, under permitted commercial/retail use. (§ 4.27 (B) (2) (c) (5) ). The criteria: Ownership or operation by public entities - MET Public structure - MET Aligns with zoning - MET Let’s apply the same criteria to the property CSU owns and wants to develop under SPAR, the former Hughes Stadium site: Ownership or operation by public entities – Unclear – At the time the development occurs, this property will be owned by Lennar Homes. The contract between CSU and Lennar makes this a reasonable assumption. If CSU achieves its goal of getting its development proposal through the SPAR process, even if it takes an overriding vote by the Board of Governors to do it, but subsequently sells the property with “development rights” to a private for-profit developer, that amounts to gaming the system and obvious abuse of the intent of this LUC provision. Public building or structure – Does NOT meet this criteria   The development being presented in the Conceptual Review meeting on Thursday, November 19, 2020 is described as residential housing with zoning UE, LMN and MMN (mixed use neighborhood, commercial uses included). Approximately 632 DU (dwelling units) and 34,000 sf commercial. Unlike the Research Boulevard parking lot in SPA #150002 or the Avenir Museum on Lake Street SPA #130003, there are no public structures included in the CSU development proposal for the Hughes property. Aligns with zoning – Does NOT meet this criteria  Unlike the Avenir Museum (SPA#130003), a community facility with a permitted use in the NCL zone district where it’s located, none of the uses identified in CSU’s conceptual design review application for the Hughes property are permitted. The property is located in the T or Transition zone district. The only permitted uses are clearly described in the code as “such legal use as existed on the date the property was placed into this zone district.” (§ 4.12 (B) (1) ) There were no residential housing units that existed on the property on the date the property was placed into this zone district. CSU cannot legally rezone its property using Site Plan Advisory Review. Zoning and rezoning is a right reserved for the City Council and the electors of the City of Fort Collins (by citizens’ initiative). How does CSU’s assertion of its “right” to pursue SPAR undermine Fort Collins’ Home Rule authority to manage Land Use, Development and Zoning? (1) A project the size and complexity of the one proposed for the Hughes property would take more than 6 months to go through the City’s development review and approval processes. None of that would apply under this SPAR. This project is land development for profit, not for a public use and should not be allowed to proceed under SPAR. (2) This project would significantly alter a large and prominently located piece of our City. All recent efforts of Fort Collins citizens and City Council will be negated if CSU is allowed to circumvent codified municipal processes, the reason for which is a public process that is accountable to citizens and under the direction of elected representatives. (3) The purpose and effect of Site Plan Advisory Review is described in LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (1) : The Site Plan Advisory Review process requires the submittal and approval of a site development plan that describes the location, character and extent of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. Location, character and extent are the limited number of criteria to be evaluated, not conformity with our Land Use Code. (4)  The project as presented in the application for conceptual review requires rezoning from the T district in which it is located. SPAR is not intended for rezoning. That is a right reserved for the City Council and electors of the City of Fort Collins. CSU is moving ahead with an approval process that is in major conflict with the laws of the City of Fort Collins. (5) Council is stripped of its authority, rendering the Council and citizens of Fort Collins powerless in a major land use decision if CSU is allowed to proceed. Council and citizens have sought a resolution with CSU but have been ignored and rebuffed. CSU is making assertions about its authority that cannot go unchallenged, lest a dangerous precedent be set. From:Katy Williams To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes citizen initiative - please consider! Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 3:32:32 PM I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space. Please support this move for open space for our children and our active citizens! Katy Williams From:Ken Orgoglioso To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughs zoning mandate by your constituents Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:48:08 AM Dear councilmembers, As a Fort Collins resident and voter, I ask that you honor your constituent's mandate by voting to permanently zone the Hughes Stadium lands as open space for our community and for wildlife habitation. My best regards, Kenneth Thomas Orgoglioso 3641 Richmond Drive Fort Collins, CO 80526 From:Kirsten Onigkeit To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Important info to consider Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 10:22:44 PM Dear City Leaders of Fort Collins, I am writing to try and convince each and every one of you to keep Hughes a natural open space. I hope that you read this and take into consideration the land that you and the citizens should fight for and keep natural. It would be devastating to lose this land to a developer who’s end game is to make as much money for himself as possible. -Fort Collins has so many new housing developments, there are other places to put developments. Hughes is a one in a million piece of land that Fort Collins NEEDS to hang on to, and protect as long as they can. Land is something you can not make more of. It’s value without houses on it is worth more than what any developer can offer. -Hughes is the gateway to horsetooth, to state parks, imagine what a beautiful place it could be now and in the future. This city prides itself on making opportunities for people to enjoy the outdoors. Hughes is a place where you can capitalize on just that, the beauty of the outdoors. It already is a place where families make memories, hiking, sledding and just being together outside, a place for students to come and step away from their studies and enjoy nature and frisbee golf, a place for tourists to gape in awe over the beauty of our city, why ruin a beautiful open space in the foothills of horsetooth with more dense crappy houses or even nice million dollar houses. -What an amazing opportunity you have to make something truly unique to Fort Collins. The possibilities are endless, A beautiful park with frisbee golf course, an amphitheater, a place to stroll with loved ones, maybe even a recreation center with a indoor and/or outdoor pool, or just leave it the way it is. -Please think of the future of our community and don’t sell the soul of our city to another developer. Nature is something that our society is lacking and why people come to Fort Collins. Many have poured their hearts and souls out to try and protect this land because they see the value in keeping it natural. Please I beg you don’t just sell this off to make money. -The tax payers have continually voted for tax increases year after year to keep our city well taken care of and make sure the people working in it and live in get the services and recreation they need. We owe it to the tax payers to hear them out, they have spoken and are asking you to fight for this land with them. Thank you for you time! Kirsten Sent from my iPhone From:Lacey Gaechter To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please adopt open space and wildlife rehab zoning at Hughes Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 4:12:21 PM Fort Collins City Council, I am emailing you to express my support for zoning the former Hughes Stadium site for open space and wildlife rehabilitation. I hope you will adopt this re-zoning at tomorrow's Council meeting. Best, Lacey Gaechter 1640 Remington St, Fort Collins, CO 80525 From:Laura Mason Ferguson To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Keep west Fort Collins open! Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:52:18 AM Dear Fort Collins City Council Members, I am writing to you all today in an urgent plea to place the decision of the former Hughes Stadium land on the ballot so the citizens of Fort Collins have an opportunity to have their voices heard regarding this critical decision. I am fortunate to live on the west side of town in the Quail Hollow neighborhood. My husband and I chose this part of town specifically so that my children (ages 2 years and 4 months old) would grow up close to open spaces, trails, recreation, and the natural environment. We believe that raising children to appreciate the city's open spaces is crucial in raising the future generations to be stewards of our earth into the future. We believe that expanding our city's open spaces is a clear message to our kids and our kids' kids that we value the environment, their health and wellness, and our greater community. Our community has always put an emphasis on the emotional, physical, and social wellness of our people and providing open spaces in and around our town is a huge component of that. The foresight that the city of Fort Collins has always had to preserve open spaces and limit growth into the foothills is what makes our city unique, beautiful, and healthy. The implications of how the Hughes land is utilized by the city is one that will reverberate in our community forever. The Open Space Tax was created for this very purpose, and your constituents want the opportunity to use that money for what it is intended for. Please help us save this piece of beautiful, iconic land. Please think of what we want Fort Collins to be in 10, 50, 100 years in the future. We owe it to our kids to fight for natural areas and open spaces. Thank you for your time, Laura Ferguson -- Laura Mason Ferguson phone (970) 231-7858 lmason33@gmail.com From:Laura Stuntz To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium open space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:07:21 PM Dear City Leaders, I would like to express my support to turn the old Hughes stadium into open space. I live right across the street from the old stadium and have heard with alarm that up to 700 homes might be built on the property if CSU sells it to developers. The old stadium property is a crown jewel in a city that's getting increasingly crowded. I am in favor of creating more open space in the city, rather that spending more money for open space way out of town near Red Mountain. I supported all the open space tax measures, but expected purchases to be in my back yard. I realize that CSU needs the revenue from the property but they are a public institution and should be receptive to working with the community they serve. We should have a say in what happens to the old stadium property. Please consider putting the matter to a vote in the City Council now to buy the land and keep it open to all of us. Thanks, Laura Stuntz 2931 Rams Ln, Fort Collins, CO 80526 Laura Stuntz Buyer In-Situ Inc. 221 East Lincoln Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 970.498.1555 970.498.1519 fax lstuntz@in-situ.com From:Lauren Hayes To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes zoning Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 8:50:46 PM   Good evening, I respectfully ask Fort Collins leaders to listen to the mandate of the residents of Fort Collins and zone the Hughes area as public open lands. This past year, the wildfires and pandemic have shown us the importance of conserving our land and providing our community an area to recreate safely now and for future generations! Thank you. Lauren Hayes Fort Collins citizen Sent from my iPhone From:Lauren Olsen To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please Adopt Open Space/Wildlife Rehabilitation Zoning at Hughes Stadium Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:33:21 AM To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in regard to the land that was formerly Hughes Stadium. I am urging you to please consider utilizing that land as open space as well as a wildlife rehabilitation center for our community. Being completely transparent, I have not spoken to a single community member within Fort Collins that is interested in high-density housing at Hughes Stadium. High-density housing would destroy the beautiful scenery leading up to Horsetooth. This land means a lot to the people of Fort Collins. Rather, the land should be zoned as open space with a portion of that land dedicated to a wildlife rehabilitation center. A wildlife rehabilitation center would help mitigate the negative impact we have had on local wildlife through ever-expanding urbanization. Since WildKind closed its doors in 2012, community members of Larimer and surrounding counties have had limited options when they come across sick, injured, and orphaned wildlife. The nearest wildlife rehabilitation center is in Longmont, and it is obligated to serve Boulder County. With urbanization continuing to expand across the state, interactions between humans and wildlife are occurring now more than ever. Larimer County desperately needs a wildlife rehabilitation center to help offset increasing instances of human-wildlife conflict in our community. Wildlife rehabilitation centers do much more than simply care for sick, injured, and orphaned wildlife. Northern Colorado Wildlife Center educates the public about how to peacefully coexist with wildlife. By building a facility where Hughes Stadium formerly stood, it would also provide opportunities for students at Colorado State University to gain hands-on experience in animal care and husbandry. Please consider adopting open space/wildlife rehabilitation zoning at Hughes Stadium. From my experience helping collect over 8,000 signatures to keep Hughes Stadium open space, this is what the people of Fort Collins want and need. I sincerely hope you take this into consideration. Thank you for your time. Best, Lauren OlsenMaster’s Candidate Zoo, Aquarium, & Animal Shelter Management Colorado State University From:Lindsay Morgan To:City Leaders Cc:Lindsay Morgan Subject:[EXTERNAL] Preserving the Hughes Property as a Natural Area Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:59:19 AM The City of Fort Collins has the ability and needs to buy this last remaining 165 acres of Hughes Property not only for the sake of the citizens of Fort Collins, but for the multitude of other environmental reasons. We live here because we are avid outdoor people who are proud to not just be another city crammed full of houses, buildings, cement and asphalt. It’s been said that the city has considered funding natural space in other cities close by and that would be unthinkable when this is such a gorgeous area right here close by, in our town which desperately needs it.. 8,300 citizens signed petitions to encourage this decision. 25% of the voters signed to put it on the April ballot. The money has already been set aside for open space, recreation related organizations wildlife migration, animal rescue and human sanity/physical and mental health. So far, the city has collected 8 million dollars in taxes since 2015 in an Open Space Fund for this very purchase. Our present natural areas, trails and parks are experiencing excessive use and are becoming overcrowded as our city grows. It’s a sign that we need to make room for our citizens to be able to work out their stress and anxiety with healthy physical activities in beautiful natural spaces. This issue and the efforts made so far by PATHS and the citizens of Fort Collins should not be hidden from view by the City Council, BOG or CSU. In cooperation with impending Climate Change, birds, native pollinators, Yucca, Prairie Sage, Red Tail Hawks, Killdeer, grasses, butterflies, mountain cats, deer and migration corridors that are vital to wild animals it’s a jewel of property that must not be squandered and made available for private consumption and development. Please take this last chance to Save Hughes. Once this precious piece of land is sold and developed with up to 650 private homes, condos, duplexes, apartments and all the buildings and roads to support it we’ll never get it back for the public use, wildlife use and plant use. We are a large collective voice speaking for all these things that have no voice. Please listen and choose to cooperate and join in keeping Fort Collins the special place of earthly values and support our efforts to "Save Hughes”. Please add these comments to the Public Record. Sincerely, Lindsay Morgan Lindsette@comcast.net 2101 Essex Court Fort Collins, CO 80526 From:Lisa P.McDonald To:Emily Gorgol Cc:Ross Cunniff; City Leaders; Jacy Marmaduke Subject:[EXTERNAL] How will you represent your constituents tomorrow? Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 10:23:43 PM Councilwoman Gorgol, I am writing in regards to the City Council meeting tomorrow evening in which a vote will take place to zones Hughes as Public Open Lands. I am fortunate to reside in Councilman Cunniff’s district as he listens to his constituents and votes based on what the majority of us want for our community. I cannot understand why you have not been doing the same for your constituents. I was one of the volunteers that obtained signatures for the petition. I spoke with residents from the southeast to the northwest of Fort Collins, and NOT ONE person wanted to see that land developed. I’ve heard a pitch about “affordable housing” for the area. The new development on the corner of Drake and Overland is selling units for over $400K - - for a townhome. This pretense about affordable housing could destroy the Hughes open space. I hope you remember your constituents tomorrow evening, and that they put their trust in you to represent them in good faith. Your vote will have a lasting impact on this community - what will that impact be? Sincerely, Lisa McDonald From:LuAnn Kainer To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 6:04:58 PM I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space. Our citizens' foresight and dedication to Open Space have allowed us to collect over $8 million each year for the last 5 years for this restricted purpose. I want our Open Space tax used to preserve Hughes for its present and future citizens, for wildlife, for climate action, for posterity as one of the city's iconic places. Sincerely, LuAnn Kainer From:Martha Roden To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Zoning Initiative Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 3:18:00 PM Dear City Leaders, I strongly urge you to adopt the Hughes Open Space Zoning Initiative. We need to expand our Public Open Lands in Fort Collins by acquiring the Hughes Stadium Property. That way, the property can be used for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Why not use our Open Space dollars to purchase this land “in our own backyard”? I believe that in these days of the pandemic, the opportunity to be in nature is even more important than ever. Everyone needs affordable access to nature, and the Old Hughes Stadium land is a perfect location for such access. When I think of all the land that has been lost over the past 30 years of my life in Fort Collins, I feel very sad. Housing tracts have moved across the open landscape like an advancing army. Mature cottonwoods have been cut down to widen roads. Open fields have been bull-dozed, and wildlife have suffered. I believe the last thing we need is more housing sprawling into the foothills, harming existing green space, increasing traffic, and destroying the view of the foothills. Keeping that land open is of paramount importance to wildlife and humans alike! Martha Roden -- Martha Roden Contract Technical Writer, Instructional Designer, and Usability Specialist (970) 225-2572 (landline) martharoden@gmail.com “Making the complex simple” From:Martha Zook To:City Leaders; Darin Atteberry Cc:Carrie Daggett; Jacy Marmaduke; marc.sallinger@9news.com; next@9news.com; jesse@coloradosun.com; moe@coloradosun.com Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zoning of Hughes property Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 5:54:54 PM Dear City Council, On one of the Saturday’s that I volunteered to gather signatures for the petition at the Farmers Market, a gentleman by the name of Michael Maxwell, a descendant of the “Maxwell” family stopped by my table to let me know he and his family drove down from Red Feather Lakes to sign our petition. Even though he knew his signature may not be counted towards the numbers, he wanted to make sure the City knew his signature was on the petition. He and the rest of the Maxwell family strongly feel that CSU should do what is right and give the land back to the community. We didn’t just get signatures from folx near the area, no, people from all over Fort Collins came to sign. Even people who recently moved from out of State who indicated Open Space was one of the reasons they chose Fort Collins over neighboring cities. Council… You have the Power to shape this city to be the best sought-after city in the state,but you also have the power to ruin and destroy it if you allow this mass-build to happen.  If you have not driven by Overland and Drake St, I urge you to go take a drive and take a look at the mass clustered build of townhomes that are right next to the Holiday Drive-inn theatre. The homes are “starting” in the mid $400’s and you tell me that a home by the foothills and closer to the lake, with the gorgeous scenery in their backyard is going to be cheaper “more affordable and/or attainable” than those across the street? You mean to tell me that the median salary here can afford homes with a price tag starting at $400,000.00+? I don’t think so! The COVID-19 pandemic has given us a renewed sense of appreciation of our open and green spaces. Hughes is the last of the large undeveloped green spaces. It has always been used for a variety of recreational and outdoor activities, including running, walking, bird watching, dog walking, frisbee golf, and winter sledding, to name a few. During the pandemic, open space has proven to be a physical and mental lifesaver, quite literally; allowing citizens open space to recreate at, while maintaining social distancing among open air. CSU is trying to stifle the voice of the City Council and the residents of Fort Collins so that we donot have a say in land use decisions within their own city limits. In fact, CSU has used the SPAR process in the past as a loophole to drive their own development agenda and circumvent the will of Fort Collins residents. This sets a dangerous precedent, and CSU must not be allowed to be a bully and a bad neighbor yet again. By supporting this ordinance on Tuesday, 11/17/2020 you will be giving a voice back to the residents of Fort and Collins and claiming your own voice as our representatives in land use decisions about this, and potentially other properties in the future, that will change the character of the town forever and for future generations. We gathered more than 8,000 signatures of the required 3,280 that were needed to get the petition on the ballot. As our representative decision makers, I ask that you show your support for citizen engagement, as we have clearly asked the Council repeatedly on multiple occasions to save Hughes as Open Space and vote in line with the overwhelming sentiment of your constituents and adopt this citizen’s initiative. Sincerely, Todd & Martha Zook From:Mary Chambers To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Property Buy it! Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:09:32 AM City Council: Please make the following comments part of record for the Hughes Stadium Property November 17, 2020 agenda item. Adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative Outright! Citizens are very supportive of this initiative. Over 8000 signed the petition for this ballot initiative. CSU’s effort to use SPAR is misguided. It was designed for public buildings not property they are selling to another entity for private residential house. Don’t let them do it. Fort Collins should buy the Hughes Stadium Property even if it costs more than other lands that are miles away. The Hughes Stadium property, where CSU is proposing 650 new units of housing is open space within the city that would be more accessible to citizens and really needed as Fort Collins grows and gets more crowded. I supported all the open space tax measures, but expected purchases to be in my backyard, not someone else’s. In January, the City announced that they were spending over $1,500,000 on another property near Red Mountain Open Space and Soapstone Prairie Natural Area. Meanwhile, developers build nothing but high density housing here. I see no announcements of purchase of open spaces within the city boundaries to match the demand that developers are creating by packing people in here like canned sardines. I have been to Soapstone a few times on weekends and the parking lot was nearly empty. Meanwhile, open spaces within the city have been crowded— even on week days. Hughes would provide more open space that will be used by citizens. Mark Twain said, “Buy land. They don’t make it anymore.” It is true here. Once land is developed, we lose open space opportunity. The Hughes Stadium property is great opportunity. Fort Collins should buy it. Adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative outright! As much support as this petition has gained, you’ll have to do it anyway. Mary Ann Chambers 2437 Hollingbourne Dr. Fort Collins CO. 80526 970 690 7954 From:Melanie Clark To:Delynn Coldiron Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 12:12:43 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Delynn, Please see the below email regarding Hughes. Thank you! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melanie Clark Executive Administrative Assistant City Manager’s Office 970-416-4312 COVID19 Resources For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus For businesses: https://www.fcgov.com/business/ Want to help: https://www.fcgov.com/volunteer/ From: Mary Grant <msgrant026@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 10:40 AM To: Julie Pignataro <jpignataro@fcgov.com>; Ross Cunniff <rcunniff@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Ken Summers <ksummers@fcgov.com>; Kristin Stephens <kstephens@fcgov.com>; Wade Troxell <WTroxell@fcgov.com>; Emily Gorgol <egorgol@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <susan.gutowsky@gmail.com>; Darin Atteberry <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com> Cc: Marc Sallinger <marc.sallinger@9news.com>; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property November 16, 2020 To: Members of the Fort Collins City Council & Darin Atteberry CC: Jacy Marmaduke, Matt Bloom, Marc Sallinger From: Mary Grant (80521) Fort Collins City Council Members, I am asking that you vote to adopt the Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property (Hughes) that has been ratified by the City and will now be an issue in on the April 2021 ballot. The disposition of the Hughes Stadium property has been difficult, frustrating and filled with skepticism on the part of the community. When this process started, I tried to keep an open mind; however, the more I research and the more I learn, I no longer believe that the city has been acting in good faith to serve the community. § I find it extremely odd that this particular property was annexed with no criteria what-so-ever. Are all properties annexed without requirement for the owner to abide by City decisions? The City obligated the community; including financial obligations, with no recourse. Was this intentional or incompetence? § The community has been extremely vocal regarding Hughes and the City, disregarding all feedback, has stuck to their original recommendation of RF and LMN which would meet the wishes of CSU which Mr. Gloss helped to develop as an advisor to CSU and Project manager for the City. Is this a conflict of interest? § I find it interesting that Mr. Atteberry stated in at least two City Council Meetings that he was having ongoing conversations with Mr. Frank; however, CORA requests show no record of those conversations. What position was Mr. Atteberry taking during those conversations. He was quick to wish Mr. Frank well and offer the support of the City once the offer was rejected (this was done in writing). § I am extremely disappointed that the recent negotiation with CSU for the City to purchase the property was a deliberate low-ball offer. Over a year ago, I submitted a redacted copy of the agreement between CSU and Lennar to the City Council (so obviously, the City had access to the information). That document, even with the redactions, showed the value of the agreement was more than $10,000,000. Why was the offer from the City so low? Or, was it just to pacify the community and the City can now say “we tried”? § They DID NOT TRY! The city owns tons of property. Why not offer to swap land, possibly with a cash incentive. A swap which would allow CSU and Lennar to build their development and the City could retain the Hughes property for the entire community. Unfortunately, there are many more instances where the behaviors of the City and some members of the City Council could be interpreted as preferential treatment for CSU. It is time for the City Council to support the wishes of the community and to vote in support of the Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property. It is time to hold the City accountable for this transaction and to negotiate in good faith on behalf of the community. It is time for creativity in developing a solution. The City does have other properties that could be used by the state for their needs. The city needs to preserve open space within the city boarders rather than spending millions on property outside the city limits. Vote in favor of the Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property. Thank you. From:Mary Steiner To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Council City Meeting Tuesday November 17, 2020 Huges Open Space Initiative Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 3:36:20 PM Dear City Council members I am writing to you and please feel free to use my comments at the council meeting on Tuesday November 17, 2020. I live in the Quail Hollow subdivision, I have been a resident of Fort Collins since 1984. When I moved to Fort Collins I loved the open space and the dedication City Council had to respect open space. Our citizens' foresight and dedication to Open Space have allowed us to collect over $8 million each year for the last 5 years for this restricted purpose. With this being said I respectively entreat you as stewards of the citizens of Fort Collins to vote in favor of adopting the keep Hughes Open Space ballot initiative outright. This is supported by the citizens of Fort Collins, these are the same citizens who voted you into your office. As City Council you work for the citizens not CSU. I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space." More than 8,300 people signed our petition. That's 25% of the number of those that last voted in the municipal election. I was one of the citizens who collected signatures. I had the opportunity to talk with the relatives of the family that donated that land to CSU, they were distraught and disappointed to see how their family's wishes were never considered. I want to give you a sense of why I am so passionate about your passing of the keep Huges open space initiative Before I start my workday I get up and either mountain bike or walk my dog up through the trails which are a part of the Huges space. There are 3 trail systems, Pineridge, Maxwell and Horsetooth trails that will be impacted. My husband and I raised our 2 boys here and they came to love the same trails. During the pandemic, open space has proven to be a physical and mental lifesaver. I ask that you walk these trails and talk to the people who utilize these trails to get a sense of their love for this open space. Tony Frank is trying once again to push his agenda, he does not represent the citizens of fort collins you all do. He has spoken about affordable housing. Look at the development right next to the drive in, they start at $400,000, is that affordable? Once you vote on the zoning of development the builder does not have to put affordable housing. With that real estate do you really think the citizens are foolish enough to think affordable housing will be available. The traffic will make it impossible for people to get access to the services they need. KEEP HUGES OPEN SPACE! Look at the outpouring from the citizens over 8300 signatures, that is not counting the people who were in Bellevue, Laporte and these people are also affected. Respect this land and the citizens' wishes. Keep this the Jewel that it is! Respectively Mary Steiner 2927 Brumbaugh Dr. Fort Collins Resident since 1984. Make me stay a proud resident! From:Mary Steiner To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes agenda item for the November 17th meeting Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 3:51:56 PM Attn City Leaders: I am writing to you and please request that my comments be placed in the public record associated with the Hughes agenda item for the November 17th meeting. I live in the Quail Hollow subdivision, I have been a resident of Fort Collins since 1984. When I moved to Fort Collins I loved the open space and the dedication City Council had to respect open space. Our citizens' foresight and dedication to Open Space have allowed us to collect over $8 million each year for the last 5 years for this restricted purpose. With this being said I respectively entreat you as stewards of the citizens of Fort Collins to vote in favor of adopting the keep Hughes Open Space ballot initiative outright. This is supported by the citizens of Fort Collins, these are the same citizens who voted you into your office. As City Council you work for the citizens not CSU. I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space." More than 8,300 people signed our petition. That's 25% of the number of those that last voted in the municipal election. I was one of the citizens who collected signatures. I had the opportunity to talk with the relatives of the family that donated that land to CSU, they were distraught and disappointed to see how their family's wishes were never considered. I spoke with numerous people and heard their stories regarding their family memories and how passionate they are about this land remaining open. I want to give you a sense of why I am so passionate about your passing of the keep Huges open space initiative Before I start my workday I get up and either mountain bike or walk my dog up through the trails which are a part of the Huges space. There are 3 trail systems, Pineridge, Maxwell and Horsetooth trails that will be impacted. My husband and I raised our 2 boys here and they came to love the same trails. During the pandemic, open space has proven to be a physical and mental lifesaver. I ask that you walk these trails and talk to the people who utilize these trails to get a sense of their love for this open space. Tony Frank is trying once again to push his agenda, he does not represent the citizens of fort collins you all do. He has spoken about affordable housing. Look at the development right next to the drive in, they start at $400,000, is that affordable? Once you vote on the zoning of development the builder does not have to put affordable housing. With that real estate do you really think the citizens are foolish enough to think affordable housing will be available. The traffic will make it impossible for people to get access to the services they need. KEEP HUGES OPEN SPACE! Look at the outpouring from the citizens over 8300 signatures, that is not counting the people who were in Bellevue, Laporte and these people are also affected. Respect this land and the citizens' wishes. Keep this the Jewel that it is! Respectively Mary Steiner2927 Brumbaugh Dr.Fort CollinsResident since 1984. Make me stay a proud resident! From:Matt Peters To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Zoning Hughes Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 9:14:21 PM   Fort Collins City Council Members,   I am writing to express my support for zoning Hughes Stadium's previous land site as open space for our community.  I am of the opinion that our city would benefit from more open space and less developments, especially those that are high density and put additional strain on our infrastructure.   Thank you for your time, consideration, and service to our wonderful city.   Regards,   Matt Peters From:Tvcky Gueswell To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Zoning Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 1:12:59 PM Hi my name is Matthew, I just wanted to reach out to you regarding my opinion about the Hughes Stadium area on the west side of town. I know there is a rehab facility in Longmont, but data actually shows that birds and mammals aren’t really brought in from the Fort Collins area. This is because it is quite a drive, so people aren’t really as willing to help certain wildlife because there isn’t anywhere near them that will help. This is why I believe it should remain an open space, and a animal rehab shelter should be built on the land (Northern Colorado Wildlife Center). That way they would be able to expand their abilities and ultimately help more of our precious wildlife. It’s also the perfect place for it, lots of room for the animals to breath and heal. The wildlife is very important to me, and many others here in the city, so I would absolutely love it if I knew that there was somewhere to take animals in need. Thank you so much for listening! -Matthew Gueswell From:Megan Thorburn To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 1:49:27 PM Dear Fort Collins City Council Members, I am writing to urge you to adopt the Hughes Stadium property as open space for the residents of Fort Collins. You have at your disposal millions of dollars collected from the Open Space Tax. Please use these funds to buy this property and protect it in perpetuity. This is exactly the reason why we have these funds earmarked for open space--so that we can acquire these important parcels of land and protect them from being developed. Look along the Front Range of Boulder and then compare that to the Fort Range of Fort Collins. Boulder is a highly educated city with a university just like Fort Collins. The difference is that the residents of Boulder have made it a priority to preserve and protect their open space against encroachment and development. Why has Fort Collins not done the same? Because CSU is acting like a petulant child, a bully, a bad neighbor. They are trying to intimidate Fort Collins city leaders so they can get their way. This needs to stop. The residents of this city have spoken. Over 8,000 people are in support of keeping Hughes Stadium for open space. On a personal note, I grew up in Fort Collins. I love this city, but it has been going through growing pains. The Fort Collins of my childhood is gone, but I want to preserve the Fort Collins of today for my children's future. Thank you for your support in this important matter. Megan Thorburn Fort Collins resident From:Melody Reed To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] HUGHES OPEN SPACE AGENDA ITEM Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 4:48:11 AM Please designate this land as open space and preserve the history of this land. Thank you, Melody K Reed 898 Sunchase Dr, Fort Collins, CO 80524 970-227-2480 From:Michael Feldhousen To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:34:19 AM We have been following the various CSU Stadium Land Use proposals over the past year. It seems that it has been very difficult to create a plan that has widespread public consensus. Given the important location of the area, it would seem that this consensus is critical. It is also clear that the land density issues in this area are very important to a widely based group of numerous citizens of Fort Collins as well. While available development land is becoming increasing sparse in the city, there remains enough other options that would preclude the necessity of any sort of density development in this strategic location. The public has sponsored a tax revenue based funding for natural areas so that strategic land purchases are supported by funding. If not here, where would such monies be better used? To take these issues into account, we support the citizen initiative to: Zone Hughes as Public Open Land Pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources bututilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax Thank you for the opportunity to comment, Mike & Marilyn Feldhousen District 3 Citizen Advocates     Sent from Mail for Windows 10   From:Michela Dunbar To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Open Space Date:Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:16:04 PM Dear Councilmembers, My name is Michela Dunbar. I am a Junior at CSU studying Zoology. I have been in the field of wildlife rehabilitation for over two years now, and I wanted to express to you all the extraordinary need for rehabilitation in Northern Colorado, and Fort Collins specifically. Daily, I see injured or orphaned animals that have no where to go and Fort Collins residents that have no where to bring them. The community, both people and animals, desperately need an established rehabilitation center that is accessible and capable of handling Colorado's diverse number of species. Northern Colorado Wildlife Center could be that place. Currently, we not only directly rehabilitate Northern Colorado's reptiles and amphibians, but also provide valuable education and involvement opportunities to the community. With adequate space, NCWC could provide much-needed help to birds and mammals as well. That brings me to the Hughes Stadium Open Space. As you all well know by now, Fort Collins residents have overwhelmingly expressed support for the non-development of the space. There are so many reasons, that I'm sure you have heard and will continue to hear via emails and in this week's upcoming meeting, to keep the space open. A wildlife rehabilitation center is one of those reasons. I urge you to consider not just my words, but the words of so many others that have repeatedly asked you to keep Hughes open. I urge you not to wait until April when the people will without a doubt repeat in the polls what they have already expressed to you directly. Your loyalty should not lie with CSU, Tony Frank, or Lennar Homes, but with the everyday people who live and spend in Fort Collins. The public wants to be able to see and walk the beautiful landscape and to enjoy the wonders of nature. We don't want, or need, housing. I ask you, listen to the people you're meant to serve. Listen to the needs of the community and the needs of Northern Colorado's ecosystems. I ask you to adopt the Hughes Ballot initiative outright this Tuesday. Thank you for your time and consideration, Michela Dunbar From:Mike Sherman To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes “Open Space” Voter Initiative Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 11:55:29 AM To Fort Collins City Council members and staff liaison, As a Fort Collins resident and property owner since 1990, I STRONGLY RECOMMEND every member to vote to accept the Hughes "Open Space" Voter Initiative and to Zone the Hughes Property as "Open Space." There are many reasons/arguments to secure this property as Open Space and not continued housing developments. I will keep this message brief and assume you are well-read on the reasons for my recommendation. Thank you, Michael Michae W. Sherman 301 S Sherwood St. Fort Collins, CO 80521 From:Nancy Stout To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Vote yes to adopt the Hughes ordinance Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:37:27 AM I am a new resident to the city of Fort Collins and will soon be eligible to vote in the city. I am writing to ask you to vote to enact the Citizen- initiated ordinance to zone the Hughes Stadium land as public open land, preserving it as open space. Thank you, Nancy Stout Wells Fargo Drive From:Nathan Teich To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Adopt Hughes Ballot Initiative Outright Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:31:03 PM Hello, Open space is a critical investment for the city Fort Collins. Open space is extremely popular with Fort Collins residents, provides crucial habitat and habitat connectivity for plants and animals, and yields significant ecosystem services. For these reasons, and many more, it is vital for the city council of Fort Collins to adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative, preserving the former Hughes stadium area as open space. The opportunity for new open space in Fort Collins is rapidly dwindling, and while there are worthy conservation areas outside of city limits, the chance to preserve the Hughes stadium area for recreation and habitat is simply one the city council can not pass up. The ballot initiative alone should show the council the popularity of this measure, gaining 8k signatures (25% of the municipal vote in 2019) even in the midst of a pandemic! As the front range continues to develop, the opportunity to conserve land for the citizens, both now and in the future, will only get more difficult.There are opportunities for housing elsewhere, there is not another opportunity like this. Thank you, Nate From:Nathan Teich To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Adopt Hughes Ballot Initiative Outright Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:46:19 PM Hello, Open space is a critical investment for the city Fort Collins. Open space is extremely popular with Fort Collins residents, provides crucial habitat and habitat connectivity for plants and animals, and yields significant ecosystem services. For these reasons, and many more, it is vital for the city council of Fort Collins to adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative, preserving the former Hughes stadium area as open space. The opportunity for new open space in Fort Collins is rapidly dwindling, and while there are worthy conservation areas outside of city limits, the chance to preserve the Hughes stadium area for recreation and habitat is simply one the city council can not pass up. The ballot initiative alone should show the council the popularity of this measure, gaining 8k signatures (25% of the municipal vote in 2019) even in the midst of a pandemic! As the front range continues to develop, the opportunity to conserve land for the citizens, both now and in the future, will only get more difficult.There are opportunities for housing elsewhere, there is not another opportunity like this. I would like for my comments to be added to the public record for the Nov 17th Hughes agenda item. Thank you, Nate On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 6:30 PM Nathan Teich <nate.teich@gmail.com> wrote: Hello, Open space is a critical investment for the city Fort Collins. Open space is extremely popular with Fort Collins residents, provides crucial habitat and habitat connectivity for plants and animals, and yields significant ecosystem services. For these reasons, and many more, it is vital for the city council of Fort Collins to adopt the Hughes Ballot Initiative, preserving the former Hughes stadium area as open space. The opportunity for new open space in Fort Collins is rapidly dwindling, and while there are worthy conservation areas outside of city limits, the chance to preserve the Hughes stadium area for recreation and habitat is simply one the city council can not pass up. The ballot initiative alone should show the council the popularity of this measure, gaining 8k signatures (25% of the municipal vote in 2019) even in the midst of a pandemic! As the front range continues to develop, the opportunity to conserve land for the citizens, both now and in the future, will only get more difficult.There are opportunities for housing elsewhere, there is not another opportunity like this. Thank you, Nate From:Nick Lieurance To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:50:05 AM Dear City Council: I'm a Fort Collins resident and a neighbor of the former Hughes Stadium. In fact, I've lived right on the northern border of the property for 11 years. All that separates my backyard from Hughes is a chainlink fence. And I watch every day as people use this land for recreation. They bring their dogs here, jog here, fly kites, watch the stars, and enjoy the unobstructed view of the foothills. I was thrilled to learn that PATHs was successful in obtaining enough valid signatures on their petition to make Hughes an open space. And now I hear that our city council might take early action to rezone and acquire the property for that purpose, instead of waiting for voters to decide in April. That's great news. I ask you to adopt the PATHs initiative into city ordinance now. It's important that we act immediately. We must move before CSU undermines our efforts to preserve this treasured land. Thank you. Sincerely, Nick Lieurance 3101 Sumac Street Fort Collins, CO 80526 From:PATHS FoCo To:City Leaders; City Clerk Office; Delynn Coldiron; Susan Gutowsky; Julie Pignataro; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; Ross Cunniff; Emily Gorgol; Wade Troxell Subject:[EXTERNAL] Please Vote to ADOPT the Citizen-initiated Zoning Ordinance for Hughes TONIGHT Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:00:00 PM Attachments:PATHS_Letter_to_Council_Hughes_Initiative_2020-11-17.pdf Please add this email and attached letter to the record for Agenda Item #13 for the Nov 17, 2020 Council meeting. Letter to City Council Citizens Initiative to Zone the Hughes Parcel as Public Open Lands November 17, 2020 Dear City Council Members, The members and volunteers of Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS) are writing to you today to request that you move to adopt our Citizen-Initiated Ordinance to zone the Hughes stadium parcel Public Open Lands (P-O-L) at tonight’s City Council meeting. By now it should be clear to you how deeply Fort Collins’ residents care about protecting and preserving Hughes for our community, for future generations, and for our local wildlife that are faced with shrinking habitat in our city. We strongly believe that no other parcel of land in Fort Collins has as much conservation value as the Hughes parcel. Hughes’ legacy and history before CSU controlled the land is as native tribal land, and more recently the Maxwell family property and farmland, and it deserves to be protected for posterity. Furthermore, Hughes is situated between two of our most popular and most visited Natural Areas in the Fort Collins Natural Areas system: Pineridge and Maxwell Natural Areas. On any given day, the parking lots, trail heads, and trails of these two designated Natural Areas are crowded and packed with recreators. We are loving our natural areas to death. We should be doing all we can to EXPAND and EXTEND and CONNECT our open spaces. It is extremely rare that a parcel like Hughes becomes available to do just that, EXTEND, EXPAND, and CONNECT currently-existing Natural Areas and open space. We cannot think of a better use of our voter-approved open space sales tax revenue, and our fellow Fort Collins residents have said as much over and over again. We will lose this once in a lifetime opportunity forever if YOU do not take courageous action tonight to zone Hughes open space within 30 days by adopting the citizen-initiated zoning ordinance that will zone Hughes Public Open Lands. The task of undertaking and organizing a citizens initiative is not easy at any given time, or by any stretch of the imagination. It’s a full time operation. But one thing is for certain: you should never doubt the dedication that exists when it comes to protecting this special and unique parcel. PATHS members and volunteers persevered through a COVID-19 pandemic, unpredictable weather, and exposure to the ever-present hazardous smoke and ash pouring from the largest wildfires in Colorado’s history. The keys to our success were the tidal wave of support we experienced from our fellow Fort Collins residents, so many of whom indisputably want to see this land conserved, and the indefatigable energy from our amazing and powerful army of volunteers. Our volunteers worked tirelessly to collect THOUSANDS of signatures from Fort Collins voters, and voters went out of their way to find us at our locations which were announced daily on social media and our website. Despite the elements and challenges we faced, we collected well over 8,300 sufficient signatures; That’s more than 25% of the total number of voters in the last Fort Collins city election (32,800), when we only needed 10%! We turned in more than enough signatures to reach the magic number of 3,280 VALIDATED voter signatures to get the Hughes open space ballot measure on the April 2021 ballot. No more can Hughes open space advocates be dismissed as “Paper Tigers” or be made to feel diminutive by being called “just a vocal minority”. If this citizens’ petition shows you anything, it’s that Fort Collins voters value open space, they want Hughes to be conserved as such, and they want YOU to step up NOW and represent them. There is another more time-sensitive and alarming reason you need to vote YES today to adopt our Hughes open space ordinance. Almost immediately after our petition was certified by the City Clerk, we learned that CSU applied for a Conceptual Review hearing which will take place Thursday morning 11/19/2020, at 10:15 am. CSU intends to abuse the Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process to sell the property to Lennar Homes, an out of state builder with a questionable reputation, to build private structures which do not fall under the appropriate uses of SPAR. CSU leaders are clearly doing this to circumvent the community’s clear wishes about the future of Hughes, despite announcing how proud they are to be “Good Neighbors” and patting themselves on the back for their “Citizen Engagement”. Even more dangerous, the SPAR process entirely usurps and circumvents the authority of the only two entities that are allowed to zone property in Fort Collins: the City Council AND the citizens of Fort Collins by citizens initiative. It is unclear why our own City would adopt code into the land use code that removes the City Council and the citizens of Fort Collins from self-determination and participation in important land use decisions, but alas, in 2014 major changes were made to SPAR that have allowed developments like the on-campus stadium and many other unpopular planning decisions to be rubber stamped, rendering City Council and the Fort Collins electors powerless in SPAR’s land use decisions. While we feel SPAR is an unnecessary and ill-conceived section in our land use code, at least we can point to the examples where it’s application by CSU is appropriate under the code as written. Here are just a few of the problems with SPAR as CSU intends to apply it for the Hughes parcel: SPAR is intended for public entities and improvements to public structures or parcels that are to be owned and operated by a public entity. CSU has entered into a purchase agreement with Lennar Homes, a private developer who will profit off the sale of private homes on this parcel, if CSU gets its development approval via SPAR. This is NOT an applicable use of the SPAR process. Proposed developments that are reviewed under SPAR must align with current zoning of the property in question. Hughes is NOT zoned for any type of development, or for anything else for that matter. By having their proposal reviewed under SPAR, CSU is violating one of the fundamental requirements of permitted uses for this property. SPAR usurps the authority of the City Council, an elected body of representatives, and transfers the power of final approval/disapproval for land use decisions to an unelected body, the Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z Board). Furthermore, SPAR intentionally accelerates the review process and eliminates the right of appeal. Even if the proposal in question is rejected by the P&Z Board, the governing body of the public entity (the CSU BOG in this case) can entirely overrule the P&Z Board’s development review decision by a two-thirds vote. To be clear, this means an external, unelected, non-municipal body can assume full authority for land use decisions in our own City, entirely circumventing our Council, P&Z Board, and developmental review procedures. Council members, this sets such a dangerous precedent, we don’t even know where to begin. Whereas most developmental review processes of the size proposed by CSU for the Hughes parcel generally take on the order of 6 months to complete, SPAR shrinks that timeline to only 60 days. The right to an appeal is an essential democratic right afforded to the citizens in all matters related to land use and other quasi-judicial decisions. However, SPAR strips away that right from the citizens of Fort Collins and OUR governing body (the City Council). This is unacceptable. Fort Collins is a home-rule municipality under which Fort Collins citizens are granted the right to decide how our local government is organized and how land use is decided and implemented. Where home-rule municipal law generally increases control of the local government for land use decisions, SPAR does quite the opposite. Fundamentally, It is a loophole that turns over full authority to an external entity that, under normal circumstances, would have to proceed under the local regulations and developmental review processes, and answer to the local government and citizens of the municipality. Again, SPAR strips these rights from us. We can’t allow this to happen. SPAR must be amended so it does not undermine the authority of our City Council and Fort Collins citizens, sooner rather than later. But, tonight, you can ensure that SPAR does not render us powerless by adopting our citizens-initiated ordinance to zone Hughes public open lands. This Ordinance is a lifeline, if you will, and it needs to be adopted before the 60- day SPAR process for the Hughes parcel commences on this Thursday, November 19th, 2020. In conclusion, we implore you to vote to adopt the Citizens’ Ordinance to zone Hughes as public open lands. Let us begin the process of earnest acquisition negotiations with CSU so that we can begin to heal and move forward from this, at times, tumultuous process. CSU would go a long way in mending and reversing so much of the contempt and animosity it has shown toward the people of Fort Collins around Hughes, as well as the Canvas Stadium development, a wound which is still raw and oozing with bitterness and resentment. And, one last thing about negotiations. If CSU values that parcel at $14 million dollars ($4 million of that due to CSU leadership’s extremely poor decision to pay for up front demolition costs), we want you to know that we are willing to pay that $14 million with a combination of partnerships, certificates of participation, GoCo grants, or even a temporary and small sales tax referred to voters as a last resort. The voters have said this time and time again. Whatever it takes. There is no way we can let this opportunity slip away. And PATHS members and volunteers will continue to fight with every last bit of recourse and strength we can muster to ensure that we conserve Hughes as public open lands for our community now, for future generations, and as unobstructed habitat for our local wildlife. Thank you for listening and representing us, your constituents, in tonight’s deliberations. Sincerely, PATHS Members and Volunteers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Paths Organizing Team Website: https://HughesOpenSpacePetition.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PATHSFoCo/ Donate: https://HughesOpenSpacePetition.com/donate Call/Text: (970) 658-0505‬ 1 Heather Walls From:Sarah Kane Sent:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:18 PM To:Heather Walls; Delynn Coldiron Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Hughes Citizen Initiative This one got caught in my spam filter but I released it and think you may want it for tonight.    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Supervisor, Administration Executive Administrative Assistant to Mayor Wade Troxell City of Fort Collins 970-416-2447 office “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of  local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same  systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” COVID-19 RESOURCES For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus Connect with resources: https://uwaylc.org/ RECURSOS COVID-19 Para miembros de la comunidad: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus Recursos de United Way: https://uwaylc.org/   From: Patricia Babbitt <chaang61@gmail.com>   Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:46 PM  To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; CAO Admin  <caoadmin@fcgov.com>; Delynn Coldiron <DECOLDIRON@fcgov.com>; Kelly DiMartino <KDIMARTINO@fcgov.com>;  Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; tony.frank@colostate.edu; csus_board@mail.colostate.edu;  governorpolis@state.co.us; Jacy Marmaduke <jmarmaduke@coloradoan.com>; Matt Bloom <matt.bloom@kunc.org>;  marc.sallinger@9news.com; next@9news.com; tips@coloradosun.com; jesse@coloradosun.com;  moe@coloradosun.com; samxye@rams.colostate.edu  Subject: [EXTERNAL] [WARNING: SUSPECTED SPAM] Hughes Citizen Initiative    City Council Members,  Before I say more, I want to thank Council Member Cunniff for his spot‐on assessment of how the Hughes  property is being handled by Tony Frank and the CSU Board of Governors. He spoke articulately and accurately  on 10/13/20 pointing out that CSU seemed to make no effort at all to negotiate when city leaders offered to  purchase the Hughes property at fair market value.  I agree that Tony Frank’s actions were a “slap in the face  to the City Council, the voters, and the taxpayers in Fort Collins”.    I am hoping now, that City Council will listen to the 8,300+ concerned citizens who signed the petition to  keep Hughes as Open Space and zone the property accordingly.  In addition to those who signed the petition,  there were countless others who don’t live in within the city limits who said that since CSU is a state property,  which receives a lot of Colorado taxpayer money, they should have some say in this matter.    2 Many Colorado residents as well as non‐residents that I have spoken with over recent months (and years,  actually) have told me that a big reason they come to Fort Collins is to enjoy its open spaces; its restaurants,  stores, and other attractions are a bonus. Last week, one of my former international students from 12 years  ago wrote, “One of the best things I like not in CSU only, but everywhere, is the OPEN SPACE, which usually  helps me to relax and refresh my mind and soul.” Please don’t let Tony Frank fool you; people in Fort Collins  and beyond will benefit much more by keeping this property as Open Space than using it for another  development.  Many people have asked me how CSU can legally sell this property to a private development company when  the land is intended for public use. I have told them that my understanding is that they CAN’T legally do this,  and I have explained why. I won’t go into my explanation now; I believe that all of you, as City Council  members who are paid to understand legal issues that “common people” might not, can see how Tony Frank is  misusing his power and misleading people in Fort Collins and greater Colorado when he threatens to use SPAR  to get his way with the Hughes property.  During the recent Board of Governors meeting, I listened to Frank go on and on about CSU’s fiduciary duties to  citizens of Colorado, the ways in which CSU students and our community could benefit from the proposed  development plans, and how greatly the CSU carbon footprint would be reduced by the development, I  couldn’t help but be reminded of the 1954 classic book called, “How to Lie with Statistics”, by Darrell Huff,  which has been used by educators for years to teach people to watch out for fact manipulators, like Tony  Frank.   I’d like to point out a few RED FLAGS IN FRANK’S ARGUMENT for the Lennar Development:  1) Fiduciary Responsibility to Colorado Citizens Where was CSU’s commitment to fiduciary  responsibility when it decided to build the new stadium???  CSU chose to ignore the outcry of  concerned citizens when it proposed the new stadium, promising that it would be a great revenue  generator and would create no debt for the university.  Now, CSU is counting on shady deals with  Lennar to recoup its losses—even though record numbers of Fort Collins citizens have spoken at City  Council meetings in efforts to keep the land zoned as open space, and the city recently proposed to  help CSU out of its self‐created financial mess by offering to buy the land at market value while  preserving it for use by outdoor lovers from the Fort Collins community and beyond.  2) Students and Our Community Will Benefit from the Proposed DevelopmentYes, a select group  of students and community members could benefit from the proposed development.  However much  larger groups of students, community members, and residents throughout Colorado and beyond‐‐  with valid concerns about the importance of preserving natural wildlife environments—would  greatly benefit if the land were to remain as open space, as would the wildlife living there.  Frank  failed to mention the citizen‐initiated petition which was circulating at the time of the Board of  Governors meeting—probably because he was afraid of the huge number of signatures that were  being gathered.  He probably was also afraid to acknowledge the huge numbers of Colorado citizens  who wanted to sign the petition but were unable to because they weren’t registered to vote within  Fort Collins city boundaries.   3) CSU’s Carbon Footprint Will Be Greatly Reduced by Building the Housing & Commercial  Development with Public Transit  What???  Building this development will reduce the carbon  footprint, but keeping it as a natural open space won’t?  Yep—Frank has mastered the art of lying  with statistics to convince many that “the elimination of an estimated 1.5 million commuting miles annually,  reducing CSU’s carbon footprint by approximately 430 metric tons of carbon dioxide emission per year, about a  3 7% reduction in CSU commuting impact.” (Frank said this about 12 minutes into his sales pitch for option 3,  during the Board of Governor’s meeting).   Honestly, as a person who doesn’t drive and who depends on public  transit, bicycle, or walking to get to work, do errands, and just “get around”, I have been very frustrated and  disgusted on CSU Football Game days when bicycles haven’t been allowed on the MAX because space was  prioritized for football fans to go to and from the Rams games—even though many routine MAX users needed  bicycles on the buses those days for non‐game related responsibilities.    Our City Council has the power to vote in favor of and adopt the citizen initiative to keep the Hughes land  zones as Open Space at the 11/17/2020 City Council Meeting.* A vote for Open Space could help a much,  much larger percentage of people—both residents and non‐residents of Fort Collins; both those with  financial & affordable home challenges and those who are thriving‐‐to benefit physically and emotionally  from this property than a development with (maybe?) a few affordable/attainable homes. I ask that, as  elected representatives of the citizens of Fort Collins, all of you vote to keep this precious parcel of land  zoned as Open Space.  *I would like to request that this email be added to the public record for the 11/17/2020 Hughes Open Space  discussion.  Sincerely,  Patricia K. Babbitt, District 6  From:Tony and Tricia Edridge To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes zoning Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 7:28:42 AM Dear Council members, I would ask that you take notice of the mandate of the residents of Fort Collins and zone Hughes Open Space immediately for our community now, and for future generations. Thank you, Patricia Edridge From:Renee Walkup To:Julie Pignataro; Ross Cunniff; Susan Gutowsky; Wade Troxell; Ken Summers; Emily Gorgol; Kristin Stephens Cc:City Clerk Office Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Vote Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 7:01:10 PM To City Council: As one of the 8,300+ residents who signed the citizen initiative you are considering on November 17, I request that City Council zone Hughes as Public Open Land and purchase this area at a fair market value from Colorado State University. You may use 1/4-cent sales tax funding available through “Open Space Yes” as well as other public and private revenue sources to acquire this property for our City. This parcel of land is too important to our community to become another housing development. The citizen initiative shows that residents of Fort Collins do not want the increased congestion, pollution, and sprawl that development by CSU and Lennar will bring to the Hughes property and to west Fort Collins. They want this area preserved as open space for future generations, and they are looking to City Council to make that a reality by voting to adopt the citizen initiative for Hughes Open Space. The community has spoken and request that Council do the right thing by taking action as requested. I respectfully request that this email message be included in the information presented to Council for this discussion on Tuesday, November 17, 2020. Or, if rescheduled, when Council has Hughes on the calendar. Thank you. Renee Walkup 3514 Pratolina Court Fort Collins, CO 80521 District 5   From:Rian Laub To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Saturday, November 14, 2020 7:22:00 PM My Representatives, I am very excited about the recent ballot initiative to require the City of Fort Collins to purchase the Hughes Open Space from CSU and rezone it permanently as community-accessible open space. This is an important issue for me as a Fort Collins resident, environmental activist, and progressive voter. If the issue is able to be suitably resolved without need for a ballot initiative, so much the better, and I hope you would capitalize on such an opportunity. I expect this issue to largely inform my future local voting behavior and I hope we are aligned in our views on this issue. Thank you for your attention to this matter and I wish you all the best. Respectfully, Rian Laub From:Rich Fisher To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughs (stadium) open space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:38:06 PM I support this strongly and am willing to devote tax money for it Rich Fisher Sent from my iPhone 970-481-7518 From:RICHARD KOMMRUSCH To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes open space Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 10:36:38 PM All, Over the last 20 years, I have hiked many times in the open space near and to the west of Hughes, I would like it to saved as open space. Thank you, Richard Kommrusch From:Rick Parsons To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Zoning Meeting Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 3:48:22 PM WE ARE CONTACTING TO ASK YOU LISTEN TO THE MANDATE OF THE RESIDENTS OF FORT COLLINS, AND ZONE HUGHES OPEN SPACE IMMEDIATELY FOR OUR COMMUNITY NOW, FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, AND FOR OUR WILDLIFE NEIGHBORS. Respectfully, Rick and Diane Parsons 3620 Coneflower Dr. Fort Collins, Co 80521 From:Riley O"conner To:City Leaders; Ross Cunniff; Wade Troxell; Ken Summers; Kristin Stephens; Julie Pignataro; Susan Gutowsky Subject:[EXTERNAL] Huges Open Space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:54:40 AM Esteemed Members of the Fort Collins City Council: Today you have a chance to make history. Today you have a chance to play a substantial role in sculpting the type of city you and the citizens of Fort Collins will live in for generations to come. Please do not relegate Fort Collins to be just another overpopulated, poorly planned city like Jakarta Indonesia where decades of thoughtless planning interventions have led the city to this state where the infrastructural mishaps highlight the poor quality of life. It should be noted that inadequate green and open spaces, extreme traffic congestion, and unplanned urban sprawl have together contributed to the situation in this city. Do not fate Fort Collins to be another Atlanta Georgia, Dhaka Bangladesh with its dystopian urban environment, or Boston Massachusetts where the geographical features that made Boston stand out have disappeared from the city scape to increase developed area. No one wins if the out of state company Lennar is allowed to develop the land. CSU will still mismanage the money they make from the sale of the land, they will still be in the red, tuition prices will still be increased by the maximum allowable amount each semester, and they will still rely on tax-payer funded state funding. With Lennar, no local jobs will be created, there will be no affordable housing, only “attainable” housing. The last bastion of green in Fort Collins west, the last glimmer of happiness, joy and sanity will be bulldozed and lost forever under a blanket of cookie cutter houses and congested traffic. Additional tax revenue? In the long run, open space with its limited upkeep and reduced crime will be much cheaper for the city to maintain. Emily Gorgol, you had approached me in Old Town during your campaign for city council. At that time, you promised to fight for open space within the city. I voted for you based on this conversation. Please honor your campaign promise today. Today, be on the right side of history. Respect the wishes of the citizens you have been given the honor of representing. Vote to keep Huges zoned for open space. With much gratitude in advance, Riley From:Robin Welsh To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium property Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 12:59:34 PM Greetings, I live about a mile east of Hughes Stadium. I birdwatch frequently at Pineridge Natural Area, it is "my patch". Pineridge trails are quite busy, even early in the morning on weekdays! If the Hughes Stadium property is taken off the table as a place for us to recreate, I am afraid that the quality of the habitat at Pineridge will be harmed. The city has the money to purchase the Hughes Stadium property. I want you to use some of the money in the Open Space Fund to purchase the land. Please don't let this property slip away from us! Sincerely, Robin Welsh 2437 Newport Ct. 80526 From:Sandra Hofer To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] November 17th meeting Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 2:47:29 PM Dear Council Members, Well over 8,000 signatures were collected asking to put the Hughes issue on the Fort Collins ballot this spring, allowing the voters to choose whether the City should purchase the land that was Hughes stadium, and zone it for open space. It is clear we are asking that this gem of the city not be destroyed, but kept as an open space that all can enjoy. The people of Fort Collins are speaking, please hear them. You have the ability to adopt and enact Hughes Open Space on November 17th! Please do this. Respectfully, Sandra Hofer From:Sara Anne Tompkins To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes support Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 9:06:02 AM Dear Community Leaders: I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space. Thank you for your support and for listening to our community! Kindly - Sara Anne Tompkins 2901 Michener Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80526 1 Heather Walls From:Sarah Kane Sent:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 12:22 PM To:Heather Walls Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] City Council Meeting - Nov. 17, 2020 - Agenda item 13 - Hughes Stadium Open Space - Ballot Initiative - Rossiter feedback Delynn may have already saved this one, but just wanted to make sure.    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane Supervisor, Administration Executive Administrative Assistant to Mayor Wade Troxell City of Fort Collins 970-416-2447 office “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of  local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same  systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” COVID-19 RESOURCES For all residents: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus Connect with resources: https://uwaylc.org/ RECURSOS COVID-19 Para miembros de la comunidad: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus Recursos de United Way: https://uwaylc.org/   From: Sarah Rossiter <co.denizen+hughes@gmail.com>   Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 11:58 AM  To: City Leaders <CityLeaders@fcgov.com>  Cc: csus_board@mail.colostate.edu; pathsfoco@gmail.com; tony.frank@colostate.edu; Darin Atteberry  <DATTEBERRY@fcgov.com>; Carrie Daggett <CDAGGETT@fcgov.com>; Delynn Coldiron <DECOLDIRON@fcgov.com>;  Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; presofc@colostate.edu; Krista@coloradotrust.org; governorpolis@state.co.us  Subject: [EXTERNAL] City Council Meeting ‐ Nov. 17, 2020 ‐ Agenda item 13 ‐ Hughes Stadium Open Space ‐ Ballot  Initiative ‐ Rossiter feedback    To the City and City Council of Fort Collins  RE: November 17, 2020 Council Meeting - Agenda item 13 - CITIZEN-INITIATED PETITION RELATING TO THE HUGHES STADIUM PROPERTY  Please make this email in its entirety part of the public record regarding the Hughes Open Space.     Dear City Leaders:   Thank you for all the time and attention you have poured into the process of reviewing proposals for the open space land that once hosted Hughes Stadium. I greatly value your consideration and deliberations on our behalf.   2 When I first heard Colorado State University (CSU) had contracted to sell Hughes Stadium land to a Florida developer of residential and commercial properties, my heart sank, my throat constricted, my shoulders tensed and my CQ (cynicism quotient) shot up by 100 points. I felt deeply angry, but beneath that was an even deeper sadness. I share this not to be discouraging; I share it so you can know how viscerally and significantly the matter of open space and connection to nature affects people here. I’m one among many in this regard.  The beauty, spirit and high-plains character of this place, this land around Fort Collins, calls me: I created the sculpture below and named it Colorado years before arriving here.  So you can imagine my absolute wonder upon seeing the spectacular geology and landscape from north of Laporte and Bellvue to Reservoir Ridge, above along Horsetooth Reservoir or below through the Hughes Stadium open space, and beyond to the Blue Sky Trail and Devil’s Backbone.   That corridor is the heart of this place. The hearts, minds, bodies and spirits of the people who live here need it.   We need it to inspire us.   We need it to awe us.   We need it to soothe us.   We need it to teach us.   We need it to connect us with nature, each other and our truest selves.  We need it to remind us of what’s important, precious and worth protecting in this world.   Please don’t mistake what’s at stake for a simple (or not so simple) money-making opportunity.   Please take a vital step in preserving the entirety of Hughes open space land—today—by voting to adopt the ballot initiative to rezone it as Public Open Space within 30 days. The 8,300-signatures submitted far surpassed the 3,280 minimum required to secure the initiative’s place on the April 2021 ballot: a clear signal local voters support this action now and will do so then.   3 While I understand the CSU system and Board of Governors have plenary jurisdiction over the Hughes land, I fundamentally question the use of a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process in this case. Therefore, I also ask you to disallow the SPAR process in CSU’s pursuit of residential and mixed-use commercial development on that land. The project clearly does not meet Land Use Code Section 2.1.3 (E) (2) applicability criteria: public buildings or structures.   CSU, a state educational institution, invoking SPAR to bypass City and citizen approvals in order to enable a Florida developer to build a private, for-profit residential and mixed-use commercial development is tantamount to using eminent domain to build a shopping mall. Not OK. Not ethical. Not collaborative. Not committed to the full meaning of community and public good. Not respectful of the fact that our tax dollars, my tax dollars as a resident and small businessperson, will be used to provide infrastructure and support services for this development, should it proceed. I disagree with unelected officials having the power to financially obligate the City of Fort Collins and its residents in this way.   While some may suggest we’re on an irreversible path and the University has no choice but to cash in on Hughes Stadium land to pay the bills during trying times of COVID19, let’s not burn the piano to heat the house. I believe the collective we of Fort Collins is more resourceful, innovative and sustainability minded than that. We can find another way.  Please vote to adopt the Hughes Open Space ballot initiative today and disallow SPAR in this case.   Thank you and best regards,  Sarah Rossiter Fort Collins resident, District 4  _______________________________________________________  CC: Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS)  Darin Atteberry - City Manager  Carrie Daggett - City Attorney  DeLynn Coldiron - City Clerk  Kelly DiMartino - Deputy City Manager  Sarah Kane - Executive Administrative Assistant  Amy Hahn - Co-president - Family Nature Summits  Colorado State University - Board of Governors  Colorado State University - Office of the President  Tony Frank - CSU Chancellor  State of Colorado - Office of the Governor  Krista Martinez - Community Partner, Colorado Trust    ADDENDUM  Health  Access to open spaces and nature is fundamentally necessary for human and community health. Witness the surge in visits to parks, natural areas and open spaces in Fort Collins, Larimer County and across the country during COVID19.   Our existing natural areas, trails, and parks are being “loved to death,” suffering from excessive use and overcrowding driven by ongoing development in our area, combined with recreational tourism.   To maintain our outdoors-loving quality of life in Fort Collins and the ecosystem that supports us, I think we need to stay ahead of development in our open-space expansion and preservation. In the Montava development alone, we will have 4,000 new homes built north of Fort Collins. While it’s convenient to think the 4 green space included in that development will be sufficient for those who live there, in reality, those residents— as many as 10,000 people—will also recreate in other open spaces in Fort Collins and throughout Larimer County.   I see and appreciate that CSU, Lennar and the City of Fort Collins have all designed green, open or natural spaces into the respective residential/commercial development plans. However, for land in this vital nature corridor, I think it’s a first principles question. Rather than asking, “Shall we build a development in Way A or Way B?” and “Where shall we put open space in this development?” it’s instead, “Shall we develop this particular land at all?”   Social justice  This is about not only health but also social justice. Not everyone has a car to drive to the mountains or the plains. Having open spaces readily accessible within walking, biking or easy busing distance—for residents including students—demonstrates our commitment to keeping nature accessible to everyone who lives in Fort Collins and the surrounding areas.   The idea that we must choose between having affordable housing and having open space in Fort Collins is a false dichotomy. These are not opposites. And in this case, the suggestion that the CSU-Lennar development will provide affordable housing is a false carrot.   In his letter to city manager Darin Atteberry, CSU chancellor Tony Frank wrote:  These [affordable housing] problems are especially acute for the approximately 1,600 CSU employees who, while they now make a living wage, are still at or below 80% of the average mean income for our community — nearly one-third of our workforce.  Building more houses for the local pool at large is a dilute way to address this problem. CSU can also subsidize living costs for ALL low-paid employees, no matter where they live, by giving them a raise, providing living-cost stipends, or offering other benefits that offset living expenses.   Restorative justice  How have and will first-wave Native Americans be proactively and actively included in determining this plan, the future of this land? For a land-grant institution to auction open-space land to a real estate developer at this time in history… At worst, it’s another colonizing act. At best, it’s a missed opportunity for leadership in catalytic, restorative action by involving the Cheyenne, Arapaho and Ute nations in stewardship of their ancestral lands in the present day. Let’s make restorative justice part of our open-space, land-trust plan.       From:Sarah Rossiter To:City Leaders Cc:csus_board@mail.colostate.edu; pathsfoco@gmail.com; tony.frank@colostate.edu; Darin Atteberry; Carrie Daggett; Delynn Coldiron; Sarah Kane; presofc@colostate.edu; Krista@coloradotrust.org; governorpolis@state.co.us Subject:[EXTERNAL] City Council Meeting - Nov. 17, 2020 - Agenda item 13 - Hughes Stadium Open Space - Ballot Initiative - Rossiter feedback Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 11:57:58 AM Attachments:image.png To the City and City Council of Fort Collins RE: November 17, 2020 Council Meeting - Agenda item 13 - CITIZEN-INITIATED PETITION RELATING TO THE HUGHES STADIUM PROPERTY Please make this email in its entirety part of the public record regarding the Hughes Open Space. Dear City Leaders: Thank you for all the time and attention you have poured into the process of reviewing proposals for the open space land that once hosted Hughes Stadium. I greatly value your consideration and deliberations on our behalf. When I first heard Colorado State University (CSU) had contracted to sell Hughes Stadium land to a Florida developer of residential and commercial properties, my heart sank, my throat constricted, my shoulders tensed and my CQ (cynicism quotient) shot up by 100 points. I felt deeply angry, but beneath that was an even deeper sadness. I share this not to be discouraging; I share it so you can know how viscerally and significantly the matter of open space and connection to nature affects people here. I’m one among many in this regard. The beauty, spirit and high-plains character of this place, this land around Fort Collins, calls me: I created the sculpture below and named it Colorado years before arriving here. So you can imagine my absolute wonder upon seeing the spectacular geology and landscape from north of Laporte and Bellvue to Reservoir Ridge, above along Horsetooth Reservoir or below through the Hughes Stadium open space, and beyond to the Blue Sky Trail and Devil’s Backbone. That corridor is the heart of this place. The hearts, minds, bodies and spirits of the people who live here need it. We need it to inspire us. We need it to awe us. We need it to soothe us. We need it to teach us. We need it to connect us with nature, each other and our truest selves. We need it to remind us of what’s important, precious and worth protecting in this world. Please don’t mistake what’s at stake for a simple (or not so simple) money-making opportunity. Please take a vital step in preserving the entirety of Hughes open space land—today—by voting to adopt the ballot initiative to rezone it as Public Open Space within 30 days. The 8,300-signatures submitted far surpassed the 3,280 minimum required to secure the initiative’s place on the April 2021 ballot: a clear signal local voters support this action now and will do so then. While I understand the CSU system and Board of Governors have plenary jurisdiction over the Hughes land, I fundamentally question the use of a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process in this case. Therefore, I also ask you to disallow the SPAR process in CSU’s pursuit of residential and mixed-use commercial development on that land. The project clearly does not meet Land Use Code Section 2.1.3 (E) (2) applicability criteria: public buildings or structures. CSU, a state educational institution, invoking SPAR to bypass City and citizen approvals in order to enable a Florida developer to build a private, for-profit residential and mixed-use commercial development is tantamount to using eminent domain to build a shopping mall. Not OK. Not ethical. Not collaborative. Not committed to the full meaning of community and public good. Not respectful of the fact that our tax dollars, my tax dollars as a resident and small businessperson, will be used to provide infrastructure and support services for this development, should it proceed. I disagree with unelected officials having the power to financially obligate the City of Fort Collins and its residents in this way. While some may suggest we’re on an irreversible path and the University has no choice but to cash in on Hughes Stadium land to pay the bills during trying times of COVID19, let’s not burn the piano to heat the house. I believe the collective we of Fort Collins is more resourceful, innovative and sustainability minded than that. We can find another way. Please vote to adopt the Hughes Open Space ballot initiative today and disallow SPAR in this case. Thank you and best regards, Sarah Rossiter Fort Collins resident, District 4 _______________________________________________________ CC: Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS) Darin Atteberry - City Manager Carrie Daggett - City Attorney DeLynn Coldiron - City Clerk Kelly DiMartino - Deputy City Manager Sarah Kane - Executive Administrative Assistant Amy Hahn - Co-president - Family Nature Summits Colorado State University - Board of Governors Colorado State University - Office of the President Tony Frank - CSU Chancellor State of Colorado - Office of the Governor Krista Martinez - Community Partner, Colorado Trust ADDENDUM Health Access to open spaces and nature is fundamentally necessary for human and community health. Witness the surge in visits to parks, natural areas and open spaces in Fort Collins, Larimer County and across the country during COVID19. Our existing natural areas, trails, and parks are being “loved to death,” suffering from excessive use and overcrowding driven by ongoing development in our area, combined with recreational tourism. To maintain our outdoors-loving quality of life in Fort Collins and the ecosystem that supports us, I think we need to stay ahead of development in our open-space expansion and preservation. In the Montava development alone, we will have 4,000 new homes built north of Fort Collins. While it’s convenient to think the green space included in that development will be sufficient for those who live there, in reality, those residents—as many as 10,000 people—will also recreate in other open spaces in Fort Collins and throughout Larimer County. I see and appreciate that CSU, Lennar and the City of Fort Collins have all designed green, open or natural spaces into the respective residential/commercial development plans. However, for land in this vital nature corridor, I think it’s a first principles question. Rather than asking, “Shall we build a development in Way A or Way B?” and “Where shall we put open space in this development?” it’s instead, “Shall we develop this particular land at all?” Social justice This is about not only health but also social justice. Not everyone has a car to drive to the mountains or the plains. Having open spaces readily accessible within walking, biking or easy busing distance—for residents including students—demonstrates our commitment to keeping nature accessible to everyone who lives in Fort Collins and the surrounding areas. The idea that we must choose between having affordable housing and having open space in Fort Collins is a false dichotomy. These are not opposites. And in this case, the suggestion that the CSU-Lennar development will provide affordable housing is a false carrot. In his letter to city manager Darin Atteberry, CSU chancellor Tony Frank wrote: These [affordable housing] problems are especially acute for the approximately 1,600 CSU employees who, while they now make a living wage, are still at or below 80% of the average mean income for our community — nearly one-third of our workforce. Building more houses for the local pool at large is a dilute way to address this problem. CSU can also subsidize living costs for ALL low-paid employees, no matter where they live, by giving them a raise, providing living-cost stipends, or offering other benefits that offset living expenses. Restorative justice How have and will first-wave Native Americans be proactively and actively included in determining this plan, the future of this land? For a land-grant institution to auction open-space land to a real estate developer at this time in history… At worst, it’s another colonizing act. At best, it’s a missed opportunity for leadership in catalytic, restorative action by involving the Cheyenne, Arapaho and Ute nations in stewardship of their ancestral lands in the present day. Let’s make restorative justice part of our open- space, land-trust plan. From:Sarah Grace Schooley To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:12:24 AM Dear Fort Collins City Council, I support the citizen initiative to (1) zone Hughes as Public Open Land and (2) pay CSU a fair market value using any public and/or private funding sources but utilizing in particular the dedicated quarter cent sales tax -- Open Space Yes! -- for acquiring Hughes as an addition to our City's open space. Thank you for protecting land that make our community special. Sarah Schooley 773-704-4408 From:scott musser To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Nov 17th VOTE TO ZONE HUGHES LAND AS OPEN SPACE NOW! PLEASE REPRESENT YOUR COMMUNITY! Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:46:54 PM Please listen to the community you represent and vote to zone Hughes land as open space now! As you know that is what the citizens of Fort Collins want and need. You have been elected by the people!!!!! Thank you, ~~~Scott and family From:Simon Lee To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Stadium Zoning Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 7:12:57 AM Please vote to adopt the Hughes Stadium zoning measure on Nov 17th. A concerned citizen. Thanks, Simon Lee, Bellvue, CO From:Sue Milcan To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space/Public Lands Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 8:38:04 AM Hello, I am writing to you, my representatives, to please vote tonight to zone Hughes as open space/public lands. This area is the gateway to the Foothills for Ft. Collins and deserves special consideration. The western access and view are what I believe make our city unique and beautiful. There are so many reasons to make this zoning dedication: our wildlife, our recreation, our environmental stewardship, and also the demonstrated wish of the people through many years now of public meetings and public comments, culminating in the citizens petition. There are many building sites for affordable housing within our city, especially development of brownfields along existing transit corridors. There is no need to develop this precious land. Decades ago, we had brave council members and city leaders who fought for open space within our city boundaries and helped create the open space and trail systems we enjoy today. Tonight is your chance to add to this legacy. Please vote to designate Hughes open space/public lands for today and future generations. Thank you, Sue Milcan From:Susan Dominica To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] [WARNING: SUSPECTED SPAM] Hughes Open Space Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:09:22 PM Dear City Council: Please listen to the citizens of Fort Collins regarding the use of the former Hughes Stadium property. This needs to be kept as open space to preserve the natural beauty of our foothills. The land must be preserved for the community, wildlife habitat and for future generations. The citizens were not listened to regarding preserving the former stadium - Hughes Stadium was in a unique and beautiful setting. Instead, CSU built an enormous stadium in one of the busiest parts of town. Please listen to the citizens of Fort Collins now regarding the use of this property. We do not have the infrastructure to handle more traffic on Overland, Drake & Prospect Roads. Thank you. Susan Susan Dominica From:Tallon Nightwalker To:City Leaders Cc:Kate Boyd Subject:[EXTERNAL] Wildlife Rehabilitation should be at Hughes Stadium Date:Sunday, November 15, 2020 4:06:46 PM City Council, It has been so great to work with you throughout this zoning decision process, and I am so happy that we were able to hear from the citizens of Fort Collins through our petition. This has clearly shown that the citizens of Fort Collins want the Hughes Stadium site to be zoned for open space and wildlife rehabilitation. With only 5 acres being needed for an expanded wildlife rehabilitation center, this is very reasonable. With these 5 acres we could bring bird and mammal rehabilitation back to our Northern Colorado communities. With this facility will come jobs, volunteerism, and internship opportunities for all people including youth, elderly, disabled, and students. The Hughes Stadium site is perfect because it allows us to do all of this while having public transportation access, being centrally located for people who find animals in need, and in close proximity to our community partners including Colorado State University, CSU's Vet Hospital, Front Range Community College, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, and many of the Poudre School District schools. Having a place our community members can come save thousands of wildlife patients a year, the same wildlife they see in their backyards every day, is an incredibly unique aspect of a community, and the Fort Collins residents have clearly stated through the petition that this is what they want for the Hughes Stadium land. Please enter my comments in public record. Thank you! Tallon Nightwalker President of Northern Colorado Wildlife Center Licensed Wildlife Rehabilitator From:Ted Manahan To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Zoning Initiative Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 3:25:53 PM Hello City Leaders, I am writing to encourage you to enact the Hughes Open Space zoning initiative that will be on the agenda tomorrow. This land is adjacent to existing open spaces, and is a rare piece of undeveloped flat land adjacent to the foothills. We really don't want another subdivision spoiling our access to and views of the foothills. Plus the disk golfcourse on the property is a real asset to the community! Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Ted Manahan 919 Fossil Creek Parkway Fort Collins, CO 80525 From:Tessa P To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Open Space Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 11:59:37 AM Hello all, I am writing to voice support for the citizens initiative that is hoping to turn the land where Hughes Stadium was into an open space with 5 acres dedicated to a wildlife rehabilitation center. Northern Colorado has been without a wildlife rehabilitation center for quite a few years now, and the services that this center would provide would help many different wildlife species in the area. I know that many residents of Fort Collins appreciate and enjoy our native wildlife, and being able to help them locally would benefit everyone involved. Additionally, keeping this land natural as an open space would provide many opportunities for recreation and allow the area around Horsetooth to remain beautiful and accessible for everyone. Thank you for your time, Tessa Parrish Tessa Parrish B.S. in Zoology Colorado State University From:Thomas Schipper To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] The petition on the former Hughes property Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 1:19:07 PM First of excuse me for not addressing each of you separately being an IT worker supporting many work at home individuals I’ve been very swamped at work lately. Please consider adopting the citizens’ initiative to conserve Hughes as open space when you review the petition tonight. I understand Gayla Maxwell Martinez sent a very well written open letter to the board that has received circulation in other circles. I echo many of the same feeling she expressed in her letter. Mary Ann Chambers letter published in the Coloradoan also does a good job of expressing how I feel about this matter. Thank you for taking the time to read this and taking my views on the importance of keeping at least the majority the former Hughes site open space. Thomas Schipper 3025 W. Stuart St., Apt. D Fort Collins, CO 80526 From:THOMAS L SMITH To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] vot YES to adopt the Hughes ordinance Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 2:54:24 PM From:Tina Vernon To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] PLEASE SAVE OUR HUGHES OPEN SPACE! Date:Friday, November 13, 2020 10:26:16 AM I am writing to let you know that I feel that if we lose our open space where Hughes Stadium is, it will be very SAD! We love that area, we have walked our dog up there many times, we love to go sledding there, it is the best place around and we have even played frisbee golf. As a resident who lives near this area it is especially a concern to me that tons of apartments and housing could be put in there and that space would be lost forever. It would also cause much more congestion on this side of town that we don't need. Fort Collins is special and we have voted to give $ for open spaces, lets use it to save this special area! Many people in Fort Collins agree with me, probably most. PLEASE HELP US SAVE THIS AREA FOR THE PUBLIC TO USE AS OPEN SPACE! Thanks for helping us! -- Tina Vernon NCTM Here is a link to some photos of special times in the open space. We have had lots more great snow fun in area, please help us save it! https://photos.app.goo.gl/XkB28KBgm8hVd8Xd8 From:Tricia MEDLOCK To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Hughes Site Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 7:42:15 PM Have you driven by the people bomb being created at the corner of Drake and Overland? If not please do so. Is this the future of Ft. Collins? Have you tried to park at Bobcat Ridge, or Devil’s Backbone, or Coyote Ridge? These areas are so busy, but the city would ignore pleas for more open space? Have you watched the kids on the sledding hill? Have you seen the cyclists , runners and walkers on the trail parallel to the property? Please, Fort Collins needs this land as open space. Sincerely, Tricia Medlock From my iPad From:Wendy Bonifazi To:City Leaders Subject:[EXTERNAL] Voter Request: Please support Hughes Open Space citizen initiative to protect us from fire, bee failure and mosquitos Date:Monday, November 16, 2020 6:37:09 PM I am writing to urge your support of the Hughes Open Space citizen initiative in order to preserve our safety and a quality of life and health that goes far beyond recreational use and a visual appeal that attracts businesses to our community and provides a sense of community identity. In light of the current dangers of forest fires, I would consider it foolhardy to build a concentration of homes that would be at direct risk from spot fires, and also to create a direct path from the mountains to the larger Fort Collins community. As a former first responder from the Larimer County Medical Reserve Corps and Red Cross, I have served at multiple forest fire sites and provided one-to-one fire mitigation education to hundreds of homeowners AFTER their neighborhoods were burned. I know individuals in Glen Haven and other nearby communities who recently lost their homes as a result of spot fires, Building homes--specifically low- income homes that are typically close together and do no not have the resources to pay for fire mitigation measures--could literally as well as figuratively add fuel to the fires that are now destroying nearby areas of Colorado. Further, our ecosystem depends on green space to sustain increasingly fragile bee populations that are essential to agriculture and the bird populations that are our primary defense against mosquito-borne diseases. Those reasons alone should be sufficient to prevent commercial development of this piece of land. It would be short-sighted to develop this land when there are other open usable spaces that are not adjacent to the foothills and do not have this significance. So often when I visit other communities, I consider how short-sighted they were to develop otherwise appealing natural resources, taking them away from the enjoyment of the entire community in order to serve a few, and make money for an even smaller number. Please do the right thing for our entire community for citizens today and generations to come. Affordable housing can go elsewhere in our community without threatening the health and safety of Fort Collins residents. Please leave a legacy of preservation and safety. -- District 2 VOTER! Wendy L. Bonifazi, RN, CLS, APR 1625 Centennial RD Fort Collins, CO 80525 Letter to City Council Citizens Initiative to Zone the Hughes Parcel as Public Open Lands November 17, 2020 Dear City Council Members, The members and volunteers of Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS) are writing to you today to request that you move to adopt our Citizen-Initiated Ordinance to zone the Hughes stadium parcel Public Open Lands (P-O-L) at tonight’s City Council meeting. By now it should be clear to you how deeply Fort Collins’ residents care about protecting and preserving Hughes for our community, for future generations, and for our local wildlife that are faced with shrinking habitat in our city. We strongly believe that no other parcel of land in Fort Collins has as much conservation value as the Hughes parcel. Hughes’ legacy and history before CSU controlled the land is as native tribal land, and more recently the Maxwell family property and farmland, and it deserves to be protected for posterity. Furthermore, Hughes is situated between two of our most popular ​and​ most visited Natural Areas in the Fort Collins Natural Areas system: Pineridge and Maxwell Natural Areas. On any given day, the parking lots, trail heads, and trails of these two designated Natural Areas are crowded and packed with recreators. We are loving our natural areas to death. We should be doing all we can to EXPAND and EXTEND and CONNECT our open spaces. It is extremely rare that a parcel like Hughes becomes available to do just that, EXTEND, EXPAND, and CONNECT currently-existing Natural Areas and open space. We cannot think of a better use of our voter-approved open space sales tax revenue, and our fellow Fort Collins residents have said as much over and over again. We will lose this once in a lifetime opportunity forever if YOU do not take courageous action tonight to zone Hughes open space within 30 days by adopting the citizen-initiated zoning ordinance that will zone Hughes Public Open Lands. The task of undertaking and organizing a citizens initiative is not easy at any given time, or by any stretch of the imagination. It’s a full time operation. But one thing is for certain: you should never doubt the dedication that exists when it comes to protecting this special and unique parcel. PATHS members and volunteers persevered through a COVID-19 pandemic, unpredictable weather, and exposure to the ever-present hazardous smoke and ash pouring from the largest wildfires in Colorado’s history. The keys to our success were the tidal wave of support we experienced from our fellow Fort Collins residents, so many of whom indisputably want to see this land conserved, and the indefatigable energy from our amazing and powerful army of volunteers. Our volunteers worked tirelessly to collect THOUSANDS of signatures from Fort Collins voters, and voters went out of their way to find us at our locations which were announced daily on social media and our website. Despite the elements and challenges we faced, we collected well over 8,300 ​sufficient​ signatures; That’s more than 25% of the total number of voters in the last Fort Collins city election (32,800), when we only needed 10%! We turned in more than enough signatures to reach the magic number of 3,280 VALIDATED voter signatures to get the Hughes open space ballot measure on the April 2021 ballot. No more can Hughes open space advocates be dismissed as “Paper Tigers” or be made to feel diminutive by being called “just a vocal minority”.​ If this citizens’ petition shows you anything, it’s that Fort Collins voters value open space, they want Hughes to be conserved as such, and they want YOU to step up NOW and represent them. There is another more time-sensitive and alarming reason you need to vote YES today to adopt our Hughes open space ordinance. Almost immediately after our petition was certified by the City Clerk, we learned that CSU applied for a Conceptual Review hearing which will take place Thursday morning 11/19/2020, at 10:15 am. CSU intends to abuse the Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) process to sell the property to Lennar Homes, an out of state builder with a questionable reputation, to build ​private​ structures which do not fall under the appropriate uses of SPAR. CSU leaders are clearly doing this to circumvent the community’s clear wishes about the future of Hughes, despite announcing how proud they are to be “Good Neighbors” and patting themselves on the back for their “Citizen Engagement”. Even more dangerous, the SPAR process entirely usurps and circumvents the authority of the only two entities that are allowed to zone property in Fort Collins: the City Council AND the citizens of Fort Collins by citizens initiative. It is unclear why our own City would adopt code into the land use code that removes the City Council and the citizens of Fort Collins from self-determination and participation in important land use decisions, but alas, in 2014 major changes were made to SPAR that have allowed developments like the on-campus stadium and many other unpopular planning decisions to be rubber stamped, rendering City Council and the Fort Collins electors powerless in SPAR’s land use decisions. While we feel SPAR is an unnecessary and ill-conceived section in our land use code, at least we can point to the examples where it’s application by CSU is appropriate under the code as written. Here are just a few of the problems with SPAR as CSU intends to apply it for the Hughes parcel: ●SPAR is intended for public entities and ​improvements to public structures or parcels​ that are to be owned and operated by a public entity. CSU has entered into a purchase agreement with Lennar Homes, a private developer who will profit off the sale of private homes on this parcel, if CSU gets its development approval via SPAR. ​This is NOT an applicable use of the SPAR process. ●Proposed developments that are reviewed under SPAR must align with current zoning of the property in question. Hughes is NOT zoned for any type of development, or for anything else for that matter. By having their proposal reviewed under SPAR, CSU is violating one of the fundamental requirements of permitted uses for this property. ●SPAR usurps the authority of the City Council, an elected body of representatives, and transfers the power of final approval/disapproval for land use decisions to an unelected body, the Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z Board). Furthermore, SPAR intentionally accelerates the review process and eliminates the right of appeal. ●Even if the proposal in question is rejected by the P&Z Board, the governing body of the public entity (the CSU BOG in this case) can entirely overrule the P&Z Board’s development review decision by a two-thirds vote. ​To be clear, this means an external, unelected, non-municipal body can assume full authority for land use decisions in our own City, entirely circumventing our Council, P&Z Board, and developmental review procedures.​ Council members, this sets such a dangerous precedent, we don’t even know where to begin. ●Whereas most developmental review processes of the size proposed by CSU for the Hughes parcel generally take on the order of 6 months to complete, ​SPAR shrinks that timeline to only 60 days​. ●The right to an appeal is an essential democratic right afforded to the citizens in all matters related to land use and other quasi-judicial decisions. However, SPAR strips away that right from the citizens of Fort Collins and OUR governing body (the City Council). This is unacceptable. ●Fort Collins is a home-rule municipality under which Fort Collins citizens are granted the right to decide how our local government is organized and how land use is decided and implemented. ​Where home-rule municipal law generally increases control of the local government for land use decisions, SPAR does quite the opposite. ​Fundamentally, It is a loophole that turns over full authority to an external entity that, under normal circumstances, would have to proceed under the local regulations and developmental review processes, and answer to the local government and citizens of the municipality. Again, SPAR strips these rights from us. We can’t allow this to happen. SPAR must be amended so it does not undermine the authority of our City Council and Fort Collins citizens, sooner rather than later. ​But, tonight, you can ensure that SPAR does not render us powerless by adopting our citizens-initiated ordinance to zone Hughes public open lands.​ This Ordinance is a lifeline, if you will, and it needs to be adopted before the 60-day SPAR process for the Hughes parcel commences on this Thursday, November 19th, 2020. In conclusion, we implore you to vote to adopt the Citizens’ Ordinance to zone Hughes as public open lands. Let us begin the process of earnest acquisition negotiations with CSU so that we can begin to heal and move forward from this, at times, tumultuous process. CSU would go a long way in mending and reversing so much of the contempt and animosity it has shown toward the people of Fort Collins around Hughes, as well as the Canvas Stadium development, a wound which is still raw and oozing with bitterness and resentment. And, one last thing about negotiations. If CSU values that parcel at $14 million dollars ($4 million of that due to CSU leadership’s extremely poor decision to pay for up front demolition costs), we want you to know that we are willing to pay that $14 million with a combination of partnerships, certificates of participation, GoCo grants, or even a temporary and small sales tax referred to voters as a last resort. The voters have said this time and time again. Whatever it takes. There is no way we can let this opportunity slip away. And PATHS members and volunteers will continue to fight with every last bit of recourse and strength we can muster to ensure that we conserve Hughes as public open lands for our community now, for future generations, and as unobstructed habitat for our local wildlife. Thank you for listening and representing us, your constituents, in tonight’s deliberations. Sincerely, PATHS Members and Volunteers November 16, 2020 Mr. Darin Atteberry, City Manager City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Hughes Stadium Property Initiative Petition Darin: I am writing about the above-referenced petition (the “Petition”), which is being discussed at tomorrow’s City Council meeting. I understand the City Clerk has determined that the Petition contains a sufficient number of signatures to place an initiated measure before the registered electors of the City of Fort Collins at the regular election on April 6, 2021. Also, upon certification and as required by the City Charter, the City Council must either adopt the proposed ordinance within thirty (30) days, or submit the proposed measure to the registered electors of the City. Given the upcoming City Council meeting about the Petition, I am providing you with some information about CSU’s position on behalf of the citizens of the State of Colorado. As you know, the Petition includes two primary components. First, the Petition mandates that “the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property … at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education.” In addition, the Petition provides that “the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district” pursuant to the City’s Land Use Code. The CSU System respects the efforts by those citizens who have championed and signed the Petition , and we understand their desire to turn the Hughes Stadium property into City-owned open space. However, for the reasons stated in the resolution of the Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System on October 9, 2020 (the “Resolution”), the Board of Governors has set forth its public purposes, goals, uses, and plan for the Hughes Stadium property , which includes satisfying the Board’s fiduciary duty to gen erate a financial return from the property to support CSU’s operations and its employees, faculty, and students. The Resolution also describes the Board’s superior authority over its Hughes Stadium property as an entity of the State of Colorado. Under Colorado law and the City’s Land Use Code, the Board has plenary authority over its property. Accordingly, if the Petition is adopted by City ordinance or as a ballot measure and the City Council zones the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands, any such action would not be controlling on CSU given our state authority, and we would continue with our plans for the property as set forth in the Resolution. In addition, I wanted to highlight that the Board’s plans for the Hughes Stadium property, as stated in the Resolution, align with the City Plan and Structure Map that were adopted in April 2019. In contrast, zoning the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands would be contrary to that City Plan and Structure Map. Further, it is worth noting that if the Petition were aimed at a private land holder and sought to derail a planned development by zoning that property as Public Open Lands and devaluing that property in order to generate leverage for the City to acquire that parcel at a reduced fair market value, the City would be creating significant litigation exposure. CSU is moving forward with the City’s Site Plan Advisory Review process in accordance with the City’s Land Use Code and state law, and whether the Petition succeeds or fails under either scenario contemplated by the City Charter, our efforts through the SPAR process would not be impacted. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional information . Sincerely, Dr. Tony Frank Chancellor, Colorado State University System Three requirements for SPAR to apply to a project: • Ownership or operation by public entities • Public building or structure • Aligns with zoning Why is CSU invoking the use of the SPAR? To avoid oversight and local control of their development plans. CSU seeks to expedite approval for their plan by using the SPAR provisions, limiting local review to just 60 days, while also holding the power to overturn a vote of disapproval by the P&Z Board, while the City Council is left entirely powerless and out of the process. Chancellor Tony Frank knows he has unanimous consent of the BOG to pursue this development, so meeting the required 2/3 majority vote to overturn the local planning commission decision is a certainty. Clearly, this is a maneuver to exclude citizen participation in this process, as well as keep an obvious groundswell of public outrage from reaching the ballot in April 2021. This is what we would call “voter suppression” in other circles. When proposed by a private developer such as Lennar, any project the size and complexity of the Hughes property proposal would take more than 6 months to go through the City’s development review and approval process, and be closely scrutinized for its alignment with our Land Use Codes. SPAR circumvents this. If other CSU projects have used the SPAR process, why is it not applicable in this case? The Land Use Code is unambiguous in stating that a Site Plan Advisory Review’s “purpose and effect” is meant for “improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities.” (LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (1)) Furthermore, its applicability is similarly unambiguous: “A Site Plan Advisory Review shall be applied to any public building or structure.” (LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (2) ) As an example, the SPAR for CSU’s proposed surface parking lot at 2400 Research Boulevard (SPA #150002) was approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board. Why? It fit the criteria for Site Plan Advisory Review. The project created improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities (Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System) UandU involved a public building or structure. (LUC §5.1.2 Definitions: Structure shall mean a combination of materials to form a construction for use, occupancy or ornamentation whether installed on, above or below the surface of land or water.) The very important thing is that SPA #150002 aligned with permitted uses for the zone district in which it is located. In this case, District E has parking lots and parking garages, as principal uses, under permitted commercial/retail use. (§ 4.27 (B) (2) (c) (5) ). The criteria:  Ownership or operation by public entities  Public structure  Aligns with zoning Let’s apply the same criteria to the property CSU owns and wants to develop under SPAR, the former Hughes Stadium site: ● Ownership or operation by public entities – Unclear – At the time the development occurs, this property will be owned by Lennar Homes. The contract between CSU and Lennar makes this a reasonable assumption. If CSU achieves its goal of getting its development proposal through the SPAR process, even if it takes an overriding vote by the Board of Governors to do it, but subsequently sells the property with “development rights” to a private for-profit developer, that amounts to gaming the system and obvious abuse of the intent of this LUC provision. ● Public building or structure – Does NOT meet this criteria The development being presented in the Conceptual Review meeting on Thursday, November 19, 2020 is described as residential housing with zoning UE, LMN and MMN (mixed use neighborhood, commercial uses included). Approximately 632 DU (dwelling units) and 34,000 sf commercial. Unlike the Research Boulevard parking lot in SPA #150002 or the Avenir Museum on Lake Street SPA #130003, there are no public structures included in the CSU development proposal for the Hughes property. ● Aligns with zoning – Does NOT meet this criteria Unlike the Avenir Museum (SPA#130003), a community facility with a permitted use in the NCL zone district where it’s located, none of the uses identified in CSU’s conceptual design review application for the Hughes property are permitted. The property is located in the T or Transition zone district. The only permitted uses are clearly described in the code as “such legal use as existed on the date the property was placed into this zone district.” (§ 4.12 (B) (1) ) There were no residential housing units that existed on the property on the date the property was placed into this zone district. CSU cannot legally rezone its property using Site Plan Advisory Review. Zoning and rezoning is a right reserved for the City Council and the electors of the City of Fort Collins (by citizens’ initiative). How does CSU’s assertion of its “right” to pursue SPAR undermine Fort Collins’ Home Rule authority to manage Land Use, Development and Zoning? (1) A project the size and complexity of the one proposed for the Hughes property would take more than 6 months to go through the City’s development review and approval processes. None of that would apply under this SPAR. This project is land development for profit, not for a public use and should not be allowed to proceed under SPAR. (2) This project would significantly alter a large and prominently located piece of our City. All recent efforts of Fort Collins citizens and City Council will be negated if CSU is allowed to circumvent codified municipal processes, the reason for which is a public process that is accountable to citizens and under the direction of elected representatives. (3) The purpose and effect of Site Plan Advisory Review is described in LUC § 2.1.3. (E) (1) : The Site Plan Advisory Review process requires the submittal and approval of a site development plan that describes the location, character and extent of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. Location, character and extent are the limited number of criteria to be evaluated, not conformity with our Land Use Code. (4) The project as presented in the application for conceptual review requires rezoning from the T district in which it is located. SPAR is not intended for rezoning. That is a right reserved for the City Council and electors of the City of Fort Collins. CSU is moving ahead with an approval process that is in major conflict with the laws of the City of Fort Collins. (5) Council is stripped of its authority, rendering the Council and citizens of Fort Collins powerless in a major land use decision if CSU is allowed to proceed. Council and citizens have sought a resolution with CSU but have been ignored and rebuffed. CSU is making assertions about its authority that cannot go unchallenged, lest a dangerous precedent be set. Nov. 14, 2020  To City Council Members and the CSU Board of Governors:  I write to you as a 30‐year resident of Fort Collins and a fourth generation Coloradoan to urge you to  honor the overwhelming voices of Fort Collins citizens (as demonstrated by a hugely popular and  successful petition) to save the Hughes stadium land as public land/open space.     As one of many volunteers who collected petition signatures, I found that more than 95% of the people  who spoke to me were overwhelmingly in favor of preserving the land for the public use and  overwhelmingly NOT in favor of developing that site.   We were successful in gathering (in person) over  8,000 signatures in a short time while facing not only the challenges of COVID, but also elements like  hazardous air quality.  I found that people living outside of the City, but within Larimer County, were  also very supportive of this petition.  I often spoke with people visiting from other states who remarked  how lucky we were to live in this area that had so much open space and how they wished they had the  same in their cities.  Yes, we are lucky to be in this beautiful geographic area, but it has been the  foresight and continuing support of the residents of Fort Collins and Larimer County (not luck) that has  preserved this land. The City of Fort Collins and the CSU Board of Governors must continue to use this  foresight to be progressive by preserving this gem that is a current wildlife corridor and a place in nature  enjoyed by so many.  In our quickly growing city we must not stop saving our land (especially this most  valuable place) as the population and demand for open space increases.   Dr. Tony Frank wrote in a recent Greeley Tribune opinion piece about CSU’s new initiative introduced as  “Your Voice, Your Vote, Your Rights.” In this piece he said, “But then, I think about the beauty of that  First Amendment to the constitution‐the amendment that ensured civil rights marchers of the 1960’s  had a voice under the law that state and local governments want to deny them.”  I appeal to the CSU  Board of Governors (a public land grant university) to follow Frank’s words and not deny us our right to  a voice and a vote regarding the fate of this land.  It would be a win‐win for both the City of Fort Collins  and CSU if the City purchased the land.  The City of Fort Collins currently has more than $8 million from  open space tax set aside to apply to the purchase this property (before partnering with other agencies)  to provide CSU with a fair market deal for the land.  At this time, CSU has not only chosen not to have a  serious dialogue with the City Council and the citizens of Fort Collins, but rather to hurriedly plow  (excuse the pun) ahead with a large development citing SPAR to try to circumvent the normal review  process. Examining our Land Use Code and the Colorado Revised Statutes, the SPAR process is not  applicable when the proposal through Lennar is for mixed use commercial development, not a public  building. If Council members decline to adopt the citizens ordinance, they must be prepared to share  with voters how they plan to assert the City’s right to enact zoning for this property and how a private,  for profit development (Lennar) will be reviewed consistent with similar development proposals.    City council members, it is time to decide whether to listen to your constituents and have your legacy be  the preservation of precious land where generations can continue to go to get away from the stresses of  life and enjoy nature, or the development of at least 650 concrete and brick homes on land we will  never get back.  As often said, it may not be the easy thing to do, but honoring the voice of its citizens  and community is the right thing for both the council and CSU to do.  This means adopting the citizens  initiative to conserve Hughes as Open Space.    Lynn Stutheit  District 1 resident       Please include these comments in the public records associated with the Hughes  agenda for the Nov. 17 City Council meeting.    November 17, 2020 Re: Public comment re: City Council Agenda for November 17, 2020, Item 13. “Items Relating to a Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property” Dear City Council: This public comment pertains to “Items Relating to a Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property”, agenda Item 13, on the City Council agenda for Tuesday November 17, 2020. ​Fort Collins residents and members of the PATHS organization respectfully request that Council members Wade Troxell and Kristin Stephens recuse themselves from any voting, executive sessions, deliberations, and/or discussions associated with agenda Item 13, “Items Relating to a Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property”.​ Furthermore, we respectfully request that Wade Troxell and Kristin Stephens decline to participate in any further discussions relating to matters which concern the disposition of this annexed property. By participating in any voting, executive sessions, deliberations, and/or discussions associated with agenda Item 13, or any other item related to the former Hughes stadium property, Council members Troxell and Stephens will be acting under an impermissible conflict of interest. Such actions constitute a breach of the public trust, of the council members' fiduciary duty, and of the constitutional standards governing the conduct of elected officials. Councilmembers are under a Colorado Constitution mandate that elected officials abstain from the appearance of impropriety. Under the Constitution, covered individuals must “avoid conduct that is in violation of their public trust ​or that creates a justifiable impression among members of the public that such trust is being violated.” Colo. Const. Art. XXIX, sec 1(c) (emphasis added). As the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission has observed, “[a]ppearances of impropriety are generally referred to as ‘perception issues’ or ‘violating the smell test,” and such appearances “can weaken public confidence in government and create a perception of dishonesty, even among government officials who are in technical compliance with the law.” Colo. Indep. Ethics Comm’n Advisory Op. 16-05, at 4. “In order to avoid the appearance of impropriety, local government officials should avoid voting on or debating questions in a manner that may lead the public to perceive that the local government official is . . . placing his or her own private business interests in a position of competitive advantage . . . .” ​Id. “The holding of public office . . . is a public trust.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-18-103(1) Therefore, elected officials are under a mandate to carry out their duties “for the benefit of the people of the state.” ​Id. ​§ 24-18-103(1) A breach of the public trust constitutes a breach of the official’s fiduciary duty. ​See id.; Gessler v. Smith, ​419 P.3d 964, 972 (Colo. 2018) Any participation in voting, executive sessions, deliberations, and/or discussions on agenda Item 13, “Items Relating to a Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property” further erodes the public trust in a process which has lacked transparency and is tainted by the conflict of interest which pervades the past and any future involvement by councilmembers Troxell and Stephens. Respectfully submitted, Fort Collins residents PATHS members November 16, 2020 To: Members of the Fort Collins City Council , CSU Board of Govenors, City of Fort Collins From: Tamra Meurer, 80525 Fort Collins City Council Members, On November 17th, I am asking that you vote to adopt the Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property that has been ratified by the City and set to be on the April 2021 ballot. There is no reason to carry this process on longer and wait until April when you have the ability to implement it now. Over 8000 signatures were attained in the petition presented to the city! If there was uncertainty before, it is crystal clear now where the community stands on this issue! Even the Maxwell family, who initially provided the land grant for Hughes, supports return of the land to the community for open space use! The issue of Hughes Stadium has been a long and frustrating journey. The absence of transparency by all involved has probably been the most frustrating. I have tried to keep an open mind; however, the more I research and the more I learn, I no longer believe that the city has been acting in good faith to serve the community. Examples: • The role of City staff to “consult” with CSU and Lennar has been a sham. One only had to pay attention to how the planning process and testimonies have been presented at the various meetings to understand that the city has more than consulted CSU on this process. • Mentions of numerous meetings between City planners and CSU /Mr. Frank have no records in CORA requests! • Conflict of interest hearings at local and state level of council members; not pursued due to lack of jurisdiction- NOT due to lack of conflict! • Recently, Mr. Atteberry was quick to offer city support to CSU once Mr. Frank rejected the City’s low-ball offer. With the level of involvement between Cameron Gloss, Lennar, Mr. Atteberry and Mr. Frank over the past few years, all knew what the the starting point for negotiations needed to be, and yet, the offer was nowhere close! I have listened twice of the recorded proposal Mr. Tony Frank made to the CSU Board of Govenors. His presentation was eloquently delivered with half-truths and crucial missing information! It was merely a PR campaign to get the Board to vote in his favor. • Mr. Frank did NOT inform the Board of the citizen initiative even though it was approved for circulation on Sept 4 and this meeting occurred on Oct 9. • Mr. Frank stated that the City requested annexation of the land-- false and misleading. Frank’s development plan depends on the infrastructure that the City would provide once it is brought into the City's domain. –subsidized by our community! • Mr. Frank stated that perhaps the case for development was not made clearly enough in the first attempt and this second attempt points out the benefits of intensive development on this site. The truth is that CSU and Lennar were shut down in their first attempt by the weight of public opposition. • Mr. Frank plans the use of the SPAR process to move forward (a process CSU has used in the past as a loophole to drive their own development agenda and circumvent the will of Fort Collins residents.) This sets a dangerous precedent, and CSU must not be allowed to be a bully and a bad neighbor yet again ! It is a slap in the face to Fort Collins community members! If CSU refuses to engage with and accept a purchase offer at fair market value for this parcel of land from the Fort Collins community, then the annexation of this property needs to be rescinded! If CSU wants to do whatever they please, then let them proceed without financial subsidies from Fort Collins taxpayers. We do not want to engage in taxation without representation! The referendum on the table offers CSU the price that Mr. Frank has valued the property to be worth. CSU needs to negotiate with Fort Collins and as a good neighbor, to maintain good faith within the community, reach an acceptable arrangement with the City of Fort Collins. It is time for the City Council to support the wishes of the community and to vote in support of the Citizen-Initiated Petition Relating to the Hughes Stadium Property . As our representative decision makers, I ask that you show your support for citizen engagement, as we have clearly asked the Council repeatedly on multiple occasions to save Hughes as Open Space and vote in line with the overwhelming sentiment of your constituents and adopt this citizen’s initiative. Sincerely, Tamra Meurer - 80525 Mayor Troxell and Councilmembers: I have written to and spoken before City Council on a number of occasions asking for rezoning of the Hughes development to reflect the wishes of the vast majority of Fort Collins residents. As one of the 8,300+ residents who signed the citizen initiative you are considering on November 17, I request that City Council zone Hughes as Public Open Land and purchase this area at a fair market value from Colorado State University. You may use 1/4-cent sales tax funding available through Open Space Yes as well as other public and private revenue sources to acquire this property for our City. The citizen initiative shows that residents of Fort Collins do not want the increased congestion, pollution, and sprawl that development by CSU and Lennar will bring to the Hughes property and to west Fort Collins. They want this area preserved as open space for future generations, and they are looking to City Council to make that a reality by voting to adopt the citizen initiative for Hughes Open Space. I respectfully request that this email message be included in the information presented to Council for this discussion on Tuesday, November 17, 2020. Thank you. Ted Walkup 3514 Pratolina Court Fort Collins, CO Mike Beckstead –Financial Advisor Hughes Stadium ATTACHMENT 6 Fort Collins Conceptual Proposal CSU Retains 15 Ac res: Ø Builds approximately 170 affordable housing units for CSU staff & faculty Ø Partners to build child-care and medical facility Fort Collins Purchases Remaining 150 acres Ø Builds or partners to build community affordable housing units –units TBD Ø Establishes Transit connection Ø Remaining acres as open space 2 CSU / Lennar Land Transaction 3 •To tal Price reflects base price -excludes potential incentive income CSU can earn from Lennar •Price included value of the water/wastewater credit associated with redevelopment •49 acres are undevelopable •Price per acre on the high side Lennar Details Total Pric e 10,000,000$ Water & WW value 3,647,000$ Total acres 165 Ac res developa ble 116 Ac res unde velopa bl e 49 water as % price 36% Price per acre Total Ac quisitio n 60,606$ Ac quisitio n w/o water 38,503$ unde velo pa ble 10,000$ de velopa ble w water 81,983$ de velopa ble w/o water 50,543$ Fort Collins Proposal Value 4 Lennar CSU Retains City Proposal Details Total Price 10,000,000$ 758,147$ 6,550,000$ Water & WW value 3,647,000$ 1,350,000$ 2,297,000$ Total acres 165 15 150 Ac res developa ble 116 15 101 Ac res undevelopa ble 49 49 water as % price 36%35% Price per acre Total Acquisition 60,606$ Ac quisition w/o water 38,503$ undevelopa ble 10,000$ 10,000$ develo pa ble w water 81,983$ 60,000$ develo pa ble w/o water 50,543$ 50,543$ •CSU 15 acres valued at $50.5k per acre •CSU retains water/wastewater credits needed to build affordable housing, child-care & medical facilities •To tal value retained by CSU $2.1M •City purchases remaining at $10k and $60k for undevelopable and developable acres respectively Fort Collins Proposal Comparison 5 Proposal to CSU CSU value reta ined 2,108,147$ City Proposal 6,550,000 City I nc entive 600,000 Total Proposal with Incentiv es 9,258,147$ % of Lennar Proposal 93% City proposal including value retained by CSU equals 93% of Lennar base price February 16, 2021 Citizen Initiative –Hughes Stadium Property Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk; Rita Knoll, Chief Deputy City Clerk John Duval, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENT 7 Hughes Stadium Petition 2 •September 4, 2020 –Form of Initiative Petition approved for circulation. •November 3, 2020 –Deadline to file petition. •Returned on November 2. •November 5, 2020 –Petition certified as sufficient. Action To Date •November 17, 2020: •Council Adopted Resolution 2020-105 •Included a conditional approval •Pending judicial determination regarding scope of the citizen-initiated measure •Question about whether requiring the City to purchase the property was administrative in nature 3 Judge’s Ruling •February 3, 2021 Order: •Retained the language that the City acquire the Hughes Stadium property. •Removed Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the citizen ordinance related to funding specifics. •February 7, 2021 Order: •Modification to reflect that the City does not concede that the requirement that the City continue efforts to acquire the property until voter approval to stop is given is legislative. The Court determined this to be legislative nonetheless and appropriate for the ballot. •Incorporated the Court ordered approved ballot title and submission clause language. 4 To night •February 16, 2020: •Council will consider Resolution 2021-024 •Amends Resolution 2020-105 adopted on November 17, 2020 •Includes a revised Initiated Ordinance •Includes revised Ballot Measure •Based on the District Court’s February 3 and February 7, 2021 Orders. 5 Proposed Ballot Language PROPOSED CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Tr ansition District to the Public Open Lands District,and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks,recreation,and open lands,natural areas,and wildlife rescue and restoration,and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing,ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council,and granting legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance. YES/FOR _____ NO/AGAINST _____ . 6 Protests 7 •City Code allows any registered elector to protest a ballot title or submission clause. •Protest Deadline: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 (by 9 a.m.). •If any are received, a public hearing will be added to the agenda and must take place before Council can adopt the Resolution. •Ballot language as presented is Court ordered. Council Choices Thank you! 8 -1- RESOLUTION 2021-024 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING RESOLUTION 2020-105 TO REVISE, AS ORDERED BY THE LARIMER COUNTY DISTRICT COURT, THE CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE AND ITS BALLOT TITLE AND SUBMISSION CLAUSE CONCERNING THE HUGHES STADIUM PROPERTY AND TO SUBMIT THEM TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY AT THE REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON APRIL 6, 2021 WHEREAS, on November 17, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution 2020-105 (“Resolution 105”) submitting a citizen-initiated ordinance concerning the Hughes Stadium property (the “Initiated Ordinance”) and submitting the Initiated Ordinance’s ballot title and submission clause (the “Ballot Measure”) to a vote of the City’s registered electors at the City’s regular election on April 6, 2021; and WHEREAS, City Council submitted the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure provisionally and conditionally in Sections 2 and 3 of Resolution 105, respectfully; and WHEREAS, the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure were submitted provisionally and conditionally due to City Council’s direction to the Fort Collins City Attorney in Section 4 of Resolution 105 to file a declaratory judgment action in Larimer County District Court (“District Court”) to seek a judicial determination as to which matters in the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure are a legislative matter appropriate for a citizen initiative under Colorado Constitution and the City’s Charter and which are an administrative matter not appropriate for a citizen initiative under the Colorado Constitution and Charter; and WHEREAS, Section 5 of Resolution 105 provided that if the District Court in the declaratory action determined portions of the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure are not properly the subject of a citizen initiative under the Colorado Constitution and City Charter, it was City Council’s intent for the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure to be modified to reflect the Court’s decision and Section 6 of Resolution also provided that this matter be returned to City Council on before February 16, 2021, for its final determination of the wording for the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure to be submitted to the City’s electorate at the April 6, 2021, regular election; and WHEREAS, as directed by City Council, the declaratory action was filed in District Court on December 7, 2020, in City of Fort Collins v. Planning Action to Transform Hughes Stadium Sustainably Corp, et al., Case No. 2020 CV 30833 (the “Declaratory Action”); and WHEREAS, on February 3, 2021, the District Court issued its “Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motions for Summary Judgment” in the Declaratory Action, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference (“February 3 rd Order”); and WHEREAS, in the February 3rd Order, the District Court determined Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance were administrative matters not subject to the citizen-initiative power under the Colorado Constitution and City Charter and ordered these sections to be severed from the Initiated Ordinance; and -2- WHEREAS, on February 7, 2021, the District Court issued its “Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Amend Final Judgment” in the Declaratory Action, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference (“February 7th Order”); and WHEREAS, in the February 7th Order, the District Court ordered the Ballot Measure to be submitted to the City’s electors be amended to be consistent with the Court’s February 3 rd Order severing Sections 5, 6 and 7 from the Initiated Ordinance and set forth the wording to be used for the amended Ballot Measure; and WHEREAS, as intended in Resolution 105, City Council adopts this Resolution to amend Resolution 105 to revise the Initiated Ordinance and Ballot Measure as ordered by the District Court in its February 3rd Order and February 7th Order. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section l. The City Council hereby adopts as findings and determinations the recitals stated above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby amends Section 2 of Resolution 105 by submitting to the registered electors of the City at the next regular City election to be held on Tuesday, April 6, 2021, the following Initiated Ordinance revised as ordered by the District Court in its February 3rd Order: WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have shown strong support to preserve and provide open space, natural areas, community separators, wildlife habitat, and trails for today and for the future; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins citizens currently enjoy their open spaces and natural areas; the recreation they provide, such as walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing; the educational opportunities and programs provided to people of all ages and backgrounds; and the beautiful landscapes and views they provide; and WHEREAS, open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, community separators, agricultural lands, and trails benefit all members of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, conserved open space and natural areas help make Fort Collins a highly desirable place to live, work, and visit; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins values sustainability in policies, plans, strategies and projects that align with its Triple Bottom Line decision-making philosophy of social, economic and environmental well-being to meet its citizens' present needs and the needs of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we all depend; and -3- WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have provided continuous funding for open space and natural areas acquisition and maintenance since first voting for a capital improvement sales tax in 1973 and approving extensions or new revenue sources in every election such a question has appeared on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins has conserved over 40,000 acres of open space and natural areas since 1973; and WHEREAS, the property formerly home to the Colorado State University's Hughes Stadium is a currently undeveloped 164.56-acre parcel of land that was recently annexed into the city of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has many distinct zoning districts in its land use code; and WHEREAS, one zoning classification in the Fort Collins land use code is "Public Open Lands," which currently allows for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education centers, subject to administrative or Planning and Zoning Board review; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property is currently zoned as Transition District (T) pursuant to Division 4.12 of its land use code, which is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property occupies an area in between the current Maxwell Natural Area and Pineridge Natural Area; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into a public open lands area would build upon the City's significant history of preserving open spaces and would provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space; and WHEREAS, absent acquisition and conservation efforts under this ordinance, the Hughes Stadium property would forever be lost to residential and/or commercial development; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property by the City of Fort Collins should occur using existing voter-approved open space sales tax revenue and other funds currently available to the City, financing agreements, grants, partnerships with other local governments, or other available fiscally responsible mechanisms; and -4- WHEREAS, publicly available information indicates Colorado State University values the Hughes Stadium property at $10 million, and the City should use that figure as a starting point in its negotiations to acquire the property at its fair market value; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium property into the Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Article l, Division 1.3 and Article 4, Division 4.13 of the land use code would be necessary to convert the property into an area for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56- acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) ("Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado") at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. Section 3. That the City Council hereby amends Section 3 of Resolution 105 by submitting to the registered electors of the City at the next regular City election to b e held on Tuesday, April 6, 2021, the following Ballot Measure revised as ordered by the District Court in its February 7th Order: -5- PROPOSED CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance. YES/FOR _____ NO/AGAINST _____ Section 4. That except as amended in this Resolution, Resolution 105 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Section 5. That by adopting this Resolution, the City Council does not intend to waive or relinquish any grounds the City has to appeal the February 3rd Order and the February 7th Order. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of February, A.D. 2021. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk District Court, Larimer County, State of Colorado 201 LaPorte Avenue, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80521-2761 (970) 494-3500 ▲ COURT USE ONLY ▲ THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule city and municipal corporation, Plaintiff, v. PLANNING ACTION TO TRANSFORM HUGHES STADIUM SUSTAINABLY CORP., a Colorado nonprofit corporation; and ELENA M. LOPEZ; MELISSA ROSAS; and PAUL PATTERSON, each in their official capacity as a petition representative of the persons signing the petition for a citizen-initiated ordinance relating to the City of Fort Collins rezoning and acquiring certain real property, Defendants. Case No.: 2020 CV 30833 Courtroom: 3B ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff City of Fort Collins (“City”) filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief against Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (“PATHS”) and other individuals, seeking to exclude certain provisions of a citizens’ initiative submitted to the City Council. Generally, the City seeks declarations that the citizen initiative at issue contains provisions that are administrative rather than legislative and, as such, shouldn’t be placed on a ballot to go before the City’s electors. The City has moved for summary judgment under Colo. R. Civ. P. 56 requesting that the Court rule, as a matter of law, that certain provisions in Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative and not legislative matters and, as such, under the Colorado Constitution and the City of Fort Collins Charter, are not proper subjects of a citizen-initiated DATE FILED: February 3, 2021 12:32 PM CASE NUMBER: 2020CV30833 EXHIBIT A 2 ordinance. PATHS opposes Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, contending that the entire Initiated Ordinance is legislative. The Court held a hearing regarding this matter on February 2, 2021. At the hearing, PATHS also made an oral motion for summary judgment, asking the Court to enter judgment that all matters on the Initiated Ordinance are legislative. The City didn’t oppose the timing or form of the motion. The Court will construe defendants’ response to the City’s motion as its brief in support of the oral motion, and will construe the City’s motion, conversely, also as its response in opposition to the same. As more fully explained below, the Court concludes that Sections 1 through 4 and 8 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative in nature and thus are proper subjects of the reserved powers by the people under Article V, § 1 of the Colorado Constitution and its counterpart in the City Charter. The Court also concludes that Sections 5 through 7 are administrative in nature and thus fall outside the people’s reserved power. Lastly, exercising its discretion, the Court will sever Sections 5 through 7 and allow the City’s electors to vote on Sections 1 through 4, and 8. I. INTRODUCTION. PATHS, a nonprofit corporation, is organized “for the purpose of organizing and representing Fort Collins area residents who are aligned in the objective of conserving as open space and for other similar uses the property on which Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium was formerly located (the ‘Hughes Stadium Property’).” Compl. ¶ 1. As readers of this Order may know, Colorado State University (“CSU”) owns the property where Hughes Stadium used to be; that land is presently vacant. The City has annexed the Hughes Stadium Property and neither CSU nor the City agrees on how the property should be zoned. So, PATHS decided to take advantage of their rights under Colo. Const. art. V § 1, and under the City’s Charter, art. X § 1(a), and submitted a proposed ordinance to the City Council. The City Council chose to refer PATHS’ initiated 3 ordinance to the City’s voters. In general, the initiated ordinance seeks to mandate rezoning of the Hughes Stadium Property and to require the City to make “good faith” attempts to purchase it. The City doesn’t believe that several of the above provisions are “legislative” and thus it argues that they’re inappropriate for inclusion on the initiated ordinance. In particular, the City asserts that sections 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and “the next-to-last recital” of the initiated ordinance “are in fact administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers of the registered electors of home rule cities under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Compl. ¶ 51. It, however, agrees that section 3 and 4 of the initiated ordinance “are properly characterized as legislative matters subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Id. ¶ 57. The City seeks very specific relief. As to sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and in the next-to-last recital, it seeks a declaration that those provisions “are administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under Charter Article X, Section 1(a).” Compl., Prayer for Relief ¶ A. Then, it requests injunctive relief, in the form of an order directing that the “Ballot Initiative and Ballot Measure to exclude and sever from them the provisions in Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and in the next-to-last recital….” Id. ¶ C. (The Court notes that, at oral argument, the City modified its request for relief because now it believes that Section 4 is legislative and because it doesn’t object to the recitals being part of the Initiated Ordinance subject to their having no legal effect. Defendants’ didn’t object to such a declaration either.) Conversely, as to sections 3 and 4, the City seeks a declaration that “the provisions in Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance requiring the City Council, immediately upon passage of the Initiated Ordinance, to rezone the Hughes Stadium Property to the Public Open Lands District 4 pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City’s Land Use Code and prohibiting the City from de-annexing or subsequently rezoning the Hughes Stadium Property “to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council,” are legislative matters ….” Id. ¶ B. I. UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS. The following facts are undisputed, unless the Court notes otherwise. On August 27, 2020, the Petition Representatives submitted to the City Clerk a “Notice of Intent to Circulate an Initiative Petition related to the Hughes Stadium Property.” Ex. 3. To Plaintiff’s Motion. They also submitted to the Clerk the form of the petition for the Initiated Ordinance to be circulated for signing by the City’s register’s electors. Ex. 4. The Clerk approved the form of the petition. Ex. 5. On November 2, 2020, Petition Representative Melissa Rosas submitted the signed Petition to the City Clerk. Ex. 6. Three days later, the City Clerk issued a Statement of Initiative Petition Sufficiency, certifying that the Petition contained more than the 3,280 valid signatures required for the initiated Ordinance to be placed on the ballot of the City’s April 6, 2021, regular election. Ex. J. The Initiated Ordinance consists of eight sections and provides as follows: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56- acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or 5 subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. That to acquire the Hughes Stadium property, the City shall seek funding from existing sources or future partnerships, including but not limited to the Fort Collins Open Space -3- Yes! sales tax fund, Certificates of Participation, the City’s general fund, Great Outdoors Colorado and other third party organizations providing open space or other types of recreational or land conservation grants, and/or partnerships with other entities such as Larimer County. Section 6. That the City Council may refer ballot measures to the voters for the purpose of seeking additional funding only if existing sources of funding or future partnerships are insufficient for the preservation of the Hughes Stadium property as described in this Ordinance. Section 7. That the City shall expeditiously, but no later than two years from the passage of this Ordinance, use best efforts in good faith to acquire the Hughes Stadium property utilizing the financial mechanisms described in Sections 5 and 6. Section 8. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. Ex. 8. To Plaintiff’s Motion. On November 17, 2020, the City Clerk presented the Statement of Sufficiency to the Council at its regular meeting. The City Council adopted Resolution 2020-105, which provisionally and conditionally submitted in Section 2 and Section 3 of the Resolution 2020-105, subject to this declaratory action, the Initiated Ordinance to a vote of the City’s registered electors at the City’s April 6, 2021, regular election. Ex. 9. The City is a home-rule municipality under Article XX of the Colorado Constitution. The Hughes Stadium Property, which is a 164.554-acre parcel, was annexed by the City in 2018. Ex. 10. When the City Council annexed the Hughes Stadium Property, it also adopted Ordinance No. 124, 2018, to zone the Hughes Stadium Property in the City’s Transition District. Ex. 11 (“Zoning Ordinance”). 6 The Hughes Stadium Property is owned by the Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System (“CSU Board”). On October 9, 2020, the CSU Board adopted a written motion, with an attached “Site Plan,” expressing and detailing its intended future use of the Hughes Stadium Property. Ex. 12 (“CSU Board Motion”). Acquiring real property by the City requires carrying out certain due diligence and possessing expertise on the subject matter. The City details what that due diligence entails and the expertise required to acquire real property. Ex. 2, Ernst Aff. ¶¶ 17 and 18. It’s also undisputed that the Colorado General Assembly has passed legislative acts regarding the acquisition, conveyance, and appropriation for real property. Def.’s Resp. To Pl.’s Summ. J. Mot. 5. Likewise, the City Council has passed legislative ordinances and resolutions regarding the acquisition and conveyance of real property. Id. II. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS. Under Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c), summary judgment is proper only where “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and … the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” A factual dispute is “material” if it is one that would affect the outcome of the case. W. Innovations, Inc. v. Sonitrol Corp., 187 P.3d 1155, 1158 (Colo. App. 2008). A party seeking summary judgment bears the initial burden of establishing that there’s no dispute regarding material facts. Pueblo W. Metro. Dist. v. Se. Colo. Water Conservancy Dist., 689 P.2d 594, 600 (Colo. 1984). To meet that burden, the moving party may rely on “pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, … admissions on file, [and] affidavits.” Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c). While “the form of the evidence, such as an affidavit, need not be admissible at trial, the content or substance of the evidence must be admissible.” People ex rel S.N. v. S.N., 329 P.3d 276, 282 (Colo. 2014). Further, evidence introduced to defeat or support a motion for summary judgment must be sworn, competent, based on personal knowledge, and set forth facts that would be admissible at trial. Colo. 7 R. Civ. P. 56(e). “[T]he trial court may not assess the weight of the evidence or credibility of witnesses in determining a motion for summary judgment ....” Kaiser Found. Health Plan v. Sharp, 741 P.2d 714, 718 (Colo. 1987). The moving party may satisfy its burden by showing the absence of evidence in the record to support the nonmoving party’s case. Id. If the moving party demonstrates no disputed material facts exist, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to demonstrate the existence of a disputed material fact. Id. The Court must give the nonmoving party all favorable inferences that reasonably may be drawn from the evidence. Id. But the nonmoving party can’t use “pretense, or apparent formal controversy,” to avoid summary judgment. Id. Nor may a “genuine issue” be raised “simply by means of argument.” Sullivan v. Davis, 347 P.3d 606, 611 (Colo. 2015). III. DISCUSSION. The City seeks summary judgment and declarations that Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative and not legislative matters and aren’t a proper subject of a citizen-initiated ordinance to be submitted to the electorate on April 6, 2021.1 The Court concludes that Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 are legislative in nature and thus may properly be included on the Initiated Ordinance submitted to the electorate. On the other hand, the Court holds that Sections 5, 6, and 7 are administrative matters, which can’t be included in the Initiated Ordinance. The Court further concludes that Sections 5 through 7 will be severed from the Initiated Ordinance. 1 The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction to consider this pre-election declaratory judgment action to determine whether the proposed initiative covers legislative matters subject to Article V, § 1. City of Idaho Springs v. Blackwell, 731 P.2d 1250, 1253 (Colo. 1987). 8 A. The Colorado Constitution and the City Charter Preserve the Right of the People to Legislate through an Initiative Process. The Court begins with first principles, which in this case lie at the heart of our representative democracy. “‘All political power is vested in and derived from the people,’ and all government originates from the people.” McKee v. City of Louisville, 616 P.2d 969, 972 (Colo. 1980) (citing COLO. CONST. art. II, § 1). As the Supreme Court has noted, the people reserved for themselves the right to legislate. Id. “This is of first order; is it not a grant to the people but a reservation by them for themselves.” Id. Specifically, the people’s fundamental referendum and initiative powers at issue in this case emanate from Article V, Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution. That provision states, in relevant part, that the legislative power of the state is vested in the general assembly, but the people reserved to themselves the power to initiate, reform, or reject any act of the general assembly. COLO. CONST. art. V, § 1. This reservation of power in the people has become to be known as the initiative and referendum powers. Like the right to vote, the power of initiative is a fundamental right at the very core of our republican form of government. McKee, 616 P.2d at 972. The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people under article V extend “to every registered elector of every city, town, and municipality as to all local, special, and municipal legislation of every character.” Vagneur v. City of Aspen, 295 P.3d 493, 504 (Colo. 2013) (citing COLO. CONST. art. V. § 1(9)). The people’s reservation of power, however, isn’t absolute. The Supreme Court has construed the above constitutional provision solely to extend to legislative matters: “only those acts of a city council which are legislative in character are subject to the referendum and initiative powers.” Margolis v. District Court, 638 P.2d 297, 303 (Colo. 1981). The City’s Charter also reserves the referendum and initiative power to the people. Article X, § 1 provides that the registered electors of the city shall have the power to initiate any ordinance or 9 resolution to the Council or at the polls. City Charter, art. X § 1(a). The Court also must examine the terms of the City’s referendum and initiative provision found in its Charter because rights granted under it are independent of those in the Constitution. City of Aurora v. Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d 1074, 1076 (Colo. 1977). The Charter can’t limit powers reserved by the Constitution, but it may grant broader powers to its electors. The Constitution, thus, provides a floor, not a ceiling. Here, the City Charter parallels and doesn’t grant more rights than those reserved by the Colorado Constitution. While the Charter uses the language “any ordinance,” the Supreme Court has interpreted an identical phrase, almost universally, to extend solely to ordinances that are legislative in character. Id. (citing the general rule and policy underlying this determination). One of the unquestioned purposes of the referendum and initiative powers is to expeditiously permit the total and free exercise of legislative powers by the people, except in rare circumstances. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303. Thus, the power to call referendum and initiative elections is a direct check on the exercise or non-exercise of legislative power by elected officials. Id. “Indeed, a heightened community sensitivity to the quality of the living environment and an increased skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’ execution” of these reserved powers. Id. With that purpose in mind, the Colorado Supreme Court has held that the retained powers of initiative and referendum are fundamental rights reserved in the people and must be liberally construed. McKee, 616 P.2d at 972. The Court views any governmental action that has the effect of curtailing the fundamental right to legislate “with the closest scrutiny.” Id. Therefore, in conducting the following analysis the Court liberally construed the Initiated Ordinance and closely scrutinized the City’s request to restrict PATHS’ right to place the Initiated Ordinance before Fort Collins’ electors. 10 B. Separation of Powers Doctrine and Relevant Precedent. As just noted, the foundation behind the reservation of power in the people solely for legislative matters rests on the separation of powers doctrine. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 503–04. Article III of the Colorado Constitution creates three separate branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and prevents each branch from exercising power belonging to the other two. COLO. CONST. art. III. While the separation of powers doctrine is clear, sometimes, especially in the present context, it proves difficult to determine whether an initiative referred to the voters deals with legislative matters. Indeed, as the Supreme Court has previously observed, “[t]he dividing lines between the respective powers [of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches] are often in crepuscular zones, and, therefore, delineation thereof usually should be on a case-by-case basis.” MacManus v. Love, 179 Colo. 218, 499 P.2d 609 (Colo. 1972). Thus, the Court must begin by discussing the basic powers reserved to the legislative and executive branches. In general, the “[l]egislative power is the authority to make laws and to appropriate state funds.” Id. at 610. The enforcement of statutes and administration thereunder are executive, not legislative, functions. Id. To fulfill its duty to faithfully execute the laws, the executive branch has the authority to administer the funds appropriated by the legislature for programs enacted by the legislature. Anderson v. Lamm, 579 P.2d 620, 623 (Colo. 1978). But the legislature “cannot administer the appropriation once it has been made.” Id. “When the appropriation is made, its work is complete and the executive authority takes over to administer the appropriation to accomplish its purpose, subject to the limitations imposed.” Id. (internal quotations omitted). Thus, it follows that the legislature isn’t permitted to interfere with the executive’s power to make specific resource-allocation decisions. Id. 11 With the separations-of-power doctrine in mind, the Supreme Court has developed two principal formalistic tests to determine whether a citizen-initiated referendum is legislative or executive.2 City of Idaho Springs v. Blackwell, 731 P.2d 1250, 1254 (Colo. 1987). It, however, has never explained which test should be applied in a particular scenario or why one test is better suited to one type of citizen-initiated referendum over another. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506 (the Supreme Court has “never explained … the interrelation between the tests or articulated whether a particular matter must be examined under more than one test to reach a determination”). It appears that this Court must apply both tests. See Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 1254 (“Two ‘tests’ or guidelines are used to resolve the [executive versus legislative] issue in most cases”). Because—in the Supreme Court’s candid admission—the classification of an ordinance “as legislative or administrative is largely an ad hoc determination,” id., the Court later noted that the two tests “are somewhat elusive.”3 Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506. The first test provides that actions that relate to subjects of a permanent or general character are legislative, while those that are temporary in operation and effect are not. Witcher v. Canon City, 716 P.2d 445, 449 (Colo. 1986). “In this connection an ordinance which shows an intent to form a permanent rule of government until replaced is one of permanent operation.” Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 2 A third test exists in appropriate cases. See Witcher v. Canon City, 716 P.2d 445 (Colo. 1986) (citing Margolis, 638 P.2d at 304). That test is inapplicable here. 3 It’s unclear what this Court must do with such a unique deck of precedential cards. While, of course, the Court must follow the Supreme Court’s precedent, it shares the concerns raised by former Chief Justice Coats in his Vagneur dissent. There, he observed that the ad hoc determinations developed by the Court are designed “primarily for the purpose of limiting the initiative power reserved to the voters by article V, section 1 of the state constitution.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 511–12 (Coats, J., dissenting). He also noted, with due concern, that while the tests developed had a narrow original purpose—“ensure that popular democracy not interfere with day-to-day administrative functions of municipalities”—“the discretionary power of the judiciary” under the tests developed to determine whether a citizen-initiated initiative is legislative “is by no means so limited. In fact, the standards guiding judicial discretion in this context, such as they are, have become so elastic as to make any point-by-point refutation of [a determination] virtually pointless.” Id. at 512 (Coats, J., dissenting). 12 1254. So, in Margolis, the Supreme Court held that zoning or rezoning decisions involve a general rule or policy regarding the city’s land-use, which is of a general and permanent nature, and thus legislative in nature. 638 P.2d at 304. As the Court noted, the term “permanent” signifies a declaration of public policy of general applicability because a permanent enactment is more likely to involve policy considerations. Id. By contrast, on the issue of “permanence,” the Supreme Court determined that the proposed ordinance in opposition of the city’s selection of the site and structure for a new city hall was not a permanent nor general act because the ordinances only excluded one parcel and one type of structure “from the range of choices available … to implement the previously declared policy of securing a city hall.” Blackwell, 731 P.2d at 1254. Similarly, in Witcher, the Court concluded that the Cañon City council’s act of amending a lease between the city and the operators of the Royal Gorge bridge was administrative, even though the lease amendment extended the useful life of the bridge until 2032. 716 P.2d at 450. The Court explained that the effect of the amendment is the “same as any other spending decision by the Council;” it is the administrative task of elected municipal officials to collect and expend monies for the protection and enhancement of public properties. Id. The second test provides “acts that are necessary to carry out [or implement] existing legislative policies and purposes or which are properly characterized as executive are deemed to be administrative, while acts constituting a declaration of public policy are deemed to be legislative.” Id. at 449–50. So, in Blackwell, the Supreme Court held that the choice of location and structure for a new city hall is an act “necessary to carry out” the existing legislative policy to build a new city hall using tax revenue and is thus administrative. 731 P.2d at 1255. Along the same lines, “while the establishment of the city-owned water-system may have been in pursuance of a broad public policy and, therefore, a legislative matter, the receipts and expenses incidental to its maintenance and management are executive or administrative matters.” Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d at 1077. The Supreme 13 Court later explained that as it ruled in Zwerdlinger, it’d be “impractical, if not impossible, for the general public to appraise [utility rates] in the absence of specific data, facts and information necessary to arrive at a fair and accurate judgment upon the subject.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 505. The Supreme Court has further explained that legislative power is defined by the work product it generates—namely, the promulgation of laws of general applicability: “when the government legislative, it establishes a generally applicable rule that sets the governing standard for all cases coming within its terms. Id. at 506–07. By contrast, executive acts typically aren’t based on broad policy grounds, but rather on “individualized, case-specific considerations.” Id. at 507. In Vagneur, the proposed ordinance was deemed to be administrative because it sought to replace the highway design already approved by the state and federal agencies through specific negotiated contractual agreements with the city of Aspen, and mandated construction of a different design not contemplated by the city, the state, or federal agencies. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 507 (“in other words, the initiatives are an attempt to reverse administrative decisions of city officials and dictate the future course of such decisions”). Following this precedent, City of Colorado Springs v. Bull, 143 P.3d 1127 (Colo. App. 2006), provides a good example of an initiative in which there were both executive and legislative matters in a single initiative. There, the Court of Appeals was faced with four initiatives, three of which are guiding here. The court held that the first initiative, the Multi-Year Contracts provision requiring all multi-fiscal year contracts to be fully funded in cash at the outset or submitted to the voters, was legislative because it created a general and permanent policy. Id. at 1136–37. It reasoned that the provision included virtually all contracts with a government entity, and that this broad scope is indicative of a general policy matter. Id. The court further explained that “[w]hile these contracting practices may be, or have been, administrative, the initiative at issue creates a new permanent and general policy limiting or eliminating the City’s ability to enter into a certain class of contracts. Id. at 14 1137. The court was also swayed by the fact that the provisions addressed some matters that have been “historically viewed” as legislative, such as the issuance of general obligation bonds or leasing of real property. Id. at 1137. On the other hand, the Court of Appeals held that the Revenue Initiative, which required the refund of street lighting fees, regulated administrative matters. Id. at 1134–35. It reasoned that, under Zwerdlinger, an initiative that is retrospective in nature and calls for a refund of revenue collected by a utility in prior fiscal years isn’t a declaration of public policy of general applicability.4 Id. at 1135. It also held that a provision requiring all current outstanding certificates of participation be paid off in no more than five equal yearly payments is administrative because it didn’t create new permanent policy, but instead merely required the council to act in a certain manner even if the alternative would be in the City’s best interest or in accordance with policy. Id. at 1137. As a remedy, the Court of Appeals severed the administrative matters from the balance of the initiatives. Id. at 1138. Lastly, in a “close case,” a court’s decision may be informed by historical examples. Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 507–09. That is, “an initiative that finds longstanding parallels in statutes enacted by legislative bodies, for example, may be deemed legislative on that basis, while initiatives that seem more like traditional executive acts may be deemed to fall on that side of the line.” Id. It’s unclear, however, what classifies as a “close case” under the Supreme Court’s precedents. As an initial matter, the parties agree—as they told the Court during oral argument—that Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative and that judgment should enter accordingly. While that has narrowed the issues, the Court must ensure that both parties are entitled 4 As the Court noted during oral argument, the dialectical nature of these holdings is hard to ignore. An argument can easily be made that the retrospective refund of revenue to the citizens from a utility is very much a declaration of new public policy, of general applicability, and permanent in nature. 15 to judgment as a matter of law given the procedural posture in which they request entry of that judgment. Colo. R. Civ. P. 56(c) (movant must establish no material factual dispute and that it’s “entitled to judgment as a matter of law”). The Court agrees that the movants are so entitled as to Sections 3 and 4. That leaves a determination of whether Sections 1, 2, and 5 through 8 are legislative or administrative. Applying the above precedent to the Initiated Ordinance, the Court concludes that Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative in character and thus a proper exercise of the people’s reserved powers, while Sections 5 through 7 are not. C. Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative. Sections 1 through 4 and Section 85 announce new public policy for the acquisition and use of the Hughes Stadium Property and are therefore legislative matters. The Court concludes that Sections 3 and 4 involve pre-eminent legislative matters that are an appropriate exercise of the people’s initiative power under Article V, § 1 of the Colorado Constitution. McKee, 616 P.2d at 672. Sections 3 and 4 of the Initiated Ordinance “establish or amend … zoning laws.” Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 510. Section 3 provides that, if approved by the electors, the Hughes Stadium Property will be re- zoned as Public Open Lands under the City’s land use code. In turn, Section 4 provides that the City can’t de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or rezone the Hughes Stadium Property without voter approval. As part of a rezoning initiative, Sections 3 and 4 are “general and permanent in character,” involving the promulgation and effectuation of a new land-use policy for the Hughes Stadium 5 Section 8, which provides an effective date for the Initiated Ordinance, is also legislative and it’s a provision that’s found in every piece of legislation. Similarly, Section 1, which incorporates the “whereas” clauses as findings and resolutions to justify the change in policy, is also legislative. The Court agrees with the parties that Section 1 doesn’t have any legal effect other than incorporating legislative findings. Nor does it direct the City to take any concrete action based on those findings. 16 Property. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 304. And Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance makes it crystal clear that the rezoning can’t be undone, except by another voter-approved ordinance, further cementing the permanent nature of the policy. The Court also concludes that Section 2 is legislative in nature and a proper exercise of the people’s reserved power. Section 2 takes the new policy to the next step, ensuring the Initiative Ordinance’s vision is actualized: purchasing the Hughes Stadium Property for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Acts that deed or acquire land are pre-eminently legislative. For example, historically, the General Assembly has enacted laws to purchase or acquire real property, to convey real property, and to appropriate funds to accomplish those acts. PATHS’ response to the motion for summary judgment describes multiple bills that do exactly that. Critically, the City itself has passed many resolutions that do the same thing: acquire or convey real property. Few would question that those resolutions or ordinances aren’t an appropriate exercise of legislative power. Similarly, in the federal context, a state may consent, via legislation, to sell land to the United States (or to let the United States condemn such land) “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8 cl. 17. Such laws are known as general-consent statutes. See, e.g., United States v. State Tax Commission of Miss., 412 U.S. 363, 372 n.15 (1973) (“General consent statutes are not uncommon.”); Paul v. United States, 371 U.S. 245, 265 n.31 (1963) (California’s general-consent statute). And such legislative acts (to sell or to purchase land) are unquestionably appropriate exercises of legislative power, enshrined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which covers the Congress. When construed together, Sections 2 and 4 further the same general land-use policy for the Hugues Stadium Property: Section 4 prevents the City from de-annexing or ceasing acquisition efforts without voter approval, while Section 2 solidifies the permanent nature of that policy by 17 requiring the City to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. Cf. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303 (observing that “heightened community sensitivity to” quality of life and “an increased skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’” exercise of their reserved powers). The City, however, contends that the acquisition of land isn’t a legislative matter for purposes of the reserved initiative powers. Reply to Mot. for Summ. J. at 14–15. The City relies on Vagneur’s statement that “the sale, exchange, conveyance, disposition, or change in use of a particular parcel of city-owned property cannot be analogized to the development of a city-wide zoning plan of general applicability.” 295 P.3d at 510 (emphasis added). The City’s argument misses the mark. To begin with, that statement in Vagneur doesn’t help the City because the proposed initiative there dealt with disposition of property that was already city- owned. Moreover, and unlike the Initiated Ordinance here, in Vagneur the “proposed initiatives at issue … do not establish or amend any zoning laws.” Id. The Initiated Ordinance here was carefully crafted to include a rezoning provision, likely to avoid this potential issue. Nor is the Court persuaded by the City’s contention that the Initiated Ordinance is like the one in Blackwell, which the City says involved an ordinance “to purchase one specific parcel of land.” Mot. for Summ. J. at 11. This case isn’t like Blackwell at all. There, the Supreme Court concluded that an ordinance dealing with “the selection of the site and structure for the city hall is not a permanent or general act within the meaning of Witcher or Zwedlinger.” 731 P.2d at 1254. Selection of the particular site for city hall, the Supreme Court observed, doesn’t involve policy considerations, especially when the proposed ordinance there only excluded one parcel of property and one type of structure from being acquired. Id. By contrast, Section 2 of the Initiated Ordinance doesn’t deal with such granular minutiae. Instead, Section 2 declares and requires acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property, a key implementation of public policy furthered by the Initiated Ordinance. 18 While the Initiated Ordinance here may, as a result, necessitate the City to negotiate contracts for the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and to conduct other studies and actions, that alone doesn’t transform Sections 2, 3, and 4 into administrative matters. “The mere prospect that a proposed initiative will have administrative consequences or require post-adoption administrative action is not, by itself, dispositive of whether the measure is administrative or legislative.” Vagneur, 295 P.2d at 509. Indeed, it’s not uncommon for legislative acts to require subsequent administrative action for implementation. Id. Thus, while Sections 2 through 4 may implicate later administrative actions, the heart of those provisions is, as noted above, to create a new permanent and general policy. Naturally, that new policy requires execution by the City to effect the will of the people. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1137. In sum, Sections 1 through 4 and 8 are legislative in nature, and they’re proper subjects under the initiative and referendum powers reserved to the Fort Collins electors by both the Colorado Constitution and the City Charter. Accordingly, the parties’ motion for summary judgment will be granted and judgment will enter accordingly. D. Sections 5 through 7 are executive or administrative. The Court doesn’t reach the same conclusion as to Sections 5 through 7 of the Initiated Ordinance. In the Court’s view, those sections are administrative in nature and fall outside the reservation of power by the people under Article V of the Constitution. Blackwwell, 713 P.2d at 1253. As the Supreme Court has noted, administrative matters are generally confined to government officials’ discretion to carry out broad policy goals. Thus, decisions that an official makes on a day-to-day basis, like purchasing city vehicles, setting various fees, and maintaining city- owned lands and buildings are administrative. Witcher, 716 P.2d at 449. To subject each such executive decision to a vote by the electorate would result in chaos and bring the machinery of government to a halt. Id. (citing Zwerdlinger, 571 P.2d at 1076). 19 Still, the limitation on the initiative and referendum power doesn’t leave the people without recourse. Citizens who disagree with the way their government operates or administers its stated policy goals may elect new officials who more closely share their values. Id. Here, Sections 5, 6, and 7 don’t meet the first test because they don’t concern permanent policy declarations of general applicability. See Vagneur, 295 P.3d at 506. For instance, Section 5 seeks to dictate the City’s decisions on the process for how and from whom to seek revenue to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. As in Vagneur, Zwerdliner, and Blackwell, those decisions require the exercise of wide discretion, including weighing of factors that are both fluctuating and temporary, like the fiscal position of the City and potential funding sources. Thus, Section 5 doesn’t promulgate permanent policy of general applicability; instead, it micromanages the process to effectuate the policy goal by telling the City from whom and in what order to seek funding to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property. That’s akin to a law that appropriated funds for a certain purpose and then dictated the administration of that appropriation, which a legislative enactment can’t do. Anderson, 579 P.2d at 623 (legislature can’t administer an appropriation of funds once made). In the same vein, Sections 6 and 7 invade and micromanage the discretion reserved for administrative matters. Section 7, for instance, would require the City to “use best efforts in good faith” to purchase the Hughes Stadium Property, and to do so “utilizing the financial mechanisms described in Sections 5 and 6.” Ex. 8, § 7. The quoted phrases are loaded with discretionary authority, which is reserved for the executive branch of government. Indeed, Section 7 interferes with the executive’s prerogative to make specific resource allocation decisions. Anderson, 579 P.2d at 623. Further, giving a hard deadline of two years to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property is administrative in nature and ill-suited for a citizen-proposed initiative. There’s no policy of general applicability in setting a time limit of two years for this land acquisition, nor is it permanent. (To the 20 contrary, it’s ephemeral.) Moreover, the impracticalities aren’t hard to fathom with such a provision: what happens if, despite “best efforts in good faith”—terms that are completely undefined—the City can’t acquire the Hughes Stadium Property in two years? Perhaps the economy crashes, the pandemic rages on, or some other unforeseen circumstance arises. The Initiated Ordinance doesn’t answer those questions—it can’t and shouldn’t because those matters are best left to the discretion of the City Council and City administrators. The two-year deadline in Section 7, with no room for flexibility, is akin to an impermissible close supervision of administrative functions by the legislative branch. While in a different context, the Supreme Court has cautioned that a legislative appropriation can’t interfere with the executive power’s authority to allocate staff and resources; the legislative power to appropriate funds doesn’t give the legislature the power “of close supervision” that’s essentially executive. Colo. General Assembly v. Owens, 136 P.3d 262, 268 (Colo. 2006) (detailing how prior case he legislative provision that made appropriations contingent upon presentation of cost-benefit reports and five-year plans to the General Assembly to be constitutionally impermissible). Section 6 also contains an incredible amount of discretion making it administrative. Under Section 6, too many eventualities must occur before the City may have to return to the voters to seek “additional funding” for the purchase, but as just noted, it’s unclear when that point could ever be reached. The discretionary decisions don’t involve policy considerations beyond those inherent in carrying out the fiscal policies of the City. The Supreme Court has struck down provisions like that as violating the separation of powers doctrine. In Owens, for instance, the Court held that “it would be a legislative infringement on executive power to mandate diversion of limited executive resources to a particular revenue-producing activity.” 136 P.3d at 268 (citing Colorado General Assembly v. Lamm, 704 P.2d 1371, 1381 (Colo. 1985)). Therefore, the Court concludes that limiting the City’s ability to 21 seek funding through a ballot measure until certain other sources are pursued and requiring that the City conduct such efforts in no less than two years, isn’t a permanent rule of general applicability. The Court further concludes that Sections 5 through 7 must be classified as administrative under the second test because those provisions, which deal with how the City should generate funds and pay for the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property, are acts “necessary to carry out” the concurrent legislative policy—to acquire such property and turn it into open space for City residents. Id. Like the Retirement of Current Certificates of Participation initiative in Bull, Section 5 merely requires the City to act in a certain manner in carrying out the policy of re-zoning and acquiring the Hughes Stadium Property. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1137. Likewise, the limitations of Sections 6 and 7 implicate actions necessary to carry out the to be existing legislative policy of acquiring the Hughes Stadium Property. Those sections don’t propose new laws or rules of general applicability that set a governing standard for all cases coming within their terms. Rather, they seek to mandate a specific proposal on how to fund the purchase of the Hughes Stadium Property. Because Sections 5 through 7 seek to modify or replace essentially administrative decisions, they’re likewise administrative in character. Naturally, PATHS disagrees. It contends that Section 5 is legislative because there’s reluctance to trust the City, and the citizens are thus looking for ways to close loopholes, such as the City intentionally failing to raise enough money to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property. Thus, it argues, because the City has been reluctant to purchase open lands, the Initiated Ordinance must be as specific as possible. The Court is not persuaded. While a general “skepticism of the judgment of elected officials provides much of the impetus for the voters’ exercise of” these reserved powers, Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303, that skepticism doesn’t provide legal grounds for the electorate to include administrative matters in the Initiated Ordinance. 22 Besides, Sections 1 through 4 of the Initiative provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that the City carries out Initiated Ordinance’s policy goals. Indeed, sound city administrators may be naturally inclined to seek funding from the sources identified in Section 5. But they need not do so. In the end, such matters are pre-eminently administrative and best left in the City’s hands. In sum, since Sections 5 through 7 are administrative in nature, they are not subject to the referendum powers reserved to the City’s electors by either the Colorado Constitution or the City Charter. IV. REMEDY BY SEVERANCE. Because the Court holds that the Initiated Ordinance contains provisions that are legislative—and thus proper subjects for an initiative—and provisions that are not, it must address whether severance of the Initiated Ordinance is an appropriate remedy. The Court concludes that severance is, indeed, an appropriate remedy and that the administrative matters may be severed from the balance of the initiative. Judicial exercise of the power to sever impermissible portions of a proposed ordinance promotes the people’s right to enact laws through the initiative process. See Bull, 143 P.3d at 1138. As the Court of Appeals explained, initiatives are largely a product of grassroots activists with limited resources, and striking an entire initiative based on flawed provisions would cost significant time and money on the part of proponents and thereby impede the people’s ability to initiate laws. Id. Thus, a court may sever an impermissible portion of an initiative if the following conditions are met: (1) standing alone, the remainder of the proposed bill can be given legal effect; (2) deleting the impermissible portion wouldn’t substantially change the spirit of the measure; and (3) it’s evident from the content of the measure and the circumstances surrounding its proposal that the sponsors 23 and subscribers would prefer the measure to stand as altered, rather than to be invalidated in its entirety. Id. Application of the above factors leads to the conclusion that severance of Sections 5 through 7 is appropriate. First, Sections 1 through 4, which deal with legislative matters, will have legal effect and will effectuate the heart of policy matter at issue here. As discussed above, Sections 1 through 4, standing alone, propose the new policy of acquiring Hughes Stadium Property for the purpose of transforming it into public open-space. Regardless of specific decisions regarding from where and how to obtain funding proposed in Sections 5 through 7, Sections 1 through 4 and 8 will still have legal effect. Second, deleting Sections 5,6 and 7 wouldn’t substantially change the spirit of the measure— principally, to acquire the Hughes Stadium Property and rezone the property. Third, given the content of the Initiated Ordinance, the circumstances surrounding its proposal, and defendants’ counsel’s statement during argument that they wish to have at least Sections 3 and 4 reach the electorate, the third prong is satisfied. It’s evident, too, that defendants don’t wish the altered Initiated Ordinance to be invalidated in its entirety, further satisfying the last prong. Therefore, the Court concludes that severance is appropriate and that the impermissible portions—Sections 5, 6, and 7—be severed from the remainder of the Initiated Ordinance. In an appendix below, the Court includes the severed version of the Initiated Ordinance. V. CONCLUSION. For the reasons set forth above, the cross motions for summary judgement are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows. The cross motions are GRANTED as to Sections 3 and 4. The City’s motion is also GRANTED as to Sections 5, 6, and 7; defendants’ motion is DENIED as to Sections 5, 6, and 7. Defendants’ motion is also GRANTED as to 24 Sections 1 and 2, and 8, and the City’s motion is DENIED as to those sections. Therefore, in accordance with Colo. R. Civ. P. 57(a), it is ORDERED and DECLARED that: (a) Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 of the Initiated Ordinance are legislative matters subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a). (b) Sections 5, 6, and 7 of the Initiated Ordinance are administrative matters not subject to the initiative powers the City’s registered electors have under Article V, Sections 1(2) and 1(9) of the Colorado Constitution and under the City’s Charter Article X, Section 1(a). (c) Sections 5, 6, and 7 are SEVERED from the Initiated Ordinance. (d) The City shall submit to the electors the Severed Initiated Ordinance reproduced below. The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment. SO ORDERED on this 3rd day of February, 2021. BY THE COURT: _________________________ JUAN G. VILLASEÑOR District Court Judge 25 Appendix — Severed Initiated Ordinance WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have shown strong support to preserve and provide open space, natural areas, community separators, wildlife habitat, and trails for today and for the future; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins citizens currently enjoy their open spaces and natural areas; the recreation they provide, such as walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing; the educational opportunities and programs provided to people of all ages and backgrounds; and the beautiful landscapes and views they provide; and WHEREAS, open space, natural areas, wildlife habitat, community separators, agricultural lands, and trails benefit all members of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, conserved open space and natural areas help make Fort Collins a highly desirable place to live, work, and visit; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins values sustainability in policies, plans, strategies and projects that align with its Triple Bottom Line decision-making philosophy of social, economic and environmental well-being to meet its citizens’ present needs and the needs of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we all depend; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins have provided continuous funding for open space and natural areas acquisition and maintenance since first voting for a capital improvement sales tax in 1973 and approving extensions or new revenue sources in every election such a question has appeared on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins has conserved over 40,000 acres of open space and natural areas since 1973; and WHEREAS, the property formerly home to the Colorado State University’s Hughes Stadium is a currently undeveloped 164.56-acre parcel of land that was recently annexed into the city of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has many distinct zoning districts in its land use code; and WHEREAS, one zoning classification in the Fort Collins land use code is “Public Open Lands,” which currently allows for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education centers, subject to administrative or Planning and Zoning Board review; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property is currently zoned as Transition District (T) pursuant to Division 4.12 of its land use code, which is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property occupies an area in between the current Maxwell Natural Area and Pineridge Natural Area; and 26 WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium Property and conversion into a public open lands area would build upon the City’s significant history of preserving open spaces and would provide an invaluable social, economic, and environmental resource for current and future generations of Fort Collins residents; and WHEREAS, the Hughes Stadium property would represent a crown jewel acquisition for Fort Collins open space; and WHEREAS, absent acquisition and conservation efforts under this ordinance, the Hughes Stadium property would forever be lost to residential and/or commercial development; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the Hughes Stadium property by the City of Fort Collins should occur using existing voter-approved open space sales tax revenue and other funds currently available to the City, financing agreements, grants, partnerships with other local governments, or other available fiscally responsible mechanisms; and WHEREAS, publicly available information indicates Colorado State University values the Hughes Stadium property at $10 million, and the City should use that figure as a starting point in its negotiations to acquire the property at its fair market value; and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the Hughes Stadium property into the Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Article 1, Division 1.3 and Article 4, Division 4.13 of the land use code would be necessary to convert the property into an area for parks, recreation and open lands, and wildlife rescue and education. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City shall acquire the Hughes Stadium property, a 164.56-acre parcel of land legally described in Section 3 of Fort Collins Ordinance No. 123 (2018) (“Annexing the Property Known as the Hughes Stadium Property Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado”) at its fair market value for the purpose of using it for parks, recreation and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and education. Section 3. That notwithstanding any contrary designation in the April 2019 City Plan or any action taken by the Council subsequent to its annexation of the Hughes Stadium property but before the passage of this Ordinance, the City shall rezone the Hughes Stadium property as Public Open Lands (P-O-L) zoning district pursuant to Division 4.13 of the City of Fort Collins land use code immediately upon passage of this Ordinance. Section 4. That the City shall not de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or subsequently rezone the Hughes Stadium property to any designation other than Public Open Lands without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council. Section 5. [Severed]. 27 Section 6. [Severed]. Section 7. [Severed]. Section 8. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the majority of the voters of Fort Collins during the first available regular city election, and any registered voter in Fort Collins has legal standing to petition for injunctive and/or declaratory relief related to City noncompliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. District Court, Larimer County, State of Colorado 201 LaPorte Avenue, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80521-2761 (970) 494-3500 ▲ COURT USE ONLY ▲ THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Colorado home rule city and municipal corporation, Plaintiff, v. PLANNING ACTION TO TRANSFORM HUGHES STADIUM SUSTAINABLY CORP., a Colorado nonprofit corporation; and ELENA M. LOPEZ; MELISSA ROSAS; and PAUL PATTERSON, each in their official capacity as a petition representative of the persons signing the petition for a citizen-initiated ordinance relating to the City of Fort Collins rezoning and acquiring certain real property, Defendants. Case No.: 2020 CV 30833 Courtroom: 3B ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO AMEND FINAL JUDGMENT The parties have filed a joint motion to amend the final judgment under Colo. R. Civ. P. 59. The motion covers two items: it seeks (1) amendment of the Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motions for Summary Judgment to reflect that plaintiff City of Fort Collins (“City”) didn’t concede that a clause in Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance was legislative; and (2) revision of the ballot measure to correctly reflect the Court’s rulings in the prior Order and here. The motion is granted as to item 1. The Order is amended to reflect that the City doesn’t concede that the clause “cease acquisition efforts” in Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance is legislative. As the City notes, it never has conceded that given its pleadings and arguments. The Court thought that the City was, in fact, conceding that the entirety of Section 4 was legislative, but it should’ve clarified that point with counsel. In any event, since the motion is joint, it’s granted. The DATE FILED: February 7, 2021 9:51 AM CASE NUMBER: 2020CV30833 EXHIBIT B 2 Court again thanks counsel for both parties for their professionalism and presentations during argument. On item two, the motion is denied to the extent the City seeks amendment of the judgment to reflect that the clause “cease acquisition efforts” is administrative. The Court already ruled—with or without the City’s concession—that all of Section 4 is legislative, including the objectionable clause: In turn, Section 4 provides that the City can’t de-annex, cease acquisition efforts, or rezone the Hughes Stadium Property without voter approval. As part of a rezoning initiative, Sections 3 and 4 are “general and permanent in character,” involving the promulgation and effectuation of a new land-use policy for the Hughes Stadium Property. And Section 4 of the Initiated Ordinance makes it crystal clear that the rezoning can’t be undone, except by another voter-approved ordinance, further cementing the permanent nature of the policy. Order at 15–16 (citation omitted); see also id. at 16 (“Section 4 prevents the City from de-annexing or ceasing acquisition efforts without voter approval.”). The motion, however, is granted to the extent the parties request that the ballot measure that’ll be submitted to the electors be amended to correctly reflect the Court’s rulings. It is, therefore, ordered that the City submit the following ballot measure to the electors: PROPOSED CITIZEN-INITIATED ORDINANCE Shall the City enact an ordinance requiring the City Council of the City of Fort Collins to immediately rezone upon passage of the ordinance a 164.56-acre parcel of real property formerly home to the Hughes Stadium from the Transition District to the Public Open Lands District, and requiring the City to acquire the property at fair market value to use said property for parks, recreation, and open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration, and further prohibiting the City from de-annexing, ceasing acquisition efforts or subsequently rezoning the property without voter approval of a separate initiative referred to the voters by City Council, and granting 3 legal standing to any registered elector in the City to seek injunctive and/or declaratory relief in the courts related to City noncompliance with said ordinance. YES/FOR _____ NO/AGAINST _____ The Clerk is directed to enter an amended final judgment. SO ORDERED this 7th day of February, 2021. BY THE COURT: ______________________________ JUAN G. VILLASEÑOR District Court Judge