The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes - Legislative Review Committee - 02/22/2001 -Legislative Review Committee DRAFT Minutes February 22,2001 CIC Room Attending: Council members:Kurt Kastein and Karen Weitkunat Staff:John Fischbach,Diane Jones,Ginny Brown,Steve Roy,Ron Phillips,and Tom Vosburg. Minutes were approved as written from the January 25,2001 LRC meeting. Discussion regarding last Thursday’s (2/15)CML Legislative workshop: The CML legislative workshop seemed well attended,however there were some logistical issues that would have made the experience better:crowding,no tables provided to take notes. Discussion regarding last night’s (2/21)Town Meeting on Growth: Purpose:Get feedback from citizens about growth in Colorado specifically as it relates to SB 148 &HB 1225. Panelists:Senator Peggy Reeves (moderator),Greg Byrne (Director CPES), Senator Ed Perimutter,Senator Stan Matsunaka,Representative Bryan Jameson and Jana Six (Sierra Club). Staff Action: Council member Kastein requested that Tom Vosburg closely examine SB 148 and HB 1225 with proposed amendments and make sure we aren’t missing any details. LRC Discussion: Comments were made about SB 148 and HB 1225 that caused concern among Council members Kastein and Weitkunat: •Towns can ‘t be less dense than they are now. Staff is not certain what the ramifications of this requirement would be. Further analysis of the bill is required to provide a comprehensive response. •A supermajority is required to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Most likely,this is a compromise from sponsors of SB 148.Having a supermajority to amend the Comprehensive Plan comes is a concept from from HB 1225 and last summer’s Amendment 24. Steve Roy commented that it is likely that this type of a requirement is inconsistent with our Charter.Can’t have more than our Council amending the comprehensive plan. Council member Kastein does not agree that sponsors of SB 148 are making concessions and is concerned that this is will lead to us giving up our local control. 0 •Presumption of Buildability. This concept was taken out of HB 1225.This is a necessary component for the Home Builders to support the bill. •A citizen mentioned two bills that Council member Kastein requested clarification on: 1.JIB 1092 Concerning Private Property Rights -“Takings” Allows the owner of private real property to file a claim with a governmental entity whose action may have inordinately burdened the property.Defines “inordinate burden”to include action of a governmental entity that has directly restricted or limited the use of private real property as a whole such that the property owner is permanently unable to attain either the reasonable investment-backed expectation for the existing use of the property or a vested right to a specified use of the real property that would otherwise exist in the absence of the governmental action. Sponsor(s):Rep.Johnson Status:2/2 House Local Govt.Comm.PT’s 2.HB 1329—Concerning Multimodal Capital Transportation Fund Creates the multi-modal capital transportation fund.Requires the state treasurer annually to transfer to the fund a specified amount of excess state revenues collected in state fiscal years 2001-02 through 2010-11 that the state is authorized by the voters to retain and spend in state fiscal years 2002-03 through 2011-12. Sponsor(s):Rep.Madden &Sen.Fitz-Gerald Status:2/21 —House Committee on Finance refers amended to Appropriations. Council member Weitkunat commented that it is important that some type of growth legislation be drafted.Currently,the legislative process allows us to have our say on what is drafted and it is more important to support the big picture. Update:HB 1209—Alcohol Tastings on Licensed Premises Summary:Allows liquor retailers to allow alcohol tastings on their premises. Provides an “opt-out”for municipalities that do not wish to participate.Counties and municipalities may further limit the number of days that tastings can occur. Status:Assigned to Senate Business Committee Response from Council members Weitkunat &Kastein: Kastein recommends that we still oppose the bill and Weitkunat is indifferent to it. Other:fiB 1195—Concerning Local Government Decisions Relating to Public Utilities Summary:Creates an appeal process that allows a public utility to appeal local government siting and building determinations for power plants and other facilities to the public utilities commission (PUC),if the local decision will impair the ability of the public utility to provide safe, reliable,or economical service to the public. Sponsor(s):Rep.Smith Status:1 17 Assigned to House Local Government Committee Recommendation by John Fischbach is to OPPOSE this bill in its current form and with CML proposed amendments.The amnedments don’t go far enough because it still violates basic local control decisions regarding land use.Utilities are trying to circumvent the municipal process for utility sitings. Staff Action:Steve Roy will research to what extent we are free from PUC regulation.If we are not bound too extensively by PUC regulation then this bill won’t affect us.