HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Full - Legislative Review Committee - 02/25/1994 - Regular Meetingr
TilE COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF FORT COLLINS
LEGISLATLVE REVIEW COMMITTEE
February 25,1994 CIC ROOM 12:00 P.M.
1.Finance
SB 68 -Debt Repayment Plans
NB 1112 -Regulation of Practices Related to Consumer Debt
HE 1286 -Election Clarification
HE 1296 -Standardized Sales Tax Forms
2.Risk Management
HE 1280 -Governmental Immunity
3.Police
Concealed Weapons Bills (KB 1025,1076,SB 90)
4.Building Inspection
HE 1119 -Qualification of Electrical Inspectors
5.Natural Resources
SB 89 -Trash Haulers’Bill
HB 1168 -Pesticide Regulation
NB 1264 -Regulation of Air Pollution
6.Poudre Fire Authority
NB 1249 -Pension Investment Limits
7.Water Issues
8.Updates on Initiatives
9.Other Business
THE LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMI~~EE MEETING WILL BE HELD IN THE CIC
ROOM.CITY CABLE 27 WILL BE CABLECASTING MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE
REVIEW COMMITtEE.THE MEETINGS WILL BE CABLECAST LIVE ON CHANNEL
27 FROM 12:00 -1:30 P.M.AND REPLAYED ON FRIDAY AT 8:00 P.M.
0
HPDesk Local Print for Andrea RIEGER
Start of Item 64.
Message.Dated:02/22/94 at 1556.
Subject:HB1280 Update
Sender:Stewart ELLENBERG /CFC/01 Contents:2.
CC:Andrea RIEGER /CFC/01
Part 1.
FROM:Stewart ELLENBERG /CFC/01
TO:DISTRIBUTION
Part 2.
I wanted to update you on the status of HB1280,the proposed bill
that would have radically changed the Governmental Immunity Act.
At the Judiciary Committee hearing on 2-15-94,Representative
Foster and the Colorado Trial Lawyers’Association unveiled a more
“friendly”bill that would change the Act in only three ways:
1.Changing the definition of a motor vehicle to:
a.Any independent object mounted on wheels,or
runners,whether motor-driven or not,which can be
pushed,pulled,or carried by another vehicle,or
b.Any motor-vehicle that can be used to carry persons
or things on land.
2.New liability for “any operation by any public entity
which places a person under the age of 18 years under the
supervisory or custodial care of a convicted sex
offender.
3.Extending pre-trial discovery while the issue of
sovereign immunity is being decided.
I will soon receive information from our insurance agent concerning
the additional cost,if any,these changes will have on our
liability insurance.
Item #1 extends liability to public entities for all types of
vehicles that the city operates.However,I cannot argue that the
we should not be liable for operating a piece of construction
equipment negligently.If we had to compromise in any of the three
areas,it would be this one.
Concerning item #2,sex offenders,Jean Helburg of Recreation gave
me an estimated number of 800 Recreation employees who typically
work with minors.Multiplying this number by the cost to run an
annual criminal history check will determine the annual cost to
taxpayers to minimize liability if this law passes.The minimum
cost will be $16 for a check of Colorado convictions.If the
employee has lived out of state for any period in the last seven
years,then criminal checks will need to be run by each state
and/or county at a cost of $19-20 per check.The estimated cost
to run annual criminal checks on current employees as well as
perspective employees is $20,000.
0
Item #3 could increase costs to defend claims where the City has
governmental immunity.Under current law passed in 1986,if
governmental immunity is an issue,the only pre-trial discovery
that is permitted must relate to the issue of immunity.This was
implemented to reduce litigation costs.I cannot determine what
cost this could have,as the court will determine if discovery can
proceed “for good cause”.
I am concerned that this bill could be amended in the future to
bring back some of the other negative aspects of the bill in its’
original form.If the bill passes out of the appropriations
committee,we should contact our legislators and encourage them to
amend the bill or vote against it.Any other suggestions would be
appreciated.
Stewart -#6774.
End of Item 64.
r r
NB 1119
HB 94-1119 Would allow cities and counties can waive a two-year experience requirement for
the electrical inspectors they employee.Felix Lee is prepared to discuss with the Legislative
Review Committee how this would benefit the City of Fort Collins.
This bill passed the House on third reading Wednesday,February 23.It has moved to the
Senate,and has been assigned to the Local Government Committee.It has not been calendared
yet.
Recommended position:Support.
cc:Louncil
Rri~n tN,lriiff
Overview:11-1264 (rhis bill was amended at 2nd reading 2122194.Third reading is 2123194)
Last year;local governments such as Fort Collins lost their ability to set local air quality standards
more stringent than the state under S-lOS.
Under H-1264,CDH and the air quality control commission would lose their ability to set many
Colorado air quality standards more stringent than minimum federal requirements.
This runs contrary to federal intent and the federal 1990 “CLEANAIR ACT”Under the state implemen
tation offederal laws known as cooperative federalism,states are actually encouraged to go beyond thefed
eral minimum requirements and set more stringent and innovative stan dan/s as they see fit,e.g.,Caflfornia.
&cCkfl 4’73-634~
0 0
r
•D oug Bruce is loose.Again.Just when
you thought it was safe to go back to
earning a living,Bruce has hurled a
ba~ket of hand grenades at the Colorado
~oñomy under the misleading label of his
proposed “Election Reform Amendmeht.”
When Bruce’s petition carriers asked
me to sign his latest 1,680-word attack on
réptesentative government,,the only
thing they explained was that it would
‘2iniit politicians’pay increases.”But Un
Iik’è most of the citizens Bruce misled into
sigding his petitions,I actually read the
whole document.In the process,I discov
•ei~è~‘it would do a lot to limit my pay
indreases —and yours,too,if you work in
%tbe Thrivate sector as I do.
••‘Oh,Bruce doesn’t put any legal limits
ob 9our pay,of course.But he throws so
many crippling blows at business and de
v~eldpment in Colorado that if Bruce II
gaises,you’ll be lucky to keep the job you
kav~,let alone get a pay increase.No
wönder the state’s leading business group,
theCColorado Association of Commerce
anW Industry,bluntly called Bruce II
“?i4~for Colorado and bad for business.”
‘fJØ basic problem,‘as always,is that
California trans
plant Bruce has
very little under
standing of how
Colorado works.
When he radically
changes the rules
for the 1,973 gov
ernmental units in
Colorado,he
B doesn’t understandORthehavochewill
EWEGEN wreak.I grew up in Col
orado and I’ve covered its state and local
governments for 30 years.Even so,my
knowledge of local government is like the
Platte River —a mile wide and an inch
deep.No one individual can understand
the details of how 63 counties,266 muni
cipalities,176 school districts and 1,467
special districts work,or how they inter
act between themselves and the state and
federal governments.
But I at least recognize my ignorance
and talk to local citizens before writing
about something that affects them.I’ve
never forgotten that the people of Pueblo
and Norwood and Lamar know infinitely
more about Pueblo and Norwood and La
mar than I do.That’s why I remain such a
strong advocate of local control.Bruce,
on the other hand,just loves to impose his
own rules on local voters.
To consider just one element of the cha
os Bruce II would cause,look at how it
would paralyze local economic develop
ment efforts.Talk to responsible land de
velopers and you’ll hear the same tale:
they can .live with any reasonable set of
zoning and development restrictions.
They’ll go through any number of hear
ings,work with all the homeowners,con
sult with city planners until they’re blue
in the face.But in the end they need one
thing —a piece of paper that says they
can dig dirt.It’s called a building permit.
Until they have legal authority to trans
form their cow pasture into your new
home or your new shopping center,they
can’t borrow the money from the banks to
start construction.
Hidden deep within Bruce II,however,
is a provision that would allow any dis
gruntled citizen —even one —to delay
any such project by up to two addit,nal
I
deep in Doug Bruce’s latest scheme
~Lh tQü
growth’
signatu~~needed to force such an elec;
Hon to nominal levels while removing vir
tually all barriet’s to fraud.If the anti,
growther5 meet this low standard,the is4
sue must be voted on at the next regularly
scheduled election.Depen4fng Upon when
the petitions were turned in,that could
mean up to another year of automatic de,
lay.The upshot is that a developer who~
faces even token Opposition could be stall-’
ed for up to two years —while costs soan
and market opportunities erode.
When former Coy.Dick Lamm proposJ
ed even modest controls on grow~in thç
‘70s,he was vilified as a “no growth ex~
tremist.”But when Doug Bruce buries an’
automatic two-year moratorium on every
significant economic developzrnnt project
in the state,he calls it “election refo-m
No Wonder Bruce buried another Io
called “reform”in Bruce II —a clause
limiting all future ballot titles to no more
than 75 Words.He’s hoping against hope
that you’ll never read the whole text of
his hare-brained scheme
Because if you understand BruceIx’
and value your job,yot~’ll vote “no.”
Bob Ewegen is assistant editoriaL~90 editor of The Pos~
0
Di~a moratoriy~0
years beyond the present already lengthy/
approval process./
That’s because Bruce removes virtØl.
ly all restriduo,,~on the initiative prytesg
and allows citizens to file initiativerover.
turifing every government action,except
for a maximum of six emergency laws
per year.Here’s how the Bruce Anti-
Growth Moratorium would work:
w Bruce prohibits any action by a city
council,county commission or Special dis
trict from becoming final for 90 days,in
cluding zoning decisions.That automau~
cally adds 90 days of additional delay to
every residential or commercial project
—in itself a costly blow to business.
1”Any citizen can use those 90 days to
take out petitions seeking to overturn that
zoning He then has nine months to gather
signatures,As a practical matter,that
means even one sorehead —and there’s
always at least one sorehead,if only Tom
Gavin —can delay a project up to one
full year,even if he never actually gath
ers a single signature.The reasonis that
no bank will lend money on a project that
could be overturned by an ele.etion
V Finally,Bruce slashes the number of
r cc:ELT 2/16/94
For your infur-iitctL~utt.
•Formula grant eliminated,Discretionary
Grant doubled to $100 million.
S $1.72 billion for 50,000 new police officers
•Juvenile justice programs would receive an
overall Increase of $69 tuITion that will fund
current programs end a new $100 mihion
initiative.
•$100 million to Implement the Brady law
•Increased funding for rural drug enforce-
mont
•Increased funding to localities without state
fnterlerence.Programs deemed ‘success
ful,’such as DARE,would be funded under
the discretionary grant.Others are expect
ed to be picked up under other Justice
Department Grant programs.
•Cities and towns would be eligible for direct
grants to hire or rehIre additional communi
ty.poriclng oriented law enforcement offi
cers and additional programs aimed to
enhance community policIng activities.
•A new $100 million initiative would provide
grants to states to reduce juvenIle participa
tion in gangs and juvenile drug tralficldng.
Grants could fund state-run programs or
fund grants to local governments to run pro
grams to do so.
•Grants would assist localities develop effec
tive law enforcemant and prosecution
strategies to combat violence against
women Including educational programs for
judges dealing with sexual assault and
domestic violence,and require mandatory
arrests In cases in which police determine
that domestic violence has occurred.
•NIC supports increased funding.lle~dbiity.
and efforts to address youth drug abuse,
crime,and violence.
•NLC supports federal legislation which
would provide funding for cities and coun
ties to develop programs to address the
problems of domestic violence through pre
vention,treatment and effective prosecu
tion.
I NLC supports legislation aimed at assisting
rural communities address the unique
anti-drug,crime and violence needs of
these communities,
r
SO
President Clinton’s Budget At-A-Glance
What it Means To The Nation’s Cities
Issues-Budget Changes -Municipal Impact NLC Position
Housing and •t~i bte%nrdeui.h~eG •Daa.ase hi bide trcoee U~IOAtlfl1~’•t&Ceçpce.saflhbalorc000 and FOAL•$575 rtai eA Ii H0L~.end RaGiwy popern with grater bitlily hi I Nc.C acpat sibta to mae flees pograrre
I kataing Innelass taat $lZ bSon we ci Inlase ~Ias ri~.Settle,Community ~•~
—-_-Development •~
be~
.I $205.itoelirdnate&ugs hfctoflg.
Transportation a Mass TransltSecticn 9 formula wards I Decrease In transit operaing assistance;•NLC opposes flrislt cperatingIncreasehicapitalgrants,25%decrease hi Raiding for Ahport and Improvement Program oats,NW sr.çport the move toward it~bid-
And operating assistance.-would stay the same;greater emphasis overall big of ISTEA.I $1.52 baice (a 15%decrease)In discretionary en hirasbucture kivestnert
Infrastructure gards,S HighwaysS2ol billori which meets the ISTEA -
authorized levels forcore Federal-Aid
Highways.
•Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems
(MIS):Increase to $589 million.
Environment a Increase ftmdsforCleanWaterSRFfl6 nil-I No appreciable change hi stahm quoIonINoslg~ticant relief from tr&mded federal envi-•NLCaçporls both loans and grants to assist
•Fund a new dmw*ig water SRF at $700 tx~-ronruental mandates,rnw*~afilies In meeting $130 billion In federal
Ion S No OcrTYT&TI&d to assuring scerce local drink’Clean Water Ad mandates
•Cut grants to sk coastal dtiei for wastewatar big water resources are targeted to contaiN-S NLC açpods aflernativo wes of proposed
tmaunert by 80%.from $500 ntlcn to $100 narita of pitlic heaTh cor~m.revenues for drinking water SRF.
mniticri -
I b-cease funding for erdorcemait and ahalnai
Investigations by 25%,from $107 niilion to
$137,Smtlion .—“,--
..S Oar funding for health ella .eaea~i on ~‘~.....,---
lamhiarthidifrddng water
•EpiasGCnFRstJObs I Dept.of Labor pledged Its support for legisla-I NW opposes the expansion of OSHA to allEducation,I Joe Ccqx k-cease of $117 ralhiori don to expand OSI-tAto a!states and locell-states and localities,since its Imrplementaticn
S School-to-woric $300 mition hi hmd’ng split ties,wit be a resbictive and costly mandate.Jobs and between DepartnentofLaborend •Woddhicieaseresaarceslorycuthemploy.•Ntoaappodstheserycutherrçlo)q-nent
•Department of Ethration Qnaease of 200%)mail and Jcb baining progams,career-and programs and the School-To Work program,Training •Dislocated Workers:Increase of $347 million rebahtg assistance for a&dls.(31%)-
S A$tOSrmT.onbicreaselorsunmerjcbs.
Children,•Head Start Increase of $700 mirmri to $4 N-•Increases kwe*uemil hi fammes and d~dren •NLC supports full funding for Head Start,asIonfor-early leaning,siçpoit’ve services and dis-wet as Increased funding for early leaning
Youth and I Child Core and Development Block Giant ease prevention.and disease prevention services.Increase of $172 million to$l.091 talon S UHEAP .edj~on burdens low Income house-I NLC opposes the near 50 pe~it oat In the
Families I Chid lrrrinilzation Increase of $195 mmon to holds wllhi Ngh eriergycosis.UREA?Program.$SSSmtion -
-•Ryan White AIDS Resource Ad Increase of
-$93 rn’h.onto$572r,ilion
I &thetance AI,we aid Prevention mease of
$BSmhiaito$1S56b.lionaLowIncomeHomeEnergyAssistance
Program QJHEAP~decrease ci $707 nillon
?$~~0n~G0ri
Crime &
Justice