Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Legislative Review Committee - 10/08/1993 -r HPDesk Local Print for Andrea RIEGER of Item 13. Message.Dated:10/19/93 at 1159. Subject:LRC MEETING MINUTES Sender:Andrea RIEGER /CFC/Oi Contents:2. FROM:Andrea RIEGER /CFC/0i Part 1. FROM:Andrea RIEGER /CFC/Ol TO:DISTRIBUTION Part 2. LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 8,1993 MEMBERS PRESENT:Chris Kneeland,Chairperson Alan Apt STAFF PRESENT:Jerry Brown Stewart Ellenberg Dave Feldman Ken Forest,PR-i Tom Gallier Alan Krcmarik Tom Peterson Andrea Rieger Tom Shoemaker Meeting called to order at 12:30. 1.UPDATE ON INTERIM COMMITTEES TAX POLICY Focusing on the Gallagher Amendment,which limits the percentage of residential property tax that can be collected in the aggregate. Concern that Amendment 1 and the Gallagher Amendment may impact Colorado’s economic development.Doug Bruce testified at a committee hearing in September that property tax should be cut all together.Alan Krcmarik attended a public hearing that the Tax Policy Committee held at C.S.U.on Sept.27. The committee is also looking at tax increment financing.Tax increment financing diverts money from counties and school districts.Part of the dilemma is that cities promote economic 4 flopment using tax increment financing,which increases demands t~county and school district services.Tax increment financing was intended to be a tool for cities to deal with blighted or marginal areas.When the increment financing goes away,the taxes revert back to their original structure.Ken Forest from Poudre R 1 mentioned that the Sta e will make up shortfalls iii school’s general operating budget due to increment financing.CML has requested that the City understand the County’s issues with tax increment financing. (Euld discuss tax issues of interest at the December evening meeting with State legislators. SCHOOL FINANCE Committee has not been too active recently.Poudre R-l will meet with Rep.Reeves to discuss their concerns.Should have more news in November. As a note:Poudre R-l has enough money to build new schools through the year 2000,however may face a shortfall in operating budgets for these new schools. STATE SCHOOL LAND The September 15 meeting of this committee was a clean-up meeting on water issues.Some discussion on administrative decisions,with little or no impact to us. On October 6 and 7 the committee started to address school land issues.There is a controversy between the Land Board,the educational lobby and the agricultural interests over school land. The question is what does the State constitution allow in managing these lands?The Land Board has been selling lands,putting the pynceeds in an escrow fund,and then buying more land to try to 3olidate land holdings.The educational lobby would like the Land Board to put the proceeds from land sales into the educational fund,so that the interest can by used for educational programs. (The other side of the coin is that the residual value of the holdings may be greater than the educational trust fund,as the trust fund does not reinvest the interest earnings.) In any case,the goal for the Fossil Creek parcel will be to maximize the value of that parcel.Therefore,it will be sold as land that could be developed.Direction given that we form a subcommittee (comprised of Tom G.,Tom S.and Tom P.?)to start exploring the issues around Fossil Creek.Perhaps we can request an evaluation of conservation values on the property,which may enable us to be “first in line”should we want to purchase the land.Also,we could see if the Land Board would consider a 50 or 100 yr.lease. 2.BALLOT INITIATIVE ON WORKER’S COMPENSATION There is a ballot initiative on worker’s compensation which would allow employees to choose their own doctor.If this passes,it may increase worker’s compensation costs 10-15%. 3.PUBLIC-PRIVATE COOPERATION MEETING ~CML committee on privatization expects that privatization will ±&~..in be an issue in ‘94.At this time the committee is trying to develop an informational packet on the subject with CACI (Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry.)Ann Azari and Susanne Edminster will attend the next committee meeting on October 13. 4.ENHANCED EMISSION TESTING The option to opt-in to the enhanced testing program will remain ~‘ough the ‘95 legislative session.Also learned that we have -e flexibility in designing an emission program than we previously thought.Working on emission testing in context with our local air quality program. We need to analyze the emissions program in Denver for effectiveness. 5.IMPACT FEES There may be legislation introduced during the next General Assembly that would (1)Restrict the ability of one entity to impose impact fees on the behalf of another entity,(2)Limit the type of fees that could be charged,and (3)Require some statement or study by the regulating government to determine the impact of the fees on housing availability and cost.Impact fees are not covered under Mtendment 1. We will know more at the end of October whether to expect such legislation.This may not be the year to push this legislation,as it has been a good year for development.Need to discuss home rule powers in general and in relation to impact fees at our December evening meeting with State legislators. 6.COMMENTS ON THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (te would like our comments on their comments on thereauthorizationoftheCleanWaterAct.We decided to wait until the State’s official letter was sent on November 1 to respond.At that time,we can discuss at the LRC and respond directly to the federal officials. 7.LEGISLATIVE AGENDA The guidelines for use are appropriate.Discussed each issue in the Agenda.Should send out draft copies of the Agenda to Council members for their comments,with a memorandum outlining the purpose and the new policy statements.Discuss comments at the Nov.LRC meeting,and schedule for approval at the first Council meeting in December. 8.OTHER BUSINESS The County is addressing the KDVR tower.Do they need anything from the City? Legislation which would allow us to opt-out of ~mendment 1 may again be introduced in ‘94. If we were to try to have legislation which prohibits preemption of home rule powers,it may do more harm than good.Decided to t~’ress the preemption of home rule powers issue by issue. Adjourned:1:50 Next meeting:November 12,1993 End of Item 13.