The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes - Legislative Review Committee - 01/19/1996 -r L Cit of Fort Collins THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE UPDATE The mission of the Legislative Review Committee is to analyze proposed legislation and express City policies and positions on issues which affect the quality of life and the governance of our community. The attached update is a newly provided service designed to keep you informed of the legislative activities in the City of Fort Collins.This update will provided every Thursday throughout the legislative session.If you have any questions regarding this information or the activities of the Legislative Review Committee please contact Blair IL Leist via E-mail or at extension 6796. Thank you. Included in this packet: I.Meeting minutes from the January 19th LRC meeting. II.Outgoing legislative correspondence The next Council-Staff meeting of the LRC is February 2,1996 from 11:30-1:OOpm. The Legislative Review Coin inittee meets from 11:30 a.m.to 1:00p.m.every 2nd Friday of the month and is cablecast live on Channel 27 with replays at specially scheduled limes. 300 Laporte Avenue •P.O.Box 580 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6790 •FAX (970)221-6329 0 (a Legislative Review Committee Council Member-Staff Meeting Meeting Minutes for January 19,1996 Council Attendance:Ann Azari,Alan Apt Staff Attendance:Gale McGaha-Mjller,Peter Dallow,Jaime Mares,Kevin Wilson,Deryle O’Dell,Liz Stroh,Diane Jones,Tom Vosburg,John DeHaes,Blair D. Leist (recorder). Guests:Water Storage and Supply Company (WSSC)Board Members:Fred Walker,Tom Moore,L.Waag;Ward Fischer ,WSSC Attorney;Bill Fischer,Fischer,Brown,Huddleson,Gunn Attorneys;Paul Graft et, Greeley City Manager;Philip Friedman,Natural Resources Advisory Board. Introductions of meeting participants were conducted. I.Land Exchange Proposal—Mike Smith,Water Utilities General Manager Mike opened the presentation by providing background information regarding the land involved in the exchange proposal.The complexities of this land exchange for exceed the scope of these meeting minutes,but the basics of the issue are as follows: •Rockwell Ranch and Timberline lake,land owned by the City of Fort Collins, Greeley,and WSSC,are proposed to be traded to the US Department of Agriculture which owns the land where the reservoirs of Barnes Meadow, Chambers Lake,Comanche,Hourglass,Joe Wright,Long Draw,Milton Seaman, Peterson Lake,and Twin Lakes. •The proposed legislation,to be carried by Representative Allard,was reviewed by the Water Board,and the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB),and the involved parties.The reviews resulted in changes to the language as it pertained to the required compliance with interim measures and a recovery program for the endangered species as addressed in a U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service biological opinion dated June 2,1994. •Concerns arose from the NRAB that the bill as originally written and subsequent rewrites,did not address the concerns listed above in regards to specific reservoirs. The LRC meeting facilitated discussion among all of the parties involved.The results of the discussion indicated that the parties were not striving for differing meanings in the language and that the confusion could be eliminated by clarification of the language. Action:Mike Smith will draft a memo for the February 6th Council meeting requesting Council discussion and direction regarding this issue.Ward Fischer (WSSC)will also provide a summary to WSSC’s position regarding the land exchange. 0 Ia.Telecommunications—Liz Stroh,ICS Liz presented information regarding telecommunications issues at both the federal and state levels.Briefly,SB-b concerns Municipal Rights of Way,and if passed,will provide rent-free use of public property by telecommunications companies.Existing rental agreements will become null and void and gives special treatment to telecomm providers over other that may have need to occupy or use public rights of way.On the federal scene,the City supports an amendment to the telecomm legislation that has been finalized in conference committee.This amendment is “a key ingredient to successful deregulation of telecommunication services for your constituents,who rely on local government to manage public Fights of way in their best interests.”Additional concerns about this bill include loss of local control over zoning telecomm ROW,construction standards,scheduling,and cost recovery. Action:Liz will prepare letters to state and federal legislators expressing the City’s position.(See attached.) lb.Norton’s Takings Bill--Tom Vosburg,CPES The City continues to oppose this taking bill on issues including the level of compensable taking,rough proportionality,ambiguous language,and local control. Detailed information and analysis regarding this bill may be found in the City Attorney’s memo dated January 4,1996 (delivered in the January 18th LRC packet). Action:A letter will be drafted to Senators Matsunaka,Norton,and Shaffer expressing the City’s opposition to this bill.(See attached.) Ic.State Land Board--Alan Apt,LRC Chair Governor Romer’s office is seeking input regarding modifying the State Land Boards member composition.The City supports changes and has offered some further suggestions. Action:Blair will draft a letter supporting changes and detailing suggestions. II.LRC Meeting Times Councilmember McCluskey is having difficulty in scheduling the Friday lunch meetings.Would like to remain on the LRC but must have a different meeting time. Action:Blair will contact Councilmember McCluskey for a list of optional meeting times.These times will be provided to staff for their response. In.Other Business None IV.Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 1:07 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Blair D.Leist rMayor City of Fort Collins January 23,1996 Senator Stan Matsunaka State Capitol Building Denver,CO 80203 Dear Senator ~ The Business Affairs and Labor Committee is considering SB96-10 regarding Municipal Rights of Way.I urge you to contact members of that committee and strongly voice your opposition to this bill. The City of Fort Collins supports and believes in competition in local telecommunication services.SB96-10 is a slap in the face to every local government.It promotes the State’s interest to the detriment of local responsibility and authority.City’s have historically negotiated and administered rights of way agreements with cable providers.Nothing has changed that would impact ability to continue those negotiations with any telecommunications provider.The local government is also in a position to best know and represent local interest.Removing authority to respond to local complaints and situations ties our hands. Lobbying from huge telecommunication providers to the detriment of the citizens of our communities should not be allowed.This bill is harmful to cities in the following areas: •Provides for rent-free use of public property.Again this is a traditional municipal responsibility •Terminates in-kind contributions from companies already required to provide those. •Existing Rental Agreements based on percentage of revenues are not allowed.Again, these agreements are already in place. •Gives special treatment to telecommunications providers over others who may have need to occupy or use public rights of way. 300 LaPorte AVenUe •P.O.Box 580 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6505 •FAX (970)224-6107 0 Senator Stan Matsunaka January 23,1996 Page Two The City of Fort Collins is not interested in erecting barriers to entry in the local telecommunications markets.Instead,the City is interested in fair and equitable conditions for all Rights of Way users.Again,please support our efforts to defeat this bill in committee. Sincerely, Ann Azari Mayor cc.Colorado Municipal League Senate Business Affairs and Labor Committee (a This letter was sent to the following Colorado State representatives: Representative Bill Jerke Representative Bill Kaufman Representative David Owen Representative Peggy Reeves Representative Steve Tool Senator Stan Matsunaka Senator Tom Norton Senator Bob Schaffer Senator Dave Wattenberg (a January 23,1996 Mayor Senator Carl Levin Russell Senate Office Bldg.,Room 459 Washington,D.C.20510 Dear Senator Levin: As Mayor of the City of Fort Collins,I strongly urge you to include the BartonlStupak amendment in any Telecommunications legislation finalized in the conference committee.This amendment passed overwhelmingly on the House floor,and is a key ingredient to successful deregulation of telecommunication services for your constituents,who rely on local government to manage public rights of way in their best interests.Completely eliminating that authority,or moving it to the federal level will not serve the citizens of Fort Collins or any other municipality.Adding responsibilities to the FCC is unnecessary additional bureaucracy.As Congress deals with the federal deficit and other budget issues,this is an additional expense that is unnecessary. There is little doubt that full and productive participation in the life of our country will increasingly depend on access to information.As this information superhighway evolves,cities are obligated to ensure that their role in protecting the interests of their communities is not compromised or sacrificed.The City of Fort Collins believes that,in order to maintain the continued integrity of the public right-of-way (PROW),the City should closely manage telecommunications installation and construction activities in the PROW.The City strongly supports the preservation of local authority in relation to matters of local impact,including construction standards,scheduling,method of installation and cost recovery. Regarding Zoning Authority,the City supports the current language in the bill that prohibits the FCC from preempting local decisions regarding zoning,as long as those decisions do not prevent providers from delivering services.Zoning and building codes are among the most basic responsibilities of local government.The responsibility should stay with local government. The use of the public streets and rights-of-way for the installation of pipes,conduits and wires to engage in private,for profit enterprise demands a fair payment for the use of the public’s asset Such payment should recover all City costs related to the activities of telecommunications providers,and also encompass the benefit provided to a private commercial entity by virtue of its occupancy of public property for the purpose of private commerce. City of Fort Collins 300 LaPorte Avenue •P.O.Box 580 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 .(970)221-6505 •FAX (970)224-6107 Senator Carl Levin January 23,1996 Page Two Institutional Networks:Section 106 of the House bill expressly preserves language preserving “institutional networks”.These networks provide important infrastructure for the City to connect buildings,control traffic lights,street lights,etc.Banning them could jeopardize public safety as well as put another econmical burden on cities to provide those functions with decreasing revenue and resources. Sincerely, Azari Mayor C This letter was sent to the following federal representatives and senators: Representative Bob Barr Senator Spencer Abraham Representative Joe Barton Senator Conrad Burns Representative Howard Berman Senator James Exon Representative Thomas J.Bliley,Jr.Senator Dianne Feinstein Representative Rick Boucher Senator Wendell Ford Representative Sherrod Brown Senator Slade Gorton Representative John Bryant Senator Ernest F.Hollings Representative Stephen E.Buyer Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison Representative John Conyers,Jr.Senator Daniel Inouye Representative John Dingell Senator Dirk Kempthorne Representative Anna G.Eshoo Senator Carl Levin Representative Jack Fields Senator Trent Loft Representative Michael P.Flanagan Senator John McCain Representative Daniel Frisa Senator Larry Pressler Representative Elton Gallegly Senator John Rockefeller Representative Bob Goodlatte Senator Ted Stevens Representative Bait Gordon Representative Dennis Hastert Representative Martin Hoke Representative Henry J.Hyde Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee Representative Scott Klug Representative Blanche Lincoln Representative Edward 3.Markey Representative Carlos 3.Moorhead Representative Michael G.Oxley Representative Frank Pallone Representative Bill Paxon Representative Bobby L.Rush Representative Dan Schaefer Representative Patricia Schroeder Representative Robert Scott Representative Clifford Stearns Representative Bait Stupak Representative Rick White Administrative Services —__C Cit of Fort Collins The Honorable Senator Bob Shaffer January 19,1996 State Capitol Building Denver,CO 80203 Dear Senator Shaffer, This letter is written in regard to SB-69 that is now in the Senate Local Government Committee.The City requests that you,as a member of that committee,vote against this bill.Our reasons for this request are as follows: •There are several lines of cases,both state and federal,that define a compensable taking.This bill goes further than any of those cases in defining the kinds of legislative or even administrative actions that would require compensation to be paid to an affected property owner. •Takings decisions have established different standards for examining the constitutionality of exactions imposed as a condition of approval,versus other kinds of regulations.The bill treats these different kinds of potential takings as if they can all be measured by the Dolan “rough proportionality”standard. In attempting to apply this standard to governmental regulation of existing uses (presumably including zoning laws,the bill would make an already difficult standard nearly impossible to interpret and apply. •The bill is ambiguous due to the number of phrases that should be better defined.The most notable of these are:“impair”and “diminish,“threat”to public health or safety,and “private property.” •The City of Fort Collins generally supports the recommendations of the Inter-Regional Council evolving from the Governor’s Smart Growth and Development initiative.Furthermore,the City will not support those recommendations if they conflict with other aspects of the City’s Legislative Agenda, or if those elements would limit the effectiveness of local planning efforts.Clearly,SB-69 would limit the effectiveness of such efforts. In general,the proposed bill is ambiguous and inconsistent,it would radically expand the judicial definition of a taking,and in so doing,it mixes the concepts of regulations and exactions to an extent that is not only unmanageable,but at least,nearly incomprehensible. As always,if we can be of further service,please contact the City’s Legislative Coordinator,Blair D.Leist at 221-6796.We thank you for your opposition to SB-69. Sincerely, [Signature on original) Ann Azari,Mayor 300 Laporte Avenue •P.O.Box 380 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (9rn ~‘I (790 •FAX (97rn 221-6329 0 Admi .~.strative Services C Cit of Fort Collins The Honorable Senator Stan Matsunaka January 19,1996 State Capitol Building Denver,CO 80203 Dear Senator Matsunaka, This letter is written in regard to SB-69 that is now in the Senate Local Government Committee.The City requests that you,as a member of that committee,vote against this bill.Our reasons for this request are as follows •There are several lines of cases,both state and federal,that define a compensable taking.This bill goes further than any of those cases in defining the kinds of legislative or even administrative actions that would require compensation to be paid to an affected property owner. •Takings decisions have established different standards for examining the constitutionality of exactions imposed as a condition of approval,versus other kinds of regulations.The bill treats these different kinds of potential takings as if they can all be measured by the Dolan “rough proportionality”standard. In attempting to apply this standard to governmental regulation of existing uses (presumably including zoning laws,the bill would make an already difficult standard nearly impossible to interpret and apply. •The bill is ambiguous due to the number of phrases that should be better defined.The most notable of these are:“impair”and “diminish,“threat”to public health or safety,and “private property.” •The City of Fort Collins generally supports the recommendations of the Inter-Regional Council evolving from the Governor’s Smart Growth and Development initiative.Furthermore,the City will not support those recommendations if they conflict with other aspects of the City’s Legislative Agenda, or if those elements would limit the effectiveness of local planning efforts.Clearly,58-69 would limit the effectiveness of such efforts. In general,the proposed bill is ambiguous and inconsistent,it would radically expand the judicial definition of a taking,and in so doing,it mixes the concepts of regulations and exactions to an extent that is not only unmanageable,but at least,nearly incomprehensible. As always,if we can be of further service,please contact the City’s Legislative Coordinator,Blair D.Leist at 221-6796.We thank you for your opposition to 58-69 Sincerely, [Signature on original] Ann Azari,Mayor 300 Laporte Avenue •[‘.0.Box 380 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6790 •FAX (970)221-6329 MayorC City of Fort Collins The Honorable Senator Tom Norton January 22,1996 State Capitol Building Denver,CO 80203 Dear Tom, This letter is written in regard to SB-69 that is now in the Senate Local Government Committee.The City of Fort Collins opposes this bill and requests that you,as sponsor of this bill,seriously consider postponing it indefinitely or amending several of its provisions.Our reasons for this request are as follows: •There are several lines of cases,both state and federal,that define a compensable taking.This bill goes further than any of those cases in defining the kinds of legislative or even administrative actions that would require compensation to be paid to an affected property owner. •Takings decisions have established different standards for examining the constitutionality of exactions imposed as a condition of approval,versus other kinds of regulations.The bill treats these different kinds of potential takings as if they can all be measured by the Dolan “rough proportionality”standard. In attempting to apply this standard to governmental regulation of existing uses (presumably including zoning laws),the bill would make an already difficult standard nearly impossible to interpret and apply. •The bill is ambiguous due to the number of phrases that should be better defined.The most notable of these are:“impair”and “diminish,“threat”to public health or safety,and “private property.” •The City of Fort Collins generally supports the recommendations of the Inter-Regional Council evolving from the Governor’s Smart Growth and Development initiative.Furthermore,the City will not support those recommendations if they conflict with other aspects of the City’s Legislative Agenda, or if those elements would limit the effectiveness of local planning efforts.Clearly,SB-69 poses detrimental consequences to both the Smart Growth initiative and local planning efforts. As you are aware,Tom,several analyses of this bill indicate the potential for broad administrative,economic, and social impacts.Because the bill has the ability to not only impact the City organization,but the entire community as well,we believe that as elected representatives,we should inform local citizens of the bill and its potential impacts.For that reason,please note that we will be making SB-69 and its associated analyses available to the public. In the meantime we welcome the opportunity to work with you on this legislation.Please contact the City’s Legislative Coordinator,Blair D.Leist at 221-6796 if we may be of further assistance. 300 LaPorte Avenue •P.O.Box 580 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 .(303)221-6505 •FAX (303)221-6329 0