The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES-11/18/2003-RegularNovember 18, 2003 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Harris, Roy. Citizen Participation David May, Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce, spoke regarding the restructuring of the Fort Collins economy and presented a letter to the Council. He stated the community needed an economic plan, and economic forum or conference, and a mechanism for an ongoing dialogue on the economy. Ken Gordon, Chair of the Human Relations Commission, read a letter from the Commission requesting passage of a human rights protection ordinance in response to the Clear Act of 2003. He stated the proposed ordinance would protect all residents regardless ofrace, ethnicity or immigration status from inquiries about their immigration status by City employees. He spoke regarding the impact of the Patriot Act adopted after September 11, 2001. He stated the proposed ordinance would promote positive interaction and decreasing the likelihood of racial profiling. He stated adoption of the human rights protection ordinance would support the City of Character Designation and reinforce diversity. Bobbie Hisam, Crossroads Safehouse, spoke regarding the impact of the Clear Act on battered immigrant women. She stated a human rights protection ordinance would ensure such women that they can have police protection and live free from violence. David Autenrieth, bilingual elementary school teacher, asked the Council to adopt a human rights protection ordinance in response to the Clear Act to give residents the dignity to be able to walk through the streets without being interrogated about legal documentation or immigration status. Soccoro (last name unstated), assisted by a certified court interpreter, stated many immigrants live in fear of the Police working with immigration. She stated the Police had no business asking about immigration status and that immigrants were afraid of the Police. She stated many were afraid to be at this meeting. 283 V November 18, 2003 Parker Preble, Human Relations Commission member, spoke in support of adoption of a human rights protection ordinance. He stated the Commission supported the ordinance. Martha (last name unstated), assisted by a certified court interpreter, spoke regarding justice for immigrants seeking to provide their children with a better life. Christinea Ajala, Women of the Earth (a Lakota organization), spoke in support of a human rights protection ordinance and social justice for indigenous people. Angelica (last name unstated), assisted by a certified court interpreter, stated she was a legal resident of this country and spoke regarding her experience in being pulled over by a police officer for no reason. Glen Colton, 625 Hinsdale Drive, spoke regarding the economic health of Fort Collins. He stated the population continues to grow faster than 3% each year, that sales and use tax are near record levels, that building permits continue at a high rate, that unemployment is below the national average, that jobs continue to be added in the community, that the community continues to attract retirees, and that there are many people involved in economic development. He recommended sticking to the existing economic development policy and asked that taxpayer time and money not be spent to attract new primary employers to the area. An unidentified female speaker thanked the Council for listening to the speakers and considering a proposal relating to a human rights protection ordinance. She spoke regarding the courage of those who came to speak. Jimena (last name unstated) asked those who supported a human rights protection ordinance to stand or raise their hands. She spoke regarding the impact of the Clear Act on immigrants. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, commented regarding the economic health of the community. He stated serious policy and political mistakes could be made by overacting to the panic expressed by some. He stated sales and use tax revenues are the second or third highest in history, that housing starts are strong and that population growth is three times the national average. He stated the population is doubling every 20 years. He stated it was healthy that the "gold rush" had slowed. He stated the economy slowed because of normal cycles and a pre -September 11 recession. He asked that positive rather than negative statements be made about the economy. He stated the economic story of Fort Collins is actually very impressive. He asked that the focus be on growing new and existing businesses and retaining existing businesses without compromising good planning, the taxpayers or environmental protection. He asked for a focus on economic health rather than artificial stimulation of population growth rates or subsidizing large private corporations with taxpayer dollars. He asked that work be done in a deliberate and timely manner rather than a panic -reactive Em November 18, 2003 way. He stated Fort Collins' approach should be based on non -incentive plans and providing quality infrastructure and quality of life. Joe Rolland, Funding Partners, stated the hallmark of Fort Collins is its visionary approach to community planning. He stated it is important to discuss what the future should be. He stated there should not be a "knee jerk" reaction to current events. He stated business interests are emphasizing the need to plan for the future. (First name unintelligible) Callahan, social work student at CSU, spoke regarding bicycle and pedestrian safety on Laurel Street. She asked for a lighted crosswalk and signal at the intersection of Laurel and Mason Street near the train tracks. Citizen Participation Follow-up Mayor Martinez thanked those who spoke under Citizen Participation. Councilmember Tharp stated it was unknown whether the Clear Act would be passed by Congress. She stated the National League of Cities had taken a position against the Clear Act because of concerns that the act would give local police additional responsibilities without additional resources. She suggested letting the Congressional know individual feelings about the Clear Act. She stated the law should be followed with regard to illegal immigrants and expressed a concern that those who were here legally might be treated as if they were illegal immigrants because of their appearance. She expressed a concern that all citizens be protected within the law and stated she would like the City to look into the recommendations of the Human Relations Commission. Councilmember Roy thanked those who spoke under Citizen Participation. He stated it was unfortunate that so many people had so much fear and expressed a concern that every citizen should have the dignity deserved by all human beings. He encouraged the City Attorney to continue looking at legislation to give honor and dignity to every citizen. Councilmember Weitkunat thanked those who spoke about the Clear Act. She stated she did not see that there was atmosphere of "gloom and doom" about the economy or that the Council were alarmists or overreacting. She stated the warning signs were on the horizon about job losses and loss of retail and health care facilities and that this was a "sign to the community to pay attention." She stated many on Council were saying that it was time to find out where we are with the economy. She stated she did not see this as a knee jerk reaction and that this was a "slow and painful process" rather than a quick process. She stated she would like to engage the community in a discussion about the economy. Councilmember Bertschy stated a memo had been received from the City Attorney regarding protections against racial profiling and requested an expanded description of actions taken by police 285 November 18, 2003 officers when someone who does not speak English is stopped. He asked what the internal safeguards are with regard to providing equal rights to anyone stopped by the Police. He stated he would also like follow-up information on the comment about the lighted crosswalk at Mason and Laurel. Mayor Martinez stated he would like to see the Traffic Engineer look at the Laurel Street crosswalk. He stated he had received a letter stating that the Police would be required to enforce immigration laws under the Clear Act and that this was not true. He stated the Clear Act would give police this authority but would not mandate it. He stated it was not the policy of this Police Department to act on immigration laws in that way. He stated individuals are protected under the Civil Rights laws and that racial profiling is prohibited as stated in a legal opinion from the City Attorney that had been made public. He stated it is difficult to get people to report incidents of racial profiling and harassment. He stated there are processes within the Police agency and the Citizen Review Board to review such cases. He asked staff about the likelihood of the Clear Act being adopted. Mark Radke, Legislative Affairs, stated the Clear Act had not passed the first step in the Immigration Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee. He stated there had been no action on the bill to this point. Mayor Martinez stated the letter he received indicated that the Police Chief supported the ordinance and that this was not true. He encouraged people to provide information to help the Council decide how to reach people if such an ordinance were passed. He stated it was not good public policy to adopt an ordinance simply to make a political statement. He stated the Clear Act would pass an unfunded mandate to law enforcement agencies and that there are concerns about the federal government telling the City how to run the Police Department. He stated it was unlikely that the Clear Act would pass. Councilmember Hamrick thanked those who spoke on the Clear Act. He stated the City had some solid economic policies and that new programs should not be started until the whole situation was understood. Mayor Martinez stated he appreciated the specific suggestions presented in David May's letter. He stated the Council did not have a knee jerk reaction to the economy. Agenda Review City Manager Fischbach stated the agenda would stand as printed. November 18, 2003 CONSENT CALENDAR 7. Items Relating to Various Code Changes. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2003, Amending Sections 20-2 and 20-3 of the City Code Pertaining to the Abatement of Unsanitary or Dangerous Premises. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2003, Amending Section 9-2 of the City Code Pertaining to the Uniform Fire Code. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2003, Amending Section 2-671 of the City Code Pertaining to the Powers and Duties of the Director of the Office of Emergency Management. Following the blizzard of March, 2003, City and Poudre Fire Authority staff reviewed the need for any City Code amendments that would be helpful in effectively dealing with future emergency situations. These three Ordinances, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, clarify the authority of the City and PFA to take emergency actions, provide for the publication of emergency rules and regulations adopted by the City Manager, and provide a penalty for a knowing violation of such emergency rules and regulations. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2003, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Wastewater Fund for Prepayment of Debt Service. Each year, the Finance Department reviews all of the City's debt instruments to determine if there are opportunities to lower interest payments. This year, staff evaluated an opportunity to save interest by prepaying debt service from reserves held in the Wastewater fund. In 1995, the City of Fort Collins issued $13,800,000 of refunding bonds to lower annual costs of the Wastewater fund. The bonds mature in 2005. Under the conditions of the bond ordinance, the City may prepay the bonds that mature in 2004 and 2005 without any prepayment penalty. By prepaying the bonds, the City can avoid S 147,500 of interest costs on the bonds. Ordinance No. 147, 2003, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003. 9. Items Relating to the Appropriation of Miscellaneous Revenues for Police Services. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Police Services Safety Belt Program. 287 November 18, 2003 B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for Police Services and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services Operating Budget to the Grant Project. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Youth Community/Family Conferencing and Restore Programs and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Municipal Court Operating Budget to the Grant Project. The City has received the following grants for Police Services: A $3,000 grant from the Colorado Department of Transportation for the Colorado Click It or Ticket "November Mobilization" 2003 campaign for the enforcement of seat belt laws. A grant in the amount of $62,259 from the U.S. Department of Justice, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) program for the procurement of equipment and technology related to basic law enforcement functions. This grant requires a cash match of $6,918 which will be met by the existing Police Service budget. A grant in the amount of $47,195 from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, for the continuation and of the Restorative Justice Program. A cash match of $5,244 is required and will be met by the Municipal Court budget. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Radon Program and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Natural Resources Operating Budget to the Grant Project. This Ordinance appropriates the $15,000 CDPHE grant funds in the General Fund for the Radon Program. It also authorizes the transfer of $15,000 from the Natural Resources operating budget to the Grant Fund. The funds will be used to continue the radon education and testing programs. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 2003, Appropriating Storm Drainage Fund Prior Year Reserves into the Fossil Creek Basin Capital Proiect for the Construction of Storm Water Improvements Associated with the Timberline Road Waterline Improvement Proiect. The Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Master Plan identifies the need to improve the storm drainage culverts under Timberline Road at Fossil Creek, between Trilby and Carpenter Roads. The new culverts are a prerequisite for a future project that will remove approximately 105 homes from the Fossil Creek floodplain in the Paragon Point area. These WE November 18, 2003 improvements are adjacent to the Fossil Creek Wetlands Natural area on the west and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Natural area on the east. 12. Resolution 2003-124 Stating the City's Intent to Not Act as a Reviewing Entity in 2004 for the Colorado Historic Preservation Income Tax Credit for Ouali ingHistoricRehabilitation Projects under Colorado House Bill 90-1033 (CRS 39-22-514, as Amended). As a Certified Local Government, Fort Collins has the opportunity each year to choose to be a reviewing entity for the Colorado Historic Preservation Income Tax Credit during the next calendar year. The City Council must adopt a resolution stating whether or not it intends to take on this responsibility in the next year. Fort Collins became a Certified Local Government in 1991 when the Colorado Income Tax Credit was instituted, but didn't take on the reviewing entity function for this program until 1995. For three years, the Landmark Preservation Commission was the reviewing entity and performed design review on qualifying historic rehabilitation projects for the Colorado Income Tax Credit. They have declined the review from 1998 through 2003. 13. Resolution 2003-125 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into a Law Enforcement Assistance Fund (L.E.A.F.) Contract #L-24-04 with the Colorado Department of Transportation to Provide Funds for the Fort Collins Police Services Drunk Driving Enforcement Program. The Colorado Department of Transportation has awarded Fort Collins Police Services a 2004 Law Enforcement Assistance Fund (L.E.A.F.) grant in the amount of$40,000 to help reduce the number of drunk drivers in Fort Collins. This grant will provide overtime compensation for Fort Collins Police Officers who are involved in operations, which focus on the detection and arrest of drunk drivers. 14. Routine Easements. A. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities from Michael and Arlene Deitz, to underground electric services, located at 1612 Remington. Monetary consideration: $300. Staff: Patti Teraoka. B. Non-exclusive easement agreement from the Board of Governors of the Colorado State University System for sanitary sewer lines, located at the Natural Resources Research Center at the Colorado State University Main Campus South. Monetary consideration: $0. Staff: Came Daggett. ***END CONSENT*** HE November 18, 2003 Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Chief Deputy City Clerk Harris. Items Relating to Various Code Changes. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2003, Amending Sections 20-2 and 20-3 of the City Code Pertaining to the Abatement of Unsanitary or Dangerous Premises. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2003, Amending Section 9-2 of the City Code Pertaining to the Uniform Fire Code. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2003, Amending Section 2-671 of the City Code Pertaining to the Powers and Duties of the Director of the Office of Emergency Management. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2003, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Wastewater Fund for Prepayment of Debt Service. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Chief Deputy City Clerk Harris. 9. Items Relating to the Appropriation of Miscellaneous Revenues for Police Services. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Police Services Safety Belt Program. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for Police Services and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services Operating Budget to the Grant Project. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Youth Community/Family Conferencing and Restore Programs and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Municipal Court Operating Budget to the Grant Project. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Radon Program and Authorizing the Transfer of MatchingFunds unds Previously Appropriated in the Natural Resources Operating Budget to the Grant Project. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 161 2003, Appropriating Storm Drainage Fund Prior Year Reserves into the Fossil Creek Basin Capital Project for the Construction of Storm Water Improvements Associated with the Timberline Road Waterline Improvement Project. 290 November 18, 2003 19. Items Relating to the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing Projects/Programs and Community Development Activities: the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program, the Fiscal Year 2003- 2004 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, and the City's Affordable Housing Fund. E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Home Investment Partnerships Fund. First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt and approve all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Staff Reports City Manager Fischbach reported that the Youth Activities Center gym is closer to reality with a $25,000 donation from the Boettcher Foundation. He stated the National Football Foundation and College Hall of Fame had awarded a grant of $750 to Parks and Recreation for touch football. He announced that the Shop Fort Collins First Campaign is up and running. He reported that the City won third place for the population category in the 2003 Digital Cities competition sponsored by the Center for Digital Government. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Tharp reported on the Legislative Review Committee discussions relating to the 2004 Legislative Policy Agenda, which will be presented to Council on December 2. She also reported on the MPO discussions regarding passenger rail strategies. Councilmember Bertschy reported that there would be a community forum hosted by ASCSU on Thursday. He reported that he would be the only Councilmember attending the National League of Cities conference and that he would gather any information that Councilmembers would like to have. He stated he would be moderating a panel at the conference on community service partnerships between universities and communities. 291 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Roy reported on an alley walk organized by a Eric O'Dell and thanked those who participated in making it happen. He also reported on the Human Relations Commission meeting and a report on boards and commissions diversity that would be presented at a study session. Councilmember Weitkunat reported on the Poudre School District/Larimer County/City liaison group discussions regarding budget cuts, a new high school and the need for a School Resource Officer (to be paid for by the School District), the Discovery Center location, West Nile virus spraying, and bus service to schools and fees for students. Mayor Martinez recommended that the Council consider an economic coordinator for the economic health of the community. He asked if there is Council support to direct the City Manager to identify funding for a full-time economic coordinator. Councilmembers Tharp, Kastein and Weitkunat spoke in support of the idea. Councilmember Roy stated he would like to fully discuss this with other economic issues at a study session. Councilmember Tharp suggested that economic issues be discussed on November 25. Councilmember Hamrick asked for clarification regarding Mayor Martinez' proposal. Mayor Martinez stated he would like Council to give direction to the City Manager to bring back information to the Council and identify existing funding for an economic coordinator. Councilmember Hamrick asked if the City Manager could look at reassigning an existing staff member to cover these additional responsibilities. City Manager Fischbach stated staff could take a look at that option. Councilmember Hamrick asked that staff look at whether there are other ways to accomplish what was needed. Mayor Martinez stated there was direction from at least four Councilmembers to the City Manager to take a look at an economic coordinator. Councilmember Bertschy expressed concerns regarding the budget cuts and previous discussions that new positions should not be added. He stated he would support having staff take a look at the matter and that he had concerns about the cost. He stated he would like to see more discussion on the matter. Mayor Martinez suggested looking at vendor's fees as a funding source. 292 November 18, 2003 Councilmember W eitkunat requested clarification regardingwhat would be discussed at a November 25 study session. Councilmember Kastein suggested that the information that had been exchanged via e-mail be discussed. Councilmember Hamrick supported discussing the issues in a public format. The consensus was to discuss the issue of an economic coordinator at the November 25 meeting, to hold the Study Session at 5:00 p.m. and to conduct the evaluations at 6:00 p.m. Public Hearing and Resolution 2003-126 Making Adiustments to Transfort and Dial -A -Ride Fares, Adopted. The following is staff s memorandum on this item. FINANCIAL IMPACT The amount of new revenue will be determined by the impact of the fare change on ridership. The fare study consultants projected ridership reductions with the proposed fare increase without substantial increase in revenue. For Council's information, financial impacts are shown on the fixed route and Dial -A -Ride systems with no change in ridership and the projected reduced ridership. RIDERSHIP FINANCIAL IMPACT Fixed Route No Drop in Ridership 1,477,735 Additional $30,422 Reduced Ridership 1,435,848 Additional $ 3,830 Dial -A -Ride No Drop in Ridership 75,033 Additional $11,840 Reduced Ridership 69,030 Additional $ 6,477 The fares for the FoxTrot transit service are not included in these proposed rate changes. The FoxTrot service is part ofan Intergovernmental Agreement with Loveland and Larimer County, and those discussions are pending. 293 November 18, 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Council requested the examination of the Dial -A -Ride eligibility criteria and the fees and fares for Transfort/Dial-A-Ride. At the October 14, 2003 study session, Council direction was to increasefaresffees for the fixed route and Dial -A -Ride transit services by 25% except for Youth fares and Dial -A- Ride Special low-income fare. The Youth fare will remain the same, at no charge. Other items discussed at the study session but not included for Council action: • Weekdays free for youth with fares charged for weekends • Increasing Youth Fare to 25 cents • No fare increase for Dial -A -Ride transit services. This proposed Resolution would establish the fares and fees for 2004 as follows: CURRENT PROPOSED TRANSFORT FARES 10 Ride $ 7.00 $ 9.00 Monthly Pass $19.00 $ 25.00 Senior Annual Pass $ 19.00 $ 25.00 Disabled Annual Pass $19.00 $ 25.00 Single Ride Regular $1.00 $1.25 Senior, Disabled $ .50 $ .60 Youth FREE FREE Transfers FREE FREE CSU Student $12.19/semester Flatfee of approximately $540,000 Passfort Annual Pass $ 35.00 $ 35.00 DIAL -A -RIDE FARES 33 Ride Ticket $ 60.00 $ 75.00 Regular $ 2.00 $ 2.50 Lower Income A. $ 1.00 $ 1.25 B. $ .50 $ .50 294 November 18, 2003 BACKGROUND In 2001, City Council asked staff to: (1) look into the eligibility requirements for Dial -A -Ride service, and to (2) to determine if the fees and fares for Transfort/Dial-A-Ride are appropriate. These items were discussed at the May 28, 2002 study session. At that session, Council agreed that Dial -A -Ride eligibility should stay the same andfares and fees should increase by 25% and should include a Youth Fare of $.25. At the July 19, 2002 City Council meeting, Council deferred the fare increase decision until staff completed the ASCSU/CSU negotiations. Staff brought the item back to Council at the October 14, 2003 study session with the recommendation that the Youth Fare not be implemented due to the projected drop in youth ridership. Staffsought input from the public and numerous boards and commissions. The general comments were that they were not opposed to the proposed fare increases. The Senior Transportation committee felt that youth should be charged a fare, and were not opposed to an increased senior/disabled fare. " City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. Marlys Sittner, Transfort, presented background information regarding the agenda item. She spoke regarding the public outreach and previous Council discussions and direction regarding fares and outlined proposed fare increases. She spoke regarding the revenue impacts of the proposed fare changes. She stated this was a public hearing opportunity. Angela Byrne asked why youths had been riding Transfort for free and stated they should be charged at least a dollar. She stated fare increases could impact low income and fixed income individuals. Yvonne Longacre expressed concerns that fares for the disabled and senior citizens will be increased by 32% and that there was no route to the Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony campus. She suggested charging youths at least 25¢ per ride and limiting free rides to younger children. She also suggested that the schools issue passes for youths riding to and from school and that youths pay a fare on weekends. She suggested extending the hours until 10:00 p.m. to eliminate night routes. Mayor Martinez asked about the loss of student ridership if a fare is charged and if the ridership would eventually go up again. Tom Frazier, Multi -Modal Transportation Group Leader, stated ridership would go back up at a slow rate. 295 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Kastein asked if the 2004-2005 budget included projections about revenue with different fees. Frazier stated the budget is based on the current fees pending Council direction. Councilmember Kastein asked for clarification regarding general ridership. Sittner stated this is the regular ridership that pays a cash fare. Councilmember Kastein asked for clarification regarding youth and fixed route riderships. Frazier stated the general ridership includes cash fares and pass fares as well as free ride tickets. Councilmember Kastein asked if revenue projections for reduced ridership are based on the general ridership. Sittner stated the revenue projections are based on the ridership figures that would not be increased or impacted. Councilmember Weitkunat stated there had been a discussion relating to the youth fare with regard to riders going to school and stated her understanding was that auxiliary buses are used for that purpose. Sittner stated there is such heavy ridership on some of the buses that all of the riders cannot be accommodated and that an extra bus is required to carry the overload of students. Councilmember Weitkunat asked how many extra buses were required. Sittner stated one bus followed the regular bus on one loop for Route 9 serving Lincoln Junior High School and that Routes 91 and 92 were created to service the school area and connect with the downtown transit center. She stated one additional bus did one loop to Blevins Junior High School to assist with overload. Councilmember Weitkunat stated it was her understanding that the City picked up the cost for the extra buses and that discussion should occur regarding the obligation of the School District to transport students living outside of a certain area. She stated the School District takes the position that it is the responsibility of youths who do not want to walk to school to pay to ride the bus. She stated the perspective of the School District is that they should not pay for a bus when students are capable of walking within a certain radius of the school. Mayor Martinez stated the School District also indicated that students could learn a lesson about life if they were charged to ride the bus. He stated it was the School District's recommendation that youths be charged to ride rather than riding for free. Councilmember Tharp stated she had heard that the Grand Junction bus system contributed to the bus fares for students and that appeared not to be the case. She stated that system took the same position as Poudre School District in stating that students should walk if they were within walking distance of the school. She stated she wholeheartedly supported charging youths to ride. She stated the City serves low income people in the Dial -a -Ride program. She questioned whether the City is dealing as well with low income people who needed to ride the bus to work. She stated she wanted to make sure that some of the cost is not shifted to social service agencies that already have cut their 296 November 18, 2003 budgets and that there should be some provision for passes or vouchers for low income people who would be hurt by fare increases. Sittner stated the City has some programs in place to assist low income people, including a ride assistance program that gives passes to agencies serving the low income population. Frazier stated the City worked with 32 different social service agencies last year to distribute 8,400 transit passes. Councilmember Tharp asked if the full fare was charged for those passes. Frazier stated those were free trips. Councilmember Roy asked when Dial -a -Ride would be privatized. Sittner stated a Request for Proposals would be issued for privatizing the part of the Dial -a -Ride service related to ambulatory passengers living outside of a 3/4 mile radius (16,000 trips out of 75,000 trips annually). Councilmember Roy asked how much money is generated by the Dial -a -Ride program as it exists. Sittner stated the passenger revenue from Dial -a -Ride last year was $67,800. Councilmember Roy asked about the average age and income of a Dial -a -Ride customer. Sittner stated information could be provided to Council. Frazier stated the last survey showed that the average age was over 75. Councilmember Kastein asked how many of the youth ridership trips are on a weekday versus weekend. Frazier stated the majority are weekday trips. Sittner stated approximately 75% of the youth ridership is on weekdays. Councilmember Roy asked how much revenue the Dial -a -Ride contract obtained through a RFP would generate. Frazier stated staff would look at the cost -per -ride differential and that it is anticipated that the average ride will cost about $5.00 less through a contractor. Councilmember Hamrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Bertschy, to adopt Resolution 2003-126. Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to amend Resolution 2003-126 to charge a youth fare of 250. Councilmember Hamrick stated the youth fare could have a negative impact on youth ridership and that he would not support the motion to amend. City Manager Fischbach stated he was talking with the Bohemian Foundation about its offer to donate money for the operation of the bus for youth. 297 November 18, 2003 Mayor Martinez stated in the short term, ridership would be affected and that it would go back up over time. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the message to youth should be "life is a free ride" or if the City should encourage youths to walk to school if they are within a walking radius. She stated a 250 fare is not taxing and that it is not the responsibility of the City to have a second bus to accommodate students who do not want to walk. Councilmember Hamrick asked what percentage of youth ridership is causing the second bus. Frazier stated information could be provided. He stated other buses were added because these were regular transit routes serving the general public. He stated not adding buses would mean leaving people of all ages standing at a bus stop. He stated under federal law the City could not require students to leave the bus so that other people could get on the bus. He stated dropping the extra buses (which cost $15,000416,000 per year) would leave general public at the bus stops. Mayor Martinez stated the discussion was adding a fare rather than dropping the extra buses. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the youth fare will require young people to pay to ride the bus like other people pay. She stated the intent is not to drop the extra buses. Councilmember Kastein stated it is important to use "market forces" to balance the load and that it was not fair for a large percentage of people to ride the bus for free. He stated he did not consider a 25¢ fare to be a disincentive and that it would raise money to offset part of the subsidy from the General Fund. Councilmember Bertschy stated he was looking at the economics of the entire bus system and that this would impact ridership. He stated he would not support the 250 fare. Councilmember Hamrick stated this would move the City further away from its stated transit system objectives. Mayor Martinez stated he believed that this would move the City closer to its objectives. The vote on the motion to amend was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays Councilmembers Bertschy and Hamrick. THE MOTION CARRIED Councilmember Roy stated he had concerns regarding Dial -a -Ride. He stated the real cost to the City for the constituents who would be part of the privatization would be $330,000 per year and that the RFP would generate about $88,500. He stated the older citizens of Fort Collins will not be November 18, 2003 served by this. He stated many people depended on Dial -a -Ride and that he did not believe that a contractor could deliver the kind of services that the citizens are receiving at this point. Councilmember Tharp stated the $88,500 would be the amount that the City would save and that the RFP contract amount was unknown. She stated it is estimated that about $5.00 per ride for ambulatory people will be saved. She stated if adequate service could be provided at a lower cost it should be done. She stated it is up to the City to monitor the service to ensure that it is adequate. Councilmember Roy asked for clarification regarding the figures. Sittner stated $88,500 is the projected savings and that it would cost the City $300,000 to provide the same service provided by the contractor for about $222,000. Councilmember Roy asked if the current cost per ride was about $20.00. Sittner replied in the affirmative and stated it is anticipated that a contractor could provide a ride for about $15.00, meaning a $5.00 per ride savings. Councilmember Roy expressed a concern that the citizens would not come out ahead. Councilmember Tharp stated the Dial -a -Ride service provided by the City places people on specialized buses that have wheelchair access and that ambulatory people do not need that kind of service. She stated a contractor could provide the same service to ambulatory people at a lower cost because they would not have to provide wheelchair access. The vote on the motion as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED ("Secretary's Note: Council took a brief recess at this point.) Items Relating to the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing Projects/Programs and Community Development Activities: the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program, the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, and the City's Affordable Housing Fund Adopted The following is staffs memorandum on this item. 299 November 18, 2003 "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Public Hearing and Resolution 2003-127 Approving the FY 2003-2004 Home Investment Partnerships Program for the City of Fort Collins. B. Public Hearing and Resolution2003-128AdoptingAdditionalPrograms/ProjectsfortheFY 2003-2004 Community Development Block Grant Program for the City of Fort Collins. C. Public Hearing and Resolution 2003-129 Allocating Funding from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. D. Public Hearing and Resolution 2003-130Approving a Policy Change in the Manner Loans are Made with CDBG, Home, and Affordable Housing Funds by Adding A 5°% Fee to the Principal Repayment Amount. E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Home Investment Partnerships Fund. F. First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 2003, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. The Home Investment Partnerships (HOME)Program and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program provide funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the City of Fort Collins thatcan be allocated to community development and affordable housing related programs and projects, thereby reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget to address such issues. The City Council is being asked to consider the adoption offour resolutions and two ordinances. The first resolution (Resolution 2003-127) establishes which programs and projects will receive funding with HOME funds for the FY 2003-2004 Program year, which started on October 1, 2003. The second resolution (Resolution 2003-128) establishes which additional programs and projects will receive funding with CDBG funds for the FY 2003-2004 Program year, which also started on October 1, 2003. The third resolution (Resolution 2003-129) establishes which programs and projects will receive fundingfrom the City's Affordable Housing Fund. And, thefourth resolution (Resolution 2003-130) approves a policy change in the manner loans are made with CDBG, HOME, and Affordable Housing Funds by adding 5% to the Principal Repayment Amount. The two ordinances (Ordinance No. 162, 2003, and Ordinance No. 163, 2003) appropriate unanticipated program income revenue for the HOME and CDBG programs respectively. 300 November 18, 2003 BACKGROUND The City Council will conduct a public hearing and consider the adoption ofa series of resolutions establishing which programs and projects will receive funding from the City's HOMEProgram for the FY 2003 Program year, which programs and projects will receive funding from available Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funds, and which programs and projects will receive funding from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The resolutions establishing which programs and projects will receive HOME, CDBG, and City Affordable Housing Fund dollars represent the culmination of the fall cycle of the competitive process approved in January 2000 by the Council for the allocation ofthe City's financial resources to affordable housing programs/projects and community development activities. Additional background material about the competitive process is included in Attachment A. Since early January of this year, the CDBG Commission and members of the City staffs Affordable Housing Team have conducted public hearings to assess community development and housing needs in Fort Collins, conducted technical assistance training workshops for applicants, and solicited applications for funding. The CDBG Commission reviewed written applications, personally interviewed each applicant, analyzed the applications, and formulated a list of recommendations to the City Council as to which programs and projects should receive funding. The competitive process established refined criteria to determine priorities between proposals received by the City. The ranking criteria are divided into five major categories. Each category is given a total number ofpoints that has been weighed according to their importance with respect to local and federal priorities. The five major categories are: 1. Impact/Benefit 2. Need/Priority 3. Feasibility 4. Leveraging Resources 5. Capacity and History The Impact/Benefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups. The Need/Priority criteria help assure that the proposal meets adopted City goals and priorities. The Feasibility criteria reward projects for timelines and documented additional funding. The Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds to the City (via loans) and for their ability to leverage other resources. And, the Capacity and History criteria help gage an applicant's ability to do the project and reward applicants that have completed successful projects 301 November 18, 2003 in the past (have good track records). The ranking sheet used to assist the CDBG Commission is presented in Attachment A. The Commission also considered the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable Housing Needs and Strategies report adopted by the Council on February 2, 1999. Theseguidelines include: • HOMEfunds should generally be allocated as follows: 90%for Housing projects and 10% for Program Administration. HUD HOME Program regulations also require the City to set aside 15%for Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) projects and allow an allocation of 5%for CHDO operations; • CDBG funds should generally be allocated as follows: 65%for Housingprojects; 10%for Program Administration; 10%for Public Facilities; and 15%for Public Services; • funds allocated to housing should generally be divided as follows: 70%for rental projects and 30%for homeownership opportunities; and • the average subsidy should be $5,000 per unit, with relatively more funding to projects producing housing for lower income families. The CDBG and HOME Programs are ongoing grant administration programs funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fort Collins has received CDBG Program funds since 1975 and HOME Program funds since 1994. The City is an Entitlement recipient of CDBG funds and a Participating Jurisdiction recipient of HOME funds, meaning the City is guaranteed a certain level offunding each year. The level offending is dependent on the total amount offunds allocated to the programs by Congress and on a formula developed by HUD, which includes data on total population, minorities as a percentage ofpopulation, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Additional background information on the City's HOME and CDBG Programs are presented in Attachments C and D respectively. AVAILABLE FUNDS The amount of the City's FY 2003 HOME Grant available for projects is $830, 039. Added to the HOME Grant will be $100, 000 of estimated HOME Program Income to make a combined amount of $930, 039 available for projects. The HOME funds will be combined with $1, 087,924 from the City's Affordable Housing Fund and $762,081 of unallocated CDBG funds plus $100,000 of estimated CDBG Program Income to create a potential pool of $2,880,044 offunds available for programs from the fall cycle of the competitive process. CDBGfunds are typically allocated in the spring and are, thus, not available for use in thefall cycle of the competitive process. However, the City did not allocate all of its CDBG funds in the spring cycle of 2003 carrying over an amount of $762,081 for allocation in the fall cycle. 302 November 18, 2003 The following summarizes the amount and sources of available funds: AMOUNT SOURCE $ 930,039 FY 2003 HOME Grant and Estimated Program Income 1,087,924 City's Affordable Housing Fund 862,081 Unallocated CDBG Funds and Estimated Program Income $2, 880, 044 Total SELECTION PROCESS On January 9, 2003, the CDBG Commission held a public hearing to obtain citizen input on community development and affordable housing needs. The HOME/CDBG Program office placed legal advertisements in local and regional newspapers starting in July to solicit requests for HOME and CDBG funded programs and projects and for proposals for the use offunding from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The application deadline was Thursday August 21. At the close of the deadline the City received twelve (12) applications requesting a total ofapproximately $4.8 million. Two (2) proposals were withdrawn by the applicants leaving ten (10) applications requesting approximately $4.2 million in the review/selection process. Copies ofall applications wereforwarded through the City Manager's office to the City Council on September 4, 2003 and placed in the Council Office for review. Also on September 4, 2003 copies of the applications were distributed to the CDBG Commission and the Affordable Housing Board. On September 18, 2003 the Affordable Housing Board conducted a special meeting to review the affordable housing proposals and formulate a list ofpriority projects which was forwarded to the CDBG Commission (see Attachment B). On September 25, 2003, the CDBG Commission met to hear presentations and ask clarification questions from each applicant. The Commission then met on October 2 for the purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded within funds availablefrom thefall cycle of the competitive process. At this meeting the Commission reviewed the written applications, the applicant's verbal presentation, the information provided during the question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of agencies who received HOME funds, CDBG funds, or other funding in previous years. The Commission then worked on the formulation of its list ofrecommendations. CDBG COMMISSION'S LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS HUD HOME regulations limit the amount of available funds that can be allocated to various categories. FundsforAdministrativepurposes are limited to 10% ofthe HOME Grant which means 90% ofthe Grant must be used for housingprojects. Within the 90% requiredforprojects, the City 303 November 18, 2003 is required to set aside 15%for Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) projects and allow an allocation of 5%for CHDO operations (ifany applications are received). Similarly, HUD CDBG regulations limit the amount of available funds that can be allocated to various categories. FundsforAdministrativepurposes are limited to 20% ofthe CDBG Grant and estimated Program Income and funds for Public Services are limited to 15%. The City allocated all eligible funds for public services during the spring cycle of the competitive process and designated approximately H%for administrative purposes. The Commission, thus, not only had to decide which applicants presented programs and projects which bestfit into the City's HOME and CDBG Programs, butalso had to insurefunding allocations were kept within HUD regulations and follow the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable Housing Needs and Strategies report. Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding and the Commission's list of recommendations. 1. Administration Proposal City of Fort Collins — CDBG Program Administration Request: $53,910 (CDBG Grant) Recommendation: $53,910 (CDBG Grant) This is a request to increase the amount of CDBG funds utilized for administration of the CDBG Program. HUD regulations limit the amount of CDBG funds that can be used for administrative purposes to no more than 20% of the Grant amount and estimated Program Income. In the spring, the City allocated $158,392 for CDBG Program administration purposes (approximately 11 % of the maximum allowed). The additional allocation will raise the percentage used for administrative purposes to approximately 15%. 2. Affordable Housing Projects City of Fort Collins - Home Buyer Assistance Request:$1, 000, 000 Loan ($500, 000 HOME, $500, 000 CDBG) Recommendation:$1,000,000Loan ($570,458HOME, $429,542CDBG) This program is administered by the Advance Planning Department and provides zero percent interest loans to eligible first-time homebuyers. The assistance covers down payment and closing costs at a current loan rate of $9, 000 for households at 51 % to 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) c� November 18, 2003 and $18,000 for buyers at or below 50% ofAMI. The funding would provide a minimum of III loans at the current loan rate of $9, 000 over the 2003 Fiscal Year. 3. City of Fort Collins - Home Buyer Assistance (Rental Properties) Request: $200, 000 Loan ($200, 000 AHF) Recommendation: $200, 000 Loan ($200, 000 AHF) This program is administered by the Advance Planning Department and provides zero percent interest loans toeligiblefirst-timehomebuyerstopurchaseformerrenta!properties. Theassistance covers down payment and closing costs at a current loan rate of $9, 000 for households at 51 % to 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) and $18, 000 for buyers at or below 50% ofAML The funding would provide a minimum of 22 loans at the current loan rate of $9, 000 over the 2003 Fiscal Year. 4. Fort Collins Housing Corporation — Rehabilitation and Refinancing of Apartments Request:$222,565($103,565HOME Grant and $119,OOOHOMELoan) Recommendation: $222,565 ($222,565 CDBG Loan) The FCHCproposes to rehabilitate and refinance the Myrtle Street Single Room Occupancy (SRO) building located at 811 East Myrtle Street. The project involves replacing the heating system, roof and several other Housing Quality Standards items for the building, which is home to 15 at risk of becoming homeless individuals. In addition, the application includes refinancing the existing loan to ensure long-term affordability. IfHUD subsidy is lost, the project may not be able to support the current mortgage loan balance ($119,000). 5. Neighbor to Neighbor —Acquisition and Rehabilitation ofApartmenis Request: $235,500 ($ 75, 000 HOME Loan and $160,000 CDBGLoan) Recommendation: $235,500 ($109,581 home CHDO Loan, $125,919 CDBGLoan) Neighbor to Neighbor requests funds to purchase an 8 plex located at 1041 Ponderosa Street in Fort Collins. The units in the project will be converted to rents at 30% and 40% ofAMI. Some deferred maintenance will be required to bring the property up to acceptable health and safety standards. This property adjoins two other Neighbor to Neighbor properties on Clearview and Crabtree Streets. The arrangement allows for an efficient economy of scale for property management and maintenance purposes. 305 November 18, 2003 6. Paradigm Real Estate Partners LLC — Lakeside Village at Rigden Farm Request: $600, 000 ($200,OOOHOMELoan, $200, 000 CDBGLoan and $200, 000 AHF Loan) Recommendation: No funding Paradigm Real Estate Partners is requesting funds for the acquisition of land to build 44 single- family homes targeted to the first-time homebuyers. The Rigden Farm Community is located south of Drake Road and east of Timberline Road. All of the units within this first phase will be assisted with public funds and sold to qualified homebuyers earning no more than 80% ofAM1. Home values will be protected and maintained as affordable as each new homeowner must commit to preserving the affordability ofthe neighborhood by agreeing to limit price appreciation on their home to 4% accrued/year or less. 7. Habitat for Humanity — Multi -Family Partnership for Land Acquisition and Infrastructure Request: $695,500 ($695,500 HOME Loan) Recommendation: $695,500 ($250, 000 HOME Loan, $445, 500 CDBG Loan) Habitat for Humanity is requesting funds for the acquisition of land and infrastructure improvements to develop the Richard Lake PUD. The City has approved this PUD for 54 units of affordable housing. The project is located north of County Club Road and west of County Road IL Habitat for Humanity plans to joint venture with the owner of the development, Scott Price, Stonebridge Properties LLC. In discussions with thefor, prof:tpartner, Habitat would receive 50% of the units, or 27 units. Habitat would use $250,000 of this request for land acquisition and $445,500 for infrastructure improvements. Habitat units would be affordable at or below 50% of AMI and the for profit partner units would be affordable at 80%and below AMI. This would ensure a 3-4 year supply of lots for Habitat. 8. Habitat for Humanity — Land Acquisition Request: $240, 000 ($240, 000 CDBG Loan) Recommendation: $ 62,569 ($30,145 CDBG Loan, $32,424AHFLoan) Habitat for Humanity is requesting CDBG funds to acquire four new lots ($60,000 per lot). The organization is actively searching for properties that will meet their needs. Habitat provides homeownership opportunities forfamilies at or below 50% ofAMI. November 18, 2003 9. City of Fort Collins Land Bank Program — Interstate Land Site Request: $410, 000 ($410, 000 AHF Loan) Recommendation: $410, 000 ($410, 000 AHF Loan) This proposal requests the balance of funds needed to purchase a portion of the Interstate Land Property neighborhood located on the northwest corner of Prospect Road and I-25 within the city limits. In the spring, the City designated $400, 000 from the Affordable Housing Fund for a portion of the $810, 000 needed for this project. The property is zoned LMN and is currently going through the City's development review process. The owners of the Interstate Land development project have approached the City about acquiring 8.3 acresforan affordable housing component in the development. The Interstate Land development will be a 176-acre mixed -use neighborhood including commercial development, single-family residential units, townhomes, condominiums and multiple small employment uses. 10. City of Fort Collins —Land Bank General Application Request: $500,000 (AHF Loan) Recommendation: No funding This application is requestingfunds topurchase a sitefor the City's Land Bank Program. Theexact site has not been identified. The City implemented the Land Bank Program to preserve scarce land resources for affordable housing projects. Currently, the City has purchased 30 acres (three properties), which will yield approximately 300-320 future affordable housing units. Total amount offunding requested = $4,157,475 Total amount offending available = $2,880,044 Total amount offending allocated = $2,880,044 The total amount offiunding requests considered by the CDBG Commission was approximately $4.2 million, however, only about $2.9 million offunds are available. With the amount oftotal requests far exceeding available finding, obviously not all applications could be funded. The CDBG Commission has recommended full fundingfor seven (7) proposals, partial funding for one (1) proposal, and no funding for two (2) projects. The Commission's reasons for either full funding, or no funding, for all projects are presented in Attachment E. 307 November 18, 2003 • The Commission has recommended allocating all (100°yo) of the available $862,081 of CDBG funds. • The Commission has recommended allocating all (100oyo) ofthe $820,458 available HOME funds. • The Commission has recommended allocating all (I00yo) ofthe $109,581 availablefrom the HOME-CHDO set -aside. • The Commission has recommended allocating all (100%) of the $1,087,924 available from the Affordable Housing Fund. Proposed Policy Change for CDBG/HOME/AHF Loans Presently, the City allocates funding from the CDBG and HOME Federal Grant Programs, as well asfundsfrom the City's Affordable Housing Fund, for non-public serviceprograms as zero -interest, due on sale, deferred loans. This means recipients of funds make no payments on their loans, but are required to repay the full loan principal amount if the property is sold at some point in the future. For example, in the Home Buyer Assistance Program, a family can receive $9,000 in downpayment assistance to help them purchase a home. The family makes no payments on the loan and only pays back the loan if they sell their home at some point in the future (or, they refinance, etc). When the family does sell, they pay the $9, 000 back to the City, whether they sell their home in I year or 10 years in the future. At the CDBG Commission meeting conducted on October 2, 2003, the Commission voted to recommend to the City Council a policy change in the manner in which the City allocates funding from the CDBG/HOME Programs and the City's Affordable Housing Fund by adding a fee to the City's loans in the amount of 5%of the loan principal, to be paid at the time that the loan is repaid. The Commission's concerns and rationale were twofold. (1) Unknown budget constraints could adversely affect the availability offunds from the three sources in the future and generating program income now could help ensure that these programs continue in the light offuture adverse financial situations. (2) Families helped by these loans should have a participatory role in helping the next family achieve their housing goals. Families receiving these loans certainly should receive a financial benefit from taxpayer involvement, paying back the loans with a fee to be used to help other families means the taxpayers' loans are reaping even more benefits. The Commission had a subcommittee review and discussed several other options; however, the Commission believes it to be unrealistic to attempt to recoup "inflation representative " dollars, i.e., where the purchasing power of the repaid loans equals the purchasing power of new loans when new loans are made. While this could be accomplished, and was an important topic of the MIR November 18, 2003 Commission subcommittee's discussions, it would essentially require the City to administer extremely cumbersome adjustable rate mortgages with monthly amortization. The Commission considered traditional inflation rates, Consumer Price Indices, etc., and determined that 5%ofthe principal amount, as a fee due on repayment, was the most efficient avenue to pursue to answer concerns listed in numbers 1 and 2 above. The end result of this proposal would be that an original $9, 000 loan, for example, would repay $9, 450 whenever the property was resold or refinanced. Of course, ifthe loan is repaid within the first year, the fee would make the loan fairly expensive. After the first year, the fee becomes more reasonable when compared to market rate "interest. " The fee becomes less burdensome for those who do not sell their homes early. " City Manager Fischbach introduced the agenda item. Ken Waido, Chief Planner, presented background information regarding the agenda item. He stated the first three components of the agenda item were Resolutions that would allocate money to various programs from three funding sources. He stated approximately $2.9 million is being allocated primarily to affordable housing projects. He stated the fourth item was a Resolution that would change the manner in which the City allocates money in the programs by adding a 5% fee to the loan repayment amount. He stated the last two items were appropriation ordinances. Joe Rolland, Funding Partners, commended the Advance Planning staff for their work on project review. He suggested encouraging first time home buyers to repay funds as quickly as possible so that other families could take advantage of the same program. He stated there is an acute need for heavily subsidized housing projects and that there needs to be a greater focus in allocating these dollars to those types of projects. He stated adding a 5% fee recognizes the administrative costs of running a program but does not build any incentive to repay the money. He asked Council to look at the issue to see if there would be alternatives to adding the burden of a 5% fee. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Resolutions 2003-127, 2003-128, 2003-129, and 2003-130 and to adopt Ordinance No. 162, 2003 and Ordinance No. 163, 2003 on First Reading. Councilmember Bertschy thanked the CDBG Commission for its hard work on making these recommendations. He supported looking at ways to encourage home buyers to repay funds quickly. Councilmember Tharp stated the CDBG Commission gave the Council well thought out recommendations. She stated the Housing Authority was also focusing on those in the lowest income brackets because that is where the need was greatest. Mayor Martinez expressed appreciation for the work of the CDBG Commission. 309 November 18, 2003 The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Mayor Martinez stated the budget agenda would now be considered. BUDGET CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Kastein withdrew item #23 Items Relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2004 from the Budget Consent Calendar. 21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2003, Amending the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Increase the Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and Neighborhood Parkland Fee to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. Ordinance No. 148, 2003, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, increases the fee schedules for the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees and Neighborhood Parkland Fee by the estimated change in the 2003 Denver -Boulder -Greeley Consumer Price Index. The City Code requires that increases keep up with annual inflation. The fees were last adjusted in late 2002. 22. Items Relating to the 2004 Downtown Development Authority Budget. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2003, Appropriating Operating Funds and Approving the Budget of the Downtown Development Authority for the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2004, and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for 2004. Ordinance No. 149, 2003, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, sets the Downtown Development Authority annual mill levy at 4.05 mills and appropriates S2,307,470 in the Operations and Maintenance Fund. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2003, Appropriating Revenue in the Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service for the Year 2004. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, appropriates funds for 2004 from the tax increment received by the City for the DDA for debt service payments. 310 November 18, 2003 23. Items Relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2004. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article XII, of the Code of the City Relating to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article III, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to User Fees and Charges for Water. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article IV, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Wastewater Fees. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article VI, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Electric Rates and Charges. E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article VII, Division 2 of the Code of the City Relating to Stormwater Fees. These ordinances, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, increase the annual Light and Power Fund Revenues by 5.3%, Wastewater Fund operating revenues by 5%, and Storm Drainage Fund operating revenues are projected to increase 10%. There are no changes to operating revenues in the Water Fund. Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Chief Deputy City Clerk Harris. 21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2003, Amending the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Increase the Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and Neighborhood Parkland Fee to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services. 22. Items Relating to the 2004 Downtown Development AuthorityBudget. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2003, Appropriating Operating Funds and Approving the Budget of the Downtown Development Authority for the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2004, and Fixing the Mill Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for 2004. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2003, Appropriating Revenue in the Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service for the Year 2004. 311 November 18, 2003 23. Items Relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2004. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article XII, of the Code ofthe City Relatingto Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article III, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to User Fees and Charges for Water. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article IV, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Wastewater Fees. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article VI, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Electric Rates and Charges. E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article VII, Division 2 of the Code of the City Relating to Stormwater Fees. 24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 2003, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2004: Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years BeginningJanuary 1, 2004, and Ending December 3l, 2005: and FixingtheMill Levy for Fiscal Year 2004. ***End Budget Consent*** Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adopt and approve all items not withdrawn from the Budget Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Items Relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2004, Adopted on Second Reading, The following is staff s memorandum on this item. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Second Reading of OrdinanceNo.151,2003,AmendingChapter26,ArticleXII,oftheCode of the City Relating to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges. 312 November 18, 2003 B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article III, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to User Fees and Charges for Water. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article IV, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Wastewater Fees. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article VI, Division 4 of the Code of the City Relating to Electric Rates and Charges. E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2003, Amending Chapter 26, Article V11, Division 2 of the Code of the City Relating to Stormwater Fees. These ordinances, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003, increase the annual Light and Power Fund Revenues by5.3%, Wastewater Fund operating revenues by 5%, and Storm Drainage Fund operating revenues are projected to increase 10%. There are no changes to operating revenues in the Water Fund. " City Manager Fischbach stated staff would be available to answer questions. Councilmember Kastein asked about the effect on the wastewater rate of last year's reduced water consumption. Mike Smith, Utilities General Manager, stated wastewater rates for residential customers are based on winter quarter water consumption, that people are conserving water, and that the metering program compounded the problem. Councilmember Kastein asked why the wastewater rate was based on winter quarter water consumption. Smith stated the winter quarter water consumption reflected indoor water use. Councilmember Kastein commented that this is a relatively nominal increase but that many rates are being increased at the same time. He asked about the use of reserves to offset that amount and how much money was in utility reserves. Smith stated there is approximately $14-15 million in wastewater reserves and that money could only be taken out of that fund. Councilmember Kastein stated he would like to see the Council explore the option of using reserves and that the City Manager had indicated that approximately $600,000 will be needed for that purpose. He stated the City Manager had also indicated that if reserves are used this year, a 5% increase will be needed next year. He stated this is a fairness issue because wastewater fees are going up because people conserved water as they were asked. He noted that a large reserve is available and that he would favor using reserves this year to offset the 5% increase. Smith stated another reason for the wastewater rate increase was a change in accounting procedures that shifted minor capital to O&M expenses on an ongoing basis. 313 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Kastein stated he would like additional information on the accounting change. Smith stated minor capital was generally used for replacements and that the decision was made to place minor capital under operating costs instead. He stated a number of capital projects had been delayed because of the impact that borrowing money would have on rates. He stated reserves would be needed to help pay for future capital projects. Councilmember Kastein asked for staff s opinion on using S600,0004700,000 from reserves at this time given future capital needs. Smith stated customers surveyed have preferred smaller rate increases over time rather than have several large increases. He stated efforts were being made to increase reserves for capital projects and that the rate increase would be delayed and would be higher next year. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the money was taken from reserves this year, if there would be a 10% rate increase next year. Smith replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Weitkunat asked for clarification about the adjustment for accounting changes. Smith stated minor capital had been shifted to operations permanently. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if all rates will go up again next year. Smith stated the projected rate increases for 2005 were 3.5% for light and power, no increase for water, 5% for wastewater and 7% for stormwater. He stated if the wastewater rates are not increased by 5% this year, the increase for wastewater in 2005 would be 10%. Councilmember Tharp requested clarification about the impact of using reserves this year. Smith stated the reserves would pay the rate increase with one-time money and that the rate increase would be double next year because it is ongoing money. Councilmember Tharp stated she was concerned about the rates going up and about the impact of water conservation on wastewater rates. She stated it appeared that using reserves this year did not help the problem. Councilmember Kastein stated the average ratepayer would save what would be paid as an increase for this year and that the new rate for next year would be 10%. Councilmember Hamrick stated the moneytaken out of capital reserves have to be paid back at some point. He asked how the capital reserve would be replenished if it was drawn down. Smith stated more money would have to be borrowed for upcoming capital projects. Councilmember Hamrick asked who would be responsible for repaying the money. Smith stated it would be the ratepayers. 314 November 18, 2003 Mayor Martinez asked why money could not be taken from reserves rather than borrowing. Smith stated the reserves will be needed in the future and would be short for those future needs. Councilmember Roy expressed a concern that the costs to the taxpayers would be increased because of a need to pay back reserves for capital projects. He stated it appeared that a rate increase for two years in a row would be prudent and conservative. Councilmember Weitkunat asked why the wastewater rate would increase 5% every year and why it would not stabilize at some point. Smith stated the rate increases are needed to catch up with revenue loss. Councilmember Weitkunat asked how long the City would be playing catch up. Smith stated the rate increase for 2004 should take care of most of that and the 2005 increase is needed to get the fund in shape to borrow money for capital projects and O&M expenses. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the money would have to be paid back to the reserves. City Manager Fischbach stated it would have to be paid back so that there would be money for future needs and that the money would be paid back through increased rates. Councilmember Tharp asked for suggestions on how costs for utilities could be contained so that constant rate increases will not be needed. Smith stated for the last few years the Utilities had conducted a peer review through the American Waterworks Association. He stated the Utilities rated high for efficiency, the quality of the water produced, and wastewater treatment. He stated the wastewater treatment plants are an efficient electricity customer and that electrical costs are going up. Councilmember Tharp requested an update on the peer reviews. Mayor Martinez asked if the utility bill will contain a check -off box for those who wanted to donate to those who can not afford to pay their utility bills. Wendy Williams, Utilities Assistant General Manager, stated a company has been identified to provide the service and that a proposal is expected. She stated the expectation is that the check -off box will appear on utility bills as of the first of the year. Mayor Martinez asked about the Platte River Power Authority's rate increase. Smith stated the City will be paying an additional 2.8% and that the projection for next year is about 3.5% for the City. Mayor Martinez asked why the City's rates are continually increased while Platte River Power Authority had not had an increase in many years. Smith stated the current electric rates are at the same level as they were in 1983. 315 November 18, 2003 Mayor Martinez asked how the City's electric rates compared with other cities in Colorado. Smith stated the City compared favorably with cities in the State. He stated the City was the fifth lowest of 55 utilities in the State. Councilmember Roy asked if the ratepayers were enjoying "subsidies" because the real costs were not being recovered. He asked if enough had been charged in the past for the utilities. Smith stated rates had been based on costs of service and that the ratepayers were the source of money for the utilities. Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 151, 2003, Ordinance No. 152, 2003, Ordinance No. 153, 2003, Ordinance No. 154, 2003, and Ordinance No. 155, 2003 on Second Reading. Councilmember Kastein stated he was concerned with the overall rate increases. He stated he could accept the argument that reserves were needed for future capital costs. He stated it would be helpful to see the reserve fund identified as a capital reserve fund. Mayor Martinez stated there were some related Charter requirements. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Ordinance No. 156, 2003 Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2004 and Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1, 2004 and Ending December 31, 2005, and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2004, Adopted on Second Readine The following is staff s memorandum on this item. FINANCIAL IMPACT This Ordinance represents the annual appropriation forfiscal year 2004, and adopts the total City budget for fiscal year 2004 at $438,069,004 and for fiscal year 2005 at $450,174,400. This Ordinance also sets the City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991, for fiscal year 2004. 316 November 18, 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ordinance No. 156, 2003, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 4, 2003. Council adopted the 2004-2005 City budget and the corresponding appropriation of monies for fiscal year 2004 expenditures on condition that on the Second Reading, the City Manager present options to fund additional Police officers in 2004. These options are described below. BACKGROUND The budgetgoalsfor 2004 and 2005 are focused on maintaining as many of our services as possible in these challenging economic times: a. Maintain to the degree possible existing services, i.e., minimize service reductions b. As services are provided by employees, avoid or minimize layoffs to the degree possible c. Maintain and, ifpossible, expand Police services d. Maintain to the degree possible current levels of Primary services The reductions over the past year and many of those proposed in 2004 have focused on delaying repairs and renovations, delaying equipment replacements, reducing training and staffdevelopment, cutting supplies and materials and operational services. We have whittled away all that we can of materials, equipment and some significant secondary and support services. In preparation for the 2005 budget "exception" process and anticipating Council approval of a Budget Advisory Committee, staff will work with the committee to reassess what our core services are and how they can be delivered in a more effective and cost-efficient manner within the resources actually available. FINAL BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS In the course of the Council's review and discussions ofthe next biennial budget, there are several items for which interest was expressed to find a way to retain or fund in the budget. Here is an update on the status of several items. Options to Fund Additional Police Staff Option A: Increase the Annual Staffing Package and Split the Hiring Between 2004 and 2005 This option would boost ourstandard, annual staffing package of 5 Police Ofcers/1.5 civilian staff to 6Police Officers/1.5 civilian staffand split the hiring between the two upcomingfiscal years. The cost would be as follows: 317 November 18, 2003 2004: Three (3) Police Officers: $335,858 ongoing $109,996 one-time One (1) Civilian staff: $ 49,008 ongoing $ 24,316 one-time Total $519,178 2005: Three (3) Police Officers: $352,651 ongoing $125,885 one-time .5 FTE Civilian staff: $ 21,350 ongoing 1801 one-time Total $501, 687 Total Package $1,020,865 We do not have any additional ongoing monies to cover the ongoing costs (which total $384,866) for 2004. My recommendation is to cover all of the 2004 projected costs with one-time dollars. The estimated one-time dollars (General Fund reserves) available for 2004 are $2, 004,878. For 2005, the continuing operational costs (for compensation, supplies, training, fuel, etc) are to be covered by ongoing monies. Option B: Reassign existing Police Officers To Add to Our Patrol/Street Strength This option reassigns and redeploys existing Police Officers from current duties to more direct Patrol Division assignments. This analysis is ongoing, but the reassignments probably would be from the Training Unit, Investigations, and Crime Prevention. However, this will impact our operations in a number ofways. Regarding training, we have extensive mandatory ongoing training in such areas as pursuit driving, firearms and defensive tactics. Patrol Officers and Detectives will still be pulled off assignments to provide this training and some added overtime costs will be required. In investigative services, work on computer crimes (such as internet pornography and internet fraud) and violent crimes will be impacted. In the area of crime prevention, work that administers our false alarm program (which frees thousands of hours of patrol officers time to provide direct service rather than respond to false alarms) and provides security and preventative information to the community and neighborhoods (such as fraud prevention forseniors and security and safety information for religious centers) will be scaled back. The 2004-2005 City Budget, as outlined in Ordinance No. 156, 2003, does not include either ofthese two options. It includes the original recommendation of no added stafng for Police Services in 2004 and expanded Police staffing in 2005. Any changes to the budget will have to be done prior to a vote on the Second Reading of the Ordinance. 318 November 18, 2003 Funded Services 1. Rivendell Recycling Center ($18,000) —funded in 2004 with 2003 carryover (one-time) dollars. We project that an additional $18,000 will be needed to sustain the recycling operations at the Center in 2004. As we near the end of this fiscal year (2003) we will have some finds from CPES to carry over into 2004 to cover the recycling operations. Also, we are beginning to receive some additional income from haulers that will help to cover the operational costs. We will monitor this closely for 2005. 2. Environmental Business Outreach/Climatewise ($20,000)—funded in 2004 through agrant award and 2003 carryover (one-time) dollars. The purpose is to work with local businesses to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We have been using one-time monies (from the General Fund and from Utilities) to support this effort. To cover the anticipated 2004 shortfall, the City received notification of a grant award late this summer that will be sufficient to cover program costs through 2004. We will monitor closely for 2005. 3. Environmental Planner ($20,000) —funded in 2004 and beyond through reallocation of personnel resources (ongoing). Approximately. 25 FTEofan Environmental Planner's time has to be picked up by the General Fund. Early in the budget planning process, there was no source offunding. With some staffing changes over the last few weeks, we are able to cover this for 2004 and beyond. Sustain Reductions as Recommended In addition to the above items, during the Budget Study Session discussions and review of the proposed service reductions, several Council members expressed a desire to reconsider some select items. However, basedon Council's direction at theNovember 4 meeting, none ofthese are "added - back" or included in the budget or appropriation ordinance for the second reading. We go into 2005 on this reduced base of ongoing service and expense reductions. However, projections indicate revenues will be stronger in 2005. As a result, we anticipate reinstating and expanding a few services in 2005 and these include: a. Expand Police staffing .............................................. $ 799,763 ongoing $ 261,998 one-time b. Resume Police Building set aside ................................. $ 320,000 ongoing 319 November 18, 2003 c. Resume Labor Market Adjustments .............................. $1,900, 000 ongoing' d. Resume Street Maintenance expanded funding ................. $ 200,000 ongoing e. Resume full amount of PFA allocation .......................... $ 594, 000 ongoing All of the above except the Labor Market Adjustment are included in the budget for 2005. During the exception process for 2005, we will review these additions, including LaborMarketAdjustments, and others in relation to revenue results in 2004 and projections for 2005. At that time, changes could be made as necessary. Benefits Costs for 2004 and 2005 The approach for increasing the employees'share ofpremium costs has been the subject of extensive discussion. At this juncture, the proposed budget increases employees'share ofpremium costs to 10% in 2004 and 15% in 2005. However, more work and discussion needs to be done on the issue ofemployees'share ofpremium costs. The following course of action will be pursued as we prepare to again address this issue in conjunction with the "budget exception process "for 2005: a. The City Manager is to work with the Personnel Board, its ad hoc Benefits' Advisory Committee, and a consultant to re-examine the issues raised by City Council and provide a recommendation as to the appropriate share of premium costs between the City and employees and over what period of time the share ratio be implemented. b. As of January 1 the share ofpremium costs of all new employees in 2004 be set at 15%. c. Examine and, if necessary, refine the market to which we compare and against which the share ofpremium costs is established. " City Manager Fischbach presented background information regarding the agenda item. He stated this is the annual appropriation for fiscal year 2004 and adoption of a City budget for 2004-2005. He stated the ordinance also set the mill levy, which has been unchanged since 1991. He stated the ordinance was drafted in response to Council direction. He outlined the budget goals for 2004-2005 as set by the Council: (1) to maintain to the degree possible existing services and minimize service reductions; (2) avoid or minimize layoffs to the degree possible; (3) maintain and if possible expand Police Services; and (4) maintain to the degree possible current levels of primary services. He stated the General Fund for ongoing operations will be reduced by a total of $3.339 million throughout the service areas. He stated the reductions were necessary due to reduced revenues in order to balance This is a very preliminary estimate for the General Fund. Staff is working on a performance review system that considers all compensation adjustments — labor market, merit and skill. 320 November 18, 2003 projected revenues and expenses. He stated projections were for stronger revenues in 2005 and that it was anticipated that a few services (expanded police staffing, police building set -aside, street maintenance expanded funding, and the full Poudre Fire Authority allocation) would be reinstated or expanded in 2005. He stated these services would be considered by the City Council during the 2005 exception process. He stated the projected gap between revenues and expenses necessitated the exclusion of any employee salary adjustments for 2004 and 2005. He stated this would mean potentially no salary increase for 3 years for 66% of the City's workforce, and that there would be no merit or skill adjustments for employees not at the top of the pay range for 2 years, except that police personnel would be eligible for skill ladder increases in 2004 and 2005. He stated employees would be required to pay more for benefit premiums (10% in 2004 and 15% in 2005). He stated all new employees would pay 15% as of January 1, 2004. He stated employees would also pay more for medications and services used. He stated more work would be done in conjunction with the Personnel Board to prepare a recommendation for scheduled changes to benefits premium costs for consideration during the 2005 exceptions process. He stated the City's fiscal plan was sound and that quality services to the community would continue. He recommended adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading with direction to the City Manager to incorporate new employees after January 1, 2004 at 15% of benefits, to immediately proceed with a reexamination of the employee benefits issues utilizing the services of a consultant, to immediately reexamine employee benefits issues in relation to the City's appropriate market and peer cities, and to provide City Council with a report of the findings of the findings in advance of the 2005 budget exception process, with adequate time for Council and staff to thoroughly discuss the findings and set a direction for 2005. He thanked Deputy City Manager Diane Jones and Budget Officer Doug Smith and the Budget Office staff for their hard work during this difficult budget year. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated the City needed to have a system dealing with compensation that would be fair to the employees and the taxpayers. He supported looking at the true labor market in setting salaries and benefits. He stated it would be important to have an objective consultant reporting directly to the Council. He stated the City was late in moving to a requirement that the employees pay 10-15% of their healthcare coverage costs. He stated employees would be hurt by skyrocketing costs if their share of health care premiums was not increased. Councilmember Bertschy stated there were a number of study sessions and public hearings on the budget and that it was time to move forward. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Ordinance No. 156, 2003 on Second Reading with direction to the City Manager to immediately proceed with retaining the services of an outside consultant to examine the employee salary and benefits issues, including relation to and the composition of the City's appropriate markets and/or peer cities, and said consultant to provide Council with a report of the findings in advance of the 2005 budget exception process, with adequate time for Council and staff to thoroughly discuss the findings and set a direction for 2005. 321 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Kastein spoke regarding an option for additional police staffing and asked for additional information. City Manager Fischbach stated an option had been discussed to take one- time monies out of the 2004 budget with the understanding that the three officers coming on line in 2005 with the increased revenues could be paid for with ongoing monies. Councilmember Kastein spoke in favor of that option and stated he would like to see the addition of another officer and civilian staff person through the use of about $100,000 from the police building set -aside money, approximately $75,000 from the newly enacted Transfort youth fares and $50,000 from reserves. He stated he firmly believed that the City did not have adequate police coverage and that the City had not met the goal of having 1.5 officers per 1,000 residents. He stated Fort Collins was the third lowest in the number of police officers per 1,000 residents in a national peer study. He stated the issue was how many officers were on patrol at any given time, what response times were, and the number of cases solved. He stated the City had only three traffic officers and one sergeant for a City of 120,000. He stated the City was third lowest in the peer study in closing cases. He stated he would like to give the Police Department more resources and that it would be a mistake to fail to fund any new police officers this year. City Manager Fischbach stated the $75,000 figure for youth fares was questionable because the ridership was projected to decline initially after the fare increase. Doug Smith, Budget Officer, stated approximately $112,000- $120,000 ongoing would be needed fora police officer, that about $49,000 ongoing would be needed for a civilian employee, and that about $60,000 in one-time monies would be needed for the officer and civilian employee. City Manager Fischbach stated this would mean approximately $220,000 for both positions and that monies would also be needed to train the officer. Councilmember Kastein made a motion to amend Ordinance No. 156, 2003 to adopt the City Manager's Option A to fund three police officers and one civilian in 2004 and three police officers and half a civilian staff member in 2005, and in addition to add one additional officer and one additional civilian employee in 2004 using police building set -aside money ($100,000), youth fares ($75,000) and reserves ($50,000). THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Councilmember Tharp stated the City Manager's recommended budget does not include the positions that were included in the motion. Mayor Martinez stated he did not understand why there is no interest in keeping up with needed staffing for police. Councilmember Weitkunat stated it was her understanding that an attempt will be made in 2005 to reinstate the funding for police officers. She stated cuts need to be made across the board and that the Police Chief had indicated that the lack of funding for new officers would not be that detrimental. 322 November 18, 2003 She stated she did not believe that the budget could support the funding that was proposed by Councilmember Kastein. Mayor Martinez stated the Council complained about the Police Department not providing the desired level of service and that the Police Chief had stated in one study session that police services were diminishing. He suggested not placing more burden on the Police Department to do more regarding minor issues when major crime has increased. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would support the main motion. He asked about administrative charges for the quarter cent community enhancements. Smith stated all capital projects were charged an administrative charge to cover the cost of administrative support services. He stated this was part of the financial management policies adopted by the Council. Mayor Martinez asked if the budget included the Rivendell recycling center. City Manager Fischbach replied in the affirmative. Mayor Martinez asked if the budget included the $20,000 for the Climatewise program. City Manager Fischbach stated money was incorporated into the 2003 budget and encumbered for expenditure in 2004. Mayor Martinez commented that a way was found to hire an environmental planner despite the hiring freeze and budget cuts and that this became a priority over hiring of police officers and opening of a new fire station. He asked about the addition of three staff positions for energy services. City Manager Fischbach stated three staff people would be assigned to energy services and that their budget would be $991,000. He stated this encompassed wind power and the energy services plan approved by the City Council in September. Mayor Martinez asked Council to think about the allocation of money to those types of programs when money could not be found for primary emergency services. Councilmember Kastein made a motion to amend the main motion to include Option Ain the budget as proposed by the City Manager. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Councilmember Roy stated he would support the main motion. He stated he wanted the employees to understand how much the Council appreciated their efforts and excellent service. Councilmember Bertschy stated he would support the main motion. He stated this was a tough budget year and that it was difficult for everyone. 323 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Tharp stated she would support the main motion. She stated many services had been cut across the board. She expressed concerns about next year's budget projections and stated she had been assured that the 2005 budget could be adjusted if needed. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would be supporting the main motion. She stated it was important that it be a level playing field and that new staff not be added at this time. She stated the budget must be balanced and follow the policies that had been established. She supported looking at issues such as benefit premiums. Councilmember Kastein thanked staff for their hard work on the budget. He stated he would not be supporting the main motion. He stated he believed that progress had been made with regard to key components of the budget. He stated he believed that the police should be adequately funded and that this was an issue to the community. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would support the main motion. He expressed a concern about the overly "robust" projections for 2005 but that could be addressed in the exception process. He supported looking at the salary and benefit markets. He spoke in support of funding for the Natural Resources Department to ensure compliance with environmental laws and requirements. He stated funding for that Department had been done piecemeal. Mayor Martinez stated he was disappointed at the lack of support for additional emergency services funding. He stated he would have liked to have the Police Chief available to answer questions. He stated Fire Station 14 will be closed for 2004 and that police services would continue to diminish although this had been identified as the number one priority by the Council. The vote on the main motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Kastein and Martinez. THE MOTION CARRIED Other Business Councilmember Hamrick requested looking at formal adoption of Robert's Rules of Order or a recommended subset. Councilmember Tharp stated formal adoption would require a parliamentarian. She asked if Councilmember Hamrick had a specific concern. Councilmember Hamrick stated he had concerns about how debate was ended on an issue several weeks ago. He stated he would like to see written procedures that would address the role of the Mayor as facilitator in a discussion to ensure that everyone can get their point across. 324 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Weitkunat stated an abbreviated version of Robert's Rules of Order is available through Colorado Municipal League. She stated adoption of the full Robert's Rules of Order would require an elaborate parliamentary procedure. Councilmember Bertschy stated it might be timely to review the abbreviated CML version. Councilmember Bertschy stated he would like to see the Council move forward on the issue of alley houses. He stated he wanted to address the neighborhoods included in the Eastside and Westside Neighborhood Plans and not the neighborhoods in the downtown district. He stated the zoning districts he wished to address were the N-C-B, N-C-M and N-C-L districts. He stated the goal would be to change within those districts the guidelines for alley houses and to eliminate the designation of more than two dwelling units as permitted uses in the N-C-M zone. He stated these changes will not be geared to decreasing planned density within the zones and that alley houses would still be permitted. He stated the issue is guidelines to retain the nature and character of historic neighborhoods. He suggested that these changes occur during the next regularly scheduled Land Use Code change period in the Spring of 2004. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, that prior to the Spring, 2004 adoption of the Land Use Code revisions, a moratorium be placed on any alley houses being initiated for planning review in the N-C-L, N-C-M and N-C-B zones, and including the initiation of any new dwellings for more than two -families in the N-C-M zone. Councilmember Roy spoke in support of the motion and stated more is needed than the existing simple guidelines. City Attorney Roy requested clarification regarding whether the intent was to begin the moratorium at this time or to have an Ordinance brought forward with regard to that aspect of the motion. He stated a moratorium would need to be imposed by Ordinance rather than by motion. Councilmember Bertschy stated he was looking for support on an Ordinance for a moratorium and spoke regarding the intent of the moratorium. He stated he would withdraw the motion. The consensus of a majority of the Council was to bring back an Ordinance to impose a moratorium on alley houses. Councilmember Tharp supported the creation of a Blue Ribbon Budget Committee to be part of the deliberations on the 2005 budget exception and adjustment process and future budgets. She proposed this as a special task force that would be selected by each Councilmember naming one person to serve. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would support the proposal. 325 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Roy asked about the possibility of soliciting applications from the community. Councilmember Kastein stated he would support Councilmember Tharp's proposal. Councilmember Tharp stated she would welcome expert advise from such a Committee. Mayor Martinez stated the consensus appeared to be in favor of the proposal regarding the Blue Ribbon Budget Committee. Councilmember Tharp asked for information about the City's involvement in the cable franchise negotiations. City Manager Fischbach stated information would be prepared for the Council. Councilmember Hamrick asked if there had been any discussion about having a Councilmember on the Programming Committee. City Manager Fischbach stated staff would prepare information. Councilmember Hamrick requested the Downtown Development Authority minutes relating to awarding of financial incentives to In -Situ and First National Bank. Councilmember Hamrick stated he believed that the upcoming report of the Mayor and City Manager to the community should be a Council report and that it should address Council policy goals and objectives. City Manager Fischbach stated the Charter required the City Manager to make a report to the community. Mayor Martinez stated the Charter required that the report be for the past year rather than for upcoming years. Councilmember Roy stated he would also like to receive information about the cable franchise. Councilmember Tharp asked what would be involved in unfreezing the bilingual and museum positions. City Manager Fischbach stated he would take a look at end -of -year revenues before he would recommend that the positions be unfrozen. Councilmember Hamrick asked about the Saturday cemetery burial policy and whether there was support for staff to flex hours to enable Saturday burials. He asked if this is a service that could be outsourced. City Manager Fischbach stated staff will provide a detailed report that addressing why this can not be done. Councilmember Tharp stated Greeley accomplished Saturday burials by allowing staff flex hours. She stated she was not convinced that it would be unfeasible to do the same in Fort Collins. 326 November 18, 2003 Councilmember Roy stated this was a sensitive issue for community members and that he would like to see a solution to Saturday burials. City Manager Fischbach stated this had been City policy for 25 years and that this was seldom an issue. He stated staff would prepare a report to the Council. Adjournment Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adjourn to 6:00 p.m. on November 25, 2003 or at the conclusion of the study session, whichever came first, for the purpose of conducting the annual performance reviews of the City Attorney, City Manager and Municipal Judge. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. ATTEST: Chief Deputy City Clerk 327