HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-10/01/1985-RegularOctober 1, 1985
' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on
Tuesday, October 1, 1985, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City
of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following
Councilmembers: Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and
Stoner.
Staff Members Present: Shannon, Huisjen, Krajicek, Lewis
Agenda Review: City Manager
Deputy City Manager Shannon asked that Item k17, Inducement Resolution
Setting Forth the Intention of the City of Fort Collins to Issue Industrial
Development Revenue Bonds for the Alpine Manufacturing, Inc. Project in the
Amount of $1,750,000, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar so that an
amended Resolution could be considered and noted Item 918, Inducement
Resolution Setting Forth the Intention of the City of Fort Collins to Issue
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Vipont Laboratories, Inc.
Project in the Amount of $5,000,000, had been withdrawn from the agenda by
' the applicant.
Consent Calendar
This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and
energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends
approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this
calendar be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately.
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately
under Agenda Item #45, Pulled Consent Items, except items pulled by anyone
in the audience or items that any member of the audience is present to
discuss that were pulled be staff or Council. These items will be
discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar.
4. Tabling of Iems Relating
Known as tuteAnnexation
to the Annexation and Zoning of Prope
A. Tabling on Second Reading of Ordinance No. 92, 1985, Annexing
Property Known as the Stute Annexation #3.'
B. Tabling on Second Reading of Ordinance No. 93, 1985, Zoning
Property Known as the Stute Annexation k3.
-458-
These ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on August
20. The applicant has requested that the ordinances be tabled on '
Second Reading to November 5. Adoption of the Consent Calendar will
accomplish the tabling of the ordinances.
5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 1985, Amending Section 114-2 of
the ode of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the 9Todel raffic
ode for olorado Municipalities', 19Edition.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on September
17 and contains one change to Article XXI, Obedience of Traffic
Regulations, contained in the Model Traffic Code, which is intended to
address problems encountered by the Police Department and the Parking
Division in their attempts to enforce public safety on the sidewalks,
parking garage, and public parking lots in the city. This change
restricts persons from riding on roller skates, skate boards, or
similar devices upon a sidewalk or in or on a public parking lot or
facility where signed.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 1985, Repealing and Reenacting
Section 9-7 of the Code and Providing for Establishment of Polling
Places by Resolution.
The ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 17
and would repeal a Section of the City Code which establishes polling
places for municipal elections, and would reenact the section to
provide that polling places be set by Resolution of the City Council.
Polling places are currently set by ordinance and are codified.
Allowing the designation to be done by Resolution will provide a
mechanism to do the same work easier and at less cost.
In addition, the Ordinance would allow amendments to polling places to
be made administratively by the City Clerk if circumstances prevent
the use of a designated polling place.
A Resolution designating the polling places for the November 5 Special
Election appears later on the Consent Agenda.
Second Reading of Ordinance=No. 108, 1985, Appropriating $5,000 of
Unanticipated Revenues in the Transportation Fund.
This ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on September
17. The Larimer/Weld Regional Council of Governments has contracted
with the Colorado Department of Highways to prepare the North Front
Range Corridor Study. Parsons Brinckerhoff consultants has been
selected to prepare the study. City of Fort Collins staff is
participating in the preparation of this study. The Larimer/Weld
Regional Council of Governments will reimburse the City for 87% (up to
$5,000) of its cost associated with the study.
-459-
October 1, 1985
8. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 112 1985 Appropriating
$50,OUO in Unanticipated Revenue in Downtown Development Authority
Fund for Street and Utility Improvements on Pine Street.
The DDA Board in a unanimous vote recommended the appropriation of
$50,000 from the bond proceeds to Larimer Community Services,
Incorporated to aid in street and utility improvements on Pine Street
in conjunction with the building of a multi -purpose community services
building.
Q
10.
11
12
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 1985, Vacating a
Portion of Den m son Avenue.
The street design in Four Seasons was changed by the recent approval
of Four Season Fifth Filing. As a result a small portion of Dennison
Avenue must be vacated to accommodate the new street layout. The
portion of the street being vacated is to be retained as a utility
easement. With this condition the utilities have no problem with the
vacation.
Hearin and First Readin of Ordinance No. 114, 1985, Vacating a
Portion of a Blanket Access Utility and Drainage asement at aintree
Commercial P.U.D. Phase I.
The Developer is requesting the vacation of a portion of the blanket
easement to accommodate a revised building design. All utilities have
been contacted and have indicated no problems with the vacation.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 1985, Vacating a
Portion of an Access and Utility Easement at Riverside ping
(.enter, i nng ase
The access off of Pennock Place for this development was to occur
across from the access for Riverside Shopping Center, Filing I. In
the review process the access for Riverside Shopping Center, Filing I
was moved 5 feet to the west. The engineers for Riverside Shopping
Center were not notified of this change and thus it was not
accommodated in their design at the time. The new easement has been
accepted by Council to realign the access and now, this vacation will
complete the realignment of the easement to accommodate the revised
access. All utilities have been contacted and have indicated no
problems with the vacation.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 1985, Appropriating
Prior Year Undesignated Reserves in the Parkland Fund for the
eimbursement of Street mprovement osts ssociated it the
Rossborough Park Site in the amount of 515.50 2
Rossborough Park site was purchased in 1980. This 9.7 acre
neighborhood site is located in southwest Fort Collins at Dunbar
Avenue and Casa Grande Blvd., west of South Shields Street and south
M.1
October 1, 1985
of Swallow Road. Part of the purchase agreement states that the City -
will reimburse the developer for street, sidewalk, street light and '
curb and gutter improvements adjacent to the park site. These
improvements were not anticipated to be completed this year when the
1985 Parkland budget was prepared. Consequently, funds for this
reimbursement were not budgeted. However, the street construction has
now been completed on Casa Grande Blvd., and the developer has
requested payment. The City's share is $15,502, which is available in
Parkland Fund Prior Year Undesignated Reserves.
13. Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Purchase Property Located at
906 East Stuart Street for the Relocation of hi unsne School Day Care.
This resolution would enable the City to purchase certain real
property located at 906 East Stuart Street and lease it back to
Sunshine School for use as a day care center. Sunshine School has
already relocated their operation from its former location on West
Mountain Avenue to the new site and is presently leasing the property
for $1,500 per month from the present owner. Community Development
Block Grant funds would be used to purchase the property, and the
City's obligation under the purchase agreement would be limited to the
amount of such funds appropriated for the School.
14. Resolution Authorizing the Transportation Development Program for
1986-1990.
This resolution was tabled from the September 17 meeting to allow more I
opportunity for Council review of the Transportation Development
Program (TOP).
The resolution approves the five-year TDP for the period of 1986-1990.
The City of Fort Collins has contracted with CRS Sirrine of Denver to
complete the five-year plan. In order to remain eligible to receive
federal funding assistance, the City is required to have a
comprehensive five-year plan for its transit system. The
Transportation Development Program is intended to serve as a planning
document and should be considered conceptual, subject to amendments as
conditions change.
Any significant changes to the existing Transfort service recommended
in the five-year Transportation Development Program (i.e. elimination
of a route) would require, a public hearing be held and City Council
action before a change could occur.
15. Resolution Establishing Polling Places for the November 5 Special City
Election.
The Resolution establishes polling places for the 69 City precincts
that were defined on the precinct map adopted by Ordinance on second
reading on September 3. Polling places used for City elections
conform as closely as possible with polling places used for the
County's elections, with a few exceptions in the fringe precinct areas ,
-461-
October 1, 1985
where portions of more than one county precinct are combined in one
City precinct because of the small number of in -City registered voters
within the county precincts.
16. Resolution Supporting Colorado Tax Amnesty Program.
On January 1, 1986, penalties for most types of state tax evasion
increase dramatically thanks to House Bill 1188 signed by Governor
Richard Lamm on June 6. However, the State of Colorado is conducting
a Tax Amnesty program from September 16 through November 15. Colorado
Tax Amnesty is a one -time -only opportunity for individuals and
businesses to pay back taxes and interest to the state without penalty
or prosecution.
This resolution supports the Colorado Department of Revenue's Tax
Amnesty Program.
17. Inducement Resolution Setting Forth the Intention of the City of Fort
Collins to Issue Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Alpine
Manufacturing, Inc. Project in the Amount of $1,750,000.
Application for Industrial Development Revenue Bond financing for the
Alpine Manufacturing, Inc. Project in the amount of $1,750,000.
Project is located approximately 112 mile north of Highway 14, in the
Urban Growth Area.
AMOUNT OF BOND PROCEEDS REQUESTED: $1,750,000
TITLE OF PROJECT: Alpine Manufacturing, Inc.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Approximately 112 mile north of Highway 14 and
just west of Summitview Drive
USE OF PROCEEDS: The acquisition, development, construction and
equipping of a 50,000 square foot office, distribution and light
manufacturing building. The building will be leased to and occupied
by Alpine Manufacturing, Inc., which manufactures and markets plastic
and metal components for the electronics and computer industry. The
project is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area.
18. Inducement Resolution Setting Forth the Intention of the City of Fort
Collins to Issue Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Vipont
Laboratories, Inc. Proiect in the Amount of SS.000.000.
Application for Industrial Development Revenue Bond financing for the
Vipont Laboratories, Inc. Buildi ng in the amount of $5,000,000.
Project is located in the Oakridge P.U.D.
AMOUNT OF BOND PROCEEDS REQUESTED: $5,000,000
TITLE OF PROJECT: Vipont Laboratories, Inc. Building
-462-
October 1, 1985
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Oakridge P.U.D. at Harmony Road and Lemay Avenue
USE OF PROCEEDS: The development of land and the construction and
equipping of a two story 50,000 square foot office, distribution and
light manufacturing building. The building will be leased to and
occupied by Vipont Laboratories, Inc., a local manufacturer of
products for the treatment of oral health problems.
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #4. A. Tabling on Second Reading of Ordinance No. 92, 1985, Annexing
7roperty Known as the Stute nnexation #3.
B. Tabling on Second Reading of Ordinance No. 93, 1985, Zoning
Property Known as the Stute Annexation #3.
Item #5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 1985, Amendinq Section 114-2
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the 'Model
Traffic Code for Colorado Municipalities" 1977 Edition.
Item #6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107 1985 Repealing and
Reenactiny Section 9-7 of the Code and Providing for
Establishment of Polling Places by Resolution.
Item #7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 1985, Appropriating $5,000
of Unanticipated Revenues in the ransportation und.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #8. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 1985
Appropriating $5U,000 in Unanticipated Revenue in owntown
Development Authority Fund for Street and Utility Improvements on
Pine Street.
Item #9. Hearing and First Reading of Ordi
Portion of Dennison Avenue. -
No. 113, 1985, Vacating a
Item #10. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 114 1985 Vacating a
Portion of a Blanket Access, Utility and Drainage Easement at
aintree Commercial .U. hase
Item #11. Hearing and First Reading of
Portion of an Access and Ut-
Center, Filing II. Phase 1.
Item #12. Hearing and First Readin
Appropriating Prior Year Um
-463-
Ordinance No. 115, 1985, Vacating a
ity Easement at kiverside Shopping
of Ordinance No. 116
signated Reserves in the
1985
kl—an
October 1, 1985
Fund for the Reimbursement of Street Improvement Costs Associated
' with the Rossborough Par ite in the amount of 1 50
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, and Rutstein.
Nays: None. (Councilmember Stoner abstained)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
I
Ordinance Partially Eliminating the Distance
Restrictions for Hotel and Restaurant
Liquor Licenses, Adopted on Second Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
This Ordinance was adopted by a 4-3 vote on September 17 and would
eliminate the existing provision that prohibits the issuance of liquor
licenses within 500 ft. of any school or university for Hotel -Restaurant
licenses only and with respect to the properties of Colorado State
University only. The restrictions would still apply to all other types of
liquor licenses and with respect to any other public or parochial school,
college, or university."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 109, 1985 on Second Reading.
Gene Mitchell, Parklane Towers, noted he had been asked by a representative
of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (M.A.D.D.) to speak against the ordinance
and again voiced his opposition to eliminating the 500 ft. distance
restriction.
Justus Wilkinson, 429 South Whitcomb, agreed with Mr. Mitchell's comments
and requested the ordinance be denied.
Beverly Wendell, Vice -President of M.A.D.D., noted her organization's
opposition to the ordinance.
Councilmember Estrada stated he felt alcohol abuse was not going on in
establishments licensed as hotel -restaurant but was occurring in dorms,
apartments, vehicles, and by students younger than 21. He stated he felt
this ordinance would not contribute to that problem.
Councilmember Knezovich stated this was a land use issue that would convert
segments of Laurel and Elizabeth to strips of bars. He urged defeat of the
ordinance to uphold the character of those neighborhoods.
The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 109, 1985
on Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak,
Ohlson, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Clarke, Knezovich, and Rutstein.
-464-
October 1, 1985
THE MOTION CARRIED. I
Items Relating to the Proposed
Fort Collins/Loveland Corridor
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 1985, Funding the Purchase of the
Fort Collins -Loveland Corridor by a 1/4 Cent Sales and Use Tax for
Five Years.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 1985, Calling a Special Election
on November 5, 1985 and Referring Ordinance No. 110, 1985 to the
Voters.
Ordinance No. 110, 1985 was adopted of First Reading by a vote of 6 to 1,
and Ordinance No. 111, 1985 was adopted unanimously on First Reading on
September 17, 1985. Ordinance No. 110, 1985, the Sales and Use Tax
Ordinance, was adopted with the provision that the tax would be on all
items, including grocery food, and that a maximum of $11,250,000 of sales
and use tax revenues would be allocated to the purchase of the Corridor.
Ordinance No. 111, 1985 calls for a special election to be held November 5,
1985 and refers the sales and use tax ordinance to the voters."
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to '
adopt Ordinance No. 110, 1985 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
(Councilmember Estrada abstained.)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 110, 1985 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Designating the Old Post
Office, 201 S. College Avenue as a
Landmark District, Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The Cultural Resources Board is initiating this request for local landmark
designation for the Old Post Office, located at 201 S. College Avenue. '
-465-
October 1, 1985
The property owner has not yiven consent to designate this property. A
' public hearing was held by the Board on September 18, 1985, at which the
Board unanimously voted to recommend designation of this property.
Background
The Cultural Resources Board is charged with studying and making
recommendations to City Council on properties the Board believes are worthy
of local landmark designation. Since early 1983, the Board has been
interested in local landmark designation of the Old Post Office, located at
201 South College Avenue. Although the building was placed on the National
Register of Historic Places in 1978, National Register listing does not
afford any protection for the structure, which the Board wanted to assure
through local landmark designation.
The Board has been working with the property owner to obtain consent for
local designation, but has been unsuccessful. At a meeting on March 28,
1985, the owner again indicated no interest in local designation of the Old
Post Office and added that he might demolish the building, as it was an
economic liability to him. As a result of this meeting, the Board spent
much time discussing the pros and cons of non-consentual designation, as
well as the owner's mention of demolition. On May 22, 1985 the Board voted
6-0 to proceed with the non-consentual designation of the Old Post Office.
Ronald Weiszmann, General Partner of Post Plaza, Ltd. (owner of record) was
contacted in July and given the opportunity to consent to landmark
designation. Since he did not give consent to designation, the Cultural
Resources Board was required (by Ordinance) to hold a public hearing, at
which time, public comment on the matter would be taken. A resolution to
hold this hearing was adopted by the Board at the August 28, 1985 Board
meeting. This hearing, held September 18, 1985 in Council Chambers, had
attendance of approximately 38 people. Seven people spoke in favor of
local landmark designation (see attached transcript of hearing). Ted
Davis, contract purchaser of the Old Post Office, requested that the Board
delay any action on this matter until November 27, 1985 pending closing on
the contract. Despite this request, the Board did not feel there was reason
to delay the matter any longer and voted 7-0 to recommend designation of
this property. The current owner did not have a representative at this
hearing.
Significance of Old Post Office
As previously indicated, the Old Post Office was listed on the National
Register of Historic Places in 1978. Significance of the building for that
nomination was based on the architecture of the structure. The building,
constructed of Alabama marble, is a stylized (or local) version of Second
Renaissance Revival, an architectural style unique to Fort Collins. Careful
attention was given in the design of the facade, to scale and juxtaposition
of architectural elements of the building. The overall impression of the
building is one of grace and grandeur, due to arched window treatments, the
facade of the building and its careful attention to detail. One statement
made in the past is that it "reminds one of a Washington monument
' transported to the plains and cow country of Colorado".
m..
October 1, 1985
The City's Landmark Preservation Ordinance defines architectural,
historical and geographic criteria for determining the significance of a
'
structure, object, or area. The Cultural Resources Board has considered
these criteria, with respect to the Old Post Office and the following
summarizes the fact that the property has local significance under each of
the three criteria:
architectural - building is a stylized example of Second Renaissance
Revival architecture, which is unique to Fort Collins.
historical - construction in 1911-12 provided an anchor for new downtown
business district.
geographic - location in "new" business district, outside of area now known
as Old Town; site of a portion of burying ground for soldiers of Camp
Collins and civilians of era, whose remains were relocated prior to
construction.
Since the site itself also has significance, this request is for a landmark
district, which would designate the building as well as the ground on which
it sits.
Non-Consentual Designation
The Landmark Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 69) provides for the Cultural
Resources Board, any citizen, or owner of property within the city limits
to initiate a request for local landmark designation. At the present time,
there are eleven structures and/or objects and two districts (Old Town and
,
the Museum) in Fort Collins that have local landmark designation. However,
this is the first time that a designation request has gone forward in Fort
Collins without the owner's consent.
The owner has verbally indicated that he would not consent to local
landmark designation unless there is an economic benefit inherent in
designation. Although such incentive programs are common throughout the
United States as a means to encourage local landmark designation, Fort
Collins does not have such a program. The property owner has also stated
that he views local designation as a "taking without compensation". This
issue has been dealt with in numerous preservation -related cases throughout
the country. Perhaps the most noted case (and the first of its kind before
the U.S. Supreme Court) was one involving Penn Central Transportation
Company and New York City, where the Supreme Court ruled that a local
landmark ordinance controlling demolition or alteration of landmarks for
aesthetic reasons is a. valid exercise of the police power and does not
constitute a "taking", unless the owner can prove the absence of a
reasonably beneficial use of the property.
This parallel between how we regulate local landmarks and other established
land use and zoning regulations exists in Fort Collins in the instance of
annexation and zoning of property. Typically, a PUD condition is attached
to the zoning placed on property at the time of annexation. This '
-467-
October 1, 1985
essentially means that no use of, or construction on the property can take
place without review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. We
regulate land use on the basis that we are doing so in the interest of
protecting the "health, safety and welfare" of the public. By protecting
significant components of our community's heritage (through local landmark
designation) for future generations, we are also attempting to protect and
promote the "welfare" of our citizens.
Requirements of Local Designation
Once a site, structure, object or area has local landmark designation, the
Landmark Preservation Commission is responsible for the review and approval
of any exterior changes proposed for landmarks or structures within a
landmark district. Exterior changes include additions, facade renovations,
new construction, signage and painting. Proposals to relocate or demolish
a locally -designated landmark must also be reviewed and approved by the
Landmark Preservation Commission. Appeals of Commission decisions can be
made to City Council. Since this building was rehabilitated in 1978 by the
current owner, the facade is in excellent condition. With the exception of
modern doors, the exterior of the building is essentially as it was at the
time of its completion in 1912. Thus, expected future changes to the
exterior would be in the nature of signage changes as tenants change.
Public Input
Public support for local landmark designation of the Old Post Office has
been shown from a variety of individuals and/or groups. At the Cultural
' Resources Board hearing of September 18, a letter was submitted by the
Columbine Care Center Resident Council in support of designation. Seven
residents were quoted in this letter of support. The DDA Board of Directors
unanimously voted on September 5, 1985 to support the effort of the
Cultural Resources Board to designate the Old Post Office. Fort Collins
resident Sharon Akins wrote a letter in support of designation, as did the
Colorado Historical Society and the State Historic Preservation Officer.
Summary
The City's Landmark Preservation Ordinance states that it is "a matter of
public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of
structures and districts of historical, architectural or geographic
significance, located within the City of Fort Collins, are a public
necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride
and general welfare of the people".
This request for local landmark designation of the Old Post Office is one
to reaffirm the basic intent established' in the City's Landmark
Preservation Ordinance. Designation of the Old Post Office as a local
landmark district would protect the structure and site, which have
architectural, historical and geographic significance as previously
established. In addition to this significance, is the importance this
structure has to the community as anchor of the Oak Street Plaza and its
role as a link with the Old Town Historic District. This is a strategic
-468-
October 1, 1985
and highly visible site in the community - one which virtually every
resident passes on a regular basis and visitors see on their way through '
the downtown. The concept that "what a community feels about itself is
reflected in its downtown" is important to consider in this matter, since
the Old Post Office is one of the few remaining structures of its era along
College Avenue and local designation is the opportunity to assure that it
remains."
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Ordinance No. 117, 1985 on First Reading.
Sherry Albertson -Clark, Senior City Planner, reviewed the proposed
designation of the building and clarified the meaning and restrictions
associated with designation.
Josephine Clements, 125 South Grant, read a statement from the Fort Collins
Historical Society in support of the local historic designation of the Old
Post Office.
Alyce Milton, Chairman of the Cultural Resources Board, encouraged
designation of the building.
Dick Beardmore, Chairman of the Landmark Preservation Commission, urged
favorable consideration of the ordinance.
Justus Wilkinson, 429 South Whitcomb, favored the designation of the Old
Post Office. '
Councilmember Estrada stated he felt the designation of the Old Post Office
would bring an added element of history and culture to Fort Collins and
supported the ordinance.
Councilmember Stoner noted he was concerned with the preservation of the
rights of the property owner but in this case the owner was aware when he
purchased the building that it was a landmark and that certain
responsibilities would go with the purchase.
Councilmember Clarke stated he felt the designation would give the owner an
opportunity to use the property in almost any manner without changing the
exterior significantly. He supported the ordinance.
Councilmember Knezovich made,a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada,
to amend the ordinance to add the necessary language to consider the
ordinance as an Emergency Ordinance.
City Attorney Huisjen cited the Charter provisions pertaining to the use of
Emergency Ordinances.
He suggested the demolition permit be issued on the condition the permit
not be actionable so long as there were persons occupying the premises and
also that the permit terminates upon the final designation of 'the structure
as a historic landmark. He suggested the designation process'continue and '
-469-
October 1, 1985
be kept separate from the demolition permit process. He pointed out that
' in the past Emergency Ordinances had been used sparingly and carefully and
questioned whether this issue fit Charter guidelines.
Councilmember Estrada withdrew his second to Councilmember Knezovich's
motion.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 117, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Making Appointments to the
Parks and Recreation Board and the
Liquor Licensing Authority, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"A vacancy currently exists on the Park and Recreation Board due to the
resignation of David Shands. A vacancy also exists on the Liquor Licensing
Authority due to the resignation of William Sheahan. The Council liaisons
have screened the applications and interviews were conducted for the Parks
and Recreation Board vacancy. Recommendations for the appointments will be
forwarded under separate cover."
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to
adopt Resolution 85-172 inserting the names of John Rabun for the Parks and
Recreation Board and Dwight Morgan for the Liquor Licensing Authority.
Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke; Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein,
and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Citizen Participation
A. Proclamation Naming the Month of October as Colorado Recycling Month
was accepted by Don Yon, Resource Associate.
B. Proclamation Naming the Month of October as International Training in
Commum cation Month was accepted by Faith Skold.
C. Proclamation Namihorng October 6-12 as Fire Prevention Week was accepted
by Poudre Fire Autity Chief John Mulligan.
D. Proclamation Naming October 16 as World Food Day was accepted by John
Leeper, Colorado State University Peace Corps representative.
E. Proclamation Naming October 24 as United Nations Day was forwarded to
' the appropriate person.
-470-
October 1, 1985
F, Proclamation Naming November 24-December 1 as National Bible Week was I
forwarded to the appropriate person.
G. Proclamation Naming October 6-12 as Mental Illness Awareness Week was
accepted by Craig Jump of the Fort Collins Alliance for the Mentally
Ill.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, objected to the use of City funds to
promote the corridor acquisition in the City news.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, asked for clarification on the permit
value of the recent Collins Cashway remodeling project.
Inducement Resolution Setting Forth
the Intention of the City of Fort Collins
to Issue Industrial Development Revenue
Bonds for the Alpine Manufacturing, Inc.
Project in the Amount of $1,750,000, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
Application for Industrial Development Revenue Bond financing for the
Alpine Manufacturing, Inc. Project in the amount of $1,750,000. Project is I
located approximately 112 mile north of Highway 14, in the Urban Growth
Area.
AMOUNT OF BOND PROCEEDS REQUESTED: $1,750,000
TITLE OF PROJECT: Alpine Manufacturing, Inc.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Approximately 112 mile north of Highway 14 and just
west of Summitview Drive
USE OF PROCEEDS: The acquisition, development, construction and equipping
of a 50,000 square foot office, distribution and light manufacturing
building. The building will be leased to and occupied by Alpine
Manufacturing, Inc., which manufactures and markets plastic and metal
components for the electronics and computer industry. The project is
located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area.
Background
Pursuant to Senate Bill No. 108, the City of Fort Collins is eligible to
apply for unlimited allocations from the Statewide balance beginning
September 1, 1985 for the remainder of the year, although there is no
assurance that funds will be available during this period. -As of September
17 there was a balance of $200 million in the State pool. This balance
changes daily, and staff will contact the Division of Local Government for ,
-471-
October 1, 1985
the current balance on October 1, prior to Council consideration of the
1 item.
Enclosed for your review is a copy of the application for the inducement of
City of Fort Collins Colorado Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Series
1985) for J&E Enterprises, a Colorado General Partnership, in the amount of
$1,750,000. The project consists of the purchase and development of land
and a metal type building with 42,000 square feet manufacturing and
warehouse space and 8,000 square feet office space which will be used by
Alpine Manufacturing, Inc. The project is located within the Urban Growth
Area, and has been reviewed by County Finance Director, Bob Grewell.
Enclosed is a copy of the comments which the Planning Department has with
regard to the project. The inducement Resolution addresses these concerns,
providing that the City's and County 's planning, zoning and land use
processes must be complied with and that prior to the issuance of bonds the
right-of-way for the proposed Timberline extension will be dedicated.
Staff has reviewed the application using criteria established by Resolution
84-92, adopting Industrial Development Revenue Bond Policies and Criteria.
The IDRB Criteria Evaluation Sheet is also enclosed.
IDRB CRITERIA EVALUATION
APPLICANT: J & E Enterprises
' PROJECT: Alpine Manufacturing, Inc.
AMOUNT REQUESTED: $1,75U,000
Points Total Maximum
Earned Multiplier Points Points
CREATION OF JOBS
Amt. of Debt
Issued/Job
2
1
2
2
Types of Jobs
2
1
2
2
Job Market
2
1
2
2
Annual Payroll
2
4
8
8
Sub -Total
INCREASE IN
TAX BASE
Assessed Value 2 4 8 8
Gross Sales/
Sales Tax 0 2 0 4
Sub -Total ___9 __17
-472-
October 1, 1985
STIMULATION
BUSINESS INVESTMENT
Construction Value
1
2
2
4
'
Export Sales
2
4
8
8
Domestic Expen.
1
4
4
8
Sub -Total
7T
20
COMPLEMENT TO
EXISTING PROGRAMS
& FACILITIES
Consistency
2
1
2
2
Community Resp.
2
4
8
8
Sub -Total
10
10
FINANCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
Debt Coverage
2
4
8
8
Net Worth
2
2
4
4
Sub -Total
12
12
TOTAL POINTS CRITERIA
58
68
BONUS POINTS
Downtown Revitalization
no
0
5
Historic Preservation
no
0
4
'
Energy Conservation
*
2
10
Financial Guarantees
yes
3
3
Targeted Industries
** yes
10
10
Sub -Total
__15
77
TOTAL POINTS
73
100
*Note: Application states that energy conservation will be utilized,
but no detail of conservation measures is provided.
**Note: Project occupants satisfy criteria for targeted industries
established by the Chamber of Commerce Targeted Industries Council."
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to
adopt Resolution 85-170.
City Attorney Huisjen noted discussions with the applicant had been held
relating to the requirements set out in paragraph 7 of the Resolution. He
detailed those requirements and noted the applicant was now in agreement
with the requirements as outlined.
-473-
October 1, 1985
Ed Laudick, 2218 Sheffield Drive, the applicant, noted he had no objections
' to the requirements or conditions of the City.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Resolution 85-170 was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Appeal of Planning and Zoning Board
Decision to Deny the Proposed Maple
Street Apartment R-M Site Plan Review
Planning and Zoning Board Decision Sustained
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summar
On August 26, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Board denied the request of
Barbara Bejmuk for R-M Site Plan approval of a 13 unit apartment building
on 0.5 acre located at 1216 Maple Street. The site is zoned R-M, Medium
Density Residential. The 5-1 denial was based on the Board's conclusion
that the applicant had not addressed its concerns as to density, treatment
of the west elevation, landscaping, and traffic generation which were
raised when the applicant first brought the project to the Board for
' preliminary review.
Barbara Bejmuk requested that the item be appealed to City Council.
Background
The proposal is for a 13 unit apartment building on 0.5 acre at 1214 and
1216 Maple Street. The area is composed of predominately single story
single family dwellings with three four-plexes, a duplex and an eight unit
apartment building in the area.
This proposal was reviewed under guidelines used for multi -family
residential projects occurring in the R-M, Medium Density Residential
zoning district. The project was reviewed on the basis of impacts of the
proposed density (including efforts to mitigate or lessen these impacts)
and compatibility with the existing neighborhood. Site plans and buildings
are to be compatible and sympathetic with the surroundings in terms of
scale, bulk, building materials, orientation,, disposition of buildings on
the lot, parking and circulation,height, landscaping and architectural
character.
The R-M Site Plan Review calls for a one time review by staff and the
Planning and Zoning Board. In this case, the applicant requested that the
project be split into preliminary and final plans in order to allow for
additional input from staff and the neighborhood. On May 20, 1984 the
' preliminary version of the plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning
-474-
October 1, 1985
Board by a 5-2 vote with the Board expressing concerns as to density, the
west elevation and traffic generation in the area (which was found to be a '
function of the density).
The final plan was submitted March 29, 1985 for staff review and was
continued by the applicant until the August 26, 1985 Planning and Zoning
Board meeting. At that meeting the project was denied by a 5-1 vote. The
Board felt the applicant had not successfully addressed the Board's
concerns and that the density was inappropriate for the site, the landscape
plan had not significantly changed and that the traffic generated was also
unacceptable. Staff had recommended approval of the project based on the
preliminary approval by the Planning and Zoning Board.
The concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board have been clarified, and are
considered by staff to be valid and cogent, and therefore recommend that
City Council uphold the Planning and Zoning Board's decision of denial."
Linda Hopkins briefly reviewed the project and showed slides of the site
plan and elevations.
Ken Wolfe, 420 South Howes, attorney representing the appellant Barbara
Bejmuk, spoke of the evolution of the project since early 1984. He noted
his client had been somewhat surprised at being asked to respond to
objections raised at the August, 1985 final approval hearing since the
Planning and Zoning preliminary approval had noted the problems with items
now listed as objections. He spoke to the quality of other projects
developed by his client and showed slides of those projects. He stated '
that Mrs. Bejmuk had complied with all the City's requirements and noted
the final approval should have been a routine matter. He asked that the
Planning and Zoning decision be reversed.
Phil Leonhardt, 1212 Maple, opposed the project and noted he was
representing the 100+ persons who signed the petitions and wrote letters
opposing the project. He stated the neighbors were opposed because of the
high density proposed, the limited amount of green space, the project being
out of character with surrounding structures, and the impact of heavy
traffic. He asked that their concerns be considered.
Frank Vella, 1205 Maple, spoke of traffic concerns and noted his opposition
to the project.
Joyce West, 1217 Columbine Court, spoke of her concerns and asked the
project be denied.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
sustain the actions of the Planning and Zoning Board and to deny the
project.
Barbara Bejmuk, 1800 Lakeshore Circle, developer of the project, responded
to Councilmembers' questions and spoke to the ways she had responded to the
City's requirements and regulations throughout the process. She asked that
the project be approved. '
-475-
October 1, 1985
' Councilmember Clarke noted he did not feel the proposed density was
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and that he did not feel the
site plan was appropriate for the buildings to be placed there.
Councilmember Ohlson noted that although he respected the ability of the
developer and her commitment to quality, he would be voting against the
project based on the objections voiced by the Planning and Zoning Board.
The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to sustain the decision of the
Planning and Zoning Board and to deny the project was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein, and
Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Public Hearing on Revised Uses of Revenue Sharing Monies
Budget Director Silvija Widmer gave a brief review and update on the 1986
Budget and spoke to the revised uses of revenue sharing funds.
Councilmember Clarke expressed frustration that cuts were achieved through
transfers rather than budget cuts.
Budget Director Widmer noted the budget had been cut extensively through
the use of the 1985 and 1986 deflators.
Lori Wolfe, 223 East Elizabeth, representing Larimer County Department of
Human Development, expressed support of the $152,000 allocation for human
service contracts.
Resolution Adopting the Financial
and Management Policies Relating
to the 1986 Budget, Adopted as Amended
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
The 1985 Budget financial and management policies were used in developing
the 1986 Budget. In addition, Section VIII.7. PARKLAND FUND POLICIES was
added; and Sections I1.2. SALES AND USE TAX DISTRIBUTION and Section 1.5.
CATEGORIZATION OF CITY SERVICES were updated.
This resolution formally adopts the City's financial and management
policies relating to the 1986 Budget.
-476-
October 1, 1985
Background
The 1985 Budget financial and management policies were used in developing '
the 1986 Budget, with one additional policy and two revisions to existing
policies. These additions and changes are highlighted below:
I.5. CATEGORIZATION OF CITY SERVICES
Natural Resources has been added, under the category of
Maintenance of Effort Services.
II.2. SALES AND USE TAX DISTRIBUTION
This section has been revised to reflect accounting mechanisms
relating to Bond Anticipation Notes (BANS) to be issued in
1985 for the Pool/Ice Rink facility. Sales and Use Taxes from
the 0.25 cent tax will be transferred to the Debt Service
Fund, rather than the Capital Projects Fund, to repay the
BANS.
VIII.7. PARKLAND FUND POLICIES
This new section has been added, to reflect Council direction
relating to the Parkland Fund.
This resolution formally adopts the City's financial and management
policies relating to the 1986 Budget." '
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-174.
Deputy City Manager Shannon highlighted minor revisions to the policies on
page Q-25 relating to Council's support of Resolution 85-134 regarding the
Sullivan principles, and on page Q-38 relating to when the Parkland Fund
was instituted.
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
delete the last two sentences of paragraph VIII.7.A.1 on page Q-37 and to
add "The 1980 base rate fee is to be adjusted periodically as future
construction and acquisition costs change."
Councilmember Knezovich stated he did not want to vote for an inflationary
increase in parkland development fees and added he felt development fees
could be used other places.
The vote on Councilmember Knezovich's amendment was as follows: Yeas:
Council members Clarke, Estrada, Knezovich, and Stoner. Nays:
Councilmembers Horak, Ohlson, and Rutstein.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-477-
October 1, 1985
' Councilmember Ohlson asked for clarification on the meaning of the
amendment and asked if this was a retreat from the policy of development
paying for itself.
Councilmember Clarke replied the policy says the City is going to cover the
costs and is going to adjust the parkland fees to do that. He added it was
not a change from the previous policy.
The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to adopt Resolution 85-174 as
amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak,
Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolutions Relating to Personnel Policies
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summa
A. Resolution establishing an official holiday on the third Monday in
January which will be known as Martin Luther King Day and providing
options to Council for trading an existing holiday for the new holiday.
' B. Resolution eliminating disparities in pay for hourly employees by
increasing these salaries and providing for annual salary increases in
the future.
C. Resolution establishing a comparable worth plan for city employees
through a three year phase -in plan.
These three resolutions relate to changes in personnel policies that will
take effect in 1986.
Background
A. Resolution 85-175 adds the Martin Luther King Day holiday to the
employees benefit package. The resolution provides the Council with
three options. Option A adds the holiday, bringing the number of
holidays received by employees up to eleven. This will improve the
quality of the benefits package and make it more competitive with other
organizations in the area and region. Option B trades the Martin
Luther King holiday for Colorado Day, leaving the number of holidays at
ten. Option C trades the Martin Luther King Day for the current
floating holiday. Council can choose any of the three options
presented and insert that letter into the resolution during the Council
meeting.
B. Resolution 85-176 eliminates disparities in the pay of hourly
' employees. A number of hourly employees work hours similar to those of
-478-
October 1, 1985
permanent part-time employees and perform similar tasks, but receive
significantly lower wages and no benefits. These employees prefer to '
work limited schedules with flexible hours, and the departments they
work for have needs that easily accommodate these employees. Therefore
it is reasonable to allow these employees to continue on an hourly
basis. Some of the inequities in pay and benefits can be resolved by
increasing hourly wages by 10% in 1986, and by providing annual salary
increases equal to the average city salary increase in future years.
C. Resolution 85-177 establishes a comparable worth plan for City
employees. Pay Equity is based on the concept that one job is "worth"
more than another when measured by such factors as skills, effort,
responsibility, working conditions, etc. The City of Fort Collins is
currently in the process of measuring our jobs. The policy decision to
be made concerns a City commitment to reconcile salaries to reflect the
"worth" of jobs. For specific jobs, this means a shift in policy from
labor market to internal worth.
The initial study indicates that there is a 7% disparity for some
employees in undervalued jobs. To begin to reconcile these differences
staff recommends a three year phase -in of the plan, beginning with Z%
in 1986. The 7% figure is an average for all jobs, so some employees
will receive more than 7% and others will receive less. The exact
percentages for each employee who will be effected will be defined when
the study is completed."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to '
adopt Resolution 85-175, Option "D", which establishes the Martin Luther
King holiday, eliminates the Colorado Day holiday, and adds a second
floating holiday.
Councilmember Estrada felt this was a compromise option that would spread
the cost of another holiday over the entire year.
Director of Employee Development Mike Powers discussed the salary costs of
an additional holiday during winter and summer operations.
The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Resolution 85-175,
Option "D" was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak,
Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada,
to adopt Resolution 85-176.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
amend the Resolution by deleting the fourth and fifth WHEREAS clauses and
the words "part-time" in the first WHEREAS. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember
Clarke.
-479-
October 1, 1985
' THE MOTION CARRIED.
The vote on Councilmember Knezovich's motion to adopt Resolution 85-176 as
amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Knezovich,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Clarke.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Resolution 85-177.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, noted his opposition to the
comparable worth Resolution and noted there was no support for the issue at
the budget hearing.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, opposed the Resolution.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he felt this was an equity question and
strongly supported the Resolution.
The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to adopt Resolution 85-177 was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson,
Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
IBudget Consent Items
Items 28-38 are being presented together in the Consent Calendar format.
These items have been reviewed and discussed at budget work sessions and
are being presented in this manner to expedite their adoption. As with the
regular Consent Calendar, any item may be withdrawn for discussion by any
member of the council, staff or public and will be considered after the
balance of the Budget Consent is adopted.
Councilmember Clarke asked that Item #33, Hearing and First Reading of
Ordinance No. 123, 1985, Adopting 1986 Parkland Fees, and Item #37,
Resolution Adopting a Rate Schedule for the Use of Lincoln Center
Facilities, be removed from the Budget Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Stoner asked that Item #29, Hearing and First Reading of
Ordinance No. 119, 1985, Adjusting the Street Oversizing Fee for the 1986
Budget, be removed from the Budget Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Knezovich asked that Item #34, Resolution Adopting the 1986
Fees and Charges Schedule for Municipal Cemeteries, be removed from the
Budget Consent Agenda.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, asked that Item #28, Hearing and
First Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 1985, Amending Chapter 93 of the Code
-480-
October 1, 1985
of the City of Fort Collins Relating to 1986 Storm Drainage Utility Fees,
Item #30, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 1985, Amending '
Chapter 112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and Sewer
Service, and Item #31, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 121,
1985, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Southridge Greens Sinking
Fund, be removed from the Budget Consent Calendar.
Councilmembers requested that Item #42, Resolution Approving the 1986
Budget for Poudre Fire Authority, be added to the Budget Consent.
28. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 1985, Amending Chapter
93 of 'the Code of the Ci ty of Fort Col 1 i ns Re] ati ng to 1986 Storm
Drainage Utility Fees.
Approval of this Ordinance will set the fees for the Storm Drainage
Utility for 1986.
The average combined monthly capital and 0&M increase for 1986 is
6.5%.
29. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 1985, Adjusting the
treet Oversizing Fee for the 1986 budqet.
This ordinance will increase the Street Oversizing Fees for the 1986
Budget. The Commercial and Industrial fees are increased according to
the formula reviewed and approved by Council during the 1985 Budget
review. The Residential fee is being raised and additional $5 per '
D.U. to offset the cost of providing landscaped medians which are now
a standard for arterials.
30. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 1985, Amend in Chapter
112 of the Code Relating to Service Charges for Water and ewer
Service.
The Recommended 1986 Budget, as presented, includes an increase in
monthly water service fees of approximately nine (9) percent and an
increase in monthly sewer service fees of approximately four (4)
percent.
The nine percent increase in water service fees and the four percent
increase in sewer service fees are necessary in order to ensure that
sufficient revenue is generated to meet anticipated expenses and to
comply with City financial policies.
31, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 1985, Appropriatin
Prior Year Reserves in the Southridge Greens inking Fund.
This Ordinance appropriates $313,500 from prior year reserves to meet
debt service requirements on the 1982 Bond Anticipation Notes.
-481-
October 1, 1985
32. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 1985, Appropriating
unds or t e A rogram.
On July 15, 1985, the administration of the SAINT (Senior Alternatives
in Transportation) program was transferred from the Transportation
Services Fund to Parks and Recreation in the General Fund. In order
to provide for the proper matching of revenues to expenses, all
expenses incurred in 1985 have been transferred to the General Fund
and all unused appropriations in the Transportation Services Fund have
been frozen. All revenue received has also been recorded in the
General Fund. Adoption of this ordinance will provide the proper
appropriations in each fund affected by the transfer of the program.
33. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 1985, Adopting
1986 Parkland Fees.
The Parkland Fund policy states that Parkland Fees are to be increased
annually by the established projected inflationary rate percentage,
and these annual fee increases are necessary to attempt to keep pace
with growing economic conditions. The 1985 fee is $625 per each new
dwelling unit. The City Budget Office established five percent (5t)
as the annual inflation rate to be used for 1986 budget purposes.
Therefore, the proposed 1986 Parkland fee is $655 per each new
dwelling unit, which is an actual increase of 4.8 percent.
34. Resolution Adopting the 1986 Fees and Charges Schedule for Municipal
Cemeteries.
This Resolution would increase the Cemetery user fees by an average of
10 percent as of January 1, 1986. This recommended increase in fees
is consistent with the 1986 recommended budget document.
35. Resolution Adopting 1986 Fees and Charges Schedule for City Park Nine
and Collindale Golf Courses.
To satisfy cost recovery policies set by City Council, an approximate
five percent increase for green fees and annual passes is budgeted in
1986 for the Golf Fund. This equates to an increase of 25 cents on
9-holes of golf and 50 cents for 18-holes; and increases of $15 for
Adult Annual Passes; $10 for Spouses, Senior, and Students, and $5 for
Junior Golfers. Fees for City golf cart rentals and other golf
related services remain the same as 1985 rates.
36. Resolution Adopting 1986 Recreation Division Fees and Charqes.
The 1986 Recreation Division fees and charges schedule remains
consistent with the fees and`charges policy adopted by City Council in
1980. It is important to note that 51 percent of general operations
of the Recreation Fund (without inclusion of ice arena/pool expense in
1986) will be recovered through fees and charges - refer to page G-35
of the Recommended 1986 Budget document. The 46 percent recovery
figure reported on page G-12 of the same document includes the 1986
-482-
October 1, 1985
ice arena/pool budget. It is expected that when this facility opens
in 1987, expenditures and associated revenues will continue to be
reflected separately in the budget. However, it is still to be
determined whether or not a separate recovery rate for the ice
arena/pool will be developed for the 1987 budget process.
37. Resolution Adopting a Rate Schedule for the Use of Lincoln Center
arilitlac
Proposed rates for 1986 reflect an increase in all areas of the
Center. We have attempted to minimize the increase for non-profit
groups and to remain competitive with other facilities for commercial
rates.
38. Resolution Increasinq 1986 Parkinq Lot Fees.
This resolution increases the surface parking lot fees (excluding the
Jefferson Street Lot) from $8 to $10 per month per space.
42. Resolution Approving the 1986 Budget for Poudre Fire Authority.
The Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and the Poudre Fire
Authority specifies that the City must approve the Poudre Fire
Authority Budget each year. This Resolution approves the 1986 Poudre
Fire Authority Budget totalling $6,169,972.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #28. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 1985, Amending
Chapter 93 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to
1986 Storm Drainage Utility ees.
Item #29. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 119, 1985, Adjusting
the Street Oversizing Fee for the 198 budget.
Item #30. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 1985, Amending
hapter 12 of the ode Relating to ervice C arges for at r
and Sewer Service.
Item #31. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 1985,
ppropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Southrldge Greens
Sinking Fund.
Item #32. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 122, 1985,
Appropriating Funds for the SAIN Program.
Item #33. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No.. 123, 1985, Adopting
1986 Parkland Fees.
1
-483-
October 1, 1985
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to
adopt and approve all items not removed from the Budget Consent Calendar,
with the addition of Item #42. Yeas: Counci]members Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 93
of the Code of the City of Fort Collins
Relating to 1986 Storm Drainage
Utility Fees, Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
Approval of this Ordinance will set the fees for the Storm Drainage Utility
for 1986.
The average combined monthly capital and 0&M increase for 1986 is 6.5%.
Background
Authority is provided in Chapter 93 of the City Code to collect on a
monthly basis, storm drainage fees consisting of an operations and
maintenance fee for all areas of the City and a capital improvement fee as
determined for each basin.
For the operations and maintenance fee, a 4.55% increase is proposed in
1986. The average single family residence will pay an additional $0.04 per
month, or a square foot base rate of $0.000384.
The monthly capital fee varies in each basin due to several factors: funds
that will be needed for capital improvement projects to solve existing
drainage problems, the size of the basin, the percentage of developed
versus undeveloped area, and, the recognition that the top limit of the fee
should be $2.50. In 1986, the Storm Drainage Utility has projected capital
project expenditures of $1.3 million for the 9 basins.
The following table recaps the operations and maintenance and monthly
capital fees to show a comparison from the time that they were initiated in
1983:
October 1, 1985
Combined
Proposed
1985
0&M
'
Combined
Monthly
Proposed O&M Monthly
1985 Capital
1986 Capital
O&M
$0.88
---
$0.92
---
Monthly
Monthly
Capital
Capital
Spring Creek
$0.31
$1.19
$0.43
$1.35
Dry Creek
$0.62
$1.50
$0.68
$1.60
Foothills
$0.70
$1.58
$0.79
$1.71
West Vine
$0.72
$1.60
$0.81
$1.73
Canal Importation
$1.00
$1.88
$1.13
$2.05
Fox Meadows
$1.08
$1.96
$1.22
$2.14
Fossil Creek
$2.05
$2.93
$2.05
$2.97
Evergreen Park/Greenbriar
$2.32
$3.20
$2.32
$3.24
McClelland/Mail Creek
$2.43
$3.31
$2.43
$3.35
The average combined monthly capital
and 0&M
increase
for 1986 is
6.5%.
The attached Ordinance adopts the
1986 fees."
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion,
seconded
by Councilmember
Ohl son, to
adopt Ordinance No. 118, 1985 on
First Reading.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood
Drive, objected
to
'
this fee increase and
asked for justification on all
the fee increases.
She noted
there were
people in Fort Collins who can't
meet their
present utility
bills.
Councilmember Ohlson pointed out
the Storm
Drainage
Board was unanimously
in favor of this increase.
The vote on Councilmember Knezovich's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 118,
1985 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke,
Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance•Adjusting the Street
Oversizing Fee for the 1986 Budget,
Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
This ordinance will increase the Street Oversizing Fees for the 1986
Budget. The Commercial and Industrial fees are increased according to the '
-485-
October 1, 1985
formula reviewed and approved by Council during the 1985 Budget review.
' The Residential fee is being raised an additional $5 per D.U. to offset the
cost of providing landscaped medians which are now a standard for
arterials.
Background
During the budget hearings in 1984, staff presented projection of the
City's Street Oversizing costs for the next five years. From this estimate
a five year Street Oversizing Fee projection was developed.
Since the projections were developed, design standards for arterial streets
in the City have been revised to include landscaped medians as standard.
The landscaped medians add approximately $20 per foot to the present $44
per foot oversizing cost for constructing one half of an arterial street.
This cost has been added to the projections done in 1984.
The 1984 projections showed moderate increases in Residential Street
Oversizing Fees, and requested an increase in the Commercial and Industrial
fees of approximately 10%. To cover the additional oversizing costs
associated with landscaped medians, staff recommends an increase in the
Residential fees of $5 per dwelling unit per year for a five year period.
Commercial and Industrial fees are recommended as shown in the following
table.
The fee adopted and recommended five year projected fees with the 1985
Budget are shown in the left column and the recommended 1986 fee and five
year projected fees are shown in the right column in the table below.
1985 Budget
Recommended Fee
1986 Budget
Recommended Fee
Res.
Comm.
Ind.
Res.
Comm.
Ind.
1985
$249/du
$4528/ac
$1514/ac
1986
250/du
5041/ac
2020/ac
$255/du
$5041/ac
$2020/ac
1987
252/du
5555/ac
2527/du
260/du
5555/ac
2527/ac
1988
253/du
6069/ac
3034/ac
265/du
6069/ac
3034/ac
1989
253/du
6619/ac
3310/ac
275/du
6619/ac
3310/ac
1990
253/du
7169/ac
3585/ac
285/du
7169/ac
3585/ac
These increases will enable the fund to meet its obligations over the next
five years with the open line of credit established for the fund used
sparingly. Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance."
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
adopt Ordinance No. 119, 1985 on First Reading.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood Drive, asked about the need for landscaped
medians.
October 1, 1985
Director of Transportation Services Bob Lee explained the safety aspects of I
medians rather than striping, noting medians allow traffic control and
driveway access control and offer shelter from two-way traffic.
Councilmember Stoner noted the increase in the industrial fees causes Fort
Collins to become less attractive to industries wanting to locate here. He
felt the industrial increase was inappropriate and would harm economic
development efforts.
The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 119, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Council members Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, and Rutstein. Nays: Councilmember Stoner.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Amending Chapter 112 of the
Code Relating to Service Charges for
Water and Sewer Service, Adopted on First Readi
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summar
The Recommended 1986 Budget, as presented, includes an increase in monthly
water service fees of approximately nine (9) percent and an increase in '
monthly sewer service fees of approximately four (4) percent.
The nine percent increase in water service fees and the four percent
increase in sewer service fees are necessary in order to ensure that
sufficient revenue is generated to meet anticipated expenses and to comply
with City financial policies.
Background
In the Water Fund, the increase in expenses in 1986 is related to the $15
million in general obligation bonds which will be issued to finance the
Water Treatment Plant Relocation Project previously authorized by City
Council. The additional average annual revenue requirement to pay the bond
principal and interest payments is estimated to be between $1.5 to $1.7
million, depending on the interest rate. The proposed nine percent increase
in water service fees in, 1986 along with the previously approved ten
percent increase in water service fee in 1985 will provide sufficient
revenue to pay the projected principal and interest payments. The nine
percent water service fee adjustment will result in an increase of $1.50
per month ($16.65 in 1985 to $18.15 in 1986) for a typical flat rate
customer with an average size lot.
In the Sewer Fund, the increase in expenses is related to additional
industrial pretreatment program requirements mandated by the EPA and
increased sludge handling costs associated with operating and maintaining '
-487-
October 1, 1985
sludge disposal equipment and resource recovery farm. The net impact of
' these items is an increase in both labor costs and equipment operation and
maintenance costs. The four percent sewer service fee adjustment will
result in an increase of $0.42 per month ($10.41 in 1985 to $10.83 in 1986)
for a typical flat rate customer with an average size lot."
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Ordinance No. 120, 1985 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Appropriating Prior Year
Reserves in the Southridge Greens
Sinking Fund, Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
This Ordinance appropriates $313,500 from prior year reserves to meet debt
service requirements on the 1982 Bond Anticipation Notes.
Background
' The Southridge Greens Sinking Fund was established on October 1, 1982 to
record the costs of acquisition and construction of the Southridge Greens
Golf Course. The acquisition and construction were financed by the
issuance of Bond Anticipation Notes in the amount of $3,300,000 in 1982.
Debt service on the BAN's will total $313,500 in 1985. No appropriations
were included in the 1985 Budget for payment of the debt service, however,
the fund has prior year reserves available for this appropriation.
Adoption of the Ordinance would provide for this year's debt service
payments.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Knezovich, to
adopt Ordinance No. 121, 1985, on First Reading.
Finance Director Jim Harmon explained this was a 1985 appropriation that
was overlooked during the 1985 Annual appropriations.
The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 121, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Horak,
Knezovich, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Estrada and Ohlson.
Ordinance Adopting 1986 Parkland Fees,
Denied on First Readinq
I
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
&
October 1, 1985
"Executive Summary '
The Parkland Fund policy states that Parkland Fees are to be increased
annually by the established projected inflationary rate percentage, and
these annual fee increases are necessary to attempt to keep pace with
growing economic conditions. The 1985 fee is $625 per each new dwelling
unit. The City Budget Office established five percent (5%) as the annual
inflation rate to be used for 1986 budget purposes. Therefore, the
proposed 1986 Parkland fee is $655 per each new dwelling unit, which is an
actual increase of 4.8 percent.
Background
Parks and Recreation Board Recommendation
The Parks and Recreation Board, at their regular meeting of August 27,
1985, reviewed and discussed the proposed 1986 Parkland Fee increase. The
Board voted 6-1 (two members absent) to approve the 1986 proposed Parkland
Fee of $655 as recommended by staff, and to recommend the same to City
Council. David Shands voted no.
Background Summary
The Parkland Fund was created by City Council in September 1969. The
Parkland Fund receives a fee from developers for each new dwelling unit
established within the City limits. Parkland fees are to be used primarily '
for the acquisition and development of neighborhood parks in those areas of
the city that are contributing to the Parkland Fund. The acquisition and
development of neighborhood parkland in growth areas is of critical
concern. It is a goal that each square mile of the city should be served
by a neighborhood park of five to 30 acres in size. An average
neighborhood park is generally 12 acres in size, and serves the residential
development within one square mile.
Parkland fees are computed using an established base rate formula
(established in 1980), which projected the average number of acres of
parkland per square mile, multiplied by the average cost per acre of
parkland acquisition and development, divided by the average number of
dwelling units per square mile. The 1980 base rate fee has then been
increased annually by the established projected inflationary rate
percentage. Annual fee increases are necessary to attempt to keep pace
with growing economic conditions.
The initial 1969 fee was set at $40 per new dwelling unit, and was to be
used for parkland acquisition only (not development). In September 1972,
an ordinance was passed to allow the monies in the fund to be spent on the
development of parklands, as well as the acquisition of parklands; and the
fee was increased to $195 per each new dwelling unit. Since 1972, the fee
was increased to $235 in 1976; $250 in 1977; $275 in"1978; .$450 in 1980;
$500 in 1981; $550 in 1982; $590 in 1984; and $625 in 1985. All fee
increases since 1980 (except 1983) were based on the approved inflationary '
-489-
October 1, 1985
rate. There were no fee increases in 1983 to help encourage the local
housing market which at that time was slow.
1986 Recommendation/Options
Staff and the Parks and Recreation Board have recommended a fee increase of
4.8 percent or $30 for 1986, raising the rate from $625 to $655 per each
new dwelling unit. However, some concern has been expressed by one member
of the Parks and Recreation Board about the propriety of the amount of
increase. David Shands felt that the five percent inflation figure is not
acceptable since the "real" inflation rate this year is around 3 percent to
3.6 percent depending upon the source.
The 1986 proposed Parkland Fund Budget and projected revenues were based
upon the five percent increase in the inflation rate. Should it be
determined to lower the inflation rate to say only 3.2 percent, we would
then increase the 1986 fee $20 to $645. This would be a revised revenue
loss of $8,000 as budgeted. If no fee increase for 1986 is approved, the
revised revenue loss would be $24,000."
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
adopt Ordinance No. 123, 1985 on First Reading.
Barbara Allison, 1212 Lynnwood, expressed the fear all the fee increases
would stop or control growth by pricing Fort Collins out of the market.
Councilmember Stoner felt market conditions should dictate the increase.
Councilmember Knezovich felt the current $625 would take care of the City's
needs for 1986 and that the
Parkland Fund had resources
to get through
another year. -
Councilmember Estrada noted he
was willing to stay with the
$625 figure for
1986 and asked for actual
figures on cost factors
associated with
acquisition and development of
parkland.
The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 123, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Ohlson, Rutstein and
Horak. Nays: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Knezovich and Stoner.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Resolution Adopting the 1986 Fees
and Charges'Schedule for
Municipal Cemeteries, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
-490-
October 1, 1985
"Executive Summary ,
This Resolution would increase the Cemetery user fees by an average of 10
percent as of January 1, 1986. This recommended increase in fees is
consistent with the 1986 recommended budget document.
Background
Cemetery user fees for 1986 are recommended to be increased by an average
of 10 percent. The Cemetery fund restructured its fees beginning in
October of 1983, with the goal of increasing operating revenue in order to
reduce the general fund subsidy. The subsidy in 1982 was 57.44 percent
compared to an estimated subsidy in 1986 of 34.9 percent.
It is too early yet to find out what the other area cemeteries intend to do
about their fees for 1986 as they have not yet decided, however, several
years history would indicate that these other cemeteries will raise their
fees to some degree and we will be in line with them and still be
competitive.
Staff met with the local monument dealers and funeral directors to discuss
the proposed 1986 fees and charges schedule on August 28. Those in
attendance at this meeting included representatives from the Fort Collins
Monument Works, Colorado Monument Company, Warren/Bohlender Funeral Chapel,
Goodrich Mortuary, and Reager Funeral Home and Crematory. We explained the
recommended 1986 fees and reasons for them. None of the people present ,
voiced any objections to these fee increases, therefore, staff recommends
increasing 1985 fees and charges for municipal cemeteries by an average of
10 percent for 1986."
Councilmember Knezovich asked the record to show he did not participate in
the discussion or vote on this item.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to
adopt Resolution 85-178. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak,
Ohlson, Rutstein and Stoner. Nays: None (Councilmember Knezovich
withdrawn).
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Adopting a Rate Schedule for
the Use of Lincoln Center Facilities, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summary
Proposed rates for 1986 reflect an increase in all/areas of the Center. We
have attempted to minimize the increase for non-prgfit groups and to remain
competitive with other facilities for commercial rates. I
-491-
October 1, 1985
Background
The Ludlow Rooms and Balcony Lobby non-profit rates for 1986 remain the
same as in 1985 with increases only for commercial usage.
Both non-profit and community rates for Canyon blest and Columbine Room have
been increased due to the recent refurbishing and to remain consistent with
similar facilities in the community.
The Performance Hall rates reflect a 15% increase over 1985 for both
non-profit and commercial usage. Rates for the hall are determined by
comparison with similar facilities and are designed to make it possible for
non-profit groups to take advantage of the state of the art equipment
provided by the Center. Labor costs for non-profit groups will not be
increased.
RATE STRUCTURE COMPARISON - (1986 rates)
City/Facility
Capacity
Rental Rate
Rate Per Seat
Denver Center
Stage
500
$ 550.00*
$ 1.10
Space
450
550.00
1.22
Boettcher
2600
1250.00
.48
Littleton Town Hall
287
275.00**
.96
Arvada Center
500
275.00
.55
Pueblo Center
500
225.00
.45
Lincoln Center
1180
480.00
.41
*4 hours - $75.00
each additional hour
**4 hours- $45.00
each additional hour
The proposed rates for the Lincoln Center remain competitive and yet are
designed to meet the recovery rate as set forth in the policies outlined by
City Council."
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Resolution 85-181.
Councilmember Estrada asked if the 15% increase would allow the Lincoln
Center to remain competitive with other facilities in Fort Collins.
Director of Cultural Services and Facilities Dave Siever replied that with
the recent renovation staff felt the rates were competitive and fair.
Councilmember Rutstein askedstaff to work with the amateur groups to
insure those groups are able to use the Lincoln Center and are not forced
to move their productions to the high school auditoriums because of the
rate increases.
-492-
October 1, 1985
The vote on Councilmember Ohlson's motion to adopt Resolution 84-181 was as I
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson,
Rutstein and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Adopting the 1986 Budget
for the City of Fort Collins and
Fixing the Mill Levy, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"Executive Summar
This Resolution adopts the 1986 Budget for the City of Fort Collins and
sets the mill levy as follows:
General Fund 0 & M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.643 mills
Parks 0 & M 1.100 mills
Poudre Fire Authority Contribution 6.968 mills
Fire Pension Fund Contribution . . . . . . . . . .800 mills
Parks Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.349 mills
TOTAL 12.860 mills
Background '
Differences from the 1986 Recommended Budget presented to Council on August
27, 1985 are as follows (these figures are slightly higher than amounts
discussed at Council's budget worksessions, which dealt primarily with
General Fund, whereas the following are City-wide amounts):
1. After the 1986 Recommended Budget was presented to Council, staff
determined that, based upon year to date receipts, the growth
projections for Sales & Use Tax contained in the 1986 Recommended
Budget for 1985 and 1986 were too high. Accordingly, the growth rates
have been reduced from 8% (1985) and 10% (1986) to 5% for each year.
This action continues our philosophy of conservatively projecting
revenues in order to guard against fluctuations in the economy. As
the result of this change, 1986 appropriations in various funds have
been adjusted to reflect anticipated decreases of $517,664 in 1985 and
$1,487,543 in 1986 from revenues projected in the 1985 Recommended
Budget.
2. The certified assessed valuation received from the Larimer County
Assessor on September 16 reflected a higher -assessed value than had
been anticipated in the 1986 Recommended Budget. Based on the
certified valuation, 1986 Property Tax revenue has been increased by
$213,599.
-493-
October 1, 1985
3. The 1986 Recommended Budget anticipated that Revenue Sharing for
' fiscal year 1986 would be at 90% of FY 1985 levels. Based upon a
joint resolution passed by Congress, this revenue source has been
adjusted to reflect FY 1986 receipts to be at 100% of FY 1985 levels,
resulting in additional 1985 revenue of $24,081 and additional 1986
revenue of $75,188.
4. The Recommended Budget anticipated the transfer of the SAINT program
from the General Fund to the Recreation Fund in 1986. In order to
maintain stability in the program, this change will not be made, and
both funds have been adjusted accordingly.
Changes to specific funds are as follows:
A. General Fund
Appropriations have been reduced by $595,872, from $24,876,939 to
$24,281,067. This change is the result of the lower Sales & Use Tax
projections which were partially offset by increased revenue from
Property Taxes and Revenue Sharing. In order to provide for 1986
General Fund expenditures, cost curtailments have been implemented for
1985 and 1986, a hiring delay has been implemented, proposed dental
coverage for employees has been deferred until 1987, and lower
contributions to the pension fund will be made in 1985 and 1986.
B. Cemeteries Fund
Appropriations have been reduced from $366,419 to $365,419 to reflect
1986 Cost Curtailments.
C. Cultural Services and Facilities Fund
Appropriations have been reduced from $975,736 to $969,736 to reflect
1986 Cost Curtailments.
D. Recreation Fund
Appropriations have been reduced from $1,491,722 to $1,458,474 to
reflect 1986 Cost Curtailments and the decision to leave the SAINT
program in the General Fund.
E. Revenue Sharing Fund
Appropriations have been increased from $991,373 to $1,175,642 to
reflect additional revenue to be received in FY 1986 and a higher
ending fund balance in 1985 due to 1985 Cost Curtailments. The
revised 1986 expenditures are for the following:
-494-
October 1, 1985
F.
G.
Public Housing
$ 275,000
Rebate Programs
200,000
'
-Sales Tax on Food $
140,000
-Utility Charge and
Property Tax
60,000
Community Service Agency
Contracts
152,100
Volunteer Program
30,943
Total Community Services
$ 658,043
General City Capital Projects
300,000
Lease/Purchase-Police
Vehicles
184,269
City Buildings -Handicapped
Accessibility
33,330
Total General Fund
$ 217,599
Total
$1,175,642
Sales & Use Tax Fund
Appropriations have been reduced
from $21,591,427
to $20,103,884
to
'
reflect lower anticipated revenue as the result of lowering the growth
rate.
Capital Projects Fund
"Essential" capital projects appropriations have increased from
$1,254,373 to $1,404,706, to provide funding for some projects not
originally funded in the 1986 Recommended Budget, and other
adjustments, as follows:
o Prospect -Shield to Taft Hill 1986 funding of $100,000 has been
delayed until 1989.
o Poudre Fire Authority Equipment Replacement has been increased
$132,000 (from $128,000 to $260,000) with offsetting decreases in
future years to take advantage of a quantity purchases discount.
o The following previously unfunded projects have been added:
Air Quality Program $55,000
Airport Capital 33,333
Annual Sidewalk
Improvement Program 30;000 "
-495-
October 1, 1985
' Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
adopt Resolution 85-184.
Councilmember Knezovich expressed concern about the General Fund Library
budget. He suggested an additional amount of money be found to fund the
book budget at a higher level by taking funds from the Quality of Life
area.
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion to appropriate an additional $51,000
for the Library book budget by reducing the appropriation for the Cultural
Services and Facilities Fund by $34,000 and by reducing the appropriation
for the Recreation Fund - Open Space by $17,000.
THE MOTION DIED FUR LACK OF A SECOND.
The vote on Councilmember Stoner's motion to adopt Resolution 85-184 was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson,
Rutstein and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Appropriating Annual Expenditures
for the City of Fort Collins in 1986
and Setting the Mill Levy for Said
' Fiscal Year, Adopted on First Reading
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"This Ordinance appropriates the 1986 Annual Budget and sets the mill levy.
Changes from the financial statements included in the 1986 Recommended
Budgets are outlined in the previous agenda item."
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Stoner, to
adopt Ordinance No. 124, 1985 on First Reading.
Councilmember Knezovich urged defeat of the ordinance so that
unappropriated reserves will not be used to fund the 1986 General Fund
budget. He suggested the budget be cut back further.
The vote on Councilmember Clarke's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 124, 1985
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada,
Horak, Ohlson, Rutstein and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Knezovich.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-496-
October 1, 1985
Items Relating to 1986 Downtown
Development Authority Budget '
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
"A. Resolution Approving 1986 Downtown Development Authority Budget.
The proposed 1986 Downtown Development Authority Budget of $225,887,
approved by the DDA Board of Directors at the regular meeting of September
26, 1985, would maintain the present staffing level. No capital
expenditures are anticipated. The Board has placed the budgeted year end
excess in contingency.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 1985, Appropriating
Revenue in the DDA Fund.
This is the Annual Appropriation Ordinance for the Downtown Development
Authority, totalling $225,887.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 1985 Setting the Mill
Levy for the Downtown Development Authority for 1986.
This Ordinance sets the 1986 mill levy for the Downtown Development
Authority at 5 mills, the same as the levy determined for 1985."
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to
adopt Resolution 85-185. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Horak, ,
Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein and Stoner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Stoner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
adopt Ordinance No. 125, 1985 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
adopt Ordinance No. 126, 1985 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohl son, Rutstein and Stoner. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Establishing a Process
for Appointing a City Manager, Adopted
Following is the staff's memorandum on this item:
-497-
October 1, 1985
"Executive Summa
'
This Resolution establishes the process that Council will follow in
appointing a City Manager. This establishes for involving
process a
plan
the Council, a citizen review panel and an executive
search firm in the
process. Citizens will be
involved in the first phase
of the recruitment
process when a profile of
the successful candidate is
developed and also
the final interviews.
Background
In order to expedite the process of recruitment and preliminary screening,
Council will hire an executive search firm. A Council sub -committee will
review the proposals received from the firms. The sub -committee will make
recommendation on which firm to hire at the October 15 regular meeting.
The consultant will be involved in defining the needs of the community and
the Council. With this information, the consultant will conduct a
nationwide search for the most qualified candidates. The firm will screen
all applicants and present a list of semi-finalists to Council. Council
will review this list of candidates and select a group of finalists who
will then enter into the interview and assessment process. ,
t
The screening process will remain confidential until the finalist have been
selected. At this point, the candidates will be informed that they have
been selected to advance in the process and will have an opportunity to
remove their name from consideration before the list of finalists becomes
' public.
A citizen review panel, selected by Council, will be involved in the
process of reviewing the finalists. The input from the panel will be taken
into consideration by the Council when it makes its final selections.
This process is one which will allow Council to closely manage the entire
undertaking, but will free them from the detail work involved in the
recruiting and preliminary screening process. This process will also allow
for meaningful citizen input, both in the initial phase of establishing a
profile and in the final phase of interviewing and assessment. The
importance of the confidentiality of the applications is also acknowledged
in the process in hopes that the highest quality applicants will feel free
to submit their names for consideration. The entire process will ensure
that all the resources that are available to Council will be used to ensure
that the best qualified candidate is selected."
Councilmember Knezovich made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to
adopt Resolution 85-173. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Estrada, Knezovich,
Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmember Horak.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
M.;
October 1, 1985
City Manager's Report
Deputy City Manager Shannon spoke of a corridor tour to be held October 16 '
and 17 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The tour will be advertised for
citizens and press to allow interested citizens to get a better idea of the
area and what opportunities are there.
Adjournment
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to
adjourn the meeting to 7:00 p.m. on October 8. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Estrada, Horak, Knezovich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays:
None.
The meeting adjourned at 12:45 a.m.
ATTEST:`
YZ
-City Clerk
-499-