HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-02/20/1990-RegularFebruary 20, 1990
' 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, February 20, 1990, 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: Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and
Winokur.
Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy
Citizen Participation
A. Proclamation proclaiming the week of March 4-10 1990
Schools Education Week was accepted by Michael and Adam Wino
Roy Vratil, 1401 Shamrock, expressed concern about the time allotted for
citizen input and noted that the doors on the north side of City Hall were
locked before the start of the Council meeting.
Joe Schauerhammer, Eagle Scout, Troop #283, asked Council for $2,950 in
assistance to fund his "Welcome to Fort Collins" sign project.
Agenda Review: City Manager
City Manager Burkett stated that Item #27, Resolution 90-24 Appointing
Council Members to a Water Demand Management Committee, contained a revised
resolution and requested that Item #25, Ordinance No. 21, 1990, Amending
Chapter 23 of the Code Relating to the Disposition of Interests in Real
Property, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda.
Yolonda Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, requested that Item #6, Second
Reading of Ordinance No. 9, 1990, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations Between Capital Projects in the Parkland Fund, and Item #10,
Items Relating to Trails System Completion, be pulled from the Consent
Agenda.
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.
-764-
February 20, 1990
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately I
under Agenda Item #20, Pulled Consent Items.
5.
M
7.
A need has been identified for a restroom at Avery Park in 1990. The
park is programmed by the Fort Collins Soccer Club for youth soccer
games and practices and use on weekday evenings and weekends is quite
heavy. Currently there are no restroom facilities at the park. A
restroom is projected to cost $60,000 and no funds have been budgeted.
In 1986 final construction estimates for Troutman Park were $720,000.
Construction was completed in 1988 for $542,000. After some
additional minor work is completed in 1990, the project will be closed
out and the balance of funds made available for appropriation from
Undesignated Reserves in other parkland projects to be determined.
This ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
February 6, will transfer $60,000 from Troutman Park project savings
for a restroom at Avery Park.
During 1989, Fort Collins Police Services utilized existing state '
statutes to seize money and property used in criminal activity.
Council receives annual reports on seizure activity and expenditures
of funds. By statute, monies allocated to the seizing agency by the
court cannot be considered a source of revenue to meet normal
operating needs. These monies are to be used to meet expenses
incurred by the agency in performing its duties which have not been
funded through the routine budget process.
These monies were deposited in the General Fund and set aside in a
restricted reserve for police expenditures. This Ordinance, which was
unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 6, appropriates
$58,120 from prior year reserves which reflects seizure money on
account through year-end 1989., Awards made by the courts during 1990
will be appropriated early in 1991.
8. Second Readinq of Ordinance No. 11, 1990, Amending Section S-
City Council, by Ordinance No. 93, 1987, combined the duties of the
Building Board of Appeals and the Building Contractors Licensing Board
into one single board. The Building Review Board was created to
consist of seven regular members and two alternate members.
While Ordinance No. 93, 1987 amended Chapter 2 of the Code to add a '
division for the Building Review Board and provided for all references
February 20, 1990
' to the Building Board of Appeals and Building Contractors Licensing
Board to be changed to the Building Review Board, it did not
specifically address necessary changes to Chapter 5 of the Code,
Buildings and Building Regulations. Although references to the
Building Board of Appeals and Building Contractors Licensing Board
were changed to the Building Review Board, language relating to the
number of members on the Building Review Board was not appropriately
amended.
This housekeeping Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First
Reading on February 6, amends Chapter 5 of the City Code to bring all
references to the Building Review Board into conformity with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 93, 1987.
a
On February 6, Council adopted Resolution 90-9 authorizing the Mayor
to enter into an agreement for the City to continue to provide Larimer
County residents with general library services and library outreach
services to serve the handicapped, elderly and other isolated persons.
In exchange for providing these services during 1990, the County will
pay to the City $101,803. This Ordinance, which was unanimously
adopted on First Reading on February 6, appropriates the Outreach
funds. General Service funds were projected and appropriated with the
' 1990 Budget,
10. Items Relating to Trails System Completion.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 13, 1990, Authorizing the Transfer
of Appropriations between Capital Projects in the General City
Capital Projects (1/4 Cent Necessary) Fund.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14, 1990, Authorizing the Transfer
of Appropriations between Capital Projects in the Conservation
Trust Fund, and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves.
Available appropriations in the General City Capital (1/4 cent
necessary) Fund and in the Conservation Trust Fund, plus some prior
year reserves in the Conservation Trust Fund, coupled with projected
future lottery revenues should be adequate to cover the estimated
costs of connecting the original trail system segments in order to
meet Council five-year goal. However, some transfers of funds are
necessary to meet expected costs. Land Acquisition Appropriations in
the General City Capital Fund need to be transferred from "Greenbelt",
and "Open Space Acquisition" projects to a new project called "Trails
and Open Space Acquisition". In the Conservation Trust Fund some
available acquisition funds need to be consolidated into the "Trail
Acquisition/Development" project to accommodate expected construction
costs. Prior year reserves (lottery revenue received in late December
1989) also
need
to be
appropriated
to the
same project. These
'
ordinances,
which
were
unanimously
adopted
on First Reading on
-766-
February 20, 1990
11.
12.
13.
February 6, transfer $200,000 of General City Capital (1/4 cent '
necessary) Funds and $645,701 of Conservation Trust Fund dollars for
Open Space and Trail projects for the acquisition and development of
the original trail system.
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 6,
1990.
Since the 1960's, the City of Fort Collins has adopted the Uniform
Fire Code, with certain local amendments. This Code is published
jointly by the Western Fire Chiefs Association and the International
Conference of Building Officials. It is a companion code to the
Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code and Uniform Plumbing
Code, which are also adopted by the City. These model codes are
published in three year cycles through an extensive code development
process and it has been the City's practice to adopt the current
edition following the publishing of the new additions. Unlike the
other model codes, the Fire Code is not administered or enforced
directly by the City, but by Poudre Fire Authority under terms of the
intergovernmental contract which created PFA in 1981. For this
reason, the adoption process parallels the standard city process but
has an intervening step of action by the PFA Board of Directors.
This edition of the Fire Code and local amendments have been reviewed
and endorsed by the PFA Board of Directors, by a special Code Review
Committee appointed by the PFA Board and by the Fort Collins Building
and Fire Review Board. There are no significant retroactive issues
involved in this adoption and no financial impact.
Questions have arisen with regard to whether Councilmembers appointed
to serve as liaisons and/or members of the boards of directors of
other agencies have conflicts of interest in performing their official
duties as Councilmembers if their decisions affect the other boards or
agencies. On February 6, Council unanimously adopted this Ordinance
as revised, which clarifies that: (1) appointments to other
governmental agencies do not generally create conflicts of interest;
and (2) service by Councilmembers on the boards of directors of
private agencies should be construed as service in a private capacity
unless official capacity service is formally approved by the Council.
A. Resolution 90-17 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations I
Regarding the Colorado Nature Center Fourth Annexation.
-767-
February 20, 1990
14.
15.
B. Hearing and First
Approximately 9.4
Fourth Annexation.
Reading of Ordinance No. 18, 1990, Annexing
Acres, Known as the Colorado Nature Center
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 19, 1990, Zoning
Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the Colorado Nature Center
Fourth Annexation, Into the T-Transition District.
This is a request to annex and zone approximately 9.4 acres located
east of County Road 9 and south of East Drake Road (extended). The
requested zoning is the T-Transition District. The property is
presently undeveloped. The property is currently zoned FA-1, Farming
District in the County. This is a voluntary annexation.
APPLICANTS: State Board of Agriculture OWNERS: Same
Room 202 Administration Building
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
The Resolution will authorize the Director of Purchasing and Risk
Management to execute Change Order No. 1 to the Professional Services
Agreement with James M. Montgomery for services including flow
monitoring of the wastewater collection system. This monitoring is an
extension of the flow measurements done by James M. Montgomery last
summer and will be incorporated into their final report.
The Intergovernmental Agreement with Poudre Valley Hospital District
provides for consolidation of dispatching services in the City's
Communication Center. The agreement is for one year, commencing
January 1, 1990.
Under the agreement, the City provides 24-hour dispatch services,
centralized response records, the central point for 911 emergency
calls, dispatchers, maintenance of equipment and radio frequency
access. In return, the District will pay the 'City $65,361 for the
services provided and anticipated expenses.
The payment from the District under the 1989 Agreement was $62,248 for
dispatch services and related expenses.
Im
February 20, 1990
16.
17.
The Poudre Valley Hospital Board has reviewed, approved, and signed I
the agreement.
The applicant, Cityscape Urban Design, on behalf of the property
owners, the Front Range Baptist Church of Fort Collins and Oak Farm,
Inc., has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of
approximately 5.3 acres located south of Harmony Road and west of
Boardwalk Drive.
The proposed Resolution makes a finding that the petition
substantially complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, determines
that a hearing should be established regarding the annexation, and
directs that notice to be'given of the hearing. The hearing will be
held at the time of first reading of the annexation and zoning
ordinances. Not less than thirty days of prior notice is required by
Colorado law.
The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area.
According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins
and Larimer County contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for
the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area, the City will consider the
annexation property in the UGA when the property is eligible for I
annexation according to state law. The property gains the required
1/6 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the
Keenland Annexation to the east.
The City of Fort Collins purchased a portion of the Maxwell property,
located on the foothills west of the city, in the mid-1970's. The
property, located northwest of the CSU football stadium is
approximately 168.23 acres in size and is eligible for annexation
through a provision in State law which allows land owned by the State
or Federal governments to be ignored for the purposes of determining
contiguity.
The proposed Resolution makes a finding that the petition
substantially complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, determines
that a hearing should be established regarding the annexation, and
directs that notice be given of the hearing. The hearing will be held
at the time of first reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances.
Not less than thirty days of prior notice is required by Colorado law.
The property is owned by the City of Fort Collins and is located
outside the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to policies and
agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County '
contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins
-769-
February 20, 1990
' Urban Growth Area, the City can consider the annexation of property
outside the UGA by giving the County proper notice and justification
for the annexation. The City has recently annexed other City -owned
open space areas along the foothills when they satisfied the
contiguity requirements. The property gains the required 1/6
contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the
Becksted Annexation and the Third Foothills Annexations to the east.
18. Resolution 90-22 Making an Appointment to the Storm Drainage Board.
A vacancy currently exists on the Storm Drainage Board due to James
Dubler's move from the Urban Growth Area.
Councilmember Horak is recommending that Bill Alexander, an alternate
on the Storm Drainage Board, be appointment to fill the position
vacated by Mr. Dubler. In addition, Councilmember Horak is
recommending that Mr. Alexander's alternate position be left vacant
until annual appointments are made in June, 1990.
Bill Alexander will complete Mr. Dubler's term as set out below:
Expiration of Term
Bill Alexander July 1, 1990
' Alternate position to be filled July 1, 1991
during annual appointments
19. Routine Deeds and Easements.
a. Powerline easement from Charles C. Britton and Maxine H. Britton,
804 Birky Place, needed to install underground electric vault.
Monetary consideration: $64.
b. Powerline easement from Maxine M. Jensen, 1616 South Whitcomb,
needed to install underground electric vault. Monetary
consideration: $64.
c. Powerline easement from Frank J. Sewald and L. Jeanette Sewald,
1331 East Mulberry, needed to underground existing overhead
electric system. Monetary consideration: $10.
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #6.
Item #7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 10, 1990, Appropriating Prior
Year Reserves from Police Seizure Activity:
-770-
February 20, 1990
Item #8. Se
of
Item #9. Se
ti
Item #10. A.
Item #11.
Item #12.
3
-27 '
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 15, 1990, Adopting the 1988
Edition of the Uniform Fire Code with Local Amendments.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #13. B.
C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 19, 1990, Zoning
Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the Colorado Nature Center
Fourth Annexation. Into the T-Transition District.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards,
to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar.
Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and
Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 9,'1990, Authorizing
the Transfer of Appropriations
Between Capital Projects in the
Parkland Fund. Adopted on Second Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
-171-
February 20, 1990
' "FINANCIAL IMPACT
A need has been identified for a restroom at Avery Park in 1990. The park
is programmed by the Fort Collins Soccer Club for youth soccer games and
practices and use on weekday evenings and weekends is quite heavy.
Currently there are no restroom facilities at the park. A restroom is
projected to cost $60,000 and no funds have been budgeted. In 1986 final
construction estimates for Troutman Park were $720,000. Construction was
completed in 1988 for $542,000. After some additional minor work is
completed in 1990, the project will be closed out and the balance of funds
made available for appropriation from Undesignated Reserves in other
parkland projects to be determined. This ordinance, which was unanimously
adopted on First Reading on February 6, will transfer $6O,000 from Troutman
Park project savings for a restroom at Avery Park."
Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to
adopt Ordinance No. 9, 1990 on Second Reading.
Yolonda Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, stated the $60,000 expenditure for
restrooms at Avery Park was excessive.
Superintendent Parks Planning and Development Randy Balok commented on the
design process of the restrooms and noted the requirements within the City
Code.
' The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 9, 1990 on
Second Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards,
Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Trails System Completion
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 13, 1990, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations between Capital Projects in the General City Capital
Projects (114 Cent Necessary) Fund.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14, 1990, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations between Capital Projects in the Conservation Trust Fund,
and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves.
Available appropriations in the General City Capital (114 cent necessary)
Fund and in the Conservation Trust Fund, plus some prior year reserves in
the Conservation Trust Fund, coupled with projected future lottery revenues
should be adequate to cover the estimated costs of connecting the original
' trail system segments in order to meet Council five-year goal. However,
some transfers of funds are necessary to meet expected costs. Land
-772-
February 20, 1990
Acquisition Appropriations in the General City Capital Fund need to be '
transferred from "Greenbelt", and "Open Space Acquisition" projects to a
new project called "Trails and Open Space Acquisition". In the
Conservation Trust Fund some available acquisition funds need to be
consolidated into the "Trail Acquisition/Development" project to
accommodate expected construction costs. Prior year reserves (lottery
revenue received in late December 1989) also need to be appropriated to the
same project. These ordinances, which were unanimously adopted on First
Reading on February 6, transfer $200,000 of General City Capital (114 cent
necessary) Funds and $645,701 of Conservation Trust Fund dollars for Open
Space and Trail projects for the acquisition and development of the
original trail system."
Yolonda Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, spoke on behalf of LaPorte residents
regarding the rails -to -trails issue.
City Manager Burkett stated that land negotiations were being conducted
with the property owners in LaPorte and noted the research regarding the
associated legal issues of the railroad right-of-way. He stated passage of
the ordinance would appropriate money to fund the City's trail system.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari,
to adopt Ordinance No. 13, 1990 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED. '
Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to adopt Ordinance No. 14, 1990 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Azari commented on the negotiations with Continental Express
and the Airport Authority and stated she believed progress was being made
on the issue.
Public Hearing on City-wide Recycling Program
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At this hearing City Council will receive comments on how to provide
curbside recycling collection in Fort Collins.
173-
February 20, 1990
BACKGROUND
At an August 1989 worksession, Council directed staff to develop options
for initiating a curbside collection program for recyclable -materials.
After considerable research, a staff report on curbside recycling was
presented to Council on November 27. The staff report indicated that a
wide variety of program designs were possible, depending on the decisions
Council made on certain variables. Those variables were: funding,
collection, processing, frequency of collection, materials collected and
the level of sorting required. The two variables that have the greatest
impact on the program design are the choice of a funding mechanism and the
choice of who would perform the collection service - i.e. a single
contractor or all local trash haulers.
The staff report was given wide circulation and was made available at the
Public Library. Interested citizens, including the local trash haulers,
were kept informed and were asked for their input on program design.
County and municipal officials within Larimer County were also kept
informed of the project's progress. An Open House on recycling was held in
January at the Fort Collins Public Library. Over 800 people attended and
wrote comments and suggestions regarding the proposed recycling program.
At the January 23 worksession Council discussed the objectives for a
recycling program. The direction staff heard at that worksession was
general agreement that a program that relied on one or two contractors,
rather than several independent trash haulers, would be acceptable -- due
to the economies of scale and other efficiencies that are inherent in a
more centralized collection system. General agreement was also heard that
the primary objective for the program would be the recovery of the highest
volume of materials -- with the caveat that restrictions on individual
freedom of choice should be minimized. A key strategy of the program
should be to "reduce barriers" to recycling -- either at the individual
level or on a system -wide basis. Council was concerned about the staff
assumption that only single-family residences would receive curbside
collection service, and asked for additional analysis of the potential to
include multi -family and commercial entities as well.
On February 2, staff forwarded to Council two recommended program options
which respond to the direction received at the January 23 worksession.
(attached)
The public hearing was scheduled to receive citizen input on these two
primary program options as outlined below:
OPTION ONE -- UNIVERSAL SERVICE TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS:
The City would use a competitive bid process to select a single collector
of recyclables for single family residential units on a City-wide basis.
the City would identify a broad based funding source to spread the cost
over a wide population. The program would be designed to make
participation convenient for individual households, and would be likely to
' result in a high participation rate. Four drop-off sites would provide
opportunity for those not covered by the curbside program to conveniently
-774-
February 20, 1990
drop-off recyclables. The proposed funding mechanism for this program
would be a "recycling utility fee" added to the utility bills of all single
family residential utility customers in the City. The estimated amount of
such a utility fee would be approximately 85 cents per household. Future
adoption of a landfill surcharge may have the potential to reduce the per
household charge.
OPTION TWO -- SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE: Using a discretionary funding source,
the City could include single-family, multifamily, commercial, and
industrial customers in a voluntary recycling program. The City would use
a competitive bid process to select a contractor, or possibly two
contractors, to collect recyclables either on a subscription basis or
funded through General Fund revenues. Although both Options One and Two
give the individual a choice whether to participate or not, in a
subscription -based program only those interested in having the service
would pay for it. If the General Fund were used, customers would not be
charged a new fee for the service, and tax revenues from a variety of
sources would pay for it.
Several factors are included in BOTH proposed options, as follows:
■ Weekly service
■ Materials separated by participants
■ Partitioned collection trucks, different from trash trucks
■ Contractor responsible for both collection and marketing
■ Newspaper, glass, aluminum, and motor oil are collected
■ Flexibility to stop or re -start newspaper collection based on
market conditions
■ Plastic and tin can collection are options to be bid separately
■ Start-up costs could come from General Fund undesignated reserves
Option One most closely resembles the recycling pilot program, and is
favored by staff as being more predictable, based on this previous
experience. Option Two may also meet the objectives Council identified at
the January 23 worksession. Staff could not identify any other community
that has operated a recycling program this way, and cannot predict the
effectiveness of this program design. Subscription service entails an
element of risk due to the unknowns.
Citizen input at the Public Hearing is expected to focus on these two
options and on the two primary variables involved: how should the service
be funded, and who should collect the materials."
Natural Resources Streets and Stormwater Utilities Director Brian Woodruff
gave a brief presentation outlining the past year's recycling efforts and
summarized the City's collection program.. He commented on' the importance
of the funding issues and the responsibility for collection and noted that
citizens were given the opportunity for input. He stated 'the primary
program objective would be to recover a high volume of materials without
restricting individual freedom of choice and noted the program should not
be available to only single family households, but should extend to
IVtIdc
February 20, 1990
multi -family households along with commercial and industrial users. He
added the program should be designed to reduce recycling barriers and
outlined the Universal Service option and Subscription Service. He spoke
of a recycling utility fee as proposed funding for Option 1 and commented
on Option 2's competitive bid process for contractor selection. He noted
funding for Option 2 would consist of money collected directly from the
subscribers or from the General Fund. He recommended that with weekly
service, materials be separated by the users, materials should be collected
in partitioned recycling collection vehicles, the trash contractor should
be responsible for the collection, the process, and for marketing the
recyclables and suggested that newspaper, glass, aluminum, and motor oil be
collected. He stated that start-up costs could be absorbed by undesignated
reserves in the General Fund and noted staff recommended Option 1.
The following persons spoke regarding the recycling issue:
1. Marcy Clawson, 400 West Douglas Road, advocated the utility fee to
fund recycling and suggested that the General Fund pay for low income
users' portion of recycling. She suggested that the General Fund be
used to educate the public on recycling.
2. Steve Ault, 3324 South Lemay, asked about the ultimate goal of the
program and expressed concern about government intervention in the
program. He expressed concern about tax dollars used to fund
recycling.
Brian Woodruff identified the reasons behind the recycling program as being
the recovery of the remaining value of the materials, to reduce the amount
of landfill space, to extend the life of the landfill, and to save natural
resources and energy and reduce pollution.
3. Will Smith, Natural Resources Advisory Board representative, spoke in
support of Option 1.
4. Ruth Burrier, 3731 Coronado Avenue, asked about the market for
recycled products and spoke in opposition to singling out single
family homeowners.
5. Karen Roth, 1529 West Prospect, representing Poudre Canyon Sierra
Club, spoke in support of Option 1 and encouraged the expansion of the
education program.
6. Linda Stanley, 1407 Osprey Court, spoke in favor of Option 1.
7. Yolonda Nicely, 1625 Crestmore Place, spoke in support of Option 2.
8. Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, expressed concern about the equity of
the utility fee and favored gradual phase development of the recycling
program. She spoke in favor of a virgin materials tax to offset the
' cost of purchasing recycled paper.
9. Bruce Welti, 519 Spinnaker Lane, spoke in favor of Option 1.
776-
February 20, 1990
10. Mark Winkel, 124 112 North McKinley, spoke in favor of Option I.
11. York Davis, 1678 Riverside Drive, representing Boy Scout Troop #190,
expressed concern about the recycling program killing other fund
raising opportunities and stated both options were too limited.
12. Roy Vratil, 1401 Shamrock, spoke of the origin of recycling problems.
13. Andy White, 1022 West Magnolia, spoke in support of the City's
recycling efforts.
14. Paul Loopo, 1732 East Brookhaven Circle, CSU employee, spoke in
support of recycling.
15. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, noted that the Larimer County
Landfill has low tippage fees, commented on the possibility of a new
landfill, and spoke against Option 1.
16. Al Kilminster, 4621 South Shields, spoke in support of Option 2.
17. Mike Hauser, Executive Vice -President Chamber of Commerce, spoke in
support of Option 1.
18. Kathy Lorsen-Evans, Bellvue, encouraged Council look at including
apartment complexes.
19. Brian Hallisey, 2031 Whiterock Court, spoke in support of Option 1.
20. Don Masard, Larimer County resident, spoke in favor of Option 1.
21. Art Gallegos, representing Gallegos Sanitation, spoke in support of
Option 1 and the utility fee.
22. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, spoke of the lack of community
progress with respect to recycling and encouraged the City fund a
comprehensive city-wide curb side recycling program, collecting as
many materials as possible. He added it should be funded on an
on -going basis and by the General Fund.
23. Randall Sinner, 527 East,Laurel, expressed concern about the frequency
of collection and the types of collection bins to be used and spoke in
support of Option 1.
24. Scott Dominguez, general manager Fort Collins Disposal, spoke in
support of city-wide recycling and spoke against one contractor.
25. Ken Stockton, 1401 West Mulberry, spoke in support of Option 1 and
commented on the exclusion of multi -family users. He spoke against
using one collector and suggested using volunteer groups to collect
and recycle on a monthly basis.
-777-
February 20, 1990
' 26. Michelle Holcomb, 510 North Shields, spoke in support of Option 1 and
added that the program should be expanded to include apartments and
businesses. She encouraged continued recycling education.
City Manager Burkett- commented on the legal constraints of involving
multi -family housing in recycling and stated educational efforts would
continue. He commented on the City's use of recycled materials.
Councilmember Mabry asked about the limited market for newsprint and asked
about the access Fort Collins would have to that market.
Brian Woodruff stated the market for recycled newspapers has declined and
added that there was speculation that the market may entirely collapse. He
noted that other projections showed that after four or five years,
additional mills would arise that could handle the old newspapers and
estimated there would be a low point in the market and then a return demand
for recycled newspapers.
Councilmember Mabry asked about the impact of increased tipping fees at the
landfill.
Brian Woodruff commented on the favorable but mixed reaction to the survey
done by the Chamber of Commerce regarding increased tipping fees at the
landfill.
' Councilmember Horak asked about having a differential fee at the landfill
for recycled products.
Brian Woodruff stated that there had been discussions with the landfill
operators about differential fees and noted the difficulty in
distinguishing materials from different locations.
Frank Lancaster, Larimer County Landfill, stated that it would be possible
to distinguish materials from specific businessess and pointed out that few
businesses have dedicated loads. He stated that it would be difficult to
determine where the trash came from and which trash was or wasn't recycled
and stated it was not feasible to make determinations regarding recycled
materials. He stated that under a quality control plan the landfill would
not be able to determine where the trash originated and described random
load checking and associated fines that are conducted on the east coast.
Councilmember Horak asked about the collapse of the recycled newspaper
market.
Brian Woodruff explained the collapse of the recycled newspaper market was
due to the increased supply causing the price of the newspapers to drop.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick expressed appreciation for the public hearing on
the city-wide recycling program and stated she was prepared to vote on a
specific plan of direction on March 6.
=&Z
February 20, 1990
Councilmember Edwards asked if utilities would be turned off if citizens
chose not to pay the recycling fee included on their utility bill.
City Manager Burkett stated the recycling fee issue had not been completely
resolved and added that utilities would not be shut off if the eighty-five
cent recycling fee was not paid. He pointed out that if the utility bill
became outstanding, action would be taken.
Mayor Winokur asked about imposing a recycling requirement on all city
trash haulers licensed to do business in Fort Collins.
Scott Dominguez, trash hauler, spoke on behalf of himself and two other
major city trash haulers. He noted they were in favor of making recycling
a condition of acquiring the business license and stated he believed
recycling was the way of the future.
Art Gallegos, trash hauler, agreed with Mr. Dominguez' statement and added
he believed that requirements should be placed on all businesses to
recycle.
Councilmember Azari asked about licensing conditions of the trash
collector.
Art Gallegos, trash hauler, commented on the discussions held with Colorado
State University on its recycling program and pointed out the need for
education on recycling. He stated the license requirement would help
ensure recycling and described the method of recycling used in Boulder.
Councilmember Edwards asked about the impact upon Mr. Gallegos if the City
contracted with one trash hauler.
Art Gallegos stated the issue centered around promoting a worthwhile cause.
He stated he believed that the selected contractor would have an advantage
and noted the benefits that the consumer would receive.
Mayor Winokur asked about imposing the separation requirements on various
customers with respect to state statutes.
City Attorney Steve Roy stated he did not believe the state statute spoke
to recycling separation requirements.
Assistant City Attorney, Paul Eckman stated he believed that the City could
regulate recycling separation and noted possible problems with respect to
administration and enforcement.
Brian Woodruff commented on the landfill surcharge and pointed out that the
landfill surcharge concept would return the money to individual cities. He
stated Council would have access to the surcharge monies and noted that if
it was determined that certain people were unfairly paying the surcharge,
it would be possible to arrange reimbursement.
-779-
February 20, 1990
Councilmember Edwards
commented on the letter
received
from County
Commissioner Hotchkiss
regarding implementing a
recycling
surcharge on
materials entering the
landfill and stating he did
not support
a surcharge.
The letter stated the
surcharge would constitute
a hidden subsidy to the
recycling program.
Councilmember Horak encouraged
citizens who support
recycling
to respond to
Commissioner Hotchkiss.
Councilmember Azari stated that many citizens were in favor of subscribing
to recycling and noted the importance of beginning the recycling program.
She pointed out that recycling was an approach to being more conscious of
the need to conserve our resources. She stated she was opposed to
government created monopolies and she urged Council not to preclude the
idea that only one contractor could do the job. She stated Council should
not wait until all of the implementation issues are resolved before
beginning the recycling program and stated she believed that no one should
be excluded from participating in the recycling program.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the ideas that had been presented to
Council regarding the inclusion of multi -family and commercial business in
a city-wide recycling program and stated the city-wide program should reach
as many families and commercial market users as possible.
Councilmember Horak spoke in support of beginning the program and stated
' that Council should not be responsible for designing every element of the
recycling program. He suggested bringing in an expert in recycling to
design the recycling program and expressed concern about the affected
parties including the non-profit organizations. He stated that the trash
collectors could be the most knowledgeable about recycling and expressed
the need for an ordinance or resolution dealing with the basic elements of
curbside recycling.
Councilmember Edwards supported Option 1 and charging the utility fee in
the initial phase of the program and encouraged the program be funded by
the General Fund. He spoke of developing the program in phases and stated
he was not comfortable with a single trash hauler versus requiring all of
the trash haulers to be in the recycling business.
Councilmember Azari supported the phased approach while focusing on
simplicity.
Councilmember Mabry stated he believed it was time to implement the
curbside recycling program and stated that .initially the,program would not
be perfect. He encouraged the program be developed in phases with respect
to practicality and expressed concern about penalizing citizens who do a
good job of recycling by charging them a fee to participate in the program.
He encouraged using the General Fund to provide for program implementation
and spoke in favor of requiring (through licensing) the trash haulers
provide the recycling service. He stated the General Fund could be used to
purchase equipment for the haulers to begin the program including a
community education program.
IVM. f
February 20, 1990
Mayor Winokur spoke in support of beginning the recycling program and
expressed concern about the responsibility of providing the service and how
the service will be paid for. He mentioned the City's leadership role and
responsibility in education, providing capital, working with the haulers
and community to effectively manage our natural resources. He stated he
was not comfortable with the recycling utility fee and stated the service
should be paid for by a tax. He supported the idea of the private sector
providing the service and added if the City provided the service, it should
be paid for by general tax revenues.
Councilmember Horak suggested staff draft options containing the basic
elements of recycling.
Councilmember Edwards stated he believed it was staff's responsibility to
create the recycling "menu" and Council would decide what to put on the
"plate".
City Manager Burkett clarified that for the March 6th Council meeting,
staff will present several options for Council's direction to be followed
with resolutions and ordinances implementing the program.
Councilmember Horak suggested the options be in resolution form with
sections dealing with different elements and after the resolution is
adopted, ordinances to carry out the components of the resolution should be
scheduled.
Councilmember Horak suggested a
identified what the City is looking
own recycling efforts and asked that
that concrete elements be included
1991 Budget.
companion resolution which clearly
at in the future with respect to its
the resolution be specific. He asked
n the resolution with respect to the
Ordinance No. 20, 1990, Appropriating
$27,500 from Undesignated Reserves
for the Purpose of Funding a Strategic
Plan for the Fort Collins -Loveland
Municipal Airport together with the
City of Loveland, Adopted on First Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
Appropriates $27,500 from General Fund Undesignated Reserves to the Capital
Projects Fund.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This appropriation covers the City of Fort Collins obligation for funding a
Strategic Plan for the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal'4Airport. Through a
-781-
February 20, 1990
' prior intergovernmental agreement, the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland
share equally in expenses related to the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal
Airport. The City of Loveland will pay an equal portion.
BACKGROUND
On September 5, 1989, the Fort Collins City Council passed Resolution
89-166 relating to the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport. Section 1.
of the Resolution stated: "The Council directs that City staff, working
jointly with Loveland and the Airport Authority, solicit Requests for
Proposal and hire a consultant to develop a strategic plan for the Airport.
Said plan shall clearly identify the Airport's mission and address and make
recommendations for accomplishing that mission."
Pursuant to that direction a team consisting of Julia Novak from the City
of Fort Collins, Linda O'Banion from the City of Loveland, and Steve Ray
from the Airport Authority prepared a request for proposal. The team
evaluated the proposals based on the written material submitted, as well as
presentations made by each of the companies to the project team. Those
interviews concluded on February 2, 1990. Proposals were received from
Airport Corporation of America, Short Hills, New Jersey; The Lincoln
Company, Littleton, Colorado; 2MS Inc., Fort Collins; and Gellman Research
Associates, Jenkintown, Pennsylvania. The project team has unanimously
recommended that Airport Corporation of America (ACA) be awarded the
contract. It was the consensus of the project team that ACA qualifications
most suited the needs of the two cities for the purpose of providing this
strategic plan. The Airport Authority at its February 14th meeting,
unanimously supported the recommendation of the project team to hire ACA to
provide the strategic plan.
The City of Loveland will enter into the agreement with Airport Corporation
of America, and the City of Fort Collins will reimburse ACA, through the
City of Loveland, for one-half of the expenses incurred in providing the
strategic plan, not to exceed $27,500."
Councilmember Maxey withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a
perceived conflict of interest.
Assistant to the Director of Administrative Services Julia Novak gave a
brief presentation and stated the appropriation will fund the strategic
plan for the Fort Collins/Loveland Municipal Airport.
Councilmember Azari commented on the cooperation from both cities and the
Airport Authority during the review of the RFP.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick asked about the RFP competition and about the
number of strategic plans a company could offer.
Julia Novak stated there was four corporations that submitted strategic
' plan proposals.
-782-
February 20, 1990
Joe Phillips, Airport Authority Member, commented on the need for
professionalism on the Airport Authority and stated he was hopeful that the
strategic plan would provide guidance and direction for the airport.
Councilmember Horak spoke in support of the strategic plan for the airport.
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to
adopt Ordinance No. 20, 1990 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, and Winokur. Nays: None.
(Councilmember Maxey withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 90-23 Appointing Two
Councilmembers to Work With Staff to
Analyze the Policy Issues Associated with
the Request for Proposals (RFP) Process for
Cemeteries Privatization, No Action was Taken
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
One Council policy agenda item for 1990 is to examine options for the
cemetery fund. These include the possible sale of Roselawn Cemetery, the
debt issue in the Perpetual Care Fund, and the potential for total contract
management (privatization) for municipal cemetery operations. The Roselawn
sale and the debt issue items will be handled separately. This Resolution
appoints two Councilmembers to work with staff to analyze the policy issues
associated with the Request for Proposals (RFP) process for the
privatization of the daily management,. operations and maintenance of the
cemeteries. The two Councilmembers will help develop bid specifications
and review proposals submitted by potential contractors.
BACKGROUND
Last June Council met in a worksession to review and discuss
proposals/questions/options contained in the staff report that presented
various options for the long-term management, operations and maintenance of
the City's municipal cemeteries. The opinions expressed by the majority of
Councilmembers provided a clearly defined course of action. For example,
staff is no longer examining the possibility of expanding the acreage of
Grandview Cemetery. Instead, staff is looking for ways to maximize the
existing available grounds at Grandview with regard to the remaining
(approximate 2,000) lots available for sale, and is examining ways to
create additional interment space by converting the home on the site or
existing roads to traditional graves and/or mausoleums, if such conversion
is deemed to be cost effective. Council did not support hiring a sales
force to pre -sell lots and cemetery services, and does not believe it is
appropriate to operate the cemeteries in a more sales oriented fashion.
1U1k10
February 20, 1990
During the budget meetings last fall, Council reduced the 1990 cemetery
expenditures to approved 1989 levels. In addition Council added funds to
the budget to purchase chemicals to deal with weed and turf problems. At
the same time staff moved the supervision of the cemeteries to the Parks
Division resulting in a reduction of 1.75 positions and a $38,000 reduction
in General fund subsidies. Staff believes that the potential exists for
further cost efficiencies and improvement of services under this
reorganization if cemeteries are reclassified from an Enterprise Fund and
moved into the General Fund so that the Parks Division and Cemeteries can
share resources.
Council identified three specific cemetery issues to be resolved. The
First is the debt issue. This is being handled by the Finance Department
under the broader heading of all unfunded liabilities in the City. The
second issue of the potential sale of Roselawn is being reviewed by the
City Attorney's Office. The attorneys have concluded that the Code must be
changed before Council can consider sale of this type of property and will
bring the Code change forward, to be followed by the consideration of the
Roselawn sale.
Three policy matters need to be considered and decided before the City can
advertise Request for Proposals (RFP) for the privatization of the
cemeteries. These policy issues have broad political ramifications. The
analysis of these issues will define many of the requirements in the bid
' specifications.
To analyze those issues, a team made up of two Councilmembers and two or
three staff members would be formed. Additionally, the team would review
the submitted proposals. The inclusion of Council members in this review
adds a broader perspective to a privatization decision. "Staff only" input
into this decision may be seen as biased.
The major decision to be made is whether to offer the cemeteries to the
private sector as a "turn -key" operation or as a traditional independent
contract. The traditional approach means that a private contractor will
take over all the functions of the cemeteries operations using its own
equipment, tools, vehicles, etc. The City will provide the sites and the
infrastructure attached to those sites such as the irrigation system,
offices, maintenance building, City records, etc. The private contractor
will purchase its own commodities and pay for the elements required to run
the cemeteries as a private business, separate from the City.
Under the "turn -key" approach, the contractor will take over everything
currently provided by the City to the cemeteries. This has the effect of
replacing City cemetery employees with private employees. The City will
continue to pay for things such as, capital equipment (either through cash
payments or lease/purchase), telephones, utilities, building maintenance,
physical property insurance, fuel, chemicals, etc. Expenditures associated
with the normal maintenance and repair of capital equipment or daily
' operating expenses will be the responsibility of the contractor.
-784-
February 20, 1990
The "turn -key" approach might be controversial; however, it is clearly '
cost-effective and will provide more private sector vendors with an
opportunity to bid for the cemetery services.
Another major issue of concern is the establishment of a pre -need sales
force. The ability of a private contractor to generate a substantial
amount of revenue hinges on sales. Currently the pre -need option is
available to the public if requested, but has not been aggressively
marketed per Council direction. Will this change for a private contractor?
The final major issue to be determined is the qualifications and background
required for prospective bidders. Staff believes that many individuals and
companies may be well qualified for specific elements of the cemetery
operations such as grounds maintenance, irrigation, office management,
etc., but that few people have extensive background or prior experience in
the total cemetery operation.
Summary:
The purpose of this RFP process is to explore ways to reduce the General
Fund subsidy. Because of the policy matters to be decided in this
particular issue, staff believes it is essential for Council to be directly
involved in the Request for Proposals process. Appointing two
Councilmembers to help staff analyze the policies, develop bid
specifications, and review submitted proposals provides the necessary
credibility and control of this process." '
Director of Cultural Library and Recreational Services Mike Powers
presented a brief historical perspective of Parks and Recreation Board
involvement with the cemetery and noted the Code changes that affected the
duties of the Board. He noted that the Code changes separated golf and
cemeteries from the Parks and Recreation Board and added that after
reorganization, the cemeteries was placed under the parks division.
Mayor Winokur asked about involving the Parks and Recreation Board in the
management of the specialized park.
Mike Powers stated that staff believes the cemetery is a historical park
and suggested it be under the parks division. He stated he believed the
Parks and Recreation Board had not been involved in the cemetery issues and
suggested beginning the RFP process without its participation. He stated
that if privatization became a reality, it would not be necessary to have a
board supervise the park management and added that if privatization failed,
then the Code would need to be "cleaned up".
Mayor Winokur asked if the Parks and Recreation Board would be informed of
the privatization issue.
Mike Powers stated that the Parks and Recreation Board would become
informed in the basics of cemetery management, perpetual care accounts and
internments, and the history of privatization. '
-785-
February 20, 1990
' Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated the policy issues did not revolve around
treating the cemetery as a historic park and expressed concern about the
cemetery privatization issue. She stated she believed it was not the
appropriate role of the Parks and Recreation Board to be involved in
privatization and recommended that Council provide direction with respect
to privatization. She stated that once direction was established, Council
could consider utilizing the services of the Parks and Recreation Board.
Councilmember Edwards asked about the amount of time the subcommittee would
need to analyze the policy issues.
Mike Powers stated he hoped to have the bids out by mid -summer and noted
that by September -October a recommendation will be brought back to Council
regarding privatization.
Councilmember Horak expressed concern regarding Council involvement in the
RFP process and encouraged staff to follow the established process. He
added that having two Councilmembers working with staff would not
necessarily indicate what Council's direction would be.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick compared the cemetery privatization with the
fireworks issue and commented about the ownership issue included in the
recommendation.
Councilmember Azari expressed concern about the cemetery's ability to be
' self-supporting and recommended that the privatization ideas be reviewed
with the Finance Committee.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated that the cemetery was not just a dollar
issue and commented on the operation and maintenance of the cemetery.
Mayor Winokur stated Council had confidence in staff to do a fair and
objective RFP process.
City Manager Burkett commented on Council involvement in the privatization
issue and stated Council would be kept informed as the process evolves.
Resolution 90-24 Appointing Council
Members to a Water Demand
Management Committee, Adopted
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Resolution wi11 appoint three Councilmembers to a Committee to review
current policies and practices regarding water demand management.
affil
February 20, 1990
BACKGROUND '
At the February 6, 1990 Council meeting, Councilmembers discussed the need
to review the City's current policies .and practices regarding water demand
management. A motion was passed to establish a Committee consisting of
Councilmembers and Water Boardmembers to review such policies and practices
and to make recommendations regarding the need for any changes."
City Attorney Roy stated Resolution 90-24 created the Management Committee
and gave Council the opportunity to name three Councilmembers. He noted
the Water Board will name the remaining three Committee members.
Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to
adopt Resolution 90-24 inserting the names:
Councilmember Edwards
Councilmember Kirkpatrick
Mayor Winokur
Councilmember Edwards asked if precedent would be set with the adoption of
Resolution 90-24, regarding the Water Board appointing members to the
subcommittee.
City Manager Burkett stated the Water Board appointed members to the Supply
Management Committee.
The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 90-24 I
including the names of
Councilmember Edwards
Councilmember Kirkpatrick
Mayor Winokur
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick,
Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. -Nays: None.
II.II•r[1l/ 111=1119AI11Ie
Ordinance No. 22, 1990';;Amending
Chapter 2 of the Code Relating to Open
Meetings. Adopted on First Reading as Revised
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this proposed ordinance is to revise the provisions of the
City Code pertaining to open meetings. As a home rule municipality, the
City is authorized by the State Constitution and relevant case law to
establish its own rules regarding procedures at meetings. At present, the '
Code provides that all regular and special meetings of the City Council
-787-
February 20, 1990
' must be open to the public. There is no requirement that meetings of
Council committees be open to the public. As to meetings of City boards
and commissions, such meetings are required to be open but, with certain
exceptions, there is no local rule governing executive sessions for boards
and commissions. As a result, such sessions are presently governed by
state statute. The proposed ordinance would:
(1) Require that Council committee meetings be open to the public, subject
to the same executive session provisions as applied to regular and
special Council meetings; and
(2) Maintain the existing open meetings requirement for City boards and
commissions and specifically authorize executive sessions for boards
and commissions for the same purposes as are permitted for City
Council.
(3) Exempt meetings of the Ethics Review Board from the open meetings
requirement for Council committees and exempt the trustees of the
Police, Fire and General Employees Pension Boards from the open
meetings requirement for boards and commissions.
Historically, meetings of the City Council have been governed by the
provisions of the City Code. The home rule provisions of the Colorado
' Constitution and relevant case law permit the City to establish its own
rules regarding procedures at meetings of its local officials. Under the
present provisions of the Charter and Code, only regular and special
meetings of the City Council are required to be open to the public. The
definition of regular and special meetings excludes meetings of Council
committees.
The proposed ordinance, if adopted by Council, would generally subject
meetings of Council committees to the open meetings requirement of the
Code. As with meetings of the full Council, the committees of Council
would be permitted, by majority vote of their members, to meet in executive
session to consider certain kinds of matters. Those would include
personnel matters, meetings with attorneys for the City regarding
adversarial situations and consideration of water and real property
matters.
For the purposes of the ordinance, a Council committee would be defined as
"any number of councilmembers established as a committee by formal action
of the City Council to perform any function related to the conduct of city
business." Meetings of Council committees would mean "all prearranged
meetings, other than social functions, of the members of a Council
committee convening for the purpose of discussing'city business."
Secondly, the proposed ordinance would revise the provisions of the Code
pertaining to the meetings of boards and commissions. The existing open
' meetings requirement would be maintained. However, specific permission
would be granted to the boards and commissions to meet in executive session
sm
February 20, 1990
for the same purposes as would justify an
Council. Previously, certain boards and
exempted from the open meetings requirement
permitted to meet in executive session only
in confidence" under the authority of
revisions would lend more consistency to
sessions for boards and commissions.
executive session for the City
commissions were altogether
of the Code, while others were
"to consider documents received
state statute. The proposed
the rules governing executive
Two specific exemptions would be created by the new ordinance. First, the
Ethics Review Board would be exempted from the open meetings requirement
for Council committees, although the opinions and recommendations of the
board would continue to be matters of public record. Secondly, trustees of
the Police, Fire and General Employees Pension Boards would still be
authorized to meet in executive session for the purpose of reviewing
pension applications, medical records, personnel records and reports and
discussion pending as well as previously granted pensions with board
attorneys.
Finally, the open meetings requirements for boards and commissions would be
relocated in the Code. The section dealing with this subject would be
removed from the article dealing with financial disclosure requirements to
the article dealing with boards and commissions."
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to
adopt Ordinance No. 22, 1990 on First Reading.
Councilmember Maxey read a note from a citizen regarding open meetings.
Councilmember Horak asked that the City Clerk be made aware of Council
committee meetings so that interested parties could be informed of the
meetings and asked that the minutes from committee meetings be available
for public inspection.
City Attorney Roy explained the two types of changes in the alternate
ordinance.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to
adopt Ordinance No. 22, 1990 on First Reading as revised.
City Attorney Roy stated the alternate ordinance would not change the open
meetings provision pertaining to boards and commissions but would remove
one sentence in the existing provisions which is duplicated in the section
pertaining to meetings of Council. He noted the additional changes add the
words "and commissions" after the word "board" and noted the inclusion of
the Human Relations Commission as one of the existing boards permitted to
conduct closed meetings. He noted the original ordinance would change the
provisions for boards and commissions by inserting a standard rule setting
out when a board or commission could go into executive session and removes
reference to specific boards and commissions that can conduct closed
meetings except for the Pension Funds.
IM
February 20, 1990
I
Councilmember Horak requested that the boards and commissions have time to
establish rules regarding procedures at meetings and encouraged Council
move ahead with the affected Council committees.
City Attorney Roy read the ordinance changes into the record.
Mayor Winokur asked about guidelines for boards and commissions with
respect to requirements for open meetings.
City Attorney Roy stated the guidelines were broader than those permitted
for Council's executive sessions.
Mayor Winokur stated he was not comfortable with that change and stated it
appeared to be an escape clause which provides no guidance from the Code or
Council and stated the language was too broad.
Councilmember Azari commented on the issue of Council operating under an
open meeting rule and stated she believed that the boards and commissions
should have the opportunity to review the issues.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she believed Council should address the
practical application of how meetings are conducted. She expressed concern
about the openers of the Mayor's lunch meetings and stated she believed the
real issue centered around trust. She stated the ordinance allowed access
' and participation and expressed confidence in City elected officials to
honestly represent the public's interest. She stated she would support an
open meeting ordinance because the issue was open versus closed and added
that she believed the real issue was participatory versus representative
government.
Councilmember Azari asked about the passage of the revised form of the
ordinance with respect to the current method of operation of the boards and
commissions.
City Attorney Roy affirmed that the passage of the revised ordinance would
not change the current operation of the boards and commissions.
Councilmember Azari clarified that the changes in Ordinance No. 22, 1990
dealt only with changes to Council meetings and commented on the issue of
trust associated with open or closed meetings. She noted the importance of
formally publicizing that open meetings are preferred and spoke in support
of establishing ground rules.
Councilmember Horak commented on the changes to the rules regarding
executive sessions and noted the importance of making the public aware of
meetings. He stated he did not believe trust was the issue and stated the
Code changes will make the City's'representative government more efficient.
Mayor Winokur stated he believed the issues were simple and added that
' representative government works well when the community and citizens are
involved. He noted the legal and adversarial issues that should be
-790-
February 20, 1990
conducted in private meetings and stated the message from Council should be '
clear regarding the City's value system. He added that representative
government should contain open meeting requirements with public notice and
minutes should be available.
Councilmember Azari maintained that the boards and commissions should be
given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding open meetings.
Mayor Winokur stated that the basic function of Council is to set the
ground rules and noted Council's responsibility to inform the boards and
commissions of policy changes.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick related her understanding of the proposed
Constitutional amendment which could affect Council by requiring that any
gathering of City staff members with Councilmembers be an open meeting.
She spoke in support of the ordinance and stated she believed that
government should be open.
Mayor Winokur spoke in support of diversity of information sources and
stated the message that is being sent to elected officials should be
pervasive throughout the entire organization.
The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 22, 1990 on
First Reading as revised was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari,
Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
'
Adjournment
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to
adjourn the meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
U
City Clerk
ayor
-791-