HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-03/20/1990-RegularMarch 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, March 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, Eckman
Citizen Participation
A. Proclamation proclaiming the week of April 1-7 1990 as the Week
Young Child was accepted by Barb Willson, representing Co
Association for the Education of Young Children.
B. Proclamation proclaiming the week of April 7-14 199U as Nationa
Community Development Week was accepted by Carl McWilliams, member o
the Community Development Block Grant Steering Committee.
C. Presentation of Plaque from Clean Air Colorado Recognizing the City o
Fort Collins as Partner of the Month 1989-1990 by Brian Woodruff.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, expressed concerns about the
appropriateness of the New Creations lawsuit and requested establishment of
rules and guidelines for the conduct of boards and commissions.
David Meyer, 2700 Virginia Dale Drive, expressed concern about the gasoline
contamination in Sheldon Lake at City Park.
Brad Edwards, local resident, spoke of the public benefits of the extension
of the bike trail from Taft Hill to Overland Trail through the use of the
extension of the Rex line.
Agenda Review: City Manager
City Manager Burkett requested that Item #8; Hearing and First Reading of
Ordinance No. 27, 1990 Amending Section 22-95 and Section 22-97 of the Code
Relating to Abatement of Assessments, be withdrawn from the Consent
Agenda.
March 20, 1990
Assistant Mayor Chuck Mabry requested that Item #11, Resolution 90-38 I
Establishing Policy for the Repair of Concrete Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk be
withdrawn from the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Azari requested that Item V , Hearing and First Reading of
Ordinance No. 26, 1990, Amending the Code Regarding Noise, 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.
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately
under Agenda Item #14, Pulled Consent Items.
5.
M
Under the current provisions of the City Code, City Council cannot
approve the City's conveyance or sale of real property unless the
Council first finds by resolution that the real property is not used,
intended to be used or secured for a "municipal purpose," and that the '
sale is in the best interests of the City. Because Colorado case law
broadly defines what is considered a "municipal purpose," there could
be many circumstances in which it would be in the best interests of
the City to sell or dispose of certain real property, but it cannot be
done because the Council cannot find that the real property is no
longer used, intended to be used or secured for a "municipal purpose."
Therefore, staff believes that the proposed additions and amendments
to the Code are necessary to give Council greater flexibility in
making decisions about selling the City's real property.
Within the past several months the Water Utility has received requests
for financial assistance from customers who wish to use raw water for
irrigation.
Reducing the demand for treated water by increasing the use of raw
water for irrigation will slow the time schedule for building new
capacity.
To achieve the benefits of raw water irrigation, the staff and Water
Board propose that the Utility provide a rebate to individuals or
associations converting existing treated water irrigation systems to I
raw water irrigation.
[3ia
March 20, 1990
R
This proposed amendment modifies Section 20-25 of the City Code by
eliminating "the unamplified human voice" as an exception to
prosecution under Section 20-22. This amendment will resolve a
recently discovered conflict between the two sections, and will allow
the Police Department and Municipal Court to enforce and prosecute
offenders under Section 20-22 (Unreasonable Noise) as was done prior
to discovery of the conflict.
LL-JJ Gllu
Assessments.
The first section of the Ordinance amends Section 22-95 to add
provisions which would empower the City Council to abate all or any
portion of an assessment, including principal, interest or penalty
interest. The recommendation for abatement must first come from the
Financial Officer and certain conditions must be met before the
abatement can be considered.
The second section -of the Ordinance amends Section 22-97 to clarify.
that the Financial Officer may assign tax certificates received
' through foreclosure of the City's assessment lien for less than full
face value if such sale is approved by Council by ordinance under the
provisions of Section 23-111, as a sale of an interest in real
property.
a
10.
The City seeks to contract for training and consulting services as
part of the implementation of the Quality Improvement Process. The
foundation of this process is identifying ways to better meet the
needs and expectations of the people of Fort Collins -- the users of
the many different services the City provides. To do this, staff
believes that additional training and consulting is crucial to
effectively implementing the changes necessary for improvements to
occur. The consultant with which the City wishes to contract,
Qualtec, Inc., has clearly demonstrated its success in implementation,
within its own organization and within numerous public and private
sector organizations.
Each year the city receives Federal Aid to Urban Systems (FAUS) funds
for the operation of Commuter Pool. This funding is administered by
March 20, 1990
12.
13
the Colorado Department of Highways.
housekeeping item which will ensure the
State of Colorado to the City for
ridesharing program.
This action is primarily a
flow of FAUS funds through the
the purpose of operating a a
The City Code places responsibility for maintaining concrete curb,
gutter and sidewalk on adjacent property owners. The annual Concrete
Improvement Program makes some concrete improvements, dividing the
cost between adjacent property owners and the City at -large. A
greater amount of concrete improvements is repaired each year entirely
at the City's expense in conjunction with the annual Street Overlay &
Sealcoat Program. To provide a consistent, effective approach to the
repair of concrete improvements, staff recommends adopting a
City -pays -all policy for the annual Concrete Improvement Program.
The Resolution authorizes the Mayor to enter into a contract with CSU
to conduct fish and benthic biosurveys in the Poudre River during
1990, and to extend the contract one additional year. The biosurveys
are necessary to assess the impact of wastewater discharges on aquatic
life in the river.
Routine Deeds and Easements.
Powerline easement from Fort Collins Housing Authority, a Quasi -
Municipal Corporation, aka Fort Collins Housing Authority, a
Colorado Non -Profit Corporation, aka Housing Authority of the City
of Fort Collins, Colorado, located at 519 E. Mulberry and 513
Smith Street, needed to underground existing overhead electric
services. Monetary consideration: $10.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City
Clerk.
Item #5.
Item #6.
Item #7
Irrigation.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 26 1990 Amending the
Code Regarding Noise.
-819-
March 20, 1990
I
Item #8.
of Assessments.
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Assistant Mayor Mabry, 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. 26, 1990 Amending
the Code Regarding Noise, Adopted on First Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This proposed amendment modifies Section 20-25 of the City Code by
eliminating "the unamplified human voice" as an exception to prosecution
under Section 20-22. This amendment will resolve a recently discovered
conflict between the two sections, and will allow the Police Department and
Municipal Court to enforce and prosecute offenders under Section 20-22
(Unreasonable Noise) as was done prior to discovery of the conflict.
BACKGROUND:
The proposed Ordinance amends Section 20-25 Exceptions of the City Code, by
eliminating "the unamplified human voice" as one of the exceptions to
Section 20-22, Unreasonable Noise Prohibited.
Based on the current wording of Section 20-25, Municipal Court has deemed
"the unamplified human voice" to be an exception to prosecution under
Section 20-22. The conflict between the two ordinances was recently
discovered by Municipal Court Judge A17in. Prior to discovery of this
conflict, the Police Department and Municipal Court had prosecuted
offenders under this section since its adoption in 1985.
Section 20-25, adopted in 1981, prohibits any noise disturbance based on
maximum permissible noise levels (set out in decibels). Section 20-22 was
adopted in 1985 so the Police Department could address the problem of
unreasonable noise without the necessity of acquiring sound measuring
equipment. When other sections of the noise ordinance were modified to
accommodate Section 20-22, Section 20-25 was overlooked, resulting in this
conflict.
Currently the Police Department cannot enforce the unreasonable noise
ordinance if the noise is emanating from a large party. The ordinance can
' be enforced if the voices are amplified or the noise emanates from a loud
stereo.
March 20, 1990
Staff believes that with the proposed amendment, the Police Department and
Municipal Court can enforce the noise ordinance as it was initially
intended."
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak,
to adopt Ordinance No. 26, 1990 on First Reading.
Councilmember Azari asked for clarification as to what is unreasonable
noise.
Brad Hurst, Fort Collins Police Officer, explained that the definition of
unreasonable noise is based on, the judgment of the officer who responds to
a complaint.
The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 26,
1990 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Edwards, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Azari.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 90-38 Establishing Policy
for the Repair of Concrete Curb,
Gutter and Sidewalk. Failed
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Code places responsibility for maintaining concrete curb, gutter
and sidewalk on adjacent property owners. The annual Concrete Improvement
Program makes some concrete improvements, dividing the cost between
adjacent property owners and the City at -large. A greater amount of
concrete improvements is repaired each year entirely at the City's expense
in conjunction with the annual Street Overlay & Sealcoat Program. To
provide a consistent, effective approach to the repair of concrete
improvements, staff recommends adopting a City -pays -all policy for the
annual Concrete Improvement Program.
BACKGROUND:
Concrete improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) are part of the "local
street improvements" required when a property is developed. The City Code
places the responsibility for maintaining concrete improvements entirely on
adjacent property owners. For the past four years, the annual Concrete
Improvement Program has assisted property owners in maintaining curb,
gutter and walk, dividing the cost of the repairs between the adjacent
property owners and the City. With the growth of the pavement management
program over the past two years, the majority of concrete repaired in the
City is now done entirely at the City's expense in conjunction with the
annual Street Overlay & Sealcoat project.
-821-
March 20, 1990
' The inconsistencies in the City's approach to concrete repairs has led some
property owners to conclude the policy is unfair. The voluntary approach
of the annual Concrete Improvement Program does not provide for the repair
of entire sections of sidewalk since some property owners refuse to
participate in the repairs. Staff has prepared the attached report
outlining the problem in detail, offering alternative solutions, and
recommending a policy.
The alternative solutions are:
1. No change --continue the present situation.
2. Adjacent property owners pay for all concrete repairs.
3. Adjacent property owners and the City split the cost of all concrete
repairs 50150.
4. City pays for all concrete repairs.
The staff report suggests the fourth option offers the best opportunity to
repair concrete improvements in a way which is sensitive to the needs and
desires of the citizens and which results in the most effective system of
public improvements.
If City Council approves the Resolution, the City-pays-a11 approach will be
implemented in the 1990 Concrete Improvement Program, tentatively set for
construction late this summer.
If the City -pays -all approach is implemented, staff anticipates requests
from citizens for repairs will exceed available funds. Requests will be
prioritized, and low -priority requests will be placed on a waiting list for
repair in a subsequent year. Some property owners who had participated in
the voluntary, 50150 cost sharing program in years past may request refunds
in light of the new policy, but staff does not recommend making such
refunds."
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to
adopt Resolution 90-38.
Councilmember Mabry asked the following three questions:
1. Why is this change proposed?
2. How will those who have already paid be treated?
3. How much is this going to cost?
City Engineer Gary Diede responded that the reason for the change is the
increased size of the Overlay Program and the policy that when a street is
overlaid, the drainage problems which involve the curb and gutter are also
taken care of. In 1990, the expected cost of this curb and gutter for
drainage problems is $300,000-$400,000. In
the
last five years,
property
'
owners have volunteered to do curb, gutter
and
sidewalk work in
front of
-822-
March 20, 1990
their property as part of the City's program and have paid half of those
costs. Diede stated that the cost of the volunteer program in the last two
'
years has been between $100,000-$150,000 and about $35,000 in revenue each
year has been received. Staff has suggested that repairs done within 1
year of a voluntary program be refunded. In residential sections the work
may include the sidewalk because curb, gutter and sidewalk are attached in
these areas.
Mayor Winokur asked if the proposed change was meant to operate instead of
or in conjunction with the existing program.
Diede responded that the voluntary Concrete Program will continue, but the
City would pay all the costs. Requests for concrete infill will be on a
priority basis, limited to the estimated $100,000 in the Concrete Program.
City Manager Steve Burkett added that sidewalk and other concrete problems
will be separate from the normal Street Overlay process. Each year money
will be allocated for Concrete Improvements, with the City paying the whole
cost. He clarified that sidewalk requests will be prioritized. The 50/50
split option might still be available for residents who wished to have work
done ahead of the scheduled year.
Councilmember Azari asked about the fiscal impact of this proposed change.
Diede stated the City presently collects about $35,000 per year from
property owners. The City pays for curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to
its own property and for the radius and crosspans and property owners pay
for sidewalk adjacent to their property.
'
Councilmember Mabry asked how the work will be prioritized each year.
Diede responded that first consideration will be given to sidewalks around
schools, then cracked or displaced concrete that is a potential safety
hazard, and then infill sidewalks where a section of sidewalk is left out.
Councilmember Maxey inquired about liability aspects if the City installs
the sidewalk. Does this mean the City owns it and the property owner does
not have to clear snow or leaves?
Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman stated injuries occurring on the public
sidewalks are a matter of City liability. He cited a case involving the
City of Denver in which the court concluded the Denver ordinance requiring
homeowners to remove snow and ice was the City of Denver's attempt to
fulfill its duty to maintain its sidewalks.
Councilmember Maxey asked if the priority aspect could become a political
issue.
Diede responded that safety will be the number 1 priority. Downtown
sidewalks will not be given more priority than residential. He added that
there could be more requests than money in the program. I
-823-
March 20, 1990
Councilmember Maxey inquired if this problem arose because of the cost of
combined rollover curb, gutter and sidewalk as opposed to separate
sidewalk.
Diede stated more citizens complained because the cost was higher than if
only the curb and gutter were replaced.
Councilmember Edwards asked if the status quo was maintained and this
program was adopted, what will be different.
Diede stated the 1/4 cent sales tax allows the City to do more overlays.
As more streets are overlayed, more neighborhoods are involved where both
different programs (50/50 and overlay) are going on.
Councilmember Edwards inquired if the priority will be on areas with no
sidewalk, curb or gutter, relegating needed repairs to a lesser priority.
Diede stated that safety hazards will be a high priority. The program will
stress infill sidewalks, with the highest priority being around schools.
Councilmember Edwards asked that if the 50/50 program will no longer be
available under any circumstances.
Diede responded that if someone really wanted to participate, the City will
be able to extend those dollars.
' Councilmember Azari stated she felt that this change would only make the
sidewalk repair situation worse, perhaps with a 5-year waiting list.
Councilmember Maxey commented he was not in favor of the program change.
He believed this would change the Concrete program from one of supporting
repair of sidewalks to one of putting in sidewalks where none exist. Since
new development must put in curb and sidewalk, this is an unfair situation.
Councilmember Edwards commented he had in the past participated in the
50/50 program and believed it was an equitable program. If this program is
not adopted, he proposed that in the future an alternative program be
brought forth to address the financial impact on citizens as the larger
overlay program moves forward.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she was not in support of the proposed
policy. She recommended if priorities need to be established, they be
reviewed by the Council Health and Safety Committee.
The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt Resolution 90-38 was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmember Horak. Nays: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards,
Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey and Winokur..
THE MOTION FAILED.
-824-
March 20, 1990
Staff Reports I
City Manager Burkett introduced Diane Jones, the new Deputy City Manager.
Burkett thanked the State of Colorado for $700,000 for repairs to install
concrete in intersections along College Avenue. The work will be done in
the summer of 1991.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Azari reported that the Airport Authority would have a
worksession on Monday, March 26 in the evening to discuss the potential of
Continental Express commuter flights to Stapleton.
Councilmember Horak asked about reimbursement payment on sidewalks
constructed under the voluntary program.
Burkett responded staff will continue the policy started last year of
reimbursing those who had participated in the 50/50 program in the last
year.
Councilmember Maxey commented that because the Street Improvement Program
is planned years in advance, it would be easy to let property owners who
request replacement under the 50/50 program know they are scheduled in the
next year or two on the overlay program.
Ordinance No. 27, 1990, Amending
Section 22-95 and Section 22-97 of
the Code Relating to Abatement of
Assessments. Adopted on first Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
No immediate financial impact. As each case is reviewed by the Council,
findings would be made as to whether the abatement is necessary to protect
the financial interests of the City. Impact to the cash flow of the
affected district and the payment of debt service would be evaluated for
each specific abatement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The first section of the Ordinance amends Section 22-95 to add provisions
which would empower the City Council to abate all or any portion of an
assessment, including principal, interest or penalty interest. The
recommendation for abatement must first come from the Financial Officer and
certain conditions must be met before the abatement can be considered.
ff.?411
March 20, 1990
' The second section of the Ordinance amends Section 22-97 to clarify that
the Financial Officer may assign tax certificates received through
foreclosure of the City's assessment lien for less than full face value if
such sale is approved by Council by ordinance under the provisions of
Section 23-111, as a sale of an interest in real property. (The proposed
amendment to Section 23-111 is discussed in the agenda item summary for
Item No. 5 of this agenda.)
Section 22-95 of the City Code currently provides that the Financial
Officer can waive or adjust penalty interest on special assessments. This
amendment would add a provision to allow the City Council to abate any
portion of an assessment, including principal, interest or penalty interest
when certain limited conditions exist.
In February of 1989, the City Code was amended to grant the Financial
Officer the discretion to waive or adjust penalty interest on special
assessments if failure to pay the installment due could be attributed to an
act or omission of the city or county. The Financial Officer has been
petitioned by individual property owners for waiver of penalty interest
under circumstances that do not meet those conditions but which may be
meritorious for other reasons. There are also certain instances where
property owners have raised issues regarding assessments after the
limitation for objections set forth in the Code. However, it may be in the
City's best interests financially to consider those issues and abate
portions of the assessments."
Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a
perceived conflict of interest.
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
adopt Ordinance No. 27, 1990, on First Reading.
Finance Director Alan Krcmarik stated this is an expanded version of waiver
and abatement which establishes four criteria for abatement.
Mayor Winokur commended the City Attorney's Office for providing the
briefing materials on this item.
The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 27, 1990,
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards,
Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Mabry
withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Regarding the Closeout and
Assessment of the Centre for Advanced
Technology Special Improvement District No. 90.
I
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
March 20, 1990
"FINANCIAL IMPACT I
The City's share of the total cost of construction, $774,592.95, is for
oversizing and will be paid from the Street Oversizing Fund, Water &
Wastewater Oversizing, and the Parkland Fund. The assessable portion of
the total costs has been calculated to minimize the cost to the property
owners while providing enough money to pay the debt service on the bonds.
District bonds in the amount of $315,000 will be called on June 1, 1990,
thus reducing the total bonds outstanding to $1,935,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 90-40 Accepting the Improvements and Ordering Notice of
Assessment in the Centre for Advanced Technology Special Improvement
District No. 90.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 28, 1990, Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund and Authorizing the
Transfer of Appropriated Amounts from the Street Oversizing Fund to the
Capital Projects Fund.
In May of 1987, the Council established the Centre for Advanced Technology
Special Improvement District No. 90 (the "District"). This SID consists of
approximately 158 acres of land located in the central portion of the City,
adjacent to and northeast of the intersection of Shields Street and Drake
Road. The District is part of the 235 acre Centre development and is '
adjacent to the south campus of Colorado State University.
The City is now prepared to begin the closeout of this District. In
accordance with Chapter 22 of the City Code, preparation of a statement of
cost, preliminary assessment roll, and a notice to be sent to property
owners has been completed.
This Resolution directs the City Clerk to publish notices in the daily
newspaper and send individual notices to each property owner in the
District. This will notify the owners of the total cost of improvements,
the portion to be paid by the City, and the May 1, 1990 hearing date of the
assessing ordinance.
The City formally established the Centre for Advanced Technology Special
Improvement District No. 90 in June of 1987 by the adoption of Resolution
87-68, Resolution 87-69 and Ordinance No. 81, 1987. The District
improvements include the realignment and regarding of Shields Street to
full arterial standards from the northernmost improvements installed with
the Raintree Shopping Center to the southernmost improvements installed
with the Hillpond P.U.D. Other improvements include the removal and
replacement of a box culvert on the Larimer No..2 Ditch, widening of the
existing box culvert at the New Mercer Ditch, 220 linear feet of storm '
-827-
March 20, 1990
drain, and curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement of a total length of 1960
feet of improved arterial street.
Internal collector street improvements consist of the extension of
Worthington and Research Avenues (formerly Meadowlark) to connect with
Centre Avenue. These improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk and
pavement, two concrete box culverts, 2780 feet of storm drain, 6180 feet of
water main, and 7296 feet of sewer main, for a total of 6065 feet of
improved collector streets.
The Master Agreement for the District has been amended to include
improvements to Drake Road to provide left turn lanes onto Research Avenue
and Worthington Avenue. These improvements will be completed as soon as
weather conditions permit. However, costs are known and have been included
in the final numbers.
The District was petitioned by three property owners: Everitt Enterprises,
CSURF and Sam Aranci. Everitt has given a direct contribution of
$19,387.67 for street improvements adjacent to the non -participating
properties of Raintree P.U.D. and the Carpenters.
The City Engineer has inspected the completed improvements and has
certified that all improvements in the District with the exception of Drake
Road are complete. Upon passage of the Resolution, the City Clerk will
have written notice published in the Coloradoan and will send an individual
notice to each property owner in the District. The public notice will be
' in the form of Exhibit "A" of the Resolution and will notify each property
owner of the total cost of the District, the portion to be paid by the
City, and the hearing date on the assessment ordinance.
FUNDING:
Special Improvement District bonds were issued in the aggregate principal
amount of $2,250,000 by Ordinance No. 81, 1987 to finance the construction
of the District improvements. The City also enacted Ordinance No. 177,
1987 which appropriated $571,792 from the Street Oversizing Fund to pay for
the majority of the City's street oversizing costs. Existing
appropriations in the Street Oversizing Fund totalling $39,581 are needed
to provide the balance of funds to meet the City's obligations including
the interim turn lane on Drake Road.
Breakdown of City's Share of Actual Costs:
Street Oversizing Fund: $611,372.28
Water & Wastewater Oversizing Fund: 69,287.77
SubTotal: $680,660.05
Parkland Fund to Pay for
Improvements Adjacent to
Rolland Moore Park 93.932.90
' $774,592.95
g: :
March 20, 1990
The statement of costs from the Finance Director and the City Engineer
details the costs of the District, including construction, engineering,
financing and miscellaneous fees. The total to be assessed and paid by the
property owners in the District is $2,121,896.28. This amount, if paid in
a timely manner,- will be sufficient to pay the debt service on the
outstanding bonds.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the approval of these items to begin the closeout of SID
#90"
Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a
perceived conflict of interest.
Civil Engineer Matt Baker made a presentation on the history, scope and
costs of the project.
Mayor Winokur inquired how actual costs compared to projected costs.
Baker responded that the street oversizing costs were slightly higher. The
district costs were approximately 12% less than the original bond issue
amount.
Mayor Winokur asked for a comparison of actual development to the original
plans for the district when created.
Baker responded that the Everitt property is proceeding rapidly, but the
Colorado State University Research Foundation parcel has not developed as
expected. He clarified that the content of the project is within the
projections of the original project. The original master plan was amended
to change from a regional shopping center to mixed retail and office. This
reduces some of the traffic generation in the area.
Lucia Liley, representing the Everitt Companies and the other 2 property
owners in the district, stated that all the property owners had executed
the proposed agreements with the City. She stated the legal documents are
the same as those prepared for SID #91, except that the dollar amounts are
much greater. There is a much greater reserve built into the district
because of the amount of interest earnings that are available. She pointed
out the difficulty in reaching this kind of result from the property
owner's standpoint, but stated the property owners feel comfortable with
the compromise.
Mayor Winokur clarified that any money remaining in the bond fund after
payoff of the bonds will be returned to the original property owners.
City Manager Burkett acknowledged that if all the districts and all the
property owners involved had the same payment record that the Everitt
Companies do, the City wouldn't be dealing with some of '.these issues.
March 20, 1990
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
adopt Resolution 90-40. Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Maxey and Winokur. Nays: None (Mabry withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
adopt Ordinance No. 28, 1990 on First Reading.
Mayor Winokur expressed the hope that the Center for Advanced Technology
will develop into a research, development and technological and support
related area.
The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 28, 1990 on
First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak,
Kirkpatrick, Maxey and Winokur. Nays: None (Mabry withdrawn)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 90-41 Amending the City of
Fort Collins Fire Fighters Pension Plan, Adopted
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
' The City of Fort Collins Fire Fighters Pension Fund, as of December 31,
1989, held investments with a par value of approximately $6.3 million. If
this Resolution is adopted, approximately $4 million will be transferred to
money purchase accounts on behalf of participants in the Plan. The
remaining balance in the Fund will be used to cover obligations to
remaining members of the Plan. This action does not eliminate the present
unfunded liability within the Pension Fund. It is expected that the City
will continue to contribute an amount each year to pay off the unfunded
liability. In 1990, the City has budgeted a contribution of $84,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The retirement benefits of fire fighters hired by the City of Fort Collins
Fire Department before April 8, 1978 are covered by the City of Fort
Collins Fire Fighters Pension Plan (the "Old Hire Fire Plan"). A17 fire
fighters hired after April 8, 1978 are covered by the Fire and Police
Pension Association Plan. The Old Hire Plan is a' defined benefit plan.
Adoption of this resolution will amend the Plan to allow active members to
join a money purchase plan as a retirement' option. Current retired members
of the Plan and those desiring not to join the money purchase option will
continue to be covered by the Old Hire Plan. As the members that may
choose the money purchase option are no longer employees of the City but
are employees of the Poudre Fire Authority, the new plan will no longer
require direct oversight by the City. A sponsor for the new plan will be
�si�I�10
March 20, 1990
determined prior to transfer of monies on behalf of those who elect to
convert. '
BACKGROUND:
Money Purchase Option Amendment
City of Fort Collins Fire Department (including those now working for the
Poudre Fire Authority) fire fighters hired before April 8, 1978, belong to
the City of Fort Collins Fire Fighters Pension Plan (the "Old Hire Fire
Plan") which is a defined benefit plan. When an employee retires, a
monthly benefit is paid for the rest of the employee's life, based on age,
years of service and final salary, and this monthly benefit does not
change. The amount contributed by an employee may or may not equal the
benefits paid out. As of the last actuarial study, the 0ld Hire Fire Plan
has an estimated unfunded liability of $1 million and the City contributes
$84,000 per year to pay off this liability.
A money purchase plan is a defined contribution plan. The amount paid into
the plan, plus earnings, belongs to the member. Benefits may be withdrawn
as needed at the time of retirement. The rate accrued benefits are
withdrawn is at the discretion of the member and can be changed based on
need.
Under the 0ld Hire Fire Plan employees contribute BY of their salary and
the City contributes BY. These contribution rates will remain the same for
those who choose the monthly purchase option. For most fire fighters, the
0ld Hire Fire Plan is the primary source of retirement income.
Advantages/Disadvantages of a Money Purchase Plan
There are several advantages of a money purchase plan:
Employees are involved in the investment of their retirement
dollars are given an opportunity to increase their retirement
benefits through a variety of investment options.
b. No unfunded liabilities exist in a money purchase plan.
A money purchase plan is "portable." After several years, an
employee may wish to make a career change. Under the current plan,
there is no pension benefit until an employee becomes vested in the
plan. With a money purchase plan, a career change can be made
without the loss of the investment.
d. Money purchase
plans fare' better in times of inflation. The
monthly benefit
under the current
plan is based on the final salary
at the time of
retirement and does not automatically grow as the
cost of living
increases. With a
money purchase plan, as inflation
rises, so do interest
rates, thus
increasing the funds available to
pay benefits.
The employee has
control over 'the monthly benefit,
and is able to
compensate for the
effects of inflation.
'
-831-
March 20, 1990
Some disadvantages of money purchase plans should also be recognized:
a. A retired employee may outlive the amount of money in the money
purchase account. Unlike the current plan, which guarantees
payment for the remaining life of the employee, a money purchase
account may be exhausted before the retiree or their dependents
die.
b. Some employees may be tempted to use proceeds from money purchase
accounts for purposes other than retirement. An employee may
desire to "cash out" the account. Unless the employee has another
retirement plan, the employee may not be able to retire at a normal
retirement age.
Procedure
Approval of this resolution is the first step in the conversion process.
To protect the interests of members of the Plan, the conversion process
must be cognizant of and protect the tax status of the existing plan and
the new plan as well. In order for the City to finalize the amendment to
the Plan, the following steps must be completed:
a. The amended plan must be submitted to and approved by the Internal
Revenue Service as to its tax qualified status.
' b. Active members of the Old Hire Plan must receive disclosure
statements regarding the benefits under the existing plan and the
proposed plan. Members must also receive a statement as to the
minimum beginning account balance in the event of the conversion to
a money purchase plan.
c. After receiving the disclosure and beginning account balances,
active plan members will vote to accept or reject the modifications
to the Plan.
d. If the amendment is accepted, all eligible firefighters desiring to
transfer into the money purchase plan must indicate their
preference and sign a waiver and release.
e. The actuarial assessment of the Old Hire Plan will be updated to
support the City Council's final determination on the conversion.
F. Monies will be distributed from the Old Hire Pension Fund when the
Council has adopted an authorizing ordinance, the IRS determination
that the Plan remains a tax qualified plan has been received, and a
new money purchase plan has been adopted by the Poudre Fire
Authority and is.in place to receive distributions."
Finance Director Alan Krcmarik made a presentation addressing the unfunded
' actuarial liability issue.
-832-
March 20, 1990
Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to '
adopt Resolution 90-41.
Councilmember Edwards asked for a definition of the word "sponsor" and why
the name of the new sponsor is left open.
Krcmarik stated "sponsored" means the City was the responsible entity for
people hired when the City had its own fire department. These people were
covered by the City of Fort Collins Plan. The Poudre Valley Fire District
had its own plan and all new hires are covered by the Fire/Police Pension
association. Krcmarik said the new sponsor has not been determined yet.
Councilmember Edwards asked what will happen if a member of the old hire
plan doesn't want to convert.
Krcmarik responded that active members will have the option of converting
to money purchase or remaining in the current City of Fort Collins
Retirement Plan.
Councilmember Maxey inquired about the numbers of individuals both retired
and on active status who might be switching over.
Bill Flint, Poudre Fire Authority Pension Board Chair, responded there are
31 active members, 28 of whom will probably go with money purchase. He was
uncertain about the number of retirees willing to convert and added some
retirees are on medical disability pensions administered by the state.
Councilmember Maxey stated there are a considerable number of retirees and '
that the defined benefit plan will remain active for a number of years.
Councilmember Mabry asked if members who chose to stay in the current plan
will add additional unfunded liability for the City.
Flint responded that there will be no additional liability.
Councilmember Edwards commended Flint on his responses.
Mayor Winokur spoke in favor of this conversion.
The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion to adopt Resolution 90-41 was as
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry,
Maxey, and Winokur. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 90-35 Determining Fundamental
Elements of the Curbside Recycling
Program, Adopted as Revised
Following is staff's memorandum on this item: '
-833-
March 20, 1990
' "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Following the February 20 public hearing on recycling, Council requested a
resolution be brought forward to give staff direction on the curbside
collection program. A menu of options has been prepared to facilitate
Council discussion. A flexible resolution has likewise been prepared with
language choices keyed to the menu of options.
BACKGROUND
The key issues for staff direction are: who is to be served, who will do
the collection, and how, and what will be the funding mechanism. Given
Council direction on these key issues, staff will bring forward the
necessary ordinances and resolutions to implement the curbside collection
program and resolve remaining details.
The following comments refer to the menu of options on the attached chart.
1. WHO IS TO BE SERVED? The choice of limiting service to single family
versus including multi -family, commercial, and industrial customers is
shown first on the menu because of statutory requirements. The City
cannot compel industrial, commercial, or multi -family complexes of 8 or
more units to use or pay for a recycling service: Including them will mean
that a non -discretionary funding source such as the recycling utility fee
cannot be used. On the other hand, options providing universal service to
' single-family only (1-A and 2-A) retain the recycling utility fee as a
permissible funding source.
2. WHO WILL DO THE COLLECTION? The choice of collectors is between one or
several contractors or all local trash haulers. One contractor is
specified for single-family collection (I -A and 1-B), because even though
the contract would be competitively bid and would not be on an exclusive
territorial basis, from an anti-trust perspective, it is important to avoid
even the appearance of a territorial allocation among haulers. Multiple
contractors are feasible in the more inclusive program, because one could
serve single-family while others serve multi -family, commercial, and
industrial customers. Commercial and industrial customers in particular
tend to generate different types of recyclable materials which should
perhaps be handled by different recycling service contracts.
3. HOW IS SERVICE PROVIDED? The choices of how the service is provided are
required universal service, subscription service, and unregulated service
(financial incentives only).
4. HOW WILL THE SERVICE BE FUNDED? Between two and four funding options are
shown for each program option. Funding could come from any combination of
the funding sources listed. For example, a single-family program using a
single contractor could rely half on a utility fee and half on the General
Fund, with the possibility of later replacing the General Fund portion with
' with proceeds of a landfill surcharge. A second example, would be a
single-family program requiring that local trash haulers provide universal
-834-
March 20, 1990
service as a licensing condition. The haulers' costs could be made up by I
increases in trash service rates or by a City subsidy (General Fund or
Recycling Utility Fee) or half-and-half, etc.
SUGGESTED RESOLUTION LANGUAGE
The accompanying resolution contains blanks that may be filled in according
to City Council's selections from the menu of options. To assist Council
discussion, staff has prepared wording that can be used to fill in the
first two blanks. The language choices offered below are numbered
according to the menu of options.
■ THE PROGRAM IS INTENDED TO SERVE
single-family households only, including multi -family
households up to and including 7-plexes; OR
single-family households, multi -family households, and
commercial and industrial customers.
■ COLLECTION IS TO BE PROVIDED BY
IA a single contractor, competitively selected by the City
following a request for proposals, who provides service
to all eligible households.
IB a single contractor, competitively selected by the City I
following a request for proposals, who provides service
only to subscribing households.
2A each private trash hauling company, who provides
recycling service to all its customers, as a condition of
its license to operate within Fort Collins.
28 each private trash hauling company, who provides
recycling service to each of its customers subscribing to
such service, as a condition of its license to operate
within Fort Collins.
3A any private trash hauling company who chooses to offer
recycling service at its own discretion, while the City
encourages hauler participation through financial
incentives.
4A two or more contractors serving different classes of
customers, competitively selected by the City following a
request for proposals, who provide service to all
customers in each class.
48 two or more contractors -serving different classes of
customers, competitively selected by the City following a '
-835-
March 20, 1990
request for proposals, who provide service only to
subscribing customers in each class.
No suggested language is offered for the remaining sections of the draft
resolution, which read as follows:
START-UP COSTS (including public education and purchase of containers, but
excluding capital equipment) will be funded from General Fund Undesignated
Reserves; and
OPERATING COSTS will be funded in the following manner and proportion:
at Y
at Y
at Y"
Director of Natural Resources Brian Woodruff made a presentation reviewing
the options and acknowledged the efforts of Larimer County staff and
Commissioners on recycling.
Councilmember Horak expressed concern about the time involved in developing
the City's plan for curbside recycling in light of the County's proposal to
do on -site recycling.
' Councilmember Maxey asked if the staff recommendations had more definitive
costs than the County proposal.
Woodruff replied that after getting direction on the exact form of the
program preferred, cost estimates will be prepared. One program (Option
1A) has a firm estimate.
Larimer County Commissioner Moe Meckelburg spoke about integration of
recycling into all the existing collection and disposal systems of Larimer
County.
Frank Lancaster, Larimer County Natural Resources, made a presentation
regarding the 4-part program presented to the County Commissioners. The
first part was a procurement resolution to give a price preference to
recycled products. The second part was coordination of commercial
recycling. Another part considered was expanding the landfill drop-off for
recyclables since curbside will serve only 47% of the population in Larimer
County. The one part that is of most concern is rear end recycling or the
material recovery facility, (MRF). He spoke of the timing of this issue in
light of technology and market changes'. He encouraged the City to go ahead
with the curbside program.
Mayor Winokur asked about the projected time frame for the County's
activities.
��Bi�
March 20, 1990
0
0
Lancaster responded that RFP's will be submitted about the first of June.
He projected the program could begin within 6-8 months.
Councilmember Maxey asked about composting.
Lancaster stated about one third of the material could be composted and
added there are limits to how much compost can be used.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick asked about communities with a combination of MRF
and curbside.
Lancaster described an orange bag program - with all recyclables sorted
into one bag of a different color. The MRF is more efficient since all
recyclables arrive in one bag.
Councilmember Azari expressed concern about time wasted when the entities
(City and County) do not work together and communicate effectively.
Councilmember Mabry inquired why the proposed resolution does not deal with
the procurement issue.
Woodruff responded that staff is developing information on how to handle
procurement.
Councilmember Maxey made a motion to adopt Resolution 90-35 with the blanks
filled in as follows:
Item U . The program is intended to serve single-family;
Item #2. Collection is to be provided by any private trash hauling
company who chooses to offer recycling service at its own
discretion;
Item U. Delete
Item #4. Delete
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND.
Councilmember Mabry spoke in support of moving forward with the City's
program, while monitoring and working with Larimer County in its efforts to
establish the 4-point program. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded
by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Resolution 90-35 filling in the following
blanks:
Item #1. The program is intended to serve single-family households
only, including multi -family households up to and including
7-plexes; (Option 1A)
Item #2. Collection is to be provided by each private trash hauling
company, who provides recycling service to all its
1BYA
March 20, 1990
customers, as a condition of its license to operate within
Fort Collins. (Option 2A)
Item U . As proposed.
Item #4. Delete.
Councilmember Azari asked why Option 1A was chosen as opposed to a
universal approach and about the effect on conditioning the license.
Councilmember Mabry responded that he felt a phased program was logical.
He stated the condition of licensing could be modified in the future as the
next phase is implemented.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick,
to amend Item #2 of the Resolution by substituting IA (a single contractor,
competitively selected by the City following a request for proposals, who
provides service to all eligible households) for 2A.
Councilmember Azari asked why that option was preferred.
Councilmember Horak responded he had some practical concerns about
Councilmember Mabry's proposed option.
The following citizens spoke on the proposed amendment:
1. Brad Edwards, 2828 Cherry Lane, spoke in support of amendment IA.
2. Mike Doten, member of the Sierra Club, 3419 Colony Drive, spoke in
support of option IA.
3. Frank Lancaster, 2313 Arctic Fox Drive, spoke in favor of option IA.
4. Karin Lindquist, 1026 Morgan, spoke in support for IA.
5. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, stated he believed option 2A is
the least damaging.
6. Mike Hauser, Chamber of Commerce, 725 Westshore Ct., spoke in support
of option IA.
7. Randall Sinner, 527 E. Laurel, spoke in support of Option 2A.
8. Neil Stone, 813 Scott Avenue, spoke in support of Option IA, with the
contingency that it be expanded at some point.
Councilmember Mabry commented on his support for Option 2A and his concern
that the Option lA package will require substantial City funding.
Councilmember Azari spoke in favor of Option 2A and of working with the
County on establishing a MRF.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick spoke in support of the amendment (Option 1A).
Councilmember Edwards spoke in favor of Option IA.
Mayor Winokur commented on the truck traffic issue, his concern that
commercial and industrial customers are not included in the proposal, and
his concerns about a single contractor.
11kIE
March 20, 1990
The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to substitute lA for 2A was as '
follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Horak and Edwards. Nays:
Councilmembers Azari, Mabry, Maxey and Winokur
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari,
to amend the original motion so that number 1 reads as follows:
1. The program is intended to serve single-family households,
multi -family households, and commercial and industrial customers.
Brad Edwards, citizen, asked for more information on state prohibitions
Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman spoke of the state statute which provides
that it is unlawful for any municipal government or county to require
commercial, industrial customers or any residential customer of an 8-plex
or larger to use or pay for trash hauling services provided by the
governmental entity in preference to services provided by private entities.
Mike Doten, Sierra Club, spoke in support of this amendment.
Councilmember Mabry asked about concerns raised in the worksession on the
impact on commercial and industrial customers who are currently recycling.
City Manager Burkett replied that the concern was regarding the landfill I
surcharge only.
Councilmember Edwards spoke against the amendment and in support of a
residential curbside program as the first phase of a recycling program.
Councilmember Maxey spoke against the amendment and pointed out there are
many businesses which already recycle.
Mayor Winokur asked for data on the nature and volume of the waste
generated by industrial and commercial customers.
Frank Lancaster, Larimer County, replied no data is available at this time.
Councilmember Azari spoke in support of the amendment.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick spoke in support of the amendment as a response
to the County's direction in recycling and to citizen input.
Mayor Winokur spoke in.support of the amendment.
The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to amend the resolution to
include commercial and industrial customers was as follows: Yeas:
Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Winokur, Horak, and Azari. Nays:
Councilmembers Mabry, Edwards, Maxey.
-839-
March 20, 1990
' THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Edwards made a motion to amend the resolution to restore #4
to read as follows:
4. Operating costs will be funded in the following manner and
proportion:
The General Fund at 100% "
Councilmember Edwards spoke of his concern that on -going funding be
addressed at this time.
In response to a request for clarification from Mayor Winokur, Deputy City
Attorney Eckman commented that the wording on 2A should read "each private
trash hauling company, who shall provide recycling service ..."
Councilmember Mabry commented that start-up costs are addressed in Item #3
of the resolution.
Councilmember Maxey commented that on -going costs should be passed through
to trash hauling customers.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated the purpose of this resolution is only to
direct staff to come back with the specific elements of the program.
Councilmember Edwards spoke of the broad public benefit of a recycling
program and of his concern about cost increases affecting participation.
Councilmember Azari commented that rates in other communities appear not to
be impacted substantially.
The following citizens spoke:
1. Brad Edwards spoke of his concern on funding.
2. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, asked for a definition of
recyclable materials and spoke of this concerns about costs.
3. Randall Sinner, 527 E. Laurel, asked for cost analysis by haulers.
4. Scott Dominguez, Fort Collins Disposal, asked for City funding of
start-up costs.
5. John Puma, Ram Waste Systems, estimated a 30% monthly increase in
price for trash service. Small haulers could not compete with
national and world-wide companies in this market.
6. Mike Hauser, Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, asked for clarification
on subsidies.
7. Mary Pas urged Council to move forward on curbside recycling.
March 20, 1990
Mayor Winokur clarified that the proposal on the floor, unlike the City
'
contracting for service, has no legal notification requirements and can
proceed more quickly.
Councilmember Horak expressed his concern that the County move ahead.
Councilmember Azari spoke in support of moving forward and working in
combination with the County.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick spoke in favor of moving forward with the
compromise program for recycling.
Councilmember Edwards spoke in .favor of moving forward with the compromise.
Mayor Winokur stated the program was a blending of components. The City
will be a partner with many other entities in solid waste management and
recycling.
The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 90-35 as
amended to include commercial and industrial customers was as follows:
Yeas: Councilmembers Mabry, Winokur, Horak, Edwards, Maxey, Azari,
Kirkpatrick. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 164, 1989, Authorizing an Intergovernmental
Agreement Creating an Emergency Telephone Service Authority,
'
Imposing an Emergency Telephone Charge upon Telephone Exchange
Access Facilities Within the City and Authorizing Service
Suppliers to Collect said Emergency Telephone Charges,
Adopted on First Reading
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
The cost to acquire equipment and begin operation of E911 in Larimer County
is estimated to be $827,178.12. The on -going operation and maintenance fee
For this county -wide system is estimated to be 19 to 23 cents per month,
per subscriber.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This item was postponed from December 19, 1989 to this date to allow
additional time to obtain information and provide for public input.
Adoption of this ordinance will authorize the City to enter into an
agreement with Larimer County and the other cities, towns and special
districts located in the County. Once the agreement is fully executed, the
telephone charges will go into effect and all other, actions necessary to ,
implement E911 throughout the County will begin.
-841-
March 20, 1990
' BACKGROUND
The current 911 emergency system for Fort Collins and Larimer County is a
basic C911 system with limited features.
An Enhanced 911 system is available through US West and contains features
that automatically display the caller's address and phone number on a
screen in the Communications Center. The system also provides backup 911
service in the event all lines are busy or equipment failure occurs.
Selective routing will predetermine which E911 center will answer the 911
call regardless of the caller's address or telephone prefix.
The present cost of the City's C911 system is $11,556 a year, which is paid
to US West solely from City funds.
The cost to acquire equipment and begin operation of E911 throughout
Larimer County is estimated to be $827,178.12. Funding will be obtained
from all phone users in Larimer County by way of an additional charge on
each monthly phone bill not to exceed $.50 per phone line per month -- or
an average of $6.00 per year. Businesses will be b'i11ed by the number of
trunk lines, not to exceed $50 per month -- or a maximum of $600 a year.
The City will no longer be solely responsible to budget for 911 services in
the northern portion of the County. The cost will be spread among the
users of the system. Continuing operation and maintenance of a system
large enough to service the Larimer County community will cost 19 to 23
cents per month per subscriber.
Council adopted Resolution 88-11 on January 11, 1988 which authorized the
signing of an intergovernmental agreement with 17 other governmental
entities for the purpose of investigating the feasibility of implementing
an Enhanced 911 emergency telephone system for the City of Fort Collins and
Larimer County. Although no intergovernmental agreement was executed
pursuant to that Resolution, additional information has been gathered at
Council's request.
Once Ordinance No. 164, 1989 goes into effect and the intergovernmental
agreement has been signed, US West will begin billing the users. It will
take approximately 18 months of billing to collect enough funds to install
the system. During this period, the Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority
Board will be established to supervise the system, administer the collected
funds and function as a single contact point with US West on administrative
matters. A technical group will be established to design and coordinate
the center installations and build the geographical data base for the
system. In the City's case, that data base has already been established.
Article X of the City Charter authorizes a variety of methods, for
submitting an ordinance to a vote of City electors. If Council wishes to
submit or refer this ordinance to a regular or special election, staff'will
prepare the necessary ordinance or resolution for consideration at a future
meeting."
-842-
.March 20, 1990
Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to '
adopt Ordinance No. 164, 1989 on First Reading.
The following citizens spoke on this item:
1. Howard Lowell, Director of Telecommunications at Colorado State
University, urged implementation.
2. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, stated he was not enthusiastic
about E911, expressing concerns about the considerable cost involved
and whether this will increase public safety.
3. Rick Perkins, Emergency Management Director for Larimer County, spoke
in support of E911.
4. Moe Meckelburg, County Commissioner, spoke in support of E911.
Councilmember Maxey spoke of his concern about inequity in representation
on the Authority Governing Board.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated that, despite her concerns, she would
support this proposal.
Councilmember Horak spoke of his concern about representation.
Councilmember Mabry spoke in support of this proposal, given the support of
neighboring communities.
The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 164, 1989 '
on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Winokur, Edwards,
Maxey, Azari, Kirkpatrick, Mabry. Nays: Councilmember Horak.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 90-14 Adopting the Recommendations
of the Council's Health and Safety Committee on the
Program Details for the Fourth of July Celebration, Failed
Following is staff's memorandum on this item:
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
The financial impact of these recommended changes will be approximately the
same as the costs in prior years for this celebration.. The funds for 1990
are budgeted in the Cultural, Libra ry;• and Recreational Services
Administration Budget, as well as monies remaining in the Mitigation Fund
account. Funding for this program in future years will need to be
recognized in the normal budget process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On February 6 Council postponed consideration of this Resolution until
March 6. After the March 6 Council meeting was cancelled due to the '
snowstorm, this item was rescheduled to this date. Council directed that
-843-
March 20, 1990
' staff solicit citizen input on the Health and Safety Committee
recommendations to distribute the Fourth of July events throughout the city
and to launch the fireworks from Pineridge Open Space area.
The following details the citizen input process used by staff and the data
gathered.
Since the February 6 Council meeting, staff has gathered citizen input
through the following channels:
1) City Park area residents were invited to a neighborhood meeting on
February 21 at 7:00 PM.
2) Southwest area residents were invited to a neighborhood meeting on
February 22 at 7:00 PM.
3) Various organizations were contacted. Some took information to their
governing boards; others responded immediately.
4) A survey was handed out at various locations. These included Edora
Pool Ice Center, Fort Collins Community Pool, Recreation office, Public
Library, Recreation classes, and the Foothills Fashion Mall (at the
3-day health/wellness fair). This was done to collect data from a more
random sampling of the population.
On all fliers and on surveys given to the public, a staff member's name and
' phone number was included so that citizens could provide direct feedback.
The results of these efforts are as follows:
1) Invitations to attend the February 21 meeting were sent to City Park
area residents.
480 fliers were mailed inviting area residents to attend the meeting;
50 more were hand -delivered. 22 people attended representing 16
households: 19 voiced opposition to the change; 3 were in favor of the
change.
A sampling of the feelings expressed by the neighborhood follows:
Pros
- the 4th of July is a bit of "small town" that should be continued
- it is a family affair
- it's only one day
- don't abandon City Park
- last year, lots of positive effort was made to make City Park safer
Cons
- traffic after the fireworks is at a standstill
- firecrackers are discharged in traffic and in the crowd
' - parking problems exist
-844-
March 20, 1990
- trash in City Park and in the neighborhood '
- the crowd "spills over" onto neighboring yards
There were several residents who felt this decision impacts the entire
city and that more citizen input is needed.
The residents attending the meeting stated the following order of
preference:
1) Keep Fourth of July event the same
2) Keep the daytime events the same and down -scale the fireworks show
3) Keep the daytime events the same and move the fireworks to Pineridge
4) Keep the fireworks in City Park and move the daytime events
5) Move everything as recommended
2) Invitations to attend the February 22 meeting were sent to southwest
area residents. These residents will be effected by the recommendation
to launch fireworks at the Pineridge location. 420 fliers were mailed
inviting residents to attend the meeting; 300 additional fliers were
hand -delivered. 7 residents attended representing 6 households (one
attendee represented the 51 unit Appleridge sub -division). 2 voiced
opposition to the change; 4 were in favor of the change; 1 felt another
solution was better.
Four concerns were conveyed by the Appleridge Homeowner Association's
representative: '
a) The noise bothers their dogs. Even when football games are played,
they have to send their dogs to a sitter. The fireworks would be
worse.
b) They will have to plan around the day's event because of traffic
congestion. It is hard to cross Overland Trail at Azalea.
c) Increased traffic and people trying for a close viewing site will
cause an increase in roadway trash.
d) There is a concern about fire danger from fireworks and people
smoking.
Concerns were addressed by staff, and several residents felt satisfied
with the plans. Several people felt the move of the fireworks to
Pineridge Open Space should be a one-year experiment.
3) The following community organizations were contacted. For the most
part, their opinions are neutral.
- New West Fest Committee - neutral
- Chamber of Commerce - neutral
- Convention and Visitors' Bureau - supports the resolution
- Poudre R-I School District - neutral '
- Downtown Business Association and Downtown Development Authority
-845-
March 20, 1990
information will be available at the City Council meeting on March 6
- Colorado/Wyoming Restaurant Association (food fair organizers) -
would like to run a food fair on the 4th of July with or without the
activities in City Park. If no activities are present in City Park,
it would be a scaled -down version of previous years' food fairs.
- Parks and Recreation Board - information will be available at the
City Council meeting on March 6
4) A total of 447 written surveys were completed and returned. The
surveys were distributed at locations throughout the city to collect
random opinion. Staff is unsure of the statistical validity of this
survey. The following summarizes the.results.
a) Of those responding, 367 people or 82Y have attended the Fourth of
July celebration.
b) 279 said they have not attended or only attend sometimes. The
reasons given for not always attending were:
Crowd - 112 responses
Parking congestion - 93
Other obligations/interests - 62
Not interested - 12
c) Of those who have attended the celebration:
187 attend both fireworks and day activities
174 attend fireworks only
30 attend day activities only
d) Should the Fourth of July day activities remain at City Park?
Yes 293 (66Y)
No 118 (26Y) (Not all respondents answered this question.)
e) Should the fireworks display be moved to a location other than
City Park?
Yes 177 (40Y)
No 244 (55Y) (Not all respondents answered this question.)
Prior to asking these questions, information was provided in the survey
instrument detailing the safety issues.
The majority response from citizens is to keep the Fourth of July daytime
activities and fireworks program at City Park.
If the fireworks display remains at City Park, insurance restrictions
prohibit the use of shells above 4" diameter. The City could assume
liability for the show and use bigger shells, but staff recommends against
accepting this liability.
f[-V
March 20, 1990
Attached to this agenda item summary is the package presented to Council on
February 6. The postponed resolution is again presented for Council
consideration along with the new survey information.
The Council Health and Safety Committee is charged with reviewing
activities in light of their effect on the health and safety of the City's
citizens. This recommendation was made in response to safety issues. The
input received from the community survey indicates that the community may
be willing to accept these safety risks in order to continue this
tradition.
Four concerns were conveyed by the Appleridge Homeowner Association's
representative:
a) The noise bothers their dogs. Even when football games are played,
they have to send their dogs to a sitter. The fireworks would be
worse.
b) They will have to plan around the day's event because of traffic
congestion. It is hard to cross Overland Trail at Azalea.
c) Increased traffic and people trying for a close viewing site will
cause an increase in roadway trash.
d) There is a concern about fire danger from fireworks and people
smoking.
Concerns were addressed by staff, and several residents felt satisfied
with the plans. Several people felt the move of the fireworks to
Pineridge Open Space should be a one-year experiment.
3) The following community organizations were contacted. For the most
part, their opinions are neutral.
- New West Fest Committee - neutral
- Chamber of Commerce - neutral
- Convention and Visitors' Bureau - supports the resolution
- Poudre R-1 School District - neutral
- Downtown Business Association and Downtown Development Authority -
information will be available at the City Council meeting on March 6
- Colorado/Wyoming Restaurant Association (food fair organizers) -
would like to run a food fair on the 4th of July with or without the
activities in City Park. If no activities are present in City Park,
it would be a scaled -down version of previous years' food fairs.
- Parks and Recreation Board - information will be available at the
City Council meeting on'March 6
4) A total of 447 written surveys were completed and returned. The
surveys were distributed at locations throughout the city to collect
random opinion. Staff is unsure of the statistical validity of this
survey. The following summarizes the results.
-847-
March 20, 1990
' a) Of those responding, 367 people or 82Y have attended the Fourth of
July celebration.
b) 279 said they have not attended or only attend sometimes. The
reasons given for not always attending were:
Crowd - 112 responses
Parking congestion - 93
Other obligations/interests - 62
Not interested - 12"
Mike Powers, Director of Cultural, Library, and Recreational Services, made
a presentation on the community outreach effort and insurance concerns
relating to the size of the shells.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards,
to adopt Resolution 90-14.
The following citizens spoke on this item:
1. Diane Sparling, 324 Jackson Avenue, encouraged keeping all events at
City Park.
2. Jim Brokish, 330 Jackson Avenue, spoke in favor of keeping all events
at City Park.
3. Ann Stewart, 1154 West Mountain Avenue, spoke against decentralizing
the festivities.
' Councilmember Mabry spoke in favor of preserving the tradition.
Councilmember Edwards expressed his concerns about the safety aspects of
keeping the event in City Park.
Councilmember Azari spoke of the safety problems surrounding the City Park
celebration. She suggested considering a laser show in the future.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick spoke in support of the Resolution, adding
additional daytime programming at City Park.
Councilmember Maxey spoke in support of the Resolution.
Councilmember Horak stated that, despite the liability concerns, he was
against the Resolution and in favor of keeping the tradition.
Mayor Winokur complimented the Health and Safety Committee on its work. He
spoke of safety and tradition.
The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion�to adopt` Resolution 90-14
was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Edwards, Maxey, Kirkpatrick. Nays:
Councilmembers Horak, Azari, Mabry, Winokur.
' THE MOTION FAILED.
ffaLFE
March 20, 1990
Mayor Winokur suggested considering a laser show as an alternative in the I
future.
Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey,
to maintain the activities in City Park with a reduced fireworks show.
Ann Stewart, 1154 West Mountain Avenue, asked whether a launch of the
fireworks from a raft in the center of the lake had been examined.
Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to
postpone consideration of Councilmember Kirkpatrick's motion to April 3.
Yeas: Councilmembers Edwards, Maxey, Azari, Mabry, Winokur, Horak. Nays:
Councilmembers Kirkpatrick.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she had received an invitation to
participate in the United Nations Conference on Local Governments for
Sustainable Future and asked for sponsorship.
Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, that
the City sponsor Councilmember Kirkpatrick's participation in the U.N.
Conference on Local Governments for Sustainable Future. Yeas:
Councilmembers Maxey, Azari, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Winokur, Horak, and '
Edwards.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:05 a.m.
Mayor
AST:
City Clerk