Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-11/23/1983-SpecialSPECIAL MEETING I COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO November 23, 1983 4:00 p.m. A special meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Wednesday, November 23, 1983, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Horak, Knezovich, Rutstein, and Stoner. Secretary's Note: Councilmember Clarke arrived at 4:10 p.m.; Councilmem- bers Elliott and Ohlson arrived at 4:20 p.m. Staff Members Present: Arnold, Huisjen, Krajicek, Wood, Harmon. Ordinances Relating to Old Town IDRB's, Adopted on Second Reading Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: ' "A. Hearing and Emergency Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 1983, Providing for the Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (IDRB's) for Old Town Partners I in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $10,000,000. B. Hearing and Emergency Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 1983, Providing for the Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (IDRB's) for Old Town Partners II in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $10,000,000. On November 15, Council by majority vote called a Special Meeting for Wednesday, November 23 at 4:00 p.m. to hold a hearing on the emergency reading of the two Old Town Partners bond ordinances. This is the formal public hearing on the ordinances, as advertised by legal publication. Both ordinances were adopted by a 6-0 vote (Councilmember Ohlson withdrawn) on first reading on November 15." Councilmember Ohlson asked the record to show he did not participate in the discussion or vote on these ordinances. City Attorney Huisjen noted there had been changes proposed to the ordi- nances as they appeared on First Reading. He stated the changes contained provisions suggesting an emergency does exist and changes to the amounts of ' -162- Special Meeting November 23, 1983 the issues. He added the Financing Agreement and the Indenture of Trust had also been changed. Mr. Avy Stein of Kirkland and Ellis summarized the changes in detail and answered questions relating to the changes. Councilmember Elliott made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Clarke, to consider adopting Ordinance No. 154, 1983 on Second Reading as an emergency ordinance with the amendments as described by Mr. Stein. Jim Heaberlin, 1136 Cobblestone Court, expressed his concerns about the City's liability with regard to these bond issues in the event of a default or in the event the issues become taxable. Mr. Stein explained that the liability for the project would fall first to the partnership and then to Continental Casualty, the mortgage insurer who has been paid a $1.6 million premium to guarantee the risk. He stressed the City had absolutely no liability. The vote to adopt Ordinance No. 154, 1983 on Second Reading as amended and as an emergency ordinance was as follows: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. (Councilmember Ohlson withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to consider adopting Ordinance No. 155, 1983 on Second Reading as an emergency. ordinance and with the amendments as described by Mr. Stein. Councilmem- bers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. (Councilmember Ohlson withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Timetable for Reviewing the Annexation and Development Proposals of Anheuser-Busch Following is the staff's memorandum on this item: "Attached are three options for Council consideration on the review process for A-B. These options are scheduled out in detail. All provide great opportunities to involve the public, to air whatever issues arise, and to -163- Special Meeting ' November 23, 1983 decide issues in a deliberate, thoughtful time frame, without unreasonably delaying decisions. The three options can be summarized as: Council Decides (1) Council makes the annexation decision. As is normal, the public may petition for an election on the subject. Council Decides Then Has a Public Vote (2) Council makes the annexation decision and immediately refers the decision to the electorate for concurrence. Council Defers Decision (3) Council defers action on the annexation ordinance and calls an election first. It's important for our elected leaders to decide issues after making informed judgments and in this way to guide and lead the public. Options #1 and #2 each provide for Council leadership, while Option #3 does not. Because Council does want to submit some kind of a capital improvement program to the public at the same time, it would be advantageous to have an election date known and scheduled in advance. So Option #2 would be favored for this reason. Making it easier for CSU students to vote also leads to Option #2. Option #2 would see an election on May 1, while CSU students are still in class; Option #,1 would be a May 29 election, after students are gone. Assuring opponents of growth, opponents of the brewery, and opponents of the agreement that there will be a vote on the subject leads to a favoring of Option #2. Because Council commits to call the election on the same day that 2nd Reading of the Annexation Ordinance is passed, opponents will know that an election is called by Council -- or will still have time to circu- late their own petitions to refer the annexation ordinance. Proponents of the brewery should also favor Option #2 because they can be assured that the question on the ballot will not be seriously flawed, imperfect in intent or effect, or in some way contaminate the election. Opponents should also know that a Council -referred ordinance would be just as binding upon Council as a citizen- referred ordinance. That statement needs to be made by Council as a moral commitment, going beyond any legal maneuvering that others might attempt. "When the public has spoken, they get what they've asked for," should be the guiding philosophy. ' -164- ' Special Meeting November 23, 1983 Some may say Council is abrogating responsibility by deciding to call an election in advance of a demonstrated demand to do so, and that's a problem with Option #2. But given the fact that Option #2 also requires Council to take a stand, to decide, and to lead before the election, that negative seems mitigated. One impact of Council calling an election in advance is on our industrial development efforts. What will other potential industries -- hi tech or not -- think about coming to a city where the leaders have referred an issue to an election? Most industries have hundreds of cities after them and would therefore not need the potential grief of rejection by an electorate for some, impossible - to -know - in- advance reason. A-B is dif- ferent, though, being bigger, needing annexation, and having more potential controversy surround it than most industries. It would be important to state that this is an unusual situation and not a policy approach of this Council. The main negative able to be seen about Option #2 is that the public hearings won't seem to mean as much. People will not have to listen to the facts or study the issues -- they can await the election and vote on emotion or on any other basis. Then too, Council will not have to listen to or pay speak at as much attention the election. to citizens as is normal, because citizens will Council needs to use its collective judgment to decide what course of action to follow. But I recommend Option #2. I also suggest Council adopt a Resolution setting all this out and hold a public hearing on the Resolution before adoption. The schedule attempts to build in time at each step for all to digest the material before having to decide it and still not lose continuity by unduly lengthening the process. I have consulted with the Mayor and Assistant Mayor, representatives of A-B, and City staff and have resolved differences of opinion where possible (and decided based on my independent judgment where not possible). This remains a recommendation of mine, though, and no one else need feel co-opted. Comments made include: • "Try to combine the 12/13 and 12/20 meetings." The suggestion is that 12/20 is too close to Christmas. I left them separate for time to digest the 12/5 and 12/13 material. • "Reduce the time for air quality discussions from 12/5 - 1/3 to a ' shorter period." -165- Special Meeting November 23, 1983 This was left as is because of the holidays. • "It may not be possible to get the right EPA and State Health people that close to Christmas." That's true. But if Council concurs on the schedule, we'll get right on it and see. • "The 12/5 Air Quality Permit Date may not be correct. The State and Fed may not issue it then. So the schedule would change somewhat." That's true. We will try to pin down that date, but it is out of our control, and we may have to adjust. There are many variations on these scenarios possible. But these seem to be the most likely and the most protective of all the interests and posi- tions in the community." Mayor Knezovich noted no action would be taken on the draft Resolution at this meeting. He noted it was Council's intent to hold a public hearing on the three options on December 6 and suggested Councilmembers and public provide their input to staff before then. Councilmember Rutstein asked that the 3 options be publicized so persons would have an opportunity to comment on them.' Councilmember Horak suggested the City purchase ads to insure the issue is prominently displayed in the media. Other Business Councilmember Clarke expressed his concern about the trolley track instal- lation on West Mountain Avenue. He noted the installation may not be in accordance with the City's maintenance standards. He suggested the City Manager have Parks and Recreation evaluate the maintenance problem and report back and also check with the City Attorney to determine if there is a violation of the agreement between the City and the Fort Collins Railway Society. Adjournment Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Rutstein, to adjourn the meeting. Yeas: Councilmembers Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezo- ' vich, Ohlson, Rutstein, and Stoner. Nays: None. -166- The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. ATTEST: �n\j City Clerk Special Meeting November 23, 1983 Q�� 8 7- 1 Ma o -167-