Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-11/15/1988-Regularr. ' November 15, 1988 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, November 15, 1988, 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: Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Staff Members Present: Burkett, Krajicek, Roy Citizen Participation A. Proclamation Naming November 13-19 as Fort Collins Arts Week was accepted by Donna Beard, 1216 Morgan. She spoke of the different art events that were scheduled for the week. B. Presentation of Awards from State Arts Council were announced by State Representative Peggy Reeves and Senator Bob Schaffer. ' C. Proclamation Naming November 28-December 8 as Chamber Days was by Chamber accepted a of Commerce representative. D. Proclamation Naming Fort Collins as International City of Peace was accepted by Michael Spurgeon, representing Citizens for Peace. E. Proclamation Naming November 18-27 as Ending Hunger Week in Fort Collins was accepted by Christine Ferguson, representing 420,000 Coloradoans who live below the poverty level. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, commented on the award received by City Manager Steve Burkett for his leadership abilities and for providing personalized quality service to citizens of Fort Collins from the Public Technology, Inc. He also expressed thanks to Sheriff Jim Black and Police Chief Bruce Glasscock for the their efforts in the quick apprehension of two rapists. Agenda Review: City Manager City Manager Burkett requested Item #11, Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 1988, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue in Various Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of ' Appropriated Amounts Between Funds, be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. -411- November 15, 1988 Councilmember Maxey asked that Item #15, Items Relating to Self -Insurance on Workers' Compensation, be pulled from the Consent Calendar. 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 #19, Pulled Consent Items. Consider approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of November 1. Items Relating to the Fossil Creek West First Annexation. A. Hearing to Make Findings and Determinations Concerning the Fossil Creek West First Annexation. Resolution 88-181 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Fossil Creek West First Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 1988, Annexing Approximately 30.1974 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West First Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 1988, Zoning Approximately 30.1974 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West First, into the T Transition District. APPLICANT: J. Paul Heffron OWNERS: U.S. 287 Ltd. and P.O. Box 1345 Foothills Office Park Ltd. Boulder, CO 80306 1624 Market Street, #204 Denver, CO 80202 This Resolution sets forth findings and determinations that the area is eligible for annexation pursuant to Colorado state law. Ordinance No. 128, 1988 and Ordinance No. 129, 1988, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 4, annex and zone approximately 30.1974 acres located west of South College Avenue in the vicinity of Fossil Creek Parkway. The requested zoning is the T Transition District. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation. Items Relating to the Fossil Creek West Second Annexation. Hearing to Make Findings and Determinations Concerning the Fossil Creek West Second Annexation. Resolution 88-182 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Fossil Creek.West Second Annexation. -412- November 15, 1988 ' C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 1988, Annexing Approximately 18.8318 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West Second Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 1988, Zoning Approximately 18.8318 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West Second, into the T Transition District. APPLICANT: J. Paul Heffron OWNERS: U.S. 287 Ltd. and P.O. Box 1345 Foothills Office Park Ltd. Boulder, CO 80306 1624 Market Street, #204 Denver, CO 80202 This Resolution sets forth findings and determinations that the area is eligible for annexation pursuant to Colorado state law. Ordinance No. 130, 1988 and Ordinance No. 131, 1988, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 4, annex and zone approximately 18.8318 acres located west of South College Avenue in the vicinity of Fossil Creek Parkway. The requested zoning is the T Transition District. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation. 8. Defeat of Items Relating to the PACE Membership Warehouse First Annexation. ' A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 1988, Annexing Approximately 9.1034 Acres Known as the PACE Membership Warehouse First Annexation. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1988, Zoning Approximately 9.1034 Acres Known as the PACE Membership Warehouse First, into the B-P Planned Business District. APPLICANT: Fred & Dorothy McClanahan OWNERS: Fred & Dorothy McClanahan c/o RBD Inc. 5001 South College Ave Engineering Consultants Fort Collins, CO 80525 2900 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 These Ordinances, which were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 4, annex and zone approximately 9.10 acres located west of South College Avenue, north of Mill Brothers Nursery and south of Fossil Creek Nursery. The requested zoning is the B-P Planned Business District with a condition that all development proceed as a planned unit development according to the criteria of the Land Development Guidance' System. The property is presently undeveloped. This is was voluntary annexation The petitioners reserved the right to withdraw the petition any time prior to second reading and the City received formal notice of their ' election to withdraw. M1!K>C November 15, 1988 a 10. II. A regular municipal election is scheduled for March 7, 1989. Any changes in precinct boundaries must be completed at least 90 days before the election. This ordinance, which was adopted 6-0 on First Reading on November 1, approves boundaries for 72 precincts as set out in the District -Precinct Map dated November 15, 1988, which is being sent to Council under separate cover. The map includes, but does not change, the Council District boundaries, which were established in August. Council will set polling places for these precincts at a later date. With the dissolution of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) transportation and Air Quality Planning functions needed to be re-established. The participating cities have adopted the Articles of Association of the North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council and the Governor has designated this Planning Council as the MPO. The City of Fort Collins has been designated, through the I Articles of Association, as the administrative entity of the Front Range Council. Several funds require supplemental appropriations for 1988 expenditures. The Background Summary gives the details for each appropriation. The intent of this ordinance is to provide City Council with a summary of a number of appropriations which need to be made before the end of the current budget year. Items considered in this "clean-up" ordinance must meet two criteria: Staff perceives them to be administrative actions, or items of no controversy; or In several cases, they are items which Council has already provided direction on. -414- November 15, 1988 ' The appropriations being considered in this ordinance reflect a number of changes from the 1988 Budget. For example, when the 1988 Budget was adopted the City did not have an employee dental plan. Council approved the current dental plan in May, after the 1988 budget had been adopted. An item in this ordinance appropriates the expenses of that program in the Benefits Fund. Also included in this ordinance are appropriations for any unforeseen expenditures which may have occurred during the year or the addition of unanticipated revenue the City has received. Rather than present each of these items for individual consideration, staff believes that this format provides for more efficient Council review. Staff typically presents these items in November for Council's review in order to "clean-up" any outstanding issues which have arisen during the year. This is done primarily because we have more accurate information on which to base projected expenditure needs on. If these appropriations are not made, the City runs the risk of receiving an unfavorable opinion from its auditors and being in violation of the City Charter. 12. uistrict. This is a request to rezone approximately 164.8 acres of City -owned property located north of East Prospect Road, west of Summit View Road, and south of the .Countryside Park Subdivision south of East Mulberry Street -into the RC River Corridor Zoning District. The property is presently in the T Transition Zoning District. The property has been one of the City's open space areas since its acquisition in 1977. 13. When South Lemay Avenue was reconstructed south of Horsetooth Road around Warren Lake, the alignment of the road was shifted to the east, below the dam. As a result, the old "county road" right-of-way, which was centered on the dam, is no longer needed. Several small slivers of land were also created between the new westerly right-of-way line and the old right-of-way line. Before the new road was constructed, Warren Lake Reservoir Company quitclaimed several parcels to the City for the new right-of-way. This Ordinance will divest the City of its interest in the land dedicated to the County years ago and will clean ' up the legal description for the South Lemay Avenue right-of-way. Warren Lake Reservoir Company is in agreement with this action. -415- November 15, 1988 14. 15 The Ordinance will insure that the City has followed the statutory procedure for divesting the City of rights -of -way dedicated "for roadway purposes". The quitclaim deed is desired by the ditch company to clear up any residual title questions that may exist with respect to those portions of land that might not have been conveyed with the limitation of use for roadway purposes only. A quitclaim deed does not warrant any title and only conveys such interest as the City may be able to convey, and nothing more. There is some overlapping that occurs as a result of the City vacating and deeding the same land. This redundancy, however, is harmless since the City is vacating only that land which was dedicated "for roadway purposes" and is executing a quitclaim deed for the entire parcel. The quitclaim deed is simply an additional measure to insure a total divestiture of the land not needed by the City and will serve as a valuable tool for title examiners in the future. This Ordinance will authorize the City to transfer the right to publish ArtLinc Magazine and the Lincoln Center Series Programs to Columbine Publishing, Inc. The contract has an open-ended term but may be terminated for default. Such a contract will not only save the City time and money, but will also expand the distribution and scope of the ArtLinc Magazine. A contract of this type is desirable for both the City and Columbine Publishing to ensure the long-term stability of the Magazine. Items Relating to Self -Insurance on Workers' Compensation. A. Resolution 88-183 Revising the Self -Insurance Program. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1988 Authorizing the Director of Purchasing and Risk Management to Enter into Agreements with Aetna Casualty and Surety Company Relating to Purchase of a Surety Bond for Self -Insured Workers' Compensation Program. The City has been insured for workers' Compensation Insurance Authority (SCIA) last few years, the City has experienced The 1983 premium was $118,231 and the approximately $550,000. During that time, has been unsatisfactory with all claim office. This has resulted in communica attention being paid to employee injuries. s compensation with the State since the 1940's. Over the a rapid growth in premiums. premium for 1988 will be the claims handling service handled out of the Denver tion problems and inadequate -416- November 15, 1988 16. 17. The City is required by the Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA) to have a current Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Plan in order to be eligible for UMTA grants. The City has had a DBE Plan since 1983. During the UMTA 3-year review, the City was notified that Council must formally adopt annual updates to the Transportation Development Program (TDP) to remain in compliance with UMTA Grant regulations. Staff is requesting adoption of the amended Transportation Development Program. This is strictly a housekeeping item, as part of the grant requirement. Adoption of this update does not preclude implementation of the Strategic Plan/Privatization study Council will review at a worksession in January. This action is strictly a formality to ensure grant approval. 18. Routine Deeds and Easements. ' a. Deed of Easement from William S. Eckert, 1802 Laporte Avenue, needed for the Laporte Bridge Reconstruction Project. The existing bridge on Laporte Avenue located over the Larimer County Canal No. 2 between Frey Avenue and Bryan Avenue has been rated as structurally deficient in the State Highway Department's bridge inventory. The City has applied for and received a State grant for 80% of the cost of design, right-of-way acquisition and construction for a replacement structure. A new bridge has been designed and construction of the replacement bridge is scheduled for winter and early spring. Consideration: $10. b. Easement from Fort Collins Pipe Company, 1925 Timberline Road, needed for the Timberline Waterline Phase III. The Timberline Waterline is included in the Master Plan for the water system to improve water service on the southeastern section of the City. The waterline will extend from the intersection of Drake and Timberline Road north to the existing 20-inch line south of Spring Creek on Timberline Road. Construction is scheduled to begin February, 1989. Consideration: $6,206.64 (Industrial land Spring Creek on Timberline Road. Construction is scheduled to based on .69 sq. ft.) Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. ' Item #6. C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 1988, Annexing Approxi- mately 30.1974 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West First Annexation. -417- November 15, 1988 D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 1988 Zoning Approxi- mately 30.1974 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West First into the T Transition District. Item #7. C. Annexation. D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 1988 Zoning Aporoxi- mately 18.8318 Acres Known as the Fossil Creek West Second into the T Transition District. Item #8. A. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 1988, Zoning Approxi- mately 9.1034 Acres Known as the PACE Membership Ware- house First, into the B-P Planned Business District. Item #9. Item #10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147 1988 Appropriating $42 578 I in Unanticipated Revenue to Fund the Transportation Planning Program as Part of the Metropolitan Planning Function Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk. Item #11. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 148 1988 Appro- priating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue in Various Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between Funds. Item #12. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 149 1988 Rezoning Approximately 164.8 acres. Known as the Riverbend Second Rezoning, from the T Transition Zoning District to the RC River Corridor Zoning District. Item #13. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 150 1988 Vacating a Right -of -Way and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Quitclaim Deed Conveying the City's Interest in Certain Lands Adiacent to Warren Lake Reservoir. Item #14. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No 151 1988 Authorizing the Director of Purchasing and Risk Management to Enter Into a Contract With Columbine Publishing Inc Transferring the Right to Publish ArtLinc Magazine and Lincoln Center Series Programs , -418- November 15, 1988 Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 148, 1988, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue in Various Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between Funds, Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT Several funds require supplemental appropriations for 1988 expenditures. The Background Summary gives the details for each appropriation. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ' The intent of this ordinance is to provide City Council with a summary of a number of appropriations which need to be made before the end of the current budget year. Items considered in this "clean-up" ordinance must meet two criteria: 1. Staff perceives them to be administrative actions, or items of no controversy; or 2. In several cases, they are items which Council has already provided direction on. The appropriations being considered in this ordinance reflect a number of changes from the 1988 Budget. For example, when the 1988 Budget was adopted the City did not have an employee dental plan. Council approved the current dental plan in May, after the 1988 budget had been adopted. An item in this ordinance appropriates the expenses of that program in the Benefits Fund. Also included in this ordinance are appropriations for any unforeseen expenditures which may have occurred during the year or the addition of unanticipated revenue the City has received. Rather than present each of these items for individual consideration, staff believes that this format provides for more efficient Council review. Staff typically presents these items in November for Council's review in order to "clean-up" any outstanding issues which have arisen during the ' year. This is done primarily because we have more accurate information on which to base projected expenditure needs. -419- November 15, 1988 If these appropriations are not made, the City runs the risk of receiving an unfavorable opinion from its auditors and being in violation of the City Charter. BACKGROUND A. General Fund A $40,100 revenue shortfall is projected for the Cemeteries Fund as of October 31, 1988, due to fewer lot sales and funerals than originally projected. The Cemeteries Fund has also experienced unbudgeted expenses during 1988 totalling $7,000 due to thefts, vandalism, equipment costs, etc. A transfer from the General Fund is needed to cover the costs of these unbudgeted expenditures and the projected revenue shortfall. Funds are available in General Fund Prior Year Reserves. FROM: General Fund Prior Year Reserves FOR: Transfer to Cemeteries Fund $47,100 $47,100 The General Fund received $378 from "Recycle Something" in 1987 and $511 in 1988. These monies were generated by the City in its program of recycling paper, etc. from City offices. Natural Resources will use these monies to purchase recycling containers for use in City offices and buildings in 1988. This item appropriates $378 from prior year reserves and $511 from current year unanticipated revenues into the Natural Resources budget. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $ 378 Unanticipated Revenue (Recycle Something) 511 FOR: Natural Resources $ 889 3. Police Services sponsored a Skills Academy which provided courses in driving, firearms, and arrest control. Tuition was charged to offset the cost of the programs ($225). Police Services also aided the Drug Enforcement Administration during an investigation and was reimbursed for labor and related expenses ($5,765). The drug task force is working on an ongoing criminal investigation and will receive funds to pay for its costs estimated at $6,350. This item appropriates the unanticipated revenue into the Police budget. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $ 12,340 FOR: Police Services $ 12,340 The General Fund Equipment Reserve is designated to fund the additional lease/purchase expenses of departments. In 1988 a five-year plan for funding and replacement of new equipment requires that several departments receive additional funds in their 1988 budget. This item appropriates funds from the Equipment Reserve for lease/purchase expenses. 11 -420- November 15, 1988 ' FROM: Equipment Reserve $ 74,358 FOR: Parks Maintenance $ 19,903 Facilities 1,755 Engineering 14,494 Police 18,701 Forestry 1,573 Transfer to Recreation 7,022 Transfer to Cemeteries 10,910 5. Under the A-B Master Agreement, the City collects property taxes, as well as amounts from Larimer County under an agreement with the County, which will be used to retire debt related to the A-B public improvements. Since the Sales and Use Tax Fund services the sales and use tax debt for A-B via the Debt Service Fund, these monies need to be transferred from the General Fund to the Sales and Use Tax Fund. They will be reserved in the Sales and Use Tax Fund for A-B debt service. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $ 27,900 Unanticipated Revenue 216,777 FOR: Transfer to Sales & Use Tax Fund $244,677 6. The General Fund has set aside $250,000 of undesignated reserves to cover Worker's Compensation retroactive adjustments and audits. Actual bills are $45,491 for 1985 policy year retroactive adjustments, $30,980 for 1987 policy year retroactive adjustments, and $79,124 for the 1987 policy year audit. This item appropriates the funds to pay these bills in the General Fund. FROM: Prior Year Reserves FOR: Worker's Compensation Charges $155,595 $155,595 A 1984 liability claim was settled this year for $25,000. Per a prior agreement the Self Insurance Fund paid the claim and should now be reimbursed by the General Fund. This item appropriates the funds for transfer to the Self Insurance fund. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $ 25,000 FOR: Transfer to Self Insurance Fund $ 25,000 B. Benefits Fund The Dental Program was instituted during 1988, but was not originally budgeted during the 1988 Budget Process. The revenue received from this new program needs to be appropriated to cover the costs associated with the Dental Plan. Also, the Daycare Account experienced an unanticipated increase in participation during 1988. The increased number of medical claims being submitted along with the higher dollar amount of those claims necessitates the need to appropriate $190,000 ' from prior year reserves. Staff is attempting to control these increased costs in 1989 by adding a hospital pre -admission certification and case management program. -421- November 15, 1988 ' FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $107,007 FOR: Dental Program $64,789 Daycare Account $42,218 FROM: Prior Year Reserves $190,000 FOR: Increased Medical Claims $190,000 Communications Fund During 1988, the IOS Division of the Communications Fund received a request from the Transfort Division to develop a Bus Stop Locator Program. The cost to design and develop this system was $12,261. The revenue received from Transfort should now be appropriated in the Communications Fund to cover the cost of the Bus Stop Locator Program. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $12,261 (Received from Transfort) FOR: Communications Fund $12,261 2. During 1988, the City sponsored a Women and Minority Intern Program. An allocation of $23,000 was granted from the General Fund - City Manager's Contingency Account for this program. A transfer from the Contingency Account to the Communications Fund is needed to pay the ' expenses of the final intern on this program. After this transfer has been made, a total of $22,500 has been spent on the intern program. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $740 FOR: Communications Fund - Intern Program $740 D. Golf Fund During 1987, $315,000 was appropriated for the Clubhouse Renovation and the Golf Car/Maintenance Storage Building projects. However, not all the funds were encumbered prior to their lapsing on December 31, 1987, and the funds reverted to prior year reserves. Also, emergency pump repairs were required at both Collindale and City Park Nine during 1988. FROM: Golf Fund Prior Year Reserves $44,052 FOR: Golf Fund Unbudgeted Expenditures $44,052 E. Perpetual Care Investment earnings in.the Perpetual Care Fund are expected to exceed projections by $8,000 for'1988. Accordingly, additional appropriations are needed so that these earnings can be transferred to the Cemeteries Fund. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $8,000 , FOR: Transfer to Cemeteries Fund $8,000 -422- November 15, 1988 F. Cultural Services & Facilities This appropriation provides funding for purchase of certain capital items which were required for a major booking at the Lincoln Center. This is a one-time expense. The revenue source for this appropriation is a transfer from the General Fund - City Manager's Contingency. FROM: General Fund - City Manager's Contingency $2,641 FOR: Lincoln Center Miscellaneous Items $2,641 Transportation Services Fund - Streets Division The Streets Division was hit particularly hard due to the severity of the past winter. Wear and tear on the equipment fleet was accelerated significantly because of the heavy use it required over the winter. Equipment repair and maintenance costs were consequently much higher than expected. In addition, overtime pay and contractual snow removal services were greater than anticipated because of the severe winter. The freak windstorms which hit Fort Collins in August and September also increased the expenses of the Streets Division. Specialized contractors were hired and street crews had to work overtime for several weeks of clean-up. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $78,000 FOR: Street Maintenance/Snow Removal Costs $78,000 Transportation Services Fund - Transfort Earlier this year, the City received a state grant to fund the Commuter Pool program. This item formally appropriates $5,000 in "in -kind" services (staff time and advertising) as the City's matching share of the grant. This appropriation is necessary in order to provide the City's full matching share of the grant, no real dollars are being added to the program. FROM: Contributions -in -Aid (Better Air Campaign) $5,000 FOR: "In -Kind" Services $5,000 Technical Studies - UMTA Grant This request appropriates grant revenue which the City will receive from UMTA. These grant funds have been apportioned to the City and are part of Fort Collins FY 1988-89 UMTA entitlement. These grant funds will be used to fund the Transit Study Project being conducted by Transfort. This project is being funded jointly with CSU and no City operating funds are required to supplement this grant. IE,FU November 15, 1988 FROM: UMTA Technical Studies Grant $22,080 FOR: CSU/Transit Study $22,080 J. vital Projects Fund This item authorizes the transfer of existing appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (Street Rehabilitation Project) to the General Fund. This transfer accomplishes two objectives. First, it provides for the repayment of $75,000 to the General Fund for half the purchase price of the Pavement Management Program. This repayment is in keeping with Council direction as outlined by Ordinance #87-112. Second, this item allows the Engineering Division to perform $34,000 worth of additional street rehabilitation projects. Engineering believes that expansion of these projects is both cost-effective for the City and more efficient for the contractor, particularly in light of the favorable bid prices the City has received this year. Because of the above -listed considerations, this item transfers $41,000 from the Capital Projects Fund to the General Fund. This amount represents the difference between the $75,000 repayment and the $34,000 in additional funding which has been requested by the Engineering Division FROM: Capital Projects Fund - Street Rehabilitation Project $41,000 FOR: Transfer to General Fund $41,000 2. Council earmarked funds in the 1988 Natural Resources budget to provide for air quality monitoring of wood smoke. Transferring this money to the air quality capital fund, a fund created in 1985 for air quality monitoring projects, will allow the woodsmoke monitoring effort to extend over a multi -year period. FROM: General Fund - Natural Resources $ 17,500 FOR: Capital Projects Fund - Air Quality $ 17,500 K. Self Insurance Fund The City's self-insurance program began in October of 1987, and beginning in 1988, the program is accounted for in the Self Insurance Fund. The administrative costs of the Self Insurance Fund were originally budgeted in the General Fund for 1988. Because the Risk Management program was moved to the Self Insurance Fund after adoption of the 1988 budget, these monies must now be moved to the Self Insurance Fund. Also, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the City must report as an expenditure any claim which can be reasonably estimated and is asserted or is probable of assertion. Although financial resources have not been expended, and will not be expended until final settlement of any claim, the 1 i' -424- November 15, 1988 amount fairly reflects the probable amount of resources which will eventually be expended. 1988 appropriations need to be increased by $1,140,422 to cover probable claim costs as well as the cost of operating the risk management program. FROM: Existing Reserves For Claims $ 991,825 Unanticipated Revenue 15,000 Transfer from General Fund 126,730 FOR: Claim Coverage $ 991,825 Administrative Costs 141,730 The listed departments paid in excess of the $500 deductible for various damaged property claims. The loss fund now needs to reimburse the funds for their overpayment. FROM: Existing Appropriations f 8,283 FOR: Transfer to Equipment Fund $ 959 Transfer to Transportation Fund 113 Transfer to Light & Power Fund 5,772 Transfer to Wastewater Fund 84 Transfer to General Fund 1,355 L. Sales & Use Tax Fund ' Sales and use tax collections for 1988 are projected to be higher than originally budgeted. The 1988 budget projected a 3.5% increase and we have revised this to a 4.25% increase. As a result the transfer to the General Fund is projected to increase from $14,373,388 to $14,879,745 for an increase of $506,357. This item appropriates the additional funds for transfer to the General Fund. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $506,357 FOR: Transfer to the General Fund $506,357 M. Policemen's Pension Fund Due to the extra work involved i Pension Plan to a money -purchase are higher than expected for the appropriations are needed to cove FROM: Prior Year Reserves FOR: Consultant's Fees N. Parkland Fund n converting the Old -Hire Policemen's plan, the pension consultant's fees Policemen's Pension Fund. Additional r these costs. $ 15,000 $ 15,000 In the 1989 Recommended Budget, the Parkland Fund added some additional projects to its 1988 budget. The City will begin replacing signs as recommended in the recently adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan, irrigation and landscaping will be installed in Quinby ' Park, and an additional five acres of storm drainage property adjacent -425- November 15, 1988 to Rossborough Park will be developed along with the park. This item I appropriates the funds for the additional projects. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $101,743 FOR: Administration additional Personal Services $ 1,743 Quinby Park Development (Phase 1) 10,000 Rossborough Park additional Design & Construction 80,000 Sign Program Design 10,000 0. Conservation Trust Fund In the 1989 Recommended Budget, the Conservation Trust Fund added $100,000 to the Open Space Acquisition project. These funds ensure that money is available when the land becomes available. This item appropriates the funds for the project. FROM: Prior Year Reserves $100,000 FOR: Open Space Acquisition $100,000 P. Recreation Fund This item appropriates $7,022 in the Recreation Fund for additional I lease/purchase expenses. Please refer to item "A-4" for more detail regarding this appropriation. FROM: Transfer from General Fund $7,022 FOR: Recreation Fund Lease/Purchase Expenses $7,022" Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Ordinance No. 148, 1988 on First Reading. Director of Administrative Services Pete Dallow gave a brief presentation, responded to questions from Council and explained the reasons for the funds expenditure in current insurance claim settlements. Director of Cultural, Recreation and Library Services Mike Powers presented information regarding the cemetery fund budget cuts. City Manager Steve Burkett expressed concern regarding the reduction in revenue in the cemetery fund. Mr. Dallow explained budget fund transfers for expenditures in the Self Insurance Fund. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, expressed concern regarding the Day Care Account and the amount of funds associated with it. -426- November 15, 1988 ' Mr. Dallow clarified the function of the Day Care Account and explained how the account functions as a reimbursement account for employees by the use of payroll deductions. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 148, 1988 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Mabry. THE MOTION CARRIED. Items Relating to Self Insurance on Workers' Compensation Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT A feasibility study was conducted by the Purchasing and Risk Management division concerning this issue. It is estimated that the City will generate savings of approximately $750,000 over the next five years by self -insuring workers' compensation claims. The City intends to build a "catastrophe" fund of $500,000 over three years that would be used exclusively for serious injuries that are above expected loss levels. Each department has already budgeted for workers' compensation insurance for 1989. These funds will be adequate to administer the Self -Insurance Program for the first year. If actual losses in 1989 equal the expected losses, there will be no need to increase charges to City departments in 1990 over the amount budgeted for 1989. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 88-183 Revising the Self -Insurance Program. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1988 Authorizing the Director of Purchasing and Risk Management to Enter into Agreements with Aetna Casualty and Surety Company Relating to Purchase of a Surety Bond for Self -Insured Workers' Compensation Program. The City has been insured for workers' compensation with the State Compensation Insurance Authority (SCIA) since the 1940's. Over the last few years, the City has experienced a rapid growth in premiums. The 1983 premium was $118,231 and the premium for 1988 will be approximately $550,000. During that time, the claims handling service has been unsatisfactory with all claims handled out of the Denver office. This has resulted in communication problems and inadequate attention being paid to employee injuries. A feasibility study of self-insurance was completed by Risk Management. The results were: 1. The City expects to have claims and administration expenses of $400,000 ' in 1989. If the City continues with the SCIA, the insurance premium for 1989 would be at least $550,000. Thus, staff's estimate is that the City will save about $150,000 each year by self -insuring, in -427- November 15, 1988 addition to interest earned on the money set aside to pay claims since I all claims are not paid out in the year in which the injury occurs. 2. A local claims office, Crawford & Company, will be hired to adjust such claims. This will improve service to injured employees and provide for faster payment to medical service providers. 3. A required excess insurance policy will protect the City from catastrophic claims. The City will be responsible for $300,000 for any incident or occurrence. While this may appear to be high, the City has never experienced a paid claim over $100,000 in the last seven years. The State law requires that the City obtain a permit from the Department of Labor and Employment to self -insure workers' compensation injuries. To receive this permission, City Council must pass a resolution authorizing a Self -Insurance Program. As the City already self -insures liability claims pursuant to Resolution 88-1, amending Resolution 88-1 to include workers' compensation claims is recommended. The Department of Labor & Employment also requires that a $300,000 surety bond be posted. The bond guarantees that the surety will pay the City's workers' compensation claims in the event the City is not able to meet its financial obligations. Aetna Life & Casualty has agreed to write this bond but requires that a "General Contract of Indemnity" be signed. This contract states that the City will reimburse Aetna for any claims that Aetna may have to pay on behalf of the City. This is a standard collateral requirement for the purchase of a surety bond. ' If a permit is obtained from the Department of Labor, the Self -Insurance Program will start January 1, 1989. It should be noted that the City of Fort Collins will be joining the ranks of other cities, counties, and school districts that are already self -insured for workers' compensation. A partial list includes: Larimer County, Poudre R-I and the cities of Arvada, Aurora, Grand Junction, Greeley, Lakewood, Longmont and Westminster." Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt Resolution 88-183. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt Ordinance No. 163, 1988 on First Reading. Director of Purchasing and Risk Management Jim O'Neill gave a brief presentation and responded to questions from Council regarding the surety bond and the requirements surrounding the payment of claims set by the Department of Labor. -428- November 15, 1988 ' The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to. adopt Ordinance No. 163, 1988 on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Kirkpatrick commented on the Convention and Visitors Bureau's hiring of a new Executive Director, Karla Needan. She noted Ms. Needan will begin working for the Bureau on December 5. She also noted the policy meeting that was held by the Colorado Municipal League in Denver and commented on the two ballot issues, the Gavel Amendment and 120 Day Legislative Limit and the affect that they will have on this year's Legislature activities. Councilmember Horak expressed concern about the possible consolidation of the Chamber of Commerce with the Convention and Visitors Bureau and questioned whether Council would review that possibility. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated that when the current contract between the Convention and Visitors Bureau and the City expires in December of 1989, Council will be looking at the issue of the structure between the two organizations. Resolution 88-174 Setting Forth the Intention of the City of Fort Collins to Issue Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds for the Oakbrook II Apartments Project, Tabled for a Period not to Exceed Three Months Following is staff's memorandum on this item" "FINANCIAL IMPACT The debt service on the housing revenue bonds will be paid by revenues generated by the project. The bonds do not constitute a debt of the City of Fort Collins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On September 8, 1988, the City received a proposal from Group B-W Holdings, Inc., for the City to issue tax-exempt multifamily development revenue bonds on behalf of a non-profit housing association for the purpose of acquiring a low-income housing project in Fort Collins known as Oakbrook II Apartments. According to the proposed project financing, the project is to be owned by CMD Association for Senior Housing, a Colorado non-profit corporation. The project, consisting of 100 housing units, all of which are currently occupied by tenants with Section 8 eligibility, is located at ' 3300 Stanford Road. -429- November 15, 1988 Passage of the Inducement Resolution would allow the City to issue up to ' $4,000,000 in development revenue bonds on behalf of the CMD Association for Senior Housing for the purpose of acquiring the project and making capital improvements to the facility. Group B-W Holdings applied for the issuance of bonds according to existing policies regarding multifamily revenue bonds. When the Council reviewed the inducement resolution on October 18, 1988, the resolution was modified to include a condition that the new owner install a sprinkler system certified by the. Fire Marshall to bring the Project in to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the City Code relating to fire protection. The project is consistent with the Council goal of increasing the quality and affordability of housing within the City and would insure that the project continue to be occupied by low- and moderate -income tenants. BACKGROUND Additional information from the Council meeting of October 18, 1988, the initial review of the inducement resolution, is included for your review. At the meeting, questions were posed regarding the financing of the project and the financial capability of the proponents of the tax-exempt financing plan. The answers to these questions are provided below. What is the financial history of the proiect? The project was constructed in 1979 as a low income subsidized complex. The owner was a limited partnership whose sole general partner was a housing developer from California. In 1984, ownership was transferred to a California limited partnership in which the general partner was a corporation affiliated with a California savings and loan institution. In 1986, the savings and loan was judged insolvent, and the institution and all affiliates were taken over by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation ("FSLIC"). FSLIC put the institution in the management consignment program and tried to sell it intact. Earlier this year, FSLIC then decided to close the institution and refund all deposits. Then FSLIC decided to sell off the assets remaining in the institution's portfolio. The Oakbrook II project is one of the assets that remains to be sold. Despite the financial history, the project has been fairly successful in terms of occupancy due the availability of the Section 8 housing certificate program. What is FSLIC's purchase price for the oroiect? It has been difficult to ascertain the exact purchase price of the project. An estimate of $2.2 million in existing financing (FHA loan) and an additional $1.2 million in equity has been provided. The applicants have provided an acquisition price of $3.7 million in the application. For the transaction to occur, verification of the sources and uses of proceeds would have to be done to support the bond documents. It would not be possible or legal for the applicant to use the proceeds for any other ' -430- 1 November 15, 1988 purpose other than to acquire or improve the project for the price established by FSLIC. The proponents of the proposed financing are CMD Association for Senior Housing, a Colorado non-profit corporation, and Group B-W Holding, Inc., a partnership of two individuals, T. Michael Wiley and George Bliudzius. They have provided confidential personal financial statements which indicate their net worth. These personal financial statements are available for Council inspection. While the financial statements are sufficient fc Bond Counsel has advised that in this type important financial element is the ability of sufficient revenue to pay off the bonds. Based in the application, it appears that with currenl can generate sufficient income to pay of th project. r a project of this size, of transaction, the most the project to generate on the cash flows provided market rates, the project bonds and maintain the The current Section 8 contracts for housing assistance subsidies for this project are cancelable in 1989. While there is no guarantee that they will be renewed, it is likely that they will be renewed if the financing for the project is resolved. The next renewal is in 1994. By then, the financial stability of the project should be resolved. If federal housing subsidies are no longer available, the project would be subject to the low income guidelines established in the City policy and federal guidelines in order to maintain the tax-exempt status of the bonds. Without the Section 8 subsidy from the federal government, it is unlikely that this project would be able to compete with existing market rate rentals. Presently, there is an oversupply of rental housing in Fort Collins, there is an undersupply of subsidized housing for the low income. This project was originally planned as a low income senior housing complex and its use is well established. Other housing projects adequately meet and provide additional' amenities at competitive market rates. In order to compete with market rate rentals, substantial improvements would have to be made to the existing structure and other enhancements would have to be made. -431- November 15, 1988 The applicant has expressed their willingness to provide a sprinkler system ' consistent with the guidelines established by the Poudre Fire Authority. Since this project was originally built as a Section 8 elderly program complex, the accessibility by handicapped individuals is being met. Will this proiect be exempt from paving property tax? According to the Larimer County Assessor's office, the project has been paying property tax. The project is currently occupied by low income elderly tenants with Section 8 eligibility. According to Colorado Revised Statutes, Sec. 39-3-101, structures owned by non-profit charitable organizations occupied by single individuals 62 years of age or over with low to moderate incomes may be eligible to receive a property tax exemption through application to the property tax administrator. The applicant has anticipated and included an annual payment of property tax in the cash flow projection through the life of the bonds and fully expects to pay the tax. The applicant has also expressed willingness to covenant to either not apply for property tax exemption or to pay an equivalent payment in lieu of property tax, should the Council so desire." Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Resolution 88-174. Finance Director Alan Krcmarik made a brief presentation and responded to ' questions from Council regarding Payment in Lieu of Taxes and covenants for property taxes and commented on the total purchase price of the property. Mike Wiley of B-W Holdings, Inc. summarized the ownership entity regarding the property as a limited partnership. Mr. Krcmarik explained the City's actual and implied liability status and discussed the industrial development revenue bonds issued for multi -family housing projects. He also indicated the bonds are not associated with a debt in any legal sense and do not place the City under any legal obligation. Loring Harkness, of Ballard, Spahr, Andrews, & Ingersoll, Special Bond Counsel to the City, spoke of the statute which authorizes the City to issue the bonds and of the bond limitations. He also discussed the requirements involved in the payment of the bonds and the responsibility of the City to disclose all of the facts to the purchaser. He spoke of the City's secondary liability with respect to due diligence and disclosure and commented on the primary liability being placed upon the underwriters and obligors. In addition, he noted the contractual documents that relate to the bonds will provide for indemnification by the owner of the property to the City for any securities or liabilities. Mr. Krcmarik gave background information .on the CMD Association for Senior Housing. I -432- November 15, 1988 ' Mr. Wiley summarized the design possibilities of the facility and the property use and options that are available. He also presented information on utility costs and maintenance upkeep. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, expressed concern over the use of IDR Bonds for housing purchases and asked about the realtor being used in the exchange. He also questioned why the City is paying a commission and requested information on the minimal holdings throughout the state that Mr. Wiley spoke of earlier. Mr. Krcmarik noted the provisions in the Federal Internal Revenue Service Code which allow tax exemption from municipal issues and he spoke of the commission payment being an eligible cost for the use of the bond proceeds. He also clarified that the City is not paying the commission, and stated the commission would be paid by Group B-W. He stated the bonds will be paid back by the renters of the facility. Mr. Wiley stated that Federal Properties is the realtor in the exchange and stated the principal holder lives in California and is employed by Federal Properties. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to table Resolution 88-174 for a period not to exceed three months until a ' written contractual agreement is provided to Council. Councilmember Winokur suggested the need for additional information regarding the appraised value of the property. Councilmember Maxey withdrew his motion to table Resolution 88-174. Councilmember Winokur stated he would like to support the motion but needs more information before he can do so. City Manager Burkett suggested adding conditions to the Resolution indicating expiration and time limits, should the conditions not be met. Councilmember Mabry stated that additional conditions to the Resolution are unacceptable. He also commented that there is not enough information about the purchase price of the property and he expressed concern regarding the legitimacy of the contract and the people who are involved. He noted that Council has never seen a property appraisal. He stated he would support tabling the motion. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated based on the information presented she did not believe it would be good public policy to support the Resolution and stated she would not be supporting the motion. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to table Resolution 88-174 for three months, during which time additional ' information regarding the current appraisal and the written contractual -433- November 15, 1988 agreement for purchase be received. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Horak and Kirkpatrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 152, 1988, Revising Chapter 95, Division 2 of the City Code Relating to Street Oversizing, Postponed Until December 20 Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "FINANCIAL IMPACT This ordinance will revise the existing street oversizing ordinance to provide a financially stable program for the construction of oversized streets. Staying within an annual budget to avoid debt has a downside, which could mean that not all oversized streets can be built as the City would prefer. There are two funding sources for the street oversizing fund. With this ordinance, the fees are revised to provide revenue based on the current land use model. The City will contribute $700,000 per year to the program, but for the first three years, the majority of these monies will be used to retire debt. The uses of the fund have been clarified, and a method to limit expenditures in order to balance the street oversizing fund has been developed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following street oversizing ordinance changes and two fee structure options represent several years' work in providing a financially stable program. The street oversizing program represents a balance of new development and community-at-]arge responsibilities, finances available and legal aspects. It took an attitude of cooperation and compromise to come to this solution, which is believed to be in the best interest of the entire community. Two fee options are presented for Council consideration: OPTION "A" - Uses the fee schedule based on traffic impacts of land uses. OPTION "8" - Lowers the Industrial category fees to provide an economic incentive to industrial uses. The revisions to the street oversizing ordinance are based on previous work by the City Council, the Street Oversizing Task Force, and City staff. There are significant modifications to the program discussed below: A new distribution model of street costs based on the residential access standard rather than the residential street standard. Implementation of criteria to evaluate the City's participation in the street oversizing costs of an outlying development. -434- November 15, 1988 1 o Implementation of a percentage payment method to limit annual expenditures of the fund to only those revenues received annually. A major change in the ordinance is the expansion of the fee categories from three to five to be more responsive to and reflective of the traffic impacts of the industrial and commercial land uses in Fort Collins. Staff believes that the wider range of fee categories is more indicative of the types of uses in the City and more equitably correlates the land use with the traffic impact. The fees in Option "A" have been expanded from three to five categories. Option "B" also uses the expanded fee categories, but has lower industrial fees. The industrial fees were reduced by about 50% to equate with residential traffic impacts. Because the industrial fee is lower, the residential and commercial fees in this option are slightly higher. This option is proposed as a way to give all industrial uses an across the board economic incentive to offset street oversizing fees. Staff has notified by mail over 200 developers, contractors, architects, engineers, and other interested persons of these changes to the fee structure, has provided detailed descriptions of all changes proposed to the City Code, and has asked for comments in order to develop the final ordinance. Attached is the one response staff received on the draft ' ordinance and staff's explanation to those concerns. Staff is seeking Council direction to pursue additional research into other alternatives to provide additional financial incentives for industrial development through reduced street oversizing fees. A memorandum entitled "Additional Opportunities for Financial Incentives for Fort Collins Base Industries", which was sent under separate cover, details some additional financial avenues. During the past twenty months, much work has been done on the street oversizing issue. Based on the work of past citizen committees, public input, and discussions with Council, a number of modifications to the street oversizing program have been proposed. Staff has now developed in final form an ordinance that provides a sound funding mechanism for street oversizing and balances the needs of the development community and the citizens of Fort Collins. Council has taken two significant steps toward resolution of the street oversizing issue: 1. The outstanding Street Oversizing debt was reduced by $1.2 million when Council authorized payment of this amount from budget savings. ' 2. Council has budgeted $700,000 annually for the City portion of the Street Oversizing Program. -435- November 15, 1988 The next step is the necessary Code amendment to modify the street ' oversizing program. Approval of this ordinance will complete the development of the new program for implementation in January 1989. The revisions to the Code address the following issues: - The land use breakdown, typical section model, and cost distribution model used to calculate street oversizing fees have been extensively revised. The residential standard has been converted to an equivalent residential access portion. Details of these changes were provided in Appendices E and F of the staff Report on Street Oversizing, dated November 19, 1987. - Development proposals will be rated against criteria for the logical extension of infrastructure to determine eligibility for street oversizing reimbursement. These criteria were presented in the report from the Street Oversizing Task Force, dated October 1, 1987. - Of the $700,000 in City funds available annually for the Street Oversizing Program, the City will dedicate $600,000 per year over the next three years to retire the remaining debt. During this time, the City's ability to reimburse developers for street oversizing costs will be limited to the $100,000 in remaining City funds plus revenues received from street oversizing fees. This ordinance will limit annual expenditures to the revenues available, by establishing a method to pay ' all developers a percentage of each developer's total billing for street oversizing. - The street oversizing fee categories have been expanded from three to five to be more responsive to the traffic impacts of the types of uses in Fort Collins. Although the changes in the land use breakdown and typical section model already significantly reduce the proposed fees for 1989, staff began researching the trips generated from different land uses to better correlate the traffic impacts with the street oversizing fee paid. The Residential Category "A" continues as a fee charged per dwelling unit. As a result of this trip generation study, the industrial category was split into two distinct categories; Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial. The Light Industrial Category "B" is for small industries or uses that have medium traffic impacts, including uses such as small warehouses, non-metal manufacturing plants, public schools, and churches. The Heavy Industrial Category "C" is for large traffic I intensive uses such as freight terminals, ;mining operations, and major products manufacturing. -436- November 15, 1988 The commercial category also became two distinct categories; Retail Commercial and General Commercial. The Retail Commercial Category "D" is for shops or stores engaged in the sale of goods or services to the general public, including restaurants, banks, hotels, service stations, and retail stores. The General Commercial Category "E" is for other business uses with a slightly lower traffic impact such as administrative offices, wholesale or business service, insurance offices, or veterinary animal clinics. Staff believes these categories are more indicative of the types of uses in Fort Collins and that this modification will provide some economic incentives to small business and industry. OPTIONS Staff has provided two options on the fee structure for Council consideration. Both fee structures use the expanded categories: OPTION "A" - The street oversizing fees have been recalculated into five ' categories. OPTION "B" - It has been suggested that lowering the industrial fees still further could be one way of stimulating or attracting industrial development to the City. This option would charge light industrial uses about the same per acre as a single family residential use. The residential and commercial fees would have to be raised to offset the lowering of the industrial fees. CATEGORY/USE CURRENT FEES OPTION "A" OPTION "B" "A"/Residential $ 622/D.U. 584/D.U. 614/D.U. "B"/Light Industrial 5,252/ac 3,687/ac "C"/Heavy Industrial 7,463/ac 7,003/ac 5,530/ac "E"/General Commercial 10,504/ac 11,061/ac "D"/Retail Commercial 14,926/ac 14,005/ac 14,748/ac IMPLEMENTATION Implementation of the adopted ordinance will commence in January of 1989. ' A handout is being prepared to explain the modified -street oversizing program clearly and concisely. -437- November 15, 1988 ' This handout will be sent to all developers and others involved in construction. Hopefully this will aid in explaining the new program. The budget for percentage reimbursement will be examined and set prior to January 1989. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance with either fee structure. Both fee structures presented would generate the same revenue for the street oversizing fund. Staff is also seeking direction and authorization to pursue additional research into other alternatives to provide additional financial incentives for industrial development through reduced fees." Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to adopt Ordinance No. 152, 1988 on First Reading. Civil Engineer Matt Baker gave a slide presentation, reviewed the Ordinance provisions and responded to questions. He explained the residential fee structure per acre in comparison to the industrial fees. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, questioned the criteria that was used to evaluate the community benefit of the street oversizing project. Bob Zakely, Fort Collins resident, noted there are several major issues that still need to be resolved. He stated that criteria for the fees ' charged in the outlying subdivisions needs to be further developed and charging twice for the same service needs to be eliminated. City Attorney Steve Roy clarified the difference between those areas eligible for reimbursement and those not eligible due to street construction requirements. Councilmember Horak encouraged more review of the two proposed options and urged additional discussion of the item at the second meeting in December. Councilmember Estrada stated the item was confusing due to the lack of criteria and information provided. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she was interested in combining aspects of the street oversizing program with the special improvement district plans. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to postpone consideration of Ordinance No. 152, 1988 until December 20, 1988 to allow additional staff review and inclusion of the community benefit criteria. Yeas: Councilmember Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. -438- November 15, 1988 IOrdinance No. 164, 1988, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue in Various Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between Funds, Adopted Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This ordinance relates to several items concerning the Street Oversizing Fund. Specifically, it appropriates prior year reserves in the General Fund and Capital Projects Fund for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund. These monies are proposed to be used to allow the Street Oversizing Fund to repay the outstanding debt it has accumulated. Item #1 appropriates $538,000 from General Fund prior year reserves for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund. These funds will be used to retire the unfunded liability of the Street Oversizing Fund as identified by the Street Oversizing Task Force. Items #2 and #3 appropriate prior year reserves in the Capital Projects Fund for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund. These funds will be used to pay off two promissory notes which were taken by developers to fund street improvements. These funds will be used to repay a $286,000 note to ' Everitt Enterprises for oversizing Harmony Road in SID #78 and a S400,000 note to Dueck Enterprises for oversizing Lemay Avenue in SID #86. These appropriations are necessary to carry out Council direction as discussed at the worksession of June 14th. BACKGROUND The Street Oversizing Task Force identified $538,000 as the unfunded liability of the Street Oversizing Fund when it was created. This item appropriates Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund. These monies will finally eliminate the outstanding obligations of the Street Oversizing Fund, as well as pay off other notes and credits owed by the fund. FROM: General Fund - Prior Year Reserves $538,000 FOR: Transfer to Street Oversizing Fund $538,000 2. A transfer from the Capital Projects Fund (114 Cent Necessary) has been proposed to pay off two promissory notes in the Street Oversizing Fund. This item appropriates prior year reserves in the Capital Projects Fund for transfer to the Street Oversizing Fund. FROM: Capital Projects Fund - Prior Year Reserves $686,000 FOR: Transfer to Street Oversizing $686,000 ' 3. A transfer from the Capital Projects Fund is proposed to pay off two promissory notes which were taken by developers to fund street -439- November 15, 1988 improvements. These notes were issued because the Street Oversizing Fund did not have sufficient cash at the time to cover those expenses. The two notes are $286,000 to Everitt Enterprises for oversizing Harmony Road in SID #78 and $400,000 to Dueck Companies for oversizing Lemay Avenue in SID #86. This item is necessary to appropriate the Capital Projects funds which are transferred to the Street Oversizing Fund in item #2. This appropriation will allow the Street Oversizing Fund to pay off the SID #78 and #86 notes. FROM: Transfer from Capital Projects (114 Cent Necessary) $686,000 FOR: Street Oversizing Debt (Payment of SID #78 and #86 Notes) $686,000" Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on this item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 164, 1988 on First Reading. City Manager Burkett gave a brief presentation and responded to questions from Council. City Attorney Roy noted the money appropriated to retire the note could not be spent without first having the appropriation to authorize the expenditure. Loring Harkness, of Ballard, Spahr, Andrews, & Ingersoll, Special Bond Counsel to the City, spoke on the two issues of SID Bonds from the City and the related oversizing fund notes. City Manager Burkett explained the use of sales tax funds and that funds would not be used for anything other than voter approved projects. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, objected to the transfer of the quarter -cent sales and use tax. City Attorney Roy noted the liability upon the City should the debt not be paid back. Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to amend the Ordinance under Item #3 by deleting reference to SID #86 and removing the "s" in notes, by changing the fund transfer amount in Capital Projects from $686,000 to $286,000, and finally changing the payment of the SID #78 note to $286,000. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, requested a clarification on the concept of using money from another fund to pay off a debt incurred on the City's oversizing project. 1 L' -440- November 15, 1988 Councilmember Maxey stated he would be supporting the amendment, although he was not totally comfortable with borrowing funds from future projects to cover obligations. The vote on Councilmember Kirkpatrick's amendment was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. The vote on Councilmember Estrada's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 164, 1988 as amended on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Estrada, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Horak. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 88-186 Adopting and Approving the Bessett Reservation Plat, Reserving the Land Described Therein for Future Acquisition for Public Street Purposes, Appointing a Board of Appraisers, and Fixing the Time and Place of Meeting for the Hearing by Said Board of Appraisers Denied Following is staff's memorandum on this item:' "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Last July, Council received a memorandum from staff regarding development activity on Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of Evergreen Park, commonly known as the Bessett Property. The site is located north of Conifer Street, between Red Cedar Circle and Blue Spruce Drive and is approximately 5.34 acres in size. The subject property falls within the State -approved alignment and right-of-way for the section of the Fort Collins Parkway/Expressway as determined by the approved Environmental Impact Statement and the State's preliminary engineering plans. The owner of the property, James Bessett, has inquired about development of the property for an office building. Staff believes it is important that this property be reserved from development in order to protect future public decisions by the City and State regarding this planned public facility. The memorandum also identified certain options for the City, including acquiring, condemning, reserving, or doing nothing regarding the subject lots. The staff recommendation was to obtain a "reservation for future acquisition" of the subject property pursuant to State statutes. Staff did not receive any objections from Council, and therefore has proceeded with the preparation of the attached resolution authorizing the staff to continue with the "reservation" process. ' On November 10, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the reservation of the property at a special public hearing, and has made a -441- November 15, 1988 recommendation to City Council by pursuant to State statutes. its adoption of a reservation plat Colorado law provides in Section 31-23-220, C.R.S., that the Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to make surveys for the exact location of the lines of a street in the City and to make a plat of the area thus surveyed showing the land which the Board recommends be reserved for future acquisition for public street purposes. The Board may transmit the plat to the City Council with the Board's estimate of the time within which the lands shown on the plats as street locations should be acquired by the municipality. Thereafter, the City Council, by resolution, may approve, reject or modify the plat and fix the period of time for which the street locations shown on the plat shall be reserved for future acquisition. If the Council determines to approve the plat, it shall appoint a board of three appraisers to ascertain the fair market value of the acquisition. The names of the appraisers recommended for appointment are being sent under separate cover. Further, the Council must fix the time and place of meetings for hearings by the Board of Appraisers. It is recommended that the hearing be set for January 5, 1989. Staff believes that one hearing would be sufficient. There is a detailed process by which the appraisers make their determination and report the determination back to the City Council for final decision. Staff believes it is in the best interest of the City that a reservation of these lots be obtained at this time in order to reduce the ultimate cost to the State Department of Highways of acquisition of these lots at a later time if development should occur in the interim. The recommended period of reservation is for 5 years, ending on December 31, 1993. The City is acting primarily in an accommodation capacity to the State in attempting to accomplish the reservation of this land for the Parkway/Expressway. The State does not have the same authority as the City to reserve the right-of-way for public street purposes. Action by Council on this reservation does not prejudge future decisions by either the City Council or the State relative to final approval of the Fort Collins Parkway/Expressway. The City has received no assurances from the State that any of the City's costs with respect to this reservation will be reimbursed to the City by the State. The State has no funding to acquire any portion of the Parkway/Expressway, east of Highway 287 (see attached map). The section of the Parkway/Expressway alignment that is the subject of this recommended reservation is not involved in the supplemental Environmental Impact Statement under preparation by the State Department of Highways. The subject property lies within the Parkway/Expressway alignment that has already received approval and has been preliminarily engineered. It is the lack of appropriate funding that prevents the State from going forward with this part of the project. 1 -442- November 15, 1988 ' Staff believes that there is sufficient municipal benefit to the ultimate construction of the Parkway/Expressway to justify the expenditure of City funds to secure this reservation for the State. Staff has also discussed this possible reservation with the owner of the property who has expressed his willingness to negotiate a settlement in the form of a lease agreement which would accomplish the same end. If a settlement can be negotiated, the lengthy reservation process would not be necessary. A negotiated settlement is preferred by staff for several reasons: 1. It is a less cumbersome and time consuming process. 2. The terms and conditions of the settlement would have the same force and effect of the more formal "reservation" process, including the agreed -upon dollar amount and the City's ability to terminate the "reservation" at will. 3. The City could cancel the lease should the State receive funding in the future and be willing to assume its obligation to acquire the property. 4. The owner of the property has agreed to negotiate in good faith to reach a fair settlement with the City and thereby avoid undue delay that could be caused by the formal reservation process. ' If these negotiations are successful, the exact terms of the settlement will be submitted to and reviewed by City Council at a future date and authorization formally sought for the City Manager to enter into such an agreement in lieu of formal reservation. The City Council has three options before it: 1. Defeat the reservation resolution and plat. The owner of the property would proceed with development of the property in accordance with City development codes and standards. 2. Adopt the reservation resolution and plat. This would instruct staff to proceed to obtain the reservation pursuant to State Statutes. 3. Adopt the reservation resolution and plat, but instruct staff to first wouia oe me same as it ine propercv naa peen rormaiiv reservea. finis would permit staff to negotiate with the, owner of the property who has expressed a desire to lease the property to the City in lieu of a reservation to save time. If a settlement can be reached, the terms and conditions would be brought back to the City Council for its approval. Staff recommends Option 3." ' Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Resolution 88-186. -443- November 15, 1988 Planning Director Tom Peterson gave a brief presentation, responded to ' questions from Council and explained the interest the owner has in developing the property. City Manager Steve Burkett clarified where the funds originated and that they have been appropriated for such use. Traffic Engineer Rick Ensdorff explained the preliminary design done by the State and approved for that section of the parkway. He noted that information on relocation and access ramps was based on the State's judgement from the late 1970's and early 1980's when the preliminary design was completed. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, expressed concern regarding the money to be spent on the property and the risks involved. Councilmember Maxey stated he had been researching the routing possibilities and noted he was not comfortable with the financial risks. Mayor Stoner stated he would be supporting the Resolution thus showing the State Highway Department that Fort Collins is committed to having an arterial or a parkway in that area of Fort Collins. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Resolution 88-186 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, and Stoner. Nays: I Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, Maxey, and Winokur. THE MOTION FAILED. Ordinances Submitting Various Charter Amendments to the City Voters at the March 7. 1989 Regular City Election. Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After discussion at the October 25 work session, Council gave direction that ordinances be prepared to submit a series of proposed Charter amendments to voters at the March 7, 1989 regular election. To meet legal deadlines, the ordinances submitting the amendments to the March ballot must be adopted no later than December. Final passage will be scheduled For December 20. Council directed that the following submission ordinances be prepared for discussion at a regular Council meeting: A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning Direct Election of the Mayor. ' -444- November 15, 1988 Al. (Housekeeping Option to Item A) Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning the Month of Regular Municipal Elections and the Procedure to Fill Council Vacancies. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning Conflicts of Interest. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning Signature Requirements for Initiative and Referendum Petitions. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning Proceedings for Recall of Elective Officers of the City. E. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of City, Deleting Provisions Concerning Circulators. F. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of City, Concerning Payments in Lieu of Utilities. No. 158, 1988, Submitting a the Registered Electors of the Compensation for Petition No. 159, 1988, Submitting a the Registered Electors of the Taxes on Account of City G. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning Special Assessment Securities in Special Improvement Districts. H. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Eliminating the Surplus and Deficiency Fund as a General Revenue Source. I. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1988, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City, Concerning Penalties for Violations of the Charter. BACKGROUND A. DIRECT ELECTION OF THE MAYOR: (Article II, Sections I(a), I(b), l(d), 2, 4, and 18 and Article VII1, Section 2] This subject was examined at length by the Charter Review Committee in 1986. The committee's majority recommendation was that a Charter amendment providing for a directly -elected Mayor be placed on the 1987 election -445- November 15, 1988 ballot. Council considered that proposal and chose not to place the matter I on the ballot at that time. Based on discussion at the October 25 work session, an ordinance has been prepared to submit an amendment that would provide that: o The Mayor is to be directly elected by the City voters beginning with the regular city election in 1991. o Nomination and election of the Mayor is to be at -large. o The Mayor is to serve as one of the three slat -large" Councilmembers for a 2-year term. o The term of the Council -elected Mayor will continue to be 1-year pending the first popular election of the Mayor in 1991. o The Assistant Mayor will continue to be elected by Council from among its members for a 1-year term before and after the direct election of the Mayor begins in 1991. o The Assistant Mayor will automatically fill any vacancy in the office of Mayor until the next regular election. o Separate procedures for filling a Mayoral vacancy are established I for vacancies to be filled more than 45 days and less than 45 days prior to a regular election. o The Council is to establish by ordinance a date and time for the election of the Assistant Mayor. The proposed amendment differs from the proposal of the Charter Review Committee, which recommended a 4-year Mayoral term and included additional duties and functions as powers of the Mayor. The proposed ordinance would submit to the voters the recommended changes in the Charter as outlined above, and would accomplish housekeeping changes outlined in Item Al. Should Council decide against placing the issue of direct election of the Mayor on the March ballot, staff recommends that Council consider placing an alternative amendment on the ballot to accomplish housekeeping changes (Item Al). IIVVJLALLr11IU Vr[IVIVJ - MrnIL LLLVIIVIIJ MIVU VVVIIVIL VlUV 11U Article II, Section I(d) and 18 and Article VIII, Section The date of regular municipal elections was changed to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March in odd -numbered years when a provision for at -large run-off elections was approved by the voters in 1981. previously, , regular elections were held in April. The proposed amendment would change the month of regular city elections back to April and would also make a -446- November 15, 1988 ' minor amendment to change the word "biannual" (which technically means twice each year) to "biennial" (which means once every two years). The housekeeping amendment would also address a potential difficulty in the current procedure to fill a Council vacancy. The Charter requires that Council make an appointment to fill any vacancy on the Council within 45 days, until the next regular election. The current provision overlooks the fact that if a Council vacancy occurs just prior to a regular election, and when the Councilmember leaving office is at mid-term, there would not be sufficient time for nomination petitions to be circulated and filed for candidates to run for the vacated office (the nomination petition deadline is 25 days before the election), for a ballot to be prepared (ballots must be printed and in the hands of the Clerk at least 10 days prior to the election), or for the legal notice of the election to be published (the deadline to publish the notice is 10 days prior to the election). The Charter, in requiring that the vacant position be placed on the ballot, requires an act that will not be legally possible within a period of time immediately before the election. Two options are presented for Council's consideration to address the question of how a vacancy would be filled in the 45-day period just before an election when the remaining term of the Councilmember leaving office is more than 2 years. ' Option A would provide for the current (pre -election) Council to appoint an individual to fill the vacant position for the balance of the unexpired term. Option 8 would provide for the appointment to be deferred until a maximum of 45 days after the newly elected Councilmembers are seated, with the term of office of the appointed Councilmember to run for the remainder of the unexpired term. B. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: [Article IV, Section 9] The repeal and reenactment of Article IV, Section 9, of the City Charter is being recommended by staff in order to provide City officials and employees with better guidelines and definitions regarding conflicts of interest. Section 9 of Article IV of the Charter presently reads as follows: No officer or employee of the city shall be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in the purchase from or sale to the city of any land, materials, or supplies or of services except personal services as an officer or employee. Any violation of this Section, with the knowledge express or implied of the person or corporation contracting with the city, shall render the contract voidable by the City Manager or the Council. The proposed new Charter language would pertain not only to purchases and sales, but also to other kinds of situations involving potential conflicts -447- November 15, 1988 of interest, such as staff recommendations on proposed courses of action ' and the decision -making of City Council and City boards and commissions. RECENT CHANGES: The Council initially discussed possible amendments to the provisions of the City Charter pertaining to conflicts of interest at a work session on July 26, 1988. Following that discussion, Ordinance No. 112, 1988, which submitted a proposed Charter amendment concerning conflicts of interest, was presented to the Council on August 16, 1988. On that date, the Council determined not to present this proposed Charter amendment to the voters at the November election. It recommended instead that the matter be tabled for further consideration, with a view toward presenting the matter to the citizens at the March, 1989 election. At the second work session, on October 25, the Council again considered the matter and recommended that the staff include within the Charter itself all relevant definitions which would be used in interpretation of the new rules of conduct concerning conflicts of interest. (The earlier proposal would have defined these phrases by ordinance rather than in the Charter.) Other changes which resulted from the October 25 work session include: (1) adding the definition of "relative" to the ballot language, so as to specify the parties who would be prohibited from making sales to the City; and (2) revising the "violations" provisions so as to give the City discretion in deciding whether monies received under a voided contract should be refunded to the City. ' The effects of this proposed Charter amendment, as recently modified, are described below. City Contracts: Sales and purchases would be separately treated under the proposed amendment. The absolute prohibition presently contained in the Charter would still exist with regard to the sale to the City of any real or personal property, etc., and would apply to Councilmembers and all employees of the City. However, the prohibition would not apply to members of any authority, board, committee or commission of the City or relative thereof other than the members of the City Council. As to purchases from the City, the only purchases that would be permitted by officers or employees would be purchases of property offered for sale at an established price, and not by bid or auction, on the same terms and conditions as to all other members of the general public. Any contract made in violation of these rules would be voidable by the City and a party obtaining payment by reason of any such contract could be required, at the option of the City, to forthwith return to the City all or any designated portion of the monies received from the City under the contract. Conflicts of Interest: New rules would be established in the Charter governing ,the conduct of City ' officials and employees regarding conflicts of interest that did not -448- November 15, 1988 ' involve actual contracts with the City. The general rule would be that any officer or employee having any financial or personal interest in a decision of the City would be required to formally disclose such interest and to thereafter refrain from participating in or attempting to influence the decision of the City regarding the matter in which he or she was personally or financially interested. Definitions: "Financial interest" would be defined in the new Charter provision to mean any interest equated with money or its equivalent. Certain kinds of specified interests would be considered remote or speculative and would be excluded from the meaning of "financial interest." Conclusion: In combination, staff believes that these changes would better address the recurring questions of conflicts of interest with which public employees and officials are frequently faced. The goal of the changes is to provide more definite rules and definitions but, at the same time, to leave sufficient flexibility within the rules so as to permit their application to any number of different fact situations with which the public official may be faced. ' G. JIGNAIUHt HtUU1HtMtN0 hUH INIIIA11Vt ANU HtftHtNUUM PtI11lMi: (Article X, Sections 1(c) and 4(e) and Article XI, Section I) Based on Council's discussion at the October 25 work session, three options are presented to increase signature requirements for initiative petitions. Option A would require that an initiative petition be signed by at least 5% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular city election. The requirement would be the same to request the placement of the issue on either a regular or special election ballot. Option B would require that an initiative petition be signed by at least 5% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular city election to place the initiative on a regular election ballot, and 10% of the same figure to place the initiative on a special election ballot. Option C would require that an initiative petition be signed by at least 5% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular city election to place the initiative on a regular election ballot. For placement on a special election ballot, the requirement would be 15% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular city election or 15% of the total number of registered electors as of the date of commencement of initiative proceedings, whichever is less. The proposed amendment would require referendum petitions to be signed by ' registered city electors equal in number to at least 5% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular city election. There -449- November 15, 1988 would be no percentage differential for placing the referendum on a regular ' or special election ballot. The amendment would also include a change to the section of the Charter specifying the signature requirements for referendum and initiative petitions for a franchise ordinance. The proposed language would replace specific signature requirements with a general reference to the article on initiative and referendum. The Charter presently requires that an initiative petition be signed by registered voters equal to at least 10% of the number of ballots cast at the last regular city election to place the initiative on a regular election ballot, and at least 15% of the same figure to place the initiative on a special election ballot. A referendum requires a petition signed by registered voters equal to at least 10Y of the number of ballots cast at the last regular city election. Under state law, statutory cities require that initiative and referendum petitions be signed by a number equal to at least 5% of the number of "registered voters". The statutory guideline is somewhat vague in that there is room for interpretation concerning the point in time at which the number of "registered voters" is to be determined. Basing the computation on the number registered at the last regular city election would establish a figure that does not change for two years. The "current" number of registered voters can change drastically over even a short period of time. ' Under the Colorado State Constitution, the maximum signature requirement would be 10Y of the "registered electors" for a referendum petition and 15% of the "registered electors" for an initiative petition. There is no difference between the requirements for placing the issue on a regular or special election ballot. As with the statutory requirement, there are no clear guidelines in the Constitution as to whether "registered electors" means current registered electors, those registered on the day of the election or as of the last preceding city election, or those registered on the date that circulation of the petition begins. Setting the signature requirement at a percentage comparable to or slightly less than the requirement for statutory cities would be a reasonable incremental change. In contrast, if the signature requirements were to be set at the Constitutional maximums, a petition would require almost as many signatures as the average voter turnout for a regular city election. The following initiative and referendum comparisons are based on these figures: "Current" voter registration (as of 10127188) 55,590 Ballots cast at 1987 regular election 9,113 Voters registered 1987 election 45,299 -450- November 15, 1988 Initiative Comparison Constitutional maximum (based on "current") 8,339 Statutory requirement (based on "current") 2,780 Current Charter - regular election 911 Current Charter - special election 1,367 Requirement - Option A - any election 2,265 Requirement - Option 8 or C - regular election 2,265 Requirement - Option 8 - special election 4,530 Requirement - Option C - special election 6,795 (Lesser of 6,795 or 8,339) Referendum Comparison Constitutional maximum (based on "current") 5,559 Statutory requirement (based on "current") 2,780 Current Charter - any election 911 Requirement under proposal 2,265 (Article IX, Sections 1(a) and 1(b) and Article IX, Section 2(e)] Currently, the Charter appears to allow at -large registered electors to recall any elected officers, including District Council representatives. The proposed Charter amendment would clarify that the right to recall District Council representatives is reserved to registered electors of the Council District in question, that is, those same voters who are entitled to vote for a successor of the incumbent. The amendment also deletes an alternate method of calculation (15% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular City election, or 30% for a second recall attempt) which would likely always be more than the Constitutional maximum, and preserves the requirement for recall at the maximum allowed by the State Constitution (25% of the entire vote cast at the last preceding election for all the candidates for office which the incumbent sought to be recalled occupies). The 15% requirement would be 6,795 signatures, and 30% would be 13,590 signatures. These figures would far exceed the Constitutional maximum which is the figure computed under the second method. It is confusing to retain the first option for calculating the recall signature requirements when it wi11 never be used in practice and exceeds the Constitutional limitation. The proposed amendment also makes_a housekeeping change to the Charter to allow petitioners to submit a 200-word affidavit setting out the charges against the incumbent to be recalled. The current 300-word limitation is in conflict with the 200-word limit set out in the State Constitution. E. COMPENSATION FOR PETITION CIRCULATORS: [Article VIII, Section 4(c), Article IX, Sections 2(c) and 2(d), and ' Article X, Sections 4(c) and 4(d)] -451- November 15, 1988 ' A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling has overruled the Charter provisions concerning compensation to circulators of nominating, initiative, referendum, or recall petitions. The Court held that prohibitions against payment to petition circulators impermissibly burden First Amendment political speech rights in two ways: (1) the prohibitions limit the number of voices who will convey the proponents message and therefore the size of the audience the proponents can reach, and (2) the prohibitions make it less likely that proponents will garner the necessary number of signatures. In reaching this ruling, the Court rejected the argument that professional circulators were any more likely to accept false signatures than a volunteer who was motivated solely by an interest in having the proposition placed on the ballot. To comply with the Court's ruling, this Charter amendment would delete provisions which prohibit compensation to petition circulators. F. PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES: (Article XI1, Section 6) During the October 25 work session on Charter Amendments, and in subsequent discussion with Council members, Council related a concern that the City Charter required in lieu of taxes fees to be collected from city -owned utilities in an amount at least as much as would be collected from property taxes and franchise fees if the utility were privately owned. The proposed amendment to the City Charter would eliminate the mandate to ' charge ILOT fees to city -owned utilities, but still allow them to be charged by ordinance adopted by the City Council. In 1986, a case involving a payment in lieu of tax fee by the Philadelphia Water Department, ACORN v GUARINO, -Pa. Cmnwlth. - 512 A.2d 1312 (1986), the court held in summary that the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter did not specifically authorize such a payment in lieu of taxes for the Water Department and therefore, the court held that there was no legal basis for this payment based upon the Charter. The City Attorney has advised that the effect of this ruling, as well as others, is that the City Charter is the legal mechanism that enables or authorizes payment in lieu of taxes, and that authorization must be specific. To delete specific reference to any particular utility in the Charter would preclude in lieu of tax payments from that utility. Staff examined three options with regard to in lieu of tax payments by City -owned utilities. Option A This option would amend the City Charter to remove water and wastewater utilities from being subject to payments in lieu of taxes into the general fund. I -452- November 15, 1988 ' Pros: would reduce water and wastewater utility rates for City residents. Cons: would reduce general fund revenue used for basic services by $885,048 (1989); would adversely impact the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions. Option B This option would amend the City Charter to remove water and wastewater utilities from being subject to payments in lieu of taxes into the general fund and to limit payment by the electric utility to NOT MORE THAN City taxes and franchise permits if the utility were privately owned. Pros: would reduce utility rates for City residents. Cons: would reduce general fund revenue used for basic services by $1,791,433 (1989); would adversely impact the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions. Option C This option is the option recommended by staff which amends the City ' Charter to state that the General Fund may collect in lieu of tax payments from the utilities rather than the present requirement that utilities pay in lieu of tax. Pros: would not adversely impact general fund revenue used for basic services; would allow present and future Councils the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions.* Cons: would reduce utility rates for City residents only when economic conditions warrant the reduction. Attached are two memos that explain the history and purpose of PILOT fees in the City of Fort Collins. G. 25% LIABILITY FOR SID BONDS: [Article V, Section 20.5] Three options for changes to the City Charter regarding special assessment securities are being presented for Council's consideration. Setting the signature requirement at a percentage comparable to or slightly less than the requirement for statutory cities would be a reasonable incremental change. In contrast, if the signature requirements were to be set at the Constitutional maximums, a petition would require almost as many ' signatures as the average voter turnout for a regular city election. -453- November 15, 1988 The following initiative and referendum comparisons are based on these , figures: "Current" voter registration (as of 10127188) 55,590 Ballots cast at 1987 regular election 9,113 Voters registered 1987 election 45,299 Initiative Comparison Constitutional maximum (based on "current") 8,339 Statutory requirement (based on "current") 2,780 Current Charter - regular election 911 Current Charter - special election 1,367 Requirement - Option A - any election 2,265 Requirement - Option B or C - regular election 2,265 Requirement - Option B - special election 4,530 Requirement - Option C - special election 6,795 (Lesser of 6,795 or 8,339) Referendum Comparison Constitutional maximum (based on "current") 5,559 Statutory requirement (based on "current") 2,780 Current Charter - any election 911 Requirement under proposal ' 2,265 cle IX, Sections 1(a) and I(b) and Article IX, Section 2 Currently, the Charter appears to allow at -large registered electors to recall any elected officers, including District Council representatives. The proposed Charter amendment would clarify that the right to recall District Council representatives is reserved to registered electors of the Council District in question, that is, those same voters who are entitled to vote for a successor of the incumbent. The amendment also deletes an alternate method of calculation (15% of the total number of registered electors for the last preceding regular City election, or 30% for a second recall attempt) which would likely always be more than the Constitutional maximum, and preserves the requirement for recall at the maximum allowed by the State Constitution (25% of the entire vote cast at the last preceding election for all the candidates for office which the incumbent sought to tie recalled occupies). The 15% requirement would be 6,795 signatures, and 30% would be 13,590 signatures. These figures would far exceed the Constitutional maximum which is the figure computed under the second method. It is confusing to retain the first option for calculating the recall signature requirements when it will never be used in practice and exceeds the Constitutional limitation. The proposed amendment also makes a housekeeping change to the Charter to ' allow petitioners to submit a 200-word affidavit setting out the charges -454- November 15, 1988 ' against the incumbent to be recalled. The current 300-word limitation is in conflict with the 200-word limit set out in the State Constitution. E. COMPENSATION FOR PETITION CIRCULATORS: (Article VII1, Section 4(c), Article IX, Sections 2(c) and 2(d), and Article X, Sections 4(c) and 4(d)] A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling has overruled the Charter provisions concerning compensation to circulators of nominating, initiative, referendum, or recall petitions. The Court held that prohibitions against payment to petition circulators impermissibly burden First Amendment political speech rights in two ways: (1) the prohibitions limit the number of voices who will convey the proponents message and therefore the size of the audience the proponents can reach, and (2) the prohibitions make it less likely that proponents will garner the necessary number of signatures. In reaching this ruling, the Court rejected the argument that professional circulators were any more likely to accept false signatures than a volunteer who was motivated solely by an interest in having the proposition placed on the ballot. To comply with the Court's ruling, this Charter amendment would delete provisions which prohibit compensation to petition circulators. F. PAYMENTS 1N LIEU OF TAXES: (Article XII, Section 61 ' During the October 25 work session on Charter Amendments, and in subsequent discussion with Council members, Council related a concern that the City Charter required in lieu of taxes fees to be collected from city -owned utilities in an amount at least as much as would be collected from property taxes and franchise fees if the utility were privately owned. The proposed amendment to the City Charter would eliminate the mandate to charge ILOT fees to city -owned utilities, but still allow them to be charged by ordinance adopted by the City Council. In 1986, a case involving a payment in lieu of tax fee by the Philadelphia Water Department, ACORN v GUARINO, -Pa. Cmnwlth. - 512 A.2d 1312 (1986), the court held in summary that the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter did not specifically authorize such a payment in lieu of taxes for the Water Department and therefore, the court held that there was no legal basis for this payment based upon the Charter. The City Attorney has advised that the effect of this ruling, as well as others, is that the City Charter is the. legal mechanism that enables or authorizes payment in lieu of taxes, and that authorization must be specific. To delete specific reference to any particular utility in the Charter would preclude in lieu of tax payments from that utility. Staff examined three options with regard to in lieu of tax payments by ' City -owned utilities. -455- November 15, 1988 Option A I This option would amend the City Charter to remove water and wastewater utilities from being subject to payments in lieu of taxes into the general fund. Pros: would reduce water and wastewater utility rates for City residents. Cons: would reduce general fund revenue used for basic services by $885,048 (1989); would adversely impact the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions. Option B This option would amend the City Charter to remove water and wastewater utilities from being subject to payments in lieu of taxes into the general fund and to limit payment by the electric utility to NOT MORE THAN City taxes and franchise permits if the utility were privately owned. Pros: would reduce utility rates for City residents. Cons: would reduce general fund revenue used for basic services by $1,791,433 (1989); would adversely impact the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions. I Option C This option is the option recommended by staff which amends the City Charter to state that the General Fund may collect in lieu of tax payments from the utilities rather than the present requirement that utilities pay in lieu of tax. Pros: would not adversely impact general fund revenue used for basic services; would allow present and future Councils the flexibility to meet changes in economic conditions.* Cons: would reduce utility rates for City residents only when economic conditions warrant the reduction. Attached are two memos that explain the history and purpose of PILOT fees in the City of Fort Collins. G. 25Y LIABILITY FOR SID BONDS: (Article V, Section 20.5) Three options for changes to the City Charter regarding special assessment securities are being presented for Council's consideration. Option A eliminates Section 20.5(d) of the Charter which pledges general ' City tax revenue to pay any assessments remaining whenever 314 of the securities have been paid. Elimination of this Section 20.5(d) would mean -456- November 15, 1988 I that the Charter is silent on the issue and the City would be required to look to the State statutes for guidance on such issues. Currently, the State statutes allow cities to guarantee payment of the last 25% of assessments and recover the cost of doing so through collection of the unpaid assessments. Option 8 changes the mandatory language of the existing provision to permissive language. Like the State statute, this alternative would require the one -quarter pledge only if provision is made for such guarantee within the terms of the bond ordinance. The reasons for presenting this as a separate alternative to merely eliminating the Charter provision and relying on State statute are that: (1) the presence of the Charter provision negates the possible implication that the authority to guarantee any portion of the securities has been eliminated, and (2) the Charter provision, unlike State statute, contains a specific grant of authority to levy ad valorem taxes if necessary to pay the bonds. While this authority would exist even absent this specific language, its presence may be considered by potential bondholders as an enhancement to the marketability of the bonds. Option C amends Section 20.5(d) to guarantee the last 25% of assessments only in involuntary, City -initiated improvement districts and, as to other districts, makes the guarantee discretionary, depending upon whether ' provision is made for such guarantee in the bond ordinance for the particular district. Revising the City Charter with respect to special assessment securities would have the following pros and cons: .TOM 1. Absent the Charter mandate, the City would be under no obligation to levy ad valorem taxes to provide money to redeem the last 25% of securities issued for any special or local improvement district. Since some default in the payment of assessments backing these bonds is likely to occur in any district, the money to pay bonds may not come to the City for several years. Removing the 25% obligation will allow the City to wait for the cash flow rather than having to levy ad valorem taxes to pay the debt. 2. The general public would not be required to pay higher taxes to pay for public improvements whose benefit to the majority of the taxpayers is minimal. 3. The City and the'County, as tax collector, would be relieved of the burden imposed while administering and collecting a tax of such specific purpose and'amount. CONS: ' 1. This pledge is a guarantee that reduces the "risk" to bondholders that their bonds would default. Perceived security of an investment directly affects the interest rate charged to the issuer for the bond. IE-14a November 15, 1988 Removal of the one -quarter pledge would increase the cost paid by the ' City or the assessed property owner in using this financing. 2. Deletion of this Charter provision would include Fort Collins with the few governmental entities in Colorado not providing additional security for special improvement district bonds (Larimer County and Fountain do not). Most statutory cities in Colorado provide the one -quarter pledge when issuing special improvement district bonds. Section 31-25-534(1) of the State statutes provides in part as follows: "...Whenever three -fourths of the bonds for an improvement construction under the provisions of this part 5 have been paid and cancelled and for any reason the remaining assessments are not paid in time to pay the remaining bonds for the district and the interest due thereon, the municipality shall pay, if so provided in the ordinance authorizing issuance of the bonds, the bonds when due and the interest due thereon and reimburse itself by collecting the unpaid assessments due the districts." Many home rule cities in Colorado go beyond the one -quarter pledge and bind the securities with a 2 mill levy pledge as a guarantee against default. (Aurora, Greeley, Gunnison, Thornton and Westminster.) City of Fort Collins bonds would be competing in a market with bonds from these communities which provide greater assurance against default. ' This competition would also increase the cost of the bonds. 3. Involuntary special improvement districts have been used by the City to provide street improvements, pave alleys, and improve utility service to developing areas. It is an important financial tool that enables the City to meet community demands for public improvements without the delays involved in waiting for funding as is done with other capital projects. Those properties specially benefitted by the improvements benefit from financing that reflects the lower interest rate provided by bonds that are secured by the City's one -quarter pledge. Deletion of the Charter provision would jeopardize the City's ability to finance needed public improvements in a timely manner. (This is not an issue, however, if Option 8 is submitted to the voters.) 4. The bonds that have been marketed with the pledge provided for in the current Charter provision, would remain protected even if the provision would be deleted from the Charter. Only future bond issues would be impacted. Since the City has developed additional policies and procedures to protect itself from the risk of default, it seems unnecessary to remove the pledge. 5. The City would not be able to insure these bonds or have them rated by Moody's or Standard and Poor's. Insurance is often the only way to market complex issues that might otherwise 'have problems with , marketability. It is an option worth maintaining. -458- November 15, 1988 ' Staff believes all options are workable but recommends Option C as providing the best tool for marketing these bonds. Total repeal, Option A, would hamper the City's ability to finance public improvements and the City would have to choose between high interest costs or delays in the construction of the improvements. In addition, it would have no impact on the large number of bonds that have already been issued. cie v, )ecrion The Charter presently provides as follows: Moneys in the surplus and deficiency fund in excess of the total principal and interest remaining unpaid on the outstanding special assessment securities of the city to which the surplus and deficiency fund is pledged may be withdrawn by Council action and used for any public purpose (emphasis added). Recent case law calls into serious question the City's ability to expend surplus special assessments for general municipal purposes. Bond counsel for the City and the City Attorney's office agree that that portion of the Charter which permits the City to use surpluses for "any public purpose" should be deleted. ' The possible disadvantage of so modifying the Charter is that, in the event that the evolving case law in this area acknowledges the City's right to withdraw and use surplus assessments for general municipal purposes, it would be necessary to restore the City's ability to do so through subsequent amendment of the Charter. Such a change in the law is unlikely, however, since the basic justification for imposing special assessments is the fact that the assessments are used exclusively for the improvements that benefit the assessed properties. Even after the suggested deletion of this Charter language, the balance of the existing provision would leave intact the Charter permission to use surpluses in the fund to cover deficiencies in other districts. This latter function of the surplus and deficiency fund is the most critical and the use of moneys in the fund for these more limited special improvement purposes is much less subject to legal challenge. rticle IV, Section This proposed amendment to Article IV, Section 10 of the Charter would replace the maximum penalty of $300 and/or 90 days in jail for Charter violations with a provision stating that the maximum penalty would be set by ordinance as needed to conform to the maximum penalty for misdemeanor violations of the Code. This would allow Council to change that maximum ' penalty from time to time, by ordinance, as necessary. In 1987, the Charter was amended to provide that the maximum penalty for a violation of the ordinances of the City would be set by the Council by ordinance. 1U-TE November 15, 1988 Council later amended the general penalty provision of the Code (Section ' 1-15) to provide that the maximum penalty for such violations (other than traffic infractions) would be a fine not exceeding $900 and/or imprisonment not exceeding 180 days. Traffic infractions were made punishable by a fine only, not to exceed $90O. Previously, the maximum penalty for all Code violations was a $300 fine and/or 90 days in jail, similar to the current penalty for Charter violations. Since the Charter is the "organic law" of the City that sets out the general provisions under which the City operates, it seems appropriate that a violation of the Charter be penalized at least as severely as a violation of the Code. Consequently, this Charter amendment is proposed to authorize Council to establish the maximum penalty for a violation of the Charter by ordinance. In that way, Council can amend the maximum penalty for both ordinance and Charter violations from time to time, as deemed appropriate, without the requirement of an election." Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 153, 1988 (Option A) on First Reading. City Clerk Wanda Krajicek gave a brief presentation and responded to questions from Council. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, encouraged Council to consider each proposed item individually including open discussion. He spoke against the Ordinance and stated that a Mayor should have the experience of serving on ' the council prior to holding the position of Mayor. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, spoke in favor of the direct election of the Mayor. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, supported the direct election of the Mayor. Councilmember Estrada stated he did not support the Ordinance and as an alternative suggested there be a choice for the type of government for the City. Councilmember Maxey agreed with Councilmember Estrada. He noted he believed the Ordinance was not solid and did not promote fairness. Councilmember Winokur spoke of several well -run cities with a Council -Manager form of government. Councilmember Winokur pointed out that the Amendment does enable Council by Ordinance the ability to delegate specific authority to the Mayor. Councilmember Kirkpatrick noted the important features of the direct election process. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by t ouncilmember Estrada, to ' amend the Ordinance to read that the pay of the Mayor be increased to $500 -460- November 15, 1988 ' a month and the pay of the Assistant Mayor be increased to $350 a month effective 1991. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, questioned regarding the salaries of the Mayor and Assistant Mayor. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane N4, spoke against combining pay increases with the direct election of the Mayor. Councilmember Maxey noted that the cities that have a directly elected Mayor also have financial compensation for those positions. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to amend Ordinance 153, 1988 was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Stoner summarized his thoughts on a directly elected mayor versus a council elected mayor. He expressed the need for continuity in the City Council, suggested a minimum of a two year term and stated he would be supporting the motion. The vote on Councilmember Winokur's motion to adopt Ordinance 153, 1988 (Option A) as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick,, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Mabry, and Maxey. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to adopt Ordinance No. 154, 1988 (Housekeeping Option to Item A) on First Reading. Councilmember Mabry noted he was not comfortable with Option A versus Option B. Councilmember Winokur pointed out the disadvantages of Option B including the operation of Council with only six members, the limitations and not being able to exercise full powers and authorities. He stated he would support Option A. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to amend Ordinance No. 154, 1988, deleting Option B and inserting Option A. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she would support Option B because it is more responsive to the interests of the community. -461- November 15, 1988 The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to amend Ordinance No. 154, 1988 ' was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, and Maxey. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Stoner, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak noted one of the disadvantages of the option chosen by the majority of Council is the possibility of a three month time period having no representative for the people. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 154, 1988 as amended (Option B) was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick and Winokur. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to reconsider Option B. Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 154, 1988 (Option B) on First Reading. Councilmember Winokur expressed concern that a district could be without a ' representative for ninety days. Councilmember Estrada agreed with Councilmember Winokur. The vote on Council Mabry's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 154, 1988 (Option B) was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 155, 1988 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmember Kirkpatrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 156, 1988 (Option C) on First Reading. Mary Margaret Glennie, 1317 Lakewood Drive, read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights and spoke of the advantages of the initiative process. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, spoke against Option C. ' -462- November 15, 1988 ' Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, questioned the need for changing the Ordinance. Jim Creeden, 4020 Goodell Lane #4, urged Council to propose the maximum signature requirements. Councilmember Estrada stated he would not support Option C because the Option did not appear to be serving the city government. Councilmember Mabry noted he would be supporting Option C and questioned the difference between the number of signatures that are needed for an regular election and the number of signatures needed to have an item placed on the ballot of a special election. He stated he believed there should be a five percent difference in the two numbers. Councilmember Horak agreed with the five percent difference in the two numbers, and noted he believed the current Charter was adequate. Councilmember Kirkpatrick stated she was not in favor of any of the proposed Options and expressed support for the initiative and referendum process. Councilmember Maxey stated the current signature requirements are outdated. Mayor Stoner stated he would not be supporting Option C and noted his preference was Option B. He expressed support for giving the voters a voice in any changes. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Mayor Stoner, to amend the motion by deleting Option C and inserting Option B. Mary Margaret Glennie, 1317 Lakewood Drive, expressed concern regarding the Ordinance and noted the obstacles that would make it difficult for minorities to be heard. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, commented on the signature process and the costs involved to hold a special election. Councilmember Horak commented on the incompleteness of the language in the Charter. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to delete Option C and inserting Option B was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Maxey and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, and Winokur. THE MOTION FAILED. -463- November 15, 1988 Councilmember Winokur made a motion, to adopt Option A which would only ' increase the number of signatures required for the referendum process and not make changes to the initiative process. THE MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Ordinance No. 156, 1988 (Option A) on First Reading. Larry Scott, 2821 Eagle Drive, questioned how the requirement for the number of signatures was determined. Mary Margaret Glennie, 1317 Lakewood Drive, commented on all of the proposed Options regarding the initiative process. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, noted the proposed changes to the referendum process. The vote on Councilmember Maxey's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 156, 1988 (Option A) was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Mabry, Maxey, and Stoner. Nays: Councilmembers Horak, Kirkpatrick, and Winokur. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Winokur made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Horak, to I adopt Ordinance No. 157, 1988 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 158, 1988, on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 159, 1988 (Option C) on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey to adopt Ordinance No. 160, 1988 (Option B) on First Reading. Loring Harkness, of Ballard, Spahr, Andrews, & Ingersoll, Special Bond Counsel to the City, spoke of the political and financial considerations I regarding the Options and noted the Charter is a document of limitation and not a grant of power. -464- November 15, 1988 ICouncilmember Horak made a motion, to delete Option B and insert Option C. THE MOTION DIED DUE TO A LACK OF A SECOND. The vote on Councilmember Mabry's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 160, 1988 (Option�B) on First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adopt Ordinance No. 161, 1988 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to adopt Ordinance No. 162, 1988 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 88-188 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Appeal of the Planning and Zoning Board Approval of the Park South PUD Master Plan, and Upholding the Decision of the Board, Adopted Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On September 6, 1988, Middel Enterprises, Inc. and Park South Venture filed an appeal of the August 22, 1988, final decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to deny the Park South PUD Master Plan. On November 1, 1988, Council voted 6-0 to uphold the final decision of the Planning and Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, the Council should adopt a Resolution making findings of fact and upholding the Planning and Zoning Board decision. BACKGROUND Middel Enterprises, Inc. and Park South Venture filed the appeal based on allegations that: (1) The Planning and Zoning Board abused its discretion, in that its ' decision was arbitrary and without the support of competent evidence on the record; -465- November 15, 1988 (2) The Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply ' relevant provisions of the Code, including the Land Development Guidance System, and the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Policies Plan; and (3) The Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that: (a) The Board considered evidence irrelevant to its findings which were substantially false or grossly misleading; (b) The Board improperly failed to receive and consider all relevant evidence offered by the Appellants. At the November 1, 1988 hearing on this matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the appellant and the public. In subsequent discussion, Council determined that the Planning and Zoning Board's decision was supported by competent evidence of record, that the Board properly applied the relevant provisions of the Code and that the Board did conduct a fair hearing; and determined to uphold the decision of the Board." Councilmember Mabry withdrew from discussion and vote on the item due to a perceived conflict of interest. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Resolution 88-188. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, ' Kirkpatrick, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. (Councilmember Mabry withdrawn) THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 88-189 Making an Appointment to the Downtown Development Authority, Postponed Until December 6 Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A vacancy currently exists on the Downtown Development Authority due to the resignation of William Friedrichsen. Advertisements were placed in October, and Councilmembers Estrada and Maxey conducted interviews on November 3. In keeping with Council's policy, adoption of the Resolution should be postponed until December 6 to allow time for public input." Councilmember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey to adopt Resolution 88-189 inserting the name of Jim Martell. Councilmember Estrada noted the highly qualified candidates that were I interviewed for the position and spoke of Mr.•Martell's qualifications and legal background. -466- November 15, 1988 ' Councilmember Mabry made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Winokur, to postpone the appointment until December 6, 1988. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 88-190 Making an Appointment to the Planning and Zoning Board, Postponed Until December 6 Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A vacancy currently exists on the Planning and Zoning Board due to the resignation of Bernhard Strom. Councilmembers Horak and Estrada screened the active applications on file, and interviewed selected applicants. on November 3. In keeping with Council's policy, adoption of the Resolution should be postponed until December 6 to allow time for public input." ' Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adopt Resolution 88-190 inserting the name of Jan Shepard as the regular member and appointing Rex Burns as the alternate to replace Jan Shepard. Councilmember Horak noted that Ms. Shepard is currently on the Board as an alternate and he noted that a complete review of the applicants was done. He commented on Mr. Burns' qualifications and past experience with the Storm Drainage Board. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mabry, to postpone the appointments until December 6. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Maxey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kirkpatrick, to adjourn into Executive Session to discuss legal matters. Yeas: Councilmembers Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: Councilmembers Estrada and Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. i[-fil November 15, 1988 Adjournment I Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Estrada, to adjourn the meeting until Tuesday, November 22, at 4:30 p.m. Yeas: Councilmembers Estrada, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Mabry, Maxey, Stoner, and Winokur. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m. May ATTEST: City Cl&V -468-