Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 01/04/2005 - CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL ITEM NUMBER: 7 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: January4, 2005 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Wanda Krajicek SUBJECT Consideration and approval of the regular Council meeting minutes of December 7, 2004 and the adjourned meeting minutes of December 10, 11 and 14, 2004, December 7, 2004 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, December 7, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers:Bertschy,Hamrick,Kastein,Martinez,Roy,Tharp and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Mayor Martinez stated each participant would have three minutes to speak. Carmen Reed, Old Town resident, stated the Rolland Moore West Neighborhood Network had collected some stories regarding antisocial behavior,Code violations and irresponsibility of landlords of rental properties. She stated these situations were threatening the quality of life in single family neighborhoods. She spoke regarding actual situations in which loud and disruptive parties affected entire neighborhoods. W.C. Waker,Avery Park Neighborhood,spoke regarding the impacts of rentals,noise,loud parties, speeding, and improper parking in her neighborhood. Melissa Anderson, Rolland Moore West Neighborhood Network, stated the neighborhood was recommending that CSU and the City work together to preserve single family neighborhoods through the following actions: expand education for students on respecting and fitting in with neighborhood norms and values; enforce occupancy limits on residential rentals in single family neighborhoods; adopt legislative that would serve to enlist landlords in addressing the issues of alcohol abuse and general nuisance issues by requiring them to have tenants sign leases that would include clauses prohibiting large parties, noise after 10:00 p.m., underage drinking and other violations of City ordinances; expand education,especially for young women,on the hazards of binge drinking; pass a keg registration ordinance to allow purchasers to be identified and contacted if needed;strengthen communication links with law enforcement, hire more staff on campus to handle increased volume of students receiving ticketed violations and reported to CSU by the police; close a loophole in the CSU freshman housing rule that allows freshmen to live off campus if parents are listed as owners of a house but are not present; raise academic standards; continue the Fort Collins police party patrols;pass a nuisance gathering ordinance to more effectively stop parties before they escalate out of control and hold instigators accountable; establish standards for maintenance and enhancement of structures and landscapes on properties operated as rental business investments in R-L and N-C-L zones; and build or support private projects for additional housing on or near campus to relieve the pressure on neighborhoods and create environments that are more conducive to student life. She stated the Neighborhood Network was submitting six pages of stories and the position paper 275 December 7, 2004 "Preserving Our Neighborhoods" for the public record. Glen Colton,625 Hinsdale Drive,spoke regarding urban renewal abuse i.e.actions taken by the City of Loveland a year ago and actions being taken by the Town of Timnath to declare farmland as a "blighted area" to get tax increment financing. He stated this could have a detrimental impact on school funding, including higher education, because discretionary State funds would be routed to municipal improvements rather than to education. He stated the use by communities of this "inappropriate tool" would also fuel urban sprawl in northern Colorado. He asked that the City support the drafting of legislation to curb the abuse of urban renewal authorities and tax increment financing. Don Taranto, 1316 La Eda Lane,objected to the proposed southwest enclave annexation. He stated the annexation would affect over 1,100 families and over 2,000 acres and could potentially be the largest forced annexation in the history of the State. He stated this annexation would not meet the "spirit of the law." He stated this enclave was created by the acquisition of open space property rather than by a"ringing"of the property by infrastructure. He stated this enclave was an"exception to the rule" and that there would be no benefit to the City or to the property owners in the area. He stated this area was not yet a "legitimate candidate" for annexation. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, congratulated everyone involved in the visionary purchase of the Soapstone Ranch. He stated he lived in the Rolland Moore Neighborhood. He stated some members of the Council appeared to be focusing on "behavior issues" relating to rentals and neighborhoods. He stated the real issue was an enforced and enforceable(and no exceptions)"three unrelated" ordinance in single family neighborhoods. He stated current policy was "destroying neighborhoods." He also stated interviews of City Manager candidates should be held in open session rather than Executive Session. Don Simpson, Mountain Valley Acres, opposed the southwest enclave annexation. He stated one of the main objections would be increased utility rates and the loss of membership in the R.E.A. He stated the area would be paying 25%more for 10 years for electricity if annexed. He stated this was a case of the City"trying to develop"the area and that the area residents had not had a voice in this. He stated the vast majority of residents were strongly opposed to the annexation. He also expressed a concern about stormwater fees for the large acreages in the area. He stated fees would be $10 to $100 per month and that this would be excessive. Dean Miller, 2856 Canby Way, stated the last study session was informative and helpful. He commended the Council for its "thoughtful deliberations and sharing of ideas." He stated it was a "respectful interaction." He stated many people want the City to move ahead and that they want to know how their money will be spent on specific projects. He stated many people would be willing to pay more taxes if it would help create good jobs. He thanked the Council for the decision to make it possible for the citizens to vote on the expansion of the Senior Center. Mark Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road, stated there would be a ballot issue in April to repeal the grocery tax. He stated the Council had asked the City Manager to identify what part of the budget 276 December 7, 2004 would be cut if the grocery tax was repealed. He asked that the Council make that decision itself because the Council sets the policy and the City Manager implements the policy. He suggested that the Council schedule time at a meeting to discuss the "least valuable parts" of the City budget and to suggest to the voters what would be cut from the budget if the grocery tax was repealed. Lindsay Byers,CSU student,stated the"three unrelated"ordinance was discriminatory,arbitrary and subjective. She stated the ordinance did not solve the nuisance problem. Citizen Participation Follow-up Mayor Martinez stated he had promised the residents of the southwest enclave annexation area a letter of response to their issues and that all of the answers were not yet available. He asked when a letter would be completed. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated the answers would all be available by the end of the week. Mayor Martinez stated the Council did make the final decisions on budget cuts and changes. He stated the staff made recommendations to the Council in that area. Councilmember Bertschy asked for more information about the keg registration ordinance recently adopted by Laramie, Wyoming. He stated the Charter required that the City Manager prepare the City budget and present it to the Council. He stated Fort Collins was working on an Urban Renewal District for the North College area that fit the true definition of urban renewal. He stated the Council was concerned about relationships with neighboring communities,such as the Town of Timnath,and about community separators. Councilmember Roy thanked those who spoke about the southwest enclave annexation. He asked if it would be possible to determine the number of kegs sold in Fort Collins. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated staff would determine if that information was available and that staff would obtain the Laramie keg registration ordinance. Mayor Martinez stated he would also like to see information collected on how well keg registration ordinances work in the communities that have adopted such an ordinance. Councilmember Roy stated he agreed that the Council was still focusing on how to create a solution to the nuisance elements of rental properties. He stated he was convinced that"true rental licensing" with standards and inspections based on the "three unrelated ordinance" was the correct direction to solve the problem. He stated Council was able to make good decisions because of the quality work on options done by staff. He stated he was proud of the Soapstone Ranch purchase. He stated there were "true blighted areas" in the North College area and that there were major differences between the City's urban renewal efforts and the activities of other municipalities regarding farmland. Councilmember Hamrick stated this Council should resolve the rental licensing issue rather than "handing it off" to the next Council. He asked for a time line for consideration of the specific 277 December 7, 2004 components of the rental licensing issue. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated a Study Session was scheduled to discuss rental licensing alternatives and Council direction on January 25. Councilmember Hamrick stated he believed that the Council had provided direction to bring back a revised"three unrelated"ordinance to change it from a criminal liability to a civil infraction. City Attorney Roy stated this direction was clear. He stated the issue being discussed at the staff level was how to tie in the possibility that certain areas may be exempt from the "three unrelated" requirement. He stated Council direction on this issue was needed before the revised "three unrelated" ordinance could be drafted. Councilmember Hamrick stated he did not want a delay in having an enforceable"three unrelated" ordinance. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated a work group was looking at the issue and that an economic analysis was being done. He stated Councilmember Hamrick's questions should be answered in material being sent to the Council within the next few days. Councilmember Hamrick stated the City Manager interviews should be held in an open and public process. He stated Council would be discussing this issue later in the meeting. Councilmember Kastein stated the urban renewal issue was not part of the legislative policy agenda and that he would therefore request that the Resolution adopting the legislative policy agenda be pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. He stated the Building on Basics ballot issue would be delayed to November because of the issue on the April ballot relating to repeal of the grocery tax. He stated the enhancement project package was a priority after maintenance of current City activities. He stated the quarter center extension for road maintenance would appear on the April ballot because it was a high priority that was currently being funded from a previous tax. He stated if that tax was not extended that the City would not be able to maintain its roads. Agenda Review Interim City Manager Atteberry stated Resolution 2004-145 recognizing retiring bond counsel Loring Harkness had been added to the agenda and asked that Council consider that item as part of the Consent Calendar. He stated item #29 Resolution 2004-144 Amending the Boards and Commissions Manual Relating to Citizen Participation during Board and Commission Meetings had a revised Resolution. Mark Brophy,1109 West Harmony Road, withdrew item #27 Resolution 2004-142 Adopting the City's 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda from the Consent Calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR 7. Consideration and approval of the adjourned meeting minutes of November 9, 2004. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2004, Amending Chapter 26, Article VII,Division 278 December 7, 2004 2 of the City Code Relating to Stormwater Fees. The Ordinance will: • NOT increase stormwater rates for 2005; but will • permit the Utilities General Manager to adjust the area utilized in calculating the monthly stormwater fee for residential lots in excess of one-half acre and for properties used for agricultural purposes. Staff recommends that Council approve the Ordinance pending further study and analysis of the capital improvement program and financing plan. Ordinance No. 174, 2004 (Option A) was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund to be Used for General Operating Support of the Adaptive Recreation Opportunities Program Recreation Works Project. The City was awarded a $43,030 grant from the Department of Education via a sub-award from Colorado State University. This Ordinance, which was adopted unanimously on First Reading on November 16, 2004, appropriates that grant money in the Recreation Works Grant H project. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 180, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for Police Services and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services Operating Budget to the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program. Fort Collins Police Services ("FCPS") has been awarded a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice LLEBG program in the amount of $13,817. The funds are to buy equipment related to basic law enforcement functions. A local cash match of$1,535 is required and will be met by the existing Police Services budget. The grant funds will be used to purchase trunk vaults for securing SWAT rifles and other SWAT equipment in vehicles. The grant requires input from an Advisory Board who will make a non-binding recommendation to the U.S. Department of Justice on the agency's use of the funds. The Advisory Board, consisting of representatives from local law enforcement (FCPS Chief Harrison),prosecution(District Attorney Stuart VanMeveren),court system(Judge Kathleen Lane), public school (Ellyn Dickmann), and a non-profit agency active in crime prevention or treatment (Scoot Crandall —TEAM Fort Collins and Pam McCracken—CSU Center for Drug and Alcohol Education), reviewed the project and supported the proposed use of the grant funds. Ordinance No. 180, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 279 December 7, 2004 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No.181,2004,Authorizing the Purchasing Agentto Enter into an Agreement for the Financing by Lease-Purchase of Vehicles and Equipment. The cost of the items to be lease-purchased is $406,132. No payments are due in 2004. Payments at the 4.43% interest rate will not exceed$91,002 in 2005. Money for the first year lease-purchase payments is included in the 2005 budget. The effect of the debt position for the purpose of financial rating of the City will be to raise the total City debt by .09%. A competitive process was used to select Koch Financial Corporation for this lease. Staff believes acceptance of this lease rate is in the City's best interest. Ordinance No. 181, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 182, 2004, Authorizing the Conduct of a Mail Ballot Election for the April 5, 2005 Regular Municipal Election. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004, authorizes the April 5,2005 regular municipal election to be conducted by mail ballot,adopts the Mail Ballot Election Act of the Uniform Election Code governing mail ballot elections, authorizes the City Clerk to submit a mail ballot plan to the Secretary of State, and establishes the polling place for in-person voting for the April election. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 184,2004,Authorizing Addendum#1 to the Long-Term Lease of Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport with Bill Sheel. Bill Sheel has constructed a private hangar on the airport under a long-term lease agreement. Mr. Sheel wishes to construct an automobile access to his hangar off of Lear Drive. The land needed for this access will be added to his lease and lease payments will be increased by an additional $115.80 per year. The cities have the option of canceling the amendment if the land is needed for any purpose in the future. The cities are not obligated for any costs if the amendment is canceled prior to the expiration of the term of the base lease. Ordinance No. 184, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 185,2004,Authorizing the Conveyance of Non-Exclusive Easement Interests for the Construction of a Twenty-Two Foot Wide Drainage Channel for the Redeemer Lutheran Church of Fort Collins on a Portion of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Regional Open Space. Pursuant to the City of Fort Collins Natural Area and Open Lands Easement Policy adopted by Resolution 2001-094, Redeemer Lutheran Church, located about 600 feet west of the 280 December 7, 2004 southwest corner of Timberline and Carpenter Roads, is requesting an easement for a drainage channel across the Fossil Creek Reservoir Regional Open Space jointly owned by City of Fort Collins and Larimer County. The 25-foot wide permanent easement will accommodate a 22-foot wide drainage channel that will be approximately 3-4 feet deep. The easement and channel will be located generally along the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way for a distance of approximately 785 feet,with a total area of 19,248 square feet (0.44 acre). A 45-foot wide temporary construction easement necessary for the construction of the drainage channel will encompass the permanent drainage easement during the time of construction and reclamation,estimated to be no more than one year, and will be a total of 34,006 square feet (0.78 acre) in size. Ordinance No. 185, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 186, 2004,Authorizing the Granting of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement to the City of Loveland on Jointly Owned, City and City of Loveland Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. The proposed easement runs the east 40 feet of the SE 1/4 of Section 28,Township 6 North, Range 68 West,a portion of the Airport property. The City of Loveland's Power Operations Division is seeking to provide new service,and improve existing service in the airpark area. The proposed easement is 40 feet in width and runs the length of the property, or 2647.71 feet. The City of Loveland's Power Operations Division will restore the ground's surface to its prior condition. Staff has determined that this easement carries a benefit which exceeds its cost. This easement will benefit the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport by bringing power to areas not currently served and thus facilitating future Airport expansion.This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 187, 2004, Amending Ordinance No. 050, 2004 Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public Improvements in Connection with the Stormwater Utility Drainage Outfall for the North Tributary System and the Street Oversizing Ziegler Road Realignment Project. With Ordinance No. 050, 2004, Council granted authorization to allow the City to begin condemnation proceedings if the continuing negotiations are not successful. The City has continued good faith negotiations with the property owners to acquire the property. As a result of these negotiations,there have been several minorchanges to the construction details of the improvements. 281 December 7, 2004 These minor changes affect the amount of property required for the storm water drainage easement, reduce the area of a planned vehicle turn around on the maintenance road, and reduce the slope easement required for the Ziegler Road embankment. In addition, the property owners have requested that the City act as intermediaries for other drainage and utility easements required by the Rigden Farm development for its Sixth Filing. To accommodate these changes and at the property owner's request, staff has prepared revised legal descriptions for the eminent domain process. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16,2004,amends Ordinance No. 050, 2004 by revising the legal descriptions of the easements. 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 188, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Home Investment Partnerships Program. The Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program provide funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the City of Fort Collins that can be allocated to community development and affordable housing related programs and projects,thereby reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget to address such issues. Ordinance No. 188, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 189 , 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Community Development Block Grant Program. The Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program provide funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the City of Fort Collins that can be allocated to community development and affordable housing related programs and projects,thereby reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget to address such issues. Ordinance No. 189, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 16, 2004. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 190,2004,Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Upgradingand nd Replacing the Development Tracking System and the Development Management System. The City of Fort Collins has operated and maintained a software application known as the DTS since 1999. This application automates the departments of Building and Zoning and Current Planning business processes. These processes include portions of the development review process, the complete building permit process, as well as peripheral processes such as contractor licensing. The software is a vital component to the operation of these departments. The vendor that supplies this application, Accela,recently released the latest version of this automated system. The City diligently researched the new software release and has deemed 282 December 7, 2004 it a very desirable upgrade. The new release will align this system with the current standards and direction of the City's overall Information Technology strategies. This upgrade would also allow for the processes of Building and Zoning and Development Review to be completely integrated within a single application. Such integration will allow a more coordinated processing of development review and construction permitting. The vendor is offering, for a limited-time, considerable pricing incentives for existing software license holders. If the City agrees to upgrade by December 31,2004,Accela will waive all licensing fees for the upgrade software,a total of$149,995. The upgrade to the latest software release will be required in the future if the City continues to use this vendor's products. 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 191, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program and the Restorative Justice Restore Program. Office of Juvenile Justice, Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ) Grant A grant in the amount of$20,000 has been received from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice("DCJ")for salaries associated with the continued operation of the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program. Restorative justice is an alternative method of holding a youth offender accountable for his or her actions by conferencing with the youth and the victim to develop appropriate consequences for the offense. By learning to understand the impacts of their actions on the victim, Criminal Justice Officials are optimistic repeat offenses will be reduced. A $2,222 cash match is required and will be met by appropriating previously collected project income (client fees) from users of this program. The grant period is from October 1, 2004 to September 30, 2005. Bohemian Foundation Grant The Bohemian Foundation awarded a grant in the amount of$25,000 for salaries associated with the continued operation of the Restorative Justice Restore Program("RESTORE"). The RESTORE Program was developed to apply a restorative justice approach to hold juvenile shoplifting suspects accountable for their actions and assist them in making appropriate amends to the victims. Families, victims and law enforcement are all involved in this monthly process in which 25 to 50 youth participate. No cash match is required. The grant period is from October 1, 2004 to September 30, 2005. The grant monies are awarded to and received by the Restorative Justice Program. They are not used in or by Municipal Court. However, about 85% of the cases handled in the two restorative justice programs are referred by Municipal Court.These cases deal primarily with youth and young adults, and are dismissed from Municipal Court upon completion of the Restorative Justice Program. The Court is sent verification of completion. Case referrals are also received from the District Court, police officers and school administrators. 283 December 7, 2004 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 192, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Street Oversizine Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Street Oversizing Fund to the Capital Project Fund - Drake and Ziegler Road Improvements Project, Phase I. The Drake and Zeigler Road Improvements Project, Phase I includes arterial street improvements for Drake Road,from Timberline east to Environmental Drive(approximately 4,500 linear feet). These street improvements will include the widening of Drake Road to a minor arterial street standard from its existing two-lane configuration,and the construction of the Environmental Drive connection(an additional 1,000 linear feet). The improvements include the installation of curb-and-gutter, sidewalks, asphalt paving, bike lanes, and storm sewers. Staff has coordinated this project with the planned construction of a new trunk sewer line to be constructed by the City's water and wastewater utility. These projects both require a full street closure in order to construct them safely and efficiently. By coordinating schedules and completing the work simultaneously, only one street closure will be necessary. The construction is planned to begin in March of 2005. The full closure of the roadway will last approximately 3 months. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 193, 2004, Amending the Zoning Man of the City of Fort Collins by Chan iinng the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Running-Deer Natural Area Rezonine. The rezoning request is consistent with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan designations of both "Poudre River" and "Open Lands, Parks, Stream Corridors." The majority of the properties contained within these "green" corridor designations are large publicly owned parks, natural areas and open lands that have a community-wide emphasis or other characteristics which warrant inclusion under this separate designation rather than inclusion in an adjoining neighborhood or other District designation. The T-Transition Zone District is intended for properties for which there are no specific and immediate plans for development. The only permitted uses are those existing at the date the property was placed into the district. Rezoning the property will allow the Natural Areas Program to move forward with its plans to construct a parking lot and a trailhead to provide public access to the property There are roughly 14.828 acres on the northern end of the property which are currently being leased by the City to an adjacent business. This area is not included in the rezoning request and will remain within the T—Transition Zone District until the future use of the property has been determined. 284 December 7, 2004 23. Items Pertaining to the Donation of a Conservation Easement From Larimer County for Natural Areas Purposes. A. Resolution 2004-138 Authorizing the Acceptance of a Donation of a Conservation Easement on Red Mountain Ranch from Larimer County for Natural Area Purposes. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 194, 2004, Appropriating the Value of a Conservation Easement on Red Mountain Ranch Donated to the City by Larimer County as Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund. This Resolution will authorize acceptance by the City of a donation of a conservation easement on Red Mountain Ranch, adjacent to the City's Soapstone Ranch,for natural area purposes. The Ordinance will appropriate the value of the donated conservation easement. 24. Items Pertaining to the Liebl Annexation. A. Resolution 2004-139 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Liebl Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 195, 2004, Annexing Property Known as the Liebl Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 196, 2004, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Liebl Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The Liebl Annexation is a request to annex and zone 2.8 acres of land located along the east side of Timberline Road, south of Kechter Road. The site contains an existing single family residence and detached garage. The parcel is designated UE — Urban Estate on the Fort Collins Structure Plan and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. The anticipated land use is a bed and breakfast consistent with the design standards in the UE zone district.The parcel is currently zoned FAl -Farming in Larimer County. 25. Resolution 2004-140 Reappointing Kathleen M. Lane as Municipal Judge and Authorizing Certain Other Amendments to the Judge's Employment Contract. Article VII,Section 1 of the Charter provides that the Municipal Judge is to be appointed for a term of two years. Kathleen M. Lane was first appointed to serve as the City's Municipal Judge for a term commencing July 1, 1989. This Resolution reappoints Judge Lane for another two-year term commencing on January 1, 2005 and ending on December 31, 2006, and authorizes the Mayor to execute an addendum to Judge Lane's Employment Agreement. 285 December 7, 2004 26. Resolution 2004-141 Approving a Fifth Addendum to the City Attorney's Employment Agreement. The Resolution would approve changes to the City Attorney's employment contract. 27. Resolution 2004-142 Adoptingthe e City's 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda. Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) develops a legislative agenda to assist in the analysis of pending legislation. The proposed 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda,which is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit"A",has been updated from the 2004 document and was reviewed and approved by the Legislative Review Committee. Changes are highlighted below.This document will be used as a guide for the upcoming 2005 General Assembly and the first session of the 109th Congress. The purpose of the Legislative Policy Agenda is to articulate the City's position on common legislative topics. It will be used by Council members and staff to determine positions on pending legislation and as a general reference for state legislators and our congressional delegation. 28. Resolution 2004-143 Concerning Alcohol Abuse in Our Community_ This Resolution recognizes a growing concern in the Fort Collins community regarding student alcohol abuse and its impact on the City and on Colorado State University, and directs the City Manager to undertake certain measures to identify strategies the City could pursue to help curb alcohol abuse in the community. 29. Resolution 2004-144 Amending the Boards and Commissions Manual Relating to Citizen Participation during Board and Commission Meetings. The Boards and Commissions Manual (the "Manual") was adopted by City Council by Resolution 2001-026. Resolution 2004-144 will amend the Manual to include a new section under"Meeting Responsibilities." The new section will be entitled"Public Input"and will direct all boards and commissions to include as part of the regular meeting agendas an opportunity for public comment. This new provision will afford the public an opportunity to provide input on topics assigned to the various boards and commissions and will broaden the base of information available to boards and commissions. 30. Routine Easements. A. Easement for Construction and Maintenance of Public Utilities from Gunter and Nicolette Bischoff, to underground existing electric system, located at 2516 South College Avenue. Monetary Consideration: $400. 286 December 7, 2004 30.5 Resolution 2004-045 Expressingthe he City Council's Appreciation to Loring E. Harkness III for His Outstanding Service as Bond Counsel to the City of Fort Collins. ***END CONSENT*** Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. S. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2004, Amending Chapter 26, Article VII,Division 2 of the City Code Relating to Stormwater Fees. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund to be Used for General Operating Support of the Adaptive Recreation Opportunities Program Recreation Works Project. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 180, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for Police Services and Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services Operating Budget to the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No.181,2004,Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enterinto an Agreement for the Financing by Lease-Purchase of Vehicles and Equipment. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 182, 2004, Authorizing the Conduct of a Mail Ballot Election for the April 5, 2005 Regular Municipal Election. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 184, 2004,Authorizing Addendum#1 to the Long Term Lease of Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport with Bill Sheel. 14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 185,2004,Authorizing the Conveyance of Non-Exclusive Easement Interests for the Construction of a Twenty-Two Foot Wide Drainage Channel for the Redeemer Lutheran Church of Fort Collins on a Portion of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Regional Open Space. 15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 186,2004,Authorizing the Granting of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement to the City of Loveland on Jointly Owned. City and City of Loveland Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport. 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 187, 2004, Amending Ordinance No. 050, 2004 Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public Improvements in Connection with the Stormwater Utility Drainage Outfall for the North Tributary System and the Street Oversizing Ziegler Road Realignment Project. 287 December 7, 2004 17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 188, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Home Investment Partnerships Program. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 189 , 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Community Development Block Grant Program. 34. Second Reading of Ordinance No.183, 2004, Amending Section 23-114 of the City Code Concerning the Leasingof f City Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 190,2004,Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for Upgrading and Replacing the Development Tracking System and the Development Management System. 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 191, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program and the Restorative Justice Restore Program. 21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 192, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Street Oversizing Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Street Oversizinu Fund to the Capital Project Fund - Drake and Ziegler Road Improvements Project, Phase I. 22. First Reading of Ordinance No. 193, 2004, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Running Deer Natural Area Rezoning. 23. Items Pertaining to the Donation of a Conservation Easement From Latimer Count Natural Areas Purposes. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 194,2004,Appropriating the Value of a Conservation Easement on Red Mountain Ranch Donated to the City by Larimer County as Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund. 24. Items Pertaining to the Liebl Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 195, 2004,Annexing Property Known as the Liebl Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 196, 2004,Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Liebl Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. 288 December 7, 2004 35. First Reading of Ordinance No. 197, 2004, Amending Chapter 7.5-32 of the City Code Regarding Street Oversizine Capital Improvement Expansion Fees. 36. First Reading of Ordinance No. 198,2004,Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adopt and approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy,Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Consent Calendar Follow-up Councilmember Bertschy spoke regarding item #23 Items Pertaining to the Donation of a Conservation Easement From Larimer County for Natural Areas Purposes. Councilmember Hamrick commented regarding item#20 First Reading of Ordinance No. 191,2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program and the Restorative Justice Restore Program and thanked the Bohemian Foundation for its contribution. Mayor Martinez asked how the Municipal Court used the restorative justice program. Judge Kathleen Lane stated this was an important alternative sentencing device and diversion program. She described the operation of the two programs. Mayor Martinez noted that the Council had recently reappointed Judge Lane for another two years. Staff Reports Interim City Manager Atteberry reported that there would be a retirement reception for retiring bond counsel Loring Harkness on December 14 at 4:00 p.m. He also reported that Rose Winkler,Human Resources Department, had received a Children's Theater Outstanding Service Award for her volunteer efforts. He reported that the cost to date of snow removal for the recent storm was $230,463 and that the annual budget for snow removal was$763,000. He reported on the magnitude of the storm conditions and the priorities for snow and ice removal. Mayor Martinez noted that there were citizen complaints about the City plowing sidewalks shut after sidewalks had been shoveled and asked how such complaints were handled. Ron Phillips, Transportation Services Director, stated the City responded to such complaints by clearing the sidewalk after the snow removal workload had diminished. He stated sidewalks were cleared where sidewalks had been covered due to plowing on a routine basis once the major snow removal had been completed. 289 December 7, 2004 Mayor Martinez asked if it was likely that a homeowner would receive a citation if the sidewalk was not cleared after snow plowing covered it up. Phillips stated no citations were written that early in the process and that if a citation was written that there was an appeal process. Mayor Martinez asked when enforcement would begin. Phillips stated the City Code provided that enforcement could commence 24 hours after the snow stops. Mayor Martinez asked if there was a process in place to ensure that tickets would not be written in cases where the sidewalk had been shoveled and the City had plowed and covered up the sidewalk. Phillips stated it was unlikely that tickets would be issued in such situations. He stated most people understood that the streets must be cleared and that they might need to clear sidewalks again after the City plowed. Mayor Martinez noted that many senior citizens had difficulty clearing their sidewalks. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated snow plow operators made efforts to control speed to avoid covering up sidewalks or locking in parked cars. He noted that when sidewalks were covered up due to plowing that the City made an effort to mitigate the situation as quickly as possible. Councilmember Tharp noted that there were some stretches of roadway such as Prospect Road where there was no alternative except to cover up the sidewalk. She commented that it seemed to take a long time to get sidewalks cleared and that this could create a hazardous situation for pedestrians. Councilmember Roy commented that one storm had used up about one-third of the snow removal budget. He commended the City for its snow removal efforts. Mayor Martinez asked if the City worked with private contractors to keep up with snow removal. Phillips stated private contractors were called out early in this storm to help keep arterial streets clear and to replace City trucks during breakdowns. Councilmember Reports Mayor Martinez reported on the grand opening for the West Elizabeth street and median improvements. Councilmember Tharp noted that she had heard complimentary comments from the business community on the West Elizabeth project. Councilmember Bertschy reported on the National League of Cities conference in Indianapolis. Mayor Martinez reported that he spoke at the opening of the new Natural Resources Research Campus visitor's center. 290 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Kastein reported on the Ad Hoc Benefits Committee discussions on benchmark changes. Councilmember Tharp reported on a sustainability workshop sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce. Ordinance No. 183, 2004, Amending Section 23-114 of the City Code Concerning the Leasing of City Property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport,Adopted on Second ReadinP The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Cities of Loveland and Fort Collins have been reviewing for approval ground leases for the construction of private hangars at the airport; these leases have been generic from one to the other and have been approved through the consent agenda. By giving the City Managers the ability to approve the leases it will expedite the approval process, reduce Councils work load and expedite the initial collections of lease payments. Ordinance No. 183, 2004, was adopted 6-1 (Nays: Councilmember Hamrick) on First Reading on November 16, 2004." Interim City Manager Atteberry stated this item was on the discussion agenda because the vote on First Reading was 6-1. Councilmember Hamrick stated the Airport impacted southeast Fort Collins residents disproportionately and that it was important to look closely at any changes at the Airport that would contribute to more airport traffic. He stated he believed that the Council should have an opportunity to review hangar leases. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the issue was hangar leases and having aircraft in a building rather than in the open. She stated this was not an issue of an increase in airport traffic. Councilmember Tharp stated she was on the regional airport study committee and that a 20-year plan for the Airport was being developed. She stated issues of expansion were being taken into consideration. She stated hangar leases were not a concern to her and that the airport study was being conducted to ensure the viability of the municipal airport. She stated the Airport was an "economic driver" for jobs, transportation and communication. Councilmember Tharp made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat,to adopt Ordinance No. 183, 2004 on Second Reading. 291 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Roy stated he had voted in favor of the Ordinance on First Reading but would vote against it on Second Reading. He stated he favored having the Council review hangar leases and anything else that would give the Council a "better handle" on "ground level" activities at the Airport. Councilmember Kastein stated he would support the motion. He commented that the Council needed to be in touch with the "bigger picture" at the Airport rather than the details of items such as hangar leases. He noted that a master plan was being developed for the Airport. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy,Kastein,Martinez,Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No.197, 2004, Amending Chapter 7.5-32 of the City Code Regarding Street Oversizing Capital Improvement Expansion Fees, Adopted on First Reading The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff is proposing a 13.8% increase to the Street Oversizing Fee. The increase consists of two elements: a 3.6% increase for inflation, and revisions to the Street Oversizing fees to account for recently adopted changes to the City's Master Street Plan. Periodic routine recalculations of the Street Oversizing fees are necessary to ensure that fee revenues will be sufficient to pay for the cost of improvements that the program will be constructing. • Construction costs have increased. Staff is recommending a 3.6%increase to keep pace with inflation. • The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan tripled the amount of arterial and collector roadway required to serve the zoning and density proposed in this planning area. • The recently adopted Transportation Master Plan reclassified several street segments as a result ofcomputer modeling ofthe transportation network. Several streets were downgraded in classification and a few were upgraded. However, no increase is necessary for these changes. Staff is proposing a recalculation of Street Oversizing fees to include these changes. The overall result is a 13.8% increase in Street Oversizing fees. 292 December 7, 2004 BACKGROUND Inflation of Construction Costs: All of the city's capital improvement expansion fees, including the Street Oversizing Fee, are adjusted annually for inflation. The Street Oversizing Fee is indexed to the Regional Construction Cost Index published in the Engineering News Record (ENR). This index is showing a 9.5% increase, mainly due to material price increases for steel, wood and fuel. However, staff also tracks construction cost pricing for each project and developer reimbursement made in the Street Oversizing Program. Staff has seen a 3.6%increase in construction costs and is recommending that fees be increased to recover this 3.6% inflation amount. East Mulberry Plan Revisions: The East Mulberry Plan area is from Mulberry Street on the south, to(but not including) Vine Drive on the north; and from Lemay Avenue to I-25. The adopted Plan looked at the transportation network needed to support the land uses indicated by the City's Structure Plan. A significant amount of arterial and collector streets were added. The previous amount of lane miles in the area was 17.61. This increased to 62.13lane miles,more than tripling the amount ofstreet improvements necessary. In the Street Oversizing analysis of these improvements, existing County developments were not included, both for the street improvements adjacent to these areas and trip destinations to these areas. However, the recalculation showed a 10.2% increase to the Street Oversizing fees. Transportation Master Plan Revisions: Staff also analyzed the reclassification of streets adopted with the Transportation Master Plan. Several street segments were downgraded. A few street segments were upgraded, the most significant being Carpenter Road rising to a six lane major arterial. However the net effect of these roadway changes was insignificant in the recalculation of the Street Oversizing fees. The Transportation Master Plan revisions did not increase the fees. History The City's policy is to require new development to pay for growth-related impacts on public facilities. The Street Oversizing Impact Fee was enacted in 1979, with revisions in 1988 and 1996. Additional impact fees for Fire, Police, Library, General Government and Community Parks were adopted in 1996. Impact fees are one-time payments that fund the development or expansion of publicfacilities needed to accommodate new development. The intent is for new development to pay for its proportionate share of the capital costs of additional infrastructure capacity. Specific costs have been identified using local data and current dollars. There are over 150 miles of arterial and collector street improvements needed in the City's transportation network to accommodate new development within the Urban Growth Area Boundary. These improvements will be needed to serve new growth. The 293 December 7, 2004 cost to complete the arterial and collector street network(including bike lanes and pedestrian ways) to build out in the Urban Growth Area has been estimated by an analysis of the adopted Master Street Plan. Included in these infrastructure costs are bus bays and shelters, commuter bicycle lanes, sidewalks and ADA ramps, and other improvements that increase the modal capability of the street into a transportation corridor. The level of improvement is based on the new Street Standards adopted in 1996. The Street Oversizing Program uses the impact fees it collects to fund the construction of arterial and collector roadways necessary to mitigate the impacts of new development. Increasing the functional capacity of existing improved streets can be viewed as correcting "existing deficiencies" in public facilities and not as a need created by new development. Impact fees are specifically restricted from correcting these existing deficiencies. These improvements are traditionally funded in Fort Collins by sales taxes. Summary Capital improvement expansion fees are annually adjusted for inflation. This year staff is recommending a 3.6% increase to offset the effects of increased construction costs. Changes in City Land Use Regulations and Transportation Plans require revising the Street Oversizing Program to bring it in line with new regulations and capture the actual costs of growth. The Street Oversizing Program has undergone routine recalculations in the past in response to changes in the City's Land Use Plan: • The Mountain Vista Sub Area Plan adopted in 1999 added significant street miles to the City's Master Street Plan and required a fee increase to recover costs. • The Fossil Lake expansion of the City's GMA in 2000 added some street miles, but also increased the amount of developable land in the City, resulting in a decrease of fees. The recently adopted East Mulberry Plan and the adoption of the Transportation Master Plan made changes to the future funding obligations of the Street Oversizing Program. Fees should be increased to recover costs. Street Oversizing must recover the costs of growth to continue to be a financially viable program for constructing transportation infrastructure in newly-developing areas. A matrix of the proposed revisions included in this routine recalculation of the Street Oversizing fees: 294 December 7, 2004 East Mulberry Plan Current Fee Inflation I add Proposed Fee - esidential $2,006/d.u. $72/d.u. $204/d.u. $2 282/d.u. i ht Industrial $1.43/s. . $0.5/s. . $0.141s. . $1.62/s. . zce $3.35/s. . $0.121s. . $0.341s. . $3.81/s. . etail $4.98/s. . $0.181s. . $0.511s. . $5.67/s. . 3.6% change 10.2% increase 1 13.8% increase Staff recommends adoption of these routine fee adjustments to the Street Oversizing Program." Interim City Manager Atteberry introduced the agenda item. Matt Baker,Transportation Services,presented background information relating to the agenda item. He stated the proposed street oversizing fee adjustments had been reviewed with the Council at a Study Session. He stated the intent of the fee was to have new development pay its fair share of transportation costs. He stated an impact fee was collected for each new development based on trip generation and that the funds received were used to reimburse developers for constructing streets or for the City to construct streets within or adjacent to the newly developed areas. He presented visual information showing a graphic representation of payment of costs and the $26.7 million in transportation improvements completed using the street oversizing program over the last six years. He stated the proposal was to make routine adjustments to the street oversizing program: an annual adjustment for inflation of construction costs and a routine recalculation due to the East Mulberry Plan. He stated the proposed adjustments were an increase of 3.6%for the 2005 inflation adjustment and an increase of 10.2% due to the recalculation of the East Mulberry Plan. He stated the total recommended increase in the fee was 13.8%. He presented an overview of the recalculations that had been done to arrive at the recommended increases. He stated the East Mulberry Subarea Plan added a significant number of street miles (about 45 lane miles) to the City network and that the Transportation Master Plan reclassified streets in accordance with the most recent computer modeling. He stated no change in the oversizing fee was recommended as a result of the Transportation Master Plan reclassifications. He presented comparative fee information for other jurisdictions and historical information relating the City's impact fees to the sales price of new homes. He stated impact fees had remained about 7.8% to 7.9% of the cost of new homes and that impact fees were currently about 7.5% of the average sale price of a new home in Fort Collins. He presented examples of increased fees for various kinds of commercial developments. He summarized the review and public outreach processes. Michelle Jacobs, Home Builders Association of Northern Colorado, stated placing the burden on families was unfair. She stated only a small amount of the cost was paid by the City. She spoke regarding impact fee court cases and stated the "essential nexis" was not apparent in the $204 increase for East Mulberry since that property was 4-8 years away from annexation. She stated it was not reasonable to impose an impact fee increase to build streets on land that was not in the City. 295 December 7, 2004 She stated an inflationary increase had already been approved earlier this year. She stated the City should"work with the money it had rather than continually going to the building permit well to shore up City finances." She stated current Fort Collins residents were moving into new homes. She stated the Council needed to look at required improvements before adopting new or updated master plans. Tim Johnson, 1337 Stonehenge Drive, Transportation Board member, stated the Board supported this increase. He stated there was a shortfall in funding for transportation needs. He stated growth caused a need for transportation and that this was the reason there were oversizing fees. He stated these fees were trip generation based fees and that this was a fair approach. He noted that "speculative"commercial development on Riverside,Timberline and other streets were not deterred by the impact fees. He noted that older intersections in town were failing due to the incremental addition of traffic from new development. He stated a combination of solutions would be necessary to pay for transportation capital needs. He stated a lack of adequate public facilities would "stop development cold." He stated oversizing fees were necessary. He urged everyone to contact the State about raising the gasoline tax and vehicle registration fees to pay for fundamental transportation needs. Glen Colton, 625 Hinsdale Drive, spoke in support of the recommended increases in street oversizing fees. He asked that the Council consider going beyond that back to the March staff recommendation for a larger increase to cover the impact of new development on existing intersections. He spoke regarding strategies included in the Economic Vitality and Sustainability Action Group report pertaining to transportation funding mechanisms. He noted that in the City Plan survey 85% of residents surveyed indicated that new development should pay for all the costs of extending roads and providing utilities and other required services. He stated implementing the March staff recommendation for a larger fee increase would raise another $1 million per year for critical funding needs. He stated this would be more fair to existing taxpayers. He stated new growth should pay what it actually costs for improvements. He stated inadequate fees contributed to an ever growing problem. He urged the Council to pass the proposed Ordinance and to go even further to adopt the March staff recommendations. David May,Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce Executive Director,spoke in opposition to the fee increases. He stated they were being represented as routine and that a 13.8% increase was not routine in these difficult economic times. He stated other mandatory costs had been added to housing costs recently i.e. radon mitigation, soil amendments, etc. He stated added fees had a significant impact on housing stock and commercial construction. He recommended that the Council commission a study to look at the impact fees in comparison to other communities. Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb Street, stated the proposed fees were inadequate. She stated streets were now inadequate because of rapid growth. She stated sales tax could not be counted on to meet transportation capital needs. She asked that the Council look at other solutions. She stated oversizing fees failed to contribute to solving the problems of inadequate intersections and "crumbling existing streets." She stated there were many "uncaptured costs" to existing residents that added up to economic shortfalls. She stated there were intangible costs, such as added air 296 December 7, 2004 pollution and associated health costs. She asked that the Council take a comprehensive look at long term transportation needs. Councilmember Tharp asked staff to summarize why it was important to add the East Mulberry streets to the analysis even though that area was not yet annexed to the City. Baker stated 20% of the East Mulberry plan area was in the City at this time and that over 90% of the area was eligible for annexation upon development. He stated upon annexation development would pay City impact fees,construct streets and be reimbursed from the street oversizing fund. He stated it was necessary to include the area in the Transportation Master Plan and to collect fees to build roads in the area. Ron Phillips,Transportation Services Director,stated this was also consistent with the City planning process. He stated the Growth Management Area had historically been the area for the base for the formulation of costs of street infrastructure. He stated it was necessary for street oversizing fees to be paid over time to help defer the cost of the development's impacts on the City. Mayor Martinez asked if a street oversizing fee was being charged in the proposed southwest annexation area. Phillips stated the area was included in the Master Street Plan and that the arterial and collector (oversized) streets were included in the fee formulation because they were in the Growth Management Area. He stated if development took place in that area in the County that there was no street oversizing fee applied. He stated the arterial and collector streets were part of the formulation of costs anticipated to go into the base of calculating the fee. Mayor Martinez asked if there was a street oversizing impact fee for streets outside of the City limits. Phillips stated they were included in the cost estimates done for the entire Growth Management Area for collector and arterial streets. He stated homes constructed in the area that were not required to annex would not pay the street oversizing fee but that if they annexed they would be required to pay the fee. Cam McNair, City Engineer, stated they would pay a fee to the County if they remained in the County and would pay a fee to the City if annexed. Mayor Martinez asked why East Mulberry was being asked to pay before being annexed. McNair stated the builder would pay a one-time fee when they drew a building permit. Councilmember Kastein asked if development had been paying for street oversizing that may eventually happen since the inception of the street oversizing fee. Baker replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Weitkunat stated this issue had been discussed at the study session. She stated she believed that everyone agreed with the inflationary increase. She asked Council to consider postponing the 10.2% portion of the increase because the East Mulberry plan was only recently adopted and because of the difficult economic times. She stated there had been incremental actions in recent months that increased the cost of development. She stated it was "arbitrary" to make the increase based simply on the addition of a subarea plan to the program. She asked for postponement of the increase based on conditions. She noted that all new construction in the City would be "picking up the tab." 297 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Tharp asked staff about the effect of such a delay. Phillips stated the City took in about $4 million annually in street oversizing fees and that 10% would be $400,000. He stated development paid the fees in effect at the time a building permit was pulled. Councilmember Kastein noted that public improvements were delayed for the Lifestyle Center and that some sales tax was rebated for that project. He also noted that Loveland offered incentives to development to a greater degree than Fort Collins. He stated L.oveland's impact fees for streets were $2,900 and that the Fort Collins fees were $1,000 less than that. He stated the comparison was not clear because of the rebates offered by Loveland and that it was unclear "how far behind" Fort Collins actually was. Phillips stated when Loveland waived fees that they were paid from the General Fund as required by law. He stated much of Loveland's new infrastructure was being paid for through the issuance of debt to be paid for through the Metro District, the Urban Renewal Authority, etc. He stated the Loveland approach to funding major infrastructure was different than the Fort Collins approach. Councilmember Kastein noted that it was not possible to compare the Loveland and Fort Collins impact fees in isolation. Phillips agreed and noted that the Fort Collins fees were figured on the rationale that had been in use for many year. Councilmember Kastein asked if streets were completely funded in the past and, if so, what had changed to create the funding shortfalls. Baker stated in past years the maintenance program was street overlay on a block-by-block basis. He spoke regarding historical maintenance problems at major intersections and the issuance of debt to patch streets damaged in snow storms. He stated such situations led to the creation of a pavement maintenance program and street oversizing program. Phillips stated the original street oversizing fees were set by Council lower than necessary and that the street oversizing fund had financial difficulties as a result. He stated there had been a "steady attempt" since then to set the fees where they needed to be. Councilmember Roy stated he had questions at the study session on strategies for existing intersection deficiencies and asked if there were any ideas on how the City should proceed. Phillips stated the staff work that had been done on the issue was presented at a study session in March. He stated additional study session discussion could be scheduled at Council's direction. Councilmember Roy stated the City should address funding for existing intersection deficiencies. He stated in response to Councilmember Weitkunat's comments that it was important to deal with this issue now rather than postponing the matter. Councilmember Hamrick asked if the$1.2 billion funding shortfall would be made worse if this fee increase was postponed and how it would impact development in some areas. McNair stated the $1.2 billion estimate was conceptual and that any action on the street oversizing fees would not change that estimated figure. He stated over time the impact fees had been about the same percentage of total housing prices. He stated Bruce Biggi had done a report on impact fees and concluded that there was no dramatic impact on development provided the fees were applied fairly 298 December 7, 2004 and consistently and that the monies were used for the intended purposes. He stated the City's program was "successful, consistent and self-sustaining" for 25 years. ("Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point.) Councilmember Hamrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Ordinance No. 197, 2004 on First Reading. Councilmember Roy asked if at least three Councilmembers were interested in having staff work on options for addressing funding for existing intersection deficiencies. Councilmembers Bertschy and Hamrick stated they were interested. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would not support the motion and would not support consideration of the intersection problem. She stated Fort Collins was in a difficult economic situation and that the City was facing issues relating to sales tax and other funding resources. She stated this Ordinance would impact the citizens and businesses. She stated more and more costs were being passed along to the citizens of the community. She stated this action and the addition of other fees would not help the economic recovery. She stated she would prefer to postpone the fee increase. She stated she could support the inflationary increase but not the 10% increase. Councilmember Hamrick stated price did not equal cost in housing. He stated impact fees had remained consistent as far as a percentage of the cost of a home. He stated impact fees could have a net positive effect on the local economy. He stated he would support the motion and that he would also support an intersection and existing deficiencies analysis. Councilmember Bertschy stated he would like the discussion to continue about existing deficiencies and intersections. He stated the fee increases were justified by the City's inability to fund the overall need. He stated there would be major improvements to be funded in an area (East Mulberry) that would be a vital part of the City in the near future. He stated the overall funding of major transportation needs must be addressed. He stated this significant increase would only be a"dent" in the problem. He stated he was also concerned about the frequency of fee increases. Councilmember Tharp stated she agreed that it was "tricky" to add more fees during time of economic downturn. She stated it was necessary to have money to pay for adequate infrastructure and that the transportation sales tax did not pass. She stated she did not want transportation funding to fall further behind and that it appeared to be necessary to increase the street oversizing fees. She stated she would reluctantly support the motion. Councilmember Kastein stated there were significant funding issues. He noted that the gasoline tax had not increased for inflation in decades and that the City was forced to find other options for street maintenance and capital. He stated he would support the motion and that he would like to see an analysis comparing the impact fees with the fees of other cities that were offering rebates to developments. 299 December 7, 2004 Mayor Martinez expressed a concern that incremental fee increases were raising the cost of housing and the cost of living. He noted that many working people could not afford to live in the City. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein,Roy, and Tharp. Nays: Councilmembers Martinez and Weitkunat. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 198, 2004, Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, Adopted on First Reading The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff has identified a variety of proposed changes, additions and clarifications in the Fall biannual update of the Land Use Code. On November 18, 2004, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed changes and took specific action on five individual items. These actions are summarized in the attached memo. Outside of these five specific items, the Board voted 6 - 0 to recommend approval of the balance of the proposed changes to City Council. BACKGROUND The Land Use Code was first adopted in March of 1997. Subsequent revisions have been recommended on a biannual basis to make changes, additions,deletions and clarifications that have been identified in the preceding six months. The proposed changes are offered in order to resolve implementation issues and to continuously improve both the overall quality and "user friendliness" of the Code. Attachments include a summary of the Planning and Zoning Board's action and a summary of all the issues as well as the proposed Ordinance itself. In addition, the attachments provided by the private party that seeks to add the Drive-in Restaurants to the Neighborhood Center zone district are included. Also provided are drafi design standards ,for Drive-in Restaurants if they are to be allowed in the N-C zone district. Should City Council decide to enact these design standards, refinements will need to be made between First and Second Readings of the Ordinance." Interim City Manager Atteberry introduced the agenda item. Ted Shepard,Chief Planner,presented background information regarding the agenda item. He stated these were the biannual Land Use Code updates. He stated at an October study session, Council directed the deletion from the package of changes a request to reduce the minimum parking 300 December 7, 2004 requirement for the two-bedroom multifamily dwelling unit. He stated Council also directed that the drive-in restaurant not be added to the NC-Neighborhood Commercial zone district. He noted that the Planning and Zoning Board voted 4-2 in favor of that change. He stated at a November Study Session the raptor buffer issue was discussed and that the Council was evenly divided on that issue. He stated the Planning and Zoning Board considered the "skinny house" issue for the NCM and NCB zone districts and voted 4-2 to recommend leaving the Code language as written. He stated the Board also favored adding space in the trash enclosure for recyclable materials containers. He stated language relating to indoor kennels was "tightened up" at the request of the Planning and Zoning Board to allow such uses in the Harmony Corridor zone in the regional or community shopping center and not in a residential district. He stated the Board voted 5-1 to continue the raptor buffer item. He noted that the Council had an extensive packet of information on the proposed Land Use Code changes, the study session discussions and Board recommendations. John Stokes,Natural Resources,presented visual information relating to the raptor buffer issue. He noted that the issue was discussed at a recent study session. He stated the proposal brought forward at the request of some Councilmembers was to eliminate the hawk buffer and mitigation provisions currently in the Code and to create a temporary disturbance radius of 450 feet during the first nesting season and during the first year of a multi-year construction. He stated in subsequent years there would not be a protected radius but that the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibited disturbance of active nests. He stated the Natural Resources Advisory Board wanted the City to retain the current standards and that the Planning and Zoning Board voted to continue the matter for further discussion. He stated concerns included the loss of urban raptors, the lack of a City-wide tree protection ordinance,and the lack of a scientific basis for the changes. He stated the staff recommendation was to modify the Code as proposed. He stated staff believed that the changes would be appropriate because the City had a"robust"landscape scale conservation system consisting of the natural areas program and Section 3.4 of the Code setting forth setbacks for wetlands and riparian corridors. Mayor Martinez stated each participant would have three minutes to speak. Michelle Jacobs, Home Builders Association of Northern Colorado, stated the cost of land development in the City contributed to increased home prices. She thanked the Councilmembers who asked that the raptor buffer issue be brought back for discussion and who condemned the $10,000 per acre mitigation fee. She stated there was a need to streamline the development review process. She asked that the Council accept staff's proposal to eliminate the raptor buffer zones with the exception of the one-year limited construction activity and to eliminate the $10,000 per acre mitigation fee. Patrick Reeves, 810 Maple Street, read a prepared statement on behalf of himself and nine other residents(Diane Riser,408 Wood Street;Robert and Elizabeth Cuff,400 Park Street;Danielle Bilou, 406 Wood Street; Pat Kendall, 502 North Shields Street; Jim Wertz, 425 North Sherwood Street; Don and Ruth Ingles-Widrick, 401 Wood Street; and Nan Reed, 308 Park Street) and stated the comments had also been endorsed by the Capital Hill Neighborhood organizing group. He stated item 666 would promote the preservation of historic Old Town neighborhoods such as Martinez Park and Capital Hill by decreasing the potential for "shoehorning" of extremely narrow single-family 301 December 7, 2004 homes and duplexes side-by-side within a single lot with a minimum street frontage dimension of 40 feet. He stated the changes did not conflict with the City Plan goals for redevelopment and in-fill in Old Town and that the planned growth could be accommodated by in-fill of existing vacant lots, consolidation of adjacent underutilized partial lots, and through construction of carriage houses behind existing dwellings. He stated the Land Use Code has not been recently updated to reflect the goals of City Plan and that there were deficiencies that could be potentially destructive to the neighborhood. He stated the revisions in item 666 were limited to single-family homes and duplexes and were not extended to all permitted uses in NCM zoned areas(multifamily dwellings of up to four units, bed and breakfasts, group homes, child care centers, etc.). He stated failing to give the same treatment to these uses as to single-family homes and duplexes would promote an alteration of the historical pattern of development and provide an economic incentive for the"scrape-off'of of existing structures and the construction of high density multifamily developments. He stated the Martinez Park Neighborhood organization was informed by staff that the rewriting of the Westside Neighborhood Plan will be delayed for two years. He stated policy EXNIA of City Plan "In-fill Development and Redevelopment"permits in-fill redevelopment only in designated areas of existing neighborhoods as determined in a subarea plan. He stated the residents of Martinez Park and Capital Hill were in a vulnerable position where in-fill was being encouraged by City Plan without appropriate quantitative standards. Dick Rule,4824 South Lemay Avenue,addressed items 674 and 675 and stated the proposed change would eliminate single-family dwellings and accessory buildings and structures from the requirements of Section 3.4.7 (Historical and Cultural Resources). He stated his assumption was that this change would have eliminated the process he had to go through on the sale of his property. He stated the proposed change would only pertain to non single-family dwelling units. He stated these changes did not adequately address Council's comments at his appeal hearing or at the Study Session on September 28. He stated he believed that Council wanted to restore the preservation program to a more voluntary program through education and incentives and to provide better notification to property owners regarding potentially eligible or declared sites or structures. He stated he did not believe that those changes were addressed. He stated Paragraph(e)in Section 3.4.7 relating to demolition or relocation referred to "individually eligible" structures rather than designated structures. He stated the proposed change would create the same kind of environment that he had to deal with on his property. He stated there should be more specific guidelines on relocation or demolition or structures other than an "opinion of the decision maker." He asked that Council require additional work on this section of the Land Use Code and on Chapter 14 of the City Code. Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated the "science" showed that there should be bigger raptor buffer zones. He stated staff should have focused on the"real reasons"for the change to zero buffer i.e. that this was a one non-endangered species provision. He stated he would have preferred to see strengthened habitat protection standards and enforcement of those standards and a stronger community separator program. He stated this change to the Land Use Code was not ready for approval. He stated the change relating to recyclable containers could also be improved. 302 December 7, 2004 Glen Colton,625 Hinsdale Drive,supported the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation that there was not enough analysis done on the raptor buffer issue. Fred Croci, 718 Meadow Run Drive, Wheeler Commercial, spoke in support of drive-throughs in NC-Neighborhood Commercial zones. He stated he believed that pedestrian safety issues could be adequately addressed. John Slack, 1831 Terrace Court, W.W. Reynolds, supported drive-throughs in the NC zone. He Scott Beard, Sonic Drive In, 1301 West Elizabeth Street, stated he had presented to the City Clerk a petition signed by 140 individuals in support of drive-in restaurants in NC districts with one contingency i.e.that design related issues be directed back to staff and Planning and Zoning to allow the development of acceptable standards. David Beard, Sonic Drive In, 1301 West Elizabeth Street, asked that Council allow drive-ins in the NC zone and refer the design standards to the Planning and Zoning Board. Shannon Velasquez,2702 Rigden Parkway,stated there were few time and cost efficient restaurants in the area in which she lived and worked. She supported the addition of a Sonic drive-through in her area. Mayor Martinez asked if Mr. Rule was correct in stating that the proposed Ordinance was contrary to Council's direction. Shepard stated he was told that the proposal would"take the single-family home out of the equation." He stated it was his understanding that if the Ordinance had been in place during the Rule Farm proceedings that there would have been no such proceedings. Councilmember Kastein stated it was his understanding that the Council direction was to allow the ultimate decision regarding historical properties to be with the property owner. He questioned the wording of the Ordinance that would allow relocation or demolition only if in the opinion of the decision maker the applicant had to the maximum extent feasible attempted to preserve the site. He asked if this language would leave the final decision up to the applicant. City Attorney Roy stated his reading of the language would leave the decision up to the decision maker. He stated he would discuss the language with the Deputy City Attorney prior to Second Reading of the Ordinance. He stated the"decision maker" and"to the maximum extent feasible"were defined terms in the Code. Greg Byrne, CPES Director, stated the proposed Land Use Code change was a partial response to the direction received from Council. He stated further work was being done on options and that a recommendation would be presented in the next round of Code changes. He stated the proposed changes would take the review process back to how it was administered two years ago and that more substantive changes would be made next spring. Councilmember Tharp asked why staff did not follow the Council's direction in making these changes. Byrne stated staff was following Council's direction and that the full changes were not ready for this round of Land Use Code changes. 303 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Tharp noted that Council did not direct staff to develop six options and that clear direction was given about the changes to be brought forward. She asked why staff was looking at six different options. Byme stated discussion was scheduled for the February 22 Study Session. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the problems that had occurred with the Rule situation would be lessened by making this change. Byrne replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the language regarding "individually eligible" made a difference and why the language relating to "designated" could not also be included. Byrne stated those options would be considered by the Council in the next round of changes. He stated the problem for the Rule situation was conflicting Code provisions. He stated in the spring changes the Council would be asked if it wanted any provisions for protection of eligible or designated structures. He stated it was his understanding that Council direction was to immediately eliminate the conflicting provisions. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if this partial solution would be better than the current situation. Byme replied in the affirmative. Mr. Rule requested permission to speak again. Mayor Martinez approved the request. Mr. Rule stated all this change would do would be to remove single-family dwellings from the requirements that he had to go through for his property. He stated the Chapter 14 provisions would continue in effect. Councilmember Kastein stated he viewed this as a first step toward a more lenient process that would be more favorable for property owners. He stated he would like the recommendations to come forward in time for this Council to make a decision before the election. Byrne stated staff planned to bring the next round of changes forward to a February Study Session for action in March. Mayor Martinez asked why the full changes could not yet be made. Byrne stated staff did not receive clear direction on some specifics. He stated staff did understand that Council wanted a relaxation in the standards. Mayor Martinez requested that staff provide a copy of the study session summary at which direction was given. Councilmember Hamrick stated a speaker indicated that item 666 relating to"skinny houses"would apply only to single-family and duplexes and asked why it would not apply to other uses. Cameron Gloss, Director of Current Planning, stated there were work plan items scheduled over the next 18 months to address this issue. He stated a Code interpretation had been done to determine that houses as narrow as 15 feet could be built in the Old Town area and that this would be incongruent with the character of the surrounding area. He stated staff believed that the recommended Code change was appropriate but did not believe that expanding the requirement beyond single-family or duplexes was 304 December 7, 2004 not necessary. He stated it would be unlikely for a four-plex that narrow to be built and that this was not viewed as an "immediate threat." Councilmember Hamrick asked if staff planned to address the issue further in the future. Gloss stated staff agreed that there were other in-fill design issues that needed to be addressed in a more "exhaustive effort." Councilmember Bertschy asked if the proposed Ordinance would allow or continue to disallow drive-through restaurants. Shepard stated this was not in the Ordinance and that the request was that allowance of drive-throughs be included in the Ordinance. He stated the direction staff received from Council was that this issue was not ready for inclusion in the Ordinance. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the drive-through issue was considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. Shepard stated the Board considered it and recommended 4-2 to add it to the Ordinance. Councilmember Bertschy asked about item 668 (trash recycling enclosures)and why the phrase"to the extent reasonably feasible"was added after the Planning and Zoning Board considered the issue. Shepard stated staff believed that the Code was written in such a way to give the flexibility to administer the standard on a case-by-case basis rather than a"one size fits all"basis. He stated there was a fear expressed at the Planning and Zoning Board that staff would not do that. He stated the language was added to indicate the intent to be flexible. Councilmember Bertschy asked if the language was added after Planning and Zoning Board approval. Shepard stated it was added based on testimony at the Board meeting. Councilmember Bertschy asked what the Board vote was on this issue. Shepard stated the Board took a unanimous "voice vote" on this issue. Councilmember Kastein asked if the Council could choose to add the drive-in language to the Ordinance. Shepard replied in the affirmative and stated staff had provided a draft of some design standards at the direction of Council. Councilmember Kastein asked if the design standards were final. Shepard stated they were not final but that the draft showed the "context." Councilmember Bertschy asked if the Council could consider the individual issues and asked how that should be handled. City Attorney Roy stated a motion could be made to divide the question and that each issue could be considered by separate motion. Councilmember Bertschy suggested a motion to propose the passage of the Ordinance minus any specific items that required more work. He stated he believed that there should be a separate vote on adding a provision to allow drive-in restaurants, making amendments to the item on trash recycling enclosures, and raptor standards. 305 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Hamrick asked if a motion could be made to adopt the Ordinance followed by motions to amend. Councilmember Bertschy stated he would like to vote for the Ordinance in general and that there were several specific items that might prevent him from voting for the Ordinance. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would prefer to divide the motion. She suggested a discussion on the direction on specific items. She stated the easiest process would be to make a motion and pull the specific items out for discussion as amendments. Councilmember Kastein stated he would prefer to divide the motion as suggested by Councilmember Bertschy to allow the Council to take a different kind of action on each item if desired. He stated he thought there should also be a motion on "skinny houses." City Attorney Roy stated the motion could be divided and each issue addressed. He stated it would then be necessary to prepare an Ordinance that would be consistent with the outcome of those individual votes. He suggested putting the Ordinance on the table by motion and then entertaining motions to add on Second Reading an item dealing with drive-through restaurants, to take out the wording relating to raptors until reworked by the Council, and to amend the recycle container provision. He stated Council could then go back to the main motion to adopt or defeat what was left in the Ordinance. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Hamrick,to adopt Ordinance No. 198, 2004 on First Reading. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by CouncilmemberWeitkunat, to amend the Ordinance to allow drive-in restaurants in the NC zone with the stipulation that design guidelines would be prepared and brought back for Council consideration. Councilmember Kastein asked if the intent was to have those design guidelines considered by the Planning and Zoning Board. City Attorney Roy stated the Code required Board consideration prior to presentation to the Council. Councilmember Weitkunat requested clarification regarding the design guidelines and whether they could be done after Second Reading of the Ordinance. City Attorney Roy stated any change to the Land Use Code must be considered by the Planning and Zoning Board before Council consideration. Gloss stated staff was proposing standards and that clarification was needed as to whether these should be standards or guidelines. He noted that staff would prefer standards. Byrne stated the concept of drive-in restaurants was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board and that the Board had not reviewed the staff's recommendations on design guidelines. City Attorney Roy stated Section 2.9.4 required the Board to make a recommendation to the City Council. He stated if the concept had been endorsed by the Board that this constituted the required recommendation from the Board to the Council to amend the text of the Code. He stated it was discretionary on whether Board input was required on the guidelines. 306 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Roy stated on October 26 the Council gave direction to staff not to pursue this. He noted that an interested party spoke at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing and that this item was now being "shoehorned" into the Land Use Code less than a month and a half after Council gave direction on this issue. Shepard stated that was a fair assessment. Councilmember Kastein asked if the Council would be asked to approve the design guidelines. Councilmember Bertschy stated that was his intent. Councilmember Kastein stated he would like to see the menu board allowed as part of the design standard. Councilmember Hamrick asked if the intent of the motion was to add this to the Ordinance. He noted that this was an effort to do that "on the fly." He stated direction could instead be given to staff to bring this back as a separate Code change. He stated this would provide more clarity and time to discuss the issue. Councilmember Weitkunat stated this issue went before the Planning and Zoning Board and that Council had two discussions on this issue. She stated it seemed to be ready for a decision with the exception of the standards. Councilmember Tharp stated the Council said"no"originally but that it was "reasonable"to listen to what was presented. She stated she was ready to move ahead on this issue. Councilmember Bertschy stated he changed his mind because "drive-through" restaurants were permitted and that"drive-in"restaurants were not. He stated"drive-ins"were more environmentally friendly than "drive-throughs" because people turn their engines off at"drive-ins." Shepard stated in the NC zone the standard at issue was very specific i.e.that fast food restaurants were allowed but that "drive-ins" and "drive-throughs" were prohibited. He stated the request was to delete the prohibition on "drive-ins" only and to continue to prohibit "drive-throughs" in the NC zone. He stated was the intent of the 4-2 Planning and Zoning Board vote. The vote on the motion to amend the Ordinance to allow drive-ins in the NC zone was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED, Councilmember Bertschy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Hamrick,to amend Section 3.2.5(B) relating to trash bin enclosures to remove the wording"to the extent reasonably feasible." Councilmember Weitkunat asked for the rationale and the effect of that change. 307 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Bertschy stated the intent was to ensure adequate space and that the language was added after the Planning and Zoning Board consideration of the previous wording. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if there could be circumstances in which it would not be feasible. Shepard stated the intent was to design a standard that was flexible rather than proscriptive. He stated there was one situation in which a branch bank did not want to have an enclosure because it shredded confidential paper through an interior recycling program rather than through an exterior trash hauling service. City Attorney Roy stated the definition of the phrase to the extent reasonably feasible was that"under the circumstances reasonable efforts have been undertaken to comply with the regulation,that costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential benefits to the public or would unreasonably burden the proposed project, and reasonable steps have been undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse impacts resulting from noncompliance." Councilmember Roy stated Section 3.4.7 had a reference"to the maximum extent feasible"and that Council had objected to that language. He stated a majority of Council was also taking exception to the language "to the extent reasonably feasible." Councilmember Weitkunat stated she did not say that the language"to the maximum extent feasible" was unpalatable. She stated she would favor the inclusion of that language in the Land Use Code because there were some "gray areas" in which flexibility was necessary. She stated the example of the branch bank was a prime example. Councilmember Roy stated he would support Councilmember Bertschy's motion to amend. Councilmember Hamrick asked how staff would handle situations such as the branch bank if the language "to the extent reasonably feasible" was not included. Shepard stated it was his interpretation that staff would still be allowed flexibility to deal with the situation. Councilmember Hamrick asked what would happen if a new user went into business at the bank location in the future. Shepard stated if there was a change from a bank to a bank that the City would have no authority to change what had been approved because it would be a minor amendment. He stated if it was a change of use requiring a change in the Certificate of Occupancy that the City would have the ability to require the trash enclosure. Mayor Martinez asked if it would hurt to leave the wording in. Shepard stated staff was comfortable either way. He stated there were apparently concerns that the inclusion of the language made the standard"too loose" at some time in the future. The vote on the motion to amend the Ordinance to remove the language "to the extent reasonably feasible" was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick and Roy. Nays: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. THE MOTION FAILED 308 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Kastein stated it was unclear what was being recommended about"skinny houses" and what the Planning and Zoning Board said. He asked if the Board was recommending leaving the Code the same. Gloss stated the Board requested that the Code change as submitted to the Council. He stated there was testimony suggesting expansion of the Code language. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy,to refer item 676 (the raptor buffer standards) back to the Planning and Zoning Board Councilmember Weitkunat stated the Council had discussed this issue many times and that she was "perplexed"about why the Planning and Zoning Board did not make a recommendation. She stated there had been enough discussion to warrant moving forward. Councilmember Hamrick asked why the Planning and Zoning Board voted to continue this item. Stokes stated the Board wanted to have some additional discussion on the issue and did not feel that the staff perspective was fully developed. He stated the Board wanted the matter to be brought back with some different options. The vote on the motion to amend the Ordinance to refer the raptor buffer standards back to the Planning and Zoning Board was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick and Roy. Nays: Councilmembers Kastein, Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Roy asked if there was a definition for "skinny houses." Gloss stated there were examples in other jurisdictions of houses that were as narrow as 15 feet. Councilmember Roy asked why there would not be a prohibition for "skinny" office buildings as well as "skinny houses." Gloss stated staff did not see a need for that prohibition at this point given the pattern of development. He stated other jurisdictions had not experienced a problem with other types of"skinny" buildings. Councilmember Roy stated he would like to see development of a definition for"skinny house"and "skinny duplex." Gloss stated staff could work on that while working on changes to in-fill policies. He stated the nomenclature was intended to refer to "narrow houses" and that the term "skinny houses" was used to help people remember the concept. Councilmember Roy stated he would not support the main motion. He stated Council had directed that the drive-in restaurant issue not be brought forward and that it had been brought forward after an interested party talked at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing. He stated the Planning and Zoning Board suggestion regarding trash enclosures had been changed after Board consideration. He stated Council direction was clear (even though he disagreed) regarding the demolition and relocation of historic buildings and that what was brought back for Council consideration did not follow that direction. He stated he did not agree with the raptor buffer zone change. He stated there 309 December 7, 2004 were concerns regarding"skinny houses."He stated the Ordinance was lacking in terms of clarity, completion and failure to follow Council direction. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the intent of the biannual Land Use Code changes was to help produce a Code that would function well. She stated these changes had been worked through and that some could reoccur in the future as work continued to correct problems. She stated she was comfortable with the direction based on changes in the community. She stated this was a"changing document" that should reflect the "changing community." Councilmember Hamrick stated he agreed with Councilmember Roy's comments and would not be supporting the main motion. The vote on the main motion as amended was as follows:Yeas:Councilmembers Kastein,Martinez, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick and Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED. ("Secretary's Note: The Council took a brief recess at this point.) Resolution 2004-142 Adopting the City's 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda,Adopted The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) develops a legislative agenda to assist in the analysis of pending legislation. The proposed 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda, which is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit "A", has been updated from the 2004 document and was reviewed and approved by the Legislative Review Committee. Changes are highlighted below. This document will be used as a guide for the upcoming 2005 General Assembly and the first session of the 109th Congress. The purpose of the Legislative Policy Agenda is to articulate the City's position on common legislative topics. It will be used by Council members and staff to determine positions on pending legislation and as a general reference for state legislators and our congressional delegation. Policy statement additions and deletions to the 2004 Legislative Policy Agenda: Paue 5. AIR OUALITY, amend statement: 2. Support legislation that encourages regional planning efforts for regional issues that cannot be solved through City action in isolation, e.g. the brown cloud and ozone. This addition highlights ozone because the Fort Collins area is currently in non-attainment. 310 December 7, 2004 Page 7, AIR QUALITY, wood smoke, amend statement: 1. Support legislation and regulation that reduce wood smoke emissions and that restrict the installation of non-certified wood stoves and f replaces. Adds wording to the policy statement that is already included in the introductory paragraph of the wood smoke section. Page 15, FINANCE, add statement: 3.Support increased state funding and budgetary autonomyfor Colorado State University and Front Range Community College The phrase budgetary autonomy refers to enterprise status for CSU and these entities'ability to set tuition rates—a key provision if they are to blunt the effects of continuing funding reductions. The health of Fort Collins' economy and City revenues are tied to the financial condition of these institutions. Page 18, FIRE PROTECTION, amend statement 1. Support legislation adopting a State fire code, the code of choice being either the Uniform Fire Code(1997 or later)or the 2006International Fire Code, which establish a State minimum standard for fire code enforcement in existing and newly constructed structures. Permit local option of municipalities to impose more restrictive standards. The International Fire Code is becoming the code of choice for cities and counties throughout the state in large part because of it's compatibility with the International building codes being adopted by those same entities. Fire Marshals have been involved in the development of both the Uniform Fire Code and the International Fire Code. Page 24, NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCES, add statement: 5. Support legislation that facilitates the eviction of public nuisance tenants. Eviction is a process covered by state statutes which currently place eviction matters in County Court. Evictions can take 60 to 90 days due to case backlogs. As the City looks for ways to improve its neighborhoods it should support ways of speeding the process for removing tenants who are chronic violators of the City's public nuisance ordinances. Possibilities include moving these cases to Municipal Court or allow them to be heard by an administrative law judge. Page 25, POLICE SERVICES, delete statement: 8. Support legislation that increases the penalty for impersonating a police officer from a misdemeanor to a felony. 311 December 7, 2004 This law was passed by the 2004 General Assembly. Page 25, POLICE SERVICES, add statement: 8. Support legislation that authorizes law enforcement peer support team members' "privileged communication" status that is not admissible in judicial, administrative, arbitration or other adjudicatory proceedings. This statement would support a bill authored by Fort Collins Police psychologist Dan Dworkin and Loveland Police psychologist Jack Digliani. The new law would give privileged communication status to conversations between police officers and law enforcement peer counseling team members. Peer counselors are fellow officers trained and certified by a police department to provide emotional support informal sessions. Peer counseling is used by officers to deal with the trauma of a critical incident or to discuss job and family related issues. It has been found to bean effective method to relieve the stress and burdens of police work. To be effective, the conversations must be held in confidence. The proposed legislation would not protect officers from any admission of felony conduct, criminal intent,family abuse or from testifying about any case in which they are involved as a police officer or a witness. Page 30, TELECOMMUNICATION, delete statement: 13. Support adequate spectrum allocation of public radio frequencies for public safety, emergency services,public works, and other public use as vital to the city's ability to safeguard citizens. The City will continue to monitor and negotiate for appropriate allocation of all telecommunication resources. IT has suggested that this statement be eliminated because it is repetitive of statement#6,page 25, under Police Services." Interim City Manager Atteberry stated staff would be available to answer any questions about the agenda item. Mark Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road,stated the Colorado Supreme Court found State Treasurer Mike Coffman guilty of using State funds to lobby against a citizen initiative (Amendment 23). He stated it was a problem in general that governments used taxpayer dollars to argue for policy decisions. He stated the government should be the "servant of the people." He stated there would be a City initiative on the ballot regarding the removal of fluoride from drinking water. He commented on a letter dated May 19,2003 from Mayor Martinez to Senator Peggy Reeves regarding proposed State legislation that were "partisan bills."He stated the Fort Collins City Council should not be using government funds to argue in this manner on "tyrannical" bills related to property rights. Councilmember Kastein asked if there was any language in the legislative policy relating to urban renewal districts and farmland being designated as"blighted areas"to allow the use of tax increment 312 December 7, 2004 financing. Mark Radtke, Legislative Coordinator, stated there was nothing in the policy that specifically addressed urban renewal in that context. He stated there were policy statements that protected the City's use of urban renewal as a tool. Councilmember Kastein asked the Legislative Review Committee to discuss this issue again. Councilmember Tharp asked for more direction. Councilmember Kastein stated he was concerned about the farmland being declared to be "urban blight" by other jurisdictions and whether this was an improper use of urban renewal districts. Councilmember Tharp stated if the last bill that was before the legislature had passed that the City could not have had the Urban Renewal District on North College Avenue because some of that land was vacant. She stated the bill would have excluded all vacant land. She stated the Committee could look at the issue again. Councilmember Weitkunat stated it might be appropriate for the EVSAG Committee to look at the issue since urban renewal districts were an economic tool. Councilmember Hamrick stated it would be worthwhile to discuss the issue to develop the City's position. Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick,to adopt Resolution 2004-142. Councilmember Kastein thanked Mr. Brophy for his comments. He stated he would be asking staff to follow up on several items. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Executive Session Authorized Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adjourn into Executive Session pursuant to Sections 2-31(a)(1)(a),2-3 1(a)(1)(d),and 2-31(a)(2)of the City Code to discuss personnel matters, potential litigation and legal issues relating to the City Manager appointment process. Mathew Benson,reporter with the Fort Collins Coloradoan,objected on behalf of his employer and the public to the decision to go into Executive Session. He stated the Colorado Revised Statutes provided that this body could meet into Executive Session to discuss certain matters and that this did 313 December 7, 2004 not appear to meet any of the criteria. He asked for an opportunity for the Coloradoan's attorney to present objections to this Executive Session. Alden Hill, attorney representing the Coloradoan, stated open government was better government. He requested an open meeting on the City Manager selection process and opposed this discussion in an Executive Session. He stated this was not a "personnel matter" relating to the employer/employee relationship. He stated taxpayer dollars would be spent to pay a critical member of a Council-Manager team. He asked that the Council`let the spotlight shine on this process." He stated an Executive Session was not justified in this situation. Councilmember Tharp asked the City Attorney to clarify why the Council could meet in Executive Session for the issues that were raised. City Attorney Roy stated this was a difficult discussion because it could"compromise the purposes for which the Executive Session discussion will occur." He stated Mr.Hill appeared to be making some assumptions about the topics that would be discussed in Executive Session. He stated he believed that the topics described (personnel matters and potential litigation and legal issues related to the City Manager selection process)were all legitimate topics for consideration and discussion in Executive Session under the provisions of the local open meetings law and the State open meetings law insofar as that might apply. Councilmember Roy stated he felt strongly that the Council's work should be done"out in front of the people." He stated there were circumstances in which the discussion was done best in Executive Session. He stated he would"promise" that he would support having every other session regarding the hiring of the new City Manager in public. He stated the Council needed an opportunity to discuss issues with the City Attorney in a confidential mode. He stated the need for an Executive Session was clear in this case. Councilmember Hamrick stated the topics that could be discussed in Executive Session were broad. He stated he was "struggling" with what part of the City Manager selection process would be confidential. He stated it would help him and the public to know what would be discussed in the Executive Session without revealing the advice that the City Attorney might give the Council. City Attorney Roy noted for the record that the "personnel matters" to be discussed in the Executive Session were not limited to the City Manager selection process. He stated a further disclosure of those"personnel matters"would compromise the purpose for which the Executive Session was being conducted. Councilmember Hamrick suggested that the "City Manager selection process" was a broad description. Councilmember Bertschy repeated the motion and stated the purpose was to discuss personnel matters, potential litigation and legal issues related to the City Manager appointment process. He stated the motion did not indicate that the appointment process would be discussed. Councilmember Hamrick stated interviews had been scheduled with the City Manager candidates and that he wanted to verify that those interviews would be conducted in public. 314 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Kastein stated the Executive Session discussion would relate to "legal issues" relating to the selection process. Councilmember Hamrick stated he would vote to go into Executive Session. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. ("Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 10:35 p.m. and reconvened following the Executive Session at 11:45 p.m. Interim City Manager Atteberry left at 11:15 p.m. during the Executive Session.) Mayor Martinez asked if there was further Council discussion. Councilmember Hamrick supported a public discussion of the process being used for the selection of the new City Manager. He stated he would also like an open discussion on the Council's participation in the selection process. He asked for an update to the public on the schedule for this week. Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, explained the process and schedule. She stated the candidates would meet with the Citizen Advisory Panel and Executive Lead Team panel on Thursday and Friday. She stated on Thursday evening at the Lincoln Center there would be a community reception and a presentation by each candidate followed by questions and answers. She stated there would be an employee forum on Friday afternoon. She stated on Friday evening the Council would meet with one candidate and on Saturday the Council would meet with the other four candidates. She stated the Council would receive the feedback from the two panels on Saturday afternoon. Mayor Martinez asked why two candidates could not be interviewed on Friday. Jones stated there would not be sufficient time to allow for two candidates to be interviewed on Friday. Mayor Martinez asked how much time was allowed for each interview. Jones stated an hour and 15 minutes was allowed for each interview and that extra time could be taken if needed. Councilmember Hamrick asked about whether the panel interviews were open to the public. Rick DeLaCastro, Human Resources Director, stated the intent was that those sessions would be private interviews because they were forums not covered by the open meetings law. Councilmember Tharp asked if the rationale was that the members of those two groups were not elected officials and that there was therefore no requirement for an open meeting. DeLaCastro replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Kastein asked about the pros and cons of having interviews conducted in public and behind closed doors. DeLaCastro stated the pros of a public interview was an open process that 315 December 7, 2004 would enable people to form their own opinions about the candidates. He stated the downside would be that the individuals who had applied were not necessarily told ahead of time that these would be public interviews. He stated the interviews could have an impact on the current employment or future employment of the unsuccessful candidates. He stated a public interview could result in the candidate not being as candid as he might be in a closed session. He stated from a human resources perspective the goal is selection and attraction of the best candidate. He stated his opinion was that the quality of the interview would be better if the session was not open to the public. Mayor Martinez asked if the process for the previous City Manager selection included public or Executive Session interviews. Jones stated the interviews were done in Executive Session. She stated one concern would be a level playing field for all candidates and that the candidates interviewed later might have an advantage over the first candidates interviewed. Mayor Martinez asked if it would be possible to apply a restriction to ensure that candidates did not observe the interviews of the other candidates. Jones stated could be done but that there would be no guarantees that the candidates would not learn the questions asked of other candidates. Councilmember Roy stated his main concern was to find the best candidate for the City of Fort Collins. He stated the five candidates had placed themselves in an "open spot" and that he wanted this process to be in public. He questioned why the process would not be made as "transparent" as possible. Councilmember Tharp noted that the City had hired a"headhunter" and asked if he had any advice about the best practice for interviewing candidates. Jones stated the comment was that there would be more complete and candid information in a private session and that the discussion about the candidates could take place in a public session. Councilmember Tharp asked if it was legal to conduct the interviews in private. City Attorney Roy stated he believed that it would be legal. He stated neither the State law or the City Code expressly spoke to the question of who could be an Executive Session with the Council. He stated the City Code authorized the consideration of the appointment or hiring of City personnel. He stated the City Council could invite people into its Executive Session for the purpose of providing information to facilitate discussion. He stated he believed that from the legal standpoint that interviews of candidates could fall into that category. Councilmember Tharp asked what other cities did in this situation. City Attorney Roy stated he talked with the Colorado Municipal League about this issue and that it was his understanding that the practice of interviewing candidates for this kind of position in Executive Session was common among Colorado municipalities. He stated a interviews by the administrative staff were clearly not subject to the open meetings law. He stated the citizen panel could, under the State law, be construed as a kind of meeting that could be subject to those laws. He stated if the Council chose to close the interviews before the citizen panel that they would have to decide whether to go into Executive Session to conduct the interviews. 316 December 7, 2004 Counci(member Bertschy stated"public"needed to be defined with regard to the Council interviews. He stated his understanding was that the interviews would not be televised and that the interviews would be held in a comfortable setting. He stated the ability of the City Manager to function in a "very public arena" was important. He stated the candidates should be notified in advance that the interviews would be public. Councilmember Weitkunat stated in this situation the Council was the "employer" and the interviewees were the "employees." She stated she did not believe that this was different than any other type of work-related interview. She stated there needed to be a one-on-one interaction to solicit appropriate responses. She stated the interviews would change in a public venue. She stated she would like to see the citizen panel interviews done in an open venue. She stated this would be the appropriate place for community involvement. She stated the City Manager would be directly responsible to the City Council. She favored private conversations between the candidates and the Council and an ensuing open discussion. She stated the interviews needed to be held in private. Mayor Martinez expressed a concern that some candidates would have an advantage over the other candidates depending on when the interview occurred. He stated if the interviews were to be held in public that all of the interviews should be held on the same day. Councilmember Weitkunat asked what would be gained through a public process. Councilmember Roy stated the Councilmembers were the elected representatives of the citizens in charge of hiring the City Manager. He stated was the reason the interviews should be held in public. Councilmember Weitkunat stated a public interview process would make the Councilmembers, rather than the candidates, the "object" of the interview. Councilmember Roy agreed with that statement. Councilmember Weitkunat stated a public process would say that the Council was "doing its job" rather than "probing" to determine the best candidate. Councilmember Tharp stated some questions about the candidate's current employment or issues the candidate was dealing with should not be asked or answered in public. She stated it did not serve the public to know such information but that it was important for the Council to know that information. She stated asking such questions in a public setting may make it difficult for the unsuccessful candidates in their current situations. She stated it would be difficult for the candidates to give "real answers" to those kinds of questions when the interviews were being done "on stage." She stated the Council would"become part of the stage" when the interviews were done in public. Mayor Martinez stated holding the interviews in Executive Session would prevent Councilmembers from discussing the interviews and candidates outside of the Executive Session. 317 December 7, 2004 Councilmember Kastein agreed with Councilmember Tharp's comments. He stated many questions could point to personnel issues,job satisfaction, relationships to the candidates' Councils, etc. He stated it would be difficult for candidates to answer those kinds of questions in public. He stated one good reason to have the interviews in public was to give the public a chance to provide feedback. He noted that there would be an opportunity for the public to participate at the Lincoln Center forum. He stated he did not believe that the citizen panel interviews should be in public. He asked if the Council chose to keep the panel interviews closed if the advice from those panels could be kept confidential. Councilmember Roy asked if Councilmember Kastein would be uncomfortable asking some questions in a public session. Councilmember Kastein stated the candidates would feel uncomfortable answering some questions in a public interview. Councilmember Hamrick stated Councils would already be asking their City Manager why they were interviewing for other jobs. He stated the City Manager would not come for an interview and"tell a different story." He stated if some of the candidates could not answer questions in public that they perhaps should not be applying. He stated this was a"political process"involving elected officials and that the process should be open. Councilmember Kastein stated some candidates may not give the real answers in a public interview but would in a private interview. Mayor Martinez stated the depth of the interview could change depending on whether it was a public or private interview. He stated the answers would be more "superficial" in a public interview. Councilmember Roy noted that the Council could not make a final choice in Executive Session. He asked how the Council would transition from the Executive Session to making a choice in the public meeting. Mayor Martinez stated there would be a public discussion on the merits of the candidates. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she was ready to make a motion. City Attorney Roy suggested that Council clarify the process with regard to the Council interviews,the staff panel interviews and the citizen panel interviews. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, to hold the staff interviews of the applicants in sessions that would not be open to the public. Councilmember Hamrick asked if "public" included the news media. City Attorney Roy stated would be his understanding. 318 December 7, 2004 Alden Hill,representing the Coloradoan, stated it would be a mistake to pass the motion. He stated this was a public process that should be open to the public. He stated the staff interviews should be open. Councilmember Tharp suggested dealing with the Council interviews first and making the other interviews consistent with the Council interview process. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the discussion had been that staff meetings were not subject to the open meetings law. Councilmember Tharp stated she would like to see consistency in the interviews. THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kastein, that the Council deal with interviews for the City Manager in Executive Session. Mr. Hill stated one way to learn about candidates was to send someone to learn about their abilities where they currently work. He stated the main concern should be the public interest rather than difficulties for the candidates. He stated the State law specifically excluded employment applications as a personnel matter. He stated this should be handled in the public arena. Mayor Martinez asked if there should be public interviews for City employees. Mr. Hill stated there was a distinction between most employees and the City Manager. City Attorney Roy recommended another Executive Session to discuss legal issues and potential litigation before voting on this motion. Mark Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road,stated former Mayor Ohlson had indicated that interviews were held in public during the last process. He suggested delaying this discussion because of the lateness of the hour. Executive Session Authorized Councilmember Kastein made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adjourn into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2-31(a)(2)of the City Code. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Hamrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. ("Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 12:30 a.m. and reconvened following the Executive Session at 12:45 a.m.) 319 December 7, 2004 Mayor Martinez noted that a motion was on the floor. Councilmember Roy spoke in favor of having all of the interviews on Saturday and sequestering the candidates away from the proceedings. Mayor Martinez stated the interviews should all be held on Saturday. City Attorney Roy asked for confirmation that the motion would only require the interviews to be held in Executive Session. Mayor Martinez replied in the affirmative. The vote on the Councilmember Weitkunat's motion that the Council deal with interviews for the City Manager in Executive Session was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein,Martinez and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Roy and Tharp. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Kastein stated if interviews were to be held in public that all candidates should be informed about that decision. He stated it was more important for the deliberation process to be conducted in private than for the interviews to be held in private. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, that deliberations would be held in Executive Session. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy,Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Martinez asked if Council agreed that all five interviews would be conducted on Saturday. The consensus was in favor of holding all interviews on Saturday. Councilmember Kastein asked if the questions to be asked in the interviews had been determined. Jones stated there were sample questions provided by the"headhunter"and that the Council would need to discuss the interview questions. Mayor Martinez suggested that the Council meet at 6:30 p.m. on Friday night for that discussion. Councilmember Kastein suggested having that discussion at this meeting. Councilmember Tharp asked if the Council would be limited to the questions. Mayor Martinez stated 12 questions were on the recommended list of questions and that Council could choose to ask any of those questions or other questions. City Attorney Roy stated he would provide advice to the Council before the questions were finalized. He stated the Council may need 320 December 7, 2004 to consider whether they wanted to make the questions public and have the candidates aware of the questions before the interviews. Mayor Martinez asked when the Council should decide on the questions. City Attorney Roy suggested adjourning to Friday night. Mayor Martinez asked if an Executive Session would be needed for that. City Attorney Roy stated he would advise the Council on that prior to the Friday night meeting. The consensus was to meet on Friday at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the questions to be asked. Councilmember Tharp suggested giving direction to the citizen and administrative committees on whether to conduct interviews in public. Councilmember Hamrick stated they should follow the same process as the Council. Councilmember Tharp made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,that the citizen committee and administrative committee decide for themselves whether to conduct the interviews in private. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Kastein,Martinez,Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Hamrick. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment Councilmember Bertschy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adjourn the meeting to Friday, December 10, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Kastein, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED.. The meeting adjourned at 1:00 a.m., Wednesday, December 8, 2004. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 321 December 10, 2004 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting- 6:30 p.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Friday,December 10, 2004, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers:Bertschy,Martinez,Hamrick,Kastein,Roy,Tharp,and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Jones, Krajicek, Roy. Executive Session Authorized Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to go into Executive Session under Subsections 2-31(a)(1)(a) and 2-31 (a)(2) of the City Code to consider personnel matters involving the hiring and appointment of the City Manager and to discuss related legal issues. Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, and Martinez. Nays: Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adjourn the meeting to 8:00 a.m. on December 11, 2004 for the purpose of conducting interviews with the five City Manager candidates. Yeas: Councilmembers Roy, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, Martinez, Hamrick, and Kastein. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 322 December 11, 2004 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting - 8:00 a.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Saturday, December 11, 2004, at 8:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers:Bertschy,Martinez,Hamrick,Kastein,Roy,Tharp,and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Jones, Roy Each of the five City Manager candidates (Darin Atteberry, Lee Evett, Michael Conduff,Pasquale "Pat" DiGiovanni, and Frank Ragan) were interviewed by Council. Executive Session Authorized Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to go into Executive Session under Subsections 2-31(a)(1)(a) and 2-31(a)(2) of the City Code to consider personnel matters related to the hiring and appointment of the City Manager and to discuss related legal issues. Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein, Roy, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, Martinez, and Hamrick. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Council reconvened at 2:40 p.m. Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to direct City Attorney Steve Roy and Bob Slavin to negotiate a contract with Darin Atteberry and present the contract to Council on December 21, 2004. Yeas: Councilmembers Roy, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, Martinez, Hamrick, and Kastein. Nays: None. Councilmember Kastein agreeed with the motion adding that Darin has shined throughout the process as well as a couple other candidates. Mr. Kastein stated the City needs the relational skills possessed by Mr. Atteberry, although he does lack some experience and has some work to do. Councilmember Bertschy stated the process had been good up to this point and there was an excellent pool of candidates. Councilmember Weitkunat supported the motion and noted each candidate had commented that the process was clear,fair,and open.She added that Mr.Atteberry has the communication and relational skills and ability to lead the community.He also exhibits a true love of the community and Colorado. 323 December 11, 2004 Councilmember Roy stated appreciation to Diane Jones, Rick DeLaCastro, and Bob Slavin as well as the citizen panel, ELT, and the employee group. He encouraged Steve Roy and Bob Slavin to go forward with negotiations. Councilmember Tharp stated she was looking for more experience from Mr. Atteberry but that he did have good relationship skills. Mayor Martinez stated this was a very good process with a great deal of public exposure. Adjournment Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adjourn the meeting to 6:00 p.m. on December 14, 2004 for the purpose of conducting an executive session under Section 2-31(a)(1)(a)of the City Code to consider personnel matters related to the hiring and appointment of the City Manager. Yeas: Councilmembers Roy, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, Martinez, Hamrick, and Kastein. Nays: None. The meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 324 December 14, 2004 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting - 6:00 p.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday,December 14, 2004, at 6:00 p.m, in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers:Bertschy,Martinez,Hamrick,Kastein,Roy,Tharp,and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy. Executive Session Authorized Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to go into Executive Session under Subsections 2-31(a)(1)(a) and 2-31 (a)(2) of the City Code for the purpose of considering personnel matters regarding the hiring and appointment of the City Manager and to consult with the City Attorney regarding related legal issues. Yeas: Councilmembers Kastein,Roy, Tharp, Weitkunat, Bertschy, Martinez, and Hamrick. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 325