Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 11/07/2006 - RESOLUTION 2006-112 RESPONDING TO THE MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER: 23 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: November7, 2006 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Darin Atteberry Steve Roy SUBJECT Resolution 2006-112 Responding to the Motion for Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 137, 2006 Relating to the Southwest Enclave Annexation. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following the City Council's adoption of an ordinance annexing the Southwest Enclave,the Citizens Against Forced Annexation("CAFA")filed a motion for reconsideration of that ordinance with the City. This Resolution responds to the grounds stated in the motion, and adoption of the Resolution would deny the motion. BACKGROUND Following extensive outreach and discussion, the City Council adopted on October 3, 2006, an ordinance annexing the Southwest Enclave, together with several other ordinances designed to mitigate the effect of the annexation on residents and businesses within the enclave. The Municipal Annexation Act of 1965 states in C.R.S. Section 31-12-116 that, before a party believing itself to be aggrieved by an annexation may bring a court action to review the findings and decision of the municipality's governing body, that party must first have filed a motion for reconsideration within ten days of the effective date of the ordinance finalizing the challenged annexation, which motion must state with particularity the grounds upon which judicial review will be sought. On October 13, 2006, CAFA filed a motion for reconsideration with the City stating the grounds upon which it objects to the annexation. The proposed Resolution responds to those grounds and, if adopted by the Council, would deny the motion for reconsideration. RESOLUTION 2006-112 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RESPONDING TO THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 137, 2006 RELATING TO THE SOUTHWEST ENCLAVE ANNEXATION WHEREAS, on October 3, 2006, the City Council (the "Council") adopted on Second Reading Ordinance No. 137, 2006 (the "Ordinance"), thereby approving the Southwest Enclave Annexation (the"Annexation") upon the terms and conditions contained in the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 2006, Citizens Against Forced Annexation, LLC. ("CAFA") delivered to the City a"Motion for Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 137, 2006" (the "Motion") requesting that the Council reconsider the Ordinance for the reasons stated in the Motion; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to formally respond to the Motion; and WHEREAS,the Council believes that the Annexation complies with all relevant provisions of the law and is in the best interests of the City and further believes that it would not be in the City's interests to reconsider the Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Council disagrees with the grounds upon which CAFA has objected to the Annexation and hereby makes the following findings as to each of those grounds: A. Phased Annexation. Annexing the Southwest Enclave in phases is not contrary to the law, as alleged in the Motion. The Colorado courts have consistently upheld the ability of a municipality's governing body to determine the appropriate timing of annexations,as well as the size and shape of parcels to be annexed, in deciding how best to promote the "natural and well ordered development"of the municipality. While neither the Colorado Municipal Annexation Act of 1965 (the "Act") nor Article II, Section 30 of the State Constitution contemplates or specifically authorizes the phased annexation of an enclave, the Act and the Constitution authorize municipalities in Colorado to annex any unincorporated areas that have been entirely surrounded and contained within their municipal boundaries for a period of not less than three years. The Southwest Enclave meets these requirements and is therefore eligible for annexation. Accordingly,the Council hereby finds that the Annexation of the Southwest Enclave, upon the terms and conditions contained in the Ordinance is permitted by law, is in the best interests of the City and will promote the natural and well ordered development of the City for the reasons stated in the ordinance. B. Right of Way. The strip of land adjacent to Taft Hill Road that forms part of the boundary of the Southwest Enclave has never been dedicated or conveyed as a public right of way, it has not historically been used as a public right of way,and it is not currently used for such purpose. Therefore,using such strip of land as part of the boundary of the Southwest Enclave does not violate C.R.S. Section 31-12-1-6(1.1)(a) as alleged in the Motion. C. Right of Way. The use of the Taft Hill Road right of way to establish contiguity for the Coyote Ride No.2 annexation was not contrary to Colorado law as alleged in the Motion. On the contrary, C.R.S. Section 31-12- 105(1)(e)(I) specifically states that, within the Fort Collins three mile area, "the contiguity required by Section 31-12-104(1)(a) may be achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, (or) a public or private right-of-way..." In addition, this kind of alleged defect, even if it existed, is not one of the grounds upon which a subsequent enclave annexation can be invalidated under C.R.S. Section 31-12-116(2)(b). D. Open Space. The use of City-owned open space or natural areas to form part of the boundary of the enclave is not contrary to the law as alleged in the Motion. In the case of County Commissioners v. Denver, 459 P.2d 292, (Colo. 1969)the Colorado Supreme Court dealt with a similar argument that tax exempt land may not be situated on the perimeter of an area to be annexed, and used in meeting the contiguity requirements of the Act. The court rejected that argument because the Act contains no such restriction,and the Council believes that the reasoning of this case holds true for enclave annexations. Since the Act contains no prohibition against using city-owned open space or natural areas to form part of the boundary of an enclave, it is permissible to use such areas for that purpose. E. Intent of the Act. For the reasons stated above and in the Ordinance, the Council disagrees with CAFA's contention that the Annexation thwarts the intent of the Act or that the Council has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion in annexing the Southwest Enclave under the terms and conditions of the Ordinance. Section 2. Accordingly, the Council hereby finds that the objections of CAFA as stated in the Motion do not warrant reconsideration of the Ordinance, and the Motion is hereby denied. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 7th day of November, A.D. 2006. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk