Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 08/19/2014 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1 Karen Weitkunat, Mayor City Council Chambers Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Nelson Interim City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Meeting August 19, 2014 Proclamations and Presentations 5:30 p.m.  Proclamation Declaring August 20, 2014 as Fort Collins' 150th Anniversary.  Historic Preservation Awards. Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.  PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE  CALL MEETING TO ORDER  ROLL CALL  AGENDA REVIEW: CITY MANAGER  City Manager Review of Agenda. City of Fort Collins Page 2  Consent Calendar Review This Review provides an opportunity for Council and citizens to pull items from the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. o Council-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered before Discussion Items. o Citizen-pulled Consent Calendar items will be considered after Discussion Items.  CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Individuals who wish to make comments regarding items scheduled on the Consent Calendar or wish to address the Council on items not specifically scheduled on the agenda must first be recognized by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem. Before speaking, please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz once when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. The timer will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Each speaker is allowed 5 minutes. If there are more than 6 individuals who wish to speak, the Mayor may reduce the time allowed for each individual. ● State your name and address for the record ● Applause, outbursts or other demonstrations by the audience is not allowed ● Keep comments brief; if available, provide a written copy of statement to City Clerk  CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP Consent Calendar The Consent Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Pulled Consent Items. The Consent Calendar consists of: ● Ordinances on First Reading that are routine; ● Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine; ● Those of no perceived controversy; ● Routine administrative actions. 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the July 1 and July 15, 2014 Regular Council Meetings, the July 8, 2014 Special Council Meeting and the July 22, 2014 Adjourned Council Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the July 1 and July 15, 2014 Regular Council meetings, the July 8, 2014 Special Council meeting and the July 22, 2014 Adjourned Council meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, amends Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance increases the threshold for art projects requiring City Council approval from $10,000 to $30,000. During First Reading, Council changed the threshold amount from $60,000 to $30,000. City of Fort Collins Page 3 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2104, Amending the Fort Collins Traffic Code Regarding Payment of Fares for Use of Public Transportation Vehicles. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, amends the Traffic Code to address fare payment requirements on public transportation and provides due process of fare violations through Municipal Court. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Waterline Easement and Temporary Construction Easement on City Property to the North Weld County Water District and the East Larimer County Water District. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, authorizes the conveyance of easements on City Property to the East Larimer County Water District and the North Weld County Water District for their NEWT II Water Transmission Pipeline Project. The East Larimer County Water District and North Weld County Water District have begun the second phase of a multi-phase water transmission pipeline project for the purposes of conveying treated water from the Districts’ Soldier Canyon Filter Plant to their drinking water distribution systems. The alignment of the pipeline will cross a section of the City Property, located east of Taft Hill Road and north of Vine Drive, which is managed by the City Park Planning Department. As such, the Districts have requested a waterline easement from the City for their project. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 104, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, authorizes the conveyance of a non-exclusive easement to Nunn Telephone Company for the purpose of installing a fiber-optic connection to an AT&T fiber regeneration hut that is located on a portion of the Meadow Springs Ranch. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and approximately 690 feet long and would be placed immediately adjacent to an existing access road. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2014 Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Compensation of the Interim City Attorney. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, establishes the salary and compensation provided the interim City Attorney while she serves in this capacity. 7. Items Relating to the Vida Sana Grant. A. Resolution 2014-066 Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Grant Agreement With The Poudre Valley Health Systems Foundation For Delivery Of Vida Sana Project Programming B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund for the Vida Sana Grant. The purpose of this item is to approve the sub-grant agreement and appropriate sub-grant funds from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, through the Poudre Valley Health System Foundation and the Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity (CANDO), for the Vida Sana program to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in access among Latino/Hispanic community members to healthy lifestyle counseling and programs. Specific interventions include increasing access to facilities providing physical activity; providing social support to increase physical activity; and implementing a community wide campaign for increasing physical activity that will be carried out by partner agencies. City of Fort Collins Page 4 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2014, Amending Ordinance No. 121, 2013, Regarding Minimum Parking Requirements in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone District to Extend Its Termination Date. The purpose of this agenda item is to request a 90-day extension of the temporary parking requirements in the TOD Overlay Zone. The ordinance (Ord. No. 121, 2013) expires on September 13, 2014. The Planning and Zoning Board is requesting more time to evaluate recommendations from the TOD Parking Study. New parking requirements are anticipated to replace the temporary parking ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Board will consider this item at its September 11, 2014 meeting. City Council will formally consider the TOD Parking Study on First Reading on October 7 and Second Reading on October 21. 9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2014, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Rates, Fees and Charges and Provide Rates for Customers Enrolled in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project. The purpose of this item is to establish a reimbursement rate for the energy that will be produced through the Fort Collins Community Solar Project (solar farm). The proposed reimbursement rate is consistent with recent changes in the rooftop net-metering reimbursement rate, adopted in Ordinance No. 067, 2014. Like the rooftop net-metering customers, participants in the solar farm, who purchase an interest in the solar farm, will be reimbursed for every kilowatt-hour of energy produced at a rate of $0.0714 per kWh (the combination of the Summer Tier 1 rate of $0.0583 per kWh and one half the facilities charge rate - $0.0131 per kWh). The difference between the two rates is that, because participants in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project will need to fully utilize the distribution infrastructure to deliver all of their household energy, the additional payment the facilities charge portion of the rate is proposed to be only half of that being given to rooftop net- metering customers. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Lease Agreement with Clean Energy Collective, LLC for the Use of City Property for a Community Solar Garden Project with an Associated Access Easement. The purpose of this item is to authorize the lease of City property located at 500 Riverside Avenue to Clean Energy Collective, LLC (through its subsidiary, CEC Solar #1038, LLC), to build and operate a community solar farm project, including an access easement to enter the property from the Wastewater plant entry road on Mulberry Street. The City has entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with Clean Energy Collective, LLC (CEC) to develop a community solar project in Fort Collins. The City property located at 500 Riverside Avenue was determined by staff and CEC to be a feasible site for the location of the project. To facilitate the development of the solar garden, CEC has requested a lease agreement for the use of the City’s property for a period of 25 years for the building and operation of the solar farm project. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2014, Authorizing the Exchange of a 9.33 Acre Portion of the Timberline Substation Property from the Electric Utility for a Comparably-Valued 3.03 Acre Site from the Parks Department. The purpose of this item is to authorize the exchange of portions of property at the Timberline Substation property between the Utility Department and the Parks Department. The City of Fort Collins owns a parcel of land at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Timberline Road which is the location of the Timberline Substation (the “City Property”). The Utility Department owns 19.92 acres of the City Property of which 7.43 acres are used for substation purposes. The Parks Department desires to develop a 9.33-acre portion of the property owned by Utilities for recreation purposes and has proposed to acquire this portion from the Utility Department. The Parks Department intends to maintain the property as a disc golf course. The Utility Department has determined that the proposed conveyance and recreation use will not adversely impact the portion of the City Property used for utility purposes. In exchange, the Utility Department desires to acquire a 3.03 acre portion of the City Property which is owned by the Parks Department. This Ordinance City of Fort Collins Page 5 authorizes the exchange of the properties between the Utility Department and Parks Department, recognizing that no funds will need to be paid between the departments, based on the comparable values of the two parcels, existing encumbrances on the 9.33-acre parcel, the value of all access reservations retained by the Utilities Department, the beneficial use each will realize in the land it acquires, and the value of additional services the Utility Department will provide to the Parks Department. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Shared Access Easement on City Property to Public Service Company of Colorado. The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of a shared access easement to Public Service Company of Colorado for an access road at the Timberline Substation Property. The City of Fort Collins Utility Department owns a property at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Timberline Road which is the location of the Timberline Substation (the “City Property”). Public Service Company of Colorado, Inc. (PSCo) owns a small tract of land on Timberline Road which is surrounded on three sides by the City Property. The access to the two properties is by means of an existing driveway located on Timberline Road of which a portion falls on to each property. In order to establish an easement of record for the allowed use of the driveway by each party, the Utility Department and PSCo have proposed the conveyance of a shared access easement allowing both parties the right to use the driveway for access purposes. 13. Items Relating to Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations. A. Resolution 2014-067 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park First Annexation. B. Resolution 2014-068 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park Second Annexation. The purpose of this item is to initiate annexation proceedings for the existing Clydesdale Park subdivision located east of Interstate 25, south of the intersection of East Mulberry Street and Carriage Parkway. Clydesdale Park includes 217 single-family residential lots on approximately 75 acres. Residents of the Clydesdale Park neighborhood have requested this annexation. In accordance with State law, the purpose of the Initiating Resolutions is to accept the Annexation Petitions and provide a schedule for upcoming Council hearings within a timeline that complies with State Statutes. 14. Resolution 2014-069 Authorizing a License to Enter to the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation for Access to City-Owned Property at 330 North Howes Street for Up to Two Years. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation to use a portion of the City's Car Barn for restoring historic fire equipment belonging to the City and Poudre Fire Authority (PFA). This License to Enter is effective for up to two years, but can also be terminated by either party at any time. 15. Resolution 2014-070 Authorizing Intergovernmental Agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Regarding Reintroducing Endangered Black-Footed Ferrets to Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Springs Ranch. The purpose of this item is to approve by resolution various agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that allow the City to reintroduced endangered black-footed ferrets to Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Spring Ranch. The City of Fort Collins implemented a black-tailed prairie dog management plan on Soapstone Prairie Natural Area (Soapstone) and Meadow Springs Ranch (Meadow Springs) with a goal of reintroducing the federally endangered black footed ferret onto the properties (ferrets predate on prairie dogs almost exclusively). The prairie dog plan was implemented in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) and resulted in the selection of the City-owned properties as City of Fort Collins Page 6 a new ferret recovery site in 2014 by USFWS. In addition, the City worked with State Representative Randy Fischer to introduce and pass HB14-1267 allowing for the reintroduction of ferrets to occur. One requirement of the legislation is that reintroduction of the species must be done in accordance with a Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Safe Harbor) with USFWS. The Certificate of Inclusion into the Safe Harbor and accompanying City of Fort Collins Black-footed Ferret Reintroduction Plan for Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Springs Ranch are considered Intergovernmental Agreements and require City Council approval by resolution. 16. Resolution 2014-071 Authorizing the Assignment of the City's Private Activity Bond Allocation for 2014 to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Finance the Rehabilitation of Affordable Housing Units at the Villages at Cunningham Corner. The purpose of this item is to assign the City's 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation (PAB) in the amount of $7,408,350 to the Fort Collins Housing Authority (FCHA) for the purpose of affordable housing rehabilitation. Specifically, the bond proceeds will be used to finance the rehabilitation of 284 affordable housing units located at the Villages on Cunningham Corner. Annually, the state allocates a portion of its ceiling for PAB to the City. If the City does not use or assign this allocation, it is returned to the state on September 15. The City will not incur debt and this will not affect the City's credit rating. There have not been any other requests to use the 2014 PAB allocation. 17. Resolution 2014-072 Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins, Platte River Power Authority, the Town of Estes Park, the City of Longmont, and the City of Loveland for Demand Side Management Program Coordination. The purpose of this item is to formalize the joint funding of demand side management (aka energy efficiency and conservation) (DSM) programs between the City of Fort Collins and Platte River Power Authority (Platte River). Jointly developed efficiency programs which are administered by Platte River require supplemental or directive funding from Fort Collins Utilities on behalf of Fort Collins customers. This intergovernmental agreement (IGA) formalizes the authority to provide additional funding via a purchase order process between the City and Platte River. The IGA is a joint document between Platte River, Fort Collins, Loveland, Longmont and Estes Park. 18. Resolution 2014-073 Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to Commission an Artist to Create Art for the Senior Center Expansion Project. The purpose of this item is it to approve expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to commission an artist to create art for the APP Senior Center Expansion Project. The expenditure of $50,238 will be for design, materials, fabrication, installation and contingency for an artist- designed steel art panel to be located in the main lobby of the Senior Center, and for artist-designed concrete form liners to be used on an exterior seat wall at this site. 19. Resolution 2014-074 Appointing Two Representatives to the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. The purpose of this item is to appoint Councilmember Wade Troxell and City Manager Darin Atteberry to represent the City of Fort Collins on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. END CONSENT  CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. City of Fort Collins Page 7  STAFF REPORTS  COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS  CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS Discussion Items The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: ● Mayor introduces the item number, and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff ● Staff presentation (optional) ● Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (five minute limit for each citizen) ● Council questions of staff on the item ● Council motion on the item ● Council discussion ● Final Council comments ● Council vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements. (staff: Gerry Paul, Mike Beckstead; no staff presentation; 5 minute discussion) This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, by a vote of 5-1 (Nays: Cunniff) appropriates funds to address high priority security findings identified by a comprehensive security assessment of City buildings. Funding is requested to implement enhancements to address the high priority findings identified in a 2013/2014 City building security assessment performed by Lyon & Associates. Funding will be directed to access control, alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening. For Second Reading, the amount has been decreased to $190,360 because it was determined that two servers were not required. 21. Items Relating to Disposable Bags. (staff: Susie Gordon; 5 minute staff presentation; 90 minute discussion) A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags. (Option 1) B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags (Option 2) At the May 13, 2014 Work Session, City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to reduce the number of disposable bags distributed by grocery stores at checkout registers. On July 1, Ordinance No. 099, 2014 was adopted by a vote of 5-2 (nays: Weitkunat, Troxell) on First Reading. Council directed staff to postpone Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014 to August 19, to allow more time for Councilmembers to review public input on disposable bags. An informational meeting held July 30 (attended by 50-60 people) allowed the public to receive answers from staff and Councilmembers on specific questions regarding the proposed ordinance. City of Fort Collins Page 8 The “Option 2” ordinance has also been developed for Council’s consideration. Option 2 has been written at the request of multiple Councilmembers to take a new approach at an ordinance that could help reduce the use of disposable bags in Fort Collins. 22. Resolution 2014-075 Naming a Loop Trail Within a New 31-Acre Natural Area and Restarting the Process for Selecting an Overall Name for the New Natural Area. (staff: John Stokes; 5 minute staff presentation; 10 minute discussion) The purpose of this agenda item is to restart the process with the Natural Areas Department and the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board to make a recommendation to Council of a name for a new 31-acre natural area on the Poudre River conveyed to the City by Woodward Governor and to name a loop trail within that natural area. 23. First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2014, Approving the Seventh Amendment to the Fort Collins- Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation, Growth Management and Related Issues. (staff: Laurie Kadrich, Karen Cumbo; 5 minute staff presentation;15 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to update a 2009 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Town of Timnath to incorporate several amendments and new land use provisions. The Land Use portions of the agreement are intended to provide planned and orderly development of urban services along the I-25 Corridor and to establish appropriate Growth Management and Influence Areas to support such development. 24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2014, Appropriating Capital Project Funding in the Light and Power, Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Drainage Enterprise Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Program, for the Construction of a New Utilities Administration Building in Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue and Renovation of 700 Wood Street. (staff: Kevin Gertig, Ken Mannon; 10 minute staff presentation; 20 minute discussion) The purpose of this Appropriation Ordinance is to provide funding for the construction of a new Utility Administration Building within Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue, as well as renovation of the existing Utility Service Center at 700 Wood Street. The total combined project costs are $23,411,000 with $4,500,000 already appropriated from Light and Power reserves, leaving $18,911,000 to be appropriated with this ordinance. A Utility Building Team comprised of internal staff and external subject matter experts has worked with the architectural firm RNL and Adolfson and Peterson Construction to assess the best way to address the current building performance and space issues facing Fort Collins Utilities’ ongoing and future business operations. Balancing the city-wide goal to have high-performing office buildings with the need to be fiscally prudent has led the Building Team to recommend the two-pronged funding process proposed in this appropriation ordinance. The four Utility Enterprise Funds (Light and Power, Water, Wastewater and Stormwater) will share the costs of the projects. All appropriations will come from the existing reserves in these four funds. 25. Resolution 2014-076 Creating a Council Committee to Make Recommendations to the Council, Commencing the Process to Select a Search Firm, and Adopting a Plan and Target Schedule for the Recruitment and Selection of a City Attorney. (staff: Janet Miller; 5 minute staff presentation; 10 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to begin the City Attorney recruitment and selection process by: 1. creating a Council Committee to screen search firm candidates and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the search firm to be chosen and to make recommendations regarding other matters related to the City Attorney recruitment and selection process; City of Fort Collins Page 9 2. directing staff to develop and implement a request-for-proposal process for search firms to aid the Council Committee in its recommendation to City Council; and 3. adopting a detailed plan and target schedule for the recruitment and selection of the City Attorney.  CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS  OTHER BUSINESS  ADJOURNMENT Every Council meeting will end no later than 10:30 p.m., except that: (1) any item of business commenced before 10:30 p.m. may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the City Council may, by majority vote, extend a meeting until no later than 12:00 a.m. for the purpose of considering additional items of business. Any matter which has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council meeting, and all matters scheduled for consideration at the meeting which have not yet been considered by the Council, will be continued to the next regular Council meeting and will be placed first on the discussion agenda for such meeting. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, 2014 marks 150 years of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, on August 20, 1864 Camp Collins moved to the banks of the Poudre River in the Old Town area and became Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, many residents remained in the area after the military post was abandoned in 1867; and WHEREAS, the contributions of those residents established Fort Collins as a growing, thriving community in Northern Colorado for generations to come; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins today is a vibrant city full of natural resources, dynamic thinkers, innovators, and residents who truly love their community; and WHEREAS, FC150 features a living time capsule and special exhibition at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; and WHEREAS, sesquicentennial events throughout Fort Collins have been hosted by a range of community organizations including: the Museum of Discovery, the Downtown Business Association, the Fort Collins Coloradoan, Visit Fort Collins, the Poudre River Public Library District, and many more; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins residents, former residents, businesses, neighbors and friends are invited to commemorate and celebrate Fort Collins’ 150 th anniversary this year. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Karen Weitkunat, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim August 20, 2014 to be FORT COLLINS’ 150TH ANNIVERSARY IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Wanda Nelson, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the July 1 and July 15, 2014 Regular Council Meetings, the July 8, 2014 Special Council Meeting and the July 22, 2014 Adjourned Council Meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the July 1 and July 15, 2014 Regular Council meetings, the July 8, 2014 Special Council meeting and the July 22, 2014 Adjourned Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. July 1, 2014 (PDF) 2. July 8, 2014 (PDF) 3. July 15, 2014 (PDF) 4. July 22, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 11 July 1, 2014 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, July 1, 2014, 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: Campana, Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Roy. Agenda Review City Manager Atteberry stated an update on the BAVA Neighborhood Outreach Program will be presented during staff reports. Citizen Participation Desiree Fiske, 334 East Mulberry, Fort Collins Community Action Network, discussed the City’s panhandling laws and suggested the City’s policies may further marginalize the homeless and other vulnerable populations. Mel Hilgenberg, 172 North College, announced the City’s 4 th of July events at City Park and suggested the City join with the County and State to extend MAX service and recommended moving the Fort Collins Mission to a property on north Linden. Bill Alexander, Fossil Creek Meadows resident, expressed concern regarding the prioritization of stream rehabilitation projects and requested the Mail Creek project be moved to the top of the priority list due to safety concerns. Monte Barry, Fort Collins resident, opposed the police crackdown on homeless individuals, noted bicycles should be particularly watched for this time of year, and discussed the Overland Trail bike lane. Rich Stave, Fossil Creek Meadows resident, suggested the Mail Creek project should be moved to the top of the priority list due to safety concerns. Nancy Mendenhall, Fort Collins resident, opposed the recent police crackdown on homeless individuals. Karen Rose, Fossil Creek Meadows resident, expressed concern regarding the sewer line which runs near Mail Creek. David Ham, 3324 Hickok Drive, thanked Council for its service and suggested the City should be better prepared for population growth and should dam the Poudre River. Mike Crane, Fossil Creek Meadows resident, opposed the City’s prioritization of stream rehabilitation and stated Mail Creek should be prioritized due to safety concerns. Packet Pg. 12 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 305 Margaret Griffin, 3245 Honeysuckle Court, discussed the possible use of eminent domain for her property along Boxelder Creek. Steve Sycks, 5224 Greenview, questioned liability issues relating to Mail Creek and stated its rehabilitation should be prioritized. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, discussed the Elizabeth and Overland Trail intersection. Harry Damm, 316 Parkway Circle North, expressed concern about West Nile virus and the mosquito population around Mail Creek. Cheryl Distaso, Fort Collins Community Action Network, questioned the City’s regulations regarding aggressive panhandling and stated the City needs to address living wages and affordable housing. Mike Pruznick, Fort Collins resident, asked if City Hall parking is limited after 6:00 p.m., questioned fire policies with regard to citizens lining up in aisles to speak, asked about the Metro District failing to issue bonds, stated the Mail Creek issue needs to be addressed due to safety concerns, and expressed disappointment regarding the City’s policies on panhandling. Rebecca Sorber, 135 South Sunset, expressed concern regarding the City’s policies regarding homeless individuals. Zach Heath, 135 South Sunset, expressed concern regarding the City’s policies regarding homeless individuals and stated the City needs to further address affordable housing and drug treatment. Brandi Williams, 3017 Parkview Court, expressed concern regarding the City’s policies regarding homeless individuals. Citizen Participation Follow-up Jon Haukaas, Water Engineering Field Operations Manager, stated there was a significant change in the prioritization of stream restoration projects following the 1997 floods. He stated a funding request has been placed in this budget cycle to complete Spring Creek in 2015-2016 and the intention is to follow-up with a similar request for Mail Creek in 2017-2018. Councilmember Campana asked if interim signage or temporary fencing could be installed. Haukaas replied in the affirmative but noted the property is private and is not owned by the City. Councilmember Campana requested staff work with the HOA to discuss potential interim fixes. Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer, discussed concerns raised by the downtown business community regarding the impact of homeless individuals on businesses. Additionally, he stated the Social Sustainability Department is working with Police Services, the court system and homeless assistance providers. Police Chief Hutto stated the challenge is finding the balance between community members on Packet Pg. 13 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 306 each side of the issue. He stated the Police Department is charged with identifying behaviors which are illegal or unacceptable. Additionally, aggressive panhandling is clearly defined in the Code. Councilmember Overbeck asked about meetings being held by Hendee and asked if a plan or strategy is being developed. Hendee replied panhandling, homeless camping, and poverty each require a different type of strategy. He discussed the possibility of meters and noted shelter solutions need to be developed. Councilmember Overbeck requested a report on the ticket issued to the citizen regarding panhandling and on the ticket issued to the individual sleeping in her car. He discussed meetings he has held with businesses and homeless individuals and groups. Councilmember Campana stated community members can work together to develop solutions. Mayor Pro Tem Horak discussed the data being collected by the Homeward 2020 project. He opposed any assertion Council or staff members are not compassionate toward the homeless population. Councilmember Overbeck discussed the compassion of the Police Department with regard to vacating campers in City natural areas. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the May 20 and June 3, 2014 Regular Council Meetings and the June 10, 2014 Adjourned Council Meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve minutes from the May 20 and June 3, 2014 Regular Council Meetings and the June 10, 2014 Adjourned Council Meeting. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 082, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue for the Senior Center Expansion Project and Transferring Appropriations to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, appropriates $150,000 to the Senior Center Expansion Project. This additional funding was raised by the Senior Center Expansion Committee. These additional funds will be put toward the cost of completing the Core and Shell space as an Education Center/Auditorium, which will seat 120+ people with state of the art technology and can be used for presentations, distance learning, seminars or movies, and athletic events. Additional funds will be used for other building furnishings to make this a World Class Facility. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 083, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund for the Employee Wellness Center. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, appropriates funds from the Benefits Fund reserves for facility/infrastructure enhancements and start-up costs for the Employee Wellness Center (commonly referred to as an Onsite Clinic). Packet Pg. 14 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 307 A recital statement regarding the location of the Onsite Clinic is deleted from the Ordinance for Second Reading. The location of the Onsite Clinic may or may not be at 256 West Mountain. Further review of this location is being conducted by the City's Operations Services staff. Additional City-owned building options are available and will be included with the final review. In all of the options being considered, the requested funding is still needed to renovate the space once a final location is selected. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 084, 2014, Amending Section 28-17 of the City Code Regarding Traffic Code Violation Penalties. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, reconciles two sections of the City Code setting the maximum penalty for Traffic Code violations. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 085, 2014, Amending Article IV, Division 2 of Chapter 23 of the City Code Regarding Disposition of Real Property. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, amends the City Code to authorize the City Manager to approve certain leases on City-owned property. The existing language in the City Code specifies that any disposition of real property, including leasing of real property, must be approved by City Council, with the exception of property at the Fort Collins-Loveland Airport. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 086, 2014, Making Various Amendments to the Land Use Code. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, addresses a variety of changes, additions and clarifications to the Land Use Code that have been identified since the last update in July 2013. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 087, 2014, Authorizing Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Public Improvements in Connection with the Vine Drive and Shields Street Intersection Improvements Project. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, obtains authorization from City Council to use eminent domain, if deemed necessary, to acquire property interests needed to construct improvements at the Vine Drive and Shields Street intersection. The Vine Drive and Shields Street Intersection Improvements Project will construct a single lane roundabout for safety and air quality improvements at the intersection. The project is planned to begin construction in the spring of 2015 and be completed in the fall of 2015. The project budget consists of both federal and local funds. To construct these improvements, the City will need to acquire certain property interests adjacent to the project area. The acquisitions include right-of-way and temporary easements from six property owners. Timely acquisition of the property is necessary to meet the anticipated construction schedule. Staff fully intends to negotiate in good faith with all affected owners and is optimistic that all property negotiations can be completed prior to the start of the Project. Staff is requesting authorization of eminent domain for all property acquisitions for the Project to comply with federal acquisition requirements. Eminent domain action will be used only if such action is deemed necessary. Packet Pg. 15 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 308 8. Items relating to Water Supply Shortage Response Plan and City Code Updates. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 088, 2014, adopting a Water Supply Shortage Response Plan. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 089, 2014, Amending Chapter 26, Article II, Division 6 of the City Code to Clarify Sections Relating to Water Conservation. These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, update the City’s Water Supply Shortage Response Plan that contains water restrictions to be put in place when a water shortage is anticipated, and make City Code changes regarding the waste of water and water restrictions. Revisions to the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan are in response to employee and citizen feedback received during the 2013 water restrictions and more recent community outreach. Highlights include adding definitions and associated restrictions for food production, splash parks, outdoor swimming pools and essential power- washing. The City Code changes provide a clearer definition of the “waste of water,” extending beyond irrigation use to service line and indoor leaks. In addition, hoses will require a hand-activated hose nozzle for spraying impervious surfaces. This section will reference the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan and how restrictions are put in place and lifted. Two sections are out of date and are proposed to be deleted. 9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 091, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue into the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. The purpose of this item is to appropriate unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School Program. The City of Fort Collins FC Moves Department has received a $25,822 federal grant through the Colorado Department of Transportation for the 2014-15 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program. This funding will allow the City’s Safe Routes to School Program (administered and staffed by FC Moves) to enhance its pedestrian and bicycle safety education programs. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 092, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects and Programs in Accordance with the Downtown Plan of Development. The purpose of this item is to appropriate unanticipated revenue for the Downtown Development Authority for projects and programs that enhance the downtown area. These funds, totaling $1,822,273, are from interest earnings, project savings, and from prior year bond proceeds. The DDA Board has authorized the expenditure on various projects and programs. 11. Items Relating to an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Downtown Development Authority for the Willow Street Improvements Project. A. Resolution 2014-051 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Downtown Development Authority to Transfer Funding to the Willow Street Improvements Project. Packet Pg. 16 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 309 B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 093, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund for the Willow Street Improvements Project and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Building on Basics Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements Project into the Willow Street Improvements Project. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and to appropriate both DDA and local funds into the Willow Street Improvements Project. Previous planning efforts for the Downtown River District identified improvements along Willow Street as a top priority project within the River District. Engineering design is schedule to begin in summer of 2014. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 094, 2014, Adopting Design Standards for the Old Town Historic District. The purpose of this item is to update the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District (Old Town District) Design Standards. The Old Town Design Standards, originally adopted in 1981, require substantial revisions to address current historic preservation practices and development concerns related to infill and redevelopment within and around the Old Town District. The update to the design standards will define and illustrate characteristics for compatible future development within the Old Town District and in the adjacent area, and a means for incorporating modern sustainable building practices into historic preservation projects. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2014, Amending the Zoning Map of the City by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Harmony/I-25 Rezoning. The purpose of this item is to rezone 264 acres located at the southwest corner of Harmony Road and Interstate 25 from Transition (T) to Harmony Corridor (H-C) and Rural Lands (R- U-L), in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan (City Plan). 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement with the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Enterprise and the Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the amended and restated intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Enterprise, and the City of Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the delivery of potable water. The item will require the party that exceeds the allotment of water allowed for exchange to provide raw water reimbursement in addition to the charges for treatment. Packet Pg. 17 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 310 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with the North Weld County Water District, the North Weld County Water District Enterprise, and the Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the Delivery of Potable Water. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to execute an amended and restated intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the North Weld County Water District (NWCWD), the North Weld County Water District Enterprise, and the City of Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the delivery of potable water. The amendment makes adjustments to the costs associated with exchanging water between the City and the NWCWD to reflect actual expenses, adjusts the requirement to balance accounts from annually to monthly, adjusts the allocation of water that is allowed to be exchanged, and provides for the transfer of associated raw water for any imbalance in excess of the allocation. 16. Resolution 2014-052 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Contract Amendment with the Colorado Department of Transportation for the North College Improvements Project – Conifer to Willox. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to sign a Contract Amendment with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for the North College Improvements Project - Conifer to Willox. This action will amend the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City of Fort Collins and CDOT, adding remaining North Front Range Metropolitan Organization (NFRMPO) federal grant funds and new Responsible Acceleration of Maintenance and Partnerships (RAMP) program funds into the agreement. These funds have already been appropriated into the project’s budget through previous Council actions (Ordinance Nos. 016 and 112, 2012, No. 145, 2013, and No. 075, 2014). Amending the IGA is the final piece of the design phase which enables the use of these funds and the project to be bid. The total funding amounts (previously appropriated) for the IGA will be amended as follows:  Federal Grant Funds - $2,934,000  RAMP Federal Funds - $3,894,000  Local Matching Funds - $5,038,859. 17. Resolution 2014-053 Authorizing a License to Enter for the Colorado Department of Transportation to Perform Work on City Property. The purpose of this Resolution is to authorize the City Manager to execute a License to Enter and Perform Work to allow the Colorado Department of Transportation to enter and perform work at the east entrance of the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility as part of its Mulberry Bridge Project. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has planned a bridge project on Mulberry Street that is anticipated to begin in the late summer or early fall 2014. The project involves replacing the existing State Highway 14/Mulberry Street Bridge over the Cache La Poudre River. The bridge replacement project will require the reconstruction of the eastern entrance to the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility. CDOT will need to obtain a License to Enter from the City, granting permission to enter the City’s property to perform the work associated with the entrance reconstruction. Packet Pg. 18 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 311 18. Resolution 2014-054 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter Into an Agreement with the Platte River Power Authority for the Design and Construction of a Perimeter Wall at the Harmony Substation. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City and the Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) for the design and construction of a perimeter wall around the Harmony electric utility substation, located at Harmony Road and Innovation Drive. The IGA provides that PRPA will design and construct the wall and the City will reimburse PRPA for the reasonable costs incurred for such work. Working through PRPA will ensure regional substation design consistency, as the work will be done under the same contract and with the same contractor as PRPA recently used to construct perimeter walls around the Dixon and Timberline electric utility substations. 19. Resolution 2014-055 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Regarding the Appeal of the April 10, 2014, Planning and Zoning Board Approval of the Bella Vira Final Plan, Extension of Vested Rights. The purpose of this item is for Council to consider adoption of a resolution making findings of fact and conclusions pertaining to the Appeal of the April 10, 2014, Planning and Zoning Board’s decision regarding a request for extension of vested rights to the Bella Vira Final Plan. On April 24, 2014, an appeal was filed concerning the Planning and Zoning Board Hearing decision regarding a request for extension of vested rights for the Bella Vira, Final Plan. An Amended Appeal was received on May 14, 2014. On June 3, 2014, City Council voted 7-0 on the motion to uphold the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to approve the Bella Vira, Final Plan, extension of vested rights. Councilmember Overbeck withdrew Item No. 3, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 083, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund for the Employee Wellness Center. Councilmember Campana withdrew Item No. 13, First Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2014, Amending the Zoning Map of the City by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Harmony/I-25 Rezoning, due to a conflict of interest. ***END CONSENT*** Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Campana, to adopt all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Poppaw, Horak, Weitkunat, Troxell, Campana, Overbeck and Cunniff. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Packet Pg. 19 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 312 Consent Calendar Follow-up Councilmember Cunniff stated additional information has been garnered regarding the Addition of a Permitted Use issue with respect to Item No. 6, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 086, 2014, Making Various Amendments to the Land Use Code. Staff Reports Amanda Nagel, Neighborhood Administrator, discussed the public outreach effort with regard to the Buckingham, Alta Vista, and Andersonville neighborhoods and the responses to a survey of homeowners and residents. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Campana reported on a meeting with CSU regarding parking and long-term off- campus parking. Mayor Weitkunat reported on the Colorado Municipal League meeting in Breckenridge. Councilmember Troxell noted Mayor Weitkunat serves on the Executive Committee of Colorado Municipal League and reported on some of the sessions he attended regarding Urban Renewal Authorities and tax increment financing. Mayor Pro Tem Horak reported on the Larimer County Open Lands Board Advisory Committee meeting and the possibility of the extension of the open space tax being placed on the November ballot. Ordinance No. 083, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund for the Employee Wellness Center, Adopted on Second Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, appropriates funds from the Benefits Fund reserves for facility/infrastructure enhancements and start-up costs for the Employee Wellness Center (commonly referred to as an Onsite Clinic). A recital statement regarding the location of the Onsite Clinic is deleted from the Ordinance for Second Reading. The location of the Onsite Clinic may or may not be at 256 West Mountain. Further review of this location is being conducted by the City's Operations Services staff. Additional City-owned building options are available and will be included with the final review. In all of the options being considered, the requested funding is still needed to renovate the space once a final location is selected.” Councilmember Overbeck asked about a strike-out in the Ordinance regarding the location of the clinic.. Packet Pg. 20 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 313 Amy Sharkey, Human Resources Department, stated a location for the wellness center had been identified; however, potential plumbing issues were discovered, leading to the strike-out of the location in the Ordinance. She stated other City facilities are being discussed for the location of the Wellness Center. She stated she does not anticipate additional funds will be needed. Councilmember Overbeck asked how many employees will be served by this Wellness Center. Sharkey replied it is currently designed to open with participation from those employees and family members age six and up that participate in the Employee Medical Plan. Councilmember Overbeck asked if a privacy policy is in place. Sharkey replied all HIPAA laws will be followed. Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Ordinance No. 083, 2014, on Second Reading. Yeas: Horak, Weitkunat, Troxell, Campana, Overbeck, Cunniff and Poppaw. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 095, 2014, Amending the Zoning Map of the City by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Harmony/I-25 Rezoning, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to rezone 264 acres located at the southwest corner of Harmony Road and Interstate 25 from Transition (T) to Harmony Corridor (H-C) and Rural Lands (R-U-L), in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan (City Plan). BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The property was annexed and zoned on October 6, 2009 as the Riverwalk Annexation. The property was held in the T, Transition zone district at the time of annexation, as the former owner was continuing to explore possible alternative land use and zoning concepts. The T zone is a holding zone for properties where there are no specific or imminent plans for development. No additional development is permitted in the zone. It is typically used to allow property owners and the City to consider zoning alternatives while the property is held in the T zone. Any rezone request for property in the T zone is treated differently than other rezone requests, because the T zone specifies requirements for the City to process the request quickly. Section 4.12(B)(2) of the Land Use Code states: “The owner of any property in the T District may at any time petition the City to remove the property from this zone district and place it in another zone district. Unless the following time limitations are waived by the petitioner, any such petition shall be referred Packet Pg. 21 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 314 to the Planning and Zoning Board to be considered at the next regular meeting of such board which is scheduled at least thirty (30) days from the date the petition is filed with the City Clerk. Within sixty (60) days from the date the matter is considered by the Board, the City Council shall change the zoning for the property in question to another zone district authorized under this Article.” The current request was received April 4, 2014; the Planning and Zoning Board considered the item at its May 8 Hearing. The Board forwarded a recommendation of approval to City Council, on the Board’s consent agenda. Typically, requests to rezone property out of the T zone into zone districts that are in accordance with the City Structure Plan, are routine procedural matters. Subject Area The subject area extends one mile southward from Harmony Road to Kechter Road, and ½ mile westward from Interstate 25 to Strauss Cabin Road. This area is divided into a north half and a south half for zoning purposes. The adopted Harmony Corridor Plan provides policy guidance for land use in the north half of the subject area. It shows a land use designation of “Basic Industrial Non-Retail Employment Activity Center”, which is a specific designation that is implemented by H-C, Harmony Corridor zoning; thus, the requested zoning is consistent with the plan. The Harmony Corridor Plan further describes this area as a community gateway with special opportunities to emphasize the Poudre River valley landscape setting in any future land use and development. This policy guidance from the Harmony Corridor Plan is reflected in City Plan, with its map of future land uses called the City Structure Plan. The specific terminology on the City Structure Plan map is slightly different from the Harmony Corridor Plan, but the meaning of the designations is consistent. City Plan provides the policy guidance for land use in the south half of the subject area. The City Structure Plan shows a designation of Rural Lands, to which the requested zoning corresponds. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Staff finds no direct financial or economic impacts resulting from the requested rezoning. The rezoning would implement the Harmony Corridor Plan and City Plan, which both reflect community consideration of economic issues as part of balanced comprehensive planning. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The physical environment will not be directly impacted by the requested rezoning. Rezoning will enable ensuing submittal of development applications, and development plans are required to comply with Land Use Code standards for development, including Environmental and Natural Area Protection standards to address potential environmental impacts. Packet Pg. 22 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 315 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On May 8, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to support a recommendation to City Council to approve the proposed rezoning. The recommendation was part of the Planning and Zoning Board Consent Calendar and was not discussed. PUBLIC OUTREACH No neighborhood meeting was required for this rezoning. No known controversy or neighborhood impacts are involved with the rezoning. Any subsequent development applications are required to comply with Land Use Code standards for public involvement in development review.” Councilmember Campana withdrew from the discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest. Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Ordinance No. 095, 2014, on First Reading. Yeas: Weitkunat, Troxell, Overbeck, Cunniff, Poppaw and Horak. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 090, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Stormwater Fund to Design and Construct the Fort Collins / Timnath Boxelder Creek Flood Mitigation Projects, Adopted on Second Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on June 3, 2014, by a vote of 4-3 (Nays: Cunniff, Overbeck Poppaw), appropriates funds in the amount of $3,750,000 to design and construct the Fort Collins/Timnath Boxelder Creek Improvements, as outlined in the Sixth Amendment to the Fort Collins - Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), as adopted by City Council under Ordinance No. 047, 2014 on April 1, 2014.” Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Campana, to adopt Ordinance No. 090, 2014, on Second Reading. Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated not passing this Ordinance would result in the City not following through on its promises. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Troxell, Campana, Horak and Weitkunat. Nays: Overbeck, Cunniff and Poppaw. THE MOTION CARRIED. Packet Pg. 23 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 316 Ordinance No. 098, 2014, Amending Article III of Chapter 12 of the City Code Pertaining to Smoking in Public Areas, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to propose expansions to the City’s Smoking Ordinance to include electronic smoking devices and 100% smoke-free hotel/motel rooms. This item proposes two City Code amendments to expand the City’s Smoking Ordinance: 1. Prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all places where conventional smoking is prohibited. 2. Require 100% of hotel/motel rooms to be smoke-free. This item provides background information, community feedback, and information about actions taken in other communities. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION History In 1984, Fort Collins was the first city in Colorado to pass a comprehensive smoking ordinance. The ordinance limited smoking in public buildings and required restaurants to have no-smoking sections. In 2003, Fort Collins was one of the first communities in Colorado to designate bars, restaurants, and workplaces as smoke-free. The Fort Collins’ Smoking Ordinance was amended in 2006 to conform to the Colorado Indoor Clean Air Act which helped the community regulate smoking in all indoor public places. Fort Collins expanded the smoking ordinance in 2013 to prohibit smoking in outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and Transfort’s public transit facilities. During the April 8, 2014 City Council Work Session regarding additional smoking ordinance expansion options, Council directed staff to move forward with the following: 1. Prohibit the use of electronic cigarettes and vaporizing devices in all places where conventional smoking is prohibited 2. Require 100% hotel/motel rooms to be smoke-free. 3. Ban smoking in all parks, trails, and natural areas. 4. Prohibit smoking at public events and festivals. 5. Make Old Town/Downtown area smoke-free. This item focuses on the first two items - electronic cigarettes and vaporizing devices and 100% hotel/motel rooms. The other items are scheduled for City Council consideration on October 7, 2014. Packet Pg. 24 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 317 1. Electronic Smoking Devices Electronic smoking devices are not currently regulated within the city. This proposal adds electronic smoking devices to the smoking ordinance banning their use from all areas where conventional smoking is prohibited. This includes bars, restaurants, workplaces, outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and transit facilities. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is beginning to consider regulation of electronic smoking devices. They have recently proposed regulations that would require registration with the FDA, not allowing free samples, minimum age requirements, and ingredient disclosure. They are currently in a 75 day public comment period. Electronic cigarettes or vaporizers are devices that vaporize and deliver to the lungs of the user a chemical mixture composed of nicotine, propylene glycol and other chemicals. (See Attachment 1) Some e-devices are offered without nicotine, and some are offered in candy or fruit flavors that can be attractive to youth. When users inhale, a battery operated vaporizer heats a liquid solution into a vapor. E-devices are also being used with highly concentrated marijuana oil or wax, and may provide a discreet way of using marijuana in public settings. While vapor from electronic devices likely contain fewer toxins and carcinogens than those found in traditional tobacco smoke, this alone does not mean that breathing e-cigarette vapor is “safe.” One recent study examined secondhand emissions from several e-cigarette brands and found that e-cigarette users not only ingest but also emit toxins and harmful ultrafine and fine particles, posting potential health risks to those nearby. Although the long-term effects of electronic smoking devices require further study, the FDA has found that some devices contain toxins and carcinogens and has expressed concerns about their safety. Use of electronic devices and vaporizers, particularly in places where conventional smoking is prohibited, may interfere with smokers’ attempts to quit by making it easier for them to maintain their nicotine addiction. Children and youth who experiment with electronic devices may become addicted to nicotine and ultimately switch to smoking cigarettes. Even small amounts of liquid nicotine used in refillable devices can be poisonous to children. The use of electronic smoking devices may be visually similar to the smoking of cigarettes, and has already been observed in locations where smoking is prohibited, creating concern and confusion. The use of electronic smoking devices where smoking is prohibited may increase the social acceptability and appeal of smoking, particularly for youth. Staff has spoken with several bar and restaurant managers who have confirmed electronic smoking devices being used in their establishments. Some have decided not to allow their use in their establishment, while others are waiting for direction from the City. Several state and local governments have decided to regulate the use of electronic smoking devices (Attachment 2): • Utah, New Jersey, and North Dakota - passed legislation prohibiting e-cigarettes wherever regular smoking is banned • 10 States (including Colorado) - passed legislation regulating e-cigarette use in certain places such as school property and State workplaces • Nationally, 172 municipalities (including large metropolitan cities like New York and Packet Pg. 25 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 318 Chicago) include e-cigarettes in their local smoking ordinances. The Fort Collins smoking survey conducted in March 2014 (See Attachment 3) had more than 2,100 respondents and asked: Do you think electronic smoking devices should be regulated in the same manner as regular smoking products? The results show: • Yes 48% • No 30% • No Opinion 22% Additionally, the City hosted a public open house to gather more input. Approximately, 35 people provided input either in person or in writing. (See Attachment 4) The input regarding electronic smoking devices were mixed with some people in favor of regulating them while others opposed regulation because of the lack of evidence showing negative health impacts to bystanders. The TobacNO Youth Coalition provided a statement of support to limit public use of e-cigarettes (Attachment 5). Additionally, the Larimer County Board of Health voted to support adding electronic smoking devices to the city’s smoking ordinance (Attachment 6). 2. 100% Hotel/Motel Rooms The current Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance aligns with the Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act, requiring at least 75% of hotel or motel rooms to be non-smoking. Additionally, the City’s smoking ordinance prohibits smoking within 20 feet of any entryway; all other outdoor areas are not required to be smoke-free. If Council chooses to adopt it, this proposal would require 100% of hotel/motel rooms be smoke-free. The primary benefit of this requirement would be to protect hospitality industry workers who may have considerable exposure as well as other patrons. In 2006, the U.S. Surgeon General’s report determined there was no risk-free level of secondhand smoke. The 2014 Surgeon General’s report expanded the list of diseases and adverse health effects caused by secondhand smoke and, for the first time, linked secondhand smoke exposure to strokes in adults. Tobacco smoke exposure is especially dangerous for the health of children, pregnant women, and persons with chronic diseases who might visit local hotels/motels as well as hospitality workers who may have considerable exposure during work. Of recent concern is third-hand smoke, the tobacco residue from cigarettes, cigars, and other combustible tobacco products that is left behind after smoking and built up on surfaces and furnishings. These sticky, highly toxic particulates, like nicotine, can cling to walls and ceilings and be absorbed into carpets, draperies, and other upholsteries. Nicotine remains on surfaces for days and weeks, so carcinogens continue to be created over time, which are then inhaled, absorbed, or ingested. Though the effects of third-hand smoke are not yet clear, a 2013 study in hotels found that when a hotel allows smoking in any of its rooms, the smoke gets into all of its rooms. Packet Pg. 26 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 319 Nationally, the following have 100% smoke-free hotel/motel room requirements (Attachment 7): • 98 municipalities (none in Colorado) • 5 states (Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wisconsin) • Many large hotel chains (including Marriott, Westin, and Comfort Inn). The Fort Collins smoking survey (Attachment 3) asked: Do you think 100% of hotel/motel rooms in the City of Fort Collins should be smoke-free? The results show: • Yes 56% • No 34% • No Opinion 10% Additionally, input received at the public open house was mixed on this topic. Some believe that hotels/motels should be 100% smoke-free while others believe it should be up to the business owner to decide (Attachment 4). The Larimer County Board of Health voted to support adding the requirement that all hotel/motel rooms in the City of Fort Collins city limits be 100% smoke-free inside (Attachment 6). There are currently five hotels/motels in Fort Collins that allow smoking in their guest rooms. Staff reached out individually to each of them and spoke with the owner and/or manager in an effort to understand their concerns, what could make it easier for them, and what timeframe they would need to make the transition to 100% smoke-free rooms if Council chooses to adopt this ordinance. The responses were: • One motel is currently moving toward converting its smoking rooms to non-smoking rooms. They only have one more room to convert, so they do not believe this will be a problem for them. They would not like the City to ban smoking on their entire property as they would like to provide an outdoor smoking place for patrons. • One motel is planning to use the fall to convert their smoking rooms to non-smoking rooms (they would like to do this while the North College road construction is occurring). They did not have concerns about the ordinance, but they would like to have until January 1 st before the ordinance becomes effective. • One motel stated that they are fine with the changes happening and it doesn’t matter to them what the timing is. Their longer-term guests usually stay in their smoking rooms, but they have cleaned up their motel a lot in the past couple of years and are continuing to make improvements. The owner would be happy to go smoke-free because she has health issues that are further impacted by smoke. They are more concerned about the North College road construction and lack of parking than a smoking ban. • One of the motels is a national chain specifically marketed for extended stays. They would need to comply with their corporate policies if they are required to go 100% smoke-free. They have a lengthy process to get approvals to build an outdoor structure for smokers which they would want to provide. A delayed implementation date would be helpful. Packet Pg. 27 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 320 • One motel is extremely concerned and believes his business would not survive if Council approves this ordinance. Most of his customers are extended stay (more than a couple nights) and are smokers. He believes that this should be his decision; not the City’s. Based on this input, staff recommends an implementation date of January 1, 2015 if Council chooses to adopt the 100% hotel/motel smoke-free rooms amendment. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS There are no financial impacts to the City. Enforcement will be done in the same manner with the same staff as it is currently done for both of these potential amendments. Education and outreach will be conducted by current staff. There may be some financial/economic impact to the five (5) hotels/motels that currently allow smoking. The impact could be negative or positive. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS There would be improved air quality in hotels/motels that currently allow smoking. PUBLIC OUTREACH The City engaged in public outreach in an effort to understand the level of community support for expanding the smoking ordinance to include prohibiting electronic smoking devices in all places where conventional smoking is prohibited and require 100% of hotel/motel rooms to be smoke-free (Attachment 8). Public engagement efforts included: • On-line informal survey - February-March 2014 - over 2,100 responses • Public Open House - May 22, 2014 • Email communications in response to public open house • One-on-one meetings with hotel/motel owners/managers • Site visits • Social media, press release, and website.” Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager, stated this item proposes two amendments to extend the City’s current smoking Ordinance. One would prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all places where regular smoking is not allowed and the other would require that 100% of hotel and motel rooms be smoke free. Sowder detailed the history of smoking regulations in Fort Collins and the results of public outreach regarding the topics. Cathy Choi, Tobacco No Youth Coalition, stated electronic cigarettes send a negative message to youth and have been found to contain dangerous chemicals. Jillian Brewer, Tobacco No Youth Coalition, opposed electronic cigarettes as being the same as regular cigarettes. Packet Pg. 28 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 321 Councilmember Cunniff asked why these items have come prior to other smoking related items. Sowder replied additional public outreach will be required for the other items. Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Ordinance No. 098, 2014, on First Reading. Mayor Weitkunat requested an amendment to the Ordinance to return Section 2(a) to the Ordinance with a 20% figure for the allotment of smoking rooms. She expressed concern regarding the effect of this Ordinance on international visitors and extended stay occupants. No second was offered. Councilmember Troxell asked about the exception mentioned in the Ordinance. City Attorney Roy stated there is an exception established which is limited to retail tobacco businesses rather than guest rooms in lodging establishments. Councilmember Troxell asked how marijuana smoking applies to this Ordinance. City Attorney Roy replied marijuana smoking is regulated along with tobacco smoking under the same terms and conditions. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Campana, Overbeck, Cunniff, Poppaw, Horak and Troxell. Nays: Weitkunat. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review a proposed ordinance that would require grocers to charge 10 cents for both single-use disposable plastic and paper bags at the check-out stand. All revenues from the sale of bags would be retained by the grocers, who would be required to use 50% of revenues to purchase durable shopping bags to be distributed for free to customers BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 2012, Fort Collins has investigated how to reduce the use of disposable bags in our community. The Council has received three staff reports (February 2013, March 2013, and May 2014) about options available for local jurisdictions to stem the flow of waste that is produced by single-use shopping bags. The 2013 proposal for a disposable bags fee ordinance was defeated on a split vote by City Council (3-3); it would have required grocers to charge a fee of 10 cents per single-use disposable plastic or paper bag, with the revenue to be split between grocers and the City. At Packet Pg. 29 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 322 the May 13, 2014 work session, staff presented a modified version of the ordinance. Council offered comments and requested staff to bring the ordinance back for adoption. As written, the proposed ordinance: • Requires grocers to apply a minimum cost of 10 cents per single-use disposable plastic or paper bag at the check-out register - Strictly defines the disposable bags as those used to bag up purchases at the point-of-sale and exempts other types of packaging such as produce bags used to contain bulk goods, and plastic bags used to prevent packages of meat from leaking • Provides that all revenue would be retained by merchants - Grocery stores will be required to spend a specified portion (50%) of revenues generated from sales of disposable bags to purchase durable bags that would then be offered at no cost (free) to their customers. The twenty-year history of regulations that have arisen to counter the flow of single-use bags entering the waste stream is well documented. Around the world and throughout the US, demonstrable reductions are shown to occur when restrictions are placed on the consumption of disposable bags; people become accustomed to bringing their own durable cloth or woven- plastic types of bags to hold shopping purchases. Typically grocery stores are targeted because of their 60% share in communities’ bags usage. In communities where mature programs have shown great success, such as San Francisco, regulations may be expanded to include other types of merchants/retailers. As discussed at previous Fort Collins City Council meetings, the number of US communities that have adopted restrictions on plastic and paper bags continues to grow. It includes a broad geographic distribution of cities from Washington, D.C., to Austin and Dallas, TX, Basalt, Aspen, Telluride, and Boulder in Colorado, San Jose, CA, Montgomery County, MD, and most recently Chicago. In a compelling illustration of effectiveness, Boulder’s 10-cent/bag ordinance has achieved a 68% reduction in single-use bags since it went into effect in July 2013. Fort Collins’ ordinance is not aimed at banning plastic bags (nor paper ones), which is another approach that has been taken elsewhere. In Fort Collins, grocery store customers will continue to have a choice to receive disposable shopping bags as long as they are willing to pay for them along with their other purchases. The purpose of adopting a local ordinance is to prevent the negative impacts that are attributed to disposable bags: • Contributing to the volume of discarded material that enters landfills, albeit a nominal amount of about 220 tons per year in Fort Collins • Climate change: a source of 772 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted from Fort Collins • Litter and habitat degradation, including in natural areas and water conveyances Packet Pg. 30 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 323 • Reduction in value of recyclables (plastic bags are a contaminant when mixed with single-stream items such as paper, cans and bottles), and • Excessive maintenance costs at recycling plants, where plastic bags routinely tangle up conveyer belts and equipment. Information from the literature is often used to define how many disposable bags, on average, most people use since actual data from the grocery industry, which is reluctant to impart proprietary information, is difficult to obtain. Brendle Group, a local consulting firm hired by the City to evaluate options for reducing consumption of single-use bags in October 2012, reported that an annual 342 bags per capita are used in Fort Collins, of which 60% (205 bags) come from grocery stores. It may be easier to reconcile each person’s experience with this number when it is broken down to four bags per week. Nonetheless, the total number of bags estimated to be used in Fort Collins yearly - over 52 million - is so large as to be hard to comprehend. Finding alternatives to single-use products such as disposable bags is an important objective of Fort Collins’ 2013 Road to Zero Waste Plan and adopted Zero Waste goals for the community. Learning new habits to use durable bags is the first step toward other new “reuse” patterns that become incorporated into people’s daily lives Adoption of the ordinance is expected to have the following results: • Encourage source reduction and re-use, leading to expanding efforts to other products • Help meet goals to divert trash from landfills and reduce greenhouse gas emissions • Reduce “life-cycle” impacts of single-use bags - such as impacts from material extraction and production -- by transitioning to a bag type with lower life cycle impacts • Reduce litter and pollution in the community, and globally, including plastic bags in trees and waterways. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS A cost of 10 cents per shopping bag will create a new income stream for the 20 grocery stores in Fort Collins - as much as $1.6 M in the first year of implementation. As the table below shows, half of this revenue applied to the purchase of durable bags suggests everyone in the community could potentially receive at least three free durable shopping bags in the first year. Estimated Revenue from Sales of Disposable Grocery Check-out Bags 2014 2015 2016 Fort Collins' population (DOLA projections) 154,131.00 156,982.42 159,886.60 Estimated number of disposable bags used at 342/person/year (assumes reduction by half every year due to behavior change) 52,712,802.00 26,843,994 13,670,304 Number of bags (60%) from grocery stores 31,627,681.20 16,106,397 8,202,182 Charge per disposable bag sold $.10 $.10 Revenue generated at grocers from bag fee $ 1,610,640 $820,218 Percent of revenue to be spent by grocers on purchase of reusable bags 50% 50% Packet Pg. 31 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 324 Amount of revenue available to be spent on purchase of reusable bags $805,320 $410,109 Number of reusable bags that could be purchased by grocers using disposable bags revenue $0.35/bag 2,300,914 1,171,740 $0.75/bag 1,073,760 546,812 $1.50/bag 536,880 273,406 Annual number of free reusable bags available per citizen $0.35/bag 15 7 $0.75/bag 7 3 $1.50/bag 3 2 Staff anticipates that distribution of free bags may be accomplished various ways, at the discretion of the grocery stores, such as rewarding customers who have earned “loyalty points”, as part of special promotional events or sales, or, supplying bags to certain customer groups (e.g., in support of food distribution at local food pantries). The City intends to offer grocers durable-bag logo design options but not to require that they use a prescribed design. On the other hand, at 10 cents per bag, it could cost the average citizen as much $20.52 per year in new costs if they elect to not switch to using durable shopping bags. The benefits of having fewer disposable bags to clean up in public areas will save the City money; however, staff is unable to quantify the costs savings to overall litter programs from a reduced number of disposable bags. Having fewer disposable bags will also save money at recycling plants in Denver, where Fort Collins’ recyclables are taken for processing, and will improve their efficiency and profit margin. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS An ordinance restricting the use of single-use disposable bags will have a small but measurable impact on the community’s waste stream. According to Brendle Group, an estimated 220 tons/year of plastic bags from Fort Collins are sent to landfills for disposal, which represents 0.2% of the waste stream that Fort Collins sends for landfill disposal (no data were available for disposable paper bags). Both single-use plastic and paper bags cause other types of environmental damage. Plastic is a very visible problem in maritime states and communities, where a serious consequence of plastic bag pollution is lethal harm to marine life that ingests bags or get tangled in them, and plastic litter can float around (for example, in large garbage “patches” that have now been found in all the world’s oceans) and wash onto shores. For landlocked Fort Collins, plastic bag litter may disappear with the wind or be broken down by sunlight and weather into smaller pieces. These bits of plastic are still pollutants, even if they don’t resemble the bags they started off as; however, the magnitude of environmental problems caused by plastic particulates in the soil and other substrates are poorly understood. On the other hand, critics of restrictions on bags will point out that replacement bags, such as cotton fabric bags, create their own carbon footprint and may not be environmentally sustainable because of reliance on fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. The report by Brendle Group concluded that reusable bags made from cotton or non-woven plastic have lower life- Packet Pg. 32 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 325 cycle impacts across these categories than any single-use bag (assuming the bag is used many times). According to a 2007 report by Sustainability Victoria (Australia), which compared life cycle analyses of shopping bag alternatives, reusable, non-woven plastic (polypropylene) bags were found to achieve the greatest environmental benefits. That study reported that “reusable bags have lower environmental impacts than all of the single-use bags; a substantial shift to more durable bags would deliver environmental gains through reductions in greenhouse gas, energy and water use, resource depletion and litter.” While plastic “film” bags and paper shopping bags are both recyclable, there is insufficient data on bag consumption and recycling quantities to estimate their current recycling rate in Fort Collins. There are at least 25 sites where plastic bags are locally accepted for recycling, including all grocery stores in town. Paper bags are widely recyclable, not only at public drop-off locations but also in single-stream curbside collection programs offered by residential haulers. Social Impacts One of the most oft-heard arguments against changing to durable bags is the potential for pathogens such as bacteria to be carried on the cloth bags brought into stores by shoppers to hold their purchases. Two articles published in the US in 2012 brought this issue to light, which has caused some to be concerned about the spread of health epidemics. While staff has been unable to find any science-based research or evidence that correlates reusable bags with human health impacts, there is no question about the importance of regularly washing durable bags. This is an important message to underscore, along with the suggestion that shoppers may wish to designate a specific bag to be used to hold any meat purchases. Charges for disposable bags may be waived by grocery stores for shoppers who use food stamps. Another way to minimize negative impacts on low-income citizens is for stores to donate durable bags to organizations like the Fort Collins Food Bank for use in distributing free food. Enforcement An implementation date of January 2015 is recommended to allow grocers to prepare for the requirement to charge for shopping bags. A violation of the proposed ordinance will constitute a civil infraction. In the first few months of implementation, it would be appropriate to apply an educational approach that ensures grocers understand the new requirements; followed later by enforcement (citations) if/when compliance is not achieved. As part of the ordinance, grocers will be required to provide data to the City on the number of disposable bags sold to customers; this information will allow Environmental Services staff to monitor stores’ implementation actions. Implementation In order to provide awareness about the new program to decrease the use of disposable bags, a contest will be held to create attractive, fun, and Fort Collins-specific artwork to decorate durable bags. Packet Pg. 33 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 326 Staff will research bag manufacturers’ products and select a sturdy, good quality bag that can be ordered in bulk quantities at a price of around $1.00 each (or lower, if manufacturers can deliver a washable bag that meets the City’s specifications for durability). Throughout the summer, staff will solicit entries in the art contest, with the goal of awarding a winner in September/October. The resulting artwork/graphics will be prepared for use on bags and an order will be placed by the City for as many as 6,000 durable bags to be given away to citizens later in the year, in anticipation of the ordinance going into effect in January 2015. Grocers, and other merchants and retailers, will be invited to use the contest-winning artwork on the bags they purchase for distribution to their customers. (Staff has learned that some stores are willing to consider this offer, while others are unable to make a commitment to print a Fort Collins-specific bag until and unless they receive corporate approval.) BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 16, 2014 meeting, the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) unanimously recommended that Council move forward with an ordinance regulating single-use disposable bags. PUBLIC OUTREACH During 2014, a variety of public engagement methods were used to obtain comments about the proposal to limit disposable bags. On multiple occasions, letters and e-mail messages were sent to grocery store representatives to inform them of the City’s interest in adopting local restrictions on disposable bags. In March, two press releases were issued and a “soapbox” article was published in the Coloradoan, as well as e-newsletter articles. An Open House was held on April 3 to allow the public to discuss its comments directly with staff. A dedicated web page was maintained that allowed people to enter comments on-line and comments were also received through Twitter and Facebook messages. After the May 13 work session and in advance of the July 1 hearing, staff again communicated with the grocery store industry and local stores to apprise them of final recommendations for the proposed ordinance.” Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director, stated finding alternatives to single-use disposable bags is an important step in the Road to Zero Waste plan and Council’s goals to reduce waste in the community. She noted the proposed Ordinance will require grocers to use 50% of the bag fee revenue to provide free durable bags; however, given that the income from the bag fee will decrease over time, there will be a limit to the number of free durable bags grocers will be required to provide. Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner, discussed the history of the disposable bag fee in the City and the variety of approaches to the issue in other communities. The proposed $0.10 fee per bag would not apply to produce or meat bags and the Ordinance would not apply to convenience stores. The estimated revenue of the program will likely be a declining source of revenue. Gordon also discussed the proposed outreach, should the Ordinance pass. Packet Pg. 34 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 327 Arlene Samuelson, Fort Collins resident, objected to the Ordinance as being an overreach of government’s role and questioned who will regulate and monitor the program. Joe Piesman, Natural Resources Advisory Board Chair, supported the Ordinance. Jennifer Damir, 1218 Cliffrose Court, opposed the Ordinance as taking away rights of citizens. Asma Henry, 1423 West Mountain, supported the Ordinance. Mike Pruznick, Fort Collins resident, questioned the legality of the Ordinance and supported the use of biodegradable bags. Mary Lou Chapman, Rocky Mountain Food Industry Association President, opposed the Ordinance as written and requested that each store be treated equally with no mandate as to how to spend the funds. Rob Cagen, 1225 Buttonwood, Natural Resources Advisory Board, supported the Ordinance. Nate Barnes, Fort Collins resident, opposed the Ordinance. Jeff Bailey, Fort Collins resident, opposed the Ordinance. Nila Kruel, Fort Collins resident, opposed the Ordinance and expressed concern regarding cleanliness. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, opposed the Ordinance stating this will encourage individuals to shop in Timnath. Hunter Harms, Fort Collins resident, opposed the Ordinance. (Secretary’s note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Councilmember Cunniff noted the stipulation that participants in federal or state food assistance programs would be exempt from the disposable bag fee. Additionally, he asked how many reusable bags would be provided by retailers. Gordon replied the number of bags distributed would be left to the discretion of the store. Councilmember Cunniff asked if a deposit/return type program was considered. Gordon replied that would require a redemption center and noted it does not occur for bags in other communities. Councilmember Troxell questioned the scope of the problem and asked about the recycling of plastic bags. Gordon replied the plastic film recycling market is slowly emerging but the recycled product is salable. Councilmember Troxell asked why all retail stores are not being targeted if a reduction in bags is the goal. Gordon replied Council has the prerogative to not limit the Ordinance to just grocery Packet Pg. 35 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 328 stores; however, grocery stores are often the first target of these types of regulations as 60% of plastic bags come from grocery stores. Councilmember Troxell asked how lower income residents will be addressed. Gordon replied all residents can learn the same habits to use durable bags. Councilmember Troxell asked about grocers who refund durable bag users of their own volition. Gordon replied the stores would have the option to make these two issues mutually exclusive. Councilmember Troxell argued Fort Collins’ bags have not been proven to affect sea creatures. Gordon replied there is no data as to where Fort Collins’ wind-borne bags land. Mayor Weitkunat asked about the primary purpose of this regulation. Gordon replied this Ordinance is very consistent with the City’s zero waste goals which are meant to be applied to the entire hierarchy of waste, including reduction and reuse, not simply recycling. Mayor Weitkunat questioned why all retail stores were not included in the Ordinance. Gordon replied the widely used approach throughout the country is to begin the focus on grocery stores. Mayor Weitkunat questioned the difference between users buying bags to line trash cans versus reusing grocery bags. Gordon replied the Ordinance will place the option to buy bags with the consumers. Mayor Pro Tem Horak asked if other communities have done research on the compensatory plastic bag issue. Gordon replied she did not come across any data that establishes a correlation between the increase of plastic bag sales and plastic bag fees. Councilmember Cunniff asked if it would be possible to raise the amount dedicated to beneficial uses, including bag recycling, to 75% of the fees collected. Gordon replied that is the prerogative of Council. Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested additional information regarding grocery stores’ administration costs prior to Second Reading. Mayor Weitkunat asked about the costs and policies relating to enforcement. Gordon replied the enforcement has been determined to reasonably fall under the purview of the Neighborhood Resources staff and grocery stores will not want to be caught out of compliance. City Manager Atteberry stated he would further research the enforcement cost issue prior to Second Reading. Councilmember Overbeck discussed the plastic bag fee in place in Breckenridge, where, according to staff, a 50% reduction in the use of disposable bags has occurred. Councilmember Campana stated the Road to Zero Waste needs to include policies such as this, despite the difficulty in making the decisions. He stated consumers still have the right to purchase plastic bags. Councilmember Campana made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to approve Ordinance No. 099, 2014, on First Reading. Packet Pg. 36 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 329 Councilmember Cunniff commended Councilmember Campana’s comments and discussed the impact of plastic bags on local wildlife. He stated this is an important, prudent step in this process. Councilmember Overbeck stated this is a bag fee and not a tax. Councilmember Troxell stated businesses should be able to make their own decisions and supported a volunteer approach. Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested additional information regarding the low income issue and program administration costs prior to Second Reading. Additionally, he supported outreach regarding expanding the program to additional retailers. Councilmember Cunniff requested additional wording regarding the distribution of reusable bags prior to Second Reading. City Attorney Roy requested additional information regarding the requests for changes prior to Second Reading. Mayor Weitkunat opposed the use of a fee to accomplish the Road to Zero Waste goals. She commended Fort Collins citizens’ recycling and reuse efforts and supported an educational approach. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Overbeck, Cunniff, Poppaw, Horak and Campana. Nays: Weitkunat and Troxell. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2014-056 Establishing a City Council Mall Redevelopment Committee to Advise the City Manager in Connection with the Redevelopment and Reimbursement Agreement for the Redevelopment of Foothills Mall, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to form a three-member committee of Councilmembers, to be known as the “Mall Redevelopment Committee,” to be available to the City Manager for assistance with the implementation of the Foothills Mall Redevelopment and Reimbursement Agreement. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On May 6, 2014, the City Council approved the First Amendment to the Foothills Mall Redevelopment and Reimbursement Agreement. The First Amendment modified certain terms and conditions related to the issuance of the District Bonds, increased the mechanisms for oversight of certain performance requirements by the City, and clarified the level of Packet Pg. 37 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 330 administrative authority of the City Manager to interpret and amend the Agreement. It was also determined that a resolution would be brought forward at a later date establishing a “Mall Redevelopment Committee”. This Resolution establishes the role and responsibilities of the Mall Redevelopment Committee. Due to the complexity of the Mall redevelopment project, it is expected and understood that the specific details of the Mall Project will continue to evolve, and the implementation of the Agreement will require the City Manager to interpret and apply the terms of the Agreement and work with the parties to manage project changes and challenges as they arise from time to time. Resolution 2014-032 modified Section 25.5 and 26 of the Redevelopment Agreement to clarify that the City Manager, in consultation with legal counsel, has the authority to amend the agreement, provided there is no change or adverse impact to the City’s financial interests or substantial change to the scope or general character of the project. As part of this clarification, the City Manager and the City Council believe that it would be helpful for the City Council to form a three-member committee of Councilmembers, to be known as the “Mall Redevelopment Committee." The purpose of the Mall Redevelopment Committee is to act as a conduit to the larger City Council for information regarding the status of the project, and to be available to the City Manager for feedback and advice in connection with administrative amendments to the Redevelopment Agreement. It is intended that the Mall Redevelopment Committee be an advisory group to the City Manager concerning potential administrative modifications per Section 25.5 and 26 of the Redevelopment Agreement. The following is representative of the type of information that would be included within the reports provided to the Committee and the associated discussions of the Committee (this is not intended to be an exhaustive list):  Lease activity and flow of funds related to required leasing thresholds, including information regarding lease verification visits.  Status of conditions precedent to bond issuance  Status of construction schedule  Status updates on performance of conditions (i.e. Youth Activity Center, Pedestrian underpass, sustainability measures)  Status update any requested administrative amendments to Redevelopment Agreement  Provide opportunity for periodic site visits. PUBLIC OUTREACH This item was discussed during the May 6, 2014 City Council hearing on the First Amendment to the Foothills Mall Redevelopment and Reimbursement Agreement.” Mayor Weitkunat withdrew from the discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest. City Manager Atteberry discussed the evolution and likely duties of the proposed Mall Redevelopment Committee. Packet Pg. 38 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 1, 2014 331 Councilmembers Overbeck made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to approve Resolution 2014-056, appointing Councilmembers Cunniff and Campana and Mayor Pro Tem Horak to the Mall Redevelopment Committee. Councilmember Troxell asked about the role of the Committee with regard to the role of Council and asked if this Committee would be acting on behalf of the URA. City Attorney Roy replied in the negative but stated the URA could form a similar Committee if desired. Councilmember Troxell questioned whether or not this Committee would lead to micromanagement. Mayor Pro Tem Horak stated the advantage of the Committee is that it can meet more quickly than the entire Council and stated the intention of the Committee will not be to micromanage. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Cunniff, Poppaw, Horak, Troxell, Campana and Overbeck. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:39 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 39 Attachment1.1: July 1, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 8, 2014 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Special Meeting - 6:00 p.m. A special meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, July 8, 2014, 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: Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell, and Weitkunat. Councilmembers Absent: Campana. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Daggett. Resolution 2014-057 Appointing an Interim City Attorney, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appoint an interim City Attorney. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION This Resolution appoints an interim City Attorney in light of the unexpected passing last week of Steve Roy, who has served as City Attorney for the City of Fort Collins since 1988. Article VI of the City Charter provides that the City Council shall appoint a City Attorney who shall be licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado, and fix the compensation of a City Attorney. The City Attorney is authorized to appoint Assistant and Deputy City Attorneys, as determined by the Council, and to assign duties to those attorneys. Under the City Charter, the City Attorney has multiple roles. The first is to advise the officers and employees of the City in matters relating to their official powers and duties. This occurs in a fast paced and rapidly changing environment and often entails researching and preparing memoranda to offer legal opinions and advice to the City Council and a variety of other constituents within the organization. The Charter also provides that the City Attorney is responsible for drafting all ordinances and other legal documents that the City needs in the course of its operations. The Charter also assigns the City Attorney responsibility for representing the City in all legal proceedings, including dozens of civil actions and handling the prosecution of cases in Municipal Court. Finally, the Charter provides that the City Attorney is responsible for attending all meetings of the City Council. In addition to Council meetings, the City Attorney oversees participation of legal staff in the meetings of a wide variety of Council Packet Pg. 40 Attachment1.2: July 8, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 8, 2014 333 committees and City boards and commissions. The quality and timeliness of the legal services provided by the City Attorney, directly and through the City Attorney’s Office, are critical to ensuring that the objectives of the City Council and City staff are met. The Resolution authorizes and requests that the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem discuss and work with the appointed interim City Attorney to develop a proposal for compensation, benefits and other terms of appointment, in consultation with the Human Resources Director. The proposed terms of appointment will then be presented in Ordinance form for Council consideration on First Reading on July 15, 2014. The Resolution provides that the interim appointment continue in effect until such time as the Council officially appoints the new City Attorney, or such earlier time as the Council may, by resolution or motion, subsequently determine to be in the best interests of the City.” Mayor Weitkunat expressed condolences to City Attorney Roy’s family and commended his service to the City. Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Resolution 2014-057, appointing Carrie Daggett as interim City Attorney. Yeas: Poppaw, Horak, Weitkunat, Overbeck, Troxell and Cunniff. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Mayor Pro Tem Horak asked when Ms. Daggett will be sworn in as interim City Attorney. City Manager Atteberry replied the swearing in could occur immediately. Carrie Daggett was sworn in as interim City Attorney by City Clerk Nelson. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:12 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 41 Attachment1.2: July 8, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 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, July 15, 2014, 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: Campana, Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, and Troxell. Councilmembers Absent: Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Daggett. Agenda Review City Manager Atteberry stated a brief update on West Nile will be added to the Staff Reports. Citizen Participation Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, discussed public finance laws, stating they exist for the protection of taxpayers. He stated the public finance laws have not been followed in the City. Mel Hilgenberg, 172 North College, announced Symphony events, an open house at the Rescue Mission, urged Council to enter into a coalition with other entities to refurbish properties for homeless families, opposed on-street paid parking, and opposed the plastic bag fee. Cheryl Workman, 2501 Bison Road, discussed homelessness and suggested showers and lockers be provided, as well as laundry vouchers. James Day, Larimer County resident, discussed his property, which is in the center of the Boxelder project. He stated he has not formally been approached with a condemnation order for his property and asked if bids were already taken by the Boxelder Stormwater Authority for the project. Additionally, he asked that Council visit the property. Christine Hickey, Loveland resident, discussed homelessness and suggested showers, lockers, and laundry facilities be provided. Mike Pruznick, Fort Collins resident, asked that an agenda item regarding terminating the mall contract be considered given a missed deadline by the developer. He asked if the senior lien on the construction loan means it gets paid off before the bonds. Margaret Griffin, Fort Collins resident, stated she owns land on the Boxelder Creek and encouraged the Authority to simply get started with the condemnation of her property. Packet Pg. 42 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 335 Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb, stated the community should provide for homeless individuals with compassion. David Bell, Fort Collins resident, opposed the homeless sweeps and stated the community should be aiding those in the margins of society. Lawrence Jurs, Fort Collins resident, stated he is part of the homeless community and suggested lockers be provided. Kelly Ohlson, Fort Collins resident, suggested the City should slow down with its stimulus and subsidization of additional growth and development. He suggested Council eliminate the BOB 2 and street maintenance sales tax from the upcoming election. Abby Landow, Fort Collins resident, stated she is homeless and suggested lockers with 24-hour access, laundry vouchers, showers, and perhaps a traveler’s aid program. Taren Hussey, Fort Collins resident, stated he is homeless and also suggested amenities be provided for homeless individuals. He stated police should not be harassing homeless individuals in the downtown square. Zach Humbert, Fort Collins resident, stated he is homeless and there are numerous injustices occurring within the city. He encouraged Council to designate a park to be available for camping. Desiree Fisk, Fort Collins Community Action Network, stated the community must move forward in combating poverty in the city and stated a balance needs to be found in order to honor and respect all facets of the community. Jeremy Wittard, Fort Collins resident, stated he is homeless and encouraged additional public housing. Steve Ramer, Fort Collins resident, opposed the police sweeps of homeless individuals and discussed a coalition of churches in the community which are housing homeless families. Brandi Williams, Fort Collins resident, expressed appreciation for the speakers and stated some homeless individuals are afraid of retaliation. She encouraged equal treatment of all members of the community and opposed the issuance of camping tickets. Cheryl Distaso, Fort Collins Community Action Network, opposed the process for commercial organic farmers to opt out of mosquito spraying as it is cumbersome. She opposed the homeless enforcement sweeps and the homeless meters and supported compassionate and creative solutions. Citizen Participation Follow-up Councilmember Poppaw opposed the homeless meters but asked where the funds would go should they move forward. She requested a list of non-profits with which the City is working and asked about the availability of bus passes. City Manager Atteberry replied the City is planning to implement the meter program unless directed otherwise by Council. He will provide Packet Pg. 43 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 336 information as to where the dollars will go and a list of non-profits with which the City has met as well as information on bus passes. Councilmember Poppaw commended the speakers and stated the sweeps should not have occurred without communication with the non-profits. Councilmember Overbeck commended the speakers and encouraged them to stay engaged with the issue and local government. Councilmember Cunniff encouraged the City to focus on partnering with other entities in order to develop creative and compassionate solutions for the homeless issue. He asked if an update regarding the mall would be provided. City Manager Atteberry replied significant deconstruction and construction is occurring and the City is encouraged by the leasing progress. The Mall Redevelopment Committee will meet next week. Councilmember Cunniff requested a future update regarding the bidding process for the Boxelder project. Mayor Pro Tem Horak discussed issues relating to homelessness and noted Larimer County deals with social service issues. Additionally, he noted this is a community issue, not solely a government issue. Councilmember Poppaw suggested an audit of the process used by non-profits to distribute bus passes. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 091, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue into the Transportation Services Fund for the Safe Routes to School Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, appropriates unbudgeted funds received through a grant for the Safe Routes to School Program. The City of Fort Collins FC Moves Department has received a $25,822 federal grant through the Colorado Department of Transportation for the 2014-15 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program. This funding will allow the City’s Safe Routes to School Program (administered and staffed by FC Moves) to enhance its pedestrian and bicycle safety education programs. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 092, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Downtown Development Authority Fund for Expenditure on Projects and Programs in Accordance with the Downtown Plan of Development. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, appropriates unanticipated revenue for the Downtown Development Authority for projects and programs that enhance the downtown area. These funds, totaling $1,822,273, are from interest earnings, project savings, and from prior year bond proceeds. The DDA Board has authorized the expenditure on various projects and programs. Packet Pg. 44 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 337 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 093, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Projects Fund for the Willow Street Improvements Project and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from the Building on Basics Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements Project into the Willow Street Improvements Project. This ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, appropriates DDA and local funds into the Willow Street Improvements Project. Previous planning efforts for the Downtown River District identified improvements along Willow Street as a top priority project within the River District. Engineering design is schedule to begin in summer of 2014. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 094, 2014, Adopting Design Standards for the Old Town Historic District. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, updates the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District (Old Town District) Design Standards. The Old Town Design Standards, originally adopted in 1981, require substantial revisions to address current historic preservation practices and development concerns related to infill and redevelopment within and around the Old Town District. The update to the design standards will define and illustrate characteristics for compatible future development within the Old Town District and in the adjacent area, and a means for incorporating modern sustainable building practices into historic preservation projects. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement with the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Enterprise and the Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, authorizes the Mayor to execute the First Amendment to the amended and restated intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Enterprise, and the City of Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the delivery of potable water. The item will require the party that exceeds the allotment of water allowed for exchange to provide raw water reimbursement in addition to the charges for treatment. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with the North Weld County Water District, the North Weld County Water District Enterprise, and the Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the Delivery of Potable Water. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, authorizes the Mayor to execute an amended and restated intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the North Weld County Water District (NWCWD), the North Weld County Water District Enterprise, and the City of Fort Collins Water Utility Enterprise for the delivery of potable water. The amendment makes adjustments to the costs associated with exchanging water between the City and the NWCWD to reflect actual expenses, adjusts the requirement to balance accounts from annually to monthly, adjusts the allocation of water that is allowed to be exchanged, and provides for the transfer of associated raw water for any imbalance in excess of the allocation. Packet Pg. 45 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 338 7. Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags to August 19, 2014. Staff requests postponement of Second Reading of this Ordinance to August 19, 2014, at the request of City Council, so that more information can be gathered and compiled to respond to questions and issues raised regarding the ordinance. This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, by a vote of 5-2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat) 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements. The purpose of this item is to appropriate funds in the amount of $210,000 to address high priority security findings identified by a comprehensive security assessment of City buildings. Funding is requested to implement enhancements to address the high priority findings identified in a 2013/2014 City building security assessment performed by Lyon & Associates. Funding will be directed to access control, alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening. 9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places. The purpose of this item is to amend Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance increases the threshold for art projects requiring City Council approval from $10,000 to $60,000 to align with the City’s Purchasing Code. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2104, Amending the Fort Collins Traffic Code Regarding Payment of Fares for Use of Public Transportation Vehicles. The purpose of this item is to provide local legislation specific to fare payment requirements on public transportation. This proposed Traffic Code is intended to provide local legislation specific to fare payment requirements on public transportation. This Traffic Code amendment is patterned after an existing Colorado statute that directly addresses fare payment requirements on public transportation; a local code would provide due process of fare violations through Municipal Court. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Waterline Easement and Temporary Construction Easement on City Property to the North Weld County Water District and the East Larimer County Water District. The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of easements on City Property to the East Larimer County Water District and the North Weld County Water District for their NEWT II Water Transmission Pipeline Project. The City of Fort Collins Park Planning Department acquired a parcel of old railroad right of way located east of Taft Hill Road and north of Vine Drive (the “City Property”) for future trail use through the national “Rails to Trails” program. The East Larimer County Water District and North Weld County Water District (collectively, the “Districts”) have begun the second phase of a multi-phase water transmission pipeline project (the NEWT II Project) for the purposes of conveying treated water from the Districts’ Soldier Canyon Filter Plant to Packet Pg. 46 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 339 their drinking water distribution systems. The alignment of the pipeline will cross a section of the City Property, which is managed by the City Park Planning Department. As such, the Districts have requested a waterline easement from the City for their project. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 104, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of a non-exclusive easement to Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) for the purpose of installing a fiber-optic connection to an AT&T fiber regeneration hut that is located on a portion of the Meadow Springs Ranch. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and approximately 690 feet long and would be placed immediately adjacent to an existing access road. 13. Resolution 2014-058 Adopting Amendments to the Financial Management Policies. The purpose of this item is to approve a revised Budget Policy and revised Fund Balance Policy. Since the last update, staff has developed a new framework for updating, controlling, formatting and publishing financial policies. The financial policies evolved as part of the Budget document. In that context they focused on explaining concepts rather than setting policy. Both of these revised policies were created based on policy guidelines from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) presented as best practices. As such, the red line versions of the previous policies have many changes that are not substantive. Staff has come up with a new format for financial policies to keep them consistent across all departments within Financial Services. 14. Resolution 2014-059 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement With the Members of the Colorado Information Sharing Consortium. The purpose of this item is to enter into an agreement with the Colorado Information Sharing Consortium to allow Fort Collins Police Services to continue as a member agency of Coplink, which allows member agencies throughout Colorado to share valuable information in order to solve crimes, develop leads and track suspects leading to their arrest. 15. Resolution 2014-060 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement With the Poudre School District R-1 for the School Resource Officer Program. The purpose of this item is to authorize the Mayor to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the Poudre School District R-1 (District) and the City of Fort Collins, on behalf of Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) which updates, replaces and supersedes the previous IGA and continues the School Resource Officer Program. 16. Resolution 2014-061 Adopting the Recommendations of the Cultural Resources Board Regarding Fort Fund Grant Disbursements. The purpose of this item is to adopt the recommendations of the Cultural Resources Board to disburse Fort Fund grants to community events from the Cultural Development and Programming and Tourism Programming Accounts. Packet Pg. 47 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 340 17. Resolution 2014-062 Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions of the City of Fort Collins. The purpose of this item is to make appointments to various boards and commissions created through resignations or unfulfilled during the annual recruitment process. ***END CONSENT*** Councilmember Troxell withdrew Item No. 7, Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags to August 19, 2014, from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Cunniff withdrew Item Nos. 8 and 9, First Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements and First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt and approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Campana, Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw and Troxell. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Staff Reports Jill Oropeza, Watershed Specialist, reported on work accomplished in the High Park fire remediation area. Councilmember Cunniff commended the presentation and project and asked if tree planting programs or federal assistance requests are planned as part of restoration efforts. Oropeza replied different programs are in place to assist private land owners and the City will work with a coalition to develop appropriate solutions for each area. Lindsay Ex, Senior Environmental Planner, reported on the City’s Nature in the City program. David Young, Public Relations Coordinator, provided an update on the City’s West Nile Virus public outreach program. Councilmember Overbeck commended staff on the outreach program. Councilmember Troxell requested additional detail regarding the mosquito surveillance location map. Young replied Mike Calhoon would be a better resource to answer that question. Councilmember Overbeck requested the opt-out program be expedited. Young replied he would report to Dan Weinheimer and Mike Calhoon on the topic. Mayor Pro Tem Horak requested additional information regarding mosquito breeding grounds in non-maintained alley potholes. Packet Pg. 48 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 341 Councilmember Reports Mayor Pro Tem Horak reported Platte River Power Authority has approved the purchase of another 28 megawatts of wind power. Councilmember Cunniff reported on the CSU Stadium Design Advisory Committee meeting. Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags, Postponed to August 19, 2014 The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff requests postponement of Second Reading of this Ordinance to August 19, 2014, at the request of City Council, so that more information can be gathered and compiled to respond to questions and issues raised regarding the ordinance. This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014, by a vote of 5-2 (Nays: Troxell, Weitkunat” Councilmember Troxell stated he pulled the item in order to allow citizen input and requested additional discussion related to the plan for additional input. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated this Ordinance creates a price mandate which is unprecedented in the city and virtually in the country. Becky Woodcox, Fort Collins resident, opposed the language of the Ordinance as an overstep of City government power. John Primsky, Fort Collins resident, opposed the disposable bag fee and referred to it as a tax. Jeff Bailey, Fort Collins resident, stated this Ordinance oversteps the bounds of City government and is a social endeavor. He opposed the disposable bag fee. Adella Engel, Fort Collins resident, opposed the disposable bag fee and stated she will travel outside the city limits to do her grocery shopping if the fee is implemented. Councilmember Troxell asked if staff has a report on the City’s usage of plastic bags. Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services, replied conversations are occurring with Parks and Natural Areas staff regarding the City’s use of plastic bags. She stated a complete response will be shared with Council prior to Second Reading. Councilmember Troxell noted the City dispenses free bags for pet waste and stated people often use plastic grocery bags for the same purpose. He asked if the County is involved in this discussion. Susie Gordon, Environmental Services, replied the County has been involved in conversations, particularly with regard to landfill management. Packet Pg. 49 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 342 Councilmember Troxell discussed glass recycling and stated this issue is of little importance in comparison to others within the city. Councilmember Overbeck made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Campana, to postpone Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, to August 19, 2014. Councilmember Campana requested information about the public outreach process which occurred prior to First Reading. Gordon replied staff hosted an open house, put up an interactive web site, and placed advertisements soliciting input. Councilmember Campana stated he requested the postponement in order to gain additional public input. The issue is becoming increasingly complex and expressed confidence in the ability of the City to find creative solutions. Councilmember Troxell requested staff suggestions regarding additional public input. Gordon replied that plan has not been formalized; however, a frequently asked questions list is likely to be provided. Councilmember Troxell asked about the possibility of an additional option at Second Reading. Interim City Attorney Daggett replied the scope of the Ordinance relates to regulations regarding disposable bags. If Council’s desire is to do something very different than keeping within the scope of the First Reading adopted Ordinance, Interim City Attorney Daggett recommended starting over with a separate Ordinance. Councilmember Troxell asked about options for tabling or postponing the Ordinance should additional public involvement need to occur. Interim City Attorney Daggett replied the Council could opt to postpone to a later date or could vote the Ordinance down. Councilmember Troxell stated he would be seeking improvements to the Ordinance and discussed the voluntary actions being taken by citizens, supporting that tactic over the implementation of a disposable bag fee. Councilmember Cunniff stated he would at least like to see minor modifications to the Ordinance prior to Second Reading. Councilmember Campana stated modifications to the Ordinance should not be crafted tonight and encouraged question and answer sessions and solutions from community members. Councilmember Troxell stated he would like data regarding waste streams in and out of the city and suggested waste could be considered a resource in direct conversion methods. Mayor Pro Tem Horak summarized the actions moving forward. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell and Campana. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Packet Pg. 50 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 343 Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate funds in the amount of $210,000 to address high priority security findings identified by a comprehensive security assessment of City buildings. Funding is requested to implement enhancements to address the high priority findings identified in a 2013/2014 City building security assessment performed by Lyon & Associates. Funding will be directed to access control, alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION There has been an increase in incidents of negative interaction with individuals across the City contributing to employee’s heightened awareness and concern for security particularly in high use public environments. In 2013, the Risk Management office contracted with a security consultant to conduct comprehensive security assessments of 19 City building. At the conclusion of the assessment, 260 findings were identified and with the assistance of the security consultant, City Risk Management staff categorized each finding as high priority, medium priority, low priority or procedural. Fifty-five (55) of the findings were categorized as high priority. Prioritization Criteria: High priority assessment enhancements address areas of highest probability for increased risk of employee or citizen injury, use of existing voice over internet protocol (VOIP) phone systems to enhance emergency communications in City buildings, and security cameras installed in areas of high use by children such as recreation facilities. The list of high priority items was provided to Operations Services and Information Technology for price quotes. The price to accomplish all items on the list as proposed by the security consultant is $538,460. After review, a scaled back alternative option was proposed that functionally achieves similar levels of enhanced security with an estimated price of $210,000. Implementation of the high priority items will increase the level of security in City facilities creating a safe, healthy and secure environment for both employees and citizens. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The total cost to implement the recommended high priority enhancements is $210,000. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS While no air, soil or water environments will be impacted by this request, the safety and security of the employee and citizen environment will be enhanced.” Packet Pg. 51 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 344 Councilmember Cunniff asked why this item could not be moved to the next budget cycle. Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer, replied placing it in the budget cycle is an option; however, staff opted to bring it forth separately due to the nature of security and the desire to have a safe and secure workplace. Councilmember Overbeck asked if there is a list of medium and low priorities in addition to the high priorities listed in the packet. Beckstead replied the medium and low priorities were not included in this item, but are available. He stated those items have fallen to the background at this point as the higher priority items were deemed more important. Councilmember Campana made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Ordinance No. 100, 2014, on First Reading. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion to amend, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to postpone consideration of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, indefinitely in order to allow the item to be part of the budgeting appropriation. Councilmember Troxell asked about the urgency of the issue. Beckstead replied a number of requests to increase security in separate offices were considered and, given the safety issue, staff opted to bring forth the item separately. City Manager Atteberry stated he recognizes the significance of bringing forth an offline budget item; however, creating a safe, secure work environment is a priority for the City. He urged Council to approve the item given concerns raised by City employees. Councilmember Cunniff asked about the data retention policies with respect to proposed security cameras and acknowledged he does not take security lightly; however, he feels this item would be more appropriately included in the regular budget Ordinance. Councilmember Troxell stated he would oppose postponement and discussed the importance of the proposed security enhancements. Councilmember Campana stated he would oppose postponement as safety issues are a primary concern. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted this item will take care of security issues for City facilities which are funded by the general fund. The vote on the motion to postpone was as follows: Yeas: Overbeck and Cunniff. Nays: Horak, Poppaw, Troxell and Campana. THE MOTION FAILED. Councilmember Cunniff requested staff examine additional efficiencies possible prior to Second Reading. The motion on the original motion was as follows: Yeas: Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell, Campana and Horak. Nays: Cunniff. Packet Pg. 52 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 345 THE MOTION CARRIED. (Secretary’s note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to amend Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance increases the threshold for art projects requiring City Council approval from $10,000 to $60,000 to align with the City’s Purchasing Code. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council established the Art in Public Places (APP) program by adopting Ordinance No. 020, 1995 which added Section 23-303 to the City Code. The Council permanently adopted the APP Program, and reenacted City Code Chapter 23, Article XII, with certain modifications in 2012. Currently, Chapter 23, Article XII (Art in Public Places), requires any art project with a cost of $10,000 or more be approved by City Council, after the project has been reviewed and voted on by the APP Board and before going to contract. The APP Board is requesting this threshold be increased to $60,000. The threshold has not changed since the APP program’s inception in 1995. Given inflation and increases in the City’s purchasing threshold over the years, this is a much needed change that will more efficiently utilize limited staff resources. The APP Board is also requesting this budget threshold be reviewed every five years to remain in alignment with the City Purchasing Code. The City’s Director of Purchasing has recommended the APP program budget threshold increase to $60,000 to be consistent with existing Purchasing Code exemptions, including City Code Chapter 8, Article IV, Section 8-161(a) (1), which authorizes the Purchasing Agent to negotiate without formal competition the purchase of materials, professional services, services or construction not to exceed $60,000 per project. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Implementing this modification would change the City Code to state that the APP Board would make recommendations to the City Council concerning the use of funds in excess of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) for the acquisition, installation, donation, and maintenance of works of art. Projects approved by the APP Board that involve sixty thousand dollars or less will be submitted to the Purchasing Agent for contracting, without going to the City Council. Packet Pg. 53 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 346 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its March 26, 2014 meeting, the APP Board discussed this City Code revision with Councilmember Overbeck. The APP Board sent a memo to the Mayor and Councilmembers on June 10, 2014, recommending the Code change (Attachment 1).” Councilmember Cunniff asked if inflation was the reason for the request for an increase. Jill Stillwell, Director of Cultural Services, stated the Art in Public Places Board recommended an increase in the threshold from $10,000 to $60,000 for art projects which come before Council. York, Art in Public Places Boardmember, stated the Board has been reviewing its processes in order to be more efficient with its funding. He stated this increase would be more in line with the current purchasing processes for the City. Councilmember Cunniff discussed the inflation-adjusted amount of just over $15,000, as opposed to the $60,000. He commended the existing art in public places projects, but suggested Council should have more oversight over the process. Councilmember Poppaw stated controversy can happen with any dollar amount and commended the increase to $60,000 in the interest of streamlining processes. Councilmember Campana requested examples of $10,000 and $60,000 art projects. Ellen Martin, Visual Arts Administrator, replied the Nix Farm office building mural was approximately $11,000-15,000. Stillwell stated the transformer projects are under $10,000 and the North College address markers were between the $10,000 and $60,000. Councilmember Campana stated the leap between $10,000 and $60,000 is large and suggested the possibility of increasing the amount to $25,000. Councilmember Overbeck thanked the Art in Public Places Board for their service and suggested a $30,000 amount since it has been twenty years since Council reviewed the issue. Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Overbeck, to adopt Ordinance No. 101, 2014, on First Reading, replacing the $60,000 amount with $30,000. Mayor Pro Tem Horak suggested deleting the third and fourth whereas clauses and amending the fifth clause given the motion. Councilmembers Troxell and Overbeck accepted the recommended changes. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Poppaw, Troxell, Campana, Cunniff, Horak and Overbeck. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Packet Pg. 54 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 347 Ordinance No. 095, 2014, Amending the Zoning Map of the City by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known as the Harmony/I-25 Rezoning, Adopted on Second Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on July 1, 2014 by a vote of 6-0 (Campana recused), rezones 264 acres located at the southwest corner of Harmony Road and Interstate 25 from Transition (T) to Harmony Corridor (H-C) and Rural Lands (R-U-L), in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan (City Plan).” Councilmember Campana withdrew from the discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest. Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunniff, to adopt Ordinance No. 095, 2014, on Second Reading. Yeas: Troxell, Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck and Poppaw. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 098, 2014, Amending Article III of Chapter 12 of the City Code Pertaining to Smoking in Public Areas, Adopted on Second Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading by a vote of 6-1 (Nays: Weitkunat) expands the City’s Smoking Ordinance to include electronic smoking devices and 100% smoke-free hotel/motel rooms. This item proposes two City Code amendments to expand the City’s Smoking Ordinance: 1. Prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all places where conventional smoking is prohibited. 2. Require 100% of hotel/motel rooms to be smoke-free.” Councilmember Campana made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Ordinance No. 098, 2014, on Second Reading. Councilmember Cunniff stated this is an important step in public health protection. Mayor Pro Tem Horak commended staff work on the item. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Campana, Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw and Troxell. Nays: none. Packet Pg. 55 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 348 THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2014-045 Approving an Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins and the Poudre Valley Fire Protection District Establishing the Poudre Fire Authority, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the revised Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) which forms the Poudre Fire Authority and the associated Revenue Allocation Formula (RAF) which allocates a share of City revenue toward the provision of fire and rescue services within Fort Collins. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 1981, the City of Fort Collins (City) and the Poudre Valley Fire Protection District (PVFPD) have had an intergovernmental agreement to provide joint fire protection and rescue services within their respective boundaries. The two “parent” entities jointly govern Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) through representation on the PFA Board of Directors. The overall purpose of the joint service model has been to consolidate two existing fire departments into one Fire Authority which would provide timely, efficient and cost-effective service within the combined boundaries of the two entities. The RAF was designed to “pass through” a predictable revenue stream from each entity to the PFA for its operations and capital needs. The PFA Board of Directors is charged with administering that funding stream for the benefit of both partners. Over the past nine months, City staff and PFA staff have worked together to update the current IGA between the PVFPD and City. While some changes are recommended in the general terms of the IGA (see below), the primary issue under review has been the RAF, which details the financial contributions of each party to the operation of the Poudre Fire Authority. The basic components of both the original and the proposed new RAF include the following factors:  Cost Sharing between City and District The original formula was based on an 80%/20% split in the total costs of operating PFA between the City of Fort Collins and PVFPD. The split was calculated based on the relative share of call volume and assessed value of properties protected.  City Contribution Calculation The City has calculated its share of the funding formula based on a share of its general sales and use tax revenue, plus a share of its property tax revenue. In 2010, the City also added a dedicated funding stream from its Keep Fort Collins Great voter approved sales and use tax. Packet Pg. 56 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 349  District Contribution The District contributes its entire property tax mill levy revenues (less minimal District expenses) directly to PFA. The mill levy rate has fluctuated through the years based on the amount of revenue it needed to generate to meet its share of the cost of PFA operations. In 2010, the District increased its mill levy to 10.595 mills to match the increase in City contributions through KFCG. In addition, the Town of Timnath contributes a share of its Urban Renewal Authority tax increment in lieu of the District property taxes that the URA properties would have otherwise paid to the District. In 2014, the City’s actual contributions to PFA totaled $20.1 Million (RAF at $17.8M and KFCG at $2.3M). With the preliminary budgeted City revenue of $21.7M in 2015, PFA will see an increase in City funding of $1.4M or approximately 7%. This represents normal revenue growth (approximately 3%) PLUS the first step in closing the City’s funding gap with first year of the phase-in (approximately $0.5M). District revenue projections for 2015 will be developed in the near future as property tax projections from Larimer and Weld Counties become available. Intergovernmental Agreement Update In addition to discussions regarding the funding formula, City staff and PFA staff have met regularly over the past several months to review the details of the IGA document. Key changes in the terms of the agreement have included such provisions as:  Appointment of the “5 th Member” of the Board (this language remains the same as the original agreement);  Impact of annexations on the financial agreement;  Appointment of a legal advisor to the Authority;  Inclusion of specific references to “Rescue” services as part of the scope of PFA’s services;  Elimination of language which distinguishes between an “Administrative Chief” and “Executive Chief;”  Clarification of the PFA’s role in contracting for EMS Ambulance Services within the jurisdiction; and  Additions regarding TABOR limitations. April 2, 2014 Joint Meeting Recap On April 2, City Council and the PVFPD Board met in joint session to review the proposed IGA and Revenue Allocation Formula. Comments and suggestions from that meeting led to the following adjustments to the final IGA document presented with this Resolution: 1. The City’s RAF has been simplified to include three components instead of four—.29 cents of sales and use tax, 67.5% of Property Tax and the KFCG revenue dedicated to Fire emergency services. Previous versions of the IGA had distinguished between property taxes for operations and maintenance and those dedicated to capital. Under the proposed IGA, all City contributions are provided to PFA to be distributed between O&M and capital needs, as determined by the PFA Board and PFA staff. Packet Pg. 57 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 350 2. Language regarding the phase-in period for the City’s increased contribution was clarified. 3. Exhibit A, “Funding Formula and Revenue Allocation Formula” was amended to include a description of “Other Revenues” which PFA generates itself, without contribution from the City or the District. These revenues consist primarily of fees generated in the development review process, but also include grants, reimbursements, investment income and miscellaneous revenue. Language in this Exhibit was also modified to better express the City’s commitment of revenues affected by Urban Renewal Authorities. 4. PFA’s ability to incur bonded debt was clarified to reinforce that PFA does not have the legal authority to issue General Obligation bonds, but does have the ability to incur some other types of debt with approval of the PFA Board. 5. Section 2.2 N of the Agreement was modified to provide more detailed direction regarding PFA annual performance report to the City and the District. 6. The description of the ambulance related service authorized in the IGA was modified to be in line with state law and the PFA’s intention to contract for ambulance services dispatched through the City’s public safety answering point (PSAP), known as the dispatch center. Changes from the current IGA are highlighted in yellow in the proposed IGA. Changes from the draft IGA presented at the joint meeting on April 2 nd are highlighted with double underlining in the proposed IGA. City Council also asked for a cost estimate for the in-kind services provided by the City to the PFA. These in-kind services, detailed in Exhibit B of the IGA, reduce the overall cost of providing fire service. PFA utilizes City support services in order to take advantage of the economies of scale created by not duplicating basic administrative functions. City staff estimates that the total annual cost of these services is approximately $400,000. These estimates were determined by calculating a pro rata share of the City’s total cost for each service and allocating those costs to PFA. For example, administration of benefits programs for all City, PFA and Library District employees was calculated to be approximately $500,000 per year, including City staff, consultants, actuaries, etc. Since PFA employees represent approximately 10% of the total employees served, the PFA’s share would be calculated at $50,000 per year. However, as part of this analysis, the City considered whether any of its actual costs would be reduced if PFA no longer participated in the City’s benefits program, and concluded that the cost savings would be minimal since virtually all of the same staff and contracted work would be done each year, with or without PFA employees being covered. The use of automated systems for much of the “per employee” work results in very little marginal cost for the addition of 200 employees. In each case, City staff has concluded that no staff positions could be eliminated if PFA were no longer served, and minimal marginal costs are actually incurred. After many months of work between the City and the District, the final approval of the IGA will take place in two stages. On May 12, the District Board approved the final IGA by unanimous vote. At the July 15, 2014 Regular Meeting, City Council will consider the same resolution. The overall schedule for consideration of the financial proposal and the IGA update has been: Packet Pg. 58 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 351  City Council Finance Committee review (Financial issues) March 17  PVFPD Board briefing and discussion (Financial Implications and provisions of IGA) March 24  PFA Board discussion (Update to Board on PVFPD and City discussions) March 25  PVFPD and City Council Joint Meeting (Review terms of IGA and RAF; develop consensus on terms to prepare for formal consideration) April 2  PVFPD Consideration of Resolution 2014 - 03 to Approve IGA and RAF May 12 City Council Consideration of Resolution to Approve IGA and RAF July 15 Incorporation of RAF into City Budget Process Summer 2014 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Three components—Cost Sharing between District and City, City Contribution Calculation, and the District Contribution—were applied to develop a new proposed Funding Agreement and RAF for future contributions. The components of the proposed formula include: Total Cost Current Budget Level of Service 2014 $24.7 million Adequate Funding for Level of Service, 2014 $27.5 million Split (based on the five- year average blend of service calls & assessed value) City 82.5% $22.7 million District 17.5% $ 4.8 million City Funding Shortfall City 2014 Contribution $20.1 million City Funding Shortfall $ 2.6 million City Contribution Sales and Use Tax .29 cents of one cent of 2.25% Base Sales and Use Tax Property Tax 67.5% of Property Tax KFCG As defined in ballot language District Contribution Property Tax 10.595 Mills Timnath URA Tax Increment in lieu of District Property Tax The proposed City RAF variables (29% of one cent of sales tax and 67.5% of property tax) were determined based on the City’s 2014 revenue forecasts and the targeted $22.7M for the City contribution. At $22.7M, the City’s contribution equals 82.5% of the PFA Level of Service Budget and requires an additional $2.6M of funding over the budgeted 2014 funding of $20.1M. Packet Pg. 59 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 352 The 82.5% allocation of costs reflects a blend of service calls and assessed value between the City and the District. City staff is proposing that the $2.6M funding gap be closed over a five- year period. Going forward, the RAF will utilize the City’s Sales, Use & Property Tax revenue forecasts to develop PFA funding, and during the next five years, a declining portion of the $2.6M shortfall will be deducted from the RAF calculated PFA funding. Budget Projections: The table below reflects how the phase-in will work. The City RAF amount in the 2015 Budgeted and 2016 Budgeted columns reflect the City’s current estimates of revenue that will be provided to PFA in 2015 and 2016. Calculation for the remaining years in the table below assumes the previously used 3% per year growth assumption for illustration purposes only.” City Manager Atteberry commended Chief DeMint and Mike Beckstead for their work on the agreement. Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer, stated the objective in revising the IGA was to update changes in the structure and revenue allocation formula. He discussed the history of the IGA and its proposed modifications. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated the City is not evolving its systems of public finance. Additionally, he discussed the history of financing the fire district. Councilmember Cunniff asked if property values are considered because of the assessed mill levies. Poudre Fire Authority Chief DeMint replied that is a consideration, in addition to the fact that PFA protects real property. Councilmember Cunniff requested information regarding the level of service shortfall and specific items to be funded by the increase. Beckstead replied this would be an overall increase in PFA’s budget over five years and detailed some of the proposed changes, the largest of which was in capital. Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution 2014-045. Mayor Pro Tem Horak discussed the importance of the increase in capital funding and in staffing. He thanked staff for work on the item. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Cunniff, Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell and Campana. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 105, 2014 Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Compensation of the Interim City Attorney, Adopted on First Reading The following is the staff memorandum for this item. Packet Pg. 60 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 353 “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to establish the salary and compensation provided the interim City Attorney while she serves in this capacity. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION City Council appointed Carrie Daggett as interim City Attorney, effective immediately, via Resolution 2014-057 on July 8, 2014. City Council appointed her to this position with the understanding that her compensation would be adjusted and that the compensation increase would be made effective with the date of her appointment as interim City Attorney. The Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem have discussed compensation terms with her, in consultation with Human Resources Department staff, and each recommend adoption of the proposed compensation, as set forth in the Ordinance.” Amy Sharkey, Compensation and Benefits Manager, stated this item recommends a compensation package for Interim City Attorney Carrie Daggett. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, provided a series of true or false questions relating to powers of the City and claimed the City Attorney has misinterpreted laws in the past. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Ordinance No. 105, 2014, on First Reading. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted the City Attorney is not a judge, but a provider of recommendations to Council. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Horak, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell, Campana and Cunniff. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Councilmember Cunniff requested the placement of a review of the sunset of Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) on the six-month calendar. City Manager Atteberry noted there was no promise KFCG would continue, nor was there a promise it would not. Councilmember Poppaw stated a sunset was desired in order to assess how well the funds were performing in keeping the community at a level expected by citizens. She stated she was never under the impression the tax would go away entirely. August 5, 2014 Regular Council Meeting Cancelled Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, pursuant to City Code Section 2-28(a), that the August 5, 2014 City Council meeting be cancelled so that Councilmembers may participate in annual Neighborhood Night Out activities that are scheduled to be held in the city that night. Yeas: Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell, Campana, Cunniff and Horak. Nays: none. Packet Pg. 61 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 15, 2014 354 THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Cunniff made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adjourn to 6:00 p.m. on July 22, 2014, so that Council may consider the following items: a Resolution amending and readopting Resolution 2014-050 regarding findings and conclusions in the appeal of The Summit on College Major Amendment, a Resolution certifying the percentage of tax increment for the Downtown Development Authority, and a Resolution establishing the process for selection of the City Attorney as well as any additional business that may come before the Council. Yeas: Poppaw, Troxell, Campana, Cunniff, Horak and Overbeck. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:26 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 62 Attachment1.3: July 15, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22, 2014 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, July 22, 2014, 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: Campana, Cunniff, Overbeck, Poppaw, Troxell and Weitkunat. (Secretary’s note: Councilmember Horak arrived at 6:06 p.m.) Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Nelson, Daggett. Resolution 2014-063 Amending and Readopting Resolution 2014-050 Adopting Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the March 19, 2014, Administrative Hearing Officer Decision Regarding the Major Amendment to The Summit on College Project Development Plan, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to amend and readopt the Council’s Resolution stating its findings and conclusions in connection with the Council’s May 20, 2014, hearing on the appeal of a major amendment to the Summit on College Project Development Plan (#130056) located west of the intersection of College Avenue and Stuart Street (the “Decision”). The revisions are intended to more fully and accurately document the Council’s action on appeal, in order to eliminate any ambiguity or confusion in that regard. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On March 19, 2014, Administrative Hearing Officer, Marcus McAskin (the “Hearing Officer”) approved a major amendment to the Summit on College Project Development Plan (#130056) located west of the intersection of College Avenue and Stuart Street (the “Decision”). Three separate appeals from the Decision were timely filed. On May 20, 2014, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, considered those appeals in a consolidated proceeding, reviewed the record on appeal, heard presentations from the Appellants and other parties-in-interest and, after discussion, remanded the Decision to the Hearing Officer for further consideration of the application of two Land Use Code provisions to the proposed amendment. The Council upheld the Decision in all other respects. On June 3, 2014, the Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-050, making findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the Decision. Certain of the appellants in the matter have since filed an action in Larimer County District Court challenging the Council’s decision. The proposed Resolution is intended to more fully and accurately document the Council’s action on appeal, in order to eliminate any ambiguity or confusion in that regard.” Packet Pg. 63 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22. 2014 304 Councilmember Troxell withdrew from the discussion of this item due to the fact he was not present at the original appeal hearing. Interim City Attorney Daggett stated this item will more accurately and fully articulate the May 20 th decision of Council. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated this Resolution is meaningless and this process has been a poor example of how land disputes should be dealt with in Fort Collins. Additionally, the City’s development review process needs to be improved. Les Kaplan, Fort Collins resident, stated this amended Resolution does not relate to what happened at the hearing. He opposed the process of approval for The Summit. Jack Daniels, 172 North College, encouraged Council to continue its excellent work and stated Fort Collins is a great city. Councilmember Campana stated the Land Use Code offers prescriptive processes through which this project went. He acknowledged lessons were learned from the project but stated this Resolution helps to further clarify what was discussed at the hearing. Councilmember Campana made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Horak, to adopt Resolution 2014-063. Councilmember Cunniff stated he is comfortable with the Resolution as written. Mayor Weitkunat stated this Resolution improves, but does not change, the record of Council’s discussion at the hearing. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Poppaw, Horak, Weitkunat, Cunniff, Campana and Overbeck. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2014-064 Approving the 2014 Certification to the Larimer County Assessor Pursuant to C.R.S. Section 31-25-807(3)(a(IV)(B) for the Downtown Development Authority Property Tax Increment, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to certify for 2014 to the Larimer County Assessor the percentages of property tax distributions that are to be allocated for the Downtown Development Authority by the Assessor as tax increment from the property taxes of all of the affected taxing entities. Packet Pg. 64 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22. 2014 305 BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 2008 the Fort Collins, Colorado Downtown Development Authority (“DDA”) was in the final ten years of its original thirty-year period (“Original TIF Term”) during which a portion of property taxes could be allocated to and, when collected, paid into the DDA’s Tax Increment Fund (“TIF Fund”). Pursuant to C.R.S. §31-25-807(3)(a), in the final ten years of the Original TIF Term, the City Council by ordinance had the authority to extend such term by one additional twenty-year period (the “TIF Extension Period”). Also, under C.R.S. §31-25-807(3)(a), the Council had the authority to allocate more than fifty percent (50%) of property taxes levied by the City to be allocated in accordance with the DDA statutes to be paid into the TIF Fund. On July 10, 2008, the DDA approved its Resolution 2008-06 recommending to the City Council (i) approval of the TIF Extension Period and (ii) the allocation of one hundred percent (100%) of the City’s property tax increment into the TIF Fund (the “100% City TIF Allocation”). On September 2, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 101, 2008 (the “2008 Ordinance”) approving the TIF Extension Period and the 100% City TIF Allocation. C.R.S. §31-25-807(3)(a)(IV)(B) provides that an annual certification from the City’s governing body to the Larimer County Assessor is required, which certification needs to include the allocations of tax increment for that year of all affected taxing entities, including the City. After adoption of the 2008 Ordinance, DDA’s staff worked with the Larimer County Assessor’s Office (“Assessor’s Office”) and the Department of Local Affairs Division of Property Taxation (DPT”) to determine a legally sufficient certification process under applicable Colorado statutes and the DPT administrative rules, resulting in a process whereby the DDA would annually provide a letter to the Assessor’s Office either attaching the 2008 Ordinance directing the 100% TIF Allocation to the TIF Fund or, if the City Council’s direction had changed, attaching the corresponding action evidencing such change (the “Annual Certification”). The DDA has submitted the Annual Certifications to the Assessor’s Office on the City’s behalf for the years 2011, 2012 and 2013, and in each instance attached the City’s 2008 Ordinance demonstrating the City’s continued commitment to the 100% City TIF Allocation. The Assessor’s Office has accepted, until recently, this process as meeting the requirements of C.R.S. Section 31-25- 807(3)(a)((IV)(B). Steve Miller, the Larimer County Assessor, has now asked that the City Council make this year’s Annual Certification rather than relying on the previously agreed upon process. The proposed Resolution constitutes this Annual Certification for 2014 property taxes payable in 2015. This Annual Certification must be provided to the Assessor’s Office by August 1, 2014. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS No changes in the financial or economic impacts as they currently exist.” Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer, briefly described the item. Brandi Williams, Fort Collins resident, suggested part of the Downtown Development Authority’s duty should be to acknowledge public access needs. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, expressed concern regarding the City’s understanding of public finance. Packet Pg. 65 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22. 2014 306 Mike Pruznick, Fort Collins resident, opposed the Resolution and questioned the legality and process behind the Resolution. He also asked why the DDA is receiving additional funding given the increase in crime in the area. Interim City Attorney Daggett stated this Resolution is intended to address and eliminate some of the disagreement that has arisen about the process to be used to provide certification to the Assessor. Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt Resolution 2014-064. Yeas: Horak, Weitkunat, Troxell, Cunniff, Campana, Overbeck and Poppaw. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2014-065 Establishing a Process for Appointment of the City Attorney, Adopted The following is the staff memorandum for this item. “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to respond to Council’s request for options associated with the recruitment of the recently vacated City Attorney position. Staff has prepared three recruitment method options for consideration. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City Attorney is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of City Council. Council appointed Carrie Daggett as interim City Attorney on July 8, 2014, following the sudden and unexpected death of Steve Roy. Council is now considering how to proceed with refilling the City Attorney position. Staff has prepared the following three recruitment method options for Council consideration. OPTION 1 - Internal Recruitment  Job is posted for application by existing City employees only  Process managed by Human Resources staff OPTION 2 - External Recruitment  Job is posted for application by existing City employees and external candidates  Regional or National recruitment  Process managed by Human Resources staff OPTION 3 - External Recruitment Using Executive Search Firm  Job is posted for application by existing City employees and external candidates  Leverages search firm resources to actively recruit candidates & tap into search firm candidate bank. Packet Pg. 66 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22. 2014 307  Firm selection through Purchasing Request for Proposal (RFP) process  Firm selection process adds 6-10 weeks onto recruitment process timeline  Estimated search firm cost $20,000 - $35,000 plus expenses, depending on services provided Several peer cities have recently hired or are in the process of filling key executive positions. The following information summarizes the processes used: City of Greeley City Attorney Dir. Water & Sewer Police Chief External recruitment - national advertising Search firm - national advertising Search firm - national advertising City of Loveland City Attorney Search firm - national advertising Fire Chief External recruitment - national advertising Public Works Dir. Search firm - national advertising In recent years, the City of Fort Collins has used the following processes for filling key executive positions: City of Fort Collins Utility Executive Dir. Search firm - national advertising Police Chief Search firm - national advertising Deputy City Manager/ Chief Operating Officer Search firm - national advertising FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS One-time dollars will be required to cover expenses associated with Option 3. Costs may be offset by salary savings associated with the position vacancy.” Interim City Attorney Daggett withdrew from the discussion of this item and was replaced by Greg Tempel, Senior Assistant Attorney. Janet Miller, Human Resources, reviewed the three options available for Council consideration. Mike Pruznick, Fort Collins resident, supported a public process involving candidates submitting legal opinions. Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant, stated the City should prioritize respect for law in its search. Packet Pg. 67 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) July 22. 2014 308 Mel Hilgenberg, 172 North College, supported Option 2 of the Resolution. John Huisjen, 115 Aruba Drive, stated Steve Roy used to be his partner and encouraged Council to replace him with someone with local knowledge and perspective, opposing Option 3. Mayor Pro Tem Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell, to adopt Resolution 2014-065, Option 3. Mayor Pro Tem Horak noted the most likely candidates will be from Northern Colorado and any of the City’s current attorneys is eligible to apply. He suggested the formation of a Council subcommittee to deal with incoming applications and to make recommendations to Council. Councilmember Troxell asked about the process regarding an out-of-state attorney receiving Colorado licensure. Miller replied some recruiters have discussed attorneys with licenses to practice in multiple states and noted the position requires licensure in the state of Colorado at the time of hiring. Greg Tempel, City Attorney’s Office, stated some states have reciprocity agreements with Colorado to allow licensure to occur without bar exam procedures. Councilmember Cunniff supported the idea of a Council subcommittee. Councilmember Troxell supported the motion given this is an executive hire in the public arena. Mayor Pro Tem Horak opposed Mr. Sutherland’s implication that the City Attorney’s Office has not been following the rule of the law. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Weitkunat, Troxell, Cunniff, Campana, Overbeck, Poppaw and Horak. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:02 p.m. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 68 Attachment1.4: July 22, 2014 (2161 : Minutes-7/1, 7/8, 7/15, 7/22) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Ellen Martin, Visual Arts Administrator SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, amends Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance increases the threshold for art projects requiring City Council approval from $10,000 to $30,000. During First Reading, Council changed the threshold amount from $60,000 to $30,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First REading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 69 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Ellen Martin, Visual Arts Administrator SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2014, Amending Article XII of Chapter 23 of City Code Relating to Art in Public Places. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to amend Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to Art in Public Places. This Ordinance increases the threshold for art projects requiring City Council approval from $10,000 to $60,000 to align with the City’s Purchasing Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council established the Art in Public Places (APP) program by adopting Ordinance No. 020, 1995 which added Section 23-303 to the City Code. The Council permanently adopted the APP Program, and reenacted City Code Chapter 23, Article XII, with certain modifications in 2012. Currently, Chapter 23, Article XII (Art in Public Places), requires any art project with a cost of $10,000 or more be approved by City Council, after the project has been reviewed and voted on by the APP Board and before going to contract. The APP Board is requesting this threshold be increased to $60,000. The threshold has not changed since the APP program’s inception in 1995. Given inflation and increases in the City’s purchasing threshold over the years, this is a much needed change that will more efficiently utilize limited staff resources. The APP Board is also requesting this budget threshold be reviewed every five years to remain in alignment with the City Purchasing Code. The City’s Director of Purchasing has recommended the APP program budget threshold increase to $60,000 to be consistent with existing Purchasing Code exemptions, including City Code Chapter 8, Article IV, Section 8-161(a) (1), which authorizes the Purchasing Agent to negotiate without formal competition the purchase of materials, professional services, services or construction not to exceed $60,000 per project. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Implementing this modification would change the City Code to state that the APP Board would make recommendations to the City Council concerning the use of funds in excess of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) for the acquisition, installation, donation, and maintenance of works of art. Projects approved by the APP Board that involve sixty thousand dollars or less will be submitted to the Purchasing Agent for contracting, without going to the City Council. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment2.1: First REading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2184 : SR 101 APP Code Change) Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 2 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its March 26, 2014 meeting, the APP Board discussed this City Code revision with Councilmember Overbeck. The APP Board sent a memo to the Mayor and Councilmembers on June 10, 2014, recommending the Code change (Attachment 1). ATTACHMENTS 1. Art in Public Places Board Memo, June 10, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 71 Attachment2.1: First REading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2184 : SR 101 APP Code Change) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 101, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING ARTICLE XII OF CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO ART IN PUBLIC PLACES WHEREAS, on April 25, 1995, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 020, 1995, establishing the Art in Public Places (APP) Program, adopting the Art in Public Places Guidelines, and setting goals and requirements for the acquisition, maintenance and exhibition of public art by the City; and WHEREAS, On April 7, 1998, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 047, 1998, which reenacted the APP Provisions of the City Code with certain modifications; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment would increase the threshold for which City Council approval is required prior to contacting for certain APP projects, increasing it from $10,000 to $30,000; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to amend Article XII of Chapter 23 of the City Code as provided herein to align the APP purchasing threshold with purchasing exemptions elsewhere in the City Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 23-308 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 23-308. Acquisition of works of art. The APP Board shall make recommendations to the City Council concerning the use of funds in excess of thirty thousand ($30,000) for the acquisition, installation and maintenance of works of art. The construction project from which the funds were generated should generally be the site where the funds will be used. However, funds may be expended at other sites when the APP Board determines such expenditure is appropriate based on the considerations set forth in the guidelines. The APP Board may appoint a selection committee to make recommendations to the APP Board concerning the selection of artists, works of art and the placement of works of art. The selection committee may include artists, architects, City representatives and members of the public. Packet Pg. 72 - 2 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 73 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Carol Thomas, Transfort Safety Security Training Manager SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2104, Amending the Fort Collins Traffic Code Regarding Payment of Fares for Use of Public Transportation Vehicles. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, amends the Traffic Code to address fare payment requirements on public transportation and provides due process of fare violations through Municipal Court. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 102, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 74 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Carol Thomas, Transfort Safety Security Training Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 102, 2104, Amending the Fort Collins Traffic Code Regarding Payment of Fares for Use of Public Transportation Vehicles. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide local legislation specific to fare payment requirements on public transportation. This proposed Traffic Code is intended to provide local legislation specific to fare payment requirements on public transportation. This Traffic Code amendment is patterned after an existing Colorado statute that directly addresses fare payment requirements on public transportation; a local code would provide due process of fare violations through Municipal Court. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Standard public transit vehicles have an on-board fare box through which fare payment is accounted for: upon boarding, customers deposit a cash fare, slide a transit pass or show a youth ID, which is monitored by the bus operator. In May 2014, the City launched a bus rapid transit (BRT) system that accounts for fares in a different way. Similar to light rail systems, BRT vehicles do not have in-vehicle fare boxes; instead, customers purchase a single fare or transit pass before boarding, at ticket vending machines that are located on each platform and at transit centers. An off-board payment system significantly speeds up the boarding process since customers may board through any door, but it requires legal enforcement since there isn’t a fare box. Enforcement of valid fare payment on BRT will be carried out through random fare checks by authorized transit staff (Transit Service Officers) and/or public law enforcement officials, who will issue citations for fare violations; adoption of a local Traffic Code will allow these violations to be processed through Municipal Court. The BRT introductory fare-free period will end in August 2014, at which time customers will be required to purchase a fare prior to boarding. This is a new type of payment system, and in light of this, Transfort will utilize a phased enforcement approach that will begin with public outreach and education. The adoption of this new Traffic Code provision, which is patterned from the state statute on the same topic (Section 42-4-1416, C.R.S), will permit citations to be written into Municipal Court. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Under the adoption of a City Traffic Code, all collected fines would go to the City’s General Fund. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment3.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2179 : SR 102 Transfort Fares Code Chg) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 102, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE FORT COLLINS TRAFFIC CODE REGARDING PAYMENT OF FARES FOR USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES WHEREAS, on February 18, 2003, by Ordinance No. 016, 2003, the City Council adopted the Fort Collins Traffic Code (the “Traffic Code”); and WHEREAS, in May, 2014, the City launched a bus rapid transit service with an off-board fare payment system where customers will purchase fares prior to the boarding of buses and receive a proof of payment document at the time of purchase; and WHEREAS, this off-board fare payment system will require enforcement by Transit Service Officers when proof of payment is not monitored by bus operators through a fare box; and WHEREAS, a phased enforcement approach will be utilized so that the public is familiarized with and educated about the fare purchase process and the need to produce proof of fare payment when requested by City enforcement personnel; and WHEREAS, those enforcing the fare payment process need a clear, efficient, and fair process for issuing citations into Municipal Court when other enforcement methods have not been successful; and WHEREAS, Section 42-4-1416, C.R.S. of the Colorado state traffic code provides a model for the enforcement in those situations where persons fail to present valid transit passes when riding buses; and WHEREAS, the adoption of a provision similar to that in the Colorado state traffic code in the City’s Traffic Code will provide a clear, efficient, and fair method of enforcing the fare payment requirements in the City’s Municipal Court; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Traffic Code amendment that has been proposed is in the best interest of the City and is necessary for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 1416 of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby renumbered to Section 1417. Section 2. That a new Section 1416 of the Fort Collins Traffic Code is hereby adopted to read as follows: Packet Pg. 76 Attachment3.2: Ordinance No. 102, 2014 (2179 : SR 102 Transfort Fares Code Chg) - 2 - 1416. Failure to pay fare or present a valid transit pass. (1) A person commits failure to present a valid transit pass if the person occupies, rides in, or uses a public transportation vehicle without paying the applicable fare or providing a valid transit pass. (2) A person shall not occupy, ride in, or use a public transportation vehicle without paying the applicable fare at the time of boarding the public transportation vehicle or without having possession of proof of prior fare payment. A person shall present proof of prior fare payment upon demand of a transit service officer, peace officer, or any other employee or agent of a public transportation entity. (3) A violation of this section is a traffic infraction. (4) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) "Proof of prior fare payment" means: (I) A transit pass valid for the day and time of use; (II) A receipt showing payment of the applicable fare for use of a public transportation vehicle during the day and time specified in the receipt; or (III) A prepaid ticket or series of tickets showing cancellation by a public transportation entity used within the day and time specified in the ticket. (b) "Public transportation entity" means a mass transit district, mass transit authority, or any other public entity authorized under the laws of this state to provide mass transportation services to the general public. (c) "Public transportation vehicle" means a bus, train, light rail vehicle, or any other mode of transportation used by a public transportation entity to provide transportation services to the general public. (d) "Transit pass" means any pass, coupon, transfer, card, identification, token, ticket, or other document, issued by a public transportation entity or issued pursuant to an agreement with a public transportation entity, used to obtain public transit. Packet Pg. 77 Attachment3.2: Ordinance No. 102, 2014 (2179 : SR 102 Transfort Fares Code Chg) - 3 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 78 Attachment3.2: Ordinance No. 102, 2014 (2179 : SR 102 Transfort Fares Code Chg) Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Jason Stutzman, Civil Engineer III SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Waterline Easement and Temporary Construction Easement on City Property to the North Weld County Water District and the East Larimer County Water District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, authorizes the conveyance of easements on City Property to the East Larimer County Water District and the North Weld County Water District for their NEWT II Water Transmission Pipeline Project. The East Larimer County Water District and North Weld County Water District have begun the second phase of a multi-phase water transmission pipeline project for the purposes of conveying treated water from the Districts’ Soldier Canyon Filter Plant to their drinking water distribution systems. The alignment of the pipeline will cross a section of the City Property, located east of Taft Hill Road and north of Vine Drive, which is managed by the City Park Planning Department. As such, the Districts have requested a waterline easement from the City for their project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 103, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 79 Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Jason Stutzman, Civil Engineer III SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 103, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Waterline Easement and Temporary Construction Easement on City Property to the North Weld County Water District and the East Larimer County Water District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of easements on City Property to the East Larimer County Water District and the North Weld County Water District for their NEWT II Water Transmission Pipeline Project. The City of Fort Collins Park Planning Department acquired a parcel of old railroad right of way located east of Taft Hill Road and north of Vine Drive (the “City Property”) for future trail use through the national “Rails to Trails” program. The East Larimer County Water District and North Weld County Water District (collectively, the “Districts”) have begun the second phase of a multi-phase water transmission pipeline project (the NEWT II Project) for the purposes of conveying treated water from the Districts’ Soldier Canyon Filter Plant to their drinking water distribution systems. The alignment of the pipeline will cross a section of the City Property, which is managed by the City Park Planning Department. As such, the Districts have requested a waterline easement from the City for their project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City Property, identified as parcel number 97032-00-949, was an old railroad right of way purchased in 1990 from Burlington Northern Railroad Company. The property was acquired by the City Park Planning Department as part of the Rails to Trails program to be used for future trail purposes, and the property remains vacant. The Districts’ NEWT Project began in 2009, with the first phase being completed in 2010. The second phase of the project (NEWT II) will connect the western end of the pipeline from phase one to the Districts’ Soldier Canyon Filter Plant. This connection will involve the installation of 19,000 feet of 42” diameter waterline. The Districts have requested a waterline easement and temporary construction easement for the new pipeline alignment that crosses the City Property. The installation of the pipeline on the City Property will be done by open trenching of the area. The Districts will then restore the City Property to its original condition after their work is complete including grading and reseeding of the area. The anticipated schedule for the NEWT II Project is September 2014 to May 2015. The work on the City Property will take approximately four to six weeks and is likely to occur between November 2014 and April 2015. The Districts will be required to notify the City prior to beginning construction activities on the City Property. No above ground improvements will be installed in the easement areas. Park Planning staff has evaluated the proposed easements and does not ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment4.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 2 believe the conveyance of the easement will interfere with the intended future use of the City Property for trail purposes. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Real Estate Services reviewed comparable sales information and recent appraisal information of nearby properties to estimate a fair market value for the easements. The estimated just compensation for the permanent easement, temporary construction easement, and fee for processing the easement request is $2787. ATTACHMENTS 1. NEWT II Easements Location Map (JPG) 2. NEWT II Project Summary and Easement Detail (PDF) Packet Pg. 81 Attachment4.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 103, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A NON-EXCLUSIVE WATERLINE EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WELD COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND THE EAST LARIMER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT WHEREAS, in 1989, the City and Burlington Northern Railroad Company (BNSF) entered into an Offer to Purchase and Interim Trail Use/Railbanking Agreement (the “Railbanking Agreement”) in accordance with Section 8(d) of the National Trails System Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 1247(d); and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Railbanking Agreement was to allow the City to purchase, for recreational trail purposes, a portion of BNSF’s rail line between Fort Collins and Laporte that BNSF otherwise intended to abandon; and WHEREAS, in 1990, pursuant to the Railbanking Agreement, BNSF quitclaimed to the City a parcel of real property located in Fort Collins, Colorado, identified in County records as parcel number 97032-00-949 (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, in 1993 the District Court for Larimer County ruled in Case No. 91CV474-3 that the City’s interest in the City Property amounted only to an easement, that BNSF still retained the underlying title to the City Property, and that property owners adjacent to the City Property have a right of reverter in the City Property if the Railroad ever formally abandons its interests there; and WHEREAS, BNSF has advised the City, through its attorney, that it disagrees with the District Court’s ruling and believes that it no longer has any interest in the City Property; and WHEREAS, the North Weld County Water District and the East Larimer County Water District (the “Districts”) have requested two easements on the City Property: a waterline easement consisting of .104 acres as described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference, and a temporary construction easement consisting of .167 acres, as described on Exhibit “B”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (together, the “Easements”); and WHEREAS, the proposed Easements would be used to install an underground pipeline to connect the Soldier Canyon Water Filter Plant to the Districts’ distribution systems as part of their North Weld - ELCO Water Transmission Pipeline - Phase II (“NEWT II”) Project; and WHEREAS, the Districts will compensate the City $2,787.00 for the estimated fair market value of the Easements and for staff processing time; and WHEREAS, City staff has identified no negative impacts to the City expected to result from the granting of the Easements; and Packet Pg. 82 Attachment4.2: Ordinance No. 103, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) - 2 - WHEREAS, City staff has advised the Districts that the City may not be the only owner of property interests in the City Property, and that the City can only grant the Easements to the extent of its ownership interest and cannot warrant its title to the City Property; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code provides that the City Council is authorized to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City, provided that the Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the conveyance of the Easements on the City Property to the Districts as provided herein is in the best interests of the City. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easements to the Districts on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal descriptions of the Easements, so long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easements. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 83 Attachment4.2: Ordinance No. 103, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) Packe Attachment4.2: Ordinance No. 103, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) Packe # Packe # Packe # Attachment4.2: Ordinance No. 103, 2014 (2183 : SR 103 NEWT II Easements) # Packe Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Patrick Rowe, Real Estate Specialist Jason Graham, Water Reclamation/Biosolids Manager Ronald Russell, Technical Services Supervisor SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 104, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, authorizes the conveyance of a non- exclusive easement to Nunn Telephone Company for the purpose of installing a fiber-optic connection to an AT&T fiber regeneration hut that is located on a portion of the Meadow Springs Ranch. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and approximately 690 feet long and would be placed immediately adjacent to an existing access road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 104, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 91 Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Patrick Rowe, Real Estate Specialist Jason Graham, Water Reclamation/Biosolids Manager Ronald Russell, Technical Services Supervisor SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 104, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Non-Exclusive Utility Easement on City Property to the Nunn Telephone Company. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of a non-exclusive easement to Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) for the purpose of installing a fiber-optic connection to an AT&T fiber regeneration hut that is located on a portion of the Meadow Springs Ranch. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and approximately 690 feet long and would be placed immediately adjacent to an existing access road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Nunn Telephone Company (NTC), a telephone and internet service provider that serves northeast Larimer County and northwest Weld County, has requested a non-exclusive utility easement from the City to allow NTC to install a fiber-optic line between Weld County Road 15 and an AT&T fiber regeneration hut located on a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch (MSR). MSR is a 26,600 acre property owned by the City and managed by the Water Reclamation and Biosolids Division as a site for land application of biosolids. The easement request pertains to the southeast corner of MSR and per Utilities staff, will have no effect on City operations. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and approximately 690 feet long and would be located immediately adjacent to the existing access road that serves the AT&T fiber hut. Installation of the 690 foot fiber-optic run will occur using a combination of equipment, but in general, a 4-inch slot will be trenched to a nominal depth of 36 inches (no less than 24 inches). After the cable is located, the soil will be replaced and compacted. To achieve a more natural look, the vegetation will be allowed to recover on its own; however, the City may request additional restoration efforts from NTC at the City’s discretion. Additionally, NTC will be required to control weeds within the disturbed areas. Upon review of the easement proposal, and given the City’s positive experience in working with NTC on a prior easement request, City staff is confident that the easement will cause minimal or no lasting disturbance. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Real Estate Services reviewed value information for Meadows Springs Ranch to determine a compensation estimate for the requested easement. Given the easement’s small size and the low dollar per acre values that are appropriate for MSR, the concluded easement value was below a minimum threshold that Real Estate ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment5.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 2 Services determined would be appropriate, and thus a nominal value of $2,500 has been concluded. Along with the property value of the easement, NTC must compensate the City a $1,000 processing fee which will be used to offset staff time to process the easement request. Additionally, NTC is responsible for any costs necessary to restore the property, including re-seeding and addressing weeds, if applicable. NTC has paid the City the $1,000 processing fee and will pay the easement compensation at the time of the easement conveyance. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Upon review of the easement proposal, and given the City’s positive experience in working with NTC on a prior easement request, City staff is confident that the easement proposal and associated work will cause minimal or no lasting environmental impact. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On June 19, 2014, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of a permanent utility easement to NTC, provided that the additional requirement of addressing noxious weeds will also be added to the City’s agreement with NTC. City staff concurs with the Water Board's recommendation regarding noxious weeds and this additional requirement will be added to the City-NTC easement agreement. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Easement Alignment Photos (PDF) 3. Easement Conditions (PDF) 4. Water Board Minutes (PDF) Packet Pg. 93 Attachment5.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 104, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITY EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO THE NUNN TELEPHONE COMPANY WHEREAS, the City is the owner of real property located in Larimer County and Weld County, Colorado, known as Meadow Springs Ranch (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the City Property is managed by the City’s Water Reclamation and Biosolids Division as a site for land application of biosolids; and WHEREAS, Nunn Telephone Company (NTC) is requesting a utility easement ten feet wide and approximately 690 feet long across the City Property for the installation and maintenance of a fiber-optic line between Weld County Road 15 and an AT&T fiber regeneration hut located on the City Property; and WHEREAS, the proposed easement is described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, the Easement would be located immediately adjacent to an existing access road that serves the AT&T fiber hut; and WHEREAS, NTC has agreed to pay the City $2,500 as compensation for the Easement, plus a $1,000 processing fee for City staff’s time to process this request; and WHEREAS, City staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City Property expected to result from the grant of the Easement and related work; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on June 19, 2014, the Water Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Easement conveyance provided that NTC agrees as part of the Easement agreement to be responsible for controlling noxious weeds within the area disturbed by NTC’s activities; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code provides that the City Council is authorized to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City, provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interest of the City and, with respect to real property that is part of the City’s water or utility systems, that the disposition will not materially impair the viability of the particular utility system as a whole and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Packet Pg. 94 Attachment5.2: Ordinance No. 104, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) - 2 - Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the conveyance of the Easement on the City Property to NTC as provided herein is in the best interest of the City, will not impair the City’s wastewater utility system, and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easement to NTC on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including, but not limited to, any necessary corrections to the legal description of the Easement, so long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easement. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 95 Attachment5.2: Ordinance No. 104, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) Packet Pg. 96 Attachment5.2: Ordinance No. 104, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) Packet Pg. 97 Attachment5.2: Ordinance No. 104, 2014 (2180 : SR 104 Nunn Easement) Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Amy Sharkey, Benefits & HRIS Manager SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2014 Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Compensation of the Interim City Attorney. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, establishes the salary and compensation provided the interim City Attorney while she serves in this capacity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) 2. Ordinance No. 105, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 98 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Amy Sharkey, Benefits & HRIS Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 105, 2014 Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Compensation of the Interim City Attorney. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to establish the salary and compensation provided the interim City Attorney while she serves in this capacity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION City Council appointed Carrie Daggett as interim City Attorney, effective immediately, via Resolution 2014-057 on July 8, 2014. City Council appointed her to this position with the understanding that her compensation would be adjusted and that the compensation increase would be made effective with the date of her appointment as interim City Attorney. The Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem have discussed compensation terms with her, in consultation with Human Resources Department staff, and each recommend adoption of the proposed compensation, as set forth in the Ordinance. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment6.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2187 : SR 105 Interim CA Salary) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 105, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 2-581 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND SETTING THE COMPENSATION OF THE INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY WHEREAS, pursuant to Article VI, Section 1 of the City Charter, the City Council is responsible for fixing the compensation of the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, the City is committed to compensating its employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and understandable; and WHEREAS, the City’s pay philosophy is based on total compensation, which includes not only base salary but also deferred compensation payments, vacation and holiday leave, and amounts paid by the City for medical, dental, life and long-term disability insurance; and WHEREAS, City Attorney, Stephen J. Roy passed away suddenly on July 3, 2014; and WHEREAS, the City Council, through adoption of Resolution 2014-057, has appointed Carrie Daggett as the interim City Attorney; and WHEREAS, this interim appointment will continue in effect until such time as the City Council officially appoints the new City Attorney or such earlier time as the Council may subsequently determine to be in the best interest of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council agrees that at such time as the interim City Attorney is relieved of her duties as interim City Attorney, she will be returned to the position of Deputy City Attorney unless the City Council appoints her as the new City Attorney; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes, based upon the added responsibilities placed on the Deputy City Attorney, that the base salary of the interim City Attorney should be established at the amount of $145,367, per annum, effective July 8, 2014. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 2-581 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-581. Salary of the City Attorney. The base salary to be paid the interim City Attorney shall be one hundred forty five thousand three hundred and sixty seven dollars ($145,367.) per annum, payable in biweekly installments. Sixty (60) percent of such sum shall be charged to general government expense, twenty (20) percent to the City water utility and twenty (20) percent to the City electric utility. Packet Pg. 100 Attachment6.2: Ordinance No. 105, 2014 (2187 : SR 105 Interim CA Salary) - 2 - Section 2. That the effective date of the salary adjustment referred to in Section 1 above shall be July 8, 2014. Section 3. That the interim City Attorney shall be entitled to compensation at the end of payroll year 2014 for accrued but unused vacation time in excess of the maximum rollover limit of 340 hours, not to exceed a total of 120 hours, at a rate of sixty nine dollars and eighty nine cents ($69.89) per hour, for a maximum payment of eight thousand three hundred eighty seven dollars ($8,387.). Section 4. That at such time as the interim City Attorney is relieved of her duties as interim City Attorney, she will be returned to the position of Deputy City Attorney unless the City Council appoints her as the new City Attorney. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 101 Attachment6.2: Ordinance No. 105, 2014 (2187 : SR 105 Interim CA Salary) Agenda Item 7 Item # 7 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Bob Adams, Recreation Director SUBJECT Items Relating to the Vida Sana Grant. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2014-066 Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Grant Agreement With The Poudre Valley Health Systems Foundation For Delivery Of Vida Sana Project Programming B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 106, 2014, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the Recreation Fund for the Vida Sana Grant. The purpose of this item is to approve the sub-grant agreement and appropriate sub-grant funds from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, through the Poudre Valley Health System Foundation and the Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity (CANDO), for the Vida Sana program to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in access among Latino/Hispanic community members to healthy lifestyle counseling and programs. Specific interventions include increasing access to facilities providing physical activity; providing social support to increase physical activity; and implementing a community wide campaign for increasing physical activity that will be carried out by partner agencies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The sub-grant from CANDO will fund salaries to support a program coordinator, two program staff and exercise coaches who will be responsible for organizing and facilitating bilingual physical activity programming targeted for Latino/Hispanic community members at risk for chronic diseases. Additionally, funds will support supplies, operating costs and free passes for admission to the National Association of Counsel for Children Conference (NACC) for program participants. The sub-grant agreement/Memorandum of Understanding expressly outlines the provisions for which the grant was awarded. The MOU requires appropriate reporting, recognition, and a commitment to fulfill the Agreement and all its terms and conditions. This MOU will guide staff through June 30, 2015 to successfully fulfill all aspects of the grant requirements. The Resolution provides for approval of the sub-grant agreement and the ordinance appropriates the sub-grant funds for expenditure in the program. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACT  $71,720 will be available to support the program.  $37,100 will be used for salaries for the Vida Sana Program Coordinator and 2 program staff, 2 assistants and exercise coaches.  $34,620 will be available for supplies, operating costs, and to reimburse NACC for free admission passes given to participants of the Vida Sana program. Packet Pg. 102 - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-066 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE POUDRE VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEMS FOUNDATION FOR DELIVERY OF VIDA SANA PROJECT PROGRAMMING WHEREAS, the Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity (CANDO) through Poudre Valley Health System Foundation (PVHSF) as fiscal administrator, has received a grant from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Office of Health Equities to fund the Vida Sana program; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins Recreation Department has received a Vida Sana program sub-grant from PVHSF to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities among Latino/Hispanic community members regarding access to healthy lifestyle counseling and programs; and WHEREAS, the grant totals $71,720, and will fund salaries for a program coordinator, two program staff and exercise coaches, who will engage participants through the City's Northside Aztlan Community Center; and WHEREAS, additional grant monies will fund supplies, operating costs and free admission passes to the National Association of Counsel for Children Conference by program participants; and WHEREAS, in order to receive the grant funds, the City must enter into a grant agreement with PVHSF and CANDO; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements, including grant agreements, to provide any function, service or facility, under Article II, Section 16 of the Charter for the City of Fort Collins and Section 29-1-203, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the Grant Agreement, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection, requires the City to offer specific programming through June 30, 2015; to make certain reports for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment; and commit to developing and evolving appropriate programming for members of the target populations; and WHEREAS, City staff recommends the City Council approve the Grant Agreement as described herein. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, that the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the Grant Agreement with the Poudre Valley Health Systems Foundation obligating the City to use $71,720 in sub- grant proceeds for the development of culturally congruent exercise programming to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities among Latino/Hispanic community members regarding access to healthy lifestyle counseling and programs through the Northside Aztlan Community Center, in substantially the form of agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and is on file in the office of Packet Pg. 103 - 2 - the City Clerk , and that the terms of the Grant Agreement are approved together with such other terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 104 EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 105 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2252 : Vida Sana Grant-RES) Packet Pg. 106 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2252 : Vida Sana Grant-RES) Packet Pg. 107 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2252 : Vida Sana Grant-RES) Packet Pg. 108 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2252 : Vida Sana Grant-RES) Packet Pg. 109 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2252 : Vida Sana Grant-RES) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 106, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE IN THE RECREATION FUND FOR THE VIDA SANA PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Recreation Department has received a grant from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, through the Poudre Valley Health System Foundation and the Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity (CANDO), for the Vida Sana program to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities among Latino/Hispanic community members regarding access to healthy lifestyle counseling and programs; and WHEREAS, the program will provide specific interventions include increasing access to facilities providing physical activity; providing social support to increase physical activity; and implementing a communitywide campaign for increasing physical activity that will be carried out by partner agencies; and WHEREAS, the grant totals $71,720, which includes funding for supplies, operating costs and free admission passes to National Association of Counsel for Children Conference by program participants; and WHEREAS, a resolution regarding approval of the grant agreement is coming before Council at the same time as this appropriation ordinance as a separate action item; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, City staff have determined that the appropriation of the revenue as described herein will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Recreation Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in that fund during any fiscal year; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from unanticipated grant revenue in the Recreation Fund the sum of SEVENTY-ONE THOUSAND, SEVEN-HUNDRED AND TWENTY DOLLARS ($71,720) for the Vida Sana program to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities among Latino/Hispanic community members regarding access to healthy lifestyle counseling and programming. Packet Pg. 110 - 2 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 111 Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Seth Lorson, City Planner Laurie Kadrich, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Dir SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2014, Amending Ordinance No. 121, 2013, Regarding Minimum Parking Requirements in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone District to Extend Its Termination Date. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this agenda item is to request a 90-day extension of the temporary parking requirements in the TOD Overlay Zone. The ordinance (Ord. No. 121, 2013) expires on September 13, 2014. The Planning and Zoning Board is requesting more time to evaluate recommendations from the TOD Parking Study. New parking requirements are anticipated to replace the temporary parking ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Board will consider this item at its September 11, 2014 meeting. City Council will formally consider the TOD Parking Study on First Reading on October 7 and Second Reading on October 21. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone primarily consists of the commercial districts in the College Avenue and Mason Street Corridors, Downtown and the CSU Campus areas. The purpose of the TOD Overlay Zone is to encourage transit-supported, compact, and walkable infill and redevelopment projects. Adopted in 2006-07, the TOD Overlay Zone standards removed minimum parking requirements for mixed-use and multi-family dwellings. The intent was to incentivize redevelopment on challenging infill sites, and show commitment to the MAX Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) investment. The amount of parking provided was anticipated to be driven by market demand, balancing the need to provide adequate parking as an amenity, with the constraints of maximizing development potential on difficult infill sites. TOD Parking Study Problem Statement In 2013, as infill and redevelopment activity increased in the TOD Overlay Zone, members of the public, the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Council expressed concerns about the lack of development-provided parking spaces in relation to the parking demand and the potential for spillover parking into adjacent neighborhoods. Other concerns were raised about the need for parking structures to accommodate the envisioned density. To address these concerns, the City Council adopted a “stop-gap” ordinance requiring minimum parking in the TOD Overlay Zone. The temporary minimum requirement is 70% of the existing standard with an alternative compliance element that allows reduced parking if supported by conclusions of a parking impact study. Packet Pg. 112 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 107, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 121, 2013, REGARDING MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT TO EXTEND ITS TERMINATION DATE WHEREAS, Section 2 of Ordinance No. 121, 2013, which established certain minimum parking requirements in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone District (the “TOD”) called for said Ordinance to terminate and be of no further force and effect at the close of business on September 13, 2014, unless extended by ordinance of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board has requested more time to discuss the recommendations contained in the TOD Parking Study so as to be able to give a more informed recommendation to the City Council regarding the nature of the parking requirements to be recommended in the TOD; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that City staff and the Planning and Zoning Board will be in a position to provide a recommendation and a proposed ordinance to the City Council in the fall of 2014 and, accordingly, City staff has requested a three-month extension of the temporary parking requirements to December 13, 2014; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the requested extension is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Section 2 of Ordinance No. 121, 2013, is hereby amended to substitute the new termination date of December 31, 2014, in place of the original termination date of September 13, 2014. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 113 - 2 - Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 114 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Lance Smith, Strategic Financial Planning Manager Norm Weaver, Senior Energy Services Engineer SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 108, 2014, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Electric Rates, Fees and Charges and Provide Rates for Customers Enrolled in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to establish a reimbursement rate for the energy that will be produced through the Fort Collins Community Solar Project (solar farm). The proposed reimbursement rate is consistent with recent changes in the rooftop net-metering reimbursement rate, adopted in Ordinance No. 067, 2014. Like the rooftop net-metering customers, participants in the solar farm, who purchase an interest in the solar farm, will be reimbursed for every kilowatt-hour of energy produced at a rate of $0.0714 per kWh (the combination of the Summer Tier 1 rate of $0.0583 per kWh and one half the facilities charge rate - $0.0131 per kWh). The difference between the two rates is that, because participants in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project will need to fully utilize the distribution infrastructure to deliver all of their household energy, the additional payment the facilities charge portion of the rate is proposed to be only half of that being given to rooftop net-metering customers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The community solar garden, formally known as the Fort Collins Community Solar Project (solar farm), is moving into the final phases before actual construction begins. The intent of this project is to expand small- scale renewable options for the benefit of Fort Collins Utility customers who do not have favorable sites for their own roof-top or ground mounted solar energy systems. Community members participate in the solar farm by purchasing interests in the panels installed for the project (i.e. subscribing), through Clean Energy Collective (CEC)-- the successful respondent to the City RFP for the project --and receiving monthly on-bill credits on their Fort Collins Utilities electric bill. A Power Purchase Agreement was executed by the City Director of Purchasing on May 2, 2014, commencing a 25 year agreement with CEC for the City’s purchase of power generated by the customer-owned panels in the solar farm and issuance of on-bill credits to participating utility customers. Approval of the lease agreement for the site is before City Council under a separate item. The proposed site of the solar garden is at the northeast corner of East Mulberry Street and Riverside Avenue- - formerly the site of the Dreher pickle plant. The lot is owned by the City of Fort Collins. CEC is proposing to lease, build, operate, and maintain a community solar farm on the lot, consisting of up to 600 kilowatts of ground mounted solar modules. The solar modules will harvest solar energy to supplement the Fort Collins Utilities energy grid. In addition, CEC will work with the City’s Art in Public Places Program to investigate how Packet Pg. 115 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 2 the development of a solar energy facility might be integrated into the Mulberry corridor community gateway project. When the lease agreement is signed, construction will begin on the solar farm. Concurrently, marketing will begin in earnest throughout the community to sell subscriptions in the solar farm to interested customers of the Electric Utility. Before the marketing materials can be developed and customers can evaluate the potential return on their investment in the solar farm, it is necessary to establish the rate at which Fort Collins Utilities will credit customers owning interests in the energy generated by the solar farm. Just as with on-site solar production, Fort Collins Utilities will compensate solar farm subscribers on a monthly basis for all energy produced at the summer Tier 1 retail rate of $0.0.0583 per kWh, in addition to an increment to compensate for the tangible and intangible benefits provided by distributed generation on the distribution system. In order to ensure that the annual benefit is not reduced by subscribing, it is necessary to make the distribution facilities credit explicit in the City Code. While the intent of this project is to allow customers who cannot otherwise participate in solar energy production to be able to contribute to the community’s renewable energy portfolio, the solar farm is not totally analogous to on-site net-metering. Subscribers to the solar farm will need to use the distribution infrastructure to deliver all of their household energy, as opposed to on-site solar generators who pull energy from the distribution infrastructure only to augment their on-site solar production. As such, Fort Collins Utilities is proposing to compensate solar farm subscribers at a rate of $0.0131 per kWh for the “facilities charge” component of the credit, i.e. the tangible and intangible benefits of distributed generation to the distribution infrastructure. The total credit extended to residential customer subscribers to the solar farm per kilowatt-hour of energy is $0.0714 per kWh. An O&M trust fund will be established and funded by a $0.0064 per kWh charge to the subscribers, which CEC has chosen to fund by setting aside 9% of the solar farm production, rather than lowering the per kilowatt-hour on-bill credit to each customer. The net effect being that the per kilowatt-hour credit that residential solar garden customer receive each month will be $0.0714. Small Individual commercial and industrial customers billed at the “GS” rate may also participate in the solar farm. The proposed rate of credit rate to GS–rate customers will be at the summer retail energy rate of $0.0403 per kWh, plus half of the net-metering distribution facilities charge of $0.0187 per kWh, or $0.0094 per kWh. The total compensation per kilowatt-hour of energy that CS-rate customers will receive is $0.0497 per kWh. The O&M Trust will be handled the same way for GS-rate customers as for residential subscribers. The net effect being that the per kilowatt-hour credit that will appear on solar garden subscribing, small commercial/GS-rate customer’s bill each month will be $0.0497. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The financial impact of this Ordinance is limited to the cost of the solar energy being purchased by Fort Collins Utilities. If this energy were not purchased through the solar farm it would be necessary to purchase the renewable energy from another source in order to meet the community and state renewable energy goals. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This project is one of limited number of options to utilize the 500 Riverside Avenue site. The minimal soil disturbance intended in constructing the solar array is advantageous for this site with known sodium chloride contamination from prior pickling operations at this location. A recent environmental assessment was completed and verified that the soil and groundwater conditions of the site are stable and improving. Monitoring of the site will be conducted during the construction of the project and follow-up monitoring will be conducted after construction and periodically over the course of the lease term. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its July 10, 2014 meeting, the Energy Board unanimously supported this Ordinance. Packet Pg. 116 Agenda Item 9 Item # 9 Page 3 PUBLIC OUTREACH A neighborhood meeting under the development review process occurred July 8th. Many attending support the project and CEC is addressing other stated concerns through the development review process. ATTACHMENTS 1. Energy Board minutes, July 10, 2014 (draft) (PDF) Packet Pg. 117 Excerpt from Unapproved July 10, 1014 Energy Board Minutes Community Solar Garden Net Metering Rate Ordinance (Attachments available upon request) Strategic Financial Planning Manager Lance Smith presented a memo and PowerPoint presentation on the Fort Collins Community Solar Project and the Virtual Solar Net Metering Rate Ordinance. The City has signed a purchased power agreement with Clean Energy Cooperative and is working on a land lease to be signed by the end of August so that construction can begin and be completed by the end of December. The CEC will lease, build, operate and maintain the solar garden. The intent is to expand small-scale renewable options for the benefit of Fort Collins Utilities customers who do not have favorable sites for their own roof-top or ground mounted solar energy systems. A rate must be established in order to market the project and sell shares. Participants would receive monthly credits on their Fort Collins Utilities electric bill. The proposed site of the solar garden is at the northeast corner of East Mulberry and Riverside Avenue, site of the former Dreher pickle plant. The property belongs to the City of Fort Collins Wastewater facility and Natural Areas, and agreements are being finalized for using the property as a solar garden, which would provide up to 600 kilowatts of ground mounted solar modules. The modules will harvest solar energy to supplement the energy grid. CEC will work with the City’s Art in Public Places Program to investigate how the solar energy facility on this property can serve as a visual gateway to the community. An O&M trust will be established and funded by a $0.005 per kWh charge to the subscribers. CEC is funding the trust by setting aside 9% of the production rather than lowering the per kilowatt-hour credit to the customer. The net effect is that the per kilowatt-hour credit appearing on the solar garden customer’s bill each month will be $0.0714. The trust will fund the lease, insurance, and facility maintenance. Mr. Smith stated Slide 5 contains the crux of the presentation, the difference between rates for rooftop and solar garden customers. Both solar garden participants and rooftop solar customers would receive credit for energy at the summer Tier 1 rate of $0.00583 per kWh. Rooftop solar customers would also receive the full distribution facilities charge of $0.0262 per kilowatt-hour as a credit. It is being proposed that the community solar garden participants would only receive half of the distribution facilities charge as a credit. Rooftop solar customers could disconnect from the energy grid and still power their house; solar garden customers would still require the grid to deliver all their household energy, not just energy pulled from the system to augment their on-site solar production, therefore they would receive half the credit for the energy distribution facilities. Small commercial customers will also be able to participate in the solar garden, and would receive a credit at the summer retail energy rate of $0.0403 per kWh plus half the distribution facilities charge of $0.0187 per kWh, or $0.0094 per kWh. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment9.1: Energy Board minutes, July 10, 2014 (draft) (2229 : Community Solar Garden Rate) Board Member Friedman moved that the Energy Board support the adoption of the Virtual Net- metering Rate Ordinance being presented to the City Council for First Reading on August 19, 2014 with the rates presented to the Energy Board on July 10, 2014. Board Member Moore seconded the motion. Highlights from the discussion:  A board member inquired why CEC would tell the City what the credit should be since the City is setting the rate, and thinks CEC would instead tell what amount of kilowatt hours is generated by the customer’s share.  A board member inquired about the warranty of the solar array components. Mr. Smith stated CEC will purchase insurance, which will be paid for by the O&M trust. Mr. Phelan added that CEC’s maintenance of the site will include mowing.  A board member inquired about net metering on time of use. Mr. Smith stated he expects the customers would be reimbursed for their energy production on peak at one rate and off peak at a different rate.  Mr. Catanach stated that’s why the premium is used; a flat energy rate was used in the past, then Utilities moved to tiered rates, so this brings it back a little, but still provides an incentive.  A board member commented on the tremendous benefit for solar garden customers. Rather than getting bids, working with installers, and managing maintenance of their own solar panels, customer can use what is essentially a one-stop shop. If any problems come up, the City calls the installer for repairs. Considering there are 1,900 modules on the U.S. market and 400 inverters, it’s a daunting process for consumers to buy their own roof-top system. The solar garden eliminates that.  Mr. Catanach stated the value for customers’ energy added into the distributed system is set and the City is purchasing that energy at a higher than avoided cost rate. The City’s triple bottom line philosophy includes social and environmental values, not just economics.  Mr. Phelan stated approximately 50 customers will be serviced by 300 kW for the first phase of the solar garden.  A board member inquired how staff arrived at proposing half the credit for distribution charge. Mr. Smith stated the reasoning is based on solar garden customers providing half the intangible benefits to the distribution system. These customers will still require the distribution system to deliver all of the energy needed at their residence but will be providing distributed energy to the distribution system through the garden. Packet Pg. 119 Attachment9.1: Energy Board minutes, July 10, 2014 (draft) (2229 : Community Solar Garden Rate) Chairperson Behm restated the motion that the Energy Board support the adoption of the Virtual Net- metering Rate Ordinance being presented to the City Council for First Reading on August 19, 2014 with the rates presented to the Energy Board on July 10, 2014. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. * Board Members Friedman, Graham, and Michell abstained due to conflict of interest. Addendum from Board Member Phil Friedman: I was confused at the Thursday, July 10, 2014 Energy Board meeting regarding a potential conflict of interest that I might have had regarding the community solar farm. I thought I had a conflict because I have a PV system on my house. Rather, I believe the potential conflict might exist if I had subscribed to the community solar farm, which I did not. I miscued on this. During a conversation after the meeting, I realized that I did not need to abstain, since I had no conflict, real, or perceived. Had I not made this mistake I would have voted for the community solar farm motion. Packet Pg. 120 Attachment9.1: Energy Board minutes, July 10, 2014 (draft) (2229 : Community Solar Garden Rate) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 108, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO REVISE ELECTRIC RATES, FEES AND CHARGES AND PROVIDE RATES FOR CUSTOMERS ENROLLED IN THE FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY SOLAR PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council is empowered and directed by Article XII, Section 6, of the City Charter to fix, establish, maintain and provide for the collection of such rates, fees or charges for utility services furnished by the City as will produce revenues sufficient to pay the costs, expenses and other obligations of the electric utility, as set forth therein; and WHEREAS, on May 20, 2014, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 067, 2014, establishing a bill credit rate for net-metered operations and moving from annual settlement of excess power generation to a monthly settlement for participating net-metered customers of the Electric Utility; and WHEREAS, the bill credit rate established for net-metered customers factors in savings the Electric Utilities realizes by not needing to transport across its electric distribution network the power produced and consumed at the site of a roof-top solar energy facility; and WHEREAS, under the Fort Collins Community Solar Project, the City engaged a third party to construct and operate a solar farm within the City to allow Electric Utility customers who cannot otherwise participate in solar energy production to contribute to the City’s renewable energy portfolio by purchasing an interest in, i.e. subscribing to, a community solar farm facility; and WHEREAS, though the Fort Collins Community Solar Project allows more Electric Utility customers to participate in solar energy production, distribution of the energy produced by the solar farm does not achieve the same distribution system efficiencies as that of on-site net- metering; and WHEREAS, energy produced at the solar farm will still rely on City electric distribution infrastructure for delivery to customers and thereby create a similar burden on the distribution infrastructure as that of standard energy distribution; and WHEREAS, in light of this operational distinction between the two types of solar energy facilities, the effective provision of electric utility service and application of the rules and regulations affecting administration of net-metering service credits would be expedited by amending the City Code to identify a specific bill credit rate for customers who subscribe to a sanctioned solar farm, distinct from the standard net-metered bill credit rate; and WHEREAS, the Electric Utility proposes to establish a bill credit rate for customers participating in the solar farm that balances the tangible and intangible benefits of distributed generation to the distribution infrastructure through that type of facility, totaling $0.0714 per kWh of energy generated; and Packet Pg. 121 - 2 - WHEREAS, the Electric Utility propose to establish a bill credit rate for customers using the “General service, schedule GS” rate, i.e. small individual commercial and industrial customers, participating in the solar farm totaling $0.0497 per kWh of energy generated; and WHEREAS, the Energy Board considered the proposed electric rates, fees, and charges for customers enrolled in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project on July 10, 2014, and unanimously recommended approval of the rate changes and additions; and WHEREAS, Section 26-465(q)(5) of the City Code, as amended in Section 2 of Ordinance No. 067, 2014, contained an incorrect internal Code reference, which reference is also corrected in the proposed revised rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, the City Manager and staff have recommended to the City Council the following electric rate adjustments for all billings issued with meter readings on or after October 1, 2014; and WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, it is the desire of the City Council to amend Chapter 26 of the City Code to revise the electric rates, fees and charges with regard to the compensation rate for customers purchasing interests in the Fort Collins Community Solar Project and any other community solar projects meeting applicable requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 26-391 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition for “Community solar project” to read as follows: Sec. 26-391. Definitions. … Community solar project shall mean a photovoltaic electric generating installation that is a qualifying facility using a qualifying renewable technology that offers shared ownership by Fort Collins Utilities electric service customers and is operated by an entity that has executed an “Interconnection Agreement” and/or “Power Purchase Agreement” with Fort Collins Utilities. The physical location of any such facility shall be within the electric service territory of Fort Collins Utilities and any electric power produced shall be consumed within the electric service territory of Fort Collins Utilities. All customers that participate under the “community solar project” rate provisions must hold evidence of ownership to, a subscription as evidence of beneficial use of, or other entitlement to the electric generating capacity of the facility. … Section 2. That Section 26-464 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the adoption of a new Subsection (r) to read in its entirety as follows: Sec. 26-464. Residential energy service, schedule R. … Packet Pg. 122 - 3 - (r) Net metering-community solar projects. (1) Net metering service is available to a customer who holds an exclusive interest in a portion of the electric energy generated by a community solar project when the generating capacity of the customer’s interest is sized to supply no more than one hundred twenty (120) percent of the customer's average annual electricity consumption at the customer’s point of service, including all contiguous property owned or leased by the customer, without regard to interruptions in contiguity caused by easements, public thoroughfares, transportation rights-of-way or utility rights-of-way. (2) The community solar project-generator and electric service arrangements shall be subject to the requirements and conditions described in the City of Fort Collins Utility Services Interconnection Standards for Generating Facilities Connected to the Fort Collins Distribution System. (3) Both the customer's consumption of energy from Fort Collins Utilities and interest in the production of energy that flows into Fort Collins Utilities’ distribution system shall be measured on a monthly basis. The energy consumed from Fort Collins Utilities by the customer shall be billed at the applicable seasonal tiered rate as outlined in Subsections (c) and (d) of this Section. The energy produced by the customer’s portion of the qualifying facility shall be credited to the customer as follows: 1. Distribution facilities charge, per kilowatt-hour: one and thirty-one one-hundredths cents ($0.0131). 2. The energy and demand credit, per kilowatt-hour: five and eighty- three one-hundredths cents ($0.0583). Section 3. That Section 26-465(q)(5) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: (q) Net Metering. . . . (5) The customer-generator's consumption of energy from the utility and production of energy that flows into the utility’s distribution system shall be measured on a monthly basis. The energy consumed from the utility by the customer-generator shall be billed at the applicable seasonal tiered rate as outlined in Section 26-464(c) Subsection (c) of this Section. The energy produced by the customer-generator shall be credited to the customer as follows: 1. Distribution facilities charge, per kilowatt-hour: two and sixty-two one-hundredths cents ($0.0262). Packet Pg. 123 - 4 - 2. The energy and demand credit, per kilowatt-hour: five and eighty- three one-hundredths cents ($0.0583). Section 4. That Section 26-465 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Subsection (r) which reads in its entirety as follows and the original Subsection (r) is hereby relettered as Subsection (s): (r) Net metering-community solar projects. (1) Net metering service is available to a customer who holds an exclusive interest in a portion of the electric energy generated by a community solar project when the generating capacity of the customer’s interest is sized to supply no more than one hundred twenty (120) percent of the customer's average annual electricity consumption at the customer’s point of service, including all contiguous property owned or leased by the customer, without regard to interruptions in contiguity caused by easements, public thoroughfares, transportation rights-of-way or utility rights-of-way. (2) The community solar project-generator and electric service arrangements shall be subject to the requirements and conditions described in the City of Fort Collins Utility Services Interconnection Standards for Generating Facilities Connected to the Fort Collins Distribution System. (3) Both the customer's consumption of energy from Fort Collins Utilities and interest in the production of energy that flows into Fort Collins Utilities’ distribution system shall be measured on a monthly basis. The energy consumed from Fort Collins Utilities by the customer shall be billed at the applicable seasonal tiered rate as outlined in Subsection (c) of this Section. The energy produced by the customer’s portion of the qualifying facility shall be credited to the customer as follows: 1. Distribution facilities charge, per kilowatt-hour: one and thirty-one one-hundredths cents ($0.0131). 2. The energy and demand credit, per kilowatt-hour: five and eighty- three one-hundredths cents ($0.0583). (rs) Loans. Special services in the form of loans for electric service-related improvements, conservation measures or efficiency enhancements shall be documented on forms determined by the Utilities Executive Director and the Financial Officer. Any such loans shall be made consistent with the applicable program requirements, credit and risk standards and interest rate provisions as set forth in this Article and in the administrative rules and regulations adopted by the Financial Officer pursuant to § 26- Packet Pg. 124 - 5 - 720. The interest rate for such loans shall be no less than the most current U.S. prime lending rate at the time of loan origination plus two (2) percent and no more than the most current U.S. prime lending rate at the time of loan origination plus five (5) percent, per annum, with the interest rate for each loan to be set in accordance with the administrative rules and regulations of the Financial Officer. Obligations for repayment of any such loans are subject to the provisions of Article XII of this Chapter. Section 5. That Section 26-466 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the adoption of a new Subsection (r) to read as follows: Sec. 26-466. General service, schedule GS. … (r) Net metering-community solar projects. (1) Net metering service is available to a customer who holds an exclusive interest in a portion of the electric energy generated by a community solar project when the generating capacity of the customer’s interest is sized to supply no more than one hundred twenty (120) percent of the customer's average annual electricity consumption at the customer’s point of service, including all contiguous property owned or leased by the customer, without regard to interruptions in contiguity caused by easements, public thoroughfares, transportation rights-of-way or utility rights-of-way. (2) The community solar project-generator and electric service arrangements shall be subject to the requirements and conditions described in the City of Fort Collins Utility Services Interconnection Standards for Generating Facilities Connected to the Fort Collins Distribution System. (3) Both the customer's consumption of energy from Fort Collins Utilities and interest in the production of energy that flows into Fort Collins Utilities’ distribution system shall be measured on a monthly basis. The energy consumed from Fort Collins Utilities by the customer shall be billed at the applicable seasonal tiered rate as outlined in Subsection (c) of this Section. The energy produced by the customer’s portion of the qualifying facility shall be credited to the customer as follows: 1. Distribution facilities charge, per kilowatt-hour: ninety-four one- thousandths cents ($0.0094). 2. The energy and demand credit, per kilowatt-hour: four and three one-hundredths cents ($0.0403). Section 6. That the amendments herein are effective and shall go into effect for all bills issued with meter readings on or after October 1, 2014. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. Packet Pg. 125 - 6 - _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 126 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Norm Weaver, Senior Energy Services Engineer SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 109, 2014, Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Lease Agreement with Clean Energy Collective, LLC for the Use of City Property for a Community Solar Garden Project with an Associated Access Easement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the lease of City property located at 500 Riverside Avenue to Clean Energy Collective, LLC (through its subsidiary, CEC Solar #1038, LLC), to build and operate a community solar farm project, including an access easement to enter the property from the Wastewater plant entry road on Mulberry Street. The City has entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with Clean Energy Collective, LLC (CEC) to develop a community solar project in Fort Collins. The City property located at 500 Riverside Avenue was determined by staff and CEC to be a feasible site for the location of the project. To facilitate the development of the solar garden, CEC has requested a lease agreement for the use of the City’s property for a period of 25 years for the building and operation of the solar farm project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Riverside Community Solar Garden (farm) Project is proposed to be located at the northeast corner of East Mulberry Street and Riverside Avenue, formerly the site of the Dreher pickle plant. The City’s property, which is currently owned by the Utilities and Parks Departments, was purchased in 1995 to meet the objectives of the City’s Poudre River Land Use Framework and provide a buffer around the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility. The funds used to purchase the property were provided 50% from the City’s Conservation Trust Fund account and 50% from the Wastewater Utility. The intent of this project, proposed as part of the 2013-2014 BFO Offer: 110.3 - Community Renewables / Community Solar Garden, is to expand small-scale renewable options for the benefit of Fort Collins Utilities’ customers who do not have favorable sites for their own roof-top or ground mounted solar energy systems. Residential and small commercial electric utility customers may participate by purchasing panels in the project and receiving credits on their Fort Collins Utilities electric bill. The developer of the project, Clean Energy Collective, LLC (CEC), was the successful respondent to a City Request for Proposal to partner with Fort Collins Utilities to develop a community solar farm. CEC is proposing to use property leased from the City to build, operate, and maintain a community solar farm facility that can be expanded up to 600 kilowatts of ground mounted solar modules. The solar modules will harvest solar energy to supplement Fort Collins Utilities energy supply, supporting the Colorado Renewable Energy Standard (RES) deliverable of receiving 10% of retail electric energy from renewable sources by 2020. In addition, CEC will work with the City’s Art in Public Places Program to investigate how the development of a solar farm facility on Packet Pg. 127 Agenda Item 10 Item # 10 Page 2 this property might be integrated into the Mulberry corridor community gateway project. In order to facilitate the development of the solar farm, CEC has requested a lease through its subsidiary CEC Solar #1038, LLC of approximately 3 acres of the City property. The term of the lease will be for 25 years with optional extension terms of up to 10 additional years. On May 2, 2014 the City Director of Purchasing signed a Power Purchase Agreement with CEC, entering into a 25-year agreement to offer a project site, acquire the power produced by the project, and provide on-bill credits to participating utility customers, conditioned on CEC’s completion of construction and commencing operation of the solar farm facility. Use of the leased premises for the solar farm appeared to render a portion of the former pickle plant site unavailable for its originally intended conservation uses and Wastewater Utility purposes. As such, Utilities staff explored the degree to which the funds originally used to purchase the site needed to be repaid under the City Code and Charter. Upon further analysis, it was determined the solar farm will not actually interfere with the intended buffering of the Mulberry Wastewater plant, nor otherwise impair the services enjoyed by ratepayers of the Wastewater Utility. Accordingly, no repayment will be made by the project to the Wastewater Enterprise Fund for use of the site. Staff further determined that 30-50% of the site shall also remain open space, to the north and west of the leased premises, with such area available for trail and overlook development, as was originally intended through use of Conservation Trust Fund monies to purchase the site. Partial occupation of the site for the project will nevertheless cause some diminution of conservation use of the site, and management staff is currently formalizing the specific amount of repayment to be made to the City’s Conservation Trust Fund account. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The power purchased from the community solar farm project will contribute renewable energy helping the City to meet requirements of the Colorado Renewable Energy Standard (RES). Council authorized funds in the 2013-2014 budget in the amount of $500,000 for incentives to participating utility customers comparable to solar rebates offered for rooftop solar arrays. Given that CEC will build the solar farm at their expense and that the project will benefit the City and Utilities customers, staff has proposed a nominal rental rate for the City property in the amount of ten dollars per year. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This project is one of a limited number of options to utilize the 500 Riverside Avenue site due to limitations on development tied to the buffer around the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility and environmental matters. The minimal soil disturbance intended in constructing the solar farm is advantageous for this site with known sodium chloride contamination from prior pickling operations at this location. A recent environmental assessment was completed and verified that the soil and groundwater conditions of the site are stable and improving. Monitoring of the site will be conducted during the construction of the project and follow-up monitoring will be conducted after construction and periodically during the course of the lease term. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION This item is scheduled to be presented to the Water Board on August 21, 2014. The execution of the Lease Agreement will be contingent on approval by the Water Board prior to second reading of this item. PUBLIC OUTREACH A neighborhood meeting under the development review process occurred on July 8, 2014. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Lease Area Detail (PDF) Packet Pg. 128 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment10.1: Location Map [Revision 1] (2217 : Solar Garden Lease AIS) $PNNVOJUZ4PMBS(BSEFO1SPKFDU-FBTF"SFB%FUBJM 1BHFPG ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. $PNNVOJUZ4PMBS(BSEFO1SPKFDU-FBTF"SFB%FUBJM 1BHFPG Packet Pg. $PNNVOJUZ4PMBS(BSEFO1SPKFDU-FBTF"SFB%FUBJM 1BHFPG Packet Pg. - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 109, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CLEAN ENERGY COLLECTIVE, LLC FOR THE USE OF CITY PROPERTY FOR A COMMUNITY SOLAR GARDEN PROJECT WITH AN ASSOCIATED ACCESS EASEMENT WHEREAS, the City is the owner of a certain parcel of real property, known as the “Pickle Plant” (the “Property”), consisting of 5 acres, located in Larimer County, Colorado identified as parcel number 97124-00-907; and WHEREAS, the Property was conveyed to the City in 1995 to meet the objectives of the City’s Poudre River Land Use Framework and to provide a buffer around the Mulberry wastewater facility; and WHEREAS, the purchase of the Property was funded with equal contributions from the City’s Conservation Trust Fund account and the Wastewater Enterprise Fund in addition to lease revenues that were applied to the purchase price; and WHEREAS, after reviewing responses to an RFP for partners to install and operate a community solar farm and provide renewable solar energy to the City’s Utility Distribution Grid, the City selected Clean Energy Collective, LLC (“CEC”) as the successful photovoltaic system developer; and WHEREAS, the City and CEC identified the Property as an appropriate location for the solar farm based on several factors, including visibility, access, and compromised soil composition of the Property that made other forms of development impractical; and WHEREAS, City staff believes the solar farm is one of few beneficial uses compatible with soil contamination issues existing on the Property; and WHEREAS, on May 2, 2014, the City entered into a power purchase agreement with CEC for up to 25-years, with extensions for an additional 10 years, to design, construct, operate and maintain a solar farm on the Property; and WHEREAS, CEC will require use of the Property during construction, during the maintenance period, and for periodic equipment replacement; and WHEREAS, CEC has requested a land lease in the form attached hereto as Exhibit ‘A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Lease”) through a subsidiary entity for the construction, maintenance, and operation of a solar farm; and WHEREAS, the proposed land area of the Lease consists of 3 acres of the Property (the “Leased Area”), as described on Exhibit “A”, to the Lease; and WHEREAS, CEC has also requested an associated access easement over a portion of the Packet Pg. 133 - 2 - Property, to provide legal access from the entry road for the Mulberry wastewater facility (“Access Easement”), as described on Exhibit “D” to the Lease; and WHEREAS, the Access Easement will not create an undue impact on the Property or the Mulberry wastewater facility entrance that is different from or greater than the use the City would need in order to otherwise develop the Property; and WHEREAS, the proposed Lease term will be for a period of twenty five (25) years; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the Lease, CEC Solar will be required to restore the Property upon expiration of the power purchase agreement and lease; and WHEREAS, use of the Property for a solar farm will not interfere with the buffering of the Mulberry wastewater facility which was intended when the City applied Wastewater Utility funds to purchase the Property, nor will the solar farm otherwise impair the services enjoyed by Wastewater Utility customers, and no additional compensation will be required of the project to the Wastewater Enterprise Fund; and WHEREAS, use of the Property for a solar farm limits potential conservation uses for the site that may have been considered when the City used Conservation Trust Funds to purchase the Property; however, staff has determined that the majority of the site shall remain open space and available for conservation uses, and therefore no repayment will be required to the City’s Conservation Trust Fund account as a result of locating the project on the Property; and WHEREAS, due to the collaborative nature of the solar farm project, the benefits realized by the City’s Utility customers from the local generation of Renewal Energy Credits by the solar farm, the enhanced screening of the Mulberry wastewater facility the project will provide without additional cost to Utility ratepayers, and CEC’s investment to create a useful development upon otherwise undevelopable portions of the Property, the staff has recommended CEC be charged only minimal rent for the use of the Leased Area and easement; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code provides that City Council is authorized to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City, provided that Council first finds, by ordinance, that any sale or other disposition will not materially impair the viability of any City utility system as a whole of which the property is a part, will benefit the City’s citizens, and will be in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That leasing of the Leased Area and an associated access easement on, over, and across City Property to Clean Energy Collective, LLC, through its subsidiary, CEC Solar #1038, LLC, as provided herein, will not materially impair the viability of any City utility system as a whole of which the property is a part, will benefit the City’s citizens, and will be in the best interest of the City. Packet Pg. 134 - 3 - Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a negotiated lease agreement for the Leased Area and an associated easement to CEC Solar #1038, LLC and such documents as may be necessary to convey the Access Easement to the Property, in substantially the form as attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal descriptions of the Leased Area or Access Easement, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Leased Area or Access Easement. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 135 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 137 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 138 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 139 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 140 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 141 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 142 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 143 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 144 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 145 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 146 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 147 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 148 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 149 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 150 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 151 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 152 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 153 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 154 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 155 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 156 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 157 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 158 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 159 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 160 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 161 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 162 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Packet Pg. 163 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2218 : Solar Garden Lease ORD) Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Ginger Purvis, Senior Electrical Engineer Steven Catanach, Light & Power Operations Manager JR Schnelzer, Director of Parks SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 110, 2014, Authorizing the Exchange of a 9.33 Acre Portion of the Timberline Substation Property from the Electric Utility for a Comparably-Valued 3.03 Acre Site from the Parks Department. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the exchange of portions of property at the Timberline Substation property between the Utility Department and the Parks Department. The City of Fort Collins owns a parcel of land at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Timberline Road which is the location of the Timberline Substation (the “City Property”). The Utility Department owns 19.92 acres of the City Property of which 7.43 acres are used for substation purposes. The Parks Department desires to develop a 9.33-acre portion of the property owned by Utilities for recreation purposes and has proposed to acquire this portion from the Utility Department. The Parks Department intends to maintain the property as a disc golf course. The Utility Department has determined that the proposed conveyance and recreation use will not adversely impact the portion of the City Property used for utility purposes. In exchange, the Utility Department desires to acquire a 3.03 acre portion of the City Property which is owned by the Parks Department. This Ordinance authorizes the exchange of the properties between the Utility Department and Parks Department, recognizing that no funds will need to be paid between the departments, based on the comparable values of the two parcels, existing encumbrances on the 9.33-acre parcel, the value of all access reservations retained by the Utilities Department, the beneficial use each will realize in the land it acquires, and the value of additional services the Utility Department will provide to the Parks Department. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City Property was purchased in 1973 and developed for an electric power substation and transmission facility. The Utility Department owns 19.92 acres of the City Property identified as Parcels A, B, and C on the attached Property Detail Map. Of the 19.92 acres owned by the Utility Department, 7.43 acres is used for the substation, depicted as Parcel B on the attached map. In 2013, the Utility Department granted permission to the Parks Department to plan a 9.33-acre disc golf course on a portion of the property surrounding the substation (Parcel C), which property was undevelopable for Utility Department purposes. The Parks Department desires to acquire Parcel C from the Utility Department who has determined that this portion of the property is not projected for use by Utilities. Parcel C is burdened by several access easements of record and others that have been used by permission of the City, such that Parcel C has limited development potential for utility purposes. Packet Pg. 164 Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 2 The Parks Department owns a 3.03-acre portion of the City Property, shown as Parcel D, which has previously been used for park maintenance storage purposes. Parcel D is not encumbered by access easements or reservations that impair development of the site. The Parks Department has agreed to convey Parcel D to the Utility Department in exchange for Parcel C, subject to all easements of record and a reservation of rights held by the Utility Department to cross Parcel C to access and maintain the substation facility that is surrounded by the parcel. Due to the comparable values of the two parcels, the greater usefulness of Parcel D for utility purposes, over that of Parcel C, the value of the reservation for access retained by the Utility Department across Parcel C, and the ancillary storage services the Utility Department will provide to Parks, the value of benefits granted and received by each department will net out as equal and neither department will be required to pay any funds to the other. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The estimated value of the Utility property to be conveyed to Parks is $373,000 without the reservation of access rights to be retained by the Utility Department. The estimated value of the Parks property to be conveyed to the Utility Department is $358,000. The Utility Department and the Parks Department are willing to exchange their properties recognizing the comparable values of each parcel, including the impact of all easements and reservations on the values of such properties. The Utility Department will also work with the Parks Department to provide an equivalent storage area at the Utility Service Center. Due to the shape of Parcel C and the existing encumbrances across it for access, as held by Platte River Power Authority, Public Service Company and others, the parcel has limited development potential for Utility Department purposes. Parcel D is not burdened by access easements, has a shape that will accommodate greater development than Parcel C, and can be put to a higher use by the Utility Department than that which Parks can put on the parcel. Considering the exchange of valuable property and services by the departments, the exchange proposed by the ordinance will not result in a diminution of value or services to ratepayers such that any Utilities Fund will require reimbursement as part of this transaction. Similarly, due to the improved development potential each department will realizes relative to the services it provides to the community, the resulting transaction will provide an equal benefit to each department and neither department will be required pay any funds to make the other whole in the exchange. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Detail Map (PDF) Packet Pg. 165 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 166 Attachment11.1: Location Map (2072 : Timberline Substation Exchange) ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 167 Attachment11.2: Detail Map (2072 : Timberline Substation Exchange) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 110, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE EXCHANGE OF A 9.33-ACRE PORTION OF THE TIMBERLINE SUBSTATION PROPERTY FROM THE ELECTRIC UTILITY FOR A COMPARABLY- VALUED 3.03-ACRE SITE FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is the owner of that certain real property located in Fort Collins and known as the Timberline Substation, which was originally purchased by the City for Electric Utility purposes (the "Substation Property"); and WHEREAS, the Substation Property, located southwest of the intersection of Timberline and Prospect Roads, was acquired on May 2, 1973 with Electric Utility funds and developed for an electric power substation facility; and WHEREAS, the Electric Utility currently uses only 7.43 acres at the center of the Substation Property for the electric power substation facility, shown as “Parcel B” on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, in 2013 the Electric Utility granted permission to the Park Department to develop a recreational use on portions of the Substation Property that could not be developed for utility purposes; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins also owns a 3.03 acre parcel of land adjacent to the Substation Property, which was purchased with Parks Department funds (the "Parks Property"), shown as “Parcel D” on Exhibit "A", and as more specifically described on Exhibit “B”; and WHEREAS, the Parks Department currently uses only a portion of Parcel D for storage of park maintenance materials and equipment, including mulch and soil amendments; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined there are beneficial uses for the unused portions of the Substation Property and the Parks Property that will not materially impact Utility or Parks operations; and WHEREAS, Utility Department staff has identified 9.33 acres of the Substation Property that is not projected for use by the Electric Utility due to its configuration and the existence of access easements across the property held by Platte River Power Authority, Public Service Company, and others, “Parcel C” on Exhibit "A", and as more specifically described on Exhibit “B” (the "Utility Property"); and WHEREAS, Parks Department staff has determined that Parcel C offers greater usefulness and access for recreational uses than does Parcel D; and WHEREAS, Electric Utility staff has determined there is greater usefulness and access to Parcel D than that available on Parcel C for utility uses; and WHEREAS, the estimated fair market value of the Utility Property, Parcel C, as of March 2014 is approximately $373,000; and Packet Pg. 168 - 2 - WHEREAS, the estimated fair market value of the Parks Property, Parcel D, as of March 2014 is approximately $358,000; and WHEREAS, in order to avoid interruption of utility services, Utility staff has requested that the Electric Utility, and its permittees and assigns, retain a reservation of all rights to access the substation facilities via the access road identified on Exhibit "A" as “Substation Drive”, and those existing access alignments for the benefit of the Utility across Parcel C, reflected on Exhibit “A” as “Secondary Access Road and Entrance”; and WHEREAS, for any access alignment depicted on Exhibit “A” that is not of record, the City shall file with the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder’s Office a Notice describing such access alignment; and WHEREAS, Parcel C, as transferred to the Parks Department, shall remain encumbered by all easements and access alignments of record, including those for the benefit of Platte River Power Authority (“Platte River”), Public Service Company, and Western Slope Gas Company; additional creation and/or transfer of easements will be subject to City Council approval by ordinance; and WHEREAS, Parcel C, as transferred to the Parks Department, shall remain subject to the right of Platte River to obtain access to Parcel B, pursuant to the Amended Contract for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy, dated September 1, 2010, as amended from time to time, between Platte River and the City; and WHEREAS, upon exchange of the real property interests as described herein, the Electric Utility shall provide and maintain available for Parks Department purposes at a separate location secure storage space comparable to that available on Parcel D, as well as inventory control for the storage of park maintenance materials and equipment; and WHEREAS, staff has recommended that the City Council consider and treat the exchange of interests in Parcels C and D to be an equivalent transaction, and require no additional remuneration, due to the comparable values of the parcels; the value of the access reservation of rights retained by the Utility Department; their greater development and use potential upon exchange, relative to the services each department provides; and additional benefits the Parks Department and Electric Utility will each realize by the exchange; and WHEREAS, approval of a separate shared access easement with the Public Service Company across a portion of Parcel C is coming before Council under a separate action item; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111 of the City Code provides that City Council is authorized to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of real property owned by the City, provided the Council first finds by ordinance that any sale or disposition of real property owned by the City will not materially impair the viability of any City utility system as a whole of which the property is a part, will be for the benefit of the City's citizens, and will be in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Packet Pg. 169 - 3 - Section 1. That transfer of “Parcel C”, as reflected on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, by the Electric Utility to the Parks Department, in exchange for the Parks Department transfer of “Parcel D” to the Electric Utility under the terms listed above will not materially impair the viability of any City utility system of which such property is a part, will benefit the City's utility customers, and is in the best interests of the City; and Section 2. That, based on the comparable real property values of the respective parcels, the greater development and use potential of the parcels upon exchange, relative to the services each department provides, the value of the reservation of rights retained by the Electric Utility, the Electric Utility’s provision of secure storage and ancillary services for the Parks Department, and the mutual benefits to each department that would be achieved by the exchange, the exchange will be deemed an equivalent transaction and no monetary compensation will be required to make either department whole; and Section 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to complete the transfer of the 9.33 acre Utility Property to the Parks Department, and the transfer of the 3.03 acre Parks Property to the Electric Utility, on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City and effectuate the purposes of this Ordinance, including but not limited to any necessary changes to the legal descriptions of the subject parcels and reservations of access alignments. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 170 - 4 - Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 171 Packe &YIJCJU# 1BHFPG Packet Pg. 173 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2115 : Timberline Substation Exchange-ORDINANCE) &YIJCJU# 1BHFPG Packet Pg. 174 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2115 : Timberline Substation Exchange-ORDINANCE) &YIJCJU# 1BHFPG Packet Pg. 175 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2115 : Timberline Substation Exchange-ORDINANCE) &YIJCJU# 1BHFPG Packet Pg. 176 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2115 : Timberline Substation Exchange-ORDINANCE) &YIJCJU# 1BHFPG Packet Pg. 177 Attachment2: Exhibit B (2115 : Timberline Substation Exchange-ORDINANCE) Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Lindsay Kuntz, Real Estate Specialist Ginger Purvis, Senior Electrical Engineer Steven Catanach, Light & Power Operations Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 111, 2014, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Shared Access Easement on City Property to Public Service Company of Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the conveyance of a shared access easement to Public Service Company of Colorado for an access road at the Timberline Substation Property. The City of Fort Collins Utility Department owns a property at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Timberline Road which is the location of the Timberline Substation (the “City Property”). Public Service Company of Colorado, Inc. (PSCo) owns a small tract of land on Timberline Road which is surrounded on three sides by the City Property. The access to the two properties is by means of an existing driveway located on Timberline Road of which a portion falls on to each property. In order to establish an easement of record for the allowed use of the driveway by each party, the Utility Department and PSCo have proposed the conveyance of a shared access easement allowing both parties the right to use the driveway for access purposes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City Property was purchased in 1973 by the City Utility Department and developed for an electric power substation and transmission facility which is operated by PRPA. PSCo’s property is surrounded by the City Property on Timberline Road (“PSCo Property). The access to both the City Property and the PSCo Property is by means of a driveway located on Timberline Road. The driveway has existed and has been used by the City and PSCo since the 1980s. It was recently determined that an easement for the driveway had never been recorded. A survey of the driveway revealed that a portion of the driveway is located on the City Property and a portion on the PSCo Property. The conveyance of the shared access easement will establish for the record the location of the easement and the allowed use by each party. As part of the shared access easement agreement, the City will reserve the right for PRPA and other users of the City Property to utilize the driveway for access purposes. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Given the existence and usage of the driveway by both parties for over three decades, City staff recommends the shared access easement be granted to Public Service Company of Colorado, Incorporated at no cost. Packet Pg. 178 Agenda Item 12 Item # 12 Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) Packet Pg. 179 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 180 Attachment12.1: Location Map (2075 : Timberline Substation Xcel Easement) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 111, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO WHEREAS, the City owns a parcel of land at the southwest corner of Prospect Road and Timberline Road identified in the records of the County Assessor as parcel number 87191-00- 917 (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, the City Property is the location of an electric power substation and transmission facility that is operated by Platte River Power Authority (“Platte River”); and WHEREAS, Public Service Company of Colorado, Inc. (PSCo) owns a small tract of land on Timberline Road identified in County records as parcel number 87191-00-826 (the “PSCo Property”), which is surrounded on three sides by the City Property; and WHEREAS, both the City Property and the PSCo Property have historically been accessed by means of a shared driveway, which a recent survey shows is partly on the City Property and partly on the PSCo Property; and WHEREAS, no easement has ever been recorded for the driveway; and WHEREAS, the City and PSCo would like to establish an easement of record on their respective properties for a right of shared access by both parties and their agents, assignees and licensees, including Platte River; and WHEREAS, the location of the proposed easement on the City Property is described on Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference (the “Easement”); and WHEREAS, the City does not plan to charge PSCo for the Easement on the City Property because, as consideration for the Easement, PSCo has agreed to grant the City reciprocal rights on the PSCo Property; and WHEREAS, City staff has not identified any negative impacts to the City resulting from the granting of the Easement; and WHEREAS, Section 23-111(a) of the City Code authorizes the City Council to sell, convey or otherwise dispose of any and all interests in real property owned in the name of the City, provided that the City Council first finds, by ordinance, that such sale or other disposition is in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Packet Pg. 181 - 2 - Section 1. That the conveyance of the Easement on the City Property to PSCo as provided herein is in the best interests of the City. Section 2. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to convey the Easement to PSCo on terms and conditions consistent with this Ordinance, together with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City, including, but not limited to, any necessary changes to the legal description of the Easement, as long as such changes do not materially increase the size or change the character of the Easement. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 182 &YIJCJU" Packet Pg. 183 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2076 : Timberline Substation Xcel Easement Ordinance) &YIJCJU" Packet Pg. 184 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2076 : Timberline Substation Xcel Easement Ordinance) &YIJCJU" Packet Pg. 185 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2076 : Timberline Substation Xcel Easement Ordinance) Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Jason Holland, City Planner SUBJECT Items Relating to Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2014-067 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park First Annexation. B. Resolution 2014-068 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings for the Clydesdale Park Second Annexation. The purpose of this item is to initiate annexation proceedings for the existing Clydesdale Park subdivision located east of Interstate 25, south of the intersection of East Mulberry Street and Carriage Parkway. Clydesdale Park includes 217 single-family residential lots on approximately 75 acres. Residents of the Clydesdale Park neighborhood have requested this annexation. In accordance with State law, the purpose of the Initiating Resolutions is to accept the Annexation Petitions and provide a schedule for upcoming Council hearings within a timeline that complies with State Statutes. These annexation requests are in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of both Resolutions. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Clydesdale Park development was approved by the Larimer County Board of Commissioners in 2001. In accordance with Larimer County’s standard development approval procedures, an annexation agreement was recorded with the original development approval. This Annexation Agreement is typically required during the County development review process to facilitate annexations that may happen sometime in the future that don’t have the requisite amount of contiguity to the city limits to meet state requirements. This is the case with Clydesdale Park. When the Clydesdale Park subdivision was planned and approved, it could not be annexed into the City because it did not share a common boundary with the city limits at the time. Now that a common boundary does exist, the City may now initiate the annexation process through the Annexation Agreement. The approval of the annexations will enable the neighborhood’s streets, including Carriage Parkway, to be accepted into the City of Fort Collins' Street Maintenance Program. Clydesdale Park’s streets are currently maintained by the residents of Clydesdale Park through their Public Improvement District (PID). The establishment of the PID was necessary because Larimer County does not typically maintain roads that are developed as part of a residential subdivision. Packet Pg. 186 Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 2 Carriage Parkway currently dead-ends at the southwest corner of the neighborhood and carries traffic predominantly for Clydesdale Park’s residents. With the new Fox Grove residential development proposed to the southwest, within the city limits, it now seems imminent that this parkway will be extended and serve as access for additional residents who have no obligation to pay into the Clydesdale Park PID. Residents have expressed concern that their continued maintenance responsibility for the existing portion of Carriage Parkway is no longer reasonable if the parkway is extended and used by future development to the south. Carriage Parkway is designated as a collector street on the City Master Street Plan, and will eventually be extended south to East Prospect Road. All portions of the future Carriage Parkway extension are within the city limits and will therefore be maintained by the City once constructed and accepted. Because all of Clydesdale Park’s streets are currently in good condition, the City Streets and Engineering Departments are in agreement that the streets can be accepted into the City of Fort Collins' Street Maintenance Program, should the annexations be approved. These annexations are located within the Growth Management Area (GMA). According to policies and agreements contained in the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements, the City will agree to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to state law. In order to gain the 1/6 contiguity with a municipal boundary as required by state law, a series of two annexations are needed to annex the Clydesdale Park neighborhood. The Clydesdale Park First Annexation gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the City of Fort Collins through the Fox Grove property to the west, which was annexed in 2005. The Clydesdale Park Second Annexation gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundary with the Clydesdale Park First Annexation, thus satisfying the requirement that no less than one-sixth of the perimeter boundaries be contiguous to the existing city boundary. The proposed Resolutions make a finding that the Annexation Petitions substantially comply with the Municipal Annexation Act, determine that a hearing should be established regarding the annexations, and direct that notice be given of the hearing. The hearing will be held at the time of first reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances; not less than thirty days of prior notice is required by State law. The requested zoning for these annexations is the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N), which is in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Because the neighborhood's streets are in good condition, significant financial / economic impacts are not anticipated. The annexations will allow this portion of the City Growth Management Area to be more integrated into the City Master Street Plan. The provision of water and wastewater utility services will not change. Electric service will be transferred from Poudre Valley REA to Fort Collins Light and Power over a period of several years. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS There are no significant environmental impacts anticipated with these annexations. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board will conduct a public hearing on the annexation and zoning requests on September 11, 2014. The Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to City Council as part of the First Reading of the annexation and zoning ordinances on October 7, 2014. Packet Pg. 187 Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 3 PUBLIC OUTREACH Planning staff has coordinated with the residents of Clydesdale Park over the past year to explain the annexation process and answer questions about how annexation into the City will affect the neighborhood’s taxes, fees, street maintenance and services. A letter from the Clydesdale Park Homeowner’s Association in support of annexation is attached (Attachment 6). ATTACHMENTS 1. Clydesdale Park First Annexation Vicinity Map (PDF) 2. Clydesdale Park Second Annexation Vicinity Map (PDF) 3. Clydesdale Park Annexations Zoning Map (PDF) 4. Clydesdale Park Annexations Structure Plan Map (PDF) 5. City Master Street Plan (PDF) 6. Annexation Rationale Letter From Clydesdale HOA (PDF) 7. County Letter -- Clydesdale Park Annexations (PDF) 8. Timnath Letter -- Clydesdale Park Annexations (PDF) Packet Pg. 188 Boxelder Creek Lake Canal Larimer and Weld Canal INTERSTATE 25 SE FRONTAGE RD E MULBERRY ST SW FRONTAGE RD NE FRONTAGE RD SUNCHASE DR CAMINO REAL KITCHELL WAY NW FRONTAGE RD CLOVERLEAF WAY BIRCH LN CARRIAGE PKWY MAPLE LN SPRINGER DR BRENTON DR QUEST DR LOCUST LN OFF RAMP WILLOW LN VITALA DR BOXELDER ST ON RAMP JUTLAND LN RUIDOSA DR BRUMBY LN ESPIRIT DR MESSARA DR COTTONWOOD LN SPRUCE LN FRISIAN DR L A PAZ DR PLEASURE DR DENROSE CT BOCA DEL RIO DR ASPEN CIR PONDEROSA DR LOMA LINDA DR OFF RAMP INTERSTATE 25 Clydesdale Park First Annexation Legend ± Vicinity Map City Limits - Area City Limits - Outline Annexation ‐ Area First Annexation Area E. Mulberry St. Interstate I-25 South C.R. 5 Carriage Pkwy ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 189 Attachment13.1: Clydesdale Park First Annexation Vicinity Map (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) Boxelder Creek Lake Canal Larimer and Weld Canal INTERSTATE 25 SE FRONTAGE RD E MULBERRY ST SW FRONTAGE RD NE FRONTAGE RD SUNCHASE DR CAMINO REAL KITCHELL WAY NW FRONTAGE RD CLOVERLEAF WAY BIRCH LN CARRIAGE PKWY MAPLE LN SPRINGER DR BRENTON DR QUEST DR LOCUST LN OFF RAMP WILLOW LN VITALA DR BOXELDER ST ON RAMP JUTLAND LN RUIDOSA DR BRUMBY LN ESPIRIT DR MESSARA DR COTTONWOOD LN SPRUCE LN FRISIAN DR L A PAZ DR PLEASURE DR DENROSE CT BOCA DEL RIO DR ASPEN CIR PONDEROSA DR LOMA LINDA DR OFF RAMP INTERSTATE 25 Clydesdale Park Second Annexation Legend ± Vicinity Map City Limits - Area City Limits - Outline Annexation ‐ Area Interstate I-25 South C.R. 5 E. Mulberry St. Second Annexation Area Carriage Pkwy ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 190 Attachment13.2: Clydesdale Park Second Annexation Vicinity Map (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) CG CG E I I LMN UE UE Boxelder Creek Lake Canal Larimer and Weld Canal INTERSTATE 25 SE FRONTAGE RD E MULBERRY ST NE FRONTAGE RD SUNCHASE DR CAMINO REAL KITCHELL WAY NW FRONTAGE RD CLOVERLEAF WAY CARRIAGE PKWY BIRCH LN CAMINO DEL MUNDO MAPLE LN SPRINGER DR BRENTON DR QUEST DR LOCUST LN OFF RAMP WILLOW LN VITALA DR BOXELDER ST JUTLAND LN ON RAMP RUIDOSA DR WITHERS DR BRUMBY LN ESPIRIT DR MESSARA DR LA PAZ DR DENROSE CT BOCA DEL RIO DR ASPEN CIR PINION CIR PONDEROSA DR I NTERSTATE 25 Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations Zoning Map ± Annexation ‐ Area First Annexation Area Legend City Limits - Outline Urban Growth Area Boundary City Zoning ZONE General Commercial (CG) Employment (E) S First Annexation Area Second Annexation Area © Clydesdale Park Annexations 1 and 2 Structure Plan Boundaries Fort Collins GMA Potential GMA Expansion Other City GMA Planning Area Adjacent Planning Areas City Limits Districts Downtown District Community Commercial District General Commercial District Neighborhood Commercial District Campus District Employment District Industrial District Neighborhoods Urban Estate Low Density Mixed-Use Medium Density Mixed-Use Edges Community Separator Foothills Rural Lands Corridors Open Lands, Parks and Water Corridors Poudre River Corridor Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit) HWY 14 1 inch = 0.3 miles Annexation ‐ Area I - 25 ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 192 Attachment13.4: Clydesdale Park Annexations Structure Plan Map (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) INTERSTATE 25 E MULBERRY ST E PROSPECT RD CARRIAGE PKWY S COUNTY ROAD 5 ORI L L A D E L LAGO INTERSTATE 25 INTERSTATE 25 City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan Printed: August 05, 2014 Scale 1:12,500 © Note: Other collector and local streets not shown will be developed in accordance with adopted sub-area, corridor, and neighborhood plans of the city. Streets and Arterials outside of GMA are shown for contextual purposes only and are not part of the Master Street Plan. The City of Fort Collins is not fiscally responsible for these improvements. > Potential Grade Separated Rail Crossing R Potential Interchange Collector 2 Lanes Arterial 2 Lanes Arterial 4 Lanes Major Arterial 6 Lanes City Limits Collector 2 Lanes - Outside GMA Arterial 2 Lanes - Outside GMA Arterial 4 Lanes - Outside GMA Major Arterial 6 Lanes - Outside GMA INTERSTATE Streets Railroads Unincorporated Land in GMA Outside GMA Adopted: March 17, 1981 Amended: December 17, 2013 CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Clydesdale Park Annexations 1 and 2 0 350 700 1,400 2,100 2,800 ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 194 Attachment13.6: Annexation Rationale Letter From Clydesdale HOA (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) Packet Pg. 195 Attachment13.6: Annexation Rationale Letter From Clydesdale HOA (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) S:\CDNS\Planning\Staff Folders\JHolland\PROJECTS\Clydesdale Park Annexation\County Letter_Clydesdale_Park_ANX.docx July 24, 2014 Jason Holland City of Fort Collins Planning Department PO Box 580 Ft. Collins CO 80522 RE: Clydesdale Park Annexation 140002 Jason, This letter acknowledges receipt of the Petition for the above proposed annexation to the City of Fort Collins. This week, staff from the Larimer County Planning, Engineering and Health Departments met to review these materials. Larimer County Community Development (Planning) would like the City of Fort Collins to consider annexing Waterdale Mobile Home Park and Vista Grande Planned Development, as well as E Mulberry St to the north. If you have any questions or concerns to my response, please Contact Matt Lafferty, Principle Planner, Larimer County Community Development Division (Planning) at 970- 498-7721. Sincerely, Dan Kunis GIS Specialist Larimer County Planning and Building Services Division 498-7680 dkunis@larimer.org COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 Planning (970) 498-7683 Planning Fax (970) 498-7711 Building (970) 498-7700 Building Fax (970) 498-7667 http://www. larimer.org/building ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 196 Attachment13.7: County Letter -- Clydesdale Park Annexations (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 197 Attachment13.8: Timnath Letter -- Clydesdale Park Annexations (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-067 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FINDING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE AND INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CLYDESDALE PARK FIRST ANNEXATION WHEREAS, a written petition, together with four (4) prints of an annexation map, has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the annexation of certain property to be known as the Clydesdale Park Farm First Annexation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to initiate annexation proceedings in accordance with the Municipal Annexation Act, Section 31-12-101, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby accepts the annexation petition for the Clydesdale Park First Annexation, more particularly described as situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to wit: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M.; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15, AND CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15 TO BEAR N00°07'27"E, SAID LINE BEING MONUMENTED ON ITS SOUTH END BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 7839, AND ON ITS NORTH END BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 31169, BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS COORDINATE SYSTEM, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE ALONG THE EAST AND NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE STATE HIGHWAY 14 – EAST FRONTAGE ROAD ANNEXATION, THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1. ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15, N00°07'27"E, A DISTANCE OF 612.47 FEET; 2. N89°40'35"W, A DISTANCE OF 209.46 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CARRIAGE PARKWAY; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED OF DEDICATION RECORDED MARCH 21, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 20070021108, N62°53'42"E, A DISTANCE OF 235.56 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Packet Pg. 198 - 2 - AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. FIRST FILING THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1. N62°53'02"E, A DISTANCE OF 516.51 FEET; 2. 337.75 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 507.72 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°06'53", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS N46°02'12"E A DISTANCE OF 331.56 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXTENSION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MESSARA DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING; THENCE ALONG SAID EXTENSION AND ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY AND EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MESSARA DRIVE THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) COURSES: 1. S58°06'23"E, A DISTANCE OF 440.40 FEET; 2. 272.04 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 267.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 58°22'41", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S28°55'02"E A DISTANCE OF 260.43 FEET; 3. S00°16'18"W, A DISTANCE OF 342.91 FEET; 4. 70.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 213.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°01'03", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S09°14'14"E A DISTANCE OF 70.37 FEET; 5. S18°44'45"E, A DISTANCE OF 26.75 FEET; 6. 11.78 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 45°00'00", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S03°45'15"W A DISTANCE OF 11.48 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 62 OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING; THENCE S20°31'45"E, A DISTANCE OF 134.88 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S19°41'26"E, A DISTANCE OF 166.45 FEET TO THE EAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, N89°43'41"W, A DISTANCE OF 1,320.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1,182,485 SQUARE FEET (27.146 ACRES), MORE OR LESS. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds and determines that the annexation petition for the Clydesdale Park First Annexation and accompanying map are in substantial compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act. Packet Pg. 199 - 3 - Section 3. That the Notice attached hereto is hereby adopted as a part of this Resolution. Said Notice establishes the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the passage of annexation and zoning ordinances pertaining to the above-described property. The City Clerk is directed to publish a copy of this Resolution and said Notice as provided in the Municipal Annexation Act. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 200 NOTICE TO ALL PERSONS INTERESTED: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Fort Collins has adopted a Resolution initiating annexation proceedings for the Clydesdale Park First Annexation said Annexation being more particularly described in said Resolution, a copy of which precedes this Notice. That, on October 7, 2014, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, the Fort Collins City Council will hold a public hearing upon the annexation petition and zoning request for the purpose of finding and determining whether the property proposed to be annexed meets the applicable requirements of Colorado law and is considered eligible for annexation and for the purpose of determining the appropriate zoning for the property included in the Annexation. At such hearing, any persons may appear and present such evidence as they may desire. The Petitioner has requested that the Property included in the Annexation be placed in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (“L-M-N”) Zone District. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Dated this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 201 Attachment1: Notice (2214 : Clydesdale Park First Annexation RESO) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-068 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FINDING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE AND INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CLYDESDALE PARK SECOND ANNEXATION WHEREAS, a written petition, together with four (4) prints of an annexation map, has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the annexation of certain property to be known as the Clydesdale Park Second Farm Annexation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to initiate annexation proceedings in accordance with the Municipal Annexation Act, Section 31-12-101, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby accepts the annexation petition for the Clydesdale Park Second Annexation, more particularly described as situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to wit: A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 15 AND IN THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M.; COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15, AND CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15 TO BEAR N00°07'27"E, SAID LINE BEING MONUMENTED ON ITS SOUTH END BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 7839, AND ON ITS NORTH END BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 31169, BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS COORDINATE SYSTEM, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, N00°07'27"E, A DISTANCE OF 720.98 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WEST LINE, N00°07'27"E, A DISTANCE OF 1,706.44 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE WARRANTY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2236, PAGE 2533 IN THE OFFICE OF THE LARIMER COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL, S89°11'19"E, A DISTANCE OF 83.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL, N00°07'27"E, A DISTANCE OF 129.99 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 14; Packet Pg. 202 - 2 - THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING FIVE (5) COURSES: 1. N89°10'59"W, A DISTANCE OF 58.00 FEET; 2. N00°07'27"E, A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; 3. N89°10'59"W, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15; 4. ALONG SAID WEST LINE, S00°07'27"W, A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; 5. N89°10'59"W, A DISTANCE OF 313.06 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE INTERCHANGE BUSINESS PARK SECOND ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1. N00°37'00"E, A DISTANCE OF 109.15 FEET; 2. N00°48'59"E, A DISTANCE OF 40.85 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID STATE HIGHWAY 14; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, S89°10'59"E, A DISTANCE OF 1,238.09 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING, S00°08'19"W, A DISTANCE OF 383.37 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING, S89°23'18"E, A DISTANCE OF 395.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE, S00°08'19"W, A DISTANCE OF 2,312.90 FEET TO THE EAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 15; THENCE N19°41'26"W, A DISTANCE OF 166.45 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 62, CLYDESDALE PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING; THENCE N20°31'45"W, A DISTANCE OF 134.88 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY AND NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MESSARA DRIVE AND ALONG ITS NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION, THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) COURSES: 1. 11.78 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 45°00'00", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS N03°45'15"E A DISTANCE OF 11.48 FEET; 2. N18°44'45"W, A DISTANCE OF 26.75 FEET; 3. 70.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 213.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°01'03", AND A CHORD Packet Pg. 203 - 3 - WHICH BEARS N09°14'14"W A DISTANCE OF 70.37 FEET; 4. N00°16'18"E, A DISTANCE OF 342.91 FEET; 5. 272.04 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 267.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 58°22'41", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS N28°55'02"W A DISTANCE OF 260.43 FEET; 6. N58°06'23"W, A DISTANCE OF 440.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CARRIAGE PARKWAY; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1. 337.75 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 507.72 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°06'53", AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS S46°02'12"W A DISTANCE OF 331.56 FEET; 2. S62°53'02"W, A DISTANCE OF 516.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,281,869 SQUARE FEET (52.385 ACRES), MORE OR LESS. Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds and determines that the annexation petition for the Clydesdale Park Second Annexation and accompanying map are in substantial compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act. Section 3. That the Notice attached hereto is hereby adopted as a part of this Resolution. Said Notice establishes the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the passage of annexation and zoning ordinances pertaining to the above-described property. The City Clerk is directed to publish a copy of this Resolution and said Notice as provided in the Municipal Annexation Act. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 204 NOTICE TO ALL PERSONS INTERESTED: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council of the City of Fort Collins has adopted a Resolution initiating annexation proceedings for the Clydesdale Park Second Annexation said Annexation being more particularly described in said Resolution, a copy of which precedes this Notice. That, on October 7, 2014, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, the Fort Collins City Council will hold a public hearing upon the annexation petition and zoning request for the purpose of finding and determining whether the property proposed to be annexed meets the applicable requirements of Colorado law and is considered eligible for annexation and for the purpose of determining the appropriate zoning for the property included in the Annexation. At such hearing, any persons may appear and present such evidence as they may desire. The Petitioner has requested that the Property included in the Annexation be placed in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (“L-M-N”) Zone District. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Dated this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 205 Attachment1: Notice (2215 : Clydesdale Park Second Annexation - RESO) Agenda Item 14 Item # 14 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Helen Matson, Real Estate Services Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2014-069 Authorizing a License to Enter to the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation for Access to City-Owned Property at 330 North Howes Street for Up to Two Years. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to authorize the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation to use a portion of the City's Car Barn for restoring historic fire equipment belonging to the City and Poudre Fire Authority (PFA). This License to Enter is effective for up to two years, but can also be terminated by either party at any time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City's Car Barn, located at 330 North Howes Street is currently used as storage for various City needs and has included space for storage of historic fire equipment. The Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation (FCFMF) is a non-profit organization created by former Fire Chief Ed Yonker for the purpose of restoring the City's and PFA's fire equipment. This historic fire equipment is stored at the Car Barn and this license to enter gives FCFMF access to the historic fire equipment in order to perform the organization's restoration work. The major restoration work is performed off-site. The City's use of the Car Barn for storage is likely to change in the near future. Because of this, the agreement with FCFMF is that the license to enter is valid for up to two years; however, the license may be terminated by either party at any time. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Staff recommends that this license to enter be granted to the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation at no cost in exchange for the restoration and maintenance of historic fire equipment at no cost to the City. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map (PDF) Packet Pg. 206 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 207 Attachment14.1: Location map (2133 : Fire Museum) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-069 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING A LICENSE TO ENTER TO THE FORT COLLINS FIRE MUSEUM FOUNDATION FOR ACCESS TO CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT 330 NORTH HOWES STREET FOR UP TO TWO YEARS WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins (the “City”) is the owner of the real property located at 330 North Howes Street, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, (the “Property”) and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2006, the City Council approved Resolution 2006-088, authorizing the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation (the “Foundation”), a Colorado non-profit corporation, to access the building commonly known as the “Car Barn”, located on the Property, for the purpose of offsite restoration of City and Poudre Fire Authority (“PFA”) historic firefighting equipment that is stored in the Car Barn; and WHEREAS, the Foundation wishes to continue accessing the Car Barn for this purpose; and WHEREAS, the above-described access to the Car Barn will facilitate the preservation of Fort Collins history and heritage to the benefit of the Fort Collins citizenry; and WHEREAS, Article XI, Section 10 of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins authorizes the City Council to permit the use or occupation of any street, alley, or public place, provided that such permit shall be revocable by the Council at its pleasure, whether or not such right to revoke is expressly reserved in such permit; and WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that the revocable permit granting access be at no cost to the Foundation in exchange for the Foundation’s restoration and maintenance work on City and PFA historic equipment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such documents as are necessary to permit the Fort Collins Fire Museum Foundation to have access to the Property, consistent with the terms of this Resolution, including such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, deems necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Resolution. Packet Pg. 208 - 2 - Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 209 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Daylan Figgs, Senior Environmental Planner John Stokes, Natural Resources Director SUBJECT Resolution 2014-070 Authorizing Intergovernmental Agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Regarding Reintroducing Endangered Black-Footed Ferrets to Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Springs Ranch. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve by resolution various agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that allow the City to reintroduced endangered black-footed ferrets to Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Spring Ranch. The City of Fort Collins implemented a black-tailed prairie dog management plan on Soapstone Prairie Natural Area (Soapstone) and Meadow Springs Ranch (Meadow Springs) with a goal of reintroducing the federally endangered black footed ferret onto the properties (ferrets predate on prairie dogs almost exclusively). The prairie dog plan was implemented in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) and resulted in the selection of the City-owned properties as a new ferret recovery site in 2014 by USFWS. In addition, the City worked with State Representative Randy Fischer to introduce and pass HB14-1267 allowing for the reintroduction of ferrets to occur. One requirement of the legislation is that reintroduction of the species must be done in accordance with a Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Safe Harbor) with USFWS. The Certificate of Inclusion into the Safe Harbor and accompanying City of Fort Collins Black-footed Ferret Reintroduction Plan for Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Springs Ranch are considered Intergovernmental Agreements and require City Council approval by resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City’s Natural Areas Department (Natural Areas) and Utility Department (Utilities) worked together to implement a black-tailed prairie dog management plan with an ultimate goal of reintroducing black-footed ferrets onto Soapstone and Meadow Springs. Management activities conducted in partnership with the USFWS and CPW, including dusting with pesticides to control fleas inflected with the sylvatic plague and experimental vaccines, have resulted in the establishment of a prairie dog complex suitable for reintroduction of black-footed ferrets. The City submitted a black-footed ferret allocation proposal to the USFWS in 2013 for reintroduction of ferrets onto Soapstone and Meadow Springs and was selected as a new black-footed ferret recovery site in 2014. Black-footed ferrets were identified in the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area Management Plan (September 25, 2007) as a native species suited for reintroduction into the black-tailed prairie dog community. In following the plan, prairie dog management activities were designed and implemented to achieve this conservation priority within the shortgrass prairie system. Packet Pg. 210 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 2 In addition to management efforts, the City supported passage of House Bill 14-1267 to amend State law to allow for the reintroduction of black-footed ferrets onto lands owned by a political sub-division of the state (i.e., County and City-owned lands). One condition within the Bill was that reintroduction could only occur if done so under a Safe Harbor granted by the USFWS. Safe Harbor Agreement The Safe Harbor Agreement was developed in 2013 to encourage non-federal landowners such as the City to voluntarily undertake conservation activities on their properties to enhance, restore, or “maintain habitat” to benefit the recovery of black-footed ferrets. As part of the Safe Harbor, the USFWS assures it will not impose restrictions on the use of the land in addition to those agreed to in the Safe Harbor and Reintroduction Plan. Basically, the City agrees to not use lethal means to control prairie dogs within areas designated as reintroduction sites (Conservation Zones) and to work with the USFWS to monitor the status of ferrets on the property. Once ferrets are reintroduced, the City will be provided “incidental take coverage”, i.e., limited exemption from prosecution for inadvertent killing of an endangered species, for black-footed ferrets harmed during normal management and land use activities that include ranching, municipal bio-solid application, public recreation, volunteer activities, law enforcement, trail and facility construction and maintenance, education and outreach activities, vegetation management, land management, and grazing, on or adjacent to the enrolled lands. Neighboring landowners will also be granted coverage for incidental take under the Safe Harbor as a non-participating landowner. The City can terminate the Safe Harbor Agreement at any time with notice to the USFWS. If this occurs, the USFWS has the option of removing any remaining black-footed ferrets on the property. Status of black-tailed prairie dogs on Soapstone Prairie and Meadow Springs The black-tailed prairie dog complex on Soapstone and Meadow Springs is approximately 3,600 acres. Of this, approximately 1,500 acres are found within established Conservation Zones (1,500 acres are necessary to support a viable black-footed ferret population of 30 breeding pairs). The remainder falls outside of the Conservation Zones and may be managed through various measures to address boundary issues with neighboring property owners. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Natural Areas and Utilities are currently conducting ongoing management activities required to sustain a functioning black-tailed prairie dog complex on Soapstone and Meadow Springs. The primary activity is related to sylvatic plague management, but also includes mapping, prescriptive grazing and use of prescribed fire to help direct colony expansion. Additional staff time will be required to monitor black-footed ferrets; however, much of this effort will be conducted in partnership with CPW and USFWS. Also of note is the availability of possible funding through the Safe Harbor Agreement to assist in the management of sylvatic plague and prairie dog distribution issues near boundaries with adjacent landowners. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Black-footed ferrets are considered one of, if not the, rarest mammal in North America. This species was once considered extinct until a small population was discovered in 1981 near Meeteetse, WY. This reintroduction will be the third in Colorado and one of about 20 current reintroduction sites within the historic range of black- footed ferrets. Captive populations have produced more than 8,000 kits in captivity and over 3,500 have been reintroduced into the wild. Reintroduction efforts have varied in success and currently there are at least 500 ferrets in the wild and another 280 within captive breeding colonies (Attachment 1). The reintroduction of the species onto Soapstone Prairie and Meadow Springs will be the first to occur on lands owned by a municipality. Packet Pg. 211 Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 3 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its June 11, 2014 meeting, the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board voted unanimously to recommend Council approval of the resolution (Attachment 3). PUBLIC OUTREACH Extensive outreach was conducted during the development of the Soapstone Prairie Management Plan (2007). Further, Natural Areas and Utilities staff has met with Folsom and Natural Fort Grazing Associations, who lease Soapstone and Meadow Springs respectively for cattle grazing, to discuss black-tailed prairie dog management and black-footed ferret reintroduction. Both grazing associations support the City’s efforts. The City, in conjunction with the USFWS and CPW, met with Weld and Larimer County Commissioners and provided detailed information to landowners adjacent to Soapstone and Meadow Springs to notify them of the black-footed ferret reintroduction and the regulatory safeguards that are in place for their properties (Attachment 2). There was no negative feedback received from these interactions with the County Commissioners and neighbors. ATTACHMENTS 1. Fact Sheet (PDF) 2. Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement Fact Sheet (PDF) 3. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, June 11, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 212 Black-footed Ferret Mustela nigripes Species Description The black-footed ferret (BFF) (Mustela nigripes) is a medium- sized mustelid (a member of the weasel family), typically weighing 1.4 to 2.5 pounds and measuring 19 to 24 inches in total length, including a 5-to 6-inch tail. It is a slender, wiry animal with black feet, a black face mask, and a black-tipped tail. Its short, sleek fur is a beige-buff color, lighter on the belly and nearly white on the forehead, muzzle, and throat. Black-footed ferrets have short legs with large front paws, and claws developed for digging. The BFF’s large ears and eyes suggest it has acute hearing and sight, but smell is its most important sense for hunting prey underground in the dark. Its large skull and strong jaw and teeth are adapted for eat- ing meat. Specialization Black-footed ferrets are highly specialized predators that depend upon prairie dogs (Cynomys spp.) for survival. Prairie dogs make up more than 90% of the BFF’s diet. Prairie dog burrows provide BFFs with suitable dens to raise their young as well as escape predators and harsh weather. In the past, this dependence was a very good survival strategy be- cause prairie dogs were plentiful. However, in the modern era, as human activities and disease deci- mated prairie dog populations, this unique survival strategy proved detrimental to BFF sur- vival. Habitat & Range Black-footed ferrets depend ex- clusively on prairie dog burrows for shelter. Historically, BFF habi- tat coincided with habitats of black-tailed prairie dog (C. lu- dovicianus), Gunnison’s prairie dog (C. gunnisoni), and white- tailed prairie dog (C. leucurus). The BFF is the only ferret species native to the Americas. Its histor- ic range spanned much of western North America’s intermountain and prairie grasslands, extend- ing from Canada to Mexico. As Threats Despite significant recovery suc- cesses, the BFF remains one of the most endangered mammals in the North America. The primary rea- sons the species remains at risk are the same that nearly caused the animal’s extinction: the loss of habitat, demise of prey and dis- ease. Conversion of native grass- lands to agricultural land, wide- spread prairie dog eradication programs, and fatal, non-native diseases, such as plague, have reduced BFF habitat to less than 2% of its original range. The re- maining habitat is now fragment- ed, with prairie dog towns separat- ed by expanses of agricultural land and other human developments. BFF at FCC/ Tamkun USFWS Legal Status under the Endangered Species Act Since March 11, 1967, BFFs have been listed as endangered across their entire range, with the excep- tion of several reintroduced popu- lations designated as experimental. In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) complet- ed a draft 5-year review of the BFF’s status. This review found that this species continues to warrant Feder- al endangered status. Population Numbers and Recovery Efforts Black-footed ferrets once num- bered in the tens of thousands, but due to a combination of human- induced threats they were believed to be extinct twice in the 20th cen- tury. In 1981, the species was re- discovered in Meeteetse, Wyo- ming. This was an opportunity to bring them back from the brink of extinction. But by 1986, due to disease, only eighteen individuals were known to exist in this isolated wild population. They were the last BFFs on the planet. Scientists cap- tured these remaining BFFs and they became the foundation for a successful captive breeding and rein- troduction program that continues today. As of 2014, this USFWS led BFF program has produced more than 8,000 kits in captivity, with more than 3,500 reintroduced into their natural habitat. It is estimated there A Safe Harbor Agreement (SHA) provides assurances to individual non-federal landowners, including Tribes, who voluntarily commit to implementing specific activities over a defined time frame that are reasonably expected to provide a net conservation benefit to species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). A Programmatic SHA addresses all appropriate regulatory considerations before the enrollment of multiple participants across the range of the species. Landowners who agree to the terms of a SHA receive guarantees from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that no regulatory restrictions will be required beyond those specified in a SHA. In other words, both the landowner and the USFWS have a mutual understanding. What is a Safe Harbor Agreement? June 2014 The Black-footed ferret (BFF) (Mustela nigripes) Programmatic SHA was developed in 2013 to encourage non-federal landowners to voluntarily undertake conservation activities on their properties to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat to benefit BFFs. The primary conservation activity under the BFF Programmatic SHA will be reintroductions of BFFs on properties of willing landowners and Tribes. Two ranchers have enrolled in the BFF Programmatic SHA to date. The USFWS is interested in recruiting additional participants in conjunction with partners, for example, State Wildlife Departments. What is the purpose of the Black-footed Ferret Programmatic SHA? The BFF Programmatic SHA is applicable across the 12-state BFF historical range and includes a wide variety of landscapes, habitat types and potential partners. These include portions of Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Non-federal lands eligible for enrollment in the BFF Programmatic SHA include private, State, and Tribal lands that have sufficient prairie dog habitat to support a population of at least 30 breeding adult BFFs, which is a minimum population goal in the BFF Recovery Plan. The acreage necessary to support 30 breeding BFF adults can vary depending on the species of prairie dogs present. Typically this would be approximately 1,500 acres or more in black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) habitat or 3,000 acres or more in white-tailed (C. leucurus) or Gunnison’s prairie dog (C. gunnisoni) habitat. Potential suitable lands will be evaluated by the USFWS and its conservation partners. Eligible lands need not be provided by a single landowner. Adjacent landowners can collectively enroll lands under the BFF Programmatic SHA to reach a sufficient acreage to support 30 breeding adult BFFs. The number of acres necessary for enrollment will be determined on a site-specific basis and identified in a Reintroduction Plan developed with each landowner who enrolls in the BFF Programmatic SHA. What Lands Are Eligible for the BFF Programmatic SHA? Black-footed Ferret Fact Sheet Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement Fact Sheet A Tool to Help Recover One of the World’s Most Endangered Species U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 970-897-2730 ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 215 Attachment15.2: Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement Fact Sheet (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement Fact Sheet U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Landowners enrolled in the BFF Programmatic SHA contribute to the recovery of the BFF. They may be eligible in some states for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) or Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS) programs that provide technical and financial assistance. Landowners receive guarantees that land use activities will not be limited beyond the terms of the BFF Programmatic SHA whether or not their voluntary actions increase the numbers or distribution of BFFs on their properties. These guarantees are provided by the USFWS through an Enhancement of Survival Permit issued to the USFWS’s BFF Recovery Coordinator, under the authority of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. A Certificate of Inclusion (CI) issued to individual landowners provides for incidental take of BFFs consistent with maintaining an agreed-upon baseline condition of zero BFFs as described in the BFF Programmatic SHA and in a Reintroduction Plan. In other words, landowner operations will not be affected by BFF reintroduction efforts. How Does An Enrolled Property Owner Benefit? The USFWS recognizes that some parties may be reluctant to enroll in the BFF Programmatic SHA due to the concerns of nearby landowner interests about potential BFF occupancy of lands in which they have various interests. Therefore, the USFWS Biological Opinion on the issuance of the aforementioned permit guarantees an agreed-upon baseline condition of zero BFFs. Non-participating neighboring landowners are defined as any landowner interest within the vicinity of enrolled lands that BFFs may use as a result of reintroductions, including but not limited to mineral interests. How Would Enrollment in the BFF Programmatic SHA Impact Non- Participating Neighboring Lands or Other Non-Participating Landowners? The duration of the BFF Programmatic SHA is sufficient to realize a net conservation benefit to the species. The principal conservation benefit anticipated will be the establishment of additional free-ranging BFF populations throughout their historical range. The success of past reintroduction efforts has varied due to a number of factors. It may take several BFF releases for a population to become established at a site. Experience from past reintroduction efforts suggests 10 years is long enough to conduct several BFF annual releases, if necessary, as well as to document reproduction and recruitment. A CI is effective upon signature by the USFWS’s Recovery Coordinator and an enrolled landowner and may be in effect for up to 50 years. Reintroduction Plans developed in conjunction with any CI will be for a term of at least 10 years and up to 40 years within the 50- year duration. A CI issued by USFWS will extend guarantees to landowners for 5 years beyond the term of the Reintroduction Plan. Any landowner interest may withdraw at any time from a CI and be provided the same regulatory assurances as those provided to non-participating neighboring landowners through the aforementioned Biological Opinion. Should the Reintroduction Plan be fully implemented, the Reintroduction Plan and CI may be extended or renewed upon agreement by both parties while maintaining the original agreed-upon baseline of zero BFFs. What is the Duration of the BFF Programmatic SHA? Packet Pg. 216 Attachment15.2: Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement Fact Sheet (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 217 Attachment15.3: Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, June 11, 2014 (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) Packet Pg. 218 Attachment15.3: Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, June 11, 2014 (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) Packet Pg. 219 Attachment15.3: Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, June 11, 2014 (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-070 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH THE UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGARDING REINTRODUCING ENDANGERED BLACK-FOOTED FERRETS TO SOAPSTONE PRAIRIE NATURAL AREA AND MEADOW SPRINGS RANCH WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is the owner of approximately 12,579 acres of land known as Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and the lessee of 3,873 acres of land owned by the State Land Board, which lies in Northern Larimer County, Colorado (collectively referred to herein as “Soapstone”); and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins, using Wastewater Utility revenues, purchased in 1990 the 25,680 acre Meadow Springs Ranch (“Meadow Springs”), which lies 22 miles north of Fort Collins on each side of Interstate 25 and 10 miles south of Cheyenne, Wyoming; and WHEREAS, the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area Management Plan (September 25, 2007) identified the black-footed ferret as a native species suited for reintroduction into the 3,600-acre black-tailed prairie dog complex located on Soapstone and Meadow Springs; and WHEREAS, the City’s Natural Areas Department and Utilities Department have worked together to develop and implement the Management Plan toward the goal of reintroducing black-footed ferrets as a conservation priority within the short grass prairie system on Soapstone and Meadow Springs; and WHEREAS, on May 17, 2014, Colorado House Bill 14-1267 was signed into law, effective August 6, 2014, allowing reintroduction of black-footed ferrets onto lands owned by a political subdivision of the state when the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (the "USFWS") consents to such reintroduction; and WHEREAS, the City submitted a black-footed ferret allocation proposal to USFWS in 2013 for reintroduction of ferrets onto Soapstone and Meadow Springs, which proposal USFWS selected for a new black-footed ferret recovery site in 2014; and WHEREAS, the USFWS has requested the City enter into a Safe-harbor Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Agreements”), addressing the management of the black-footed ferret population on each property where reintroduction will occur; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreements, USFWS will provide technical assistance in monitoring and evaluating the black-footed ferret population in the 3,600-acre prairie dog complex on Soapstone and Meadow Springs; and WHEREAS, the City may terminate the Agreements at any time with notice to the USFWS, upon the occurrence of which the USFWS may elect to remove any remaining black- footed ferrets on the properties; and WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that City Council authorize the City Manager Packet Pg. 220 - 2 - to enter into the Agreements for the two natural areas, in light of the benefits to be achieved through cooperation with the USFWS in reintroducing the black-footed ferret into its natural habitat and furtherance of the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements to provide any function, service or facility, such as a grant agreement, as provided in Article II, Section 16 of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins and Section 29-1-203, C.R.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into Safe-harbor Agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service regarding reintroduction of black- footed ferrets on the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Meadow Springs Ranch, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, upon the terms and conditions described above and such other terms and conditions, or subsequent modifications or amendments, as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City and effectuate the purposes set forth herein, not otherwise inconsistent with this Resolution. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 221 Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 1 | Page Black-Footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement October 23, 2013 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Black-footed Ferret Recovery Program EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 222 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 2 | Page Table of Contents Appendices .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Glossary ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 10 2.0 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 11 3.0 Authorities ...................................................................................................................................... 16 4.0 Covered Species .............................................................................................................................. 17 5.0 Eligible Lands ................................................................................................................................... 17 6.0 Baseline Determination .................................................................................................................. 18 7.0 Conservation Activities ................................................................................................................... 19 7.1 Black-Footed Ferret Reintroduction and Management .................................................................. 20 7.2 Disease Management ...................................................................................................................... 21 7.3 Prairie Dog Management ................................................................................................................ 22 7.4 Livestock Grazing ............................................................................................................................. 23 8.0 Incidental Take and Net Conservation Benefits .............................................................................. 23 8.1 Incidental Take and Return to Baseline .......................................................................................... 23 8.2 Net Conservation Benefits .............................................................................................................. 25 9.0 Monitoring ...................................................................................................................................... 27 10.0 Roles and Responsibilities of the Parties ........................................................................................ 28 10.1 The Permittee (Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator) ......................................................... 28 10.2 Cooperator ..................................................................................................................................... 29 10.3 Additional Partners ........................................................................................................................ 30 11.0 Changed Circumstances .................................................................................................................. 30 12.0 Agreement Duration ....................................................................................................................... 32 13.0 Assurances to a Cooperator ............................................................................................................ 32 14.0 Non-participating Neighboring Landowners ................................................................................... 33 15.0 Modifications .................................................................................................................................. 34 15.1 Modifications of the Agreement or Reintroduction Plans ............................................................ 34 15.2 Amendment of the Permit or Certificate of Inclusion .................................................................. 34 15.3 Early Termination of the Agreement ............................................................................................ 34 16.0 Permit Suspension or Revocation ................................................................................................... 35 Packet Pg. 223 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 3 | Page 17.0 Other Measures .............................................................................................................................. 36 18.0 References ...................................................................................................................................... 38 19.0 Signatures ....................................................................................................................................... 42 Packet Pg. 224 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 4 | Page Appendices Appendix A. Historical Range of Prairie Dogs and Black-footed Ferrets. Appendix B. Black-footed Ferret Site Specific Reintroduction Plan TEMPLATE Appendix C. Black-footed Ferret Recovery Guidelines by State (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013) Appendix D. Annual Report to Cooperator by Permittee TEMPLATE Appendix E. Annual Report to Permittee by Cooperator (Questionnaire) TEMPLATE Appendix F. Black-footed Ferret Recovery Team Members Packet Pg. 225 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 5 | Page Glossary 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit (Permit) – This Permit also may be referred to as an incidental take permit or a recovery permit. It authorizes incidental take of a threatened or endangered species that would otherwise be prohibited by section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) when such take is a result of activities for scientific research or to enhance the propagation or survival of a listed species. Section 10 of the Act provides for exceptions to prohibited activities identified in section 9 of the Act. Section 10(a)(1)(A) allows the Secretary of Interior to issue permits to authorize incidental take of threatened and endangered species for scientific research or to enhance the propagation or survival of such species. The Safe Harbor policy (64 FR 32717) provides for the extension of this authority to non-federal landowners who volunteer to enroll in a Safe Harbor Agreement that provides a net conservation benefit to covered species. 10(j) Experimental Population – Section 10(j) of the Act allows the Secretary of Interior to introduce experimental populations of threatened or endangered species into the wild as long as they are wholly separate from non-experimental populations of the same species. This designation is accomplished through a rulemaking process and allows for regulatory flexibility within the section 10(j) designated areas. Assurances – Regulatory certainty provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) pursuant to the Safe Harbor policy (64 FR 32717) that it will not impose additional conservation measures and restrictions on the use of land, water, or resources beyond those measures and restrictions agreed upon in the Safe Harbor Agreement as a result of voluntary conservation actions by participating landowner interests (Cooperator) that benefit covered threatened or endangered species. These assurances are conveyed to the Cooperator through certificates of inclusion issued under a 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permit. Baseline – Population estimates and distribution (if available or determinable) of the covered threatened or endangered species and/or habitat characteristics of enrolled property at the time of enrollment under the Safe Harbor Agreement as mutually agreed upon by the Black- footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator (Permittee) and the Cooperator. Baseline for this Agreement will be zero black-footed ferrets for both existing and new reintroduction sites, because none will occur on any property until reintroduction of the species, and none will likely occur in the foreseeable future on any property that may have ferrets now without purposeful management of prairie dogs to protect both ferrets and prairie dogs from sylvatic plague––a recurring non-native disease that will likely result in any extant ferret population being reduced to zero without active management. Biological Opinion – A document, pursuant to Section 7 of the Act, stating the opinion of the Service on whether or not a Federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. In this Packet Pg. 226 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 6 | Page instance, the Federal action is the implementation of a Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement and related permit for the black-footed ferret. Bottleneck – A reduction of a population due to a natural or manmade cause, such that the surviving population is no longer self-sustaining. Certificate of Inclusion – The document issued by the Permittee to a Cooperator that conveys the Permit’s incidental take authorization for covered threatened and endangered species. Changed Circumstances – Changes in circumstances affecting a threatened or endangered species or geographic area covered by a Safe Harbor Agreement that can be reasonably anticipated and planned for by the Service (e.g., the listing of a new species, or a fire or other natural catastrophic event in areas prone to such events). Conservation Activities – The actions that will be taken or avoided under this Safe Harbor Agreement to provide a net conservation benefit to the black-footed ferret. Conservation activities may be carried out by the Permittee (or designee), the Cooperator, as described in the Reintroduction Plan for the enrolled property, or partners approved by the Permittee and Cooperator. Conservation Zone – An area that can contribute to the necessary attributes to support at least 30 adult ferrets. Typically, it will be a minimum of 1,500 acres of black-tailed prairie dog occupied habitat or 3,000 acres of white-tailed prairie dog or Gunnison’s prairie dog occupied habitat. It may be owned by one or more Cooperators. All otherwise legal activities may be conducted as appropriate, except those that are incompatible with ferret recovery. Inappropriate, prohibited activities will include any activity that reduces prairie dog numbers, including, but not limited to, poisoning, shooting, and major landscape alterations (e.g., tilling soil). The Conservation Zone will be identified on a map of the enrolled lands. All conservation activities within the Conservation Zone will be described in the Reintroduction Plan for the enrolled property. Prohibited activities will also be identified in the Reintroduction Plan. Cooperator – Any non-federal landowner––including but not limited to private individuals, Tribes, States, counties, and municipalities––eligible for enrollment in the Safe Harbor Agreement who voluntarily chooses to assist in the development and implementation of a Reintroduction Plan for black-footed ferrets on their lands (or some portion of their lands). Under the Agreement, the Permittee issues each Cooperator a Certificate of Inclusion, which conveys the Permit’s incidental take authorization. Covered Species – The species listed under the Act for which the Safe Harbor Agreement is designed to provide a net conservation benefit and for which incidental take and Safe Harbor assurances are authorized. For this particular Agreement, the covered species is the black- footed ferret. Packet Pg. 227 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 7 | Page Delist – The removal of a species from a listed status under the Act. Usually delisting is a result of successful recovery actions that have increased a species’ numbers and addressed threats to its viability. For the black-footed ferret, delisting is expected to require the establishment of at least 3,000 breeding adult ferrets in 30 or more populations in at least nine states within the historical range of the species, with no fewer than 30 breeding adults in any population. Management efforts will continue to address threats to the species, especially from disease. Downlist – The reclassification of a species from endangered to threatened. Usually downlisting is a result of successful recovery actions that have increased a species’ numbers and addressed some portion of the threats to the species. For the black-footed ferret, downlisting is expected to require the establishment of at least 1,500 breeding adult ferrets in 10 or more populations in at least six states within the historical range of the species, with no fewer than 30 breeding adults in any population. Management efforts will continue to address threats to the species, especially from disease. Endangered species – An animal or plant species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Enrolled lands – Non-federal lands (see below) that are included in the Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement through the process of Cooperators signing and the Permittee issuing Certificates of Inclusion. Experimental population – A population (including its offspring) of a listed species, designated by rule published in the Federal Register, that is wholly separate geographically from other populations of the same species. An experimental population may be subject to less stringent prohibitions than are applied to the remainder of the species to which it belongs. Incidental Take – Incidental take is the accidental or inadvertent take of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the Act while carrying out otherwise legal activities. Kit – A kit is the young of a black-footed ferret. Landowner – Any entity with a legally recognized interest in a parcel of land including, but not limited to, surface, mineral, mortgage, and/or lease rights. Management Zone – An area adjacent to or near a Conservation Zone. It may or may not have occupied prairie dog habitat. All otherwise legal activities may be conducted as appropriate, including lethal control of prairie dogs––except for the use of anticoagulant toxicants such as chlorophacinone (Rozol®) or diphacinone (Kaput®). The Management Zone will be identified on a map of the enrolled lands. The precise characteristics and size of a Management Zone, including the associated conservation activities, may vary for each enrolled property, depending on the physical and biological attributes of a particular property, the needs of the Cooperator, and the potential concerns of non-participating neighboring landowners. Consequently, site- specific details will be described in each individual Reintroduction Plan. Packet Pg. 228 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 8 | Page Net conservation benefit –Improved status of the covered species or population as a result of a Safe Harbor Agreement’s conservation actions minus the impacts from any incidental take of the species. Non-essential experimental population – An experimental population whose loss would not appreciably reduce the prospect of survival of the species in the wild. Non-federal lands – Lands owned by entities other than the Federal government, including Tribes (see tribal lands below), States, counties, municipalities, private individuals, and non- governmental organizations. Non-participating landowner – Any landowner within the vicinity of a black-footed ferret reintroduction site developed under the Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement––including private individuals, Tribes, States, and municipalities––who does not participate. Under this Agreement, non-participating neighboring landowners will be covered for incidental take, via an associated Biological Opinion, of any black-footed ferrets that may disperse onto their lands. Parties – The Permittee, the Cooperator, and others as described in Part 10.3 of this Safe Harbor Agreement and identified in the Reintroduction Plan. Permittee – The entity who holds the 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit issued under the Safe Harbor Agreement. Under this Agreement, the Permittee is the Service’s Black-footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator. Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Agreement) – The parent document, prepared by the Service, that describes the conservation strategy and activities that will be carried out to provide a net conservation benefit for the covered species, in this case the black-footed ferret. It also describes the process and requirements for developing the site-specific Reintroduction Plans for lands to be voluntarily enrolled in the Agreement. Reintroduction Plan – The document that describes site-specific characteristics of any lands enrolled in this Agreement. It will include: (1) a description of the ownership interest; (2) a map of the enrolled land, identifying boundaries of any nearby Conservation and Management Zones; (3) a description of the conservation activities to be carried out in any Conservation and Management Zones on the enrolled lands; and (4) a description of any activities that may be prohibited within the Conservation or Management Zone. The Permittee and the Cooperator will develop a Reintroduction Plan prior to enrollment of any property and prior to issuing any Certificate of Inclusion. Upon completion, it will be signed by the Permittee and the Cooperator. Information provided in a Reintroduction Plan could be made public as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request. A template for the Reintroduction Plan is in Appendix B of this Safe Harbor Agreement. Packet Pg. 229 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 9 | Page Routine Livestock Grazing and Ranching Activities – Those activities required to manage a livestock operation. For the purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement, any livestock grazing or ranching practice that does not reduce prairie dog occupied habitat to a degree that the viability of a ferret population occupying the same lands would be impacted would be appropriate. Prohibited activities within any Conservation Zone would include lethal control of prairie dogs and/or major landscape alterations, except in unusual circumstances as agreed to by both the Permittee and Cooperator. Split Estate – For purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement, a split estate refers to any property where the management of wildlife habitat may be diminished by other ownership interests (e.g., mineral rights, mineral leases, hunting agreements, etc.). Take – Defined by the Act as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Take may include significant habitat modification or degradation if it kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Threatened species – An animal or plant species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Tribal Lands – Tribal lands refer to those lands within the boundaries of an Indian reservation or land outside of an Indian reservation that are held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an individual Indian or Indian Tribe, held by an individual Indian or Indian Tribe, or held by a dependent Indian community. Unforeseen Circumstances – Circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan or agreement that could not reasonably have been anticipated by the Service at the time of development of the Safe Harbor Agreement, and that result in a substantial and adverse change in the status of the covered species. Packet Pg. 230 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 10 | Page Black-Footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 1.0 Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Safe Harbor Program (64 FR 32717) is a program that provides regulatory flexibility to non-federal landowners who voluntarily commit to implementing or avoiding specific activities over a defined timeframe that are reasonably expected to provide a net conservation benefit to species listed under the Endangered Species Act (Act). In exchange for this commitment, enrolled landowners (Cooperator) receive assurances from the Service that no additional future regulatory restrictions will be imposed or commitments required for species covered under a Safe Harbor Agreement. The purpose of this Black-Footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Agreement) is to encourage non-federal landowners to voluntarily engage in conservation activities to benefit and advance recovery of the endangered black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). The primary conservation activity under this Agreement will be reintroductions of ferrets on properties of willing landowners. Cooperators who enroll in this Agreement may withdraw at any time without penalty, providing they give the Service an opportunity to retrieve any ferrets on their lands. Based on this Agreement and compliance with all other associated regulations and laws, the Service will issue a section 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit (Permit) to the Service’s Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator (Permittee) for a term of 50 years. Under the Permit, the Permittee may enroll eligible and willing non-federal landowners through Certificates of Inclusion for a minimum term of 10 years under this Agreement. The Certificates of Inclusion will convey the Permit’s incidental take authorization and the Safe Harbor assurances to Cooperators. An attendant Biological Opinion will be developed as a result of an intra-Service section 7 consultation, under the Act, on the effects of the issuance of the Permit and implementation of the Agreement. This Biological Opinion will provide incidental take of black-footed ferrets to non-participating landowners (i.e., nearby non-enrolled landowners) where dispersing ferrets from a reintroduction effort under this Agreement may affect their ownership interests. Cooperators who withdraw from the Agreement become non-participating landowners and will also be covered for future incidental take of ferrets through the Biological Opinion. Split estate owners of severed mineral interests are covered for any incidental take of ferrets related to otherwise lawful activities as non-participating landowners. The Permittee has the capability and commitment to administer the Permit and the terms of the Agreement. The Permittee oversees the recovery efforts of the black-footed ferret with the assistance of the Black-footed Ferret Recovery Implementation Team (BFFRIT). The BFFRIT was established in 1996 and reaffirmed with a revised charter in 2012. The BFFRIT is guided by an Executive Committee made up of various State and Federal agencies, Tribes, and non-governmental organizations with a purpose of recovering the ferret Packet Pg. 231 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 11 | Page through coordinated efforts of many interested entities (Appendix F). All of these partners have been instrumental in the implementation of ferret recovery efforts to date. The Permittee will work closely with the BFFRIT on the implementation and monitoring of this Agreement. To date, the Permittee, with the assistance of the BFFRIT, has established a successful captive breeding program, initiated 20 reintroduction sites, and coordinated the release of more than 2,700 ferrets since 1987. This Agreement is programmatic in nature and applicable across the 12-state historical range of the black-footed ferret, which includes portions of Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. However, the Service expects that the Agreement will be implemented in only a small portion of this area because only 0.08 percent of the ferret’s historical range will be needed to recover (delist) the species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). This historical range includes a wide variety of landscapes, habitat types, and potential partners. This broad diversity in landscapes necessitates site-specific black-footed ferret Reintroduction Plans (Reintroduction Plan) for the enrolled lands. Reintroduction Plans will describe the specific conservation and management details of each site within identified Conservation and/or Management Zones on each enrolled property. Each Reintroduction Plan will be developed by the Permittee and the Cooperator, with technical input from other partners as appropriate. Partners may include State wildlife agencies, Tribes, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services, and others as appropriate. The Permittee will issue a Certificate of Inclusion to each Cooperator after a Reintroduction Plan is approved and signed by the Permittee and the Cooperator. Collectively, the Permittee and the Cooperator are hereafter called the Parties. The programmatic nature of this Agreement provides Cooperators with a streamlined process for obtaining assurances that actions taken to benefit black-footed ferrets on their land will not restrict current land use or result in additional regulatory obligations associated with the species under the Act. Prior to enrollment of any landowner as a Cooperator to the Agreement, inquiries will occur to determine if any split estate ownership may exist that could limit management of wildlife habitat. If these split estate ownership interests occur, the Service will either attempt to enroll all the interests as Cooperators or evaluate if the exercise of any activities pursuant to these ownership interests could materially limit any potential net conservation benefit for the black-footed ferret. For example, if the ownership of subsurface mineral rights was severed from surface ownership, the likelihood and extent of any development of those minerals would be evaluated. Enrollment of partial ownership interests for a property may or may not be determined to be appropriate based on this evaluation. 2.0 Background The black-footed ferret is an endangered carnivore with a black face mask, black legs, and a black-tipped tail. It is approximately 18 to 24 inches long and weighs up to 2.5 pounds. It is the only ferret species native to North America. The ferret is mainly solitary, except when Packet Pg. 232 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 12 | Page breeding and when mother and young are together (Forrest et al. 1985). In the wild, it first breeds at 1 year of age, usually from mid-March through early April with litter sizes averaging 3.5 individuals (Wilson and Ruff 1999). The mean life expectancy of wild ferrets in the last known free-ranging population in Meeteetse, Wyoming was 0.9 years (Biggins et al. 2006). Black-footed ferrets are specialists that prey primarily on prairie dogs (Cynomys spp.) and use their burrows for shelter and denning (Henderson et al. 1969, Hillman and Linder 1973, Forrest et al. 1985, Biggins 2006). Since ferrets depend almost exclusively on prairie dogs for food and shelter, and the ferret range directly overlaps that of certain prairie dog species (Anderson et al. 1986) with no documentation of ferrets breeding outside of prairie dog colonies, we believe that ferrets were historically endemic to the range of three of the prairie dog species (Gunnison’s, white-tailed, and black-tailed). The historical range of these prairie dog species collectively occupied approximately 100 million acres of intermountain and prairie grasslands within a potential range of an estimated 562 million acres extending from Canada to Mexico (Anderson et al. 1986, Biggins et al. 1997, Ernst 2008). Today, largely due to a number of anthropogenic factors including land conversion, poisoning, and the non-native disease sylvatic plague, most prairie dogs occur in highly fragmented subpopulations (Luce 2003, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2010). Significantly reduced and fragmented prairie dog populations that fluctuated spatially and temporally created bottlenecks for ferret populations. The ferret population declined precipitously as a result (Fagerstone and Biggins 1986, Cully 1993, Biggins 2006, Lockhart et al. 2006). Nevertheless, prairie dogs appear able to persist in smaller, more fragmented populations than were common historically. However, ferrets require relatively large, stable prairie dog complexes to maintain a viable population. Accordingly, management efforts to successfully recover the ferret must coordinate with landowners to provide appropriate stable prairie dog habitat for the species. The same historical factors that have impacted prairie dog numbers have also impacted black-footed ferrets. By 1987, the last remaining wild ferrets were taken into captivity for captive breeding purposes (Hutchins et al. 1996, Garelle et al. 2006). Approximately 280 animals currently make up the captive population at six facilities. Multiple facilities ensure redundancy, reducing the risk of a single or even multiple catastrophic events eliminating the entire captive ferret population. A Species Survival Plan ensures their genetic fitness and provides surplus animals for release. After successful captive breeding efforts, the first captive bred ferrets were released back into the wild at Shirley Basin in Wyoming in 1991. Today, in addition to the six captive breeding facilities, a minimum of approximately 274– 448 adult ferrets exist at 20 managed reintroduction sites across their historical range (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Captive breeding and the release of surplus ferrets continues, in efforts to augment existing sites and establish more ferret populations throughout their range. Reintroduction efforts have met draft recovery goals at four sites. Ferret populations at many reintroduction sites are challenged by disease (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Considerable effort has been undertaken to identify additional suitable reintroduction sites to advance recovery of the species. Packet Pg. 233 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 13 | Page Previous studies suggest that a minimum of approximately 75 acres of occupied black-tailed prairie dog habitat or 100–150 acres of occupied white-tailed or Gunnison’s prairie dog habitat are needed to support one female black-footed ferret (Biggins et al. 2006). However, conservative field observations suggest the prairie dog acreage required to support a female ferret may be as much as 225–375 acres depending on prairie dog densities, which vary by species, and other factors including disease and climactic conditions (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Male ferrets have overlapping ranges with female ferrets and do not require additional prairie dog habitat beyond that considered for females (Biggins et al. 2006). These conservative estimates of 225 acres of black-tailed prairie dog occupied habitat and 375 acres of Gunnison’s or white-tailed prairie dog occupied habitat to support one female ferret were used to determine the amount of habitat needed for downlisting and delisting criteria (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). The amount of habitat needed by a black-footed ferret population is directly related to the amount of occupied prairie dog habitat and the density of prairie dogs on that habitat (Biggins et al. 1993). Therefore, prairie dog management can be crucial to ferrets. However, landowner attitudes toward prairie dogs vary greatly and prairie dogs have long been a focus of conflict with agricultural producers (Miller et al. 2007). The principal conflict centers on competition between livestock and prairie dogs for forage, but also includes concern for livestock safety. Competition for forage between prairie dogs and livestock in some instances––depending on factors such as prairie dog density, rainfall, temperature, and stocking rates––may be a threat to the economic viability of livestock producers. However, competition among herbivores is a complex interaction that varies by livestock operation size, geographic location, vegetation type, biomass productivity, season, and year (Derner et al. 2006, Detling 2006). The complexity associated with this interaction and related ranching concerns have led to ongoing control of prairie dogs in some areas. Successful reintroductions of black-footed ferrets, which depend on healthy prairie dog populations, cannot be sustained without addressing this concern. Judicious and targeted management of prairie dog colonies is necessary to maintain support for the conservation of the ferret from landowners whose ranches provide suitable ferret habitat and from their neighbors. Prairie dog management can involve either lethal or non-lethal methods. Lethal control of prairie dogs typically includes poisoning or shooting, both of which can limit the number of black-footed ferrets that a site can support (Pauli 2005, Reeve and Vosburgh 2006). Poisoning of prairie dogs is regarded as a major factor in the historical decline of prairie dogs and ferrets (Forrest et al. 1985, Cully 1993, Forest and Luchsinger 2005). Currently, most poisoning is more limited in nature and undertaken by landowners at very localized locations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). Toxicant use on or adjacent to ferret reintroduction sites is of particular concern due to the potential use of toxicants with secondary impacts to non-target wildlife, including ferrets that consume prairie dogs. However, carefully managed and implemented use of specific toxicants with identified Packet Pg. 234 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 14 | Page management objectives has been important to address prairie dog encroachment issues at ferret reintroduction sites (Gober pers. comm. 2012a, Griebel 2010). At one reintroduction site in Kansas, management of prairie dogs by Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services at the property boundary has been conducted to minimize the expansion of prairie dog colonies onto adjacent properties. Purposeful management of prairie dogs can help alleviate conflicts associated with prairie dog expansion and impacts to livestock forage. Flexibility in prairie dog management may generate more support from landowners to participate in this program and conserve ferrets. The ability to collaborate to purposefully manage prairie dogs in some areas, while limiting their expansion in other areas, can help build a strong private land conservation model for the ferret. Shooting of prairie dogs often focuses on the most vulnerable segment of the population, i.e., naïve young of the year (pups). These animals are smaller than adult prairie dogs, and as a result more available to hunting black-footed ferrets. Pup availability to adult female ferrets providing for their young (kits) is an important factor in kit survival at ferret reintroduction sites. Prairie dog shooting on any ferret reintroduction site likely reduces the value of the area for recovery of the ferret. However, this impact may be ameliorated by the size of the ferret reintroduction area and the species of prairie dog present. Shooting of prairie dogs occurs on very large successful reintroduction sites at Aubrey Valley in Arizona, where Gunnison’s prairie dogs occur, and at Shirley Basin in Wyoming, where white-tailed prairie dogs occur. At smaller successful ferret reintroduction sites such as Conata Basin, South Dakota, shooting has significantly reduced black-tailed prairie dog populations, with likely disproportionate impacts on pups. Accordingly, shooting has been limited at Conata Basin to better support ferret recovery. There are several diseases, both native and nonnative, that impact black-footed ferrets. Of particular concern is nonnative sylvatic plague, which can be lethal to ferrets and prairie dogs––their main prey source (Barnes 1993, Gage and Kosoy 2006). Sylvatic plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis and is transmitted via fleas, through consumption of infected animals, or through breathing in tiny droplets containing the bacterium (Godbey et al. 2006). Since 2005, plague has been detected in prairie dogs in all 12 states throughout the historical range of the ferret (Abbott and Rocke 2012). The potential significance of plague on ferret populations underscores the value of establishing multiple reintroduction sites across the widest possible distribution of the species’ historical range; more populations can significantly minimize the chances that plague outbreaks will cause widespread decline in the species (Gage and Kosoy 2006, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). The establishment and, more importantly, the management of multiple reintroduction sites is a risk management strategy to promote recovery of the species. The original recovery plan for the black-footed ferret was completed in 1978 and revised in 1988 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1988). The revised recovery plan identified downlisting criteria that included at least 1,500 adult ferrets in 10 wild populations, with no fewer than 30 breeding adults in any population. The widest possible distribution of those 1,500 adult ferrets across the landscape was encouraged. Packet Pg. 235 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 15 | Page Since 1988, knowledge about the black-footed ferret and the threats it faces has grown. Many reviews of the 1988 recovery plan and subsequent recovery progress have been undertaken including reviews by the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG) (1992), Hutchins et al. (1996), CBSG (2004), Ray (2006), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2008). These reviews were used in the preparation of a Draft revised recovery plan that will direct ferret recovery in the future (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). The overall strategy to recover this species will rely on engaging multiple partners including States, Tribes, Federal land management agencies, non-governmental organizations, and private landowners. Recovery criteria will provide guidance to establish multiple free-ranging populations in an effort to minimize impacts to the stability of ferret populations from localized stochastic events. Recovery goals define downlisting criteria to include the establishment of at least 1,500 free-ranging breeding adult ferrets in 10 or more populations, with at least 1 population in each of at least 6 of 12 States within the species’ historical range. Delisting criteria include the establishment of at least 3,000 free-ranging breeding adult ferrets in 30 or more populations, with at least 1 population in each of at least 9 of 12 States within the historical range of the species, with no fewer than 30 breeding adults in any population and at least 10 populations with 100 or more breeding adults (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). The table below identifies the status of reintroduction efforts through 2012 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013). Estimates of breeding adults can vary from year to year for a recovery site based on a number of factors including kit production and survival, predation, the presence of plague, the management efforts implemented, and the amount of monitoring conducted. Therefore, we provide a range of estimates. Table 1. Approximate number of black-footed ferrets released and extant in the wild, 1991-2012, at white- tailed (Wtpd), black-tailed (Btpd), and Gunnison’s (Gpd) prairie dog colonies1. Site (year initiated) Prairie dog spp. Ferrets released Minimum fall population1 2008 Estimated breeding adults2 2009 Minimum fall population 2011 (approximate) Estimated breeding adults3 2012 Average estimate of breeding adults Shirley Basin, WY (1991) Wtpd 534 196 98 203 (in 2010; partial survey) 102 (in 2011) 100 UL Bend NWR, MT (1994) Btpd 242 13 7 20 10 9 Badlands NP, SD (1994) Btpd 225 20 10 33 17 14 Aubrey Valley, AZ (1996) Gpd 354 66 33 75 1234 78 Conata Basin, SD (1996) Btpd 161 292 146 72 36 91 Ft. Belknap, MT (1997) Btpd 102 No data No data 0 0 0 Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 16 | Page BLM 40 Complex, MT (2001) Btpd 95 3 3 No data No data 0 Wolf Creek, CO (2001) Wtpd 254 16 8 No data No data 4 Janos, Mexico (2001) Btpd 299 13 7 No data No data 4 Rosebud, SD (2003) Btpd 162 30 15 No data No data 8 Lower Brule, SD (2006) Btpd 107 26 13 12 6 10 Wind Cave NP, SD (2007) Btpd 61 26 13 46 23 18 Espee Ranch, AZ (2007) Gpd 77 Recent release No data No data No data No data Smoky Hill, KS (2007) Btpd 125 66 19 38 22 26 N. Cheyenne, MT (2008) Btpd 88 Recent release No data No data No data No data Vermejo Ranch, NM (2008) Btpd 167 Recent release 84 5 3 2 Grasslands NP, Canada (2009) Btpd 75 Recent release No data 12 6 3 Vermejo Ranch, NM (2012) Gpd 20 Recent release No data No data No data No data Total 3923 942 468 544 362 418 Since the last non-reintroduced black-footed ferret population was discovered at Meeteetse, Wyoming in 1981, significant progress has occurred toward the recovery of this species. Early efforts concentrated on immediate survival of the species through the establishment of a captive breeding population by Wyoming Game and Fish Department, the Service, and the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). These efforts led to the establishment of the Service’s recovery program for the species, which coordinates all recovery actions and houses a majority of all captive ferrets. The Service coordinates efforts to breed ferrets for reintroduction in the wild with the AZA and several other partners. With the success of the captive breeding program, recovery efforts now include other tasks such as establishing a wide distribution of reintroduction sites with sufficient quantity and quality of prairie dog habitat as well as addressing the impacts of disease and assuring the adequacy of management actions. The accomplishments to date have involved an active BFFRIT. These efforts demonstrate a long term commitment by the Service to coordinate with the diverse members of the BFFRIT to cooperatively advance recovery of the ferret. 3.0 Authorities This Agreement has been developed under section 10 the Act, the Service’s Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717) and final regulations (64 FR 32706), and revisions to the regulations (69 FR 24084). This Agreement supports the intent of the Parties to follow the procedural and substantive requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act. The Safe Harbor Policy was developed to encourage private and other non-federal landowners to voluntarily undertake conservation activities on their properties to enhance restore or maintain habitat to benefit federally listed species. Packet Pg. 237 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 17 | Page 4.0 Covered Species Covered species are those federally listed species that are subject to a Safe Harbor Agreement and accompanying 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit, as defined in the Service’s final Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717). This Agreement’s covered species is the black-footed ferret, federally listed as endangered. 5.0 Eligible Lands The geographical lands eligible for enrollment in this Agreement include non-federal lands (including tribal lands) within the historical range of the black-footed ferret. This includes portions of Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming (Appendix A) that have adequate acres of occupied prairie dog habitat to support a population of at least 30 breeding adult ferrets. The acreage necessary to support 30 breeding adults can vary depending on the species of prairie dogs present. Typically, this would be approximately 1,500 acres or more in black- tailed prairie dog habitat or 3,000 acres or more of white-tailed or Gunnison’s prairie dog habitat. Eligible land need not be provided by a single Cooperator. Adjacent landowners can collectively enroll lands together under the Agreement such that sufficient acreage to support 30 breeding adult ferrets is enrolled. Potential suitable lands will be evaluated by the Permittee based on available site information and site visits. The number of acres required for enrollment will be determined on a site-specific basis and will be identified in the Reintroduction Plan. While a minimum of 1,500–3,000 acres of active prairie dog habitat may support 30 breeding adult black-footed ferrets, we would encourage and prioritize larger enrollments to maximize the ability to contribute to the recovery goals of the ferret. Factors such as total size of occupied prairie dog habitat, densities of prairie dogs, documented presence of plague, total size of the grazing/ranching operation, proximity to incompatible land uses such as urban areas, the number of adjacent landowners who have concerns about prairie dog expansion, and the land uses of those neighbors will also be considered in the enrollment of eligible lands. By considering the concerns of the Cooperator and their neighbors, a logistically sound and sustainable ferret reintroduction effort will be possible. Efforts to distribute black-footed ferret populations throughout their historical range stem from the need to maximize the redundancy of populations, which will minimize the risk of a catastrophic event eliminating the species in the wild. A potential approach would be to distribute ferret populations in proportion to the amount of historical habitat in each State (Appendix C). For example, North Dakota has a much smaller portion of the historical range than Colorado. Consequently, Colorado would be encouraged to enroll more acres occupied by prairie dogs and establish more ferret populations to achieve recovery. Therefore, should enrollment resources become limited, the Service would consider the historical ferret presence along with the above factors for prioritizing enrollments. Packet Pg. 238 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 18 | Page 6.0 Baseline Determination Baseline is a measure of the conditions associated with the covered species or its habitat that occur on eligible lands at the time of enrollment in the Agreement. Measuring prairie dog population numbers and spatial extent is time-consuming and expensive. These parameters can also fluctuate greatly over time. Therefore, the most reasonable and practical approach for determining baseline under this Agreement would be the number of black-footed ferrets present at the time of enrollment. Since the last remaining wild ferrets were taken into captivity for captive breeding purposes, extensive efforts to find additional wild ferrets have been unsuccessful (Hanebury and Biggins 2006). Therefore, the baseline on eligible lands for this Agreement will be zero ferrets. Some black-footed ferret reintroductions onto private lands have already occurred under sections 10(j) and 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act since 1991. Ferrets were reintroduced in seven locations under section 10(j) of the Act in Arizona (1), Montana (1), South Dakota (3), Utah and Colorado (1), and Wyoming (1). Section 10(j) authorizes the Service to designate experimental populations for the purposes of reintroduction of threatened and endangered species. Under section 10(j), non-essential experimental populations are considered threatened for all purposes of the Act other than section 7 (such populations are considered as proposed for listing for the purposes of section 7). The Service may issue special rules that provide flexibility in management of these populations. The 10(j) rulemaking process for each of the designated non-essential experimental populations of ferrets uses that flexibility to ensure the continued existing use of all lands within the defined area, include ranching and associated activities. Although non-federal landowners within these 10(j) areas do not need additional incidental take coverage, they may desire the higher level of regulatory assurances provided under this Agreement. Furthermore, reintroductions in the 10(j) areas did not always include the conservation activities provided by this Agreement that would benefit the species, such as disease management, targeted prairie dog management, and monitoring. Section 10(a)(1)(A) authorizes the Service to issue permits for research and the enhancement of survival of listed species. Six section 10(a)(1)(A) permits for black-footed ferret reintroductions have been issued in Arizona (1), Kansas (1), New Mexico (1), Montana (1), and South Dakota (2). These permits and the Service’s accompanying section 7 biological opinions provided incidental take coverage to the landowners whose lands supported these reintroductions, as well as their neighbors. However, these mechanisms do not provide the same regulatory assurances as the Safe Harbor program that no further restrictions or commitments would be imposed on landowners. Additionally, these permits did not always include conservation activities that would benefit the species, such as disease management, targeted prairie dog management, and monitoring. Finally, these permits did not provide an extended period of coverage or baseline condition to which cooperating landowners could return, as provide by the Safe Harbor policy (62 FR 32178). Packet Pg. 239 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 19 | Page There have been 20 reintroduction sites initiated for black-footed ferrets as of 2012. Some neighboring reintroduction sites were covered by one 10(j) rule. The sites in Canada and Mexico are regulated by their respective governments. In both 10(j) and 10(a)(1)(A) reintroductions, landowners have allowed the Service to test the effectiveness of release, management, and monitoring methods, as well as attempt to establish new populations. This participation in reintroduction efforts was the foundation of the development of successful techniques that are allowing the Service to expand reintroduction efforts rangewide through this Agreement. However, these “early adopters” under section 10(a)(1)(A) permits and section 10(j) designations do not enjoy the same level of regulatory assurances as participants in this Agreement would. For these reasons, such non-federal landowners may be eligible to participate in the Agreement and receive Safe Harbor assurances for reintroductions that have already occurred. Furthermore, if this Agreement had existed at the time of those reintroductions, the baseline conditions for those landowners would have been zero ferrets. Therefore, the ferret baseline will be considered zero for all landowners who volunteer to participate in the Agreement. The goal of the conservation activities in this Agreement is to increase the number of black- footed ferrets on enrolled properties above the baseline to provide a net conservation benefit to the species through establishment of additional populations (see Section 8.0). The Cooperator may opt to return to baseline upon completion of the Reintroduction Plan (Section 7.0 and Appendix B). The Cooperator may also opt to return to baseline prior to completion of the Reintroduction Plan by withdrawing from the Agreement. Incidental take coverage would be retained, provided the Cooperator notifies the Permittee and allows the Service access to recapture ferrets during the following fall, prior to a return to baseline. A Cooperator who returns to baseline without notifying the Permittee and providing access, will not receive coverage for incidental take. A Cooperator who withdraws from the Agreement with proper notification will be regarded as a non-participating landowner and will receive incidental take coverage via the Biological Opinion associated with the Agreement. The landowner will not be held responsible for events beyond their control (e.g., drought, fire, or plague) that may result in a decrease of the number of ferrets. 7.0 Conservation Activities Conservation activities are those actions that would be implemented on enrolled lands and which are intended to provide a net conservation benefit to black-footed ferrets. Conservation activities that will provide a net conservation benefit on an individual piece of land may vary by location but at a minimum will include the reintroduction of ferrets. Conservation activities are discussed below and will be identified for each site as necessary and defined within a Reintroduction Plan developed for each enrolled property (Appendix B). Within the enrolled lands, a Conservation Zone and/or a Management Zone will be defined. The Conservation Zone should be a minimum of approximately 1,500 acres of occupied black-tailed prairie dog habitat or a minimum of 3,000 acres of white-tailed or Gunnison Packet Pg. 240 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 20 | Page prairie dog habitat in order to provide adequate habitat to support a population of at least 30 adult black-footed ferrets. Conservation activities within the Conservation Zone will include ferret reintroduction and disease management as discussed below. Routine livestock grazing and ranching activities are largely compatible with maintaining occupied prairie dog habitat capable of supporting ferrets. All activities of Cooperators that are compatible with ferret recovery will continue in the Conservation Zone, including but not limited to, routine livestock grazing and ranching activities. Land uses and activities of Cooperators that could reduce prairie dog occupied habitat to a degree that the viability of the ferret population would be impacted would be prohibited. Incompatible activities in the Conservation Zone would include lethal control of prairie dogs and major landscape alterations such as plowing, unless approved by both the Permittee and Cooperator. The Cooperator and/or the Permittee should withdraw enrolled lands from the Agreement if incompatible activities are planned and/or conducted. Conservation activities within the Management Zone are intended to provide benefits to the black-footed ferret while providing flexibility in prairie dog management to Cooperators, including the option for lethal control. The Management Zone will consist of additional acres adjacent to or in close proximity to the Conservation Zone, and may or may not exceed the number of acres in the Conservation Zone. It may or may not have occupied prairie dog habitat. Conservation activities within the Management Zone may include disease management and/or prairie dog management as discussed below and as defined in the Reintroduction Plan. It is expected that any lawful ownership activities, including but not limited to routine ranching activities, will occur in the Management Zone. All of the following conservation activities are important in that they support the reintroduction of black-footed ferrets. It will require coordinated efforts of multiple partners to implement these conservation activities. The Permittee and any Cooperators will determine what partners may participate in conservation activities. Likely partners in the implementation of the conservation activities include but are not limited to State Wildlife Agencies, Tribes, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Offices, Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U. S. Geological Survey, the National Association of Conservation Districts, and other non-governmental organizations. Partners will vary depending on factors such as the state in which the eligible lands are located, budgets, logistics, and work efficiencies. This Agreement provides a mechanism for the coordinated efforts of multiple partners to contribute to recovery of this species. 7.1 Black-Footed Ferret Reintroduction and Management Lands enrolled under this Agreement will provide an opportunity to increase the number of wild black-footed ferret populations. Once a Cooperator has a signed Reintroduction Plan and is enrolled under the Agreement, ferrets will be reintroduced to the site as described therein. All ferret reintroduction and management actions will be coordinated and carried out by the Permittee (or designee) and all funding for such actions will be provided by the Packet Pg. 241 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 21 | Page Permittee and/or others, to the extent funds are available. State wildlife agencies will be instrumental in these activities. Typically, a minimum of 20 juvenile black-footed ferrets will be reintroduced during one release event in the fall. Depending on the size of the site and quality of the habitat, additional animals may be released during this timeframe or in subsequent years. In the latter case, the baseline of zero ferrets will remain. Release events typically occur near dusk and involve a minimum of two biologists. Depending on topography, most animals can be distributed across the site via existing roads or on foot, minimizing impact to the landscape. All reintroduction efforts will utilize techniques outlined in Roelle et al. (2006). The Permittee will work with each Cooperator to coordinate these activities to minimize disruptions to the Cooperator’s use of land during reintroduction activities. Once black-footed ferrets are released, efforts will be undertaken as necessary to determine the success of reintroduction activities. These efforts are described in Section 9.0 (Monitoring) of this Agreement and would require access to the property. This monitoring may occur in subsequent years, as necessary, in coordination with the Cooperator, to determine if excess wild kit production on specific enrolled lands could be removed to support other approved reintroduction sites. 7.2 Disease Management There are a number of diseases that can affect both captive raised and wild black-footed ferrets. However, sylvatic plague presents the greatest threat to wild ferret populations. In order to address this threat, Cooperators enrolled in this Agreement will allow for the treatment of disease, as appropriate and necessary, on their enrolled lands for the protection of ferrets and prairie dogs. Disease management activities will be coordinated and carried out by the Permittee at no cost to the Cooperator. Currently there is an effective vaccine that will protect black-footed ferrets from plague. All animals at the captive breeding facilities are vaccinated for plague and other diseases as necessary, including those intended for reintroduction. However, if reintroductions are successful and reproduction occurs, it may be necessary to live trap any kits that are produced on a reintroduction site in order to vaccinate them. These efforts would likely occur during the fall concurrent with monitoring efforts, but could occur during the spring in some cases (Section 9.0 of this Agreement). Fleas are considered a primary vector of plague transmission. Currently, the most effective control of fleas (and thereby plague) is the application of deltamethrin, the active ingredient in the insecticide DeltaDust (dusting). DeltaDust is an unrestricted-use pesticide classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and is considered safe for many applications including use in and around homes. Product transport, mixing, application, storage, cleanup, and use of protective gear will be consistent with label instructions. DeltaDust may be applied according to the EPA label requirements once per year, generally between March and August, and would involve placement of approximately 5 grams of DeltaDust Packet Pg. 242 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 22 | Page directly into each prairie dog burrow. The insecticide is typically applied by a spray device mounted on ATVs or by hand while walking depending on topography (Seery et al. 2003, Matchett et al. 2010). Applications take several days to two weeks depending on the acreage treated and the size of work crews. An alternative to the use of insecticides is currently under investigation that involves a sylvatic plague oral bait vaccine for prairie dogs. The vaccine is a genetically modified viral vaccine, using attenuated raccoon pox virus as a vector for orally delivering plague antigens to target animals through the use of baits (Abbott and Rocke 2012). If effective, this vaccine could be used on lands enrolled under this Agreement. The oral bait vaccine would be placed in baits that are distributed from ATVs or aerially onto a prairie dog colony once per year or possibly less often, depending upon research results. Prairie dogs would consume the bait and become vaccinated, thereby limiting plague outbreaks on treated lands. Administration of oral plague vaccine is expected to occur no more than once per year after emergence of prairie dog pups and might occur from late May through October. This plague abatement technique is expected to be less labor intensive than dusting. However, it may require limiting access of livestock to treated areas for a few days after application to avoid livestock consumption of the bait. The bait will not adversely affect livestock, but could decrease the amount available for prairie dogs and therefore decrease the vaccine’s effectiveness. Regardless of the method used, the Permittee (or designee) will work with each Cooperator to coordinate these activities to minimize disruptions to the Cooperator’s use of the lands during plague management activities. The science of disease management within wildlife populations is evolving. New techniques and protocol may be considered in the future. Any changes in disease management on lands covered by this Agreement will be agreed to by both Parties prior to implementation. 7.3 Prairie Dog Management Sustainable black-footed ferret populations are not possible without purposeful management of prairie dog populations to address disease and conflicts with human activities (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). Prairie dog management within the Management Zone may include both lethal and non-lethal activities. Lethal activities may include the use of zinc phosphide, shooting, and other activities as approved by the Permittee. Anticoagulant pesticides such as Rozol® and Kaput® will not be allowed on enrolled properties due to the risks of secondary poisoning to other non-target wildlife species that consume prairie dogs, including ferrets, and the resultant impact on the establishment of a ferret population that could contribute to species recovery. Lethal control within the Management Zone will be addressed for each enrolled property and defined in the property’s Reintroduction Plan. Responsibility for implementing management of prairie dogs will be defined in the Reintroduction Plan. Lethal prairie dog management may be carried out by Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services and/or other local entities, such as weed and pest boards, following discussions with these entities regarding management options. Packet Pg. 243 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 23 | Page Non-lethal management activities may occur in both the Management and Conservation Zones and include, but are not limited to, barriers and translocation. Lethal prairie dog management will not be allowed within the Conservation Zone of the enrolled lands, except in unusual circumstances agreed to by both the Permittee and Cooperator. The Reintroduction Plan can be modified as necessary to address changing prairie dog management needs with concurrence by both the Permittee and the Cooperator. Non- lethal prairie dog management may be carried out by Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services, other partners, the Permittee, or the Cooperator as agreed to and identified in the Reintroduction Plan. Management to maintain sufficient quantity and quality of prairie dog habitat on lands covered by the Agreement will be critical to its success. 7.4 Livestock Grazing Most, if not all, of the private land that supports adequate numbers of prairie dogs essential to maintaining black-footed ferret populations is agricultural in nature and predominantly used for livestock grazing. It is expected that any management decisions regarding grazing practices on enrolled properties will continue to be determined by the Cooperator and will be described in the property’s Reintroduction Plan. Grazing practices on lands enrolled under this Agreement should provide habitat for the ferret and be economically viable for the Cooperator. It is understood that certain practices such as, but not limited to, grazing livestock, driving vehicles and equipment to and from the livestock operations, driving vehicles to and between pastures to move and/or feed livestock or administer medical attention to animals, building and maintaining fences and watering facilities, treating invasive plants, prescribed fire, reseeding, fertilization, and brush management, may be necessary to facilitate sustainable grazing. Grazing and related activities will be further described in the Reintroduction Plan. Implementation of all grazing activities will be the responsibility of the Cooperator. It is not the intent of this Agreement to limit any land use that does not materially reduce the viability of any reintroduced ferret population. 8.0 Incidental Take and Net Conservation Benefits 8.1 Incidental Take and Return to Baseline Implementation of this Agreement and any related Reintroduction Plans could result in the incidental take of black-footed ferrets. The regulatory take assurances provided in the Certificate of Inclusions apply only to ferrets. Incidental take of black-footed ferrets could occur through reintroduction and monitoring of ferrets while handling or transporting to the reintroduction site. Ferret deaths have occurred while anesthetizing animals for health care purposes. In addition, release sites have experienced occasional ferret deaths during transportation due to heat stress when air conditioning equipment failed; however, less than one half of one percent of more than 2,700 ferrets reintroduced have perished from handling and transportation (Gober pers. comm. 2012b). While equipment failures could occur during ferret reintroductions under Packet Pg. 244 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 24 | Page this Agreement, the precautions contained in the protocol for handling and monitoring reintroduced ferrets outlined in Roelle et al. (2006) will minimize this possibility. Incidental take of black-footed ferrets may also occur in carrying out other conservation activities, including implementing plague management, prairie dog management, and routine ownership interest activities including, but not limited to, livestock grazing and ranching activities. The most likely means of incidental take associated with these activities would occur through vehicle or equipment collisions. While such incidental take has been documented, the risk of vehicle collisions is low due to the nocturnal habits of ferrets. Other than potential collisions with vehicles or equipment, plague management is unlikely to result in incidental take of ferrets. Incidental take of black-footed ferrets from non-lethal prairie dog management is not expected in either Conservation or Management Zones. Incidental take from lethal prairie dog management authorized in Management Zones could occur if ferrets are present. Such take may occur through accidental shooting or non-target exposure of ferrets to toxicants meant for prairie dogs, or potential collisions with vehicles or equipment. Such take is not expected in Conservation Zones because shooting and the use of toxicants will not occur within Conservation Zones, except in unusual circumstances agreed to by both the Permittee and Cooperator. The provisions of this Agreement allow any Cooperator to return the enrolled lands back to a baseline of zero black-footed ferrets at any time through any legal means. Such means cannot include deliberate killing of ferrets. A return to baseline may result in incidental take of all ferrets released onto the enrolled lands. Should the Cooperator choose to return to baseline, the most likely means to do so will be through the absence of plague management, through extensive lethal prairie dog control on all enrolled lands including the Conservation Zone to the point where the prairie dog population is no longer adequate to support a ferret population, or through conversion of enrolled lands from grazing lands to other land uses such as cultivated agriculture or intensive energy development. Before carrying out any activities that would result in a return to baseline, Cooperators are required to notify the Service in sufficient time to allow relocation of the ferrets. September and October are the most suitable months for trapping ferrets. Therefore, this Agreement requires that Cooperators notify the Permittee by July 1 of any given year to allow logistical planning for the recapture of ferrets from the enrolled lands during the following months of September and/or October, or as otherwise mutually determined by the Permittee and Cooperator. If the Permittee is not notified and/or access is not granted, the Cooperator would lose coverage for incidental take. In the absence of plague management, it is likely that a plague event will occur that decreases prairie dog populations to a level that will no longer support black-footed ferrets. While prairie dogs have the reproductive potential to increase their numbers after such an event, it is unlikely that ferret populations would recover without additional reintroductions. Likewise, extensive lethal prairie dog management across all enrolled lands Packet Pg. 245 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 25 | Page would likely result in considerable decreases in prairie dog populations such that they would not support ferrets. The reproductive potential of prairie dogs could allow them to return after extensive lethal control, but it is unlikely that ferrets populations would return without additional reintroductions. While conversion of rangeland to cultivated agriculture in the past resulted in the loss of considerable black-footed ferret habitat, much of the most suitable land has already been converted. Therefore, present and future conversion to cropland is less likely (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). However, changes in demands for various crops such as corn for ethanol could influence rate and location of conversion to cropland, which is difficult to predict. Unlike conversion to cropland, energy production does not result in a complete loss of habitat. It reduces the total amount of habitat by converting portions of it to an impermeable surface, i.e., roads and well or turbine pads, but it does not preclude burrows and occupation of prairie dogs and hence ferrets. However, it may increase the potential for incidental take via vehicle collisions during construction and operations and maintenance. Structures associated with energy development may also increase predation by providing additional perches for raptors. The likelihood of the conversion of enrolled lands to energy production is unknown and difficult to predict, but will be influenced by energy prices and energy policy. While suburban and commercial development is also possible, given the rural and relatively remote locations of many of the eligible lands, it is less likely than conversion to cultivated agriculture or energy development. By whatever means, a change in land use could make the enrolled lands unsuitable for prairie dog habitat or, more likely, impair the quality of prairie dog habitat. Without adequate prairie dogs, sustainable black-footed ferret populations will not be maintained and the enrolled lands will return to their baseline of zero ferrets. The extent of the incidental take associated with the implementation of conservation activities is difficult to quantify as we do not know how many eligible landowners will enroll. Incidental take associated with the return to baseline is also difficult to anticipate. However, a qualitative review of the Service’s Safe Harbor Program indicates that most participants remain committed to these programs and very few choose to return to baseline. Given that livestock grazing and ranching is the primary use for these lands, we anticipate that most Cooperators will not return these lands to baseline. 8.2 Net Conservation Benefits Net conservation benefits are the cumulative benefits to the black-footed ferret minus the impacts of any incidental take allowed by the Permit. Net conservation benefits must be sufficient to contribute, either directly or indirectly, to recovery of the ferret. The conservation activities identified in this Agreement support recovery efforts identified in the current Recovery Plan by reestablishing the ferret on the enrolled lands and by addressing the most significant threats. The net conservation benefits of each conservation activity are discussed below. Packet Pg. 246 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 26 | Page Black-Footed Ferret Reintroduction – The principal conservation benefit provided by this Agreement is the opportunity to establish additional free-ranging populations of ferrets throughout their range on non-federal lands. Recovery efforts to date demonstrate that reintroduction of ferrets can be successful, such as those at Conata Basin, South Dakota; Aubrey Valley, Arizona; Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, South Dakota; and Shirley Basin, Wyoming. Additional reintroduction sites throughout the species’ historical range will provide more ecologically diverse release sites. Release sites that vary in site-specific habitat characteristics will increase options to address uncertainty associated with local stochastic events such as plague, other diseases, and potential effects of climate change. If successful, reproduction at these sites could also contribute surplus, wild born kits to reintroduction sites elsewhere. This could foster better survival on site as well as at future reintroduction sites. Disease Management – Currently, the most destructive disease impacting black-footed ferrets is sylvatic plague. Plague will be addressed as described in Section 7.2 above and may be managed on all lands enrolled under this Agreement as necessary. Engaging in plague management within the Conservation Zones of enrolled lands will reduce or eliminate this lethal threat to ferrets. Plague management within the Management Zones could also provide a conservation benefit by creating a buffer to plague on adjacent lands. Plague management will also benefit ferrets by limiting large fluctuations in prairie dog numbers, thus stabilizing their prey base. Prairie Dog Management – Adequate numbers of prairie dogs are essential for black-footed ferret survival and population stability. However, prairie dogs may be in conflict with landowner interests. Since the early 1900s, considerable efforts have been undertaken to poison prairie dogs as a means of reducing competition with domestic livestock for forage (Forrest and Luchsinger 2005). Lands enrolled under this Agreement will be subject to purposeful prairie dog management. This means that prairie dogs will be conserved in any Conservation Zone, as defined in the Reintroduction Plan, but may be actively controlled in any Management Zone as necessary. Overall, this will likely result in a substantial increase in suitable ferret habitat available on non-federal lands throughout the species’ historical range inasmuch as control of prairie dogs is not often purposefully limited on any significant area of private lands at present. Purposeful management of black-footed ferrets and prairie dogs, with different activities supported for different outcomes in the Conservation Zone and Management Zone as defined in this Agreement, will demonstrate how a balance of tolerance and control of prairie dogs can benefit both ferret recovery and Cooperator interests. The benefits of allowing purposeful management of prairie dogs in conjunction with ferret reintroduction is critical to minimize impacts of prairie dog encroachment onto neighboring properties and to create an environment in which landowners will allow the release of ferrets. The positive value of establishing new reintroduction sites will exceed the minor negative impacts of any potential incidental take of ferrets associated with prairie dog management. Packet Pg. 247 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 27 | Page Livestock Grazing – Most lands eligible for enrollment under this Agreement will be non- federal grazing lands. As members of grassland/shrub steppe ecosystems, prairie dogs have evolved with grazing. While there is much debate regarding competition between ungulates and prairie dogs, grazing can benefit prairie dogs by reducing vegetation height, which can improve visibility, thereby reducing predation on prairie dogs. Enrollment of these lands will allow for their continued use as grazing lands, as determined by the landowner, during the term of the Reintroduction Plan. It will also help to ensure that there will not be substantial conversion to other uses such as cropland or other development during the term of the Reintroduction Plan. Conservation activities collectively provide a net conservation benefit at each site by balancing prairie dog habitat with livestock grazing, purposefully managing the prairie dogs present, and controlling the diseases that can devastate both prairie dogs and black-footed ferrets. This approach makes it possible to carry out the primary goal of the Agreement––to establish additional free-ranging populations of ferrets throughout their range on non- federal lands. Long-term benefits include demonstration of the compatibility of livestock grazing and endangered species conservation, which could lead to additional ferret populations on non-federal lands throughout their range beyond the term of this Agreement. As one of the most highly endangered mammals in North America, the black-footed ferret has made great strides toward recovery. It has gone from being extirpated to approximately 274–448 animals in the wild at 20 sites. This progress has been achieved through the efforts of many people. However, many more people will need to become engaged in order to recover this iconic species. In addition to the conservation activities described above, this Agreement will allow the Service to engage a broad spectrum of conservation partners including additional private landowners, Tribes, States, non- governmental organizations, and others to advance recovery of this species. 9.0 Monitoring The purposes of this Agreement’s monitoring program are to: (1) inform the Service of the status of implementation of the conservation activities, (2) track incidental take of black- footed ferrets, and (3) determine success of ferret reintroductions on enrolled properties. The Permittee will coordinate all monitoring efforts. Cooperators will provide information and participate where appropriate with the Permittee to monitor actions described in each Reintroduction Plan. The monitoring on each enrolled property will vary based on the conservation activities taken and the situation at each site. In a coordinated effort with the Cooperator, the Permittee will track implementation of conservation activities on the Cooperator’s property and provide an annual report to the appropriate Service Regional Offices and to each Cooperator (Appendix D). This report will include the state and county in which the Reintroduction Plan and Certificate of Inclusion were issued, the conservation activities implemented––including the number of acres Packet Pg. 248 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 28 | Page treated for plague and/or poisoned, the methods used, the dates of black-footed ferret releases, and any incidental take. The Service’s appropriate Regional Offices will review these reports to ensure that the terms of the Permit, conditions of the Agreement, and purposes of the monitoring program are being met. Grazing practices carried out by the Cooperator, as well as incidental take, will be tracked through a self-reporting process in an annual questionnaire completed by the Cooperator and returned to the Permittee (Appendix E). In addition to the implementation of monitoring described above, the Permittee may use aerial imagery, such as the National Agriculture Imagery Program, to assess presence and expansion or contraction of prairie dog colonies to determine if adequate black-footed ferret habitat exists on enrolled properties. Based on the aerial imagery, as well as the Cooperator survey information, the Permittee may coordinate periodic site visits when necessary to confirm the continued presence of reintroduced ferrets. This may include nocturnal spotlight surveys within a fourteen day period in the fall, preferably around the full moon, carried out in accordance with appropriate notification to the landowner and using methods described in Roelle et al. (2006). While methods for successful reintroduction of black-footed ferrets to their native habitat are generally well understood and will be described for each enrolled property in the Reintroduction Plan, it is possible that with time and experience in developing Reintroduction Plans in varied landscapes, knowledge and skills will evolve. Therefore, every five years (or more frequently if necessary), the Permittee will consolidate information and reports from all enrolled properties to date for the purposes of assessing the implementation and administration of the Agreement. All Cooperators and additional partners will be invited to discuss and provide input. Any necessary changes identified from the information provided will be addressed pursuant to Section 15.0 (Modifications) of this Agreement. 10.0 Roles and Responsibilities of the Parties 10.1 The Permittee (Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator) The Permittee agrees to: A. Upon consideration of all other applicable legal requirements, obtain and hold a Permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act, authorizing incidental take of black-footed ferrets as a result of lawful activities on the enrolled property in accordance with the provision of such Permit. The term of the Permit will be 50 years. B. Develop and sign Reintroduction Plans in coordination with each Cooperator for lands proposed for enrollment in the Agreement, thereby ensuring consistency with the provisions of this Agreement. Packet Pg. 249 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 29 | Page C. Upon signature of a Reintroduction Plan developed in coordination with the Cooperator, issue a Certificate of Inclusion to convey incidental take to the Cooperator pursuant to section 10.1 A hereof. D. Coordinate all ferret reintroduction efforts with Cooperators and any other appropriate partners. E. Coordinate all plague management actions with Cooperators and any other appropriate partners. F. Coordinate all prairie dog management activities as defined in the Reintroduction Plans with Cooperators and any other appropriate partners. G. Support private landowner enrollment and participation in the Agreement. H. Provide Cooperators with technical assistance in implementing conservation activities and monitoring to the maximum extent practicable as needed. I. Ensure that any impacts to cultural and historic resources due to activities to be carried out under this Agreement are avoided or otherwise in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. J. Coordinate monitoring described in the Section 9 of the Agreement and in Reintroduction Plans as applicable. K. Provide annual monitoring report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 and Region 6 offices. L. Address concerns of non-participating neighboring landowners by providing incidental take authorization equivalent to that provided to Cooperators. 10.2 Cooperator A Cooperator agrees to: A. Work cooperatively with the Permittee to develop a Reintroduction Plan acceptable to both Parties that includes all provisions identified in Appendix B. B. Sign the Reintroduction Plan and Certificate of Inclusion enrolling the identified land under this Agreement and managing the land pursuant to the Reintroduction Plan. This will include cooperating with the reintroduction and management of black- footed ferrets, including disease management as described in the Reintroduction Plan, implementing any grazing activities as described in the Reintroduction Plan, and implementing and/or cooperating with the management of prairie dogs as described in the Reintroduction Plan. C. Except as identified in 10.2 F and as required by law, allow access to the enrolled property with 30 days notice by the Permittee (or designee) for purposes related to this Agreement and associated Reintroduction Plan including, but not limited, to ferret reintroduction and monitoring, disease management, and prairie dog management, as described in the Reintroduction Plan. D. Promptly report to the Permittee any dead, injured, or ill specimens of ferrets observed on the enrolled property. Notifications may be by letter, e-mail, or phone. E. Complete annual questionnaire surveys provided by the Permittee (or designee) for information related to implementation of the Reintroduction Plan. F. Notify the Permittee of any planned activity that the Cooperator reasonably anticipates may result in take of ferrets on the enrolled lands so that efforts to Packet Pg. 250 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 30 | Page recapture any animals can occur in the fall to the extent possible, when trapping success can be maximized. G. Promptly notify the Permittee of any unexpected incidental take on the enrolled lands. This includes take that may result from conservation activities or other activities such as emergency maintenance. Notifications may be by letter, e-mail, or phone. H. Notify the Permittee within 30 days of any transfer of ownership so that the Permittee can attempt to contact the new owner, explain the Agreement and related Certificate of Inclusion applicable to the enrolled lands, and invite the new owner to continue the existing Certificate of Inclusion or enter into a new one that would benefit listed species on the enrolled lands (enrollment of lands shall not constitute an encumbrance if the Cooperator sells or transfers these same lands, since the Cooperator may withdraw from the Agreement at any time). 10.3 Additional Partners Additional partners may be necessary and beneficial to implementing the conservation activities identified in this Agreement. These partners may vary for each Reintroduction Plan developed including, but not limited to, any of the following: State wildlife agencies, Tribes, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Offices, Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U. S. Geological Survey, and various non-governmental organizations. The Permittee and Cooperator will mutually agree as to the participation of additional parties. 11.0 Changed Circumstances Changed circumstances are changes affecting black-footed ferrets within the enrolled lands that can reasonably be anticipated and for which contingency plans can be made. These circumstances include, but are not limited to, drought, fire, disease, land use changes, and new species’ listings under the Act within the Agreement plan area. These changes could impact the habitat and prairie dogs necessary for ferrets. Should alterations to the habitat occur, the following actions may be undertaken as necessary as described in Table 2. Should any of these circumstances occur, the Permittee will work with the Cooperator to address any issues that may have resulted in the loss of ferrets. Table 2. Changed Circumstances Changed Circumstance Potential Effect to Black-Footed Ferrets Proposed Response Drought Drought can limit forage quantity available for prairie dogs and livestock. Competition for this forage could limit prairie dog reproduction. Limited prairie dog reproduction could lead to limited food availability for ferrets. Upon identification of a D2 or higher by the Drought Monitor and declaration by State Authorities, the Permittee will determine if adequate habitat is available on the enrolled lands for ferrets. If not, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. Landowner grazing activities will not be limited by the Permittee. Additional ferrets may be reintroduced to the enrolled lands after drought Packet Pg. 251 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 31 | Page conditions have improved. Fire Direct effects of fire to ferrets or prairie dogs are unlikely as they can seek refuge within their burrows. However, fire can have short term impacts to the availability of forage for prairie dogs and therefore ferrets as discussed above. Should a fire impact a significant portion of the enrolled lands, the Permittee will determine if adequate habitat is available on the enrolled lands for ferrets. If not, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. Additional ferrets may be reintroduced to the enrolled lands after enrolled lands have recovered from the fire. Disease There are a number of native and non-native diseases that can impact ferrets. Impacts occur both directly (death of ferret) or indirectly through the loss of their food source, prairie dogs. In the case where disease other than plague is suspected to have impacted ferrets, the Permittee will coordinate efforts to identify the disease with U.S. Geological Survey’s National Wildlife Health Lab and the appropriate State Agency that oversees wildlife disease outbreaks. Potential response to the disease could include trapping and relocating ferrets if adequate habitat exists elsewhere. If disease causes loss of all ferrets at a reintroduction site, additional ferrets may be reintroduced, if adequate habitat exists that is not impacted by disease. Additional Land Uses Changes in land use include, but are not limited to utility development (e.g., waterlines, power lines), energy development, and associated infrastructure. These changes could result in the incidental take of ferrets through vehicle collision and/or decreased availability of prairie dog habitat and prairie dogs for ferrets. Any additional land uses proposed within the enrolled lands during the term of the Reintroduction Plan will be identified and reviewed by the parties to determine if the proposed use will decrease prairie dogs or ferret habitat. Any significant decreases in prairie dog habitat could be offset by adding prairie dog habitat contiguous with the Conservation Zone to achieve no net loss of adequate prairie dog habitat. If sufficient additional habitat does not exist, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. Changed Circumstance Potential Effect to Black-Footed Ferrets Proposed Response New Species Listings on Enrolled Lands Conservation activities to benefit the black- footed ferret may have potential impacts to the newly listed species. If a non-covered species that occurs within the Agreement area Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 32 | Page 12.0 Agreement Duration The duration of this Agreement must be of sufficient time to realize a net conservation benefit to the black-footed ferret. As identified above, the principal conservation benefit of this Agreement will be the establishment of additional free-ranging ferret populations throughout their historical range. Successful reintroduction of ferrets can vary based on a number of factors that are not fully understood. Sometimes it may take several ferret releases over multiple years for a site to be considered successful such as occurred at Shirley Basin, Wyoming and Aubrey Valley, Arizona. Experience from past reintroduction efforts suggests that 10 years is sufficient time to accommodate several ferret releases, if necessary, as well as document reproduction and recruitment. Additional time beyond 10 years will extend these benefits by providing additional ferret generations exposure to wild conditions. In the event that offspring from these animals are translocated to other sites, it could increase the probability of survival of several separate populations. It will also provide additional protection against catastrophic events elsewhere throughout the range. We view a single release as a net conservation benefit inasmuch as history demonstrates that Parties to previous reintroduction sites have continued with their recovery efforts for several years after the initial reintroduction effort, and the presence of additional reintroduction sites throughout the range of the ferret provides redundancy and additional opportunities for the translocation of wild-born individuals to other suitable sites. This Agreement and the Permit, described in section 10.0 A of this Agreement, become effective for 50 years from the date of signature of the Agreement by all relevant Parties and permit issuance by the Service. Reintroduction Plans developed pursuant to the Agreement will be for a term of at least 10 years and up to 40 years within the 50-year term of the Permit. A Certificate of Inclusion issued by the Permittee will extend incidental take coverage and assurances to the Cooperator for as long as the terms of the Agreement and Cooperator’s Reintroduction Plan are upheld. Upon full implementation of the Reintroduction Plan, the Reintroduction Plan and Certificate of Inclusion may be extended or renewed with agreement by both Parties while maintaining the original agreed upon baseline. Non-participating landowners receive permanent incidental take coverage via the Biological Opinion developed in conjunction with issuance of the Permit. Cooperators become non-participating landowners if they withdraw from the Agreement. 13.0 Assurances to a Cooperator Through each Certificate of Inclusion, the Service provides Cooperators with assurances that no additional conservation measures or restrictions on land, water, or resource use, beyond those agreed to in the Agreement and Reintroduction Plan, will be required of the Cooperator for the black-footed ferret. These assurances apply only where the Agreement and associated Certificate of Inclusion and Reintroduction Plan are being properly implemented. If additional conservation and mitigation measures are deemed necessary, the Service may request additional measures of the Cooperator, as applicable, but only if such measures are limited to modifications within the Conservation and Management Zones, if Packet Pg. 253 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 33 | Page any, for the ferret and maintain the original terms of the Agreement. However, where additional conservation measures might need to be implemented by Cooperators, the parties to this Agreement also recognize, in the spirit of the Agreement, that any such measures would be developed jointly and cooperatively by the Cooperator and the Service. Additional conservation measures will not involve the commitment of additional land, water, or financial compensation or additional restrictions on the use of land, water, or other natural resources otherwise available for development or use under the original terms of the Agreement without the consent of Cooperators, as applicable. Each Certificate of Inclusion will convey authorization of incidental take of black-footed ferrets consistent with maintaining the baseline condition of zero ferrets as described in Section 6.0 and identified in a Reintroduction Plan with the following conditions: A. When a Cooperator is implementing the conservation activities identified in Section 7.0 hereof and further defined in a Reintroduction Plan. B. When a Cooperator is carrying out any legal activity, including but not limited to routine ranching and grazing, on or adjacent to the enrolled lands in concert with conservation activities identified in section 7.0 hereof and further defined in a Reintroduction Plan. C. When a Cooperator is making any lawful use of Cooperator-owned non-enrolled lands that are adjacent to or in proximity of enrolled lands. D. When a Cooperator is returning the lands to baseline at any time through otherwise lawful means. 14.0 Non-participating Neighboring Landowners The Service recognizes that some landowners may be reluctant to participate in the Agreement due to concerns regarding non-participating neighbors’ fear of liability under the Act should black-footed ferrets disperse onto their lands. Therefore, Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717) provides for incidental take assurances to neighbors, whether or not they choose to participate in the Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, non-participating neighboring landowners are defined as any landowner, or any landowner interest (severed mineral estates associated with a Cooperator interest), within the vicinity of enrolled lands upon whose land ferrets may disperse and/or occupy as a result of ferret reintroductions. The Service will not enter into an Agreement with a willing landowner as a Cooperator without first considering the concerns of non-participating neighboring landowners. Voluntary enrollment of Cooperators in the Agreement and implementation of conservation activities will result in the establishment of additional black-footed ferret populations on non-federal lands. Reintroduction of ferrets and subsequent successful breeding of reintroduced ferrets on the enrolled lands may result in an increase of these populations that would exceed the carrying capacity of the enrolled lands. As a result, ferrets could disperse onto non-participating neighboring properties in search of appropriate habitat. Because landowners of non-participating properties likely would not be implementing the conservation activities, particularly disease management, sufficient suitable habitat to Packet Pg. 254 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 34 | Page support ferrets may not be available; in which case, ferrets are unlikely to persist and establish additional populations on such lands. Therefore, loss of such individuals through incidental take would not result in adverse effects to any existing or reintroduced populations of the ferret. Flexible regulatory assurances for non-participating neighboring landowners could contribute to increased enrollment by other landowners and ultimately increased conservation for the black-footed ferret by helping to maintain good relations with neighbors and by demonstrating that ferret reintroductions will not limit land use, except as agreed to by Cooperators. The Biological Opinion, pursuant to the intra-Service section 7 consultation under the Act on the issuance of the 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival permit under this Agreement, will provide incidental take coverage to non-participating landowners should ferrets disperse to their lands. Non-participating neighboring landowners will not be subject to any land use restrictions. Except as authorized through a separate Enhancement of Survival permit or section 7 Biological Opinion for other activities with a Federal nexus, deliberate take of ferrets not related to an otherwise lawful activity would be prohibited. 15.0 Modifications 15.1 Modifications of the Agreement or Reintroduction Plans Any party to this Agreement or associated Reintroduction Plans may propose modifications by providing written notice to the other parties explaining the proposed modification and the reasons for the modification. Approval of a modification will require the written consent of the Permittee and Cooperator and must be consistent with the assurances described in Section 13.0 of the Agreement. Any proposed modification to the Agreement or associated Reintroduction Plan will be considered effective as of the date that all affected Parties have agreed in writing to the modification. 15.2 Amendment of the Permit or Certificate of Inclusion The 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit or any Certificate of Inclusion may be amended in accordance with all applicable legal requirements in force at the time of the amendment, including, but not limited to, the Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and Service permit regulations (50 CFR, Parts 13 and 17). A request for an amendment of the Permit or Certificate of Inclusion would require, at a minimum: a written explanation of why the amendment is needed; and an explanation of what, if any, effects the amendment would have on the black-footed ferret. An amendment to the Permit would require the Service to publish a notice in the Federal Register of a 30-day public comment period for the proposed amendment. 15.3 Early Termination of the Agreement As provided for in Part 12 of the Service’s Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717), the Permittee may terminate the Agreement or an associated Reintroduction Plan, prior to its expiration date. In such circumstances, the Cooperator may return the enrolled lands to baseline Packet Pg. 255 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 35 | Page conditions even if the conservation activities identified in the Reintroduction Plan for the enrolled lands have not been fully implemented. Similarly, the Cooperator may terminate the Reintroduction Plan early. A Cooperator who withdraws from the Agreement would subsequently be regarded as a non-participating landowner interest who receives incidental take via the associated Biological Opinion, provided the Cooperator notifies the Permittee and allows the Service access to recapture ferrets during the following fall, prior to carrying out any otherwise lawful activity that may result in take of ferrets on enrolled lands, including a return to baseline. If a Cooperator fails to notify the Permittee regarding possible take or fails to provide access, coverage for incidental take will not be granted. 16.0 Permit Suspension or Revocation The Service may suspend the privileges of exercising some or all of the permit authority at any time if the Permittee is not in compliance with the conditions of the permit, or with any applicable laws or regulations governing the conduct of the permitted activity. Such suspension shall remain in effect until the issuing officer determines that the Permittee has corrected the deficiencies. The Service may not revoke the permit except as follows: x The Service may revoke the permit for any reason set forth in 50 CFR 13.28(a)(1) through (4). This regulation authorizes revocation if: (1) the Permittee willfully violates any Federal or State statute or regulation, or any Indian tribal law or regulation, or any law or regulation of any foreign country, which involves a violation of the conditions of the permit or of the laws or regulations governing the permitted activity; or (2) the Permittee fails within 60 days to correct deficiencies that were the cause of a permit suspension; or (3) the Permittee becomes disqualified; or (4) a change occurs in the statute or regulation authorizing the permit that prohibits the continuation of a permit issued by the Service. x The Service may also revoke the permit if continuation of the permitted activity would either: (1) appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery in the wild of any listed species; or (2) directly or indirectly alter designated critical habitat of any listed species such that it appreciably diminishes the value of that critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of that listed species. Critical habitat has not been designated for the black-footed ferret. Packet Pg. 256 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 36 | Page Before revoking a permit for either of the last two reasons, the Service, in coordination with the Permittee, will pursue all appropriate options to avoid permit revocation. These options may include, but are not limited to: extending or modifying the existing Permit, capturing and relocating the species, or in unusual cases compensating the landowner to forgo the activity, purchasing an easement or fee simple interest in the property, or arranging for a third party acquisition of an interest in the property. 17.0 Other Measures A. Remedies. No party shall be liable in monetary damages for any breach of this Agreement, any performance or failure to perform an obligation under this Agreement, or any other cause of action arising from this Agreement. B. Dispute Resolution. The Parties agree to work together in good faith to resolve any disputes using dispute resolution procedures agreed upon by all Parties. C. Succession and Transfer. As provided in 50 CFR 13.25, if a Cooperator transfers his or her interest in the enrolled lands to another non-federal entity, the new owner has the option to accept the original Cooperator’s responsibilities and assurances. If the new owner chooses to accept the original Cooperator’s responsibilities and assurances, the Service will regard the new owner or manager as having the same rights and responsibilities with respect to the enrolled lands as the original Cooperator for the remainder of the term of the Agreement. If the new owner chooses not to participate in the Agreement and the activities described in the property’s Reintroduction Plan, he or she will retain authorization for incidental take due to otherwise lawful activities via the Biological Opinion as a non-participating landowner, provided the Service is given an opportunity to trap ferrets currently on the property. D. Availability of Funds. Implementation of this Agreement is subject to the requirement of the Anti-Deficiency Act and the availability of appropriated funds. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed by any Party to require the obligation, appropriation, or expenditure of any funds from the U.S. Treasury. The Parties acknowledge that the Service will not be required under the Agreement to expend any Federal agency’s appropriated funds unless and until an authorized official of that agency affirmatively acts to commit to such expenditures as evidenced in writing. E. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement does not create any new right or interest in any member of the public as third-party beneficiary, nor shall it authorize anyone not a party to this Agreement to maintain a suit for personal injuries or damages pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The duties, obligations, and responsibilities of the Parties to this Agreement with respect to any third-Party shall remain as imposed under existing law. Packet Pg. 257 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 37 | Page F. Notices and Reports Any notices and reports, including monitoring and annual reports required by this Agreement shall be delivered to the persons listed below, as appropriate: Black-footed Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 190 Wellington, CO 80549 (970) 897-2730 Regional Director, Region 6 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 134 Union Blvd Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Regional Director, Region 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service PO Box 1306 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103-1306 Packet Pg. 258 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 38 | Page 18.0 References Abbott, R.C., and Rocke, T.E. 2012. Plague: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1372. 79 pp. Anderson, E. S.C. Forrest, T.W. Clark, and L. Richardson. 1986. Paleobiology, biogeography, and systematics of the black-footed ferret, Mustela nigripes (Audubon and Bachman), 1851. In Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs No. 8 The Black-footed Ferret. S.L. Wood, editor. Brigham Young University. Pp. 11–62. Barnes, A.M. 1993. A review of plague and its relevance to prairie dog populations and black- footed ferret. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Management of Prairie Dog Complexes for the Reintroduction of Black-footed Ferret. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 13. Pp. 28–37. Biggins, D.E. 2006. The symposium in context. In Recovery of the Black-footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 3–5. Biggins, D.E., B.J. Miller, T.W. Clark, and R.P. Reading. 1997. Management of an endangered species: the black-footed ferret. In Principles of Conservation Biology. G.K. Meffe and C.R. Carrol, editors. Pp. 420–436. Biggins, D. E., J.L. Godbey, M. R. Matchett, and T. M. Livieri. 2006. Habitat preferences and intraspecific competition in black-footed ferrets. In Recovery of the black-footed ferret – progress and continuing challenges. J.E. Rolle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5293. Pp. 129–142. Biggins, D.E., B.J. Miller, L.R. Hanebury, B. Oakleaf, A.H. Farmer, R. Crete, and A. Dood. 1993. A technique for evaluating black-footed ferret habitat. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Management of Prairie Dog Complexes for the Reintroduction of the Black- footed Ferret. J.L. Oldemeyer, D.E. Biggins, and B.J. Miller, editors. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report No. 13. Pp. 73–38. CBSG. 1992. Black-footed ferret recovery plan review. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, Minnesota. 44 pp. CBSG. 2004. Black-footed ferret population management planning workshop. Final Report. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, Minnesota. 130 pp. Cully, J.F. 1993. Plague, prairie dogs, and black-footed ferrets. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Management of Prairie Dog Complexes for the Reintroduction of Black-footed Ferret. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 13. Pp. 38–49. Packet Pg. 259 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 39 | Page Derner, J.D., J.K. Detling, and M. F. Antolin. 2006. Are livestock weight gains affected by prairie dogs? Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 4:459–464. Detling, J.K. 2006. Do prairie dogs compete with livestock? In Conservation of black-tailed prairie dogs. J.L. Hoogland, editor. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA. Pp. 65–88. Ernst, A.E. 2008. Retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. E-mail regarding ferret habitat calculations. Personal Communication with Pete Gober. August 4, 2008. Fagerstone, K.A. and D.E. Biggins. 1986. Comparison of capture-recapture and visual count indices of prairie dog densities in black-footed ferret habitat. In Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs No. 8 The Black-footed Ferret. S.L. Wood, editor. Brigham Young University. Pp. 94–98. Forrest, S.C., T.W. Clark, L. Richardson, and T.M. Campbell III. 1985. Black-footed ferret habitat: some management and reintroduction considerations. Wyoming BLM Wildlife Technical Bulletin No. 2. 49 pp. Forrest, S.C. and J. Luchsinger. 2005. Past and current chemical control of prairie dogs. In Conservation of the Black-tailed Prairie Dog. J.L. Hoogland, editor. Island Press, New York. Pp. 115–128. Gage, K.L. and M.Y. Kosoy. 2006. Recent trends in plague ecology. In Recovery of the Black- footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 213–231. Garelle, B., P. Marinari, and C. Lynch. 2006. Black-footed ferret species survival plan. American Zoo and Aquarium Association Population Management Center. 29 pp. Gober, P. 2012a. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Personal communication with Elise Boeke regarding use of toxicants at ferret reintroduction sites. October 2, 2012. Gober, P. 2012b. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Personal communication with Elise Boeke regarding incidental take of ferrets. October 10, 2012. Godbey, J.L., D.E. Biggins, and D. Garrelle. 2006. Exposure of captive black-footed ferrets to plague and implications for species recovery. In Recovery of the Black-footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 233–237. Griebel, R. G. 2010. Wall Ranger District boundary and interior management zone 2009 Monitoring Report. Unpublished Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Nebraska National Forest, Wall Ranger District, Wall, South Dakota. 6 pp. Packet Pg. 260 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 40 | Page Hanebury, L.R. and D.E. Biggins. 2006. A history of searches for black-footed ferrets. In Recovery of the Black-footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 47–65. Henderson, F. F., P.F. Springer, and R. Adrian. 1969 (revised 1974). The black-footed ferret in South Dakota. South Dakota Dept. of Game, Fish & Parks Technical Bulletin No. 4. 37 pp. Hillman, C.N. and R.L. Linder. 1973. The black-footed ferret. In Proceedings of the Black- footed Ferret and Prairie Dog Workshop. September 4-6, 1973. R.L. Linder and C.N. Hillman, editors. South Dakota State University; Brookings, South Dakota. Pp. 10–20. Hutchins, M., R.J. Wiese, and J. Bowdoin. 1996. Black-footed Ferret Recovery Program Analysis and Action Plan. American Zoo and Aquarium Association. 137 pp. Luce, R.J. 2003. A multi-state conservation plan for the black-tailed prairie dog, Cynomys ludovicianus, in the United States. 79 pp. Lockhart, J.M., E.T. Thorne, and D.R. Gober. 2006. A historical perspective on recovery of the black-footed ferret and the biological and political challenges affecting its future. In Recovery of the Black-footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 6–19. Matchett, M.R., D.E. Biggins, V. Carlson, B. Powell, and T. Rocke. 2010. Enzootic plague reduces black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) survival in Montana. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 10: (1):27–35. Miller, B.J., R.P. Reading, D.E. Biggins, J.K. Detling, S.C. Forrest, J.L. Hoogland, J.Javersak, S.D. Miller, J.Proctor, J. Truett, and D.W. Uresk. 2007. Prairie dogs: an ecological review and current biopolitics. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(8):2801–2810. Pauli, J.N. 2005. Ecological studies of the black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus): implications for biology and conservation. Master thesis. University of Wyoming. 77 pp. Ray, C. 2006. Annotated recovery plan outline for the black-footed ferret. 238 pp. Reeve, A. F. and T.C. Vosburgh. 2006. Shooting prairie dogs. In Recovery of the Black-footed Ferret: Progress and Continuing Challenges. J.E. Roelle, B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. U.S. Geological Survey. Pp. 119–128. Roelle, J.E.. B.J. Miller, J.L. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins, editors. 2006. Recovery of the black- footed ferret––progress and continuing challenges. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5293. 288 pp. Packet Pg. 261 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 41 | Page Seery, D.B., Biggins, D.E., Montenieri, J.A., and Enscore, R.E. 2003. Treatment of black-tailed prairie dog burrows with deltamethrin to control fleas (Insecta: Siphonaptera) and plague. Journal of Medical Entomology. 40:718–722. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. Black-footed Ferret Recovery Plan. 154 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) 5-year status review: summary and evaluation. 38 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. 12-month finding on a petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog. FR 2009-28852. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. 12-month finding on a petition to list the white-tailed prairie dog. FR 2010-12599. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Draft recovery plan for the black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. 130 pp. Wilson, D. and S. Ruff. 1999. The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Pp. 168–175. Packet Pg. 262 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Packet Pg. 263 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 43 | Page Certificate of Inclusion Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement # [ ] This certifies that the lands described as follows [description of enrolled lands covered by the Safe Harbor permit] owned by [name of Cooperator] is included within the scope of Permit Number [TE000000], held by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator (Permittee), issued on [date] and expiring on [date] under the authority of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(A). The Permit authorizes incidental take of black-footed ferrets from all lawful activities by participating landowners (Cooperators) as part of the Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Agreement) to reintroduce and establish new populations of the black- footed ferret. Pursuant to the Permit, this Certificate of Inclusion authorizes incidental take of the black-footed ferret that may result from any otherwise lawful activity on the above described lands, subject to the terms and conditions of the Permit, the Reintroduction Plan, and the Agreement. This Certificate of Inclusion becomes binding upon the Cooperator upon the date of the last signature below and continues for as long as the terms of this Agreement and the Reintroduction Plan are met. The attached Reintroduction Plan is incorporated as part of this Certificate of Inclusion for the enrolled lands. It is understood that any ownership interest in these lands that is not addressed via an appropriate signature below (e.g., mineral interest) is not constrained by this agreement and will not be limited in any way from the exercise of such interests, except when related to the deliberate take of a listed species and any already extant legal obligations. COOPERATOR DATE BLACK-FOOTED FERRET RECOVERY COORDINATOR DATE Packet Pg. 264 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 44 | Page APPENDIX A Historical Range of Prairie Dogs and Black-footed Ferrets Packet Pg. 265 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 45 | Page APPENDIX B Black-footed Ferret Site-Specific Reintroduction Plan TEMPLATE Cooperators Name: Certificate of Inclusion (COI)#: 1.0 Legal description and map of enrolled lands: Include a written legal description and a map showing the Conservation Zone and the Management Zone as discussed in section 7.0 of the Safe Harbor Agreement. 2.0 Baseline for the Covered Species: Include the number of black-footed ferrets on the lands at time of enrollment (for the purposes of regulatory assurances, baseline is considered to be zero). 3.0 Current land use: Include a description of current grazing practices on the land such as what types of livestock, approximate stocking rates, and timing of grazing. 4.0 Conservation Activities: A. Black-footed Ferret Reintroduction and Management: Upon signature by all Parties, the enrolled lands will be eligible to receive black-footed ferrets. Reintroduction and management activities will be carried out by the Permittee (Black-footed Ferret Recovery Coordinator) or designee. Approximately 20 ferrets may be released annually within the Conservation Zone identified on the enrolled lands in the fall. This process will be undertaken over the course of 3 days. [Include additional specific information as necessary] You will be notified 30 days prior to release activities.* B. Disease Management: Upon signature by all Parties, the enrolled lands will be eligible for disease management activities. These activities will be carried out by the Permittee or designee. Disease management activities may include applying approximately 5 grams of DeltaDust™ (MSDS attached) into prairie dog burrows within the Conservation Zone and the Management Zone. Dust is typically applied using ATVs or by foot depending on topography. Applications can take several days to several weeks depending on acreage treated and size of work crews. Alternatively, oral vaccine baits could be distributed from ATVs or possibly aerially onto a prairie dog colony no more than once per year after emergence of the young. [Include additional specific information as necessary] The Cooperator will be notified 30 day prior to any disease management activities.* C. Prairie Dog Management: Upon signature by all Parties, the enrolled lands may be eligible to receive assistance in prairie dog management. This will be facilitated by the Permittee or designee and carried out by Wildlife Services or other designated party. Prairie dog management may include lethal control of prairie dogs only outside of the Conservation Zone where identified on the Reintroduction Plan map to keep specific lands free of prairie dogs. [Include additional specific information as necessary] The Cooperator will be notified 30 days prior to any prairie dog management activities.* Insert Cooperator Name Insert COI # Packet Pg. 266 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 46 | Page *All conservation activities will be coordinated with the Cooperator. Every effort will be made to minimize conflicts with Cooperator’s use of the lands. Only in emergency situations will the Permittee request access in less than 30 days. 5.0 Monitoring: Each Cooperator will be expected to respond to a questionnaire (Appendix E of the Agreement) provided to them by the Permittee on an annual basis regarding status of ferrets on the enrolled land and ongoing routine grazing and ranching activities. Spotlight surveys for black-footed ferrets will be coordinated by the Permittee (or designee) to determine the success of the ferret reintroduction. [Include a description of anticipated surveys to be conducted] 6.0 Changed Circumstances: Changed Circumstance Potential Effect to Black-Footed Ferrets Proposed Response Drought Drought can limit forage quantity available for prairie dogs and livestock. Competition for this forage could limit prairie dog reproduction. Limited prairie dog reproduction could lead to limited food availability for ferrets. Upon identification of a D2 or higher by the Drought Monitor and declaration by State Authorities, the Permittee will determine if adequate habitat is available on the enrolled lands for ferrets. If not, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. Landowner grazing activities will not be limited by the Permittee. Additional ferrets may be reintroduced to the enrolled lands after drought conditions have improved. Fire Direct effects of fire to ferrets or prairie dogs are unlikely as they can seek refuge within their burrows. However, fire can have short term impacts to the availability of forage for prairie dogs and therefore ferrets as discussed above. Should a fire impact greater than 50% of the enrolled lands, the Permittee will determine if adequate habitat is available on the enrolled lands for ferrets. If not, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. Additional ferrets may be reintroduced to the enrolled lands after enrolled lands have recovered from the fire. Disease There are a number of native and non-native diseases that can impact ferrets. Impacts occur both directly (death of ferret) or indirectly through the loss of their food source, prairie dogs. In the case where disease other than plague is suspected to have impacted ferrets, the Permittee will coordinate efforts to identify the disease with U.S. Geological Survey’s National Wildlife Health Lab and the appropriate State Agency that oversee wildlife disease outbreaks. Potential response to the disease could include trapping and relocating ferrets if adequate habitat exists elsewhere. If disease causes loss of all ferrets at a reintroduction site, additional ferrets may be reintroduced if adequate habitat exists that is not impacted by disease. Additional Land Uses Changes in land use include, but are not Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 47 | Page additional species through the Section 7 process. If the landowner wishes to conserve the species and receive assurances for that species, the Service and landowner would mutually amend the Reintroduction Plan to document the baseline conditions for the species; potentially modify or add conservation measures; and the Service would amend the Agreement, Biological Opinion, and any relevant National Environmental Policy Act documents while providing for required public comment. Any Cooperator may withdraw for the Agreement at any time. Change in Ownership Interest Withdrawal of Cooperator from Agreement and termination of Reintroduction Plan may result in loss of site. Coverage for incidental take will be maintained via the Biological Opinion, provided the former Cooperator notifies the Permittee and allows access to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere. 7.0 Reintroduction Plan Duration: The duration of this plan will be [number] years from the date of signature. The Certificate of Inclusion will be in effect for as long as the terms of this Agreement and the Reintroduction Plan are met. 8.0 Assurances to the Cooperator: Provided that the Cooperator complies with the provisions outlined in the Reintroduction Plan developed for the enrolled lands, the Service assures that it will not impose conservation measures and restrictions for the ferret on the use of the Cooperator’s land, water, or resources additional to those already agreed upon in the Safe Harbor Agreement and the Reintroduction Plan throughout the term of the Certificate of Inclusion. Furthermore, the Certificate of Inclusion will provide the Cooperator with incidental take coverage of the ferret consistent with maintaining the baseline conditions as described in Section 2.0 of this Reintroduction Plan with the following conditions: A. When a Cooperator is implementing the conservation activities identified in Section 4.0 of this Reintroduction Plan. B. When a Cooperator is carrying out any legal activity, including routine ranching and grazing, on or adjacent to the enrolled lands in concert with conservation activities identified in section 4.0 of this Reintroduction Plan. C. When a Cooperator is making any lawful use of Cooperator-owned non-enrolled lands that are adjacent to or in proximity of enrolled lands. D. When a Cooperator is returning the enrolled lands to baseline at any time through otherwise lawful means. 9.0 Modifications: a. Reintroduction Plan: Any party to this Reintroduction Plan may propose modifications by providing written notice to the other parties explaining the proposed modification and the reasons for the modification. Approval of a modification will require the written consent of the Permittee and Cooperator and must be consistent with the assurances described in Section 8.0 of the Packet Pg. 268 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 48 | Page Reintroduction Plan. Any proposed modification to the Reintroduction Plan will be considered effective as of the date that all affected parties have agreed in writing to the modification. b. Certificate of Inclusion: The Certificate of Inclusion may be amended by the Cooperator and/or the Permittee in accordance with all applicable legal requirements in force at the time of the amendment, including, but not limited to, the Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and Service permit regulations (50 CFR, Parts 13 and 17). A request for an amendment of the Permit or Certificate of Inclusion would require, at a minimum: a written explanation of why the amendment is needed; and an explanation of what, if any, effects the amendment would have on the black-footed ferret. An amendment to the Permit would require the Service to publish a notice in the Federal Register of a 30-day public comment period for the proposed amendment. c. Early Termination of the Reintroduction Plan: As provided for in Part 12 of the Service’s Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717), the Permittee may terminate the Reintroduction Plan prior to the expiration date. In such circumstances, the Cooperator may return the enrolled lands to baseline conditions even if the conservation activities identified in the Reintroduction Plan for the enrolled lands have not been fully implemented. Similarly, the Cooperator may terminate the Reintroduction Plan early. A Cooperator who withdraws from the Agreement would subsequently be regarded as a non-participating landowner interest who receives incidental take via the associated Biological Opinion, provided the Cooperator notifies the Permittee and allows the Service access to recapture ferrets during the following fall, prior to carrying out any otherwise lawful activity that may result in take of ferrets on enrolled lands, including a return to baseline. If a Cooperator fails to notify the Permittee regarding possible take or fails to provide access, coverage for incidental take will not be granted. 10.0 Other Measures: A. Remedies. No party shall be liable in monetary damages for any breach of this Reintroduction Plan (Plan), any performance or failure to perform an obligation under this Reintroduction Plan or any other cause of action arising from this Plan. B. Dispute Resolution. The Parties agree to work together in good faith to resolve any disputes using dispute resolution procedures agreed upon by all Parties. C. Succession and Transfer. As provided in 50 CFR 13.25, if a Cooperator transfers his or her interest in the enrolled lands to another non-federal entity, the new owner has the option to accept the original Cooperators responsibilities and assurances. If the new owner chooses to accept the original Cooperator’s responsibilities and assurances, the Service will regard the new owner or manager as having the same rights and responsibilities with respect to the enrolled lands as the original Packet Pg. 269 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 49 | Page Cooperator for the remainder of the term of the agreement. If the new owner chooses not to participate in the Agreement and the activities described in the Reintroduction Plan, he or she will retain authorization for incidental take due to otherwise lawful activities via the Biological Opinion, provided the Service is given an opportunity to trap ferrets currently on the property. D. Availability of Funds. Implementation of this Plan is subject to the requirement of the Anti-Deficiency Act and the availability of appropriated funds. Nothing in this Plan will be construed by the Parties to require the obligation, appropriation, or expenditure of any funds from the U.S. Treasury. The Parties acknowledge that the Service will not be required under the Plan to expend any federal agency’s appropriated funds unless and until an authorized official of that agency affirmatively acts to commit to such expenditures as evidenced in writing. E. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Plan does not create any new right or interest in any member of the public as third-party beneficiary, nor shall it authorize anyone not a party to this Plan to maintain a suit for personal injuries or damages pursuant to the provisions of this Plan. The duties, obligations, and responsibilities of the parties to this Plan with respect to any third-party shall remain as imposed under existing law. F. Notices and Reports Any notices and reports, including monitoring and annual reports required by this Agreement shall be delivered to the persons listed below, as appropriate: Black-footed Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 190 Wellington, CO 80549 (970) 897-2730 11.0 Signatures: COOPERATOR DATE BLACK-FOOTED FERRET RECOVERY COORDINATOR DATE Packet Pg. 270 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 50 | Page APPENDIX C Black-footed Ferret Recovery Guidelines by State (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013) State # Breeding adults established to date # Adults/# acres to downlist # Adults/# acres to delist Arizona 33-38 74 adults/17,000 ac 148 adults/34,000 ac Colorado 8 149 adults/29,000 ac 288 adults/58,000 ac Kansas 7-19 123 adults/18,500 ac 246 adults/37,000 ac Montana 7-10 147 adults/22,000 ac 294 adults/44,000 ac Nebraska 0 134 adults/20,000 ac 268 adults/44,000 ac New Mexico 3 220 adults/39,000 ac 440 adults/78,000 ac North Dakota 0 38 adults/6,000 ac 76 adults/12,000 ac Oklahoma 0 70 adults/10,500 ac 140 adults/21,000 ac South Dakota 110-272 102 adults/15,000 ac 204 adults/30,000 ac Texas 0 254 adults/38,000 ac 508 adults/76,000 ac Utah 1-13 25 adults/6,000 ac 50 adults/12,000 ac Wyoming 98-102 171 adults/35,000 ac 341 adults/70,000 ac TOTAL 274-488 1,507 adults/256,000 ac 3,004 adults/512,000 ac Packet Pg. 271 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 51 | Page APPENDIX D Annual Report to Cooperator by Permittee Certificate of Inclusion #: Name: State: County: Date (covering past year): Conservation Activities Date: # Released Black-footed Ferret Reintroductions * Date: # Acres Treated Method Disease Management Date: # Acres Treated Method Prairie Dog Management *Note number of animals released and pertinent conditions at release Packet Pg. 272 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 52 | Page APPENDIX E Annual Report to Permittee by Cooperator Questionnaire Certificate of Inclusion #: Name: State: County: Date (covering past year): Ferrets 1. Have you seen ferrets or any sign of live ferrets? If so, give approximate location. 2. Have you seen any dead ferrets? If so, how many? Please provide approximate location. 3. Please describe what circumstances resulted in the dead ferret, if known. Prairie Dogs 4. What changes have you noticed in prairie dog densities? Die-offs? If any, describe the extent of the die-off. Grazing 5. Are you actively grazing the enrolled lands? 6. Please describe any changes in your grazing practices in the past 12 months. General 7. Has the reintroduction of ferrets caused any hardship to your operation? If so, please describe. 8. Other comments or suggestions Packet Pg. 273 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 53 | Page APPENDIX F Black-footed Ferret Recovery Implementation Team – Executive Committee as of 2012. Position Agency Chair Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Vice Chair U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Past Chair Wyoming Game and Fish Department Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Member – State Arizona Game and Fish Department Member – State Colorado Parks and Wildlife Department Member – State Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism Member – State Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Member – State Nebraska Game and Parks Commission Member – State New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Member – State North Dakota Game and Fish Department Member – State Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation Member – State South Dakota Department of Game Fish & Parks Member – State Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Member – Federal U.S. APHIS - WS Member – Federal U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Member – Federal U.S. Bureau of Land Management Member – Federal U.S. Forest Service Member – Federal U.S. Geological Survey Member – Federal National Park Service Member – Federal Natural Resources Conservation Service Member – Tribe Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Member – Tribe Gros Ventre & Assiniboine Tribe Member – Tribe Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Member – Tribe Northern Cheyenne Tribe Member – Tribe Rosebud Sioux Tribe Member – Tribe Navajo Nation Member – International Grasslands National Park of Canada Member – International Universidad Autonoma Matropolitana Mexico Member – NGO Audubon of Kansas Member – NGO American Zoo & Aquarium Association Packet Pg. 274 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Black-footed Ferret Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement 54 | Page Position Agency Member – NGO Defenders of Wildlife Member – NGO National Wildlife Federation Member – NGO Prairie Wildlife Research Member – NGO The Nature Conservancy Member – NGO Turner Endangered Species Fund Member – NGO World Wildlife Fund Member – NGO National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Packet Pg. 275 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Sustainability Specialist Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer Mary Atchison, Director of Social Sustainability John Voss, Controller/Assistant Financial Officer SUBJECT Resolution 2014-071 Authorizing the Assignment of the City's Private Activity Bond Allocation for 2014 to the Fort Collins Housing Authority to Finance the Rehabilitation of Affordable Housing Units at the Villages at Cunningham Corner. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to assign the City's 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation (PAB) in the amount of $7,408,350 to the Fort Collins Housing Authority (FCHA) for the purpose of affordable housing rehabilitation. Specifically, the bond proceeds will be used to finance the rehabilitation of 284 affordable housing units located at the Villages on Cunningham Corner. Annually, the state allocates a portion of its ceiling for PAB to the City. If the City does not use or assign this allocation, it is returned to the state on September 15. The City will not incur debt and this will not affect the City's credit rating. There have not been any other requests to use the 2014 PAB allocation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Private Activity Bonds (PAB) are tax-exempt bonds that can be issued by eligible authorities. The proceeds of the sale of the bonds may be used for specific purposes as determined by the Internal Revenue Service. Permitted purposes include, but are not limited to, affordable housing development and rehabilitation. PAB financing has also been used by the City for economic and industrial development purposes. The State of Colorado PAB allocation program is established by the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Section 24-32-1701, et seq., C.R.S. (the Allocation Act). In 2014, the total amount available statewide is $526,836,700. Fifty percent of the state ceiling is allocated directly to statewide authorities and the other half is allocated directly to local governments based on population size. The City has been notified that, pursuant to Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation Act, it has an allocation of a portion of the state ceiling (as defined in the Allocation Act) for 2014 in the amount of $7,408,350 (Attachment 1). If a local government does not issue bonds or assign the bond cap to an entity for a local project by September 15th annually, the cap automatically reverts back to the state’s pool. Historically, Fort Collins has assigned its annual allocation on a first come, first serve basis. From 2009 through 2012, the Fort Collins allocation was not used and reverted back to the state's pool. The 2013 PAB Allocation, in the amount of $6,962,218 was assigned to the Fort Collins Housing Authority for the rehabilitation of 95 affordable housing rental units in the Village on Plum project, located at the southwest corner of Plum Packet Pg. 276 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 2 Street and Taft Hill Road. The FCHA is the issuer of the bonds for this rehabilitation project. While this was the first FCHA request for the City's PAB allocation, market conditions make the Colorado Housing Finance Authority’s (CHFA) 4% Low Income Tax Credit Program a viable way to finance affordable housing development. The City anticipates more requests to use the annual PAB allocation for this purpose in the future. This year's request from FCHA was anticipated. CHFA requires these types of financing deals to include private activity bond financing. The City has received a formal request from the FCHA for the entire 2014 PAB allocation (Attachment 2). The proposed use of the bond proceeds is the financing of the rehabilitation of 284 affordable units located in the Villages on Cunningham Corner (Attachment 3). The property, owned by the non-profit development arm of FCHA, serves households with incomes of 30%-80% of the Area Median Income. FCHA estimates utilizing approximately $25,000,000 in bond cap for this project. It is likely that FCHA will need to use several years’ allocations to get to that sum. It can aggregate PAB allocations from the City, county or other local jurisdictions to help achieve this goal in a timely fashion. (Last year FCHA requested and received allocations from Larimer and Weld Counties in addition to the Fort Collins 2013 PAB allocation). If FCHA has not used the entire 2014 Allocation by December 2014, it can apply for a three-year carryover. If it does not do this, the unused bond cap will revert to the state’s pool. FCHA’s intended use of affordable housing rehabilitation supports the City’s goal of preserving existing affordable rental housing units. This is a permissible and beneficial use of the City’s 2014 allocation. For FCHA to use this financing tool, the City Council must adopt a resolution assigning the 2014 Allocation or a part thereof to the FCHA so it can submit this with its application to the state no later than September 15, 2014. Additionally, the use of the City’s allocation is evidence of local support for this project, which helps FCHA leverage other funding sources and is important to CHFA’s 4% Low Income Tax Credit Program. The investment of tax credit equity in the project will extend the affordability period for the Village on Cunningham Corners by a minimum of 30 years. In addition to last year's assignment of the PAB allocation to FCHA, the City has used the PAB allocation to finance multifamily low and moderate income rental housing at Fox Meadow Apartments (2000) and Caribou Apartments (2002), and multifamily senior housing at Oakbrook Manor (2005). In these examples, the City’s allocation was assigned to CHFA. Prior to that, the City was the issuer of multifamily housing revenue bonds for Bull Run (1997) and Courtney Park Apartments (1995). The City has not received any other requests for the 2014 PAB allocation. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The Private Activity Bonds that will be issued by the FCHA cannot and will not be obligations of the City of Fort Collins. The debt service on the bonds will be repaid from revenue generated by the housing projects, and does not constitute a debt of the City. This action will not affect the City’s credit rating. The rehabilitation of 284 units will require goods and labor which will benefit the local economy. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Affordable housing programs help provide for a healthy environment. By offering affordable housing options for lower income people, more of Fort Collins’ work force can live in the community instead of being forced to live outside the community and commute into the city for work. This helps reduce traffic congestion and, thus, improves air quality. The rehabilitation will include specific improvements required by CHFA that will result in energy savings. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its June 5, 2014 meeting, the Affordable Housing Board reviewed the request of the FCHA and recommended that the City assigns its entire 2014 Allocation to the FCHA (Attachment 4). Packet Pg. 277 Agenda Item 16 Item # 16 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. 2014 DOLA Allocation Letter (PDF) 2. FCHA Request Letter, April 2014 (PDF) 3. Affordable Housing Board Minutes, June 5, 2014 (PDF) 4. The Villages on Cunningham Corner Location Map (PDF) Packet Pg. 278 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 279 Attachment16.1: 2014 DOLA Allocation Letter (2100 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation) ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 280 Attachment16.2: FCHA Request Letter, April 2014 (2100 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation) Packet Pg. 281 Attachment16.2: FCHA Request Letter, April 2014 (2100 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation) ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 283 Attachment16.3: Affordable Housing Board Minutes, June 5, 2014 (2100 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation) The Villages on Cunningham Corner Willow Grove Village Hickory Hill Village Rosetree Village ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 284 Attachment16.4: The Villages on Cunningham Corner Location Map (2100 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-071 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE CITY’S PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION FOR 2014 TO THE FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FINANCE THE REHABILITATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AT THE VILLAGES AT CUNNINGHAM CORNER WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is authorized and empowered under the laws of the State of Colorado (the “State”) to issue revenue bonds for purposes including the financing of multi-family rental housing projects for low- and moderate-income persons and families; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), restricts the amount of tax-exempt bonds (“Private Activity Bonds”) which may be issued in the State (the “State Ceiling”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Code, the Colorado legislature adopted the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24, Colorado Revised Statutes (the “Allocation Act”), providing for the allocation of the State Ceiling among various State and local governmental units, and further providing for the assignment of such allocations from such governmental units to any entity or person with the authority to issue bonds; and WHEREAS, pursuant to an allocation under Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation Act, the City has received a direct allocation of the 2014 State Ceiling for the issuance of Private Activity Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $7,408,350 (the “2014 Allocation”); and WHEREAS, if the City does not issue bonds or assign its annual allocation to another entity by September 15 of each year, its allocation is relinquished to the statewide balance; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins Housing Authority (the “Authority”) has requested that the City assign all of the 2014 Allocation (the “Assigned Allocation”) to the Authority pursuant to Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation Act for the purpose of assisting in the financing of the rehabilitation of 284 affordable housing units (the “Project”) located in the Villages at Cunningham Corner, which is owned by the non-profit development subsidiary of the Authority and consists of three rental housing projects whose names and respective addresses are: Hickory Hill Village Apartments, 3425 Windmill Drive, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; Rose Tree Village Apartments, 1000 Horsetooth Road, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; and Willow Grove Village, 1025 Cunningham Drive, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the 2014 Allocation can be utilized most efficiently by assigning it to the Authority to issue Private Activity Bonds for the purpose of financing the Project; and Packet Pg. 285 - 2 - WHEREAS, the City has determined that such assignment to the Authority will advance the City’s objective of increasing the availability of adequate affordable housing for low- and moderate-income persons and families within the city; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to assign the 2014 Allocation to the Authority, which assignment is to be evidenced by an Assignment of Allocation between the City and the Authority in substantially the form attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” (the “Assignment of Allocation”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fort Collins as follows: Section 1. That the assignment to the Authority of the City’s 2014 Allocation of $7,408,350, for use by the Authority for the purposes set forth herein, is hereby approved. Section 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Assignment of Allocation in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, along with such other terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Resolution. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 286 DMWEST #10080442 v3 ASSIGNMENT OF ALLOCATION THIS ASSIGNMENT (the “Assignment”), dated August ____, 2014, is between the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, a municipal corporation (the “Assignor”), and the Fort Collins Housing Authority, a body corporate and politic (the “Assignee”). RECITALS A. The Assignee intends to finance the rehabilitation of 284 affordable housing units located at the Villages at Cunningham Corner which consists of three rental housing projects whose names and respective addresses are as follows: Hickory Hill Village Apartments, 3425 Windmill Drive, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; Rose Tree Village Apartments, 1000 Horsetooth Road, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; and Willow Grove Village, 1025 Cunningham Drive, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado (collectively, the “Project”). The Project will be designed to qualify as a “project” within the meaning of Title 29, Article 4, Part 2, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended (the “Act”). B. The Assignee intends to provide for the issuance of its Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (the “Proposed Bonds”), pursuant to the provisions of the Act for the purpose of financing the Project. C. The Assignee has requested that the Assignor assign to the Assignee all $7,408,350 of the Assignor’s 2014 allocation (the “Allocation”) under the bond ceiling for the State of Colorado and its issuing authorities (the State Ceiling”) computed under Section 146(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) as provided for the Assignor as a “designated local issuing authority” under part 17 of article 32 of title 24, Colorado Revised Statutes (the “Allocation Act”), for use in connection with the financing of the Project. D. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Assignor desires to assign to the Assignee, and the Assignee desires to accept, $7,408,350 of the Assignor’s 2014 allocation from the State Ceiling. ASSIGNMENT In exchange for the agreements set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Assignor hereby assigns and transfers to the Assignee the Assignor’s 2014 Allocation from the State Ceiling for private activity bonds in an amount equal to $7,408,350. The Assignor and the Assignee understand that such assigned allocation shall automatically be relinquished to the “Statewide Balance” as defined under the Allocation Act unless (a) the Proposed Bonds are issued by the Assignee on or before September 15, 2014, or (b) Section 24-32-1706(3)(c), C.R.S., pertaining to the carryforward of the assigned allocation, applies. EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 287 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2232 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation - RES) DMWEST #10080442 v3 2 2. The Assignor represents that it has received no monetary consideration for the assignment set forth above. 3. The Assignee hereby: (a) accepts the assignment of $7,408,350 of the Assignor’s Allocation from the State Ceiling described above; (b) agrees to use its best efforts to issue and use the Proposed Bonds for the purpose of financing the Project; and (b) agrees to abide by each of the terms and conditions of this Assignment in connection with the use of such Allocation. 4. The Assignor hereby consents to the election by the Assignee, if the Assignee in its discretion so decides, and if the Project has a carryforward purpose, to treat all or any portion of the assignment set forth herein as an allocation for a project with a carryforward purpose. 5. This Assignment shall not constitute the debt or indebtedness or financial obligation of the Assignor within the meaning of the constitution or statutes of the State of Colorado, nor give rise to a pecuniary liability or charge against the general credit or taxing power of the Assignor. [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank] Packet Pg. 288 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2232 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation - RES) [Signature Page to Assignment of Allocation] S-1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Assignor and the Assignee have caused this instrument to be executed to be effective as of the date and year first written above. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, as Assignor ____________________________________ [SEAL] Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ ____________________________________ City Clerk Assistant City Attorney FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY, as Assignee By: ________________________________ [SEAL] Its: ________________________________ ATTEST: By: ________________________________ Its: ________________________________ Packet Pg. 289 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2232 : 2014 Private Activity Bond Allocation - RES) Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF John Phelan, Energy Services Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2014-072 Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Fort Collins, Platte River Power Authority, the Town of Estes Park, the City of Longmont, and the City of Loveland for Demand Side Management Program Coordination. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to formalize the joint funding of demand side management (aka energy efficiency and conservation) (DSM) programs between the City of Fort Collins and Platte River Power Authority (Platte River). Jointly developed efficiency programs which are administered by Platte River require supplemental or directive funding from Fort Collins Utilities on behalf of Fort Collins customers. This intergovernmental agreement (IGA) formalizes the authority to provide additional funding via a purchase order process between the City and Platte River. The IGA is a joint document between Platte River, Fort Collins, Loveland, Longmont and Estes Park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 2004, Fort Collins and Platte River Power Authority have jointly funded DSM programs (aka efficiency and conservation programs) for residential and commercial customers. The planning and development of DSM programs on the Fort Collins power transmission network is jointly managed by Fort Collins and Platte River, typically in conjunction with the other owner cities. Administration of common program elements, those offered in all four cities, generally lies with Platte River. This includes rebate administration and making rebate payments to customers. Each entity has separate approved budgets for DSM; Platte River’s overall DSM budget is allocated to each city based on its annual ownership percentage (typically 47% for Fort Collins). For common programs, Platte River commits funding based on applications from customers. After they have committed Fort Collins allocation of their budget, they are in effect committing Fort Collins DSM funding. Fort Collins and Platte River have used a purchase order process to guarantee the commitment of funding to Platte River on behalf of Fort Collins customers. With further integration of programs in 2014, staff has determined that an intergovernmental agreement is appropriate to formalize the practice of collaborative funding and administration of DSM programs. The IGA is a joint document between Platte River, Fort Collins, Loveland, Longmont and Estes Park. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The intergovernmental agreement does not directly have an impact on City finances because it is formalizing current practice. Supplemental funding to support Fort Collins customers efficiency projects varies from year to Packet Pg. 290 Agenda Item 17 Item # 17 Page 2 year, but is expected to be $750,000 to $1,000,000 annually. These funds are budgeted and appropriated in the Utilities Light & Power business unit. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The intergovernmental agreement does not directly have an increased environmental impact because it is formalizing current practice. Efficiency projects funded by joint programs currently reduce electricity use by 10,000,000 to 15,000,000 kilowatt-hours annually, with associated avoided carbon emissions. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its July 10, 2014 meeting, the Energy Board unanimously approved a motion recommending that City Council adopt the Demand Side Management Partnership Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Fort Collins and Platte River Power Authority. Packet Pg. 291 - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-072 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY, THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, THE CITY OF LONGMONT, AND THE CITY OF LOVELAND FOR DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM COORDINATION WHEREAS, Platte River Power Authority ("PRPA") was formed by contract among the City of Fort Collins, the Town of Estes Park, the City of Longmont, and the City of Loveland to provide electric generation and transmission services and other related functions to benefit the founding municipalities, pursuant to C.R.S. Section 29-1-204; and WHEREAS, as one of the founding municipalities, Fort Collins operates an electric distribution system providing retail utility service to customers within the City’s municipal boundaries and service territory; and WHEREAS, since 2004, Fort Collins and PRPA have jointly funded “Demand Side Management” (“DSM”) energy efficiency and conservation programs for residential and commercial customers on the Fort Collins electric system, the planning and development of which has been jointly managed by Fort Collins and PRPA, in coordination with DSM programs in the other founding municipalities; and WHEREAS, administration of common DSM program elements offered by each founding municipality has generally been managed by PRPA, including rebate administration and issuing rebate payments to customers; and WHERAS, the founding municipalities have separate approved budgets for DSM, and PRPA’s overall DSM budget is allocated to each founding municipality based on the municipality’s annual ownership percentage (typically 47% for Fort Collins); and WHEREAS, there are economies of scale in continuing to coordinate DSM programming among the founding municipalities and PRPA, and the parties desire to formalize these efforts by entering into an intergovernmental agreement for such purposes; and WHEREAS, Article II, Section 16 of the City Charter empowers the City Council, by ordinance or resolution, to enter into contracts with other governmental bodies to furnish governmental services and make charges for such services or enter into cooperative or joint activities with other governmental bodies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an Intergovernmental Agreement for a Demand Side Management Partnership between the City, Platte River Power Authority, the Town of Estes Park, the City of Longmont, and the City of Loveland in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A", with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purpose of this Resolution. Packet Pg. 292 - 2 - Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 293 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PARTNERSHIP This Intergovernmental Agreement (“Agreement”) is made this _________ day of __________, 2014 by and between the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, a Colorado municipal corporation (“Estes Park”), the CITY OF FORT COLLINS, a Colorado municipal corporation (“Fort Collins”), the CITY OF LONGMONT, a Colorado municipal corporation (“Longmont”), the CITY OF LOVELAND, a Colorado municipal corporation (“Loveland”), and PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the State of Colorado (“Platte River”), collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.” When specificity is not required, the municipal corporations which are parties hereto will hereinafter be individually referred to as “Municipality,” and collectively as “Municipalities.” WHEREAS, the Municipalities contracted with one another to establish Platte River as a separate legal entity and multi-purpose intergovernmental authority to provide the electric power and energy requirements of the Municipalities and to engage in related business activities including demand side management (“DSM”); and WHEREAS, periodically Platte River develops Integrated Resource Plans that detail Platte River’s plans and programs in the areas of generation and transmission, renewable energy, and energy efficiency, including DSM; and WHEREAS, Platte River’s DSM programs include those offered to the utility customers of the Municipalities, which programs are contracted for and funded by Platte River; and WHEREAS, Platte River seeks to maintain an equitable distribution of DSM funds among the Municipalities; and WHEREAS, the Parties intend to expand the scope of Platte River’s current DSM programs, and desire to define certain terms and conditions related to program management as set forth in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Parties are authorized, pursuant to C.R.S. § 29-1-203, to cooperate or contract with one another to provide any function, service, or facility lawfully authorized to each. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 294 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 2 1. Definitions. “Common Programs” shall mean DSM programs and related services which are developed by, contracted for, and funded by Platte River. Common Programs are offered by Platte River to the utility customers of the Municipalities, up to an amount equal to each Municipality’s Equity Share of Platte River’s DSM budget. “Directive Funding” shall mean funding that is provided by a Municipality to procure DSM services that fall outside of those DSM services provided through the Common Programs. “Equity Share” shall mean the pro rata share that each Municipality would receive of Platte River’s assets upon dissolution as provided in Section 2.8 of the Platte River Power Authority Organic Contract. “Fiscal Year” shall mean with reference to any Municipality, the applicable fiscal year for such Municipality, in accordance with its individual budget and accounting practices. “Supplemental Funding” shall mean funding that is provided by a Municipality to procure Common Programs services in excess of those provided by Platte River based upon the Municipality’s Equity Share. 2. Supplemental Funding. During any calendar year demand for Common Program services within a Municipality may result in the full commitment of its Equity Share of Platte River’s DSM budget. Upon the request of a Municipality whose Equity Share of the DSM budget has been fully committed, Platte River shall continue to offer Common Programs within that Municipality; provided, however, that before Platte River commits such additional funding, the Municipality must issue a purchase order authorizing Supplemental Funding in the necessary amount. Supplemental Funding shall be from funds that have been appropriated and are available in the Municipality’s budget. Platte River shall invoice the Municipality under such purchase order when expenditures have exceeded its Equity Share of Platte River’s DSM budget. The Municipality shall pay Platte River within thirty days of invoice. 3. Directive Funding. Platte River or a Municipality may identify additional DSM programs or services not contemplated within the scope of the Common Programs. Platte River and the interested Municipality may decide to collaborate in offering these programs or services when they determine that such collaboration would result in the effective delivery of the programs or services to the Municipality’s utility customers. In these cases, Platte River will work closely with the Municipality’s designated staff to Packet Pg. 295 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 3 establish a scope of work for the program or service as well as a budget containing sufficient funding to complete the scope of work. Prior to Platte River undertaking any Directive Funding activity, the Municipality must issue a purchase order authorizing an amount of expenditure from funds that have been appropriated and are available in the Municipality’s budget. Platte River shall invoice the Municipality on a monthly basis, or at another agreed upon interval. The Municipality shall pay Platte River within thirty days of invoice. 4. Term. This Agreement will be effective upon execution by the Parties and will remain in effect until terminated. 5. Termination. A Municipality or Platte River may terminate its participation in this Agreement upon sixty (60) days written notice to the other Parties; provided, however, that any work commenced by Platte River under a purchase order issued by a Municipality prior to receipt of the written notice of termination will be completed by Platte River and reimbursed by the Municipality. 6. Appropriation Required. The financial obligations of the Municipalities under this Agreement are from year to year only and shall not constitute a multiple-fiscal year debt or other financial obligation or fiscal obligation of any kind payable in any Fiscal Year beyond the Fiscal Year for which funds are so appropriated for the payment of current expenditures. 7. Designated Representatives. The designated representatives for each of the Parties are as follows: Platte River: Paul Davis, Customer Services Manager Platte River Power Authority 2000 East Horsetooth Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 970-229-5370 Davisp@prpa.org Estes Park: Reuben Bergsten, Utility Director Estes Park Light & Power Estes Park Municipal Building P.O. Box 1200 170 MacGregor Ave Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Fort Collins: John Phelan, Energy Services Manager Packet Pg. 296 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 4 Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood St Fort Collins, CO 80522 Longmont: Energy Services Manager Longmont Power & Communications 1100 S. Sherman St. Longmont, CO 80501 303-651-8727 Anne.Lutz@ci.longmont.co.us Loveland: Gretchen Stanford, Customer Relations Manager Loveland Water & Power 200 North Wilson Avenue Loveland, CO 80537 970-962-3550 Gretchen.Stanford@cityofloveland.org A Municipality or Platte River must notify the other Parties in writing of any subsequent changes in appointed representative. 8. Notices. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval, or communication that a Municipality or Platte River is required to give shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, or by fax or email, to the designated representative of the recipient at the address designated as set forth above, or as subsequently provided in writing. 9. Confidential Customer Information. To the extent required by Platte River (as an agent of the Municipalities) to perform the work required under this Agreement, a Municipality may provide Platte River with confidential utility customer information. Platte River agrees to keep such information confidential and shall not disclose such information, including to the other Municipalities, except as required by law. Platte River shall notify the Municipality prior to any such disclosure so that the Municipality may have an opportunity to take such legal action as it deems necessary to prevent the disclosure. 10. Liability. Each of the Parties hereto agrees to assume responsibility and liability associated with its own acts and the acts of its employees in the performance of this Agreement in accordance with Colorado law. By agreeing to this provision, neither Platte River or the Municipalities waives or intends to waive, the limitations on liability Packet Pg. 297 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 5 which are provided to them under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, § 24-10- 101 et seq., C.R.S., as amended. 11. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and, except as provided herein, may not be modified or amended except by written agreement of the Parties. 12. No Third Party Beneficiaries. The Parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement is intended to only document the relative rights and obligations between the Parties to one another, and that no third party beneficiaries are intended. 13. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado, and venue shall be in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado. 14. Authority. The Parties recognize the legal constraints imposed upon them by the constitutions, statutes, and regulations of the State of Colorado and of the United States, and imposed upon the Municipalities by their Charter or Municipal Code, and, subject to such constraints, the Parties intend to carry out the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, in no event shall the Parties exercise any power or take any action which shall be prohibited by applicable law. This Agreement may be executed in separate counterparts, and the counterparts taken together shall constitute the whole of this Agreement. 15. Superseded Agreements. This Agreement supersedes and replaces the following agreements which are hereby terminated: “Intergovernmental Agreement for Demand Side Management Program Funding” between the City of Loveland and Platte River, dated December 18, 2012. “Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Longmont and the Platte River Power Authority Concerning Use of Longmont’s Electric Utility Customer Data,” dated January 10, 1995. “Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Longmont and the Platte River Power Authority Concerning Use of Longmont’s Electric Utility Customer Data,” dated May 30, 2002. “Agreement” between Platte River Power Authority and the City of Longmont, dated April 8, 2005. Packet Pg. 298 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO ATTEST: By:________________________________ By:______________________ [Title] Town Clerk CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ATTEST: By:________________________________ By:______________________ Karen Weitkunat, Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:________________________ Assistant City Attorney CITY OF LOVELAND, COLORADO ATTEST: By:_____________________________ By:______________________ [Title] City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:_________________________ Assistant City Attorney CITY OF LONGMONT, COLORADO ATTEST: By:_____________________________ By:______________________ Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: By:________________________________________ General Manager of Longmont Power & Communications PROOFREAD: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Packet Pg. 299 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) 7 _________________________________________ ____________________ Assistant City Attorney PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY ATTEST: By:_____________________________ By:______________________ Jackie Sargent, Chief Executive Officer Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:_________________________ General Counsel PROOFREAD: _________________________________________ Packet Pg. 300 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2239 : Demand Side Management IGA-PRPA-RESOLUTION) Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Ellen Martin, Visual Arts Administrator SUBJECT Resolution 2014-073 Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to Commission an Artist to Create Art for the Senior Center Expansion Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is it to approve expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account to commission an artist to create art for the APP Senior Center Expansion Project. The expenditure of $50,238 will be for design, materials, fabrication, installation and contingency for an artist-designed steel art panel to be located in the main lobby of the Senior Center, and for artist-designed concrete form liners to be used on an exterior seat wall at this site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Section 23-303 of City Code, which was added in 1995, established the Art in Public Places Reserve Account, and designated it for use in acquiring or leasing works of art, maintenance, repair or display of works of art, and administrative expenses related to the Art in Public Places Program, in accordance with the Art in Public Places Guidelines adopted by the Council in Ordinance No. 020, 1995. The Council permanently adopted the Art in Public Places Program, and reenacted City Code Chapter 23, Article IX, with certain modifications in 2012. After the original artist selected for the APP Senior Center Expansion project elected not to sign a contract with the City, the APP program and Project Team started working with Carolyn Braaksma, who was selected as the alternate in the RFQ process. Ms. Braaksma’s design concept and budget have been reviewed by the APP Board and the Project Team and are being recommended to City Council for approval. APP artist Carolyn Braaksma will create an art panel depicting botanical images for the lobby of the Senior Center. The images will include birds and Colorado indigenous plants. This artwork will become a major focal point in the main lobby and will define the entry point between the paid entrance areas and the free area open to the community. The metal panel will be fabricated from steel and painted to coordinate with the Center’s interior design colors. The rendering of the plants and flowers are simplified and stylized and will be laser cut into steel, enabling the viewer to see through the panel. Artist Carolyn Braaksma is also known for her work with concrete walls and form liners. She has created an original concrete form liner design for the short seat wall that defines the outside patio space near the new multi-purpose building addition. The form liner image depicts a “Bugs and Brushes” pattern. Packet Pg. 301 Agenda Item 18 Item # 18 Page 2 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The funds for this item have been appropriated in the Art in Public Places Reserve Account in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund. The Art in Public Places program has a maintenance fund for the long-term care of the APP art collection. The APP Senior Center Expansion Project budget is $50,238 for design, materials, fabrication, installation and contingency for this project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The APP artist has been collaborating with the Project Team on this project. The artwork is integrated in the overall design of the project. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its July 16, 2014 meeting, the design concept and budget for this project were reviewed and recommended by the APP Board. ATTACHMENTS 1. Written Description and Images of Proposed Artwork (PDF) 2. Art in Public Places Board Minutes, July 16, 2014 (draft) (PDF) Packet Pg. 302 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT ARTIST: CAROLYN BRAAKSMA Artist Carolyn Braaksma has designed an art panel for the lobby of the Senior Center that will become a major focal point and will define the entry point between the paid entrance areas and the free area open to the community. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 303 Attachment18.1: Written Description and Images of Proposed Artwork (2224 : APP-Senior Center Expansion Project) Artist Carolyn Braaksma worked with the Project Team to develop the concept for art for the Senior Center Expansion Project. Art in Public Places arƟst Carolyn Braaksma will create an art panel for the lobby of the Senior Center that depicts botanical images. The images will include birds and Colorado indigenous plants. This artwork will become a major focal point in the main lobby of the Senior Center and will define the entry point between the paid entrance areas and the free area open to the community. The 5 Ō. tall by 15 Ō. long metal panel will be fabricated from steel and painted to coordinate with the Center’s interior design. The rendering of the plants and flowers are simplified and stylized and will be laser cut into steel, enabling the viewer to see through the panel. The art panel is designed to fit the space and will be aƩached to the wall on one side. The other side creates the entry into the paid areas of the facility. Carolyn Braaksma is also known for her work with concrete walls and form liners. She has created a unique form liner for the short concrete seat wall that defines the outside paƟo space near the new mulƟ-purpose building addiƟon. The form liner image depicts a “Bugs and a Brushes “paƩern. This relief image will be used on both sides of the wall. Individual Module, the black in the drawing represents the metal Packet Pg. 304 Attachment18.1: Written Description and Images of Proposed Artwork (2224 : APP-Senior Center Expansion Project) ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 305 Attachment18.2: Art in Public Places Board Minutes, July 16, 2014 (draft) (2224 : APP-Senior Center Expansion Project) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-073 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING EXPENDITURES FROM THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES RESERVE ACCOUNT TO COMMISSION AN ARTIST TO CREATE ART FOR THE SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT WHEREAS, on January 21, 2014, City Council adopted Ordinance 002, 2014, appropriating funds for the Senior Center Expansion Project, including appropriation of funds allocated to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for Art in Public Places projects; and WHEREAS, the funds allocated and appropriated to the Art in Public Places reserve account by Ordinance 002, 2014, are available for commissioning art to be installed as part of the Senior Center Expansion Project, including work on a new main lobby entry piece and seat wall at the Senior Center (the "Art Project"); and WHEREAS, the City was unable to engage the artist initially selected through the public bidding process to provide the Art Project; and WHEREAS, the alternate artist identified in the bidding process, Carolyn Braaksma, has since entered into an agreement with City and worked with a subcommittee to design the Art Project; and WHEREAS, the Art in Public Places Board (the "Board") at its July 16, 2014, meeting reviewed and approved the design for the Art Project, consisting of a laser-cut steel panel with renderings of stylized plants and flowers and a concrete form liner seat wall defining the outside patio space at the Senior Center; and WHEREAS, the estimated cost to create the Art Project, including commission of the Artist, purchase of materials, fabrication, installation and contingency for the Project is $50,238; and WHEREAS, Section 23-308 of the City Code requires that the Board's selection of the recommended art be presented for Council review and approval, because the cost of the Art Project exceeds $10,000; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Council to authorize the expenditure of $50,238, from funds appropriated in the Art in Public Places reserve account in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund, to be applied towards payments on the Art Project involving fabrication of a new main lobby entry piece and seat wall as part of the Senior Center Expansion Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of up to FIFTY THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED THIRTY EIGHT DOLLARS ($50,238) from the Art in Public Places reserve account in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art Project, consisting of a laser-cut steel panel with renderings of stylized plants and flowers and a concrete form liner Packet Pg. 306 - 2 - seat wall defining the outside patio space at the Senior Center, as proposed by artist Carolyn Braaksma, the design for which was reviewed and approved by the Art in Public Places Board on July 16, 2014. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 307 Agenda Item 19 Item # 19 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Darin Atteberry, City Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2014-074 Appointing Two Representatives to the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appoint Councilmember Wade Troxell and City Manager Darin Atteberry to represent the City of Fort Collins on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Appointments to the Colorado Municipal League (CML) Policy Committee are made each fall and members serve for a one-year period from approximately September through August. Each member municipality of the League is entitled to a representative, and all cities over 100,000 are entitled to designate two representatives. The Policy Committee is responsible for reviewing legislative proposals and recommending to the League Executive Board, positions of support, opposition, no position or amendment to a wide variety of legislation affecting cities and towns. At each annual conference in June, the Policy Committee proposes to the membership, revisions to the League’s policies which guide League positions on public policy issues affecting municipalities. The Committee meets three or four times a year, before and during legislative sessions as well as in May prior to the annual conference. The first CML Policy Committee meeting will be held on Friday, October 17. Packet Pg. 308 - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-074 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPOINTING TWO REPRESENTATIVES TO THE COLORADO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE POLICY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Colorado Municipal League (the “League”) is an influential voice for municipal interests on state and federal policies affecting municipalities; and WHEREAS, the League is also an important source of information for municipal officials in serving their communities; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Fort Collins are best served by an informed and effective local government; and WHEREAS, the League Policy Committee is responsible for reviewing legislative proposals and making recommendations to the League Executive Board; and WHEREAS, the Policy Committee proposes to the League membership revisions to the League’s policies which guide League positions on public policy issues affecting municipalities; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to have maximum representation on the Policy Committee; and WHEREAS, the Legislative Review Committee has recommended that Wade Troxell and Darin Atteberry be appointed to represent the City on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Councilmember Wade Troxell and City Manager Darin Atteberry are hereby appointed to represent the City on the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 309 Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Gerry Paul, Director of Purchasing & Risk Management Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on July 15, 2014, by a vote of 5-1 (Nays: Cunniff) appropriates funds to address high priority security findings identified by a comprehensive security assessment of City buildings. Funding is requested to implement enhancements to address the high priority findings identified in a 2013/2014 City building security assessment performed by Lyon & Associates. Funding will be directed to access control, alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening. For Second Reading, the amount has been decreased to $190,360 because it was determined that two servers were not required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (PDF) Packet Pg. 310 Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 15, 2014 City Council STAFF Gerry Paul, Director of Purchasing & Risk Management Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 100, 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund to Fund High Priority Security Enhancements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate funds in the amount of $210,000 to address high priority security findings identified by a comprehensive security assessment of City buildings. Funding is requested to implement enhancements to address the high priority findings identified in a 2013/2014 City building security assessment performed by Lyon & Associates. Funding will be directed to access control, alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. Management staff presented and recommended implementation of fifty-five (55) high risk priority security enhancements to ELT staff on May 7, 2014. The ELT endorsed implementation of the enhancements without delay to increase security for City staff and citizens. Staff recommends appropriation of funds in the amount of $210,000 for this project from prior year reserves in the General Fund. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION There has been an increase in incidents of negative interaction with individuals across the City contributing to employee’s heightened awareness and concern for security particularly in high use public environments. In 2013, the Risk Management office contracted with a security consultant to conduct comprehensive security assessments of 19 City building. At the conclusion of the assessment, 260 findings were identified and with the assistance of the security consultant, City Risk Management staff categorized each finding as high priority, medium priority, low priority or procedural. Fifty-five (55) of the findings were categorized as high priority. Prioritization Criteria: High priority assessment enhancements address areas of highest probability for increased risk of employee or citizen injury, use of existing voice over internet protocol (VOIP) phone systems to enhance emergency communications in City buildings, and security cameras installed in areas of high use by children such as recreation facilities. The list of high priority items was provided to Operations Services and Information Technology for price quotes. The price to accomplish all items on the list as proposed by the security consultant is $538,460. After review, a scaled back alternative option was proposed that functionally achieves similar levels of enhanced security with an estimated price of $210,000. ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 311 Attachment20.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2181 : SR 100 Security Enhancements) Agenda Item 8 Item # 8 Page 2 Implementation of the high priority items will increase the level of security in City facilities creating a safe, healthy and secure environment for both employees and citizens. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The total cost to implement the recommended high priority enhancements is $210,000. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS While no air, soil or water environments will be impacted by this request, the safety and security of the employee and citizen environment will be enhanced. ATTACHMENTS 1. Security High Priority List (PDF) Packet Pg. 312 Attachment20.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary, July 15, 2014 (2181 : SR 100 Security Enhancements) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 100, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND TO FUND HIGH PRIORITY SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS WHEREAS, the City is committed to providing the public and employees with safe and secure facilities and work environments; and WHEREAS, a comprehensive security assessment was completed in 2013 to address the increase in incidents of negative interaction that has resulted in heightened awareness and concern for security in high-use public environments; and WHEREAS, the assessment identified 260 findings with 55 of the findings classified as high priority; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting $210,000190,360 from prior year General Fund reserves to implement enhancements to address the high priority security findings; and WHEREAS, staff recommends this project be funded from the General Fund as this project focuses on public and employee security; and WHEREAS, funding will include alarm systems, internal public address systems, security cameras, and minor remodels to increase security workspace hardening; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9, of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of TWO HUNDRED TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ONE HUNDRED NINETY THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY DOLLARS ($210,000190,360) to fund high priority security enhancements. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 15th day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 313 - 2 - Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 314 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner SUBJECT Items Relating to Disposable Bags. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags. (Option 1) B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags (Option 2) At the May 13, 2014 Work Session, City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to reduce the number of disposable bags distributed by grocery stores at checkout registers. On July 1, Ordinance No. 099, 2014 was adopted by a vote of 5-2 (nays: Weitkunat, Troxell) on First Reading. Council directed staff to postpone Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014 to August 19, to allow more time for Councilmembers to review public input on disposable bags. An informational meeting held July 30 (attended by 50-60 people) allowed the public to receive answers from staff and Councilmembers on specific questions regarding the proposed ordinance. The “Option 2” ordinance has also been developed for Council’s consideration. Option 2 has been written at the request of multiple Councilmembers to take a new approach at an ordinance that could help reduce the use of disposable bags in Fort Collins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Option 1, whereby Ordinance No. 099, 2014 is adopted on Second Reading with a suggested minor amendment that would make the ordinance automatically expire in five years. This period of time would allow the Council and the community to monitor how effectively disposable bags usage in Fort Collins is reduced as a result of a charge of 10 cents on grocery checkout bags. With respect to Option 2, in the event that Option 1 (Ordinance No. 099, 2014) is voted down and a vote is made to adopt Ordinance No. 112, 2014 on First Reading; the City staff offers a provisional recommendation for adoption contingent on further analysis of implementation details. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Council has examined local restrictions on the use of disposable bags for two years. During March and April, staff sought public comment on a proposal designed to reduce single-use bags at grocery stores by as much as 80-90%, based on research about similar ordinances that have been implemented in over 133 communities around the country. Packet Pg. 315 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 2 Subsequently, Council reviewed the proposal, directed staff to bring it forward for formal action, and voted to adopt the ordinance for a “10 cents/bag” requirement for grocery stores in Fort Collins on July 1. At the scheduled Second Hearing on July 15, Council voted for a postponement. Several Councilmembers then requested that staff prepare a second option for consideration at the August 19, 2014 meeting; this proposal departs significantly from the original proposal and is further described below as Option 2. Option 1 is Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014 as originally presented to Council and adopted on First Reading July 1, 2014. Staff is recommending adoption of the original ordinance, and suggests that Council consider amending the ordinance to add a sunset clause that would terminate the requirement after five years. Creating a specific end-date to the ordinance may help assure the community that if significant reduction in disposable bags usage does not occur as a result of the City’s actions, and therefore the City Council does not elect to deliberately renew the ordinance at some point within the next five years (before December 31, 2019), Fort Collins’ requirement for grocers to charge for disposable checkout bags will expire. Option 2 First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2014 amending the City Code would apply the following provisions: 1. All retailers, with the exception of temporary vendors of food products, farmers’ markets, and restaurants (as defined in the Land Use Code) that offer disposable bags to customers for the purpose of holding purchases would be required to do the following: a. Prominently display disposable bag recycling bins at their business locations (and recycle the bags deposited in the bins); b. Provide disposable bags only upon the express consent of the customer after informing the customer of the charge per bag; c. Charge no less than the actual cost per bag for each disposable bag provided including retailers’ costs for being in compliance with the City’s ordinance, and state the number of bags, cost per each and total, as a separate item on the sales receipt. There was an addition to the definition of “disposable bag charge” in the Ordinance compared to the ordinance that was distributed to the public last week. The addition clarifies that the disposable bag charge includes not only the cost of the bag itself to the retailer, but also the costs associated with the disposable bags, such as costs of handling and transporting the bags, and costs to administer the provisions of the Ordinance. d. Maintain records of the disposable bag charges collected, and make them available for audit by the City. 2. Retailers would be allowed to set the cost for disposable shopping bags based on the full cost incurred by the retailer to provide each bag. 3. The City Manager would be directed to evaluate opportunities for use of biodegradable animal waste bags and other refuse bags in City operations, implement City practices that promote reduction of use of disposable bags, and eliminate the use of disposable bags where feasible. 3. The City Manager would be directed to develop an innovative awareness and conservation campaign to educate the public about the financial and environmental costs of using disposable bags. If funds are available, educational materials, the City will produce educational materials for use by retailers upon request. 4. Newspapers that regularly deliver to customers must obtain written consent from customers to use protective plastic delivery bags and may only use them when wet weather conditions are reasonably expected. Packet Pg. 316 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 3 5. The Ordinance sunsets after a one-year period of implementation to allow City Council to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the Ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (PDF) 2. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 317 Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 1, 2014 City Council STAFF Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014, Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code to Establish Regulations Regarding Disposable Bags. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review a proposed ordinance that would require grocers to charge 10 cents for both single-use disposable plastic and paper bags at the check-out stand. All revenues from the sale of bags would be retained by the grocers, who would be required to use 50% of revenues to purchase durable shopping bags to be distributed for free to customers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Since 2012, Fort Collins has investigated how to reduce the use of disposable bags in our community. The Council has received three staff reports (February 2013, March 2013, and May 2014) about options available for local jurisdictions to stem the flow of waste that is produced by single-use shopping bags. The 2013 proposal for a disposable bags fee ordinance was defeated on a split vote by City Council (3-3); it would have required grocers to charge a fee of 10 cents per single-use disposable plastic or paper bag, with the revenue to be split between grocers and the City. At the May 13, 2014 work session, staff presented a modified version of the ordinance. Council offered comments and requested staff to bring the ordinance back for adoption. As written, the proposed ordinance: • Requires grocers to apply a minimum cost of 10 cents per single-use disposable plastic or paper bag at the check-out register - Strictly defines the disposable bags as those used to bag up purchases at the point-of-sale and exempts other types of packaging such as produce bags used to contain bulk goods, and plastic bags used to prevent packages of meat from leaking • Provides that all revenue would be retained by merchants - Grocery stores will be required to spend a specified portion (50%) of revenues generated from sales of disposable bags to purchase durable bags that would then be offered at no cost (free) to their customers. The twenty-year history of regulations that have arisen to counter the flow of single-use bags entering the waste stream is well documented. Around the world and throughout the US, demonstrable reductions are ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 318 Attachment21.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 2 shown to occur when restrictions are placed on the consumption of disposable bags; people become accustomed to bringing their own durable cloth or woven-plastic types of bags to hold shopping purchases. Typically grocery stores are targeted because of their 60% share in communities’ bags usage. In communities where mature programs have shown great success, such as San Francisco, regulations may be expanded to include other types of merchants/retailers. As discussed at previous Fort Collins City Council meetings, the number of US communities that have adopted restrictions on plastic and paper bags continues to grow. It includes a broad geographic distribution of cities from Washington, D.C., to Austin and Dallas, TX, Basalt, Aspen, Telluride, and Boulder in Colorado, San Jose, CA, Montgomery County, MD, and most recently Chicago. In a compelling illustration of effectiveness, Boulder’s 10-cent/bag ordinance has achieved a 68% reduction in single-use bags since it went into effect in July 2013. Fort Collins’ ordinance is not aimed at banning plastic bags (nor paper ones), which is another approach that has been taken elsewhere. In Fort Collins, grocery store customers will continue to have a choice to receive disposable shopping bags as long as they are willing to pay for them along with their other purchases. The purpose of adopting a local ordinance is to prevent the negative impacts that are attributed to disposable bags: • Contributing to the volume of discarded material that enters landfills, albeit a nominal amount of about 220 tons per year in Fort Collins • Climate change: a source of 772 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted from Fort Collins • Litter and habitat degradation, including in natural areas and water conveyances • Reduction in value of recyclables (plastic bags are a contaminant when mixed with single-stream items such as paper, cans and bottles), and • Excessive maintenance costs at recycling plants, where plastic bags routinely tangle up conveyer belts and equipment. Information from the literature is often used to define how many disposable bags, on average, most people use since actual data from the grocery industry, which is reluctant to impart proprietary information, is difficult to obtain. Brendle Group, a local consulting firm hired by the City to evaluate options for reducing consumption of single-use bags in October 2012, reported that an annual 342 bags per capita are used in Fort Collins, of which 60% (205 bags) come from grocery stores. It may be easier to reconcile each person’s experience with this number when it is broken down to four bags per week. Nonetheless, the total number of bags estimated to be used in Fort Collins yearly - over 52 million - is so large as to be hard to comprehend. Finding alternatives to single-use products such as disposable bags is an important objective of Fort Collins’ 2013 Road to Zero Waste Plan and adopted Zero Waste goals for the community. Learning new habits to use durable bags is the first step toward other new “reuse” patterns that become incorporated into people’s daily lives Adoption of the ordinance is expected to have the following results: • Encourage source reduction and re-use, leading to expanding efforts to other products • Help meet goals to divert trash from landfills and reduce greenhouse gas emissions • Reduce “life-cycle” impacts of single-use bags - such as impacts from material extraction and production -- by transitioning to a bag type with lower life cycle impacts • Reduce litter and pollution in the community, and globally, including plastic bags in trees and waterways. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS A cost of 10 cents per shopping bag will create a new income stream for the 20 grocery stores in Fort Collins - as much as $1.6 M in the first year of implementation. As the table below shows, half of this revenue applied to Packet Pg. 319 Attachment21.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 3 the purchase of durable bags suggests everyone in the community could potentially receive at least three free durable shopping bags in the first year. Estimated Revenue from Sales of Disposable Grocery Check-out Bags 2014 2015 2016 Fort Collins' population (DOLA projections) 154,131.00 156,982.42 159,886.60 Estimated number of disposable bags used at 342/person/year (assumes reduction by half every year due to behavior change) 52,712,802.00 26,843,994 13,670,304 Number of bags (60%) from grocery stores 31,627,681.20 16,106,397 8,202,182 Charge per disposable bag sold $.10 $.10 Revenue generated at grocers from bag fee $ 1,610,640 $820,218 Percent of revenue to be spent by grocers on purchase of reusable bags 50% 50% Amount of revenue available to be spent on purchase of reusable bags $805,320 $410,109 Number of reusable bags that could be purchased by grocers using disposable bags revenue $0.35/bag 2,300,914 1,171,740 $0.75/bag 1,073,760 546,812 $1.50/bag 536,880 273,406 Annual number of free reusable bags available per citizen $0.35/bag 15 7 $0.75/bag 7 3 $1.50/bag 3 2 Staff anticipates that distribution of free bags may be accomplished various ways, at the discretion of the grocery stores, such as rewarding customers who have earned “loyalty points”, as part of special promotional events or sales, or, supplying bags to certain customer groups (e.g., in support of food distribution at local food pantries). The City intends to offer grocers durable-bag logo design options but not to require that they use a prescribed design. On the other hand, at 10 cents per bag, it could cost the average citizen as much $20.52 per year in new costs if they elect to not switch to using durable shopping bags. The benefits of having fewer disposable bags to clean up in public areas will save the City money; however, staff is unable to quantify the costs savings to overall litter programs from a reduced number of disposable bags. Having fewer disposable bags will also save money at recycling plants in Denver, where Fort Collins’ recyclables are taken for processing, and will improve their efficiency and profit margin. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS An ordinance restricting the use of single-use disposable bags will have a small but measurable impact on the community’s waste stream. According to Brendle Group, an estimated 220 tons/year of plastic bags from Fort Collins are sent to landfills for disposal, which represents 0.2% of the waste stream that Fort Collins sends for landfill disposal (no data were available for disposable paper bags). Both single-use plastic and paper bags cause other types of environmental damage. Plastic is a very visible problem in maritime states and communities, where a serious consequence of plastic bag pollution is lethal harm to marine life that ingests bags or get tangled in them, and plastic litter can float around (for example, in large garbage “patches” that have now been found in all the world’s oceans) and wash onto shores. For landlocked Fort Collins, plastic bag litter may disappear with the wind or be broken down by sunlight and weather into smaller pieces. These bits of plastic are still pollutants, even if they don’t resemble the bags they started off as; however, the magnitude of environmental problems caused by plastic particulates in the soil and other substrates are poorly understood. Packet Pg. 320 Attachment21.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 4 On the other hand, critics of restrictions on bags will point out that replacement bags, such as cotton fabric bags, create their own carbon footprint and may not be environmentally sustainable because of reliance on fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. The report by Brendle Group concluded that reusable bags made from cotton or non-woven plastic have lower life-cycle impacts across these categories than any single-use bag (assuming the bag is used many times). According to a 2007 report by Sustainability Victoria (Australia), which compared life cycle analyses of shopping bag alternatives, reusable, non-woven plastic (polypropylene) bags were found to achieve the greatest environmental benefits. That study reported that “reusable bags have lower environmental impacts than all of the single-use bags; a substantial shift to more durable bags would deliver environmental gains through reductions in greenhouse gas, energy and water use, resource depletion and litter.” While plastic “film” bags and paper shopping bags are both recyclable, there is insufficient data on bag consumption and recycling quantities to estimate their current recycling rate in Fort Collins. There are at least 25 sites where plastic bags are locally accepted for recycling, including all grocery stores in town. Paper bags are widely recyclable, not only at public drop-off locations but also in single-stream curbside collection programs offered by residential haulers. Social Impacts One of the most oft-heard arguments against changing to durable bags is the potential for pathogens such as bacteria to be carried on the cloth bags brought into stores by shoppers to hold their purchases. Two articles published in the US in 2012 brought this issue to light, which has caused some to be concerned about the spread of health epidemics. While staff has been unable to find any science-based research or evidence that correlates reusable bags with human health impacts, there is no question about the importance of regularly washing durable bags. This is an important message to underscore, along with the suggestion that shoppers may wish to designate a specific bag to be used to hold any meat purchases. Charges for disposable bags may be waived by grocery stores for shoppers who use food stamps. Another way to minimize negative impacts on low-income citizens is for stores to donate durable bags to organizations like the Fort Collins Food Bank for use in distributing free food. Enforcement An implementation date of January 2015 is recommended to allow grocers to prepare for the requirement to charge for shopping bags. A violation of the proposed ordinance will constitute a civil infraction. In the first few months of implementation, it would be appropriate to apply an educational approach that ensures grocers understand the new requirements; followed later by enforcement (citations) if/when compliance is not achieved. As part of the ordinance, grocers will be required to provide data to the City on the number of disposable bags sold to customers; this information will allow Environmental Services staff to monitor stores’ implementation actions. Implementation In order to provide awareness about the new program to decrease the use of disposable bags, a contest will be held to create attractive, fun, and Fort Collins-specific artwork to decorate durable bags. Staff will research bag manufacturers’ products and select a sturdy, good quality bag that can be ordered in bulk quantities at a price of around $1.00 each (or lower, if manufacturers can deliver a washable bag that meets the City’s specifications for durability). Throughout the summer, staff will solicit entries in the art contest, with the goal of awarding a winner in September/October. The resulting artwork/graphics will be prepared for use on bags and an order will be placed by the City for as many as 6,000 durable bags to be given away to citizens later in the year, in Packet Pg. 321 Attachment21.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 5 anticipation of the ordinance going into effect in January 2015. Grocers, and other merchants and retailers, will be invited to use the contest-winning artwork on the bags they purchase for distribution to their customers. (Staff has learned that some stores are willing to consider this offer, while others are unable to make a commitment to print a Fort Collins-specific bag until and unless they receive corporate approval.) BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 16, 2014 meeting, the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) unanimously recommended that Council move forward with an ordinance regulating single-use disposable bags. PUBLIC OUTREACH During 2014, a variety of public engagement methods were used to obtain comments about the proposal to limit disposable bags. On multiple occasions, letters and e-mail messages were sent to grocery store representatives to inform them of the City’s interest in adopting local restrictions on disposable bags. In March, two press releases were issued and a “soapbox” article was published in the Coloradoan, as well as e- newsletter articles. An Open House was held on April 3 to allow the public to discuss its comments directly with staff. A dedicated web page was maintained that allowed people to enter comments on-line and comments were also received through Twitter and Facebook messages. After the May 13 work session and in advance of the July 1 hearing, staff again communicated with the grocery store industry and local stores to apprise them of final recommendations for the proposed ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Natural Resources Advisory Board memo, April 14, 2014 (DOCX) 2. Public Comments (DOCX) 3. Other Communities-Regulations and Results (DOCX) 4. Work Session Summary, May 13, 2014 (PDF) 5. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 322 Attachment21.1: First Reading Agenda Item Summary (w/o attachments) (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 1 Disposable Bags Ordinance City Council August 19, 2014 Regular Meeting Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 323 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 2 Background • November, 2012 worksession – City investigating range of options to limit disposable bag – Triple Bottom Line analysis (consultants) • March, 2013 regular meeting – vote (3-3) on ordinance whereby grocers must charge for bags; City split revenue with grocers • May 13, 2014 worksession – Council revisited options, directed staff to bring to hearing • July 1, 2014 regular meeting – First Reading of Ordinance No. 099 (approved 5-2 vote) – Second Reading postponed to August 19 Packet Pg. 324 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 3 Goal of Disposable Bag Ordinance • Contribute to waste reduction and re-use, identified as key strategies to achieve Zero Waste – Provide financial motivation to engage in re-use – Lead to further re-use habits • Also: – Divert trash from landfills – Help reduce greenhouse gas emissions – Reduce life-cycle impacts of single-use bags (material extraction, production, disposal, etc.) – Reduce stray litter and pollution in the community, and globally, including plastic bags in trees and waterways Packet Pg. 325 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 4 Over 133 US City/County Bag Regulations Key Ordinance Details Results Austin, TX 2013 Bans single-use disposable plastic & paper shopping bags 90% reduction single-use disposable bag waste Boulder, CO 2013 Charges 10¢ / disposable plastic or paper grocery bag 68% reduction in use of plastic & paper grocery bags since ordinance effective July, 2013 San Jose, CA 2010 Bans single-use disposable plastic bags in all retail stores, charges 10¢ / paper bag Reduced plastic bag litter 89% in storm drain systems, 60% in creeks and rivers, and 59% in streets and neighborhoods Washington D.C. 2010 5¢ / disposable plastic & paper bags (food or alcohol stores) 80% reduction in usage of plastic and paper bags Packet Pg. 326 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 5 Survey of Other Communities City Public health issues Impacts to low income residents Shoppers go outside city Austin, TX No direct situations have ever been found No reports. Gave away 1,000s of bags to low income residents Haven’t seen anything drastic happen Los Angeles, CA Since January start date, haven’t received a single complaint on health issues Not an issue. Stores required to give free bags to residents on state assistance programs. None. Most cities near LA have similar ordinances Port Townsend, WA No reports of any health issues Very few issues; people have become used to the change Sales tax revenues have held steady Packet Pg. 327 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 6 City Public health issues Impacts to low income residents Shoppers go outside city San Jose, CA No instances have been reported Haven’t seen any impacts to low- income residents No loss in revenue WA DC No issues have occurred. DC staff recommends folks wash bags 1Xweek Worked with non- profits to target low- income families and gave out 100,000 bags Recent survey showed people are not leaving the District to shop. Seattle, WA City has never seen any documented issues with public health None documented; ordinance exempts people in state and federal assistance programs Chain-stores have reflected a 5 % reduction Packet Pg. 328 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 7 Option 1 - Ordinance No. 099, 2014 • Adopted on First Reading, July 1 – Grocers must charge minimum 10 cents per bag at the check-out register – Revenue retained by grocery store; 50% spent on purchase of durable bags for customers – Maintain records of charges collected and make them available for audit by the City • Second Reading postponed for more public input – Grocery industry representatives – Public Q&A meeting held July 30, attended by 50-60 people Packet Pg. 329 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 8 Option 2 – Ordinance No. 112, 2014 All retailers (except temporary vendors of food products, farmers’ markets, & restaurants) must: • Provide on-site recycling for disposable plastic and paper bags • Provide disposable bags only upon express consent of customers • Charge at minimum actual cost per bag (including complying with City ordinance) and list on sales receipt • Maintain records of charges collected and make them available for audit by the City Packet Pg. 330 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 9 Option 2 (continued) • City directed to evaluate options to use biodegradable waste & refuse bags in operations, and reduce/eliminate disposable bags as feasible • City will develop education campaign on financial & environmental costs of using disposable bags, make materials available for use by retailers • Newspapers that deliver to customers must obtain written consent to use protective plastic bags, and may only use them in wet weather conditions • Council reviews after 1 year to evaluate options for moving forward Packet Pg. 331 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) 10 Ordinance Options for City Council to Consider Option 1 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 099, 2014 Option 2 First Reading of Ordinance No. 112, 2014 Packet Pg. 332 Attachment21.2: Powerpoint presentation (2141 : SR 099 Disposable Bags) - 1 - OPTION #1 ORDINANCE NO. 099, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS REGARDING DISPOSABLE BAGS WHEREAS, the City, through its policies, programs, and laws, supports efforts to reduce the amount of waste deposited into the landfill and to pursue waste minimization as a long term goal by emphasizing waste prevention efforts; and WHEREAS, the use of plastic or paper disposable bags has severe impacts on the environment on a local and global scale, including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm to wildlife, atmospheric acidification, water consumption, and solid waste generation; and WHEREAS, even when recycled, plastic disposable bags cause operational problems at recycling processing facilities; and WHEREAS, although disposable paper bags are perceived by some as being more environmentally friendly than disposable plastic bags, the manufacturing, transport, recycling, and disposal of paper bags consumes a substantial amount of environmental resources; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins consumers use approximately fifty (50) million disposable bags from food stores each year; and WHEREAS, the disposable bags provided by food stores make up approximately sixty (60) percent of the disposable bags used by Fort Collins consumers; and WHEREAS, some food stores do not provide disposable bags to their customers, thereby avoiding the environmental impacts associated with the use of such bags; and WHEREAS, the City’s taxpayers bear the costs associated with the negative impacts of disposable bags; and WHEREAS, from an overall environmental and economic perspective, the City believes that the best alternative to the continued use of disposable bags is to promote the use of more durable, reusable bags; and WHEREAS, studies document that when customers are charged for disposable bags, the use of such bags is dramatically reduced; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that requiring food stores to charge for the use of disposable bags would help address the environmental problems associated with such use, would relieve City taxpayers of the costs incurred by the City in connection therewith, and would be in the best interests of the City. Packet Pg. 333 - 2 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated herein as findings of the City Council. Section 2. That Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article IX which shall read in its entirety as follows: ARTICLE IX DISPOSABLE BAGS Sec. 12-137. Definitions. The following terms used in this Chapter shall have the meanings ascribed to them below unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Disposable Bag shall mean a bag, other than a reusable bag, provided to a customer at a checkout stand, cash register, point of sale, or other point of departure by any retail establishment for the purpose of transporting and carrying away items purchased at the store. Disposable Bag shall not include: (1) bags used by consumers inside the store, before the point of sale, to: a. package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; b. contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, or fish; c. contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; or d. contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods. (2) bags used to protect a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other items when placed in a reusable bag; (3) bags provided by pharmacists to contain prescription drugs; or (4) newspaper bags, door-hanger bags, laundry-dry cleaning bags, or bags sold in packages containing multiple bags for uses such as food storage, garbage, pet waste, or yard waste. Food store shall mean a retail business within the City limits that is located in a permanent building containing at least five thousand (5,000) square feet of retail space, Packet Pg. 334 - 3 - that operates year round as a full-line, self-service market offering for sale staple foodstuffs, meats, produce, dairy products or other perishable items for off-premise human consumption, and that provides disposable bags to customers. Food store shall not include: (1) temporary vending establishments for fruits, vegetables, packaged meats, and dairy; (2) vendors at farmers' markets or other temporary events; (3) businesses at which foodstuffs are an incidental part of the business; For the purposes of subsection (3) above, food sales will be considered to be “incidental” if such sales comprise no more than two (2) percent of the business’s gross sales in the City as measured by the dollar value of food sales as a percentage of the dollar value of total sales at any single location. Reusable Bag shall mean a bag that: (1) is designed and manufactured to withstand repeated uses over a period of time; (2) is made from a material that can withstand regular cleaning and disinfecting; (3) is at least two and one-quarter (2.25) mils thick if made from plastic; (4) is designed to have a minimum lifetime of seventy (75) uses; and (5) has the capability of carrying a minimum of eighteen (18) pounds. Disposable bag charge shall mean a cost imposed by a food store pursuant to the provisions of this Article upon each disposable bag used by customers to transport goods from the store. Sec. 12-138. Disposable bag charge requirements. (1) For each disposable bag a food store provides to a customer, the food store shall collect from the customer, and the customer shall pay, at the time of purchase, a disposable bag charge of no less than ten cents ($0.10). (2) All food stores shall record on the customer transaction receipt the number of disposable bags provided to the customer and the total amount collected from such customer for the disposable bag charge. (3) No food store may provide a rebate or in any way reimburse a customer for any part of the disposable bag charge. Packet Pg. 335 - 4 - (4) No food store may exempt any customer from any part of the disposable bag charge for any reason except as stated in Section 12-140. (5) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit food stores from providing incentives for the use of reusable bags through credits or rebates for customers who bring their own bags to the point of sale for the purpose of carrying away goods. (6) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit customers from using bags of any type that the customers bring into the store or from carrying away goods purchased by such customers and that are not placed in a bag. Sec. 12-139. Retention and administration of the disposable bag charge. (1) Subject to the requirements of subsection (2) below, all monies collected by a food store for any disposable bag charge may be retained by the food store. (2) Each food store must use at least fifty (50) percent of the revenue derived in each calendar year from the imposition of disposable bag charges to procure and distribute to its customers, free of charge, reusable bags. (3) The City Manager shall administer the disposable bag charge and may adopt administrative rules and regulations to implement the provisions of this Article. Sec. 12-140. Exemptions. A food store may provide a disposable bag to a customer at no charge if the customer provides proof that he or she is a participant in a federal or state Food Assistance Program, to the extent permissible under the relevant program. Sec. 12-141. Audits. (a) Each food store shall maintain accurate and complete records of the disposable bag charges collected under the provisions of this Article and the number of disposable bags provided to customers, and shall also maintain such books, accounts, invoices, or other documentation necessary to verify the accuracy and completeness of such records. It shall be the duty of each food store to keep and preserve all such documents and records, including any electronic information, for a period of three years from the end of the calendar year of such records. (b) If requested, each food store shall make the foregoing records available for inspection and audit by the City during regular business hours so that the City may verify compliance with the provisions of this Article. To the extent permitted by law, all such records shall be treated as confidential commercial information. Packet Pg. 336 - 5 - Sec. 12-142. Violations and penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this Article, whether by acting in a manner declared to be unlawful or by failing to act as required, commits a civil infraction and shall be subject to the penalty provisions of Subsection 1-15(f) of this Code. Sec. 12-143. Severability. If any provision, paragraph, clause or word of this Article is declared to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, it is hereby declared to be the legislative intent that the effect of such decision shall be limited to the provision that is expressly invalidated. Such decision shall not affect, impair or nullify this Article as a whole or any other part, and the rest of this Article shall continue in full force and effect. Section 3. The provisions of this Ordinance shall take effect January 2, 2015. Section 4. This Ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City, and covers matters of local concern. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 1st day of July, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 337 - 1 - OPTION #2 ORDINANCE NO. 112, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS REGARDING DISPOSABLE BAGS WHEREAS, the City, through its policies, programs, and laws, supports efforts to reduce the amount of waste deposited into the landfill and to pursue waste minimization as a long term goal by emphasizing waste prevention efforts; and WHEREAS, the use of plastic or paper disposable bags has severe impacts on the environment on a local and global scale, including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm to wildlife, atmospheric acidification, water consumption, and solid waste generation; and WHEREAS, even when recycled, plastic disposable bags cause operational problems at recycling processing facilities; and WHEREAS, although disposable paper bags are perceived by some as being more environmentally friendly than disposable plastic bags, the manufacturing, transport, recycling, and disposal of paper bags consume a substantial amount of environmental resources; and WHEREAS, some retailers do not provide disposable bags to their customers, thereby avoiding the environmental impacts associated with the use of such bags; and WHEREAS, the City’s taxpayers bear the costs associated with the negative impacts of disposable bags; and WHEREAS, from an overall environmental and economic perspective, the City believes that the best alternative to the continued use of disposable bags is to promote the use of more durable, reusable bags; and WHEREAS, studies document that when customers are charged for disposable bags, the use of such bags is dramatically reduced; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that requiring retailers to charge for the use of disposable bags would help address the environmental problems associated with such use, would relieve City taxpayers of the costs incurred by the City in connection therewith, and would be in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated herein as findings of the City Council. Packet Pg. 338 - 2 - Section 2. That Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article IX which shall read in its entirety as follows: ARTICLE IX DISPOSABLE BAGS Sec. 12-137. Definitions. The following terms used in this Chapter shall have the meanings ascribed to them below unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Consent to purchase shall mean a customer understands there is a charge for a disposable bag and agrees, by words or actions, to purchase a disposable bag. Disposable bag shall mean a bag, other than a reusable bag, provided to a customer at a checkout stand, cash register, point of sale, or other point of departure by any retailer for the purpose of transporting and carrying away items purchased at the retail location. Disposable Bag shall not include: (1) bags used by consumers inside the retail location, before the point of sale, to: a. package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; b. contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, or fish; c. contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; or d. contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods. (2) bags used to prevent a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other items when placed in a reusable bag; (3) bags provided by pharmacists to contain prescription drugs; or (4) door-hanger bags, dry cleaning bags, or bags sold to the end user in packages containing multiple bags for uses such as food storage, garbage, pet waste, or yard waste. Disposable bag charge shall mean a cost imposed by a retailer for each disposable bag it provides to a customer; the minimum amount of which is the actual cost to the retailer in acquiring such disposable bag. Actual cost includes, but is not limited to, the cost of transportation and handling of each disposable bag, the cost of each bag, and the cost to administer the requirements of this ordinance. Packet Pg. 339 - 3 - Newspaper company shall mean any corporation, business, or company that provides to customers any publication, printed on newsprint, intended for general circulation, and published regularly at short intervals, containing information and editorials on current events and news of general interest. Retailer shall mean any person selling, leasing or renting tangible personal property or services at retail. Retailer shall include any of the following: (1) auctioneer; (2) salesperson, representative, peddler or canvasser, who makes sales as a direct or indirect agent of, or obtains such property or services sold from, a dealer, distributor, supervisor or employer; and (3) charitable organization or governmental entity that makes sales of tangible personal property to the public, notwithstanding the fact that the merchandise may have been acquired by gift or donation or that the proceeds are to be used for charitable or governmental purposes. Retailer shall not include: (1) temporary vending establishments for fruits, vegetables, packaged meats, and dairy; (2) vendors at farmers' markets, garage sales, or other temporary events; or (3) any establishment that is a type of restaurant as defined in the City’s Land Use Code. Reusable Bag shall mean a bag that: (1) is designed and manufactured to withstand repeated uses over a period of time; (2) is made from a material that can withstand regular cleaning and disinfecting; (3) is at least two and one-quarter (2.25) mils thick if made from plastic; (4) is designed to have a minimum lifetime of seventy (75) uses; and (5) has the capability of carrying a minimum of eighteen (18) pounds. Sec. 12-138. Disposable bag requirements. Packet Pg. 340 - 4 - (a) For each disposable bag a retailer provides to a customer, the retailer shall collect from the customer, and the customer shall pay, at the time of purchase, a disposable bag charge. (b) No retailer may provide, and no customer may receive, a disposable bag unless such customer has given consent to purchase such bag. (c) Each retailer that provides disposable bags to customers shall record on the customer transaction receipt the number of disposable bags provided to the customer, the charge per disposable bag, and the total amount charged for the disposable bag or bags received. (d) Each retailer shall provide, and prominently place at any retail location at which disposable bags are provided to customers, a disposable bag recycling bin for use for recycling of disposable bags. Each such retailer shall recycle all recyclable disposable bags collected for recycling. (e) No retailer may provide a rebate or in any way reimburse a customer for any part of the disposable bag charge. (f) No retailer may exempt any customer from any part of the disposable bag charge for any reason except as stated in Section 12-142. (g) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit a retailer from providing incentives for the use of reusable bags through credits or rebates for customers who bring their own bags to the point of sale for the purpose of carrying away goods. (h) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit customers from using bags of any type that the customers bring into a retail location or from carrying away goods purchased by such customers and that are not placed in a bag. Sec. 12-139. Retention of the disposable bag charge. All monies collected by a retailer for any disposable bag charge may be retained by the retailer. Sec. 12-140. Subscription newspapers. (a) Any newspaper company that provides for regular delivery of newspapers to customer premises must obtain customer written consent for the use of protective newspaper bags for delivered newspapers each time the customer begins or renews a newspaper subscription. A newspaper company must permit the customer to request that protective newspaper bags only be used when wet weather conditions are reasonably expected. Packet Pg. 341 - 5 - (b) If requested, each newspaper company shall make the foregoing records available for inspection and audit by the City during regular business hours so that the City may verify compliance with the provisions of this Article. Sec. 12-141. Administrative rules and regulations. The City Manager may adopt administrative rules and regulations to implement the provisions of this Article. Sec. 12-142. Exemptions. Any retailer that participates in a federal or state food assistance program may provide a disposable bag to a customer at no charge if the customer provides proof that he or she is a participant in a federal or state food assistance program, to the extent permissible under the relevant program. Sec. 12-143. Audits. (a) Each retailer shall maintain accurate and complete records of the disposable bag charges collected under the provisions of this Article, the cost of acquiring such bags, and the number of disposable bags provided to customers. Each retailer shall also maintain such books, accounts, invoices, or other documentation necessary to verify the accuracy and completeness of such records. It shall be the duty of each retailer to keep and preserve all such documents and records, including any electronic information, for a period of three years from the end of the calendar year of such records. (b) If requested, each retailer shall make the foregoing records available for inspection and audit by the City during regular business hours so that the City may verify compliance with the provisions of this Article. To the extent permitted by law, all such records shall be treated as confidential commercial information. Sec. 12-144. Violations and penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this Article, whether by acting in a manner declared to be unlawful or by failing to act as required, commits a civil infraction and shall be subject to the penalty provisions of Subsection 1-15(f) of this Code. Sec. 12-145. Severability. If any provision, paragraph, clause or word of this Article is declared to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, it is hereby declared to be the legislative intent that the effect of such decision shall be limited to the provision that is expressly invalidated. Such decision shall not affect, impair or nullify this Article as a whole or any other part, and the rest of this Article shall continue in full force and effect. Sec. 12-146. Sunset. Packet Pg. 342 - 6 - The provisions established in this Division shall terminate and be of no further force and effect on April 1, 2016, unless this sunset provision is repealed or modified by the City Council. Section 3. The City Manager is directed to evaluate opportunities for use of biodegradable animal waste and other refuse bags in City operations, implement City practices that promote the reduction of use of disposable bags, and eliminate the use of disposable bags wherever feasible. Section 4. The City Manager is directed to develop an awareness and conservation campaign to educate the public about the financial and environmental costs of using disposable bags. If funds are available to produce educational materials as part of said awareness campaign, the City Manager shall make them available upon request to retailers that are subject to the requirements of this Ordinance. Section 5. The provisions of this Ordinance shall take effect April 1, 2015. Section 6. This Ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City, and covers matters of local concern. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 343 - 7 - Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 344 Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF John Stokes, Natural Resources Director SUBJECT Resolution 2014-075 Naming a Loop Trail Within a New 31-Acre Natural Area and Restarting the Process for Selecting an Overall Name for the New Natural Area. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this agenda item is to restart the process with the Natural Areas Department and the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board to make a recommendation to Council of a name for a new 31-acre natural area on the Poudre River conveyed to the City by Woodward Governor and to name a loop trail within that natural area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the proposed Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Earlier this year Woodward Governor conveyed a 31-acre site to Natural Areas along the river and adjoining their new corporate headquarters location. It is the practice of the Natural Areas Department (Department) to name its properties for both interpretive and management reasons. Names typically reflect the natural values of the property or the area, although a number of Natural Areas have been named for persons (Attachment 1). Shortly after the acquisition of the property, Department staff solicited names from the public. Many suggestions were submitted (Attachment 2). Prior to adoption of a new Naming Policy in 2011, staff would have administratively selected a name from the list developed by the public. The 2011 Naming Policy, however, requires that a Council ad hoc committee be appointed to make a naming recommendation to Council for its review and approval if the property is to be named after a person or entity. Based on the language of the 2011 Naming Policy there are two options available for naming City-owned property or facilities. 1. If the property is to be named for a person or entity, the name must be approved by Council resolution and after review by an ad hoc committee “formed for the purpose of selecting and recommending a name for such property…” The ad hoc committee “may be initiated by request of the City Manager or the Mayor or by majority vote of the City Council.” a. If a personal name is to be considered, a resolution adopting the name shall “include a description of the donation or other significant service or benefit to the community… that is the basis for the designation of the name approved.” b. If using a personal name the person(s) shall have been determined “to have provided significant service or direct benefit to the community that has endured, or will endure, over many years.” Packet Pg. 345 Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 2 c. If a donation is the basis for the personal name under consideration, the donation generally “should be no less than seventy-five percent…of the value of the property…” 2. If a personal name is not under consideration, the City Manager is authorized to “establish administrative rules and procedures for the selection…” In the case of Natural Area properties, as noted above, staff solicits names from the public and selects a name for the site which can then be reviewed and approved by the City Manager. On January 15, 2014, Department staff recommended the name Coy Hoffman Natural Area to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (the “Board”). Staff made the recommendation due to the significant cultural, agricultural, and water rights history associated with the site. John Coy homesteaded the property in 1862 and was one of the earliest citizens of Fort Collins. The water right developed by Coy is the 13th priority right on the river. The Department now owns 50% of the water right. The original Coy barn is still located on Woodward Governor’s adjacent property and there will be a loop trail that brings visitors near the barn. The Hoffmans married into the Coy family and established a mill on the property which operated for many decades. (Attachments 3-8 provide historic information as well as information from surviving family members). The Board, however, was opposed to this name for a variety of reasons. (Attachment 9) Essentially the Board was concerned that the land had not been donated by the Coy or Hoffman families and that a site name reflecting the natural or Native American history would be more appropriate. In addition, the modern settlement history of the property including the histories of the Coy and Hoffman families, could be interpreted as being endorsed by the City as, for example, is the case at Bobcat Ridge Natural Area. At its February 12, 2014 meeting, the Board passed a motion to advise Council of its opposition to the “Coy Hoffman Natural Area” name, but did not recommend another specific name for the Property. On April 1, 2014, City Council adopted Resolution 2014-029 which called for the appointment of an ad hoc Council committee to consider and recommend a name for a new Natural Area recently conveyed by Woodward Governor to the City’s Natural Areas Department. The ad hoc committee met on May 8, 2014. The four members of the committee were not able to reach consensus. Two members favored staff’s original recommendation of Coy Hoffman Natural Area. The other two members of the committee were interested in honoring and recognizing the Coy Hoffman families and their Fort Collins history and accomplishments; however, they were not comfortable using a personal name for a City-owned facility. The ad hoc committee met again on August 11, 2014 and directed staff to prepare a resolution that would name a loop trail on the site the Coy-Hoffman Trail (Attachment 10). Visitors to the loop trail will pass nearby the historic barn. The barn itself is on Woodward Governor’s property but is only a short distance from the loop trail. The ad hoc committee also instructed staff to provide historic interpretation at the barn overlook. The resolution will also direct staff to restart the process to name the property. The process would include public outreach by the Natural Areas Department, a review and recommendation by the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board, and a final review and approval by City Council. The ad hoc committee asked that special attention be paid to the location of the property in the heart of Fort Collins and its historic, cultural, and natural significance. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board recommended against naming the entire site Coy-Hoffmann. The Board also indicated its support for other potential names representative of the natural features of the area. PUBLIC OUTREACH The Natural Areas Department solicited names from the public (Attachment 2). Staff discussed the name with the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board on several occasions. Staff brought the item to Council on Packet Pg. 346 Agenda Item 22 Item # 22 Page 3 April 1st when it appointed a Council ad hoc committee to consider the matter. The ad hoc committee met on May 8th and August 11. Several members of the public and surviving family members spoke in favor of Coy Hoffman Natural Area. ATTACHMENTS 1. Natural Area Site Names that Utilize Personal Pronouns (PDF) 2. Name Suggestions (PDF) 3. Dorothy Whisler letter (PDF) 4. John Coy history (PDF) 5. Carol Tunner memo to Council (PDF) 6. Heather Wolhart note to Council (PDF) 7. Gordon Hazard note to Council (PDF) 8. Janet Williams note to Council (PDF) 9. Land Conservation Stewardship Board memo, May 1, 2014 (PDF) 10. Loop trail map (PDF) 11. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 347 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 348 Attachment22.1: Natural Area Site Names that Utilize Personal Pronouns (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Packet Pg. 349 Attachment22.1: Natural Area Site Names that Utilize Personal Pronouns (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 2 Name Suggestions 1 NATURAL CULTURAL Raccoon Hollow The Hicken Loop Er Beaver Point Poudre Head-On-My-Shoulder Humulus (Humulus lupus = hops) Antoine Janis Woodhouse Wonderland Governors’ Woods Woodhouse’s Wonderland Coy Hoffman Woodhouse’s Wetland Temple Grandin Woodhouse Wetlands Pascal’s View Woodhouse Riverside Chief Friday Windhorse Park Old Pickle Factory Whistle Stop Links Lincoln Greens The Woodlands at Olde Town Lincoln Greenway Silver Fox Minnie Luzahan Cottonwood Curve John F. Kennedy Memorial Spring Hatch Woodward Evergreen Augustina Godinez Meadowlard LongsView Greenway Chief Friday’s Camp Sweetgrass Patrick Kind Bankfull Bend Baldwin Willow Brook Bend Old Town Willow Brook Mulberry Mallard Creek Brewer’s Park Mallard Rush Odaroloc Rainbow Bends Stone Mill Cedar Fen John Coy Homestead Cottonwood Old Town Open Space Swift Currents Woodward Woods Cottonwood Falls Hoffman Hollow Red Flicker Falls Udall Cottonwood Corner Woodward Woods Muskrat Meadows Woodward Bend Mink Haven Hoffman Farm Mallard Meanders Coy Park Merganser Meanders John and Emily Coy Park Horned Owl Haven Coy Boxelder Bend Mayberry Poudre Prairie Berrymay Granite Valley LeBerry Streamside Sheltering Place Aera larutan Swallowtail Shores Cottonwood Corridor Riparian Byway Riparian Way Riparian Packet Pg. 350 Attachment22.2: Name Suggestions (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 2 Name Suggestions 2 Catnip River Wild River Wild Chelydra Snapping Turtle Bees Poudre River Edge Trail Poudre River Side Trail and Conservation Area Ridgeway Riverside Nature Preserve Remembrance River’s Edge Bee = koho’ok Crow = houu Deer = bih’ih Blackbird = nih’eeno Magpie = woo uh ei Bear = wox Fox = beexou Cottontail = nooku Coyote = koo oh Elk’s Rest Mullin Wood Lightfoot Trail River Side Park Screech Owl Chase Screech Owl Stretch Screech Owl Hollow Screech Owl Burrow Screech Owl Roost Skyline Rist Park Nature Mountain Sky Cloud Riverside Park Eagle Eye Giant Blue Heron White Tail River Island Pearl Wind Fox Song Mink Meandor Lincolnberry Woods Heron’s Haven Serenity Acres Packet Pg. 351 Attachment22.2: Name Suggestions (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 2 Name Suggestions 3 Cottonwood Springs Poudre Springs River Run River Walk Foxtail Marshes Cottonwood Corridor Cottonwood Marsh Dogleg Megafauna Meadow River Passage River Pass Caddis Corridor Winding River Coyote Willow Willow Sand Bar Willow Packet Pg. 352 Attachment22.2: Name Suggestions (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 353 Attachment22.3: Dorothy Whisler letter (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Packet Pg. 354 Attachment22.3: Dorothy Whisler letter (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 4 History of John G. Coy Packet Pg. 355 Attachment22.4: John Coy history (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Attachment 5 City Manager Atteberry, Madame Mayor Weikunat, and members of City Council: I am writing to recommend that the new natural area bordered by the Poudre River and owned for the last 151 years by the Coy-Hoffman family be named the Coy-Hoffman Natural Area. As documented in my 1995 State Register of Historic Properties nomination: Fort Collins began as “Camp Collins” in 1862 when it was a military outpost organized near present day Laporte. It was founded to protect emigrants and the Overland Stage Line from outlaws and Indians. The flood of 1864 forced the relocation of the camp downriver to a site that was one mile west and across the river from the Coy Farm which had been homesteaded in 1862. The Coy’s accommodated the soldier’s gardens on their land and Chief Friday’s band of Indians camped on Coy’s land when they visited the fort. The earliest settlement had been fur trappers and their Indian wives, but with the gold rush of 1858-59, disillusioned miners retreated to the area along with emigrants like the Coys who staked out the rich bottomland along the river for their subsistence farming. By 1861 there were fewer than ten settlers outside present day Laporte with most of them located on the river bottomlands southeast of present day Fort Collins. The handful of area farmers found their hay and grain products were very marketable to the surrounding gold mining camps. John G. and Emma Coy were married in 1862 and headed west on their wedding trip. A harrowing account of their experiences crossing the country is chronicled in “The History of Larimer County,1911” by Ansel Watrous. In Missouri, their shotgun was taken by highwaymen and their lives were threatened. While in Nebraska, some of their oxen and a cow disappeared or were stolen one night and they limped into the Cache la Poudre valley with few animals to pull their wagon. Emily was the first married white woman in the area. The winter was closing in and the mountains were high so after spotting an abandoned trapper’s cabin down by the river, they chose to stay and Coy filed on his claim in August 1862. By spring, Emily was pregnant with the first of five children to attain adulthood. Second child, Francis, married John M. Hoffman, a miller, and in 1894 he built the notable Hoffman Flour and Feed Mill just across the river from the farm to the south. Hoffman was a prominent citizen as president and general manager of the Hoffman Milling Company. Their Victorian home at the corner of Whedbee and E. Oak Streets is one of Fort Collins’ most important historical buildings recognized on the Local, State, and National Registers. Hoffman Mill Road today takes one into the city’s Nix Farm Natural Areas headquarters. John and Francis Hoffman were the grandparents of James Porter Hoffman, owner of the Coy-Hoffman Farm until it was sold in 2013 to Woodward-Governor. John Coy was Director of the County Fair Association and president in 1881. He was a leader in the formation of the Farmer’s Protective Association in 1884 which built the Harmony Mill still standing on E. Lincoln. He was instrumental in founding the Colorado Agricultural College and he was one of the leaders of the newly-organized grange who plowed up the land and raised a crop to start a local fund to build the college. In 1880 he helped form the Farmers’ Institute for the college. Coy helped establish Roosevelt National Forest and Park. Coy was a charter member of the Larimer County Packet Pg. 356 Attachment22.5: Carol Tunner memo to Council (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Stockgrowers Association that realized the industry depended on water. The John G. Coy ditch, a low 13th in priority, gives Coy’s land one of the oldest water rights on the Poudre River. In 1867 Coy was a judge of election for Precinct No. 4, Larimer County, he was on the first Grand Jury, and he was County Commissioner from 1874 to 1877 and 1893 to 1896. John G. Coy’s lifelong occupation was as a farmer at the heart of all agricultural pursuits, and they were dependent on the Poudre River. In 1995 the Coy-Hoffman Barn, silos, and milk house stood alone. The barn’s roof was collapsed on the south side and the entire structure was threatened. In 1991 the golf course had torn down the wonderful historic 1862 farmhouse. Jim and Ruth Hoffman asked me to save the barn but this was an outparcel and not able to be locally designated. Just then Dr. Donald Klein of CSU, a barn historian, came into my office and offered to co-chair a restoration with an initial donation of $500. I accepted the challenge to devote three years volunteering to professionally write the successful State Register of Historic Properties nomination, write a $52,000. State Historical Fund grant, and manage the grant and fund-raising. Jim Hoffman donated over $8,000 for the cash match. After we cleaned hay out of the second floor barn, the floor was rotted through - we needed thousands more to replace it. We had a golf tournament on the property, a garage sale, an appeal letter to Fort Collins’ professionals, and Odell Brewery volunteered to give us 25 cents for every bottle sold of Old Barn Ale named after our barn. We raised $25,000 more for barn restoration. Our SHF grant sponsor was the Fort Collins Historical Society. I feel uniquely qualified to have a say in this naming of Coy’s 1862 homestead along the Poudre River. The Poudre nourished and grew this town. Our first 4th of July celebrations were held here. It was once considered to be City Park. Its banks were the cradle of our civilization in the 1850s and 60s. We have lost the river’s historic buildings in the Strauss cabin, Strang farm, Sherwood Stage Station, and Grout House at the environmental learning center to arsonists. What could have been a wonderful trail of history along the river is lost. Coy-Hoffman is all that is left and the pioneer structures in this historic district need to be memorialized permanently in the natural area’s name so generations to come will know of Fort Collins’ beginnings. Interpretation along the river is excellent and should be done but it doesn’t reach everybody and in time that gets removed, replaced, defaced, forgotten. Fort Collins’ ever growing population deserves to know about our communities’ roots permanently in naming the natural area. Carol Tunner Historic Preservation Planner May 6, 2014 Packet Pg. 357 Attachment22.5: Carol Tunner memo to Council (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 6 On May 8, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Heather Wolhart" wrote: City Council, First I want to thank those of you that were involved in this mornings open discussion about naming the open space property along the Woodward site. Thank you also for allowing and listening to comments from those of us that sat in on your meeting. It appears that there is an impasse on the naming issue that divides along the lines of those committed to the nature part of natural areas and those committed to the historical significance of this particular site. There may be common ground yet vetted completely. John Coy was the original patron of the concept of natural land preservation in this area. He was a very progressive thinker when it came to a deep understanding of the balance needed between using land for agriculture/profit and conserving land for the good of the land itself and the future. He was the force behind what is now Arapaho State forest and Roosevelt Natl. Forrest. His deep understanding of good agricultural land practices and wise water use made him at one point the most successful farmer in the valley. He would probably have been appreciative of the natural area program and its overall purpose. So by acknowledging him in a name for that area you would be honoring someone that was a founder of the natural area concept in this area. Would it therefor be possible to find a name that would incorporate both the family history and the nature benefactor that he was? Something like the John Coy River Bend Wetlands? Just a starter idea, but maybe a way to work towards consensus. Thank you for thinking about this. Respectfully, Heather Wolhart Packet Pg. 358 Attachment22.6: Heather Wolhart note to Council (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area)  John Stokes From: Wendy Williams Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 1:18 PM To: John Stokes Subject: FW: Naming of new Natural Resources Area - Fort Collins Historical Society &z/  ͲͲͲͲͲKƌŝŐŝŶĂůDĞƐƐĂŐĞͲͲͲͲͲ &ƌŽŵ͗ŐŚĂnjĂƌĚ΀ŵĂŝůƚŽ͗ŐŚĂnjĂƌĚΛůĂŵĂƌ͘ĐŽůŽƐƚĂƚĞ͘ĞĚƵ΁ ^ĞŶƚ͗tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ͕DĂLJϬϳ͕ϮϬϭϰϭϭ͗ϯϭD dŽ͗ŝƚLJ>ĞĂĚĞƌƐ ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗EĂŵŝŶŐŽĨŶĞǁEĂƚƵƌĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐƌĞĂͲ&ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů^ŽĐŝĞƚLJ   DĂLJŽƌĂŶĚŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝůDĞŵďĞƌƐ͕  dŚĞ&ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů^ŽĐŝĞƚLJƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƐƚŚĞƵƐĞŽĨƚŚĞŽLJͲ,ŽĨĨŵĂŶEĂƚƵƌĂůƌĞĂĂƐƚŚĞŶĂŵĞŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂƵŶĚĞƌ ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚŝƐŶĂŵĞƌĞĨůĞĐƚƐŚŝƐƚŽƌLJŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͘WůĞĂƐĞƚĂŬĞƚŚŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶǁŚĞŶƐĞůĞĐƚŝŶŐĂ ŶĂŵĞ͘zŽƵƌĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶǁŝůůůŝǀĞŽŶůŽŶŐĂĨƚĞƌĂŶLJŽĨƵƐĂƌĞƐƚŝůůŚĞƌĞ͘  dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͘  'ŽƌĚŽŶ͘,ĂnjĂƌĚ WƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚ &ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů^ŽĐŝĞƚLJ  ϭϰϭϯŵŝŐŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚ &ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ͕KϴϬϱϮϰͲϰϮϮϭ ϰϴϰͲϵϭϵϰ ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 359 Attachment22.7: Gordon Hazard note to Council (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 8 Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 2:43 PM To: Sue Kenney Subject: Coy Park -- Name for New Natural Area Dear Natural Areas Department: I am the great-great granddaughter of John and Emily Coy. In response to the article published in the Ft. Collins Coloradoan on November 24, 2013, titled "City is seeking name suggestion for new natural area," I would request that the City consider naming the area the "Coy Park" or the "John and Emily Coy Park." My mother, Dorothy Whisler, mailed a detailed letter to you with information regarding the history of John and Emily Coy's homesteading of the subject property in 1862 and their dedicated community involvement. (If for some reason you didn't receive her letter, please let me know and I will email you a scanned copy of the letter). Ownership of the property remained in members of the Coy family for over 150 years until my mother and her cousin sold the remaining property to Woodward Inc. this past spring. My mom's cousin, Jim Hoffman, and his family continue to reside in Ft. Collins. John and Emily Coy, and their children and grandchildren, and now great grandchildren, great-great grandchildren and great-great-great grandchildren continue to be active members of the Ft. Collins community. Thank you for your consideration of incorporating the Coy name into the name for the new natural area. Janet Williams Packet Pg. 360 Attachment22.8: Janet Williams note to Council [Revision 1] (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 361 Attachment22.9: Land Conservation Stewardship Board memo, May 1, 2014 (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) ATTACHMENT 10 Packet Pg. Site Name for New 31-acre Natural Area Packet Pg. 363 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Background Woodward conveyed a 31-acre property to the Natural Areas Department in January Natural Areas names its sites for identification, management purposes, and to provide some local flavor Natural Areas staff developed several names for this site, including an option that utilizes a family name Packet Pg. 364 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Background Based on Council adopted policy, if a personal name is under consideration an ad hoc naming committee must be formed to review potential names and make a recommendation to Council And, if recommending a personal name, it shall be determined by the ad hoc committee that the person or family has made significant service or contributions to the community Packet Pg. 365 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) On January 15, Natural Areas staff brought forward the name Coy- Hoffman Natural Area to the Land Conservation Stewardship Board On February 12, the Board passed a motion to oppose Coy-Hoffman and to favor a name in keeping with the site’s natural characteristics or Native American history Background Packet Pg. 366 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Ad Hoc Committee The Mayor requested that an ad hoc Council committee be formed to review options for naming the property and to make a recommendation to Council The committee met on May 8th, but was not able to reach consensus on a name Packet Pg. 367 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Alternatives Swift River Winding River Packet Pg. 368 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) Alternatives Pedestrian Bridge Packet Pg. 369 Attachment22.11: Powerpoint presentation (2097 : Name for new 31-acre Natural Area) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-075 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS NAMING A LOOP TRAIL WITHIN A NEW 31-ACRE NATURAL AREA AND RESTARTING THE PROCESS FOR SELECTING AN OVERALL NAME FOR THE NEW NATURAL AREA WHEREAS, on November 1, 2011, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 134, 2011, which added to the City Code Sections 23-141 and 142 regarding the naming of City properties and facilities; and WHEREAS, on January 15, 2014, Woodward, Inc., conveyed to the City a 31-acre parcel of land adjacent to the Poudre River to be used for Natural Areas purposes (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, on January 15, 2014, Natural Areas staff evaluated names solicited by the public and recommended to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (“LCSB”) that the Property be named “Coy-Hoffman Natural Area” after the families that homesteaded and farmed the Property, prior to Woodward, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the LCSB voted not to support the name proposed by staff and took no formal action on a second proposed name, “Swift Current Natural Area;” and WHEREAS, Section 23-141(b) of the City Code states that the naming of a City property or facility for one or more persons or entities shall be approved by the City Council by resolution, after review by an ad hoc City Council committee formed for the purpose of selecting and recommending a name for the property; that the formation of an ad hoc naming committee may be initiated by request of the City Manager or the Mayor, or by majority vote of the City Council; and that the committee may seek such public input and may request and consider such proposals and recommendations of City boards and commissions and the City Manager as the committee deems appropriate; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 23-141(b), Mayor Karen Weitkunat requested an ad hoc City Council committee be formed to select and recommend a name for the Property; and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution 2014-029, appointing Councilmembers Ross Cunniff, Bob Overbeck, Wade Troxell, and Mayor Karen Weitkunat to an ad hoc committee to review the options for naming the Property and to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding a name; and WHEREAS, the ad hoc committee met on May 8, 2014, and was unable to reach consensus among its members regarding a name to recommend to the City Council for the Property; and WHEREAS, the ad hoc committee met again on August 11, 2014, and voted to recommend a loop trail in the new natural area be named the “Coy-Hoffman Trail,” and to recommend that Council direct staff to restart the process to name the overall natural area; and Packet Pg. 370 - 2 - WHEREAS, upon consideration of the recommendations of the ad hoc committee, City Council finds it to be in the best interest of the City to name a loop trail after the Coy-Hoffman family, but to restart the process to select a name for the Property overall. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby directs that a loop trail to be located in a new as of yet un-named natural area donated by Woodward, Inc. on January 15, 2014, be designated the “Coy-Hoffman Trail.” Section 2. That the City Council hereby directs the City Manager to restart the process to select a name for that new 31-acre natural area that should strive to reflect the historical, cultural, geographic and natural significance of the site and area of the site in the heart of the City. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 371 Agenda Item 23 Item # 23 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Laurie Kadrich, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Dir Karen Cumbo, Director of PDT SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 113, 2014, Approving the Seventh Amendment to the Fort Collins-Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation, Growth Management and Related Issues. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to update a 2009 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Town of Timnath to incorporate several amendments and new land use provisions. The Land Use portions of the agreement are intended to provide planned and orderly development of urban services along the I-25 Corridor and to establish appropriate Growth Management and Influence Areas to support such development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The original agreement was reached in 2009 (Attachment 1) and has subsequently been extended by each jurisdiction. There are a number of reasons why the parties wish to amend this agreement. The Town of Timnath has recently completed a Comprehensive Plan and desires to have its updated Growth Management Area (GMA) reflected in an updated IGA with Fort Collins. Also, the City of Fort Collins wishes to remedy an inadvertent conflict that was created by the 2009 Timnath Agreement, The Timnath Agreement calls for certain changes to be made to the Fort Collins GMA; however, the City’s previous agreement with Larimer County requires County approval of any changes to the Fort Collins GMA. This puts Fort Collins in the untenable position of having to possibly violate the County agreement in order to comply with the Timnath Agreement. In addition, Fort Collins desires to ensure that lands are available within the Fort Collins GMA to complete an enclave of the Mulberry corridor. Finally, both Fort Collins and Timnath desire to create shared Areas of Influence (IAs) for key interchanges along I-25 in order to properly plan and fund infrastructure improvements and create orderly and attractive development along the Interstate. What needs to be resolved?  The negotiations in 2009 were acrimonious in nature and a mediator was used to form a tentative agreement between the two communities. At the time, Timnath was reaching towards the west side of I-25 to annex properties into its community. The 2009 agreement clearly states where either community is able to annex. Unfortunately, the agreement was not implemented due to the conflicting portions between the City-Timnath agreement and the City-Larimer County agreement. This new agreement will satisfy all parties in order that GMA boundaries can then be amended to be consistent with those in the County and those between Fort Collins and Timnath. Packet Pg. 372 Agenda Item 23 Item # 23 Page 2 Land Use Benefits to the City of Fort Collins:  Creation of three Areas of Influence (IAs) (Attachment 2). The intent of the IAs is to begin to develop joint financing mechanisms for public improvements and potential revenue sharing alternatives within such areas or modified areas, similar to the Windsor agreement for improvements at I-25 and Highway 392. This would provide Fort Collins with influence over how and what may develop within the Timnath GMA areas adjacent to key interchanges. Two are proposed for the I-25 interchanges at Prospect and Mountain Vista (Attachments 3 and 4). A third area near the Mulberry interchange was identified in the event that properties east of the interchange petition to annex into Timnath, otherwise the IA would not be considered as all surrounding property would be in the Fort Collins GMA (Attachment 5). The proposed language in this amendment establishes the general principles of Influence Areas, but specific properties and funding options will be negotiated and finalized later, after public engagement, much the way the Windsor agreement was developed. This does not change decision-making authority for land use within city boundaries. One adjustment to evaluate, for example, is moving the Mountain Vista boundary further north.  All subdivisions that developed to Fort Collins standards and entered into a pre-annexation agreement with Fort Collins would return to the Fort Collins GMA. This change is supported by Larimer County and would keep Fort Collins in compliance with the Larimer County IGA. This change is also supported by the Clydesdale subdivision and would allow the property owners to request annexation into Fort Collins. The affected subdivisions (Attachment 5) include: - Cloverleaf Mobile Home Park (MHP) - Vista Bonita Subdivision - Vista Grande Subdivision - Clydesdale Park Subdivision - Sunflower Subdivision  As part of this agreement, the parties would consult with the property owners in the Cloverleaf MHP and Vista Bonita to see if they wish to become part of Timnath rather than Fort Collins. If property owners desire to become part of Timnath, Fort Collins and Timnath would agree to seek the removal of those properties from the area described in the Fort Collins-Larimer GMA.  The City is ensured a method to create an enclave enclosing the East Mulberry Corridor by retaining a portion west of the Cloverleaf MHP. In the event Cloverleaf petitions for annexation to Timnath, Timnath agrees to provide a 40-foot boundary that would serve to close the enclave with additional annexation being sought from the railroad. Additional highlights of the Proposed Land Use Amendments (Attachment 6):  Timnath’s GMA increased on the Northern border into the Cobb Lake area. This expansion is part of the Timnath Comprehensive Plan.  There are also some “housekeeping” changes in removing language that no longer applies from the agreement, and clarifying where the Timnath GMA boundary is relative to the east access road along I-25. Timnath also requested that land owned by Poudre School District (PSD), east of I-25 and currently annexed into the City of Fort Collins, be moved to the Timnath GMA in the event PSD builds educational facilities to serve Timnath at that location. The amendment provides assurance to Timnath that Fort Collins would consider a de-annexation request by PSD under those circumstances, and further provides that, if de-annexed, and the property is not used for school purposes, any revenue would be shared with Fort Collins. Packet Pg. 373 Agenda Item 23 Item # 23 Page 3 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS There are increased costs of services due to the return of 5 subdivisions into the Fort Collins Growth Management Area rather than the Timnath Growth Management Area. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2009 Timnath Agreement (PDF) 2. Fort Collins-Timnath GMA plus Influence Areas (PDF) 3. Prospect IA (PDF) 4. Mountain Vista IA (PDF) 5. Mulberry IA plus 5 Subdivisions (PDF) 6. Summary of Boundary adjustments (PDF) 7. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 374 ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 375 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 376 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 377 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 378 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 379 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 380 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 381 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 382 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 383 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 384 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 385 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 386 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 387 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 388 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 389 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 390 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 391 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 392 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 393 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 394 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 395 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 396 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 397 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 398 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 399 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) Packet Pg. 400 Attachment23.1: 2009 Timnath Agreement (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 2014 Timnath Proposal Addions or Subtracons from 2009 Agreement (Plus Proposed Influence Areas) Last Revised: 04/03/2014 ATTACHMENT 2 N Timnath City Limits Timnath GMA Prior to 2009 Amendment Proposed Prospect Rd Influence Area (IA #1) Proposed Mtn. Vista Dr Influence Area (IA #2) Potenal Mulberry St Influence Area (IA #3) 2014 Proposed Timnath GMA Boundary GMA Addions Agreed to in 1st IGA Timnath (+) Fort Collins (-) Fort Collins (+) Fort Collins (-) Fort Collins (-) Packet Pg. 401 Attachment23.2: Fort Collins-Timnath GMA plus Influence Areas (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 402 Attachment23.3: Prospect IA (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 403 Attachment23.4: Mountain Vista IA (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 404 Attachment23.5: Mulberry IA plus 5 Subdivisions (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 405 Attachment23.6: Summary of Boundary adjustments (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 1 Seventh (7th ) Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Town of Timnath Karen Cumbo Director, Planning, Development & Transportation Laurie Kadrich Director, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Rick Richter Director, Infrastructure Services August 19, 2014 Council Meeting ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 406 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 2 Timnath & Fort Collins IGA: • February 17, 2009 • Established an agreed to Growth Management Area (GMA) • Inadvertently created a conflict with Larimer County IGA and the Fort Collins GMA • General agreement areas east of I-25 would be in the Timnath GMA Packet Pg. 407 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 3 Why an Amendment?: • First Amendment expired, temporarily extended • Timnath has completed a comprehensive plan and requests to update their GMA in the Fort Collins IGA • To resolve conflicts with the Larimer County IGA • To ensure an E. Mulberry Enclave option • To provide an opportunity for shared planning, infrastructure improvements and revenues for areas along the I-25 corridor by creating Influence Areas (IA) • Housekeeping changes Packet Pg. 408 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 4 Fort Collins – Timnath 2009 GMA Boundary Packet Pg. 409 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 5 Fort Collins – Larimer County GMA • Adopted May 1, 1980 • Amended November 21, 2000 Packet Pg. 410 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 6 Proposed Removal of Lands: • CSU Horticulture • State of Colorado • Agriculture, vacant or multiple owners • PSD • Multiple Activities; commercial, RV park, Nursery Packet Pg. 411 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 7 Proposed Prospect IA • Potential: – shared infrastructure costs – shared planning area – shared revenues Packet Pg. 412 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 8 Mountain Vista IA • Potential: – shared infrastructure costs – shared planning area – shared revenues Packet Pg. 413 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 9 Potential IA - Mulberry • Currently all Fort Collins GMA • Cloverleaf may petition to annex to Timnath • Vista Bonita may also petition to annex to Timnath Packet Pg. 414 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 10 7th Amendment Map • North Extension • 5 Subdivisions • 2 Proposed IAs • 1 Potential IA • PSD land • I-25 Access Rd. • 40’ Strip • Cloverleaf & Vista Bonita Packet Pg. 415 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) 11 Staff Recommendation • Staff recommends Adoption First Reading of Timnath 7th Amendment Packet Pg. 416 Attachment23.7: Powerpoint presentation (2118 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 113, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING A SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE FORT COLLINS-TIMNATH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING COOPERATION ON ANNEXATION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED ISSUES WHEREAS, on February 17, 2009, Timnath and Fort Collins entered into an intergovernmental agreement relating to annexation, growth management and related issues, which agreement resolved certain differences that had arisen between the parties regarding a variety of planning and growth management issues (the “Intergovernmental Agreement”); and WHEREAS, the parties are situated on opposite sides of Interstate 25 and are both committed to planned and orderly development; regulating the location and activities of development which may result in increased demand for services; providing for the orderly development and extension of urban services; to simplifying governmental structure when possible; promoting the economic vitality of both municipalities; protecting the environment; and raising revenue sufficient to meet the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, because of the proximity of the City and the Town, the parties have agreed to work toward developing a comprehensive development plan for certain areas of mutual interest and concern within the immediate vicinity of I-25, the purpose of which plan would be to explore joint financing mechanisms for public improvements and potential revenue sharing alternatives within such areas; and WHEREAS, the parties have previously executed First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement and now wish to execute a Seventh Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement in order to establish certain expectations with regard to joint planning and revenue sharing within the abovementioned areas of mutual interest and concern, and to address certain other issues that have arisen since the initial execution of the Intergovernmental Agreement, including Fort Collins’ interest in annexing a certain strip of property within the revised Timnath GMA, the disconnection by Fort Collins of certain Poudre School District land, the modification and addition of certain exhibits to this Intergovernmental Agreement, and the elimination of Fort Collins’ obligation under the Intergovernmental Agreement to unilaterally amend the boundaries of its Growth Management Area even if such amendment is not acceptable to Larimer County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the Mayor is hereby authorized to enter into a Seventh Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperation on Annexation, Growth Management and Related Issues in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, with such additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purpose of this Ordinance. Packet Pg. 417 - 2 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 418 EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 419 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 420 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 421 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 422 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 423 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 424 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 425 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 426 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 427 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 428 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 429 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 430 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Packet Pg. 431 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2132 : Timnath Intergovernmental Agreement ORD) Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Kevin Gertig, Utilities Executive Director Ken Mannon, Operations Services Director SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2014, Appropriating Capital Project Funding in the Light and Power, Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Drainage Enterprise Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Places Program, for the Construction of a New Utilities Administration Building in Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue and Renovation of 700 Wood Street. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this Appropriation Ordinance is to provide funding for the construction of a new Utility Administration Building within Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue, as well as renovation of the existing Utility Service Center at 700 Wood Street. The total combined project costs are $23,411,000 with $4,500,000 already appropriated from Light and Power reserves, leaving $18,911,000 to be appropriated with this ordinance. A Utility Building Team comprised of internal staff and external subject matter experts has worked with the architectural firm RNL and Adolfson and Peterson Construction to assess the best way to address the current building performance and space issues facing Fort Collins Utilities’ ongoing and future business operations. Balancing the city-wide goal to have high-performing office buildings with the need to be fiscally prudent has led the Building Team to recommend the two-pronged funding process proposed in this appropriation ordinance. The four Utility Enterprise Funds (Light and Power, Water, Wastewater and Stormwater) will share the costs of the projects. All appropriations will come from the existing reserves in these four funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Staff has discussed with the City Council Finance Committee, as well as at the November 19, 2013 City Council Work Session, information regarding the Utility Service Center (USC) at 700 Wood Street. The USC has grown through seven additions to its current 108,000 square foot capacity over the past 45 years. Key drivers that support the renovation of the USC are:  Growing business operations that support Fort Collins community service delivery expectations  Building significantly lacks in sufficient energy efficiency, especially the HVAC system  Light & Power crews have male only facilities Initially, to address this last immediate need, the Light & Power Enterprise Fund appropriated $4.5M. However, recognizing ongoing space needs will impact Fort Collins Utilities’ effectiveness to meet current performance levels for service delivery and customer satisfaction in the near future, it was determined that it is Packet Pg. 432 Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 2 highly desirable to relocate several external customer-focused departments under one roof downtown. A comparison of the costs associated with the addition to the USC to the costs of new construction led to the recommendation of a more limited renovation at 700 Wood Street and building a new Utilities Administration Building (UAB) downtown as part of the development of Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue. The vision for both the UAB construction and the USC renovation is one that will demonstrate how facilities can serve as a model in environmental stewardship to the Fort Collins community. Sustainability for the 21st Century is a defining focus of Utilities core services; delivering a level of service our customers expect and in an environmentally and socially responsible way while making the best economic choices for the long-term. The Building Team recommended the two projects be combined into one design and funding process in order to align the vision and results of both projects and optimize economies of scale. These projects present an excellent opportunity for Utilities to “walk the talk” by demonstrating best practices in high performance new construction and retrofit projects. Based on energy studies at the USC and what is being accomplished in new construction, it is proposed that these two facilities be designed to be “net zero energy ready.” This means that the buildings will be designed and constructed to have very low energy use, such that the addition of on-site renewable energy would result in net zero energy consumption on an annual basis. It is expected the new UAB will achieve a LEED Gold certification at a minimum. Utility Administration Building (UAB) This new building would house the entire Customer Connections Department and some senior management of Fort Collins Utilities. At 37,500 square feet, this building will meet the long term space requirements of the Customer Connections department and administrative functions that would be relocated from the Utility Service Center and space currently leased by Fort Collins Utilities from the City’s General Fund at 117 North Mason. Space initially unused by Utility staff would be leased in this building to the City’s Sustainability Services Area until it is needed by Fort Collins Utilities. The construction of the 37,500 square foot Utility Administration Building is expected to cost $14.1M as shown in the table below: UAB Budget $14,100,000 Includes… Capacity for staff through 2028 Water source heat pump system Open office environment LEED Gold certification PV system on roof for Net Zero building 1% for Art in Public Places Does not include… Added Cost… Install Alpen 725 Series fiberglass windows $220,000 Ground Source Geo-thermal system for heat pumps $300,000 Add additional site furnishings for exterior plaza area $120,000 Packet Pg. 433 Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 3 The $14.1M provides sufficient funding for the new construction, meeting space requirements through 2028 and providing a rooftop solar photovoltaic system to make the UAB a Net Zero building. This appropriation request, however, does not provide sufficient funding to also install high efficiency fiberglass windows, implement a ground source geothermal heat pump, or furnishings for an external plaza area. Diagonal and parallel parking has been added along Howes Street increasing the number of spaces available by 25 spaces between LaPorte Avenue and Cherry Street. Most of the employees who will be occupying this building already work downtown at 117 North Mason. It is anticipated there will be 41 employees relocating from 700 Wood Street to this building. Parking Services has indicated there is sufficient capacity in the parking garages during business hours for these 41 employees. Utility Service Center (USC) The new building on LaPorte Avenue would relieve some of the space needs at the USC. However, there remain operational needs which would best be met by also renovating the existing space at the USC. Such a renovation would modify some existing space to meet the Light & Power crew needs as well as improve the building’s security and energy efficiency. The current HVAC system is at the end of its life and will require significant investment over the next few years even without this renovation. Incorporating the HVAC investment into a more comprehensive renovation of the entire building envelope will substantially improve the energy efficiency of the building. The renovation of existing space at the USC is expected to cost $9.3M as shown in the table below: Packet Pg. 434 Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 4 The budget provides sufficient funding to fully address the Light & Power crew space needs, replace the current HVAC system, renovate the entrance area, improve building security, and provide extensive building envelope improvements. Building envelope improvements include replacing the current exterior windows, repairing the existing skylights, and adding roof insulation. Making these improvements will result in a lower cost HVAC system and long-term energy savings as well as move the building closer to being a net zero energy building. This appropriation request, however, does not provide sufficient funding to also implement a geothermal heat exchange system, remove existing interior walls to create an open office environment, acquire new furnishings or provide a solar array to achieve net zero energy consumption. The baseline budgets for both projects include all permit and development fees, deconstruction costs and sufficient contingency funding for reasonable contingencies. Combining the two projects into the single appropriation being requested herein of $18.9M includes the associated 1% appropriation for Art in Public Places: Combined Projects Summary Staff Recommendation for new UAB: $14,100,000 Staff Recommendation for USC Renovation: $9,311,000 Total Construction Budget $23,411,000 Less Prior Appropriation $4,500,000 Proposed Appropriation $18,911,000 The appropriation request is allocated to the four utilities as follows: Enterprise Fund Project Share Share of Projects Cost Less Existing Appropriation Funds Being Requested Here Light & Power 50.0% $11,705,500 $4,500,000 $7,205,500 Water 25.0% $5,852,750 $5,852,750 Wastewater 12.5% $2,926,375 $2,926,375 Storm Drainage 12.5% $2,926,375 $2,926,375 100.0% $23,411,000 $4,500,000 $18,911,000 The attached memorandum (Attachment 1) dated January 23, 2014 to the Council Finance Committee outlined the rationale behind recommending that the appropriation be made from the cash reserves of the four utility Enterprise Funds rather than through a debt issuance as had been previously discussed with the City Council. The reasoning being based on the collective healthy balance of the utility Enterprise Fund Reserves, the relatively low yield of these cash reserves compared to the current borrowing rate, and the complication of issuing debt across the four utilities. Packet Pg. 435 Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 5 FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS The financial impact of this appropriation on the short term financial health of the four utility Enterprise Funds will be to reduce the amount of unappropriated cash reserves held by each utility. These reserves are used for capital projects associated with aging infrastructure replacement and renewal, growth, and new regulatory requirements. The reserves grow through development fees and operating revenues in excess of actual operating expenses. Higher than projected development fee revenues in 2013 allowed three of the four utilities to increase reserves in 2013. The Water Enterprise Fund reserves decreased from $67.0M at the end of 2012 to $65.5M through 2013. However, higher than budgeted operating revenues and development fees, along with additional revenue from the sale of excess treatment capacity, should increase the working capital for the Water Fund by $5-8M in 2014. No capital projects identified and submitted for consideration in the 2015-16 Budgets are being impacted by this appropriation. The table below summarizes the reserve balances for these Enterprise Funds at the end of 2013 and after this appropriation. Enterprise Fund Cash & Investments (12/31/13) Available Working Capital (12/31/13) Funds Being Requested Here Available Working Capital After This Appropriation Light & Power $55.3 $26.6 $7.2 $19.4 Water $65.5 $8.5 $5.8 $2.7 Wastewater $33.1 $17.8 $2.9 $14.9 Storm Drainage $17.2 $6.9 $2.9 $4.0 $171.1 $59.8 $18.9 $40.9 $ in millions Use of these reserves will not trigger a rate increase for customers of any of the four utilities. The projected increases in Light & Power rates in 2015 and 2016 are driven entirely by the increased cost of the purchased power from Platte River Power Authority. The proposed rate increases of 3% in 2015 and 2016 in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund have been planned ahead of the decision to recommend this appropriation. The increased revenues from the proposed increases to the Wastewater utility are consistent with the long term financial requirements and strategic planning based on the 10 year capital improvement plan for this utility. It is anticipated that gradual, moderate rate increases may be required for some of the utilities over the next few years which may be delayed by a year or two without this appropriation but the need for any such rate increase will persist even without the appropriation, as it is driven by a longer term perspective of revenue requirements and capital project planning. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Currently, energy use at the USC is responsible for over 1,000 tons/year CO2e in greenhouse gas emissions. With efficiency upgrades at the USC (envelope and HVAC improvements) and high performance design at the UAB, energy modeling shows the combined emissions for the two buildings at 850 tons/year CO2e, lower than current emissions at the USC alone. The addition of solar PV systems will further lower these emissions. Attention to water efficient design elements at UAB will optimize water use inside and out. Energy and water systems for the UAB are being designed in context with the future built-out of the Civic Center complex. As such, the potential exists for developing campus-wide energy and water systems. For example, heat pumps in the building will be able to tie into a campus GeoExchange wellfield to exchange Packet Pg. 436 Agenda Item 24 Item # 24 Page 6 energy with the earth and adjacent buildings. PV systems on one building or a parking garage can share energy with all Civic Center buildings, or possibly a larger energy district. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its August 7, 2014 meeting, the Energy Board unanimously approved a motion supporting this Ordinance. This item will be presented to the Water Board on August 21, 2014 and its comments will be provided to Council on Second Reading of this Ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Memo re: Building Funding - Cash vs. Bonds, January 23, 2014 (DOC) 2. Energy Board minutes, August 7, 2014 (draft) (PDF) 3. Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF) 4. Coucil Work Session Summary, November 19, 2013 (PDF) 5. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 437 215 N Mason Street 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6795 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com Date: January 23, 2014 To: Council Finance Committee Thru: Darin Atteberry, City Manager From: Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive Director Lance Smith, Utilities Strategic Financial Planning Manager Topic: Utilities Customer Service & Administration Building Funding – Cash vs. Bonds Financial Services has worked with the Utilities finance team to evaluate the possibility of utilizing existing fund balance cash to fund the construction of the new CSA building rather than borrowing through a bond offering.  Combined, the four Utility Enterprise Funds have $169M of cash and investments at the end of 2013. Deducting minimum fund requirements, yearend encumbrances, and approved capital projects, $58M is available for future capital needs.  The $58M available increased from $34M at the end of 2012 because of strong revenue in L&P, Development Fees and the onetime payment to the Water Fund from the FCLWD agreement and spending below budget in all Funds.  Comparing interest earnings to the cost of borrowing – current cash earned approximately .9% in 2013; borrowing rates are currently approximately 4.5%. While interest earning rates are expected to increase, staff believes using available cash when earning rates are at historically low levels is an appropriate use of existing cash.  Issuing bonds for the CSA building will be a complicated transaction given each enterprise fund is a unique entity and one can’t support the others. We have confirmed with bond counsel that we can structure a deal but with many cross agreements between the Utility Funds. Future capital projects that are fund specific will be more appropriate bonding candidate’s when/if outside funding is needed.  Large capital projects within Utilities that will require within the next 5-10 years have very uncertain timing – i.e. Halligan Reservoir, Mulberry annexation. Holding the cash today for future projects with uncertain timing requirements is overly conservative. Staff recommends using cash to fund the Utility CSA building. Packet Pg. 438 Attachment24.1: Staff Memo re: Building Funding - Cash vs. Bonds, January 23, 2014 (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) Excerpt from Unapproved August 7, 2014 Energy Board Minutes Building Appropriation Ordinance (Attachments available upon request) Strategic Financial Planning Manager Lance Smith presented two documents: (1) “First Reading of Ordinance Appropriating Capital Project Funding in the Light and Power, Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage Funds for the Construction of a New Utilities Administration Building in Block 32 on Mason Street and a Renovation of 700 Wood Street” and (2) a PowerPoint on “Financing a New Utility Administrative Building and Remodeling Wood Street.” He recommended that the board consider providing meeting minutes to City Council ahead of the August 19 Council first reading of the Appropriation Ordinance on the board’s discussion and any recommendations. Highlights from the discussion:  The existing Customer Service Center (CSC) at 117 N. Mason, which is owned by the City’s General Fund, not the utility Enterprise Funds, has inadequate parking for customers and is an old building with poor lighting, security and layout.  The Utilities Service Center (USC) on Wood Street is one of the City’s most energy in- efficient buildings and requires significant upgrades: HVAC, windows, skylights, external sealing. It also has not met fundamental space needs for many years. The operations and crew space is limited, in poor condition, and features only single gender capacity (Utilities hired its first female line-crew employee a few years ago and doesn’t have adequate facilities). Estimate of additional space needed is 24,000 square feet (s.f.). Increased security requirements post 9/11 are difficult to meet with public access to the building, and long-term plans will eventually require the operations center to be more centrally located rather than on the north end of the city.  The 700 Wood Street building will cost $9.3 million to renovate.  The Appropriation Ordinance will provide funding toward the construction of a new Utility Administration Building on Mason Street as well as renovation of the antiquated Utility Service Center on Wood Street. Total combined project costs are $23,411,000 with $4.5 million already appropriated from Light & Power reserves resulting in the appropriation request being $18,911,000. The four Utility Funds (Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater) will share the project costs. All appropriations will come from available reserves in these funds.  The new Utility Administration Building will look similar to 215 N. Mason but will be larger and more energy efficient, and will feature 37,500 s.f., three stories, and dedicated parking. The cost will be $14.1 million.  Sustainability Services will lease space from Utilities. Utilities will eventually need that space.  A photovoltaic (PV) system on the roof will generate enough solar energy to make the building net-zero.  A board member inquired about the cost per square foot of the new building compared to the cost of the building at 215 North Mason, and staff said they could research this ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 439 Attachment24.2: Energy Board minutes, August 7, 2014 (draft) (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) information after calculating for inflation to compare it to the cost of the 215 N. Mason building, which is about 14 years old.  A board member inquired about the total city budget; staff estimated it is approximately $500 million. Utilities revenue is approximately $200 million.  A board member inquired whether funding of this project will increase his electric bill.  Mr. Smith explained it will not drive rate increases directly. It may accelerate rate increases indirectly by a year or two or three.  Instead of revamping the interior of the Utility Service Center to an open style at a cost of $2.3 million, the funds being requested will focus on renovating the exterior.  Mr. Phelan noted that Utilities has no choice but to do something because the building is so antiquated; the HVAC system is at the end of its life. When the boiler went out last winter, some employees were working in 50-degree offices.  A board member commented that when you consider the years of use, we’re getting our money’s worth. A small percentage of the annual budget buys us 50 years of effective operating space by renovating the 700 Wood Street building. He said he’d support the ordinance on that basis.  A board member commented that increased energy efficiency will result in significant cost savings.  Mr. Smith commented that operating expenses for Wood Street are $200,000 to $300,000 per year. The building is 115,000 s.f. and staff is looking for another 20 years out of that building.  A board member inquired whether staff considered a new space that would last 50 years.  Mr. Smith replied that the building committee did. The two separate buildings are needed because most people who park in the 700 Wood parking lot are not working in the offices; they’re field crews who need space to park their equipment and vehicles.  A board member inquired whether Utilities employees separated into two buildings would pose any problems.  Mr. Phelan stated that Utilities currently has two buildings and multiple plants. The 117 N. Mason Street building (containing the board room) would shut down and staff would move to the new building that will be Gold or Platinum LEED-certified.  Mr. Smith said the City Council’s first reading of this ordinance will be on August 19, and the second reading and adoption would be on September 2. Chairperson Behm moved that the Energy Board recommend to City Council approval of the Utility Buildings Appropriation Ordinance scheduled for City Council First Reading on August 19, 2014 appropriating capital project funding from the Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Funds, for construction of a new Utilities Administration Building at the corner of LaPorte and Howes and renovation of 700 Wood Street. Board Member Moore seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: it passed unanimously Packet Pg. 440 Attachment24.2: Energy Board minutes, August 7, 2014 (draft) (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) Form Completed Oct 28, 2013 Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM) Project or Decision: Blocks 32 & 42 – Master Plan Evaluated by: Utilities Building Team & City Staff Social Environmental Economic Workforce/FLEX Community STRENGTHS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block: Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  More secure during the day.  Provides for future growth of City departments for the next 50 years with additional space for future buildings. Both designs:  Provides all buildings in one central location. Easy access for employees.  Provides good interaction between City departments for collaboration.  Good access between new building Downtown and 700 Wood St.  Provides improved wellness programs with open space. STRENGTHS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Ties in well with the current urban development so it walks the talk of the City for development.  Howes remains as a through street for the public use.  Jewel of the community as genuine civic park of sufficient scale to meet Community needs in downtown Fort Collins.  Giving back to the citizens a public square/civic space. Place for community. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Provides a secure place for the public when using the Civic Center area with the buildings surrounding the area.  Provides a tie between the CSU oval and the relationship the City has with the University.  Provides a buffer to the residential neighborhood from the Civic space. Both designs:  Have a large dedicated open space for Civic events.  Provides all City Customer Services in a central location for one stop shopping.  Extends from the existing diagonal walkway through the existing civic park. STRENGTHS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Higher density minimizes the impact with smaller development footprint and maximizes the open space.  Buildings are on smaller footprint which results in less building surface area. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks: This design allows for the best sustainable practices to be implemented. Both designs:  Potential site for geo-thermal systems which can serve the Form Completed Oct 28, 2013 LIMITATIONS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Lack of expandable space and departmental growth with current design. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Building users and customers will have Howes street to cross when going between the various buildings. Both designs:  Lack of parking for City employees, until parking garage is constructed. LIMITATIONS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Connection with residential neighborhood with the large civic space and noise. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Splitting of Howes street will create some concerns for the public with having to cross the street for access to the various buildings. Both designs:  Unsure of how much use the Civic space will see from the public. LIMITATIONS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Geo-thermal systems would need to be placed under new structures unless there is commitment to maintain Civic space for this use.  More challenging to design the east/west building orientations. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Having Howes street go through the development creates car centric environment.  Installation of the eco water system for the entire development with the street running through the development. Both designs:  Must deal with the existing detention pond in NE corner of development. LIMITATIONS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Challenge to get building efficiency if east/west orientation is not maintained.  Ability to secure and maintain boundaries on all four sides of the Civic space for events.  Future growth of City departments for the next 50 years does not provide for future buildings. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Losing potential lease for FoCo on Block 32 (Depends on timeline for phase 2). Both designs:  Lose Eco-thrift as block is developed. OPPORTUNITIES: Works for both designs:  Create relationships across the various building departments.  Potential to provide City employee functions (picnic) locally so employees would be able to come and go as available. OPPORTUNITIES: TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS Derived from a TBLAM Brainstorm on DOWNTOWN CUSTOMER SERVICE BUILDING AND RENOVATED UTILITY SERVICE CENTER In Collaboration with the BUILDING TEAM Purpose: To extract key triple bottom line information from a TBLAM, and use that information to offer recommendations on key indicators and suggested action items for the proposed new City Building to be located near Mason + LaPorte I. General Observations from TBL Analysis Map (TBLAM): A. The TBLAM effort so far (performed late in the project team’s discussions of this project) was generally well balanced, with a good variety of strengths and limitations identified. B. The TBLAM exercise placed future opportunities in with strengths and future threats into limitations. C. Many considerations crossed into many columns, and rows. 1. Crossing columns indicates excellent depth of discussion and debate. 2. Crossing of rows indicates potential for conflicting values. D. More discussion after this or additional TBLAM exercise(s) will provide more granular detailed data for Economic strengths and limitations. However, 1. New building offers much needed space as well as centralization of City Utility Customer services. 2. Made very clear during the TBLAM effort is the inefficiency and limited space offered by the current USC buildings; urgency expressed not to lose track of the need to renovate this facility. E. The Social component of the TBLAM was exceptionally vigorous during this analysis, for both City staff and for the public user, and outweighed either the Environmental or Economic components of TBL. F. One limitation included ensuring sufficient parking for this new downtown structure that would also allow for good public access. G. Opportunities and Threats should be further explored – will the structure built be the one that is appropriate well into the future/its’ expected use? How will it mesh into our community/downtown development and traffic growth? Does an opportunity exist to better use (increase the use of the Transit Center) or take pressure off of other City offices (currently spread amongst several buildings in several locations). H. No fatal flaws discovered at the time of the TBLAM – (Note: economic factors will be further evaluated post TBL with a thorough B/C or other appropriate economic analysis, unless this been done already by the Team). II. Conclusions Offered: A. Additional effort for a thorough TBLAM is recommended, with basic economic factors considered including design, space per employee and expected public, renovation costs of USC, etc. added as general inputs since these were not expressed explicitly but may have been accounted for in the new Building discussion history (see notes section of TBLAM). B. Clarity should be offered in the AIS as to where TBL discussions occurred. 1. Make sure that the history of the team’s decision to go with a new structure and the importance of such as well as renovating USC is explained here (see notes section of TBLAM). III. Potential Key Indicators Suggested: A. The main limitation expressed by the Building Team was that the City should not lose sight that the current USC structure needs to be renovated with or without a new City building downtown. B. Additional TBLAM effort would be useful – and can include ideas emanating from the Building Team charrette in October if those ideas are not simply green-washing the existing plan. 1. Any new City structure will require a communication plan & public engagement plan. 2. Must determine how to sell the vision, but details of how the public will be better served will be important. C. Question for the Building Team – please return any feedback to the TBL Team. 1. Was this useful? Did this help? 2. What came from the discussion? How will you use this? 3. How could the TBL brainstorm be improved? 4. Would you like the TBL Team involved in any future TBLAMs for this project? Packet Pg. 443 Attachment24.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) M E M O R A N D U M Date: November 22, 2013 To: Mayor Weitkunat and City Councilmembers Thru: Darin Atteberry, City Manager From: Ken Mannon, Director of Operation Services Re: Work Session Summary – November 19, 2013 Two concept Master Plan diagrams #3 and #9 were presented to the Council showing how the City could develop Blocks 32 and 42. The Council was supportive of conceptual diagram #9 with the Civic Space at a central location using both Blocks 32 and 42 with the future City buildings around the perimeter. The new Utilities Customer Service Building was shown to be located in the Southwest corner of Block 32 at the intersection of LaPorte and Howes Streets. The City will need to vacate the buildings currently being used where the new Utility Customer Service Building will be located and will move to the structure currently being used by the Bike Library. The timeline for the development is to begin design of the new Utility Customer Service Building in January 2014, then start vacating the necessary buildings in first quarter of 2014. De- construction of the buildings will then take place in second quarter of 2014. Construction of the New Customer Service Building is to begin in the third quarter of 2014. The design process will provide the opportunity for community input with neighborhood meetings at various stages. Future buildings included in this plan are long-term because there is currently no funding in place for any projects beyond the Utility Customer Service Building. Utilities presented their expansion plan to build the new Customer Service Building on Block 32 consisting of 35,000 SF and renovate their existing 75,000 SF Utility Service Center at 700 Wood Street. Utilities is planning to fund this expansion by using $4.5 million previously appropriated and then issuing bonds in the amount of $15.5 million for a total of $20 million. $12 million is to be used for the new building and $8 million for the renovation work. ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 444 Attachment24.4: Coucil Work Session Summary, November 19, 2013 (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 1 Financing a New Utility Administrative Building and Remodeling Wood Street Presented to City Council August 19, 2014 ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 445 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 2 117 N Mason – Customer Service Center (CSC) • Parking – Challenging for customers to find adequate parking on Mason • Space Design – old building with poor lighting, security and layout • Opportunity for Development – interest in West Mountain Ave Wood Street • Energy Efficiency: • One of the City’s most energy in-efficient buildings • HVAC, windows, skylights, external sealing - requires significant upgrades • Has not meet fundamental space needs for many years: • Operations & Crew space limited, poor condition, single gender capacity • Utilities requires additional space – estimate current need of 24K sq ft • Security: • Increasing security requirements post 9/11 difficult to meet with public access to Wood St building • Long Term – ideal to have operations center more centrally located vs. on the north end Challenges with Existing Utilities Building Packet Pg. 446 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 3 Aging Mechanical Equipment at USC Packet Pg. 447 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 4 Proposed Solution Ø Renovate the Utility Service Center at 700 Wood Street Ø Build a new Utilities Administration Building on Block 32 at the corner of LaPorte Avenue and Howes Street Packet Pg. 448 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 5 Packet Pg. 449 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 6 New Downtown Civic Center Master Plan Packet Pg. 450 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 7 Utilities Administration Building UAB Budget $14,100,000 Includes… Capacity for staff through 2028 Water source heat pump system Open office environment LEED Gold certification PV system on roof for Net Zero building 1% for Art in Public Places Does not include… Added Cost… Install Alpen 725 Series fiberglass windows $220,000 Ground Source Geo-thermal system for heat pumps $300,000 Add additional site furnishings for exterior plaza area $120,000 Packet Pg. 451 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 8 Schematic Design Rendering June 2014 (37,500 SF) View Looking from Corner of LaPorte and Mason Packet Pg. 452 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 9 Utilities Service Center USC Budget $9,311,000 Includes… L&P Crew Space (women's restroom& lockers) HVAC Replacement of water source heat pump Renovated entrance area Security Enhancements Window replacement Skylight repair & solatubes Additional roof insulation 1% for Art in Public Places Does not include… Added Cost… Lake GeoExchange system * $150,000 Open office environment, new finishes $2,300,000 PV system for Net Zero $4,700,000 * Does not include lease agreement for access to the pond Packet Pg. 453 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 10 Project – Sources and Uses Combined Projects Summary Staff Recommendation for new UAB: $14,100,000 Staff Recommendation for USCRenovation: $9,311,000 Total Construction Budget $23,411,000 Less Prior Appropriation $4,500,000 Proposed Appropriation $18,911,000 Packet Pg. 454 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 11 Project – Sources and Uses Enterprise Fund Project Share Share of Projects Cost Less Existing Appropriation Funds Being Requested Here Light & Power 50.0% $11,705,500 $4,500,000 $7,205,500 Water 25.0% $5,852,750 $5,852,750 Wastewater 12.5% $2,926,375 $2,926,375 Storm Drainage 12.5% $2,926,375 $2,926,375 100.0% $23,411,000 $4,500,000 $18,911,000 Packet Pg. 455 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) 12 Project – Sources and Uses Enterprise Fund Cash & Investments (12/31/13) Available Working Capital (12/31/13) Funds Being Requested Here AvailableWorking Capital After This Appropriation Light & Power $55.3 $26.6 $7.2 $19.4 Water * $65.5 $8.5 $5.8 $2.7 Wastewater $33.1 $17.8 $2.9 $14.9 Storm Drainage $17.2 $6.9 $2.9 $4.0 $171.1 $59.8 $18.9 $40.9 $ in millions * YTD Revenues for the Water Fund have exceeded budget by $6.1M which will be added to Reserves. Packet Pg. 456 Attachment24.5: Powerpoint presentation (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 114, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES PROJECT FUNDING IN THE LIGHT AND POWER, WATER, WASTEWATER, AND STORM DRAINAGE FUNDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATIONS TO THE CULTURAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES FUND FOR THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IN BLOCK 32 ON LAPORTE AVENUE AND A RENOVATION OF THE UTILITIES SERVICE CENTER AT 700 WOOD STREET WHEREAS, the Utility Service Center (USC) at 700 Wood Street has grown over its lifetime through seven major additions to its current 108,000 square foot capacity, resulting in an energy inefficient building that lacks sufficient security; and WHEREAS, a new 37,500 square foot Utilities Administration Building (UAB), to be located in Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue downtown, has been proposed to house the entire Customer Connections Department and some senior management of Fort Collins Utilities, satisfying the long term space requirements of the Customer Connections Department and administrative functions to be relocated from the Utility Service Center and space currently leased by Fort Collins Utilities from the City’s General Fund at 117 North Mason; and WHEREAS, space initially unused by Utility staff in the UAB would also be leased to the City’s Sustainability Services Area until it is needed by Fort Collins Utilities; and WHEREAS, there remain operational needs for Utilities that would best be met by also renovating the existing space at the USC, including modification of existing space to meet the Light & Power crew needs, improving the building’s security and energy efficiency, and replacing the current HVAC system, which is at the end of its life and its replacement will substantially improve the energy efficiency of the building; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the construction of the new UAB is $14,100,000; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the renovation of the USC is $9,311,000, which includes $4,500,000 previously appropriated in the 2011-2012 budget from Light & Power reserves to address growth and space needs of the Electric Utility and $45,000 that was transferred to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the Art in Public Place (APP) projects; and WHEREAS, of the total remaining $18,911,000 appropriation, $189,111 represents the additional appropriation for the two projects that must be transferred into the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for the APP projects from the four utility funds; $41,604 (22%) of which will be transferred to the Cultural Services Fund for reserve for the maintenance of the artwork and operations of the APP program; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be Packet Pg. 457 - 2 - available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 10, of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one fund (project) to another fund (project), provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. WHEREAS, City staff recommends appropriating from prior year reserves in the Light & Power Fund $7,205,500, the Water Fund $5,852,750, Wastewater Fund $2,926,375, and the Storm Drainage Fund $2,926,375 for a total amount of $18,911,000 to be used for the construction of a new Utilities Administration Building in Block 32 on LaPorte Avenue, a renovation of the Utilities Service Center at 700 Wood Street, and the required funding for Art in Public Places. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the Light & Power Fund the sum of $7,205,500 as follows: New Utilities Administration Building and renovation of 700 Wood Street Project $7,133,445 Art in Public Places Project 72,055 TOTAL $7,205,500 Section 2. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the Water Fund the sum of $5,852,750 as follows: New Utilities Administration Building and renovation of 700 Wood Street Project $5,794,222 Art in Public Places Project 58,528 TOTAL $5,852,750 Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the Wastewater Fund the sum of $2,926,375 as follows: New Utilities Administration Building and renovation of 700 Wood Street Project $2,897,111 Art in Public Places Project 29,264 TOTAL $2,926,375 Section 4. That there is hereby appropriated for expenditure from prior year reserves in the Storm Drainage Fund the sum of $2,926,375 as follows: Packet Pg. 458 - 3 - New Utilities Administration Building and renovation of 700 Wood Street Project $2,897,111 Art in Public Places Project 29,264 TOTAL $2,926,375 Section 5. That the unexpended appropriated amount of FORTY-ONE THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED AND FOUR DOLLARS ($41,604) is authorized for transfer in the Art in Public Places Projects from the Light & Power, Water, Wastewater and Storm Drainage Funds to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and appropriated therein for the Art in Public Places Program Maintenance and Operations and transferred as follows: Light & Power $15,852 Water 12,876 Wastewater 6,438 Storm Drainage 6,438 TOTAL $41,604 Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of September, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 459 Agenda Item 25 Item # 25 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY August 19, 2014 City Council STAFF Janet Miller, Human Resources Director SUBJECT Resolution 2014-076 Creating a Council Committee to Make Recommendations to the Council, Commencing the Process to Select a Search Firm, and Adopting a Plan and Target Schedule for the Recruitment and Selection of a City Attorney. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to begin the City Attorney recruitment and selection process by: 1. creating a Council Committee to screen search firm candidates and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the search firm to be chosen and to make recommendations regarding other matters related to the City Attorney recruitment and selection process; 2. directing staff to develop and implement a request-for-proposal process for search firms to aid the Council Committee in its recommendation to City Council; and 3. adopting a detailed plan and target schedule for the recruitment and selection of the City Attorney. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The following table outlines the steps involved in the recruitment and selection process for the City Attorney. It provides a target timeline and indicates parties responsible for each step, including recommended involvement of the Council Committee. Formal action for Council is indicated where applicable. Step Responsibility Action Target Date* Appoint Council Committee Authorize staff to create RFP for Recruiter Define Recruitment / Selection Process Council Resolution Aug 19, 2014 Screen Recruiter Proposals  RFP  Evaluation  Recommendation Committee, Staff Sept 24, 2014 Packet Pg. 460 Agenda Item 25 Item # 25 Page 2 Step Responsibility Action Target Date* Select Recruiter Council Resolution Oct 8, 2014 Finalize Position Profile Committee, Recruiter Engagement  Key Stakeholders  Staff Oct 30, 2014 Approval Position Profile Council Resolution (Recruiter support) Nov 4, 2014 Post Position Recruiter, Staff Nov 6, 2014 Proposed Semi-finalists (10-15) Recruiter Dec 2, 2014 Discuss and Consider Semi-finalists Committee or Council Dec 16, 2014 Select Finalists Council Adjourned Meeting Resolution Jan 13, 2015 Candidate Interviews Committee, Council Staff, Key Stakeholders Week of Jan 25 or Feb 2, 2015 Selection Council Resolution Feb 17, 2015 Background, Reference Checks, Negotiate Proposed Contract Terms Recruiter, Staff, Committee Contract Approval Recruiter, Committee, Council Resolution/Ordinance Mar 3, 2015 * Tentative schedule subject to change due to Committee availability and other unanticipated conflicts ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 1 1 City Attorney Recruitment and Selection August 19, 2014 2 Council Action Requested • Creation of Council Committee • Implementation of Search Firm Request-for- Proposal (RFP) • Adoption of Detailed Plan and Target Schedule ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 462 Attachment25.1: Powerpoint presentation (2231 : City Attorney Selection Process) 2 3 Council Committee • Screen and evaluate search firms • Develop proposed position profile • Recommend semi-finalists • Participate in candidate backgrounds, reference checks and negotiation of proposed contract terms 4 Process and Target Schedule • Recruiter evaluation and selection – Sept/Oct • Development of position profile – Oct • Recruitment, candidate evaluation, semi-finalist identification – Nov – Dec • Selection of finalists - Jan • Interviews – Jan/Feb • Selection and appointment – Feb/March Packet Pg. 463 Attachment25.1: Powerpoint presentation (2231 : City Attorney Selection Process) - 1 - RESOLUTION 2014-076 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CREATING A COUNCIL COMMITTEE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL, COMMENCING THE PROCESS TO SELECT A SEARCH FIRM, AND ADOPTING A PLAN AND TARGET SCHEDULE FOR THE RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION OF A CITY ATTORNEY WHEREAS, on July 22, 2014, City Council adopted Resolution 2014-065 establishing a recruitment process for appointment of the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, City Council chose to post the position for application by current City employees and external candidates using a search firm to recruit the potential candidates; and WHEREAS, said Resolution also directed staff to develop a detailed plan and schedule for recruitment and selection to be considered by the City Council at its August 19, 2014, meeting; and WHEREAS, City Council desires to create a Council Committee to screen search firm candidates and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the search firm to be chosen and other matters related to the City Attorney recruitment and selection process; and WHEREAS, City Council desires to adopt a detailed plan and target schedule for the recruitment and selection of the City Attorney, subject to future adjustment by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby appoints Councilmembers ________________________ to serve as the Council Committee to screen search firm candidates and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the search firm to be chosen and other matters related to the City Attorney recruitment and selection process. Section 2. That the City Council directs staff to develop and implement a request-for- proposal process for search firms to aid the Council Committee in its recommendation to City Council. Section 3. That the City Council hereby adopts the detailed plan and target schedule for the recruitment and selection of the City Attorney attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to future adjustment by the City Council. Packet Pg. 464 - 2 - Passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 19th day of August, A.D. 2014. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 465 EXHIBIT A Step Responsibility Action Target Date* Appoint Council Committee Authorize staff to create RFP for Recruiter Define Recruitment / Selection Process Council Resolution Aug 19, 2014 Screen Recruiter Proposals  RFP  Evaluation  Recommendation Committee, Staff Sept 24, 2014 Select Recruiter Council Resolution Oct 8, 2014 Finalize Position Profile Committee, Recruiter Engagement  Key Stakeholders  Staff Oct 30, 2014 Approval Position Profile Council Resolution (Recruiter support) Nov 4, 2014 Post Position Recruiter, Staff Nov 6, 2014 Proposed Semi-finalists (10-15) Recruiter Dec 2, 2014 Discuss and Consider Semi-finalists Committee or Council Dec 16, 2014 Select Finalists Council Adjourned Meeting Resolution Jan 13, 2015 Candidate Interviews Committee, Council Staff, Key Stakeholders Week of Jan 25 or Feb 2, 2015 Selection Council Resolution Feb 17, 2015 Background, Reference Checks, Negotiate Proposed Contract Terms Recruiter, Staff, Committee Contract Approval Recruiter, Committee, Council Resolution Mar 3, 2015 * Tentative schedule subject to change due to Committee availability and other unanticipated conflicts Packet Pg. 466 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2227 : City Attorney Selection Process RESO) Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Potential to bring in some new larger events with having approximately 6 acres available. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  New street layout could provide three separate areas for multiple venues to use Civic space. Works for both designs:  Opportunity for the public and City to engage on more frequent basis. OPPORTUNITIES: Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Could upsize the relocated stormwater pipe and use it as a water retention system. Works for both designs:  Great potential for education of the sustainable systems incorporated into the design.  Lead by example and show the public what is possible.  Potential to create an eco-grid for a particular district.  Reduce the use of personal transportation with many City services located next to public transportation. OPPORTUNITIES: Works for both designs:  Retail space at parking garage.  Allows for employees and customers to use City transit system for access to many services. THREATS: Works for both designs:  Many employees will need to adjust to cubical spaces. THREATS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  The potential for City of Fort Collins to sell off the open civic space for private development. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Loss of current Washington Park and trees.  Potential security issues with Civic space not visible from LaPorte or Maple streets. Works for both designs:  A negative perception by the Public of the open civic space.  Potential security concerns between buildings. THREATS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  More challenging to achieve Net Zero with development of one block. Works for both designs:  Portion of this development is in the 100 year flood plain.  Doing away with the buildings having historic significance. THREATS: Works for both designs:  Not getting the funding to complete the development of Block 32 and 42 as designed. NOTES: Packet Pg. 442 Attachment24.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) entire block.  Design works well using sustainable practices. STRENGTHS: Design #3 – City Buildings on one Block:  Six acres will bring in additional events which is revenue generation for the City of Fort Collins.  Potential sell of Block 42 with all City functions on Block 32. Design #9 – City Buildings across both blocks:  Repurposing Ops Services and City Hall to be used for another 25+ years.  Design provides locations for private buildings lots to be developed. Both designs:  Add retail to the outer edge of development is revenue for the City of Fort Collins.  Great use of City owned property.  Potential revenue generation for eco- grid system.  Catalyst for re-development of the surrounding area. ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 441 Attachment24.3: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (2228 : Utility Building Appropriation) limited to utility development (e.g., waterlines, power lines), energy development, and associated infrastructure. These changes could result in the incidental take ferrets through vehicle collision and/or decrease available prairie dog habitat and prairie dogs available for ferrets. Any additional land uses proposed within the enrolled lands during the term of the Reintroduction Plan will be identified and reviewed by the parties to determine if the proposed use will decrease prairie dogs or ferret habitat. Any significant decreases in prairie dog habitat could be offset by including additional prairie dog habitat contiguous with the Conservation Zone resulting in no net loss of adequate prairie dog habitat. If sufficient additional habitat does not exist, the Permittee may elect to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere with adequate habitat. New Species Listing on Enrolled Lands Conservation activities to benefit the black- footed ferret may have potential impacts to the new species. If a non-covered species that occurs within the Agreement area becomes a federally listed species, the Service will assess whether the implementation of the Agreement may affect such species. If implementation may result in incidental take of such species, the Service will work with the enrolled landowners to determine appropriate modifications to the Agreement’s conservation activities to either avoid or minimize incidental take. If take cannot be avoided, the Service will determine whether amending the Agreement and permit would be necessary to cover such Packet Pg. 267 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) becomes a federally listed species, the Service will assess whether the implementation of the Agreement may affect such species. If implementation may result in incidental take of such species, the Service will work with the enrolled landowners to determine appropriate modifications to the Agreement’s conservation activities to either avoid or minimize incidental take. If take cannot be avoided, the Service will determine whether amending the Agreement and permit would be necessary to cover such additional species through the Section 7 process. If the landowner wishes to conserve the species and receive assurances for that species, the Service and landowner would mutually amend the Reintroduction Plan to document the baseline conditions for the species; potentially modify or add conservation measures; and the Service would amend the Agreement, Biological Opinion, and any relevant National Environmental Policy Act documents while providing for required public comment. Any Cooperator may withdraw for the Agreement at any time. Change in Ownership Interest Withdrawal of Cooperator from Agreement and termination of Reintroduction Plan may result in loss of site, if the new landowner elects not to enroll in the Agreement Coverage for incidental take for a new non-participating landowner will be maintained via the Biological Opinion, provided the former Cooperator notifies the Permittee and allows access to trap any remaining ferrets for reintroduction elsewhere. Packet Pg. 252 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) Coyote Basin, UT (1999) Wtpd 424 25 13 3 1 7 Cheyenne River, SD (2000) Btpd 351 150 75 25 (partial survey) >13 44 1 Source: unpublished data from USFWS National Black-footed Ferret Conservation Center. 2 Minimum fall population counts are derived from spotlight surveys and trapping efforts except in Shirley Basin, WY, where a model was used to estimate fall population. 3 Breeding adult figures are estimated to be one-half minimum fall population counts from the previous year. 4 Actual count. Packet Pg. 236 Attachment1: Exhibit A (2211 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone-RESOLUTION) are currently more than 500 BFFs in the wild, and another 280 living in breeding facilities. These recov- ery efforts are managed by the USFWS’s National Black-Footed Ferret Conservation Center in northeastern Colorado. Recovery Partners Despite today’s radically altered environment wildlife managers believe recovery of the species is attainable. There are over thirty Federal, State, Tribal and non- government agencies diligently working together in a recovery team effort to conserve this na- tive species. Due to these part- nerships BFF recovery goals are within reach. For Information To learn more about the BFF and conservation efforts on behalf of the species please contact: The National Black- footed Ferret Conservation Center (970)897-2730. Or visit the following sites: The Black-footed Ferret Recovery Program: http://www. blackfoot- edferret.org/ The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s ECOS page: http://ecos.fws.gov/ speciesProfile/profile/ speciesProfile.action?spcode=A004 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mountain-Prairie Region 6 PO Box 25486 Denver Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225 308 / 382 6468 For State relay service TTY / Voice: 711 U.S. Fish & Wildlife service http://www.fws.gov June 2014 BFF Release in the Wild / USFWS Two Young BFFs/ Tamkun USFWS Packet Pg. 214 Attachment15.1: Fact Sheet (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) of 2014, BFFs have been rein- troduced in the wild at 21 sites across 8 states, Canada, and Mexico. Reproduction The mating season for BFFs is March-April. Ges- tation time is 41 to 43 days, and kits are born May through June. Litter sizes are typically 3 to 5 kits. In the wild, kits are born blind and help- less, staying below ground until they are about two months old. For unknown reasons, at this age BFF mothers move their litters to various burrows with- in their home range and begin to take them on hunting forays. At approximately 90 days of age, kits reach 90% of their adult size, and are adept at kill- ing prairie dogs. BFF Mom and Kits/ Tamkun USFWS BFF in the Wild/ Tamkun USFWS BFFs in Preconditioning Pens/ Tamkun USFWS BFF / Lockhart USFWS ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 213 Attachment15.1: Fact Sheet (2120 : Black footed Ferret Agreements-Soapstone) Feet ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 193 Attachment13.5: City Master Street Plan (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations) Industrial (I) Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) Urban Estate (UE) Second Annexation Area Sunflower Kitchell Subdivision Clydesdale Estates Clydesdale Interchange Park Business Park Residential Lots Fox Grove (proposed) Undeveloped Vista Bonita Carriage Pkwy. Future Extension South C.R. 5 Packet Pg. 191 Attachment13.3: Clydesdale Park Annexations Zoning Map [Revision 1] (2221 : Clydesdale Park First and Second Annexations)