HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 01/15/2008 - CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE N ITEM NUMBER: 6
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: January 15, 2008
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Wanda Krajicek
SUBJECT
Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the November 20, 2007, December 4, 2007 and
December 18, 2007 Regular Meetings and the November 27, 2007 Adjourned Meeting.
November 20, 2007
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, November 20,
2007, 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: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
John Gless, 311 Whedbee, thanked Council for its thoughtful consideration of the appeal by the
representatives of the University Acres Neighborhood of the Planning and Zoning Board decision
to allow the parking structure and medical office building to be built at Poudre Valley Hospital and
he agreed with Council's decision.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset,urged Council to consider a resolution calling for the withdrawal
of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq. She quoted a statistic that stated 25% of veterans were
homeless.
Ray Martinez,4121 Stoneridge Court,thanked Council for the Alzheimer's Awareness Proclamation
and he urged citizens to wear purple the next day to show support for the Alzheimer's Association.
John Clark,Fort Collins resident,stated the statistic about homeless veterans was incorrectly quoted.
The statistic was that 25% of homeless are veterans.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry requested Item #24 Resolution 2007-104 Approving the Programs and
Projects That Will Receive Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)
Program and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program Grants, and the City's Affordable
Housing Fund be postponed to December 4, 2007.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the changes made to Item#18 Resolution 2007-102 Adopting the
City's 2008 Legislative Policy Agenda required the Item be pulled and acted separately upon by
Council. City Manager Atteberry stated the changes were minor and did not require separate Council
action. City Attorney Roy noted the two changes to the Legislative Policy Agenda were to change
"achieving cost effectiveness" to "fully considering cost effectiveness" under ClimateWise and
replacing a section under Urban Renewal Authority to read "support legislation that limits the
1
November 20, 2007
designation of urban renewal areas to those areas that genuinely urban in character and that
appropriately acknowledges the impact of tax increment financing on the infrastructure and services
of other taxing entities."
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Second Readins of Ordinance No. 114, 2007, Amending the City Code to Increase the
Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chanter 7.5 of the Code
so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2007, increases the
fee schedules for the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees and Neighborhood Parkland Fee
by the estimated 2007 changes in the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index
("CPI").
Costs in the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees ("CIEF") Study and the fee schedule for
the Neighborhood Parkland Fees were calculated using costs from 1995. The fees were last
adjusted in 2006. This Ordinance increases the CIEF and the neighborhood parkland fees
by the estimated 2007 increase in the CPI of 2.50%,and the Street Oversizing fees by 4.85%,
which reflects the projected increase reported in the Engineering News Record.
7. Items Relating to the 2008 Downtown Development Authority Budget
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2007, Appropriating Downtown
Development Authority Operating Funds and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year
2008.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 2007, Appropriating Revenue in the
Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service
for the Year 2008.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2007, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development
Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment
Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A.
The Downtown Development Authority Board of Directors (the "Board") adopted its
proposed budget for 2008 totaling $6,709,104 on September 13, 2007. The Board
determined the mill levy necessary to provide for payment of administrative costs incurred
by the DDA at its regular meeting of September 13, 2007. Ordinance No. 115, 2007,
appropriates the DDA operating funds and sets the mill levy.
2
November 20, 2007
Ordinance No. 116,2007,appropriates funds for 2008 DDA debt service payments from the
tax increment received by the City.
Ordinance No. 117, 2007, authorizes the transfer of appropriations of$1,000,000 from the
City of Fort Collins Museum project to the funding of Beet Street for 2008.
These Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2007.
8. Items relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2008
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Water Plant Investment Fees and Raw Water Requirements.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120,2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Wastewater Rates and Charges.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121,2007,Amending Chapter 26 ofthe City Code
to Revise Sewer Plant Investment Fees.
D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122,2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Electric Rates and Charges.
E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Electric Development Fees and Charges.
F. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Stormwater Plant Investment Fees.
G. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges.
Ordinance No. 120, 2007 and Ordinance No. 122, 2007, establish monthly wastewater and
electric rates for 2008. The electric rate Ordinance also includes a housekeeping change to
the power adjustment clause.
Ordinance No. 125, 2007, updates utility connection fees and miscellaneous charges for
returned items and turn-off notices to recover the cost of these services.
Ordinances Nos. 119, 121, 123, and 124,2007, adopt revised water, sewer and stormwater
plant investment fees and electric development fees. The fees are one-time charges paid by
developers or builders for the cost of the utility infrastructure needed to serve new
development. Per Council direction,plant investment fees are reviewed on an annual basis
and revised during the biennial budget cycle. Plant investment fees (PIFs) for water,
wastewater and stonmwater were updated with the 2006-2007 budget. Electric development
fees and charges are updated annually.
3
November 20, 2007
These Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2007.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2007 Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for the Operation of the Colorado Welcome Center.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6,2007,appropriates
grant funds received from the Colorado Tourism Office in the amount of$75,726 for the
operation of the Colorado Welcome Center. The City has contracted with the Fort Collins
Convention and Visitors Bureau to operate this program. Neither City General Funds nor
Lodging Tax revenue are included in this project.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131,2007 Amending the City Code Regarding Nuisance
Abatement Collections and Liens.
The City Code currently permits imposing tax liens on properties for unpaid abatement
assessments in three separate sections of the Code. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted
on First Reading on November 6, 2007, clarifies the process and make each section
consistent with the others. The changes to the Code regarding the procedures for recouping
the City's costs of abating nuisances, sidewalk snow removal, and forestry encroachments
will provide the City with an efficient mechanism with which to place liens on properties for
unpaid and delinquent abatement charges.
11. Items Relating to Real Property Conveyances for the Benefit of the Willow Street Loft
Project.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132,2007,Authorizing the Conveyance of Certain
Real Property at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Lagunitas Giddings,
Inc.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2007, Authorizing the Conveyance of a
Sidewalk Easement, Landscape Easement, Drainage Easement and a Temporary
Construction Easement at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Lagunitas
Giddings, Inc.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2007, Authorizing the Conveyance of a
Utility Easement at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Comcast of
California/Colorado LLC and to Qwest Corporation.
Lagunitas Giddings, Inc. ("LGI") has been in the planning process for some time for the
Willow Street Loft Project("WSLP"). In order for LGI to design the project to the design
of its choice, LGI needed to acquire one-half of a vacated alley on City-owned property and
also needed to acquire the above described easements. All these property interests are on
City-owned property known as the Northside Azdan Community Center("NACC"). These
4
November 20, 2007
Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2007, authorize the
conveyance of the easements needed by LGI.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No 135 2007 Authorizing the Conveyance of a Portion of
Lot 30 in Golding-Dwyer Subdivision of Block 275 in the City of Fort Collins
A local real estate broker is attempting to sell the house and lot at 525 North Whitcomb
Street,being Lot 31, in Golding-Dwyer Subdivision,of Block 275. Lot 31 is adjacent to the
City-owned Lot 30. A two-car garage that is attached to the house on Lot 31 is located on
and encroaches upon a portion of City-owned Lot 30. The broker wants to sell Lot 31 and
the encroachment area on Lot 30 together, in order for the purchaser to have both house and
attached garage on two lots. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on
November 6, 2007, conveys the portion of Lot 30 that contains the encroachment area.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No 136 2007 Assessing the Cost of Improvements in the
Timberline and Prospect Special Improvement District No 94 in the City of Fort Collins
Colorado. and Providing for the Payment and Collection Thereof.
In October 2005, Council established the Timberline and Prospect Special Improvement
District#94(the"District'). The City has completed the improvements and is now prepared
to assess the District. This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on November
6, 2007, assesses the District costs to the property owners benefitted by the improvements.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No 137 2007 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund- Soanstone Prairie Public Improvements
Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of Public Improvements at
Soanstone Prairie Natural Area.
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area will be opened for public recreation in June 2009 in
accordance with the recently adopted management plan. Prior to opening, the construction
of public improvements is required. The improvements include: 9.5 miles of gravel access
road; an entrance station; two gravel parking areas; interpretive features;picnic shelters and
vault toilets; and over 30 miles of soft trails.
Construction of the access road started in October and will be completed by spring 2008.
Construction of the remaining improvements will start in the spring and be completed prior
to June 2009.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No 138 2007 Authorizing the Appropriation of 2008 Fiscal
Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds of the Fort Collins Loveland Municipal
Ai1port.
The 2008 annual operating budget for the Airport totals $648,310, and will be funded from
Airport operating revenues, contributions from the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland,and
5
November 20, 2007
interest earnings. This Ordinance appropriates the City of Fort Collins' contribution,which
is a 50% share of the 2008 Airport budget and totals $324,150.
This Ordinance also appropriates the City of Fort Collins' 50% share of capital funds,
totaling $2,860,580 for the Airport from federal and state grants; passenger charges;
contributions from Fort Collins and Loveland; and the Airport General Fund. The 2008
Airport capital funds,totaling$5,721,160,will be used to rehabilitate the Airport's primary
runway 15/33 and cross-wind runway 6/24,repairing a portion of the t-hangar ramp area,and
purchasing of two mowing machines. Rehabilitation of the primary runway will include
reconstructing a portion of the north end of the runway, overlaying the remaining length of
the runway with a five inch asphalt mat,replacement of existing runway lights,engineering
design services, surveying, geotechnical services, and construction management services.
Rehabilitation of the cross wind runway is being funded entirely by the tenants in the Airport
Industrial Park.
16. Resolution 2007-100 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions Pertaining to the Anneal by
Representatives of the University Acres Neighborhood of the September 20 2007
Determination of the Planning and Zoning Board to Approve with Conditions the Poudre
Valley Hospital Parking Structure and Medical Office Building Project Development Plan.
On October 24,2007, an Amended Notice of Appeal was filed regarding the September 20,
2007 decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to approve, with conditions, the Poudre
Valley Hospital Parking Garage and Medical Office Building Project Development Plan.
On November 6, 2007, City Council voted 5—2 to uphold the decision of the Planning and
Zoning Board. In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, Council should adopt
a Resolution making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the Appeal.
17. Resolution 2007-101 Adopting the 2007 Update to the Three Mile Plan for the Cia offort
Collins.
This is a review of updates to the Three-Mile Plan for the City of Fort Collins. The Three-
Mile Plan is a policy document that is required to ensure that the City complies with the
regulations of the Colorado Revised Statutes.
18. Resolution 2007-102 Adoptingthe he City's 2008 Legislative PolicyAgenda.
Each year the Legislative Review Committee(LRC)develops a legislative agenda to assist
in the analysis of pending legislation. The proposed 2008 Legislative Policy Agenda has
been updated from the 2007 document and was reviewed and approved by the Legislative
Review Committee. The Legislative Policy Agenda will be used as a guide for the upcoming
2008 General Assembly and the second session of the 110th Congress. The purpose of the
Legislative Policy Agenda is to articulate the City's position on common legislative topics.
It will be applied by Councilmembers and staff to determine positions on pending legislation
and as a general reference for state legislators and the congressional delegation.
6
November 20, 2007
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 114, 2007, Amending the City Code to Increase the
Amounts of the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees Contained in Chapter 7.5 of the Code
so as to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services.
7. Items Relating to the 2008 Downtown Development Authority Budget.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 115, 2007, Appropriating Downtown
Development Authority Operating Funds and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year
2008.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 116, 2007, Appropriating Revenue in the
Downtown Development Authority Debt Service Fund for Payment of Debt Service
for the Year 2008.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 117, 2007, Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development
Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment
Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A.
8. Items relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2008.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Water Plant Investment Fees and Raw Water Requirements.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120,2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Wastewater Rates and Charges.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Sewer Plant Investment Fees.
D. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122,2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Electric Rates and Charges.
E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Electric Development Fees and Charges.
F. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
to Revise Stormwater Plant Investment Fees.
7
November 20, 2007
G. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125,2007,Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code
Relating to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for the Operation of the Colorado Welcome Center.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131,2007,Amending the City Code Regarding Nuisance
Abatement Collections and Liens.
11. Items Relating to Real Property Conveyances for the Benefit of the Willow Street Loft
Project.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132,2007,Authorizing the Conveyance of Certain
Real Property at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Lagunitas Giddings,
Inc.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2007, Authorizing the Conveyance of a
Sidewalk Easement, Landscape Easement, Drainage Easement and a Temporary
Construction Easement at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Lagunitas
Giddings, Inc.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2007, Authorizing the Conveyance of a
Utility Easement at the Northside Aztlan Community Center to Comcast of
California/Colorado LLC and to Qwest Corporation.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2007, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Portion of
Lot 30 in Golding-Dwyer Subdivision of Block 275, in the City of Fort Collins.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2007, Assessing the Cost of Improvements in the
Timberline and Prospect Special Improvement District No. 94 in the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, and Providing for the Payment and Collection Thereof.
23. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 118, 2007, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance
Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2008 and Adopting the Budget for
the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1,2008 and Ending December 31,2009, and Fixing the
Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2008.
26. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130,2007,Amending Section 25-123(c)of the City Code
Relating to the Vendor Fee for Collecting and Remitting Sales Tax.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2007, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund- Soapstone Prairie Public Improvements
8
November 20, 2007
Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of Public Improvements at
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No.138, 2007, Authorizing the Appropriation of 2008 Fiscal
Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal
Airport.
25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2007, Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement
Between the Fort Collins Regional Library District, Latimer County and the City of Fort
Collins.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt all items on
the Consent Calendar except Item #24. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Manager Atteberry thanked Mark Radke, Legislative Affairs Coordinator, for his excellent
service to the City for 5 years, and he noted Radke was leaving the City to work with the Colorado
Municipal League in Denver.
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Councilmember Troxell thanked staff for its work on the Soapstone Prairie Project and for moving
forward as rapidly as possible to open this Natural Area to the public. He requested information on
the source of unappropriated funds available in 2007 for this Project.
Councilmember Reports
Mayor Hutchinson stated he attended the National League of Cities Conference in New Orleans
where he attended a session entitled "Legislating for Outcomes," which touted Budgeting for
Outcomes as a method to focus activities of city government on the citizens.
Resolution 2007-103
Considering the Adoption of a Revised Holiday Display Policy
in Response to the Recommendations of
the Holiday Display Task Force, Adopted Option C
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
It is assumed that any change to the City's holiday display could not be fully implemented until the
200812009 season. The estimated additional costs for the recommended displays are listed below.
9
November 20, 2007
One time:
• $ 10,000 Fort Collins Museum
• $28,600 City buildings
Should Council accept these recommendations, several Task Force members have volunteered to
seek community donations and/or sponsorships to offset the cost of the new displays. Another
potential contributor is The Fort Collins Museum Foundation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Holiday Display Task Force was appointed by the City Manager in early August 2007 for the
purpose of reviewing the City's current Holiday Display Policy and recommending possible
modifications to the policy. The Task Force met weekly to review the current policy, study
applicable legal principles, research and discuss a number of alternatives, and consider the
potential impact to the community of Fort Collins.
The Task Force is recommending the current policy be replaced with a new policy that includes an
educational display on or around the grounds of the Fort Collins Museum and changes the
standardsfor Oak Street Plaza and the exterior and interior ofall City buildings. The intent ofthese
recommendations is not to minimize past traditions, but rather to create a festive, welcoming
environment that reflects the variety of ways that citizens of Fort Collins celebrate the season.
Following publication of the Task Force recommendations Council received a significant amount
of citizen input. Based on citizen and Council member input, staff then prepared an additional
version of the policy that includes some, but not all, of the Task Force recommendations. As a
result, three options are presented for Council consideration. These three versions of the policy
are:
(a) The current policy
(b) A revised policy(`Task Force Recommendations')that incorporates all of the Task
Force recommendations, described in detail below
(c) A revised policy("Optional Version')that incorporates elements ofboth the existing
policy and a portion of the Task Force recommendations. This version of the policy:
• Retains most aspects of the current policy for Oak Street Plaza and the
interior and exterior of City buildings
• Adds an educational, multi-cultural display at the Museum
• Adds the creation of artwork depicting the diversity of traditions in our
community, which could then be displayed on and within City buildings and
Oak Street Plaza.
10
November 20, 2007
BACKGROUND
For sometime, the subject of religious displays on public property has been a topic of considerable
discussion by City Council and the community as a whole. In early 2006, City Council reviewed its
Holiday Display policy, which addresses both outdoor displays on City buildings in Old Town and
displays on other City property. At that time the decision was made to maintain the policy. In 2007,
City Council decided that a detailed review of the Holiday Display policy by community members
could lead to additional insights and options that the City might wish to pursue. Council thus
directed the City Manager to appoint a diverse group of citizens to review the policy and recommend
any modifications they believe appropriate. The Holiday Display Task Force was appointed and
began meeting in August 2007. A list of Task Force members and the organizations they represent
is included in Attachment 2.
Over the course of several months Task Force members have had many thoughtful and spirited
discussions. In addition to reviewing the current policy and applicable legal principles, members
have discussed community needs, conducted research, sought input from a variety of sources,
solicited and reviewed public comment and eventually reached agreement on a set of
recommendations for the City's consideration.
Policy/Project Scope
One challenge for the Task Force and the community has been that of clarifying the boundaries of
the City's Holiday Display Policy, or what is and is not a City-sponsored display and thus covered
by the policy. The City Policy addresses seasonal decorations sponsored by the City, erected
between November land January 30, and located on City property that is open to the public. The
Policy encompasses City-sponsored displays inside and outside City buildings and facilities, and
includes Oak Street Plaza.
The Policy does not cover Old Town Square, which is owned by and under the authority of the
Downtown Development Authority (DDA). It also does not cover unattended private displays on
City property; these are addressed in specific provisions of the City Code. Finally, the Policy does
not address public or private programs held in conjunction with the holiday season or displays on
private property.
Holiday Display Task Force Background Statement
Fort Collins has long recognized the celebration of the winter holiday season. For much of the
cty's history, that recognition has focused on Christmas as the primary religious and cultural
holiday celebrated by city residents. As Fort Collins has grown over the years, it has become a
dynamic, culturally diverse community. Specifically, Fort Collins is now home to people of many
religious and cultural beliefs and traditions; including Christian, Jew, Hindu, Baha'i, Buddhist,
Wiccan, atheist and Muslim, among others. City residents celebrate a variety of winter holidays,
such as Christmas, Hanukkah, Diwali, Birth of Baha'u'llah, Bhodi Day, the Winter Solstice,
Kwanzaa and more. Recognizing the desire for all citizens to feel valued, welcomed, and included,
11
November 20, 2007
the Task Force strove to provide a recommendation that could unite all City residents and visitors
in the spirit of community celebration.
Throughout history and across the world, the most common theme of winter celebration is light at
a time of darkness. Some ascribe religious significance, while others strive to cultivate an inner,
spiritual light, while still others rejoice in the spirit ofcommunity that the winter season brings and
in the anticipation of the return of light and warmth to the world. Light thus serves as a theme that
expresses certain shared values and is a common thread running through many of our celebrations.
The TaskForceproposes a holiday displaypolicy that recognizes the variety ofcelebrations enjoyed
by the diverse citizenry of Fort Collins. To emphasize the community-wide nature of the holiday
season, and to foster education about the diversity of cultural and religious traditions represented
in Fort Collins, the Task Force suggests the active participation ofthe community's museums. The
recommendation covers what the Task Force envisions as the primary City holiday display on or
around the Fort Collins Museum grounds, as well as the exterior and interior public spaces of all
City buildings, and the Oak Street Plaza.
Fort Collins Museum
1. For the City's primary holiday display, the Task Force proposes an annual display on or
around the grounds around the Fort Collins Museum. The display, designed and produced
by Museum staff, should be an educational, multi-cultural presentation that respectfully
presents our differences and embraces our commonality. Both religious and non-religious
celebrations should be included, with careful thought to broad representation and balance
among different traditions.
Ifguidance is needed for which symbols to include, it is suggested that the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) list of"Emblems ofBelieffor Placement on Government Headstones
and Markers"be used as a basis for ideas. This list can be used as a reference;however, the
list should not be used to exclude religious or cultural holidays not found there, such as
Kwanzaa.
The Museum Director met with Task Force members and Museum staff have discussed
several concepts that meet these objectives.Additional background information is included
in Attachment 3, "Symbols Incorporating Light. "
2. If the trees around the museum are decorated, they should feature white lights and avoid
decorations that would dilute the broad multi-cultural message, unless they are part of a
display.
City Buildings-Exterior
1. The exterior ofany City building may be decorated with white lights, secular wintersymbols
not traditionally associated with any particular holiday (snowflakes, icicles, etc) and
unadorned garlands ofgreenery (not decorated with ribbons or ornaments).
12
November 20, 2007
2. In addition, the Task Force recommends that the City collaborate with the Fort Collins
Museum of Contemporary Art (MOCA) to solicit educational artwork depicting the same
spirit of winter celebration—the unifying theme of light and the diversity of traditions within
our community. This art can then be printed on posters, banners, etc., be distributed though
the community, and displayed on and within City buildings. Ideally, MOCA will solicit new
artwork each year, giving many local artists a chance to contribute to what the Task Force
hopes will become a cherished winter tradition, as well as a collectible series of art.
3. The Executive Director of MOCA met with the Task Force to discuss how an invitation to
artists would be developed, including specific guidelines to ensure the objectives for the
display are met. She confirmed that MOCA would be interested in partnering on this project
should the City wish to do so.
City Buildings-Interior Common Areas
1. Common Areas"refers to those interior areas that thepublic can enter without an invitation,
such as lobbies, hallways and conference rooms. Common areas do not include employees'
personal work spaces.
2. The content of Common Area indoor displays should be the discretion of the heads of the
department or departments located in those facilities. However, department heads are
encouraged tofollow the Guidelinesprovidedin Attachment4, "Guidelinesfor City Building
Common Areas. "
Oak Street Plaza
• White lights and secular winter symbols not traditionally associated with any particular
holiday(snowflakes, icicles, etc)are recommended as the primary decoration for Oak Street
Plaza. The Task Force expects that the artwork commissioned by MOCA may also be used
as a centerpiece for Oak Street Plaza.
Interim Policy for 2007-2008 Season
The Task Force's recommendations outline goals for an inclusive, unifying, and festive holiday
display in future years. However, there is not enough time and funding to fully implement these
recommendations this year. Should Council accept these recommendations, members feel there
should be a visible sign to the community that changes in the City's displays are beginning to be
implemented. With that goal, the Task Force recommends that the following steps be taken for the
2007 holiday season:
• The new policy for interior and exterior City building decorations should not be taken as
binding for 2007; however, City staff are encouraged, wherever practical, to make their
displays consistent with the task force's ultimate recommendations. This can include:
13
November 20, 2007
o Increased use of white lights and winter symbols as decoration.
o Decreased use of decorated greenery that carries connotations of particular
holidays;for instance, removing red ribbons from wreaths and removing stars and
ornaments from trees.
• The Fort Collins Museum should proceed with installation of at least some elements of the
multi-cultural educational display. Ultimately, Museum staff will need to determine what
is feasible, and the Task Force recognizes that this exhibit may not be as elaborate or
extensive as in future years. This display should acknowledge multiple winter celebrations
(at least three, more i(possible) within the Fort Collins community.
• The City should utilize the Guidelinesfor City Building Common Areasfor interior common
areas of City buildings.
• The City and MOCA are encouraged to pursue the community art project described in the
full recommendation, and begin planning to commission artworkfor use in the Winter 2008
holiday celebration.
Advisory Group
An advisory group should collaborate on the initial design and ongoing development of the above
recommendations, in order to ensure that the City continues to express the spirit of these
recommendations. This group could meet on an as-needed basis to provide feedbackand assistance
to City staff members as the displays for next season are developed. Several Task Force members
are willing to volunteer to serve on this group.
Conclusion
The three policy options presented in this document reflect a great deal of thought, consideration
and community dialogue about the City's Holiday Display. In order to help understand the
similarities and differences between the three options, staff members prepared the matrix below.
14
November 20, 2007
Comparison of the Three Policies
Current Policy Task Force Policy Optional Combined
Policy*
Oak Street Plaza Permits: Permits: Permits:
• white or colored white lights; white or colored
lights; secular winter lights;
• trees, wreaths, symbols not secular winter or
garlands, other associated with a holiday symbols;
foliage; particular holiday; trees (incl.
• written secular artwork done in Christmas trees),
messages collaboration with wreaths,garlands,
community groups other foliage;
• written secular
messages;
• artwork done in
collaboration with
community
groups
Exterior of Permits: Permits: Permits:
Downtown City white or colored white lights; white or colored
Buildings** lights; secular winter lights;
• trees, wreaths, symbols not secular winter or
garlands, other associated with a holiday symbols;
foliage; particular holiday, trees (incl.
• written secular unadorned garlands Christmas trees),
messages ofgreenery; wreaths,garlands,
• artwork done in other foliage;
collaboration with written secular
communitygroups messages;
• artwork done in
collaboration with
community
rou s
Exterior of Other In discretion of Permits: Permits:
City department heads,but white lights; white or colored
Buildings/Facilities must be secular in secular winter lights;
nature. symbols not secular winter or
associated with a holiday symbols;
particular holiday; trees (incl.
• unadorned garlands Christmas trees),
ofgreenery; wreaths,garlands,
• artwork done in other foliage;
collaboration with written secular
communitygroups messages;
• artwork done in
collaboration with
community
groups
15
November 20, 2007
Current Policy Task Force Policy Optional Combined
Policy*
Fort Collins Permits: Multi-cultural Multi-cultural
Museum white or colored outdoor display, outdoor display;
lights; includes religious includes religious
• trees, wreaths, and secular and secular
garlands, other celebrations; celebrations
foliage; only white lights on
• written secular trees unless
messages incorporated into a
display
Interior Public In discretion of In discretion of Permits:
Areas of City department heads, but department heads, but white or colored
Buildings must be secular in encouraged to decorate lights;
nature. with symbols of winter secular winter or
not associated with a holiday symbols;
particular religious or trees(incl.
cultural celebration. Christmas trees),
Could include the wreaths,garlands,
artwork described above. other foliage;
Additional displays, while written secular
not encouraged, may be messages;
added, but must not artwork done in
advocate or emphasize a collaboration with
particular celebration community
and should represent at groups
least three religious or
cultural traditions.
Time Frame for November l through November 1 through November I through
Displays Covered by January 30 January 30 January 30
Policy
Secular or Only secular Religious elements may Religious elements
Religious Symbols be included at Museum, may be included at
Allowed? in building interiors and Museum. Only
in the art work referred secular symbols
to above, but primary elsewhere, with the
effect must not be to exception of the
advance or endorse artwork referred to
religion. above. Primary effect
must not be to
advance or endorse
religion.
*Note that Optional Combined Policy treats Oak Street Plaza and the interior and exterior
of all City buildings (except the Museum) the same.
16
November 20, 2007
** Current Policy regulates displays at Oak Street Plaza, City Hall, old Police Services
Building, the two parking structures, Transit Center, Museum, 222 LaPorte, 117 North
Mason, 215 North Mason and 281 North College more strictly than other City facilities or
buildings."
Tess Heffernan, Policy and Project Manager, introduced Seth Anthony and Howard Cohen, two
spokespersons for the Holiday Task Force.
Howard Cohen, Task Force member, stated two years ago, the Chabad Jewish Center of Northern
Colorado, requested the inclusion of a menorah in the City's holiday display. This request was
denied by the City in 2005 and 2006. In 2007,in recognition of the public debate surrounding this
issue, Council created the Holiday Display Task Force to review the entire display policy and to
make recommendations to Council for an updated policy for the interior and exterior of City-owned
and occupied properties. The Task Force was selected by the City Manager from a pool of more than
30 applicants. The members represent a diverse group of individuals and leaders from the
community. The group never selected a leader to give equal weight to the input from each member.
All meetings were facilitated by a representative from the City Manager's office, who also set
agendas and explained specific areas of domain for task force recommendations. The Task Force
consulted with staff from various City departments, including the City Attorney's office, as well as
members of community organizations and representatives from a range of religious and cultural
traditions. Throughout the process,the meetings, agendas and documents were open to the public
for comment and input. The process centered around consensus. Much time was spent on defining
consensus. The Task Force agreed to strive for recommendations that every member of the group
could support. The recommendations reflect the strength of the group and would unite the
community, preserves important traditions, and acknowledges differences.
Heffernan stated the City's Holiday Display Policy has been in place for many years. It addresses
City-sponsored,seasonal decorations,from November 1 st through January 30th. The Policy applies
to City buildings and facilities, including Oak Street Plaza. It does not apply to Old Town Square,
which is governed by the Downtown Development Authority,or to unattended,private displays on
City property or displays on private property. In August 2007,the Holiday Display Task Force was
appointed to review the Policy and to make recommendations on possible modifications. The Task
Force was composed of 15 members from a variety of organizations and faiths. Its initial
recommendations were published on November 6th. Since that time, much feedback has been
received from the community which has led to three options for Council to consider. One is to
maintain the current policy. The second is to revise the Policy and incorporate the recommendations
of the Task Force. The third option is to revise the Policy and incorporate some of the Task Force
recommendations and keep some of the original elements of the current Policy.
The current Policy covers two areas. The first area deals with outdoor displays in Old Town and lists
the specific City buildings in Old Town and includes Oak Street Plaza. It specifies white or colored
lights,trees, wreaths,garlands,or foliage and written secular holiday messages. Secular is defined
as "not overtly or specifically religious." The other area in the Policy describes displays on other
17
November 20, 2007
City properties. In those buildings, the Policy specifies that displays,both indoor and outdoor, are
at the discretion of each facility's department head, with the limit that the display must be secular.
The Holiday Display Task Force used the current Policy as its starting point and developed a
different set of key provisions. One recommendation was to create an educational, multi-cultural
display on or around the grounds at the Fort Collins Museum. The display would include a
presentation of both religious and secular celebrations. The unifying theme of light among the many
traditions and religions that celebrate during this time of the year would be the centerpiece of this
display. White lights were recommended for all trees and buildings while the display could have
colored lights. The Veteran's Administration has an extensive list of emblems of beliefs which
could be used as a reference for symbols to be incorporated in the display.
The Task Force recommends white lights,secular winter symbols such as snowflakes,and unadorned
garlands of greenery for the exterior of buildings. The Task Force also recommends the creation of
artwork that would depict the unifying theme of light and illustrates the various religious and cultural
traditions to be printed on posters and banners and hung on the exterior of City buildings. The City
could partner with one of the arts organizations to create this artwork. It is recommended that Oak
Street Plaza be decorated with white lights and secular winter symbols, as with the exterior of City
buildings and the artwork.
For the interior, common areas of City buildings, the Task Force recommends the holiday displays
remain at the discretion of each facility's department heads and encourages that the displays be made
welcoming to all, such using the symbols of winter. If additional displays were desired, such as
displaying a Christmas tree, those displays should not have the effect of advocating a particular
celebration,but should include at three religious or cultural representations. Any displays placed on
City property must be designed in such a way that their primary purpose or effect is not the
advancement or endorsement of religion.
The third option is a Policy developed recently at the direction of Council after feedback received
when the Task Force recommendation were published. This is a hybrid of the Task Force
recommendations and the current Policy. It includes the recommendation for an educational,multi-
cultural display on or around the Museum grounds that is a presentation of religious and secular
celebrations but does not recommend the specific use of white lights. This option has the same
guidelines for the interior and exteriors of City buildings and Oak Street Plaza as the current Policy.
It would permit white or colored lights,winter or holiday symbols that are secular in nature, such as
snowflakes, trees, wreaths or garlands and written, secular holiday messages. It would also permit
artwork printed on posters and/or banners that could be displayed on or inside City property and Oak
Street Plaza. This option also states that any displays placed on City property must be designed in
such a way that their primary purpose or effect is not the advancement or endorsement of religion.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the reports in the local and national media about Fort Collins "banning
Christmas" or "banning traditional displays" are almost all based on incorrect assumptions made
before the Holiday Display Task Force recommendations were released. That misinformation is still
18
November 20, 2007
in emails and the media. The Holiday Display Task Force acted properly,not as a decision-making
body, but in an advisory capacity. The City Council, as elected representatives, will make the
decision regarding the Policy. Last July,Council created the Task Force to review the City's Holiday
Display Policy with the goal of making it more inclusive. There was no direction to eliminate or
change any components of the traditional holiday display which includes Christmas trees, wreaths,
and colored lights. On November 2nd,before the Task Force recommendations were completed and
released publicly, the Coloradoan ran a front-page article, based on comments from Task Force
members that was headlined"Task Force: Only White Lights for Holidays." The article focused on
possible recommendations to change the traditional holiday displays on city-owned property that
would include allowing only white lights and no Christmas trees. The article was immediately
picked up by the national media which chose to exaggerate the original misperceptions. On
November 6th,after the Task Force report was released,the Coloradoan ran front page corrections.
The national media has not yet made those corrections. Another fact that has been overlooked by
the media is that any policy adopted by the Council will apply only to holiday displays put up by the
City government between November 1 and January 30. That Policy will not apply elsewhere in the
City nor to homes, businesses, the Downtown Development Authority decorations and does not
apply to the white lights currently displayed in the downtown area. Council has studied the Task
Force recommendation and has listened to all the public comment that has been received. He
requested respect and civility during public comment.
The following people spoke against adoption of the Holiday Display Task Force recommendations:
Neil McCaffrey, 1331 Silk Oak Drive
Allen Ginsborg, 5700 Hearthstone
David Way, 7109 Woodglenn Lane
Tom Hecker, 1733 Miramont Drive
Gerry Velte, 3518 Westminster Court
Amber Hopkins, 6908 Sedgwick Court
Paul Rosenzweig, 112 Rutgers
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive
Karen Roubal, 3806 Granite Court
Richard Sinor, 3614 Richmond Drive
Elizabeth Springer, 1820 Indian Hills Circle
Stacy Jones, 3614 Richmond Drive
Jim Keeton, 2312 Northridge Court
Lori Stolen, 6354 Buchanan Street
David Post, 3954 Boxelder Drive, Loveland
Chris Quint, 337 East 10th Street, Loveland
John Morris, 5821 North County Road 29C, Bellvue
Josh Ginsborg, 5700 Hearthstone
Jack Needy, 1025 Hinsdale Drive
Christy Fagerlin, 4133 Sumter Square
Ryan Houdek, 1308 Patton Street
19
November 20, 2007
Jim Givens, Fort Collins resident
Chelsea Kroyer, CSU student
Jeanne Ginsborg, 5700 Hearthstone
Joliann Beck, 369 Brinn Court
Carrie Gillis, 8020 Park Hill Drive
Carol Landsverk, 2055 Adriel Drive
Vicki Square, 2801 Calendar Court
Connie Schwindt, 3834 Lynda Lane
Joey Ginsborg, 5700 Hearthstone
Larry Bruns, 444 Huntington Hills Drive
Jake Ginsborg, 5700 Hearthstone
Fernando Pedroza, 1425 Salem Street
Ray Martinez, 4121 Stoneridge Court
Bonnie Burris, 3226 North County Road 23E
Susan Stauffer, 4201 Table Mountain Place
The following people spoke in support of the Task Force recommendations:
Sam Shelanski, 1818 Lakeshore Circle
Saul Hopper, 1029 Valley View Road
America Christenson, 3821 Carrick Road
Karen Schwartz, 1818 Lakeshore Circle, task force member
Rabbi Yerachmiel Gorelik, 940 Pioneer Avenue
H. J. Siegel, Fort Collins citizen, asked if a menorah display was included in the three options
Council was considering. He also asked for information about the Downtown Development
Authority.
Patsy Goldberg, 2961 Garrett Drive, objected to the length of time holiday decorations were left in
place.
Councilmember Brown asked if the proposed display at the Museum would be inside the fenced area
and if the display would include nativity scenes and menorahs. Heffernan stated the exact site has
not yet been chosen but it would possibly be located on the west side of the Museum. In its
recommendation, the Task Force did specifically list a nativity scene to be included in this display.
The final selection of what symbols would be used will be determined by the Museum staff after
working with citizens.
Councilmember Brown asked if the display would be limited to only those groups whose symbols
were listed in the Veteran's Administration list. Cheryl Donaldson, Director of the Fort Collins
Museum, stated many details of the display are yet to be determined. A committee of community
members would provide input on the displays. The Task Force has identified nine groups who
20
November 20, 2007
celebrate during this time of year and the Museum would follow the Task Force's recommendation
regarding those groups. All nine groups may not wish to provide a symbol for the display.
Councilmember Manvel asked if organizations would set up displays at the Museum or would they
just make suggestions and the Museum staff would design and set up the display. Donaldson stated
the Museum staff would be responsible for the display.
Councilmember Troxell asked if there was general recognition that December 25 is Christmas.
Heffernan answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the Task Force attempted to understand the tradition of Christmas
in Fort Collins. Heffernan stated all members of the Task Force are Fort Collins residents with a
variety of faiths represented. The group developed a list of community objectives to decide what the
community wants and that list evolved into a broad set of recommendations the entire community
would want. Howard Cohen, Task Force member, stated the Task Force looked at the Holiday
Display Policy which covers the time from November 1 through January 30 and covers many
holidays in that time span. The Task Force attempted to develop a display to include all holidays
between November 1 and January 30, not specifically Christmas.
Councilmember Troxell noted the dates covered bythe Holiday Display Policy include Thanksgiving
and Martin Luther King Day, which are both federal holidays along with Christmas. Mr. Cohen
stated the Task Force recognized there are a number of holidays during the time span, some that are
well-known and others were lesser known. The list of celebrations provided is not intended to be
an exclusive list but is to be a starting point for the Museum staff to use to develop a display.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Task Force was charged to examine holiday displays between
November 1 and January 30 and asked if the City puts up decorations on City property for
Thanksgiving or MLK Day. City Manager Atteberry stated the City does not put up decorations for
those holidays. Heffernan stated the Resolution establishing the Task Force directed the Task Force
to review the existing Policy and the existing Policy deals with Christmas decorations.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the Task Force was aware the City has used white lights downtown
for the past 25 years. Mr. Cohen stated the Task Force did know the City had used white lights for
many years and that was a major consideration in its recommendation. The intent was to develop
a city-wide celebration that was consistent. Heffernan stated the scope of the Task Force did not
include the white lights in Old Town.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the Holiday Display Policy applies to all City buildings. City
Manager Atteberry stated that depends on which option Council chooses. Both the Task Force
recommendation and the third option, which is a hybrid option, leave the decoration of interior
spaces to the discretion of the building manager. Heffernan clarified that the current Policy leaves
interior decorations to the discretion of the each building manager. The Task Force recommendation
also leaves interior decorations to the discretion of the building manager but includes some specific
21
November 20, 2007
guidelines. The hybrid Policy option does set guidelines for interiors and does not leave the
decorations to the discretion of the building manager. City Manager Atteberry stated all three Policy
options are clear concerning exterior decorations, but vary in direction concerning interior
decorations.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for clarification on the use of colored lights in the Museum display
in the hybrid option. Heffernan stated the third option is silent on the issue as staff believed Council
did not want lights specified as part of the Museum display. The Task Force recommended white
lights as a backdrop for the display at the Museum but the hybrid option does not specify so as to
allow either colored or white lights in the display. City Manager Atteberry noted the hybrid option
was developed to attempt to blend individual discussions between staff and Councilmembers and
to try to reflect the sentiment of the public input.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the Museum would be moving in the future and he questioned
whether the display would move to the Museum's new location, would be discontinued or would
stay at the current site of the Museum.
Mayor Hutchinson stated Council is setting the Policy and administrating the Policy, such as
deciding if the display would move with the Museum or not,would be decided by the City Manager,
in consultation with Council.
Councilmember Ohlson stated a citizen has requested information about the Downtown
Development Authority(DDA) and he noted it is a quasi-governmental body appointed by the City
Council to manage the downtown area. It is a public body with open meetings. It is run with public
monies that are generated by certain financing mechanisms. The Holiday Display Policy does not
apply to Old Town Square, which is managed by the DDA.
Councilmember Poppaw asked if the Museum would be required to use the Veteran's
Administration list as its standard of symbols to be included in the display. Heffernan stated the VA
list was to be a guideline but was not to be used to exclude possible symbols.
Councilmember Roy asked if the hybrid option included adding a menorah to the decorations on the
exterior of City buildings. City Attorney Roy answered in the negative. The intent of the hybrid
policy is that the educational, multi-cultural display at the Museum and the art work would be the
place where religious and quasi-religious symbols were included. Elsewhere,interiors and exteriors
of City Buildings and Oak Street Plaza would contain only symbols that are purely secular. The
courts view the Christmas tree as a secular symbol. The creche is viewed as a religious symbol that
celebrates the religious aspects of Christmas. There is no majority opinion on the menorah but it is
viewed as a symbol that has religious significance but,if displayed in a certain manner,is acceptable
in government displays. He did not interpret the word "secular"to include a menorah because the
courts view it as being a religious symbol. It can be included in a government display, as can a
creche, without violating the First Amendment, if displayed in such a way that the overall message
of the display remains secular. The menorah would not be considered a secular symbol to be
22
November 20, 2007
included in the interior or exterior of City buildings under the hybrid option, which is the way the
hybrid policy is worded and not because of any First Amendment considerations. The Policy can
say whatever Councils wants the Policy to say as it is City speech. Council can choose what symbols
can be included and what message is to be communicated to the community.
Councilmember Roy asked how the language in the hybrid option specifically precludes the
inclusion of a menorah in the exterior displays. City Attorney Roy stated the hybrid policy
specifically states each exterior symbol must each be secular. The current Policy states the content
of the displays, as a whole, must be secular which might allow for a menorah.
Councilmember Roy stated one court decision allowed the placement of a menorah and a Christmas
tree together as a secular display. A menorah, displayed by itself, is not a secular symbol, but
together with a Christmas tree, could be consider a secular display. City Attorney Roy stated the
menorah, by itself, is not viewed by the courts as a secular symbol. When it is combined with a
Christmas tree,it can convey a secular message. If a menorah and creche are in a display,along with
other secular symbols,the overall message would be a secular message. The question, from a legal
standpoint, is not whether a particular symbol is purely religious, quasi-religious or purely secular,
but what message is conveyed when the symbols are combined. If the message is one that celebrates
the various ways in which the holiday is celebrated, then displaying a menorah is not a violation.
Councilmember Brown asked when a nativity scene was last displayed by the City. City Manager
Atteberry stated, to his knowledge, the City has never displayed a nativity scene. Heffernan stated
there was no evidence available that the City had sponsored a creche in recent history.
Councilmember Brown asked why the display proposed for the Museum could be allowed since it
would also be on City property. City Attorney Roy stated the 1 Oth Circuit Court has held that the
City is entitled to "present a holiday message to its citizens without incurring a constitutional
obligation to incorporate the message of any private party with something to say." It would be the
City's own display and the City can choose what it wants to put in the display. If it chooses to
include religious symbols, the display cannot endorse any one religion.
Councilmember Brown asked what the Task Force recommendation intent was for display of a
menorah. Mr. Cohen, Task Force member, stated the intent of the Museum display was to be
educational and secular in nature. Displays in the interiors of City buildings would be left to the
discretion of building managers with the overall intent of being secular. City Attorney Roy stated
a Christmas tree could be displayed with either white or colored lights and be considered secular.
Councilmember Troxell asked for an explanation of the difference between City employees
presenting a display with religious objects,such as the proposed display at the Museum,and working
with Rabbi Gorelik in placing a menorah somewhere on City property.
Councilmember Manvel asked whether citizen groups can put up displays on City property as
opposed to the City putting up a display. City Attorney Roy stated a legal difference does exist
23
November 20, 2007
between a City display and private displays place on public property. The City can pick and choose
what to include in its display and is permissible within First Amendment rights. Another option is
to create a public forum in which private speech is permitted but different rules apply and the City
cannot regulate content in the same way it can with its own display.
Mayor Hutchinson asked Council to consider two suggestions. He asked Council to consider
rejecting any recommendations that diminish Christmas in Fort Collins, especially the traditional
display of Christmas trees, colored lights and other secular symbols. He also asked Council to
consider adding to the traditional displays to make them more inclusive. For example, the Task
Force recommends an inclusive City primary display on the grounds of the Museum which would
add a mixture of religious and secular displays that can include a menorah, a nativity scene, and
others.
Councilmember Troxell made a motion to reject the Task Force recommendations and continue with
the current policy.
THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw to adopt Option C,
the combined recommendation.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the Task Force was formed this year to assist Council in determining how
to create a holiday display that was more inclusive. The menorah was part of the issue, but the
recommendations were to go further and help Council determine ways to add other symbols,
including religious symbols to make City displays more inclusive.
Councilmember Troxell stated the question of placement of a menorah did not seem to answered by
the proposed combined policy.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the Task Force recommendation to create an inclusive display at the
Museum did answer the question of where to place a menorah and would include the required
balance of secular and religious symbols.
Councilmember Manvel stated Rabbi Gorelik had requested placement of a menorah on City
property which Council did not allow because of concern about creating a public forum and allowing
anyone to put up unattended displays which is against City Policy. The menorah has been in the
center of downtown for the last two years and is located on private property. He thanked citizens
for their respectful input during public comment and noted that Fort Collins has had only white lights
in its downtown display for 25 years and had not been an issue before now.
Mayor Hutchinson noted most of the comments received by Council requested Council not to change
the traditions of Fort Collins. The intent of Council in July when the Task Force was created, was
24
November 20, 2007
to make the displays more inclusive and not to do away with the current traditions. The option now
under discussion does not take anything away from the traditions but it builds on them.
Councilmember Troxell stated he did not believe having City staff create inclusive displays would
be truly inclusive. The public square should be open for different groups to demonstrate their own
faith. Policies could be developed that addressed issues of length of time for the display and
whether it would be attended or unattended.
City Manager Atteberry stated the Museum staff is highly capable of creating an inclusive display
that would be balanced and fair to various groups.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if"open public display"meant giving a certain amount of area to any group
that signed up to create a display and then allowing those groups to make a display.
Councilmember Troxell stated that was his intent with an"open public square" and Council could
create the boundaries for such displays that could attended. He felt having the City create displays
of symbols of various faiths was at odds with what citizens were requesting during public comment.
Mayor Hutchinson stated having an open public forum requires a completely different set of rules
regarding free speech. He asked how the proposed display at the Museum could be considered as
not inclusive.
Councilmember Troxell stated the displays should be initiated by members of any faith that wanted
a public display and should not be a display created by Museum staff. City Attorney Roy noted if
Council wants to create an open public forum, it is legally permissible to do so. Different rules do
apply. Modifying the current Policy concerns government speech or City speech since it is the City's
own message and the City gets to choose what is displayed. Creating a public forum affords private
individuals the opportunity to express their own views and the City does not get to choose what the
message is except for certain broad limits such as prohibiting obscenities. Other restrictions such
as time, manner, place and content-neutral restrictions could also be put into place.
Councilmember Roy stated Museum staff often prepares professional displays on different subjects
that it does not have first-hand knowledge of and those displays are informative and creative. He
believed Option C best supported the traditions and ideals cherished by the citizens.
Councilmember Manvel stated creating an open public forum causes many problems because the
spaces would be opened not only to various religious groups, but also to other groups, such as the
Boy Scouts or the Ku Klux Klan. Anyone who wanted to set up a display would be allowed to do
so. If groups were allowed to create displays at the Museum,they should also be able to create them
elsewhere on City property. The City has rules against unattended displays.
Councilmember Ohlson stated creating an open public forum is an idea that needs to be considered
at another time. It would not be for just the dominant culture, but would be for everyone which
25
November 20, 2007
might not be comfortable for many people. An open forum is not the issue currently under
discussion but should be discussed at another time.
Councilmember Manvel asked if a public square already existed and if it was permissible for a
person to stand in Old Town Square and make a speech or hold a sign. City Attorney Roy stated the
courts have recognized certain kinds of public property as traditional public forums. The City
regulates public forums such as streets and sidewalks by prohibiting unattended displays. Public
forums do exist for various means of expression not limited to carrying signs,handing out leaflets,
standing and expressing one's views. Unattended displays are expressly prohibited because they
create different kinds of safety and aesthetic issues.
Councilmember Ohlson stated Old Town Square would not be a place to create a public forum
because of size, merchant concerns and is its own entity.
Councilmember Brown asked any public property could be turned into a public square and have
limits concerning who can display on that property put into place. City Attorney Roy recommended
pursuing such discussion in executive session at another time.
Councilmember Manvel stated the City has not included either a creche or a menorah in its displays
and so those are not traditions of Fort Collins. He questioned if the displays would be respectful of
religions as the displays of religious symbols would have to be next to secular symbols of the
holidays. He had concerns that inclusion of religious symbols on government property would
conflict with the separation of church and state. He believed the displays at the Museum would be
educational and recognizes the diversity in the community. Option C of the Policy seemed the best
choice.
Councilmembers asked for information from staff about the various issues created by forming an
open public square.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the Task Force for its work and the public for its input. The
overwhelming majority of people do not want to change the tradition of Christmas in Fort Collins
and Option C retains the traditions while increasing inclusion.
Councilmember Troxell stated recognizing Christmas as Christmas was important and he was
concerned the Museum displays would not do that. He did not support the motion.
Councilmember Brown thanked the Task Force and the public for the input. He supported the idea
of the creation of a public square.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the proposed display at the Museum would include all the traditions
of Christmas and nothing was taken away from those traditions.
26
November 20, 2007
Mayor Hutchinson stated the goal was to create greater inclusion in the community and to recognize
all the various ways the holidays are celebrated in the community. It is not about promoting one
religion over another or religion over non-religion. Option C achieves that goal.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and
Roy. Nays: Troxell
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Ordinance No. 118, 2007,
Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the
Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2008 and Adopting
the Budget for the Fiscal Years Beginning January 1, 2008
and Ending December 31, 2009, and Fixing the Mill Levy
for Fiscal Year 2008,Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
This Ordinance represents the annual appropriationforfiscal year 2008 and adopts the total City
budget for fiscal year 2008 at $569.7 million and for fiscal year 2009 at $537.3 million. This
Ordinance also sets the City mill levy at 9.797 mills, unchanged since 1991,for fiscal year 2008.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The AnnualAppropriation Ordinance ispresentedfor SecondReading. This Ordinance sets the City
Budget for the two year period 2008-2009. The Ordinance is based on the City Manager's
Recommended Budget, with several additions directed by City Council at its October 9, 2009 Work
Session. The additional offers total $1,038,916 in one-time General Fund expenditures and
$124,148 (2009 costs) in on-going General Fund offers. If approved on Second Reading, these
additions to the Recommended Budget would be funded through the use of an additional$477,715
in General Fund Reserves and an increase in revenue from the Sales and Use Tax Vendor Fee of
$390,000 per year (on-going.)
City Council unanimously adopted the Annual Appropriations Ordinance on First Reading on
October 16, 2007. The Ordinance was accepted as published with one addition to provide an
appropriation of$65,000 in 2008 for Nighttime Dial-a-Ride Service. This offer will be funded
through the use of General Fund reserves. The revised Ordinance adjusts both the General Fund
and the Transit Fund to implement this change.
27
November 20, 2007
These additions use all of the total available funds, including one-time Reserves and on-going
Vendor Fee revenue. On November 6, City Council adopted the proposed changes to the Vendor
Fee on First Reading, with the Second Reading set to coincide with the Second Reading of the
Appropriations Ordinance.
Since the October 16 passage of this Ordinance on First Reading, the City has been notified by
Lorimer County that the City's share of Road and Bridge Levy revenue will be reduced by$560,490
in 2008 and$1,120,980 in 2009. This total revenue loss will equal$1,681,470 over the two year
budget period. Staff does not recommend modifying the Appropriation Ordinance at this time, but
will plan to update City Council on revenues and 2007 Year End resources in the first quarter 2008.
At that time, adjustments to the 2008 or 2009 appropriations may be necessary.
Another change to the Appropriations Ordinance since First Reading is moving an appropriation
from the NaturalArea Fund to the Capital Projects Fund to provide fundingfor a 2008 construction
project at Soapstone Prairie. This$2 million transfer will be used for construction of improvements
at Soapstone Prairie, including an entrance station, access roads, interpretive features and other
public improvements. The $2 million transfer from the Natural Areas Fund will be appropriated
in the Capital Projects Fund— Soapstone Prairie Natural Areas Capital Project. Accordingly,
Ordinance No, 118, 2007, appropriating the 2008 budget, is increased by$2 million in the Capital
Projects Fund on Second Reading to account for the appropriation needed for Soapstone Prairie
Improvements. "
City Manager Atteberry stated the budget for 2008-2009 is approximately $1.1 billion. It is a
responsible plan,given the City's resources and expected slow growth in sales tax over the next two
years. New retail construction is underway and moderate revenue growth is expected for the next
budget cycle. There are long-term needs that are currently unmet including police staffing, street
maintenance,parks maintenance,fire service needs and transportation capital issues. Citizens expect
a very high level of service from its local government. hi order to meet expected levels of service,
City efficiencies must be examined often and services provided as cost effectively as possible. The
City is doing a good job of being as cost effective as possible,but will continue to search for ways
to perform better. The proposed budget does recommend using one-time reserve funds with the
anticipation of increased revenues in 2010 with the completion of new retail construction.
Councilmember Troxell asked if the mill levy freeze imposed by Governor Ritter would impact the
City's mill levy. Mike Freeman, Interim Finance Director, stated the mill levy freeze has not
impacted the City in terms of the proposed budget.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the budget does not increase the mill levy.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if Larmer County had officially voted to reduce the City's share of
Road and Bridge Levy revenue. Freeman stated Larimer County did intend to lower the City's share
but it was unknown if the County had taken formal action yet. City Manager Attebeny stated the
City was notified after First Reading approval of the budget that Lorimer County intended to
28
November 20, 2007
withhold$550,000 in 2008 and$1.12 million in 2009 and beyond. After several conversations with
the County Manager and County officials, it is apparent the County will vote to reduce the City's
share of Road and Bridge Levy revenue. He recommended adoption of the budget and stated staff
would provide information in early 2008 to Council about actual revenues versus actual expenses
from the end of 2007. If actual revenues exceed actual expenses, the$550,000 will be covered by
the excess revenue. He did not believe the $1.12 million revenue cut could be absorbed.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to adopt Ordinance No.
118, 2007, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Roy noted staff has worked diligently to fund the Mason Corridor and the budget
did include funding for the Project.
Councilmember Troxell stated the BFO process was a good beginning but improvements were
needed. Many needs still exist in transportation, police and fire services that are not addressed in
this budget. The issues of the County cutting the City's share of the Road and Bridge Levy revenue,
pavement maintenance and parks maintenance also have not been addressed. He did not support the
proposed budget
Councilmember Brown stated the budget seemed overly optimistic in light of the national economy
not being overly strong. Fort Collins has lost over 4,000 jobs in the past eight years. Fuel prices are
increasing and other costs are also increasing. Spending reserves to balance the budget was not a
wise move. He did not support the proposed budget.
Councilmember Manvel stated addressing the unmet needs of transportation,police and fire services
would require a tax increase. The only alternative would be to cut millions from the proposed budget
which is not a direction Council wants to go. Spending reserves is a responsible option in order to
save more money in the future. If the roads are not maintained to a certain standard, it will cost
much more to repair them in the future. If Fort Collins does not continue to be a great place to live,
the loss of jobs will accelerate.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the BFO process has flexibility and has provided transparency to the entire
budgeting process. Cuts of$15 million of planned expenditures have been made from the General
Fund and with the flexibility of the BFO process, Council could pick items to be cut that were not
focused on the citizens and could choose to provide greater funding to those areas it decided were
of greatest benefit to the citizens. It was a responsive process and a responsible budget had been
created.
The vote on the motion was as follows:Yeas:Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw and Roy. Nays:
Brown, Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
29
November 20 2007
Ordinance No. 139, 2007,
Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement Between the Fort
Collins Regional Library District, Larimer County
and the City of Fort Collins, Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
Under the terms of the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) City-owned assets used to provide
library services will be transferred to the District. These assets include: the Main Library; most of
Library Park; the Southeast Branch Library; right to use Harmony Library; Building on Basics
Library Technologyfmding;Library CapitallmprovementExpansion(Impact)Fee revenue;library
books, media and other materials, library shelving, furniture, technology and other personal
property. The aggregate replacement value of these assets is estimated to exceed thirty million
dollars.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Fort Collins Regional Library District (the District) was approved by the voters in November
of2006and funded with three mills ofproperty tax. The District Board of Trustees was selected and
ratified by the Council and County Commissioners. The District, City and County entered into an
Interim Intergovernmental Agreement in July of this year. Under the IGA the City continued to
operate the libraries on behalf of the District and at District expense. The Interim IGA set a goal
of transferring library operations to the District by January 1, 2008.
The Trustees and the Council formed subcommittees to work through the details of the finalIGA and
the full Council and the Board of Trustees have spent considerable time formulating an agreement
that best meets the needs of all parties and the community.
The essential elements of the Final IGA include:
• Transferring ownership of the Main Library and much of Library Park to the District.
• Conveying the new Southeast Branch Library to the District upon completion.
• Assigning all of the City's rights and obligations under the Harmony Library agreement with
Front Range Community College to the District, with approval of the College.
• Remitting the Building on Basics (BOB) library technology revenues to the District to be used
for voter approved purposes.
• Conveying to the District books, media materials,furnishings, technology, shelving and other
personal property used by the City to provide library services.
• City ownership of the Poudre Creamery Properties, unencumbered by Building Community
Choices (BCC) restrictions.
• Use ofremaining 2007 library impactfees and earned interestfor completion of the Southeast
Branch Library.
30
November 20, 2007
• Continuation of City library impact fees in 2008 at least until completion of the Southeast
Branch Library and use of the 2008fee revenues for completion of the branch library, ifneeded.
• The City retains ownership of the Carnegie Building and parking area at Mathews and Olive.
• Lease of buildings at Mountain and Howes to the District for library operations.
• Availability of City support services (HR, accounting,payroll, risk management,purchasing,
IT,facilities maintenance etc.) to the District at District expense.
• Selection offuture Trustees according to State law procedures (ratification by 213 majority of
Council and County Commissioners)
• Transfer of library operations and of City library employees to District employment by
December 31, 2007.
BACKGROUND
In November 2006, voters approved the formation of the Fort Collins Regional Library District and
provided three mills o ro er tax to and it. A committee comprised o two Councilmembers and
P fP P tJ' .f P of
two
County Commissioners selected the District Board of Trustees who were ratified by the full
Council and the Commissioners. State law requires the parties to enter into an intergovernmental
agreement within 90 days of the ratification of the Trustees. The City, County and District entered
into an Interim IGA in July to meet the State requirement. The Interim IGA continued library
services through the City on behalf of the District at the District's expense. The Interim IGA also
established a goal of transferring management and operation of library services to the District by
January 1, 2008.
The Final IGA addresses all of the issues associated with the transfer of library operations from the
City to the District, as outlined in the Executive Summary section above. Adoption ofthe Ordinance
approves the terms of the IGA and authorizes the Mayor to sign the agreement.
A summary of the issues addressed in the IGA include:
• Harmony Library
The City has an agreement with Front Range Community College to use the Harmony Library
buildingfor 50years, beginning in 1996. FRCC owns the building. The City does notpay rent. The
library is operated for the benefit of the students and the community. The City may assign its rights
and obligations under the agreement with the consent of the College. The IGA provides for this
assignment and the College has given its consent. This means the District takes the City's place and
will operate Harmony library in partnership with the College.
• Southeast Branch Library
The City has entered into an agreement with Bayer Properties for the construction of a 17,000
square foot branch library on the second f oor ofan attractive, centrally located building in Bayer's
Front Range Village retail development near Ziegler and Harmony roads. The IGA providesfor the
31
November 20, 2007
conveyance ofownership ofthe branch libraryfrom the City to the District upon its completion. The
transfer will be conditioned on the building being used as a library.
• Poudre Creamery Properties
In April 1997, voters approved the Building Community Choices (BCC) capital program, which
included 2.3 million dollars to acquire land for anew library and for design services. The City used
the BCC funds to acquire the Poudre Creamery (northwest corner of Laporte and Howes) and
adjacent properties. The District does not believe the Creamery properties are suitable for anew
library and the City wants to retain ownership of the properties. Instead of using the Creamery
properties as a new library site, the District is interested in expanding the Main Library and wishes
to obtain ownership of Library Park for the expansion.
Under the IGA, the District will trade the Creamery properties to the City in exchange for most of
Library Park (excluding the Carnegie Building, courtyard and grounds, and playground). If the
value of the Creamery Properties exceeds the value of Library Park, the difference will be paid by
the District to the City in exchange for the conveyance of the Main Library Building to the District.
In turn, the City will give the District BCC funds in the same amount as the District paid for the
Main Library. The District must use the BCC funds for the purposes authorized by the voters.
The District will use Library Park for expansion of the Main Library and for other library purposes.
The District will cooperate with the City to allow public use of the park and to schedule and allow
events and other public activities in Library Park not incompatible with library operations. The
District understands and accepts the current restriction on Library Park requiring voter approval
before additional park ground can be developed.
• Main Library
The District may become the owner of the Main Library building as part of the transaction
exchanging Library Park for the Poudre Creamery as described above. If conveyance of the Main
Library is not needed to complete the exchange, the City will convey the Main Library building to
the District without charge.
• Carnegie Building
The Carnegie Building(current home of the Fort Collins Museum) will remain in City ownership.
The Museum plans to relocate to a new Museum/Discovery Science Center facility in a few years.
If the District determines it needs the Carnegie Buildingfor expansion of the Main Library, the City
will work with the District in good faith on the possible transfer of the building to the District after
the Museum relocates.
32
November 20, 2007
• Mathews/Olive Parking Lot
The City owns property on the southwest corner of Mathews and Olive used as a parking lot. The
City will retain ownership of this property. The lot is currently open for public parking and library
staff and patrons may continue to use it for that purpose. The City may sell, develop or change the
use of the property in the future.
• Mountain/Howes Buildings
The City will retain ownership of the buildings on the northeast corner of Mountain and Howes.
The buildings are currently used by the library for technical services and for the Friends of the
Library. The property was purchased with BCC funds as a site for anew performing arts center.
The City will lease the buildings to the District on a year to year basis for a dollar a year. The
District will coverall expenses associated with the property. The lease can be terminated upon six
months notice. If the City terminates the lease and other City owned property is available and
suitable for library needs, the City will work with the District to make the property available for
District needs on the same lease terms as the Mountain/Howes lease. Any needed repair or
renovation would be at the District's expense.
• Library Capital Improvement Expansion (Impact) Fees
The City has collected a library impact fee on new residential development since 1996 This one-
time fee is used to buy books and materials and build library space to offset the impact of new
residents on library services. The fee averages $459 per residential unit. Annual fee revenues in
2001 exceeded$700,000 but dropped to under $300,000 in 2006 and 2007 due to a slow down in
residential construction. Fee revenues have been used primarily to fund the construction of the
Southeast Branch Library.
The IGA continues the library impact fee at least until completion of the Southeast Branch Library
project. At that time Council will determine if the fee will continue or terminate. Fee revenues will
be used for the benefit of City residents. Larimer County is interested in creating a companion
library impact fee on residential construction within the District boundaries that do not pay the City
fee, with revenues benefiting those residents.
• Library Technology Funding
The voters approved the Building on Basics (BOB) capital program in 2005 and provided
$5,950,000 in sales tax revenues for library technology. The IGA provides for these funds to be
given to the District in eight equal annual installments beginning in 2008. The District must use the
funds to provide library technology primarily for the benefit of City residents.
• Selection of Future Trustees
State law (C.R.S. 24-90-108)provides that future Trustees are appointed by ratification of a 213
majority of Council and 213 majority of the County Commissioners. The IGA provides that
appointment offuture Trustees will be according to this law.
33
November 20, 2007
• Support Services
The City provides a variety of support services to City departments including: human resources;
payroll; accounting; risk management; purchasing; information technology; and facilities
maintenance. The IGA provides that the City will make these services available to the District and
the District will pay the City's cost in providing the services selected by the District.
• Transition of Staff and Operations
The IGA provides that City library staff will become employees of the District effective December
31, 2007 and will no longer be City employees. The District is offering positions to all current
library employees. Under the IGA, library services will be provided by the District and not the City
beginning December 31, 2007. "
Marty Heffernan, Director of Culture,Parks,Recreation and Environment, stated voter approval of
the Fort Collins Regional Library District included a 3 mill property tax to fund District operations.
A group of Trustees, chosen by Council and Larimer County Commissioners has been working to
organize the District. An interim intergovernmental agreement between the District, Fort Collins
and Larimer County was entered into within 90 days of the ratification of the Trustees, as required
by state law. Under that agreement,Fort Collins continued to provide library services on behalf of
the District, with the District bearing the expense of providing services through 2007. The interim
IGA called for the parties to transfer all services to the District by the end of 2007. The proposed
IGA transfers ownership of the Main Library and much of Library Park from the City to the District.
It conveys the Southeast Branch Library, currently under construction and design and, assigns the
City's rights and obligations with Front Range Community College for the Harmony Library, a 50-
year partnership for the City to operate the Harmony Library in partnership with the College. The
IGA also transfers Building on Basics Library technology funds of approximately $6 million
approved by voters to the District to be used for Library technology to serve the citizens. It conveys
all the personal property used to provide library services in the past, including books, materials,
shelving,computers,office supplies,and othermaterials needed to continue library operations. Also,
the IGA involves a real estate transaction where the City keeps the Poudre Creamery property,
purchased with voter-approved Building Community Choices dollars as a site for a future library.
The District has indicated the Creamery is not its preferred site for a future library. The District
would like to expand the current Main Library on the Library Park site. The real estate transaction
exchanges much of Library Park for the Poudre Creamery property and, to the extent that the
Creamery property is worth more than the Park property,the District would pay the difference to the
City in exchange for ownership of the Main Library. The City would give the District an equal
amount of money and it use would be restricted to land or design services for a new library.
The IGA would keep the Library Impact Fee in place through the end of 2007 and continue it into
2008, until the Southeast Branch Library is completed. When it is known that sufficient revenues
are available to complete the Branch Library,Council would consider whether to continue the Impact
Fee. The City would retain ownership of the Carnegie Library Building, current home of the
Museum,and a nearby parking lot,but the City agrees to have discussions regarding those properties
34
November 20, 2007
in the future if the District determines the property would be beneficial to the expansion. A lease
of buildings currently occupied by the Library used for tech services and the Friends of the Library
would continue as a zero-rent lease with the District bearing the costs of using the buildings. The
District would pay the City to provide support services such as payroll,HR,purchasing,accounting,
finance, and risk management.
The Trustee selection process would be according to state law which states two-thirds majority of
the Council and two-thirds majority of the Commissioners must ratify the replacement of Trustees
in the future. Transfer of operations would occur by the end of 2007. City employees would become
District employees as of December 31.
Mike Liggett, Library District Trustee, stated the IGA puts the District in a place where it can go
forward and provide a high level of services expected by the community. He requested Council
approve the IGA.
Shelly Kalkowski, Library District Trustee, thanked those who helped craft the IGA.
Councilmember Brown asked if the IGA needed to include a statement that Council would determine
if the Library Impact Fee would continue once the Southeast Branch Library was continued. City
Attorney Roy stated it was not necessary to include such language in the Ordinance. Ingrid Decker,
Assistant City Attorney, noted the IGA does contain language that states Council will make the
determination to continue the Impact Fee after the final payment is made on the Southeast Branch
Library. City Attorney Roy stated a vote would be taken by Council only if Council chose to amend
City Code and discontinue the Impact Fee. City Manager Atteberry stated the County
Commissioners have not acted to impose an Impact Fee on unincorporated residents and District
Trustees need to initiate the conversation with the County.
Councilmember Troxell asked ifthere had been anypublic input for the IGA. Heffernan stated much
discussion was done in executive session as the issues dealt with real property and the parties needed
to be private about those discussions. The agreement has been finalized in the past week and was
driven by the December 31 deadline to complete the transition. The Impact Fee is already in place
and is being used for construction of the Southeast Branch Library. There will be time for public
input once the Project is completed and Council has the discussion on whether to continue the
Impact Fee.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if it was necessary to have public input for the IGA. Heffernan stated all
rules had been followed and it had been an open process. There did not seem to be much public
interest in the IGA.
Councilmember Troxell stated the Trustees are appointed and it was Council's responsibility to act
as an accountability mechanism to ensure full public involvement in each step. He asked fora public
input session to be held between First and Second Readings. Heffernan noted the Coloradoan ran
a story recently regarding the IGA, so the public had been notified.
35
November 20, 2007
Councilmember Ohlson asked why the City employees would become District employees on
December 31 and not on January 1, 2008. Heffernan stated the pay period ends on December 30th,
so the date was chosen for payroll and benefit considerations.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for assurances that the District would pay all City costs for support
services. Heffernan stated the terms of the IGA provide that the District can select which support
services it wants to procure from the City and that the District will pay the cost for those services.
The departments providing the services will need to ensure the costs of providing those services to
the District are passed to the District. The City cannot collect amounts over the costs of those
services as the IGA specifies the District will pay the actual costs. City Manager Atteberry stated
it would be a "fee for service" and is not a profit center for the City.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for clarification of the costs the District was to repay for 2007.
Heffernan stated the District has reimbursed the City on a quarterly basis for 2007 costs to provide
services. Those funds were accounted for to balance the 2007 budget.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson,to adopt Ordinance
No. 139, 2007 on First Reading.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the appointment of Trustees in the future should be the same process
as the one followed to select the current Trustees. A Council/Commissioner team would interview
candidates and makes recommendations to the Council and the Commissioners. He did not want
the Boardmembers to select Trustees. Decker noted state statute specifies that once the initial Board
of Trustees has been appointed, the governing bodies have two choices. They can either continue
the nominating panel such as was used to choose the original Trustees or they can turn that
responsibility to the Board of Trustees. The IGA states the appointment of Trustees would be done
as pursuant to state law. Whether potential Trustees are chosen by a panel or the Board, the
candidates must be ratified by a two-thirds majority of the Council and County Commissioners.
Councilmember Manvel supported adding the clarification of appointing Trustees through a panel
process to the IGA.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy
and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to suspend the rules and
continue the meeting. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
36
November 20, 2007
Ordinance No. 130, 2007,
Amending Section 25-123(c) of the City Code Relating to the Vendor Fee
for Collecting and Remitting Sales Tax,Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on November 6, 2007 by a vote of 6-1 (Nays: Brown),
modifies the formula used to calculate the vendor fee for sales and use tax licensees. The proposed
modification will result in$390,000 ofongoing additional revenue being available for General Fund
uses. This change will not increase taxes or fees charged, but will lower the amount of City sales
and use taxes that vendors are allowed to retain in exchange for the service they provide in
collecting City taxes. Currently, vendors are allowed to retain 3%ofsales and use taxes collected,
up to a maximum of$90 per reporting period. Under the proposed fee, vendors will retain I%of
the tax, up to $45 per reporting period. "
Councilmember Troxell asked if the additional revenue would be used for any other purpose than
the General Fund. City Manager Atteberry stated the purpose is to help fund services Council has
determined are priorities. It is an additional funding source outside of the recommended budget.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
130, 2007 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if many cities comparable in size to Fort Collins have a vendor's fee.
Mike Freeman, Interim Finance Director, stated Fort Collins was in the middle of the range of
vendor fees paid by cities. The range of vendor fees is from zero to 3%.
The vote on the motion was as followed: Yeas:Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel, Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adjourn to 6:00 p.m.
on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 to continue the annual evaluations of the City Manager, City
Attorney and Municipal Judge and to conduct any other business that may come before the Council.
Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
37
November 20, 2007
Adiournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
38
November 27, 2007
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, November
27,2007, 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: Brown,Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Executive Session Authorized
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adjourn into Executive
Session under Subsection 2-31(a)(1)(a) of the City Code for the purpose of discussing the
performance and proposed compensation and benefits of the City Manager, Municipal Judge, and
City Attorney. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's Note: The Council adjourned into Executive Session at 6:00 p.m. and reconvened
following the Executive Session at 7:45 p.m.)
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
39
December 4, 2007
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, December 4,
2007, 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: Brown,Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
David May,225 South Meldrum,Chamber ofCommerce President,stated the Library IGA approved
the transfer of millions of dollars of assets from an elected body,the City,to an appointed body,the
Library District. He agreed with Council representation in selecting Library District trustees and
asked that the annual report from the Library Board be made verbally to Council and not just as a
written report. He was concerned the process of creating the IGA was not as open as it should have
been.
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset, requested Council consider adoption of a resolution calling for
the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Allen Ginsberg, 5700 Hearthstone, thanked Council and staff for the decision made regarding the
Holiday Display Task Force recommendations. He requested Council reconsider placement of a
menorah on City property other than just at the Museum display.
Carrie Gills, 8020 Park Hill Drive, stated greater public input should have been allowed before
Council considered adoption of the IGA with the Library District. Most of the deliberations were
done in executive session and citizen input was minimized.
Bob Carnahan,4325 Westbrooke Court,thanked the Library Board Trustees for its work and agreed
with the provision in the IGA regarding the selection of future trustees. He was concerned about the
amount of funds to be managed by an appointed board and asked Council to exercise due diligence
when voting to appoint members to the Board.
Joe Kissel, 913 West Oak, urged Council to consider adoption of a resolution calling for the
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, stated the practice of purchasing renewable electric energy
credits to supply renewable power in lieu of actual renewable energy purchases needs to be reviewed
40
December 4, 2007
as the credits do not meet the requirements in the Electric Supply Policy and there does not seem to
be any benefit provided by renewable energy credits.
Karen Rose, 5200 Parkway Circle East, stated questions submitted by a group of citizens living in
the Southwest Annexation area to City staff have not yet been answered and requested information
that would address the area's concerns.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Mayor Hutchinson stated the IGA negotiations with the Library District required Council to hold
executive sessions since those negotiations involved real estate transactions and those transactions
were the only negotiations discussed during the executive session.
Councilmember Troxell stated he had concerns about the Library IGA and requested Item#8 Second
Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2007,Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement Between the Fort
Collins Regional Library District, Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins be pulled from the
Consent Calendar. He encouraged the City Manager to work to find ways to display the menorah
on City Property. He requested information on the different phases of the Southwest Annexation.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if direction could be given to staff regarding Item#8 during Consent
Calendar Follow-up instead of pulling the Item. He requested staff work with the Library Board to
provide yearly or semi-annual reports on the District's finances and reserves and reserves policy.
Councilmember Troxell requested a"State of the Library"presentation,and not just a written report.
City Attorney Roy stated the Ordinance approving the IGA does authorize the City Manager, in
consultation with the City Attorney, to make amendments or modifications to the final IGA as
Manager determines is necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or advance the
objectives of the Agreement. It was possible to negotiate these items with the District.
Councilmember Ohlson stated Council did want a formal agreement with the Library District
regarding reports made to Council on the District's finances,the reserve policies and some form of
face-to-face meeting between the Board and the Council on a regular basis. City Attorney Roy
suggested the motion to adopt the Consent Calendar should contain the direction given to staff
regarding the IGA with the Library District.
Mayor Hutchinson asked about the status of City services in the Southwest Annexation area. City
Manager Atteberry stated the first priority of the City was to provide police services to the area and
the revenues collected from the first phase were being used to provide public safety and health for
the area. He asked anyone in the area already annexed and who had concerns about the service being
received to contact his office.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry requested Item#23 Resolution 2007-108 Expressing Council's Opposition
to the Mining of Uranium in the Vicinity of Nunn, Colorado be moved ahead of Item #22 Items
Relating to the East Skyway Rezoning under Discussion Items.
41
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Troxell pulled Item#6 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2007,Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund - Soapstone
Prairie Public Improvements Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of Public
Improvements at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area and Item#16 Resolution 2007-105 Approving the
Purchase of Digital Control Units for Residential Air Conditioning Electrical Load Control as an
Exemption to the Competitive Process.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Second Readine of Ordinance No. 137, 2007, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund- Soapstone Prairie Public Improvements
Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of Public Improvements at
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 20,2007,appropriates
revenue in the Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund to be used for construction
of the access road at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area which was started in October and will
be completed by spring 2008. Funds being appropriated for this project will come from
designated Natural Areas Program sales tax revenues.The funds budgeted in 2007,2008 and
2009 are revenues from the Open Space Yes (City) 1/4 cent sales tax and Help Preserve
Open Space (County) 1/4 cent sales tax. The unappropriated funds available in 2007 are
revenues from the original 1/4 cent Natural Areas sales tax(collected from 1993-1997) and
from the Building Community Choices 1/4 cent sales tax revenues designated for the Natural
Areas Program (collected from 1998 to 2005).
Funds Budgeted in 2007 $2,166,000
Unappropriated Funds Available in 2007 $ 800,000
Funds Budgeted in 2008 $2,000,000
Funds Budgeted in 2009 $ 134,000
Total Appropriation $5,100,000
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No.13&2007,Authorizin the he Appropriation of 2008 Fiscal
Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal
Airport.
This Ordinance unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 20,2007,appropriates
the City's 50% share($3,184,735)of the annual appropriation for the fiscal year 2008 Fort
Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport(the"Airport")budget. The City of Loveland manages
the Airport's budget and finances, but since the City of Fort Collins owns 50% of the
Airport, it is necessary for the City to appropriate its 50%portion of the Airport budget.
42
December 4, 2007
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2007.Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement
Between the Fort Collins Regional Library District, Larimer County and the City of Fort
Collins.
The Fort Collins Regional Library District (the District) was approved by the voters in
November of 2006 and funded with three mills of property tax. The District Board of
Trustees was selected and ratified by the Council and County Commissioners. The District,
City and County entered into an Interim Intergovernmental Agreement in July of this year.
Under the IGA the City continued to operate the libraries on behalf of the District and at
District expense. The Interim IGA set a goal of transferring library operations to the District
by January 1, 2008. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
November 20, 2007 and approves the final IGA between the District, Larimer County and
the City of Fort Collins.
Changes to the IGA between First and Second Readings include:
1. Provision for Larimer County to take formal action to establish the District.
2. As Council requested, language was added specifying that the selection of new
District Trustees would continue to be done by a committee of two Councilmembers
and two County Commissioners.
3. Clarifying City library impact fee revenues will be used to complete the Southeast
Branch Library project,the facility will be conveyed to the District upon completion
and will be used by the District as a library.
4. Clarifying the Branch Library will be constructed according to current plans,with any
reduction in value or quality requiring agreement of the City and the District.
5. Ensuring the District has input into the operational agreement between the City and
Bayer Properties regarding the Branch Library.
Please note the Library District is in the process of reviewing the proposed changes to the
IGA. The District or City staff will confirm the District's agreement with the changes, or
highlight any unresolved issues prior to Council action on this item.
There are also two changes to the Ordinance on Second Reading, shown in redline and
strikeout. The first change clarifies that the conveyance of Library Park to the District would
be with the restriction that it be used for library purposes, including possible expansion of
the Main Library. The second change adds a new Council finding that the conveyance of
Library Park to the District is in the best interests of the City, even if the District ultimately
does not use the Park property for expansion of the Main Library.
9. First Readinp of Ordinance No. 140,2007,Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General
Fund and Authorizing Transfer Between Funds for Asset Replacement.
This Ordinance provides appropriations from General Fund reserves to the Fleet Fund and
Communications Fund to implement the new asset replacement programs for vehicles,
43
December 4, 2007
facilities, and Information Technology needs. The funds are recommended to be
appropriated from General Fund reserves. These funds were created through prior year
budget savings and are intended to be used for Asset Replacement needs. It is recommended
that $2,350,000 be appropriated to the Fleet Fund and $1,500,000 be appropriated to the
Communications Fund.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 141,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the City
Sales and Use Tax Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds.
This Ordinance increases total City 2007 appropriations by$2,667,000. Of that amount,this
Ordinance increases General Fund 2007 estimated revenues by$2,000,000. This Ordinance
also increases the estimated revenues for the Capital Projects Fund ($222,333),the Natural
Areas Fund ($222,333), and the Transportation Fund ($222,334) due to greater than
projected collections of the following dedicated sales and use taxes:0.25 Building on Basics,
0.25 Open Space Yes,and 0.25 City Street Maintenance sales and use tax,respectively. This
Ordinance only appropriates the transfer of the additional sales and use taxes from the Sales
Tax Fund to the above funds. It does not increase appropriations within those related funds.
These additional revenues will increase the reserves in the related funds as of year-end 2007.
Appropriations for expenditure from the various fund balance reserves will be presented to
City Council during the first quarter of 2008.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 142,2007,Authorizing Leases of City Property at 200 West
Mountain Avenue, Suite C. For Up To Five Years As Part of the Fort Collins Technology
Incubator Program.
The Fort Collins Technology Incubator (FCTI) nurtures high potential innovation-based
companies in their formative stages to increase the probability they will survive and make
a sustainable contribution to the economic health of the community. One of the services they
offer to accomplish this goal is residence in an incubator facility which gives participants
access to shared services,synergy with other startup businesses and below market lease rates.
The City currently offers two facilities for this purpose at 200 West Mountain Avenue and
321 Maple Street. The currently defined FCTI residence program is a three-year lease with
increasing lease rates each year. Due to the fact that not all companies reach the desired self-
sustaining status within this three year window,FCTI would like to add the option of offering
up to two additional 12-month extensions at the end of the initial three year period. The
program would increase each year by$1/SF for any companies staying after the initial three
year period, making the fourth year$10/SF and the fifth year$11/SF.
Staff recommends leasing 200 West Mountain Avenue, Suite C, to the FCTI and its client
companies. Benefits to the City include: replacement of primary jobs lost over the past
several years,increased economic robustness, especially in the downtown area,retention of
the City's highly talented professional workforce, and an enhanced sales tax base.
44
..
December 4, 2007
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 143,2007,Approving the Terms of the City's Lease of 612
South College Avenue, Suite 22, Fort Collins. Colorado.
In order for this portion of the property to become tax exempt, state law requires that the
Council approve the terms of the lease by Ordinance.
Since December 1992, the City has been leasing approximately 388 square feet of office
space located at 612 South College Avenue, Suite 22, for the office of Dr. Dan Dworkin,
Police Services psychologist. Both Dr. Dworkin and Police Services desire to continue
leasing this office space.
This lease extension shall be effective as of December 1, 2007 and expire November 30,
2008,with two 12-month lease extension options. Lease payments will include base rent and
insurance. Base rent shall be$457 per month. Utilities charges are not included in the base
rent and shall be 14.22% of the utilities statements for the property. Rent for the option
period will be calculated by the Consumer Price Index.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
at 212 LaPorte Avenue. Alone with Related Parking Rights at 222 LaPorte Avenue, for up
to Five Years.
In July 2005,the City purchased the former Abraxis property at 212 LaPorte Avenue to allow
for future City development. The property was leased back to Abraxis until March of this
year while the new Abraxis facility was built. The City has no immediate use for the
property.
Staff recommends that the former Abraxis property, as well as the adjoining parking to the
west at 222 LaPorte Avenue,be leased at current market rates, no less than $5.00 per sq ft
annually, for a period of up to five years to offset maintenance expenses and generate
revenue.
14. First Readine of Ordinance No. 145, 2007, Amending Section 2-575 of the City Code
Relating to Councilmember Compensation.
Article II, Section 3 of the City Charter provides that the compensation of Councilmembers
shall be adjusted annually for inflation in accordance with the Denver/Boulder Consumer
Price Index. In 2007, Councilmembers were compensated$630 per month, and the Mayor
received $945 per month.
This Ordinance amends Section 2-575 of the City Code to set the 2008 compensation of
Councilmembers at$650 per month and the compensation of the Mayor at$970 per month,
as required by the City Charter.
45
December 4, 2007
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2007, Adopting the 2008 Classified Employees Pay
Plan.
The 2008 Pay Plan incorporates the new pay philosophy of establishing pay ranges by using
the average actual salary data for benchmark positions to set the pay range mid-point. Data
from the public and private sectors was used to determine the prevailing market rates for
approximately 100 benchmark jobs. This Ordinance sets pay ranges,not specific salaries of
individual employees.
16. Resolution 2007-105 Approving the Purchase of Digital Control Units for Residential Air
Conditioning Electrical Load Control as an Exemption to the Competitive Process
In 1982,Utilities Light and Power began offering customers with electric water heaters away
to reduce their contribution to the distribution system electric demand during system peak
usage times. Light and Power selected a system from Scientific Atlanta, Inc as the best
option for needs at that time and dubbed the program Hot Shot. Today,Fort Collins Utilities
has about 2,000 customers who have a Hot Shot Digital Control Unit(DCU)on their electric
water heaters. The original Hot Shot load control devices operate on a proprietary
communications protocol that assured accurate communications and avoided false operations
from other radio frequency signals that could reach the customer premises. The technology
developed and sold by Scientific Atlanta has since become the property of Comverge, Inc,
and it continues to support the City's existing installed base of water heater DCUs.
As residential air conditioning(AC)market saturation in Northern Colorado grew from less
than 10% in the early 1980's to today's number of nearly 70%, according to Platte River
Power Authority, summer peak electric demand has steadily increased with residential AC
purchases. While population has increased about 60% in the last 10 years, electric peak
demand has increased over 100%,largely as a result of air conditioning. In response to this
trend,it is evident that controlling summer-season electric loads is necessary to move toward
the City's Electric Energy Supply Policy goals.
In 2007, a Utilities team recommended expansion of the water heater program to include air
conditioning control. An air conditioning pilot study of 100 DCUs during the summer of
2007 proved the effectiveness of the air conditioning controllers as a method of reducing
summer-season peak demands. Staff plans to add 500 units per year for the next two years.
To implement an air conditioning load control program that also incorporates existing
installed base of water heater DCUs, it will be necessary to use the Comverge system. The
air conditioning control system will operate on the same Comverge control system as the Hot
Shot water heater control program. The backbone of the control system is the recently-
upgraded LMS (Load Management Software) program, which is a proprietary software
program used to control the DCUs. Comverge hardware also controls the transmitters in the
electric substations, which send the signal to the DCUs.
***END CONSENT***
46
December 4, 2007
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2007, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund- Soapstone Prairie Public Improvements
Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of Public Improvements at
Soapstone Prairie Natural Area.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No.138,2007,Authorizing the Appropriation of 2008 Fiscal
Year Operating and Capital Improvement Funds of the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal
Airport.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2007,Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement
Between the Fort Collins Regional Library District, Larimer County and the City of Fort
Collins.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
9. First Reading of Ordinance No. 140,2007,Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General
Fund and Authorizing Transfer Between Funds for Asset Replacement.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 141,2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the City
Sales and Use Tax Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 142,2007,Authorizing Leases of City Property at 200 West
Mountain Avenue, Suite C, For Up To Five Years As Part of the Fort Collins Technology
Incubator Program.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 143,2007,Approving the Terms of the City's Lease of 612
South College Avenue, Suite 22, Fort Collins, Colorado.
13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property
at 212 LaPorte Avenue, Along with Related Parking Rights at 222 LaPorte Avenue, for up
to Five Years.
14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2007, Amending Section 2-575 of the City Code
Relating to Councilmember Compensation.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2007, Adopting the 2008 Classified Employees Pay
Plan.
24. First Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2007,Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the Municipal Judge.
47
December 4, 2007
25. First Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2007, Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Attorney.
26. First Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2007, Amending Section 2-596 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Manager.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt and approve
all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar and for staff to work with the Library District
to include reporting to Council on the District's finances, the reserve policies and some form of
face-to-face meeting between the Board and the Council on a regular basis in the final IGA. Yeas:
Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Manager Atteberry requested Council consider Item#16 at this time.
Resolution 2007-105
Approving the Purchase of Digital Control Units for
Residential Air Conditioning Electrical Load Control as an
Exemption to the Competitive Process, Adopted
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
Utilities would like to purchase 1,000 digital control units used in an electric load control program
for a total purchase price of$106,250. Comverge, Inc. is offering a $9.00/unit discount for
committing to a purchase of 1,000 units. By agreeing to purchase 1,000 units from Comverge,
Utilities is receiving a discount that will save$9,000 over the cost ifstaffcontinued with the normal
purchase quantities.
To meet the financial and technical needs of the demand side management program, we must sole-
source Comverge as the manufacturer of the DCUs (Digital Control Units)for the "Hot Shot"air
conditioning program. There are other load control companies, each with their own proprietary
systems, but none of them are compatible with the City's existing system. To implement another
system would be exceedingly expensive as it would necessitate the removal of the transmitting and
control infrastructure as well as the removal and replacement of the installed base of 2000 DCUs
that currently control electric water heaters.
Because the Hot Shot program offers a means to reducing electric demand during times of peak
energy use, the program helps reduce coincident peakpurchase power costs, the savings of which
are passed on to ratepayers.
48
December 4, 2007
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1982, Utilities Light and Power began offering customers with electric water heaters a way to
reduce their contribution to the distribution system electric demand during system peak usage times.
Light and Power selected a system from Scientific Atlanta, Inc as the best option for needs at that
time and dubbed the program Hot Shot. Today, Fort Collins Utilities has about 2,000 customers
who have a Hot Shot Digital Control Unit(DCU)on their electric water heaters. The original Hot
Shot load control devices operate on a proprietary communications protocol that assured accurate
communications and avoided false operations from other radio frequency signals that could reach
the customer premises. The technology developed and sold by Scientific Atlanta has since become
the property of Comverge,Inc, and it continues to support the City's existing installed base of water
heater DCUs.
As residential air conditioning(AC) market saturation in Northern Colorado grew from less than
10% in the early 1980's to today's number of nearly 70%, according to Platte River Power
Authority, summer peak electric demand has steadily increased with residential AC purchases.
While population has increased about 60%in the last 10years, electric peakdemand has increased
over 100%, largely as a result of air conditioning. In response to this trend, it is evident that
controlling summer-season electric loads is necessary to move toward the City's Electric Energy
Supply Policy goals.
In 2007, a Utilities team recommended expansion of the water heater program to include air
conditioning control. An air conditioning pilot study of 100 DCUs during the summer of 2007
proved the effectiveness of the air conditioning controllers as a method of reducing summer-season
peak demands. Staff plans to add 500 units per year for the next two years.
To implement an air conditioning load control program that also incorporates existing installed
base of water heater DCUs, it will be necessary to use the Comverge system. The air conditioning
control system will operate on the same Comverge control system as the Hot Shot water heater
control program. The backbone of the control system is the recently-upgraded LMS (Load
Management Software) program, which is a proprietary software program used to control the
DCUs. Comverge hardware also controls the transmitters in the electric substations, which send
the signal to the DCUs. "
Councilmember Troxell recused himself from this item as he had a PhD student in his program who
is an executive officer for the company under consideration in this item and he believed it could be
interpreted as a conflict of interest for him.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the process to exempt a purchase from the competitive process was
very strict and was used as an exception, not as a common practice. Kraig Bader, Standards
Engineering Manager, stated digital control units had been in use by the City since 1982. The
company who makes the units is now owned by Comverge and is the only company that has the
technology that is functional for the City's use.
49
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt Resolution
2007-105. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel,Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Staff Reports
Mark Jackson,Interim Transportation Director introduced Helen Migchelbrink,new City Engineer.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Ohlson thanked staff for work done to create the new Northside Aztlan Community
Center. It is a high-quality, functional center and the City can be proud of the structure. He
requested further information from the Humane Society regarding reports from citizens about vicious
dog attacks and the Humane Society's handling of the situations. He asked for a report on the
possibility of adding more kinds of plastic recycling to the recycling stream as Loveland has recently
expanded its list of recyclable products and Fort Collins should do the same.
Resolution 2007-104
Approving the Programs and Projects That Will Receive Funds from
the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program Grants,
and the City's Affordable Housing Fund, Adopted Alternative version
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
`FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and Home Investment Partnership
(HOME)Program provide Federalfunds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) to the City of Fort Collins which can be allocated to housing and community development
related programs and projects, thereby, reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget
to address such needs. City funds for this item have been appropriated as part of the Affordable
Housing Fund in December 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Resolution will complete the fall cycle of the competitive process for allocating City financial
resources to affordable housing programs/projects and community development activities.
BACKGROUND
This Resolution establishes which programs and projects will receive funding with CDBG and
HOME funds for the FY 2007 Program year, which started on October 1, 2007, including the use
50
December 4, 2007
of Carry-over CDBG Entitlement Grant funds, Carry-over HOME funds,funds from the FY 2007
HOME Grant,funds from the HOME Community Housing Development Organization(CHDO)Set
Aside, HOME Program Income, and funds from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The CDBG
Commission r presents a list of recommendations as to which programs and projects should receive
funding.
The following table summarizes the amount and sources of available funds:
AMOUNT SOURCE
$361,920 FY 2006 CDBG Reprogrammed Funds
312937 FY 2007 CDBG Unprogrammed Funds
120187 FY 2006 HOME Reprogrammed Funds
$172,499 FY 05IFY 06 HOME CHDO Reprogrammed Funds
480792 FY 2007 HOME Grant
96139 FY 2007 HOME CHDO Funds
50000 FY 2007 HOME Program Income
83000 FY 2006 Affordable Housing Fund
133000 FY 2007 Affordable Housing Fund
$1,810,474 Total Funding Available
Reprogrammed funds are funds returned to the City from projects that were previously allocated
funding but the project failed to materialize. Unprogrammed funds are from previous grants that
haveyettobe allocated tospecificprojects. HOME Community Housing Development Organization
(CHDO)set aside funds represent a portion of the HOME grant that must be earmarked for CHDO
agencies.
The CDBG Commission presents recommendations as to which programs and projects should
receive funding from the available funding sources presented above. The following tables present
the allocations recommended by the Commission to the City Council within each major category:
Affordable Housing
Applicant Funding Commission's Unfunded
Project/Program Request Recommendation Balance
HO-1 City of Fort Collins— $250,000 $250,000 $0
Home Buyer Assistance
HO-2 Fort Collins Housing $14,613 $0 $14,613
Corporation—First Step
Expansion -Administration
51
December 4, 2007
HO-3 Fort Collins Housing $192,144 $0 $192,144
Corporation—First Step
Expansion
110-4 Neighbor-to-Neighbor $244,866 $244,866 $0
— Coachlight Driveway
Parking Lot Repairs &
Improvements
Total $701,623 $494,866 $206,757
All funding recommendations in the Affordable Housing category are in the form of
a "Due on Sale Loan + 5%Simple Interest Loan."
Public Facility
Applicant Funding Commission's Unfunded
Pro'ecilPro ram Request Recommendation Balance
PF-1 City of Fort Collins— $55,671 $55,671 $0
Crossroads Safehouse:
Facility Safety Rehabilitation
The funding recommendation in the Public Facilities category is in the form of a
"Due on Sale Loan + 5%Simple Interest Loan. "
A summary of the Commission's funding recommendations by category is presented in thefollowing
table:
Recommended Funding % of Total Category
$494,866 89.9% Affordable Housin
$55,671 10.1% Public Facilities
$550 537 100.0% Total Allocated to Programs and Projects
The CDBG Commission has recommended that$550,537(30.4%)of the available funding amount
of$1,810,474 be allocated leaving a balance of$1,259,937(69.6%)from all of the funding sources
to be carried over and made available for allocation in the 2008 spring cycle of the competitive
process. The following table summarizes the utilization offunds from all sources.
Recommended Funding % of Total Cate ory
$550,537 30.4% Allocated to Programs and Projects
$1,259,937 69.6% Carry-over to 2008 Spring Cycle
$1 810 474 100.0% Total Funds Available
Ken Waido, Chief Planner, stated the Resolution under consideration is the culmination of the fall
cycle of the competitive process that allocates the City's financial resources to affordable housing
programs and community development activities. Several sources of money are available through
the Community Development Block Grant program and the HOME program,both federal programs,
and the City's affordable housing fund. The total amount available this cycle is $1.8 million.
52
December 4, 2007
Applications were solicited in July and five applications were received. Four applications were for
affordable housing programs and one was for a public facility. The applications totaled less than
$800,000. The review process for screening the applications included the Affordable Housing Board
who reviews the written proposals and then submits a list of priorities to the CDBG Commission.
The CDBG Commission also reviews the written proposals and conducts personal interviews with
each applicant. The Commission then formulates recommendations for the Council who conducts
a public hearing and adopts a resolution making the final decision on the allocation of funds. The
CDBG Commission is recommending allocating$550,000 with 90%of that funding going towards
affordable housing and 10%to a public facility request. The Commission recommends only 30%
of the available funding be allocated at this time and$1.2 million or 70%of the funds be carried over
to the 2008 Spring funding cycle. Applications for the Spring cycle will contain proposals for
funding requests that are much greater than the amount of funds available and the carry-over funds
will be applied at that time.
Bob Browning,CDBG Commission Chairperson,stated the Commission recommended three of the
applications received and did not recommend two of the applications received. The Home Buyer's
Assistance Program is a very successful affordable housing program and the Commission
recommends full funding for the program. The Neighbor-to-Neighbor Project to help renovate the
Coachlight Apartments is Phase Two of a project funded in the last cycle and is a needed project.
The Commission recommends full funding of the Project. The public facilities project is a security
upgrade to the Crossroads Safehouse and the Commission also recommends full funding for that
project. The Commission does not recommend full funding for the two projects proposed by the
partnership of the Fort Collins Housing Authority and Larimer County Mental Health. The
Commission believes the Project is premature at the current time and recommended Council defer
funding on the Project until the Spring cycle. The partnership between the Housing Authority and
Larimer County Mental Health is a program that uses housing as an incentive to get people with
mental health and substance abuse problems into counseling. The issue is not housing but providing
counseling and the Commission is unsure of how effective or what contributions the counseling is
making to the City. The Commission feels it needs more information before it can recommend
funding the Project to the Council.
Eric Berglund, CDBG Commission Vice-chairperson, stated the Commission views its process as
being similar to the BFO process where offers provided by applicants are reviewed for tangible
outcomes that can benefit the City and are good uses of taxpayer dollars. The CDBG provided initial
funding a few years ago for the pilot program to create the First Step Expansion Program. The
Program is entering its second year of funding for the full Program. When the Commission
discussed the outcome of the Program with the Housing Authority,the Commission did not receive
assurances that the Program provided a tangible result for the City. When the Commission looked
at reducing the funding requested, the Housing Authority asked in its application that the funding
be"all or nothing." The Program does not have a proven track record and the Commission did not
believe expanding the Program was a good use of funds.
Mr Browning stated the Commission questioned the administrative costs requested in the application
for the First Step Expansion Program and asked how many staff were needed to administer the
Program. The Housing Authority told the Commission no extra staff was needed. The Commission
53
December 4, 2007
believed the funds requested for administrative costs,which are affordable housing funds,would be
used to fund salaries of staff already employed by the Housing Authority. Funding administrative
costs is not one of the stated reasons for use of affordable housing funds.
Kay Rios, 1501 Patton, CDBG Commission member, supported the decisions of the Commission.
If Council disagrees with the Commission's recommendation,a work session should have been held
to discuss the differences. The Commission had general consensus that it was not fiscally
responsible to spend the funds just because the funds were available.
Cheryl Olson, Chairperson of the Steering Committee for the Mental Health and Substance Abuse
Planning Project, stated the Partnership is composed of 30 organizations and 5 consumers who are
actively involved in the goal of restructuring how mental health and substance abuse services are
administered in Fort Collins and Latimer County and to improve their effectiveness. She asked
Council to reconsider the application from the Housing Authority. The application would provide
12 additional housing vouchers for people suffering from co-occurring conditions of mental illness
and substance abuse. The Partnership supports the Housing Authority's application as it provides
appropriate intervention for those who suffer from severe mental illness that often leads to severe
substance abuse. The consequences of failing to provide intervention for the person include that
person being unable to live independently and often they become homeless and die at an early age.
The community pays a heavy price for failing to provide intervention as these people cycle through
services many times with no good outcome. The Program, Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment
(IDDT), has strong evidence that it is effective in interrupting the cycle. The Partnership has made
the commitment to bring IDDT to the community. Housing assistance is one of the elements of the
Program and the application from the Housing Authority is to provide housing vouchers. She
requested Council adopt the alternate version of the Resolution and provide funding for Housing
Authority application.
Councilmember Poppaw asked for clarification on the allocation of funding for the administrative
dollars in the application. Julie Brewen, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, stated the
Housing Authority was asked to separate the application into two pieces, the HOME money for
rental assistance and the administrative portion to be provided by other funds. When the
Commission asked if the Housing Authority would be hiring new staff to administer this Program,
the answer was that no new staff would be hired but existing staff would administer the program.
A portion of one full-time employee would be dedicated to this Program and that person would be
paid with the funds applied for in the application. The duties of that staff person would be handled
by a new person to be hired.
Councilmember Poppaw asked how many years had the Program been in place. Brewen stated the
Program was at the end of its third year. It started as a two-year pilot program with money from the
Colorado Division of Housing. Each family involved received two years of transitional housing
assistance and 76%of those people secured permanent housing by the end of the two years. Another
allocation was received for two more years for each family enrolled in the Program and is now at the
end of the first half. Success is defined as finding permanent housing solutions and the goal was to
move people from homelessness into secure housing. 76%of the people enrolled did achieve that
goal, two were terminated for noncompliance and some dropped out of the program.
54
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Poppaw noted the letter received from the Housing Authority states the Program
meets the priority needs identified by Council in the City's Consolidated Plan. Brewen stated the
City's Consolidated Housing Plan does include tenant-based rental assistance as a priority need and
uses the HOME fund for this assistance. Tenant-based rental assistance differs from other rental
subsidies programs because it is given to individual households rather than to a particular unit. It
offers a way to meet fluctuating demands for housing and can be tailored to meet the distinctive
housing needs of the community. The 12 vouchers that would be provided by the requested funding
would be targeted more narrowly to those who have co-occurring conditions of mental illness and
substance abuse with more intensive case management. The Housing Authority is providing the
housing portion of the treatment for the Partnership.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the request from the Housing Authority for the funds not approved
by the CDBG Commission was for both the Program and the administrative costs for the Program.
He also asked if the funds were for actual physical structures or would these funds be ongoing
monies that would commit the CDBG funds on an ongoing basis. Waido stated the request was for
both parts to be approved. Providing the funds does not commit the CDBG to ongoing funds and
if the Program was to be extended, another application must be submitted and would compete with
other applications in the another funding cycle.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for an explanation of the$192,144 requested. Waido stated the funds
would be used for 12 vouchers to provide tenant-based rental assistance to help the families of
individuals in the Program.
Councilmember Manvel asked for information about the City's past involvement with rental
assistance. Waido stated the City has been involved in rental assistance programs and this Program
was funded in the past. Another form of tenant-based rental assistance is in the Public Service
category where an agency such as Neighbor-to-Neighbor has been granted money in the past to help
families on an emergency basis when financial hardship has arisen for a month or two so the family
does not lose its home. This Program is an ongoing, year-long program for individuals and is
considered a housing program, not a public service.
Councilmember Manvel noted the CDBG materials stated the Program is not a housing program,
but it is a welfare program and that was not an accurate statement. Mr. Browning stated the crux of
the Program is not a housing program but it is a counseling program.
Councilmember Manvel stated the Program was a broad-based program that involves many
elements, including housing. The funding requested is for housing. Mr. Browning stated housing
is used as an incentive to get people into the counseling program. The Commission wanted to see
tangible results from the Program before more funds were provided. Mr.Berglund stated the CDBG
Commission did not recommend funding for the fall cycle because the Commission felt the
application was premature. The Housing Authority had an unsuccessful application in at the same
time to the federal government for a grant. The Commission felt that extra time was needed for a
more comprehensive funding request that could be submitted in the spring cycle and the Commission
could then be provided with more information and make a more informed decision.
55
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Roy asked if any information or the success rates from other similar programs
around the country had been considered. Mr.Browning stated the Commission was not aware of any
other programs of a similar nature. The Commission was not suggesting this Program should not
be supported, but it wanted more information before more funds were given.
Mayor Hutchinson asked what the cost would be of funding this program before more information
is available. Mr. Browning stated the Commission felt the application was premature and the
Commission wanted more information before it committed to a program that would require funding
over a long period of time. Mr. Berglund stated the Commission was concerned the Program was
only in its first year of a two-year funding cycle for the existing program and expanding the Program
now when the Partnership was in the process of restructuring and seeking federal grants that were
not yet in place was not a prudent use of funds. The Commission weighs applications heavily with
regard to leveraged funds. The Program was not up and fully running yet and did not have all the
information concerning desired outcomes and what other grants or funds would be available to the
Program. The Commission did not feel it would be detrimental to the Program to have the
application resubmitted for the spring cycle.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if funds were available for this Program. City Manager Attebeny
stated funding could be provided either through use of reserves or to wait until year-end figures are
known and it can be determined if funding can be provided from the General Fund.
Councilmember Manvel stated the funds requested are not for physical buildings or for loans which
are repaid and the funds can be used again,but the funds are for rent which does not offer any return
to the City. The funds would be used for a very needy population. It could cost the City more if this
population is homeless than ifhelp is provided for them. Mr.Berglund stated the Commission asked
the applicant how many people in the program were not being served. The response was that over
80%were already in existing Housing Authority properties and the voucher program would be used
with private landlords to take in this population who has a high turnover rate. A larger population
has been identified but are not yet in the Program.
Councilmember Manvel asked why vouchers were needed if most people in the Program were
already in Housing Authority properties. Brewen stated the 12 new vouchers would be used for
people that are now homeless and not in any type of subsidized housing. The Program as a whole,
with the dozens of community partners, does have huge amounts of leveraging dollars and that
information was not part of the application because the application was concerned only with the
housing piece. Each participant pays a minimum rent or 30%of their income, so the voucher is not
for the total amount of rent.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the specifics of funding for the Program could be resolved at a later
date with direction given at this time. City Manager Atteberry stated research was needed to find
a funding source for this Program as any extra General Fund dollars available at year-end would be
needed to cover the gap created by Larimer County's decision to reduce the City's share of the Road
and Bridge Levy revenue.
56
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt the
alternative version of Resolution 2007-104 that fully funds all the applications presented to the
CDBG Commissions.
Councilmember Manvel stated the City does provide rental assistance and the Program does serve
the most needy population. He believed the Program provided a vital service to the community and
deserved the funding.
Councilmember Ohlson stated many families were touched by mental health issues or substance
abuse and the Program deserved the support of the Council.
Councilmember Poppaw thanked the CDBG Commission for its hard work and careful examination
of all applications. The Program is greatly needed in the community and she supported the
Resolution.
Councilmember Troxell stated the 2008-2009 budget left basic city services unfunded and funding
this Program was not a good use of reserves or City funds.
Councilmember Roy stated the Program provided a way to make a significant difference in the lives
of the most needy in the community and he supported the Resolution.
Councilmember Ohlson noted the CDBG funds cannot be used for police,fire or other city services
and must be used for very specific categories. Waido clarified the administrative funds for the
Program would come from the City's Affordable Housing Fund and the Program's tenant-based
rental assistance funds will be provided by the HOME program.
Mayor Hutchinson stated while there are many areas to use funds to help improve people's lives,
great care must be given in committing those resources. The CDBG Commission has requested a
delay of support for the Program until more information can be provided and that is good
management of funds. He supported the recommendation of the CDBG Commission.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and Roy. Nays: Brown,
Hutchinson and Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2007-106
Accepting the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan; Approving an
Agreement Among the Town of Windsor, the City of Fort Collins, and
Metro Acquisitions, LLC; and Approving an Intergovernmental
Agreement Among the Colorado Department of Transportation,
Town of Windsor, and City of Fort Collins, Postponed Indefinitely
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
57
December 4, 2007
"FINANCL4L IMPACT
Acceptance of Resolution 2007-106 would result in a cost sharing agreement between the City
(2591o), the Town of Windsor(25%)and Metro Acquisitions,LLC(50%)for contracting, consultant
work, including requestfor separate action with Colorado Department of Transportation("CDOT')
and Federal Highway Works Administration and ifadopted,proceeding with the 1601 Interchange
approval process and review by CDOT, with a total estimated cost for services of$153,561.
The estimated share for the City of Fort Collins for this work is $38,391 (25%), unless the
development does not proceed, in which event the City and Windsor must reimburse the developer
for its costs thereby increasing the City's share to $76,782.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The I-251SH 392 Interchange Improvement Plan (Plan)represents a joint plan between the City of
Fort Collins and the Town of Windsor as directed by the Intergovernmental Agreement established
in 2006. Rather than pursue a more traditional planning process including establishing a vision,
goals and policy directives, this Plan provides a clearframework and direction to follow quickly by
implementation. As a result, the Plan reflects a unique process with a focus on strategic
implementation actions and identification of critical next steps to achieve the primary goal to fund
and reconstruct the interchange. The key elements of the Plan include interchange design, west
frontage road alignment, natural area buffers and funding scenarios. All will require additional
discussions, refinement and coordination prior to finalization, as part of on-going implementation
efforts.
BACKGROUND
The interchange at the junction of Interstate 25 and Colorado State Highway 392 serves as a
gateway to both Fort Collins and Windsor. The interchange has failed to function at an acceptance
level of service "C",particularly during the morning and evening peak hours. This being the case,
numerous meetings and discussions involving the elected officials and staffs of Fort Collins,
Windsor, Larimer County, the Stakeholder Group, North Front Range Metropolitan Planning
Organization(MPO),and the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT), have occurred over
the past several years in an attempt to address traffic congestion at this interchange.
The importance of this interchange as a gateway into both jurisdictions is significant, as well as
from a functional standpoint in providing mobility and access to existing and future development
in the area. Although the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT)has identified this area
as a high priority project, there is no Federal or State funding available now or in the foreseeable
future. The existing interchange problem cannot be fixed by implementing smaller interim
improvements such as frontage road realignment and ramp widening. The bridge overpass along
with the supporting interchange infrastructure needs to be replaced to meet the transportation needs
for the next 20 years. The estimated cost to replace the interchange is approximately $21 to $25
million.
58
December 4, 2007
In March 2006, Fort Collins and Windsor entered into an intergovernmental agreement(IGA)for
the purpose of addressing urban services, infrastructure, and land uses at this interchange (see
Attachment#3). One of the key components and directives of the IGA was for the two municipalities
to work cooperatively to develop a comprehensive plan to fund the reconstruction of this
interchange.
As such, Fort Collins and Windsor appropriated $50,000 each for a total budgeted amount of
$100,000 to begin the process of developing the comprehensive interchange plan. This amount was
later supplemented by an appropriation from the MPO of$26,000,for a grand total of$126,000 to
be used towards the development of the plan.
In August 2006, Fort Collins and Windsor entered into a contract with the EDAW Consulting Firm
to develop the comprehensive development plan. Additionally, EDAWpartnered with the DMJM-
Harris Engineering, BBC Consulting, and PBS & J Engineering firms to assist them with the
development of the plan. A technical advisory committee (TAC) comprised ofstaff representatives
from Fort Collins, Windsor, Larimer County, CDOT, and the MPO was formed to work with the
consultants and oversee the development of the plan.
The purpose of the Plan is to develop action strategies to implement improvements to the
interchange, with particular emphasis on developing alternative funding mechanisms to allow the
project to go directly into final design.
Key Elements of Plan:
Land Use
The Corridor Activity Center (CAC) [See Figure 3, Page 4 of the Plan] is the focus of this study
identifying existing and future commercial, employment and residential land uses on both sides of
the interchange. The quality of development, views and open lands within the CAC is important for
establishing this area as a primary gateway into Windsor and Fort Collins. Three fundamental
drivers of the land use plan for the area are the Bus Rapid Transit(BRT)station in the immediate
area of the interchange, the open space amenities at Fossil Creek Reservoir, and a series of
transportation improvements (including relocation of the frontage road). Development would
complement these three elements, creating new employment areas, neighborhoods, commercial
areas, and a system ofconnected open space areas. The CAC contains 402 acres ofcommercial(252
on east and 150 on west), 114 acres of employment, and 369 acres of mixed-use residential on the
east side[See Figure 5, Page 15 of the Plan].
Transportation
The preferred transportation layout follows the tight diamond interchange configuration from the
North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). [See Figure 24, page 44 of the Plan].
This design will improve both local and regional mobility by alleviating traffic congestion and
decreasing overall travel times. Based on the North Front Range MPO's Regional Traffic Model
and CDOT's Environmental Overview Study (EOS) for the State Highway 392 corridor, the
59
December 4, 2007
recommended cross section for the highway and interchange bridge is 4-travel lanes, in addition to
the necessary turn lanes at intersections,pedestrian and bicycle lanes and sidewalks. The current
City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan (MSP) shows a 6-lane facility between US-287 and I-25
which was based on earlier analysis. Later in 2008 and once the 1601 Study process is complete,
staff will consider supporting a recommendation to amend the MSP to make it consistent with this
most recent determination, after first reviewing additional analysis from the 1601 Study process.
The frontage road alignment located on the east side is consistent with the DEIS. On the west side
of the interchange, three alternatives are identified in the Plan. The City of Fort Collins Master
Street Plan currently shows a general alignment, which closely matches the DEIS location. The
Plan identifies two alternatives to the DEIS to initially assess increasing the separation between the
interchange ramp and frontage road intersections, and not bisect vacant land designated for future
commercial development. A final west frontage road alignment will be determined in conjunction
with the proposed future development in the area.
Local bus service from the planned new transit hub at College Ave. and Harmony Rd. would act as
a feeder system to the proposed Bus Rapid Transit(BRT) station or Park-and-Ride facility within
the CAC. The DEIS proposes that the BRT parking area be located on either the east or west side
of I-25. Ideally, a station located in the center of I--25 could be accessed from Park-and-Ride
facilities on both sides ofl-25 via a pedestrian bridge. Ifa BRT station is not constructed, the DEIS
assumes that Park-and-Ride facilities would still be constructed along with the new pedestrian
bridge over I-25. Additional transportation options for the local streets adjacent to the interchange
could include a dedicated on-street bike lane for cyclists, a detached sidewalkforpedestrians and
a trail for other users.
The City of Fort Collins Transportation Board at its October 17th meeting recommended to City
Council that ten percent(10%) of the overall interchange improvement project cost be earmarked
for transit. A majority (5-4)felt it important to ensure that finding was in place in this project to
increase transit amenities and service to and from the activity center and possibly between Windsor
and Fort Collins.
Natural Resources
As part of the partnership between the City and Town of Windsor to reconstruct the interchange, the
City has a unique challenge on the west side in balancing the need to support future development
that will help contribute to funding interchange improvements, and preserving important natural
resources including migratory roosting habitat, shoreline and wetland habitat. The Plan includes
an inventory of existing natural resources and assesses corresponding setback buffers based on type
of habitat.
The Plan seeks to maintain the integrity of the environment around Fossil Creek Reservoir through
adherence to specific buffers that protect sensitive species and habitat. If needed, wetland
mitigation measures, both on site and offsite, will take place to enhance key resources. The Plan's
protection measures are set by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Colorado Division
of Wildlife, the City of Fort Collins, and Larimer County. The buffer zones identified in the Plan
60
December 4, 2007
include a 114 mile buffer from critical roosting habitat, between a 100 — 300 foot buffer from
shoreline habitat, and for wetlands a 50 - 100 foot buffer. [See Figure 29 and 30 on Page 49 and
50 of the Plan].
The widening ofSH392 west ofthe interchange will result in wetland loss as the street cross section
is expanded from a 2-lane to a 4-lane facility. The timing of this improvement will be separate from
the interchange reconstruction project and either addressed as part offuture development or part
of CDOT's future SH 392 highway improvement schedule.
The identified buffer areas form the basis for future development activities adjacent to the natural
areas. As the area develops, the City will review development proposals according to Section 3.4.1
ofthe Land Use Code.As part ofthe reviewprocess,an ecological characterization study(ECS)will
be prepared. Final buffers will be established based upon the findings in the ECS. The resulting
buffers will then be delineated prior to commencement of any construction activities and enforced
by City inspectors during construction. Any disturbance within a buffer zone will be restored
according to Section 3.4.1(E) (2)—Development Activities within the Buffer Zone.
Funding
Funding emerged early on in the Plan's process as its primary challenge. The finding scenarios
match benefits with costs and ensure a reliable funding stream to repay anticipated bonds over a
twenty year timeframe. The estimated total cost of reconstruction ofthe interchange bridge, ramps,
frontage roads and landscaping is approximately$21 million to $25 million. To identify the most
feasible strategy, three funding scenarios were identified.
Funding Scenario 1 focuses on the private sector and includes a special assessment and property
tax,for CAC landowners implemented over 20 years; an impact fee imposed on the "travel shed";
and, a Public Improvement Fee (PIF). No municipal or other governmental support is assumed for
this scenario.
Funding Scenario 2 is based on partnerships and includes financial support from CDOT($2.0
million), the NFRMPO ($1.2 million —future allocation) and, the municipalities of Windsor ($1
million) and Fort Collins ($1 million); a lower special assessment than Scenario 1 on CAC
landowners (undeveloped land only) that sunsets in 10 years; a PIF; and a property tax on CAC
landowners.
Funding Scenario 3 focuses on spreading the burden to a larger area and includes all municipal
funding (Windsor and Fort Collins)from Scenario 2 and an expanded property tax district with a
mill levy. There is also a small special assessment on all undeveloped CAC land that sunsets in 10
years and a PIF.
In the future, additional public funding (beyond existing assumptions) may become available
through sources such as CDOT, NFRMPO and a future Regional Transportation Authority. While
the Plan does not have a specific funding recommendation, it is assumed that one or a combination
61
December 4, 2007
of these funding scenarios will be used to further negotiate a final funding package to support the
cost of the interchange improvements as implementation continues.
Implementation
Staff has identified several implementation actions after Plan acceptance. One of the first steps is
to develop new agreements to continue the partnership among the jurisdictions that have a direct
interest in the interchange. This would include other governmental entities such as CDOT, as well
as local developers.
The options to receive approval for interchange improvements are: (1) wait for the current North
I-25 EIS process being conducted by CDOT to be completed, which may happen by the end of 2009
at the earliest or be pushed back farther; or (2) approach and pursue a parallel process by
submitting to CDOTa Justificationfor Separate Action. Given thepotential development timelines,
staff believes that the second of these options may be more advantageous; if approved, this would
allow the submittal of a CDOT 1601 Policy Directive.
The second option listed above is supported by Town and City staff, based on a request by Metro
Acquisitions, LLC "Lauth" (developer with options on properties on both the east and west sides
oftheInterchange). The Town, City, and developer are requesting ajustif:cationfor separate action
from CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in December. Under the first
agreement that is being presented for Council's consideration, the cost for this request would be
shared among the Town (25016), City (25%)and the developer(50%) . If Windsor and Fort Collins
agree to move forward with this approach, the three parties could then proceed with an accelerated
1601 process and share a similar cost sharing arrangement.
The request a justification for separate action from CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration
represents the first step in initiating an accelerated 1601 process. The 1601 process is the Colorado
Department of Transportation's policy to evaluate new interchanges or major improvements to
existing interchanges along interstates and major highways. The 1601 process would initiate a
feasibility study for the I-251SH 392 Interchange and could include the following analysis:
• Identify operation and capacity analysis for existing conditions and year 2030
• Identify all reasonable and feasible interchange access alternatives
• Screen all of the alternatives (identify pros and cons)
• Review environmental conditions in area
• Work toward a single best alternative
• Develop a funding plan
Apreferred alternative will be identified based on this analysis. Additional environmental analysis
maybe necessary which will most likely include an Environmental Assessment(EA). Both the 1601
and the EA will utilize the data currently being collected as part of the EIS and SH 392 EOS, and
contained in the Improvement Plan. The 1601 process would be completed and approved prior to
final design of the interchange improvements. It is anticipated that the Justification for Separate
Action and CDOT 1601 process will take approximately one year. Again, if the Justification for a
62
December 4, 2007
Separate Action is denied, the alternative would be to wait for the North 1-25 EIS to be completed
in 2009.
An EOS is a planning study which evaluates potential transportation solutions by employing a
context-sensitive solutions approach, and then considers potential environmental effects in the
development and selection of alternatives. Although it is not a National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) study, the SH 392 EOS does address many of the same elements, and is intended to
recommend a solution which is anticipated to be the starting point for future NEPA studies. The
study does not clear a project for construction. If, at a later date, a federally funded construction
project is pursued, a NEPA-compliant study would be required.
The Federal Highway Administration,Federal TransitAdministration and the Colorado Department
of Transportation have commissioned an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to determine the
effect that adding various transportation improvements along1--25 will have on the lives ofresidents
and commuters in the area.
This study will build on the findings of the previously completed North Front Range Transportation
Alternatives Feasibility Study, which was a Major Investment Study completed in 2000. This EIS is
the next step in planning for transportation improvements along the 1-25 corridor.
The North 1-25 EIS, currently underway in the region, is a federal requirement set forth in the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The EIS is a more in-depth study to determine the
purpose and need offuture transportation improvements in the same area; identify alternatives to
be developed;and document the anticipated impacts of those alternatives. The North 1-25 EIS is the
next step in identifying alternatives for transportation issues.
The Environmental Assessment(EA)is a federally mandated study that identifies the environmental,
economic, historical and social impacts of a proposed project. It results in one of two documents:
an Environmental Impact Statement, which describes the project's probable impacts, or a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
Additional actions needed over the next two years include development of interchange preliminary
design,completion oftheNorth1-25EISand other environmental compliance actions by CDOT,and
establishment of a special district within the Corridor Activity Center.
The Town of Windsor is currently in discussions with Lauth (Metro Acquisitions, LLC), a national
developer for a large commercial project on the northeast quadrant of the Interchange, and with the
City for property on the west side. Because discussions are very preliminary, details of these future
projects are not available at this time.
Public Process
Throughout each facet of the development of the Plan, the process has included public involvement
and inputfrom the keystakeholders including residents,property owners and businesses in the area.
The Plan has also been guided by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of 29
63
December 4, 2007
members, including representatives from the City ofFort Collins, Town of Windsor,Larimer County,
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Northern Front Range Metropolitan Planning
Organization (NFRMPO), and consultants. Throughout the planning process, in addressing
environmental issues, the TAC included City environmental planners and representatives from the
consultant team. In addition to the stakeholders meetings, the consulting team and representatives
of the TAC also facilitated two public open houses to receive additional information, comments and
feedback from the public on the proposed Plan. Two municipal websites provided the community
with up-to-date information.
By adoption of this Resolution, the City will be accepting the I-251SH 392Interchange Improvement
Plan and approving two agreements. The first is an agreement among the Town of Windsor, the City
ofFort Collins and Metro Acquisitions, LLC, to jointly f le a Justifcation for Separate Action with
CDOT and FHWA. Upon its approval of that agreement, the City and Town will jointly apply to
CDOT, NFR-MPO, and FHWA for approval of the Interchange Improvements in accordance with
the 1601 Process. The agreement would also provide that the Town, the City, and Metro
Acquisitions, LLC would share the project's initial consulting costs as well as the subsequent costs
generated by the 1601 Process. The second agreement is an intergovernmental agreement among
CDOT, the Town of Windsor, and the City ofFort Collins under which the Town and the City would
reimburse CDOTfor the costs CDOT incurs in reviewing the conceptual designs,studies, and other
documents filed by the Town and the City as part of the Justification for Separate Action and 1601
Process. "
Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, stated the proposed Plan was a partnership between the Town of
Windsor and the City and is a plan for the SH392/I-25 interchange. The proposed Resolution
contains three parts. Acceptance of the Plan is the first part of the Resolution and is a step to
acknowledge the planning process and the elements of the Plan. Two other agreements are also
associated with the Resolution. The first agreements is between the Town of Windsor and the City
and the developer to initiate and fund the next step in implementation in working with CDOT and
the Federal Highway Administration to proceed with the 1601 Study. Another agreement is between
Windsor and the City and CDOT to support and fund CDOT's oversight and review of the 1601
process. An IGA formalized early in 2006 set the stage for the planning process and established a
focused study area in and around the interchange. It jointly created a comprehensive development
plan for the interchange. The Plan has a focus of implementation and examining strategic actions
that could be followed to the ultimate goal of funding and reconstructing the interchange. The
planning process identified key stakeholders in the area,property owners and business owners and
representatives of potential development in the area. Two public open houses have been held and
the Plan has been reviewed by various boards and commissions and other agencies and other public
outreach. The process was divided into three areas. One looked at existing conditions, another
examined developing the actual interchange improvement plan and phase three looked at specific
implementation actions. Plan participation included a technical advisory committee of City,
Windsor and County staff and representatives from CDOT. Funding strategies were examined to
develop fair and equitable ways to fund the necessary changes. The existing land uses and natural
resources in the area, the condition of the interchange and the supporting highway and street
infrastructure were examined by Plan participants. CDOT has been preparing an environmental
impact statement (EIS) for the northern Colorado I-25 corridor for several years and staff has
64
December 4, 2007
participated in that process. This Plan process has been coordinated with CDOT's EIS process. The
Plan includes CDOT's alternative of a tight diamond design for the interchange, similar to the
Harmony/I-25 interchange, with potential for future bus rapid transit and the potential for a bus
station. CDOT's final EIS should be completed in 2009.
Land uses for the Windsor side of the interchange include a combination of future residential and
general commercial uses. The northeast quadrant of the interchange is zoned for future Employment
uses, and the southeast quadrant has both commercial and residential uses currently. The west side
of the interchange has a mixed-use commercial land use designation with some existing commercial
development on the northwest quadrant. There is also residential use and the Fossil Creek Reservoir
and Swede Lake extension.
Dana Leavitt, Environmental Planner, stated Swede Lake is the southeast arm of the Fossil Creek
Reservoir and contains bald eagle nesting sites,prairie dog colonies and wetlands. Buffer zones are
proposed in the Plan to protect this area. Staff has worked with the Colorado Division of Wildlife,
County environmental planners and private consultants to identify the buffer areas. The proposed
buffer zones would be minimum standards and future development plans could include larger buffer
zones.
Wray stated the transportation improvements associated with the Plan include replacing the bridge,
ramps and a portion of the frontage roads. The layout would follow a tight-diamond configuration.
The overall estimated cost for improving the interchange ranges from $21 million to $25 million.
Another proposed improvement is realignment of the frontage road on the west side. The frontage
road on the east side is already established with existing development. CDOT has proposed an
alternative frontage road on the west as part of its EIS that matches closely with the City's Master
Street Plan. Realignment of the frontage road could help alleviate traffic stacking problems at the
interchange and increase the potential for development in the northwest and southwest quadrants.
Future transit projects have also been identified as part of the Plan, including a bus rapid transit
station and a Park-N-Ride facility. Regional trails around the Fossil Creek Reservoir and pedestrian
and bike facilities are proposed,including a pedestrian bridge over I-25 to connect with the bus rapid
transit station.
Chuck Seest,Finance Director,stated the costs for the Project are estimated at$22 million. Different
scenarios have been developed to pay the costs. One scenario places the entire cost on the existing
property owners within the area and would utilize a public improvement fee (PIF), along with a
special assessment on commercial and residential properties and does not use direct municipal or
governmental entity contributions. The cost is borne by the PIF and landowners. Another scenario
examined other areas of funding that might be available from MPO, CDOT, the Town of Windsor
and Fort Collins. It was estimated that$5 million could come from those sources with the remainder
of funds coming from a PIF. The third scenario identified other stakeholders that would benefit from
improving the interchange and would impose a property tax on commercial and residential within
a given corridor that utilizes the interchange.
65
December 4, 2007
Wray stated the proposed Resolution includes anew intergovernmental agreement between the Town
of Windsor, the City and the developer to initiate and fund the 1601 process, an agreement with
CDOT to fund and support the overview and administration of the 1601 process. An improvement
district will be formed and examination of preliminary and final engineering reports will occur in
the next two years with the goal to reconstruct the interchange late 2009. In order to proceed with
this schedule, a separate action must be requested from CDOT to complete a 1601 Study as it will
not have completed its EIS process before 2009. The 1601 Study includes an environmental
assessment and would be completed in 2008. He noted Section C of the agreement between the City,
Windsor and the developer contains a cost-sharing agreement for the 1601 Study and reimbursement
in the event the developer did not move forward with his project. Staff is continuing to discuss that
reimbursement with the affected parties and agreement has not yet been reached.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Carolyn White,attorney representing Lauth Property Group,affiliated with Metro Acquisition,LLC,
the third party in the cost-sharing agreement,stated Lauth Property Group supported the Resolution
as a way to move forward with improvements to the area.
Tim Johnson, 1337 Stonehenge Drive, stated Fossil Creek Natural Area is recognized as an
important birding area nationally by the Audubon Society so the realignment of the frontage road
should locate the road as close to 1-25 as possible and as far from this Natural Area as possible to
protect the Area. He urged Council to reject the financing strategies proposed in the Resolution as
the financing is too dependent on the PIF for the funding stream.
Gary Wockner, 516 North Grant, stated the proposed Plan was not the best way to improve the
interchange. Dealing with the issues of improving intersections and development along 1-25 needs
to handled in a comprehensive manner, not just one intersection at a time. The 1-25 Corridor Plan
and City Plan are being written over with little thought or public discussion with the Plan. The
financing strategies are not fiscally responsible public policy. He requested Council put the Plan on
hold and review the entire I-25 Corridor Plan before proceeding with this Project.
v' h David May, 225 South Meldrum Camber of Commerce President stated the worst two
Y, ,
interchanges in Northern Colorado were the Crossroads/1-25 interchange and the SH392/1-25
interchange. The interchange is a primary point of access to Fort Collins and I-25. Action is needed
now to help regional transportation issues.
Councilmember Manvel asked what Council was endorsing by accepting the Plan. Wray stated
accepting the Plan would lay the foundation for future discussions on zoning recommendations,
amendments to the Master Street Plan, and changes to the City Structure Plan. The key elements
identified in the Plan that are important to provide the framework for ongoing implementation are
identified as alternatives. Accepting the Plan acknowledges the elements of the Plan, the process
and agrees to move forward with the partnership. City Manager Atteberry stated accepting the Plan
does not bind the City to anything in the Plan but acknowledges the work already done and moves
the work forward. He noted there had been public input during the process of developing the Plan
with numerous community meetings held as well as the stakeholders involved in each step. Wray
66
December 4, 2007
stated work on the Plan has been ongoing for over a year. Key stakeholders such as property owners
and business owners in the immediate vicinity of the interchange were identified and encouraged to
be actively involved in the process. Two public open house meetings were held and all information
was available on the City's website, three newsletters were distributed and advertising was done.
A joint work session was held between the Council and the Windsor Town Board. He stated the
issue was before Council now as the timing was important to the Town of Windsor who is one of
the partners in the agreement.
Councilmember Manvel stated the Plan had many unanswered questions and contained contradictory
statements and he preferred using different terminology from "acceptance" of the Plan. City
Attorney Roy noted the Resolution states "acceptance of the Plan will set the stage for the Plan's
implementation"but that statement could be reworded, if Council chose. Acceptance of the Plan
does not commit the City to implement any or all of the Plan. The Plan establishes the backdrop for
the action of authorizing the two agreements and initiating the 1601 process. Proceeding with the
Resolution indicates Council approval of separating out the environmental review and other kinds
of review of this proposed project from others that are currently being studied by CDOT so as to
accelerate the planning and possible design and possible future construction. It does not go beyond
the cost-sharing and cooperative effort with CDOT to separate this project from other parts of the
I-25 corridor that CDOT is now studying.
Councilmember Manvel asked what additional input steps are needed before moving ahead with the
1601 process. Wray stated the Resolution before Council acknowledges the partnership and funding
for the 1601 Study. Further Council review would be needed for finalization of funding, frontage
road placement, response to future development that would go through the City's annexation and
zoning process.
Councilmember Manvel asked what the 1601 Study would be based on, since the Plan was not in
its final stages and Council was only acknowledging the Plan and not approving all details in the
Plan. Wray stated the 1601 Study focuses on the improvements to the interchange, including the
bridge, ramps, and the frontage roads that CDOT has shown in its EIS. Mark Jackson,
Transportation Director, stated the 1601 Study will identify the funding strategy the parties that are
petitioning for the 1601 Study want to use to fund the interchange improvements. The 1601 Study
is considered a"mini"environmental clearance and is a way for communities,developers or agencies
to have a review of all existing conditions,forecast conditions,design issues,environmental issues,
mitigation required for those issues, and alignments done for a concentrated area rather than on a
large scale study area as is done for an EIS, which can take 3-5 years to complete. It is a focused,
intense, small-scale area analysis that shows what must be done to move forward and make
improvements to a particular area.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the Study was also a development study. Joe Frank, Advance
Planning Director, stated the 1601 Study is based on the Comprehensive Plans of the two cities and
is not a vision plan. The Study is not for land-use planning. Jackson stated it is a way to petition
CDOT to request an analysis of a particular interchange and prove how the improvements will be
done and what mitigation will occur to lessen impacts. It is not creating a vision or a land-use plan.
67
December 4, 2007
Mayor Hutchinson asked when land-use decisions will occur such as the size of buffers or decision
regarding funding occur. Jackson stated staff would create a clear line of communication with
Council and Boards and Commissions as the Project moves forward. Accepting the Plan is moving
the Plan forward but it is not letting control go of key decisions. One decision point would occur
when with analysis of environmental issues, and staff would bring the analysis to Council. City
Manager Atteberry stated staff would bring decisions regarding frontage roads,funding mechanisms
and other issues to Council. He assured Council that it would be involved in decisions made through
the 1601 Study process.
Councilmember Ohlson asked how many of the public meetings were held in Fort Collins. Wray
stated two public open houses were held on location at the interchange in July and August.
Councilmember Ohlson noted Windsor's area in the Corridor Activity Center surrounding the
interchange was four to five times the size of Fort Collins' area and he asked why the cost would be
split equally. Wray stated equal amounts were agreed upon to support the planning process over the
past year. It was also agreed in the potential funding strategy that included funding from the Town
of Windsor and Fort Collins that the costs would be shared equally. The final funding strategy will
take many discussions through the next two years and the equal sharing of costs could change.
Councilmember Ohlson asked who would be responsible for payments on bonds if the public
improvement fees (PIF), an additional tax on the retail sales in the area, are not collected in the
amounts needed. Mike Freeman, Interim Finance Director, stated that is one of many details to be
answered at a later date. The Plan lists different scenarios for financing and it is unknown how the
financing will be handled until more details about specific projects are finalized. Beginning the 1601
Study will give the partners the ability to begin exploring additional and higher levels of financial
participation at the federal and state level. The financing plan will be very complicated and will
unfold over several years. Generally speaking, in Colorado, most bond counsel does not believe
public improvement fees are adequate to support third party debt so deciding who issues the debt and
how it would be repaid is a matter to be resolved in the future.
Councilmember Ohlson asked Windsor and Fort Collins would completely reimburse the developer
if the Project does not move forward. He believed the developer should assume the risk. Frank
stated staff was asking for direction regarding that condition of the agreement.
Carolyn White, attorney representing Lauth Property Group, stated the costs contained in the
agreement area very small portion of the overall costs associated with the Project. This agreement
is concerns only the engineering costs associated with creating and submitting a separate action to
CDOT and conducting the 1601 Study. It does not include other engineering the developer has
already done, the earnest money already paid for land and legal and consulting fees the developer
has already invested to get to this point. The developer is asking for the reimbursement clause in the
event the developer could not complete the project. The developer believes the market is available
to complete this project and is willing to go forward. The interchange is needed by the Town of
Windsor and Fort Collins already and planning documents show it is at a failing level of service.
If there is no project,the developer does not need the interchange,but Windsor and Fort Collins do.
If the developer were not able to complete the project,it would lose all the other investment but Fort
68
December 4, 2007
Collins and Windsor could proceed with the improvement of the interchange. The Town Board of
Windsor has already approved the agreement with this condition in it.
Councilmember Ohlson questioned why Fort Collins would fund improvement of an interchange that
would enable another community to have a massive retail outlet that would draw sales tax dollars
from Fort Collins. He did not believe a different funding scenario from the ones presented would
be brought forward. Freeman stated it is not accurate to say the three scenarios listed in the Plan
would be the only scenarios available to fund the Project. Financing a Project of this magnitude is
very complex. Staff made a conscious decision to list likely scenarios,but a different scenario could
be adopted. When the intersection is at full development, it is estimated that one-third of the sales
tax revenue generated will come from the Fort Collins side of the interchange. Frank stated it was
never part of the Project for staff to comment on Windsor's Comprehensive Plan or its long-term
vision. Windsor staff did not comment on Fort Collins' Comprehensive Plan or long-term vision.
This Project was started because the two cities have a common interest in a major transportation
infrastructure entryway into Fort Collins. 25% of the traffic at the interchange has destinations in
Fort Collins. Both communities have a land-use plan and vision for the area and the Project is about
building infrastructure to support that vision.
City Attorney Roy stated to alleviate concerns that the Citymight be committed to one of the funding
scenarios currently listed in the Plan, Section 1 in the Resolution could be amended to indicate the
identification and obtaining of funding commitments may or may not be limited to the alternatives
identified in the Plan and Council will be revisiting those options in the process of formulating a
final recommendation.
Councilmember Roy asked for clarification of a comment made by Ms. White that stated "time is
of the essence. If this is going to be a long, lengthy study process, why bother taking it away from
CDOT." Ms. White stated if nothing is done and the resolution is not approved, as a practical
matter,this intersection will continue to be studied as part of the CDOT EIS process. The Study is
projected to be completed in 2009 or 2010. When the EIS is completed, funding sources will not
yet be identified and there is no plan in the foreseeable future to fund the improvements for this
interchange. Time frames for development move much faster than that and, based on the market,
there is a real opportunity to bring retail to this intersection now but that opportunity will disappear
if the developer must wait until the conclusion of the CDOT process to even begin the discussion
of funding.
Councilmember Poppaw asked when a broader conversation would occur about prioritization and
funding mechanisms for all five major gateways into Fort Collins. City Manager Atteberry stated
it is possible to discuss the 1-25 Corridor Plan while concurrently participating in a 1601 Study for
this interchange. He suggested having a work session in January to discuss the I-25 gateways.
Councilmember Roy asked for clarification of the words "implement" and pledge" in the
Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Highway 392 Interchange, Section 3 that stated"the IGA
serves to implement the cooperation pledged by the City and Town in the existing IGA." City
Attorney Roy stated the language states an existing IGA is in place whereby the Town and City
agreed to cooperate to develop a way to fund improvements to the interchange and this agreement
69
December 4, 2007
furthers the cooperation. Implement does not mean any specific action. The paragraph does not
contain any binding commitment. It is continuing the cooperative effort set forth in the original IGA
and the City agrees to do the things that are cited in more detail.
Councilmember Roy asked if the phrase "in the shortest possible time" listed in paragraph A of
Section 3 which states "parties agree to undertake in good faith all reasonable means to obtain the
necessary authorization and funding for, and construction of, the interchange improvements in the
shortest possible time" was binding. City Attorney Roy stated the phrase had to be read in
conjunction with "necessary authorization" and the backdrop for this is the City Charter which
regulates what can and cannot be done. In any time frame,money cannot be spent that has not been
appropriated or it cannot be spent if funds are not available to satisfy the request. The point is to
recognize this is a time-sensitive undertaking. If Council does not believe it is a time-sensitive
matter,then it needs to change the agreement or reject it. This agreement does not force Council to
do anything it does not want to do in the future if it decides to cease participation in the Project.
Councilmember Roy noted the 1601 Study rules state only a governmental or quasi-governmental
entity may apply for this process and he asked why the IGA lists the developer as"coordinating with
the Town, City,CDOT and federal highway and will engage additional consultants, as necessary to
prepare the justification for separate action." Jackson stated the justification for separate action was
not the 1601 process but is the entry into the process. Permission must be requested to enter into the
1601 process. A governmental or quasi-governmental entity must submit the petition for a 1601
Study.
Councilmember Roy asked for information on the analysis done to determine the buffer zones.
Leavitt stated a private property owner whose property adjoins Swede Lake requested an analysis
of his property as to what habitat value and what buffers would be needed to preserve the habitat in
2005. During the process to develop the proposed IGA,the report was made available to staff. Staff
did not retain a consultant to do a new study of the natural area, but used existing information to
develop the proposed IGA.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if revenue sharing had been discussed with the Town of Windsor.
Frank stated the partnership that is proposed is a revenue sharing arrangement as sales tax,PIF and
property tax and other financing mechanisms will be shared to build the interchange. The partner
that has the greater amount of commercial property will pay a greater portion of the costs.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for information on buffer zones and what protection will be provided
for the riparian habitat in the Windsor area of the Project. Leavitt stated Windsor does have buffer
zones but they are not as extensive as what Fort Collins requires. Habitat on both sides of I-25 was
identified but they have not yet been mapped or evaluated as to whether they are critical areas of
habitat.
Councilmember Roy asked who now owns the interchange and who would own it after the
improvements were completed. Jackson stated CDOT owns the interchange now and would retain
ownership after the improvements were completed.
70
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Troxell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to adopt Resolution
2007-106.
Councilmember Manvel requested a change to the language in Section 1 of the Resolution as he felt
the language was too strongly worded.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he did not approve of the agreement in its current state as it was not
put in context of the rest of the I-25 Corridor Plan. Developing the land along the interstate just to
pay for improvements to the interchanges did not match his view of entryways to Fort Collins. Land
use planning,habitat protection,view sheds,open space,community separators and revenue sharing
are issues that need to be resolved regionally with agreement reached in all areas before retail is
allowed to move in. He wanted an open view along the interstate, not continual retail along the
highway. He did not support use of a PIF to fund interchange improvement.
Councilmember Roy stated the interchange improvements should be funded by federal and state
dollars. He did not believe allowing or encouraging retail development at the five interstate
interchanges that lead into Fort Collins was in line with land use strategies that have been developed
through the years. He did not support the resolution.
Councilmember Poppaw stated she did not believe this Plan fit into the goals and visions the City
has set . She would not support the Resolution and wanted a discussion about the entire I-25
Corridor.
Councilmember Manvel offered a friendly amendment to the motion, to amend the IGA, page 3,
paragraph A and replace the phrase"shortest possible time"with"a reasonable period of time."
Councilmember Troxell, maker of the motion, did not accept the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to amend the IGA,
page 3, paragraph A and replace the phrase "shortest possible time" with "a reasonable period of
time."
Councilmember Manvel stated he would not support the Resolution unless the wording in the IGA
was changed. The change in wording would reflect the idea that Council is not committed to any
specific detail in the Plan, but does want to move the process forward. City Manager Atteberry
stated the change in wording would allow staff to work on the expedited 1601 process and does not
impede the process.
The vote on the motion to amend was as follows:Yea:Manvel,Hutchinson,Brown. Nays: Ohlson,
Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
THE MOTION TO AMEND FAILED.
Councilmember Troxell stated this agreement is a critical next step and there are many points in the
future to resolve the issues some Councilmembers have. Acceptance of the Plan would provide a
71
December 4, 2007
better functioning road system that is in dire need of improvement and it would demonstrate that Fort
Collins is a regional partner in resolving transportation issues.
Councilmember Brown stated funding interchange improvements will be a tremendous hurdle to
overcome as CDOT has been very clear in stating it has no funds to provide for improvements.
Federal dollars are also difficult to find. This Plan is a way to improve an intersection that is failing
and is a good first step.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the entryways to Fort Collins need careful planning to ensure view
sheds are preserved, architectural standards are upheld and to retain an open feel yet generates
economic health. He believed postponing this Resolution to a later date would enable Council to
review the plans for all entryways into Fort Collins and make comprehensive decisions.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to postpone
Resolution 2007-106 indefinitely.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he wanted to consider this issue at another time after staff has had
more time to do further work and Council has had opportunity to do a comprehensive review of all
I-25 gateways into Fort Collins. City Manager Atteberry stated the issue would return to Council
as soon as was reasonably possible after the January 22 work session.
Mayor Hutchinson stated approval of the IGA would only state that Fort Collins wanted to continue
to cooperate with the Town of Windsor but postponing the item would allow it to be reconsidered
at another time with the potential to be passed at that time.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and
Roy. Nays: Troxell.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
("Secretary's note: The Council took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.)
Resolution 2007-108
Expressing Council's Opposition to the Mining of Uranium
in the Vicinity of Nunn, Colorado. Adopted as Amended.
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Members ofthe City Council asked that a resolution be prepared to express the Council's opposition
to uranium mining in Northern Colorado.
72
December 4, 2007
BACKGROUND
A Canadian company, PowerTech Uranium Corporation, is considering a uranium mining
operation across nearly 6000 acres of land in the vicinity of Nunn, Colorado, about 11 miles
northeast of Fort Collins, known as the Centennial Project. PowerTech proposes to extract the
uranium in situ, meaning that uranium will be dissolved out of porous sands located deep
underground and brought to the surface for processing. In addition, PowerTech has not ruled out
extracting some uranium using open pit mining techniques. PowerTech has indicated that it will
start applying for necessary permits beginning in mid-2008.
The Centennial Project would be the first in-situ uranium mining operation in Colorado. In-situ
uranium mining is a newer method of mining uranium and environmental impacts and threats to
public health are unknown.
In-situ leaching mining technology holds inherent risks, including possible contamination of
groundwater and degradation of natural groundwater conditions through the groundwater
restoration process utilized after completion of the leaching operations. Because the mining
operations, and the potential damage, occur below the surface, we may not know until too late what
problems are caused by in-situ uranium mining.
The North Front Range is growing rapidly in population and employment. The Centennial Project
would be located near Fort Collins and in an area with a growing population. The North Front
Range generally, and the proposed Centennial Project site in particular, are not suitable for
uranium mining, because the level of risk to the health and safety of area residents cannot be
determined with any degree of certainty. In addition, uranium mining at the proposed Centennial
Project site would have a detrimental effect on the image and economic well-being of the City. The
project should not be allowed because it cannot be proven it will not have adverse effects on the
health, environmental, or economic interests of the people of Fort Collins and Northern Colorado.
In-situ uranium mining in Colorado would be subject to the regulatory requirements listed below.
All county, state, and federal agencies that may review the project should be made aware of the
City's opposition, and should act to deny all permit applications for the project.
Regulatory requirement A enc
Notice of Intent to Conduct Prospecting Colorado Department of Natural
Activities Resources, Division of Reclamation and
Mining Sae DRMS
Reclamation permitfor mining activity DRMS
Underground injection control permit U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Radioactive Materials License Colorado Department of Health and
Environment, Radiation Management Unit
Use by Special Review Permit Weld County Planning Commission and
Weld County Board of County
Commissioners
73
December 4, 2007
The regulatory process takes roughly one to two years. Assuming that PowerTech begins the
regulatory process in mid 2008 as expected, then the process may be complete between mid-2009
and mid-2010. It is not possible to provide a more precise time line because the agencies involved
determine the permit schedule based on a variety of factors, some of which we currently do not
know.
With the exception of the Notice of Intent to Conduct Prospecting Activities, each permit process
provides an opportunity for the public to make comments to the regulatory agency prior to its
decision whether or not to grant a permit. These public comment opportunities are summarized in
the attached figure. "
Mayor Hutchinson noted this item was before Council at Council's request. It is not a staff-initiated
item. City Manager Atteber y stated Council could direct staff to do more in-depth scientific
research and appropriate funds to do the research.
Brian Woodruff, Environmental Planner, stated staff has done limited research on the issue of
uranium mining in the vicinity ofNunn,Colorado. The process to receive a permit for in-situ mining
includes four different regulatory permits, each of which allow public comment. There are risks to
public health from uranium mining,primarily through contamination of drinking water,risks to the
environment from the spread of radionucleides and heavy metals and threats to the economic well-
being of the City and region.
The following citizens spoke in opposition to the proposed uranium mining in Nunn,Colorado and
supported the Resolution before Council:
Elizabeth Hudetz, 1407 Ticonderoga Drive
Jackie Adolph, 155 West Harvard
Previn Hudetz, 1407 Ticonderoga Drive
Loretta Bailey, 3808 Jackson Court, Wellington
Reed Woodford, 416 North Meldrum
Louis Sharpe, 816 West Myrtle Street
Jim Woodward, Wellington resident
Dian Sparling, 324 Jackson Avenue
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset
Carol Hossan, 504 Edwards
Bette Cantor, 2112 Whitewood Drive
John Brubaker, 3407 Rolling Green Drive
Paul Smith, Fort Collins resident
Daniela Butrick, 2401 Blevins
Howard M. Williams, 52337 Weld County Road, Carr
John Dickson, 1704 West Brookhaven Circle
Tim Johnson, 1337 Stonehenge
Nora Dickson, 1704 West Brookhaven Circle
Gary Wockner, 516 North Grant
Marge Dugan, 4225 Westshore Way
74
December 4, 2007
Victoria Gardner, 3342 Liverpool Street
Karen Miller, Fort Collins resident
Jay Davis,Nunn, Colorado
Chester McQueary, 613 Princeton Road
Mary McCauley, Larimer County resident
Shane Miller, 4325 Mill Creek
The following citizens spoke in opposition to the Resolution before Council:
Carmia Fiechtner, 919 West Mountain Avenue
James Bonner, Vice-President of Exploration, Powertech(USA), Inc.
Mike Beshore, Senior Environmental Coordinator, Powertech (USA), Inc.
Councilmember Troxell asked for a description ofPowertech's proposed project,how much acreage
was involved and if Powertech owned the land or had options on it. Woodruff stated Powertech is
proposing to mine uranium on two separate sections where the northern section would use in-situ
leaching and the southern section where uranium deposits are closer to the surface, could use open-
pit mining or a modified leaching process. He did not have information as to the land area the
mining would cover or ownership of land. The permit process for the mining has not yet begun so
many details are not yet available.
Councilmember Troxell asked whythis issue was before Council at this time instead of at a later date
when more information would be available.
Mayor Hutchinson noted three or more Councilmembers had requested this issue be put on the
Agenda. He asked at what points in the permit process would cities in the region would be asked
to give input on environmental studies. Woodruff stated once the regulatory process begins, there
are four different permit processes that have public comment periods as part of their processes.
Cities could make comments during an of those periods.
Y
Councilmember Poppaw stated she had requested this item be placed before Council because it is
important for all concerned to speak against this proposal and its potential implications of harming
the health, environment and economic health of the region.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Resolution
2007-108 as revised.
Councilmember Troxell asked if confidence could be placed in the four permit processes to produce
a result that is acceptable and why there was no staff recommendation for this item.Woodruff stated
staff has not studied the permit processes in depth and could not offer any recommendation. City
Manager Atteberry stated it will take resources and staff time to provide more scientific-based
information and give a recommendation and Council needs to give staff direction if it wants more
information. This Resolution was drafted at Councilmember Poppaw's request and based on
information available.
75
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Manvel made an amendment to the earlier motion, seconded by Councilmember
Roy, to strike the fifth Whereas clause in the Resolution.
Councilmember Manvel stated materials from Powertech indicate there have been in-situ mining
operations in Colorado previously. The fifth Whereas clause incorrectly states this would be the first
in-situ mining operation in Colorado.
The vote on the amendment to the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel,
Ohl son, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE AMENDMENT CARRIED.
Manvel stated this was an atypical situation as staff has not much time s
Councilmember Man s yp p
gathering data and research to develop a recommendation. He did not want to expend City resources
for further research on this issue. He did not want a uranium mine located close to a major
population. The benefit from a uranium mine would be short-tern,but the cost to the region would
be long-term.
Councilmember Troxell stated this was a complex issue and making this decision with little data or
information was difficult.
Councilmember Ohlson asked what the next step would be if the Resolution is adopted. City
Manager Atteberry stated the Resolution would be sent to the regulatory agencies to notify them of
Council's opposition to the mining operation.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw and
Roy. Nays: none. Abstain: Troxell.
City Attorney Roy noted an abstention vote counts as an affirmative vote.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the East Skyway Rezoning, Postponed to December 18, 2007
City Manager Atteberry requested postponement of consideration of Item#22,Items Relating to the
East Skyway Rezoning to the meeting of December 18.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to postpone
consideration if Item#22,Items Relating to the East Skyway Rezoning to the meeting of December
18.
Brian Schumm, 5807 Bellina Court, stated his concerns about the process of rezoning this property
and requested delaying a decision on the rezoning until Council considers the South College Corridor
Plan.
76
December 4, 2007
Councilmember Brown made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell to suspend the rules
and continue the meeting. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Roy stated rezonings are quasi-judicial and are governed by the criteria in the Land
Use Code. Any rezoning is to be done according to the criteria in the Code and Council needs to be
cautious in reviewing any other information that might distract Council or invite a decision based
on other considerations.
The vote on the motion to postpone consideration of Item#22 to December 18,2007,was as follows:
Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 147, 2007,
Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and Setting the
Salary of the Municipal Judge,Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance establishes the 2008 salary of the Municipal Judge.
Article VII, Section 1 of the Charter provides that the Municipal Judge is to be appointed for a term
of two years. Kathleen M. Lane was first appointed to serve as the City's Municipal Judge effective
July 1, 1989. Resolution 2006-127 reappointed Judge Lane for another two-year term ending on
December 31, 2008.
BACKGROUND
City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and
understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to
recognize and reward quality performance. In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and
the Municipal Judge meet once a year to discuss last year's performance and set goals for the
coming year.
In 2007, the total compensation paid to the Municipal Judge included the following:
77
December 4, 2007
SALARYAND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON-MONETARY BENEFITS
Salary $ 82,581 Vacation (26 days per year)
Medical Insurance 8,628 Holidays (11 days per year)
Dental Insurance 540
Life Insurance 289
Long Term Disability 653
ICMA (457) 2,477
ICMA (401) 81258
Total Monetary Compensation $ 103,426
The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and
Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000, amended
by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, and further amended by the adoption
ofResolution 2006-124 on December S, 2006,provides that any change in compensation for the City
Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in
sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the
ensuing year. "
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to Adopt Ordinance
No. 147, 2007 on First Reading, setting the base salary of the Municipal Judge at $86,958 and the
corresponding total compensation package.
Mayor Hutchinson noted the move of Municipal Court went smoothly and Council thanked Judge
Lane for doing an excellent job.
Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 148, 2007,
Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting
the Salary of the City Attorney. Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council met in Executive Session on November 13 and November 27, 2007 to conduct the
performance review of City Attorney Steve Roy. Ordinance No. 148, 2007, establishes the 2008
salary of the City Attorney.
78
December 4, 2007
BACKGROUND
City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and
understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to
recognize and reward quality performance.
In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Attorney meet once a year to discuss
last year's performance and set goals for the coming year.
In 2007, the total compensation paid to the City Attorney included the following:
SALARY AND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON-MONETARY BENEFITS
Salary $ 144,750 Vacation (35 days per year)
Medical Insurance 8,628 Holidays (11 days per year)
Dental Insurance 540
Life Insurance 418
Long Term Disability 1,144
ICMA (457) 4,343
ICMA (401) 14,475
Total Monetary Compensation $174,297
The Sixth Addendum to the City Attorney's employment agreement, approved by the Council in
December 2006, set the City Attorney's 2007 salary at $144,750, and provided for an increase
(based on satisfactory performance during 2007) to no less than $152,500 effective as of the first
pay period in January 2008.
The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and
Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000, amended
by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, and further amended by the adoption
ofResolution 2006-124 on December 5,2006,provides that any change in compensation for the City
Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in
sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the
ensuing year.
Councilmember Poppaw made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy to adopt Ordinance No.
148, 2007 on First Reading, setting the base salary of the City Attorney at $152,500 and the
corresponding total compensation package.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the City Attorney works for Council and serves Council with excellence.
Council thanked the City Attorney for his hard work and excellent advice.
79
December 4, 2007
Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 149, 2007,
AmendingSection 2-596 of the City Code and
ty
Setting the Salary of the City Manager,Adopted on First Readin¢
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council met in Executive Session on November 13 and November 27, 2007 to conduct the
performance appraisal of City Manager Darin Atteberry. Ordinance No. 149, 2007, establishes the
salary of the City Manager.
BACKGROUND
City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and
understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to
recognize and reward quality performance.
In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Manager meet once a year to discuss
last year's performance and set goals for the coming year.
In 2007, the total compensation paid to the City Manager included the following:
SALARYAND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON-MONETARYBENEFITS
Salary $ 163,404 Vacation (30 days per year)
Medical Insurance 8,628 Holidays (11 days per year)
Dental Insurance 540
Life Insurance 472
Long Term Disability 1,291
ICMA (457) 4,902
ICMA (401) 16,340
Car Allowance 9,000
Total Monetary Compensation $ 204,578
The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and
Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000, amended
by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, and further amended by the adoption
ofResolution 2006-124 on December 5, 2006,provides that any change in compensationfor the City
Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in
80
December 4, 2007
sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the
ensuing year."
Mayor Hutchinson stated Council unanimously believes the City Manager's performance has been
outstanding in all respects. Council policy is to establish market pay ranges for all city employees
using a market-average actual salary data with the goal of fairness to employees and fairness to tax
payers. An independent consultant has provided Council with salary data for city managers in 13
cities nationwide that are similar to Fort Collins and the conclusion is the City Manager's salary is
20%below the average salary of a city manager in similar cities. Council is considering raising the
City Manager's salary 20% over three years to reach the market average. He noted the City
Manager's salary is paid 40%from the General Fund,40%is paid by Light and Power,and 20%by
Water Utility.
Councilmember Roy made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Poppaw,to adopt Ordinance No.
149, 2007 on First Reading, setting the base salary of the City Manager at $176,455 and the
corresponding total compensation package.
Council thanked City Manager Attebery for his excellent performance and management of the City
through difficult times.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown,Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy
and Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 137, 2007,
Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Natural Areas Fund
and the Capital Projects Fund- Soapstone Prairie Public Improvements
Capital Project to Be Used for the Design and Construction of
Public Improvements at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area,Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 20, 2007, appropriates
revenue in the Natural Areas Fund and the Capital Projects Fund to be used for construction of the
access road at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area which was started in October and will be completed
by spring 2008. Funds being appropriated for this project will come from designated Natural Areas
Program sales tax revenues. The funds budgeted in 2007, 2008 and 2009 are revenues from the
Open Space Yes(City) 114 cent sales tax and Help Preserve Open Space(County) 114 cent sales tax.
The unappropriated funds available in 2007 are revenues from the original 114 cent Natural Areas
sales tax(collected from 1993-1997) and from the Building Community Choices 114 cent sales tax
revenues designated for the Natural Areas Program (collected from 1998 to 2005).
81
December 4, 2007
Funds Budgeted in 2007 $2,166,000
Unappropriated Funds Available in 2007 $ 800,000
Funds Budgeted in 2008 $2,000,000
Funds Budgeted in 2009 $ 134,000
Total Appropriation $5,100,000"
Councilmember Troxell asked the source of the$800,000 in unappropriated funds available in 2007.
Chuck Seest, Finance Director, stated the $800,000 represent savings the Natural Areas Fund had
set aside for certain capital projects that were not longer needed and were now available for this
specific project.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Troxell,to adopt Ordinance
No. 137, 2007 on Second Reading. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and
Troxell. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
82
December 18, 2007
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council-Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting- 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, December 18,
2007, 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: Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel, Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy,
and Troxell.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Gail Zirtzlaff, 2048 Manchester Drive, stated her support for the occupancy limits of 3 unrelated
persons in rental housing and did not want the issue reopened.
Joe Kissell, 913 West Oak, thanked Council for its adoption of a Resolution expressing its
opposition to uranium mining in Nunn, Colorado. He urged Council to adopt a Resolution calling
for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq.
John Gilbreth, 325 East Mulberry, Thrifty Nickel Publisher, expressed his concerns about the
proposed Code changes regarding newsracks. He stated the proposed changes would cut the
distribution of his paper in downtown locations by 30%and he felt the changes were in violation of
the First Amendment.
Jerry Rigney,Fort Collins resident and City of Fort Collins employee,stated the raise granted to the
City Manager was not fair to other City employees and the 4%raise granted to employees was not
a sufficient compensation.
Eric Sutherland, 631 LaPorte Avenue, stated the Resolution passed by Council opposing uranium
mining in Northern Colorado was not strong enough and he was disappointed there was no staff
recommendation with the Resolution. He urged Council to direct staff to research the issue further
and bring back an even stronger Resolution along with a staff recommendation.
Michael Mockler, 1124 North Overland Trail, Publisher of Scene magazine, stated the proposed
Code changes regarding newsracks would cause him to lose 40%of his distribution racks in the Old
Town area. He and other publishers were working towards a solution that would regulate themselves
without a Code change.
Kyle Villers,2391 Cotswold Court,stated the newsracks in the downtown area need a face life,but
were essential to businesses for advertising and provided valuable information to consumers. Self-
regulation from the industry itself seems a much better solution than regulating it with laws.
83
December 18, 2007
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset, urged Council to adopt a Resolution calling for the withdrawal
of U.S. troops from the war in Iraq.
Vivian Armendariz, 135 South Sunset,encouraged the community to shovel their sidewalks and help
their neighbors and to shovel past the curb cut in sidewalks. Seniors and disabled people have
difficulty navigating sidewalks when snow and ice is not removed. She urged the City to clear curb
cuts when plowing.
Sadie Moore, 316 West Mountain Avenue, owner and publisher of the Rocky Mountain Chronicle,
stated newsracks in the downtown area do look cluttered but the proposed changes are much too
restrictive. The bottom bins in the proposed condominiums do not hold papers the size of her paper.
She believed the industry could regulate itself and reach a solution that is acceptable to the
Downtown Business Association.
Josh Johnson, 320 East Elizabeth, Associate Editor of the Rocky Mountain Chronicle, stated
proliferation of publications being distributed in Old Town represents a free market of ideas and is
a sign of a healthy democracy. The proposed changes would cut the papers distribution points in half
and would limit reader access. He urged Council to allow the industry to regulate itself.
Jeff Evans,Fort Collins resident,expressed concerns regarding plowing of streets after a snowstorm
and stated the plows dumped snow back on his sidewalk after he had already shoveled and cleared
them.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Roy stated staff had prepared the Resolution opposing uranium mining in Northern
Colorado at Council's request and was not given time or direction to do in-depth research in order
to formulate a recommendation. He noted the City Manager's raise would help bring his salary in
line with other City Managers in cities of comparable size and Council was unanimous in this
decision.
Councilmember Troxell stated the proposal from the publishing industry to regulate themselves is
a solution Council should consider and would be in the best interest of a free society. He noted
Council did receive a letter from Powertech regarding the Resolution opposing uranium mining in
Northern Colorado that provided its view and he requested the letter be included with the records
kept regarding the Resolution.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the City was moving towards competitive salaries and benefits at all
levels with an emphasis on fairness to both the taxpayer and the employee. The Council ranked City
Manager Atteberry exceedingly high in his performance and the raise was well-earned. He believed
he had enough information to make an informed decision regarding uranium mining and he did not
want staff to spend more time on research. He requested information on snow plowing and why
plows would put snow back on sidewalks that had already been shoveled.
84
December 18, 2007
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the published Agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the November 6,2007 Regular Meeting and
the November 13, 2007 Adjourned Meeting.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 140, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
General Fund and Authorizing Transfer Between Funds for Asset Replacement.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4, 2007, provides
appropriations from General Fund reserves to the Fleet Fund and Communications Fund to
implement the new asset replacement programs for vehicles, facilities, and Information
Technology needs. The funds are recommended to be appropriated from General Fund
reserves. These funds were created through prior year budget savings and are intended to be
used for Asset Replacement needs. It is recommended that $2,350,000 be appropriated to
the Fleet Fund and $1,500,000 be appropriated to the Communications Fund.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 141, 2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
City Sales and Use Tax Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts
Between Funds.
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4,2007,increases total
City 2007 appropriations by$2,667,000. Of that amount,this Ordinance increases General
Fund 2007 estimated revenues by$2,000,000. This Ordinance also increases the estimated
revenues for the Capital Projects Fund($222,333),the Natural Areas Fund($222,333), and
the Transportation Fund($222,334)due to greater than projected collections ofthe following
dedicated sales and use taxes: 0.25 Building on Basics,0.25 Open Space Yes,and 0.25 City
Street Maintenance sales and use tax, respectively. This Ordinance only appropriates the
transfer of the additional sales and use taxes from the Sales Tax Fund to the above funds.
It does not increase appropriations within those related funds. These additional revenues will
increase the reserves in the related funds as of year-end 2007. Appropriations for
expenditure from the various fund balance reserves will be presented to City Council during
the first quarter of 2008.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2007, Authorizing Leases of City Property at 200
West Mountain Avenue, Suite C. For Up To Five Years As Part of the Fort Collins
Technology Incubator Program.
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4, 2007, leases 200
West Mountain Avenue, Suite C, to the FCTI and its client companies. The Fort Collins
Technology Incubator(FCTI) nurtures high potential innovation-based companies in their
85
December 18, 2007
formative stages to increase the probability they will survive and make a sustainable
contribution to the economic health of the community. One of the services they offer to
accomplish this goal is residence in an incubator facility which gives participants access to
shared services, synergy with other startup businesses and below market lease rates. The
City currently offers two facilities for this purpose at 200 West Mountain Avenue and 321
Maple Street. The currently defined FCTI residence program is a three-year lease with
increasing lease rates each year. Due to the fact that not all companies reach the desired self-
sustaining status within this three year window,FCTI would like to add the option of offering
up to two additional 12-month extensions at the end of the initial three year period.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 143 2007 Approving the Terms of the Cit 's Lease of
612 South College Avenue Suite 22 Fort Collins Colorado
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4,2007,approves the
lease extension on approximately 388 square feet of office space located at 612 South
College Avenue, Suite 22, for the office of Dr. Dan Dworkin,Police Services psychologist.
Both Dr. Dworkin and Police Services desire to continue leasing this office space.
11. Second Readin&of Ordinance No. 144 2007 Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned
Property at 212 LaPorte Avenue Alone with Related Parking Rights at 222 LaPorte Avenue
for up to Five Years
This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4,2007,authorizes the
lease at 212 LaPorte Avenue at current market rates, no less than $5.00 per sq ft annually,
for a period of up to five years to offset maintenance expenses and generate revenue.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145 2007 Amending Section 2-575 of the City Code
Relating to Councilmember Compensation
Article II, Section 3 of the City Charter provides that the compensation of Councilmembers
shall be adjusted annually for inflation in accordance with the Denver/Boulder Consumer
Price Index. In 2007, Councilmembers were compensated $630 per month, and the Mayor
received $945 per month.
This Ordinance which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4, 2007,
amends Section 2-575 of the City Code to set the 2008 compensation of Councilmembers
at$650 per month and the compensation of the Mayor at$970 per month, as required by the
City Charter.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147 2007 Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the Municipal Jude
City Council met in Executive Session on November 13 and November 27,2007 to conduct
the performance appraisal of Municipal Judge Kathleen M. Lane. Ordinance No. 147,2007,
86
December 18, 2007
unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4,2007,establishes the 2008 salary of
the Municipal Judge at$86,958.
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148,2007,Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Attorney.
City Council met in Executive Session on November 13 and November 27,2007 to conduct
the performance review of City Attorney Steve Roy. Ordinance No. 148,2007,unanimously
adopted on First Reading on December 4, 2007, establishes the 2008 salary of the City
Attorney at $152,500.
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149,2007,Amending Section 2-596 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Manager.
City Council met in Executive Session on November 13 and November 27,2007 to conduct
the performance appraisal of City Manager Darin Atteber y. Ordinance No. 149, 2007,
unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 4, 2007, establishes the salary of the
City Manager at $176,455.
16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150,2007,Adopting the 2008 Classified Emplovees Pay
Plan.
The 2008 Pay Plan incorporates the new pay philosophy of establishing pay ranges by using
the average actual salary data for benchmark positions to set the pay range mid-point. Data
from the public and private sectors was used to determine the prevailing market rates for
approximately 100 benchmark jobs. This Ordinance,unanimously adopted on First Reading
on December 4, 2007, sets pay ranges, not specific salaries of individual employees.
17. Items Relating to the Recycled Bike Project.
A. Resolution 2007-109 Authorizing the Lease of a Portion of the City-owned Property
at 222 Laporte Avenue to Friends of the Fort Collins Bike Program, Inc., for up to
Two Years as Part of the Recycled Bike Project.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 151,2007,Amending City Code Sections 23-127 and
23-130 Pertaining to Disposition of Stolen,Found or Abandoned Personal Property.
The Recycled Bike Project enables the partnership between the City of Fort Collins and the
FC Bike Co-op to collect, store, and repair found, abandoned/donated bicycles, and to place
these refurbished bicycles back into the community,rather than being shipped to California
for auction. Refurbished bicycles will be used in an Earn-a-Bike program, the future Bike
Library, and/or given to those who qualify as financially challenged or "at risk." Bicycle
frames and parts that cannot be repaired or reused will be recycled. This Code change is
needed to permit the processing of the abandoned/donated bicycles. The Resolution
authorizing the lease agreement is intended to permit a two year lease to the FC Bike Co-op
97
December 18, 2007
to occupy 222 Laporte Avenue(old Poudre Valley Creamery building) in order to conduct
these community services.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of a Residence on City-
Owned Property at Reservoir Ridge Natural Area to the Facility Attendant for Up to Five
Years.
Primrose Studio,consisting of a house and 21 acres of land,is now a part of Reservoir Ridge
Natural Area. It was donated to the Natural Areas Program with the condition that it be used
as a nature education classroom and as a low cost meeting space for non-profit groups. The
studio has recently been remodeled and is now available for use. As part of this effort, a
Facility Attendant was hired to manage the studio and as a condition of employment, is
required to reside in and occupy the house located on site.
The Facility Attendant will pay rent monthly at the rate of three hundred and fifty dollars
($350)per month. This rental rate is a 50%reduction from the fair market value rental rate
and is provided due to the requirement that the Facility Attendant must reside in and occupy
the Premises. Also, the Facility Attendant will be required to perform job duties that may
at times interrupt off-duty personal activities.
In addition to rent, the Facility Attendant will be responsible for payment of all utilities,
including but not limited to electricity,personal telephone,water,trash,and cable television.
The Facility Attendant will be required to vacate the premises if he/she is no longer in this
designated position.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153,2007,Designating the Hoel House, 616 Locust Street,
Fort Collins.Colorado,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
The owners of the property,Ellen Richey and Douglas Simons,are initiating this request for
Landmark designation. The residence has individual significance to Fort Collins under
Landmark Preservation Standard (2), for its association with its prominent designer,
Montezuma Fuller, and for its owner,Dr. George L. Hoel; and under Standard(3), as a very
good representation of Fuller's trademark eclectic combination of architectural styles.
20. Resolution 2007-110 Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned Property at 208 North Howes
Street For Up to Two Years.
As a result of the construction of the new Police Facility, Police will be relocating and
consolidating a number of Police functions that previously took place in various City
buildings to Police's new location on Timberline. One impact of this
relocation/consolidation will be the availability of the Poudre Feeds building located at 208
North Howes Street for other City uses. At present,the City does not have an immediate use
for the space,and therefore staff recommends that the space be leased at current market rates,
no less than$5 per sq ft, for a period of up to two years to offset maintenance expenses and
generate revenue.
88
December 18, 2007
21. Resolution 2007-111 Agreeing to Act as a Reviewing Entity for Commercial Properties for
the State Income Tax Credit Program for Oualifyini4 Rehabilitation Projects.
This Resolution states the City's intent to act as a reviewing entity for State Tax Credit
projects involving commercial properties within the city limits. The provisions of the State
Tax Credit legislation require that each Certified Local Government adopt annually a
resolution stating whether the Certified Local Government will act as a reviewing entity
during the following twelve(12)months.
22. Resolution 2007-112 Adopting Revisions to the Master Street Plan.
The Master Street Plan is a map-based plan identifying the major transportation network
within the Growth Management Area. The Plan was developed using the City Structure Plan
as the basic urban form projected to the year 2025. The Structure Plan projects density,
transit service,activity centers,and mixed-use corridors. This information is used to predict
travel behavior and the demand for transportation infrastructure. The Master Street Plan is
the map of that infrastructure. The Master Street Plan was last amended on March 2, 2004
with the adoption of the Transportation Master Plan.A recent staff assessment of the Master
Street Plan has determined that there are numerous "Clean Up" items that need to be
amended through the Minor Amendment process.
23. Resolution 2007-113 Adopting Certain Amendments to the Downtown Development
Authority Bylaws.
This Resolution will amend the Bylaws of the Downtown Development Authority:
• to include a member of the Larimer County Commissioners on the DDA Board of
Directors.
• to authorize the DDA Executive Director to approve and execute contracts up to
$5,000 so long as the funds have been budgeted and appropriated, and to authorize
the Director to approve and execute contracts greater than$5,000 but not more than
$50,000,so long as the funds have been budgeted and appropriated and provided that
approval for such contract has been given by the DDA Executive Committee.
Employment contracts are not included.
24. Resolution 2007-114 Making Appointments to Various Boards, Commissions, and
Authorities of the City of Fort Collins.
Vacancies currently exist on various boards,commissions,and authorities due to resignations
of board members and the expiration of terms of members. Applications were solicited
during September. Council received copies of the applications and Council teams
interviewed applicants during October and November.
89
December 18, 2007
Section 1 of this Resolution makes 12 appointments to 8 boards and commissions to fill
current vacancies with terms to begin immediately. Names of those individuals
recommended to fill current vacancies have been inserted in the Resolution with the
expiration date following the names.
Section 2 of this Resolution makes 53 appointments to 22 boards and commissions to fill
expired terms to begin on January 1,2008. Names of those individuals recommended to fill
expired terms have been inserted in the Resolution with the expiration date following the
names.
25. Routine Easement.
A. Easement for construction and maintenance of public utilities, to underground
electric service, located at 112 Peterson. Monetary consideration: $10.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 140, 2007, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
General Fund and Authorizing Transfer Between Funds for Asset Replacement.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 141, 2007,Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
City Sales and Use Tax Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts
Between Funds.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2007, Authorizing Leases of City Property at 200
West Mountain Avenue, Suite C, For Up To Five Years As Part of the Fort Collins
Technology Incubator Program.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 143, 2007, Approving the Terms of the City's Lease of
612 South College Avenue, Suite 22, Fort Collins, Colorado.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of City-Owned
Property at 212 LaPorte Avenue,Along with Related Parking Rights at 222 LaPorte Avenue,
for up to Five Years.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2007, Amending Section 2-575 of the City Code
Relating to Councilmember Compensation.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147,2007,Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the Municipal Judge.
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148,2007,Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Attorney.
90
December 18, 2007
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149,2007,Amending Section 2-596 of the City Code and
Setting the Salary of the City Manager.
16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150,2007,Adopting the 2008 Classified Employees Pay
Plan.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 151,2007,Amending City Code Sections 23-127 and 23-130
Pertaining to Disposition of Stolen, Found or Abandoned Personal Property.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2007, Authorizing the Lease of a Residence on City-
Owned Property at Reservoir Ridge Natural Area to the Facility Attendant for Up to Five
Years.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153,2007,Designating the Hoel House, 616 Locust Street,
Fort Collins,Colorado,as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
29. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the
City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known
as the East Skyway Rezoning.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poppaw, to adopt the items
on the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy and Troxell.
Nays: none
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Mayor Hutchinson stated Council policy is to establish a market pay range for all City employees
using the market-average actual salary data. The goal is fairness to employees and taxpayers.
Market-based pay begins in 2008 and Council believes it should also apply to the three employees
who work directly for Council.
Councilmember Ohlson stated 65 citizens have been appointed to boards and commissions to advise
Council and he thanked all the citizens who applied.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Manvel met with the Regional Air Quality Council in Denver which continues
working on solutions to the ozone problem, particularly short term efforts that will occur next
summer. A cost-effective solution to reduce ozone is for people to replace their old lawnmowers.
91
December 18, 2007
Councilmember Poppaw stated Shepardson Elementary students are participating in the "O"
Ambassador's Program, a joint project of Oprah's Angel Network and Free the Children. The
students learning about global issues and making a tangible difference in the lives of their peers in
the developing world.
Councilmember Ohlson stated Comcast has added a basic package for customers at a price of$11.
It is difficult to find any information about this package on Comcast's website and Comcast does not
advertise that this package is available. He requested away be found to inform citizens that a basic
package of cable programming is available.
Items Relating to the East Skyway Rezoning Adopted on First Reading
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 2007-107 Amending the City's Structure Plan Map Pertaining to Land along
Skyway Drive East of College Avenue.
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the
City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for that Certain Property Known
as the East Skyway Rezoning.
This area was annexed into the City as part of Phase I of the Southwest Enclave Annexation in April,
2007, under a Structure Plan designation of Urban Estate(U-E). The original intent ofdesignating
U-E for these properties was to acknowledge the existing large-lot County parcels zoned Farming
in the County; U-E is the City's zoning that is most similar to the County's zoning.
Staff has since considered the situation along this part of East Skyway in much more detail, in
extensive discussions with owners, neighbors, and the County. These discussions have been
prompted by issues related to an existing business at 209 East Skyway and by the recent annexation
process in 2007. Stafffinds that the properties along Skyway do not reflect the character of the
Farming or Urban Estate designations, but bear closer resemblance to both the commercial uses
in the area and the existing residential neighborhood(which is more dense than Urban Estate) to
the north and east.
As a result of the long history of discussions centering on 209 East Skyway, staff is recommending
Council consider these changes now, rather than delay a decision further and include this item as
part of the South College Corridor Plan process (Planning and Zoning Board recommendation),
anticipated to be completed at the end of 2008.
BACKGROUND
The City of Fort Collins Structure Plan Map amendment will change the existing Structure Plan
designation for two properties located at 209 and 225 on East Skyway Drive, Claire Court, one
92
December 18, 2007
property on Clair Court, and a City owned parcel. The first property (209 East Skyway) is a
proposed/recommended change from Urban Estate to a combination of Commercial and Low
Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. The secondproperty(225 East Skyway)will changefrom Urban
Estate to Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. Claire Court, a cul-de-sac which extends south
offo S wa Drive will cha
.f kJ' Y change from Urban Estate to Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. The
City owned parcel east of Claire Court will change from Urban Estate to Open Lands, Parks and
Stream Corridor designation.
The corresponding proposed/recommended rezoning changes are as follows:
(1) The first property is located at 209 East Skyway Drive. Existing zoning is
Urban Estate. Proposed zoning is a combination of Commercial on the west
2/3 of the property and Low Density Residential on the east 1/3 of the
property-
(2) The second property, at 225 East Skyway Drive, abuts the first property on
the east, with existing zoning of Urban Estate. The proposed zoning is a
combination ofLow Density Residential on the northern 1/3 of the property
and retention of Urban Estate on the remaining southern 2/3 ofthe property.
No such zoning amendment is needed or Claire Court wit
h tth an existing
zoning of Low Density Residential.
(3) The third property is adjacent and east of Claire Court and is City-owned
(part of Prairie Dog Meadow) with an existing zoning of Low Density
Residential. The proposed zoning is Public Open Lands, representing a
housekeeping action.
Site Description
The site consists of two properties located at 209 and 225 East Skyway Drive, as well as Claire
Court with its 9 fronting houses. The two properties along Skyway were recently annexed and zoned
Urban Estate to match the County's zoning in April 2007 in Phase I of Southwest Annexation.
Claire Court was already in City Limits. The first property at 209 East Skyway Drive, is 3.6 acres
and includes a single-family detached home with a home occupation business and separate metal
warehouse used for personal storage. The existing business is a small engine repair operation.
The second property located at 225 East Skyway Drive, is 4.8 acres and includes an existingprivate
Montessori School with a horse pasture extending behind the school.
Claire Court includes 9 parcels. The City-owned property east of Claire Court is a vacant parcel
of 1.5 acres.
The surrounding land uses/zoning are as follows:
93
December 18, 2007
N: R-L; Existing single-family detached residential (Lynn Acres Subdivision)
S: U-E; Existing vacant lots
E: P-O-L; City Natural Area (Prairie Dog Meadow)
W. C; Existing commercial businesses (South College Ave corridor)
Structure Plan Amendment
The City Structure Plan, a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan (City Plan), is a map that sets
forth a basic framework which shows how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 10
years. City Plan allows for amendments through a Minor Amendment process as outlined in
Appendix C. The two review criteria are:
A. The City Plan and/or any related element thereof is in need of the proposed amendment;and
B. The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with
the vision, goals,principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof.
This area was annexed into the City aspart ofPhaselofthe Southwest Enclave Annexation in April,
2007, under a Structure Plan designation of Urban Estate(U-E). The original intent ofdesignating
U-E for these properties was to acknowledge and match as closely as possible the existing large-lot
County parcels zoned Farming in the County; U-E being similar to the County's zoning.
Staff has since considered the situation along this part of East Skyway in much more detail, in
extensive discussions with owners, neighbors, and the County over several years. These discussions
have been prompted by issues related to an existing business at 209 East Skyway, and also by the
recent annexation process in 2007. Staff finds that the properties along Skyway do not reflect the
character of the Farming or Urban Estate designations, but are more in character with both the
commercial uses in the area, and the existing residential neighborhood to the north and east. At 209
East Skyway, staff is recommending a Commercial designation on the west 213 ofthe property, with
a designation of Low Density Residential on the east 113 of the property to provide a transition to
the neighborhood(Attachments I and 2).
This proposed Commercial designation is the substantive aspect of the proposed changes. 1t reflects
the transitional, mixed character ofthe area: a U-haul truckfacility in the Kelmar Strip commercial
corridor is abutting to the west; the sides of single family homes are across Skyway; a Montessori
school is abutting to the east; and two vacant 3-acre lots abut the property to the south. These two
vacant lots appear to be candidates for future rezoning, but will be considered as part of the
upcoming South College Corridor Plan process because the issues have not been considered as
thoroughly as at 209 and 225 East Skyway. South and southeast of the two vacant lots, land uses
include a permanent City Natural Area,Humane Society headquarters, City bus facility,and a range
of "city-edge" residential lots ranging from about 114 acre to over an acre in the Lynn Acres
County subdivision, all well within view of the subject property.
94
December 18, 2007
The existing small business on the subject property and any future new commercial uses on the
subject property can form a transition from existing U-Haul and other commercial uses adjacent
to the west, now and in the future. Further commercial changes to the subject property appear likely
and would both trigger improvements (e.g., landscaping, sidewalk, and changes to the existing 6-
foot chain linkfence) to meet Land Use Code development standards, and would improve the street
frontage and appearance on East Skyway.
The changes involving Low Density Residential are much less substantive. The Low Density
Residential designation for the remaining eastern portion of 209 and northern portion of 225 East
Skyway is more appropriate than the current Urban Estate based on existing development and
density of houses and the school. It also provides a more logical land use pattern with a transition
in intensity from College Avenue eastward.
A cul-de-sac of houses called Claire Court, abutting 225 East Skyway, is also included in the
recommended Low Density Residential designation because it simply fits that designation rather
than its current UE designation (which allows a maximum of two dwelling units per acre). Staff
considers the Low Density Residential portion of the proposed changes to be minor editing of the
Structure Plan map, to create a more logical and orderly land use pattern along Skyway and fitting
existing development to the right designation.
A final proposed amendment includes the property adjacent to and east of Claire Court, a City
owned parcel which is part of a larger open lands acquisition in 2003 (Prairie Dog Meadow). The
existing land use designation is Urban Estate and the proposed designation is Open Lands, Parks
and Stream Corridors.
Request for C and R-L Zoning—Section 2.9.4(H)
Staff is recommending that the Plan Amendment be approved and Commercial (C), Low Density
Residential (R-L), and Public Open Lands (POL)zoning be implemented as a related action. The
request to rezone the two parcels from U-E to C and R-L, and one parcel from U-E to POL
(Attachments 3 and 4). This change is considered quasi-judicial (versus legislative) since the
parcels are less than 640 acres. There are five standards that may be used in evaluating a request
for a quasi-judicial rezoning. These standards, and how the request complies, are summarized
below:
1. Mandatory requirements:
A. Any amendment to the Zoning Map shall be recommended for approval only if the
proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan:
The request for the C, R-L, and POL zoning districts is consistent with the City Structure
Plan as amended in the proposed prior action. The Commercial zoning change would be
compatible with the existing commercial to the west along the Kelmar Strip and the other
mixed-uses in the area, provide a transition between the College Avenue commercial and
95
December 18, 2007
residential use to the east, and provide a transition between the College Avenue Kelmar Strip
commercial and residential use to the east.
The change from Urban Estate to Low Density Residential is more compatible with the
existing residential neighborhood to the north and east. The change from Low Density
Residential to Public Open Lands is compatible with the existing residential neighborhood
to the west and north and existing open lands owned by the City.
B. Any amendment to the Zoning Map shall be recommended for approval only if the
proposed amendment is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood
surrounding and including the subject property.
Changed conditions in the area are largely a result of what has developed on and around
these two parcels since the time of County Zoning of FA-Farming in the early 1960's. The
area now reflects a more "mixed urban fringe"character than farming or rural residential
character. Stafffinds that a change to Commercial zoning on part of 209 East Skyway is
warranted given the situation on the 3.6-acre property and the mix of uses in the area. The
proposed Low Density Residential is appropriate to reflect the residential and school
development which has occurred along East Skyway.
The City-owned property purchased in 2003 warranted a map change then, but was missed
at the time. This rezoning represents a housekeeping action to update the zoning map based
on previous decisions.
2. Additional, Optional Considerations:
C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing
and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district
for the land.
As stated above, staff has determined that the current Urban Estate is not the most
appropriate zoning in between existing commercial and low density residential uses.
Stafffinds the proposed amendment for 209 East Skyway to be compatible with the existing
commercial area to the west, the existing residential to the north, and the various uses that
make up a mixed character to the south and east. The change to 225 East Skyway would
better reflect the existing residential character across the street to the north and east.
D. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to, water, air,
noise, storm water management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and the natural
functioning of the environment.
Stafffinds no adverse environmental impacts.
96
December 18, 2007
E. Whether and the extent to which theproposed amendment would result in a logical and
orderly development pattern.
The proposed amendment results in a logical and orderly development pattern by allowing
a modest, transitional amount ofadditional commercial use on aportion of209 East Skyway
adjacent to existing commercial use to the west and north of the property. The change from
U-E to R-L simply reflects the existing residential development on and around the subject
properties. This is essentially a "house keeping" change to create a more logical and
orderly pattern than the current pattern, which includes U-E on properties, that better fit the
R-L designation. The R-L clearly fits the existing residential uses and any potential future
residential development that could occur on the east part of 209 East Skyway. The initial
zoning of U-E as part of the South College enclave annexation and zoning was close to
reflecting the existing uses, but based on further review by staff, a recommendation to
change to Low Density Residential zoningprovides a more logical and orderly development
pattern and transition to surrounding uses in the area.
Neighborhood Meeting Summary
A neighborhood meeting was held on August 30, 2007. A more detailed summary is attached. The
number of property owners in attendance was six. The following main points areas follows:
• Of the six property owners in attendance,five supported the proposed plan
amendment and rezoning. A general response includedsupportfor the existing
small engine repair business and other planned commercial uses requested by
the owner of 209 East Skyway and changes to 225 East Skyway.
• One owner did not support the proposed plan amendment and rezoning. The
comments focused on history of previous County decisions, compatibility
concerns, and a general opposition to commercial zoning for this location.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION.•
In evaluating the request for a Structure Plan Amendment and rezoning, staff makes the following
findings offact:
A. The proposed amendment meets the criteria outlined in Appendix C of City Plan through a
Minor Amendment process including a need for the change and promoting the public
welfare, and will be consistent with the vision, goals,principles and policies of City Plan.
B. The proposed rezoning is consistent with City Plan and more specifically the City Structure
Plan Map, since the two actions are being done as a unified package.
C. The proposed rezoning amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses
surrounding the subject land and is the appropriate zone district for the land.
97
December 18, 2007
D. The proposed rezoning amendment would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the
natural environment.
E. The proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the East Skyway Plan Amendment and Rezoning.
On October 18, 2007, the Planning and Zoning Board voted (5-0) to recommend Council not
approve the East Skyway Plan Amendment and Rezoning, with an added comment to consider this
request as part of the South College Corridor Plan effort. The rationale for this recommendation
is based on looking at the larger context of adjoining properties and if there is any other changes
warranted with additional analysis as part of the corridor planning process.
Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, stated the four properties under consideration are east of South
College Avenue and the Kel-Mar Strip, and south of Skyway Drive. The current land use
designation for these properties is Urban Estate. The existing zoning along East Skyway Drive is
a combination of Urban Estate, and Low-Density Residential. The property at 209 Skyway Drive
was purchased in 1998 and had a small engine repair business in the garage,which is attached to the
house. The owner later added a detached warehouse. This use was allowed in the County FA-
Farming zoning as a home occupation use with no outside storage. Since 1999, the owner has
requested Commercial zoning from the County. Staff has had numerous discussions with the owner
regarding requests for Commercial zoning and zoning violations before and after annexation. The
request for rezoning of the adjacent properties to the east are related but less substantial in nature.
This rezoning would change the designation of the properties from Urban Estate to Low Density
Residential and Public Open Lands along with the corresponding zoning. At its October 18, 2007
meeting,the Planning and Zoning Board recommended Council not approve this item as it supported
inclusion of this item in the South College Corridor Plan process which is projected to be reviewed
in the next year. The Board felt Council should look at the larger context of the area and consider
that the Urban Estate designation does work now and could act as a transition between other uses.
Staff s recommendation differs from the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation as it believes
a decision needs to be made now. This property has been in review for nine years and staff does not
believe the decision regarding the property will be different if it is delayed until the South College
Corridor Plan is reviewed. The owners of 209 East Skyway need to know the status of their property
now so they can assess future dealings with their businesses and uses of their property.
Criteria for structure plan amendments include whether there is a need for a change and whether the
change is consistent with City Plan. Staff believes there is a need for a change in zoning. The intent
of the Urban Estate designation was to acknowledge the existing large-lot County parcels zoned
Farming in the County and the properties along Skyway Drive do not reflect the character of farming
or the Urban Estate designation. The properties are more in character with the commercial uses
along the Kel-Mar Strip and the existing residential neighborhoods to the north and east. The use
of the property at 209 East Skyway reflects a transitional mixed-use character of the area with the
98
December 18, 2007
existing businesses along College Avenue and existing family homes along Skyway Drive. Located
south of the property is a City Natural Area,the Humane Society,Transfort facility and other large-
lot residential properties. The existing small engine repair business and large warehouse building
and any future new commercial uses could create a transition from the commercial along College
Avenue and the existing neighborhoods to the north and east. The future commercial changes appear
likely and would trigger improvements to the property with a proposed new use and project
submittal.
Other properties included in this rezoning request are (1) 225 East Skyway, which would change
from Urban Estate to Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood; (2)Claire Court, a cul-de-sac which
extends south off of Skyway Drive, which would change from Urban Estate to Low Density Mixed
Use Neighborhood, and; (3)the City-owned parcel east of Claire Court, which would change from
Urban Estate to Open Lands,Parks and Stream Corridor designation. These are minor Structure Plan
changes that would more accurately reflect the uses of the properties.
Staff believes these changes are consistent with City Plan in the areas of compatibility,maintaining
the character of the area, protecting existing neighborhoods, and assisting small businesses. The
properties along Skyway Drive are identified for potential change in the Growth Management Policy
of Compatible Infill and Redevelopment. The proposed changes are warranted by changed
conditions in the area,largely as a result of the general transition and development on South College
Avenue and East Skyway and reflects the mixed-use,urban fringe character of the area as opposed
to the Urban Estate designation. The proposed Structure Plan amendment is compatible with
existing and proposed uses, does not result in significant, adverse impacts on the natural
environment, and does provide a logical and orderly development pattern.
Brian Schumm, 5807 Bellina Court, urged Council not to adopt the rezoning change as he did not
believe Commercial zoning should extend east of the Kel-Mar Strip. He owns two properties that
would be adversely affected by the rezoning. The City-owned open space and Claire Court do not
need to be rezoned at this time. 209 East Skyway is currently a residence with a home business and
a large steel building for personal storage. This property has been the subject of much discussion
over the past 11 years. The County has not allowed commercial use of this property for many years.
When the property was annexed, it was zoned U-E. The South College Corridor Plan should be
reviewed before any rezoning request is considered.
Randy Whitman, 209 East Skyway, stated he runs a small business on the Kel-Mar Strip. His
property was included with the first phase of the Southwest Annexation,which was annexing all the
commercial property on the Kel-Mar Strip. His property is surrounded by commercial and
properties
should be zo
ned commercial. He requested Council approve the rezoning 4 pp omng change.
Andrea Whitman, 209 East Skyway, stated the business at 209 East Skyway has grown through the
years and cannot grow further without the zoning change. She urged Council to rezone this property.
City Attorney Roy stated the decision before Council is a quasi-judicial decision. Small area
rezonings and Council appeals of particular proposed land uses do not entail the making of law but
99
December 18, 2007
the application of law. When Council makes laws, it acts in a legislative capacity and takes into
consideration many things that should not be considered when it is applying the laws to a particular
situation. Council should make its decision based on its consideration of the criteria listed in City
Code. Deputy City Attorney Eckman stated the Structure Plan amendment criteria are(1)whether
or not any part of the Plan is in need of an amendment and (2) whether the Plan amendment will
promote the public welfare and be consistent with the vision, goals,principles and policies of City
Plan. The Structure Plan amendment must be adopted first as one of the two criteria for amending
the Zoning Map is that"any amendment to the Zoning Map shall be recommended for approval only
if the proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan." Without the
amendment,the rezoning would not be consistent with City Plan. The other criteria is whether the
change is justified based on a change of conditions in the area. Council does not need to find both
criteria are met to adopt the rezoning change. Other optional criteria are(1)whether and the extent
to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the
subject land and is the amendment appropriate for the land; (2)whether and the extent to which the
proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment; and
(3) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly
development pattern. Council can consider the optional criteria, but it is not mandatory for the
proposal to meet them.
Councilmember Ohlson requested further information about the Structure Plan comparison. Wray
stated the current Structure Plan map lists the zoning of the subject properties as Urban Estate. The
proposed change would change the zoning of western two-thirds of the property at 209 East Skyway
to commercial and the other one-third would be zoned Low Density Residential. The property
located at 225 East Skyway is a large property containing a Montessori school and a horse pasture
Staff believes 225 East Skyway and the lots located on Claire Court would more accurately reflect
the character of the area with a Low Density Residential zoning.
Councilmember Ohlson asked whether the rezoning was warranted based on changes in uses in the
surrounding properties,including the subject property. He stated rezoning based on changes of use
of the subject property would be allowing a zoning change based on previous use that was
incompatible with the current zoning and rewarding those who ignored zoning code. Joe Frank,
Advance Planning Director, stated staff recommended the zoning change based on the uses of the
surrounding area and not the current use of the property. Deputy City Attorney Eckman stated the
Code was written in an attempt to generally cover many different situations. If the property was
considered a"non-conforming"use,then the use of the subject property should be taken into account
when rezoning is requested. Frank noted properties have been annexed into the City that are zoned
Farming by the County,but are more compatible with the Commercial zoning designation from the
City. The subject property use is only one reason among many given by staff to support a rezoning
recommendation.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the property at 209 East Skyway was in compliance with City Code.
Peter Barnes,Zoning Supervisor, stated the property does have a long history of zoning issues. At
the time the property was annexed into the City, the only uses allowed on the property were those
uses allowed by the County. According to the Code, when a multi-parcel annexation occurs such
100
December 18, 2007
as the Southwest Annexation, any property that has illegal uses must be brought into compliance
with City Code within a certain amount of time. The County allowed home occupation consisting
of a small engine repair business with no outdoor storage. A court action in 2005 ordered all outdoor
storage of non-personal items to cease. Compliance of the property was achieved after several visits
by County employees. When the property was annexed into the City, items were being stored
outdoors on the property. Mr. Whitman was notified compliance was necessary within a certain
date. The Code states when an illegal use occurs that was not the subject of a County court order
or was the subject of any enforcement action by the County,the property owner has two years from
the date of annexation to bring the property into compliance. If the County-initiated enforcement
action resulted from a complaint from a citizen, as was the case with the subject property, upon
annexation into the City, and it was determined the complaint was bona fide, the property must be
brought into compliance in 90 days, with a possible 180 day extension. A deadline in June was
established for compliance with certain conditions, such as removal of outdoor storage of non-
personal items. Complete compliance was required by September 30, which meant the large,
detached building could be used only for non-personal items. In October,staff noticed non-personal
items were still being stored outdoors. A summons was issued to Mr. Whitman who was assessed
a fine for non-compliance. At this time,outdoor storage of non-personal items has ceased. The City
will continue to enforce its Code. If the rezoning is allowed, the only way for Mr. Whitman's
business to be become legal, with outdoor storage and RV storage would be to go through a
development review process. His business would be called a workshop and custom small industry,
not a home occupation. He could have outdoor storage with screening by a solid fence. The RV
storage would be in a building and be considered enclosed mini-storage. Both uses are allowed in
the proposed zoning. Improvements to the site would also be required, including landscaping, and
potential sidewalks.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if the staff recommendation to approve the rezoning could change
after the review of the South College Corridor Plan. Frank stated the property does meet the criteria
for a rezoning and it does make sense to rezone the property. The Whitmans have been restricted
in running their business by the court order and the current zoning. A decision is needed so the
Whitmans can make plans for their business either at the current location or to move it to a different
location. Staff believed it was not logical to continue discussion about rezoning this property for
another year until the South College Corridor Plan review was completed and the recommendation
would not be changed.
Councilmember Brown asked if the outdoor storage issue would be enforced. Wray stated the
proposed Commercial zoning does not allow outdoor storage and Mr. Whitman would need to go
through the development process to be allowed outdoor storage on the property.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the Whitmans could continue their business with the Urban Estate
zoning currently in place. Frank stated he was unsure the Whitmans could continue their business
for another year until the South College Corridor Plan review is completed. It would bean economic
hardship for them to wait for a decision as they are currently turning business away and they have
a desire to expand.
101
December 18, 2007
Mayor Hutchinson asked if Council should consider the Whitmans' ability to continue business in
its deliberation of this issue. City Attorney Roy stated Council's consideration should be based on
land use, land use patterns, compatibility and not economic impact on particular land owners.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt Resolution
2007-107.
Councilmember Ohlson stated it made sense to proceed with the rezoning as this issue has been
around for a long time and the likely outcome would not be any different if it is postponed for a year.
He hoped the property would remain in compliance with the Code.
Councilmember Brown stated the property owners deserved an answer regarding rezoning the
property so they could make future business plans.
Mayor Hutchinson stated while the Planning and Zoning Board recommended waiting to make the
decision regarding this rezoning, the issue needs to be resolved now. Waiting will not change any
factors under consideration in this issue.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Brown, Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw, Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Roy,to adopt Ordinance No.
146,2007 on First Reading. Yeas:Brown,Hutchinson,Manvel,Ohlson,Poppaw,Roy and Troxell.
Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Other Business
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion,seconded by Councilmember Manvel,to cancel the regular
meeting scheduled for January 1, 2008. Yeas: Brown,Hutchinson, Manvel, Ohlson, Poppaw,Roy
and Troxell. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
102
December 18, 2007
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
103