Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 07/26/2016 - COMPLETE AGENDA
City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor City Council Chambers Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Adjourned Meeting July 26, 2016 6:00 p.m. (Revised 7/22/16) CALL MEETING TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Items Relating to the Organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District. (staff: Patrick Rowe, Josh Birks; 10 minute staff presentation; 20 minute discussion) THIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION A. Resolution 2016-055 Setting for August 16, 2016, a Noticed Public Hearing for the City Council’s Consideration of an Ordinance Authorizing the Organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2016, Establishing the Midtown Business Improvement District, Appointing the Initial Members of the Board of Directors of the District, Approving the District’s Initial Operating Plan and Preliminary 2017 Budget, and Designating the Service Area of the District. The purpose of this item is the formation of a Business Improvement District (BID) within Midtown Fort Collins. The Midtown BID’s purpose is to increase commercial and economic activity within the district by focusing on promotion, placemaking, and programming. City of Fort Collins Page 2 1. Resolution 2016-058 Accepting Advisory Opinion and Recommendation No. 2016-01 of the Ethics Review Board. (staff: Carrie Daggett; 5 minute staff presentation; 15 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to submit the opinion of the Ethics Review Board to Council for its consideration and possible approval. 2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2016, Calling a Special Municipal Election to be Held in Conjunction with the November 8, 2016 Larimer County General Election. The purpose of this item is to call a Special Municipal Election to be held in conjunction with the November 8, 2016 Larimer County General Election, and preserves the opportunity for Council to place Council-initiated or referred issues on the November ballot. If Council decides to place any measures on the ballot, it would need to do so no later than at its September 6 meeting. If Council does not take action by ordinance or resolution before the statutory deadline (September 9) to certify ballot language to Larimer County, the election will be cancelled and the provisions of this Ordinance will be of no further force and effect. This Ordinance does not submit a specific measure to the November 8, 2016 ballot. Adoption of this Ordinance is a required step in preserving the option for City Council to submit any ballot measures that Council may desire, at the November 8, 2016 General Election. 3. First Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2016, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund and in the Light and Power Fund for Continuation of Energy Efficiency Initiatives Associated with the 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan and Rescinding Ordinance No. 081, 2016. (staff: Kevin Gertig, John Phelan; 5 minute staff presentation; 20 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to rescind Ordinance No. 081, 2016 (Adopted on July 19, 2016) and amend the $1,460,000 appropriated by Ordinance No. 081, 2016; appropriating from the General Fund $730,000, and $730,000 from the Electric Utility Light & Power fund, for continuation of energy efficiency programs in 2016, as outlined in the draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan. Ordinance No. 081, 2016 will become effective as originally adopted and shall provide funding until this Ordinance becomes effective, i.e., funding for the Energy Efficiency Programs up to $730,000 will not be further delayed pending Second Reading of this Ordinance. OTHER BUSINESS A. Council will consider a motion to adjourn into executive session to consider legal advice. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 26, 2016 City Council THIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION STAFF Patrick Rowe, Redevelopment Program Coordinator Josh Birks, Economic Health Director SUBJECT Items Relating to the Organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2016-055 Setting for August 16, 2016, a Noticed Public Hearing for the City Council’s Consideration of an Ordinance Authorizing the Organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 095, 2016, Establishing the Midtown Business Improvement District, Appointing the Initial Members of the Board of Directors of the District, Approving the District’s Initial Operating Plan and Preliminary 2017 Budget, and Designating the Service Area of the District. The purpose of this item is the formation of a Business Improvement District (BID) within Midtown Fort Collins. The Midtown BID’s purpose is to increase commercial and economic activity within the district by focusing on promotion, placemaking, and programming. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The South Fort Collins Business Association (SFCBA), which represents a number of business and property owner interests within Midtown Fort Collins, has spearheaded an effort to create a business improvement district (BID) within Midtown Fort Collins. As stated in the petition, the purpose of the BID is to “leverage public sector investments and provide private sector stakeholders in the area with a stronger platform through which to advocate for - and directly fund - needed improvements as Midtown comes into a new era”. The District’s operations will be funded through a special tax assessment based on frontage that would apply to commercial properties along College Avenue and East Foothills Parkway (the portion of Foothills Parkway that runs through the Foothills Mall) between Prospect Road and Harmony Road (Attachment 1). (Note: Per state law, no residential property is included; if a property’s county assessment status changes from commercial to residential, it will be excluded from the BID and any BID assessment). The proposed Midtown BID cites the following goals and objectives in its proposed Operating Plan: Create a collective voice to accomplish the goals of the neighborhood, provide leadership for the neighborhood, and champion the vision of the Midtown. Serve as the activator of the Midtown neighborhood, providing programming, marketing and activities year-round. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 2 Purposefully improve and advance Midtown and facilitate economic growth and overall increased vitality in Midtown. Develop and establish Midtown’s character and personality, communicate it succinctly, and bring it to life. Create synergistic relationships with the City of Fort Collins to create an accessible and desirable place for locals and visitors. Find interesting, active and creative uses for shops, sidewalks and open spaces that can boost the economy, thus diversifying the mix and adding new business opportunities. Provide awareness, recognition, promotion and education about Midtown. Keep Midtown safe, clean and welcoming. Be an administrative umbrella that brings the neighborhood together and maximizes funding opportunities for the future of Midtown. Initial Proposed Projects and City Partnership Projects the BID may consider in its initial years include: Corridor branding efforts - aesthetic elements such as signage, lighting, flowers, public amenities, etc. Facilitation of music, entertainment and other programming. Development and implementation of Midtown-branded wayfinding and signage. Hiring of full-time staff to work specifically for Midtown. Utilization of the district as a platform for building partnerships with the City and other stakeholder groups. With shared interests and goals, a productive partnership between the BID and the City is anticipated. Potential areas of partnership include enhancements to planned City projects, leveraging new projects, and supporting each other with ideas and resources. As an early investment in that potential partnership, the City made a $30,000 loan available to help cover specific formation costs. Additionally, the City has expended resources to install irrigation sleeves in anticipation of mutual work to renovate Midtown landscape medians. BID operations and undertakings will be funded through a special assessment of properties within the district boundary based on College Avenue and East Foothills Parkway frontage. The assessment is based on $10 per linear foot of frontage and is anticipated to raise approximately $300,000 annually. The BID will have the ability to raise the assessment annually, up to, but not to exceed, the consumer price index (CPI). Business Improvement District Governance State statutes provide for a board of between five (5) and eleven (11) members. SFCBA, acting as the BID formation group, has recommended a board of individuals to be appointed as the initial board. SFCBA made its recommendation based on whom it believes to be interested, qualified, and those it believes to broadly represent the district’s interests (for a list of these individuals, please refer to Attachment 2). The term of office shall be staggered to encourage continuity of governance. The length of the term is staggered between two (2) and three (3) years. State statute provides that future board appointments are to be made by City Council. Per state statute, BIDs in Colorado may exist in perpetuity. As proposed, the Midtown BID will have an initial ten-year term. This allows stakeholders to evaluate the BID’s effectiveness. If the BID is successful, as anticipated, it will request a continuation from City Council. BID statutes require the BID to file an annual operating plan and budget with the City on or before September 30 of each year. The City reviews and approves these documents as provided by law. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 3 Business Improvement District Formation Process The formation of a BID is initiated by a petition of affected property owners within the proposed district’s boundaries. State statutes set two minimum thresholds which must be met for the petition to be valid: (1) petition signatures must represent at least 50% of the proposed district according to valuation; and (2) petition signatures must represent at least 50% of the proposed district by acreage. Following a successful petition, the question of formation is put to City Council for consideration, which includes a public hearing on the matter. (Note: Petition results were not available at the time this Agenda Item Summary was published). State statute provides that whether a BID is created is within the City Council’s “sole discretion.” State statute also provides that Council is to decide all questions of fact related to the organization of a BID, including the genuineness of the signatures on the petition. After the public hearing and upon the successful creation of the BID entity, the BID board is expected to call a TABOR election to address the BID’s future revenues. The BID itself will conduct this election process in coordination with Larimer County. Key dates of the Midtown BID’s proposed formation schedule are as follows: July 25, 2016 Completed Petition submitted to City July 26, 2016 First Reading of formation ordinance & Setting a Public Hearing for Aug. 16th (THIS ITEM) August 16, 2016 Public Hearing / Second Reading of BID formation ordinance Note: A public hearing may occur at either a first or second reading. Due to timing requirements prescribed by state statute and firm dates related to the BID’s required TABOR election, a second reading public hearing date was necessary. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The district is self-funded with no direct costs to the City. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION N/A PUBLIC OUTREACH Property owners within the service area and boundaries of the proposed district have received petition correspondence from the BID formation group. Additionally, after the public hearing date is set, affected property owners will receive formal mailed notice of the hearing which is planned for August 16, 2016. The public at large will also be notified via published notice consistent with state law and standard City practice. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map (PDF) 2. Initial Proposed Board (PDF) 3. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) S Shields St S College Ave E Drake Rd W Drake Rd E Prospect Rd SMason St E Horsetooth Rd WProspect Rd W Harmony Rd S Lem a y Ave W Horsetooth Rd B o a r d walk D r E Harmony Rd J o hn F K e n n ed y P kwy Landings Dr S Lemay Ave Proposed Midtown Business Improvement District Boundaries Street Centerlines - Major Foothills Parkway Frontage College Ave Frontage © ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Location Map (4661 : MID BID Formation) 1 BID GOVERNANCE The BID statute allows for a board of 5 to 11 members who are BID electors. The Midtown BID board will initially consist of nine appointed members from the Midtown BID area. The Midtown BID recommends that City Council appoint the following initial board members: Board Member Affiliation Rationale for Inclusion on Board Steve Taylor Hot Corner Concepts Long standing Fort Collins business owner and resident who has participated in the Old Town DDA and will help represent the restaurant users along the corridor Rayno Seaser The Egg & I Long standing Fort Collins business owner and resident who has participated and will also help represent the restaurant users along the corridor Mike Dellenbach Dellenbach Chevrolet Long standing Fort Collins business owner and resident who will help represent the car dealers along the corridor David Fritzler BBVA Compass Well established and respected member of the business community who will help represent the financial institutions along the corridor Spiro Palmer Palmer Properties Long standing Fort Collins business owner and resident who will help represent the shopping centers and general businesses Luke McFetridge NewMark Merrill Mountain States President of the SFCBA leading the efforts to form the BID and will remain on the Board to see the vision through John Gaffney Foothills Mall GM of Foothills Mall, representing a catalyst project in Midtown and demonstrating the Mall’s commitment to the BID by serving Lauren DeRosa Wild Birds Long standing resident and business owner in Fort Collins and will help represent the business lessees 1 Midtown Business Improvement District Josh Birks and Patrick Rowe ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 2 Tonight’s Action’s: 1) Resolution setting August 16th as the date of Public Hearing. 2) First Reading of the formation ordinance (Second Reading to occur on August 16th ). Business Improvement Districts 1.3 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 3 Business Improvement Districts What are they? Over 1,200 BIDs nationwide. 1.3 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) Business Improvement Districts Funding 4 Self funded: • Commercial property special assessment; and/or • Commercial property mil levy. • May issue bonds 1.3 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 5 I. Initiated by petition – 50% of proposed district by acreage AND 50% by assessed value (commercial real and personal property only – no res) II. Public Hearing – formed by municipal ordinance III. TABOR election Business Improvement Districts Formation 1.3 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 6 • Do NOT have the power of eminent domain; • May exist in perpetuity, but many suggest and impose term limits in operating plan; • Only commercial properties may be included; property status changes between residential and commercial are reflected as they occur per County Assessor. • Governed by Board (appointed, elected, or City Council). Business Improvement District Other Information 1.3 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) Midtown BID // Boundary 7 Commercial property with College Ave or E Foothills Pkwy frontage, between Prospect Rd and Harmony 1.3 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) Midtown BID // Purpose 8 Purpose: • Leadership, support, and advocacy on matters critical to the district. • Placemaking and maintenance along College Avenue, including public art, banners, flowers, lighting and more. • Programming, marketing, and events. • Cultivate City partnership around mutual goals and objectives – sharing resources and ideas. 1.3 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 9 Funding: • Frontage assessment of $10 / linear foot. • Anticipated to raise approximately $300,000 per year. • Assessment increases limited to the Denver-Boulder Consumer Price Index (CPI, Denver-Boulder). Midtown BID // Funding 1.3 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 10 • Initial term of 10-years (can be extended by City after initial term) • Governance - Formation group, the South Fort Collins Business Association, has recommended initial slate board of nine (9) individuals. Midtown BID // Other Features 1.3 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 11 Midtown BID // Formation Steps and Schedule DATE ACTION July 25, 2016 Petition Submittal Deadline (OCCURRED) July 26, 2016 First Reading Formation (TONIGHT'S ACTION) August 16, 2016 PublicHearing and Second Reading Formation September 1, 2016 BID Board organizational meeting and oath of office Oct/Nov 2016 TABOR Election 1.3 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 12 Tonight’s Action’s: 1) Resolution setting August 16th as the date of Public Hearing. 2) First Reading of the formation ordinance (Second Reading to occur on August 16th ). Business Improvement Districts 1.3 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) 13 Thank you. 1.3 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4661 : MID BID Formation) -1- RESOLUTION 2016-055 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FOR AUGUST 16, 2016, A NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL’S CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MIDTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Fort Collins City Clerk ("City Clerk") has received a petition requesting that the City Council adopt an ordinance authorizing the organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District (the "Midtown District") pursuant to the provisions of the Business Improvement District Act, as found in Part 12 of Article 25 of Title 31 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, (the “Act”) and requesting that the Council designate the service area of the Midtown District as a location for new business or commercial development; and WHEREAS, in accordance with C.R.S Section 31-25-1206 of the Act, the City Council is now required to set the date, time and place for the Council to conduct a public hearing on this request to organize the Midtown District; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk is also now required, in accordance with Section 31-25-1206, to cause a notice by publication to be made of the pendency of the petition and of the service area boundaries, improvements, and services of the proposed Midtown District, and of the date, time and place of the public hearing before City Council as set in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk is further required by Section 31-25-1206 to cause a copy of said published notice to be sent by first-class mail to each property owner within the service area and boundaries of the proposed Midtown District at each property owner’s last-known address, as disclosed by the tax records of Larimer County; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearing, if City Council determines that the petition satisfies the requirements of the Act, Council will consider designating the boundaries and service area of the proposed Midtown District as a location for new business and commercial development, and further consider the adoption of an ordinance organizing the Midtown District. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That a public hearing on the sufficiency of said petition for the organization of the Midtown District is hereby ordered to be held before City Council, as required by Section 31-25-1206, on the question of whether the service area of the proposed Midtown District shall be designated as a location for new business or commercial development and to consider the adoption of an ordinance to organize the proposed Midtown District. Section 3. That such hearing shall be held during the August 16, 2016, regular meeting of the City Council that will start at 6:00 p.m. and be held in City Council Chambers Packet Pg. 21 -2- located at 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, at which date, time and place any interested party may appear and be heard on the sufficiency of the petition and on the issue of whether the service area of the proposed Midtown District shall be designated as a location for new business or commercial development. Section 4. That the City Clerk shall cause notice of this public hearing to be published and mailed in accordance with the requirements of Section 31-25-1206 of the Act. Passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 26th day of July, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 22 -1- ORDINANCE NO. 095, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ESTABLISHING THE MIDTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, APPOINTING THE INITIAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DISTRICT, APPROVING THE DISTRICT’S INITIAL OPERATING PLAN AND PRELIMINARY 2017 BUDGET, AND DESIGNATING THE SERVICE AREA OF THE DISTRICT WHEREAS, City Council has received a petition for the organization of the Midtown Business Improvement District within the City (the “District”); and WHEREAS, based upon the petition for organization (the “Petition”) and other evidence presented to City Council, the Petition has been signed in conformity with the Business Improvement District Act, C.R.S. Section 31-25-1201 et seq., (the “Act”), the signatures on the Petition are genuine, and the signatures of parties thereon represent the persons who own real or personal property in the service area of the proposed District having a valuation for assessment of not less than fifty percent of the valuation for assessment of all real and personal property in the service area of the proposed District and who own at least fifty percent of the acreage in the proposed District; and WHEREAS, the Petition sets forth, among other things: (a) The name of the proposed District, which is: “Midtown Business Improvement District”; (b) A general description of the boundaries and service area of the proposed District which is: the boundaries include parcels fronting South College Avenue from Prospect Road in the north to Harmony Road in the south, as well as those fronting East Foothills Parkway between East Swallow Road and South College Avenue in the City. A map of the proposed BID boundary is attached hereto for reference. The boundaries of the BID include all properties within the service area perimeter which are classified as commercial property as defined in the Business Improvement District Act, C.R.S. Section 31-25-1203(2), all of which is located in the City and consists of approximately 264.76 acres, more or less (the “Service Area”); (c) A general description of the types of services or improvements or both to be provided by the proposed District; (d) The names of three persons to represent the petitioners, who have the power to enter into agreements relating to the organization of the District; (e) A request that City Council appoint the initial members of the Board of Directors of the District pursuant to C.R.S. Section 31-25-1209(1)(b); (f) A request that Council consider the District's initial operating plan and 2017 budget for approval in accordance with C.R.S. Section 31-25-1211; Packet Pg. 23 -2- (h) A request that City Council approve the organization of the District; and WHEREAS, City Council has determined that it appears that the allegations of the Petition are true; and WHEREAS, City Council has determined that the types of services or improvements to be provided by the proposed District are of the type which best satisfy the purposes of the Act; and WHEREAS, the Petition was filed with a cash deposit of $500, the amount determined by the City Clerk to be sufficient to cover all municipal expenses associated with these proceedings in case the organization of the proposed District is not effected; and WHEREAS, the Service Area of the proposed District is entirely within the City; and WHEREAS, the Service Area of the proposed District is not located within any other existing business improvement district; and WHEREAS, a legal description of the Service Area of the proposed District is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, a map of the boundaries of the Service Area of the proposed District is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, and said exhibits are incorporated herein by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That upon consideration of a recommendation that an ordinance be enacted creating the Midtown Business Improvement District (the “District”), Council finds: (a) That the proposed District was initiated by a Petition filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Fort Collins, on or before the 26th day of July, 2016, that the Petition was sufficient, that the allegations in the Petition are true, that such Petition was determined to be in due and regular form and properly executed, and that appropriate organizational fees have been paid by Petitioner; (b) That City Council has heretofore fixed a place and time for a hearing on the Petition, which hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2016, at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, City Hall West, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado; (c) That notice of such hearing has been duly published and the proponents of the District have mailed notice of such hearing to each property owner within the boundaries of the proposed District, as required by C.R.S. Section 31-25-1206; Packet Pg. 24 -3- (d) That the District’s 2017 Operating Plan and Budget (the “Initial Operating Plan”), which document includes the District's preliminary 2017 budget, is attached hereto as Exhibit “C”; (e) That the proposed District is lawful and necessary, should be created and established, and that the proposed District does not include territory that is within any other business improvement district. (f) That the area of the proposed District is hereby designated, after notice and public hearing, as a location for new business or commercial development. Section 2. The Midtown Business Improvement District is hereby created, organized, and established for the purposes and shall have the powers set forth in the Act, except as otherwise modified in this Ordinance. All services and improvements provided by the District shall be undertaken in accordance with the Act and the Initial Operating Plan, as the same may be amended from time to time. Any amendments to this Ordinance must first be approved by City Council. Section 3. The Service Area of the District is set forth in Exhibit “A” and depicted in Exhibit “B”, which exhibits are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The District is located entirely within the City of Fort Collins and a general description of the Service Area is the area generally described as: the boundaries include parcels fronting South College Avenue from Prospect Road in the north to Harmony Road in the south, as well as those fronting East Foothills Parkway between East Swallow Road and South College Avenue in the City, consisting of approximately 264.76 acres. The boundaries of the proposed District shall consist of all “commercial property” now or hereafter located within the Service Area, as that term is defined in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1203(2), but specifically excluding all taxable personal property. As set forth in the Initial Operating Plan, the District may provide services and improvements inside and outside of the Service Area. Section 4. Inclusion and exclusion of property into or from the District shall be completed as provided in the Act. Property located within the Service Area of the District, as shown in Exhibit B attached hereto, that satisfies the definition of “commercial property” set forth in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1203(2), but specifically excluding taxable personal property, shall automatically be included within the District's boundaries as provided in the Act and shall have all rights and obligations of other commercial property located within the District on and after January 1 of the year following said change. Section 5. The District shall be a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado with all powers and responsibilities thereof. The District shall hereafter have the corporate name specified in the Petition: Midtown Business Improvement District. Packet Pg. 25 -4- Section 6. Pursuant to C.R.S. Section 31-25-1209(1)(b), the Board of Directors of the District (the “Board”) shall consist of nine (9) electors of the District, appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by City Council. Each member of the Board shall be an elector of the District, as that term is defined in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1203(4)(a). The initial members of the Board are hereby appointed and confirmed, and shall take office upon qualification and their terms are set as follows: (a) Steve Taylor (3 years) (b) Rayno Seaser (3 years) (c) Mike Dellenbach (3 years) (d) David Fritzler (2 years) (e) Spiro Palmer (2 years) (f) Luke McFetridge (3 years) (g) John Gaffney (2 years) (h) Lauren DeRosa (2 years) (i) Carrie Baumgart (2 years) Section 7. In accordance with C.R.S. Section 31-25-1209(1)(b), members of the Board shall serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and City Council. Meetings of the Board shall be subject to the Colorado Open Meetings Law. A majority of the Directors in office constitute a quorum. Officers of the District shall include a Chairperson and President, Vice-President, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and Treasurer. The Directors shall elect the District's officers. Within thirty (30) days after a vacancy occurs or as otherwise provided by law, a successor shall be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by resolution of City Council. Section 8. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Ordinance, or within thirty (30) days of each subsequent appointment to the Board by the City Council by resolution, each member of the Board shall appear before an officer authorized to administer oaths and take an oath that he or she will faithfully perform the duties of his or her office as required by law and will support the constitution of the United States, the constitution of the State of Colorado, and laws made pursuant thereto. The Board shall carry out the responsibilities required of such Board by the Act and other applicable law. Section 9. The Initial Operating Plan, including the District's preliminary 2017 budget, is hereby approved. The Board will formally adopt the District's 2017 budget following the effective date of this Ordinance, in compliance with the Colorado Local Government Budget Law. Once formally adopted by the Board, a copy of the District's 2017 budget will be provided to the City Clerk. The budgets for 2018 and subsequent years shall be incorporated into the District's annual operating plan submitted to the City for review and approval on or before September 30th of each year (commencing with September 30, 2017), as required by C.R.S. Section 31-25-1211. The District is authorized to proceed with an election on November 8, 2016, for any purpose authorized by the Act. The District shall have the power to issue debt, subject to the limits and restrictions on the same as set forth in the Initial Operating Plan and electoral approval. Packet Pg. 26 -5- Section 10. The District shall not have the power to levy ad valorem taxes. No business personal property shall be deemed to be within the boundaries of the District. Section 11. The District shall have the power to provide improvements as defined in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1203(5) and services as described in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1212 as limited by the Initial Operating Plan, as amended from time to time. Section 12. The Board shall file its annual operating plan and budgets, including any proposed amendments thereto, with the City Clerk for the approval of the City Council as provided in C.R.S. Section 31-25-1211. Section 13. The actions of the City Clerk, petitioner, and the designated election official in setting and providing public notice of the public hearing on the sufficiency of the Petition, and in the November 8, 2016, election and in furtherance hereof are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 14. All acts, orders, resolutions, ordinances, or parts thereof, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, except that this section shall not be construed so as to revive any act, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof previously repealed. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 26th day of July, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 27 A?;>;;988: :* * A?;=9=@88= =* A?:=:>?889 9* S Shields St S College Ave E Drake Rd W Drake Rd E Prospect Rd SMason St E Horsetooth Rd WProspect Rd W Harmony Rd S Lem a y Ave W Horsetooth Rd B o a r d walk D r E Harmony Rd J o hn F K e n n ed y P kwy Landings Dr S Lemay Ave Proposed Midtown Business Improvement District Boundaries College Ave Frontage © Foothills Parkway Frontage EXHIBIT B 2 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Exhibit B (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) B ($+#)' # '' "%&$* " #( '(& (0 1 % &( # !# C % %+ ) *+ % 2+ - %) + - ,* * &)* &'*2* .#"*%&' %*' *+ +%&&*++ &%&$02+ ,* - )* 0 % + $ /% % % .,* % **&''&)+,% + *4 )&- .) % **2) & % + &%2')&$&+ &%% ,+ &%&,+ +&.%4 D - # ++ % - %+*+ +) - +) %+&,* % ** *%# - ) % ')+% )* '*. + +&.% *+" &# )*4 - ,# %&$$,% +0) #+ &%* %*,''&)+& )&. % + +&.%&)) &)+ + #'')&$&+ . 0 +&.% * *+ %+ &% % +*&.%) +4 E $ $ )* '*2 9 &)9* )- ')&! +*2)&.*&,) % %')+% )* '*&%+&'& + *' # ** **$ %+4 &)2. + +0'')&-#2.&,# + )$ % + %%,#&' )+ % , + 0 ) & &' )+ &%*2* ,'&%+ ') &) + ** +&,+ %+ *'#%4 )&' )+ *! %++&2,+%&+. + %+ &,%) *2$0 # ++&')+ '+ %+ 4'&% ) (, *+2+ .&,#')&- + % #** *+% +& #'4&&*&2+ &.% )*& *, ')&' )+ * .&,# ) (, ) +& # .) ++ %' + + &%. + + +0& &)+&## %*2) (, *+ % + ++ )')&' )+0 %#, %+ 4 ' + + &%* ## &$'% 0 '&* +& $&% 0*, %++&'0## &*+*& + %#,* &%&) /#,* &%')& % *4,# %&+ . ## - %2',# ) % . ## # %%&) %% $0 &'+ 0&)+&## %* +0&,% #4 + )$ %+ &%& ** **$ %+ &) ')&' )+ *!& % % + . &%&+ - )&%+ &% + )&## - %, &)&&+ ##*)".0 * ## ** ** + *$ )&%+ )+ *+ ) *+& + &)+ )')+ ,#) )&%+ &%+ *+) + + 0) #&+ 4 *##&. 0#.2+ $0 **, &%*&)&+ )$,#+ '# 90 ) %% #&# + &%* F %*+ +,+ &%*#&% + &)) &) ' )&#$ ) #$ ))&' )+ * &% *+% % &)+&## %* ,* % **&.% )%) * %+ . &. ## #') ') * %++ * &'' % %+ )*% % )# ,* % ** *#&% + &)) &) ," +) .)" )) ##&,%+ %++ * ) * %+& + # % + &)+*+& &)$+ %. ##) $ %&%+ &)+&* + - * &% + )&, & % % 0 &&+ ##*## & &&+ ##*##2 ) ') * %+ % +#0*+')&! + % +&.%% $&%*+)+ % + ##5* &$$ +$ %++&+ 0 * )- % &%+ &) ,) % &* # )* &% *+% % ) * %+% ,* % **&.% ) %&)+&## %* %. ## #') ') * %++ ,* % **# ** * )) ,$ )+ )"# 0&+&)* ' )+ % )& )"# 0&+&)*) ') * %+ % + ) # )* %+ *+) + + )$*& & * ## *+ ) +& %&,) &%+ %, +0 % &- )%% 4 $/ $,$# % + & + )$ *+ ) ;D<0 )*%+ &%* ,+ - + )$# $ +* ## +.&;C<+ )$*4 + )$ $ ) * ,# ## +.&&%* ,+ - + )$*2+ +' )*&%$0%&+ $ $ )& + +&.% &- )% % &0 &)+ ) ;D<0 )* &) % ) ''& %+ 4 G +&.% . ##')&- %,$ )& % +*+&+ +0& &)+&## %*2 %#, % 3 &## + - # )% $' &% &)+ - * &%& +&.%2%# )')+% ). + . + +0 %.&)" #'+ +0& &)+&## %*-% +*" 0*+)+ &! + - * # ) &%&$ % +*2 %#, % ,+%&+# $ + +&3 - %) * *# *) - %, + )&, + + -+ &%2$)" + % %')&$&+ &%& +&.%) + % $&) - * +&)*%$&) *' % % %+ ) - - #&'$ %+& +&.%*% %+ )+ %$ %+%* &'' % , - %+ ) *+ % 2+ - %) + - ,* * &)* &'*2* .#"*%&' %*' * ''&)+,% +0+& ,)+ ) $&%*+)+ + &$$ +$ %++& +&.%&,+# % %+ +05* +&.% #% ) + * &%+ - +0 %+ ) %&)+&## %*%6'# 7 0&%&.%+&.% %&)+&## %* &) - * +&)*%#&#* ,+ + &%& + +0+ )&, ) ) * % %- &)+ ) +) (, ) *+ +& # %%%,#&' )+ % '#%%, +. + + +0&%&) &) '+ $ )DA& 0 )4 +0. ##) - .%'')&- + &' )+ % '#%%, +*')&- 0#.4 % )&#&)&#.2+ $0 **&#- &##&. % ',# ) % ')&' )+0&.% )* ) ') * %+ % +# *+FAJ& ) . + %+ %+# *+FAJ& +&+#** ** -#, . + %+ *,$ +' + + &%* &) **&#,+ &%+& +0&,% #4 +0&,% ##*&) + %* *) + &%+& % + + **&#,+ &%')& % * + #*+&*,$ +%&' )+ % '#%%, + &)+.&*, ** - 0 )*4 3 Packet Pg. 37 Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 26, 2016 City Council STAFF Carrie Daggett, City Attorney SUBJECT Resolution 2016-058 Accepting Advisory Opinion and Recommendation No. 2016-01 of the Ethics Review Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to submit the opinion of the Ethics Review Board to Council for its consideration and possible approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Under City Code Section 2-569, City Councilmembers may present to the Council Ethics Review Board inquiries regarding the application of state or local ethical rules to actual or hypothetical situations involving potential conflicts of interest. The Ethics Review Board met on July 12, 2016, July 19, 2016, and July 25, 2016, to review and approve the draft Ethics Opinion No. 2016-01, with continued consideration of an inquiry by Councilmember Campana requesting that the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion regarding whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to an applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person, as needed. Any other discussion which needs to take place concerning Board consideration of the same question as it relates to Councilmembers. Section 2-569(c) provides for the opinions and recommendations of the Board to be submitted to the full Council for Council consideration and approval. 2 Packet Pg. 38 1 Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes July 12, 2016 4:00 p.m. Members in Attendance: Board members Ray Martinez, Gino Campana and Kristin Stephens Also Present: Kevin Jones, Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce; Vicky McLane; Cari Brown; Gina Janett; J Beatty; Wanda Winkelmann, City Clerk; Rita Jordan, Transportation Board; Mike Gebo, City of Fort Collins; and Tom Leeson, City of Fort Collins. Staff in Attendance: Carrie Daggett, City Attorney; Brad Yatabe, Asst. City Attorney; Jeanne Sanford, Paralegal; Cary Alton, Paralegal A meeting of the City Council Ethics Review Board (“Board”) was held on Tuesday, July 12, 2016, in the City Attorney’s Office Large Conference Room, to consider the following issue: That the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion of whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to any applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person. The inquiry also requested that the Board consider the same question as it relates to Councilmembers. The meeting began at 4:10 p.m. The Board reviewed the Agenda which contained the following items: 1. Appointment of Chair for Meeting of the Ethics Review Board for July 12, 2016, Meeting. 2. Consideration of an inquiry by Council member Campana requesting that the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion regarding the question of whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to an applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person. The inquiry also requested that the Board consider the same question as it relates to Councilmembers. 3. Other Business. 4. Adjournment. The Board discussed appointment of a chairperson for the meeting. Councilmember Campana nominated Councilmember Ray Martinez to chair the meeting. Councilmember Stephens seconded the nomination and Councilmember Martinez accepted the role of chairperson with the unanimous consent of the Board. ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 2 The Ethics Review Board Chair Martinez stated that this is an Ethics Review Board meeting on July 12, 2016 4:00 p.m., and declared that all members of the Board were present. Chair Martinez summarized the specifics of the issue before the Board and City Attorney Daggett summarized the materials which included the Agenda Item Summary and supporting opinions adopted by the Ethics Review Board. City Attorney Daggett indicated that the Agenda Item Summary runs through the relevant Charter provision Article 4, Section 9(e)(3) which relates to actions that officers/employees must take once they have determined a conflict exists and have disclosed the conflict. Also provided are prior adopted Ethics Review Board opinions adopted, namely 91-3, 98-53 and 91-2. It was noted that the City Code prohibits Councilmembers from representing any person or interest before the Council or a City board. Councilmember Campana elaborated on the request by indicating that historical interpretation of the limitation on appearances by board members has been that there is a conflict if one participates in an official capacity as a board member, not as a citizen or professional at large. Councilmember Campana commented that this has been under re view recently. Councilmember Campana was phoned by a member of the Landmark Preservation Commission who reported that several Commission members said that if they can’t do work for the City, even after recusing themselves on a project that they worked on, then they cannot serve on the Commission. Councilmember Campana stated this presents a problem for the City where experts are needed on a board. Councilmember Campana stated the question, why are we interpreting the limitation differently now as opposed to the last 20 years? Councilmember Campana noted it was unwritten policy in board member training and that stipulation said that, for example, if you are a Planning & Zoning member and a professional architect in the community and you are working on a project that is going before the Planning & Zoning board, you recuse yourself from that decision, you don’t present in front of the board, but certainly a member from your firm can present before the board. Councilmember Campana stated he believed the situation that triggered this discussion was a little more defined in that if you are a single person office, if you recuse yourself from that decision, can you represent your work to that board that you’re on? Historical interpretation has been called into question. Councilmember Campana stated “influencing a decision” in the official capacity of that board member seems to be a differentiating sentence that lays out the intention. Councilmember Campana stated he agreed with City Attorney Daggett that it does not explicitly say you can. It would be an option at this point to get an opinion out of the committee, supported by Council, and work on clarity of the Charter at a later date. City Attorney Daggett added it has been a specific aspect of the issue and the reason this conversation started is that there are times when materials are presented in writing and the question was if someone showed up and talked to the board, that is obvious, but if someone wrote a report and presented it to the board, that is not spoken communication but a written report that goes to the board’s decision and is attempted to sway or persuade the board, so the 2.1 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 3 real question under the Charter, is that different? The Charter does not reference those distinctions. Councilmember Campana stated he believes the hinge point is, are you influencing in your official capacity as a board member? Councilmember Campana stated the suggestion of not presenting to the board was to try to eliminate perception of influence, but believed the way the language is written that you could personally present to the board, because you are participating outside your capacity as an official board member. Councilmember Campana believes the City took a conservative approach previously to eliminate any gray area. Councilmember Campana stated it was clear to him that if you recuse yourself, you are eliminating yourself from that official capacity on that board. Chair Martinez asked, if you recuse yourself, can you actually participate as an expert? Chair Martinez stated the board has an obligation to base decisions on facts and not who is presenting those facts. Councilmember Stephens noted that expertise is needed as it is not so cut and dry. She asked if written materials are not explicitly discussed in the Charter. City Attorney Daggett stated that the prior Ethics Opinions specifically discussed not representing other persons before the board. The Ethics Review Board opinions attached to the AIS put the standard out there. City Attorney Daggett stated the prior Opinions indicate that you could talk to your board if it is about your personal matters, but you cannot do it not in a representational capacity. Looking at Opinions 98-53 and 91-3, 91-2, City Attorney Daggett stated they basically say if you are appearing, for example, before Planning & Zoning Board to represent some other person, that would be prohibited under the 1998 decision, however, the discussion there is about physically appearing and standing in front of the board to present, so the issue coming up more recently is, is it okay for written materials to be submitted to the board? Does it make it okay that a boardmember is not standing in front of his or her board? Councilmember Campana stated he disagrees with the 1998 opinion. Councilmember Campana stated one cannot present to the board as a professional. Councilmember Campana stated he was confused how that decision was ever made, and stated there was a gap between discussion and opinion and there was a need to focus on the intent behind the Charter provision. City Attorney Daggett read aloud the Charter provision. Councilmember Campana stated it’s the decision you cannot participate in. Councilmember Campana called attention to two things: 1) the language states that you cannot participate in in the manner as an officer/employee and 2) he believes they specifically left out from the prohibition participating as a “professional” or “citizen” and he believed that was intentional, otherwise a boardmember could not work in the City. 2.1 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 4 City Attorney Daggett pointed out there are a lot of situations where professionals could have others from their firm participate and present to the board they serve on, where the boardmember doesn’t have a direct role and is not authoring the documents. Councilmember Campana agreed, but except for one-person firms. Councilmember Campana stated this has happened historically a couple times with special permission. He fears interpretation presented today does not even allow that. Councilmember Campana stated he wanted to go back to the Charter provision, figure out intent and interpretation. Councilmember Campana believed the Charter was attempting to be conservative where it stated one could not participate in the decision, as opposed to the hearing. Chair Martinez noted he was hung up on the phrase, “otherwise participating in decision”. When you recuse yourself, not an officer or employee, only thing sticking out “attempting to influence” but who defines what that is? City Attorney Daggett indicated the question is raised here of physical presentation vs. written materials and what is that meaning? That goes towards the interpretation of the term “attempting to influence” and that is a key question for this discussion. Chair Martinez asked for clarification on state law pertaining to that issue. City Attorney Daggett replied there was no case law interpreting the Charter’s use of the term “attempting to influence.” Where there is ambiguity in the Charter that leaves some room for Council to adopt an interpretation so long as it is a reasonable attempt to interpret the language. City Attorney Daggett stated that in this case the Council may reasonably believe the language is ambiguous and that interpretation was needed. One source of ambiguity has to do with what rules of interpretation apply and how they would operate. City Attorney Daggett discussed the Last Antecedent Rule and the reason why it is not absolutely clear how that would be applied to the Charter provision being considered. Councilmember Campana agreed. Councilmember Stephens asked Councilmember Campana if his main concern is the individuals who are sole proprietors from being excluded. Councilmember Campana, answered that historically, one would fill out a conflict of interest form, recuse from voting on it as a boardmember, and have someone from your firm handle it for the applicant/project. Councilmember Campana stated the issue we are having is to make clearer for boards and commissions how this applies to them and what they can do, in order to avoid panic or unnecessary resignations. Councilmember Campana explained that is why the Ethics Review Board needed to meet and hash this out. City Attorney Daggett replied that where we have Ethics Opinions adopted and where the City Attorney’s Office is involved in discussing with board members on interpretation, the attorneys look to those Ethics Opinions as a source of guidance, and is not in a good position to overlook 2.1 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 5 the things that Council has approved and adopted in the past with regard to interpretation. Because of this, if the Ethics Review Board of Council would like a different outcome, it is helpful for the Board to consider an issue and recommend an updated Ethics Opinion to Council for adoption., So it is probably helpful for the Board to be looking at this question to evaluate it and establish what is probably more definitive guidance for board members to rely on. City Attorney Daggett stated that Council can choose to establish limitations on boardmembers. Council may adopt additional guidelines or limitations in the City Code that do not require Charter changes so long as they are stricter than the Charter, not more lenient. Councilmember Campana inquired as to whether the approach he has been describing would require to the Ethics Review Board to interpret Charter differently from past Boards/Councils. City Attorney Daggett affirmed that to be the case. Councilmember Campana further asked if there is enough from the discussion to move forward if the Board supports that. City Attorney Daggett replied that she felt the Board would be in a position to go in that direction if that is the route the Board determines to be appropriate. The Board then discussed training for boardmembers and how that was handled. City Clerk Winkelmann discussed the training videos currently used and stated they have not be updated for several years, and that there has been discussion of how to update and make them more user friendly for the boardmembers. Councilmember Campana agreed the videos should be changed and improved. Councilmember Campana and Chair Martinez discussed “attempting to influence” and if you have recused yourself upon a conflict, you are not participating so the Charter is clear enough. Councilmember Campana suggested a clarification about rendering expertise and knowledge, but not participating in decision. Councilmember Campana said his suggestion on this issue is that it should be covered in the board’s manual where you don’t present yourself before your board unless you are the only one who could, and in that event you get special permission. Chair Martinez stated you could get a form of variance in that instance. Councilmember Campana stated your firm appearing before the board occurs frequently, but hardly ever if you had to personally present in front of your board in the case of hardship. The Board and City Attorney Daggett discussed special circumstances for variances and Councilmember Campana noted he believed there were occasions of special permission given by Council in the past. Councilmember Campana added this should pertain to Councilmembers as well as board members. 2.1 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 6 City Attorney Daggett then summarized what she had heard on the issue. The Board believes the Charter language is actually narrower than it has sometimes been interpreted and actually goes to participation in a matter as an officer/employee rather than any capacity. Councilmember Campana added this should relate to participation in the decision. City Attorney Daggett noted that attempting to participate in a discussion has been viewed as attempting to influence it, so it is hard to not be attempting to influence and be a part of the discussion. Councilmember Campana noted that discussion is usually part of the decision, and Chair Martinez agreed. Councilmember Stephens questioned whether the Board needed to explicitly mention the discussion since it is usually part of the decision. City Attorney Daggett stated the focus is on the capacity of the person and what role they are in if they are out in the audience participating on behalf of an applicant, and stated she understood the Board’s position to be that participating in that way is not participating as an officer/employee. City Attorney Daggett resumed her summary, “Participating in discussion” probably is “attempting to influence.” It is hard to not attempt to influence and still be part of the discussion. So, focus should be on the capacity of the person and what role they are in. If one is in the audience presenting with an applicant, then one is participating on behalf of the applicant, and not participating as an officer/employee. The Board is interested in seeing follow-up discussion by Council of more narrow limitation than in the Charter and what Council would want to institute in the Code to create limitations on board member activities, including a potential for a variance or some other special process for board members who are seeking to participate in a process in front of their own board in a representational capacity. City Attorney Daggett stated that she was unclear whether the Board had completed its discussion of the last agenda point about the limitations on activities of Councilmembers. Councilmember Campana stated he thought it best not to make a distinction. Councilmember Campana then asked City Attorney Daggett if she felt there is a distinction. City Attorney Daggett stated there is state law on members of a local governing body being held to a stricter standard. The Board members stated they were okay with that approach. It was further discussed that state law suggests Council members should be held to a stricter standard when presenting to Council. Councilmembers Campana and Stephens agreed. Chair Martinez asked for clarity on the state law and how the idea of “representing an interest” would be interpreted. 2.1 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 7 City Attorney Daggett stated that there is some room for distinctions to be made in applying that term. There is a difference, for example, if an architect draws up a plan that is then used for some later step in a process, as compared to the architect responding to questions about how the plans relate to the land use code. The latter would pretty clearly be “attempting to influence” while in some cases the former might not be, depending on the circumstances. Councilmember Campana agreed that it would be helpful to provide greater clarity about that distinction. The Board unanimously affirmed City Attorney Daggett’s summary of the issues. City Attorney Daggett indicated she would draft an opinion, which would be provided to the Board as a public document for comment, and that the Board will review and discuss any modifications. A follow-up meeting was proposed for after the Legislative Review Committee meeting on Tuesday, July 19, 2016, in the City Manager’s Commons Conference room, 2 nd floor. Once the Board is satisfied with the opinion, City Attorney Daggett will get the issue on the next City Council agenda for Council review and consideration of a resolution adopting the opinion. For the record, there was a consensus by all Board Members on what City Attorney Daggett described. Chair Martinez noted he would like a copy of or link to the training video discussed. Other Business: City Attorney Daggett discussed updating the training. She would like to see an updated approach to perhaps using “Ted Talks” style to the videos to shorten them down and make them more efficient. Councilmember Campana affirmed that on these quasi-judicial boards that one is “thrown in” and noted training is more important for some board than others. He added it might be beneficial to require a couple of meetings with a coach as training. Councilmember Stephens agreed and added that it’s especially helpful to make people clear about conflicts. Meeting Adjourned at 4:58. ________________________________________ Carrie M. Daggett, City Attorney 2.1 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 12, 2016, (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 1 Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes July 19, 2016 4:45 p.m. Members in Attendance: Board members Ray Martinez, Gino Campana, and Kristin Stephens; and Board Alternate Ross Cunniff. Also Present: Kevin Jones, Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce; Staff in Attendance: Carrie Daggett, City Attorney; Brad Yatabe, Asst. City Attorney; Jeanne Sanford, Paralegal; A meeting of the City Council Ethics Review Board (“Board”) was held on Tuesday, July 19, 2016, in the Commons Conference Room, to continue consideration of the following issue: That the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion regarding whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to any applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person. The inquiry also requested that the Board consider the same question as it relates to Councilmembers. Ethics Review Board Chair Martinez called the meeting to order at 4:45 p.m. The Board reviewed the Agenda which contained the following items: 1. Review and approval of the July 12, 2016 Minutes of the Ethics Review Board. 2. Review and Approval of Ethics Opinion 2016-01, with continued consideration of an inquiry by Councilmember Campana requesting that the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion regarding whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to any applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person. The inquiry also requested that the Board consider the same question as it relates to Councilmembers 3. Other Business. 4. Adjournment. ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 2 Ethics Review Board Chair Martinez stated that this is an Ethics Review Board meeting on July 19, 2016 4:45 p.m., and the Board took a roll call for all present, including Councilmember Ray Martinez, Councilmember Gino Campana, Councilmember Kristin Stephens, and Councilmember Ross Cunniff (alternate); Carrie Daggett, City Attorney; Brad Yatabe, Assistant City Attorney; Jeanne Sanford, Paralegal; and Kevin Jones, Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce. The Chair stated the first item was to approve the July 12, 2016 Minutes of the Ethics Review Board. Councilmember Campana indicated he had some comments on the Minutes. Mr. Campana stated on page one, second paragraph under staff attendance of the Minutes, it was important to point out “so long as they do not personally appear before the Board to advocate on behalf of another person”, that was the initial intent to review, but thinks the way the Opinion was written, we are not addressing that. Councilmember Campana also stated on page two, third paragraph down in the Minutes, the phrase “several members of Landmark Committee phoned him”, may have been confused. One member (the Chair) phoned him who told him five other members were thinking of quitting because of discussion about the interpretation of the Charter. Councilmember Campana also stated that on page three, sixth paragraph down, beginning with, “Councilmember Campana called attention to two things”, he thought he had talked about the capacity of the board members but also that there was a lot of discussion about decision vs. discussion (by board members). He noted that he couldn’t find anywhere in the Minutes where that discussion was captured. Councilmember Campana felt that was an important point. City Attorney Daggett stated she believed that was captured on the top of page four. Councilmember Campana agreed but stated he would like to see more on capturing the discussion between discussion and decision. Mr. Campana stated the other point he was trying to make was the distinction between discussion and decision. Chair Martinez asked Councilmember Campana how he would like to capture that, if it was by re-listening to the recording? Councilmember Campana indicated he would like staff to re-listen to the recording and would request that the Minutes not be approved tonight. City Attorney Daggett stated she could edit the Minutes so the Board could read revisions right now, and then the Board might be able to approve on everything in the Minutes other than the last point. She noted her concern on the last point was in trying to make sure the Minutes were accurate to the recording, and that staff could go back and try to find more content in the recording if something had been omitted. 2.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 3 Councilmember Campana stated he proposed the Board not approve the Minutes and that they should be re-addressed to try to capture the key points to the opinion. City Attorney Daggett asked about the items to be reviewed – first whether it was requested that staff clarify the initial point about personally appearing before the board to advocate for another person. Councilmember Campana stated that was not a point that need to be addressed, and stated that he would like to better capture the issue of discussion vs. decision and the reason for the emphasis is that if a board member states a conflict, recuses himself, then presents before the board, that board member is presenting in the discussion, not the decision of the board. To support that opinion, it must be captured in the Minutes. City Attorney Daggett commented that conceptually she may have missed something in the distinction Councilmember Campana was noting about what capacity that board member is operating in. City Attorney Daggett further stated that the distinction of what capacity a board member is operating in makes the other questions less significant in terms of interpreting the Charter. City Attorney Daggett stated that by saying that only as a Landmark Preservation Commission member one cannot participate under the Charter, then the distinction about them appearing before the Commission (to represent a party) is no longer addressed in the Charter. Councilmember Campana stated he agreed that is where he thought the Board was going in the last meeting, but the Opinion does not read that way to him. He noted that, for example, where you have your first initial check that, okay, I am not acting as a board member or decision maker, then the rest does not apply to me, I am just a citizen, we need to adjust the Opinion so this is a moot point. City Attorney Daggett asked if the Minutes were a concern. Councilmember Campana replied that there needs to be more robust review to ensure that the Minutes capture what the Board dialogue was. City Attorney Daggett stated that staff would go back and listen to the recording and look for more detailed discussion. Chair Martinez stated the Board would hold off approving Minutes until they were changed to address Councilmember Campana’s concerns. Chair Martinez presented the second agenda item – the review of City Attorney Daggett’s draft Ethics Opinion 2016-1, which had been presented to the Board. Chair Martinez asked the Board if everyone had a chance to read it. Councilmember Stephens replied she had, and that the Opinion captured a lot of what was discussed. She asked Councilmember Campana to state where he had a problem. 2.2 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 4 Councilmember Campana read the bottom line, at page two, second sentence of the Opinion, starting with “Board recommends the City adopt City Code provisions limiting board members from other participation in those decisions, in a personal or representational capacity except where a variance for special hardship has been granted.” Mr. Campana stated he thought, in his mind, that it was mixing two different ideas the Board had discussed. One was if there was a conflict, they should not participate in any capacity in the decision and secondly, once a board member has recused himself/herself as a decision maker, they should be allowed to participate via their work without a variance, but if they want to present personally to their board, there would be a variance option process. City Attorney Daggett clarified this was a point she didn’t see come through in discussion (so maybe more discussion would be beneficial) -- the original question about whether there is a difference between showing up at a board meeting and presenting and writing a written piece and giving it to the Board as an item for consideration, but not verbally – that was the original question that sparked the whole discussion. Councilmember Campana asked City Attorney Daggett what her understanding of the Opinion was. City Attorney Daggett stated her understanding of the Opinion from the discussion was that the Board is still viewing the need to limit board member appearances in a broader sense - provided there would be a process for getting an exception or variance in hardship cases. Councilmember Campana asked about the term “broadly”, meaning their work or personally appearing? City Attorney Daggett replied yes, their work in the sense of advocacy material prepared for the Board in contrast to somebody, for example an engineer who designed something, but is not a front and center part of policy discussion or advocacy regarding the land use code, but just part of the work force who created the project. That was the distinction she was trying to make. Councilmember Campana stated that was not his take from the meeting and a critical point of why the Board was here. He thought discussion revolved around the first test: Do you have conflict? If so, note that, recuse yourself as a board member, then the balance of that provision does not apply. You could present yourself personally and your work. However, the Board felt it would be better if you did not present your work personally to your board, but in the event of a hardship where you are sole proprietor for example and could not get someone else to present your work, you could go through a variance process to get approval to present your work. That is different than what you are saying. City Attorney Daggett stated that the Opinion was on track through the point of “once there is not a Charter provision that creates an issue, because you are not acting as a board member now, you are acting as a professional,” and that is the discussion about Council establishing standards 2.2 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 5 relating to that, that is the place where Councilmember Campana had different expectations than what is in the draft Opinion. She noted that she may have missed his intended meaning, but does think there was some discussion at the end of the meeting that may have confused the issue. Chair Martinez stated that it was just explained just now and asked if City Attorney Daggett understood. City Attorney Daggett stated that when she asked for confirmation from the Board last week, the outline she had given to confirm the Board’s intention must have not been clear enough on this issue. City Attorney Daggett indicated she wanted to confirm that the points were clear. Chair Martinez asked City Attorney Daggett about today. City Attorney Daggett stated she understood what Councilmember Campana was saying. Chair Martinez asked if the Board concurred. Councilmember Stephens asked for clarification that work could come before the board so long as they are not presenting. Councilmember Campana replied, yes, for example, if a member of the Landmark Preservation Commission was working on a project as a lead on a report, would say he has a conflict and recuses himself, his work could be presented to the Commission, but if he personally wanted to present, he would need a variance. Chair Martinez stated that variance would need boundaries. Councilmember Cunniff stated the variance would need to define specifically some parameters around a hardship. Councilmember Campana stated historically that has happened before based on what board members have told him. Councilmember Campana elaborated by saying if someone in your office is ill, the key to this is once a conflict has been declared and you recuse yourself, there should not be a limitation on your ability to present to that board. Councilmember Cunniff supported authoring of written materials, but appearing, advocating and answering questions on a project before the board should only be in extreme circumstances of hardship due to potential of appearance of influence on the board and to avoid fears by competitors that there is a special advantage here. Councilmember Campana agreed and stated that he would like to capture this in the Opinion. Chair Martinez asked how to define what a variance is. City Attorney Daggett stated her Opinion probably did not capture what the Board was looking for in basic terms. Her recommendation would allow a board member as a professional to be 2.2 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 6 involved in project, communicate in writing, prepare reports, etc., but not appear personally before the Board. Chair Martinez added, once they have recused themselves. Councilmember Campana stated he thought it would be put in the Opinion, you are allowed to present personally, but address it in the Boards and Commissions Manual that board members shouldn’t present before their own board without a variance. City Attorney Daggett stated that the option of the Boards and Commissions Manual was discussed on July 12th, and suggested it might be preferable for sake of transparency to be in the Code as opposed to the Boards and Commissions Manual. Councilmember Campana stated he was okay with that but didn’t think that’s what he took away from the meeting last week. City Attorney Daggett stated the Opinion clearly needed to be revised. When it gets to Council, it will be decided if it will be a Code provision or Manual change. The Board members then stated it was their strong opinion to adopt a Code provision. City Attorney Daggett stated that the Board’s input would provide good direction in revising the Opinion. There are key things which are substantially different: 1. Expectation that Code provisions would affirmatively say board and commission members can participate in projects before their boards where a conflict exists and they have recused themselves, so long as they don’t personally appear before the board. Councilmember Cunniff stated this will be a little tricky. He asked that this structure be limited to allowing authoring of work product and not creating new advocacy letters to the board. He noted it is important to separate out work product from advocacy. The Board agreed. City Attorney Daggett discussed the process and timing to turn out a new opinion fairly quickly so it could be reviewed and discussed by the Board prior to the Council meeting next Tuesday. A meeting was proposed for Monday, July 25, 2016 at 9:30 a.m., in the City Attorney’s Large Conference Room. All agreed to the meeting time, date and place. Councilmember Campana stated he would like to discuss something further. On the third point in the Opinion, he had a concern and question with, for example, suppose you have a 2.2 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) 7 Councilmember who is an architect and the firm presents their work. He was concerned that the way the Opinion is written precludes a Councilmember from doing that. City Attorney Daggett replied someone from the firm could, since the prohibition is on the Councilmember representing any person or interest. Councilmember Campana added that we need language that clearly states that, because it is confusing the way it reads. Councilmember Campana further asked about presentations by the Councilmember’s firm. City Attorney Daggett said they should be able to present and additional clear language may be helpful on that. Councilmember Campana stated the firm should be able to present. City Attorney Daggett stated there will be a follow-up meeting on Monday, July 25, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. and that she would get out a revised opinion circulating as early as she can, along with draft revised Minutes. Councilmember Campana stated that would be great. Chair Martinez asked if there was any other business. Chair Martinez presented the motion to adjourn and the Board was all in favor. Meeting adjourned at 5:16 p.m. ________________________________________ Carrie M. Daggett, City Attorney 2.2 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, July 19, 2016 (Board Approval Pending) (4672 : Ethics Review) -1- RESOLUTION 2016-058 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ACCEPTING ADVISORY OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION NO. 2016-01 OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD WHEREAS, the City Council has established an Ethics Review Board (the “Board”) consisting of designated members of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Board is empowered under Section 2-569 of the City Code to render advisory opinions and recommendations regarding actual or hypothetical situations of Councilmembers or board and commission members of the City; and WHEREAS, the Ethics Review Board met on July 12, 2016, July 19, 2016, and July 25, 2016, to review and approve the draft Ethics Opinion 2016-01, with continued consideration of an inquiry by Councilmember Campana requesting that the Board consider and provide an advisory opinion regarding whether under the City Charter board and commission members, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in that matter on behalf of an interested stakeholder (for example, as a technical professional providing advice to an applicant), so long as they do not personally appear before the board to advocate on behalf of another person, as needed, and how the same question applies to Councilmembers; and WHEREAS, the Board has issued an advisory opinion with regard to this matter concluding that in the case of a conflict of interest the Charter prohibits City board and commission members from participating in any way as a board or commission member in the decision of interest, but allows participation in a professional or personal capacity; and WHEREAS, in light of this, the Board has also recommended that the Council adopt Code language to establish and clarify the limits on board and commission member participation in as a representative and in a personal capacity, which in general should allow participation other than direct advocacy on behalf of others, and provide for a variance process for consideration of exceptions to this limit on direct advocacy in cases of special hardship, and intends to further review this issue and recommend Code amendments for Council consideration; and WHEREAS, the Board has further concluded that a board or commission member is not prohibited from having a financial interest in a sale of services to the City unless her or she supervises the services on behalf of the City, and recommended that Council propose a Charter change in this regard; and WHEREAS, the Board has also reaffirmed that stricter limits apply to Councilmembers, in light of current Code and statutory provisions, and concluded that Councilmembers are precluded from personally representing any person or interest in front of the Council or any City board or commission, and intends to further review this issue and recommend Code amendments for Council consideration; and -2- WHEREAS, Section 2-569(e) of the City Code provides that all advisory opinions and recommendations of the Board be placed on the agenda for the next special or regular City Council meeting, at which time the City Council shall determine whether to adopt such opinions and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the opinion of the Board and wishes to adopt the same. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Opinion No. 2016-01 of the Ethics Review Board, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit “A,” has been submitted to and reviewed by the City Council, and the Council hereby adopts the opinion contained therein. Passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 26th day of July, A.D. 2016. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 2016 -1 OPINION OF THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS July 25, 2016 The City Council Ethics Review Board (Athe Board@) met on July 12, 19 and 25, 2016, to consider and render an advisory opinion on a question submitted to the Board by Councilmember Gino Campana. The question presented is the extent to which a member of a City board or commission (together referred to as “boardmember”) may take action as a private citizen (and not as a boardmember) to influence the decision of his or her board after declaring a conflict of interest in that decision. The pending inquiry also requests review of the question as it relates to City Councilmembers. Bottom Line. • The Board interprets Article IV, Section 9(b)(1)c to prohibit an officers or employee from providing services to the City when he or she supervise those services for the City. • The Board interprets Article IV, Section 9(b)(3) of the City Charter to prohibit any officer or employee of the City from acting as an officer or employee in connection with a decision in which he or she has a financial or person interest. The Board recommends that Council adopt City Code provisions to establish and clarify the limitations on direct communications by boardmembers in a representative capacity in regard to that decision, as well as a variance procedure to allow the granting of variances for more direct involvement in the case of a special hardship (as outlined on pages 5 and 6). • The Board recommends that City Councilmembers continue to be limited from representing any persons or interests before the Council or other City board or commission, but notes that this limitation does not prevent a Councilmember’s firm from appearing before and advocating to Council in a matter, so long as the Councilmember has recused himself or herself from the matter and does not personally participate in it. • The Board intends to consider specific Code amendments related to the Code-related items, in order to make specific recommendations to Council. Background. In contrast to the questions commonly before the Ethics Review Board for consideration, this inquiry relates not to whether a conflict of interest must be declared, but rather to what limits apply to a boardmember or Councilmember once a conflict has been declared. Article IV, Section 9(b) of the City Charter states as follows (emphasis added): . . . (b) Rules of conduct concerning conflicts of interest. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 2 (1) Sales to the city. No officer or employee,1 or relative2 of such officer or employee, shall have a financial interest in the sale to the city of any real or personal property, equipment, material, supplies or services, except personal services provided to the city as an officer or employee, if: a. such officer or employee is a member of the Council; b. such officer or employee exercises, directly or indirectly, any decision-making authority concerning such sale; or c. in the case of services, such officer or employee exercises any supervisory authority over the services to be rendered to the city. (2) Purchases from the city. No officer, employee or relative shall, directly or indirectly, purchase any real or personal property from the city, except such property as is offered for sale at an established price, and not by bid or auction, on the same terms and conditions as to all members of the general public. (3) Interests in other decisions. Any officer or employee who has, or whose relative has, a financial or personal interest in any decision of any public body of which he or she is a member or to which he or she makes recommendations, shall, upon discovery thereof, disclose such interest in the official records of the city in the manner prescribed in subsection (4) hereof, and shall refrain from voting on, attempting to influence, or otherwise participating in such decision in any manner as an officer or employee. (4) Disclosure procedure. If any officer or employee has any financial or personal interest requiring disclosure under subsection (3) of this section, such person shall immediately upon discovery thereof declare such interest by delivering a written statement to the City Clerk, with copies to the City Manager and, if applicable, to the chairperson of the public body of which such person is a member, which statement shall contain the name of the officer or employee, the office or position held with the city by such person, and the nature of the interest. If said officer or employee shall discover such financial or personal interest during the course of a meeting or in such other circumstance as to render it practically impossible to deliver such written statement prior to action upon the matter in question, said officer or employee shall 1 The Charter defines “officer or employee” to mean “any person holding a position by election, appointment or employment in the service of the city, whether part-time or full-time, including a member of any authority, board, committee, or commission of the city, other than an authority that is: (1) established under the provisions of the Colorado Revised Statutes; (2) governed by state statutory rules of ethical conduct; and (3) expressly exempted from the provisions of this Article by ordinance of the Council.” Charter Art. IV, § 9(a). 2 The Charter defines “relative” to mean: “the spouse or minor child of the officer or employee, any person claimed by the officer or employee as a dependent for income tax purposes, or any person residing in and sharing with the officer or employee the expenses of the household.” Charter Art. IV, § 9(a). Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 3 immediately declare such interest by giving oral notice to all present, including a description of the nature of the interest. (5) Violations. Any contract made in violation of this Section shall be voidable by the city. If voided within one (1) year of the date of execution thereof, the party obtaining payment by reason of such contract shall, if required by the city, forthwith return to the city all or any designated portion of the monies received by such individual from the city by reason of said contract, together with interest at the lawful maximum rate for interest on judgments. Past ethics opinions evaluating the Charter limitations on boardmembers with a conflict of interest have distinguished between representing the interests of others before a boardmember’s board (not allowed where a conflict has been declared), and representing personal interests before that board (allowed in the interests of preserving personal rights of boardmembers). This distinction has raised concerns in recent months in part because some City boards include, or are required under the Code to include, professionals in fields related to that board’s functions. There are challenges posed by a bar on appearing in front of that board by boardmembers, particularly those who are sole practitioners and do not have colleagues who can work on client matters as needed. In these situations, while the boardmember does not participate as a member of the board, there is a question as to the extent to which he or she must avoid any participation as an advocate or representative for an applicant or other party. In addition to these Charter limitations on Councilmembers with conflicts of interest, Section 2-568(c)(2) of the Fort Collins Municipal Code provides that “No Councilmember shall represent any person or interest before the City Council or any board or commission of the City.” Application of City Charter Provisions. 1. Sales to the City. A question underlying this inquiry is the interpretation of Section 9(b)(1)c of Article IV of the Charter (provided above, entitled “Sales to the City”) which prohibits an officer or employee from having a financial interest in a sale to the City if he or she exercises “any supervisory authority over the services to be rendered to the city.“ The Board has considered this question, and has found that the proper interpretation and application of this provision is as referencing supervisory authority exercised on behalf of the City (in a City role), rather than supervisory authority exercised outside of and unrelated to the officer or employee’s role for the City. To read this provision otherwise would broadly prohibit any person involved in providing services to the City from participating in City government in any way, regardless of how unrelated that participation may be to that individual’s role as a service provider. The language of this provision is ambiguous and susceptible to at least two interpretations. There is no indication in the legislative history of this provision or elsewhere that such a comprehensive effect was intended when this Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 4 provision was added to the Charter. The Board recommends that the Council propose to the voters a clarifying change to the Charter that would avoid future uncertainty related to this provision. 2. “As an Officer or Employee.” A Council-adopted “Policy Statement on Ethics,” in place from 1988 until it was superseded by the adoption of the conflicts provisions in the Charter in 1989, prohibited boardmembers from acting in a representative capacity for compensation to influence a decision of his or her board. In contrast, the relevant Charter language, adopted by the voters in March 1989, prohibits a boardmember with a conflict of interest in a board decision from “attempting to influence, or otherwise participating in such decision in any manner as an officer or employee.” (City Charter Article IV, Section 9(b)(3) (emphasis added)). This prohibition extends to attempting to influence or participating in decisions of boards and commissions that make recommendations to the board that an individual serves on. This Charter provision has been specifically addressed in three Ethics Opinions: • Ethics Opinion 91-2 distinguished between boardmembers addressing their own personal interests and boardmembers representing the interests of others: The Board believes that members of City boards or commissions, as non-elected citizen volunteers, should not be required to give up the right to protect their personal interests when they might be directly affected by a board or commission, even if they serve on that board or commission. This right should not extend, however, to representing interests other than their own individual interests. For example, while a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals should be able to argue in favor of a variance for his or her private residence, that same board member should not be permitted to serve in a representative capacity, with or without compensation, and make presentations to the Zoning Board of Appeals on behalf of another person or entity, such as a developer or neighborhood association. (Ethics Opinion 91-2, page 2). • Ethics Opinion 91-3, citing to Ethics Opinion 91-2, indicated that the limits on a Councilmember’s participation did not extend to that Councilmember’s spouse, so long as the Councilmember declared a conflict of interest and did not participate in any way in the subject Planning and Zoning Board decision. (Ethics Opinion 91-3, page 4). Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 5 • Ethics Opinion 98-1, which was approved by the City Council in Resolution 98-53, 3 addressed the question of personal appearances by a boardmember on behalf of a client where the boardmember had declared a conflict of interest and was not participating as a member of the board. That opinion, also citing to Ethics Opinion 91-2, concluded that such appearances before one’s own board in a representative capacity would not be allowed, but did not address whether other means of advocating to the board, or providing other materials for consideration by the board, on behalf of a client would also be prohibited. (Ethics Opinion 98-1, pages 3-4). After a thoughtful review of these prior ethics opinions, the Board has carefully considered the language of the Charter, and is concerned that applying the Charter language to activities not carried out by an individual in his or her role “as an officer or employee” goes beyond the intended meaning and proper interpretation of the language of the Charter. (Please note that different considerations apply to the activities of Councilmembers, in contrast to boardmembers, as described below.) The Board recognizes there is a need to carefully govern both the involvement of boardmembers where they have declared a conflict, and to avoid any appearance of impropriety that might result from boardmember advocacy to said member’s own board. However, the Board believes it would be more appropriate for the Council to adopt City Code provisions establishing and clarifying the extent to which boardmembers may participate in a matter once a conflict has been identified, rather than rely on a broad reading of the Charter provision. The Board also recommends an exception or variance process that allows certain participation in circumstances of hardship or other special circumstances, provided that the decision making board could continue to carry out its decision making role properly. 23. “Attempting to Influence.” In addition, the Board has considered the question of what constitutes “attempting to influence” a decision. The Board concluded that participating in discussion of a particular matter as a boardmember is likely difficult to distinguishindistinguishable from “attempting to influence,” and should be avoidedis prohibited by the Charter. Many board decisions of significance are quasi-judicial matters that do not allow for ex parte communications or discussion with stakeholders outside of the hearing process. In those circumstances, the potential for confusion regarding the role in which an individual is acting is very limited. 3 In July 1993, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 064, 1993, which changed the process for adoption of ethics opinions so as to require Council review and approval. Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 6 The Board believes guidelines are needed to set out the limits on and types of interactions that are permissible where a conflict of interest is present. For example the guidelines could: • Expressly allow boardmembers to be involved (in a representative or personal capacity; not as a boardmember) in matters that come before their board for decision. o When participating in a personal capacity, the type of communication would not be limited. o When participating in a representative capacity, permissible involvement would including preparation of materials, plans, studies and designs, that are prepared in the normal course of development of the project and that may be presented to and considered by that board but are not made for the primary purpose of communicating with or advocating to the board or a board that will make a recommendation to the boardmember’s board on a matter related to the boardmember’s work); • Prohibit boardmembers from appearing or communicating directly with their board in a representative capacity regarding a decision in which they have a conflict, except when a variance has been granted because special hardship or other special circumstances create unfairness for the boardmember or other persons; • Establish a variance process by which the Council may consider on a case-by-case basis and grant variances that would permit participation in the form of direct communications, presentations, and advocacy, in the event a boardmember has an unusual hardship or other special circumstance (such as illness or incapacity of a professional firm colleague, or unavailability of others as a result of sole proprietorship); • Address whether limitations should be imposed regarding a boardmember’s participation in and communications with boards or commissions that make recommendations to the board the boardmember serves on; • Clarify that although a boardmember may have a conflict of interest because his or her firm is actively working on a project, this means that the firm is not disqualified from the project so long as the boardmember recuses himself or herself as a boardmember; and • Establish a disclosure process for a boardmember to use when the boardmember must appear before his or her board to protect a personal interest. 34. Councilmember Appearances. As noted above, express Code language governs concerning the second question (may a Councilmember appear before Council, after declaring and disclosing a conflict of interest, and Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 7 participate on behalf of an interested stakeholder if they do not personally appear before Council to advocate on behalf of another person). Section 2-568(c)(2) of the Fort Collins Municipal Code provides that “No Councilmember shall represent any person or interest before the City Council or any board or commission of the City.” In addition, Colorado statute requires that members of local government governing bodies abstain from any matter in either a personal or an official capacity in the event of a conflict in order to avoid a breach of fiduciary duty and public trust. (Section 24-18-109(3)(a), C.R.S.). In light of these provisions, the Board agrees it is appropriate to hold Councilmembers to a higher standard and limit more strictly Councilmember participation in any decision in which that Councilmember has a conflict of interest. Nevertheless, in extreme circumstances this may preclude a Councilmember from personally defending his or her own personal interests. The Board also agreed that although a Councilmember may have a conflict of interest because his or her firm is actively working on a project, the firm is not disqualified from the project so long as the Councilmember recuses himself or herself from the matter. This is because the codified prohibition is on the Councilmember’s personal representation (as opposed to a relative or colleague’s representation) of any person or interest. Board Conclusions and Recommendations: 1. The language of Article IV, Section 9(b)(1)c is most reasonably interpreted to prohibit an officer or employee from exercising supervisory authority on behalf of the City (in a City role) over services to the City, as opposed to exercising supervisory authority outside of and unrelated to the officer or employee’s role for the City. To resolve this ambiguity otherwise results in an unreasonably broad prohibition on participation in City government. The Board recommends that the Council propose to the voters a clarifying change to the Charter to avoid future uncertainty related to this provision. 2. The language of Article IV, Section 9(b)(3) of the City Charter is most reasonably interpreted to limit the actions of a City officer or employee only in his or her capacity as an officer or employee, and not outside of that role. 23. The Council should adopt City Code provisions to establish and clarify what actions boardmembers are allowed to take, in a representative capacity and in a personal capacity (outside of the boardmember role) in connection with matters in which they have a conflict of interest, as described in Section 2 on pages 5 and 6, above. The Board recommends adoption of a variance process through which the Council may on a case-by-case basis allow boardmembers to actively participate through direct communications, presentations, and advocacy in a matter (as a Ethics Opinion 2016-1 July 25, 2016 Page 8 representative or a stakeholder) when hardships or other special circumstances create unfairness for the boardmember or other persons. 34. The restriction on Councilmember representation of any persons or interests before the Council or a City board or commission should remain in place, although it may be beneficial to clarify this language to distinguish between representation where a Councilmember has a financial or personal interest (as defined in the Charter), and representation in the sense of advocating for certain policy or other interests in the role as a Councilmember. The Board interprets However, this prohibition to does not extend only to a Councilmember personally, and not to the Councilmember’s firm or relatives, consistent with prior Ethics Opinions. 45. If this Opinion is adopted by the City Council, to the extent this Opinion conflicts with prior Ethics Opinions of the Ethics Review Board, such prior Opinions shall be superseded. 6. If this Opinion is adopted by the City Council, the Board intends to consider proposed City Code revisions to address recommendations 3 and 4, above, and to recommend specific Code revisions upon completion of that review. This advisory opinion was reviewed and approved by Councilmembers Ray Martinez, Gino Campana, and Kristin Stephens, as the designated regular members of the Ethics Review Board. Under Section 2-569(e) of the City Code, this opinion and recommendation is to be immediately filed with the City Clerk and made available for public inspection. This opinion will be considered by the City Council at its adjourned meeting on July 26, 2016. Dated this 25th day of July, 2016. ____________________________________ Carrie M. Daggett, City Attorney Agenda Item 2 Item #2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 26, 2016 City Council STAFF Wanda Winkelmann, City Clerk SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 097, 2016, Calling a Special Municipal Election to be held in Conjunction with the November 8, 2016 Larimer County General Election. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to call a Special Municipal Election to be held in conjunction with the November 8, 2016 Larimer County General Election, and preserves the opportunity for Council to place Council-initiated or referred issues on the November ballot. If Council decides to place any measures on the ballot, it would need to do so no later than at its September 6 meeting. If Council does not take action by ordinance or resolution before the statutory deadline (September 9) to certify ballot language to Larimer County, the election will be cancelled and the provisions of this Ordinance will be of no further force and effect. This Ordinance does not submit a specific measure to the November 8, 2016 ballot. Adoption of this Ordinance is a required step in preserving the option for City Council to submit any ballot measures that Council may desire, at the November 8, 2016 General Election. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 097, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CALLING A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE NOVEMBER 8, 2016 LARIMER COUNTY GENERAL ELECTION WHEREAS, under Article X, Section 3 of the City Charter the City Council may, by resolution, submit any question or proposed ordinance or resolution, or refer any adopted ordinance or resolution, or submit any initiative or referendum measure, to a vote of the people at a special election, in the same manner as a citizen initiated or referred measure, at any time prior to the statutory deadline to certify ballot content to the County Clerk, however, the decision to call a special election must be made by ordinance; and WHEREAS, although there are no identified ballot measures at this time, in order to preserve the option to hold an election and meet all statutory requirements, an ordinance calling the election and authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with Larimer County for the conduct of the election must be adopted on second reading no later than August 16, 2016; and WHEREAS, for the foregoing reason, the City Council wishes to call a special municipal election on November 8, 2016, to be held in conjunction with the Larimer County General Election, for the purpose of submitting to the electorate of the City any ballot measures approved by the City Council prior to the deadline for certifying ballot content to the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That a Special Municipal Election in the City is hereby called for Tuesday, November 8, 2016, which shall be held in conjunction with the Larimer County General Election and conducted in such manner as shall be determined by the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 2. That the provisions of the Uniform Election Code of 1992 are hereby adopted with respect to the conduct of said election in lieu of the provisions of the Municipal Election Code of 1965. Section 3. That, subject to any applicable provision in Colorado statute to the contrary, the City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, submit to the voters at said election any citizen-initiated or City-initiated measure that complies with the requirements of the City Charter, irrespective of the nature of such measure. Section 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to certify the ballot content for the Special Municipal Election to the Larimer County Clerk no later than September 9, 2016, for any ballot titles set by the City Council prior to said date. -2- Section 5. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with Larimer County for conduct of the election, pursuant to Section 1-7-116(2) of the Colorado Revised Statutes. Section 6. That, in the event that the City Council does not take action by ordinance or resolution prior to September 9, 2016, to submit any ballot measures to the voters at the November 8, 2016 Larimer County General Election, the election provided for herein shall be cancelled and the provisions of this Ordinance shall be of no further force and effect. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 26th day of July, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 26, 2016 City Council STAFF Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Kevin Gertig, Utilities Executive Director Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer Laurie Kadrich, Director of PDT Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director John Phelan, Energy Services Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 096, 2016, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund and in the Light and Power Fund for Continuation of Energy Efficiency Initiatives Associated with the 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan and Rescinding Ordinance No. 081, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to rescind Ordinance No. 081, 2016 (Adopted on July 19, 2016) and amend the $1,460,000 appropriated by Ordinance No. 081, 2016; appropriating from the General Fund $730,000, and $730,000 from the Electric Utility Light & Power fund, for continuation of energy efficiency programs in 2016, as outlined in the draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan. Ordinance No. 081, 2016 will become effective as originally adopted and shall provide funding until this Ordinance becomes effective, i.e., funding for the Energy Efficiency Programs up to $730,000 will not be further delayed pending Second Reading of this Ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION On June 21, 2016, City Council unanimously approved Ordinance No. 081, 2016 on first reading to fund the municipal green waste initiative (in the amount of $85,000) with one amendment: the amended Ordinance fully funded the energy efficiency incentives for the business community and the Efficiency Works Neighborhoods Pilot through 2016 out of General Fund Reserves (in the amount of $1,460,000). On July 19, 2016, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 081, 2016 as amended on second reading. During Council consideration of the Ordinance, Council recognized the level of engagement by the private sector in 2016 in energy efficiency incentives programs, their significant contributions to the 2020 CAP Goals of reducing community emissions 20% below 2005 levels, their leverage of private sector dollars, and the overall program benefits to the community. In addition to adopting Ordinance No. 081, 2016, on July 19, 2016, Council requested staff return with responses on the following issues for the continued Council meeting on July 26, 2016. 3 Packet Pg. 62 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 2 1. Splitting funding appropriated by Ordinance No. 081, 2016 for energy efficiency programs between General and Light & Power fund reserves Staff response: Staff from the Utilities and Environmental Services departments recommend the full funding for energy efficiency programs approved by Ordinance No. 081, 2016 be split equally between General Fund reserves and Light & Power fund reserves. Such a split is appropriate under the City Charter when program results provide citywide outcomes as well as utility enterprise specific objectives. The funded energy efficiency programs serve to meet the 2016 Energy Policy efficiency target and the Climate Action Plan 2020 target. In addition, it is a best practice to provide equitable co-funding for personnel costs that advance General Fund and Utility goals (e.g., personnel cost division for the Energy Code Compliance Specialist FTE approved during the 2015 mid-cycle budget process). The proposed Ordinance affirms funding in the full amount of $1,460,000 (as appropriated by Ordinance No. 081, 2016 which will be rescinded), amending the source of those funds to $730,000 from Light & Power fund reserves and a maximum of $730,000 from the General Fund. 2. Proposed revision to energy efficiency program funding in 2016. Staff Response: At this time, no new information is available by which to evaluate changing the funding approved in Ordinance No. 081-2016 for energy efficiency incentives. As noted at the regular Council meeting on July 19, 2016, the amount of business funding is dedicated in full to customer incentives, which are inherently performance based. If sufficient projects are not identified and funds committed during the remainder of 2016, any remaining funding will lapse to the reserve source from which it was appropriated and shall become available for reappropriation in later cycles. 3. Proposed changes to the structure, rules or incentive levels for the Efficiency Works Business program. Staff response: A staff team from Utilities, Platte River Power Authority and the other three Platte River member cities will continue to meet regularly to review the progress, results and parameters of the Efficiency Works Business program. While changes to the program are typically made on an annual basis, including incentive levels for specific measures, mid-year changes are made as needed. This collaborative decision making process will continue for the remainder of 2016. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Adoption of this Ordinance has a bottom line impact of $730,000 to Electric Utility Light & Power fund reserves in 2016, with no ongoing commitment to the City budget. The appropriation from the General Fund is also reduced to $730,000. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Boards and commissions have not been briefed on this proposed Ordinance due to the timing between the second reading of Ordinance No. 08, 2016 on the July 19, 2016 regular Council meeting and Council’s request that staff return with additional information at the July 23, 2016 continued Council meeting. However, both the Energy and Air Quality Boards previously provided recommendations related to the adopted Ordinance No. 081, 2016 prior to its adoption. On June 23, 2016, the Energy Board unanimously recommended support for Ordinance No. 081, 2016, to implement the three initiatives identified in that Ordinance. The Energy Board expressed support for the use of General Fund dollars to fund the business energy efficiency incentives for the remainder of 2016, as the Board believed it demonstrated the importance of energy efficiency to Council and the communitywide impact this program has beyond the Light & Power Fund. On July 18, 2016, the Air Quality Board submitted a memo in support of the proposed energy efficiency program funding from General Fund reserves as adopted in Ordinance No. 081, 2016. 3 Packet Pg. 63 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 3 PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff has reviewed the initiatives and BFO Offers associated with the 2020 CAP Strategic Plan with the Climate Action Plan’s Community Advisory Committee. Staff is beginning to schedule public outreach events, including an Open House with former Governor Bill Ritter to gather community feedback on the Climate Action Plan. However, the status of these off-cycle funding decisions has not been discussed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 64 1 CAP – Energy Efficiency Jeff Mihelich, Kevin Gertig, Jackie Kozak Thiel, Mike Beckstead, Lucinda Smith, Lindsay Ex, John Phelan July 26, 2016 ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) Energy Efficiency Funding 2 • July 19 – Ord. No 081, 2016 adopted on Second Reading § Funded $1.46M from the General Fund for Energy Efficiency Programs • Tonight § Ordinance First Reading Splitting the $1.46M Energy Efficiency Funding 50/50 between the General Fund and Light & Power Reserves 3.1 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) Fort Collins Efficiency Programs Collaborative Programs with Platte River • Efficiency Works Home - EW Neighborhoods pilot • Efficiency Works Business • Retail Lighting • Larimer County Conservation Corp Fort Collins Programs • Appliance Rebates and Recycling • Home Energy and Water Reports • Integrated Design Assistance Program • Also financing, water, solar, demand response and green code amendments CORE FUNCTIONS: Audits – Technical Assistance – Incentives - Financing 3.1 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) Question From Second Reading 4 • Could the source of the funding be shared between the General Fund and Light and Power? § Propose 50/50 split between General Fund and Light & Power Reserves for the $1.46M in funding § Logic o Shared City and Utilities goals – CAP & Energy Policy o Consistent with historical funding splits 3.1 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) Next Steps 5 • Next Steps § Resume Efficiency Works Business program operations § Updates on pace of participation § Discussions with Platte River and member cities about program administration 3.1 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) Energy Efficiency Funding 6 • July 19 – Ord. No 081, 2016 adopted on Second Reading § Funded $1.46M from the General Fund for Energy Efficiency Programs • Tonight § Ordinance First Reading Splitting the $1.46M Energy Efficiency Funding 50/50 between the General Fund and Light & Power Reserves 3.1 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4674 : CAP and Energy Efficiency) -1- ORDINANCE NO. 096, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND AND IN THE LIGHT AND POWER FUND FOR 2016 PROJECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2020 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) STRATEGIC PLAN AND RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 081, 2016 WHEREAS, on March 3, 2015, City Council adopted Resolution 2015-030, updating community greenhouse gas goals and targets to be achieved by 2020, 2030, and 2050; and WHEREAS, staff has developed an implementation plan based on the accelerated goals of the Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) and has identified several initiatives for immediate action and investment based on guidance provided by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 046, 2016, appropriating funds toward four projects identified for immediate action and investment (1) Building energy Disclosure and Scoring, (2) CAP Program Support, (3) CAP Pilot Project/Innovation Fund, and (4) Biomass Burner Feasibility Study; and WHEREAS, on June 21, 2016 City Council considered on first reading Ordinance No. 081, 2016 appropriating funds for two additional projects identified and proposed for immediate action and investment: (1) Solar Incentives and Rebates, and (2) Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Sites; and WHEREAS, appropriated, but unexpended and unencumbered, funds are available in 2016 from the Solar Purchase Power Program (SP3) and the Community Shared Solar program in the Light and Power fund to support the Solar Incentives and Rebates Program; and WHEREAS, staff requested $85,000 for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative, including compost-turning equipment of $51,000 and other expenses, outlined in the Draft 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan, from funds accumulated during 2015 and prior years in the Waste Innovation Program account in the City’s General Fund; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site will enable municipal composting for organic landscape debris through a small-scale (100 tons/year) composting facility at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, including site grading at the Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility, purchase of compost-turning equipment, and ongoing composting operations and management by the Streets Department; and WHEREAS, composting capability will increase landfill waste diversion by City departments that generate organic debris from municipal maintenance activities, including Parks, Streets, Forestry, Natural Areas, Stormwater, and Light and Power; and WHEREAS, in 2010, the City created the Waste Innovation Program (the “WIP”) fund where revenues collected for the program are held in a reserve account in the General Fund; and Packet Pg. 71 -2- WHEREAS, the WIP funds are used to administer grants that allow City departments to initiate new waste diversion and recycling projects with special attention to departments that have larger quantities of waste that is self-hauled to the Larimer County Landfill; and WHEREAS, a team of interdepartmental employees (the “WIP Team”) acts as a liaison for incorporating waste reduction, promoting recycling strategies, and awarding WIP funds when requests are received from participating City departments; and WHEREAS, the WIP Team voted unanimously to recommend the funding request for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative; and WHEREAS, the City has implemented certain energy efficiency programs identified in the 2020 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Strategic Plan (“Energy Efficiency Programs”), and has operated these programs using funds appropriated in the Light and Power Fund; and WHEREAS, the funds appropriated for the Energy Efficiency Programs for 2016 have been fully committed, preventing new participation in those Programs until such time as additional funds have been made available; and WHEREAS, on June 21, 2016, City Council adopted on First Reading Ordinance No. 081, 2016, to include an additional appropriation of $1,460,000 from General Fund reserves for Energy Efficiency Programs as described in the CAP Strategic Plan; and WHEREAS, on July 19, 2016, Council adopted on Second Reading Ordinance No. 081, 2016, and at that time requested that staff examine the Energy Efficiency Programs for any appropriate modification of the project amount or source of funding for it in 2016; and WHEREAS, staff has examined the funding source for the Energy Efficiency Programs approved in Ordinance No. 081, 2016, and identified an alternate and more preferable source of funding for the purposes described in that Ordinance; and WHEREAS, based on new funding information provided by staff, Council desires to rescind Ordinance No. 081, 2016, and reestablish the appropriation described therein in furtherance of the Energy Efficiency Programs and Composting Initiative; and WHEREAS, consistent with Article XII, Section 6 of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins, funding of a portion of the total cost of the Energy Efficiency Programs from Light and Power Fund reserves serves electric utility purposes and reflects a proportionate benefit expected to accrue to Light and Power electric utility ratepayers by seeking to manage and minimize overall future capital needs, and resulting rate impacts, that would otherwise be required to support increasing peak demand and overall electric service loads; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated. Packet Pg. 72 -3- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby rescinds adoption of Ordinance No. 081, 2016. Section 3 That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of EIGHTY-FIVE THOUSAND ($85,000) for expenditure in the General Fund for the City of Fort Collins for the Municipal Green Waste (Composting) Site Initiative as part of the Waste Innovation Program. Section 4. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the General Fund the sum of SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($730,000) for expenditure in the General Fund for Energy Efficiency Programs as described in the CAP Strategic Plan. Section 5. That there is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Light and Power Fund the sum of SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($730,000) for expenditure in the Light and Power Fund for Energy Efficiency Programs as described in the CAP Strategic Plan. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 26th day of July, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 16th day of August, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 73 City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC) Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. City Council Work Session July 26, 2016 After the Adjourned Meeting, which begins at 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER. 1. Short Term Rentals (STRs). (staff: Ginny Sawyer; 10 minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to review draft regulatory concepts and public feedback regarding short- term rentals (STRs.) Council and staff have been studying STRs, including potential impacts, benefits, and community desire in advance of considering an ordinance to regulate the activity. 2. Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County. (staff: Beth Sowder, Mike Beckstead; 5 minute presentation; Carol Plock and Laurie Stolen (Larimer County)-10 minutes; 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to provide information about the recommendations for the development of critical behavioral health services in Larimer County. The Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Partnership of Larimer County recently commissioned a study to quantify the gaps in treatment for mental health and substance use disorders locally. The study identified major gaps in critical behavioral health services, offering recommendations in what services are most needed, at what levels, and for what cost. Because these gaps have a significant impact on local citizens and their families, government, health, and social services, this is an educational presentation to share the findings. Carol Plock, Executive Director, Health District of Northern Larimer County, will present information on the study findings. Laurie Stolen, Director, Larimer County Alternative Sentencing Department, will present information on the possible solution. City of Fort Collins Page 2 3. Night Sky Initiative. (staff: Ginny Sawyer; 10 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to inform Council of the current Night Sky Initiative and proposed staff work. The Night Sky Initiative is one element of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan. OTHER BUSINESS. ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: July 26, 2016 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Short Term Rentals (STRs). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review draft regulatory concepts and public feedback regarding short-term rentals (STRs.) Council and staff have been studying STRs, including potential impacts, benefits, and community desire in advance of considering an ordinance to regulate the activity. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What, if any, changes would Council like to add to the proposed regulatory concepts? 2. Does Council support consideration of an ordinance at an upcoming Council meeting? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Short Term Rental (STR) refers to rental agreements for less than 30 days. With the creation and growth of online platforms, the STR market has become much more mainstream and widespread. Vacation Rentals by Owner (VRBO) and Airbnb are two of the most widely known and used companies supporting the online short term rental market, however, many other platforms exist. Staff and Council have been working to scope and define the potential positive and negative impacts of a growing STR market and potential regulations. Work to date includes: June 9, 2015 Council Work Session-direction: o Utilize tools City already has in place o Better define problem and problem severity o STR definition and more outreach October 27, 2015 Council Work Session-direction: o Create draft regulatory framework o Continue public outreach February 23, 2016 Council Work Session o Regulatory ideas presented Since February, staff has further refined regulatory concepts and continues to seek public feedback. The proposed framework includes definitions and a revocable, non-transferrable licensing mechanism with minimum standards. Concepts are described below. 1 Packet Pg. 3 July 26, 2016 Page 2 Short Term Rentals-Definition While all rentals for less than 30 days are considered STR, staff is proposing the following also apply: STRs may only rent to a single party at a time (not multiple parties like a B&B or hotel) STR are not open to the public (cannot walk in off the street) No signage There are two distinct types of STRs to be defined: Short Term Rental-Primary STR is the owner’s primary residence as verified through billing information or voter registration. Short Term Rental-Non-Primary Non-primary residence STRs may have owners that are in town or out of town but who do not live at the residence. Taxes Anyone operating a STR unit must obtain sales and lodging tax licenses from the City’s Finance Department. Licensing License: License is for the person not the property. License is non-transferrable and revocable. License number would be required to be included on all advertising. Licensing Process: Application Written notice to neighbors for non-primary STR Affidavit of smoke and CO2 alarms Proof of ownership/residence Proof of insurance Confirmation of required parking o Primary STR: 1 per 2 bedrooms plus one for owner o Non-Primary: 1 for every 2 bedrooms Other Considerations: $200 Fee/ $100 renewal Renewal required at one-year and then every two years following City provided “Rules and Norms Sheet” available in all STRs (Attachment 1) Waiving of fee for handicap accessible STRs (City would provide a checklist of required attributes and owner would provide photos and sign affidavit of proof) Limitations: No more than three Non-Primary licenses per person No more than one STR per block face in the NCM and NCL zones HOAs can continue to prohibit 1 Packet Pg. 4 July 26, 2016 Page 3 Concentration limits are proposed in the Neighborhood Conservation Medium and Low Density zones due to proximity to CSU, downtown and other attractions, and the number of STRs currently operating in these zones. Those that have been operating since January 2016 would be allowed to apply for a license even if it exceeds the concentration limit. Enforcement Enforcement policies have not been discussed at length; however, any ticket issued at a property would be tracked under the City’s current public nuisance process and considered at time of license renewal. Fort Collins has been contacted by emerging businesses focusing on STR host compliance. These services range from $8K annually for address identification to $21K annually for proactive monitoring and a 24/7 hotline for neighbors. Public Outreach Staff hosted a public meeting/open house on June 22 to present the outlined regulatory ideas. Approximately 45 people attended. Throughout the month of June there was also an online feedback form to rate and comment on the ideas. Feedback results can be viewed at Feedback_Results. A shorter summary (no comments) is included (Attachment 2). Citizen input continues to be divided. The STR operators participating in the outreach process tend to be those currently utilizing best practices and supporting some level of regulation. Some of those opposed to STR activity have had negative experiences ranging from over-parked streets, loud noise/dogs, and general disrespectful guests. Others in opposition feel strongly that STR activity is a commercial activity that is benefitting from quality neighborhoods while not returning anything to the neighborhood. The most divided opinions involve allowable zones and concentration limits and the non-primary STR use. See below for general stakeholder desires. REGULATION DRAFT PROPOSAL MORE LENIENT MORE RESTRICTIVE Non-Primary STR Allow in all zones; limit to 3 per person Don’t limit to 3 Don’t allow in residential zones; limit to less than 3 Neighbor Notification Mailing and Dev. Review sign for Non-Primary Mailing only; no development review sign in yard Require for both Primary and Non-Primary STRs Concentration Limit One per block face in NCM and NCL Non-Primary only Both primary and non-primary; would prefer 3% of census track and/or proximity criteria Zoning Limitations None, only the concentration limit Allow in all zones Define use by zone and do not allow in all zones Fees $200/$100 renewal High, especially for Primary STR Non-Primary fees should be higher Other Communities July 26, 2016 Page 4 STRs and Existing Plans While STRs are not directly mentioned in any existing plans, City Plan, the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, and some of the work to date on the Downtown plan all support maintaining healthy neighborhoods and compatibility. These plans also address supporting accessory housing: Policy LIV 6.1 – Types of Infill and Redevelopment in Residential Areas Infill and redevelopment in residential areas may occur through: a. The addition of new dwellings on vacant lots and other undeveloped parcels surrounded by existing residential development. b. Dwelling units added to existing houses (e.g., basement or upstairs apartments). c. Small, detached dwellings added to lots of sufficient size with existing houses (e.g., “alley houses” or “granny flats”). d. Expansion or redevelopment of properties. e. Neighborhood-related, non-residential development. Policy LIV 7.3 – Encourage Accessory Housing Unit Development Recognize accessory housing units as a viable form of additional and possibly affordable housing and encourage their development provided such development is consistent with existing residential neighborhood character. The Global trends Report, provided by Progressive Urban Management Associates as part of the development of the Downtown Plan highlight promoting the sharing economy: Promote the “sharing economy”: Grounded with less consumptive values and armed with mobile technologies, Millennials and Gen Z consumers are increasingly seeking opportunities to share, rent or resell goods and services. Bicycle and car sharing will be the accepted norm in downtowns. Localized apps and other accessible technology platforms for sharing consumer goods, workplaces, housing, recreation and social experiences will build a sense of community. In the future STRs may be directly mentioned within plans. Next Steps Staff will schedule consideration of an ordinance at an upcoming Council meeting regarding regulations of STRs. If Council supports this timeline, a draft ordinance will be made available for public review in advance of the scheduled meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Fort Collins Norms and Rules Sheet (PDF) 2. Short Report for STR Feedback Form (PDF) 3. STR Comparison Matrix (PDF) 4. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 6 FORT COLLINS NORMS AND RULES Welcome to Fort Collins! We have a great community here and as we see more short-term rental visitors there are a few things nearby neighbors would like the City of Fort Collins to let you know. Noise The noise ordinance is in effect 24/7 and takes into account the type of noise and time of day. Your neighbors may not be on vacation so please be considerate if windows are open, people are coming and going, or if you or any pets are outside on the property. Parking While street parking is all public, people do like to park in front of or near their home. Please be considerate of all neighbors and use as much off-street parking as you have available. Trash Trash containers must be screened from view and can only be out on the street 12 hours prior to and after pick- up. Fort Collins has curbside single stream recycling that takes glass bottles and jars, aluminum, paper, cartons (like milk) and plastic. Call of Doodie Please pick-up after your dog and keep your dogs leashed. Snow and Sidewalks If you are visiting during the winter (or spring!) months you may see snow. Residents are responsible for clearing their sidewalks of all ice and snow within 24 hours of snow accumulation. Mosquitos and West Nile Virus If you are here in the summer months, please adhere to the Four D’s - Drain any standing water; Dress to avoid mosquito bites; DEET-or other types of repellent when outside; Dawn/Dusk-is high mosquito time so limit time outdoors. Good Numbers to Know Emergencies: 911. You can also text 911 Police non-emergency: 221-6540. Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD- 711. ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Fort Collins Norms and Rules Sheet (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) , , , , , , , , , . ! # ! 3 %% )1 4%% 0# $ ! 3 %% # 4%% $ #0 ! 3 %% 4%% 0 $ ! 3 %% ) 4%% 0# $ 1 ) ! 3 %% 4%% $ )1 ! 3 %% 00 4%% # $ SHORT TERM RENTAL COMPARISON MATRIX CITY PRIMARY RESIDENCE NON- PRIMARY RESIDENCE TAX REQUIRED LICENSE REQUIRED N’BOR NOTIFICATION CONCENTRATION LIMIT ZONING LIMITATIONS OTHER FEES FORT COLLINS Yes Yes. No more than 3 per person Sales and Lodging Yes, non transferrable Yes 1 per block face in NCM & NCL No, except for concentration limits $200 first time; $100 2-year renewal BOULDER Yes No Yes Yes, non transferrable No No Occupancy limits determined by zone $130 first time; $105 for 4 year license DENVER Yes No Yes Yes, non transferrable No No No $25 annually DURANGO Yes Yes No? no mention on website. Yes, non transferrable Yes, 300 ft radius Yes, concentration limits by zone including total number & by block face Yes, only allowed in certain zones Site visit and inspection. Property posted. Parking 1 Ginny Sawyer Ted Shepard City Council Work Session Short Term Rentals (STRs) July 26, 2016 ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) 1. What, if any, changes would Council like to add to the proposed regulatory concepts? 2. Does Council support bringing an ordinance to an upcoming 2016 regular meeting? 2 Questions and Direction Sought 1.4 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Background Best Guess: § ~ 300 listings among multiple sites § ~ 103 existing STR sales and lodging tax licenses § ~ .44% of housing stock § Exact address and owner contact information is not available on Airbnb and limited on other sites § Listings are inconsistent, hard to search, with overlap between sites 3 1.4 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Background June 9, 2015 - Council Work Session; direction: • Utilize tools City already has in place • Better define problem and problem severity • STR definition and more outreach October 27, 2015 - Council Work Session; direction: • Create draft regulatory framework • Continue public outreach 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Background February 23, 2016 - Council Work Session; direction: • Continue with the definitions including Primary and Non-Primary residence. • Move forward with options that: - Ensure appropriate tax collection - Address concentration and dispersion of STRs - Aren’t overly regulatory but still position Fort Collins to be nimble and address issues as needed now and in the future 5 1.4 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Definitions Short Term Rental: Any rental less than 30 days • STRs may only rent to a single party at a time • STR are not open to the public (can’t walk in off the street) • No signage Short Term Rental-Primary: STR is the owner’s primary residence as verified through billing information or voter registration. Short Term Rental-Non-Primary: Owner does not live at the residence. 6 1.4 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Proposed Regulatory Concepts Taxes: Anyone providing STRs must obtain Sales and Lodging tax licenses from the City’s Finance Department. Licensing: • License is for the person not the property. • License is non-transferrable and revocable. • License number would be required to be included on all advertising. 7 1.4 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Licensing Process: • Application • Written notice to neighbors for Non-Primary STR • Affidavit of smoke and CO2 alarms • Proof of ownership/residence • Proof of insurance • Confirmation of required parking - Primary STR: 1 per 2 bedrooms plus one for owner - Non-Primary: 1 for every 2 bedrooms 8 Proposed Regulatory Concepts 1.4 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Other Considerations: • $200 Fee/ $100 renewal • Renewal required at one-year and then every two years following • City provided “Rules and Norms Sheet” available in all STRs • Waiving of fee for handicap accessible STRs (City would provide a checklist of required attributes and owner would provide photos and sign affidavit of proof) 9 Proposed Regulatory Concepts 1.4 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Limitations: • No more than 3 Non-Primary licenses per person • No more than one STR per block face in the NCM and NCL zones • HOAs can continue to prohibit 10 Proposed Regulatory Concepts 1.4 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) 11 1.4 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Overall, what do you think about the proposed STR regulations? 12 Public Outreach In Favor Strongly Opposed Oppossed Strongly In Favor 35.9% 13.0% 24.4% 26.7% In Favor or Strongly in Favor: 48.9% Opposed or Strongly Opposed: 51.1% 1.4 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) REGULATION MORE LENIENT MORE RESTRICTIVE Non-Primary STR Don’t limit to 3 Don’t allow in residential zones; limit to less than 3 Neighbor Notification Mailing only; no development review sign in yard Require for both Primary and Non-Primary STRs Concentration Limit Non-Primary only Both Primary and Non-Primary; would prefer 3% of census track and/or proximity criteria Zoning Limitations Allow in all zones Define use by zone and do not allow in all zones Fees High, especially for Primary STR Non-Primary fees should be higher 13 Public Outreach 1.4 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) 1. What, if any, changes would Council like to add to the proposed regulatory concepts? 2. Does Council support bringing an ordinance to an upcoming 2016 regular meeting? 14 Questions and Direction Sought 1.4 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) DATE: STAFF: July 26, 2016 Beth Sowder, Director of Social Sustainability Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide information about the recommendations for the development of critical behavioral health services in Larimer County. The Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Partnership of Larimer County recently commissioned a study to quantify the gaps in treatment for mental health and substance use disorders locally. The study identified major gaps in critical behavioral health services, offering recommendations in what services are most needed, at what levels, and for what cost. Because these gaps have a significant impact on local citizens and their families, government, health, and social services, this is an educational presentation to share the findings. Carol Plock, Executive Director, Health District of Northern Larimer County, will present information on the study findings. Laurie Stolen, Director, Larimer County Alternative Sentencing Department, will present information on the possible solution. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have any questions about or feedback on the proposed recommendations for expanding critical behavioral health services in Larimer County? 2. Does Council have direction on City support for these recommendations? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The lack of critical behavioral health services has a direct impact on major City of Fort Collins concerns. Community residents, their families, and workplaces, are all directly significantly impacted by the lack of adequate depth and continuum of mental health and substance use disorder treatment. The gaps in services also has a substantial impact on services and issues with a direct relationship to the City, including police services, the criminal justice system, businesses, poverty, homelessness, the new Outreach Fort Collins project, and Support Services for those living in Permanent Supportive Housing. The Partnership’s study considered the additional services needed in the community, how they could be organized, and the cost. Larimer County has been considering the possibility of developing a long-term solution for filling the critical gaps. A citizens’ group has formed to advocate for solutions. Bridging the critical gaps in behavioral health treatment services, if achieved, is anticipated to have a notable impact on health, quality of life, and societal and services costs. City Alignment and Impacts The City has representatives from Police Services and Social Sustainability who are active members of the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Partnership. This involvement, along with many other community agencies represented, has been critical in the collaborative and comprehensive approach to the recommendations for expanding critical behavioral health services in Larimer County. When looking at how expanding critical behavioral health services in Larimer County will impact the City organization, there will likely be both quantitative and qualitative results. 2 Packet Pg. 39 July 26, 2016 Page 2 Quantitative Data and Projection Looking at Fort Collins Police Services calls for service (alcohol, drug, suicide, and welfare calls), there would be a potential reduction in calls varying by call type by 5-15% (chart provided in PowerPoint presentation). This could realize efficiencies that would be the equivalent of almost a half-time police employee; however, it would be expected that these efficiencies would be effectively used rather than an actual reduction in workforce. Additionally, it is expected that more of an impact would come from calls for service for the most frequent and heavy consumers of multiple services (Police, Mental Health, Medical, etc.). Of a group of 131 high service utilizers monitored by the Interagency Group convened by Fort Collins Police Services, 92 (70%) had contacts with a police officer between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016. For those 92 individuals, there were: A total of 1,125 police contacts (ranging from 1 to 178 contacts per individual) 1,584 officer hours spent o Top 25 individuals’ cases used nearly 1,100 of the total 1,585 officer hours Costs for these contacts include officer time, dispatch, booking, and court costs, if needed Additional minor efficiencies could be realized in Parks, Municipal Court, and Natural Areas. Qualitative Alignment and Benefits The expansion of critical behavioral health services in Larimer County is in alignment with some of the City’s stated goals: The Social Sustainability Department Strategic Plan has a goal that states: Foster increased availability and access to mental and behavioral healthcare through: o Work with local organizations to ensure 24-hour availability of mental and behavioral health care and treatment. o Encourage and support programs providing mental and behavioral health care for low-income persons and persons experiencing other barriers. o Through education, outreach, partnerships, and collaboration, increase the community’s general awareness/acceptance of mental and behavioral health and illness. o Support education, outreach, partnerships, collaboration, and prevention/intervention efforts, increasing the community’s general awareness regarding substance abuse. o Support increased discharge coordination and planning, improving continuity of mental and behavioral health care and recovery for people leaving hospitals, correctional facilities, and other similar situations. o Support development of halfway housing and permanent supportive housing for persons with mental and behavioral illness. o Partner with other community entities to create a residential treatment facility for people with drug and alcohol addictions. o Support creation and operation of a detox facility in Larimer County. The Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis also included the following goals: o Residents are able to rapidly access and receive the depth of treatment needed for mental health, physical health, and substance abuse needs. o High quality health care is delivered across the continuum of care: therapy, outpatient care, inpatient care, residential treatment for addictions, mental health care. The City’s 2016 Strategic Plan includes the following strategic objectives: o Neighborhood Livability & Social Health: Leverage and improve collaboration with other agencies to address homelessness, poverty issues, and other high priority human service needs. o Safe Community: Improve community involvement, education and regional partnerships to make our community safer and stronger. 2 Packet Pg. 40 July 26, 2016 Page 3 Potential Benefits for Housing and Human Services Programs The expansion of behavioral health services will also offer greater ability for residents of permanent supportive housing have access to support services they need to retain their housing. There is a high incidence of mental illness and substance use disorder in the homeless population. Evidence shows that overall the population of those who were formerly homeless who became housed and receive behavioral health treatment make significant health and functional improvements, and have significantly less use of emergency service. The expansion of behavioral health services will positively impact the coordination of services for many of the non-profit service providers who receive funding from the City’s Human Service Program funds. The expansion of behavioral health services will positively impact Municipal Court, Special Agency Sessions, and Outreach Fort Collins by providing an immediate referral option. Sales Tax Rate Considerations The total sales tax rate within Fort Collins will increase from 7.4% to 7.65% if this measure is approved by voters. At 7.65%, Fort Collins would be within the middle range of peer front range communities. Council Finance Committee has recently discussed possible future tax initiatives of the City that include the renewal of Keep Fort Collins Great, as well as funding for the Climate Action Plan, Transit Services, and Vine/Lemay grade separated crossing. ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary of Recommendations in Infographic form (PDF) 2. At-A-Glance Visual of Existing and Recommended Behavioral Health Capacity (PDF) 3. List of Services to be provided with estimated amounts (PDF) 4. Highlights of Quality Cost Effectiveness and Effectiveness of Treatment Studies (PDF) 5. Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County (PDF) 6. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 41 ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Summary of Recommendations in Infographic form (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 2.1 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Summary of Recommendations in Infographic form (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: At-A-Glance Visual of Existing and Recommended Behavioral Health Capacity (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: List of Services to be provided with estimated amounts (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Highlights of Quality Cost Effectiveness and Effectiveness of Treatment Studies (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in 2.4 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Highlights of Quality Cost Effectiveness and Effectiveness of Treatment Studies (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in 2.4 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Highlights of Quality Cost Effectiveness and Effectiveness of Treatment Studies (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in 2.4 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Highlights of Quality Cost Effectiveness and Effectiveness of Treatment Studies (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in ATTACHMENT 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County 2.5 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Executive Summary of Report: Recommendations for the Development of Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County Recommendations for the Development of Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Partnership of Larimer County Critical Behavioral Health Services In Larimer County July 26, 2016 ATTACHMENT 6 2.6 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 1. Does Council have any questions about or feedback on the proposed recommendations for expanding critical behavioral health services in Larimer County? 2. Does Council have direction on City support for these recommendations? Council Direction Sought 2.6 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Families, individuals, health and human services providers, the criminal justice system, schools, and more In our community’s ability to adequately address mental health and substance use disorders Consistently report major gaps The Issue 2.6 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) “ The service I need to connect him to does not exist in this community. What do you expect me to do??? ” - Care Coordinator 2.6 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Like other illnesses, mental illness and substance use disorders § Can be disabling, even life-threatening § Can be chronic and relapsing § Affect families and work places too § Are treatable (early ID and access to treatment are critical) 2.6 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) It’s Not a Small Problem Major Health Burden Leading Cause of Disability in US Impacts Thousands in Larimer County 44,300 Mental Illness (MI) (10,000 w/serious MI) 31,200 Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) (Numbers may overlap; many have co-occurring MI and SUD) Disability & early death Medical Costs Lost productivity Unemployment/Poverty Criminal Justice Impact on Family Costs are High 2.6 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) The Process of Developing Recommendations § Identify the behavioral health services most needed in our community. § Determine the level of need § Analyze potential costs, revenues, remaining need § Create recommendations for development of critical services _________________________________________________________________ Key Finding The local continuum of behavioral health treatment and support services is not sufficient to meet the need 2.6 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Larimer County Jail High Utilizers (4 bookings in 1 year in LC Jail): Costs of Crisis and Treatment Services Annual Expenditures (2013) TOTAL: $1,708,424 Crisis Services Treatment Services TOTAL: $ 239,159 2.6 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 2.5 Substance Use Disorders: The ASAM* Continuum of Care *ASAM: American Society of Addiction Medicine 0 0.5 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 1 2 3 4 2.1 Outpatient Services Intensive Outpatient/ Partial Hospitalization Services Residential Inpatient Services Medically Managed Intensive Inpatient Services Early Intervention Intensive Outpatient Services Partial Hospitalization Services Clinically Managed Low-Intensity Residential Services Clinically Managed Population-Specific High-Intensity Residential Services Clinically Managed High-Intensity Residential Services Medically Monitored Intensive Inpatient Services 2.6 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) …Rethink Everything… 2.6 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 2.6 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) New 24/7 Behavioral Health Services Center • Acute Treatment Unit (ATU) Acute mental illness stabilization when hospitalization not required 12 beds / 990 admissions • Withdrawal Management (f/k/a detox) Medically monitored 12 beds / 820 admissions • Short Intensive Residential (SIR) For substance use disorder treatment 11 beds / 300 admissions • Thorough Assessments Professionals skilled in both MI and SUD Connection to appropriate community service 7,600 assessments • Client Assistance Help paying for transportation, medications, co-pays, and deductibles 1,600 clients Services Needed: Facility 2.6 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) In the community… Encourage Others to Expand Provide 90 day for Substance Use Disorders 52 beds, 190 admissions • Increase Intensive Outpatient & Outpatient Services • 24/7 Certified Addictions Counselors • Client Assistance with Costs When living in Permanent Supportive Housing • Long-term Low Intensity Residential • For Those with Complex Needs Care Coordination (250 people) Support Services (100 people) …….………. ……………………….. 2.6 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Summary, Increased Capacity for Critical Services Estimate: Up to 4,700 individuals served, some duplicated Capacity Total Utilization Assessments 7,655 Focused Client Services (people) 1,970 Client Assistance 1,620 Care Coordination 250 Support Services, PSH 100 Admissions (admissions) 2,304 Acute Treatment Unit 986 Withdrawal Management 822 Short-term Intensive Residential 305 Low-Intensity Residential 191 TOTAL 11,929 2.6 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Estimated Costs OPERATING Personnel $ 8.6 million Client Assistance $ 2.4 Other $ 4.8 TOTAL: $15.8 million Less Revenues $ 4.0 Needed Annual Funding: $ 11.8 million Facility: 51,000 square feet, $20.4 million 2.6 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Treatment Works: Effectiveness Compared to Other Serious Chronic Diseases National Institutes of Health, 2012 Outcomes 2.6 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Value of the Investment Immeasurable Save lives! Maintain and restore health, healthy families, workplaces Target $$ to effective treatment Proven Outcomes in Study after Study Avoided use of health care system - Health Care Costs: ED, hospital, ambulance, primary care - Mental health care Avoided crime; lowered recidivism - Criminal justice system: law enforcement, prosecution, incarceration, etc. - Victim losses: bodily and emotional harm, property theft/damage Increased chances of employment; contributing taxes Significant increases in years of healthy life lived 2.6 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) A Sound Investment Studies Consistently Show Significant Economic Impact • Every dollar spent on addiction treatment programs yields a return of between $4 and $7 in reduced health, crime, and criminal justice costs, and impaired work (NIH, 2012) [= $40M return locally] • CA state treatment system: on average, substance abuse treatment cost $1,583 and is associated with a monetary benefit to society of $11,487 (>7:1 ratio) – mostly due to reduced costs of crime and increased employment earnings • Kaiser (CA): matched control group; those in substance use treatment had 35% less inpatient cost, 39% less ER cost, 26% lower total medical cost. 2.6 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) “Like every other health condition, we need to be sure we have adequate services available right here in our community so that we can give our families, friends and co-workers a fighting chance at recovery.” Anne Hudgens, Partnership Chair 2.6 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) • Potential reductions in calls vary by type from 5-15% • Efficiencies could be realized within police for avoided calls • Most impact would come from time saved responding to frequent utilizers 20 - 2,000 4,000 6,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Annual Call Volume Alcohol Drug Suicide Welfare Quantitative Benefits FCPS Response Hours & Cost 2.6 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) • Social Sustainability Department Strategic Plan: Foster increased availability and access to mental and behavioral healthcare through numerous objectives. • Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis: Residents are able to rapidly access and receive the depth of treatment needed for mental health, physical health, and substance abuse needs. • City’s 2016 Strategic Plan includes: Leverage and improve collaboration with other agencies to address homelessness, poverty issues, and other high priority human service needs. Alignment with Strategic Plans 21 2.6 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Other Qualitative Benefits may include: • Housing retention and reduction in emergency services • Coordination of services of the non-profit service providers who receive funding from the City’s Human Service Program funds. • Immediate referral options for Municipal Court, Special Agency Session, and Outreach Fort Collins Complements City Investments 22 2.6 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) Backup 23 2.6 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 24 Front Range Community Tax Rate Comparison & Considerations • Fort Collins is still lower than average with additional county tax • FC Considerations: • Renewal of KFCG • Other possible discussions • Revenue diversification • Climate Action • Transit / Vine & Lemay 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00% 10.00% Critical BH Srvcs Cultural County RTD City State 2.6 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) 1. Does Council have any questions about or feedback on the proposed recommendations for expanding critical behavioral health services in Larimer County? 2. Does Council have direction on City support for these recommendations? Council Direction Sought 2.6 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4660 : Critical Behavioral Health Services in Larimer County) DATE: STAFF: July 26, 2016 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Night Sky Initiative. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to inform Council of the current Night Sky Initiative and proposed staff work. The Night Sky Initiative is one element of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council support the initiative’s goals? If yes, 2. Does Council support staff bringing a resolution for Council consideration? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Following the adoption of the Nature in the City (NIC) Strategic Plan, staff began the early work of identifying current City efforts that were already in place to support City Practice and Policy ObjectiveCP2 (Attachment 1): CP2: Work cross-departmentally and with external partners toward a darker night sky. The NIC Strategic Plan encourages ensuring that existing dark sky locations are protected, baseline and trends in regional night skies are monitored, and regulatory changes to facilitate best practices for dark skies are implemented. This identification process led to the creation of a large interdepartmental team that is now organized through the City Manager’s Office. The team is made up of staff from: Utilities Building Services Planning Operation Services Police Services Safety, Security, and Risk management Natural Areas Recreation Partners from the National Park Service Objectives and Focus Areas The team has identified four main objectives and three focus areas. Objectives 1. Reduce sky glow (brightening of the night sky caused by outdoor lighting) 3 Packet Pg. 82 July 26, 2016 Page 2 2. Reduce light trespass (light being cast where it is not intended or needed) 3. Reduce glare (excessive brightness that causes visual discomfort) 4. Optimize light color, balancing night vision and health needs (e.g., reduce blue-rich white light) Meeting these objectives will not only improve the night sky but will also maintain safe environments, support human and wildlife health, and improve habitat for plants and wildlife. Focus Area Technology and Research Lighting o Research lighting trends and best practices with emphasis on night sky protection, energy efficiency, aesthetics, human and wildlife health. Safety and Security o Research lighting trends and best practices including public and private applications that reduce glare and improve visibility. Policy and Codes Land Use Code o Research, draft and vet applicable Land Use lighting code Building Code o Research, draft, vet, and enforce applicable best practice lighting codes Natural Areas Focus o Pursue independent 3rd party Dark Sky Certification o Continue regular night sky monitoring with regional partners Education and Awareness Develop website Continue existing education programs (Contractor Series, etc.) and develop new programs Conduct lighting tours and surveys with citizens Develop and promote best practice lighting material Work with local retail providers Scope The Night Sky Initiative objectives and focus areas include both operations internal to the City organization (street lighting, outdoor facility lighting, etc.) and external practices of residents and businesses (codes, education and awareness.) Public Outreach Staff has presented the Night Sky Initiative at the June Board and Commission Super Meeting, to the Energy Board, Land Conservation and Stewardship Board, and the Natural Resources Advisory Board. All Boards have been supportive and interested. Staff presented general concepts and goals and did not ask for any action from the boards. Next Steps If Council supports the Night Sky Initiative efforts, the team will continue in its work and will bring forward the draft Resolution at a future meeting for Council consideration. 3 Packet Pg. 83 July 26, 2016 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Nature in the City Night Sky Objective (PDF) 2. Draft Resolution (PDF) 3. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 84 56 Nature In The City Chapter 3: Policies 2015 4XDOLW\ 6WHZDUGVKLS 3KRWR&UHGLW $YD'LDPRQG &3 :RUN FURVVGHSDUWPHQWDOO\ DQG ZLWKH[WHUQDOSDUWQHUVWRZDUGDGDUNHU QLJKWVN\ Dark night skies are an important, yet sometimes overlooked value of nature. The absence of natural darkness that all living organisms have evolved with over time can have numerous negative impacts. Wildlife are impacted by artificial light and sky glow. Behavioral and physiological changes due to artificial light include altered circadian rhythms, spatial disorientation, disrupted reproduction, and altered predator/prey relationships. These impacts can be detrimental on their own, but are often combined with other environmental stressors, which may trigger population and ecosystem level changes. Human circadian rhythms can be impacted by bright nights as well, with a lack of quality sleep having many health consequences. Beyond health concerns, losing the ability to view a starry sky impacts stargazers, community heritage, connection with the natural environment, and a small-town character. The City will establish regional partnerships to address night sky brightness issues, including partnering with the National Park Service Night Skies Program and adjacent communities in Northern Colorado and Wyoming. Education, combined with a regional regulatory environment that fosters careful use of exterior lighting will be essential to conserve this resource at the regional scale. An ongoing citizen science program monitoring night sky brightness across the City annually provides a baseline condition and will show trends in night sky quality. Additionally, review and alignment of existing City Land Use and Building Codes related to lighting will be conducted to reflect best practices for exterior lighting. The City will incorporate night sky conservation standards regarding exterior lighting intensity, color temperature, and timing. Such best practices for exterior lighting can enhance safety, reduce energy use, and improve the environment. Finally, in important locations where the night sky is still relatively dark, such as Soapstone Prairie Natural Area, the City will seek recognition of these areas by independent certification programs. The City also has an opportunity to elevate its status, marketing appeal, and quality of life for its citizens by pursing Dark Sky Community certification. 2XWFRPH A regional darker night sky Dark Sky Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is committed to improving and maintaining our unique sense of place, neighborhood livability, safety, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins is growing and population density is increasing which can bring an increased amount of both residential and commercial exterior lighting; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins and its residents support conservation efforts and the natural environment through programs such as the Climate Action Plan and Nature in the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins seeks to promote a culture, both internally and externally, of innovation, best practice, and socially and environmentally friendly planning and actions; and WHEREAS, dark sky compliant lighting practices can preserve, protect, and enhance the night sky and can mitigate adverse impacts to human health and wildlife habitat; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins supports eliminating glare, reducing light trespass, and minimizing light pollution while conserving energy and resources; and WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins will lead by example by improving, retrofitting, and pursuing standards where necessary to support night sky protection efforts; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City will endorse and incorporate the principles and pursuit of protecting and preserving the night sky through implementation of best lighting practices at City-owned facilities and within City-owned lighting. Section 2. That the City will incorporate dark sky policies and standards into Building Codes, Land Use Codes, and Streetscape standards when applicable and appropriate. Section 3. That the City will educate and raise awareness publically to encourage best lighting practices throughout the community. Section 4. That the City will seek to obtain dark sky certification by an independent body for Natural Areas and other locations in the region that have high quality night skies; and that the City will continue to partner and monitor regional night sky measures annually. Section 5. That the City will pursue night sky protection without compromising health, safety or security. ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Draft Resolution (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 1 City Council Work Session Night Sky Initiative July 26, 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 3.3 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Direction Sought 1. Does Council support the initiative’s goals? If yes, 2. Does Council support staff bringing a resolution for Council consideration? 2 3.3 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Purpose Nature in the City Objective CP2: Work cross-departmentally and with external partners toward a darker night sky. The Night Sky Initiative will: § Maintain safety and security § Develop and implement best practices in outdoor lighting § Reduce light pollution § Support human and ecological health 3 3.3 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Objectives § Reduce sky glow (increase night sky visibility) § Reduce light trespass and light glare § Optimize light color and balance 4 3.3 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Focus Area – Technology and Research § Research and evaluate new and next generation lighting • LEDs/rapidly evolving technology • New, more effective measures and considerations: • color temperature, efficiency, percent blue light, etc. § Track and ensure meeting existing goals: • Energy conservation • Cost efficiency • Safety and Security 5 3.3 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Focus Area – Policy and Codes § Land Use and Building Code • Incorporate best practices into code updates § Natural Areas • Pursue Dark Sky Certification from an independent body § Citywide • Consider Council Resolution and future ordinances to support stated efforts and objectives 6 3.3 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Focus Area – Education and Awareness Promote Outdoor Lighting Best Practices: § Light only where you need it § Light only when you need it § Shield lights and direct them downward § Use the minimum amount of light needed § Select the most energy efficient lighting § Select lamps with warmer colors 7 3.3 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 2003 Northeast Blackout 8 3.3 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 9 3.3 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 10 3.3 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 11 3.3 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 12 Bright light glare makes traffic signage hard to read. 3.3 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 13 Walmart in Longmont 3.3 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) 14 Overlighting can create dark shadows. 3.3 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) Direction Sought 1. Does Council support the initiative’s goals? If yes, 2. Does Council support staff bringing a resolution for Council consideration? 15 3.3 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Nature in the City Night Sky Objective (4663 : Night Sky Initiative) requirements. $750 first time NASHVILLE Yes Yes Yes Yes, non transferrable Only to n’bors sharing common wall or driveway Yes,Non-Primary only; 3% limit by census tract No more than 4 sleeping rooms. $50 annual SANTE FE Yes Yes Not originally, just started. Permit in Residential zones; Registration in nonresidential zones Yes, within 200 ft Cap of permits in some areas; number may be revisited and changed whenever cap is met; Some units may not be rented more than 17x a year; no directly adjoining units Yes Inspections $100-$325 annually depending on type ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: STR Comparison Matrix (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' ! 3 ' , " *- " &! ) ,( '- ; + +( ' 0 " '- /( +, &! " ' ( , . , ! " & # 1.2 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' 1 ! 3 ' , " *- " &! , )( '- ; ( . 0 " '' ( + &! " , '( . 1 - ! "& & ! 7 & !# ) ;"%2 ! & # 1.2 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' 1 ! 3 ' , " *- " &! -( / ; . )( + 0 " + /( -+ &! " , ( . # + ! 2" & # 1.2 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' ! 3 ' , " *- " &! / +( ) ; ( , 0 " . +( '. &! " ' ( +' . 0 ! "& &" # ' ! 2! ! & 2 # 1.2 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' 1 ) ! 3 ' , " *- " &! . ( ', ; / ( - 0 " '- ( +) &! " , )( ' . ! " 2" # ! " # 1.2 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) ' )1 ! 3 ' , " *- " &! - .( '+ ; ) ,( 0 " + /( -+ &! " ) ,( . / ! 2 # 1.2 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! , ,( '. ; / ( ) 0 " ' +( +' &! " /( ' . 1 - ! "& & # ! 3 4% 4% $ ' ! 3 ' & . ,( ' ' ( +- '' '( ' ' ( ! , )( ' / )( -+ + ( - ', .( - ,( ) /( -' '/ )( ++ ' .( , .( - '( +) '+ )( -- + +( !" , ,( ' / ,( +- '' )( -/ ++ ( ) ! " "# , ! " # 1.2 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! ' ( + ; + ( ' 0 " '+ ( +- &! " )( + . + ! 2 & 7 4 ! 2 # 1 1 ! 3 %% 0 $ ' # 4%% # ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! / ( + ; + .( '+ 0 " '' )( +) &! " +( , . 1 ! " # ' ! # ! 3 %% 0 4%% 0 $ ' ) ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! - -( '. ; / -( / 0 " ' /( +) &! " + ( ') . 0# ! " & # ! # # ! 3 %% 0 4%% ) $ ' 0 ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! ( '+ ; ' ( 0 " , /( +' &! " ', ( -, . 0 . ! "& & & &7 # / ! # ! 3 %% # 4%% # $ ' 0 ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " &! / +( , ; , ( ' 0 " -. '( - &! " - ( , . ) ! " "# , ! & &7 # ! 3 %% 4%% 1 # $ ' 1 ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " 0 6 / ,( + 0 " ! & - ( - 0 " : 2 - ,( - 0 " : '( ' 2 '( ; 4 0 . ( ', - ! # #0 ! 3 %% 1 4%% 0 $ ' ! 3 ' 1.2 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " .4 + ( -4'+ , '( '- '-4++ '( +' +-4-+ , .( ') --4)+ ) ,( -+ )-4,+ . +( , ,-5 ( + 2 - +( . + ! 67 8 !9# 0 6 0 " 0 " : 0 " : ; 4 0 ' + - ) 1.2 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) " *- " $ % & ' ( )' $ %*& ' ( +, % & - .( ' %*& / ( '/ 0 1" ' /( . 2 ) /( + . ' 32! # / 0000000000 1 /0 0000000000000 /00 0000 1 0 / 0000000000 )1 /)0 0000000000000 0 ) /100000000000 1 22222222 0 * + 1.2 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) !! "# !" # !" # $ % & ' ( )# * + ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Short Report for STR Feedback Form (4670 : Short Term Rentals (STRs)) Staff has highlighted other community actions here and in previous work sessions. (Attachment 3) Since October, both Denver and Boulder have adopted ordinances. Boulder is in the implementation phase and has chosen to not allow non-primary resident STRs; however, many ads are still active. Boulder application fee is $130 and is not conducting any on-site inspections. Denver prohibits non-primary STRs; the program includes a $25 annual fee and no on-site inspection. 1 Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation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acket Pg. 36 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation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acket Pg. 35 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) . ##.&)"+&+ -+ + ',# ) #$ % +&.% % - #&'# %2* % ) %#0 %- )&%$ %+2& ) % % % $ %+*%$ % + *+ + ) + . #&$ % *+ %+ &%%*,''&)+#) )9*# % )*+),+,) ')&! +*')&'&* &)+ ) 4)&! +*. ## %#, 3 - ) + &%& ,% (, +&.%$ % %* %* & '# + + ** 2 ** # 2.#"# % *0+&')"4 - - #&'$ %+& ,% 0 % *+ + &) +&.%5*',# *' *%) +& .0+ )&, + + &%& ',# ) #$$ % + *+ )&, &,+ +&.%2 %#, % $&) % *2 " )"*2 ',# )+%+)* 8) 0# % %*4 - %- *+$ %+* %,% (, +&.%.0 % % * % % + .0*+ +) + * %* & '# % #' , *+* /'#&) + ) . + )0)20 0# 2&)&% &&+4 - % &#&)%- )%0+&+ *+) +0 ,% % %% )*2 &# 0# + % %',# )+4 - .#"# % % %'&. ).* % 2# ++ )%. # %,'% ) + ) $&-#*. ##* *%&.) $&-#+ %+ )* + &%*%) + #',# **) *4 - ) % % 2 %#, % '#%+ % %$ %+ % % #&. )*2'&" +')"*%&+ ) ) %*' *4 - &)" % . + +0& &)+&## %*+&&$'# $ %+ / *+ % ')&! +*%$ %+ %% &)+*% +& *+# * % .*0% ) *+ &''&)+,% + *4 . ##,+ # 1 %** **$ %+$ + &+ + ** ,'&%# % ) )&%+ & ')&' )+0&%&## - %, %&&+ ##*)".0. + %+ &,%)04 # ( !'' ''" #(+ !! 354% &! # & $$(-##)!!,.%#0&$$ ) ##09** ** ')&' )+ *. ## %#, 4 . ##) * '')&/ $+ #0 ?DAA2AAA % +* )*+0 )& &' )+ &%*4 + &%##02+ . ## - + # +0+&) * + ** **$ %+%%,##0%&++& / + &%*,$ ) ) % / &)##)%&%*,$ )*; 9< &)+ %- )9&,# )9) # 02&#&)&$ +)&'&# +% ) 4 * * &%. ## ++ *) + &%& + &)4 %+ )*+0 )& &' )+ &%*2 + *')&'&* + ++ .&,# %- *+) *&,) *+&,% )+" + &##&. % - " 0')&! +*3 B4 - #&'+ +&.%)%% %+ +0 C4 *+# * +&.%9)% .0 % % %* % ')& )$2 %#, % %*+## % + .0* %+& + +&.%) D4 ) ,##9+ $ *+ +&.&)"*' ##0 &) +&.%2* )- % *# *&%+&*+" &# )*%% -&+ +&+ +0& &)+&## %*&%$++ )*) + #+& +&.%5* ,+,) E4 - #&'% $'# $ %+')& )$& 0 )9)&,% - %+*+& ')&, %')+% )* '. + #&# *+" &# )* F4 * %% $'# $ %+'# $" % % % $ %+*2 %#, % &# 0# + % 2',# )+2%% )* % #&. )* ) % % %) - %, %&%+) ,+ &%* % + &%+&+ ** **$ %+. ## %) * $'+% #' + &) % 1+ &%+& *+# - ) %- *+$ %+* %+& +&.%4&+ + %2+ . ##.&)"+&')&,) *,''&)+ % ,% % )&$+ +0& &)+&## %**. ##* )%+*2&%+ &%*2*'&%*&)* '*2 3 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) ' +&.%* 2# %%. #&$ % 4 %$ % *+)+ - ,$) ##+ +) % *+ % &) &&+& + )%$/ $ 1 * ,% % &''&)+,% + * &)+ ,+,) & +&.%4 +&.% %#, *') #* )&%+ % &,+ &## - %, )&$)&*' +& %+ %&)+ +& )$&%0& %+ *&,+ 2*. ##*+ &* )&%+ % *+&&+ ##*)".0 +. %*+.##&.& %&,+ &## - %, %+ +0& &)+&## %*2&,%+0& ) $ )2++ & &#&)&2% ##,*+)+ 0+ &,%)0++ % 4 * &,%) *) $&) ')+ ,#)#0 *) 0+ ++ +* & ') #*. + %+ &,%) *%+ )# # *) '+ &%** 4 *' * )- *+ ++ . ## ,% - % - #&' %') &) + 1 0+ ,* % **% ')&' )+0&.% )*& +&.%2% %#, 3 . ## + &9+&) *&,) &) +&.%2')&- % # )* '%,* % ***,''&)+2. # $' &% % *+" &# )*5% *+& ) + % %- )&%$ %++ +5*. #&$ % +&+ #) )&$$,% +0%- * +&)*4)&! +*+&*,''&)+ + *+" &# )*. ## %#, 3 - + *+ + +%$% +&.%2-&+ &) +&.%% *2% &,*&% # - ) % ) *&,) *% $')&- $ %+* &)+ ) 4 - )&$&+ &%& +&.%&$$ ) #* +&) - #&'$ %++ +*,''&)+**+)+ &%&$ )&.+ %) + *- )%+ %- )&%$ %+ %. +&.%,* % ** *%+ ) - 4 - ,''# $ %+ % + , +% %+ 0 % *+)+ ,% % &''&)+,% + *+&# - ) % % % + * ** **$ %+*&## + )&$0 )+&0 )4 - , # % ')+% )* '*% - #&' % *+)+ *+& %) * &$$,% +0')+ '+ &%2# )* ' %&&) %+ &%2 %#, % *' ##0')+% )* '*. + + +0& &)+&## %*2+ &)+&## %* &.%+&.% - #&'$ %+,+ &) +02%+ &.%+&.%&)+&## %*,* % ****& + &%4 - )&- % ,* % ***,''&)+ &) +&.%,* % ** *2* )- % *+ 6&% ) 7 &)##+ % * +&.%% #' % ,* % ** **, 0')&- % + $. + ,* ,#+&&#*%) *&,) *2 %#, % +)" % '&# *2+2%&+ ),* ,# % &)$+ &%4 - ' % + ) + #2) *+,)%+%&- )##*+&) )&%+ /' ) % % +&.%0 - #&' % % $'# $ %+ % *+)+ 0 &)*+) % + % % + & )&%+ )&,%# - #% % % % + / *+ % ,* % * *$ / % +&.% 4 . ## - #&'% # - ),% (, /' ) % + + %&,) *#&#*%- * +&)*+& /'#&) +&.%% *+# * *+)&% %+ +0 + + *) & % 1# % # +*+ *+ %+ - +&.%& )4)&! +*. ## %#, 3 - - #&'$ %+& %,+ %+ 2&$' ## % %# ))% &) +&.%+ +,% (, #0 %+ * +*& )%'&+ %+ #4 - )&, % +) + $)" + % %$ ** % +&+ &$$,% +0%- * +&)*4 - - #&' % 0 )9)&,%')& )$$ % 2 - %+*%+ - + *+ +). % - )* $& )' )&,'*+& /' ) % % /'#&) +&.%% - + $) *&%+&*+02 /'#&) %*' % $&% 0 %+ *+) +4 3 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation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acket Pg. 32 Attachment: Exhibit C (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) 9* 9 A * A?;>;<888; ;* * A?:=:::898 9899* ? ** == 99 A?:>9888:: 9.<:>/?/>A . :@? @A;8299@-<>*8;82;8*<<;<2>A->*89A2?=?-9*98=A2;8398:*89A298:8->>*89A2?8 . 9;=?/;; A?:<::=88= <= =* >*:8-= ?* 9**+ 98A</=?< A?:<:9>A9: 9:* 9* 2* A?:<:9>A99 99* 9* 2* A?:;<9;889 * 59* *, :89:88;:>:90 1 A?:;<9;88< * 59* * A?:<;8A8<< <<* :* A?:=:::88< <* > * A?:=;;889< 9<* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;889; 9;* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;889= 9=* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;889: 9:* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;9898 * *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;889? 9?* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;;88; * :*0:89=88:8=981+ 9988: A?:=;/;;/89@ A?:=;;:899 99* :*0:89=88:8=981 A?:=;;:89A 9A* :*0:89=88:8=981 A?:=;;888A A* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;889> 9>* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;:89@ 9@* :*0:89=88:8=981 A?:=;;8898 98* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:=;;988= * *0:89<88:@??>1 A?;>:<@889 9* *9 * A?;>:;:889 *33.* A?:>9:;88: :* :* A?:<:9>898 98* 9* *+ 98A8/<@? A?:>9888;< :>/?/>A*9.<*@A<;2=8 :@?0 1*89A2 @9@-;;*89A2 :88*@A<;2;?8*89A2:88*@A<;2;?8*89A2:88*@A<;2;?8* A?:=:::88@ @* > * A?;>::8889 * A?;>::9889 *+ @A8;<AAA, @A;82:<39;8-98*48:A2;>3A+ @A;82:<3;:*8:A2;>39:->?*@A;82:<39:-=:*<<;82:<39-8@* 1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Exhibit A (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) * :* A?:<:<8889 94:* * A?:<;:<889 9** < * :+ A?89<8<: A?:;98?88: :* *+ @>8;9@8;* A>88A>:A A?:;98@889 9* 9* A?:;98A889 9/ 9* *+ :89:88=>A;8 A?:>9;:889 4* * :89988:@??A A?:<::>88: :889* :4 9 ?* 9* * A?:<:8;88= :</?/>A @A=@2;8*8?2@-@8*8<;2:>>-<*9::82:8-9+@A=@2:;;-99*=@9=2>;-9?*>;;?2@8*@@<:2AA-<*8:=>2<8-A*9 A?:;99=88; ;* 0:89988>=8;81 A?:;99=88< <* 0:89988>=8;81 A?:=:::89= == 99* ? * A?:<:9>889 94:* 9* *+ 98A;/;>>* A<8A@;8:4A=8<=<@A A?:<:9>88; ;* 9* *+ 98A8/<A= A?:<:9>88< <* 9* *+ 98A;/;<8 A?:<:9>88= =* 9* *+ 98A8/<A; A?:=:>?88: :* 9 9 A * A?:><9<88; ;*<*=*@*A*98*:?*:@*:A4:> :4?4;>-A9 ;84** :?*8=<2;<=-A>*@A==2;<9-9<*@A=<2;@=*8=2;;<-A=* 9=*:;->9 A?:><9<889 9* >* :*?*;:** * * , ;:* @A==2883;;@-:<+ 888=28839>A-99+ @A=<2883;A=-?<+ 8A=?2;83::-A9 A?:><9<899 994A 9:** A?:=;;888: :* *0:89<88:@??>1 A?:;<8?889 22* * A?;=<<:889 9* :* A?:<;8A8;> ;>* 9* A?:<:9>88A A* 9* *+ 98A9/;@: A?;=9=8889 9* * A?;>;>=889 9*--- *0:88988<??:1 A?;=<=8889 9* 9 * A>88<9<8, * @A<?2<39:=*.===;2=93*?=4* ?;-9?* <929<39> A?:;98@88: :4 ;* 9*, ;*:>-:=*98< 9* 9*:>-:=. ;*98< ;+ 98 :89=88<@9:9 A?:<:?@889 9* 9* :4 9? 9* * A?;=99888: 9* 9* 9*:*;4<* + <=8<2;<3<:-9<+ 88892:>3>89-?A+ *9=*.A8::2==3* .<=9:2=<3:9-:@* :;->>+ @A; A?;=998889 9* 9* 9*:*;4<* + @A<;29<3>;-;@+ :?:?2<=3?8-;?+ <8=;29;3@;-?:+ 888828839?-9>+ A8882883>;-<A+ 88882883A-?8+ A?;=9:<889 9* 9* A?:><;<889 9* * A?:;<8=889 22* * A?;>:8=8:= ?* **9;@-< *@A=92=>-< :@?*@A=92;89*8;A29<8-:*?8::298A->;*@=;?2:88-@ :@?*8:<299A-<?+ A?:<;8A8<: <:* :* A?:<:9>88? ?* 9* *+ 98A:/;<> A?:<:9>88@ @* 9* *+ 98A8/<@A A?:><;<88: :* * A?:>9;A889 ** A?;=<<=889 9*/ /* A?;=<8=88= 9* *,9.<;=/?/>A* @A<?2<3<@ 5:@? 9* 8;?2=:39<=* 89;2@3:?8 A?:<:;>889 9* * A?:=:::889 9* > *+ A?8:<;=@ A?:>9:<889 * A?;=9@8889 9* ;* * :0:8898@?;9;1 A?:<:9>88> >* 9* 2*+ 98A8/<A9 A?:><;A889 9* ) *0:8898>;=9:1+ :89<889;8?; A?:;<9:889 * *+ A?8:<;:= A?;>:<A88; 9**9 * A?:>9;?88: 9 98* 9* *:* A?:>9;?889 9498 9* 9* *:* A?:<;8A99> 99>* = * A?;>;8888? 9.<9.<;>/?/>A**@A=;2:?9-? *8?2;8. >@*@A=;2 . >@9:@-;@*<;;2;839;>-<?. :@?*8<2;83 . 9>=-?@* A?:;98?889 9* * @=8;??><+ A=8>?=?8 A?;=<8=889 9* + 9A=9/:8@ A?;=98A88= 9;= =* ** A?:;<99889 9* / *+ :89988:@>:9 A?:;98>88? ?* ** 98A;/9:= A?;>:9=88; ;4<** A?:=:::89> 9<* ? ** A * 82<=39;?A-=>*A=:=/?/>A*9:8*9=8*9;=*882<=39;=* 9=*:;-=?* .<<=A2;@3 A?;=<><88; ;* *; * A?:=;9:88: 9* :**, @A<=2;83999-@8488:?29=3;9->:4<=;<29=3:>-9<4@A<=2;83;>@-A?:=/?/>A* 889<2;839@? A?:<:@:889 9* *0:88?88;=;<@1 A?:<;8A9A: 9A:* = *+ = 9?A* = * A?:<:8;88> 9.<:</?/>A*98:=2:8@-89+:9;2;83A8-:*@A=@2::;-?9*=?=:29839A-9?*88?2@8*@A=@2:<;-:. 1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Exhibit A (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) A?:<:9?88; ;8 9<*** :88+ 9<*9?=+ :+ 9<*;@+ :8:+ 9<*:9; A?8@:=99 A?:=;8@898 * = * A?:=:<;889 :* A * ;8 * ;8 * A?:=:>?88; ;* 9* 9* A * ;8 * A?:<;;=889 9* * A?:<;;=88: :* * A?:<;;=88; ;* * A?:<;;=88< <* * A?:<;;=88= =* * A?:<;;=88> >* * A?:<;;=88? ?* * A?:<;;=88@ @* * A?:<;;=88A A* * A?;>;=?88: :* 9* * A?:=:::88? ?* > *0 A?:=:/::/98:1 A?:;<<9889 9* *0:88<88;;>8=1+ :89988;:=A? A?:><:=889 * *+ :89<888@?:A A?;>:9@889 9 * A?:<:9?88< :<8 :4:<8=8 9*>=:** A?:=;:?889 9* *= * A?:<::=889 94:* ??-@4 * 9*2* A?:><9=889 *+ :89;88><@8: A?:><;;88: :* *: * A?;>:;<889 * * A?;>:8=88= 2=2* ** @;:/:<@* A=8=::=:+ * A?;>:9=889 94;@ :**+ :88=88998?> A?:;98>89A :* * @@8A2;?-?> :* @@8A298A-A8*=<9>2:;-A<*:8-A@*89::2;839;@->A*@A=?29=8*89::2;839:@-9; A?:>9:?889 9 @:*4 : * A?;>;<888: :* * A?;>;<8889 9* * A?:>9::889 9* 9* A?:=;9:88< 9* *:**@A<=2;83999-@+ 8:?29=3;9->:+ <=;<29=3:>-9<:=/?/>A+ <=;<29=3<<-?@+ 8:<2<=39==-=:+ @A<=2;83<89-:@* 89<2;839@?+ @ A?;=<8=88> 9* ,9.<* @A<?28<3 <@ :@?+ 88;?2=:3 . 9<=+ 889;28@3 <?9+ @A<?28<39A=-=@+ A?:=:::89: 9:* ? * A?;=<=888: :* 9 * A?:>9;9889 94:*4;8 ;* * A?:;<9888: :* / *+ A?:;<88A8@ ,:;/?/>A+ @A:>2<;3?;:-=@+ 89:;29:3;8=-=A+ 9A-A? ?<-==* :8=>28;39A-A9+ :@;>2<@3; A?:;<9888< <* / *+ :* / * 9>8=/;98+ :89<88:>88=:;/?/>A* :;*@A:>2<;3?@@-8= + *89:;29:3 A?:;<98889 9* / * A?;=99A88= =* : * A?;=9=888: :* * A?:>99<889 9* *+ A>8;8;?9+ :89=88=?:=@- A?:>98889> 9.<:>/?/>A* @A;8299@-<>+8;82;8+<<;<2>A->8+89A2:=?-9:+ . 9+ 89A2>8 . *@A;82;>:-<+89A2>8+@A;82; A?:;98>8:9 >* ** >*8:=2=9-9>*@A;A2;83<8-??*8:82;83;-;*@A;A2;83<A-8A :@?*9:82;83=?-?*A8-@*8:=2=;-@<. A?:;98>88> >* ** >*8:=2=9-9>*@A;A2;83<8-??*8:82;83;-;*@A;A2;83<A-8A :@?*9:82;83<?-;;*@A-9. A?:>9;@889 9* / * A?:;98>88@ @* *+ 98A</=?: A?:>9:?88< @: 9* * A?:=:<<889 9* ;* A * A?;=9=>889 9* * A?;>;;988< <* * A?:><:;88; ;* *+ 9.<:>/?/>A+ ;* @A<;2883=8 :@?*89A2883@?8-@9 *@A<=28839@;-;;9.<:>+ 89=2883;=*@A<=2883 A?:;<9;88; * 59* * A?:<::=88; ;*<4= = * 9** A?:;99=88: :* 0:89988>=8;81 A?:<:9?88A 988 =** A?:<:@9889 9* *0:88<88A:9@81 A?:=:::88= 9>@ =4 9@ >* > *+ :88<88>;A?= A?:<;8A8;= ;=* 9* A?;=<<;889 9* 9* A?;>;=>889 9* * * A?;>;;988= =* * A?;>;;9889 9* * ! " # " ' &!%(!$#$ & "' EXHIBIT A 1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Exhibit A (4665 : MID BID Formation ORD) Carrie Baumgart Markley Motors Chief Operating Officer of Markley Motors representing the car dealers in the district ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Initial Proposed Board (4661 : MID BID Formation)