The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 09/24/2019 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor City Council Chambers Kristin Stephens, District 4, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Susan Gutowsky, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Julie Pignataro, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Ken Summers, District 3 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Emily Gorgol, District 6 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk Adjourned Meeting September 24, 2019 6:00 p.m. (Amended 9/23/19) Persons wishing to display presentation materials using the City’s display equipment under the Citizen Participation portion of a meeting or during discussion of any Council item must provide any such materials to the City Clerk in a form or format readily usable on the City’s display technology no later than two (2) hours prior to the beginning of the meeting at which the materials are to be presented. NOTE: All presentation materials for appeals, addition of permitted use applications or protests related to election matters must be provided to the City Clerk no later than noon on the day of the meeting at which the item will be considered. See Council Rules of Conduct in Meetings for details. 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.  CALL MEETING TO ORDER  ROLL CALL 1. Consideration of a motion to adjourn into executive session. “I move that the City Council go into executive session for the purpose of meeting with the City’s Attorneys and City Management Staff to discuss the following matters as permitted under City Charter Article II, Section 11(2), City Code Section 2-31(a)(2) and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(b): City of Fort Collins Page 2 1. Specific legal questions related to potential litigation regarding the City’s responsibility for environmental remediation of conditions at the Larimer County Landfill; and 2. Specific legal questions related to a draft Compliance Order on Consent pertaining to environmental remediation of conditions at the Larimer County Landfill.”  OTHER BUSINESS 1. Consideration of a proposed rehearing on the Consolidated Service Plan for the Northfield Metropolitan Districts Nos. 1 through 3, to be conducted at City Council’s October 1, 2019, meeting.  ADJOURNMENT City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC) Kristin Stephens, District 4, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Susan Gutowsky, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Julie Pignataro, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Ken Summers, District 3 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Emily Gorgol, District 6 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Delynn Coldiron 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. City Council Work Session September 24, 2019 After the Adjourned Council Meeting, which begins at 6:00 p.m. • CALL TO ORDER. 1. 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations. (staff: Darin Atteberry, Mike Beckstead, Lawrence Pollack; 15 minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to review the additional 2020 Budget Revision Offers requested by City Council during the September 10 Work Session. The request was specifically for lower cost, one- time funding that could inform a 2020 BFO Offer or an upcoming policy discussion that would support the City Council’s Priority Dashboard. 2. Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions. (staff: Ginny Sawyer; 10 minute staff presentation; 50 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to clarify the desired goal, outcome, and process in achieving the Council Priority, “Reimagine Boards and Commissions”: Better structure the board and commission system to set up success into the future, align with Outcome Areas and allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that allow for greater use of ad hoc meetings, diverse stakeholders and additional community participation. 3. Northeast Fort Collins Planning Discussion. (staff: Rebecca Everette, Theresa Connor, Dean Klingner, Jeff Mihelich; 15 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to discuss planning considerations and policy guidance in northeast Fort Collins (north of Vine Drive, east of Lemay Avenue and generally encompassed in the Mountain Vista Subarea). As the largest area of mostly vacant, agricultural land in the Growth Management City of Fort Collins Page 2 Area, significant development is anticipated over the coming decades. Multiple development applications have been approved in recent years or are currently undergoing development review. As development occurs, amendments to various City plans may be requested, including the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, Master Street Plan, and Parks and Recreation Master Plan. New and proposed development in the area has necessitated a holistic analysis of utility provision, the transportation network and community amenities in northeast Fort Collins, which pose both opportunities and constraints for the City. City Council may be involved in various decisions related to planning and development in this area of the community, including plan amendments, development plans, annexation and zoning decisions, utility service agreements, metro districts, and funding for capital projects. Staff seeks to provide background information for Council and to understand Council’s expectations for new development in northeast Fort Collins. • OTHER BUSINESS. • ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: September 24, 2019 Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director Darin Atteberry, City Manager Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review the additional 2020 Budget Revision Offers requested by City Council during the September 10 Work Session. The request was specifically for lower cost, one-time funding that could inform a 2020 BFO Offer or an upcoming policy discussion that would support the City Council’s Priority Dashboard. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What questions or feedback does City Council have on the requested Offers to support the Council Priority Dashboard?  Is City Council ready to consider First Reading of the Annual Appropriation Ordinance, currently scheduled for October 15, 2019? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In preparation for the 2020 Annual Appropriation Ordinance, the City conducts its Budget Revision process for the second year of the biennial budget. Those 2020 Budget Revision Offers were originally reviewed with the Council Finance Committee on August 19 and then with the full Council during the work session on September 10. During that work session Council provided guidance to include all the proposed Revision Offers excluding the Offer for ‘Train Horn Noise- Federal Lobbying.’ During the meeting Council requested staff to review the Council Priority Dashboard and evaluate options for lower cost, one-time funding that could inform either a 2020 BFO Offer or an upcoming policy discussion. The Executive Leadership Team (ELT) discussed various Offer ideas and based on that dialogue staff is bringing forth the following Offers which are described in Attachment 1: • Mobile Home Park Neighborhood Improvement and Community Building Grant Fund • Mobile Home Park Public Engagement and Owner-Renter Handbook • Childcare Access and Affordability Funding • Evaluation of Microplastics and Impact on River Health • Emerging Contaminants-Public Education and Outreach to Protect River Health • Reduce Plastic Pollution-Outreach and Data Collection • Effective, Innovative and High Performing Board • Urban Lakes Water Quality Management Policy and Guidance Development During those discussions the ELT decided there were areas of potential Offers that were better saved to compete for funding in BFO 2020. Here is the context around those areas: Climate Action Plan • As reported in the August 20 Memo to City Council, Fort Collins is well-positioned to achieve the 2020 climate action goals of a 20% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels. In accordance with the global protocol, 1 Packet Pg. 3 September 24, 2019 Page 2 current projections indicate emissions will be below 2005 levels by between 19-25% by the end of 2020 and between 29-32% by 2021. • In the 2019-2020 budget, Council funded updates to the Climate Action Plan, Energy Policy, and Road to Zero Waste Plan (total of $150,000 of investment) - all of which are collectively being updated together via the “Our Climate Future” process. • Our Climate Future is focused on the 2030 goals, asking what equitable and scalable solutions are needed to achieve our community goals around climate action, energy, and zero waste. • While Our Climate Future is set to run through 2020, staff is also working to identify what are those high impact, scalable solutions that could be addressed via the 2021-2022 budget process. Affordable Housing and Mobile Home Parks (MHP) • The Revision Offer going forward regarding Affordable Housing Revenue Study sets staff up to have needed information to put forward appropriate Offers for the next BFO cycle. • The Revision Offers suggested for the MHP priority will provide needed resources to support resident relations, support, and translation services. • Staff is also planning/preparing to address additional resource gaps with budget Offers for the 2021-22 budget cycle in an effort to respond to Council’s priorities for affordable housing and manufactured homes. • Staff will be evaluating priorities of this work which will be informed by the affordable housing strategic planning process.\ • PDT and SSD are leading the work related to the Health and Housing Grant awarded by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for $795,657 over two years with the following top goals: o Implementation of City Plan, City Strategic Plan, and City’s adopted housing policies o Identify and implement policy and code changes to improve housing affordability o Co-create policy options with impacted residents • A memo went to Council in the September 19 packet with the requested list of unfunded Offers related to affordable housing and manufactured homes. Air Quality • In support of the Council priority related to particle pollution, staff will use existing resources to develop a monitoring plan to inform a potential 2021-22 BFO Offer. This will include working with CSU to design a pilot program for deployment of low cost and high-quality particle monitors. Ultimately, building out this type of monitoring network could provide community members better tools to see and respond to particle pollution episodes, such as wildfire smoke events. ATTACHMENTS 1. Council requested Offers (PDF) 2. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 4 2020 Budget Revisions ‐Council Requested Offers September 24, 2019 ATTACHMENT 1 City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Neighborhood Livability & Social Health Contact: Svc Area: Planning, Dev & Transportation Related Offer #: N/A Department: Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svcs Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 100 - General Fund $50,000 $50,000 2) $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 100-General Fund: Reserves $50,000 $50,000 2) $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 NLSH 1.4 - Co-create a more inclusive and equitable community that promotes unity and honors diversity Mobile Home Park Neighborhood Improvement and Community Building Grant Fund Marcy Yoder It establishes a grand fund for public investment in mobile home parks neighborhoods to improve livability, safety, sustanability, and equitable access to City services. Performance A metric has yet to be developed for this Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: Choose Primary Strategic Objective: The fund would award grants of approximately $1,000 -$5,000 per project to neighbors, property managers, and/or property owners through an application-based approach with selection criteria developed collaboratively by mobile home park residents, City staff, property managers, and mobile home park owners. Projects funded could include sewer scoping, tree trimming, community events, recycling, exploration of single water metering, etc., to address immediate concerns and build agency within the mobile home parks to continue to advocate for their neighborhoods. It is intended to foster co-creation by the City and neighbors through City support for neighborhood leadership training and funding neighbor led projects that meet goals outlined in the Sustainable Neighborhood framework and Neighborhood Connections initiative. City staff provides the structure and direction for the process but empowers neighbors to lead and implement projects. The fund will be modeled on both the collaborative level public participation of Sustainable Neighborhoods action planning and implementation, as well as, the best practices and lessons learned from the 2017-2018 Vibrant Neighborhood Grand Fund for neighborhood led projects throughout the City. Timeline: Q4 2019 Community meetings for each Mobile Home Park in City limits and Growth Management Area to determine common issues of interest and grant funding selection criteria. Work with partner organization to engage residents. Develop the grant application and selection criteria. Q1 2020 Outreach on grant application, process, and selection criteria. Host application preparation events in mobile home parks, community centers and libraries. Award funding and conduct leadership training for grantees. Neighborhood Liaisons assist with initial project scoping, implementation, and support. Q2-4 2020 Neighborhood projects and funding reporting completed. City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Neighborhood Livability & Social Health Contact: Svc Area: Planning, Dev & Transportation Related Offer #: Department: Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svcs Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 100 - General Fund $10,200 $10,200 2) $0 $0 $10,200 $10,200 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 100-General Fund: Reserves $10,200 $10,200 2) $0 $0 $10,200 $10,200 NLSH 1.3 - Improve accessibility to City and community programs and services to low- and moderate- income populations Mobile Home Park Public Engagement and Owner/Renter Handbook Marcy Yoder Provides a resource to specialized segment of our community, mobile home park residents. Translation increases acessibility for residents that speak/read Spanish. Performance A metric has yet to be developed Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: Choose Primary Strategic Objective: Neighborhood Services will develop a specialized version of the existing Landlord & Tenant Handbook for mobile home residents, property managers, and owners. Review of the handbook by a subject matter expert in the legal field with a focus on issues surrounding mobile home park livability, rights and responsibilities and alignment with messaging for the revised Mobile Home Park Act is necessary to assure accuracy and quality of the material. Of the total, $5,200 will be needed to translate the document into Spanish. Neighborhood Services will host a training opportunity when the handbook is complete. City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Economic Health Contact: Svc Area: Sustainability Services Related Offer #: Department: Social Sustainability Capital? Offer Description: ECON 3.3 - Enhance business engagement to address existing and emerging business needs Childcare Access and Affordability Funding Adam Molzer Addresses childcare access and affordability barriers and impact experienced by the business workforce. ECON 30. % of residents responding very good/good to the City's performance in - Support of businesses NLSH 85. Human Service Client Impact Performance Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: Choose Primary Strategic Objective: This offer supports the City's efforts to respond to systems-level work emerging in the community around the issue of childcare affordability and accessibility. The lack of affordable childcare is one of the main barriers impacting workforce recruitment and retention in Fort Collins. The City's role is to assist with reducing barriers, increasing capacity, and responding to childcare needs. The City is aligning its efforts with the Larimer County-led childcare objective work, which has adopted the recommendations of the Talent 2.0 Childcare Task Force, and will focus on: o Data & Public Awareness o Funding Affordability o Facilities/Codes/Land Use/Regulatory o Workforce Development City staff are serving on the County's Steering Committee and Sub-Committees, which are currently beginning their work. Specific funding opportunities are not yet detailed or defined, however; funding needs will emerge in 2020 to advance the Sub-Committee work and other childcare projects/needs in the community. Opportunity funding for 2020 would catalyze the systemic childcare work that is underway in partnership with Larimer County, and allow for the City of Fort Collins to be responsive to unique one-time projects and pilots that need small-dollar funding partners to advance. Expected outcomes from these funds include: o Strengthened alignment with childcare sector leaders and institutional partners that will help inform policy considerations and future budget offers o Increased childcare center 'spots', decreased budget burden for families, and/or improved childcare teacher retention Examples might include: SWOT Analysis facilitation for subcommittees, site visits to peer communities with successful childcare models, training/tuition support for childcare teachers to advance their credentials. Similar opportunity funding in 2017-2018 created the following results: o Pre-construction support for the Teaching Tree childcare center redevelopment and expansion o Classroom expansion at The Family Center / La Familia o Early childhood education teacher workforce retention program support o Tuition scholarships and childcare program funds for low-income families City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Childcare Access and Affordability Funding Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 100 - General Fund $25,000 $25,000 2) $0 $0 $25,000 $25,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 100-General Fund: Reserves $25,000 $25,000 2) $0 $0 $25,000 $25,000 City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: Svc Area: Utility Services Related Offer #: N/A Department: UT Water Quality Services Div Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 502 - Water Fund $17,500 $17,500 2) 503 - Wastewater Fund $17,500 $17,500 $0 $35,000 $35,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 502-Water Fund: Reserves $17,500 $17,500 2) 503-Wastewater Fund: Reserves $17,500 $17,500 $0 $35,000 $35,000 ENV 4.9 - Sustain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre River and its watershed Evaluation of Microplastics and Impact on River Health Jill Oropeza Choose Primary Strategic Objective: The Utilities will coordinate with Sustainability Services on any research, outreach, and engagement for microplastics and macroplastics to ensure alignment and to better understand the relationship between both types of plastic pollution. The science related to microplastics is evolving. Consequently, funding from this offer will be utilized to conduct research in to the science related to microplastics and to identify strategies, if any, to reduce and/or mitigate microplastics in waterways. The goal of the offer will be to 1) bring awareness to the sources of microplastic pollution, 2) the negative impacts on water treatment and distribution systems, 3) treatment technologies that may be available now or in the future to remove these compounds, and 4) the relationship between macroplastic and microplastic pollution. . This offer is in response to the Council Priority to reduce plastic pollution and to track advances in treatment technologies for reducing or eliminating microplastics from water supplies. This offer supports ENV 4.9 by gaining knowledge related to the impact that microplastics have on our watershed and the environment and lays the foundation for the development of effective strategies to reduce microplastics in the wastestream and/or mitigate their impacts. ENV 97. % of residents responding "same effort" on how the City addresses - Environmental Health Performance Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: Svc Area: Utility Services Related Offer #: ENV 9.9 Department: UT Water Quality Services Div Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 502 - Water Fund $7,500 $7,500 2) 503 - Wastewater Fund $7,500 $7,500 $0 $15,000 $15,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 502-Water Fund: Reserves $7,500 $7,500 2) 503-Wastewater Fund: Reserves $7,500 $7,500 $0 $15,000 $15,000 Emerging Contaminants - Public Education and Outreach to Protect River Health Jill Oropeza This offer supports ENV 4.9 by helping the community understand the connection between community/residential activities and the health of the Cache la Poudre River watershed. Performance ENV 90. % of residents responding very good/good - Overall quality of the Environment Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: Choose Primary Strategic Objective: This offer is in response to the Council Priority to continue to improve and protect the ecological condition, aesthetic quality, and resiliency of the Poudre River and its watershed/tributaries. Expected outcomes are to increase public awareness around 1) the connection between safe pharmaceutical disposal and Poudre River water quality; 2) opportunities available in the community to safely dispose of prescription medication, 3) and to identify ways that medication take-back programs may be more accessible to the community. Education & Outreach - There are several opportunities available to the community for safe disposal of unused, unneeded and expired over-the-counter and prescription medications. For example Fort Collins Police Department (FCPD) provides for safe disposal of unused medications any day of the week at the Fort Collins Police Services, M-F, 8 am - 6 pm; Saturday & Sunday. Funding this offer will expand advertisement of the safe disposal opportunities in the community through education avenues such as increased and updated website content, news releases, and dissemination of printed educational materials.In addition, staff will seek to identify opportunities to make safe medication disposal more accessible to the community. City Utilities also currently monitors drinking water supplies for the presence of pharmaceuticals, personal care products and other compounds of emerging concern through the Northern Colorado Compounds of Emerging Concern Program (CEC Program) . Increased awareness of the CEC Program will strengthen public understanding of the link between safe disposal of medications and water quality protection. ENV 4.9 - Sustain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre River and its watershed City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: Svc Area: Sustainability Services Related Offer #: N/A Department: Environmental Services Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 100 - General Fund $35,000 $35,000 2) $0 $0 $35,000 $35,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 100-General Fund: Reserves $35,000 $35,000 2) $0 $0 $35,000 $35,000 ENV 4.4 - Achieve the 2020 Road to Zero Waste goals and work toward the 2030 zero waste goals Reduce Plastic Pollution - Outreach and Data Collection Susie Gordon Choose Primary Strategic Objective: Education & Outreach – Environmental Services currently provides general information to the public about how to “recycle” right and encourages the community to choose reusable products and packaging. With a mid-cycle funding enhancement, outreach efforts will be refined to increase focus on direct messaging about unrecyclable plastic wastes to the community, including for businesses and individuals. Examples of information to be shared in a compelling and engaging way could include: ideas for alternatives to common single-use plastics; tips on reducing inadvertent plastic pollution; context on why low-quality plastics are problematic; etc. Data Collection – Very little research has been conducted locally to understand the frequency and composition of litter. As part of this offer, staff will partner inter-departmentally (SSA, Natural Areas, Streets, Parks) and with members of the community and CSU to crowd source the collection of relevant data. This study will yield information about what portion of community litter is made from plastic and what the most commonly littered plastic products and packaging are. Council can then use that information to consider targeted programs and policies in the future. This offer is in response to the Council Priority to reduce plastic pollution and would fund both education/outreach and data collection related to the subject. The expected outcomes are 1) to help the public be more knowledgeable and able to take direct action 2) to help Council have data-informed policy dialogue/appraise 2020-21 budget offers. The funding from this offer will provide for the development and design of educational materials and a robust awareness campaign to broadcast the messaging city-wide. Outreach and engagement on both macro- and micro-plastics will be coordinated between Sustainability and Utilities to ensure alignment in implementation. This offer supports ENV 4.4 by helping the community understand local impacts and actions related to the global problem of plastic pollution. Performance ENV 139. Community Landfilled Waste Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: High Performing Govt. Contact: Svc Area: Information & Employee Svcs Related Offer #: N/A Department: Human Resources Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 100 - General Fund $30,000 $30,000 2) $0 $0 $30,000 $30,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 100-General Fund: Reserves $30,000 $30,000 2) $0 $0 $30,000 $30,000 HPG 7.1 - Provide world-class municipal services to residents and businesses Effective, Innovative and High Performing Board Teresa Roche This was identified as a 2019-2020 Council Priority. By equipping City Council with the resources, training and tools to be a highly effective, innovative, and high-performing governing body their individual and collective capacity and capability to lead well and serve the community grows. HPG 67. % of residents responding very good/good to the City's performance in - Listening to citizens HPG 66. % of residents responding very good/good to the City's performance in - Welcoming citizen involvement Performance Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: Choose Primary Strategic Objective: Phase 1 of this project would be to work with the Mayor and Council on the model of leadership and required capabilities they would like to aspire to as a governing body. This work would set the foundation for a leadership curriculum beyond the onboarding process. External research on high performing councils as well as insights from other sector boards will be considered to guide the dialogue. The dollars requested are to secure assistance from a consultant to work with the Chief Human Resources Officer, City Manager, City Council and key staff members as well as pay for development sessions already requested by Council members, such as navigating complex conversations where there is diverse opinions in Council listening sessions. City of Fort Collins 2020 Revision - Offer Request/Reduction Form Offer Name: Outcome: Environmental Health Contact: Svc Area: Utility Services Related Offer #: N/A Department: UT Water Quality Services Div Capital? No Offer Description: Ongoing One-Time Total Expense Fund(s): 1) 502 - Water Fund $50,000 $50,000 2) 503 - Wastewater Fund $50,000 $50,000 $0 $100,000 $100,000 Ongoing One-Time Total Funding Source(s): 1) 502-Water Fund: Reserves $50,000 $50,000 2) 503-Wastewater Fund: Reserves $50,000 $50,000 $0 $100,000 $100,000 ENV 4.9 - Sustain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre River and its watershed Urban Lakes Water Quality Management Policy & Guidance Development Jill Oropeza Choose Primary Strategic Objective: The Utilities will convene a team tasked to develop a Urban Lakes Water Quality Policy and Guidance Document that will include the following: 1. A GIS-based inventory of city-owned waterbodies located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area 2. Research current and future water quality pollution threats and current best management practices used by the City to mitigate water quality pollution risks. 3. Conduct GIS modeling to identify pollution threats based on land use. 4. Develop an urban water quality management policy that includes objectives that align with City priorities and strategic objectives. 5. Develop an Urban Lakes Management Guidance Document to support policy objectives Water quality of urban lakes is changing in response to urban development and other land use changes, climate change, and a decrease in water movement in these lakes over time. Concerns about changing water quality in these waterbodies are consistently raised by citizens, including concerns regarding public health and safety, environmental quality, and aesthetics.Currently, the City does not have a clear policy and/or plan to address emerging issues related to water quality in urban lakes. This offer is in response to the Council Priority related to improving and protect the ecological condition, aesthetic quality, and resiliency of the Poudre River and its watershed/tributaries. This offer supports ENV 4.9 by developing a policy and guidance document relative to water quality in urban lakes and reservoirs. Performance ENV 90. % of residents responding very good/good - Overall quality of the Environment Measure(s): How does Offer Support Primary Strategic Objective: 2020 Budget Revisions Council Work Session - September 24, 2019 Mike Beckstead - CFO ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) Today’s Agenda 2 1) Summary of September 10 work session 2) Review of Council requested Offers for consideration 1.2 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) Timeline for the 2020 Budget Revisions 19 Aug: Council Finance Committee meeting - Completed 10 Sept: Council Work Session #1 24 Sept: Council Work Session #2 15 Oct: 1st Reading of the 2020 Annual Appropriation 5 Nov: 2nd Reading 3 1.2 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 2020 Budget Revision Offers from September 10 work session 4 Fund Revision Requested FTE Ongoing $ One-Time $ Total General Fund Developing Equity Gaps Analysis, Indicators, and Principles - - 120,000 120,000 East Mulberry Corridor Plan Update and Annexation Assessment - - 175,000 175,000 Park Improvement Project Support - - 50,000 50,000 Continued Voluntary Compliance Support for Outdoor Residential Wood Burning - 0.25 FTE 0.25 18,638 - 18,638 Chief Privacy Officer with Records Management Responsibility (start date of 1 Mar 2020) 1.00 93,750 17,962 111,712 Ongoing Agreements from 2018 Collective Bargaining - 585,000 - 585,000 Sales Tax Technician - 1 FTE 1.00 50,585 - 50,585 Affordable Housing Impact Fee Study - - 75,000 75,000 Digital Equity Program - Income Qualified Connexion Credits - 195,000 - 195,000 Total General Fund 2.25 942,973 437,962 1,380,935 Capital Expansion New Block 32 Parking Structure Design - - 1,515,000 1,515,000 Fund Block 32 & 42 Plan Refresh - - 300,000 300,000 (General Gov't) Total Capital Expansion Fund - $0 $1,815,000 $1,815,000 Self Insurance Fund Security Specialist - 1.0 FTE 1.00 113,400 - 113,400 Total Self Insurance Fund 1.00 $113,400 $0 $113,400 Stormwater Fund Northeast College Corridor Outfall A4 (Lemay) Stormwater Lateral Design and Construction - - 959,500 959,500 Total Stormwater Fund - $0 $959,500 $959,500 Broadband Fund Digital Equity Program - Income Qualified Connexion Credits - PILOT to the General Fund - 195,000 - 195,000 Total Broadband Fund - $195,000 $0 $195,000 TOTAL ALL FUNDS 3.25 1,251,373 3,212,462 4,463,835 1.2 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) Summary of Proposed Changes 5 All values in $k General Fund Ongoing General Fund 1-Time Capital Expansion Stormwater Self Insurance Broadband TOTAL Available Revenue and Reserves 943 2,298 11,100 8,300 165 197 2020 Budget Revision Requests Ongoing Requests (943) (113) (1,056) One-Time Requests (438) (1,815) (960) (195) (3,408) Total of 2020 Revisions (943) (438) (1,815) (960) (113) (195) (4,464) Net Impact (positive = available) $0 $1,860 $9,285 $7,340 $52 $2 Proposed Annual Adjustment Ordinance ($480) (1st Reading scheduled for October 1) Remaining General Fund Reserves* $1,380 * The amount shown is for the portion of the General Fund reserves which are available for nearly any purpose 1.2 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) Requested 2020 Revision Offer Summary 6 Offer for Consideration Amount Fund Reserves Mobile Home Park Neighborhood Improvement and Community Building Grant Fund $50.0 Generlal Fund Mobile Home Park Public Engagement and Owner-Renter Handbook 10.2 Generlal Fund Childcare Access and Affordability Funding 25.0 Generlal Fund Evaluation of Microplastics and Impact on River Health 35.0 Water & Wastewater Fund Emerging Contaminants-Public Education and Outreach to Protect River Health 15.0 Water & Wastewater Fund Reduce Plastic Pollution-Outreach and Data Collection 35.0 Generlal Fund Effective, Innovative and High Performing Board 30.0 Generlal Fund Urban Lakes Water Quality Management Policy & Guidance Development 100.0 Water & Wastewater Fund Total: $300.2 1.2 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 7 Mobile Home Park Neighborhood Improvement and Community Building Grant Fund • Grants of approximately $1,000 -$5,000 per project to neighbors, property managers, and/or property owners • Application-based approach with selection criteria developed collaboratively • Projects funded could include sewer scoping, tree trimming, community events, recycling, exploration of single water metering, etc. • City staff provides structure and direction for the process; empowers neighbors to lead and implement projects Mobile Home Park Public Engagement and Owner-Renter Handbook • Develop a specialized version of the existing Landlord & Tenant Handbook in both English and Spanish for mobile home residents, property managers, and owners • Focus on issues surrounding mobile home park livability, rights and responsibilities and alignment with messaging for the revised Mobile Home Park Act Requested 2020 Revision Offers 1.2 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 8 Evaluation of Microplastics and Impact on River Health • Conduct research into the science related to microplastics and to identify strategies, if any, to reduce and/or mitigate microplastics in waterways • Goal to bring awareness to the sources of microplastics, their negative impacts, possible treatment technologies, and the relationship between macro and microplastics • Includes coordination with Sustainability Services on research, outreach, and engagement Childcare Access and Affordability Funding • Would catalyze the systemic childcare work that is underway in partnership with Larimer County • Allows for the City to be responsive to unique one-time projects/pilots that need small-dollar funding • Expected outcomes from these funds include: 1. Strengthened alignment with childcare partners to help inform policy considerations and future budget offers 2. Increased childcare center 'spots', decreased burden for families, and/or improved childcare teacher retention Requested 2020 Revision Offers 1.2 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 9 Emerging Contaminants-Public Education and Outreach to Protect River Health • Increase public awareness around: 1) The connection between safe pharmaceutical disposal and Poudre River water quality 2) Opportunities available in the community to safely dispose of prescription medication 3) Identify ways that medication take-back programs may be more accessible to the community. • Staff will seek to identify opportunities to make safe medication disposal more accessible to the community Reduce Plastic Pollution-Outreach and Data Collection • Partner inter-departmentally (SSA, Natural Areas, Streets, Parks) and with members of the community and CSU to crowd source the collection of relevant data • Outreach efforts will focus on direct messaging about unrecyclable plastic wastes to the community • Expected outcomes from these funds include: 1. Help the public be more knowledgeable and able to take direct action 2. Help Council have a data-informed policy dialogue and appraise possible BFO Offers Requested 2020 Revision Offers 1.2 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 10 Effective, Innovative and High Performing Board • Work with the Mayor and Council on the model of leadership and required capabilities • Set the foundation for a leadership curriculum beyond the onboarding process • Funding would be for consulting and development sessions already requested by City Council Urban Lakes Water Quality Management Policy & Guidance Development • A GIS-based inventory of city-owned waterbodies located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area • Research current and future water quality pollution threats and current best management practices used by the City to mitigate water quality pollution risks • Conduct GIS modeling to identify pollution threats based on land use • Develop an urban water quality management policy that includes objectives that align with City priorities and strategic objectives • Develop an Urban Lakes Management Guidance Document to support policy objectives Requested 2020 Revision Offers 1.2 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) 11 Guidance Requested: 1. What questions or feedback does City Council have on the requested Offers to support the Council Priority Dashboard? 2. Is City Council ready to consider First Reading of the Annual Appropriation Ordinance currently scheduled for October 15, 2019? 1.2 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (8294 : 2020 Budget Revision Recommendations) DATE: STAFF: September 24, 2019 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to clarify the desired goal, outcome, and process in achieving the Council Priority, “Reimagine Boards and Commissions”: Better structure the board and commission system to set up success into the future, align with Outcome Areas and allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that allow for greater use of ad hoc meetings, diverse stakeholders and additional community participation. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What are the desired outcomes of this priority? a. Work more cross-functionally in advisory groups? b. Align advisory boards to Outcome areas? c. Create more diversity in Board make-up and structure? d. Reduce the number of boards and commissions? 2. What questions/suggestions does Council have moving forward? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City has 28 boards and commissions that perform a range of functions from advising to decision making. Over 200 residents volunteer valuable time and expertise through board membership. Eight of these boards are considered “quasi-judicial”, meaning they make findings. These include: • Building Review Board • Human Relations Commission • Landmark Preservation Commission • Planning and Zoning Board • Retirement Committee • Water Board • Zoning Board of Appeals As early as 2011, City Council prioritized continuous improvement efforts within the board and commission structure. The attached memos (Attachment 1) from 2012, 2014, and 2017 highlight the conversations and efforts to date. In late 2017-early 2018, the City’s Equity Team researched and created a Public Participation Report (Attachment 2) that included a survey and analysis of existing board members as well as recommendations to remove barriers and increase more diverse participation among residents. In 2018, there was a pilot, spearheaded by members of the Economic Advisory Committee, utilizing combined meetings of the boards and commissions housed under Sustainability. The first pilot meeting summary is attached 2 Packet Pg. 26 September 24, 2019 Page 2 (Attachment 3) and highlights participants appreciation and desire to work cross-functionally and to provide meaningful input early in a process rather than as a final check before (or after) going to Council. Out of this work improvements have been made, including: • The “Super Issue” meeting effort • Updates to the Board and Commission Manual • Ability to use MinuteTraq for board and commission processes • Development and inclusion in Engage the volunteer management system • The Pilot joint board meetings mentioned above\ • Board and Commission work plan reviews Re-imaging a structure and process that meets the needs and desires of residents into the 21st century will require many considerations. Staff is looking to clarify the desired outcomes and better determine what success looks like. Possible outcomes include: 1. Work more cross-functionally in advisory groups? Being able to work and have dialogue in a more diverse structure was and continues to be a desire of board and commission members and was part of the motivation behind the EAC recommended pilot. Creating greater diversity of thought can occur in a variety of ways from having broader topic area boards to ensuring specific stakeholder representation on all boards (youth, women, seniors, mobility-impaired, equity-focused, etc.) 2. Align advisory boards to Outcome areas? Aligning boards and commissions to outcome areas is one method of alignment and could mean having 7 outcome focused boards or could be grouping boards under an outcome area and focusing their workplans to those specific strategic objectives. 3. Create more diversity in Board make-up and structure? The Public Participation report offers recommendations for lowering barriers to participation and many of those are already underway. Additional elements that could be considered include having a variety of terms (1, 2 and 4 year); more defined board member make-up as mentioned under item 1; and use of more ad-hoc or temporary boards. 4. Reduce the number of boards and commissions? While this is not a stand-alone goal it could be the result of both alignment, efficiency, and greater cross- functional structure. Staff has researched peer and other communities in search of similar efforts elsewhere. While other communities are having similar conversations, to date, another specific example of a model has not emerged. Proposed Efforts Moving Forward Project Alignment: September 24 • Ensure Council agrees with the priority outcomes. Process and Outreach Plan: September-December 2019 • Develop overall plan and timeline • Develop specific outreach plan for existing board and commission members 2 Packet Pg. 27 September 24, 2019 Page 3 • Develop public outreach plan • December 10 work session to align on proposed options and next steps Develop Process for “New” Model: January-April 2020 • Code changes written and adopted • Develop transition and implementation plan ATTACHMENTS 1. Previous memos to Council (PDF) 2. Public Participation Report (PDF) 3. Pilot Memo (PDF) 4. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 28 ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2.1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Previous memos to Council (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) November 2017 City of Fort Collins Equity Team – Public Participation Subcommittee Selina Lujan, Co-Lead Annie Bierbower, Co-Lead Edgar Dominguez, Community Liaison Janet Freeman Nalo Johnson, Ph.D. Christine Macrina Angela Pena Glen Shirey Dianne Tjalkens ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) EQUITY TEAM PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT – TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 BACKGROUND 1 METHODOLOGY 2 FINDINGS 2 Municipal Boards and Commissions Best Practices 2 City Boards and Commissions Questionnaire 2 City Boards and Commission Application and Process 7 CONCLUSION 7 APPENDIX 8 Appendix A: Recommendations in Support of Inclusive Public Participation 9 Appendix B: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – 2017 12 Appendix C: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire Demographic Analysis 15 Appendix D: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – Synopsis of Qualitative Responses 25 Appendix E: Boards and Commissions National Best Practice List 27 Appendix F: Application for Board and Commission Membership 28 2.2 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2016, the City’s internal Equity Team established the Public Participation subcommittee to focus on improving representation among the City’s public engagement opportunities. The committee’s 2017 workplan targeted public engagement strategies for Boards and Commissions, Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) teams, and the CityWorks program. After examining the Boards and Commissions process – including a questionnaire for current Boards and Commissions members and conducting an environmental scan of municipal best practices – the team identified major findings, including: • Current Boards and Commissions members do not represent the breadth of our community in relation to race/ethnicity, age and income status. • Candidates experience a lack of clarity regarding what to expect in the application, interview and appointment process. • Barriers to participation include meeting schedule expectations, such as conflicts with work day schedules. To proactively address these findings, the Public Participation subcommittee developed recommendations that include: • Conduct targeted outreach to populations currently underrepresented on Boards and Commissions. • Broaden the applicant pool by providing information to applicants that clearly defines the expectations and timeline of the application, interview and appointment process. • Identify alternative methods for participation such as the ability for members to remote into meetings. The following report provides specific details as to the subcommittee’s findings with a full list of recommendations contained on p. 9-11. While the Public Participation subcommittee focused its efforts on the Boards and Commissions process, the findings are relevant across public engagement activities, including BFO teams and CityWorks participation. The subcommittee is grateful for the participation and candidness of the Boards and Commissions members which created a better understanding of the current state of participation. We look forward to being a resource for the organization as it considers the recommendations. BACKGROUND The Public Participation subcommittee of the City’s internal Equity Team was established to evaluate and form recommendations regarding inclusive public involvement practices. The committee’s 2017 workplan specifically identified a focus on Boards and Commissions, BFO teams and the CityWorks program. The team sought to identify and recommend process improvements to ensure diversity and inclusive practices within these three significant public engagement opportunities. A more accurate representation of the community ensures a breadth of experiences and perspectives are used to inform the City. By implementing the recommendations, the City can increase community members’ accessibility to the organization and remove barriers to participation, and as a result, uphold the City’s values as it strives to provide exceptional service for an exceptional community. 2.2 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 2 METHODOLOGY After gaining approval from the Equity Team Steering Committee, the subcommittee developed and administered a demographic questionnaire to determine baseline demographics among Boards and Commissions members, and thus identify areas of opportunity for representation. Additionally, the subcommittee held interviews and reviewed processes with 12 municipalities that are considered leaders in equity and inclusion practices, as well as our neighboring regional communities. (See Appendix E for the list of best practice cities.) The subcommittee also reviewed the current Boards and Commissions application and process. FINDINGS Municipal Boards and Commissions Best Practices The following best practices were identified in structuring inclusive Boards and Commissions: • Provide training and onboarding for staff liaisons as well as applicants (demystifies the process and ensures staff is attuned to challenges and opportunities for inclusive recruitment) • Clearly recognize the Boards’ and Commissions’ work to develop and maintain community relationships (helps promote relevance of participation) • Offer stipends or other incentives to help alleviate needs among demographics that may not otherwise be able to participate • Collaborate with community groups for targeted outreach/recruitment to catalyze participation • Customize the application process and outreach to align with a Board’s area of focus • Hold interviews with all available Councilmembers to ensure breadth of input • Record interviews so that all Councilmembers and/or other staff can review/provide input • Departments and/or staff liaisons are expected to provide feedback on candidates as to strengths, weaknesses and potential • Announce a set interview date at the beginning of the recruitment process so applicants can plan accordingly • Offer candidates the option to interview with Council by phone or Skype • Use a standardized set of questions, generated by Council with input by staff, in the interview process • Offer Boards and Commissions specific feedback from Council regarding the assistance/recommendations they provided to Council • Assign multiple staff to support the Boards and Commissions process City Boards and Commissions Questionnaire The committee conducted a voluntary questionnaire with all current Boards and Commissions members in May 2017 to determine current demographic representation as well as gather members’ perspectives as to potential barriers to participation and the ways in which the City may enhance its engagement efforts to broaden the pool of applicants. (See Appendix B for a copy of the questionnaire.) Of the 208 current members, 126 responses were collected for a 61% response rate. The committee compared questionnaire responses with community demographics (using 2015 American Community Survey Census data) to identify gaps in representation. A full description of this comparison may be found in Appendix C; however, the following highlights comparative findings on gender, race/ethnicity, income, and age. 2.2 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 3 Fort Collins is virtually evenly split with a male population of 50.03% and a female population of 49.97%. The gender distribution of Boards and Commissions members by Council District is as follows: District FC Female % B&C Female % Delta FC Male % B&C Male % Delta 1 49.71% 44.44% - 5.27% 50.29% 55.6% + 5.31% 2 51.59% 50.00% - 1.59% 48.41% 50.0% + 1.59% 3 51.24% 38.46% - 12.78% 48.76% 61.5% + 12.74% 4 51.04% 64.71% + 13.67% 48.96% 35.3% - 13.66% 5 48.36% 61.54% + 13.18% 51.64% 38.5% - 13.14% 6 47.64% 53.57% + 5.93% 52.36% 46.4% - 5.96% Citywide 49.97% 53.13% + 3.16% 50.03% 46.88% - 3.15% While nearly 18% of Fort Collins residents identify as a person of color (i.e., non-White and/or Hispanic/Latinx), Boards and Commission members overwhelmingly identify as White and/or non- Hispanic/Latinx. Of the survey respondents, only eight (8) members identified as a person of color [two (2) Asian, two (2) Two or more races, and four (4) Hispanic/Latinx].1 All eight of those members were also female. The racial/ethnic comparison is as follows: Percent Number City B&C City B&C White 82.71% 94.35% 134736 116 Hispanic 10.25% 3.23% 16703 4 Asian 2.86% 1.61% 4666 2 2+ 2.34% 0.81% 3804 2 Other2 1.84% 0.00% 2990 0 As shown in the following table, there is no striking disparity between any of the target populations across districts, rather, the lack of representation among residents of color is a Citywide challenge of equal proportion in any district. Column1 District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 White 82.00% 83.46% 82.84% 85.00% 82.46% 80.56% Hispanic 12.47% 9.79% 9.57% 8.47% 8.97% 12.08% Asian 1.75% 3.15% 4.04% 2.43% 3.44% 2.45% 2+ Races 2.02% 1.96% 2.29% 2.38% 2.85% 2.55% Black 1.08% 1.06% 0.85% 1.17% 1.67% 1.53% Other Race 0.12% 0.15% 0.14% 0.10% 0.11% 0.21% Pacific Islander 0.05% 0.06% 0.01% 0.05% 0.13% 0.10% 1 Please note that racial identities are not synonymous with ethnic identities. Thus, for example, one can be racially White as well as identify as ethnically Hispanic/Latinx. 2 “Other” encompasses additional racial categories that were not selected within the survey results. 2.2 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 4 The table and charts below show that household incomes below $50,000 are underrepresented among Boards and Commissions members while incomes $75,000 and higher are overrepresented with a sharp spike at the $100,000-$149,000 range. City B&C Less than $10,000 13.68% 1.94% $15,000-$24,999 9.05% 1.94% $25,000-$34,999 10.62% 5.83% $35,000-$49,999 12.12% 4.85% $50,000-$74,999 16.02% 16.50% $75,000-$99,999 13.78% 16.50% $100,000-$149,999 15.36% 34.95% $150,000-$199,999 4.94% 8.74% $200,000 or more 4.43% 8.74% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% Income Distribution City and B&C City B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% Income Distribution by District Council District 1 Council District 2 Council District 3 Council District 4 Council District 5 Council District 6 2.2 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 5 In terms of age, younger age bands are underrepresented while older age bands are overrepresented. 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 City Age Distribution City and District 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ 2.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 6 Members identified the following as barriers to participation and/or gaps in current representation on Boards and Commissions (see Appendix A): • Meeting times that conflict with the work day • Limitations around night meetings and early morning meetings • Candidate interview times limited to work day • Lack of information on board-specific topics • Lack of transparency in the recruitment process • Lengthy application process with little direction as to what to expect • Need for more diversity across multiple identities (racial/ethnic, socioeconomic status, etc.) • Need for younger members (76% of respondents were 40+ yrs.) • Inconsistency among board incentives (i.e., not all boards serve food during meetings held around traditional mealtimes) • Consider ways in which board membership may be exclusive (i.e., for DDA you must live or own a business in the DDA boundary, which might make it hard for people of varying income levels to participate) • Lack of communication between Council and Boards and Commissions as to how members’ input is used and/or if it is effective Members recommended the following as ways in which the City could enhance its outreach and engagement efforts for Boards and Commissions participation: • Advertise vacancies in multiple ways such as: o Major employers o Chamber of Commerce o Social Media o Church bulletins o Larimer County Workforce Center o Affordable housing residences • Allow members to participate virtually to mitigate barriers around employment, childcare, etc. • Provide childcare as needed • Determine gaps in representation and conduct targeted recruitment to fill those gaps o Focus on underrepresented communities (Hispanic, low-income, younger people with families) • Hold more informational community events; hold recruitment fairs/open houses, host tables at public events and other opportunities such as the recreation centers; advertise among volunteer opportunities such as Make a Difference Day • Use current/previous board members as “ambassadors” to help in the recruitment strategies; consider mentor opportunities between older and newer members • Communicate the story of what Boards and Commissions have helped the City to achieve; provide templates/opportunities for members to “report out” to the community through media, social media, or presentations • Ensure process and requirements for serving are readily available to the public o Process and requirements should be easily understood and accessible o Length of time between application submission and candidate selection should be shorter 2.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 7 City Boards and Commission Application and Process Through a review of the Boards and Commissions application and process, the following items were highlighted for recommendations: Application • Candidates’ entire applications are made publicly accessible in the AIS; this led to a discussion around safety concerns. Immediate action was taken to redact personally identifiable information from the AIS and create a subsequent recommendation to address these safety concerns. Applicant interview process • Interviews are required to be in-person and scheduled at the Councilmembers’ convenience • Candidates only interview with the Council liaison to their potential board • There is no specific set of questions for Councilmembers to use in a candidate interview • There is no set process laid out for informing applicants about what to expect Applicant background check • Currently any City staff and/or volunteer, excluding Council, in a “position of trust” must undergo a background check CONCLUSION While the Public Participation subcommittee focused its efforts on the Boards and Commissions process, we believe the findings to be relevant across public engagement activities, including BFO teams and CityWorks participation. We are grateful for the participation and candor of the Boards and Commissions members to help us better understand the current state of participation and look forward to being a resource for the organization as it considers these recommendations. 2.2 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 8 APPENDIX Appendix A: Recommendations in Support of Inclusive Public Participation 9 Appendix B: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – 2017 12 Appendix C: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire Demographic Analysis 15 Appendix D: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – Synopsis of Qualitative Responses 25 Appendix E: Boards and Commissions National Best Practice List 27 Appendix F: Application for Board and Commission Membership 28 2.2 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 9 Appendix A: Recommendations in Support of Inclusive Public Participation Level of Priority: High Medium Low Process Recommendation Rationale3 Next Steps Resources Required Recommended Implementation Recruitment 1.1: Conduct an annual demographic questionnaire of existing Board and Commission members Ensure our Boards and Commissions membership reflects the diversity of our community and the City’s goals related to equity and inclusion. Refine questionnaire before next recruitment period; expect all members to complete Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office and Public Participation Team In progress (see Appendix A) Recruitment 1.2: Review and update recruitment process, including messaging, materials and targeted outreach Improve diversity of applicants for Board and Commission openings by conducting targeted, culturally responsive outreach, as identified in the Boards and Commissions questionnaire. Develop communication plan and materials Time and PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 10 Application 2.3: Replace member applications in AIS with relevancy biographies. While Councilmembers will receive the entire application to review, the relevancy biography provides the public information as to the candidate’s qualifications while protecting the safety of the candidate by limiting the release of their personally identifiable information. Execute if approved Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office Fall 2017 for January 2018 appointments Interview 3.1: Develop list of standardized interview questions. Ensures transparency and reduces risk to Council by ensuring all applicants are asked the same questions. Develop interview questions Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office, staff liaisons and Public Participation Team Fall 2019 for January 2020 appointments Interview 3.2: Include staff liaison in applicant interviews. As a subject matter expert and main contact for support throughout Board members’ tenure, the staff liaison may provide an additional point of view for PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 11 Ongoing Participation 4.2: Provide an annual training for staff liaisons. Raise level of awareness regarding existing barriers to participation and provide support to staff regarding City’s use of an equity lens in its work. Consider including training related to the assessment of a prior conviction record – what is the relevancy and/or concern of the conviction. Training development and implementation Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office and Public Participation Team In progress Ongoing Participation 4.3: Council liaison provides more in- depth feedback and comments on input received from the Board or Commission. The Boards and Commissions questionnaire found that members strongly believed they would benefit from greater feedback from Council as to the usefulness of their input and how it is used. Identify input process and structure Time and capacity of staff liaisons 2018 Ongoing Participation 4.4: Provide alternative methods for participation, such as the ability to remote into meetings while retaining voting status, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 12 Appendix B: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – 2017 Background: The City is surveying its Board and Commission members to better understand demographics of current participants and to identify areas in which the City can increase community participation. We also seek input about your interests and experiences serving on a Board or Commission, as well as recommendations to make the Boards and Commissions more representative of the community. Survey Process: Your answers are confidential and we appreciate your participation in helping the City strengthen its inclusive practices. An analysis of survey findings will inform recommendations to City Leadership and Council. If you have any questions about the questionnaire, please feel free to contact: Christine Macrina at cmacrina@fcgov.com or 970-416-2525 Many thanks for your participation! Please select the categories with which you identify: (we have mirrored U.S. Census categories where possible) Gender: o Female o Male o Other, please self-identify _______________________ o Decline to specify Race: o American Indian/Alaska Native o Asian o Black/African American o Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander o White o Two or more races o Decline to specify Ethnicity: o Hispanic/Latino o Non-Hispanic/Latino o Decline to specify Age Range: o 15-19 yrs o 20-29 yrs o 30-39 yrs o 40-49 yrs o 50-59 yrs o 60-69 yrs o 70 yrs or older o Decline to specify 2.2 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 13 Household Income Range: o Less than $10,000 o $10,000-$14,999 o $15,000-$24,999 o $25,000-$34,999 o $35,000-$49,999 o $50,000-$74,999 o $75,000-$99,999 o $100,000-$149,999 o $150,000-$199,999 o $200,000 or more o Decline to specify Geographic Location: o Council District: (select 1-6) o Decline to specify o Length of residence in Fort Collins: o 1-5 years o 6- 10 years o 11- 15 years o 16-20 years o More than 20 years o Decline to specify Do you own or rent your residence? o Own o Rent o Other (please specify) o Decline to specify Educational Attainment: o Less than high school graduate o High school graduate (or equivalency) o Some college or associate’s degree o Bachelor’s degree or higher o Decline to specify Name Board/Commission on which you serve: (Dropdown menu) Following are open/essay format: How did you learn about the City Boards and Commissions? Why did you want to serve on a Board or Commission? 2.2 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 14 Challenges I experience in my participation on a Board or Commission include (select all that apply): o Transportation o Childcare o Meeting time o Work schedule limitations o Caring for a person(s) experiencing disabilities o Caring for an elderly person(s) o Other (please specify):____________________ o I do not experience any challenges to my Board or Commission participation. What do you see, if any, are the benefits to serving on a board or commission (select all that apply)? o Impact community direction o Share my knowledge base o Build an understanding of different perspectives o Build an understanding of local government o Meet new people o Other – please describe (fill in the blank) o I do not experience any benefits What suggestions do you have to broaden recruitment efforts for Boards and Commissions? Any other relevant information you would like to share? 2.2 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 15 Appendix C: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire Demographic Analysis This paper represents the comparison of Boards and Commissions participation according to the following demographic parameters: • Gender • Ethnicity • Income • Age The Boards and Commissions data (B&C) was compiled from recent voluntary survey responses; not all members responded and of those who did had the option to decline. The City and District data (City) was compiled by ESRI (GIS) from the US Census’ 2015 ACS data (American Community Survey), the latest available. The reader should be aware that this is objective data presented without bias, prejudice, or judgment. Outlier data points simply indicate a demographic parameter that lies outside of the norm; they do not subjectively indicate intent. These are simply tools to help us focus where we may be vulnerable to demographic parameters skewing outcomes. Gender The City is virtually evenly split with a male population of 50.03% and a female population of 49.97%. The following factors may serve to skew the data, but are assumed to be statistically insignificant especially since we are considering ratios (percentage) and not raw number comparisons: • The City data started at 21 or older while the B&C data started at 20 or older • The City data included ages 85 and older while the B&C data specified 70 or older. Logically, there is an age whereupon B&C participation becomes problematic and you may well not expect participation on a B&C from that age group. Remembering that the City is virtually 50/50 female/male, the gender distribution by district by City and B&C is represented below by table and charts: District City Female % B&C Female % Delta City Male % B&C Male % Delta 1 49.71% 44.44% - 5.27% 50.29% 55.6% + 5.31% 2 51.59% 50.00% - 1.59% 48.41% 50.0% + 1.59% 3 51.24% 38.46% - 12.78% 48.76% 61.5% + 12.74% 4 51.04% 64.71% + 13.67% 48.96% 35.3% - 13.66% 5 48.36% 61.54% + 13.18% 51.64% 38.5% - 13.14% 6 47.64% 53.57% + 5.93% 52.36% 46.4% - 5.96% Citywide 49.97% 53.13% + 3.16% 50.03% 46.88% - 3.15% Where the gray lines extend to the right in the charts below the gender is over-represented on Boards and Commissions; where the gray lines fall to the left, that gender is likewise under-represented. 2.2 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 16 2.2 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 17 Ethnicity Ethnicity distribution data is distributed below comparing the City to B&C composition, the response to the voluntary B&C surveys was so overwhelmingly “White” that a valid breakout by District was not possible. The data is presented in percent and raw number forms. Percentages show trending, but we must also look at the raw numbers due to the small number of members of color as a percent in the City or on a Board or Commission. The following two charts show the racial/ethnic representation on Boards and Commissions as compared to the racial/ethnic makeup of the City. The line chart shows the general trend of overrepresented White and underrepresented people of color on Boards and Commissions. The bar chart adds detail that is not visible in the line chart and we can see the disparity more clearly. As shown, those identifying as White are overrepresented on Boards and Commissions. The disparity between the White overrepresentation and Hispanic underrepresentation is clear from the graphs. However, the disparity for other race/ethnic groups is not apparent because we are dealing with such small numbers as a percentage. 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% White Hispanic Asian 2+ Other* Race/Ethnicity Distribution in City and B&C City B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% White Hispanic Asian 2+ Other* Race/Ethnicity Distribution in City and B&C City B&C 2.2 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 18 While it can be difficult to obtain representation on Boards and Commissions when drawing from significantly smaller populations, targeting the barriers to participation strengthens the City’s commitment to broad community engagement. Percentage and number population breakdowns by race/ethnicity are as follows: Percent Number City B&C City B&C White 82.71% 94.35% 134736 116 Hispanic 10.25% 3.23% 16703 4 Asian 2.86% 1.61% 4666 2 2+ 2.34% 0.81% 3804 2 Other4 1.84% 0.00% 2990 0 With the Census data shown in the table and chart below, we see there is no striking disparity between any of the target populations across districts, rather, the lack of representation among residents of color is a Citywide problem of equal proportion in any district. Column1 District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 White 82.00% 83.46% 82.84% 85.00% 82.46% 80.56% Hispanic 12.47% 9.79% 9.57% 8.47% 8.97% 12.08% Asian 1.75% 3.15% 4.04% 2.43% 3.44% 2.45% 2+ Races 2.02% 1.96% 2.29% 2.38% 2.85% 2.55% Black 1.08% 1.06% 0.85% 1.17% 1.67% 1.53% Other Race 0.12% 0.15% 0.14% 0.10% 0.11% 0.21% Pacific Islander 0.05% 0.06% 0.01% 0.05% 0.13% 0.10% 4 “Other” encompasses additional racial categories that were not selected within the survey results. 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% White Hispanic Asian 2+ Races Black Other Race Pacific Race/Ethnicity Distribution across Districts District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 2.2 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 19 Income The raw numbers and trending for income distribution is shown below for the City and Boards and Commissions. Please Note: The ESRI ACS data only went as low as less than $15,000 whereas the B&C surveys specified less than $10,000, thus there is an apparent hole between $10,000 and $15,000 in the survey response. As we can see from the table and charts below, incomes below $50,000 are underrepresented and incomes $75,000 and higher are overrepresented with an unexpectedly sharp spike at $100,000- $149,999. Statistically, this spike represents a vulnerability as an indicator to consider whether B&C outcomes are vulnerable to being skewed towards the interests of higher middle-income level households. City B&C Less than $10,000 13.68% 1.94% $15,000-$24,999 9.05% 1.94% $25,000-$34,999 10.62% 5.83% $35,000-$49,999 12.12% 4.85% $50,000-$74,999 16.02% 16.50% $75,000-$99,999 13.78% 16.50% $100,000-$149,999 15.36% 34.95% $150,000-$199,999 4.94% 8.74% $200,000 or more 4.43% 8.74% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% Income Distribution City and B&C City B&C 2.2 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 20 The following series of charts compares income levels on Boards and Commission to the income levels within the related district. Each district shows some form of skew toward higher income levels. District 2 is the most uniform and District 3 is more erratic, but is also the smallest population. Districts 1, 4, 5, and 6 all show a skew at the $100,000 income level. What is significant is that District 1, and particularly Districts 2 and 3, have the lowest distribution of higher income brackets in their districts, yet still have a significant skew at $100,000. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% Income Distribution by District Council District 1 Council District 2 Council District 3 Council District 4 Council District 5 Council District 6 2.2 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 21 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% District 1 Income Distribution B&C Population 22 ACS-1 B&C-1 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% District 2 Income Distribution B&C Population 22 ACS-2 B&C-2 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% District 3 Income Distribution B&C Population 10 ACS-3 B&C-3 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% District 4 IncomeDistribution B&C Population 13 ACS-4 B&C-4 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% District 5 Income Distribution B&C Population 11 ACS-5 B&C-5 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% District 6 Income Distribution B&C Population 25 ACS-6 B&C-6 2.2 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 22 Age Raw numbers and distribution of age throughout the City and Boards and Commissions are shown below. The populations in the City and on Boards and Commissions are only nearly congruent in the 50s age range. Other than that, the younger age bands are clearly underrepresented and the older age bands are overrepresented. B&C City 20 - 29 6.35% 32.42% 30 - 39 16.67% 18.40% 40 - 49 21.43% 14.01% 50 - 59 18.25% 14.81% 60 - 69 23.02% 11.20% 70+ 14.29% 9.16% This phenomenon can be rationalized by taking the college population into account and realizing that older, particularly retired community members, have more discretionary time. Indeed Districts 5 and 6, which mostly cover the CSU campus and surrounding neighborhoods, have a distinctly large 20-year- old population skewing the City average, and thus creating questions as to how to represent that population. Overall, however, there is a decided propensity on Boards and Commissions to have overrepresentation by the older age groups. 2.2 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 23 The following charts show the age distribution per Council District and on their corresponding Boards and Commissions. While there is no obvious common skew pattern, there is a common skew toward the higher age bands and particularly away from the lower one in all Districts. 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 City Age Distribution City and District 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ 2.2 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 24 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 1 and B&C Age Distribution Population 27 District 1 B&C 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 2 and B&C Age Distribution Population 24 District 2 B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 3 and B&C Age Distribution Population 12 District 3 B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 4 and B&C Age Distribution Population 16 District 4 B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 5 and B&C Age Distribution Population 13 District 5 B&C 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 25 Appendix D: Boards and Commissions Questionnaire – Synopsis of Qualitative Responses What suggestions do you have to broaden recruitment efforts for Boards and Commissions? • Hold more community informational events, recruitment fair/open house, tables at public events, rec centers, volunteer days like Make a Difference Day • Message the story of what Boards and Commissions have helped the City achieve (newspaper articles) o Provide templates/opportunities for members to “report out” to the community through social media or presentations • Ensure process and requirements for serving are readily available to the public o Process/requirements should be easily understood and accessible o Process should be shorter (application, interview, etc.) • Use a marketing campaign: o Target one’s desire to participate in community decisions o Use current members to speak/recruit/give presentations at other community events o Place stories in the newspaper of Boards and Commissions accomplishments/impact o Advertise vacancies in:  Major employers (FRCC, CSU, HP, Woodward, UC Health, breweries)  CSU campus  Chamber of Commerce  Through social media (i.e., NextDoor)  Church bulletins  Larimer County Workforce Center  Affordable housing residences  At Council meetings  CityWorks 101 and Larimer County 101 • Revise interview process to: o Ensure members’ capacity to serve  “As a whole I don’t think the board I serve on has a very strong understanding of the subject matter at hand. Therefore the conversations are not particularly high level and the board is very rarely consequential in City policy. I'd love to see a combination of reorganization of the seat allocation, and a commitment to ongoing education on important concepts, and a directive to staff, as the board matures, that we have more impact on plans earlier, and not just work as a rubber stamp for existing plans.” o Accommodate for evening interview times (i.e., only daytime interview slots were given and a candidate’s schedule did not permit them to attend, yet no accommodation was made for an evening interview slot) • Shift meeting times to accommodate working professionals’ schedules • Consider options for people to attend meetings from home • Provide childcare (prefer childcare over food/snacks/thank-you gifts) • Offer food during meeting periods • Use current/previous board members as “ambassadors” to help in the recruitment strategies • Identify where there are recruitment issues and recruit specifically to fill those gaps o Focus on diverse communities (Hispanic, Low Income, etc.) o Recruit younger community members and those with families o “Be aware that in some situations, a deep knowledge of the history of the city and expertise in the issue at hand is more important than getting representation from every diverse group.” o Age range of board members should match demographics of the community 2.2 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 26 o Councilmembers, staff and current board members should actively recruit underrepresented populations o Seek more working corporate executives • Ensure staff is responsive to board/community input • Give boards actual voting rights – make them feel that they are actually impacting the community • Ensure no conflicts of interest between members and the board they serve on • Provide better training for board chairs on how to facilitate meetings and ensure all can speak Any other relevant information you would like to share? • Use social media to increase knowledge and interest on Boards and Commissions; share stories of what they have helped the City achieve • Use staff/current board members to assist in recruitment strategies • Ensure proper training/vetting for participation o “It is frustrating as a marginalized individual to serve in a Commission [where] white [people] hinder us. The lack of knowledge on the dynamics of [privilege] is flabbergasting and infuriating. Their intentions are good but we need a Commission whose knowledge match[es] their passion and intentions.” • Enjoy opportunity to serve on a board • Review term limits o Some people have had very long terms on a board and feel like they own the issues and can stifle the input from newer members o Need succession planning and planning for turnover during the year so that the rest of the members are not overloaded • City staff work hard and respect community members; use board members’ expertise to do things like background research o “Assign us more responsibility to truly make change in our community.” o “Boards and commissions should not be primarily in the passive role of reviewing staff actions. The City has competent staff. What is needed from the community is to provide topical guidance to the Council. Boards and Commissions should have input on strategy and vision aspects of their topics and be part of the process of Council setting the long- term goals and objectives for the City.” • Consider ways in which board membership may be exclusive • Consider mentor opportunities between older and newer members • City buildings need to be aware of handicapped parking issues • Important to recruit younger people to the boards • Non-liaison staff need to take board feedback seriously o “Don’t just check the box that you presented to the board.” • Microsoft Sharepoint is not a useful system to make materials available • Ensure Council input as to the impact of board feedback/recommendations/contributions 2.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 27 Appendix E: Boards and Commissions National Best Practice List The Public Participation Subcommittee researched communities across the country to gather information about municipal Boards and Commissions processes. Communities that are known as leaders in equity, inclusion and community engagement were chosen, as well as regional neighbors. The following communities were reviewed and/or interviewed. The URL link directs to their main Boards and Commissions page. Austin, TX: http://www.austintexas.gov/department/boards-and-commissions Burlington, VT: https://www.burlingtonvt.gov/CityCouncil/Boards-Commissions-Committees Eugene, OR: https://www.eugene-or.gov/86/Boards-and-Commissions King County, WA: http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/executive/boards.aspx Minneapolis, MN: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/boards/index.htm Portland, OR: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/oni/37423 St. Paul, MN: https://www.stpaul.gov/departments/mayors-office/committees-boards-and-commissions Seattle, WA: https://www.seattle.gov/boards-and-commissions Boulder, CO: https://bouldercolorado.gov/boards-commissions Denver, CO: https://www.denvergov.org/content/denvergov/en/mayors-office/about-the-office-of-the- mayor/boards-commissions.html Greeley, CO: http://greeleygov.com/government/b-c/home Longmont, CO: https://www.longmontcolorado.gov/departments/boards-committees-and-commissions 2.2 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 28 Appendix F: Application for Board and Commission Membership 2.2 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 29 2.2 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Sustainability Services 222 LaPorte Ave. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6505 970.224.6107 - fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: June 18, 2019 TO: Mayor Wade Troxell & City Councilmembers THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer FROM: Victoria Shaw, Senior Finance Analyst, SSA RE: Joint Board & Commission Pilot Meeting ________________________________________________________________________ Bottom-line: Per a resolution adopted by Council in July 2018, a pilot meeting including representation from all Boards and Commissions supported by Sustainability Services staff liaisons was held April 11 th . The meeting focused on the Triple Bottom Line Scan (TBL-S) and Accessory Dwelling Units. Feedback to date has been positive, and a second pilot meeting will be held before the end of the year. Background: In May 2018, Futures Committee discussed the future of community advisory engagement. Two members of the Economic Advisory Commission recommended an experiment involving representation from mixed boards. In July 2018, a Resolution was unanimously adopted by Council to allow for two pilot meetings. The Resolution outlined that all six Boards and Commissions supported by Sustainability Services would be included, and allowed the flexibility to expand to invite additional Boards and Commissions as needed. The two pilot meetings were intended to develop and test the process and effectiveness of this engagement model. The Resolution outlines that staff will determine topics, which Boards participate, and when the joint meetings occur. Early Learnings: Staff met with board liaisons and representatives multiple times during the planning process for the first pilot meeting. Initially, the proposed topics for the joint meetings were identified collaboratively. This yielded good indicators of where various Boards and Commissions might share interest; however, it generally identified the topics too late to be successful scheduling and convening the large group before the next decision point. Representatives provided feedback that they felt a limited timeline would reduce the effectiveness and impact the collective group could have. To mitigate this issue, DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659 ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Pilot Memo (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2 staff pivoted the focus for the first pilot meeting to an internal City process that did not have upcoming Council milestones. Process: The TBL-S was selected as a topic because all invited Boards and Commissions will review results of TBL-S assessments. This topic was coupled with City Plan Housing options, specifically Accessory Dwelling Units, to demonstrate and test how the internal TBL-S process is performed. Staff presented overviews and supported participant dialogues. Participants were mixed at small tables and each table completed a separate TBL-S with the assistance of a table facilitator. The results of all scans were presented and discussed by participants. Feedback: 17 board and committee representatives attended. Feedback within the meeting was positive for the meeting structure. Specifically, participants expressed that they enjoyed having a mix of Boards and Commissions that were connected to the topic, with the opportunity for them to ask the same questions. There was also expressed desire to tie knowledge from the meeting to an outcome, such as joint statement. Participants stated they felt the model of engagement was different and significantly more active compared to a Board and Commission Super Issues Board meeting, which also addresses multiple Boards and Commissions collectively. Feedback was also collected on impressions of the TBL-S and Accessory Dwelling Units. This feedback was provided to the relevant core teams. A follow up survey was also sent to all invited participants. Highlights from survey results for attendees include  100% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the meeting  100% would recommend attending a joint Board and Commission meeting to peers  100% would attend a future joint Board & Commission meeting  Among members that were invited, but did not attend the pilot meeting:  80% were unable to attend due to schedule or conflicts  30% indicated they would be more willing to attend if there were clearer outcomes Next steps: 1. Ongoing - Participating Boards & Commissions will debrief individually in their regular meetings and complete an online survey on their experience. 2. Q2 2019 - Staff will regroup with the data from board discussions and participant surveys responses. This information will help inform direction for the second and final approved pilot meeting. 3. Q3 2019 - The planning process for the second pilot meeting will begin, including staff liaisons and representatives from participating Boards and Commissions. DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659 2.3 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Pilot Memo (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 3 4. Q4 2019 – Current targeted timeline for the next joint board and commission pilot meeting. 5. End 2019 – Results from pilot will be complete and communicated to Council. DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659 2.3 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Pilot Memo (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) City Council Work Session September 24, 2019 Re-Imagining Boards & Commissions Ginny Sawyer ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Direction 1. What are the desired outcomes of this priority? a. Work more cross functionally in advisory groups? b. Align advisory boards to Outcome areas? c. Create more diversity in Board make-up and structure? d. Reduce the number of Boards and Commissions? 2. What questions/suggestions does Council have moving forward? 2 2.4 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2019 Adopted Council Priority Re-imagine Boards and Commissions: Better structure the board and commission system to set up success into the future, align with Outcome Areas and allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that allow for greater use of Ad Hoc meetings, diverse stakeholders and additional community participation. 3 2.4 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) 2018 Futures Committee 4 TODAY 10 YEARS 20 YEARS 30 YEARS 40 YEARS 50 YEARS • Continuous improvement efforts • Structural and process improvement • Envision roadmap to future structure Create and implement roadmap to future vision What does an effective community advisory structure and process look like in 30-50 years 2.4 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Today  28 standing Boards/Commissions  7 quasi-judicial  225 total volunteers  27 staff liaisons, 11 admin support  Boards governed by Article 3, Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code  15 vacancies, 50 expiring terms end of 2019 5 2.4 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Today  Boards and Commissions advise the Council on various issues and perform functions as the Council may designate.  Established and known mechanism to engage residents in areas of interest.  Part of a broader public engagement/volunteer system. 6 2.4 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Historical  Majority of Boards and Commissions established in between the 1950s and 1980s  Three created in the 2000s  Increased use of ad hoc committees: Community Trust, Broadband, Impact Fees, Development Review, Affordable Housing Homeless Service Center 7 2.4 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Continuous Improvement Efforts Council 2011-2012 Work Plan – Priority project: • Convene a representative group of B & C members to assess and suggest improvements Council Future’s Committee- January 2014 • Project Plan for the B&C Function and Structure Review Equity Team Public Participation Report- 2017 • Demographic questionnaire to determine baseline demographics and identify areas of opportunity. Reviewed current Boards and Commissions application and process. Member-Driven Multi-Board Experiment/Future’s committee - 2018 • Seeking cross-board discussion utilizing TBL framework 8 2.4 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions)  The “Super Issue” meeting effort  Updates to the Board and Commission Manual  Ability to use MinuteTrac for board and commission processes  Development and inclusion in Engage  The Pilot joint board meetings  Board and Commission work plan reviews 9 2.4 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Outcomes Work more cross-functionally in advisory groups?  Broader topic area boards  Ensure specific stakeholder representation on all boards (youth, women, seniors, mobility-impaired, equity-focused, etc.)  Other? 10 2.4 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Outcomes Align advisory boards to Outcome areas?  7 outcome focused boards  Group existing boards under an outcome area and focus workplans to specific strategic objectives  Other? 11 2.4 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Outcomes Create more diversity in Board make-up and structure?  Variety of terms (1, 2 and 4 year)  More defined board member make-up  Use of more ad-hoc or temporary boards  Other? 12 2.4 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Board and Commissions Diversity Index 13 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Race/Ethnicity Gender Identity LGBTQ Disability Income Age Veterans Board & Commission Representation vs. City Demographics Current Representation Parity with Community 2.4 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Outcomes Reduce the number of Boards and Commissions?  Alignment  Sunset timelines  Other? 14 2.4 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Direction 1. What are the desired outcomes of this priority? a. Work more cross-functionally in advisory groups? b. Align advisory boards to Outcome areas? c. Create more diversity in Board make-up and structure? d. Reduce the number of Boards and Commissions? 2. What questions/suggestions does Council have moving forward? 15 2.4 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) DATE: STAFF: September 24, 2019 Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Dean Klingner, Transfort and Parking Interim General Manager Theresa Connor, Water Engineering Field Operations Mrg WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Northeast Fort Collins Planning Discussion. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to discuss planning considerations and policy guidance in northeast Fort Collins (north of Vine Drive, east of Lemay Avenue and generally encompassed in the Mountain Vista Subarea). As the largest area of mostly vacant, agricultural land in the Growth Management Area, significant development is anticipated over the coming decades. Multiple development applications have been approved in recent years or are currently undergoing development review. As development occurs, amendments to various City plans may be requested, including the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, Master Street Plan, and Parks and Recreation Master Plan. New and proposed development in the area has necessitated a holistic analysis of utility provision, the transportation network and community amenities in northeast Fort Collins, which pose both opportunities and constraints for the City. City Council may be involved in various decisions related to planning and development in this area of the community, including plan amendments, development plans, annexation and zoning decisions, utility service agreements, metro districts, and funding for capital projects. Staff seeks to provide background information for Council and to understand Council’s expectations for new development in northeast Fort Collins. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED What questions or guidance does Council have related to planning and development in northeast Fort Collins? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Mountain Vista Subarea Plan The Mountain Vista Subarea Plan was adopted in 2009 and provides land use and policy guidance for the northeast quadrant of the city. The plan describes the vision for this subarea as: “…an area of Fort Collins known for its impressive views of the mountains and recognized for its successful and innovative community design. This subarea will be distinct and attractive with a comfortable, town-like atmosphere that residents and businesses identify with and take pride in. Neighborhoods, parks, schools, shopping district and business centers within this subarea will be connected and served by a variety of travel choices including vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes…” Other key elements of the subarea plan’s vision and policies include: • Mixed-use neighborhoods composed of a variety of housing types and prices ranges • Commercial centers and amenities in close proximity to neighborhoods • A new community commercial district with a small town-like pattern of streets and blocks and an emphasis on pedestrian use • A network of streets and trails that are attractive, safe and pedestrian-oriented 3 Packet Pg. 89 September 24, 2019 Page 2 • A range of job opportunities for the area, community and region on industrial and employment lands • Access, mobility and connectivity for all travel modes, with strategically located transit hubs • Preservation and enhancement of existing natural features, historic resources, and scenic views • Schools, parks and recreation opportunities linked by a greenway network • Well designed and attractive landscaping, signage and lighting with high-quality and innovative building design In 2016, City Council revisited the vision and framework plan for the Mountain Vista subarea. In their work session discussions, Council reinforced their support for a land use framework that integrates open lands, including agricultural production, parks, natural habitat, and stormwater areas with new residential neighborhoods, public facilities and employment areas - with particular focus on agri-urban development, affordable housing, and implementation of Nature in the City goals. Any amendments to the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan would require City Council approval. Master Street Plan and Transportation Projects The Master Street Plan establishes the overall street network for the community, including the layout and classification of roads, intersections and other infrastructure. The last major update to the Master Street Plan was in 2011, though the recent City Plan Update involved significant analysis and community input related to the plan. A number of amendments to the Master Street Plan are currently in review. Some potential amendments were identified through the City Plan process, and others have been requested in conjunction with development projects in northeast Fort Collins. The proposed amendments include a combination of realignments, additions, deletions or reclassifications of various roadways. The most significant proposed changes are the realignment of Timberline and Mountain Vista and the addition of Turnberry and Giddings connections (south of Mountain Vista). The proposed realignment of Timberline and Mountain Vista would keep the existing road alignments and remove a future curve of Timberline through private property. The proposed Turnberry and Giddings connections would provide an additional 4 lanes of north/south capacity feeding to Suniga. The remainder of requested changes are minor realignments or additions that primarily impact the Montava development and would be tied to the approval of the Montava PUD application. In addition to Master Street Plan amendments, major transportation projects planned in northeast Fort Collins include: • The Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue overpass • The completion of various portions of Suniga Road • A new signal at Timberline Road and Vine Drive • A new signal at Turnberry Road and Country Club Drive • Vine Drive bridge over I-25 (CDOT) • A new signal at SH1 and Douglas Road Other improvements, including roadway widening consistent with the Master Street Plan and intersection projects, will be identified through individual development applications. The City will work closely with the County to accommodate the sensitive nature of Country Club Road, which is a collector in unincorporated Larimer County. Any amendments to the Master Street Plan would require City Council approval. Parks and Recreation Policy Plan Based on the 2008 Parks and Recreation Policy Plan, there are approximately eight neighborhood parks and one community park planned for northeast Fort Collins. The City recently completed construction of a neighborhood park in the Maple Hill neighborhood, now called Crescent Park. Sugar Beet Park, located near Vine Dr and 9th Street, is currently under construction and will be open before the end of 2019. Design efforts for 3 Packet Pg. 90 September 24, 2019 Page 3 Trail Head Park are currently underway, with construction planned for 2020. A larger community park, currently referred to as the Northeast Community Park, is also planned for this part of the community. Multiple regional trail connections are planned as development occurs over time. A new recreation center is also planned for northeast Fort Collins as the population continues to grow. The Park Planning and Development Department has been coordinating with multiple developers to reserve parkland and secure easements for future paved recreational trails. Conversations with the Montava developer regarding a potential location for Northeast Community Park are ongoing. Any amendments to the Parks and Recreation Policy Plan would require City Council approval, and a comprehensive update to this plan is scheduled for 2019-2020. Schools and Libraries Poudre School District (PSD) has long had plans for developing additional schools to serve northeast Fort Collins, including elementary, middle, and high school sites. Schools would be sited and built as needed and as funding allows in response to population growth and development activity. PSD continues to partner with developers in northeast Fort Collins to secure potential school sites and ensure that the District’s long-term needs can be met. PSD has not indicated a timeline for the development of the schools. The 2019 Poudre River Public Library District Master Plan identifies the need for an additional library facility that is “accessible for the populations of and beyond north Fort Collins.” The new library would offer “diverse spaces for people and programming” and would serve as a key community amenity for residents in northeast Fort Collins. Utility Services Water Utilities The Mountain Vista Subarea is predominately within the East Larimer County Water District (ELCO), which provides water treatment and delivery services for existing and future customers. The only exception is that Fort Collins Utilities serves the Anheuser Busch facility near Richards Lake Road and I-25. ELCO requires new development to provide certain water rights to meet the water demands of the new development, and generally does not accept cash-in-lieu of those water rights. Some developers have expressed difficulty in acquiring these water rights (versus paying cash-in-lieu) and are concerned about their rising costs and the effect on the affordability of housing in the area, especially when compared to a lower cost for water supplies in the Fort Collins Utilities service area. Fort Collins Utilities and ELCO are exploring ways to jointly provide water services that might reduce the overall costs in the Mountain Vista area. However, this is difficult given the constraints of Colorado Water law related to sharing water supplies, which would present risks to either party relative to normal water requirements. Any water sharing arrangements between Fort Collins Utilities and ELCO would require City Council approval. Wastewater Utilities The Mountain Vista Subarea is predominately within the Boxelder Sanitation District (BSD) service area for wastewater conveyance, treatment and disposal. Like water service, Fort Collins Utilities serves the Anheuser Busch facility, even though it is within BSD’s service area. BSD has a treatment plant across the Poudre River from the Fort Collins Drake Water Reclamation Facility. BSD’s Plant Investment Fee (PIF) is much higher than Fort Collins Utilities’ PIF, approximately $12,000 compared to approximately $4,000, and they do not have separate PIF rates for multi-family and single-family units. Fort Collins Utilities has received feedback that this can be a substantial drawback to developing in this area. The average monthly bill for residents in BSD is around $80, versus close to $40 for Fort Collins Utilities. This can be a strain to households in the BSD service area, which impacts the overall affordability of housing in this area. BSD staff has indicated they are trying to develop policy solutions to address these challenges. 3 Packet Pg. 91 September 24, 2019 Page 4 Stormwater Utility The Mountain Vista Subarea is in the Cooper Slough Drainage Basin, which drains to Boxelder Creek watershed and eventually the Poudre River. Fort Collins Utilities Stormwater Division has completed a Master Stormwater Plan, including a Selected Plan for improvements in the Cooper Slough Basin to address a lack of adequate stormwater infrastructure within the basin to meet the level of service as established by policy. Working with developers within the Cooper Slough Basin is an opportunity to partner to meet the requirements of the developer and make improvements identified to serve existing residents. The Stormwater Department generally works through Development Agreements as a way to partner on these projects. Metropolitan Districts Metropolitan Districts are special tax districts that provide municipal services such as sewer, water, parks, and amenities. Metropolitan Districts issue bonds to build and maintain this infrastructure. Properties within the Metropolitan District boundary pay a property tax to service the debt issued by the District. Formerly, the Metropolitan District tool was only available to developments comprising 90% commercial uses in Fort Collins. In 2018, Council updated the Metropolitan District policy and now allows residential development to use the tool. Residential development must provide additional public benefits to gain access to the Metropolitan District tool, per the City’s revised policies. To seek approval for a Metropolitan District, developers produce a service plan outlining the proposed mill levy, the improvements the bonds will fund, and the public benefits associated with the development. City Council is the decision maker for these service plans. Metropolitan Districts are also subject to a vote to comply with the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). A few developments under review or under construction in northeast Fort Collins have applied for a Metropolitan District. These developments include: • Water’s Edge • Waterfield • Montava Public benefits associated with each Metropolitan District vary from using non-potable water for irrigation or improving energy efficiency to the provision of affordable housing. Council approved preliminary service plans multiple proposed Metropolitan Districts in 2018. Each development will need to seek final approval of their service plans and are subject to a vote in order to establish their Metropolitan Districts. Planning and Development Activity Multiple development projects are planned, under review or have been approved in recent years in northeast Fort Collins. Council’s role in relation to development projects varies based on the nature of the project. For projects that involve plan amendments, annexation, zoning or rezoning, metro districts, or Planned Unit Developments larger than 640 acres, Council is the decision-maker. For development projects that do not involve these actions, Planning and Zoning Board or an administrative hearing officer are the decision-makers, though Council may be involved in appeal proceedings. Development projects are required to comply with all applicable Land Use Code requirements and must conform to the policy guidance in City Plan, the Master Street Plan, and other adopted policies and plans. ATTACHMENTS 1. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 92 September 24, 2019 Northeast Fort Collins Planning Discussion Planning, Development, Transportation & Utilities Staff ATTACHMENT 1 Purpose of this Item • Provide context and background on planning and development issues in northeast Fort Collins • Outline opportunities and constraints related to planning, transportation, parks and recreation, and utility services • Prepare Council for future discussions related to capital projects, plan amendments, and development projects 2 Area of Consideration 3 VINE LEMAY • North of Vine Drive, East of Lemay Avenue • Council District 1 • Majority of vacant land in Growth Management Area • Mountain Vista Subarea • Separate water and wastewater districts City Council Involvement • Council may be involved in various decisions related to planning and development in northeast Fort Collins, including: • Plan amendments (e.g., Master Street Plan) • Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plans for projects >640 acres • Annexation, zoning and rezoning decisions • Funding decisions for capital projects • Utility service agreements • Development projects on appeal • Metro district requests 4 5 Planning & Development Mountain Vista Subarea 6 Growth Management Area (GMA) Boundary Mountain Vista Subarea City Limits (Yellow) Zoning Acreage Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN) 1,298 acres Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (MMN) 144 acres Employment 660 acres Industrial 450 acres Open land, community park and school site 400 acres Community Commercial 30 acres Total 2,989 acres Mountain Vista Subarea Plan 7 1999 Framework Plan Adopted 2008-2009 Plan Update Update 2009 Plan Update Adopted 2015 Rural Scenario Assessment Direction from Council (2015) • Specific topics to be incorporated: • Nature in the City • Urban Agriculture • Housing Affordability • Investigate partnership opportunities for infrastructure improvements • Promote innovative design • Enhance livability and integrate agricultural and natural systems 8 L a k e C a n a l No. 8 Outlet Larimer a n d Weld Canal R i c h a r d ' s L a k e L o n g P o n d Lin d e n m e ier L a ke J a c k s o n D i t c h L a k e C a n a l No. 8 Outlet Larimer a n 10 Transportation Master Street Plan Turnberry Rd Mtn Vista Drive Timberline Rd Giddings Vine Drive Suniga Conifer Existing Master Street Plan Slide 11 Turnberry Rd Mtn Vista Drive Bar Harbor Dr. Giddings Timberline Rd Giddings Vine Drive Suniga Conifer Requested Amendments N Transportation Projects Turnberry Rd Mtn Vista Drive Timberline Vine Dr Giddings Suniga College Country Club Dr Lemay 11 11 Vine & Lemay Overpass Suniga (various sections) Timberline/Vine Signal 22 Current Projects (Funded/partially funded or underway) Future Projects (with Development) 77 Turnberry (various sections) Turnberry & Country Club Signal 33 Timberline / Mtn Vista widening & intersection improvements 99 Mtn. Vista / I-25 Signal 44 Richards Lake Rd Douglas Rd SH 1 Vine Dr Bridge over I-25 (CDOT) 55 66 22 33 44 55 SH 1 / Douglas Rd Signal 88 99 N 12 77 66 88 13 Parks, Recreation & Schools 14 Parks & Recreation Policy Plan Park Site Identified or Acquired Park Constructed Park Planned Schools & Libraries • Proposed schools: • Elementary school • Middle school • High school • Future library identified for northeast Fort Collins 15 16 Utility Services Water Utilities • Primary provider: East Larimer County Water District (ELCO) • Requires water rights • Higher cost than Utilities • ELCO and Utilities exploring ways to jointly provide services • Water law challenges • Any arrangements require Council approval 17 Mountain Vista Subarea Wastewater Service Challenges 18 Wastewater Utilities • Primary provider: Boxelder Sanitation District (BSD) • Higher cost of Plant Investment Fee (PIF) and rates than Utilities • BSD has indicated they are seeking policies within their organization and is not interested in near term partnership with Utilities • BSD would consider long-term planning solutions Mountain Vista Subarea 19 Stormwater Utility • Fort Collins Utilities the stormwater provider in this area • Mountain Vista Subarea is in the Cooper Slough Drainage Basin • Any partnering on stormwater improvements would be incorporated into development agreements Cooper Slough Basin Development Opportunities & Challenges Opportunities • Largest undeveloped area of city • Potential for full range of housing options and mixed neighborhoods • Impact fees for infrastructure and amenities • Potential for new parks, schools, protected open space, and other community facilities 20 Challenges • High cost of development • Utility service constraints • High infrastructure needs to serve growing population Council Discussion • What questions or guidance does Council have related to planning and development in northeast Fort Collins? 21 22 PUD Process • Optional for development projects >50 acres • Projects 50-640 acres  Planning & Zoning Board • Projects 640+ acres  City Council • Two neighborhood meetings • Significant coordination among City departments and external agencies • Subsequent development phases follow standard development review process, reviewed for conformance with PUD Master Plan 23 PUD Master Plan Benefits of PUD: • Generates additional public benefit and high-quality design • Provides overall vision for long- term development • Ensures consistent, coordinated development over multiple phases • Extended vesting period Includes: • Uses, densities and development standards • Transportation network • Open space network • Preliminary utility information • Architectural concept plan • Phasing plan 24 Summary: Rural Scenario Assessment 25 Pros Cons Greater agricultural production within the City Housing Becomes Less Affordable Fewer collector streets constructed Increased VMT and congestion on City streets Fewer City services and programs needed Substantial Increase in Regional Green House Gas Emissions Greater potential to enhance natural habitat Loss of Street Oversizing Fees to cover costs of regionally-induced transportation impacts Insufficient density to support transit Stranded assets-arterial streets & school site Substantial Loss in Job Opportunities Vision 26 • Vision for the Mountain Vista Subarea: Provide a framework for successful and innovative community design. • One of the last remaining major growth areas in the City • Intended to have a new community center, enhanced multimodal travel corridors, industrial lands, employment areas, a new community park and open lands. • Fresh concepts for incorporating urban agriculture and natural spaces into future development to preserve rural character Plan Amendment Process The process for amendments to adopted subarea plans, including the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, is outlined in City Plan and includes the following procedures: 1. Citizens and development applicants may submit requests for plan amendments, and such amendments may be processed concurrently with development applications 2. City Council is the decision-maker for plan amendments, with recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Board, staff, and any boards and commissions that have a legitimate interest in the proposed amendment 3. City Council must find that the plan is (1) in need of an amendment and (2) that the proposed amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and its related elements 27 Plan Amendment Process The process for amendments to the Master Street Plan includes: 1. Technical analysis and review is conducted by various City departments, including travel demand modeling and consideration of relevant Transportation Master Plan and City Plan policies 2. City Council is the decision-maker for Master Street Plan amendments, with recommendations from the Transportation Board, Planning and Zoning Board, and staff 28 Master Street Plan Requested Amendments • 13 requested changes • Tied to approval of Montava PUD Key Highlights • Turnberry extension south of Mtn. Vista • Giddings / Suniga connection • Conifer extension N 29 d Weld Canal R i c h a r d ' s L a k e L o n g P o n d Lin d e n m e ier L a ke J a c k s o n D i t c h Recent Development Activity Turnberry Rd Mtn Vista Drive Timberline Vine Dr Giddings Suniga Country Club Dr Lemay 11 11 Montava* 22 Country Club Reserve 33 Water’s Edge* In Review Process 44 Waterfield* Richards Lake Rd Douglas Rd 22 33 44 Recently Approved * = Requested Metro District N 9 55 55 Northfield* 50.00% 60.00% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ Council District 6 and B&C Age Distributions Population 28 District 6 B&C 2.2 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) as well as allowing phone interviews or scheduling applicant interviews outside of the workday schedule. The Boards and Commissions questionnaire identified the inability to be physically present as a potential barrier to participation. Exploring alternative methods for participation may improve access for community members with barriers to being physically present as well as allow the City to remain innovative in our participatory strategies. Identify potential code changes Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office 2018 Ongoing Participation 4.5: Offer board members opportunities for public engagement and involvement in recruitment activities. The Boards and Commissions questionnaire found that members identified a specific interest in engaging with the public to promote broader participation. Development and implementation of key strategies Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office, staff liaisons and Public Participation Team 2018 2.2 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) Council to consider. Determine structure of participation Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office and staff liaisons 2018 Ongoing Participation 4.1: Allocate $5,000 to support interpretation/translation services, transportation, and childcare for Board and Commission members, as needed. The Boards and Commissions questionnaire found that the majority of members are White, homeowners, have household incomes exceeding $75,000, and are over 50 years of age. To expand membership, we must work to remove some of the most common barriers residents may have to participation. Spending will be analyzed to adjust for future needs; as board membership barriers and needs fluctuate, spending will need to remain flexible and responsive. Determine who/how funding will be administered Ongoing funding January 2018 2.2 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions) capacity of City Clerk’s Office and Public Participation Team Ongoing Recruitment 1.3: Develop a flow chart and timeline that clearly and concisely describe the application, interview, and appointment process to applicants. Provide clarity and expectations to potential applicants. Flow chart and timeline development Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office and Public Participation Team Fall 2019 for January 2020 appointments Application 2.1: Incorporate demographic questionnaire into applications Compare the demographic representation of applicants to Board and Commission membership to analyze if and where we lose subsets of people through the application process. Software purchase (in progress) Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office Fall 2019 for January 2020 appointments Application 2.2: Adopt recommended changes to Boards and Commissions application. (See Appendix E) The scope of work undertaken by this subcommittee included analyzing the Boards and Commissions application using an equity lens to remove any potential barriers to participation. See Appendix E Time and capacity of City Clerk’s Office Fall 2018 for January 2019 appointments 3 Determined through questionnaire findings and review of best practices 2.2 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Public Participation Report (8274 : Re-Imagining Boards and Commissions)