HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 12/10/2019 - COMPLETE AGENDACity 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
December 10, 2019
6:00 PM
• CALL TO ORDER
1. Manufactured Housing Preservation and Livability Strategies. (staff: Tom Leeson; Sue Beck-
Ferkiss; 15 minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this work session is provide Council with an update of progress on Council priorities
related to manufactured housing communities (MHC) since the imposition of a moratorium on
redevelopment and to seek direction on potential options to preserve this type of housing and
address livability issues that have been raised by residents and owners.
MHCs typically are structured to divide asset ownership with homeowners renting the land under
their home from community owners. MHCs are an important part of the community’s housing stock
and are a relatively affordable type of housing. Staff has been asked to provide options for Council’s
guidance and feedback to both preserve this type of housing and improve livability in MHCs.
For the purpose of this presentation, staff is using the phrase “manufactured housing” to refer to both
mobile homes and manufactured homes. Federal definitions define mobile homes as units
constructed prior to 1976, while units constructed afterwards are defined as manufactured homes.
2. Reimagine Boards and Commissions. (staff: Honore Depew; 10 minute staff presentation; 30
minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to provide an overview of findings from previous Council direction for
achieving the Council Priority, Reimagine Boards and Commissions, and to seek further direction on
outreach and engagement plans.
City of Fort Collins Page 2
3. Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan. (staff: Matt Fater, Theresa Connor; 15 minute staff
presentation; 30 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to update City Council on future stormwater improvements in the
downtown area. The downtown area is vulnerable to flood risk and pollution from stormwater runoff.
The area was constructed over a century ago prior to design standards and criteria for stormwater
management. As a result, there’s a lack of infrastructure to manage both stormwater quality and
flood risks.
The Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan (DISP) is a system of stormwater improvements
planned to address the stormwater quality and flood risks in the downtown area. The improvements
include a combination of storm sewer and water quality enhancements to be implemented over the
next 12-15 years. The specific projects in the plan will be recommended in future budget cycles for
Council’s consideration.
• ANNOUNCEMENTS
• ADJOURNMENT
DATE:
STAFF:
December 10, 2019
Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs
Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Social Policy and Housing Program
Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Manufactured Housing Preservation and Livability Strategies.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is provide Council with an update of progress on Council priorities related to
manufactured housing communities (MHC) since the imposition of a moratorium on redevelopment and to seek
direction on potential options to preserve this type of housing and address livability issues that have been raised
by residents and owners.
MHCs typically are structured to divide asset ownership with homeowners renting the land under their home from
community owners. MHCs are an important part of the community’s housing stock and are a relatively affordable
type of housing. Staff has been asked to provide options for Council’s guidance and feedback to both preserve
this type of housing and improve livability in MHCs.
For the purpose of this presentation, staff is using the phrase “manufactured housing” to refer to both mobile
homes and manufactured homes. Federal definitions define mobile homes as units constructed prior to 1976,
while units constructed afterwards are defined as manufactured homes.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers want staff to bring a manufactured housing zone forward for Council consideration?
2. Do Councilmembers have direction on which resident's rights and livability strategies to prioritize?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
This summer, City Council initiated a moratorium on the acceptance of development applications that could result
in the partial or total closing of manufactured housing communities. The moratorium began in August 2019 and
will last until the earlier of the City’s adoption of regulations and/or strategies for the preservation of manufactured
housing communities or one year. Councilmembers also directed staff to investigate livability issues at these
communities and to help clarify rights and responsibilities of manufactured housing owners and residents. This
item will address preservation and resident’s rights/livability strategies separately.
Affordable housing, manufactured home preservation, and manufactured housing resident protections are Council
priorities and well-aligned with the recent City Plan update and the 2018 Strategic Plan. City Plan Policies LIV 6.4,
Permanent Supply of Affordable Housing, LIV 6.9, Prevent Displacement, and LIV 6.10, Mitigate Displacement
Impacts are specifically relevant to manufactured housing in Fort Collins. Policy directed to this housing type is
also contained in the City’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan and the Affordable Housing Redevelopment
Displacement Mitigation Strategy. In addition, the Colorado General Assembly recently passed legislation (HB19-
1309) to strengthen enforcement of the State’s Mobile Home Park Act which encourages local governments to
play an active role in ensuring the Act is upheld.
Since the implementation of the moratorium, several interdepartmental staff teams have been working to better
understand current issues and operations in Fort Collins’ manufactured housing communities and to investigate
manufactured housing preservation strategies and livability issues. A core team is overseeing all work on these
1
Packet Pg. 3
December 10, 2019 Page 2
priorities and a resident rights/livability technical team has been formed to address those issues specifically.
(More information on this team will be found in the residents’ rights/ livability section below). The core team
includes:
• Neighborhood Services
• Planning
• Communications and Public Information Office
• Social Sustainability
• Utilities
• City Attorney’s Office
• Finance
This work is also in collaboration with external partners such as: The Family Center/La Familia, the Larimer
County Department of Health Built Environment Team, and several MHC resident leaders, owners, and
managers.
Manufactured Housing in Fort Collins
MHCs represent an important housing choice in Fort Collins. While residents may own or rent their home, they
always rent the pad the home rests upon. Residents of manufactured housing communities may not have the
means to rent or purchase in other neighborhood types. MHCs are exempt from some livability Codes and
Ordinances, as well as enforcement of those by City staff as private property, most of which is usually not visible
from public streets and sidewalks. Additionally, MHCs are home to historically underserved populations of non-
English speakers, lower-income households, and senior citizens. Through a series of meetings with MHC
residents and community partners working in the residents’ rights space, need was expressed by the public and
Council for programs and projects focused on manufactured housing livability and safety, preservation of
manufactured housing communities as an affordable housing option in Fort Collins, and equitable access to City
resources in historically underserved neighborhoods and populations.
Within Fort Collins city limits there are 10 manufactured housing communities and approximately 1,400 home
sites. An additional 14 communities and approximately 2,100 home sites exist within the Fort Collins’ Growth
Management Area (GMA) as illustrated in Attachment 1. Several of the largest communities in the GMA are also
immediately adjacent to City limits. While staff is preparing options for Council’s consideration to move forward
within City limits, consultation and collaboration with Larimer County will play an important role in strategies for
the communities outside City’s limits.
Manufactured housing is an important and significant form of private, unsubsidized, affordable housing in Fort
Collins. The approximate 3,500 manufactured homes in the GMA represent nearly the same inventory as the
City’s subsidized affordable housing stock of 3,450 units.
In addition to the relative affordability of manufactured homes, this type of housing has many benefits for
residents, including:
• Privacy and a single-family housing lifestyle
• Private or semi-private outdoor areas and gardens
• Strong sense of community
• Access to community amenities, if available (pools, playgrounds, community centers, etc.)
As mentioned above, residents of manufactured housing must contend with divided asset ownership. While a
resident may own or rent their home, the land underneath is rented from a community landowner and operator.
For residents this can lead to:
• Frequent and unpredictable housing cost increases
• Housing instability and fear of potential community closure and displacement
• Difficulty and cost of moving homes
• Power dynamics with owners/operators and limited tenant protections
1
Packet Pg. 4
December 10, 2019 Page 3
The large majority of the GMA’s manufactured housing communities were also constructed decades ago, and
development of new communities is rare. While no manufactured housing community has closed in Fort Collins
since the Bender Mobile Home Park in 2012, a future closure of one of the larger communities could mean the
displacement of a majority of residents and a large decrease in the City’s private affordable housing stock. The
closure of the Bender Park was the impetus for the City’s Affordable Housing Redevelopment Displacement
Mitigation Strategy and while that work’s focus was mitigation of redevelopment, the work presented here is
designed for preservation of this type of community.
Resident & Owner Issues - Community Engagement
The engagement plan for manufactured housing preservation and residents’ rights strategies (Attachment 2) has
focused on expanding organizational understanding of current resident and owner/operator issues. While staff
has completed several City-led meetings with residents and owners, a significant portion of issues has also been
relayed via community organizations and partners. Engagement with both MHC owners and residents is ongoing.
Collaboration & Coordination:
In September 2019 a cross-departmental residents’ rights/livability technical team (“Team”) led by Neighborhood
Services began meeting biweekly to plan and implement three interim budget cycle funded projects to improve
transparency and accessibility of resources:
• Manufactured Housing Community Handbook
• Manufactured Housing Community Neighborhood Improvement and Community-Building Mini-Grants
• Manufactured Housing Community Neighborhood Liaisons for the highest need communities
The residents’ rights/livability technical team includes contributors from Neighborhood Services, Communications
& Public Involvement, Social Sustainability, Utilities Customer Connections, and Planning. Community
engagement related to MHC livability with internal and external stakeholders and outlined in the attached Public
Engagement Plan for Mobile Home Parks is already underway.
In October, the Team met with representatives from six community organizations working within MHCs to raise
awareness of potential shared resources and future community engagement activities. The community partners at
the October meeting represented:
• Bike Fort Collins,
• CSU Center for Public Deliberation,
• La Familia/The Family Center,
• The Genesis Project,
• Larimer County Health Department,
• Urban Renewal Authority
• FC Moves
Through this collaborative work, community partners have provided information on MHC resident issues and
concerns gathered through neighborhood meetings, surveys, and workshops. This partner group will also assist in
identifying Neighborhood Liaisons for MHCs based on current or previous relationships established with
residents.
Language barriers, protection of resident privacy, fears of retaliation, and a lack of trust with the City meant some
of the traditional outreach approaches used by the City are not appropriate in this engagement effort. Partner
organizations such as The Family Center/La Familia, the Larimer County Department of Health Built Environment
Team and several resident leaders invited staff to existing meetings and events and provided summaries of
resident issues and concerns to staff (Attachment 3).
To supplement the information provided by partner organizations, Neighborhood Services staff is conducting
additional engagement to guide development of the Manufactured Housing Community Handbook and assess
1
Packet Pg. 5
December 10, 2019 Page 4
priorities for Manufactured Housing Community Mini-Grants. In November, Staff met with residents of three MHCs
through the Mi Voz community group and with an additional group of residents from a fourth mobile home park at
The Genesis Project. Staff has also hosted an information booth to connect with approximately 100 families from
seven different MHCs at the Homeward Alliance Family Resource Fair. Staff is intentionally attending existing
community events in recognition that residents are busy people with limited time to provide feedback on public
policy through community outreach.
In November, Staff met with property managers from Harmony Village and the Timber Ridge Manufactured
Housing Communities and with community partner, The Genesis Project, to gather information and schedule
participation in upcoming onsite community events.
The following outreach events are scheduled in December:
• Toys for Tots Distribution Event for Parklane, Hickory Village, and Poudre Valley MHC residents;
• Harmony Village Cocoa & Gingerbread Night;
• Manufactured Housing Grant Kick-Off Event for residents of Hickory Village, Poudre Valley, North
College, Montclair, and Stonecrest MHCs;
• An additional workshop and listening session for MHC owners and property managers is scheduled for
December 18, 2019.
See Attachment 5 for summary of completed engagement efforts to date. The residents’ rights/livability technical
team will continue to meet biweekly through Q1 2020.
Neighborhood Services staff is also conducting bimonthly meetings with the City Attorney’s Office and Purchasing
Department staff to finalize processes for mini-grant review and distribution that minimizes barriers to participation
for manufactured housing residents, property managers, and owners. Manufactured Housing Neighborhood
Improvement and Community-Building Mini-Grants will begin accepting applications in late December 2019 with
review of the first round of applications in March 2020.
Continuing outreach and mini-grant application workshops will be conducted Q1-3 2020 and will include
participation in community events for seniors, non-English speakers, and lower-income families, as well as
targeted outreach at manufactured housing communities and neighborhood meetings. Community partner
organizations with existing resident relationships have been identified for four MHCs and will begin developing a
Memorandum of Understanding with the City to serve as designated Neighborhood Liaisons in Q1 2020.
Resident Issues
The following list summarizes general issues or concerns shared with City staff or partner organizations. Note that
particular issues may vary by individual manufactured housing community. For a more detailed summary see
Attachment 4.
• Housing instability / fear of community closure
• Utility billing transparency
• Maintenance responsibilities (trees, amenity-upkeep, snow)
• Retaliation / harassment
• Frequent rent increases
• Evictions
• Safety (vehicle speeds, lighting)
• Restriction on home sales
• Availability of management
• Language equity
• Frequent rule changes
• Infrastructure conditions
1
Packet Pg. 6
December 10, 2019 Page 5
Owner/Operator Issues
The following list summarizes general issues or concerns by management shared with City staff, primarily in one-
on-one or small-group meetings. A larger owners meeting is planned with City staff on December 18th which may
reveal additional issues. Note that particular issues may vary by individual manufactured housing community.
• Frequent changes in management
• Communication with residents; poor means to distribute information
• Relationships between outside service providers, tenants, and owners/managers
• Language barriers
• Property maintenance enforcement
• Home protections & resources for residents (insurance)
Other Colorado Responses
While most jurisdictions have regulations related to Manufactured Housing Communities, some Colorado cities
have passed regulations for the purpose of preserving this housing type and address livability issues. The City of
Boulder and Boulder County are clear leaders in this space, and Broomfield, Lafayette, and Steamboat Springs
are examples of local jurisdictions with preservation-oriented policy and regulations. A list of regulations passed in
other Colorado cities that address similar issues raised by Fort Collins MHC residents includes:
• Manufactured Housing Zoning
• Accessory Structures Privileges
• Utility Billing Transparency
• Limitation on the Prohibition of Sales of Manufactured Homes
• Limitation on Required Upgrades to Existing Manufactured Homes
• Tree Maintenance Responsibilities
• Right to Privacy
• Prohibitions on Retaliation
• Mediation of Disputes
Efforts Underway in Fort Collins
The City has begun several efforts to begin to address several manufactured housing issues raised by residents
and owners/operators. These efforts include:
Manufactured Housing Handbook & Webpage - Guide for residents and owners of manufactured housing
communities with information on common questions, details about programs and incentives, identification of
responsibilities, mediation and dispute resources, and a calculator and formulas to improve billing of water
utilities.
Mini-grants - Council appropriated $50,000 to establish a mini-grant program for manufactured housing
communities that can be used by residents and owners for projects to improve livability. Examples of potential
projects could include translation services, sewer scoping, tree maintenance, or upgrades to community
amenities. Two grant rounds are anticipated In Q1-Q3 2020.
Neighborhood Liaisons - City or partner staff assigned to the highest need manufactured housing communities
to build relationships, answer questions, register complaints, and provide information on programs and incentives.
In addition to these City-led efforts, the State will begin a new program in Spring 2020 to improve enforcement of
the Mobile Home Park Act, including registration of manufactured housing communities, and a resident complaint
system.
1
Packet Pg. 7
December 10, 2019 Page 6
DISCUSSION
These City and State efforts are only a beginning and staff is providing additional preservation and residents’
rights strategies to bring forward for Council consideration.
Preservation oriented options
Preservation Strategy #1- Manufactured Home Zoning
Redevelopment of existing manufactured home communities is one of the primary factors that may result in
community closures and displacement of residents. To help prevent closures resulting from redevelopment, the
City could develop and implement a new manufactured housing zone district.
Creating a new manufactured housing zone district is one of the most direct and effective tools other jurisdictions
have implemented to help preserve existing communities. Manufactured housing zone districts designed for
preservation typically permit a much narrower range of land-uses in an effort to limit redevelopment opportunities.
In Fort Collins, most of the City’s manufactured housing communities are currently located in either the Low
Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) or Service Commercial (CS) zone districts. These zone districts permit a
broad range of housing types and densities, as well as other commercial/retail uses. A new manufactured housing
zone district would likely be designed with a narrower range of permitted land uses and intensities, including
fewer opportunities for commercial land-uses or higher density residential redevelopment unless it included
affordability provisions.
While limiting potential MHC closures resulting from redevelopment is a primary benefit of manufactured housing
zoning, other benefits may include:
• Closure Notice Period - Many forms of redevelopment would first require Council-approval of a rezoning,
which will add time to the development review process and provide additional notice of an upcoming
community closure.
• Clarify Status of Nonconforming Uses - Nonconforming uses (grandfathered uses) can lead to delays or
complications for owners when completing financial transactions and imposes additional land use restrictions
that limit the ability of existing communities to change or expand.
• Development Standards - Opportunity for the City to implement specific development criteria for
manufactured housing communities, such as setbacks, landscaping/screening, or separation distances
between units. These types of standards are generalized for all types of housing but could become more
specific to manufactured housing communities in a new zone district.
In developing a manufactured housing zone district, the City should also consider:
• Impact on Private Property Rights - A new zone district would represent a downzoning and an impact on
private property rights. Many owners of manufactured housing communities in other communities who
proposed similar zoning opposed the actions. No outreach with owners specific to this potential strategy has
yet been held, however, this idea was previously discussed during the 2013 Affordable Housing
Redevelopment Displacement Mitigation Strategy. Further, many of the City’s manufactured housing
communities used to be zoned as one of two Mobile Home Park zoning districts prior to 1997.
There have been several legal challenges to manufactured home zoning across the country, either as
examples of a takings or spot rezoning. In many circumstances, the zone districts have been upheld,
especially if it can be demonstrated a reasonable economic use of the property remains.
1
Packet Pg. 8
December 10, 2019 Page 7
• City Plan Update - Any rezoning should be consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. Several updates
may be needed to City Plan and the City’s Structure Plan Map, which provides future land use guidance, prior
to creating a new zone district and rezoning properties. Any City Plan updates could be processed prior to or
concurrent with potential rezoning and are anticipated to be minor in scope.
• Larimer County Collaboration - A majority of manufactured housing communities in the Fort Collins
community are located in the GMA rather than city limits. Any direction to proceed forward with a
manufactured housing zone district should also include discussion and consultation with Larimer County to
determine their interest in similar efforts for those communities within the GMA.
Next Steps:
If direction is received to pursue this strategy, additional targeted outreach with owners and residents of existing
communities is recommended. Staff would also begin additional work to develop specific zone district standards,
determine which communities make sense for voluntary or involuntary rezoning, and make necessary updates to
City Plan. Staff anticipates Council Consideration of rezoning and the new zone district could occur as early as
April 2020.
Preservation Strategy #2 - Negotiated Improvements & Incentives
Infrastructure upgrades and maintenance requirements also factor heavily in the financial viability and long-term
stability of many manufactured housing communities. Upgrades or replacement of critical infrastructure can cost
millions of dollars and create a tipping point where existing communities face substandard conditions or become
financially insolvent.
Several jurisdictions have partnered or offered financial assistance to manufactured housing communities to help
complete important maintenance and infrastructure upgrades and preserve the financial viability of a community.
• This assistance typically takes the form of low interest loans, grant funding, or the use of other federal, state,
and local affordable housing program funds.
• Financial assistance or other incentives could also be tied to requirements and other community benefits the
City could not otherwise require due to state preemption.
• Examples include agreements for pad rent stabilization, leasing terms, operational agreements or
opportunities to purchase.
Next steps:
Discussion and inventory with current owners/residents on current conditions and infrastructure investment
needed and would help clarify the timing and scale of any potential assistance that may help preserve
manufactured housing in the community. Identification of existing financial resources or a future budget offer for
new financial resources would be required to advance this strategy.
Preservation Option #3- Resident Cooperatives & Ownership
Resident Owned Communities (ROC USA) is a national nonprofit that has become synonymous with resident
ownership of manufactured home communities. By providing technical and financial assistance, the group and its
partners have assisted over 250 communities in the transition to resident ownership.
1
Packet Pg. 9
December 10, 2019 Page 8
As residents become their own owners, they have more control over the future of their manufactured housing
communities, rents, and operational and governance practices.
Resident owned communities can be found across the country but are especially prominent in New England and
the Pacific Northwest where concentrations of non-profits, technical experts, and supportive state and local
policies are in place to facilitate opportunities for residents to organize and submit competing financial offers when
a manufactured housing community is available for purchase.
Local government involvement for resident owned communities has traditionally involved financial assistance
during the initial sale/financing of a community. Some jurisdictions have also advocated for state-level changes to
create a more supportive environment that can facilitate resident owned communities. Policies that are credited
with helping facilitate resident owned communities in other parts of the country that are currently not defined or
required in Colorado or at local levels includes:
• Notice of Sale - Notice to residents must be given prior to a sale of a manufactured housing community.
• Opportunity to Purchase - Several states have provisions to require owners to consider competitive offers or
the right for residents to match a final offer when a community is for sale.
• Right to Organize / Retaliation Protection - Affirm and enforcement of fundamental resident rights to meet,
gather, and organize.
Next steps:
Identification of existing financial resources or a future budget offer for new financial resources would be required
to advance this strategy if the City wishes to help facilitate any future transactions or purchase opportunities by
residents. The City could also advocate for state-level changes such as an opportunity to purchase provisions.
Additionally, the City could partner with other technical experts and organizations to help educate residents about
resident cooperatives and ownership opportunities.
Residents’ Rights and Livability Issues:
While the Manufactured Housing Community Handbook, Neighborhood Improvement and Community-Building
Grants, and Neighborhood Liaison programs are designed to improve some of the resident and owners’ issues
describe above, others will require additional time, resources, and research to adequately address. All this will
add to the existing City supported Larimer Home Improvement Program that provides no or low-interest loans to
manufactured housing owners for needed improvements and provides emergency grants for certain repairs.
In the short term (3-6 months), Staff can explore:
A. Internal operating policy or modifying City Code related to water utility billing transparency for master-metered
mobile home parks*
B. Utilities oversight role in determining a reasonable percent for infrastructure administration costs, and
verifying invoices on improvements that are passed along to residents*
C. Utilities Customer Accounts providing calculations or online calculators to mobile home park owners,
managers, and residents to verify what they should be billing for Utility services*
D. Prohibition of retaliation and/or defining specific forms of retaliation
E. Proposing City Code changes to incorporate consistent property and tree maintenance responsibility for
manufactured housing communities in Fort Collins
1
Packet Pg. 10
December 10, 2019 Page 9
F. Proposing City Code change to limit upgrades required by manufactured housing communities to mobile or
manufactured home
G. Proposing City Code changes to prohibit limitations on sales of homes in parks
H. Abating sales tax on the purchase of manufactured homes
*Denotes activities already initiated by Utilities Customer Connections in Q3-4 2019
In the midterm (7-12 months), Staff can explore:
A. Incentivized mediation participation for resident groups, managers, and property owners**
B. Local complaint registration system to address gaps in the state reporting system**
C. Budgeting for Outcomes offer for Manufactured Housing Community Neighborhood Grant Funds for
infrastructure projects similar to the Vibrant Neighborhood Grant and Community Redevelopment Grant
programs funded in the past
D. Accessory structures privileges and guidelines for the decision-making process for building and maintaining
accessory structure
E. Enforcement or clarification of homeowner and tenant privacy rights in mobile home parks
** Denotes activities with similar existing programs or processes in place through Neighborhood Services
In the long term (more than 12 months to develop) or for activities that would require additional resources, Staff
can explore:
A. Requiring or incentivizing transparent manufactured housing community maintenance planning and budgeting
from community owners
B. Enforcement of sub-metering by manufactured housing community owners to verify billing of commodity and
maintaining infrastructure to Utilities standards
C. Neighborhood Liaisons for all manufactured housing communities
Table of options for livability issues:
Short Term (3-6 months) Mid Term (7-12 months) Long Term / Resources Req.
Maintenance responsibilities Accessory structures privileges Negotiated investments
Utility billing transparency Local Complaint System Owner Master Metering (water)
Trees Maintenance Incentivized Mediation Liaisons (all parks)
Home sale protections Privacy rights Sale notice & purchase opportunity
Retaliation protections
Limitation of required upgrades
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of Manufactured Housing Communities (PDF)
2. Engagement Plan (PDF)
3. Summary of Resident Issues-The Family Center (PDF)
4. Summary of Resident Issues-City Staff (PDF)
5. City Activities Summary (PDF)
6. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 11
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14 15 13
16 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24*
MAP
KEY
PARK
NAME
HOME
SITES
CITY /
GMA
1 Terry Cove 24 GMA
2 Blue Spruce 28 GMA
3 Terry Lake 29 GMA
4 Equestrian Center 4 GMA
5 Poudre Valley 349 GMA
6 Spaulding Lane 8 GMA
7 Highland Manor 66 GMA
8 Hickory Village 204 City
9 North College (Plaza) 320 City
10 Montclair 9 City
11 Stonecrest 24 City
12 Collins Aire 329 GMA
MAP
KEY
PARK
NAME
HOME
SITES
CITY /
GMA
13 Meldrum / Cherry 5 City
14 North Star 54 City
15 Co�onwood 12 City
16 Aspen 32 GMA
17 Skyline 172 City
18 Parklane 65 GMA
19 Mountainview 37 GMA
20 Sunflower 190 GMA
21 Timberidge 585 GMA
22 Harmony Village 486 City
23 Pleasant Grove 114 City
24 Cloverleaf 391 GMA
1
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN
A. OVERVIEW
PROJECT TITLE: Manufactured Home Communities - Working Toward Collective Solutions
PROJECT LEADS:
• Susan Beck-Ferkiss (sbeckferkiss@fcgov.com)
• JC Ward (jcward@fcgov.com)
• Ryan Mounce (rmounce@fcgov.com)
• Tom Leeson (tleeson@fcgov.com)
BACKGROUND:
Definitions
• Manufactured Home:
Factory-built housing, constructed on or after June 15, 1976 and subject to construction standards
established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
• Mobile Home:
Built prior to June 15, 1976, most but not all, adhere to American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
standards.
• Manufactured Home Community (MHC):
City and state ordinances and laws refer to “mobile home parks”, however the term “manufactured home
community” is a common industry term. For purposes of discussion we will use “manufactured home
community” in all project plans.
Manufactured Home Communities in Fort Collins
There is a total of 3,537 homes sites in Fort Collins with 1,590 being within City limits and 1,947 in the Growth
Management Area (table 1). According to the 2015 – 2019 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, the number of total
housing units in Fort Collins is 61,294 as of 2015. This means mobile homes or manufactured homes constitute
approximately 5% of total housing units, and as such they are an integral component of affordable housing in the city.
PARK NAME SITES CITY/GMA PARK NAME SITES CITY/GMA
Terry Cove 24 GMA Meldrum/Cherry 5 City
Blue Spruce 28 GMA North Star 54 City
Terry Lake 29 GMA Cottonwood 12 City
Equestrian Center 4 GMA Aspen 32 GMA
Poudre Valley 349 GMA Skyline 172 City
Spaulding Lane 8 GMA Parklane 65 GMA
Highland Manor 66 GMA Mountainview 37 GMA
Hickory Village 204 City Sunflower 190 City
North College (plaza) 320 City Timberridge 585 GMA
Montclair 9 City Harmony Village 486 City
Stonecrest 24 City Pleasant Grove 114 City
Collins Aire 329 GMA Cloverleaf 391 GMA+
Total 1,394 Total 2,143
(table 1)
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
2
Issues Experienced by Residents of Manufactured Home Communities
There have been several issues and concerns expressed by community members regarding the quality of life in
these communities. Some of the issues and solutions identified by City staff in conjunction with The Family Center
are:
ISSUES POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS TO EXPLORE
• Concerns about rent increases • Rent stabilization
• Right of first refusal
• Opportunities for residents to purchase
• Lack of enforcement of Colorado Mobile Home
Park Act and no resources to obtain legal
services
• Local enforcement
• Dedication of funding for mediation/arbitration
• Housing insecurity due to residents’
vulnerability to park closure or change in park
ownership leading to new rules and lot rents
• Opportunities for residents to purchase
• Cooperatives
• High water bills and lack of transparency for
utility charges
• Transparency, accountability, oversight and
enforcement
• Backed up sewers leading to waste flooding
homes and lawns
• Transparency, accountability, oversight and
enforcement
• Trees damaging homes and cars from both
branches and root systems
• Neighborhood grant program to contract tree
trimming services
• Harassment and retaliation from owners and
managers
• Dedication of funding for mediation/arbitration
• Right to have witnesses at meetings with
management
• Changes to leases require the consent of the
homeowner (signed by both parties both get a
copy of the signed agreement)
• Owners and managers setting limitations and
not allowing residents to sell their homes
• Limit park owners’ prohibitions on sale of
homes
PROJECT PURPOSE: In order to address the issues and concerns expressed by community members who live in
manufactured home communities, City Council implemented a moratorium that prevents the redevelopment of these
communities until August 2020, with the possibility of being extended. City staff will explore different options and
come up with a solution that contributes to the wellbeing and quality of life of community members who live in these
communities. Part of this solution involves looking at existing policy, looking at new policy formation, going over
different city codes that could be more strongly enforced, and also talking to owners and managers to see what they
can do to help. The City will seek the support of community organizations, community partners, and community
members, in coming up with more ideas that will help create a collective vision for how the problem or opportunity
could be addressed. This will take the form of a robust public engagement strategy that will ensure the interests of
those affected, mainly residents, are taken into consideration in the formation of a collective solution. As such the
public engagement plan will consist of meetings with residents, owners and managers, working groups with
community partners, community events, development of informative resources, development of communication tools,
tools that will help community members stay engaged in the decision making process, presentations, distribution of
information, etc.
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 14
3
OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Consult and Involve
City staff has identified the level of public engagement needed for this project as and “Consult,” and “Involve.’
• Consult
Obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and/or decisions
• Involve
Work directly with the public throughout the process to ensure that public issues and concerns are
consistently understood and considered.
GOAL: Facilitate solutions that benefit all parties involved with a focus on:
• Preservation of manufactured home communities
• Protection of residents’ rights
• Enhancement and improvement of manufactured home communities
• Understanding residents’ concerns
• Understanding owners and managers of manufactured home communities’ concerns
• Alignment of chosen solutions to City’s Strategic Plan
• Addressing the power imbalance between residents, owners and managers
OBJECTIVES:
• Research and compile existing data regarding issues faced by residents of manufactured home
communities
• Host a series of meetings and/or events with residents
• Host a series of meetings with owners and managers
• Develop list of preservation strategies to be presented to City Council
• Develop list of livability and residents’ rights strategies to be presented to City Council
• Develop list of solutions approved by City Council to be presented to residents, owners and managers
• Engage residents, owners and managers in choosing their preferred solutions
• Create a handbook for residents that includes information regarding resources and supportive services
• Create online resources for residents that allows them to submit complaints
• Create guidelines for a neighborhood grant program to be used for neighborhood improvement projects
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY:
• Timeline: September 2019 – December2020
The strategy is broken down in four phases. The first phase will consist of understanding issues and
concerns from internal and external stakeholders by researching existing data. The data will be used to draft
a list of potential preservation options and a list of potential options related to livability and protection of
residents’ rights. In the second phase City staff will present list of possible solutions to City Council who will
provide guidance, approval and suggestions. The feedback received will be used to create the first iteration
of an implementation plan which will be shared with internal and external stakeholders to receive additional
feedback. City staff will meet with internal stakeholders in the third phase to refine the implementation plan.
Lastly, City staff and partner organizations will host a series of community meetings to share the final draft
of the implementation plan and to present next steps. The public engagement will be closely coordinated
with partners currently doing work in the targeted communities, as well as public engagement efforts for the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Health Disparities Grant (CDPHE Health Disparities
Grant)
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
4
• Phase 1 (October – December) – Understand Concerns and Develop Lists of Solutions
o City staff will meet with partner organizations who are currently working with, or have done work in
manufactured home communities, to develop a list of issues residents are facing. City staff will also
host a meeting with owners and manager of mobile home parks to learn some of the obstacles and
challenges they are facing that prevent them from addressing the issues stated by residents.
o Another component of this phase will consist of researching existing data obtained from community
partners and previous city-led community engagement events to build upon the list of issues.
o Feedback received from community members and community partners for the CDPHE Health
Disparities Grant will also be used to draft the list of solutions
• Phase 2 (December – February) – Present Lists of Potential Solutions
o City staff will develop a list of potential preservation solutions as well as a list of potential solutions
that address livability and protection of residents’ rights using the feedback and data obtained in
Phase 1. Possible solutions could include but are not limited to: enforcing existing policies,
following other municipalities’ ordinances, exploring land use regulations, developing a
neighborhood grant program, and creating a resident handbook etc. The lists will then be
presented to City Council for approval and guidance.
o City staff will host a series of community meetings and/or events to present the respective lists of
solutions to residents. These events will include several interactive activities designed to
encourage feedback from residents regarding their preferred options and will inform them about the
the next steps.
• Phase 3 (February – March) – Prioritize Lists of Solutions and Draft Implementation Plan
o City staff will analyze the feedback received from community members and use it to draft an
implementation plan that will prioritize next steps. The draft will then be presented to partner
organizations to collaborate with them in the creation of a final draft.
• Phase 4 (March – August) – Follow up and Implement
o City staff and partner organizations will organize a community event to present to community
members the final implementation plan and to let them know how their input influenced the creation
of such plan. The implementation plan will also be available online and will include a timeline of
next steps as well as tools for community members to stay informed and receive project updates.
KEY STAKEHOLDERS:
Internal Stakeholders
• City Council
• Executive Leadership Team
• City Planning Team
o Neighborhood Services
o Social Sustainability
o Planning, Development, and Transportation
o Communications and Public Involvement
• Advisory Committees/Groups
o Affordable Housing Board
o Internal Affordable Housing Task Force
o Planning and Zoning Board
o Larimer County Board of Health
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
5
o Larimer County Affordable Housing Group
External Stakeholders
• Residents of manufactured home communities
• Property managers and owners of manufactured home communities
• The Family Leadership Training Institute (FLTI)
• Larimer County Department of Health and Environment (LCDHE)
• CSU’s Center for Public Deliberation (CPD)
• The Family Center/La Familia (TFC)
• Partnership for Age-Friendly Communities
• Larimer County
• Genesis Project
• Institute for Built Environment
• Fort Collins County Commissioner Kefalas
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
City Council and City staff
• Will work together in designing the strategy and assigning resources needed to implement the strategy as
well as resources needed to carry out the Public Engagement Plan
• City staff will put together an internal planning team that will implement the strategy
• City staff will organize an external planning team composed of community partners and community
members
External Planning Team
• External planning team will contribute with ideas, suggestions, and resources
• Will help with dissemination of information with community members
• Will collaborate with the City in creating community events
POTENTIAL TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES (more tools and techniques could be added as the project
progresses)
Phase 1
•World Cafe with owners
and managers
•Meetings with partner
organizations
•Meetings with residents
•Focus groups with
residents
•Anonymous comment
box
Phase 2
•Communityevents
•Our City page
•Questionnaires
• Info sheets
• Information kiosks
•Newsletters
•Lemonade stand
Phase 3
•Community events
•Lemonade stand
•Resource fairs
•Resident Handbook
•Surveys and
questionnaires
•Collaborative
workshops
•Social media
•Newsletters
•Our City page
Phase 4
•Community events
•Focus groups
6
B. DETAILED ENGAGEMENT PLAN
Phase 1 – Understand Concerns and Develop Lists of Solutions (INFORM)
Timeframe: October – December
Goal: Have a clear understanding of issues and concerns stakeholders in manufactured home communities are
experiencing and draft initial lists of solutions using feedback received from community members and partners.
Tools:
• World Cafe with owners and managers
• Meetings with partner organizations
• Meetings with residents
• Focus groups with residents
• Anonymous comment box
Objectives:
• Finalize Public Engagement Plan
• Host meeting with community partners to inform them about the project and to build list of issues residents
are experiencing
• Draft list of potential preservation solutions to be presented to City Council
• Draft list of potential solutions that address livability and protection of residents’ rights
• Research and compile existing data on mobile home parks including:
o City data
▪ City Plan
▪ 2015 – 2019 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
▪ CDPHE Health Disparities Grant
o Partner data
o Open data
• Start working on public engagement tools to:
o Receive feedback from stakeholders (e.g. doorhangers w/questionnaire; online questionnaire;
hotline; anonymous comment box)
o Centralize information for planning team (e.g. One Drive; internal Our City page; Microsoft Teams)
o Keep stakeholders informed about the project (e.g. Our City page; newsletter)
Phase 2 – Present Lists of Solutions (CONSULT)
Timeframe: December – January
Goal: Compile and analyze feedback received and present to community members
Tools:
• Community events with a fun theme
• Our City page for community members
• Questionnaires
• Info sheets
• Lemonade stands
• Newsletters
Objectives:
• Participate in City Council work session and present relevant documents to seek input regarding lists of
solutions
• Work with City Council in refining list of solutions that address livability and protection of residents’ rights
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
7
• Organize internal stakeholder meeting to review list of solutions
• Organize external stakeholder meeting to present list solutions
• Organize meeting with community partners to report back on feedback received from City Council
• Create public engagement tools to:
o Receive feedback from stakeholders (e.g. doorhangers w/questionnaire; online questionnaire;
hotline; anonymous comment box)
o Centralize information for planning team (e.g. One Drive; internal Our City page; Microsoft Teams)
o Keep stakeholders informed about the project (e.g. Our City page; newsletter)
• Get additional feedback from external stakeholders by
o Canvassing in manufactured home communities to invite residents to first community event and to
inform them about the project
o Identifying partner, community, and/or city events in, or near, manufactured home communities
where City staff could set up an outreach table
o Interviewing stakeholders
Phase 3 – Prioritize List of Solution and Draft Implementation Plan (COLLABORATE)
Timeframe: January – March
Goal: Refine list of solution and prioritize next steps
Tools:
• Community events
• Lemonade stand
• Resource fairs
• Resident Handbook
• Surveys and questionnaires
• Collaborative workshops
• Social media
• Newsletters
• Our City page
Objectives:
• Draft implementation plan using feedback received from City Council and community members
• Meet with community partners to share the implementation plan draft and to collaborate with them in refining
the plan
• Create tools that will make it easier for community members to provide anonymous feedback
Phase 4 – Follow-up and Implement Livability and Residents’ Rights Solutions
Timeframe: March – December
Goal: Share final implementation plan with internal and external stakeholders and begin working on established
priorities that address livability and protection of residents’ rights
Objectives: (Objectives will be developed using feedback received from stakeholders, as we move along the
project)
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Hello,
Below you will find a summary of issues The Family Center/La Familia has heard from mobile home park
residents. The Family Center/La Familia has been working diligently with mobile home park residents for
over a year and a half to gain a better understanding of the unique issues and challenges they are facing.
Residents have come forward to speak to these issues with a high level of fear of eviction, retaliation
and harassment for voicing their concerns and experiences. We ask that the information below be
treated with respect and acknowledgement of the risk these community members have taken to
provide the information.
The issues we have collected are summarized into seven categories; Rent and Fees, Lack of Enforcement
of Colorado Mobile Home Park Act, Housing Insecurity, Utilities and Infrastructure, Protection of
Homeowner’s Equity, Harassment and Retaliation and Other. Following the issues we have provided
some suggested solutions based on best practices and work we have seen from our partners across the
State.
While most of the solutions we present are policy, we recognize that this process can be lengthy and
controversial. Therefore, we ask the City to show their commitment to the preservation and protection
of mobile home communities and residents by creating solutions to address the immediate needs of the
community during the policy process. The immediate needs of the community include: high water bills
due to overbilling and lack of enforcement/regulation, retaliation and eviction during this process and
damage to homes and cars from lack of tree maintenance. By addressing the immediate needs of the
community the City is showing their commitment to preserving and protecting these communities.
Issues
Rents and Fees
Issue: Concern about rent increases, many residents are experiencing high rent increase multiple times a
year. High concern of a future in which homeowners could no longer afford their lot rents.
Issue: Selective enforcement of park rules and regulations, often resulting in fees without warning.
Lack of Enforcement of Colorado Mobile Home Park Act (CMHPA)
Issues: Homeowners having rights under the CMHPA is not sufficient, particularly when the only remedy
involves engaging a lawyer and filing suit, a lengthy and expensive process.
Issue: Currently CMHPA states rules should be for convenience, safety and welfare of residents. This is
arbitrary, many parks have rules that fall outside of these guidelines.
Housing Insecurity
Issue: Residents are vulnerable to closure, forcing residents to sell or abandon their homes.
Issue: Residents are vulnerable to change in park ownership leading to new rules and lot rents.
Issue: High rates of evictions/threat of eviction
Utilities and Infrastructure
Issues: High water bills that vary widely. Residents report retaliation through water bills. Lack of
transparency for utility charges, unable to locate water meters.
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-The Family Center (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Issue: Backed up sewers lead to waste flooding the home and lawns
Issue: Poor water quality due to aging water and sewer system. Many residents drink only bottled water
due to smell, taste and/or discoloration.
Issue: Trees damaging homes and cars from both branches and root systems.
Issue: Limited access to utilities, many parks do not have internet and rely on hot spots. (This has
become a larger issue when PSD switched to online reporting only and parents cannot access
information related to their child’s education).
Issue: Poor street maintenance (large pot holes, crumbling streets)
Issue: Safety issues due to lack of lighting, speed limit signs, stop signs, speed bumps. Low enforcement
of illegal activity in parks.
Issue: Inadequate trash facilities and inadequate or no recycling services.
Protection of Homeowner’s Equity
Issue: Some parks set limitations or do not allow residents to sell their home. Rules vary across parks,
some parks set a year that homes cannot be sold others simply don’t allow it. For example one park
does not allow homes built previous to 1985 be sold. If a residents wishes or needs to move they have
to pay to have their home removed or torn down (both are costly) or they abandon their home all
scenarios end with the homeowner losing an investment and built equity.
Issue: If you buy a home in a mobile home park you have to be approved to live in the park by
management. Sometimes management denies residency in the park (sometimes for no reason at all),
leading to residents not being able to live in their own home. In other cases managers require residents
to update the home or land (new windows, roof, removing sheds, etc.) that are outside the scope of the
lease and these demands are arbitrary.
Harassment and Retaliation
Issue: Selective enforcement of rules and regulations
Issue: Discrimination through: application approval, additional structure approval, utility bills,
upkeep/maintenance requirements
Issue: Predatory towing inside the park
Issue: Changes to lease do not require the consent of the homeowner. Managers threaten residents
with eviction if they do not sign new lease.
Issue: Evictions (some due to retaliation). Homes are owned by people and are difficult/impossible to
move, if an eviction happens it can required moving out, removal of home, or forfeiting the home to the
park owner. Forfeited homes (sometimes forcefully forfeited) are often fixed and resold with no benefit
to resident who originally owned the home.
Issue: Residents are threatened or harassed for: trying to hold community meetings, doing door to door
outreach, bringing up issues with management.
Issue: No clear rules on right to fences, additional structures, patios, sheds. Rules often change and
residents have to remove structures that they were previously told they could have.
Issue: Some parks do not allow residents to rent out extra bedrooms.
Issue: Park leases, rules and regulations are only in English.
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-The Family Center (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Other
Issue: Residents are charged extra parking fee some parks do not allow residents to park work truck
(landscaping, construction, etc.) inside the park.
Issue: Residents are charged a pet fee to have a pet living inside a home that they own.
Issue: Some rules/regulations restrict home owner from making improvements that contribute to green
house gases. Lawn/solar/insulation/windows
Issue: Residents are unable to communicate with park management/owner due to language barriers
and/or lack of management staff and communication channels. Some parks have been without park
management in office for multiple months.
Suggested Solutions
Stabilize Rent
Solutions: “Rent Control” has been mentioned repeatedly. While there is an issue legally with rent
control, some creativity surrounding stabilizing rent is a possibility. For example, most residents are in a
month to month lease and the manager can raise as many times as they wish with a 60 day notice.
Could they sign a year lease with a prevision that rents do not increase during that period.
Solution: Right of first refusal. If RoFR is not possible than solely opportunity to purchase. If both are
possible then there are ways they can work together.
Level the Power Dynamic
Solutions: The need for local enforcement and dedication of funding to mediation/arbitration that is
affordable and the balance of power is equal. The current mediation program the CFC offers is not
sufficient nor is able to address the unique needs of mobile home park issues.
Solution: Right to have witness at meetings with management
Solution: Right to door to door outreach
Solution: Stipulations are reviewed by a judge or mediator- landlord cannot force agreement on a
stipulation. Judge/mediator paid for by the City.
Solution: Landlord cannot demand any repair or modification to any home for cosmetic reasons.
Demand for repair should come from city/county/state inspector.
Solution: Clarification on right to fences, additional structures, patios, sheds
Solution: Changes to leases require the consent of the homeowner (signed by both parties both get a
copy of the signed agreement)
Solution: Translated leases
Utilities- Higher quality and provision of services
Solutions: Transparency, accountability, oversight, enforcement: should apply to any utilities provided
by the park and billed to residents. Amounts should be fair/equitable, billed separately and itemized.
Billing should be subject to audit.
Solution: Adequate trash service, recycling
Solution: Land owners are identified as responsible for tree maintenance (enforced)
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-The Family Center (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Protect of Homeowners Equity
Solution: Limit park owners prohibitions on sale of homes
Other Ideas and Considerations
Ability to rent rooms out
Way to report issues w/o being retaliated against or joint agreed mediation
Cities interpret and enforce the CMHPA to determine if park rules are for residents’ welfare, safety and
convenience
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-The Family Center (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Detailed Outreach Summary (City-led efforts)
Detailed summary of residents’ rights and livability issues for mobile home parks as identified by
stakeholders in more than one mobile home park through community partner resources and
engagement work to date by the City of Fort Collins:
• Rent and Fees:
o Increases in rent and notices thereof
o Frequency of rent increases
o Frequency of Mobile Home Park fee changes and notices thereof
• Mobile Home Park Rules and Enforcement:
o Inconsistent enforcement of park rules and/or lease terms
o Fear of retaliation and eviction for community organizing or bringing issues to
management
o Possible violation of Colorado Mobile Home Park Act regarding park rules and/or lease
terms
o Lack of enforcement responsibility for Colorado Mobile Home Park Act
o Distinction between mobile home parks and other neighborhoods leaves mobile home
park residents without some City enforcement of livability-related Codes
o Inconsistency in application and additional structure approval processes and decisions
• Utilities:
o Lack of water utility billing transparency for master-metered mobile home parks
o Inconsistent calculations of monthly water utility charges and/or inconsistent fee
structure between housing units for master-metered mobile home parks
o Costs to residents from continuous consumption of water resulting from park
infrastructure maintenance issues or irrigation systems maintained by mobile home
park owners
o Clogged or compromised sewer systems that result in wastewater flooding homes and
lawns
o Compromised potable water quality due to aging park infrastructure or maintenance
issues
o Inadequate stormwater drainage or site flooding
o Restrictions on home improvements designed to address energy efficiency and
renewable energy sources
o Limited internet access and supporting infrastructure
• Park Maintenance and Safety:
o Need for clarity regarding responsibility and cost of tree trimming, root system
monitoring, and care
o Lack of safety outdoor lighting
o Inadequate street maintenance
o Need for traffic calming measures and stop signs within the mobile home park
o Changes to lease length without resident consent
o Inadequate law enforcement in mobile home parks
o Availability of recycling services and trash facilities
• Communication:
o Lack of availability and requirement for materials, announcements, leases, rules, or
regulations to be available in Spanish
ATTACHMENT 4
1.4
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-City Staff (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
o Language barriers between residents and property management staff
o Need for access to current property manager contact information and office hours
• Property Rights:
o Challenging process and cost associated with moving a mobile home out of a park that
varies from one park to another
o Availability of other mobile home parks for relocation of a home
o Restricting or denying mobile home buyers based on park management residency
approval process that is not transparent or open to homeowners
o Requiring homeowners to upgrade their home or yard
ATTACHMENT 4
1.4
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Summary of Resident Issues-City Staff (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
City Summary of Events & Activities (to date)
Manufactured Housing Livability
Implementation Progress for Mobile Home Park Livability Projects
Project/Activity Completion Date Participation
Internal MHC Residents’ Rights
& Livability Team
10/2/19 Internal Staff
Neighborhood Liaison Research
- MHC Internal & External
Stakeholder Engagement
Coordination
10/8/19 Partner Organizations – Bike Fort Collins, CSU
Center for Public Deliberation, La Familia, The
Genesis Project, Larimer County Health
Department Urban Renewal Authority
City Departments – CPIO, FC Moves, Long-
Range Planning Neighborhood Services,
Social Sustainability
Mini-Grant - Application &
Award Process
11/6/19 Internal Staff
Handbook & Mini-Grant -
Neighborhood Outreach
11/6/19 7 participants - Mi Voz Community Group
Handbook & Mini-Grant -
Property Manager Outreach
11/13/19 2 property managers - Harmony Village and
Timber Ridge MHCs
Neighborhood Liaison Outreach
- Community Partners
11/14/19 2 community partners - The Genesis Project
Handbook & Mini-Grant -
Neighborhood Outreach
11/16/19 Homeward Alliance Family Resource Fair
Booth - 200 families total with 7 MHCs
represented
Handbook & Mini-Grant –
Neighborhood Outreach
11/18/19 6 participants – Parklane MHC/The Genesis
Project
Handbook & Mini-Grant –
Neighborhood Outreach
12/5, 12/6,
12/7/19
Parklane MHP, Hickory Village, Poudre Valley
MHC
Handbook & Mini-Grant –
Neighborhood Outreach
12/13/19 Harmony Village
Handbook & Mini-Grant –
Property Manager/Owner
Outreach
12/18/19 TBD
Handbook & Mini-Grant –
Neighborhood Outreach
TBD – Dec.
2019/Jan. 2020
Hickory Village, Poudre Valley MHP, North
College MHP, Parklane MHP, Montclair MHP,
Stonecrest MHP
December 10, 2019
Manufactured Housing Redevelopment Moratorium
Tom Leeson, Sue Beck-Ferkiss, Jeff Mihelich
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Work Session Overview
Background
Divided Asset Ownership
Resident & Owner Issues
Location in the Growth Management Area
Preservation Strategies
Manufactured Housing Zoning
Livability / Residents’ Rights Strategies
Menu of options
2
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Alignment
City Plan
LIV 6.4 Permanent Supply of Affordable Housing
LIV 6.9 Prevent Displacement
LIV 6.10 Mitigate Displacement Impacts
3
Strategic Plan – Neighborhood Livability & Social Health
1.1 Improve access to quality housing that is
affordable to a brand range of income levels
1.3 Co-create a more inclusive and equitable
community that promotes unity and honors diversity
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
4
Direction sought from City Council
1. Does Council want staff to bring a manufactured housing zone
forward for Council consideration?
2. Does Council have direction on which resident's rights and livability
strategies to prioritize?
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Zone Development Timeline
5
City Limits
Manufactured Home Community
GMA Boundary
City GMA Total
Communities 10 14 24
Home Sites 1,400 2,137 3,537
Manufactured Housing Community (MHC)
Locations in the Fort Collins GMA
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Home Living
Manufactured housing represents a significant portion of Fort Collins’
private affordable housing stock
Similar benefits to single family homes:
Privacy
Single-family lifestyle
Semi-private outdoor areas
Strong sense of community
Relative affordability
6
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Home Living
Disadvantages:
Land is rented; unpredictable cost increases
Housing instability and potential community closure
Difficult & costly to move homes
Power dynamics with operators
Limited tenant protections
Shared utility billing
7
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Home Communities
Most communities constructed decades ago
New communities are relatively rare
When communities close, residents are often
displaced
Limited regional inventory to accommodate
displaced residents
May be frequent ownership or management
changes
8
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
State Regulation:
The Mobile Home Park Oversight Act
• Colorado Mobile Home Park Act (1991, amended 2010)
• Mobile Home Park Oversight Act (2019)
• Creates a Mobile Home Park Act Dispute Resolution and
Enforcement Program
• Grants counties and municipalities the power to enact
certain ordinances for MHCs
• Extended the time period between the notice of nonpayment
and termination of tenancy
• Extended time to vacate after eviction order
9
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
10
Council-initiated moratorium on development in manufactured
housing communities
Goal: Implement preservation strategies
Goal: Implement livability and residents’ rights strategies
Moratorium
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Work Underway
Outreach /
Understand Issues Research / Analysis Initial Implementation
Partner data
Resident outreach
Owner & management
outreach
Building relationships
Utility billing practices
Preservation &
residents’ right
strategies
Legal constraints
Local options
State regulations
State advocacy
Handbook
Webpage
Mini-grants
Neighborhood liaisons
(highest need parks)
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Resident Issues
Input shared by community organizations or collected by City staff
Issues or concerns vary by community
12
Fear of closure / housing
instability
Utility billing transparency
Maintenance responsibilities
(trees, amenities, snow)
Retaliation / harassment
Frequent rent increases
Evictions
Safety
Home sale restrictions
Management availability
Language equity
Frequent rule changes
Infrastructure conditions
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Owner & Manager Issues
Input shared by owners and operators
Issues or concerns vary by community
13
Frequent changes in management
Communication with residents; poor distribution networks
Relationships between service providers, tenants, owners/managers
Language barriers
Property maintenance enforcement
Home protections & resources (insurance)
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Strategies used by Colorado Communities
Manufactured Housing Zoning
Accessory Structures Privileges
Utility Billing Transparency
Limitation on the Prohibition of Sales of Manufactured Homes
Limitation on Required Upgrades to Existing Manufactured Homes
Tree Maintenance Responsibilities
Right to Privacy
Retaliation Prohibited
Mediation of Disputes
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Preservation Strategy
Implement new manufactured housing
zone district
Most effective preservation
strategy
Limits redevelopment opportunities
of existing communities
Similar to mobile home park
zoning that existed in Fort Collins
pre-1997
15
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Housing Zoning
Potential benefits:
Limits potential community closures caused by redevelopment
Additional notice period when rezoning is proposed
Clarify status of nonconforming uses
Define manufactured housing specific development standards
16
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Housing Zoning
Additional considerations:
Downzoning & impact on private property rights
Requires minor City Plan updates
Consultation with Larimer County on communities located in the GMA
17
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Current Zoning
MHCs in city limits located predominantly in two zone districts:
Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) & Service Commercial (CS)
These zone districts permit a broad range of uses and intensities:
18
RESIDENTIAL USES NONRESIDENTIAL USES MISC. USES
Single-family
Duplex
Townhomes
Mobile Home Parks
Multifamily
Group Homes
Childcare
Retail
Office/clinics
Gas stations
Restaurants / Brewpubs
Indoor Recreation
Light Industrial (CS only)
Workshops (CS only)
Parks
Schools
Community Facilities
Churches
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Manufactured Housing Zoning
Manufactured housing zoning for preservation typically permits
a narrow range of land uses and intensities:
19
RESIDENTIAL USES NONRESIDENTIAL USES MISC. USES
Single-family
Duplex
Manufactured Housing
Multifamily *
Childcare
Accessory Retail / Vending
Bed & Breakfast
Parks
Schools
Community Facilities
Churches
* Some communities permit multifamily redevelopment with affordability restrictions
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Zone Development Timeline
20
Council
Work Session
Dec 2019
Targeted Outreach &
Board Recommendations
Jan – Mar 2020
Develop
zone district
standards
Council
Consideration
Apr 2020
Determine
communities
for voluntary /
involuntary
rezoning
City Plan update
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Livability / Residents’ Rights
21
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Summary of Options
In Progress /
Underway
Short Term
(3-6 months)
Mid Term
(7-12 months)
Long Term / Resources
Req.
Handbook Maintenance
responsibilities
Accessory structures
privileges
Negotiated investments
Website Utility billing
transparency
Local Complaint System Owner Master Metering (water)
Mini-grants Trees Maintenance Incentivized Mediation Liaisons (all parks)
Liaisons
(highest need parks)
Home sale protections Privacy rights Sale notice & purchase
opportunity
LHIP & Emergency
grants
Retaliation protections
Limitation of required
upgrades
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Pad rent stabilization – currently prohibited by state law
Right of first refusal – requires balancing of property rights
Lease provisions
Other Potential Approaches
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
New State Program
Starting 2020, new state dispute resolution program begins
Enforcement of Mobile Home Park Act
Registration of manufactured housing communities
Complaint registry
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
25
1. Does Council want staff to bring a manufactured housing zone forward for
Council consideration?
2. Does Council have direction on which resident's rights and livability
strategies to prioritize?
Short Term (3-6 months) Mid Term (7-12 months) Long Term / Resources Req.
Maintenance responsibilities Accessory structures privileges Negotiated investments
Utility billing transparency Local Complaint System Owner Master Metering (water)
Trees Maintenance Incentivized Mediation Liaisons (all parks)
Home sale protections Privacy rights Sale notice & purchase opportunity
Retaliation protections
Limitation of required upgrades
Direction sought from City Council
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
DATE:
STAFF:
December 10, 2019
Honore Depew, Interim Project and Policy Manager
Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Reimagine Boards and Commissions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an overview of findings from previous Council direction for achieving the
Council Priority, Reimagine Boards and Commissions, and to seek further direction on outreach and engagement
plans.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What questions do Councilmembers have regarding the summary of findings?
2. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the Outreach Plan and timeline?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The City has 24 boards and commissions that are charged with advising Council; some also perform outreach
and engagement functions; some also make official decisions. Over 200 residents volunteer valuable time and
expertise through board membership. Six of these boards are considered “quasi-judicial,” meaning they provide
official findings.
Recent History of Topic
On July 2, 2019 City Council adopted the priority to 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.
In 2017 the City’s Equity Team researched and created a Public Participation Report (Attachment 1) 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 a pilot, led by members of the Economic Advisory Committee, utilized combined meetings of the boards
and commissions housed under Sustainability. The first pilot meeting summary (Attachment 2) 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. In fall of 2019, a Triple-Bottom Line Super Issue
board and commission meeting was held to focus on the Our Climate Future Project and also received very
positive feedback.
In 2019, City Clerk’s Office received direction to pause reappointments/interviews for all boards and commissions,
with the exception of quasi-judicial boards or boards/commissions at risk of falling below quorum. This was done
due to potential structural changes that might result as part of the Reimagine Boards and Commissions project,
as well as to ensure diverse representation on the boards based on the guidelines/strategies developed as part of
this project. A summary of vacancies by board is attached to this AIS (Attachment 3).
2
Packet Pg. 52
December 10, 2019 Page 2
At a September 24, 2019 work session (Attachment 4), Councilmembers gave direction for staff to:
• Move forward with standardizing the interview and on-boarding processes (and integrating Council
Priorities)
• Provide a summary of Boards & Commissions, including their roles and features as dictated by City Code
(Attachment 5)
• Provide a summary of progress made towards recommendations in the 2018 Public Participation Report
(Attachment 6)
• Develop an outreach plan and timeline for public consideration of options and implementation of
recommendations
Summary of findings
• Almost all Boards and Commissions are officially tasked with advising Council
• Inconsistent language exists in City Code related to advising functions:
o “Informs and advises”
o “Advises City Council” or “Advises City Council and staff”
o “Makes recommendations”
• Several are specifically charged with outreach and engagement
• Note: Several boards and commissions listed in Chapter 2 of City Code have been removed from the
matrix because they do not primarily serve to advise City Council:
o Downtown Development Authority (DDA), Housing Catalyst, Airport Commission, General
Employee Retirement Plan Committee (GERP)
• Some equity recommendations are moving forward on 2020 workplans and some will need more
guidance through engagement efforts
o 1.1, 3.1, 4.1, and 4.2 are identified as priority next steps for continuous improvement
Outreach Plan Overview (Proposed)
Staff plans to use multiple avenues of public outreach and stakeholder engagement, in the first two quarters of
2020, to seek input and ideas related to the Reimagine Boards & Commissions project. Engagement will focus on
the themes of structure and consistency and include discussion of recommendations from the Public Participation
Report. Outreach strategies include:
• Spring Community Issues Forum
o with CSU’s Center for Public Deliberation
o To focus on Boards & Commissions and Public Engagement Council Priorities
• Boards & Commissions Super Issue Meeting
• Engagement with current and former members of Boards & Commissions
• Engagement with other potential stakeholder groups
o Historically underrepresented populations
o Volunteers registered with Engage
o City Works alumni
• Questionnaire / Interviews with staff liaisons to Boards & Commissions
Examples of subjects for consideration during public outreach include:
Structural Related to Consistency
Use of ad hoc committees Budgets / resources
Board consolidation (add subcommittees) Staff support levels
Meeting frequency Council Priority and Outcome Area linkages
The purpose and goal of 2020 engagement efforts is to explore improvements to the Board & Commission system
and offer recommendations to:
2
Packet Pg. 53
December 10, 2019 Page 3
a. Continue and enhance meaningful opportunities for engagement, including a greater diversity of
perspectives and
b. Ensure Council receives complete, timely, and useful advice.
Timeline (Proposed)
Q1 2020 Engage Community to Explore Enhancements
Q2 2020 Work Session – Set Direction for Implementation
Q3 2020 Develop Process for Desired Implementation
Next Steps
If supported by Council, staff will implement the outreach plan and begin engaging with community members who
have and have not participated in Boards & Commissions. Based on scheduling and progress, a Q2 2020 work
session is anticipated.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Public Participation Report (PDF)
2. Board Pilot Memo (PDF)
3. 2019 Board and Commission Vacancy Status (PDF)
4. Reimagining Boards & Commissions Sept 24 2019 Work Session Summary (PDF)
5. Boards & Commissions Current Status Matrix (PDF)
6. Boards & Commissions Equity Recommendations Matrix (PDF)
7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
2
Packet Pg. 54
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 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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+
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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?
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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?
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 16
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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+
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 28
Appendix F: Application for Board and Commission Membership
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT 29
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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 11th
. 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 2
2.2
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Board Pilot Memo (8508 : Reimagine 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
x 100% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the meeting
x 100% would recommend attending a joint Board and Commission meeting to peers
x 100% would attend a future joint Board & Commission meeting
x
Among members that were invited, but did not attend the pilot meeting:
x 80% were unable to attend due to schedule or conflicts
x 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
ATTACHMENT 2
2.2
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Board Pilot Memo (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 2
2.2
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Board Pilot Memo (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
City Clerk
300 LaPorte Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6515
970.221.6295 - fax
fcgov.com
BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCY STATUS
The following is the current status of board and commission vacancies as of December 4, 2019.
This information reflects the instruction the City Clerk’s Office received on pausing reappointments/interviews for all
boards and commissions with the exception of quasi-judicial boards or boards/commissions which are at risk of falling
below quorum. This approach was developed due to potential structural changes that might result as part of the
Reimagine Boards and Commissions project, as well as to ensure diverse representation on the boards based on the
guidelines/strategies developed as part of this project.
The general process used for reappointment recommendations for boards where there is risk of falling below quorum is
to make appointments that will bring the board to one member over quorum. In cases where these boards have more
than one eligible member, all interested eligible members are recommended for reappointment without the need to
interview. The regular recruitment and interview process is being used for all quasi-judicial boards.
Board
or
Commission
# of
Members
# for
Quorum
# of
Vacancies
or Expiring
Terms
# Eligible to
Reapply
# After
Recommended
Action Recommendation
Affordable
Housing Board
7 4 3 1 5 Reappoint eligible member.
Air Quality
Advisory Board
9 5 2
0 – Both
vacancies
due to
resignation
7
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Art in Public
Places Board
7 4 2 1 6
Reappoint eligible member;
quorum issues reported and
verified.
Building Review
Board
(Quasi-Judicial)
7 4 2 2 7 Interviews completed.
Citizen Review
Board
7 4 1
Boards and Commission Vacancy Recommendation
December 4, 2019
Page 2
Board
or
Commission
# of
Members
# for
Quorum
# of
Vacancies
or Expiring
Terms
# Eligible to
Reapply
# After
Recommended
Action
Recommendation
CDBG
Commission
9 5 4 1
7 until 12/31;
then 6
Reappoint eligible member.
Will be losing a member at
year end.
Cultural
Resources
Board
7 4 2 1 5
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Economic
Advisory
Commission
9 5 4 2 7 Reappoint eligible members.
Energy Board 9 5 4 1 6 Reappoint eligible member.
Golf Board 7 4 2 2 5
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Human
Relations
Commission
(Quasi-Judicial)
9 5 2 1 9
Interviews scheduled on
December 17.
Land
Conservation &
Stewardship
Board
9 5 2 2 7
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Landmark
Preservation
Commission
(Quasi-Judicial)
Boards and Commission Vacancy Recommendation
December 4, 2019
Page 3
Board
or
Commission
# of
Members
# for
Quorum
# of
Vacancies
or Expiring
Terms
# Eligible to
Reapply
# After
Recommended
Action
Recommendation
Planning &
Zoning Board
(Quasi-Judicial)
7 4 1 1 7
Recruitment and interviews
completed.
Senior Advisory
Board
9 Council
Appoint-
ments
5 3 2 6
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Transportation
Board
9 5 4 2 7 Reappoint eligible members.
Water Board
(Quasi-Judicial)
11 6 3 1 11
Interviews scheduled
December 17.
Women’s
Commission
9 5 4 2 6
Reappoint eligible member;
quorum issues. One eligible
member is moving so
reappoint only one.
Youth Advisory
Board
5-9 Varies 0 0 9 No action needed.
Zoning Board of
Appeals
(Quasi-Judicial)
7 3 1 0 7 Interviews completed.
15 term-limited positions
29 expiring positions
17 resignations
4 vacancies for other reasons
ATTACHMENT 4
2.4
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Reimagining Boards & Commissions Sept 24 2019 Work Session Summary (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
ATTACHMENT 4
2.4
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Reimagining Boards & Commissions Sept 24 2019 Work Session Summary (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Board Purpose/Charge Year Established Board Size
Building Review Board
Is charged with the responsibility to hear appeals and
requests for variances related to the Fort Collins building
codes and contractor licensing regulations.
1987 7
Human Relations Commission
Promotes the acceptance and respect for diversity through
educational programs and activities, and to discourage all
forms of discrimination based on race, religion, age, gender,
disability, etc.
1964 9
Landmark Preservation Commission
Primary functions are the local landmark designation of
historic properties and the review and approval of plans for
exterior changes to them.
1968 9
Planning and Zoning Board
Makes recommendations to the City Council regarding zoning,
annexations, major public and private projects and any long
range planning activities (such as City Plan or subareas plans)
that require Council approval.
1955 7
Water Board
(Quasi‐judicial function in floodplain
regulation variances)
Advises the City Council regarding water, wastewater and
storm‐water policy issues such as water rights, planning,
acquisition and management, conservation and public
education, floodplain regulations, storm drainage and
development design criteria.
1963 11
Zoning Board of Appeals
Approves variances from the requirements of the Land Use
Code and to hear and decide appeals from any decision made
by an administrative official pertaining to a specific property.
1968 7
Board Purpose/Charge Year Established Board Size
Affordable Housing Board
Advises the City Council on matters pertaining to affordable
housing issues of concern to the City; To aid and guide the
development of City‐wide affordable housing programs to
address currently existing and potential affordable housing
issues
1993 7
Air Quality Advisory Board
Advises the City Council regarding policies, plans, and
programs to improve and maintain the city's air quality. The
Board may, without limitation, biennially review air quality
indicators and recommend adjustments to the Air Quality
Action Plan. advise the Governor‐designated lead agency for
air quality planning on matters pertaining to the Fort Collins
element of the State Implementation Plan. The Board may
also convene ad hoc citizen task groups.
1989 (Temp)
1994 (Permanent) 9
Art in Public Places Board
Advises and makes recommendations to the City Council
regarding incorporation of works of art into construction
projects.
Board Purpose/Charge Year Established Board Size
Cultural Resources Board
Primary function is to advise City Council on issues relating to
the Lincoln Center and the Fort Collins Museum. In addition,
the Board reviews applications and makes recommendations
for funding from the City of Fort Collins' Cultural Development
and Programming Account and Tourism Programming
Account (Fort Fund).
1985 7
Economic Advisory Commission Advises the City Council on matters pertaining to the
economic health and sustainability of the City. 2007 9
Energy Board Advises the City Council and staff regarding the development
and implementation of the City's energy policy. 1991 9
Golf Board
Makes recommendations to the Community Services Director
and the City Council as to rules, regulations, policies,
administrative and budgetary matters pertaining to the
operation and maintenance of all City‐owned golf courses.
1970 7
Land Conservation Stewardship Board Advises City Council and staff on matters having to do with
the City's Natural Areas Program. 2005 9
Natural Resources Advisory Board
Advises Council on all matters pertaining to natural resources
and environmental protection issues of concern to the
Community.
1986 9
Parking Advisory Board
Recommendations to Council regarding the implementation
of parking plans, advocate for parking initiatives and
programs, and educate the public about parking issues.
1979‐88 (as Parking Commission)
2013 (as Parking Advisory Board) 9
Parks and Recreation Board
Makes recommendations to Community Services and the City
Council for their approval as to the rules, regulations, policies
and administrative and budgetary matters pertaining to Parks
and Recreation, excluding matters relating to the operation
and maintenance of City‐owned golf courses and cemeteries.
1965 9
Senior Advisory Board
Primary objective is to help aging citizens in Fort Collins and
the surrounding area live full and interesting lives so that they
might continue to contribute, participate and share in the life
of the community.
1968 11
Transportation Board
Advises the Fort Collins City Council on transportation issues.
The Bicycle Advisory Committee is a subcommittee of the
Transportation Board.
1992 9
Women's Commission Informs and advises the City Council on policy issues affecting
women. 1986 9
Water Board
(Advisory function in budgets, fee setting)
Advises the City Council regarding water, wastewater and
storm‐water policy issues such as water rights, planning,
acquisition and management, conservation and public
education, floodplain regulations, storm drainage and
development design criteria.
1963 11
Recommendation Rationale Status Next Steps
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.
2020 Workplan
(Priority)
Refine questionnaire
before next recruitment
period; expect all
members to complete
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.
2020 Workplan Develop communication
plan and materials
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.
2020 Workplan Flow chart and timeline
development
Recommendation Rationale Status Next Steps
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.
Further Engagement
Planned
Further legal analysis
2.2: Adopt recommended changes to
Boards and Commissions application.
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.
2020 Workplan Update application (see
Appendix F in report)
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
Recommendation Rationale Status Next Steps
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.
2020 Workplan
(Priority)
Determine how funding
will be administered
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.)
2020 Workplan
(Priority)
Training development
and implementation
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.
Further Engagement
Planned
Identify input process
and structure
4.4: Provide alternative methods for
participation, such as the ability to remote
into meetings while retaining voting
status, 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
City Council Work Session December 10, 2019
Reimagine Boards and Commissions
Honoré Depew
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Direction
1. What questions do Councilmembers have regarding the summary of
findings?
2. What feedback do Councilmembers have on the Outreach Plan and
timeline?
2
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2019 Adopted 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
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Previous Direction
Focus on Continuous Improvement
• Summarize current Boards and Commissions
• Provide status of recommendations in Public Participation Report
Explore Structural Enhancement Options
• Develop outreach plan and timeline for public input
• Ensure Council receives timely and useful advice
4
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Summary of Boards & Commissions
24 Boards & Commissions Advising Council
6 Quasi-judicial
Governed by Chapter 2, Articles 3&4
of Municipal Code
225 (+/-) Total Volunteers
24 Staff Liaisons, 13 Admin Support
65 Vacancies (end of 2019)
28 Anticipated Appointments (January 2020)
5
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Summary of Boards & Commissions
• Majority created in the 80s and 90s
• Between 7 and 11 members each
• Almost all Boards and Commissions
are tasked with advising Council
• Several are specifically charged with
outreach and engagement
6
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Public Participation Report Recommendations
7
2020 Workplan Items:
• Annual demographic
questionnaire of members
• Standardized interview
questions
• Interpretation services
and childcare options
• Annual training for staff
liaisons
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Enhancements to Consider
in Public Engagement Phase
Structure
• Use of ad hoc committees
• Board consolidation
• Add subcommittees
• Meeting frequency
8
Consistency
• Budgets / resources
• Staff support levels
• Council Priority and
Outcome Area linkages
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Q1/Q2 2020
Proposed Outreach Plan
• Q1 Super Issue Meeting
• Spring Community Issues Forum
• Topics:
• Reimagine Public Engagement
• Reimagine Boards and Commissions
• Supported by Center for Public Deliberation
• Additional Engagement
• Current and former members of Boards & Commissions
• Other potential stakeholder groups
• E.g., Engage Volunteers
9
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Next Steps
Develop
Process for
Desired
Implementation
Set Direction
for
Implementation
Continuous
Improvement
Actions
Engage
Community to
Explore
Enhancement
Options
Confirm
Process and
Outreach Plan
10
Tonight 2020 Q1 Q2 Q3
Work Session Work Session
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Direction
1. What questions do Councilmembers have regarding the summary
of findings?
2. What feedback/suggestions do Councilmembers have on the
Outreach Plan and timeline?
11
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Additional Slides
12
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Current Conditions
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
13
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
2018 Futures Committee
14
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
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine 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
15
ATTACHMENT 7
2.7
Packet Pg. 112
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
DATE:
STAFF:
December 10, 2019
Matt Fater, Utilities Special Projects Manager
Theresa Connor, Water Engineering Field Operations
Mgr
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to update City Council on future stormwater improvements in the downtown area. The
downtown area is vulnerable to flood risk and pollution from stormwater runoff. The area was constructed over a
century ago prior to design standards and criteria for stormwater management. As a result, there’s a lack of
infrastructure to manage both stormwater quality and flood risks.
The Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan (DISP) is a system of stormwater improvements planned to
address the stormwater quality and flood risks in the downtown area. The improvements include a combination of
storm sewer and water quality enhancements to be implemented over the next 12-15 years. The specific projects
in the plan will be recommended in future budget cycles for Council’s consideration.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have any specific questions regarding the stormwater risks facing downtown Fort
Collins?
2. Do Councilmembers have any questions on the approach to the Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Stormwater Utility
The purpose of the Stormwater Utility is to provide flood damage reduction, enhance stormwater quality, and
protect and restore riparian habitat. The City is divided into twelve stormwater basins for planning purposes. Each
basin has a master plan that recommends improvements to meet these stormwater management goals. The
challenges and opportunities within each basin are unique to that basin for several reasons, including topography,
land use, available open space, and time frame of development. For example, basins developed before
stormwater design criteria and floodplain regulations generally have a higher flood risk than basins developed
after these criteria were adopted. The Stormwater Utility has invested over $100M in infrastructure based on the
recommendations from each basin master plan. The flood mitigation improvements are designed to meet the 100-
year storm protection standard. The 100-year storm is defined as a storm that has a 1% chance of being equaled
or exceeded for a given location in any given year. Yet, significant improvements are still needed to provide all
areas of Fort Collins with this same level of service.
Old Town Basin
The Old Town basin was primarily developed prior to design criteria and standards for stormwater management
and flood hazards. As a result, flood hazards and pollution from urban stormwater runoff are significant risks to
the community and the Cache la Poudre River. The 2003 Old Town Basin Master Plan identified a system of
improvements to address these challenges including the Magnolia Street Outfall. Attachment 1 identifies the
100-year floodplain for the Old Town Basin as well as the existing major stormwater outfall projects and the Udall
Water Quality Area.
3
Packet Pg. 113
December 10, 2019 Page 2
The flood risk within the basin can be characterized as urban flooding due to the lack of stormwater infrastructure
or a defined stream channel. During intense rainstorms, stormwater runoff is conveyed easterly along streets
such as Maple, Magnolia and Myrtle. Flow depths in these streets can quickly reach 2-4 feet during these events
exceeding curb heights and impacting adjacent homes and business. A recent study completed by ICON
Engineering on behalf of the Utilities estimated nearly 550 structures would be damaged with an estimated
damage cost of $83M to $92M as a result of the 100-year storm. Of these damaged structures, approximately half
of these structures contain finished or partially finished basements that are particularly vulnerable to flood risk and
pose a safety risk for people that may occupy these basements. This same study noted the repetitive nature of
the flood risk with an estimated cost to the community of $151M to $165M over the next 50-years if no
improvements are made. In addition, these conditions create economic, social, and environmental impacts such
as public safety, business closures, traffic disruptions, and sewer overflows.
Pollution from urban runoff is also a concern within the Old Town Basin. Sediments, fertilizers, oil, grease and
other contaminants collect on the urban watershed. More frequent and less intense storms can mobilize these
contaminants contributing to a water quality risk to the Cache la Poudre River. The City has constructed water
quality treatment areas with past stormwater projects such as the Udall Water Quality Area. However, some areas
of the Old Town basin lack sufficient treatment prior to discharge to the river.
Magnolia Street Outfall
The 2003 Old Town Basin Master Plan identified a system of projects necessary to address the remaining flood
risk in the basin. The Magnolia Street Outfall was one of these projects. The conceptual project included storm
sewers up to 120-inch diameter, extending from the Poudre River to Shields Street primarily within Magnolia
Street. In addition, stormwater would be diverted to the Udall Water Quality area for treatment. The 2017/2018
City budget included $1.5 million in funding to begin design of the Magnolia Street Outfall (Safe Community Offer
8.19).
Staff, with the assistance of Anderson Consulting Engineers, conducted a feasibility study for the project in 2018.
The feasibility study estimated the project cost at $80 million with a construction duration of over three years. A
significant portion of the flood hazard in the downtown area would be addressed. However, flood hazards would
still exist until all remaining projects within the basin are constructed. The feasibility study revealed the need to
evaluate the Magnolia Street project and the remaining downtown projects as a system of integrated
improvements. The study also revealed the need to evaluate additional alternatives to determine if more cost-
effective solutions exist for the entire downtown area.
Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan
In the first half of 2019, staff, with the assistance of Anderson Consulting Engineers, completed a basin wide
study to re-evaluate the recommendations of the 2003 Master Plan. The objectives of this study were to
determine if a more cost-effective solution exists, as well as evaluate opportunities to meet other City objectives,
such as park space, access to nature and additional stormwater filtration. Staff conducted workshops with other
City departments to identify potential opportunities for collaboration. Alternative solutions for flood reduction such
as regional detention, underground detention and repurposing portions of the right-of-way with smaller detention
areas were all considered. However, these alternatives were determined to not be feasible due to cost, limited
open space, and impacts to property access and parking. It was determined that opportunities for collaboration to
meet other city objectives exists with a conventional storm sewer option due to excavation and reconstruction of
the street.
A system of five storm sewer projects was identified to most cost-effectively address the flood risk. Important
advantages of this modified plan include less relative cost, reduced construction risk, greater utilization of existing
stormwater infrastructure and outfalls, more opportunity for project phasing, and more opportunity for
collaboration to meet other City objectives. The modified plan defined as the Downtown Stormwater Improvement
Plan (DSIP) is shown on Attachment 2.
The five projects within DSIP are large diameter storm sewers ranging in size from 36-inch to 102-inch diameter
pipes designed to address the flood risk up to the 100-year storm. In addition to the storm sewers, the plan would
provide storm water quality enhancements for the basin. The projects will require significant excavation and
3
Packet Pg. 114
December 10, 2019 Page 3
reconstruction of several streets in the area. While this construction will be a significant disruption, several
opportunities for collaboration have been identified that could leverage this construction to meet other City
objectives. Some of these collaboration opportunities include streetscape, green infrastructure, bike/pedestrian
improvements, Nature in the City projects, street maintenance, and aging utility infrastructure replacement. As
each project moves forward with design, significant discussion and public outreach will be needed to identify
which of these opportunities are appropriate and feasible for each block of the project.
A cost estimate has been developed for the plan of improvements for both the flood reduction and water quality
projects. Costs are considered conceptual due to the very early stage of design. Costs are presented below as a
range to account for unknown conditions. The certainty of the cost estimates will increase as the design for each
project moves forward. The design process will also evaluate options for minimizing construction risk and
opportunities for cost savings.
Conceptual Cost
Storm Sewer Projects $130M - $150M
Water Quality Enhancements $10M - $20M
Total $140M - $170M
*Costs are shown in 2020 dollars.
The improvements would be implemented over several City budget cycles. A conceptual implementation plan
was developed with the goal of minimizing construction impacts to the public as well as minimizing the financial
impact on stormwater utility fees. The implementation considered factors such as flood risk reduction, utilization of
existing infrastructure, constructability, and opportunities for collaboration. The implementation plan indicates the
projects could be designed and constructed over the next 12-15 years, with the first of these projects proposed to
start design as part of the 2021/22 budget and construction as part of the 2023/24 budget. This schedule
assumes one project is under construction at a time to minimize impacts to the public.
Financial Impacts
Rate stability is a key goal of the Utilities Financial Strategic Plan. DSIP is part of the overall stormwater capital
improvement plan. Analyses were completed to determine the financial feasibility of the Stormwater Utility to fund
DISP along with other capital projects in the Financial Strategic Plan. Bonding will be required to generate enough
capital to construct the projects within a reasonable timeframe. Preliminary analysis indicates this debt could be
incurred with periodic rate increases of less than 3% given the Utility’s high debt capacity. The Stormwater Utility
has significant, annual operating margin intended for capital improvements. Additional analysis will be needed to
further confirm the financial feasibility of these improvements. Staff will be presenting the Utilities Financial
Strategic Plan to the Council Finance Committee in prior the 2021/2022 budget discussions.
Public Outreach
Projects of this magnitude and expense require significant public outreach through planning, design and
construction. Staff is committed to raising awareness of the proposed improvements as well as minimizing public
impacts during construction. The outreach efforts are in the early stages with Water Board and Chamber of
Commerce presentations already completed. Staff will be seeking other opportunities to present to community
groups in the future. A public open house was conducted on October 23rd as a first opportunity for the public to
learn about the proposed projects. Also, a project website and informational video have been developed to raise
awareness. Upon budget approval for each project, staff will begin project specific outreach efforts to seek
feedback on street improvements and construction impacts.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Old Town Basin Floodplain and Existing Outfalls (PDF)
2. Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan (PDF)
3. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
3
Packet Pg. 115
3.1
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: Old Town Basin Floodplain and Existing Outfalls (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
3.2
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment: Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
1
Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan
Matt Fater –Director, Civil Engineering, Utilities
December 10, 2019
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Council Questions
• Do Council Members have questions regarding the
stormwater risks facing downtown Fort Collins?
• Do Council Members have questions on the
approach to the Downtown Stormwater
Improvement Plan?
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Stormwater Policy Guidance
Multi-dimensional criteria includes:
• Water quality
• Flood protection
• Stream rehabilitation
• Low impact development
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Overview
• Downtown Stormwater Risks
• Proposed Projects
May 22, 2018 - 2 inches in 40 minutes
June 24, 1992 - 2.5 inches in 30 minutes
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
MASTER
PLANS
Project ID
Conceptual Costs
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
Prioritization
Levels of Service
STRATEGIC
FINANCIAL
PLAN
Rates
Debt
BUDGET
OFFER
Design
FUTURE
BUDGET
OFFER
Construction
Capital Improvement Process
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Video
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Floodplain and Existing Outfalls
Oak Street Outfall – 90-inch tee
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Floodplain Removed
Locust Street Outfall
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Downtown Stormwater Improvements
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Project(s) Benefits
• Improve public safety
• Avoid estimated $151M-$165M
in flood damages
• Address recurring street and
intersection flooding
• Improve stormwater quality to
the Poudre River
• Opportunities for green infrastructure
• Remove regulatory floodplain
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Opportunities for Collaboration
• Downtown Plan
• Utility infrastructure
replacement
• Nature in the City
• Streetscaping
• Green
infrastructure
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Cost Evolution
COST CERTAINTY
100%
50%
MASTER PLAN CONCEPT DESIGN CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Cost Range
Improvements Conceptual Cost
Storm Sewer Improvements $130M - $150M
Water Quality Improvements $10M - $20M
Total Cost $140M - $170M
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
MASTER
PLANS
Project ID
Conceptual Costs
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
Prioritization
Levels of Service
STRATEGIC
FINANCIAL
PLAN
Rates
Debt
BUDGET
OFFER
Design
FUTURE
BUDGET
OFFER
Construction
Capital Improvement Process
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Implementation
(Preliminary Construction Timeframes)
2024 - 2025
2026 - 2027
2028 - 2029
2031 - 2033
Jefferson Street project to
be coordinated with future
road improvements.
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Public Outreach
• Overall Planning
• Raise awareness
• Community presentations
• Website and video
• Open House, Oct. 23
•Project
• Project specific
• Seek feedback on street improvements
• Design and construction
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
Council Questions
• Do Council Members have questions regarding
the stormwater risks facing downtown Fort
Collins?
• Do Council Members have questions on the
approach to the Downtown Stormwater
Improvement Plan?
ATTACHMENT 3
3.3
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (8513 : Downtown Stormwater Improvement Plan)
remain innovative in our participatory
strategies.
Further Engagement
Planned
Further legal analysis;
identify potential code
changes
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.
Further Engagement
Planned
Development and
implementation of key
strategies
Ongoing Participation
ATTACHMENT 6
2.6
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Boards & Commissions Equity Recommendations Matrix (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
identifiable information.
Further Engagement
Planned
Further legal analysis;
execute if approved
Recommendation Rationale Status Next Steps
3.1: Develop list of standardized interview
questions.
Ensures transparency and reduces risk to
Council by ensuring all applicants are asked
the same questions.
2020 Workplan
(Priority)
Develop/synthesize
interview questions; seek
guidance from City
Attorney's Office
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 Council to
consider.
Removed Staff liaison available as a
resource for Council
liaison applicant reviews
Application
Interview
Recruitment
Boards & Commissions Equity Recommendations Matrix
ATTACHMENT 6
2.6
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Boards & Commissions Equity Recommendations Matrix (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
Youth Advisory Board
Gathers information from local youth, other groups,
organizations and agencies regarding youth‐oriented issues
and makes recommendations to City Council in reference to
these issues.
1994 7
Advisory Boards & Commissions
ATTACHMENT 5
2.5
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Boards & Commissions Current Status Matrix (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
1995 7
Citizen Review Board
Reviews internal investigations where a peace officer is
alleged to have used force, discharged a firearm, committed a
crime, when a person sustained severe injury, death, or
alleged their civil rights were violated by a peace officer, or
other investigations requested by the City Manager or Police
Chief.
1998 7
Commission on Disability Serves as an advisor to the City of Fort Collins City Council on
issues relating to citizens with disabilities. 1986 9
Community Development Block
Grant Commission
Advises the City Council on matters pertaining to the City's
Competitive Process which includes Department of Housing
and Urban Development's (HUD) Community Development
Block Grant Program (CDBG) and HOME Programs and the
City's Affordable Housing Fund.
1988 9
Quasi‐Judicial Boards & Commissions
Advisory Boards & Commissions
Boards & Commissions Current Status Matrix
ATTACHMENT 5
2.5
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Boards & Commissions Current Status Matrix (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
65 vacancies
28 recommended appointments
A resolution making appointments is expected to move forward to Council on January 7.
ATTACHMENT 3
2.3
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: 2019 Board and Commission Vacancy Status (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
9 5 2 1 9 Interviews completed.
Natural
Resources
Advisory Board
9 5 5 2 6 Reappoint eligible members.
Parking
Advisory Board
9 5 6 2 9
Only one of the eligible
members is interested in
reappointment. Reappoint
one and recruit additional
member(s).
Parks and
Recreation
Board
9 5 3 1 6
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
ATTACHMENT 3
2.3
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: 2019 Board and Commission Vacancy Status (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
0 –
Vacancy
due to
election of
Julie
Pignataro
6
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
Commission on
Disability
9 5 3 1 6
Leave as is until reimagine
project is complete.
ATTACHMENT 3
2.3
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: 2019 Board and Commission Vacancy Status (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine 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
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Public Participation Report (8508 : Reimagine Boards and Commissions)
ATTACHMENT 5
1.5
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: City Activities Summary (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
•Our City page
•Resource Fairs
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
Attachment: Engagement Plan (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)
MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMUNITIES:
HOME SITES:
City - 1,400
GMA - 2,137
Total - 3,537
Harmony
Trilby
Kechter
Horsetooth
Drake
Prospect
Elizabeth
Mulberry
Laporte
Vine
Willox
Mountain Vista
Richards Lake
College
Shields
Taft Hill
Overland
Lemay
Timberline
Ziegler
Strauss Cabin
Turnberry
MANUFACTURED HOUSING
IN FORT COLLINS GMA
City Limits
GMA Boundary
Manufactured
Housing Community
ATTACHMENT 1
1.1
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Map of Manufactured Housing Communities (8504 : Manufactured Housing Preservation & Livability Strategies)