HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-08/17/2004-RegularAugust 17, 2004
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, August 17, 2004,
at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered
by the following Councilmembers: Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat.
Councilmembers Absent: Kastein.
Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Joe Lewandowski, 1036 Mirromere Circle, asked Council to cancel the advertising and promotional
campaign to discourage truckers from driving through Fort Collins to Laramie. He stated this would
be a waste of $300,000 since the 600 truckers passing through Fort Collins each day would continue
to use this route to save time. He stated the money could be used for traffic calming elsewhere in
the City.
Paul Anderson, 2107 Constitution Avenue, spoke in favor ofrental licensing for single-family units
and maintaining the "three unrelated" rule.
Ray Czaplewski, 2012 Huntington Circle, Rolland Moore Neighborhood Network, spoke in support
of rental licensing to address nuisance problems in single-family neighborhoods. He stated the
"three unrelated" rule could be enforced using two new approaches: (1) make prosecution of
occupancy violations more effective by changing criminal penalties to civil infractions; and (2)
develop a rental licensing program in single-family R-L districts designed to better enforce the Land
Use and municipal codes.
Gail Zirtzlaff, 2048 Manchester, Rolland Moore Neighborhood Network, expressed neighborhood
concerns relating to rentals that had become "dorms."
Al Bacilli, 520 Galaxy Court, expressed concerns regarding the vendor fee paid for sales tax
collection.
Pete Seel, 1837 Scarborough Drive, Rolland Moore Neighborhood Network, supported rental
licensing and stated neighborhoods were being negatively impacted by rentals. He asked that the
City create a rental licensing board and a program to allow variances to the "three unrelated" rule,
14
August 17, 2004
to allow inspection as part of the process, and to allow the City to oversee residential rental
properties in single-family neighborhoods. He asked that the program be cash funded, revenue
neutral and adequately staffed.
Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, expressed concerns regarding employee compensation and
benefits and stated there was valuable information in the consultant's report. He stated the executive
summary prepared by the consultant was incomplete and flawed and did not touch on most of the
key points and recommendations of the report. He stated reforms were needed to the compensation
and benefits program because revenues would not go up fast enough and reserves would not be
available to continue the status quo. He stated health care costs to the City must be reduced and that
a solution must be found that would be fair to employees, the City (a public entity) and the taxpayers
and ratepayers.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Bertschy stated the expenditure of the money referenced by Mr. Lewandowski was
approved by the voters specifically for that purpose. He also thanked the residents from the Rolland
Moore neighborhood for their presentations. He stated a study session was scheduled to discuss
rental licensing. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated the study session was scheduled for October
12.
Mayor Martinez asked if the money was not spent on the truck route issue, if it would have to be
given back to the people. City Attorney Roy stated there was no obligation to refund the money and
that there was a limitation on how the money could be spent. He stated the money could "sit there"
until the voters approved a different use of the money.
Councilmember Hamrick requested a one -page memo on the effect of rentals on the cost of homes
in Fort Collins and the percentage of rental homes in each specific neighborhood of the City. He
stated he was interested in a change to eliminate the vendor fee.
Agenda Review
Interim City Manager Attebeny stated there were no changes to the printed agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Consideration and approval of the Council meeting minutes of June 15 and July 6 and the
adjourned meeting minutes of June 8.
15
August 17, 2004
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 121, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for the Poudre Valley Health System Reduce Intoxicated Driving
Program.
The State of Colorado and the Alcohol and Drug Division of the Colorado Department of
Human Services require that the grant funds be dispersed to a "local public procurement
unit." A "local public procurement unit' means any county, city, municipality, or other
public subdivision of the state, any public agency of any such political subdivision, any
public authority, any educational, health, or other institution, and, to the extent provided by
law, any other entity which expends public funds for the procurement of supplies, services,
and construction.
PVHS requested that the City serve as the local public procurement unit and a pass -through
recipient of the grant proceeds. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First
Reading on July 20, 2004, allows the City to disburse the grant funds to PVHS (via the
Hospital Foundation) upon completion of any grant -related documents and a subgrant
agreement between the City and PVHS.
9. Second Reading of OrdinanceNo. 122,2004, Authorizingthe Lease of City -Owned Property
at 400 Wood Street for Up to Five Years.
This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 20, 2004,
authorizes the City Manager to enter into a Lease Agreement with Foothills Gateway for city -
owned property at 400 Wood Street.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2004, Authorizing the Amendment of the Lease of
City -owned Property at 430 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, to Colorado State
University.
CSU has asked the City to amend the existing lease to add an additional five-year extension
period and to extend the termination notice period to five years. Extending the term of the
lease and the termination period will show a long-term commitment by the City to use of the
property for the engine lab. CSU indicates that a long-term commitment is essential for the
program to obtain grants and donations. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First
Reading on July 20, 2004.
16
August 17, 2004
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2004, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public
Improvements in Connection with the Manhattan Regional Detention Pond and the Mason
Transportation Corridor Bike/Pedestrian Trail.
The Manhattan Regional Detention Pond Project will provide needed stormwater detention
in a predominately mature and built -out residential and business area which is at risk in a 100
year flood. In addition, the Mason Transportation Corridor Bike/Pedestrian trail can be built
concurrently with a berm for the Manhattan Regional Detention Pond. Although
negotiations are continuing and expected to be successful, eminent domain proceedings must
begin in order to assure all necessary property interests are obtained in a timely manner.
Ordinance No. 124, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 20, 2004.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 128.2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Prior
Year Reserves in the Light and Power Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Existing
Appropriations in the Equipment Fund for the Purpose of Purchasing Hydrogen Fueling
Equipment and Infrastructure at the Transfort Alternative Fueling Station.
This Ordinance authorizes a $35,000 appropriation of prior year reserves in the Light and
Power Fund for purchase of hydrogen fueling equipment and infrastructure for the Transfort
Alternative Fueling Station. In addition, this Ordinance authorizes appropriation of$210,000
in equipment and funds being donated by the Colorado Governor's Office of Energy
Management and Conservation to the Transfort Alternative Fueling Station. This Ordinance
also authorizes transfer of $207,000 from the Equipment Fund operations budget to the
Equipment Fund — Transfort Alternative Fueling Station.
13. Items Relating to the Mason Transportation Corridor Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project
A. Resolution 2004-095 Authorizing the Mayor to Enter into an Agreement with the
State Board of the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund in Order for the City to
Receive Grant Funding for the Mason Transportation Corridor Trail Project.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2004, Appropriating Funds to the Building
Community Choices (BCC) Capital Projects Fund, Mason Transportation Corridor
(MTC) Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project, from The State Board of the Great Outdoors
Colorado Trust Fund.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2004, Appropriating Funds to the Building
Community Choices (BCC) Capital Projects Fund, Mason Street Transportation
Corridor (MTC) Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project, from the General Fund Reserves
17
August 17, 2004
on a Temporary Basis to Allow the City to Contract for all of the Construction
Improvements to the Mason Transportation Corridor Trail Project in 2004.
This Council action will authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement with The State
Board of the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund for the City to receive $80,000 for the
MTC trail project as well as appropriate these new grant funds into the project's budget. In
addition, this action will appropriate $1 million into the MTC trail project's budget on a
temporary basis until it can be repaid by the sales tax cash flow in 2005. The MTC project's
budget will repay the $1 million back to the City's General Fund reserve account in 2005.
These funds will be used in 2004 to construct the bicycle/pedestrian trail in a more timely
cost effective manner. Currently, the MTC project does not have sufficient funds
appropriated in 2004 to bid the entire trail segment. A portion of the MTC funding is in the
2005 budget. In transferring these funds, the MTC project will be able to advertise for bid
the entire trail segment insuring a more competitive bid and completion of trail construction
earlier in 2005. This transfer will have no negative financial impact on the General Fund
reserves account.
14. Items Relating_ to US287/South College Avenue Bicycle Lane Project.
A. Resolution 2004-096 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Agreement Between the
City and the Colorado Department of Transportation for the Funding of the Design
and Construction of On -Street Bike Lanes on South College Avenue Between
Harmony Road and Carpenter Road.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and
Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Services Fund to be used to Construct On -
Street Bike Lanes on South College Avenue Between Harmony Road and Carpenter
Road.
The City of Fort Collins Transportation Planning Department received a grant from CDOT
Enhancement Funds for FY 2003-05 to construct on -street bicycle lanes on South College
Avenue/US 287 from Harmony Road/SH68 southward to Carpenter Road/CR32. This new
commuter bikelane facility will greatly improve safety and connectivity for local as well as
regional commuter cyclists. This primary route between Fort Collins and Loveland has been
identified through the public planning process by the City of Fort Collins as well as the North
Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization as a critical link in the local and regional
bicycle lane system. Both the City of Fort Collins Bicycle Program Plan and the North Front
Range Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan indicate the need for this project.
In
August 17, 2004
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2004, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from
the Street Oversizing Fund to the Capital Project Fund for the En ing eerin Desi ref
Timberline Road from Drake Road to Prospect Road
Traffic congestion at the Timberline/Prospect intersection is well below the City's Level of
Service requirements, with almost all legs and turn movements failing during the morning
and afternoon peak rush hours. In accordance with the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,
any new development which impacts this intersection cannot proceed until these existing
deficiencies are corrected.
In the absence of any City Capital Improvement funding for this intersection, two impacted
developers are electing to privately fund these improvements in order to proceed with their
development projects. These developers are the majority property owners and have proposed
the initiation of an involuntary Special Improvement District to spread a portion of the costs
through assessments to other undeveloped property in the area benefitted by the
improvements.
The initiating developers have provided $100,000 in funds to allow the City to prepare the
Engineering plans, estimate of costs, and maps of the district. An additional $162,050 is
needed for the Street Oversizing portion of the design, the geotechnical reports and
environmental studies. This Ordinance will appropriate $162,050 from the Street Oversizing
Fund into the Capital Project account for this project.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No 133 2004 Desi icg atin the he Alpert Building as a Fort Collins
Landmark Pursuant to Chanter 14 of the City Code.
The owner of the property, the Walter J. Frick Trust, is initiating this request for Fort Collins
Landmark designation for the Alpert Building. The Alpert Building retains excellent
physical integrity and is judged to be both architecturally and historically significant under
Fort Collins Landmark Standards (1), (2), and (3). It is a fine example of early twentieth
century commercial architecture in Fort Collins. It is also a noteworthy example of the
commercial architectural design of Fort Collins' most notable architect, Montezuma Fuller.
Increasing its significance even further, the Alpert Building was one of Fuller's final designs
before his death. The building is also historically important for its role in the development
of the flourishing commercial district which grew along the College Avenue corridor,
displacing Old Town as the commercial center. Finally, the property is significant for its
association with Joseph 1. Alpert, the building's namesake. Joseph Alpert was a German
from Russia immigrant, who became a highly regarded Fort Collins businessman.
19
August 17, 2004
17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2004, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Parcel of City
Property in Exchange for a Property Located at 1833 East Mulberry Street Appropriating the
Related Donation in Value In the Amount of $11,532, and Rescinding Ordinance No 007
2004.
This Ordinance would allow a proposed conveyance of 2.468 acres of land on the Poudre
River Corridor and adjacent to the Kingfisher Natural Area from William C. And Maureen
D. Stockover to the City in exchange for property 0.621 acres in size owned by the City at
1833 East Mulberry Street owned land adjacent to and west of land owned by the Stockovers.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 135.2004, Authorizing the Acquisition byEminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public Improvements in
Connection with the Mason Transportation Corridor Trail Project.
This Ordinance does not begin the eminent domain process; it simply allows staff to use the
process if absolutely necessary and extensive good faith negotiations are not successful.
Staff is hopeful that all acquisitions will be accomplished by negotiated agreement. This
process does not apply to the negotiations between the City and the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railway Company or Colorado State University. It will only apply to any other
potential private property owners along the corridor where right of way (ROW) may be
needed permanently for the trail or temporarily during the construction process.
19. Resolution 2004-097 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Car Rental Concession
Agreement at the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport with Entemrise Leasing
Company of Denver.
Enterprise Leasing Company of Denver wishes to lease space in the airport terminal building
as a rental car outlet to service the traveling public. The Agreement is for up to a two year
period beginning September 1, 2004. The leased area includes 133 square feet of counter area
and parking spaces for staging rental cars.
20. Resolution 2004-098 Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to Enter into a Professional Services
Agreement with an Executive Search Firm,
At Council's July 6, 2004 meeting Resolution 2004-084 was adopted setting forth the
process to be used in the City Manager search process. Interviews were conducted with the
following fines: Gerry Plock Associates, Mercer Group Inc., Slavin Management
Consultants and Bennett Yarger Associates.
The Committee conducted its interviews on August 6, 2004, in accordance with the City's
purchasing policies and procedures. As a part of this process, the Committee scored each
20
August 17, 2004
fine based on its presentation and on answers to Committee questions. The highest ranked
firm being recommended is Stavin Management Consultants.
21. Resolution 2004-099 Authorizing the Execution by the Mayor of a GOCO Grant Agreement
for Construction of the Children's Garden at the Gardens on Spring Creek
A proposal was submitted and approved for a Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grant for
the amount of $200,000 towards the construction of a Children's Garden at the recently -
opened Gardens on Spring Creek. The mission of the Children's Garden will be to provide
outdoor recreation and education on horticulture and the natural world, within a garden -like
setting. The Children's Garden will not be a garden in the strict sense, but rather an
integrated combination of various "child -scaled" theme gardens and garden -like elements for
experiential play, gardens planted and maintained by children, a small amphitheater for
presentations, interactive educational exhibits, inter -connecting paths and comfortable
benches.
22. Routine Easements.
A. Easement for Construction and Maintenance of Public Utilities from Nick C. And
Joyce C. Wells, to underground electrical service, located at 1305 Village Lane.
Monetary consideration: $200. Staff: Patti Teraoka.
B. Utility and Drainage Easement from Scott P. Livingston, for the Utility Services
Vehicle Storage Project located at 930 North Shields Street. Monetary consideration:
$5000. Staff: Alice Faye Richardson.
***END CONSENT***
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No 121 2004 Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
in the General Fund for the Poudre Valley Health System Reduce Intoxicated Driving
Program.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 122,2004,Authorizingthe Lease ofCity-Owned Property
at 400 Wood Street for Up to Five Years.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 123, 2004, Authorizing the Amendment of the Lease of
City -owned Property at 430 North College Avenue, Fort Collins. Colorado to Colorado State
University.
21
August 17, 2004
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 124, 2004, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public
Improvements in Connection with the Manhattan Regional Detention Pond and the Mason
Transportation Corridor Bike/Pedestrian Trail.
26. Items Relating to the Adoption of the Changes and Amendments to the 2003 International
Residential Code® , 2003 International Mechanical Code® and the 2003 International
Fuel Gas Code®.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article 2,
Division 2, of the City Code for the Purpose of Making Certain Amendments to the
1997Uniform Building Coder"'
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article 2,
Division 2, of the City Code for the Purpose of Adopting the 2003 International
Residential Code (IRQV with Amendments.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127,2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article4, ofthe
City Code for the Purpose of Repealing the 1991 Uniform Mechanical Coder'
,Adopting the 2003 International Mechanical Codex with Amendments, and
Adopting the 2003 International Fuel Gas Code® with Amendments.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 128 2004 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Prior
Year Reserves in the Licht and Power Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Existing
Appropriations in the Equipment Fund for the Purpose of Purchasing Hydrogen Fueling
Equipment and Infrastructure at the Transfort Alternative Fueling Station
13. Items Relating to the Mason Transportation Corridor Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2004, Appropriating Funds to the Building
Community Choices (BCC) Capital Projects Fund, Mason Transportation Corridor
(MTC) Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project, from The State Board of the Great Outdoors
Colorado Trust Fund.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2004, Appropriating Funds to the Building
Community Choices (BCC) Capital Projects Fund, Mason Street Transportation
Corridor (MTC) Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project, from the General Fund Reserves
on a Temporary Basis to Allow the City to Contract for all of the Construction
Improvements to the Mason Transportation Corridor Trail Project in 2004.
22
August 17, 2004
14. Items Relating to US287/South College Avenue Bicycle Lane Project.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 131,2004, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and
Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Services Fund to be used to Construct On -
Street Bike Lanes on South College Avenue Between Harmony Road and Carpenter
Road.
15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2004 Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations from
the Street Oversizing Fund to the Capital Project Fund for the Engineering Design of
Timberline Road from Drake Road to Prospect Road.
16. First Reading of Ordinance No. 133 2004 Desi natin the he Alpert Building as a Fort Collins
Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code.
17. First Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2004, Authorizing the Conveyance of a Parcel of City
Property in Exchange for a Property Located at 1833 East Mulbem Street Appropriating the
Related Donation in Value In the Amount of $11 532 and Rescinding Ordinance No 007
2004.
18. First Reading_ of Ordinance No. 135,2004 Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain
Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary for the Construction of Public Improvements in
Connection with the Mason Transportation Corridor Trail Project
28. First Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2004 Amending Chapter 7 of the City Code so as to
Include a New Article 7 Pertaining to Election Offenses.
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt and approve
all items on the Consent Calendar. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Councilmember Bertschy spoke regarding item #13 Items Relating to the Mason Transportation
Corridor Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Project and item #14 Items Relating to US287/South College
Avenue Bicycle Lane Project.
Councilmember Tharp spoke regarding item #21 Resolution 2004-099 Authorizing the Execution
by the Mayor of a GOCO Grant Agreement for Construction of the Children's Garden at the
Gardens on Spring Creek.
23
August 17, 2004
Mayor Martinez asked if staff was following up on his request for information about the matching
funds relating to item #12 First Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2004, Appropriating Unanticipated
Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the Light and Power Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of
Existing Appropriations in the Equipment Fund for the Purpose of Purchasing Hydrogen Fueling
Equipment and Infrastructure at the Transfort Alternative Fueling Station. Interim City Manager
Atteberry stated the information requested by Mayor Martinez was in the "read before the meeting"
packet.
Items Relating to the Adoption of the Changes and Amendments
to the 2003 International Residential Code®, 2003 International Mechanical Code®,
and the 2003 International Fuel Gas Code® Adopted on Second Reading
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 125, 2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article 2, Division 2, of
the City Codefor the Purpose of Making Certain Amendments to the 1997Uniform Building
CodeTV.
Ordinance No. 125, 2004, was adopted 5-1 (Nays: Mayor Martinez) on First Reading on
July 20, 2004.
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article 2, Division 2, of
the City Code for the Purpose ofAdopting the 2003 International Residential Code (IRC)®
with Amendments.
Ordinance No. 126, 2004, was adopted 4-2 (Nays: Councilmembers Martinez and
Weitkunat) on July 20, 2004.
C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2004, Amending Chapter 5, Article 4, of the City
Code for the Purpose of Repealing the 1991 Uniform Mechanical CodeTA4 ,Adopting the
2003 International Mechanical Code' with Amendments, and Adopting the 2003
International Fuel Gas Code® with Amendments.
Ordinance No. 127, 2004, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on July 20, 2004.
The 2003 International Residential Code (IRC)®, 2003 International Mechanical Code 2003®and
the International Fuel Gas Code® (the latest version ofthe nationally -recognized "model"building
codes) and proposed Amendments have undergone an extensive sixteen -month review by staff and
24
August 17, 2004
a local representative task group. These latest building codes are already in effect in much of the
country. Closer to home, over 90jurisdictions in Colorado have adopted the -I-Codes ", including
the State of Colorado, the City and County of Denver, Colorado Springs, Aurora, and several other
cities and counties in the Metro -Denver area. The new codes are the replacement,for the "Uniform "
code series, which are being phased -out and no longer supported by the model code organization.
The proposed (IRQ9 and Amendments specifically cover only new one- and two-family dwellings
and new additions thereto. The new code package contains some of the most significant potential
changes to the Fort Collins Building Code in many years. "
Interim City Manager Atteberry stated staff was available to answer questions about the agenda item.
Councilmember Roy asked if there were systems in place to test passive radon systems. Felix Lee,
Director of Building and Zoning, stated the only test for a passive system was an ambient radon
indoor air test to determine the level of radon.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated information had been received from the National Association of
Homebuilders proposing that the Council accept the Code and look at elements dealing with
affordable housing. She asked if staff had considered the merits of the argument from the
Association. Lee stated the arguments were taken into account, particularly with the Energy Code.
He stated the Fort Collins Code would have an amendment that would allow less restrictive wall
insulation than the model code for homes less than 1,600 square feet.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she was concerned about the Association's recommendation to
support the enabling legislation that would allow statewide amendments to the model code to
account for jurisdictional differences or to enhance housing affordability by providing cost effect
requirements to provide for the health and safety of the occupants. She stated the amendments that
had be added would add to the cost of housing. She asked if that had now been considered. Lee
stated affordability was discussed with the code development group. He stated the amendments
would not add the largest share of the cost and that the model code itself would do that. He stated
the cost would increase as the amount of wall insulation was increased as a result of the model code.
Greg Byrne, CPES Director, stated there was a local amendment that would provide for flexibility
and allow the builder or homeowner to reduce the cost of insulation by substituting a high efficiency
furnace.
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Ordinance
No. 125, 2004 on Second Reading. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers
Bertschy, Hamrick, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: Mayor Martinez.
THE MOTION CARRIED
25
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adopt Ordinance
No. 126, 2004 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would not support the motion because of the issue of
affordability. She stated there were other directions that could be taken.
Mayor Martinez stated he would not support the motion due to increases in housing costs.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Roy and Tharp.
Nays Councilmembers Martinez and Weitkunat.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to adopt Ordinance No.
127, 2004 on Second Reading. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers
Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Resolution 2004-100
Making Appointments of the Citizen Advisory
Committee for the Executive Search Process for the City Manager Adopted
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
Funds will come from the 2004 City Manager Budget.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At Council's July 6, 2004 meeting Resolution 2004-084 was adopted setting forth the process to be
used in the City Manager search process. Interviews were conducted with the following firms:
Gerry Plock Associates, Mercer Group Inc., Slavin Management Consultants and Bennett Yarger
Associates.
The Committee conducted its interviews on August 6, 2004, in accordance with the City's
purchasing policies and procedures. As a part of this process, the Committee scored each firm
26
August 17, 2004
based on its presentation and on answers to Committee questions. The highest ranked firm being
recommended is Slavin Management Consultants.
BACKGROUND
Staff solicited proposals from executive search firms nationwide. Eleven firms responded with
proposals. Staff reviewed the proposals based on the Purchasing Division's standards criteria. As
a result of this scoring process, four firms were selected, for interview.
The firms were interviewed by a committee composed of Jim O'Neill, Wendy Williams, Rick
DeLaCastro, Wynette Cerciello, Diane Jones and Councilmembers Tharp and Weitkunaton Friday
August 6, 2004. Each firm presented its qualifications and proposal. The Committee then asked
questions of the firms. The Committee's recommendation to the Council is based on the highest
score which resulted form the interview process. "
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, stated the suggested names (Dr. Jim Butzek, Ray Chamberlain,
Carey Hewitt, Kim Jordan, Mike Powers, Peggy Reeves, and Barbara Rutstein) were included in a
revised Resolution contained in Council's "read before the meeting" packet. She stated the
committee would be providing Council with information regarding the position profile for the new
City Manager.
A] Bacilli, 520 Galaxy Court, stated Darin Atteberry should be permanently appointed as the City
Manager and that money should not be spent to hire from elsewhere.
Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, suggested that the focus of the citizen panel should be on the
skill sets rather than the "personal philosophies" of the City Manager candidates.
Councilmember W eitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to adopt Resolution
2004-100.
Councilmember Bertschy stated the Council would be considering internal as well as external
candidates.
Councilmember Tharp stated this was a diverse committee. She stated Council was the policy -
making body and that the new City Manager would carry out that policy direction. She stated the
committee would provide perspective on the candidates. She stated Council was receptive to hearing
any ideas, points of view and suggestions from anyone. She stated this was a complicated process
and that Council wanted to do a good job in hiring a City Manager who would be here for a long
time.
27
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Hamrick thanked those who volunteered to serve on the committee. He stated the
interim position could be filled internally and that it was necessary to open up the process to allow
anyone (internally and externally) to apply for the permanent position.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy,
Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Ordinance No. 136, 2004
Amending Chapter 7 of the City Code so as to Include a New Article 7
Pertaining to Election Offenses, Adopted on First Reading, Failed to Pass.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
`EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance would prohibit knowing and wild misrepresentations by the circulators of
initiative or referendum petitions.
BACKGROUND
Under the State Constitution, home rule municipalities may adopt local laws governing matters
related to local elections. The City Charter requires that each initiative or referendum petition
contain a purpose statement and that the entire text of the initiated or referred measure be attached
to the petition. However, neither the purpose statement nor the entire measure appears on each
signature page of the petition. Therefore, it is possible that persons signing a petition may not fully
understand the purpose of the measure and may be misled by representatives of the petition
circulator.
An issue arose during a recent local election in which representations made by the circulator of an
initiative petition were arguably inconsistent with the stated purposes of the petition. This
Ordinance would prohibit any petition circulatorfrom knowingly and willfully misrepresenting the
purpose of an initiated or referred measure that is the subject of a petition, or the issues to be
submitted to the electorate regarding the initiated or referred measure, in order to better ensure that
persons signing such petitions are not misled in any way. "
Interim City Manager Atteberry introduced the agenda item.
W3
August 17, 2004
City Attorney Roy presented background information regarding the agenda item. He stated this item
was brought forward at the request of three Councilmembers. He stated the intent was to address
possible misrepresentations by the circulators of initiative and referendum petitions. He stated the
Ordinance would prohibit any petition circulator from knowingly and willfully misrepresenting to
any person through statements, acts or omissions the purpose of the initiated or referred measure or
the issues to be submitted to the electorate. He stated the proposed Ordinance was consistent with
the request received from Councilmembers.
Councilmember Hamrick stated he was one of the three Councilmembers requesting the Ordinance.
He asked how the Ordinance would be enforced. City Attorney Roy stated the Ordinance was
"theoretically enforceable" and that there could be some difficult in practicalities. He stated the
difficulty would be in proving what was said. He stated many laws came down to a "credibility
contest' and the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Councilmember Hamrick asked about the process for a petition signer to make a complaint. City
Attorney Roy stated the issue of who would do an investigation had not been discussed. He stated
an investigation could be prompted by a complaint by one or more people who were approached to
sign a petition or who had signed a petition and who believed that they were misled in terms of the
purpose. He stated the investigator would interview those involved.
Councilmember Hamrick asked if it would be easier to pass an Ordinance requiring citizens to read
something before they sign a petition. City Attorney Roy stated the petition circulator was required
to sign an affidavit after the fact indicating that all petition signers were given an opportunity to read
the petition. He stated the alternatives would include imposing an affirmative obligation that was
enforceable at the time the petition was circulated or adding to the form of the petition a purpose
statement on every page where signatures appeared or a warning or notice to alert people to the fact
that they should read the purpose statement before signing.
Mayor Martinez stated he favored the suggestion to change the form of the petition to encourage
citizens to read the statement of purpose. He asked about the scenario in which the petition signer
could not read. City Attorney Roy stated the concept was that the petition signer should read the
purpose statement or have it read. He stated staff could work on the idea of imposing an obligation
on the petition circulator to read the purpose statement if requested by the petition signer and to have
a one or two line warning on each page of the petition. He stated another ordinance could be brought
back based on that direction.
Mayor Martinez suggested the would like the language to indicate that a person would not need to
state why the petition would need to be read to them. He also favored a statement on each page of
the petition alerting people to read the purpose statement.
29
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Weitkunat stated this ordinance did not appear to be ready for consideration yet.
She stated she had concerns about the language referring to "omissions." She stated the ordinance
should focus on "willful, misleading and false" as opposed to oversights. She stated she understood
the intent of the ordinance but that the City did not need another law on the books that was
unenforceable and questionable. She stated she would prefer to table indefinitely. City Attorney
Roy suggested defeating the ordinance if the majority believed that it was not the right approach.
He stated Council could then consider a separate motion to determine if the majority was interested
in the alternative that had been discussed.
Councilmember Hamrick asked if there were any implications associated with placing an undue
burden on the petition circulator. City Attorney Roy stated he did not believe that the alternative
discussed would be a problem from a Constitutional or legal standpoint.
Councilmember Tharp stated she would like to see the Council vote on the ordinance.
Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt ordinance
No. 136, 2004 on First Reading.
Councilmember Tharp stated it was important to state what a petition circulator should do or not do
in terms of misrepresentation. She stated the ordinance would call attention to the fact that
misrepresentation by the petition circulator would work against the petition process. She stated the
essence of what the Council wanted to accomplish was in this ordinance.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she seconded the motion so that the Council could vote on the
ordinance. She stated the intent was in the ordinance but that the mechanism was missing. She
favored taking a look at how this would work with regard to enforcement.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmember Tharp. Nays Councilmembers
Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy and Weitkunat.
THE MOTION FAILED
Mayor Martinez asked Council to support having the City Attorney bring forward an ordinance that
would address the scenario for those who could not read and that would require a statement on each
page of the petition.
Councilmember Roy stated the ordinance could require the circulator to indicate that the petition
would be read to the signer if necessary or to ask if the signer wanted the petition to be read.
Mayor Martinez stated his concern was that the petition signer not be required to indicate what he
or she wanted the petition to be read.
9M
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Hamrick stated he was in favor of the concept and that staff could wordsmith the
language. He asked that staff include information in the agenda item summary on how the ordinance
would be enforced.
Mayor Martinez asked if staff had clear direction on how to proceed. City Attorney Roy replied in
the affirmative.
Items Relating to a Citizen -Initiated Ordinance Relating
to the Reduction of the Sales Tax on Grocery Food, Adopted.
The following is staffs memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Presentation of a Petition Relating to Citizen -Initiated Ordinance No. 2, 2004 (Relating to
the Reduction of the Sales Tax on Grocery Food) Certified by the Ciry Clerk as Suff cient for
Placement on a Special Election Ballot. (No Action Needed)
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2004, Relating to the Reduction of Sales Tax on
Grocery Food. (Option 1)
OR
Resolution 2004-101 Submitting Proposed Citizen -Initiated Ordinance No. 002, 2004,
Relating to the Reduction of Sales Tax on Grocery Food to a Vote of the Registered City
Electors at the Next Regular Municipal Election on April 5, 2005. (Option 2)
The City Clerk's Office received an initiative petition on July 19, 2004, which has been determined
to contain a sufficient number of signatures to place the initiated measure before the registered
electors of the City. Pursuant to the City Charter, upon presentation of an initiative petition
certified as sufficient by the City Clerk, the Council must either (1) adopt the proposed ordinance
without alteration within 30 days (Option 1); or (2) submit such proposed measure, in the form
petitioned for, to the registered electors of the city (Option 2). If the Council chooses to submit the
proposed measure to the voters, Resolution 2004-101 submits the measure to the voters and
establishes the ballot language for the measure.
31
August 17, 2004
BACKGROUND
The City Clerk's Office has certified a sufficient number of signatures on an initiative petition
received on July 19, 2004. Under Article X of the City Charter, 3,902 signatures of registered
electors (at least 15% of the total ballots cast in the last regular City election) are required to place
an initiative on a special election ballot. Upon presentation of an initiative petition certified as to
sufficiency by the City Clerk the Council must either adopt the proposed ordinance without
alteration or submit the proposed measure in the form petitioned for, to the registered electors of
the city.
Article X, Section 1 of the City Charter normally requires that, if a petition requests a special
election (which this petition does), the Council must call a special election to be held on a Tuesday
within 120 days ofthepresentation ofthe certifiedpetition to the Council. However, anothersection
ofthe City Charter (ArticleX, Section 6(e)), states that not more than one special election on citizen -
initiated measures maybe held within any twelve month period. Because a special City election has
just been held on August 10, 2004, this new measure relating to the reduction of a sales tax on
groceryfood must be placed on the April, 2005 ballot. "
Interim City Manager Atteberry introduced the agenda item.
City Clerk Krajicek presented background information regarding the agenda item. She stated the
City Clerk's Office had certified as sufficient the initiative petition. She stated the petition was
received on July 19, 2004 and that the Charter required 3,902 signatures for placement on a ballot.
She stated upon presentation of the certified petition the Council must either adopt the proposed
Ordinance without alteration or submit the proposed measure to the voters. She stated Charter
normally required placement on a special election ballot within 120 days if the petition requested
such an election. She stated another Charter provision also indicated that no more than one special
election on citizen -initiated measures could be held in any 12 month period. She stated a special
election was just held on August 10, 2004 and that this new measure must therefore be placed on the
April 2005 regular election ballot.
Mayor Martinez requested clarification regarding the two conflicting Charter provisions. City
Attorney Roy stated the provision prohibiting more than one special election within any 12 month
period would prevail in this situation. He stated his opinion was that the general rule was that the
special election was to be held within 120 days of the date of petition certification and that there was
an exception to that rule prohibiting more than one special election within a 12 month period.
Mayor Martinez stated each audience participant would have three minutes to speak.
John Knezovich, 1205 Green Street, asked if citizen input would be allowed on the timing of the
election or the substance of the matter. He asked if there would be two different opportunities for
32
August 17, 2004
citizen participation. City Attorney Roy stated any comments relevant to an agenda item should be
received at the same time.
Mayor Martinez stated participants could speak to both the timing and the substance during their
three minutes.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, stated in the past an item would be placed on the floor
and that citizen comments would then be requested. He suggested putting a motion on the floor so
that citizens would know what to address.
Mayor Martinez asked for legal clarification regarding the procedure. City Attorney Roy stated the
Council process in recent years had been to entertain citizen input on an agenda item before a motion
was made. He stated the current Council practice was also to allow citizen comment once per
agendaitem.
Mayor Martinez stated the current process would be followed.
Mark Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road, stated he was a sponsor of the initiative and that the
purpose was to reduce the tax and regulatory burden on businesses and citizens. He stated the State
repealed the grocery tax in 1979 and that a citizen tax committee also recommended repealing the
City grocery tax in 1979. He asked that the Council accept the initiative because it would definitely
be approved by the voters. He stated the sales tax rate overall was 1 % in 1968, 2% in 1977 and 3%
today (with 2.25% for grocery items). He stated there was a larger tax base because of greater
shopping opportunity in Fort Collins. He stated adjusted for inflation and population growth that
there had been a 40% increase in sales and use tax per capita since 1984. He stated the initiative
needed to be passed to reduce the size of City government. He stated in 2003, $67.7 million in sales
and use tax was collected compared to $15 million in 1984, which amounted to $2,076 for a family
of four compared to $1,484 in 1984.
Dan Cochran, non-resident, stated he worked in Fort Collins and spent a significant portion of his
income in Fort Collins. He stated he was a petition circulator. He stated Fort Collins was one of the
largest cities in the State with a food sales tax. He stated Lakewood had a food sales tax and that it
was considerably less than the tax in Fort Collins. He stated staff did not include that information
in their "biased" staff report. He stated staff had pointed out that the City provided rebates to low
income people and that the repeal of the food tax would therefore not affect such people. He stated
federal statistics clearly showed that in Latimer County less than one-third of the people who were
at a poverty level qualified for food stamps and that people must qualify for food stamps to get the
tax rebate. He stated it was "immoral' to tax food sales for low income people in order to support
a prosperous City government. He stated this initiative should not be put off until April when there
would be a low voter turnout compared to the November election. He stated the Council could take
33
August 17, 2004
a "moral high ground" and eliminate the food sales tax or could place the measure on the November
ballot as a Council referendum.
Al Bacilli, 520 Galaxy Court, opposed the collection of sales tax on food and the payment of a
vendor fee for the collection of the tax.
Mary Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road, stated she was a sponsor of the initiative. She asked the
Council to vote to repeal the grocery tax or to place it on the November ballot. She stated the
initiative called for a January 1, 2005 reduction in the sales tax. She stated the Colorado
Constitution provided for the right of citizens to petition the government with initiatives and
referendums. She stated the Colorado Revised Statutes provided that such measures must be placed
on the ballot within 150 days or less. She stated placement on the April ballot would not liberally
construe the law in favor of the citizens. She stated repeal of the grocery tax would mean a "modest
cut' of 6% in the $90 million General Fund. She stated City government was larger in Fort Collins
than in many other communities. She stated City residents rather than non-residents were the ones
paying the grocery tax.
Elizabeth Whitley, a two-year resident of Fort Collins, stated she was a petition circulator and that
people freely signed the petition because they wanted lower taxes in Fort Collins. She asked the
Council to place the measure on the ballot.
John Knezovich, 1205 Green Street, urged the Council to submit the initiative to the voters in
November rather than adopting the initiated ordinance. He noted that there could be as many as
three other sales tax measures on the April ballot. He stated he was part of the City Council that put
together a mechanism for a sales tax rebate. He urged Council to take a look at how the program
was structured. He stated the sales tax reduction would take place over two years and that the entire
$6 million would be lost at the end of two years. He stated represented about 10% of the General
Fund of the City. He suggested that the Council consider what alternatives would be possible to
replace this as a revenue source to the City. He stated it would be difficult for the City to deal with
the loss of $6 million in revenue. He stated the citizens needed to be informed that there was a
rebate mechanism and that this was a fair tax. He noted that the City could not raise property taxes
because of TABOR, that there was no income tax, and that it would be difficult to find new revenues
for the City. He stated the Councilmembers should vigorously oppose this initiative and should
propose alternatives.
Rich Shannon, 5000 Boardwalk Drive #43, encouraged Council to put the measure before the voters.
He stated this was a "feel good issue" to remove the sales tax from groceries. He stated this was not
the "real issue" and that the Council should take a leadership role in explaining to the community
that the issue was the long term financial health of the community. He stated the issue was how the
City would continue to maintain the quality of life that it currently enjoyed. He stated the "agenda"
being brought forward could be the first of many Libertarian initiatives promoting a reduced form
August 17, 2004
of government. He stated this was an "attack on City Hall and government." He asked the Council
to be very vocal about letting the community know that this was what was happening. He stated
every organization should look internally from time to time to see what could be cut but that this was
not the appropriate way to do that. He asked that the Council place this before the voters and take
a leadership role as individuals in ensuring a "healthy debate" within the community. He stated
"silence would be viewed as acceptance."
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 East Harmony Road, stated the amount of proposed cuts were not excessive.
He stated there was a $2.2 million payment on bonds annually to pay for a $33 million police facility
and that was an "exorbitant amount of money." He stated if the initiative passed that the Council
would have to make some "tough decisions" on whether to spend $33 million for a police facility.
He stated private entities have always had to face such choices. He stated the City would not make
such decisions until forced to do so. He stated taking away revenues would force the City staff to
figure out a way to cope with a 10% in revenues as many private entities have already been forced
to do.
Kelly Ohlson, 2040 Bennington Circle, stated he was an "undecided voter" on this issue. He stated
he was a firm believer in the citizen initiative process and that there should not be a nine -month lapse
between validation of the petition to having the vote. He stated he would be looking at how the City
"sells the issue" in identifying what would be cut if the initiative passes. He stated less important
things would be cut or delayed and that he did not want the City to misrepresent the issue by saying
that something as important as police officers would be cut. He stated he would also be following
whether the City would be dealing quickly with the costly compensation and benefits issue. He
stated it was also important for the City to look at O&M costs for any capital improvements.
Mayor Martinez asked if it would be a special election if Council placed this on the November
ballot. City Attorney Roy stated the Charter provision that limited the frequency of special elections
would not prohibit the Council from calling a special election at any time. He stated the Council
could choose to place this on the ballot as a Council initiated or referred measure.
Councilmember Hamrick stated the language in the initiative talked about implementation on
January 1, 2005 and what the impact would be if the measure was placed on the April ballot i.e.
whether it would be retroactive. City Attorney Roy stated was a decision that would have to be made
by the Council at that time.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked how Councilmembers could be involved in taking a position on
the initiative. City Attorney Roy stated as a matter of practice, once a measure was placed on the
ballot that the provisions of the Fair Campaign Practices Act would be triggered. He stated there
were numerous exceptions and that the Act primarily limited the ability of the City to expend public
funds opposing or supporting a ballot measure.
35
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Weitkunat asked what would be allowed. City Attorney Roy stated the Council is
permitted to adopt a Resolution in support of or in opposition to a measure, that Councilmembers
could express their personal opinions, that staff could respond to unsolicited questions, and that
personal funds or time could be spent to support or oppose a measure.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the history of the 2.25% sales tax on groceries. She noted
that information had been presented about the elimination of a State sales tax on groceries in 1979.
She asked if there was history on why the City decided to retain a 2.25% sales tax on groceries rather
than eliminating it. She also asked about the amount of revenue that would be affected. She noted
that the larger cities that did not have a grocery tax had a larger base tax. Alan Krcmar k, Finance
Director, stated staff had reviewed the records back to 1968 and that the Council looked at the
taxation of groceries three separate times. He stated each time the Council expressed a concern
about how taxing grocery food tended to be regressive in nature i.e. people at the lowest income
levels would pay a higher portion of their total incomes on grocery food than did higher income
people. He stated each time the Council looked at the issue they decided that it was appropriate for
all members of the community to pay a portion of the cost of the services provided by the City. He
stated a rebate program was established in the early 1980s to provide a way for the lowest income
households to apply for a sales tax rebate. He stated the rebate program had been run continuously
since then and that each of the capital project sales taxes had not included tax on food. He stated the
intent was to distribute the tax burden and offer a mechanism by which money could be given back
to the lowest income households.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked what the amount of tax would be on $100 in grocery food.
Krcmarik stated the tax was $2.25 on $100.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the average rebate offered. Krcmarik stated a $40 per person
rebate was offered and that an average size (2.5 person) household would be eligible for a $100
rebate. He stated the statistics from the Consumer Expenditure Survey done annually nationwide
suggested that the tax on grocery food was approximately $70-75 per year. He stated the City was
therefore rebating more money than what was actually paid according to that Survey.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the difference in assessing an across-the-board sales tax
(including food) and a tax on general merchandise. Krcmarik stated total rates could be lower if
there was a broad based tax, and that based on the 58 home rule cities in Colorado that collected their
own tax that most included a tax on food in their base. He stated those that did not include a grocery
sales tax had a higher rate. He stated the average sales tax rate for those not taxing food was 3.9%
and that if a food sales tax was included in the base that the average sales tax was about 3.1 %.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked what the City would need to do to recover the lost revenue if the
food sales tax was eliminated. Krcmarik stated staff was estimating that a quarter cent levy that
36
August 17, 2004
would exclude food would generate about $5.4 to $5.5 million. He stated staff projected that the loss
of revenue to a tax on food would be higher than that.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the general sales tax would therefore have to go to about 2.5%
in order to compensate for the lost of the grocery sales tax. Krcmarik replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Tharp asked if a new quarter cent sales tax would have to go to the voters.
Krcmarik replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Tharp asked if the City was prepared at this point to come up with a substitute. She
stated Mr. Brophy's position was to eliminate the tax and that it might be difficult to convince people
that the City really needed the new quarter cent tax in place of the food tax. She asked if it was
realistic to say that there would be a substitute tax. Krcmarik stated other communities had been
successful in raising their sales tax rates in the past few years. He stated it was always a difficult
package to present to the voters and that people were still waiting for an economic rebound.
Councilmember Tharp noted that the City twice tried unsuccessfully to get a sales tax for
transportation. She stated it was already difficult to deal with three issues at once on this agenda
item. She stated the issue of bow the lost revenue would be replaced would be a separate issue. She
stated a key issue was the timing of placement on the ballot. She requested clarification regarding
whether the Council could place the matter on the November ballot and what the repercussions
would be. City Attorney Roy stated there would be no legal repercussions.
Councilmember Tharp asked if the Council could choose at this meeting to place the matter on the
November ballot. City Attorney Roy stated a special election would need to be called by Ordinance
and that could be done on September 7. He stated the Council could adopt the Resolution placing
the measure on the April ballot, since some action needed to be taken with regard to the petition, and
to come back on September 7 with the measure as a Council measure for placement on the
November ballot.
Councilmember Tharp asked ifthe procedure could be simplified. City Attorney Roy stated a special
election would have to be called by ordinance and that an ordinance had not been prepared for that
purpose. He stated the Council must either adopt the initiated Ordinance or place it a ballot. He
stated in his opinion the only way to place the citizen -initiated measure on the ballot was to put it
on the April ballot.
Mayor Martinez asked about the procedure to cancel initiative on the April election if Council would
decided on September 7 to place the measure on the November ballot. City Attorney Roy stated staff
would need to explore that issue separately. He stated the petition representatives appeared to be
indicating that placement on the November ballot would be consistent with their wishes. He stated
37
August 17, 2004
there would need to be assurances that there would be no need to place the measure on the April
ballot if it would be placed on the November ballot.
Mayor Martinez asked if the petition's ballot language would be used if the Council placed the
matter on the ballot. City Attorney Roy stated he would prefer to wait to respond to that question.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if Council decided to place the measure on the November ballot,
could a decision also be made on September 7 to submit a tax initiative to the ballot for a substitute
tax. City Attorney Roy stated anything for the November ballot must be submitted by September
7 in order to meet the September 8 deadline for certifying ballot content to Larimer County. City
Clerk Krajicek stated an intergovernmental agreement must be entered into with Larimer Countyby
September 3 and that the ballot language must be certified to the County on or before September 8.
City Attorney Roy stated Council must decide by September 7 whether to place this matter on the
November rather than April ballot.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would be interested in submitting another substitute tax
measure to the ballot at that time.
Executive Session Authorized
Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Bertschy, to adjourn into
Executive Session to discuss legal issues with the City Attorney pursuant to Section 2-31(2) of the
City Code. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick,
Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
("Secretary's Note: The Council reconvened following the Executive Session at 8:20 p.m.)
Items Relating to a Citizen -Initiated Ordinance Relating
to the Reduction of the Sales Tax on Grocery Food, Continued.
Mayor Martinez stated the item relating to the sales tax on grocery food would continue. He asked
about the petitioners for the citizen initiative. City Attorney Roy stated they were the petition
representatives.
Mayor Martinez asked how many petition representatives there were. An unidentified member of
the audience responded and indicated that there were three petition representatives.
1K
August 17, 2004
Mayor Martinez asked if that represented a problem. City Attorney Roy stated for the purpose of
moving forward on this item that an indication from two of the petition representatives would be
helpful on several questions.
Mayor Martinez asked the petition representatives to come forward.
Mark and Mary Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road, stated they were petition representatives.
Mayor Martinez asked the Brophys if they would consider withdrawing the petition that would
require placement on the April ballot and agreeing that two elections would not be necessitated on
the same ballot measure if the Council placed the measure on the November ballot. Mr. and Mrs.
Brophy stated the petition representatives would be agreeable to that. He stated the intent was to
have one election in November rather than two elections.
Councilmember Tharp asked if the petition representatives were in agreement regardless of whether
or not the measure passed in November. Mr. and Mrs. Brophy indicated that they were in agreement
that only one election would be held regardless of the outcome. Mr. Brophy stated the assumption
was that the ballot language would be retained without alteration. Mrs. Brophy stated she believed
that the third petition representative would also be in agreement.
Mayor Martinez asked if the Council needed to take action at this meeting. City Attorney Roy stated
the provision was that upon presentation of an initiative petition certified as sufficient, the Council
shall either adopt it without alteration within 30 days or submit the proposed measure to the
registered electors. He stated submission of the measure to a ballot on September 7 would meet the
requirements of the Charter.
Mayor Martinez asked if there was a motion to not adopt the Ordinance.
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, that the Council not
adopt Ordinance No. 137, 2004 and instead submit the question to the voters.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy,
Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to postpone
Resolution 2004-101 and to request the City Attorney to bring back at the September 7 meeting an
additional option to be considered placing the question on the November ballot.
39
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Roy asked what areas would likely be cut if there were a 10% cut to the City budget.
Interim City Manager Atteberry stated a further $6 million reduction in a two-year period in the City
budget would have a significant and real impact on the City's ability to continue to provide quality
services. He spoke regarding the cuts that had been made in the past two years. He stated he would
be working with the City's Executive Lead Team to develop a list of specific service reductions. He
stated this issue raised a high level of concern regarding the City's ability to respond to this without
a significant impact to the citizens of Fort Collins.
Councilmember Roy stated there were some people that would like to see the size of government
reduced and those who were looking for "compassion" in government. He stated it was important
in this discussion that items that were heavily subsidized (such as Transfort and affordable housing)
for individuals would not be curtailed or endangered. He stated there was room in any organization
to remove some funding. He stated as this discussion continued it would be important to understand
the difference between "trying to take a knife to government" and making sure that government can
continue to provide the services that only it can provide. He stated organizations such as the City
can not just "drum up" $6 million. He stated this issue would have a significant impact on the lives
of many citizens and perhaps a very negative impact on the same citizens who purportedly would
benefit from the sales tax cut. He stated he had strong feelings about this matter and that it was clear
that the actions of governments affected lives. He stated he personally he felt that government
affected lives in a positive manner more often than not.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she tended to support placement of this measure on the November
ballot. She stated she would also like to pursue consideration of an alternative tax measure to
accompany this initiated measure to compensate for the lost food sales tax.
Councilmember Tharp stated it would be difficult to organize an alternative tax that quickly.
Councilmember W eitkunat stated she believed that it would be possible to move quickly. She stated
similar actions had been taken in other communities. She stated she would like to see something
"simple" to cover the lost revenue. She suggested that the ballot language for the alternative tax
could be written to state that it would not take effect unless the food sales tax was repealed by the
voters. She stated the Council should make an attempt to cover the lost revenue and that this was
an appropriate time to take this action.
Councilmember Hamrick stated he would support scheduling discussion of this on a study session
agenda. He stated the Council also needed to look at the impact of scheduling an alternative tax
measure on the November ballot.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he agreed with Councilmember Roy about the impact of the cuts,
which would be made to secondary rather than basic services. He stated the secondary services
impacted a great majority of the citizenry and provided some of the quality of life for this
m
August 17, 2004
community. He stated quality of life brought employers to the City. He stated the Council needed
to state the case for why the City needed to recover the lost funds. He agreed with Councilmember
Weitkunat that one way to state the case was to place an alternative tax measure on the ballot. He
stated the Council needed to make a solid case about what the losses would be and what a potential
substitution should be if the food sales tax was lost.
Councilmember Tharp stated she agreed that the secondary quality of life services (museum, library,
transit, Lincoln Center, parks and recreation, etc.) would be cut and that primary services would not
be cut. She stated the City just went through a lengthy discussion on economic development and
why this was a solid community i.e. that this was a good place to live. She stated if the cuts were
made that the community "would be in trouble." She stated the reality was that it would be difficult
to get a ballot item ready for an alternative tax measure in such a short time. She stated the impact
of removing the sales tax from food would be compounded by the fact that cuts had been made for
the last two years (hiring freezes, delayed raises for employees, etc.) and that reserves had been
heavily used. She stated she could not imagine where cuts would be made except in programs such
as the library. She stated the next level of cuts would reduce the number of employees, the amount
of service that would be provided, and the types of services enjoyed by the citizens. She stated her
concern was with the mechanics of placing an alternative measure on the ballot in such a short period
of time and having it be successful.
Mayor Martinez stated employers asked about the quality of life in the community before making
a decision to locate here. He asked if all other cities that did not have a food sales tax had a larger
base tax. Krcmarik stated Denver had a tax rate of 3.75%, Colorado Springs 2.5%, Aurora 3.75%,
and that on average the 10 cities on the list had an average tax rate of 3.95%.
Mayor Martinez asked what percentage of the cities in Colorado had a food sales tax. Krcmarik
stated a study by the Colorado Municipal League estimated that 82% of the cities and towns in
Colorado had a sales tax taxed food.
Mayor Martinez stated a picture had been painted that Fort Collins was one of the rare cities to have
a food sales tax when in fact 82% had a food sales tax.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated this was an opportunity to propose an alternative tax measure at
the same time as the initiated measure in order to be effective. She stated she believed that people
would support the alternative tax because it was a "repositioning of the tax" rather than a new tax.
She stated she would hope that those who understood the need for the sales tax in the General Fund
would rally and campaign to make it successful. She stated time was of the essence and that some
positive things could come from the effort.
Mayor Martinez stated the City government had done a good job of "cutting" and not putting new
taxes in place. He stated the police building (a high priority) was being paid for by setting money
41
August 17, 2004
aside every year to make it happen rather than through a new sales tax. He stated if the initiated
measure passed and more cuts would be necessary that he would oppose any cuts to basic services
such as emergency services.
Councilmember Hamrick stated he supported Councilmember Weitkunat's comments regarding a
shifting of the taxes. He stated he was opposed to taxes on food and drugs because it was a
disproportionate burden on the low income and seniors. He stated this would be an opportunity to
shift the taxes and that he would support having something for consideration in September.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he agreed with Councilmember Weitkunat.
Mayor Martinez stated he favored tax cuts and saving tax dollars but that it was important to
understand the impacts on people. He stated people were attracted to this community because of the
amenities and that the voters had approved funding for such amenities. He stated new taxes had not
been placed on food. He stated this would affect the secondary services and that it would be difficult
to fund those services if people still demanded them. He stated it could become necessary to
increase fees for such services.
Councilmember Tharp stated if higher fees had to be charged, lower income people would be
precluded from using the amenities.
Mayor Martinez stated it could become even more difficult for lower income people to even live in
the community.
City Attorney Roy requested clarification regarding the motion.
Councilmember Bertschy stated the motion was to postpone Resolution 2004-101 and to bring back
to the September 7 meeting, two options (this Resolution and an option placing the same measure
on the November ballot).
City Attorney Roy asked if that included Councilmember Weitkunat's direction.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he believed that was included in the motion.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy,
Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
:W
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to direct staff to
prepare a Resolution for September 7, 2004 for a replacement tax to cover the loss of 2.25% on food
sales tax.
Krcmarik noted that the measure proposed in the citizen initiative was a three -step process and asked
if the new revenue should match those three steps.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if it would be sufficient to have a motion to replace the grocery
tax with the replacement tax. City Attorney Roy stated if the intent was to offset the loss with a
corresponding new revenue stream that the staff could develop language to carry out that intent.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated was her intent.
Councilmember Bertschy stated there may not be a need for a motion because three Counci ]members
had indicated an interest in following the direction articulated by Councilmember Weitkunat. City
Attorney Roy stated specific direction was needed so that staff would know what to present.
Councilmember Tharp supported voting on the motion and stated the essence was to come up with
a mechanism to deal with offsetting the lost food sales tax revenue. She stated the details would
need to be worked out. City Attorney Roy stated he understood.
Councilmember Roy stated he could not support the motion. He stated years were spent coming up
with plans that were "coherent and cohesive." He stated he agreed that it was important to replace
the lost revenue but that this action gave the appearance of "being panicked" rather than "good
governance." He stated if the food sales tax was repealed, it was questionable whether people would
be willing to pay a separate tax. He stated many people had signed the petition and that some
probably signed the petition because they believed in the right of citizens to bring such issues
forward for public discussion. He stated if the community could not be convinced that there was a
reason to have a sales tax on food that it "deserved to be repealed." He stated there were compelling
reasons for the tax to continue. He stated reacting in such a "compressed time frame" would be
detrimental to the City's ability to create a "cohesive, cognizant tax plan." He stated the best way
to deal with the issue was to "speak strongly and clearly to the public and citizens about why this tax
was important" to the community and the "end user of the tax dollars."
Councilmember Tharp stated she agreed with Councilmember Roy and questioned submitting an
alternative tax at the same time as the initiated measure. She stated she understood that
Councilmember Weitkunat's intent was to "create an opportunity" to ensure the "least disruption of
governmental services." She stated the replacement sales tax would be the next step if the initiative
passed. She stated she was "ambivalent" about the timing of the replacement tax measure. She
stated if the two measures were submitted to the voters at the same time that this would send "mixed
messages" to the voters.
43
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Weitkunat stated it was "logical and simplistic" to schedule both measures at the
same time. She stated this would not send "mixed messages" and that it was important that the
Councilmembers provide a policy commitment to "keep this government running smoothly and
efficiently." She stated this must be kept simple and must not be made complex.
Mayor Martinez asked the Brophys if the intent was to cut the sales tax because it was on food or
if the intent was to give government less tax. Mr. Brophy stated he wanted the government to be
smaller.
Mayor Martinez stated he would support the motion to look at this. He stated he was not certain that
he would support a shifting of the tax when the matter was brought forward for consideration.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Tharp and
Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Roy.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Executive Session Authorized
Councilmember Tharp made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Bertschy, to adjourn into
Executive Session to discuss legal issues with the City Attorney pursuant to Section 2-31(2) of the
City Code. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick,
Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
("Secretary's Note: The Council reconvened following the Executive Session at 8:20 p.m.)
Items Relating to a Citizen -Initiated Ordinance Relating
to the Reduction of the Sales Tax on Grocery Food, Continued.
Mayor Martinez stated the item relating to the sales tax on grocery food would continue. He asked
about the petitioners for the citizen initiative. City Attorney Roy stated they were the petition
representatives.
Mayor Martinez asked how many petition representatives there were. An unidentified member of
the audience responded and indicated that there were three petition representatives.
Mayor Martinez asked if that representing a problem. City Attorney Roy stated for the purpose of
moving forward on this item that an indication from two of the petition representatives would be
helpful on several questions.
Vil
August 17, 2004
Mayor Martinez asked the petition representatives to come forward.
Mark and Mary Brophy, 1109 West Harmony Road, stated they were petition representatives.
Mayor Martinez asked the Brophys if they would consider withdrawing the petition that would
require placement on the April ballot and agreeing that two elections would not be necessitated on
the same ballot measure if the Council placed the measure on the November ballot. Mr. and Mrs.
Brophy stated the petition representatives would be agreeable to that. He stated the intent was to
have one election in November rather than two elections.
Councilmember Tharp asked if the petition representatives were in agreement regardless of whether
or not the measure passed in November. Mr. and Mrs. Brophy indicated that they were in agreement
that only one election would be held regardless of the outcome. Mr. Brophy stated the assumption
was that the ballot language would be retained without alteration. Mrs. Brophy stated she believed
that the third petition representative would also be in agreement.
Mayor Martinez if the Council needed to take action at this meeting. City Attorney Roy stated the
provision was that upon presentation of an initiative petition certified as sufficient the Council shall
either adopt it without alteration within 30 days or submit the proposed measure to the registered
electors. He stated submission of the measure to a ballot on September 7 would meet the
requirements of the Charter.
Mayor Martinez asked if there was a motion to not adopt the Ordinance.
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, that the Council not
adopt Ordinance No. 137, 2004 and instead submit the question to the voters.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy,
Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Hamrick, to postpone
Resolution 2004-101 and to request the City Attorney to bring back at the September 7 meeting an
additional option to be considered placing the question on the November ballot.
Councilmember Roy asked what areas would likely be cut if there must be a 10% cut to the City
budget. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated a further $6 million reduction in a two-year period
in the City budget would have a significant and real impact on the City's ability to continue to
provide quality services. He spoke regarding the cuts that had been made in the past two years. He
stated he would be working with the City's Executive Lead Team to develop a list of specific service
45
August 17, 2004
reductions. He stated this issue raised a high level of concern regarding the City's ability to respond
to this without a significant impact to the citizens of Fort Collins.
Councilmember Roy stated there were some people that would like to see the size of government
reduced and those who were looking for "compassion" in government. He stated it was important
in this discussion that items that were heavily subsidized (such as Transfort and affordable housing)
for individuals would not be curtailed or endangered. He stated there was room in any organization
to remove some funding. He stated as this discussion continued that it would be important to
understand the difference between "trying to take a knife to government" and making sure that
government can continue to provide the services that only it can provide. He stated organizations
such as the City can not just "drum up" $6 million. He stated this issue would have a significant
impact on the lives of many citizens and perhaps a very negative impact on the same citizens who
purportedly would benefit from the sales tax cut. He stated he had strong feelings about this matter
and that it was clear that the actions of governments affected lives. He stated he personally he felt
that government affected lives in a positive manner more often than not.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she tended to support placement of this measure on the November
ballot. She stated she would also like to pursue consideration of an alternative tax measure to
accompany this initiated measure to compensate for the lost food sales tax.
Councilmember Tharp stated it would be difficult to organize an alternative tax that quickly.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she believed that it would be possible to move quickly. She stated
similar actions had been taken in other communities. She stated she would like to see something
"simple" to cover the lost revenue. She suggested that the ballot language for the alternative tax
could be written to state that it would not take effect unless the food sales tax was repealed by the
voters. She stated the Council should make an attempt to cover the lost revenue and that this was
an appropriate time to take this action.
Councilmember Hamrick stated he would support scheduling discussion of this on a study session
agenda. He stated the Council also needed to look at the impact of scheduling an alternative tax
measure on the November ballot on the BCC taxes that might be scheduled for the April ballot.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he agreed with Councilmember Roy about the impact of the cuts,
which would be made to secondary rather than basic services. He stated the secondary services
impacted a great majority of the citizenry and provided some of the quality of life for this
community. He stated quality of life brought employers to the City. He stated the Council needed
to state the case for why the City needed to recover the lost funds. He agreed with Councilmember
Weitkunat that one way to state the case was to place an alternative tax measure on the ballot. He
stated the Council needed to make a solid case about what the losses would be and what a potential
substitution should be if the food sales tax was lost.
August 17, 2004
Councilmembernarp stated she agreed that the secondary quality of life services (museum, library,
transit, Lincoln Center, parks and recreation, etc.) would be cut and that primary services would not
be cut. She stated the City just went through a lengthy discussion on economic development and
why this was a solid community i.e. that this was a good place to live. She stated if the cuts were
made that the community "would be in trouble." She stated the reality was that it would be difficult
to get a ballot item ready for an alternative tax measure in such a short time. She stated the impact
of removing the sales tax from food would be compounded by the fact that cuts had been made for
the last two years (hiring freezes, delayed raises for employees, etc.) and that reserves had been
heavily used. She stated she could not imagine where cuts would be made except in programs such
as the library. She stated the next level of cuts would reduce the number of employees, the amount
of service that would be provided, and the types of services enjoyed by the citizens. She stated her
concern was with the mechanics ofplacing an alternative measure on the ballot in such a short period
of time and having it be successful.
Mayor Martinez stated employers asked about the quality of life in the community before making
a decision to locate here. He asked if all other cities that did not have a food sales tax had a larger
base tax. Krcmarik stated Denver had a tax rate of 3.75%, Colorado Springs 2.5%, Aurora 3.75%,
and that on average the 10 cities on the list had an average tax rate of 3.95%.
Mayor Martinez asked what percentage of the cities in Colorado had a food sales tax. Krcmarik
stated a study by the Colorado Municipal League estimated that 82% of the cities and towns in
Colorado that had a sales tax taxed food.
Mayor Martinez stated a picture had been painted that Fort Collins was one of the rare cities to have
a food sales tax when in fact 82% had a food sales tax.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated this was an opportunity to propose an alternative tax measure at
the same time as the initiated measure in order to be effective. She stated she believed that people
would support the alternative tax because it was a "repositioning of the tax" rather than a new tax.
She stated she would hope that those who understood the need for the sales tax in the General Fund
would rally and campaign to make it successful. She stated time was of the essence and that some
positive things could come from the effort.
Mayor Martinez stated the City government had done a good job of "cutting" and not putting new
taxes in place. He stated the police building (a high priority) was being paid for by setting money
aside every year to make it happen rather than through a new sales tax. He stated if the initiated
measure passed and more cuts would be necessary that he would oppose any cuts to basic services
such as emergency services.
Councilmember Hamrick stated he supported what was said by Councilmember W eitkunat regarding
a shifting of the taxes. He stated he was opposed to taxes on food and drugs because it was a
47
August 17, 2004
disproportionate burden on the low income and seniors. He stated this would bean opportunity to
shift the taxes and that he would support having something for consideration in September.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he agreed with Councilmember Weitkunat.
Mayor Martinez stated he favored tax cuts and saving tax dollars but that it was important to
understand the impacts on people. He stated people were attracted to this community because of the
amenities and that the voters had approved funding for such amenities. He stated new taxes had not
been placed on food. He stated this would affect the secondary services and that it would be difficult
to fund those services if people still demanded them. He stated it could become necessary to
increase fees for such services.
Councilmember Tharp stated if higher fees had to be charged that lower income people would be
precluded from using the amenities.
Mayor Martinez stated it could become even more difficult for lower income people to live in the
community.
City Attorney Roy requested clarification regarding the motion.
Councilmember Bertschy stated the motion was to postpone Resolution 2004-101 and to bring back
to the September 7 meeting two options (this Resolution and an option placing the same measure
on the November ballot).
City Attorney Roy asked if that included Councilmember Weitkunat's direction.
Councilmember Bertschy stated he believed that was included in the motion.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy,
Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp, to direct staff to
prepare a Resolution for September 7, 2004 for a replacement tax to cover the loss of 2.25% on food
sales tax.
Krcmarik noted that the measure proposed in the citizen initiative was a three -step process and asked
if the new revenue should match those three steps.
August 17, 2004
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if it would be sufficient to have a motion to replace the grocery
tax with the replacement tax. City Attorney Roy stated if the intent was to offset the loss with a
corresponding new revenue stream that the staff could develop language to carry out that intent.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated was her intent.
Councilmember Bertschy stated there may not be a need for a motion because three Councilmembers
had indicated an interest in following the direction articulated by Councilmember Weitkunat. City
Attorney Roy stated specific direction was needed so that staff would know what to present.
Councilmember Tharp supported voting on the motion and stated the essence was to come up with
a mechanism to deal with offsetting the lost food sales tax revenue. She stated the details would
need to be worked out. City Attorney Roy stated he understood.
Councilmember Roy stated he could not support the motion. He stated years were spent coming up
with plans that were "coherent and cohesive." He stated he agreed that it was important to replace
the lost revenue but that this action gave the appearance of "being panicked" rather than "good
governance." He stated if the food sales tax was repealed that it was questionable whether people
would be willing to pay a separate tax. He stated many people had signed the petition and that some
probably signed the petition because they believed in the right of citizens to bring such issues
forward for public discussion. He stated if the community could not be convinced that there was a
reason to have a sales tax on food that it "deserved to be repealed." He stated there were compelling
reasons for the tax to continue. He stated reacting in such a "compressed time frame" would be
detrimental to the City's ability to create a "cohesive, cognizant tax plan." He stated the best way
to deal with the issue was to "speak strongly and clearly to the public and citizens about why this tax
was important" to the community and the "end user of the tax dollars."
Councilmember Tharp stated she agreed with Councilmember Roy and questioned submitting an
alternative tax at the same time as the initiated measure. She stated she understood that
Councilmember Weitkunat's intent was to "create an opportunity" to ensure the "least disruption of
governmental services." She stated the replacement sales tax would be the next step if the initiative
passed. She stated she was "ambivalent" about the timing of the replacement tax measure. She
stated if the two measures were submitted to the voters at the same time that this would send "mixed
messages" to the voters.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated it was "logical and simplistic" to schedule both measures at the
same time. She stated this would not send "mixed messages" and that it was important that the
Councilmembers provide a policy commitment to "keep this government running smoothly and
efficiently." She stated this must be kept simple and must not be made complex.
m
August 17, 2004
Mayor Martinez asked the Brophys if the intent was to cut the sales tax because it was on food or
if the intent was to give government less tax. Mr. Brophy stated he wanted the government to be
smaller.
Mayor Martinez stated he would support the motion to look at this. He stated he was not certain that
he would support a shifting of the tax when the matter was brought forward for consideration.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Tharp and
Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Roy.
THE MOTION CARRIED
Other Business
Mayor Martinez stated he would like to hear from staff about obtaining timers for each
Councilmember. Interim City Manager Atteberry stated there were two options and that he would
provide a memo to the Council.
Executive Session Authorized
Councilmember Bertschy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Tharp to adjourn into
Executive Session pursuant to Section 2-31(])(a) and 2-32(2) to discuss personnel matters and to
consult the City Attorney regarding legal issues and potential litigation. The vote on the motion was
as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Bertschy, Hamrick, Martinez, Roy, Tharp and Weitkunat. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED
("Secretary's Note: The Council reconvened following the Executive Session at approximately
10:30 p.m.)
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
i' •