Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-12/20/2005-RegularDecember 20, 2005 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, December 20, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy, and Weitkunat. Staff Members Present: Attebeny, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Mayor Hutchinson stated former City Attorney Arthur (Art) E. March, Jr., passed away on December 17, 2005. He stated Arthur E. March, Sr., was the City Attorney from August 19, 1948 to October 19, 1972, and his son Art March, Jr. succeeded him as City Attorney and served until August 31, 1978. He stated Art March helped form the Poudre Fire Authority, helped form Platte River Power Authority, and after his retirement as City Attorney helped form the Downtown Development Authority. He stated he also worked to foster education for ministry class programs for lay ministers serving in a number of regional churches. He stated Art March was a "remarkable citizen of Fort Collins" and expressed deepest sympathy to the family. Ron Simms, President of the Poudre Fire Authority Firefighters, recognized and presented certificates of appreciation to five Councilmembers (Mayor Hutchinson, Mayor Pro Tern Weitkunat, and Councilmembers Kastein, Brown, and Manvel) who participated in the Fire Ops 101 program on October 14. Mayor Hutchinson stated this experience helped with an understanding of the Poudre Fire Authority. Agenda Review City Manager Atteberry stated there were no changes to the agenda as published. CONSENT CALENDAR 6. Consideration and Approval of the Special Meeting, Minutes of November 2, 2005 and Adiourned Meetine Minutes of November 8, 2005. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2005, Appropriating Prior Years Use Tax Carryover Reserves for the Temporary Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate Program. In March 1996, City Council approved a Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate Program ("Rebate Program") for use tax paid on manufacturing equipment. The goal of the program 153 December 20, 2005 was to maintain the local economic base by providing modest tax relief to manufacturers located in Fort Collins. The Rebate Program has provided rebates to manufacturers for the calendar years 1996 through 2001. The Rebate Program was suspended for calendar year 2002 due to economic conditions. Council reinstated the program in January of 2004 for a two year period to coincide with the biennial budget. Under the Rebate Program, the rebate payments are paid by the City during the year following the year in which the use tax was remitted by the vendor. This is a rebate of taxes paid in 2004 and not a tax exemption. Twelve companies have filed applications this year for a total of $168,000 in rebates. The source of funding for the Rebate Program is the sales and use tax fund, specifically the use tax cant' -over reserve. This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program. A grant in the amount of $20,000 has been received from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice for salaries associated with the continued operation of the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program. Restorative justice is an alternative method of holding a young offender accountable by facilitating a meeting with the youth, the victim and members of the community to determine the harm done by the crime, and what should be done to repair the harm. By learning to understand the impact of their actions on the victim and community, criminal justice officials are optimistic that repeat offenses by these youth will be reduced. A $2,222 cash match is required and will be met by appropriating previously collected project income from users of this program. The cash match is currently in General Fund prior year reserves for Police Services. The grant period is from October 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006. Ordinance No. 144, 2005, which was adopted unanimously on First Reading on November 15, 2005, appropriates the grant funds. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2005, Approving a General Form of Petition for Initiated Charter Amendments. Ordinance No. 145, 2005, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005, approves a general form of petition for citizen -initiated Charter amendments. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2005, Authorizing the Lease of City -Owned Property at 945 East Prospect Road for Up to Five Years. The City purchased this house and lot as part of the Prospect/Lemay Choices '95 Intersection Improvement Project, which is still pending. Should this project become active in the future, this house will be affected by the right -turn lane that is to be added turning south on Lemay Avenue from Prospect Road. The construction of this right -turn lane can be accomplished at a more affordable price if it can be constructed at the same time as the corner redevelops. It is staff s recommendation to continue renting this house in the interim, having the tenant 154 December 20, 2005 responsible for all utility expenses and site clean-up. On November 15, 2005, Council unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 146, 2005 on First Reading. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2005, Authorizing the Grant of a Temporary Construction Easement and an Access Easement from the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, to Spring Creek Ranch, LLC. Spring Creek Ranch LLC, is developing an 11-acre parcel located at 1926 Hull Street into 88 condo units, and has requested a nonexclusive Access Easement and a Temporary Construction Easement on property owned by the City on the south side of Hull Street, in connection with the development. The proposed Access Easement will provide a necessary emergency access route to the development. The proposed Temporary Construction Easement will be used during construction of the Access Easement to provide proper grading of the area. Utilities (Stormwater) has determined that the proposed easements will not impact the use of the property for stormwater purposes, and has no objection to the proposed easements. The triangular -shaped Access Easement contains 154 square feet and the rectangular Temporary Construction Easement contains 1,829 square feet. Ordinance No. 147, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2005, Desi mating the A.M. Woods House as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. The owner of the property, Gwyneth Robe, is initiating this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the A.M. Woods House. The building is judged to be both architecturally and historically significant under Fort Collins Landmark Standards (1) and (3). The A.M. Woods House is a good example of the locally rare Colonial Revival architectural style. The home is also significant as one of the oldest dwellings existing in Fort Collins. Built circa 1880, the home has been a part of the Eastside Neighborhood for nearly 125 years. The building exhibits good integrity, and readily conveys its architectural and historical significance. The property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register of Historic Properties, as a contributing element of the Laurel School National Register District. Ordinance No. 148, 2005, designating the A.M. Woods House as a Fort Collins landmark, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 13. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park First Annexation and Zoning_ A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park First Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park First Annexation. 155 December 20, 2005 This is a 100% voluntary annexation and zoning of a property approximately 15.55 acres in size. The site is located on the east side of the I-25 East Frontage Road south of State Highway 14 (East Mulberry Street). Contiguity with the existing municipal boundary is gained along a portion of the southern boundary which is shared with the north property line of the State Highway 14 — East Frontage Road (35.86 acres). The recommended zoning is C, Commercial, which is in conformance with the I-25 Sub Area Plan. This annexation is the first in a series of three that will cumulatively result in the annexation of 62.33 acres. Ordinances Nos. 149 and 150, 2005, were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 14. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation. This is a 100% voluntary annexation and zoning of a property approximately 34.08 acres in size. The site is located on the east side of the I-25 East Frontage Road south of State Highway 14 (East Mulberry Street). Contiguity with the existing municipal boundary is gained along the entire south and a portion of the southeast boundary which is shared with the north property line of the Interchange Business Park First Annexation (15.55 acres). The recommended zoning is C, Commercial, which is in conformance with the I-25 Sub Area Plan. This annexation is the second in a series of three that will cumulatively result in the annexation of 62.33 acres. Ordinances Nos. 151 and 152, 2005, were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 15. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation. This is a 100% voluntary annexation and zoning of a property approximately 12.70 acres in size. The site is located on the east side of the I-25 East Frontage Road south of State Highway 14 (East Mulberry Street). Contiguity with the existing municipal boundary is gained along the entire east property line which abuts the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation (34.08 acres). The recommended zoning is C, Commercial, which is in conformance with the I-25 Sub Area Plan. This annexation is the third in a series of three 156 December 20, 2005 that will cumulatively result in the annexation of 62.33 acres. Ordinances Nos. 153 and 154, 2005, were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2005, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Requiring the Provision of Accurate Ownership Information in Connection With the Provision of Utility Services. Ordinance No. 155, 2005, amending Chapter 26 of the City Code requiring accurate ownership information in connection with utility services, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. The Ordinance has been slightly revised between First Reading and Second Reading in response to Council discussion on First Reading, in order to make the required information listed in City Code Section 26-27 consistent with a similar list in Section 26-25(a). 17. Items Related to the Comnletion of the Fall Cvcle of the Comnetitive Process for Allocatin City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing Projects/Programs and Community Development Activities Utilizing HOME Investment Partnerships Funds, Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG") Funds, and Funds from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the HOME Investment Partnership Program. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the Community Development Block Grant Program. The CDBG Commission recommends which programs and projects should receive funding from several funds including: the City's Home Investments Partnership ("HOME") Program funds for the FY 2005 Program year; other available HOME Program and CDBG Program funds; and/or the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The total amount of funding requests considered by the CDBG Commission was approximately $2.1 million, however, only about $1.9 million of funds are available. The CDBG Commission recommends full funding for six (6) proposals, partial funding for two (2), and no funding for one (1) proposal. Unallocated funds will be carried over to the Spring 2006 cycle of the competitive process. Both Ordinances were unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 15, 2005. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2005, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Emplovees' Retirement Fund. The City Council created the General Employees' Retirement Plan in 1971 to provide a retirement benefit in addition to the Social Security system. Oversight is provided by a six - member committee, five of whom are appointed by Council, the other being the Financial Officer. 157 December 20, 2005 The single -sum benefit, approved by City Council in 1998, is designed to be actuarially neutral to the Plan. When an employee elects to receive a lump sum amount from the Plan, the liability of providing a future pension benefit to the employee is removed from the Plan. Although actuarially neutral, voluntary elections of single sum payments reduce the uncertainty regarding the number of employees for whom the Plan must provide an income over an unknown period of years. From that standpoint, lump sum payments are considered financially favorable. On November 29, 2005, Ordinance No. 159, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading. 19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 2005, Authorizing the Lease of Portions of Soapstone Prairie Natural Area to Folsom Grazing Association. Ordinance No. 160, 2005, which authorizes a grazing lease on approximately 16,450 acres (12,588 Soapstone, 3,862 Colorado Lease Lands) located within the Soapstone Prairie Natural Area to the Folsom Grazing Association beginning on January 1, 2006 and ending December 31, 2008, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. The lease was awarded through a competitive request for proposal process. The duration of this lease corresponds to the opening of Soapstone Prairie to the public in 2009. The interim lease was designed to continue grazing as a habitat management tool while other portions of the Soapstone Management Plan were developed. This ensures that any future grazing plans will be developed to minimize conflicts with recreation use and other management objectives of the Natural Area. 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 2005, Makin¢ Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. Staff has identified a variety of proposed changes, additions and clarifications in the Fall biannual update of the Land Use Code. On November 17, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed changes and voted 5 — 0 to recommend approval of the proposed changes to City Council with one exception. On the item relating to requiring a higher level of connectivity in the Urban Estate Zone (Item 704), the Board voted 4 — I to approve the proposed change. Ordinance No. 161, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. 21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 2005, Amending Section 2-575 of the Cites Relating to Councilmember Compensation. Article II, Section 3 of the City Charter provides that the compensation of Councilmembers shall be adjusted annually for inflation in accordance with the Denver/Boulder Consumer Price Index. In 2004, Councilmembers were compensated $595 per month, and the Mayor received $895 per month. Council compensation remained the same for 2005. 158 December 20, 2005 Ordinance No. 162, 2005, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005, amends Section 2-575 of the City Code to set the 2006 compensation of Councilmembers at $606 and the compensation of the Mayor at $912, as required by the City Charter. 22. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 2005, Amendine. Section 25-75 of the City Code so as to Extend Certain Portions of the Citv s Sales and Use Tax in Accordance with Three Voter -Approved Ballot Measures. Fort Collins' voters have approved the renewal of three one -quarter cent sales and use taxes to fund high priority capital needs in the community. The three taxes were previously used to fund three packages of capital projects in the Building Community Choices capital plan. All three current taxes are set to expire on December 31, 2005. Ordinance No. 163, 2005, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005, implements the tax extensions by amending the sales and use tax code to reflect the provisions of the voter actions. 23. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 164, 2005, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Self Insurance Fund to Cover the Annual Actuarial Report Adjustment. The City's Self -Insurance fund pays for liability (auto, public officials, general liability), property (damage to buildings, flood etc.) and worker compensation claims and related expenses. An actuarial report is provided annually in March to project reserves which are needed for claims which have been filed but not settled and claims that have not been filed or reported to the City. These are known as claims incurred but not reported, or "IBNR" claims. Claims are affected by timing. Once an incident has occurred, claimants have 180 days after the incident to file a claim with the City for a State covered tort and two years to file claims covered by Federal law. The reserves necessary to cover claims that have not been reported or filed (IBNR claims) and claims which have not yet been settled, fluctuates annually. For example, in 2002 the reserve/IBNR increased $156,000, in 2003 it increased $1,300,000, and in 2004 it decreased $1,400,000. It is estimated that the amount of reserves will increase by $500,000 — 800,000 for 2005. Ordinance No. 164, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. 24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 165, 2005, Repealing Division 2 of Article II of Chapter 21 of the City Code Concerning the Personnel Board. Because the functions of the Personnel Board can be more efficiently and economically met by the use of ad hoc committees and the streamlining of the administrative disciplinary 159 December 20, 2005 process to allow for the conduct of personnel hearings by the City Manager or his/her designee, the Personnel Board can be dissolved without adversely affecting the City. Ordinance No. 165, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. 25. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 166, 2005, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development Authority perations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins. Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A. The City of Fort Collins created the Downtown Development Authority ("DDA") to make desired improvements in the downtown area. Through tax increment financing, the DDA has made significant contributions to the redevelopment and improvement of the downtown area. This Ordinance authorizes the transfer of unexpended appropriations in the Downtown Development Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund resulting from the cancellation of an improvement identified in Ordinance No. 89, 2004, the 2004 Bond Appropriation Ordinance for the DDA. Ordinance No. 166, 2005, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005, authorizes the transfer of funds for the improvements identified or are in process of being identified and an existing improvement that will receive increased funding. 26. Second Readin¢ of Ordinance No. 167, 2005, Amendingthe City Code Relatine to General Penalties. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005, provides a new and dedicated revenue source to fund enforcement of speed limits in neighborhoods, citywide awareness programs and other traffic calming measures. Approval of this Ordinance changes the way the City approaches the "speeding in neighborhoods" issue. This program is an enhancement to the existing Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program (NTSP) housed currently housed in Traffic Operations. Fort Collins residents want to feel safe in their neighborhoods. This is an important quality of life aspect that many folks believe they are missing. One of the main causes of concern is speeding in neighborhoods. The Traffic Operations Department has had a neighborhood traffic calming program in place for approximately 10 years and the program has been largely ineffective at reducing speeds in neighborhoods. The new program approach is intended to change the approach to reducing speeds on neighborhood streets. 27. Second Readine of Ordinance No. 168, 2005, Appronriatine Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Poudre Valley Health System "Reduce Intoxicated Driving" Program. Poudre Valley Health System ("PVHS") developed a comprehensive prevention program called Reduce Intoxicated Driving ("RID") to minimize the number of individuals who drive 160 December 20, 2005 while intoxicated. RID collaborates with local government, businesses, law enforcement, health care providers, Colorado State University, Poudre School District and other community sectors to reduce the number of individuals who drive intoxicated. The program uses many strategies to decrease the number of people who drive intoxicated such as public education and dissemination of information about hazards of driving while intoxicated to youth in the community. 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 education, 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 will allow 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. Ordinance No. 168, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. 28. Second Readine of Ordinance No. 169, 2005, Creating the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. In November 2002, voters passed a ballot measure known as Open Space, Yes! (OSY), a continuation of the City's .25 cent sales tax for the acquisition and management of open space. Open Space, Yes! begins collecting and distributing revenues to the City's Natural Areas Program as of January 1, 2006. Section 15 of OSY states that: "...the City Council shall designate a voluntary City Advisory Board, either existing or new, to advise and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the expenditure of the moneys for the purposes stated herein." Ordinance No. 169, 2005, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 29, 2005. 29. Hearine and First Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 2005, Amending, the Zoning Map of the City ofFort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for That Certain Property Known as the Timberline Center Parcel, From T, Transition to I. Industrial. This is a request to rezone a 16.13 acre parcel from T, Transition to I, Industrial. The parcel is located on the west side of Timberline Road approximately one-half mile north of East 161 December 20, 2005 Drake Road. The Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way forms the western boundary. The request complies with the City's Structure Plan Map. The parcel is a part of the larger 435-acre Timberline Annexation which was annexed in 1997 as an enclave. Upon annexation, all parcels contained within the Timberline Annexation were placed into T, Transition zone district. The Transition zone requires that City Council change the zoning to another zone district within 60 days of the Planning and Zoning Board hearing of December 8, 2005. 30. First Reading of Ordinance No. 171, 2005, Amending Section 2-474 of the City Code Pertaining to the Membership of the Fort Collins Housing Authority. The Board of Commissioners of the Fort Collins Housing Authority has requested that its membership be decreased from nine members to seven members because a seven -member body would be more manageable and would still allow for proper representation from related fields and backgrounds. Section 29-4-205, C.R.S., provides that the Housing Authority shall consist of no more than nine commissioners appointed by the Council. This Ordinance would amend Section 2-474(2) of the City Code to reflect the change recommended by the Commissioners. 31. First Reading of Ordinance No. 172, 2005, Amending Chanter 26 of the City Code to Revise Sewer Plant Investment Fees. This is a housekeeping ordinance to amend the sewer plant investment fee. Ordinance No. 134, 2005, was adopted by Council on November 15, 2005. Council approved Ordinance No. 134, 2005 with the intent to phase in one-third of the increases proposed in the 2005 plant investment fee study. The Ordinance includes fees calculated for high strength commercial customers based on one-third of full implementation; however, corresponding flows were not adjusted to reflect the same. This Ordinance will reduce the flows used to calculate the fees for high strength commercial customers in order to comply with Council's original intent and direction. This housekeeping change will only affect commercial customers with high strength discharges. Residential and commercial customers with normal strength discharges are not impacted. 32. Resolution 2005-131 Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to Commission an Artist to Create Art Elements for the Bobcat Ridge Project. This Resolution would approve expenditures of $ 7,544 for design, materials, installation and contingency for a project with artist Robert Tully to create three sculptural elements for Bobcat Ridge Natural Area. Robert Tully has already been paid $2,830 for Design Consultant Services to develop the art concepts for the Project site. 162 December 20, 2005 33. Resolution 2005-132 Approving the Purchase of Animal Control Services from the Larimer Humane Society for 2006 and 2007 as an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process. The City of Fort Collins has contracted with the Larimer Humane Society for animal control services for over 30 years. The contract requires the Larimer Humane Society to provide a variety of specialized equipment and personnel necessary to provide animal control services to the City of Fort Collins; to operate a shelter facility; to provide emergency veterinary care; to dispose of dead animals; to respond to animal -related calls for service; to enforce City ordinances pertaining to animals; to administer a pet licensing program; and to provide accurate quarterly reports to City staff. There is no other known organization, entity or individual currently capable of performing these services. The City of Fort Collins relies on the Larimer Humane Society to address animal -related issues within the City limits and it remains dedicated to providing professional animal control services to the City. Adoption of this Resolution will allow this contractual relationship to continue. 34. Resolution 2005-133 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Drunk Driving Enforcement Grant Contract #L06-24 Between the City and the Colorado Department of Transportation The Colorado Department of Transportation has awarded Fort Collins Police Services a 2006 Law Enforcement Assistance Fund (L.E.A.F.) grant in the amount of $11,750 to help reduce the number of drunk drivers in Fort Collins. This grant will provide overtime compensation for Fort Collins police officers who are involved in operations which focus on the detection and arrest of drunk drivers. 35. Resolution 2005-134 Authorizing the Extension of the Sublease Agreement with the Fort Collins Convention and Visitors Bureau for a Portion of the Facility at the Welcome Center Located at 3545 East Prospect Road. In August 1999, the City and the Colorado State Board of Agriculture ("State") entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement ("IGA") regarding the Environmental Learning CenterNisitor's Center/Welcome Center (the "Facility") located at 3545 East Prospect Road. Under the terns of the IGA, the City leased a portion of the Facility from the State. In June 2001, the City entered into a Sublease Agreement with the Fort Collins Convention and Visitors Bureau to sublease the City's portion of the Facility for convention and visitor services. The sublease terminates December 31, 2005. The City Purchasing Department anticipates bidding out convention services in the early part of 2006. The successful bidder will then enter into a new sublease agreement with the City for use of the Facility. Since the bid is not until the early part of 2006 and this lease terminates at the end of this month, we are requesting approval to extend the current lease to March 31, 2006. 163 December 20, 2005 36. Resolution 2005-135 Approving Revised Costs and Fees for Fort Collins Municipal Court. The Fort Collins Municipal Court assesses various costs and fees, in addition to fines and other penalties. According to the City Charter, these costs and fees are enacted by Council, upon recommendation of the Judge. Various costs and fees have been approved by resolution over the years. At this time, Judge Lane recommends increasing the amount of certain existing costs and fees. Although there may be some increase in revenues collected by the Municipal Court due to the revised costs and fees, the increases are being recommended not to raise revenues but, rather, to provide monetary incentive to the public to appear, pay and /or comply on a more timely basis. Better attention to such requirements will reduce the Court staff time needed to address failures to appear, pay and/or comply. Under the proposed Resolution, the revised costs and fees would become effective January 1, 2006. 37. Resolution 2005-136 Expressing the Intent of the City Council With Respect to Council Involvement in Acquisitions for the Natural Areas Program. At its November 29 meeting, City Council directed staff to bring forward a Resolution that would articulate its role in land and water acquisitions undertaken for the Natural Areas Program and with Open Space, Yes! and Help Preserve Open Space funds. 38. Resolution 2005-137 Making Appointments to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Ordinance No. 169, 2005, adopted on Second Reading this same date, created a new Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Vacancies were advertised during September and Mayor Hutchinson and Councilmember Manvel interviewed applicants. The Council interview team recommends the nine individuals listed in the Resolution to fill the newly created Board. 39. Resolution 2005-138 Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions. Vacancies currently exist on various boards, commissions, and authorities due to resignations of board members and the expiration of terms of members. Applications were solicited during September. Council received copies of the applications and Council teams interviewed applicants during October and November. This Resolution makes 65 appointments to 26 boards and commissions. Names of those individuals recommended for appointment by each Council interview team have been inserted in the Resolution. 164 December 20, 2005 40. Resolution 2005-139 Authorizing a Revocable Permit For Civil. Environmental Cultural and Geotechnical Surveys on Meadow Springs Ranch Williams Pipeline is considering the construction of a twenty inch (20") diameter Liquid Natural Gas pipeline under a portion of Meadow Springs Ranch in northern Weld County along and near a presently -existing pipeline. Survey crews for Williams are asking to enter Meadow Springs Ranch in December or January to conduct an initial route (civil) survey. Then, in the spring after local plants have bloomed, Williams is further asking to send an environmental survey team to the Ranch to conduct an environmental impact assessment. Only after those two surveys have been completed will Williams design the proposed route of the new pipeline and determine whether said route will cross City -owned property at Meadow Springs Ranch or on other property. At that time, should Williams decide to construct this new pipeline within City -owned property, Williams will enter into negotiation with the City to purchase appropriate easement rights and request that Council approve an appropriate written easement prior to initiation of construction. 41. Routine Easements. A. Easement for construction and maintenance ofpublic utilities to underground electric system, from Gregory A. Vaniscak and Silva Properties, LLC, located at 1736, 1740, 1742, and 1746 East Mulberry. Monetary consideration: $500. B. Easement for construction and maintenance ofpublic utilities to underground electric system, from 1802 N. College Investments, LLC, located at 1802 N. College Avenue. Monetary consideration: $600. C. Easement for construction and maintenance ofpublic utilities to underground electric system, from Ray M. And Norma J. Mayes, located at 120 Grape. Monetary consideration: $200. ***END CONSENT*** Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2005, Appropriating Prior Years Use Tax Carryover Reserves for the Temporary Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate Program. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing Program. 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2005, Approving a General Form of Petition for Initiated Charter Amendments. 165 December 20, 2005 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146,2005, Authorizing the Lease of City -Owned Property at 945 East Prospect Road for Up to Five Years. 11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2005, Authorizing the Grant of a Temporary Construction Easement and an Access Easement from the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, to Spring Creek Ranch, LLC. 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2005, Designating the A.M. Woods House as a Fort Collins Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. 13. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park First Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park First Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park First Annexation. 14. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park Second Annexation. 15. Items Relating to the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation and Zoning. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2005, Annexing Property Known as the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Interchange Business Park Third Annexation. 16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2005, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Requiring the Provision of Accurate Ownership Information in Connection With the Provision of Utility Services. 17. Items Related to the Completion of the Fall Cycle of the Competitive Process for Allocating City Financial Resources to Affordable Housing Projects/Programs and Community Development Activities Utilizing HOME Investment Partnerships Funds, Community 166 December 20, 2005 Development Block Grant ("CDBG") Funds, and Funds from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the HOME Investment Partnership Program. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 158,2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Projects in the Community Development Block Grant Program. 18. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2005, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the General Employees' Retirement Fund. 19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 2005, Authorizing the Lease of Portions of Soapstone Prairie Natural Area to Folsom Grazing Association. 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 2005, Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. 21. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 2005, Amending Section 2-575 of the City Code Relating to Councilmember Compensation. 22. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 2005, Amending Section 25-75 of the City Code so as to Extend Certain Portions of the City's Sales and Use Tax in Accordance with Three Voter -Approved Ballot Measures. 23. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 164, 2005, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Self Insurance Fund to Cover the Annual Actuarial Report Adjustment. 24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 165, 2005, Repealing Division 2 of Article II of Chapter 21 of the City Code Concerning the Personnel Board. 25. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 166, 2005, Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Between Capital Improvements Within the Downtown Development Authority Operations and Maintenance Fund Related to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Downtown Development Authority Taxable Subordinate Tax Increment Revenue Bonds, Series 2004A. 26. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 167, 2005, Amending the City Code Relating to General Penalties. 27. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 168, 2005, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue in the General Fund for the Poudre Valley Health System "Reduce Intoxicated Driving" Program. 167 December 20, 2005 28. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 169, 2005, Creating the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek. 29. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 170, 2005, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classification for That Certain Property Known as the Timberline Center Parcel, From T, Transition to I, Industrial. 30. First Reading of Ordinance No. 171, 2005, Amending Section 2-474 of the City Code Pertaining to the Membership of the Fort Collins Housing Authority. 31. First Reading of Ordinance No. 172, 2005, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise Sewer Plant Investment Fees. 45. First Reading of Ordinance No. 173, 2005, Amending Section 4.16(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code (Text Amendment). 47. First Reading of Ordinance No. 174, 2005, Amending Section 2-596 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the City Manager. 48. First Reading of Ordinance No. 175, 2005, Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the Municipal Judge. 49. First Reading of Ordinance No. 176, 2005, Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the City Attorney. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to adopt and approve all items on the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED Consent Calendar Follow-up Councilmember Weitkunat commented regarding item #32 Resolution 2005-131 Approving Expenditures from the Art in Public Places Reserve Account in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to Commission an Artist to Create Art Elements for the Bobcat Ridge Project and questioned whether it was time to examine where the dollars were going for this program and look at a new direction. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support looking at that program and that he would like a clarification regarding the legality of using open space funds for art in public places. Councilmember Weitkunat stated as the liaison to the Art in Public Places Board she had asked the Board to do an inventory of the money collected and how and where it was spent. She stated she supported the program but felt that it was time to look at those financial issues. City Manager Atteberry stated staff would take a look at the work of the program and report back to Council. IM December 20, 2005 Councilmember Weitkunat also commented on item #38 Resolution 2005-137MakingAppointments to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. She stated a "significant other" of a Councilmember was appointed to the Board and that she had raised the question of how appropriate it was for Councilmembers to appoint colleagues or spouses to boards. She suggested the need for a policy in this area. Mayor Hutchinson stated he felt that this was a policy issue that the Council should perhaps discuss at a study session. Councilmember Manvel supported discussing that policy issue. He stated it was important to note that Ms. Stanley, Councilmember Ohlson's spouse, was very qualified to serve on the Board. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support looking at a policy for the future and noted that there was no policy in place at this time. He stated he was not on the interview team and was not the liaison to the Board. Mayor Hutchinson stated the policy was the issue. He asked that staff work to bring the matter forward for Council discussion. City Manager Atteberry asked that Tess Heffernan, Policy and Project Manager, comment regarding the purpose of item #16 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2005, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Requiring the Provision of Accurate Ownership Information in Connection With the Provision of Utility Services. Councilmember Reports Councilmember Kastein reported on North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council discussions regarding the RTA. Councilmember Weitkunat reported on the Poudre Fire Authority discussions relating to the 2006 budget and pay plan and the performance review of the Fire Chief. She stated on January 24, 2006 there would be a joint session between the Poudre Fire Authority and the Poudre Fire District to discuss long range funding strategies. Mayor Hutchinson, Councilmember Weitkunat and Councilmember Manvel reported on the National League of Cities Conference that was held in Charlotte, North Carolina. Ordinance No. 173, 2005, Amending Section 4.16(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code (Text Amendment), Denied on First Reading Following is staff s memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is J & M Automotive which owns 425 and 429 North College Avenue. This is a request to amend the text of the Land Use Code so that three additional auto -related uses would become permitted in the C-C-R, Community Commercial — Poudre River zone district. The three uses are Vehicle Minor Repair; Vehicle Major Repair and Vehicle Sales and Leasing. The affected code section is 4.16(B)(2)(c) which is the permitted use list for land uses that are subject to 169 December 20, 2005 administrative review (Type One). The applicant further requests that these three uses be conditioned upon abutting North College Avenue and being 300 feet from the Poudre River. BACKGROUND History and Current Conditions In 1996, the property was rezoned from I-G, General Industrial, to R-C, River Corridor in fulfillment of both the Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan and the Downtown Plan. In 1997, City Plan supplanted the R-C zone with the C-C-R zone and the subject parcels were placed in the C-C-R to implement City Plan. The existing operation at 425 North College is known as J & M Automotive. The three uses presently being conducted on the property are considered Vehicle Minor Repair, Vehicle Major Repair and Vehicle Sales and Leasing. This is an active operation that was in existence prior to adoption of the Land Use Code. The business has not been discontinued for more than 12 consecutive months. Therefore, the three uses are considered legal non -conforming. The parcel at 429 North College Avenue was formerly occupied by the State of Colorado for vocational and technical trainingfor teaching vehicle emissions testing and procedures. In addition, the parcel was used for Vehicle Minor Repair. The Vocational and Technical Training has been discontinued for over 12 consecutive months (as ofAugust 2004). The property continues, however, to be used for Vehicle Minor Repair which is considered legal non -conforming. With respect to 429 North College Avenue, the Zoning Administrator has ruled that no repair, servicing or maintenance activities can be conducted at 429 North College Avenue on vehicles that are offered for -sale or intended to be offered for- sale by J & M Import Auto Sales, J & M Automotive or any other entity conducting auto sales from 425 North College Avenue. Additionally, no major vehicle repair activities can be conducted on the property and no 'for -sale " vehicles can be parked, displayed or stored on the property at 429 North College Avenue. These uses have no history on the parcel and therefore, do not enjoy any grandfather privilege. Summary of the Applicant's Request The applicant proposes that the text of the C-C-R zone be amended to add three land uses: Vehicle Minor Repair; Vehicle Major Repair; and Vehicle Sales and Leasing. None of these uses are presently permitted in the C-C-R zone. The definitions of these uses are attached. 170 December 20, 2005 The applicant further proposes to add qualifier language such that these three new proposed uses would be subject to: Provided such use abuts North College Avenue and is located at least 300 feet away from the top of the bank of the Cache La Poudre River. The effect ofadding this qualifier to the three proposed new uses limits the practical location to only two properties in the C-C-R zone - 425 and 429 North College Avenue. The applicant contends that the two buildings have useful life remaining as auto -related uses. Therefore, the applicant makes the following two assertions: A. The current legal non -conforming uses should be continued and, therefore, made conforming by adding three auto related uses to the C-C-R zone. B. Two additional auto -related uses should be permitted on 429 North College Avenue by adding three auto related uses to the C-C-R zone. If the Text Amendment Is Approved With respect to 425 North College Avenue, the Text Amendment would convert all three legal non- conforming uses to permitted uses without triggering any additional review process or site improvements. With respect to 429 North College Avenue, the TextAmendment would convert the single legal non- conforming use (Vehicle Minor Repair) to a permitted use without triggering any additional review process or improvements. If Vehicle Major Repair or Vehicle Sales and Leasing are added to this lot, then a Change of Use application process, subject to Type One review is required. This review process would trigger site improvements to bring the lot up to the standards of the Land Use Code. If the lots are combined into a single consolidated business operation, with shared parking, shared inventory, shared mechanical bays, and Vehicle Major Repair and Vehicle Sales and Leasing are desired on 429 North College, then this would trigger site improvements on 425 North College as well. Site improvements may include landscaping,screening, construction ofa connecting walkway, etc. Staff Analysis A. Definitions of Non -Conforming The three uses on 425 North College Avenue and the one use on 429 North College Avenue are legal but do not conform to the C-C-R zone. The C-C-R zone was adopted in 1997 as a result of City Plan and the Poudre River Corridor Study. 171 December 20, 2005 For clarification, according to the Land Use Code, the definition of Non -conforming Use is provided: "Nonconforming use shall mean either a use which was lawful and nonconforming under prior law on the day before the effective date of this Land Use Code or subsequent amendment thereof, or with respect to lands newly annexed, a use which was lawful immediately before annexation but which does not conform to the use regulations for the zone district in which such use is located either at the time of annexation or as the result ofsubsequent amendments to this Land Use Code. " Article Five allows for further clarification of a term or definition from specific sources. According to The New Illustrated Book of Development Definitions. by Harvey S. Moskowitz and Carl G. Lindbloom (Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University. N.J. 1997), the definition of "Non -conforming Use" is provided: A use or activity that was lawful prior to the adoption, revision or amendment of the zoning ordinance but that fails by reason of such adoption, revision or amendment to conform to the present requirements of the zoning district. " B. Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan and Downtown Plan The Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan was adopted in 1986. The Downtown Plan was adopted in 1989. These Plans created a vision and expression ofa desired future for the downtown area that was, at that time, zoned I-G, General Industrial. The Plans called for the area generally north and east of Jefferson Street to be re -designated as the "Poudre River Corridor. " The purpose of the rezoning was to implement the vision of the Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan and the Downtown Plan. Ordinances No. 126, 1996 and No. 127, 1996 amended the zoning map and the R-C, River Corridor zone respectively. C. Poudre River Land Use Plan and City Plan Between 1996 and 1997, Staff f urther analyzed the Poudre River corridor under the context of City Plan. The result was principles and policies enumerated in City Plan as PRC 1— 9. (See attached.) The basic thrust of these principles and policies was to divide the R-C, River Corridor zone into two new zone districts: River Downtown Redevelopment District (R-D-R) Community Commercial — Poudre River District (C-C-R) The permitted uses and development standards of these two zones are specifically designed to implement City Plan as it relates to the Poudre River. The essence of City Plan and these two new zone districts is consistent with previous analyses that call for integrating the corridor with downtown -like uses but in an ecologically sensitive manner that respects the riparian character and habitat. 172 December 20, 2005 D. Downtown Strategic Plan The Downtown Strategic Plan was adopted in February of1004 and remains consistent with earlier planning efforts with regard to encouraging a fractional yet sensitive relationship between downtown and the Poudre River corridor. E. Development and Planning Activity in the Vicinity • Cherry Street North • Cherry Street Station Penny Flats • Discovery Museum and Science Center Three of these projects are in the planning phase while one is under construction. This level of activity indicates that both the public and private sector are making economic decisions that value the area. While perpetuating legal non -conforming uses is allowed under the "grandfather" privilege, adding and expanding non -conforming uses clearly violates the intent of the Land Use Code that legal non -conforming uses should be phased out overtime. This is especially important given the evidence of significant public and private investment in the immediate vicinity. Staff Conclusion There is compelling evidence that the City has expended significant efforts to analyze the existing and future land use patterns along the Poudre River in order to convert the historic industrial core into a logical extension of downtown, while at the same time, blending new development with natural resource protection. The evolution ofzone districts, from I-G (General Industrial) to R-C (River Corridor) to C-C-R (Community Commercial—Poudre River) and R-D-R (River Downtown Redevelopment), reflects the values of integrating the downtown type land uses within the setting of the Poudre River. In addition, sensitive redevelopment opportunities are envisioned. Auto related uses are not a part of this vision and, therefore, are not included in the permitted use lists for either the R-D-R or C-C-R districts. In the short term, such uses are allowed expansions and enlargements in accordance with Section 1.5, Nonconforming Uses and Structures, ofthe Land Use Code. This acknowledges thepractical reality ofthe current business establishments and allows expansions up to 25%. In the long term, however, it is clear that non -conforming auto related uses do not implement the vision for the Poudre River corridor, particularly in the downtown area. Findings of Fact In evaluating the requestfor a TextAmendment to the C-C-R zone that would allow three new auto - related uses, subject to abutting North College Avenue and being at least 300 feet from the Poudre River, staffmade thefollowingfindings offact in the StaffReport to the Planning and Zoning Board: 173 December 20, 2005 A. In 1986, the Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan was adopted and identified policies that would enhance and facilitate both existing and future businesses, housing, recreational, educational, and cultural activities whilepreserving importantfish and wildlife habitats and open space along the river. The Plan called for the adoption of the Downtown River Corridor zone district. The subject parcels were included in the boundary of this policy plan. B. In 1987, the City adopted the R-C, River Corridor zone which defined the permitted uses, established performance standards, landscape standards, minimum area of lot and site plan review requirements. This zone was designed to implement the two aforementioned plans. C. In 1989, the City adopted the Downtown Plan which reinforced the concept of converting the I-G type uses to a land use pattern that complemented and supported the land typically associated with Downtown. D. In 1996, the City down -zoned the I-G, General Industrial zone district into the R-C, River Corridor zone. The subject parcels were included in this rezoning. E. In 1997, in order to implement City Plan, the parcels were placed into the C-C-R zone. F The plans and polices of these efforts indicate that auto -related uses are not apart of the long term vision of the Poudre River corridor as it relates to the downtown area. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION On November 17, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 4-1 to recommend denial of the Text Amendment, #37-05, to add the following uses to C-C-R zone district: Vehicle Minor Repair, Vehicle Major Repair and Vehicle Sales and Leasing, subject to abutting North College Avenue and being at least 300 feet from the Poudre River. " City Manager Atteber y introduced the agenda item. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner, presented background information regarding the agenda item. He stated this was a request for a text amendment to the Land Use Code. He stated the request was for vehicle minor repair, vehicle major repair, and vehicle sales and leasing. He explained a matrix that described how the two land uses would affect the two different sites. He stated for 425 North College Avenue all three uses existed on the property prior to adoption of the Land Use Code and were therefore legal nonconforming (grandfathered) uses. He stated of the three uses only the vehicle minor repair use existed at 429 North College Avenue as a nonconforming use. He presented a vicinity map of the site and spoke regarding projects under construction in the area. He presented site shots of 425 and 429 North College Avenue. He stated the Land Use Code provided that legal nonconforming uses were allowed to expand up to 25% subject to criteria and Planning and Zoning Board approval. He stated 425 North College Avenue was ` maxed out' as far as expansion. He 174 December 20, 2005 stated many plans and studies guided staff s review, including the Poudre River Trust Land Use Policy Plan adopted in 1986 and the Downtown Plan adopted in 1989. He stated those two documents presented a vision of how to deal with an urbanizing and expanding downtown as it got close to the Poudre River and how to deal with the old historic industrial core of the City that was zoned IG - General Industrial since the mid 1960s. He stated those two documents led to the downzoning of the IG area to implement the two plans in 1996. He stated there had been a lot of public acquisition in the area for natural areas, recreation and trails. He stated there had also been significant public investment in capital improvement projects, ranging from the $6 million project to do public sidewalks and street improvements from the Poudre River bridge to Jefferson Avenue, to minor projects such as the Coy Diversion Ditch and Boat Chute. He stated the Sunday Coloradoan reported that the federal government was going to reauthorize funding of the Poudre Heritage Area, in addition to State funding through CSU involvement in the old power plant conversion to an Energy Conversion Lab. He stated there was also a clean-up effort related to the old coal gasification project. He stated there were significant public sector capital projects proposed in the vicinity and some private investment as well. He presented a map showing the site and the aforementioned projects within a quarter -mile radius. He stated staff viewed this activity as implementation of the vision. He stated there was a strong and fundamental basis of plans and policies that indicated this area was a "very special area" that called for "sensitive downtown urbanization that respected the quality and the characteristics of the Poudre River." He stated that was the basis of the downzoning to the current zoning of C-C-R. He stated staff recommended denial of the request and that the Planning and Zoning Board voted 4-1 to recommend denial in November. Mayor Hutchinson stated citizens would each have five minutes to comment. Troy Jones, representing the applicant, stated there were four areas of the C-C-R zone and that there was an aerial of each in the Council's packet. He stated the applicant was asking for the ability to allow the useful life of these automotive building finish out and not force them to redevelop prematurely. He stated his client agreed that it would make sense to redevelop the property into a mixed use project at some point in time. He stated the time was not right for that redevelopment. He stated the business was "bursting at the seams" in the current location and that the applicant bought the building next door with the assumption that he could expand into that location. He stated this was a question of "timing" i.e., whether the property would be forced to redevelop sooner or allowed to redevelop when the market was such that the property owner would choose to sell. He presented visual information showing the portion of the C-C-R zone in which this site was located. He stated there were no other automotive uses in this or the other three portions of the C-C-R zone. He stated this would be the only place where an existing automotive business could expand to have sales and major repairs where only minor repair was currently allowed. He stated the applicant was requesting that all of the uses be allowed in both properties. He stated the intent was not that automotive uses would "be there forever." He stated those uses would be there until the time was right for redevelopment. Michael Reiger, owner of J&M Precision Automotive, stated he bought this property in 1981 "when downtown Fort Collins was boarded up." He stated the business generated taxes and employment and was growing. He stated he purchased the property next door to expand to have car sales and to 175 December 20, 2005 fix up the building. He stated he would like to continue the automotive service and repairs at 425 North College Avenue and have 429 North College Avenue as a sales office and car display lot. He stated this would provide more employment and his business could grow. He stated his plan would improve the property and that he would eventually retire or sell the place or redevelop the property. He stated this was an existing business that was trying to expand and do something positive on the north side of town. Councilmember Kastein noted that this text amendment would allow a change of use and that staff had presented information on the vision for this area. He stated staff had concluded that this use was not consistent with that vision. He asked how expanding this use from "minor to major" would be "harmful" to that vision, the Poudre River Corridor, or existing properties. Shepard stated it represented an opportunity to fulfill the vision, since the City would not know the timeframe for the nonconforming uses and text amendments to continue. He stated implementing visions took time and that the public and private sectors were "responding to this area in a very positive fashion" in ways that would fulfill the vision. Councilmember Kastein asked about environmental disadvantages to the River with the change in use from "minor to major" automotive repair facility. Shepard stated he was not qualified to speak to environmental impacts. He stated from an aesthetic perspective relating to the approach to downtown from the north and the relationship of downtown to the River, the staff found that the auto display lots and auto related uses would tend to be contrary to aesthetics. He stated the Land Use Code had specific recommendations on screening of auto display lots. He stated from a land use and visual aesthetic perspective, the proposal would be a "detriment." Councilmember Kastein stated staff's presentation indicated that this area was downzoned. He asked if that was with the participation of property owners. Shepard replied in the affirmative and stated this was a lengthy and controversial process to go from IG to RC zoning. Councilmember Kastein asked if Mr. Reiger owned 429 North College Avenue at the time of the downzoning. Shepard stated he believed that Mr. Reiger did not own that property at that time. Councilmember Kastein asked if Mr. Reiger would care to comment. Mr. Reiger stated he did not own that property at that time. Councilmember Weitkunat stated this was a piece of property that was currently in the C-C-R zone and a legal nonconforming use. She stated the C-C-R zone did not allow this type of business except as a nonconforming use. She stated it was her understanding that the property owner purchased 429 North College Avenue in order to expand the business and that the intended uses were not allowed so the applicant was asking for a LUC change. Shepard stated this was correct. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if changing the LUC would allow automobile repair shops in the C-C-R zone across the board and not just at this specific site. Shepard replied in the affirmative. He stated the request before the Council was to "qualify" the new uses so that they would be restricted to two characteristics that would apply only to these two properties i.e., that the uses must 176 December 20, 2005 be 300 feet from the Poudre River and abutting North College Avenue. He stated the practical effect of those qualifications would mean that the change would only apply to these two parcels. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if there was a recent zoning change for storage units with automobile related services and whether an additional use was created. Shepard stated Councilmember Weitkunat could be referring to adding outdoor storage on Riverside in the C-L zone. Councilmember Weitkunat stated that was the example she had in mind. Shepard stated in that case, unless there was some significant redevelopment in that zone, the most immediate impact would have been on one parcel. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the City would be creating a use for a particular property. She stated if that was the case she had a concern about doing that. She stated zoning to meet the conditions of individual parcels seemed to be "defeating the purpose" of the zoning. She asked if this would be "fairly selective" in limiting it this way. Shepard replied in the affirmative. Mayor Hutchinson stated this seemed to be a "sideways way" to do something for one parcel. He asked if there would be more "direct ways" to deal with the matter, such as a variance request. He asked why this was necessary. Shepard stated the Code was set up so that the zone district could not be amended through the permitted use list. He stated the permitted uses in every zone district could not be modified. He stated if they werel that would be the same as the situation that existed prior to the Land Use Code wherein uses per se were more flexible than they were under the current system. He stated there was no other way to handle the applicant's request under the current system. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to deny Ordinance No. 173, 2005 on First Reading. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the business in question was important to North College Avenue. She stated this was a changing area and that this particular zone was "especially sensitive to change." She stated the City needed to follow the plan with the zoning that was in place to be able to implement the desired changes. She stated the business would be allowed to continue as a legal nonconforming use for the life of the business. She stated she did not believe that the change to the LUC would be appropriate. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support the motion to deny the Ordinance. He stated the plans that were referenced in the materials took years of work to produce. He stated he could not support "pulling away" from the plans in this particular case. Councilmember Kastein stated he would support the motion. He stated zoning was created to protect zones from each other. He stated in this case the use may not be "harmful" to the River. He stated he wanted to see the vision for the Poudre River Corridor implemented to make it the "fabric of the downtown" and do some "reasonable development" while eliminating development that did not fit the vision. He stated this did not seem like an appropriate use next to the River. 177 December 20, 2005 The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION TO DENY THE ORDINANCE CARRIED. Resolution 2005-140 Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Appeals of the Administrative Hearing Officer's Denial of the 120 Cherry Street, Cherry Street Station Project Development Plan 09-05), Adopted Following is staffs memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On September 21, 2005, and September 30, 2005, Amended Notices of Appeal (a total of two) were filed regarding the September 8, 2005 decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer to deny the Cherry Street Station Project Development Plan. On November 29, 2005, City Council voted 4-3 to overturn the decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer. In order to complete the record regarding these appeals, the Council should adopt a Resolution making findings offact and finalizing its decision on the appeal. BACKGROUND TheAppellants'Notices ofAppeal were based on allegations that the Administrative Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter. At the November 29, 2005 meeting on this matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the applicants/appellants, and those both supportive of and opposed to the Appeals. In subsequent discussion at this hearing, Council determined that the Administrative Hearing Officer did improperly interpret and apply certain provisions of the Code and Charter. Therefore, Council voted 4-3 to overturn the decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer. " Mayor Hutchinson asked the City Attorney for advice on how this agenda item should be handled. City Attorney Roy stated the Resolution summarized the reasons for the Council decision on November 29. He stated this was not a rehearing of the appeal and was brought to the Council pursuant to the Code. He stated the question for the Council was determine if the Resolution accurately reflected what Council did and why. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt Resolution 2005-140. Councilmember Roy stated he would not support the motion because he did not believe that the Hearing Officer failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Land Use Code as stated in the Resolution. 178 December 20, 2005 Councilmember Ohlson asked about voting for the Resolution when he did not agree with the findings set out in the Resolution. City Attorney Roy stated such Resolutions are adopted unanimously because they did not reflect the Council vote at the time of the appeal. He stated he viewed the issue as whether or not the Resolution accurately reflected the grounds upon which the Council made its decision. He stated Councilmembers had the option to vote against the Resolution if they believed that a "yes" vote would be misconstrued. Councilmember Manvel asked if some sense the Council was approving the "minutes" from that proceeding. City Attorney Roy stated this was what a court would look to as a summary of the findings of fact and conclusions as to how this fit the criteria. He stated this was a summary of what the majority of Council decided to do and why. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson and Weitkunat. Nays: Councilmember Roy. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 174, 2005, Amending Section 2-596 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the City Manager. Adopted on First Reading Following is staffs memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council met in Executive Session on December 13, 2005 to conduct the performance appraisal of City Manager Darin Atteberry. This Ordinance establishes the salary of the City Manager. BACKGROUND City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to recognize and reward quality performance. In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Manager meet once a year to discuss last year's performance and set goals for the coming year. 179 December 20, 2005 In 2005, the total compensation paid to the City Manager included the following: SALARYAND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON-MONETARYBENEFITS Salary $ 149,280 Vacation (30 days per year) Life Insurance 522 Holidays (11 days per year) Medical Insurance 8,904 Dentallnsurance 540 Long Term Disability 1,478 ICMA (457) 4,478 ICMA (401) 14,928 Car Allowance 9, 000 Total Monetary Compensation $ 189,130 The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000 and further amended by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, provides that any change in compensation for the CityManager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the ensuing year." Mayor Hutchinson stated the Council met in Executive Session last week, as permitted by the City Code, to discuss the performance of the three direct employees who reported to the City Council: the City Manager, Municipal Judge and City Attorney. He stated the specifics that were discussed were held confidential. He stated the Council also discussed the proposed 2006 compensation and benefits for those employees. He stated the salary of each employee was set forth in the City Code and that any change in salary must be approved by Ordinance. He stated the salary Ordinances were presented to the Council on First Reading as part of the discussion agenda so that any citizens wishing to comment could do so and so that Councilmembers could discuss the proposed salaries and comment on the performance of their employees. He stated in setting the compensation for the three employees, Council considered the quality of the employee's performance, the nature of their duties and responsibilities, and the salary and benefits of others who held comparable positions in Front Range cities and counties. Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Ordinance No. 174, 2005, on First Reading setting a salary of $159,730 and a total compensation of $199,864 for the City Manager. Mayor Hutchinson stated the major factors in Council's decision were the innovative and outstanding performance and enthusiasm and drive of Darin Atteberry. He stated one of the primary examples was the Budgeting for Outcomes process, which was an "extraordinary achievement." He stated Council also looked at the peer group salaries. He stated Council also looked at the "value" to the City and the organization. He stated the consensus was that the City Manager's performance had been outstanding. December 20, 2005 Councilmember Roy stated he would support the motion. He stated it was important to recognize that the City Manager had been faced with an unusual set of circumstances and had handled those "exceedingly well." Councilmember Manvel stated one ofthe big considerations was the market for City Managers along the Front Range. He stated the City Manager had "done a bang up job" and that he would support the motion. Councilmember Ohlson stated the City Manager's "intelligence, experience, work ethic, insights, instincts, tone, style" were a valuable skill set and that he was doing an outstanding job. Councilmember Brown stated the Council appreciated the City Manager's skill set and that he appreciated everything the City Manager did for the City. Councilmember Kastein stated the City Manager had one-year of good, hard work behind him and that he would look forward to many more years of the same type of effort and production. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she was pleased with the City Manager's performance and expected that performance and "high energy" leadership to continue. Mayor Hutchinson stated there were many tough issues and that the City Manager provided "superb" leadership and perspective. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 175, 2005, Amending Section 2-606 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the Municipal Judge. Adopted on First Reading Following is staff s memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council met in Executive Session on December 13, 2005 to conduct the performance appraisal of Municipal Judge Kathleen M. Lane. This Ordinance establishes the 2006 salary ofthe Municipal Judge. 181 December 20, 2005 BACKGROUND City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to recognize and reward quality performance. In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the Municipal Judge meet once a year to discuss last year's performance and set goals for the coming year. In 2005, the total compensation paid to the Municipal Judge included the following: SALARYAND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON -MONETARY BENEFITS Salary $ 91,904 Vacation (30 days per year) Life Insurance 320 Holidays (11 days per year) Medical Insurance 8,904 Dentallnsurance 540 Long Term Disability 910 ICMA (457) 2,757 ICMA (401) 9,190 Total Monetary Compensation $ 114,525 The Judge's most recent salary increase took effect in January, 2002. The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000 and further amended by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, provides that any change in compensation for the City Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the ensuing year." Mayor Hutchinson introduced the agenda item. Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt Ordinance No. 175, 2005, on First Reading setting a salary of $99,256 and a total compensation of $121,723 for the Municipal Judge. Mayor Hutchinson stated Judge Lane had not had a pay raise for three years. He stated her "exceptional performance" and her "value" to the City and the organization warranted a pay increase. He stated comparable positions for other municipalities had been surveyed. He stated the Council commented on the importance of the Judge maintaining "judicial independence" in situations such as the Purple Martini hearing. 182 December 20, 2005 Councilmember Manvel commented that the Municipal Judge had considerable administrative duties in addition to serving as the judge. He stated she had run an efficient operation that had saved the City considerable money. He stated the proposed salary was appropriate when compared with similar positions on the Front Range. Councilmember Kastein complimented the Municipal Judge for her skill set and years of service. He stated she contributed to the City's success. He stated he had different views on the Purple Martini issue than some, but that the Municipal Judge's decision on that issue did not depend on a "bias." He stated he depended on the Judge to interpret the law correctly and consider the facts accurately. He stated the Judge was doing her job well. Mayor Hutchinson thanked Judge Lane for her outstanding performance. He stated this was a fundamentally important position and that the Judge would be asked to determine how fines would be assessed relating to the "three unrelated" Ordinance. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 176, 2005, Amending Section 2-581 of the City Code and Setting the Salary of the City Attorney, Adopted on First Reading Following is staff's memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council met in Executive Session on December 13, 2005 to conduct the performance appraisal of City Attorney Steve Roy. This Ordinance establishes the 2006 salary of the City Attorney. BACKGROUND City Council is committed to compensating employees in a manner which is fair, competitive and understandable. The goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees and to recognize and reward quality performance. In order to accomplish this goal the City Council and the City Attorney meet once a year to discuss last year's performance and set goals for the coming year. 183 December 20, 2005 In 2005, the total compensation paid to the City Attorney included the following: SALARYAND BENEFITS ANNUAL NON -MONETARY BENEFITS Salary $ 121,590 Vacation (35 days per year) Life Insurance 425 Holidays (11 days per year) Medical Insurance 8,904 Dental Insurance 540 Long Term Disability 1,204 ICMA (457) 3,648 ICMA (401) 12,159 Total Monetary Compensation $ 148,470 The City Attorneys most recent salary increase took effect in January, 2002. An addendum to the CityAttorney's employment agreement approved by the Council in December oflastyear states that, assuming satisfactoryperformance, the City Attorney's base salary will be increased to no less than $137, 000 as of the first pay period in January, 2006 The process established for evaluating the performance of the City Manager, City Attorney, and Municipal Judge, adopted by the Council via Resolution 2000-123 on October 17, 2000 and further amended by the adoption of Resolution 2001-018 on February 6, 2001, provides that any change in compensation for the City Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge will be adopted by the Council by ordinance in sufficient time for the change in compensation to take effect as of the first full pay period of the ensuing year." Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt Ordinance No. 176, 2005 on First Reading, setting a salary of $137,000 and a total compensation of $164,879 for the City Attorney. Mayor Hutchinson stated the major factors were exceptional performance, salaries for comparable positions, and the "world class" value to the Council, the City staff and the citizens. He noted that the previous Council entered into a contract addendum with the City Attorney last year at a time when the City Attorney was considering another employment opportunity, and that contract addendum specified the City Attorney's compensation increases for 2006-2007 based on his performance as an incentive for him to remain. He stated the question for this Council was whether the Council agreed with the terms of that contract addendum. Councilmember Roy stated he would support the motion. He stated the City Council benefitted greatly from Mr. Roy's experience and counsel. He stated his loyalty to the City organization was "without peer." He stated the City Attorney's counsel was "measured" and that he was careful in what he crafted. He stated the City Attorney was a "brilliant individual" whose counsel and hard work had benefitted the Council and the organization. '�' December 20, 2005 Councilmember Weitkunat stated commented on the extent of the work done in the City Attorney's office. She stated the City Attorney had not had a raise over the last three years and that he could make a lot more money in the private sector. She stated the City Attorney was a "jewel." Councilmember Brown stated the City Attorney provided "great guidance" and that the Council appreciated the City Attorney's hard work. Councilmember Kastein stated the City Attorney saved the City a lot ofmoney in avoiding litigation. He stated the cost of the office was much lower than comparable legal offices in other cities. He stated the City Attorney's pay increase would still not place him at the top of the pay scale compared with other cities. Councilmember Manvel thanked the City Attorney for the administrative work he did and for the work done by the City Attorney's office. Councilmember Ohlson stated his vote would reflect his feelings. Mayor Hutchinson stated he had always been "impressed" with the City Attorney's professionalism. He expressed appreciation for the City's devotion to the City and the City Council. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2005-141 Establishing an Ad -hoc Public Safety Planning and Funding Committee to Formulate Recommendations Regarding the Staffing of. and Fundin¢ for, the City's Public Safety Services, Adopted Following is staff s memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY One of the basic priorities in our community and a key outcome of the 2006-2007 Biennial City Budget is ensuring a safe community. Over the past few years, police staffing levels have been modestly increased in an effort to keep pace with service needs. In order to determine the specific, future staffing and resources needs related to Police Services, Council has asked staff to prepare a more detailed service plan and set of metrics that are pertinent and directly applicable to Fort Collins' community profile and public safety needs. To facilitate this work, this Resolution establishes a two -member Council committee (Public Safety Planning and Funding Committee) to work with the City Manager in preparing an assessment of the resource needs of Police Services and recommendations as to how best to maintain, as well as M December 20, 2005 increase, thefunding availablefor such services. The Committee is an ad -hoc committee ofthe City Council and will serve until the completion of this project." City Manager Atteberry stated this was an outcome of the budget process. He stated the City was unable to fund additional offers in 2006-2007. He stated Council, the staff and the Police Chief all agreed that it would be good to have a separate committee level conversation with the Council to look at long term Police staffing levels and funding strategies. He stated this would be a two -person Council committee which was intended to be ad hoc. He recommended that the Council support the Resolution. Councilmember Weitkunat asked about the staff members that would work with the Committee. City Manager Atteberry stated the staff would be himself, the Police Chief, and related staff people from the City Manager's Office or the Police Department. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the Committee would specifically look at Police funding and staffing. City Manager Atteberry replied in the affirmative and stated the Council could amend the scope of responsibilities if there was a desire to see other work by the Committee. Councilmember Weitkunat stated she would support appointing Councilmember Kastein to the Committee since this was his idea. Councilmember Kastein stated he would like to be a part of the Committee. He stated he viewed the role of the Committee to be a "strategic" one with relation to police funding. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would also be willing to serve on the Committee. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt Resolution 2005-141 inserting the names of Kurt Kastein and Kelly Ohlson. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2005-142 Making an Appointment to the Water Board, Adopted Following is staff s memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A vacancy currently exists on the Water Board due to the expiration of Jim Finley's term. Councilmembers Roy and Brown conducted interviews but did not agree on a recommendation for the Water Board. The Council interview team wishes to submit two names (Paul Czarnecki and Phil Phelan) for Council's consideration for that position. Applications are attached for the two applicants being considered. " December 20, 2005 City Clerk Krajicek stated the two Council interview partners did not agree on the appointment. She stated since the agenda was printed a second vacancy on the Water Board had occurred. She stated two individuals needed to be appointed. Councilmember Manvel stated he understood that there were five candidates for the Water Board. He asked if these were the top two names and whether the Council could appoint one of the other applicants. Councilmember Roy stated the new vacancy changed the situation. He stated the two individuals listed in the agenda item summary were the two top candidates. Councilmember Brown stated both interview team members agreed that these were the top two names. He suggested that the two individuals be appointed to the two vacancies. Councilmember Roy asked Council to support appointing Mr. Phelan for the term expiring 2009. City Attorney Roy stated the Resolution would be rewritten to reflect the appointment of two individuals to fill two vacancies. Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt Resolution 2005-142, inserting the names Phil Phelan for the term expiring December 31, 2009 and Paul Czarnecki for the term expiring December 31, 2007. Councilmember Manvel stated both candidates were well qualified. He stated the only objection that he and some Councilmembers had to Mr. Czarnecki was that he was an engineer at Anheuser-Busch and was involved in its water program. He stated Anheuser-Busch was a major water consumer and questioned how that would affect Mr. Czarnecki's service on the Water Board. He stated he would support the motion but would like some explanation of how that would work. Councilmember Weitkunat stated this would be an "excellent balance." She stated water users would have a perspective that would be different from others. She stated the City needed to be sensitive to the perspectives of industries, businesses and facilities that utilized large amounts of water. Councilmember Manvel asked if Mr. Czarnecki would have to withdraw from discussions on water rates that would affect Anheuser-Busch. Councilmember Weitkunat stated if the rate was specific to Anheuser-Busch there would be a conflict of interest, but if it was City-wide there would be no conflict of interest. City Attorney Roy stated the Charter defined both personal and financial interests. He stated if there was something specifically aimed at Anheuser-Busch, the appointee would declare a conflict of interest and not participate in the decision. He stated this would be decided on a case -by -case basis. He stated, generally speaking, there was an exception in the Code to both personal and financial interest with regard to the receipt of public services when such services were generally provided by the City on 187 December 20, 2005 the same terms and conditions to all similarly situated citizens. He stated, as a general rule, the fact that one was a recipient of water or sewer or other utility services did not preclude that person's participation in voting on or making recommendations to the Council about water and similar rates. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support the motion. He stated he would like the Water Board, Water Utility staff and City Attorney's Office to be sensitive to these kinds of issues. He stated in his view, there had been "incredible" conflicts of interest at times on the Water Board. He expressed a concern that Mr. Czarnecki's application stated "we" (Anheuser-Busch) wanted to be involved. He expressed a concern that there could be an "innate pressure" on a board or commission member from an employer in some cases. City Attorney Roy stated the Council Ethics Review Board also participated in these kinds of issues. He stated his office would continue to advise individuals appointed to boards and commissions. He stated any Councilmember, board or commission member, or any other member of the board or commission could present a particular question to the Ethics Review Board for an advisory opinion. Councilmember Kastein asked why there would be any issue of conflict of interest for a board member who had a purely advisory role. City Attorney Roy stated the conflict of interest provisions applied to decision -makers and to those whose duties included making recommendations to the decision -makers. He stated the objective was to ensure that those who had a role in the process were objective. Councilmember Kastein asked if the recommendation of a board member was different than the recommendation of a citizen speaking to the Council when neither was paid for his or her efforts. City Attorney Roy replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Roy asked if the Water Board made quasi-judicial rulings. City Attorney Roy replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Roy stated this underscored the issue. He stated this discussion could occur at another time. Greg Snyder, 619 Bear Creek Drive, commented on "City politics" and stated a person in the private sector who had specific expertise on an issue was almost always barred from serving in an advisory capacity. He stated someone with such expertise should be viewed as an "asset" rather than a "potential liability." He stated boards should be staffed by knowledgeable, rather than "politically correct", people. Councilmember Roy listed the credentials of people already serving on the Water Board. He stated this board was `replete" with individuals who were "talented" in this particular field. Councilmember Ohlson stated there could be a pressure on an employee if a recommendation by a board member could affect the employer. He stated it was important to avoid conflicts of interest and that the City's rules had been somewhat "loose" in some cases in the past. December 20, 2005 Mayor Hutchinson stated the motion on the floor showed that the Council was taking a "balanced" approach to appointments. Councilmember Kastein stated there was protection from specific Code provisions that addressed this type of situation. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Resolution 2005-143 Assigning a Councilmember as Liaison to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Adopted Following is staff s memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ordinance No. 169, 2005, adopted on Second Reading this same date, created a new Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. City Council appoints a Council liaison to each board and commission. This Resolution appoints a Council liaison, to be determined by the Council, to the newly created Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. " Mayor Hutchinson stated a name needed to be inserted. Councilmember Manvel stated he would be happy to serve. Councilmember Weitkunat noted that Mayor Hutchinson and Councilmember Manvel conducted the interviews and that Councilmember Manvel was liaison to a number of boards. She suggested appointing the Mayor as the liaison to this new board. Mayor Hutchinson stated he would be willing to serve. Councilmember Kastein stated this liaison would have the same role as liaisons for other boards. He stated he would support either Councilmember Manvel or Mayor Hutchinson as the liaison to this board. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson, to adopt Resolution 2005-143, inserting the name Doug Hutchinson. Mayor Hutchinson stated he believed that it was best to let the Board work without undue influence and that he would bring some "philosophical guidance" to the Board. :' December 20, 2005 The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Other Business Mayor Hutchinson proposed a one -day summit. He stated this would be an opportunity to interact with the citizenry across the board. He suggested that each Councilmember invite five participants from the community so that there would be 35 leaders participating in the facilitated summit to do some "high level brainstorming." He stated the desired outcome was validation or modification of the Council policy agenda and approach. He proposed holding the summit on January 21, 2006. He asked if there was Council support for going ahead with the summit as proposed. Councilmember Brown supported the idea. He asked if it would be possible to have the summit televised. Mayor Hutchinson stated televising the summit could be considered. He stated this could be a six - hour summit. Councilmember Roy supported the idea of a summit with a broad range of perspectives. Councilmember Kastein supported the idea. He stated it would be important to tell the summit participants what the Council's approach was by way of a ten -page Executive Summary of the work that had been done and the proposed economic plans. He stated another outcome for the group would be to prioritize the next steps. Councilmember Weitkunat asked if the Mayor was looking for Council buy -in on the concept, followed by work on the details. Mayor Hutchinson stated he wanted to make sure that the most effective economic "agenda" was being set for the coming year. He stated he had talked with the proposed facilitator and that he would like to prepare a package for the Council to consider on how the summit might work. City Manager Atteberry stated it would be important to notify the participants soon so that they could schedule this time on their calendars as quickly as possible. Councilmember Ohlson stated he had believed that the summit would look at an overall community work plan and that the focus now seemed to be on the economic "subset." Mayor Hutchinson stated this would be an "across the board" summit on the Council policy agenda. He stated economics was one part of that. Councilmember Kastein stated he thought the goal was the economic plan. He stated he had done a lot of "legwork" on talking with people about the policy agenda. 190 December 20, 2005 Mayor Hutchinson stated he did not believe that the summit would be limited to the economy, although that was one of the larger issues. Councilmember Roy stated he had a scheduling problem for January 21. Councilmember Brown stated he would like to see some sort of synopsis for Councilmembers to send to the invited participants. Councilmember Manvel stated it would be a challenge to come up with a "balanced" group. Mayor Hutchinson stated he was open to proposals. Councilmember Weitkunat stated there would be a benefit to suggesting categories of industries from which people could be invited. Councilmember Ohlson stated he wanted to ensure that this was done well and that there was a need to focus the summit on City government rather than the community. Mayor Hutchinson stated the summit would focus on the Council's agenda for the coming year. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support the summit. He noted that the Council had adopted a policy agenda and that there were no citizen comments. He stated he would like a clearer understanding of the desired outcomes of the summit. Mayor Hutchinson stated this would be a "by invitation" opportunity for that missing public input. Councilmember Kastein stated he would be more "excited" about an economic summit but that he would support the summit as proposed. He stated he would like to have a time when all Councilmembers could participate. Councilmember Roy spoke about his scheduling conflict for January 21. Councilmember Kastein asked if there was support for focusing on the economic policy agenda. Councilmember Ohlson stated there was more to local government than economic development. Mayor Hutchinson stated the vision was a healthy economy that reflected the values of this unique community. Councilmember Manvel stated everything about the community was interrelated and that business health was an important element. He favored a broader discussion. Councilmember Kastein stated he would like a discussion on what makes a healthy economy. He stated he did not want to open the discussion on the whole work plan for the next year and wanted a discussion on the economic work plan. 191 December 20, 2005 Councilmember Weitkunat asked what would be accomplished with the summit. Mayor Hutchinson stated the desired outcome was citizen input that the Council could consider as it looked at the agenda for the coming year. He stated the purpose was not to reinvent the agenda. Councilmember Weitkunat stated the summit participants could focus on the economy or could focus on something else. Mayor Hutchinson stated he believed that the summit would confirm the proposed direction. He stated he would work with staff to further define the proposed summit for Council approval. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. May ATTEST: City Clerk 192