HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-11/21/2006-RegularNovember 21, 2006
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, November 21,
2006, 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: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy.
Citizen Participation
Mayor Hutchinson accepted the presentation of funds for the Inspiration Playground from ACT and
the Colorado Eagles.
Mayor Hutchinson accepted a special presentation of a model of Streetcar #21 to the City from the
Fort Collins Municipal Railway Society.
Agenda Review
City Manager Atteberry announced Item #22, Items Relating to the Northwest Subarea Plan was
rescheduled to December 5, 2006.
Councilmember Kastein requested Item #18 Resolution 2006-119 Adopting the City's 2007
Legislative Policy Agenda, be pulled.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No 178 2006 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund to Develop the I-25 and State Highway 392 Interchange Improvement Plan
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 7, 2006, appropriates
a grant from the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization ("MPO") in the
amount of $25,420. This grant is to develop the I-25/SH 392 Interchange Improvement
Plan.
7. Second Reading of Ordinance No 179 2006 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Recreation Fund to be Used for the Youth Pottery Program
The City Recreation Division was recently awarded a matching grant from the Colorado
November 21. 2006
Council on the Arts in the amount of $7,030. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First
Reading on November 7, 2006, appropriates $7,030 to support the Youth Pottery Program
in 2006/2007 and authorizes the transfer of appropriations totaling $3,515 from the
Recreation Fund 2006 operating budget to grant project budget, representing the required
2006 matching dollars. Grant matching funds for 2007 ($3,515) are included in the
Recreation Fund 2007 budget.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 181, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Program and
Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services
Operating Budget to the Grant Project.
A grant in the amount of $30,635 has been received from the Colorado Division of Criminal
Justice (DCJ) for salaries associated with the continued operation of the Restorative Justice
Program. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 7, 2006,
appropriates the grant money.
9. Postponement of Second Reading of Ordinance No. 182, 2006, Authorizing and Approving
the Issuance and Sale of Not to Exceed $20,000,000 Pollution Control Refunding Revenue
Bonds_ (Anheuser-Busch Project) Series 2006 of the City of Fort Collins. Colorado. to
Refund Certain Bonds of the City of Fort Collins. Colorado. Issued to Refinance Certain
Water Pollution Control Facilities, Sewage Facilities and Solid Waste Disposal Facilities:
the Execution and Delivery of an Indenture of Trust to Secure Said Bonds: the Execution and
Delivery of a Loan Agreement Between Anheuser-Busch Companies, hic. and the City of
Fort Collins. Colorado Providing for the Repayment of the Loan of the Proceeds of Said
Bonds: the Execution and Delivery of a Tax Regulatory Agreement, Bond Purchase
Agreement, Official Statement and Said Bonds in Connection Therewith: and Providing for
Certain Other Matters in Connection with the Delivery of the Bonds to December 5. 2006.
In 1984, the City issued $35,000,000 of pollution control revenue bonds for the Anheuser-
Busch Companies, Inc. (the "Company"). In 1986, the bonds were reissued in the amount
of $20,000,000. The first call date for the 1986 bonds was September 4, 1996. The bonds
were used to finance the costs of acquiring, constructing, installing and equipping pollution
control facilities, sewage facilities, and solid waste disposal facilities to be owned by the
Company or one of its subsidiary companies. Because of the change in interest rates, the
Company would like to refinance the outstanding bonds to attain debt service savings. The
1986 bonds carry an interest rate of 7.375%. The refinanced rate of interest is expected to
be around 6.5%. The proposed refinancing will extend the maturity of the bonds from 2014
to 2036. Ordinance No. 182, 2006, authorizing and approving the issuance and sale of the
bonds, was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 7, 2006. Bond counsel for
Anheuser-Busch has requested this postponement in order to have additional time to finalize
the documents associated with this refinancing and to schedule closing dates.
November 21, 2006
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 186, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund - Inspiration Playground Capital Project to Be Used for Design and
Construction of a Fully Accessible Playground for All Children at Spring Canvon
Community Park.
This totally accessible playground will ensure that children of all abilities will be able to play
side -by -side. No child will be left out at this playground. The playground will have a
rubberized surface for accessibility, enhanced play equipment that allows children to play
together throughout the playground with unique sensory and audio features. The water
splash park will be barrier -free for the enjoyment of all children.
The community fund raising effort includes $250,000 in matching money from the Colorado
Eagles, a $200,000 Great Outdoors Colorado grant, and numerous donations from citizens,
businesses and community organizations.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 187, 2006, Designatinp.133-137 South College Avenue (the
North Half of the Colorado Building) as a Local Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the
City Code.
The owner of the property, Ida Siegel, through her son Ed Siegel, as attorney -in -fact, is
initiating this request for Local Landmark designation for 133-137 South College Avenue,
the north half of the Colorado Building. The building has individual significance to Fort
Collins under Landmark Preservation Standards (1), (2), and (3).
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 188, 2006, Authorizing the Acceptance of a Donation of
.901 Acres of Real Property from Calvin C. and Lois Johnson and Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Project Fund — Timberline Road Widening Project
305-23270.
The Timberline Road Widening Project required the fee simple acquisition of.464 acres and
various easements on a 1.365 acre property located just south of Spring Creek on the
westerly side of Timberline Road, which was owned by Calvin and Lois Johnson. These
interests were to be used for the interim construction of the Timberline Road improvements.
City staff successfully negotiated and acquired the necessary interests for the project and an
integral part of the agreement was that the Johnsons would donate the remainder of their
property that will be needed in approximately ten years when the City of Fort Collins
constructs the ultimate improvements to Timberline Road.
13. Resolution 2006-114 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings
for the Plank PLD & PD Annexation.
This is a 100% voluntary annexation. The applicant, Stanley K. Everitt, on behalf of the
property owners, Leonard and Barbara Plank, has submitted a written petition requesting
annexation of 17.35 acres located at the southeast corner of Kechter Road and Ziegler Road.
The property is developed as a single-family residence with outbuildings and is in the FA-1
November 21, 2006
Farming District in Latimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is LMN - Low
Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The area to be annexed is the entirety of an enclaved
property that has been surrounded by the City of Fort Collins for more than three (3) years.
The surrounding properties are currently zoned LMN - Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood in the City to the north, south, east, and west.
14. Resolution 2006-115 Finding Substantial Compliance and Initiating Annexation Proceedings
for the Liberty Farms Annexation.
The applicant/consultant, Vignette Studios (c/o Don Tiller), on behalf ofthe property owners,
Kevin W. Frazier and Michael P. O'Donnell, has submitted a written petition requesting
annexation of 22.32 acres located on the east side of North Timberline Road at the Larimer
& Weld Canal, approximately 1/4 to 1/3 mile north of East Vine Drive. The property
contains two (2) existing single-family residences and agricultural land. It is in the FAl -
Farming District in Latimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is LMN - Low
Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The surrounding properties are currently zoned LMN -
Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood and MMN - Medium Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood in the City to the north, LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood in the
City to the west, FA 1 - Farming in Latimer County to the east, and FA 1 - Farming in Larimer
County to the south.
15. Resolution 2006-116 Authorizin the he City to Enter into Change Orders With Feslburg Holt
& Ullevig to Amend an Existing Aeseement to Advance the City's Funding Request For the
Mason Transportation Corridor Project to the Federal Transit Administration.
This Resolution will authorize the Purchasing Agent to amend the existing agreement, by
change order, with the consulting firm of Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, to include additional
work tasks necessary to complete the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental
Assessment of the Mason Transportation Corridor Project. This work is necessary to
advance the City's funding request for the Mason Transportation Corridor project to the
Federal Transit Administration. Change order #3 will be executed in November 2006 and
change order #4 will be executed in March 2007.
16. Resolution 2006-117 Agreeing to Act as a Reviewing Entity for Properties Located Within
the Downtown Development Authority Boundaries for the State Income Tax Credit Program
for Oualifving Rehabilitation Projects.
This Resolution states the City of Fort Collins chooses to be a reviewing entity for the
Colorado Historic Preservation Income Tax Credit within the Downtown Development
Authority boundaries during the next calendar year.
0
November 21, 2006
17. Resolution 2006-118 Establishing the Fort Collins Retdonal Library District and Appointing
Two Members of City Council to Serve on a Committee to Select Candidates for the Board
of Trustees of the District.
The citizen initiative to form and fund the Fort Collins Regional Library District was
approved by the voters on November 7. Pursuant to the Colorado Library Law, the City and
County must establish the District forthwith and provide for its financial support no later than
January 1, 2007. The Colorado Library Law also requires the City Council to appoint two
of its members to a committee that will select the initial board of trustees (the Selection
Committee). The County Commissioners must appoint two Commissioners to the
Committee. Trustees selected by the Committee must be ratified by a two-thirds majority
of the Council and a two-thirds majority of the Commissioners. The Council and
Commissioners must act on the Committee's recommendation within 60 days or the
recommended trustees are automatically ratified.
The Selection Committee, with approval of the Council and Commissioners, must decide if
there will be five, six or seven trustees. The initial appointments for the trustees (set by state
law) must be for terns of one, two, three, four, and five years respectively. If there are six
trustees, two will have five year terms. If there are seven trustees, two will have four year
terms and two will have five year terms. Thereafter, the length and number of terms is
determined by the District by-laws. Trustees may only be removed by a majority vote of the
Council and the Commissioners upon a showing of good cause.
Once the District Board of Trustees is established, state law requires an intergovernmental
agreement (IGA) between the City, the County and the trustees must be effected within 90
days. The IGA must determine the rights, obligations, and responsibilities, financial and
otherwise, of the parties to the agreement.
This Resolution appoints Councilmembers Ben Manvel and Karen Weitkunat to the
Committee to Select Candidates for the Board of Trustees of the Fort Collins Regional
Library District.
18. Resolution 2006-119 Adoptin the he Citv's 2007 Legislative Policy Agenda.
Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) develops a legislative agenda to assist
in the analysis of pending legislation. The proposed 2007 Legislative Policy Agenda has
been updated from the 2006 document and was reviewed and approved by the Legislative
Review Committee. This document will be used as a guide for the upcoming 2006 General
Assembly and the first session of the 110th Congress. The purpose of the Legislative Policy
Agenda is to articulate the City's position on common legislative topics. It will be applied
by Council members and staff to determine positions on pending legislation and as a general
reference for state legislators and our congressional delegation.
***END CONSENT***
November 21, 2006
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 178, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund to Develop the I-25 and State Highway 392 Interchange Improvement Plan.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 179, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Recreation Fund to be Used for the Youth Pottery Program.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 181, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Grant Revenue
and Prior Year Reserves in the General Fund for the Restorative Justice Program and
Authorizing the Transfer of Matching Funds Previously Appropriated in the Police Services
Operating Budget to the Grant Project.
23. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 180, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Wastewater Fund and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Within the Wastewater
Fund to be Used for Odor Control Measures at the Drake Water Reclamation Facility.
24. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 183, 2006, Amending the City Code to Increase the
Capital Improvement Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and Neighborhood Parkland Fee
to Reflect Inflation in Associated Costs of Services.
25. Items Relating to the Adoption of a Transportation Maintenance Fee and a Community Park
Maintenance Fee.
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 184, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City
Code to Establish a Transportation Maintenance Fee. (Option B-1 from First
Reading)
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No 185, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City Code
to Establish a Community Park Maintenance Fee. (Options B-1 and B-2)
26. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 177, 2006, Being The Annual Appropriation Ordinance
Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2007; Amending the Budget for
the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2007, and Ending December 31, 2007; and Fixing the
Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2007.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Krajicek.
10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 186, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
Capital Projects Fund - Inspiration Playground Capital Project to Be Used for Design and
Construction of a Fully Accessible Playground for All Children at Spring Canyon
Community Park.
11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 187, 2006, Designating 133-137 South College Avenue (the
North Half of the Colorado Building) as a Local Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the
City Code.
rel
November 21. 2006
12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 188, 2006, Authorizing the Acceptance of a Donation of
.901 Acres of Real Property from Calvin C. and Lois Johnson and Appropriating
Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital Project Fund — Timberline Road Widening Project
305-23270.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt and
approve all items not withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown,
Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consent Calendar Follow-up
Councilmember Brown requested information whether there was any increased penalty for
destruction of historical markings in downtown. City Manager Attebeny responded he did not
believe there were any extra penalties for destroying downtown historical landmarks but he would
follow up with Police Services and the City Attorney to see if it was possible to increase those
penalties. There is a Graffiti Hotline to report graffiti the public was encouraged to use.
Councilmember Weitkunat spoke regarding Item #17Establishing the Fort Collins Regional Library
District and Appointing Two Members of City Council to Serve on a Committee to Select Candidates
for the Board of Trustees of the District, noting the process is just beginning and she and
Councilmember Manvel had been asked to serve on the committee, as well as two county
commissioners. Citizens were encouraged to follow the process closely.
Councilmember Kastein noted the appointees for the Library District Trustees would be approved
by Council and requested the application process be as open as possible. He spoke regarding Item
#10 First Reading of Ordinance No. 186, 2006, Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Capital
Projects Fund - Inspiration Playground Capital Project to be Used for Design and Construction of
a Fully Accessible Playground forA11 Children at Spring Canyon Community Park to commend all
who gave private contributions of $720,000, including $250,000 from the Eagles Foundation,
$200,000 from Great Outdoors Colorado, and $270,000 from All Children Together (ACT) fund
raising efforts. Development impact fees in the amount of $475,000 were collected, as well, so the
playground was a collaborative effort ofbusiness, developers and individual citizens. He also spoke
regarding Item #15 Resolution 2006-116 Authorizing the City to Enter into Change Orders with
Feslburg Holt & Ullevig to Amend an Existing Agreement to Advance the City's Funding Request
for the Mason Transportation Corridor Project to the Federal TransitAdministration to request that
information on future capital projects updates to include schedules and costs and whether the project
is meeting projections or is coming in either under or over projections so Council could know
whether there was overspending or underspending or exactly on target. He requested the last report
on the capital update of the Mason Transportation Corridor.
7
November 21, 2006
Staff Reports
City Manager Atteberry stated Fleet Services Division recently completed an extensive testing
process that showed the City's fleet is among one of the most cost-effective fleets in North America.
Fleet Services went through a rigorous fleet certification program and qualified as an industry -
competitive fleet management operation. The Vehicle Replacement Program and Alternative Fuel
Vehicle Program, Fleet Utilization Program, which uses a committee to oversee the fleet size, and
upgraded Fleet Management software technology were some successful programs recognized by the
certification from Fleet Counselor Services, hic. (FCS). Ken Maranon was publicly acknowledged
for his leadership over many years in Operation Services.
Councilmember Reports
Mayor Hutchinson reported on the Mayor's histitute for Community Design held in Austin, Texas.
He also reported he has been invited to be a Director on the Colorado Climate Project, a
public/private project, which is a year -long, bipartisan effort to look at actions that should be taken
regarding climate change. Three Fort Collins citizens, Tony Frank of CSU, Brian Moeck, General
Manager, Platte River Power Authority, and Judy Dorsey, executive secretary of the Clean Energy
Cluster and CEO, Brindle Company, were chosen as members of the Blue Ribbon Panel, the main
leadership group of the Colorado Climate Project.
Mayor Hutchinson reported on the first annual Urban Design Awards that recognized architectural
design work done in Fort Collins, including the "green" building, the Lofts, and the work done on
alleyways such as Trimble Court.
Ordinance No. 180, 2006,
Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Wastewater Fund
and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriations Within the
Wastewater Fund to be Used for Odor Control Measures
at the Drake Water Reclamation Facility. Adopted on Second Reading
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Additional project dollars ($1,200, 000) are needed to fund odor control due to significant increased
costs in materials. The Wastewater Fund recently transferred land valued at $2,000,000 to the
General Fund in exchange for property used in the operations of the various utilities. $800, 000 of
the property transferred to the Wastewater Utility is used in the operations ofthe Water Utility. The
Water Utility willpay the Wastewater Utility $800,000fortheproperty. The Wastewater Utility will
also transfer $400,000 from budgeted contingency funds to capital project for odor control.
Ordinance No. 180, 2006, unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 7, 2006,
appropriates these funds. "
R
November 21. 2006
Brain Janonis, Water Resources and Treatment Services Manager, stated this odor control project
results from long term plans to control odors at the edge of the 1000-foot buffer that has been
adopted around the wastewater treatment plant. Cost increases have occurred, requiring this
appropriation.
Councilmember Ohlson stated information provided by staff indicated $12.2 million was needed for
odor control and asked where funding for these projects comes from and questioned why such a huge
increase in funds was necessary. Janonis stated the funding comes primarily through wastewater
rates to fund the costs of odor control.
Councilmember Ohlson asked what is the impact of this on each household's monthly water bill.
Mike Smith, Utilities General Manager, stated it was probably 3% to 4% of the wastewater cost.
Councilmember Ohlson asked for reasons why this was such an expensive project. Janonis stated
staff had studied the odors and picked the most cost-effective technology to treat odors which keeps
O&M costs from increasing. Greater odor control is being pursued since development has gotten
closer to the plant and there are more odor complaints.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if wastewater rates will be increasing at a greater rate. Smith
answered in the negative and stated funding was included in long-term projections for capital
projects.
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt
Ordinance No. 180, 2006 on Second Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein,
Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance No. 183, 2006,
Amending the City Code to Increase the Capital Improvement
Expansion Fee, Street Oversizing Fee and Neighborhood
Parkland Fee to Reflect Inflation in Associated
Costs of Services, Adopted on Second ReadinP
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on November 7, 2006, increases
the fee schedules for the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees and Neighborhood Parkland Fee by
the estimated 2006 changes in the Denver -Boulder -Greeley Consumer Price Index ('CPI').
November 21, 2006
Costs in the Capital Improvement Expansion Fees ("CIEF') Study and the fee schedule for the
Neighborhood Parkland Fees were calculated using costs from 1995. The fees were last adjusted
in 2005. This Ordinance increases the CIEF and the Neighborhood Parkland Fees by the estimated
2006 increase in the CPI of 3.75%, and the Street Oversizing fees by 4.2391o, which reflects the
projected increase reported in the Engineering News Record. "
City Manager Atteberry stated staff was available to answer any questions.
Councilmember Brown asked if the fees would be reduced since the regional Library District had
passed. Marty Heffernan, Executive Director of CLRS, stated the impact fees could still be
collected, but how they will be utilized once the District is providing library services has yet to be
determined. Council will need to provide direction to staff. Fees would not be reduced as the
inflationary increase included in the ordinance provides sufficient funding to offset the impacts of
new residents to the City. The money is used to buy books and materials based on existing levels
of service and to provide new library space. This money will be used to build the new southeast
branch library that the District will operate.
City Attorney Roy noted the City Code states the fee will be increased annually to reflect inflation
and the ordinance implements what the Code says. Council will retain the ability to impose this kind
of fee, notwithstanding the existence of the Library District, as long as the City has an IGA that puts
the fees to work for the benefit of the residents of the city. The choice of continuing the fee will be
up to Council.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked if a discussion on amending the City Code regarding having a
Capital Expansion Fee that builds money for the library could be held at a different time. City
Attorney Roy answered in the affirmative. New development will continue to have an impact on all
capital facilities and, depending on the arrangement worked out with the Library District, Council
may wish to continue the fee in recognition of the impact of new development on libraries and,
through the IGA with the Library District, work out the way in which those fees are expended.
City Manager Atteberry stated even if this Ordinance did not pass, the impact fees would continue
to be collected at the previous rate and the rates would not increase.
Councilmember Kastein asked if this Ordinance did not pass, then would the City be in violation of
the City Code. City Manager Atteberry answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Kastein asked if the Library District has the ability to collect impact fees. City
Attorney Roy stated the question could be asked of the Library District's attorney but he did not
believe there was statutory authority for a library district to do so.
Councilmember Kastein stated the parkland fee was used to buy parks for which no operations and
maintenance funding is available. Marty Heffernan, Executive Director of CLRS, stated the issue
would be addressed in the Parks and Recreation Policy Plan Update that is underway. A consultant
has been hired to help with the public outreach process and a process for developing alternatives and
options and information. It will be a few months before the Update is completed.
10
November 21, 2006
City Attorney Roy stated the action tonight was not discretionary unless the Code was amended.
Section 7.5-18 of the Code states the impact fees will be increased annually according to the Denver
Boulder Consumer Price Index so this ordinance implements the increase by changing the amounts
that appear in the Code. If Council wished to change the Code so that the increase became
discretionary, a different ordinance would be necessary to amend the Code.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adopt Ordinance No.
183, 2006 on Second Reading.
Councilmember Kastein stated that, while he raised the question of the City buying parkland and not
being able to operate and maintain the parks, he was supportive of parks in the City but the
discussion was necessary to address the problem.
Councilmember Manvel stated the Library Impact Fee currently in place will enable the Library
District to build a Southeast Branch Library. These impact fees enable the City to save up money
to build needed facilities and the increase for inflation is necessary to prevent huge increases in fees.
This is an example of good governance.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein,
Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Adoption of a
Transportation Maintenance Fee and a
Community Park Maintenance Fee,
Ordinance No. 184, 2006, Defeated on Second Reading
Ordinance No. 185, 2006, Defeated on Second Reading
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"FINANCIAL IMPACT
These Ordinances propose a Transportation Maintenance Fee (TMF) and a Community park
Maintenance Fee (CPMF). The total net revenue from the new special services fees will equal
approximately $3.15 million per year. The IMF revenue will be allocated to the Pavement
Management Program and the CPMF revenue will be allocated to the maintenance of City Parks.
Transportation
Maintenance Fee
Park
Maintenance Fee
Total
New Revenue
$1, 736, 568
$1, 686, 722
$3, 423, 290
Exemptions
$<272,835>
n/a
$<272,835>
Net Revenue
$1 463 733
$1 686 722
$3150 455
11
November 21, 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 184, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City Code to
Establish a Transportation Maintenance Fee. (Option B-1 from First Reading)
B. Second Reading of Ordinance No 185, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City Code to
Establish a Community Park Maintenance Fee. (Options B-1 and B-2)
On November 7, 2006, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 184, 2006 on First Reading by a vote
of 5-2 (Nays: Ohlson, Roy). Ordinance No. 185, 2006 was adopted on First Reading by a vote of
6-1 (Nays: Roy). The Transportation Maintenance Fee (TMF) would be applied to all properties,
including residential and non-residential properties, with $1.06/month applied to residential
properties. The Community Park Maintenance Fee (CPMF) would be applied to each residence in
the City in the amount of $2.67 per month. Fees will be added to utility bills beginning in January
2007.
The monthly TMFfee will be applied according to the following schedule:
Transportation
Maintenance Fees
Institutional
$
16.44
Per Acre
Industrial
$
13.09
Per Acre
High Traffic Retail
$125.11
Per Acre
Retail
$
51.65
Per Acre
Commercial
$
16.44
Per Acre
Residential
$
1.06
Per Dwellinz Unit
Total new fees (TMF and CPMF) to residences will be $3.72 per month.
The new fees will add $3.15 million in new revenue to the City's resources in 2007 and balance the
2007 Budget.
BACKGROUND
On First Reading on November 7, 2006, City Council approved the establishment of a
Transportation Maintenance Fee and a Community Park Maintenance Fee. If approved on Second
Reading, the fees will be effective on utility bills issued after January 1, 2007.
Council selected an option to create the two fees with approximately equal revenues. Council also
voted to implement the TMF with exemptions for governments, public and private schools (K-12)
and places of worship. The proposed TMF rates will be adjusted to increase the net revenue to
accommodate all exemptions.
12
November 21, 2006
Transportation Maintenance Fee
The establishment ofa TMF would provide supplemental funding to maintain city streets, bike lanes,
medians (excluding landscaping), and City -maintained sidewalks. Maintenance includes such work
as keeping pavement surfaces in good condition, performing seal coats as needed, repairing
potholes and cracks, repaving and other work to keep the City's transportation system safe.
The fee would be applied to all non-exempt properties within the city limits, including residential
properties and non-residential properties. The fee would be a flat dollar amount for each residential
dwelling unit, based on trip generation data for residential uses. A flat fee of $1.06per dwelling unit
will be added to monthly utility bills. Non-residential properties will be assessed the fee based on
various categories of use and the trip generation characteristics of those categories.
Institutional
Industrial
High Traffic Retail
Retail
Commercial
Fees
$ 16.44
Per Acre
$ 13.09
Per Acre
$125.11
Per Acre
$ 51.65
Per Acre
$ 16.44
Per Acre
The net savings to the General Fund from enacting the TMF would be $1,463,733, after utility
billing costs, exemptions, rebates and bad debts. The fee of $1.06 per month or $12.72 per year per
residential dwelling unit will appear on City utility bills produced after January 1, 2007.
Nonresidential fees would be calculated based on a formula which includes trip generation data by
land use type and acreage.
The fee will be adjusted annually for inflation based on the Denver —Boulder -Greeley Consumer
Price Index and as directed by City Council. The fee will reduce the need for General Fund support
of the street system. This funding would be in addition to the voter approved Building on Basics
Street Maintenance Sales and Use Tax and revenue from state gas taxes and street cutfees. The total
cost of the street maintenance program in 2007 is projected to be over $9 million.
Community Park Maintenance Fee
The Council directed staff to provide two options for Second Reading of the Park Maintenance Fee
Ordinance. The implementation of the CPMF as originally drafted (Option B-1) would support
maintenance of the City's community park system. The implementation of Option B-2 would fund
maintenance of neighborhood parks as well as community parks. The fee will be imposed on all
residential dwelling units as defined in the attached ordinance. A flat fee of $2.67 per dwelling unit
will be added to monthly utility bills beginning in 2007.
The fee will be used in conjunction with General Fund resources to fund all aspects of maintaining
parks. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to maintenance ofall landscaped areas, facilities and
13
November 21, 2006
infrastructure, administration, and minorcapital improvements as needed to keep theparkfacilities
in safe and usable condition for the general public.
The net savings to the General Fund from enacting the CPMF would be $1,686,722 after utility
billing costs, rebates and bad debts. The fee of $2.67 per month or $32.04 per year will appear on
City utility bills produced after January 1, 2007.
The fee will be adjusted annually for inflation based on the Denver —Boulder -Greeley Consumer
Price Index and as directed by City Council. The fee would reduce the need for General Fund
support in the park system and provide a possible funding source for future maintenance of new
parks.
Rebates
A rebate program will be established to offset the impact of the new fees on low-income residents.
Residents will have to meet qualifications previously established through the rebate program for
sales tax on food as well as the new State immigration requirements. One rebate check will be issued
per dwelling unit for both fees and the grocery tax rebate. The rebate would be up to 100% of the
total fee paid. The rebate for both fees in 2007 will be $ 44.76 per low-income household. Rebates
would be made to qualified residents in 2008 for fees paid in 2007.
Exemptions
Staffrecommends that the TMF exempt all property owned and occupied by government entities and
public schools. Though both generate a significant number of trips per day, charging a fee to these
entities would only serve to shift public money from one type ofgovernment to another and would
diminish the public revenues available to them to carry out their public purposes. No new net
increase in funds available for public services would be achieved.
On November 7, Council voted to provide exemptions from the IMFfor places of worship and
private schools (K-12).
EXEMPTION COSTS
Transportation Maintenance Fee
Public Schools
$132, 029
Government
$ 77,987
Places of Worship
$57,494
Private Schools
$5,325
Grand Total
$272,835
Thefinal ordinance will include exemptions forgovernment and public school properties as well as
places of worship and private (k-12) schools. The total cost of all exemptions will be $272,835. "
14
November 21, 2006
Mayor Hutchinson stated the discussion time would cover the transportation maintenance fee,
community park maintenance fee and the 2007 budget as the items were related.
City Manager Atteberry recognized Council, staff and board and commission members for the hard
work done to bring forward the budget. He stated the City has faced several years of significant
budget problems, beginning in 2001. It directly related to the September 1 lth crisis, intemet sales,
and a significantly changing economy. One of Council's Policy goals was to increase the financial
stability of the City and not fill gaps with one-time revenues but to balance the 2007 budget and
create long-term financial stability for the City. Significant budget cuts had been made of $11
million; $8 million in costs have been avoided by employee compensation freezes over the past
several years; and 110 City employee positions have been eliminated in the past two years.
Last spring, a $5.8 million shortfall was projected in the City's General Fund Budget for 2007. In
addition to the budget gap, other strategic service adjustments were identified and included in the
amended 2007 budget, such as additional Transfort fixed -route service and altering Dial -A -Ride
services, requiring an additional $1.1 million in 2007. The total funding gap of $7.9 million was
addressed by (1) further pursuing organizational efficiencies; (2) looking at services provided and
deciding whether to reduce or eliminate services; and (3) looking at new revenue.
Some examples of organizational efficiencies were the Information Technology consolidation which
saved $250,000, review of take-home policies and leave policies, lease consolidation ofcity facilities
throughout the community, implementation of a performance measurement program, and electronic
time sheets. Employee compensation was reduced by $1 million that resulted in the elimination of
merit base pay increases for all City employees. The commitment to the pavement management
program was reduced by $700,000, Dial -A -Ride was reduced by $600,000, and other cuts were made
to parks and recreation and the library. Some budget additions included an increased investment to
fixed -route services, manufacturers' use tax rebate program, natural gas cost increases, and
additional costs related to the Phase I of the Southwest Annexation. New fee revenue would come
from the Transportation Maintenance Fee and the Parks Maintenance Fee, approved on First Reading
on November 7. It was estimated the two fees would generate $3.15 million in 2007. The purpose
of the new fees was to achieve long-term financial stability and sustainability. The City organization
could not continue to be so heavily dependent on sales and use tax, as it had been in the past. Those
taxes were too volatile and unpredictable as a revenue source. About 60% of the budget is from
sales and use tax. The fees represented a more stable and predictable funding source for long-term
services the City provides.
With the passage of the Library District measure, the City will phase out its provision of library
services. The annual General Fund allotment of $3.3 million could be reappropriated for other
needs. The potential uses of the resources that support the City Library were not considered during
the 2007 budget dialog, at Council's request. While using the funding for library services and not
enacting the fees has been suggested to fill the budget shortfall, City Manager Attebery
recommended adopting the fees to put the City in a stronger financial position than it has been in
since 2001.
15
November 21, 2006
There were three options relating to the fees. (1) Do not adopt the fees and close the General Fund
gap with the library funds. (2) Adopt the fees and place the revenues in reserves for the 2008-09
budget needs. (3) Adopt either one or both fees.
Many expenses are anticipated in 2007-09 that are currently unfunded, including Dial -A -Ride
services, expanded police and fire services, future phases of the Southwest Enclave Annexation to
provide public safety, remodeling the Police Services building once Police Services moves into its
new facility, and the Mason Corridor Project, which will require a local match of $1 million in 2007.
Employee compensation needs to be addressed.
Mayor Hutchinson stated each audience participant would have three minutes to speak.
The following people spoke against cutting funding for Dial -A -Ride:
Nancy York, 130 South Whitcomb
Michael Devereaux, 2150 Maid Marian Court
Teresa McClain, 1508 West Elizabeth
Susan Williams, 400 Impala Circle
Nancy Jackson, 3249 Silverthome
Dave McDanal, 143 West 2nd Street, Loveland
Tracy Mueller, 1020 Rolland Moore Drive, probation officer for Larimer County
Litsa Tanner, 620 Mathews Street, Disabled Resource Services
Robin Sager, 1600 West Plum Street, CSU student
Moe Adl, 3918 Moss Creek Drive
Jenny Shock, 2604 Mount Ouray Street, Wellington
Laura Burnett, 1807 Effingham Street
Shelbi Mestas, 127 North Meldrum
Don Silar, 5220 Griffith Drive
Vivian Armendariz, 820 Merganser Drive
Paul Rosenzweig, 112 Rutgers
Mark Settle, 703 Glemnoor Drive
Toni Lueck, 2400 North Taft Hill Road
Andrea Advill, Fort Collins resident, spoke against the TMF and supported Dial -A -Ride
Tim Walsh, 2012 Coastal Court
Cheryl Distaso, 135 South Sunset Street
Deanna Brookhouser, 6537 Westbourne Circle
Yvonne Longacre, 1550 Blue Spruce Drive
Dan Palmer, 620 Matthews Street
Chris Campbell, 222 South Whitcomb Street, spoke on behalf of the Fort Collins Board of Realtors,
and urged Council to vote against the parks maintenance fee and transportation maintenance fee.
With the passage of the library district, the fees are no longer necessary.
Eric Kronwall,1119 Monticello Court, stated he did not support the parks maintenance fee or the
transportation maintenance fee.
16
November 21, 2006
Bruce Hall, Fort Collins resident, spoke in support of the TMF and PMF as well as Dial -A -Ride.
("Secretary's note: Council took a recess at this point in the meeting.)
Councilmember Brown stated a Task Force meeting on Dial -A -Ride was scheduled for December
7th and encouraged all citizens to attend.
Councilmember Weitkunat asked whether there was a rebate provided from Medicaid for each Dial -
A -Ride trip. Marlys Sittner, Transfort/Dial-A-Ride General Manager, stated a small number of trips
provided were paid for by Medicaid which pays a flat fee, based on whether the person is ambulatory
or non -ambulatory and whether it was a medical or non -medical trip. The rate paid by Medicaid
varies between $12 and $15. Each trip costs the City about $22/trip. The Medicaid payments and
passenger fare revenues account for $2/trip. Each trip has a $20 cost that is paid for by General Fund
money, with a portion paid by federal grants.
Councilmember Weitkunat clarified that these funds have always been included in the calculations
of the Dial -A -Ride costs, but never been singled out. Sittner answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated the discussion about Dial -A -Ride in recent months included
different alternatives. One alternative was to keep the status -quo for six months so alternatives
would be on the table.
Mayor Hutchinson stated cutting Dial -A -Ride meant people outside the city limits would not be
served. Because of ADA requirements and the three-quarter mile limit, some areas within the city
limits would not be served. He asked about the costs and implications of not providing Dial -A -Ride
services to people who live in the county, and instead providing services to all who live within the
citylimits. Don Bachman, Interim Transportation Services Manager, stated that to provide daytime
Dial -A -Ride service to ADA-eligible people outside of the proposed new Dial -A -Ride area, but up
to the city limits, the estimate for daytime Dial -A -Ride service was $120,000/year as an ongoing
cost.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he supported a six-month grace period for everyone currently served
by Dial -A -Ride and a permanent grandfathering of existing clients within city limits. Bachman
stated the cost amount of $120,000/year was based on current city limits. Any expansion of city
limits by annexation would increase the cost as ridership increased.
Councilmember Ohlson stated one option might be to grandfather those who live in the GMA so
people currently served who live in the GMA would be still be eligible when they were annexed into
the City. People have made life choices and live inside the city and may not now be serviced.
However, "status quo" is not likely to continue in Dial -A -Ride. The goal is to minimize the hardship
to these citizens. There are increasing demands and limited resources. Bachman stated there were
84 current registered Dial -A -Ride users who reside outside the proposed coverage area. To serve
those for an additional six months would cost $60,000, beginning January 1. Of the 84 registered
17
November 21, 2006
riders, 57 reside within the city limits. To continue those on an ongoing basis would cost
$84,000/year.
City Manager Atteberry asked what the cost would be to extend the current service for six months
and for one year. Bachman responded the cost is estimated to be $500,000 for one year, assuming
some growth in ridership. Services would remain the same, including the same eligibility
requirements, evening service and discounted fares.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the differences in costs quoted - $84,000/year and $500,00/year -
were due to the cost of providing evening service and eligiblityrequirements that would be changing
under the new proposals. Bachman answered in the affirmative. Calculations were based on
destinations within the service area, not serving people who live outside the service area to
destinations that are outside the service area. Bachman made a correction to the figure previously
given and stated the cost of $500,000 to continue services at the current level would be the cost for
six months and the cost for one year would be $1 million. Sitmer stated the budget contained
$600,000 for service beyond the ADA mandate. A total of $1.1 million of additional funds would
be needed to continue services at the current level for 2007.
Councilmember Manvel asked for clarification of the amount needed to stay at status quo and to
continue evening service and the same eligibility requirements and destinations that are currently in
place and what is proposed to be spent on Dial -A -Ride in the 2007 Budget. Sittner stated $1.75
million is currently in the 2007 Budget as presented. To continue services exactly as is currently
being provided, $2.23 million in funding would be needed.
Councilmember Manvel stated the main part of Dial -A -Ride would continue to exist. The City
would be spending considerably more on public transportation in next year's budget if the current
proposal goes forward than would be spent with the program staying at status quo. Sittner stated
Dial -A -Ride is not being eliminated but the level of service is being reduced. The additional three
new routes and all of the Dial -A -Ride service that would go with those routes can be covered for
$1.1 million or the status quo can continue, with no new fixed routes.
Councilmember Manvel stated there are people in the City who, while not covered by ADA
requirements, need public transportation to get around the city since they do not own automobiles.
The new routes will expand the number of people served by Trsfort.
Mayor Hutchinson asked staff whether or not options such as partnering with Shamrock Taxi as a
form of public/private partnership, would be considered. Bachman stated as long as fixed route
services are being provided, the City is obligated to provide the ADA minimum of paratransit
service. It is too soon to tell how the non-profit community will respond to this need. Shamrock
Taxi has stated it would continue to provide taxi service and has the capability to transport
nonambulatory fares at a rate set by the company. The City could develop a voucher system so
citizens could receive a reduced fare, but those details have not been worked out. The City currently
contracts with Shamrock Taxi for some of the services provided and some money is saved per trip.
The cost of Dial -A -Ride is much more than just the operator and the vehicle. Dispatching,
In
November 21, 2006
maintenance, qualifying of passengers and the organization are all costs of the Dial -A -Ride system,
not just the operator and vehicle.
Mayor Hutchinson stated dispatching costs and the people who had to be on duty supporting the one
driver made a significant difference in the cost for nighttime Dial -A -Ride. City Manager Atteberry
noted the owner of Shamrock Taxi stated he could provide that service cheaper than what it costs
the City to provide. The City needs to explore the possibility of privatization of the system but needs
to ensure reliability, customer service, and the quality of service. Other opportunities should be
pursued, such as faith -based organizations, not -for -profits or for -profit organizations.
Councilmember Kastein asked staffto explain what are minimum ADA requirements. Sittner stated
ADA minimum level of service would be 3/4 of a mile on either side of any fixed routes, whether
existing or the proposed three new routes; all trips would begin and end within that service area;
hours of service would be the same as for fixed route hours of service, from approximately 6 AM
to approximately 7 PM; fares would be no more than fixed -route price so the fares would be $2.50;
only people who have a disability that prevents them from using fixed route would be eligible for
Dial -A -Ride trips.
Councilmember Kastein asked if grandfathering the 84 current registered Dial -A -Ride users who
reside outside the proposed coverage area meant providing service from 6 AM to 7 PM for $2.50/trip
for people with disabilities for six months for $60,000. Sittner stated that was correct, if the 84 had
disabilities that prevented them from using the fixed routes.
Councilmember Kastein clarified $84,000 is the cost for providing services for one year to the 57
people who live within city limits, but outside the three-quarter/mile limit. Bachman stated that was
correct.
Councilmember Kastein asked what portion of the $1.1 million for the proposed new routes was for
paratransit. Sittner stated $355,000 would be spent on Dial -A -Ride.
Councilmember Kastein asked for an estimate of the cost of not adding new fixed routes, but
providing paratransit service. Some people would use the fixed route service, but would also qualify
for Dial -a -Ride service. Sittner stated that cost had not been estimated. Part of the consideration
of costs was that, out of the 145 current Dial -A -Ride users that would live in the expanded Dial -A -
Ride service area, the expectation was that they would have to have a disability preventing them
from using the fixed route and, if they could use the fixed route, the expectation was that they would
do so. The cost of additional trips if the additional fixed routes were not added had not been
calculated.
Councilmember Kastein asked if there would be much of an increase in cost over $355,000 if the
new fixed routes are not added. Sittner stated grandfathering in the area without adding new fixed
routes would increase the cost because there would be an increase in the number of trips. The
$355,000 was based on the assumption some riders would use the fixed routes.
19
November 21. 2006
Councilmember Ohlson commented, that at this point there did not need to be resolution on the issue
of grandfathering people who live in the GMA. The budget needed to contain a dollar figure that
was high enough so staff can give details later. The budget needed to be adopted now with the intent
to have a six-month grace period for everyone, including evening service, as alternatives are
developed. The other intent was a permanent grandfathering of existing residents for Dial -A -Ride,
according to the new rules and possibly adding people as they are annexed into the City, if they are
current Dial -A -Ride users. He asked staff for an estimate to provide the services for six months.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if the fees were not approved and the library funds were used instead,
would that amount of money cover these costs of Dial -A -Ride. City Manager Atteberry stated he
understood the request was to keep the status quo from January 1 through the end of June, with a
cost quoted by staff of $550,000 so Council would need to find $550,000 to continue current service.
Without the fees, current service cannot be continued unless one-time dollars are found to cover that
cost. Using the library fees leaves a surplus of about $189,000 that Council could allot.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the $189,000 included the possible savings of $60,000 from not
starting all the new fixed routes on January 1 st. One proposal for Dial -A -Ride was to delay the start
of two of the routes until March. Atteberry answered that amount was not included in the $189,000
so those might be additional funds to use.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she believed there was a general consensus to move to ADA
standards, but there is an obligation to current users of Dial -A -Ride. The question of grandfathering
centers around whether to bring in the 57 who reside within city limits or the 84 who are under the
current program. If service is provided to those 84 who meet ADA requirements, the cost would be
$122,000 in the 2007 budget and the cost would be ongoing. No new customers would be added.
There was a sense of obligation to those who already use the service because there was somewhat
of a promise from the past, but it is not a sustainable promise as more riders cannot be added and
keep the service. Adjustments to Dial -A -Ride service must be made in order to meet ADA
standards, but increasing costs cannot be borne by the City.
Councilmember Manvel commented the figure of$122,000 did not include evening service and does
not include destinations outside the 3/4 mile limit, such as Foothills Gateway.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated ongoing discussions have to take place as the problem needs to
be corrected.
Councilmember Ohlson stated if six months of extending current service was not possible, then three
months might be an option to offer a transition time. Reserves and one-time funds are available for
the transition period. These funds would be for a one-time transition, not on -going, so reserves could
be used for this purpose. City Manager Atteberry clarified there may be one-time dollars available
to cover the cost of the proposed transition period and not dip into reserves. He strongly advised not
using reserves for this type of service. The proposal to use one-time dollars to provide this bridge
was a rational idea.
W
November 21, 2006
Councilmember Kastein stated he understood grandfathering to mean operating from 6 AM to 7 PM
and cutting back to the minimum standards, except for allowing those who had been riding to
continue to do so as long as they met the requirements. He questioned how Foothills Gateway did
not fall under those requirements. Sittner answered she understood the discussion was about the 84
people who live outside the newly created service area. The expectation was they would be picked
up and transported to destinations within the three-quarters of a mile service area. If people lived
within the three-quarters of a mile service area, they would not be taken outside the service area.
The Foothills Gateway facility is outside the three-quarters of mile limit, so it would not be a
destination served.
Councilmember Kastein asked for an estimate of the cost of providing rides to destinations such as
Foothills Gateway. Sittner responded the cost, based on 2006 ridership, of taking trips to and from
the Foothills Gateway facility was approximately $500,000 annually.
Councilmember Weitkunat suggested that one of the areas needing more discussion was what other
resources might be available. Six months did not seem to be a good option so three months might
be a better time frame to work on transitions.
Mayor Hutchinson stated there seemed to be a consensus to ask staff to use the $189,000 in ongoing
dollars, along with using one-time dollars to fund a transition time. He asked whether that was
adequate to pass the budget, without actually designing the details ofmodifying Dial -A -Ride service.
City Manager Atteberry stated using the $189,000 was a possibility and asked if it were to be used
as if it were one-time dollars i.e., a short -time solution, or for an ongoing solution.
Councilmember Kastein clarified the $189,000 was an on -going funding source and, if
grandfathering occurred, that would also be on -going, as the cost was $120,000. City Manager
Atteberry stated the cost of grandfathering was $120,000 and the on -going dollars are available to
do so. It was Council's policy decision whether or not to fund the grandfathering.
Councilmember Ohlson stated staff should work the numbers for solutions based on 3 to 6 months
to develop a transition policy.
Mayor Hutchinson stated if Council indicated it wanted to obligate those monies for those purposes,
in general without details, then the needs of the budget will be satisfied and there would be time to
work out the details.
Councilmember Roy stated the six month time frame seemed a more realistic length of time to
develop solutions as any shorter length of time would not allow the community time to help develop
solutions.
Mayor Hutchinson stated future discussions will resolve the question of length of time for a
transition. General guidelines for budget purposes were all that was needed at this time.
Councilmember Brown asked if the three fixed routes would be delayed with these proposals. City
Manager Atteberry stated the Harmony Corridor Route would start as of January 1 and Timberline
21
November 21. 2006
and Prospect Routes would start around March 1 to allow time to acquire the capital, i.e., the buses.
By delaying the Timberline and Prospect Routes, about $60,000 in savings could be used anywhere
in the budget.
Councilmember Brown stated there was an urgent need for the Harmony Route but the other two
routes did not seem as critical. He preferred delaying the two routes and using the funds for Dial -A -
Ride.
City Manager Atteberry asked if Councilmembers were discussing keeping Dial -A -Ride services
at "status quo" or using a "narrowed -down" version to provide service for six months. If "status
quo" is being discussed, then the cost was $550,000. There is $189,000 available, but there is a gap
of $361,000 of one-time money, assuming a six-month window. If that was Council's direction,
those funds may or may not be available.
Councilmember Roy stated he was considering a "narrowed -down" version as a basis for services
for the next six months. City Manager Atteberry clarified that the definition of a "narrowed -down"
version of services would mean within city boundaries, not including the GMA.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he believed it included the GMA and evening service to provide the
transition people needed to learn to go without the evening service. Evening service was going away
so the transition had to include evening service and the GMA. If the time frame needed to be
narrowed to fit the budget, that should be done, but the transition time should include riders in the
GMA and evening service.
Councilmember Kastein asked if $120,000/year would cover the cost of providing service to the
GMA and evening service. Bachman stated $120,000 does not cover evening service. Currently
evening service goes to 2:30 AM on Fridays and Saturdays.
Councilmember Kastein stated he was thinking of the $120,000 solution which is 6 AM to 7 PM,
$2.50/ride for people with disabilities.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he believed the transition time should include evening service,
perhaps not as late as currently provided, as well as to the people in the GMA to allow them time to
adjust to the proposed changes.
Councilmember Kastein stated a transition period would not be necessary if evening service were
not included in the discussion. A grandfather clause could provide service, funded on -going, with
the current budget.
Mayor Hutchinson asked if, at this time, all that was necessary was for Council to appropriate
$189,000 towards Dial -A -Ride, no other details were necessary. City Manager Atteberry answered
in the affirmative.
Councilmember Kastein asked if more open space dollars could be spent on parks and trails and use
Conservation Trust funding for O&M. Staff and the Parks and Recreation Board had recommended
22
November 21, 2006
against more spending on O&M as this would further delay trails capital construction if Conservation
Trust monies were used for maintenance rather than purchasing and implementing trails. His idea
was to replace these funds with open space dollars. He asked how much money was available to do
this and "free up" dollars currently used for O&M in the budget. CLRS Director, Marty Heffernan,
stated of all the Conservation Trust dollars budgeted for 2007, about $1.1 million, can be used for
park and trail maintenance. Historically, those funds have been used for construction of the hard
surface trail system. Through the last few budget cycles, many hundreds of thousands of dollars of
Conservation Trust money have been moved from trail construction to park and trail maintenance.
The Open Lands money can be used for the trail program. The County 1 /4 cent Open Space money
was available to be used for the City's trail program or Natural Areas Open Land Program. There
was no restriction on how much of that money goes for one purpose or another. The Open Lands
money was available for trail construction if Conservation Trust money was dedicated to the
maintenance function, which traditionally was funded through the General Fund. Over $3
million/year comes in through the 1/4 tax.
Councilmember Kastein asked how much was being spent on trails O&M from the General Fund.
Heffernan responded trail maintenance costs $220,000, of which $70,000 traditionally has been
funded from the Conservation Trust and the difference was made up by the General Fund. The
proposed 2007 budget moves $125,000 of Conservation Trust money from construction to
maintenance. Nearly all trail maintenance was funded out of Conservation Trust money.
Councilmember Kastein asked if there was money to be used from open space dollars that could
replace General Fund dollars, whether directly or indirectly, and if Conservation Trust dollars that
were used for capital could be used for the maintenance. City Manager Atteber y stated that was
being done now, to the extent that it can legally be done.
Councilmember Kastein asked about the maximum amount of open space dollars to be used for
capital implementation of trails to "free up" more General Fund dollars. Heffernan stated if more
Conservation Trust money is diverted from the Trail Construction Program to the maintenance
function and the open lands dollars are used for trail construction, there are fewer open lands dollars
to buy natural areas and the resulting infrastructure. There are limitations on the other funding
source for natural areas, which is the Open Space Yes! money. It has an 80/20 split and many
restrictions. There was flexibility in using these funds, but there are trade-offs. If trail construction
program was funded this way, then the natural areas program was slowed down. The other
consequence was that as more Conservation Trust dollars are devoted to maintenance, then fewer
are available after the trail system is built out to build the next recreation center or take care of
infrastructure problems that are now known in some parks. Fossil Creek Park and Spring Canyon
Park do not have funding, due to current budget constraints, for replacements 5 to 10 years down the
road as things wear out. The Conservation Trust has been a good source to fund replacements in the
park system. If that money goes toward maintenance, finding funding for these other projects will
be tough.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he would support more money going from the Open Space fund to
trail construction, but he was unsure if the County had the same restrictions as the City, in that the
trails had to have a relationship with an open space. Also, the problem of not having funding for
future capital projects, i.e., a recreation center or park improvement, using Conservation Trust funds
23
November 21, 2006
once the trail system is built out, was one to be addressed. He did support the shift of funds from
natural areas to trails, as that was always a part of the ballot measure.
Councilmember Kastein asked how much open space natural areas money can go into the capital
construction. Once that information is known, then the decision can be made relating to purchasing
natural areas versus building trails.
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to adopt
Ordinance No. 184, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City Code to Establish a Transportation
Maintenance Fee, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she did not support this Ordinance on Second Reading. There had
been much feedback from the community and, with the passage of the Library District, this fee was
not necessary.
Councilmember Brown stated job number one of government was to find solutions to very real
problems and not to turn to the taxpayers wallets or purses to solve problems. He did not support
any fees at this time.
Councilmember Manvel stated there were good arguments in favor of passing these fees, including
using the funds to meet many needs in the City, using funds for Dial -A -Ride and improving all
public transportation for everyone. Long time solutions to the City's financial problems are needed.
Some cuts from the 2007 Budget, including cutting $1 million for City employee raises, cutting
$700,000 from the pavement management program and the possible Mason Corridor match could
be funded. Improving police services, improving roads, maintaining parks are improvements all
could support, yet have been cut. The budget was written with a $3.1 million gap and the fees were
designed to fill that gap. The citizens have spoken and established the Library District and the fees
are not essential to balance the budget.
Councilmember Kastein stated the fees were not a desirable solution. Fees instituted by Council
when a crisis no longer exists are not necessary.
Councilmember Ohlson stated no one liked the fees and at this point in time the fees were no longer
necessary. Any substantial fees, other than in an emergency situation, should go to a vote by the
public. Many people had expressed irritation that these fees were not being sent to the voters for
approval. If Council thinks a tax increase is necessary to adequately fund the community, then the
voters should be asked. He did not support either fee increase.
Councilmember Roy did not support either fee as those fees were a stop -gap measure to create a
balanced budget for 2007 and with the Library District passing, the fees are not necessary. If these
fees were adopted, a long-term "loss of trust" from the citizens might result.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the fees were a part of the process to create a successful budget. Trust
between the citizens and Council was critical and Council was acting to prove that trust, even though
there were difficult issues, such as cutting Dial -A -Ride services. The TMF would have impacts on
the economic health of Fort Collins, as well.
24
November 21. 2006
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: none. Nays: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson,
Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat.
THE MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Manvel made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt
Ordinance No. 185, 2006, Amending Chapter 7.5 of the City Code to Establish a Community Park
Maintenance Fee, on Second Reading.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated the City has a financial situation existing with the parks. There
is a strong policy that establishes parks every so many miles and there are 17 more parks planned and
no mechanism in place to pay for them. A small amount - $2.67 per dwelling unit - would have
brought in $1.6 million to help offset that cost. This community loves its parks and wants them
maintained. This fee was a mechanism to do that. The economic health of the city organization has
a need to move into some kind of mechanism to maintain parks. This $1.6 million could have
provided leverage in order to get the Mason Corridor in place. Because it is important to have the
public trust and confidence and the public did not want this fee, she was not supporting the parks
maintenance fee at this time.
Mayor Hutchinson stated there really is no stable revenue for either the transportation system or the
parks system so this subject will return.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: none. Nays: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson,
Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat.
THE MOTION FAILED.
(**Secretary's note: Council took a recess at this point in the meeting.)
Ordinance No. 177, 2006,
Being The Annual Appropriation Ordinance
Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the
Fiscal Year 2007; Amending the Budget for the
Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2007, and Ending
December 31, 2007; and Fixing the Mill Levy for
Fiscal Year 2007, Adopted on Second Reading
The following is the staff memorandum on this item.
"FINANCL4L IMPACT
This Ordinance amends the City Budget for fiscal year 2007 and represents the annual
appropriation for fscal year 2007 in the amount of $473, 456,338. The Ordinance also sets the City
mill levy at 9.797 mill, unchanged since 1991.
25
November 21, 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
State statutes and the City Charter both require an annual appropriation to cover expenses for the
ensuing fiscal year (2007) based upon the adopted budget. The Second Reading must be adopted
before the last day of November.
On October 17, 2006, City Council approved the recommended changes to the 2007 budget and
approved the 2007 Appropriation Ordinance on First Reading by a vote of 5-1 (Nays: Brown,
Kastein). With Second Reading of the Ordinance, there is an adjustment that takes into account
changes in the new Special Services Fee ('Transportation Maintenance Fee and the Community
Parks Maintenance Fee) revenues approved by Council on First Reading on November 7, 2006
The Net City Budget of $3 79,328,212for 2007, which excludes transfers, remains the same as was
included in First Reading of this Ordinance.
Adopted 2007
1 Amended 2007
Operations
$322, 633, 068
1 $322, 799, 201
Debt Service
24, 269, 655
1 24, 269, 655
Capital
26 465106
1 32,259,356
BACKGROUND
The Amended 2007 Budget and the Annual Appropriation Ordinance reflect several changes to the
adopted 2006-2007 Budget. The majority of adjustments are to balance the General Fund in light of
the projected $5.8 million revenue shortfall and additional budget issues such as expanded Transfort
Fixed Routes and restructuring of Dial -a -Ride services, extension of City services for the Southwest
Annexation, and earmarking monies for the Manufacturers' Use Tax Rebate.
General Fund cost reductions included reduced employee compensation, Information Technology
efficiencies and consolidation, and over $3.0 million in numerous service reductions.
To avoid further service cuts, two new special services fees are reflected in the budget that will provide
approximately $3.15 million in revenue for 2007. Additionally, new revenues from the Southwest
Annexation are to be allocated toward Police Services.
2007 REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS
The annual appropriation ordinance is being adjusted on Second Reading to reflect changes made to
the Transportation Maintenance Fee and Park Maintenance Fee on November 7, 2006 The fees
approved by Council are:
26
November 21, 2006
Special Services Fees
Effective January 1, 2007
Transportation Maintenance Fees:
Institutional $16.44
Per Acre
Industrial $13.09
Per Acre
High Traffic Retail $125.11
Per Acre
Retail $51.65
Per Acre
Commercial $16.44
Per Acre
Residential $1.06
Per Dwelling Unit
Community Park Maintenance Fee:
Residential $2.76
Per Dwelling Unit
The total net revenue from the new special services fees will equal approximately $3.15 million per year.
The TMF revenue will be allocated to the Pavement Management Program and the CPMFrevenue will
be allocated to the maintenance of City Parks. General Fund resources have also been adjusted to
reflect the impact of the Special Service fees on the General Fund.
Transportation
Maintenance
Fee
Park
Maintenance
Fee
Total
New Revenue
$1,736,568
$1,686,722
$3,423,290
Exemptions
$<272,835>
n/a
$<272,835>
Net Revenue
$1463 733
$1 686 722
$3 150 455
2007 SERVICE ADJUSTMENTS
To recap, funding has been included in the amended 2007 General Fund Budget for several items:
$1,100,000 Additional Transfort Fixed Routes /Dial a Ride:
Reduces Dial -a -Ride services to the Americans for Disabilities (ADA) services levels and curtails night
services. Offsetting the changes, the $1.1 million appropriation adds three new fixed routes on
Harmony, Timberline and East Prospect. The expanded fixed route service is accompanied with the
mandatory DAR service within 314 miles of the fixed routes.
$250,000 Manufactures Use Tax Rebates:
For the 2007 Amended Budget, the recommendation is to earmark $250, 000 for Use Tax rebates for
eligible local manufacturers.
27
November 21. 2006
$150,000 Natural Gas Cost Increase:
The volatility and growing costs for Natural Gas could not be accommodated under the 2007 budget
funding levels and additional funds are added to cover these costs.
$170,000 Employee Compensation Corrections:
Several adjustments to employee compensation are necessary in 2007 to correct pay inequities that
resulted from freezing the pay plan in 2002.
$437,122 Southwest Annexation
An enclave area of approximately 2.7 square miles was recently annexed into the City. The City will
be providing services to the Phase One area. While services, such as Golf, Electric and Stormwater,
are directly funded by user fees, other services are funded by a combination of property taxes, sales
taxes, and fees. Many of the City' services are currently used by enclave residents and do not trigger
additional expenditures. All of the new revenue generated from the Phase One Southwest Annexation
is allocated toward increasing Police Services.
Dial -a Ride/Paratransit Service
The 2007 budget as approved on First Reading October 17 includes changes to Transfort/Dial-a-Ride
(DAR) Services. Due to the increasing demand for DAR and its high cost per trip, the budget reduces
the service levels to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) service levels. This will reduce the
service coverage area from the current Growth Management Area, to the Federally required minimum
of 314 miles from the fixed routes. Also, night service would be curtailed and the fare and eligibility
policies changed to match the ADA standards. Offsetting these changes, the budget appropriates an
additional $1,100,000 for three new fixed routes on Harmony, Timberline, and East prospect. The
expanded fixed route service is accompanied with the mandatory DAR service within 314 miles. These
changes in service will help to control the cost growth whileproviding much more actual transit service
to the public in accordance with the Transfort strategic plan.
At the October 17 meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff work with Lorimer County, non-profit
organizations, and DAR users to seek alternative solutions to City operated DAR services for those
patrons who would lose service under the new ADA minimum service area. On November 2,
Transportation Services staff sponsored a focus group meeting to begin the process of engaging these
groups. There were 15 attendees including staff and a Council member. There was consensus that
the attendees could be thefoundation for a steering committee. The notion is that everyone would digest
the information, return to their organizations, and recommend additional participants. A subsequent
steering committee would be called for the task of organizing a Dial -a -Ride "Summit", which would be
a public meeting. Consequently, at the time offinal budget adoption this will still be a work in progress.
The second meeting has been scheduled for December 1, 2006.
November 21, 2006
The City Council also requested staffto investigate the possibility of using one-time funds to extend DAR
service outside the new service area to allow time for users to find alternatives to the City provided
service. Presently approximately 85 present active users would reside outside the new service area.
The budget assumes that the three new fixed routes would begin service on January 1, 2007. However,
on closer analysis of the service plan it has become apparent that equipment, bus stops, and other needs
make full implementation on January I a significant challenge. Transfort is prepared to start the
Harmony immediately in 2007. Amore reasonable target for the Timberline and East Prospect routes
is March 2007. This two month period would allow $60,000 to be available for DAR alternatives
without any additional appropriation.
In conjunction with the November 21 Council agenda packet, a separate staff memorandum will be sent
to Council that presents possible options for providing some level of service until alternatives can be
examined for current DAR riders that will lose service.
Conservation Trust Fund.
Council asked for some additional information regarding the options that may be available to the City
for shifting the use of Conservation Trust Fund revenue from capital projects and trail development
toward trail maintenance. CLRS staff and Natural Resources staff have developed more detailed
information for Council 's consideration. A memorandum is provided under separate cover as part of
the November 16 Council Thursday Packet. "
Councilmember Roy asked for clarification from Councilmember Ohlson regarding the Dial -A -Ride
proposal being made.
Councilmember Ohlson stated there are many details to be worked out by staff. The number needs to
be "plugged in" regarding money that is left over from the library as well as other one-time monies. A
staff recommendation was needed on the number of months, the hours of service, who qualifies and
other such details. Options and a recommendation should be presented to Council by staff on how to
fill a temporary transition period for all people currently covered by Dial -A -Ride and a long -tern
grandfathering of people who live inside the City limits, based on the new criteria as well as a transition
and grandfathering of those people who are currently covered who live in the GMA, so that when they
become city residents, they will be covered.
City Attorney Roy asked if the intent was to grandfather only those existing users of Dial -A -Ride that
are ADA eligible. Councilmember Ohlson asked for a staff recommendation before that decision was
made.
Councilmember Kastein suggested the time frame be for an entire year, but not providing evening
service.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the specifics did not need to be worked out at this time.
City Attorney Roy stated Option B of the existing Appropriation Ordinance contains these directions and
would not need to be modified. Adopting the Ordinance, Option B, will enable staff to implement the
directions given by Council. The money is in the Ordinance; it is just a question of how it would be
29
November 21, 2006
utilized. Option B is the version of the Appropriation Ordinance that does not contain the TMF or the
PMF. City Manager Atteberry agreed Option B would allow staff to develop options and
recommendations.
Councilmember Roy asked how accountability would be maintained regarding developing a positive
solution to Dial -A -Ride. Council is committed to working toward a solution to this obligation. City
Manager Atteberry stated the best way to maintain accountability is to come back in a work session
setting to talk through the process and the players to get to the next steps. Using an outside facilitator
has been suggested to help with some of the meetings.
Councilmember Roy asked what data was available from other communities that have public/private
cooperative relationships concerning paratransit.
Councilmember Manvel stated the Youth Activity Center has been the center of much discussion in the
past and asked what monies were available in this budget to continue some services at the Youth
Activity Center and what other programs could be continued. City Manager Atteberry stated the 2007
budget did not contain funds to continue the Youth Activity Center beyond the date of the opening of
the new Northside Aztlan Community Center. The gymnasium portion ofthe Youth Activity Center will
continue to operate. Marty Heffernan, CLRS Director, stated the amount of the lease for the YAC
building is quite expensive, even with the discount offered. The gymnasium was built with community -
donated dollars and does not have any rental obligation with it. Existing recreation staff will run the
program at the gymnasium for a variety of classes and activities. In the morning, there would be Early
Childhood Development classes and classes for parents of young children. A variety of activities and
sports will occur in the gymnasium as there is a lack of gymnasium space in the community for non -
school related activities. There will be some drop -in hours, but it will be less than what is currently
offered with the YAC. Also, the YAC staff is needed to staff the new Northside Center as it is three
times larger than the existing facility and funds were not available to hire new staff.
Councilmember Manvel asked about the anticipated opening of the new Northside Aztlan Community
Center. Heffernan responded it should open in July or August, barring unforseen circumstances.
Councilmember Manvel asked if the YAC would continue to operate if the new center was not opened
by July. Heffernan stated there was only enough money budgeted to keep the YAC open through
August.
Councilmember Roy made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Weitkunat, to adopt Ordinance No.
177, 2006, Being The Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to the Annual Appropriations for the
Fiscal Year 2007; Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2007, and Ending
December 31, 2007; and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal Year 2007, Option B on Second Reading.
Councilmember Kastein moved to amend the motion, to specifically appropriate $120,000 from the
$189,000 for one year of Dial -A -Ride service that would grandfather current users, but scale back the
hours of service to 6 AM-7 PM. Motion was seconded by Councilmember Ohlson.
30
November 21, 2006
Councilmember Kastein stated there is an obligation to people who will have to make changes to their
lives due to changes in Dial -A -Ride. There is a big difference between grandfathering people for as long
as they need the service and grandfathering them for four months.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated this motion does not negate the need for a three-month transition
period. This motion guarantees that for one year the Dial -A -Ride service will be provided from 6 AM-
7PM at $2.50/ride for qualified disability. What is not provided is the night service which could be
created with a transition from 7 PM- 11PM for the 84 people who would be grandfathered.
Councilmember Kastein stated this motion does not contain a transition period for those who use the
service from 6 AM-7PM. Other funds could be used to provide night service.
Councilmember Ohlson stated his original proposal included all users who are currently in the city limits
using Dial -A -Ride, so they did not have to worry about a transition period, but would receive service
through grandfathering. The only people who would be unsure of continued service would be those in
the GMA that are not annexed into the City. The transition period of 3-6 months would be used to find
other solutions for them.
Councilmember Kastein stated his motion would provide service to all who currently receive it, both
inside city limits and within the GMA, and the service will continue at a cost of at least $120,000.
Councilmember Ohlson stated a transition period was necessary to provide some evening service. One
-time monies could be used to cover any cost over $189,000. City Manager Atteberry clarified that the
motion is to grandfather 84 passengers and continue to serve them only, using the $122,000, from 6 AM-
7 PM, to provide on -going service. Additionally, for those not served by these parameters and to
continue status quo in the evening and other services, a 3-6 month transition is needed to provide time
to study and look for alternatives. If the transition period lasts for 6 months, the cost is $550,000 and
3 months would cost $275,000.
Councilmember Kastein stated continuing the night service did not seem very practical and was quite
expensive and not very needed. It is not an essential.
Councilmember W eitkunat stated she did not support continuing the "status quo," until 2 AM, but would
support providing abbreviated hours for evening service.
Councilmember Manvel stated Transfort does not provide evening service, so those who are not disabled
but are without cars in Fort Collins have no evening transportation service. The Dial -A -Ride evening
service is desirable, but the demands for it are not as great. Adding extra services beyond ADA
minimums, such as providing service to those outside of city limits or offering extended evening hours,
could have a detrimental effect. If only ADA minimums are provided and demands are much greater
than the amount budgeted, the federal government will allow the City to put limits on the services. But
if service is provided to people whom the City is not required to serve or if the City is giving services
it is not required to serve, and the cost of service becomes too great, then the federal government will
require the City to provide the service without the option of scaling back since services were provided
beyond ADA minimums.
31
November 21, 2006
Councilmember Ohlson stated this motion appeared to maintain most of the "status quo", only removing
night service.
Councilmember Kastein stated removing evening service would remove a big part of the "status quo"
that costs a lot of money and is not an absolute requirement.
Councilmember Manvel stated people would not be delivered to places outside the service area, such
as Foothills Gateway, so the 84 people would be served, but only within the 3/4 mile limit.
Councilmember Kastein stated he wanted to provide a continuing service for people who use Dial -A -
Ride today, during the same hours of operation that Transfort currently operates so all that use public
transportation will be on a level playing field. A commitment will be made for on -going service for the
people who are currently signed up, wherever they happen to live, to be delivered to destinations that
are within the 3/4 mile limit from fixed -route service.
Councilmember Brown stated he wanted to extend evening hours past 7 PM.
City Attorney Roy asked if the motion was to amend the annual appropriation ordinance or to leave the
ordinance as it is currently written with the direction given. Staff would need to recalculate the
appropriation ordinance before it was adopted, if it was amended. Deputy City Manager Jones stated
ultimately the appropriation would need to be changed as funds were being transferred from the General
Fund to Transportation. The choices were either immediate recalculation or bringing another
appropriation ordinance to transfer these funds.
Councilmember Kastein asked if his motion could be used as simply as direction. City Attorney Roy
answered in the affirmative. Jones stated a transfer of funds from the General Fund to Transportation
would have to be made at some point. City Manager Atteberry suggested another appropriation to
transfer the funds would be optimal. The motion provides clear direction.
City Attorney Roy clarified the motion now was to adopt Option B of the Ordinance with the direction
that staff return another ordinance implementing the direction with regard to the $122,000.
The vote on the motion to provide direction was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson,
Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Roy thanked Council and staff for the hard work done on the budget.
Councilmember Brown stated he was disappointed there were not more cuts brought forward, but was
glad there were no fees. He supported the budget.
Councilmember Kastein stated a $379 million budget was being adopted. He did not believe adding new
services was appropriate at this time. He supported the budget and believed the right decisions were
made concerning Dial -A -Ride.
32
November 21. 2006
Councilmember Manvel stated this was a good budget, but felt the transit solution was a good one,
serving more people. Hopefully, other organizations that do good in the community would be willing
and able to step up and help fill some holes in the Dial -A -Ride service. Until there is good public
transportation throughout the city, the ridership will not reach the levels that it could reach. As public
transportation grows, as it must to serve the city, areas will no longer be more than 3/4 mile away from
service, and Dial -A -Ride will cover more areas.
Councilmember Weitkunat stated she supported the budget. The approach from the beginning was to
reduce expenditures and look at new revenues. There were over $3.3 million in service cuts as well as
a cut of $1 million for employee compensation and benefits. The cuts were difficult to make. To have
a first-class city and first-class service comes with a cost. When costs and services are reduced, it is no
longer a world -class city and a world -class organization with world -class employees. There is a
balanced budget, but it was a hard process.
Mayor Hutchinson stated the budget is balanced, but one cut of $1 million was for employee
compensation and that cannot continue. Fees may still need to be added to create a sustainable and
predictable revenue source.
The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel,
Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution 2006-119
Adopting the City's 2007 Legislative Policy Agenda, Postponed to December 5, 2006
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY"
Each year the Legislative Review Committee (LRQ develops a legislative agenda to assist in the
analysis of pending legislation. The proposed 2007 Legislative Policy Agenda has been updated from
the 2006 document and was reviewed and approved by the Legislative Review Committee. This
document will be used as a guide for the upcoming 2006 General Assembly and the first session of the
110th Congress. The purpose of the Legislative Policy Agenda is to articulate the City's position on
common legislative topics. It will be applied by Council members and staff to determine positions on
pending legislation and as a general reference for state legislators and our congressional delegation.
BACKGROUND
SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY AGENDA
Policy statement additions, deletions and amendments to the 2005 Legislative Policy Agenda are
highlighted in italics:
33
November 21. 2006
AIR QUALITY, page 6, addition to list of objectives:
The City's adopted ubjective air quality objectives include:
• reduce total vehicle emissions, by focusing on technology (e.g., tailpipe
emissions) and behavior (e.g., driving patterns)
• reduce high priority pollutants (ozone, fine particles, mobile source hazardous
air pollutants and greenhouse gases)
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30% below projected 2010 levels by 2010
• reduce commercial and industrial emissions in the Fort Collins area
• reduce wood smoke emissions in the Fort Collins area and reduce the number of
non -certified wood stoves and conventional fireplaces
This wording updates the policy agenda to reflect City air quality policy.
AIR QUALITY, page 6, revise statement #4:
"Support legislation and regulations that make tailpipe standards more stringent; that
establish equal standards for cars, light trucks and sport utility vehicles; that set fuel
neutral standards for gasoline and diesel that decrease sulfur content offuels; and -that
promote advanced low emission vehicle technology, and that provides incentives for
alternative fuels such as biodiesel, cellulosic ethanol and compressed natural gas. "
This statement expands the previous list to reflect the changing marketplace ofalternative fuels.
AIR QUALITY, page 7, addition of statement #6:
"Support legislation and regulations that reduce vehicle emissions by reducing
unnecessary idling of vehicles. "
An additional statement was added in light ofthe pendingstate legislation to reduce the amount
of train trips through Fort Collins. Air quality would benefit from the associated reduction in
vehicle idling.
AIR QUALITY, page 7, revise statement #8:
"Support legislation and regulations that provide incentives to encourage renewable
energyproductions, including windpower, andprovidefor "State Implementation Plan"
credits for renewable energy (excluding residential wood burning and corn -based
ethanol) and energy efficiency. "
This revision adds support for State Implementation Plan credits for energy efficiency and
renewable energy. The Air Quality Control Commission will consider this issue in 2007. Fort
Collins could benefitfrom formal recognition of energy efficiency and renewable energy efforts
in State Implementation Plans if we were to be designated non -attainment for ozone.
34
November 21, 2006
AIR QUALITY, page 7, addition of statement #10:
"Support legislation and regulations that provide incentives for green building and
sustainable design. "
This adds new language to support incentives for green building and sustainable design.
LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE, page 20, addition of new section:
"The Legislative Review Committee is a representative group of Council members that
reviews and reacts to proposed legislation on behalf of the City Council and the City.
In taking a position on particular bills, the Committee interprets and applies the various
policies that are included in the Legislative Policy Agenda. If a bill may fall within two
ormorepolicies, then the Committee must decide how to balance thosepolicies in taking
a position. Ifa bill falls outside of the Legislative Policy Agenda, the Committee refers
the bill to the full Council for consideration before a position is taken on behalf of the
City. 11
The Committee believes it is important to clearly spell out the how the Committee will handle
legislation when more than one policy statement may apply and when legislation is not
addressed by an existing policy statement.
POLICE SERVICES, page 25, addition of statement #10:
"Support legislation that regulates the use of cell phones by a motorist while operating
a vehicle."
This statement was added due to concern over the increased risk of traffic accidents due to
distractions caused by cell phone use.
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 26, addition of wording to statement #1:
"Support integrated waste managementplanningfor the state and for local and regional
communities. "
Additional wording was added to broaden the scale for waste management planning.
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, revise wording to Statement #3:
"Support "buy recycled" or "environmentally preferable purchasing" policies for
government agencies ' procurement. "
35
November 21, 2006
This revision is to broaden the support for recycled products to include environmentally
preferable purchasing.
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, addition of wording to statement #5:
"Support legislation that clarifies and broadens the regulatory authority of local
government to ensure the efficient collection and processing of recyclable material and
solid waste. "
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, revise wording to statement #7:
"Support increased involvement by the State to collect and monitor data on trash
volumes, rates of diversion from landfill disposal and economic impacts of recycling. "
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, addition of wording to statement #11:
"Support consideration ofcertain waste restrictions in Colorado landfills, e.g., bans on
electronic waste, organic materials and "white goods ". "
This wording addresses growing issue of proper disposal of electronic waste which includes
such items as computers, televisions and printers.
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, revise wording to statement #12:
"Support legislation to require greater producer responsibility, such as "take back'
regulations that assist consumers to appropriately recycle electronic equipment (e.g.,
computers and televisions)"
This statement addresses the growing issue ofproper disposal of electronic waste which includes
such items as computers, televisions and printers.
RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE, page 27, revise wording to statement #13:
"Support legislation that establishes a deposit fee on beverage containers using
unclaimed deposits to fund recycling programs"
The purpose of this revision is to specify that deposit money that remains unclaimed in the
program should be used for recycling programs rather than returned to the general fund.
TRANSPORTATION, page 32, addition of statement #13:
"Support legislation that limits the ability of railroad locomotives, cars and trains to
block street and highway grade crossings. "
36
November 21, 2006
This statement is to specifically support legislative efforts to address unreasonable blockage of
grade crossings by trains. Such legislation may be introduced at the state level in 2007.
WATER UTILITIES, page 33, addition of statement #7.
"Support legislation that would reasonably allow Colorado water courts to address
water quality concerns while not significantly altering the responsibility ofwater courts
in protecting water rights against injury. "
The purpose of this statement is to support only legislation that truly deals with water quality
issues involved in the transfer of water rights as opposed to the use of water quality issues as
a tactic to block the legal transfer of water rights. "
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Manvel, to postpone pulled
Item #18 Resolution 2006-119 Adopting the City's 2007 Legislative Policy Agenda, to December 5,
2006. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat.
Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
City Manager Atteberry thanked staff for its hard work and continued effort on the budget. He noted
it was the last meeting for Don Bachman, Interim Transportation Director, as he had taken a new
position in northern California. Mark Jackson will be his replacement as Interim Transportation
Director.
Other Business
Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Roy, to adjourn to November
28, 2006 for a possible executive session regarding the salaries of the City Manager, City Attorney and
Municipal Judge. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Manvel, Ohlson, Roy and
Weitkunat. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
37