Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-02/02/1993-RegularFebruary 2, 1993 ' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday February 2, 1993, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Councilmembers Absent: Winokur. Staff Members Present: Jones, Krajicek, Roy. Citizen Participation Abe Ramos, 205 Buckingham Street, spoke of racism concerns and recent threats received as a result of his desire to run for Council. Citizen Participation Follow-up Councilmember Azari invited citizens to attend an upcoming Diversity Task Force meeting. ' Councilmember Horak sympathized with Mr. Ramos and assured him Council did not condone racism. Agenda Review Deputy City Manager Diane Jones stated there were no changes to the agenda as published. Consent Calendar This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be considered separately under Agenda Item #23, Pulled Consent Items. 7. Brett Larimer has petitioned to include the property he owns in the 300 block of Mathews Street in the Downtown Development Authority District. To be annexed, the property or properties must be contiguous to the existing district and all property owners must consent to the annexation. ' In this instance, Mr. Larimer's property is separated from the DDA 397 91 0 February 2, 1993 ' District by a City -owned parking lot located behind the DMA Plaza building. To meet the legal requirements for annexation, the City must authorize the annexation of its own property into the DDA District. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 19, will approve the annexation of Mr. Larimer's property, and amend the DDA creation ordinance to include the additions of both these properties within the District. The City solicited proposals for this lease -purchase package on November 6, 1992. Because of the uncertainty created by Amendment 1, First Interstate Bank the low bidder chose to withdraw its offer of financing (4.9%). The second low bidder also withdrew. The next lowest bidder Safeco Credit Company Inc. will honor its bid to the City and will agree to changes required to comply with the provisions of Amendment 1. Based on the original list of equipment to be purchased the higher interest rate will result in additional interest payments of $11,728. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January ' 19, authorizes the Purchasing Agent to enter into a lease -purchase financing agreement with Safeco Credit Company Inc. at 5.65% percent interest rate for the lease of the required vehicles and equipment. This lease -purchase financing is consistent with the financial policies of the City of Fort Collins. Under the terms of the lease -purchase agreement, no long term debt is incurred since the lease is subject to annual renewal and appropriation. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 19, will allow the City Wastewater Utility to develop an alternative procedure to use in calculating the wastewater surcharge applied to customers that discharge wastewater containing higher than normal levels of organic material. The alternative procedure is based on a laboratory test known as Total Organic Carbon (TOC). The new procedure was developed to replace the Chemical Oxygen demand test (COD) because the COD test generates a hazardous waste. Extensive laboratory testing has allowed the Wastewater Utility to develop a TOC surcharge rate that is equivalent to the COD surcharge rate it will ' 398 10. February 2, 1993 replace. Using the new TOC surcharge rate will not have a significant effect on the dollar amounts charged to industrial customers. and Guidelines. In September of 1991, staff began a formal planning process for a four mile section of East Prospect Road which has resulted in the Prospect Road Streetscape Program. The study area consists of all properties within 1/3 mile of Prospect Road from Riverside Drive on the west, to the Urban Growth Area boundary one mile east of I-25 (County Road 5). This Ordinance, which was adopted 6-1 on First Reading on January 19, establishes design standards and guidelines for future streetscape development. The standards and guidelines provide a framework for decision -making for both the City as well as private developers proposing projects and/or improvements in the corridor and, as an evaluation tool by the Planning and Zoning Board in the development review process. The Program also includes several Implementation Actions that entail additional research and/or design work. ' Staff recommends postponement of the ordinance on second reading to allow additional time to meet with the appropriate boards and individuals to resolve a number of issues identified on first reading. Adoption of the Consent Agenda will postpone this item to February 16. III 12. This Ordinance will vacate excess right-of-way for Foxtail Street and Sugarpine Street, dedicated with the Replat of Evergreen Park 2nd Filing, located north of Conifer Street and west of North Lemay Avenue. and Documentation of Historical Structures. The City of Fort Collins was awarded a 1992 grant from the Colorado Historical Society in the amount of $4,000 for the work necessary to nominate two local properties to the National Register of Historic Places and to create a "How To" video on preparing local and national historic designations. This information will be used in the Historic Resources Preservation Program. 1 399 13. 14. February 2, 1993 1 Like the State, the City of Fort Collins has maintained laws in its Code against theft and the destruction of property (criminal mischief). Currently, under State law, such crimes may be considered either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending upon the amount of dollar loss. Under the City Code such crimes are misdemeanors. Effective in 1992, the Colorado General Assembly changed the jurisdictional amounts for the crimes of theft, theft of rental property, and criminal mischief by raising the break point between misdemeanor and felony crimes from $300 to $400. The Code currently uses the prior break point of $300. This Ordinance amends Sections 17-36, 17-37, 17-38, and 17-39 to raise the value limit of stolen and damaged property to $400, consistent with State statutes relating to theft of property, theft of rental property, and criminal mischief. The proposed Ordinance would allow the discharge of water from sump pumps I into the City's sanitary sewer system if certain conditions are met and applicable fees are paid. 15. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 13, 1993, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves. 16. Funds were appropriated in 1992 for specific purposes, but not spent. The unspent funds were added to the reserves at the end of 1992. Appropriations were typically not spent because there was not sufficient time to complete bidding in 1992, and thus there was no known vendor or binding contract to encumber the funds for expenditure in 1993. This ordinance reappropriates the 1992 funds for the same uses as were originally approved by Council in 1992. This ordinance would appropriate $7,496.70 earned as interest on an escrow account into the Street Oversizing fund for payment of construction costs at Southridge Greens Boulevard. 400 February 2, 1993 17. Items Relating to the Conversion of CBT Water Held Under Temporary Use Permits with the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to a Permanent Class B Contract. In A. Resolution 93-15 Authorizing Application to Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District for Cancellation of Temporary Use Permits. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 15, 1993 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to Apply and Contract for the Beneficial Use of Water on Behalf of the City of Fort Collins and Prescribing the Terms of Application for an Allotment of Water to the City by Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. This Resolution and Ordinance are needed to apply for the transfer of 745 acre-foot units of Colorado -Big Thompson (CBT) Project water held by the City under Temporary Use Permits to a permanent Class B Contract. The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District ("NCWCD") requires that Temporary Use Permits be converted to a permanent Class B Contract every few years. The City and School District have recently executed an Intergovernmental Agreement (Master Agreement) pertaining to the planning and construction of school facilities within the City. Continued capital investment by the School District in Fort Collins suggests that increased coordination between the City and the School District can result in more effective planning and development of school facilities. Toward this end, staff proposes that a member of the senior staff, well - versed in the City's planning, review and development processes, serve as a .development liaison between the City and the School District. Specifically, this individual would assist the School District in obtaining timely City review of any proposed land use project which is subject to City review under the Master Agreement. In July of 1992, Council passed Resolution 92-106 which allowed Poudre R-1 to keep school buses and a snow tractor on City property near McGraw Elementary in Clarendon Hills. The School District has been attempting to establish a south side bus facility, in conjunction with the City's bus 401 20. 21 22 February 2, 1993 facility. Complications extended the District's schedule and its facility will not be ready by the time the current lease expires on February 26, 1993. The School District has requested that the lease be extended to the end of June 1994 to allow them to work out the details of its proposed bus facility. Transfort continues the implementation of the Transit Development Program 1991-1995 (TDP) and Campus Transit Plan 1991-1995 this year. As a part of that effort, service to the central CSU campus was improved and implemented in August of 1991. This agreement continues the financial formula that has been used in the past, but sets the financial arrangement between the City and ASCSU to reflect the new fee structure established by student referendum. Resolution 93-19 Making Appointments to the Cultural Resources Board. Vacancies currently exist on the Cultural Resources Board due to the resignations of William Kneeland and Alison White. Councilmembers Edwards and Azari reviewed the applications on file and are recommending that the individuals listed below be appointed to fill the unexpired terms as set forth after each name. Name Expiration of Term William Cordiner July 1, 1994 Deborah Romero July 1, 1996 Routine Deeds and Easements. This is a Powerline Easement from John T. & Rosalie A. Durkin, 3016 Ring Neck, needed to install a new street light. Monetary consideration: $10. Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2. 1993, Annexing Certain Properties Into the Downtown Development Authority District. 0 402 February 2, 1993 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 6, 1993, Amending Article IV of Chapter 26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to a Wastewater Surcharge Rates Based on a Test for Total Organic Carbon. 10. and Guidelines. 26. Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek. 27. A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 18, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning Enterprises and City -Owned Utilities. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 19, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning the Vote Required for Executive Sessions. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 20, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning District Residency Requirements. D. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 21, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning Clarifications to the Initiative Process. M Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. 403 February 2, 1993 THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 116, 1992, Authorizing the Sale of Certain Real Property on Portner Road to Poudre R-1 School District for the Amount of $110,268, Adopted on Second Reading. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Poudre R-I School District will purchase the 6 acre site on Portner Road to build a bus facility to store and maintain 30-33 buses. This site was selected adjacent to the Transfort building to allow the District to utilize the existing fueling and bus wash facilities. This site is no longer needed by Light 9 Power or other City departments. The District projects by relocating these buses to this new site it will save about $86,000 per year in its budget, eliminate 135,000 bus miles per year, and reduce annual fuel usage by 22,500 gallons. These savings will be used to reduce the impact of the recent passage of Amendment )'and the failure of Amendment 6. The purchase price represents the appraised value of the property as determined by an MAI appraiser hired by the City plus an additional amount for the impacts ' to Portner Road. Ordinance No. 116, was adopted 6-1 as amended on First Reading on January 19, 1992. When the ordinance approving the sale of this property to the School District was adopted on first reading, language was added by amendment to require that any development of the property would be subject to review and formal approval by the City, rather than review and comment, as would be the case with other property owned by the School District. This requirement was to be made enforceable by a deed restriction. As written, the wording of this amendment to the ordinance might be construed as requiring the use which is immediately proposed by the School District (the bus facility) to go back through the City's land use review processes for formal approval. Consequently, language has been added on second reading to clarify that this is not Council's intent and that only future changes in use would be required to be submitted to the City for formal approval. As to the bus facility, additional language has been added to the ordinance which would require the School District to comply with all improvements and modifications that have been recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board during its earlier review of the bus facility project." Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 116, 1992 on Second Reading. 404 February 2, 1993 Director of Administrative Services Pete Dallow highlighted revisions to Ordinance No. 116, 1993 since first reading. He spoke of issues and objections regarding site development, future development of school district property, and plans for the undeveloped property owned by the City. Ron Spies representing Poudre R-1 was available for Council questions. Councilmember Horak opposed the motion and questioned if the land was being sold to soon. The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: Councilmember Horak. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinances Submitting Proposed Charter Amendments to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City of Fort Collins at the April 6. 1993 Regular Election, Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The regular biennial city election is scheduled for April 6, and state law requires that any proposed Charter amendments be placed on the ballot by ordinance. To meet the statutory requirement that a legal notice be published at least 30 days prior to the April 6 election, Hearing and First Reading of any Ordinance submitting a proposed Charter amendment to the April ballot must be considered on February 2, with Second Reading on February 16. At the January 26 work session, Council discussed a number of proposed Charter amendments and gave direction that the following Ordinances be presented for formal consideration at the February 2 meeting. A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 18, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning Enterprises and City -Owned Utilities. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 19, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning the Vote Required for Executive Sessions. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 20, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning District Residency Requirements. 1 405 February 2, 1993 D. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 21, 1993, Submitting a Proposed Charter Amendment to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City Concerning Clarifications to the Initiative Process. BACKGROUND: At the January 12 work session, Council created an Ad Hoc Committee to review a series of potential ballot issues identified by staff. Committee members Horak, Maxey, and Winokur met with staff in a discussion session on January 14. Subsequently, at the January 26 work session, Council discussed the attached staffmemorandum, which presented information on the possible ballot issues and outlined the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee. Following is a brief summary of each of the proposed amendments: Proposed Charter Amendment 1 - Utilities/Enterprises Amendment 1, which was approved by Colorado voters last November, exempts from its application so-called "enterprises." This exemption was reportedly intended to apply to all utilities, but in order for a utility to constitute an enterprise under Amendment 1, it must be authorized to issue its own bonds. It is questionable whether the existing Charter language would permit the City -owned utilities, if established as enterprises, to issue their own bonds. Consequently, the revenues and expenditures of the City's utilities are presently ' being considered as subject to the Colorado Amendment 1 limitations. The proposed Charter change would amend Article V, Section 19.3 of the Charter to expressly authorize the Council to establish as an enterprise any City -owned utility and empower such enterprise to issue its own revenue bonds. The Council would have to implement this authority through the subsequent passage of an ordinance in order to actually establish any utility as an enterprise. At the January 26 work session, Council gave direction that the proposed Charter amendment should be limited to City -owned utilities and should not be extended to apply to other City -owned businesses. Staff has prepared additional information regarding this proposed Charter amendment. Proposed Charter Amendment 2 - Vote Required for Executive Sessions The State Sunshine Act requires a two-thirds vote to authorize an executive session, while the Charter states that a majority vote is sufficient to authorize any action of the Council, including decisions to go into executive session. The proposed amendment would change Article II, Section 11 of the Charter to permit executive sessions to be held only upon a two-thirds vote of the members present at the meeting. 406 February 2, 1993 Proposed Charter Amendment 3 - District Residency Requirements The Charter is not as explicit as it might be concerning residency requirements for Council District candidates. Language would be added to make it clearer that District Council representatives must reside within the District. The proposed Charter amendment would provide that it is sufficient for District candidates to reside within the District as of the date that the candidate signs the verified acceptance on the nomination petition, which is filed with the City Clerk during the time period from 30 to 50 days prior to the election. Proposed Charter Amendment 4 - Initiative Process During the processing of two initiative petitions in 1992, a number of questions arose concerning the initiative petition process. The proposed amendment would clarify the Charter provisions relating to the form and content of the notice to commence initiative proceedings and the petition's statement of purpose, and would clarify that if an elector signs an initiative petition more than once, all of that elector's signatures on the petition would be subject to invalidation by the City Clerk." City Attorney Steve Roy introduced the amendments and outlined additional language added to the ordinances after publication of the agenda. ' Finance Director Alan Krcmarik gave a slide presentation and spoke of the financial implications of Amendment 1 and federal energy tax increases. Councilmember Horak asked if Amendment 1 excluded government owned businesses, and if they were not excluded, could they be. u City Attorney Steve Roy stated he believed the language indicated utilities were excluded from Amendment 1. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt Ordinance No. 18, 1993 on First Reading as presented by City Attorney Steve Roy. Yolanda C. Nicely, 749 South Lemay A-3176, supported the motion and spoke of the efficient manner which the utilities are operated. Pete Salg, representing the Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the motion. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, stated he was undecided about his vote and questioned if utility rate increases should be presented to a vote of the citizens. Councilmember Kneeland supported the motion stating it was sound fiscal management. 407 February 2, .1993 Mayor Kirkpatrick supported the motion stating the amendment should be put to a vote of the citizens. Councilmember Azari supported separating utility operations from general government operations. The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion was as follows: Yeas:, Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt Ordinance No. 19, 1993 on First Reading. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Horak made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Edwards, to adopt Ordinance No. 20, 1993 on First Reading. The vote on Councilmember Horak's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. I THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Maxey, to adopt Ordinance No. 21, 1993 on First Reading. The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 16, 1993 Establishing a Passenger Facility Charge, Pending Federal Aviation Administration Approval, for the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport, Adopted. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "FINANCIAL IMPACT This Ordinance will, pending Federal Aviation Administration approval, implement the maximum Passenger Facility Charge allowable of $3.00 per enplaned passenger. Collection is anticipated to begin October 1, 1993, and to end when the projects ' 408 February 2, 1993 approved by the Federal Aviation Administration have been completed. Completion of projects is estimated to be October 31, 1996. Total financial impact, based on present enplanements with a 3.7Y annual growth factor calculated over the three year project period, will be $246,360. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is estimated that the airport industry will spend $76 billion to finance airport improvements in the 1990's. Industry experts expect that the funding sources will include $37 billion in revenue bonds and $20 billion in grants, which leaves a shortfall of $19 billion that must come from currently unidentified sources. One additional source of funds has been authorized under federal legislation enacted in 1990. This legislation allows airports to collect a Passenger Facility Charge of $1, $2, or $3 per enplaned passenger. It is recommended that a $3 Passenger Facility Charge be implemented for the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport to generate sufficient funds for the Passenger Facility Charge projects. The Passenger Facility Charge would be included as part of the total cost of the ticket collected by the airlines. It is estimated that passengers will pay an average of less than 2 percent more for a one-way ticket as the result of the Passenger Facility Charge collected at the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport. ' Several of the projects included in the Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport Passenger Facility Charge application have already been completed. The Passenger Facility Charge legislation allows airports to use Passenger Facility Charge fees to recover the sponsor's share of Airport Improvement Program projects completed between November 5th, 1990, and the approval of the Passenger Facility Charge application. These recovered funds are not bound by the restrictions placed on Passenger Facility Charges collected after the approval of the Passenger Facility Charge application, i.e. Passenger Facility Charges cannot be used to fund parking facilities, rental car facilities, restaurants,. concessions, or any other exclusive use facility. H Descriptions of the capital project needs of the Airport as identified to date have been attached. Each description includes anticipated project start and completion date, identification of need for funding summary. A resolution authorizing these projects will be coming to Council in the near future. Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Program grants and State of Colorado Department of Aviation grants will continue to be sought as sources of funding for Fort Collins -Loveland Municipal Airport improvements. The addition of the Passenger Facility Charge will help meet the challenge of building adequate facilities to improve safety and accommodate growth by funding a portion of Airport improvement programs." 409 February 2, 1993 Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Azari, to adopt Ordinance No. 16, 1993 on First Reading. Airport Manager Fred Anderton explained the Passenger Facility Charge (the "PFC") and clarified the fees are intended to be used for expansion projects. ° Anderton responded to Council questions regarding charging a parking fee and stated enplanement is at 40,000 passengers per year which is considered to be a break even point to charge a parking fee. He clarified that the PFC could not be used to fund parking lot concessionaires. Councilmember Horak questioned how the fee related to Amendment 1. City Attorney Steve Roy clarified a portion of the fees would be received by the City and included in the City revenues for Amendment 1, and expenditure of the funds would be subject to Amendment 1 limitations. Finance Director Alan Krcmarik spoke of Amendment 1 implications. Councilmember Edwards questioned if it was a sound financial decision, given Amendment 1, to collect the Passenger Facility Fee and asked if fee collection could be stopped at anytime. Fred Anderton stated the fee could be rescinded. ' Yolanda C. Nicely, 749 South Lemay A-3176, spoke in support of the motion. John Knezovich, 1205 Green, supported charging a parking fee and spoke of Amendment 1 expenditure limitations. Councilmember Horak questioned if federal grant funds were excluded under Amendment 1. Krcmarik clarified federal funds were excluded from Amendment 1. Councilmember Azari spoke in support of the motion. Councilmember Horak requested additional information before second reading addressing the financial impact to the City and requested recommendations from staff regarding possible effects to the City. The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. 410 February 2, 1993 Resolution 93-20 Supporting Larimer County's Application to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs Seeking Designation of Certain Areas within Larimer County as an Enterprise Zone, and Appointment The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Resolution provides support for the County's effort to have specific areas within the County designated as an Enterprise Zone by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs. As Zone Administrator, the County Planning Director will be responsible for all record keeping associated with the Zone, as well as certifying whether a business applying for tax credits is located within the Zone. The City of Fort Collins retains full authority regarding issues of land use and development review. The Urban and Rural Enterprise Zone Act of 1986 declared it the policy of the State of Colorado to provide tax incentives for private enterprise encouraging them to expand or locate within economically disadvantaged parts of the state. ' While Fort Collins as a whole would not qualify for designation, certain "pockets" within the City may be eligible under the State's enterprise zone criteria. Though the tax incentives focus on state taxes, designation offers cities the ability to offer Local tax incentives to eligible businesses located within the zone. The City of Fort Collins is currently able, through the Economic Development Incentive Program, to consider development fee waivers for eligible basic industrial firms. A listing of the tax advantages to businesses from Enterprise Zone designation is attached as well as a map of the area proposed for designation." Councilmember Azari made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to adopt Resolution 93-20. Economic Affairs Director Frank Bruno defined the Enterprise Zone and spoke of financial incentives for businesses that locate in the zones. He reported the cities of Loveland, Berthoud and Wellington have adopted resolutions supporting the initiative. John Barnett, Larimer County Planning Department, briefly spoke of the Enterprise Zone and the purposes for their creation. He clarified the Bureau of Census was responsible for drawing the boundaries. I 411 February 2, 1993 Frank Bruno stated the Department of Local Affairs provided the information for eligibility criteria, ie., per capita income and unemployment rates. He spoke of different enterprise zones in various communities. Mayor Kirkpatrick made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Kneeland, to amend the original motion to add the following language: WHEREAS, the City has identified areas within its corporate limits for inclusion within the Enterprise Zone proposed by Larimer County and has cooperated with the County Planning Director regarding the identification of areas which are located within the City's Urban Growth Area boundary for inclusion into the proposed Enterprise Zone which areas are identified on the map attached hereto; and and additional language added to Section 3: provided that approval of said areas shall not preempt, in the specific context of enterprise zones in the state, the authority of the City of Fort Collins with respect to police and emergency powers, planning and land use, or any other regulation intended to protect the safety and well-being of the community. This approval is also conditioned upon agreement by the Department of Local , Affairs to consult with the City of Fort Collins regarding any significant changes or amendments to the enterprise zone program. Mayor Kirkpatrick spoke of the importance of the conditions. Yolanda C. Nicely, 749 South Lemay A-3176, supported the creation of enterprise zones. Ed Stoner, 225 South Meldrum, spoke in support of the amendment. Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, requested that Highway 14 not be included in the enterprise zone. John Knezovich, 1205 Green, questioned parliamentary procedures. The vote on Mayor Kirkpatrick's motion to amend was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Mike Hauser, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of designating enterprise zones and urged Council to adopt the resolution. 412 February 2, 1993 Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, questioned the advantages of enterprise zones and opposed the resolution. Ed Stoner, 225 South Meldrum, described how the census was conducted. Ed Secor, 621 Laporte Avenue, opposed the Center for Advanced Technologies location in the proposed enterprise zone. Yolanda C. Nicely, 749 South Lemay A-3176, stated she supported the enterprise zone and encouraged Council to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Maxey questioned if adjustments could be made in the future to the designated areas. Barnett spoke of the process for adjusting enterprise zones. Councilmember Kneeland spoke in support of local control, movement to the north and supported the criteria for tax credits. Councilmember Azari stated although it was a not a cure she supported the motion. Councilmember Edwards supported the motion and concurred with Councilmember Azari. ' The vote on Councilmember Azari's motion as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Ordinance No. 17, 1993, Amending Chapter 2, Article V, of the Code Pertaining to Conflict of Interests Complaints, Adopted Option A as Amended. The following is staff's memorandum on this item. "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Code outlines a procedure whereby any person may file a complaint with the Mayor if he or she believes that a City councilmember or board or commission member has committed an ethical violation. Under this procedure, any such complaint which is to be placed on the next Council agenda for review. and possible action by the Council. In the event that such a complaint is filed against four or more councilmembers, the Council is unable to obtain a quorum to act with regard to the complaint. The purpose of the proposed revision is to provide a procedure for dealing with such complaints. 413 February 2, 1993 1 BACKGROUND: The City Charter and Code contain various provisions pertaining to ethical conduct, conflicts of interest and the handling of complaints or inquiries pertaining to these subjects. Section 2-569 of the Code establishes an Ethics Review Board ("the Board") consisting of three regular members and an alternate. The Board is comprised of councilmembers, and it is charged with the responsibility of reviewing any inquiries or complaints regarding the application of ethical rules of conduct under State statute or the Charter or Code. Any person who believes that a councilmember or a board or commission member has violated any provision of State law or the Charter or Code pertaining to ethical conduct may file a complaint with the Mayor. The complaint is then placed on the agenda for the next special or regular City Council meeting for. review and possible action by the Council. Upon receipt of the complaint, the Council is to decide whether to submit the complaint to the Board for an advisory opinion and recommendation. If the matter is not referred to the Board, the Council is to decide what, if any, other action pertaining to the complaint is appropriate. In the event that a complaint is filed against four or more councilmembers, the s Council is unable to obtain a quorum to carry out its responsibility under the Code to review the matter. This is because the councilmembers named in the complaint have a conflict of interest under the City Charter provisions in taking any action with regard to the complaint. Because there is presently no procedure in the Code for dealing with complaints in this particular situation, such r complaints receive no review by the Council or the Board until such time, if at all, that the composition of the Council changes. The proposed Ordinance would amend this Section of the Code to provide a _ procedure for dealing with complaints in which four or more councilmembers are named in the complaint. Two options have been provided. OPTION A Under this option, a complaint filed against four or more councilmembers would not be submitted to the Council for action but would instead be reviewed by a "substitute" board of review consisting of members of City boards and commissions selected at random by the City Clerk. The procedure for conducting the review board meeting and rendering an advisory opinion would be the same as exists for handling other complaints. OPTION B Under this option, the complaint would be reviewed by special legal counsel for the City, in consultation with any remaining councilmembers who had not been named in the complaint. Because of the possibility that a particular complaint could name all councilmembers, the usual roles of the councilmembers and the attorney would be reversed, so that the advisory opinion and recommendation would ' 414 February 2, 1993 actually be rendered by special legal counsel, and any councilmembers available to participate in the review would serve in an advisory capacity. In terms of the relative merits of the alternatives, both have advantages and disadvantages. Under Option A, the review board would still consist of citizen representatives whose perspective would likely be more akin to that of the councilmembers regularly serving on the Board. On the other hand, since board and commission members are appointed by the City Council, asking them to review complaints filed against councilmembers may place them in an awkward position, at least in terms of public perception. Option B has the advantage of utilizing the services of independent legal counsel who, presumably, would have the requisite expertise to interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Charter, Code or State statute from a iegal perspective and would likely be viewed as more "independent" of the City Council. Additionally, any councilmembers not named in the complaint could participate in the review the councilmember perspective which underlies the concept of the citizen review board. The potential disadvantage of this approach is that citizen input may be entirely lacking in the event that all councilmembers are named in a particular complaint. Also, as mentioned above, the normal roles of the attorney and the councilmembers 'have been reversed in this alternative procedure, and it may be unacceptable to have the attorney, rather than the councilmembers, primarily responsible for the opinion that is rendered, since the ' idea of a citizen review board is premised on the value of obtaining opinions and recommendations from a citizen's perspective rather than a strictly legal perspective. Adoption of the proposed ordinance would permit the review of a pending complaint filed by Barbara Allison against four current councilmembers, which has been pending for some time. Absent Council action, no review of that complaint will be possible unless the April 6 election results in the installation of at least four councilmembers who are not members of Challenge Fort Collins (since membership in that organization is the basis of the alleged conflict of interest)." City Attorney Steve Roy gave a presentation on this item. Mayor Kirkpatrick stated due to a potential perception of a conflict of interest on her part, she had filed a letter with the Secretary of State disclosing her involvement. Councilmembers Azari, Kneeland and Maxey stated they also have filed letters with the Secretary of State. Councilmember Edwards made a motion, seconded by Councvlmember Horak;:.to.adopt Ordinance No. 17, 1993 Option A. 311 February 2, 1993 Councilmember Edwards stated he would like to combine options and expand the alternative review board to seven (7) members, and add language to provide that the alternate ethics review board would be made up of remaining Councilmembers without a conflict with the balance to be made up of board or commission members randomly selected by the City Clerk. Councilmember Horak, as the seconder of the motion, accepted the amendment as.a friendly amendment to the previous motion. Councilmember Maxey stated he did not believe five (5) days was a sufficient amount of time to convene the board and review a complaint. Councilmember Horak supported the five (5) day timeframe, stating timeliness was important. Mayor Kirkpatrick suggested extending the timeframe to ten (10) days to accommodate everyone's schedules and providing enough time to sufficiently review the materials. Councilmember Kneeland questioned if prospective Boards and Commission applicants should be made aware that they may be called to serve on a Ethics Review Board. City Attorney Steve Roy stated before the ordinance was presented on second reading there would be new language stating board or commission members who were ' randomly selected would not be forced to serve. Councilmember Azari stated she was pleased to have an alternative. The vote on Councilmember Edwards' motion as amended was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Edwards, Horak, Kirkpatrick, Kneeland and Maxey. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. ATTEST: City Clerk 416 ew Iom