HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-01/20/1981-RegularJanuary 20, 1981
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 5:30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on
Tuesday, January 20, 1981, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City
of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Coun-
cilmembers: Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and
Wilmarth.
Absent: None.
Staff Members Present: Arnold, Ruggiero, Lanspery, Krajicek, Lewis,
and Mabry.
' Agenda Review: City Manager
City Manager John Arnold announced that Item #18, Amendment of a Non -Con-
forming Use - 2105 S. Shields Street, would need to e tabled or one mont
at
t e request ot the applicant.
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 be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately.
4. Consider approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 6,
T381.
5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 1, 1981, Vacating an Alley in Indian
HTTTS ub3ivision3th�i ling.
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 6th
and is a request for approval of an alley vacation. The alley is
located west of lots 86, 87, 88, 89, and 90 in the Indian Hills
_ Subdivision 5th Filing and adjacent to the Indian Hills West P.U.D.
17
January 20, 1981
6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2, 1981, Appropriating Unanticipated
Revenues in the apita Projects Fund or 9$(l
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 6th
and appropriates unanticipated revenues ($23,198.00) from future
assessment proceeds in the Capital Projects Fund for 1980 to cover the
assessable portion of several improvement district costs.
7. Second Readin of Ordinance No. 3 1981 Appropriating Unanticipated
'6ev anncc in a arnat a aYT`arp Fund for
17DU.
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 6th
and appropriates an additional $4,775 in the Perpetual Care Fund for
1980.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 4, 1981, Appropriatin�Prior Year
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 6th
and appropriates $8,298 in the Revenue Sharing Fund for transfer to
the Telephone Fund in 1980.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 5, 1981, Appropriating Unanticipated
Revenues in tFie Te ep one Fund or 98 .
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on January 6th
and appropriates $48,350 to cover additional operating and maintenance
costs for the telephone system.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, 1981, Relatin to the Creation of a
oca Massa e ar or Authority an sta fishing Licensing ees an
Minimum Requirementsr assage Par or Premises.
This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on January 6th by a 4-1
vote and creates a Massage Parlor Licensing Authority, that Authority
being made up of the members of the Liquor Licensing Authority.
Additionally, the Ordinance establishes licensing fees and minimum
requirements for massage parlor premises.
11. Hearin and First Readin of Ordinance No. 10, 1981, Pertaining to
ontracts or ro essiona ervices.
This Ordinance incorporates the selection procedure for professional
firms as a part of the City Code.
0
12. Hearinq and First Readi
13
14
of Ordinance No.
i inq, Lots 6-
January 20, 1981
1981, Rezoning a Repl
100777
This is a request to rezone Lots 46 - 49, Block 4, Replat of Evergreen
Park, Second Filing, from RLP, Low Density Planned Residential, to
RLM, Low Density Multiple Family, located on Conifer Street, east of
Redwood, consisting of 1.41 acres.
Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 12, 1981, Relating to
Revisions to BL, IL, PT and Z ones- s�T ow, ay are enters in t-fiese
Zones.
This is a staff -initiated change to the Zoning Ordinance to add child
care centers as a use by right in the B-L, C, I-L, and I-P zoning
districts,
Resolution Asking the Legislature to Insure that the Future
Lottery Profits a Earmar State a for af—rks and Recreation Purposes.
' This Resolution would ask the Legislature to insure that the future
lottery profits be earmarked for Parks and Recreation purposes.
15. Resolution
mending Mr, and Mrs. William J. Suitts for Their
ons to rai the Ts Proqram.
This Resolution would recognize the Suitts family for their contribu-
tions to the Trails Program,
16, Resolution Establishing the Preference of the City with Regard to the
oocatio o t ie Fort oTTins Expressway.
This Resolution establishes the "Orange -Purple -Red" alignment as the
preferred route of the Fort Collins Expressway,
17. Resolution Authorizin the City Manager to Enter Into An Agreement
With t e State of o orado Loncern�ng Impion of a omprehen-
sive Traffic Safety Program.
This Resolution would authorize the City Manager to enter into a
contract with the Division of Highway Safety to assist the Police
Department in implementing a Selective Enforcement Program. The
contract is for the purchase of a police motorcycle, radar unit and
related equipment and is the amount of 18,472,00;.
19
January 20, 1981 '
18. Amendment of a Non -Conforming Use - 2105 S. Shields Street.
This is a request to amend an existing non -conforming use located at
2105 South Shields Street, zoned RP, Planned Residential. The exist-
ing structure presently has 1,124 square feet used as retail space
(which is the non -conforming use) and 2,295 square feet in residential
use. The applicant proposes to change the use of the entire area of
the structure, 3,419 square feet, to professional office space.
19. Consider 1980 Annual Report for the Liquor Licensing Authority.
Staff recommends that Council accept the annual report of the Liquor
Licensing Authority and express their appreciation to the Authority
for their accomplishments in 1980.
20. Routine Deeds and Easements.
Deed from the City to the Housing Authority.
In 1979, the City acquired two lots located at Buckingham and
First Streets under the CDBG program. Last year, the City
granted title of these lots to the Housing Authority so that the ,
Housing Authority could apply for a Colorado Division of Housing
grant and a loan to develop a four-plex on the site. When the
City donated the property to the Housing Authority, the deed
included a clause to provide for the property to revert to the
City if it was not used for the construction of low-income
housing within two years. This new deed removes the reverter
clause and is coming before Council because of that change.
B. Deed from Diamond International Corporation.
This deed conveys Tract A of the Prospect -Timberline PUD First
Filing, which contains 1.0381 acres for the Spring Creek Trails
System.
C. Power line easement from Cimarron Associates Ltd. located at 415
East Monroe, to provide electric service to Cimarron Western
Wear. Consideration: $1.00.
D. Agreement with Bernard Ryan for property acquisition needed in
Mulberry Street Improvement District No. 74. This represents a
negotiated settlement for a parcel originally acquired by an
immediate possession award. The consideration.for this parcel is
$8,778 including $6,700 as the fee simple consideration, $160 for
a permanent easement, $134 for a temporary easement and $1,787 '
for settlement.
20
IJanuary 20, 1981
Ordinances on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk, Wanda
Krajicek.
Item #5. Second Readinq of Ordinance No. 1, 1981, Vacating an Alley in
Item
#6.
Second
Readin
of Ordinance No.
2, 1981,
Appropriating
Unantici-
pate
evenues
in t e capital Projects un or
Item
V .
Second
Readin
of Ordinance No.
3, 1981,
Appropriating
Unantici-
patedevenues
in t e Perpetualare
un
for
Item
#8.
Second
Reading
of Ordinance No.
4, 1981,
Appropriating
Prior Year_
esT erves in He
b aring
Fund for
1980.
Item
#9.
Second
Reading
of Ordinance No.
5, 1981,
Appropriating
Unantici-
pate
evenues
in t e e ep one
un or
Item
#10.
Second
Reading
of Ordinance No.
8, 1981,
Relating to the
Creation
o1 a
oca assage
Par orr u�ty
an
2tabfishing—Ticensing
'
Fees an minimum Requirements or Massage Parlor
Premises.
Ordinances on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk, Wanda Kra-
jicek.
Item #11. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 10,1981 Pertaining
to Contracts for Professional Services.
Item #12. Hearing and First Readin�.of Ordinance No. 11, 1981, Rezoning a
Tep at o vergreen ark, S7 d 1—iling, Lots - 9, Block
Item #13. Hearin and First Readin of Ordinance No. 12, 1981, Relating_to_
e M ions to an ones o allow ay are enters in
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman St. Croix, to
adopt and approve all items not removed from the Consent Calendar. Yeas:
Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and
Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
21
January 20, 1981 '
Amendment of a Non -Conforming Use -
2105 S. Shields Street, Tabled to February 17
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Kross, to table
the amendment of a non -conforming use at 2105 S. Shields Street. Yeas:
Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and
Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Consideration of Engineering Service
Contract with Black and Veatch for the
Sludge Disposal Project, Contract
Awarded to Black and Veatch
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"Review of the attached items will bring the City Council up-to-date on the '
Sludge Disposal Project:
0 Conceptual Design Report
0 Estimated Costs and Grant Funding
0 Work Breakdown Structure
0 Milestone Schedule
0 Scope of Engineering Services
Our Sludge Management Plan was submitted to EPA in April 1980 and has been
under review since that date. Following their tentative approval, the EPA
"Finding of No Significant Impact" FONSI was announced to the public for a
30 day review and comment period which ended January 10, 1981. We expect
to receive EPA final approval within a few days.
We must now proceed on a very fast schedule of final plan completion by
August 1, 1981 in order to assure an additional 10% funding (above 75%) of
our construction.
The Engineering Services contract is to be in a maximum amount of $647,694.
This work has been contemplated in our 1981 budget and will carry on '
through 1983.
22
I
January 20, 1981
This is a continuation of a contractual relationship with Black and Veatch
on expansion of Wastewater Treatment Plant #2. Selection of Black and
Veatch was made about six years ago."
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Kross, to award
the contract to Black and Veatch and to look at a way of dealing with long
term contracts that are compatible with the new professional services
selection procedures. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves,
St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Resolution Adopted Terminating Alley
Improvement District No. 11
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"On October 7, City Council directed the Director of Public Works to
' prepare the plans, etc. for the Consolidated Alley Sidewalk Improvement
District No. 11.
On November 18, City Council approved the plans, specifications, ownership
map, and engineers' estimate as prepared for the Consolidated Alley Side-
walk Improvement District No. 11.
The sidewalk phase has been completed by the property owner. Therefore,
the Consolidated Alley Sidewalk Improvement District No. 11 will no longer
be concerned with the sidewalk phase, and the title changed to Alley
Improvement District No. 11.
On January 6, City Council voted against the ordinance which would have
established the Alley Improvement District No. 11.
In order to stop the proceedings of the improvement district, it will be
necessary for the City Council to pass a resolution terminating the dis-
trict."
Councilman Kross asked to be excused from vote and discussion on this item
as he is a property owner.
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by. Councilman Bowling, to
adopt this Resolution. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, St. Croix,
Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilwoman Reeves (Kross out of room).
I
THE MOTION CARRIED.
23
January 20, 1981
Ordinances Adopted Relating to
the Establishment of a Landmark Preservation Commission
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"A. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 6, 1981, Establishing a
Landmark Preservation Commission
B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 7, 1981, Amending the Code
Relating to the Duties of the Cultural Resources Board
The Cultural Resources Board has recommended the establishment of a new
Landmark Preservation Commission which would serve as a technical board to
review landscaping, construction and appearance changes to landmark struc-
tures or structures located in landmark districts. The attached Ordinance
No. 6 has been drafted for that purpose and to establish the criteria and
procedure whereby landmark structures and landmark districts are designated
and how an owner can obtain permission to perform construction or land-
scaping work on such structures. The attached Ordinance No. 7 simply
clarifies the duties of the Cultural Resources Board since that board would
play a key role in the designation process for landmark structures and ,
districts.
These ordinances were tabled on first reading at the January 6th meeting to
allow staff to address Council concerns. Advertisements for positions on
the Commission have continued and an application deadline was set for
January 16, 1981. The concerns expressed by Council at the January 6th
meeting are as follows:
1. Composition of the Commission. The ordinance has
been redrafted to provide in Section 69-4 (B) that the
Commission need not be solely composed of residents of
the City.
2. Procedure for Designation. Section 69-7 (A) has been
changed to provide tF ai the Cultural Resources Board
can recommend designation of a landmark structure or
landmark district only upon the affirmative vote of at
least five of its members if such designation is
involuntary. If the designation is a voluntary one,
the recommendation of the Board can be made upon
the affirmative vote of a majority of the quorum.
We have also provided that no motion or application for
designation of a specific landmark or landmark district
may be made more than once during any twelve consecu-
tive months.
24
Planning Office Review. Section 69-7
ceanged to require notification of the
Planning and Development if the Planning
to respond within seven days after receipt
a proposed designation.
January 20, 1981
(C) has been
Director of
Office fails
of notice of
Designation Hearing. Section 69-7 (B) has been
c angeFi�d to requiredesignation hearings of the Cultural
Resources Board to be conducted by at least five
members of the Board. We have also added language
which would require at least 24 hours advance notifi-
cation of any known shortage of sufficient members to
conduct the hearing. This paragraph has also been
changed to require the hearing be recorded and tran-
scripts provided to the Council.
5. Findin s and Recommendations of the Board. Section
as een amended to require tie Board to act
officially on each proposed designation within 35 days
of the hearing. This time period was shortened in
order to hasten the designation process and it was felt
that 35 days would give the Board ample time to act on
a proposed designation at its next regularly scheduled
monthly meeting.
6. Deletions. We have made certain deletions to provi-
sions which were contained in the original ordinance
which Council felt might be appropriately deleted.
Section 69-7 (F) (b) which required the -Board, within
15 days after reaching its decision to terminate the
designation procedure was deleted. It was felt that
the recommendation of the Board to continue or termi-
nate the procedure could be transmitted to the City
Council and that the Board itself would not terminate
the procedure. We also deleted a sentence in paragraph
(G) which required Council action within ninety days of
receipt of the Board's recommendation; and we deleted a
sentence in paragraph (H) which would suspend the
effective date of the designation until recording with
the County Clerk and 'Recorder had been accomplished
since the law would imply such a requirement anyway.
7. Approval of Applications for Building Permit. Section
69- has been cfianged to permit Changes in appli-
cations for building permits or the plans and specifi-
25
January 20, 1981 '
cations for the work without resubmittal to the Commis-
sion except where such changes would defeat the pur-
poses of the Landmark Preservation Ordinance.
8. Remedyin of Dangerous Conditions. Section 69-9
as een c ange to permif
_ity officials to
include timely received recommendations of the Commis-
sion in emergency orders but not to require the
inclusion of such recommendations.
Other than as outlined above, and except for minor typographical changes,
Ordinance No. 6 is being presented to you in the same form as presented on
January 6th. There have been no changes to Ordinance No. 7.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilwoman Reeves, to adopt
Ordinance No. 6, 1981 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling,
Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to adopt '
Ordinance No. 7, 1981 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling,
Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ordinance Tabled on First Reading
Amending the Zoning Ordinance Relating
to Group Homes in Residential Areas
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"The zoning ordinance at present makes no specific provision for group
homes. The proposed ordinance changes are intended to recognize the
increasing utilization of group homes within the community, and require
that they be physically compatible with their neighborhood and not be
over -concentrated in any neighborhood.
As suggested
by the Council at its December 9 work
session, the staff has
prepared two
alternative ordinances.
Alternate
A is the ordinance initially drafted by the
staff
and recommended by the Planning and
Zoning Board,
which
allows group homes in all residential
zones subject
1
26
IJanuary 20, 1981
to scale and separation requirements. The requirements,
however, have been revised in response to Council input
to be more protective, especially in the RL zone.
Alternate B would differ from A by requiring a special
review hearing process for any group home proposal in
the RL zone. This alternate also includes general
criteria for review of group home uses in the low density
zones, and .sets forth a special review process which
involves public hearings before the Planning and Zoning
Board and the City Council. Under the special review
process as proposed, the Planning and Zoning Board would
make a recommendation to the City Council which would
make the final decision. (This Ordinance could be
modified to provide for special review and a final
decision by the Planning and Zoning Board with an appeal
to the City Council.)
Both alternates require by definition that group homes be operated as
single dwellings and be licensed by an appropriate governmental agency.
The staff recommendation is for Alternate B because it is intended to allow
careful consideration of concerns over the scale and type of group homes to
be located in the RL zone, while still conforming with the generally
objective approach of the ordinance recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Board in the RM and RH zones."
Senior Planner Paul Diebel explained that staff has prepared two versions
(Alternates A and B) of this Ordinance for Council consideration.
Alternate A is similar to the original Ordinance presented in August and
allows group homes in all residential zones by right subject to size and
scale limitations. It was revised slightly to make the size limitations
more restrictive in the R-L zone.
Alternate B differs from A by requiring a special review process for any
group home proposed in the R-L zone. He noted that the staff recommenda-
tion was for Alternate B.
Councilwoman Reeves questioned why the Planning and Zoning Board could not
have the final decision on group homes with appeal to Council.
Paul Deibel replied that it would be more consistent for Planning and
Zoning to have the final review but that the Ordinance allowing the Plan-
ning and Zoning Board final review powers only applies to subdivisions and
' P.U.D.'s. The Ordinance would need to be revised to allow Planning and
Zoning these further powers.
27
January 20, 1981 '
Councilman Wilkinson stated that he felt the matter was critical enough
that both Planning and Zoning and Council should review the location of
group homes.
Councilman Bowling expressed concern about the R-L zone stating that he
felt that zone deserved protection. He agreed that Planning and Zoning
should be the final review to avoid two separate hearings.
Councilman St. Croix noted his opposition to the locating of group homes in
the R-L zone.
Councilman Wilkinson expressed agreement with Councilman St. Croix.
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion to amend the Ordinance to have the
Planning and Zoning Board conduct the hearing and make the final recommend-
ation with appeal to Council.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Assistant City Attorney Pete Ruggiero explained that this was a substantial
change and suggested the item be tabled to allow staff to come back with 2 I
or 3 ordinances to modify the original ordinance and provide Planning and
Zoning with the final authority.
Planning Director Curt Smith suggested that other items such as expansion
of non -conforming uses might be included in the ordinance giving the
Planning and Zoning Board final authority.
Councilwoman Reeves made a motion, seconded by Councilman -sdilmarth, that
the group homes ordinance be written with Alternate B and th:a the special
review process would take place before the Planning and Zoning Board and
come to the City Council only on appeal.
Councilman Kross noted that the motion was an amendment and made no mention
of tabling. He again requested clarification.
Assistant City Attorney Pete Ruggiero noted that by amending the ordinance
it does not stand alone. The Charter provision allows Council to act by
ordinance to empower the Planning and Zoning Board with additional author-
ity. If this ordinance were adopted as amended, staff would still have to
come back with another ordinance amending and giving authority to the
Planning and Zoning Board and another ordinance amending the appeals proce-
dure. If this ordinance were passed on First Reading, we would end up
staggering the other items. He recommended considering all the ordinances
at the same time. I
m
9 January 20, 1981
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
table Ordinance No. 13, 1981, on First Reading to February 3. Yeas:
Councilmembers Bowling, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: Council -
members Kross, Reeves, Gray.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Executive Session Authorized
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
adjourn into executive session for the purpose of discussing legal matters.
Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Reeves, Gray, St. Croix, and Wilkinson.
Nays: Councilmembers Kross and Wilmarth.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Citizen Participation
Mayor Gray introduced Gerald Clark and his Webelo troop who were visiting
' Council Chambers.
City Manager's Report
City Manager John Arnold noted that appointments to the Landmark Preserva-
tion Commission and the Quality of Life Committee would be made at the
February 3 meeting.
He further noted that electrical demand and usage in Fort Collins has
increased 9.6% per year while the rest of the country is only experiencing
a 2 to 3% increase per year.
Public Hearing on Downtown
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"There are two items on the agenda dealing with the downtown. One calls an
election on the question of the Downtown Development Authority. The other
is a general public hearing on the downtown.
This is the general public hearing.
' It's intended to begin the discussion on the downtown by soliciting open
comments and suggestions from the public."
► @1
January 20, 1981
The following persons spoke at this hearing:
1. Richard Beardmore, 110 N. College.
2. Art March, Jr., 110 E. Oak.
Ordinance Adopted on First Reading
Submitting the Question of the Establishment
of a Downtown Development Authority to a Vote
of the Qualified Electors of the District
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"An ad hoc committee of downtown citizens has been meeting for some months
to consider the question of a creation of a Downtown Development Authority.
A copy of its report and recommendation from that body was presented to the
City Council on January 6th. Staff concurs with the recommendation of the
committee to create the Downtown Development Authority.
One of the City's goals for a number of years has been to strengthen the ,
downtown. To that end, a number of efforts have been exerted. The special
improvement district was created, a general improvement district was
created, and the City spent about $750,000 for both of those projects. The
City has also committed over $180,000 of its Community Development Block
Grant monies to strengthen the downtown, another $45,000 to help develop
the concept of the Convention Center -Hotel. The City has worked at some
length with the Burlington Northern Land Development Corporation to en-
courage development of the 25 acres owned by that body, and has exerted a
great deal of effort with the County to acquire and develop some land that
would in part benefit the downtown. We also made a major effort at urban
renewal in response to a specific development proposal, and that was the
only effort to date that was unsuccessful or unpromising.
The promise of the Downtown Development Authority is strong. The more
everyone involved in consideration of the question has learned about
Downtown Development Authority, the more enthusiastic each has become. The
opportunities of using tax increment financing as a way of saving general
taxpayers money and capturing the benefit of increased development- -part i-
cularly that development that appears to be going to happen anyway --cer-
tainly seems to make good sense. Furthermore, this activity adds to the
momentum that is evident and is building in the downtown. Unlike urban
renewal, there needs to be a declaration of distress existing in the
downtown. It's a positive program of action.
To the extent that the Downtown Development Authority could be a coordi-
native body, unifying the diverse elements in the downtown --public, pri-
30
,. January 20, 1981
vate, and non -profit --toward identifying common goals and helping each to
do its part to move toward that common goal, then the Downtown Development
Authority offers a dimension of unparalleled opportunity. The staff would
applaud that effort.
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance calling the election creating
the Downtown Development Authority."
Councilman Wilkinson made a motion, seconded by Councilman Bowling, to
adopt Ordinance No. 14, 1981 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers
Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays:
None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Public Hearing on Ballot Items
Following is the City Manager's memorandum on this item:
"Council has considered, to date, ten ballot items for the April election.
1. Proposed Amendment No. 1 would establish a run-off election system for
'at large" elections.
2. Proposed Amendment No. 2 would allow the City to sell, lease or
exchange parts of the water or electric utility system by ordinance as
long as the system as a whole is not impaired.
3. Proposed Amendment No. 3 would eliminate the Charter requirement that
Council must approve the discharge of any person who has been employed
full-time with the City for ten years and who is within five years of
retirement.
4. Proposed Amendment No. 4 would amend three sections of the Charter
dea—Ting with the budgeting process:
a. to change the time when the City Manager is required to submit a
proposed budget from October to September.
b, to change the time the annual appropriations ordinances must be
adopted from November to October.
C. to provide that the certification of the annual tax levy will be
' made by the City Clerk to the County.
31
January 20, 1981
1
5. Proposed Amendment No. 5 would provide that appropriations for capital
projects and grant--s will not lapse at the end of the budget year, but
will remain in effect until project completion.
6. Proposed Amendment No. 6 would allow the City Manager to transfer
unused budget amounts from one budget category to another in the same
fund, at any time during the budget year.
7. Proposed Amendment No. 7 would delete the Charter requirement that the.
ounce ave prepared at the end of every fiscal year a report of the
financial administration of the City.
8. Proposed Amendment No. 8 would create a new section in the Charter
relating -to-- municiTborrowing and would authorize the Council to
issue tax increment bonds, by ordinance and without an election.
9. Proposed Amendment No. 9 would allow Council to enter into lease -
purchase or installment purchase agreements for the purpose of acquir-
ing real or personal property.
10. Proposed. Ballot Issue No. 10 would authorize the sale of $5,065,000 in
Community Park
'
general o igatio-n Fon-3s to support a four-year pro-
gram.
The formal hearing and first reading of any issue scheduled for the April
election will be held on February 3rd."
Mayor Gray asked if anyone wished to speak on Proposed Charter Amendments
1-9. Hearing no comments, she asked if anyone wished to speak on Proposed
Ballot Issue No. 10. The following persons spoke on that issue:
1. LarrY Kline, Fort Collins .Soccer Club, asking for additional
soccer fields.
2. Mike ImMasche, member of the Parks and Recreation Board, speaking
in support of placing the bond issue on the ballot.
Councilman Wilkinson requested assurance that staff is investigating ways
to include operating and maintenance costs with the proposed bond issue.
Councilman Bowling noted that on February 3, he would propose wording for
Proposed Ballot Issue No. 10 that the bond issue shall be paid for by an
increase in the property tax levy and/or proceeds from the state lottery
funds. He asked staff to see how that could be included in the ballot
language.
32
January 20, 1981
City Manager John Arnold replied that there would be a report on both items
on February 3.
Other Business
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman St. Croix, to
appoint Councilman Wilmarth as an additional member of the Airport Ad Hoc
Committee and to authorize Councilmembers Kross and Reeves to attend the
meetings as time permits. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross,
Reeves, St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
interview applicants to the Landmark Preservation Commission and the
Quality of Life Committee before making appointments and to have Councilman
Kross chair the interview committee consisting of Councilmembers Kross,
Wilmarth and Reeves. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves,
St. Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None. '
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Appointment to Senior Citizens Coordinating Commission
Councilman Bowling made a motion, seconded by Councilman Wilkinson, to
appoint Lucy Tackle as a permanent member of the Senior Citizens Coordinat-
ing Commission. Yeas: Councilmembers Bowling, Gray, Kross, Reeves, St.
Croix, Wilkinson, and Wilmarth. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
---
33