Littleton City Council
December 5, 2006

These minutes do not reflect every item that was discussed at the council meeting. I have only included what I thought was most interesting. The complete and official minutes are available on the city’s web site.

Unscheduled Public Appearances

Debbie Brinkman asked the council to move the public hearing on WalMart to January 22 – “people want you to slow this down.” The Planning Commission has spent 9 hours on this subject and they are still not done. If council begins the discussion on the 19th of December the meetings will carryover into the holidays. It is a public hearing and the public needs to be heard. Several people will be out of town for the holidays will not have the opportunity to be heard if the meeting is not rescheduled.

Brinkman also addressed the possibility that Don Knight, commissioner, might be asked to step down from the Planning Commission since he is an employee of the city. Brinkman thought that Knight had demonstrated his open-mindedness, he has been fair, and has asked appropriate questions. Council should be ashamed of themselves in bringing this matter forward at this time. Council’s decision to appoint Don Knight was spot on.

Linda Poullier asked the council to reconsider the calendar date for the hearing also. It is important to have an opportunity to attend and the holiday venue is inappropriate. Give everyone the opportunity to attend.

Paula Szilard was shocked and saddened to hear that Knight might not continue serving on the Planning Commission. He is the one that has asked the most intelligent questions. His expertise and analytical ability is needed. The city council knew of this conflict before appointing him. She questioned the timing of the matter – just a week after he has asked some very probing questions. She also did not think it was appropriate to have the hearings so close to the holidays.

Bill Snyder said he looked at the zoning regulations and suggested the council read and review the procedures. Something didn’t look right to him. He brought up the poor notice and said the council would have to post the location again and he urged them to make sure it could be read from Santa Fe Drive.

He told the council that they did not yet have jurisdiction to take action on a zoning request.

Approval of Municipal Judges’ Contracts

The next matter to come up was to approve the judges’ contract. Doug Clark moved to amend the motion to remove Don Knight as one of the judges. Jim Taylor seconded.

Amy Conklin said she had considered the issue carefully and upon further reflection she can see how they made a mistake but this is not the time to deal with it. She suggested March would be a more appropriate time. They will be making other appointments then.

John Ostermiller said they just appointed Knight back in March and they had the discussion at that time. They decided that since he worked only 12 hours the prior year they went ahead with the appointment. The Charter does not prohibit the appointment and neither does code. He suggested that they ask legal counsel to prepare an Ordinance and if it passes they can replace Knight in March or April. He said the amendment to the motion does not give Knight a choice of whether or not he serves on the PC or the bench.

Rebecca Kast did not see a conflict and if there was one, Knight would recuse himself.

Tom Mulvey agreed with Ostermiller’s position and said they have the same problem with Mayor Taylor.

Doug Clark said he was the instigator of this issue. He said Section 97 of the Charter, paragraph 2 could be read in a number of ways. It states, “No officer, appointee or employee of the City shall be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in the sale of any land, materials, supplies or services to the City…” Boards and commissions are citizen committees – employees have a different relationship with council. Mr. Knight wanted an opportunity to discuss this with council but had a conflict and could not be there tonight. However, he did send an email to each council member late in the afternoon. Mr. Knight would prefer to stay on the PC.

Jim Taylor did not have a problem with Knight on the PC. Taylor also said the River Front Authority is mandated by law to have a council member sit on the committee, and he is a member of that board. Mulvey said that was not referring to the River Front Authority but the Housing Authority which Taylor is a member.

Pat Cronenberger amended the motion to include Knight as a municipal judge. There was some discussion about her amendment – how could she amend a motion that removed him with an amendment that included him. After some discussion about what motion was before them and what was really needed Clark withdrew his motion and another motion was made to approve all judges. It passed 6 to 1 with Clark voting no.

Highline Business Improvement District

Next item of business was the approval of the Highline Business Improvement District (BID). Clark spoke in great detail about his concern over the financial dealings of the board. He said it looks like the property owners are loaning money to the district to pay themselves and this practice spans several years. He said there wasn’t an audit report for 2005 and 2006 that he could find. The BID is under the jurisdiction of the council. The District continues to pile on debt and the longer it goes on the higher the debt. He did not recommend the approval of their operating plan and budget. Tom Mulvey seconded Clark’s motion.

Because this was such a complicated set of circumstances that Clark brought up as concerns, I asked him if he would briefly state those concerns. Below is his response.

#1
It appears that the board of directors of the BID, which is also the land owners, are reimbursing themselves for real or fake costs at the expense of future property owners.

#2
Those costs will be reimbursed via taxes.

#3
Those costs are driving up the total debt levied against the property, making the property less desirable vis-à-vis other properties in the south metro area.

#4
The council has ultimate authority and responsibility for the organization and operation of the district, i.e. the city’s reputation is at stake.

#5
The payments being made by the district do not currently cover the interest or principle payment requirements.

Taylor asked legal counsel if they had the authority to do that (not approving their operating plan and budget) and what would happen. Larry Berkowitz, city attorney, said he would have to look at the statute but the budget had to be certified by December 15. He said they did receive an audit and he didn’t know when they stopped copying the council on the audit. He said in the beginning everyone had on rosy glasses but the development did not develop as fast as they planned.

Clark said the request should have been submitted by September 30 and now it is presented right before it is due. Clark thought there should be a serious look at the mil levy.

Kast wanted to know how not approving the budget helped the council. Clark told her they could get rid of the board and amend the operation plans.

Ostermiller thought they were trapped. There were investors and bond holders that took the risk. There was a time when the Centennial Race Track redevelopment was the biggest bust – now it is some of the highest priced and desirable property. I know they have problems and the owners keep digging into their pockets. We will put the whole 50 acres under. (if they do not approve the plan)

Cronenberger said if they fool around with it they will do more harm to their bond rating.

The motion to deny approval was defeated 2/5 with Clark and Mulvey voting yes.

WalMart Hearing

Kast made a motion to move the public hearing to February 6th saying that they did not anticipate a 3rd PC meeting when they set the date. She was sorry that it put the applicants off another month. After some discussion her motion was withdrawn and another was made to hold the meeting on January 23 and January 30 (if a second meeting becomes necessary). Incorporated in the motion was the approval of the rezoning on first reading. Motion passed 6/1 with Cronenberger voting no.

Approval of Audit Contract

Council had to approve the accounting firm chosen for the audit. Clark moved to add up to $10,000.00 to add an auditing task to look at the postings of expenses. He had taken a look at a couple of entries and found the postings questionable. Motion failed 3 to 4 with Conklin, Kast, Cronenberger and Ostermiller voting no.

Reports

Jim Woods said the discussions on regionalization with Grayson Robinson, Arapahoe County Sheriff, have begun.

Workshop topics were discussed.

Mulvey moved that the council hold their workshop at the museum on Friday, Feb. 2. Kast seconded and motion passed 7 to 0.

The topics for discussion at the retreat include:

1. Urban Land Institute report in Mineral RTD site

2. Realignment of police Community Resource Officers (CRO)

3. Regionalization of law enforcement facilities and programs

4. South Platte River Corridor Projects

5. CML/DRCOG regionalization issues

6. Prioritization of study session topics

Clark suggested they talk about economic gardening – is economic gardening enough. He thought the city might be too late but should try to entice the new Boeing Lockheed Alliance into Littleton.

Mulvey wanted to discuss marketing Littleton.

Clark suggested that topics for the retreat should be limited to those items that they cannot adequately cover in their special meetings. He preferred to pick one or two topics that are vital issues. He suggested regionalization of the police and economic development.

Someone suggested a citizen’s budget process be discussed too.

Kast was suggesting an optional bus tour of Littleton – a systematic look at the different neighborhoods.

Taylor said the ULI (Urban Land Institute) report will have a major impact on Littleton.

Conklin said she had been very busy the last couple of weeks. She has potential solutions to three of their problems.

1.
TABOR – council members would be receiving a memo from Woods and Conklin that would address some ideas on an ad hoc citizen budget committee.

2.
The water fund – Since there is no more water in Colorado the only new source of water is through conservation. She thinks it makes sense to use the water fund to develop a water conservation plan, either by hiring a water consultant or a staff person. She said Littleton is not cutting edge at all and needs to look at what other communities are doing.

3.
Trail Mark emergency services – She proposed using $250,000 to improve their services. She would take $125,000 from the travel and training budget and $125,000 from the contingency fund. She suggested contracting with an ambulance service or to beef up the paramedics at station 16.

Clark said the Trail Mark issue should be discussed at the January 9th study session along with other alternatives and that $250,000 might not be enough money.

Ostermiller said they had not heard from Lockheed Martin yet. He suggested that talking to the chiefs of the different districts wasn’t bearing fruit and they should start talking with other elected officials.

Taylor thought Cindy Hathaway from Trail Mark should be included in the discussions on Trail Mark and Ostermiller thought not.

Clark reminded the council that West Metro’s response to Trail Mark was not any better than Littleton’s. He is not sure either of the solutions (Lockheed Martin and West Metro) will get the results they want.

Conklin tried to make a motion to appropriate the money. She was told that what she was trying to do was not an appropriate way to amend the budget. She was also told that nothing was going to happen until they had discussed the matter on the 9th of January. There was a vote to have staff come up with an ordinance to appropriate the money. Motion failed 3 to 4 with Ostermiller, Taylor, Mulvey, and Cronenberger voting no.

Clark moved that there be a study session to discuss emergency services at Trail Mark on Janaury 9th. Motion passed 6 to 1 with Ostermiller voting no.

Taylor said Main Street looks fantastic. (It really does look magical. The City staff did an incredible job “lighting” up downtown Littleton.)