Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-20-23 - Study Session Agenda PacketSTUDY SESSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 W. 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO November 20, 2023 6:30 pm This meeting will be conducted as a virtual meeting, and in person, at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Municipal Building. City Council members and City staff members will be physically present at the Municipal building for this meeting. The public may participate in these ways: 1. Attend the meeting in person at City Hall. Use the appropriate roster to sign up to speak upon arrival. 2. Provide comment in advance at www.wheatridgespeaks.org (comment by noon on November 20, 2023) 3. Virtually attend and participate in the meeting through a device or phone: • Click here to join and provide public comment • Or call +1-669-900-6833 with Access Code: 838 0263 4857 Passcode: 402058 4. View the meeting live or later at www.wheatridgespeaks.org, Channel 8, or YouTube Live at https://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/view Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. Contact the Public Information Officer at 303-235-2877 or wrpio@ci.wheatridge.co.us with as much notice as possible if you are interested in participating in a meeting and need inclusion assistance. Public Comment on Agenda Items 1. Public Notice Requirements for Development Related Applications 2. Appointment Process for Presiding Judge 3. Staff Report(s) 4. Elected Officials’ Report(s) Item No. 1 Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Gerald Dahl, City Attorney DATE: November 20, 2023 SUBJECT: Public Notice Requirements for Development Related Applications ISSUE The purpose of this study session is to discuss how the public is informed of quasi-judicial public hearings and specifically to revisit the code and process associated with letter notice. This memo summarizes recent code updates, recent procedural changes, and the recent rezoning application that prompted this discussion. To the extent there is interest in revising letter notice, analysis of several options is provided. BACKGROUND For several years, the City Council and staff have prioritized improvements in public information and engagement. At the strategic planning retreat in February 2021, the City Council identified “new community engagement efforts and education” as a priority. A workplan related to this priority was discussed in May 2021, and accomplishments since then include the launch of What’s Up Wheat Ridge, creation of an internal Community Involvement Task Force, the Let’s Talk program, the Wheat Ridge 101/102 program, and the redesigned City website. Over the last four years, notice and engagement has also evolved specifically related to the topics of private development and quasi-judicial public hearings. Changes in practice and in code are summarized below. These changes have improved the City’s ability to inform and engage the public by providing more options and by better aligning with best practice. Code Updates Public notice is a critical legal requirement for a variety of development-related applications. Notice requirements for public hearings are detailed in Charter Section 5.10 and Code Section 26-109 which stipulate four types of notice for public hearings: sign notice, letter notice, publication in a newspaper, and publication on the City’s website. Letter notice has been expanded in two ways through recent code amendments: • Letter notice for public hearings was expanded from 300 to 600 feet in October 2020. This was discussed at length in a study session in August 2020, and that memo is 2 attached for reference. At that time, the mailing radii for similar notice forms in other communities was reviewed and ranged from 200 to 1000 feet. A 600-foot distance was determined to be appropriate in part because it extends approximately two blocks in width. The change from 300 to 600 feet also aligned the distance for public hearing notice with the distance used for neighborhood meetings which was historically 600 feet. • Letter notice was expanded to include owners and occupants in November 2021. This topic was discussed in a study session in August 2021, at which time the Council acknowledged a stakeholder’s right to information regardless of their status as an owner or renter. This practice is rare among peer communities but an increasingly best practice. • In combination these two changes have resulted in hundreds more letter notices being mailed for each public hearing. • With the recent change in the subdivision review process, the content of letter notices is also being updated so the public can better understand a proposed application and better understand the purpose of the mailing (to inform or to seek comment). Additionally, the format of envelopes is being modified to improve the chance that notices are opened. Sign notice was improved and expanded in October 2020 as well: • Public hearing posting signs were increased from one per street frontage to instead be based on the length of the property frontage and based on the parcel configuration. Applications comprised of multiple parcels or subject properties wider than 200 feet have at least two signs per street frontage. Larger properties require one sign per 400 feet of street frontage. • Posting signs were also redesigned in late 2020 to reduce clutter, provide key information more clearly, and to include a QR code for more information. New Practices In addition to codified changes, the City has instituted several tools that improve public engagement options and provide information more readily: • Wheat Ridge Speaks was adopted in November 2019. The platform was originally discussed in a study session in October 2019 at which Council and staff agreed with the need to provide more inclusive public hearings. Wheat Ridge Speaks does not replace the public hearing but augments the public’s ability to participate by providing a convenient, online location for reviewing meeting agenda packets and submitting comments. The platform was originally adopted only for development-related cases but was adopted for the full Council agenda in March 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The site has over 2,000 users annually with a peak of 6,686 users in 2022. • Zoom technology was implemented for public hearings in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It was decisively retained after the pandemic to enable a hybrid meeting format. Zoom allows the public to join meetings remotely online or by phone to provide public comment. This provides the public with a welcome alternative to attending in person and having to wait until the agenda item of interest to them. • An interactive online development map was recently launched on November 1 allowing the public to look up and learn about private development in various stages: under review, pending hearing, approved, and under construction. Dubbed the “Projects & Property Map,” the online map allows residents to look up key details of mid- to large-size projects and find more information either online or through staff contact. Delayed by 3 the 2022 cyber security incident, the recent launch of the map responds to a Council strategic priority and to the public’s desire for more self-serve information. DISCUSSION A discussion of the City’s letter notice requirements was requested in the context of the recent Bank of the West rezoning. The fact pattern is provided below: • The City owned the former Bank of the West parcel at 7575 W. 44th Avenue at the northeast corner of 44th and Wadsworth. • The parcel was zoned C-1 and was the subject of a City-initiated zone change to MU-C to match surrounding zoning. It was made clear that the City’s intent was to sell the parcel in the future to Foothills Regional Housing. • Foothills Regional Housing owns four surrounding parcels: 7525 W. 44th Avenue, 7490 W. 45th Avenue, 4470 Wadsworth, and 4490 Wadsworth. Three of these surrounding parcels were previously rezoned to MU-C in 2011, and the parcel at 7525 (the former Pep Boys) went through a zone change hearing last year in 2022. • Public notice for the Bank of the West zone change was prescribed by the Code, including letter notice as measured radially 600 feet from the property boundary. This mailing included 306 recipients. Because of the small size of the subject property and because the Wadsworth to Vance block is a “superblock” (twice as wide as the standard Wheat Ridge block) the letter notice did not extend very far into the lower density neighborhood to the east. The parcel is small and only required one posting sign on each street frontage (44th and Wadsworth). The Projects & Property Map was not yet available at the time of the public hearing for this case. • The sale of the former Bank of the West property to Foothills did not require a letter notice to the neighborhood. However, a public hearing was noticed and held on August 14, 2023 and approval of at least three-fourths of the entire city council was received per Section 16.5 of the City Charter. The City has long adhered to the codified notice requirements with a “no more, no less” philosophy to ensure due process rights and predictability. This is, in fact, a bedrock principle of due process—the notice requirements cannot vary on a case-by-case basis. The purpose of the November 20 study session discussion is to revisit letter notice requirements and determine whether the code should be updated in general or to address the specific fact pattern described above. Options for Discussion In consultation with the City Attorney, staff has provided several options for discussion: 1. Expand letter notice for known assemblages – This option, recommended by Council for exploration, responds to the specific fact pattern described above. In more general sense this option would require that if a subject parcel is part of a larger assemblage, then the 600-foot letter notice boundary shall be set by the boundary of the assemblage. The intent would be that the larger assemblage boundary results in a larger mailing, regardless of whether the assemblage is subject to the quasi-judicial request. After a review of zone change applications over the last 10 years, a similar fact pattern has only arisen one other time. At Clear Creek Crossing, the majority of the site was 4 rezoned to a Planned Mixed-Use Development (PMUD) in 2018 by Evergreen Development Company. In 2021, a different entity, Evergreen’s multifamily development company, purchased an adjacent parcel and rezoned it to a PMUD for the purpose of developing the second phase of the Outlook Apartments. The project was adjacent to the larger Clear Creek Crossing development but not necessarily part of an assemblage. While this approach would respond to recent public comment, the challenge with the approach is defining what constitutes the “known larger assemblage.” Due process requires there to be no subjectivity in applying whatever standard is adopted. For example, Foothills Regional Housing owns several parcels in the block including an office building and an auto parts store, and it is unknown at this point if one, both, or neither would be redeveloped in the future. In both examples (Bank of the West and Clear Creek Crossing), the subject parcel and the surrounding parcels were under different ownership. Also, in both examples, the surrounding parcels already had zoning in place. To use an assemblage noticing approach may give the wrong impression to the public or to decisionmakers of what is under review. 2. Expand letter notice for adjacent property under singular ownership – This approach removes the discretion of determining an overall project boundary, by relying more objectively on ownership. The challenge with this approach is that it wouldn’t apply to the recent fact pattern because the parcels were under separate ownership. The timing of property conveyance and rezoning varies. 3. Expand letter notice in general – The 600-foot radius is measured radially from the boundary of a subject property. As noted above, when this dimension was adopted in 2020, it considered the average block size and street grid in Wheat Ridge. The council can reconsider the mailing distance for zone changes specifically or for all quasi-judicial public hearings. While this approach would result in more notice, it may be unnecessary to expand notice for all projects. The online map and newspaper notice is calibrated to the public, sign notice is oriented to the passing public, and letter notice is generally intended for the impacted public. While subjective, the direct impacts of a project likely diminish beyond a block or two. It should be noted that letter notice is the City’s most expensive form of public notice. This cost is not currently passed on to applicants, but it could be. 4. No action – No single method of notice can capture all possible audiences, and there are strengths and weaknesses to each type of notice. The goal of the code and current practice is to provide options. Unfortunately, the Projects & Property Map was not available during the Bank of the West proceedings. At this point, neighbors and community members can learn about development in several ways: • Letter notice • Sign notice • Jeffco Transcript legal notices • City website legal notices • Public notice posting board at City Hall 5 • Wheat Ridge Speaks • Projects & Property Map NEXT STEPS The staff is not recommending any change but is committed to providing good public notice and is open to analyzing any proposed option. Next steps will depend on the direction provided by Council at the November 20th study session. Attachments: 1. August 2020 study session memo regarding letter notice 2. 44th and Wadsworth maps Memorandum TO: City Council and Mayor THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Ken Johnstone, Community Development Director Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manger DATE: July 20, 2020 (for August 3, 2020 study session) SUBJECT: Legal Notice for Public Hearings for Planning and Development Items PURPOSE Public notice is a critical legal requirement for a variety of zoning and subdivision cases. The City’s Charter and Code of Laws establish legal notice requirements not only for the purpose of informing the public on proposed developments, but also to protect the due process rights of stakeholders. The extent of notice generally corresponds to the level of review and impact with the highest level of notice required for those applications which require public hearings. In April 2020, members of Council requested that staff prepare a study session item that addresses a few targeted issues related to public notice. Specifically, these issues relate to the sign and letter notice associated with public hearings. This memo is organized as follows: •Current Notice Requirement for Public Hearings •Analysis of Sign and Letter Notice Procedures •Future Opportunities BACKGROUND Current Notice Requirements for Public Hearings Notice requirements for public hearings are described in Charter Section 5.10 and Code Section 26-109. The Charter requirements are specific to zone changes, and the code section applies to allquasi-judicial public hearings associated with planning and development items. This includes avariety of case types before a variety of deciding bodies: Type of Request Public Hearing Body City Council Planning Commission Board of Adjustment Zone change D R Special use permit D Major subdivision D R Minor subdivision D Specific development plan D Planned Building Group D Master Sign Plan D Variance D R = Recommend to Council D = Decide upon request ATTACHMENT 1 2 In combination, Charter Section 5.10 and Code Section 26-109 stipulate four types of notice for public hearings related to zoning and subdivision and prescribes the duration and content of notice. The Code sections have been minimally changed in recent years. The last substantive change to 26-109 was in 2014 to increase the number of days for posted and letter notice from 10 days to 15 days. Sign Notice (Sec. 26-109.C and Charter 5.10) • Posted for 15 consecutive days (includes the day of the posting and the day of the hearing) • One sign per street frontage • Required to be within property boundaries • Must be visible from street, legible, and maintained in good condition • Minimum size is 22” x 28” posted at a height of 30” to 72” • Sign must include: the request; reviewing body; time, date and location of hearing; and the location/address of the subject property (for zone changes only, the Charter also requires this statement: “specific plans for the proposed changes are available for inspection at the Wheat Ridge City Hall”) Letter Notice (Sec. 26-109.D) • Sent 15 days before the hearing by first class mail • Sent to property owners within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property • Letter must include: the request; reviewing body; time, date and location of hearing; and the location/address of the subject property Newspaper Notice (Sec. 26-109.B and Charter 5.10) • Published at least 15 days before a zone change hearing and at least 10 days before other hearing types • Published in a newspaper of general circulation • The Clerk’s Office typically publishes in the Wheat Ridge Transcript (now Jeffco Transcript) for which the publishing deadlines are several days before distribution; publications are occasionally printed in the Denver Post • Newspaper notice must include: the request; reviewing body; time, date and location of hearing; and the location/address of the subject property (for zone changes only, the Charter requires the legal description in the newspaper and also requires this statement: “specific plans for the proposed changes are available for inspection at the Wheat Ridge City Hall”) Web Notice (Sec. 26-109.B) • Published at least 10 days before the hearing • Located on the City’s Legal Notices page on the website • Web must include: the request; reviewing body; time, date and location of hearing; the location/address of the subject property; and the legal description No single method of notice can capture all possible audiences and there are strengths and weaknesses to each type of notice. In addition to these codified requirements, the public can find information on upcoming hearings on the City’s online calendar, on the Wheat Ridge Speaks site, and on the public notice posting board at City Hall (formerly in the lobby and now outside the front door). 3 Analysis of Sign and Letter Notice Procedures The specific discussion items requested for this study session relate to the size of posting signs, the location of posting signs, and the distance of letter notification. Staff has analyzed the City’s requirements and practice, other community requirements and practice, and specific examples in Wheat Ridge. Size of Sign As noted above the minimum size for a posting sign is 22 x 28. Most communities do not codify a minimum size, but Wheat Ridge size requirements appear to be similar to the signs of other communities. The purpose of posted notice is to capture the attention of passing pedestrian or vehicular traffic, so the critical design feature of posting signs may be less about the size and more about the overall design: Does it catch your attention? Is it legible? Does it clearly communicate the message? An image of a recent sign posting is shown in Attachment 1. The City’s posting signs have not changed in design in at least two decades. While the yellow and red may be visible, the sign content is cluttered and could be improved. Staff does not recommend any change to the code as it pertains to the size of sign, but does recommend a redesign of posting signs to better achieve the purpose of posted notice. Location of Sign As noted above, posting signs must be located within the subject property boundaries and must have at least one sign per street frontage. These requirements are common in other jurisdictions as well. Staff does not recommend that signs be located off-premise to avoid confusion about the location of the subject property. Likewise, staff does not recommend that all individual lots within a subject property contain a sign as this too could create confusion about the scope of a change being requested in a given land use application. The goal of the sign location requirements is to maximize the opportunity for affected people to see the sign and become aware of the proposal. Generally, this means that the sign(s) are highly visible to people traveling near the subject property. However, with such a wide range of site sizes and configurations, affected people see mixed results in achieving this goal. Staff is recommending that the number of posting signs be required based on the length of the property frontage. This approach is employed in some jurisdictions and would be appropriate for a target audience of passerby traffic. Under this approach, the code could be amended to require: • A minimum of one sign per street frontage, • At least two signs for properties with frontage length of 200-400 feet, and • One sign per 400 lineal feet for properties with longer street frontages. The images in Attachment 2 provide examples of how this would apply to several different properties in Wheat Ridge. 4 Distance of Letter Notification As noted above, letter notice is sent to the owners of property within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property for public hearings. This distance is on the lower end of the spectrum as compared with other metro area communities. What’s more notable, however, is how this distance compares to the letter notice for neighborhood meetings. For two specific application types, those which deal with land use rights—zone changes and special use permits—City Code requires a neighborhood meeting. Letter notice is required to the residents and property owners within 600 feet of the boundary of the subject property. (This practice of reaching out to both owners and residents for neighborhood meetings is broader than other communities. While different than others and different than the notice for hearings, staff recommends maintaining this practice since Wheat Ridge has a higher rate of renters than other communities.) Not all jurisdictions require neighborhood meetings, but for those that either require or recommend a neighborhood meeting, the letter notice distance for the meeting and the hearing are usually the same. The tables below show where Wheat Ridge ranks among other jurisdictions. Neighborhood Meeting Letter Notice (in feet) Public Hearing Letter Notice (in feet) Aurora abutting Aurora abutting Lakewood 300-500 Denver 200 Westminster 300 Commerce City 300 Arvada 400 Westminster 300 Denver 400 Wheat Ridge 300 Commerce City 500 Lakewood 300-500 Golden 500 Arvada 400 Broomfield 500 Broomfield 500 Wheat Ridge 600 Golden 500 Littleton 700 Louisville 500 Lafayette 750 Littleton 700 Englewood 1000 Lafayette 750 The table on the following page illustrates that the letter notice distance is usually aligned for neighborhood meetings and public hearings. Staff recommends that the code be modified such that the letter notice in Wheat Ridge is also the same distance for both types of meetings. Attachment 3 shows the difference between a 300- and 600-foot mailing distance relative to three recent zone change requests in different areas of the City. Wheat Ridge is part of the Denver Metropolitan Street Grid and like much of the metro area the short end of a single block in Wheat Ridge is about 230-280 feet in width. This means that a 300-foot mailing usually reaches the properties within one block of subject property, and a 600-foot mailing reaches the properties within two blocks. 5 Neighborhood Meeting Letter Notice (in feet) Public Hearing Letter Notice (in feet) Aurora abutting abutting same Lakewood 300-500 300-500 same Westminster 300 300 same Arvada 400 400 same Broomfield 500 500 same Golden 500 500 same Littleton 700 700 same Lafayette 750 750 same Englewood 1000 1000 same Denver 400 200 differs by 200 Commerce City 500 300 differs by 200 Wheat Ridge 600 300 differs by 300 Future Opportunities Aside from meeting the legal notice obligations associated with public hearings, staff recognizes there are other ways to help residents stay in the know about potential development. This will be an important discussion point with residents as part of the Let’s Talk engagement program to implement the 2019 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy. Staff recommends addressing these targeted public notice changes in the short term and having feedback in the early rounds of Let’s Talk inform a potentially broader set of changes addressing this issue more holistically. For example, improved notice could include more mailings or meetings, better information online, or notice at the outset of a development application. Information and public notice could be differentiated between notice that is seeking input versus notice that is merely informational. Procedural or code changes responsive to Let’s Talk feedback will be presented to Council and could be good as an early implementation task. NEXT STEPS Staff Recommendations In summary, staff recommends the following updates: • Revise the design of posted signs to better communicate with passersby (administrative adjustment) • Revise the number of posted signs required based on frontage length (code amendment by Ordinance) • Revise the letter notice to align the distance for neighborhood meetings and public hearings (code amendment by Ordinance) Council Direction Requested Staff is seeking direction on the following items: • Does Council support the updates noted above to address the public notice signs and distance requirements? • What letter notice distance is recommended? 6 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Sample posting sign 2. Posting sign frontage examples 3. Mailing distance examples 7 The image below show s a completed posting sign. Staff recommends a redesign to better communicate with passersby. ATTACHMENT 1 8 44th & Kipling – If developed in the future, a subdivision would be necessary. The parcel lines that make up the property today are irregularly spaced, so one sign per parcel would not be meaningful. If signs were required at one per 400’ of frontage, there would be 3 signs on Kipling and 2 signs on 44th Ave which is more appropriate for a project of this size. Applewood Village Shopping Center – In recent years this property had public hearings for an updated zoning document and master sign plan. Signs were posted on the three street frontages. If signs were required at one per 400’ of frontage, there would have been 3 signs on W. 38th Ave, 5 signs on Youngfield, and 2 signs on W. 32nd Avenue. Quail Ridge Subdivision – This property was originally platted in 2008 and then replatted in 2015. For the replat, a posting sign on each lot would not have been meaningful, but 2 signs on Ridge and Quail Streets would have been more effective than 1 each. 4000-4066 Upham – A single sign advertised public hearings on this property. This frontage is 260 feet and a single sign advertised public hearings. If 2 signs were required, they would better bookend the subject property and signal the full limits of the subject site. 32nd AVE YO U N G F I E L D KI P L I N G 44th AVE UP H A M QU A I L ATTACHMENT 2 9 The images below show the difference between a 300-foot (left) and 600-foot (right) mailing distance relative to three recent zone change requests in different areas of the City. As part of the Denver Metropolitan Street Grid system, the short end of a single block in Wheat Ridge is about 230-300 feet in width. This means that a 300-foot mailing usually reaches the properties within one block of subject property, and a 600-foot mailing reaches the properties within two blocks. ATTACHMENT 3 6985 W. 38th Avenue 300’ = 3300 Ames Street 300’ = 4440 Tabor Street 300’ = Attachment 2 - 44th and Wadsworth Maps Map 1 The Bank of the West parcel at 7575 W. 44th Avenue (outlined in yellow) was zoned Commercial-One (denoted by pink shading) and owned by the City. The surrounding parcels in the block are zoned Mixed Use-Commercial (denoted by blue shading). The parcels highlighted in bright blue are all owned by the Foothills Regional Housing Authority, though not all parcels will be part of imminent redevelopment. ATTACHMENT 2 Map 2. This map shows the 600-foot mailing radius used for the recent Bank of the West zone change in 2023. The 600-foot buffer is measured radially from the property boundary. Map 3. This map shows the 600-foot mailing radius used for the 2022 rezone of the Pep Boys property by Foothills Regional Housing. The 600-foot buffer is slightly irregular in shape because the parcel is irregularly shaped. Item No. 2 Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Allison Scheck, Deputy City Manager Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Kersten Armstrong, Court Administrator Cole Haselip, Management Analyst DATE: November 20, 2023 SUBJECT: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge ISSUE: Christopher Randall has served Wheat Ridge as presiding judge of the city’s municipal court since January 1, 2002. Judge Randall submitted his resignation on October 3, 2023, effective December 31, 2023. Per Sec. 14-6 of the Code of Laws, Mayor Starker has appointed Judge Paul Basso as the substitute municipal judge effective January 1, 2024, until a presiding judge is appointed by Council. Judge Basso serves quite frequently as a relief judge and administrative hearing officer for Wheat Ridge Municipal Court and is very familiar with the City’s court functions. Staff requests direction from Council on the path forward to select and appoint a presiding judge in 2024. PRIOR ACTION: City Council appointed Judge Christopher Randall effective January 1, 2002. Under the Charter, the Municipal Judge serves a two-year term and may be reappointed. Council has consistently reappointed Judge Randall for two-year terms with the most recent two-year contract approval on July 24, 2023. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The 2024 Municipal Court budget is approximately $1.2 million including the contracted presiding judge, relief judges, twelve employees and all expenses related to the functioning of the court. Currently, the presiding judge is classified as a non-exempt employee at a rate of $102.83 per hour plus medical benefits, director-level retirement, holidays, and paid time off. DISCUSSION: To aid Council in preparation for this discussion, information pertaining to the presiding judge is separated by topic as follows: Charter and Code considerations; duties of the presiding judge; summary of structure and staffing of municipal courts in other Colorado municipalities; recruiting and appointing a presiding judge; and options for consideration. Staff Report: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge November 20, 2023 Page 2 Charter and Code Considerations Sec. 8.2 of the Home Rule Charter enables the City of Wheat Ridge to organize a municipal court. The Charter requires that the City Council appoint a judge to serve a two (2) year term and that they be a member of the Bar of the State of Colorado and have a minimum of five years’ experience on the bench or in the active practice of law in Colorado immediately prior to appointment. Furthermore, the Charter specifies the duties of the presiding judge as follows: • Formulate and amend the local rules of the court with the approval of the Colorado Supreme Court. • Supervise all court personnel. • Submit a yearly budget request to the Council for the proper functioning of the court. Chapter 14 of the Code further codifies the powers, jurisdiction and workings of the court and presiding judge including: • In the absence of a municipal judge, the Mayor shall appoint a substitute • The presiding judge may appoint “referees” to conduct hearings related to the traffic code, parking tickets, animals and parks and recreation. The City refers to these appointees today as administrative hearing officers • Adopt rules and regulations to conduct the business of the court • The establishment and use of the Municipal Court Fund • Power authority of the court marshals Please see attachment 1 for Chapter VIII of the Charter and Chapter 14 of Municipal Code. Duties of the Presiding Judge The City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Court has authority over traffic violations and all City ordinances. Court is in session ten to twelve days per month on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and the first two Thursdays, excluding holidays. Additional virtual prisoner hearings are held during the week on non-scheduled court days to meet the state’s regulation that prisoners be seen within 48 hours. Jury trials, if scheduled, are held on the third or fourth Thursday of the month. Generally speaking, the presiding judge works up to 30 hours per week. Relief judges are called to substitute for the presiding judge due to illness, vacation, or recusal. Judge Randall is considered the Director of the City’s Municipal Court department and sits on the City’s Executive Management Team. He supervises the court administrator; all other court personnel report to the court administrator (see attachment 2, Municipal Court Organizational Chart) Structure and Staffing of Municipal Courts in Colorado Communities A court’s operation relies on two key components: administrative and judicial functions. Administrative functions include the support tasks necessary to ensure successful and efficient operations. Judicial functions refer to the legal and decision-making processes that result in rulings and penalties. A more detailed description of each function is included below. Staff Report: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge November 20, 2023 Page 3 Administrative Functions: • Case Management: Municipal courts handle a large volume of cases, including traffic violations, municipal code violations, and other minor offenses. Case managers are responsible for managing and tracking these cases from initiation to resolution. • Record Keeping: Maintaining accurate and comprehensive records is crucial for the functioning of any court. Courts are responsible for record-keeping, which includes filing documents, managing case dockets, and ensuring that all relevant information is accessible when needed. • Scheduling: Coordinating court schedules involves setting dates for hearings, trials, and other court proceedings. Efficient scheduling ensures that the court operates smoothly, and cases are processed in a timely manner. • Financial Management: Municipal courts handle fines, fees, and other financial matters related to cases. This function includes managing financial transactions, processing payments, and accounting for court-related revenue. • Personnel Management: Personnel management, including judicial assistants, probation officers, court marshals, and other support staff is required to maintain a successful court program. This includes hiring, training, and overseeing day-to-day operations. • Facility Management: Ensuring that the court facility is well-maintained and equipped is a necessary responsibility. This includes managing physical infrastructure, security, and other logistical aspects of the court. Judicial Functions: • Legal Proceedings: This involves the actual legal proceedings related to cases. Judges preside over hearings, trials, and other court sessions. They interpret and apply the law, make legal rulings, and ensure that the proceedings are conducted fairly and according to established legal procedures. • Decision Making: Judges in municipal courts are responsible for making legal decisions based on the facts presented and applicable laws. This includes rendering judgments, imposing sentences, and overseeing settlements. • Adjudication: The court's primary function is to adjudicate disputes and administer justice. This involves listening to evidence, determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, and, in the case of guilt, imposing appropriate penalties or remedies. • Legal Interpretation: Judges interpret and apply the law to specific cases. They ensure that legal principles are correctly understood and followed in the resolution of disputes. • Ensuring Due Process: Courts must uphold the principles of due process, ensuring that all parties involved in a case are treated fairly and have the opportunity to present their case. This is a critical aspect of the court's role in maintaining justice. A successful municipal court must have a clear organizational structure and division of roles. After researching several court structures, staff uncovered a couple of common approaches to court management: the Administrative Management Model, and the Judicial Management model. A description of the advantages and disadvantages of each model follows. These pros and cons were reviewed by several regional Court Administrators who independently confirmed their accuracy. Staff Report: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge November 20, 2023 Page 4 Administrative Management Model The Administrative Management Model removes administrative responsibilities from the presiding judge. The judge retains all judicial responsibilities, and the administrative functions are overseen by a court manager that typically reports to a department director or the City Manager’s Office. Administrators are generally trained in managing budgets, people, and improving processes to develop highly efficient operating procedures. This model allows city administration to provide centralized oversight of the municipal court. Thereby ensuring that the court’s management practices align with other departments and the goals of the City. However, administrative professionals may lack legal expertise that could result in decisions that prioritize efficiency at the cost of unforeseen legal implications. Judicial Management Model Under the Judicial Management Model, the presiding judge is responsible for managing administrative and judicial functions of the court. Judges may have a better understanding of the specific needs and challenges faced by the court than typical administrative professionals. However, judges are not trained administrators. As a result, they may lack the expertise or interest necessary to manage a highly efficient court administration. Judges may also be more likely to make administrative decisions that facilitate their preferred model of justice rather than decisions that increase efficiency or align with the goals of City. Staff discovered that most similarly sized cities in the Denver metro took advantage of the Administrative Management Model to oversee their municipal courts. The only exception is in the City of Englewood, where the judge is elected. The Judicial Management Model was more common in larger cities like Fort Collins and Denver. Excluding circumstances when the municipal judge is elected, all cities procured judge services by contracting with individuals. When the Court Administrator did not report to the judge, they most often reported to the City Manager’s Office, Administrative Services Director, or a non- elected City Clerk’s Office. Full results are detailed in the table below: Table: Comparing Wheat Ridge’s Court Management to Regional Cities City Population How are judge services procured?Is the Judge the Department Director? Is the Judge a member of the leadership team? Who does the Court Administrator report to? Golden 19,871 Individual Contract (appointed)No No Finance Director Louisville 20,975 Individual Contract (appointed) No No City Clerk Lafayette 30,411 Individual Contract (appointed)No No City Clerk Englewood 33,516 Elected No Yes Judge and CM Littleton 45,191 Individual Contract (appointed)No No ACM Northglenn 37,333 Individual Contract (appointed)No No City Manager Brighton 40,693 Individual Contract (appointed)No No ACM/Director of General Services Erie 30,038 Individual Contract (appointed)No No Admin Division Manager Wheat Ridge 32,722 Individual Contract (appointed)Yes Yes Judge Denver 711,463 Individual Contract (appointed to 2yr term by Mayor and then elected) Yes Yes Judge Colorado Springs 483,956 Individual Contract (appointed)No No Deputy Chief of Staff Fort Collins 168,538 Individual Contract (appointed)Yes Yes Judge Staff Report: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge November 20, 2023 Page 5 As mentioned previously, currently, the City follows the judicial management model with Judge Randall directly overseeing the court personnel. City Council could consider restructuring the reporting relationship in a way that honors Sec. 8.4 of the Charter (“the presiding judge shall supervise all court personnel”) but in a manner in which the hiring and management of staff is aligned within the City’s usual personnel structure. Recruiting and Appointing Presiding Judge Staff researched how other cities obtain judge services, either by issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) or posting job openings. Brighton, Louisville, and Northglenn have previously used RFPs, while Littleton and Fort Collins opted for job postings. Fort Collins employed a recruiting firm to manage the hiring process, consistent with their standard practice for all council appointed positions. Regardless of how the city attracted applicants, each City Council interviewed candidates and selected an appointment. At the City of Fort Collins, all applications were reviewed by a subcommittee of City Council members who narrowed the field. The final candidates went through a day of interviewing with all City Council members, HR, the Court Administrator, and then a public question and answer period before Council made their final decisions. At the City of Brighton, all proposals were initially reviewed by staff who narrowed the field. Council conducted interviews of final candidates and made their final decision. As previously mentioned, Mayor Starker has appointed Judge Basso to serve as the substitute municipal judge effective January 1, 2024. Judge Basso has indicated his interest in an appointment to the role of presiding judge and his resume is included as attachment 3 to this packet. Options for Consideration As the City moves to appoint a presiding Municipal Judge, Council may want to consider a combination of the following options for the municipal court structure and presiding judge recruitment: Administrative versus Judicial Management Structures 1. Continue with the current staffing structure. In this scenario, the presiding judge acts as the department director for the municipal court and directly manages the staff. 2. Migrate to an Administrative Management Model Council could assign hiring and personnel management activities to the court administrator under the direction of City management, while still aligning with the Charter giving assignment of general supervision of the court personnel to the presiding judge. Staff recommends this option. Staff Report: Appointment Process for Presiding Judge November 20, 2023 Page 6 Presiding Judge Recruitment 1. Direct staff to issue a widely distributed RFP or job posting to find interested candidates for the role of presiding judge. Staff recommends this option. 2. Consider Judge Basso as a replacement for the presiding judge based on his experience and job qualifications. Review Committee 1. Review all applications and conduct interviews by the entire City Council. 2. Establish a search committee which could be composed of elected officials, staff and community members who would provide a list of finalist(s) to City Council for consideration. Staff recommends this option. 3. Direct staff to review applications and provide a finalist recommendation to City Council for consideration. NEXT STEPS: Staff are requesting direction from Council on the three sets of options above, as well as any other comments or guidance Council wishes to give. Attachments: 1. Applicable Charter and Municipal Code sections 2. Municipal Court Organizational Chart 3. Judge Paul Basso Resume PART I - CHARTER CHAPTER VIII. LEGAL AND JUDICIARY Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Code of Ordinances Created: 2023-10-12 10:19:46 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) ATTACHMENT 1 Page 1 of 6 CHAPTER VIII. LEGAL AND JUDICIARY Sec. 8.1. City attorney. The council shall appoint a city attorney to serve for an indefinite term at the pleasure of the council. He shall be an attorney-at-law admitted to practice in Colorado and have at least five (5) years' experience in the practice of law. The council may provide the city attorney such assistants, facilities and considerations as council may deem necessary, and may on its own motion or upon request of the city attorney, employ special counsel. The council shall establish compensation for the city attorney, his assistants and special counsel. The city attorney shall be the legal representative of the city and shall represent the city in all cases and in all courts. The city attorney shall act as legal adviser to the council and other city officials in matters relating to their official powers or duties when requested and shall provide a copy of any written opinion to the city clerk. The city attorney shall also perform such other duties as the council may prescribe by ordinance or resolution. Sec. 8.2. Municipal court. There shall be a municipal court which shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine all cases arising under this Charter or the ordinances of the City of Wheat Ridge. The council shall appoint a presiding judge. The council may also appoint one (1) or more associate judges, who shall sit at such times and upon such cases as shall be determined by the presiding municipal judge. Such associate judge shall have all the powers of a municipal judge and his orders and judgments shall be those of the municipal court. All judges shall be members in good standing of the Bar of the State of Colorado, and shall have a minimum of five (5) years' experience on the bench or in the active practice of law in the State of Colorado immediately prior to appointment. Sec. 8.3. Tenure and removal of judges. The council shall appoint all judges for a term of two (2) years and they may be removed by the council during their term only for cause. A judge may be removed for cause if: (a) He is found guilty of a felony or any other crime involving moral turpitude; (b) He has a disability which interferes with the performance of his duties, and which is, or is likely to become, of permanent character; (c) He has willfully or persistently failed to perform his duties; or (d) He is habitually intemperate. Sec. 8.4. Duties of the presiding judge. The presiding judge shall have the following duties, in addition to presiding in court: (a) He shall formulate and amend the local rules of the court with the approval of the Colorado Supreme Court. Created: 2023-10-12 10:19:46 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) Page 2 of 6 (b) He shall supervise all court personnel. (c) He shall submit a yearly budget request to the council for the proper functioning of the court. Sec. 8.5. Compensation of judges. All judges shall receive a fixed salary or compensation set by the council, by ordinance, and such salary or compensation shall not be dependent upon the outcome of the matters to be decided by the judges. A judge's compensation may not be reduced during the term of his appointment. Chapter 14 MUNICIPAL COURT1 Sec. 14-1. Created. A municipal court in and for the city is hereby created and established, pursuant to the provisions of Article XX, section 6(b) and (c) of the Constitution of the State of Colorado, and Chapter VIII, sections 8.2, 8.3 and 8.4 of the home rule charter of the city. (Code 1977, § 12A-1) Sec. 14-2. Court of record. The municipal court shall be a court of record, and the presiding municipal judge shall provide for the keeping of a verbatim record of the proceedings and evidence at trials by either an electronic device or stenographic means. (Code 1977, § 12A-2) Sec. 14-3. Jurisdiction and powers of the court. The municipal court shall have such legal and equitable powers to effectuate its jurisdiction and carry out its orders, judgments and decrees as are provided for by the city charter, state constitution, state statutes, and ordinances of this city. (Code 1977, § 12A-3) Sec. 14-4. Appeals. Appeals from the municipal court shall be in accordance with the practice and procedure provided by C.R.S. §§ 13-10-116 through 13-10-125, and applicable supreme court rules of procedure, as may be amended. (Code 1977, § 12A-4) 1Charter reference(s)—Municipal court, § 8.2 et. seq. State law reference(s)—Municipal courts, C.R.S. § 13-10-101 et seq. Created: 2023-10-12 10:20:00 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) Page 3 of 6 Sec. 14-5. Appointment, salary of municipal judges. Pursuant to the provisions of section 8.2 of the charter of the city, the municipal court shall be presided over by a presiding municipal judge and such associate judges as may be necessary, with the presiding judge and the associate municipal judge appointed by the city council pursuant to the terms and subject to the provisions of section 8.3 of the charter. During the term of the presiding and associate judge, said judges shall be paid a salary as fixed by the city council, which salary may not be diminished during the term of office of the presiding and associate judge. (Code 1977, § 12A-5) Charter reference(s)—Compensation of judges, § 8.5. Sec. 14-6. Substitute municipal judge. If a municipal judge is absent or unable to act in any manner or case, the mayor shall call any eligible person to act and serve temporarily, and if he fails to, or cannot call in a substitute, the council shall appoint a substitute. (Code 1977, § 12A-6) Sec. 14-7. Qualifications; oath. (a) Any person appointed to the office of municipal judge or associate municipal judge shall be a member in good standing of the state bar, and shall have a minimum of five (5) years on the bench or in the active practice of law in the state immediately prior to appointment of office. (b) Before entering upon the duties of his office, a municipal judge shall make an oath or affirmation that he will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state and the laws and ordinances of the city, and will faithfully perform the duties of his office. (Code 1977, § 12A-7) Sec. 14-8. Presiding judge's powers. (a) The presiding municipal judge shall have full power and authority to make and adopt rules and regulations for conducting the business of the municipal court. Such rules and regulations shall be consistent with the state municipal court rules of procedure, and shall be reduced to writing. (b) The presiding municipal judge shall have authority, with the advice and consent of the city council, to appoint referees as necessary to conduct court business. (Code 1977, § 12A-8) Charter reference(s)—Presiding judge, § 8.4. Sec. 14-9. Sessions of court. There shall be regular sessions of the court for the trial of cases, and the duly appointed judges of the municipal court shall hear and determine complaints for the violation of any city ordinance; provided, however, the presiding judge may authorize special sessions of the court at any time, including Sundays, holidays and at nighttime, if, in the discretion of the presiding judge, such special sessions are deemed advisable. Created: 2023-10-12 10:20:00 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) Page 4 of 6 (Code 1977, § 12A-9) Sec. 14-10. Referee—Appointment. The presiding judge of the municipal court, with the advice and consent of the city council, shall appoint one (1) or more referees to serve at the pleasure of the court, who may conduct hearings concerning the following matters and functions relating to violations of municipal ordinances: (1) Violations of the model traffic code adopted by the city pursuant in section 13-2 for which no points are assessed; (2) Parking tickets; (3) Violations of the provisions of Chapter 4 of this Code, except for violations of section 4-14 thereof; and (4) Violations of the provisions of Chapter 17 of this Code. (Code 1977, § 12A-10) Sec. 14-11. Same—Authority and procedure; duties. (a) General provisions. Referees shall conduct hearings for those violations specified in Section 14-9 hereof in the manner provided by the local rules of municipal court procedure, which shall be established by the presiding judge. Referees conducting hearings for such violations shall have authority to administer oaths and affirmations, rule on offers of proof and receive evidence. Strict rules of evidence and procedures shall not apply in hearings. All proceedings may be maintained by electronic device or stenographic means. (b) Election to appear before judge. The referee shall inform all persons appearing before the court that they have the right to a hearing or arraignment before the municipal court judge in the first instance, and that they may execute a written waiver of that right, but that by waiving that right they are bound by the findings, judgments and orders of the referee. Upon request, or in the event such waiver is not executed, the referee shall set the matter down for hearing before a municipal court judge. (c) Findings shall be binding. All findings, orders, judgments and decrees made by the referee under this section shall be binding, and have the same effect as if done before the municipal judge, and shall become the final decree of the municipal court unless a written request for review is filed in the manner provided in subsection (e) herein. (d) Trial de novo. At the conclusion of a hearing, the referee shall advise the parties orally and in writing of their rights to a trial de novo under subsection (e). (e) Request for trial de novo. A request for trial de novo before the municipal judge shall be filed on forms provided by the city within ten (10) days after the conclusion of the hearing before any referee. If review is not requested within ten (10) days, all findings, orders, judgments and decrees made by the referee under this section shall become final. (Code 1977, § 12A-11) Sec. 14-12. Same—Reduction or dismissal of violation. Referees may reduce or dismiss violations brought before them if it appears that the city could not obtain a conviction at a trial on the merits of the case, or the interests of justice are served by reducing or dismissing the violation. Created: 2023-10-12 10:20:00 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) Page 5 of 6 (Code 1977, § 12A-12) Sec. 14-13. Trials. (a) Trial by jury. A defendant shall not be entitled to a trial by jury unless: (1) The defendant is charged with a criminal offense for which sections 16-10-101 and 16-10-109(1), Colorado Revised Statutes (as amended July 1, 1988) preserves the right to a jury trial; and if (2) The defendant complies with the requirements of Colorado Rule of Municipal Court Procedure 223 and section 13-10-114 Colorado Revised Statutes (as amended). (b) Jury membership. The jury shall consist of three (3) members, unless a greater number, not to exceed six (6), is requested by the defendant in a written jury demand. (c) Trial to the court. All other criminal matters for which the defendant has pled not guilty, but for which the defendant has not perfected his right to a jury trial pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, and all civil matters, shall be tried to the court with the municipal judge as fact-finder. (Ord. No. 1989-793, § 3, 5-8-89) Sec. 14-14. Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund. (a) Establishment; use of proceeds; authority to create and collect. Proceeds of the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund may be used for other purposes related to probation or municipal court programs in the event funds are available after meeting the demands of the victim witness services. There is hereby established within the City of Wheat Ridge a special fund to be known as the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund. The proceeds of such fund shall be used for the provision of services and programs to be made available to victims and witnesses of crimes which have occurred within the city and to provide assistance, service and information prior to, during and after the prosecution of such crimes to all victims thereof and witnesses thereto. The city council specifically finds that the creation of such fund, and the collection and disbursement of funds thereunder, is within the city's powers granted by article XX, section 6(c) and (h) of the Constitution of the State of Colorado. (b) Costs and surcharges assessed. As the means of funding the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund, there is hereby authorized to be assessed as court costs and surcharges the following: (1) An additional five dollars ($5.00) in court costs shall be assessed on every case appearing before the court on or after February 1, 1993, in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere is entered, or upon which a conviction is obtained, or upon which a deferred judgment or a deferred sentence is imposed; (2) An additional fifty dollars ($50.00) in court costs shall be assessed on each domestic violence case appearing before the court on or after February 1, 1993, in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere shall be entered, or upon which a conviction shall be obtained, or upon which a deferred judgment or a deferred sentence shall be imposed; (3) The court costs identified in this subsection shall be paid to the clerk of the court, who shall deposit the same in the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund as established by this section. (c) Costs deemed mandatory; exception. The court costs and surcharges imposed by this section shall be mandatory and shall be in addition to any other surcharge, fine or cost imposed either by the Code of Laws of the city or by the municipal court, except that the court shall have the authority to waive or suspend the court costs imposed by this section only upon a determination by the court that the defendant upon whom such charges are imposed is indigent. Created: 2023-10-12 10:20:00 [EST] (Supp. No. 71, Update 1) Page 6 of 6 (d) Expenditure of funds; designation budget line item; council's authority to appropriate additional funds; accounting. All funds collected as a result of the imposition of the court costs established by this section shall be specifically earmarked for the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund and shall be expended solely for the programs authorized by the municipal court which provide victim and witness assistance or other programs as approved by the municipal court pursuant to subsection (a) relating to crimes which occur within the city. The city council shall, for as long as this section is in effect, designate a line item in the city's budget for the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fund. The city council retains its sole authority to appropriate additional monies into this fund over and above those amounts which are collected pursuant to the provisions of this section. Council shall be provided an annual accounting for the expenditures of the fund. (Ord. No. 1993-918, § 1, 2-8-93; Ord. No. 1995-992, § 1, 3-27-95) Sec. 14-15. Office of municipal court marshal. (a) There is hereby created within the municipal court the municipal court marshal's office. All municipal court marshals shall be appointed by the presiding judge of the municipal court, in such number as the presiding municipal judge may deem necessary for the efficient operation of the office. Municipal court marshals shall be managed and supervised by the municipal court administrator and municipal court judges. Marshals are not sworn police officers of the city and shall not be entitled to any of the retirement, pension, disability or other benefits to which sworn police officers are entitled. (b) Pursuant to C.R.S. § 16-2.5-145, all municipal court marshals must be certified by the state peace officer standards and training board. (c) Pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. § 16-2.5-145 and the Colorado Municipal Court Rules, the municipal court marshals are hereby designated as peace officers. (Ord. No. 1287, § 1, 5-12-03; Ord. No. 1406, § 1, 1-14-08) Sec. 14-16. Court marshals—Authority. (a) All marshals in the municipal court marshal's office shall be responsible for and are authorized to perform the following functions and duties: (1) To provide security for and keep the peace within the Wheat Ridge City Hall, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, 80033, its grounds and parking areas; (2) To serve and execute, within the city, arrest warrants, search warrants, subpoenas, summonses, show cause orders, and all other legal process issued by the municipal court; (3) To conduct investigative work relative to locating individuals named in legal process issued by the municipal court; (4) To transport, detain, and maintain control over city prisoners en route to and from municipal court and the lawful place of detention for such prisoners; (5) To cooperate with and, upon request, assist the Wheat Ridge Police Department within the city; and (6) To perform such other duties as authorized by law and assigned from time to time by the municipal court administrator or municipal judges. (Ord. No. § 2, 5-12-03; Ord. No. 1406, § 2, 1-14-08) ATTACHMENT 2 Municipal Court Municipal Judge (Appointed) Court Administrator Deputy Court Administrator Court Marshal (3)Probation Officer Judicial Assistant II (4)Judicial Assistant I (2) ATTACHMENT 3 RESUME Paul D. Basso (303) 650-6503 E-Mail attypdbasso@yahoo.com EMPLOYMENT Attorney, Licensed in Colorado since 1986. Relief Judge and Administrative Hearing Officer City of Wheat Ridge Colorado. June 2016 to present. I conduct arraignments, sentencings, motion hearings, and trials and assist the Presiding Judge with court operations. As the Administrative Hearing Officer, I conduct administrative hearings for alleged code violations related to business license violations, junk, weeds, home business and permit violations. Presiding Judge Town of Firestone Colorado. August 2004 to December 2021. I was responsible for setting and implementing the policies and administration of the Court. I supervised the Court Clerks and coordinate with the Town Manager and with the Chief of Police to keep the Court running efficiently. I presided over arraignments, sentencings, motion hearings, jury trials, and court trials and I was available to answer questions from court staff outside of court. Associate Judge City of Westminster Colorado. February 2003 to December 2015 working 32 hours per week. And a Pro Tem (substitute) Judge, City of Westminster. July 1996 to February 2003. In Westminster I assisted the Presiding Judge and Court Administrator with the administration of the Court and conducted arraignments, sentencings, motion hearings, administrative hearings, I presided over more than 150 jury trials and thousands of court trials. Paul D. Basso, Attorney at Law November 1987 to April 2007. I was engaged in the general practice of law with an emphasis on criminal law, family law and civil litigation. I have extensive experience in the State of Colorado Municipal, County and District Court trials and appeals as well as administrative hearings, Juvenile cases, and Federal Court cases. Basso & Smith P.C. February 1989 to November 1994. Partner in the law firm in the general practice of law including litigation of Domestic, Civil, Criminal and Administrative matters in all courts. ATTACHMENT 3 Lozow, Lozow and Elliott Associate attorney, January 1987 to December 1987. Experience included litigation in Municipal, County and District Court criminal, civil and administrative matters as well as appeals. EDUCATION Oklahoma City University School of Law. Juris Doctor awarded in May 1986. National Judicial College. General Jurisdiction Course. A two-week training course for new Judges, 2005. Kings College, Wilkes-Barre Pennsylvania; I earned a Bachler of Arts degree with honors in May 1983 in Government and Politics with a Concentration in the Study of Law. OTHER EXPERIENCE Volunteer Attorney, Woman in Crisis, Family Tree, Arvada Battered Woman’s Shelter 1989 to 2007. I advised and trained the victim advocate to assist their clients in obtaining restraining orders and other legal assistance and regularly presented a family law seminar to their clients. Board of Directors, Westminster Drug and Alcohol Resistance Education Foundation (D.A.R.E.), 1994 to 1996. I am the author and editor of the chapter on sentencing and several other chapters of the Colorado Municipal Judge’s Association Bench Book. I am the author of The Right to a Jury Trial in Municipal Court, In the Municipal Prosecutor Handbook published by the Colorado Municipal League in 2020. Continuing Education Presentations: I presented Continuing Education Seminars on several topics: Recent Appellate Decisions, The Right to a Jury Trial in Municipal Court, and Sentencing in Municipal Courts. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Colorado Municipal Judge’s Association (CMJA). President 2013/2014 and Board of Directors, April 2007 to 2009, 2010 to 2013, 2021 to 2023. Representative to the Colorado Municipal League Policy Committee 2015 and 2016. Member of the CMJA Municipal Rules Committee and the Speedy Trial Rule Subcommittee. Colorado Bar Association and 1st Judicial District Bar Association.