Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/15/1975 MINUTES December 15, 1975 The three hundred and nin~h regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City Council was called to order by Mayor Homer Roesener at 7 30 p m. at 4355 Field 5tree~. Councilmen attending were Mary Jo Cavarra, Joseph Donaldson, Robert Howard, Calvin Hulsey, Larry Merkl and Louise Turner. Also attending were City Administrator John Jer~an, City At~o:ney Maurice Fox, City Clerk Elise Bnwgham, staff and Interested cItIzens. Motion by Councilman Turner "r move the Minutes of. 12/8/75 be approved (as written.) Motion was seconded by CouncIlman Cavarra and passed 5-1. Councilman Merkl voted "nay." Motion by Councilman Turner "I move the Minutes of November 24, 1975 be approved with the deletion of the last four words on the last page (Page 12. 'regarding a legal matter') because the Executive Session wasn't on a legal matter." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 5-0. Motion by Councilman Turner "I move the Minutes of 11/3/75, and 11/10/75 be approved." Motion was seconded by Councilman Cavarra and passed 4-2. Councilmen Howard and Hulsey voted "nay." Public Comment was made by Harrv Nvlund of 10095 West 34 Ave. stated he had attended the recent information meeting held regarding the proposed Crown Hill Development and although the City of Wheat Ridge does nOC have direct jurisdiction, it was his understanding that the Council can express an opinion on the development. He stated he would like to make his personal opinion known on the matter which is complete opposition to the development in spite of the "glowing picture" presented. He stated he felt Council should consider whether or not Wheat Ridge as a whole should be for or against the development. He stated if the rezoning goes through, the City Council will find they "have pretty well been committed to a course of action outside their control." He aated he felt this development will effect subsequent general policies of the City, and the development seems to him to be an excessive, intensive type of development to have on the borders of Wheat Ridge. He also felt the development would pui a considerable financial burden on Wheat Ridge services wherein Lhe cost cannot be recovered. He stated if the development goes through at the County there will be little or nothing Wheat Ridge can do 1,0 gain control and recover I;heir additional expenses. He added that annexation might possibly be looked at. Councilman Cavarra stated she had intended making a Motion regarding this subject under Council reports tonight, but perhaps after Mr. Nylund's comments, it might be appropriate now. Mavor Roesener stated that Council has not heard the Department of Community Development input and that this is needed before a decision could be made. Councilman Cavsrra stated it was her understanding that Council's recommendation is needed by 1/1/76 to be forwarded to the County and she felt a Resolution should be scheduled for 12/29/75. Mayor Roes8n8r stat8d citiz8n input could b8 h8ard and it would b8 up to the new Mayor after his term runs out. Councilman Cavarra stated she felt the Council had no choice but to hear it soon because the were asked for input by 1/1/76. She stated she felt it should be a unified opinion reflecting the citizen input. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -2- Motion by Councilman Cavarra "I move we have a resolution on he Agenda of 12/29/75 regarding the City's posi~ion on the proposed Crown Hill Development." Motion~s seconded by Councilman Turner. MOTION WAS DE~EATED 4-2 after the following discussion. Councilmen Donaldson, Howard, Hulsey and Merkl voted "nay." Councilman Hulsey felt there should at least be 2 resolutions for the Agenda, 1 for and 1 against ~he development so that there would be a choice. Councilman Turner agreed that there could be 2 resolu~ions, but that a determination should be made to fit the County's schedule. Councilman Howard stated he noted for next week's I-entative Agenda there is a staff report scheduled on the development. Dennis Zwa~man stated if the Planning Commission makes a determination on Thursday, then a recommendation could be forwarded to Council by that Monday. Mayor Roesener did not think this would be enough time for hearings etc Councilman Turner stated the Planning Commission hearing on Thursday should be u public hearing and felt there should be another one before Council. l"layor Roe$ler stated there must be staff input and lVlrs. Turner stated this can be given at the hearin~ Councilman Hulsey stated there had already been one hearing 2t Everitt Jr. High by the developers of the proposal and they had made it clear that that would be their only presentation and if other hearings were held they wouldn't be present. He stated that he felt this had been a Public Hearing on the subject and that this is a County matter and not a City matter. Councilman Turner stated at tha Public Hearing the citizens could not express their wishes on the matter but only listen, and it had been her understanding that at that meeting the public would be heard at a later time. She stated if the City is to give a recommendation to the County, the wishes of the citizens must be made known. Councilman Hulsey stated he felt the citizens could go to the County Public Hearing which will be scheduled and if the City has a Public Hearing here it would be one sided. Councilman Cavarra suggested not using i,he words 'Public Hearing' but that there will be a resolution regarding this matter to be acted upon by Council on which the public may comment. Mayor Roesener stated the meeting at Everitt Jr. High was not a Public Hearing and that Whe"'t Ridge h3s no corirol in the matter. He stated the~oposed development borders Wheat Ridge and is also by the northwest corner of Lakewood. He stated Lakewood may be in favor of annexing the development and then Wheat Ridge would be left with nothing. Councilman Cavarra stated she was appalled at the tactics of pitting one city against the other with the threat of annexation etc. lVlayor Roesener stated in the long term, the development could hurt the City and Councilman Cavarra stated then the only position the City could take is to very strongly oppose the development. Mayor Roesener stated unless the Resolution is passed unanimously he would not sign it. Councilman Turner asked if that meant there might be a possibility the City would not forward an opinion. Mayor Roesener stated under the law he had 2 weeks to return it unsigned (with his reasons), but it could be forwarded to the County unsigned. Councilman furner asked if there had been offers ~o either City to -annex t.he land. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -3- Mavor Roesener said "No, but you'd have to be blind no~ to see ~he situat.ion." Councilman Turner stared Wheat Ridge will bear the "brunt; of the development, good or bad" and the last time the development was proposed the tactic of annexing was used, and if the developers have offered to annex to the City, il should be made public. Motion by Councilman Turner "I move that an item be scheduled on next week's Agenda which will not be a Public Hearing but a means in which Wheat Ridge citizens can make their wishes known to the City Council in regards to the proposed development at Crown Hill." Motion was seconded by Councilman Cavarra and WAS DEFEATED 4-2. Councilmen Howard, Hulsey, Merkl and Donaldson voted "nay." Councilman Turner suggested scheduling a special meeting or having it on the 29th to allow citizen input which she felt was essential Mavor Roesener stated it is Council's prerogative to do this. Councilman Merkl stated he would be in favor of having it on the 29th so it would be settled, and Council could "get on with the Agenda." Motion by Councilman Turner "I move that such a meeting (for citizen input on the proposed Crown Hill Development) be held on 12/29/75." Motion was seconded by Councilman Cavarra and TIED 3-3. Councilmen Hulsey, Donaldson and Howard voted "nay." Mayor Roesener vote "aye" and MOTION PASSED 4-3. Motion by Councilman Donaldson "I move that item 5.B.2. (Request of Jefferson High School for City Contribution to help finance the Close-Up Program) be moved up under Council Decisions by Resolution or Motion to be Item 2.F." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 5-0. Dave Olson of Galbraith & Green Inc. gave a report on the bid results for the City's Health Insurance Program. The report is in file. The report listed all companies invited to bid with reasons listed why certain companies did not bid. It gave the information which had been sent to bid and existing benefits of the two health insurances I-hat the City presently has which are Blue Cross and Blue Shield and Kaiser. It gave medical claims experience of the City. There was also a summary of the existing life insurance that the City has. He gave the unit monthly rates of the companies that bid which were as follows (For the employee only) BC/BS pTefered 90 - $21.95, Prefensd 120 -$23.70, P. Servo $26.33 and Panel Practice - $26.45, Kaiser $26.84, Comprecare $28.73 and Northwestern National - $27.96. He stated in the future that the Comprecare (Health Maintenance Organizations) will be mandatory to be offered by the City but this year they are not as competitive as the present health insurance offered by the City. In summary Galbraith & Greene recommended the following 1. The life insurance coverage offered by Security Life is $180 more expensive that the Washington National proposal. They felt it should not be changed because the savings are so small and the paper work involved to change it. 2. The responding companies indicated they would charge higher or rates equal to Blue Cross. They felt Blue Cross was justified in having a 35% rate increase due to the percentage of losses and recommended that the City retain Blue Cross. 3. They analyzed Blue Cross benefits and recommended that Preferred Service be offered which would make all participating Blue Shield physicians to aUEpt the Preferred Service schedule as "full and final payment" irregardless of the income. 4. They recommended retaining Kaiser and not offer Comprecare at this time because it is somewhat higher and doesn't offer substantially different benefits. They stated Comprecare will have to be offered by 1/1/77. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -4- Councilman Cavarra asked if there was anything unusual in the statistics of claims by city employees. Mr. Olson stated the loss ratio of expenditures is "way up." Councilman Cavarra asked if there was less usage, could they be adjusted downward. Mr. Olson indicated this does not happen very often and due to inflationary factors he doubted if the fees would ever go downward, and gave an example that the surgical fees have gone up one full unit. It was agreed that a Motion could be scheduled for the next meeting approving the rates of health insurance for '976. Motion by Councilman Hulsey "I move that Council approve the renewal of the Class G Liquor License with Extended Hours for Pavilion East Inc. at 4715 Kipling Street, J&E Corp. at 6995 W. 38 Avenue (Jenny's Italian Restaurant), Red Lobster Inn #119 at 4455 Wadsworth Blvd, Country Broker Inc. a+ 10151 W. 26 Ave., Caravan West Inc at 11221 West 44 Avenue, Club Corners Inc. at 6551 W. 44 Avenue, (he Rockette Bar, Ronald J. Hood Owner at 10006 W 44 Avenue, and Jim Mola, Village Inn Pancake House at 4700 Kipling Street." Motion W2~ seconded by Councilman Turner. Councilman Cavarra asked City Attorney Fox if he had reviewed all the police cases and disturbance calls which had been distributed regarding several establishments, and she asked the City Attorney if serving liquor to an intoxicated person is grounds for a violation of the liquor code. She also noted that many police hours are involved with only a certain few establishments. City Attorney Fox stated the Liquor Code may be so interpreted that serving liquor to intoxicated persons is grounds for a violation. Gouncilman Hulsev stated he felt it was ridiculous to have the owners appear for these disturbances and it was wasting their time. He also stated in most cases the owner called for assistance from the police. t.avor Roesener agreed that in most cases the manager or owner had called for police assistance. No one appe r8U in opposition of any of the license renewals that were passed at the meeting. Question was called on Councilman Hulsey's Motion for liquor license renewals and passed 6-0. Motion by Councilman Turner "I move that Council approve the renewal of the Class G liquor license for Granny's West Inc. at 9110 West 44 Avenue, DB&M Inc. at 1-70 and Kipling (Big Daddy's), and Happy Traveler West Inc. at 4400 Ward Road." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 6-0. Case WZ-75-22 was scheduled for Public Hearing which was a request for rezoning property at 6890 W. 44 Avenue from Restricted-Commercial- One to Restricted-Commercial by Henrietta B. Urton. ~ennis Zwagerman, Director of Community Development stated the property is located at the southeast corner of W. 44 Ave. and Quay. He stated although the Land Use Plan recommends low density residential for the property, it shows commercial on the adjacent lot. He also stated the following 1. The building cannot meet for the Restricted Commercial Zone. permit is required, a variance will of Ordinance 98 must be met. 2. Existing uses and zoning make Restricted-Commercial zoning logical. The parcel to the east is zOl,ed Restrict.ed-Commercial, as is the parcel to the northeast. 3. The parcel contains an existing shoppette, and the staff feels that the difference between Restricted-Commercial-One and Restricted-Commercial is not great enough to justify denial of this rezoning. front and side yard setbacks In the event that a building be needed and all other provisions MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -5- The Planning Dept. and Planning Commission recommended approval. In answer to a question, Mr. Zwaqerman stated the Land Use Plan stops the commercial zone in the middle of the block and can be logically extended. He staTIm the setbacks for Restricted-Commercial or Restric~ed-Commercial-One are no~ proper. Councilman Turner stated her at,tachmen~s show that 10' street dedication is being asked for. Mr. Zwagerman stated that should have been crossed out Councilman Merkl commented that the Planning Commission had asked for the 10 foot dedication. Mr. Zwaqerman stated the Planning Commission had asked for the 10' dedication and that it had been thought that there was a larger ROW requirement which would involve the 10' in the major thoroughfare plan. He stated the 10' is not required but could be given on a voluntary basis. He stated the Planning Commission requested it because at that time it had been a Department recommendation. Mr. ZwaQerman went on to say that it should be City policy in acquiring ROW for street improvement but at the present time there is no proposal to utilize the wider street. He stated the existing ROW on the street is 60' and at one time it had been thought that a collector street requires 70', but that width is not required. He stated if the 10' was given there would be jog in the street and if it was ever widened the property would be less conforming than it is now. Councilman Turner questioned if this policy was pursued how many other buildings would become non-conforming and that this was in conflict wi th the major thoroughfare plan. Mr. Zwagerman stat ed the standards for streets are in the Subdivision Regulations and he has not been able to ascertain the widths of the streets on the Major Thoroughfare Plan. Councilman HulseV asked if it would be non-conforming if the 10' was taken. Mr. Zwaqerman stated it would result in 10 feet less for the property, but that the acquisition is a tool to insure ROW for the City. Councilman Howard questioned the plans which showed a 3' jog on the 60' ROWand asked if, at the intersection it would be 63'. Mr. Zwagerman stated "yes, it appears to be (63' .)" Harold Urton stated he was representing his mother, Henrietta Urton, who was also present. He stated he was not sure about the 10' setback. He stated he had agreed at the Planning Commission Meeting to accomodate the Master Plan. He stated presently it is not a requirement and would be a jog in the street. He stated in 1972 a building permit was issued for the building and at that time it met all requirements. He stated the reason for the rezoning request is that they have one tenant apply for a sales tax license and was turned down. He stated the physical outlay of the building is 500 sq. ft. per unit or less, so that it would be impossible for large retail. He stated the setbacks at the time of the building of the building were proper as far as he knew. Mr. Zwagerman stated he had found that the front yard setback is different for each zoning class (R-C-1 is 3D' and R-C is 50') so the rezoning of the property would affect the conformity of the building. He stated in any rate the usage could continue on indefinitely and it could be rebuilt etc. Mavor Roesener asked Mr. Urton if the applicant would be willing to give 10'. Mr. Urton stated he was reluctant to do 50 and he didn't, know if it would ever be used. If the Comprehensive Plan was in effect he stated he would be willing to do so. Mavor Roesener commented if the 10' were given, a future Board of Adjustment might not know all of these facts if and when the applicant asked for a variance, and he did not want to see the applicant penalized. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -6- Councilman Merkl stated he was in favor of acqulrlng t~he 10' which is for fu~ure planning and could be for a left turn lane. He stated acquisitions like this would save condemnation in the future. He stated it could be given back in the fu~ure. Mrs. Urton asked if there would be a cloud on the title if the land was given. City Attorney Fox stated "no" and that the legal description on the deeds would be changed. Councilman Cavarra stated she didn't think the 10' was needed and there is a misunderstanding of interpretation and it isn't in the Land Use Plan to make the streets. She added that citizens north of W. 44 Ave. had recently suggested making that area a greenbelt. Councilman Turner agreed that the land isn't needed and would be a conflict with the Major Thoroughfare Plan. She stated she felt it was improper to take property for a future plan. No one appeared in opposition. Mr. Nylund of 10095 W. 34 Avenue stated he was disturbed to hear talk about street widening, and did not like the concept of acquiring a piece here and there and finally joining them. He concluded that he was opposed to acquiring the 10'. Motion by Councilman Cavarra "I move that Case WZ-75-22 at 6890 West 44 Avenue with Restricted-Commercial-One zoning be rezoned to Restricted-Commercial for the following reasons 1. the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommend approval. 2. It is in compliance with the Land Use Plan. 3. fhere is very little difference between the present zoning and the proposed zoning." Mo~ion was seconded by Councilman Hulsey and passed 6-0. Case WZ-75-21, a rezoning request from Restricted-Commercial to Commercial-One at 9730 W. 44 Avenue by Benclyde Enterprises was scheduled for Public Hearing. Dennis Zwaqerman stated this is the property with the hot dog stand on it. He stated there is Commercial-One zoning east and west of the property He stat,ed ~he Land Use Plan shows mid-density for the area and the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommend approval. He also stated the following 1. The mid-density designation recommended by t~e Land Use Plan is not realistic, due to the existing uses, zoning and arterial function of West 44 Avenue. 2. Most of the land use and zoning in the area does not conform to the Land Use Plan. 3. The parcel to the east was rezoned from Restricted-Commercial to Commercial-One on 9/15/75. The parcel to the west is zoned Commercial- One. 4. A development agreement will be necessary for curb, gutter and sidewalk. 5 If a building permit is desired, all requirements of Ordinance No. 98 must be met. Councilman Turner asked if there was any other structure on the property and Mr. Zwaqerman stated there was small outbuilding. The Planning Commission had approved the case with the recommendation tha~ 10' be dedicated on W. 44 Avenue. Councilman Cavarra asked what the ROW would be if Lhis was given. Mr. Zwaqerman s~ated 70'. Councilman Cavarra asked what the rationale was for asking for an additional 10', and Mr. Zwagerman stated this widrh could accommodate a major collec or with turn lanes. Councilman Turner asked him what the width of the pavement was presently and Mr Zwagerman stated he did not know. Councilman Turner asked if asking for 10' was now I.he policy for rezonlng cases on W 44 Avenue. Mr Zwagerman said "yes." MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -7- Mr. Dick Zarlenqo, attorney was presenl, who represented "he applican He stated the business had been known as the Chuck Wagon, International Hotdog and the Subwagon previously and has been there 15 years He stated it had been zoned properly under the County, but when City zoning became effective the property became non-conforming. He stated the business had been closed and it could have been reopened under non-conforming use, but they felt they should request a rezoning. Councilman Turner asked if the board of Adjustment could be asked to grant a variance for the use. City Attorney Fox stated this could be possible but it is usually for a year and then must be renewed. No one appeared in opposition or in favor of the rezoning. Councilman Merkl made a Motion to approve the rezoning and to request a 10' dedication for ROWand later withdrew the Motion after the following discussion. Councilman Donaldson had seconded the Motion and also withdrew his second. Councilman Cavarra stated she wanted to vote separately on the rezoning and land dedication. Councilman Turner stated she had no objection to the rezoning but was opposed to the dedication and would have to vote against the Motion unless there were 2 separate votes. Councilman Hulsey stated stated in the other zoning case heard tonight the 10' dedication was not required and he didn't know of any plans for the ROW. He stated if it was requested of the applicant for this case it would not be fair and he was not in favor of the 10' dedication, but he wouldn't, deny the the rezoning because of the required dedication. Councilman Turner suggested amending the motion. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move for approval of Case WZ-75-21 for the following reasons It would bring the property into conformity. It was recommended by the Planning Department and Planning Commission." Motion was seconded by Councilman Hulsey and passed 6-0. Case WZ-74-30 which was an industrial development with a preliminary and final development plan at 4850 Ward Road by Alan C. McLean was scheduled for Public Hearing. Dennis Zwagerman stated the following 1. The Land Use Plan calls for Industrial in the area. 2, Proposed use is compatible with both the commercial and industrial uses in existence and planned for the area. 3. The Planning Dept. recommends approval because a. The plan conforms to the land use plan gUidelines. b. The site plan meets all ordinance requirements for 5 preliminary and final development plan, luith the exception of the requirement for a 75 foot setback where adjacent to the Residential-Two property. The Planning Dept. recommends the Planning Commission waive this requirement since the Residential-Two parcel does not contain a residence and is not likely to remain residentially zoned in the future. c. A waiver for a curb cut wider than 3D feet is being requested to allow a turning radius for trucks. d. A development agreement or escrow will be required for street improvements. e. The restaurant shown is a uSe-by-right in the Industrial zone if it is planned as an incidental use with no exterior advertising. If advertising is desired, Planning Commission approval for a Commercial-One use is required whiCh has been done. He also stated that on 5/29/75 Council did approve a Preliminary Plat from Residential-Two to a Planned Industrial Development. He stated the preliminary plan is back ~fore the Council because it has been changed and is less intense and has more open space. Councilman Cavarra asked if there was adequate parking for the C-1 use. Mr. Zwagerman stated the total parking is adequate, and in answer to another question he stated I,here is 38~ landscaping. Councilman Turner asked if there was a street dedication to the north and Mr. Zwagerman stated there is no street dedication 10 the north and there is Residential-Two property there. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -8- Councilman Turner a5ked if ~he Board of Adjustment and Planning Commission can approve a U5e that is not compatible with the zoning. CiLY Attorney Fox 5tated the Board may approve the use of the land. Councilman Turner asked if it was a determination allowed the Planning Commission to permit, the restaurant for public use. City Attorney Fox Stated actions of the Planning Commission is subject to Council's approval and if their recommendation is not accepted by Council then it is not part of the plan. The exception to this is the Board of Adjustment decisions which can only be reviewed in the District Co~t. City Attorney Fox stated uses desired can be set up in a planned development which then allows more than 1 use within the plan. Mr. Zwaqerman stated Section 21 in Ordinance No. 98 states that the Planning Commission can approve any use. City Attorney Fox stated Council has the right to zone property and what is currently before the Council tonight is a request to zone the property with a new Preliminary Plan. If it is denied the zoning etc. would revert back to the original preliminary plan that was approved in May. He stated the preliminary development plan that is before them tonight is in itself a rezoning request. Councilman Turner stated in the past there have been rezoning plans that have been denied but the zoning remained. City Attorney Fox stated that if the plan was denied then the zoning remained agricultural or whatever it had originally been. Councilman Turner stated there had also been property rezoned without a plan being submitted. City Attornev Fox stated in all other zoning classes a plan is not required, and that prior to the establishmenL of Planned Unit Development zonings the industrial zoning also did not need plans which is now changed with the requirement of a preliminary de~opment plan etc. and the zoning change is supported by approval of the plan. Applicants using the planned development concept are not allowed to use set categories, and must develop in exact compliance of the plan which creates a restrictive zoning category. Allan Ojala architect for the applicants stated there had been the following changes in the original plan reduced the building coverage by 20%, increased landscaping by 30%, increased gross square footage of the building, increased the parking stalls but not the parking area. He stated they put the 3 buildings in the original plan into 2 buildings. He stated the only other change is the restaurant which is 4000 sq ft. and they would like it for the people in the area instead of just employees of the complex. He stated the intent of the project is the same which will be light industrial and offices related to the graphic arts. He staum they are 12 cars over in design in parking, and the larger curb cut at Jan Gorden will allow maneuverability and relieve congestion. He stated they would like a letter of credit for the first phase of the development for improvements and they aren't sure where the northern building will be yet so they would like development agreements in that area. Councilman Turner asked the capacity seating for the restaurant. Mr. Ojala stated there we~36 parking spaces and stated there would be a maximum of 100 sets. Councilman Turner asked if their number of parking spaces was the same as for a C-1 zoning district. He stated for C-1 it is slightly less and they used the parking requirement that was for the greatest amount. In answer to a question he estimaed there would be 50 workers in building 1, 25 in building 2 and he was not sure for building 3. He stared he did not know at; this time if they would request a liquor license for the restaurant. Councilman Turner commented she felt it was unfortunate that the proper setback requirement for the property in the residential zone was not used. M 0'1 sleated t,he area is all industrial wi"h just 1 house ~o the r. 1a a . MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -9- north 100 ft. away that i5 not used as a residence. He stated also there i5 only 1 5mall parcel of ground zoned Residential-Two and that i5 next to the professional building that is proposed and won't be next to the industrial use. Councilman Turner commented that there is a reason why setback requirements exist. No one appeared in favor nor in opposition to the proposed development plan. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move for acceptance of the concept of the Preliminary Development Plan for Case WZ-74-~ and that Council grant the waiver of the 40' curb cut because it was recommended by the Planning Department and Planning Commission and the site plan meets all the requirements except the 75 foot setback where adjacent to the Residential-Two property. I further move that Council waive this requirement since the Residential-Two parcel coes not contain a residence and is not likely to remain residentially zoned in the future." Mo~ion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson and passed 4-1. Councilman Turner voted "nay" and Councilman Hulsey abstained. Acceptance of the final developmen~l~Qs next. It was explained that this would be built in two stages with Stage I. including building 1 to be co~rcted within the next 18 months, and Stage 2 including the other buildings to be built over the next 10 years. The first stage has escrowed funds for all street improvements plus everything outlined in Phase 1 (Stage 1). The remaining parcels will have development agreements pertaining to the improvements. Mr. Zwagerman pointed out tha Council has the opiton of putting time limits on the construction. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move for approval of the final plat for industrial development at 4850 Ward Road with the stipulation that an escrow agreement be worked out for Phase I and for all development along Van Gorden and Ward Road, and that a development agreement with the City be written for the remaining Phase 2 and Phase 3." Motion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson. It was explained that the applican'ts time table for development was accepted by adopting the plan. Councilman Howard felt that 10 years was too long to grant for development. Motion to Amend by Councilman Howard "I move that a 2 year maximum be placed on Phase 2 and 3 (for completion.)" Motion was seconded by Councilman Turner. Councilman Merkl felt this was unreasonable since the request for Phase 1 was 18 months, and felt 5 years would be more reasonable. Councilman Turner stated she felt if the development would take 10 years it should be applied for in steps and that this was too long for an area to be under construction. Question was called on Motion to Amend and was DEFEATED 3-2. Councilmen Merkl, Cavarra and Donaldson voted "nay" and Councilman Hulsey abstained. Motion to Amend by Councilman Cavarra "I move that Council set a time limit of 5 years for completion of Phase 2 and Phase 3." Motion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson and passed 5-0. Councilman Hulsey abstained. Councilman Howard asked for an explanation of Councilman Hulsey' abstentions and Councilman Hulsev stated he was a personal pf Mr. McLean. (frlend) Question was called on Councilman Merkl's Amend Motion to approve the final development and passed 4-1. Councilman Turner voted "nay" and Councilman Hulsey abstained. Motion by Councilman Hulsey "I move that Item 2.F. (Request from Jefferson High students for financial help and which had been previously moved up to Item 2.F. on the Agenda) be moved up to the next Item on the Agenda to be Item 1.E." Motion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Mr. Heath, teacher at Jefferson High and two student.s, Brent Singer and Lynda Eastman were present. Mr. Heath explains they were present MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -10- to seek donations from the City to help pay for trips for students who were participating in the Close Up Program. The students would go to Washington D.C. to see the government in action and will observe various parts of the government in action and visit with the Representatives and Senators. Brent Singer, student stated there are 50 high schools participating and that many students from Jefferson High live in Wheat Ridge who are participating in the program. He stated he felt this would be a valuable experience and it had been interesting listening to the Council, and that he would be able to utilize this k lowledge in his 3rd quarter class which is structure of governments. Lvnda Eastman, student gave the itinerary which included visiting the executive branch, pentagon, state department, legislative branch, judicial department, White House, Smithsonian Institute and meeting wi~h senators and representatives. She stated it would be a very busy week and educationally "packed" and that she was especially interested since she would be able to vote next year. Mr. Heath stated these are "top notch" students who are attending and that they get 1/4 credit. He stated the cost of the trip is $440. He stated they had the following projects to raise money selling candy, sponsoring a dance, seeking funds from clubs etc. and the had been before the City of Edgewater which had contributed toward the trip. He stated there are so many clubs in the school seeking funds that sometimes it is overwhelming. Councilman Hulsey asked how the students are picked. Mr. Heath stated any student who has the $440 could attend. He added if a donation is given he felt it should be equal among all the students. Councilman Hulsey stated he felt this was an admirable project but wondered how many other groups would come in seeking money. He stated he felt if the City donated the money, that the students could work for this in the various departments of the City for "1 or 2 hours to work it off." Councilman Cavarra felt this was a good idea and that Mr. Jerman should work this out with the staff. She stated she felt this was a worthy cause and would like to see it supported. Brent Sinqer stated winter is a busy time for many students, but perhaps some of the students could do summer work for the City. Councilman Turner stated she agreed with Councilmen Hulsey and Cavarra and that money means a lot more when it is earned. She stated she had a box which is for recycling cans which is owned by the Environment Committee and she would be willing to let the students empty it and use the money from the cans. Councilman Merkl stated in the past he had opposed anything of this sort of request and that the City had turned down funds for the Jefferson County Community Retarded Center. He stated he felt this was an outstanding program and he liked the idea if the City paid out money to get something in return, but he wasn't sure if this was any more worthy than other requests which have been turned down. He stated he would like to see a plan worked out by Mr. Jerman before he could support this. Councilman Howard stated he agreed with Councilman Merkl to a certain point, but felt if money was given this would set a precedent and it will open the door to everv organization that needs funding and he could "see a steady stream" coming into Council. He also felt the students at Wheat Ridge High might come in with the same request and that the Council has never given for this type of program in the past and he was against it now. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - ContinueD -11- Councilman Turner asked if the money could be given on a loan basis and Mr. Fox said "no, and that Council could give the money for services rendered at a later date or just outright donate the money." Councilman Turner requested that Mr. Jerman bring in a proposal next week that is more definite regarding the idea of working it out in the City. Councilman Cavarra asked what amount were they looking for and used the figure of $50 per student. Mr. Heath stated that would be a "tremendous donation. He stated school would be out next week and the trip starts on February 15th. Motion by Councilman Howard "I move that Council take action on the request on the first meeting in January, January 5, 1976." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 6-0. Councilman Merkl stated this would be Study Session Meeting. Councilman Turner requested tm proposal for the next meeting from Mr. Jerman and encouraged the students to attend Council Meetings. A petition from Kipling 5000 for the creation of a Special A sessment District was scheduled. Mr. Jerman stated he recommended the City retaining a financial advisor and legal advisor for this complex end technical area. He had distributed a proposal from Hanifen, Imhoff and Samford Inc. of Denver to serve as financial advisor to the City with respect to Special Improvement Districts and other financial matters. He stated this is the firm which served the City in the 4/1/75 bond election. He stated the agreement had been studied by the City Attorney. He stated there is no front-end money required from the City and the fees payable by the City evolve from the proceeds of the bonds. His memo stated there would be minor out-of-pocket expenses for the City but only with specific administrative approval. He also recommended hiring a legal advisor due to the leg~ technicialities that are not normally services performed by a city attorney. He recommended the firm of Willson and Lamm and that they would have no fee if the district is abandoned but there would be one if the bonds are sold, which would be paid from the proceeds. He stated he felt Council should take action to accept the petition and authorizing retaining these 2 firms. Councilman Merkl stated he thoug~Kipling 5000 was responsible for the development. Mr. Jerman stated this is true. Councilman Merkl stated if this was true, then why doesn't the developer pay for all the legal help requred etc. Mr. Jerman stated there is no cost to the City and that the district formation is at the request of the property owners. He stated all costs are figured before the bonds are sold and before the district is closed, and then taxes pay for the district. Councilman Merkl asked why the City had to name a bond consultant and legal attorney and why couldn't the developers do it themselves. Mr. Fox stated that the bonding firm etc. would meet with Kipling 5000 and they would work out the project, and the City would only inspect the project. He stated the City is requested to guarantee the last 25% of the bonds. Councilman Merkl questioned underwriting the bonds by the City, and Mr. Fox stated the only way the expense can be gleaned through taxes is by a special improvement district, and Mr. Jerman stated the City would only have to pay if the bonds went into default and in that case the City would have the property to "Fall back on " Councilman Cavarra stated she had the same concerns as Mr. Merkl and asked if the Imhoff agreement was signed would it be an enforceable contract, and also the terms which states it would have all future business from the CitV. Mr. Fox stated it would be a contract but there is a clause if 30 days notice is given the agreement can be cancelled. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -12- Councilman Cavarra stated after the April bond election that several other firms had contacted her and had been disturbed that no other company had been contacted. She also questioned their proposals of investigating the present financial structure of the City and preparing a study which ou~lines all means of achieving future debt obligations and assisting in financial matters including advice in expanding the capital projects: She stated she felt the voters had indicated a pay as you go basis for capital improvements and felt those proposals were not needed. City Attornev Fox commented that if the City begins this type of bonded indebtedness, tha~ at some point in the future the saturation poin~ for this liability might be reached. He stated "we are jus' starting to see what problems can result from bonding for cities." Mr. Jerman stated there are many kinds of bonds, and that these bonds are not general obligation bonds. Councilman Cavarra questioned the proposal of Imhoff regarding expansion of the City's capital improvements, and Mr. Jerman stated they would merely review the City's capability. Councilman Cavarra also questioned if just one firm was contacted for a proposal or were several contacted. Mr. Jerman stated he had contacted no other bonding company, and that this was the firm used in the April bond election. Councilman Turner asked if a special district must be formed by ordinance and if there were any other requirements. City Attorney Fox stated that it is correct that there are several steps required to be taken and before action is taken Council should understand the impact of rheir decision. Councilman Turner stated she was opposed to hiring any financial advisor on a continuing basis, and that if this is formed, it does set the precedent to allow any developer not to pay for the cost of his development. Councilman Turner also questioned that water and sewer services were provided through this and asked if these districts had been contacted Mr. Lamm, attorney stated these will be special assessment bonds and will not be general obligation bonds He stated the statutes had been amended to allow that 3/4 of the bond shall be paid, and if there is default the City would pay the last ~ of the issue and would be reimbursed for closure proceedings. Councilman Merkl asked if the City is required to do this. Mr. Lamm stated the bonds probably wouldn't be sold unless there was this provision in them. City Attornev Fox asked if this would be a potential liability against the City, and Mr. Lamm stated the payment is assessment on the property owners within the district. City Attornev Fox asked if the credibility of the municipality's ratings in the bonding market would be affected if there were several districts of this type in the City. Mr. Lamm stated ordinarily special assessment bonds do not affect this. Councilman Cavarra asked if the City's bonding capability would be affected. Mr. Lamm stated this type of bond does not create a debt, although this interpretation has not been tried in the courts. He stated in case of default the City could attach a lien. Councilman Cavarra asked if in case of bankruptcy, would the City get precedence or would the debts be prorated on the dollar. Mr. Lamm stated the statute was not clear on this point. Councilman Cavarra stated if not, the City would not be assured through the value of the property because other creditors could make their claim also. Councilman Hulsey asked if ~his was common practice in other cities. Mr. Lamm stated yes. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -13- Motion by Councilman Turner "I move we dispense with t.he Rules of Procedure and continue with the meeting." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 6-0. Bob Williams who is a partner of Kipling 5000 stated they have been involved with Denver, Arvada etc. in special improvement districts He stated it makes the property owner responsible to pay for it. He noted there had been a recent tax sale in Jefferson Co. and said very few properties go into default. Councilman Cavarra asked if they had estimated the total dollar figure. Mr. Williams stated no engineering had been done yet, but that the district is a means to get the work done faster than escrowing the money. He stated plans include Kipling St., diagonal of Kipling to Independence, Independence to Garrison and sewer on other property shan his own and a segment on his property. Councilman Merkl stated when the development was approved, the City had stated the developers were required to improve the property. He stated now the developers want the City to underwrite the project. and this bothers him. He stated why wasn't this brought out at the time of the proposal. Mr. Williams stated the state law is a recent one which allows statutory cities to do this, in regards to the 25% funding. In answer to a question, he stated they plan to lease as much as they can, and plan to retain as much ownership as they can. Councilman Turner asked how many feet would this district relieve ~he developer of frontend expense. Mr. Williams estimated 1300 to 1400 plus 800 and then if Garrison Meadows is added 1320. Mr. Jerman noted there were two petitions presented with the original including the area of Kipling for the Olympia Ridge Apts. and the alternate excluding this. Councilman Cavarra questioned if the Imhoff agreement was approved, would the City be retaining them for 1 project only. Councilman Hulsev stated he was only talking about "hiring this firm to handle this one project only." Councilman Howard asked what is the cost to the the agreement states the City would pay for the etc. out of pocket expense. City Attornev Fox a minimum of $250 if the bonds fail plus out of City and noted that printing of bonds stated it would be pocket expense. Councilman Turner stated when smaller districts had been formed in the past a. tremendous amount of time had been spent for the city engineering staff time for each property, and she stated with the enormity of this project the cost would be quite high. Mr. Jerman stated all costs of engineering would be on the cost of the property. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move to table this item until ~he second meeting in January so that the cost to ~he City of Wheat Ridge can be brought back to Council." Motion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson and TIED 3-3. Councilmen Cavarra, Hulsey and Turner voted "nay" and the Chair voted "nay" and MOTION WAS DEFEATE[D 4-3 Mr. Lamm stated in other cities all costs that are incidental in the bonding project are included in the bond issue and the City doesn't pay anything. Mr. Hobbs asked if the staff did the engineering work, if that would constitute thaI. they would be pract,1sing outside engineering work. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -14- Mr. Lamm stated he had found in the statutes that in case of a li8n etc. the City would have priority over all other claims except a general tax lien. M~. Jerman stated the cost for all improvements would come out of the property and would be assessed on all the parcels. Councilman Cavarra asked what happened if there was default bBbre 75% had been paid off. Mr. Lamm stated 3/4 of the principi must be paid off before the City can undertake the debt. ago Jim H81big partner of Kipling 5000 stated 6 months this new procedure became effective so that they could petition Wheat Ridge for this sort of thing. They would like to accelerate their development and the national economic situation has been slow. He stated he assumed the development would be of some help to the City as well as to themselves. He stated if the district is not allowed, development would be slow. Councilman Cavarra requested that Mr. Jerman contact neighboring cities for recommendations of other bonding consultants. She explained that this is a highly competitive business. Mr. Jerman stated the 3hedules of bonds are the same and 2 firms were considered for the April bond election and Imhoff had been chosen. Motion by Councilman Hulsey "I move we accept th8 petition and that we use the firm of Hanifen, Imhoff and Samford Inc. (as bond consultants) and that we use the services of Lamm & Willson, attorneys and that all other action necessary to bring an ordinance etc. before the City be taken." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl. (No vote was taken, see motion below to table.) Mr. Williams stated in most other cities the City does the engineering of the project and the cost has been charged back into the district cost. Councilman Cavarra asked if the sale was unsuccessful, does the City bear the cost. Mr. Lamm stated the bonds go out for public sale for a best bidder. Mr. Jerman stated Imhoff has agreed if there is no bid to buy the bonds themselves. Councilman Cavarra asked if this was a guaranteed sale as the wording stated "nothing will preclude the firm from purchasing the bonds." Councilman Merkl questioned the cost to the City again, even if it is absorbed later on, he questioned what the i~tial cost would be. Motion by Councilman Cavarra "I move to ask Mr. Merkl to reconsider his Motion to table until complete information regarding cost and guarantee of selling the bonds can be obtained (Table until 1/12/76)." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 5-1. Councilman Turner voted "nay." Motion by Councilman Howard "I move we cover Items 2.D and 8.A. next" Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 6-0. Item 2.D. was a staff report regarding the advisability of placing a marker at 38 Ave. and Youngfield by the Centennial Commission. The report from the Chief of Police and Director of Public Works stated that certain area may create an impedimentto traffic and a pedestrian hazard. Mayor Roesener stated the locations did not seem too definite and asked if the property owners had been contacted. Councilman Turner stated the request had only been specifically for the one location at 38 Ave. and Youngfield to begin with. Councilman Turner asked if something could be done with pedestrian etc. signs at the location and recommending tabling the sugg8stion until 80m8thing could be worked out with tne staff. Motion by Councilman Turner "I mOV8 U raol~ thi~ request until a later time." Molion was seconded by Councilman Cavarra and passed 6-0. Councilman Turner stated this specific location had been requested becBuse of historic significance. Mr. Jerman requested that future requests go through his office so that he could coordinate them. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -15- Item B.A. was a request of the Centennial Commission to have temporary signs on the street name signs which showed the old names the streets used to have. Councilman Turner stated they planned to have wooden signs with routed letters and they would be red, white and blue. She also added there are state funds for this project and there would be help from the schools. Mr. Hobbs stated he approved this idea and he wanted the signs placed above the present signs so that they would not interfere with the view of motorists. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move we authorize signs renaming certain designated streets in the City as requested by the Centennial Bicentennial Commission." Motion was seconded by Councilman Howard and passed 6-0. Resolution No. 428 was introduced by Councilman Turner which was to pue protesting the Mountain Bell franchise tax billing procedure and was read. Councilman Cavarra questioned the value of this and it was her understanding that this was going to be appealed in the Courts and is out of the PUC's hands. Motion by Councilman Donaldson "I move for the adoption of Resolution No. 428." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 6-0. A Motion to authorize payment to Centennial Engineering for street program engineering services in excess of $10,000 was scheduled. Motion by Councilman Merkl: "I move we approve payment to Centennial Engineers not to exceed $15,686.75 to be charged to Account 441.32 for street program engineering services." Motion was seconded by Councilman Donaldson and passed 5-1. Councilman Howard voted "nay." Councilman Turner aSked if Centennial Engineers understmod the billing procedure now, and Mr. Jerman said "yes." Councilman Cavarra asked for a cost breakdown on the work on W. 32 Ave. walkway at a future date. Councilman Howard stated that he wanted to see other companies contacted for future engineering projects and that he was "not enthused" about the work on W. 41 Ave which has problem areas. Motion by Councilman Merkl "I move that Item 2.E. (Resolution supporting State funding for peaca officer training program) be postponed 1 week." Motion was seconded by Councilman Howard .and passed 6-0 Councilman Merkl explained that the Chief was not present to explain this CounCilman Merkl introduced Ordinance No 194 setting the sa18ry of the City Treasurer on second reading and the title was read Motion by Councilman Cavarra: "I move that Ordinance No. 194 be approved on second reading." Motion was seconded by Councilman Hulsey and passed 6-0. Councilman Merkl introduced Ordinance No. 195 on second reading and requested that it be published and that the title be read. Motion by Councilman Cavarra: approved on second reading." Hulsey and passed 6-0. 81 move that Ordinance No. 195 be Motion was seconded by Councilman Ordinance No. 197 amending Ordinance No. 135 by making the use tax 2% was introduced by Councilman Hulsey and the title was read. -"---- MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -16- Councilman Cavarra stated the first time she had been opposed to this ordinance but now felt there was some validity that if it was not passed purchases might be made other than in the City limits. Motion by Councilman Hulsey: HI move that Ordinance No. 197 be approved on first reading and be pUblished." Motion was seconded by Councilman Howard and passed 5-1. Councilman Turner voted "nay." Consideration of employee fringe benefits as proposed by the Police Protective Assoc. was scheduled. Mr. Jerman stated he strongly endorsed all the proposals that had been thoroughly discussed with the PPA and himself and the Mayor. He felt these benefits were in line with other cities and that it should be adopted for 1/1/76. Mavor Roesener agreed. Mr. Jerman stated that the pay issue had been settled for 4/1/76 but that there would be an impact for the employees with family benefits in insurance and that the remaining portion of the package could be made effective 1/1/76. Ed Rav, Chairman of the PPA stated that the PPA felt the proposalbBs fair that had been worked out. They were in favor of a pay increase on 1/1/76 rather than 4/1/76. He stated he felt this whould "go far in reaffirming relations with employees. and failure to implement this would decrease the morale and Job effectiveness. He stated it is known that the City will have a large budget surplus in 1976 He stated there is going to be a large insurance increase to the employees, and if the salary is not adjusted then most employees will have a reduction in their paychecks. He added if employees do not feel they are important to the City they will not promote the plans of the City as effectively. He stated the PPA did not want to have serious employee prOblems and urged Council to consider an adjustment. Dave Shellev Chairman of the Employee Council stated they agree with the PPA and would like to see a salary raise on 1/1/76. Motion by Councilman Merkl: "I move we adopt the remainder of the PPA package and make the 50% medical coverage (for dependents) extend to all city employees of the City of Wheat Ridge to be effective 1/1/76." Motion was seconded by Councilman Hulsey. Councilman Cavarra asked if this was in addition to the 5% raise. Councilman Merkl stated the 5% raise would be 4/1/76. Councilman Cavarra asked if this was budgeted. Mr. Jerman said "yes" and that some of it might come out of the unallocated reserve. Councilman Cavarra questioned if this was equitable for sigle people and that she did not want to see the City locked into ever increasing operating costs. Councilman Turner stated in the PPA package there had been a tradeoff for a lesser raise for the increased insurance benefit, and that t is wasn't fair to Single people. She stated she felt it would be proper to implement the remainder of the package on 4/1/76 and explained that this had been a compromise date made by Council. Councilman Merkl stated that the majority of the employees would benefit from the health plan. Councilman Hulsev agreed with Mr. Merkl and felt a reconsideration of the 5% salary raise should be made also, and he felt paying it in January would be cheaper in the long run than negotiating with a union at a later time and it would increase employee morale. Question was called on the Motion and TIED 3-3. Councilmen Cavarra, Howard and Turner voted "nay." Discussion followed whether or not the Mayor should vote on this if implementation would require an ordinance. Part of the proposed benefits would be an ordinance amendment it was explained. Citv Attornev Fox stated this would also require a resolution for appropriation. Councilman Cavarra stated part of these were in the Personnel Rules and asked how ~---'_. MINUTES - 12/15/75 - Continued -17- they were amended. Mr. Jerman stated the Rules were authorized by Ordinance and changing them is in the body of the Rules. Cit~ Attornev Fox stated an ordinance amendment may well be needed and the ayor stIould not vote on the Motion. Motion by Councilman Turner: "I move that the remaining portion of the PPA proposal be amended to be implemented 4/1/76 so the benefits to the Police Dept. will occur the same time as benefits to all the departments, with the exclusion of No.3 (50% dependent medical coverage) to be acted upon separately." Motion was seconded by Councilman Cavarra. Mr. Jerman brought the fact that he didn't think the medical coverage could be changed in April and that it is from Jan. to Jan. annually. Mr. Andrews seted there were two times during the year that it could change. Councilman Cavarra stated she was in favor of the PPA package being effective 1/1/76 excluding #3. Motion to Amend by Councilman Cavarra: "I move that the date be changed to 1/1/76." Motion was seconded by Councilman Merkl and passed 4-2. Councilmen Howard and Turner voted "nay. 'I Question was called on Amended Motion which would make the PPA package effective 1/1/76 excluding #3 and Motion passed 5-1. Councilmen Howard voted "nay." Councilman Herkl announced a meeting with RTD, Board member Johnnie Harper and the Aass Transit Committee and Council on 12/16/75 at 7:00 p.m. Meeting was adjourned at 1:10 a.m. A' -) 1 ,~ I, ( J _ , ~ C) 7 ;; (" ,Iu' ) (" t_ f' >-- . , '~ ,-"-i' ,-..-/ l€e Brougham), 1::1 t erk APPROVED II / . c' If; - 7 L 1-1 ~ / -) I / To CITY L JNCIL From MAYOR ROESENER A"u CITY 4L~1~rJISTR[\TOR, John ~J\ ,\m,n Dt ./ Subject Below Da~ ~eptember 24, 1975 Approved Date SUBJECT DISCUSSIONS WITH P.P.A. AND CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS BY EMPLOYEE COUNCIL ~GENDA ITEM .5...__~j At the request of the representatives of the Police Protective Association (PoP.Ao), the Mayor, City Administrator, Chief of P~~~ and Director of Administrative Services held a series of meetings wi~;it{.Jttkl D-~mi tteenttbE___ P.PoA. to discuss proposals concerning the salaries and fringe benefits of Sworn officers in the Police Departmento DEe .L 5 1975 On September 12, the City Council received a memo from the Employee Council containing other reco~mendations for the 1976 budget relative to salaries, fringe benefits, and uJorking conditions of other City employees. Attached is a report of the cost effect of the proposals prepared by the Director of Administrative Services. The cost summary is as follows by item 10 S 3,665 (Police only) 2. -0- 3. 20,000 (All Employees) 4. 7,350 (Police only) 50 5,560 (Police only) 6. 2,880 <-Police onlv) 7. 7,212 (All EmplDy~es) 8. DEFERf~ED 9. (1,772) (Police only) $44,895 TOTAL I [ f I ! , f ! I I , i ~ I I It has been agreed thet the cost of item 3, Family Hospital and Medical Benefits, if approved by Council, would be deducted from the proposed five percent (5%) pay increase. The percentage impact of all of the above is approximately three peC'cent (3%) of payrolL The percentage impact of the Family Hospital-Medical Benefit is approx- imately t~o percent \20)0 Atts. 2 :c Richard Ko Ar.drews, Director of Administrative Services Chief Ed Pinson Dave Shelley, Chairman, Employee Council Detective Ed Ray, Police Protective Assno, Wheat Ridge I:, CITY ';...- WHEAT RIDGE - MEMORAf )UM fu\YOR HOl~R L ROESENER To CITY COUNCIL HEMBERSV' . EMPLOYEE COUNCIL 11EMBERS SEPTEMBER 12, 1975 From Subj6ct ( BELOW) Date Approved Date SUBJECT PLCOMMENDATIONS FOR 1976 BUDGET At its meeting on Sertember 12, 1975, the Employee Council made the following recommendations relat~ve to salarles, frlnge benefits, and w~rking condltions for consideration by the City Council for posslble incorporation ~n the 1976 Budget 1 Grant cost of living increase comparable to the actual increase in the cost of Ilving, effective January 1, 1976, for all City employees to include department heads 2 City paid family coverage for health insurance reco~~end that the City evplore the possibility of dental and optical insurance coverage Also, implementing 3 Improve on-the-job training Have representativeCs) come to the City to e pla_n equlpment, e+c , used by City employees Expand professlonal approach to staff tralning both in-house and external--allow more e<cosure for employees to profession job-related training and conferences Allow more employees to attend minor and/or major conferences 4 Review job classlficatlons and provide for reclassification, etc where applicable Revievi job classifications for parity both in-house and wic:hln the 2,etro area relative to responslbilities and duties, educatlon and evperience and salary ranges Also, recorrunend that the salary survey be conducted by an unbiased third party rather than in-house 5 Uniforms for Parks employees In addition to regular uniforms, issue one pair of coveralls for each employee to use during miscellaneous JObS (palnting, e~c) This will keep employees' every-day unlforms looking clean and wlll create a better public image Also, recoQIDend heaJier winter jackets 6 New or used lockers for Parys employees to hang winter clothes and supplies This ~ill elimlnate employees having to leave work to chaRge clothes )utside temperature varies during the day, and proper clochlng ~ill reduce siLkness and increase efficiency and morale 7 Purchase compact vehicles for use bj all departments to reduce gasoline, maintenance, etc , expenses 8 Implement complete merit system for all City employees rather than automatic increase, and/or salary rev-{ews by elected officials 9 Improve communication system within City Hall to adequately service all City offlces (newer model switchboard) ,--(~_. ^ 'Y ... --........ ...~ To CITY ADMINISTRATOR From DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Da~ SEPTEMBER 22, 1975 Subject (See B810w) Approved Date COST EFFECT ON PROPOSED CHANGES IN BUDGET (Review of discussion with P.P.A ) 1 COURT TIME COURT APPEARANCES PER YEAR AMOUNT PAID AT l~~ TIMES FOR EACH HOUR IN COURT COURT APPEARANCES PER MDrJTH OSITION Corporals Police Officers Juvenile Officer Detectives 2 4 1 96 1200 12 10 $ 276.48 $3,324.00 $ 33 24 $ 31 60 MOUNT CITY PRESENTLY PAYS FOP ONE-HOUR MINIMUM OF COURT PAY $3,665.32 $3,665 32 $7,330.64 DDITIONAL AMOUNT CITY WILL PAY FOR TWO-HOUR MINIMUM OF COURT PAY DT AMOUNT CITY WILL PAY FOR COURT TIME IN 1976 2 NO COST 3 50% MEDICAL COVEPAGE FOR FAMILY MEMBERS 30,500 Projected insurance cost of employee in 1976 for City 50,500 City cost for employee plus 50% family coverage in lieu of a portion of the 5% cost of living increase. ~ UNIFORM ALLOWANCE ) Uniformed police personnel at $175 00 per year itv would pay a total of $7,350 00 J __EANING ALLOWANCE 5,184 Cost per year for the cleaning costs of 42 uniformed personnel 375 Cost per year for the cleaning costs of 5 detectives receiving $75.00 per year. J OVERTIME AND COURT PAY FOR SERGEANTS Z,880 City will pay for 5 Sergeants spending 4 hours in court per month. ""-nrt SIT~ ADMINISTRATOR PAGE TWO #7 SICK PAY CONVERSION AFTER 60 DAYS ACCRUAL S '7 ~ L- "'l2 Amount to be paid by Cit. in 1976 for accrual of 480 or more hours or sick lEave on a one for one basis +Is OK ~9 DETECTIVE DUTY PAY ~1,771 50 per YEar savings if duty pay is deleted from the present pay ordinance. RK,C\ kkw