HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-20 (Regular) Meeting Minutes•
•
1 . C•II to Ord1r
ENOLEWOOCI CITY COUNCIL
ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO
Regular SHllon
Augu1t 20 , 2007
Thero, ,lar meeting of the Eng lewood City Counc il was called to order by Mayor Wolosyn al 7:30 p.m.
2. Invocation
The Invocation was given by Counc il Member Barrentine .
3. Pledge of Alleglence
The Pledge of Alleg lanca was led by Mayor Wolosyn .
4. Roll C ■II
Presen t:
Ab sent:
A quorum was present.
Council Members Tomasso , Moore , Barrenl ine , Oakley , Mccaslin ,
Woodward , Wolosyn
None
Also present: City Manager Sears
City Allomey Brotzman
Deputy City Manager Flaherty
Deputy Clerk Bush
City Clerk Ellis
Direclor Gryglewicz, Finance and Adm inistra tive Services
Dlreclor Fonda , Utilities
Director Black , Parks and Recreation
Director Kahm , Public Works
Director Wh ile , Commun ity Development
Ch ief Bu il ding Official Sm ith, Safety Serv ices
Eng ineering/Capital Projects Adm inlstralor Henderson, Public Works
Pollca Commander Walson , Safely Services
5. Con1ld1r1tlon of Mlnut11 of Prevlou1 Se11lon
(a) COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES OF THi: REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 2007 ,
Mayor Wolosyn as ked If lhere were any comments . There were none .
Vote r11ult■:
Ayes : Council Members Berrentlne , McCaslln, Moore, Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomaaso, Oakley
Nays : None
Motion carried .
• 6. Recognition of Schedul ■d Public Comment
There were no scheduled visitors .
Englewood City Council
Augu1t 20, 2007
P1ge2
7. Recognition of Un1chldul1d Publlc Comment
(a) Marilyn Meister , a Littleton resident, said I woJld like to introduce my husband Brad Meister .
We 're here as the owners of Liquor Control Incorporated, wi ,I ;h la the company that owns the property between
Lehow and the creek that la the subject of one of your resolutions regarding eminent domain later this evening .
And the reason we 're here is that we would Ilka lo express some concem, from our perspective , of the history,
kind of Iha highlight of Iha history, of the events from our perspective. We have concerns about eminent domain
being used . But let me tell you first , we heard about the bike trail In Informal discussions with Bob Seams . And
then In Februery of 2003 , In a loller, we ware asked to donate about 2 acres of our 4 acre parcel ... whlch caused
us concern .. .for a ten fool wide bike trail. We didn't think 2 acres were needed . But we never have received any
answ~rs to a couple of specific questions lhel we have posaJ to Mr . Seams . At that time though , he did tell us
that eminent domain was not an option, so we were kind of surpr la_ d by soma of Iha subsequent events .
Nothing much happened for awhile . Then in 2005, a casuel ec<,, fntance of ours , Mr . John Cavey, repeatedly
told us, al various social occasions, you should just sell that proper :y to Englewood. And we never did figure out
what was go ing on, because there was no real business meeting, ever, that took place between us and Mr .
Cavey. And we didn 't know If he was trying to represent the City, or was he trying lo represent us? We could
never figure out what his Interest was in this whole situation . So that kind of died down for awhile and then In
the middle of 2006, we got a copy of an appraisal and, as we recall , Mr . Cavey dropped it off to my husband
Brad al another social event. In 2006, in August, we got a loller from Stan Dial, saying he was working with the
City and South Suburban Park Foundation about this easement. So since we felt that our issues had never
been taken seriously before , at that time, we hired an attorney. We sent him lo meet with Mr . Dial. He had our
list of questions , issues , proposals and alternatives . And once again , we got no response lo anyth ing on our list.
No acknowledgement of the meeting or any response of any kind. Then in January of 2007, we read about
ourselves in the Englewood Herald, in regard lo a December City Council meet ing, where , I guess , you folks
•
were considering new negotiations because of these "previous, lengthy, unresolved negotiations ." And •
reference was mad9 lhal negotiations dated back lo 1997, although , In our experience, this was off by several
years. Based on our business and real estate experience, we really had never seen any real negotiations al
that point. This current year, in May, Mr. Ed Peck or Ed Dry from Peck and Associates scheduled a meeting
with us , so we went to downtown Denver to meal with Ed . He could not attend the mealing but other folks from
Peck and Associates were there . We again presented our list of issues and questions and concerns and al that
mealing , we were given cop ies of public documents such as the flood plain Info and zoning , but nolhlng ... no
new Information was given lo us . The public documents came from Mr . Bagley . Then In June, we actually met
with Ed Dry and we did receive some information about City liab ility for accidents on the bike trail , which was not
our real Issue . We again gave Ed Dry our list of issues and concerns. He gave us a verbal offer , wh ich again
did not address our concerns, Issues or questions . And he said he would contact us aga in after July 4th, for
further discussions . In lht first part of August , we hadn't heard anything so we called Mr. Dry and he ••id ii was
back lo the City of Englewood . We found out after several calls that we were on the agenda here tonight. So , in
conclusion, we still have about four main questions : we wonder why Is this up for a vole lo use eminent domain
when, from our perspective, there have been no real negotiations? We submitted our concerns and Issues lour
limes , three limes formally and have received no answe rs. People say that there has been an offer made to
Liquor Control , we'd like lo gel a copy If there 's a written offer . And elong with that offer , we would like
explanetlons of what the offer Is based on, and all our Issues and concerns and questions , have they been
considered and are they all rejected? Is that the status or what's going on? And we've got concerns with all of
these various people , I guess , allegedly saying they've been negotiating . So we wondered , can we get copies
of the bills that were paid lo all of these various so-called negot iators? We are sta rti ng to wonder II the funding
spent on all of these people that have bean Involved in one way , shape or form, but don't gel back lo us , or don't
give us anything In writing, or don 't answer queslions ... we'd really like to know what the dollar value is that's
been spent for those efforts compared lo any offer . We wondered is II more prudently responsible lo use funds
on those folks or Is II more prudent lo actually use them In an effort to negotiate In true good faith? That's all I
have .
Mayor Wolosyn said thank you . During this part of the meeting , we d•Jn 'I engage In dialog, but I can assure you •
these questions will come up, later in the mealing .
•
•
•
Englewood City Council
Augu ■t 20, 2007
P1g13
Mr■. Mt11l1r 111d thtnk you , thank you very mur.t, fo r L~e time . Th ia la my first experience with any City Council
10 lt'a 111 new to me .
Mayor Woloayn 11ld thank you .
(b) Bred Melater, a Llttlelon realdent, sa id basically , I will Just address Counc il as basically when
good fr.Ith eff011a are put forward, that means both parties do It. You guys have called us for meellngs or your
repre1141ntallvea have . We've shown up every tlms . Nobody's shown up on your behalf. Thay say we 'll get
beck to you . Nobody av r has . I don 't think that It Is good faith effort . That's all I have to say .
Mayor Wolosyn asked If anyone else wished to address Council at this time? No one did.
8. Communlc1tlon1, Procl1m1tlon1 and Appointment■
(a) A letter of resignation from Jon Cook from the South Broadway Englewood Business
lmprovem ,,nt District was cons idered .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION
OF JON COOK FROM THE SOUTH BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there were any comments .
Council ~ember Barrentine said Jon Cook was vary Instrumental in gett ing that district started , and I know that
ha Is probably busy , butt.a will be daarty missed as he was one of the founders and innovators and owns a
huge amount of lhat property . I was confused why they would want to tax themsel ves add itionally to do that but
they made it successful , and I'm sorry to see him go .
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there ware any other comments . There were none .
Vote re■ult■:
Motion carried .
Ayes : Council Members Barrentine , Mccaslin , Moore, Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomasso , Oakley
Nays : None
(b) A proclamation declaring September as National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery
Month was cons idered .
COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO DECLARE SEPTEMBER AS
NATIONAL ALCOHOL AND DRUG AWARENESS RECOVERY MONTH .
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there were any comments . There were none .
Voto re■ult■:
Motion carried .
Ayes : Counc il Members Barrentine, Mccaslin , Moore , Woiosyn , Woodward,
Tomasso, Oakley
Nays : None
(c) A resolution appointing Brian A. Hart to the South Broadway Englewood Business
Improvement District was considered .
COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 8(c) •
RESOLUTION NO . 14, SERIES OF 2007 .
RESOLUTION NO . 84, SERIES OF 2007
Englewood City Council
August 20 , 2007
Pags4
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BRIAN HART TO THE SOUTH BRON)WAY ENGLEWOOO BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT OISTRICT.
Mayor Wolosyn asked If there were any comments .
Council Member Tomasso said Brian Is a very active member of the buslnesa community and he was a
unanimous cnolce by the BID board .
Council Member Barrentine sa id he Is the owner of Frame d'Arl and he mentioned that he's done twice the
business since he's been in Englewood , and I was very grateful to hear that.
Mayor Wolosyn said I should add that Brian has really been Involved with the arts community since he arrived .
Council Member Mccaslin said you knew I've dealt with Brian for quite awhile . I do a lot of charity eve nts for
dlabetos and he's always been very aCC6ss!ble , participating in my events . So I appreciate the work he 's done
for the City and continues to do .
Mayor Wolosyn said If there is no further discussion , please vote .
Vote rHulta:
Ayes : Council Members Barrent ine , Mccaslin, Moore , Wolosyn, Woodward,
Tomasso , Oakley
Nays : None
Motion carried .
9 . Consent Agenda
(a) Approval of Ord inances on First Readi ng
There were no add itional Items submitted for approval on first re adi ng . (SEE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a).)
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT \VAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM 9 (b) (I),
(b) Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading
(I) ORDINANCE NO . 44 , SERIES OF 2007 (COUNCI. BILL No . 46 , INTRODUCED BY
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD)
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWE:EN THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, BY AND THROUGH THE ARAPAHOE COUNTY
CLERK AND RECORDER , AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO , TO CGNDUCT A
COORDINATED ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 6, 2007
Vole rHults:
Motion carried ,
Ayes : Council Members Barrentine , McCeslln, Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomasso , Oakley
Nays : None
(r,) Resolutions and Motions
There were no addltlonal resolutions or motions submitted for approval. (See Agenda llem 11 (c),)
10 . Public Hoartng Items
•
•
•
•
•
•
Engln,UC!d Clly Council
Augu■t 20, 2007
P191S
N~ public hearing w11 scheduled before Council.
11 . Ordln■ncH, R1 ■olutlc,n ■nd Mo!lon ■
(e) Approval of Ordinances on First Reedi r>!I
(I) Chief Building Official Sm ith prr,sented a ra<:Qmmendatlo~' n Safety Services, Division of
Buildi ng Y'' (,afety, to approve a Bill for an Or:l :""r.C"' adopting the lntamatl Property Maintenance Code
2006 to establish clear and specific property maintenance requirements with ,cqulred property improvement
provisions . I-lo •aid I'm here to recommen d Ille approval to adopt the ordinance of the lntematlonal Property
Maintenance Code 2006 . This will establish clear and specific property maintenance requirements with requ ired
property lm r,, ,ament provisions . Some background on it: we have, since 1985, utilized the Englewood
Municipal Ct • TI IIA 9 Housing Regulations end In 2000 , Wll adopted the Uniform Code for Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings . This document , the Property Meintem,nce Code, will replace those two document• es our
code for maintaining end caring of both commerc ial end residential property . The financial Impact of It is very
minimal, less than $200 .00 for code books. We've been receiving training for the last several years on this
Code as well as ell of the other International Codes . The amendments that we're proposing ere basically
known . Most of them are administrative , to really show compliance ,,i th the current Municipal Code provisions
for penalties, violations, and how to placard and post properties . Definitions we've Included are family and
household from Iha Municipal Code to address the needs of tha t. In general requirements, we show that we've
deleted several items . These items are covered under other provisions within the Municipal Code . Chapter 4 is
a new one that we haven'l really seen in the Codes . We'll address overcrowding in residential units by limiting
the number of occupants based on a square footage calculation . The mechanical and electrical requirements
are calling for te0 baJic necessities in a house : heat , minimum lighting , and minimum ventilation an d just to
make the pl~. cs cccupiable l,y the residents of both commercial and residential properties . He asked if there
were any question .
Mayor Wolosyn asked do you have any questions !or Lance? We had this in Study Session a couple of weeks
ago. There were no questions .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a)
(I) • COUNCIL BILL NO . 45 .
COUNCIL BILL NO . 45, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 2(F) -ENTITLED "THE ABATE MENT OF
DANGEROUS BUILDIN GS CODE" ANO TITLE 9, CHAPTERS 1 THROUGH 4 -ENTITLED "HOUSING
REGULATIONS" OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000 , ANO REENACTING A NEW TITLE 8,
CHJl nTER 2(F), ENTITLED "INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE 2006" FOR THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOt;, COLORADO .
Mayor Wolosyn asked ~ there was any discussion .
Council Member Barrentine sa id I won't be voting for this on first reading . It's quite a complicated document ,
and while I understand the financ ial impact to the City is only a couple of hundred dollars, the property rights
Issues and potential financ ial impact to property owners are Increasing In my opinion. I've tried to seek some
additional Information outside to clarify some of that, at least to supplemer ' some of the Information that you
gave us In Study Session . So et t~ls time, I don't feel comfortable to vote for that until I get that other
Information . Thanks .
Counctl Member Tomasso said ate workshop I attended by the National League of Cities In Washington D. C.,
they stated the National Property Maintenance Code was one of the ways to clop the slide Into e ghetto of the
first ring , first tier suburbs, end It was one of the tools to use to bring your community back up to the highest
standards available, end to Improve the outlook of your community end to prevent some properties from slum
landlords, and what they would do to that property . So I'm voting for It
Englewood City Council
Auguat 20, 21'~7
Paga I
Council Member McCaalln aald I gueas I'd like to state that all of the department heads, In their goel1, are for a
aale, clean end attrectlva City. I think that this Just adds enothar step In making It a clean and attractive City, W
we help with the maintenance and upkeep of our build ings and rasldentlals . So I will vote for It.
Ma)Or Woloayn said thank )'OU Bob.
Mayor Wolosyn asked If there were any other comments . There were none .
Vote rHults:
Motion carried.
Ayes : Council Members McCaslln , Moore, Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomasso, Oakley
Nays : Council Member Barrentine
(ii) Director Fonda presented a recommendation from the Water and Sewer Board and the
Utl itles Department to adopt a Bili for an Ord inance approving the Grant of an Easement for the Zuni Water
Ta;,k and a Quit Claim Deed for 2890 Soult Zuni Street. He sa id back In 1960, the water t&nk was co.ostructed,
the oroperty was divided and the property not needed for the water tank was sold to private Interests, but we did
not rutain a right-of-way . That has recently come to our attention that this was the case ... the right-of-way for the
line that i~ads away from the water tank to the street. The property owners are wililnp to give u~ that, in
exchange for us remov ing some clouds on the !Ille that are really not significant to us . One of them is a five and
one-hall loot temporary construction easement for curb and gutter that was probably put in back in 1960, which
we certainly don't need . And the other was not even a re co rded instrument. It was simply eighteen feel of
property that we were cons idering keep ing In addition for the pipe easement and never did . And we don 't need
•
ii; the twenty feet Is actually plenty for us to maintain the water line . So with this we have a voluntary grant of •
easement for the water line from these property owners and the staff and Water and Sewer Board are
recommending adoption of this ordinance .
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there were any questions for Stu? There were none .
COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a)
(II) • COUNCIL BILL NO . 48 .
COUl,CIL BILL NO . 48, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO
A Biel FOR AN Or.lJINANCE AUTHORIZING A GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR THE WATER LINE TO THE
ZUNI WATER TANK AND A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR 2890 SOUTH ZUN I STF-EET .
Mayor Wolosyn us~:,d ii :~,ere was any discussion. There was none .
Vote results :
Motion carried .
Ayes : Council Members Barrentine , Mccaslin, Moore , Wolosy11 , Woodward ,
To masso , Oakley
Nays : None
(Iii) Director Fonda prese11ted a recommendation from the Water and Sewer Board and the
Utilities Department to adopt a Bill for an Ord i11 anca approving a Llcanse -City Ditch Crossing agreement for
3088 South Sharman Straet. He said the Dl !ch Is currently pipe d In this location. Apparently, a new home Is
currently being constructed there . And what they're asking Is to remove a fence, that used to kaep people from
throwing things In the Ditch, that is now piped, and putting decorative rock over -:,e concrete abutment that Is
located there, that usld to be needed to kaep cars from running Into the Ditch . So right now, we think this •
would make the area more attractive and we are recommending approval.
Mayor Wolosyn asked ~ there ware any questions?
•
•
•
Englewood City Councll
Augu ■t 20, 2007
P1g17
Council Member Mccaslin sa id I lhlnk that lhls Is a grul Improvement lo that block, 10 I appreciate it.
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONllED, TO .APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (1)
(Ill) • COUNCIL BILL NO . 4t.
COUNC IL BILL NO . 49, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A "LICENSE -CITY DITCH CROSSING AGREEMENr FOR
PLACING DECORATIVE ROCK ON A PORTION OF THE CITY DITCH RETAINING WALL AND REMOVING
A.'! EXISTING FENCE IN THE CITY DITCH EASEMENT ADJACENT TO THE LOCATIOll OF 3066 SOUTH
SHERMA N STREET, ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO .
Mayor Wolosy,• asked if there was any further discussion . There was none .
Vote results:
Mot ion carried.
Ayes : Council Members Barr entine , Mccaslin, Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomasso, Oakley
Nays : None
(b) Approval of Ordinance" on Second Reading
(i) Council Bill No . 44 authorizing a Purchase Agreement and Lease Back to Koch Land sca pin g
for the South Platte River Oxbow property in Englewood and Littleton for open space. rec ·ealion , wildlife habita t,
and waler quality uses was considered .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MC'VED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE A'3ENDA ITEM 11 (b)
(I)· ORDINANCE NO . 45, SERIES OF 2007 .
ORDINANCE NO . 45, SERIES OF 2007 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 44, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
WOODWARI))
AN ORDlll'ANCE AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE AND SUBSEQUE NT LEASE BACK OF PROPERTY
WITHIN TrlE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD KNOWN AS THE SOUTH PLATT[-RIVER OXBOW
HABITAT/WETLANDS .
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any discussion .
Council Member Barrentine said I needed lo ask if this had anyth ing to do with us agreeing lo maintenance on
there? Dan? Gary?
City Manager Sears said Laurett, as I understand ii , when we lake over the o, operty, ii will be ou r respons ibilit y
to mainta ;n the Oxbow property .
Counc il Member Barrent ine said that was not my understand ing that we wer~ going lo do that, but in the
meantime, is the lease holder going to be doing that?
City Attorney Brotzman said the lease holder, Koch Landscap ing, during tn• period of the lease, has lo maintain
lhe property . And !here's insurance as well as an in~emnlty prov ision for that. As to when , after that five year
period ends, we will be adopting an Intergovernmental agreement that Is not before you at the present time .
Council Member Barrentine said correct , so we haven 't ag reed to the r,ralntenence piece yet. That Is In the
future?
Cit)' Attorney Brotzman said correct.
Englewood City Councll
Augu1t 20, 2007
Pagel
Council Member Barrentine Hid okey. Just from all of lhe confusion, I'm just voicing • dlaagrHment that we
ever take o·,er the maintenance place of that, I'm going to vote no against this, and I've explained why .
Mayor Woloayn aaked ~ there were any other comments. Thero were none .
Vote rHulta:
Motion carried.
Ayes : Council Members Mccaslin, Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward,
Tomasso , Oakley
Nays : Council Member Barre .,tlna
(Ii) Council Bill No . 47 submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of
Englewood a Charter Initiative on the November 6, 2007 ballot to emend Article XV of the City of Englewood
Home Rule Charter by changing Sectl<1n 137:5 end by adding Section 137:9 was considered .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MC, /ED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b)
(II)• ORDINANCE ►JO . 46, SERIES OF l007.
ORDINANCE NO . 46, SERIES OF 2007 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 47, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
WOODWARD)
AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MUNICIPAL ELE CTION A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
ARTICLE XV , ENGLEWOOD EMPLOYF.E RELATIONS AND CAREER SERVICI:: SYSTEM ACT -1981,
•
SECTION 137:5 "Subjects for collective bargaining" AND THE /,DDITION OF A N~W SECTION 137 :9 •
"Deductions allowablP. from payroll compensation• OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOME: RULE CHARTER.
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any discuss ion .
Council Member Barrentlns said I have one question for Lou . Where it says question number , is thal the
verbiage that will be on the ballot piece of it?
City Clerk Ellis responded yes .
Council Member Barrentine said okay, and that's jusl how it was submitted?
City Clerk Ellis responded yes .
Council Member Barrentine said okay . Than '< you . I just wondered what would be on the ballot. Thank you .
Vote rHults:
Motion carried .
Ayes : Council Members Barrentine , McC .. stln, Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward ,
Tomasso, Oakley
Nays : None
(c) Resolutions and Motions
(I) Director Foe Ja presented a recommendation from the Water and Sewer Board and the
Utllltles Department to adopt a Reso;utlun authorizing the Transfer of Water Service at 2270 and 2275 West
Cheneago Avenue to enver Water. Ha said we have an agreement with the D6nver Water Board , along our
common bound A•Y, for Denver to serve Englewood properties or Englewood to serve Denver properties , should •
It be to the advanlllge of both entitles . And In this case, we have no lines In th is area , and Denver has a looped
system . It would be very dmlcull for us to put a looped system In there to serve these two properties. So, with
that, we're requesting to allow Denser to serve these properties, which are In Englewood , and Denver has
•
Englewood City Council
Augu1t 20, 2007 PIii••
1grHd to do 10. We would 1110 reciprocate In other areaa where we hed llnea and they did not. So we would
recommend that. A110, part of the proposal la to 1llow the Director of Ullllllea to go forw■rd ..tth thoae, In the
llmlled number lhel we have, where we heve e common boundery end II meku aenae to , for one city or the
other to aerve .
Meyor Woloayn asked W there were any queallons for Siu .
Council Member Oakley said II aaya here thal the majority of this development la In Iha City of Littleton . Majority
meaning?
Director Fonda replied the properties being developed In both cities and most of the deve' nt is In the
Littleton side . These two properties happen lo be In the Englewood City boundaries, even , .• Jgh I think the
developer owns the entire parcel.
Council Member Oakley said these two properties are in Englewood .
Director Fonda said yes, they are in Englewood.
Council Member Oakley said and Lowe 's is in Littleton . Was ii all one development?
Director Fonda s2 id no, I th ink this is separate from Lowe's. It's another ... it's some other buildings that are
being built.
Council Member Oakley said okay, I know that we go down, there in a square , but I've never seen the survey on
that.
• Director Fonda said but Lowe's has already come on . Their being served by Denver and that's why they have
these lines in place that could serve these other properties .
•
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there were any other questions . There were none.
COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c) (I)
• RESOLUTION NO . 81, SERIES OF 2007 .
RESOLUTION NO . 81, SERIES OF 2007
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF WATER SERVICE AT THE LOCATION OF 2270 AND
2275 WEST CHENANGO AVENUE TO CONNECT WITH DENVER WATER.
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any other discussion . There was none .
Vote result■:
Motion carried .
Ayes: Council Members Barrentine , Mccaslin, Moore, Wolosyn, Woodward,
Tomasso , Oakley
Nays : Nona
(II) Director Black presented a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Department
to approve a Resolution supporting the City's grant application to Greet Outdoors Colorado for Duncan Park
acqulalllon funding . He said staff has recommended that Council approve the resolution supporting the City of
Englewood's grant application to Great Outdoors Colorado for the acquisition of Duncan Park . You are aware
that we have already received a $250,000.00 grant from Arapnhoe County Open Space . Thia resolution will
support our application, which Is due August 27 . The maximum amount that we can apply for, In this grant, Is
$200,000.00 . We will submit the resolution with our eppllcallor and wa should be notified the latter part of
December ae to whether we are succeaaful or not for this grant.
Englewood City Council
August 20, 2007
P1g110
Mayor Wolo1yn aald thank you Jerrell. Are there any questions or comments for Jerrell? There were none .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c)
(II)· RESOLUTION NO, 82, SERIES OF 2007,
RESOLUTION NO . 82, SERIES OF 2007
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO GRANT APPLICATION FOR
DUNCAN PARK AC,QUISITION FUNDING .
Mayor Wolosyn asked If there was discussion . There was none .
Vote rHulta :
Motion ce r""i ed .
Ayes: Council Members Barrentine, McCa Glin , Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward,
Tomasso, Oakley
Nays : Noel
Director Black said thank you very much .
(iii) Director Kahm presented a recommendation from th& Department of Public Works to
adopt a Resolution indicating the City of Englewood's Intent to acquire easements of real property along Big Dry
Creek Trail from Lehew to Broad.vay using the City's power of eminent domain for the purpose of providing a
multi-use recreational trail . He said as you just stated , we are requesting at this lime that Council approve a
resolution concerning the City 's intent to acquire property ... easements actually, for Big Dry Creek Trail system .
•
The history on this is somewhat sorted . First , 'all, I would like to slate that the City is only a sponsor on this •
project. It was never our project. South Suburoan , I believe , made several attempts, starting as earty rs 2001
to acquire rights-of-way or easements for, from Liquor Control Inc . and from RWC Ltd . for this missing link of the
trail system . I know that as earl y as 2005 , the South Suburban Foundation came to us and pointed out that they ·
had been unsuccessful In negotiating a settlement and in acquiring these properties . They asked us for help, us
being the City . At that time, we believed that negotiations possibly hadn't been done . I'm not saying in good
faith but not effectively anyway . A re,;ow was hired, this John Cavey, by South Suburban . I believed that he
made attempts to negotiate a settlerse ,,t but to no resolve . Later, in this past December, actually your Council
Communication says that II was De~nmber 4, 2007 but actually it was 2006, we did present this situation to
Council at a Study Session . Our feeli 11q heing that unless Council was wi lli ng lo go forward and the end result
possibly being condemnat:on, we were no: going to be able to negotiate any settlement. Subsequent lo that, we
went forward . We contracted for South Suburban, with H. C. Peck and Associates . They began some
discussions earlier this year . They carr ,e to us in late June and told us they believed that without , al least , the
threat of condemnR!ion and the exercise or eminent domain, it may not be possible to acquire these rights-al-
way, these ea sements. The other thing that happened to us is ... you 've heard from the Meister's tonight. The
second cwne l' was RWC Ltd . Their attoreey requested awhile back, as we were trying to negotiate , that they
wanted to sea our authority to do this, and from that standpo int, we met with our City Attorney, and we felt that
we should formalize this process wilh tonight's resolution . With this resolution, it just begins an extremely
formal negotiation project. H. C. Peck is on the State approved list for negotiators . They are one of only a
handful that the State approves al this time . This Is what they have been doing for many years . They are very
good al it, so when they came to us and said they felt this was the next step , we had to honor that. The process
Is an attempt to acquire this trail easement for public use , completing the existing missing link In the system .
The whole purpose of the process Is Intended to compensate the property owners for the market value of the
taking. Hopefully, a negoilated settlement can be reac;1ed along the way . The procacs is Intended lo protect
the owners as well as Iha City In this acquisition. So, that is where wa are at this point In time . And as I said,
the other prope~y out there had requested the resolution to formalize the process . The next step would be our
negotiators would present both of these owners with the resolution and with the appr •lsals and an offer for the
acquisition . •
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there were any questions for Rick?
•
•
•
Englewood City Council
Augu■t 20, 2007
Paga11
Mayor Wolo■yn 1ald I felt whan we 1ddre11ed 1h11 In Sludy Se11lon that although eminent domain is one of
thou thing■ that you never want to UH except for the good of the people, thl1 1umed to be en example of the
good of tha peopla . It 11 about a connection of well u ■ed tr1ll1 . It will help connect two p1rt1 In a aafe manner
ecro11 Broadway. I underat■nd that 1h11 will not ever burden the City of Englewood with fund ing it. South
Suburban Parka Foundation will be doing that, and we are helping to facilltate 1h11 joining . And from the
preaent■tlon thet we had , I waa under the lmpresalon that they were follow ing due proceas . I have be en hearing
about 1h11 for a number of yeara . And really, Rick, from your dlacusslon, I don 't SH that you are the peraon to
answer the four queatlona here. One Is why Is this up for vole? You did ·1ary well to ffXplaln that. A copy of any
offera that were mad e .. we weren't part of that. Mr . Kehm said we were' 't part of those things and that Is
why ... thla 11 elmoat Ilka starting over and starting fresh . No one can aliest to oxactly what the con versations
were or what kind of negotiations really took place ... we weren 't part of them . Mayor Wolosyn sa,d, what's it
based on ... that seems to be the same and bills for the negotiation , that would be someth ing frt<'' South
Suburban? Mr . Kehm sa id yes , that Is all South Suburban .
Mayor Wolosyn said so saying that Is there any other discussion?
Council Member Tomasso said so the bike trail will basically follow the sewer easement , give or take a few feet?
Mr . Kehm sa id yes , basically what they have done Is they have placed the tra il ... 11 has actually been redesigned
at the ownor's request , and It has been placed as low in the channel as we could place it. It is right ne xt to the
low flow cha nnel . For the most part , It is all In the Flood Pla in and a good part of it is in the flood way o. Big Drt
Creek . It Is ground that can't be used for many other purposes ... you can 't develop It .
Council Member Tomasso sa id and the flood way , it happens how often? Is a cycle of heavy spring runoff, is
that when the trail gets flooded? Mr . Kehm said I would expect that , you know, when we are talking about the
Flood Pla in ... the flood way itself Is actually the moving water that is assoc iated with a Flood Plain . I wou ld
expect that we wouldn't see any problem on that any more frequently than we see on Little Dry Creek th l'o11 c:1
Englewood . It 's about the same situation . Mr. Tomasso said once or twice a year ? Mr. Kahm said probably not
that frequently, maybe once every other year . Mr . Tomasso said right .
Mr. Kehm sa id the other th ing I want to mention is that the Urban Dra inage and Flood Control District is
participating on this and by the tra il be ing access ible , they will also be involved with helping to ma intain those
situations with flooding and all. And South Suburban will mainta in the trail.
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any other discussion .
Council Member Barrentine said yes, how much was H. C. Peck ... whal was the ir contract? I heard !hey had
two meetings so what was their contract? Mr . Kahm said you will ha ve to ask Mr . Henderson .
Engineeri ng/Cap ital Projects Administrator Henderson sa id I bel ieve , I don 't have It in fron t of me and I'm
guess ing , I'm estimating , it is $13,000 .00 . Bui that is an hourly rate , that was the ir estim ate to go fr om st art to
finish . It will depend on how many meet lngs ... they have not expended that much . I bell ,,vo to date , we've
expended about $6 ,000 .00.
Council Mem ber Barrentine said bu ' the contract didn 't go thro ugh the eminent domain proceedings ? Mr .
Henderson sa id no , it didn 't. Ms . Barrentine said okay . Did we negotiate with these people as a group ... are we
negotiating with these two properties as a group? Mr. Henderson said no , wo are negotiating inaependently.
Ms . Barrentine said so It Is possible to separate out th is propsrty wllh people who are com ing to us saying that
they have questions , that they don 't bellove that we are answering and that they are trying lo move forward with
this ,n good fa ith on their part , and they don't think they have been handled properly . You 've got the other one . I
guess you said an attorney contacted us , so we could certainly deal with them separately. And W there Is an
opportunity to continue negotiations without doing an eminent domain , W that should Interfere with that proceas .
Because what I am hearing from them Is that they think that doing eminent domain for them would Interfere with
this ~1esent negotiating process . Maybe It wouldn't for the other property ; I am only dealing with who showed
up .
Englewood City Council
Auguat 20, 2007
Page 12
Public Work• Director Kehm aald quite hone1Uy, H you go Into 1h11 proce11 ... e very formal proceu ... 11 doe• not
preclude nagotletlon In eny way. It begin•• new negotiation . But when exparts In thl• field coma to u1 and 1ey
that they don't believe that any negotiated aattlement cen be reached without eminent domain being In play,
then I have to rHpect that because that 11 what thHe people do, state wide, that 11 their bu1ine11 . Peck, I
mean .
Council Member Barrentine said I understand. Having gone through this , I certa inly have a IOI of que1tlon1 .
The first time, the reason that I didn't support the eminent domain the first time. was because of one comment
that was made and that was , when I asked , why won't they sell their property? And I was given the lmpreaslon
that these negotiations have gone on for years and nobody could tall me why they wouldn't sell their property .
And that doesn't sound Ilka• reasonable good faith negotiation to not walk away from the tabla, to at least have
some clear understanding why the other party won 't sell . And upon further Investigation , the money,
approxln,ately 10 or maybe 15 thousand dollars spent on the South Suburban Parks Foundation part on these
negotiations , the Information thnt I found out didn't seam to be in good faith and I think that soma of It anded up
causing soma bad blood by the time we got Into II . Now, If that's true , than we forget about history , ~•capt that
so much money has already been spent , that if we put It altogether and put It Into the kitty as an offer, they
couldn't possibly refuse it If they ware sane people . But of course, that has already bean paid to other people
on the Foundation Board and all over with other taxpayer money . If they actually onl~ have these four
questions, and they believe that If those things were answered, and they would prefer to continua negotiating
without the cloud of eminent domain over their heads , why can 't we separate them out?
Mayor Wolos ,, 1 sa id I guess ii would be .• matter of a motion , right , if somebody wanted to do that? She said I
am going lo refer this to City Attorney Bro tzman .
City Attorney Brotzman said you would remove part of the exhibils ... you would remove those exhibits that
pertain lo the Meister's property.
Council Member Woodward sa id just so I understand . If we were lo go through with this, from what I believe I
heard from the Me ister's, was that they are willing sellers , we have will ing buyers and yet there 's ... what they
have said Is that Peck , or whoever these people are, have not shown up for the negotiations ... this would
certainly start the negotiations, I would think . There Is an appraisal of fair market value via eminent domain ; the
value would be fair market value . So, I don 't know if we went forward with this , what is the downside other than
movin~ ii forward?
Mr . Kahm said let me just share it. I think, you know, I don't know what all th~ issues are because I haven't
been at the table . I know that one of the Issues is that we had an appraisal done on the property and that our
negotiator came back to us and told us that the price the owners were looking for was four times the value of the
appra isal.
Council Member Barrentine said however, with the information that has been provided in he re , it says II ls
$27,000 .00 for the three easements . Does that include the Wolf Camera property as well? Seco nd page , on
the fourth paragraph up . Engineering/Capital Projects Admin istrator Henderson sa :r1 I believe I can an swer that
Rick ... those three easements for $27,000 .00 ... those are three ea~ement, strictly fe r tho RWC parcel, two of
thdm are permanent easements . Council Membe r Barrentine said that is lh 0 Wolf c,mera property and Mr .
Henderson replied yes , one for the main trail and one for the ramp up Broo• .,ay and the third Is for a temporary
construction easement just allowing us to build the trail . So there are three easements associated with RWC
and one with the Liquor Control parcel. Ms. Barrentine said so that the $54,000 .00 Is a separate number? Mr.
Henderson said that Is a separate number . Mr. Woodwarrt said that Is the Liquor Control property. Ms .
Barrentine seld Dave , could you go ahead and tell us what the $54,000 .00 Is? Mr . Handerson said that is the
latest appraisal for the easement acquisition from the Liquor Controt parcel. Ms. Barrentine said okay.
•
•
Council Member Sarrantlna said so , again, If II ls a matter of question and not, I mean there aro ot11ar lasues
that are b-•lng brought up . I don't understand why If they are requesting to continua nagollatlons and not be •
under the cloud of condemnation, with certainly from all the Information gathered In the recant developments
over In She ridan, this does crest& a huge problem and I don't understand why we can 't just separate them out.
•
•
•
Englewood City Council
Augu ■t 20, 2007
Pege 13
Mayor Wolosyn said Laural!, as I said, ~ you wish to make a motion for an amendment, we can either vote up or
down on what la In front of us or we can make amendments to It and vote .
COUNCIL MEMBER BARRENTINE SAID I AM MAKING THAT AMENDMENT THAT WE SEPARATE THEM
OUT AND VOTE ON THEM SEPARATELY AS FAR AS ALLOWING THE PROCESS OF CONDEMNATION.
Mayor Wolosyn asked If there was a second. There was none . The motion died from lack of a second .
Council Member Mccaslin said I need some information on the negotiations too .
Council Member Barrentine said I have to admit that I went to Rick In February, when all of this happened, and I
do have some additional Information if somebody would like that shared . I don't know . It was enough so that I
was concerned about the process up to the point where Lee took II over. I again became concerned when this
whole thing bolled down to two muetings .
Mayor Wolosyn said I should Just point out that we haven't moved II at all, so we can 't amend ii yet .
Council Member Woodward said I would move the Agenda Item . I think, from what I understand and from what
I am hearing , that if anything , this can start generating the discussions and open negotiations, I would hope , with
both parties , with all three parties .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c)
(Ill)· RESOLUTION NO . 83, SERIES OF 2007 .
RESOLUTION NO . 83, SERIES OF 2007
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF El:G LEWOOD , COLORADO TO ACQUIRE
REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING A MUL Tl-USE RECREATIONAL TRAIL THROUGH
THE UTILIZATION OF THE CITY 'S POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN .
Council Member Oakley said I feel a liltle uncomfortab le because of not knowing exactly what South Suburban
has done . If it was our negotiations and we were voting on that, I could see that. So, you know, if Laurel! would
have ... well I can 't even say that...l sta rted lo sey that if she had worded the motion a little different I might have
seconded it, just to gel a vote ... not saying that I am for or against ii. I just do feel a little bit uncomfortable,
speaking for South Suburban , or not speaking for South Suburban, or them speaking for us . I don 't know
exactly how to interpret this .
Council Member Barrentine said I only want to make one clarification . When we are talking about South
Suburban , we are not talking about South Suburban Parks and Rec Department. We are talking about South
Suburban Foundation . Okay, which Jerry Call, the elected representative of South Suburban Parks and Rec,
made it very clear to me, that the foundation is separate from them . So, it is not the Parks and Rec piece of ii,
It's this Foundation .
Mayor Wolosyn said we are aware of that. I am going to ask Wayne a question before I ask you lo put your
amendment back on the table . Wayne , would splitting it ease your mind or do you feel that you don't have
enough informalion ... you feel uncomfortable voling on the whole th ing?
Council Member Oakley said well, the negotiations that went the way they have with both properties and II has
been somebody else that hes been doing the negotlatlng ... l have all the faith In the world In our guys telling us
how they feel , but I know these people come before us and give a different side . I don't know whether If we
talked to South Suburban again i! It would help us any or not.
Council Memb&r Barrentine said ~~lck did make It clear at the beginning that II has not been our people doin~
this negotiation . South Suburban Parks Foundation has paid for this . They were the ones doing the negotiating
before and paying Board members and people who work for them , and then volcad that fl'\Jstratlon that that
didn't go well . My research In checking that out was that It was shabbily dona , It was unprofessional, II was
Englewood City Council
August 20, 2007
Paga 14
Inappropriate and nothing that a normal person could have considered negotiating prior to this process . I am
not so sure that Peck handled II that well either . But, I believe, that we are that close that we should allow at
least some period of time for them to go ahead and finish their negotiation, without that condemnation, because
they have taken that time to come down here and say that they would be more comfortable doing that. Nothing
would stop us In the future from going ahead and votng on condemnation for that piece as well It it didn't go
right.
Mayor Wolosyn said Laurett, I will asi< you to ;esubm it, to restate your amendment now tha t th is is on the table .
Council Member Barrentine said would you help me Wayne in how I should word this otherwise , I will have Dan
do it? I'm not good at this .
Council Member Oakley said under this condition, Laurett , for Just the matter of a vole , depending on how you
do your motion , I could well second it Just to have a vote . Thal is going to move it forward, one way or the other .
And if that fails, then Jim's motion is still on the table. Is that correct? City Attorney Brotzman said correct.
Council Member Tomasso said so are you going to put a time limit of three months, two months, one month or
five years? What is the time limit? How many more years are we going to wail for this trail system to be
completed so that the bicyclists don't have to go up , onto Broadway, circumvent a few dangerous streets on
their bicycles to get back on the bike path? How important Is public safety to you?
Council Member Barrentine sa id but I understand, this is a serious issue and I don 't want to talk about the
timeline . Mr . Tomasso said how long has it been going on Laurett? Council Member Barrentine said for this
whole thing because they have only been in this process for a few years . We may have decided ... the Parks
Departmenl...may have decided that they were going to use their property in 1994 , but they didn't become
•
aware of ii until just a couple of years ac~ that they were part of some grand plan . I lake condemnation very •
seriously . What would be reasonable, lrigally, Dan , what 's normal? I do n't disagree with the tlmellne for it to
come back if there is no resolution in n,,gotiations . What's reasonable?
City Altol"ley Brotzman sa id ii is simply a timeline for the appraisers to sit down with the Meister's, so you are
talking about ii coming back very quickly , probably within a month .
Council Member Barrentine said okay. I got this information from Rick In February , so I guess six months . We
were able to como this far in six months ... hire people and gel all of this information .
Mayor Wolosyn said Lauren, are you going to make your motion?
Council Member Barrentine said I want to separate the properties out for the purpose of Just moving forward
with condemnation .
Mayor Wolosyn asked are you attr.ching any time element to it?
Council Member Barrentine said with a five months limit and tr,en it would come back .
City Attorney Brotzman said so what you are actually doing Is you are going to move forward the Resolution ,
including eminent doma in as to the Liquor Control property . As to the Meister's property , you are going to have
negotiations lake place and if negotiations have not come to a resolution, that will come back In five month1 .
Mayor Wolosyn said I heard Laurett say she wants, Instead of one vote, two votes ... one that would be, to have
whether or not we ... do you w&nl to phase that , whether or not we are going to pursue and let condemn ation or
that we would went to bring that one back ... ?
Council Member Barrentine said I want to separate the two out because lo be honest with you, I em not going to •
be voting on the condemnation so I would like lo vole on separating It and voting on them aeperetely .
•
•
•
Englewood City Council
August 20, 2007
Page 15
Mayor Wolosyn sa id Laurel!, I am trying to clarify. I think we're saying the ume th lng ... The firat thing we would
vote on Is bringing the $54,000 .00 parcel back In five months and the second one would be , we would vote on
as stated In the packet. Is that correct?
City Attorney Brotzman said that la correct.
Council Member Barrentine said whether you ■g(ff or nol , I don 'I even know how to word It.
Council Member Moore said let me take a Ihot It thl1 . HI 11ld Council Member Barrentine will correcl me . I
th ink she Is simply saying for purpoIe ■ of lonlght , remove the Malltar pro~rty from Iha vote, pretend II didn 't
come to us . This purpose will simply be formal procaecllngI for purposes of the olher property . And so , It Is nol
so much separating it, es pulling that out and leaving It for now .
Mayor Wolosyn said is that your motion? Ma . Barrentine ■aid yea , I think he did lhat qu ite well.
COUNCIL MEMBER BARRENTINE MOVEO, ANO IT VI' '.S SEr.ONDED , TO FORMALIZE PROCEDURES ON
THE RWC PROPERTY AND NOT INCLUDE THI! LIQUOR CONTROL PROPERTY.
Council Mernber Moore said that la accuralely Itated , correct? Ms . Barrentine said yes.
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any discussion?
Council Member Moore said Iha motion tonlghl will be limited lo formalizing procedures on the olher property ,
the RWC property, and it will, as far as the Liquor Control property, it's just not , it's nol up for a vole ton ight . Is
lhat still accuralely slaled correcl, Laurelt?
Council Member Woodward said so lhe live monlhs lhal was formerly slaled has been ellmlnaled . II is jusl lo
be moved. Cily Allomey Brotzman said correct. M· Woodward said okay .
Council Member Moore said I would lhen move ... not move ... but for purposes of discussing lhls motion, I would
say for discussion purposes, we can talk aboul lhet tlmel lne . Th is ia where I am a lillle blt...l don 'I wanl lo say
five monlhs as much as when Direclor Kehm feels ii is necessary lo enler lhe formal negolialion
proceedlngs ... whelher lhat is a week from now or five months from now ... that this is necessary that you bring it
back . That would be how I would view this motion. I am doing two things ... one , I em slaling whal I lhlnk Laurelt
is putting out , as well as in asking my queslion . So I will gel my queslion oul of the way to Rick , which
is ... would you benefit from some time to more personally assess these negotiations given the past is somewhat
muddy , or did I hear you say, based on that you feel, thal lhls is necessary now for bolh properties from your
own assessmenl of the silo,tion?
Director Kahm said I lh ink you heard me correclly , Mr. Moore . Council Member Moore said lhank you . Mr .
Kahm said the folks who are experts in lhls field , and I am nol one , have told me lhal this la lhe naxl step .
There are advantages to lhis slap . One advanlaga is thal onca you slart lhis procaaa and the apprai11l1 are
provided lo the owners, I baileve lhe Soulh Suburban Foundation has an obllgalion lo purchase an appralIal for
Iha owners as well , as part of lhat condemnelion procass . So lhal provides that for them . Keeping In mind, Iha
whole lnlenl of eminent domain ... lh ls lsn 'I a melter of public good , lhls is a matter of public uaa ... okay, which Is
whal eminenl domain was originally inlended to deal wllh . And In lhls particulor instance, I don 'I know where
South Suburban would play on this because rlghl now there are lwo pieces that ara the mi11lng link In 1h11 trail
system . For South Suburban to go forward and poaaibly only obtain one of those piece■ doesn't give them •
project and doesn't complele the trail. So there 11 another thing , I have been thinking about thlI 81 you have
been talking , but I'll' ·ot sure how that plays out II well .
Council Member Barrenline seld the information thal I got In February, they aeemad pretty comfortable with an
alternative plan that didn't even Include the11 two propertlea . Now the additional axpanae In going and doing
eminenl domain and hiring lewyera, I mean, they do make a good polnl in trying 10 do thl9 10 I don'I -•
problem with whal a slight delay In trying to -n thara 11 aome good faith effort therl to lhore 1h11 up . PluI I
would baf lave lhat n they wr.e able lo come to an ag,eemenl , that that would put more pre1Iure on the other
Inglewood City Council
Augu1t 20, 2007 ,. ... 1,
p,ope,ty , But 1lnce you were elwaya negotiating with them separately , you always took the risk thet one would
NII end on■ would not end we would be In the sama spot doing one . Had they come to an agreement , we
would tttll be here talking abou1 Iha RWC ?roperty anyway. I mean that Is kind of a moot point.
M1yor Wolo1yn Hked If there was any further discussion on the motion lo amend . There was none .
Council Member Woodward said so wo era voting on the motion to amend . Mayor Wolo•yn sa id the motion to
■mend that John aald .
Council Member Moore said bu1 rlghl now we are just voting on whether we want to pull off the Liquor Control
property and only address the RWC property or do y<>u want to leave them together? So the vote right now Is
)u1t whether or not to pull thet out or not.
Vote r11ult1 :
Ayes : Council Member Barrent ine
Nays : Council Membe rs Mccaslin , Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward , Tomasso , Oakley
Motion defeated .
Mayor Wolosyn asked if there was any further discussion on the mot ion as proposed
Council Member Barrentine sa id I Just want to state aga in that the information I have , I would be happy to share
lh ls ... lhe Information that I got in February ... and the llmeline of th is. I am very disappointed in the way all of this
was handled . I am very disappo inted in the mun icipality's bureau cracy's ability to go ahead and put plans on
people 's property and then they don 't even find out about ii for years . Hopefull y the leg islature will correct some
of that. It Is disingenuous . It is inappropriate and a burden on private property and I just don't thin k it was done
in good faith . I can 't vote for this .
· Mayor Wolosyn said if there are no other comments please vole on the original motion .
Vote reaulta:
Ayes : Council Members Mccaslin, Moore , Wolosyn , Woodward, Tomasso , Oa l· ey
Nays : Council Member Barrent ine
Motion earrled .
Ma r or Wolosyn sa id thank you Rick .
Director Kehm sa id we will work closely as this process goes forward and keep you abreast of what is
happen ing . Thank you .
12 . General Dl1cu11ion
(a) Mayor 's Ch a!~•
Mayor Wolosyn did not have any matters to bring before Council.
(b) Council Members' Cho ice
{I) Council Member Mccaslin :
1. He said I would like to send my condolences to our Judge Vince Atencio who lest his mother a couple of
weeks ago .
•
•
2. He sa id unfortunately, I will not be able to make the Board and Comm issions Appreciation Night •
because I had tha same th ing happen . My wife's mother passed away yesterday and I wal be leaving to
Cleveland, Ohio tomorrow to attend the memorial serv ice and I will be back on Sunday night.
•
•
•
Englewood City Councll
,u11u1t 20, 2007
Page 17
Mayor Wolosyn said thank you Bob and please extend our condolences to your wife . Council Member McCa1lln
said thank you .
(II) Council Member Oakley said I have a queslio" about the Cou ncil Requt11t # 07-122
referring to tha raquast for infonnation on the Layton/Acoma parking lo, concems . I believe thal wH brought
forth by Laurett . I guess I am kind of curious , sines this is in my district, how this came forward I might Ilka to
talk lo the person and see whal their concerns are . It kind of smacks, to me , of retallatlon , against the garage
owner, for his objection to tha signage en !he building across !he street.
Council Member Barrentine said are you asking how the request came through? Mr . Oakley said yes , how It
came through . Ms . Barrentine sa id !he request came through from people 01mcerned about the graffiti thal 11 on
the cars over there and also from me . When the mural had been photographed by several of the ntw1
organizations, there was a sea of cars that almost looked as if we were in a junk yard and I co•Jldn't figure oul
where lti ey had filmed It !rom ... lhe angle they had filmed it. And It wasn't unlll I go! this complaint on graffiti that
I wen! over there and realized that !hey had done ii from that back lot. It is an open lot. There were over 20
cars on there . Some of them were derelict and thAy did have graffiti on them . And so I just needed to know why
they were able to ... who owned it.. .because I didn 't know and why they were all there . And no , nothing ha1
anything to do with retaliation . When something gets put on Channel 9 and it is that unattractive , It Is a concern
for anybody in the community to wonder what the heck that is and why we are allowing that. We do not allow
that auto use along Broadway and so that infonnation was inaccurate . Many of the c~r dealerships are nol
allowed to do that so I am investigating ii a little further .
Ccuncil Member Oakley said do you think you want me to lJlk to these people? Ms . Barrentine aa ld pardon .
Mr. Oakley said do you think it would help for me to talk to these people ? Ms . Barrentine said well , you know , I
think there are valid concerns about the graffit i that is written on some of the cars . Mr . Oakley said I am
concerned about graffiti too and I hope that gets cleaned up . Ms . Barrentine said but you kno w, I talked to a
couple of people around there and they said it had been like that for a long time . It might be In their beat lntere•t
to try to put up a fence to shade that because it is not very attractive . Mr . Oakley said did you In itiate the .... I .
Bi.rrentine sa id no , because at the time I didn 't know whry owned the property and that Is why I put the requ,,.,
in . I didn't know who owned that lot. Mr . Oak ley said okay .
13 . City Man1ger'1 Report
(a) City Manager Sears did not have any matters lo bring before Council .
14 . City Attorney's Report
(a) City Attorney Brotzman did not have any mailers to bring befure Council .
15. Adjournment
MAYOR WOLOSYN MOVED TO ADJOURN . The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
D~pu~