HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-07-21 (Regular) Meeting MinutesCOUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO
JULY 21, 1975
REGULAR MEETING:
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe
County, Colorado, met in regular session on July 21, 1975, at
7:30 P.M.
Mayor Taylor, presiding, called the meeting to order.
The invocation was given by Councilman David Clayton.
The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Taylor.
The Mayor asked for roll call. Upon the call of the
roll, the following were present:
Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
Also present were: City Manager Mccown
Assistant City Manager Nollenberger
City Attorney Berardini
Director of Finance James
Director of Public Works Waggoner
Director of Utilities Carroll
Deputy City Clerk Johannisson
• • • • •
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN JONES SECONDED
A MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEN BLESSING AND BROWN FROM THE MEETING.
Councilman Clayton stated that Councilman Blessing's
brother had passed away, and therefore, he was unable to attend
the meeting.
Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Meeting of July 21, 1975
2
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JULY 7, 1975.
Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON SECONDED
A MOTION TO CONSIDER ITEM 5-C-i RELATING TO THE SANTA FE-UNION
ANNEXATION. Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as
follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
City Attorney Berardini explained the current status
of the litigation regarding the Santa Fe-Union annexation. He
said that the court has not yet ruled on the City's request to
have a new trial. Upon the court decision, the City then has
30 days within which to file its appeal.
Mayor Taylor stated that he would like to have a full
Council to decide on this matter.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED A
MOTION TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE SANTA FE-UNION ANNEXATION
UNTIL THE COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1975. Upon the call of
the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Meeting of July 21, 1975
3
Mr. Roy Richards, 2189 West Vassar Avenue, was
recognized. Mr. Richards commented on the Paving District
No. 22 affecting Vassar Avenue. He said that when Paving
District No. 22 was proposed, they were all for it. They
wanted the street. In building the street, they find that
their driveways are now three feet higher than the street,
and the improvement that is being built is of no help to them.
He asked for the City's help in resolving this situation.
COUNCILMAN JONES MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON SECONDED
A MOTION TO HAVE THE MATTER RELATING TO PAVING DISTRICT NO. 22,
PARTICULARLY WEST VASSAR AVENUE, BE RESEARCHED BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO DETERMINE WHAT MEANS THE CITY CAN PROVIDE FOR THE
POSSIBLE FUNDING OF THIS STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INVOLVING
THE DRIVEWAY CHANGES, SO THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY HAVE MORE
INFORMATION FOR THEIR DECISION. THE REPORT SHOULD BE A WRITTEN
REPORT. Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Councilman Sovern said that this situation points out
the need to build streets prior to the development of the area.
Councilman Clayton said that Council might consider
setting up a contingency fund to take care of situations like
this.
• • • • •
Mrs. Vardeman, 2073 West Baker, was recognized. She
asked if there was a City ordinance prohibiting trash pickup
trucks from operating at 5:00 A.M. City Manager Mccown said
that he believes that the noise control ordinance prescribes
the hours of operation of this type of business, and he will
have an answer for her.
• • • • •
Myrtle Jones, 5020 So. Washington, was recognized.
She asked what the difference is in R-1-A, R-1-B, R-1-C zoning.
She also questioned the mobile home requirements. She asked
that she be given time on the agenda at the August 4th meeting.
Meeting of July 21, 1975
4
Mayor Taylor answered her questions relating to the
correspondence he had sent to her.
• • • • •
The following communications were received for the
record, with no action.
Minutes of the Career Service Board meeting of
June 19, 1975.
Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting
of June 12, 1975.
Councilman Mann asked that the representative from
Troop 263 explain the plans for the historical trail along the
City Ditch. Mr. Robert Webster, 1210 West Radcliff was recognized.
He is the Scoutmaster of Troop 263. He stated that he had contacted
other Boy Scout troops in Englewood, telling them of the project,
and found no interest.
Councilman Mann said that he had talked with others who
were interested and gave the names to Mr. Webster.
Mr. Webster explained that the trail was a Centennial-
Bi-Centennial project, and the plan was to submit this to the
National Boy Scouts of America for consideration for part of the
National Trails system. There would be five in the Denver Metro
area. The State Centennial-Bi-Centennial Committee plans to
designate these as historical trails also.
. Councilman Clayton asked what would happen to the
historical trails if the City Ditch were closed in the future.
He said that this is a complicated consideration because the
future of the City Ditch is uncertain.
Mr. Webster said that the trail designations could be
changed if there was a change in the .status of the City Ditch.
Mayor Taylor asked Mr. Webster to present a report in
writing to the City Council giving the background for the
historical trail program, and that the City Council would study
the situation before a decision is made.
Councilman Sovern asked that a legal opinion be given
by the City Attorney.
.. COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED A
MOTION TO CONSIDER ITEM 4-C ON THE AGENDA AT THIS TIME RELATING
TO A REQUEST BY BOY SCOUT TROOP #263 TO USE THE CITY DITCH
RIGHT OF WAY FOR A WILDERNESS TRAIL FOR THE CENTENNIAL-BI-
CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION. Upon the call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Meeting of July 21, 1975
5
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 4-C RELATING TO CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST
BY BOY SCOUT TROOP #263 TO USE THE CITY DITCH RIGHT OF WAY FOR A
WILDERNESS TRAIL FOR THE CENTENNIAL-BI-CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION AND
TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO GIVE A LEGAL OPINION ON THIS
SITUATION. Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as
follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Returning to the agenda, the following items were
received for the record.
Minutes of the Library Board meeting of July 8, 1975.
Financial report for the month of June, 1975.
Report from the Assistant City Manager to the City
Manager concerning expenditures by the City for Council Members'
spouses.
Memorandum from the Director of Libraries to the City
Manager concerning a grant awarded to the Library from the
Colorado State Library.
• • • • •
City Manager Mccown presented a recommendation from
the Water and Sewer Board to ratify the action of the telephone
poll taken to recommend a thirty day extension of the Coors
lease/purchase agreement, and to recommend that the Mayor be
authorized to execute a one-year extension of the agreement
commencing on August 10, 1975 and terminating August 9, 1976.
City Manager Mccown asked that the City Council
extend the lease for 90 days instead of one year, because other
·considerations have been presented. This would give the staff
Meeting of July 21, 1975
6
an opportunity to negotiate more fully with the Coors
corporation.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED I
A MOTION TO RATIFY THE LEASE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH COORS FOR
THE BOREAS PASS WATER RIGHTS AND EXTEND THE LEASE FOR 90 DAYS
FROM THIS DATE AND PRESENT IT TO THE WATER AND SEWER BOARD FOR
FURTHER CONSIDERATION. Upon the call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * *
City Manager Mccown presented a recommendation from
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to permit an encroachment
for a retaining wall at the property at 4661 South Bannock.
Mr. Mccown said that this is similar to other requests received
in that area, as a result of a sidewalk district.
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN JONES SECONDED
A MOTION TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT OF A
RETAINING WALL AT THE PROPERTY AT 4661 SOUTH BANNOCK. Upon the
call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • *
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from the
Director of Finance to the City Manager requesting Council
action on the selection of an auditing firm for the year 1975.
He said that the last selection of an auditing firm
was handled by a sub-committee of the City Council. We
received proposals from auditing firms, they were then inter-
viewed and a selection was made and ratified by the City Council.
Meeting of July 21, 1975
7
City Manager Mccown emphasized that this is a City
Council function and that the selection should be made by
them.
Councilman Mann asked if it was feasible for the
Citizens Budget Committee to act as the selection group ; City
Manager Mccown said that because of time limitations, the
Budget Committee would not be appropriate to act on this.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED
A MOTION TO APPOINT THREE COUNCILMEN TO INTERVIEW AND SELECT
AN AUDITOR, WITH THE FINAL SELECTION TO BE RATIFIED BY THE
FULL CITY COUNCIL. Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted
as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Councilman Jones stated that consideration should be
given to a local firm.
Volunteers for the committee were Councilmen Sovern,
Mann, and Clayton.
City Manager Mccown appointed Director of Finance
James to the committee.
• • • • •
City Attorney Berardini presented an ordinance which
would permit the Career Service Board to have 20 days in which
to make their findings a matter of record, as opposed to the
5 days which is currently required.
INTRODUCED AS A BILL BY COUNCILMAN MANN.
BY AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. 29, SERIES OF 1975
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13 (f) OF CHAPTER 3, TITLE V, OF
THE 1969 E.M.C. ENTITLED 'DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AND APPEALS',
BY EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD IN WHICH THE CAREER SERVICE BOARD
SHALL MAKE ITS FINDINGS A MATTER OF RECORD.
(Copied in full in the Official Ordinance Book.)
Meeting of July 21, 1975
8
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON SECONDED
A MOTION ·ro APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 29' SERIES OF 1975. Upon the
call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * • •
City Attorney Berardini presented a Bill for an
Ordinance which would permit the City Manager to have ten (10)
business days in which to render a written decision in an
employee grievance. The City Manager currently has five (5)
calendar days within which to consider an employee grievance,
and the City Manager feels that ten business days would permit
more time to fully investigate the employee grievance.
City Attorney Berardini pointed out that in line 6 of
the paragraph D, should have added after the word and number 10,
the word "business", and should then read, "the City Manager
shall render a decision within ten (10) bus·iness days from
receipt of employee's grievance.
INTRODUCED AS A BILL BY COUNCILMAN MANN.
A BILL FOR
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 12(d) (5), CHAPTER 10, TITLE V,
OF THE 1969 E.M.C., BY EXTENDING THE AMOUNT OF TIME IN WHICH
THE CITY MANAGER HAS TO RENDER A WRITTEN DECISION ON AN EMPLOYEE
GRIEVANCE TO TEN (10) BUSINESS DAYS.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO APPROVE A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE
CITY MANAGER'S DECISION ON EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCES. Upon the call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Meeting of July 21, 1975
9
City Attorney Berardini reported on the law suit
brought by Mrs. Weist challenging the methods of apportioning
costs in special districts. The City, which initially won the
case, was appealed by Mrs. Weist. She has since withdrawn her
appeal to the court decision.
I I I I I
City Manager Mccown reported on the progress of the
intergovernmental contract with Littleton on the fire training
facility. He said that there were several changes made in the
contract which he was not pleased with.
First, the conunittee makeup was disporportionate in
its representation, in that Englewood has two representatives,
Littleton would have two representatives, and the Littleton
Fire District would have one representative.
Second, the land ownership agreement was not
satisfactory.
Third, there is a disagreement on the way the fund
would be set up for the project.
There is a meeting next Thursday between the two
cities to iron out differences which exist.
I I I I I
City Manager Mccown presented the six-quarter budget.
He stated that there was a net downfall in the revenue portion
of it of $68,128, unless adjustments are made through appropriations.
Appropriation changes were reconunended. 1. Delete the Zuni Street
improvement. 2. Delete the land acquisition for the Little -·Dry
Creek. 3. Change the building of the greenhouse from 1976 to
1975. 4. Add $15,000 to Interchange Park. 5. Add $5,000 to the
General Storm Drainage. 6. Transfer $8,000 to Romans Park and
the Northwest Greenbelt. 7. Re-allocate $2,000 from the Space
Utilization Study. 8. Re-allocate $3,283 from the 1974 Sidewalk
District. By making these adjustments, the $68,128 downfall
would be covered.
City Manager Mccown went on to outline the changes in
the proposed 1976 budget.
COUNCILMAN JONES MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE SIX-QUARTER BUDGET TO A
STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD JULY 29, 1975. Upon the call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Meeting of July 21, 1975
10
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
In answer to a question relating to what the BOR is,
City Manager Mccown stated that it is an abbreviation for the
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.
• • • • •
The following is a verbatum transcript of a portion
of the Council meeting dealing with the Memorandum of Under-
standing between the Englewood Firefighters Association and
the City.
Mccown: O.K. 6c, your honor, 6c is a Memorandum of
Understanding between the Firefighters
Association and the City of Englewood. We
were very pleased that we were able to come
to an agreement with the Firefighters Association.
Essentially, it is the same type of agreement
that was signed with the non-emergency employees some time
back. It is an agreement that calls for about 4 to 5 per cent
in that area, of fringe benefits for next year in the memorandum
of understanding, with no salary increase effective in January.
There will be a salary reopener in the first quarter of next
year, at which time a salary survey will be done of Denver,
Aurora, and Littleton, and if funds are available and the
determination of the funds being available is up to the City
staff and City Council, if the funds are available, then a
salary increase would be given to match the total compensation
package of the averages of the three cities, Denver, Aurora,
and Littleton. So that effective January 1st it will be a 4
to 5 per cent fringe benefit increase, a zero salary increase,
with the salary reopener in the first quarter of next year to
be effective April 1st if the funds are available at that time.
There is, I believe, attached to this, well, it's not attached
to it, but there is, we did receive a letter of, a formal
letter from the Firefighters Association notifying us of the
ratification by the required number of firefighters.
Mayor: Thank you, Andy. Dave -
Clayton: Let's get back to this agreement for a minute.
Just to make sure that we're OK. When we say
determination, when we say "City", are we
referring to the City Council?
I
Meeting or July 21, 1975
11
Mccown: Yes. We will........ The City negotiated
with the City staff, mainly the Finance
Department and the City Manager's staff,
would have to undertake an analysis of the financial position
of the City at that time. Once that analysis is made, then we
would make reconunendations to you as to the City's capability
of providing the type of increase that may or may not be
necessary at that time, and it will be Council's decision to
Clayton: O.K. On page 2, under sub-paragraph 2 at the
top of the page, or close to the top of the
page, ••••• O.K •.•.. the last sentence, where
it says "City", does it mean City Council?
Mccown: Yes.
Clayton: So that the negotiators are not in a position
here or granting rights.
Mccown: Well, by ratifying this contract, you are saying
that should the financial condition of the City
be in shape next year to give the salary increases
that the survey may show or may not show is necessary .....
Clayton: Yup •.•.•.
Mccown: Then, upon the availability of the funds that
you can give that type of increase. So, it
gives you, the City Council -
Clayton: I'm just trying to -to make sure we're not
getting ourselves in a position where the City
Council is delegating something to somebody
else they ought not to be doing. I want to make sure the
City Council acts for the City. Is there any question in
that agreement?
Mann:
Mccown:
Not in my mind. I would like to get an average
salary, annual salary, of the present firemen.
Karl, do you know that off the top of your head?
Mann: Second and third grade.
Nollenberger: The average in the fire department, excluding
the Chief, would run just a little over $14,000,
probably about $14,300, or so.
Mann: Is that with benefits -
Nollenberger: No, the fringe benefits would be added on top
of that -
Meeting of July 21, 1975
12
Mann: The fringe benefits are added on top of that?
Nollenberger: That is correct.
Mann: And we're talking about the longevity, the I
vacation leave, the sick leave, the holidays,
life insurance, the disability insurance, the
pension, the health insurance, and the dental health insurance.
Is this what we're talking about?
Nollenberger: Yes, that would be added on top of the salary
itself.
Mann: Andy, I'd like to ask you if, if these three
cities that we're basing the salary increase
on, on the first of April, I believe, 1976,
these three cities we have picked are, or that the negotiators,
I understand, have picked, the City and firemen both, happens
to be Denver, Aurora and Littleton. Is that correct?
Mccown: That's correct.
Mann: I'd like to ask you why Denver, with a population
of a half million people, is involved with Aurora
and Littleton and why wouldn't it be better to
have another city of similar size.
Mccown: Well, we have to go back to the agreements that
were made back in 1972 for 1973. At that time,
the City, with all three associations, fire,
police, and non-emergency, entered into agreements that a salary
and fringe benefit survey would be made in certain cities in the
metropolitan area to determine a total compensation in each one
of those cities, and then salary and fringe benefit increases
would be given to our employees to match the average of those
cities. In the case of the fire department, these were the
three cities that they used. In the case of police, we're still
using the same group of cities that we used in 1972, in the case
of non-emergency, we're still using the same group of cities that
we used back then. Since that was agreed to by both the City and
the negotiators at that time, that has set a standard for the
cities to be used in the survey. Now, to remove a city or to
add a city to that list, that has to be negotiated. In other I
words, if you wish to remove Denver from the list of compara ~
bilities in the fire department, our negotiators would have to
go in next year and negotiate that with the firefighters
association and it would have to be a mutual agreement. If
they couldn't come to a mutual agreement, perhaps an impasse
could be called on that one issue alone. Now, as to why it's
done, of course, that's a question of philosophy and several
other things, I suppose. It's hard to compare jobs. In fire-
Meeting of July 21, 1975
13
fighting, and I would think they would tend to be similar
because basically when they are fighting a fire, a fire is
a fire is a fire. There comes a difference in some of the
top level jobs where you have a difference in the number of
men supervised, the amount of ••••• you are responsible for
and this type of thing. But it gets very difficult to say
well, a fireman's job in Denver is different than a fireman's
job here, a secretary's job in Denver, and that type of thing.
Mann: I understand this. I understand the methodology
that you are using to aPrive at this wage increase
on the first of April, but judging how much these
other three cities are going to be paid, if they get paid this.
Now, my question is, if that should happen, that formula should
happen to come out under a pay raise, like you're stating here
in your memo that it might be a 3.1% increase, what happens if
it's a 4 or 5 per cent decrease, are we going to be allowed,
according to this agreement, to reduce wages to match this
formula?
Mccown: No. According to this contract you cannot reduce
the wages or the fringe benefits, either one -
to match the ..... .
Mann: Well, we're kinda between the hard rock and
another hard rock •.••
Mccown: You're in between two hard rocks.
Mann: Thank you.
Jones: I would like to ask the Manager a question, as
to what approximately, what is the percentage
factor of added cost the City for a fringe
package over and above the average.
Mccown: Well, let's see. I remember what it was for
non-emergency, and it should be probably about
half that in case of firemen .....
Nollenberger: This package right here is worth $32,891.
Mann: Percentage wise.
Nollenberger: Percentage wise, it's a little ..... .
Mann: Fringe -
Nollenberger: 4% increase in fringe benefits -
Clayton: What is the total fringe benefit in percentage
worth of the salary.
Meeting of July 21, 1975
? ? ?
Nollenberger:
give them 40%
Mann:
14
(Several talking at same time -unintelligible)
I'm sorry, I see what you're saying. It runs
right around, with this package, right around
40%. For each one dollar in salary we will
in benefits -
Over and above -
Nollenberger: Not all of which is pure cash, some of that is
vacation, sick leave, and things like that.
Mccown: We're taking applications the first of
(unintelligible).
Person in
Audience: Where do they take applications?
Clayton: There's a freeze on hiring. That means that
with the -if we take $14,000 round numbers,
40% of that -(long pause) -about $20,000.
Mayor: O.K. Any other discussion on this with the
City Manager?
Mccown: We need a ratification from Council.
Clayton: Mr. Mayor, since we've had a little discussion
on this, I think we ought to make one other
statement that the City Manager made. I'm not
sure the audience caught what he said and the significance of
it. There are three groups of employees we negotiate with
annually. The police, the fire, and all the others we refer
to as the non-emergency. The non-emergency contract has been
settled, basically along the lines of the one we are about to
vote on for the firemen. This is for firemen, and I understand
we are not at an agreement with the policemen. And I think we
just need to take another half a minute and tell you what
happens when you don't reach an agreement. The next step is
that either party can appeal it to Career Service Board of the
City which has 5 members, two elected by the City, two elected
by the employees and those four elect the fifth member who is
Chairman. They give a decision. Either side has the prerog-I
gative of accepting that decision or appealing that decision
to the voters in November. And the voters will be the final
authority on which side in that dispute we're to take for that
group. Now, had we not settled with any of the three, we would
vote on each of the three separate because some of the conditions,
of course, because the jobs are different. But since we went
into it this much, I think the audience ought to know how that
procedure works.
Meeting or July 21, 1975
Jones:
Clayton:
Johannisson:
?
Mayor ·:
Johannisson:
Mann:
Johannisson:
Clayton:
Johannisson:
Jones:
Johannisson:
Sovern:
Johannisson:
Taylor:
Johannisson:
15
Let's vote for ratification of the agreement
with the firefighters.
Second.
Doug, did you second or did Dave?
?
Question.
Councilman Mann.
Yes.
Clayton.
Yes.
Jones.
Yes.
Sovern.
Yes.
Taylor.
Yes.
5 ayes, 2 absent, your honor.
• • • • •
City Manager Mccown stated that the impasse which
currently exists between the City and the Police Benefit
Association has gone to the Career Service Board for
determination.
• • • • •
City Manager Mccown said that the Council needs to
appoint someone to the Water and Sewer Board to fill the
existing vacancy. Only one application has been received, that
from Glen E. Wallace.
Councilman Sovern said that the City should make one
more attempt to get more applicants.
Meeting of July 21, 1975
16
Mr. Martin Lathrop, 3259 So. Clarkson, was recognized.
He said that Mr. Wallace is currently on vacation and would not
be able to meet the recommended interview date.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED I
A MOTION TO HAVE INTERVIEWS FOR THE WATER AND SEWER BOARD ON
AUGUST 18, 1975 PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MEETING OF THAT DATE.
Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Director of Utilities Carroll outlined the background
and need for a contingency plan for rationing water. He said
that conditions have existed in the past where it has been
necessary to ration water. He recommended that the City Council
consider a set of criteria that the Utilities Department can use
to impose water restrictions. He recommended that the raw water
reservoir trigger level be established at 15 feet, and that the
treated water reservoir trigger level be established at 9 feet.
Councilman Mann asked Director of Utilities Carroll
if he was asking for authority to use these levels as trigger
levels to institute water restrictions. Mr. Carroll answered
in the affirmative. Councilman Mann said that he doesn't see
why this authority needs to be given as the City Council members
are usually available. Director of Utilities Carroll said that
he is just desirous of having a firm policy at which point water
restrictions could be instituted. The Council and the City
Manager would be responsible for implementing any action.
Councilman Clayton said that he would like to see a
3-member committee composed of two Councilmen and the City
Manager to make interim decisions in emergency situations until
full Council can act at a scheduled Council meeting.
In response to Councilman Jones' question, City
Attorney Berardini said that a committee of the Council cannot
act on the legislative matters.
Mayor Taylor said that his opinion is that the Council
delegates authority to the City staff to make decisions, and the
situation at hand it is not giving away its authority or autonomy.
It is just providing criteria at which point the City staff knows
when to take action.
Meeting of July 21, 1975
17
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON SECONDED
A MOTION TO DISALLOW GIVING BLANKET AUTHORITY TO THE CITY STAFF
IN SITUATIONS RELATING TO WATER RESTRICTIONS AND TO DIRECT THE
CITY STAFF TO NOTIFY THE MAYOR OF EMERGENCY SITUATIONS SO THAT
A SPECIAL SESSION OF COUNCIL CAN BE CALLED TO RENDER A DECISION.
Councilman Sovern stated that the City Council is in
a position of neglect if they do not permit the City employees
to react in emergency situations. The City Council is in no
position to react quickly enough, because a quorum is not
always guaranteed.
Councilman Mann said he does not agree with the
criteria established in this case.
Councilman Sovern said that we may not agree with the
specific criteria, but the principal of giving the City staff
ability to react is necessary.
Mayor Taylor said his philosophy of Council action
is that they are the policy-making body and that they require
the staff to administer the policy which they legislate.
City Attorney Berardini clarified his earlier statement
regarding delegation of authority of the City Council, in that a
committee of the Council cannot act as a legislative body, but
that a quorum of the Council must exist before legislation can
be enacted.
Upon the call of the roll, the vote on the motion
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Mann, Clayton.
Nays: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Taylor.
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion defeated.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED
A MOTION TO FURTHER CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF WATER RESTRICTIONS
AND TO INSTRUCT THE CITY STAFF TO PRESENT MORE SUPPORTING DATA
RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. Upon the call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Meeting of July 21, 1975
18
City Manager Mccown reported on the housing project
for the elderly. The City has applied to the Housing and Urban
Development as the developer, which HUD has approved. The
Housing Authority has proposed that revenue bonds be issued
by the City to provide funds for the project. In HUD's I
approval, they required a unit contract rental of $220. At
the current price, the sale of the bonds would not be permitted
on today's market. The Housing Authority is investigating an
alternative. The Housing Authority has made a proposal which
would include the Housing Authority allocating $70,000 of its
own funds to the architectural bid provided that the City would
allocate $35,000 for the arthitectural bid, and that the City
would waive use taxes and water tap fees and other building
fees required for the project.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION THAT THE CITY WAIVE USE TAXES, ALL BUILDING PERMIT FEES,
UTILITY TAP FEES, CITY USE TAXES, AND THAT STATE USE TAXES BE
RETURNED TO THE PROJECT AND THAT THE CITY ALLOCATE AN ADDITIONAL
$35,000 FOR THE COST OF THE BIDDING FOR THE ELDERLY HOUSING
PROJECT. Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • •
Mayor Taylor thanked those who were at the Council
meeting tonight for the nice turnout.
Mayor Taylor said that he would like to squelch the
rumors that there is going to be a tremendous rise in the water
fees for the people in Englewood.
• • • • •
Mayor Taylor reminded the people that there was going
to be a Mayor's coffee on Thursday, July 24th, and the program
would involve zoning, particularly multi-family zoning ordinances.
• • • • •
Mr. Maurice Merlin, 3688 So. Sherman St., was recognized.
He said that there was an article in the Rocky Mountain News which
caused rumor about the increase in water rates. The City should
ask for a correction from the Rocky Mountain News.
I
Meeting of July 21, 1975
19
Councilman Sovern said that the City Council would
be less than honest if it said that there was no water increases
being considered for the future. A rate increase may be needed
in the future in order to cover c'sts.
• • • • •
Ruth Parrant, 3200 So. Clarkson, was recognized. She
heard that a $35.00 increase per month was being planned and
her source was from a councilman.
Councilman Clayton explained the special study the
City had done in relation to the water situation. It involved
the possibility of future rate increases.
• • • • •
Martin Lathrop was recognized, and he further discussed
the water situation.
Mayor Taylor reminded people that rumors can be
dangerous.
• • • • •
Dora Rakestraw, 2190 West Harvard, was recognized.
She explained her problem in relation to Paving District No. 22,
in that the street in front of her house was being raised three
feet above her yard level, causing a water problem. She said
her house was built in 1939 and Public Service gas main was
installed in 1951, and that the street was being built in order
to accommodate the Public Service main. She asked the City
Council for assistance with her problem.
Councilman Sovern asked that this problem be included
with the study of the property on Vassar.
• • • • •
Councilman Mann said he would like to recognize the
fine work of the Housing Authority and its chairman, Tom Burns.
He said the Englewood Housing Authority was helping the Lakewood
Housing Authority solve some of their problems.
• • • • •
Jerry Blumenheim, 3400 So. Clarkson, was recognized.
He said that he was interested in seeing a senior citizens'
recreation center be put into the old Police/Fire Center on
West Girard. He said he has a group of volunteers who would
be more than willing to renovate the building and clean it up.
• • • • •
Meeting of July 21, 1975
20
Mrs. Vardeman was recognized. She asked what the
rent is in the government-sponsored elderly housing project.
Mayor Taylor said that it is 25% of the individual's monthly
income. He also said that there is a long waiting list for
occupancy.
• • • • •
Liz Richards, 2189 West Vassar, was recognized. She
asked if the funds that were being re-allocated from the
Northwest Greenbelt would mean that there would be a loss of
equipment and services for the greenbelt. City Manager Mccown
said that there would be no loss of equipment as the playground
equipment would soon be in place. He said that the re-allocation
was because of a savings realized. She also asked who was
responsible for putting up the signs directing traffic from the
streets involved in the Paving District. City Manager Mccown
said that this is the contractor's responsibility.
• • • • •
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON SECONDED
A MOTION TO ADJOURN. Upon the call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Jones, Sovern, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: None
Absent: Council Members Blessing, Brown.
The Mayor declared the motion carried and the meeting was
adjourned at 10:05 P.M.
Clerk
I