City Council Regular Meeting 17 October 2016

City Council Regular Meeting           17 October 2016               Citizen Minutes

Citizen Comments

Carol Brzeczek mentioned the on-going difficulty with accessing the video minutes. She read from the Colorado Archives web page: “The Colorado State Archives is authorized by statute to prepare retention and disposition schedules for state agencies, municipalities and counties, school districts and special districts in Colorado. These schedules authorize legal destruction of records that are no longer of value to the agency, and they advise agency officials as to which records must be retained permanently.”

Brzeczek reminded council that they adopted the Municipal Records Management Manual in 2008 which says regarding minutes and supporting documentation:

Minutes are the official record of the proceedings of the governing body and supporting documentation of a substantive nature such as exhibits referenced in the minutes. They should be retained permanently provided that routine material may be destroyed after 2 years as long as the summary description is included in the minutes. Minutes of the governing body are considered essential municipal records, and the State Archives recommends that the “record” copy be retained in paper format.

She then asked a question that she expected to be answered – how does one get a document submitted “on the record” knowing that the video of the meeting now stands as the “minutes?”

Bruce Beckman responded to Brzeczek by saying that this would be discussed at the December 13, 2016 council meeting.

Pam Chadbourne offered a couple of corrections to the Journal that was before council. She told council she had not coordinated with Brzeczek. She believed it was up to the city clerk to interpret the intent of the speakers and did not think the intent captured was always accurate. She asked for council member’s positions to be included in the Journal. She asked to go back to written minutes.

Consent Agenda

There were so many items I will list what was passed on consent and then address those items pulled.

  1. Establishment of the tax mill levy of 6.662 mills.
  2. The Aspen Grove Business Improvement District 2017 Operating Plan and Budget
  3. Hiring Waters & Co to conduct the city manager and city attorney search
  4. Resolution approving the City of Littleton Title VI Plan

The above items were approved 7/0.

The Annual Appropriation Bill – Doug Clark pulled. He requested that the sales tax increment be included in the 2016, 2017 and 2015 budgets and he would not be approving the budget until increment was included.

Doug Farmen, Finance Director, reported that there was $114,040 in sales tax increment payable to LIFT. He did not include the increment in the 2017 budget because he wanted to wait and see what happened with UR. He would be asking for a budget amendment for the 2016 budget. Clark also wanted the costs for the attorney supporting LIFT to be broken out in the budget. Farmen said the sales tax period for LIFT increment ends in November and if UR still exists he will do the calculation. Clark told him it had to be done. Farmen asked for council direction.

Clark said even if LIFT is not abolished the appropriation is needed to be able to transfer the money to LIFT. Clark wanted the appropriation to be made so it would be included in the budget for the citizens to see. He said the 2016 budget needed to be amended to show the sales tax increment going to LIFT.

Mark Relph, acting city manager, said the tax increment financing (TIF) could be included and submitted for the second reading. An amendment for the 2016 budget could be prepared.

Clark thought the citizens should be aware of how much property taxes were being diverted to LIFT but since it is handled by the County he was not certain how to do that. Phil Cernanec moved to include the TIF in the budget. Cole seconded and motion passed 6/1.

 Ordinance on first reading to approve the Master Services Agreement with Comcast Cable Communications. Clark pulled. He said the agreement had the City indemnifying Comcast, which he thought was a violation of the Colorado Constitution. Clark had an attorney opinion for those that might challenge his opinion. After a bit of discussion Relph suggested that the item be pulled until they get a legal opinion. Cole moved to pull the item and I do not know who seconded. Motion passed 7/0.

Certification of the Oct. 4, 2016 regular meeting minutesa video. Clark has consistently pulled the certification of the video so he can vote no. Beckman asked as a matter of procedure about when a citizen makes suggested changes. Wendy Heffner, city clerk, said it could be done in a couple of ways. You can make changes or bring it back later or approve it with the changes. Beckman was concerned that council had not had the time to review the changes – how would council delay action? Heffner told him to bring it back the next time. Brinkman reminded the council that they were voting on the video and not the written journal and changes cannot be made to the video! Motion passed 6/0 with Clark dissenting.


Public Comment

Jeanie Erickson said UR is back on the hot seat and it is not doing what Michael Penny and some thought it would. There are no projects and money is being taken away for 25 years. Developers are building in Littleton – they are here for the long haul and not for incentives. It is all about location and market forces. Columbine Square’s owner blighted himself – the business owners did not want to leave but they were forced out by Mr. Cheng and Mr. Cheng does not need our tax dollars to redevelop his property.

Pam Chadbourne – she agreed with Erickson. It is not a family group that owns Columbine Square but an investment group fund. This is not beneficial to any local family. Chadbourne went to the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) meeting , but it was a study session again so no public input. She requested council ask the HPB to reconsider the parking incentive. There are other incentives that could be offered. There are parking problems downtown that need to be resolved and not made worse. The parking incentive harms us.

Carol Brzeczek commented on the TIF for the 2017 budget. She asserted that whether or not LIFT is abolished the appropriation of TIF in the 2017 budget was required because the TIF was accrued in 2016 and payable in 2017.



Bill Hopping commented that the city’s revenues are up 6% and the expenditures are up 12%. He requested a revenue study.

Beckman suggested Jan 10th. Relph thought it was the most reasonable date. Hopping offered to work with staff – we do not have an expenditure problem. He wanted a report on sales tax leakage.

Clark said if he was not looking for a tax increase – what do we do about revenue? Our sales and use taxes are up 8% – if you are not happy with 8% – set a goal of what you think it should be then look to see how it can be achieved. Cernanec said the first step will be Jan. 10. They could talk about the Main Street Fairness Act (taxing internet sales) and get information about what other municipalities are doing.   Brinkman thought it was part of their responsibility – we evaluate expenses all year long and there was no harm in a study session to discuss and share information – an opportunity to get the public conversation going.

Beckman said there was time to gather info.

City Manager will present his priorities and work plan on Nov. 8th.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: