MINUTES

CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

NOVEMBER 1, 2001

 

 

 

PRESENT AT ROLL CALL:                               Mayor Sam Skramstad

 

COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:     Bob Zanella, Jean Martensen, Don Vanderhoof, Mary Steinbrecher, and Don Gillespie, and Rick Davis

 

ALSO PRESENT:                                 Mike Copp, City Manager; Teresa Williams, City Attorney; Mike Harman, Director of Finance; Robin Millyard, Director of Public Works; Robin Clemons, City Clerk; Andrew McGregor, Director of Community Development; Mike Piper, Fire Chief; Dan Rodgerson, Director of Parks and Recreation; Terry Wilson, Director of Public Safety; Sebrina Hoffmeister, Personnel Director; Larry Thompson, City Engineer; Karl Hanlon, Assistant City Attorney; John Hines, Electric Superintendent; Pat Seydel, Building Inspector and Russell Grance, Building Official.

 

Councilor Zanella led in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

 ITEM NO. 2            Citizens Appearing Before Council.

 

Judy O’Donnell, 504 West Harvard, representing the Center for the Arts, said that on October 19th, the Sopris Barracudas and the Friends of the Performing Arts, met with fundraiser Judy Hancock.  It was an enlightening meeting. They learned that, for their success in fund-raising for the pool and theater, it would be best to raise funds for only one venue at a time.  They took a vote and it was unanimously approved that they should push for the pool at this time.  Immediately after the fund-raising was completed for the pool, they would begin fund-raising for the theater. In subsequent meetings, the groups have joined together forming the Friends for the Community Center.  They hoped the community would join them in completion of the Community Center.  She thanked Council for giving the seed money to make sure these entities complete the center.

 

Glenn Chadwick, 705 Silver Oak Drive, stated he was present partly as a representative of Sopris Barracudas and partly for the swimming community as a whole.  They were thrilled to follow Ms. O’Donnell’s announcement about the cooperation they were able to foster in the last few weeks together, since the City committed funds.  He thanked Council for doing that and for getting the Community Center building started and opened soon.  They looked forward to working together as Friends of the Community Center and expanding the base of support for the fund-raising efforts. He noted they had good conversations with several Council members.  In a meeting earlier this week, Mike Copp and Dan Rodgerson kicked off the grant writing efforts for the aquatics component. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if Councilor Steinbrecher would like to announce the schedule of the Grand Opening of the Community Center and then the official opening. 

 


Councilor Steinbrecher stated the City was pleased to have the Community Center Grand Opening celebration on Saturday, November 10th.  An open house will take place from 10:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m.  The Parks and Recreation Commission members would be there to give tours of the building.  During that time, they would be having a Rec. Fest, so the public could shoot hoops in the gym or try climbing the new climbing wall. She thought ice-skating would be available.  The big celebration would be a noon ribbon cutting.  They would have the first inductees into the Glenwood Springs Hall of Fame.  The day will finish with a sock-hop community dance from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.  Families with children were encouraged to come.  They hoped the whole community would be a part of the celebration.  The drawings for the future aquatics center and theater will be up so people could see what those components would look like.  The Community Center Commission worked on this for a long time, along with a lot of people in the community.  They were excited and hoped to see everyone there and it will be free.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof applauded Ms. O’Donnell and Mr. Chadwick on the announcement made tonight.  He thought this was one of the most important announcements made about the Community Center in a long time.  This would go a long way in making sure they were successful, for both the pool and theater.  He commended the cooperation between the two groups.

 

Councilor Davis noted that the actual opening dates of the Community Center might be slightly after the Grand Opening.  Mr. Copp said that would take place later in the meeting.  Mayor Skramstad thought they were shooting for December 1st.  Mr. Copp said he thought it was earlier.  Mayor Skramstad said the word needed to get out that the Community Center would not be open for business the day after the Grand Opening.  The punch list would not be ready and a lot of equipment that has not arrived.

 

ITEM NO. 3             Consent Agenda:

 

                                A.            Receipt of Minutes of the Special Meeting of October 11, 2001 and Regular Meeting of October 18, 2001.

                B.            Consideration of Ordinance No. 47; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Amending the City’s Code by Revising the Fee Schedule for Temporary Certificates of Occupancy.  (SECOND READING)

               

                C.            Payment of Bills.

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Vanderhoof, to approve the consent agenda.  The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.

 

ITEM NO. 4           Council Reports on Board, Committee and Commission Meetings. 

 

Councilor Zanella reported that the last two-and-a-half weeks have been interesting.  The Airport Committee met on the 19th for the regular meeting. On the 28th, he, Jill Peterson and Stephanie Stanfield went to Greeley to apply for a grant to chip-and-seal the runway.  They applied for 75% and received 70%, which was $53,824. Unfortunately, he was in an accident with the City Manager’s car.  Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Councilor Martensen stated she attended the Roaring Fork Transit Authority and Rural Transportation Authority workshop in Carbondale October 24th.  Thanks to Councilor Steinbrecher and Councilor Vanderhoof the meeting was facilitated by a nationwide consultant from Texas on how to form boards and make them work. It was very good.  October 25th the Housing for Tomorrow Commission met to decide the final guidelines overview.  A letter was drafted to Glenwood Meadows, stating the importance of adding a mix of housing with the commercial areas in their plan.  Also on the 25th, She attended Garfield County Housing Needs Assessment.  They hired a consultant to look into all the housing problems in Garfield County.  The meeting was very interesting and weighty.  She said Mr. McGregor would be happy to leave it with any Council members.  Glenwood Springs came out very well.  For example the question of where people wanted to live, every single segment was Glenwood Springs.  She met with Councilor Gillespie and the West Glenwood Sanitation District October 26th.  They were coming to an agreement how to work out the 201 Plan.  October 27th, she attended, for the first time, the Ghost Walk presented by the Frontier Museum.  It was excellent for delving into this area.  The ghosts were five people, four of which were buried there and one who had family buried there.  The “ghosts” were all in costume and talking with lanterns hanging on the trees.  It was excellent. She noted that Electric Department Director, John Hines, was part of it.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof said he attended the Rural Transportation Authority meeting with Doug Edie on the wind up of the retreat.  As Councilor Martensen said, it was an excellent meeting showing how boards should be formed and run. The Financial Advisory Board met and made recommendations for distribution of a portion of the discretionary funds that was on the agenda later this evening.  He and Councilor Steinbrecher, representing the City, attended the ribbon cutting ceremony for the new jail.

 

Councilor Davis noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission had a regular meeting that was mostly things that had been continued.  The Commission had a special meeting on Glenwood Meadows.  He also attended a Parks and Recreation Commission meeting in which they discussed issued the Parks and Recreation Commission would like to review on Glenwood Meadows and the opening of the Community Center.

 

Councilor Gillespie said the only meeting he had was mentioned by Councilor Martensen with the West Glenwood Sanitation District.  They agreed to get out of the way of the West Glenwood Sanitation District and let them do their expansion.  No matter what they would do, it would probably benefit the City should the City merge with them in the future. 

 

Councilor Steinbrecher attended the Rural Transportation Authority Doug Edie strategic plan workshop.  One thing she learned was that theoretically on November 15th, which was her last official day, they would have the last official meeting of the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority.  Supposedly, all the official people have signed off on the transfer of the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority to the Rural Transportation Authority.  That was a milestone and a goal in the formation of the Rural Transportation Authority to bring all the transportation venues into one organization. As Councilor Vanderhoof mentioned, she also attended the jail ribbon cutting.  That was a long time in coming and it would be good to have the old jail gone.

 

Mayor Skramstad said that he, Mr. Copp and Bill Evans, Director of the Downtown Development Authority, participated in a day-long symposium with the Russian delegation.  That was very interesting.  The group came from throughout Russia.  They were very interested in how things were done locally to make improvements in the City.  It was a good experience for both sides.

 

ITEM NO. 5           Old Business:

 

                A.    Colorado West Detoxification Unit.

 

Mike Copp said he thought people in the audience would like to address Council on this item.  They received correspondence from all parties concerned.  He would like Police Chief Terry Wilson to talk about this.  In August, the City had an initial letter from Mike Lucid, from Colorado Counseling Services, talking about the financial problems that the detoxification unit was having.  He asked for the financial support of the communities to keep it going.  The Council also had an outdated letter from Mr. Lucid, dated October 19th talking about funding shortfalls, what communities were helping and the other City shares.  The share for the City of Glenwood Springs was $32,000.  He noted that the Council had other correspondence in the Council packet. Mayor Skramstad asked Teresa Williams if she made a determination on V.A.L.E.   Ms. Williams stated that there is a provision in the Municipal Code relating to early crisis intervention.  She thought that would include Detox.

 

Terry Wilson said he would like to hear from many in the audience that were here to address Council for this purpose.  Chief Wilson spoke with Gary Kline, Chief of Police in Dillon and a CACP representative for this region, and he asked that a regional meeting be set with law enforcement, Colorado West and some elected officials to do some further fact finding and problem solving on this issue.  That meeting was tentatively scheduled for November 8th from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and he hoped some things could be resolved.  Some difficulties in finding a solution was that everyone  was having trouble finding extra money to put toward new sources of need.  From the correspondence received from Colorado West, many of the agencies have difficulties with the methodology of coming up with the apportioned shares due from each municipality.  They questioned the designation of responsibility, for the number of book-ins, or commitments to that facility.  He spent the last week going through a year’s worth of paperwork from last year. Rather than 56 credited to Glenwood Springs in Mr. Lucid’s initial memo, he came up with 40. He thought he knew how they came up with 56, but he disagreed with that.  Those were things that would need to be discussed.  If the finances requested were based on the number of clients committed to the facility, he thought that was an important number and it was important to be clear on those.  He was concerned with the representation regarding the danger to public safety.  He emphasized that, from a law enforcement standpoint, the Police Department supported the need for a Detox Facility.  It was a considerable resource and something very beneficial toward keeping the community safe, and keeping people healthy and protected.  The problem, from a law enforcement standpoint, and something that was discussed for many years was that this facility had limitations.  If the City was going to get into the business of funding a facility for this purpose, from a law enforcement aspect, they would like to see those monies toward funding a more functional, much broader use facility, something with lockdown capacity and a higher level of security.  That was not possible in the present location.  It had been through the Planning and Zoning Commission issues and zoning problems in the past.  However, from a law enforcement stand point, it would plug a bigger hole in the dam.  The people they were able to commit were primarily more cooperative in nature.  Chief Wilson said that he felt that some of the public safety concerns left an image. Many people had an image in mind that the result would be no facility in which to put a very, angry, violent intoxicated person.  Currently, they could not put that kind of person in the Detox.  Those people who violated a law would be put in jail.  At this time, the rest were released back into the community, taken home or something of that nature.  That would not change.  From the perspective of the Police Department, those who were near unconscious or severely impaired, more than representing a danger to the community at large, or the citizens of Glenwood Springs, they represented more of a danger to themselves.  Part of the Police Department’s job was to protect those people, as well.  Detox provided that service.  They would like to see support being directed toward a facility that would provide a much broader use for law enforcement.

 

Chief Wilson stated that the time crunch was a real problem.  Mr. Lucid set up a meeting and only three law enforcement representatives were able to make it.  That was not a representative group.  He thought a broader approach was needed with much more input from law enforcement.  He also thought that input from the elected officials and decision makers, as well.  This is a much broader issue that he, the other Police Chiefs and Sheriff could address.  They believe this is a medical issue and a civil issue, not a criminal issue. Only a very percentage involved criminal incidents.  This fell into the health and welfare category.  This was not the forte’ of the Police Department.  Their limitations are specific, but the responsibilities are vague.  Law enforcement did not have adequate resources to do what needed to be done.  At one time, a lock-down portion of the jail was dedicated, in the initial design, to the detox function.  They supported that because it would have served a broader need.  Chief Wilson thought that other players, like the hospitals needed to be a significant part of the solution.  That would provide a better service for the community.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked where the discussions with Colorado West about relocating by the Municipal Operations Center stood.  Mr. Copp said he and Mr. Lucid had lengthy discussions, but that was pretty much on hold, because of the financial situations.

 

Michael Lucid, 994 Cottonwood Lane, with Colorado West, said they had been talking with Robert Macgregor about a parcel that would better suit their needs.  They were working with him to see if they could get some financial consideration, to make it affordable.  Beyond that, they would need to secure grant funding to build the facility.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if the Police Station would be usable for them and would they consider trading properties? Mr. Lucid replied that had not crossed his mind, but he would consider it.  It would be worth discussing. Councilor Gillespie pointed out that it was bigger and could probably accommodate lock-down facilities. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked for a show of hands of those wishing to address Council on the Detox Facility. He asked the speakers to restrict their comments to two minutes.

 

Bill Kaufman, 925 Bennett, asked if Council knew what Council Chambers would look like if the City tried to put a Detox facility where the Police Department was now. That was a quiet neighborhood with a lot of children. The “NIMBY’s” would not allow it in that neighborhood.  He recalled the dispute about the facility being in the downtown area.  He though the City’s sales tax base had been great and the City had been able to do many things.  He commended Council for all the good things done, like the Community Center, which he strongly supported.  They have pledged money for the pool and would probably pledge money for the theater.  He thought there were things that people liked to have, and other things the community needed.  The Detox Facility was something that the community absolutely needed.  They were not asking for much money, but a place was needed to put these people.  He agreed with Chief Wilson that it was not a criminal problem. Many times there was a health problem and the hospital would not take them.  The jail could not take them because they did not have the money to provide medical services.  Colorado West was about the only organization that could do it.  If millions could be spend on other things, the City should be able to spare this amount. He pointed out that the economy, both locally and nationally, was in bad shape.  The sales tax revenue projections the City had been working from might not prove true.  The City would be short of cash and sales tax revenue, so he asked Council to use it wisely.  One place to use it wisely was on the Detox Center.

 

Pam Saydee, 1512 County Road 137, said she sat on the local advisory Council with Colorado West as a citizen liaison to keep the public aware of what was going on with Colorado West.  She asked for the Council’s consideration in helping to find a solution.  They were in a situation where everyone wanted it but was saying it was someone else’s responsibility.  She understood the budgetary constraints.  However, she felt that it provided a need, as Mr. Kaufman said.  They were not asking for anything recreational or for entertainment.  They are just asking to keep the beds open to help people.  She feared that if the Detox Facility had to close, which was imminent according to the financial figures, it would be comparable to a ship stopping in the ocean.  To get it started would cost more in staff and financing than finding a stop-gap method to find a solution.  She noted that everyone seemed willing.  This was not part of the criminal justice system, but it was part of the community.  She asked Council to support them and help find a way to keep the facility open. 

 

Amy Hadenmarsh, Cattle Creek, said she worked for White River Counseling in Glenwood Springs and Rifle.  She worked in the chemical dependency field for about 26 years.  She got her start in a detox facility on the graveyard shift in 1979.  Earlier in the afternoon, she wrote a letter before the discussion of the possible exchange of property.  She asked to share it and submit it for the record.  She read, “Prior to the late 1970's, those in need were transported 90 miles west to Grand Junction or 150 miles east to Denver.  When necessary, Garfield County Sheriff’s Department deputies would transport individuals to the Mesa County line where the Mesa County S.O. would continue to transport to Grand Junction.  At other time, private individuals would make the trip.  There was no local halfway house or outpatient substance abuse treatment services available to help those considering the arduous journey into recovery.  In 1977, the late David Bernheimer, backed by a small board of directors from Eagle, Garfield and Pitkin counties, started a Detox Facility in a small, rather dark building in New Castle.  I began working on the graveyard shift in Detox in 1979, when it was housed in the basement of a director’s residence in West Glenwood. Later that year, due to the need for more bed space and a real kitchen, we moved the facility to a building on 8th Street, just behind the Fire Station, in Glenwood.  The halfway house was added upstairs, as were more beds and detox for women.  Agreements were developed with the Glenwood P.D. and the Garfield County S.O.  In 1984 a satellite facility opened in Avon.  In 1986, or thereabouts, Colorado West Regional Mental Health became involved and the agency expanded, offering group counseling, DUI classes, and other outpatient services. I left the agency in 1986 to work at an inpatient treatment facility in Aspen.  This is not meant to be a record of my employment history.  However, it is significant that the need for substance abuse treatment in the valley had grown in less than 10 years to include a detox and halfway house in Glenwood, a satellite detox in Avon and an inpatient treatment center in Aspen.  In 1988, the Detox moved to its present location and in the early 1990's, two more satellite detox facilities were added in Aspen and Breckenridge.  At present, there are at least four agency providers of outpatient substance abuse treatment in Glenwood Springs and Rifle.  There is also an active recovery community in the valley, all of which suggests that the need for support for those recovering from substance abuse and addiction is far greater than it was in 1977.  Unfortunately, there are no longer any inpatient treatment centers in the valley but four full time satellite detox facilities nearby.  The Glenwood Springs Detox remains the only unit of its kind between Denver and Grand Junction.  Grand Junction’s detox, however, to my knowledge, won’t take clients from outside Mesa County.  So, you could say that our recover center provides the only full time detox services between Denver and Salt Lake City.   Who will transport someone in need of monitored detox to Denver.  Garfield County S.O., local ambulance?  Do you think Valley View will airlift a person without health insurance in the acute stages of withdrawal to Salt Lake City?  No, you say.  Of course not. That’s ridiculous!  So what will happen to these people if Detox closes?  Last year, Catherine Ketchum and Dr. William Asbury reported in their book, Beyond the Influence, ‘47% of the people admitted to hospital emergency rooms have positive blood alcohol levels.  In the great majority of cases, the patient was treated and discharged with no effort to diagnose or treat the underlying alcohol problem.’ They also stated that, ‘In 1998, 15,935 people died in alcohol related traffic accidents in the country, an average of 44 every day and about 308 every week.  These deaths represent 38.4% of the total national number of 41,471 traffic facilities.’  Before this community turns its back on Detox, I think we need to ask the doctors and nurses at Aspen Valley, Valley View and Claggett Memorial Hospitals, as well as our local law enforcement officers, if they have the time and patience to deal with an active addict or alcoholic.  If they have the training and expertise to recognize other additions-related issues that need to be addressed in treatment.  If they have the knowledge of community providers and local 12-step groups to make accurate referrals for appropriate continuing treatment.  Some say there isn’t a need for Detox in Glenwood, that there aren’t a lot of drunks wandering the streets. I say that’s because Detox is doing its job.  There is more to detox than keeping drunks off the streets.  We don’t have to reinvent the wheel, we don’t have to go back to the dark-ages of chemical dependency treatment.  We could simply ask ourselves how we, as a community, can help maintain a facility that for us, and the surrounding counties, has provided that time, patience, expertise and knowledge of detoxification and early recovery needs for over 20-years.  I urge you to do everything you can to support Detox.”

 

Carolyn Spencer, from Salvation Army, 2306 Blake, said when she heard Detox was closing, her heart dropped.  She asked who would take these folks. It was a major issue in this town and valley.  She knew they wanted the hospital involved, and that is a nice, good idea, on a professional level, but it would cost more than $400 to put them there. Detox cost less than that.  She knew Council knew the need and understood it was a community responsibility.  She just hoped that the City would respond to keep Detox going until it could be resolved.

 

Rhonda Henry, 820 Palmer, said she was a registered nurse, trained in critical care.  She had a certifications in critical care, basic life support, pediatric life support and addictions nursing.  She worked 13-years at Valley View and after her evening shift, she would go to Detox to evaluate patients and help – on her own time.  She worked five years at Aspen Valley Hospital and took care of an alcoholic that went into Pitkin County jail, who failed the jail detox effort.  The patient ended up in the intensive care unit cost the taxpayers thousands of dollars because the person was not properly detoxified.  Alcoholism was a horrible disease.  She had been around it all her life, from her grandfather to her parents, so she had a personal interest as well as professional interest.  A study was done, throughout the valley a few years ago where they determined that addiction and alcoholism was the number one health problem in this valley.  To close Detox would be a real mistake.  Financially, if Detox closed, it would cost the taxpayers much more.  These people need to be taken care of and the jail was the place and the hospitals do not want them.

 

Jim Movel, said he lived in the valley for 30-years and thought it unfortunate that people put money before human life.  He was sure everyone in the room had someone who was involved in or addicted to alcohol or drugs.  Detox, by definition, was a losing proposition.  The community could pay now, or pay later.

 

Mayor Skramstad closed the public comment portion of this item, bringing it back to Council for discussion and action.  He invited Mr. Lucid to finish his presentation.

 

Michael Lucid said he appreciated Council’s time.  He did not think Council had made a decision and so they were present to talk about what the City might be able to do.  He addressed the allocation method.  It was an example of what could be.  The allocation was modeled after two other situations, one in Summit County and the other in Durango. He would welcome meeting with Chief Wilson and the other law enforcement folks and anyone from Council to determine a method with which everyone was comfortable.  He thought Valley View Hospital understood the implications of the Detox closing and thought they would be willing to join in those discussions.  Only about 42% of the referrals to this Detox facility come through law enforcement agencies.  That was unusual.  In most communities, it was the lion’s share of the referrals.  A large number of people come through referrals from other agencies, the hospital and from family and friends, or they will bring themselves to detox. That was a good thing.  That meant that those people were not presenting themselves to law enforcement.  They were taking care of themselves. That saved Chief Wilson a great deal of time.  Of the more than 500 missions they had to Detox last year, about 41% were residents of Glenwood Springs. Being located in Glenwood Springs was part of it.  However, Glenwood Springs was the center of the valley. 

 

Mr. Lucid contended that the Detox Facility helped law enforcement do their job. It was not just a public health or healthcare issue.  Clearly it was part of the responsibility of the healthcare system, but he believed it was an intersection of public safety and healthcare. Both systems could work together to make it work.  He noted Council  had seen the material he sent.  The issues of what might happen if Detox were to go away they have reviewed.  He commented that if he created the impression that there were many difficult and combative people that would be out in the community if Detox were to close, he apologized.  That was not his intention. However, individuals did come to them, on their own, who, if they did not show up at Detox would present themselves to law enforcement at some point. He believed that some people who came to them were suicidal, and might do something, under the influence. If Detox were not there, the issue of suicide alone, would cause a great deal of consternation and difficulty.  Those people needed to be supervised.  The major impact would be on Chief Wilson and his staff and the interaction with hospital staff in the emergency room, to deal with these folks.  He asked Gary Klein to join him.  He was the Chief of the Dillon Police Department.  In Summit County, they developed a cooperative, interagency agreement to fund a detox holding facility in Breckenridge.  He had experience from the law enforcement side of being part of that funding process.  The other side was that Chief Klein was also on the Colorado West Regional Board of Directors. He is the president-elect.  He brought an interesting perspective to the issues.  

 

Gary Kline, 275 Lake Dillon Drive, Dillon, stated that five years ago the Summit County Detox program was in exactly the same position this one is today. They were well utilized, underfunded and operating in a deficit and in danger of being closed because of that deficit.  Their deficit was much greater than that of the Glenwood Springs Detox facility.  Next week, they were going to attempt to get the key players to the table.  Chief Wilson was sponsoring the meeting.  They were trying to get everyone involved.  They would like to identify the problems and issues and brainstorm solutions.  Two problems exist now.  One is a short-term problem.  The deficit must be funded, at least in some portion, to keep the facility open for the next few months.  If the facility could be kept open for a couple of months, that would give time to work through the issues.  They would be having some intense meetings over the next few weeks, but he did not think this would be resolved by November 30th.  If Council could see its way clear to fund some portion, to keep the facility operating through the first of the year, that would give time to work through the issues.  Now, Summit County had a model program and has worked well for the past five years.  The Durango program was modeled from the Summit County program and had worked well.  One sticking point, when they first started their discussions, was how those numbers were allocated.  He understood that was a very big problem here.  They began looking at the number of detox clients that each police department took into the unit.  That focus had to be shifted to the number of clients from each community.  Now, rather than looking only at the numbers from the police departments, they look at numbers from the individual communities.  When they shifted their thinking they began to come together on a formula for equitably funding the Detox throughout the communities. Chief Klein said he did not know of a single publicly funded detox in the country operating at a profit or even breaks even, without support from governmental entities.  They would begin working on this next week. The formula proposed by Mr. Lucid was only a proposal and an example.  As a group he thought they could determine an equitable way of funding the Detox Facility.  The law enforcement people and elected officials could bring that back to their own councils for approval.

 

When Chief Klein referred to Glenwood Springs residents, Mayor Skramstad asked if there were using Glenwood Springs zip code residents, or actual residents within the City limit.  Mr. Lucid replied it was based on zip code.  Mayor Skramstad said the City might argue the difference between City residence and County residents with a Glenwood Springs address.  He thought that might be Chief Wilson’s point when he differed with Mr. Lucid on the numbers.  He agreed it was a social issue and not a law enforcement issue.  He did not think anyone on Council would argue the need and the City’s obligation to participate.  Everyone was willing to do their fair share.  Mr. Lucid emphasized that he appreciated hearing that.  They were very willing to work out a formula on which everyone could agree.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if they needed $75,000 to stay open two more months.  Mr. Lucid responded that would be the estimated deficit for the coming fiscal year.  Currently, they ran a $6,000 to $8,000 deficit each month. If he was to get permission from his board to continue to operate.…  Councilor Gillespie asked when the fiscal year began.  Mr. Lucid stated it began in July.  Councilor Gillespie asked how much they needed to stay open for two more months. Mr. Lucid replied that $16,000 would do it.

 

Councilor Davis agreed with Mayor Skramstad that Council understood the need.  After Chief Wilson had his meeting, he would like to have a work session to talk about the things that could be done.  He would like to see how the allocations were done and an itemized summary of the cost of operations.  They provided the cost of proposed allocations, but no ideas of the budget.  When Council gave out sizable funds, it was nice to see how things worked and have some discussions.  He stressed the Council was not asking for control.  He heard that a sign of a good community was how they took care of their most needy.  Alcoholics were very much on that list.

 

Mayor Skramstad suggested entertaining the idea of funding the deficit for two months on the condition that, at the end of 30 days, a formula is agreed upon by everyone.  He noted that this was more than a short-term funding problem.  This was a long-term problem.  Something was needed in the Glenwood Springs area that was more than what Detox provided now. Any commitment from Council to Mr. Lucid, his organization and this community must include something that made sense.  The location on Grand Avenue did not make sense for the problem.  He would like to tie those things to this funding.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof moved, seconded by Councilor Martensen,  to take $16,000.00 from the VALE fund for the Detox center operation for the next two months, which goes against the end funding.  He agreed with Mayor Skramstad’s assessment of what needed to happen.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system. The motion passed unanimously.

 

                B.    Kanzer Water Service at Overlin Drive

 

Mayor Skramstad announced that this item was removed from the agenda because resolution had been reached.

 

                C.    Goals Update

 

Councilor Zanella had given Council an updated list.  The most interesting part was the 30 line items on their goal list, which are also posted at the back of Council Chambers.  Out of 30 items, 22 items, or 73%, were either happening or done. Only eight items had not been addressed. 

 

Mayor Skramstad said that, in the interest of time, of those eight items, was there a specific item Council felt needed attention. 

 

Councilor Zanella stated that the 8th Street connection seemed to be dragging.  He thought the engineering reports were to be in last March.  Mayor Skramstad noted that this specific item was listed in old business. Item G, regarding the CARE Facility; item H the 8th Street connection, and item I, an update on City Hall, were both added to the list of Old Business.

 

Councilor Zanella said that a lot of the items were probably being worked on, but not reported to Council.  He noted that two items were about the river trails.  They probably had been discussed, but Council was not aware of any updates.  Mayor Skramstad suggested posting this list for the public and giving a copy to the newspaper.  He thanked Larry Thompson for his report on the same issue regarding the engineering.

 

Councilor Zanella suggested that, when Council established new goals, they should start with this list.  It would be nice to review these every six months.

 

Councilor Martensen asked about Cardinelle Ranch.  She noted Councilor Zanella indicated, “Implement plan for access to Cardinelle Ranch.”  It also talked about determining use for Cardinelle.  Councilor Zanella said that tied with the 201 Plan. Mayor Skramstad added that, until the 201 was done, the City could not determine the use.

 

                D.    MOC and Community Center Budget Update

 

Steve Vanderleest, Assistant City Engineer, stated the Municipal Operations Center project was running smoothly.  The building was on schedule for opening at the end of January.  The current projection is that the project will come underneath the $5.7 million guaranteed maximum price.  The site work is a little behind schedule.  They thought the final landscaping might need to be done next spring.  

 

Pat Seydel noted that they were nearing the end of the Community Center project.  He noted Councilor Gillespie and Councilor Vanderhoof were there last week.  Much work still needed to be done, but they were still saying it would be ready for the Grand Opening.   The City would be receiving the pay application tomorrow, which would give a better understanding of where the City was.  It should come it at the allocation.  Mr. Copp added that he and Mr. Seydel would meet and would get a memo to Council early next week about where they were with the budget after the last payout.  Mr. Seydel noted they were at 86% after the most recent payout.

 

                E.     27th Street Bridge Update

 

Mr. Copp stated Larry Thompson would cover this item, the 8th Street connection and Council’s plan for the Midland Avenue roundabout, regarding saving the trees.  Mayor Skramstad said that would be a good discussion item for next Tuesday’s meeting with the County.  He noted the Council set a workshop to have their ducks in a row.  The workshop would preplan the County meeting, Tuesday, 5:00 p.m.

 

Larry Thompson said the deck replacement on the 27th Street Bridge was on schedule to be completed by the target opening date of November 21st.  A major milestone was reached Tuesday with the pouring of the major portion of the new concrete deck. A couple more pours will occur including the cantilevered widening of the deck and the curbs that would support the rails. 

 

Mayor Skramstad said he had a constituent yell at him because his wife got rear ended on Midland Avenue, and it was his fault because the bridge was closed. 

 

                F.     Four Mile Road/Midland Avenue Roundabout

There was no discussion on this item.

 

                G.    CARE Facility

There was no discussion on this item.

 

                H.    8th Street Extension

 

Larry Thompson stated most of the design work was done for  the portion of 8th Street, in front of City Hall.  He had a meeting scheduled with the County Engineer next week to discuss some details of the impacts on the adjoining parking lot.  Construction was to be undertaken in the spring, with completion when City Hall was ready to open, next summer. 

 

Councilor Davis asked if Mr. Thompson could help with information on the areas where the City and County connected.  It would help to bring information like traffic studies to the work session so Council could be prepared for their meeting with the County regarding specific issues.  Mr. Thompson said he would see what he could do.  He was planning to be in Denver next Tuesday.  Mayor Skramstad suggested that Steve Vanderleest attend. 

 

Mr. Thompson said that portion of the project had admittedly lagged.  A meeting with the consultants was scheduled next week.  The 30% design involved the approval of the preliminary design plan by Union Pacific Railroad.  He would give Council and update at the next meeting or in the near future and move that back to the top of the priority list. 

 

                I.      City Hall Update

 

Pat Seydel reported that the foundation for City Hall had been started and was about 75% done.  So far, it was running smoothly. Underground plumbing would be started next week along with electrical.  Steel erection would start in two to three weeks.

 

Mayor Skramstad commented that his Russian friends were appalled that the Mayor did not have an office in City Hall.

 

He noted that everything would remain on Old Business for the next Council meeting except Items B and C.  Mr. Copp said Council would receive monthly updates on the Municipal Operations Center and City Hall. 

 

ITEM NO. 6           Consideration of 2002 Discretionary Funding.  (Director of Finance)

 

Mike Harman noted that, in the 1999 voter approval, $50,000 was allocated to be awarded for discretionary funding. This year, 24 requests were received with requests totaling $57,530.  The Financial Advisory Board met Tuesday. Six entities were denied and one entity was referred to the VALE fund, leaving 17 requests.  He stated Council received a copy of the Financial Advisory Board recommendations.  The recommendations total $34,150, leaving $15,850 to be awarded later in the year as additional requests were received. He reminded Council that the $50,000

 

must be paid out in that calendar year.  Everything was allocated for 2001.  He suggested that Council could approve or deny that recommendation.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked where the $16,000 for Detox would come.  Councilor Davis said it would come from the VALE Fund.  Mayor Skramstad said the City was going to send to VALE the request from Garfield Legal Services.  They get funds from the County’s VALE program. 

 

Councilor Vanderhoof said the discretionary funds were for social services.  He thought they could consider giving Detox $5,000 next year from these funds.  Mr. Copp noted they would have to make application.

 

Councilor Davis asked if the funds were initially directed and not save any for things that might come up during the year.  Councilor Vanderhoof explained that was why the $35,000 was funded, leaving $15,000 for emergency and other unexpected needs.  Mayor Skramstad said that $57,000 was requested, but only $34,000 was granted, knowing that other things would present themselves.  He noted that with the applications, the Financial Advisory Board considered the number of people served and whether those being served were City residents.  Councilor Vanderhoof added that they also look at the budget and how much went for payroll.  Mayor Skramstad commented that some were jobs created that were taxpayer funded.  Councilor Vanderhoof said it was a tough decision.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if the City ever asked Aspen for money.  Mayor Skramstad said he was sure Glenwood Springs groups did.  Councilor Gillespie noted that the Aspen Music Festival asked the City of Glenwood Springs for money as did Leadership Aspen. Councilor Steinbrecher said she did not think a debate was necessary.  Councilor Gillespie said he thought the public should know that Aspen groups were looking for money from the City of Glenwood Springs.  Councilor Steinbrecher said that although she would not swear to it, she thought the Aspen Music Festival probably did curriculum for the RE-1 School District.  Leadership Aspen involved people from Parachute to Aspen.  Glenwood citizens benefit from programs that might have Aspen in their names.

 

Councilor Martensen pointed out there were more than just social services here.  She wanted to make that point because the Friends of the Community Center were going to need some funds to market and fund-raise.  Mayor Skramstad said they should apply, just like any other group.  Councilor Gillespie asked what happened to the 2Rivers Fund.  Councilor Martensen said that was not a fund-raising fund.  It was a holding entity. 

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Steinbrecher, to accept the recommendation of the Financial Advisory Board and allot the $34,150 as they recommended.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone in the audience would like to address Council on this item.  Seeing none, he called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 7           Consideration of Intergovernmental Agreement for the Ruedi Water and Power Authority.  (City Manager)

 

Mike Copp stated that several meetings ago Mark Fuller explained where the Ruedi Power and Water Authority was going.  The beginning contract was finished and the new agreement had to be entered between the communities, now that Aspen paid off the debt from the actual dam and the electricity was coming down.  Before Council was the finalized agreement, in which they were asking all the cities to participate.  The City’s portion to help fund Ruedi Power and Water Authority was $3,000.  A benefit was the City had water rights from the Frying Pan River into the Roaring Fork River.  He thought Ms. Williams reviewed the contract. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone in the audience would like to address Council on this item.  Seeing none, Mayor Skramstad brought it back to Council for discussion and action.

 

Councilor Davis asked if the City was assuming any liabilities as far as repairs to the dam or other issues that might occur.  Mayor Skramstad replied that as original signatories of the document, the City shared a certain amount of liability.  Councilor Davis asked if any additional liability was assumed by this.  Ms. Williams replied, “No.”  Mayor Skramstad added that the difference was the City of Aspen would take over the power plant and that was totally their liability.  Mayor Skramstad asked David Merritt to explain.

 

David Merritt, 1504 Mountain Drive, stated Ruedi Reservoir and dam were built and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation.  The Ruedi Power and Water Authority evolved with the construction of the hydro-power plant, at the base of Ruedi dam.  Ruedi Power and Water Authority served as a valley government organization.  They have purchased water contracts from the reservoir itself.  In terms of long-term liability, Ruedi was a federal project and owned by the Federal Government.  Issues for project repayment will come along in 2019, if the balance of the reservoir was not contracted.  It was there for west slope use.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Gillespie, for approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Ruedi Water and Power Authority and the annual contribution of $3,750.00.

 

There being no further discussion Mayor Skramstad called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

At 7:45 p.m., Mayor Skramstad called for a break.

At 7:52 p.m., Mayor Skramstad reconvened the meeting.

 

ITEM NO. 8           Award of Bid for Fiber Optic Backbone.  (City Manager)

 

Mike Copp said the bid for a fiber optic backbone had two phases.  The City began this process about six to eight months ago going through various stages of determining where, what and who.  He noted that Diane Kruse, the consultant, had been a big help.  He asked her to give a history and an overview of the business plan.  Mike Rodman from Peak 15 was also present.  He would like him to discuss his memos to Council regarding why the company selected was actually selected.  As a City, they knew they did not have the kind of expertise to analyze the bids thoroughly, so someone was brought from the outside. 

 

Diane Kruse said the goal was to provide City Council with enough information and tools to assist in the decision-making process. She thought that she would not need to go into detail about where things were prior to the business plan.  She would like to talk about what had been done since then.  They had several meetings and discussions with key players in the valley.  They met with most of the local Internet Service Providers (ISP’s).  They provided excellent feedback on the original business plan as well as some of their concerns.  They began discussions with AT&T Broadband.  They would like to have them as a partner before they step up to the plate to compete against them.  Research on the City of Ashland was conducted.  A professor of Finance at the University of Denver conducted a study into local governments in the telecommunications and cable business.  They gathered information he provided.  They also had several discussions with him. They have reworked the business plan and financial statements, with a number of various assumptions. 

 

Ms. Kruse said she would first like to talk about the meetings with the ISPs.  The primary concern of most of the ISPs was they did not want the City to compete directly with them in the Internet Service Provider business.  She agreed with that concern.  She thought the City should strive to find a way in which everyone could win with this broadband project.  Not only would it be a benefit to the community, but the City would also like to find a way to not compete with the ISPs, in their arena. She thought another discussion involved in having the City be the primary, last-mile access provider.  She explained that the customer needed last-mile access to an Internet Service Provider or to other telecommunication applications.  Then the ISP would take it from there.  They proposed that the City be the last-mile access, or the connection between the customer location and the Internet Service Provider or the customer and a number of their other locations, or to a long-distance provider or provide data communication activities.

 

The second concern that came out of the meetings with the ISPs was they thought the original business plan was too aggressive and that the market penetration numbers were too aggressive.  Ms. Kruse said they have rerun numbers based on assumptions they have given.  She appreciated their feedback and willingness to work with the City. 

 

Ms. Kruse noted they revised the business plan to assume that the City would compete against the ISPs as an Internet Service Provider, but would be a last-mile access provider.  This plan lowered operational costs.  Certain costs were inherent in operating an ISP, and those were taken out of the business plan.  They also lowered the revenue projections.  They originally assumed $49 per month for last-mile access and the Internet for a residential customer.  That number was reduced to $20.  They also took the ISP’s suggestion to cut in half the market penetration speed.  Instead of assuming they would penetrate 7% of the market share the first year, it was dropped to 3%.  Each year they took a more conservative approach.  The conclusion was the financial plan still worked, even with a much more conservative approach.  Ms. Kruse gave Council the return-of-investment analysis.

 

Mayor Skramstad said that while she was doing that, he would like to clarify something.  At one meeting, they discussed future access of broadband within the City of Glenwood Springs and AT&T’s willingness to provide that.  It was not even on their board.  They had no intention of doing so. Within the next five years, they had nothing in their budget to provide broadband to the City of Glenwood Springs.  Initially, when the City became involved, the City planned to concentrate on the commercial aspect, providing broadband to new, clean industry moving to Glenwood Springs.  Broadband would also be provided to Federal, State, County and City governments, the hospital, the schools, and the college.  These were the entities driving the initial idea.  Mr. Kruse said she was glad Mayor Skramstad raised that issue.  All the benefits to the community were still there.  The community needed broadband access.  Qwest did not offer DSL service in the valley.  The City needed to try to retain the local youth and attract cleaner industries to Glenwood Springs.  All those issues were still very valid.  She said she had been talking primarily about some of the concerns expressed.  She noted the article written in the newspaper recently and said she was addressing some of those concerns. 

 

Ms. Kruse said she wanted to highlight that all the milestones on the critical numbers, the return-on-investment numbers, positive cash flow, and cumulative revenue, everything was still positive.  With a more conservative approach, they have extended the critical number one or two years.  For example, on the capital requirement, they originally required capital for five years.  Under a much more conservative plan, they would require it for seven years.  Repayment of capital in the original plan was in year six.  In the more conservative plan it was in year eight.  She reminded Council that both of the plans written were conservative.  They did not include any numbers from a potential large wholesale provider like AT&T Broadband or another telecommunications company that would share conduit and/or lease dark fiber from the City. Those would be large numbers that could potentially offset much of the cost of the network.  She also noted that no revenue from some of the other cities, including Basalt, Carbondale, El Jebel, Aspen, expressing an interest in jumping on the network was included.  Conduit could be shared amongst those cities, running between Glenwood Springs through Aspen.  Those cities expressed an interest in being part of this.  Revenue sharing possibilities not in the business plan could exist.   She emphasized that the business plan still worked even with a more conservative model.  Both plans were very conservative.

 

Ms. Kruse said that they had a conference call with the vice president of AT&T, managing the Glenwood Springs area. He said that AT&T had in their budget, pending approval for next year, to put money into the Glenwood Springs market.  They expressed that they would like to see that money go into this broadband project and they would share resources with AT&T Broadband.  It would be much less expensive for them to use a portion of the City’s network.  They would be a customer of the City of Glenwood Springs.  The City would greatly benefit, having an anchor tenant, a large customer on the network.  Currently, they are in the middle of the budget process and expect that it would be approved or denied in the next few months.  They also recommended that they do some revenue sharing, if they could not get it into the budget for next year.  They could be creative in putting something together for AT&T.  She thought that strategy should be explored first before entering into the cable business. 

 

Ms. Kruse stated they had several telephone conversations with the professor at the University of Denver.  The primary findings he stated were that most cities that entered into providing cable or telecommunications were much too aggressive in their assumptions -- so she was glad the numbers were reworked.  They also underestimate the local incumbents’ efforts to counterattack competitions.  For example, many of the City governments that have gotten into the cable business did not expect such fierce competition and counterattack.  The local incumbent in many communities slashed rates, lower than the City could offer, and began an aggressive advertising campaign.  Some were in lawsuits.  The other finding was that none of the City governments were cash-flow positive.  Some are just now at the break-even point.  A couple of things should be considered when looking at these studies.  One, the professor received a grant from TCI to do the research.  TCI was a cable provider, so there might be some slant to the research.  She thought the research was too early in the process.  As Council knew, a City entity looked at a business plan from a 20-year perspective rather than what a business would look at in a three to five year perspective.  The local governments that have entered into the cable and telecommunications business first did so in 1997. They were projecting positive cash flows in similar years as the City was in year five through ten.  It was too early in the process to criticize these governments for not being cash flow positive.  She thought the City should pay attention to lessons learned, which she would address. 

 

Ms. Kruse said they spoke with the Mayor of the City of Ashland.  They were providing cable to their community members and offering their network to the local ISPs to enhance their capabilities. The general conclusion, from the perspective of the Mayor, was that the venture had positive results for both business and residential community members.  He noted that more businesses were opening in Ashland and more jobs for those who lived there.  Additionally, he thought the quality of life improved for all now that they had access to high-speed Internet and better cable television options for less cost.  The Mayor maintained it was the right thing to do and he would make the choice to do it, again.  The negatives were that they had to readjust their original business plan to be more conservative.  The original cash-flow-positive year was year five.  That had been adjusted to year nine.  She emphasized that taking a conservative approach to the business plan was good.  She said he also talked a lot about the local competition.

 

Mayor Skramstad noted Ms. Kruse related many comments about cable. He interpreted cable to be cable television service.  Ms. Kruse said he was right. Mayor Skramstad pointed out that the City had never discussed getting into the cable television business. They discussed being the provider of broadband.  He cautioned that when she addressed those concerns being raised by everyone else, it would not be apples to apples.  Then the newspaper picked up that the City was going into competition with the wireless providers and television providers.  He did not understand why this kept going back there.  That decision was never made.  It was brought up and he thought the decision was made not to go down that road.   Mayor Skramstad said he knew what they were doing, but every time the City addressed those issues and talked about providing cable, the City kept getting deeper in the hole. Ms. Kruse said that much of the research available was for cable.  She said they had to take what information was available, but she thought Mayor Skramstad was right.  She clarified that the City had no intention of going into the cable business.  They wanted to partner with AT&T. 

 

Councilor Gillespie said he thought the original deal was that the City would spend $2 million to get the basic broadband into the area.  This plan stated $4 million.  Ms. Kruse said that would cover the shortfall of the operating loss until the City would turn a profit.  Councilor Gillespie asked if that was strictly broadband or was this the whole thing.  Ms. Kruse said that was strictly the telecommunications piece.  Mr. Copp specified it was not cable.  Cable would cost another $5 to $7 million.  When the wire would go in, the cable wire would go in with it so AT&T could use that wire, at some point.   Councilor Gillespie asked what happened to the $2 million?   Mr. Copp said that as the Council looked at the bids, they could see what they would cost.  Unlike any business, the City would have some losses early on.  That interest would be capitalized.  That was why that amount.  Councilor Vanderhoof remarked that had always been there.  Ms. Kruse agreed.   Mayor Skramstad said it was important that the right perception be out there.  The public currently had the wrong perception.   Ms. Kruse said she was glad Mayor Skramstad made that clarification.

 

Councilor Davis defined that the City was talking about the Bean-pole Project and the last-mile. The October issue of the Colorado Municipal League paper had a good article about getting connected.  It talked about how this started out of the Governor’s office.  It talked about his reach to rural areas and what he was doing to connect the County seats.  It also talked about a couple of agencies that were formed within the Governor’s office.  One was the Colorado Technology Alliance.  That was to reach out to the rural people to help them develop the last-mile and determine how best to utilize the last-mile.  He liked where this had gone so far.  At this time, was the City at the cutting edge of what should be done or were they reinventing the wheel?  They have not contacted the Governor’s office to work with them, the information they had available, and what they could do for the community.  He asked if the footwork on those pieces had been done.  Mayor Skramstad said that Marina Florian was present, and she could probably answer that.  He said he did not want to keep interrupting Ms. Kruse’s  presentation.

 

Marina Florian, 720 Cooper Avenue said she had been involved with other communities and have talked with Marc Holtzman, the State Secretary of Technology, and they had no programs available to help the last-mile.  They made that very clear.  She thought the Technology Alliance was to bring technological companies to Colorado.  It was a marketing program by the State.  They thought the communities needed to do that themselves.  They have put in the Multi Use Network (MNT) and felt that the communities should take it upon themselves to build out the last-mile.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked her to talk about the Bean-pole Project.  Ms. Florian replied that she did not really know the future of the Bean-pole Project.  That was a State program to help local communities specifically hook up the public sector offices, or the City, County, hospital, and library.  They have been giving up to a three-year subsidy of hook up fees to Qwest and others to join the State network.  Glenwood Springs applied for funding.  That application will be subject to review in March 2002 by the Governor’s office.  At this point, there is nothing from the State helping them make their way.

 

Ms. Kruse again stated the number of the business plan still made sense and was very conservative.  She wished that she could tell them that they had a big anchor tenant and AT&T would commit a certain amount of money to the project.  She thought there were players that would be large customers of the network.  That would relieve everyone of the worries of making their numbers.  She thought that the City needed to move forward cautiously.  The overhead expenses needed to be kept down.  In not competing against the ISPs, working with them, outsourcing some of the operations to them would reduce the overhead expenses and were good approaches.  She thought the City should work aggressively toward win/win relationships with the ISPs, AT&T Broadband and with the other cities expressing an interest in getting on the broadband wagon. 

 

Mayor Skramstad said Ms. Kruse initially commented about holding up releasing bids to install the cable until the issue with AT&T’s participation was resolved.  He asked if she said that or if he misunderstood.  Ms. Kruse said she did not say that.  She wished they had AT&T’s participation now.  It would be a no-brainer in making the numbers and making the business plan; however, she thought a decision needed to be made based on the information they had.  Mayor Skramstad said that, as a matter of clarification, the first part of the discussion should be related to the bond and issuing the ordinance to go ahead with the project.  The second part would be the bid award.  Ms. Williams clarified the bid must be done first.  She thought they could be discussed together, because they were intertwined, but the vote on the bid must be done first.

 

Ms. Kruse said she had a lot of documentation, but said she would hold off on passing it along to Council   She wanted Council to know it was available.

 

Robin Millyard said they received five bids September 21st.  Very early on in the review of those bids they realized they were way beyond the in-house expertise.  In discussion with Mr. Copp and Ms. Williams, staff recommended that an outside consultant be sought to help with the evaluation and recommendation.  He contacted Qwest and asked them if they could point the City in the right direction.  That was how they came to ask Peak 15 to help review the bids.  Michael Rodman came for two days to evaluate the submitted bids and made a recommendation.  He said he would turn it over to Mr. Rodman to explain his background and recommendation.

 

Mike Rodman said he was requested to review the bid responses received from the City’s request for proposal to install the fiber backbone network project.  First, he said he wanted to review his qualifications to make the recommendation, because his qualifications have been called into question.  He began working in the telephone industry in 1963.  He was with Southwestern Bell Telephone Company for 30 years, of which 27 was primarily dealing with outside plants that was cable, fiber optics, and service wires.  He spent 13 years in Wichita, Kansas, where he was division manager of the Southern Division of Kansas.  He had a construction budget of approximately $25 million each year, of which about $10 to $15 million was awarded to outside plant contractors for various jobs, including normal cable.  Starting in 1984 it included fiber optics.  He placed fiber optic cable through 1990.  He noted that they did their own splicing and testing. At that time, no contractors were available with the experience to do fiber optic splicing, so he developed an organization within Southwestern Bell that did contract splicing until other splice companies became available with the equipment and certified splicers who knew the technology.  Then, he was in Mexico for three years developing their fiber network. When he came back he went to work for an outside plant contractor for two years, developing a fiber optic placing and splicing organization.  He noted he had been around the construction industry and outside plant since 1963.

 

Mr. Rodman explained that they only had two days to review the bids.  He performed a review of the bidders’ response. He knew nothing of the background of the five bidders and he had never heard of them.  He made no judgment other than that based on the response they provided the City of Glenwood Springs.  If Council had other information, or other reasons why a different vendor should be selected, they would have to make that decision.  In his review he considered whether they appeared to be, from what was presented, technically qualified and financially viable, so that the City would not be left holding the bag on an uncompleted project.  The request for proposal contained a number of requirements and he reviewed whether the bid response met all those requirements.  If they did not, he looked at the requirements they did not meet.  That was the reason for providing Council with a revised file.  He stressed that this recommendation was made solely on the reading of these five bids and the information presented in the bids.  He outlined, in his recommendation, the items they review.  He provided a table, based on his review, of each of the five bidders and where they stood on each item.   The conclusion he reached on the technical qualifications was that three of the companies appeared to be technically qualified to do the job.  In this phase he eliminated Manuel Brother and UtiliCon.  They presented no information on their ability to splice and test the fiber optic project. It appeared they planned to use subcontractors, but no information was presented as to the qualifications of the subcontractors.  He had no indication that the subcontractors had performed projects similar to the City’s.   In review of the financial viability, three companies met this test, Brunetti, Drake and Sturgeon.  He could not assess Manuel Brothers.  They only provided documents for their parent company.  He was concerned with UtiliCon because most of what they presented seemed to be Qwest related.  He was concerned, with Qwest cutting back on their capital program, where that would leave UtiliCon regarding financing this project up-front and be able to complete it successfully.

 

Regarding the specific requirements in the request for proposal, Mr. Rodman stated he only found one bidder that met all requirements.  That bidder was Brunetti. Some of the missing requirements were minor. It would be easy to go back to the contractor and ask whether they could provide the requirement.  He outlined each item the bidders failed to meet in their response in their bid document.  From just reading the request for proposals, determining financial viability, technical qualifications, and the requirements outlined in the request for proposal, Mr. Rodman stated that Brunetti stood the test and that would be his recommendation.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof said he was bothered by some items on which various people bid.  On the testing, one of the companies had a bid of $175,000 to do testing of the optic cables.  Another had $8,000.  He asked if that was the fault of the request for proposal.  Mr. Rodman stated that was not the fault of the request for proposal.  That was an indication, he thought, of how much testing they planned.  Once the fiber optics were complete, then it was necessary to test every fiber, from end to end, documenting the loss at each splice. That would be needed in the future when problems develop.  It would take time to do that.  He did not actually believe that either one of those bid amounts was the right answer.  Councilor Vanderhoof noted several areas where the bids were quite different, and it made him wonder.   Mr. Rodman said it raised the question about what kind of job would be done in a specific area.  That was a valid point. 

 

Councilor Davis said this was a tough task, reviewing a review.  He noted Mr. Rodman had more information than Council did.   He noted UtiliCon was the low bidder, but they did not provide a bid bond.  Mr. Rodman agreed that was one requirement they failed to meet.  Instead, they provided a company check to be valid until October 31st. Councilor Davis commented that was not a standard in the industry.  Typically, those bids that did not perform that part of the request for proposal were not accepted in the construction industry.  The next lowest bid was Manuel Brothers.  They were about $180,000 lower than Brunetti.  When he looked at the table Mr. Rodman provided, and noted they did not include a mitigation plan.  He also noted Superintendent Qualifications and Certifications for Fiber Optics.  Of those three, the most critical was their ability that was under the certifications.  Mr. Rodman stated that some of those could be mitigated in the contract negotiation process.  His concern was that he did not see any fusion splicers, or equipment used to electronically fuse the two pieces of fiber. He did not see any type of specialized placing equipment.  When fiber is placed, it could only be pulled so hard.  It was not like copper cable that if a rough spot was encountered in the conduit, it could be pulled and pulled.  Only so much tension could be applied to fiber optic cable, so special cable-pullers that measure the amount of tension on the cable, at all times, must be used.  It would automatically shut down when that point was reached.  He also did not see clean vans.  When fiber optic is spliced, it has to be done in a sterile environment to prevent a high loss connection. 

 

Councilor Davis said that, apparently, this company had not done much this.  Mr. Rodman remarked that he came to the conclusion that they did not do it themselves, but use subcontractors, but they provided no information on the subcontractor to be used.  The City explained that they were looking for someone who could come in and do the entire job and the City could be assured they would have the product they needed.

 

Councilor Gillespie noted that, in the comparison between Manuel Brothers and Brunetti, the biggest thing that stuck out was project management.  Manuel Brothers would only spend $25,000 while Brunetti planned to spend $100,000.  He asked what rod existing conduit was.  Mr. Rodman explained that, between manholes, there are four-way, six-way or nine-way ducts in the conduit. The conduit was not cemented.  Normally they were cement blocks placed beside each other.  Over time, dirt, silt, sewer, seeps into it.  Before any placement could be done, before the inner duct could be replaced, they would have to go with essentially a big swab and high pressure water and clean out the duct.  Then they would place the inner duct in the conduit.  Then the fiber optic cable is pulled through the inner duct.  Councilor Gillespie asked how Manuel could only spend $8,500 and Brunnetti would spend $73,000.  He thought something was being short-cut.  Mr. Rodman said he did not know how long the City’s conduit had been in the ground.  If it was more than 10-years, it would be a bigger problem than $8,000.  Councilor Gillespie said the other deal was the fiber transition cabinets.  Brunetti was going to spend $1,600 yet Manuel would spend $33,000.  Mr. Rodman said he suspected that Manuel Brothers did not understand all that was involved.  The fiber transition cabinets were not that expensive.  They were basically a termination point.  He thought $33,000 was high.  Councilor Gillespie noted that miscellaneous hardware was $4,000 and the other was $60,000.  He asked what miscellaneous hardware was.  Mr. Rodman said it depended on what they included and how they looked at it.  Some companies may have included the splice case.  Once the fiber optic cable was spliced, it had to be encased.  Some might have included that in their splicing costs and others might have included that in other hardware.  Unless the details were known, it would be hard to judge where various components were included.

 

Mayor Skramstad observed that, when Mr. Rodman went through his first pass-through of the bids and eliminated two, leaving Brunetti, Sturgeon and Drake, the lowest bid was from Brunetti.  Mr. Rodman said that was correct.  He felt the City could negotiate with all three and all would be qualified to do the job. 

 

Councilor Vanderhoof commented that Council was looking at the total bid.  In looking at the bids, he asked Mr. Rodman whether he thought that, since the City did not have an engineer’s estimate, since the City had no fiber optic engineer, if the bids looked reasonable.  Mr. Rodman replied they did.  He thought Sturgeon Electric was high. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to comment on this item, as it related to the bid.

 

Vinda Mikssay, 4908 County Road 154, said she was the estimator for UtiliCon.  The general manager, Robert Kline, was also present.  They felt that a huge injustice had been done in eliminating their bid.  She thought their bid was eliminated because they provided a cash-bond, which was wrong. She stated that the request for proposal specifically stated they could turn in a cash bond.  What is better than cash?  While it was not a standard procedure in the business, it was allowed.   They also work with Qwest.  They have a contract with Qwest that gave them much experience in the communication industry.  They have been working with Qwest for years and have a contract with them for another two or three years.  It was one of their bigger accounts, but it was not their sole account. They have other customers including Aldelphia Communications.  They have many projects in Denver now dealing with communications.  They clearly have the right qualifications for this job.  This is a three-month project.  It could be financed.  The check submitted was covered with a bank statement showing the money was in the account for that project.  They were $180,000 lower than Brunetti.  She did not see how the City could justify that, when they were qualified.  They were also local.  No one mentioned anything about local preference.  She said the City seemed willing to give money to someone out of the community, assuming they were more qualified.  That was a lot of money and could go to help the Detox center. 

 

Robert Kline, 734 Burning Mountain Avenue, General Manager of UtiliCon observed they were the low bidder on the project.  They were qualified and capable to do this kind of project.  They had the experience.  The only information was that they had to include a certified bid bond.  In the City Code on this type of project, it stated, “Bid security shall be required for all competitive sealed bidding for construction contracts.  That shall be a bond provided by a surety company, authorized to do business in the State, or the equivalent in cash.”  The bonding agent happened to be out of town when the bid came out.  He assured the City UtiliCon was bondable.  They were working on a job in Spring Valley and were bonded.  As Ms. Mikssay noted, they were the only local contractor to bid on the project.  He and many of the citizens of Glenwood Springs would rather have the money spent in the valley than outside the valley.  Another intangible part was that all their employees live, and work, in the valley.  They would take a great deal of pride in doing the project for the City.  He was a Glenwood Springs native and was very aggressive when they worked on this bid.  They really wanted to do this project.  One reason they were the low bidder was that they were a local company and did not have much cost to mobilize equipment and manpower.   Mr. Kline maintained the report done by the consultant was completely erroneous as far as how it reflected UtiliCon.  He noted Mr. Rodman could not spell the name of the company correctly.  That made them question how hard he looked at the bid.  Other things were erroneous.  The thing that bothered him the most was the actual price of the bid was the thing that was considered the least.   They participate in many events with CDOT and other counties and municipalities in the valley including Aspen and Pitkin County.  He had never seen a bid process go quite like this. The entire thing left a bad taste in his mouth.  He suggested that Council not award the bid to Brunetti tonight.

 

Councilor Gillespie noted that the recommendation report said they had no experience with fiber optics nor splicing and testing. He wanted to know if that was true.

 

Mr. Kline said he did not know what bid Mr. Rodman was looking at, but he had a copy with him.  It was full of letters of recommendation, regarding fiber optic projects from CDOT, Qwest and many others specifically mentioning fiber optic projects.  They included a project list specifically mentioning fiber project they had done.  Enclosed in the package was a brochure from UniTel, from Grand Junction.  They were to be the subcontractor to splice the cable.  They have the experience and equipment to do the project.  Mayor Skramstad asked if that was in the bid application.  Mr. Kline said it was.

 

Mary Beth Taylor, 835 South Pennsylvania Street, Denver, said she was representing Manuel Brothers.  Manuel Brothers, much like UtiliCon, was very surprised that their bid, which was approximately $180,000 less than Brunetti’s had been turned down, particularly in a rural jurisdiction.  She was a District Attorney, in the 5th Judicial District, and every year, they fought the budget battle.  To see that large of a difference in bid amounts be rejected was something to see.  It was something they looked at very carefully.  She thought Mr. Rodman addressed many issues she had as did Council’s responses.  When they first saw the recommendations and the breakdown of the inadequacies stated by Mr. Rodman on the part of Manuel Brothers, they thought he must have had only a limited time with only the documents in front of him.  That was the only way he could have possibly come to some of the conclusion.  Their concern was that their bid, which was almost $182,000 less than Brunetti’s was rejected based on misinformation and miscommunication.  She wanted to address the three areas of evaluation – the contractor qualification selection criteria used by Mr. Rodman.  Beginning with the requirements of the request for proposal, Mr. Rodman asserted that Manuel Brothers did not comply with several elements.  He indicated that none of their references included fiber optics.  She also had a copy of the bid as submitted by Manuel Brothers.  She counted three pages of references, all of which were communication companies including MCI Worldcom, AT&T Communications, NY Communications, all of which were fiber optic.  Manuel Brothers had been doing fiber optic work since 1983. Last year, they did about $98 million  in revenue of which 95% was generated from fiber optic work.  They have extensive experience in fiber optics and provided references to show that. 

 

Regarding the sequence and time schedule, Ms. Taylor stated that Mr. Rodman alleged it was not submitted.  She countered that it absolutely was submitted.  It was in the middle of the bid.  It showed that Manuel Brothers expected to complete the project in about 14 weeks, directly in line with most bids submitted.  The report also said there was no schedule for disrupting roads and normal operations.  She could not remember which Council member addressed it with Mr. Rodman, but indicated they were expecting a brief narrative.  He did not know whether cover letters and things like that were provided to Mr. Rodman.  Certainly his focus was on the actual content of the request for proposal.  She noted the cover letter submitted with the bid stated, “Section 6.3 of the submittals with proposal section of the request for proposal requires a schedule detailing disruptions of normal operations that we anticipate the City may experience.  Due to the variable nature of the traffic and the needs of the Electrical Department, preparations of a schedule of this nature, in advance of a preconstruction meeting with all of the players would be speculation on our part. We would, therefore, propose to work with the players, upon award, to develop a workable schedule.”  Ms. Taylor said that was particularly important in this type of area.  The area had freak September snow storms, and things that would interrupt work.  To be able to be able to interact with the people involved in this project and do a day to day update, once the project was started, in addition to the proposed schedule for interruptions, so that plans could be made, was a far more feasible way to do it.  That was further evidenced by the fact that two of the other bidders responded in almost an identical way. Sturgeon Electric stated that would be submitted at the time of contract signing.  Drake Contractors said it was not detailed for them.  The procedure for repair and damage was similarly not detailed for them.  In the cover letter submitted by Manuel Brothers, the damage was also addressed.  She thought that was information Council should have.  As Mr. Rodman stated, he only dealt with the information in front of him.  If anyone had more information, that should be considered.  It should be considered in this case. 

 

Next, Ms. Taylor said that the report states that a 25-year warranty on fiber optics products was not supplied by Manuel Brothers.  She observed that it was not supplied by UtiliCon or Drake Contractor, either.  That was because the proposal documents, prepared by Brunetti stated that the contractor had to facilitate that warranty.  There was no requirement that it be provided with the request for proposal or bid proposal, at all. Manuel Brothers did not submit it because they were not asked to.  It was something that happened in a later stage of the process. 

 

Ms. Taylor noted the report asserted that Manuel Brothers was not authorized to do business in Colorado.  She stressed that was wrong.  They have been authorized to do business in Colorado since July 21, 1999.  In the request for proposal, it did not ask if they were authorized to do business in Colorado.  They were asked if they were licensed.  They included their California license, because Colorado did not require a contractor’s license to do business.  They do not have a contractor’s license in Colorado.  She emphasized that the State Statute said they did not need one. They have a license in every western state requiring a license.  As Mr. Rodman mentioned, two of the other bidders also had insufficiencies or deficiencies in their request for proposal requirements.  She also noted he said that those were things that could be followed up on with the bidder. That was a normal course of practice.  She maintained that there was no contact with Manuel Brothers, to follow up on anything that was a concern or question in this process.  They have not gone through that phase of the process.  She stated that Paul Manuel, the Vice President of Manuel Brothers, was with her.  She also had Joe Midel, who would be the superintendent of the project with her.  Both would be happy to handle specific questions to the process itself.  Some Council members raised concerns about the price variation.  She would leave those questions to them.  She thought Mr. Rodman addressed that.  Depending how a contractor saw a specific request in a request for proposal, they might include something in one area and not in another.  However, the overall bid was the thing that counted. 

 

Regarding financial viability, Ms. Taylor said there was a misunderstanding.  The financial statements submitted for Manuel Brothers were not just for the parent company, Quanta.  They were for both the parent company and the subsidiaries.  That was important for a couple of reasons.  Manuel Brothers was a wholly owned subsidiary of Quanta.  Their accounts were completely linked.  The only way Manuel Brothers would go belly-up was if Quana went belly-up. She had additional documents including more information on Quanta, including a financial statement as it would be for Manuel Brothers, itself.  Quanta was an almost $2 billion dollar company.  They were very financially viable. With further respect to financial viability, they provided evidence of insurance. They provided a bid bond.  They were ready and willing to have a 100% of performance of payment bond in place that would cover anything that could arise.  Financial viability was not a concern with Manual Brothers.

 

Ms. Taylor emphasized, regarding technical qualifications, Manuel Brothers had reference sheets with all the big players in the industry.  They have done projects ranging from a couple of miles, to a couple thousands miles, of fiber optics.  In fact, Mr. Midel just returned from a project identical to this, meaning that the meshing of electrical and fiber optics equipment, about three weeks ago.  He could address any concerns on that basis.  Further, Mr. Rodman’s conclusion was correct.  The splicing and testing would be done by a subcontractor.  However, that information was provided in the bid.  The name of the subcontractor was Splice Works.  Splice Works had only been in business about two years.  However Manuel Brothers worked with  Randy Hornby, who was essentially Splice Works, for ten years and have found him to be very gifted.  He had a very distinct expertise in this. She added that Splice Works was certified to do the testing.   As a subcontractor he owned the equipment that Mr. Rodman was concerned they did not have.  However, the request for proposal did not ask for the equipment from the subcontractor.  It asked only for the equipment of the bidder, which they provided.  They did not include potential model and serial numbers.  They did state that upon award of the contract, they would let the City know all that information.  Manuel Brothers had a number of project in process, and they did not want to commit themselves to one, specific piece of equipment, only to find out that piece of equipment was in Nevada.  Mr. Hornby was one of the people that started the groups of organizations that subcontracted the splicing and testing.  That was an incredibly narrow and specific expertise, taking a real touch.  Essentially, Manuel Brothers was the general practitioner and they were calling in a specialist for specific need.

 

Ms. Taylor encouraged Council to reconsider.  The rejection of their bid was made erroneously and without full information.  Manuel Brothers responded to the questions put before them and the requests made in the request for proposal.  They did not provide things like the fact they were authorized to do business in Colorado because they were not asked for that information.  Those were the kinds of things Council should research.  They should not be rejected for those independent deficiencies.  As she explained, Manual Brothers had financial viability as well as technical expertise in this area.  In addition to the financial statements for Manuel Brothers, specifically, not including the parent company she had the details of the specific projects this superintendent had worked on since 1994.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof noted Ms. Taylor kept saying the bid was rejected.  Ms. Taylor clarified that she understood Council had not rejected it; however, Manuel Brothers’ bid that was $182,000 lower, was essentially rejected as the recommended bid.  She asked if Mayor Skramstad wanted the additional information.  Mayor Skramstad suggested she leave it with the City Attorney.

 

Bob McNutt, Desktop Consulting, a local computer consultant that did work for several businesses in town, admitted he had no qualifications to speak on the review process.  He said he knew nothing on fiber.  He encouraged Council to move forward with the project, particularly if they did not compete with the ISPs.  The City needed to stay away from that.  The private sector could do that much better than government.  Most of the large businesses, down to small business, with from three to ten computers could benefit from this.  By putting in the fiber ring, the only company the City would compete against would generally be Qwest.  He said he needed to clarify something Ms. Kruse said.  Qwest does not provide DSL service as an ISP.  They provide circuits that could be use by ISPs for DSL service. The only other section the City could compete with would be the wireless people.  He encouraged Council to make a decision quickly.  In this industry, things move quickly.  A quarter was equivalent to a year in normal business.  He urged Council to get the information they needed to make a decision and make it quickly.  The City is losing about a full quarter for every month they delayed. 

 

Charlie Brunnetti, with Brunetti, said the entire bid process had been going on now for two to three months.  This speaks miles about the fact they were very proactive in making sure their product met the requirements of the document.  This was a standard bid document. Many in the process were reacting, but Brunetti was proactive.  He said there was something to be said for that in how they worked with clients.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone else from the audience would like to address Council on the bid process. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council for discussion and action.

 

Mayor Skramstad commented that the thing that bothered him most was that Mr. Rodman apparently did not have access to the subcontractor information.  He asked Mr. Rodman to address that.   Mr. Rodman said he would address what he saw.  UtiliCon included a pamphlet or marketing brochure from UniTel.  When he reviewed who they spliced fiber optics for, there were none of the standard service providers listed.  It was all inside-type work for hospitals, schools, office buildings, etc.  He did not see any splicing in a typical outside-plant environment.  He made his judgment based on that.   One reason he gave Council a revised recommendation was to clarify a couple of points.  He thought both UtiliCon and Manuel Brothers were very well qualified in the construction area, in what he called “placing.”  He said he tried to clarify that he did not see the references to specific fiber optic splicing and testing. He did not see any references or jobs outlining – from all appearances, it appeared to be placing and construction, not splicing and testing. 

 

Regarding Manuel Brothers, he saw one certificate was for fiber optic orientation. It did not specify certified fiber-optic splicer.  That was something he was looking for.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if hearing the comments of UtiliCon and Manuel Brothers had changed his mind.  Mr. Rodman replied it did not.  Councilor Gillespie added that even though he heard they had qualified splicers.  Mr. Rodman maintained that he did not see documentation that they were qualified.  Council would have to judge that. In the bid response, no evidence was presented of the necessary equipment to splice or test fiber optics or the personnel certified in the splicing and testing.

 

Mayor Skramstad noticed in Mr. Rodman’s spreadsheet, in terms of things he saw and did not see, and neither applicant addressed it.  He asked if Mr. Rodman could address the fiber optic fusion splicers.  Three companies addressed that and these two did not.  Mr. Rodman said he thought that did not address it, because they sub-contract that work.  Mayor Skramstad asked Mr. Rodman if he found the quality of the request for proposal, in terms of areas, might be construed as being vague. Mr. Rodman said he thought it was vague because they did not do that work.  They mentioned the name of the subcontractor; however, his experience was that when a subcontractor was used, a section was included on the subcontractor’s qualifications.  That was what he was looking for, but did not see.

 

Councilor Davis asked if the initial request for proposal sent out was compiled by the City or did Brunetti help put the request for proposal together.  Mr. Millyard replied that all documents were prepared by Brunetti.  Councilor Davis asked Ms. Williams if the cash bond, as quoted by the gentleman from UtiliCon, was acceptable per City Code.  Ms. Williams said the bid proposal did not include cash.  The bid proposal documents included secured bid bond, cashier’s check or a bank-certified check.  Councilor Davis asked for clarification on what was submitted.  Ms. Williams stated they submitted a company check.  Councilor Davis asked how a bank-certified check was different from a company check with a bank letter.  Ms. Williams said it would be a bank check and certified by the bank.  Councilor Davis asked Councilor Vanderhoof if the letter from the bank did the same thing.    Councilor Vanderhoof replied, it did.   Councilor Davis said that, essentially, they would be one and the same.  Councilor Vanderhoof said he did not see the bank’s guarantee, and it could depend on what it said.  If it were worded correctly, it would be the same.  The bank would absolutely tell the City that, no matter what the conditions, the bank would pay the City $52,000 if needed.  Ms. Williams said she understood that was guaranteed through yesterday.  Councilor Davis asked if a performance bond was part of the request for proposal criteria, so no matter whom the City would chose, they would be responsible to provide the City with a performance bond.  Ms. Williams replied, yes, because of the amount of the contract, they are required to.  Councilor Davis clarified that whomever the City would choose, must provide a 100% performance bond.

 

Councilor Davis noted there was less than $200 between the two low bids, with $180,000 between those two and the third lowest bidder, Brunetti.  He noted UtiliCon had a 5% local bidder’s preference, weighing in their favor.  He said he was concerned that if they did meet the intent of the request for proposal, with the bank letter and company check, and if this was stretched beyond October 31st due to internal issues, they should be given the benefit of the doubt.  Since two were so close in dollars, he felt that Council should go slowly and analyze the subcontractors and the ability to do this job because $180,000 was a lot of money.  He thought some extra review would be warranted, given the fact they would all have to provide a performance bond, the work would be done. Personally, he thought if the City could go with a capable local company, that would be even better.

 

Councilor Gillespie felt the additional information provided by Manuel Brothers and UtiliCon warranted some additional consideration.  The City should be looking locally to provide work. 

 

Councilor Vanderhoof asked Ms. Williams to explain a 5% bid bond. Ms. Williams explained the bid applicant had to provide a bond from a security company that was worth 5% of their bid.  Councilor Vanderhoof gave the example of the contractor getting only 50% of the job done, would the City only get $52,000?   Ms. Williams responded that the bid bond only covered the case where a bond was awarded and that company failed to even start the project.  It would not cover performance.  That would be a separate bond. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked, as a matter of policy and legal position on the City’s process for request for proposals, what latitude or restrictions did Council have, in dealing with the process?  Was there a window to go back and ask certain bidders for a best and final offer to clear up separate issues?  Ms. Williams replied that, in order to be fair, and not run afoul of the other bidders, the next step would be to ask for specific information from all the bidders.  Everyone would be on an equal playing field.  Mayor Skramstad noted that every bidder knows the other bids.  If clarification of information is requested.…  Councilor Davis said he did not think that they needed to go back to the bid amounts.  They just needed information on capability and capacity.  The bids were what they were.  It seemed there were three low bidders and two higher bidders.  He suggested that the City deal with the three low bidders, unless a technical reason would prevent that.  Ms. Williams said she understood what Councilor Davis was saying;  however, she respectfully disagreed with only requesting information from three.  The City could run into legal problems if it were not requested of all five.  Mayor Skramstad agreed.  The other route would be to reject all bids and start over.  Ms. Williams said that was exactly right.  Councilor Zanella noted that if the bid amounts stood, then it would not make much difference if they City went to all five.  Councilor Vanderhoof agreed with Councilor Davis about not talking dollars, just capabilities.  Mayor Skramstad said that then three would not respond at all because they knew they have been beat.  It would be like throwing out three at the start.  Ms. Williams said she would also be concerned about being specific about what information was being requested. The bidders provided subcontractor names.  She suggested Council request information on the subcontractors whose names they already provided.  That would not allow them to go back and shop for subcontractors.  Mayor Skramstad said his concern was that if they asked the bid applicants to address these particular issues, two contractors would do it, Manual and UtiliCon.  The others would not bother because Council has already indicated what they were after, the bottom dollar bid.  Unless they were asked to come back with a best and final offer, along with the clarifications, the City would have just selected the bottom two, throwing out the other.  Ms. Williams stated she knew the dollars were a concern.  However, what needed to be understood was that the same criterion was used for all the packages the City received.  They were all judged on the information received.  That was why that recommendation was made.  They all had the same criteria and they chose to respond the way they wanted.  The City either got enough information, or it did not.

 

Councilor Gillespie said all he wanted the City to do was review the subcontractors.  Mr. Rodman made the comment that he was perfectly happy with the low bidders getting everything in the ground.  He would like to look at the subcontractors, and award the bid at the next meeting.  A more intelligent decision could be made. 

 

Councilor Davis agreed.  The representation was made by Mr. Rodman that construction placing for either of the two low companies seemed appropriate.  The fiber optic testing was in question for UtiliCon and Manuel.  He asked if that was worth $180,000.  He thought it was.  The City knew Brunetti was capable, based on information given.  However, common sense would say that it was easy to have the right answers if you helped proposed the questions.  That was not to say anything against Brunetti, but they were part of the creation of the document.  Bidding something that was unfamiliar, what was read into it could be different.  For a $180,000, Council owed it to their constituents to affirm they could do the work and go with one of those two.  An evaluation needed to be made whether UtiliCon was legally in the ball game with the check and the letter.  The City needed to determine if the two were in the running.  If they were in the running, were they capable?  If not, then the next step would be to award it to the next capable bidder, which was Brunetti.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked Councilor Gillespie if he could look at a folder with subcontractors' qualifications, could he be assured that from what he was reading, they were qualified.   He asked if Councilor Gillespie was putting this on staff or Mr. Rodman or who?  Councilor Gillespie said staff is always “we."  Robin Millyard said he was not qualified.  Councilor Gillespie asked if Mr. Rodman could test out the subcontractors.  He evidently did not know they were there.  Mr. Rodman clarified he knew the names, but no other information was presented.  Councilor Gillespie maintained that now, he had the information.   Commissioner Davis agreed to stay with Mr. Rodman to do the evaluation.

 

Councilor Zanella asked why the contract could not be awarded, with conditions.  Councilor Gillespie said, no.  Councilor Davis said they were not yet verified.  Councilor Zanella said the condition of awarding the contract would be that this would be verified.  If it were not verified, the contract award would be invalid.  He asked Ms. Williams if that could be done.  Ms. Williams said that could be done, but then the City could have a fight later about whether they were qualified.  Mayor Skramstad said he thought all the concerns had to be addressed, or the subcontractor information and qualifications to allow Mr. Rodman to make a recommendation based on sufficient information that he had.  Councilor Gillespie said that sounded good.

 

Councilor Davis asked Mr. Rodman if, within the request for proposal, was there a qualification statement, about the company, the things they had done, the history, and track record as part of the submittal?    Mr. Rodman said that was a request.  The bidders supplied contractors and they indicated what companies they worked for on fiber optic projects.  He interpreted that, since they do not have resident splicing, to mean they placed, but did not splice, or test, in the other two companies.

 

Councilor Davis asked Mr. Rodman if what he heard tonight, would he be able to ask some specific questions, regarding the bidders and their subcontractors, about what information the City needed. Mr. Rodman replied that, what the City would be asking was similar information about the subcontractors, as what was requested of the primary contractor, including references, tool and equipment, or the information the other companies supplied, because they had it in house.  Councilor Davis said they should also ask if the subcontractors were bondable.   Councilor Zanella said he did not think that was necessary because the prime contractor held the liability.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher said she did not read or answer request for proposals; however, if someone was asked about their fiber optic splicing abilities, and they indicated that someone else would be the subcontractor, was it common practice to include the qualifications and all information in the proposal? Mr. Rodman stated that, in the areas in which he worked, it was common.  Companies would not award bids with an unknown subcontractor. Councilor Steinbrecher remarked that she understood the question about doing the low bidder and maybe the two companies did not give the information they were asking.  On the other hand, if they have done many of these jobs and used the subcontractors many times, then why did they not put the subcontractor information into the proposal?  Mayor Skramstad noted that was a question they could not answer.  Councilor Steinbrecher said she understood that, but she was asking if that was indicative of other things the City would not find out or know about along the process.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked Ms. Williams if Council was within their legal rights to go down the road suggested by Councilor Gillespie and Councilor Davis. Ms. Williams said, absolutely.  She added they could waive certain technical requirements.  Council had a lot of latitude.

 

Councilor Martensen asked Mr. Copp if he ever got into this with other bid processes, with the self-analysis.  Councilor Martensen clarified that she was referring to the company coming forward to make their own analysis of their own bids.  Mr. Copp said many times the City used certain people, for example for fire equipment, because that is the market.  The City did not have the capabilities in-house.  Councilor Martensen said she understood that.  This was one that was put together.  If asked, Mr. Rodman would probably say there was nothing unusual about the request for proposal that went out. Councilor Martensen observed the bid process was quite structured.  Mr. Copp said in some ways.  In some cases, bids were disqualified.  Many times the City had recommended throwing bids out because they did not meet some qualifications.  The City was able to do that, because they understood the qualifications; however, in this case, staff did not have the expertise.  That was why Mr. Rodman was brought in.  Councilor Martensen said it came down to what was best for the City and citizens.  Mr. Copp said he thought John Hines would have some input.  Mr. Hines was very protective of the electric system, as well he should be.

 

Assuming bidders were allowed time to provide that information, taking the time to check references and go through all the processes that he would normally do if this were his request for proposal, Mayor Skramstad asked Mr. Rodman, how much time he would need.  Mr. Rodman said it would take five to eight days.  Mayor Skramstad clarified that to do this right, that was what the City should have contracted him to do, in the first place.  Mr. Rodman contended that to do it right, the original statement of work called for two weeks of investigation.  This was narrowed to a two-day review of the bid proposals. The first step would be to prepare a letter so that everyone understood what was needed.  That letter should be run through the City’s legal counsel. A reasonable length of time would be needed for the bidders to respond.  They would have to gather information similar to what was in the original request for proposal. Then it would be five to eight days after that he could provide a recommendation.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked Ms. Williams what could be done with the expired check.  Could they be asked to supply a bid bond to remain in the process.  Ms. Williams said that requirement should be waived and accept what they have done, or leave it alone. Mayor Skramstad noted that now, it was worthless.  Ms. Williams said as far as she knew.  If Council were going to waive the requirement of the bid bond, and accept what they have provided, it would seem to her that since the City drug their feet, they could get another letter from the bank. 

 

Councilor Gillespie wondered how fast the bidders could get the information.  Mayor Skramstad said it would depend on how quickly Mr. Rodman could get the letter.  Councilor Gillespie said they would have two weeks to get it back to Council.

 

Robin Millyard addressed the time frame. He thought the City was allowed to hold the bid securities for 60 days. 

 

Councilor Davis asked Ms. Williams for a clarification on waiving the bid bond.  Ms. Williams said that was not really what she meant.  She meant waiving the technical requirement in the proposal that required either a bid bond, a cashiers’ check or a bank-certified check.  The requirement could be waived because they technically complied, in the opinion of Council.  Mayor Skramstad said they would still have to get a new letter that would extend the date.  Ms. Williams said it should be done until November 21st.

 

Councilor Gillespie moved, seconded by Councilor Davis, to postpone awarding the bid on the fiber optics until we have further investigated the subcontractors that are involved with the other bids and come back on the 15th to award the bid adding the recommendations made by the City Attorney and that all those conditions that led to Mr. Rodman’s determination be resolved and the City will contract with Mr. Rodman to pursue the answers.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof said that perhaps Mr. Rodman should be asked if he was willing to do this.  Mr. Rodman replied that he had gotten himself in this far, he would finish. 

 

There being no further discussion, Mayor Skramstad called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

Mr. Rodman asked Council how they wanted to address the question of the 25-year warranty.  Mayor Skramstad asked the general business practice in that area.  Mr. Rodman said he thought the City would want to know who was providing the fiber optic cable.  Many vendors sell fiber optics, and the City should know who that cable was being purchased from and if they would provide a 25-year warranty.  Council agreed.  Mayor Skramstad asked if Mr. Rodman could provide the letter by next week.  Mr. Rodman said he would have a draft by the close of business, Monday.  Mayor Skramstad said a timeline needed to be developed from November 15th.  He suggested asked if Mr. Rodman had the information by November 9th could a recommendation be made by November 15th.  If the respondents did not get a FedEx response to the City by November 9th, they would be out of the running.  Mr. Rodman stated it would be November 6th before a letter was sent.   Ms. Williams said that would not give enough time for the letter to be received.   Mayor Skramstad said if it was not going to work, Council needed to know that now.  Ms. Williams explained that if Mr. Rodman got the letter to the City by Monday and it was faxed out Tuesday morning, he would need to get the responses by November 7th in order to have eight days before the Council meeting November 15.  Mayor Skramstad suggested a special meeting November 20th.  He noted that could put the onus on possibly three new Council people.  Councilor Davis said that seemed proper, time-wise.  Mayor Skramstad agreed.  Ms. Williams said that Council must amend their motion because the motion stated it would be continued until November 15th.  Ms. Williams pointed out that a new motion needed to be made because they already voted.

 

Councilor Gillespie moved, seconded by Councilor Davis, to postpone awarding the fiber optical bid until a Special Meeting to be called November 20th.

 

There being no further discussion, Mayor Skramstad called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

                        A.    Consideration of Ordinance No. 41, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Acting by and Through its Utility Enterprise, Authorizing the Issuance of Electric Revenue Bonds, Series 2001B, for the Purpose of Financing Capital Improvements for Use in its Electric Facility Activities; Prescribing the Form of the Bonds; Providing for the Payment of the Bonds from the Operation of Electric Facilities; and Providing other Details and Approving Documents in Connection with the Bonds.  (SECOND READING)

 

Mayor Skramstad opened the public hearing for the ordinance to allow the City to issue Electric Revenue Bonds to pursue the installation of fiber optic backbone, not television cable. 

 

Bill Challis, Crimson Wireless, 918 Grand Avenue, stated that according to what he understood, Ordinance 41 would finance this project off bonds the City sold.  He thought that moving forward with this project at this time was premature.  He attended a meeting with City representatives and Ms. Kruse to discuss the business plan, as written.  After going over the financial of the project, the estimates the City received, regarding the number of customers they would acquire were skewed.  The numbers were quite high.  Ms. Kruse addressed Council about this earlier.  He was not sure if Council received an email he sent earlier.  He hoped they had a chance to review it. The success of the business plan, as written, required a certain number of customers to be hooked up to the system.  If the City were to go forward with the issuance of the bonds, it would require the payback period be 20-years.  If the numbers were incorrect, he did not see how this would pay itself back, over that period.  His concern was that if it were not able to  pay itself back, who would pay for that?  Would that be a function of the electric customers by increases in utility rates?  They heard from the City that probably would not happen, but could the City assure that would not happen?  He realized they were coming into this a little late in the game, but they acquired the plan about three weeks ago.  He had a vested interest in this.  As a local provider of Internet service, they provided the same type of system the City was considering providing.  The fiber backbone would provide a ring around the City.  Once that ring was established, that would not be the last-mile solution.  The last-mile solution proposed to present to the customer base would be via a wireless connection.  He would assume the City would have wireless nodes around the City.  That was not included in this request for proposal.  The fiber component was, but nothing about the wireless portion.  He assumed that would come next.   He realized that this was splitting hairs, but the City provided the last-mile connection to a customer.  The customer would have to be billed for a portion of that.  Ms. Kruse told the City they would lower their revenue stream to $20 per customer, when they were at $49 before.  The ISP that would be allowed to sell the City’s services would be a traditional dial-up ISP.  He said he would mention the ones he knew in the valley: Sopris Surfers and RoFIntUG.  Their company is currently in Glenwood Springs, Carbondale and Rifle and soon New Castle, and to interface with other last-mile providers currently in the market in the valley.  The City began this process a couple of years ago. In that time, things have changed dramatically. People were providing the services they were talking about doing.  The City would spend a tremendous about of money, and he believed the net result was that they would be forced out of business, as providers.  The City was attempting to create some kind of climate to bring businesses into the valley.  This seemed contrary to normal business for a government, or for a government entity to go into private business and compete directly against the incumbents already there.  He emphasized he was not Qwest.  They buy their services from Qwest.  They could possibly buy some of their services from the City of Glenwood Springs; however, that was a function of the free-market society. 

 

Mr. Challis said it seemed this needed to be discussed further.  They have been in business for a year.  They should have been at City Council every time they had a meeting to discuss this.  Personally, he was not aware of the speed at which the City was moving.  He said that was his fault.  After reading the plans, as written, and looking at the projections of cash flow, he thought it would not work.  He would like someone to demonstrate how they would, even with tweaking the numbers.  He said he had been through this five or six different ways.  The numbers, and he said he was being liberal, were still at a 50% level from what the City was told they would be.  For the City Council to make a decision on this without first taking a look at whether these numbers would work, a last minute decision was not the time to make it.  He stressed that he had a vested interest and he did not want Council to make a decision until the right time.  Ms. Kruse told Council she recently changed the numbers.  Council had not had a chance to digest it and he had not see the revised numbers.  He did not see the plan working for the citizens of Glenwood Springs.  He said that it did not matter whether he was in the wireless business.  What mattered was making the right choice for all the residents.  His business was currently providing that service and would continue, no matter what happened.  They would remain competitive in the open market.  She thought Ms. Kruse was right.  He talked with Mr. Rusito from the University of Denver four or five times.  He was right.  He read and had his report on cable industry.  He made some assumptions about the offer of the plan, as written.  His suggestion was to go slower, and Mr. Challis agreed. This was not something to enter into lightly.  This would be a 20-year commitment.  Two weeks was not that long to wait.

 

Mike Hoffman, stated he was an attorney representing the firm of Broadband West LLC, a wireless broadband services provider operating in Basalt, Aspen, Rifle and Glenwood Springs.  He said he was joined by Scott Young, owner and CEO of the company.  They were concerned that City Council already made up their minds about a fiber optic ring in Glenwood Springs and little could be done to have them take a fresh look at the idea.  Tonight, Council was being asked to do too much.  They were being asked to consider the feasibility plan, or the business plan of which Ms. Kruse talked.  They spend a lot of time talking about the bid process.  Now they were being asked about the funding for the bonding process.  It was too much to have a thoughtful discussion of the feasibility of the plan.  He hoped Council would allow a more fully informed public process in which other service providers and members of the public could participate.  He recognized that might be difficult when the City already spent approximately $250,000 to a consultant to develop the idea, City staff was enthusiastic and the process of selling Municipal bonds was well under way.  Nonetheless, they request that Council take a fresh look at this idea.  It was important that a more thoughtful discussion take place.  Much was at stake for the City, financially, and for the future of the business environment. 

 

Mr. Hoffman commented that if the City’s plan for a fiber optic services network did not pan out, as projected by the consultant, Brunetti DEC, the folks who pay for electrical service within the City would end up picking up the $2.9 million tab, plus interest.  The second thought he would like to leave with Council was that the private sector, including his client could provide the City with a solution similar to the one contemplated by the plan, without any cost or risk to the City or repayers of electrical service within Glenwood Springs.  They spent time on the assumptions set forth by Brunetti DEC.  Those cost estimates were unaffected by the changes Ms. Kruse described earlier.  The cost was too high to justify the risks.  Those costs included the initial $2.7 million construction cost, operating deficits, operating cost were $65,000 per month, exclusive of debt service, and the repayment of $2.9 million in bonds plus interest.  The initial analysis conducted by Brunetti DEC was deeply flawed Ms. Kruse essentially admitted that tonight when she brought an entirely new set of assumptions, which they never had a chance to review.  Even under the assumptions made by the Brunetti group, the consultant found the City would have to fund operating deficits of $1.25 million over four years.  There was enough uncertainty that the City should conduct additional fact finding and listening to the constituents before approving the proposal.  Other Cities have constructed fiber optic infrastructure including Ashland Oregon, Longmont Colorado, Troy New York and others. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked how many pages he had.  Mr. Hoffman said he had a page-and-a-half.  He continued that to their knowledge they have had inconsistent success.  Utilization of the system in Ashland Oregon fell substantially behind projections.  The current economic climate could not help the viability of this system.  What would happen if the system was not economically viable? Electricity users’ rates within the City would increase.  He said Mr. Young would discuss some of the capabilities of the private sector, especially his company in providing similar solutions.  Mr. Hoffman concluded that the cost of this proposed fiber optic network was high. The ability of the City to make the system economically viable depended on the City’s ability to attract and service customers.  They thought the analysis and conclusion drawn by Brunetti DEC was badly flawed.  The cost of the mistake was higher electricity costs.

 

He said he would take a moment to address what Ms. Kruse said earlier.  She talked about the D.U. professor who cited several concerns that should be considered in the decision.  She noted past systems have been flawed by too aggressive estimations on financial projections. The cities underestimated the competition.  As a result, cash flow was problematic. These were serious issues and they ask Council to table the underlying issue, whether the system made sense for the City.   He added that Council had meetings January 4th, May 3rd, June 21st, August 2nd and September 6th of this year.  In not one of the meetings, according to the minutes, was any public comment made.  He suggested that the people of Glenwood Springs were uninformed.  They needed more information to make their own judgments.  He asked Council to give them that opportunity, before they commit $4 million of their long-term money.

 

Scott Young, Aspen, said he was the owner and CEO of Broadband West.  They were located and operated in the valley area.  They provide last-mile solution.  They do T-1, wireless, dial-up and all the ways to be connected to the loop. Additionally, they also have backbone. They currently had fiber installed in their offices with a capacity of over 600MB per second.  To give an idea of how big that was, the Bean-pole Project for the State was only providing 400MB.  The received this free from Qwest by making a financial commitment to them of what they would do in the private sector -- how much business they would do with them for the next five years.  No one in Aspen had to pay anything for this.  They did not have to pay anything for the fiber and it was more fiber than the Bean-pole Project did for the State.  All they had to do was make the reasonable business commitment.  In the private sector, they felt they could afford to take that business risk.. They had partnership agreements with Qwest, Cisco, Lucent and Nortel, Cable and Wireless, Optical Solutions and Western Multi-Plex.  They have become a player. They had clients throughout the valley from Rifle to Edwards and through Aspen.  They had a significant number of clients, bandwidth, and revenue from Glenwood Springs.  Unfortunately, with all the background, they were never invited or made aware of the meetings or work sessions.  He would have liked to have been there to be sure the City understood there was a private-sector alternative to provide broadband and backbone to the community, with no risk to the community.  Additionally, they were offering solutions to Old Snowmass and the Snowmass Water District.  They were developing a town-wide solution for Basalt. They were also working with the developer of Willits to develop a community-wide solution.   They have commitments in Utah and Montana.  These solutions include fiber, wireless and dial-up, whatever was appropriate for the required outcomes for the community, not for the means.  They were looking at the ends.  What do people really need to be connected?  How much bandwidth did they need, when do they need it, what do they need it for and how do they get connected to the Internet?  They have found that in Geenfield or new areas, fiber optic lay nicely, and was a good economic solution; however, they also found that, when they went into an existing community, like the town of Basalt, it was not necessarily economical to lay fiber. Other ways exist to move broadband around an area.  Some could be fiber and some other connectivity.  They work with Western MultiPlex, and they had a 60MB system with no degradation.  That was a wireless system they were introducing in February.  Fiber made sense for television, phone, security systems, for broadband in Greenfield situations.  When it went under existing roads, it was a different issue.  They were also working with the City of Aspen to connect their loop from a wireless connection, rather than doing fiber, just doing their loop into a wireless connection with their fiber POP, so they could get the benefit of Broadband West’s backbone.  They did not have to do anything. Qwest paid for it.  The City had no risk.  Now the City of Aspen, including Emergency Services was going to POP through their fiber network and drop onto Broadband West’s fiber.

 

Mr. Young asked Council to reconsider the alternatives that were in the valley, with valley people.  They saw the opportunity.  They have been in business for a year and a half.  They spent the first year doing no business except studying the needs of this larger, T-shaped triangle from Vail to Rifle.  They have a client in Craig, New Castle  and up the valley. 

 

Paul Huttenhower, 4277 Culver Circle, said he is co-owner of Sopris Surfers.  They have been offering the Internet for more than five years.  He worked a little with the City and other broadband providers in the valley.  They felt that if the City put in the infrastructure it would be used and could be successful, assuming the City worked with ISP’s like Sopris Surfers and RoFIntUG.  One question in his mind was what was the demand, based on price. They found they offered DSL, which is broadband, in Glenwood Springs for about nine months and have 40 customers.   Their lowest price point was $65 per month.  If they could come in with a product that was between $40 and $45 per month, he thought there would be substantial demand creating a profitable situation for the City.  It would also keep the money in the valley.  He liked having the residents pay for the service and keeping it in the City with that money going to local jobs, supported by local companies, like theirs.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone else would like to address Council on this item.  Seeing none, he closed the public hearing.  At this point, he said this was a no action item.  Ms. Williams said she thought Council should move to postpone, as they did the last item.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Davis, to postpone consideration of Ordinance #41, Series of 2001 to November 20, 2001.

 

There being no further discussion, Mayor Skramstad called for the question.

 

Council registered their vote on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

At 10:09 p.m., Mayor Skramstad called for a break.

At 10:12 p.m., Mayor Skramstad reconvened the meeting.

 

ITEM NO. 9           Approval of Firefighter Reserve Program.  (Fire Chief)

 

Fire Chief Mike Piper said he was not here to sell Council anything or ask for any money.  He brought Council’s attention to his memo outlining the Firefighter Reserve Program proposed for the Fire Department.  This reserve program would augment the career staff, standardize the recruitment practices and make things an even playing field.  It would give the opportunity for “a farm team” allowing staff to evaluate prospective members of the department. When a career opportunity became available, those folks could be moved in.  This would give a broader base for recruitment from outside to the City or Fire District and get it from a regional area that allowed augmentation of the staff.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked how this would impact existing volunteers.  He asked how many volunteers were left. Chief Piper replied there were ten.  Mayor Skramstad asked how many of the ten would he anticipate moving into the reserve program.  Chief Piper said possibly two out of the ten.  The rest prefer to remain as current volunteers. 

 

Councilor Martensen asked if the department would still maintain a volunteer program.  Chief Piper said they would maintain the current volunteers, as their present participation in the department had been.  They have the opportunity to move into the reserve program if they chose to move in that direction.  Many felt their participation was minimal, at best, at these times because the career staff handled most of the calls.  When there was a conflagration and a large incident that all manpower was needed, then they need some help in that process.  They were understanding of that.  They have moved forward with the department in hiring of career folks.  He thought the citizens had benefited greatly from it.  It was time to look at an option or a different way of recruiting.  Previously, they talked about a residency program; however, residency programs were very expensive to operate.  Often, they are training programs, in which the City would compete with others including Snowmass, most all of Eagle County, Vail, and Avon have residency programs in which they attract people worldwide to try to augment their forces.  This would give Glenwood Springs a different process that was being used in other places and would work well for Glenwood Springs.  Councilor Martensen thought it was excellent. She was thrilled to read through it.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher said it was her understanding that if anyone wanted to become a volunteer for the Fire Department, they would now go through the Reserve Firefighter Program.  They would not have the title of volunteer. Chief Piper said that was correct.  They would be considered a reserve firefighter.  They would meet all the current volunteer standards, Fair Labor Standards Acts and Pension Credit.  It was just being called a different program and refocusing the initial entry into the process to be consistent with what the career folks were subject to in their entry level to the department, as well.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Vanderhoof, for approval of the Reserve Firefighter Program as recommended by Chief Piper.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone in the audience would like to address Council on this item.  Seeing none, Mayor Skramstad called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 10         Planning Items:  (Director of Community Development)

 

                        A.    #62-01 Conceptual Review for a Major Development Permit for an Auto Dealership (Elk Mountain Motors)

 

                                Applicant:             Ron Liston

                                Owner:                   Elk Mountain Motors – Joel Towbin

                                Location:               Lots 9, 10 and 11, Gilstrap Subdivision

                                Lot 9, 253 Gilstrap Court

                                Lot 10, 036 Riverine Road

                                Lot 11, 100 Riverine Road

                                Zoning:                  General Commercial District

 

Ron Liston, Land Design Partnership, 918 Cooper, noted that Joel Towbin, the owner of Elk Mountain Motors and Wayne Anderson from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, would be the civil engineer on the project.  He had a lengthy outline, of which he marked about half off.  The key element was that Elk Mountain Motors was on North 6th. They have the opportunity to move to the west end of the Gilstrap subdivision and open the area up on 6th Street.  They were involving three lots at the far west end of the Gilstrap subdivision, against the West Glenwood Sanitation District facility.  He noted that there were about three dealerships in that area.  The site was below I-70. As someone would travel along I-70 they would look over the top; however, it had good access at the interchange and off Midland Avenue and Highway 6.  A plat amendment would be submitted as part of the Major Development Permit, where they would vacate the lot lines.  He noted an easement for a public trail across the lots would be moved to the west and the trail would be built to the west of the project, by Mitchell Creek, tying into the extension of the sidewalk.  The site had two points of access.  One access would be off Riverine Road, on the north, short of the current paving on Riverine and another from Gilstrap Court at the southeast corner.  Parking was the lifeblood of an auto dealership, so they would have 210 parking spaces on the parcel.  That would be far beyond the Code requirement.  They would be asking for a couple of critical design variances, one in the central part of the site.  They would have some areas in which they would have stacked parking, similar to the Land Rover, where inventory parking was stacked.  In the back part of the project, along the river, they would request a variance away from the required landscaped island every 9th parking space.  Those would be on the front part of the site.  To compensate, they beefed up the parking in the central island, a triangular shaped area, resulting in good blocks of landscaping central in the parking area.  They could intensify the trees and screening along the community trail.

 

Since the building would sit down, Mr. Liston said they would like to move some of the street tree planting on the area in front of the building.  As someone would look down from I-70 and the trees would gain maturity, they would block the vision of the parking area for display.  They would have the required number of trees, but change the position of the trees in front of the building.   He gave Council an elevation of the structure.  He noted the color on Council’s copy was darker than actual.  They worked with Audi and Volkswagen to try to incorporate as much variation into the design as possible.  They introduced some stone material on the front facade.  The back service area was in a split-faced block in a redish-tanish color with a lot of strong horizontal lines.  Glass was on the face display side of the building and an off-white stucco.  The building was quite attractive and would allow use of some materials consistent with this part of the country. 

 

Mr. Liston noted that, since the property would be seen from other higher parts of the community, they would try to

control the color of the flat-roofed section of the building to keep it from being too bright by keeping it a darker tone.  A unique element was that when the subdivision was created, Mr. Gilstrap offered to restrict the free-standing pole signs in the subdivision.  They were allowed only one, the one seen at the Kum and Go.  That was in compensation for having two smaller directory signs on the project.  At the time, they did not envision an auto dealership.  They would be requesting that be revisited to have at least one pylon-type sign. Normally that would meet the criteria of the City’s Sign Code.  They have three lots that would normally have signage.  Now they would just have one pylon sign plus the normal signage on the building, the Audi and Volkswagen logos.   

 

Councilor Davis noted that when, the hotel in that area was reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission, they were sensitive to the view from the riverside.  He noted Patti Haefeli addressed that in her comments. Some landscaped areas and other buffers were placed between the building and river.  He thought that would be important.  To have that many vehicles parked so close to the river, they would be looking for adequate oil and grease interceptors to protect the river.  While the lighting ordinance was not in place, it was close.  He assumed the applicant would incorporate all the things in the new ordinance.  As Mr. Liston knew, vehicle dealers were some of the biggest resistors to passing this.  Mr. Liston observed that he looked at the lighting plan, and they would work with City standards.

 

Councilor Martensen said there was no indication where the elevations were.  Mr. Liston explained the top elevation was the view from I-70 on the north.  The elevation at the bottom would be the view from the trail on the south.  He had landscaping and tree plantings against the wall as well as what would occur along the trail.  The second elevation down would be the view from the east, from Gilstrap Court.  The third down was the view from the west. Councilor Martensen asked if the trail was going to go around.  Mr. Liston replied most of the trail would see the lower elevation, that kind of parallels the trail.  That was the one in which there were more plantings.  Councilor Martensen noted that Ms. Haefeli stated the parking lot would be right on the 30-foot river setback. Mr. Liston said that was not unusual.  The curb line for the parking lot would be on the river in setback.  Nothing would be happening outside that except the trail.  The site was already disturbed in that area and they would build the community trail. Mayor Skramstad pointed out that the whole site was fill.  Councilor Martensen said she was aware of that, which was a worry.  Mr. Liston stated the building would be done on caissons. Councilor Martensen pointed out that the City had design guideline standards.  Mr. Liston said he knew. Councilor Martensen asked if the rear of the building facing the trail would be okay with commercial guidelines.  Mr. Liston said they had not gone through that in great detail, but he thought that would be very similar to what was done with the service section of Land Rover.  Councilor Martensen remarked they did not have a public trail behind that.  Mr. Liston said they would be focusing on landscaping as well as the building for the experience along the trail. Councilor Martensen asked the height of the planned free-standing sign considered.  Mr. Liston said the maximum in the City would be 35-feet. Councilor Martensen asked if that was still allowed in the City.  Mr. McGregor said 30-feet was the maximum. 

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if Lot 8 was the rafting outfit.  Mr. Liston stated Lot 8 would be the lot west of the hotel.  This project would start on Lot 9.  The rafting was east of the hotel on Lot 6.

 

With the trail being extended along the river and coming up on the west side of the property, Councilor Steinbrecher  asked how that interfaced with the area next to the West Glenwood Sanitation District that the City might want to use as a bridge crossing.  Mr. Copp said he thought the City would still be okay.  He thought Robin Millyard might have a comment.  When the City swapped land with the State and the State sold it back to the West Glenwood Sanitation District, it gave a little more room. Councilor Steinbrecher said she would want to make sure that enough room remained to do whatever kind of road was needed.  She also reiterated the questions about landscaping, adding the more the better.  She thought the part of the building facing the river was very plain and not very attractive.  If river usage and walkways were to be promoted, that needed to be made more aesthetically pleasing.  She was not thrilled with the idea of making the whole area next to the trail just parking.  If the applicant was not going to put in the islands, then the caliber of tree going into that area would have to be substantial. Car dealerships have many cars.  It was hard to make them look appealing.  However, she thought something needed to be done to try.  Regarding the flat-roof color, she noticed  with the Land Rover building that the metal slanted part was green, but the flat roof was sandy-white. Mr. Liston said that was why he raised this issue.  They wanted to get away from the white and get a color that would not attract the eye.  Councilor Steinbrecher said she did not thing Land Rover’s roof was white, it was more of a sand color and it was still quite light.  Mr. Liston noted that the darker the color, the more it would recede, which is what they would consider. Councilor Steinbrecher maintained that it would be good to look at that, and recolor the Land Rover roof, too.

 

Mayor Skramstad said no one mentioned the benefits of this move to the community regarding what would happen on 6th Street.  Sometimes, things worth having come at a price.  He reminded the Planning and Zoning Commission and  Council of that. He thought Glenwood Springs would win out of this particular move; however, he cautioned Mr. Liston not to bank on that after November 15th, since he would be gone.  Councilor Vanderhoof said he would still be around, and he agreed.

 

ITEM NO. 11         Consideration of Ordinance No. 45, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Amending the Cardiff Glen P.U.D. Regarding Open Space Requirements and Allowing for the Creation of an Additional Single-Family Lot.  (FIRST READING)

 

Karl Hanlon explained this was a cleanup ordinance on the P.U.D. amendment to Cardiff Glen, creating a lot for Habitat for Humanity. A landscape and open space plan was attached to the back of the ordinance.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Davis, to approve Ordinance No. 45, Series of 2001.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 12         Consideration of Ordinance No. 52, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Fixing and Certifying the Mill Levy on the 2001 Assessment for Collection in the 2002 Fiscal Year; and Providing for a Temporary Tax Credit.  (FIRST READING)

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Vanderhoof, to approve Ordinance No. 52, Series of 2001.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.               

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 13         Consideration of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Fixing and Certifying the Mill Levy on the 2001 Assessment for Collection in the 2002 Fiscal Year for the Glenwood Springs General Improvement District No. 1980; and Providing for a Temporary Tax Credit.  (FIRST READING)

 

Mayor Skramstad said he thought the G.I.D. was going away.  Mr. Copp explained this was the last year.  Once the G.I.D. was melded into the Downtown Development Authority, this would go away.  Ms. Williams said she expected to bring back something the first of the year to have Council dissolve the G.I.D.

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Martensen, to approve Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2001.

               

Based on their discussion earlier, Councilor Davis wanted to clarify that this was for 2001, but collected in 2002. Council should give Ms. Williams direction on what to do with the G.I.D., specifically as it related to parking and other directions needed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. That needed to be put on a future Council agenda. 

 

Councilor Zanella asked if he was referring to the Downtown Development Authority.  Councilor Davis said he was referring to the G.I.D., not the Downtown Development Authority.  Councilor Zanella said he thought he was referring to some of the problems with zoning because of the G.I.D.  Those need to be reworked.  Councilor Davis said he was.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

Councilor Davis asked if that could be added to the agenda for the next meeting. He would like to give direction to Ms. Williams regarding zoning and issues of parking in the G.I.D.      

 

ITEM NO. 14         Consideration of Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Appropriating Funds for Fiscal Year 2002.

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Vanderhoof, to approve Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2001.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.               

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 15         Consideration of Ordinance No. 55, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Appropriating Funds for Various City Projects and Programs.

 

 Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Martensen, to approve Ordinance No. 55, Series of 2001.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 16         Discussion of Ordinance No. 56, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Amending the City’s Code by Amending the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Fire Code and by Adopting the International Energy Conservation Code.  

 

Karl Hanlon said they warmed Council up to this at the last meeting with the revisions to the TCL. Russell Grance proposed a number of revisions.  This was only a discussion item. He knew it was late and perhaps not the best time for Council to be engaging on this.

 

Russell Grance, Building Official, said they were trying to address what they had currently on the local amendments to the model Codes.  They were trying to avoid any unnecessary local amendments.  They were trying to do this to be consistent with the direction of the model codes, with the formulation of the International Code Council.  This organization inception was a response to the needs of architects and designers and other building industry professional.  More than 20-years ago, the American Institute of Architects and Building Performance Regulation Committee asked the country’s three regional model Building Code organizations to publish a single set of codes.  They are currently doing this under the International Code Council, which were called the I-Codes.  It would give the ability for architects, engineers and designers to be able to compete and design for any jurisdiction across the nation, without the need to learn new codes.  With the concept of having one set of codes for the nation, it would still allow the ability to make local amendments due to geologic, topographic, climatic, fire protection or seismic issues. He analyzed the current amendments and felt that several amendments were not consistent with the criteria mentioned.  To justify such amendments, they would need to have facts and findings on record.  Having found none, many of the amendments the City currently had he did not believe fully served the public or the building industry. 

 

The other part of this was the adoption of the IECC that was the International Energy Conservation Code.  He thought it was an opportune time to adopt a Code that would benefit the community and environment.  In the short three months he had been here and processing applications on various projects, applicants made numerous comments that they were not aware of an Energy Code or stated, “I never had to do this in the past.”   He studied the City’s Energy Code and felt it was not a user-friendly document, not only for design professionals but to the owner-builder.  He had many projects where he asked the individual to comply with a computer program the Department of Energy provided called MecCheck.  They provided that on several projects and it did not increase the cost of the project.  It  simply showed compliance with the national standard, which was the direction in which the City should be going.

 

Councilor Martensen thanked Mr. Grance.  This was a boring kind of job, but needed to be done.

 

ITEM NO. 17         Consideration of Ordinance No. 57, Series of 2001; An Ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Appropriating Funds for Various Parks and Recreation and Community Center Items.

 

Councilor Zanella moved, seconded by Councilor Steinbrecher, to approve Ordinance No. 57, Series of 2001.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

ITEM NO. 18         Award of Bid for Fitness Equipment at the Community Center.  (Director of Parks and Recreation)

 

Dan Rodgerson introduced Andy Worline who came to the City from Wheatridge and would be doing all the City athletics.  He hit the ground running and Mr. Rodgerson said the City was very lucky to have him. The second was Kathleen Milbrat, a recent graduate who was working in Golden at the Coors Fitness Center. She was another super addition to the staff.

 

Mr. Rodgerson said he had the chance to tour many different fitness centers including Silverthorne, Avon, Breckenridge, and the New Castle Fitness Center.  He talked with two or three vendors to see what was popular.  He gave Council a breakdown of the equipment and room layouts.  They tried to hit a particular niche with the fitness equipment for the families and moms who were looking to be a bit healthier and take off a few pounds.  They wanted to be very heavy into the cardio section, but did not want a lot of free weights.  They only have one small barbell rack. If someone were interested in moving a lot of iron, this would not be the place to go.  He asked Ms. Milbrat to explain a bit about the equipment.

 

Kathleen Milbrat brought Council’s attention to an illustration of the equipment.  These were life fitness machines.  She noted that three were for lower body, i.e. leg press, leg curl and leg extension.  Next were abdominal, chest press and shoulder press.  She noted the treadmill had a flex step which is good for runners and take tension off the knees. They will have two bikes and a Stairmaster.

 

Mr. Rodgerson stated that Dave Sheriff, who was involved in the Recreation Center all along, essentially bid all his equipment at cost.  He was not making any money on any of the equipment.  It was his donation to the center.  He knew there was a question on the shipping.  The shipping was estimated on the high end, but they were moving about 10,000 pounds of equipment. The City would be paying direct shipping costs, with no additions.

 

Councilor Martensen noted that Healthstyles showed “plus shipping” but the Fitness Systems did not say that.  Was that included in their bid?  Mr. Rodgerson said that, with all the vendors, the bids were just straight equipment without shipping or installation.  Staff chose the lowest bidder and talked with them about shipping.  He noted Mr. Sheriff was by far the lowest bidder, at cost, the local vendor, which they liked.  It was also the right equipment.  The last page of the printout showed other recreation centers using similar equipment. 

 

Mayor Skramstad asked into what room this equipment was going.  Mr. Rodgerson said that was a good question.  Going downstairs, just off to the left was a large room that was going to be the locker rooms for the pool.  That area was left open. The second room was a multi-purpose room that was intended to be kind of a stretch room.  That would be the area for strength training.  When the pool came on board, those rooms would be reverted to their original purpose. 

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Davis, to award the bid for fitness equipment at the Community Center to Healthstyles Fitness, in the amount of $56,484.00

 

Councilor Gillespie explained why he would vote no.  Council promised the public they would not get into the fitness business and turn the Community Center into a health club, which was what they have done.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone from the audience would like to address Council on this item. Seeing none, he brought it back to Council and called for the question.

 

Council registered their votes on the electronic lighting system.  The results were:

 

        AYES:                            Davis, Steinbrecher, Skramstad, Vanderhoof, Martensen, Zanella

        NAYS:                            Gillespie

        ABSTAIN:                    None.

 

The motion passed.

 

Mayor Skramstad said Council would need Mr. Rodgerson to address the issue of Grand Opening versus anticipated opening for use. Mr. Rodgerson said his common phrase is, “Welcome to the Community Center, but don’t come back for a couple of weeks.”  He noted that some heavy equipment was still on site.  The ice-rink building was not completed.  Even when the contractors leave, satellite televisions, security systems and other things would need to be done.  He thought the weekend following Thanksgiving would be a great time to have people in the building.  However, there was an issue of some people who already have some space rented in the building.  Those need to be addressed on an individual basis, particularly the hockey association that was looking to begin to skate November 14th.  If the majority of the people could be kept out of the building, on a drop-in basis, yet honor commitments and contracts to the residents, that would be best. Mayor Skramstad asked Mr. Rodgerson to let Council know if that date needed to be later.

 

Councilor Gillespie asked if the hockey arena would be completely ready by November 14th.  Mr. Rodgerson replied it would not.  There would be an ice-rink with ice, but the building would not be complete.  The compressors would be started Tuesday.  They would begin making ice Wednesday and painting ice Thursday, finishing Friday, running the Zamboni through Friday night to be ready Saturday. It would be tight.  The ice rink building, which came late, would not be finished. That would be the skate house, with skates and restrooms.  Mayor Skramstad noted that the hockey kids all have their own stuff.  Councilor Gillespie said he was talking about the public.  Mayor Skramstad said he was referring to this first week.  Councilor Gillespie said he did not want to see anything open unless it was ready, promise or no promise to the hockey team.  Mr. Rodgerson explained the hockey team would not need the building.  They could use restrooms in the facility.  They would not be renting skates.  He said there would be some safety issues and staff would have to put up some signage and red tape to keep people out of the construction areas.  If they felt is was a serious safety concern they would call it.

 

ITEM NO. 19         Award of Proposal for Sound Equipment at Community Center.  (Director of Parks and Recreation)

 

This item was removed from the agenda.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked when this might be back before Council.  Mr. Rodgerson explained they went out for bid on the sound, then they needed a roof on the ice-rink, and they needed sound under the roof.  Then they added the fitness area and needed sound in that area.  It would be a big proposal, probably $20,000 to $30,000, but it was not ready.   He hoped to be back at the next Council meeting.

 

ITEM NO. 20         Citizens Appearing Before Council.

 

Mayor Skramstad asked if anyone in the audience wished to address Council on an item not on the agenda, and received no reply.

 

ITEM NO. 21         Report from City Administration:

 

                A.            City Manager.

               

Mr. Copp brought Council’s attention to a report of tax information showing the accommodations' tax was up for the month of September by 1.63% or for the year 2.55%.  Sales tax was up for the month of September 7.2%, which brought the increase for the year to 3.7% for the year.  Staff would be vigilant. The national economy was not doing well, so they would continue to track it carefully and keep Council advised.

 

Mr. Copp stated that the November 15th Council meeting is supposed to include the review with the Municipal Judge.   At breakfast, Council talked about trying to put the Downtown Development Authority workshop on that day.  Since this is the Council’s employee with which they had scheduled a work session, he would like direction from Council. Councilor Gillespie asked if it could be started early.  Mr. Copp stated that whatever Council wanted to do was fine.  Councilor Martensen asked if they could do both.  Mayor Skramstad said they would.  Ms. Williams suggested that, if they started at 4:30 p.m., there should be time for both. 

 

Regarding sales tax, Councilor Zanella asked if Mr. Copp thought about contacting and of the key businesses in Glenwood Springs to give an update on increases or decreases from last year.  Mr. Copp said he did not want to do that.   The key businesses take more time to get their tax information together.  Councilor Zanella said they should know if their business was up or down within three to five after close of business.  Mr. Copp said that a lot of proprietary information was involved.  Councilor Zanella maintained they were not asking for financials, just asking if they were up or down by percentage.  Mr. Copp said if he thought it was critical, he would. He thought they would only be talking about a lag of 15 to 20 days.  The key businesses were the ones producing most of the sales tax revenue. 

 

Ms. Williams noted that she received Mr. Copp’s comments on the Chamber contract and it was forwarded last week to Marianne Virgili. She telephoned Monday and she forwarded it to their attorney.  Ms. Williams said she hoped it would move along quickly. 

 

                B.            City Attorney.

 

Ms. Williams said she talked to Don DeFord, the County Attorney, on the first right of refusal on the County shops.  He was drafting that and they have it as an executive session item for Monday.  The City should see a draft shortly thereafter, hopefully before November 13th.  Mayor Skramstad asked if Ms. Williams would ask Mr. DeFord to give a summary of what happened at the City’s meeting with Council on November 13th.  Ms. Williams explained it was an executive session, so she did not think that would be possible.  Mayor Skramstad said he would like Council to have an idea of what happened. 

 

Mayor Skramstad announced that the Council would have a meeting at 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 6th to discuss issues to be discussed at the November 13th meeting with the Garfield County Commissioners. 

 

Mayor Skramstad said he would entertain a motion to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher moved, seconded by Councilor Gillespie, to extend after eleven o-clock to have comments from Council and an executive session.

 

The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.          

 

ITEM NO. 22.        Comments from Council.

 

Councilor Gillespie thanked Chief Wilson and staff for helping with the traffic.

 

Councilor Steinbrecher asked that a formal budget request from the County be presented for the South Midland Avenue Bridge, be added to the discussion  for the November 5th meeting.

 

Councilor Zanella thanked everyone for their support and prayers over the past three weeks. 

 

Councilor Martensen reminded everyone that Valley Resource Management Fall Conference was Noveber 2nd in Carbondale beginning at 8:30 a.m.  She was disappointed that no one from Public Works or the Landfill attended these meetings.  This meeting had time frames for the type of recycling someone would be interested in.  For example, computer recycling was at 8:45 a.m.

 

Councilor Vanderhoof said that after the meeting with the County November 6th, Council was invited to take a tour of the jail the day before the open house November 7th.

 

ITEM NO. 23         Executive Session for the Purpose of Discussing the Purchase, Acquisition, Lease, Transfer or Sale of Real, Personal or Other Property Interest Under C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(a)

 

At 11:01 p.m., Councilor Martensen moved, seconded by Councilor Steinbrecher, to go into executive session for the sole purpose of discussing the City’s acquisition of real property in accordance with C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(a).  No Council Member has a personal interest in the acquisition.

 

The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.

 

At 11:44 p.m., Mayor Skramstad adjourned the executive session and announced that, during the previous executive session, no resolution, rule, regulation, ordinance or formal action was taken or made.

 

ITEM NO. 24         Adjournment.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.