Loading...
07.25.01 OSBT Minutes Agenda Item 1 Page 1 Approved. OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes July 25, 2001 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Chris Mueller Sean Kendall Linda Andes-Georges Linda Jourgensen STAFF PRESENT Jim Crain Mike Patton Delani Wheeler Dave Kuntz Ronda Romero Cecil Fenio Jim Tydings Jim Reeder Wally Cameron Matt Jones Marti Hill Michael Sullivan CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm. AGENDA ITEM 1 – Approval of Minutes Linda Jourgensen moved that the minutes of July 11, 2001 be approved as amended by Sean Kendall. Linda Andes-Georges seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 2 – Co-Director’s Update Jim Crain shared with the board a copy of an email that he sent to Christine Andersen in response to a letter written to the city council by Cathy Miller complaining about prairie dogs and the damage they were causing. Ms. Miller believed that the prairie dog infestation on her property was the result of activities on or management of the adjacent Open Space. Jim told the board that prairie dogs were on the property when it was purchased by Open Space and that staff has not transferred additional prairie dogs to that location. The department’s intention is to introduce agricultural activities onto the property and staff is waiting for a water case in court which will, hopefully, enable them to irrigate. This may provide some environmental checks on the prairie dog population. Chris Mueller asked if the department intended to relocate prairie dogs there in the future and Jim assured him that they had no such plans. Delani Wheeler distributed information about a public meeting that was to be held the following evening sponsored by Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO). She told the board that the Sierra Club has voiced concern that GOCO money initially designated for acquisitions has been diverted to species protection programs. A representative of the Sierra Club sent an email urging people to attend the GOCO meeting to express their views about this change. Delani mentioned that the department has benefited from some of GOCO’s nonacquisition funds for restoration projects along Coal Creek and at Sombrero Marsh. Chris Mueller asked how much GOCO money is going to the Coal Creek restoration project. Dave Kuntz explained that GOCO money is disseminated through the Colorado Division of Wildlife which has been involved in granting these funds for various OSMP projects. He thought that the Coal Creek project has received about $50,000 of Agenda Item 1 Page 2 these funds. Linda Andes-Georges clarified that GOCO acquisition money was being used for the operational costs of state agencies and that was why the Sierra Club was troubled. Jim Crain told the board about a controversial proposal to build a sewage treatment plant in the Eldorado Springs area where several homes are on private septic systems. Delani Wheeler explained that the county is concerned about these aging septic systems and thinks that either a small treatment plant should be built to service this community or that a hook-up to the city’s sewage system be provided. Boulder County has received a grant from the EPA to study the options. If a plant is built it would have to be placed outside the floodplain. Besides one large private parcel other optimal land is open space. A hook- up to the city’s system would involve running a line to Highway 93. Delani told the board that the city’s Comprehensive Plan would support such a project. No specific requests have been made at this time but there has been conversation between the OSMP Department and the county. Jim assured the board that there would not be a recommendation to allow the building of a sewage treament plant on open space but perhaps there would be an attempt to buy that part of the private parcel not needed by the county if it was purchased for that purpose. Linda Jourgensen questioned if the Comp Plan could supersede the Open Space charter. Delani and Jim assured the board that it would not and Delani explained that the land would have to go through the charter disposal process in order to be used for such purposes. Jim Crain gave the board a preview of the city manager’s Budget Reduction Strategic Plan for the General Fund and described how it will effect OSMP. There are two areas of concern to the department – the $80,000 reduction for Real Estate services and a decrease of $100,000 for OSMP. He said that the impact of these cuts will be felt starting in 2004. Jim explained that the budget reductions in several city departments could provide funds for the police and fire departments or a possible downturn in revenues. He was distressed that the budget plan used the term “subsidy” when describing the allocations of general fund money to OSMP. This plan will be presented to city council at its August 7 meeting. Jim told the board that Wally Cameron is in the process of preparing a conservation easement buyer program that will address the potential of people buying property or an easement and then donating it. Staff thought that this program would be ready to bring to the board in September. Jim wanted the board to be aware of an article in the Denver Post regarding the possibility of using Jefferson County open space as a potential site for a sex-offender facility. He said that the Jefferson county manager had discussed with OSMP the possibility to share conservation easements on some open space owned by each program which implied the intention of keeping it as open space for perpetuity. The article, however, indicates some reconsideration of that intention on the part of Jefferson County. Jim introduced Matt Jones who presented some highlights from the most recent citizen survey. Matt clarified that the city’s Division of Audit and Evaluation administers this survey about every two years. He pointed out that OSMP received the highest rating among city services although it has trended slightly downward over the past several years. The top priorities of land management issues, particularly protection of habitat and preserving scenic views, reflect the major goals of OSMP. Matt also emphasized the fact Agenda Item 1 Page 3 that over 60% of those surveyed favored increased taxes for the acquisition of open space. Jim told the board that Matt will return at a later time with a more in-depth look at the survey. Mike Patton told board members that staff will be returning to them with more information regarding the amphitheater project. This is in response to the board’s wishes that the department step back and take a broader view of the facility and its possiblilites. Staff will also return with trail alignment suggestions for the Coalton to Greenbelt Plateau connection using the input from Linda Andes-Georges and Sean Kendall who accompanied some staff members to the site. Mike also told the board that they are crafting a letter, with Don Glen, regarding gliders and their disruption of nesting raptors but they may not get the support from the government agencies they had previously hoped. Mike said that they received a discouraging response from a representative of the FAA but they were proceeding anyway. The airport manager, Ray Grundy, continues to be supportive of the attempt to establish some restrictions for gliders and tow planes to protect the raptors. Sean Kendall asked if there has been any attempt to look at the lease arrangements with the airport as a way to leverage restrictions and Mike told him that he would work with the City Attorney on this approach. Dave Kuntz reminded staff and the board that there will be a Transamerica Walk event that would be using a segment of the OSMP trail system. This is a group of Japanese youth that is walking across America in celebration of the signing of the peace treaty. Lottery Update Delani Wheeler referred board members to a rather large packet of documents which they received with their agenda packets addressing the questions they had regarding the use of lottery funds. The focus for this information centered around the $304,000 debt service for Area III and if the allocation for this need followed appropriate discussion, understanding and agreement among the involved departments. The Parks and Recreation Department responded with copies of various correspondence, agenda item memos, council proceedings, etc. which they believed addressed the questions. It was established that funding the debt service does extend until 2008. Linda Andes-Georges pointed out that after careful review she wasn’t satisfied that the questions had really been answered. She expressed her concern that not one person noticed that the decision was made by council (about extending the debt service beyond the agreed time frame) without discussion between the two boards of the departments involved. She also questioned the lack of reference to the debt service and the meaning of the phrase “Total Use of 1996 Lottery Funds”. Sean Kendall said that he assumed that council knew how much money was available and therefore would know how long a time it would last. Delani added that there were many complexities surrounding this issue and that conversations about this extended from about 1996 to 1999. Chris Mueller thought that there was no indication in this information that the city council was aware that there was an agreement between the two departments regarding how the lottery money would be shared. Jim agreed and stated that this came before council and was voted on without staff’s knowledge or input. Linda Jourgensen commented that she thought it strange that there was discussion about buying property without discussion about where they would get the revenues. Jim said that the city manager made a recommendation to council based upon a request by the Parks and Recreation staff and it was approved. Delani added that they probably looked at projected lottery revenues and decided this would be a good source of funds for this purpose. Linda Agenda Item 1 Page 4 Andes-Georges recalled a Parks meeting that she attended when this funding was being discussed (1998) and she voiced her belief that this was a decision that was supposed to be agreed upon by both boards (PRAB and OSBT) and the response was that their department (Parks and Recreation) needed this money… that they could not function without it. She also commented on a document titled “Lottery Fund 1998 Capital Improvement Program” and the fact that there seemed to be many assumptions made that were probably inappropriate. Chris Mueller remarked that it was approved without any reference to the agreement between the two departments and that council may not have known that they were overriding a previously made decision. Field Trip Updates & Scheduling Jim Crain told the Board that the next field trip will focus on the south end of the “donut” behind the Mountain Parks system and that Wally Cameron would lead the trip and discuss potential purchases in that area. Staff and the board agreed that August 6 or 13 would be two possible dates and they felt that the morning schedule (7:30 – 11 or 12) worked out well. The group will meet at Chautauqua Cottage. AGENDA ITEM 3 – Matters from the Board Sean Kendall told the board that he and Linda Andes-Georges went to see the Coalton – Greenbelt Trail alignment that has been discussed at previous board meetings. He said that they were pleased with what staff has worked out but questioned the true need for the trail other than it serves as a connector. Linda agreed that the planned alignment seemed to provide a positive trail experience with good views and minimal traffic noise. Linda Andes-Georges asked if staff and the board would be willing to do more issue oriented field trips because she gained so much from the last trip that focused on climbing issues. She suggested themes such as dog issues, mountain bike issues – anything that would be connected to the Visitor Use Plan. Linda also wanted to update staff and the board on the discussion the county commis- sioners had about the Betasso Loop trail and the decision they made to close it to bikers for two days a week. She attended that meeting in hopes of getting an idea of how the situation regarding mountain bike use will eventually effect OSMP. She passed around an editorial by Dirk Vinlove and the rebuttal by Tim Hogan for the board to read and she advised staff and the board to be prepared because this issue will soon be presented to them. Linda requested from staff a summary of the number of miles of trails in the system, the number of trails open to bikes, staff opinion about trail connectors and some type of bike memo. Matt Jones told the board that he has been compiling this type of information for the citizen forum that is being scheduled to address the Visitor Plan. The open space part of the system has about 80 miles of trails and the mountain parks system has about 60 miles of trails (actually, this amount is probably closer to 40). The inclusion of social trails more than doubles that amount. As far as bikes go – about 38 miles of trails are open to bikes. Matt named several new trails – Cottontail, Coalton, and Lefthand, noting that they all have been designated for multiple use. Sean Kendall asked if the survey addresses the needs of the different types of mountain bike riders. Matt said that that there were no questions about the needs of a hard core rider and a dirt road rider but the issue of conflict was presented. Some citizens mentioned feeling some degree of discomfort sharing the trail with dogs and bikers. Linda Jourgensen shared her experience of hiking in California on a trail that was open to bikes on certain days and believes this is the result of a greater Agenda Item 1 Page 5 number of people using the trail. She agreed that hiking and biking are not compatible activities and that this is something that the department will have to face. Matt Jones said that it was very difficult to develop a management plan that will be effective 20 years into the future. He and Jim agreed that the use of OSMP will probably double in the next 10 – 20 years. Dave Kuntz questioned how much responsibility the department has to provide every possible recreational experience for every type of recreational activity. He mentioned other places where a technical mountain bike rider could find challenging trails to ride. Dave verified Chris Mueller’s suggestion that the Visitor Plan will provide a set of principles that will be used as a guideline rather than assign specific uses for specific trails. Chris Mueller asked Jim to share what he knew was happening with the budget ordinance and charter change proposals. Jim replied that the charter proposal has been forwarded to the charter committee and the ordinance has gone to the budget committee. At this time it is not known when each of these will come out of the committees and go to council. Delani Wheeler told the board that an ordinance to place the charter change on the ballot would have to be read and approved by September 4 in order to get on the ballot this year. Jim clarified that the committees would eventually return some kind of recommendation to the council. Although it looks doubtful at this time it is possible that something could be ready for the August 7th council meeting. Jim told the board that they would be notified when these proposals were slated for council. In reference to the city manager’s budget reduction plan Chris thought that the ordinance proposal was very timely. Chris Mueller wished to express his appreciation for the field trip on the 23rd and thanked staff, particularly Matt Jones and Rick Hatfield. AGENDA ITEM 4 – Public Participation/Items Not on the Agenda Ricky Weiser, 4020 North 75th Street, suggested placing the wheelchair ramp under the trees as a possible solution to the amphitheater project. She thought that this would not destroy the unique quality of the structure. She invited staff and the board to see the rare prairie gentian that was currently blooming on her property. Ricky also suggested that there should be some research conducted on hot air balloons and their conflict with powerlines. Having attended the county meeting regarding bikes she expressed her appreciation of how the commissioners handled the sensitive issue and supported preservation rather than use. Bruce Bland, 1340 Lehigh, acknowledged his appreciation for the minutes and commended Cecil on her work. He read a passage from the same article that Jim Crain referred to earlier in the meeting regarding Jefferson County open space. He thought that since the owner of the mining quarry (Keller) was not interested in dealing with Jeffco Open Space that this might be a good opportunity for OSMP to pursue that acquisition. Jim Crain informed Bruce that the city manager and council have already authorized this pursuit. Bruce mentioned the Abbott parcel that is east of Rocky Flats and the fact that the owners were also disappointed in how Jefferson County was handling their open space. He thought that they might be willing to deal with OSMP and suggested the possibility of working with Westminster to acquire that property. Bruce advised the board that building a sewage treatment plant on Open Space was not appropriate and noted the current example of disgruntled potential sellers having second thoughts in Jefferson County. Regarding the GOCO funding issue, Bruce clarified that the GOCO funds are divided into Agenda Item 1 Page 6 4 portions (roughly equal over time) one of which is for wildlife. Much of this wildlife money has been used to purchase habitat. Last fall a sudden decision was made to shift most of the habitat money to pay for programs and personnel in the Division of Wildlife (DOW). He was concerned because he believed the state General Fund should be covering these costs sparing GOCO funds for other uses. Finally Bruce told the Board that the visitor plan committee unanimously agreed that paintball games would not be an appropriate activity on Open Space land. AGENDA ITEM 5 – Continued consideration of a lease management program for certain structures on Open Space and Mountain Parks lands and recommendation to apply revenue from such leases directly to building maintenance, refurbishment, restoration and stabilization for Open Space and Mountain Parks purposes and to review the success and applicability of this program within 5 years* Jim Reeder reviewed this agenda item that was thoroughly discussed at the previous OSBT meeting. He reminded the board that engaging a lease manager to handle the properties frees staff to pursue other tasks. He told them that by keeping the structures repaired and in good condition options for future use are maximized. Some of the houses have no better use at this time but staff will continually look for other and better uses. Staff will evaluate the program and bring it back to the board in about 5 years. Sean Kendall asked about the modular home and if it could be moved and/or sold but Jim told him that it is not on wheels and appeared to be firmly attached to the ground. Sean also wondered about leasing structures for agricultural uses – storage, seasonal workers, etc. Jim Reeder told him that some structures are already being used in this way. Jim Crain thought that another possible use would be to recruit students from agricultural schools to come out and do some kind of work and learn program on open space. Delani Wheeler stressed that the department prefers to lease these for agricultural purposes but there doesn’t seem to be a need right now. Linda Jourgensen questioned if there will be a way to compare the values of the different possible uses for these structures and thought that would be an important part of the review process. Public Participation None Return to Board & Staff None MOTION Linda Jourgensen moved that the Open Space Board of Trustees recommend support for leasing of these and similarly appropriate residential structures and application of the additional net revenues (estimated at $37,000 to $44,000) to deferred maintenance, restoration and stabilization on the farms and ranches on the Open Space and Mountain Parks system with the understanding that over time staff will seek to phase the use of these and similar buildings into defined Open Space and Mountain Parks purposes, including the agricultural management program. In addition, a review of the success and applicability of this program will be brought to the Board within 5 years. Linda Andes-Georges seconded the motion. VOTE The motion passed unanimously. Agenda Item 1 Page 7 AGENDA ITEM 6 – Discussion and recommendation of the Preliminary 2001-2002 Open Space and Mountain Parks Departmental Budget and Projected Open Space Fund Financials 2001-2007* Michael Sullivan began the budget discussion by enumerating the four basic expectations that this current budget should address. The first is that by adopting this budget the department will continue the acquisitions program that has been laid out and that it will provide the needed funding. This budget meets the allocation needs of the remaining unspent portion of the $45 million bonding authority, $20 million is planned to be issued in 2003 and another $5 million will be issued in 2006. This is subject to change depending on how fast Wally Cameron’s group buys land. The second expectation is to increase the funding for general operating expenses. The department also expects to maintain the reserve fund balance ($6.3 million) and finally to maintain some form of unrestricted fund balance. (This is unallocated money that is diminished over time as anticipated.) Michael reminded the board that this budget is subject to sales tax revenue collection and that the currently projected growth factor has been included. Chris Mueller noted that the general fund transfer amount does not reflect the proposed budget from the city manager. The budget cuts from the city manager will either cover the public safety needs or insulate city departments from the loss of tax revenue if the economic down turn is severe. The budget cut would effect the department by about $180,000. Michael stressed that the department must be prepared in case these budget cuts are implemented. The city manager will roll out his budget proposal at the August 7th city council meeting. Michael told the board that staff would be returning to them after operating costs have been finalized and noted that BMPA notes and debt service will also change over time. Michael continued by pointing out that the budget is basically divided into four categories: general operating costs, cost allocation transfer, capital improvement program (CIP) and debt service. He described the 65/35 Open Space fund ratio for management expenses and acquisition costs as coming from these four categories. The “management expenses” are composed of the operating costs and cost allocation and the “acquisition costs” are made up of the CIP and debt service. The total 2002 budget breaks down to be more like a 61/39 split. If the cost allocation, which is somewhat uncon- trollable, was removed, the ratio would probably be more like 64/36. In response to a question from Chris, Michael assured the board that he felt confident with the projections and commented that the city council rarely made adjustments to our budget. Although we are prepared for a decrease in tax revenue, surprisingly the economy is still showing slight growth. If this continues Michael said that the department’s budget would be more secure and additional funds could be used for leverage in the future. Jim Crain stressed the tenuous condition of the Crossroads Mall that provides the program with 6% of its income. Michael added that the major concern with a dip in tax revenues would be how it effects our bonding capacity. He thought it might be OK for the next couple of years but if the department wants to expand its acquisitions it will need to maximize its bonding capacity. Jim Crain explained how a shift in responsibility from the general fund to the department could have negative impact on future bonding capabilities. Sean Kendall reminded staff and the board that if the community supports the request for the $1.5 million, the department will be in even better shape. Chris Mueller requested that staff run Agenda Item 1 Page 8 the same calculations reflecting the manager’s cut and show how it would effect acquisitions if the entire reduction came from that area and also if the entire cut was taken from the operating expenses. He thought this would be a dramatic way to present what could happen to the department. Jim Crain offered the same type of configuration but this time removing the $1.212 million general transfer that has currently been referred to as a “subsidy”. Michael told the board that although we were committed to operating the parking fee system as it was transferred with the mountain parks responsibilities for an entire year, it is currently under review. The budget office has stated that the money collected is supposed to be turned over to the general fund. Chris, as well as some staff members, questioned this practice thinking that the money should be turned back to the OSMP fund as other lease revenue from OSMP facilities has been. Jim Crain told the board that if the money is not turned over to the general fund the budget office has suggested that the amount will be deducted from the $1.2 million that comes to the department from the general fund. Sean Kendall asked for an explanation of the CIP. Michael explained that the Planning Board was required to approve any projects over $50,000. These are very general proposals because specifics about costs are not yet known. The amounts proposed are projected to be more than what the department anticipates needing. Public Participation None Return to Board & Staff Jim thanked staff, especially Michael and Ronda, for preparing the budget and memo for tonight’s meeting. Chris Mueller asked how the amount of money budgeted for acquisitions this year compared to the amount budgeted last year. Michael told him it is about the same. Wally Cameron clarified that the combined total of the debt service and CIP from the budget was in reality far less than what the department actually encumbers for acquisitions. He estimated that in fact $10 million - $15 million is being spent (encumbered) for acquisitions yearly. This money comes from not only the CIP, but also the bond fund and BMPA notes. There was discussion about using lottery money for operational costs and whether or not the $100,000 historically allocated to support the junior ranger program was restricted to be only used for that program. The general consensus among board members was that it was transferred to OSMP because they were getting the responsibilities of the junior ranger program, but that the money could be used for any mountain parks expense. Linda Andes- Georges thought that we should check the motion to find out about this. Chris Mueller asked Michael how a loss or reduction of the general fund money would impact the $20 million and $5 million in bonding that has been built into the projections. Michael estimated that to be a cash flow of about $24 million over the next 20 years that the department counts on. He also reminded Chris that since we have to show more net income than the amount we borrow, it could effect the department’s bonding capacity. This would have a detrimental effect on the department’s ability to meet its acquisition goals of 6000 – 8000 acres. Chris suggested that it would be helpful to present this kind of Agenda Item 1 Page 9 information to the city council as it considers the charter and budget proposals from the board. Jim Crain gave an example of how this could also effect the willingness of foundations or individuals to loan the department money. Linda Andes-Georges questioned why biological IPM was eliminated on the updated department overview. Jim Reeder explained that this is something that staff is very interested in pursuing but it is not currently being used. He said that it will probably be included in next year’s budget. Linda Jourgensen stressed the importance of keeping records to show how much of the budget is being spent on the mountain parks. Jim Crain agreed and Michael commented on the difficulty in estimating the amount when, for example, staff may be working on both the open space and mountain parks parts of the system. Linda added that these records will help the department when it requests funding. MOTION Sean Kendall moved that the OSBT: approve, and recommend that City Council approve, the appropriation in 2002 of $21,091,272 from the Open Space Fund, General Fund and other sources, to cover the 2002 expenditures and transfers as outlined in this memorandum (Attachments A & D); approve and recommend that the Planning Board, at its July 26, 2001 meeting, approve and recommend to City Council the $2,336,000 from Open Space Fund for the proposed 2001 Capital Improvements Projects budget (Attachment C); and approve and recommend that the City Council approve the appropriation of $164,000 as an Adjustments-to-Base budget request as outlined in this memorandum and related attachments. Linda Jourgensen seconded the motion. VOTE The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT – The meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm. These draft minutes were prepared by Cecil P. Fenio.