07.25.01 OSBT packet OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Wednesday, July 25, 2001 at 6:00 pm
City Council Chambers, 1777 Broadway
Please note: Times are approximate only. Actual hearing of an item may occur before or
after the time listed.
AGENDA
6:00 Approval of Minutes -z—u ly I I
Co-Director's Updates
Lottery Update
Field Trip Updates & Scheduling
Matters from the Board
Public Participation/Items Not on the Agenda*
Continued consideration of a building maintenance and leasing program for Open
Space and Mountain Parks purposes*
Discussion and recommendation of the Preliminary 2001-2003 Open Space and
Mountain Parks Departmental Budget and Projected Open Space Fund Financials
2001-2007*
Adjournment
For additional Information call Boulder FYI at 303-441-4060, extension 365; Open Space
Administrative Office, 303-441-3440; or visit the Web site at:
www.ci.boulder.co.us/openspace
MEMORANDUM
To: Christine Andersen
Deputy City Manager for Environmental Affairs
From: James C. Crain '
Co-Director, Open Space and Mountain Pair&
Date: July 24,2001
Re: Cathy Miller letters July 16,2001
Please find enclosed a response concerning the above referenced letter.
The City Open Space Program purchased the Ute Industrial park in 1994 for$1,100,000 in order
to stop any further development of the property. The property was zoned Industrial in the county
and the two existing buildings were being used for office and industrial purposes. In addition to
the industrial zoning, the property had been platted residentially to accommodate up to 28
homes. The property was also purchased for it's wildlife value and because it was adjacent to
Valmont lakes. A waterfowl refuge was but one of the many wildlife qualities which were
considered at the time of the purchase.
Prairie dog towns colonized the property in 1994. The program has not relocated any prairie
dogs to the Ute Property since 1994. Any additional prairie dogs have resulted either from
natural increases or from colonization form the adjacent Excel Energy property. Areas
surrounding the Miller property along with other private properties had and still have extensive
prairie dog colonies. We have no plans at this time to move any additional prairie dogs onto the
site.
The Open Space and Mountain Parks program is currently pursuing a water case in court so that
irrigation water can be used on the property. When the property was purchased,the previous
owner had scraped away the topsoil on the southeast portion of the property,preparing it for
future development. The City, if we are successful in water court, will use the water as part of a
plan to revegetate an agricultural strip adjacent to the Miller property. Without the water, any
attempts to reintroduce any agricultural activities would not be successful. The property was not
being used as an agricultural parcel when it was purchased as Open Space. The Open Space
program has spent considerable sums of money to improve the property since its purchase
including the expenditure of about $7,000 on a prairie dog fence.
The Open Space and Mountain Parks Program will continue to manage the property with
available funding and hope to continue to work in finding a solution that will work for Mrs.
Miller and for the wildlife. Mike Patton and I would be happy to accompany you, the City
Manager, members of the City Council, members of the public or Mrs. Miller to the site to
review the facts and our plans to revegetate the property when water is available.
cc.: Cathy Miller
Ron Secrist, City Manager
Joe deRaismes, City Attorney
Mike Patton, Co-Director Open Space and Mountain Parks
Bryan Pritchett, Reservation Conservation, E & O
County Cornrnissioners
Barrie Hartman, Boulder Daily Camera
L v-.—Lax 'V 1 1 1 iininnuLa NIA kv. .1VJ Y`ki Lvi f U F. UL/UO
r`~ -T Y ti, 7001 ( =U tq �.�
`_'o: D. Corson
T. ECdridge ✓ �
S. HavCick ✓ f
D Mock _,�
F Poirset j
G. Riggle
W. Too
Subject: DouCder City CounciC-Meeting -JULY 3, 2001
.agenda Rem loB "TroposedCity of Boulder Prairie
Dog Relocation Rute"
.As you may recaC� we described our ongoing dilemma with
thousands of.prairie clogs Located on City Open Space -- Ute
T Bark (in the County) migrating to the adjacent private
agriculturaCCands. We have sought relief through every
avaiCabCe process since the City purchased this property in
�9g4. however, the .Animal'YVildltfe Defense Group can so
easily get everything it wants because it is `yoCiticaCly correct
in Boulder" and you aCCvote without CogicaCthinking of the
present and long range ramifications of prairie dogs on vita.0
ag producing Cands.
It was most interesting to o6serve Open Space's reaction to our
comments and for their statement that very few HC-A's are
ad'acent to private Cand: Does this imply that the City owns
all of the Cand in the County too, There -was aCso reluctance
to advise bordering landowners whenprairie dogs were to be
relocatedon existing HCA's because this, in their viewpoint,
was reaCCy the function of the CoCorado Division of`WirdCfe,
�- Huh??
JUL 1 1, 20E]: u
, UL-1 l-LUU! l'J� U"J' ;Jd ill"l i UULI)L'K UI i Y ItIMHU�A 1 Hl Aul 3UJ 44i 4418 15 Uj/U0
C. UJ, Un
Perhaps OS shouCdread their own published brochure 'Wil -
-We re your Open. Space Department! -- "We need your heo.
-We need your thoughts on how to care for 23oulder's Open
Space. We want your ideas on managing this valuable
resource. We needto know how we can serve you better. CaCC
us any time! Drop us a note! Tisit us!" -We sureCy have seem,
no evidence of caring in 7 years!!!!!!!
FoClowing are some important points that we have stated in
letters, meetings, discussions, etc.
o, FYI, we do not want to see any species become extinct!
,r. The `prairie Dog HC.A spec ficalCy affecting our hayCand-
�� was formerly the Ute Site that was purchased by the City in
1994. If you refer to the City Councdvideo of Tuesday,
Septem6er 13, 1994, this property was purchased(sm million)
as a waterfowCrefuge. "... City CounciCman Spense Havack
suggested the city consider a new kind of access to the area - a
wooden walkway for visitors to catch a discreetpeek at the
WiCdl if-e." Our question: How can a Candpurchase approved
by Councdfor waterfowCrefuge uCtimateCy become aprairie
dog HC-A with administrative and maintenance offices on
site as weCCas stored materials, vehicles and Carge equipment.
At this same ,9113194 CounciC meeting, it was reitereated b y
Mayor Durgin that our concerns for encroaching prairie dogs
from Open. Space be addressed by OS Staff.
Please, we urge you to view this video.
IVL vv Jv ,,,, ❑UV LV LII l, 1 nil 1W. JUJ 441 ' 4ib F. 04/06
r 2. A coupCe of years ago, we invited Tom. ECdridge to come out
to ourproperties. Aprominent downtown business owner
recommended that he wo uCd be a good Listener. Tom said
he grew up in Lafayette and recognized ourproblem "but
the prairie dog issue is a hot button in BouCder" but he
wound recommend that noprairie dogs be relocated to this
spec ffic site. Tom, where were you Cast Tuesday?
3. We urge City Council Members, et aC glean the "City of
Bounder CrassCandManagem.ent Black-wiled Prairie Dog
Habitat Conservation PCan" 07) dated December 1-996+
7'hisp(an Cooks great onpaper but inpractice it is a farce.
OS violates its own.plan as wed as the Boulder -Valley
Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the environmentaCand
economic value of productive agricuCtural Cand and that it
shouCCbe conserved amdpreserved
4. Ute Property is in the County. Suggest you also drowse the
"Guide to R.uraCliving in Bou.Cder County." 'We have lived
at our ruraCresidences for over 30 years and enjoy being
gooddstewards of our Cand: We invite you topersonally
come out and Cook at the 68 acres of denudeddgrounc,
weeds, traffic., dust, and of course, the migrating prairie
dogs and the ineffective management too CNutuaCbarrier)
erected to `protect" us,
5. `Why does it take 5 months to finally get a response
(authored by Brunn. Pritchett) to a Letter directed to Mr.
Secrist with the sauce Came OS commentary. As a matter of
fact, Mr. Pritchett admittedtha.t he had not walked aCong
ourfenceline in several months.
i-2001 TUB 09 39 r-i KDULD R Ci Y MI",N'r:uc: rH;2 11-01 '13'U-3 �i o
a
6. Based on Item. ; , we requested a meeting with afresh aS
staff person, Chris Andersen. That meeting happened on
.Ap'riC20rr. `We are stiffawaiting a "fresh" answer with
what we believe is necessary corrective action, and attitude
with this horrc problem.
-As an aside, we
find it baffling that the Daily Camera never
reports prairie dog conflicts of private Candowners but
glorifies the attributes andworks of the - nimaFWiCdCfe
Defense groups. The newspaper neglected to mention the
eit' enpartic dation comments at Cast Tuesda y s CounciC
meeting relating to the prair%e dog relocation, ruling. With the
many poC6 that the DaiCy Camera conducts, a reasonable
future question couCd be, `jwouCd you Cike to haverairie dogs
in your yard or your neighbor's yard?$ and"if so, haw would
you manage them?"
This tetter is written out of disappoinment by the highCy
acclaimed Bou,Cder Open Space Department,frustration with
the misuse of everybody's Cand and its affect on, adjacent ag
Cane, the takings of our private Cand, and restricting our
right to farm far a CiveCihood:
For your information, we are not going away.
We truly Hope you wid find time to visit the Ute Site, Cook
over the south fencetine and think about the monster situation
that has happened and is getting Carger. Prairie dogs are
devastating our hayiancC they are in our backyards and
burrowing into our CeachfieCds. They are eating our seeca ng
Vv'-2r at �-v L_. �a i i ........—_.. I IEU. )UJ 441 441Q r. 'vii UC
� trees and eroding our fence.yosts. We are yleading for you to
yerson.aCCy hear andsee our side of this ro6Cem.
looking forward to an earCy resyonse. Thanks.
Yours in Conservation%
f
Cathy %fiMer
2147 75`h Street
Bo'uCder CO 80301
303-447-8388
cc: PauCDanish, County Commissioner �f)
,Tana Mandez, County Commissioner
Ron Stewart, County Commissioner
Barrie Hartnwn, BouCder DaiCy Camera
.Toe deRaismes, City Attorney
Pon Secrist, BouCder City Nanager
MEMORANDUM
TO: Open Space Board of Trustees
FROM: Delani Wheeler, Division Manager, Open Space and Mountain Parks
SUBJECT: Update on GOCO Strategic Plan Public Meetings
DATE: July 25, 2001
Attached is an e-mail received yesterday from Sierra Club expressing their concern that the
GOCO fiends should be primarily focussed on acquisition of Open Space land. For example, the
club is concerned that money their members wished to see spent on habitat acquisition was
shifted to the species protection program at Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) in November
2000. Open Space and Mountain Parks staff shares this concern. The department is also very
interested in obtaining more GOCO funding for acquisitions within the Boulder area. Only one
of Boulder's requests for acquisitions funding has been approved; for assistance with the Joder
conservation easement purchase in 1997.
The public meeting for the Boulder, Clear Creek, Jefferson area is being held in Broomfield
tomorrow night at 7:00 PM at the Broomfield Municipal Center at 1 DesCombes Drive. There
will be a stakeholders meeting at the same location tomorrow afternoon at 3:00 PM. Staff will
attend.
Attachments:
Sierra Club e-mail
Schedule of Public Meetings
GOCO Press release
...osbt\memos0l\GOCOupdate072501
Sierra Club e-mail, July 24, 2001
Here some more information on our campaign and the messages that we are working to bring to
these GOCO hearings.
Thanks for your time.
Hope to see you there.
Aimee
Aimee Cartier
Sierra Club Conservation Organizer
Denver/Boulder,Colorado
303-449-5595
airnee.cartier@sierraclub.org
SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE--REVIVE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO!!!
SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE—REVIVE GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO!!
What: Great Outdoors Colorado Public Hearing
When: July 26, 2001
Where: City of Broomfield Municipal Center 1 DesCombres Dr., Broomfield
Time: 7pm
Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) has been our state's primary preserver of open space.
Help keep it that way by attending GOCO hearing nearest you!!
Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO)
In 1980, the Colorado State Lottery was created, proceeds of which were set aside to purchase
and protect parks and open space. Shortly thereafter, the state legislature made an effort to use
lottery proceeds to build prisons, forcing Coloradans to take the issue back to the ballot and
redirect funding toward land protection once again. GOCO was created by voters in 1992 to use
state lottery proceeds to protect parks, opens space, outdoor recreation, and wildlife habitat.
Since then, GOCO has protected more than 235,000 acres of land, preserving such places as
Sugarloaf Mountain, the St.Vrain River Corridor, and open space buffer zones between Louisville
and Broomfield.
Open Space Dollars on the Chopping Block Again
Over the past decade, in the face of rampant development GOCO has emphasized acquiring land
in order to protect it. Recently however, GOCO has started to shift its funding focus away from
the#1 priority of Coloradans-- land preservation -- by putting an increasing amount of declining
lottery proceeds into the operational costs of state agencies.
Just this past November,for example, GOCO transferred dollars away from habitat acquisition to
the species protection program within the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW), even as non-
GOCO funding sources for this program were reduced. Funding for that very worthwhile program
should be provided from other sources instead of taking money away from open space
preservation.
DOW has cited habitat loss as a the number one limiting factor for Colorado's declining,
threatened, and endangered species, noting that 56% of those species suffer from lack of habitat.
To provide a long term response to the plight of endangered species GOCO should use land
acquisition to protect these critical habitats. GOCO should not allow the 2/3 decrease in land
acquisition proposed by DOW. Increased needs for worthwhile programs should be funded from
new sources rather than through reductions in open space acquisition.
Increased Spending on State Agency Operations = Decrease for Land Protection
The greatest demand for GOCO dollars has been for open space acquisition, but GOCO is able
to fund only 1/4 of those requests. Clearly, the current need for open space protection is already
greater than available resources.
Meanwhile, lottery proceeds are declining at a time when demand for land protection is
increasing. Growth in Colorado is off the charts. We are losing ten acres of open lands and farm
lands every hour to development. We are losing valuable wildlife corridors, recreational lands,
and productive farm and ranch land. A shift away from land acquisition means less money will be
spent preserving these precious places.
NOW, MORE THAN EVER, Colorado needs GOCO to lead the way in funding permanent
` land protection. Come to the hearing or e-mail GOCO at info(_goco.orcl (Atte: Strategic
1 Plan Comments) and LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD—for our families,for our future.
Tell GOCO
§ Land acquisition is still Coloradoan's top priority for GOCO dollars.
§ GOCO dollars should be used for permanent protection of land, not temporary leases.
§ GOCO Legacy projects (funding for land protection of regional and statewide significance)are
still an important use of GOCO dollars.
1410 Grant St. Ste. B303 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: 303-449-559
_..sierraclub-G000072501
Great Outdoors Colorado Strategic Plan Public Meetings
All meetings are at 7:00 p.m.
June 19, Colorado Springs August 7,Denver
Counties invited: El Paso,Elbert, Teller Counties invited:Denver,Adams
City Council Chambers REI Flagship Store
30 S. Nevada Large(East)Meeting Room
1416 Platte Street
July 10,Fort Morgan
Counties invited: Cheyenne,Kit Carson,Lincoln, September 5,Alamosa
Logan,Morgan,Phillips,Sedgwick, Washington, Counties invited: Alamosa, Conejos, Costilla,
Yuma Mineral,Rio Grande,Saguache
Fort Morgan County Club Alamosa County Office
17586 County Rd T.5 South Wing,Upstairs Conference Room
702 4`h Street
July 17, Glenwood Springs
Counties invited. Eagle, Garfield,Pitkin,Summit September 12,Durango
Hotel Colorado Counties invited:Archuleta,Dolores,La Plata,
526 Pine Street Montezuma,San Juan
City Council Chambers
July 18, Grand Junction 949 E. 2nd Avenue
Counties invited: Delta, Gunnison,Hinsdale,
Mesa,Montrose, Ouray,San Miguel September 18, Steamboat Springs
Adams Mark Hotel Counties invited. Grand,Jackson,Moffat,Rio
743 Horizon Drive Blanco,Routt
Olympian Hall
July 26,Broomfield Howelsen Hill Lodge
Counties invited: Boulder, Clear Creek, Gilpin, 845 Howelsen Parkway
Jefferson
City of Broomfield Municipal Center September 19,Littleton
1 DesCombes Drive Counties invited: Arapahoe,Douglas
The Hudson Gardens & Events Center - -
August 1,Trinidad 6115 S. Santa Fe Drive
Counties invited: Huerfano,Las Animas,Pueblo,
Chaffee, Custer,Fremont,Lake,Park September 20, Loveland
Holiday Inn Counties invited:Larirner, Weld
3125 Toupal Drive City of Loveland
Council Chambers
August 2,Las Animas 500 E. Third Street
Counties invited: Baca,Bent, Crowley,Kiowa, Loveland, CO
Otero,Prowers
Best Western Bent's Fort Inn
10950 E. Hwy 50
GREAT OUTDOORS COLORADO SEEKS CITIZEN INPUT ON
LOTTERY DOLLAR INVESTMENTS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Leding
June 13, 2001 Kristin Tiemeyer
(303) 863-7522
DENVER -- The Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) Trust Fund Board will
conduct a statewide strategic planning effort this summer to reevaluate its current plan
and grant programs. GOCO is seeking input from citizens on how to best invest lottery
dollars in parks, outdoor recreation, open space and wildlife projects.
GOCO will kick off its planning effort on June 19, 2001 in Colorado Springs.
Public hearings will be held in 13 cities throughout the state. A schedule of those
meetings is attached.
Three years have passed since GOCO adopted its current strategic plan. Several
factors have changed since then, including the appointment of new Board members and a
decline in lottery proceeds. "Only one of our fifteen board members was on the Board
when the current strategic plan was adopted," said John Hereford, GOCO executive
director. "We need to hear how we're doing and discuss how we best invest our limited
resources." GOCO receives almost four times as many requests for dollars as it has funds
available.
In addition to public hearings, GOCO will hold stakeholder meetings with local
government, state agency and nonprofit group representatives who are familiar with
GOCO's grant application process. Board members and staff will also tour GOCO
projects at each location.
Since 1994, GOCO has awarded $275 million for more than 1600 park, outdoor
recreation, open space and wildlife projects in Colorado. GOCO was created in 1992 as a
result of a citizens' initiative that redirected a portion of lottery proceeds to preserve and
enhance parks, wildlife, trails, rivers and open space through strategic grants.
People wanting additional information about the meetings can call GOCO at (303)
863-7522 or access www. og co.org and click on the information desk/calendar of events.
Ii
City Of Boulder
STUDY SEssjoN
July 249 2001
7:15 - 8:00 p.m.
Budget Reduction Strategic Plan
...-.. . ..-.. __ _
za;n - oudgetrea,�ctionmemo.�^.rpd -- ---- _
CITY Or BOULDER
CITY COLiINCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEM
TO: Mayor Toor and Members of the City Council
Ronald A. Secrist,City Manager
FROM:
DATE: July 24, 2001
i
SUBJECT: General Fund Budget Reduction Strategy
ed is a proposed 4-year plan to reduce General Fund expenditures by approximately $4
Attach p p � 1 million in
million. The plan calls for annual reductions of approximately $800,000 in 2002, $
2003, $1.2 million in 2004, and$1 million in 2005.
lowing two
This plan was developed as a contingency to address ° or Coune of lnil decision ossible lnot t put the it m on
i
i The first scenario would be the unsuccessful passage ( safetypurposes. The
the ballot for consideration) of a renewal pi the . 0 sales tax or lindicate wecould fund I.
current authorization of the tax is set to expire in 2004, and projections `
I the enhanced services originally afforded by the sales tax through 2005. The second contingency
scenario would be to cover a significant economic downturn that would result in a sizeable
I, reduction in sales tax revenues.
i y
The plan before YOU was developed by Me. While to ss at my the prequest,ptl e final formulation s p
I, strategies that were presented by Department Dir
e
mine. Obviously there are numerous other appro Ilion.willaches to lbe controversial
overs al and cause vanxiety.
y
taken. Likely, this, or,any proposal to reduce $4 mi consider F
I I both recognize and appreciate these,concerns. Please know I am willing to openly !
other alternatives and strategies. However, if we are
It would be easier not to address the issue of reducing ther throe h a downturn in ales tax coli ctions
preparing for the potential of reduced revenues, e u oses, then I believe a phased reduction
or the expiration of .15 of sales tax for public safety p rp i
cticable approach to meet the challenge presented to us.
over a 4-year period is the most pra
avings. As with any
The proposed reductions are intended to be lastingunavoidable impacts. s
I
service reductions of this
magnitude, there are real,
Safer Police and Fire) services assume slightly more than 1/4th of the total reductions 1
Public t5 ( ears. 17.5 FTE's (full time equivalent
over the four year period: $1.081 million over 4 y I hope we
positions) are included and spaced out over four years. If these cdue to the lame omposition of
s are ena
p )
achieve the personnel reduction target largely through attrition
the work groups and pending retirements, etc.),i11 order to avoid layoffs.
I
I�
i
Page 2
The second largest area of reducti
Managers office: $1.035 on falls in administrative programs delivered from the City
million over 4 years. This includes 5.5 FTE's and reductions in
contracts to several community agencies.
The proposed Urban Renewal Authority(BURR) reductions ($25"
8,000 in 2004 and $263,000 in
2005) assume BURR expires in 2002 and enables a one-_year operational transition at $250,000.
While this scenario assumes no additional ongoing
I agency/division, there is additional, one-time funding
for BURA or some successor
m` of more than $2 mil
fiellion that could be
directed towards BVRC projects. These monies come from the BURR bond reserve and the
revolving loan d. The '04 and '05 identified reductions likely defer initiation of a city-wef
ongoing economic initiative for some time, unless an alternative funding source for su hda
Program can be identified. Also, the 3 FTE now assigned to BURA would likely be impacted as
well, but are not reflected in the total FTE reductions described later, since these ma occur
a longer time frame, given the availability of reserve funding. Y over
While we believe we can accommodate the reduction in the Computer Replacement F
($573k)by restructuring the replacement schedule, we had hoped to reprogram these monies into
the Connectivity Fund, which would have invested more heavily
p
infrastructure. Yin our community's high speed
I
Reducing the General Fund's allocations (subsidies) to Planning and Development Se
Open Space & Mountain Parks, and Recreation Funds, will very likely necessitate either I
increased user fees, seeking alternative revenues from
service levels in these program areas. grants and donations, or reductions in
I:
Overall, the $4 million in expenditure reductions comprise about 5 1/2% of the City's
General Fund. The proposed reductions reduce the City workforce by 23.37 FTE's, slightly over
2%of the total City staff.
This proposal and the associated review exercise wI'
ll no doubt stimulate discussion and ideas.
will be happy to answer any questions and assist the Council in understanding the rationale for
these proposals and/or with developing alternatives. I would recommend City Council carefully
consider this strategic plan in the context of the 2002-2003 Recommended Bud et which I
formally present on August 7, 2001. g will
I [
Thank you. I
I
f
E
li
Crain - budgetreductionmem-3_vpd -
-- -------- - --
2003 2004 - 211 Tctai. = '/of Tota1
3,815,
CEP ARTM ENT ITEM S' 5,0,00 2,�46
5345 s 0+1gel
li City Attorney' Consultants&InfoResources 5 2. $ 5.345 $ 3.515 $ 16.13.,
Total S .000 $
�+ $ 7,962 0.195'0City Council rm `h Total) S 6500 SS S I
53.0871
Gity Mar& CitizeniCouncil Services-1 FTE 08:
Channel 8 Telecom -1 FTE i I 95,3141 !
f CMO Assistant-1FTE gg,794� 1
�EnvironmemtalAffairs -1FTE 53,2501 .I
Neighborhood Services-1FTE 4
i14,996
Parking Enforce.-5 FTE 24 471 •I I
Contribution to Alt Modes 255;000 263.0001
i I BURR
Yi 4,71
Bou5
lder F1
1 1 ! I l
BECC Contract Reda5,447] +c?ion 4,50,01 4,E35� ?
i Reduce Bidr.History Uuseum Contract
II Buredl of cc-if Sery& Cu'turat Aff 5,0001 ( 7,483 !
�CATv Fundis Recktction 7,000! ?'210 x 475 $ 263,000 $ 1,035,501 25.32%
111 9 243.496• 456,
'I Total $ 72,fi29 $ 1
F!na ice' ^os?Allocation Study
7,000 1 59,554
'Treasury 1 FTE Y i I
2,8001 �.
iTraining(Travei -1 11,714
Advice of Deposits Print/Mail To!ai 9,800 $ 11,718 $ $ 69,584 $ 91,102 2.23°6
Fn 1aa 7n 3Rn
giro _ A'i Q�� 38 740 I !
Fires Secretary
r I A TFc I 1 X40 j
Secretary 1`T` I 22,515 !
i Seasonal Wildlaod Crew I 68,1821 I
I Public Educuation 1 FTE 20,,600 9,597 21 854 447,264 ;0.44
Non-Personne!Reduction 143,412 $ 114,752• $ 1
Total $ 63,922 $ 125,179 $ 21.8551 ! I
20,600 21.2181 I`
'Wouslnq/Hamar. Reduce Human Service Aeencv Contacts 13,3901 13,792 I Il
Senior Services Program-.37 FTE ;5,938
Chid Care Recrai?rnent Prog.5 FT-`_ 9107412.86%
Nor,Persornel Reduction =35, , $ 30 929 $ 116.857• 2.8690
� Tctal $ 16,938 $ 33,990 $
3.650!
Humanf Peer Ci.ies sa:dvlcensus 4,5631 r I
�Print'99pay FlaI 33
n 25,205Y .
I Y EAP Service Reduction
$ 33.418 $ - $ _ $ ,112
111111 157 BQ5 418 0.82% II
Total $
1liada 162,426 $ 100,C G $ 5?3,223 14.02% ,
f;nfo.^na:icn nonj r Total $ 153.1021 $ 15„695 $
.I r 43,353
!Library &Arts Technical Servioes 1 r:E ! 25,324
Shelving Staff-1FTE
27.947
t Close Branch One mayI
i 18,171 ! I.
Reduce Cameg-e Branch 6 Hrs.Week g 3951r•
Mini-grant Reducticr, 86 848 $ $ 27,947 $ 124,190 3.04%! j
Total $ 9,395. $ ' z l
i a '
Municipal;Cu[ R 1 ' R 1 5,000Y $ 2.575 $ 5,345! $ 2,'33.
Tctal $ 38.3381 [
I
J Parks& J Parks er Cons _5 FTE 5:2,291 j
i 1 Parks Positicos Fund Transfer5,170 X,580; 1
j {Fort Desk Temps '2,8341
i 5,170
Tree Replacement Reduction 5 1701 16,030
Pla72; $ 155,53 3.80%
Flo '
! I wer atng ReductEcn21,200! $ 51,1 8r
Y Total S 57,451 $ i j
6
Foiice Senior Clerk 3.5 FTE I .i1�j 37,309
Secretary-1 FTE 1 34,918 '
Program Assistant- FTE !
information Specia5sts-2 FTEs 72,4 82 110,151 113,478
j 1 Police Officers-4 FTEs 54,CCC. 30,9001 32,070 32,790
j .Non-Personnel Reduction 7634;246 15.51
126,482, $ 181,968 $ 1.8,533 $ 146,268 $ 6�
I ' 116.673 !
Publie'Je'arks I Maior Maintenance-est -B!id Building 21,000 $ 137,673• 3.37%
I I Equipment Replacement -Building Tial $ 137,673 $ - $ -! $
1117 it $ 80 492 $ - $ 80,492- 1.97
,I Real Estate Total -
1 1 1 7 f
i 273 $ 418,363 10.23%
Piro&Develoc.
Total $ 100,000 $ -.03,000' $ 106,090 $ 109, I-
! 101 5 0 2.48
j Y Mtn.ParkslOoen r 50 000 St 500
I
$ 32,188 $ 33.153 $ 34,148 $ 99,499 2.43%
Recreation Total $ 4,089,361 100.00%
GRAND TOTAL $ 796,320 $ 1,009,444 $1,278,478- $1,C05,119Y $
Juiy,2001 t
:
*Cost A1locatev,
V
t
I
� to cc CU
� o c�i -[� Sc� 3 d cv, aV'w� o o
ce +- o D, �c v o� 3 o 0 0 0,.E; -
°''° °' 3•�y Q. a [z?.0 b'S 4), a)
411
,.
�.� v.o. � va�'Sv I � �'� [o•° vm �, � �� ° °'ti,�.
,o i'', �. _:. .�a +• o. o o a o-o•o•Q o: a o
CU
ZIA
�''j•�'�-+'U � �'ti y Q t0 �. � -C O-O Go ctt
IOU, vi �� Ga ���- vov � o 42 CC
Uca m � ss, �•.. cc voiia '� ^� p.et '�
rG m om.y kyr 0.0 f Z y�,� �0., R I-�,'V .�a ai.p' W r O y5.
+'�3,p p er; .gg a ��e O O i°. 10 i°. O' yC'� y O �' y Z!s a.yam v
�.
CL)
M a - 3 j. .^n om d � � '� °' � o •�
0 a v v a 5 o a
co) S OA cu
ovEupo'o 3�.c v .•�� v'�ao`v►>�3�
v
" C . o �aQv�v
v�Ga`E
$. , vt o V °'
v vAl 9.4 v � c00. , .0 CIS rjo4v
CL to co b• v (u W � ao �
vgL� aDo4
4) '� cco ° v .vv °+oho bo
O �W . ; O' °'1 � vO
. C3 z ot �ov v .oOp a av4aov � p
.dTV :3
v a Cq a
' ° 4 �' � v�v1v rvo �
!/ . '��' ov --
b.v
boowvvS . �
5v 0 v. -0 0 am, 0. Q-0 � .vi
� vss °' &.0 o9 � Cc0 -
- o ° so�$
.
to
va
ami a>i
c o,d v �, eon v, o ZA Q1* ;L st '
O �v+ � 3� `��. � � Cdp oo a>3CU
p CC
nom ,• � ».
:S - -w v, tO'�= �-,''tel. N 4+' + O �O O 7 Rt �O" L 'C y .a, v O a�.,'L9•� 0
v , ° w O .Q.. .Q TJ 0- -0 O Z +�.- O:O.L� 'Com. a o> � x' V
o � + cc PQ m ca v, v v m o o' c rc�' .ti _ �� .� o . �_d.o,_ o,_ .
� O 'gyp v•C c v x 0 ;0, o.o +, 0 o '� '� (U y o t 42 ,a-..
v�.�°�°.,,+�>°omo,•=oa�o7�ote..h,��' v �+�A��o-+�v o •wa, avvi,�v o.. aQca �.,a' �ti.'d,.cia�a, �GB ovvw�oeavR;�vv� 0�1vmvv.�ao�Owt�i,,' o, ".dooo�tl.d,
�s,
•"x��.".'Uodmo�2rzy
^ g ,.oUc b oCo �tigw •0 Oe °ab.3 .
� �O� � t_oS ^O •v ao o ca ovv ~ ro . 3 o � c$zowoaon.ov + C4gv
EjR v) >a 'V' O,aze
-Ei carkta cd = a � 'k,, * r°v*E; ° ao m xe�ao�d�d."
N'
eor
4-e.4 Cz
aQ, 3, O• �v3v e .SOW3 OO v ►.' rso O'.0��x�f1i eCl Q vU�O, ^3 mO l"�'�
'�� ..v., •��:cvaxrn =,.d
w°59,�j — o pay .Sa a ° oa
� o� mo °cv � a ~m v v o 0 v
•vv, � a��. v
:'^�l/ ma,-.v'�'°oC' +°,oco-`°au�i,•°y, � .oQaoa"±�aO 3o•z,oy1o' �C0Lo �c� -.oNo� ° vc:�, .'�c". av� .C�7q:v0
o v 3
06
`° oo cG `° • �vv000y .o oD
boU :'� vI.. o ° ivvo3 ;ti a �+ vo • �is.ov>,`���Q°a'. oo +ooo�
wv°
A
oa"ci
9 a. . .o..o o a
v �,_ ° yv ks '�
�'. �.� '^ o �. �,. 2 v v v c.� 3 3 +, v 0 S 0.v, o
c o v o rA 4) 1 w v r, °',° � � � a '� � 03 v 0 v C.- c.. s°..f=
.o �... ° 47 Iz
,, +3�,� O a) Q .� ,, r, °,s,.'b v-�, v _� s_N ° y, a)� a 5 n3o-�.
aoc .� to Se•0 3 rA � Q� ° g � 0. 10a `° v �v`� , � �-
co
LoCU •
CU co O',..7. H+r!'•��rJ�p-1,. _ z>s7,, S,0o2v rnvv o ,�,y�m.v,.i'v3o°i av''a'�v.�wabm �'cd, �v �'m s��v-m=+-�moovs°~ �v��v, >,°v c�n, .a. .��o b.s?; --�oaiSv a, o�•`i3~��
voatovv1Q
°'40"F oaa >bb a° '� o_°d vzy �l
.°.~co19= ad a -0 � oU " vt,
o
aoo 4v4) v 4)
� O0
0 ov
sco° vov -o °
V vS �co vo � ' 00
�U � ., o
rII CU
in. a L) m cl
v0
, `�� o ' er bu ,z ooa, v. V' � oaQ. �. � .o ,00 -.
c, ' �Mm cpto �•�-a a°iA o•° o�
CITY
i
OF
����
� .BOULDER
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
Support Services / City Clerk's Division
City Clerk•Licensing •central Records•Citizens Services•Municipal Elections•Boards&Commissions
PLAN-Boulder County
P.O. Box 4682
Boulder, CO 80306
July 17, 2001
Dear Ms. Teter and Members of the Board,
Thank you for your letter concerning the continuing financial support to the Mountain
Parks program within the framework of the consolidated Open Space and Mountain
Parks Department. We appreciate your continued commitment and support for these.
program areas that are a priority for the whole community:
In respon"se to the specifc budget issues addressed in your letter, I am attaching a
copy of the letter that was sent to the Open Space Board of Trustees that covered
those same issues. The intent of the agreements negotiated during the merger
process was to maintain commitments made on many levels. While we know that
there will continue to be conflicts to resolve and issues to be worked through, the
past six months have put-us'on a constructive path to'having a fully,integrated Open
'Space and Mountain Parks program that is focused on the future. I hope you find
the enclosed information useful in understanding the context of the budget
allocations-that were made as part of the merger.
Thank you again for the continued interest and commitment to-this {grogram.
Sincerely,
Lil-
Christine-F. Andersen
_Deputy City Manager for Environmental Services
encl
CC.
Mayor and Members of Council
Open Space Board of Trustees
Jim Crain, Co-Director OSMP
Mike Patton, Co-Director OSMP
i
I
P.O. Box 791 Boulder, Colorado 803 06-079 1 (303) 441-3000 Fax (303) 441-4478 www.ci.boulder.co,us
Printed ori 10V6' Pos[Consumer Waste Paper a j
i
CITY
OJu
A BOULDER .
OFFICE.OFTHE CITY MANAGER
June 22, 2001
Open Space Board:of Trustees
Christopher Mueller, Chair
Larry MacDonneill, Vice=Chair
Linda. Andes-Georges
.Linda Jourgensen
Sean Ken.dalf
Dear Mr. Mueller and Members of the OSBT,
This is in response to,your.letter to the Mayor and Members of City Council dated
May 31,•2001. As mentioned in your letter, we agree that the past year's_ effort to
bring about the merger of the Mountain Parks and Open Space and Real Estate
programs has.been successful and effective.. Staff has worked''very hard to
accomplish the changes necessary to createa new organization and that.work
continues. There seems to be, however, a misunderstanding regarding the general
fund budget transfer associated .with the transfer of Mountain Parks-lands and
program responsibilities,.formerly managed by the Parks and Recreation .
Department, to the new department of Open,Space and Mountain Parks:
When finalizing the mechanics of consolidating Mountain Parks and Open Space, it
was agreed that the cU�rent level of furiding.for Mountain Parks'land would be
transferred to the Open Space fund. To determine the amount of. a four- .
year history of expenditures was used in order to avoid a one-year anomaly that -
might bias the figures.
Another factor.in this determination'was the amount of Mountain Parks land
retained .by the Parks and Recreation Department,:and the concurrent commitment.
to-support those lands. Basically, the commitment was made to ensure support for
what.used•to be Mountain Parks land in an equitable way for the Open Space and
the Parks and Recreation departments, and that commitment is being honored.
To clarify,.in FY2001, Mountain:Parks.•resources were distributed as
follows:
Average annual_expenditure (allocation base) $1,641,322
Transfer to Open Space from General Fund $1,231,322
Transfer-to Open Space from. Lotter/ Fund $100,000
P&P, Department.funds retained to support MP properti.es/programs $270,000
Prairie Dog. relocation fund (ongoing) $40,000
L '
P.O. Box 791 Boutd_er, Corrado 80306-0791 ,• (303)441-3090 Fax (30_)441-447 w•ww-ci,.boulder.co.us
Printed on 1005, Post Consumer,Wash Paper WI
For the FY2002 proposed budget:
Allocation to.'Open Space from General Fund $1r29511000
Allocation to Open Space from Lotter,y.Fund . .$186,000
Total allocation to Open Space $1,481;000
For the FY2003 proposed budget:
Allocation to Open Space from General Fund $1,324,000
Allocation to-,,Open Space from Lottery Fund $184,000
Total allocation to-.open Space $1,508,000.
Over the four-year history of funding.for the Mountain Parks program there has
been a Lottery fund allocation in each of those years that has been used'to support
the Junior Ranger program and various maintenance.projects. That was part of the
logic behind the recommendation for Lottery fund distribution in future.years that
was jointly made by.the Parks and Recreation.Advisory Board and the Open Space
Board of Trustees last month. .The City of Boulder receives an estimated $750.1000
annually"in Lottery funds. The recommended annual .distribution formula for.
FY20.02-2007 is as follows:
Greenways Program $150100G
(M-anaged 'by neither OSMP nor P'&R, has received contributions for.many years)
Cost Allocation $20,000
(.Based on city recovery.of central.supports to special funds)
Land acquisition debt service (Area III) $304,344
_ (Approved in 1996 by City. Council for 10-year period)
Open Space/Mountain. Parks $100,000
(Based on past annual allocation)
Estimated remaining allocation: 50% OSMP $86,000
50Q/6 P&R $86,000
Program consolidations across departments can provide the opportunity for healthy
evaluation of those programs and this merger is a great example. The new Open
Space and Mountaih Parks Department recently assessed the physical assets
associated with Mountain Parks and identified maintenance needs. for future
resource focus. This will undoubtedly be helpful in prioritizing work plays.
The concern expressed in your letter that either we must take money away from
Open Space acquisitions to operate Mountain Parks or we must devote to Mountain
Parks much Cess than is necessary for its operation" is a dilemma faced by many
program. areas of the, city: In fact, another option for the department is to work
within the current allocation to operations, without impacting.the acquisition'
program, by prioritizing work plans and gaining .efficiencies from the consolidation
of the t.wo program areas. .Reflected in your letter is the fact that the level of
service available to Open Space lands is greater than the level of service that has
been
avail to Mountain Parks through the general;fund. Had the program -
continued to be managed.by.the Parks and Recreation Department it.would have
expected to receive a continuation in .the level ' general fund support from prior.
years. That is the basic commitment that was made during the merger to both
departme-nts and to boards and council and we have.done. our best to honor that'.
commitment.
Sincerely,
Az
Ronald A. Secrist Christine Andersen
City. Manager Deputy City Manager for Environmental
Services
cc:- ,
Mayor and Members of Council
Jim Crain, Co-Director OSMP
.Mike Patton, Co-Director OSMP
MEMORANDUM
To: Open Space Board of Trustees
From: Delani Wheeler,Division Manager,
Open Space and Mountain Parks
Date: July 20,2001
Subject: Response to Requests for Information
On May 23'd Board members asked a number of questions regarding use of the lottery
fund. The attached information has been received from the Parks and Recreation
Department in response to questions about the $304,344 annual debt service for the Area
III park site. Also, as a point of reference, Parks and Recreation Staff has responded that
this debt service payment will extend through 2008.
Attachments:
May 31 and June 8, 2001 emails.
July 6, 2001 Memorandum and six attachments as noted.
',-JWCbUU11 Un LQUe-Fy rums - -- -- -.-- - -.--- ---- .- — - Page
From: Delani Wheeler
To: Bridgewater, Julya
Date: 5/31/01 5:21 PM
Subject: Question on Lottery Funds
Julya--This is a followup on my voice mail to you.
At their 5/23 meeting OSBT members raised several questions to follow-up on the 5/16 joint meeting on
Lottery Funds. I was able to address several of them but three questions remain which I believe are best
answered by you or your staff. Here they are and please give me a call at X2010 if I can help to clarify
any of them.
1) Is the$304,000 debt service committed for the length of the CIP or beyond?? Through what year???
2) Can the 0.25 be used for debt service? What are the stipulations for its use--IE Big or Little Park?
Could it be used for Area III purchases?? What are the other sources of funding for debt service???
3) Was Council really aware(when the$304,000 debt service was added to Lottery Fund obligations) that
the Lottery Funds were being dedicated beyond the time of the agreement between OSBT and PRAB?
Julya, I think that you did attempt to reply to question#3 at the joint board meeting but some type of
documentation on this and the other questions would be most helpful. My thought is that you or your staff
probably generated memoranda etc. at the time of each of these various actions/decisions and that you
would have much easier access to these documents than we do.
Our next Board meeting will be Wednesday June 13 and we will be preparing the packet material for that
meeting on June 7 so if you could have this information before then it would be very helpful.
Please let me know your time line on this.
Thanks.
dw
CC: Crain, Jim ; Patton, Mike; Sullivan, Michael
Delani Wheeler-..Re: Question on Lottery Funds Page
From: Julya Bridgewater
To: Crain, Jim ; Patton, Mike; Wheeler, Delani
Date: 6/8/01 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Question on Lottery Funds
here is the best I can do now. I'm maxed out here, but have had someone working on this and we are
waiting from City Clerks office on council minutes. My answers are below each question.
Julya Bridgewater
Administrative Services Division Director
City of Boulder Parks and Recreation
303.413.7207
>>> Delani Wheeler 05/31/01 05:21 PM >>>
Julya--This is a followup on my voice mail to you.
At their 5/23 meeting OSBT members raised several questions to follow-up on the 5/16 joint meeting on
Lottery Funds. I was able to address several of them but three questions remain which I believe are best
answered by you or your staff. Here they are and please give me a call at X2010 if I can help to clarify
any of them.
1) Is the$304,000 debt service committed for the length of the CIP or beyond?? Through what year???
The last piece ends in 2008
2) Can the 0.25 be used for debt service? What are the stipulations for its use--IE Big or Little Park?
Could it be used for Area III purchases?? What are the other sources of funding for debt service???
.25 bond funds could not be used to purchase area III. There wasn't enough money from .25 or
other funds to purchase this land and our board and council wanted to own it for future use.
Council was particularly interested in us buying Valmont Park and the land was very expensive.
But they didn't want us to give up Atrea Ill. No one was certain how the city would use this land.
3) Was Council really aware(when the $304,000 debt service was added to Lottery Fund obligations)that
the Lottery Funds were being dedicated beyond the time of the agreement between OSBT and PRAB?
Yes, because they wanted us to buy Valmont and greenleaf parcels. We recommended not to buy
those two pieces of land because of the price. Council wanted wanted us to buy them. At,the time
they were working to reduce jobs - remember that? Council wanted us to find a way to do both. I
don't think the lottery fund "agreement"seemed like much of an issue then to them.
Julya, l think that you did attempt to reply to question #3 at the joint board meeting but some type of
documentation on this and the other questions would be most helpful. My thought is that you or your staff
probably generated memoranda etc_ at the time of each of these various actions/decisions and that you
would have much easier access to these documents than we do.
Our next Board meeting will be Wednesday June 13 and we will be preparing the packet material for that
meeting on June 7 so if you could have this information before then it would be very helpful.
Please let me know your time line on this.
Thanks.
dw
CC: Hawthorne, Doug; Kotowski, Linda
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
July 6, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To: Jim Crain, Codirector of Open Space/Mountain Parks Department
Mike Patton, Codirector of Open Space/Mountain Parks Department
From: Doug Hawthorne, Acting Codirector, Parks and Recreation Department
Linda Kotowski, Acting Codirector, Parks and Recreation Department
Re: Information Requested Regarding Debt Services Funding from Lottery Funds
Attached is information that was requested subsequent to the May 16, 2001 joint meeting of the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) and the Open Space Board of Trustees (OSBT). Julya Bridgewater
from our staff responded via e-mail on June 8, 2001 to Delani Wheeler that our research was in progress
and she provided Delani with some basic information.
We hope this information answers the questions that you and the OSBT may have concerning the
decisions to fund the Area III land from Lottery Funding. Please let us know if you need additional
information.
Attachments
1 - City Council Agenda Item- 9-3-96
2 - City Council Proceedings - 9-3-96
3 - Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Agenda Item - 10-28-96
4- City Council Proceedings - 10-29-96
5 - City Council Minutes - 11-19-96
6 - Lottery Fund 1998 Capital Improvement Program
cc: Christine Andersen
CITY OF BOULDER
OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: July 25,2001
(Agenda Item Preparation Date: July 20, 2001)
AGENDA TITLE: 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.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: James C. Crain, Co-Director
Open Space and Mountain Parks
Delani Wheeler, Central Services Division
Manager,Presenter
Jim Reeder, Land and Facilities Services
Division Manager,Presenter
FISCAL IMPACT: Staff anticipates an increase in net revenues of$37,000 to $44,000 from gross
additional revenues of$47,000 to $56,000 in 2002, which would be the first full year of operation.
PURPOSE
To obtain Open Space Board of Trustees recommendation to support leasing of six residential structures and
to apply the additional net revenues(estimated at$37,000 to $44,000 in 2002)directly to deferred building
maintenance,restoration and stabilization on the farms and ranches of the Open Space and Mountain Parks
system and to review the success and applicability of this program within 5 years.
BACKGROUND
The Board first considered this program on July 11,2001. Board members discussion included the potential
costs and benefits to the program, an interest in preserving residential structures,and a concern that residential
leasing should not become a permanent program objective for the department but should be phased into Open
Space purposes,including agricultural uses, as the opportunities arise. Staff agrees that this residential leasing
program is an interim use for these buildings and that phasing of these buildings into defined Open Space and
Mountain Parks purposes,including the agricultural management program should be a priority as opportunities
arise.
In the instance of the residential structures proposed for this maintenance and leasing program,the structures
are not currently needed for Open Space and Mountain Parks program needs but could meet such needs in the
future. For example,five other residential structures are currently leased to agricultural tenants of the program
or their employees; this use could expand over time as the current mix of agricultural tenants changes and as
additional agricultural lands are purchased. Staff will bring this program back to the Board for review within
five years.
The Open Space Long Range Management Policies(LRMP)adopted in 1995 address this issue. The LRMP
states that:
"The Department may, in the course of its land purchases, acquire existing farmsteads and other buildings
AGENDA ITEM#5 Page 1
and structures such as residential structures, barns, silos and corrals, which it may preserve and use for
the implementation of Open Space program goals. Such uses may include,but not be limited to:
• Maintenance and management of such structures for public Open Space use and education:
• Leasing for uses and occupancies related to Open Space program goals;
• Securing and maintaining the structures for future Open Space needs, including Open Space office
and maintenance needs;
• Removal of structures that cannot be made structurally sound or otherwise appropriate for Open Space
program needs.
The maintenance,management,and use of such structures shall follow applicable local, state, and federal
regulations."
Staff has evaluated the six residences currently proposed for leasing and determined that the most practical
and economical method of managing them at this time is to lease them in the open market.Under the proposed
maintenance and leasing program the buildings will be kept in a serviceable condition, and costs for their
management and maintenance will come directly out of the revenues they generate. Further, additional net
revenues are anticipated which will provide additional funding for maintenance and repair of some of the other
un-leased buildings. The annual base for such maintenance costs is budgeted at approximately$450,000 and
is used for a wide range of needs including fences, irrigation structures, barns and other outbuildings. The
additional funds from this leasing program will assist in meeting deferred maintenance needs across the
system.
In order to meet the Board's concerns, staff suggests that the maintenance and leasing program proposed on
July 1 lth be approved with the proviso that the maintenance and leasing program be reviewed within five
years for its success and applicability in relation to overall Open Space and Mountain Parks program goals.
As discussed briefly with the Board on July l 11h, staff has examined and tested a number of management
options for this type of structure over the past several years. (Please see Attachments A and B.) Two (the
original Cherrywale administration building and the Foothills Nature Center)have been completely converted
to other Open Space and Mountain Parks program needs and two others(Ellison/Fire Cache on North 51 st
Street and Hawkins on South Boulder Road) are also used for other program needs. Two (NNTright) are
currently leased back to the original seller under a life estate structured as part of the purchase agreement.
Agricultural tenants of the program and their employees currently lease five of these structures as residences.
Until last year the department had six residential properties leased under an employee caretaker program.
This program was terminated due in part to potential issues about compensation and taxation regulations. Two
of those residences were deconstructed after vacation as they were determined to be impractical for continued
leasing. The flagstone from one of these was reused in the new Cherry-vale administration building.
Staff will continue to evaluate the condition and utility of all buildings placed under its management
responsibility, including such buildings that may be acquired in the future,for utility and value to the program.
In the case of residential structures that are not needed for other uses and are economically suitable for leasing
in the open market, staff believes that the current proposal is efficient and economical. Out-sourcing the
managment and maintenance of these buildings through a reputable management firm and entering into
strongly written rental management and leasing agreements will protect the city's interests while relieving staff
time for other programmatic needs.
Staff will continue to manage these and other buildings within the guidelines of the Long Range Managment
Policies and applicable regulatory requirements. In order to further address Board concerns, staff suggests
that the management and leasing program come back to the Board within five years for re-evaluation.
ANALYSIS
Staff has looked at a number of options for managing these six residential structures and concluded that the
best current use for these six buildings, and others that are found to be similarly suitable and available, will
AGENDA ITEM#5 Page 2
be as performing assets of the Open Space and Mountain Parks program which will help to offset costs for
deferred maintenance across the system. By retaining ownership of the buildings the program has the ultimate
control and flexibility over their long-tern use.
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS
This item was heard on July 11, 2001 and is being heard at this public meeting, advertised in the Daily
Cainera.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends 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 building maintenance,restoration and stabilization on the fanns and ranches on the
Open Space and Mountain Parks system with the understanding that over time stag 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.
Submitted
a s C. Crain
Director
pen Space and Mountain Parks
Delani Wheeler
Central Services Division Manager
Open Space and Mountain Parks
Jim Reeder
Land and Facilities Services Division Manager
Open Space and Mountain Parks
Attachments:
A. List of residential Facilities
B. Map
AGENDA ITEM#5 Page 3
ATTACHMENT A
Residential Facilities on Open SpaceI-Iountain Parks Lands-071101
Grouped by Type:
I) Available for ne'w management and leasing program
A) Currentiv leased and/or occupied as residences
Deluca modular home, 7872 N. Foothills Highway--Bridenbaugh ($1700/mo)
Manchester, 3862 Valmont at 75`h—Hoffman ($725/mo) to 7/01/01
Knaus. 3696 Lookout Road—VACANT
Schooley—house, N. Foothills Highway—VACANT
Schooley—trailer, N. Foothills Highwav--VACANT
Spicer, 7763 Baseline Road—VACANT
B) Vacant/being evaluated for future use/feasibility issues
Hartnagle, 3975 Valmont Road
Kolb, 3936 N. 75" Street
Lewis, ----N. 75`h Street
II) Included in Agricultural Preservation/Leasing Program
A) Habitable and included in larger OSMP agricultural leases
Church, 1226 S. Cherryvale Rd.—Hogan
BVR, 3700 Longhorn Road—Lover
Log House
Bunk House
Van Vleet/CVR Apartment-66 S. Cherryvale Rd.--RMRDA/Graham
B) Habitable and leased separately to OSMP agricultural tenants and/or their hired hands
Axleson I, 6281 N. 55`h Street—Cushinan
Axleson II, 6559 N. 55`h StreetPenner
C) Leased back to original seller
Wright North Foothills Highway—Long term lease back to seller
Ranch House
Bunk House
III) Not available for lease
A) Used for non-residential OSMP mission/1-nanaL7einent-related purposes
Ellison/Fire Cache-6003 N. 51 st street Wildland Fire Crew
Hawkins-5990 South Boulder Road—Staging/storage for CVR programs/staff
B) Not habitable and stabilized for other OSMP mission/management uses
Viele, SW Corner South Boulder and Cherry-vale Roads —Historic House
Johnson, N. 55th Street--Historic house and bat colony
• [ , LLQ I'.
CITYOFBOULDER
1 Open Space &
Y. f, - -
°
x_
Residential
Buildings
#
•
air-
qj
�y
y
I
U�
:
IL
»zr�v l
'J �
AA
a
i
1
i
Current Housing
a ,
r�
Ag Lease Housing
oustn
Future Evaluation
City of Boulder Open Space
Open Space&Mountain Parks i r.
OSA4PConservation Easements ---
I .. r
Other Public Lands .'77,�"'" ,�� `•"' '; � Y=j r —y 1 '�
_ 1
Map Scale ® :,
0 ' 2 3 Mlles
cer/macfiles/crcne-tvAacusino.apr Jure 22.2001 ��- � L��J
CITY OF BOULDER
OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
MEETING DATE: Jul
(Agenda Rein Pi-e Y 2S, 2001
paration Date: July 25, 2001 )
AGENDA TITLE: Discussion and
Space and p Recommendation of the Prelirnina
Mountain parks De artmental Budget and Pro e
2001-2007, ry 2002-2003 Oen
cted Open Space Fund Financials
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: James
C' Crain, Co-Director, Open Space and
Mountain Parks
Michael D. Patton, Co-Director, OS
Mountain Parks pen Space
and
Michael Sullivan, Financial Services Manor
Presenter ger,
FISCAL IMPACT. Sufficient
budget to cover the funds are available in the O
Balance 2001 proposed 2002-2003 budget. Pen Space and
Proposed
B. g See City of Boulder open
p no S Mountain perks
Space Fund
PURPOSE
This is a request for the Open Space Board of Trustees to:
a) approve, and recommend that Cit
from the Open Space ped Y Council approve, the a
transfers as outlined in ' General Fund and other sources pover the 2Q02 2 of
this memorandum $21,091,272
(Attachments A'
&D). expenditures and
b) approve and recommend that the Pla
recommend to City Council the ening Board
Capital $2,336,000 fro ' at its July 26, 2001 meeting,
p the
Projects bud et m the Open S ace F g, approve and
g (Attachment C); p and for the proposed 2001
C) approve and recommend
that the
Adjustments-to-Base budget eque it Outlined cil approve the appropriation of
DEPARTMENT in this memorandum and related at 000 as an
OVERVIEW hznents.
CRE�ITION OFNEI�DEPARTMEIVT-
Deport tmentand the 1 012 January 1 2001 the
the' resozrt ces and be�oZ13Ztazza park
Division o Open Space/Real Estate
2001 they were budgeted an the zzewl f the Paz ks Recreation De
eted se yformed Open Space &Mountaln Parks pa tment merged
Paz'ately. Begzjaning in 200 the budget is consolidatecl.ment. ha
Depart
I:`.OSBT.bIEMOS01120pz2003BDGT.725.DOC
DRAFT 42
���IYf rn rrr..
De artz�lent is to promote Open
The focus of the Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSN1P) p
toward these goals. The
Space and Mountain Parks a
s essential components of ahealthy and sustainable e:zvuoninent an
omn-unity and to support regional and ince. departmental partnersr.p
c Department is to protect the land and saes Within a context of rapidly
top priority of the OSMP p lam provides
continuing to PTO"ide high-quality passive recreational experiences
in decision-rTzaking with an emphasis on
• �T vi to our land. The departmentalorgnization and work p p
inczeasznV yr
opportunities for community contacts and participation
ecosystem-based management.
Budget Office projections, continues to remain financially
acquisitions proposed under the
The Open Space Fund,based on Buds the Open Space Board
gyp) approved by
healthy. The Fund has sufficient-revenues ions Plan (OS1 property 2-2003 budget request will .
Open Space Management and Acqur
OSBTD and City Council in September
c he 200ng ddit oval parcels in thearks.
of Trustees ( Q for the acquisitions prob
provide adequate fundirz� Northern Boulder County and West of the Mountain P
following areas: Jefferson County, Jefferson County
May-2001, approximately 1 sitio acres, m,bringing the total Open
Front January 1990 through- S uisition Program,
properties,have been purchased under the current Acq ether with the 6,555 acres of former
Space acreage purchased since 1967 to 30,332 naent currently manages 36,887 areas under the
Mountain Parks lands,
the new OSMP Dep 796 acres of forner Mountain Parks land
Open SpDepartment- Approximately 1,800 additional acres 007 we
p ace Charter. Seven hnDepartand six ( s estimating that by
remains with the Parks and Recreationpurchase by OSMP in 2 00 1, and staff r
under active negotiations for
may acquire an additional 4,000 acres.
of open Space continues unabated,wih sMountain Parks estimatedtions at
The popularity and attraction Year
for Open Space and the newly added
approximately 4,000,000 each y completed in 2002. This will address issues and
ro en Space Visitor Plan will be comp for the entire system'
ro ernes. The Op p gates.
p p 've recreation, education, and resource protection con essions, fences and g
opportunities for passive
including development of specific policies on commercial us d op erational funding by
mincreasing resource management an P
The 2002-2003 budget proposes stewardship of the lands already acquired.This ease of the Long Rang OSMP
$164,000 to enhance the stet reflecp the continuing implementation of and other
resource management budg
' 'es the Mountain Parks Resource ProtePlans and Visitor Use Plan,
Management Policy Management
Plans-
completed Area Management and Resource
na Tement Policies adopted in 1995, together with the Boulder
The Open Space Long
Range Ma g management
Resource Protection and Visitor Use Plan ad°palong�9 h the area and resource
Mountain parks specific resource
direction for the OSMP Department. These policy
zeland budgetp
management laps,provide the framework top OSMp staff is in the
p ended in the North Boulder
management actions to further the departme 'a d actions ecomm Currently, . the Grassland
base of the goals, objectives, Management Plan,
implementation p
Valley Area Management Plan,the South Boulder Creek Area: anag
V Y
Ecosystem Plan, and the Forest Ecosystem Plan' programmatic goals;
bets closer to achievement of its proms' from
as the acquisition program b
In the future, debt issues are paid off,there will be a shift of focus and funding
and as the outstanding d
acquisition to management of the OSMP program.
AGENDA ITEM.it 6 Page 2
P,OS n,pl,4ENIGSO I\2002-2003 B DGT.725.DOC
Areas (in progress); mapping threats to habitat quality from weed invasion; and expansion of
efforts to improve forest health and reduce wildfire hazards through prescribed thinning and
burning.
Relocation of prairie dogs within city limits, is the primary responsibility of OSMP. OSMP is
developing best management practices for prairie dogs under the current prairie dog manacrement
ordinance, that mandates relocation of prairie dogs from city-owned lands and private lands
within the city to OSMP lands. Relocation of a large number of prairie dogs to OSMP grassland
habitat has proven to be a large undertaking with significant impacts on budget and staff!
Management of prairie dogs relocated to OSMP lands provides a suitable home for prairie dogs
and helps some individuals survive, but does not address habitat loss for prairie dogs in general.
Managing prairie dogs has generated the need for substantially increased weed control efforts in
relocation sites. Baseline information on the presence of rare and sensitive plant species and
communities in proximity to relocation sites is insufficient to ensure that they are not threatened
by prairie dogs. In order to improve on-the-ground management of grassland ecosystems (of
which prairie dogs are one component), revision and completion of a resource management plan
for grasslands management is needed.
Sombrero Marsh restoration is continuing in the third year of restoring and sustaining the
natural salt marsh by excavating the old landfill,planting of native plants, and restoring natural
water cycles. In cooperation with the Boulder Valley School District OSMP is using the
educationally rich outdoor setting for teaching children and adults about wetland ecology,
environmental restoration, and land stewardship. We are moving forward on the establishment
of a trail and boardwalk on parts of the marsh to further environinental education for children.
Coal Creek restoration continues along 3 miles of Coal Creek including grassland restoration at
an old gravel mine site, restoration of an abandoned oxbow floodplain feature and associated
wetlands, and rehabilitating the riparian zone by removing cattle access. The Coal Creek
Restoration Project is a cooperative project supported by the Terra Foundation, Boulder
Audubon Chapter, and the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
Water Quality
Water resources managed by OSMP serve a variety of natural resource, agricultural, and
recreational goals.
Improvement of water quality is occurring from reducing use of chemicals in agricultural
production and weed control; enhancing minimum stream flows along South Boulder Creek;
making run-off water quality improvements along the Boulder Feeder Canal; and reducing soil
erosion through trail reconstruction or relocation projects.
OSMP has been studying the damaging effects of runoff from Flagstaff Road and sediment flow
into Long Canyon and Gregory Canyon Creeks. Specific site restoration plans for these areas are
being developed, which will require County and City participation to implement. No funding
source has been identified. OSMP reconstructed a ditch structure on Boulder Creek that
incorporates a fish ladder for fish migration.
CHANGES IN FTES
Due to the January 1, 2001 consolidation and reorganization of the Open Space/Real Estate
I:1OSBTLMEMOS0112002-2003BDGT.725.DOC
DRAFT 2 AGENDA ITEM Y 6 Pale
Department and the Mountain Parks division of the Parks and Recreation Department into the
newly fonned OSMP Department,the new department began with 75 FTEs, down from 87
FTEs, a reduction of 12 FTEs.
ADJUSTMENTS TO BASE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND INCLUDED
IN THE 2002-03 PROPOSED BUDGET
$120,000 Increase NSPE &NPE to implement CC goals related to IPM & Resource
Management plans.
$ 44,000 Increases the budget for fleet & facility energy conservation improvements.
Grant Funded Programs
Coal Creek Restoration Project is in the third year of a three-year project to restore and reclaim
the Coal Creek riparian corridor. The donation of$300,000 from the Terra Foundation and the
Audubon Society will contribute to fencing, stream bank stabilization, reclamation and pursuing an
instream flow program for Coal Creek
Open Space received $50,000 from Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) through the Colorado
Division of Wildlife for additional fencing to exclude cattle grazing along Coal Creels and improve
habitat for the threatened Prebles Meadow jumping mouse.
With acquisition of the Jewell Mountain and Van Vleet properties in Jefferson County, OS_,vIP now
owns or controls over S miles of this stream corridor. Staff will seek to cooperate and coordinate
with adjacent landowners and management agencies to protect Coal Creek.
Sombrero Marsh Restoration Project received$22,000 from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and $72,000 from the North American Wetlands Conservation Council
(NAWCC) to restore and protect this ecologically important salt marsh. Restoration of the
previously filled portion of the marsh was completed in February 2001. Additional work
scheduled for completion during 2001-2002 will complete a trail and boardwalk system. In 2001
Volunteers of Outdoor Colorado (VOC) will undertake a major site enhancement project at the
marsh, including construction of boardwalks and viewing stations.
The EPA and NAWCC funds augment the $150,000 OSMP obtained from Great Outdoors
Colorado (GOCO) to build an environmental education center at Sombrero Marsh. The
Environmental Education Center was built by the Boulder Valley School District and is
scheduled to open in the Fall of 2001. The Thorne Ecological Institute will operate the Center
through a lease with the Boulder Valley School District. The trails budget is further
overwhelmed by the need to build several highway underpasses to connect trails and to construct
a trail that is accessible for persons with disabilities.
Facilities and Trail Maintenance and Construction
OSMP engages in trail construction, general trails maintenance and major trail
reconstruction/restoration. The following areas need major reconstruction: Saddle Rock/First
Flatiron, Royal Arch, Anemone Hill, Upper Fern Canyon, Upper Bear Peak West Ridge, Bear
Canyon, Upper Crown Rock, NCAR Mesa, Doudy Draw, East Boulder and Bear Canyon. There
are not enough funds nor staffing available to do each of these trails this year. With the
consolidation of the Open Space and Mountain Parks systems the trails budget has been
overwhelmed. For example, the OSMP department needs to comply with the Federal law and
L\OS BT.MEMOS01\2002-2003BDGi.725.DOC AGENDA JEM#6 Page 6
DRAFT 72
make the Amphitheater on Flagstaff Mountain accessible to persons with disabilities. The city
has been out of compliance for several years.
Annual trail maintenance is conducted largely by Junior Ranger crews and can be done with the
current level of staffing.
The OSMP system has a high level of trail maintenance needs with over 120 miles of designated
and maintained trails.
The OSMP system contains over$4 million of deferred maintenance including$1.2 million
identified in the mountain backdrop. The OSMP Department will need future funding for the
construction of underpasses to adequately connect the current trails system. They would also
provide for a safer recreational experience for our public. No funding source has been identified
for the deferred maintenance.
Future Open Space Bonding
A $20,000,000 series of bonds was issued in March 2000 as the first phase under the
$45,000,000 authorization approved by voters in November 1997. Two additional series of
bonds are projected to be issued in 2003 and 2006. These dates and amounts are subject to
change depending on a variety of factors, including future sales tax collections, as well as the
speed with which the current bond proceeds are exhausted before 2003.
Parking Fee System Evaluation
During 2001-2002, the OSMP department will be reviewing, evaluating, and may be
recommending to OSBT and City Council changes including potential fee increases in the
structure, costs, and fees related to the parking fee system instituted in 1992 in areas of Mountain
Parks.
DEPARTMENTAL SERVICES
Real Estate Services Division
Since January 1990 the Real Estate Services staff acquired 14,224 additional acres,bringing the total
of Open Space acreage purchased since 1967 to 30,332. Together with approximately 6,555 acres
of former Mountain Parks lands,the new OSMP Department currently manages over 36,887 acres
under the Open Space Charter. Seven hundred and ninety six (796) acres of former Mountain Parks
land remain in the Parks and Recreation Department.
The Real Estate Services staff additionally negotiated for easements, rights of way, and fee
ownership or otherwise provided real estate services to and for over 70 city projects. This also
includes review of more than 150 city development review applications and utilization of the Land
Link System. They also provided support for development and implementation of current
Management plans, OSMP lease management, easements and boundary issues.
Volunteers
Over 800 dedicated volunteers have contributed to all phases of OSMP operations and supplement
staff's ability to focus on critical issues. Staff continues to work cooperatively with homeowner
groups, neighborhoods, and schools in providing education and outreach activities to the public.
Construction Material Recycling
Properties are often acquired with structures and improvements that are in serious need of repair and
maintenance and may become significant management and enforcement problems. Rather than
UOSBT.MEMOS0P•2002-2003BDGT.725.DOC
DRAFT AGENDA ITEM 6 Page 7
=2
simply being demolished, some non-historic structures are"deconstructed" to salvage all reusable-
building materials. These materials, including beams, wall lumber, roof trusses, rock walls and
sheets of plywood are donated to a local recycling company for reuse by the building industiv.
Energy Use/Privatization/outsourcing/contracting
The department continues to closely monitor vehicle usage. More car-pooling and vehicle
sharinc,has occurred, thus reducing the total number of vehicles in the department. The
department had acquired two hybrid gas-electric vehicles to reduce both costs and pollution, as
well as increasing miles per gallon. They have proven to be a good choice.
Also, the use of seasonal, temporary, contract and part-time empioyees has resulted in salary and
benefit savings.
Resource Planning and Management
Resource management planning is critical for adequate protection and management of the
valuable natural and agricultural lands and water that comprise the OSMP system. Resource
inventories are the foundation upon which management decisions are made. Planning and
management are based on landscape level ecosystem management. The location and relationship
of public and private lands in this regional landscape matrix substantively influence and
determine the management issues and direction of OSMP lands. The OSMP program has
adopted and implemented various management plans, including the South Boulder Creek and
North Boulder Valley Area Management Plans, the Forest Ecosystem Management Plan, the
Mountain Parks Visitor and Resource Management Plan, and the Grassland Management Plan-
Black-tailed Prairie Dog Component.
Monitoring of native ecosystems and rare plants and animals is a key element of the management
philosophy of the OSMP program—using the results of information analyses to adapt current
management. Staff continues monitoring of more than 50 rare plants and animals and native
ecosystems on OSMP lands.
An essential part of the data collection and monitoring program is the resource-based geographic
infonnation system developed by OSMP. Analyses generated by the GIS group provide the
information upon which resource management decisions are made. The technical services
division of OSMP continues to work cooperatively with other city departments on mutual
projects, including setting standards for mapping and data analyses and sharing information and
technology.
Administration
OSMP staff participated in citywide training opportunities and adopted a departmental training
policy. In 2001 this included a focus on department-wide training in coaching and communication
skills. Staff also developed and implemented divisional budgets for programmatic accounting for
the new department.
I1,OSBT,MEM0S01\2002 1-003BDGT.725.DOC AGENDA IT:;R1 16 Pace 8
DRAFT I-'_
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
PERFORMANCE
MEASURES
1) Total Acres under Total acres under Management Total acres under Management and
Management and Stewardship and Stewardship of Stewardship of Department is
of Department Department is expected to be expected to be 40,487 acres in
39,487 acres in 2002. 2003.
2) Internal Customer Continue to provide Real Continue to provide Real Estate
Satisfaction Estate services to internal services to internal customers (other
customers (other city city departments,not Open Space)
departments, not Open Space) at or above previous satisfaction
at or above previous levels.
satisfaction levels.
3) Continue to implement To be scheduled annually To be scheduled annually
adopted area and resource
management plans with
specific measures
major/keystone tasks
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS
This item is being heard at this public meeting advertised in the Daily Camera.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
This is a request that the Open Space Board of Trustees approve and recommend to the Planning
Board and the City Council that they approve the 2002-2003 Open Space and Mountain Parks
Departmental Budget and Capital Improvements Projects requests as set forth in this memorandum
and accompanying spreadsheets.
Submitted by:
James C. Crain, Michael D. Patton,
Co-Director CO-Director
Open Space and Mountain Parks Open Space and Mountain Parks
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Budget Overview
B. City of Boulder 2001 Fund Balance Open Space Fund (2001-2007)
C. Open Space Fund 2002 Capital Improvements Program budget submittal.
D. 2001 Budget Summaries of PE and NPE By Fund and By Department.
1:'OSBTNEMOS01%2002-2003BDGT.725.DOC AGENDA ITEM#6 Page 9
DRAFT Q S
ATTACHMENT A
co0C-) OJN
0 of o 001 0 0
0oao 0 0 0 0 0
N O N 0 0 O O O O
CL 00 Co R O 00 0 (o (D �i
Ul) co N r ti 14
N Or T
C r r r r � r
G (;03� 619- 69
O O O O O O O O O
M 0qj, L[) G) I~ r Q
Ln CD r N M O CD O O
co N O M O O 6 O O
N r CO co '[t co O
r
0 0 0 0 0o MN r CO O O O N
t1 O O O O co O O O) co O Go co I`
0 0 0 0 d r 0 r- r, O -t V- N
(D O L)Cr co Co O o) co O 00 O ti
O Lo I` O N I` O) col co LC) Ll) O �
(D r CA CD 4- O CD I� r h O CD
a) CC) [0 � N I` N O r C17
r r r r
O 69 64 6%
Lu
1
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 2
0 0 0 0 � � 0 0 a
O ;r C'7 CD M CO r I- O r- LCA M M (D Co I`It O m
e M I� CD (A r 0 0 O e ch N CD O CO O N (') OV-
V- O O N co O I- O Ul) O M N r CD I- O
LLI CA m O N r cl � to O ro
� m
❑ rn
N O O O O m O M M N Go m N r Co O d7 O N Co
m a O O O O 00 O co 00 c c0 O O O co O CC) CC) ti LC? oD
N O O O O N O N N N rLn 'd' It N r
CD O L6 r CC) Co IT LC) p r Co O CD CD 00 " r o
W Co Ln r- 0) U-) 0o "1' m W LC) O Ln cr) O M LL) O O O
y O r r 0 N r -' V M O c' 0 m m 1, O O r T
O 00 co O O LC) M 00 O N c3i ci m
(L r r 69 Efl N G. 64 64 6% r N m
O 6F} EA 69 Q 64 Cf} m
EL IL
O a. a� 3
U NN
CD
O m L
a) O (LII n ao
_ a N 0
[p CL O O
i Cn NLO CD CL -aN
p L n C ui U-
z E U) co O E O O C O C LL o 0
a� co
m ° c m` �- Cn xQ ° (Lo a� ° °
E LL F- N O ❑ N W CII ~ O N °N
LL O U f- C Z CL 4) C t0 > CL N m
(B = X C CII O C O
i O Lf O U)
CIO
a. `n O � C !— v LL W C co ss .c) v
co LL 0
0 06 -Fu ol c: -
N
o � m � � Q oO�(1) o � o o Cl)
W c � U) oO c > ° =3 o n (L) o ° o m ° O n
,
U) CA c: --IU) U' _3 c/) F— 0- Z U) U iq U 0 U) }— b
ATTACHMENT B
O O O O 0 CD Or 1� p
❑ 0 0 0 O O O co O N L] O O 0 0 0; 0 f� O 0 CD 0 O)
W O O O O O O CD O ("1 O O O o O C7 � p (0D O C O
f Cn O L7 cc CD coLO CO m C° V CO Cl) (7 C9 (` N O C.O - LO O l° C
WN COJ LO n r CA m (` LO m m (D O N O nm :7'tV" co m
O69 5r N N N N (LY. m
� wN 69 64 EA E9 E9 64:69 N69 CA
LL
C- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O — O Cl. C O O O O O O cm)
t`
❑ pop ppo o ihp c) m o 00 0000 0 0 00
Ly V C Cl0 O C O O O L7 r O 0 0 O 0 O h n O O O
O 0 (D (D (9 Lo O
co U m N 1n r O CO Ln r CD 7 N 0 O !D 0 co 0 0 N m (7 r CO -It 0 (O
O W O m r O V r N r Cl) N m O m O r N O N m Cl)
N r 64 69 Ln r lO (A O N lO fv N N O� O O N` L - 0 K
69 bg (i3 CY 11 64. bq NN, EFy 69
4.9CL
O O O O O O O O O m O p0 0 a O O O
D 0 0 0 O O O D) O m N 0 0 O Oa O n O O O
LLIO O O O O m O O CO ti O O O O �{ C N O O O V
F- to V O LO LO (D O (A (D O c0 CD O O (V t O) to LO O LO CD
LO U CO O LO � co CA fX) m (D N CO I-- Cn (O
p CD LLIr _ _ m r L(') (P N f� fT (`') Cm�J O (A N m0 V CO m co
N m N• O 6<i r N O EA m N N N
K3 N(+3 69 Ef3 [H CR r6? 64 64 EA
a
03 co 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 rn rn o 0 0 0 0 0 (n o 0 0 0 0
❑ O O O O. O O c0 O N O CD O O O 0 O r O O O
O O O m O O !T O O 0 0 O [P r O O O
LI O 0 C 0 p r
I- ^ (P p C) CO N N N (+O") CD O N CD (P LO O L[] O
Lo r- O (D m V co[D (P O O
O m Q6
W C➢ O r r m r Cn f- N CO (D m (`m') O t` 0 co N
N n co CDO 69 N (g (H r C4 � ER � N CIT 6N9 69 C� N H3
ba 6p,
a
a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r o 0 o 0 0 o rn o 0 0 en
v o00 000 0 0 0 (o m
❑ N O O O O O O C O O O O 0 O Cl O O O O O
W h CA O LO O co (D to O Cl) CO O m m c7 O LO O Ln N
C) co N O O (3) fO m 7 �_ to 't Cl) O O O LO Cl) ti N- (P O
� D
O O m O N r LO CO Cl)m m O m C� N CA C) V co m (D
O CL m O) 64 C r 6 va. � N 0 m N CY) O CA lO 69 (D
N 0 69 N E9
C)
N bNN4 Cr-} (f3 VER 6469 EA ta
wi o a
LU z z
oQ?
-- Cb 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 r 0 0 0C w, -0m O o o p (7
0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 O (7) Q1 0 O t` r m t- 7 0 o p v
❑ m 0 0 0 O O O O O r r_ O O m V m N O O O N
a• W L� (D O L6 m CD lO O 'ct O CD m C W Ln f� LO O Lo N
O ❑ ❑ N 0 V 0 O N co C' � (mD O m O N LO O co N-- D1 (D O
O O m m N ti (� � CO m �
} LL.Z O (L CA W r r O co C) CV CN m CA - co LO co N
U O d N 0 69 CflN 64 E9 (A 64 NN (i3 69 6% W
69.
NO d
N O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 f` (D m [A O O m
(D 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O (� d' -Clot r O O cc:))
N 0 0 0 0O O O O O O O O O 0 0 (� (� m Cl)
m O O O to
❑ h <}' O LO O N_ O r LO N r CD O O O - N N O C) f� Ln CO
W CO tO (D O (D Cl) r 7 O) C) T O Of�
p ( LO O [I' O) m O to
/7 n rEiT N r O [.O m O m _ N N ly O N 7 V co m _
O > C) coO r (J] CD Ef3 O N C 3 - m CCT O LT LO !H O cl
N � 69 64 69 43 r bg 1-t
(i? M
69 69
LO O n 0 0 CD N CO V (D O 0) O OCA V O CA N O 0 0 N
O O N r O O O In 7 -3 m Ln O m co O O O (D
O cc0 0 0 0 LO m @ O O C, O CV ti 0) N O 0 0 N
-� N: r- r I-- 7 O to O LI) r (fl O _ m r" LO ti LO r (D
CQ V Ln Ln (D co O CD 0 O) m (D (A N O O m 7 (D C N
❑ CA O d" r r cl C! LO (A (D tO LO (D NL (D (n (p p] m
O 1-- to CO r O mN N 7 ti O LO CD
N U 64 N 7 64 (f3 � r es (i3 N m 69 (R N
Q E
m (� y
LU c C7 m (n � w
ZJO -0y y C U) O O ❑ O C
ixn.. Z m ° C w
a
a) LL L ¢ w U
m O w LL t- a > C LL L) ° o w w ¢
❑ a) ° c m ayi ° a) C D w ° ° E O � z m LL w J
m (n a y Z Z' y ° a
c cSO E z y °' L w m y . W . ¢ (a W U) Q �y 0 O U W m
p } CO >� m m E < � w c O1� o � ❑ O ,(u Maf a = (1) o ,0 Z Z www Z
w Z a' O a' �,H W y - m T H a G m y C W ❑ m m lL C� � U-
r
LL y LL
n a o � a 20 = p a > > g o ° z O U ? wn ❑
z �, a LU
rn z z w w
11 O �. b y LL LL ca J � y p W +' D Q O Lr H
N W (!J N d v N °) , LL N } O I" c a U F 00 (n U) ❑ U) Q H U cf
W
nam CD ° — o o O ° o Q `D o h o m ° o -� m co w (n
Z O Z J m a 0 C7 (� E- ui O Q a ¢ C.7 U a m F- ❑ a ❑ ❑ F Z O C O w
U) L=i 7
ATTAG4MENT C
OPEN SPACE FUND
2002 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO(s.KHAM
OVERVIEW:
The proposed 2002 CIP for the Open Space & Mountain Parks Department continues funding for
the swine four progran areas as submitted last year: $1,500,000 for open space land acquisitions and
5350,000 for trails rehabilitation, construction, and major maintenance. Water Rights Acquisition
would remain at $200,000 and Mineral Rights Acquisition would continue at$100,000.
The Open Space Fund, based on Budget Office projections, continues to remain financially healthy.
The fund has sufficient revenue to continue property acquisitions proposed under the Open Space
Management and Acquisitions Plan approved by the Open Space Board of Trustees and City Council
in September 1999.
POLICY ISSUES:
NONE AT THIS TIME.
HIGHLIGHTS:
From January 1990 through May 2001, approximately 14,224 acres, including Jefferson County
properties, have been purchased under the current Acquisition Program, bringing the total Open
Space acreage purchased since 1967 to 30,332 acres. Together with the approximately 6,555 acres
of former Mountain Parks lands,the new OSMP Department currently manages 36,887 areas under
the Open Space Charter. The other 796 acres of former Mountain Parks land remains with the Parks
and Recreation Department. Approximately 1,800 additional acres are under active negotiations for
purchase by OSMP in 2001, and staff is estimating that an additional 4,000 acres may be acquired
by 2007.
The Water Rights Acquisition program provides funding to purchase additional water shares from
private owners or other City agencies for use on Open Space for agricultural and environmental
purposes as water becomes available. Program funding primarily will focus on water acquisitions
in the Coal Creek area. Funding will also be used for professional fees, legal and engineering fees,
analysis and snapping necessary to manage and protect the water portfolio. Because of our
continuing wildlife concerns, the Open Space&Mountain Parks (OSMP) Department will continue
to work with other City departments to cooperate in enhancing minimum stream flow where
possible.
The Mineral Rights program provides funding to purchase underlying mineral interests from private
owners as they become available on the real estate market. Some of these interests in minerals, gas,
oil, and aggregates were severed from the lands previously purchased by Open Space and could
cause future mana-ement dilemmas. Funds also support researching, mapping and analyzing
potential acquisitions.
1
071161012:13 PM
IAADIII\TITS\02CIPBGT 060S01.D0C
I l,e Trails and Trailhead Construction program provides finding for maintenance on existing trails
and trailheads, new trails and trailhead construction on proposed and existing Open Space and
Mount,,",-. Parks. Funds will be used to implement management directions developed in area
management plans for visitor use and passive recreational activities. An Open Space Visitor Use
Plan is being prepared and provides general goals and guidelines for visitation on Open Space and
Mountain Parks. Results of the Open Space Visitor Use Study and resource evaluations will be
incorporated in the area management plans.
FINANCINTG:
Sufficient funds are available in the Open Space Fund to appropriate the 2002 CIP as proposed to
the OSBT, Planning Board and City Council.
A $20,000,000 series of bonds was issued March 2000 as the first phase under the $45,000,000
authorization approved by voters in November 1997. Two additional series of bonds are projected
to be issued in 2003 and 2006. These dates and amounts are subject to change depending on a
variety of factors, including future sales tax collections, as well as the speed with which the current
bond proceeds are exhausted before 2003.
RELATIONSHIP TO OPERATING BUDGET:
The Open Space Long-Range Management Policies adopted in 1995, together with the Boulder
Mountain Parks Resource Protection and Visitor Use Plan adopted in 1999, set the management
direction for the OSMP Department. These policy level plans, along with the area and resource
management plans, provide the framework to prioritize and budget specific resource management
actions to further the OSMP Department mission.
Currently, OSMP staff is in the implementation phase of the goals, objectives and actions
recommended in the North Boulder Valley Area Management Plan, the South Boulder Creek Area
Management Plan, the Plains Ecosystem Plan, the Forest Ecosystem Plan and the Boulder Mountain
Parks Resource Protection and Visitor Use Plan.
In the future, as the Accelerated Acquisition Program gets closer to the achievement of its
programmatic goals with the purchase of any additional properties recommended by the Board and
approved by the Council, and as the outstanding debt issues are paid off, there will be a shift of focus
and funding fiom acquisition to management of the Open Space & Mountain Parks properties.
OSBT ACTION:
It is anticipated that the Open Space Board of Trustees will consider and then recommend to both
the Planning Board and City Council for approval the attached 2002 —2007 CIP budget submittal
at a public hearing at its July 11, 2001 meeting.
07/16/012:13 P-M
I:�AD\IIti1\TS\03�-�I'i GT_OGOSOLDGC
2002 BUDGET
OPEN SPACE FUND
OPEN SPACE & MOUNTAIN PARKS DEPARTMENT
MASTER PLAN GOALS
The Open Space&Mountain Parks Department will implement the goals and objectives of the City
Charter Article XII. Open Space, with guidance of the adopted BVCP, Open Space Long Range
Management Policies, the Boulder Mountain Parks Resource Protection and Visitor Plan, Area
Management Plans and Resource Management Plans, including the following:
1) Continue to acquire lands to protect natural and scenic values (reduce continued loss of land and
critical habitat to development), to maintain urban buffers and community integrity, and to restore
natural lands and ecosystem functions.
2) Complete land and resource inventories and planning for management and funding decisions.
Information will be developed in an ecosystem framework and future management decisions will
be based upon long term ecological monitoring and analyses as the basis for adaptive decision
making.
3) Contribute to the long tenn protection of local agriculture as an essential part of the preservation
of land and sustainable natural and human communities.
4)Provide opportunities for people to enjoy and learn about the natural history,recreational setting
and future needs of the area.
5.) Protect and restore the area's rivers and streams, grasslands and prairies, shrublands and forests,
wetlands and mountains as part of our natural heritage for our children's children and their children.
3
I:\ADilffiWIS\02CIPBGT-060801.DOC 07/16/012:13 PAT
O � � � � � � °•IIS' � N �
c - CD
i„t � n F� C �D•
f*Di
CO CC O O O
C O O O I
O I p o o c o
� � I
0 0000
I bo
N N p
.P
o C 0 own c
n
0 0 0 0CD
! �
o
I �
N
O O O O K i 1
C p C, O O
I ►� N
N N O O
in .-• W N T
0 0 0 o o n
o O 1=o
0 0 0 0 0 o
0 o
N
CJI VI � W N �• O
CD CD
O O O CD
O O ¢
O ! O O 'III
2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
PROJECT NAME Project Number. Map ID NUM:
Water Rights Acquisition 930000 OSRE04
DEPARTMENT: Open Space & Mountain Parks SUBCOMMUNITY: :System-wide
FUNDING SOURCE: Open Space Fund BVCP Area Area III
PROJECT STATUS: On-Going Projects
CEAP REQUIRED? Not Required
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This will provide funding to purchase additional water shares from private owners or other City agencies for
use on Open Space for agricultural and environmental purposes as water becomes available. Program
funding primarily will focus on water acquisitions in the Coal Creek area. Funding will also be used for
professional fees, legal and engineering fees, analysis and mapping necessary to manage and protect the
water portfolio. Because of our continuing wildlife and habitat concerns, the Open Space Resource
Conservation Division will continue to work with other City departments to assist in enhancing minimum
stream flow where possible.
i
Relationship to Master Plan:
`Funding for the acquisitions supports the Open Space Acquisitions and Management Plan as approved by the OSBT and City Council in
September 1999. The conceptual acquisition area in Area III is annually coordinated and incorporated with the Boulder Valley Comp
Plan.
Public Process Status, Issues:
Specific purchases are approved by both the OSBT and City Council.
Relationship to Council Goals:
Supports City Council Goals of environmental sustainability including environmental priorities of pesticide reduction habitat
preservation and water quality. The Open Space acquisitions program is one that has made the City of Boulder a nationwide
environmental leader and role model for other communities. The Open Space lands not only add to the visual appeal of our community,
but the management practices after acquiring these properties insures that we continue to provide habitat preservation for wildlife and
Relationship with Other Departments:
The Open Space &Mountain Parks department works cooperatively with City Departments, primarily Parks, Greenways, Utilities and
Transportation. The department also works with and promotes inter-governmental cooperation with national, state and local
conservation and Open Space programs,such as Boulder County Open Space, Jefferson County Open Space, Louisville, Lafayette and
Longmont, GOCO, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, CDOW and others.
_ CAPITAL FUNDING PLAN
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 FFUNDINGIO PLANNED
LETION I FUNDING
i � I
Projected Funding:
200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000. 200,00010, 1,200,0001
TOTALCAPITALCOSTS: 1st Year of Funding. on-going 1
. . - --- -
$1,11 600,000 Funding prior to 2002: $400,0ool
2001 Approved funds: $200,00ol
2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
PROJECT NAME Project Number: Map 1D NUM:
Trails and Trailhead Construction843000 OSREO?
DEPARTMENT: ,Open Space & Mountain Parks SUBCOMMUNITY: System-wide
FUNDING SOURCE: Open Space Fund BVCP Area Area III
PROJECT STATUS: On-Going Projects
CEAP REQUIRED? Required _
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This program would provide funding for maintenance on existing trails and trailheads, new trails and
!trailhead construction on proposed and existing Open Space. Funds will be used to implement management
directions developed in area management plans for visitor use and passive recreational activities. An Open
Space Visitor Use Plan is being prepared and provides general goals and guidelines for visitation on Open
Space. Results of the Open Space Visitor Use Study and resource evaluations will be incorporated in the
area management plans.
Relationship to Master Plan:
Trail development and related facilities are directed by the completed Area and Resource Management Plans, as adopted, Boulder
Valley Comp Plan, OSBT and City Council direction.
Public Process Status, Issues:
A trails planning process that includes public participation and involvement was approved by the OSBT and is being instituted for all
major trail construction projects. Specific projects are subject to CEAP process.
Relationship to Council Goals:
Supports City Council Goals of environmental sustainability including environmental priorities of pesticide reduction, habitat
preservation and water quality. The Open space acquisitions program is one that has made the City of Boulder a nationwide
'environmental leader and role model for other communities. The Open space lands not only add to the visual appeal of our community,
but the management practices after acquiring these properties insures that we continue to provide habitat preservation for wildlife and
Relationship with Other Departments: _
The Open Space & Mountain Parks department works cooperatively with City Departments, primarily Parks, Greenways, Utilities and
Transportation. The department also works with and promotes inter-governmental cooperation with national, state and local
conservation and Open Space programs, such as Boulder County Open Space, Jefferson County Open Space, Louisville, Lafayette and
Longmont, GOCO, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, DCOW and others.
T CAPITAL FUNDING PLAN _
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 FUNDING TO PLANNED
COMPLETION FUNDING
Projected Funding:
3501
000 350,000 350,000 350,000 — 350,0001 350,000N -- Oli 2,100,000
1st Year of Funding: on-going
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS:
$2,$00,000 Funding prior to 2002: $700,000,
2001 Approved funds: $350,000
2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
PROJECT NAME Project Number Map ID NUM:
Mineral Rights Acquisition 935000 OSRE02
DEPARTMENT Open Space & Mountain Parks sUBCOMMUNITY: System-wide
FUNDING SOURCE: Open Space Fund BVCP Area Area III
PROJECT STATUS: On-Going Projects
CEAP REQUIRED? Not Required
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This program would provide funding to puchase underlying mineral interests from private owners as they
.become available on the real estate market. Many of these interests in minerals, gas, oil and aggregates
were severed from the lands previously purchased by Open Space and could cause future managment
dilemmas. Funds would also provide funding for researching, mapping and analyzing potential acquisitions.
Relationship to Master Plan:
Funding for the acquisitions supports the Open Space Acquisitions and Management Plan as approved by the OSBT and City Council in
September 1999. The conceptual acquisition area in Area III is annually coordinated and incorporated with the Boulder Valley Comp
Plan.
Public Process Status, Issues:
,Specific purchases are approved by both the OSBT and City Council.
I
Relationship to Council Goals:
Supports City Council Goals of environmental sustainability including environmental priorities of pesticide reduction, habitat
'preservation and water quality.The Open Space acquisitions program is one that has made the City of Boulder a nationwide
,environmental leader and role model for other communities_ The Open Space lands not only add to the visual appeal of our community,
.but the management practices after acquiring these properties insures that we continue to provide habitat preservation for wildlife and
Relationship with Other Departments:
The open Space&Mountain Parks department works cooperatively with City Departments, primarily Parks, Greenways, Utilities and
.Transportation. The department also works with and promotes inter-governmental cooperation with national, state and local
conservation and Open Space programs,such as Boulder county Open Space,Jefferson County Open space, Louisville, Lafayette and
Longmont, GOCO, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, CDOW and others.
CAPITAL FUNDING PLAN
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 =FUNDIANNED
NDING
Projected Funding:
j 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,0001 100,0001 Oi 600,006
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS: 1st Year of Funding. on-going
$800,000 Funding prior to 2002: $200,0001
2001 Approved funds: $100,000
2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
PROJECT NAME Project Number: Map ID NUM:
a
Acquisition Program 720000 OSRE0
DEPARTMENT: Open Space & Mountain Parks SUBCOMMUNITY: System-wide
FUNDING SOURCE: Open Space Fund BVCP Area System-wide
PROJECT STATUS: On-Going Projects
CEAP REQUIRED? Not Required
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project is to acquire additional acres of open space, subject to available funding, within the BVCP Area
III areas as well as the expanded areas in the Northern Tier and in Jefferson County as approved by the
OSBT and City Council. Funding is provided from the projected restricted open space sales tax revenue.
The project includes funding for survey, appraisal, professional fees and related acquisition and maintenance
costs.
Relationship to Master Plan:
Funding for the acquisitions supports the Open Space Acquisitions and Management Plan as approved by the OSBT and City Council in
September 1999. The conceptual acquisition area in Area III is annually coordinated and incorporated with the Boulder Valley Comp
Plan.
Public Process Status, Issues:
Specific purchases are approved by both the OSBT and City Council
Relationship to Council Goals:
Supports City Council Goals of environmental sustainability including environmental priorities of pesticide reduction, habitat
preservation and water quality. The Open Space acquisitions program is one that has made the City of Boulder a nationwide
environmental leader and role model for other communities. The Open Space lands not only add to the visual appeal of our community,
but the management practices after acquiring these properties insures that we continue to provide habitat preservation for wildlife and
Relationship with Other Departments:
The Open Space & Mountain Parks department works cooperatively with City Departments, primarily Parks, Greenways, Utilities and
Transportation. The department also works with and promotes inter-governmental cooperation with national, state and local
conservation and Open Space programs, such as Boulder County Open Space, Jefferson County Open Space, Louisville, Lafayette and
Longmont, GOCO, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, CDOW and others.
CAPITAL FUNDING PLAN _
2002 1 2003 2004 F2005 2006 2007 FUNDING TO I PLANNED
COMPLETION FUNDING
Projected Funding:
1,500,0001 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000II, 0 9,000,0001
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS: 1st Year of Funding: on-going
$12,865,000 Funding prior to 2002: $3,865,000]
2001 Approved funds: $1,500,000]
2002 Budget Summaries ATTACHMENT D
of PE and NPE
by Fund and By Dept
With ATB Request
Dept 52 Dept 26 Total Fund 150 Fund 990 Total
Fund 150 Fund 950 Fund 150 Dept 52 Dept 52 Dept 52
Personnel Expense - Std 4,181,852 199,784 4,293,636 4,181,852 299,503 4,401,355
Personnel Expense -Temp 1,057,852 Q 1,057,852 1,057,852 Q 1,057,852
Total Personnel Expense 5,239,704 191,784 5,351,488 5,239,704 219,503 5,459,207
Total NPE 2,948,729 57,374 3,006,103 2,948,729 Q 2.948.729
Sub-Total Mgmt Expenses 8,188,433 169,158 8,357,592 8,188,433 219,503 8,407,936
Cost Allocation Expense 639,191 0 639,191 639.191 0 639,191
Subtotal-Operating Expenses 8,827,624 169,158 8,996,783 8,827,624 219,503 9,047,127
Capital Improvement Projects 2,336,000 0 2,336,000 2,336,000 0 2,336,000
nr',` "ervice Expenses 9,758,489 Q 9.758,489 9,758,489 Q 9,758,489
Subtotal -Acquisitions 12,094,489 0 12,094,489 12,094,489 0 12,094,489
Total Expenditures 20,922,113 169,158 21,091,272 20,922,113 219,503 21,141,616
Standard FTE's 72.33 1.66 73.99 72.33 2.67 75.00
Temporary/Seasonal FTE's 40.00 9.00 40.00 40.00 0.00 40.00
Total FTE's 112.33 1.66 113.99 112.33 2.67 115.00
01_2002 TARGET@070501.xis 1 7/25/2001 - 12:01 PM