HomeMy WebLinkAbout750992.tiff l'i't t `.t w"1- tyVi --
HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION
® PHONE (303) 3532212 EXT. 23)
;I "" ' • GREELE Y, COLORADO 80638
COLORADO
January 21, 1975
Dear Mr
The County Relations with Municipalities Committee of the Home Rule Charter
Commission of Weld County is holding a Public Hearing on Tuesday, February 4,
1975, at 7 :30 P.M. The meeting will be held in the new Public Health Building
just east of Weld County General Hospital, at 1516 Hospital Road.
We would like to extend a special invitation to you to attend this meeting,
as we would like very much to discuss the problems of Town-County relations
with you.
This meeting is open to the public, so please inform anyone you think would be
interested in attending.
•
COUNTY RELATIONS COMMITTEE
Committee members are: John T. Martin - Chairman
John L. Weigand
Ralph E. Waldo, Jr.
Glenn K. Billings
W. E. Rosenoff
pem
copies sent to: Mr. Curtis Strong - 317 Cherry Avenue - Platteville - 80651
Dr. Hal Christensen - Town Hall - Eaton - 80615
•
Mr. Mel Brusch - 48 Circle Drive - Ft. Lupton - 80621
Mr. Ben Galletin - Town Hall - Pierce - 80650
Adam Lepore - Town Hall - Firestone - 80520
Vic Klein - 405 1st - Kersey - 80644
Mr, Glen Anderson - 520 Locust - Windsor - 80550
Mr. Tom Wood - 305 N1 - Johnstown - 80534
CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary
Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson—
Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenhruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin— Ruben Srhlcsler—William H.Southard—
75-a 977t
mar \ ( I / 75
z.. ; O
rink
HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION
C� PHONE (3031 353-2212 EXT. 237
P. O. BOX 758
GREELEY,COLORADO 80631
COLORADO
January 20, 1975
The County Relations with Municipalities Committee of the Home Rule
Charter Commission of Weld County is holding a Public Hearing on
Tuesday, February 4, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. The meeting will be held in
the new Public Health Building, just east of Weld County General
Hospital, at 1516 Hospital Road.
We would like very much for you to attend this meeting, as we would
like to discuss the problems of Town-County relations with you.
This meeting is open to the public, so please inform anyone you
think would be interested in attending. Thank you for your interest!
COUNTY RELATIONS COMMITTEE
Committee members are: John T. Martin - Chairman
John L. Weigand
Ralph E. Waldo, Jr.
Glenn K. Billings
W. E. Rosenoff
pem
CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary
Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson—
Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenbruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin—Ruben schlssler—William H.Southard—
r r ,. , T ., . . , �,.. "l •4. y c ,ors . r...�nnn
Cs) WELD COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES `:
mayors
AULT - - 8342844 Dr. Kenneth Masterson P. 0. Box 98 80610
DACONO 833-2317 James Loveland Town Hall ' . 80514
EATON 454-2876 Dr. Hal Christensen Town Hall 80615
ERIE 828-3843 John D. Price Town Hall 80516
449-3085
EVANS 356-6770 Gene Aplin (352-5350) Town Hall 80620
FIRESTONE 833-3291 Adam Lepore Town Hall 80520
FT. LUPTON 857-6667 John T. Martin (353-5681) 330 Park Avenue 80621
FREDERICK 833-2388 Holly Hall (371-0660) Town Hall 80530
GARDEN CITY 352-4294 Clarence J. Krieger 2741 6th Avenue 80631
GILCREST 737-2494 Dean Crosier (737-2282) Town Hall 80623 '
GREELEY 353-6123 George Hall Civic Center 80631
I
GROVER 895-3375 Frances (Fritz) Duggan (895-3395) 80729
Box 94
HUDSON 536-4735 Ralph Lee Rouse Box 221 80642
JOHNSTOWN 587-4622 V. E. Whitmore Town Hall 80534
KEENESBURG 732-4281 Carlos Gray Town Hall 80643
•
p
KEOTA 656-2400 Dean Bibens Town Hall 80739
KERSEY 353-1681 Ellis Johnson Town Hall 80644
LA SALLE 284-6564 Maurice McMahan (284-5596) Box 427 80645 F
MEAD 535-4400 Robert Clark Town. Hall 80542
MILLIKEN 588-4331 Richard Mann Town Hall 80543
NEW RAYMER 437-2543 Walter Bussey Town Hall 80742 t
k
NUNN 897-2385 Wayne Foster Box 171 80648 F
k
PIERCE 834-2851 Ben Gallatin Town Hall 80650 I•
PLATTEVILLE 785-2245 Lloyd Rigg Box 6 80651 t
ROSEDALE 353-1273 G. E. Kendrick Town Hall 80631
SEVERENCE 686-2601 Richard Tallman Town Hall 80546
WINDSOR 686-7476 Roland Margheim (686-9913) Box 627 80550
LOCHBUIE 659-9960 Leo Sack c/o Brighton 80601
I
. WELD COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES •
mayors
AULT 8342844 ,./Dr. Kenneth Masterson P. 0. Box 98 - 80610
i DACONO 833-2317 r---James Loveland Town Hall ' . 80514
EATON 454-2876 ,— Dr. Hal Christensen Town Hall 80615
ERIE 828-3843 John D. Price Town Hall 80516
449-3085
EVANS 356-6770 Gene Aplin (352-5350) Town Hall 80620
FIRESTONE 833-3291 ,,--Adam Lepore Town Hall 80520
FT. LUPTON 857-6667 John T. Martin (353-5681) 330 Park Avenue 80621
a
FREDERICK 833-2388 Holly Hall (371-0660) - Town Hall 80530
GARDEN CITY 352-4294 Clarence J. Krieger 2741 6th Avenue 80631
i
GILCREST 737-2494 Dean Crosier (737-2282) Town Hall 80623
GREELEY 353-6123 George Hall Civic Center 80631
GROVER 895-3375 Frances (Fritz) Duggan (895-3395) 80729
i Box 94
HUDSON 536-4735 Ralph Lee Rouse Box 221 80642
! JOHNSTOWN 587-4622 V. E. Whitmore Town Hall 80534
KEENESBURG 732-4281 Carlos Gray Town Hall 80643
KEOTA 656-2400 Dean Bibens Town Hall 80739
l KERSEY 353-1681 Ellis Johnson Town Hall 80644
LA SALLE 284-6564 Maurice McMahan (284-5596) Box 427 80645
MEAD 535-4400
9 0 Robert Clark Town Hall 80542
NILLIKEN 588-4331 Richard Mann Town Hall 80543
9 NEW RAYMER 437-2543 Walter Bussey Town Hall 80742
INUNN 897-2385 Wayne Foster Box 171 80648
{ PIERCE 834-2851 /Ben Gallatin Town Hall 80650
1
PLATTEVILLE 785-2245 Lloyd Rigg Box 6 80651
ROSEDALE 353-1273 G. E. Kendrick Town Hall 80631
I
I SEVERENCE 686-2601 Richard Tallman Town Hall 80546
WINDSOR 686-7476 Roland Margheim (686-9913) Box 627 80550
LOCHBUIE 659-9960 Leo Sack - ou-%el - or O\4 c/o Brighton 80601
- --
I Mr. Curtis Strong - 317 Cherry Avenue - Platteville - 80651
Dr. Hal Christensen - Town Hall - Eaton - 80615
1
Mr. Mel Brusch - 48 Circle Drive - Ft. Lupton - 80621
Mr. Ben Galletin - Town Hall - Pierce - 80650
Adam Lepore - Town Hall - Firestone - 80520
Vic Klein - 405 1st - Kersey - 80644
i Mr. Glen Anderson - 520 Locust - Windsor - 80550
r 1. Mr. Tom Wood - 305 N1 - Johnstown - 80534
„. S r \ .F.- - x .,'7. 4-1;,•::47-t-&-
,Zt ` -.---:,---,:-..^ -:� 4 �r �^'a�'r 1\... y� � '>,-,'°. ��...,'"ti:h�"y1 " ..'` .. . ?..4e
PRELIMINARY REPORT
COUNTY RELATIONS WITH MUNICIPALITIES
Local Improvement Districts,
Regional Council of Governments
Members Present: John T. Martin
Glenn K. Billings
Ralph E. Waldo, Jr.
Members Absent: John L. Weigand
W. E. Rosenoff
An open hearing was held Tuesday, February 4, at 7:30 P.M. , in the County
Commissioners meeting room, in the new Public Health Building.
Mr. Thomas Wood, Councilman from Johnstown, favored county sales tax,
better county wide representation and suggested one way for the county to help
municipalities was through purchasing power for supplies and equipment.
Joe Linguist, Councilman from Lochbuie said he would support county sales
tax, county wide police protection and the county health proposal. He said a
small town problem is lack of funds. r•
Connie Dedon, League of Women Voters President, submitted a written opinion
(enclosed with this report) , concerning the League' s position on County Government,
and C.O.G. (Council of Governments).
Mel Brusch, City Administrator for Fort Lupton, goes on record as favoring the
three (3) Commissioners, with some redistricting adjustments.
Alice Mack, Director of Human Recourses for C.O.G. , recommended more local
Government. Everything possible should be handled on a local level.
Dick Mac Ravey, Larimer-Weld C.O.G. , Director, gave an insight into the
Council of Governments, and their functions.
He will appear before the entire Charter Commission with a complete exposure
of the C.O.G. and its functions.
The meeting was informative and we were able to view the problems.and
perhaps better equip ourselves to deal with the solutions. The night was cold
and the roads slick. Since only three (3) cities were represented, we
determined another hearing should be scheduled to gain a little broader insight.
•
. •
COUNTY RELATIONS WITH MUNICIPALITIES
Local Improvement Districts,
Regional Council of Governments
Members Present: John T. Martin, Chairman
John L. Weigand
Ralph E. Waldo, Jr.
Members Absent: W. E. Rosenoff
Glenn K. Billings
Representatives for nine (9) Weld County towns, including Mayor George Hall,
of Greeley. He urget that the County Home Rule process help put resources back
at the local level.
To allow local cities and towns to cope, Mayor Hall suggested the Home Rule
body study recommendations for "County Revenue Sharing" with town governments,
similar to federal revenue sharing or a major shift in county-level taxation.
The Mayor of Greeley suggested thought be given to eliminating much of the
County government property taxation, within incorporated areas of Weld. That
would be replaced, he suggested, by county and cities agreeing on a county wide
r•
1% or 2% sales tax, with both types of government gaining from it.
Mayor Hall urged the Home Rule body to write major changes so that
government, even at the county level, is brought back to more of a local
prospective. He said that with Weld County's great size, County government
would appear to face a large enough task dealing strictly with rural problems,
such as upkeep of rural roads and bridges.
The apparent alternative, he said, would be to continue with current trends
of even larger, more costly government.
The Larimer-Weld C.O.G. came in for criticism. Fort Lupton Councilman
L. W. (Corky) Colgrove, who sits on the 14 member board, said, "We've got another
monster on the horizon -- that C.O.G. is getting awfully big."
Hall agreed, saying Greeley Councilman Gid Gates, who sits on the C.O.G.
board, shares that sentiment. Hall said the C.O.G. ' s boards continuing major
task of performing regional review of federal - state grant requests from local
governments, has evolved mostly into "a delay."
He said the initial C.O.G. concept largely was one of regional planning
and sharing of information between the two counties and their towns. "But
when we've gotten into it," said Hall, "it' s just another agency with a high-
salaried director. It contributes to inflation."
• t • -2-
Hall and Colgrove said they doubted any larger city in Weld, such as Greeley,
or Fort Lupton, would be willing to give up its own police force for a county-
wide law enforcement unit. But hall added that smaller towns such as Pierce or
Hudson probably could be aided by a county law enforcement agency.
Frederick Councilman Edward Tagliente, critized county-wide support for the
new Weld County Ambulance Service, whose operational area largely is in and around
Greeley. He urged that if such taxation continues, part of it be returned to
outlying areas -- such as Frederick, Firestone, Dacono -- which already have their
own ambulance services.
Kersey' s Johnson agreed with the idea, as did Norma Jeanne Carroll of Dacono.
County Engineer Richard Straub, early in the session, said technical advise
on public work projects could be made available from his agency to smaller Weld
towns. And he said, signs for towns also could be available, at cost, from the
county sign shop.
Hall predicted that creation of a public works agency, with a section set
up specifically 'to assist towns, might be worth while. e-
Questioned about the Home Rule idea in general, Hall said he likes it, but
that danger does exist, in building up a massive appointed bureaucracy.
Nineteen people were present at this meeting, representing nine (9) towns
and cities of Weld County.
ri fl -
/ r
•ituten:ent to the County iielat.ion. ; '.-committee
of' the County Home Rule Commission
- the League of .Yotnen Voters of Creeley=veld County
i:v Connie uedon, President
The icarmie of •,omen Voters of Greeley- eld County appreciates the
W opportunity to speak at this public hearinT to the committee of the
Weld County dome pule Commission . I will address myself to
interrelations anon:, various levels of local twvernnent and the
County activities, because of the Lea•;ue ' s belief that efficient
government needs coordination among the different agencies and levels
)I of Eoveriment.
• vie know this committee will be concernin:' itself mostly with inter-
relations alnonr' county and municipal "governments specified by the
state constitution and statutes. e support all your efforts to write
into the charter coordination among different agencies and amon other
levels of 7overnment for effective ar,:, responsive rovernment . ;.e realize
it is necessary for your committee to branch out and study ail aspects
that influe,:ce the county -overnment for future decisions. r;e
understand how difficult this must be and still have your uii.zhts in line
as to what the charter should include and not include . We wish to
speak about two types of interoverrunental and county cooperation;
Council of Cove_rnments (CU : ' s) and Re:' ional Services Authorities ( RCA's) .
We do so knowing; this committee probably will not write into the charter
recommendations to regional covernmezttal agencies . One thing the charter
could do in this re •ard , and we recommend it highly, is to allow the
flexibility necessary to take advanta •e of CGC ' s and liA ' s . The charter
must not be co specific that it will impose limitations upon the people,
of .old County in the future .
As you know .geld and Larimer County, along with their municipalities,
have formed a CC : , under Chapter £ 8 C: S 1963. Its advantaLes are that
it has created vreater cooperation among the two counties on mutual
problems, and that it is a flexible and relatively uncomplicated
solution to regional Government. 1'he disadvantage of a COL is that
the board is composed of elected officials appointed by local government,
not by direct voter approval . A county or city joins simply by the
vote of its ;rovernin:' authority to approve CO.'. ' s bylaws. It would
appear to the eneral public that all transactions it volvin_ a Lui.
could be done without many voters realizing what is happening.
i would like now, to direct your attention to another possible
regional :governmental agency, Re. ional Services Authority. The Lca ;uec{
of Women Voters of ureeley-V'•eld County, Fort Collins, and Loveland
studied this a few years ado and support its formation. .;e do not
CU -
feel 1 C is totally wron because it could be the best solution for
i a i .en area and it has effected real cooperation between counties .
howev.:r we feel there are certain advanta`•e5 a RSA could achieve for
our area that a CCC Cannot. A CCC could be a stepping stone to tale
formation of an RSA .
A Re"ional Service Authority is a new form of p:overnment available
to a re:i.or, of two or morn counties upon voter approval . It is
1 governed by a board directly elected by the people and gives the voter
+..„., _. nnn.. vn +n rnnrnnnntntlCn . An RLA 's primary purpose is to
3
�
-' s
4
A
provide re 1o)ial h111'inin:-.. It can jiso, with approval of the voters,
rrovi i an ,' of cervices specified by Stn:Le law. :Such services could be ;
doi est±c water collection, treatment, and distribution; urban drainage
t.::d tl.UU.a control ; :ew;i ? treat:.:eni, c,llc:etio);, ?nd disposal ; public
trur.;:.;ortatio) solid waste collectic:: and disposal ; park's and
recreation; libraries ; fire protection ; hospitals and lur'ir:) homes;
facilities housin ' .'ilallac'eme t serv1Jc:� local
cultural j ", ` i.,S GT electric
services; jails and rehabilitations, land and Loll preservation.
I .
uur local members feel an ,, :ti would erilarye the scope of pli;.nin • and
incrcase accouL tauility to the p ;l.lic . ihcy feel other advar)trt es
would .e ; 1 ) more cificici-.L hwvdlin' of rnrvic which lend themselvesto re'' lanal ndui.nistenti.on ; 2 ) reduction ir, the number of special
districts ; j ) prevention ci formation of more special districts ; 4)
increased tax base to handle projects too vast for ore city or one
county to i;nitertaic e. , such as a recyclin'r, plant ; 5) coordination of
�j . plainirin TO meet common objectives of re :•:ion.
An l, i.t would ;haJt,more power to it; tructure than our present ..C';
ties' u r of toe t in'' authority that it would acquire then voted into
9X1 teas^ Lavin(' public endor$erent by �otimr `C t into existence,
votl) for. possible services, vo tin: on Y cO 1 d memhe1 i would "ive it
•;!':,,:
addltiohal control to the voter that the ch" now denies them . �rhe
question that CU . ' s and itJA ' s raise is, do we in +.eld Uounty want a
re,•_'.ional over'ur eit which is composed of re presentatiVes of cities and
counties, or do we• 1 tart a rn''loial :`io'iernn?nt elected ov one-man,
one- vote':' if:e iea-,ue prefers the latter. :hat do the citizens of
:. L.; .;cold ;.:ount;;i want? :.ecause you do net have the voter' s answer, the
charter :Would allow either. e-
ill clu;;i:: " we Cay a 'ain, we realize N.iA ; S cannot be written into a
LOU2,i:y : ome iTeile '-Barter, just as Utli.. ' s purposes pro baolj l.onit
be included in the charter, but we au:2e ;t a charter flexible enowth
. to allow the existin : JUL. and to allow possible formation of its
• 1 replacement, an • .i..,A.
• 'i'hEi.•t'': you .
•
7
A BRIEF OUTLINE P THE SERVICE AUTHORITY AC4:X 1972
Background
The Colorado Service Authority Act of 1972 is a direct result of the
1970 state constitutional amendment on local government which Colorado
voters approved by a substantial majority. The accelerated growth of
urban areas his made it increasingly apparent that some method is needed
whereby services may be provided on a larger-than-county basis . The
Service Authority Act is the enabling legislation which provides for the
establishment of service authorities in Colorado.
The Concept
The concept of a multi-functional service agency is not new. Other
attempts have been made in other parts of the country and it is hoped that
the Colorado Service Authority Act avoids the pitfalls that other states
have experienced . Basically, a service authority ( most often referred to
as a Regional Service Authority, or RSA ) would constitute a new form of
government designed especially to provide a number of specified services
on a regional basis.
The sole purpose of establishing an RSA is to provide for the more
effieient delivery of those services, or portions thereof, which best
led themselves to regional administration. One of the more important
aspects of the RSA approach is the emphasis on preventing further pro-
liferation of special purpose districts . The RSA Act prohibits new
special districts from being formed within the ioundaries of an existing
service authority to perform a function authorized to the service authority.
At the same time, no service authority could unilaterally absorb or dissolve
existing special districts without the approval of the electors within
the district involved.
Size
It is provided that boundaries are to be determined by the residents
of the area desiring to establish an RSA . However, the Act states that
an RSA must include at least two contiguous counties and the entire area
of each one . The boundaries can include more th,,n two counties as long
as they are contiguous and the entire county area is included. By the
same token, no territory may be included in more than one service authority,
and no enclaves may be created .
Formation ( See chart displayed at unit meetings . )
The establishment of an RSA may be initiated by a petition of citizens
or by a resolution adopted by a majority of the governing bodies within
the proposed service area . The petitions must be signed by qualified
electors numbering not less than 5% of the total votes cast for all
candidates for the Office of Governor in the preceding election within
the area of the service authority. ' The petition or resolution will then
be filed with the district court of the largest county to be included in
the eSA. The court will determine if the petition or resolution complies
with all requirements . If it does , the court will aproint an election
committee and an organizational commission. The commission must hold its
first meeting within 20 days of the date of appointment . Then it has
90 days to file its report with the district court . This resort must
include the services to be performed, together with the maximum property
tax levy for their support ; the districts that elected candidates to the
service authority board will be from; the date for the election, which may
be the same as the next general election. The organizational commission is
automatically dissolved the day of the election. If the electors fail to
puss the measure then the entire process must be started over. A simple
majority of all votes cast on the RSA question is necessary to establish
a service authority. However, it is necessary to hove
simple ity
of each county involved ( concurrent majority ) to approve the services
Le -et „l1 rr,rfprm. r ,. ,.. ,.i ,„a r,..r,,) ( over-- )
+ /
Structure and OrganizatTc,n O
The service authority would be governed by a board of directors, the
size of which would depend upon the population of the area concerned.
Members will be elected from single member districts at the regular general
J election in November. The first Board is elected at the time the RSA
question is on the ballot. The candidates may run on a partisan or
independent basis . For the first five years after the formation of an
RSA, or until January 1, 1980, (which ever happens first) members must be
9 elected from among the mayors , councilmen, trustees , and county commissioners
within the service authority. Candidates receiving the highest number of
votes would be elected. Members would serve four year over-lapping terms .
The Board will elect its own officers and appoint members to fill vacancies
that might arise . Sufficient corporate and governmental powers necessary
for the effective delivery of services would be granted to the Board .
Fiscal Authority
A wide range of fiscal resources would be granted to the RSA. These
include ad valorem taxes , service charges and fees , permission to share in
any state system of state-collected, locally-shared taxes, special taxing
districts within the RSA. The Board is authorized to issue revenue and
general obligation bowls which would require the approval of the voters .
Services
An RSA could provide one or more of the sixteen services designated
in the Act, tut only on the approval of the majority of the voters in
each of the counties concerned . (See "Digest of Services" . ) Services
approved at the time an RSA is formed would be provided concurrently
with local jurisdictions . This means that : 1) cities, counties, and
srecial districts could continue to provide the RSA approved services
within their boundaries and the RSA would provide the service outside those
boundaries ; or, 2 ) the RSA could assume the responsibility for a service
currently being provided by counties or municipalities by contract or
agreement ; or, 3) a county or municipality may relinquish control of all
or part of and authorized service at its option. At any general election
after the initial election forming the RSA, voters could authorize
a service authority to provide any service on an exclusive basis, meanings'
that the RSA would be the only entity authorized to provide that service .
After the formation of an RSA new services may be added by the approval
of a majority of voters in each county . These new services. may be proposed
by: 1 ) a resolution of the Board of the RSA; 2 ) a resolution of the majority
of the governing bodies of the counties and municipalities ; 3) petition
of 5% of the qualified electors . ( see definition of qualified electors under
"Formation" . )
Regional comprehensive planning was originally viewed as a service
which would require voter app-oval . ? any, however, consider it a fundamental
prerequisite to orderly growth and development, and therefore, a necessary
and basic function which should be performed by any RSA, regardless of
what services are otherwise provided. Thus, regional planning has been
designated a basic responsibility of service authorities , and as such, is
included as a general power of the Foard . As a result, an RSA would also
be designated the review agency for local project grant applications in
accordance with federal and state requirements .
L
a
•
•
provide re ;iot:al p1.11a1irl=.. It can also , with approval of the voters,
provide any of services specified by state law. ti• ch services could . be.
Coloestic water col l'. C : 10:1, treatment, and distribution; urban drainar e
and f1uod control ; sewaae treat . ..ii., collection, and disn01al; public
trans • o. tation ; solid waste collection and disposal ; parks and
recreation; libraries ; fire- protection ; hospit+i1C and nurninj homes;
cultural LcCilltieE ; hoasli. ,, :anaeenrr't ::erv1occ local as or electric
services; jails and rehabilitations , land and boil preservation.
L'ur local r-iywbers feel an ..., a would enlar-c the scope of pifl1:1in and
J.raer i cccot...tauility to 1.:. . •:ui:lic . ihcy feel other advar:ta;-es
�' ,. . � ii'l, 'i- hr ci 7er. C r which end themselves
would '. " • 1 ) .lore ; , .ail.: . •u1 l .tn - r,.f ri . ,^ �., �i�. 1 thE•..._ r.l
to rc" lot .:: I catilnl_ tr ti Ct: ; 2 ) reduction is Cho punt'•-r ci rtnc1.al
dl:;tf ietn ; J) iarcve;. tion c !' i'ormation of : :ere. ..,.'^C l.rl districts; )}0
increased T.9X base t0 handle projects too vast tor one city or O;iO
count/ co ia.der i:a}Ce, such as a recyclir:r plant; j) coordination oI
pi&1 !':ir:" l0 fleet C0i ":Oi of ' c tives 07, r' ion.
,1". h 1_d have Lore 1fO ;t r i,i) 1 Cn .:t l'c.c t lrii than our '(ires7.nt .. c .
bech.pa 0f the C:_ 1... .'%} Or 1 i:'+ that C heuld acquirett,,.r9. voted )::t0
existence . -av1, onLI : C' hsdersesent, ✓O T.1.i': n: into existence,
Son
o. ,''o•: .:iolE' services, vOti;t: 0:. rl:OR1'i: L ,11 ,Oslo -Ave It
urjd.ltieh aJ C:O1'.1,1'0l. to 1.h^ voter that the Ito1, derlli'H the:!' .
i iciertion that LA. : 's and ':iLA• s raise is! du we in ;ielu Count' vast a
re''.1'w:al over; r':at,t '. blch .1:' cc:'poseu of representatives of cities and
'counties, or do '.;0 \.ai t f:: l'i' local 1't. tr'1.nelt o e tec, by one-man.
one-:Jute': 1'}•:i? _. ':'a no j•refera the LitLer. hat do th rth a citizens of
-:cin otiiL, ';'wit? : °cause "out do not have the vc ter' LS antnver, the
hhi.+i L _ :l o'zid ;l l.ou cithex'.
\N? ;:.a/ a Sift, ve realize :> >•'. ; :-+ r ajinot he written into a
l.li , i. , :.U, '-•. •idle ' har ter, j list as l.(. .. • s purposes prouaol y .•G?:• t
if: Cha charter, but we au . 'eit a charter flexible .:'Y;OI1 "11
I.0 ...! .Ll::; ttul OHiL; L1t JC't. au to allow possible formation of its t.
lFi . '.'o'1: .
O 0
TOWNS - Incorporated ii
f WATER & SANITATION DISTRICTS
Greeley T- 1 Ault S- 1
Garden City T- 2 Dacon S- 2
Rosedale T- 3 Erie S- 3
Ault T- 4 Evans S- 4
Dacono T- 5 Gilcrest 5- 5
Eaton T- 6 Franklin S- 6
Erie T- 7 Hudson 5- 8
Evans T- 8 Keenesburg 5- 9
Firestone T- 9 Mead 5-10
Fort Lupton T-10 N.W.Greeley (Ward Acres) S-11
Frederick T-11 Southwest Greeley S-12
Gilcrest T-12 South Weld County 5-13
Grover T-13 Tri-Area S-14
Hudson T-14 Belair S-15
Johnstown T-15 East Greeley S-16
Keenesburg T-16 Highland Hills 5-17
Keota T-17 Hill N Park 5-18
Kersey T-18 Milliken 5-19
LaSalle T-19
Mead T-20
Milliken T-21
Nunn T-22
Fierce T-23 Northern Colo. Water Consy Dist C- 1
Platteville T-24 Central Colo. Water Consy Dist. C- 2
Raymer T-25 St. Vrein Left Hand Water Consy D. C- 3
Severance T-26 North Weld County Water Dist. D- 1
Windsor T-27 Central Weld County Water Dist. D- 2
Lochbuie T-28 Little Thompson Valley Water Dist. D- 3'
North Kiowa Bijou Management Dist. M- 1
Lost Creek Ground Water Mgm. Dist. M- 2
FIRE 1
DISTRICTS F- Greeley General Improvement Dist. I- 1
Jt. Berthoud F- 2
Jt. Brighton F- 3
Eaton F- 4
Fort Lupton F- 5
Galeton F- 6
Hudson F- 7
Johnstown F- 8
LaSalle F- 9
Longmont F-10
Milliken F-11
Nunn F-12
Platteville F-13
Platte Valley F-14
Poudre Valley F-15
Jt. Southeast-Weld F-16
Windsor-Severance F-17 ,
Wiggins F-18
Dacono F-19
Western Hills F-20,4
• DIGEST c4' SEXViCES •
This list cf sixteen services is the same list that the RSA Act specifies
may be ( but does not have to be ) part of a Regional Service Authority .
Services other than these sixteen cannot be part cf an RSA unless the
General Assembly permits additional services by state legislation. This
digest shows how each of the sixteen is currently handled in Larimer
and Weld Counties .
The service of planning has been designated as a mandatory power of any
RSA . That is , regional planning would be an inherent service of any RSA.
1. DCMESTIC WATER CCLLECTION , TREATMENT, AND DISTRIBUTION.
Municipal, County, Special District.
2 . URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL.
Municipal, Federal, Special District.
3. SEWAfE TREATMENT , COLLECTION, AND DISPOSAL.
Municipal, Special District. -
' 4. PUBLIC SURFACE TRANSPORTATION .
Municipal, Special District ( school buses ) , Private .
5. *COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE.
Municipal, County, Private.
6. PARKS AND RECREATION .
Municipal, County, State, Federal. •
7. LTBRARIES .
Municipal, County, State . .
8. FIRE PROTECTION .
Municipal, Special District .
9. HEALTH CARE ( hospitals , nursing homes, ambulance ) .
County, Special District, Private .
10. MUSEUMS , ART GALLERIES , THEATERS , AND OTHER CULTURAL FACILITIES .
Municipal, State, Private .
11. HOUSING .
Municipal , Federal.
12. WEED AND PEST CONTROL.
Municipal, County, Federal, Special District.
13. MANAGEMNT SERVICES ( Central purchasing, equipment pool , maintenance ,
Municipal, County. legal services, or any services of local govern-
ments which are related to improving the efficiency
or operation of local governments ) .
14 . **LOCAL GAS OR ELECTRIC SERVICES .
Municipal, Private .
15. JAILS AND REHABILITATION .
Municipal, County.
16. LAND AND SOIL PRESERVATION .
County, Federal, Special district .
*This service is qualified in the following manner in the RSA Act : "Rut
the service authority shall not collect solid waste except on finling by
the Board th: t the existing solid waste collection service is inadequate .
"'This service is qualified in the following manner in the RSA Act : "No
facility of a municipally-owned utility can he crmiin'.d with the facility
of another municipally-owned utility without its consent . And the ed;9ition
of more gas or electric services shall ' not infringe on any existing
supplier who falls under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Public Utilities
Commission. "
• ( over--)
- -- s recycled Dai r)
s
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
., there• nal Service Authority .
Like any new concept which is being considered for implemental on,
•, „e advantages and disadvantages to forming a RegSo
The m;. Jor advantages can be summarized as follows : ) more efficient
hcndling of services which lend themselves to regional administration; 2 ) _
duction in the numberof sinule purpose districts ( special districts ) ; 3)
sale vcn of cial tnhann of the le 'ojectsnit000vast fnreone city orroneccounty tocundertakeX use
as a recycling plant ; 5) co-ordination of plantatedtas meet
followsel )n c�breatio
as of a region. The major d nment n2) weakening of county sovernment ; 3) not
h. of another level of government ;
likely to lower taxes ; 4 ) possibly slow down county
cg reform
over�nmnment ernmr one o ste
( 1 .n . , County Home Rule ) ; 5) putting certain aspects of government
Hello