HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090620.tiffRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
MARCH 9, 2009
The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, met in regular session in full conformity
with the laws of the State of Colorado at the regular place of meeting in the Weld County Centennial
Center, Greeley, Colorado, March 9, 2009, at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by the Chair and on roll call the following members were
present, constituting a quorum of the members thereof:
Commissioner William H. Garcia, Chair
Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, Pro-Tem
Commissioner Sean P. Conway
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer
Commissioner David E. Long
Also present:
County Attorney, Bruce T. Barker
Acting Clerk to the Board, Elizabeth Strong
Director of Finance and Administration, Donald D. Warden
MINUTES: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the minutes of the Board of County
Commissioners meeting of March 4, 2009, as printed. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, and
it carried unanimously.
READ ORDINANCE BY TAPE: Commissioner Long moved to read Ordinances #2009-3 and #2009-4 by
tape. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CERTIFICATION OF HEARINGS: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the Certification of
Hearings conducted on March 4, 2009, as follows: 1) USR #1678 - Wayne Marsh. Commissioner
Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA: Chair Garcia added new item of business 11) Consider Expression of
Opposition to H.B. 09-1250.
PUBLIC INPUT: No public input was given.
CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve the Consent Agenda as printed.
Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COORDINATOR REPORTS: There were no Commissioner Coordinator Reports.
BIDS:
CONDUCT ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - NE1/4, S12, T9N, R66W: Barb Connolly,
Controller, stated, due to the lack of response regarding these leases, she recommends continuing the
2009-0620
•
BC0016
b3G97061
items to Wednesday, March 11, 2009. She explained the person who nominated the tracts for auction did
not submit a bid before the deadline; therefore, the Board needs to determine if it wishes to reject the bids
and conduct further advertising or if it wishes to continue the bids to another date. Don Warden, Director
of Finance and Administration, stated the person who nominated the tracts for auction was non -responsive;
therefore, the bids may not be continued and need to be rebid. Commissioner Rademacher moved to
rebid the lease. Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONDUCT ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - NW1/4, S14, T8N, R66W: Chair Garcia called
up items 2-7. Commissioner Conway moved to rebid all of the remaining oil and gas leases.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONDUCT ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - W1/2 SE1/4, S14, T8N, R66W: See previous
discussion.
CONDUCT
discussion.
CONDUCT
discussion.
CONDUCT
discussion.
CONDUCT
discussion.
ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - SE1/4, S14, T9N, R66W: See previous
ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - NW1/4, S24, T9N, R66W: See previous
ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - E1/2 SE1/4, S26, T9N, R66W: See previous
ORAL AUCTION FOR OIL AND GAS LEASE - NW1/4 /4 SE1 /4, S26, T9N, R66W: See previous
NEW BUSINESS:
CONSIDER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD
PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - NEW HORIZON CHRISTIAN CHURCH: Judy Griego,
Director of the Department of Human Services, stated the Memorandum of Understanding is to provide
support for the grant awarded to New Horizon Christian Church by the Colorado Department of Human
Services. Ms. Griego stated the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Project supports positive growth and
development for fathers of at -risk children in Weld County, the Department will reimburse New Horizon
Christian Church the amount of $10,360.00, and the term of the memorandum commences
February 1, 2009, through September 30, 2009. Commissioner Conway moved to approve said
memorandum and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Kirkmeyer, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR BAGS OF LOVE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE
CHAIR TO SIGN - IT'S MY VERY OWN, INC.: Ms. Griego stated the Memorandum of Understanding is
not financial; It's My Very Own, Inc., will provide age -appropriate toys, personal care items, and handmade
blankets for children who have been removed from their homes and placed into the Department's custody
by law enforcement and/or the Courts, for a term commencing January 1, 2009, through
December 31, 2009. In response to Chair Garcia, Ms. Griego stated the items are typically delivered within
one week of the children being placed in the Department's custody. Commissioner Long moved to
approve said memorandum and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Rademacher,
the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER AGREEMENT CONCERNING PURCHASE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS TO CRS 7 AND 48 AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN NECESSARY DOCUMENTS -
VERNON AND MARY JESSER: Leon Sievers, Department of Public Works, stated this is the first of five
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 2 BC0016
parcels to be acquired by the County for the County Roads 7 and 48 Project, and the property is located
on the east side of County Road 7 and north of County Road 48. Mr. Sievers stated the County is
acquiring 1.298 acres of right-of-way for $15,000.00, which is $11,600.00 per acre and based on an
appraisal prepared by Foster Valuation Company. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Sievers
stated Vernon and Mary Jesser are willing sellers. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said
agreement and authorize the Chair to sign any necessary documents. Seconded by Commissioner
Conway, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE AND
AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - RJML, LLC, DBA LA MARAVILLA: Bruce Barker, County Attorney, stated
there is a memorandum from Deputy Julie Mercer, Sheriffs Office, regarding positive on -site visits to the
establishment. Ms. Mercer stated everything is in order with the establishment and the application, and
she has no concerns. Rubin Rodriguez, owner, stated he has strived to work closely with the Sheriff's
Office regarding any concerns. In response to Chair Garcia, Mr. Rodriguez stated the establishment is
open on Fridays and Saturdays, and occasionally on Thursdays and Sundays. Commissioner
Rademacher moved to approve said renewal application and authorize the Chair to sign. Seconded by
Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - PENMEN DEVELOPMENT, LLC:
Christopher Woodruff, Assessor, stated multiple parcel numbers are being presented for consideration,
and the properties are hangar units at the Erie Airpark. Mr. Woodruff stated the petitions were filed for Tax
Years 2007 and 2008. He stated the records indicate the properties were sold in December, 2005, for
approximately $114.00 per square foot, and the appraisals were based on this amount. He further stated
the valuation placed on the properties is approximately $110.00 per square foot; therefore, he believes the
values were appropriately assessed and he recommends the petition for abatement be denied. There
were no representatives of Penmen Development, LLC, present. Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to deny
said petition, based on staffs recommendation. Seconded by Commissioner Rademacher, the motion
carried unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - METAL SALES MANUFACTURING
CORP.: Mr. Woodruff stated the petition is for Tax Year 2007 and the Board of Equalization adjusted the
property value in 2008. He stated normally the two tax years, 2007 and 2008, would be yoked; however,
the property owner in this case already appealed the value in 2007. He stated the petitioner received a
Notice of Determination; however, they did not appear before the State Board of Equalization, due to some
confusion on the petitioner's part. He further stated the petitioner appealed to the Board of Assessment
Appeals in Denver and a hearing was scheduled; however, the petitioner withdrew their petition and waived
all rights to appeal their 2007 property taxes; therefore, the petition is an illegal request and no further
adjustment is warranted. There were no representatives of Metal Sales Manufacturing Corp., present.
Commissioner Conway moved to deny said petition, based on staff's recommendation. Seconded by
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES - N AND S JOSEPH PROPERTIES:
Mr. Woodruff stated requested that the matter be continued to March 23, 2009, so the petitions for Tax
Years 2007 and 2008 may be considered at the same time, and the petitioner is agreeable to the
continuance. There were no representatives of N and S Joseph Properties present. Commissioner
Conway moved to continue the matter to March 23, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. Seconded by Commissioner
Kirkmeyer the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER NINE PETITIONS AND ANNEXATION AGREEMENT FOR CRS 4, 6, AND 27 AND
AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - CITY OF BRIGHTON: Mr. Barker stated the annexation agreement
applies to all nine of the petitions, and it involves portions of County Roads 4, 6, and 27. He explained the
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 3 BC0016
Brighton City Attorney, Margaret Brubaker, made some changes to the agreement which he deems
acceptable. He stated representatives from the Cities of Brighton and Fort Lupton are present, and there
may be surrounding property owners present.
Christopher Erntz, Assistant Brighton City Attorney, stated the Mayor and City Manager are present.
Mr. Erntz stated the City of Brighton has been working diligently with the County Attorney's Office and
expressed his appreciation for the County's cooperation and assistance on the matter. He stated the
petitions and the annexation agreement are acceptable to the City of Brighton and they are prepared to
move forward at the special Brighton City Council meeting tomorrow.
Mike Konefal, Fort Lupton City Administrator, stated the City of Fort Lupton supports the Vestas Project;
however, there are concerns regarding the Project moving north of County Road 6, including the transfer
of ownership of County Road 6 to the City of Brighton, which may create a situation in which the City of
Brighton may move northerly into the City of Fort Lupton's Planning Area Boundary. Mr. Konefal stated
the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton have been working on the matter over the last couple of months,
and reached an agreement of principle on Thursday; however, the intergovernmental agreement has not
been agreed upon by the City Councils. He stated the Fort Lupton City Council will be considering the
intergovernmental agreement on Wednesday; therefore, he requests the matter be continued a minimum
of one week to ensure all of the parties have approved and formally signed the intergovernmental
agreement. Mr. Konefal stated the City of Fort Lupton is interested in protecting its interests and it will take
any precautions necessary to do so. Responding to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Konefal stated the
intergovernmental agreement is not on the Fort Lupton City Council agenda for Wednesday yet; however,
he will be adding it, and it will be the first time the Council has a chance to review the agreement; therefore,
he cannot predict if the Council will have any concerns regarding approving it. In response to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Konefal stated the City of Fort Lupton will not deannex County Road 6 until
an intergovernmental agreement is approved, and if the intergovernmental agreement is approved the
sewer boundary adjustment issue will be resolved.
John Dent, Attorney for the Fort Lupton Fire Protection District, requested a continuation until the
intergovernmental agreement between the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton is approved. Mr. Dent stated
the matter is important to the Fire District because it has a direct impact on the boundaries of the territory
to be served by the Fire District. He clarified currently the boundary between the Fort Lupton and Brighton
Fire Districts is the center line of County Road 6. He explained fire districts are much more property tax
driven than communities; therefore, a loss of potential property tax is extremely consequential. Mr. Dent
requested again that the Board defer consideration of the matter until the intergovernmental agreement
is approved. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Dent stated the Fort Lupton Fire District is not
a party to the intergovernmental agreement between the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton. Commissioner
Kirkmeyer inquired as to how the intergovernmental agreement will protect the Fort Lupton Fire District.
Mr. Dent stated it depends on the nature of the agreement; however, it would be his preference that the
Fort Lupton and Brighton Fire Districts are parties to the agreement. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated it
is her understanding the Brighton Fire District has an agreement with the City of Brighton that the Fire
District will provide service to areas annexed by the City. Mr. Dent stated the City of Fort Lupton has the
same agreement with the Fort Lupton Fire District. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Dent
stated there has been discussion regarding making the Fire Districts be party to the intergovernmental
agreement; however, it is not contemplated in the present draft.
Mr. Ernst stated County Road 6 is the principle growth boundary line between the Cities of Fort Lupton and
Brighton and the concept that the Cities will cooperate in good faith to determine which areas will be served
by each Fire District is intended for inclusion in the intergovernmental agreement; therefore, he believes
the issue will be addressed by the intergovernmental agreement. Commissioner Kirkmeyer reiterated there
are existing agreements between the Fire Districts and the Cities, and she inquired if those agreements
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 4 BC0016
require amendments. Mr. Ernst stated he does believe the agreements need to be amended because the
intergovernmental agreement between the City of Brighton and the Brighton Fire District, which established
County Road 6 as the boundary, includes the concept that there shall be communication and agreement
between the Fire Districts. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the agreement states the Fire District will
provide service within the municipal boundaries; however, she does not understand why the agreement
does not require an amendment if the Fire Districts are not a party to the proposed intergovernmental
agreement between the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton. Mr. Ernst stated he does not understand
Commissioner Kirkmeyer's concern because the intergovernmental agreements between the Cities and
the Fire Districts address cooperation and communication occurring between the Fire Districts regarding
service areas, and the Brighton City Council will review the intergovernmental agreement with the Brighton
Fire District. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the City of Brighton is legally bound by an agreement with
the Brighton Fire District and the agreement states the Brighton Fire District will provide service within the
legal boundaries of the City of Brighton; therefore, if the City annexes north of County Road 6, the City of
Brighton is bound by the agreement with the Fire District, regardless of having an agreement in place with
the City of Fort Lupton. She stated to resolve the matter, the agreement with the Fire District must be
amended to state the Brighton Fire District will not serve north of County Road 6, regardless of the area
being annexed, or the Fire Districts need to be parties to the intergovernmental agreement between the
Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton. Mr. Ernst stated he has not heard it is objectionable to the Fort Lupton
Fire District that the City of Brighton annex north of County Road 6.
Mr. Dent stated the proposed intergovernmental agreement between the Cities of Brighton and Fort Lupton
does not resolve the boundary issue because the Fort Lupton Fire District wants to retain all of its territory,
including the territory which is proposed for annexation; however, it will consider a reasonable compromise.
He stated there has not been any discussion regarding a compromise.
Phil Tiffany, Fire Chief for the Fort Lupton Fire District, stated the Fort Lupton Fire district was not notified
of the proposed annexations, and he would like to be engaged in a conversation with the City of Brighton
and the Brighton Fire District.
In response to Chair Garcia, Mr. Dent and Mr. Ernst stated there is no possibility taxes will be double
assessed if the Fire District boundaries are adjusted.
Manuel Esquibel, Brighton City Manager, stated at this point in the process only roadways are being
considered for annexation, and he understands Fort Lupton's position. Mr. Esquibel stated the Cities of
Fort Lupton and Brighton have been discussing the intergovernmental agreement for months, and recently
the Cities have conceptually come into agreement. He stated the City of Brighton has cautiously
considered other entities, including the Fire Districts, and encourages the Brighton and Fort Lupton Fire
Districts to meet regarding the matter, since the Cities cannot make decisions on behalf of the Fire
Districts. Mr. Esquibel stated he has heard some discussions have taken place between the Fort Lupton
and Brighton Fire Districts regarding the matter. He reiterated at this time the City of Brighton does not
want to consider any annexation matters, other than the roadways, and the City of Brighton is working in
good faith with the City of Fort Lupton; however, the City Councils will make the final determinations
regarding the intergovernmental agreements. He expressed his appreciation for the efforts made by
County staff and the County Attorney in working with the City of Brighton on the matter; however, he stated
the City of Brighton is on a strict schedule for Vestas to open on time, and if the matter is continued, it will
delay the project. Mr. Esquibel stated the City of Brighton will continue to work on the issues, and it will
not annex any further than the roadways until the intergovernmental agreement is in place. In response
to Chair Garcia, Mr. Esquibel stated if the matter is continued a week, the Vestas project will be delayed
because the process requires the City of Brighton to provide infrastructure to the site and in order to
complete the infrastructure process, the City must gain access to the roadways through annexation. He
stated the bid process has already taken place for the infrastructure, and the bid is waiting for approval
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 5 BC0016
based on the annexations being approved. He stated in order to meet the schedule, the contractors will
need to be on Board by Monday.
Mr. Ernst stated the Brighton City Council has a special meeting scheduled tomorrow evening and then
the Council will be in Washington D.C. next week for the National League of Cities Conference; therefore,
if the matter is continued, the Council will not be able to meet until the end of March or the beginning of
April regarding the matter. He stated the City of Brighton has a mid -May deadline to extend the
infrastructure from County Road 27 to the Vestas site. He stated the issues raised today have been
addressed and discussed, and will be able to be resolved shortly. In response to Chair Garcia, Mr. Ernst
clarified staff will not be able to move forward with the construction of the infrastructure until the City
Council returns. Mr. Ernst stated the Federal and State grants require the City of Brighton has ownership
of the roads. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Esquibel stated not all of the infrastructure
improvements are in the right-of-way for County Road 27.
Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mary Falconburg , Community Development Director for the City
of Brighton, stated the water and sewer lines will travel from County Road 27, from the existing City limits,
to County Road 6, within the right-of-way of the existing road, and then the lines will travel eastward on
County Road 6 to the eastern edge of the Vestas property. Further responding to Commissioner
Kirkmeyer, Mr. Falconburg clarified the City of Brighton will have to utilize the entire length of County
Road 27, from County Road 2 to County Road 6, to install the water and sewer infrastructure; and he
stated the ownership requirement in the grant is for the City of Brighton to acquire ownership of the
roadway before the funds will be released to the City.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the City of Brighton has not yet submitted its 208 Water Control Plan
amendment, and she inquired when construction is scheduled to commence. Mr. Ernst stated the
amendment to the 208 Plan is an issue addressed in the intergovernmental agreement between the Cities
of Fort Lupton and Brighton and it establishes the County Road 6 boundary. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
stated the City of Fort Lupton does not make changes to the 208 Plan; there is a 208 Water Quality Control
Committee, which has not received an adequate amendment proposition, and she inquired again about
the construction start date. Mr. Ernst stated the City of Brighton would like construction to commence as
soon as possible because the City has to provide the site with water infrastructure by May 15, 2009.
Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Esquibel stated approximately 30 percent of the
infrastructure improvements will be funded by the City. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the City of
Brighton may immediately begin the planning and the design for the infrastructure improvements, prior to
the annexation of roadways. Mr. Esquibel stated the City of Brighton has already completed the planning
and the design, and he reiterated the construction has already gone out to bid and the City is simply
waiting to award the construction contract until the annexations have been granted. In response to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Esquibel reiterated the annexation is tied to the release of funds; therefore,
the City cannot release the contract until the annexations have been approved.
Raymond Gonzales, President and CEO of the Brighton Economic Development Corporation, stated the
organization took the lead in applying for the United States Department of Commerce Economic
Development Action (EDA) grant and the Colorado Department of Local Affairs grant. Mr. Gonzales stated
Mr. Esquibel is correct, in that if EDA funds are involved, everything must be in place before any money
is expended. Commissioner Kirkmeyer reiterated an adequate amendment has not been submitted to the
208 Water Quality Control Committee. Mr. Esquibel stated the 208 Plan is a continual process and it does
not prevent the City of Brighton from commencing construction. He stated the City has had discussions
with the 208 Water Quality Control Committee, and it has no concerns regarding the project; however, the
amendment needs to be submitted as a formality. He stated the only timeline which is a concern to the
City is the Vestas timeline. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Esquibel stated five of the
Brighton City Council members will not be present next week.
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 6 BC0016
Mr. Dent stated the Fort Lupton Fire District understands the urgency of the Vestas project and it is willing
to deal with the matter on an urgent basis; however, he is not convinced continuing the matter one week
is an unreasonable request, and it is not an acceptable answer to suggest the situation does not need to
be resolved in the intergovernmental agreements. He stated the matter will not be resolved unless the
intergovernmental agreements between the Fire Districts and the Cities specifically address the modified
service areas and the current agreements do not address the issue, as they are currently written.
In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Esquibel reiterated the City of Brighton must provide water to
the Vestas site by May 15, 2009, and the construction length is estimated to take seven weeks.
Commissioner Conway stated he does not understand how continuing the matter for one week will delay
the project, since two months remain before the deadline for the construction's completion. Commissioner
Kirkmeyer stated the United Stated Department of Commerce EDA grant is a reimbursement grant;
therefore, the work must be completed prior to the funding being granted. Mr. Ernst stated although the
United Stated Department of Commerce EDA grant is a reimbursement grant, there is a condition that
before the grant is awarded the City of Brighton must own the roadways. Commissioner Conway stated
the annexations may be granted next week, if the matter is continued to Monday, which will not delay the
project. Mr. Ernst stated if the matter is continued, the Brighton City Council will not be able to act on the
second reading of Annexation Ordinances until at least the week following the continuance. Mr. Esquibel
stated there is also a waiting period after recording, and the City of Brighton is at risk of not making the
deadline even without the matter being continued. Mr. Ernst stated if the City of Brighton does not meet
the deadline it is subject to a liquidated damages provision in the agreement with Vestas, and continuing
the matter will put the City at a great disadvantage.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated another issue she has with approving the annexations is she does not
believe proper notification was given to the surrounding property owners, since Mr. Barker only provided
the notice on Friday, and mostly by telephone. Mr. Barker stated he mailed notices via Federal Express
on Thursday and most of the property owners received it on Friday, in addition to the phone calls.
Mr. Ernst stated the property owners were notified by the City of Brighton in January, 2009; therefore,
proper notice was provided. Mr. Dent reiterated the Fort Lupton Fire District was not notified. Mr. Barker
stated he spoke with many property owners and none of them were aware the roadways were being
considered for annexation; however, none expressed objections. In response to Commissioner Conway,
Mr. Barker stated he did receive an inquiry from a property owner who received their notice just this
morning and it was the first notification he had received; however, he did not object to the annexations.
Commissioner Rademacher stated he is not aware of any punitive damages Vestas can impose on the
County for not having the water provided by May 15, 2009, and the same applies to the Cities. Mr. Erst
stated there is a liquidated damages provision in the agreement between the City of Brighton and Vestas,
and the Use by Special Review (USR) documentation, as determined by the Board, it acknowledges the
City will be annexing the roads and it will be installing the infrastructure; therefore, the City is striving to
fulfill the requirements of the County's USR.
Bruce Davis, City of Brighton resident, stated his property is adjacent to County Roads 2.5 and 7, and he
was adequately notified by the City. Mr. Davis stated the matter has been heavily discussed among the
surrounding property owners, and the County Attorney called him; therefore, it is hard to imagine anybody
in the area is unaware of the project. He stated it is hard to understand why the water and sewer services
would not be delivered as intended while the Fire Departments sort out their issues, and as a taxpayer he
wants the project to go forward immediately to bring new jobs to the area. Mr. Davis requested the Board
approve the annexations today, and deal with the Fire District issues at a later time.
Karen Crawford, City of Brighton resident and Executive Director for the Brighton Chamber of Commerce,
stated she is very much in favor of the annexations, and encouraged the Board to move forward.
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 7 BC0016
Peter Gunderson, City of Denver resident, stated Vestas is the best and largest project in the State and
it is a bright light in these difficult economic times. Mr. Gunderson stated he owns property located at the
southeast corner of County Roads 6 and 27, and he has attended a number of meetings, including the
Weld County Planning Commission meeting last fall, and it was refreshing to see the City of Brighton and
Weld County cooperating to accelerate the project so Vestas may be in production by Fall of this year.
He stated Vestas began construction before the USR was granted and the property was purchased from
the City of Brighton. He stated the City of Brighton provided sound advice on the annexation process and
prepared the annexation map, which streamlined the process. Mr. Gunderson stated the process needs
to move forward, and it should not be delayed because Vestas needs to have water service to be in
production by this Fall. He stated Colorado needs Vestas, and thousands of people are waiting for the
project to be completed because they need jobs. He further stated he heard Vestas may relocate their
U.S. headquarters to the City of Brighton, which would be monumental to the area.
Dennis Kitayama, City of Boulder, stated he owns property near the intersection of County Roads 4 and 27,
and his property is adjacent to the Vestas Project. Mr. Kitayama expressed his full support of the
annexation process and concurred with Mr. Gunderson's comments. He stated the Project should not be
delayed.
Janice Powlowski, Mayor of the City of Brighton, stated this has been an ongoing process, which began
November 20, 2008, and she submitted a binder containing supportive documentation into the record,
marked Exhibit A. Ms. Powlowski encouraged the Board to move forward regarding the annexations, and
to not delay the project. She stated the Crown Prince of Denmark and the Governor of Colorado will be
present on March 25, 2009, for the ground breaking ceremony, and she hopes Vestas is not aware of the
difficulty the City of Brighton is having in getting the process started. In response to Chair Garcia,
Ms. Powlowski stated five out of the nine Brighton City Council members will be at the conference next
week; therefore, a meeting cannot take place.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated even though she was only elected to the Board in November, she has
researched the matter and she has been following the process since it began. She stated the County
approved the USR on December 10, 2008; therefore, she is dismayed the City of Brighton has not provided
its 208 Plan Water Quality amendments. She stated she does not believe the intergovernmental
agreement between the Cities of Fort Lupton and Fort Lupton would be underway if it were not for the
process required by the Board. She suggested perhaps Brighton could include a section in the agreement
stating it will not annex further north of County Road 6 until such time that an intergovernmental agreement
is in place between the two Fire Districts. Ms. Powlowski stated she is open to examining the issue;
however, she is concerned about adding such a statement to the agreement because Vestas has
approached the Cities of Brighton and Fort Lupton regarding another property it would like to be annexed
to the City of Brighton. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated there is no reason the annexation of the property
cannot wait. Mr. Esquibel stated the City of Brighton is not interested in further annexation at this time,
and the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton have reached an agreement in principle. He stated the Fire
District is another issue, and he encourages the two Fire Districts to work together to resolve the matter
and the City of Brighton will do what it can to facilitate the process, including changing language in the
agreement; however, he does not want to undermine the decision -making process of the Fire Districts.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the boundary line in the intergovernmental agreement between the City
of Brighton and the Brighton Fire District is County Road 6; however, the intergovernmental agreement
between the Cities of Fort Lupton and Brighton is showing a boundary line north of County Road 6;
therefore, if the Cities can agree to the boundary line remaining at County Road 6 for the time being, it may
resolve the issue with the Fire Districts. She stated it is a problem the intergovernmental agreement
between the Cities is not in place to review. Mr. Esquibel stated the City of Fort Lupton has agreed to the
boundaries defined by the City of Brighton, and the Cities have been working on the boundary line for
several months and he believes the proposed boundary is one both Cities deem acceptable.
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 8 BC0016
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the problem is with the Fort Lupton and Brighton Fire Districts; therefore,
even if the City of Fort Lupton has agreed to the boundary line, it does not resolve the boundary issue.
She reiterated if both Cities are willing to make County Road 6 the boundary line, it will resolve the issue
the Fire Districts have. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Esquibel stated the City of Fort Lupton
does not have the ability to waive the second hearing of the Ordinances. Ms. Powlowski stated it is
unnecessary to delay the Project, which is important to the local economy. Mr. Dent stated this is not a
referendum on Vestas, which everyone supports, and a revision needs to occur to the proposed
intergovernmental agreement to state the automatic extension of the Brighton Fire District's territory north
of County Road 6 will not occur. He stated if the revision occurred the Fort Lupton Fire District would not
be in opposition to the proposed annexations. Mr. Konefal stated the City of Fort Lupton initially intended
for the boundary line to be County Road 6; therefore, if there is a statement designating the boundary line
as County Road 6 in the proposed intergovernmental agreement, he is certain the Fort Lupton City Council
would agree to it, since the boundary line presently in the proposed agreement is a compromise.
Mr. Esquibel stated it is important that the Board understands the process of drafting an intergovernmental
agreement between Fort Lupton and Brighton did not just begin, and information was presented to the
County well in advance of today's meeting; therefore, the Board had plenty of time to address any
concerns it has regarding the annexation petitions in advance. He further stated Ms. Powlowski submitted
documentation into the record supporting this assertion and documenting the correspondence the City of
Brighton has had with the County regarding the Project. He stated the City of Brighton will not annex any
property before the intergovernmental agreement is reached; however, it needs to annex the roadways
at this time to perform the necessary improvements.
Mr. Warden suggested continuing the matter until tomorrow morning, after the Brighton City Council
meeting has taken place this evening. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated she is in favor of continuing the
matter to the next day; however, the Fire Districts need to be involved with the intergovernmental
agreement and not only the Cities. Mr. Barker stated the Board may call for a special meeting for
tomorrow morning, and staff will need to post notice of the meeting. Commissioner Long expressed his
appreciation for all of the public testimony, and stated this Project provides opportunities for the
governments involved to construct creative solutions; however, he is not comfortable approving the
annexations until the intergovernmental agreement is in place. He stated the Board has to consider the
long term affects and how all parties will be affected. Commissioner Rademacher concurred with
Commissioner Long that the matter cannot move forward until the intergovernmental agreement is signed;
however, he is not sure the Fire Districts need to be a party to the intergovernmental agreement between
the Cities. Commissioner Kirkmeyer concurred that the Board requires a signed intergovernmental
agreement in order to move forward. Mr. Barker suggested making the approval conditional on the
intergovernmental agreement being signed, or whatever evidence the Board deems sufficient that an
agreement has been reached. Commissioner Conway moved to continue this matter to March 10, 2009,
at 9:00 a.m., and he instructed staff to provide proper notice of the meeting. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
seconded the motion. Commissioner Conway stated everyone is aware of the importance of the Project;
however, the Cities, Fire Districts, and the County need to work through the identified issues. Chair Garcia
concurred with Commissioner Conway and thanked everyone for attending and providing pertinent
information. Mr. Esquibel inquired as to what the Board expects the City of Brighton to provide at the
meeting tomorrow. Commissioner Long stated he would like to see some signed documentation from the
Mayors of Fort Lupton and Brighton, involved boards, and the Brighton and Fort Lupton Fire Districts to
illustrate all of the involved parties clearly understand what is being agreed to. There being no further
discussion, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER SERVICE EXPANSION REQUEST NO. 2009-02 FOR SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES AND
AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - ACS GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS, INC.: Ms. Mika stated the agreement
modifies the contract between the County and Affiliated Computer Services (ACS) Government Systems,
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 9 BC0016
Inc., to change one County position to an ACS position. Mr. Warden stated there will be no additional cost
to the County by making the adjustment. In response to Commissioner Rademacher, Ms. Mika reiterated
the original ACS agreement is being altered. Responding to Commissioner Rademacher, Mr. Warden
explained there is one County position that is supervised by an ACS employee and he has never felt
comfortable having a County employee supervised by a non -County employee, and the expansion request
will correct the issue. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said expansion request and authorize
the Chair to sign. Seconded by Commissioner Kirkmeyer, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER GRANT APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR 2009 JUSTICE AND MENTAL
HEALTH COLLABORATION PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL: Dave Rastatter,
North Range Behavioral Health, stated the grant is a collaboration among the District Attorney's Office,
the Juvenile Assessment Center (JAC), North Range Behavioral Health, and the 19th Judicial District.
Mr. Rastatter stated the grant is for $250,000 over a period of three years, and the match will be 20 percent
the first and second years and 40 percent the third year, and it will be provided by North Range Behavioral
Health and JAC. He stated there is no risk or liability to the County. He stated he is awaiting some letters
of support request; therefore, he requests a continuance to March 11, 2009. Commissioner Long stated
the grant application was brought to his attention last week and three members of the Board were able to
attend a work session regarding it. He stated the members of the Board who attended the work session
are all comfortable with the grant application; however, he wants to have all of the paperwork in place
before the Board approves it. Commissioner Kirkmeyer inquired if the Board may approve it today and
Mr. Rastatter can submit it on March 11, 2009, when it is due, after the letters of support have been
received. Mr. Rastatter stated in addition to waiting for the letters of support, there are some last minute
negotiations taking place regarding the matching amounts. Chair Garcia reiterated there are no County
funds involved in the grant, and he stated at the work session it was discussed that the intention of
sustaining the Program after the federal funds are no longer being received. Mr. Rastatter explained if
positive outcomes are demonstrated regarding the Juvenile Treatment Court, future funding sources may
include Medicaid funds and Juvenile Service Planning Commission funds from the Division of Youth
Corrections. Commissioner Long moved to continue said grant application to March 11, 2009. Seconded
by Commissioner Conway, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER EXPRESSION OF OPPOSITION TO H.B. 09-1250: In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer,
Mr. Warden stated the annual amount of National Forest funds the County receives is approximately
$100,000.00; however, he does not know the exact amount for this year yet. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
stated Colorado Counties, Inc. (CCI) also opposed this legislation. She stated the legislation takes away
the Board's discretion on certain matters. Mr. Warden stated the County has historically given fifty percent
of the funds to the four school districts in the Pawnee National Grasslands area; however, the legislation
will force the County to give fifty percent each year, and there have been times the Board has considered
reducing the amount. In response to Mr. Warden, Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the legislation is related
to the Safe Rural School Act. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said expression of opposition
to H.B. 09-1250. Seconded by Commissioner Kirkmeyer, the motion carried unanimously. (Clerk's Note:
The actual amount of the funds is $222,398.57, contrary to Mr. Warden's estimate before receiving the
information.)
(Clerk's Note: Chair Garcia called a two minute recess and upon reconvening Bruce Barker is excused for
the remainder of the meeting, and Cyndy Giauque, Assistant County Attorney, is in attendance.)
PLANNING:
CONSIDER IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT ACCORDING TO POLICY REGARDING COLLATERAL
FOR IMPROVEMENTS (PRIVATE ROAD MAINTENANCE), AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN, AND
ACCEPT COLLATERAL FOR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW #1638 - BARTEZ, LLC: Kim Ogle, Department
of Planning Services, stated two replacement Letters of Credit have been received for Use by Special
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 10 BC0016
Review (USR) #1638 from Bartez, LLC, and the first one is in the amount of $39,708.00 for private road
maintenance improvements. He stated staff has deemed the amount is sufficient. In response to
Commissioner Rademacher, Clay Kimmi, Department of Public Works, stated, the property is located on
County Road 22, approximately one-half mile east of U.S. Highway 85, and just north of the City of Fort
Lupton. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve said improvements agreement, authorize the Chair
to sign, and accept collateral for USR #1638. Seconded by Commissioner Conway, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT ACCORDING TO POLICY REGARDING COLLATERAL
FOR IMPROVEMENTS (PUBLIC ROAD MAINTENANCE), AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN, AND ACCEPT
COLLATERAL FOR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW #1638 - BARTEZ, LLC: Mr. Ogle stated the second
replacement Letter of Credit is in the amount of $3,804.00 and is for off -site improvements through the
Public Roads maintenance agreement, and staff has determined the amount to be sufficient.
Commissioner Conway moved to approve said improvements agreement, authorize the Chair to sign, and
accept collateral for USR #1638. Seconded by Commissioner Rademacher, the motion carried
unanimously.
FIRST READING OF WELD COUNTY CODE ORDINANCE #2009-3, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING
AND REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 26 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, OF THE WELD
COUNTY CODE - PIONEER COMMUNITIES, INC., AND HP FARMS, LLC: Michelle Martin, Department
of Planning Services, stated this is the first reading of Ordinance #2009-3, the second reading will be on
March 30, 2009, and the final reading will be on April 20, 2009. Ms. Martin stated the first amendment,
reflected in Ordinance #2009-3, concerns the modification of the Southeast Weld Mixed Use Development
Area Structural Plan, Map 2.1 Structural Land Use Map; and the second amendment, reflected in
Ordinance #2009-4, is for the inclusion of approximately 320 acres. She stated the modifications to the
map will include agricultural and residential uses, which is consistent with the uses presently in the MUD.
She further stated the amendment will transfer 1,000 residential units to Sections 17 and 18, which were
initially proposed for Section 2, and it will not adversely affect the services for the area. Ms. Martin stated
the applicant signed an affidavit agreeing to the prior commitments, as determined by prior applications
and actions by the Board. She stated 295 acres are proposed for residential use, and the 1,000 units will
yield a population of approximately 2,550 people. She stated the applicants are present. In response to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Martin stated it is an even trade as far as the number of residential units,
and the school, park, and trail designations will remain; however, they will be at new locations.
Thomas Di Rito, Director of Development for Pioneer Communities, stated he will conduct a lengthier
presentation at the second hearing, and Commissioner Kirkmeyer's assessment is correct; the density is
being moved from one area to another. He stated upon evaluating the zoning for Pioneer Communities,
it became apparent certain portions of the property yielded better to agricultural uses than others. In
response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Di Rito reiterated the same number of residential units proposed
for one area will now be on another.
There was no public testimony.
Don Dunker, Department of Public Works, stated the drainage report and traffic letter have been
submitted, and staff has no objections. Commissioner Rademacher moved to approve
Ordinance #2009-3, on first reading. Seconded by Commissioner Long, the motion carried unanimously.
FIRST READING OF WELD COUNTY CODE ORDINANCE #2009-4, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING
AND REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 26 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, OF THE WELD
COUNTY CODE - PROSPECT FARMS II HOLDINGS, LLC: Ms. Martin stated the applicants have applied
to amend the Weld County Comprehensive Plan for inclusion of additional acres into the Southeast Weld
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 11 BC0016
Mixed Use Development Area. She stated the amendment includes part of the west half of Section 5,
which is east of and adjacent to County Road 51, and north of and adjacent to County Road 24. She
stated, if approved, the additional 320 acres will be used for residential units. She stated the area is
adjacent to the Southeast Weld MUD on three sides, and there are no schools or parks planned for the
320 acre area at this time. She stated the 320 acres will yield 445 residential units and a population of
1,135 people, according the applicant.
Don Dunker, Department of Public Works, stated a traffic letter and drainage letters have been submitted,
and additional processes will follow. Mr. Dunker stated the applicant has signed the affidavit to honor the
commitments from the previously approved Resolution. He stated County Road 20 is a two lane collector
road, which travels from County Road 51 to County Road 49, and the applicant will construct the roadway
with signalization and turn lanes at County Roads 49 and 20. He further stated the applicant is planning
to improve the intersection adjacent to County Road 53, and staff has no objections to the application.
In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Di Rito stated the 320 acres were not originally available and
the property was later acquired; however, it is a key piece of property, because a waste water treatment
plant is planned for the area. He clarified the drainage area running north and south on the map was
previously planned to run north; however, now it will be able to run into the lower area, and the additional
units will not dramatically affect the financing plan.
There was no public testimony.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated the Planning Commission minutes state the additional units will not put
the total number of residential units over the 12,000 unit cap. Ms. Martin stated that is correct information;
the total number of residential units will remain under 12,000.
Commissioner Long moved to approve Ordinance #2009-4, on first reading. Commissioner Conway
seconded the motion. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated she will vote in favor of the Ordinance because it
is the first reading and the number of residential units remains under the cap. There being no further
discussion, the motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: The resolutions were presented and signed as listed on the
Consent Agenda. Ordinances #2009-3 and #2009-4 were approved on first reading.
Let the minutes reflect that the above and foregoing actions were attested to and respectfully submitted
by the Acting Clerk to the Board.
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 12 BC0016
There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELDjJODU% COLORADO
ATTEST:
Weld County Clerk to the Boar
BY:\
Depot
6L atc
Clerk t
L?t
. the Board
William Garcia, Chair
- —7/7
Dougl-- Rademacher, Pro-Tem
Sean P. Conway
ra Kirkmeyer
ccicZ
David E. Long
Minutes, March 9, 2009 2009-0620
Page 13 BC0016
Hello