Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972 Home Rule Charter Commission,~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETI NG HOME RU LE CHARTER COMMISSION APRIL 20, 1972 m 'ssi n was convened at The first meeting of the- Home Rule Charter Co mi o 10:15 a, m. , April 20, 1972, in the Conference Roam of the Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: John Dobson Jahn Donovan Thomas Steinberg Hans Weibel Gerry White Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant ~` Sharon Brown, Vail Trail , Mr. Minger announced that Mr. Gorsuch had decided to resign from the Commission. Thus, at its next meeting, the Commission. would need to decide upon a replacement. Organizational and informational matters included: 1 . the Commission would need to elect a Chairman, Vice-Chairman and ,secretary; 2', pos- sible outside speakers include Ken Bueche, attorney for the Colorado Municipal League who was involved in writing the 1971 Home Rule Act and Ted Tedesco, City Manager of Boulder who has worked in five home rule cities in five states; 3. Howard Klemme, Professor of Law at the Univer- sity of Colorado has agreed to review from a legal viewpoint anything we draft; 4. a great deal of research has been done in the Town Office and Mr. Minger, Mr. Robinson and Miss Hobart will act as staff advisors.; 5 , while the Home Rule Charter is a li mitation of authority, ca~^e must be taken not to limit things needlessly; the. Charter should be viewed as a framework with the details provided by ordinance, and amendments to ordinances; 6. the Charter must be submitted to the citizenry 12Q days from the day of the election; if it is not accepted, there is a 30--day period allowed for re--drafting; if, at the next election the Charter is not accepted, the Commission is dissolved. The public should have at least three `weeks to review the proposed charter and at least one formal public meeting during the drafting must be held . All meetings, however, are. open to the public. Mr. Minger presented his thoughts on how to proceed with the drafting. First,. the group can look at other charters; second, they can bring iri experts; the. next step could be to elect a drafting committee who would put into draft form the tentative decisions of the Commission and then present this to the corn- . mittee as a whole. The discussion of the composition of the Drafting Com- mittee first touched upon whether one or several committees, each to do a portion, should be appointed. The latter was deemed undesirable because 1 . not ail members might be able to give that much time; 2.' it would be more difFicult to introduce several groups to the process and 3, cross-referencing problems might arise. In terms of procedure, there are certain basic deter- minations which will decide the type of passages needed later : After these , decisions, far example form of gover. nment, are made, the Charter can. be ~~° taken section by section. The Commission went through the various articles in the information book which had been prepared. Although only 2 sample charters were i'rtieludecl, all Colorado charters are available, if needed . s +. The schedules for the members are as follows: Mr. Donovan, out of town in June; Dr.. S~ei~nf~erg, .o'u~" of ,town from'fV1ay 1,O.to•.June ~; Mr. White, rio plans for leaving; Mr. Dobson, out of town from May 1 to 17; Mr. Wright, no plans for leaving; Mr., Weibel,,, out of town-;April- 21 to May 8; Mr. Lapin, out of town until June 4; ~ Mrs: Bailey, returning to town on April 25. After a consideration oi= these sched.~les, Nlr. D.,obson nominated Gerry White for Chairman; Dr. Steinberg seconded; his selection was unanimous.: Mr. Donovan expressed the opinion that, .after this appointment, no more Trustees should serve on the executive committee. Mr. White nominated Dr. Steinberg as Vice-Chairman; Mr. Weibel seconded; his selection was unanimous. Mr. Donovan nominated Doris Bailey as Secretary; Mr. Weibel seconded; her selection was unanimous. It was decided that these officers should be the Drafting Committee with one alternate . Mr.. Dobson moved that Jen Wright be selected as alternate; Mr. Donovan seconded; passage was unanimous.. The weekly meeting time was set for Monday at 8:30 a,m: The Drafting .Com- mittee meetings, while open to the public, will not have a set time. If any members of the public would like to attend, they may call the Town Office for information as to time and day. In the matter of the appointment of a new member, it was agreed that the person should not be a Trustee; that his main qualifications would be interest in the community and availability during the time period allowed. After discussion, the group decided to ask Jim Slevin if.he would care to participate. ~' The first substantive decision relating to the actual charter was the form of government. Currently Vail operates with a hybrid council-manager form. The various forms that have been used in the U.S. were discussed (Chapter 3, Section D, 1(a) through {e) of the Charter Commission Book). Additional points brought out were that: 1 . a Cnmmissiori form resembles the County Commissioners organization; 2. the Strong Mayor-Council form is more adapted to large cities acid is also a highly partisan political form; 3. in the Mayor-~ • Administrator form, it might be more effective if the administrator were elected . by the Council rather than appointed by the Mayor; 4. aCouncil-Manager gov- ernment may still have a mayor, whose method of election may be either direct or by the members of the council; in the latter case, . it is usually an unwritten rule that the person with the most votes is Mayo~^. If the Mayor is elected separately, •the disadvantages are that the dispersion of authority makes it dif- ficult to focus on one head of government and also the mayor may have problems of disagreement with the council. The decision was made, after some discussion, that for a Town with the character of Vail., the council~anager farm would be ~ the only viable arrangement. Mr. Donovan made a motion to this effect; Dr. f~-•~-•`5teinberg seconded, passage was unanimous. Charters for cities which have this form of government will be used as samples; some additional .provisions might be included such as the requirement for a public informational (not deci- sional) hearing in the event the manager is fired. Mr..Dobson suggested that another general decision that must be reached is the procedure to be followed with the existing Board of Trustees . Otherwise, their, authority to decide questions in on-going matters would be arribiguous. Chairman • White requested that a listing of all matters. that need to be determined before beginning the section-by-section analysis be made for consideration at the next. meeting . The meeting adjourned at 12:20 p. m. .~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING HOME RU LE CHARTER COMMISSION APRIL 24, 1972 A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 8:35 a. m. , April 24, 1972, in the Conference Room of the Vail Municipal Building . Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: John Donovan Jim Slevin Tom Steinberg Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail • `rte u An error made in the previous meeting of April 20 was noted; the Board of Trustees will need to appoint the new member, not the Commission. Thy question of the transition period to the government set forth in the Charter was first raised . The feeling of the group was that as we just had an election and we are keeping the same form of government, we should make provision for the same group to remain in office. Chairman White brought up the ques- tion of whether we should have the election in the spring or fall. Dr. Steinberg noted that the election should be held in add--numbered years; his suggestion was to begin to hold elections under the new Charter in the fall of 1973. It was proposed that the election be held the third Tuesday in November, prior to Thanksgiving, provided there is no conflict with the fiscal year. For special elections, it would be necessary for a Council resolution to call for the election 30 days prior to the date set. It was noted that perhaps the Charter can incor- porate the Colorado Municipal Election Cade with amendments. Dr. Steinberg -suggested that the Town maintain 'its own election register and require. that individuals register at the Town Office. Mr. Robinson indicated that he would research the extent to which a Town can deviate from the Colorado Municipal Election Code before a final decision is made on these matters. General points of information were that:: 1 . _ the designation of Vail cannot be changed from "Town" to "City" as we do not have 2 , 000 people; 2 , it would be possible and desirable to<change the ha me of the governing body from Board of Trustees to Town Council. In the section bf the Charter relating to powers of the city, Dr.Steinberg recommended ,that architectural control be enumerated; although this would be found in 'the section on commissions, the additional mention would strengthen the provision. In addition,. it would be a good idea to have a section which would allow future absorption of the special districts. Perhaps a broad provision, stating that the lack of specific enumera- tion of a power does not necessarily preclude its possession by the Council is needed. Mr. Slevin asked for the Commission's opinion on the review of the Charter every five years, for example. There was general agreement that this would be a good idea . Additional paints agreed upon were: 1 . to include a phrase that would allow the Town, in the future, to set up election districts; 2. to have seven people an the Town Council. Although both 2-year and 4-year terms have advantages, the Commission, after same discussion; settled upon 4-year terms. At the first election, in order to stagger terms, the three, people with the highest number of votes will serve 4-year terms, the other three will serve 2-year terms. The next question was that of the method, of election of the mayor and his Voting status. Mr. Minger gave his opinion that, in acouncil-manager .,,, i' • • farm of government, it is better to have the Mayor elected from the council; . otherwise, there exists the- possibility that the Mayor will be totally incompa- tible with the Council and also that he will divert attention from the individual councilmen. Dr. Steinberg added that it would seem-that the councilmen would be in a better position to assess file qualifications of the candidates . Mr. White contributed that a disadvantage would ~be that the selection process for the mayor could split the Council. Secondly, many people view the Mayor as a spokesman for the Town, a function that might be lost if he were not elected by the Town.. It might be true that if the Mayor can only vote. in case of a tie, he would not then be taking away from;, the Council. powers.. Dr. Steinberg con- tributed that it would be beneficial to give the Mayor a vote; thus, there ,would be fewer cases when a quorum was nqt ,constituted., It was suggested that the Mayor be elected every two years by !a rria~ority:vote of the council (initially seven people). The first meeting after the election could be deemed an organ- izational meeting, open to the public, where they could voice their opinion on the person to be Mayon. In the matter of a possible ia~me--duck provision, it was decided that the more desirable course would be for the newly-elected officials to take office immediately. The Mayor Pro-tem would also be elected by the Council. The qualifications far office were set as: 1 . shall have been a resident of the Town for two years; 2. if the potential candidate. lives in a newly annexed area, the length of time he has ,resided in that area shall be applied to the requirement; 3, there shall be no .provision for length of time individual has been a citizen; 4. there shall be no age qualification for holding office. Many charters state that a salaried .employee of the Town cannot perform other work for the Town. In this case, it was suggested that the provision read, "other than incidental contract services." One item that would need. further, research was how those Council members who are not up for re-election can receive salary increa9es; if they can receive the same increase given to newly elected members. It was. suggested that a provision be inserted in the Charter that the Mayor can be removed by the Council at any time (if elected by them) . As the method of election of the Mayor had not been definitively determined, it . was suggested that we solicit outside comments on this point and continue the discussions, In regard to special rrieetings, a protective clause could be .inciucled that would require consent in advance to the agenda from any member who would be absent. A subject which would require some further research was whether it would be necessary or correct to include a clause allowing executive, closed sessions of the Council; these sessions being for discussion only, no measures being adopted in them. In this regard, a good precedent might be to allow a member of the press to attend executive sessions with the understanding that they are private. Thy discussion of what-constitutes a quoruri-~ brought out that an ordinance may not be passed unless a majority of the elected members are present; otherwise, it is, a majority of the members present. It was agreed that two meetings of the council should be required to pass ordinances except. emergency ordinances which would require only one meeting and become effective immediately. Qbvi-~ ously, it would be necessary to use emergency ordinances sparingly. In this regard, a point for research was whether. an emergency ordinance should carry a time limit of its applicability or whether it should. be subject to referendum instead. A point of information was that a referenclurrm cannot be extenc{ecl to financial matters. In regard to referendum, initiative and recall, it was sug- gested that perhaps these provisions as found in several charters are required by law to be adopted in .foil; this point will be investigated. The Drafting Committee agreed to meet at 10 a: m. on Wednesday, April 26. The nature of press coverage was discussed; it was agreed that the thing to be avoided was giving the impression that a final decision has been reached when all decisions will be tentative fora :eonside.rable length of time. Per- haps the best article would only indicate the alternatives discussed in.the preliminary (before drafting) meetings; thus, public feedback would be . Page 2 encouraged . There wiii be an outside speaker at the next meeting. Mr, Minger asked if there were any suggestions for speakers other than those who have been mentioned; the ~lVlayor of .4~spen was suggested . The meeting adjourned at ~1:~p a,rn. , ,, Chairman lh • C7 t f • MINUTES REGULAR MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION MAY ~ , ~ 972 A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was. convened at 8:35 a. m. , May 1 , 1972, in the Conference Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey ' John Donovan ', Jim Slevin Tom Steinberg Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail ~ 'I ,. Chairman White opened tlne meeting ::with. Athe cprn~ment that in the draft ~~ charter provisions of April 27, a change would need to be made regarding terms of office,(Section 3.2), ' As seven people will be elected, four will 'i have to be elected to 4-year terms the first year and three the next elec- tion year. In the further sentence referring to the elections thereafter, the wording will need to be changed to reflect the need to elect either four ~! or three new councilmen. ~, The Commission proceeded to review the draft section by section.. Tt was noted in the section on Municipal Powers that the attempt was to be general ', and broad rather than specifically enumerate powers. Tn .Section. 1 ,4, Form of Government, it was suggested that the addition be made Hof a brief overview ~I, spelling out that in acouncil-manager form of government the Council is charged with the legislative policy_making functions while the Town Manager; is responsible for the daily administration. Secondly, the intent to have a Mayor could also be indicated in this section:to avoid confusion. It was explained that Section 2.4 regarding Etection Precincts does not allow for the election of councilmen to represent only a particular district; the provision '~ it makes is for a convenience of the electors in voting for their a~-large repre-'', sentatives. It was pointed out (Section 3.3). that although the eou.ncil.men will take office immediately after the election, the Mayor must be selected within ', 7 days following the election. It was noticed that a provision for council selec- ~~ tion in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor had not been inserted in Section ', 3.3; its transfer from Section 3.9 would be desirablE. Section 3.7, the section prohibiting financial interest in any coniract with the Town, on the part of elected officials; was the subject of lengthy discussion. Mr. Donovan suggested that too strict a provision might, in a Small town, ~~ encumber the Town in hiring people to accomplish needed work.. Mr. Wright. suggested that full disclosure might be an alternative control. Chairman White felt this would not Fulfill the purpose of prever+ting an ,individual from ', running for councilman only in order to better himself financially; or,. in ' the mare ordinary case, protecting the Council ,and the individual, member from charges of unfair dealing. Dr. Steinberg noted that the term "contract" ~i insured that the provision applied only to large jobs . Mr. Donovan suggested ', that the provision state a percentage of interest in a corporation that would or ', would not be allowable for a councilman if that corporation were doing business I, with the Town. An alternative suggestion was to provide for a vote' of the ', Council to determine if one of their members could do a particular jab for the ~~ Town. This was seen as placing the other members in an intolerable position ', of judging their colleague. As no decision could be reached, it was suggested that the matter be temporarily tabled, discussed with the other members, and i', some outside opinions be solicited. ~, • _:~-. 4 The decision on the matter of compensation of council members was ,that while the salary n-~ay be increased by an out-going council for the new members to be elected, those members whose terms did not expire- cannot receive the increase , in the matter of individuals appointed to the Council in the case of a vacancy, it was decided they should serve until the next general election rather than special election.' The discussion of new materials began with the article on City Administration. it was decided not to include the requirement that the Town.- Manager must live in the Town. Mr. Minger suggested, however, that it was a -good idea to retain the "recruitment clause," that the person appointed need not live in the city or state at the time of his appointment: Dr. Steinberg suggested that in the council selection of a manager, the vote be that of a majority of the entire council. Other provisions to be included in this section were that no member of the Council could be appointed manager within two years of holding office; that an acting .manager could not have been a member.of the council within the preceeding two years . Mr..Minger explained why he thought it important to include a provision for a public hearing upon the removal of a manager. Cthsr employees, as hired and fired by the Town Manager., had, an implicit right to appeal to 'the Town Council; the manager, however, having been hired and fired by the Council, had no such implicit right. As ;removal from the position would affect the person's entire professional career, it could be especially important to have the reasons publically stated. Mr. Minger did not see. the manager as debating these points in the public hearing; also, the hearing would not be mandatary so that cases of mutual agreement,. for example, would .not require the statement of reasons. The hearing, if requested, would be a form of cheek and :balance; it could contribute to the public accountability of the Council. There was general agreement that such a provision would be drafted. The discussion returned to the question of the provision of a hearing for other employees. Mr. Minger felt that any such. provision would .need to be carefully worded; if employees felt the manager did not have the power to hire and fire, the situation could be troublesome. Miss;Hobart contributed t1~at in many cities this provision was included in an employee manual rather than in the basic laws. Mr. Minger stated that to require Council approval of the Finance . Director and Clerk, as in some Charters,, seems to violate the theory that the manager will be cornpatitble with the ~Co~lncil ane9.hire''individuals who reflect this compatibility. Chairman White indicated that the difficulty, as he saw it, was that if a new manager wanted- to bring in his own. people, Council approval would be protection for along-time employee about to be'~removed. Mr. Minger indicated that the question of why the Finance Director and Clerk era specifi- cally mentioned in several charters would be researched. Chairn~-an White suggested that as the Clerk is mentioned throughout and is alegally-defined position, its inclusion in the Charter might be necessary. it was suggested that if the provision for a Clerk is kept in the Charter, the function of the position in elections should be spelled out in the reference. it was suggested that the provision regarding bonding be expanded by stating that the expense will be borne by the Town. The Legal and Judiciary section was next considered. Mr. Minger stated his opinion that it was a good check to have ,the Town Attorney completely respon- sibie to the Council only. In regard to the Municipal Judge, it was decided that: 1 . while it would be desirable ford him to be an attorney, it was not realistic in Vail; 2. the Judge should ire appointed by the Council every two years; however, after the appointment,'he could be removed only for specific, non-political reasons; 3.. .the Judge should have a set salary for the two-year period . The next article to be considered was the one relating to.goards and Commissions: Agreement was reached that the majority on any board or commission should ~' not be held b councilmen. Mr. Minger indicated that research would be done y on the question of whether there are many situations, such as occurred with t Page 2 ~ the Non-profit Corporation for the. Municipal Building, where 'the Board is required to be composed of the Council. It was suggested that perhaps .lt would reinforce our .position if the anticipated use of an architectural con- trot board and a sign review board were provided for in the Charter.; Ntr, Minger stated that perhaps these would not need to be specifically named but that the provision for the creation of boards and carYimissions could be more strongly worded . Mr . Donovan suggested that this is. an area for research , Agreement was reached that a person would not be required to meet a resi- dency requirement to serve on a board or commission; thus, mare flexibility would be given to utilize talent. Mr. Minger felt that an exception would be the Planning Commission; as they exercise a great deal of pavte r, the members should reside in the Tawn. The provision. that a member could not be a city employee was retained. The terms of office for the various boards and com- missions would be left to ordinance. It was noted that the Council either appoints all boards or gives the authority to do so; also, that they specify to whom and how often a board should report. In regard to the Financial Article, Mr. Bernstein, the Finance Director, was in the process of preparing a memo on the matter which would be available shortly. He had also spoken to Aspen's finance director, vrh o has not found the provisions of their charter to be workable. 'This conversation could be added to the memo. The members will discuss the memo among themselves at the next meeting and at the following meeting will discuss it with Nlr. Bernstein. Also at the next meeting there will be a report on haw other charters handle the no-financial-involvement provision. The meeting adjourned at 1 'I :0o a. m. lh Page 3 ~: F Chairman ~. -.,. ~ MLNUTES REGULAR MEETING HOME RULE CHARTERCOMMZSSION MAY 8, 1972 • A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was corNened at 8:40 a, m. , May 8, 1972, in the Conference Room of the Vaii Municipal Building , Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey John Donovan Jim Slevin Tom Steinberg Hans. Weill Jen Wright • Also .pY~esent were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail The meeting opened with a discussion of the provision already drafted that the manager or manager pro-tem cannot have been a member of the Council within the preceeding two years . The point was that perhaps the manager pro-tem should be allowed to have been an elected official as such an indivi- dual would have the knowledge of town affairs necessary to .conduct an interim administration. It was suggested that the pros and cons of such an arrange- ment be one of the items of discussion -with Ken Bueche and Ted Tedesco, who . shall be at the meeting next Monday. The Trustees will be invited to this meeting . The commission next reviewed the major changes reflected in the draft pro- visions of May 5. The requirement for written consent to a special meeting from an absent Council member had been dropped; all that will be requ-fired is written notice. Also, a meeting can be called on less than 24-hours notice if a quorum of the Council consents. It was decided to add that the Town Manager can request a special meeting, It was noted that the decision had been reached not to provide far executive sessions in the Charter. In Section 6. 1 regarding the Town Manager, it was added that a manager must be appointed within 6 months of a vacancy; also, in the case of removal, pending a public hearing, a manager is considered to be suspended, An addition shiou~ld be made to Section 6.2 stating the powers and duties of an acting town manager. In regard,to the composition of boards and cornmi~sions (Section 8,2},,the change has been made that the Mayor cannot serve on a board or commission except as an ex-officio member. He is not, however, required to serve. The reasoning behind this decision is that the. Mayor should have a broader view of the operations of the Town and also that his predominance of power could have an undesired effect an the operatipn of .these bodies ., The question was raised- as to why the Planning Commission is given specific :mention in the Charter while other bodies are not. 'T'his is because it requires different qualifications; its members must be residents .of the Town. There was some discussion as to the proper place to insert architectural control or if it needs specific mention at all. It was decided to get a legal opinion on the placement of architectural control, recreation, advertising, etc. in the charter.. A final change noted in the draft was that the membership of the Planning Commission had been increased to seven. scion of new rovisions be an with a consideration of the financial The disco p„ g . memo submitted by Mr. Bernstein. There was general agreement that 3 to 5--year capital improvement projections: were necessary. Requiring. things beyond this, such as an operating expenditures projection, in the charter rr+ight ^ • C7 ~J • not be realistic; however, if the Council felt they needed additional projections they could request them. One goal to be rnax.is~nized in the charter provisions was to protect the community by requiring an accepted accounting. system .and budget, for example. Chairman White suggested that the capital program ancf the budget be submitted at different times, even though it is assumed they are prepared together. One important financial feature of being -home rule is that the Town will no longer be operating under the state bddget law which prohibits any budget increase above 5% of the previous budget without specific permission. However, It was Mr. Minger's opinion that it should just be assumed the Town, has the power to increase its .budget without inserting a specific provision in the Charter. Thus, the problem of artiticipating growth would be avoided., Chairman White and Mr, Minger bothi disagreed with Mr. Bernstein's suggestion of a Budget Finance Committee;, this is more of an administrative function. A provision which must be included in tl~e charter is the allowing of supplemental budget appropriations. Chairman 1Nh~te suggested that the requirement of a special hearing on the status of the i% sales tax account be included. Mr. Minger thought the warding of this would ~be difficult if too rigid a requirement were to be avoided; however, Dr. Steinberg feat an emergency clause would cover a temporary situat ion, if it were desired to use this fund for other than :capital improvements on a long-term basis, it should be submitted,to the elec- torate, One addition which will be rr~de will be that the auditors will be selected by the Council. Additional regiairem~nts which should be provided for are. one for short-term borrowing in anticipation of revenues and one for inter-fund bor- rowing. Chairman White noted that care would. need to be taken to indicate from what funds one can borrow. In the muter of the debt ceiling, Mr. Minger sug- gested 20% of the actual valuation, Dr'. Steinberg noted that this -would be in addition to the debt of the special dis~ricts,, however. Chairman White suggested that if the special districts were incorporated into the Town in the future,. bonding capacity would be lost; thus, the limi~atian needed to be high. Outside .experts will be consulted on this point.. It ways agreed that a ;restriction on the sale of real property unless approved by the jelectorate was a clesirab.le provision, However, it might be possible to exclude small items from this requirement. The next section. to be., considered wa~.the one on Public Utilities and Franchises . Mr. Minger suggested some provisio be'made. forth; consolidation of 'services .' Chairman White inquired if there needs to be a general election on the granting of every franch'ise,.° Mr.Minger thought it was :required by the State Constitution but would consult an attarr+ey on the matter, He also noted. that a good thing to include would be a provision for per~its and licenses .revocable by the Council. An attorney would be consulted as well on the possibility of grants to a regional service authority or to special districts, Mr. Slevin brought up the prabiem of town growth .beyond the area covered in an anginal franchise agreement. Mr. Minger indicated that it could be provided that a franchise extends to annexed areas; however, if the area is already under a different franchise for the same service, it is doubtful if they could be required to utilize the other firm. It was also felt that a provision for rev ew of a franchise should be written into. the agreement itself, rather than the charter. However; the charter could stipulate that a review period must bi provided. Chairman White suggested that the article on Miscellaneous Provisions begin; with a statement of Veil's uniqueness.. A list of possible provisions for this section included: 1 . architectural control; ~. sign review committee,;. 3, consolidation of districts; 4., community promotional activities; 5. recrea.- tional developments and facilities wi~.hin and outside the Town limits; and 6.' transportation systems. In regard to emergency powers, Mr, Minger sug-- . gested that it should be the manager ~nrho is empowered to assume control after the Council has declared an err~~ergeney or insurrection. There was some discussion of the role of the Mayor in a crisis situation. Mr. Minger suggested that a continuity of govern~-r+ent clause be drafted to establish a succession of governmental officials.. Another provision to be drafted would be one for the periodic review of thelCharter. Also, a cheek will be made for any additional definitions which needito be included, i Mr. Weibel commented that in rega id to the transition period to government under the new charter, it would appear that some .current members of boards Pag~ 2 ::.~ r a. and commissions wilt heed to relinquish their positions. It was acknowledged that this would be necessary,• a paragraph could be added that the Boards and commissions shall continue to function .but as provided for in this charter. Also, the effective date of the budget provision- would be for the 1973 annual budget . .. It was decided that there will be a public me eting around: the first of June . Next Monday, the commission will meet at 9:00 a, m. The meeting adjourned at ~ 1 :50 a , m. ~. ecr . ary ~ lh ~~ ~~ • :,, ,~ ~. ~ '' MINUTES REGULAR- MEETLNG HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION MAY 15 , 1972 ~J A .regular meeting .of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 9;15 a. m. , May 15, 1972, in the Conference -.Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey John Donovan'' Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger,. Town Manager Stan Bernstein, Director of Administrative Services Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant George Knox, Vail Trail . Ken Bueche, General Counsel, Colorado M.y~nicipal League Ted Tedesco, City Manager of Boulder t Mr. Bueche began his remarks by noting that he'has a bias in favor of fiexibilttjr; in favor of a broad granting oF.powers. However, if the people want certain powers withheld, the charter is the place to make. this reservation. Basic safe- guards to be included are the initiative, referendum, and recall provisions; council procedure provisions; or provisions providing for the type of publication of ordinances. Philosophically, the charter can be viewed as a grant of power or a limitation of power. The courts have interpreted it in -both ways. One means of avoiding the disadvantages of enumerating powers and yet providing for possible interpretation as a grant of powers is to declare the charter to be a "grant of all powers found in Article 24 except as hereinafter provided .'" Areas in which detailed provisions are needed include;. 1 .. the difference among ordinances, resolutions and motions; 2. the actions which must fie taken by ordinance and those that ca.n be done by resolution or motion; 3, the powers of the mayor and those of the council; 4. the number of votes necessary to carry various actions of the council; 5. whether or not ordinances need to be read in full . In other areas, Mr. Bueche recommended that: 1 . rather than include ,a severability clause in every ordinance, a general statement be made in the charter that such a clause is implied unless stated otherwise; 2, deviation from the State provision regarding adoption of codes by reference might be desirable; 3. the fiscal year may not need to be established in the charter. Mr. Minger opened the question and answer session with an inquiry into the .difference between a home rule city and a home rule .town. Mr. Bueche responded that they are the same except:.- 1 . if the .charter is silent on a particular area., state law, which often varies by size; will apply; 2. in areas of authority denied to municipalities, state law applies; 3, as home rule for towns is a recent develop- ment, there are many provisions in state law.. that say "dae`'s not apply to home rule cities;" whether these include towns is a judicial question not yet deckled. Mr. Donovan inquired wi-et~er .there was any legal background for architectural control and also if it shoulc] be included in the charter. According to Mr... Bueche, a carefully and tightly drawn ordinance, not granting too great an authority and not open to abuses, has a good, chance o~ being judicially validated due to an expanded view of the police powers. Mrs . Bailey expanded the question ley asking .. if they would be impeding other powers by specifically referring to only one power. Whether a judge viewed a charter as a grant or limitation of powers would affect the answer given. In any case, on the negative side, such a mention might. result in a freezing of the power Prom adaptation. However, it might positive~.y=enhance the power. Perhaps a draft provision could be written to be circulated to various r , ~. experts for their reaction. Or ~a preamble cou•ld° be adopted setting forth goals, including architectural control. The next inquiry concerned the financial interest provision. Mr. Buecha saw two problems in this section: 1 , ascertaining when a financial interest is involved, and 2, ascertaining when it is detrimental.to the town, He noted that often even the appearance of a conflict of interest breaks down public. trust. An additional problem is posed by tYle case where an elected officialrs interest is affected, but in no way different from other individuals .in his Business situa- tion, for example. It might be possible to provide that the individual concerned could not vote, although this has the disadvantage of not preventing other forms of influence. Or, the contract could Be given on a competitive bid basis, Addi- tional questions to be dealt with would include a determination of how much stock held in a company would constitute a conflict and how specific the charter should be in order to prevent any particular council. from changing the ruling. Mr. Bueche indicated he would do some research an this area, - in regard to a public hearing far the Town Manager upon .dismissal, fvlr, Bueche's 'inclination was to not include it in, the charter. However, if it was included, it should be made clear that the purpose was only to clear the air; that the hearing was not evidential or decisional, In regard to possible slander or libel suits arising from this., his opinion was that the danger was nat very g .rent. The - broader philosophical question involved is that, cif the public accountability of the manager . Miss Hobart asked if ari election was necessary before the granting of a franchise,' Although the area needs mare research, at .present. the understanding is that this is required in a home rule municipality although not in .a statu.t o~ry municipality. This illuminates the problem of charter provisions vis-a--vis constitutional r.e~- interpretation. If a limitation is included in-the charter because current inter- • pretation supports it, the problem may arise in the future where -the municipality still has the limitation by charter while the re-interpretation has been made that it is not required. Or the reverse situation of failing to include .a desired limita~ ` tion because it is presently part of state law can occur . In regard to possible deviations from standard initiative, referendum and recall •. ~ provisions, there have been cases establishing the right .to allow broader referen~- ~F ~~ ~ . dum provisions. However, the question oi' areas where the right can be restricted has not been interpreted judicially, Presently, the areas in which it can be restricted are; 't . emergency ordinances; 2 , appropriations ordinances; 3. ordinances on assessments For local, improvement districts , The exclusion of . emergency ordinances has been subject to .abuse; restrictions reed to be included on what can be declared an emergency: The present draft charter for Vail may be overruled on some of the restrictions of the referendum it has included. Mr. Bueche did not think a provision requiring periodic review of the charter was a good idea because; 1 , an attempt should be made to create a flexible charter not requiring periodic change; 2. review might be forced at an inap- propriate time; and 3, given that amendment, is a relatively easy process, changes could be made as needed. -Miss Hobart asked Mr. Bueche's opinion of not .requiring residency to serve on boards' and commissions . He had no objections if they had no legislative authority. Mr. Donovan asked about the problem of enforcing charter provisions in special districts that v~iere not co-extensive with -the town. Mr, Bueche suggested that. for this, reason and also because at some point the districts might begin to work at cross-purposes with the town, the authority should be provided to merge the districts with the town. Mr. Tedesco first gave his thoughts an the position of the.: town manager. He felt that the manager shou.~:~i be freed of detailed administrative. tasks by allowing him a personal staff. Second,, that the. managei^ should be prnfessionaily trained. If. he is competent, he can, quickly perceive what are the Local problem areas. One thing a prospective manager will consider is,the, charter and the constraints or freedorris it allows to him. Mr. Tedesco agreed that the better method is to have the mayor elected Pram among the council. ,r: Otherwise, the mayor might feel .he has a mandate from the people and also the task of defining relationships Page 2 rs„u~; ~ ~ ... ,, - c .iii. ~'..~''... - i ., ~ ' .' -.. .. ~- • among the mayor/council/manager will be complicated. If it is assumed the mayor speaks for the council and not hims.alf, election fnom the ,council will help insure communications among the 'group. Even a mayor elected by a compromise among the council is better than an independently elected mayor not acceptable to the council. Mr. Tedesco agreed that in cases of crisis or emergency, the Town Manager should 'refain his authority to direct the depart- ments without interference. On the matter of the voting status of the mayor, Mr. Tedesco would tend to give him a vote in order 'to encourage his participa- tion; of course, without a vote for the mayor, more authority is given to the council. Mr, Tedesco also noted that if the budget is well-written and well- documented, the council does not need to be involved in small appropriation matters , In regard to the Boulder .charter, Mr. Tedesco felt that the fact that it is clear as to functions and establishes meaningful rates for participants had attracted welt-qualified personnel. One problem posed by their charter is the fiscal constraints it includes, A second problem is that the Boulder charter is too detailed in regard to administrative organisation. Mr. Tedesco suggested he would include an even stronger financial interest provision than the one currently drafted . He would .recommend that there be full disclosure of financial involvements .before taking office and that during the term these investments could not be enhanced, Any interests allowed would need to be clearly defined. Although the prohibition against financial interest had been done by ordinance in Boulder, he would include it in a new charter. In Boulder at present, architectural control is Only exercised on city projects; however, it is developing -into acity-wide function. Nlr. Tedesco agreed that the manager pro-tem should not have iaeun.an elected official for 2 years . Without this provision, a person desiring to be manager could initiate the removal of a manager and then obtain the position of manager pro-tem. If the administration is operating well, it should not take long to hire another person; also, a good manager has always provided back-up people for his absence,. Mr. Tedesco felt that a 3~-year contract for the manager is a good thing; without it unwritten conditions of employment are often not known to later, officials; also, it guarantees the town that the manager will hot just leave without notice. In the charter it might be mentioned that the right exists to make this contract, He also saw as desirable the provision for a public hearing. in: his thinking, the people- have elected a form of government and to remove a manager is a major change within that fori~n. Mr. Tedesco would limit participation on boards and commissions of the mayor ~_ and council even further than the draft has suggested. In this way,. the .council can be used as a court of last resort., reviewing appeals from the planning com- mission, for example. In addition, if a member of the council is on a board, the other members will tend to look to him for their opinions rather than arriving at independent positions. Thirdly, too much participation taxes the energies of the councilmen. In Boulder, the councilmen serve as the Board of Directors of special districts in order that there not be independent. boards that could work at cross-purposes to the council. In regard to the absence of a residency require- ment for boards and commissions, Mr. Tedesco had no strong feelings on the matter as long as~ they had na decision--making authority. The Vail Tr.uatees present at this meeting agreed that it might be a good idea for them not to serve on appointed boards and commissions . Mr. White asked Mr. Tedesca's opinion of limitations on the borrowing. power of the town. The essence of the answer was that any limitation should be realis- tic rather than just a contrived figure thrown in to reassure people. In regard to supplemental appropriations, if the original budget is flexible; they are only needed perhaps 3 times a year, Freedom to transfer between funds was seen as necessary. ' The final matter consid~recl was the terms of councilmen: Mr. Tedesco saw 4 years as the best term of office,, In Boulder, ther:e_are always 5 of 9 running. ,, ., r The person who receives the least number of votes of the 5 elected is given a 2-year term and required to run again at the next election.. They have no limitation on number of terms served. Also, if.it is necessary to appoint a new member, they select someone who has ,not run for the .position and this person fills the remainder of the term. As there were no further questions, the meeting adjourned at 12:4 p. m. ~~ w A ecr ary lh i~ Page. ~ :a~~ -.~:~ • ~. MINUTES , - REGULAR MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER C4MMISSIQN MAY 22', 1972 • A regular meeting of the Home Rule .Charter Commission was convened at 8:45 a.m., May 22, 1972, in .the Conference Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey John Liobson John Donovan Jim Slevin Hans 4~Teibel Jen W~cight Also present were; Terry Minger, Town Manager Stan Bernstein, Finance Director Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant • t • The financial pravisians of the charter were the first subject of discussion. Mr. Bernstein suggested that the charter of Scotts-- dale, Arizona, was a-goad model. It was agreed .that it eras prefer- able not to establish the fiscal. year in the Charter. In regard to the amount of detail necessary or desirable in the charter, it was suggested that bond counsel might require a certaixi.amount of detail and also that the determination needs to be made of what is necessary to protect the people from irresponsible actions. On the .other hand, the Council can request whatever. detailed reporting they desire with-~ out specifically requiring it by charter. Chairman V~hite suggested that. it was oat necessary to require by charter that comparative figures be presented with the budget. Mr. Minger indicated that the staff would draft a financial provision and submit it to the commission.. Mr. White clarified that in regard to the capi-tel. program budget his suggestion had been that it be submitted prior to the budget in ordex to a11ow time for detailed consideration of botYi, Also, that there be a separate portion of the hearing to consider the fund created by' the l~ sales tax. The feeling had been that the capita]. program bud- get should be a three-year projection. Mr. Donovan .suggested that the hearing on the l~ sales tax could be included as part of the section dealing with the establishment of a sales tax. Mr. Manger cautioned against this unless a provision were included which allowed the use of this fund in emergencies, however. A statement to. the effect that a: unanimous vote of the Council could authorize its use for other Fur poses was suggested. Chairman White noted that a Section would be needed on the tax rate, on amendments to the budget of-ter adoption and also on transfer of funds. A statement would :need to be included that the monies of the l~ sales tax fund are not transferrable. An addi-. tional provision wi11 be for an independent audit by certified account- ants within 4 months after the end of the fiscal year. zn regard to municipal borrowing, it was suggested that a time limita- tion within which short-term notes must be repaid be included, although a renewal option could be also provided. Mr.` Bernstein indicated that a .limitation of within 6 months would not cause any problems; however, 4 months would be undesirable. The provision: will be written for the 5 month limitation and then revie~red. The 'opinion of a bond attorney would be helpful.. - Ghairman ~rJhite inquired why an election was not needed for the issuance of utility bonds. This is because the town's taxing power is not pledged in this case. In tYie.case of general obligation bonds, if the town were to become delinquent, the holders of the bonds could, increase the mill levy, in order to prevent a defaul~~ Wa,th a utility bond, for example, they cannot increase utility rates, Mr. Donovan suggested that the rectuixement for an 'election in the case,, of, general obligation bonds was enough of a safeguard; other protective provisions might not be necessary in the charter. In regard to a c;ebt limitation, Chairman V~]hite asked how the real valuation of the town is determined. ' This figure would be easy to derive if all property were assessed at the same rate; however,, this is not dcsne and, hence.,. the deter- mination of real value presents a problem. Although the need: for a limitation appears to be only psychological.., additional advantages might be given. Mr. Minger suggested that sosr-e research will. be done on this question. Chairman i~'hite suggested that .:the draft exclude . such a limitation and the peoples' reaction. to this be cansidared. Mr. Donavan suggested the limitation :be lift to ordinance; there would be two. public hearings as well as .the.eloction if the limit were increased. That it might become dif•fioult to sell the bonds without a limit was one consideration.. An addtional:consideration would be the effect of a debt ceiling on the .passible Future refunding of bonds, zn regard to revenue bonds, the ability to use sales tax revenue to service these bonds might be a.necessary provision. This was the sub- ject of Aspen's. first charter amendment.. A sample situation ~zould be that of a project which should be revenue-producing but the bond com-- ponies will not hand.~:e it without a guarantee, from sales tax far example.. An election is not required in. this case as the saps tax is not considered~to be the full faith and credit of the town. Advice will be sought on the provisions 'necessary for special improvement districts; these are often formed when,a project will only benefit a portion of the town rather than the citi~e~.ry at large. In regard to situations such as the .Municipal. Building Authority, where the building is theoretically held by a bank. and could be possessed by it in case of default, there was.some discussion as to the merits. of the flexi- bility this .could grant as. compared to :the danger of by-passing the election provision. 'Although ,expert advice will be sought, the tenta~ tive opinion was that it l:s not necessary to.ment~;on authorities of this type in.the charter. A final suggestion for this section was a px~,ovision to limit the amount of a general assessment that can be contributed to a special improvement district. .The section to prohibit conflicts of financial interest was next con- sidered. It was suggested that a l.egal..interpretation of stockholding as a conflict of financ:ia~l i~:terest be _o~tained. The general opinion was that an attempt shou3:d.be made to create the strictest situation possible; if found unworkable, amendments could be made.. In cases of subtle dodges of.the provision, the Council could vote against a mem- ber on the grounds that`he was violating the intent of the provision. In a situation where a possible conflict arises only after the election, the member concerned would have to choose between his office and his financial interest.. It.was suggested, that the.provisian as drafted should perhaps be expanded to k~etter reflect. the intent. The possibility of leaving the details to ordinance was suggested but this carries the difficulty that any one council. could change the provision, perhaps in their own financial interest.. Mrs. Bailey. indicated that she. was con- cerned not so much with major conflicts, but with the small items which coudl arise every day. Chairman White questioned whether this provision would be effective when the charter was adopted, thus possibly requiring thy: resignation of same members... Mss:Hobart.was,asked to draft a pry- vision reflecting the day's.dscussian an`d,including an exception for items of less than $1d0 cumulative value over the course of a year... The decision was made to 'fol,low ,the system of el:ectian used in Boulder. The person elected 'who has•received the lowest number o~ v,~~es shall be given only a 2~year term.and be required,..to run .again in tfhe next elec- tion. In this manner, a majarty~•of the"°council will be elected every two years. The prbhibiti.on of mayoral participation as a member of boards and commissions was reviewed., It was pointed out that the fac,~.... that councilmen cannot constitute,;more than 1/3 of any board or commis- Sian does not mean that they cannot constitute less nor that ordinance cannot later prohibit their participation. The method of electing tY~e mayor was reviewed,• Mx. Dobson contributed. that this was .desirable as.. it eliminates a situation where a Yiighly-qualified councilman is lost if he runs for mayor and is defeated... No information has ,yet been received on whether a general election is required far the granting of a franchise. Mr.. Donovan suggested that the preamble be written in such a way that it can be the source of the intent of the charter. An additional point of information was that ari opiniozi is still pending on whether the provision on refere~:dum as now drafted is too restrictive.. The next meeting of the commission was set. for. PTednesday, May 3l, at 9;00 a.m. At that time, a bond attorney will be present to discuss the financial sections. Page 2 4 r.. The meeting- adjowned`. a.t'1.1:30` am. 5 lh • • Page 3 ~.~ . ~: y T ~., ~' - MINUTES ~ SPECIA L MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION MAY 3.1 , 1972 A special meeting of the -Home Rule Charter- Commission was. ,convened at 9:20 a. m. , May 31 , 1972, in the Conference Room o~E the Vail Municipal Building. - Chairman Gerry White and the following members were. present: Doris Bailey John Donavan Jim Slevin Hans Weibel Also present were: Terry Minger, Town. Mapager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Stan Bernstein, Finance Director Sharon Brown, Vail Trail Dan Herrington; Boettcher and Company Bob. Tallmadge, Tailmadge & Tallmadge The meeting opened with. a discussion of the provision for municipal borrowing. Mr. Herrington explained. that one form of short-term borrowing, anticipation warrants, would be restricted by the .provision as now written. This could be corrected by either extending the repayment period to 12 months or by creating. a separate category for anticipation warrants, These are called warrants as their repayment is to be; n~a de from a specified source: It was agreed to' define anticipation warrants and short-term ,notes separately; the former would be specified to mean borrowing in anticipation of .bonding or other permanent financing.. In regard to: the qualifications of. electors in bond elections, Mr. Tallrrradge sug- gested the provision as currently drafhed be changed to read "quaiified electors as defined by state iaw." Mr. Herrington suggested that the modification ga further and say oniy "as defined by law," thus encompassing Supreme Court rulings as weal. There was some discussion of the current status of such defini-- Lions and the changes now occurring; however, the modifications suggested would enable the charter to respond to the changing requirements . Mr. Herrington noted that it is not wise to say only "water" and assume it includes "sewer." There followed a discussion of whether it is desirable to require an election for some utility bonds. It was noted that the interest rate is often lower on general obligation bands than revenue bonds . Mr . Herrington pointed out that . a bonding. firm might be reiuctant to .handle a general obligation bond without an election. Mr. Robinson cautioned that"the provision'as now written might be. interpreted to exclude from election a lar..ger category.of situations- than has been intended. Chairman 1/Vhite noted :that it does not prevent an. alection from being. held; h.e felt that the entire charter had been written with the assumption that the Councii is honest and that this section shoulc[,:not be an exception, Subsequent discussion brought out that the intent- is that, there should be elections in the ,case of major projects. On the other hand, to state that ".acquisitions,'" for example, should be subject to election is undesirable as it might be a minor acquisition. It was suggested that the provision be included that.the town has all the powers as provided by statute for water and sewer; Mr. Herrington suggested that such a provision be expanded as the state law is rather vague in regard to "supplying," for example, Mr. Minger summarized by stating that it appears to be agreed that a major project should require an election; .a draft will be done with this in mind . In regard to the debt limitation, Mr, Herringtan's comments were that: 1 .. real ~~ ~ .value should not form a basis, as it .is too difficult to determine; 2, a limitation is perhaps needed as the investment banking industry should not be relied upon as a check; and 3. as there is a presumption that a limitation should be included, the town might be open to law suits regarding its non--inclusion. However, it was ., ;:. ,. ,, ,.._. , ..._ ,.,:.. - n.. .. - 4 ` agreed that no limitation was preferable to one set by ordinance. IVtr. Robinson noted that it might be necessary to provide for a limitation.; otherwise, it might, be interpreted that the town ri~ust operate under state law. That a bonding com- pany, prior to selling bonds, laoE~ for protections against a decrease in value before maturity was one consideration that might point to setting a limitation. Mr. Bernstein pointed out that certain types of indebtedness would be excluded from the limitation, thus making it less constraining than at first appearance. A further question would be whether the people would accept a limitation such as 60% of assessed valuation; the selling paint would be the fact that inclusion of the special districts would require it to be that high. Chairman White noted that some other charters have no debt limitation. Mr. Donovan moved that there be no debt limitation in the Vail Charter; Mrs . Bailey seconded The sequence of Section 10.5 will be changed in order to avotd the connotation that revenue bonds that have been brought to election are not .part of any debt limitation. Mr. Herrington and Mr~. Talmadge wiii change the wording of Section 10.6 on refunding bonds, Section 10.7, special or local irriprovement district bonds, will be similar to the Cortez charter. Rather than a detailed provision in the charter, a procedure ordinance will be adopted when the first need For it occurs. ~: "- ~ . In the taxation section, the wording wiii be changed to reflect that any additional tax levied will be subject to; a. vote.,. ; 'lt was also suggested that a fist of possible taxes, such as bed` tax, use ta'x, e~t'c. ; be added. Mr. Minger raised the pos- Bible problem caused if the state legislature enacts a, law limiting a.ll municipal safes taxes to 2/°. Mr-. Herrington thought that one way of retaining 3% in that case would be to have the rate tied to a contra.ctural .obligation of some sort. He wiii look into this problem. ~ ~ .. • Mr. Herrington was very strongly against a restriction on the sale of town property. He could see where this .could hamper the operation of a municipal non=profit corporation, for example. Chairman White noted that often the public had been asked to approve a major purchase, :in this case it would seem .reasonable to .get their approval for its disposition. Mr. Tallmadge and Mr., Herrington were of the opinion, however, that the town should' have this power by charter. They thought it should be included in Section 1 .2. under municipal powers and grant the power to own, rent, Tease, sell, or otherwise dispose of property. In regard to the budget provisions, Mr. Herrington found them quite adequate. Mrs. Bailey suggested that a clause be added that the budget should be submitted 30 days prior.to the end of the fiscal year. The wording of Section 9.8 will be changed to allow for the possibility of certifying the mill levy before adopting. 'the budget. . The next meeting of the commission will be at 9:00 a. m. , Monday, June 5. It is anticipated there wilt be a public meeting in approximately 2 weeks. The. meeting adjourned at 11 :30 a. m. lh • Page 2 C Secre ..Y`~ ._ ~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION . JUNE 5, 1972 A regular meeting of~the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 9:30 a. m. , June 5, 1972, in the Conference, Room of the -Vail Municipal Building . The following members were present: Doris Bailey Merv -Lapin Jim Slevin Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Stan Bernstein, Finance ©irector Sharon Brown, Vail Trail Eve Homeyer, Mayor of Aspen Prior to the arrival of Mrs. Homeyer, Mr. Lapin noted that the Aspen charter appears mare .protective; it does not seem to assume to the same Extent as the Vail draft that the Council will be good. He asked what procedure the coms•nission had been following in order to determine consensus on a matter. The general agreement was that it is not necessary to go through the draft charter section by section with a vote on each; rather, if anyone felt strongly on a certain point, he was free to bring it before the group or the public. An .additional point of inForma- tion was that Howard Klemme, Associate Dean of the University of Colorado Law School, will review the charter and attempt to.answer any legal questions the com-- rriission may have. This should be done before the public meeting. It was agreed that it might be beneficial for the members to go down to his oFFice if he has the time. Mr. Lapin contributed that he agreed with the omission of a debt limitation because the town does not issue bonds for large amounts; hence, their saleability would not be affected. A further topic of .dicussion was the severability clause.; why it is needed and how it functions . • ~J At this juncture, Mrs. Homeyer arrived. Her first point was that it is perhaps a good idea to have council candidates nominated from districts and then elected, by the general public. In this way, tFie political trouble inherent in having the bulk of councilmen all living in one area is avoided. A second suggestion was to appoint an ex~ofFicio member of the council from the high-school age group. The only objection Mrs. Homeyer could see to having the mayor eleoted from the council would be that the person selected might only be the-best politician among the council rather than the person the public would choose. Mrs. Homeyer felt that having a home rule. charter is very goad psychologically for .a cori~munity; it ;gives confidence in approach- ing problems. Mrs. Homeyer was quite strongly in favor of a provision prohibiting the sale of city property; at some point., .the city. or town. will need the property being considered. She agreed with giving tFiE manager a broad `grant of power and keeping him out of electoral politics. Executive sessions in Aspen are held to .discuss personnel and: finance. No motions are made or formal actions taken in these sessions . In regard to the suggestion that a member of the press be admitted in confidence, Mrs. Homeyer noted that they have had problems with the members of the press violating this confidence. However, she finds these sessions preferable to calling members individually; in this way, the possible UnconSClOl.ls slanting of the proposal to Fit the individual can be avoided . Although Mrs. Homeyer was in favor of a strict provision prohibiting conflict of interest, she did not agree that the member in question should resign.' Rather, they should declare the interest and abstain from voting. Also, a councilman should not be allowed to bid on a project. She also noted that personal conflicts, rather than financial conflicts, can be impohtant. In regard to a possible exception fo~^ a mono- poly conflict of interest, Mrs . Homeyer maintained that the individual~'in question should not be.allowed to run; nor should the director of a corporation. .., ~. .~ • r~ L J • • Councilmen do not sit an boards and commissions in Aspen. Mrs... Homeyer also pointed out that she opposes independent districts as they are an invisible center of power. When asked if they have difficulty with the boards and council working at cross-purposes, Mrs , Homeyer responded that this had occurred. at first but that now, as a matter of policy, the council does not act until it has received the appropriate board's recommendation. However, she was not in favor of requiring this procedure by charter; it could be too restrictive and prevent adaptation to new methods of obtaining advice. Also, as these boards are not elected, it should not be required that their recommendations be accepted. As an aside, she mentioned that at times it is advantageous to hire a planner, for example, as demands rather than requests can be made to such an individual. In regard to Aspen's 20% of assessed valuation debt limitation, ,Mrs. Homeyer estimated they would bE indebted to this level. They had rahdomly selected this figure when writing their charter. There have been no initiatives or referendums as yet in Aspen. The Regional Service Authority in which Aspen was involved had problems in resolving disagreements. However, even with the difficulties, Mrs. Homeyer was in favor of formalized attempts at coordination and cooperation in the future. In regard to special improvement districts, she was not in favor' unless the area benefited was a residential area. Although Aspen, like Vail, is very much under state law in regard to liquor licenses, they review every liquor establishment twice a year with a view to their compliance with city rules and regulations. 'Mrs. Homeyer informed the com- mission that the reason the Aspen charter mentions the finance director is that they saw this as a possible check on the city manager. Although she acknowledged the point raised that this in itself might not stop cor-nivance, Mrs. Homeyer main- tained that when dealtng with the financial portions of the charter, the corrrmission cannot be too careful. The spelling out of budget procedures in the charter was viewed as desirable as it counters requests of individuals or groups who have not gone through the proper procedures. Mr. Lapin agreed that perhaps, in the financial area, the more specific provisions were desirable. Mrs. Homeyer added, as a mayor , that she:.•felt she was given better feedback in.those areas where rules have. been spelled out. An additional reason for• detailed provisions in the budget area might bE in order to make it palatable to the public, It was suggested that the Vail charter 'include, a sentence requiring the- budget to be balanced.. However, after discussion, it was generally agreed that this would not have any positive Effect. Mr. Slevin inquired haw the public presentat;ioris and election had been conducted in Aspen. Passage was smooth in this''case as: 1 . they had 21 members on their commission with good attendance; 2. they received broad press coverage; 3. they invited special interest groups to attend .their meetings; 4, they had 3 meet- ings aweek for six weeks. In regard to the possibility that people will object to only one section, but the particular section in question will be difficult to determine, Mrs. Bailey suggested that these points would come out in the public me eting. In regard to this meeting, Mr. Minger indicated that he and Chairman White thought that the entire commission should be seated in the front of the room and the deter- mination should be made in advancE of what needs to be discussed rather than going through the charter word by word. This hearing will be after the legal review of the charter. The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon. lh Secretary .~ r ~-, r ~_: MINUTES SPECIA L MEETTN.G HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSLO.N JUNE 13, 1972 A special meeting aF the Home Rule Charter .Commission was convened at 9:15 a, m., June 13, 1972, in the Confier,ehce Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the Following members vie re present: John Dobson John Donavan Merv Lapin Jim Slevi:n Tom Steinberg Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger', Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town,Attorney Stan Bernstein, Finance Director . Sharon Grown, Vail Trail Discussion First centered around Eve Homeyer's suggestion that. councilmen should be nominated. From districts. Most of the members Fe it that, at the present time, the nature ciF Vail'"s population' and residential d,i.stricts does- not warrant this procedure. Mr. Weibel disagreed; he Felt tha..t it was not enough to say that the districting can be done at 'a later date by ordinance . Rather, a provision should be inserted saying that if Bighorn, For example, is annexed, they are entitled to a representative . Otherwise, the Board in office at the time may protect their own positions. ar~d not district. Chairman White noted that the proposal would create a political situation where none now exists; he felt that the matter should be IeFt apen until the demand arises, Mr. Minger contributed ti~.t these provisions should not be in the cha...rter as it is too diFFicult to say, From the vantage paint of today, where the districts should be tomorrow, etc. IVIr. Minger noted that a copy of the, draFt charter had been given to Howard Klemme, who .is currentiy.on vacation and will be -bask July 12, Mr, Dobson. indicated that he would be inclined- to .obtain all of the proFess.ional. advice post- Bible beFore going to the public meeting; •the election does not need to take 'place until the latter part of August. Mr. Minger was hesitant to have the two so close together; however, the general feeling was that this would not be a problem. The preamble of the Charter remains to be written. This is viewed. as a synopsis of the phiiasophy of government in the charter. Chairman White suggested that the dre.fting committee prepare a tentative preamble and present it to the grciup, One of the things to be included will be that, as a i^ESOrt community, Vail: has many unique problems and aesthetic control is very important here. At the next meeting, the commission will go through each section doing their Finat revisions, lV1r, Robinson contributed that interpretation' of a charter is usually accomplished through litigation. A particular council, acts czn tYie bas ~s of a ~ce.rtain. interpretation; if t . are sued, it is that interpretation which is chatienged and either upheld or revised. The minutes and papers of the commission rra:~y ;be used. t~ discover intent but more important is to draFt in an unambiguous:-way.' ~Chairn~n White suggested that-:the Board of Trustees and members of other governing.bodi.es in Vail be requested to review the draFt and then discuss their interpr~etatior with thy. members of the com-- ,: , , mission, :. ,~ Mr. Tallmadge, who spoke earlier to the commission, 31ad sent a latter containing his recommendations. His suggestion to add a subsection re), Anticipation Warrants, was changed to make this subsection lb) of Section 1O. 1 , Section 10.2 will be modi.~ Fled with short-term notes maturing. 12 rrionths~aFter issued. An additional section (new 10.3) will be added stating that "Ant.icipatiori Warrants may mature within such period as shall be determined by the Council." The old Section 10,3; General ' t :; ,. ... h obligation Bonds, has been rewritten. Mr. Lapin inquired why an election is not required For issuance of utility bonds, Mr, Minger responded that this is because they are looked upon as a revenue issue. Mr, i..apin was hesitant due to the Fact that iF things were going well, a utility might be revenue-producing,• however, iF things were going poorly the assumption would not hold, Mr. Dobson suggested that a philosophical. comment be included elsewhere in the charter that large issues should be voted upon whatever their character,. There was general agreement that the Golden provision providing 'For no debt limitation should be used. It was noted that Section 10,5 as rewritten by Mr, Tallmadge encompas- sed the amendment that Aspen had found necessary. The provision Far reFunding bonds had been extensively rewritten by Mr. Tallrrmadge, :However, Section 10,7 on special improvement district bonds had been le Ft as drafted. In the section on taxation, several additional taxes; occupation, Franchise; were suggested as well as use and bed taxes , This raised the .question of whether it is necessary or desirable to list specific taxes. It was decided to include the listing but to get an opinion on its eFfect. Dr. Steinberg suggested that one eFFect, if a Franchise tax were included, would be to bring the franchise fnr a vote, N1r. Klemme will be asked for his opinion on the question of the necessity of an election in order to grant a Franchise, Mr. Robinson recommended caution in nat leaving open the interpretation that the current taxes wilt not be in Force aFter the adoption, of the charter; it will perhaps be necessary to .rewrite Section 11.1. The basic intent of this section is to cover, all possible types of taxes and also to provide that a tax levied must be voted by the people . In regard to the Town's ability to dispose of property, Mr. Lapin suggested a' dollar limitation be set, above .which the vote of the people is necessary to autho- rite the disposition. Aside Fro ~, the' fact that the proper figure might be difFicult to determine, an additional consideration is that the green belt, perhaps an item of concern in this regard, is already restricted From. sale. Further, Full. public knowledge of any sale would exist. Mr. Minger noted that the phrase "currently in use for public purposes" seemed open:to too many interpretations. It ~nras . agreed to strike this phrase . Mr. Minger presented the i^eseai^ch` fir°>~~ngs of th'e Colorado Municipal League in regard to conflict of interest provisions. Mr, Robinson questioned the meaning of the word "major".in the Veil provision as currently drafted. However, both Chairman White and Mr.. Minger felt that-the word was 'needed to prevent the requirement From being absurd; also, a definite monetary limit would be difFicult to 'Fix. Sharon Brown suggested that a sentence be added requiring Iiublic dis- closure of financial involvement;. Mr. ©obson Fe it that tFiis should not be at the time of election but only prior to any issue- of a`contract, 'sale, etc, which rriight arise. The Fact that if the Council is the judge of its own members' involvement a certain amount of objectivity is tort was brought out by Mr. Robinson. However, there was some feeling that it should be the option of the Council as to whether a person must resign if a conflict arises. Mr. Donovan questioned why, iF it has .been assumed throughout that the Council will be honest, .etc. , this assumption is snot, present in this section; the answer was that in this case it is a person's own money at stake. Dr. Steinberg suggested that perhaps it was unavoidable that an arbitrary Figure be set to separate what is a major and minor interest; in the case of the Former, the member must resign; in the latter, he must abstain From voting. Mr, Dobson sug- gested leaving the provision as written and adding a requirement For public disclo- sure, at the request of the Council, Whether the provision, however written, would be efFective immediately was. questioned; the general agreement was that it will apply upon the charter adoption., It was also pointed out that:; as-thus far written and discussed, disclosure and abstention From voting do not overcome the require- ment to resign in a case of major conflict, The discussion continued in an attempt to determine the philosophy desired in the charter. Mr. Robinson noted that the use of the word "significant" is preFerable to "major." ,The removal of the phrase list- ing "stockholding" as a conflict was recommended. Mr. Slevin.agreed'with this as it would appear that "significant holdings" would include major stockholeJings. The inquiry was made as to what constitutes an "indirect" interest; the answe r was that this is an interest of a spouse or of a partnership, etc, Page 2 :. , • 1 • U Discussion returned to the content of the prefatory.synnpsis. It was suggested that a statement be included to the- effect. that the chaster had. been brief because it assumes council intelligence; also that a statement be included indicating the intent was to prevent a governmental position frorri being a source of financial gains. Although this sectioh may n.ot be binding,, it is a place from which intent might be sought. Returning to the provision on conFl'rct of interest,, lVlr. Robinson suggested. that the problem which the commission has been struggling' with .,has already bean solved in that the word ."contract" has been included; there :are many transactsons which are not undertaken 'by contract;. Specifically, many-.of the minor purchases about which the commission has been concerned, the absurd prohibitions, would not be done by contract. There was general agreement that this was a .logical solution. It was also decided to include a disclosure provision with the determ;ina- lion of significance resting with the council. or the public ultimately. The prohibi- tion against officers of a corporation holding- public office was retained. Chairman White indicated the drafting committee will rewrite the financial interest provision and also write the prefatory synopsis. The next meeting of the commission will be at 8:30 on Monday; June 19. Following thismeeting, the charter will be given to the elected officials 'for their comments . The meeting adjourned at 1 1 :40 a, m. Secretar lh ..a MINUTES REGULAR MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION JUNE 19, 4972 A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Cammission was convened at 8:35 a, m. , June 19, 4972, in the Conference Roam of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the Following me tubers were' present: Doris Bailey John Donovan Jim Slevin Hans Weibel Also present were: John Dobson Merv Lapin Tom Steinberg Jen Wright Terry Minger, Town Manager Stan Bernstein, Finance Director Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brawn, Vail Trail The meeting opened with a discussion. of the prefatory synopsis prepared by the Drafting Committee. There was some concern whether "executive" was the proper word to use in referring to the Town Manager's Functions; perhaps it should be "administrative." However, it was generally agreedthat.the word, "executive" helped :to clarify the°riature of acouncil--manager Form of gaverri- ment. The decision was made to keep the synopsis brief rather than spell out in detail the provisions that ark ih,tho Charter: Mr. Donovan asked if the requiremer~t.For living in the town for two years beFore running For ofFice could b~e unconsti~utionat. Mr. Minger's oiainion was .that the new court interpretations apply more to voting than to qualifications for nomination. There was sortie Feeling that the prohibition against conflicts of interest had once again be+coi~rme absurdly petty, as a result oi' the inclusion ot" "sale" of goocls~ to the Town. It was also suggested that the section be expanded to include directors of a corporation. As currently drafted the prohibition applies only to the trans actions'oF corporations; an attempt will be made to word the section to apply to all profit-seeking entities but not to non--.profit corporations, etc. In order to provide for the application of this. provision upon adoption of the Charter, a sentence should be added to Section 14.3 stating that current members shall remain in office unless prohibited by other portions of the Charter. In regard to the .potential conflicts of members of other boards; .the Cciuncil shall be the judge of these. Mr. Steinberg. suggested the requirement 'for disclosure be changed from "a potential conflict" to, "any .potential conflict.." Mrs. Bailey suggested that disclosure handled minor- .confl.i.cts and also served to alert the Council to passible future problems. It was .noted, that the provision does not prohibit employees of any Corp-oration frorrm serving on the Council. Mrs. Bailey suggested it be made clear that the Council appoints the successor of any person who leaves a vacancy on the Council, fvlr. Wright suggested that the phrase, "by reason a~", in-this section be careFulty considered to ascertain that it states what the commission desires. Chairrrza.n White Hated that the drafting .committee had added the provision that the Town Manager should be an ex-~ofFicio member. of all committees, boards, and commissions . He also ind i-cated that this committee had. decided that archi- ` tectural control was too specific a subject for the synopsis. Thus; they added ;Section 8.4 relating to ari Environmental Commission.'- Mr. Wright. suggested .that perhaps this should be combined with the Planning Commission to avoid con-- Flirts of Function; hpwever, it was generally agreed that this diFficulty could be avoided. It was also noted that the group would be only advisory: Chairman White ,. :. .: - .:as ^ ~~ -. a emphasized that the Charter provision is viewed as a theoretical statement of the need For such a commission, not an operating guideline, H~ suggested that the members each give some thought as to whether the idea makes sense conce~stually, In the Financial area, it was. agreed that the cost would be prohibitive of publishing. the audit. Mr. Lapin inquired. how much of a budget is unencumbered; it. varies from year to year. Mr. Minger emphasized that the current draFt gives the manager power to transfer Funds within departments and the Council power to authorize trans- fers between departments. Mr. Donavan stated that he was not in Favor of allowing sales tax to be pledged toward revenue bonds without an election. Mr. Minger noted: that if an election is necessary the Town might as well issue General Obligation Bonds. Mr. White questioned why the provision on sale or lease of property stated it .could be done with or without an election. Mr. Wright suggested it was necessary as an election is desired in soE-ne cases and this provision gives the citizen grounds . on which to question why an election was not held. Mr.. E3ernstein pointed out to Mr. Lapin that the intent of the charter has been to allow the budget to be adopted after the certiFication of the mill levy to the county. The date For reporting to the County is October 16; in the past, we have not met this date but the county might begin to enforce it, Mr. Lapin saw no reason why this could not be done as the amount of revenue from this source is of small import to the Town. Mr. Lapin suggested the number of terms of oFfice a person may serve be limited, aFter which he must step. off For 2 years, He saw this as a limitation of power. A discussion ensued with the majority of members opposed to the suggestion.. How= ever, Mr. Lapin did not agree and- added that he -Found it a good way to force change. Also, with only four positions to be filled at each election and some of these being sought by incumbents, the difficulty of a nEw person in winning election is increased . from the present situation. Mr. Dobson asked what the usual provision was through- out the state. Not many municipalities have a limitation. Mr, Minger contributed that if a person knows he cannot be re-elected, he becomes a lame .duck; he may cease to care what happens. -The decision was not fio include a limitation, A second point of Mr. Lapin's was that Councilmen should not serve on boards and commissions at all; in this way, more people, perhaps new people, would be obis to participate. Mrs. Bailey agreed; however, her concern was to be able to realistically handle the affairs of the town; hence, she suggested a date be set by which no councilmen could be on boards oi^ commissions. Or it could be estab- lished by ordinance that no councilmen shall serve. Mr, Dobson agreed that such a prohibition would be desirable in the Future; along- these lines he suggested a statement in the synopsis to the eFfect that the charter has been designed to provide - for and encourage citizen participation. lvlrs. Bailey noted that i:f a date were set this would not prohibit. the etiminati_on o:F councilmen on these bodies previous to ~~ that date. A second reason for 'not taking such a step immediately was to insure continuity. Chairman White suggested that ar exception could be oracle far the .Planning Commission and the remainder of the .boards would operate with the pro- hibition immediately. It was 'suggested that,;}~e^haps iF'n.o councilmen served on other. bodies, it would elevate the~ppsition of councilman, After further discussion of the various aspects of this question, there was 'general agr~:emant to i turned lately require no participation by councilme.r' on boards and commissions . It was also, agreed that; neither councilmen nor the mayor would be ex--officio remembers of these boards or commissions . Mr. Lapin questioned whether Section 4.7 on voting. wasrn.conflict with the conflict - of interest provision in that it requires abstention from voting in cases of conFlict. It was decided it was not as such would be the procedure if the .conFlict was a minor one. Another question to arise was iF the .council can no longer sift as the local liquor licensing authority in view of the prohibition tram their participation on boards and commissions. This will be asked of the Town Attorney. This particular activ- ity might be the exception as it is a state Function. Miss Hobart Hated that the Aspen charter prohibits council participation yet their council acts as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Mr. Minger thought that if such a function is currently pro-- hibited, the charter should be changed to give the council .the option of serving in y this capacity. Chairman White thought it should be separated; one is a judging function, and the other is apolicy-setting 'Function, The other side of this argument Page 2 ." .: ,, ..- - . ,, - ,~.,. .:.,..... :. ,. ~,.1 ;. is that none of the other boards and commissions can. set legal policy; hence, the liquor licensing should be in the hands of the council. Mr. Weibel asked if a provision should be included in the charter regarding outside employment _ of town employees. There was general agreement not to place this in the charter but, rather, in the rules of employment. Copies of the charter will be sent to the Board of the VRA, some of the peoplE at VA, the Town Trustees, the planning commission and other ofFicials. Mr. Weibel suggested that a notice be placed in the paper that copies of the charter are avail- able to interested citizens . A meeting will be held with individuals who have received copies to hear their suggestions and comments on Wednesday, June 28 at 7:30 p. m. The commission will next meet on Tussday, the 27th at~ 8:3D a, m. ,Chairman White will prepare a cover statement for the copies mailed out. The meeting adjourned at 11 :15 a, m. lh • i• _.~~ :. t. l ~ ~ ~~ d' ~ ~~ SECT ary' PagE 3 MINUTES. .. SPEGTAL MEETING , HOME RU LE CHARTER COMMTSSTON JUNE,27; 1972 A special meeting of the Home Ruie Charter Commission was convened at 8:45 a. m, , June 27,. 1972, in the Conference Roam of the Vail Mi~nicipai Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey John Donovan Jim STevin Hans Weibel Also present were: John Dobson Merv Lapin. Tom Steinberg Terry Minger, Town Manager Stan Bernstein, Finance Director Sharon- Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail The meeting began with a discussion of whether a date should be included prior to -which the budget should be submitted 'to the council. After some discussion, it was decided to state that the budget should be submitted no later than 30 days prior to the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Donavan inquired what types of items would be considered capital improvements.. Mr. Minger suggested they were physical improvements, usually of a one-of-a-kind nature. Mfr. Lapin added 'that they were items that would- be capitalized. Chairrr~an White noted that it appears that the section on the special hearing for the additional 1% sales tax is not sufficiently .clear as now written. In reading the ordinance 'and the ballot , from that election, it was shown that .these did not tie the Fund specifically to capital improvements, although this has been the actual situation. After some discussion as to whether it was necessary or desirable to provide more of a legal basis for limiting the use of this fund, Mr. Minger suggested that the words !'allocated by Ordinance No. 8 {Series of 1971)" be added to better delineate the fund in question and that the phrase "currently earmarkec! for capital improvements and open space" .be included with the provision that the unanimous vote of the council can change this. It was generally agreed that borrowing from this Bind should not be allowed. Chairman White asked whether an annexation is a contract. There are conflicting opinions on this subject. Mr. Donovan suggested that "Contract" be defined in the definitions section of the charter. Although Mr. FZabinson sug~ sled that a .contract has certain definable elements; ,such as mutuality, consideration, the exchange of services; the general agreement was that this is not specific enough. Mr. 5levin suggested an additional phrase be added to Section 3.7 to cover small items. In response to a question from Mr. Lapin as to whether the intent was to exclude persons who do not have ,a contract but perform services ,on a continuing.. basis, the general agreement was. that the intent is to exclude-persons performing services of such a nature . Mrs . ,Bailey reite .rated that the intent was also to exclude major, one-time services. Mr. Dobson suggested the wording of the definition of contract include the- phrase., ".excludes .incirlentai purchases and ser- vices rendered to.`the Town as authorized by the Board of Trustees." P:ithough Chairman White did not like the dependence upon the council, he did think that the phrase provided a certain amount of protection for them by providing an answer to those who would question every deai.ing.. Ne noted that a portion-.that will come - under attack will be the prohibition relating to a director of aYcorporation.. However, as he understood it, a director is charged yYith loi~king eater the financial health of the company. There was general agreement that a clirector~,is„involved, in more than long-term policies . •, :: - Mrs . Bailey asked why the decision had been. made to have certain sections of the charter effective immediately and others in the future . Chairman White responded that it was decided not to have another election fn view of the fact that one was held less than 6 months ago; but that, as the., charter imposed new qualifications on those who hold ofFice, it was felt these qualifications should be met. Mr. Dobson added that this .does not automatically disqualify anyone from serving; it only requires that they meet the new qualifications. Mrs. Bailey, Hated that having the mayor elected from the council is a major change; perhaps , this should be made e~Ffective immediately. Mr. Donovan suggested that these were the decisions that had been made and that, unless good reasons could be found for changing them, they should remain. Mr. Donovan questioned why the provision on boards and commissions had been changed to eliminate all participation by councilmen. Mr. Dobson noted that he would welcome it because of the time demands involved in each .position and be-- cause an advisory function can best be performed by a different group of persons from those who are to receive the advice . Mrs . Bailey added that it would make the council a court of last resort. It would also serve to bring new people into the government. The Town Manager would be at the meetings and the council could regc~~st one of their members to sit. in on particular meetings also. A final comi+r~ent was that a councilman, being responsible to the people, would have a different approach from a member of an appointed boars[. Chairman White questioned Section 4.3, which- allows legal action at a special meeting, as there is little opportunity .For public involvement in such cases, Mr. Minger pointed out that at certain crisis times, such action is necessary. However, it would be foolish ;For a council to take controversial action at `a -, special meeting. After some'. discussibrj,tt was sug'~ested-'that only an emergency ~~.° ', ordinance relating to ar impending crisis ,should be allowed; all other legal actions would take place only at regular meetings . A second suggestion was that notice should be posted in public"~laees oF'the meeti=ng at the same Mime that notice is ". g~.ven to the council. There was some discussion of deFining three types of meet- ings; regular, special, and emergency. .4,1t.the third category of meeting, only • the matters dealing with the emergency could be covered; the second type would be the meeting held at a different time or on a different day from the regular schedule and it would have to be pub-fished or posted in regularly designated pub- . ~ , lie places. It was suggested that 48 hours should be required for posting notice. Mr. Minger noted that there is no time limit on calling emergency meetings. He ' also noted that one public recourse in regard to an emergency ordinanoe would be - to take the matter to court, where it could be declared not to have .been an emergency. The discussion was summarized as 1 , a quorum of the council can call an emergency meeting, 2. only the emergency can be discussed, ,.and 3. only an _- . emergency ordinance relating thereto can be adopted. It was agreed that an . emergency ordinance should. be subject to referendum. It was suggested that perhaps only the two categories presently drafted were necessary; only a few word changes would be needed. It was questioned whether or not the Planning Commission has' the statuatory right to take actions without the approval of the council. Currently, they have. certain powers over subdivision regulations, 'for example. It was decided that if it is covered by statute, there is no need to mention it in the charter. Chairman White wondered if it were necessary to enumerate the same things in regard to the two boards specifically mentioned in the charter. Mr. Minger suggested that it was a legitimate answer to any questions on.this point to indicate that there is no experi- ence of what is needed in regard to the environmental commission and hence it is necessary to leave the provision until it is detet^i~nined what the needs are. He also noted that perhaps "enhancement" should be included as well as. preservation of the quality of life in the range of matters to be considered by this commission. It was questioned whether the transfer of appropriations should be accomplished by resolution or ordinance . As an ordinance is a legal action transcending any part~- cular council, the over-use of it might constitute a downgrading of the concept of ordinance. A supplemental appropriation. i~ done by ordinance because it represents a new action; however, a transfer is within a budget that has already been adopted by ordinance. Mr. Lapin disagreed with spending money in another area that had Page 2 ..... ... - ,_ been saved in the original area. However, Mr.. Minger noted that `this encourages. the spending agent to obtain the best possible buy in the original .purchase.. There was some discussion aF whether a utility bond, when it involves the question. of growth, shouidrl,'t come to .election. However, tha .facts that annexation can be accomplished without an etectiori;that there. are_ other ways for people to express themselves on t'he growth policies, and,that such actions can be done without home rule were all brought against the,.position. Also, the charter does .not prohibit the bringing-to election of a:.co,nt'rov~rsial .issue. It was suggested that it be required that 30-days notice be given of an impending revenue bond issue. Mr. Steinberg noted that, as currently written, the provision on elections assumes that only 4 people will need to be elected. Elections might arise where there were more vacancies , It was agreed that this wording should be changed . Mr. Lapin inquired what the procedure would be at the ,meeting with community leaders. Chairman White noted that i,t was not necessary to have unanrrrnous agreement of the commission as they are asking for imput From the group who . have read the charter. There will be no meeting next week. The next meeting will be at $;30 a. m. ; July 10. The meeting adjourned at 1:~ noon. • lh • • ` •~-~:, =`-~ecreta s .. MINUTES r. SPECIAL MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION JUNE 28, 1972 • A special meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 7;40 p.m., June 28, 1972, in the Council Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present: Doris Bailey John Donovan Jim Slevin Hans Weibel Also present were: John Dobson Merv Lapin Tom Steinberg Terry Minger, Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail George Knox, Vail Trail • • • The purpose of the special meeting was to present the charter to those groups and individuals who have ~shawn an interest-and to discover both if they agreed philosophically and if the provisions were clear. The Charter- was summarized article by article with questions, comments and. criticisms requested after each article. The first change, to be questioned was the holding of elections in the Fall. Mr, Kindel, a Trustee, felt that as this is the beginning of the ski season,. it might not be the most opportune time. TE~e points in favor of this time were that; 1 , the summer is actually a more busy time for the Town;. 2 . the budget would be passed before the election; 3. there would Eye three incumbents, in any case; and 4. the electorate is more stable at that time. Section 8.7, Financial Interest Prohibited,, which was read in full, evoked the, most discussion. Chairman White explained that tie intent was to prohibit a person with a direct financial interest in a contract with the Town from serving as a councilman. The provision is,proposed to be efFective .immediately; although Mr, Kindel-will be affected, the question to be discussed is rrrore general. A memorandum from Mr. Parker of Vail. Associates: was read in: full. Some of his points were that the `provis-ion is too„lirnitinq for a town the size of Vail and that the determination of a harmFul conflict ~hou~ld be left up`to the voter. Mr, `~ Peterson of Vail Associates agreed with this position and added that he disapproved of the Council judging the conflicts, that the avoidance of harmful decisions should be left to the integrity of the individual, and that any problems would-come out in elections , Chairman White emphasized that. the Trustees named in Mr. Parker's letter, Trustees Staufer, Bailey or Donovan, would not be clisqualiFied as they are not doing business ,under a contract with the town, Mr. Peterson questioned the differentiation between doing business, and doing business under a contract; he felt only one form of relationship, perhaps not the more problematic form, had been eliminated. To the extent that a Trustee's interests are not affected. in ariy way difFerent from all other citizens with. the same interests,. Chairman White felt that no conflict was present. Mr. Peterson asked why the requirement had not been that the individual involved drop out of-the negotiations . To this it was answered that his very presence has an impact. The discussion returned to the question of the adequacy of Vail's size for this type of provision. Dr. Steinberg interjected that the Charter is being written for the future. Chairman White indicated that he feels Vail is large enough at the present: He added that he doubts whether the average citizen knows the conflicts that arise in the conduct of Town business, Mrs. Bailey stated that she is of the opinion.that the problems arising from conflicts will increase in the future. Mr. Slevin con- tributed that his feeling was that it gave bath organizations involved in a business dealing more strength to meet one another. ~~ • Mr. Donovan stated that he did not think the. commission had addressed itself , fully to non-contractual interests, and that stating that some of them are acceptable because they are held in common with many others does not solve the problem. Chairman White noted that the interest held in common would appear to be one. basis of representation. Mr. Lapin added that in the, case of everyday conflicts, the provision had been made for the individual to disqualify himself. N1r. Dobson saw the question as the philosophical one of whether there s,liould be some restric- tions on who is eligible for office.; hisi:orically, all charters or constitutions have some restrictions. Mr. Peterson agreed that there should be some recognition that conflicts do exist; however, lie ~e.lt they couid be hand led .by abstaining- from voting or by non-participation in negotiations. In response to the question why he. thought many governmental bodies had found it necessary to have provisions regarding conflict of interest, Mr. Peterson stated that perhaps when the Town had grown to the point where personal contact with the candidates was reduced, these provisions would be needed and could be adapted at that time. We inquired if the charter couid be amended,; Mr. Slevin answered that it couid but that the feeling of the commission was that conflict. of interest should be prohibited now. In regard to his proposal 'For abstention, Mr. Peterson feat it would soil be workable even if one man found it necessary to abstain half of the time. - ~, lv1r. Staufer, a Trustee, emphasized that the Charter is a document for the future . -The characters of the people i'nvo3.ve:d ,are unl~nowabie :at this point,. A provision of this type is needed to. protect the integrity of the~~Town, and ,also the integrity of any partieuan co.uncil., Mr. 1lVeibel noted. that one reason for restricting the membership of the council was because they are entrusted with broad powers. Also, in regard to the argument that a representative on the councii furthers communication, he suggested that perhaps these types of com- munications should be handled on the executive rather than the legislative revel. Mr. Langmaid, a Trustee, proposed that Mr. Kindel be allowed to's.erve out his term; that Section X4.3 be changed. Chairman White suggested that it would be difficult to define an exception. Nlr. Dobson emphasized that Mr, Kindel could remain on the Board even if the charter were adopted as currently written; he has a choice. Mr._ Lang maid's opinion was that the passage of the entire charter . is being jeopardized by this provision and its effective date. Mr. Dobson sug- gested that~the exception being. proposed only postponed the problem. Mr. Kindel interjected at this point .that regardless of the eFFective date of 3.7, he would resign . His objection was that a particu tar type of interest has been specified that disqualified a person, which interest may only arise occasionally; while other interests, perhaps aF more direct bearing and greater magnitude, are not prohibited, In summary, 3.7 sets up an artificial differentiation. When asked what type of provision he would consider more acceptable, Mr. Kindel indicated that he felt there were no conflicts that could not be handled by abstaining. . N1r. Dobson inquired if Mr. Kindel Felt a member should continue in offii.ce if he had a contract for a major project for the, town. Mr. Kindel responded affirma- tively because the decision to let the contract is only made once and there are many other decisions to be made. Mr. ©vbson mentioned that if something went wrong, the reputation of the councii would be clouded, 'In addition., his member- ship might be interpreted as the reason he was .granted the contract. However, Mr. Kindel maintained that there could be great conflicts that were not contractual, which also create these problems. AFter further discussion, Mr. !Kindel suggested the decision should be left with the voters, ~Mr. Dobson suggested the voters should decide the major question once and for ail".by their vote on the Charter; if possible, he would like a separate election on the conflict of interest issue. Mr. Lang maid suggested that the provision merely state that a member of the council cannot have a contract with the Town. Mr, Knox stated that >1e is in Favor of Section 3.7 because he feels it necessary to prepare for the future . Tha^ e was more discus- sion as to whether major conflicts would always be the result of a contractual situation. Mr. Kindel pointed out that there is a loophole as the section does not refer to ownership. He also inquired about stockholding. Mr. Robinson noted that defining the amount of stock beyond which a person has a conflict is too difficult.. However, Page 2 J • • • a sole proprietorship has been inadvertently omitted from the draft: Mr.-.Elias of Manor Vail contributed that he did not think the provision could be enforced; there were many ways to violate the intent without viplating the letter of the , provision. As a digression, he inquired about participation Far absentee owners. Chairman White responded that hopefully the voter, would not elect individuals who were trying to counteract the ir~ent. Mr. Bailey, a Trustee, stated that he did not have any objection to a director or ofFicer of a corporation serving on the board. Mr. McCall of the VRA suggested that, passible combinations be drawn out and the situation they would reflect be considered; "indirect; "contract" and "service," far example. He felt that .perhaps too many individuals would be eliminated. On this note, discussion on Section 3.7 was discontinued. It was pointed out that the draft has been amended. to require that only erroergericy ordinances can be considered at a species;l.meeti~ig. Also, an emergency ordinance has been t-rx~de subject to referendum in order to give citizen, control. Mr. Elias asked why a bed tax did not need to be brought to election. The~^e was general agreement that it should be included in the list of those taxes for which elections are required. fvfr. Langmaid inquired why revenue bonds could be issued without the approval of the eaters. Mr. Lapin agreed that .this could be traublesartie in a case where the facility was intended to .produce revenue but: did not. Mr.. Minger explained that General Obligation Bonds carried the full faith and credit of the fawn; hence, taxes would be raised to whatever .level necessary to prevent default. Revenue bonds only carry the faith and credit of the particu- lar project. Sales tax can be pledged- to them but the extent to which this could be done is limited by the fact that the bulk of the revenue from this source is being used to administer the city.. The requirement for 30 days notice of the issuance of revenue bonds has been added . These are also checked by those who underwrite the bonds, those -who sell them and the pov~e r of recall. Mr. Kindel inquired if there were any provision for the appointment of a group to investigate the town operations. Mr. Dobson indicated that, Section 8.6 allows for the appointment. of any boards and commissions that are considered necessary.. Chairman White added that the council can require any information they feel necessary from the manager. Mr. Staufer, inquired whether Section 6.1 means the council can suspend the manager regardless of the public feeling on the matter . Chairman White confirmed that the results of the public hearing are not the deter- mining factor. Mr. McCall asked why Section 4: ~ 1 on errmergency ordinances did not include that they could be promulgated in order to preserve the community economic health. Although the provision an emergency appropriations should satisfy this need, it was generally agreed that it would be acceptable to reinforce this .reference with the inclusion of "welfare" in this section. There was some objection to the provision that neither the mayor nor councilmen could serve on boards ar commissions. It wa.s suggested that such a requirement is too restrictive in a small town; however, it was pointed out that only the Planning GommiSSion requires that its members Abe residents of the town. The paint was made that any one individual would~ be too busy iF serving on several bodies; however,: it was scaggestec! that this determination be left to the individual.. P, further point in favor was that this he°lpec9° to make the Board the court of last resort. Mr. Elias indicated. he was in favor of the lack of a residency require- ment as it helped give an opportunity for:; participation by absentee owners. Chairman White pointed out that Section 8.4 establishes an Environmental Com- mission which will include architectural control. There was general agreement that this was a good idea. However, there was .some disagreement with placing many functions under a single commission. Chairman White explained that separate committees could be created for .each function after the original com- mission was established. ~. The meeting adjourned at ~ 0:50 p. m. lh Page 3 ~~'• - MINUTES - ~ REGULAR ..MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION JULY 10, '1972 A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 8:40 a. m. , July 10, 1972, in the Conference Room of the Vail. Municipal Building.. Chairman Gerry White and the following members were present:. Doris Bailey John Dobson-; John Donovan ~ ~ ,Merv Lapin Hans Weibel - fen 1Nright ' Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Sharon Hobart, Administrative ,4ssistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail Chairman White presented. the idea that perhaps the qualifications for running for council should be lowered to a one-year residency rather than two years. ~., It was suggested that two years are required before, the person is actually known; also, at the end of two years their .permanence in the- Town is more assured. Chairman.White suggested that if a person were well-eriough_known to run at the end of one year, h~.should l?e allowed to do so. Otherwise, it might be objected that the requirement is not democratic.. However, it was . pointed out that a new person could always be appointed to a board or com- ri~ission. The general agreement was to leave the requirement at two years.. There was some discussion of the effect of. the last Vail Trail article; as to whether it fully presented the arguments in favor of the conFlict of interest section. Mrs. BaiiEy noted that a prevalent misunclerstandirig is that one ~F the people who was not elected at the last election must fill any vacancy; she suggested that the method o~F choosl:ng a successor be clarified. A person who had run could be appointed but also it-need not be a person in this situation. Mr. Lapin inquired what the mechanisms are that will enForce Section 3.7. Mr. Minger stated that if it is the-Town Attorney's interpretation that there is a violation, it could finally be taken to court. Mr. Dobson contributed that an issue of concern to many people is whether the position of Vail ASSOCiates is a unique one and, further, whether there should be some official acknowledgment of this position in the .,Charter . A corollary of this would be whether there ~ is • the possibility of a breach between the Town and Vail Associates if such acknow-- ledgment is not given. Chairman White. was not 'in Favor, feeling that comrnunica- Lion should. not depend on having a representative on the Board. Also, exceptions could cause many problems. Further discussion brought out that there was general agreement that an annexation is a contract. In response to a question whether :a liquor license was a contract, the agreement was that it was not and that these functions coulc9' also be handled by a board separate from the council. A view aspect. of the arguments in favor of Section 3.7 was the point, that the negotiating of a contract does not .end when it is let; hence just abstaining. from one vote would not eliminate the undesirable influence. - In regard to procedure in the event that the majority of people are opposed to Section 3.7 and its effective date, the choices appeared to be: 1 . have the election this fall rather than in 1973; 2. have the effective date of the, provision at the 1973 election rather than immediately; 3. have a meeting on Section 3,7 only.. The first Would force the issue as Kindel would probably resign; the second could be objected to on the grounds that if it is important,..', it is important to do it now; and the last might res`ult'in people voting. on 3.7 alone. Discussion continued on the „ :course to be taken in regard to 3.7. It was painted nut that a letter will be draFted in reply to Bunny Lang maid. Also, a synopsis is being written of the entire charter. .. .. ~ k -.: ,' ~ ice.. :a,~_ :.... ~. ~ - -- .: .'. - ..:;s ~ .:. ... .. a. .'- ,. .. ~~...f -. ~...i. .-._• 11111' .: i A new word, "owner," has been inserted in Section 3.7. It was generally agreed. that the meaning of the term is unclear; another word will be inserted. It was also pointed out that an "indirect financial interest in any contract cahcernng services" would refer to a situation where the contract for a service was held by a person's wife or a member of his immediate family, for exarriple. . Miss Hobart listed several suggestions of the Town Attorney: 1 . Section 4~.8 as currently written excepts the budget from being adopted by ordinance; there was general agreement that this is not desirable; rather, it should be done by ordinance but be excepted frdm the requirement of publication in Full; 2. Section 4.10 on procedure for adopting ordinances should except Sections 4.12 and 4.13 by number; 3. Part D of this section should emphasize that the ordinances should be published once; Mr. Lapin suggested that this also be inserted in. Section 4.11 regarding the procedure for emergency ordinances; 4. Section 5.5 should read "insufficiency of petitions," rather than "sufFiciency;" 5. Section 5.6(c) should perhaps require more than 3 people to withdraw a referendum petition; howEVer, the general agreement was that this is a majority of the .5 members who serve on the committee and is therefore sufFicient; 6. Section 8.6 should include the phrase, "and shall determine residency requirements, if any;" 7. in Section 13.10, the reference to the "1971 Municipal Home Rule Act" should be changed to "state statutes . " Mr. Lapin requested that the reasons for having the elections in November be repeated. Chairman White replied that the town is lass tense at this time and yet most residents are in town. Mr. Lapin asked if the intent was to disenfran- chile people; he felt this was the practical efFect and was in disagreement: Mr. . Dobson replied that for some it was an advantage to have a tY,ore stable electorate. Mr. Minger added thatconducting the election at this time allows the new council to be involved in fiscal decisions . Mr. Kiemme had noted that Section 3.3 does not clearly indicate that the mayor is to be selected from the council. He also had asked,.why the mayor -was not given a vote, as he is an elected councilman. It could be too tenuous a position _ to vote only in the case of a tie. Chairman White noted that the original thought had been that they mayor carries more weight and that this fact should be counter- balanced. Mr. Minger suggested that perhaps the mayor should be given an opportunity to express his opinion on record; perhaps he should always vote last. There was general agreement orb this suggestion. Mr. Kiemme had questioned whether excise tax should be included, as it now is, in the portion of Section 11 .1 which requires an election prior to levying a ta.x. Mr. Lapin stated that he thought either all taxes should be included or all excluded. However, Mr. Minger feat that only those taxes that affect everyone .` should be voted upon; if only a small segriment of the population is affected, it is apolitical decision. Mrs . Bailey noted that if the tax is levied. by ordinance, it is in front of the people; also, it cannot be done by emergency ordinance. Chair- man White mentioned that it had already been agreed that abed tax should be voted upon. Mr. Lapin pointed out that income tax and excise tax had been left out of the listing of possible taxes in the first paragraph o~f Section 11 .1 . The desire is for this listing to be all inclusive; however, income tax will be left out; as it is currently illegal and could., in the future, be levied due to the phrase, "without limitation." Income tax will. also be deleted from the second paragraph.. Mr. Minger inquired if the commission cared to .change the qualifications for - Town Manager in accordance with the letter from Mr. Parker; there was general agreement that his suggestions are already covered by the current wording. Chairman White asked the feeling of the commission on changing the qualifications for judges to include that they must have time ~ta devote to the position. It 'was generally agreed that this problem is already provided for in the current draft. There will be a meeting with Mr. Kiemme in Boulder on Friday. The Charter must be submitted to the governing body by August 16; they have 30 days ~n which to call for an election for which 30-days notice :must be given.. Chairman White suggested that a meeting. be held on Monday,. July 17th to discuss Mr. Klemme's Page 2 .. ~ . suggestions. On Mgnday evening:, July 2~-,=ar.publie.hearing will be held and the Charter can be submitted.to~the Trus°tees at thei~^ regular meeting on August 1 . The meeting adjourned at 11;20 a. m. ;~ 1 Se.cretar I lh • • f ; ~ ~~~ v ~ .Yi:• .~ ' MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER, COMMISSION J~1 LY 19, 1972 • A special meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convehed at 8;40 a, m.., July 19, 1972, in the ConFerence Room of the Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the following, members were present: Doris Bailey John Dobson John Donovan Merv Lapin Jim Slevin Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present were; Terry Minger, Town Manager . Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vail Trail Chairman White expressed the opinion that some members of the commission `~ thought Section 3.7 should be changed. Mr. Klemn~e had' }pointed out that under common law a councilman cannot have a contract with the, town for which he serves. Mr, Donovan Felt the section as presentay written did not cover all possibilities, Chairman White's opinion was that this section goes beyond what other charters have stated ar~d that perhaps it should be changed. Mrs..' Bailey disagreed but suggested that,.Mr,. Bailey and ,Mr~. Kindel',' who were in attendance, be allowed to give their opinions .° .Mr. Donovan added that he'Fincls the provision to' be good, but for five years in the Future . Mr. Bailey stated that: 1 , he has . trouble with the word "contract;" 2. he thinks • that disclosure ~at a public meeting of any conflict is sufFicient protection; 3. he does na~t think that directors of corporations should be disallowed From serving; and 4.~ a contribution can be ' made to a :board by having someone from Vail Associates, for example, as a member. Chairman White inquired what he thought about a member of 'the board - having a contract with the Town to sell something, for example. Mr. Bailey thought that major contracts should be prohibited but that an inciden°tal contract should be allowed. However, if it were an open bid situation, he did not feel the person need do more than disclose his interest and abstain. From voting and conver~ sa'tion. Mr. Kindel read his letter of resignation from the Board of Trustees. He Felt hirn~ selF compelled to take this action as a result of curtain portions of 3.7 that he found. unequal, unfair, and unjust; specifically, he Feit that 'this section only prohibited a type of conflict that could be labeled, whereas ind'ividuats .who, have almost continu~- ous conflicts potentially as dangerous were not .necessarily disqualified. Also, if the town were larger with, for example, several banks to choose among, 'the need For this section might be more evident; however, in the current situation, this need is not so readily apparent. He added that if a conflict is defined as a special`:interest which tries to 'impose its good in place of the good of the whole, then it is ~.pjaarent that many conflicts are possible- that are not prohibited by Section 3.7. Mr. Kindelts ~- ... recommendation was to either tighten the provision or require only that ,the person concerned abstain from discussion and voting. In regard ~to several specific situa- tions such as a person who is actually on both sides of negotiations, a person with a personal interest or a person with an interest in common with o'tners in tYie same situation, Mr. Kindel stated that he did .not find i~t practical in a smalltown ~to exclude anyone in these situations nor could he determine if any one of the situations was potentially more harmful than any .of the others. A person ,involved in both sides. of negotiations should disqualify himself and a person with 'a common interest perhaps should not vote but should be involved in discussions. A person involved in the business perhaps has valuable insights and any distortion aF his opinions should be balanced by the other six- council members. Mr. Kindel also Felt a case could be made for including major influences in the community, such as Vail Associates, on the council. Mr. SliFer agreed with Mr. Kindel that each individual. ,* • councilman should moderate his own c'¢nFlicts. At 'this point, sample provisions From other charters were read; the group had many questions on these, pointing up the reason why the Vail commission had decided to go fu,rthertn the :provision they would like to have included. Same discussion followed of whether it would be possible to disqualiFy an individual From discussion as well as voting. Mr. Wright suggested that perhaps i't is more cletrimen'tal 'to be toq restrictive thane td be rather lenient in a provision of this sort; perhaps 'the intelligence of the electorate had been underestimated Mr. Kindel had Further ques~tiansregarding the- lack of 'di .rest control by the trustees of the manager. He-felt that a liaison man should.be appointed from the council to each of the various departments toFurther,the communication of the desires of 'the people. Char,man;W,-hite,noted"than Mr. :, Klernme had thought. that the charter leaned more on the people 'than most do. However, Mr.. Kindel 'Felt that in Vail even more ,citizen input. is' needed . Foll.ow~ng. his- comments, Mr. Kindel left the meeting . There was general agreement that the council, iF it sa des•ires, can assign one of _ its members to specialize in any one department without this being written into the. charter. Chairman White stated that he 'Felt the intent of the charter was being lost through 'the personal conflict over Section 3.7. Perhaps it should be changed in order to refocus attention on the rest of the charter, which is more importan'~. Further discussion brought out the agreement that perhaps only one type of conflict. . had been eliminated. Mr. Dobson inquired: iF there. was .any provision requiring that candidates disclose their inter.es'ts. This could be a beginning, even though it would not be known what involvements would develop . There was general agreement that it would be difFicult to know what 'interests to disclose. Chairrrian White inquired if it was desir-,ed to prohibit a councilman From doing business. with the town on a personal basis. Mr.. Slevin added that the exclusion For incidental purchases should be included. AFter some further discussion, Mr. Dobson sug- Bested that. it First be determined if clisqualiFtca.tion is desired; after it has been decided who can be a member, it can be decided what are the restrictions under which a member must operate . Chairman White read a provision he had prepared tb replace the old Section 3.7. It was generally agreed that a provision For voiding the contract, such as included in Chairman White's draft, was needed to camp.lete the section. Such contract would be voidable by tkie council, the town manager, or any citizen. He emphasized that these provisions apptiecl 'to a person only after elected and did not disqualify him from running for ofFice. In regard to the connec- lion of a councilman with a contract that would bring the provision into efFect, an „ officer or director of a corporation had.no't been speciFicaliy mentioned because their actual interest in the corporation is indeFinable on a general level. Mr. Minger suggested that Chairman White's provision be used with the provision For voiding of contracts. This suggestion will b.e considered' at a meeting Thursday • n at 2.04 . m. Points of taw in ,the charter will also be considered. at afternoo p that :time . ' N1r. Dobson noted that he was concerned From a prackical .perspective about the exclusion of trustees From the planning and :zoning commission. Mr. Weibel suggested that acut-ofF date for their participation be included. Another question was whether the mayor should always vote last, as the onus of bei ng the 'tie--breaker will always be applied to him. However, the general. agree- ment was that a change would only place the burden on someone else. Mr. Minger Suggested that it be emphasized in 'the Formal public meetings that the requirements for referendum in the charter are rawer than 'those in the state constitu'rion. The meeting adjourned at 12:5 p. m. ~. Y 'I 3 JJff//aa~ `~ Secr~tary lh .: Pag;p. ~.F I ~ .:'.,.ar ~y n_ .. u 3 . ~; ~ z..; •. MI NUTE~ '' SK'ECIAL MEETING HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION JULY 20, 1972 A special meeting of the Home Ruie Charter Commission was convened at 2:~0 p. m. , July 20, 1972, in the Conference Room o~f'the Vail Municipal Building, Chairman Gerry White and the Following. members -were present: i7oris Bailey John Dobson John Donovan Merv Lapin Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town.Manager Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant In regard to Section 3.7, Chairman White had sa ggested that a phrase making the contract voidable be included and that fhe forfeiture of. office be omitted, thereby making the entire provision deal with Financial items. I't was noted that Colorado State Statutes prohibit the letting of a contract to a councilman; this provision would still be in Force if the Vail Charter .omitted any reFerence. 'T'he de'termin- anon of whether a person has a cc~nFlict is a legal question to be 'answered by the Town Attorney or, finally, the courts . A discussion- followed of whether it is desirable or possible to exclude a person with a conflict from direct negotiations. There was also some discussion of why a change of the .provision is suggested now. Ghairn-+an White stated that he had written a suggested new provision because he was unable to give a,good argument when .asked about greater conflicts that were not exciudecl. Also,, other charters are not so strong and the personal conFronta-~ :.i.:. ' lion that was building was jeopardizing the entire charter, Finally, he had written an alternative, •because the commission had not recently looker! at an alternative, _ Although i~t might appear that the commission had over-responded to intimidation, it was signiFicant that he had written the revised version prior to Mr, Kindelfs ' resignation from the Board of Trustees. There followed rr~ore discussion of whether or not the provision should be'changed. IVir, Lapin inquired what the harmFul consequences would be if.the charter were voted down and hiad to be 'changed; As a working ~~olitici~an, Mr. Dobson responded that it would be difficult because ;the charter' i:s needed, 'Also, if defeated, i~t can only be revised rather than significantly changed. Mr. Donovan stated 'that he ~`~ felt the provision as re-wri'kten° was. preferable kiecau~e' more definable with fewer loopholes. Another reason given for changing the provision was that liFe in Vail is fairly simple and a provision such as the~..ons formerly draFted only complicates -, matters. Mr, Lapin was against the new provision because i•t did no't include. the exclusion of an officer or director of a corporation from the Board, . Mr. Weibel preFerred to combine the :two provisions by adding a section in council procedure that a person must completely withdraw 'From negotiation sessions that concern his interests. Chairman White suggested this was not necessary as there are six other ,people who can override a biased view. It was also decided that such a requirement would be too difFicult to enforce, If a person made it difficult 'to .conduct negotiations, the board itselF could ask him to leave.. Mrs. Bailey voted in favor of the provision as written by Chairman White with 'the inclusion of the clause that a contract is voidable if there is a conflict of interest. Mr, Wright,. Mr. Donovan and Mr. Dobson concurred in this vote, Although this agreement . had been reached, each member should Feel free 'to present rninarity reports on the matter. Mr. Lapin raised the,ques'tian of a limitation for councilmen of eight consecutive ,~ years in office. The individual need only remain out of office 'far two yea~^s. The provision would be efFective beginning at the next. election rather than retroactively. Mrs, Bailey concurred, finding the argument that it would allow new people to serve .:-: .. .. 1 . ~ - ' ~ to be the best argument in favor. Also, there would be other avenues of service F a person were really in•teres•Eed in the fawn government. There was general agreement that this limitation should be included in Section 3.2. IF the s.i•Euation should arise where one individual has served for 6 years and is running- again,. ~. it would be necessary for that person •to resign after 2' years of the additional term: There was s me dis ussion f the t' .~ O G O prac. ~cality of prohrb~tL:ng councilmen from serving on boards and commissions, especially the planning commission. It was suggested that this not become effective until the next municipal election. However, Mr. Minger felt it was necessary to go one way or the other on this question. Chairman'V1lhite felt that if it were to be cFianged.:at all; it should be to go back 'to the provision that no more than 1/3 of •the members could be council- men. Most of the members of:the corrimission thought it .preFerable to prohibit participation entirely,.' To;overcome the practical problems, perhaps the councit could appoint those members who are currently serving on another board to attend the meetings as advisors until the new members have gained enougFi back- ground. Another point in :Favor oP~the prohibition was that new people would have a fresh approach •to the problems. Mr. Dobson withdrew his suggestion. Chairman White noted that the corrimission will have.a mmeeting following the upcoming public meeting, ,although there will not necessarily be any meetings after the charter is presented to the Board of Trustees . All questions shou id be res~ived before the presentation to the Boarct. • ~ The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p. m. •~ ~;~ ' ~ f ~'.c~Q~ "U'''" y lh t Page 2 `; .. boX 100 V~1~, coiorado 81557 • 303.476.561 3 Duly 2a, 1972 To the Members of the Home Rule Gharter Commission: The Board of Trustees, by unanimous vote of its members present at a meeting today, Juty 20, 7972, hereby commends the members of the Home Rule Charter Commission in 'their outstanding work toward the creation of a Home Rule Gharter for consideration of adoption by the citizens of Vaii. The Board of Trustees has every confidence in the ability and desire of the Gharter Commission to be sensitive .and responsive to the comments and recommendations of the peopte of Vail, as has been consistently evidenced by their actions since they began. The Board fu11y realizes the difFiculty of the task of the -Home Rule Commission, and commends the eorrimissicin for its out- standing diligence and devotion. ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ • ~~~~ F mac--ii _ .-_ .... _ .. - ...... ~~~. ~~ •' ~ MINUTES. SPECIAL MEETIN"G HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION ,. JULY 24, 1972 A special meeting of the Home Rule C"har•ter Coms~nission way convened at ` n i Room of the Vail IVlunici"al Buildin 7:50 p, m. , July 24, 1972, ~n the Cou c l p g Chairman Gerry White and the fbtlowing members were: present: Doris Bailey ~ ~ John" C?abson ' Jahn Donovan Merv Lapin Jim Slevin Hans Weibel " Jen Wright • Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Larry Robinson, Town Attorney Stan Bernstein, Finance Director Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistant Sharon Brown, Vain Trail " George Knox, Vail Trail" Chairman White noted that the Charter will be submitted to 'the Board of Trustees .. • ."_ on August 1 . The Final meeting>of the comrrsission will be on Monday, July 31 . The Charter was read article by article with comments, iF any, made after the reading of the article. The Charter establishes acouncil-manager form of government, selected because ' the commission found it best for a.small" municipality like-Vail. The elections had been scheduled For November because this is a more stable time.•than April. It had been decided that a person should serve ire office for six months before he can be recalled as this length of time should be given in order for the person to `•prove himsel"F. A provision had been included which allowed any one person to " serve only eight consecutive years; in this way, new people would be brought fnto the government. The mayor would be elected From. the council as it was felt that the council should be the highest entity with the mayor as spokesman. In regard to Section 3.7, Chairman White read a statement explaining why it. had been changed and "briefly ou•tiining the intent of the commission (see attached), ':4=~ 'He noted that the provision as newly written defined "contract" and "financial. ~`~" interest in a contract." Instead of forfeiture of office, "the pe,na.lty in the new version is the voiding of "the contract. Mr.. Kindel asked if i't were' not possible for an individual to have 9/~ of each of several classes of stock and still, not be .. in viala"ti~on of the provision.. If there were three classes, he could then own up to 27%. Mr . Robinson "responded that only common stock has voting equity; ,also, -the percentage given is not a percentage of the company bu•t only of a type of stock. Mr, Kindel inquired what "oFFicer" as used in the new provision referred 'to. Chairman White responded that ttie intent was 'that it refer 'to councilmen, He suggested that perhaps the provision should be changed to read "an aggregate of 10% of stock;" however, Mr. Robinson felt this was not necessary. Mr. Kindel inquired if the fact that 10% 'of one company could be a small amount while 10% of another could- be a large amount caused, any problems For the members o"F the commission. Chairman White replied that it did not, In regarcE to "the exemption for minor transactions, the determination of what is within this category would be made by the trustees; although if they were to. decide that .something shall be done on a regular basis, il; could take on,'the nature of a contract. There was a question regarding the members of the council, who could themselves be running for re- election, judging the qualifications of others who"desired •to. run. However, •this `~~ question need only arise, after the election. Even though this was the case, Mr. y, was not in Favor of the council itselF decieling whether a conFlict was subs Kindel stantial or not. Mr. Parker noted that 'there i5 precedent for this in "the Federal government;"also, Federal ofFicials must divest themselves of interests before taking office. In addition, Chairman White noted that a decision ca~i be challenged and evehtually •taken to court by a private, citizen or "the Town Manager. fig y. . ~ ~ fi -. - ~ Article .IV is mare ~sti^ingent than sta'Ee statutes, in line;with the desire that •the council acts in concert with the wishes o'F the people. Although an ordinance- will be eFfectiye 5 days aFter publication according to the proposed charter, 'the procedure has been lengthened 'to require two meetings in add'i'tion to a publica-. tion between the two meetings. _ In Article V, it was noted that the nurriber of signatures .required to initiate. a ~Y referendum has been lowered from that set forth in stag statutes. .Also an - ~ y elector, rather 'than a registered elector, can sign a referendum petitign. ;4 large portion of •this section has been dictated by state statutes, The sections in Article VI dealing with 'the town manager-'rrius~ .b~ "i~~aad' in tight of the Fact that •the operation of the system is analogous to that of a corporation. Aii types of fitness would be considered in hiring a manager, in addition to his professional qualifications. Section 6.3 is a job,descrip•tion for the manager. Section 6.4, the relationship of the council to the administrative. service, is important in that it helps to insure qualiFied applicants For the job of manager; such people would desire the type of control herein set forth. Mr, ,Kindel inquired what were the mechanisrrrs of inquiry. Chairman.White suggested that either a council or citizens committee or an outside expert could be the vehicle of inquiry. Whether the municipal judge should be an attorney has been left..to the discretion of the council by Article VII . The commission had felt •that, in an area such as -._~ the Vail area, anon-attorney can do a good job. Also,. it would be possible under this Article for the judge to be anon-resident of the community;. the council - can set the residency .qualification it desires. There was some discussion off.. whether a person with legal experience "would function better in 'khe position, It was pointed out that the current municipal judge; although not an attorney, meets i;he qualifications established when- the justice of the peace system was abolished, Tn regard to the removal of a judge for occupational interests which in•terFere ,with the performance of his duties, [t was suggested that the clause "persistent failure to perform duties," covered this instance: ~, It was explained that Article XIII prohibits councilmen from serving on boards and commissions because the council should be the court of last resort. Also,. the boards deal with the theoretical and the council with •the practical. The nature of •the board and' developments in the -Future would be r+e levant 'to any residency requirement set by the council. Iri regard to whether the sign review board would be absorbed by the environmental commission, 'their day-•to-day duties would not be aboorbed, but questions of re-writing '.the ordinance, for ,example, could be handled by the higher hoard. ConFlict of interest on boards and commissions will be handled by the council in their appointment of members, In regard to Section 10.5, it was explained that there would be no debt limitation., an acceptable figure being difficult to define, In efFect, the limitation is provided by the bond attorneys;, the Finance director and the council. The provision regarding revenue bonds is the same procedure provided by state statutes. If an issue is net paying for itself, other funds can be used although no ad valorem taxes can be. used. Special assessment.distric'ts can be initiated by 50% of~•the landowners in an area rather than by the owners of 50% of the land.,. There was some discussion of haw it would be determined iF lands were benefited or not.. It was noted that if a majori'~y of the landowners who are to be assessed feel that others are benefitedk to a degree;. where they should share 'the cost, 'they can protest the formation of the district: It was also painted out that if one large .land- owner was put .into a hardship situation,, he likewise could appeal to the Council.. Returning to the question of revenue bonds, NLr. Lapin '.pointed ou't that, as now written, a utility such as Holy Crass"'could be acquired and the bonds- issued with- out an election. In addition, a utility could be sold without an election. Mr. Knox suggested that a limita~f:ion of amount be included, above which an election would- be necessary. Chairman White noted that, in any case, •there would be public hearings before any revenue bond issue. -Also, 99% of 'the- time, the 'transactions are insignificant. Page 2 y ~ ., - .. According to Article XI, ail taxes of a general nature will be brought •to a vote This represents a check on the issuance of revenue bonds, For same new funds to be pledged to a project would need approval.. The emergency powers of the Town- Manager set forth in Article XIII insure- tha•E. the person. who has been administering affairs in normal times will continue to do sa in an emergency. It was suggested that an addition be made to this article setting forth a line of succession so as 'to leave no doubt as to who is in charge. Some questions arose regarding the amendment of the charter; these were answered from state statute. Mr. Knox asked if the election was on the entire charter or only portions of it. The entire charter will be the subject of •tFie election. Mr. Kindel inquired if the apiaointment by 'the council of a review board for any phase of the governmental operation would. constitute interference with the town manager, according to Section 6.4. The general agreement was that "inquiry" means "review." N1r. Robinson added that if •the board of inquiry became a continuous body, however, this could constitute interference. Mr. Kindel asked about the specific ,case of a board to do .research into a particular subject, but not at the behest of the town manager. Mr. Robinson thought that as long as this board did. not interfere with the administi^a•tive responsibility of the manager, it would be allowed. Mr. Minger added that he understood the provision to mean that members of the council could not give specific instruc- ~- tigns to employees of the Town, other than the..Town manager. To this Mr. ~•` Dobson added that the council ~cou~l'd order `the •towri manager to aid a review Board . Mr. Lynch recommended that Section .10.4 on' General Obligation Bonds be changed to require an election on the issuance of said bonds for utilities. Although traditionally •these are ex~mp•ted, •rhey can .be viewed as an instrument of a growth policy,.. in which case he Felt they should be voted upon. Chairman White indicated that the commission would discuss this point. Mr. .Lynch also expressed dissatisFaction with the provision allowing the issuance of revenue bonds without an election, especially if sales tax were pledged •to them or if they were for utilities. Mr. Lapin Felt that in regard t4 utilities, a diFFerentia-- tion could be made between major purchases and extensions. Mr. Lynch sug- gested this could be deFined as a borrowing of a certain percentage of assets.. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p. m. • lh ~~ ~ ~. t ~~•' ~°~ Se retar,~a~~-~~ f~ ..J. 4 Page 3 • • • . a. .., 5 ~:~ _:,.. , _ i •__ . ~+ ~ ~ ,~ MINUTES .F: '~ REGULAR MEETLNG HOME RULE CHARTER C~MMI SS1 ON -" JULY 31, 1972 A regular meeting of the Home Rule Charter Commission was convened at 8;50 a. m. , July 31 , `1972, ~in the ConFerence R.oorn' of the. Vail Municipal Building. Chairman Gerry White and the Following members were present: Doris Bailey. John Dobson John Donovan Hans 1Neibei Jen Wright Also present were: Terry Minger, Town Manager Sharon Hobart, Administrative Assistari"t . Sharon Brown, Vail Trail Discussion First centered on.Sectioh 3.7. I't.was decided that the provision as _ draFted did not require the addition of a' reference 'to the aggregate amount of '~~ = ~ . stock held. The reason given was that 10% of a class of stock is no't necessarily 1.0% ownership. One change which was,-needed was From "securities in a partnership" to "interest in a partnership." Also, "ofFicer" has been. changed to "member of the council." :. `~A^ Section 10, 4 had been changed to provide -that the' acquisition of a .u•tiiity system- required an election while improvements and extensions did not. Mr, Minger, expressed doubts about this change as any one action might be various-ly nter- preted as either an improvement or an acquisition, for example. Chairman White thought, however, that the problems of interpre'ta'tion could not be Further eliminated. A line of succession had been added to Section 13.6. I't was suggested that the Assistant Town Manager be placed between 'the Town 1Vlanager and 'the Mayor. However, this provision is only effective in emergencies; otherwise, the. Assistant Town Manager is next in line, As the section as previously written stated that the council shall provide For continuity of government and the addition, gives the line of succession, it was questioned whether .the Former statement-was needed. Miss Hobart noted that providing for continuity is more. :than providing a leading Figure. Mr, Weibel inquired to what extent the adcl:itional provision in Section 13.8 changed 13.5. Section 13.5 is applicable to emergencies and 13,6 to disasters. Discussion returned to whether 'the Assistant Tawn Manager should follow the Town Manager in the line of succession. Mrs. Batley stated that often the Assistant Town Manager could be a person who is not brieFeci on the administration as a whole, Mr. Dobson was concerned that the ,elected representatives of the people exercise responsibility, He would prefer that the wording be "the town manager is empowered by 'the trustees" rather. than "empowered by the Charter," It was brought up 'that in the case of an emergency,. the people may not be willing to follow an Assistar7t Town. Manager. There was some discussion of how much control by 'the. council in an emergency situation was implied in the Charter, It was Hated. that, to a large extent, this would depend on-'the relationship between .a particular council and a par'ticu.lar manager. Another consideration was that, in an emergency, it was no't desirable Ito-have a manager who would decline to 'take any action until he had convened the council. Mr, Dobson inquired iF 'there were any reason for waiting 48 hours beFore calling For help From other governmental bodies and convening 'the council. The wording suggested was "if the emergency situation continues,, the Town Manager shalt convene the council who may.take such measures as necessary." ^ ,:.,' 1 M Discussion turned to the line of succession when i•t reaches the administrative staFF. There was disagreement with .the wording, "administrative staFF on the basis of seniority." I•t,:was agreed to ineluc9e the. ph~^ase, "an orderly succession kSy L i(:j.. ~g .~ -., ~ - - - 1 .. :.: through the administrative department heads." As it was the intent that,,the ' line of succession should apply to both err~ergencies and, disasters, a sentence will be added to 13.5 stating that the succession. shal.i be ~.s provided in 13.6.. A final item of business was the possii~ili'ty that ,perhaps capital improvements -^~^ should not be excluded from a referendum: However,., these would be budgetary items and would involve a contract.. Also, there would probably b~ a band election in which the public could voice, its opinion. As there was no Further business, Mr. Donovan moved the meeting adjourn. Adjournment was at 9:45 a. m. . ,. n `~ ~''. ~, er , lh ~~ ~~ i~ i~