MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

 

MONDAY, JUNE 1, 2020

 

 LAND USE HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m., with Don Threewitt, Principal Planner. Chair Johnson presided, Commissioner Donnelly and Commissioner Kefalas were present. Alyssa Martin, Community Development joined the meeting by teleconference. Also present were: Michael Whitley, Community Development; Steven Rothwell, Engineering Department; and Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk.

 

Chair Johnson opened the hearing with the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

Chair Johnson noted that the following items were on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested to do so by the Board, staff, or members of the audience.

 

1.          ROSELIUS APPEAL, FILE #20-ZONE2655: This request is an appeal to Section 4.3.10.H.c of the Land Use Code which limits the size of a detached accessory living area to 40% of the square footage of the single-family dwelling, excluding any garage or basement area, whether finished or not, or 800-square-feet, whichever is less.

 

The property is a 10-acre parcel. The property contains an existing residence, livestock shed, barn, and shop. The existing residence was constructed in 1885 and is 2,475-square-feet. The applicant intends to decrease the square footage of the existing residence to 899.5-square-feet.

 

A second dwelling of 3,678-square-feet is proposed 300 feet south of the existing residence. The applicant would like to utilize this dwelling as the primary residence to allow her to age in place and maintain the existing residence as a detached accessory living area. As noted above, the square footage of the detached accessory living area is limited to 40% of the primary residence, or 800-square-feet. As proposed, the detached accessory living area exceeds the 800-square-foot maximum.

 

The applicant’s project description indicates that the new residence will be specially equipped to accommodate an elderly person living alone that may be physically handicapped or ill. The accessory living unit would be used for a health care assistant or property caretaker. Prior to this, the living unit would be available for visiting family and friends. In addition, the applicant noted she will be living in her 27-foot mobile home while the residences are in construction and use an off-site dump station for waste disposal.

 

The property owner submitted a Public Site Plan application and size appeal. If the size appeal is granted by the Board of County Commissioners, the Public Site Plan can be approved administratively by the Community Development Director.

 

Both dwellings will share the existing access point off E. County Road 44. Adequate parking for the residence and accessory living area are provided within the existing driveway.

 

The Development Services Team evaluates each request on its own merits, but historically has supported accessory living areas up to 1,200-square-feet in detached buildings.

 

22.2.3 REVIEW CRITERIA FOR APPEALS TO DEVIATE FROM STANDARDS OR REQUIREMENTS OTHER THAN MINIMUM LOT SIZE

 

When considering whether to approve an appeal to deviate from standards or requirements of this Code, other than minimum lot size requirements, the Board of County Commissioners may grant the appeal subject to safeguards and conditions consistent with their findings concerning the following factors. The Board of County Commissioners will consider each of the following factors and make findings pertaining to each one which, in their discretion, applies to the appeal:

 

A.        Approval of the appeal will not subvert the purpose of the standard or requirement. The purpose of the section is to allow for accessory living areas that are incidental to the primary use of the property as single-family residential and of an appropriate scale. The size limitation was included to ensure the accessory use remains accessory and to prevent the use from turning into multi-family residential and/or rentals where it is not permitted. As discussed above, the existing residence will be scaled down to 899.5-square-feet and remain accessory to the future primary residence of 3,678-square-feet. Given that the accessory living area will not be rented, would not be out of scale for the property, and can meet all other Land Use Code requirements, approval of the appeal would not subvert the purpose of the size standard.

 

B.         Approval of the appeal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood. Notice of the Public Site Plan application and size appeal were sent to surrounding property owners. No neighbor concerns were received. The Engineering Department did not have concerns; and parking for both dwellings will not interfere with the right-of-way. Water will be provided by the East Larimer County Water District. Sewer will be proved by Boxelder Sanitation District. It is not anticipated that granting the appeal would be detrimental to the public health, safety or property values in the neighborhood.

 

C.         Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary. Approval of the appeal is the minimum action necessary to allow for a portion of the existing residence built in 1885 to be accessory to a new primary residence. The proposed primary residence will allow the applicant to age in place and allow an accessory living area for family and future medical assistant.

 

D.        Approval of the appeal will not result in increased costs to the general public. It is not anticipated that the project will result in the need for improvements to public facilities or increased costs to the public.

 

E.        Approval of the appeal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code. The intent of the detached accessory living area regulations is to allow guest quarters that are secondary to the principal single-family home on the property and compatible with uses in the surrounding area. While the proposed appeal exceeds the 800 square foot maximum, it does not change the existing character of the property. Approval of the appeal would be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code.

 

The following county offices provided comments. The Engineering Department noted that Transportation Capital Expansion Fees will be required at the time of building permit and the structure is anticipated to be built in a way not to affect drainage patterns. The Department of Health and Environment noted that there are two septic permits for the property that are adequate to serve both dwelling. The Building Department indicated that a building permit will be required, and they note several building code standards will be applicable. The Addressing Coordinator noted that an address will be provided if the appeal is approved. The Poudre Fire Authority, as well as, the East Larimer County Water District and the City of Fort Collins had no objections to the application.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Roselius Appeal, File #20-ZONE2655 with the following condition:

 

            A.        The Accessory Living Area shall be located as shown on the approved site plan.

 

The Development Services Team notes that if the proposed appeal is approved, additional conditions will be placed on the Public Site Plan approval including meeting all development standards, the need for obtaining all applicable permits, and an expiration of the Public Site Plan approval.

 

2.         NELSON 384 MOUNT ETHEL ROAD EASEMENT VACATION, FILE #20-LAND3971: The Nelson property, located in Bellvue, is Lot 10A Stratton Park Estates First Filing. An amended plat was approved in 2018 (#17-LAND3715) that adjusted the property lines between former Lots 10 and 15. There was a 7-foot utility easement that ran along each side of the previously shared property line (14-feet total).  When the property lines were adjusted and the existing property line vacated, vacating the easement was overlooked. This requested easement vacation will vacate the easement that is not needed that runs through a portion of Lot 10A.  There are currently no utilities in the existing easement. The utility check sheet was signed by all applicable utility companies.

 

The Larimer County Land Use Code (Section 5.9.3) allows for the approval of a right-of-way or easement vacation if the following review criteria are met:

 

A.        Approval of the vacation request will not leave any land adjoining the right-of-way without an established public road or private access easement connecting the land with another established public road, or without utility or drainage services. The vacation of the platted utility easement will not affect access to a public right-of-way, nor prevent utility access to the property or neighboring properties.

 

B.         The recommendations of referral agencies have been considered. Referral agency comments have been considered.  The Engineering Department has noted that they do not have any concerns as long as the appropriate utility companies have had an opportunity to comment. As noted above, the Utility Check Sheet was completed by all applicable utility companies. Health and Environment had no concerns. Any right-of-way that is vacated will be divided equally between the lots on each side, unless it can be demonstrated that all of the right-of-way was originally taken from one parcel. In that case, the right-of-way will be returned to that parcel. Property owners on each side of the right-of-way may agree to divide the vacated right-of-way differently but must sign deeds to transfer ownership after the Board of County Commissioners approve the vacation. No right-of-way is proposed to be vacated as part of this application.

 

The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Nelson 384 Mount Ethel Easement Vacation, File #20-LAND3971 subject to the following condition:

 

A.        The Board of County Commissioners are authorized to sign the Findings and Resolution for this action when it is presented.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Kefalas moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the two items on the Consent Agenda for, Monday, June 1, 2020, and further moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the findings and resolutions.

 

Motion Carried 3-0

 

3.         STREET MEDIA GROUP SIGN APPEAL, FILE #20-GNRL0478: Michael Whitley, Community Development. Mr. Whitely provided the Board with background on the appeal. He noted that the subject property is a 6.46-acre parcel is located northwest of the intersection of Harmony Road and Interstate 25. It is zoned C – Commercial and is in the Fort Collins Growth Management Area.  The property is part of a small enclave of three parcels and a portion of Harmony Road right-of-way that is surrounded by Fort Collins city limits.

 

Mr. Whitley reported that the applicants seek approval to construct a 30-foot-tall electronic message billboard with two faces of 240-square-feet each. The applicants propose a hold time between messages of six seconds.  The sign is proposed to have a setback of 30-feet from the property line adjacent to Harmony Road. In exchange, the applicants propose to remove five existing billboards from unincorporated Larimer County and within the City of Fort Collins. The five existing billboards have a total of eight faces that display signage. 

 

Mr. Whitley informed the Board that the proposed billboard would require approval of appeals to Sections 10.5.B, 10.5.E and 10.11 of the Land Use Code.

 

Section 10.5 deals with prohibited signs.  The sections appealed reads that the following signs are not allowed in any zoning district:

 

B.         Signs which contain any flashing, rotating, animated or otherwise moving features. The appearance of electronic or changeable message signs cannot change more frequently than once every minute.

 

E.         Billboards, off-premises signs, except that a home occupation and an accessory rural occupation may have a temporary, off-premises directional sign as described in section 10.6.K.

 

Mr. Whitley noted that the Larimer County Land Use Code defines an off-premises sign as, “a sign which is used or intended for use to advertise, identify, direct or attract the attention to a business, institution, product, organization, event or location offered or existing elsewhere than upon the same property where such sign is displayed.”

 

The proposed size, height and setback require appeals to Section 10.11 of the Land Use Code which contains standards for nonresidential zoning district.  The standards include a maximum allowed size and height of a freestanding sign based on the setback of the sign from a property line adjacent to a street.  The Larimer County Land Use Code does not allow freestanding signs taller than 18-feet or larger than 90-square-feet per sign face.  To have a freestanding sign of that height and size, the sign would need to have a setback of 36-feet or more from the property line.

 

New off-premises signs have been prohibited in unincorporated Larimer County since June 15, 1992.

 

Mr. Whitely reported to the Board that the proposed sign has non-parallel faces, angled from each other so they are each visible from a different direction of traffic on Harmony Road.  He stated that according to the applicants’ materials, the sign displays are proposed to “incorporate redundant brightness control systems that respond to ambient light (dimming the sign at night and during inclement weather), as well as SITELINE technology to ensure that light is directed only towards the intended audience of the sign, and that no perceptible light spills over into the Arapaho Bend Natural Area.” 

 

Mr. Whitley also noted that the Department of Health and Environment recommends that if the appeals are granted, that the Board of County Commissioners consider placing a condition of approval that the electronic  message board shall be designed and operated to meet the most current Guidance for Electronic Message Centers issued by the International Dark-Sky Association.  The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department expressed similar concerns regarding the impact of light pollution on wildlife

 

Mr. Whitley stated that to approve an appeal from the applicable requirements in Section 10 of this Code, the Board of County Commissioners must consider the following review criteria and find that each criterion has been met or determined to be inapplicable:

 

A.         Approval of the appeal is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Code. According to Section 10.1 of the Land Use Code, the purpose of the sign regulations is to “protect the health, safety and welfare of the public; to provide the public and property owners with an opportunity for safe and effective identification of uses and locations within the county; and to avoid clutter and protect and maintain the visual appearance and property values of the agricultural, residential, business, commercial and industrial areas of the county.”

 

The intent of the regulations within Section 10 of the Land Use Code is to not allow off-premises signs, to provide consistent regulations for the allotment of commercial signage, and to have sign regulations consistent with the regulations adopted by the City of Fort Collins and the City of Loveland.

 

Larimer County’s sign regulations were deliberately written to be consistent with the regulations adopted by the City of Fort Collins and the City of Loveland to reduce the potential for nonconformities should signs permitted in unincorporated Larimer County be annexed to one of those cities.

 

Approval of the appeal would allow this property to have a billboard when new billboards have been prohibited since June 15, 1992 and would allow the billboard to be 30-feet tall when the maximum height of a freestanding sign is 18-feet (1.7 times taller than allowed) with 240-square-feet per sign face when a maximum size is 90-square-feet per sign face (2.7 times larger than allowed).

 

In the applicants’ project description, it is noted that removal of the five billboards from other locations in the Fort Collins area will reduce visual clutter.  Staff notes that as nonconforming signs, the intent is for the five billboards to be removed over time as their physical condition deteriorates. This would ultimately result in the removal of the five signs without being replaced by a permanent electronic message sign.

 

The City of Fort Collins provided comments that indicate the proposed appeals conflict with their current sign regulations.  Their regulations do not allow new off-premises signage, allow one message per minute on electronic sign displays, do not allow electronic message center displays on pole signs, and limit pole signs to 18-feet in height and 80-square-feet per sign face.

 

This property is within the Harmony Gateway Area which is a subarea of the Harmony Corridor Plan.  According to the City’s comments, an amendment to the City’s Harmony Corridor Plan is pending a second reading with the Fort Collins City Council.  The proposed amendment would prohibit billboards and would also prohibit electronic message center signs on properties within the Harmony Gateway.

 

The City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Department provided comments expressing concerns about the impact of light from the proposed billboard on wildlife in the adjacent Arapahoe Bend Natural Area and nearby Eagle View Natural Area.

 

The Development Services Team’s assessment is that approval of the appeal would not be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Land Use Code.  The proposal does not comply with this criterion.

 

B.         There are extraordinary or exceptional conditions on the site which would result in a

peculiar or undue hardship on the property owner if Section 10 of this Code is strictly enforced. No sign permits have been previously issued for a freestanding sign on the property.  There have been five permits issued for walls sign which cumulatively are well under the overall sign allotment for the property.

 

If Section 10 of the Land Use Code is strictly enforced, the owners of businesses located on the property would have the ability to obtain permits for a freestanding sign along the property’s Harmony Road frontage, a freestanding sign along the property’s I-25 frontage, and permits could be obtained for additional wall signage.  Each of the two freestanding signs could be 18 feet tall with two 90-square foot sign faces.

 

The strict enforcement of Section 10 would not allow for the construction of a new billboard of any size, would not allow for a freestanding sign (on-premises or off-premises) taller than 18 feet tall or larger than 90 square feet per sign face and would not allow for an electronic sign with a hold time between messages of less than 60 seconds.  Staff has not reviewed compelling evidence that there are extraordinary or exceptional conditions on the site that would result in a peculiar or undue hardship on the property owner if Section 10 of the Land Use Code is strictly enforced. Staff finds that the proposal does not comply with this criterion.

 

C.         Approval of the appeal would not result in an economic or marketing advantage over

other businesses which have signs which comply with Section 10 of this Code. Approval of the appeal would allow this property to have a billboard when new billboards are no longer permitted and would allow the billboard to be 30 feet tall when the maximum height of a freestanding sign is 18 feet (1.7 times taller than allowed) with 240 square feet per sign face when a maximum size of a freestanding sign face is 90 square feet (2.7 times larger than allowed). The sign elevation at sidewalk level is approximately 16 feet, however the Larimer County Land Use Code does not contain provisions for elevation-related compensation.  It would also allow the sign at a lesser setback than required by the Code for smaller signs and would also a hold time of 6 seconds between messages when a 60 second hold time is required.  The Colorado Department of Transportation’s minimum hold time between messages is 4 seconds.

 

Approval of the appeal would provide an economic and marketing advantage over businesses that comply with Section 10 of the Land Use Code by allowing the following: increased sign height, increased sign and copy size, presence of electronic message display, reduced copy hold time, and placement within an area where off-premises signs are otherwise prohibited. Staff finds that the proposal does not comply with this criterion.

 

Mr. Whitley also reported to the Board that just before the meeting, the County did receive communication from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) that if the appeal is granted that a CDOT permit would potentially be required.

 

Mr. Whitley concluded his presentation by relaying that the Development Services Team recommends denial of the Street Media Group Sign Appeal, File 20-GNRL0478.

 

There was a discussion between the Board and staff if the communication from CDOT has been shared with the applicant.  The Board also asked for clarification as to whether the City of Fort Collins had factored in the use of SITELINE technology that was being utilized. Additionally, the Board sought clarification regarding the discrepancies in the recommended times for changing minutes: 60 seconds in the Larimer County Code, six seconds in the application being presented today and CDOT’s recommendation of four seconds.

 

The Board and staff also discussed what the timeframe would potentially be for the proposed signs to be removed if the appeal were not approved.  Staff noted that the signs can be repaired, but the life of the sign cannot be extended.  Essentially a timeframe is unknown for the removal. There was further discussion about how the Intergovernmental Governmental Agreement (IGA) between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins applies.  It was noted by Mr. Haug that while the City of Fort Collins views are considered, they do not directly impact the county’s ability to grant the appeal. Lastly, the Board and staff discussed the topography of the area and the number of signs which have been removed in the 20 plus years that the prohibition of off premise signs has been in place.

 

Chair Johnson invited the applicants to present the case for the appeal.  Todd Messenger, attorney with Fairfield and Woods, addressed the Board.  Mr. Messenger stated that Gary Young and Troy Hammond with Street Media Group were also present in the audience. Mr. Messenger walked the Board through why the application for the appeal should be granted.

 

Mr. Messenger reported to the Board that the application meets all of the county standards for an appeal.  He noted that the applicants intend to remove eight sign faces and replace it with a single electronic sign which will greatly reduce clutter along the roadway. He also noted that this will be a state of the art aesthetically pleasing sign. Additionally, he stated that the owner of the land is the State Land Board whose mission is to lease lands and then direct that revenue to public schools in the state.  The lease here will direct $1 million to the state’s public schools.

 

Mr. Messenger then walked the Board through a series of arguments and court case which the applicant believes makes the sign code unconstitutional and obsolete. He reported to the Board that when the sign code was adopted in 1992, by the applicant’s analysis, it was already out of bounds based on a 1981 case opinion issued by the Supreme Court which deemed billboards to be speech.

 

Mr. Messenger also noted that the area where the sign will be located is near several large retail stores which have a series of lights in place in their parking areas. The applicants take issue with the idea that the lighting from the sign would drastically impact the natural environment given the stores currently at or near the location. Additionally, the applicants noted that the site is at a well-lit highway interchange and the addition of the sign would not impact the wildlife. Mr. Messenger also stated that billboards located along a major artery, such as this one, offer local businesses who do not have the resources for such prime locations a chance to level the playing field by having the opportunity to at least advertise.

 

There was a discussion between the Board and the applicant regarding the timeframe of when the existing signs would be removed. Mr. Young relayed to the Board that they would be willing to remove the signs before the new sign is put in place and could look to remove the signs at the time of permitting.  Additionally, there was discussion as to whether the sign can be adjusted as the migrating pattern of waterfowl and other wildlife in the area are better understood.  The applicant noted that the electronic sign will have a limited impact compared to the other stores and lighting mechanisms in the surrounding area.

 

Chair Johnson then opened the meeting for public comment.  No one from the public addressed the Board on the appeal and Chair Johnson closed public comment. The Board thanked the applicant and staff for their presentations and entered into a discussion regarding the appeal.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the purposed Harmony Road Electronic Billboard Sign Appeal File #20-GNRL0478.

 

Motion Carried 3-0

 

With there being no further business, the Board adjourned at 4:40 p.m.

 

 

TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 2020

 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MEETING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Linda Hoffmann, County Manager. Chair Johnson presided. Commissioner Donnelly and Commissioner Kefalas were present. Also present were Alisha Jeffers, Commissioners’ Office, and Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk.

 

1.    PUBLIC COMMENT : The following members of the public addressed the Board of County Commissioners: No one from the public addressed the Board

 

2.         APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 25, 2020:

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Kefalas moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the week of May 25, 2020.

 

Motion carried 3-0

 

3.         REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF JUNE 8, 2020:   Ms. Jeffers reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.

 

4.         CONSENT AGENDA:

 

ABATEMENTS: As recommended by the County Assessor, the following petitions for abatement have been denied: Barbara Stube- R0355461(2019); Dale E. and Jennifer L. Land- R1135791 (2019); David Meissner, Meissner Associates; Poudre Valley Mobile Home Park, LLC-R0663816 (2019); Tucker and Sharon Cusick- R1001264 (2019); Morris & Sommers Investments, LLC; Rhett B. Strom, The Group, Inc-R1663526 (2019).

 

AGREEMENTS:

 

1.          AMENDMENT #2 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

 

RESOLUTIONS:

 

1.          ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION FOR DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY I

2.         ROSGEN RESOLUTION FOR EXTENSION OF APPROVAL

3.         RESOLUTION DESIGNATING LIMITED LARIMER COUNTY LIQUOR LICENSE AUTHORITY

 

LIQUOR LICENSES: The Following Liquor licenses were approved/issued: Fort Fun-Tavern; Wedgewood Wedding and Banquet Center-Tavern; Wedgewood Wedding & Banquet Center-Hotel & Restaurant.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda for June 2, 2020.

 

Motion carried 3-0

 

5.         COMMISSIONERS GUESTS: Commissioner Donnelly invited the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Angela Myers, to address the Board on upcoming election activities. Clerk Myers reported that a primary will be held on June 30, 2020. To protect voters, as well as those working the election, she requested that voters not wait until election day to cast their ballots, but to utilize the mail in option.  Clerk Myers noted that if an individual will turn 18 years old before the November election, they are eligible to vote in the primary. First time voters and those who need to update or change their registration can do so on the Clerk’s website.

 

Clerk Myers relayed to the Board that ballots will be sent out on June 8, 2020.  Unaffiliated voters will receive ballots for both parties. If a voter’s ballot is spoiled, they can call the office for a replacement. Additionally, she reported that sample ballots will be on the website for voters to view. Lastly, Clerk Myers requested that if voters do need to go to a voting services and polling center (VSPC), that they please wear a mask and practice social distancing.

 

There was a brief discussion between the Board and Clerk Myers regarding steps being taking to provide proper protections for individuals who will be processing and counting ballots on election night. Clerk Myers noted that the team has come up with creative means of protecting folks who will still have to work in bipartisan teams with protective curtains and shields. Lastly, the Board thanked Clerk Myers for the update and offered a special thanks for ensuring that military personnel outside the state received their ballots.

 

6.         COVID-19 UPDATE AND DECISION: Linda Hoffmann, County Manager. Manager Hoffmann introduced Tom Gonzales, Public Health Director, Lori Hodges, Director of Emergency Management and Laura Levy, Recovery Manager.

 

Director Gonzales updated the Board on the early warning indicators and current data surrounding those indicators.  He reported that the county can now complete 1,000 tests a day. He noted that in the suppression plan, the goal is to keep the number of new cases of COVID-19 under 25 or 10 percent of those tested on three separate days for a period of 14 days.

 

Director Gonzales reported to the Board that another early-warning trigger is the number of new cases admitted to hospitals.  The early warning trigger number is no more than 15 new positive admissions a day to the hospitals for three days over a 14-day period. Currently, the numbers in the county have been between one and four which is extremely encouraging. Additionally, Director Gonzales reported that the number of patients in the hospitals is also continuing to decrease.  Lastly, he was pleased to report to the Board that the hospital capacity is remaining well under the early-warning triggers as well as the number the of intensive care unit (ICU) beds being used.  He clarified that the numbers relating to capacity and ICU beds is reflective of total patients. The level of capacity is critical, though, as it ensures that hospitals have needed resources and space to treat patients if there is a spike in COVID-19 cases.

 

There was a discussion between the Board and Director Gonzales as to whether there has been any indication that the recent relaxing of the stay-at-home order has caused an uptick in the number of cases.  Director Gonzales reported that while so far there are no early signs of an increase, it is still to early to provide concrete data.  Director Gonzales also notified the Board that the Public Health Department is continuing to work on guidance provide by the State Health Department on recreational outdoor activities, houses of worship and childcare facilities. The Board thanked Director Gonzales and his team for their continued hard work.

 

Lori Hodges, Director of Emergency Management addressed the Board by teleconference. Director Hodges provided an update on the Emergency Operation Center’s (EOC) activity over the 40-day period of April 17, 2020, through May 26, 2020.  She was pleased to report that over this period the team has investigated 358 cases, identified 162 close contacts and expanded the number of investigators and contact tracer by 28. These steps along with the increase in testing capability are critical components to moving forward.

 

Director Hodges also updated the Board on several challenges the EOC has overcome.  These include working to prevent staff burnout, utilizing data management technology to aid the EOC in its operations, and working to secure the personal-protective-equipment supply chain.  She also reported on some key accomplishments the EOC has achieved in the last 40 days.  These include expanded testing, which is now available three days a week; a partnership with the local business community and the county; and that the county was one of the first to submit its public-assistance application.

 

There was a discussion between Director Hodges and the Board regarding the Alternate Care Facility and if there have been any residents at the site. Director Hodges reported that they do have regular meetings with the state regarding the site.  She noted that while the site is ready to go, it will only be opened as needed. Lastly, Director Hodges confirmed that the state plans to keep the site operationally ready through the fall.

 

Laura Levy, Recovery Manager, then addressed the Board by teleconference.  Ms. Levy reported to the Board that the recovery effort is grounded in four central values: equity, connectivity, stability and resilience. Additionally, Ms. Levy touched on the Recovery Collaborative organizational structure. The Collaborative will have three advisory boards focused on business, government and community recovery. In addition, there will be four focus groups including a workforce group; housing and human services; community support services; and government education and policy. Lastly, Ms. Levy noted that as the Recovery Collaborative moves into various phases it will focus on moving from “fragile to agile.”  The goal of this process will be a focus not just on the short-term and long-term recovery, but also efforts to build for greater resiliency in the future.

 

7.          COUNTY MANAGER UPDATE: Ms. Hoffmann updated the Board on this week’s coordination meetings and upcoming projects and activities.     

 

8.         COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS: The Board detailed their attendance at events during the previous week.

 

9           EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Board entered into Executive Session to discuss upcoming opioid litigation. 

 

MOTION

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board enter into Executive Session to discuss Opioid litigation, case law changes related to sign code and regulation of commercial signage in the county, pursuant to C.R.S 24-6-402(4)(b) conferences with an attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions.

 

Motion carried 3-0

 

With there being no further business, the Board recessed at 10:15 a.m.

 

 

ABATEMENT HEARING

 

The Board of County Commissioners met at 2:30 p.m. with, Jennifer Pawleshyn, Senior Appraiser. Chair Johnson presided. Commissioners Donnelly and Kefalas were present. Also present was: Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk. Ms. Pawleshyn and the applicant, John Richards joined the meeting by teleconference.

 

1.          PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OF TAXES FOR 2019 TAX YEAR (SCHEDULE #R1099833): Ms. Pawleshyn addressed the Board and presented a packet of information detailing the method in which the Assessor’s Office arrived at their current valuation of $238,900 for the subject property located at parcel #87303-38-003 in Fort Collins.  Ms. Pawleshyn noted that the assessment was based on the sale of similar properties between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2018. Additionally, Ms. Pawleshyn reported that the values of the properties sold are adjusted to the final day of the data-gathering period.

 

The applicant, John Richards, addressed the Board by teleconference. Mr. Richards reported to the Board that he used the sales from five similar condos in the complex and area which had sold in the designated time period and then divided by five.  This is how he arrived at a value of $214,000.  Mr. Richards noted that he did not understand that values on those sales were adjusted to the date of June 30, 2018.

 

Some discussion ensued between the Board, staff, and the petitioner regarding the time adjusting values. Ms. Pawleshyn confirmed state statute dictates that the time adjustment be factored into the assessment.

 

M O T I O N

 

Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners deny the petitioner’s abatement request and to uphold the Larimer County Assessor’s value of $238,900 for the property located at 3500 Rolling Green Drive.

 

Motion carried 3-0.

 

 

With there being no further business, the Board adjourned at 2:50 p.m.

 

 

____________________________________

STEVE JOHNSON

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

 

 

ANGELA MYERS

CLERK AND RECORDER

 

ATTEST:

 

_____________________________________

Elizabeth Carter, Deputy Clerk