| LovelandPolitics.com a non-partisan website about Loveland politics for residents concerned about our community's quality of life. Send us your story or comment on the blog. |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
| City Council Off-Site - Meeting Protocol Discussed Off-Site Provided Rare Opportunity to See Council Argue Process |
Loveland - January 18, 2009
The Loveland City Council listed as #16 on the annual retreat feedback items "council raises" to be addressed in 2009. The
council pay increases were listed just ahead of #17, Visual Arts, #18 Downtown Branding and #18 Performance based
budgeting. The top five items included downtown revitalization, exploring new ways to lure private investments into Loveland
and county enclaves within in the city.
The Loveland City Council met January 9 & 10 at Group Publishing in Loveland in a conference room painted with the images
of cartoon woodland creatures to conduct their annual off-site study session.
Loveland's City Manager, Don Williams, described Loveland's budget as "really the same as Ft. Collins except for scale
maybe..." when asked to consider performance budgeting for 2009. Williams was clearly against the idea and told the council
the process would cost money and take too much time to implement. He also indicated that Loveland's budget is too small for
the performance budgeting methodology being discussed and suggested they move onto the next topic.
Saturday morning was reserved as an open topics forum where participants in the off-site could raise their own concerns,
complaints or suggestions. Councilman Walt Skowron raised the issue of performance based budgeting several times during
the morning session.
Loveland Councilman Glenn Rousey complained, "We have an extremely difficult time focusing on issues." He complained the
council had just "wasted half an hour" trying to respond to his colleague, Councilman Walt Skowron, on questions regarding
Loveland's methodology for budgeting.
Walters responded, "Okay, I just want to give a rebuttal...." as he explained his reasons for raising the questions he did in an
attempt to get greater clarity on why the city does certain things. Rousey then interrupted, "Then it should have been separate
item Walt instead..."
Under the category of "new topics" discussion, Rousey again raised his complaint by stating, "We do not focus on what we are
supposed to be dealing with." Councilwoman Carol Johnson spoke in favor of Rousey's complaints and complimented
Loveland Mayor Gene Pielin for "keeping the meeting focused" by stopping her colleagues from asking certain questions and
allowing the focus to shift away from the issue at hand.
Councilman Kent Solt raised as his issue the fact a number of citizens have complained to him regarding the unlimited rebuttal
time afforded developers after public comment in a public hearing. Mayor Pielin responded, "The reason I don't allow rebuttal
on the other side is because the application is a public document." The Mayor went on to explain that residents have ample
time to study the application before a meeting to finalize their comments. Solt pointed to recent hearings where the developer
either introduced new information at the hearing or responded to resident comments with information the public didn't have
access to prior to the public meeting.
Mayor Pielin said he will consider reopening public comment in the future as long as four or more councilors communicate to
him they want the hearing opened again during the meeting. Of particular concern by some was a recent hearing where the
applicant, McWhinney Enterprises and Centerra, were allowed unlimited time to improperly restate and refute any arguments
raised by Loveland residents in order to discredit these arguments. The City Attorney, John Duval, contributed his thoughts
that he believes applicants need to have the last word since they have the burden of proof and the public speakers do not have
to meet that burden to prevail.
Councilman Heckel stated, "I think Gene does a great job because if you let the public go on.....Gene has probably saved us
hours...." Curiously, Mayor Pielin used this opportunity to thank developers who coordinate their strategy in advance with the
city staff and raised complaints about one developer he said did not. Mayor Pielin stated, "I was very disappointed in Floyd
who didn't coordinate with staff ahead of time." He explained that by coordinating ahead of time with the staff the developer
removes surprises from the process and allows council to proceed as planned. This raises the bigger question as to whether it
is legal for developers to choreograph the meeting and presentations in advance with city staff. The hearing is intended, by
law, to be a new opportunity for the council to consider the application and make their decision based on the testimony
provided on that date and not some prior meeting when the public was not allowed to attend. Clearing the information they
will present in advance with staff appears to be another potential violation of Colorado's sunshine laws by the City of Loveland
and its senior officials.
Councilman Darryl Klassen announced that he was once a "radio man" and complained about the quality of the acoustics in
city hall for the council meetings taped and replayed on Loveland's cable access channel. He complained that soft spoken
councilman like David Clark are difficult for him to hear since the city's technician taping the show fails to properly adjust the
microphones while council is in session. Clark contributed his belief that the microphones are to far forward for those
addressing council causing them to lean forward to be heard.
A suggestion was made to upgrade the microphones on one of the two lecterns facing council. Pielin stated, "I think the
audience should be restricted to the microphone on the left." Indicating his support for replacing or improving the microphone
for only one lectern in the council chambers instead of two.
The Loveland City Council listed as #16 on the annual retreat feedback items "council raises" to be addressed in 2009. The
council pay increases were listed just ahead of #17, Visual Arts, #18 Downtown Branding and #18 Performance based
budgeting. The top five items included downtown revitalization, exploring new ways to lure private investments into Loveland
and county enclaves within in the city.
The Loveland City Council met January 9 & 10 at Group Publishing in Loveland in a conference room painted with the images
of cartoon woodland creatures to conduct their annual off-site study session.
Loveland's City Manager, Don Williams, described Loveland's budget as "really the same as Ft. Collins except for scale
maybe..." when asked to consider performance budgeting for 2009. Williams was clearly against the idea and told the council
the process would cost money and take too much time to implement. He also indicated that Loveland's budget is too small for
the performance budgeting methodology being discussed and suggested they move onto the next topic.
Saturday morning was reserved as an open topics forum where participants in the off-site could raise their own concerns,
complaints or suggestions. Councilman Walt Skowron raised the issue of performance based budgeting several times during
the morning session.
Loveland Councilman Glenn Rousey complained, "We have an extremely difficult time focusing on issues." He complained the
council had just "wasted half an hour" trying to respond to his colleague, Councilman Walt Skowron, on questions regarding
Loveland's methodology for budgeting.
Walters responded, "Okay, I just want to give a rebuttal...." as he explained his reasons for raising the questions he did in an
attempt to get greater clarity on why the city does certain things. Rousey then interrupted, "Then it should have been separate
item Walt instead..."
Under the category of "new topics" discussion, Rousey again raised his complaint by stating, "We do not focus on what we are
supposed to be dealing with." Councilwoman Carol Johnson spoke in favor of Rousey's complaints and complimented
Loveland Mayor Gene Pielin for "keeping the meeting focused" by stopping her colleagues from asking certain questions and
allowing the focus to shift away from the issue at hand.
Councilman Kent Solt raised as his issue the fact a number of citizens have complained to him regarding the unlimited rebuttal
time afforded developers after public comment in a public hearing. Mayor Pielin responded, "The reason I don't allow rebuttal
on the other side is because the application is a public document." The Mayor went on to explain that residents have ample
time to study the application before a meeting to finalize their comments. Solt pointed to recent hearings where the developer
either introduced new information at the hearing or responded to resident comments with information the public didn't have
access to prior to the public meeting.
Mayor Pielin said he will consider reopening public comment in the future as long as four or more councilors communicate to
him they want the hearing opened again during the meeting. Of particular concern by some was a recent hearing where the
applicant, McWhinney Enterprises and Centerra, were allowed unlimited time to improperly restate and refute any arguments
raised by Loveland residents in order to discredit these arguments. The City Attorney, John Duval, contributed his thoughts
that he believes applicants need to have the last word since they have the burden of proof and the public speakers do not have
to meet that burden to prevail.
Councilman Heckel stated, "I think Gene does a great job because if you let the public go on.....Gene has probably saved us
hours...." Curiously, Mayor Pielin used this opportunity to thank developers who coordinate their strategy in advance with the
city staff and raised complaints about one developer he said did not. Mayor Pielin stated, "I was very disappointed in Floyd
who didn't coordinate with staff ahead of time." He explained that by coordinating ahead of time with the staff the developer
removes surprises from the process and allows council to proceed as planned. This raises the bigger question as to whether it
is legal for developers to choreograph the meeting and presentations in advance with city staff. The hearing is intended, by
law, to be a new opportunity for the council to consider the application and make their decision based on the testimony
provided on that date and not some prior meeting when the public was not allowed to attend. Clearing the information they
will present in advance with staff appears to be another potential violation of Colorado's sunshine laws by the City of Loveland
and its senior officials.
Councilman Darryl Klassen announced that he was once a "radio man" and complained about the quality of the acoustics in
city hall for the council meetings taped and replayed on Loveland's cable access channel. He complained that soft spoken
councilman like David Clark are difficult for him to hear since the city's technician taping the show fails to properly adjust the
microphones while council is in session. Clark contributed his belief that the microphones are to far forward for those
addressing council causing them to lean forward to be heard.
A suggestion was made to upgrade the microphones on one of the two lecterns facing council. Pielin stated, "I think the
audience should be restricted to the microphone on the left." Indicating his support for replacing or improving the microphone
for only one lectern in the council chambers instead of two.
