Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20180724 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION 4:00 PM I. November ballot language discussion CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION July 24, 2018 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA November ballot language discussion P1 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR and COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: JAMES R. TRUE DATE: July 19, 2018 DATE OF MEETING: July 24, 2018 RE: Work Session regarding potential ballot issues ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ A work session is scheduled for Tuesday, July 24, 2018, to discuss potential ballot issues for this November’s general election. Over the past several months up to eight potential ballot issues have been considered as possible. However, several potential issues have been dropped or proponents have determined that the issues would be best considered at a later date. For instance, it is the general consensus of all involved that a vote on Lift 1A issues should be put off until a special or general election next year. Thus, at this moment it appears that there are four issues that are intended or have been contemplated for the ballot in November. Each is discussed below and each will require further action by Council in August. I. COMCAST FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. City staff and outside counsel Ken Fellman, a Denver attorney specializing in municipal franchises, negotiated a franchise renewal agreement with Comcast. The prior agreement ended in December of 2017, however, by its terms, it continues until another agreement is reached. The City worked collaboratively and shared resources in these negotiations with Pitkin County, Snowmass Village and Basalt. We began the negotiations using the model franchise agreement developed between Comcast and the Colorado Communications and Utility Alliance (CCUA)1, making modifications in that document to address City-specific needs. The negotiations were completed and the other three entities have or will execute the agreement. However, our Charter, Section 11.4, requires that all franchise agreements be approved by the City’s electorate. Although there are questions as to whether this Charter provision has been preempted by Federal Law, Council has previously indicated that it wished to place this on the ballot based on the Charter provision. Thus, ballot language will be brought forward for the November ballot. 1 The CCUA is a consortium of Colorado local governments who collaboratively work on telecommunications and utility issues. The CCUA has approximately 58 members, including Pitkin County. P2 I. 2 II. CHARTER AMENDMENTS. A. FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS. As noted above, the Aspen City Charter requires that franchise agreements be adopted by a vote of the electorate. This was a provision of the initial Charter and is quite rare among other communities. Given the nature and complexity of these agreements, as well as the legal issues that can arise if voters fail to pass such an agreement, many believe that the provision is outdated and should be removed from the Charter. This would allow the Council to approve any future agreement without a public vote. This particular Charter amendment has been discussed by staff and has been mentioned as a possibility at prior council meetings. However, Council has not given direction regarding an interest in placing it on the ballot at this time. Staff is seeking input on whether to bring this back in August. B. ENTERPRISE FUND BONDING. In 1992, the Colorado electorate adopted an amendment to the Colorado Constitution referred to as TABOR. This amendment greatly restricted the ability of government to increase taxes and spending without approval by the electorate. It also included provisions that required voter approval for issuance of new debt. One exception that TABOR provided was the ability of enterprise funds to issue revenue bonds without such election. The reason for this exception was so utility infrastructure projects would not be held up and that voters would not be voting on whether to replace utility lines or build water tanks. However, the Aspen City Charter, in Article X, an article that was adopted and then amended prior to TABOR, provides in Section 10.5 that “no revenue bonds shall be issued until the question of their issuance shall have been approved by a majority of the electors voting on the question at a regular or special election.” Thus, although TABOR would allow an enterprise fund to issue a revenue bond without an election, our Charter does not. It should be noted that the original Charter and its pre-TABOR amendments did allow the issuance of bonds for utility purposes without an election. However, this was through the issuance of a general obligation bond. See, Section 10.3. TABOR on the other hand, specifically requires that all general obligation bonds be approved by a vote. So, while our charter anticipated a mechanism for issuing debt for utilities without a vote, that mechanism was eliminated by TABOR. Thus, staff believes that it would be appropriate to ask the electorate to amend the Charter to conform to TABOR on this issue and to restore the original intent of the Charter. As with the franchise agreement amendment, this issue has been discussed by staff and has been discussed with various council members. However, Council as a whole has not given direction regarding an interest in placing it on the ballot at this time. Staff is also seeking input on whether to bring this back in August. C. ELECTION DATE This issue will be brought to Council by a citizen’s group that has circulated petitions to amend the Charter to move the general election date from May to March. If the general election is moved to March, the runoff would be in April. The petitions supporting this Charter Amendment were circulated and signed petitions were submitted to the Clerk on July 12th. The Clerk is reviewing the P3 I. 3 petitions as required by statute and has until August 2nd to complete the review. If deemed sufficient, the Council must approve the final ballot language at its next meeting following the designation of sufficiency. If deemed insufficient, the petitioners may have fifteen days to collect additional signatures. It should be noted that the petitioners worked with staff to make certain that the proposed language would be appropriate given other considerations and that it did not create any internal inconsistencies within the Charter. Particularly, the Mayor and two Council Members have terms that currently end in June of 2019. Even if this amendment is adopted by the electorate in November, it is my opinion that it is inappropriate to shorten a term previously established and to which the mayor and council members were elected. Thus, since the petitioners wanted this amendment to take effect immediately, if it is successful and the next election is in March of 2019, the terms of the current mayor and council members will still not end until June. The individuals elected in March of 2019, will thus take office in June. The petitioners were not inclined to have all future elections be conducted in March but have elected individuals not take office until June. So, the ballot language is written in a manner that keeps the current council in place until June of 2019, and starts the term of the new members at that time. Thus, the three individuals elected in March of 2019 or in the runoff in April, if this Charter amendment passes, will have a term that is two months shorter than a full two years. Starting in 2021, old terms will end and new terms will begin in April. III. OTHER BALLOT ISSUES. If Council wishes to address any other issue that it would like to place on the November ballot, we can discuss those on Tuesday. Please note that the City Clerk, as well as the County Clerk, as this will be a coordinated election, would like to have all ballot questions formalized no later than the end of August. P4 I.