HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.069-08RESOLUTION NO. 69
Series of 2008
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
TO RECEIVE, ACCEPT AND ADOPT CERTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE ASPEN CITIZEN BUDGET
TASK FORCE.
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2008, by resolution of the City Council of the City of
Aspen, Colorado, they did create a City of Aspen Citizen Budget Task Force, provide for
a schedule of meetings and request said Task Force to provide a final report of its
findings and recommendations by September 1, 2008,
WHEREAS, The Mayor has proposed and City Council endorsed the creation of a
Citizen Budget Task Force, to evaluate major issues of budgetazy and financial policy,
and provide a set or findings and recommendations to the City Council, and
WHEREAS, on May 20, 2008, the Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the Citizens
Budget Task Force met with the City Council and made 10 recommendations to them:
1. Employer Sponsored Analysis of Current and Expected Housing Demand/Supply
and Proposals for Public/Private Partnerships
Council response: Council wanted to wait and see if the City & County survey efforts that aze
currently in progress yielded a sufficient amount of information before commissioning additional
survey efforts. If employers other than City/County were to organize their own survey efforts, the
City would support those efforts in concept (but not with funding) and would be happy to shaze
information with employers. The employer survey is nearly complete and should be released soon.
2. Post-Completion Review of Burlingame Phase 1
Council response: Council agreed to this recommendation and commissioned two such
independent investigative audits: (1) a Performance Audit with the firm of Alvazez & Marsel
whose scope of services was agreed to by the Subcommittee members, and (2) a Financial Review
of the staff reconciliation of Burlingame costs by the City's external auditors, McMahan and
Associates.
3. Reconsider Burlingame 2 and 3 Assumptions and to have an objective third party
industry expert consultant estimate the costs for Burlingame Phases 2&3
Council response: Council agreed that the Construction Experts Group (CEG) the City Manager
had convened would serve this purpose, and that they would consider construction methods,
partnership possibilities, density changes in terms of sizing of the units and the number of units to
be built, and more economical fmishes to units. This group continues to meet.
4. Create a specialized Task Force to develop potential optional financial incentive
programs to allow existing AH residents to downsize, sell, bridge to free-market,
etc. Explore providing loan support programs for bridging to free mazket
ownership for AH and free-market renters.
Council response: Council has tabled this recommendation for now, but previously expressed
support for this kind of analysis to be undertaken. This is part of a series of long term
recommendations to be considered by the Housing Authority citizen board, and they have agreed
to convene a group of locals to work on these issues.
5. Establish Independent Compliance Advisory Board to advise housing executives
on compliance matters, and monitor compliance complaints.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
6. Establish Outsourced 24 hour Help Line for Compliance.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
7. Outsource Eligibility Testing to Specialized Firm.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Boazd for then review and recommendations.
8. Legal Review of All Contracts for Maximizing City Rights.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
9. Establish Public Policy Review Committee whose Purpose is to advise on major
Capital Spending prior to legal commitments.
Council response: This recommendation has been tabled by the Task Force for the time being.
10. Update City Procurement/RFP system.
Council response: Council agreed to this recommendation. Recommendations are expected from
the auditors on this subject.
WHEREAS, on June 30, 2008, the Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the Citizens
Budget Task Force met with the City Council and presented a series of recommendation
in two areas:
1) Development Related:
a) study and incorporate BG development options by CEG as to: construction methods, public/private
partnerships that lessen public subsidies, density increases in terms of both sizing of units and
number of units, more economical finishes that utilizes the City's buying power or allows for owner
purchased upgrades
b) preparation of a detailed plan and a comprehensive budget for BG 2/3 using recommendations from
CEG
2) Financial and Management Control Systems:
a) financial and management systems review of BG Ranch to include validating the dollars in the city's
reconciliation spreadsheet, testing a sample of payments to contractor, review of internal controls
surrounding multi-year capital projects, and make recommendations for improvements in the
processes used to prepare construction budgets and forecasts
b) performance audit of processes and procedures used for overall construction management
administration
c) direct Staff to recommend for immediate implementation the recommendations from those audits
d) review of BG Phase 2/3 budget by independent industry professional prior to contract for value
engineering options
e) City Manager to provide a plan and a timeline for implementation of all recommendations, Council to
approve that plan and get regulaz updates on progress and report to Community at least quarterly
t) assessment of projects needs, resources, skill sets to ensure staffing capability and experience for
necessary oversight of all future AH projects
g) Council to direct staff to develop and implement a routine, semiannual reporting procedure for Council
and the public on progress on lazge capital projects against the initial budget including revenues
h) implement process to ensure accuracy of voter information and reasonableness of financial projections
i) engage independent consultant for risk assessment and systems assessment of above prior to execution
of BG 2/3 contracts
j) Analyze the bonding capacity proposals of the Director of Finance regazding: (1) Housing Fund's
ability to absorb any proposed subsidy for any AH project, (2) capacity of the City to service any
debt for BG 2/3, BMC West and any other proposed AH project, and (3) Council to make fmal
recommendations with full awazeness of, and publicity to voters of, relationship to reasonably
anticipated future funding needs and capacity for BG and other projects as well as other major
capital improvements.
k) Council establish a written policy and guidelines for AH subsidies for current and future AH
projects. This policy to acknowledge a connection between subsidy levels and financial capaciTy of
a AH project and possible overall impact on CiTy's financial condition.
Council response: Council agreed to these recommendations pending the completion of the independent
auditor's recommendations (Alvazez and Mazsel) before fully committing to the details. They aze in
agreement with the principles that drive the purpose of those audits and anticipate accepting the audit
recommendations.
WHEREAS, it is the belief of the Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the Citizens
Budget Task Force that these recommendations aze crucial to preparing for a bond issue
for future Affordable Housing development proposals and that they should be
implemented as soon as possible. That the upcoming bond election is not simply a
"Burlingame Issue" but involves the future of the Affordable Housing program and the
best use of the funds available. That the development of a realistic timeline for the steps
delineated in the recommendations and rigorous execution plan of same will increase
community confidence and support of Burlingame and the Affordable Housing program.
WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the Citizens Budget Task Force
declares that:
^ Burlingame Ranch is Aspen's unique, high potential Affordable Housing resource
^ Burlingame has been approved on two occasions by vote of Aspen citizens
^ City Council is committed to Burlingame II and III
^ Funding for Burlingame Phases II and III requires a bond issue or other forms of
multi-year financing as the RETT based fund is significantly depleted
• Passage of a bond issue requires broad based citizen support
^ The present confusion as to actual vs. projected costs as presented in the 2005
brochure has weakened public trust
^ Therefore the Citizen Budget Task Force recommends that prior to sending a
proposal fora Burlingame phase II bond issue to the voters, the City Council accept
and commit to implementing these recommendations.
We the City Council do therefore, receive, accept and adopt these recommendations as noted
and do express our gratitude for the work of the Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the
Citizen Budget Task Force.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on
the 28th day of July, 2008. /
Michael Ir and, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the
foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the