Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20140201Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 1 CITIZEN COMMENTS ................................................................................................................. 2 COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS .............................................................................................. 2 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................... 3 Resolution #8, 2014 - Burlingame Phase II Construction Contract Buildings 5-7 .............. 4 Board Appointments - P&Z - Jasmine Tygre; Brian McNellis; Ollie Nieuwland-Zlotnicki; Jason Elliott – alternate ............................................................................................................... 4 Wheeler Board - Tom Kurt; Richie Cohen .......................................................................... 4 Minutes - January 27, 2014 .................................................................................................. 4 ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 2014 – Pacific Avenue Condominiums – Affordable Housing Credits ............................................................................................................................................. 4 ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 2014 – Erdman Partnership Lot Split – Subdivision Amendment5 ORDINANCE #3, SERIES OF 2014 – Code Amendment Procurement ....................................... 6 ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2014 – Approving lease/purchase agreement IT Firewall ........... 6 RESOLUTION #10, SERIES OF 2014 – Land Use Code Amendment – Calculations and Measurements ................................................................................................................................. 7 ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2014 – Code Amendment – Growth Management Deadlines ..... 8 ORDINANCE #51, SERIES OF 2013 – Hotel Aspen PUD .......................................................... 8 RESOLUTION #9, SERIES OF 2014 – Easement Pitkin County Library .................................... 8 2014 RENEWABLE ENERGY WORK OVERVIEW AND STATUS OF THE CCEC ............ 10 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 2 Mayor Skadron called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Frisch, Daily, Romero and Mullins present. CITIZEN COMMENTS 1. Jim Markalunas said Aspen has a history in the development of clean hydro-electric energy and he hopes Council continues the tradition. Markalunas said Council has an obligation to protect Aspen’s heritage and future. Markalunas urged Council to extend the application for the FERC permit. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman Frisch said he participated in the spell bee fund raiser for the Aspen Youth Center and it was a great time. 2. Councilman Romero reported on the exchange students from Abetone in Aspen who attended the winter X-games and experienced the epic snow storm. They enjoyed their time in Aspen. 3. Mayor Skadron noted the snow on the mountains is great and everyone should go and experience it. 4. Mayor Skadron expressed condolences to the Oksenhorn family and friends on the death of Stewart. 5. Randy Ready, assistant city manager, said kudos should be given to the parks and streets crew for their snow removal efforts. They are doing a great job and appreciate residents’ patience. 6. Councilwoman Mullins suggested Council meet with the Red Brick staff at the red brick. There is a lot of activity going on, including school programs and a new community work space. 7. Councilwoman Mullins reported on the health and human services POD meeting where discussions on the city’s approach to 2015 funding have begun. 8. Councilwoman Mullins said there is a water efficiency kick off meeting, Governor Hickenlooper’s efforts to get Colorado water efficiency plan completed by the end of 2014and each of the 9 river basins boards are putting together an efficiency plan. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 3 CONSENT CALENDAR Chris Everson, asset department, told Council at Burlingame buildings 1 - 4, 17 units have been sold; 27 under contract with 3 units reserved and 1 unit unreserved. There are 13 reservations for buildings 5 – 7. Councilman Romero asked about the capital plan to fund this phase. Everson said the budget for buildings 5 – 7 is $15 million and contains a contingency of $1.7 million. Everson said he would not like to see a contingency of $1.7 million spent. Everson said the carry forward for the existing project from 2013 to 2014 is $4.4 million and the remaining work, the contract balance is about $3.8 million and there are some soft costs to be paid; closing out the work in progress should leave a budget of $220,000. There was $750,000 in contingency budgeted and $500,000 has been spent. Councilman Romero asked the source of funds for 2014. Barry Crook, assistant city manager, said staff forecast a fund deficiency for the end of 2013 of $1.9 million, which did not occur because the RETT was higher than forecast and expenditures did not occur in 2013 but will be spent in 2014. Councilman Romero said the city is not borrowing from an outside source for this project and there are sufficient reserves and resources to manage this project. Councilman Romero encouraged staff to schedule open houses and include current owners, new owners and prospective buyers. Councilwoman Mullins asked the completion schedule for this next phase. Everson said people should be moving into this phase in February 2015. Everson noted the work is defined in the guaranteed maximum price contract and any change to that document is a change to the work and that may or may not change the GMP. These are done in writing by the city so there is control over those change orders. Crook told Council the city’s employee housing fund is prepared to purchase the last unit in Burlingame 1 – 4. Buildings 5 through 7 are 34 additional units, currently 13 reservations, which is a lower number of reservations a year ago when Council decided to build buildings 1 – 4. Crook said there are higher category units in buildings 5 through 7 and the category mix will be flexible depending on the demand. The categories could be lowered if necessary. Council requested review of any category changes. Crook said the city’s employee housing fund has invested $2.5 million which entitles the city to 4 plus units and may put more money in to get a fifth unit. The city pays the full price of the unit and the units are sold to match the employee’s category. The units are sold back to the city when the employee leaves the city’s employ. Councilman Frisch moved to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. The consent calendar is: Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 4 • Resolution #8, 2014 - Burlingame Phase II Construction Contract Buildings 5-7 • Board Appointments - P&Z - Jasmine Tygre; Brian McNellis; Ollie Nieuwland-Zlotnicki; Jason Elliott – alternate • Wheeler Board - Tom Kurt; Richie Cohen • Minutes - January 27, 2014 ORDINANCE #4, SERIES OF 2014 – Pacific Avenue Condominiums – Affordable Housing Credits Councilman Daily recused. Justin Barker, community development department, told Council this project is located outside the city limits at the Airport Business Center, lot 2 of the Alpine subdivision, there is one lot of affordable housing units and this vacant lot which is approved for 8 affordable housing units that have not been constructed. The applicant proposed to complete those 8 units and is requesting Council approval of accepting affordable housing outside the city limits within the urban growth boundary and to establish certificate of affordable housing credits for 24 FTEs at category 2. Barker noted Council has the authority to accept affordable housing within the UGB under certain criteria. One of those is that all approvals have been received from Pitkin County. Barker noted the vested rights expired in 2010 and the applicant is requesting administrative approval to meet this criterion. Councilman Frisch pointed out Burlingame was in the county when the city purchased it; BMC was in the county when the city purchased it. Councilman Frisch said this is within an existing mass, including other affordable housing, and questioned why the city would discount 75% the number of FTEs credits allowed. Barker said he can address this at the public hearing. Councilwoman Mullins stated she does not agree with discounting to 75%. Councilwoman Mullins said for second reading she would like a map of the city within the UGB. Councilwoman Mullins said the applicant should get full credit for the housing they are providing and that 75% seem arbitrary and she would like the reasoning behind that percentage. Peter Fornell, applicant, told Council there is a PUD overlay for affordable housing, which has been unused for 10 years. There are not many areas for 24 FTEs of affordable housing. Fornell said the affordable housing credit program allows one to build lower categories and sell the units for less and get the rest of the revenue by selling the housing credits. Fornell said this is a balance of the private sector being able to build lower categories and get units into circulation. Mayor Skadron said for second reading he would like to hear about principle in the AACP regarding building affordable housing. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 5 Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #4, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 4 (SERIES OF 2014) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CERTIFICATE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS FOR THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS UNIT B, PACIFIC AVE CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED AUGUST 9, 2006 IN PLAT BOOK 80 AT PAGE 79 AND COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 412 AABC Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #4, Series of 2014, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Romero, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Romero said for second reading he would like to know how many units have been built through the credit program and how many remain. Councilwoman Mullins said she would like to see the distinction between the UGB and the city limits. ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 2014 – Erdman Partnership Lot Split – Subdivision Amendment Justin Barker, community development department, pointed out this is two properties on Lake Avenue, one property contains a single family dwelling and an ADU; the other lot is vacant. Ordinance #66, 1990, the original approving ordinance, has a condition requiring each property provide on-site affordable dwelling unit as affordable housing mitigation. At the time, that was the only form of housing mitigation in the land use code. Councilwoman Mullins said in the previous discussions regarding this property, the concern was taking pieces from different land use codes and Council agreed to stick to one adopted land use code and is the same situation. Jim True, city attorney, said this action would be consistent with the position Council took on this previous application. Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #5, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 5 (SERIES OF 2014) Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 6 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS 6 AND 7 OF ORDINANCE 66, SERIES 1990, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE ERDMAN PARTNERSHIP LOT SPLIT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: LOTS 1 & 2, ERDMAN LOT SPLIT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED NOVEMBER 26, 1990 IN PLAT BOOK 25 AT PAGE 42, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #5, Series of 2014, on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Daily, yes; Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #3, SERIES OF 2014 – Code Amendment Procurement Barry Crook, assistant city manager, told Council this amendment will change the threshold limits to raise department head approval from $5,000 to $9,999, to increase the limits for competitive quotes requiring city manager sign off to $10,000 and $24,999, to require formal RFPs at $25,000 and above and raise the threshold for emergency procurement that must be reported to Council to $25,000. Crook noted if this ordinance is adopted, the thresholds can rise by CPI every year. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #3, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #3, Series of 2014, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Romero, yes; Daily, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #6, SERIES OF 2014 – Approving lease/purchase agreement IT Firewall Don Taylor, finance department, told Council the Charter requires Council adopt an ordinance for this type of financing for the firewall for IT. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 7 Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #6, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 6 (SERIES OF 2014) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #6, Series of 2014, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Daily. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Frisch, yes; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #10, SERIES OF 2014 – Land Use Code Amendment – Calculations and Measurements Sara Adams, community development department, said this relates to the miscellaneous calculations and measurements of the land use code and is very technical dealing with how floor area is measured, how height is measured, and measuring internal spaces. Ms. Adams noted this section is reviewed an updated every other year to make sure it is up to date. The goal in this update is to provide predictability in zoning reviews and clear up the language. This amendment does not contain policy changes. If Council adopts this resolution, it will direct staff to continue with an ordinance to amend the code. Ms. Adams told Council staff has done some outreach, sending a summary of the changes to more than 550 professionals and architectural firms. Councilman Daily asked how roof top amenity space is calculated and does this change affect that. Ms. Adams said the existing code explains how to calculate height for chimney, railings, etc. but not built in grills are counted. This would detail how a built in grill would be counted towards height. Councilwoman Mullins said she would like specificity on how roof top amenities affect overall height of a building. Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing. Councilman Romero moved to approve Resolution #10, Series of 2014; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 8 ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2014 – Code Amendment – Growth Management Deadlines Jessica Garrow, community development department, told Council all land use projects are placed into 4 categories of growth management and 3 of these can apply for allotments at any time; however, some development is limited to application deadlines of February 15 and August 15 to apply for the allotments. This can cause delays for those projects. This amendment allows all projects to come in anytime during the year. This will eliminate the growth management competition system for those projects required to apply February and August 15th. Ms. Garrow pointed out the city has not had a competitive environment and projects are not adding to their applications in order to gain more points. Mayor Skadron asked if any review criteria on growth and development are diminished by eliminating the deadlines. Ms. Garrow stated all growth management applications are subject to the review criteria. Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of 2014, on second reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Daily, yes; Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #51, SERIES OF 2013 – Hotel Aspen PUD Councilman Frisch moved to continue Ordinance #51, Series of 2013, to February 24, 2014; seconded by Councilman Daily. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #9, SERIES OF 2014 – Easement Pitkin County Library Jim True, city attorney, told Council staff has been working with the library board and the county to work out an easement to allow the library to expand its facility. True pointed out there will be meeting rooms on the north portion of the site and an extension of the children’s rooms on the south portion of the site. The portion for the children’s room requires additional support through the parking garage. True said in 1995 there were property exchanges between the city and county; lot 2 was conveyed from the county to the city and the county retained a 44’ easement from the east wall of the library over the parking garage for the purpose of expanding the library. True told Council there are two ways to get support for the expansion of the children’s section; one is to drop support columns through the garage, which would interfere with garage operations. The alternative, agreed to by both parties, is to provide horizontal support tying into an existing wall and columns in the parking garage. This solution will require an additional Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 9 below surface easement extending 17’ more to the east as well as amending the existing easement to go 4’ below the existing Galena Plaza. True pointed out the library feels it needs to be able to rely in perpetuity on the supporting wall and columns. True noted if the city decided to reconstruct the garage, under reliance on the supporting wall and columns, the city would be required to maintain the wall and columns for the library. True said this would require the city and other parties to agree to share in the maintenance and repairs of the wall and columns. John Ely, county attorney, told Council the library’s request is that if the structure is built it be tied into the structural elements of the garage so that if the city decides to do something different with the garage, the library will still have support for their expansion. Councilwoman Mullins agreed Council’s action should be clear so in the future if the garage is rebuilt, there will be no question about the intent of this easement. Councilman Romero said allowing this in perpetuity with the structure is all right with him; it is for two community public purposes. True pointed out putting vertical columns through the parking garage would be less expensive for the library; however, it would eliminate parking spaces and affect the garage operations. The library will pay for the horizontal supports. The city and county would agree to maintain jointly the wall and columns the library would be tying into. The only issue would be the impact in the future when the garage may be remodeled. The city’s commitment is to maintain the wall and the columns for the library’s structural support. Councilman Frisch said if the easement in perpetuity for horizontal support to the wall of the garage is approved and in the future the garage is remodeled, will that cost the city more money. Councilwoman Mullins said she would like to know the ramifications of doing everything within the 44’ easement. John Laatsch, asset department, said if vertical columns are used, the loss will be several parking spaces per level and there are 4 levels so that could be the loss of up to 30 spaces as well as infringing on the drive lanes. Jody Smith, county facilities superintendent, reminded Council the library has been working on expansion plans for 6 years. In this redesign, city staff suggested the library look at tying into the 60’ wall rather than sinking columns through the garage. The columns would be 2’ by 2’ with insulation for fire code and tying into the 60’ wall would result in a smaller footprint in the garage. Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. John Wilkinson, president Library board, told Council the library is looking forward to starting construction on their expansion, which they have been working on for 6 years. Wilkinson said the library is the number 1 visited public building in Pitkin County. Wilkinson said this redesign program addresses what they wanted from the original proposal. The expansion has been scaled back in mass and size and the expansion is within their budget. Wilkinson told Council the library looked at using the 44’ easement and putting columns into the parking garage; however, it was city staff suggestion to look at going to the 60’ wall. Wilkinson stated going to the 60’ wall Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 10 will cost more money; however, the library board agreed it was in the best interest of the city, the garage and the library to go to the 60’ wall. Wilkinson said the library requests wording added to the easement for the ability to have the library structurally in place in the event of rebuilding the parking garage. If the library spends $6 or $7 million on their expansion, they want the assurance that when the garage is redeveloped, the library will remain. Jim Moran, library board, said the understanding should be the city can do whatever necessary with the parking garage as long as the city continues to provide support for the library. Jeff Woods, parks department, told Council staff is opposed to using the 44’ easement and requiring vertical columns. It is a huge structural impact and the columns would have to go through all 5 stories. Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing. Councilman Romero moved to approve Resolution #9, Series of 2014, amending it to provide reliance on the maintenance of 60’ wall and provide for mutual maintenance and repair for the city, county and library board; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. 2014 RENEWABLE ENERGY WORK OVERVIEW AND STATUS OF THE CCEC Mayor Skadron said this is a report that gets filed every 6 months, as has happened in the past. This includes a request for $5,000 to $8,000 because this report calls for more substantial information than what has been required of previous reports. The expenditure does not move the hydropower project forward at all; it keeps hydropower as an energy option to be considered by the community in the future. Mayor Skadron stated if this is not supported by Council, then this becomes a decision prior to Council receiving any information from NREL on energy alternatives. Dave Hornbacher, utility department, told Council this is an update on the goal of the city achieving 100% renewable energy. Hornbacher said there are 3 areas of work being done; one is the study by NREL, another is maintenance of the FERC application; the third is the water rights abandonment case. Will Dolan, utility department, told Council there is a work session April 7 to hear NREL’s list of alternatives and Council will choose 3 alternatives to go forward with further analysis. The third step of the NREL process is a deeper analysis of the 3 alternatives and will cost about $30,000. Dolan pointed out staff kicked off the energy efficiency component last week. Dolan told Council staff has been making reports to FERC regularly; this is not out of the ordinary. This report is to complete the administrative record for FERC for this project which entails compiling and summarizing all reports and studies to date. Hornbacher reminded Council the water rights abandonment case was set for trial last fall. The parties agreed to look at the project and see if there is common ground for stream ecology that Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 11 could be done. Hornbacher said filing this report with FERC is to preserve Council’s ability to make choices for renewable energy. Councilman Frisch said his interpretation of the November 2012 vote on hydropower was not to abandon the project but to pause, reflect, look at other alternatives. Councilman Frisch said he feels the election results meant no money or staff time were to be spent on the issue. Councilman Frisch stated he does not have a problem keeping the hydropower option open but not to actually pursue the project. Hornbacher said this report is to keep the hydropower option open while working on other options. Councilman Frisch noted Council received an e-mail from American Rivers with the opinion that the city does not lose any options by not going forward with this report. Councilman Frisch said there is a perception in the public that status quo is actually moving the project forward. Hornbacher said several years ago, the city was going forward with a conduit exemption interaction with FERC. At Council’s direction, staff changed that application to a minor water power project, which creates a venue for additional studies and interaction with FERC. Dolan said not filing this 6 month report is actually doing something; the city’s FERC lawyer advised not filing a 6 month report can be interpreted as a surrender of one’s intention to pursue the project. Dolan said the report needs to be filed by March 1st and it is his understanding that the city would be precluded from filing for two years if they do not keep this option open. Staff is requesting up to $8,000 for the city’s FERC lawyer to help in filing the report. Hornbacher told Council there is the possibility that someone else could file for FERC if the city does not keep the application active. Mayor Skadron opened the public hearing. Connie Harvey noted staff is presenting this as a way to keep the city’s options open; however, the documents seem to go beyond that stating the city plans to continue to study the feasibility of Castle Creek hydroelectric project during the next 6 months and to coordinate with staff to address all pre-filing consultation requirements with the goal of filing a license application as soon as permitted. Ms. Harvey said that seems to be a statement that the intention of the city is to build the hydropower project. Ms. Harvey said the hydropower project is a bad project and it will destroy streams and riparian areas. The proposed project is also bad from an environmental standpoint. Ms. Harvey said studying alternatives or energy efficiency is a better way to go. Paul Noto, representing landowners opposed to the project and attorney for the water rights lawsuit, stated there is a difference between a preliminary permit and a license application; the preliminary permit holds the city’s place in line so others cannot step in front of the city. Noto questioned the statement that the city would lose a right for file for two years if they do not do this report; the city would lose a right to file for a preliminary permit not a license. Noto said if there were a competing application, the federal power act provides preference for municipalities. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 12 Noto told Council preliminary permits only last 3 years; this permit will expire in about 1 year. Noto asked if the city plans on taking action in the next year and if not why make this report. Jim True, city attorney, reminded Council there is a distinction between the license and the preliminary permit. Preference for municipalities is discretionary with FERC; the city could lose their place in line. There are ramifications in not filing the report. Maureen Hirsch said the city does not have to have an attorney prepare the reports; staff could prepare the report and save money. Ms. Hirsch read a memo from Will Dolan noting that the contract with MEAN local utility scale renewable energy must be hydro electric and any non- local energy purchase must be made from MEAN. Ms. Hirsch asked why the city is spending $70,000 when they are pigeon-holed; that the city has to do hydro electric and if the city does anything other than hydro electric, it has to go through MEAN. Dolan told Council what he wrote about the MEAN contract is accurate; however, this still warrants an NREL analysis as there are many options to pursue through MEAN. Hornbacher told Council NREL will be showing alternatives that are viable within the city’s contract with MEAN. Councilman Frisch said he would like to see an analysis that is not related to any contracts the city has, then overlay the restrictions. The city needs to know all the options regardless of any contracts. Dolan said that is a criteria Council will be using to gauge the viability of the projects presented by NREL. Tom Hirsch noted a letter to Council saying anyone else can file on the project. Hirsch said that sounds ominous; however, the land is owned by government agencies or individual private property owners and is it realistic that anyone could file. Hirsch said no one else can file a permit. Hirsch said the city was asked for emergency $2.3 million for a drain line which turned out not to be an emergency but the start of funding this project. Hirsch said the emergency drain line turned into a penstock which is required to make this a hydro electric plant. Hirsch said there does not seem to have been proper due diligence. Mayor Skadron closed the public hearing. Councilman Romero said the city has a fiduciary obligation to vet all alternatives and choices. Councilman Romero said he is encouraged by settlement negotiations and the city should not do anything to upset those negotiations. Councilman Romero said the city will get a list of options from NREL in the spring and hydroelectric will be one of the options. Councilman Romero said he is fine with this expenditure and placeholder. Councilwoman Mullins said there have been a lot of contradictory statements about both this project and this report. Councilwoman Mullins said one of Council’s obligations is to sort all the facts out and the contract with NREL is a good way to sort things out. Councilwoman Mullins said she is convinced that filing this report is maintaining status quo, not moving forward, but maintaining the option. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 10, 2014 13 Councilman Frisch said he is not supportive of this right now; he would rather spend the next 20 days hearing about American Rivers’ statements and hearing from the attorneys. Councilman Frisch said he needs more information before he can support this. Councilman Daily said this is a place holder proposal. Councilman Daily said his support for this is not necessarily a support for hydropower. Councilman Daily said he does not have the information he needs to make that decision. Mayor Skadron said approving this funding request does not move the project forward; it keeps hydro as an option to be considered by the community in the future. Mayor Skadron said if the staff recommendation is not supported, it is a decision point prior to receiving NREL’s report to Council. Mayor Skadron stated not funding the FERC report is an attempt to foreclose the discussion and killing the project at this time. Councilman Romero moved to go into executive session at 8:50 p.m. pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6- 402(a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest ; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. (Councilman Daily left Council meeting). Councilman Romero moved to come out of executive session at 9:10 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Romero moved to adjourn at 9:10 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn Koch City Clerk