ITEM 1 - CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Burkholder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Lakewood Civic Center South, 480 South Allison Parkway, Lakewood, Colorado.

ITEM 2 - ROLL CALL

Those present were: Mayor Steve Burkholder, Presiding

Tom Booher
Ray Elliott
Jackie Herbst
Carol Kesselman
Bob Murphy
Jean Saum
Debbie Koop
Mike Stevens
Cheryl Wise

Absent: Barb Martin

Others in attendance: Mike Rock, City Manager
Roger Noonan, City Attorney

Full and timely notice of this City Council meeting had been given and a quorum was present.

ITEM 3 - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Cub Scout Pack #478 presented the flags. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

ITEM 4 - RECOGNITIONS

Mayor Burkholder thanked Cub Scout Pack #478 and self-introductions were made.

Mayor Burkholder recognized a Boy Scout in the audience who was attending the Council Meeting in order to receive his Citizenship and Community Service Merit Badge.

Mayor Burkholder presented Councilwoman Saum with a corsage and congratulated
her and her husband, Don, on celebrating their 50th Wedding Anniversary.

Councilwoman Wise stated that a resident had requested that the amendment to Resolution 2001-98 regarding the 13th Avenue Corridor Framework Plan for the West Corridor Light Rail Line be read into the record. The amended resolution was adopted at the December 10, 2001 City Council Meeting. Councilwoman Wise read the amendment as follows: "Whereas, because information continues to change due to ongoing fact finding for the Environmental Impact Study; the EIS, the City and its citizens commit to hold a meeting with RTD for the purpose of providing updated information prior to the finish of the environmental consequences phase and prior to the draft EIS. After this meeting, a City-sponsored workshop will be held to incorporate responses from citizens to the updated information supplied by RTD. These responses would comprise an Appendix C of the Framework Plan for the West Corridor Light Rail Line to be submitted to RTD as part of the EIS."

Mayor Burkholder recognized four participants of Leadership Jefferson County who were seated in the audience. Mayor Burkholder explained that Leadership Jefferson County is a nine-month program designed to teach individuals more about city, county, and state government; health and human services, the business community, and the integral workings of a community.

ITEM 5 - PUBLIC COMMENT

Andrea Hollen - 2545 Field Street - Lakewood, CO
Ms. Hollen is the Lakewood Planning Commissioner for Ward 2. She invited City Council and the general public to attend a Town Hall Meeting to discuss the updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The meeting is scheduled for Thursday, January 31, 2002, at the Lakewood Cultural Center from 7:00-9:00 p.m.

Tom Stewart - 1330 Depew Street - Lakewood, CO
Mr. Stewart stated that he was unable to obtain copies of minutes from the Clerk's Office because they had not yet been typed. He stated he had seen playing cards on a computer monitor and felt that someone should have time to type them. Mr. Stewart said it would have been good to have the ordinance regarding nuisance abatement at the table at the last Council Meeting for his review. He stated that although he had signed the public comment roster regarding the ordinance, he would be leaving and asked if Councilwoman Koop could read his letter into the record.

Mayor Burkholder stated that communication to citizens was one of Council's top goals and asked Joni Inman, Director of the Mayor and City Manager's Office, to talk about the methods of communication within the City. Ms. Inman stated that the Council agenda and minutes are posted on the City's website, www.lakewood.org. In addition, legal notices are published on line. Information is cross-referenced in the citywide newsletter, Looking at Lakewood, which is distributed to every address in the City of Lakewood, free of charge, and broadcast on KLTV-8. In addition, press releases are sent to the media and to every homeowners association and schools within the City. The City also holds a number of public meetings and other programs to disseminate information to the public. An extensive outreach effort is currently underway and the City plans for more in the future.

CONSENT AGENDA - The following items from the Consent Agenda were read into the record by the City Clerk.

ITEM 6 - RESOLUTION 2002-1 DESIGNATING THE PUBLIC PLACE FOR POSTING NOTICES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS DURING 2002 PURSUANT TO C.R.S. 24-6-402

ITEM 7 - ORDINANCE O-2002-1 ORDINANCE TO MODIFY AN EXISTING OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REZONE LAND LOCATED AT 551 SOUTH AMES STREET, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COLORADO

ITEM 8 - ORDINANCE O-2002-2 AUTHORIZING A NON-EXCLUSIVE WATER LINE EASEMENT ACROSS A PORTION OF CITY OWNED TRACT P OF WHITE FENCE FARM SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO

ITEM 9 - APPROVING OF MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Regular City Council Meeting December 10, 2001
Special City Council Meeting December 10, 2001
Special City Council Meeting December 17, 2001

ITEM 10 - ACCEPTING MINUTES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

Liquor and Fermented Malt Beverage Authority October 25, 2001
Liquor and Fermented Malt Beverage Authority November 8, 2001
Lakewood Planning Commission October 17, 2001
Lakewood Planning Commission November 7, 2001
Lakewood Planning Commission December 5, 2001

Councilwoman Wise made a motion to approve the Council minutes; to accept the minutes of Boards and Commissions; and ordered all ordinances introduced on first reading to be published in the Lakewood Sentinel with public hearing set for the date included in the ordinance; and ordered the adoption of resolutions, all of which were included in the Consent Agenda items introduced into the record by the City Clerk. The motion was seconded by Councilman Elliott.

Councilman Murphy asked for further clarification regarding the Planning Commission meetings regarding Ordinance O-2002-1. The matter was heard on October 17th and reconsidered on November 7th and then reheard again on December 6th.

Chad Minor, Project Manager, stated that one of the commissioners on the Planning Commission made an error in his voting and did not determine the error until the end of a meeting. The Commission decided to revote the case. The second revote allowed moving the matter forward to City Council.

Vote: All Ayes. No Nays. The motion carried.

ITEM 11 - ORDINANCE O-2001-50 ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 9.80.100 OF THE LAKEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO NUISANCE ABATEMENT

Mayor Burkholder stated that everyone on Council had received a letter with photographs from Mr. Stewart and it will be taken into consideration.

Councilwoman Koop read Mr. Stewart's letter into the record:

"Regarding Ordinance O-2001-50 amendment to Section 9.80. Nuisance Abatement. Dear Debbie, (and he also wrote this to the rest of Council), As we have discussed, I take this attempt at the law change, as a very serious breach in our individual freedom. The statutes are based entirely on subjective criteria such as substantially annoyed as stated and declared nuisances. Compost section 980.151(a). I think that my actions were a prime motivation to amend this ordinance. I was cited October 30, 2001 under nuisance for composting. My neighbor was substantially annoyed and Code Enforcement eagerly complied with her annoyance. My neighbor's prime annoyance was that I quit giving her vegetables. I did so because she made a bigoted statement about a black friend of mine. Code Enforcement told me that if I tilled under all my garden residue, the corn, squash, leaves, straw, etc., she would be abated even though she admitted knowing little of gardening and composting. I refused. All of my neighbors, including Mrs. Annoyed, contributed leaves and other vegetable organic materials to my recycle program. Code Enforcement's edict dictated sending my organic material, corn stocks, etc. to the landfill. Coarse organic materials do not work into the soil with small horticultural techniques. This amended ordinance is based solely on subjective criteria. I have chosen to plead not guilty before a six-member jury of my peers and confront this no logic approach to Code Enforcement. Under an amended nuisance code environment, the City could have come onto my property and completely disrupted my organic recycling program and would have probably charged me for the service. There is a flagrant difference in the treatment of my industrial neighbors. For example, Rocky Mountain Tree Services maintains a pile actively composting 100 yards from my meager pile and their pile must be 1000 times larger than mine. If I am substantially annoyed by their operation, is the City going to remove it. Sincerely, Tom Stewart."

Mayor Burkholder stated that the above letter was forwarded to all Council members as well as the Sentinel Newspaper.

Barb Brown, Code Enforcement Supervisor, explained that one of the means of enforcing the ordinance is to issue an official notice and then proceed with the abatement. When property owners do not want us on their property, we go to court and apply for a warrant to enter the property and remove the violation. The current warrant ordinance is specifically for police officers and their purpose is to search and cease evidence. Code Enforcement's purpose is to search and cease nuisance violations. That warrant ordinance does not work for Code Enforcement. The process for amending the ordinance began over a year ago. It is difficult to research, write, and bring forward an ordinance to Council in just a few months. In regards to Mr. Stewart's case, Code Enforcement issued a summons on the 30th of October to appear in municipal court. The huge pile, which at one point was manure, piles of pumpkins, and trash bags full of debris still remains on his property. Until the case goes to court and a judgment is received, that nuisance will remain.

Mayor Burkholder opened the public hearing.
There were no further public comments.
Mayor Burkholder closed the public hearing.

Councilman Elliott asked Barb Brown if the ordinance being considered tonight would change the process regarding Mr. Stewart's issue.

Barb Brown stated that the process with Mr. Stewart will start in municipal court. If the City proves its case and he is found guilty of the violation, the judge could order an abatement of that. He has an opportunity to abate it himself and if not, the judge could order the City to abate the nuisance and the City would charge Mr. Stewart accordingly.

Councilman Elliott asked if the new ordinance would allow Code Enforcement to get a warrant or does the City have to go through the court hearing phase to enter the property.

Barb Brown stated that the court phase would be skipped and the City would be able to get a warrant directly. The City would have to show their evidence and proof of the violation.

Councilman Elliott asked if the passing of the ordinance would expedite the process and referred to an earlier violation on Green Mountain that took over a year to abate.

Barb Brown stated that the case being referred to was heard in District Court which is also more time consuming. Another difference is Code Enforcement was trying to obtain access to the inside of a property, which is out of the norm.

City Attorney Roger Noonan stated that this amendment process started when the Attorney's Office was researching and read a Federal Decision where a city went through exactly the same process as our Code Enforcement. The Federal Court Decision stated that they did not have the authority to go on the property without either the permission of the owner or with an actual warrant. On the basis of that Decision, legal staff met with the Code Enforcement officers and they decided to move forward with the amendment. A Court Order was obtained in the case mentioned by Councilman Elliott. It was not an entry warrant. It was a Court Order that allowed the landowner so many days to abate and he didn't do that so it gave the City specific authority to go on the property. That is the intent of this amendment. This was never intended to be an ordinance that was a result of one or two particular enforcement issues. This is a situation that applies citywide and Mr. Noonan strongly recommended City Council adopt the amendment.

City Manager Mike Rock stated that the City always tries to balance private property rights with the rights of the larger community and certainly most citizens of Lakewood take care of their property and are very responsible property owners. In those instances, where they are not, and their actions or lack of actions create an intolerable living situation for people who have to live near them, the City needs the ability to abate the situation. He stated that most of the community members are very responsible, but in the case where someone isn't, the City needs the ability to take the appropriate action.

Councilwoman Wise made a motion to adopt Ordinance 2001-50 on second and final reading. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott.

Councilwoman Koop stated that Mr. Stewart's letter stated he is concerned about the wording "substantially annoyed." She asked Barb Brown to explain the process of what happens when Code Enforcement receives a phone call from a neighbor reporting another neighbor they are having trouble with.

Barb Brown stated that Title 9.80 specifically defines the nuisances that Code Enforcement can enforce. If it is not defined in the ordinance, Code Enforcement cannot arbitrarily go out and declare it a nuisance. Code Enforcement inspection standards are based on the specifics in the ordinance.

Roger Noonan clarified that Mr. Stewart was not talking about the ordinance being voted on tonight. The language he was referring to is in the existing codes as it relates to nuisance actions. The ordinance before Council tonight specifically addresses only the issue of whether or not Council approves the entry warrant language.

Councilman Stevens asked Barb Brown under what circumstances would the warrant be granted.

Barb Brown stated that currently the ordinance allows the City the authority to go onto a property and remove violations, but because of federal case laws and in order not to violate people's rights, a warrant needs to be obtained first. Code Enforcement is working with the municipal judges to develop the standards and process for bringing a violation to them to obtain a warrant.

Councilman Stevens stated that the ordinance states a requirement for a signed sworn testimony and asked if the person filing the complaint or the officer would be required to sign the affidavit.

Barb Brown stated it would be the Code Enforcement officer signing the affidavit.

Councilman Stevens stated that the current process allows for anonymous complaints and wanted to know if, through the warrant process, the person filing the complaint would have to identify himself.

Barb Brown stated that the ordinance would not affect the fact that those filing complaints could remain anonymous. The Code Enforcement officer would need to observe the violation and would testify to it.

Councilman Stevens referred to a resident placing a cover over an inoperable vehicle without a current tag and if the warrant would allow an officer to go onto the property, lift the cover, check the tag, then issue a citation.

Roger Noonan stated that "probable cause" needs to exist. A prior violation would not be considered probable cause. The affidavit has to set forth reasonable grounds on which there is a violation. It is presented to the court and the court has to find probable cause to issue that warrant.

Mike Rock stated that there may possibly be a situation which would necessitate going onto a property and looking into violations. In addition, the amendment is strictly an enforcement issue. Inoperable vehicles as a violation already exists in the Code. The City does not want people to circumvent City ordinances.

Councilwoman Kesselman asked for a further explanation on the process for obtaining a warrant.

Roger Noonan stated that the affidavit is written by a Code Enforcement officer who would present the facts in that affidavit and sign it. The basis upon which the judge would issue the warrant or not, would be that affidavit. There is not an additional hearing, it's not taking other outside evidence, it has to be on the face of the document to justify the issuance of the warrant.

Mike Rock stated that the process is the same process currently being used. What changed is a legal decision that now requires a warrant to enter the property. The City is not changing its practices, simply bringing into line the appropriate ordinance to continue the practice. Absent that warrant or permission of a property owner to abate a nuisance, some of the more egregious nuisances in the community would never be abated.

Councilman Booher asked if there was an appeal process now for an independent review from the judge.

Roger Noonan stated that a warrant is either issued or denied by the judge. This is the current process as well.

Barb Brown stated that there prior to attempting to obtain a warrant, there is an appeal process for the Official Notice that the property owner receives.

Councilman Booher asked if the review was an independent review or a City review.

Roger Noonan stated there are different approaches. Notices are sent out giving the property owner so many days to respond. If they respond and challenge, then an administrative hearing is scheduled. The decision from that process can be appealed to District Court. Another approach is filing a case in municipal court stating the City believes the ordinance has been violated. It is a criminal prosecution in municipal court. The third approach is also the court process and that is to go to District Court and ask the District Court for civil relief.

Councilman Booher asked if the property owner has an opportunity to speak before a judge prior to the judge issuing a warrant.

Roger Noonan stated that is the intent. The entry warrant is allowing the City to enforce the abatement of the nuisance after the judge determines the nuisance exists.

Councilman Booher asked if the officers were limited to the violations listed on the warrant or if they discovered another violation once they were on the property, could the second violation be added.

Roger Noonan stated that they are limited to what the warrant allows.

Councilman Booher asked if there was any additional exposure for the City.

Roger Noonan stated the reason for requesting passage of the ordinance was to eliminate exposure for the City.

Councilman Booher stated that he understood that the City did not collect the cost of abatement on the Green Mountain property spoken about earlier.

Roger Noonan stated that that was incorrect. The City collected over $43,000 and satisfied that judgment against the property owner.

Councilman Elliott asked Mr. Noonan to explain the process of how the City is reimbursed for abatement services.

Roger Noonan stated that if the City hires a contractor to abate a nuisance, the City bills the property owner for that. If the property owner does not pay it, it is certified by the City Clerk to the County Assessor's Office and that is collected along with other taxes as delinquent charges against that property. It is the easiest and most direct approach, however, it can take up to 18 months or longer to get the money. A direct court order was involved in the Green Mountain property and direct City costs were reimbursed. Another way is to file a lien with the Jefferson County Clerk & Recorders Office and at the time of the sale of the property, the City receives its money.

Councilman Murphy stated that the passage of this ordinance will allow Barb Brown and her staff to do their job. The largest number of complaints received on the City's quarterly comment cards are code enforcement issues. He stated that if the ordinance helped Ms. Brown and her staff do their job, then he would vote for it.

Vote: All Ayes. No Nays. The motion carried.

Mayor Burkholder asked Barb Brown to briefly describe what Code Enforcement does on a routine basis.

Barb Brown stated that the Code Enforcement officers enforce the nuisance code which includes overgrown weeds, accumulation of junk and rubbish, parking violations, and the accumulation of inoperable motor vehicles. They enforce land use issues regarding possible zoning violations, home occupation businesses, the wood burning ordinance, and the bus bench ordinance. She stated that in the year 2001 the number one complaint was regarding parking violations including commercial vehicle parking, parking of inoperable vehicles, parking on private property and parking on city rights of ways.

Councilman Elliott stated that a warrant is not always issued just because a complaint has been received. The officers inspect the property first and sometimes a violation does not exist and the service request is closed.

Mike Rock stated that sometimes the complaint is not merited. Beyond that, the property owner generally voluntarily comes into compliance. Sometimes the property owners simply aren't aware of the code or that a violation exists. Most citizens are willing to come into compliance. The City's effort in every case is to avoid going to court, avoid having to abate a nuisance, and to get a voluntary compliance. That's the goal of the department.

ITEM 12 - GENERAL BUSINESS

Councilwoman Wise made a motion to hold an Executive Session following the adjournment of the meeting for the purpose of developing strategies for negotiations relating to economic development projects including the Belmar project, 1st & Wadsworth, Colfax & Wadsworth, a potential fourth site, and Rooney Valley, pursuant to CRS 24-6-42(2)(e) and Section 2.15(2) of the Home Rule Charter. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott. Vote: All Ayes. No Nays. The motion carried.

ITEM 13 - REPORTS

Mayor Burkholder
Announced that City Hall will be closed next Monday, January 21st, in observation of Martin Luther King Day and encouraged the public to spend a moment remembering Dr. King. He announced a breakfast and program being held at Red Rocks Community College at 7:30 a.m. Reservations are required by calling 303-914-6298.

Announced that the official dismantling of Villa Italia began today. He had the privilege of working the gears of a demolition machine. The Grand Opening of Belmar should be the fall of 2003 or spring or the fall of 2004. Nineteen city blocks will be created on the site in Phase I. This will create a sense of place in the City of Lakewood.

Councilwoman Saum
Announced that the Jefferson County Library System is celebrating their 50th birthday this year and the Mayor and her attended a big celebration last Saturday at the Lakewood Library branch. The Lakewood Library is celebrating their 25th birthday. She stated the celebration was a nice reminder of how valuable the library system is to the community.

Councilwoman Koop
Stated she was excited about the new Belmar project being underway.

Councilman Stevens
Reminded everyone that the Villa Advisory Committee will be having a meeting in on Tuesday, February 5th in the Employee Relations Training Room, on the second floor at the end of the south campus. The public is invited to attend and the members of the committee will be getting an update on what is happening with the new Belmar project.

Councilman Murphy
There are three upcoming meetings regarding the Environmental Impact Study within the next month. The Technical Advisory Committee will have a meeting Wednesday, January 16th at 8:30 a.m. in the RTD Conference Room downtown on Blake Street. The Policy Advisory Steering Committee, which several Councilors from Wards 1 and 2 are members, will be Friday, January 18th at 7:30 a.m. in the Denver Public Library, lower level conference room. The entire Policy Advisory Committee will be meeting Friday, February 15th at 12:30 p.m. again at the Denver Public Library, lower level conference room.

The 3rd Annual Citizens for Lakewood's Future Community Forum is scheduled for Saturday, February 23rd at Red Rocks Campus on 6th Avenue. It's a great event. It's $20 which includes a continental breakfast and lunch. You get to meet with people and talk about issues that affect every one of us including policing issues, neighborhood issues, and a panel of developers from Mills, Colfax & Wads, and Belmar. Asked City Council to join the citizens for a reception at 3:30 p.m. if the Annual Planning Session is over by that time. There will be an exciting kick off announcement of a contest that the whole community can participate in.

Councilwoman Kesselman
Reminded everyone that the Sister City Australian Student Exchange is continuing with their interviews and encouraged interested parties to contact Matt Armsbruster with the Sister City Program.

Councilwoman Herbst
Congratulated her daughter, who was selected to place the wreath on the tomb of the unknown soldier in April.

ITEM 14 - ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Burkholder adjourned at the meeting at 9:10 p.m.

Submitted by

Margy Greer, City Clerk