Study Session Minutes - July 7, 2008

MINUTES
LAKEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION MEETING
6:00 p.m., July 7, 2008

Minutes are not a verbatim transcription, but rather an attempt to capture the intent of the speaker by the City Clerk.

Mayor Murphy called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Lakewood Civic Center, 480 S. Allison Parkway, Lakewood, Colorado.

Diana Allen
Doug Anderson
Cindy Baroway
Karen Kellen
Sue King
Debbie Koop
Adam Paul
Ed Peterson
Tom Quinn
Vicki Stack

Staff in attendance: Mike Rock, City Manager
Tim Cox, City Attorney
Kevin Paletta, Police Chief
John Camper, Patrol Division Chief
Janet Young, Deputy City Attorney-Police Advisor
Kathie Beard, Public Information Officer

Full and timely notice of this Study Session had been given and a quorum was present.

Police Chief Kevin Paletta said this has been a difficult week for the City of Lakewood Police Department. He expressed appreciation to the Mayor, Council, City Staff and the community at-large for their support during this time of tragedy.

Officer John Camper, Division Chief, Patrol Division gave an update on the dog licensing program which started a year ago. One reason for starting the program was to address the issue of the condition of the Table Mountain Animal Shelter, which is an aging facility that has required constant repair. In an effort to raise capital for a new shelter, an educational program was initiated. By January 1, 2008, there was a 14.4% compliance rate and it has increased since that time to 16.1%, and is well on the way to meeting the next threshold of 20% compliance rate after the second year. In addition to providing some funding for a future animal shelter, some of the pros for the program are to allow 24/7 access to data of lost animals, medical condition of animals are noted on the application, emergency contact information, encourage pet owners to have their pets spayed and/or neutered, pet owners are alerted as to when rabies vaccines are due, provides reminders to update contact information, and it gives the number and kinds of animals in the community. From a statistical standpoint, there are 42,816 dogs in the City of Lakewood, and this has brought in revenue of $84,327, and some 6,931 licenses have been issued. During this period, the number of dogs impounded reduced by 14%. Overall, this is a good program.

Mayor Murphy added that this program is a collaboration of all the municipalities in Jefferson County, and it's something that the county already had in effect.

Councilwoman Koop wanted to know how much of the revenue raised will go to the Table Mountain Animal Shelter.

Agent Camper said as he understands it, 10% will go to the Table Mountain Animal Shelter. The County initially takes off administrative fees.

Mike Rock, City Manager, said Staff will look at this because the intent was that after administrative fees, all remaining revenue would go to the Table Mountain Animal Shelter.

Agent Camper said the formula used comes from the US Pet Ownership and Demographic Source, which compute the number of households times .435 at 1.52 per household. This formula is used by all agencies throughout the county.

Agent Camper said this happens when a dog is picked up by an Animal Control Officer, perhaps after the issuance of a dog-at-large summons, and they may also find that the dog has not been registered. There have not been a great deal of tickets issued and none were issued until May.

Mr. Rock said those percentages were negotiated by all the municipalities based on the County's experience with compliance. Most people don't intentionally not comply , they are simply not aware of it. Therefore, our primary goal is to get the
animal licensed, not to issue a ticket. With the coordinated education program, the municipalities jointly agreed on phase-in compliance.

Councilman Anderson asked about the TMAC property, how much of it is being rebuilt, relying upon something happening with the Cabelas project, and how much is revolving around the dollars that come in through this program.

Mr. Rock said the assumption is still that the current site is not the long-term site. With the indefinite delay on the Cabelas project, the ability to sell that property and convert it into cash that might go towards the new project, is also in limbo. However, the assumption is that the new facility (when all soil analyses, engineering and architectural work is done to everyone's satisfaction), will be in or around the current Jefferson County Fairgrounds. The work that's being done at the current TMAC facility is the minimum necessary to keep the facility open with the idea that it will eventually be abandoned and replaced by the new facility.

Councilman Anderson wanted to know the source of funds that will be used to build the new facility.

Mr. Rock stated that the first thing is to make sure the site is acceptable, which is a big variable in cost. The next step would be to obtain a more detailed architectural analysis of the cost benefits of various size facilities, including whether or not the facility has a veterinary component that would allow dogs to be spade/neutered before they left, rather than getting a voucher as is done with the current system, and whether or not that's beneficial and has the support of the vet community. When all that work is done, a new dollar amount will be determined and we think it will be somewhere between $6,000,000 and $9,000,000. At that point, there will be a discussion with the County, but right now they are having their own financial problems. Without the sale of TMAC within that time frame, that money is off the table. The intent is for entities to mutually agree to a design, cost, and location and, then finally, a financing plan. Our hope is that Jefferson County would provide the financing vehicle and all municipalities would agree to devote all of the revenue from the licensing program, minus administrative cost, to the construction of the new facility. We would next evaluate the amount of support that we're currently providing to TMAC, and that probably would be 'lumped' in with the licensing revenue. We hope the combination of the two will provide sufficient cash flow to finance the project. That is the model, but until we have numbers, we don't know if it will work.

Councilman Anderson asked Mr. Rock to explain the "refund mechanism" contained in the IGA with Jefferson County and the City of Lakewood.

Mr. Rock said the intent was if the City of Lakewood over-complied and the other cities barely or under complied, the City of Lakewood should benefit from our additional marketing efforts. For example, if Lakewood over-complied by $10,000 per year, we would have the ability to reduce our support to TMAC by that same amount, or simply put that amount in our General Fund. It has been discussed with the other municipalities, that if all were to over-comply, we'd rather see the funds go towards getting the facility built quicker and the debt paid sooner.

Councilman Anderson asked Council to encourage the over-complied policy as described by Mr. Rock.

Councilwoman Allen wanted to know if any more marketing and/or seasonal campaigns are planned.

Agent Camper said nothing is currently planned at this time. Right now the compliance rate is going very well. However, it is something they can review.

Councilwoman Koop suggested that brochures explaining dog licensing be placed in Councilmembers' mailboxes and they can distribute them when attending neighborhood meetings. Also, she wanted to know if it was possible to get dog registration for three years.

Chief Paletta said it was decided that it would be more beneficial to do the registration on an annual basis because it would allow for better tracking (accurate information) of the animals and their owners. The rabies vaccines are good for three years.

Councilwoman Baroway asked if local veterinarians have received any of the marketing information about dog licensing.

Mr. Rock indicated yes, and added that there was a primary effort to work with the vets because they are the point of contact and there is a great deal of coordination being done.

Councilman Paul suggested that it may be a good idea to place registration information (using some type of weatherproofing) at Forsberg Park-the new dog park.

Agent Camper said a Graffiti Task Force was organized in early 2007 for the purpose of developing a coordinated and effective method to prevent, report, force and mitigate graffiti offenses within the City of Lakewood. Although Lakewood's Municipal Code prohibits the defacing of public or private property, currently, Lakewood does not regulate the possession of graffiti materials. Several sub-committees were formed and all agree that a new municipal ordinance should be adopted to regulate the possession of graffiti materials in an effort to fight this problem in the City of Lakewood. He also noted that during the 2008 legislative session, a bill was introduced that would make it a crime to possess graffiti materials. Unfortunately, that bill was not successful. There has to be evidence/proof of the unlawful intent to commit a criminal offense by using graffiti materials.

Janet Young, Deputy City Attorney, talked about two proposed ordinances - one to regulate juvenile possession of graffiti materials such as spray paint, spray paint nozzle, a permanent broad tipped marker pens, paint pens, glass cutting/etching tools and instruments, i.e, an acid based cream that's used to etch glass. If a juvenile possessed graffiti materials, he/she would be in violation of this proposed ordinance. To be realistic in the application of this ordinance, there are some exceptions. For example, a juvenile could have these materials under the supervision of parent(s), legal guardian, teacher, employer or law enforcement officer. The other proposed ordinance has the intent requirement that will be use predominantly with adults. It includes unlawful possession of graffiti materials, but in order to have a violation of this crime, we must prove that the person possessing the graffiti materials had the intent to use them in the crime of defacing or criminal mischief or damaging of public or private property. Thus, the mere act of possession would not be sufficient. This ordinance is modeled after the old "burglary tools" charge which has been a felony crime in Colorado since 1963. It's not against the law to possess such tools, but it becomes a burglary tool by the intent of the owner, i.e. casing cars in the middle of the night.

Mayor Murphy noted that the proposed two ordinances will give the Police Department additional tools to combat a growing problem in our community.

In further discussion of the proposed ordinance, among the noted questions and concerns from the Council were, while the intent of the proposed ordinance is understandable, the application may be questionable, i.e., there may be some "over zealous" persons involved. Also, would the retailers have any responsibility or be liable for selling these tools? Another concern voiced by Council was in regards to the affirmative defenses in the ordinance, particularly the language used in the ordinance "esp. in regards to school activities." It was suggested that the language should note "school sanctioned extra curricular activities".

Mrs. Young said it shall be at the officer's discretion whether or not to issue a ticket. There must be a reason and contact for an officer to find out that a violation has happened or will happen. The ordinance does not put a burden on any retailer to ask for identification of anyone who purchases these products, however, some cities have such ordinances.

Councilman Anderson said he is not comfortable with the term/connotation of 'possession' for those under the age of 18. He wanted to know if this was a first amendment issue, and why graffiti stickers were not included as prohibited graffiti materials.

Mrs. Young said it's not a first amendment issue if a person does it to his own property. However, if graffiti is done on public property or done to someone else's property without permission, it is a first amendment issue - it is defacing property or criminal mischief. Also, she stated that stickers were just brought to her attention today and it's something that the other municipalities who have a graffiti ordinance, did not address. However, if it becomes a predominant way of doing it, she can tweak the ordinance in the future to add stickers.

Councilwoman Allen noted at this point all the burden falls on the property owners who are also the ones being victimized, and it's hard to get the ones committing the crime. This ordinance is a tool that focuses more on the perpetrators of the crime as opposed to the property owners who actually are the victims. Property owners are hit over and over again and they have to pay to get their property cleaned up in so many days. Public funds cannot be used to help the private property owners. Those committing the crimes are not getting busted. Surrounding municipalities are also looking at this type of ordinance. Those who've adopted it already have had less graffiti violations that those who have not.

Councilwoman Koop said she is in support of the ordinance. Graffiti seems to be the number one concerns of business owners-it's very costly and it's a burden to them. She asked if this ordinance is passed, is there something that can be done to inform the graffiti artists that this won't be tolerated. Perhaps place signs in business owners windows letting the artists know that graffiti is unlawful.

Agent Camper said this is probably one of the things that "lagged behind" because so many steps had to be implemented before making the public aware of anything. He said they are quickly reaching a point where they will 'step up' efforts in this regard. If this ordinance passes, he feels that publicity in the schools, parent groups, etc., informing them of what is illegal would be in order.

Councilman Peterson said he will strongly support this ordinance because not only is graffiti a problem in the Lakewood community, but it is also becoming a serious problem in the Denver Metropolitan Area. Most people who've experienced it on their property is fed up with the cost and expense involved to get their property cleaned. Additionally, graffiti is an entry level crime and can lead to more serious crimes on the part of the perpetrators. He's all for informing people that Lakewood is not the place for graffiti and the possible penalties that will be imposed. There is sufficient safeguard in the

Affirmative Defense portion of the ordinance and this is a tool the Police Department has needed for some time.

It was the consensus of all Council Members present, except Councilman Anderson, to move this ordinance forward.

ITEM 5 - REPORT - IGA (INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT) WITH DENVER REGARDING DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION

Tim Cox, City Attorney, in giving the nuts and bolts of this proposed IGA, said a draft of this IGA calls for the City of Lakewood to receive certain documents from Denver, i.e., the Use of Force Policy, the Operations Plan that describes the services each jurisdiction will provide, and the federal grant of which Denver has the funds to pay the jurisdictions providing law enforcement services. This IGA is primarily a reimbursement and insurance agreement - it is not an operations plan, nor does it spell out what the officers will wear or where they will be. That is handled at the police department level. Also, this IGA has two primary purposes: (1) to provide a formula and process for reimbursing the Lakewood Police Department for expenses incurred, and (2) provisions to cover the agents while they are working with the Denver Police Department before and during the Democratic National Convention. The activities are scheduled to start on Saturday, August 23, 2008 through Thursday, August 28, 2008. Resolution for approval of the IGA will be present to the Council on July 14, 2008.

Continuing with the overview, he added that Lakewood agrees to provide a certain number of agents, personnel and vehicles for the duration of the convention. It is an estimate of what Denver anticipates they will need, and in exchange for that, Denver agrees to reimburse the City of Lakewood for its expenses. The intent of the agreement is for agencies, like the Lakewood Police Department, to get paid for everything they incur. However, there are contingencies and things could happen along the way, which could result in some expense to Lakewood, other agencies and to Denver. As drafted, the IGA gives a pretty good level of comfort that the City of Lakewood will not be out-of-pocket, except in extraordinary circumstances. The grant from the Federal Government is in the amount of $50,000,000 from the Department of Justice. Under this IGA, the maximum estimated amount that the City and County of Denver will reimburse to the City of Lakewood for its law enforcement services is $1,090,000. Negotiations between Denver and other jurisdictions revolve around the fact that the number of officers provided by each jurisdiction, including Lakewood, would be confidential, at least for the time being. When the IGA is presented to the Council, a portion of it will be kept confidential for security purposes. Additionally, Denver will purchase an insurance (law enforcement) liability policy in the amount of $10,000,000 that will cover all 40 plus jurisdictions and agencies that will provide law enforcement services. For each claim, there is a $10,000 deductible, and the insurance deductible credit for the City of Lakewood is $81,375.
It is pro-rated based on the number of officers provided by each jurisdiction. This means that if the City of Lakewood has one officer who has to defend a claim, there is a $10,000 deductible, but this will be reimbursed from the City and County of Denver. If there are multiple defendants, the deductible credit will be equally divided. Also, Denver has purchased a worker's compensation policy to cover the officers during the duration of the convention.

Councilman Paul wanted to know who would be responsible for long-term disability if officers are injured. Also, once claims are submitted to Denver, what's the turn-a-round time in getting the reimbursement?

Mr. Cox said at this point for LTD (Long Term Disability) it appears that Lakewood would be on its own. The Employees Relations Department looked at possible policies, but what they were able to locate was probably not worth the cost. Thus, there will not be any LTD coverage from Denver. Regarding turn-around time for reimbursement, Denver has a reimbursement policy. The Deputy Manager of Safety for Denver reviews/approves each reimbursement request and then forwards to the Police Department Finance Bureau. The requesting agency shall receive reimbursement for the request within 30 days of receipt by the Denver Police Finance Department. He added that even though we will be assisting the City and County of Denver, all agents will be working for the Lakewood Police Department.

Councilwoman Baroway said the maximum amount of reimbursement was given but she did not hear the minimum (low end) amount of reimbursement.

Mr. Cox said we will be reimbursed for all services provided-direct or indirect for the convention. The only place for potential vagueness/ambiguity is secondary services, i.e., backfield. To the extent that Lakewood agents are covering Lakewood so that other Lakewood agents could work in Denver, that backfield is not part of the services covered by the federal grant, and therefore, not reimbursable. However, if Lakewood agents are working in Denver elsewhere so that Denver personnel could be at the convention, it would be within the federal grant.

Mayor Murphy said this will be moved forward and heard at the meeting on July 14, 2008.

Mr. Rock said questions were asked during the break regarding the IGA for the Democratic National Convention, and to clarify the answers, he said the insurance policy we will receive from Denver, covers claims against the city for actions of our officers. It does not cover our officers if they get hurt, break their glasses get a broken tooth, etc. Our normal insurance will cover that. Our insurance covers the officers if they are out of city. The different kinds of insurance for the City of Lakewood are applicable whether the employee is working in or out of the City. None of the items covered under the IGA overlap with that coverage. The IGA is intended to deal with liability claims against the City. All other items would be under the purview of our existing insurance coverage.

Kathie Beard, Public Information Officer II-Citizen Relations reported results on the 2008 City-wide Citizen Survey. Hard copies of the slide presentation were given to each Council Members. It was prepared by the National Research Center, Inc., who has the most extensive national and regional data base available on municipal issues, and because of that they've conducted the survey for the City of Lakewood for the past five years. She encouraged members to read the detailed report.

Tom Miller, President, National Research Center, explained the PowerPoint presentation and noted that the survey is a window into performance and is one of many ways of looking at how well city government is doing. This extensive survey included questions regarding the quality of community life, the quality of city services and local government, city staff and local elected officials, information and communications and community development. Highlights of the survey were the quality of life, government operations, parks and recreation and public trust. Two-thirds of the residents polled said neighborhoods have pretty much stayed the same or have slightly improved for the better. Overall response to the survey was good indicating that there has been an improvement in quality of life, city government, transportation, customer service, information and communications and community development. Two services were below the norm - Police Services and "Looking At Lakewood".

Mayor Murphy said the survey contained good information that can be used for future decisions regarding allocation of resources.

Joni Inman, Director, Mayor and City Manager's Office, added that this survey reflects responses in regards to an overall city community view as to what's going on and to help the Council, as representatives of the City as a whole, to make decisions, i.e. budget discussions. Staff will review the same information and discuss any changes that should be presented to Council. It's not intended to be an area-by-area view. The survey will be accessible via the website. She also noted that in the section "Looking At

Lakewood", the change fluctuations are consistent with the budget cuts. It has gone from two issues per year to six issues per year. There was no consistency until now.

As the discussion continued, Council Members made suggestions that should be considered during the next survey, which will be two years from now. They also discussed how to increase the response rate.

Councilwoman Allen said there is concern about the noise ordinance, why it is not more measurable and how to enforce it. The City of Denver has a decibel level with their noise ordinance. She suggested that Council direct Staff to look at what is being done in other jurisdictions.

Mr. Rock said the entities that enforce the ordinance by decibel have their police agents and/or code enforcement personnel carry decibel meters. These individuals must be certified because they have to verify in court that the instrument was properly calibrated and the reading was correct. Some research has been done and a previous suggestion from Staff was to not adopt it unless preparations are made to devote additional resources in terms of personnel and equipment.

Council Members feel some education about the noise ordinance would be helpful and it could be posted on the website. Also, notifying your neighbors when you plan to have a party so that they will know.

It was reported that many people are not happy with the experiences they've had with the City of Lakewood Building Department. A suggestion was to have a representative from the Building Department make a presentation to City Council on how things should be done. The concern is that we may lose potential businesses because they may not want to deal with our building department. Also, it was suggested that it would be very helpful to homeowners if a handout detailing basic information as to what is needed, that could be picked up at the Permit Counter.

Mr. Rock noted that it has been a long-term policy that the City does not provide a list of contractors. He added that if Council would like a study session, he would be glad to arrange it.

Mayor Murphy said there is enough interest in the topic of building permits that Council will pursue it to decide whether to call a study session or conduct a field trip. We will allow time for the new department heads involved to get settled in. This matter will be examined in some format in the near future.

Councilwoman Stack inquired about upcoming CDBG dollars and wanted to know if Council would consider adding a maintenance program to the grant so that any neighborhoods that would like to see cleanup done in the public sections of said neighborhood, some CDBG funds could be used if the neighborhood does not have the funds to do it.

Joni Inman noted that according to current policy statements, this would not be permitted in the neighborhood grant program. We would have to revisit the current policy statement and this is something Council could do.

Mayor Murphy and City Council Members reported their attendance at previous meetings and events and announced upcoming neighborhood meetings and events.

Councilman Anderson said he would like for Council to consider some type of tax reduction for individuals who have not used police services during the course of the year. Some properties have repeatedly used police services and some have not used them at all. He feels that those who have no use for a very expensive department (police) should receive some type of reward. Also, he wants Council to discuss/consider reducing taxes to businesses that come to Lakewood and provide good paying jobs (not low-paying retail jobs), but companies who pay over a certain standard for an average job.

There being no further business to come before the Council; Mayor Murphy adjourned the meeting at 8:52 p.m.


	Home \| Search \| Contact Us \| Privacy Policy Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Notice © City of Lakewood, 480 S. Allison Pkwy., Lakewood, CO 80226, 303-987-7000