County Offices, Courts, and the Landfill will all be closed on Monday, May 30, 2016 for the Memorial Day Holiday. Critical services at Larimer County are not disrupted by closures.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, MAY 10, 1993 SUBDIVISIONS (#221 & 222) The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. in regular session with John Barnett, Director of Planning. Chairman Hotchkiss presided; Commissioners Disney and Duvall were present. Also present were Al Kadera, Subdivision Manager; Carol Evans, Associate Planner; Richael Michels, Planner; Elaine Spencer, Manager Engineering Operations & Planning; Jerry Blehm, Environmental Health; and, Jeannine Haag, Assistant County Attorney. Recording Clerk, D. Lord. Mr. Barnett advised the Board that the applicants for Item 5, Sunship Planned Unit Development, had requested that their hearing be tabled until May 24, 1993, and the applicants for Item 6, Jenks Minor Residential Development, had requested that their hearing be tabled until June 7, 1993. Chairman Hotchkiss asked if anyone had come to testify on either of these items. Lowell Keup stated that he had come to protest the continual break-up of county land, as he felt was being requested in the Jenks proposal. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved that the Sunship Planned Unit Development hearing be tabled until May 24, 1993, and that the Jenks Minor Residential Development be tabled until June 7, 1993. The motion carried 3 - 0. Mr. Barnett also advised the Board that Agenda Items 1 through 4 were consent items that would not be discussed in detail unless specifically requested by the Commissioners or members of the audience. Chairman Hotchkiss said the Board would review each item separately to ensure all concerns were addressed. 1. SIECZKOWSKI EXEMPTION, LOT 2 (#93-EX0271): 28-05-69; NORTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 16H; JUST EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 21; WEST OF LOVELAND 3 ACRES; LOVELAND URBAN GROWTH AREA (5-10-93) Mr. Barnett explained that this request would revise the Sieczkowski Exemption, which now requires a public sewer. Staff Findings include: 1) The Sieczkowski Exemption was conditionally approved in 1981; 2) A condition of approval required that the vacant lot be served by a public sewer; 3) Public sewer has not been extended to this area and there is no indication that sewer will be available in the near future; and, 4) The County Health Department has no objection to removing the public sewer requirement, although there may be a requirement that an engineered septic system be installed on this site. Staff Recommendation is for approval of the request to remove the condition of approval, which requires that public sewer serve Lot 2. 2. FOX ACRES COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT - SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT (#S-46-85, #S-138-86, #S139-86, #S140-86): PORTIONS OF 22, 27, and 18, TOWNSHIP 10 NORTH; RANGE 73 WEST; ADJACENT TO ROOSEVELT NATIONAL FOREST; AND, NORTH OF THE RED FEATHER LAKES; 458.42 ACRES; 118 LOTS; E-1 ESTATE ZONING (5-10-93) This is a request to release warranty collateral and Subdivision Improvements Agreement. Staff Findings include: 1) Fox Acres Country Club Planned Unit Development was originally approved in 1985; 2) The developer has completed all the improvements and the warranty period for previously released improvements has expired; 3) The County holds a Certificate of Deposit in the amount of $25,000 as collateral for the recently completed improvements and the previous warranty; and, 4) The County Health Department notes that all water and sewer improvements are complete and the collateral should be released. Staff recommendation is for approval of the request to release the developer from his obligations under the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for Fox Acres Country Club Planned Unit Development and the Warranty Collateral Agreement for previously released improvements with the condition that the developer execute a Warranty Collateral Agreement for the last of the improvements and provide warranty collateral in the amount of $1077. Mr. Ted Carter, representing Campbell Development, stated that the only condition he objected to was the requirement for the $1077 warranty collateral charge. Mr. Kadera explained that he didn't believe the charge was necessary for this particular developer, but that the charge was according to regulation. He explained that Campbell Development was responsible for all of the interior improvements, and that there was no risk to the county if the warranty amount was waived, except that regulations required the 5% warranty to be paid. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved that the Warranty Collateral payment of $1077 be waived because the developer provides its own improvements and maintenance and the county has no further obligation for the development; and that the county attorney is instructed to develop language to address the rationale for this waiver. The motion carried 3 - 0. 3. ASHLEY EXEMPTION (#93-EX0274) 01-04-73; TRACTS 2 and 3; BETWEEN STATE HIGHWAY 7 AND CARRIAGE HILLS, SOUTH OF ESTES PARK; 5 ACRES; E-ESTATE ZONING (5-10-93) This request is to remove a condition of approval which requires that public water service be utilized by these lots; the town of Estes Park notes that water is not available. Staff Findings include: 1) The Ashley Exemption was conditionally approved in 1982; 2) A condition of approval required that public water serve all three lots; 3) The Town of Estes Park, the only water provided in this area, has indicated that it is not feasible to provide water to these sites at this time; and, 4) The State Engineer has indicated that domestic well permits will be issued for the lots to provide a potable water source. Staff recommends approval of the request to amend the conditions of approval for the Ashley Exemption to allow domestic wells for a water supply in lieu of providing public water to each site. Debi Coleman, Listing Agent for the land, supported the Staff recommendation as it will release future homeowners of these lots from requirements to hook up to city water, since they would have to bear the cost themselves. 4. ROCK RIDGE LANE STREET NAME REQUEST (#93-OS0273); 11 and 14-05-70; SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 34 AND THREE MILES WEST OF LOVELAND; 35 ACRE PARCELS: RURAL ZONING (5-10-93) This request is to name an unnamed road which provides access to several 35 acre lots. Staff findings include: 1) The proposed street name, Rock Ridge Lane, was reviewed by all appropriate agencies and no objections were noted; 2) The proposed street name does not duplicate any existing street names in this part of the County; and, 3) Naming the street will facilitate addressing and emergency response to this area. Staff recommendation is for approval of the proposed street name: Rock Ridge Lane. MOTION: Commissioner Disney moved to adopt the consent items: Sieczkowski; Fox Acres; Ashley; and, Rock Ridge, with the change adopted for Fox Acres regarding warranty collateral, as recommended by Staff. The motion carried 3 - 0. 7. LINQUIST APPEAL RE: MRD APPLICATION LIMITATIONS; (#93-OSO269); SOUTH OF ESTES PARK ON THE WEST SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 7; E-ESTATE ZONING (5-10-93) This is an appeal of the limitations placed on the Minor Residential Development process. The applicant requests that a Minor Residential Development be processed on this site, even though the parcel was created after 1972 and the parcel is outside the designated area. Staff findings include: 1) The property in question existed as a separate, conveyable, 50 acre parcel in 1963; 2) This part of the County has utility services and access that are not generally available in the western part of the County; 3) This appeal should be granted to allow the property owner an opportunity to proceed through the Concept Technical Review Process to determine if adequate services exist to serve the property; and 4) A public hearing will be held to determine the appropriateness of creating additional lots in this area, if the appeal is approved. Staff recommends approval of the appeal to permit the Linquist property to proceed through the Minor Residential Development Process. Robert Black and Cynthia Linquist informed the Board that the property in question has been considered for tax purposes to be 2 separate properties for 13 years, in that the parcels have been assessed, bought and sold, and taxed separately since 1980. He stated that the parcels were 42 and 10 acres, and that Ms. Linquist had purchased them separately. The larger acreage is currently under a purchase option with the Peregrine Golf Course Association. The smaller piece of property currently has two residents residing on the smaller parcel, and the property owner would like to allow them to stay on the land. He said that the Interim MRD regulations prohibited Ms. Linquist from submitting an application for consideration of clarifying the separation of the parcels, even though the only step that hasn't been finalized in the current status of the two properties is the approval of the Planning Commission. Mr. Kadera said that the request to the Planning Department was only to request permission to submit the application, and he supported approving only the right for Ms. Linquist to appeal the two parcels in the original request. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved approval for the Linquist property, consisting of 52 acres, to proceed through the Minor Residential Development process. The motion carried 3 - 0. 8. WELD COUNTY WATER SPECIAL REVIEW (#93-ZRO219); NW 1/4 14-04-70; SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 8E; 1/4 MILE WEST OF COUNTY ROAD 27E; 1/2 MILES SOUTH OF EXISTING PLAN; 1/2 MILE WEST OF CARTER LAKE; 40 ACRES; 1 LOT; O-OPEN ZONING (5-10-93) This project is located in the southwest part of the County near the southern end of Carter Lake. Staff findings include: 1) The Larimer County Engineering and Health Departments, the Fire District, all utilities, and other interested agencies have reviewed this subdivision and have stated no objections as long as certain conditions are met; 2) The proposed water treatment facility is consistent with the existing development in the area and appears consistent with the Larimer County Comprehensive Plan; and, 3) Approval of the Special Review, with the following conditions, will not result in any significant negative impacts on the surrounding properties, transportation facilities, utility services, the natural environment, or on overall health and safety. Staff and Planning Commission recommended conditions for approval: 1) Two fire hydrants must be installed as specified by the Berthoud Fire Protection District, as well as the approved access roads, prior to building permit for the buildings or a Subdivision Improvements Agreement being executed; 2) All other requirements of the Berthoud Fire Protection District and the Uniform Fire Code must be met prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy for the buildings, including but not limited to, exhaust treatment system, fire extinguishing system, smoke detection system, and gas detection system; 3) An erosion control plan and reseeding plan must be submitted to the County Flood Plain Administrator prior to building; 4) Issues must be resolved with the Bureau of Reclamation prior to reseeding: a letter placed in the file stating that the issues have been resolved is sufficient; 5) A letter from the Division of Wildlife to place in the file will be needed regarding fencing prior to proceeding; 6) A new landscape plan must be submitted to Staff and to the County Forester for approval prior to proceeding: it must specify locations, sizes, and species of plant materials; more trees should be shown than are shown on the originally submitted plan; consideration should be given to screening for all sides of the facilities; a grass seed mix and spreading rate must be provided, as well as an irrigation plan; and, backwash ponds should be shown with a more natural appearance; 7) Culvert size must be approved by the County Engineering Department prior to its installation; 8) a written, intergovernmental agreement should be developed between the County Board of Commissioners and the Water Districts that these facilities and expansion of services will not dictate or drive County land use decisions; and 9) Lighting should be down lighting only: no elements can be visible from off the site; no fugitive light should leave the property; and, this condition is to apply to both the new and existing site. Kevin Archer of Rocky Mountain Consultants, Mr. Richard Whittet of the Little Thompson Water District and John Zadel, of the Central Weld Co. Water District made presentations to respond to the conditions recommended with the approval of the application. They said that they had already received letters regarding the land use agreement and had no problems with meeting the conditions as set forth by the Planning Commission. The only obstacle was the location of the holding pond, due to the terrain, but they would work with the County Forester to reach an agreement as to its placement. There was discussion regarding the other conditions, particularly condition number 8. It was decided that County staff would work on formulating the intergovernmental agreement on land use. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved for approval with the conditions as set forth by the Planning Commission and Staff, and the formalization of condition #8 as an interagency agreement. The motion passed 3 - 0. 9. SHEEHAN MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT-RELEASE OF COLLATERAL (#92-EXO001); NW 1/4 32-04-69; SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 4; 1/2 MILE EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 23E; 19.9 ACRES; 4 LOTS; FA-FARMING; URBAN RESERVE (5-10-93) This is a request for release of collateral for the Sheehan Minor Residential Development, per the County's Collateral Policy. Staff findings include: 1) Sheehan Drive in the Sheehan Minor Residential Development has been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineering Department; and, 2) Release of 95% of the applicant's collateral at this time is consistent with the collateral policy. Staff recommends release of the collateral. No testimony was offered. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved approval of the release of collateral for the Sheehan Minor Residential Development, per the County's Collateral Policy. The motion carried 3 -0 The meeting was recessed at 11:00 a.m. MONDAY, MAY 10, 1993 MEETING REGARDING REHAB HOUSING APPLICATION (#222) The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 2:00 p.m. with Tom Hart, Director of the State of Colorado Division of Housing and Rena Mackrill, Director of Human Development Department (HDD). Chairman Hotchkiss presided; Commissioner Duvall was present; and, Commissioner Disney was attending a meeting in Greeley. Also present were: Bill Gordon, County Administrator; Donna Aguilar, Colorado Division of Housing; Carol Gillespie, Community Development Director - HDD; and Lani VanEck, Housing Development Specialist-HDD. Recording Clerk, D. Lord. Ms. Mackrill stated the County's need for clarification of the State's position regarding the Larimer County Rehab Grant. She and her Staff have worked diligently to expand the grant's focus from single county to the larger base recommended by the State. She said that she was fairly certain that the City of Loveland would be a co-grantee, and that Wellington, LaPorte and one other city may be amenable to applying as one grantee for all the areas. There is a time-constraint to including the City of Fort Collins, as the city's current funding doesn't expire until December of 1994. Mr. Hart said he appreciated the difficulty of all of the entities forming a multi-agency application, but the State's position is that single county grantees would no longer receive funding for rehab housing. He said that Larimer County had not shown an adequate need for the services, based on a very small waiting list survey. In addition, he said that he believed that the County must develop a joint powers agreement with neighboring counties, such as Morgan, Weld, Jackson, etc., if funding is to be expected in the foreseeable future. Commissioner Duvall asked if, for the current application process, a grant that included only Larimer County and Loveland would be considered viable to the State with the long-term objective of developing a multi-county, city/county partnerships to administer the grant included. Mr. Hart said such a grant would be considered for funding. Chairman Hotchkiss said that the first step toward developing this shared approach would be to instruct Larimer County Staff to begin meeting with the other entities to develop the type of administrative body the State required. Ms. Mackrill agreed to initiate the process. The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1993 MEETING REGARDING PERSONNEL ISSUES The Board of County Commissioners met with Ralph Jacobs, Personnel Director at 9:00 a.m. Chairman Hotchkiss presided: Commissioners Duvall and Disney were present. Also present were Patsy Maroney, Compensation/Benefits Specialist; and Bill Gordon, County Administrator. MOTION Commissioner Disney moved that the Board go into Executive Session to discuss Personnel matters. The motion carried 3 - 0. The Board recessed at 10:40 a.m.; no action taken. PUBLIC WORKS MEETING (#223) The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 10:45 a.m. in regular session with Rex Smith, Director of Public Works. Chairman Hotchkiss presided: Commissioners Duvall and Disney were present. Also present were: Bill Gordon, County Administrator and Bill Heiden, Director of the Road and Bridge Department. Recording Clerk, D. Lord. Mr. Heiden presented a memo which provided a preliminary cost estimate to build the proposed Larimer County Road and Bridge Shop in Livermore. After discussion of the options, it was decided that a decision for proceeding with the bid process would be delayed until the Board had identified a priority expenditure plan to implement the planning objectives that are in the process of being developed. Mr. Smith and Mr. Heiden presented the conclusions reached as a result of investigating the options as related to initiating a chip seal program for the bicycle loop identified as a particular problem area for cyclists. The cost for the fog sealer, just for the loop, is projected at $25,000. After discussion, it was decided that the County implement the following: 1) Increase efforts to sweep the areas immediately after chips are laid; 2) Place signs when chips are laid to warn cyclists before they enter the area; 3) Notify bike shops and the newspaper to alert cyclists when roads are scheduled to have chips laid; and 4) Use smaller chips to provide more protections for both motorists and cyclists. The project will be evaluated to determine its efficacy. Mr. Heiden then made a presentation to the Board regarding the difference between treated and untreated gravel roads, including the process utilized, the costs, the time frames for application, and the impact in relation to dust and cost factors. The most prevalent complaint of residents in areas where gravel is laid is notification. The Board suggested a more attention-getting flyer or brochure may work better than the current letter of information. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1993 ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS (#224) The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:30 a.m. in regular session with Bill Gordon, County Administrator. Chairman Hotchkiss presided; Commissioners Disney and Duvall were present. Also present were: John MacFarlane, Parks, Director; Bob Martell, Purchasing Agent; Patrice Luehring, Buyer II; Jerry Westbrook, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; Wil Banner, Bureau of Reclamation; and Russ Ragsdale, County Clerk's Chief Deputy. Recording Clerk, S. Graves. 1. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER THE CONTRACTING OF A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT TO PREPARE A RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Subsequent to the receipt of proposals for contracting a professional consultant to prepare a Resource Management Plan of Horsetooth Reservoir, Carter Lake, Pinewood Lake, and Flatiron Reservoir for the Larimer County Parks Department and the Bureau of Reclamation, four consultant companies were interviewed and their proposals evaluated. The Evaluation Committee was comprised of members of the Larimer County Park Department, Purchasing Department, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, and the Bureau of Reclamation. Following much deliberation, the evaluation team voted 3 to 2 in favor of Burns and McDonnell and requested Board approval of same. Lengthy discussion ensued concerning the rationale for choosing Burns and McDonnell, a Kansas and Denver based firm, over EDAW, a local firm. It was also noted that the proposal from EDAW was approximately $800 lower than Burns and McDonnell. The Evaluation Committee responded that their decision between the two firms was close, but they determined that that Burns and McDonnell was the most qualified and made the most effective verbal presentation. The interview time limit was questioned--Burns was allowed one hour and the other companies were given one-half hour. Mr. Banner stated that if the Board decides to go with the local firm, that decision will probably invalidate the Bureau's participation in the project, as Federal regulations will not support a project if the determining factor in the final decision is to choose a local firm. CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was to defer action on this matter until the County Attorney is consulted regarding the legality of the Board's decision in choosing a local firm, and the Bureau is apprised of the situation and whether or not they will withdraw their funding. 2. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A PERSONAL COMPUTER PURCHASE: Mr. Ragsdale requested Board approval for the purchase of three personal computers for the Clerk's Office to be used for the transcription of Board of County Commissioner Meetings and the Board of Equalization process. Mr. Ragsdale requested financial assistance from the General Fund for this purchase as these functions are performed in conjunction with the Board of County Commissioners. M O T I O N Commissioner Disney moved that the Board approve the request for the purchase of three personal computers for the Clerk and Recorder's Office in the amount of $8,394; funds to be derived from the Capital Outlay Fund. Motion carried 3 - 0. 3. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS: Commissioner Duvall requested the LAPAC discussion be deferred until after the Planning Meeting on Monday, May 17, 1993 to enable members of the Planning Staff to attend. Discussion also will be held concerning Colorado Memory Systems. Commissioner Disney reported that it was noted at the CCI Urban District Meeting that a workshop on school impact fees will be held at the CCI Summer Conference. 4. WORKSESSION: -- Park Permit Rates for Senior Citizens: Mr. Gordon noted that the Parks Board reviewed the current policy of park permits regarding senior citizens and recommended no change be made in the current policy. During the summer of 1992, the Board agreed to begin phasing out the senior reduced rate because they believe that age is not a basis for reduction of rates. The Board believes that the current fees are extremely reasonable for an elective activity such as visiting a recreation area. CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was to agree with the recommendation of the Parks Board for no change in the current policy with regard to park permits for senior citizens. However, at the next Parks Board Meeting Commissioner Disney will encourage the Parks Board to consider a policy whereby an individual with low income can apply for a special discount. 5. DOCUMENT REVIEW: The following documents, of a routine nature, were considered by the Board: M O T I O N Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the Minutes for the week of May 3, 1993, and the Agenda for the week of May 17, 1993, as submitted. Motion carried 3 - 0. M O T I O N Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve a letter to Ms. Micki Hackenberger of CCI regarding Larimer County Application for FY 94 State Special Bridge Fund Monies. Motion carried 3 - 0. LIQUOR LICENSES: County Approval was granted for a Waive of Hearing for a 6% OPTIONAL PREMISE LICENSE to the existing Hotel and Restaurant License for the Aspen Lodge at Estes Park, 6120 Hiway 7, Estes Park, CO. Licenses were issued to Fort Namaqua Wine & Spirits - 6% -Loveland, CO; Inlet Bay Marina, Inc. - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO. and Sandy's - 3.2% - Fort Collins, CO. M O T I O N Commissioner Duvall moved that the Board approve the following documents: A93-98 AMERICAN BANK ESCROW ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT FOR HEROLD MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND CHARLES D. HEROLD A93-99 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR, INC. OF FORT COLLINS (Store Equipment from the Community Garden Program) A93-100 LION'S PARK EASEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE STATE, COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE C93-22 CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COULSON ENGINEERING CO., INC. (Reconstruction of CR 2H - Project #166) D93-09 DEED OF DEDICATION BY RICHARD L. WEISS AND MARYANNE WEISS (Project #166 - Long's Peak Road) R93-60s FINDINGS AND RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE VACATION OF PLAT OF ACCESS EASEMENT IN TERRA VISTA MINOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Motion carried 3 - 0. The meeting recessed at 10:50 a.m. MEETING WITH WILDFIRE GROUP (#226) The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 1:00 p.m. with Wendell Amos and Members of the Wildfire Group. Chairman Pro-Tem Duvall presided; Commissioner Disney was present. Chairman Hotchkiss was absent. Also present were Don Griffin, Bill Nelson, and Erik Nilsson of Emergency Services; and Carol Evans, Associate Planner. Recording Clerk, S. Graves. Mr. Amos stated that the purpose of today's meeting is to seek the Board's support and endorsement of the Colorado Front Range Wildfire Cooperative Organization and its objectives. Mr. Amos explained that the Wildfire Mitigation Committee was formed after the many devastating fires in 1988-89 and is composed of representatives from the National Park Service, United States Forest Service, Colorado State Forest Service, and the Larimer County Sheriff's Department Emergency Services. Mr. Amos noted that their objective is to educate mountain homeowners in the Estes Valley of the fire danger associated with living in the urban interface and to show and assist the landowners ways they can reduce the chance of wildfire destroying their homes and properties. Presentations were made from the various members of the Committee and slides were shown of the before and after of what has been accomplished to date; future projects were outlined. The possibility of not allowing shake roofs in Larimer County was discussed; Commissioner Duvall would like to have Planning Staff work with the Wildfire Committee in setting requirements and conditions for building permit receipt in wildfire areas. The meeting recessed at 2:30 p.m. MEETING REGARDING EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION (#227) The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 2:45 p.m. in regular session with Ralph Jacobs, Personnel Director, and Jodie Boatright, Personnel Office Supervisor. Chairman Pro-Tem Duvall presided. Commissioner Disney was present; Chairman Hotchkiss was absent. Also present was Bill Gordon, County Administrator. Recording Clerk, S. Graves. As previously requested by the Board, the Personnel Department has reviewed, and presented today, various options for the Board to consider regarding employee recognition/longevity awards. It was noted that employee recognition and longevity awards have not been presented for 1992. The options were discussed and CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was for an array of gifts to be chosen for the longevity-award recipients for 1992 to select their gift and for each department to have a ceremony honoring the recipients and their gifts presented; Board Members will attend the ceremonies. Other options discussed were: Presentation of Award Pins indicating years of service; Gift Certificates; Selection of an Employee of the Month Award. Other items discussed were whether or not plaques should be continued for retirees; if a a new committee should be formed for determination of employee recognition/longevity awards or can this function be incorporated into an existing employee committee; etc. Mr. Jacobs requested periodic meetings be scheduled with the Board to discuss the many personnel items which occur each month; such as policy changes, changes in the law, etc. CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD was to agree to a regular monthly meeting with Personnel. The meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. THURSDAY, MAY 13, 1993 BUDGET DISCUSSION MEETING (#229) The Board of County Commissioners met in regular session at 9:30 a.m. with Bob Keister, Budget Manager. Chairman Hotchkiss presided; Commissioners Duvall and Disney were present. Also present were: Bill Gordon, County Administrator; Rex Smith, Director of Public Works; Dana Klausmeyer, Controller; Wayne Lawler, Director of Facilities Management; and, Jim Stokes, Director of Information Management. Recording Clerk, D. Lord. Mr. Keister informed the Board he would be transmitting a memo to all department heads next week requesting that they submit their revised estimates for projected revenues for 1993 and 1994, per the Board's direction from the last budget meeting. He hopes to have all of the information together to provide a report for the Board by June 15, 1993. In addition, Mr. Keister stated that he would be submitting the first Budget Revision for the 1993 budget by the last week in June. By law, the Budget Revision must be published in the paper, and a public hearing held to allow input into the changes to the budget. All departmental budget changes will be included in this document. Mr. Keister then provided the Board with an overview of the Capital Expenditure Fund Expenditure Analysis, and the process used to control the income and expenditures within the county government. No action was taken and the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. ___________________________________ COURTLYN W. HOTCHKISS, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ( S E A L ) ATTEST: _____________________________________ Dolores Lord, Deputy County Clerk _____________________________________ Sherry E. Graves, Deputy County Clerk