Minutes: June 2015

THE TOWN OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 8, 2015
7:00 PM

PRESENT: Mayor Jeff Kiddie; Mayor Pro-Tem Patricia Lilliston; Councilmembers: Leola

Boone; Dodie Dosh; Lou Fehlberg; Kathleen Hancock and Lisa Maurath

STAFF MEMBERS

PRESENT: Ryan Malarky, Town Attorney; Mark Toth, Police Chief; and Sarah Albright,

Interim Town Clerk/Treasurer recorded the meeting. Minutes are not verbatim.

MEETING TIME: 7:00 PM

LOCATION: Town Hall

REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN OF MOUNTAIN VIEW TOWN COUNCIL CALLED TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

7:00 PM

Mayor Kiddie called the meeting to order and asked for the roll call. No conflicts were declared at this time.

CONSENT AGENDA

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

Councilmember Maurath asked to pull items A and C from the agenda.

Councilmember Maurath motioned to pull Items A and C from the Consent Agenda. Motion was seconded by Councilmember Dosh and was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

Maurath stated the question she had on the Summary Account Information. She was trying to determine which one of the accounts was the VIN account.

Chief Toth stated it is the regular savings account.

Maurath stated the minutes she had some clarifications she needed. On the third page, states in the second paragraph that a variance for the height on the Chase property was not needed and she understood that it was and wanted clarification on that.

Consultant Reid stated there is no variance required for the height.

Maurath thanked him for that and she had a question on verbiage, and noted the correction on page five, fourth paragraph, should be seconded by Hancock and that was all she had.

Kiddie asked for a motion to approve the Summary and a motion to approve the minutes.

Councilmember Fehlberg stated he had a question before they voted on that.

Fehlberg sated that on one of the bills he had a question. It was on page 3. With regard to the charges from SAFEBuilt for building inspections, the amount was $3,040.70. He asked if that was for the quarter.

Reid stated that is tied into inspections being done now, or a portion of the costs were for Ames Street or plan review at The Sniff Shack. Ultimately the costs are paid for by the applicant who pays the building permit fees. There is corresponding revenue associated with that expense.

There was discussion with regard to the amount of details to provide council regarding payables, how the Finance Committee reviews invoices, track the coding, and approve prior to meetings to save time.

Reid noted the council didn’t have current financials before them and that would show the offsetting revenue. The town may incur the expense and receive the revenue in a different month.

Fehlberg stated as long as the Finance Committee is tracking it.

Councilmember Lilliston stated that the purpose of the Finance Committee is to clarify and to stream line, not add more work.

Councilmember Boone agreed.

Kiddie asked for a motion to approve Item A and Item C of the Consent Agenda.

Councilmember Lilliston motioned to approve Item A and Item C of the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Boone seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of the council members present.

Kiddie asked for a motion to ratify the Accounts Payable May 2015 Check Detail Report.

Councilmember Dosh moved to ratify the Accounts Payable for May 2015, the Check Detail Report. Councilmember Maurath seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of the council members present.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Kiddie introduced the agenda item. There were no public comments at this time.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE APPROVAL OF COMCAST BUSINESS SERVICE ORDER AGREEMENT

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

Mark Horney, Comcast, brought the models of the types of phones that were talked about. He noted he had met with the Chief, Patricia, and Sarah at various times.

Toth interjected they were looking at some issues with the contract and he turned the conversation over to the attorney to discuss.

Attorney Malarky stated the contract was lengthy and there were inconsistencies, and not terribly difficult to fix. Some of the prices were not lining up, there was an issue of either a 30 day and 60 day termination period, and some language that he thought the town would need, government immunity, and red lined the contract and sent it to Mark and Sarah and forwarded it on.

Horney stated that he would take it back to their legal department to be on same page. The product is 30-45 days out from install, and a 60 day guarantee in the industry, giving the town an out if they wanted to break the contract. Comcast offered dollar wise the town a free month of service, which covers all the basic install fees.

Reid stated that the option would be to move to approve the agreement subject to final review by the attorney. He suggested if there were inconsistencies like that to be sure the attorney was aware so as not to cause complications later on.

Fehlberg asked about the installation fees.

Forney stated there are installation fees upfront. The one month free they offer is on the second billing cycle. Your first bill is more than the standard than what you see on the agreement. It is scalable up and down. It’s not a traditional, they are not residential. Once the contract is signed that is what you are billed for.

Maurath asked for and Horney gave a brief overview of the functionality of the phone system.

Discussion continued: on the types of phone; the contract updates; numbers matching; Ethernet drops and installation costs to the town; update the wiring; number of drops approximately 20; performing work on a Friday; two call ques; number of lines needed; pricing sheet; number of phones; an auto attendant;

Kiddie asked for an amended agreement, with the Finance Committee giving the approval of the expenditure subject to the attorney review and let the attorney know.

Lilliston in addition to the review by the Finance Committee, we talked about the IT person coming in, and the fees associated with that individual, we have Comcast costs, IT costs and wanted to map out a time line for review and a bid for the internal wiring. Then this could be done before our next meeting or when.

Horney stated they are typically out 30-45 days for installation. He suggested once the wiring is done, normally a 2-3 hour job to drop lines, Comcast would push out to 90 days.

Councilmember Lilliston moved to approve the Comcast phone installation with the review of the Finance Committee of the updated costs, the bid for the IT drops, and the final review of the contract by the attorney. Councilmember Boone seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

RMS UPDATE

Kiddie introduced the agenda item and turned this portion of the meeting over to Chief Toth who introduced Commander John Pickard, Lakewood Police Department, to answer questions. He is addressing the reason for the change to the IGA.

Commander Pickard stated that he would like to address the specific change to the IGA. There was a lot that went into preparing the IGA, and part of what was going on was the regionalization issues being worked on in Jefferson County, the communication center, the crime lab, and a number of other things. Arvada suggested they try to create an IGA that was an umbrella IGA that would cover the regionalization.

The thought was to create a separate legal entity for the records management system. This is the first time he has been a project manager. They had Lakewood in the IGA as the fiscal agent and once it all passed then the finance people informed him that they could not be a fiscal agent for a separate legal entity. They would have to have a separate attorney to advise the board, and hire an accounting firm, and a separate audit firm, and make public notifications of the meetings, for a cost of about $20-40,000 to establish the separate legal entity when what they want to do would be to share the cost for the computer application. When they discovered this, it was going to be a.4-6 month process to set it up to do it right. They thought a better track would be to amend the IGA, remove the language that says separate legal entity, and create a cost sharing consortium. The IGA does not change any of the language. They have Lakewood as the fiscal agent, and bill all the different agencies their percentage of the share in the records management system, send them the money, and Lakewood writes the bills. Each agency maintains their uniqueness in that records management system. Once it is signed, he and the RMS manager would manage the enterprise version. It made sense to not incur costs but to share the expense of the application. And that is the reason why the IGA was amended. That amended IGA has been sent out to the legal counsel for all six agencies, and all have given their reviews and we are close to having a final version. That’s the background as to why we went from a separate legal entity to a cost share consortium. The configuration can begin once it is signed. They first started this process back in 2013.

Fehlberg asked how the percentages would work as to population.

Pickard stated it is based on the number of sworn officers per agency. They have identified the town at two percent of the consortium. The company was chosen as they are very simplistic. Their software is based on the number of authorized officers, not the number you have which can fluctuate. It is $1,400 per officer per the contract. There are training costs, initial costs, upgrades and updates are included in that cost.

Toth stated they had all that information handed to them previously and they already approved the IGA. They are making a change to it.

Attorney Malarky stated when they originally approved the RMS agreement a provision was included that any amendment needed to come before the council for a resolution. They will see a resolution when it is ready and subject to their approval.

Maurath noted it was very helpful.

Kiddie asked if there would be a court module.

Pickard stated there is functionality. The reason they chose Niche was because their business process was they are able to fix it themselves and don’t need to depend on the company. Its incident based allowing your court to see the records without having to pay additional monies. This company is based out of Canada. Yes he believed there is court functionality for the system. They would build it specific to Mountain View.

Council thanked him for his time.

RESOLUTION NO 2015-06-08, A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

Malarky stated the Town Charter requires alternating terms. In 2009, the town appointed the BOAA, Board of Adjustment. The mayor and another councilmember selected names. So they need to select names to comply with the charter.

Kiddie read the resolution into the record with Craig Patterson and Gene Bird selected for three-year term. Catherin Colwell and Shawna McGregor were selected for a two-year term and Frank Mazon was selected for a one-year term.

Lilliston asked the members present to introduce themselves.

Consultant Reid wanted to note while there are no any conflicts of interest, three are a couple of familial relations that should be disclosed for the minutes for transparency purposes.

Kiddie stated that Catherine is related to Councilmember Boone and Frank is related to Councilmember Lilliston.

Councilmember Dosh moved to approve Resolution No. 2015-06-08. Councilmember Maurath seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

Kiddie thanked each of the members for their interest and look forward to working with them.

Malarky noted that training materials were being collected for them and he was in the process of finishing a memo from his law firm to them explaining what it means to act as a member of the Board of Adjustment and how you act as a quasi-judicial entity, meaning you essentially act like judges, and you apply certain provisions and requirements in the town code to applications that are presented to you or appeals from actions of the Chief Building Official. We are going to help you walk through that process depending on the circumstances. You will have training materials; we’ll give you a sense of what your responsibilities are and answer questions.

Reid added, in the meantime, if anyone on the street wishes to have a conversation with you about some pending event that might be a public notice, please not have that conversation. That is not the appropriate venue. You will have a hearing where testimony would be taken if they want to talk about an issue; direct them to attend that meeting.

Malarky stated if anybody talks to you about possible land use issues in the town; don’t have that conversation as we want you to be impartial and to consider the materials that would be presented to you.

SELECTION OF TOWN ENGINEER – SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

Lilliston stated the committee met last Thursday and she was asked to be the spokesperson and referred to her notes. She reminded them that prior to that Thursday, June 4th meeting, we were looking at Diamondback and JRS Engineering that that they all had the RFQ and had received it, reviewed it, and read it. As a result of that, Sarah, Leola, Chuck and I were determined to be the committee to interview these two. She stated on behalf of the committee, we appreciated the opportunity to interview these two firms. They were outstanding, they had excellent qualifications, they were well prepared and they took our needs seriously. We concluded our discussion in the selection process, we realized the method and the practice of what we did by selecting a committee to interview and provide discussion and decision and select the candidate was truly focused, efficient, and an effective practice. We would endorse this particular methodology in the future for other interviews that would come up. Having that said, the committee recommends Diamondback Engineering and Surveying. We have several reasons as to what our thinking was. Please note the interviews were probably about 45-60 minutes each in length and our discussion was equally 60 minutes in length. It was a very thoughtful conversation that we had. John Enochs, who represented Diamondback Engineering, spoke very specifically about the professional services; they have eight staff members. And he said although they were small in number that was by design. They have an extensive networking system. Their work in both Empire and Edgewater was not just limited to that but those were ones that paralleled the potential work we would need in Mountain View. They expressed an understanding of the composite and the challenges for a very small community and that was compelling to us. John was very communicative, concise and clear in the explanation of their services, their procedures, the special projects that they had conducted and performed successfully. He produced a billing sample which detailed the services incurred in similar projects. We saw the transparency of the company that way. Something else that led to the strong recommendation is when he was asked about Diamondback’s potential in securing grants related to infrastructure projects he specifically noted available grants, sources and necessary measures for securing grants and examples and acquisitions that Diamondback has done successfully secured for other projects. References checked out favorably. For these particular reasons we recommend Diamondback. As a committee we would like to see Diamondback hired to be able to complete an engineer review, a needs assessment which would allow us to prioritize the projects in the community, talk to community, most importantly, in the future we would be able to then actively start pursuing grants.

Reid said that the one thing the RFQ process which the town specifically asked for and one of the pieces that generated the request for the proposals was the sidewalk and concrete project. He recommended to council to focus on that needs assessment as part of the 2016 budget because in terms of the project prioritization that an engineer would see might be different than what the council may see at this point and time.

Lilliston noted that was a good point. We did specifically discuss sidewalks and concrete, gutters, that type of thing. That is what they have done in Edgewater. We wanted to make it a doable project.

Discussion included: costs; pay structure; tier pricing; subcontracting; sourcing out; needs assessment calculating each project; needs assessment; range of pricing; fall back to project proposal costing; JRS’s ideas for security and insurance.

Reid agreed that each one of the applicants brought different samples of work. We didn’t ask them to bring a standard construction contract and that is what Jim brought. He also brought photos. John brought design sheets of another project and a sample invoice for our review.

Reid asked for a motion to approve selecting Diamondback Engineering and authorizing the Attorney and himself to work on the Professional Services Agreement.

Councilmember Maurath motioned to approve the selection for Town Engineer of Diamondback Engineering, and approve the Town Attorney and Economic Consultant to complete the agreement to move forward, and authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement. Councilmember Dosh seconded and it was approved by unanimous roll call vote of those present.

RESOLUTION NO. 2015-06-08B, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDGEWATER AND THE TOWN OF MOUNTAIN VIEW

Kiddie introduced the agenda item and noted there were disagreements regarding the IGA and we will listen to both sides. He started with Chief Toth for his comment and then the Attorney will comment.

Chief Toth stated that the agreement was drawn up between the attorneys in our town and Edgewater, and at no time during this did they contact the parties that would be affected by this agreement, which would be him and our police officers. They just put it out there and said here you go. There was not a discussion with us about this agreement. His second complaint was that there is no need for a mutual agreement between agencies. We cover other agencies and they cover us; it is standard operating procedure in Colorado, and is covered by statute. We don’t have an agreement with Denver, Lakeside, and Wheat Ridge, all of the towns or cities that border us. Edgewater sent this agreement, the IGA, to us and Lakeside. Lakeside told them absolutely not. Edgewater borders Lakewood, Denver, Wheat Ridge, and they were not asked to sign an IGA. Lakewood is there as much as we are. Jefferson County dispatches for Edgewater and they didn’t ask them to have an IGA. Now it’s down to us. He reiterated there is absolutely no need for it; everything is already being done for the most part. There are too many things in there that he disagreed with. He continued to review and comment on specific sections of the agreement. Emergency Mutual Aid , the second to last sentence was read and he gave an example as to why he felt it is ambiguous. It doesn’t say enough. His question to the town attorney was how do you decide that? How much experience did the group of you together have in a patrol car, knowing when to cover officers, and all the things that go into that?

Attorney Malarky stated he had no experience sitting in a police car but our law firm does have experience making sure that the contracts are written to assign liabilities to protect our clients where we think it is in their best interests. No, he didn’t have any experience in law enforcement other than prosecuting for the town. We feel this agreement is not ambiguous; it is important for the town in order to clearly state what the liabilities of your police officers are.

Toth stated they have never had anybody come back to them as long as he has been working with the town; nor have we gone after anyone else. We are responsible for our officers. We don’t need an agreement, they know that and we know that. What it says is that they now would have to call the Chief of Police, or somebody in charge every time they go there on something that is considered emergency mutual aid. Then he referenced the non-emergency mutual aid section that read if a shift supervisor is unavailable for a Party (meaning us), the highest ranking officer available for such Party may act as the shift supervisor for purposes of this subsection; what that says is if that is a non-emergency call and they want to go cover Edgewater on a non-emergency call, they are making that officer now a shift supervisor. He doesn’t want that option. Say something goes horribly wrong with that call and gets us in trouble, he as the Chief can say this is what happened, this is the liability and discipline the officer himself; then the policy says he is a supervisor and a supervisor should be acting with a little more authority, have more knowledge than average officer; it is putting emphasis on someone who is not a supervisor. It is not necessary; there is no reason to do that and that is exactly what it is doing. He also reviewed self-dispatching comments and gave examples of what they do on a regular basis. He noted they don’t have the man power to do those specific types of things reference in the agreement. The average tenior at Edgewater is two years and ours is 16 years for the Town and you are asking our officers to go to them and listen to them; they are only a two-year officer with little experience. It’s a lot of words that unnecessarily cover what they already do. We don’t do mutual aid agreements, in the metro area they don’t do IGAs. It’s a waste.

Malarky stated that Mark was correct. This draft was prepared; it was not presented to the police department before we presented to you. He and Mark did have a brief conversation about this in 2014, about the idea of an IGA between Mountain View and Edgewater, and he said he didn’t like it. He noted Mark was correct there is a state statute that talks about mutual aid, and it is generally for temporary assistance to another department for large scale emergency events as stated in Section 1A, that first page. It’s for very serious emergencies like riots; it also addresses firefighters for huge fires; that’s the purpose of the statute and it leaves a lot of holes in the general day-to-day practices of police departments that we think that this agreement fills. It addresses liabilities and responsibilities. Emergency mutual aid like he said is large scale events. It would not include some of the routine calls the police department handles. The concept of self-dispatching…they hear calls for service and rather than being requested, they just show up on scene. They think it is important for the town to make clear who is responsible, who is liable for what. We’re not trying to interfere with Chief Toth and his department’s ability to assist Edgewater and vice versa. The idea is that we all understand that if an officer from Edgewater is requested to come up here then they are subject to the direction of the town’s police department here because it’s your jurisdiction, and vice versa. He understood the concern with a newer officer in Edgewater and a more experienced officer here going there but ultimately it is their jurisdiction; they have the right to control how their police practices are done down there; that’s the idea behind this agreement. In terms of request and approval, there are three subsections and we are on page two, section two. He wanted to clarify what these say. For emergency mutual aid, that is the large scale emergencies like if there is a riot that does require communication between the Chiefs of Police and if they were not available then next in command and henceforth, down the line. Chief Toth will still retain the ability to approve or disapprove emergency mutual aid. He thought that type of situation would not happen often but if it did, Chief Toth still has the authority to say to Edgewater they didn’t need the emergency mutual aid. With respect to non-emergency mutual aid, the idea here is the shift supervisor of either party may request from the other party non-emergency mutual aid from the shift supervisor of the other party. This agreement doesn’t turn officers into shift officers, if a shift officer is not available, it goes to the next highest ranking person and that’s in the paragraph.

Discussion continued on: clear language in the agreement; liability issues; intent of the agreement; Edgewater board approved it; protecting the town; the Town’s insurance company, CIRSA, along with the attorney approved of agreement; how it fits with what’s happening around the country; provisions in state law for mutual aid; importance of outlining liabilities and clarification of officers’ responsibilities; understanding obligations and responsibilities moving forward; consideration of other municipalities; common agreement in Colorado; community safety and town liability; not a multi-community agreement; table the agreement.

Reid suggested and recommended the Mayor and Chief go meet with Edgewater’s mayor, police chief, and manager to ask questions about the generation of this request.

Kiddie said he would agree to a meeting and having clarification would be good. We can table it until they have that conversation.

Lilliston stated that she was in favor of this with the liability addressed and our insurance recommending it. She saw validity in it and there are some that find it favorable, and asked they be aware there are some who feel it is valid.

Reid noted this type of conversation is critical and we need clear boundaries and agreements to define those boundaries. The world has changed for police departments and entities as well.

Malarky stated it was important enough to discuss this though the chief did not approve of it. The status quo is in effect.

It was suggested to table this item to provide Mayor Kiddie, Chief Toth, and Chuck Reid more time to communicate with Edgewater, and possibly include the attorneys.

Councilmember Dosh motioned to table Resolution No. 2015-06-08B, to allow the mayors of Mountain View and Edgewater, the police chiefs, and city managers, and possibly the attorneys, time to discuss it. Councilmember Maurath seconded and it was approved unanimously by roll call vote of council members present.

SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 2015-05-11, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 5 OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING MUNICIPAL COURT PROCEDURES

Kiddie introduced the agenda item. He noted there was an amendment to this.

Malarky stated he sent everyone an email. He had a chance to reconsider this ordinance and what he is asking for is an amendment removing Subsection B as it is duplicative, excess drafting. Subsection A covers the issue. To clarify the ordinance, make note of the change.

Councilmember Lilliston motioned to allow the second reading with the amendment allowed striking Subsection B of Ordinance No. 2015-05-11. Councilmember Maurath seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

ORDINANCE NO. 2015-06-08, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 14 OF CHAPTER 8 OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE TO ELIMINATE IMPRISONMENT AS A POSSIBLE PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS OF CERTAIN TRAFFIC INFRACTIONS

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

Malarky stated this ordinance was brought to council last month and he had some last minute comments received from the municipal court judge. It was designed to clarify penalties for traffic infractions, to remove jail time for stop sign violations. When he originally drafted the ordinance he identified three major offenses that other clients used to keep jail time as a possible penalty. He did get comments from the chief and the judge. They had some concerns and wanted it expanded somewhat. There were a few violations in there and he read them to council. The fine schedule will stay the same.

Toth noted that the first draft had the incorrect fine schedule.

Malarky noted that Mark pointed out, in the most recent draft, he was looking at the older version of the ordinance that they had on their server, and this is part of what Sarah and I have been trying to do to clarify our mutual record keeping and it was incorrect; now it is up-to-date.

Councilmember Maurath motioned to accept Ordinance No. 2015-06-08 with the change of the addition of Section C, Section 8-14-10, Penalties. Councilmember Lilliston seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

COMMITTEE REPORTS/STAFF UPDATES AND/OR REPORTS

Kiddie introduced the agenda item.

  • Economic Development/Chuck Reid

Reid had no updates.

  • Finance Committee / Lisa Maurath and Dodie Dosh

Maurath stated they were busy and distributed a report. They had a meeting with Roni to get a better understanding of the recommendations that were sent to the Town Council and Mayor, in the letter dated April 28, 2015. Recommendations include outsource payroll, accounts payable, and we wanted to get a better understanding why they felt that was needed. Roni’s experience is in non-profit in large organizations with high level of work but low dollars and she does not government accounting experience. She stated that she will not do day-to-day accounting, such as bill paying, sewer bills and payroll. She will only do the financial reporting and taxes. She did state she has a background in streamlining processes but does not have any formal training. When asked about outsourcing, she did state that outsourcing payroll was recommended. At the time of their meeting she had no longer recommended outsourcing accounts payables as she felt Sarah was handling that well. She would still recommend outsourcing payroll. QuickBooks is not capable of doing 941 taxes so it must be done manually. Police department time is difficult and time consuming, and taxes are not being paid on time. She implemented a user friendly excel form that would be used for payroll for the police department and it simplifies it.

Maurath stated the first recommendation for council to consider would be to hire a temporary part-time accountant/bookkeeper, whatever is appropriate. She distributed a job description for review and explained that their vision for this position would be four hours a day via morning/afternoon, whatever fits the needs of the town; this position would be handling in house accounting functions, payables, receivables, sewer bills, setting up VIN inspections, payroll, and manage the window. They would prepare reports for our accounting firm, support the town council and the Finance Committee. They would like a highly qualified trained individual, with experience, that could develop policies and procedures and once that was completed the processes could be handed back to Sarah, and then it would be consistent, in writing.

The next recommendation would be for the town to place a RFP for a new accounting firm. In the interim, we could ask Eileen as she knows our accounting business and prior to her leaving CRS, she expressed her willingness to assist. We would like to bring in a QuickBooks professional, a consultant to determine if this is the system that we need, if we need to upgrade, get a new system, or what we need. Also, they recommended bringing in a process improvement professional trained in that methodology to thoroughly review the court processes, to recommend the changes, to improve the process flow that could cut down time being taken now and creating the maximum amount of overtime. Upon approval of those recommendations, we would like to authorize them to write the procedures to meet those recommendations. They could in turn be handed to the court clerk for improvement in the process and work flow thus reducing the overtime.

There are some minor process changes we discussed. There were issues with the payroll taxes and that they were not paid on time, resulting in penalties. The reason being Linda had them set up to be paid on a quarterly basis because of the volume of our taxes happened to be below the benchmark. The Finance Committee recommended they move to paying per payroll period. With the chief using the payroll form she created it will help with payroll processing and streamline that process more.

Councilmember Hancock asked if Maurath would send an email copy of the report to review.

Councilmember Lilliston asked what else would be important to address, a priority.

Discussion continued on: holding invoice for CRS; $155 charges per hour; finding accounting firm to meet needs; the audit; asking Eileen for assistance; CRS only prepares work for audit; questionable charges not agreed to; CRS agreement clause to renew; pricing schedule; April invoice breakdown; part time assistance; temporary service average rates; and general accounting principles (GAP).

Malarky stated the idea the Finance Committee is recommending is to find temporary help, like a contract, or a temp agency, and not actually hire an employee of the town.

Maurath stated for right now, they are recommending an interim for six months, do a review and see where Sarah is at with the work load and then re-evaluate if we need to hire someone permanent to get through this period of adjustment.

Reid thanked the Finance Committee for putting their energy and time into their recommendations. One thing that he wanted to discuss was the governmental accounting preferred, it is not negotiable it needs to be someone that knows it. When he first started working with Mountain View, it was a concern then and has been an issue for quite some time and not sure why it continues. Outsource or internal. Financials should be seen and have not been seen in months. He suggested they review at a special meeting or in a workshop environment. The accounting piece has an immediate need and he said he would be available for budget meeting.

Maurath stated that we need our financials. We need to make changes. We do not realistically know where we are with our budget.

Kiddie stated we have audit preparation.

Maurath noted we were getting information until something personal happened. Prior to that there were no issues. Do the daily work, window, temporarily to set something in place that we don’t have. We need someone, temporarily, to put procedures in place. We are doing bad habits. We need someone to do audit preparation. She has zero confidence in CRS. There were no financials since Eileen has left. She can assist us through the audit process.

Toth noted there was a reliability issue. She did good work but reliability was a concern and this was before anything personal happened.

Kiddie asked council to refer to the CIRSA report. Discussion continued: financial controls and data security with one year to implement; one person takes in payments/monies with another staff member doing the deposits (Sarah); security and financial controls; a third, full time person; a professional person to work six months; base position on needs; CIRSA compliance; January 1, 2016, deadline.

Reid stated there are many needs in terms of finance and other employee positions and Linda has indicated at wanting to come to work part time. There are immediate needs as well. It doesn’t sound like there is a consensus.

After a vigorous discussion, it was agreed to have the consultant and the town’s attorney write a letter to CRS addressing the town’s concern with CRS’s ability to timely meet its obligations and provision of services.

Councilmember Lilliston moved ask Consultant Reid and Attorney Malarky write a letter to CRS acknowledging the recommendations and addressing the discrepancies in the contract amount and letting them know that we are considering other options with other companies. Councilmember Boone seconded and it was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present.

Planning / TJ Dlubac

Dlubac referred council to his report in the packet and if they had any questions, he would be happy to answer them.

Boone asked about The Sniff Shack’s request for fees to be waived.

Kiddie noted they had not received the variance yet.

Maurath asked if the variance was in line with the added fees due to the plan changes.

Dlubac said to be clear, you are talking about the Sniff Shack. He did a quick analysis of the potential of what it might cost between SAFEBuilt fees that have already been paid, plus his time, and Ryan’s time on it, could potentially be somewhere between $14,000-$16,000. The building permit fee that was already paid was over $12,000 and the revisions for the building permit would fall in the range of $600-$800. It depends how well it comes in. The revisions are an hourly rate once plans are approved and changes are made. That total number does include the variance application fee of $400. It does not include the site plan or some other smaller fees. He tried to round up. Optimistically, it would be a total of $14,500 to $18,000 total. They’ve only paid roughly $12,000.

Reid noted before you issue a final certificate of occupancy you would need to decide. You have time to make that decision. He suggested scheduling it for July 13, 2015, if possible.

Kiddie thanked him for all he has done.

Public Safety / Chief Mark Toth

Chief Toth referred to his report and updated council with the highlights.

Town Attorney’s Report and Update / Ryan Malarky

Malarky stated he has been working on the memo with regard to TABOR election and an election calendar.

COUNCIL MEMBERS’ REPORTS/ITEMS

Kiddie introduced the agenda item. No reports at this time.

MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS

Kiddie stated the Meet and Greet was held and the normal attendees showed up. Kudos received about the street sweeping. Another comment received was about the snow plowing this past year, that it was very good, a better job than in most years. The flower baskets were done and put up. Some graffiti showed up so we need to be more vigilant, one was on the liquor store and Jim’s independent. On Eaton Street we have a dump and we will stay on top of that. They had cars for sale, and another car with a for sale sign on it.

MEETING ADJOURNED

Councilmember Hancock motioned to adjourn and seconded by Councilmember Lilliston. It was passed by unanimous roll call vote of council members present. Meeting adjourned at 10:58PM

 

ATTEST:

______________________________
Sarah A. Albright, CMC
Interim Town Clerk

TOWN OF MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNCIL

______________________________________

Jeff Kiddie
Mayor