Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005727minutesMINUTES OF WORK SESSION Date: July 5, 2005 Meeting Start Time: 11:00 am Commissioners present: [] Patti Clapper [] Dorothea Farris [] Jack Hatfield [] Michael Ireland [] Michael Owsley Commissioners not present: [] Patti Clapper [] Dorothea Farris [] Jack Hatfield [] Michael Ireland [] Michael Owsley WORK SESSION ITEM: Stillwater Housing Project Celebration STAFF DIRECTION: The Board made opening comments and thanked various individuals and entities for their contributions to the project's completion. Board members toured the site and visited with citizens and residents. WORK SESSION ITEM: Memos of Interest STAFF DIRECTION: 1. Consumer Protection Funding - informational only, no direction needed. WORK SESSION ITEM: Future Agendas/Agenda Requests/Monthly Calendars STAFF DIRECTION: 1. Joint meeting with Gunnison County BOCC Carbondale Town Hall Aug 23rd. Staff advised the Board that the entire work session will be conducted at the Carbondale Town Hall. 2. July 8 New Century Foundation Transit Workshop - Commissioner Farris will be attending. Commissioner Ireland asked to be registered for the workshop. WORK SESSION ITEM: Board Membership Reports STAFF DIRECTION: 1. RTA - Commissioner Farris stated there is a desire to have a bus only lane out of town. 2. NWCCOG & QQ - Commissioners Clapper and Ireland will be attending the upcoming meeting on July 26th. 3. ACRA - no update. 4. CCI - the Board asked that the Mountain District meeting be noticed on the Board,s agenda. 5. RRR - no update. 6. RWPA - Commissioner Hatfield stated that Kristine Crandall will be representing RWPA for the statewide discussion. WORK SESSION ITEM: Open Discussion STAFF DIRECTION: 1. Rose Ann Sullivan was present to discuss the appointment of a representative per House Bill 1177. The Board directed that Ms. Sullivan's name be submitted. 2. Staff advised the Board that the requested Burlingame buy down information would be provided at the upcoming September joint meeting with the City of Aspen. 3. The Board was advised of road improvement work done by a private citizen on Midnight Mine Road. Staff is investigating. 4. Judge for Bow Wow Meow Ball on July 16th - Commissioner Clapper will serve as a judge. 5. Use of $1000 NWCCOG member service benefit on J. Sue Robertson's housing study project - the Board authorized the use of the $1,000 membership benefit. 1 6. The Board directed the Chair to contact the East of Aspen Caucus chair about advertising fo/other. · businesses. 7. Crystal River Caucus request for a letter to Quest regarding DSL service. The Board directed that the Caucus be informed of the upcoming master plan for the translator sites and for a letter to be sent asking Quest about their plans to provide wireless service in the rural areas of the County. 8. Staff provided a request received from Chip Comins for $5,000 to support the Aspen Renewable Energy Day 2005. The Board asked for further information regarding last year's request and will consider the item at next week's work session. WORK SESSION ITEM: Supplemental Budget Requests - Debe Nelson STAFF DIRECTION: The Board reviewed the list of supplemental requests, heard staff comments and engaged in discussion. The Board directed staff to prepare a resolution approving the following requests: Eden Software/On line approvals Employee Bonuses Employee Holiday Party Records Organization Professional Temporary Help Thomasville Lime Kilm Project Rewrite of ISDS Regulations Court Clerk Office Remodel Courtroom Technology Upgrade Snow Cat Blade Emma Master Plan Water Mapping Project File Scanning Project Land Use Code Training Phase I Community Involvement Plan Community Values Analysis Community Health Needs Assessment $10,000 (technology budget) $ 50,000 $ 21,500 $10,000 $ 25,000 $136,241 (park dedication fee s) $ 35,000 $ 20,000 $ 28,000 (technology budget) $10,000 $ 20,000 $10,000 $ 30,600 $ 9,000 $19,000 $10,000 $ 7,500 COMMISSIONER HATFIELD LEFT THE MEETING AT 4:00PM. WORK SESSION ITEM: RFTA Discussion-Dan Blankenship STAFF DIRECTION: The Board discussed the financial picture for RFTA with Dan Blankenship. Mr. Blankenship indicated that the RFTA budget is in fairly good shape through 2013. Discussion ensued about the need to plan for contingencies. Tom Oken questioned the financial plan in terms of local match for future bus rapid transit (BRT). Mr. Blankenship discussed future federal and state funding issues and the need for reauthorization of TEA-21 before getting clear direction from the RFTA board on the BRT local match. Commissioner Farris stated that New Century Transportation is also working on this issue of the local match. Commissioner Farris raised the issue of a transit only lane in Aspen. Mr. Blankenship indicated that this proposal is different from the 1994 trial. The current proposal comes from the S-curves task force, who felt a bus lane on Main Street during peak hours is essential. The recommendation is to eliminate parking on the south side of the street altogether and creating a new bus lane. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is planning to resurface Main Street in 2006, and that may be the time to implement a new plan. Mr. Blankenship stated that CDOT has been involved in looking at solutions and is okay with the proposal. Discussion ensued. Finally, Mr. Blankenship indicated that the anticipated shortfall is $18-19 million, not the $80 million indicated on report. WOI~K SESSION ITEM: Preparation for Joint Meeting with Basalt & Rural Fire Protection District STAFF DIRECTION: The Board discussed the following items: 1. Impact fee Intergovernmental Agreement. 2. Cooperation with Assessor's office. 3. International Fire Code -Lance Clark indicated that adoption would give the Fire District the ability to set grades and widths for roads and that staffhas concerns. The Board determined that they will listen to the District presentation on this, but allow staff time to look at it further. Discussion ensued. 4. Commissioner Clapper asked to provide an update on the Gateway-Bureau of Land Management fire mitigation plan. The Commissioners concurred. Adjourned at 4:50 p.m. Prepared by: Respectfully submitted: Hilary Fl~her Smith, c%~ty M~gager ~'~'~Silvia Davis, Clerk and Recorder 3 APPROVED JULY 27, 2005 MINUTES. PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING JULY 13~ 2005 NOTE: For all staff memorandums and associated documents, including additional exhibits submitted, refer to the BOCC PACKET FOR JULY 13, 2005 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Ireland called the regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners to order at 2:00 PM. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Mick Ireland, Michael Owsley and Dorothea Farris COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Patti Clapper due to attendance at hearings in Washington D.C. on behalf of the county. Commissioner Hatfield due to a scheduled vacation. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None PROCLAMATIONS: None PUBLIC COMMENT: Ray Poigman appeared before the board to discuss an issue with certain property associated with the Crystal Island Ranch being sold to Sustainable Settings. Mr. Poigman was advised that a response, in writing, would be sent to him shortly. If he has any questions after he received the letter then he could request work session time for discussion purposes. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commissioners gave comments on current local and state issues and sports events. CONSENT ACTIONS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 22 AND WORK SESSION MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2005 - MOTION TO APPROVE - STAFF PERSON: JEANI= ! I E JONES, CLERK TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 Commissioner Farris moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. CONSENT ACTIONS - FIRST READINGS SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 27, 2005: RESOLUTION APPROVING EXPENDITURES OF FUNDS GENERATED THROUGH THE RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM - MuTION TO APPROVE ON FIRST READING AND SET FOR SECOND READING ANu PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 277 2005 FIRST READING - ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLE 10 (AIRPORT REGULATIONS) OF THE PITKIN COUNTY CODE - MOTION TO APPROVE ON FIRST READING AND SET FOR SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 27, 2005 CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS: RESOLUTION PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE 2005 BUDGET FOR CARRYOVER PROJECTS AND OTHER 2005 PROJECTS APPROVED TO DATE - MOTION TO APPROVE ON FIRST READING AND SET FOR SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 27, 2005 - STAFF PERSON: DEBE NELSON~ FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION PROVIDING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE 2005 BUDGET FROM ADDITIONAL REVENUES COLLECTED IN 2004 - MOTION TO APPROVE - STAFF PERSON: DEBE NELSON~ FINANCE DIRECTOR Commissioner Farris moved approval of the items on this portion of the agenda. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS - SECOND READINGS SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION ADOPTING PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN - MOTION TO APPROVE - STAFF PERSON: ELLEN ANDERSON, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR Commissioner Farris moved approval of the Resolution. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 LAND USE CONSENT PUBLIC HEARINGS: BENNETT SPECIAL REVIEW - CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 12, 2005, TO BE CONTINUED TO JULY 27~ 2005 - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JULY 27. 2005 - STAFF PLANNER: SUZANNE WOLFF Vice-Chairperson Mick Ireland opened the public hearing on this application and entertained a motion to continue the matter to July 27, 2005 Commissioner Farris moved to continue the Bennett application to July 27, 2005. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. LAND USE PUBLIC HEARINGS: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ROAD NAME CHANGE OF TRACT 36 TO ROAD TO BEAR RIDGE ROAD - MOTION TO APPROVE AS WRITTEN - STAFF PLANNER: EZRA LOUTHIR Applicant's Representative: Paul Spencer Applicant's Request: A change in the name of Tract 36 Road to Bear Ridge Road Applicants: Homeowners Accessed off of Tract 36 Road Commissioner Ireland opened the public hearing on this application. Commissioner Owsley moved approval of the Resolution as written. Commissioner Farris seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FLYING DOG RANCH SPECIAL REVIEW USE PERMIT EXTENSION - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO AUGUST 10~ 2005 - STAFF PLANNER: SUZANNE WOLFF Applicant: Richard and Lydia Mclntyre; flying Dog West Ranch, Inc. Applicant's Request: A ten-year renewal of the Special Review Use Permit for a reception hall and meeting facility, two guest ranch cabins and an arts and crafts studio. The applicant proposes to continue to operate pursuant to the previously established limitations. Vice-Chairperson Ireland opened the public hearing on this application. Dorothea disclosed that she is an adjacent property owner. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 The applicants said they would have not problem with Commissioner Farris participating in this matter. Suzanne Wolff gave a presentation on this application as summarized in her memorandum to the board contained in the BOCC packet for this meeting. Commissioner Farris noted that the application has the unanimous support of the Crystal River Valley Caucus. Commissioner Farris moved approval of the Resolution as written. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. Vice-Chairperson Ireland closed the public hearing on this application. FIRST READING - ORDINANCE REZONING A PORTION OF THE COMPASS PROPERTY FROM PUBLIC (PUB) TO RS-201PUD - MOTION TO APPROVE ON FIRST READING AND SET FOR SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 107 2005 - STAFF PLANNER: SUZANNE WOLFF FIRST READING - RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL TO COMPASS FOR LIFELONG LEARNING FOR THE COMPASS AND ASPEN COMMUNITY SCHOOL PUB (PUBLIC) MASTER PLAN AMENDMENTS; AND SPECIAL REVIEW, 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION AND GMQS EXEMPTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE - STAFF PLANNER: SUZANNE WOLFF Applicant: Richard and Lydia Mclntyre; Flying Dog West Ranch, Inc. Applicant's Request: Amendment to the 1995 Master Plan to allow an expansion of the educational facilities on the COMPASS property, which includes the following: Rebuild the Aspen Community School Building · Refurbish the gymnasium · Enlarge the Early Childhood Center · Allow up to 2,500 square feet for future unspecified accessory educational space Suzanne Wolff gave a presentation on this application as summarized in her memorandum to the Board contained in the BOCC packet for this meeting. Commissioner Ireland questioned if the commitments from the previous approval had been met by the applicant? BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 Ms. Wolff responded that none of the previous commitments had been made. Commissioner Ireland said that a plan needs to be in place for fulfillment of the previous promises and a benefit in hand or at least collectable before he can approve this application, regardless of the outcome of today's approval. Jim Curtis stated that they are not expecting a vote on this matter tonight. He explained that the applicants need time to work with the neighborhood on the issue of the road and the driveway. He then proceeded to give an overview of their operation as outlined in their application contained in the BOCC packet for this meeting. Mr. Curtis said relative to Mick's issue they acknowledge the commitments from 1995. He explained that the goal of the proposal is to achieve financial stability for the K-8 Woody Creek School, which was founded in 1970. He explained that the school is part of the Aspen School District and although it receives money from the state, there is an operating shortfall of about $300,000 a year. He explained that the shortfall is primarily because state funding is allocated on a per student basis and the school has a Iow student/teacher ratio. The shortfall has historically been made up by fundraising, grants and grant from George Stranahan, who was one of the school's founders who gifted the school 200 acres in 1980. He said the school wants to become financially independent of Mr. Stranahan and the subdivision proposal would help achieve that independence in establishing an endowment that would likely generate about $150,000 a year. He explained that the rest of the shortfall would continue to come from fundraising and grants. Commissioner Ireland said he would only approve the project if its developers could somehow guarantee these improvements get carried out. He said he thinks the community should get what it was promised, regardless of the outcome of today's application. He said he could not vote for this without that commitment being made. He then moved to continue the application until August 10, 2005 pending the applicant providing adequate security, to the satisfaction of the county attorney for prior commitments and opportunity for them to work out the road and driveway issue. Chelsea Congnon, President of Compass, thanked the board for hearing their application. She assured the commissioners that the officers are taking the past commitments very seriously and they thought that one way to more forward in fulfilling those commitments, was by way of this application. Commissioner Farris seconded the motion made by Commissioner Ireland. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfleld not present. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 5 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 RESOLUTION GRANTING AN APPEAL BY NANCY AND ANDREW SHAPIRO OF A HEARING OFFICER DETERMINATION RELATED TO THE BARN~' I I FAMILY TRUST~ LOT 10~ ASPEN OAKS SUBDIVISION - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO AUGUST 10~ 2005 - STAFF PLANNER: LANCE CLARKE, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR Applicant: Nancy and Andrew Shapiro Applicant's Request: Appeal of Hearing Officer's Determination of the Barnett Subdivision John Lassalette, Attorney for the appellants, Nancy and Andrew Shapiro, said he has a video tape, which he would like to introduce into the record and requested that he be able to show it and enter it into the record for this appeal. Ted Gardenswartz, representing the Bametts, argued that the appeal should be an appeal on the record and the record is what was presented to the hearing officer when he made his decision that is being appealed. He said he thinks it is inappropriate to introduce new evidence at this juncture. A copy of the complete record associated with this development application is attached to the end of the BOCC packet for this meeting, under additional exhibits. John Ely, County Attorney, said the standards for an appeal are less than fully described in the code. He said the board has dealt with the dilemma in the past and has gone a couple of different directions. The board has in the past, expanded the record to allow the parties to introduce new information and the board in the past, depending upon the item in front of it on an appeal, have limited it to the record. He said he thinks that that Board needs to make that decision up front. It was the consensus of commission members that Mr. Lassalette could proceed with a video presentation showing the topography of the subject property, the adjoining properties and the common area. At the close of the video presentation he has argued that above Aspen Oak Drive the property is pristine and undisturbed and below it is extensive existing disturbance. Above the road will require driveway cuts and fills on 15-30 degree slopes - below has an existing driveway without a cut or fill on its entire length. Additionally, the existing driveway, since it serves another property, will not go away. So the area would end up with two roads rather then one. Another aspect is that essentially it would be going from building in an existing moderate fire hazard and moving to a severe fire hazard in violation of the code. Instead of clustering to benefit there would be extensive habitat destroyed in violation of the code. He said the lot slope of the entire area, above the road, is between 15 and 45%. Below the road the slope is between 0 and 15%. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 6 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 Mr. Gardenswartz said the only objection to the proposed building envelope has been voiced by the Shapiros that there are no other objections by any other neighbors or by anyone else in the subdivision, and the county has not appealed the decision by James R. True the hearing officer. He said with respect to the building envelope being moved to the common area, according to the covenants, there is to be no development in the common area. And in fact, the Shapiros were involved in a lawsuit with the Barnetts in which the Bametts were sued for expanding their septic location in the common area and the Shapiros signed off on an agreement acknowledging that there could be no development and here they are saying you should develop in the common area. He said the original application for this property shows the proposed development envelope avoids slopes exceeding 30%, wildlife issues are addressed, wildfire issues are addressed and there are letters and expert reports in the application. Additionally, Jim True conducted a site visit with members of the staff, the Shapiros, representatives of the Barnetts and with other neighbors. After the site visit, the hearing was held by Mr. True and he granted 1041 Hazard and Ridgeline review approval. He sited the administrative procedure act, which says a party who desires to reverse or modify a decision of a hearing officer shall file certain portions of the record, shall do certain things, and then have the burden of showing why the decision of the hearing officer is not supported, which is a requirement that the agency (such as the BOCC) to discover a clear error by the hearing officer. He said Mr. True's findings were based upon all the evidence, which was presented over a period of time. With respect to moving the building envelope into the common area, he said that parcel, since 1972, was deemed to be common area, when the subdivision was created and everybody has the right to use that property. When Mr. True made his determination he didn't say there couldn't be development down there because of the common area, but rather his findings were that the proposed development area is in a severe hazard wildfire/wildlife area, but the severe hazard of wildlife and wildfire can be mitigated. He said it is important to note that severe hazard/wildfire exists on the lower portion as well and the fire marshal says that the parcel has easy access. With respect to the wildlife hazard, he said Mr. True's finding said the approved site was preferable from a wildlife perspective because there are houses on both sides of the Barnetts and disturbance by other houses. He referred to a referral comment by the Division of Wildlife, which says placement of the new home on the mountain side shrub hillside above the existing residence should not cause significant additional impacts to wildlife. With respect to the slope issue, the application proposes to avoid slopes exceeding 30 percent so there aren't any slope issues. With respect to the scenic issues, he said the existing homes on both sides are oriented off toward the lower area of the meadow. So building up above would preserve those scenic views and vistas. Mr. Lassalette explained that there was a comment that the Shapiros were actively pursuing litigation against Ms. Barnett and that is simply not true, but rather, they were brought in as third-party defendants. They were dragged in by BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 7 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 six people who did want to correct the fact that there was septic, which had been built, without approval, from any of the homeowners within the subdivision and it was on the common area. With regard to the homeowners association, it did not sue anybody, but rather, six individual people who were in the subdivision presented that lawsuit. With respect to the wildlife issue, he said if you read the entire letter, it shows that each habitat has its own merits. With regard to the wildfire issue that area can be mitigated, but the code says you are not suppose to go jumping into severe when you have moderate available. He said the other aspect to this is that in the site visits, Mr. True never went below the road, he never looked below the road, and he never did any site review of the 3.3 acres below the road. The only thing he looked at was the 1.7 acres above the road. Additionally, he referred to the applicant's copy of a site plan, which reflects that they are avoiding 30% slopes. He indicated where that would leave the building envelope and he said he does not think they are proposing to build on either site. Francis Krizmanich, land use planner for the Barnetts, proceeded to give an overview of their site plan and the reasons for placing the home site in it's approved location. With respect to wildfire, he said their fire expert, Art Hoaglund, looked at both sides of the road and determined that they were about the same. He said he thinks they met all of the code criteria in fact, when all the issues are put together, Jim True agreed with them that they had the best house site. Nancy Shapiro voiced her objection to the home being located on the approved lot. A copy of her written comments associated with this matter is attached to he end of the packet for this meeting, under additional exhibits. Ms. Shapiro said she attended the site visit. She said Mr. True was only there for about one hour, and when she asked him if he would kindly walk down to the area where Mrs. Barnett's house is, he said no that he was only here to view the proposed submission (proposed lot) that he was not here to view the entire parcel. So at that point, she felt that his visit was flawed. She said she is not here to oppose the size of the house, she is saying please put it on the better spot where it is already disturbed. She said they were on Sally Barnett's side when she was in litigation over putting her septic system in the commons area and they are not opposed to her getting the 15,000 square foot permit, but would like it located in the right spot. Mr. Shapiro voiced opposition to the proposed building envelope. He said they would be willing to swap some land or whatever to preserve that property for the future. He urged that the lower part of the property be considered for the building envelope. Lenny Oates said the property has been sold and no one has ever discussed building a 15,000 square foot house so he doesn't think this is an appropriate item for this appeal. Secondly, he said Sally can't build in the common area and BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 there is no place else for her to build below the road. Additionally, this hearing is designated as an appeal process not to discuss an exchange of properties with the Shapiros. A neighbor of Ms. Barnett's commented that the only possible place that Ms. Barnett can build is where she is proposing. If she builds on a small part of the common area she would be impacting wildlife, view plains, etc. Sally Barnett commented that when she and her husband bought their home they intended to live there the rest of their lives unfortunately, her husband succumbed from cancer. She said she complied with all the requirements for developing her upper property and she felt that she tried to do everything honestly and above board. She said she has this beautiful natural place to build a house, which has two houses right on either side of it, roads top and bottom, and houses up above it. She explained that the Shapiros house happens to be very close to the property line and is oriented toward her property instead of oriented down the hill and looking out to the open space as all of the other houses in the subdivision are. However, she is sure that something very beautiful, tucked in against hill with trees, is going to put in that place. Mr. Shapiro said that Ms. Barnett has been painted into a corner with covenants, which were approved in 1972. But if the county allows itself to be painted into a corner, with this process, then he thinks it would be setting a very dangerous covenant. Commissioner Ireland said this is going to be a difficult decision but the applicant's attorneys gave a good presentation on behalf of their client. He said he would also like to thank the neighbors for being courteous to each other during their presentations. He explained that at this point, the board will be taking this matter under advisement until the meeting after next, due to Commissioner Farris not being in town for the next meeting. He said the door is never closed to some sort of resolution proposed and developed by the adversarial parties and brought forward to the board. He encouraged both parties to try to arrive at a solution because that solution would probably make them much happier than the solution that the board might arrive at because it would be their solution and be more creative than anything the board can do because all it can do is yes or no decisions not say swap properties or move roads. He said at this point the public hearing is closed. Commissioner Farris moved to continue this matter to August 10, 2005. Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with three yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Farris moved to convene into executive session for the purpose of conferring with counsel on the Grace Church and Smuggler Mountain matters, pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402 4b. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 9 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005 Commissioner Owsley seconded the motion. Motion passed with four yea votes. Commissioners Clapper and Hatfield not present. Jeanette Jones Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners Mick Ireland, Chairman Board of County Commissioners g\bocc\min utes~OO5\min,reg.07132005 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 10 REGULAR MEETING JULY 13, 2005