ALP 5

ALPOM &R Issociation
November 12012 Board Meeting Minutes
(11/20/12— raft_v2)
atte I pted and if the City cannot annex the Lake Nighthorse area in order to provide law enforcement,
the City should not be involved in the recreation at the lake.
Liz T for requested a sample of an Annexation Agreement that narrowly defines the project specific
resol tions.
JasodJohn asked if there is a time horizon for the annexation. David Smith stated the term would be
fore *r unless the area was de- annexed. Jason further asked about the consultation process the BOR
folio s; Jason pointed out that the review process will take more time and member entities may
deve p more questions as the process evolves.
Rand Kirkpatrick reiterated his concerns about adding another layer of bureaucracy and that this
proje in t may be subject to the whims of a special interest group. The SJWC will be meeting with the
BOR November 14 and he will address his considerable concerns in that meeting.
Cath Metz acknowledged the concerns that were voiced in today's meeting and stated the City
manz ges recreation very responsibly and she feels the Association would be very pleased with the
resul s but the City cannot manage the recreation without the support of their police department and
that i equires annexation. Further, Cathy stated we will have to look very closely at the Annexation
Petiti n and the agreement that has been developed between the City of Durango and the Bureau of
Recla ation to address the Association's concerns.
Man iu al Heart discussed the Brunot Agreement which is within the boundaries of Lake Nighthorse and
the i es fr om the inclusion of a possible buffer zone. Celene Hawkins explained the UMUT does not
thinake Nighthorse is a good area for a buffer zone because there are hunting and fishing
nities and it is not a residential area.
Bruce Whitehead, SWCD and ALP District, stated it was the ALP District that helped move the
Recreation Master Plan forward. There were very public meetings and various individual members of
the A sociation were at almost all the meetings, but the Plan is still in the comment process. The City is
here oday to hear the Association's concerns so the Association's interests can be written into the
plan. The intent was to create a good plan that works well for everybody and protects the Association.
Jason John summarized the Association's process schedule; each individual project participant needs to
talk to the BOR to iron -out individual concerns and then meet as an Association to review the issues.
The Association can likely get back to the City again to discuss the Annexation process in January or
February, 2013. Greg Hoch summarized the City's internal process in order for the Annexation process
to oc ur: through this year, the City will work towards amending the Comprehensive Plan Map, second,
the City must receive an Annexation Petition from the BOR in order for the Annexation time frame to
start, and January would be a good time for the Association and the City to resume conversations about
theAlinexation. Greg Hoch further acknowledged that the amending of the map has no regulatory or
other impact to the Association's property. Annexation is a 3 month process if there are no problems
and a itails two meetings; one public hearing in front of the City Planning Commission and one hearing
in fro it of the City Council, but the time frame is dependent on the length of time it takes to negotiate
the A inexation Agreement.
Liz Ta for requested a copy of a Draft Annexation agreement, for discussion purposes, which reflects
the li ited jurisdiction wanted by the City for the Lake Nighthorse area.
Page 4