Council hears midterm update on priorities; staff seeks direction on city charter modernizations and grouping of ballot questions

City staff returned to Fort Collins City Council for a midterm check‑in on adopted council priorities and to seek direction on proposed charter modernizations and how to bundle them for voters.

Staff presented highlights across priorities including housing (first project moving through development review, exploration of a revolving loan fund using capital quarter‑cent revenues), vulnerable populations (immigration legal fund award of $100,000 and eviction and healthy‑homes expansion), economic health (ICED accreditation and international outreach), 15‑minute‑city work (place‑based assessments and coordination with Poudre School District), zero‑waste infrastructure (contract transitions and construction/demolition and organics planning), climate and air quality (an $11 million grant for charging infrastructure and longer‑term funding from a 2050 tax the city estimates will provide roughly $100 million over 27 years), water (one‑water coordination and Halligan permit scheduling), and transportation (active‑modes planning and a transportation optimization study).

Councilmembers asked for clarification on specific items, urged more discussion of how the 2050 tax might be deployed to bridge climate and economic goals, and requested additional attention to single‑use plastics and producer responsibility. Staff said both the plastics/pollution questions and the road to zero‑waste work are scheduled for future council work sessions and memos.

After the priorities update, staff presented options for modernizing the city charter and asked whether council wanted to group changes for the next ballot into topic bundles or limit the number of ballot questions. Staff proposed several groupings: corrections and timing fixes (for example alignment of initiative timelines and recall language with ranked choice voting), alignment of charter language with state law (open meetings/records, executive session bases, vacancy timing and other clarifications), publication requirements (allow website or council‑determined publication rather than mandatory newspaper publication), conflict‑of‑interest and property standards, and a “dead letter” cleanup group.

Council members discussed trade‑offs between putting more items on the ballot vs. voters’ capacity and suggested the following guidance: treat timing and correctness fixes as high priority; include the items that align the charter with state law; consider publication modernization (staff and multiple councilmembers recommended language that allows council to set publication method by ordinance rather than hard‑coding a newspaper requirement); and defer or handle the attendance/vacancy wording through procedural rules where possible (for instance an explicit council action excusing attendance when a meeting is canceled), though several councilmembers said they would prefer charter clarity on the attendance/vacancy language because of the high consequence of a vacancy determination.

On campaign‑finance language, staff presented options to restrict contributions involving “confidential” or “policy‑level” employees and asked whether council favored a limited charter prohibition. Several councilmembers favored a narrowly scoped change to clarify conflicts and limit certain contributions; staff said that definitions for “confidential” and “policy‑level” employees would be added to any draft language.

Staff said they plan to return with draft ordinances on April 1 for first reading and that the timeline still allows additional items to be added if council requests them during March work, but asked council to prioritize which groupings they prefer that staff draft into ballot language for voter consideration.