Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2021-01-12The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high-quality, reliable services for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting. The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK TO BE HELD VIRTUALLY Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. Board Room – 170 MacGregor Avenue Estes Park, CO 80517 The Town Board of Trustees will participate in the meeting remotely due to the Declaration of Emergency signed by Town Administrator Machalek on March 19, 2020 related to COVID-19 and provided for with the adoption of Ordinance 04-20 on March 18, 2020. Procedures for quasi-judicial virtual public hearings are established through Emergency Rule 06-20 signed by Town Administrator Machalek on May 8, 2020 and outlined below. ADVANCED PUBLIC COMMENT Options for the Public to Provide Public Input: 1. By Public Comment Form: Members of the public may provide written public comment on a specific agenda item by completing the Public Comment form found at https://dms.estes.org/forms/TownBoardPublicComment. The form must be submitted by 12:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 12, 2021. All comments will be provided to the Board for consideration during the agenda item and added to the final packet. 2. By Telephone Message: Members of the public may provide public comment or comment on a specific agenda item by calling (970) 577-4777. The calls must be received by 12:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 12, 2021. All calls will be transcribed and provided to the Board for consideration during the agenda item and added to the final packet. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING BOARD MEETING Options for participation in the meeting will be available by call-in telephone option or online via Zoom Webinar which will be moderated by the Town Clerk’s Office. CALL-IN (TELEPHONE OPTION): Dial public participation phone number, 833-548-0276 (toll-free) Enter the Meeting ID: 982 1690 2040 followed by the pound sign (#). The meeting will be available beginning at 6:30 p.m. the day of the meeting. Please call into the meeting prior to 7:00 p.m., if possible. You can also find this information for participating by phone on the website at www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings by clicking on “Virtual Town Board Meeting Participation”. Request to Speak: For public comment, the Mayor will ask attendees to indicate if they would like to speak – phone participants will need to press *9 to “raise hand”. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board. Once you are announced by phone:  State your name and address for the record.  DO NOT watch/stream the meeting at the same time due to streaming delay and possible audio interference. Prepared 12-30-2020 Page 1 NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (ONLINE): Individuals who wish to address the Board via virtual public participation can do so through Zoom Webinar at https://zoom.us/j/98216902040 – Zoom Webinar ID: 982-1690-2040. The Zoom Webinar link and instructions are also available at www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings by clicking on “Virtual Town Board Meeting Participation”. Individuals participating in the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site, and not via the website, due to the streaming delay and possible audio interference. Start Time: The Zoom Webinar will be available beginning at 6:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Participants wanting to ensure their equipment setup is working should join prior to the start of the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Request to Speak: For public comments, the Mayor will ask attendees to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board.  You will experience a short delay prior to re-connecting with the ability to speak.  State your name and address for the record. In order to participate, you must:  Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer. o Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience.  Join the Zoom Webinar. o The link can be found above.  Click “Participate Virtually in the Regular Town Board Meeting of the Board of Trustees”.  DO NOT watch/stream the meeting via the website at the same time due to delays and possible feedback issues. WATCH THE MEETING: The Town Board meetings will be livestreamed at www.estes.org/videos and will be posted within 48 hours of the meeting at the same location. Documents to Share: If individuals wish to present a document or presentation to the Board, material must be emailed by Monday, January 11, 2021 by 8:00 a.m. to the Town Clerk’s office at townclerk@estes.org. Quasi-Judicial Proceedings (Quasi-Judicial items will be marked as such) Written Testimony Must be submitted by mail to Town Clerk, PO Box 1200, Estes Park, CO 80517 or by completing the Public Comment form at https://dms.estes.org/forms/TownBoardPublicComment. Members of the public may provide public comment or comment on a specific agenda item by calling (970) 577-4777. All calls must be received by 8:00 a.m., Monday, January 11, 2021. All comments received will be provided to the Board and included in the final packet material. Oral Testimony To ensure your ability to provide comments during the meeting, you must register by emailing townclerk@estes.org or calling (970) 577-4777 by Monday, January 11, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. During the meeting, any individual who did not register to speak on a quasi-judicial item may join public participation by following either the Call-In or Online option previously mentioned. Individuals who do not register prior to the meeting risk being unable to testify due to administrative/technical difficulty during the meeting. Written presentation materials or exhibits must be delivered to townclerk@estes.org by 8:00 a.m. Monday, January 11, 2021 in order to be presented during the meeting. No other written presentations or exhibits will be accepted during oral testimony by any member of the public. Packet Material The packet material can be accessed through the following link: Town Board Packet or under the Town Board section at www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings or you may request a paper packet by emailing townclerk@estes.org or calling (970) 577-4777. Page 2 AGENDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES – TOWN OF ESTES PARK TO BE HELD VIRTUALLY PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance). AGENDA APPROVAL. PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Bills. 2. Special Town Board Minutes dated December 3, 2020 and Town Board Minutes dated December 8, 2020 and Town Board Study Session Minutes dated December 8, 2020. 3. Parks Advisory Board minutes dated November 19, 2020 (acknowledgement only). 4. Transportation Advisory Board minutes dated November 18, 2020 (acknowledgement only). 5. Resolution 01-21 Public Posting Area Designation. 6. Resolution 02-21 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20 – Establishing 2021 Parking Fees. 7. Resolution 03-21 Approving a Waiver and Release Agreement with the Colorado Economic Development Commission, City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, and Larimer County and the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for Town Board Final Action. 1. ACTION ITEMS: A. ORDINANCE 01-21 AMENDING CHAPTERS 2, 3, 10 AND 13 OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING MINOR ADJUSTMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS. Planner Woeber. Proposed amendment to the Estes Park Development Code to add a "Minor Adjustment" process and other related revisions. ACTION ITEMS: 1. RESOLUTION 04-21 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT TWO WITH SAFEBUILT COLORADO, LLC, FOR RENEWAL OF BUILDING SAFETY SERVICES CONTRACT, 2021. Director Hunt. To renew existing SAFEBuilt contract for Building division staff and services for the 2021 calendar year with no changes in scope and compensation. Prepared 12-30-2020 Page 3 NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 2. APPOINT AUDIT FIRM FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020 WITH FOUR OPTIONAL ANNUAL RENEWALS. Director Hudson. To formally appoint a new audit firm to perform the Town's audit for the year ended December 31, 2020. 3. RESOLUTION 05-21 FOR CDOT INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR MULTIMODAL OPTIONS FUND AND TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM FUNDS FOR FALL RIVER TRAIL. Grant Specialist Crosser. To secure grant funding in excess of $1.4 million for the construction of the Fall River Trail in 2023. 4. REVISE POLICY 671 – TOWN FUNDING OF OUTSIDE ENTITIES. Assistant Town Administrator Damweber. Consider revisions to Policy 671 - Town Funding of Outside Entities. 5. 2021 LINEWORKER PAYSCALE. Director Williamson. To consider a modified 2021 Lineworker payscale to address current recruitment and retention issues. 6. ORDINANCE 02-21 TEMPORARILY EXTEND BUSINESS LICENSE RENEWAL DEADLINE TO JUNE 30, 2021 AND TO WAIVE CERTAIN LIQUOR LICENSE FEES UNTIL DECEMBER 8, 2021. Town Clerk Williamson. Consider extension of the due date for business license fees with the exception of VHRs and waiver of liquor license fees to be in line with State Bulletin 20-27. ADJOURN. Page 4 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 3, 2020 Minutes of a Special meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall and Virtually in said Town of Estes Park on the 3rd day of December, 2020. Present: Wendy Koenig, Mayor Patrick Martchink, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees Carlie Bangs Marie Cenac Barbara MacAlpine Scott Webermeier Cindy Younglund Also Present: Travis Machalek, Town Administrator Jason Damweber, Assistant Town Administrator Dan Kramer, Town Attorney Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary Absent: None Mayor Koenig called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ACTION ITEMS: 1. 2021 VISIT ESTES PARK (VEP) OPERATING PLAN AMENDMENT. Town Administrator Machalek provided an update regarding the VEP Operating Plan, letter from VEP Chair Gibson, and addendum, referred to as Appendix A in the operating plan. Chair Gibson provided background on the Larimer County Commissioners’ request for the addendum to provide analytics on expenses and a letter outlining the CEO recruiting process. The Board discussed the recruitment of CEO, cooperation between the VEP Board and staff on reqruitment and marketing of the position, and providing more information to the public regarding VEP operations. It was moved and seconded (Younglund/Webermeier) to approve the 2021 Visit Estes Park Operating Plan, addendum, and letter, and it passed unanimously. Whereupon Mayor Koenig adjourned the meeting at 12:16 p.m. Wendy Koenig, Mayor Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary DRAFTPage 5 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 8, 2020 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall and Virtually in said Town of Estes Park on the 8th day of December, 2020. Present: Wendy Koenig, Mayor Patrick Martchink, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees Marie Cenac Barbara MacAlpine Scott Webermeier Cindy Younglund Also Present: Travis Machalek, Town Administrator Jason Damweber, Assistant Town Administrator Dan Kramer, Town Attorney Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Absent: Carlie Bangs, Trustee Mayor Koenig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION. Mayor Koenig read a proclamation recognizing Brad Fitch for his years of entertainment as Cowboy Brad. AGENDA APPROVAL. It was moved and seconded (Webermeier/Cenac) to approve the Agenda as presented, and it passed unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Georgia LeBon/Town citizen requested the Board assist the local businesses impacted by COVID-19 and the recent move back to a shutdown of local businesses such as indoor seating at restaurants. She urged for an action plan to assist businesses, form an alliance with other local entities to develop marketing plans, consider a holiday on fees such as business licensing and utilities, and develop a small business relief fund. Donna Carlson/Estes Chamber of Commerce Executive Director thanked the Board for the previous funding to businesses during the first shutdown earlier this year. The shutdown has been burdensome with the rules set by the State recently on the operating guidelines. The Chamber has developed a petition signed by 92 businesses and presented to the State to try to increase the business operating environment. Jenna MacGregor/Town citizen and owner/operator of the Reel Mountain Theater, Park Theater & Cafe, and The Slab and Arcade. She requested assistance from the Town to help businesses suffering during the pandemic, especially those that are not able to operate such as theaters. She stated businesses need help developing creative solutions and a waiver of business license and liquor license fees. She commented businesses would benefit if resources available to businesses were located in one location/website. TRUSTEE COMMENTS. Trustee Younglund commented the Community Family Advisory Board (CFAB) met last week and requested clarification on what the Board would like included in a report on the current childcare situation. She indicated she directed the CFAB to provided details on what COVID has brought to the childcare situation: have we lost providers, gained providers, decreased need with parents at home and schooling children. The CFAB would continue reviewing the needs assessment. DRAFTPage 6 Board of Trustees – December 8, 2020 – Page 2 Trustee Webermeier stated the Local Marketing District/Visit Estes Park Board approved the 2021 Operating Plan which would be submitted to the State. The entities 2021 budget would be approved at their next meeting. A consultant would be engaged to facilitate a national search for a new CEO with Abi Huebner named the interim CEO. The position would be filled sometime during March 2021. Mayor Pro Tem Martchink thanked those providing public comment and for offering recommendations on how to address the issues and concerns raised by the business community. Trustee Cenac commented the Park Advisory Board has been working on a new waterfall within Mrs. Walsh’s Garden. The Board would bring forward a proposal to form an Arts Committee. Mayor Koenig commented the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority agreement to develop projects needs to be extended to move the projects forward. An updated agreement would be forthcoming. Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) would meet to discuss possible relief to the PRPA communities. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. The Estes Valley Resiliency Collaborative, a group administered by the Town and headed by Vanessa Solesbee/Parking and Transit Manager, has met weekly with the EDC and the Chamber to address concerns of the business community. The group recognizes some business categories have seen more impacted than others, and have continued to explore methods to supplement the federal and state relief. The Town would discuss central tools and support for businesses. Administrator Machalek recognized staff which have gone above and beyond this past year during the COVID pandemic and the fire incidences, including Vanessa Solesbee, Jason Damweber, Kate Rusch, Suzanna Simpson, Emily Lizotte, Corey Pass, Eric Rose, Jon Landkamer and the COVID wastewater delivery team. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Bills. 2. Town Board Minutes dated November 24, 2020. 3. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated September 17, 2020 (acknowledgment only). 4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated October 21, 2020 (acknowledgment only). 5. Letter of Support for FEMA Project Scoping Grant Application. 6. Resolution 72-20 Amending the Intergovernmental Agreement with CDOT for Federal Transit Administration CARES Act funding to support 2020 and 2021 Estes Transit Administration and Operating Expenses. 7. Auditor Selection Committee Appointment. 8. Local Marketing District Board Reappointment of Marie Cenac for a term expiring April 26, 2022. It was moved and seconded (Webermeier/Martchink) to approve the Consent Agenda, and it passed unanimously. 2. LIQUOR ITEMS: 1. NEW HOTEL & RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE FILED BY MISE EN PLACE CONSULTING LLC DBA STELLA'S PLACE, 207 PARK LANE, ESTES PARK, CO. Mayor Koenig opened the public hearing. Town Clerk Williamson reviewed the application for the new Hotel and Restaurant liquor license, stating all paperwork and fees have been submitted. Robert and Joanne Corey/owners have completed TIPS training in 2017 with the opening of Seasoned – An American Bistro which is located next to the new establishment. The Mayor closed the public DRAFTPage 7 Board of Trustees – December 8, 2020 – Page 3 hearing. Mayor Koenig closed the public hearing and it was moved and seconded (Cenac/Webermeier) to approve the Hotel & Restaurant Liquor License Application for Mise En Place Consulting LLC dba Stella’s Place, 207 Park Lane, and it passed unanimously. 3. ACTION ITEMS: 1. RESOLUTION 73-20 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS #10. Director Hudson presented the Resolution to amend the 2020 budget to increase the General fund to incorporate the $50,000 grant funds awarded the Town to purchase heaters, fuel for heaters, lighting, canopies, seat warmers, signage etc. to assist local businesses during the winter months impacted by the COVID restrictions. The Community Center fund would be amended to reflect an increase in revenues and transfer of $15,347 to the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District. It was moved and seconded (Webermeier/Younglund) to approve Resolution #73-20 Supplemental Budget Appropriation to the 2020 Budget, and it passed unanimously. 2. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 2021-2025. Director Hudson presented the 2021-2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) outlining projects and funding needs. The approval of the CIP does not provide spending authority or directly allocate any resources to the projects. The document provides guidance to the Board, staff and the citizens on upcoming projects and funding needs. It was moved and seconded (Younglund/Webermeier) to approve the 2021-2025 Capital Improvement Plan, and it passed unanimously. 3. POLICY 227 - WORKFORCE HOUSING GUIDELINES. Assistant Town Administrator Damweber reviewed the policy and stated the proposed policy would provide Workforce Housing guidelines to define workforce housing for the Town’s purposes; articulate the Town’s workforce housing goals; articulate the Town’s role related to workforce housing; and establish a funding mechanism to advance the Town’s workforce housing goals. Bob Leavitt/County resident stated the definition of workforce should remain in the Development Code and not in a separate policy. He stated concern with a disconnect on the AMI requirements in the Development Code of 150% and the proposed policy of 175%. The mention of ADUs in the policy would put the Town Board on the record of supporting such units in the future. Anne Morris/County resident stated concern with the Town Board considering a policy on workforce housing during the ongoing pandemic and recovery from the recent fires. She recommended the policy discussion be delayed until such time the public could participate in the discussion and the AMI formula has been further vetted. Board discussion was heard on issues related to the inclusion of the ADUs in the policy and its impact on further Board discussions or decisions related to the units or workforce housing, the proposed AMI percentage, and the discrepancy between the policy and Development Code. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Webermeier/Martchink) to approve Policy 227 – Workforce Housing Guidelines with alterations to 3.c. fifth bullet to remove everything after the semicolon and to 3.d.ii to add to the end of the first sentence “of budgeted sales tax revenues”, and it passed unanimously. 4. CLOSURE OF TOWN OFFICES ON DECEMBER 31, 2020. Town Administrator Machalek proposed the Board authorize the Town Administrator to close all Town offices on December 31, 2020 to recognize the efforts put forth by the Town employees during the challenging year addressing COVID related impacts. Jenna MacGregor/Town citizen supports an additional day off for staff but would recommend a day other than New Year’s Eve to ensure the public has access to DRAFTPage 8 Board of Trustees – December 8, 2020 – Page 4 staff on that day. It was moved and seconded (Cenac/MacAlpine) to approve the closure of Town offices on December 31, 2020, and it passed unanimously. 5. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF JOURNEY LINEWORKERS. Director Williamson stated the Town has experienced difficulties in recruiting and retaining Lineworkers due in large part to the Town’s pay structure. Superintendent Lockhart reviewed a presentation outlining the difficulties the other Platte River Power Authority communities of Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland have also experienced with recruiting and retaining staff. He noted the larger Rural Electric Authorities and Excel Energy tend to have higher wages and an industry standard pay plan in which each Lineworker makes the same wage regardless of years of experience. In the last ten (10) years the Town has trained 17 apprentices and two (2) remain. The Town has advertised for over a year with few qualified applications received for the Lineworker position. The cost to train an apprentice through the four (4) year process is approximately $88,000. Staff would recommend the Town consider moving to an industry standard pay plan which would pay Lineworkers at a competitive wage at the top of the range after 6 months of earning their Journey Lineworker status rather than the current pay range. Staff would bring forward a new pay range for the Board’s consideration at the January 12, 2021 meeting. 6. REQUEST TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved and seconded (Webermeier/Martchink) to entering into Executive Session for a conference with an attorney for the Board for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions - Section 24-6-402(4}(b}, C.RS. and for the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators - Section 24-6-402(4}(e}, C.RS. – Regarding the Downtown Estes Loop, and it passed unanimously. Mayor Koenig recessed the meeting at 9:32 p.m. The Board entered executive session at 9:45 p.m. and concluded the executive session at 11:05 p.m. Mayor Koenig reconvened the regular meeting at 11:10 p.m. Whereupon Mayor Koenig adjourned the meeting at 11:11 p.m. Wendy Koenig, Mayor Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk DRAFTPage 9 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado December 8, 2020 Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the Board Room and Virtually in said Town of Estes Park on the 8th day of December, 2020. Board: Mayor Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem Martchink, Trustees Bangs, Cenac, MacAlpine, Webermeier, and Younglund Attending: Mayor Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem Martchink, Trustees Cenac MacAlpine, Webermeier, and Younglund Also Attending: Town Administrator Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator Damweber, Town Attorney Kramer and Recording Secretary Disney Absent: Trustee Bangs Mayor Koenig called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. DOWNTOWN ESTES LOOP QUARTERLY UPDATE. Director Muhonen presented the Downtown Estes Loop quarterly update, and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). TAC provided progress updates on Right-of-Way (ROW) acquisitions, the Conditional Letter of Map Revisions, budget, schedule, and the Memorandum of Agreement with Central Federal Lands Highway Division. TAC proposed continuing work on design and ROW acquisition efforts, finalizing hydraulic analysis, and utility relocations through the remainder of 2020, bidding the construction work in the last quarter of 2021. Additionally, Town staff has been evaluating two alternative FEMA grant opportunities to potentially fund Phase 2 improvements as defined in the Downtown Estes Loop environmental assessment. The Board discussed the temporary parking which has taken place in the location of previously acquired ROW acquisitions, the delay on inclusion of TABOR clause, clarification on the CLOMR, changes to the project timeline from original estimates, and the Town’s role and timeline of ROW acquisitions. POLICY 671 – TOWN FUNDING OF OUTSIDE ENTITIES REVISIONS. Assistant Town Administrator Damweber provided background on Policy 671 and the expressed interest of the Town Board in reassessing the eligibility criteria for Town funding of outside entities, specifically regarding Community Initiative Funding. He sought the Board’s input on amending Policy 671 to make other taxing districts and organizations that support taxing districts and organizations which require membership dues ineligible for Community Initiative Funding. The Board discussed differences between taxing districts and organizations that require membership dues, the number of organizations which could be affected by adjusting eligibility, issues with excluding entities based on revenue streams, application eligibility not being a guarantee of funding, organizations which have a direct connection and support of taxing district entities, inability to predict funding needs of taxing districts in the future, communication and feedback with entities which could be affected by changes to eligibility, and ability of entities to request funding during other times of the year for needs which arise. The Board directed staff to bring forward Policy 671 revisions to exclude taxing entities and entities whose sole purpose would be the support of a single taxing district entity. DRAFTPage 10 Town Board Study Session – December 8, 2020 – Page 2 TRUSTEE & ADMINSTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS. Trustee Younglund requested the Board provide further direction to the Community and Family Advisory Board (CFAB). Tt was determined Trustee Younglund and Town Administrator Machalek would confirm CFAB’s questions and will bring back to board if more information is needed. FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS. Town Administrator Machalek requested and it was determined to schedule the Review of Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and Readiness Plan for January 26, 2021 and the Discussion of Commercial Enterprises in Residential Zones be added to approved unscheduled items with a tentative date of January 12, 2021 or early February 2021. There being no further business, Mayor Koenig adjourned the meeting at 6:22 p.m. Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary DRAFTPage 11       Page 12 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 19, 2020 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PARKS ADVISORY BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually in said Town of Estes Park on the 19th day of November, 2020. Committee: Merle Moore, Chair, Rex Poggenpohl Vice Chair, Geoffrey Elliot, Dewain Lockwood, Vicki Papineau, Ron Wilcocks Attending: Merle Moore, Rex Poggenpohl, Geoffrey Elliot, Dewain Lockwood, Vicki Papineau, Kevin McEachern, Greg Muhonen, Megan Van Hoozer Absent: Ron Wilcocks Chair Moore called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment. Chair Moore introduction the PAB’s newly appointed member, Kirby Nelson-Hazelton. She introduced herself and shared her connection to Estes Park and all PAB members introduced themselves. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and seconded (Papineau/Lockwood) to approve the September meeting minutes and all were in favor. MRS. WALSH’S GARDEN COMMITTEE UPDATE Chair Moore shared that at the last meeting of the committee, he received the final Mrs. Walsh’s Garden (MWG) Master Plan from Aloe Terra. The 30% design plans for the restoration of both the waterfall and pond damaged by the 2013 flood. Supervisor Berg will use these design plans in a design/build project. Berg has physical copies of these design plans at the Parks Division office. If want to look at the plans in more detail, please Supervisor Berg. The MWG Master Plan is intended to guide MWG’s development for the next 10 years. The Committee is hoping for the waterfall/pond completion in 2021. The water features include planting pockets within. The RFP will be created soon for the construction of these elements. Muhonen suggested confirming with staff that it is in the existing budget. Staff is able to authorize up to $50K in MWG expenditures. Member Papineau stressed the importance of the liaison role with MWGAC moving forward. Chair Moore has been faithfully serving this need but has announced his resignation from the PAB after the December 2020 meeting. Moore stated he will remain on the Committee so he would be willing to continue bringing updates to the PAB. Poggenpohl made a motion to have Moore be the MWG Committee advisor and consultant to the PAB. Papineau seconded the motion and all were in favor. Member Elliot recommended this agenda item remain at the top to allow Moore to leave after his reports should he choose. The PAB agreed. ESTES PARK WOMEN’S MONUMENT COMMITTEE UPDATE Chair Moore provided an update of the Monument Committee’s Minutes of November 5, 2020 received from Member Wilcocks. Moore stated the Committee is looking for fundraising ideas which will continue at the December 3, 2020 Committee meeting. Once the committee makes final determinations, the recommendation will be passed to the PAB and the PAB will recommend approval to the Town Board. The Town Board has already approved two different sites. One is located at Bond Park and the other near the parking lot at Riverside Drive and Elkhorn Avenue. Page 13 Parks Advisory Board – November 19, 2020 – Page 2 AIPP TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION UPDATE Member Poggenpohl, after checking Arts Master Plans in other communities, provided a 15-20 minute update to the Town Board Trustees in a recent study session. The Trustees were very interested and understood the dilemma of attracting grants and/or donors without the key piece being a formalized Arts Master Plan. The Trustees expressed that they’re in favor of pursuing, but not spending money. It was recommended Poggehpohl speak with universities to see if they have interest in helping create this Master Plan. Town Administrator Machalek and Poggenpohl will send a written request for participation to graduate students. A motion was made and seconded (Poggenpohl/Papineau) to approve Chair Moore sign a letter with Machalek and all were in favor. Poggenpohl discussed establishing a subcommittee to the PAB for art and aesthetic review. Machalek stated he was not in favor of creation of a subcommittee for this purpose. He was, however in favor of the art community in Estes Park participate in decisions relative to art. Prior to forming any type of subcommittee, Machalek requested it be brought back in front of the Town Board sharing why PAB isn’t sufficient to serve in this capacity. Poggenpohl stated that the original concept was to have someone with applicable expertise outline the maintenance plan for all art. At this point maintenance of art is only defined for bronze sculptures. There are a variety of mediums of art with no maintenance plan ever established. Member Wilcocks has expressed he may have opportunity to join with the arts community (in addition to PAB) to get some of the maintenance needs figured out. Moore stated that Wilcocks indicated that he understands the individuals working on that project may very well co-mingle with PAB in an advisory capacity – in its evolution and is wondering if it would need to be an Arts Advisory Board. Trustee Liaison Cenac shared that the direction from the Town Board was that, once justified, present as a sub-advisory committee to the PAB with members of the art community. Poggenpohl stated that he should have something for PAB to review and agree upon within the next couple weeks. He is attempting to get responses for the end of year to get on agenda for the next semester. If the window is missed, there will likely be no assistance from schools until Fall 2021. Moore asked that Poggenpohl put together whitepaper and bring back to PAB in December, for presentation to the Town Board in January 2021. DRAFT PAB POSITION DESCRIPTION Merle introduced a draft PAB Position Description to members for review, suggested changes and approval for future recruitment. After reviewing a motion was made and seconded (Lockwood/Elliot) and all were in favor. PROJECT UPDATES (Public Works Director, Greg Muhonen) Downtown Estes Loop Director Muhonen shared drawings for the Downtown Estes Loop and discussed needed adjustments. An independent peer reviewer was hired and the recommendations are now reflected. Muhonen asked the PAB if they wanted to view the detailed plant listings or if they’re comfortable with the Parks Division making sound decisions. PAB would like an opportunity to review the plans as the project progresses. Muhonen also referenced the roundabout central island, reminding the group of the original plan for a stone wall with “Estes Park” engraved. Muhonen requested a change of the design due to the probability that people would stop and take a picture with that sign as is so frequently done on US 36. Poggenpohl expressed his agreements with the changes. Muhonen shared a conceptual image with the group. Muhonen proceeded to discuss the originally planned enhanced concrete crosswalks. Muhonen will be recommending moving the planned crosswalk on Moraine Ave. further to the North to better accommodate the pedestrians crossing from the West side of Page 14 Parks Advisory Board – November 19, 2020 – Page 3 Moraine Ave. and will save two diagonal parking spaces. He will propose to utilize thermoplastic rather than enhanced concrete except where the Riverwalk crosses roadways. This will assist with cost savings as the project continues to get more expensive. Moore stressed the need for flashing beacons due to the busy area. Muhonen agreed and will look for that in the final plans. Muhonen continued reviewing other modifications to Riverwalk and landscape. He shared that the new bridges will have more capacity but there’s no guarantee it will prevent the Post Office parking lot from flooding at extremely high water. He stated the crosswalk near the Riverside Restroom will be synchronized with the intersection pedestrian crossing to improve traffic flow. CDOT is also pushing back on the decorative concrete in the intersection of Elkhorn Ave. (US-36) and Riverside Dr. The existing proposal shows the decorative concrete in an ‘X’ shape to allow for the Barnes Dance. Muhonen will propose a compromise to have the standard thermoplastic added in that form to show pedestrians they can cross any direction. Due to the work with the new floodplain, a KLOMR will need submitted. It then takes 9- 12 months for approval. Since the project can’t begin until after approval, and all easements are required (30) to be completed. This phase is just beginning so it is anticipated construction will not begin until 2022/2023. Downtown Wayfinding The original conception of this project was to put signs at select Riverwalk locations providing key destinations. The project is now on track to provide parking signage for the paid parking program. This is all that will be done regarding downtown wayfinding in 2021. Paid parking is on track to begin in 2021 pending approval on November 24, 2020 at the Town Board meeting. Beginning in 2022, the Town will continue to work toward a full wayfinding plan which will be brought back to the PAB for review. Elkhorn Lodge Development Muhonen stated all the work related to the Elkhorn Lodge Development is all being done by a private developer, clarifying this is not a Town project. Chair Moore asked if the development plans have finally been approved. Muhonen indicated that the approvals have made it through the Town Board but the developer and Town are still working through final construction plans. There was a requirement to extend their landscape plan and install a new 10’ sidewalk for connectivity. The developer will be adding a crosswalk for pedestrian safety. Their guest traffic will then be able to walk to Mrs. Walsh’s Garden and cross the road safely continuing to the downtown area. Chair Moore asked Muhonen who is responsible for follow-up to new construction landscape plans. He stated that the landscaping at Dollar General is terrible and it appears the landscape contractor messed up. Poggenpohl indicated that no one goes back to check. The development code does not require follow through at that level, but only to confirm the plantings have occurred. He stated the Town needs to be stricter. Poggenpohl suggested meeting with Community Development Director, Randy Hunt. Muhonen shared there is simply a lack of staff to perform this type of post-inspection. OTHER BUSINESS Moore stated that, for the December meeting, the Estes Valley Land Trust (EVLT) plaque inventory will be discussed. He asked members to review the document before the December meeting to discuss what a template may look like. Moore also asked the group to review the AIPP Guidelines and be ready to make any needed updates at the December meeting. Moore shared photos of historic signage purchased by the Estes Park Museum as informational. Page 15 Parks Advisory Board – November 19, 2020 – Page 4 There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded (Poggenpohl/Hazelton) to adjourn the meeting and all were in favor. Chair Moore adjourned the meeting at 9:51 a.m. Megan Van Hoozer, Recording Secretary Page 16 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 18, 2020 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually on the 18th day of November 2020. Committee: Belle Morris, Tom Street, Janice Crow, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton, Gordon Slack, Ron Wilcocks Attending: Belle Morris, Tom Street, Janice Crow, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton, Gordon Slack, Trustee Carlie Bangs, Public Works Director Greg Muhonen, Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee Absent: Ron Wilcocks Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:03 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT No electronic submissions of public comment were received prior to the deadline and no public was in attendance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and seconded (Gamble/Slack) to approve the October meeting minutes and all were in favor. SIDEWALK / TRAIL INVENTORY (Chair, Belle Morris) Chair Morris introduced the concept of defining a separate task force or subcommittee to discuss the specific focus of the data collection of needed work on sidewalks and trails, beginning around the schools. Referencing a plan put together in February regarding trail needs, she stated there is a good start on the downtown trails. Member Moulton created a spreadsheet allowing the documentation and categorization of identified improvement needs. The suggestion is to utilize the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) overlay, starting from the school and establishing a one-mile radius to determine safety. The key is to identify deficient, crumbling, or otherwise degraded areas along the sidewalks and trails; provide associated locations; and identify a ranking each by importance of the areas. Once the one-mile radius is complete, the group will then evaluate the two-mile area, while continuing to repeat the process and establish a basis for potential future SRTS grants, as well as making recommendations to the Town Board. This will also serve issues of connectivity and is in-line with the Estes Valley Master Trails Plan, established as a guiding document. Member Gamble stated that he’d spent some time on the internet after the last TAB meeting and found a tremendous amount of information on SRTS with tons of resources available – guides, checklists for parents/students, etc. to help define safe routes. Gamble suggested not reinventing the wheel and utilizing the established methods provided. He also suggested a small group be defined to view what is readily available and how to make this process more streamlined. Finley suggested, if a small group is created, that the information found be brought back to the TAB for discussion and additional TAB direction. Morris stated she wants to define a formal subcommittee to document infrastructure. With the Brodie Avenue SRTS being the leading need, the champion of the subcommittee would work with Public Works on education and outreach in addition to infrastructure needs. She stated there needs to be a defined order and structure to this initiative. Muhonen said it could also be a potential task force, a subset of TAB with or without public participation. Morris added that the student/staff encouragement and education Page 17 Transportation Advisory Board – November 18, 2020 – Page 2 are a requirement of the SRTS grant. Morris said that one or two TAB members may be able to work alongside Public Works in the Brodie and Graves Avenue areas to see how it works. The findings could then be reported back to the TAB, rather than having subset of existing TAB members. Gamble stated that in his research, a number of communities have utilized consultants to get started. This is a big process and is more of a community undertaking and he understands that Public Works may not have the capacity to champion this focused effort on their own. To do it well, it requires a significant amount of effort. He suggested that the TAB could encourage someone in the community to champion this effort that could be more heavily involved. Member Slack stated that the current Chair to the successor organization for Families for Estes may be willing to take this on as a project and should be contacted. Morris suggested she would step up since the work is in the school area and she has a good grasp of the Graves Ave. project and what TAB is doing. Trustee Liaison Bangs stated that may be a good start as the organization is involved with the education foundation as arm of the school district. Manager Solesbee knows an individual that would like to be more involved in the community as well. The woman has a tremendous amount of experience with SRTS and has the time available. If desired, Solesbee would be happy to connect her with Chair Morris for work on the Graves Ave. project. Chair Morris accepted the offer. Muhonen stated that Grant Specialist Crosser shared that she also has a citizen that would be interested in participating in the process. Morris stated again that she would like to see a task force be formed. The TAB Members that would join the task force are Members Finley, Gamble, Hanick and Chair Morris. Finley stated she’d like to start with looking at the information found by Gamble. Gamble asked members of Public Works if this is something the Town Board would have to approve. Muhonen shared an example of a task force created by one PAB member, Ron Wilcocks, as a subcommittee to the PAB. That subcommittee only had one advisory board member so it was not considered a public meeting for the PAB. It was run entirely by the subcommittee and Wilcocks reports back to the PAB. Either way it is a separate meeting track and generally contains interested citizens from the community. The individuals that will be reviewing the information discovered by Gamble are Moulton, Morris, Hanick, Finley and Gamble. Once a meeting time is identified the Public Works Administrative Assistant will be notified for needed advertisement of the public meeting. PROJECT / ADMINISTRATION UPDATES (Public Works Director Greg Muhonen) Director Muhonen provided updates to the TAB on ongoing work and/or discussions since the last meeting. Downtown Estes Loop: Muhonen shared with the TAB, an updated engineering drawing showing a crossing at Davis Street on Moraine Ave. To add that crossing, it will take two diagonal parking spaces. He suggested recommending a change to that design by moving the crossing to the South and freeing up two parking spaces. He further stated that this change would help those traveling on the West side of the road. Gamble agreed and sees no fatal flaws while servicing the pedestrians better. Members Crow, Finley and Hanick agree. Muhonen will move forward with the recommendation and will confirm with the design team of Central Federal Lands (CFL) about including a rapid flashing beacon at that location. Another comment to the CFL project manager that Muhonen would like to address is the previous discussion about enhanced concrete material. The continued uptick in cost continues to be a threat. Muhonen would like to recommend that rather than use this material in all crosswalks, that they just be used in areas identifying the Riverwalk. The enhanced concrete material is basically just fancier and costs more. He would like to Page 18 Transportation Advisory Board – November 18, 2020 – Page 3 propose using traditional crosswalks for the cost savings. CDOT is pushing back on some other areas of decorative concrete. The change would not propose a safety reduction for pedestrians. The area of pushback is at the intersection of Elkhorn Ave. (US-36) and Riverside Dr. The existing proposal shows the decorative concrete in an ‘X’ shape to allow for the Barnes Dance. Muhonen’s proposal would be to have the standard thermoplastic be added in that form to show pedestrians they can cross any direction. Gamble doesn’t recommend putting up a fight about how the crosswalk is identified in the intersection, as long as it is identified. Morris disagrees and thinks it will pose a safety hazard for Community Service Officers. Muhonen will be offering the thermoplastic crosswalk inlays as a compromise to the decorative concrete. Community Drive Roundabout: Muhonen shared that there will be a meeting tomorrow and that he will share the final design in a public way. He will plan to have special presentation at a future TAB meeting. 3rd Street Traffic Calming: The contractor has come up to Estes Park and performed striping on 3rd St., North Ct. and South Ct. for the new traffic concept in the reclamation neighborhood. PROJECT UPDATES (Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee) Parking: Manager Solesbee shared with the TAB that staff will be presenting a resolution on November 24, 2020 at the Town Board Meeting to establish 2021 parking fees. She thanked the TAB for the letter of support submitted for this item. Solesbee and The Car Park’s General Manager, Matt Eisenberg are already planning for 2021. They’re planning robust outreach and communication efforts with both locals and visitors. If the Town Board approves the resolution, the outreach will start with residential and employer/employee permits. Communication will then be targeted to guests and visitors. The Downtown Wayfinding project will be resuming under Engineering Manager Hook. The initial phase of the project is directed to paid parking. Solesbee would like to come back and share the final designs for the parking signage. She also plans to provide an update on items being discussed with the Police Department. These items are related to parking ordinance updates, code changes, and escalated enforcement if needed. Chair Morris has heard that some communities have provided an option for those individuals with high parking fees. In lieu of payments, they have accepted canned food items or other forms of community service. Solesbee stated she will investigate different options. Solesbee stated that there will be no graduated fine structure due to lack of effectiveness per research found. Chair Morris asked if, along Graves Ave. for example, construction vehicles are permitted to park on the side of the road. She asked what the Town has in place so they can’t just park their vehicles and equipment along the road. Solesbee stated she will be visiting with the Police Department next month and this goes into a larger conversation about on-street parking and how to better manage those areas. Transit: Solesbee reported that there is a lot going on in the Transit world. The winter pilot service begins today. She thanked those that helped get the word out. A map will be going on the website to show what the new service will offer. Solesbee has received lots of positive feedback but looks forward to seeing what ridership is like. Solesbee is submitting two award projects related to the electric trolley. Both awards are very competitive but worth our time. She invited the TAB, if so inclined, to provide a letter of support as part of the nominations. Would like TAB’s permission to have Belle write a letter. The TAB was supportive of this letter being written. Page 19 Transportation Advisory Board – November 18, 2020 – Page 4 The Town Board approved the contract for the Town’s 2nd electric trolley last week. The new trolley should be delivered by May 2021 and will be coming from the same vendor. Other big project is possible because of a bus facility grant from CDOT. The project is likely to get kicked off in the spring and will be managed by the Town’s Facilities Manager. Completion is anticipated to be in the Fall of 2021. The Shuttle Committee will be meeting in early December. Solesbee will update the TAB and the next regularly scheduled TAB meeting. Member Moulton shared information received regarding the winter pilot program schedule. The primary comment was that it is too bad the pilot is not scheduled to run early in the morning. Solesbee shared that one reason for the schedule is that she had worked with school officials on when students may need access. Another reason is that the electric aspect of the trolley may operate better, in the winter, in the afternoon and would reduce the potential for cancellation during the colder weather. The Electric Vehicle (EV) Plan will be ready and delivered to by the end of November. Once the documents is nearly finalized, she will share it with the TAB, post it on the Town website, and share with stakeholder groups to gather feedback throughout December. The project manager, Sarah, will come to December meeting. At the end of January the plan will be presented at the Town Board Study Session, with hopes to finalize the plan at the February 8, 2021 Town Board Meeting. OTHER BUSINESS (Chair, Belle Morris) There being no further business, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 1:27 p.m. Megan Van Hoozer, Recording Secretary Page 20 RESOLUTION 01-21 PUBLIC POSTING AREA DESIGNATION WHEREAS, Section 26-6-402(2)(c) of the “Colorado Sunshine Act of 1972” as amended, requires a municipality to designate a public place to post notices of its meetings; and WHEREAS, House Bill 19-1087 amended Section 26-6-402(2)(c) to transition from posting physical notices of public meetings in physical locations to posting notices on a website, social media account, or other official online presence; and WHEREAS, the Town designates www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings of the Town’s website as the public place for Posting Notices of Town Meetings through this Resolution 01-21; and WHEREAS, admittance to Town Hall remains limited due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, in the event of an internet outage, the Town designates the main entrance to Town Hall as the Public Place for Posting Notices of Town Meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: That the page www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings of the Town’s website is hereby designated as the Public Place for Posting Notices of Town Meetings. In the event the Town is unable to post a notice online in exigent or emergency circumstances such as a power outage or an interruption in internet service that prevents the public from accessing the notice online, notices may be posted at the main entrance of Town Hall, located at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado. DATED this day of , 2021. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney REVISED 01-08-2021 Page 21       Page 22 PUBLIC WORKS Memo To: Honorable Mayor Wendy Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Vanessa Solesbee, CAPP, Parking & Transit Manager Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Resolution 02-21 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20 Establishing 2021 Parking Fees PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Adoption of Resolution 02-21 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20. Present Situation: The Town Board unanimously approved Resolution 71-20 Establishing 2021 Parking Fees at their regular meeting on November 24, 2020. During this meeting, Public Works staff were asked to clarify/confirm the following: 1. The total number of spaces reserved without fee for persons with disabilities (Resolution Item #4); and 2. The increases made to the total number of spaces reserved for civil access to the Post Office, Town Hall and Library (Resolution Item #5) were reflected in the overall totals represented in the totals for all parking areas (Resolution Item #3). Staff did not have the information needed to confirm the numbers during the meeting, so the Resolution was passed as presented and staff indicated that they would follow up after confirming the two items in question. Public Works staff have determined that the following minor updates to the adopted Resolution need to be made: 1. Resolution Item #4: Increase the total number of spaces reserved without fee for persons with disabilities from 27 to 28. 2. Resolution Item #3: • Decrease the total number of seasonal paid parking stalls from 703 to 682. • Decrease the number of seasonal paid parking stalls in the Town Hall parking area from 240 to 224. Page 23 • Decrease the number of seasonal paid parking stalls in the Post Office from 91 to 86. While these changes do not change the intent of Resolution 71-20, Public Works staff thought it important to follow up with the Town Board and amend Resolution 71-20 so that it accurately reflects what will be implemented in the field in summer 2021. Proposal: Public Works staff recommend approval of Resolution 02-21 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20. Advantages: • This resolution provides for continued transparent communication with the Town Board and community regarding the plan to resume implementation of seasonal paid parking in 2021. Disadvantages: • No disadvantages identified for amending a resolution to reflect the most accurate and up to date information that staff has available. Action Recommended: PW staff recommends the Town Board adopt Resolution 02-21 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20. Finance/Resource Impact: Resuming implementation of seasonal paid parking in 2021 will require a future budget supplement to cover a one-time capital investment of $127,000, $373,719 in annual operating funds, and $48,000 in annual management fees totaling $548,719 in new program-related costs for 2021. These additional implementation costs are projected to be fully offset/covered by new parking revenue (gross revenue estimated at $792,000), with an estimated net revenue of $243,481. The expense and revenue projections have been updated to reflect the resolution updates outlined in this memo and are based on a conservative 55% average occupancy. Both revenue estimates and cost projections were prepared by the Town’s professional parking operator, The Car Park, and have been vetted by Public Works staff. The Car Park’s proposed 2021 budget to implement seasonal paid parking is available upon request. Level of Public Interest While Staff generally expects a high level of public interest in any activity related to the implementation of seasonal paid parking, interest in this minor amendment is low. Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of Resolution 02-21. Attachments: 1. Resolution 02-20 Correcting Clerical Errors in Resolution 71-20. 2. Resolution 71-20 Establishing 2021 Parking Fees Page 24 RESOLUTION 02-21 CORRECTING CLERICAL ERRORS IN RESOLUTION 71-20 WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on November 24, 2020 adopted Resolution 71-20 Setting Paid Parking Fees For 2021, Establishing Parking Permit Fees, and Adopting Parking Permit Rules and Regulations; and WHEREAS, Resolution 71-20 contained clerical errors to be corrected herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1: Section 3 of Resolution 71-20 is amended by the addition of underlined material and the deletion of stricken material, to read as follows: Daily parking fees shall be collected for 682703 parking stalls (312% of 2,174 total stalls available system-wide and 678% of the 1,022 stalls located in the downtown core) in eight public parking lots as follows: the Town Hall parking lot (22440 of 281 stalls), East Riverside parking lot (41 of 44 stalls), Riverside parking lot (91 of 94 stalls), Wiest parking lot (132 of 141 stalls), Post Office parking lot (8691 of 99 stalls), Tregent parking lot (16 of 17 stalls), Virginia parking lot (19 of 20 stalls) and Bond Park parking areas (73 of 76 stalls). The Parking & Transit Manager shall determine which specific stalls within these lots shall be designated as paid parking stalls, consistent with these totals, and shall ensure that they are conspicuously so designated. Section 2: Section 4 of Resolution 71-20 is amended by the addition of underlined material and the deletion of stricken material, to read as follows: Daily parking fees shall not apply to the 287 stalls marked for disabled persons in these parking lots: Town Hall (10 stalls), Post Office (4 stalls), Bond Park (3 stalls), Tregent (1 stall), Wiest (4 stalls), Riverside (2 stalls), Virginia (1 stall) and E. Riverside (3 stalls). Section 3: The Board repeals all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this resolution, but only to the extent of such inconsistency. DATED this day of , 2021. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 25 TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney Page 26 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29       Page 30 Town Attorney’s Office Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees From: Dan Kramer, Town Attorney Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Resolution 03-21 Approving a Waiver and Release Agreement with the Colorado Economic Development Commission, City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Larimer County, and the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Approve an agreement the Colorado Attorney General’s Office has identified as necessary in order to restructure state financing for the Stanley Film Center. Present Situation: In 2015, the Colorado Economic Development Commission approved state funding under the Regional Tourism Act for a package of development projects in northern Colorado. One of these projects is the Stanley Film Center, a proposed auditorium and related attractions on the Stanley campus. The Stanley’s share of the approved funding is capped at about $46 million. The Stanley has requested an extension of its deadline to commence substantial work on the project, an extension of the financing term from 30 to 40 years, and the ability to shift the financing entity for the Film Center project from the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority to another body. The State is willing to accommodate these requests, but is first requiring the Town and the other local governments involved to agree not to sue the State regarding the approval. The Town’s role in these affairs was as the applicant for the funding under the Regional Tourism Act. The Town does not manage the money and is not accountable for the project. Proposal: Approve the Waiver and Release Agreement as drafted by the State. Page 31 Advantages: Continued potential for a significant state-funded economic development project in the Town. Disadvantages: Forgo the opportunity to challenge the state approval in court. However, the Town would be supporting the approval. Action Recommended: Approve the agreement. Finance/Resource Impact: No direct impact to Town finances, but indirect positive impact to the Town’s economy and tax revenue estimated in the many millions of dollars over many years. Level of Public Interest The Stanley Film Center is probably of high interest, but this procedural step is probably of low interest. Sample Motion: I move for the approval of Resolution 03-21. Attachments: 1. Resolution 03-21 Approving a Waiver and Release Agreement with the Colorado Economic Development Commission, City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Larimer County, and the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority 2. Waiver and Release Agreement 3. Exhibit A to Agreement: Resolution No. 4 of the Colorado Economic Development Commission (can be linked) 4. Exhibit B to Agreement: Motion for Consideration by the Colorado Economic Development Commission Page 32 RESOLUTION 03-21 APPROVING A WAIVER AND RELEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE COLORADO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, CITY OF LOVELAND, TOWN OF WINDSOR, LARIMER COUNTY, AND THE NORTHERN COLORADO REGIONAL TOURISM AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to enter a waiver and release agreement referenced in the title of this resolution for the purpose of structuring Regional Tourism Act funding for the Stanley Film Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board approves, and authorizes the Mayor to sign, the waiver and release agreement referenced in the title of this resolution in substantially the form now before the Board. DATED this day of , 2021. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney ATTACHMENT 1 Page 33 Page 1 of 12 WAIVER AND RELEASE AGREEMENT This Waiver and Release Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into between the State of Colorado, acting by and through the Colorado Economic Development Commission Commission”), the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County (collectively, the “Local Governments”), and the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority (“NCRTA”). Throughout this Agreement, the Commission, Local Governments, and NCRTA also are referred to collectively as the “Parties,” and individually as a “Party.” RECITALS WHEREAS, pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-3-101, the Commission is an agency of the State of Colorado; WHEREAS, the City of Loveland is a home rule municipality and Colorado municipal corporation and, with respect to the application and award described below, is authorized to act by and through its City Manager; and WHEREAS, the Town of Windsor is a home rule municipality and Colorado municipal corporation and, with respect to the application and award described below, is authorized to act by and through its Mayor; and WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park is a statutory town and Colorado municipal corporation and, with respect to the application and award described below, is authorized to act by and through its Mayor; and WHEREAS, Larimer County is a political subdivision of the State of Colorado and, with respect to the application and award described below, is authorized to act by and through its County Manager; and WHEREAS, NCRTA is a body corporate and politic of the State of Colorado established pursuant to Part 3 of Article 46 of Title 24, C.R.S., and is authorized to act by and through its Board; and WHEREAS, the Commission is responsible for reviewing and approving local government applications for awards of state sales tax increment revenue to support regional tourism projects under the Colorado Regional Tourism Act, §§ 24- 46-301, through 24- 46-310, C.R.S. (2020) RTA” or “Act”); and WHEREAS, by application dated February 17, 2015, the Local Governments, acting by and through their jointly created 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Go NoCO, sought a state sales tax increment revenue award under the Act to support a regional tourism project known as the “Go NoCO Project” (“ Project”), which is comprised of four elements known as the Stanley Film Center, the PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center, the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies, and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park (collectively, the “Project Elements”); and ATTACHMENT 2 Page 34 Page 2 of 12 WHEREAS, after determining that the proposed Project materially met each of the criteria for approval set forth in C.R.S. 24-46-304(3) of the Act, the Commission voted to approve an award of state sales tax increment revenue for the Project on November 12, 2015, and authorized NCRTA to act as the Financing Entity for the Project; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. §§ 24-46-305(3) and (4) of the Act required that, upon approval of an application submitted by a local government pursuant to the Act, the Commission shall adopt a written resolution specifying: (a) the local government that has been approved to undertake a regional tourism project; (b) the area of the regional tourism zone; (c) whether the Commission has authorized the creation of a regional tourism authority; (d) the percentage of state sales tax increment revenue that will be dedicated to the regional tourism project; and (e) any conditions of approval imposed by the Commission and incorporated in writing into the Commission’s resolution of approval; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2015, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 4 governing the award of state sales tax increment revenue to the Project, including a Minimum Element Allocation Percentage dedicated to each Project Element, during the Financing Term of thirty (30) years from November 12, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Parties intend that all capitalized words and terms contained in, but not expressly defined by, this Agreement, including these recitals, shall have the same meanings as those defined by the Act and/or Resolution No. 4, as previously amended by the motion carried by the Commission on August 31, 2020, collectively attached hereto as Exhibit A, and collectively referred to hereinafter as “Resolution No. 4, as previously amended”; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. § 24-46-309(2) of the Act and Resolution No. 4, as previously amended, require substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and the Commission’s conditions of approval for each individual Project Element to commence within five years of November 12, 2015, subject to a one-year extension of the commencement deadline by the Commission upon a showing of good cause for the delay; and WHEREAS, if substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and the Commission’s conditions of approval for each remaining Project Element does not commence by November 12, 2020, then C.R.S. § 24-46-309(2) of the Act and Resolution No. 4, as previously amended, provide that the Commission may revoke or modify its approval of the Financing Entity or the remaining Project Element(s); and WHEREAS, C.R.S. § 24-46-309(2) of the Act requires that, if substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and the Commission’s conditions of approval in Resolution No. 4, as previously amended, for each remaining Project Element does not commence within any one-year extension granted by the Commission, then the Commission shall revoke approval of the Project Element(s); and WHEREAS, in a letter dated August 27, 2020 sent to Office of Economic Development International Trade (“OEDIT”) staff by Martin Lind, the sponsor/developer for the PeliGrande Page 35 Page 3 of 12 Resort & Windsor Conference Center Project Element, notified the Commission that his company would no longer be pursuing development of the Project Element; and WHERAS, neither the Town of Windsor, Mr. Lind, nor the NCRTA submitted a written request to the Commission before November 12, 2020 seeking an extension of the commencement of substantial work deadline and proposing permissible modifications to the PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Project Element for the Commission’s consideration; and WHEREAS, the Commission is inclined to revoke its approval of the PeliGrande Resort Windsor Conference Center Project Element as authorized under C.R.S. § 24-46-309(2) of the Act and Resolution No. 4, as previously amended; and WHEREAS, at the request of the NCRTA and Local Governments, the Commission adopted a motion at its August 31, 2020 meeting modifying the Project by combining the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Project Elements into a single, integrated Project Element known as the “Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort” and making certain amendments to the original Resolution No. 4; and WHEREAS, in a writing dated October 15, 2020 that was submitted to the Commission on behalf of the City of Loveland and the Town of Estes Park and expressly supported by all four Local Governments, the NCRTA requested a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements to November 12, 2021; and WHEREAS, the City of Loveland, Town of Estes Park, and NCRTA also jointly requested that the Commission consider modifying the Project and making certain additional amendments to Resolution No. 4, as previously amended on August 31, 2020, specifically relating to the percentage of state sales tax increment revenue dedicated to the Project, the length of the Financing Term, and several of the existing terms and conditions of approval concerning payment of the total cumulative dollar limit of $86,119, 375.00; and WHEREAS, the Commission is inclined to grant a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements, and to make some, but not all, of the requested modifications referenced in the immediately preceding recital, and anticipates voting on whether to do so at its next regular meeting on January 21, 2021; and WHEREAS, assuming the Commission grants such an extension and approves certain modifications at its January 21, 2021 meeting, the Town of Estes Park has indicated that, after that date but before the November 12, 2021 commencement of substantial work deadline, it may request that the Commission modify its approval of the NCRTA as the Financing Entity for the Stanley Film Center Project Element and instead approve another entity to serve as the Financing Entity for the Stanley Film Center Project Element; and Page 36 Page 4 of 12 WHEREAS, the Commission is inclined to approve such a request by the Town of Estes Park to modify the Financing Entity for the Stanley Film Center Project Element provided that the NCRTA consents in writing to the modification at the time the request is made; and WHEREAS, one or more of the Local Governments and/or the NCRTA may in the future assert administrative, state, and/or federal causes of action, at law or in equity, related to their respective interests under the Act and/or Resolution No. 4, as previously and hereafter amended by adoption of the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, against the State of Colorado, including, without limitation, the Commission, OEDIT, the Colorado Department of Revenue, the Governor and/or his Office, Colorado Risk Management, and all current and former commissioners, employees, officials, agents, and attorneys of each of those entities (collectively referred to hereinafter as, “the State”); and WHEREAS, the Parties wish to avoid the expense and vagaries of litigation and, in exchange for the Commission granting a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements, approving only some requested modifications to the Project, and making certain amendments to Resolution No. 4 that are specifically described in the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, the Local Governments and NCRTA are willing to waive and release all rights, claims, and remedies against the State for any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act , including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of a written amended Resolution No. 4, as previously amended on August 31, 2020 and hereafter amended in conformity with the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B (collectively referred to hereinafter as, “Amended Resolution No. 4”), on the terms set forth in this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and unilateral undertakings, covenants, obligations, promises, and warranties of the Parties, the legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: OBLIGATIONS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND NCRTA RELATING TO THE PROJECT 1. WAIVER. In all respects relating specifically to the State’s actions in granting a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements, approving only some requested modifications to the Project, and making the amendments to Resolution No. 4 set forth in the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, the Local Governments and NCRTA, including the respective officials, employees, successors, agents, and assigns of each, each hereby waives and relinquishes all rights, claims, and remedies, which it has, or may have, at law or in equity, against the State, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, for any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act, including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of Amended Resolution No. 4. Specifically, but not by way of limitation, the Local Governments and NCRTA each waives the right to seek specific performance against the State as a remedy for any of the following claims: Page 37 Page 5 of 12 Any claim under C.R.S. §§ 24-46-301, through -310, as currently enacted or subsequently amended. Any claim arising under any State statute, such as C.R.S. §§ 24-4-101, through -108. Any claim arising under any State rule of civil procedure, such as C.R.C.P. 106. Any claim seeking declaratory, injunctive, or other equitable relief. Any claim in tort, contract, or for violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Any other claim of any type whatsoever, arising out of federal law, the common law of any State, any State statute, any local law, or any administrative procedure or rule. 2. RELEASE. In all respects relating specifically to the State’s actions in granting a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements, approving only some requested modifications to the Project, and making the amendments to Resolution No. 4 set forth in the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, the Local Governments and NCRTA, including the respective officials, employees, successors, agents, and assigns of each, each hereby releases the State from any and all claims, causes of action, liabilities, expenses and/or damages which the Local Governments and NCRTA may have or assert against the State as a result of any acts by the State which occurred before or after the effective date of this Agreement, or omissions by the State to perform acts which should have been performed before or after the effective date of this Agreement, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act, including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of Amended Resolution No. 4. Specifically, but not by way of limitation, the Local Governments and NCRTA each releases the following claims: Any claim under C.R.S. §§ 24-46-301, through -310, as currently enacted or subsequently amended. Any claim arising under any State statute, such as C.R.S. §§ 24-4-101, through -108. Any claim arising under any State rule of civil procedure, such as C.R.C.P. 106. Any claim seeking declaratory, injunctive, or other equitable relief. Any claim in tort, contract, or for violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Any other claim of any type whatsoever, arising out of federal law, the common law of any State, any State statute, any local law, or any administrative procedure or rule. 3. COVENANT NOT TO SUE. In all respects relating specifically to the State’s actions in granting a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Page 38 Page 6 of 12 Center Project Elements, approving only some requested modifications to the Project, and making the amendments to Resolution No. 4 set forth in the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, the Local Governments and NCRTA each further agrees and covenants that it has not and will not sue, or assert any administrative, state, or federal cause of action, at law or in equity, whether before a court of law or an administrative agency, against the State for any claims, causes of action, liabilities, expenses and/or damages arising out of any acts by any of them which occurred before or after the effective date of this Agreement, or omissions by any of the State to perform acts which should have been performed before or after the effective date of this Agreement, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act, including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of Amended Resolution No. 4. 4. SOLE OWNER OF CLAIMS. In all respects relating specifically to the State’s actions in granting a one-year extension of the November 12, 2020 commencement of substantial work deadline for only the Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park & Resort and the Stanley Film Center Project Elements, approving only some requested modifications to the Project, and making the amendments to Resolution No. 4 set forth in the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B, the Local Governments and NCRTA each represents and agrees that it is the sole owner of its respective claims purported to be released hereby, that it has not assigned or transferred any such claim against the State to any third party before the effective date of this Agreement, and that it will not assign or transfer any such claim against the State to any third party after the effective date of this Agreement. The Local Governments and NCRTA each further represents and warrants that no third party is subrogated to its interest in those claims released hereby, including but not limited to insurers, parent companies or subsidiaries subrogated by reason of payment of costs or expenses, or, if any third party has been subrogated to its interest in such claims, the interest of any subrogee has been settled, compromised and extinguished. To the extent permitted by law, the Local Governments and NCRTA each agrees to defend and indemnify the State from such claims released hereby and hold the State harmless against such claims if held by any assignee or subrogee. 5. OPEN RECORDS ACT AND OTHER RELEASES PROVIDED BY LAW. The Local Governments and NCRTA each understands and agrees that upon a valid request made pursuant to applicable open records laws, including, without limitation, the provisions of the Colorado Open Records Act, § 24-72-101, et seq., C.R.S. (2019), as presently enacted or subsequently amended, the State is obligated to provide the requesting person a copy of this Agreement. The Local Governments and NCRTA each agrees that it will not hold the State liable for any public disclosure of this Agreement in compliance with applicable law. 6. ATTEST AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 4. After this Agreement has been fully executed by all Parties, the Commission has approved the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B at its January 21, 2021 meeting, and the Commission has adopted Amended Resolution No. 4 nunc pro tunc at a later meeting, the Local Governments and NCRTA each agree that their respective authorized signatories will execute the “ATTEST AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT” portions of Amended Resolution No. 4 without delay. Page 39 Page 7 of 12 OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO 7. ADOPTION OF AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 4. After this Agreement has been fully executed by all Parties, the Commission will approve the motion attached hereto as Exhibit B at its January 21, 2021 meeting, and adopt Amended Resolution No. 4 nunc pro tunc at a later meeting. GENERAL PROVISIONS 8. NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY. By entering into this Agreement, the Parties do not admit to any impropriety, wrongdoing, or liability of any kind whatsoever, but are entering into this Agreement in compromise of any claims, causes of action, liabilities, expenses and/or damages arising out of any acts which occurred before the effective date of this Agreement, or omissions which should have been performed before the effective date of this Agreement, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act, including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of Amended Resolution No. 4. The Parties agree that this Agreement does not constitute evidence of, or an admission of any liability, omission, or wrongdoing of any kind by the Parties. This Agreement shall not be offered or received into evidence or otherwise filed or lodged in any proceeding against a Party except as may be necessary to prove and enforce its terms. 9. INTEGRATION. The Parties understand, acknowledge and agree that this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties regarding the subject matter and transactions referred to herein. The Parties understand, acknowledge and agree that the terms of this Agreement are contractual in nature and not mere recitals. As such, the Parties understand, acknowledge and agree that this Agreement is fully integrated and supersedes all previous oral or written agreements of the Parties. 10. BINDING EFFECT. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the successors, assigns, and heirs of the Parties. 11. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY RIGHTS. No person or entity not a Party to this Agreement is an intended beneficiary of this Agreement, and no person or entity not a Party to this Agreement shall have any right to enforce any term of this Agreement. 12. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement is entered into in the State of Colorado, and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. 13. HEADINGS. The headings used in this Agreement are for the convenience of the Parties only. As such, these headings shall not have any legal effect whatsoever or, in any other way alter or modify the meaning or interpretation of the substantive terms of this Agreement. 14. ADDITIONAL ASSURANCES. This Agreement is intended to be self-operative. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties agree that, at the reasonable request of the other party, Page 40 Page 8 of 12 they shall execute any further documents or instruments reasonably necessary to effectuate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, including specifically Amended Resolution No. 4. 15. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement is declared unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue to be binding upon the Parties. 16. COSTS. The Parties agree that each Party shall bear its own costs and attorney fees, if any. 17. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS OR BY FACSIMILE. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts or with signatures obtained via facsimile or email transmission, each of which shall have full force and effect upon execution by all Parties to this Agreement. 18. VALIDITY/EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement shall not be deemed valid until it has been signed by the Commission’s Chair at the direction of a majority of a quorum of commissioners. The effective date of this Agreement is the date that it is signed by the Commission’s Chair at the direction of a majority of a quorum of commissioners. 19. WARRANTIES. The Parties expressly warrant that they have carefully and completely read the terms of this Agreement. The Parties expressly warrant that they have had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel before executing this Agreement, that they fully understand the terms of this Agreement, and that they enter into this Agreement knowingly and voluntarily, and without coercion, duress or undue influence. The Parties expressly warrant that their respective signatories each has full authority to act in signing this Agreement. The Parties expressly acknowledge that they believe the terms of this Agreement are appropriate to reach a full and final resolution of this matter. The Parties expressly understand and agree that the signing of this Agreement shall be forever binding, and no rescission, modification or release of the Parties from the terms of this Agreement will be made for mistake or any other reason. The Parties represent that they are legally competent to execute this Agreement and accept full responsibility and assume the risk of any mistake of fact as to any damages, losses, or injuries, whether disclosed or undisclosed, sustained as a result of any act or omission arising out of or relating to the Commission’s interpretation and implementation of the Act, including its powers and duties thereunder, and its later adoption of Amended Resolution No. 4, any claim brought or which could have been brought, or any other matter between the Parties occurring up to the effective date of this Agreement. The Parties further warrant and acknowledge that no promise or inducement has been offered except as set forth herein and that this Agreement was executed by them without reliance upon any statement or representation by the persons or Parties released or their representatives concerning the nature or extent of any damages or any legal liability therefore. The Parties acknowledge that entering into this Agreement is not an admission by any Party of any wrongful or improper action, but rather reflects the Parties’ mutual desire to resolve this matter amicably and without additional expense or litigation. 20. AMENDMENT. This Agreement may not be amended except in a writing setting forth such amendment and executed by all Parties. Page 41 Page 9 of 12 21. ENFORCEABILITY. The Parties expressly acknowledge that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be enforceable in accordance with its terms only in Colorado state courts of competent jurisdiction. Court jurisdiction and venue for any disputes arising out of this Agreement shall exclusively be in the Denver District Court for Colorado’s Second Judicial District. CAUTION: THIS IS A RELEASE. READ BEFORE SIGNING. WHEREFORE, the Parties agree to and do accept the terms of this Agreement. Remainder of page intentionally left blank] Page 42 Page 10 of 12 CITY OF LOVELAND, COLORADO DATE By: Stephen C. Adams, City Manager ATTEST: By: Hannah Hill, Acting City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Moses Garcia, City Attorney TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO DATE By: Wendy Koenig, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ By: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Dan Kramer, Town Attorney Page 43 Page 11 of 12 TOWN OF WINDSOR, COLORADO DATE By: Paul Rennemeyer, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ By: Karen Frawley, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Ian D. McCargar, Town Attorney LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO DATE By: Linda Hoffman, County Manager ATTEST: _______________________ By: Angela Myers, County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: William Ressue, County Attorney Page 44 Page 12 of 12 NORTHERN COLORADO REGIONAL TOURISM AUTHORITY DATE By: John Fogle, Board Chair ATTEST: By: Tiffany Villavicencio, Board Secretary COLORADO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION DATE By: Carrie Schiff, Chair Page 45 TOWN BOARD MEETING January 12, 2021 Consent Item 7. Resolution 03-21 Approving a Waiver and Release Agreement with the Colorado Economic Development Commission, City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, and Larimer County and the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority. Attachment 3 – Exhibit A link Page 46 RESOLUTION NO. 4 RESOLUTION BY THE COLORADO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONCERNING THE REGIONAL TOURISM ACT AWARD TO THE CITY OF LOVELAND, TOWN OF WINDSOR, TOWN OF ESTES PARK, AND LARIMER COUNTY FOR THE “GO NOCO PROJECT” WHEREAS, the Colorado Economic Development Commission (the “Commission”) is charged with the responsibility for the review and approval of local government applications requesting the dedication of new state sales tax revenue to support regional tourism projects pursuant to the Colorado Regional Tourism Act, Part 3 of Article 46, Title 24, C.R.S. (the Act”); and WHEREAS, by application dated February 17, 2015[ (the “Application”), the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County, acting by and through their jointly created 501(c)(3) non-profit, Go NoCO (collectively, the “Applicants”), requested the dedication of such state sales tax revenue to support a regional tourism project generally referred to as the “Go NoCO Project,” and as more specifically described below in this Resolution No. 4; and WHEREAS, the Application materially met each of the following criteria as set forth in C.R.S. § 24-46-304(3) of the Act: (a) the project is of an extraordinary and unique nature and is reasonably anticipated to contribute significantly to economic development and tourism in the state and the communities where the project is located; (b) the project is reasonably anticipated to result in a substantial increase in out-of-state tourism; (c) a significant portion of the sales tax revenue generated by the project is reasonably anticipated to be attributable to transactions with nonresidents of the requested regional tourism zone; and (d) the applicant has provided reliable economic data demonstrating that, in the absence of state sales tax increment revenue, the project is not reasonably anticipated to be developed within the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS, following review by the state’s third party analyst, review of the recommendations provided by the Executive Director the Colorado Economic Development Commission, and after conducting a public hearing as required by the Act, a majority of the Commissioners participating in the review of the Application voted to approve an award of state sales tax increment revenue to the Go NoCO Project on November 12, 2015; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2015, the Commission voted to set the percentage of state sales tax increment revenue dedicated to the Go NoCO Project at a value that, in the best estimation of the Commission, will result in only the net new revenue likely created by the project and related development being dedicated to the financing entity as required by C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(d) of the Act; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. §§ 24-46-305(3 – 4) and 24-46-303(6 – 7) of the Act require the Commission to adopt a resolution specifying: (a) the local government that has been approved to undertake a regional tourism project; (b) the area of the regional tourism zone; (c) whether the Commission has authorized the creation of a regional tourism authority; (d) the total cumulative dollar amount and percentage of state sales tax increment revenue that will be dedicated to the EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT A 1 REGIONAL TOURISM ACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND FINANCING RECOMMENDATION LETTER FROM THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE (“OEDIT”) BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FIONA ARNOLD, TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (“Commission” or “EDC”) December 4, 2015 This letter is a follow-up to my November 9, 2015, letter recommending that the EDC approve the Go NoCO Regional Tourism Act (“RTA”) application subject to certain conditions. As required by C.R.S. § 24-46-305, I am completing my responsibility to recommend “that the Commission approve or deny the application, or approve the application with conditions.” This letter contains additional conditions that I am strongly recommending the EDC apply to the Go NoCO approval to include in the final written resolution and protect the State’s interests. APPLICANT: City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County (collectively operating and referred to as “Go NoCO” or “Applicant”). PROJECT NAME: Go NoCO (“Project”). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Go NoCO Project has four distinct elements intended to create a tourism destination in northern Colorado, as summarized in the table below. Element Name Description Size Cost Target Opening Stanley Film Center Located on the grounds of the Stanley Hotel in the Town of Estes Park, this non-profit dedicated to celebrating the horror film genre will include, as described in the application, a “world class” 500-seat film auditorium, 45- seat VIP theater, 300-seat and 50-seat outdoor amphitheaters, horror film museum and discovery center that will exhibit “crown-jewel” genre artifacts, a film archive (notably the “world’s largest horror film archive”), a green screen and Foley sound stage interactive experience, classroom and seminar space, film production spaces including editing facilities and a sound stage, and retail concessions. 43,350 SF building 9,700 outdoor SF 24.5M 2018 PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Set at an expansive lakefront development in the Town of Windsor, this would be northern Colorado’s only 4-star resort (300 rooms) and conference center (58,500 SF of ballroom/meeting space). It will be adjacent to Pelican Lakes Golf course in Water Valley and near the planned Raindance National Golf course. The PGA Champions tour has pledged to bring an event to Raindance immediately following completion of the golf course if the PeliGrande is built, and a second-in-the-nation destination Boat House Restaurant (similar to the one in Orlando) will be a part of the resort. 309,514 SF building 109.9M 2018 Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies** Located in the City of Loveland, as described in the application, this will be an immersive “first of its kind,” new generation,” family-friendly indoor and outdoor waterpark (75,000 SF indoor/55,000 SF outdoor) and hotel (300 themed guestrooms), along with a family entertainment center and meeting space. 449,495 SF building 138.3M 2018 EXHIBIT A 2 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park** Located in the City of Loveland and adjacent to the proposed indoor waterpark hotel. This would be one of only four whitewater parks of its kind in the U.S. and would include the following features: a design to Olympic standards, 2,200 linear feet pumped water whitewater channel with class 1-6 rapids, adventure tubing, lazy river, plus dry sports amenities such as rock climbing, ropes courses, canyoneering, zip lines, retail concessions, and group event space. 20 Acre whitewater system 34,000 SF of buildings 60.9M 2018 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS ACROSS ALL ELEMENTS $333,763,000 From a water conservation perspective, the Applicant has stated that the developers are designing the Whitewater Park and Waterpark Resort utilizing the most recent advancements in water conservation technology. They're also using low flow valves and shower heads. Based on prior Water Park Resort and Adventure Park experience in the eastern United States, it is estimated that 95 percent of the water provided to these two elements will be reused. I. STATUTORILY REQUIRED TERMS AND CONDITONS A. Appendix 1 at the end of this letter provides a list of terms and conditions that the statute proscribes be determined by the EDC (C.R.S. §§ 24-46-303(3) and 24-46-305(3)(a) to (d)). Where relevant, the Applicant’s request and the Third Party Analyst’s (“TPA”) recommendations are both listed. The final TPA report is provided as Attachment 1 to this letter. B. The TPA and the Applicant have both provided detailed information supporting their respective opinions, in writing and through a thorough public process, as to the total state sales tax incremental revenue that would be generated from the project. The EDC, having approved the project, now has the discretion to determine the appropriate percentage of sales tax revenue and the total cumulative dollar cap of incremental revenue that will be diverted to this Project. C. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-305, “the commission shall not approve any project that, if approved, would likely create a state sales tax revenue dedication of more than fifty million dollars to all regional tourism projects in any given year.” OEDIT staff has reviewed the projected cash flows of all approved RTA projects including Denver and Go NoCO, and even if the Denver and Go NoCO projects both receive their full requested amounts, it is unlikely that all regional tourism projects would collectively receive more than fifty million dollars in state sales tax revenues in any given year. II. RECOMMENDED TERMS, CONDITIONS AND GUARDRAILS A. STANLEY FILM CENTER As I described in my previous recommendation to approve letter, the Stanley Film Center (“SFC”) is a start- up non-profit that will require the development of continuous, ongoing, changing and very high quality content and programming that is not inherent in the physical attributes of the facility in order to draw in net new out of state visitors. Furthermore, because the center does not yet have an endowment, operating funds or own any film archives or “crown jewel artifacts” which are critical to its success, it is important that the EDC develop substantial guardrails and conditions for this element. This will help to ensure the assumed net new tourism benefits to the state are achieved over the anticipated 30-year period. The SFC will submit an annual affirmation to the Commission no later than March 31 of each year that the SFC is being operated in the manner set forth in the approved application, such as: Operating a horror genre museum with rotating and permanent exhibits of “crown jewel artifacts” and interactive film-related experiences; Hosting classes, seminars, and workshops related to film and the horror genre; EXHIBIT A 3 Maintaining the “world’s largest archive of horror films;” and Hosting regular film screenings, festivals, and special events related to the horror genre. At the request of OEDIT or the EDC, the SFC shall provide additional information supporting the affirmation. Before RTA funds or bond proceeds supported by RTA funds (“RTA Funds”) can be used to reimburse Eligible Costs (defined below) for the SFC, apart from debt service and financing costs or minor administrative expenses incurred by the Financing Entity, the following requirements must be met: The non-profit entity that will operate the SFC will be created and the Board of Directors established with at least 9, but no more than 12, voting members. o All but one member must be independent from the Stanley Hotel and Grand Heritage Hotel Group and their employees, owners and family members. o They shall be experienced film school or film industry professionals. o One voting board member shall be appointed by the OEDIT Film Commissioner and one voting Board member shall be appointed by the OEDIT Executive Director. Prior to their finalization, the EDC must review and approve the governing documents of the SFC 501c(3) to ensure they comply with the EDC resolution, the RTA statute, and the information provided by the SFC in the RTA application. The SFC must own the building where the film center will operate. The Stanley Hotel or the entity that owns the Stanley Hotel (referred to as “the Stanley Hotel”) and the SFC must execute a 99 year assignable ground lease to provide the SFC rights to the land where the film center building is situated for $1.00 per year. o This lease may also include access to the outdoor facilities (500-seat outdoor amphitheater and 75-seat outdoor amphitheater) which were included in the SFC application proposal and are part of the SFC operations. o Furthermore, the EDC will have final approval in assigning the lease if the SFC no longer operates the building. o The lease cannot restrict the method or hours of operation of the SFC or patrons ’ access to parking. o Prior to execution, this lease is subject to review and approval by the EDC and the final executed lease must be provided to the EDC. If the ground lease does not include the two outdoor amphitheaters included in the SFC application proposal, the Stanley Hotel must sign a minimum 30-year lease or similar agreement with the SFC, giving the SFC first priority to use these facilities for $1.00 per year with the right to admissions revenue for SFC events held in these facilities. Prior to execution, this lease is subject to review and approval by the EDC and the final executed lease must be provided to the EDC. Based on commitments made by the Applicant during the application process, the Stanley Hotel must sign a long-term lease (at least 10 years) with the SFC that includes the following: o Debt service: The Stanley Hotel will be responsible for servicing private debt incurred to finance the up-front costs of the SFC, thus leaving the SFC with no debt obligation. o Utilities: The Stanley Hotel shall negotiate a payment to the SFC which shall be at least 249,000 per year with a growth factor built in to cover utilities. Note that according to the Applicant’s pro-forma for the SFC, the utilities cost was projected to be $249,000 per year and the administrative and general expenses will be $686,000 per year in 2018. o In turn, the lease may allow the Stanley Hotel to operate and receive revenue from the restaurant and retail concessions and provide catering to the Stanley Film Center. o The lease must also require the Stanley Hotel to provide in-kind maintenance, landscaping and parking for the SFC facilities. EXHIBIT A 4 o Prior to execution, this lease is subject to review and approval by the EDC and the final executed lease must be provided to the EDC. All non-SFC revenue generating activities held at the SFC building, apart from retail concessions, restaurant, food service and catering, require arms length agreements and fair market value payments to the SFC. The Stanley Hotel will maintain the SFC facilities in excellent condition. In additional to providing in-kind ongoing maintenance services to the SFC as described above, the Stanley Hotel will also provide an appropriate contribution each year into a capital maintenance reserve account dedicated to the SFC. This account is intended to fund periodic capital maintenance costs at the SFC. Such amount shall be no less than $200,000 per year with a growth factor built in and is separate from and additional to the lease payment from the Stanley Hotel to the SFC described above. The Applicant’s pro-forma shows capital maintenance reserve costs starting at $226,000 per year and increasing to more than $400,000 per year in 2020. This maintenance contribution must be documented in a written agreement. Prior to execution, this agreement is subject to review and approval by the EDC and the final executed agreement must be provided to the EDC. The Stanley Hotel must sign an agreement to provide in-kind digital marketing and social media services to the SFC. The final executed document must be provided to the EDC. Per commitments made by the Applicant, the Stanley Hotel must relocate existing infrastructure including but not limited to sewer, water, electricity, roads, and sidewalks) needed to allow the construction of the SFC indoor and outdoor facilities. These expenses are not considered Eligible Improvements (defined below) or Eligible Costs (C.R.S. § 24-46-303(4)) for reimbursement from the RTA funds and must be funded by the Stanley Hotel. The independent Board of the SFC must develop a business plan for their archive department to demonstrate how they will create the “largest horror movie archive in the world.” At a minimum , this plan needs to determine how many films the archive must obtain in order to be considered the world’s largest horror film archive, provide a timeline for how long it will take to acquire the these films, and include memorandums of understanding with at least five film organizations, societies, festivals, collectors, studios or similar entities who will provide the SFC access to their collections for making digital archival copies. Examples of targeted organizations include, but are not limited to, the European Federation of Fantastic Film Festivals, the Luxemburg Cinémathèque, the Korean Film Archives, the Latin American Film Market, INCAA (Argentine National Film Board), The Swiss Cinematheque, AGFA (American Genre Film Association), international consultants Annick Mahnert and Tom Davia and others. The SFC must sign a contract or purchase order to acquire or establish a long term lease of at least 10 years for digital conversion and server equipment needed to establish an archive. Such equipment shall be professional and archival grade such as Lasergraphics 5K scanner and an Editshare central server along with an Ensemble Media Server for compression and distribution of film or similar caliber equipment. The servers must contain enough storage capacity to hold the world’s largest film archive. Prior to execution, this agreement is subject to review and approval by the EDC and the final executed document must be provided to the EDC. The Applicant stated that “an endowment fund (to be fund[ed] through philanthropic donations) will also be established to help assist with future archival acquisitions as necessary.” As part of the film archive business plan, the independent Board of the SFC must determine the size of the endowment needed, including the amount needed to begin operations, and provide this to the EDC along with a fundraising timeline and strategy to obtain the archival endowment. The endowment must be kept in a separate account from other SFC endowments, capital and operational funds. The SFC shall annually provide documentation of this endowment to the EDC via bank statements on March 31 for the preceding calendar year. The SFC museum will exhibit “crown jewel artifacts” from the horror film genre including permanent exhibits and some rotating exhibits to stay current with trends in the horror genre and to maximize the entertainment and education value to visitors and participants. The SFC must sign binding agreements EXHIBIT A 5 with the owners of materials for at least 5 different rotating exhibits which will be displayed at the SFC during its first two years of operations. Such exhibits may include Charlie Adlard ’s “Walking Dead” art collection, Clive Barker’s (Seraphim Films) “Clive Barker: Dreams and Nightmares,” Rich Baker’s “Special Effects in the Horror Genre,” a Spectrevision exhibit, Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho and suspense, Kaiju Tsunami or other exhibits of a similar, very high caliber quality and strong level of appeal to genre fans. The executed agreements shall be provided to the EDC. Additionally, the Applicant has stated that “an endowment (to be funded through philanthropic donations) will be established to provide funding for extraordinary exhibits/events and to help ensure the maintenance of ongoing exhibits.” As such, the Applicant must create a strategic exhibit plan. As part of the exhibit plan, the independent Board of the SFC must determine the size of the endowment needed, including the amount needed to begin operations, and provide this to the EDC along with a fundraising timeline and strategy to obtain the exhibit endowment. This endowment must be kept in a separate account from other SFC endowments, capital and operational funds. The SFC shall annually provide documentation of this endowment to the EDC via bank statements on March 31 for the preceding calendar year. The SFC shall pledge in a written document to the EDC to maintain at least 8,000 SF of museum exhibit space that is fully programmed on a continual and ongoing basis and open to visitors. The Applicant has stated that the SFC will require an estimated annual operating budget of $7.35M per year, of which 7% will come from “donations and annual fundraising,” which equals $515,000 dollars per year. In addition to the archive and exhibit endowments required herein and operating and maintenance contributions provided by the Stanley Hotel, the SFC must raise at least $300,000 in philanthropic cash contributions to have on hand for the first year’s operating budget. The Applicant shall provide evidence of this to the EDC via bank statements. The SFC shall sign a binding agreement with an accredited film school or film department in an accredited school in or out of Colorado (known as “Higher Education Partner” or “HEP”) to begin offering master classes, seminars, workshops and other teaching offerings. Such offerings may also include a film school preparatory program, horror literature workshops, film technology education and other related subjects. Such offerings must be contracted to begin within 1 year of the SFC opening. The offerings must include classes which provide transferable credits toward degree programs at institutions of higher education including “Januarymester” and “Maymester” courses. The agreement must divide the responsibilities and revenue streams between the Stanley Film Center and the HEP which is planning the curriculum. This executed agreement shall be provided to the EDC. The TPA that reviewed the Go NoCO application noted that the Stanley Film Center is relying heavily on state funding to cover a large share of total element costs (40%). The TPA recommended that a feasible construction financing [and business] plan” needs to be completed. This plan should consider the potential addition of a philanthropic capital campaign typically associated with non-profit fundraising or other sponsor equity contributions. Such a construction financing and business plan should be created and provided to the EDC. This plan should include and incorporate the archive and exhibit plans listed above. The SFC must have closed on financing and funding for at least 90% of its construction and furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) budget through any combination of RTA funds, a private philanthropical capital campaign and debt payable from the Film Center’s operating results (including any required loan guarantees). The executed financing documents must be provided to the EDC. The Stanley Hotel must sign an agreement with the SFC to provide housing for students taking classes or working at the SFC. Such housing shall be available within 1 year of the SFC opening. The SFC must submit architectural plans and a letter from their architect certifying that they are building the SFC to the required specifications described in the final written resolution and summarized below. The Stanley Hotel, Stanley Film Center and other participating parties must sign an agreement which structures how the Stanley Film Festival and the Stanley Horror Film Awards (a.k.a. “The Stanleys”) will be owned and operated. The Stanley Hotel must sign a lease or similar agreement with the entity EXHIBIT A 6 that runs the Stanley Film Festival to make available Stanley Hotel owned venues and (such as the Concert Hall, MacGregor Ballroom, and Stanley Pavilion auditorium) on its property to maximize visitation and participation in the film festival. In addition to the Stanley Film Festival, the SFC shall program a regular and ongoing series of film screenings of horror and related genre films. These shall include film openings, sneak peeks, previews, and rare and exclusive screenings with bonus programming. The SFC shall submit to the EDC a film programming schedule for the first 6 months of its operations. To the extent the SFC has a funding deficit, I encourage SFC to consider adding a public improvement fee on admissions, food and retail at the center and to hold a capital campaign to help fund operating and/or capital expenses. B. PELIGRANDE The PeliGrande shall have finishes, amenities and service provided to a 4-star resort standard and shall be located on the site in the Water Valley development in Windsor as proposed by the Applicant. Before RTA Funds can be used to reimburse Eligible Costs for the PeliGrande, apart from debt service and financing costs or minor administrative expenses incurred by the Financing Entity, the following requirements must be met: The PeliGrande shall have a minimum 9,000 square foot signature destination The Boathouse Restaurant built into the resort open and operating. The Boathouse Restaurant at the PeliGrande will feature the same amenities and caliber of finishes and food, in a smaller footprint, that are included at the Orlando location as listed below [minimum numerical requirements listed in brackets] o “spectacular nautically-themed rooms,” o “floating artwork: dream boats from the 30’s, 40’s & 50’s, “[5 to 10 boats],” o guided tours aboard an Italian Water Taxi, [at least 1 taxi], and o guided tours on vintage restored original 1960s Amphicars [2 to 4 cars]. At the time The Boathouse Restaurant opens at the PeliGrande, there cannot be more than four The Boathouse Restaurants open in the United States (including the one at the PeliGrande) and there cannot be one within a four hundred mile radius of the PeliGrande. If these requirements are not met, the PeliGrande construction costs will not be eligible for reimbursement with RTA funds. The Raindance Golf Course as designed by Fred Funk, and with all needed facilities and amenities to host a PGA Champions Tour event, shall have closed on final financing and have all needed funds for construction and operation available. The financing documents shall be provided to the EDC for review and confirmation of closing. The PGA must sign a “Definitive Agreement,” as described in the draft “Binding Letter Agreement” submitted as part of the Go NoCO application materials, to host a Champions Tour event at the PeliGrande once a year for at least 10 years. This agreement may allow for the event to be temporarily held at the Pelican Lakes Golf and Country Club while the Raindance club is under construction. Additionally, such agreement must designate the PeliGrande as the official host hotel of the tournament. The PeliGrande developer must submit architectural plans and a letter from the architect certifying that they are building the hotel to the required specifications described in the final written resolution and summarized below. The developer of the PeliGrande must establish a self-imposed public improvement fee (“PIF”) to help finance the development. Based on the data provided by the Applicant, the PIF shall be at least 2% on all on-site food and beverage and retail sales and 7% on all lodging sales. The executed document establishing this PIF must be submitted to the EDC. EXHIBIT A 7 The Town of Windsor must provide an executed binding written document to the EDC that pledges to the financing of this element all of the municipal sales and property taxes generated on-site by the PeliGrande. C. WHITEWATER PARK The Whitewater Park (“WWP”) must be built to Olympic standards with the facilities capable of hosting national and international elite level competitions. The WWP must have at least 2,200 linear feet of pumped whitewater channels with class 1 to 4 rapids. The WWP must have other facilities and amenities as described below. The WWP Park must support whitewater sports such as rafting, kayaking, stand up paddle boarding and river wave surfing. Before RTA Funds can be used to reimburse Eligible Costs for the WWP, apart from debt service and financing costs or minor administrative expenses incurred by the Financing Entity, the following requirements must be met: The Whitewater Park developer must submit architectural and site plans and a letter from their architect certifying that they are building the park to the required specifications described in the final written resolution and summarized below. The developer of the WWP must establish a self-imposed PIF to help finance the development. Based on the data provided by the Applicant, the PIF shall be at least 2% on all on-site food and beverage and retail sales and 7.8% on all admissions and rentals. The executed binding document establishing this PIF must be submitted to the EDC. The City of Loveland must provide an executed binding written document to the EDC that pledges to the financing of this element all of the municipal sales taxes generated on-site by the WWP. D. WATERPARK RESORT This will be an immersive “first of its kind,” “next generation,” branded, family-friendly indoor/outdoor waterpark with substantial differentiation from existing waterpark resort hotel models in that it targets a broader age range from families with young children to older children. Before RTA Funds can be used to reimburse Eligible Costs expense for the Waterpark Resort WPR”), apart from debt service and financing costs or minor administrative expense incurred by the Financing Entity, the following requirements must be met: The WWP with all the amenities and design elements summarized in this document and described in the EDC’s final written resolution shall have closed on final financing and have all needed funds for construction and operation available. This is subject to verification and confirmation by the EDC. The WPR shall be located immediately adjacent to the site where the WWP is being constructed and rights of way must be provided which will allow visitors to walk between the two facilities. The WPR developer must submit architectural plans and a letter from their architect certifying that they are building the park to the required specifications described in the final written resolution and summarized below. The WPR developer must submit a finalized, detailed list of slides, rides and programs that the developers will build at the Waterpark Resort to target older children and which are not included in competing parks that target families with younger children. This list must be reviewed and approved by the EDC and any changes prior to the WPR opening must be approved by the EDC. The developer of the WPR must establish a self-imposed public improvement fee (PIF) to help finance the development. Based on the data provided by the Applicant the PIF shall be at least 2% on all on- EXHIBIT A 8 site food and beverage and retail sales and 5% on all lodging sales. The executed binding document establishing this PIF must be submitted to the EDC. The City of Loveland must provide an executed binding written document to the EDC that pledges to the financing of this element all of the municipal sales and property taxes generated on-site by the WPR. The City of Loveland must also enter into a joint destination marketing agreement with the WPR under which at least one-third of City lodging tax revenues generated on-site at the WPR are provided to the WPR for marketing services. III. ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL AND TAX TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. Go NoCO shall submit a list of businesses in the Regional Tourism Zone to the Department of Revenue DOR”) on or before the date this award becomes effective, and subsequently every month beginning with, and through, the term of the Commission Resolution, including but not limited to: 1) The Colorado Business Account Number and site number; 2) Company name; 3) Trade name or d/b/a; 4) Location address; 5) Start date; 6) Description of whether it is an existing, new, or closed account; 7) Description of whether it is a new location in the zone or moved out of the zone; and 8) Other information required by DOR. B. Before any RTA Funds can be used on any Project Element, per the governance structure discussed in the Go NoCO Application, the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County (collectively operating and referred to as “Go NoCO”) must create a Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority (NCRTA) per the requirements in C.R.S. § 24-46-306 and as further defined in the Commission’s forthcoming written resolution. C. Before any RTA Funds can be used on any Project Element apart from necessary administrative expenses for NCRTA, NCRTA must sign intergovernmental or inter-organizational agreements delineating the relationships and decision-making authority between: NCRTA and the SFC Non-Profit, and the developers of the PeliGrande, WWP and WPR and the Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, City of Loveland and Larimer County. D. The State of Colorado accepts the Applicant’s contention that the four Go NoCO Project Elements Stanley Film Center, PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center, Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies, and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure park) have synergies with each other and that the state has a strong interest in incentivizing the completion of all four Project Elements to maximize the overall beneficial economic impact of the Go NoCO program in Colorado. As such, the NCRTA must allocate a minimum proportion of the RTA funds to each of these Project Elements (“Minimum Element Allocation Percents” or “MEAPs”). The amount of the MEAPs and the rules surrounding them shall be further defined in the written resolution and are intended to be similar to the terms of the EDC’s Resolution Number 3 for the Colorado Springs City for Champions Project with changes as needed based on the specifics of this Project. E. Before any RTA Funds can be used on any Project Element apart from necessary administrative expenses for NCRTA, NCRTA must develop and present to the EDC a detailed timeline of key milestones for development activities and completion dates for all of the Project Elements. EXHIBIT A 9 F. Procurement: The Applicant must follow applicable state, federal and local procurement laws. However, in all circumstances contracts for more than $25,000 must be awarded using RFI/RFQ/RFP processes with bidding information posted on a public website. G. As a condition precedent to paying or reimbursing any entity for any Eligible Costs, the Financing Entity shall obtain relevant certifications from an independent engineer, CPA, and/or Financial Advisor with similar requirements as included in the Colorado Springs RTA written EDC Resolution (attached as Attachment 3). H. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-303(5), the specific authorized Eligible Improvements are listed below: All the following facilities are REQUIRED COMPONENTS and must be included as part of the finished Project. 1) STANLEY FILM CENTER* Required Components: UPPER LEVEL Public lobby and concessions: 5,000 gross square feet 500 seat Auditorium/Theater: 5,000 gross square feet Theater support: 2,000 gross square feet Film Museum and Discovery Center: Minimum 8,000 gross SF Gift shop: 1,000 gross square feet UPPER LEVEL TOTAL: 21,000 gross square feet* LOWER LEVEL Restaurant, lounge and private dining: 5,850 gross square feet Kitchen and support: 2,300 gross square feet Event Center: 4,000 gross square feet Video editing studio: 700 gross square feet Sound editing studio: 500 gross square feet Sound Stage: 3,000 gross square feet Event center support: 300 gross square feet Film archive & Special Events: 1,600 gross square feet Museum storage: 2,300 gross square feet Building support: 1,800 gross square feet LOWER LEVEL TOTAL: 22,350 gross square feet* TOTAL MINIUMUM BUILDING AREA: 43,350 gross square feet* OUTDOOR Outdoor Amphitheatre 1 (500 seat): 8,200 gross square feet Outdoor Amphitheatre 2 (75 seat): 1,500 gross square feet OUTDOOR TOTAL: 9,700 gross square feet* Additional Required Components: Auditorium and Theaters 500-seat auditorium** AV recording and broadcast capabilities Venue for premieres, film festivals and award ceremonies 45-seat VIP Theater/Private Screening Room ** EXHIBIT A 10 500 and 75-seat outdoor amphitheaters** Venues for “Film Under the Stars” includes all necessary film screening equipment such as projection, audio, display. 13,000 SF Film Archive and Discovery Center World’s largest horror film archive and equipment as described earlier in the resolution to make and store digital copies of films Rotating interactive displays and exhibits of original props, international posters, memorabilia, and films Interactive tours, games and experiences Green Screen and Foley Sound Stage Experience – put yourself in a film Creative Production, Learning and Workshop Spaces 3,000 SF sound stage 4,000 SF of classroom, event and workshop space 1,200 SF film and editing suites Discovery Center Support 150 - seat specialty restaurant Lobby and Concessions Stanley Film Center Gift Shop 2) PELIGRANDE RESORT & WINDSOR CONFERENCE CENTER* Required Components: Ballroom #1: 15,000 gross square feet Ballroom #2: 8,000 gross square feet Meeting Rooms: 21,200 gross square feet Board Rooms 800 gross square feet Function Space: 13,500 gross square feet Subtotal Meeting & Function : 58,500 gross square feet TOTAL MINIUMUM HOTEL SPACE 309,514 gross square feet* NOTE before the final EDC written resolution, Go NoCO will need to supply a detailed breakdown of all hotel component square footage. Additional Required Components: 300 resort hotel rooms and suites 2 full-service restaurants (including The Boathouse Restaurant meeting all requirements specified above). The tenant improvements and fixtures and equipment associated with creating The Boathouse Restaurant are not Eligible Improvements. Upscale lounge Luxury spa Fitness center 58,500 SQ of ballroom, meeting & pre-function space Business center Gift shop Retail services EXHIBIT A 11 3) INDOOR WATERPARK RESORT OF THE ROCKIES* Required Components: Floor Below Garage Pool Equipment Room(s): 6,160 gross square feet Ground Floor Linen Storage & Laundry Room: 4,270 gross square feet General Storage: 2,440 gross square feet Employee Break & Restrooms: 2,130 gross square feet Personnel & Administration: 3,360 gross square feet Security Office: 660 gross square feet Receiving Office & Secretary Office: 300 gross square feet Receiving: 1,260 gross square feet HVAC: 870 gross square feet Maintenance: 1,540 gross square feet Restrooms: 2,040 gross square feet Kitchen of Confectionary/Snack Bar: 4,510 gross square feet Circulation: 8,358 gross square feet Fitness Room: 810 gross square feet Party Room: 1,940 gross square feet Waterpark F&B Support: 860 gross square feet Snack Bar: 2,210 gross square feet Family Day Play: 18,910 gross square feet IWP Restroom & Lockers: 2,590 gross square feet Life Guard, Chemical, First Aid: 440 gross square feet Indoor Waterpark: 75,000 gross square feet Total Ground Floor & Below Garage: 140,658 gross square feet* First Floor HVAC Mezzanine: 6,160 gross square feet Kitchen for Family Dining: 4,660 gross square feet Administration & Call Center: 2,910 gross square feet Circulation: 5,231 gross square feet Front Desk: 520 gross square feet Cart Storage & Valet: 880 gross square feet Restrooms: 1,040 gross square feet Confectionary: 1,330 gross square feet Spa: 3,000 gross square feet Lobby, Living Room, Public Space: 13,550 gross square feet Restaurant & Support: 7,400 gross square feet Restrooms: 1,550 gross square feet Coat Room & Pre-function: 3,040 gross square feet Conference Storage: 690 gross square feet Meeting Rooms: 32,060 gross square feet Board Room(s): 2,780 gross square feet EXHIBIT A 12 Hotel Ground Floor: 36,706 gross square feet First Floor: 36,706 gross square feet Second Floor: 36,706 gross square feet Third Floor: 36,706 gross square feet Fourth Floor: 36,706 gross square feet Fifth Floor: 36,706 gross square feet Total First Floor & Hotel 308,837 gross square feet* Total Minimum Gross Building Area 449,495 gross square feet* Additional Required Components: 75,000 SF Minimum Indoor Waterpark 55,000 SF Minimum Outdoor Waterpark 20,000 SF Family Entertainment Center including bowling, indoor miniature golf, laser tag, and video arcade 330 hotel rooms 3,000 SF Spa 250 seat, 7,500 SF restaurant/lounge 40,000 SF Meeting Space 3,000+ SF Retail space 4) U.S. WHITEWATER ADVENTURE PARK* Required Components: 20-acre artificial whitewater river system Zip lines & high ropes course Obstacle courses A canopy tour Climbing wall Children’s play area Team building area Restaurant Retail shops Amphitheater Multi-purpose event space Outdoor structures Since detailed architectural plans have not yet been finalized, a precise square foot calculation for each Element and Component of the Project and the Eligible Improvements within the Project is not available as of this writing. Further investigation of site issues, infrastructure planning, building design, and changes in construction cost are among the many factors that could cause material differences in the gross square footage numbers set forth above. However, the total completed space for each of the four Project Elements and components that include the word “minimum” above may not be less than the minimum gross square feet outlined above. EXHIBIT A 13 IV. SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-305(4), the Commission imposes the following conditions: A. Applicant (in conjunction with its partners) must submit a written plan detailing Project milestones and a graduated plan by March 16, 2016, including but not limited to, the following milestones for which evidence of completion to be submitted to the Commission: 1) Letter of intent from the Applicant and its partners stating plan to move forward with the approved Regional Tourism Project. 2) Detailed financing commitments, including but not limited to, philanthropic gifts, equity investors, debt instruments, local tax increment, and local sales tax. 3) Timeline for necessary land acquisition. 4) Engineering/Architectural plans. 5) Construction permits. 6) Construction timeline. B. The Financing Entity must submit Quarterly Reports detailing the progress on the Project and the Applicant, the Financing Entity, and partners, as needed, must be available to participate in Quarterly Meetings with OEDIT to discuss progress on the Project to begin in the 1st quarter after the Commission’s effective date of approval. C. Twice a year, the Applicant, the Financing Entity, and relevant Project Element partners must participate in meetings with the Commission to discuss progress on the Project to begin in 1st half year after the Commission’s effective date of approval. V. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Shall be included similar to what were included in previous RTA Board Resolutions with additions and changes as needed to accommodate the unique circumstances of this Project. VI. SUBSTANTIAL WORK Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-309, the Commission imposes the following conditions: A. Applicant must commence substantial work on each individual approved element of the Project pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-309(1)-(3) within five years of the date of the approval of the Project by the Commission or the Commission may revoke or modify its approval of that element and reduce the amount of the RTA award by the MEAP associated with that element. VII. FINAL COMPLETION DATE A. Each approved element must be fully completed and placed in service within 10 years of the Commission’s Approval of the RTA Project. If this does not occur the element is subject to revocation or modification which may reduce the amount of the RTA ward by the MEAP associated with that element. EXHIBIT A 14 VIII. AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY A. Pursuant to C.R.S § 24-46-308(1), the Financing Entity shall submit annual reports detailing: 1) the total amount of state sales tax increment revenue that the Regional Tourism Project has collected; 2) how it has been spent; 3) projected revenue for the remainder of the dedication period; 4) a summary of the status of construction of the Eligible Improvements; and 5) other information requested by the EDC or OEDIT. B. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-305(4), annual reports shall include an economic analysis that assesses the actual overall effectiveness of the Regional Tourism Project to date including: 1) the number of net new jobs directly created by the Project in each category as defined by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment and the wages and health benefits for jobs in each category; 2) the market impact; 3) regional and in-state competition; 4) attraction of out-of-state tourists; 5) the fiscal impact to local governments within and adjacent to the Regional Tourism Zone; 6) the return to the state on its investment; 7) information on all tax expenditures for regional tourism economic development during the prior fiscal year; and 8) in the event that the Applicant, Financing Entity or other local entities use property tax revenue to finance any element of the Project, Applicant must present an analysis of the impact to local school districts and the percentage of the total program that the state is required to fund. C. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-46-308(2), annual independent audits of Applicant’s financial status and confirmation that sales tax increment revenue is being used only for Eligible Costs shall be submitted by the Financing Entity. D. Pursuant to C.R.S § 24-46-308(3), if the audit finds that state sales tax increment revenue has been used for unauthorized purposes, the financing entity shall be liable for the repayment of this revenue. There are various ways the repayment may be made. E. Additional terms and conditions should be included similar to what were included in previous RTA Board Resolutions with changes as needed to accommodate the unique circumstances of this Project. EXHIBIT A 15 APPENDIX 1: STATUTORILY REQUIRED TERMS AND CONDITONS. Term Location in Statute Applicant Request TPA Analysis) The local government that has been approved to undertake a regional tourism project” C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(a) City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County The area of the regional tourism zone” C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(b) See Applicant’s Regional Tourism Zone map in Attachment 2 Whether the Commission has authorized the creation of a regional tourism authority” C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(c) The Applicant has requested permission to create the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority to serve as the Financing Entity for the Project The total cumulative dollar amount….of the state sales tax incremental revenue that will be dedicated to the regional tourism project” [i.e. the “cap”] C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(d) Applicant: $86,119,375 TPA: $61,644,489) The total cumulative dollar amount and percentage of state sales tax increment revenue that can be dedicated to the…project shall not exceed the third party analysts calculation...by more than 50%; Except that the commission ..[may exceed] third-party’s calculations by more than fifty percent by a unanimous vote of all members of the commission” C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(d) 92,466,733 The….percentage of the state sales tax incremental revenue that will be dedicated to the regional tourism project” C.R.S. § 24-46-305(3)(d) Applicant: 20.48% TPA: 15.79%) Financing entity [Financing Entity] means the entity designated by the commission in connection with its approval of a regional tourism project to receive and utilize state sales tax increment revenue.” C.R.S. § 24-46-303(6) The Applicant requested that the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority (NCRTA) shall serve as the Financing Entity. Financing Term’ …the aggregate period authorized by the commission…within which the financing entity is authorized to receive and utilize state sales tax increment revenue…” C.R.S. § 24-46-303(7) In line with the Applicant’s request, payments shall occur for 30 years from the effective date of the Commission award ending in 2045. EXHIBIT A 16 Stanley Film Center contribution to dollar cap Applicant: $46,399,582 TPA: $28,504,409) PeliGrande contribution to dollar cap Applicant: $12,991,003 TPA: $12,598,260) Whitewater Park contribution to dollar cap Applicant: $4,706,140 TPA: $3,959,364) Waterpark Resort contribution to dollar cap Applicant: $22,022,650 TPA: $16,582,457) Stanley Film Center contribution to percent Applicant: 15.19% TPA: 9.60%) PeliGrande contribution to percent Applicant: 4.41% TPA: 4.29%) Whitewater Park contribution to percent Applicant: 1.66% TPA: 1.48%) Waterpark Resort contribution to percent Applicant: 7.41% TPA: 5.67%) EXHIBIT A 17 ATTACHMENT 1: FINAL THIRD PARTY ANALYST REPORT EXHIBIT A Revised Final Report Third Party Analyst Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application Prepared for: Colorado Office of State Planning and Budgeting Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. October 30, 2015 EPS #143071 Attachment 1 Table of Contents 1.INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .................................................................. 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 Approach ................................................................................................................. 3 Scope of Work .......................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................ 5 Financial Need ........................................................................................................ 11 2.PROPOSED TOURISM PROJECT ................................................................................. 13 Project Description .................................................................................................. 13 PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center ...................................................... 13 Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies ..................................................................... 20 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park ............................................................................... 25 Stanley Film Center ................................................................................................. 29 Total Visitors and Taxable Sales ................................................................................ 35 Project Phasing ....................................................................................................... 35 Total Cost and RTA Funding Requests ........................................................................ 35 3.PELIGRANDE RESORT ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 38 Net New Visitors ..................................................................................................... 38 Tax Increment Analysis ........................................................................................... 42 4.INDOOR WATERPARK RESORT OF THE ROCKIES ANALYSIS ................................................. 47 Net New Visitors ..................................................................................................... 47 Tax Increment Analysis ........................................................................................... 50 5.U.S. WHITEWATER ADVENTURE PARK ANALYSIS ........................................................... 53 Net New Visitors ..................................................................................................... 53 Tax Increment Analysis ........................................................................................... 55 6.STANLEY FILM CENTER ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 58 Influences on Visitor Forecasts ................................................................................. 58 Third Party Analyst Visitor Forecast ........................................................................... 65 Tax Increment Analysis ........................................................................................... 69 7.FINANCIAL NEED ................................................................................................ 72 Financial Need Criteria ............................................................................................. 72 PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center ...................................................... 73 Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies ..................................................................... 75 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park ............................................................................... 76 Stanley Film Center ................................................................................................. 77 Attachment 1 8.FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS ............................................................................. 79 Construction Employment ........................................................................................ 79 Ongoing Operations Employment .............................................................................. 80 Other Impacts ........................................................................................................ 81 School Impacts ....................................................................................................... 82 Attachment 1 List of Tables Table 1 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Overview ..................................................... 6 Table 2 Comparison of Applicant and TPA Visitor Estimates ............................................... 8 Table 3 Comparison of Applicant and TPA Net New Sales Tax Estimates ............................. 9 Table 4 Comparison of Total Tax Increment for All Projects ............................................. 10 Table 5 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Overview ................................................... 13 Table 6 PeliGrande Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) .................................................. 15 Table 7 PeliGrande Resort Taxable Sales & Eligible Increment Estimates .......................... 17 Table 8 PeliGrande Resort Development Costs .............................................................. 18 Table 9 PeliGrande Resort Funding Sources .................................................................. 19 Table 10 Indoor Waterpark Resort Development Program ................................................ 20 Table 11 Indoor Waterpark Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) ........................................ 21 Table 12 Indoor Waterpark Resort Taxable Sales & Eligible Increment Estimates ................. 22 Table 13 Indoor Waterpark Resort Development Costs ..................................................... 23 Table 14 Indoor Waterpark Resort Funding Sources ......................................................... 24 Table 15 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Visitor Estimates (Applicant) ............................. 25 Table 16 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Taxable Sales and Eligible Increment Estimates ... 26 Table 17 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Development Costs .......................................... 27 Table 18 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Funding Sources .............................................. 28 Table 19 Stanley Hotel Ghost Tour Attendance ................................................................ 29 Table 20 Stanley Film Center Program ........................................................................... 30 Table 21 Stanley Film Center Attendance (Applicant) ....................................................... 31 Table 22 Stanley Film Center Net New Visitor Days (Applicant) ......................................... 32 Table 23 Stanley Film Center Net New Sales Tax (Applicant) ............................................ 33 Table 24 Stanley Film Center Project Cost ...................................................................... 34 Table 25 Stanley Film Center Financing Plan ................................................................... 34 Table 26 Go NoCO Total Visitation (Applicant) ................................................................. 35 Table 27 Go NoCO Project Phasing ................................................................................ 35 Table 28 Go NoCO Project Costs, All Projects .................................................................. 36 Table 29 Go NoCO Total RTA Funding Request ................................................................ 37 Table 30 PeliGrande Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) .................................................. 38 Table 31 Comparable Golf Tournament Attendance ......................................................... 39 Attachment 1 Table 32 PeliGrande Resort Net New Adjustment ............................................................. 40 Table 33 PeliGrande Resort Spending Assumptions .......................................................... 41 Table 34 Base Sales Tax Forecast, 2015-2045 ................................................................ 43 Table 35 PeliGrande Sales Tax Increment Contribution to RTZ .......................................... 45 Table 36 PeliGrande Resort Estimated Net New Sales Tax ................................................ 46 Table 37 Indoor Waterpark Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) ........................................ 47 Table 38 Indoor Waterpark Resort Net New Adjustment ................................................... 48 Table 39 Indoor Waterpark Resort Spending Assumptions ................................................ 49 Table 40 Indoor Waterpark Contribution to RTZ Tax Increment ......................................... 51 Table 41 Indoor Waterpark Net New Sales Tax ............................................................... 52 Table 42 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Visitor Estimates (Applicant) ............................. 53 Table 43 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Spending Assumptions (Applicant) ..................... 54 Table 44 Whitewater Adventure Park Resort Contribution to RTZ Increment ....................... 56 Table 45 U.S Whitewater Adventure Park Net New Sales Tax ............................................ 57 Table 46 Horror Film Market Share of Top 100 Films, 2012-2015 (YTD) ............................. 59 Table 47 Market Share by Film Genre 1995-2015 (YTD) ................................................... 60 Table 48 Cultural Museum and Film Center Facilities ........................................................ 61 Table 49 Adjusted Stanley Film Center Stabilized Attendance and Visitor Days .................... 65 Table 50 Adjusted Stanley Film Center Visitor Forecast .................................................... 67 Table 51 Stanley Film Center Out of State and Net New Visitor Forecast ............................ 68 Table 52 Stanley Film Center Contribution to RTZ Increment ............................................ 70 Table 53 Stanley Film Center Net New Sales Tax ............................................................. 71 Table 54 Summary of Financial Performance by Project ................................................... 74 Table 55 Direct Construction Jobs Impact ....................................................................... 79 Table 56 Direct, Indirect, and Induced Construction Jobs ................................................. 80 Table 57 Ongoing Operations Employment Impacts ......................................................... 80 Table 58 Payroll and Personal Income Tax ...................................................................... 81 Attachment 1 List of Figures Figure 1 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Locations ................................................... 14 Figure 2 Horror Film Releases, 1930-2007 ..................................................................... 58 Figure 3 Estes Park Sales Tax Collections by Month, 2014 ............................................... 64 Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS This report evaluates the revised Application submitted to the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT) by Go NoCO, a private 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation formed by the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County, Colorado for state funding under the Regional Tourism Act. Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) was contracted by the State of Colorado Governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting (OSPB) to serve as the Third Party Analyst (TPA) to provide an independent review of the Project including the required estimates of: The total tax increment expected to be generated within the Regional Tourism Zone (RTZ); The maximum portion of the total RTZ tax increment that the project would be eligible to receive; A determination that the requested RTA funding is needed to enable the project to be feasibly built (financial need); and The fiscal and economic impacts of the project to the State of Colorado. Introduction The Regional Tourism Act (24-46-300 C.R.S.) promotes diversification of the state’s economic base by providing a financing mechanism for attracting, constructing and operating large-scale regional tourism projects that will attract significant investment and revenue from outside the state, as stated in the 2014/15 OEDIT Application Guidelines. Tourism or entertainment facilities include but are not limited to museums, stadiums, arenas, major sports facilities, performing arts theaters, theme or amusement parks, conference centers or resort hotels or other similar venues that draw a significant number of regional, national or international patrons. The Act and Guidelines identify several criteria projects need to meet to be eligible for funding: Projects are of an extraordinary and unique nature, Are anticipated to result in a substantial increase in out-of-state tourism, Generate a significant portion of their sales tax revenue from transactions with nonresidents of the state. An exception to this requirement may apply if a significant portion of the sales tax revenue generated by the project is reasonably anticipated to be attributable to residents of the state but the revenue would otherwise leave the state due to a lack of a similar project or facility in the state, and The local government must provide reliable economic data demonstrating that in the absence of state sales tax increment revenue, the project is not reasonably anticipated to be developed within the foreseeable future. The Economic Development Commission (EDC) can approve up to two projects per year for three years through the RTA and shall not approve any project that would create a state sales tax revenue dedication of more than $50 million to all projects in any given year. Project financing entities for approved projects shall receive a percentage of annual state sales tax increment revenue to a defined maximum dollar total above a baseline revenue amount set by the EDC to be used to finance eligible costs for the project. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Revised Final Report Regional Tourism Zone Section 24-46-303 (11) defines a “Regional Tourism Zone” (RTZ) as: the geographic area defined by the Commission as part of an approved regional tourism project. A regional tourism zone shall not extend into the territorial boundaries of any local government except for the local government that is requesting the designation of the regional tourism zone. A regional tourism zone may be limited to portions of a local government and may include noncontiguous tracts or parcels of property.” An RTZ may be larger than the specific boundaries of a project and may be non-contiguous, but may not extend beyond the jurisdictional boundary of the local government (City or County) requesting RTZ designation. Eligible Tax Increment Under the state statute, there is a distinction between the total tax increment generated within a RTZ and the portion of the increment that is eligible to be dedicated to a project. A project can receive only the portion of the tax increment that represents new revenue to the state, as opposed to new revenue to the RTZ or local jurisdiction. Section 24-46-305 (3)(d) indicates that a project is only eligible to receive the portion of the RTZ tax increment that is “net new” to the state: The percentage of the State sales tax increment revenue that will be dedicated to the regional tourism project. Such percentage shall be set at a value that in the best estimation of the Commission will result in only the net new revenue likely created by the Project and related development being dedicated to the Financing Entity and shall exclude any sales tax revenue the State would likely have received without the Project and development.” The above language requires the TPA to determine how much of the RTZ tax increment is net new to the state, and to exclude from any funding award any sales tax the state would have received without the project. This requires the TPA to exclude any sales tax increment resulting from competition with existing tourism attractions (cannibalization) regardless of whether it occurs in the RTZ or not. Due to cannibalization and competition impacts, a project may generate substantial positive local economic impacts, but have less of a positive impact at the state level due to the redistribution of economic activity within the state. Page 8 of the 2014/15 RTA Application Guidelines provides additional clarification on the determination of net new sales tax revenue. It states that revenue from residents of the zone will be subject to the highest standards of scrutiny”. It also adds direction on the treatment of other revenue growth in the RTZ. Other revenues that will not be available to the project include sales tax from “unrelated new projects in or near the zone”, and “general improvements in economic or demographic conditions or changes in trends”. Indirect and induced economic impacts are therefore not included in the eligible tax increment revenues. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Revised Final Report Approach EPS has estimated the total RTZ tax increment, the portion expected to be net new to the state of Colorado, and the financial need for RTA funding for each proposed Project. The following points on statutory guidance and interpretation were verified with OSPB and OEDIT. Net New Revenue – The role of the TPA is to determine the eligible tax increment revenues over the 30-year period of eligibility. In order for tax increment revenue to be net new to the state, the revenue must be derived from out-of-state visitors who would not otherwise have come to Colorado. It is possible, however, for a project to generate net new revenue by capturing spending from Colorado residents who may have traveled to another state to engage in a recreation or tourism/entertainment activity. Without this demonstration of spending “leakage”, spending from Colorado residents within an RTZ is a redistribution of spending and associated tax revenues that would have occurred elsewhere within the State of Colorado with or without the project. The “net new” tax increment must also take into account competition that the proposed project will create and any resulting “cannibalization” of existing state revenues. Statewide Economic Impacts – There is a distinction between economic activity that is net new to a local jurisdiction and net new to the State of Colorado. It is a reality in economic development that municipalities within the same region or state are often competing for the same economic development opportunities. A gain of economic activity in one community or facility can result in a decline in another community. The net impact to the state in this case is often minimal to zero unless new dollars and new jobs are being imported from outside Colorado. Projects that introduce competition with existing facilities or businesses without bringing in substantial new dollars from outside Colorado, or relocate existing uses, will not result in significant statewide benefits although their local benefit may be significant. Percentage of RTZ Tax Increment – The role of the TPA is also to determine the percentage of state sales tax revenues a project may be eligible to receive in a year. This calculation requires an estimate of the dollar amount of sales tax generated by a project in its RTZ as well as the dollar amount estimated to be net new. Since revenue projections involve inherent uncertainties, the state would be exposing itself to the potential of providing funding in excess of what is generated by a project. A project is only eligible to receive a percentage of the revenue generated in the RTZ which will vary according to the performance and timing of the project. Construction Use Tax – The RTA Legislation does not allow for the inclusion of state construction use tax in the eligible tax increment. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 Revised Final Report Scope of Work The report includes the following chapters following this Introduction and Summary of Findings: Proposed Tourism Project – A summary of the proposed development project, timing, estimated visitation, and available state tax increment revenues as presented in the submitted RTA Application. PeliGrande Resort Analysis - The TPA’s evaluation of the PeliGrande Project element including: total, out of state, and net new visitors and spending; an estimate of the total state sales tax generated by the Project in the RTZ; and the net new state sales tax revenues and percentage of incremental state sales tax revenues that the Project is eligible to receive. Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies Analysis - The TPA’s evaluation of the Indoor Waterpark of the Rockies Project element including: total, out of state, and net new visitors and spending; an estimate of the total state sales tax generated by the Project in the RTZ; and the net new state sales tax revenues and percentage of incremental state sales tax revenues that the Project is eligible to receive. U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Analysis - The TPA’s evaluation of the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Project element including: total, out of state, and net new visitors and spending; an estimate of the total state sales tax generated by the Project in the RTZ; and the net new state sales tax revenues and percentage of incremental state sales tax revenues that the Project is eligible to receive. Stanley Film Center Analysis - The TPA’s evaluation of the Stanley Film Center Project element including: total, out of state, and net new visitors and spending; an estimate of the total state sales tax generated by the Project in the RTZ; and the net new state sales tax revenues and percentage of incremental state sales tax revenues that the Project is eligible to receive. Financial Need – An analysis of the financial need for state tax increment financing addressing the stipulation that “but for” the state’s investment, the Project could not be built in the foreseeable future. Fiscal and Economic Impacts – The estimated fiscal and economic impacts of the Project to the state as well as any extraordinary fiscal impacts to the sponsoring jurisdiction. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 Revised Final Report Summary of Findings Proposed Project Go NoCO is a private 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation formed by the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, Town of Estes Park, and Larimer County. Go NoCO’s proposed development program contains four elements summarized below and in Table 1. PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center - A proposed 300-room hotel and conference center in Windsor. It is envisioned to be Northern Colorado’s only four star golf resort hotel and conference center, and described as comparable in quality and market appeal to the Broadmoor Resort in Colorado Springs. Currently no resorts of this quality exist in the Northern Colorado market area. The resort will be located on a 10-acre site in Water Valley, an existing resort-style lakefront golf community in the Town of Windsor approximately six miles east of I-25. Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies - The Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies is a proposed 330-room hotel property to be built in the City of Loveland on Fairgrounds Avenue north of the existing Budweiser Events Center. Included in the complex is a 75,000 square foot indoor water park, 55,000 square foot outdoor water park, 20,000 square foot family entertainment center featuring mini-golf and laser tag, 40,000 square foot of meeting and conference space, 3,000 square foot of retail, a 3,000 square foot spa, and 7,400 square foot restaurant and lounge. U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park - The U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park is proposed for a site north of the existing Budweiser Events Center adjacent to the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies. The main attraction is a 20-acre artificial whitewater river system designed to Olympic standards, allowing the facility to host U.S. Olympic Trials and other national and international events as well as accommodating beginner and intermediate paddlers. Numerous other outdoor activities are a part of the development such as a whitewater rescue training center, climbing wall, zip line, obstacle course, canopy tour, canyoneering attraction, and children’s’ play area. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 Revised Final Report Stanley Film Center – The Stanley Film Center is proposed to be developed in partnership with the owners of the historic Stanley Hotel with programming support from the Colorado Film School and notable film industry contributors. This 42,750 square foot theater and museum facility would a home of the horror film genre. It would include an 11,000 square foot museum and gallery and four film theaters of varying sizes. Programming would include expanding the existing Stanley Film Festival and on-going film screenings and related events. Table 1 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Overview Net New Visitors A comparison of the Applicant’s and the TPA’s estimates of total, out-of-state, and net new out- of-state visitors is provided below (Table 2). A summary of the major adjustments follows: PeliGrande Resort – The Applicant’s estimates of total, out-of-state, and net new visitors to the Hotel were judged to be reasonable. The Applicant had estimated that 46.5 percent of the out-of-state visitors would be net new to the state, which we agree is an appropriate estimate for a resort hotel that competes with other properties in the state. The only adjustment made was a 15 percent reduction in food and beverage and retail spending assumed to be captured in the RTZ, which equates to 93.8 percent of spending including lodging. By definition, 100 percent of lodging stays would be in the RTZ for this Project component. Indoor Waterpark – The Applicant’s visitor forecast was based on a 71 percent annual hotel occupancy rate which we judged to be reasonable for this location based on the information provided. The resulting annual visitor estimates of 299,320 and 56.8 percent from outside Colorado were not adjusted. While we consider that Applicant’s estimate of 88.9 percent net new visitors to be aggressive; we do recognize the unique nature of the Project and its potential to entice visitors to stay an extra day in Colorado, and the potential to draw people from surrounding states. We have estimated that 75 percent of out-of-state visitors would be net new as this Project may not be the primary purposed for a trip to Colorado for some percentage of visitors. Whitewater Adventure Park – No adjustments to visitor levels were made. Other spending adjustments were made, however, to reduce the assumed spending capture in the RTZ from 100 percent to 85 percent. Facility Location Description PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Windsor 300 room resort hotel and conference center Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies Loveland, north of The Ranch 75,000 sq. ft. indoor water park, 330 room hotel U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Loveland, north of The Ranch 20 acre whitewater park, outdoor adventure facilities Stanley Hotel Auditorium Stanley Hotel, Estes Park 42,750 sq. ft. film center, museum, and theatres Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Program081015version2.xlsx]1-Prog Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 Revised Final Report Stanley Film Center –The Applicant’s estimate of out-of-state visitors was adjusted for general meeting, and concert and entertainment events from 79.5 percent out of state to 50 percent out of state. Net new visitors were adjusted from 87.1 percent to 50 percent for general meetings, concerts and entertainment as well. Overnight stays (visitor days) by museum guests were adjusted down from 1.0 per attendee to 0.25 per attendee. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 Revised Final Report Net New Sales Tax and Eligible Tax Increment The forecasts of the total tax increment in Go NoCO RTZ and net new sales tax increment are shown below in Table 3 and Table 4 and compared the TPA analysis. As noted above, the major differences are due to lower spending estimates for day visitors by the TPA, our reductions in spending captured in the RTZ, and adjustments to net new and overnight stays for ancillary uses of Stanley Film Center. Table 3 Comparison of Applicant and TPA Net New Sales Tax Estimates Project Applicant Third Party Analyst PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center RTZ Increment Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 $253,548,134 Project Tax Increment $41,119,569 $39,876,445 Total RTZ Increment $294,667,703 $293,424,579 Net New Sales Tax PeliGrande Net New Tax Increment $12,991,003 $12,598,260 of RTZ Increment 4.41%4.29% Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies RTZ Increment Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 $253,548,134 Project Tax Increment $43,596,690 $38,899,816 Total Increment $297,144,824 $292,447,950 Net New Sales Tax Net New Tax Increment $22,022,650 $16,582,457 of RTZ Increment 7.41%5.67% US Whitewater Adventure Park RTZ Increment Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 $253,548,134 Project Tax Increment $30,468,329 $14,646,199 Total Increment $284,016,463 $268,194,333 Net New Sales Tax Net New Tax Increment $4,706,140 $3,959,364 of RTZ Increment 1.66%1.48% Stanley Film Center RTZ Increment Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 $253,548,134 Project Tax Increment $51,813,138 $43,466,116 Total Increment $305,361,272 $297,014,250 Net New Sales Tax Net New Tax Increment $46,399,582 $28,504,409 of RTZ Increment 15.19%9.60% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Summary 10-2-2015.xlsx]Increment Comparison Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 Revised Final Report In total, the Applicant is requesting $86.1 million over 30 years, or 20.48 percent of the RTZ tax increment as forecasted in its Application (Table 4). Our analysis calculates that the eligible net new sales tax is $61.6 million over 30 years, equivalent to 15.79 percent of the cumulative 30 year tax increment forecast in this report. Table 4 Comparison of Total Tax Increment for All Projects All Projects Applicant Third Party Analyst RTZ Increment Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 $253,548,134 Project Tax Increment $166,997,727 $136,888,576 Total RTZ Increment $420,545,861 $390,436,710 Net New Sales Tax $86,119,375 $61,644,489 of RTZ Increment 20.48%15.79% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Summary 10-2-2015.xlsx]Total Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 Revised Final Report Financial Need RTA funding is intended to act as gap financing for projects in which there is a financial hurdle that is impeding development; it is not intended to function as a grant program nor is it intended to be the primary source of funding. In order to demonstrate financial need, it needs to be shown that “but for” requested state funding the project cannot be feasibly developed. The financial criteria also require the applicant to demonstrate some degree of "project readiness" so that there is an assurance that any state funding that is committed will go to a project that is defined and approved based on the application, and does not substantially change after funding is granted. The RTA Statute requires the Applicant to “provide reliable economic data demonstrating that in the absence of state sales tax increment revenue, the Project is not reasonably anticipated to be developed in the foreseeable future.” The Applicant has demonstrated financial need for each project component as summarized below. PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center The financing gap for the PeliGrande is attributed to two primary factors. First, the hotel would be built to standards and at a cost above what the Northern Colorado market currently supports. The cost per room is estimated at $366,600, compared to a cost of $150,000 to $200,000 for mid-range limited service hotels that are more common in the surrounding market area. Second, the Applicant’s analysis of room rates recommends an average room rate of $247 per night based on competitive rates in the surrounding market area, which is not high enough to generate a return on investment at the proposed construction cost and quality. Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies The cost of the Waterpark Resort is $138.3 million, or $419,000 per room including the water park feature. Similar to the PeliGrande, the development costs require a room rate above what the local market supports. The RTA funds, pooled with local sales tax incentives and a public improvement fee generate a sufficient financial return for the project to proceed. U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park The Whitewater Adventure park cost is estimated at $61 million, including $10.5 million in land costs amounting to 17 percent of the total cost. RTA funds are estimated by the Applicant to contribute $1.0 million in financing proceeds, a minor amount of the funding and financing needs at 1.7 percent of project cost. Renegotiating with the land owner to reduce the land costs by 1.0 million or more would have the same and potentially greater impact than RTA funds. The financial need for this Project is in our judgement due in part to high land costs. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 Revised Final Report Stanley Film Center The Stanley Film Center meets the test of financial need, however the financing plan relies heavily on state RTA funding in place of contributions from other project partners. The project cost is $24.5 million. The financing supported by the requested RTA funds amounts to nearly 40 percent of the project cost or $9.7 million. The Applicant has not raised any philanthropic support from the film industry, Film Center Board members, or the broader Estes Park community. The Stanley Hotel, which will directly benefit from activities held in the Film Center, will likely have to provide loan guarantees but the financing plan does not include substantial equity from the Stanley Hotel or related entities. The Project is unique and potentially a significant tourism draw, however the concept is also risky and unproven. We recommend that any RTA award for this Project element be contingent on the completion of a comprehensive business plan, a feasible construction financing program, and specific benchmarks regarding the programming and development of film and media events that are truly capable of attracting out-of-state destination visitors. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 2. PROPOSED TOURISM PROJECT This chapter summarizes the Go NoCO Project Application including the development program, timing and phasing, construction costs, and use of RTA funds. It also includes a summary of the Applicant’s economic analysis and visitation and state sales tax increment estimates. Project Description Go NoCO’s development program contains four elements summarized below and in Table 5. PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Stanley Film Center Table 5 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Overview PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center The PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center is a proposed 300-room hotel and conference center in Windsor. The development plan calls for two restaurants, upscale lounge, luxury spa, 58,500 square feet of meeting and conference space, and an event island for weddings and other functions. It is envisioned as Northern Colorado’s only four star golf resort and conference center and described as comparable in quality and market appeal to the Broadmoor Resort in Colorado Springs. Currently no resorts of this quality exist in the Northern Colorado market area. The resort will be located on a 10-acre site in Water Valley, an existing resort-style lakefront golf community in the Town of Windsor approximately six miles east of I-25. Facility Location Description PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Windsor 300 room resort hotel and conference center Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies Loveland, north of The Ranch 75,000 sq. ft. indoor water park, 330 room hotel U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Loveland, north of The Ranch 20 acre whitewater park, outdoor adventure facilities Stanley Hotel Auditorium Stanley Hotel, Estes Park 42,750 sq. ft. film center, museum, and theatres Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Program 081015version2.xlsx]1-Prog Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 Revised Final Report Figure 1 Go NoCO Proposed Tourism Projects Locations Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 Revised Final Report Visitation Estimates In the stabilized operating year, estimated to be 2021, the $110 million resort and conference center hotel is estimated to attract nearly 146,000 visitors accounting for 81,000 room nights, as shown in Table 6. Of the 145,854 visitors, just over two-thirds are projected to be from outside Colorado with 46,080 or 31.6 percent of the total (46.5 percent of out-of-state visitors) estimated to be net new to the state. Table 6 PeliGrande Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) The developer of the proposed PeliGrande Resort has secured a commitment from the Professional Golf Association (PGA) to host a Champions Tour event at a new Fred Funk designed Raindance National Golf Course. Although Raindance is not a part of the RTA request and will be funded separately, the development of the hotel property is integral to the PGA commitment. This tournament would be Colorado’s only long-term PGA sponsored event and is projected to attract 32,500 attendees generating approximately 16,000 annual room nights. Additionally, strategic relationships will be set up with local and regional outdoor amenities including activities such as boating, hiking, horseback riding, shooting, climbing, and mountain biking. According to the Applicant, the primary existing hotel/conference competitors for the PeliGrande Resort Conference Center in the Northern Colorado market are the Hilton and Marriott in Fort Collins and the Embassy Suites in Loveland. Secondary competitors are identified as higher end properties outside of the immediate market and include the Broadmoor in Colorado Springs and the Grand Hyatt, Westin, Four Seasons, and Brown Palace in Denver. Component Room Nights Visitor Days Pct. Visitors Pct. Visitors Pct. Of Total 1.80 Commercial 4,000 7,203 67.9% 4,890 46.5% 2,276 31.6% Meeting & Group 49,000 88,233 67.9% 59,908 46.5% 27,876 31.6% Golf Travelers 16,000 28,811 67.9% 19,562 46.5% 9,102 31.6% Leisure 12,000 21,608 67.9%14,671 46.5%6,827 31.6% Total 81,000 145,854 67.9%99,032 46.5%46,080 31.6% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program09-26-2015.xlsx]2-Visitors Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 Revised Final Report Taxable Sales Estimates The PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center is forecast by the Applicant to generate approximately $1.4 billion in visitor spending over the 30 year tax increment period from 2016 through 2045, as shown in Table 7. Out-of-state visitors are estimated to account for just over two-thirds of the total spending at $962.7 million. Net new spending is estimated at $447.9 million which is 46.5 percent of out-of-state spending. These spending projections equate to a Project tax increment of $41.1 million with $12.9 million in net new sales tax generated by out- of-state visitors. The net new sales tax equates to 4.41 percent of the total tax increment forecasted in the RTZ (natural growth of the base plus project increment). Note that the Applicant does not include any spending impacts from the prospective PGA event in its funding request. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 Revised Final Report Funding Request Table 8 shows the Applicant’s projected development costs for the PeliGrande Hotel and Conference Center. Land costs for the 10-acre site are $6.53 million or approximately $15.00 per square foot of land. Total hard costs total 76 percent (including land), with 15 percent for soft costs and a 9 percent contingency. In total, the Project is expected to cost approximately $110 million to construct which equates to nearly $367,000 per room or $355 per square foot. Table 8 PeliGrande Resort Development Costs Description Total Cost % Total Per Room Per Sq. Ft. of Bldg. Soft Costs Permits and Fees $700,000 0.6% $2,333 $2.26 Finance $0 0.0% $0 $0.00 Pre-Opening Expenses (Marketing, Staffing, etc.)$1,750,000 1.6%$5,833 $5.65 Capital Maintenance and Reserves $1,000,000 0.9%$3,333 $3.23 Other Soft Costs $13,264,389 12.1%$44,215 $42.86 Subtotal Soft Costs $16,714,389 15.2%$55,715 $54.00 Hard Costs Parking $7,541,150 6.9%$25,137 $24.36 Land ($15.00/sq. ft. of land)$6,534,000 5.9%$21,780 $21.11 Construction $56,601,265 51.5%$188,671 $182.87 FF&E $11,750,000 10.7%$39,167 $37.96 Field and Sport Equipment $0 0.0% $0 $0.00 IT Systems $850,000 0.8%$2,833 $2.75 Subtotal Hard Costs $83,276,415 75.7%$277,588 $269.06 Contingency $9,999,080 9.1%$33,330 $32.31 Contingency % (of Hard Costs)12.0%---12.0%12.0% Total Facility Cost $109,989,884 100.0%$366,633 $355.36 Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program 09-26-2015.xlsx]11-All CostsPG Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 19 Revised Final Report Table 9 shows the expected funding sources for the PeliGrande Resort and Conference Center. Private debt and equity are currently assumed at $83 million or 76 percent. Public sector funding, including local sales tax sharing and public improvement fees, will cover slightly more than 21 percent of the Project costs. The remainder, 3 percent, will be funded by the bond proceeds from RTA funding. Table 9 PeliGrande Resort Funding Sources Description Amount Private Debt $58,000,000 Private Equity $25,000,000 Net Bond Proceeds Local TIF $3,907,471 Public Improvement Fees $19,444,583 Participant Facility Fees $0 Developer Contribution/Guarantee $359,321 RTA Funding (Bond Amount) $3,277,625 Total $109,989,000 Funding Source Allocation Private Funding 75.8% Public Sector Funding 21.2% RTA Funding (Bond Amount)3.0% Total 100.0% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Program 071515.xlsx]12-Funding Sources Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 20 Revised Final Report Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies The Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies is a proposed 330-room hotel property to be built in the City of Loveland on Fairgrounds Avenue north of the existing Budweiser Events Center. Included in the complex is a 75,000 square foot indoor waterpark, 55,000 square foot outdoor waterpark, 20,000 square foot family entertainment center featuring mini-golf and laser tag, 40,000 square foot of meeting and conference space, 3,000 square foot of retail, a 3,000 square foot spa, and 7,400 square foot restaurant and lounge as shown in Table 10. Table 10 Indoor Waterpark Resort Development Program The property is expected to be comparable in scale, quality, and market position to a Great Wolf Lodge Resort. The Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies management team previously worked for Great Wolf Resorts, the owner-operators of 13 properties across the country in locations such as the Poconos, PA; Williamsburg, VA; and Wisconsin Dells, WI. The business model ties together waterpark and hotel admission and creates a comprehensive resort experience by complementing this with specialty restaurants, arcades, spas, fitness rooms, and children’s play areas. Component Size Hotel 330 rooms Indoor Waterpark 75,000 sq. ft. Outdoor Waterpark 55,000 sq. ft. Family Entertainment Center 20,000 sq. ft. Meeting Conference Space 40,000 sq. ft. Retail 3,000 sq. ft. Spa 3,000 sq. ft. Restaurant/Lounge 7,400 sq. ft. Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark Program 081015.xlsx]IWP-Prog Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 21 Revised Final Report Visitation Estimates The Project is projected to attract nearly 300,000 visitors annually at stabilization in 2021. Families will make up a majority of the guests and as a result the facility has a high average occupancy figure of 3.5 persons per room. Out-of-state visitors are estimated to be 170,128 or 56.8 percent of the total. Of these, 151,200 or 50.5 percent are projected to be net new (60 percent of induced room nights). Table 11 Indoor Waterpark Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) Taxable Sales Estimates Table 12 shows that over the 30-year increment period, the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies is projected to generate over $1.5 billion in new spending. Of this total, $854.5 million or 57 percent is projected to be generated by out-of-state visitors. The Applicant estimates that 759.4 million or 89 percent of the out-of-state spending will be net new to the state. This equates to $22.0 million in net new sales tax which is the RTA funding request. It is equivalent to 7.41 percent of the tax increment forecasted in the RTZ. Project Room Nights Visitor DaysPct. Visitor DaysPct. Visitor Days Pct. Of Total 3.50/room Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies 85,520 299,320 56.8% 170,128 88.9% 151,200 50.5% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 23 Revised Final Report Funding Request Projected development costs for the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies total $138.3 million as shown in Table 13. Construction, land, parking and furniture, fixtures and equipment comprise $112.6 million (81.4 percent) of the cost and the Project has a built in 7 percent contingency of $9.7 million. Approximately $16 million or 11.6 percent of the total will be devoted to finance and pre-opening expenses such as marketing and staffing in addition to other soft costs. The costs per room and per square foot, $419,000 and $308 respectively, are about 15 percent higher than that of PeliGrande. This is due to the added construction costs associated with the waterpark. Table 13 Indoor Waterpark Resort Development Costs Description Total Cost % Total Cost Per Room Cost Per Sq. Ft. Soft Costs Permits and Fees $0 0.0% $0 $0.00 Finance $5,500,000 4.0% $16,667 $12.24 Pre-Opening Expenses (Marketing, Staffing, etc.)$1,900,000 1.4%$5,758 $4.23 Capital Maintenance and Reserves $0 0.0%$0 $0.00 Other Soft Costs $8,595,000 6.2%$26,045 $19.12 Subtotal Soft Costs $15,995,000 11.6%$48,470 $35.58 Hard Costs Parking $4,000,000 2.9%$12,121 $8.90 Land $6,500,000 4.7%$19,697 $14.46 Construction $92,500,000 66.9%$280,303 $205.79 FF&E $9,630,000 7.0%$29,182 $21.42 Field and Sport Equipment $0 0.0% $0 $0.00 IT Systems $0 0.0%$0 $0.00 Subtotal Hard Costs $112,630,000 81.4%$341,303 $250.57 Contingency $9,705,000 7.0%$29,409 $21.59 Contingency % (of Hard Costs)8.6%---8.6%8.6% Total Facility Cost $138,330,000 100.0%$419,182 $307.75 Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark 09-23-2015.xlsx]11-All Costs WP Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 24 Revised Final Report The expected funding sources for the Indoor Waterpark Resort are shown in Table 14. Nearly 80 percent of the $138.3 million needed to develop this Project is expected to come from private debt and equity. In addition to the $107.9 million in private funding, local public funding in the form of TIF and public improvement fees make up 17 percent of the total, or $23.6 million. The final 4.4 percent is the financing amount estimated to be supported by the proposed $22 million in RTA funds over the 30 year financing period. Table 14 Indoor Waterpark Resort Funding Sources Description Amount Percent Private Funding Private Debt $75,565,000 54.6% Private Equity $32,335,000 23.4% Subtotal $107,900,000 78.0% Net Bond Proceeds Local TIF $8,835,218 6.4% Public Improvement Fees $14,815,864 10.7% Developer Contribution/Guarantee $648,275 0.5% RTA Funding (Bond Amount)$6,130,642 4.4% Subtotal $30,430,000 22.0% Total Sources $138,330,000 100.0% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark 09-23-2015.xlsx]12-Funding Sources Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 25 Revised Final Report U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park The U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park is proposed for a site north of “The Ranch”, the Larimer County Fairgrounds Complex in Loveland, adjacent to the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies. The main attraction is a 20-acre artificial whitewater river system designed to Olympic standards, allowing the facility to host U.S. Olympic Trials and other national and international events as well as accommodating beginner and intermediate paddlers. Numerous other outdoor activities are a part of the development such as a whitewater rescue training center, climbing wall, zip line, obstacle course, canopy tour, canyoneering attraction, and children’s play area. Supporting features include a restaurant, retail shops, amphitheater, and event space. Currently there are only a handful of comparable facilities in the country, namely the U.S. National Whitewater Center in Asheville, NC and the planned Riversport project in Oklahoma City’s Boathouse District. Visitation Estimates The $61 million Project element, which would be highly visible along I-25 near the existing Budweiser Events Center, is projected to attract nearly 400,000 annual visitors. Only about 8 percent are projected to be net new to the state as it is assumed that many of the visitors would have been coming to Colorado to paddle on the state’s rivers or participate in other outdoor activities (Table 15). Attendees will have whitewater and dry-sport passes to choose from and visitation will also be driven by races and events, private functions, concerts and festivals, private and group instruction, and youth team activities and camps. Table 15 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Visitor Estimates (Applicant) Taxable Sales Estimates Spending from overnight visitors totals $342.2 million from 2016 through 2045 (Table 16). Spending from out-of-state overnight visitors comprises just over 63 percent of the spending. An estimated 75 percent of the out-of-state overnight visitors are estimated to be net new to Colorado, spending $162.3 million and generating $4.7 million in net new sales tax to the state which is the funding request for this Project element, or 1.66 percent of the tax increment. Component Room Nights Visitor Days Pct. Visitors Pct. Visitors Pct. Of Total U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park 43,930 397,920 10.5% 41,640 75.0% 31,230 7.8% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Whitewater Program081015.xlsx]2-Visitors Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 27 Revised Final Report Funding Request Total development costs totaling $61 million for the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park are shown by category in Table 17. As with the hotel projects, the land, fixtures and construction of the facility make up a large majority of the total; $50.3 million, or 82.5 percent of the cost, is dedicated to these parts of the Project. Marketing, staffing, and other soft costs comprise 6.7 percent of the total budget or $4.1 million. Land acquisition is a significant cost item at $10.5 million for the 30-acre site or $8 per square foot. There is also $6.6 million or 13.1 percent of hard costs allocated to contingencies. Table 17 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Development Costs Description Total Cost % Total Cost Per Ac. Soft Costs Permits and Fees $0 0.0%$0 Finance $0 0.0%$0 Pre-Opening Expenses (Marketing, Staffing, etc.) $482,669 0.8% $24,133 Capital Maintenance and Reserves $0 0.0%$0 Other Soft Costs $3,581,306 5.9% $179,065 Subtotal Soft Costs $4,063,975 6.7%$203,199 Hard Costs Parking $0 0.0%$0 Land $10,454,000 17.1% $522,700 Construction $38,613,486 63.3% $1,930,674 FF&E $1,254,539 2.1% $62,727 Field and Sport Equipment $0 0.0%$0 IT Systems $0 0.0%$0 Subtotal Hard Costs $50,322,025 82.5% $2,516,101 Contingency $6,590,000 10.8% $329,500 Contingency % (of Soft Costs)13.1%---13.1% Total Facility Cost $60,976,000 100.0% $3,048,800 Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Whitewater Program 081015.xlsx]11-All Costs WWP Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 28 Revised Final Report Table 18 shows the Applicant’s planned funding sources for the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park. Of the $61 million in development costs, approximately $49 million will come from private debt and equity accounting for 80.6 percent of the total. Local TIF and public improvement fees of $10.8 million will fund 17.8 percent of the Project and RTA bond proceeds estimated at $1.0 million will cover the remaining 1.7 percent of Project costs. Table 18 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Funding Sources Description Amount Private Debt $39,231,200 Private Equity $9,807,800 Net Bond Proceeds Local TIF $816,729 Public Improvement Fees $10,022,275 Participant Facility Fees $0 Developer Contribution/Guarantee $85,667 RTA Funding (Bond Amount) $1,012,329 Total $60,976,000 Funding Source Allocation Private Funding 80.6% Public Sector Funding 17.8% RTA Funding (Bond Amount)1.7% Total 100.0% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Program 071515.xlsx]12-Funding Sources Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 29 Revised Final Report Stanley Film Center The 140-room Stanley Hotel is an iconic historic hotel in Estes Park and is perhaps best known as the inspiration for the classic horror film, The Shining. The Stanley Hotel is owned and operated by Grand Heritage Hotel Group, who specializes in owning, operating, and acquiring and repositioning unique or niche hotel and resort properties in the U.S., Europe, and Central America. Estes Park is the gateway to Rocky Mountain National Park, which had 3.4 million visitors in 2014. The Shining (1980) was based on a Stephen King novel of the same name, starring Jack Nicholson and directed by Stanley Kubrick. Stephen King had stayed in Room 217 and awoke from a nightmare which gave him the inspiration for the book. The exterior shots of the hotel in the movie are actually the Timberline Lodge in Mount Hood, Oregon and much of the interior portions of the movie were filmed in a studio in England. Nevertheless, the Stanley Hotel is known for and has been successful in marketing its close connection to The Shining. The Stanley Hotel reportedly has approximately 400,000 drop-by visitors per year, and hosts 60,000 to 80,000 people per year on one-hour ghost tours (Table 19). It was also used as a filming location in the 1994 film Dumb and Dumber. Table 19 Stanley Hotel Ghost Tour Attendance The four day Stanley Film Festival is hosted at the Stanley Hotel and had paid attendance of 2,142 in 2015 and was founded in 2013 in partnership with the Denver Film Society. The Film Festival was held in the Stanley Concert Hall, Park Theatre, and Reel Mountain Theatre. Many screenings were reported to be sold out in 2015, generating a need for a larger venue. The proposed RTA Project is an 11,000 square foot museum (gallery and exhibit area), state-of- the-art movie theaters, supporting food and beverage, and a 1,200 square foot museum shop Table 20). The museum is proposed to have the world’s largest horror film archive and rotating displays and exhibits of original movie props, posters, memorabilia, and classic horror films. The Center would contain: a 500 seat main theater, a 300 seat outdoor theater, a small 50 seat outdoor theater, and a VIP theater of approximately 50 seats. The Film Discovery and Archive Center (museum) would consist of 8,000 square feet of gallery space and 3,000 square feet of special exhibit space. There would also be 4,000 square feet of meeting rooms, plus video and sound editing studios for special classes and other meetings. Year Tour Tickets Sold 2011 59,951 2012 74,163 2013 63,869 2014 72,025 YTD 2015 65,342 Source: Stanley Hotel Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 30 Revised Final Report The Stanley Film Center has been described by the developer as “the permanent home of the horror film genre”. It is proposed as a partnership between the Stanley Hotel and Colorado Film School. An MOU between the Colorado Film School and the Stanley Film Center outlines the types of programs, exhibits, and events which they will collaborate to develop. The Applicant has received numerous letters of support and interest from film industry professionals and other film festivals and film archives. Table 20 Stanley Film Center Program Description Amount Units Theater Main Theater 500 Seats Outdoor Theater 300 Seats Outdoor Theater 2 50 Seats VIP Theater 45-50 Seats Film Discovery and Archive Galleries 8,000 Sq. Ft. Archive/Special Exhibit Area 3,000 Sq. Ft. Meeting Rooms 4,000 Sq. Ft. Video Editing 700 Sq. Ft. Sound Editing 500 Sq. Ft. Theatre and Discovery Center Support Restaurant 150 Seats Museum Shop 1,200 Sq. Ft. Concession Area 60 Seats Private Dining 50 Seats Lounge 40 Seats Source: GoNoCO Application H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\M odels\[143071-Stanley Program.xlsx]1-Program Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 31 Revised Final Report Visitation Estimates The Applicant builds an attendance estimate based on average attendance per event multiplied by the number of days of operation for each event including museum visits, film screenings, and other special events. Museum attendance is estimated at 400 per day and 144,000 per year Table 21). The Film screenings would consist of cult classic films, regular showings of The Shining, and new releases. The Film Festival would also be extended from 4.5 to 6 days. In total, film screenings are projected to be 400 per year by 2021, the stabilized operating year for the Project. Annual attendance to film screenings is estimated at 73,250 per year. Other center attendance would come from theater rentals and meetings, at 75 events per year each. Concerts and other entertainment shows are estimated at 25 events per year. Fifteen days of social events and awards (including the Stanley Film Festival) are estimated. Finally, the Applicant estimates 50 annual Master Classes with horror film industry experts in fields such as sound and video production/editing, makeup, special effects, writing, and production. These Master Classes are described as college credit courses offered for a three to four week period in January and May. This allows college students enrolled at other institutions to earn credit for one class offered during a period when they are on vacation. Some colleges have modified their schedules to allow for this option by modifying the nine-month school year to a 4-4-1 or 4-1-4 semester system. Total annual attendance is projected by the Applicant to be 259,375 which equates to 280,500 visitor days after applying a factor for the length of stay attributed to the attraction. Overnight visitor days, the major spending driver in the RTA analytical framework, are estimated at 263,400 per year after adjusting for a small proportion of people who do not stay overnight to visit the attraction. Table 21 Stanley Film Center Attendance (Applicant) Venue Operation Days or Events Average Attendance Annual Attendance Nights Stayed Visitor Days Percent Lodgers Overnight Visitor Days Museum 360 400/day 144,000 1.00 144,000 95.0% 136,800 Film Screenings Large Hall 200 250/event 50,000 1.00 50,000 95.0% 47,500 Half Hall 75 185/event 13,875 1.25 17,344 95.0% 16,477 Small Halls 125 75/event 9,375 1.25 11,719 95.0% 11,133 Subtotal 400 73,250 79,063 75,109 Other Events Theater Rentals 75 275/event 20,625 1.50 30,938 95.0% 29,391 Meetings 75 40/event 3,000 1.50 4,500 95.0%4,275 Concerts and Entertainment 25 400/event 10,000 1.00 10,000 95.0%9,500 Awards and Social Events 15 450/event 6,750 1.00 6,750 50.0%3,375 Master Classes 50 35/event 1,750 3.00 5,250 95.0%4,988 Subtotal 240 42,125 57,438 51,528 Total 1,000 259,375 280,500 263,438 Source: GoNoCO Application H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\M odels\[143071-Stanley Program 10-26-2015.xlsx]2-Attendance Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 32 Revised Final Report Of the 263,438 overnight visitor days, the Applicant estimates that 79.5 percent of those captured in the RTZ will come from outside Colorado and that 87.1 percent will be net new to the State (Table 22). The total blended adjustment of 79.5 out-of-state and 87.1 percent net new is 69.3 percent when combined, which is derived from an estimate of the room nights that can be captured in Estes Park considering the size of the Town’s bed base and the new demand resulting from the film center. The Applicant forecasts 182,600 annual net new visitor days upon project stabilization in 2021. Table 22 Stanley Film Center Net New Visitor Days (Applicant) Taxable Sales Estimates and Funding Request The funding request for the Stanley Film Center is $46.4 million over 30 years (Table 23). Overnight visitors are estimated to generate $68.1 million in spending in 2021, the stabilized year, and day visitors generate another $1.1 million in annual spending. After adjusting for spending captured in the RTZ (87 percent), and net new spending (90 percent), the resulting net new state sales tax totals $46.4 million over 30 years with 2.5 percent annual inflation. This is equivalent to 15.19 percent of the forecasted sales tax in the Go NoCO RTZ. The requested funding amount is estimated to support $9.7 million in financing which is equal to nearly 40 percent of the Project cost. Venue Overnight # Overnight Out of State % Overnight Out of State # Overnight In State Net New Out of State % Net New Out of State # Museum 136,800 79.54% 108,817 27,983 87.1% 94,826 Film - Large Hall 47,500 79.54% 37,784 9,716 87.1% 32,926 Film - Half Hall 16,477 79.54% 13,106 3,370 87.1% 11,421 Film - Small Hall 11,133 79.54% 8,856 2,277 87.1% 7,717 Theatre Rentals 29,391 79.54% 23,379 6,012 87.1% 20,373 Meetings 4,275 79.54% 3,401 874 87.1% 2,963 Concerts & Entertainment 9,500 79.54% 7,557 1,943 87.1% 6,585 Awards, Social Events, & Meetings 3,375 79.54% 2,685 690 87.1% 2,339 Master Classes 4,988 79.54%3,967 1,020 87.1%3,457 Total 263,438 79.54% 209,551 53,887 87.1% 182,607 Source: Anderson Analytics H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Stanley Program 10-26-2015.xlsx]MA Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 34 Revised Final Report Project Cost and Financing Plan The Stanley Film Center construction budget is $24.5 million, or $572 per square foot for the 42,750 square foot facility (Table 24). The 2.5-acre site is proposed to be donated by the Stanley Hotel and is valued at $2.0 million which is equal to $18 per square foot. The building hard cost is $447 per square foot. Soft costs and contingency are budgeted at 10 percent of hard costs, or $47 per square foot. Furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) are budgeted at another 32 per square foot. Table 24 Stanley Film Center Project Cost The Project would be financed with a conventional loan by the RTA Project entity, estimated at 11.1 million or 45.5 percent of the Project cost (Table 25). Bond proceeds from the requested 46.4 million in RTA funds are estimated at $9.7 million and comprise 39.8 percent of the Project cost. A developer guarantee would likely be needed on a portion of the bond debt service, estimated at $1.6 million. No equity contributions from non-profit fundraising, Stanley Film Center Board member contributions, or Grand Heritage Hotels are included in the financing plan. Grand Heritage or a related entity would likely have to provide loan guarantees on any debt, however. No local funding or financing from the Town of Estes Park is included due to Town budget constraints related to flood recovery. Table 25 Stanley Film Center Financing Plan Item Cost Per Sq. Ft. 42,750 Land [1]$2,000,000 $47 Buildings 19,100,000 447 Soft Costs and Contingency 2,000,000 47 FF&E 1,368,000 32 Total $24,468,000 $572 1] Per square foot cost is per square foot of building area. Source: GoNoCO Application H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Stanley Program.xlsx]Costs Source Amount Percent Donations $2,000,000 8.2% Non-Profit Debt 11,130,000 45.5% RTA Bonds 9,730,011 39.8% Developer Contribution 1,607,989 6.6% Total $24,468,000 100.0% Source: GoNoCO Application H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Stanley Program.xlsx]Costs Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 35 Revised Final Report Total Visitors and Taxable Sales The Applicant’s estimates of total visitors are shown by Project element in Table 26. A total of 1.11 million annual visitors are forecast by the Applicant with 520,351 out-of-state visitors. Of the out-of-state visitors, 411,000 or just under 80 percent estimated as net new (NNOSV). Table 26 Go NoCO Total Visitation (Applicant) Project Phasing All four components of the Go NoCO application have an expected Project approval date of January 2016 and a construction period of 24 to 30 months (Table 27). The Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park are each projected to open in January of 2018. The PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center has a projected opening date of July 2018, and the Stanley Film Center has an estimated opening date of July 1, 2018. Table 27 Go NoCO Project Phasing Total Cost and RTA Funding Requests The total Project development costs of the four components evaluated is $333.8 million as shown in Table 28. The total requested tax increment derived from net new out-of-state visitor spending totals $86.1 million over the 30-year time period which is 20.48 percent of the total as shown in Table 29. Facility Year of Stabilization Total Visitors Out Of State Out of State % NNOSV NNOSV Peligrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center 2021 145,854 67.9% 99,032 46.5% 46,080 Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies 2021 299,320 56.8% 170,128 88.9% 151,200 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park 2020 397,920 10.5% 41,640 75.0% 31,230 Stanley Film Center [1]2021 263,438 79.5%209,551 87.1%182,607 Total 1,106,532 47.0% 520,351 79.0% 411,117 1] Overnight visitor days. Total visitor days are 280,500 per year. Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Summary 10-2-2015.xlsx]Sheet1 Project Component 2018 Peligrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Stanley Film Center Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Summary 09-23-2015.xlsx]Phasing 2016 2017 30 Months;Opening July2018 24 Months;Opening Jan.2018 30 Months;Opening July 2018 24 Months;Opening Jan.2018 Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 38 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 3. PELIGRANDE RESORT ANALYSIS This chapter presents the TPA’s independent evaluation of the Applicant’s total estimates of total and net new out-of-state visitors and the associated spending and state sales tax projections for the PeliGrande Hotel and Windsor Conference Center. It also provides the TPA estimate of the net new sales tax eligible to be dedicated to the Project from 2016 through 2045. Net New Visitors The Applicant has estimated that 67.9 percent of PeliGrande’s 145,854 annual visitor days will come from outside Colorado (Table 30). Visitors drawn by the Raindance golf course are estimated to support 16,000 room nights, equating to 28,800 annual visitor days. The remaining 117,000 visitor days are attributed to other business and leisure travel generated by the resort. Visitors who are net new to the state are estimated by the Applicant at with 46.5 percent of the out-of-state visitors, or 46,080 per year which equates to 31.6 percent of total annual visitors. Table 30 PeliGrande Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) Component Room Nights Visitor Days Pct. Visitors Pct. Visitors Pct. Of Total 1.80 Commercial 4,000 7,203 67.9% 4,890 46.5% 2,276 31.6% Meeting & Group 49,000 88,233 67.9% 59,908 46.5% 27,876 31.6% Golf Travelers 16,000 28,811 67.9% 19,562 46.5% 9,102 31.6% Leisure 12,000 21,608 67.9%14,671 46.5%6,827 31.6% Total 81,000 145,854 67.9%99,032 46.5%46,080 31.6% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program09-26-2015.xlsx]2-Visitors Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 39 Revised Final Report The PeliGrande developer has received a commitment from the PGA to host a Champions Tour event once the Fred Funk designed Raindance National Golf Club has been completed. The Applicant is not requesting any credit for spending and sales tax attributed specifically to the PGA Tour event. The only visitor spending attributed to the golf course is shown above as part of the hotel. The golf course is therefore an amenity which helps to drive room nights in the PeliGrande hotel. This PGA tour would be the state’s only annual PGA event (based on a letter of commitment). Attendance figures from other golf tournaments provided by the Applicant are shown below in Table 31. The Mississippi Gulf Resort Classic is the only Champion’s Tour event listed, and had attendance of 35,000 with 22 percent from outside Mississippi. The other events are either not comparable or are located in larger market areas. The Applicant’s attendance estimate of 32,500 is lower than the one PGA Champions Tour event shown and is therefore judged to be a reasonable estimate. Table 31 Comparable Golf Tournament Attendance Tournament Location Year Total Attendance Out of State Attendance WMPO Phoenix, AZ 2012 518,062 29.8% US Open San Diego, CA 2008 295,429 21.2% PGA Championship Sheboygan, WI 2005 94,470 32.8% Toshiba Classic Newport Beach, CA 2007 85,000 20.0% Players Championship Ponte Vedra, FL 2005 72,000 44.0% American Express Championship San Francisco, CA 2005 47,000 17.0% Mississi ppi Gulf Resort Classic [1]Biloxi, MS 2011 35,000 22.0% Champions Tour Average 60,000 20.6% 1] A Champions Tour event Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-GoNoCo Program 081015.xlsx]TournamentComps Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 40 Revised Final Report While the PeliGrande will be Northern Colorado’s only four star resort and conference center, meeting and group business travel is highly competitive. Some of PeliGrande’s business will most likely come as a result of cannibalization from other properties in the state. Colorado has numerous high end hotel, conference centers, and golf courses including The Broadmoor in Colorado Springs, and others in mountain areas such as Vail, Beaver Creek, and Aspen. The Applicant’s analysis already includes a 46.5 percent net new factor, assuming that the remainder of the hotel business would come from competition with other existing properties in the state Table 32). This net new estimate, while aggressive, is judged to be within the parameters of reasonableness; therefore no further adjustments have been made. Table 32 PeliGrande Resort Net New Adjustment Criteria Comments Adjustment Initial Total 100% Uniqueness and Competition - Applicant's adjustment recognizes potential competition with other high-end resorts and conference centers in the state. 53.5% Relocation of Existing Use within Colorado -N/A 0% Primary Destination / Reason for Trip -No adjustment 0% Ability to Capture Spending/Tourism Leakage from Colorado Residents No adjustment 0% Net New Factor 46.5% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program 09-1-2015.xlsx]14-Resort Net New Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 41 Revised Final Report The Applicant’s spending assumptions for the PeliGrande are shown in Table 33. Daily spending of $273 per overnight visitor was deemed reasonable due to the high-end nature of the PeliGrande Resort. The Applicant’s figures were presented in 2021 dollars to project hotel operating revenues at Project stabilization in 2021 and are adjusted back to 2015 dollars for the purposes of spending and sales tax projections. We also adjusted the proportion of spending estimated to be captured within the RTZ. Since the resort hotel is the destination, 100 percent of lodging spending attributed to the PeliGrande would be captured in the RTZ. However, we believe that less than 100 percent of retail and food and beverage spending would occur in the zone, such as Fort Collins and other nearby communities or attractions outside the Go NoCO RTZ. We have adjusted retail and food and beverage spending to 85 percent capture, resulting in an overall average spending capture rate of 94 percent as shown below. Table 33 PeliGrande Resort Spending Assumptions Description Applicant Spending Estimate Applicant Spending Estimate TPA Estimated Spending Captured in RTZ Captured Spending 2021 $2015 $2015 $ Lodging Spending Lodging Room Rate $286.92 $247.41 Persons Per Room 1.8 1.8 Total Lodging Spending Per Overnight Visitor $159.40 $137.45 100.0% $137.45 Other Overnight Visitor Spending On-Site Food & Beverage $76.51 $65.97 On-Site Retail/Other $23.29 $20.08 Off-Site Food & Beverage $0.00 $0.00 Off-Site Retail $13.87 $11.96 Off-Site Recreational $0.00 $0.00 Total Other Spending Per Overnight Visitor $113.67 $98.02 85.0% $83.31 Total Spending Per Overnight Visitor $273.07 $235.47 93.8% $220.76 Note: Assumes 2.5% inflation Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program 09-1-2015.xlsx]Spending Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 42 Revised Final Report Tax Increment Analysis In order to calculate the incremental sales tax that a project is eligible to receive, the base sales tax must be established. A project is only eligible to receive the net new incremental sales tax above the base it generates within the RTZ. Other incremental sales tax revenue growth not attributable to a project cannot be directed to a project. The RTA allows an applicant to define RTZ boundaries beyond project boundaries, and can encompass an entire jurisdiction, or multiple jurisdictions if there are multiple jurisdiction sponsors to an application. Broadly defined RTZs, such as the zone proposed in the Go NoCO Application, contain a large share of the total retail and lodging development in the region. These zones will therefore experience sales tax growth from general economic activity and the ‘natural growth’ of the community. The eligible tax increment is only what is generated by the increase in tourism activity from the project itself over the natural growth of the base. Base Sales Tax The 2015 Base Sales Tax within the Go NoCO RTZ is $7.51 million. OSPB prepared a forecast of the sales tax growth in the RTZ to establish the natural growth of the sales tax base above the 2015 base year from 2016 through 2045 (Table 34) and defined the growth rate for the Application at 4.5 percent. The natural tax increment above the 2015 base resulting from the growth of the base at 4.5 percent per year over the 2015 through 2045 time period is estimated at $253.5 million. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 43 Revised Final Report Table 34 Base Sales Tax Forecast, 2015-2045 Year Base Sales Tax Natural Tax Increment 4.5% Growth Rate 2015 $7,512,006 $0 2016 7,850,046 338,040 2017 8,203,298 691,292 2018 8,572,447 1,060,441 2019 8,958,207 1,446,201 2020 9,361,326 1,849,320 2021 9,782,586 2,270,580 2022 10,222,802 2,710,796 2023 10,682,828 3,170,822 2024 11,163,555 3,651,550 2025 11,665,915 4,153,910 2026 12,190,882 4,678,876 2027 12,739,471 5,227,465 2028 13,312,747 5,800,742 2029 13,911,821 6,399,815 2030 14,537,853 7,025,847 2031 15,192,056 7,680,051 2032 15,875,699 8,363,693 2033 16,590,105 9,078,100 2034 17,336,660 9,824,654 2035 18,116,810 10,604,804 2036 18,932,066 11,420,060 2037 19,784,009 12,272,003 2038 20,674,290 13,162,284 2039 21,604,633 14,092,627 2040 22,576,841 15,064,835 2041 23,592,799 16,080,793 2042 24,654,475 17,142,469 2043 25,763,926 18,251,921 2044 26,923,303 19,411,297 2045 28,134,852 20,622,846 Total Natural Tax Increment $253,548,134 Source: GoNoCO Application, Colorado OSPB, Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-PeliGrande Program09-26-2015.xlsx]13-RTZ BaseVert Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 44 Revised Final Report The eligible tax increment for the Project is calculated using the methodology described below and presented in the sections which follow. Total RTZ Tax Increment – The total tax increment in the RTZ with the PeliGrande Project is calculated as the natural growth of the base (without the Project) plus the new sales tax in the RTZ from the Project, comprised of all new spending in the zone from in-state and out- of-state visitors. The cumulative 30 year tax impact of the Project is added to the natural growth tax increment to get the total RTZ tax increment. Net New Sales Tax – The cumulative 30 year sales tax estimated to be net new to the state is divided by the total RTZ tax increment to calculate the percentage of the total tax increment that the Project is eligible to receive. Project Contribution to RTZ Increment The total tax increment generated by the PeliGrande is estimated from the total room nights, visitor days, and resulting spending captured in the RTZ. In a stabilized operating year, the hotel is forecast to generate 145,854 annual visitor days. With spending of $235.47 per person per day (2015 dollars), and 93.8 percent spending capture, the hotel supports $32.2 million in annual spending in the stabilized year (2021) and $934,000 in annual sales tax in the RTZ. In 2015 dollars, the total tax increment for the hotel is $25.96 million and $39.9 million with 2.5 percent annual inflation (Table 35). Net New Sales Tax The natural growth of the base is estimated at $253.5 million. Adding the Project tax increment gives a total RTZ tax increment forecast of $293.4 million (Table 36). The net new sales tax is divided by this amount to calculate the percentage of the tax increment the Project is eligible to receive. In calculating the net new sales tax, we use the Applicant’s estimates of 67.9 out-of-state overnight visitors, and 46.5 percent net new estimate. The only adjustment is to account for a modest amount of retail and food and beverage spending that may occur outside the RTZ, as hotel visitors from outside Colorado will likely want to visit other areas outside the Loveland RTZ such as Fort Collins and other areas of Larimer County. Of the 145,854 hotel visitors, 67.9 percent are estimated to be from out of state and 46.5 percent are estimated to be net new equating to 46,080 annual net new visitor days. With average daily spending of $235 per person, the net new sales tax totals to $8.2 million over 30 years in 2015 dollars. With inflation, total net new sales tax is $12.6 million or 4.29 percent of the RTA tax increment over 30 years. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 47 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 4. INDOOR WATERPARK RESORT OF THE ROCKIES ANALYSIS This chapter presents the TPA’s independent evaluation of the Applicant’s total estimates of total and net new out-of-state visitors and the associated spending and state sales tax projections for the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies. It also provides the TPA estimate of the net new sales tax eligible to be dedicated to the Project over the 30 year 2016 through 2045 time period. Net New Visitors As shown in Table 37, the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies is projected by the Applicant to draw 299,320 annual visitors, 56.8 percent (170,128) of which will be from outside Colorado. Of the out-of-state visitors, 88.9 percent or 151,200 are estimated to be net new to the state. The estimate of 299,320 visitor days is based on an annual occupancy forecast for the hotel of 71 percent at stabilization in 2021. The 330 room hotel would generate 85,520 room nights at 71 percent occupancy, and 299,320 annual visitor days at an average of 3.5 people per room. Since these hotels are family oriented, they tend to have a larger number of occupants per room than traditional hotels. Table 37 Indoor Waterpark Resort Visitor Estimates (Applicant) The Applicant had access to proprietary zip code data from similar water park hotels which was used as a base for its out- of-state visitor numbers. While some of the comparables were located close to nearby state borders, we do not have a strong reason to dispute the estimate of 56.8 percent out-of-state visitors. In Colorado, these could be comprised of Colorado tourists who were extending their trip by a day or two to visit the Waterpark Hotel, or visitors from nearby Wyoming and Nebraska. Project Room Nights Visitor DaysPct. Visitor DaysPct. Visitor Days Pct. Of Total 3.50/room Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies 85,520 299,320 56.8% 170,128 88.9% 151,200 50.5% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark 09-23-2015.xlsx]4.1-Visitors Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 48 Final Report The Applicant also reviewed confidential data from other water park hotels, and considered the supply and demand trends in Northern Colorado in developing its occupancy forecast. The Applicant has forecasted the annual occupancy at 71 percent. Upon reviewing the data provided, we judged this to be a reasonable estimate for the Loveland and Northern Colorado market. The Applicant estimates that 88.9 percent of out-of-state visitor days will be net new to the state 60 percent of induced room nights). We feel that this estimate is aggressive considering other attractions in Northern Colorado such as Rocky Mountain National Park, Estes Park, Fort Collins, and many other surrounding recreation and natural areas. However, we recognize that the Project may be unique enough to entice some visitors to stay an extra day to visit the waterpark, and may draw some new visitors from adjacent states. We have made a -25 percent adjustment to net new out-of-state visitors to account for the likelihood that in our opinion the Waterpark Hotel will not be the primary reason for a trip to Colorado for a portion of visitors (Table 38). Table 38 Indoor Waterpark Resort Net New Adjustment Criteria Comments Adjustment Initial Total 100% Uniqueness and Competition - Unique water park facility in the Intermountain West. 0% Relocation of Existing Use within Colorado - N/A 0% Primary Destination / Reason for Trip - May not be primary reason for visit for all visitors. 25% Ability to Capture Spending/Tourism Leakage from Colorado Residents No adjustment 0% Net New Factor 75.0% Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark 09-01-2015.xlsx]17-Waterpark Net New Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 49 Final Report The Applicant’s daily spending assumptions are shown in Table 39 and total $128.62 per person per day in 2021 dollars (year of stabilization) and $110.90 in 2015 dollars. The room rate of 288 includes admission to the waterpark which is valued at approximately $20-$25 admission fee per person. A majority of other overnight visitor spending is assumed to be captured at the resort with approximately 25 percent spent on off-site—but not necessarily outside the RTZ— retail purchases. To account for some expected spending leakage outside the RTZ and for consistency with other TPA analyses, we have applied an 85 percent spending capture rate to retail and food and beverage spending; total captured spending in the RTZ equates to 94.6 percent in this analysis. Since the waterpark is only accessible to hotel guests, day visitor spending is not a consideration and is not estimated. Table 39 Indoor Waterpark Resort Spending Assumptions Description Applicant Spending Estimate Applicant Spending Estimate TPA Estimated Spending Captured in RTZ Captured Spending 2021 $2015 $2015 $ Lodging Spending Lodging Room Rate $288.35 $248.64 Persons Per Room 3.5 3.5 Total Lodging Spending Per Overnight Visitor $82.39 $71.04 100.0% $71.04 Other Overnight Visitor Spending On-Site Food & Beverage $21.29 $18.36 On-Site Retail/Other $11.07 $9.55 Off-Site Food & Beverage $0.00 $0.00 Off-Site Retail $13.87 $11.96 Off-Site Recreational $0.00 $0.00 Total Other Spending Per Overnight Visitor $46.23 $39.86 85.0% $33.88 Total Spending Per Overnight Visitor $128.62 $110.90 94.6% $104.93 Day Visitor Spending Assumptions $0.00 $0.00 Note: Assumes 2.5% inflation Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Indoor Waterpark 09-01-2015.xlsx]Spending Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 50 Final Report Tax Increment Analysis The tax increment for the Waterpark Hotel is calculated in the same manner as the PeliGrande. The starting point is the natural tax increment from the growth of the base. Next, the incremental sales tax from all spending sources is added to the base. Lastly, the 30 year total net new sales tax is divided by the 30 year total tax increment to calculate the eligible percentage. Project Contribution to RTZ Increment For the Waterpark Hotel, the Project’s contribution to the total tax increment is comprised of all spending and resulting sales tax attracted to the RTZ by the Project. At stabilization in 2021, the Project attracts 299,320 annual visitors (Table 40). With average spending of $110.90 per day and 94.6 percent spending capture, the Project attracts $31.4 million in spending to the RTZ. The resulting state sales tax is $910,800 from 2021 onward (2015 dollars). Over the 30 years from 2016 through 2045, the total tax increment from the Project, from all in- and out-of-state spending sources, is $25.3 million in 2015 dollars, and $38.9 million with inflation. Net New Sales Tax The natural tax increment resulting from the growth of the base at 4.5 percent per year over the 2015 through 2045 time period is estimated at $253.5 million (Table 41). The Project tax increment is $38.9 million, and the total tax increment forecast in the RTZ resulting from the Waterpark Hotel is $292.4 million. The net new state sales tax is divided by this amount to calculate the eligible percentage of the tax increment that can be directed to the Project. The 299,320 total visitors from 2021 onward are multiplied by 56.8 percent to calculate out-of- state visitors, and then by 75 percent to calculate net new out-of-state visitors. From 2021 onward, we have estimated that the Project will draw 127,600 net new visitors to Colorado. With daily spending of $110.90 per day and 94.6 percent of spending made in the RTZ, there is 13.4 million of net new spending and $388,250 of net new sales tax per year (2015 dollars). The 30 year total net new sales tax is estimated at $16.6 million with inflation of 2.5 percent per year. This equates to 5.67 percent of the RTZ tax increment above the base. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 53 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 5. U.S. WHITEWATER ADVENTURE PARK ANALYSIS This chapter presents the TPA’s independent evaluation of the Applicant’s total estimates of total and net new out-of-state visitors and the associated spending and state sales tax projections for the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park. It also provides the TPA estimate of the net new sales tax eligible to be dedicated to the Project over the 30 year 2016 through 2045 time period. Net New Visitors The U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park is estimated to attract 397,920 annual visitors. This facility will have a large local user base with only 10.5 percent of visitors from out of state. Of the out- of-state visitors, 75 percent or just over 31,000 are projected to be net new as the Applicant implies that a portion of the clientele will also be coming to Colorado for other outdoor activities including paddling on the state’s many rivers (Table 42). EPS considers these to be reasonable estimates and thus no adjustments have been made to out-of-state or net new visitors. Table 42 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Visitor Estimates (Applicant) Component Visitor Days Pct. Visitors Pct.Visitors Pct. Of Total U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park 397,920 10.5% 41,640 75.0% 31,230 7.8% Source: GoNoCO Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Whitewater Program 09-26-2015.xlsx]2-Visitors Out of State Net New Out of State Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 54 Revised Final Report The spending assumptions for the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park are shown in Table 43. Total spending of $137 per overnight visitor was deemed reasonable and no adjustments were made other than to deflate the 2020 spending figure (stabilized year) to 2015 dollars. The day visitor spending assumption of $70.69 is considered to be high, however. The Applicant cites Longwoods Travel and Tourism Research as a basis for this figure. After reviewing the 2014 Travel Year Longwoods Report, it was determined that this data pertains to out-of-state day visitors while the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park will be drawing a mostly local clientele. As such, the day visitor spending was adjusted down to $15 per day per person. In addition, an 85 percent capture rate is applied to overnight visitor spending in the RTZ, as not all visitors to the Whitewater Park can be assumed to lodge in the RTZ, and for consistency with other TPA analyses. Table 43 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Spending Assumptions (Applicant) Description Applicant Spending Estimate Applicant Spending Estimate Estimated Spending Captured Captured Spending 2020 $2015 $2015 $ Lodging Spending Lodging Room Rate $141.45 $121.97 Persons Per Room 1.5 1.5 Total Lodging Spending Per Overnight Visitor $94.30 $81.31 85.0% $69.12 Other Overnight Visitor Spending On-Site Food & Beverage $5.28 $4.55 On-Site Retail/Other $3.54 $3.05 Off-Site Food & Beverage $19.82 $17.09 Off-Site Retail $13.87 $11.96 Off-Site Recreational $0.00 $0.00 Total Other Spending Per Overnight Visitor $42.51 $36.66 85.0% $31.16 Total Spending Per Overnight Visitor $136.81 $117.97 85.0% $100.28 Day Visitor Spending Assumptions On-Site Food & Beverage $5.28 $4.55 On-Site Retail/Other $3.54 $3.05 Off-Site Food & Beverage $24.44 $21.07 Off-Site Retail $22.92 $19.76 Off-Site Recreational $14.51 $12.51 Total Spending Per Day Visitor $70.69 $60.96 --- $15.00 Note: Assumes 2.5% inflation Source: GoNoCo Application; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Whitewater Program 09-1-2015.xlsx]Spending Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 55 Revised Final Report Tax Increment Analysis Project Contribution to RTZ Increment The Whitewater Park’s contribution to the total tax increment is comprised of all spending and resulting sales tax attracted to the RTZ by the Project. At stabilization in 2020, the Project attracts 397,920 annual visitors based on the Applicant’s estimates (Table 44). With average spending of $117.97 per day and 85 percent spending capture in the RTZ for overnight visitors, the Project attracts $11.6 million in spending to the RTZ. The resulting state sales tax is 336,000 per year from 2019 onward (2015 dollars). Over the 30 years from 2016 through 2045, the total tax increment from the Project, from all in- and out-of-state spending sources, is 9.62 million in 2015 dollars, and $14.6 million with 2.5 percent annual inflation. Net New Sales Tax The natural tax increment resulting from the growth of the base at 4.5 percent per year over the 2015 through 2045 time period is estimated at $253.5 million (Table 45). The Project tax increment is $14.6 million over the 30 year funding period, and the total tax increment forecast in the RTZ resulting from the Whitewater Park is $268.2 million. The net new state sales tax over 30 years is divided by this amount to calculate the eligible percentage of the tax increment that can be directed to the Project. To calculate net new out-of-state visitors, the 397,920 total visitors at stabilization in 2021 are multiplied by 10.5 percent to calculate out-of-state overnight visitors, and then by 75 percent to calculate net new out-of-state visitors. With daily spending of $117.97 per day and 85 percent of spending made in the RTZ, there is $3.1 million of net new spending and $90,800 of net new sales tax per year (2015 dollars). The 30 year total net new sales tax is estimated at $3.96 million with inflation of 2.5 percent per year. This equates to 1.48 percent of the RTZ tax increment above the base. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 58 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 6. STANLEY FILM CENTER ANALYSIS This chapter presents the TPA’s independent evaluation of the Applicant’s total estimates of total and net new out-of-state visitors and the associated spending and state sales tax projections for the Stanley Film Center. It also provides the TPA estimate of the net new sales tax eligible to be dedicated to the Project over the 30 year 2016 through 2045 time period. Influences on Visitor Forecasts The success of the Stanley Film Center will depend on multiple factors both internal and external to the project. Horror Film Genre – The Horror film and TV genre has grown exponentially in recent years Figure 2). While it represents a small portion of the overall film market, it has a dedicated cult” following. From 2012 through 2015 (YTD), horror film market share of the top 100 films ranged from three to 13 percent (Table 46). Figure 2 Horror Film Releases, 1930-2007 Source: http://www.popmatters.com/column/horror-cinema-by-the-numbers/ Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 59 Revised Final Report Table 46 Horror Film Market Share of Top 100 Films, 2012-2015 (YTD) Market Share by Film Genre 1995-2015 – The average market share for the past 20 years is 4.5 percent (Table 47). Horror films and TV have grown in popularity due to uncertainty around global trends and threats such as terrorism and prolonged wars, the Great Recession, and climate change and the related sustainability of the human race. Popular entertainment preferences therefore shift according to global events and sentiment. Although impossible to predict, the Horror Film genre may continue to grow, or alternately could decline in popularity in coming years. Potential to tap into other Film and Popular Culture Markets – If the Horror Film Genre declines, the Film Center may need to adapt to bring in films from other popular genres and/or other events to sustain the level of attendance and net new spending projected by the Applicant. The Applicant has noted potential crossover genres such as fantasy (e.g. Game of Thrones, The Hobbit) and Sci Fi that would be highly compatible with large national and international audiences that could be brought to Colorado. The Applicant has also indicated that references to “horror” were specifically left out of the Film Center name to allow for future flexibility in programming. Quality of the Experience/Project Execution – With any museum, other cultural center, or entertainment venue, the quality of the exhibits and events ultimately has the greatest influence on attendance and the ability to draw new people into a market. The Stanley Film Center is at a very early stage in its development and it is hard to predict based on the information presented how successful the programming will be. While the Applicant is pursuing collection and exhibit commitments, and is proposing a state of the art theatre facility, nothing (with any proposed project) is certain until it is complete and operating. Continued brand recognition of the Stanley Hotel and The Shining – The Shining was released in 1980, 35 years ago. While it still has a strong cult following, the popularity of the film and the strength of the association with the Stanley Hotel may decline over time. This could affect the strength of the brand and its ability to reach to U.S. markets outside Colorado and international markets as it does today. As noted, the Film Center would need to continue to adapt to changing market trends. Ability to sustain and refresh the experience – Successful museums and cultural centers continually update their rotating exhibits and collections to have relevance with popular culture, current events, or historic themes with resurging popularity. The Film Center will need to engage or have on staff top tier museum and cultural experts or consultants to aid in the continual curation and marketing of the overall experience. 2012 2013 2014 2015 (YTD) Horror films in Top 100 11 8 6 12 Horror Film Revenue $574,472,763 $664,208,834 $282,144,918 $998,230,429 Total Top 100 Revenue $10,034,865,654 $10,059,687,522 $9,584,804,025 $7,641,417,956 Horror Film Market Share 5.72%6.60%2.94%13.06% Source: boxofficemojo.com; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Data\[143071- Movie grosses 2012-2015.xlsx]Top 100 Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 60 Revised Final Report Table 47 Market Share by Film Genre 1995-2015 (YTD) Stanley Hotel Brand Although it was noted above that there is the potential for a decline in the broad name recognition and association between the Stanley Hotel and The Shining, the Stanley Hotel still enjoys strong and far reaching name or brand recognition. The Go NoCO project team prepared a press release announcing the planned Stanley Film Center. Within one week of the press release, nearly 300 news and popular culture publications had picked up the story. Major media brands that carried the story included CNN, CNBC, MTV, Bloomberg, and the BBC. Rank Genre Movies Total Box Office Tickets Share 1 Comedy 2,159 $40,970,506,993 6,480,601,588 22.18% 2 Adventure 640 $39,750,211,259 6,001,093,383 21.52% 3 Action 742 $33,116,412,659 5,126,977,723 17.93% 4 Drama 4,008 $31,065,221,622 5,013,091,899 16.82% 5 Thriller/Sus pense 794 $15,881,818,088 2,440,943,570 8.60% 6 Romantic Comedy 500 $9,235,576,060 1,513,279,033 5.00% 7 Horror 440 $8,297,455,719 1,306,026,987 4.49% 8 Documentary 1,618 $1,922,552,372 300,837,037 1.04% 9 Musical 132 $1,902,424,514 287,891,205 1.03% 10 Black Comedy 139 $1,169,228,969 176,092,503 0.63% 11 Western 50 $810,631,670 118,540,899 0.44% 12 Concert/Performance 52 $355,145,994 49,262,409 0.19% 13 Multiple Genres 25 $17,634,411 2,278,270 0.01% 14 Reality 4 $582,635 69,657 0.00% Source: http://www .the-numbers.com/market/genres H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Data\[143071- Market Share for Each Genre.xlsx]Genre Market Share Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 61 Revised Final Report Comparable Facilities The Applicant (nor the Third Party Analyst) has not been able to identify any directly comparable film centers, museums, or cultural attractions upon which to base attendance estimates. The film centers listed in the Applicant’s reports generally focus on historic films or films with a much more narrow audience than horror, fantasy, or sci-fi (Table 48). Despite being located in major metropolitan markets for the most part, they have relatively low attendance. Other specialized museums that focus on aspects of popular culture such as sports, rock-n-roll music, and historical events or themes are located in areas that are either large metropolitan areas, major tourist destinations on their own (generating general pass-through museum attendance), or both. Table 48 Cultural Museum and Film Center Facilities Facility Location MSA Population 2010) Ann. Visitors Capture Out of State Film Centers Anthology Film Archives New York, NY 19,567,410 55,000 0.3% --- George Eastman House Rochester, NY 1,054,323 105,238 10.0% --- Harvard Film Archive Cambridge, MA 4,552,402 19,000 0.4% --- Museum of the Moving Image New York, NY 19,567,410 145,000 0.7% --- Pacific Film Archive Berkeley, CA 4,335,391 71,421 1.6% --- Stanley Film Center & Auditorium Estes Park, CO 299,630 144,000 48.1% 90% Other Specialized Museums International Spy Museum Washington, D.C. 5,636,232 700,000 12.4% 90% Rock & Roll Hall of Fame [1] Cleveland, OH 2,077,240 450,000 21.7% 69% National WWII Museum New Orleans, LA 1,189,866 375,000 31.5% 80% Mob Museum Las Vegas, NV 1,951,269 250,000 12.8% 77% Football Hall of Fame Canton, OH 2,077,240 200,000 9.6% 70-80% Nat'l Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum Oklahoma City, OK 1,252,987 200,000 16.0% --- 1] Out of state attendance figure during hall of fame inductions. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, US Census H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Data\Stanley Film Center\[143071-Comps.xlsx]Comps Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 62 Revised Final Report Film Centers (Applicant’s Comparables) Only one of the film centers identified has more visitation than projected for the Stanley Film Center, the Pacific Film Archive located in the California Bay area with a population of 4.3 million. The Anthology Film Archives in Manhattan focuses on the preservation, study and exhibition of film with a focus on independent and avant-garde cinema. The facility draws 55,000 annual visitors and features 187-seat and 72-seat theaters, a film library with nearly 10,000 books, and a 1,100 square-foot film vault. Rochester, NY’s George Eastman House contains 400,000 photographs and negatives; 28,000 films and more than 4 million film stills; 53,000 publications; and more than 25,000 pieces of technology. Film screenings, held in two theaters with capacities of 500 and 200 patrons, account for over 40,000 of their approximately 105,000 annual visitors. We would expect a similar attendance pattern at the Stanley with theater patrons accounting for a large percentage of museum visitors. The Harvard Film Archive, a division of Harvard’s Fine Arts Library, is a collection of over 25,000 audio visual items from around the world and from almost every period in film history. The facility draws 19,000 visitors annually. The Museum of the Moving Image draws 145,000 annual visitors to its collection of over 130,000 artifacts relating to the art, history, and technology of the moving image in order to educate the public and examine the impact of film on culture and society. Located in Queens, the facility features rotating exhibitions and an amphitheater used to screen over 400 films annually. The Pacific Film Archive in Berkeley features a collection of more than 10,000 titles with areas of concentration in international, independent and experimental film. The PFA hosts approximately 71,000 visitors for over 450 annual programs. A redesigned facility (opening in 2016) will feature two new theaters with capacities of 232 and 33 people, a performance forum, study centers, and an art-making lab. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 63 Revised Final Report Specialized Museums These specialized museums have higher attendance figures. However, the common theme is that they are in major metropolitan markets and/or attract a broader audience. The International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C. is dedicated to the history and contemporary role of espionage. Over 750 related artifacts are displayed and the facility also features special exhibitions and educational programs. The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland celebrates the history and cultural significance of rock music. Opened in 1995, the 150,000 square foot, I.M. Pei designed building holds thousands of pieces of memorabilia including instruments used by famous musicians, stage clothing and props, original album art, handbills, posters, and photographs. With over 450,000 annual visitors, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame has the highest attendance of any hall of fame museum. The National World War II Museum (formerly the National D-Day Museum) in New Orleans focuses on the contribution made by the United States to the Allied Victory in World War II. It draws 375,000 annual visitors and features exhibits on home front planning and D-Day operations as well as several types of military vehicles and aircraft used in both the European and Pacific conflicts. The Mob Museum, or The National Museum of Organized Crime and Law Enforcement, located in Las Vegas is dedicated to featuring the artifacts, stories, and history of organized crime and the related actions and initiatives of law enforcement in the United States. The main attractions are a courtroom where several organized crime trials took place in the 1950’s and a blood-stained wall from the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre. Other exhibits are focused on mob violence as well as casino money skimming operations and law enforcement wiretapping. The facility draws 250,000 visitors annually. The Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio focuses on professional football in the United States with a primary focus on the National Football League. The facility draws 200,000 visitors per year and features exhibits include those devoted to past inductees as well as a Super Bowl Theater and artifacts from milestone moments in football history. The National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum in Oklahoma City draws 200,000 annual visitors with a focus on western history, art, and culture. It features a collection of classic and contemporary western art, a turn of the century western town, and interactive historic galleries relating to cowboys, rodeos, Native Americans, Victorian firearms, and frontier military history. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 64 Revised Final Report Film Festivals Film festivals are also not good comparables as they are generally one to two week events. The Sitges Film Festival outside Barcelona, Spain is the premier horror film industry event currently, and attracts roughly 50,000 to 65,000 paid attendees during the 9 day event. It is noted, however, that it is an international event which illustrates the potential market reach of the Film Center. The Sundance Film Center attracts approximately 45,000 attendees per year, but includes many film genres. Seasonality Seasonality will also play a role in the level of visitors that any new venue in Estes Park will be able to achieve. June, July, and August account for 55 percent of the Town’s sales tax collections, which is a good proxy for tourist activity (Figure 3). To achieve the attendance levels forecasted, the Film Center will need to attract people in what is traditionally the off-season in Estes Park with less optimum weather conditions. From an economic development perspective, this is desirable as there is little other economic activity in Estes Park outside the summer tourist season. The Film Center could therefore potentially add visitors during off-peak times. Figure 3 Estes Park Sales Tax Collections by Month, 2014 Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 65 Revised Final Report Third Party Analyst Visitor Forecast The considerations discussed above indicate the uniqueness of the proposed Stanley Film Center as well as the challenges in forecasting attendance and net new visitors. We have not identified any compelling data either in the Application or through our own research to validate the Applicant’s attendance forecast. We do have concerns that the attendance figures are high overall and may include (based on the methodology used) some double counting of attendees to the museum and other events by attendees who were already at the Film Center for a related or un-related event. In supplemental information provided, the Applicant suggests that the projections account for this and are conservative because they are only attributing a 1.0 to 1.5 day/night average trip length or overnight stay to most attractions. The Applicant suggested that if analyzed using a more typical average trip length of 2.0 to 3.0 days, a much lower net new factor (estimating the draw of the Film Center as the primary trip purpose) would be applied, ranging from approximately 40 to 50 percent. We do however believe that the number of overnight stays attributed to the museum are either overstated or double counted among the other attractions. The museum is a portion of the overall Film Center, and the Applicant has suggested that the entire Film Center will be used as an attraction, not just the 11,000 square foot museum portion. While difficult to quantify, we believe it to be likely that museum visitors are being double counted along with visitors to the other components of the Film Center. We have therefore assumed that 25 percent of museum attendees are motivated strongly enough to see the museum. This reduces the overnight visitor day estimate to 162,640 from the Applicant’s 263,400. Table 49 Adjusted Stanley Film Center Stabilized Attendance and Visitor Days Upon project stabilization in 2021, the Film Center is forecasted to attract 280,500 visitors per year comprised of 162,640 overnight visitors and 117,860 day visitors (Table 50). The potential novelty effect” forecasted by the Applicant of higher museum attendance in the opening years is included in the forecast. Venue Attendance Length of Stay Visitor DaysOvernight % Overnight # Day Visitors Museum 144,000 1.00 144,000 25.0% 36,000 108,000 Film - Large Hall 50,000 1.00 50,000 95.0% 47,500 2,500 Film - Half Hall 13,875 1.25 17,340 95.0% 16,470 870 Film - Small Hall 9,375 1.25 11,720 95.0% 11,130 590 Theatre Rentals 20,625 1.50 30,940 95.0% 29,390 1,550 Meetings 3,000 1.50 4,500 95.0% 4,280 220 Concerts & Entertainment 10,000 1.00 10,000 95.0% 9,500 500 Awards & Social Events 6,750 1.00 6,750 50.0% 3,380 3,370 Master Classes 1,750 3.00 5,250 95.0%4,990 260 Total 259,375 280,500 58.0% 162,640 117,860 Source: Anderson Analytics H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-Stanley Program 10-26-2015.xlsx]Attendance 10-26 Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 66 Revised Final Report Out-of-State and Net New Visitors The Applicant estimates that nearly 80 percent of visitors to the Film Center will originate from outside Colorado. This number was based on Stanley Hotel guests, of which 70 percent come from out-of-state, and a collection of other properties managed and booked by the Stanley Hotel which has approximately 90 percent out of state guests. While hotels and hotel-based attractions would typically have a higher portion of visitors from out-of-state, we point out that the Applicant’s forecasts exceed may other large attractions. For comparison, 25 percent of the visitors to Rocky Mountain National Park come from outside Colorado. The proportion of out of state visitors to the Colorado Chautauqua in Boulder is 19 percent and 17 percent at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, the highest out-of-state visitors of the Science and Cultural Facilities District venues. The only (somewhat) comparable museum where out-of-state attendance this high is the International Spy Museum in Washington D.C., a small enclave which borders two states with high out-of-state visitation in part due to its unique geography. However, given the potential national and international draw of the Film Center due to the popularity of the horror film genre, it is possible that the film center could outperform other venues in the state, if successful. The TPA has made adjustments to out-of-state visitors for the event types that are more likely to have a broader and more general audience, including concerts and entertainment, and meetings. These have been adjusted down to 50 percent out-of-state. These types of events also have the most potential for cannibalization with other Colorado venues, and have been adjusted to 50 percent net new. While we believe the out-of-state estimates for museum and film attendees are high, we have not identified any quantitative data upon which to provide an adjusted estimate. Total net new out of state visitors are estimated by the TPA at 106,640 per year from 2021 onward (Table 51). Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 69 Revised Final Report Tax Increment Analysis Project Contribution to RTZ Increment The Film Center’s contribution to the total tax increment is comprised of all spending and resulting sales tax attracted to the RTZ by the Project. At stabilization in 2021, the TPA estimates 208,500 total annual visitors (Table 52). With average spending of $217.42 per day (Applicant’s estimate) the Project would attract $37.1 million in spending to the RTZ. No adjustment for spending captured in the RTZ is made as it is included in the Applicant’s forecast of out-of-state room nights. The resulting state sales tax is $1.03 million per year from 2021 onward (2015 dollars). Over the 30 years from 2016 through 2045, the total tax increment from the Project, from all in- and out-of-state spending sources, would be $28.2 million in 2015 dollars and $43.5 million with 2.5 percent annual inflation. Net New Sales Tax The natural tax increment resulting from the growth of the base at 4.5 percent per year over the 2015 through 2045 time period is estimated at $253.5 million (Table 53). The Project tax increment is $43.5 million over the 30 year funding period, and the total tax increment forecast in the RTZ resulting from the Film Center is $297.0 million. The net new state sales tax over 30 years is divided by this amount to calculate the eligible percentage of the tax increment that can be directed to the Project. To calculate net new out-of-state visitors, the 106,640 net new out-of-state visitors at stabilization in 2021 are multiplied by the daily spending factor of $217.42 per day. This results in $672,400 in annual net new sales tax from 2021 onward (2015 dollars) and $18.5 million over 30 years. The 30 year total net new sales tax is estimated at $28.5 million with inflation of 2.5 percent per year. This equates to 9.60 percent of the RTZ tax increment above the base. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 72 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 7. FINANCIAL NEED This chapter addresses the RTA statute requirement to evaluate whether the requested RTA funding is needed to enable the Project to be built. The Applicant needs to “provide reliable economic data demonstrating that in the absence of state sales tax increment revenue, the Project is not reasonably anticipated to be developed in the foreseeable future.” Financial Need Criteria RTA funding is intended to act as gap financing for projects in which there is a financial hurdle that is impeding development; it is not intended to function as a grant program nor is it intended to be the primary source of funding. In order to demonstrate financial need, it needs to be shown that the financing gap is the principle impediment to a project moving forward. These criteria therefore requires an applicant to demonstrate some degree of "project readiness" so that there is an assurance that any state funding that is committed will go to a project that is defined and approved based on the application, and does not substantially change after funding is granted. The 2014/15 Application Guidelines provide the following Criteria and Assessment Factors: Description of the financing entity and financing plan. Financial feasibility analysis and pro forma including the project’s eligible costs and other costs and revenues (break out of TIF and other revenue sources). Analysis demonstrates that project can generate enough revenue to cover operating costs, debt service, and provide a return of and on equity. Ratios such as return on equity IRR, debt coverage, loan to value and others relevant to the project should be provided. Financial pro forma model shows the use of state sales tax increment revenue should provide an economic impetus which makes the project’s development viable when it otherwise would not be, or an analysis showing a project might be viable without tax increment revenue but with much smaller scale and would be much less extraordinary and unique. Identification of specific viable sources of private and/or public capital for project. Commitment of public and/or private capital for the project demonstrated by letters of interest and commitment letters from lenders, identification of equity sources, and similar documents. TIF revenues are gap financing (i.e., not the first piece of the capital structure). Project is specifically identified and described with site selected. Project is near shovel ready: concept plans and drawings prepared, builder RFPs drafted, required federal, state and local permits and regulations identified, and land control assemblage, options, leases) in place. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 73 Revised Final Report PeliGrande Resort and Windsor Conference Center Project Readiness The PeliGrande is proposed to be developed by Senate Hospitality Group, comprised of executives from the Gaylord Entertainment Company and John Q. Hammons hotel developer and owner groups. The hotel development team would partner with Water Valley Development, owner of the proposed hotel site. Water Valley Development is the developer of the Water Valley master planned community in Windsor, CO. The Applicant reports that all necessary utilities are available at the proposed site. Based on the information submitted, we have not identified any unusual or obvious impediments to the Project moving forward. The Applicant’s analysis assumes visitors from a proposed golf course and a commitment from a PGA Champions Tour event. The golf course is not part of the Application and we have not evaluated its status or likelihood that it will be built. Financial Need The proposed financing plan assumes a 23 percent equity contribution by the developer which is a reasonable amount of equity to risk in a development project (Table 54). A bond from a 2.0 percent public improvement fee (which is a privately imposed fee but functions similar to a sales tax), accounts for 18 percent of the funding. Local sales tax sharing from Windsor makes up 4 percent of the sources, and RTA funds are estimated at 3 percent. The developer would also secure a $58.0 million conventional loan, comprising 53 percent of the funding sources. Public financing sources account for 25 percent of the funding sources as described in Chapter 2. EPS reviewed the Applicant’s financial analysis of the Project contained in the HVS Report Application Appendix) and in supplemental spreadsheets submitted. Using the band of investment technique, an accepted measure which values the income streams to equity and debt, the HVS analysis identifies a financing gap for the Project of approximately $27.0 million. The financing gap is attributed to two primary factors. First, the hotel would be built to standards and at a cost above what the Northern Colorado market currently supports, with a per-room cost of $366,600, compared to a cost of $150,000 to $200,000 for mid-range limited service hotels that are more common in the surrounding market area. Second, the analysis of room rates recommends an average room rate of $247 per night based on competitive rates in the surrounding market area, which is not high enough to generate a return on investment at the proposed construction cost and quality. The Applicant also provided a development cash flow pro forma. The internal rate of return (IRR) estimated in the pro forma with $3.2 million in bond proceeds from $12.9 million in RTA funds is estimated at 12.9 percent, including $6.5 million in land costs. The net present value (NPV) at a 12 percent discount rate is $3.9 million. Without the $3.2 million RTA bond, the IRR is 12.1 percent and the NPV is $650,000. Without the total city and state public financing package, the IRR is 7.9 percent with an NPV of negative $23.1 million. In previous RTA applications, we have analyzed financial pro formas against a 12 percent hurdle rate (discount rate) on an unlevered basis. This is in our opinion a reasonable hurdle rate for projects requesting public subsidies or incentives. Depending on the financing assumptions, an unlevered 12 percent IRR can generate higher leveraged returns on equity ranging from the mid- to high-teens to low 20 percent range. The Applicant has noted, and we agree, that the IRR calculation is highly sensitive to the timing Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 74 Revised Final Report of cash flows and can easily change by 2 or more percentage points if bonds are delayed or if construction draws occur earlier or later than estimated, hence its reliance on the band of investment technique to estimate financial need. The Town of Windsor has indicated in a letter provided in the Application that the local public financing incentives are subject to the successful award of RTA funds. This would appear to suggest the Applicant is relying on RTA funding as the first piece of the capital structure which is not in compliance with one of the assessment factors listed above. The Applicant provided supplemental information describing how local and state funds would be combined to support bond financing; local and state funds would enter the project capital stack at the same time. If bonds can be underwritten and sold, it would not be until the equity and conventional debt financing pieces are in place. Table 54 Summary of Financial Performance by Project Project Net Present Value Internal Rate of Return PeliGrande Resort Before Public Financing -$23,064,106 7.9% With Local Public Financing $647,269 12.1% With Local Public Financing and RTA Funds $3,924,894 12.9% Indoor Waterpark Resort Before Public Financing -$24,927,832 8.7% With Local Public Financing -$4,092,191 11.4% With Local Public Financing and RTA Funds $2,002,168 12.3% U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Before Public Financing -$13,476,404 8.1% With Local Public Financing -$2,551,733 11.1% With Local Public Financing and RTA Funds -$1,539,404 11.5% Stanley Film Center Before Public Financing -$11,744,737 2.2% With Local Public Financing N/A N/A With Local Public Financing and RTA Funds -$406,737 11.4% Source: GoNoCO Applicants; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Data\[143071-GoNoCO Proforma Summary.xlsx]Pro Forma Summary Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 75 Revised Final Report Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies Project Readiness The development team for the Indoor Waterpark includes former management from Great Wolf Resorts, the owner and developer of 13 indoor waterpark hotels. The Application identifies a site for the Project and reports that all necessary utilities and access are readily available to the site. Based on the information submitted, we have not identified any major impediments to the Project. Financial Need The proposed financing plan for the $138.3 million Project includes an equity contribution from the developer of $32.3 million or 23.4 percent of the Project cost. Local public financing includes an $8.8 million local sales tax-based TIF from the City of Loveland (6.4 percent), and $14.8 million from a 2.0 percent PIF (10.7 percent) on all on-site food and beverage and retail sales, and a 5.0 percent PIF on all lodging sales. Conventional bank financing comprises $75.6 million 54.6 percent) of the funding and financing sources. Using the band of investment technique, the HVS Analysis values the Indoor Water Park Hotel at 107.9 million based on the values of the income streams to debt and equity, compared to construction cost of $138.3 million, indicating a financing gap of $30.4 million. In the development pro forma analysis (10 year cash flow), prior to any state or local public financing, the Project is estimated to generate an IRR of 8.2 percent and a NPV of negative $28.4 million, including $6.5 million for land. With City of Loveland public financing and the proposed PIF, the IRR is estimated at 11.4 percent. With $6.1 million in RTA bond proceeds, the IRR is estimated at 12.3 percent. As noted above, the IRR is highly sensitive to the timing of cash flows, whereas the band of investment technique removes some of this uncertainty. The City of Loveland has stated in the Application that the local public financing package is contingent on the award of RTA funds. As noted above, the Applicant provided a clarification that indicates that the state and local funds will be pooled to support bond financing. If bonds can be underwritten and sold, it would not be until the equity and conventional debt financing pieces are in place. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 76 Revised Final Report U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Project Readiness The identified development team for the Whitewater Park includes several individuals with various business backgrounds and a common interest in whitewater sports. It is not specifically stated in the Application if the team has experience in the development or operation of major tourism facilities. One team member is reported to have been a key designer for the U.S. National Whitewater Center in Charlotte, N.C, the primary comparable project cited in the Application. Financial Need The financing plan includes $9.8 million in private equity (16 percent), and assumes a $39.2 million loan (64 percent). The City of Loveland local TIF contribution is minor, at $817,000 in bond proceeds. A $10.0 million bond is estimated from a 2.0 percent PIF on all on-site food and beverage and retail sales, and a 7.8 percent PIF on all admissions and rentals. RTA funds are estimated by the Applicant to contribute $1.0 million in financing proceeds, a minor amount of the total funding and financing needs. Before the PIF and local TIF, the IRR for the Project is estimated at 8.1 percent over a 10 year holding period. This is not a typical real estate product that would be developed to be sold for its cash flow, and the Applicant has used an appropriately high 11.5 percent capitalization rate to calculate the reversion (sale) value of the asset at the end of the holding period. After local TIF and the PIF are applied, the IRR is estimated at 11 percent with NPV of negative $2.5 million. The $1.0 million in financing from the RTA funds has a small impact on the pro forma, raising the IRR to 11.5 percent. The Whitewater Park is a highly specialized facility, and a 12 percent hurdle rate may not be appropriate. A private investor may require a higher return; a project like this developed in partnership with local governments may only look for break-even operating revenues. The $10.5 million in land costs comprise 17 percent of the Project cost, which is high in our judgement. Renegotiating with the land owner to reduce the land costs by $1.0 million or more would have the same and potentially greater impact than RTA funds. The financial need for this Project is in our judgement due in part to high land costs. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 77 Revised Final Report Stanley Film Center The development team for the Stanley Film Center is led by the Grand Heritage Hotel Group, owner of the Stanley Hotel, and includes the Stanley Film Center Founding Board. The Stanley Film Center Board includes several notable actors and film industry professionals. Elijah Wood, an American actor perhaps best known for playing Frodo Baggins in the Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit, is a partner in Spectre Vision (a film company) along with actors Daniel Noah and Josh Waller who would have some involvement in the Film Center. Simon Pegg (played Scotty in Star Trek and roles in other notable films), and directors and writers George Romero and Mick Garris are also on the board. The Executive Team consists of Alexandre Philippe, a Colorado-based film maker, and Frederic Lahey, director of the Colorado Film School which is located at the Colorado Community College Aurora campus at Lowry. Discussions with the Applicant indicate that they are planning to hire a museum consultant(s) to be either on staff or on a contractual basis to assist with the ongoing planning and securing of permanent and rotating exhibit materials and/or activities. The financing plan for the $24.5 million Stanley Film Center includes a donation of $2.0 million equivalent to the land cost for the project. The operating pro forma for the film center shows approximately $8.6 million in operating revenues and $7.2 million in expenses for net operating income (NOI) of $1.4 million in a stabilized year. At a 14 percent discount rate, the NOI is worth 11.1 million over a 30 year Project financing period. The non-profit Project entity indicates it would secure an $11.1 million loan on the Project net operating income, and RTA bonds would contribute another $9.7 million. A developer bond debt service guarantee of $1.6 million is also included. The Grand Heritage Hotel Group or a related entity or investor would likely need to guarantee any loans secured by RTA funds and operating income, estimated at approximately 13 million in guarantees. It is our determination that the financing plan for the Stanley Film Center is not fully developed. While there is clearly a financing gap and the Project would need RTA funds to be viable, it is relying on RTA funds as the major funding source. The Applicant has not raised any philanthropic support from the film industry, Stanley Film Center Board members, the broader Estes Park Community. The Stanley Hotel, which directly benefits from activities held in the Center, will likely have to provide loan guarantees but the financing plan does not include substantial equity from the Stanley Hotel or related entities. The Project is unique and potentially a significant tourism draw, however the concept is also risky and unproven. We recommend that any RTA award for this Project element be contingent on the completion of a comprehensive business plan, a feasible construction financing program, and specific benchmarks regarding the programming and development of film and media events that are truly capable of attracting out-of-state destination visitors. Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 78 Revised Final Report Speculative Project – The attendance and sales tax forecasts for the project are highly uncertain because of the unique nature of the project. There are no comparable facilities that provide a good indication of possible performance. The performance of the project will be almost entirely dependent on the Applicant’s ability to successfully execute the project, market it to a national and international audience, and sustain a high level of out-of-state visitation over the 30 year financing period. State Share of Risk – Over 30 years, the State’s contribution to the project exceeds the project cost in nominal dollars. The amount of financing estimated to be supported by RTA funds is estimated at 40 percent of the project cost. Compared to the other Go NoCO project components, the State would be assuming a considerably larger share of the risk that the project is successful. As noted above, amount of debt supported by the forecasted operating revenues is likely optimistic, although we have no quantitative basis to dispute the attendance forecasts which drive the operating revenues. If these operating revenues are not achieved, the project will either not be sustained at the level of quality proposed, and/or require a larger equity contribution from the owners or Stanley Film Center Board. Private equity, non-profit, or Board Participation in Project – Notably absent from the funding and financing plan is any private equity film industry donations or other philanthropic fundraising from the Film Center Board, or contributions from the Film Center Board members themselves. We understand the owners may need to guarantee loans, however, there is no true equity component to the project financing plan. The Project is potentially a significant tourism draw that may be worthy of RTA support. However, we recommend that any RTA award for this Project element be contingent on the completion of a comprehensive business plan, a feasible construction financing program, and specific performance benchmarks regarding the programming of the museum and film center and the development of film and media events that are truly capable of attracting out-of-state destination visitors. Attachment 1 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 79 143071-Go NoCO Report_10-29-15.docx 8. FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS This chapter presents EPS’ analysis of the Project's economic and fiscal impacts to the state, including employment, wages, income tax, and school impacts. This analysis isolates the impacts of the Projects’ construction and operations employment. It does not evaluate the broader economic impacts of increased tourism, which the Applicant has provided in the Application. Construction Employment The Project will create one-time employment impacts during construction and ongoing annual employment during the operation of the Project. Based on the Applicant's estimated construction costs, the direct construction employment from the $302 million in total construction spending not including financing costs) would support 2,771 direct jobs during the construction period, as shown in Table 55. Over the two year construction period estimated by the Applicant, this is equivalent to 1,385 annual jobs. Table 55 Direct Construction Jobs Impact The 2,771 direct construction jobs also support an additional total of 980 indirect jobs through the purchases of materials and services needed during construction (Table 56). The spending of labor income from the direct and indirect jobs supports 1,500 induced jobs during the five year construction period for a total impact of 5,251 jobs. The construction employment multiplier for the Project is 1.90. The impacts of each Project component are also reported separately, below. Cost Item IMPLAN Sector Construction Cost Output per Worker Direct Construction Jobs Average Annual Wage Indoor Waterpark Resort Non-residential construction $126,330,000 $109,000 1,159 $42,000 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Non-residential construction $50,522,000 $109,000 464 $42,000 PeliGrande Resort Non-residential construction $100,705,884 $109,000 924 $42,000 Stanley Film Center Non-residential construction $24,468,000 $109,000 224 $42,000 Total $302,025,884 $109,000 2,771 $42,000 2 Year Average Annual Employment 1,385 Source: City of Denver, IMPLAN, Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-NoCo IMPLAN 09-23-2015.xlsx]Direct Constuction Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 80 Revised Final Report Table 56 Direct, Indirect, and Induced Construction Jobs Ongoing Operations Employment The Project will employ a permanent ongoing workforce after the proposed facilities begin operations. The Applicant’s direct job estimates from the Application and HVS Reports are summarized below. The full Project would support a total of 552 jobs when complete (Table 57). The employment multiplier for the four Project components ranges from 1.83 to 1.99 with an average of 1.96. The multiplier effect results in an additional 272.5 indirect and 255.1 induced jobs. These figures reflect only the impacts of operations jobs for an evaluation of the job types created. The Application presents a more thorough analysis of the economic impacts of new visitor spending. Table 57 Ongoing Operations Employment Impacts Project Component Construction Cost Direct Construction Jobs Indirect Impact Induced Impact Total Impact Indoor Waterpark Resort $126,330,000 1,159 410 630 2,199 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park $50,522,000 464 160 250 874 PeliGrande Resort $100,705,884 924 330 500 1,754 Stanley Film Center $24,468,000 224 80 120 424 Total $277,557,884 2,771 980 1,500 5,251 2 Year Average Annual Employment 1,385 490 750 2,625 Construction Jobs Multiplier 1.00 0.35 0.54 1.90 Source: IMPLAN, Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\M odels\[143071-NoCo IM PLAN 09-23-2015.xlsx]Direct Const IM PLAN Facility Industry [1] Total Direct Jobs Indirect Jobs Induced Jobs Total Effect Operations Jobs [2] Indoor Waterpark Resort Hotels and motels 200.0 102.6 88.6 391.1 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3] Other amusement and recreation industries 65.0 21.1 32.6 118.6 PeliGrande Resort Other Accommodations 270.0 140.0 126.0 536.0 Stanley Film Center Museums, historical sites, zoos, and parks 17.0 8.8 7.9 33.7 Total 552.0 272.5 255.1 1,079.5 Job Multipliers Indoor Waterpark Resort Hotels and motels 1.00 0.51 0.44 1.96 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3] Other amusement and recreation industries 1.00 0.32 0.50 1.83 PeliGrande Resort Other Accommodations 1.00 0.52 0.47 1.99 Stanley Film Center Museums, historical sites, zoos, and parks 1.00 0.52 0.47 1.99 Overall Project 1.00 0.49 0.46 1.96 Note: Direct operations jobs estimated by EPS; not provided by Applicant. 1] IMPLAN Sector Scheme 2] Jobs include part and full time jobs, not adjusted for full time equivalents. Source: IMPLAN; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-NoCo IMPLAN 09-23-2015.xlsx]Ops Impact Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 81 Revised Final Report Other Impacts Income Tax The payroll impacts of the Project will generate state personal income tax. Effective tax rates were obtained from OEDIT's Colorado Insight Model. Using the average wages below, provided by the Applicant, the Project would support $15.3 million in annual payroll (Table 58). The resulting state personal income tax is estimated at $384,000 per year. Table 58 Payroll and Personal Income Tax Facilit y Industry [1]Calculation Operations Employment Indoor Waterpark Resort Hotels and motels 200 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3] Other amusement and recreation industries 65 PeliGrande Resort Other Accommodations 270 Stanley Film Center Museums, historical sites, zoos, and parks 17 Direct Jobs 552 Average Wage Indoor Waterpark Resort $28,100 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3]22,400 PeliGrande Resort 28,100 Stanley Film Center 37,232 Overall Project $27,710 Total Payroll Indoor Waterpark Resort $5,620,000 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3]1,456,000 PeliGrande Resort 7,587,000 Stanley Film Center 632,944 Total Annual $15,295,944 Personal Income Tax Effective Tax Rate Indoor Waterpark Resort 2.5%$142,000 U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park [3]2.4%$34,000 PeliGrande Resort 2.5%$191,000 Stanley Film Center 2.7%$17,000 Total Annual $384,000 1] IMPLAN Sector Scheme Source: City and County of Denver; OEDIT Colorado Insight Model; Economic & Planning Systems H:\143071-Colorado RTA Evaluation\Models\[143071-NoCo IMPLAN 09-23-2015.xlsx]Payroll Attachment 1 TPA Evaluation: Go NoCO RTA Application October 30, 2015 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 82 Revised Final Report School Impacts The 552 direct jobs estimated to be supported by the Project are small in comparison to the total Northern Colorado labor market. Any in-migration resulting from out of area job seekers fitting new jobs can likely be absorbed within the Loveland, Windsor and surrounding community school districts. Attachment 1 18 ATTACHMENT 2: REGIONAL TOURISM ZONE AREA MAP PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT EXHIBIT A Loveland RTZ 0 0.25 0.5 0.7510.125 Miles Windsor Loveland County vs. Loveland RTZs County Loveland EXHIBIT A CR 36 CR 40 CR 30 CR 3CR 3C R 3FCR 32E CR 34CCR 5CR 5CR3CROSSROADS BLVD E HARMONY RDMAIN ST4TH AVE NFAIRGROUNDSAVECENTERRAPKWYWCR 74 WCR 19WCR 76 1/ 2WCR23WCR70N LCR 3WCR 76 WCR 62WCR15WCR 68 1/2 W C R 60 W CR 76 WCR 13WCR 72 E LCR 30 WCR64 E LCR 32 W CR62 1/4WCR 21WCR 15WCR 17S LCR 5WCR 13MAIN ST EASTMAN PARK DR 1ST ST7THST1 inch equals 1 miles Updated: 1/28/2015 Updated by: stometich Created: 10/6/ 34 LakeEstesPark T h om p s o n R i v e r Thompson R i v e r F R E E L A NDCTE W O N D E R V I E W A V E S W S TEAMERPKWYSO U T H LN WILLOWST O N E D R PRIVATEDRIVE FI N D L E Y CTOVER L O OK CT STEAMERD R PANORAMACIRMACGREGORAV E BIG THOMPSON AVEHighlighted property boundary is the proposed RTZ boundary provided to Enterprise GIS in a sketch drawing. 0325 650162. 5 Feet Daycd 2/ 27/15 Stanley RTZ Boundary Request EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT A 19 ATTACHMENT 3: COLORADO SPRINGS FINAL WRITTEN RESOLUTION EXHIBIT A 1 August 31, 2020 motion for consideration by the Commission: Based on all supporting materials included in the board book for this meeting, as well as presentations from OEDIT, the NCRTA, and the developer in this and previous meetings, I move that the Commission modify its approval of the NCRTA (Go NoCO) Regional Tourism Act Project (“Project”) as follows and direct OEDIT staff and legal counsel to incorporate the following new conditions of approval and other related provisions (that apply only to the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park Project Elements) into an amended Resolution No. #4 for adoption by the Commission nunc pro tunc at a later meeting: The two Project Elements (the Indoor Waterpark Resort of the Rockies and the U.S. Whitewater Adventure Park) are combined into a single integrated Project Element. This integrated Project Element must still fulfill all of the conditions of approval set forth in the existing Resolution #4, except to the extent that modifications to such conditions, which include proposed changes in the size of facilities and programing as more fully described in the board book for this meeting, are hereby approved by this motion. The Project Element Cap for the integrated Project Element is $25,088,909, which is 1,639,881 decrease from the combination of the two previously separate Project Element Caps. The Aggregate Cap for the Go NoCO Project is correspondingly reduced to 84,479,494, from $86,119,375. OEDIT staff must calculate the resulting change in the percentage of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue due to the modifications approved by this motion that will be dedicated to this integrated Project Element and the overall Go NoCO Project. The Commission understands the developer of the integrated Project Element will be seeking a one-year extension of time to Commence Substantial Work, and refers the developer to the March 11, 2020 email from OEDIT Executive Director Betsy Markey to NCRTA Chair John Fogle, and the May 15, 2020 email from Jeff Kraft to Chair Fogle, which contains guidance for the submission of a written request for extension. EXHIBIT A Motion for Consideration by the Commission at January 21, 2021 Meeting [[OED IT staff recommends that the EDC approve the following motion concerning the Go NoCO Regional Tourism Act Project]] Proposed Motion: I move that the Commission modify its approval of the Go NoCO Regional Tourism Act Project ("Project") as follows and direct OED IT staff and legal counsel to incorporate the following terms and conditions of approval into a written amended Resolution No. 4, as previously amended by the motion carried on August 31, 2020 and hereby amended (collectively, "Amended Resolution No. 4"), for adoption by the Commission nunc pro tune at a later meeting: •Unless otherwise stated, all capitalized terms in this motion have the same meaning as defined by and used in the Colorado Regional Tourism Act,§§ 24-46-301 through -310, C.R.S. (2020) ("RTA"). •For good cause shown in the October 15, 2020 written request for an extension submitted by the Northern Colorado Regional Tourism Authority ("NCR TA") on behalf of the Town of Estes Park and the City of Loveland, the deadline to commence substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 for the two remaining Project Elements, the Stanley Film Center ("SFC") and Loveland Whitewater Adventure Park and Resort ("WAPR"), is extended to November 12, 2021. •Based on the letter dated August 27, 2020 to OEDIT staff from Martin Lind, the sponsor/developer for the PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Project Element representing that his company would no longer be "pursuing the project known as the Peli Grande Resort and Convention Center," as well as the lack of any request by the Town of Windsor to extend the commencement of substantial work deadline and propose permissible modifications to that Project Element, approval of the Peli Grande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Project Element is revoked. •If, between January 21, 2021 and November 12, 2021, the Town of Estes Park and the SFC Project Element Sponsor/Developer request that the Commission modify its approval of the NCR TA and instead approve another Financing Entity to serve the SFC, the Commission may adopt a motion doing so provided that the NCRTA consents in writing to the modification at the time the request is made. Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. •If the Commission adopts a motion approving another Financing Entity to serve the SFC, then the NCR TA shall promptly transfer 64.9% of the State Sales Tax Increment Revenue that is held in the special fund required by C.R.S. § 24-46-307(1)(b) as of the date of the motion and is hereby allocated to the special fund established and maintained by the new Financing Entity for the SFC. Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT B ATTACHMENT 4 Page 47 Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT B If the Commission adopts a motion approving another Financing Entity to serve the SFC, then the NCRTA and the new Financing Entity shall promptly agree to an arrangement by which the portion of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue dedicated to the Project is apportioned and paid on a monthly basis 64.9% to the special fund maintained by the new Financing Entity for the SFC and 35.1% to the special fund maintained by the NCRTA for the WAPR. If the Commission determines that both remaining Project Elements have commenced substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then all State Sales Tax Increment Revenue dedicated to the Project that is received by the Financing Entity(ies) after January 21, 2021 must be allocated 64.9% to the SFC and 35.1% to the WAPR. These percentages are based on each Project Element’s share of overall net new revenue generated by the Project as approved by the Commission. If the Commission determines that only one of the remaining Project Elements commences substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then 100% of the State Sales Tax Increment Revenue dedicated to the Project that is received by the Financing Entity(ies) after January 21, 2021 must be allocated to the Project Element that has commenced. If the Commission determines that neither Project Element has commenced substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then the Project shall be revoked and the Colorado Department of Revenue shall cease all further payments of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue to the Financing Entity(ies). If the Commission determines that both remaining Project Elements have commenced substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then the total cumulative dollar amount of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue dedicated to the Project (referred to hereinafter as the aggregate cap”) decreases from $86,119.375.00 to $71,488,491.00. If the Commission determines that only the SFC has commenced substantial work on or before November 12, 2021, then the aggregate cap decreases from $86,119.375.00 to $46,399,582.00, which is the Project Element-specific cap for the SFC. If the Commission determines that only the WAPR has commenced substantial work on or before November 12, 2021, then the aggregate cap decreases from $86,119.375.00 to $25,088,909.00, which is the Project Element-specific cap for the WAPR. Once the aggregate or Project Element- specific cap, as applicable, has been received by the Financing Entity(ies), the Colorado Department of Revenue shall cease all further payments of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue even if the Financing Term for the Project has not yet expired. If the Commission determines that either or both of the two remaining Project Elements commence(s) substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then the percentage of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue dedicated to the Project shall remain at 20.48% until either the date on which the applicable total aggregate cap has been received by the Financing Entity(ies), or the date on which the Financing Term expires, whichever occurs sooner. Page 48 Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT B The Financing Term for the Project is extended from thirty (30) to forty (40) years and ends on November 12, 2055. Any State Sales Tax Increment Revenue received by the NCRTA through January 21, 2021, including any revenue specifically dedicated to the PeliGrande Resort & Windsor Conference Center Project Element under Amended Resolution No. 4 shall remain the property of the Financing Entity(ies), which must use the revenue to finance Eligible Costs of the two remaining Project Elements. If the Commission determines that both remaining Project Elements commence substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then the total amount of revenue received by the NCRTA through January 21, 2021 shall be allocated 64.9% to the SFC and 35.1% to the WAPR. If the Commission determines that only one of the remaining Project Elements commences substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then 100% of the total amount of revenue received by the NCRTA through January 21, 2021 shall be allocated to that Project Element. If the Commission determines that neither Project Element has commenced substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 on or before November 12, 2021, then 100% of any unspent State Sales Tax Increment Revenue received by the Financing Entity(ies) must promptly be returned to the Colorado Department of Revenue. Before any State Sales Tax Increment Revenue, or the proceeds of any bond or debt instrument funded by a pledge of State Sales Tax Increment Revenue, may be used to reimburse any Eligible Costs for the WAPR, except for administrative costs of the NCRTA, the separate financing transactions for the development of the hotel and water amenities (i.e., the Whitewater Adventure Park and waterpark) that comprise the WAPR must both be completed (i.e., closed). The hotel and water amenities that comprise the WAPR must be located adjacent to and physically connected with one another. The separate operators of the hotel and water amenities must enter an agreement for their joint operation that provides mutual benefits and ensures that the WAPR Project Element operates in a cohesive manner. Before any State Sales Tax Increment Revenue may be used to reimburse any Eligible Costs for the SFC, except for administrative costs of the Financing Entity serving the SFC, or pledged to any bond or other debt instrument, the Town of Estes Park and the Financing Entity serving the SFC must sign a cooperation agreement with the SFC Project Element Sponsor/Developer delineating the relationship and decision-making authority for the SFC. Before any State Sales Tax Increment Revenue may be used to reimburse any Eligible Costs for the WAPR, except for administrative costs of the NCRTA, or pledged to any bond or other debt instrument, the City of Loveland and the NCRTA must sign a cooperation agreement with the WAPR Project Element Sponsor/Developer delineating the relationship and decision-making authority for the WAPR. Page 49 Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT B Per the representations made by the Local Governments in their original RTA application to the Commission, before any State Sales Tax Increment Revenue may be used to reimburse any Eligible Costs for the WAPR, except for administrative costs of the NCRTA, or pledged to any bond or other debt instrument, the City of Loveland must execute a binding written document that pledges all of the 3% municipal sales tax generated on-site by the WAPR and all property taxes assessed to the WAPR based on current property tax rates to the financing of the Project Element for 30 years from the date of City Council approval of such pledge notwithstanding the new Financing Term for the Project set forth herein, and the Project Element Sponsor/Developer must execute a binding written document establishing a self-imposed public improvement fee to help finance the development of WAPR that shall be at least 2% on all on-site food, beverage, and retail sales, at least 7.8% on all admissions and rentals, and at least 5% on all lodging sales for 30 years from the date the WAPR is placed in service, notwithstanding the new Financing Term for the Project set forth herein. Copies of these executed binding written documents must be submitted to the Commission. Beginning February 1, 2021, through and including November 30, 2021, the NCRTA and any other Financing Entity that later may be approved by the Commission to serve the SFC, must submit written updates detailing all progress toward the commencement of substantial work for each of the two remaining Project Elements before each regular Commission meeting and send a representative to attend at least every other regular Commission meeting. Except as expressly modified by this motion, all of the terms and conditions of approval in Resolution No. 4, as previously amended by the motion carried on August 31, 2020, shall remain in full force and effect. Instructions Related to the Motion: The Commission directs OEDIT staff and legal counsel to work with all Project stakeholders to prepare and submit a draft of Amended Resolution No. 4 for discussion at the February 18, 2021 regular meeting, and to prepare and submit a final draft for approval at the March 18, 2021 regular meeting. The Commission further directs OEDIT staff to prepare and send letters to all Project stakeholders detailing what events and milestones will lead OEDIT staff to recommend to the Commission that substantial work toward the goals specified in the application and Amended Resolution No. 4 for the SFC and WAPR has commenced if they occur on or before November 12, 2021. Page 50 PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING Applicable items include: Rate Hearings, Code Adoption, Budget Adoption 1. MAYOR. The next order of business will be the public hearing on PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEM 1.A ORDINANCE 01-21: AMENDING CHAPTERS 2, 3, 10, AND 13 OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING MINOR ADJUSTMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS.  At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the information presented during the public hearing, from the Town staff, public comment, and written comments received on the item.  Any member of the Board may ask questions at any stage of the public hearing which may be responded to at that time.  Mayor declares the Public Hearing open. 2. STAFF REPORT.  Review the staff report. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT.  Any person will be given an opportunity to address the Board concerning the item. All individuals must state their name and address for the record. Comments from the public are requested to be limited to three minutes per person. 4. MAYOR.  Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard to the item which are not in the Board packet.  Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any further questions concerning the item.  Indicate that all reports, statements, exhibits, and written communications presented will be accepted as part of the record.  Request Board consider a motion. 7. SUGGESTED MOTION.  Suggested motion(s) are set forth in the staff report. Page 51 8. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. Discussion by the Board on the motion. 9. VOTE ON THE MOTION. Vote on the motion or consideration of another action. *NOTE: Resolutions are read into record at the discretion of the Mayor as it is not required to do so by State Statute. Page 52 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Jeffrey Woeber, Senior Planner Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Ordinance 01-21: Amending Chapters 2, 3, 10, and 13 of the Estes Park Development Code Regarding Minor Adjustments and Subdivisions (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: The Town of Estes Park Community Development Department proposes a text amendment to the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC), to allow a Boundary Adjustment, Amended Plat, or Land Consolidation Plat to be defined as a “Minor Adjustment,” and to be processed as a staff level review. The amendment also proposes increasing the time for submitting a subdivision plat for recording from the current 60 days, to 180 days. Present Situation: Currently the EPDC defines an Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment, or a Land Consolidation Plat as a Minor Subdivision, requiring Planning Commission review and Town Board approval. As typically there is little or no impact from these “Minor Adjustment” processes, they can appropriately be reviewed and processed by staff. The amendment would also allow a more realistic time frame for receipt and recordation of Final Subdivision Plats. There has been some inconsistency in past years in Community Development’s processing of Amended Plats and similar, where lots or parcels are consolidated (combining two or more into one), where an internal lot line or lot lines are slightly adjusted, or other minor technical corrections. Staff has found examples where Amended Plats have been processed at staff level. This has not caused any issues that staff is aware of. In the last couple of years staff has applied a strict interpretation of the applicable review procedures within the EPDC, Section 3.9, which require any of these Page 53 to be processed as a “Minor Subdivision,” rather than, for example, a “Minor Modification to an Approved Final Plan” as provided for in Section 3.7. Minor Subdivisions require review by the EPPC and Town Board approval. The technical terms “plan” and “plat” refer to different instruments in typical best planning practice, so the wording and structure in Section 3.7 is a bit careless at best. Any subdivision process that creates two or more new lots from a parent parcel would, with this proposed Code amendment, go through a review and approval process involving public notice, public meetings, Planning Commission review, and Town Board approval. However, for Minor Adjustments, that do not involve creating any additional lots or building sites, there is little or no impact and they can be appropriately processed by staff. This is staff’s recommendation, which matches usual and customary regulatory practice in most North American local jurisdictions. Staff has written the specific revisions to the Code text in the Chapters, see Exhibit A. There are revisions proposed to Chapters 3 and 10, for consistency and clarity. These include a provision for compliance with the requirements within the EPDC’s Appendix B, Submittal Requirements as determined by the Community Development Director. This is due to the EPDC’s Appendix B currently having no specific requirements or references whatsoever to Minor Subdivision, Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment, or Land Consolidation Plat. Apparently this was an oversight on the part of the original authors of the EPDC. Applying all of the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat requirements listed within Appendix B is unnecessary, and many are not applicable. Based on direction from the Estes Park Planning Commission, staff has added a Procedure, with staff as decision-making authority, for Minor Adjustments within a Table in Chapter 2. The increase from the 60-day submittal time period to 180 days is to provide a better, more reasonable period to submit a plat for recordation after approval. This will allow much more flexibility for both the applicant and for staff, and avoid unnecessary extensions or expirations. Proposal: Staff proposes changes to the EPDC, summarized as: 1. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.9 Subdivisions, to differentiate a “Minor Subdivision” from a “Minor Adjustment.” A “Minor Adjustment” would be an “Amended Plat,” “Boundary Adjustment,” or a “Land Consolidation Plat.” There are existing definitions in the EPDC of “Boundary Adjustment” and “Land Consolidation Plat.” Staff has added a definition of “Amended Plat” as this is not currently defined in the EPDC. Minor Subdivisions will continue to be limited to subdivisions involving not more than four lots, with each fronting onto an existing street and not requiring extension of public facilities. These Minor Subdivisions are currently defined as Page 54 “Frontage Lots.” The amendment would re-designate such subdivisions as “Minor Subdivisions,” in accord with best planning practice. Minor Subdivision would require Planning Commission review and Town Board approval as they do now. A Minor Adjustment would be a staff level review. 2. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure, G. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type, by adding a “Minor Adjustment” category which specifies a required staff review. 3. Amend Chapter 10, Subdivisions, Section 10.2 Applicability/Scope, to differentiate a Minor Subdivision from a Minor Adjustment, consistent with what is proposed for Section 3.9 (see No. 1., above). 4. Amend Chapter 13 Definitions, Section 13.3 Definitions of Words, Terms, and Phrases, by amending the existing definition of Minor Subdivision, to be consistent with the rest of this proposed code amendment (see No. 1., above). 5. Amend Chapter 3, Review Procedures and Standards, Section 3.9.F.1. Effect of Approval of a Minor Subdivision, and Section 3.9.F.3. Effect of Approval of a Final Subdivision Plat, by increasing the time period to submit a plat for recording, after approval, from the current sixty (60) days, to one hundred and eighty (180) days. 6. Amend Chapter 2, Code Administration and Review Roles, Section 2.1.B. Table 2 – 1: Code Administration and Review Roles, by adding Minor Adjustment as a Procedure, with Staff having the Review and Decision Making Authority for Minor Adjustments. Note, No. 6 above was added by recommendation of the Estes Park Planning Commission at their November 17, 2020 meeting. Community Development Department Public Notice Policy: This Code Amendment was continued by the Estes Park Planning Commission (EPPC), from September 15 to November 17, 2020. A primary concern expressed by the EPPC was that there was no public notice or public input proposed for a Minor Adjustment. Staff had not initially considered a public notice for a Minor Adjustment. On November 17, 2020 staff brought a Code amendment to the Planning Commission which added a department policy where any Minor Adjustment application would involve public notice. Staff’s proposed department policy is acceptable to the Planning Commission. Currently, the EPDC requirements for public notice are found within the EPDC Section 3.15 General Notice Provisions. Staff would require the Newspaper Notice requirement and the Written Notice requirement for any Minor Adjustment, noting there are some modifications to that which is required in Section 3.15, which is applicable to public hearings and not to a staff decision. Staff’s proposed requirements for Minor Adjustments are as follows: Page 55  Newspaper Notice of Minor Adjustment. Notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in Estes Park at least fifteen (15) days prior to the Minor Adjustment staff review deadline (deadline is generally six weeks from submittal).  Written Notice of Minor Adjustments. 1. The Community Development Department shall be responsible for mailing written notice at least fifteen (15) days before the Minor Adjustment staff review deadline, to all landowners within a specified boundary perimeter as required in this Section. 2. Failure to send or receive this written notice shall not affect the review and decision concerning the Minor Adjustment. 3. Written notice shall be sent by regular USPS mail in a standard business envelope, and shall include a description of the Minor Adjustment, the location of the property(s) proposed for review, a notice that written comment may also be submitted for the Minor Adjustment at any time prior to the Minor Adjustment staff review deadline, staff contact information, and a procedure for obtaining additional information if desired. 4. The boundary perimeter within which written notice is to be mailed shall be determined to include the following: a. The subject property(s); b. All properties abutting the subject property(s); c. All properties directly across a public street or public right-of-way from the subject property(s), measured by a straight line perpendicular to the street or right-of-way centerline; d. All properties in whole or in part less than or equal to one hundred (100) linear feet from the outermost boundaries of any property included in (a), (b), or (c) of this Section. The width of any intervening public street or public right-of- way shall not be counted against the 100-foot linear measure.  Posting Minor Adjustments on the Town Website All Minor Adjustment applications and submittal documents shall be included in the “Current Application” section of the Town of Estes Park website. This is found under “Community Development, Planning and Zoning.” Advantages: • Generally complies with the EPDC §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review, as applicable. Page 56 • Establishes and clarifies a review procedure for Amended Plats and similar that can streamline the review process, which benefits the Town officials, staff, and the residents of Estes Park. • Provides a more reasonable and realistic time period to submit a plat for recordation. Disadvantages: • Adds slightly to Code length and complexity. Action Recommended: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Code amendment. The Estes Park Planning Commission, at their November 17, 2020 meeting, forwarded a recommendation of approval of the Code Amendment, by a vote of 3 – 0. Finance/Resource Impact: N/A Level of Public Interest Low. Any written comments will be posted to: www.estes.org/currentapplications Sample Motion: I move that the Town Board of Trustees approve the Estes Park Development Code amendment as stated in Ordinance 01-21, including findings as identified in the Ordinance. I move that the Town Board of Trustees deny the Estes Park Development Code amendment as stated in Ordinance 01-21, finding that… [state findings for denial] I move that the Town Board of Trustees continue the Estes Park Development Code amendment as stated in Ordinance 01-21 to [date certain], in order that… [state direction to staff pursuant to continuance] Attachments: 1. Ordinance 01-21 2. Exhibit A Page 57 ORDINANCE 01-21 AMENDING CHAPTERS 2, 3, 10, AND 13 OF THE ESTES PARK DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING MINOR ADJUSTMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS WHEREAS, on September 15, 2020, the Estes Park Planning Commission opened a public hearing, which was then continued to November 17, 2020, on a proposed text amendment to the Estes Park Development Code adding a “minor adjustment” category to sections 3.2, 3.9, and 10.2, amending the definition of minor subdivision in section 13.3, adding minor adjustments as a procedure in section 2.1, and adding an appeal process for minor adjustments; and found that the text amendment complies with Estes Park Development Code section 3.3(D) (Code Amendments: Standards for Review); and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2020, the Estes Park Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the text amendment; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park finds the text amendment complies with Estes Park Development Code section 3.3(D) and has determined that it is in the best interest of the Town that the amendment to the Estes Park Development Code, as set forth on Exhibit A, be approved; and WHEREAS, said amendment to the Estes Park Development Code is set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Sections 2.1, 3.2, 3.9, 10.2, and 13.3 of the Estes Park Development Code are hereby amended by the addition of underlined material and the deletion of stricken material as set forth on Exhibit A. In Exhibit A, ellipses indicate material not reproduced as the Board intends to leave that material in effect as it now reads. Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption and publication. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 58 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado this ____ day of _______________, 2021. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2021 and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of , 2021, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado. Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney Page 59 § 2.1 - Code Administration and Review Roles . . . B.Table 2-1: Code Administration and Review Roles. PROCEDURE REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY Staff EVPC Boards [1] BOA [1] . . . Minor Adjustments DM - - A ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 8 Page 60 § 3.2 - Standard Development Review Procedure . . . G. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type. "V" = Voluntary "M" = Mandatory "A" = Applicable "N/A" = Not Applicable "APP" = Appeals "BOA" = Board of Adjustment "SR" = Special Requirements (Refer to Text) Step 1 Pre- Application Conference Step 2 Neighborhood & Community Meeting Step 3 Application/ Completeness Certification Step 4 Staff Review & Report Step 5 EVPC Action Step 6 Board Action . . . Minor Subdivision (Ord. 18-01 #5 M V A A A A Minor Adjustment V V A A N/A N/A . . . ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 8 Page 61 § 3.9 – Subdivisions . . . C. Procedure for Approval of Subdivisions (Except Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments) . . . D. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. 1. Defined. Minor subdivisions shall be defined as follows: Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments are categorized as follows: a. Frontage Lots Minor Subdivision . Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall also be a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of public facilities. No more than a total of four (4) lots shall be created out of a lot, tract or parcel or set of contiguous parcels in the same ownership using the minor subdivision procedure. Frontage Lot subdivisions shall be titled as a "Subdivision." (Ord. 18-01 #8; Ord. 8-05 #1) b. Boundary Adjustments . Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes, shall be considered a minor subdivision for review procedure. Boundary Adjustments shall be titled as a "Boundary Line Adjustment" for properties not within a platted subdivision or "Amended Plat" for properties within a platted subdivision. Minor Adjustment. Minor Adjustments are Amended Plats, Boundary Line Adjustments, or Land Consolidation Plats: The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to, shall become a part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as shown." (Ord. 8-05 #1) c. Land Consolidation Plats . Unplatted contiguous legal lots approved for single-family residential development can be combined with a land consolidation plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as a "Land Consolidation Plat." The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes." (Ord. 8-05 #1) (1) Amended Plat. An Amended Plat is an instrument to amend a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat is a revision to a recorded subdivision plat, or a portion of a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat may reconfigure lots, vacate interior lot ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 8 Page 62 lines, change or eliminate a platted building envelope, or correct drafting or technical errors. To qualify as an Amended Plat, no additional lots or building sites may be created, nor any lots that do not comply with zoning standards or other requirements of this code. An Amended Plat must not include easement or right-of-way vacation or dedication, involve more than five (5) lots, or necessitate new or modified public improvements; such plats shall be considered final subdivision plats under subsection 3.9.C, above, and shall require a public hearing before the Town Board of Trustees. (2) Boundary Adjustment shall mean the division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the sole purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. (3) Land Consolidation Plat. Unplatted contiguous lots approved for single-family residential development may be combined with a Land Consolidation Plat, provided that the new lot conforms to all requirements of this code. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as “Land Consolidation Plat.” The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: “Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes.” 2. Hazard Areas. Except Land Consolidation Plats, aAreas with geologic hazards as defined by §7.7 of this Code shall not be eligible for the minor subdivision process. (Ord. 18-01 #9; Ord. 8-05 #1) 3. Procedure for Approval of Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. Applications for minor subdivision or minor adjustment approval shall follow the standard development approval process set forth in §3.2 of this Chapter. , except that Land Consolidation Plats shall not be subject to review by the Planning Commission. Land Consolidation Plats shall follow the review timeframe established for Final Plats. (Ord. 18-01 #10; Ord. 8-05 #1) 4. Submittal Requirements. Boundary Line Adjustments and Amended Plats A Minor Adjustment shall follow the applicable subdivision submittal requirements within the EPDC Appendix B. II., as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. involving exchange of land shall require deeds describing the resultant parcels, signed and dated by owners, and dated and sealed by a Notary Public, to be submitted with the Mylars. (Ord. 18-01 #11; Ord. 8-05 #1) 5. Modifications and Waivers. The Community Development Director, or designee, shall have authority to grant modifications and/or waive standards set forth in Chapter 10 in conjunction with an Amended Plat, Boundary Adjustment or Land Consolidation Plat. . . . F. Effects of Approval. ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 4 of 8 Page 63 1. Effect of Approval of a Minor Subdivision or Minor Adjustment. Within sixty (60) one hundred and eighty (180) days of the Board's approval of the minor subdivision or minor adjustment, the developer shall submit the minor subdivision or minor adjustment final plat for recording. If the minor subdivision or minor adjustment plat plan is not submitted for recording within this sixty-day one hundred and eighty day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void. . . . 3. Effect of Approval of a Final Subdivision Plat. Within sixty (60) one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of the Board's action on the final subdivision plat, the Applicant shall make all required revisions, if any (see §3.2.E above), and shall submit the final subdivision plat to the Town for recording. If the final plat is not submitted for recording within this sixty-day one hundred and eighty day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void. ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 5 of 8 Page 64 § 10.2 - APPLICABILITY/SCOPE . . . B. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments. Minor Subdivisions and Minor Adjustments are subject to full review and compliance with the applicable standards set forth in Chapter 10 and the applicable submittal requirements set forth in Appendix B,.as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. (Ord. 18-01 #22) 1. Frontage LotsMinor Subdivision. Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land into a total of not more than four (4) lots shall also be considered a minor subdivision, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing street, and that the subdivision entails no extension of public facilities. No more than a total of four (4) lots shall be created out of a lot, tract, parcel or set of contiguous parcels in the same ownership using the minor subdivision procedure. Frontage Lot Minor sSubdivisions shall be titled as a "Subdivision." (Ord. 18-01 #23; Ord. 8-05 #1) 2. Boundary Adjustments Minor Adjustments. Minor Adjustments are Amended Plats, Boundary Line Adjustments, or Land Consolidation Plats: Division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes, shall be considered a minor subdivision for review procedure. Boundary Adjustments shall be titled as a "Boundary Line Adjustment" for properties not within a platted subdivision, or "Amended Plat" for properties within a platted subdivision. The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to, shall become a part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as shown." (Ord. 8-05 #1) 3. Land Consolidation Plats. Unplatted contiguous legal lots approved for single-family residential development can be combined with a Land Consolidation Plat. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as a "Land Consolidation Plat". The final map shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: (Ord. 8-05 #1) "Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes." (Ord. 8-05 #1) (Ord. 18-01 #22, 23, 10/23/01; Ord. 8-05 #1, 6/14/05) (1) Amended Plat. An instrument to amend a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat is a revision to a recorded subdivision plat, or a portion of a recorded subdivision plat. An Amended Plat may reconfigure lots, vacate interior lot lines, change or eliminate a platted building envelope, or correct drafting or technical errors. To ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 6 of 8 Page 65 qualify as an Amended Plat, no additional lots or building sites may be created, nor any lots that do not comply with zoning standards or other requirements of this code. An Amended Plat must not include easement or right-of-way vacation or dedication, involve more than five (5) lots, or necessitate new or modified public improvements; such plats shall be considered subdivision plats under subsection 3.9.C., and shall require a public hearing before the Town Board of Trustees. (2) Boundary Adjustment. The division of one (1) or more lots, tracts or parcels of land for the sole purpose of adjusting boundary lines between such lots, tracts or parcels of land and adjacent lots, tracts or parcels of land, which adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes. (3) Land Consolidation Plat. Unplatted contiguous lots approved for single-family residential development may be combined with a Land Consolidation Plat, provided that the new lot conforms to all requirements of this code. Land Consolidation Plats shall be titled as “Land Consolidation Plat.” The final plat shall clearly indicate the original boundaries of each lot and shall contain the following statement: “Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building sites for any purposes.” ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 7 of 8 Page 66 § 13.3 - Definitions of Words, Terms and Phrases . . . 235. Subdivision, Minor shall mean subdivision for the purposes of boundary adjustments; or subdivision into a total of not more than four (4) lots, provided that each resulting lot fronts onto an existing dedicated public street and the subdivision entails no extension of municipal facilities. . . . ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Page 8 of 8 Page 67       Page 68 To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Resolution 04-21 Professional Services Agreement Amendment Two with SAFEBuilt Colorado, LLC, for Renewal of Building Safety Services Agreement, 2021 (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Review and approve a contract amendment renewing our existing Professional Services Agreement with SAFEBuilt Colorado, LLC for building safety services on behalf of the Town. The amendment would exercise a renewal clause in the current contract to extend the contract through calendar year 2021. Except for the renewed timeframe, no changes to the existing contract are proposed or contemplated in 2021. Present Situation: Since early 2019, the Town and SAFEBuilt have had a contractual agreement for staffing the Building Safety division in the Community Development Department and performing operational services and responsibilities in the division on behalf of the Town and community. This contract and the services performed pursuant to it have proven more than satisfactory over almost two years. Both Town staff and SAFEBuilt personnel are pleased with the contract and believe renewing it without material change is in all parties’ best interest. Section 25 of the existing contract reads as follows: 25. TERM: This Contract shall commence on January 1, 2020 and shall continue through December 31, 2020 with the option of four (4) additional renewals, on an annual basis, upon agreement of both parties. Proposal: Report COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Page 69 The contract section above provides the authority for SAFEBuilt and the Town to renew the contract for calendar year 2021. To ensure that all contract elements are including in a single, updated document, the Town and SAFEBuilt propose that an amendment to the contract be approved that would exercise the first of the four renewal options in Sec. 25. Approving this amendment will add it to the current contract and leave all remaining provisions in effect. The renewal amendment is Amendment Two to the contract (Attachment 2.) The Board will recall that Amendment One was adopted in July 2020; it added the Building Permit Technician position to the contract in exchange for increasing SAFEBuilt’s permit-fee recovery to 100 percent of fees paid, and also provided for subvention of 50 percent of SAFEBuilt’s charge to the Town for certain building projects meeting community-benefit criteria. A copy of the full existing contract, including Amendment One, is included (Attachment 1.) To put it in a single sentence: Town staff is happy with SAFEBuilt’s services and personnel; we believe the contractors and community members are, too; and this amendment will continue the relationship along the same lines through 2021. Advantages: • Continues a positive model for providing building-safety services to the Town and community at a reasonable financial rate. • Allows a currently mutually beneficial contractual relationship to continue. Disadvantages: • There is always an argument for providing Town services through a Town staffing and resource model. Action Recommended: Staff recommends approval of the contract amendment as drafted. Finance/Resource Impact: Approx. budget neutral, based on estimated cost and revenue. Estimated building-permit revenue in 2021 is approx. $397,000. Level of Public Interest Medium-to-high among contractors and builders; low among general public. Sample Motions: 1. I move for the approval/denial of Resolution 04-21. Attachments: 1. Resolution 04-21 2. Amendment Two / Professional Services Agreement between Town of Estes Park, Colorado and SAFEBuilt Colorado, LLC 3. Town of Estes Park, Colorado Professional Services Agreement [with SAFEBuilt Colorado, LLC] (including Amendment One), dated July 15, 2020. Page 70 RESOLUTION 04-21 APPROVING AMENDMENT TWO TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SAFEBUILT COLORADO LLC FOR BUILDING SAFETY SERVICES WHEREAS, the Town Board desires to enter into an amendment to renew the professional services agreement referenced in the title of this resolution for the purpose of providing building safety services; and WHEREAS, the original agreement was approved by Town Board at its January 14, 2020 Town Board meeting, with an effective date of January 1, 2020; and WHEREAS, Amendment One was approved by Town Board at its July 14, 2020 Town Board meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board approves, and authorizes the Mayor to sign, Amendment Two to the SAFEBuilt Colorado LLC professional services agreement, as referenced in the title of this resolution, in substantially the form now before the Board. DATED this day of , 2021. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney ATTACHMENT 1 Page 71 AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Page 1 of 1 AMENDMENT TWO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AND SAFEbuilt COLORADO, LLC This Amendment is entered into to amend the Professional Services Agreement previously entered into on January 01, 2021, by and between Town of Estes Park, Colorado (Town) and SAFEbuilt Colorado, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of SAFEbuilt, LLC, (Consultant). Town and the Consultant shall be jointly referred to as the “Parties”. Amendment Effective Date: This Amendment shall be effective on January 1, 2021. RECITALS AND REPRESENTATIONS Town and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement (Agreement), by which both Parties established the terms and conditions for service delivery for the period of January 01, 2020 through December 31, 2020 with the option of four (4) additional renewals, on an annual basis, upon agreement of both Parties; and On July 15, 2020, Town and Consultant instituted Amendment One to the Agreement to add Permit Technician services; and Parties hereto now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth herein; and NOW, THEREFORE Agreement is hereby amended as set forth below; and 1.Town and Consultant desire to exercise the first of four (4) renewal options provided for in Section 25. Term. The term of Agreement shall be extended for an additional twelve (12) month period of January 01, 2021 through December 31, 2021. All other provisions of the original Agreement shall remain in effect, to the extent not modified by Amendment. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the undersigned have caused this Amendment to be executed in their respective names on the dates hereinafter enumerated. ______________________________ ____________________ Thomas P. Wilkas, CFO Date SAFEbuilt Colorado, LLC TOWN OF ESTES PARK: ______________________________ ____________________ Mayor Date ATTEST: ______________________________ ____________________ Town Clerk Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ ATTACHMENT 2 Page 72 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 73 Page 74 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 EXHIBIT A SAFEbuilt SCOPE OF SERVICES AND COST PROPOSAL 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant will perform Services in accordance with codes, amendments and ordinances adopted by the elected body of Municipality. The qualified professionals employed by Consultant will maintain current certifications, certificates, licenses as required for Services that they provide to Municipality. Consultant is not obligated to perform services beyond what is contemplated by this Agreement. 2. SOLICITATION/HIRING OF CONSULTANT’S EMPLOYEES During the term of this Agreement and for one year thereafter, Municipality shall not solicit, recruit or hire, or attempt to solicit, recruit or hire, any employee or former employee of Consultant who provided services to Municipality pursuant to this Agreement (“Service Providers”), or who interacted with Municipality in connection with the provision of such services (including but not limited to supervisors or managers of Service Providers, customer relations personnel, accounting personnel, and other support personnel of Consultant). Parties agree that this provision is reasonable and necessary in order to preserve and protect Consultant’s trade secrets and other confidential information, its investment in the training of its employees, the stability of its workforce, and its ability to provide competitive building department programs in this market. If any provision of this section is found by a court or arbitrator to be overly broad, unreasonable in scope or otherwise unenforceable, Parties agree that such court or arbitrator shall modify such provision to the minimum extent necessary to render this section enforceable. In the event that Municipality hires any such employee during the specified period, Municipality shall pay to Consultant a placement fee equal to 25% of the employee’s annual salary including bonus. 3. LIST OF SERVICES Building Official Services  Manage and help administer the department and report to Municipality’s designated official  Be a resource for Consultant team members, Municipal staff, and applicants  Help guide citizens through the complexities of the codes in order to obtain compliance  Monitor changes to the codes including state or local requirements and determine how they may impact projects in the area and make recommendations regarding local amendments  Assist Municipal staff in revising and updating municipal code to comply with adopted requirements  Provide Building Code interpretations for final approval  Oversee our quality assurance program and will make sure that we are meeting our agreed upon performance measurements and your expectations  Provide training for our inspectors on Municipality adopted codes and local amendments as needed  Oversee certificate of occupancy issuance to prevent issuance without compliance of all departments  Attend staff and council meetings as mutually agreed upon  Responsible for reporting for Municipality – frequency and content to be mutually agreed upon  Responsible for client and applicant satisfaction  Work with Municipal staff to establish and/or refine building department processes  Issue stop-work notices for non-conforming activities – as needed Building, Plumbing, and Mechanical Inspection Services  Consultant will provide a certified Combination Inspector  Services excludes Electrical Inspections to be provided by the State of Colorado  Perform code compliant inspections to determine that construction complies with approved plans  Meet or exceed agreed upon performance metrics regarding inspections  Provide onsite inspection consultations to citizens and contractors while performing inspections  Return calls and emails from permit holders in reference to code and inspection concerns Page 87 TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 14 of 17  Identify and document any areas of non-compliance  Leave a copy of the inspection ticket and discuss inspection results with site personnel Vacation Rental Inspections  Provide in accordance with Ordinance 06-19 and 2015 International Residential Code Plan Review Services  Provide plan review services electronically or in the traditional paper format  Review plans for compliance with adopted building codes, local amendments or ordinances  Be available for pre-submittal meetings by appointment  Coordinate plan review tracking, reporting, and interaction with applicable departments  Provide feedback to keep plan review process on schedule  Communicate plan review findings and recommendations in writing  Return a set of finalized plans and all supporting documentation  Provide review of plan revisions and remain available to applicant after the review is complete Permit Technician Services  Provide qualified individuals to perform the functions of this position  Facilitate the permitting process from initial permit intake to final issuance of permit  Review submittal documents and request missing information to ensure packets are complete  Provide front counter customer service as necessary  Answer questions concerning the building process and requirements at the counter or over the phone  Form and maintain positive relationships with Municipal staff and maintain a professional image  Determine permit fees based on Municipal fee schedule as established by ordinance, if requested  Work with Municipal Clerk to facilitate Colorado Open Records Act requests, if requested  Provide inspection scheduling and tracking to ensure code compliance  Act as an office resource to inspectors in the field  Process applications for Municipal Boards and Commissions – if requested  Provide input, tracking and reporting to help increase efficiencies Reporting Services  Consultant will work with Municipality to develop a mutually agreeable reporting schedule and format 4. COMMUNITY CORE SYSTEMS TERMS AND CONDITIONS  Provide Community Core in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 5. MUNICIPAL OBLIGATIONS  Municipality will provide office space, desk, desk chairs, file cabinets, local phone service, internet, use of copier and fax 6. FEE SCHEDULE  Municipality will promptly notify Consultant of any revisions or amendments to Municipal Fee Schedule  Municipality will periodically review its Municipal Fee Schedule and valuation tables and make adjustment to reflect increases in the cost incurred by Consultant in providing Services  Beginning January 01, 2021 and annually thereafter, the hourly rates listed shall be increased based upon the annual increase in the Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or successor thereof, Consumer Price Index (United States City Average, All Items (CPI-U), Not Seasonally adjusted, All Urban Consumers, referred to herein as the “CPI”) from the previous calendar year, such increase, Page 88 TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 15 of 17 however, not to exceed 4% per annum. The increase will become effective upon publication of the applicable CPI data. If the index decreases, the rates listed shall remain unchanged.  Consultant fees for Services provided pursuant to this Agreement will be as follows: Service Fee Schedule: Inspection Service (permits issued prior to service start date) $75.00 per inspection Inspection Service (permits issued after service start date) 82% of Municipal Permit Fee as established by ordinance or resolution Plan Review Services - excludes engineer review fees 82% of Municipal Plan Check Fee as established by ordinance or resolution Structural Engineering Plan Review $150.00 per hour – one (1) hour minimum Building Official Services Included in percentage of fees above Permit Technician Service $55.00 per hour – one (1) hour minimum After Hours/Emergency Inspection Services $100.00 per hour – two (2) hour minimum Non-Permitted Activity (by request only) $75.00 per hour – one (1) hour minimum Investigative Services (by request only) $75.00 per hour – one (1) hour minimum Town Owned Projects and School Projects 50% of applicable Municipal fees as established by ordinance or resolution Note: Three percent (3%) of Consultant fees for Estes Park Community Outreach Program Page 89 EXHIBIT B – SAFEbuilt PERFORMANCE 1. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Services will be performed during normal business hours excluding Municipal holidays.  Services will be performed from Municipal offices Monday through Friday, (8) hours daily between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm  Consultant’s representative(s) will be available by cell phone and email Deliverables INSPECTION SERVICES Perform inspections requested by 4:00 pm next business day TWO HOUR INSPECTION WINDOW Provide a two-hour window of time that the permit holder can expect to have their inspection performed – Upon request only MOBILE RESULTING Provide our inspectors with field devices to enter results immediately PRE-SUBMITTAL MEETINGS Provide pre-submittal meetings to applicants by appointment PLAN REVIEW TURNAROUND TIMES Provide comments within the following timeframes: Day 1 = first full business day after receipt of plans and all supporting documents Project Type:  Single-family within  Multi-family within  Small commercial within (under $5M in valuation)  Large commercial within First Comments 7 business days 10 business days 10 business days 20 business days Second Comments 5 business days or less 7 business days or less 7 business days or less 15 business days or less Page 90 TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 17 of 17 EXHIBIT C – COMMUNITY CORE SOLUTIONS Attach here Page 91 Page 92 FINANCE DEPARTMENT Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Duane Hudson, Finance Director Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Appoint Audit Firm for Year Ended December 31, 2020 with Four Optional Annual Renewals (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER - Motion QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: To formally appoint a new audit firm to perform the Town’s audit for the year ended December 31, 2020 with optional renewals for the next four years through 2024. Present Situation: Audit services were bid out October 28, 2020, at the direction of the audit committee. Four audit proposals were received by the November 23, 2020 due date. A proposal evaluation team consisting of Town Administrator Machalek, Finance Director Hudson, Accounting Manager Garcia, Accountant Johnson, and Grant Coordinator Beesley reviewed the audit proposal and ranked them by technical qualifications. The proposal evaluation team then reviewed the sealed cost bids in light of the firm’s technical qualifications. All four firms were then invited to meet with the interview committee consisting of Mayor Koenig and Trustee MacAlpine. Staff present included Town Administrator Machalek, Visit Estes Park’s Chief Financial Officer Kevin Benes, Finance Director Hudson, Accounting Manager Garcia, and Accountant Johnson. The interviews were held Dec 10 & 11, 2020. After interviewing the prospective audit firms, and discussion of the proposals with staff, the interview committee asked that references be checked on two firms, Haynie & Company and Hinkle & Company PC. The interview committee also requested staff to contact Haynie & Company to make sure they understood the need to prepare the draft financial statements, including separate financial statements for Visit Estes Park (VEP). Finance Director Hudson proceeded to contact references during the week of December 14th, 2020 and reached out to Haynie & Company regarding the financial Page 93 statements. Haynie and Company then resubmitted a revised dollar bid reflecting the additional work on the financial statements. Haynie & Company remained the low bidder, even after the dollar bid revisions. The interview committee met again on Dec 21, 2020 along with staff and reviewed the results of the reference checks and financial statement clarifications. Town and VEP staff unanimously expressed comfort with Haynie & Company after the dollar bid revisions. After detailed discussion, the interview committee unanimously recommended appointing Haynie & Company as the Town’s auditors. Proposal: The interview committee recommends that Haynie & Company be awarded the contract to perform the Town’s audit for the year ended December 31, 2020 with optional annual renewals for the next four years through December 31, 2024. Advantages: The Town is required by state statute, debt requirements and by grantor agencies to have an annual audit conducted by a qualified CPA firm. This action will demonstrate continued compliance with this requirement. Award of the engagement to Haynie & Company on January 12, 2021 will allow the work to begin quickly to meet upcoming deadlines. Disadvantages: None identified. Action Recommended: Appoint Haynie & Company as the Town’s auditors for the year ended December 31, 2020 with optional annual renewals for the next four years through December 31, 2024. Finance/Resource Impact: The audit is an annual expense budgeted at a total of $57,000 for 2021. The audit fee for 2020 as proposed is $49,000, which is within the budgeted amount. Level of Public Interest No inquiries or comments have been received regarding this appointment from the general public. Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial to award the financial audit engagement for the year ended December 31, 2020 with optional annual renewals for the next four years through 2024 to Haynie & Company. Attachments: 1. Auditor Proposal Bid Tabulation Page 94 TOWN OF ESTES PARKSUMMARY OF FIVE YEAR AUDIT BIDS - RevisedFISCAL YEARS 2020 TO 20242020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Eide Bailly LLP 87,975 73,020 74,940 76,860 78,300 20,250 20,850 21,450 22,050 22,500 Haynie & Company49,000 50,250 51,600 53,050 54,400 9,400 9,700 10,000 10,300 10,600 Hinkle & Company55,000 55,000 57,750 57,750 60,650 15,000 15,000 15,750 15,750 16,550 McGee, Hearne & Paiz, LLP 57,000 58,500 60,000 61,500 63,000 17,500 18,000 18,500 19,000 19,400 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Eide Bailly LLP625 500 500 500 500 150 150 150 150 150 Haynie & Company312 305 305 305 305 68 67 67 67 67 Hinkle & Company499 499 499 499 499 134 134 134 134 134 McGee, Hearne & Paiz, LLP 605 605 605 605 605 200 200 200 200 200 Town of Estes ParkVisit Estes ParkTotal Maximum Not to Exceed PriceTotal HoursTown of Estes ParkVisit Estes ParkAttachment 1Page 95 TOWN OF ESTES PARK AUDIT BID TABULATION FISCAL YEAR ENDED 12-31-2020 FIRM - Eide Bailly HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT PARTNER 135 40 5,400 135 15 2,025 MANAGER 135 55 7,425 135 15 2,025 SUPERVISORY STAFF 135 120 16,200 135 40 5,400 OTHER STAFF 135 120 16,200 135 40 5,400 SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER MAJOR GRANT PROGRAM 135 65 8,775 135 0 - SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER CARES grant 135 125 16,875 135 0 - SUBTOTAL 525 70,875 110 14,850 GASB 68 & 75 ENTRIES 175 20 3,500 ** PREPARATATION OF CAFR 135 80 10,800 135 40 5,400 MEALS & LODGING 2,500 - TRANSPORTATION 300 - OTHER - - TOTAL MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED PRICE 525 87,975 110 20,250 TOWN OF ESTES PARK VISIT ESTES PARK ** CAFR time estimates assumes that you will make prior year CAFR templates available to us. If we have to create from scratch, CAFR prep will be charged based on time incurred at quoted hourly rates. Attachment 1 Page 96 TOWN OF ESTES PARK AUDIT BID TABULATION FISCAL YEAR ENDED 12-31-2020 FIRM - Haynie & Company HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT PARTNER 310 20 6,200 310 2 620 MANAGER 180 36 6,480 180 12 2,160 SUPERVISORY STAFF 140 101 14,140 140 30 4,200 OTHER STAFF 110 155 17,050 110 24 2,640 SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER MAJOR GRANT PROGRAM 4,300 - SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER CARES grant - - SUBTOTAL 312 48,170 68 9,620 GASB 68 & 75 ENTRIES - PREPARATATION OF CAFR - - MEALS & LODGING 500 - TRANSPORTATION 1,000 - OTHER - - DISCOUNT (670) (220) TOTAL MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED PRICE 312 49,000 68 9,400 TOWN OF ESTES PARK VISIT ESTES PARK Attachment 1 Page 97 TOWN OF ESTES PARK AUDIT BID TABULATION FISCAL YEAR ENDED 12-31-2020 FIRM - Hinkle & Company HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT PARTNER 140 50 7,000 140 10 1,400 MANAGER 120 75 9,000 120 45 5,300 Rounded SUPERVISORY STAFF 110 125 13,600 Rounded 110 40 4,400 OTHER STAFF 100 199 19,900 100 39 3,900 SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER MAJOR GRANT PROGRAM 50 5,500 - SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER CARES grant - - SUBTOTAL 499 55,000 134 15,000 GASB 68 & 75 ENTRIES - PREPARATATION OF CAFR - - MEALS & LODGING - - TRANSPORTATION - - OTHER - - DISCOUNT - - TOTAL MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED PRICE 499 55,000 134 15,000 TOWN OF ESTES PARK VISIT ESTES PARK Attachment 1 Page 98 TOWN OF ESTES PARK AUDIT BID TABULATION FISCAL YEAR ENDED 12-31-2020 FIRM - McGee, Hearne & Paiz, LLP HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT HOURLY RATE HOURS AMOUNT PARTNER 225 40 9,000 225 10 2,250 MANAGER 120 75 9,000 120 25 3,000 Rounded SUPERVISORY STAFF 90 170 15,300 Calc Diff 90 80 7,200 OTHER STAFF 70 270 18,900 70 85 5,950 SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER MAJOR GRANT PROGRAM 50 5,000 - SINGLE AUDIT - COST PER CARES grant - - SUBTOTAL 605 57,200 200 18,400 - - - MEALS & LODGING 1,000 - TRANSPORTATION 1,500 - OTHER - - DISCOUNT (2,700) (900) TOTAL MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED PRICE 605 57,000 200 17,500 TOWN OF ESTES PARK VISIT ESTES PARK Attachment 1 Page 99       Page 100 Public Works Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Christy Crosser, Grant Specialist Ryan Barr, Pavement Manager Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Resolution 05-21 for CDOT Intergovernmental Agreement for Multimodal Options Fund and Transportation Alternative Program Funds for Fall River Trail (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Public Works staff seek Town Board approval for this Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for construction funds for the Fall River Trail project. Present Situation: The Town Board supported Public Works staff to submit for two CDOT grant applications which were awarded: 1. Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) is Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funds. Award amount: $955,000. Local cost share amount: $238,750. 2. Multimodal Options Fund (MMOF) is state funds. Award amount: $448,226. Local cost share amount: $178,664. The Fall River Trail project is a high priority trail according to the Estes Valley Master Trails Plan. As such, Town staff have worked diligently to research grant opportunities and submit applications. This work will consist of multimodal trail construction along Fall River Road (US 34) starting at the current trail terminus near Sleepy Hollow Court. The proposed construction will follow US 34 west for approximately 0.25 miles. The design phase of this work was completed to a 90% phase in 2017 through a Federal Transit Administration Sarbanes Alternative Transportation in Parks and Public Page 101 Lands Grant. Final 100% design efforts are scheduled for completion in 2021, supported with Town funds. Following final design, the Town will solicit bids for construction. The construction phase of the project is estimated to begin in federal fiscal year 2023 and estimated completion for this trail segment will be spring 2023. Proposal: Town Board approval IGA will allow staff to proceed with final design and construction of this important trail project. This is an expensive project and its successful completion is possible with grant funds. Advantages: • Town staff strategically applied for these CDOT funds for this specific trail segment because it is on their highway system (US 34) and because this is a particularly challenging area because of the proposed trail alignment to the road and river bank. • These funds support another segment of this trail that will connect historic downtown Estes Park with Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP). • When completed, this will be the first multimodal trail that connect with RMNP. • This project supports the Estes Valley Master Trails Plan. • To date, approximately 1.2 miles of this 2.5-mile trail has been constructed. This segment will add another 0.25 miles toward completion, and it will be constructing the most challenging and expensive segment. • This trail extension will provide added safety to residents and visitors that walk and bike this heavily-trafficked stretch of Fall River Road (US34). Disadvantages: • These funds do not complete the trail; however, construction of this segment extends the trail closer to completion. • As most all grants, there is a required cost share; however, funds have been allocated for this project through the 1A Trail Expansion Funds and Larimer County Open Space Funds. • Construction activity will be disruptive especially to motorists along Fall River Road; however, traffic control will be provided and construction will primarily be conducted during the slower tourist months. Action Recommended: Staff recommends Town Board approval for this IGA for Fall River Trail construction support. Finance/Resource Impact: • TAP grant: $955,000 • Cost share: $238,750 is supported from 1A Trail Expansion Funds and Larimer County Open Space Funds and will be budgeted in future years. • MMOF grant: $448,226 Page 102 • Cost share: $178,664 is supported from 1A Trail Expansion Funds and Larimer County Open Space Funds and will be budgeted in future years. Level of Public Interest Moderate. Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of Resolution 05-21. Attachments: 1. Resolution 05-21 2. CDOT IGA 3. Video of proposed area to be shown during meeting Page 103 RESOLUTION 05-21 APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION FOR GRANT FUNDING FOR THE FALL RIVER TRAIL WHEREAS, the Town Board desired to enter the intergovernmental agreement referenced in the title of this resolution for the purpose of constructing a segment of the Fall River Trail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board approves, and authorizes the Mayor to sign, the intergovernmental agreement referenced in the title of this resolution in substantially the form now before the Board. DATED this day of , 2021. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney ATTACHMENT 1 Page 104 TOWN BOARD MEETING January 12, 2021 Action Item 3. Resolution 05-21 For CDOT Intergovernmental Agreement for Multimodal Options Fund and Transportation Alternative Program Funds for Fall River Trail. Attachment 2 - IGA Page 105       Page 106 TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S OFFICE Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Jason Damweber, Assistant Town Administrator Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Revise Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION X OTHER Motion QUASI-JUDICIAL YES X NO Objective: Revise Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities Present Situation: During the Budget Work Sessions held in October, the Town Board expressed interest in reassessing the eligibility criteria for Town funding of outside entities, particularly those related to Community Initiative Funding. Concern was expressed about the lack of existing eligibility restrictions stated in Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities. More specifically, some Trustees questioned whether it was appropriate for Town funds to be used to support other taxing districts or organizations that support those taxing districts. There were also questions about the appropriateness of Town funds supporting organizations that are primarily funded through their membership. As it relates to Community Initiative Funding, the policy currently includes the following eligibility criteria: “Any entity or group serving the Estes Valley is eligible to apply for Community Initiative funding, except those groups receiving Base funding under Section 3.a of this policy. Base funding recipients must ask for all desired funds through the Base funding process.” The Town Board held a Study Session on December 8, 2020 to discuss potential revisions to Policy 671. At that meeting, the Board directed staff to prepare a policy revision based on feedback provided. Page 107 Proposal: Consistent with the Board’s discussion at its December 8, 2020 Study Session, staff proposes revising the eligibility criteria section of Policy 671, Section 3(b)ii, as follows: “Any entity or group serving the Estes Valley is eligible to apply for Community Initiative funding, except those groups receiving Base funding under Section 3.a of this policy, other taxing districts, and organizations that exist for the purpose of providing financial support and/or fundraising for other taxing districts. Base funding recipients must ask for all desired funds through the Base funding process.” Advantages: • If Policy 671 is amended as proposed, Town funding for Community Initiatives would not go to other taxing districts or organizations that exist for the purpose of providing financial support and/or fundraising for other taxing districts. These funds could be used to support other eligible organizations or otherwise be reallocated. Disadvantages: • Some organizations that support taxing districts and/or those that require dues for membership may also provide benefits to the community. It is possible that such community benefits may be jeopardized without financial assistance from the Town. Action Recommended: Approve revisions to Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities Finance/Resource Impact: Not applicable at this time. Level of Public Interest Medium. Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of the proposed revisions to Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities Attachments 1. Revised Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities Page 108 Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 02/25/2020 Revisions: 23 Town of Estes Park, Finance Page 1 of 5 Effective Period: Until superseded Review Schedule: Triennially Effective Date: 02/25/2020 References: Governing Policies Manual 3.12 FINANCE 671 Town Funding of Outside Entities 1.PURPOSE To provide a process by which the Town of Estes Park allocates and distributes funding to outside entities. 2.POLICY The Town of Estes Park recognizes the important role that outside entities play in meeting the needs of the residents of the Estes Valley. Accordingly, when adequate funds are available, the Town may make financial contributions to these entities in accordance with the procedure below. 3.PROCEDURE a.Base Funding i.Purpose Base funding from the Town is intended to support the general operations and overhead of nonprofit entities that play a critical role in supporting the Town’s Strategic Plan. ii. Eligibility The following entities are eligible to apply for Base funding from the Town of Estes Park: 1)Crossroads Ministry of Estes Park 2)Estes Park Economic Development Corporation 3)Estes Park Housing Authority 4)Estes Park Nonprofit Resource Center 5)Estes Valley Crisis Advocates 6)Estes Valley Investment in Childhood Success 7)Salud Family Health Centers (Estes Park) ATTACHMENT 1 Page 109 Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 02/25/2020 Revisions: 23 Town of Estes Park, Finance Page 2 of 5 8) Via Mobility Services 9) Estes Valley Watershed Coalition iii. Review of Eligible Entities The Town Board will review the list of entities eligible to apply for Base funding at every scheduled review of this policy. This review will also include opportunity for public comment. iv. Application Eligible entities seeking Base funding from the Town shall submit a completed “Base Funding Application” (Exhibit A) to the Assistant Town Administrator by July 1st of each calendar year for the next year’s budget (i.e. by 07/01/2017 for the 2018 budget year). v. Process Applications for Base funding will be processed as a departmental budget request by Town staff and presented to the Town Board as such. The following information will be presented by staff to the Town Board during the public budget hearings: 1) The Base funding request from each entity; and 2) The Base funding support recommended by the Town Administrator. vi. Annual Report Any entity receiving Base funding must submit an annual report to the Assistant Town Administrator by May 30th of the year following the year in which funding was received (i.e. May 30th, 2019 for funding received for the 2018 calendar year). This report must be no more than 350 words and should be structured as a press release on what programs and services the entity used the Town funding to support. b. Community Initiative Funding i. Purpose Community Initiative funding is intended to support specific projects and programs that advance one or more Outcome Areas in the Town’s Strategic Plan. ii. Eligibility Any entity or group serving the Estes Valley is eligible to apply for Community Initiative funding, except those groups receiving Base funding under Section 3.a of this policy, other taxing districts, and organizations that exist for the purpose of providing financial support and/or fundraising for other taxing districts. Base funding recipients must ask for all desired funds through the Base funding process. Page 110 Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 02/25/2020 Revisions: 23 Town of Estes Park, Finance Page 3 of 5 iii. Application Eligible entities seeking Community Initiative funding shall submit a completed “Community Initiative Funding Application” (Exhibit B) to the Executive Assistant in Administration on or before August 31st of every year. iv. Process Applications for Community Initiative funding will be reviewed and ranked by each Board member individually in advance of the annual public budget hearings. Funding decisions will be made by the Board as a whole and will be adopted along with the budget. v. Criteria The following criteria will be used in the evaluation of Community Initiative funding applications: 1) Application Quality – is the application complete and does it adequately describe the proposed project or program? 2) Strategic Plan Advancement – how well, or to what degree, does the proposed project/program advance the Town’s Strategic Plan? 3) Initiative Reach – how many residents of the Estes Valley will benefit from the proposed project or program? vi. Project Report Any recipient of Community Initiative funding must submit a project/program report to the Assistant Town Administrator upon completion of the project/program that received funding from the Community Initiative funding process. The report must be no more than 350 words and should be structured as a press release that the Town may use to tell the story of the project. c. Event Sponsorship Funding i. Purpose Event Sponsorship funding is intended to demonstrate the Town’s support for community events. ii. Eligibility Any nonprofit organization that is organizing a local event (serving the Estes Valley) that is open to the public may request Event Sponsorship funding from the Town. iii. Application Eligible entities seeking event sponsorship funding shall submit a completed “Event Sponsorship Funding Application” (Exhibit C) to the Executive Assistant in Administration. Page 111 Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 02/25/2020 Revisions: 23 Town of Estes Park, Finance Page 4 of 5 iv. Process All Event Sponsorship funding applications will be reviewed and awarded by the Leadership Team. No sponsorship shall exceed $1,000 and an organization may only receive one (1) sponsorship per calendar year (no in-kind funding requests will be considered). A budget for event sponsorships will be adopted annually and will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis. v. Criteria The Leadership Team will evaluate Event Sponsorship funding applications using the following criteria: 1) Vision Alignment – does the event align with the Town’s Vision? 2) Cost of Event Attendance – is the event free or affordable for the general public? 3) Reach of Event – how many people does the event expect to attract? 4) Other Funding – have the organizers of the event received any other funding? vi. Exclusions Promotional sponsorships funded by Trailblazer Broadband are excluded from subsection (c), including the Event Sponsorship Funding criteria and processes. d. Limitations on Off-Cycle Funding Requests i. Definitions For the purposes of this policy, an “Off-Cycle Funding Request” is any request for financial support from an eligible outside entity that occurs outside of the procedures established in Sections 3.a, 3.b, and 3.c of this policy. ii. Purpose The Town of Estes Park strives to consider all funding requests from eligible outside agencies in a holistic manner in order to best prioritize these requests. To this end, the Town does not accept or grant off-cycle funding requests with the exception of those described in Section 3.d.iii. iii. Exceptions The Town will only consider off-cycle funding requests from entities that are eligible for Community Initiative funding, and only in the following circumstances: 1) The Town is being asked to fund the final gap of a fundraising effort for a time-sensitive project or program, and the Town’s contribution represents twenty-five percent (25%) or less of the total amount fundraised; or 2) There is a time-limited opportunity to leverage a significant amount of outside funding (at least a 1:1 match of the funding requested from the Town). Page 112 Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 02/25/2020 Revisions: 23 Town of Estes Park, Finance Page 5 of 5 iv. Application Eligible entities seeking off-cycle funding must submit the following to the Town Administrator: 1) A completed “Community Initiative Funding Application” (Exhibit B); and 2) A letter (no more than 500 words) explaining why the request qualifies under one of the exceptions listed in Section 3.d.iii of this policy. v. Process If the off-cycle funding request application falls under one of the two exceptions listed in Section 3.d.iii of this policy, the Town Administrator will schedule the consideration of said request as an action item for a Town Board meeting. Approved: _____________________________ Todd JirsaWendy Koenig, Mayor _____________ Date Page 113       Page 114 Human Resources Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk/HR Director Date: January 12, 2021 RE: 2021 Lineworker Payscale (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: To consider adopting a modified 2021 Lineworker payscale that aligns with industry standards to address ongoing recruitment and retention of Journey Lineworkers once they have completed the approximately four-year apprentice program. Present Situation: As was noted during the study session discussion with the Board at their December 8, 2020 meeting, staff has seen a trend over the past decade of Apprentice Lineworkers completing their training in Estes Park and then leaving once they have received their Journey Lineworker credentials to other private entities such a Rural Electric Authorities (REAs) and Excel Energy. This trend has also been experienced by the other PRPA sister cities at a cost of approximately $90,000 per apprentice. The cost of losing a Journey Lineworker has other additional costs related to safety, on-call rotations, and the cost to complete development. It was further noted during the discussions that Estes Park has advertised two (2) vacant Journey Lineworker positions during 2020 and only filled one of the two vacancies. Additionally, the Town has received less than a handful of applications with most candidates not meeting the qualifications. The industry pay standard for a Journey Lineworker is to pay each Lineworker at the same pay rate regardless of their years of experience because each has the same skill set to complete the work. The Town’s current payscales for all positions, with the exception of an Apprentice Lineworker who have a set pay rate for each apprentice step completed, consist of a pay range which includes a minimum, midpoint and maximum. The current Lineworker payscale contains a 15% pay range from the minimum of the pay range to the maximum rather than the traditional 35%. It has been noted it takes Page 115 approximately three (3) to four (4) years to move through this modified pay range if the Town provides a 2% merit each year. This extended timeframe has been the source for losing Journey Lineworkers during their first year because they can leave Estes Park and make $6 to $9/hour more immediately after completing their apprenticeship. Proposal: Staff has worked with the Town’s compensation consultant to develop a revised payscale that aligns with the Power Industry standards and the other PRPA communities, which includes removing the pay range for the Journey Lineworker and Lead Lineworker and create a standardized pay rate for each. The proposed pay rates are competitive with the Town’s PRPA communities and slightly less than the private entities. The proposed payscale would impact each Apprentice, Journey and Lead Lineworker because the step program is based on a percentage of the Journey Lineworker rate. The Crew Chief, renamed Crew Supervisor, would be moved to the Management payscale and would continue to have a pay range. Advantages: • To improve the recruitment and retention of Journey Lineworker staff. • Decrease the turnover costs to train new staff. • Improve the Division’s productivity and safety of the crew. Disadvantages: • There will be a financial impact; however, the improved productivity will have long term benefits in the quality and safety of the division’s operations. Action Recommended: Approval of the proposed Lineworker payscale for 2021 and adjustment to each impacted employee’s pay rate. Budget: The Power and Communication personnel costs would increase by approximately $70,000 and would require an adjustment to the 2021 budget. Level of Public Interest: Low Sample Motion: I approve/deny the modified Lineworker payscale for 2021 and future years. Attachments: 1. 2021 Lineworker Payscale Page 116 Lineworker Pay Scale - Revised Structure (Nov 2020) Town Job Title Pay Grade Annual Hourly % of Journey Annual Hourly Increase $ Apprentice Lineworker LW 90 70,731$ $34.01 70%62,014$ $29.81 $4.19 Apprentice Lineworker LW 91 73,762$ $35.46 73%64,598$ $31.06 $4.41 Apprentice Lineworker LW 92 76,793$ $36.92 76%67,182$ $32.30 $4.62 Apprentice Lineworker LW 93 79,825$ $38.38 79%69,869$ $33.59 $4.79 Apprentice Lineworker LW 94 82,856$ $39.83 82%72,664$ $34.93 $4.90 Apprentice Lineworker LW 95 85,887$ $41.29 85%75,571$ $36.33 $4.96 Apprentice Lineworker LW 96 88,919$ $42.75 88%78,593$ $37.79 $4.96 Apprentice Lineworker LW 97 91,950$ $44.21 91%81,737$ $39.30 $4.91 Journey Lineworker <6 mo LW 98 95,992$ $46.15 95% Journey Lineworker >6 mo LW 99 101,044$ $48.58 100%$0.95 Lead Lineworker LW 80 106,096$ $51.01 105% Crew Supervisor*MGMT 5 86,449$ 105,900$ 125,351$ 41.56$ 50.91$ 60.26$ Crew Superintendent MGMT 6 95,519$ 117,011$ 138,503$ *Bottom of range not applicable; place above Lead Lineworkers Proposed Rate Current Rate Range Town of Estes Park Effective January 2021 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 117 Page 118 PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING Applicable items include: Rate Hearings, Code Adoption, Budget Adoption 1.MAYOR. The next order of business will be the public hearing on ORDINANCE 02-21 TEMPORARILY EXTEND BUSINESS LICENSE RENEWAL DEADLINE TO JUNE 30, 2021 AND TO WAIVE CERTAIN LIQUOR LICENSE FEES UNTIL DECEMBER 8, 2021.  At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the information presented during the public hearing, from the Town staff, public comment, and written comments received on the item.  Any member of the Board may ask questions at any stage of the public hearing which may be responded to at that time.  Mayor declares the Public Hearing open. 2.STAFF REPORT.  Review the staff report. 3.PUBLIC COMMENT.  Any person will be given an opportunity to address the Board concerning the item. All individuals must state their name and address for the record. Comments from the public are requested to be limited to three minutes per person. 4. MAYOR.  Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard to the item which are not in the Board packet.  Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any further questions concerning the item.  Indicate that all reports, statements, exhibits, and written communications presented will be accepted as part of the record.  Request Board consider a motion. 7.SUGGESTED MOTION.  Suggested motion(s) are set forth in the staff report. Page 119 8.DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. Discussion by the Board on the motion. 9.VOTE ON THE MOTION. Vote on the motion or consideration of another action. *NOTE: Resolutions are read into record at the discretion of the Mayor as it is not required to do so by State Statute. Page 120 TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S OFFICE Memo To: Honorable Mayor Koenig Board of Trustees From: Town Administrator Machalek Date: January 12, 2021 RE: Ordinance 02-21 Temporarily Extend Business License Renewal Deadline to June 30, 2021 and to Waive Certain Liquor License Fees Until December 8, 2021 (Mark all that apply) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER: _____________ QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO Objective: Town Board consideration of an ordinance that would extend the business license renewal deadline to June 30, 2021 and waive certain Town liquor license fees until December 8, 2021. Present Situation: The impacts of COVID-19 and the measures enacted to slow its spread have put a significant burden on Estes Park’s small businesses. While some businesses have been only minimally impacted, others have struggled mightily due to shutdowns, capacity restrictions, and the ever-changing regulatory environment made necessary by the threat to public health posed by the Coronavirus. To-date, in addition to other assistance provided to the community, the Town has provided a significant amount of business support including: •$300,000 in direct assistance to local small businesses distributed in partnership with the Estes Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) and the Estes Park Economic Development Corporation (EDC) early on in the pandemic. •Establishment, facilitation, and significant staff support of the Accelerated Recovery Team which morphed into the Estes Valley Resiliency Collaborative (EVRC) in conjunction with community partners. The EVRC has, among other accomplishments, put together the Safe and Strong Resiliency Plan and assisted with the "Keep NoCo Open" campaign. A full list of EVRC initiatives can be found at: www.estes.org/evrc. •Creation and implementation of the "Embrace the Views" program for businesses. •Administration of the Winterizing Outdoor Spaces Program. Page 121 •Application intake, processing, and award distribution for the State’s Small Busines Relief Program in partnership with the Chamber and EDC. As vaccines begin to be distributed and we embark on a new, more hopeful phase of the pandemic, it is still readily apparent that additional business support is needed. While the Town cannot provide complete relief for all of the economic hardships faced by our small businesses during this pandemic, there are steps we can take to help in these times where every dollar counts. Accordingly, staff will continue to bring forward opportunities for the Town to support our small business community to the Town Board. Ordinance 02-21 addresses two such opportunities. Proposal: If enacted, Ordinance 02-21 would do two things: •Waive Town liquor license renewal fees for all license categories except “Retail Liquor Store” and “Fermented Malt Off Premise” licenses to be in line with Senate Bill 20B-001 which waived State renewal fees through December 7, 2021. The proposed ordinance would waive renewal fees for all liquor licenses expiring December 8, 2020 through December 8, 2021. •Temporarily extend the Town’s business license renewal deadline from January 31, 2021 to June 30, 2021 with the exception of Vacation Home and Bed and Breakfast license renewals; and Waive Town Liquor License Fees A significant proportion of the businesses that have been hardest hit by the public health measures enacted to slow the spread of COVID-19 hold liquor licenses. Recognizing this, the State of Colorado chose to waive many of its State- imposed liquor license fees from December 7, 2020 through December 7, 2021. Staff is recommending that the Town follow the State’s lead and waive Town liquor license renewal fees for all license categories except for “Retail Liquor Store” and “Fermented Malt Off Premise” as businesses holding these types of licenses have not had the same level of severe restrictions imposed on them as holders of the other license types. Town liquor license renewal fees range from $662 to $869 depending on the license category. Temporary Business License Deadline Extension Every dollar counts for our small businesses at this time. Though the cost of a Town business license is only $50, staff recognizes that winter and early spring are difficult cash flow months for many of our community’s small businesses in even the best years. The intent of proposing an extension of the business license deadline is to provide a modicum of relief for small businesses with a tight cash flow before visitation picks up in May/June. This also extends the penalty of $200 for late renewals. This business license deadline extension would not apply to Vacation Home and Bed and Breakfast license renewals. Advantages: •Provides financial relief for businesses that have been hit hard by COVID-19 restrictions. Page 122 •Aligns the Town’s approach to liquor license renewal fees in 2021 with the State of Colorado’s. Disadvantages: •Waiving liquor license fees will have a negative impact on General Fund revenue and is not reflected in the current 2021 budget. Staff believes that the benefits to small businesses are worth forgoing the anticipated revenue. Action Recommended: Staff recommends the Town Board approve Ordinance 02-21. Finance/Resource Impact: Waiving Town Liquor License Renewal Fees will result in a revenue decrease in the General Fund of approximately $50,000. The only financial impact from extending the business license deadline to June 30, 2021 will be a delay in the cash flow from this source. The Town has a strong cash and investment reserve and staff does not anticipate any cash flow issues in 2021. Level of Public Interest Medium Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny Ordinance 02-21. Attachments: 1.Ordinance 02-21 2.Link to Senate Bill 20B-001 Page 123 ORDINANCE NO. 02-21 AN ORDINANCE TO TEMPORARILY EXTEND THE RENEWAL DEADLINE FOR CERTAIN BUSINESS LICENSES TO JUNE 30, 2021 AND TO WAIVE CERTAIN LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWAL FEES THROUGH DECEMBER 8, 2021 WHEREAS, the impacts of COVID-19 and the measures enacted to slow its spread have put a significant burden on Estes Park’s small businesses; and WHEREAS, a significant proportion of the businesses that have been hardest hit by these public health measures hold liquor licenses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Business license deadline extension. For the year 2021 only, the deadline of January 31 established in section 5.20.060(1) and (3) of the Estes Park Municipal Code for renewal of a business license shall be extended to June 30; provided however that this extension shall not apply to renewal applications for business licenses for vacation homes or bed and breakfast inns as defined in chapter 5.20. For business license renewals subject to this deadline extension, full payment of the applicable business license fee is required on or before June 30, 2021, and payments received after such date will be assessed a penalty of two hundred dollars ($200.00) in addition to the licensing fee. Section 2: Liquor license fee waiver. Fees to renew a license for malt, spirituous or vinous liquor, established pursuant to section 5.30.010 of the Estes Park Municipal Code, shall be waived for licenses due to expire beginning December 8, 2020 and extending through December 8, 2021, except that this waiver shall not apply to retail liquor store licenses issued under section 44-3-409, C.R.S., nor fermented malt beverage off premises licenses issued under section 44-4-107(1)(a), C.R.S. The waived fees shall automatically be reinstated for licenses due to expire on December 9, 2021 or thereafter. Waived fees already paid shall be refunded. Section 3: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado this ____ day of _______________, 2021. ATTACHMENT 1 Page 124 TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2021 and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of , 2021, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado. Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney Page 125 SENATE BILL 20B-001 BY SENATOR(S) Winter and Priola, Bridges, Crowder, Danielson, Donovan, Fields, Foote, Ginal, Gonzales, Hansen, Lee, Moreno, Petersen, Rankin, Story, Tate, Todd, Williams A., Zenzinger, Garcia; also REPRESENTATIVE(S) Herod and Sandridge, Arndt, Benavidez, Bird, Buckner, Buentello, Caraveo, Coleman, Cutter, Duran, Esgar, Exum, Froelich, Garnett, Gonzales-Gutierrez, Gray, Hooton, Jackson, Jaquez Lewis, Kennedy, Kipp, Kraft-Tharp, Lontine, McCluskie, McLachlan, Melton, Michaelson Jenet, Mullica, Roberts, Singer, Sirota, Snyder, Sullivan, Tipper, Titone, Valdez A., Valdez D., Weissman, Woodrow, Young. CONCERNING SUPPORT FOR ENTITIES IMPACTED BY SEVERE CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, MAKING AN APPROPRIATION. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. Legislative declaration. (1) The general assembly finds and declares that: (a) Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing public health emergency that Colorado has been battling since March of 2020, many Capital letters or bold & italic numbers indicate new material added to existing law; dashes through words or numbers indicate deletions from existing law and such material is not part of the act. small businesses in the state, including those that are subject to mandatory capacity restrictions, have suffered severe declines in revenue during the pandemic; (b) Small, minority-owned, and women-owned businesses are among those most impacted by the pandemic; (c) Arts venues and artists have also been severely impacted by the pandemic and associated public health restrictions; (d) The closure of small businesses in the state also has a devastating effect on employees of those businesses, will further strain the state's unemployment insurance program, and will have other ripple effects throughout the state; and (e) As more counties in the state move to heightened restrictions on business operations to help contain COVID-19 and to protect the health of all Coloradans, it is imperative that the state provide relief to those small businesses in the most severely restricted counties in order to stem the tide of business closures, protect the state's economy and its communities, and help small businesses continue their operations and retain their employees. (2) The general assembly further declares that the executive branch will continue to develop a framework to certify businesses that demonstrate exemplary compliance with public health orders during the pandemic through an evidence-based certification program that is aligned with the state's objectives to contain the COVID-19 virus. SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 24-32-129 as follows: 24-32-129. Small business relief program - address negative effects of capacity limits due to COVID-19 pandemic - distribution through local governments - definitions - report - repeal. (1) Definitions. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: (a) "COVID-19" MEANS THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE CAUSED BY THE SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY SYNDROME CORONAVIRUS 2, ALSO KNOWN AS SARS-CoV-2. PAGE 2-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (b) "DIVISION" MEANS THE DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS. (c) "ELIGIBLE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS" MEANS A COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS THAT INCLUDES AT LEAST ONE ELIGIBLE COUNTY OR, IF APPLICABLE, AT LEAST ONE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY. (d) "ELIGIBLE COUNTY" MEANS A COUNTY OR CITY AND COUNTY THAT IS: (I) AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2020, UNDER SEVERE CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS, AS DETERMINED THROUGH A STATEWIDE OR LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER THAT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE DECEMBER 10, 2020, OR EARLIER AND THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS: (A) THE CLOSURE OF RESTAURANTS FOR IN-PERSON, INDOOR DINING; (B) THE CLOSURE OF BARS AND THE PROHIBITION OF INDOOR EVENTS; AND (C) A LIMIT OF THE LESSER OF TEN PERCENT CAPACITY OR TEN PEOPLE PER ROOM OR POOL FOR GYMS, RECREATION CENTERS, AND INDOOR POOLS; AND (II) IN GOOD-FAITH COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO COVID-19 AND ALL APPLICABLE STATEWIDE AND LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS THAT ESTABLISH SEVERE CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT AND AS DEMONSTRATED BY: (A) THE COUNTY'S GOOD-FAITH EFFORTS TO ENFORCE OR PROMOTE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE EXECUTIVE AND PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ITS AUTHORITY AND IN CONSIDERATION OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES, INCLUDING ENGAGING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ENFORCE EXECUTIVE AND PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER VIOLATIONS; AND (B) THE COUNTY NOT ADOPTING A PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER OR ENFORCEMENT POLICY THAT IS LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN A STATEWIDE PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER ADOPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND PAGE 3-SENATE BILL 20B-001 ENVIRONMENT, UNLESS THE COUNTY HAS OBTAINED A VARIANCE OR OTHER EXEMPTION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT. (e) "ELIGIBLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT" MEANS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATED BY THE UNITED STATES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION THAT INCLUDES AT LEAST ONE ELIGIBLE COUNTY OR, IF APPLICABLE, AT LEAST ONE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY. (f) "ELIGIBLE INDUSTRY CATEGORY" MEANS A: (I) RESTAURANT, INCLUDING ANY LIQUOR LICENSED ESTABLISHMENT HOLDING A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LICENSE PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-413; (II) BAR, INCLUDING A LIQUOR LICENSED ESTABLISHMENT HOLDING ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING LICENSES: (A) A LIMITED WINERY LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-403; (B) A BEER AND WINE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-411; (C) A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-413; (D) A TAVERN LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-414; (E) AN OPTIONAL PREMISES LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-415; (F) A RETAIL GAMING TAVERN LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-416; (G) A BREW PUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-417; (H) A CLUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-418; (I) AN ARTS LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-419; (J) A RACETRACK LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-420; (K) A VINTNER'S RESTAURANT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-422; (L) A DISTILLERY PUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-426; PAGE 4-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (M) A LODGING AND ENTERTAINMENT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-428; (N) A FERMENTED MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-4-107 (1)(b); OR (0) A FERMENTED MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-4-107 (1)(c); (III) BREWERY, LICENSED PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-407 (1)(b)(I) AND THAT OPERATES AN ATTACHED SALES ROOM PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-407 (1)(b); (IV) WINERY, LICENSED PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-402 (1) OR 44-3-403 AND THAT OPERATES AN ATTACHED SALES ROOM PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-402 (2) OR 44-3-403 (2)(e); (V) DISTILLERY, LICENSED PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-402(1) AND THAT OPERATES AN ATTACHED SALES ROOM PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-3-402 (7); (VI) CATERER; (VII) MOVIE THEATER; OR (VIII) FITNESS AND RECREATIONAL SPORTS CENTER. (g) "ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT" MEANS AN ELIGIBLE COUNTY, ELIGIBLE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, OR ELIGIBLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; EXCEPT THAT, IF A COUNTY IS DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION TO BE INELIGIBLE BASED ON THE COUNTY'S FAILURE TO MEET THE CRITERIA SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTION (1)(d) OF THIS SECTION OR IF A COUNTY IS UNABLE TO ADMINISTER THE RELIEF PROGRAM, ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN THE COUNTY, EITHER ACTING SEPARATELY OR AS A GROUP, CONSTITUTE AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE RELIEF PROGRAM. (h) "ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY" MEANS A MUNICIPALITY THAT IS: (I) AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2020, UNDER SEVERE CAPACITY PAGE 5 -SENATE BILL 20B-001 RESTRICTIONS, AS DETERMINED THROUGH A STATEWIDE OR LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER THAT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE DECEMBER 10, 2020, OR EARLIER AND THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS: (A) THE CLOSURE OF RESTAURANTS FOR IN-PERSON, INDOOR DINING; (B) THE CLOSURE OF BARS AND THE PROHIBITION OF INDOOR EVENTS; AND (C) A LIMIT OF THE LESSER OF TEN PERCENT CAPACITY OR TEN PEOPLE PER ROOM OR POOL FOR GYMS, RECREATION CENTERS, AND INDOOR POOLS; AND (II) IN GOOD-FAITH COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO COVID-19 AND ALL APPLICABLE STATEWIDE AND LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS THAT ESTABLISH SEVERE CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT AND AS DEMONSTRATED BY: (A) THE MUNICIPALITY'S GOOD-FAITH EFFORTS TO ENFORCE OR PROMOTE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE EXECUTIVE AND PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ITS AUTHORITY AND IN CONSIDERATION OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES, INCLUDING ENGAGING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ENFORCE EXECUTIVE AND PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER VIOLATIONS; AND (B) THE MUNICIPALITY NOT ADOPTING A PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER OR ENFORCEMENT POLICY THAT IS LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN A STATEWIDE PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER ADOPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, UNLESS THE MUNICIPALITY HAS OBTAINED A VARIANCE OR OTHER EXEMPTION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT. (0 "ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS" MEANS A SMALL BUSINESS THAT: (I) IS LOCATED IN AN ELIGIBLE COUNTY OR, IF APPLICABLE, AN ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY, AS OF THE TIME OF APPLICATION FOR RELIEF; (II) IS CURRENTLY OPERATING IN THE STATE, AS EVIDENCED BY: PAGE 6-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (A) VERIFICATION OF THE SMALL BUSINESS'S COLORADO INCOME TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER OR, FOR A SMALL BUSINESS THAT IS EXEMPT FROM FILING A COLORADO INCOME TAX RETURN, THE COLORADO TAX EXEMPT CERTIFICATE NUMBER; AND (B) THE SMALL BUSINESS'S RECEIPT FROM ITS MOST RECENT PAYMENT OF UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PAYROLL TAXES; (III) IS ENGAGED IN AN ELIGIBLE INDUSTRY CATEGORY, AS VERIFIED BY ITS NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE; (IV) DEMONSTRATES ITS INTENT TO CONTINUE OPERATING IN THE STATE FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS; (V) PROVIDES EVIDENCE OF AT LEAST TWENTY PERCENT REVENUE LOSS SINCE MARCH 26, 2020, DUE TO THE RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON THE BUSINESS UNDER THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER D 2020 017, ORDERING COLORADANS TO STAY AT HOME, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT'S AMENDED PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER 20-24 IMPLEMENTING STAY-AT-HOME REQUIREMENTS; EXCEPT THAT THIS SUBSECTION (1)(i)(V) DOES NOT APPLY TO A SMALL BUSINESS THAT BEGAN OPERATING ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2020, AND ON OR BEFORE MARCH 26, 2020; (VI) HAS A VALID BUSINESS LICENSE AND IS IN GOOD STANDING WITH THE AGENCY THAT ISSUED THE BUSINESS LICENSE; AND (VII) CERTIFIES TO THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO WHICH THE SMALL BUSINESS APPLIES FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT UNDER THE RELIEF PROGRAM THAT THE SMALL BUSINESS: (A) HAS NOT APPLIED FOR NOR RECEIVED ANY OTHER RELIEF PAYMENTS FROM THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM CREATED IN SECTION 24-48.5-316, ENACTED BY SENATE BILL 20B-001, ENACTED IN THE FIRST EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE SEVENTY-SECOND GENERAL ASSEMBLY; AND (B) IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO COVID-19 AND ALL APPLICABLE PAGE 7-SENATE BILL 20B-001 STATEWIDE AND LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS, INCLUDING CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS. (j) "SMALL BUSINESS" MEANS A CORPORATION, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, PARTNERSHIP, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP, OR OTHER BUSINESS ENTITY THAT: (I) HAS ITS HEADQUARTERS LOCATED IN AND IS DOING BUSINESS IN COLORADO; (II) HAS AT LEAST ONE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE; EXCEPT THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE ONE EMPLOYEE DOES NOT APPLY TO A SMALL BUSINESS THAT IS A SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP; AND (III) (A) FOR A SMALL BUSINESS THAT WAS OPERATING BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2020, HAD ANNUAL RECEIPTS OF LESS THAN TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE 2019 CALENDAR YEAR; AND (B) FOR A SMALL BUSINESS THAT BEGAN OPERATING ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2020, AND ON OR BEFORE MARCH 26, 2020, HAD ANNUAL RECEIPTS OF LESS THAN TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN THE 2020 CALENDAR YEAR. (k) "SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAM" OR "RELIEF PROGRAM" MEANS THE SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAM CREATED IN SUBSECTION (2) OF THIS SECTION. (2) Small business relief program. (a) (I) (A) THERE IS CREATED IN THE DIVISION THE SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAM TO ALLOCATE MONEY TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PROVIDE RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES OPERATING WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THOSE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. THE DIVISION SHALL DEVELOP A PROCESS FOR ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO APPLY FOR AN ALLOCATION OF AVAILABLE MONEY TO PROVIDE RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES OPERATING WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES. (B) AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT CHOOSES TO APPLY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RELIEF PROGRAM MUST SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE DIVISION BY JANUARY 8, 2021, AND BY JANUARY 15, 202 1 ,THE DIVISION SHALL ALLOCATE THE MONEY APPROPRIATED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (3) PAGE 8-SENATE BILL 20B-001 OF THIS SECTION TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTIONS (2)(a)(II) AND (2)(a)(III) OF THIS SECTION, THE DIVISION SHALL ALLOCATE MONEY TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BASED ON THE POPULATION OF THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AS DETERMINED PURSUANT TO THE MOST RECENTLY PUBLISHED POPULATION ESTIMATES FROM THE STATE DEMOGRAPHER APPOINTED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS. (II) FOR PURPOSES OF THE ALLOCATION TO AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT IS AN ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY, THE DIVISION SHALL ALLOCATE THE MONEY TO THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY BASED ON THE PROPORTION OF THE POPULATION OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY IS LOCATED THAT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY. (III) THE DIVISION SHALL SET ASIDE TEN PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT APPROPRIATED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (3) OF THIS SECTION TO DISTRIBUTE ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS TO ELIGIBLE COUNTIES THAT: (A) DEMONSTRATE HIGH NEEDS, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION; AND (B) HAVE A POPULATION OF NOT MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE. (b) (I) THE DIVISION MAY ALLOCATE UP TO THE AMOUNT APPROPRIATED TO THE DIVISION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (3) OF THIS SECTION TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN THE STATE UNDER THE RELIEF PROGRAM; EXCEPT THAT THE DIVISION MAY USE UP TO FIVE PERCENT OF THE APPROPRIATED AMOUNT FOR THE DIVISION'S AND ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS' ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IN OPERATING AND ADMINISTERING THE RELIEF PROGRAM. (II) ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES MAY RECEIVE RELIEF PAYMENTS AS FOLLOWS, REDUCED AS NECESSARY BY THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO AVOID EXCEEDING THE TOTAL AMOUNT ALLOCATED TO THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (2)(a) OF THIS SECTION: (A) FOR AN ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS THAT HAD LESS THAN FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN RECEIPTS IN THE 2019 CALENDAR YEAR, PAGE 9-SENATE BILL 20B-001 A RELIEF PAYMENT OF UP TO THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS; (B) FOR AN ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS THAT HAD FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OR MORE BUT NOT MORE THAN ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN RECEIPTS IN THE 2019 CALENDAR YEAR, A RELIEF PAYMENT OF UP TO FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS; AND (C) FOR AN ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS THAT HAD ONE MILLION DOLLARS OR MORE BUT NOT MORE THAN TWO MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN RECEIPTS IN THE 2019 CALENDAR YEAR, A RELIEF PAYMENT OF UP TO SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. (c) (I) EACH ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES TO APPLY FOR AND DEMONSTRATE ELIGIBILITY FOR RELIEF PAYMENTS AND THE AMOUNT FOR WHICH A SMALL BUSINESS IS ELIGIBLE UNDER THE RELIEF PROGRAM. AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY USE ANY NEW OR EXISTING PROCESSES AVAILABLE IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING PROCESSES AVAILABLE THROUGH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND CONTRACTS WITH PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ENTITIES, TO ENABLE THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO: (A) PROVIDE THE RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES IN THE LEAST COSTLY AND MOST EXPEDITIOUS AND EFFICIENT MANNER; AND (B) ENCOURAGE AND FACILITATE THE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITIES AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS LOCATED WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. (II) EACH ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT RECEIVES AN ALLOCATION FROM THE DIVISION PURSUANT TO THE RELIEF PROGRAM SHALL: (A) ALLOW SMALL BUSINESSES LOCATED WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN TWENTY-ONE DAYS DURING WHICH TO APPLY FOR RELIEF PAYMENTS; (B) NOT DISTRIBUTE RELIEF PAYMENTS BASED ON THE ORDER IN WHICH APPLICATIONS ARE SUBMITTED OR RECEIVED; AND PAGE 10-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (C) COLLECT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FROM SMALL BUSINESS APPLICANTS TO ENABLE THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO ISSUE AN INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO AN ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS THAT RECEIVES A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION. (III) ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT APPLY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RELIEF PROGRAM MUST COMMUNICATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE RELIEF PROGRAM IN A MANNER THAT INFORMS SMALL BUSINESSES LOCATED WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ABOUT THE RELIEF PROGRAM AND HOW AND WHEN TO APPLY FOR RELIEF PAYMENTS. (IV) ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SHALL DETERMINE THE RELIEF PAYMENT AMOUNT FOR EACH ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BASED ON THE PAYMENT AMOUNTS SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTION (2)(b)(II) OF THIS SECTION, REDUCED AS NECESSARY BASED ON THE TOTAL AMOUNT ALLOCATED TO THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (2)(a) OF THIS SECTION, AND SHALL MAKE THE DISTRIBUTION OF RELIEF PAYMENTS AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE AFTER RECEIVING THE MONEY FROM THE DIVISION, BUT NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 12, 2021. AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL PROVIDE AN INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO EACH ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS TO WHICH IT DISTRIBUTES A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION. (V) IF, AFTER DISTRIBUTING RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ALL ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES IN THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAS MONEY REMAINING FROM ITS ALLOCATION FROM THE DIVISION, THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FROM AND DISTRIBUTE THE REMAINING MONEY TO OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTIONS (1)(i) AND (1)(j) OF THIS SECTION EXCEPT SUBSECTION (1)(j)(III) OF THIS SECTION. THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT DISTRIBUTE MORE THAN SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS TO ANY BUSINESS THAT IS ELIGIBLE FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION (2)(c)(V). (VI) IF AN ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY RECEIVES AN ALLOCATION FROM THE DIVISION PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION AND, AFTER DISTRIBUTING RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ALL ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES LOCATED WITHIN THE PAGE 11-SENATE BILL 20B-001 GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY, HAS MONEY REMAINING FROM ITS ALLOCATION FROM THE DIVISION, THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY MAY ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FROM AND DISTRIBUTE RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES LOCATED: (A) IN AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY IS LOCATED; AND (B) WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ELIGIBLE MUNICIPALITY. (d) THE DIVISION MAY DEVELOP POLICIES AND PROCEDURES NECESSARY FOR THE OPERATION OF THE RELIEF PROGRAM, INCLUDING: (I) THE APPLICATION AND INFORMATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS; AND (II) A REQUIREMENT THAT EACH ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT RECEIVES AN ALLOCATION PROVIDE A REPORT TO THE DIVISION DESCRIBING HOW THE MONEY WAS DISTRIBUTED TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES AND HOW MUCH OF THE ALLOCATION THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, DETAILING HOW THE MONEY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS WAS SPENT. (e) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, AN ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS THAT RECEIVES A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THE RELIEF PROGRAM: (I) IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY OTHER RELIEF PAYMENTS FROM THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM CREATED IN SECTION 24-48.5-316, ENACTED BY SENATE BILL 20B-001, ENACTED IN THE FIRST EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE SEVENTY-SECOND GENERAL ASSEMBLY; AND (II) IS REQUIRED TO RETURN ANY RELIEF PAYMENT RECEIVED PURSUANT TO THE RELIEF PROGRAM IF THE ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS IS FOUND TO BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ANY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTION (1)(i) OF THIS SECTION. (3) Funding. FOR THE 2020-21 STATE FISCAL YEAR, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL APPROPRIATE THIRTY-SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS FOR USE BY THE PAGE 12-SENATE BILL 20B-001 DIVISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION. (4) Report. (a) AS PART OF ITS REPORT PURSUANT TO THE "STATE MEASUREMENT FOR ACCOUNTABLE, RESPONSIVE, AND TRANSPARENT (SMART) GOVERNMENT ACT" BEFORE THE 2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THE DIVISION SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE SENATE OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE AND THE TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE, DETAILING HOW RELIEF PROGRAM MONEY WAS ALLOCATED, INCLUDING: (I) THE LIST OF ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT RECEIVED AN ALLOCATION UNDER THE PROGRAM; (II) THE AMOUNT EACH ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT RECEIVED, DETAILING HOW MUCH OF EACH ALLOCATION TO EACH ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT WAS: (A) DISTRIBUTED BY THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES; AND (B) SPENT BY THE ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, SPECIFYING THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE MONEY WAS SPENT; (III) INFORMATION ABOUT THE ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT RECEIVED RELIEF PAYMENTS AND THE AMOUNT OF THE PAYMENTS; AND (IV) ANY OTHER INFORMATION DEEMED PERTINENT BY THE DIVISION. (b) THE DIVISION SHALL ALSO SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR. (5) Repeal. THIS SECTION IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 3. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-21-113, add (28) as follows: 39-21-113. Reports and returns - rule. (28) NOTWITHSTANDING PAGE 13-SENATE BILL 20B-001 ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS SECTION, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SHALL PROVIDE THE DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS, OR ANY ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 24-32-129 (1)(g), WITH ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION THAT IS NECESSARY TO VERIFY THE ELIGIBILITY OF A SMALL BUSINESS FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-32-129. ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED TO THE DIVISION OR TO AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION (28) REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL, AND ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE DIVISION OR AN ELIGIBLE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN SUBSECTION (4) OF THIS SECTION AND THE PENALTIES CONTAINED IN SUBSECTION (6) OF THIS SECTION. SECTION 4. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 24-48.5-301, amend (2)(a)(IV), (2)(a)(V), (2)(b) introductory portion, (2)(b)(III), and (2)(b)(IV); and add (2)(a)(VI) and (2)(b)(V) as follows: 24-48.5-301. Creative industries division - creative industries cash fund - creation - definition - repeal. (2) (a) There is hereby created in the state treasury the creative industries cash fund, referred to in this section as the "fund". The fund consists of: (IV) Moneys MONEY appropriated to the fund by the general assembly, including, but not limited to, moneys MONEY appropriated for the purpose of providing need-based funding for infrastructure development within creative districts as authorized by section 24-48.5-314 (5)(b); ?rrrd (V) Any gifts, grants, or donations from private or public sources that the division is hereby authorized to seek and accept; AND (VI) (A) SEVEN MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS APPROPRIATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO THE FUND FOR THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-48.5-316. (B) THIS SUBSECTION (2)(a)(VI) IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. (b) The moneys MONEY in the fund shall be annually appropriated to the division for the operation of the division, and for the following: PAGE 14-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (III) For the purchase of works of art pursuant to the art in public places program, taking into consideration the artist's preliminary site visit, the design fee, the total costs of construction and installation of the work of art, jury expenses, and program administration in compliance with the provisions of section 24-48.5-312 (6); and (IV) For need-based funding for infrastructure development in creative districts as authorized by section 24-48.5-314 (5)(b), to the extent that the general assembly appropriates moneys MONEY to the fund for that purpose; AND (V) (A) WITH REGARD TO THE AMOUNT APPROPRIATED TO THE FUND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (2)(a)(VI) OF THIS SECTION, FOR THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-48.5-316. (B) THIS SUBSECTION (2)(b)(V) IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 5. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 24-48.5-316 as follows: 24-48.5-316. COVID-19 relief program for arts, cultural, and entertainment artists, crew members, and organizations - definitions - report - repeal. (1) Definitions. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: (a) "ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ARTIST OR CREW MEMBER" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED IN THE MUSIC, THEATER, MOTION PICTURE, TELEVISION, DANCE, OR VISUAL ARTS INDUSTRY. (b) "ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ORGANIZATION" MEANS A NONPROFIT OR FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION INVOLVED IN THE MUSIC, THEATER, MOTION PICTURE, TELEVISION, DANCE, OR VISUAL ARTS INDUSTRY. (c) "COVID-19" MEANS THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE CAUSED BY THE SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY SYNDROME CORONAVIRUS 2, ALSO KNOWN AS SARS-CoV-2. (2) Arts relief program. (a) (I) THE DIVISION SHALL ADMINISTER OR CONTRACT WITH A THIRD PARTY TO ADMINISTER AN ARTS RELIEF PAGE 15-SENATE BILL 20B-001 PROGRAM TO PROVIDE RELIEF PAYMENTS TO ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ARTISTS, CREW MEMBERS, AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT MEET ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA DEVELOPED BY THE DIVISION. WHEN DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR AND THE SIZE OF AN ARTS RELIEF PAYMENT, THE DIVISION SHALL: (A) CONSIDER THE TYPE OF ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ARTIST, CREW MEMBER, OR ORGANIZATION THAT IS APPLYING FOR AN ARTS RELIEF PAYMENT, THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON THE ARTIST'S, CREW MEMBER'S, OR ORGANIZATION'S BUSINESS MODEL, IF APPLICABLE, THE SIZE OF THE ORGANIZATION, IF THE APPLICANT IS AN ORGANIZATION, AND THE AVAILABILITY OF AND THE ARTIST'S, CREW MEMBER'S, OR ORGANIZATION'S ACCESS TO OTHER RELIEF OR GRANT FUNDING; AND (B) PRIORITIZE ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ORGANIZATIONS WHOSE VENUES ARE DETERMINED TO BE AT THE HIGHEST RISK OF PERMANENT CLOSURE. (II) THE DIVISION SHALL NOT DISTRIBUTE RELIEF PAYMENTS BASED ON THE ORDER IN WHICH APPLICATIONS ARE SUBMITTED OR RECEIVED. (III) THE DIVISION SHALL COLLECT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FROM APPLICANTS TO ENABLE THE DIVISION TO ISSUE AN INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO AN APPLICANT THAT RECEIVES A RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION. WHEN ISSUING A RELIEF PAYMENT TO AN APPLICANT, THE DIVISION SHALL PROVIDE THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO THE APPLICANT. (b) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, AN ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ARTIST, CREW MEMBER, OR ORGANIZATION THAT RECEIVES AN ARTS RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY OTHER RELIEF PAYMENTS FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAM CREATED IN SECTION 24-32-129, ENACTED BY SENATEBILL20B-001, ENACTED IN THE FIRST EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE SEVENTY-SECOND GENERAL ASSEMBLY. AN ORGANIZATION THAT APPLIES FOR AN ARTS RELIEF PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL CERTIFY THAT THE ORGANIZATION NEITHER APPLIED FOR NOR RECEIVED ANY OTHER RELIEF PAYMENTS FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAM CREATED IN SECTION 24-32-129, ENACTED BY SENATE BILL PAGE 16-SENATE BILL 20B-001 20B-001, ENACTED IN THE FIRST EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE SEVENTY-SECOND GENERAL ASSEMBLY. (3) Funding. FOR THE 2020-21 STATE FISCAL YEAR, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL APPROPRIATE SEVEN MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE CREATIVE INDUSTRIES CASH FUND CREATED IN SECTION 24-48.5-301 (2) FOR THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM. THE DIVISION MAY USE UP TO FIVE PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT APPROPRIATED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION FOR ITS ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IN ADMINISTERING OR CONTRACTING WITH A THIRD PARTY TO ADMINISTER THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM. (4) Report. BY NOVEMBER 1, 2021, THE DIVISION SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR, THE BUSINESS, LABOR, AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE OF THE SENATE OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE, AND THE BUSINESS AFFAIRS AND LABOR COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE DETAILING HOW THE MONEY WAS ALLOCATED THROUGH THE ARTS RELIEF PROGRAM, INCLUDING: (a) THE LIST OF ARTS RELIEF PAYMENT RECIPIENTS AND THE AMOUNT ALLOCATED TO EACH RECIPIENT; (b) THE TYPES OF ARTS, CULTURE, AND ENTERTAINMENT ARTISTS, CREW MEMBERS, AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT RECEIVED ARTS RELIEF PAYMENTS; AND (c) ANY OTHER INFORMATION DEEMED PERTINENT BY THE DIVISION. (5) Repeal. THIS SECTION IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 6. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 25-4-1607, amend (10) as follows: 25-4-1607. Fees - repeal. (10) (a) County or district boards of health created in part 5 of article 1 of this title TITLE 25 shall collect fees under this section if the county or district boards of health are authorized by the department to enforce this part 16 and any rules promulgated pursuant to this part 16. PAGE 17-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (b) (I) NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECTION (10)(a) OF THIS SECTION, STARTING JANUARY 1, 2020, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2021, COUNTY OR DISTRICT BOARDS OF HEALTH AND THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER MAY CONTRACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO RECEIVE MONEY FROM THE STATE IN LIEU OF CHARGING ESTABLISHMENTS AN ANNUAL LICENSING FEE. (II) THIS SUBSECTION (10)(b) IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 7. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 44-3-501, add (6) as follows: 44-3-501. State fees - rules - one-time fee waiver - repeal. (6) (a) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THIS SECTION TO THE CONTRARY, THE FOLLOWING FEES IMPOSED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION ARE WAIVED FOR TWELVE MONTHS FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SUBSECTION (6): (I) LICENSE FEES IMPOSED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTIONS (1)(a)(IV), (1)(g), (1)(h), (1)(i), (1)(j), (1)(k), (1)(1), (1)(m), (1)(n), (1)(o), (1)(p), (1)(q), AND (1)(v) OF THIS SECTION AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 44-4-105; (II) APPLICATION FEES IMPOSED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (3)(a)(I), (3)(a)(XII), AND (3)(a)(XIII) OF THIS SECTION AND PURSUANT TO REGULATION 47-302 (F), 1 CCR 203-2; AND (III) ALL FEES ASSOCIATED WITH TIIE RENEWAL OF A LICENSE. (b) THE WAIVER OF FEES SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTION (6)(a) OF THIS SECTION APPLIES TO THE FOLLOWING LICENSE TYPES: (I) A LIMITED WINERY LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-403; (II) A BEER AND WINE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-411; (III) A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-413; (IV) A TAVERN LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-414; (V) AN OPTIONAL PREMISES LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-415; PAGE 18-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (VI) A RETAIL GAMING TAVERN LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-416; (VII) A BREW PUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-417; (VIII) A CLUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-418; (IX) AN ARTS LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-419; (X) A RACETRACK LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-420; (XI) A VINTNER'S RESTAURANT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-422; (XII) A DISTILLERY PUB LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-426; (XIII) A LODGING AND ENTERTAINMENT LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-3-428; (XIV) A FERMENTED MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-4-107 (1)(b); AND (XV) A FERMENTED MALT BEVERAGE LICENSE UNDER SECTION 44-4-107 (1)(c). (c) THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL APPROPRIATE AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED SEVENTY-EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND STATE LICENSING AUTHORITY CASH FUND FOR USE BY THE DEPARTMENT TO OFFSET THE REDUCTION IN FEE REVENUES USED BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS OF THE LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND THE STATE LICENSING AUTHORITY IN THE ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF ARTICLES 3 TO 5 OF THIS TITLE 44. (d) THIS SUBSECTION (6) IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 8. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 24-49.5-106 as follows: 24-49.5-106. COVID-19 relief for minority-owned businesses - definitions - repeal. (1) Definitions. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, UNLESS THE PAGE 19-SENATE BILL 20B-001 CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: (a) "CARES ACT" MEANS THE "CORONAVIRUS AID, RELIEF, AND ECONOMIC SECURITY ACT", PUB.L. 116-136, 134 STAT. 281 (2020), AS AMENDED. (b) "COVID-19" MEANS THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE CAUSED BY THE SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY SYNDROME CORONAVIRUS 2, ALSO KNOWN AS SARS-CoV-2. (c) "MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESS" MEANS A BUSINESS THAT IS AT LEAST FIFTY-ONE PERCENT OWNED, OPERATED, AND CONTROLLED BY AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A MEMBER OF A MINORITY GROUP, INCLUDING AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS AFRICAN AMERICAN, ASIAN-INDIAN, ASIAN-PACIFIC AMERICAN, HISPANIC AMERICAN, OR NATIVE AMERICAN. (2) Relief payments, grants, and loans to minority-owned businesses. (a) (I) THE OFFICE SHALL USE A PORTION OF THE MONEY APPROPRIATED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (4) OF THIS SECTION, INCLUDING A PORTION ANNUALLY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, TO ADMINISTER A PROGRAM TO PROVIDE: (A) RELIEF PAYMENTS TO MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN MOST IMPACTED BY COVID-19 AND HAVE LACKED MEANINGFUL ACCESS TO FEDERAL LOANS AND GRANTS UNDER THE CARES ACT; AND (B) GRANTS AND LOANS TO MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES FOR START-UP AND GROWTH CAPITAL. (II) THE DIRECTOR SHALL ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES TO APPLY FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT, GRANT, OR LOAN UNDER THE PROGRAM, INCLUDING THE DEADLINE FOR APPLYING, THE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE TO DEMONSTRATE ELIGIBILITY FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT, GRANT, OR LOAN, AND ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED BY THE DIRECTOR. (b) THE OFFICE SHALL ESTABLISH POLICIES SETTING FORTH THE PARAMETERS AND ELIGIBILITY FOR THE PROGRAM, INCLUDING: (I) THE TERMS OF AND ELIGIBILITY FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT, GRANT, PAGE 20-SENATE BILL 20B-001 OR LOAN; (II) CAPS ON THE AMOUNT OF A RELIEF PAYMENT, GRANT, OR LOAN; (III) DEADLINES FOR APPLYING FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT, GRANT, OR LOAN; (IV) GRANT REQUIREMENTS AND LOAN REPAYMENT TERMS; AND (V) ANY OTHER POLICIES NECESSARY TO OPERATE THE PROGRAM. (C) THE OFFICE SHALL COLLECT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FROM MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR A RELIEF PAYMENT OR GRANT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION (2) TO ENABLE THE DIVISION TO ISSUE AN INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO A MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESS THAT RECEIVES A RELIEF PAYMENT OR GRANT. WHEN ISSUING A RELIEF PAYMENT OR GRANT TO A MINORITY -OWNED BUSINESS, THE DIVISION SHALL PROVIDE THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FORM 1099 TO THE RELIEF PAYMENT OR GRANT RECIPIENT. (3) Technical support. THE OFFICE SHALL USE A PORTION OF THE MONEY APPROPRIATED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (4) OF THIS SECTION, INCLUDING A PORTION ANNUALLY FOR STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT, TO INCREASE THE OFFICE'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CONSULTING SUPPORT TO MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES ACROSS THE STATE. THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CONSULTING SUPPORT MAY INCLUDE: (a) PROVIDING MINORITY -OWNED BUSINESS LEADERS WITH EXPANDED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND NETWORKING OPPORTUNITIES; (b) INCREASING THE AVAILABILITY OF THE OFFICE'S EXISTING PROGRAMMING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT, INCLUDING THROUGH THE SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER; (C) DESIGNING STATEWIDE CERTIFICATION OPPORTUNITIES; AND (d) CONDUCTING STATEWIDE AND LOCAL OUTREACH CAMPAIGNS TO EDUCATE BUSINESS OWNERS AND ENTREPRENEURS OF PROGRAMMING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT. PAGE 21-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (4) Funding. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL APPROPRIATE FOUR MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE COLORADO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND CREATED IN SECTION 24-46-105 FOR USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION IN THE 2020-21 AND 2021-22 STATE FISCAL YEARS. (5) Report. BY NOVEMBER 1, 2021, AND NOVEMBER 1, 2022, THE OFFICE SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR, THE BUSINESS, LABOR, AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE OF THE SENATE OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE, AND THE BUSINESS AFFAIRS AND LABOR COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR ITS SUCCESSOR COMMITTEE, DETAILING HOW THE OFFICE IS EXPENDING THE MONEY APPROPRIATED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION. (6) Repeal. THIS SECTION IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 9. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 24-46-105, add (6) as follows: 24-46-105. Colorado economic development fund - creation - repeal. (6) (a) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THIS SECTION TO THE CONTRARY, THE COMMISSION SHALL ALLOCATE MONEY APPROPRIATED TO THE FUND PURSUANT TO SECTION 24-49.5-106 (4) TO THE MINORITY BUSINESS OFFICE CREATED IN SECTION 24-49.5-102 FOR USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 24-49.5-106. (b) THIS SECTION IS REPEALED, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2022. SECTION 10. Appropriation. (1) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $37,000,000 is appropriated to the department of local affairs for use by the division of local government. This appropriation is from the general fund and is based on an assumption that the department will require an additional 2.1 FTE. To implement this act, the division may use this appropriation for relief to small businesses. (2) (a) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $7,500,000 is appropriated to the creative industries cash fund created in section 24-48.5-301 (2)(a), C.R.S. This appropriation is from the general fund. The office of the governor is responsible for the accounting related to this appropriation. PAGE 22-SENATE BILL 20B-001 (b) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $7,500,000 is appropriated to the office of the governor for use by economic development programs. This appropriation is from reappropriated funds in the creative industries cash fund under subsection (2)(a) of this section. To implement this act, the office may use the appropriation for the council on creative industries. (3) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $4,000,000 is appropriated to the economic development fund created in section 24-46-105 (1), C.R.S. This appropriation is from the general fund. The office of the governor is responsible for the accounting related to this appropriation. (4) (a) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $6,780,000 is appropriated to the food protection cash fund created in section 25-4-1608 (1), C.R.S. This appropriation is from the general fund. The department of public health and environment is responsible for the accounting related to this appropriation. (b) (I) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $6,780,000 is appropriated to the department of public health and environment for use by the division of environmental health and sustainability. This appropriation is from reappropriated funds in the food protection cash fund under subsection (4)(a) of this section. To implement this act, the division may use the appropriation for the environmental health programs. (II) Any money appropriated in this subsection (4)(b) not expended prior to July 1, 2021, is further appropriated to the department for the 2021-22 state fiscal year for the same purpose. (5) For the 2020-21 state fiscal year, $1,891,775 is appropriated to the department of revenue. This appropriation is from the general fund. To implement this act, the department may use this appropriation as follows: (a) $13,775 for the division of taxation for tax administration IT system (GenTax) support; and (b) (I) $1,878,000 for use by the liquor and tobacco enforcement division for personal services. (II) Any money appropriated in this subsection (5)(b) not expended prior to July 1, 2021, is further appropriated to the department for the PAGE 23-SENATE BILL 20B-001 2021-22 state fiscal year for the same purpose. SECTION 11. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety. eroy M. Garcia PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE Zre/z .e .0(rilatieteci-4. Cindi L. Markwell SECRETARY OF THE SENATE KC Becker SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES J Robin Jones CHIEF CLERK F THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPROVED DWSvC0--UkrOJI ,2-020 xt-- (0 ik? 001V\ (Date and Time) Jared or GO RN R OF THE STA I r OF COLORADO PAGE 24-SENATE BILL 20B-001