HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2021-06-08
June 8, 2021
4:45 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.
Board Room/Virtual
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.
To view or listen to the Study Session by Zoom Webinar
ONLINE (Zoom Webinar): https://zoom.us/j/91077906778 Webinar ID: 910 7790 6778
CALL-IN (Telephone Option): 877-853-5257 (toll-free) Meeting ID: 910 7790 6778
If you are joining the Zoom meeting and are experiencing technical difficulties, staff will be
available by phone for assistance 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting at 970-577-4777.
4:45 p.m. Downtown Loop Quarterly Update. (Director Muhonen)
5:15 p.m. Cameron Peak and East Thompson Zone Debrief. (Captain
Rose)
5:45 p.m. Demonstration of Laserfiche Process Automation for Municipal
Court. (Deputy Town Clerk Beers)
6:15 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions.
6:25 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
6:30 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting.
Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this
meeting at approximately 4:15 p.m.
AGENDA
TOWN BOARD
STUDY SESSION
Page 1
Page 2
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Project Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Date: June 8, 2021
RE: Quarterly Update on Downtown Estes Loop Project (DEL)
Objective:
Update the Town Board on the activities that have taken place on the Downtown Estes
Loop (DEL) project since the March 23, 2021 Town Board Study Session.
Present Situation:
• Right of Way: The Phase 2 Right of Way negotiations continue for the
acquisition of easements and rights-of-way slivers from 23 property owners.
Eleven agreements are complete or awaiting closing.
• CLOMR: the application to FEMA for the Conditional Letter of Map Revision was
submitted April 30, 2021. The FEMA review and approval process is expected to
take 9 to 12 months. A flood bypass culvert is proposed to mitigate rises in the
1% flood base flood elevation otherwise caused by Crags Drive roadway and
intersection work proposed in the floodplain.
• Budget: No changes since the March update. Central Federal Lands Highway
Division (CFLHD) previously updated the project budget from $17.2 million to
$22.58 million to reflect the estimated additional costs to complete the
preliminary engineering (design, right of way acquisitions, easement acquisitions,
and building demolition). This is reflected in the amended MoA.
• Schedule: The project schedule anticipates completion of the construction
documents by the fall of 2021. Right of way and easement acquisitions are
expected to extend to the end of 2021. The incomplete ROW and CLOMR
processes are delaying the project construction work. Bidding is targeted for
spring 2022 with off-roadway construction occurring in the summer of 2022 (new
wall near Fun City and Ivy Bridge). The primary project construction is expected
to begin in October 2022 and extend thru June of 2023.
• Memorandum of Agreement (MoA). The MoA and Reimburseable Agreement
amendments were approved by the Town Board March 9th and have been signed
by all parties. This amendment process is complete.
Page 3
Proposal:
The TAC proposes to continue the design and right-of-way acquisition efforts in 2021
and bid the construction work in the second quarter of 2022.
Advantages:
The project benefits are numerous and include relief to the Town’s downtown traffic
congestion problems, improved downtown mobility for bicyclists, reduction in downtown
flood risk from the Big Thompson River, improved water delivery for fire protection, and
closure to property owner uncertainty surrounding the DEL.
Disadvantages:
Some community members do not support the partner agencies building the DEL.
Action Recommended:
n/a
Finance/Resource Impact:
The Town has expended no additional funds for this project since the previous quarterly
update. The 2014 Memorandum of Agreement between the Town, CDOT, CFLHD, and
RMNP estimated this project would cost $17.2 million with construction occurring in
2016. In 2019 CFLHD dedicated more than $2 million of additional Federal Lands
Access Program (FLAP) funds to cover increased right of way acquisition costs. The
Town remains obligated to pay a local match of $4.2 million (CDOT devolution funds)
for the Phase 1 project. The Town has spent $3,823,977 to-date. A total of $9.5 million
has been spent by CFLHD on the project to-date.
Level of Public Interest
The known level of public interest in this item is high.
Attachments:
1. Presentation slides for the Phase 1 project
Page 4
6/8/2021
1
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Downtown Estes Loop Project
Estes Park Town Board Study
Session
June 8, 2021
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Today’s Agenda
• Progress Update
•Right of Way
•CLOMR Permitting
•MOU Amendment/
Budget Update
• Project Schedule
• Next Steps
•Q&A
6/8/2021
2
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Project Scope – Phase 1
• Phase 1:
– Reconstruction and realignment of
Riverside Drive
– Reconstruction of the Ivy Street Bridge
– New and Coordinated traffic signals with
Riverwalk
– Associated transportation improvements
along Elkhorn and Moraine
– New on street bike lane on Moraine and
Riverside
– Continuous sidewalks along entire Loop
– Channel Improvements between Ivy St
and Rockwell St
– Wayfinding signs, parklands
• Does not include:
– Rockwell and Riverside Bridges
– Relocation of Public Restroom
– Downstream Floodplain Improvements
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Right-of-Way Acquisition
• CDOT is the lead agency for Right of Way (ROW) Acquisition on the Project.
• Process follows Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act of 1970 (Uniform Act).
• CDOT continues to assist the
property owners and tenants who
require Relocation.
• Currently, acquisition is in
process for the remaining
parcels, which are primarily
temporary work easements.
• Of 23 ownerships, 11
agreements are complete or
awaiting closing.
• Acquisition will continue
through 2021.
CDOT owned properties
6/8/2021
3
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Summary of Right-of-Way
Acquisition Process
Draft Presentation subject to change.
General Condemnation Process
6/8/2021
4
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Budget Update
PROJECT BUDGET FOR ALL SEGMENTS
Item
Estimated Cost for
CFLHD Performed
Services
Comments
Preliminary Engineering
(PE) and Environmental
Compliance
PE Subtotal $2,880,000
ROW Acquisition & Utility
Relocation ROW Subtotal $7,100,000
Construction Contract (CN)
CN Subtotal $11,200,000
Schedule A $10,600,000
Option X $600,000
100% of Cost Borne
by Town of Estes Park.
Construction Engineering
(CE)CE Subtotal $1,400,000
TOTAL $22,580,000
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Project Schedule
6/8/2021
5
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Construction Schedule Scenarios
Major Factors Driving Schedule:
– CLOMR Application Approval
– ROW/Easement Acquisition
Construction Schedule*:
– Advertise Spring 2022
– Construction 2022/23
*Pending permit approvals and ROW acquisition
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Next Steps
•Upcoming Milestone:
– 95% Design Submittal – June 2021
– Continue Right of Way Acquisition through 2021
– CLOMR Application submitted 4/30/21
– Submit USCOE 404 Permit Summer 2021
– Utility Relocations (Xcel, CenturyLink, EPSD, UTSD, Town of EP
Water/Power) October, 2021 through May, 2022
• Monthly Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meetings
– Members include representatives from CFLHD, CDOT, Estes Park
• Town Board Quarterly Updates
– next presentation on September 14, 2021
6/8/2021
6
Draft Presentation subject to change.
Questions and Answers
POLICE Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Captain Eric Rose, Emergency Manager
Christy Crosser, Grant Specialist
Date: June 8, 2021
RE: After Action Report East Troublesome and Cameron Peak Fires
Objective:
This report presents issues and recommendations from the wildfire events;
improvements that can be applied in emergency management of future disasters and
emergencies and in particular, wildfire evens.
Present Situation:
The Town experienced a rapidly moving and growing wildfire, the East Troublesome
Fire that resulted in a valley-wide evacuation order on October 22, 2020. Evacuation
planning had been completed; however, a full-scale test was never feasible. This was a
live test. We were fortunate with the pandemic likely meant fewer visitors in the area.
The Cameron Peak Fire also impacted Estes Park including Town employees as well as
the Utilities Department Power & Communications.
Following these events, department staff were invited to participate in virtual meetings
to receive an overview the events from the Emergency Manager, and an opportunity to
provide feedback on their experience and observation regarding the event including the
evacuation.
Five virtual meetings were held and employees unable to attend or if they had additional
feedback were invited to talk with me or send email messages. Meeting notes were
compiled and combined with all written messages received and used as source data for
this report.
Proposal:
This After Action Report provides an opportunity to share information on what worked
and areas of improvement. The lesson learned are many; however, overall the
evacuation worked. In a matter of 6 hours, people were out of the valley with the
exception of authorized personnel.
Page 5
Improvements are noted; however, each event will present challenges in a different
situation requiring unique responses. The intent is to apply lesson learned in
preparation for the next emergency and disaster and adapt accordingly.
This report is the first step in preparation and more work will need to be done to detail
the Town’s effort to implement the recommendations including working closely with
leadership.
Advantages:
• This report will provide the first step in implementing recommendations and sharing lessons
learned with the Board, Town staff, partner organizations and the community.
• This report will continue the ongoing effort to improve emergency and disaster response to
keep people and property safe.
Disadvantages:
• No two disasters are alike; however, lessons learned can be applied to other disasters with
a measure of flexibility.
• Emergency preparedness is ongoing, never-ending. This is one more step in a process.
Action Recommended:
There is no Board action required; however, Town staff will continue to work on
emergency and disaster preparedness with the community and partner organizations.
Among the actions for Town staff will be training, review of Intergovernmental
Agreements and Mutual Aid Agreements, review event-essential employees’ roles and
responsibilities, and discuss improved communications methods.
Finance/Resource Impact:
None identified at this time.
Level of Public Interest
This report should be high; however, we also know the longer the time between a
disaster and implementation of change that interest wanes.
Attachments:
1. After Action Report
Page 6
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 1
After Action Report
East Troublesome and Cameron Peak Fires
August-December 2020
Report version 05/26/2021
CPF, Estes Park, Denver Post, Oct 16,2020
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 7
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 2
Table of Content
Contents
About the Fires .............................................................................................................................................. 3
East Troublesome Fire .............................................................................................................................. 6
Cameron Peak Fire .................................................................................................................................... 6
Process .......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Report Format ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Communications ........................................................................................................................................... 9
Communications ⸻ Internal..................................................................................................................... 9
Communications ⸻ Dispatch ................................................................................................................... 9
Communications ⸻ Public Information ................................................................................................. 10
Communications ⸻ Partner Agencies .................................................................................................... 12
Operations .................................................................................................................................................. 13
Operations ⸻ Organizational ................................................................................................................. 13
Operations ⸻ Community partnerships ................................................................................................ 15
Operations ⸻ Town Departments ......................................................................................................... 15
Utilities ................................................................................................................................................ 16
Public Works – Streets and Engineering ............................................................................................. 17
Community Services – Events Complex .............................................................................................. 17
Operations ⸻ Emergency Management ................................................................................................ 18
Emergency Management .................................................................................................................... 18
EVACUATION ............................................................................................................................................... 20
EDUCATION AND TRAINING ........................................................................................................................ 22
Glossary ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
Page 8
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 3
About the Fires
The Cameron Peak Fire (CPF) started on August 13
near Chambers Lake/Cameron Pass area. On
September 7, the fire moved into Chapin pass area
within Rocky Mountain National Park. This action
prompted the Town of Estes Park Emergency
Manager and Fire District Chief to review previous
fire emergency and evacuation planning developed in
2017 and begin preparation if the fire moved closer
to Estes Park, Glen Haven, and nearby communities.
The planning developed in 2017 included modeling
and fire predictive behavior.
Modeling identified a fire in the Chapin pass area of
Rocky Mountain National Park, driven by prevailing westerly winds and dry conditions which could
predictably take a similar path as the Fern Lake Fire (2012), causing a substantial risk to the Estes Park
community. Our preparation included expanding the current plan to incorporate shared resource
allocation with our partner agencies, evacuation mapping, tracking the current fire movement and
revisions to field guide procedures.
Through the remainder
of September and into
October our local
firefighters from Estes
Park and Glen Haven
joined with the
National Incident
Management team in
firefighting efforts in
and around Glen
Haven, Storm
Mountain, and nearby
communities.
While supporting these efforts we were monitoring the East
Troublesome Fire (ETF) in Grand County, for fire behavior and the
affects to Trail Ridge Road for potential evacuation routing. The fire,
originated near Kremmling, was moving towards the two communities
of Grand Lake and
Granby.
On October 21, the
East Troublesome fire ran approximately 18 miles
causing rapid evacuations of over 6,500 residences in
Grand Lake and Granby areas and continued to move
into the west side of Rocky Mountain National Park
near Green Mountain.
ETF, Granby Oct 21, 2020
CPF, from Medicine Bow Curve, RMNP
CPF, from Prospect Mtn, Estes Park
Page 9
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 4
On the morning of October 22, a notice from partners at Rocky Mountain National Park stated that a
satellite had located a “heat signature” east (Estes Park side) of the Continental divide in Spruce Creek/
Forest Canyon area.
It is not uncommon for heat indications from smoke clouds to show up on satellite imagery, which could
explain the indication was from the East Troublesome Fire smoke cloud we experienced overnight and
into the day. An Infrared flight was unable to fly due to high winds and poor visibility prompting a
member of the Incident Management Team to attempt a visual sighting of the location. A branch
Division Chief travelled by vehicle to the area and confirmed a fire was active in the Spruce Creek
drainage, indicating the East Troublesome fire had spotted over the Continental Divide to ignite the
area. Later
investigation
determined
the fire had
spotted
approximately
1.5 miles from
the head of
Tonahutu
Creek on the
west side of
the
Continental
Divide to the
head of
Spruce Creek
on the east
side of the
Continental
Divide.
Due to the fire’s location, extremely high winds,
predictable travel path, and evidence of swift fire
movement witnessed in the communities of
Grand Lake and Granby the day prior,
evacuations for the majority of the Estes Valley
were implemented. Approximately 15,000-
25,000 people were evacuated to neighboring
communities within an approximate 4-hour
timeframe.
Estes Park, NPR, 1:00 pm
Page 10
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 5
Our populace managed the evacuation process
well, due in part to daily public messaging
regarding the nearby Cameron Peak fire provided
a sense of readiness throughout our community in
the days prior. The smoke cloud lingering over the
Estes Valley that morning contributed to the
Schools closing which resulted in easing parents’
stress of collecting their children during the egress.
The fire’s outlook was indistinct due to forecasted
dry winds (cold front) predicting more movement
to the East, endangering properties along US
Highway 66 and High Drive Corridor.
A cold front with significant snowfall stalled the fire on October 25 allowing firefighting actions and
favorable weather conditions to halt the major movement of both the East Troublesome and Cameron
Peak Fires.
Approximately 30,000 acres, or 9 percent of the Rocky Mountain National park, was impacted by the
East Troublesome and Cameron Peak Fires.
(photos, Denver Post)
Estes Park, Loveland Herald, 1:00 pm
Estes Park, Loveland Herald, 3:00 pm
Page 11
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 6
East Troublesome Fire
48 days, October 14- November 30, 100 % contained, 4 Incident Management Teams, 193,812 acres.
Inciweb, National Wildfire Coordinating Group Summary
The East Troublesome Fire was reported on the afternoon of October 14. The origination point was
northeast of Kremmling in Grand County in the Arapaho National Forest. The cause is still under
investigation. Within three days, high winds and low humidity allowed the fire to spread to over 10,000
acres. The direction of fire spread threatened State Highway 125 and forced the closure of the road and
mandatory evacuation of approximately 90 homes by October 17.
Between Oct. 20-23, the fire spread increased dramatically with 24-hour increases of around 18,000 to
87,000 acres during the four-day run. The peak fire spread of 87,093 acres occurred between late afternoon
on Oct. 21 and the early afternoon of Oct. 22. The size of the fire exploded from 18,550 acres to 187,964
acres during this period. The fire crossed Highway 125 on the afternoon of Oct. 21 and spread eastward
into the Rocky Mountain National Park on Oct. 22, crossing the Continental Divide, and reaching the
western edge of Estes Park on Oct. 23.
Th e fire was fueled by wide-spread drought, numerous dead and down beetle-killed trees, red flag weather
conditions created by high winds and dry conditions, and poor humidity recovery overnight. The
combination of these factors led to unprecedented, wind-driven, active fire behavior with rapid spread
during the overnight hours. During this period the area north of US Highway 40 from near Granby and
extending eastward to Grand Lake and Estes Park had over 7,000 structures threatened, and a population
of over 35,000 placed under a mandatory evacuation.
A winter storm from Saturday, Oct. 24 through the morning of Oct. 26 brought very cold temperatures,
precipitation in the form of snow and lighter winds, resulting in a dramatic drop in fire behavior with
smoldering and reduced fire spread on both sides of the Continental Divide. Over this 3-day period, fire
growth fell to a total of around 4,500 acres for a total of 192,457 acres. From that point forward, fire activity
remained minimal with little change in area and a final total acreage of 193,812. The fire was declared
contained on Nov. 30, 2020.
National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) InciWeb, 2020. East Troublesome Fire. Retrieved from:
https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/7242/
Cameron Peak Fire
Inciweb, National Wildfire Coordinating Group Summary
112 days, August 13- December 2, 100 % contained, 9 Incident Management Teams. 208,913 acres.
The Cameron Peak fire ignited on August 13 on the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests near Cameron
Pass and Chambers Lake. The East Thompson Zone Fire started on Oct. 22 when the East Troublesome Fire
spotted across the Continental Divide and became established in Rocky Mountain National Park between
the Divide and Estes Park. The fires burned in heavy timber stands over rugged terrain. High winds
combined with critically dry fuels drove fire growth. Cooler temperatures and widespread snow over the
area had been dampening fire activity. The fire was declared contained on Dec. 2, 2020.
Page 12
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 7
National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) InciWeb, 2020. Cameron Peak Fire. Retrieved from:
https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/6964/
Page 13
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 8
Process
Each Town Department was invited to participate in virtual meetings with the Emergency Manager
(EM), who presented a brief information on preparedness and how the evacuation transpired. With this
background information, the EM proceeded to ask for feedback on areas of improvement. Each
participant was provided an opportunity for input. Email messages were also received from Town staff
who could not attend one of the department meetings. The discussions focused on the first 48 to 72
hours of the incident and what Town staff experienced during this time frame.
Purpose
This report considers improvement recommendations from the wildfire events; improvements that can
be used in emergency management of future disasters and emergencies.
Report Format
•Issue Summary
•Recommendation
•Responsible Department
•Implementation Timeframe
Page 14
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 9
Communications
(within the Town of Estes Park government)
Communications ⸻ Internal
Issue Summary: Internal staff communications among departments proved to be challenging
during the incident response. Swift moving events and COVID restrictions provided the lack of
an engagement forum for Department Directors with staff, creating information imbalances and
lost efficiencies.
Recommendations:
1.Event-essential personnel are assigned radios for improved communications;
2.Utilize Hip Link tool to provide current and changing field information with event-essential
employees and leadership;
3.Training and education on radio communications;
4.Training and education on roles and responsibilities during emergency and disaster
responses; and
5.Daily morning and evening briefings activated for event-essential Department Directors
when Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is established. Briefings will be consistent with
Incident Command (ICS) structure. Department Directors will gain knowledge about the
incident, assist in planning, receive assignments, collaborate across departments, and
disseminate information and tasks to employees.
Responsible Department: Emergency Manager, Police, and Department Directors
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Communications ⸻ Dispatch
Issue Summary: To better coordinate the multijurisdictional evacuation zones an agreement
was made for Larimer County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) to launch evacuation notices. This proved
more challenging than initially determined as the plan was to provide a single source for
communications. Notifications were not mutually determined with the Estes Park Police
Department (EPPD) and the EPPD Dispatch for successful coordination and information-sharing
regarding field operations in the areas of law operations, evacuation measures and utilities.
Recommendation: Dispatch will provide a representative to attend briefings as available and
resources allow, and if this is not possible, then the Operations Section Chief or designee will
provide briefings for dispatch following morning and evening briefings. Information will be
coordinated with LCSO Dispatch and Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority.
Responsible Department: Police, Larimer County SO, and LETA
Page 15
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 10
Implementation Timeframe: this recommendation has been approved and will be implemented
during the next emergency event.
Communications ⸻ Public Information
Issue Summary: Distributing communications to key community stakeholders experienced a
number of challenges including timeliness of the information; accuracy; and a consistent and
centralized place for people to access information. A comprehensive list of stakeholders is
needed.
Recommendations:
1.Develop procedures for contacting partners in the event the EOC is activated. Partners
include and not limited to; Estes Valley Fire Protection District (EVFPD), Rocky Mountain
National Park (RMNP), Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (LETA), Larimer County
Sheriff Office (LCSO), Estes Park Sanitation District (EPSD), Upper Thompson Sanitation
District (UTSD), Estes Valley Library, Estes Park Health and other health care providers, Estes
Park Economic Development Corporation (EDC), Estes Chamber of Commerce, Estes Park
Nonprofit Resource Center (EPNRC), community organizations and association that
represent businesses.
2.Provide area training with partners to improve coordination and messaging procedures.
3.Develop shared messaging practices for consistency.
4.Develop a comprehensive list of stakeholders, with contact information. Review the list
annually.
Responsible Department: Police, Administration’s Public Information Officer (PIO)
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Issue Summary: Residents, business owners, and property owners were concerned about the
security of their homes, businesses and property for fire protection and other threats such as
vandalism. Little to no information was provided to ease these concerns.
Recommendations:
1.Provide public messaging to inform evacuees that security measures are in place by police
personnel supplying protection of property.
2.Public messaging to include that only authorized personnel area allowed in the areas.
3.Provide public messaging for evacuees about law enforcement role in providing security to
evacuated areas.
Responsible Department: Police and the Administration’s PIO.
Implementation Timeframe: Information will be presented as a community preparation effort
and during an emergency event.
Page 16
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 11
Issue Summary: Contraflow traffic allowance during the evacuation was not communicated and
caused confusion and traffic issues. During evacuation, emergency vehicles inbound to Estes
Park had their sirens on so the outbound motorist would stop and pull over which slowed the
traffic down considerably. This is a common occurrence in emergency situations and is to be
expected and was not communicated.
In an emergency evacuation, contraflow lanes roughly double the number of lanes available for
evacuation traffic. During the evacuation, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)
determined that contraflow would be difficult because of the number of side roads along US
Highways 36 and 34, and Colorado Highway 7. It was also determined by emergency personnel
that the fire threat was not so imminent to require contraflow traffic.
Recommendations:
1.The Town’s Portable Variable Message Signs could include relevant information for
outbound traffic.
2.Provide clear and concise information before and during evacuation measures if contraflow
traffic is allowed or not.
3.Provide information and education to evacuees that they are not required to pull over and
stop for inbound emergency vehicles.
Responsible Department: Police and Administration’s PIO.
Implementation Timeframe: This will be included in the routine information and education prior
to an evacuation event.
Issue Summary: The Town’s permanent variable message signs (VMS) are for inbound traffic
only and likely not useful during evacuation events. However, the Town owns portable VMS that
could be strategically placed with public information messages.
Recommendations:
1.Event-essential personnel need to know where the portable signs are located to be able to
retrieve and put into use as needed.
2.Coordinate the message with Public Works and CDOT.
3.Draft pre-approved messaging for rapid deployment.
Responsible Department: Public Works, Administration PIO, and Police
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Page 17
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 12
Communications ⸻ Partner Agencies
Issue Summary: Fire-related communication from different agencies was sometimes
contradicting and confusing and described as too much information for people to understand
during an emergency. There were longer than anticipated delays experienced from the time a
decision was made to the actual message release, including the evacuation notice. Cross-
jurisdictional information needs improvement.
Recommendation: Develop communications procedural guidelines through an operations
manual developed in partnership with the Estes Valley Fire Protection District.
Responsible Department: Police and Estes Valley Fire Protection District
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Issue Summary: The high usage of the cell towers stretched its capacity to provide reliable
services. This challenged communications between the Emergency Managers, EOC personnel
and Town staff. Calls were dropped or did not go through.
Recommendation:
1.Partner with Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (LETA) and cell providers to enhance
cell coverage and capacity for Estes Park and Estes Valley. Crown Castle will be providing
the power for proposed cellular coverage installation along US 36 and may lease dark fiber
form Larimer County and LETA911, or possibility Town Power & Communications.
2.Research priority calling options via service providers. Provide Government Emergency
Telephone Services (GETS) to designated staff.
3.Issue radios to key personnel.
4.AT&T has installed a new site on the north side of the YMCA and they have plans for
additional sites within Estes Park and on US Hwy 36 between Estes Park and Lyons.
Responsible Department: Police
Implementation Timeframe: 12-24 months
Page 18
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 13
Operations
Operations ⸻ Organizational
Issue summary: A lack of clear and concise information and expectations on roles and
responsibilities for Town employees resulted in confusion and opportunities for improvement.
Recommendations:
1.Provide training workshops for each departments’ Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP)
use.
2.Provide tabletop exercises with emphasis on training and information for individuals with
limited Incident Command System (ICS) experience.
3.Revise the COOP to include employee tracking: attendance and location system for
employee safety and resource allocation.
4.Revise COOP to include duty descriptions for event-essential and define roles for Town
employees during ICS/EOC activations. Define ICS positions for Town employees.
5.Revise COOP to include a check-in/ reporting system for event-essential Town employees.
6.Revise COOP to be accessible electronically.
7.Include safety protocols information and education.
Responsible Town Department:
•Police and other Departments assigned to participate in the response.
•The Emergency Manager or designee provides training for Department Directors, Division
Managers and Supervisors during their regular meetings, and also to employee groups who
have event responsibilities.
•COOP revisions: Department Directors
•EOC manual: Police Department with the Estes Valley Fire Protection District
•EOP: Emergency Manager, Department Directors.
Implementation Timeframe: 12-24 months
Issue Summary: Some Town employees did not have proper identification to access authorized
areas. Also some Town employees were using their personal vehicles to access areas which
resulted in delays to their destinations.
Recommendations: Develop a policy that requires event-essential employees to always have
Town identification with them during an emergency and disaster event. Provide signage for
personal vehicles to access travel in restricted areas.
Responsible Department: Police Department and Department Directors
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Page 19
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 14
Issue summary: During and following emergencies and disasters, people and organizations want
to help. This should be expected and planned for and the Town should document offerings and
be responsive to volunteers and organizations. A coordinated effort will also help to avoid
unwanted donated items. The 2020 wildfires proved to be challenging because of multi-
jurisdictional agencies involved in the response making the coordination of donations
challenging.
The volunteer and donation coordination by the Town would be specific to the Town’s
responsibility for an emergency and disaster response. For events with multiple jurisdictions,
this would require clear organization among partners.
Recommendation:
1.The Town's volunteer manager will coordinate with the emergency manager and logistics
manager for Town-specific incidents on donations, utilizing volunteers for recovery, etc., as
well as work with Estes Park Nonprofit Resource Center (EPNRC) through their volunteer
clearinghouse, and Volunteers Active in a Disaster (VOAD).
2.The Town volunteer manager will promote the needs of the Town during an emergency
through established communication channels including social media, email, and website.
3.The Town’s volunteer program will coordinate opportunities the EOC Branch Director for
Town-specific responses to emergencies and disasters.
4.A list of possible volunteer and donation opportunities could be developed in advance and
in preparation of emergencies and disasters.
Responsible Departments: Administration and Police
Implementation Timeframe: 6-12 months
Issue Summary: Town employees were making last minute decisions on what to remove from
their offices and facilities and where to take valued items. This includes physical assets
(equipment, materials, artifacts, etc.) and unique and original documents, as well as digital
backup.
Recommendation:
1.Develop a safekeeping plan for critical Town assets.
2.IT has multiple servers in various locations and is planning on additional remote or cloud
backup.
3.Documents should be in digital format and saved on the Network and/or in LaserFiche for
safe keeping.
Responsible Department: Department Directors, IT
Implementation Timeframe: 12- 24 months
Page 20
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 15
Operations ⸻ Community partnerships
Issue Summary: Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) is the zone of transition between unoccupied
land and human development. It is the line, area or zone where structures and other human
development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. Communities
adjacent to and surrounded by wildland are at varying degrees of risk from wildfires and Estes
Park is no exception.
Recommendation:
1.Collaborate with the Estes Valley Fire Protection District (EVFPD) to provide education and
training for neighborhoods within Estes Park and the Estes Valley on fire mitigation
measures.
2.Partner with area homeowner associations (HOAs) to provide fire prevention education and
inspections, and other mitigation measures.
3.Conduct outreach efforts to inform and educate the community about wildfire risks.
4.Participate and support resiliency efforts provided through the Colorado Resiliency Office
(CRO), Department of Local Affairs (DOLA).
5.Integrate mitigation and resiliency efforts in planning and projects at every opportunity,
including the 2021 Comprehensive Plan.
6.Reference the Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan and maintain this plan as a resource
to respond to and prepare for hazards. Provide training for staff members related to
hazards, mitigation and resiliency efforts, projects, and funding in partnership with Larimer
County and the Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
(DHSEM). Participate in community-based recovery groups.
7.Reference Larimer Connect.
Responsible Departments: Police and Community Development, EVFPD
Implementation Timeframe: 12-24 months
Operations ⸻ Town Departments
During the 2020 wildfire response, some of the challenges experienced by Town Department
employees can be attributed to multiple jurisdiction agencies “in charge”. This event placed the
Town in a partnership role and not in a lead role.
This section is a brief description of the issues Town Department experienced, and includes
some recommendations. The recommendations generally include education and training for
Department Directors and event-essential employees, which is considered ongoing and
continuous. In some cases, the recommendation is to review plans and update these as
indicated.
Page 21
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 16
Depending on the recommendation, the implementation timeframe is generally between 6 and
24 months.
Utilities
Issue Summary: Town Utilities personnel received communications from various sources making
it difficult to determine priorities. This added to the challenges that some of the Town’s utilities
assets were in high-risk areas requiring fire or law enforcement escort coordination to keep
utilities personnel safe.
Recommendation:
1.Assign an EOC primary and secondary (backup) contact for Town Utilities and communicate
who this will be with the Utilities Department. Responsible Department: Emergency
Manager, Police.
2.Communicate who the contacts are with EOC personnel and dispatch. Responsible
Department: Emergency Manager, Police.
3.Contractors and private sector entities will need to be provided a liaison for power, gas, and
water shut off and on requests.
Issue Summary: Coordination with private sector utilities was necessary during the wildfire
event including Xcel gas. Shutting off and turning on gas services in coordination with the Town
Water and Power & Communications Divisions was necessary for the safety of people and
properties.
Recommendation: Communication with Xcel administration (and general service providers) can
be improved by aligning their representative with a designated logistics role or Branch Director.
Issue Summary: Utilities was not included in daily briefings which would have beneficial in
coordination efforts.
Recommendation: Supervisors will attend daily briefings, as noted in the Communications
section and relay information to all workgroups.
Issue Summary: The Water Division received requests from customers for services that are the
responsibility of the customers. Water Division staff expressed a need to inform and educate
customers on who is responsibility for what services and repairs.
Recommendation: The Water Division drafted a customer service letter for distribution that
outlines service and repair responsibilities. This letter has not been distributed yet.
Page 22
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 17
Issue Summary: Employee safety protocols for water plant operations during emergency events
are in need of revisions to include protective resource sharing with other departments and
improved communications.
Recommendations:
1.In the event of emergency operations that require on site management of water plants in a
hazardous area, water employees will follow established safety plans to include law
enforcement and/or fire personnel to assist.
2.A revision of the COOP will include safety plans for escort, on site accompaniment and
needs deemed necessary to ensure the safety of water employees while performing duties
in a hazardous area due to an emergency event such as wildfire.
3.The employees and accompanying emergency personnel will maintain communications with
Police/ Dispatch Communications center via radio for safety and welfare.
4.Training in safety plans, multi-department response and radio use will be required.
Public Works – Streets and Engineering
Issue summary: Traffic control, roadblocks and directional signage are often a critical
component to emergencies responses are not limited to evacuations. Not all event-essential
Town staff are trained on responding nor are their roles and responsibilities well defined which
requires Town staff to make immediate decisions that impact public safety.
Recommendation:
1.To improve traffic control management during emergency and disaster responses, by
training event-essential employees on roles and responsibilities.
2.Develop training exercises for emergency traffic management that includes signage, routing,
and flexible planning in the event of activation.
3.Partner with agencies in Larimer and Boulder Counties for multi-jurisdictional
implementation of traffic control in the event of an evacuation. Partners include: EVFPD,
CDOT, LCSO, Boulder County Sheriff’s Office (BCSO), Larimer County Office of Emergency
Management (LCOEM), CSP, and others as identified.
Community Services – Events Complex
Issue Summary: This was the first time that the Events Complex was used for the EOC. The EOC
was moved from Town Hall to the Events Complex which was greatly beneficial for the
coordination of resources and meeting space; however, there were some challenges including
establishing the layout and clearly communicating this to users
Recommendation:
1.Outside the buildings: provide directional signage for easy location for each jurisdiction.
2.Inside the buildings: label areas for specific jurisdictions including Town, County, RMNP,
federal agencies, etc.
Page 23
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 18
Issue Summary: Large animal rescue and sheltering proved to be challenging. While the
Fairgrounds could accommodate livestock and large animals, there was concern if the Events
Complex had to be evacuated.
Recommendation: Establish mutual aid with other jurisdictions to transport (if needed) and
shelter large animals and livestock in the event the Town is unable to accommodate.
Operations ⸻ Emergency Management
Emergency Management
Improve Emergency Operations Center operations and communications at the Events Complex
Issue Summary: Employees and partner agencies/contractors were sometimes unsure of the
organizational framework at the emergency operations center (EOC), who to contact, where
resources were located.
Recommendation:
1.Develop a variable based expanding/decreasing staffing system to effectively manage
emergency incidents as influenced by changing events.
2.Develop mapping at the EOC setup to ensure easy access by various teams to locate their
respective areas. This is subject to the incident make up EOC needs.
Responsible Department: Emergency Manager, and Community Services
Improve planning for equipment storage and use by the private sector.
Issue Summary: Partner agencies and contractors need specific parking and storage locations at
the EOC. Federal Firefighters required space and storage for personnel and equipment.
Recommendation:
1.Add a policy addendum to EOP to manage Town and public equipment and vehicle storage.
2.Determine pre-planned areas and signage to allow for organized storage and travel for EOC
personnel, Federal Incident Management Team, partner agencies, and private sector
contractors on Town property.
Responsible Department: Emergency Manager, Community Services, Public Works
Improve coordination with Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
Issue Summary: During this incident multiple jurisdictions were affected and Unified Command
structure was adapted to manage multiple resources within and outside of the Town and Fire
Page 24
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 19
District jurisdictions. This contributed to multiple layers of communication causing confusion for
utilities crews including power and water.
Recommendation: Assign a dedicated liaison who will be provided to contractors and private
sector entities for power, gas, and water shut off coordination.
Responsible Department: Emergency Manager, Power and Communications, Public Works,
EVFPD
Harden critical infrastructure in high-risk areas.
Issue Summary: During the wildfire event it was discovered multiple Town infrastructure would
benefit from mitigation measures.
Recommendation: Identify high-risk infrastructure and discuss opportunities to harden against
future wildfires with the aid of generators, design, mitigation work, and implement a variety of
precautionary measures to protect infrastructure from wildfire.
Responsible Department: Town Departments with assets and infrastructure in high-risk areas.
Page 25
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 20
EVACUATION
Many issues overlap with evacuation and areas of improvement. Please see the Communications and
Operations Sections for related information.
Improve evacuation notification alerts.
Issue Summary: Everbridge evacuation notices were confusing and lengthy, creating delays that
made it difficult for evacuees to determine instructions and direction. The notices were only
sent in English, with no resources posted in Spanish. Resource limitations caused decreased
coordination among Larimer County, Estes Park Dispatch and Larimer Emergency Telephone
Authority (LETA).
Recommendations:
1.Coordinate plans with LETA, the Estes Valley Fire Protection District (EVFPD), and the
Larimer County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) to make improvements in evacuation notification
procedures. This recommendation is currently in progress, discussions are ongoing as to the
responsible entity in providing emergency notifications for all residents in Larimer County,
and a recommendation is for LETA to be in this role for all jurisdictions.
2.In future incidents a County representative assigned to the EOC would provide a more direct
line of communication in planning the emergency.
Responsible Department: Police, EVFPD, LETA
Implementation Timeframe: In progress, 6-12 months
Improve evacuation egress and traffic coordination with partner agencies.
Issue Summary: Colorado State Patrol (CSP), Larimer County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) and Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) coordination are areas for improvement. During the
mandatory evacuation, plans were in place to provide maximum outflow of traffic movement;
however, there were challenges that require attention for improvements. Planning agencies
included EPPD, Estes Valley Fire Protection District (EVFPD) and LCSO. CSP was requested by
LCSO during this event to assist. Additional productive preplanning with partner agencies
offering contingency evacuation routes due to unforeseen road closures would provide more
effective results.
CDOT provided information regarding the challenges of contraflow traffic on highway with
multiple side roads and used for incoming emergency vehicles.
Recommendation:
1.Develop and maintain evacuation traffic management plan within Police EOP addendum.
2.Corroborate with Law Enforcement, CDOT, and Public Works for updates and training
exercise.
Page 26
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 21
3.Assign a Law Branch Director within the Operations section of the ICS to manage this effort
during an event.
Currently this recommendation is in progress with the Town Emergency Manager, Fire Chief and
LETA Director, revising Estes Park proper/Valley evacuation zones and vehicle routing.
Responsible Department: Police and Public Works and Partner agencies
Implementation Time Frame: In Progress, 6-12 months
Improve patrol evacuation traffic management planning.
Issue Summary: Evacuation planning had been completed, but a full-scale test was never
feasible. Sergeants were provided planning packets and materials for familiarity and input.
Recommendation:
1.Provide patrol officer training/awareness regarding evacuation planning and
implementation.
2.Partner with Public Works for traffic flow management, detour routing, and signage
assistance during an evacuation.
3.Update evacuation traffic management plans based on plan revisions and experience.
Responsible Department: Police and Public Works
Implementation Timeline: 6-12 months
Page 27
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 22
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Issue Summary: Training in the Incident Command System (ICS) management system improves
preparedness, safety and efficiency by providing a coordinated systematic approach to incident
management.
Recommendation:
Develop an annual training schedule which includes new hire orientation for ICS 100-200, and
Supervisor training ICS 300-400, including Tabletop specific exercises.
Ensure supervisors train their employees so all Town employees receive department specific
emergency, hazard mitigation and/or resiliency training.
Training could be expanded to the community and includes business owners, nonprofits,
residents, and property owners.
Responsible Department: Human Recourses, Emergency Manager
Implementation Timeframe: 12-24 months
Page 28
Wildfire After Action Report – Estes Park 23
Glossary
COOP Continuity of Operations Plan
IAP Incident Action Plan
IC Incident Commander-Overall responsibility for incident
ICS Incident Command System
Command Staff-Operations, Planning, Logistics, Finance, Public Information, Liaison, Safety
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EOP Emergency Operations plan
VMS Variable Messaging Sign
VOADS Volunteer Organizations Active in Disaster
Page 29
Page 30
TOWN CLERK’S OFFICE Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Deputy Town Clerk Beers
Date: June 8, 2021
RE: Demonstration of Laserfiche Process Automation for Municipal Court
Purpose of Study Session Item:
To review process automation and updates to municipal court records and court day
operations utilizing the Town’s enterprise-wide document management system
Laserfiche.
Town Board Direction Requested:
No direction is required for this item.
Present Situation:
In April 2018, Municipal Court was moved to the Town Clerk’s office with the Municipal
Court Clerk supervised by the Town Clerk. Prior to the move, Municipal Court consisted
of a contracted Municipal Judge and contracted Municipal Court Clerk which operated
out of the Police Department. The Court Clerk operated mainly from a home office with
paper files stored offsite and with little oversight.
The current Municipal Court Clerk brought experience from a larger communities which
utilized court software to manage court processes. In reviewing options, it was
determined the initial cost to purchase software, approximately $10,000, was too high
for the Town level of citations processed annually. The software purchase would have
also required an annual maintenance fee. In lieu of purchasing a separate software
package requiring additional fees, in 2018 staff engaged Peak Performance, the Town’s
Laserfiche software support company, to begin developing a business process to
reduce paper consumption and digitize the court procedure.
Laserfiche was selected in 2016 as the Town’s enterprise-wide document management
software. The software is used to store official Town records, set retention on records,
and make documents available to the public through the Town’s records portal. In
addition, Laserfiche has various programs which can be used for business process
automation such as creating digital fillable forms, digital business processes/workflows,
and enhanced scanning, including character recognition. This powerful software has
been used in the Clerk’s office to automate other processes such as annual invoicing for
business licensing, agenda management and production, processing open records
Page 31
requests, etc. Each automated business process has created significant improvements
in both time and hard costs.
Proposal:
Staff has prepared a presentation to provide the Town Board an overview of the final
business process automation for Municipal Court. The process sources Municipal Court
citation information stored in the Police Department’s ticketing software for the virtually
paperless court process. The automated process stores all information digitally and
creates a separate electronic file for each citation. As staff will demonstrate, the
process has also eliminated the need to shuffle paper files from the Prosecutor and the
Municipal Court Judge during court proceedings as files are moved electronically
throughout the process.
Staff anticipates the automation of municipal court may initially result in a material cost
savings of $0.75 per citations paid prior to court and $4.65 per citation for those heard
at court. Staff further anticipates staff time savings of 25 minutes per citation for
citations paid prior to court and 40 minutes per citation which go through court. These
are initial estimates. Staff will update these numbers as the new process is used
throughout the year.
Advantages:
•The continued use of the Town’s enterprise-wide document management software
Laserfiche.
•Increase efficiency and streamline workflow for both internal operations and services
provided to the community.
•Decrease paper files and improve record retention.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
None.
Finance/Resource Impact:
Staff time and contracted services to build the process were minimal compared to the
cost and time saving anticipated by staff. The Town realizes a cost savings in
purchasing an additional software package at an approximate cost of $10,000 and the
annual maintenance cost. IT staff time to upload and maintain the software on a local
service is not required, which saves additional staff time.
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Attachments:
1.Municipal Court Presentation
Page 32
Confidential Customized for Lorem Ipsum LLC Version 1.0
Town of Estes Park
Municipal Court Process through
June 8, 2021
Process Overview
1. Citations issued from the Police Department are routed to the Municipal Court Clerk
a.The Municipal Court Clerk collects payment and closes the file
b.Creates files for
i.Citations entered as a summons to court
ii. Defendants who desire to contest the violation
iii. Defendants who fail to remit payment
c.Defendants who appear before the Court
i. May be offered a plea by the Prosecuting Attorney
ii. Appear before the Judge for sentencing
1. Payment Agreement/Sentencing Conditions
2. May reappear before the court
d. Case Closed
Page 33
ATTACHMENT 1
Obtaining Information from Citations
A process has been developed to handle Municipal Court processing digitally through Laserfiche
Forms. A Workflow captures citation information issued via SmartPrint and creates a citation
folder in the TownofEstesParkPolice Repository.
Use of Contact Information
COVID-19 Changes
Defendant contact information (primarily email) is used in the entire Municipal Court process.
●Primary means of contact
●Payment confirmation
●Court notifications/follow up
○Virtual Court Procedures/Instructions
○Court ordered requirements
○Plea Offers
○Hearings
○Post court emails i.e. payment agreement/sentence conditions
Page 34
970-577-4777
name@domain.com
*NEW
Page 35
Retention
Record retention can be applied directly into the
system to meet the Colorado Records Retention
Manual.
Retention is confirmed prior to the final
disposition of any record.
Creating the Docket
Page 36
Docket
Example
Prosecuting
Attorney
Review
Laserfiche Forms Process Automation
Judges Orders Court Clerk Confirmation
Emails/Paperwork
Advertisement of Rights/Guilty Plea Acknowledgement
Follow Up, Close File, Set Retention
Returns to Court/Conditions
Page 37
Laserfiche Forms Process Automation
●Available on the website
●Can be completed in advance of court
●Provided in English and Spanish
Advertisement of Rights/
Guilty Plea Acknowledgement
●Dynamic
●Intuitive
●Simplistic
Prosecuting Attorney/Plea Offer
Page 38
Judges Orders
Court Clerk Review
Page 39
Confirmation Emails/Letters to Defendants
The system will send an email to the defendant with payment instructions and conditions of the
court as applicable.
Password Protected Emails
Password protected/encrypted
emails to protect personal
identifiable information (PII).
Page 40
Process Map
ROI - Return On Investment
2019 Citation Totals 2020 Citation Totals
523 - Issued into Municipal Court
315 - Paid/Closed
208 - FTA, BW, Dismissed
485 - Issued into Municipal Court
366 - Paid/Closed
119 - FTA, BW, Dismissed
Page 41
Prior to 2020/2021 Laserfiche Implementation - Preliminary
Citations paid prior to court
Staff Time - .5 Hour(s) per citation
Processing payments, phone and email
communications, data entry, complete forms and
filing.
SUPPLIES
Paper, printing, envelopes, postage etc.
Approximate Cost for Materials = $1.25
Staff Time - 1 Hour(s) per citation
Phone and email communications, data entry,
preparing court documents (docket sheet, driver history,
case reports, supporting documents etc.), mailing
letters/notices file follow up, complete forms and
filing.
SUPPLIES
Paper, printing, labels, folders, envelopes,
postage, carbon copy paper etc.
Approximate Cost for Materials = $5.40
Citations which go through Court
ROI - Return On Investment
Post Laserfiche Implementation
Staff Time - 5 Minutes per citation
Processing payments, phone and email
communications, data entry, complete forms
and filing.
SUPPLIES
Paper, printing, envelopes, postage etc.
Approximate Cost for Materials = $0.75
Staff Time - 20 Minutes per citation
Phone and email communications, data entry, preparing
court documents (docket sheet, driver history, case reports,
supporting documents etc.), mailing letters/notices file follow
up complete forms and filing.
SUPPLIES
Paper, printing, labels, folders, envelopes, postage,
carbon copy paper etc.
Approximate Cost for Materials = $0.75
Citations paid prior to court Citations which go through Court
ROI - Return On Investment - Preliminary
Page 42
Citations Paid Prior to Court Citations which go through Court
40%86%
Material Cost Savings of $4.65 per CitationMaterial Cost Savings of $0.75 per Citation
ROI - Return On Investment - Preliminary
Citations Paid Prior to Court Citations which go through Court
83%
Staff Time Savings of 40 Minutes per CitationStaff time Savings of 25 Minutes per Citation
67%
ROI - Return On Investment - Preliminary
Page 43
Questions?
Page 44
June 22, 2021
• Rooftop Rodeo Financial Overview
July 13, 2021
• Revisit Fee Waiver/Subsidy Policies
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
• Park Planning and Pocket Parks
• Distributed Energy Discussion
• Oral History Program Discussion
Items for Town Board Consideration:
• Quarterly CompPAC Update
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
June 8, 2021
Page 45
Page 46