HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2012-01-10Prepared 12/30/11
*Revised
TOWN or FS 1 ES I'
The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable,
high -value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take
great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community
by being good stewards of public resources and natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
PROCLAMATION — WOMEN'S CLUB CENTENNIAL. Mayor Pinkham.
YULETIME LIGHTING CONTEST — PRESENTATION OF AWARDS. Mayor Pinkham.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated December 13, 2011 and December 20, 2011 and Town
Board Study Session Minutes dated December 13, 2011.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes — None.
4. Resolution #01-12 - Public Posting Area Designation.
2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK UPDATE. Superintendent Baker.
2. THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL UPDATE. Finance Officer McFarland.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for
Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. AMENDED CONDOMINIUM MAP - Unit 19, The Promontory at Kiowa
Ridge Condominiums, 535 Promontory Drive, Diane & Peter
Kassab/Applicant.
4. ACTION ITEMS:
1. 2012 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. Interim Administrator Richardson.
2. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPOINTMENTS.
• Wayne Newsom, 3 year appointment, expiring, February 28, 2015.
• Jeff Moreau, 3 year appointment, expiring February, 28, 2015.
3. CREATIVE SIGN DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPOINTMENTS.
• Charley Dickey, 3 year appointment, expiring March, 1, 2015.
• Diane Muno, 3 year appointment, expiring March 1, 2015.
4. VIRGINIA DRIVE, PARK LANE AND MACGREGOR AVENUE REHABILITATION
PROJECT DESIGN CONTRACT. Director Zurn.
5. ADJOURN.
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not availaf}te at the tirne the agenda was
prepared.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 13, 2011
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 in
said Town of Estes Park on the 13th day of December, 2011. Meeting
called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Levine.
Present:
Also Present:
Absent:
Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Eric Blackhurst
Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Jerry Miller
Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorne
Jackie Williamson, Town
William C. Pinkham, LVlayor
Lowell Richardson, Deputy°'Town Administrator
Mayor Pro Tem Levine called the meeting to order at<7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do
so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance
PUBLIC COMMENT.
A group of Estes Park High School' students, read a prepared letter of support for the
Elkhorn project, stating it `=Would benefit them ":by establishing year round outdoor
recreational activities, providejobs and'Ong families to Estes Park. They requested
the opportunity to helpGthe Town pursue the Elkhorn project.
Johanna:DardenfTown citizen read"'comrjehts from Bill Darden requesting the Town
disclose Town funds'dedicated to the Elkhorn project, SOPA funds, loans and any other
otiations neg related to fundin��an g,d revise the MOU to included the title to the land on
which the Performing Arts Center an parking would be developed in exchange for $1.2
million in improvements. Ste stated the Third Party Analyst has pointed out the project
would not bring additional visitors or families to Estes Park. There are currently a
number of recreational opportunities for the children in town and the addition of skiing
wa
would not be beneficial.�t�
Ron Wilcocks/County citizen questioned the need for an Assistant Town Administrator
for a community the size of Estes Park.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen invited the Board to the business after hours meeting this
Thursday. He questioned if the Town received a letter from WAPA with regard to the
new transmission lines on Pole Hill and coming down Highway 36. He stated support
for funding additional cost to address concerns with the Third Party analysis of the RTA
application for the Elkhorn project.
Ron Norris/Town citizen, Rex Poggenpohl/County citizen and Sherry White/Town
citizen spoke to the proposed transmission lines requesting the Town Board weigh in on
the issue and pass a resolution expressing concern over the proposed route due to the
virtually intrusive route and negative impact on the entire Estes Valley.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Miller stated the LMD met and approved a 2012 budget and reviewed the IGA
between the LMD and the Town.
Board of Trustees — December 13, 2011 — Page 2
Trustee Koenig commented Kellsie Purdy represented the State of Colorado and the
Town of Estes Park at Miss Rodeo America recently in Las Vegas, and although she
did not win, she represented the state and town to the best of her ability.
Trustee Ericson informed the Board the TVC would continue to meet to discuss the
report that would be completed during the first quarter of 2012. He asked the citizens
of Estes to buy American and buy local whenever possible. The 2012 caucuses would
take place earlier this year and reminded the public they have 30 days to change their
affiliation in order to participate in the process.
Trustee Blackhurst encouraged those interested in knowing more about Town
operations to apply for the Citizen Information Academy, or the Citizen Police Academy
for those interested in the Police functions. The Estes Park Housing Authority would
meet on Wednesday, December 14th at 8:30 a.m. in Room 203 and invited those
interested.
Mayor Pro Tem Levine recognized the efforts of the; individuals involved in Bright
Christmas as well as all of those contributing through donations and/or the adoption of
families to provide local families with a Christmas. The 27 year old program continues
to provide food and gifts for over 131 low income familiesin,2011.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. ;,_.,
Town Administrator Halburnt reviewed `those employees receiving years of service
awards in December including 25 years o4ervice- m Lorraine McCown 20 years — Todd
Steichen, Mary Thacker, Peter Marsh, Debbie iVMcDougall, CoreyPass and Mike
Hulbert; 10 years - Bruce Walters Lowell Richardson and Alison Chileott; 5 years - Sue
Perney, Shawn Bledsoe, Claude Traufield, Timothy Good, Derek Fortin' and Cynthia
Deats.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minuies dated November22; 2011 and December 5, 2011,
Town Board,,Study Session Minutes dated November 22 and 30, 2011.
3. Committee Minutes
4. Est s:Valley Pla`nning;Commission Minutes dated November 15, 2011
(acknokeemeritonly)
5. Estes Park ree Board Minutes dated July 15, 2011, September 16, 2011
and October 52011 (acknowledgement only).
It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Blackhurst) to approve the Consent Agenda,
and it passed unanimously.
2. REPORT ITEMS:
1. ELKHORN LODGE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SOCIETY'S WOUNDED
WARRIOR PROJECT. Rich Johnson/Elkhorn Historic Preservation Society
presented their mission and goals to restore the Elkhorn Lodge and provide a
safe healing environment for the Wounded Warriors and all Veterans through a
"History and Heroes" program. The non-profit organization has begun raising
$20 million dollars to purchase and restore the lodge and to help in aiding the
wounded warriors overcoming both mental and physical issues by providing
them a safe, supporting environment. The society is seeking Town support
and has an immediate need for $150,000 in support to continue the Wounded
Warrior program. Additional comments were provided by Billy Ward/Town
citizen, Angela Schmitt/Program therapist, and Heather Cook/Health care
provider, including the additional sales tax generated by the soldiers and their
Board of Trustees — December 13, 2011 — Page 3
families; therapy programs that would be provided to the soldiers to address a
range of disorders that occur for soldiers readjusting to civilian life; and the
need to help soldiers with back to work projects.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Items reviewed by Planning Commission or
staff for Town Board Final Action.
1. ACTION ITEMS:
A. AMENDED PLAT, LOT 1, SUNDANCE MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION,
1531 FISH HATCHERY ROAD, JEFF MOREAU/APPLICANT. Item
continued from October 25, 2011 meeting. Planner Shirk reviewed
the request to vacate a platted building envelope to expand an existing
cabin closer to the river. Prior to building the addition, approval of a
variance and an amended plat was required. In April, the Estes Valley
Board of Adjustment approved the river setback variance, and in July,
the Estes Valley Planning Commission recommended approval of the
amended plat with conditions including theformal dedication of an
existing aerial easement in place since-1967. The property owner has
expressed concern with the de_i ation that would allow replacement of
the existing single-phase line with a�`t , ree-phase line directly over her
property. Relocation of the; line has been discussed; however, due to
co
the river crossing thecost would be prohibitive tothe property owner.
Therefore the property owner has ar�equested the Town bard approve
the amended plat without the easement dedicatiorj. Attorney White
stated it is his opihion the Utilities<department could upgrade the current
line from single tolhree-phase without a formal dedication; however, the
utility policy requires prescriptive easements to be formalized during land
use or building permrt,applications.
Jane`'pLivingston/property, owner stated.,she was unaware of the power
Imewhen she`' purchased the home. She would be willing to provide an
easement for the existing single-phase line with the understanding the
Town would move the line upon upgrading the line to three-phase.
After fu her discussion it was moved and seconded (Elrod/Blackhurst)
to approve tFexproposed Amended Plat of Lot 1, Sundance
Mountain subject tathe findings and conditions recommended by
he Estes Valley Manning Commission, and it passed unanimously.
4. ACTION ITEMS:
1. APPOINTMENT-- OF LYNETTE LOTT TO THE LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT BOARD. Town Clerk Williamson stated an announcement was
placed in the local paper and the Town website for one Town and one County
position on the LMD Board expiring on December 31, 2011. Four applications
were submitted and interviews were conducted on November 171h by members
of the Town Board, LMD Board and County Commissioner Donnelly. The
interview team recommended the reappointment of Bill Almond by the County
and appointment of Lynette Lott by the Town. Discussion followed with
Trustee Blackhurst expressing concern with the appointment of an additional
accommodation owner and EALA member to the LMD Board, and recommend
future appointment consideration is given to other business groups in the
community. Trustee Miller shared the same concerns; however, he stated as
liaison he has not seen any favoritism toward the lodging community by the
current LMD Board.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen stated he, too, would like to see other business
entities represented on the LMD Board.
Board of Trustees — December 13, 2011 — Page 4
Lynette Lott stated appreciation for the opportunity to serve. She commented
her Board appointment on EALA would expire in April. She stated the
importance of working with all aspects of the business community to provide
their guests with things to do during their visit.
It was moved and seconded (Miller/Koenig) to appoint Lynette Lott to the
Local Marketing District to a four-year term expiring on December 31,
2015, and it passed unanimously.
2. RTA APPLICATION PROPOSED REVISIONS AND FUNDING REQUEST.
Town Administrator Halburnt stated the Town approved the final application for
an RTA grant in July and funding for the Third Party analysis. The Third Party
analyst draft report does contain sales tax revenue estimates lower than those
in the submitted application. At this point the Town Board must decide to either
address the errors and omissions within the report at no additional cost, or
submit additional information for consideration requiring an additional fee of
$5,845 for the purpose of reviewing the new data prior to finalizing the report.
Curt Cleaves/EPI member stated the rep6rt'contains'a number of errors and
needs to be revised. The report preparedy EPS confirmed expectation with
winter visitation and with the creatio of new jobs, however, the report did
contain erroneous analysis with regard to sales tax revenue computation. He
stated EPS reviews of the otherRTA applications also reoeved reports that did
not follow the state statute. EPS indicated; the project would ortlty�be eligible to
receive 66% of the RTA increment ; EPI`:awould like to have the Third Party
report revised prior to, final submissioand`provlde additional information to
help clarify portions ofthe=document.
Discussion followed onr what information would beyprovided and whether or not
the information iri the report' was erroneous anditherefore, should be corrected
by EPS priorIto submission of the final report,at no additional cost to the Town;
the private sector should support the project and fund the corrections if it is
important to move th project to,the top of the list; and additional funding
should not be s pported to improve'„up_on an unsatisfactory report.
Tom GootzlTown citizen commented an incompetent agency was chosen by
theState which ,is evident in the gross difference between the EPI projections
andlthhose by EPS He wou(d, suggest an independent attorney provide a legal
opinion on the interpretatioin'¢of the statute and what can be funded by the RTA
grants before the Town moves forward with the application.
Johanna Darden/Town citizen voiced concern that a development plan was
requested and h s not been provided for the proposed development. She
requested the potential salaries of EPI members be made public.
Ron Wilcocks/County citizen stated the project would be important to the
community to grow the winter economy. He would support funding the
improvements to the report.
Rich Johnson/Elkhorn Historic Preservation Society suggested the project
would not support additional jobs, would not increase school enrollment and
proposed RTA funding for the project would not support the cost to build the
infrastructure.
Jim Tawney/Town citizen stated the errors and omissions should be corrected
without additional costs; however, he would support funding if additional
information would provide a stronger report.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen requested Town Attorney White provide a legal
opinion on whether or not the items in the report are errors and omissions.
Board of Trustees — December 13, 2011 — Page 5
Harry Hutcherson/Town citizen objected to the project or additional funding for
the report.
After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Miller/Koenig) to
prepare a fetter addressing the errors and omissions in the Third Party
analyst report for the RTA application and the letter to be prepared,
reviewed and jointly sent by the Town of Estes Park and the Elkhorn
Project Inc., and it passed with Trustees Blackhurst and Elrod voting "No".
Mayor Pro Tem Levine requested a 5 minute break at 9:18 p.m.
3. RESOLUTION #16-11 - 2011 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION.
Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the supplemental appropriation resolution
allowing a municipality to authorize additional money for a specific fund than
was originally adopted. The requested supplemental appropriations address
both revenue and expenditure difference from:; the approved 2011 budget.
Examples include increased revenue to the GeneralFund due to an increase in
sales tax revenues forecasted; projected revenues` xceeded original forecast
for business licenses, application fees sand building permit fees; Light and
Power revenues lagged expectations„as Well as`'a, decrease in demand; and
Water revenues exceeded budget due to pent development fees and water
rights. All funds maintained expenditures,within the `% riginal budget with the
exception of the Community Reinvestment Fund because ,the original budget
did not anticipate projects completed in NJ). After discussoon it was moved
and seconded (Ericson/Miller) to approve3 Resolution #16'11 adopting the
supplemental appropriations for the 2011 budget;" and it passed
unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Mil etIBlackhurst)�toextend the meeting to
10:30 p.m.and move Actioli Item #5 and StakReport Item #1 to the
special meeting on December 20''2011' andy it passed unanimously.
4. LETTER OE SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC LANDS HIGHWAY DISCRETIONARY
(PLHD),, GRANT TO sD€VELOP q TRANSPORTATION RECREATION
OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM r,d(TROS). Director Zurn and Elijah
HenleylTransportation:;Planning Team Lead, Central Federal Lands Highway
Division for Federal Highway,Administration reviewed the purpose and benefit
of developing TROS, whici'would develop a new set of analytical planning
tools tote used kthe 'Federal Land Management Agencies (FMLA) at the
local, regional, and Inational level, to identify and prioritize projects to improve
federal land access, and to evaluate transportation impact on natural and
cultural resources, the enhance the visitor experience and spur economic
growth and job a eation. The TROS would determine where in the study areas
improvements may be needed such as increasing transportation choices, traffic
calming, multi -modal and connectivity improvements, development of livability
plans and access to community or natural resources. It is being developed in
parallel with various transportation planning initiatives including those
conducted by the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service,
and other FLMAs. The project was initially funded with $110,000 in Public
Land Highway Discretionary (PLHD) funds and although additional direct
funding would not be allocated, the project would acquire data from other
planning projects; however, support letters are being collected from gateway
communities, counties, local land use planning agencies and state and local
transportation agencies to gain support for additional PLHD grants.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen questioned if there would be opportunity for public
comment on the project and if the Town's Transportation Visioning Committee
could be involved in the process.
Board of Trustees — December 13, 2011 -- Page 6
After further discussion it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig) to
approve the execution of a letter of support for the funding of a
Transportation Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (TROS), and it passed
unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION #17-11 INTERIM TOWN ADMINISTRATOR SALARY & JOB
DUTIES. Item moved to the special Town Board meeting on December 20,
2011.
6. APPOINTMENT OF REUBEN BERGSTEN TO PLATTE RIVER POWER
AUTHORITY. Town Administrator Halburnt's term expires on December 31,
2011 and with her departure eminent the Town must appoint a new member to
the Platte River Power Authority. In the past, the two PRPA seats have been
filled by the Mayor and the Utilities Director. It was moved and seconded
(Ericson/Blackhurst) to appoint Reuben Bergsten/Utilities Director to the
Platte River Power Authority Board for ,a four-year term expiring
December 31, 2015, and it passed unanimous
5. STAFF REPORT.
1. 2012 STAFF COMPENSATION. The item was, continued to the special Town
Board meeting on December 20,R201 1.
Whereupon Mayor Pro Tem Levine adjournef-the/rr)eeting at 10:00 pi,t
Chuck Levine Mayor" Pro Tem
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk ',`
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 20, 2011
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 in
said Town of Estes Park on the 20`h day of December, 2011. Meeting
called to order by Mayor Pinkham.
Present:
Also Present:
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Eric Blackhurst
Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Jerry Miller
Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator
Lowell Richardson, Deputy Town Administrator
Town Attorney White
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
For a conference with the Town Attorney for thepurpose of receiving legal advice on
specific legal questions under C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b) related to the Bond Park Project.
It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Levine) the Town Board enter into Executive
Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions
related to the Bond Park Project, under C.R. S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b), and it
passed unanimously.
Whereupon, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 6:03 p.m.
Mayor Pinkham reconvened the meeting to open session at 6:50 p.m. and called a ten
minute break.
At 7:00 p.m., Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
RESOLUTION OF RESPECT FOR TOWN ADMINISTRATOR HALBURNT.
Mayor Pinkham read a Resolution of Respect honoring Town Administrator Jacqueline
Halburnt, thanked her for her service to the Town of Estes Park and wished her well as
she begins new endeavors.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS I LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Miller expressed his appreciation to Town Administrator Halburnt. He stated
that an organizational meeting of the shuttle committee was held on December 19th with
the next meeting scheduled for Monday, January 9, 2012. He said the Local Marketing
District (LMD) Board had approved the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) that will be
considered later in the meeting.
Trustee Koenig wished Town Administrator a fond farewell.
Board of Trustees — December 20, 2011 — Page 2
Mayor Pro Tem Levine voiced his respect for Town Administrator Halburnt and his
appreciation for her service to the Town.
Trustee Ericson wished Town Administrator Halburnt the best in her future endeavors.
He encouraged the community to shop locally for holiday gifts.
Trustee Elrod said the Estes Valley Planning Commission (EVPC) and the Town Board
will be scheduling a joint study session to discuss accessory dwelling units (ADU). He
also wished Town Administrator Halburnt well.
Trustee Blackhurst said that Town Administrator Halburnt was hired as Deputy Town
Administrator after a national search and subsequently promoted to Town
Administrator. He said she was accountable and efficient at achieving the goals
established by the Town Board, meeting or exceeding these goals each year of her
contract. He said he will miss her good will and good humor and thanked her for her
service to the Town.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
• Town Administrator Halburnt said she enjoyed serving the citizens of Estes Park
and the Town Board.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Joint meeting of the Town Board, Larimer County Commissioners and the
Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated November 15, 2011.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
a. Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee, December 8, 2011:
1. 2012 & 2013 Tree Trimming Contract, Wright Tree Service -
$191,089.60 2012 Budgeted, $193,710.40 per 2013 appropriations.
It was moved and seconded (Levine/Blackhurst) the Consent Agenda be approved,
and it passed unanimously.
2. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or
staff for Town Board Final Action.
1. ACTION ITEM:
A. ORDINANCE #21-11 Amendments to the Estes Valley Development
Code — Chapter 6 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Lots to allow
for more flexibility to modify the interior of existing non -conforming
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU).
Dir. Chilcott stated that, currently, non -conforming ADUs can be
maintained but significant alterations to the structures are not allowed.
She said the proposed amendment would allow for the improvement
and modernization of the interior space of existing non -conforming
ADUs. For example, reconfiguration of rooms, location of doors, and
improvement of windows would be allowed. However, the proposed
amendment would not allow for the expansion of the square footage,
footprint, or height of the structure. The amendment is being proposed
in response to requests from the public to allow alterations to non-
conforming ADUs. She noted that the EVPC recommended the
changes at their November 15th meeting and the Larimer County
Commissioners approved the change at their meeting on December
19th. Attorney White read Ordinance #21-11 into the record.
Board of Trustees — December 20, 2011 — Page 3
It was moved and seconded (Miller/Koenig) to approve ordinance #21-11, and it
passed unanimously.
3. STAFF REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. 2012 STAFF COMPENSATION.
The 2012 budget included a 3% staff raise. The Personnel Manual contains a
statement related to the Town's merit compensation philosophy in which
employee pay increases coincide with their level of performance. ft was
Administration's intention to employ a merit pool for 2012 with raises
corresponding with the employee's annual evaluation and employment
anniversary date. However, different interpretations of how to implement the
3% increase have surfaced, with some members of the Board favoring a 3%
cost of living adjustment (COLA) and others favoring a merit pool. Staff
requested direction from the Trustees as to how to proceed. Discussion is
summarized: approved a 3% merit pool to coincide with performance
evaluations to be done at the beginning of the calendar year; minutes of
October 21st budget session reflect discussion of 2% bonus for 2011 and a 3%
raise for 2012; consider a 2% COLA increase and a 1% merit pool as equitable
solution; consider a 3% special salary increase to take effect January 1, 2012;
in favor of all employees receiving a 3% increase; approved a 3% salary
increase to compensate employees for working to bring Town through difficult
economic times; strongly favor a merit program to incent and reward
performance; compensation is a management tool to be used by managers to
motivate employees; and 3% increase is to make up for years in which no
raises were given.
Charley Dickey, Town resident, spoke in favor of a merit system. He said the
Town needs to follow itspolicies and if necessary make changes to the
policies.
It was moved and seconded (Levine/Miller) to enact a special 3% salary
increase across the board effective on January 1, 2012.
An amended motion was made (Elrod/Ericson) to award the 3% raise in
accordance with the stated policy in the personnel manual based on
performance effective January 1, 2012, and the motion failed. Those voting
"Yes" Trustees Elrod and Ericson. Those voting "No" Mayor Pro Tem Levine,
Trustees Blackhurst, Koenig, and Miller.
Mayor Pinkham then called for a vote on the original motion to enact a
special 3% salary increase across the board effective on January 1, 2012,
and it passed. Those voting "Yes" Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees
Blackhurst, Ericson, Koenig, and Miller, with Trustee Elrod voting "No".
The Mayor commented that in the future the Board must have a clear
understanding of how compensation monies will be allocated and managed.
The Board all agreed that the personnel manual, policies, and administrative
directives should be reviewed and revised if necessary.
4. ACTION ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION #18-11 TO CONSIDER COMMENTS FOR WESTERN AREA
POWER AUTHORITY'S PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE FOR THE
ESTES-FLATIRON REBUILD.
Staff prepared a draft resolution related to the proposed transmission line for
the Estes -Flatiron Rebuild by the Western Area Power Authority (WAPA).
Administrator Halburnt noted that the WAPA project is a transmission line
rebuild project to increase system capacity, improve access, bring the facility
up to current codes, and replace old, deteriorating structures, and is not
within the Town's jurisdiction. She said, at this time, WAPA is conducting an
environmental assessment study of the project, which will include a scientific
Board of Trustees — December 20, 2011 — Page 4
visual impact study of the transmission lines, and encouraging comments.
The proposed resolution requests consideration of the impact of transmission
lines on the rural character, views, and natural beauty of the area; the effect
on property owners; and impacts to the local tourism -based economy. The
comment deadline date is January 2, 2012, however, WAPA has considered
extending the deadline.
Mayor Pinkham said it is important to work with WAPA to find an appropriate
solution toward a mutual goal of protecting views, and invited public
comment.
Keith Pearson, Ron Norris, Don Sellers, Johanna Darden, Rainer Schelp,
George Hackman, Rebecca Urquhart, Cullen Darnell, Chris Jones, Bob Ernst,
Tom Vogelsang, and Gordon Pedersen provided statements during the
meeting. Their comments are summarized: support the upgrading of
infrastructure; do not want upgrades to harm the landscape; use existing
utility corridors for improvements; need to discuss alternative routes to
mitigate view impacts; urge WAPA to remove the support structures across
Lake Estes and Crocker Ranch; underground the lines for health reasons and
to maintain natural look and feel of the area; transmission lines would be ten
stories high and visible from everywhere in Estes Park and Rocky Mountain
National Park; do not want industrial look along the view corridor impacting
scenery; project will effect tourist economy for a long time in the future;
WAPA states it is more expensive to use existing right-of-way which may
have less visual impact; honor property rights and respect property owners;
find funding to balance interests and help WAPA pursue alternatives; costs to
underground lines are at least ten times higher; consider phasing the project;
support upgradesbut route is incompatible with scenic views, use current
corridor and consider burial and two -post instead of single -post lines; and
opposed to adding three more overhead power lines.
Trustee Blackhurst stated that the Town has no control over this project but
can cooperate and work with the entities involved. He noted that
Administrator Halburnt has had conversations with Platte River Power
Authority (PRPA) related to undergrounding the lines across Lake Estes
which would be a multi -million dollar process. He stated that a resolution is
the wrong approach to take, preferring to work through the Mayor and the
Utilities Director to provide information to WAPA to express the concerns of
the entire community.
Mayor Pro Tem Levine said burying the power lines across the lake is
separate from this project. He proposed a more cooperative less antagonistic
approach be taken in the resolution.
Trustee Koenig said she did not find the resolution negative and said it points
out topics of concern. Trustee Miller agreed that the resolution contains
concerns heard from the public and wanted to ensure the Town's position
and comments were received within the allocated timeframe.
Trustee Elrod commented on the security of the electrical grid and estimates
related to the cost of undergrounding utilities to be four to 14 times more
expensive than overhead lines. He proposed an addition to the resolution
requesting that WAPA examine the true impact and cost of undergrounding
the transmission lines for the security of residents and for the reliability and
security of the environment.
Trustee Ericson said he agrees with the concept of working together and
supports Trustee Elrod's proposed addition to the resolution related to
security issues. Mayor Pinkham proposed rewording the resolution's second
paragraph to reduce its adversarial tone.
It was moved and seconded (KoeniglEricson) to approve Resolution #18-
11 with rewording of the second paragraph and the addition of Item #5
Board of Trustees — December 20, 2011 — Page 5
examining undergrounding for security reasons as proposed by Trustee
Elrod, and it passed. Those voting "Yes" Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees
Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, and Miller, with Trustee Blackhurst voting "No".
2. AMENDED LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT.
Trustee Blackhurst recused himself from discussion. Deputy Town
Administrator Richardson stated that since the creation of the Local
Marketing District (LMD) in 2008, an IGA between the Town of Estes Park
and the LMD has been adopted annually. He stated proposed changes to
the 2012 IGA deal primarily with four former employees of the Town who
were assigned to the LMD. The LMD assumed financial responsibility for the
employees' salary compensation and benefits in 2010 and the liability of sick
time and vacation time accruals for these employees was transferred to the
LMD in 2011. Two LMD employees have vacation and sick time accruals
remaining on the Town books and one LMD employee has sick time
remaining on the Town books. Subsequent to input from Town Attorney
White and discussions related to the transfer process, it was determined that
the most efficient method to account for these earned benefits would be to
payout in cash the value of the accrued benefits. Two employees would be
entitled to a cash payout and one employee's accrued sick time would be
assumed by the LMD. The Town's policy related to a resignation or
termination of employment allows for a cash payout of unused vacation time
or sick time. The liability to the Town is $18,143.01. Trustee Ericson said he
would prefer the money be transferred to the LMD and paid out to these
individuals when their employment with the LMD ends, and recommended
the Town review this policy. It was moved and seconded (Miller/Ericson) to
approve the Local Marketing District IGA as presented, and it passed,
with Trustee Blackhurst abstaining from the vote.
Johanna Darden, Town resident, requested that a balance in the makeup of
the LMD Board be considered when appointments are made.
3. EAGLES CREST RESORT WATER MAIN LINE EXTENSION CONTRACT.
Dir. Bergsten stated that construction and startup costs for waterline
extensions are paid for by new customers requiring water service. The Town
of Estes Park Water, Department standards allow for a portion of these
construction costs to be recovered by the customer if, within ten years,
adjacent land owner(s) tap into the waterline extension. Construction of a
new waterline extension has been completed by Estes Resort Group LP dba
Eagles Crest Resort to serve their facility on Spur 66. Staff presented a
waterline extension agreement, which was reviewed by Town Attorney White,
for approval. Dir. Bergsten said that the reimbursement does not include
interest and, in this case, there is only one adjacent vacant property that
could be developed. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Miller) to
approve the Eagles Crest Resort Water Main Line Extension Agreement
as presented, and it passed unanimously.
4. ORDINANCE #22-11 SETTING THE COMPENSATION OF THE MUNICIPAL
COURT JUDGE, ASSISTANT MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, AND THE
MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.24.030 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE.
Attorney White stated that Colorado State Statute provides that the annual
compensation for the municipal court judge, assistant municipal court judge,
and the municipal court clerk be set annually by ordinance. It has been Town
policy to increase the judge and clerk salaries in even numbered years.
Adoption of Ordinance #22-11 would provide a 5% salary increase for the
judge and clerk. The compensation for the assistant municipal court judge
would remain unchanged at $150 per case. Attorney White read Ordinance
Board of Trustees — December 20, 2011 — Page 6
#22-11 into the record. It was moved and seconded (BlackhurstlMiller) to
approve Ordinance #22-11, and it passed unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION #17-11 INTERIM TOWN ADMINISTRATOR SALARY & JOB
DUTIES.
Attorney White reported that Resolution #17-11 was revised to reflect
changes discussed at the Special Town Board meeting that was held on
December 5, 2011. Revisions include: that the Interim Town Administrator
will serve at the pleasure of the Town Board, a monthly salary increase while
serving as Interim, and the date for reduction in salary back to the Assistant
Town Administrator salary will be the start of the pay period immediately
following termination of the interim appointment. Due to a 3% salary increase
approved earlier in the evening, the resolution will be changed to reflect a
monthly salary increase of $537, Item #4 related to a bonus payment will be
removed, and the date in #3 Return to Current Salary will be changed to read
January 1, 2012.
Trustee Elrod spoke in opposition of approval of the resolution stating that the
Assistant Town Administrator job description includes assuming the duties of
the Town Administrator in his or her absence. He said it would be more
appropriate to recognize the additional responsibilities in the form of a bonus
to be considered at the expiration of the service rendered.
Charley Dickey, Town resident, asked who would serve as second in
command to the interim Town Administrator. Administrator Halburnt said it is
current practice for a department head to serve in this capacity.
It was moved and seconded (Elrod/Blackhurst) to approve Resolution #17-
11 with amendments in. #2 and #3, as outlined above, and striking #4,
and it passed. Those voting "Yes" Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees
Blackhurst, Ericson, Koenig and. Miller, and Trustee Elrod voting "No".
6. 2012 TOWN MISSION, VISION AND GOALS.
The Town Board met in Septemberto review the Town's vision, mission and
guiding principle statements and ` recommended leaving the statements
unchanged. The 2012 goals were also discussed at that time, and staff
recommends that the Town Board adopt the goals as formal statements. The
2012 goals include enhancing the Town's economic vitality; improving
transportation; sustaining infrastructure; and the redevelopment of Stanley
Park and Bond Park.
Johanna Darden, Town resident, voiced disagreement with the Town's vision
of Estes Park as a premier resort community. She said Estes Park's
uniqueness and naturalness should be maintained.
It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Miller) to approve the 2012 Town
vision, mission and goals for 2012 as presented, and it passed
unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 13, 2011
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
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 13th day of
December, 2011.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees
Blackhurst, Elrod, Ericson, Koenig and Miller
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Attorney White and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator
Richardson
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR RECRUITMENT PROCESS
Gary Suiter/The Mercer Group was present to receive input from the Board on the
process including the established timeline, discuss expectations for public and staff
involvement, and discuss strengths and challenges for the town. Concern was raised
with the proposed timeline having the Board consider adoption of an employment
contract after the April 3rd Municipal election. Clerk Williamson clarified the new Board
would not be seated until the second meeting in April, thereby allowing sufficient time
for the current Board to finalize an employment contract Further discussion ensued on
the need to take action prior to the election, and the consensus of the Board was to
proceed with the current timeline in an effort to select the right candidate. Mr. Suiter
stated the timeline is only a guide for the process and where possible could be
compressed when appropriate.
The Board discussed the need and options for public/staff involvement in the process.
The consensus of the Board was to involve the public during the beginning stages of the
process with a questionnaire available on the Town's website, newspaper and public
announcements through the Town's Public Information Office with a comment deadline
of December 28th. Mr. Suiter would receive all comments and compile the information
for the Board's. review. Town staff would have a modified questionnaire available to
provide anonymous comments by December 28`h. The department heads would have
individual interviews. with Mr. Suiter and would provide input on the questions provided
to the Town Board. The public and staff would also get a chance to meet the
candidates during the final stages of the interview process.
Mr. Suiter led a discussion with the Board on the strengths and challenges of Estes
Park:
Strengths
• Healthy financial reserves, no General Fund debt
• Intellectual capital in the staff and the community (educational level)
• High level of Volunteerism
• Quality of the employees
• #1 mountain resort community in Colorado, 3rd most popular visited location in
the State
• Presence of RMNP — Easy access
• Positive Intergovernmental relationships with other entities. High level of
cooperation with the other entities for support, projects, etc.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Town Board Study Session — December 13, 2011 — Page 2
• High quality of life
• Accessibility (no mountain passes)
• Access to quality health care
• High quality education
• Infrastructure that is capable of handling 50,000 people a day — as well as a
strong public safety Department
• Located conveniently to DIA/Denver/Boulder
• Town is the focal point of the government — sole source of local government and
not competing with others
• Recreational opportunities
• Natural Environment
• Low property taxes
• Cultural arts — art, music, performing arts
• Events/Rodeo
• Quiet time in winter
• Friendly
Challenges
• Seasonal nature of the economy
• "Pay as you go" philosophy for major infrastructure/capital projects/maintenance
— financial limitation
• Inadequate maintenance of infrastructure (roads)
• Changing demographics — retirement, aging population, less than 10 years
residency
• Educated base has high expectation that issues will be addressed immediately —
high expectations for service
• Year-round employment opportunities / not hiring from within the community
• Housing affordability
• Homogenized service/care providers
• Enclosed valley
• Lack of hi -technological opportunities
Strengths of Organization
• High quality staff
• Commitment of the staff to the community
• Customer service
• Little turnover in staff
• Well-equipped
• Well -organized
• Commitment to training, education, growth
• Finance dept. recognition statewide
• Intergovernmental cooperation
• Support of events
• Community reinvestment to improve the quality of life
• Support of non -profits
• Involvement of community with local government
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.rn.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 01-12
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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
1. That the lobby area immediately adjacent to the Administrative Offices in
the Estes Park Town Hall, located at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park,
Colorado, is hereby designated as the Public Place for Posting Notices of
Town Meetings.
DATED this day of , 2012.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
Memo
To:
rr
LPG
TOWN OF ESTES PAID
Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Steve McFarland — Finance Officer
Date: January 10, 2012
RE: Third Quarter 2011 Financial Update
Background:
Attached is the Financial Update through November 2011. Additional details have been
provided where available. For example, income statement material is reported through
November, but sales tax information is only available through October, and is only
posted in the financial statements through September. In this way, "third quarter" is
something of a misnomer: but, information as current as possible is provided in each
section.
The expenditure categories used in the General Fund box are not identical to the way items
are reported in the budget. The categories in this report are in line with GFOA
recommendations, but it is useful to understand how the General Fund departments
correspond to the attached report:
General Government: Legislative (1100), Judicial (1200), Executive (1300), Elections
(1400), Finance/Admin (1500), Community Development (1600), Buildings (1700),
Employee Benefits (1800), Subsidies/Grants (1900), Transportation (5600).
Public Safety: Police (2100, 2155, 2175), Protective inspections (2300).
Engineering/Public Works: Engineering (2400), Streets (3100).
Culture/Recreation: Parks (5200).
A more intuitive way of interpreting the General Fund expenditures is provided (by
department) on one of the accompanying detail pages.
Other revenues include all of non -sales tax revenues in the General Fund, the largest of
which include property tax, use tax, franchise fees, interest, PILOTS, and business and
liquor licenses.
Page 1
A
fP
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Memo
COMMENTS ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS/ATTACHED SLIDES
SALES TAX
Sales Tax through October 2011 is ahead of budget by 6.6% and 2010 by 7.0%. This
compares favorably with CAST (Colorado. Association of Ski Towns). It appears to have
been a banner year for many Colorado mountain communities, including Estes Park.
Jan - Oct analysis is interesting — food and lodging are up 9% and 8%, respectively.
Amusement is up 22%, but is a small category. Lagging (below average) categories include
automotive (-8%), retail (+4%), construction (+3%), personal/professional (+3%), and utilities
(+4%). All categories except automotive have experienced an increase from 2010.
Other sales tax details can be seen in accompanying graphs, which will be reviewed at the
Town Board meeting.
One final note on sales tax is that the formulae that staff uses for projecting sales tax
forecast anywhere from $7.44m - $7.46m. This would be significantly higher than the 2011
revised budget estimate of $7.20m, and would set an all-time record.
FINANCIAL
The General Fund box reports all revenues at 88.2% of budget (calendar is 92% complete).
Revenues are lagging budget due to timing and cyclicality of sales tax receipts (budget is
through November; sales tax is only reported through September — October sales tax was
received AFTER November financial reports were completed). Sales tax is 6.6% ahead of
forecasts through October.
Staff has elected to report expenditures vs. the original budget so that variances that have
occurred throughout the year can be more readily seen than if compared vs. the revised
budget. The overall variance in expenditures between the original and revised budget is
only $40,000 ($11,496,452 original budget), so the difference is not material.
As the first ten months of the calendar year is complete, the reference point for expenses is
the 92% (10/12 months) level. "General government" expenditures are at 109% because the
EVFPD transfer was recategorized from "transfers" to "general government". The other
General Fund categories are in the 61-86% range. Overall, the General Fund expenditures
are at 84% of budget.
Page 2
4
P
TOWN OF ESTES PAI
Memo
The Enterprise Funds box reports utility revenues at 90% of budget. Expenditures are all in
line with, or slightly under budget. Total expenditures are at 78%. The revised 2011 Budget
did forecast utility revenues at a slightly decreased level from what is reported here.
The Investments box has been retooled. The box now shows what types of investments the
Town possesses (money markets/CDs, US Treasuries, US Instrumentalities). Further
details will be provided at the Town Board meeting. 2011 was a year that ended flat (sp500
was unchanged), but throughout the year there were peaks and valleys. 2011 was another
year, like 2008, where the Town was better off with its debt instrument investments than it
would have been with equities.
OTHER ITEMS
Staff continues to try to provide varying insights into Town finances. The last two pages of
this report delve into Balance Sheet items. Staff will discuss in more detail at the Town
Board Meeting, but essentially one wishes to have their balance sheets be liquid (lots of
cash), have assets exceed liabilities, and have little debt. The General Fund scores very
well in these areas.
The firm of Rubin/Brown, industry leaders in Public Sector financial statement statistical
analysis, recently issued their 2011 report. The report provides a wide spectrum of
benchmarks that staff is anxious to integrate into future quarterly reports.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
N/A
Sample Motion:
N/A
Page 3
Sales tax facts
V
ro
a'i
00
4,
4-1
au
a.
E
0
V
O
N
V
0
co
83% of fiscal year.
42)
W
eta
aJ
L �
0
LC; CO
o 0
o c0
0
:47-;
0 EL.) c
Co
E
E E
�— 0 0
U V
CAST COMMUNITIES
(0)
J•
/�dP
0/
ab
teas/ /4
0
s
�°94vJ����4
a
rs
a'a 9
ora
0/04,0 kaa
taas/ � /s
O/ o, 0
Icy %P, 6L !T,
b
��14%
i
0/ as
of b
teas/ � 0041
Cd y
P
�/°84a'"41
016 P
t0O/40ioo
toi
o ash
'b.✓4a
P a J
t ' ,r -�d
ati6 09 17.
tya O4b
U
0
i
co
cn
0
e rrr
Prior Prd
cri Ci
N
0
0
co
Q1
>- (
f !
,
o
,r1
in
m
e-1
in
l
coo
4
m
00
r1
2,276,067.821
1,267,948.96
1,568,251.29�
n
Ln 1
al
c-F 1
011
Ni
(
87.771.87
,iO1
,
rn
c--E
m
4
aa r
o
jco
N
at
o
1
1
Prior Prd
O '
(41
I
O
t
E
g
[
i 1
1
i m
O
oo
0
4
127,527.94
N
a'
Lo
r1
m
sv
1,245,057.99
1,654,237.10
00
N
r i
m,
N
1
to
o0
m
co
of
00
in
Ln
;•
P-1
cri
4
41
6,214,801,16
i
g
F i
ii '
r-1
1*
N
m
N
N
is) ;
1
,-1N
%00T
{
f
i+
1 0
i
Mj
C, I i O
N a
i
0
rl
1
0
r1
v-I
*I
N
o
CYLr'1
1-1
1
�
o 1
f
o
tO
1`
o
Ol
I
1
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
12011 SALES TAX CLASSIFICATION BREAKDOWN
CO
o
al
o
'L7'
1 o
CO
l
o
m
o
m
o
'Cr'
N
i
( BRIEF _ TOTAL
DESCRIPTION ---_ YEAR
AMUSEMENTS/RECREATION j— 51,402.44
o
at
m
N
r1
,--1
tO
r1
m
N
m
in
N
a
I___..1,299,067.24
j 1,789,307.79
304 459.50
N
I-4
Q
N
m
uu
Lfl
LO
,-
to
4
6,648,516.45]
AUTOMOTIVE
0
0
O
•
RETAIL
LODGING
CONSTRUCTION
PERSONAL/PROFESSIONAL
1
1
1
in
Li.'
E
-' I
Dj
GRAND TOTAL
Sales tax rates of change (thru Oct 11)
•nog ando 2g3y, °JAI g
0
fi
0
N
00
`4:
O
0
0
o
0
69
0
0
0
0 00 0 00 00 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
auuoauq
0
ao
E
0
X
co
VA
ai
-a
v)r's
Irv0
• 1
0
�rrm
CL
REVENUES
r-I
U
0
Z
a
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
FINANCIAL INDICATORS
THRU NOV 2011
%ofyear elapsed>j 92%
REVENUES I I
Utility Sales 1$14,075087 $15614665 1 ($1539578)I 90.1%
Fees/services 1 348732 — 2255461_ 123186I 154.6%
Other . 216,863f 302,618 I (85,755)1 71.7%
INVESTMENTS (Fair value)_I }
Money markets/CDs I __-- 10,703,682 I 11,454 034 t 11,354,146
U.S. Trea s u ri es {_ 2,8_098681_ 2,809,507_1 2,811,449
U.S. Instrumentalities 5,651,001 I 5,645,467I 5,639,976
Total 19,164,550 I 19,909 008 L_19,805,571_
Police pension/FOSH € 458,453I.458,265 i 458,289
2011 data thru 12 31/11 DJIA+5.5%, S&P500 +0.0%, NASDAQ 1 8%
annual pooled govt mm rate: 12/31/11 0.08%; Town getting 0.15% locally.
Customer Accounts_ 6 952572 1
__Admin n /Geeral5
1,82_626
,6261__2„360,342I
Interfund Transfers Out 1,060,997 ; 1,139,732
Debt Service 1 877,499 878,1491
I
I I
'
1
1
1 1 E
GENERAL FUND
I 2011 —__ 2011! %of
TYear to Date Budget Variancel Budget
%ofyearelapsed>1._ ....W_92%
REVENUES I '-----_.., _---------- ----._._--
Sales taxes_ , $6,934,758 j $8015 375 1(51,080,617)1 86.5%
Other I1,691,0401— 1,825,966I (134,920 92.6%
Transfers from Enterprisel 1,060,997 f 1,139,732 I (78,735)1 93.1%
IN.
CO
_..,.
NN
N
V
41
N
E
N
rn
4
E
—
' VD
I t0
[ p
i a
N
E
*includes sales -related taxes through September
.,...._
3rd 0.1_ October Total
3,140,325 548,582ff6,238,042
3,450,883 ; 590,039E 6,648,516
3,178,426 556,579 I 6,214,800_
3,001,758 lk 513,925 6 092,782
to
{E •
AD
_ ._
Icr ` to
. NLO
a?!
!!
O
1--
o
I_i
to
..r
I
IIlLeFJUUUU IrdttSrerS VUL L,V7/,71! I 4.e o/,HBa 0....,,7308 1
3
rn
n
o
a
I
TOTAL REVENUES mm; 9,686,795 I
jr-
EXPENSES
GeneralGovernment j 2,865,686
SALES TAX i 1st half yr
2011 BudgetJT 2,549,135
(Jan-Oct).2,607,594
—20101 2,479,795
2009 I 2,577,099
2011 vs budget -__ __—.___
2011 vs 2010 5.2%I
0
i
03
NI
0
0
H
is
to
n
' N10 nto V ID. m-mM,
DI m in co, n N I ID, ml
03 0 O 0IN: a. or,
mm111 N to 0 LO CO
NN40110'
m MI 10i1;H1in r3T-m
UlmHoIfllinr1A'.ID
H'- ID N H O I 0 cD i\; H
0'0 NNr cfl 0CNN' 0
I
N �P0a if}- 0 0 ck 03 m i! a. ID, m N n: 0
C. trH m ct NI r a 0'a3 N rvlN.mio Io m1N 0
01: H1 N-H; 03 W m N'..m 0I av 1011 -1J ID 01, r:0
111 N O- NI m V1 VI. 01. H COI IL COI l m .j d NI 0, in
N 0i-d'; rf NIP)! I0I IV-10) m40
1.
N.• 1111 IN O, N a fr1.- D
r!: N m cal o 0 N ID CO
1p:1Il]N'mIN m Ifl.h N
Oil o m; vi° Ili;o re; 0 0
ni0 HI m 03 03 0,0)
Hl m m tt N' NI
i
I
I I
I CO 11 01 03 CO C0 0 ID
n o NIiID[V1 001m m"CO
N ID, MI 01 01 V11 NIm;0
Nei N O'101N 'Co';03
n n€mloo-m
c11COIH w-
dii 'N
(DI m O O 00'1 V 03:W1 .1./1 MI COI nlr m Hlcr n
▪ Co N, n n m; n H l0': 0: 10 O
o
i s m m m�m H HjH
H n n: to: H rH�
u N 0; Oi0 01'co N ;m;NNCO!0. INn
01, H V; 01 IN N. 41 H m H 1, n V! n. N; V1
H .11 01, 03 03 N 1.0 NI col m n'N
I j i N
N I 00 101 01 CO 00 O m .: O` Ill,' m; O b 0 0 lfl l COIN .
00= m',m vi.G o m 1' u1 N1 V 0�ml ofo.ml in co H
N H: 0 0 H ID: 03 0 a.. MI 0 0. W] ID I NIL/In/ 01
1+! aiN0Nt0.N o3TN 03NNI,001111NCOI 0N
N H'm lD H m:N H N'OI CO 0"Njm1n n;r I[t N
N' H m N. m 03 ' NI N ID: N3 N1 11), ri- N
cm..; Hj "'I H: I .
m1
W1
Z€
W I
>;
W
l➢'mIa)0`t11N m.CO. 0
m 0 N. O. CO N ID H. V1
N 0 N. WIN 0 01 N•0'
m ▪ O0 rl-IN 0r�lN
H1 o 1' Mott 1l-HIN
HI0i°kr,nrto H Cr•w
01 Hry m-t0 N ITV CO
m1NTi; O'tflillm'0o`
a n ry ID' m i
m H' H.. V'00 0 N', 0
H /{ mm0: NI
II
I
I 1
k I I
03 1 j 0j
0!
1 ormi
co;
W ? O :I 0G0,mon1 1�J100=0 Ot�• f[ 0 vNo; 0OnNiyI0QN HiHV,-I
f: Z1' UI �'S'i —- N m1
Fk:
Z w
Woovo; 0E—a'E-ro: ooI000 _I�,0
o x_-._I o E' a
o o a 0 V 2 [1 j m L L Ili a- ufl 0) a! I-
ck
001
m=
H^
I0
m;
N;
N=
m
d co! rrco 1 co'=. m m N V1
m: V- a (DI N, m V1 n 00
m n;n10 03 IDiN N TY
m'I;rlo N1o'1
VI N 1D,r�03'0I0 0 ID
O1 N N j m 1 1 ID' m N 0
;Ili
t1'H'H1111EN Hln N 0
011'N111.-N ID;N 03 0
ON=Hn100NIDIri:0
N V1' m o 00! 1 6 6 to
coo ▪ N N' m1 m l r I Oro
ri I ri1 N
I { ,
ID
U1
0
N
m
ri
H
03
ID
tAL
0
H
0
r
v
m
ID
rl
0
m
r
m
0)
H
m
w
0)
1 co
a
m
0
t4
m
m
ID
H
n
0)
r
Cr)
1D
N
i`
0)
0
101;
E
0I
.0
0
0
a
IL.
0
o
w
N.
Ci
D
w
3
D.
c-1
0
Statements
CO
....
0
CO
.=
LL
BALANCE SHEET
INCOME STATEMENT
Net income
Balance sheets are all about
Income statements are
I "CI
7Z) CI
tO °
0
ct
o rip
E
Cip
r-4
COD
co
J
.4-+
C
s
L.
V
C
N
E
us
cl)
C
s
cn
ro
U
V)
N
M
d a
+-, c6
C O-
L vi
+-,
J
1- rti
a
u o
Z O
A
ce 0 m
O_
We care because:
s (payables, loans, payroll)
it tells us whether or not we can pay our current bi
U)
Q)
▪ 03
J
C
a)
L
L
D
V
v)
4J
cu
v)
Q
4-1
a)
5-
V
0
Q
cc
H
z
cc
ce
U
We care because:
1/3
C
0
03
bA
0
.4-.+
C
L
U
O
4-
O
r6
(7
O_
C
r0
U
a)
a▪ -J
v)
C
co
a)
E
O
C
CO
4J
a)
O
IP
r6
5-
co
C
N
5-
(.)
a)
L
O
E
x
m
N
'3)
r0
.,C
4)
v)
C
r0
Q)
E
t
U
m
N
vs
O
r6
cc
C
EAU
5-
V
LJ-
c
C
w
V)
CD
25
li3
4-1
L)
U
C
co
v)
4-1
cOn
cn
co
660
Cf-
=I
und's Current Ratio is 13.6, which means we have 13.6x more current
co
L
a)
ra
V
assets than current liabilities. Through July 2011, it was 7.3.
E
E
O
u
co
rc
V
V1,
Z
LL
Tv
+-+
c
E
c
L
O
0
1
0
co
I_
4--1
al
TO
U
V)
ro
0
be
a�
L
0
E
co
c
0
00
Lri
c-I
v)
N
a)
.
L
a)
E
E
U
a)
U
co
CL
aJ
0
tA
II:
0
its
L
v)
C
0
U
4-+'
CV
+�
V)
cu
.0)
Oi
v)
co
tu-
-
co
0
m
E
0
L
4-
.�..i
n
0
v)
co
U
,-
0
0
L[—
c
+,
4-
0
1)
co
U
al
a)
v1
co
0J
U
c
co
1)
0
+-i
L
a)
I—
sales tax receipts.
.
v)
9)
v)
C
LPL 73
CO
co
+ cti
C
Ln
t/'f
U
o •�
0 to
aJ
+-,
O
0
tD E
cn U
a)
0
U a)
U
a)
a) 0-
cn c
r^-1
U 0-..--..+
C 0 4-in
CD LL L
CC i—
..0 U
LL -0 ru
co
a) o c
c c
O
(9 0 U
a)
Memo
To:
7f7 ) ///////POW4),,f•P'fr I j :1
Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Alison Chilcott, Community Development Director
Dave Shirk, Planner
Date: January 10, 2012
RE:
AMENDED CONDOMINIUM MAP - Unit 19, The Promontory at Kiowa
Ridge Condominiums, 535 Promontory Drive, Diane & Peter
Kassab/Applicant.
Background: The Promontory is an
approximately six -acre site zoned A -
Accommodations and developed with
22 condominium units for long-term
residential or short-term
accommodations use.
This is a request by Diane and Peter
Kassab to adjust the Limited Common
Element (LCE) of Unit 19, The
Promontory at Kiowa Ridge
Condominiums. The purpose of this
amendment is to allow a deck addition.
111111111111111111111101111
10000000
LCEs serve as property lines in condominium developments; in order to build the deck
addition the LCE needs to be expanded to document that area is owned and maintained
by the Kassab's instead of the condominium association.
The area is currently a General Comment Element which all unit owners own in
common and have the right to use. The area will be converted to an LCE, which only
Kassab has the right to use,
The condominium association has approved this request, and will sign the plat mylars.
Neighborhood Comments, Staff received comment from an adjacent property owner
who stated the subject property "has previously been a short term rental managed by
Marys Lake Lodge, The Lodge has a long history of conflict with the full time and
seasonal residents of this subdivision and ! think if you check with the Estes Park police
you will confirm that they are frequently called as to noise complaints from the wedding
parties booked by the lodge. The expansion of the deck at the neighboring property will
Page 1
further facilitate large groups gathering at a relatively short distance from our bedroom
windows."
The request to amend the condominium map and the associated deck expansion
comply with existing development code regulations such as structure setback and lot
coverage. Staff will follow code compliance procedures if there are code compliance
issues at Marys Lake Lodge or the Promontory in the future.
Budget: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the amended condominium
map.
Sample Motion: I move to approve the Amended Condominium Map of Unit 19 of The
Promontory at Kiowa Ridge Condominiums.
Page 2
ilaokii;
gooh
33��
OH
OPP
11
.01 MOO E.
1
z �
mains ONY OlableiirE OM tiVA
b
1
tls
ILV'Ida21 EWI SLM t '9 ,LO'I
'03 Z06I21 VllO131 ItIOLMONO2dd 31M,
,Mp„per par' ups
61 .LINf1 AO dV)f 6511IN3Mr
1
t
i
1
ag
0-1
z
a)
AT KIOWA RIDGE
300
u i a -mirk d'sus? . d ✓ troy
warms atv ONroa1NIONf� iow Svel
1zrigo
AiLatio
gigue
CV �
gal
cs
QO�
cC
o
pCJ
r7r•••
i v id a'I s, M `9 L0'i
03 ffOffra VMODT JY I2101t4ONO id SRL
et Win Jto dVPt Qaartaiw
iE
1
a
1
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
r'OWN C.)F ESTES PARI
ouullr,i�u iom
NN
„i,i i1 a ,u 11
n III
From: Lowell Richardson, Interim Town Administrator
Date: January 10, 2012
RE: Town of Estes Park Administrative Organizational Plan
Background:
Historically, Town Administration has presented an organizational chart to the Town
Board for approval annually. Past approvals referenced the Town of Estes Park
Municipal Code for the purpose of presenting the organizational chart. A review of the
Estes Park Municipal Code, section 2.28.020 section (6) revealed the Town
Administrator is responsible for presenting to the Town Board for approval an
organization plan, rather than an organizational chart.
Typically, a component of an organizational plan is an organizational chart outlining the
operating structure of a business entity. Contemporary organization plans can be
developed for annual operations or for longer terms of operation, depending on the
policy making bodies preferred/defined practices. A closer examination of Ordinance
2.28.020 identifies the functions and duties of the Town Administrator as:
1) Responsible to the board for efficient administration of all Town departments;
2) Supervise enforcement of all laws and ordinances;
3) To recommend and administer an annual budget;
4) To recommend for adoption measures deemed necessary;
5) To perform other duties as assigned by the Board; and
6) To present an organization plan to the Board for approval.
The ordinance does not call for an annual presentation of the plan, but states that one
shall be presented for approval. Since ordinance 2.28.010 requires the Town Board to
appoint the Town Administrator after the results of a biennial election are certified, it
might be prudent for an organization plan to be presented at the first board meeting in
June following said election.
Given the importance of an organization plan, the time required to complete a plan of
this nature, and the fact that a permanent Town Administrator is not in office, the
following temporary plan is recommended:
1) The revised 2011 organizational chart should remain in effect until a permanent
Town Administrator is selected; (see attached A)
2) The approved resolution #17-11 for the Interim Town Administrator should serve
as a temporary plan to be administered until selection of a Town Administrator
occurs; (see attachment B) and
3) The approved 2012 Town Board Goals should serve as part of the temporary
organization plan. (see attachment C)
Budget:
None
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approving the temporary organization plan that includes the revised
2011 organizational chart, resolution 17-11 outlining duties of the interim Town
Administrator and the Town Board approved 2012 Goals.
Sample Motion:
move to approval/or deny the temporary organization plan as presented and required
by Municipal Ordinance 2.28.020.
RESOLUTION NO. 17-11
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.28 of the Municipal Code provides for the
appointment of a Town Administrator and sets out the functions and duties of the
Town Administrator; and
WHEREAS, on January 1, 2012, the position of Town Administrator will be
vacant; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has initiated the process to select a
new Town Administrator; and
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2011, the Board of Trustees appointed
Lowell Richardson, Assistant Town Administrator, as the Interim Town
Administrator; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to define the term, job responsibilities, salary,
and benefits of the Interim Town Administrator for the interim appointment.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK as follows:
1. Term. The term of the appointment of the Interim Town Administrator
shall be from January 1, 2012 until June 30, 2012, until the new Town
Administrator has commenced the duties of Town Administrator, or
until further action of the Board of Trustees, whichever first occurs.
2. Salary and Benefits. During the interim period, the Assistant Town
Administrator's salary shall be increased $537.00 per month as
compensation for his duties as Interim Town Administrator. All other
current benefits including, but not limited to, health, vision and dental,
vacation and sick leave, pension and automobile allowance shall
continue during the interim appointment.
3. Return to Current Salary. Upon termination of the interim appointment,
the Interim Town Administrator's salary shall return to the Assistant
Town Administrator rate as of January 1, 2012. The effective date of
this adjustment shall be the start of the pay period immediately
following the end of the interim appointment.
4. Job Responsibilities. The Interim Town Administrator shall be
responsible for all the functions and duties set forth in the Town
Administrator's job description and as follows:
a. The Interim Town Administrator shall maintain the current status of
the organization. Current status shall include training programs for
staff, capital improvement policies to support the CAMP, shuttle
system methodologies that involve community members, and
department operating plans outlining services provided. No major
changes in staff other than disciplinary actions pursuant to the
Town's Personnel Policy Manual or policies of the Town shall occur
during the interim appointment.
b. The Interim Town Administrator shall work on compiling information
for the new Town Administrator on critical issues of Town
administration including, but not limited to, budget, organizational
chart, assessment of organization, current policies, staffing levels,
standard operating practices and current issues.
c, The Interim Town Administrator shall identify and create a list of
short and long-term issues the new Town Administrator may face
upon assumption of his/her duties as Town Administrator.
d. Upon termination of the interim appointment, the Assistant Town
Administrator shall return to his previous duties set forth in the
Assistant Town Administrator's job description.
Dated this kga"--day of peckw_, 2011.
ATTEST:
Town of Estes Park
2012 GOALS
Develop Economic Strategy
Engage the community in an economic development visioning process
Evaluate economic development and grant opportunities
- Participate in county, regional and state economic planning
Improve Transportation
Enhance Visitor Experience
o Evaluate/Improve Public Transportation Services
o Encourage use of the transportation hub and measure effectiveness
Reduce Congestion
o Continue to partner with CDOT and RMNP to seek solutions
Sustain Infrastructure
- Implement Comprehensive Street Maintenance / Replacement Program
o Explore internal and external funding options
o Recommend street maintenance /replacement plans for 2013 budget
Recommend Utility maintenance / replacement plan for 2013.
Stanley Park Redevelopment
- Develop long-term alternatives for financing the completion of the Stanley Park Master
Plan
- Begin construct of replacement horse stalls
Resolve SOPA feasibility at Fairgrounds and FOSH funding by May 2012
Bond Park Redevelopment
- Complete the first stage of development
- Develop scope and implement the second stage of development
(Attachment C)
Memo
To:
Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Alison Chilcott, Director
Date: January 10, 2012
RE: Board of Adjustment Appointments
Background:
The Estes Valley Board of Adjustment is five -member, joint Town/County board that
reviews requests for variances to the Estes Valley Development Code.
Two members are appointed by the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners;
three members by the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees; one alternate member is
jointly appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Town Board of Trustees.
Members must reside in their respective areas of the Estes Valley.
Chuck Levine and Wayne Newsom's terms expire on February 28, 2012. Staff
recommends re -appointing Wayne Newsom for a three-year term expiring on February
28, 2015. Chuck Levine has decided not to re -apply for another term. As suggested by
Trustee Levine, staff recommends appointing alternate member Jeff Moreau for a three-
year term. After discussions between staff and the Mayor additional applicants were not
solicited. However, staff will advertize in the Trail -Gazette for a new alternate member.
Wayne Newsom has lived Estes Park for over 30 years. He is a co-owner of Coldwell
Banker Estes Village Properties. He served as a Town Trustee for eight years, has
been a Board of Adjustment member since 1990, and was a long-time Urban Renewal
Authority commissioner.
Jeff Moreau has lived in Estes Park for over 20 years. He owns Daliman Construction
and has served as an alternate member of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment for
approximately two years and on the Creative Sign Design Review Board for a year.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends appointing Wayne Newsom and Jeff Moreau.
Page 1
Sample Motion:
move to appoint (or not appoint) Wayne Newsom and Jeff Moreau to the Estes Valley
Board of Adjustment for three-year terms expiring February 28, 2015.
Page 2
Memo
To:
Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Alison Chilcott, Director
Date: January 10, 2012
RE: Creative Sign Design Review Board Appointments
Background:
The Creative Sign Design Review Board was created approximately one year ago to
review Creative Sign Program applications, sign variance applications, and appeals of
staff decisions on the Estes Park Sign Code. Since its formation the Board has
reviewed and approved two sign variance applications.
The Board consists of five volunteer members appointed by the Mayor and confirmed
by the Town Board. Last February, two members were appointed for one-year terms
expiring on March 1, 2012. Staff recommends re -appointment of these two members,
Charley Dickey and Diane Muno, for three-year terms expiring on March 1, 2015.
After discussions staff and the Mayor, additional applicants for the positions were not
solicited. This year staff will provide additional board training and work with the Sign
Board to develop review procedures comparable to the Estes Valley Board of
Adjustment's. Consistency in membership will aid in Board development.
Diane Muno, Local Business Owner, has been a resident of Estes Park since 2006.
She owns the Spruce House, Christmas Shoppe, and White Orchid downtown.
Previously she worked in marketing and sales.
Charley Dickey, Local Resident, has lived in Estes Park for approximately three
years. Prior to moving to Estes Park he worked in construction in Texas and Wyoming,
working as a general contractor in Texas.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends re -appointing Diane Muno and Charley Dickey.
Sample Motion:
I move to re -appoint (or not appoint) Diane Muno and Charley Dickey to the Estes Park
Creative Sign Design Review Board for three-year terms expiring March 1, 2015.
Page 1
Memo
To:
TOWN OF FETES PR
11111111111111111
Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
1111110,11,111,11:11111111101011111111
From: Kevin Ash, Public Works Civil Engineer
Scott A. Zurn, PE, CFPM, Public Works Director
Date: January 10, 2012
Ifl
111111111.4
RE: Virginia Drive, Park Lane & MacGregor Avenue Rehabilitation Project
Consultant Selection
Background:
The Town of Estes Park Public Works Department and Utilities Department have
coordinated efforts with the Estes Park Sanitation District to provide public infrastructure
improvements to Virginia Drive, Park Lane and MacGregor Avenue. Coordination of the
design and construction of these improvements will help minimize the impacts to
businesses and residents that multiple traffic closures and construction congestion will
cause. A scope of work for the project includes multiple infrastructure improvements
including: waterline installation, asphalt mill and overlay, new sidewalk, new curb and
gutter, drainage improvements, etc.
A Request for Proposal was published in early December, and seven firms responded.
A review team was created that was made up of staff members from Administration,
Public Works, Utilities and the Estes Park Sanitation District. Each proposal was
evaluated on Experience, Proposal Adequacy, Firm Qualifications, Availability and Cost.
The following chart contains the bids for each of the responding firms:
Firm Name
City
Fee
The Engineering Company (TEC)
Fort Collins
$67,627
Landmark Engineering Ltd.
Loveland
$80,700
TST Consulting Engineers
Fort Collins
$142,652
Ayres Associates
Fort Collins
$137,990
RG & Associates
Wheatridge
$107,790
Cornerstone Engineering & Survey
Estes Park
$81,440
Vision Land Consultants, Inc.
Golden
$86,700
After the evaluation was complete, The Engineering Company (TEC) of Fort Collins was
the selected firm. In their proposal, TEC demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the
project area and offered a detailed approach to provide the requested road and
waterline improvements. TEC is a municipality -focused firm that has been in business
for 26 years. Their project experience includes several successful municipal pipeline
and road rehabilitation projects within downtown business areas. Their proposal
showed an understanding of the importance needed to communicate with business
owners and residents during construction times. They included some unique and
creative methods to keep pedestrian traffic open during construction times. In addition
to their engineering expertise, TEC is proposing to provide full-time construction
management for the 2 month construction schedule. Several municipal references were
called and all came back with high recommendations,
Including additional services and a 15% contingency, a price for a total project cost not
to exceed $81,500 has been determined.
Schedule:
This project is scheduled to be designed, bid and constructed by May 23, 2012. To
meet this, TEC has provided the following:
Preliminary Design 1/10 —1/24
Final Design & Bid Documents 1/25 — 2/21
Bidding 2/22 — 3/7
Construction 3/13 — 5/23
Included in this schedule are several meetings with Town Staff, business owners,
residents and utility providers.
Sample Motion:
move to recommend/not recommend awarding the contract for design engineering and
construction management services to The Engineering Company (TEC) of Fort Collins,
for a project cost not to exceed $81,500.