HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2012-02-28The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high-quality, reliable
services for the benefit of our citizens, visitors, and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources and natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
SWEARING IN OF SERGEANT LIFE.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated February 14, 2012, Town Board Study Session Minutes
dated February 14, 2012.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes – None.
4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated January 17, 2012
(acknowledgement only).
5. Resolution # 03-12 – Schedule public hearing date of March 27, 2012 for a New
Tavern Liquor License Application filed by The Hillside Burger Inc. dba Hillside
Burger, 205 Virginia Drive.
2. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for
Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. AMENDED CONDOMINIUM MAP, RIVERSPOINTE DOWNTOWN
CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT 2B; 111 Wiest Drive; Riverspointe Downtown Lofts,
LLC/Applicant.
Prepared 2/19/12
* Revised
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
B. AMENDED PLAT, LOTS 15 & 16 AND VACATED STREET ADJACENT TO
SAID LOTS, GRAND ESTATES ADDITION; 1258 & 1260 Big Thompson
Avenue; Wallace & Laurine Burke/Applicant.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE #02-12 – AMEND SECTION 2.04.050 QUORUM. Attorney White.
2. RENEWAL OF AND AMENDMENT TO INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT
WITH CUTWATER INVESTOR SERVICE CORP. Finance Officer McFarland.
4. STAFF REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. REMODEL AND UPGRADE OF DISPATCH COMMUNICATION CENTER.
Sergeant Kenney.
2. 4TH QUARTER SALES TAX. Finance Officer McFarland.
ADJOURN.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 14, 2012
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 14th day of February, 2012. Meeting
called to order by Mayor Pinkham.
Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Eric Blackhurst
Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Jerry Miller
Also Present: Greg White, Town Attorney
Lowell Richardson, Assistant Town Administrator
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent:
Mayor Pinkham 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 presented a petition signed by students in
support of the Elkhorn Project.
Elizabeth Fogarty/County citizen and Winterfest organizer thanked the Town Board for
their participation and attendance during this year’s event. She also thanked town staff
and other local Associations for their support. The event continues to grow each year
and even filled Barn W this year. She and others would support a new event center at
the fairgrounds and encouraged the Board to maximize the size of such a building.
Johanna Darden/Town citizen stated she attended the neighborhood meeting for the
Elkhorn Project where neighbors voiced concern with privacy, noise and property
values. There were also concerns with what would be done to the property, employee
housing bringing an unwanted lifestyle to town, cars parking in the neighborhood, and
noise violations that would not be addressed by the Town. She stated the overall
sentiment of the neighbors would be for the Town not to fund the project.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Blackhurst thanked the snowplow crews for the snow removal efforts this year.
The Housing Authority continues to move forward to divide the Pine Condominiums into
two subdivisions, affordable housing and senior housing on separate lots, to help with
financing the affordable units. He reminded the nonprofits in town to apply for the
grants offered by Ride the Rockies in the amount of $5,000 and encouraged the
nonprofits to be involved in the event.
Trustee Ericson commented on the next Municipal Election taking place on Tuesday,
April 3, 2012 to elect three Trustees and the Mayor seat. He stated the election would
be an all-mail ballot election, last day to register March 5th, petitions for candidacy are
due March 2nd and ballots would be mailed on March 12th.
Mayor Pro Tem Levine thanked Kelsie Purdey for representing Estes Park during her
reign as Ms. Rodeo Colorado and for being an ambassador to the community.
Trustee Koenig informed the public the Sister Cities committee would not meet this
month. She too thanked Kelsie Purdy.
Board of Trustees – February 14, 2012 – Page 2
Trustee Miller stated the Local Marketing District would now be known as Visit Estes
Park moving forward. The LMD Board received updates from RMNP focused on Ride
the Rockies and the Ecoblitz sponsored by National Geographic, strategic branding,
and approval of strategic marketing plan for 2012/2013 at their recent meeting. The
Shuttle Committee would meet to discuss the timing and the routes for the year after
taking a ride to see how proposed new routes may work and what issues may arise. A
final recommendation would come forward to the March 13th Town Board meeting.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Interim Administrator Richardson provided an update on the RTA application stating the
Office of Economic Development sent a letter to the county for comment. The
applicants would provide a presentation to the State to address any concerns raised on
March 8th at 2:20 p.m. in Denver with Mayor Pinkham, Frank Theis and Todd Jirsa to
present.
Other items include a presentation on the CAMP scheduled for February 28th would be
moved and a new date would be announced and lights down Elkhorn Avenue would
remain until the end of the week to allow photography by the LMD.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated January 24, 2012 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated January 24, 2012.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development/Community Services Committee, January 26,
2012.
B. Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works, February 9, 2012.
1. Reassignment of contract with The Engineering Company (TEC) to
Farnsworth Engineering.
2. Bond Park Phase V Design Consultant, Chroma Design - $43,873,
Budgeted.
4. Estes Park Tree Board Minutes dated November 18, 2011 & December 16,
2011.
Johanna Darden/Town citizen requested the Community Development/Community
Services Committee minutes be removed from the Consent Agenda and added as an
Action Item. It was moved and seconded (Levine/Koenig) to approve the Consent
Agenda items I, 2, 3.B.1, 3B.2 and 4, and it passed unanimously.
Consent Agenda Item 3.A. Community Development/Community Services
Committee minutes January 26, 2012 – Johanna Darden/Town citizen requested the
Board open discussion on her definition of open space. Trustee Blackhurst stated point
of order. The only item up for discussion were the committee minutes and not an item
discussed at the committee meeting. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Miller)
to approve the Consent Agenda item 3.A, and it passed unanimously.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP – FROM REBECCA, INC. DBA FAMOUS
EASTSIDE FOOD STORE TO SERINA LLC DBA FAMOUS EASTSIDE
FOOD STORE, 381 S. SAINT VRAIN AVENUE. Town Clerk Williamson
presented the application stating all required paperwork and fees had been
submitted and a temporary license was issued. The owner was present and
Board of Trustees – February 14, 2012 – Page 3
confirmed the manager Alicia Escobar has completed T.I.P.S. training and he
too would be completing the training. Mayor Pro Tem Levine encouraged
anyone selling alcohol complete the training because the Town takes the
selling of alcohol to minors very seriously. It was moved and seconded
(Blackhurst/Miller) to approve the Transfer Application filed by Serina LLC,
dba Famous Eastside Food Store for a 3.2% Off-Premise liquor license at
381 S. St. Vrain Avenue, and it passed unanimously.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ROOFTOP RODEO CLASSIFICATION AS A MEDIUM SIZE RODEO.
Manager Winslow outlined justification for reclassifying the Rooftop Rodeo as a
medium sized rodeo. The Pro Rodeo Cowboys Association (PRCA)
categorizes rodeos by purse size for which the athlete competes (Small = $0 -
$2,999; Medium = $3,000 - $9,999; and Large = $10,000+). To determine the
correct category size for a rodeo, the total amount of committee-added money
is divided by the number of PRCA-sanctioned events. In 2011, the Rooftop
Rodeo had seven sanctioned events and provided $23,600 in committee-added
money (averaging $3,371 per event). This moved the Rooftop Rodeo into the
medium-size rodeo category. An additional PRCA policy states that in order for
a rodeo to be sanctioned, it must budget at least 17% of the previous year’s
ticket sales toward the current year’s purse. For example, 17% of the 2010
ticket sales of $137,000 ($23,290) must be budgeted as the purse for 2011.
Since the 2011 purse budget was $23,600, the Rooftop Rodeo satisfied this
PRCA policy. Advantages of remaining a medium-size rodeo include greater
purse money would attract additional and higher-quality competitors;
communities ability to market in larger markets such as two new national
sponsors (Wrangler Clothing and Pendleton Spirits); and greater public
relations opportunities such as requests to present to the Association of Rodeo
Committees and competitors of the Rooftop Rodeo to compete in Colorado vs.
the World. In order for the rodeo to return to small-size category it would
require a decrease in revenues through a reduction in the number of shows,
limiting the number of shows or capping attendance. Manager Winslow stated
it would be mathematically impossible to qualify as a large rodeo unless there
was an increase in seating, admission price or the number of shows. One
consideration of moving to a medium-size rodeo would be an increase in the
annually-negotiated contract if a large increase in contestants occurs, with an
estimate of an additional $5,000 in stock fees. The 2012 approved budget
includes funding for an increase in purse money and stock fees. Ticket
revenues are expected to increase by $10,000, and, sponsorship revenue has
increased $3,000 with an additional $3,000 anticipated. Staff recommends that
the Rooftop Rodeo remain a PRCA-designated medium-size rodeo for 2012.
Comments were heard from the Board and are summarized: Mayor Pro Tem
Levine stated the move from small to medium-sized rodeo was a direct effect of
a decision made by the Town Board to increase the grandstand seating.
Trustee Elrod stated the numbers covered the 2011 reason for moving to a
medium-size rodeo and stated that future decisions should be well informed
decisions; and Trustee Blackhurst questioned what would happen if increased
revenue projections are not met in 2012. After further discussion, it was
moved and seconded (Koenig/Miller) to approve the Rooftop Rodeo move
from a small to medium-size rodeo as designated by PRCA, and it passed
unanimously.
2. ROOFTOP RODEO COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION.
Interim Town Administrator commented members of the executive board of the
Rooftop Rodeo committee met with staff and Town Board members individually
to discuss reorganization of the volunteer group. This would be a continuation
of staff’s efforts to establish clear relationships with other Town volunteer
organizations, Friends of the Museum and Senior Center Inc., through new
MOUs. Staff has reviewed the proposal that would bring greater continuity of
Board of Trustees – February 14, 2012 – Page 4
operations between the two organizations, increased efficiencies for operation
of the Rodeo event, increased administrative efficiencies and greater
accountability of financial activities.
Howell Wright/President and Mark Purdy/Treasurer of the newly formed Estes
Park Western Heritage, Inc. (EPWH) a 501(c)(3), replacing the non-profit Top
Hands organization, were present to review the proposed reorganization of the
Rodeo committee, a special committee as outlined in the Municipal Code. The
1940’s Town formed Rodeo Committee proposes a new operating structure for
the organization and redefining the relationship with the Town. EPWH request
the committee no longer operate as a special committee appointed by the Town
Board. The Friends of the Rooftop Rodeo volunteer organization would
continue to coordinate the volunteers and fundraise for the rodeo. The rodeo
would continue to belong to the Town, be managed by Town staff, and
determine personnel and funding required to produce the rodeo. The new
organization would expand fundraising opportunities; contribute to the rodeo’s
future growth through an added capital campaign arm; and through a Board of
Directors to control administrative issues, thereby limiting the Town’s
involvement in daily operations.
Trustee Blackhurst voiced concern with the Town taking action on an item that
has not been vetted thoroughly by the entire committee. He requested
additional time be given to review the changes by both the Town and the
committee, and the MOU have an end date to review the relationship in the
future. ITA Richardson stated the MOU would be reviewed annually as other
volunteer MOUs. He also suggested this model be considered for other Town
volunteer organizations, especially the liaison position.
After further discussion, It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Miller) to
approve the reorganization of the Rooftop Committee to operate as a
separate non-profit entity discontinuing the committee as a special
committee and eliminating the requirement for appointment of the
committee members by the Town Board, and it passed with Trustee
Blackhurst abstaining.
3. ORDINANCE #01-12 PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCES BY TITLE ONLY
AND ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT THAT PAYMENTS OF BILLS AND
STATEMENTS CONCERNING CONTRACTS AND REBATES BE
PUBLISHED. Town Clerk Williamson presented two ballot questions for
consideration during the upcoming April 3rd Municipal Election:
Question #1: “Shall the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, be authorized to
publish ordinances by title only rather than publishing each ordinance in
full in accordance with Section 31-16-105 C.R.S.?”
Question #2: “Shall the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, not publish
proceedings relating to payment of bills and statements concerning all
contracts awarded and rebates allowed in accordance with Section 31-20-
202 (1.5) C.R.S.?”
As a statutory town, the Town of Estes Park is required to publish the full text of
ordinances adopted by the Town Board including exhibits per C.R.S. §31-16-
105 and a summary of the bills per C.R.S. §31-20-202. The state statute
allows a municipality to eliminate the publishing requirements for ordinances at
a regular or special election by publishing ordinances by title only rather than by
publishing the ordinance in full. The same is true for the publication of bills. If
approved the Clerk’s Office will publish ordinances by title and the entire text
would be available on the Town’s website immediately following approval. Bills
would continue to be available on the website in full detail rather than the
summary published in the paper. A statement concerning contracts awarded
and rebates allowed with a value greater than $30,000 per annum would be
placed on the website. The purpose in proposing an ordinance at this time is to
YES
NO
YES
NO
Board of Trustees – February 14, 2012 – Page 5
address the costs associated with publications, and provide additional
government functions online, thereby delivering information to the citizens
efficiently and effectively through e-government. Attorney White read the
Ordinance into the record. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Levine)
to approve Ordinance #01-12, and it passed unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION # 03-12 RE-APPROPRIATION OF 2011 ENCUMBERED
FUNDS TO 2012 BUDGET. Finance Officer McFarland stated some Town
departments entered into contracts in 2011 for goods and/or services that were
not fulfilled by the end of 2011; therefore, the funds would be rolled over to
2012. There are 31 items totaling $544,965 that include funds for the NEPA
study, infrastructure improvements and vehicle replacements. Several projects
slated for 2011 were not started, therefore, the funds would return to the
General Fund including $310,000 in STIP funding. Staff may come forward in
2012 to request additional funds for additional STIP funding. Mayor Pro Tem
Levine expressed concern with STIP funds not being spent in 2011. After
additional discussion, it was moved and seconded (Ericson/Blackhurst) to
approve Resolution #03-12 to re-appropriate funds from 2011 to 2012
budget as outlined above, and it passed unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION # 04-12 GASB STATEMENT NO. 54 FUND BALANCE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. Finance Officer McFarland stated the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued Statement 54,
Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions requiring
new categories and new terminology as it relates to fund balances. It applies
only to “Governmental Funds” including the General Fund and Special
Revenue Funds (Community Reinvestment, Conservation Trust, Open Space
and Community Services). It does not apply to the Internal Revenue Funds or
Enterprise Funds. The current “restricted” and “non-restricted” are replaced
with “non-spendable”, “restricted”, “committed”, “assigned” and “unassigned”.
The new fund balance assignments would appear in the 2011 CAFR. The
proposed Resolution assigns a designee to make the classifications as required
by Statement 54. It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Miller) to approve
Resolution #04-12, and it passed unanimously.
6. CHANGE ORDER FOR STEAMER DRIVE OVERLAY CONSULTING
SERVICES WITH THE ENGINEERING COMPANY. Director Zurn stated staff
has negotiated a scope and fee with The Engineering Company (Farnsworth
Engineering) for design, specifications and construction management services
for the Steamer Drive Overlay project at a cost of $23,337. This project would
be added to the approve Virginia rehabilitation project. The additional scope of
work would make the project more attractive to bidders. The PUP Committee
recommended approval of the change order to the Town Board for
consideration. The total combined fee for both projects without contingency
would be $90,964. it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig) to
approve a change order to the design engineering and construction
management services for the Virginia Drive Rehabilitation Project with
The Engineering Company (Farnsworth Engineering) to include Steamer
Drive Overlay design engineering and construction management at a cost
of $23,337 with a 10% contingency, and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 14,
2012
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 14th day of
February, 2012.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees
Blackhurst, Elrod, Ericson, Koenig and Miller
Attending: All
Also Attending: Interim Town Administrator Richardson, Town Attorney
White and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
LMD DESTINATION BRANDING STRATEGY.
Executive Director Peggy Campbell, Stakeholder Services Kirby Nelson and Branding
Consultant Duane Knapp of BrandingStrategy Inc. presented a review of the branding
effort to date. The presentation reviewed the branding assessment process, branding
assessment methodology, branding assessment research, branding assessment
conclusions and paradigm shifts. The branding strategy is a four phase process
including brand assessment, brand promise, brand blueprint and brand culturalization.
The brand assessment methodology included the review of research from thousands of
Estes Park visitors, frequent travelers and community influencers and a review of
dozens of previously completed research studies. Assessment conclusions included
the following: the town has achieved positive performance despite a downturn in the
economy; there is a positive relationship with the Rocky Mountain National Park and it
enjoys a high level of satisfaction with its visitors; visitors enjoy the destination, however
satisfaction declines during the prime summer season due to traffic and parking; one
season with no strategy to create a year-round destination; a gateway mindset; Estes
Park viewed as a relaxing mountain getaway; no strategy to optimize/sustain the wildlife
experience; no specific strategy to provide a consistent exceptional experiences; and
enhance success through wayfinding strategy throughout Estes Park and improve the
sense of arrival. The overall paradigm shifts would be moving from a gateway versus a
getaway; guest versus visitor; favorite versus one of many, always in season versus on-
or off-season and village versus resort.
MAYOR’S RIGHT TO VOTE.
The Mayor’s right to vote is determined by Colorado State Statute; however, a
municipality may provide by ordinance that the mayor shall not be entitled to vote on
any matter before the board, except in the case of a tie vote. The Clerk’s Office
performed a review of past codified Municipal Codes and was able to determine the
Mayor’s right to vote in the case of a tie vote only has been in existence since at least
1961. A quick survey was conducted of other municipalities and it was determined that
approximately half of those surveyed have also adopted an ordinance limiting the
mayor’s voting to a tie vote.
Trustee Elrod stated constituents that he has communicated with on the issue are
surprised to find out that the mayor does not vote on all issues. Limiting the mayor’s
voting rights appears to limit the voters’ rights to representation. He would support as
Town Board Study Session – February 14, 2012 – Page 2
outlined in the state statute a repeal of the current limitation and return the full voting
rights to the mayor prior to the April Election.
Discussion followed amongst the Board members and many of the Trustees
appreciated the issue being brought forward; however, the consensus was to maintain
the current mayor’s right to vote (tie breaking vote only) because it allows the mayor to
hear all sides of an issue in the event a tiebreaking vote becomes necessary. The
Board also discussed the need to eliminate counting the mayor position as part of the
quorum if the position does not vote on all issues; therefore, the Board requested staff
present an ordinance at the next Town Board meeting to amend the Municipal Code
section related to quorum.
TOWN BOARD COMPENSATION.
The current board’s annual compensation for the Mayor is $6,000, Mayor Pro Tem is
$5,000 and Trustee is $4,000. Medical, dental, vision and retirement benefits are
available at the same contribution rates paid by a fulltime employee of the Town. There
is no policy established on how and when the Town Board compensation is reviewed.
The Board’s compensation was last reviewed in 2008. Staff would recommend Board
compensation include 100% medical coverage for all members that participate in the
Town’s medical plan. Staff would also recommend a policy be established similar to the
Municipal Court staff on how and when the elected official salaries are reviewed.
The Board discussed a potential increase prior to the 2012 election, which by state
statute would only affect those newly elected to the Board in April. All other Board
member’s salaries would remain at the current level. Several stated a slight increase
would help to cover the current medical premium costs. All agreed a policy should be
reviewed and suggested a review should be conducted on the off-election years during
the budget process. This would allow funds to be budgeted for the following election
year. The Board requested staff review salaries of similar communities and provide
recommendations on potential salary increases for board members elected during 2012
at an upcoming study session.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission
January 17, 2012 - 1:30 p.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Ron Norris, Alan Fraundorf, John
Tucker, Betty Hull, Rex Poggenpohl, Joe Wise
Attending: Chair Klink, Commissioners Norris, Fraundorf, Tucker, Hull, Poggenpohl,
and Wise
Also Attending: Director Chilcott, Town Board Liaison Elrod, and Recording Secretary
Thompson
Absent: None
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence.
Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There was one person in attendance.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of minutes, December 20, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to approve the consent agenda as
presented, and the motion passed unanimously.
3. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS
Director Chilcott reported no new pre-application conferences since the last meeting.
Staff is reviewing a development plan (staff-level decision) for additional units at the Best
Western/Silver Saddle. An amended plat application associated with this project will
come before Planning Commission in February.
Director Chilcott reported the High Pines Amended Plat, owned by the Daily family, is
going before the County Commissioners this afternoon. The Planning Commission
recommended approval in December.
Director Chilcott reported the January 24, 2012 Town Board Study Session will include
discussion of the ADU Problem Statement. Chair Klink and Vice-Chair Tucker will be
attending. Depending on the outcome of the study session a tentative joint study session
with Planning Commission and Town Board could be held in the next month or so.
Director Chilcott reported the February 21, 2012 Planning Commission meeting will
include two presentations: one an update from Estes Park Housing Authority Director Rita
Kurelja; the other an update on projects from Public Works Director Scott Zurn. Mr. Zurn’s
presentation will include projects that have long-term impacts to the community.
Chair Klink reported the Livingston Amended Plat was recently approved by the Town
Board, conditional to recording the utility easement on the plat.
Director Chilcott reported the Board of Adjustment approved the height variance for The
Meadow Condominiums. A Supplemental Map will be heard by the Town Board on
January 24, 2012. There has been discussion with the developers about a possible
modification to the development plan. She assured the Commission that staff will closely
monitor all future applications where building height could be an issue. Care will be given
to ensure proper procedures are followed.
Director Chilcott reported a problem statement and definition of open space will be
presented to the Community Development/Community Services Committee on January
26, 2012. This was initiated by local resident Johanna Darden, with assistance by staff.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
January 17, 2012
There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 1:40 p.m.
___________________________________
Doug Klink, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
Page 1
Town Clerk’s Office Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: February 24, 2012
RE: Resolution # 03-12 – Schedule public hearing date of March 27, 2012 for
a New Tavern Liquor License Application filed by Hillside Burger Inc. dba
Hillside Burger, 205 Virginia Drive.
Background:
The local licensing authority is required by C.R.S. 12-47-311 to set a public hearing for
a new Tavern liquor license located at 205 Virginia Drive. This location was previously
operated by Vega with a Hotel and Restaurant liquor license that was not renewed in
2011 and the business did not open its doors during the 2011 season.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the resolution to set the public hearing for the new
Tavern liquor license for Hillside Burger.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Resolution #03-12.
RESOLUTION #03-12
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
That the filing date of the application for a New TAVERN Liquor License, filed by,
HILLSIDE BURGER INC., dba, Hillside Burger, 205 Virginia Drive, Estes Park, Colorado, is
February 17, 2012.
It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the
Board Room of the Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, March 27,
2012 at 7:00 P.M., and that the neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of said
application and hearing shall be the area included within a radius of 2.9 miles, as
measured from the center of the applicant's property.
DATED this 28th day of February, 2012.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
COLORADO LIQUOR CODE
(4) An applicant for an optional premises license who desires to sell, dispense, or serve alcohol beverages
on optional premises shall file with the optional premises license application a list of the optional premises
locations and the area in which the applicant desires to store alcohol beverages for future use on the optional
premises. The applicant shall file the application and additional information with the state and local licensing
authorities upon initial application, and each license year thereafter. Approval of the license and areas must be
obtained from the state licensing authority and the local licensing authority. The decision of each authority
shall be discretionary. In the event that the state and local licensing authorities allow the area or areas to be
designated optional premises, no alcohol beverages may be served on the optional premises without the
licensee having provided written notice to the state and local licensing authorities forty-eight hours prior to
serving alcohol beverages on the optional premises. The notice must contain the specific days and hours on
which the optional premises are to be used. This subsection (4) does not permit the violation of any other
provision of this article under circumstances not specified in this subsection (4).
12-47-311. Public notice - posting and publication. (1) Upon receipt of an application, except an
application for renewal or for transfer of ownership, the local licensing authority shall schedule a public
hearing upon the application not less than thirty days from the date of the application and shall post and
publish the public notice thereof not less than ten days prior to such hearing. Public notice shall be given by
the posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises for which application has been made and by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the premises are located.
(2) Notice given by posting shall include a sign of suitable material, not less than twenty-two inches wide
and twenty-six inches high, composed of letters not less than one inch in height and stating the type of license
applied for, the date of the application, the date of the hearing, and the name and address of the applicant, and
such other information as may be required to fully apprise the public of the nature of the application. If the
applicant is a partnership, the sign shall contain the names and addresses of all partners, and if the applicant is
a corporation, association, or other organization, the sign shall contain the names and addresses of the
president, vice-president, secretary, and manager or other managing officers.
(3) Notice given by publication shall contain the same information as that required for signs.
(4) If the building in which the alcohol beverage is to be sold is in existence at the time of the application,
any sign posted as required in subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall be placed so as to be conspicuous
and plainly visible to the general public. If the building is not constructed at the time of the application, the
applicant shall post the premises upon which the building is to be constructed in such a manner that the notice
shall be conspicuous and plainly visible to the general public.
(5) (a) At the public hearing held pursuant to this section, any party in interest shall be allowed to present
evidence and to cross-examine witnesses.
(b) As used in this subsection (5), "party in interest" means any of the following:
(I) The applicant;
(II) An adult resident of the neighborhood under consideration;
(III) The owner or manager of a business located in the neighborhood under consideration;
(IV) The principal or representative of any school located within five hundred feet of the premises for
which the issuance of a license pursuant to section 12-47-309 (1) is under consideration.
(c) The local licensing authority, in its discretion, may limit the presentation of evidence and cross-
examination so as to prevent repetitive and cumulative evidence or examination.
(d) Nothing in this subsection (5) shall be construed to prevent a representative of an organized
neighborhood group that encompasses part or all of the neighborhood under consideration from presenting
evidence subject to this section. Such representative shall reside within the neighborhood group's geographic
boundaries and shall be a member of the neighborhood group. Such representative shall not be entitled to
cross-examine witnesses or seek judicial review of the licensing authority's decision.
12-47-312. Results of investigation - decision of authorities. (1) Not less than five days prior to the
date of hearing, the local licensing authority shall make known its findings based on its investigation in
writing to the applicant and other interested parties. The local licensing authority has authority to refuse to
issue any licenses provided in sections 12-47-309 (1) and 12-46-107 for good cause, subject to judicial
review.
Page 20 of 57
Page 1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Alison Chilcott, Director
Dave Shirk, Planner
Date: February 28, 2012
RE: AMENDED CONDOMINIUM MAP, RIVERSPOINTE DOWNTOWN
CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT 2B; 111 Wiest Drive; Riverspointe Downtown
Lofts, LLC/Applicant.
Background: This is a condominium map application to re-subdivide a second-floor
residential unit into three residential units, as originally approved in 2005. In 2008, a
previous owner combined the three units into one unit.
Budget: N/A
Planning Commission Recommendation:
On Tuesday February 21, 2012, the Estes
Valley Planning Commission held a public
hearing to review the application. The
Planning Commission found:
1. This proposal complies with applicable
sections of the Estes Valley
Development Code, including Section
3.9.E “Standards for Review” and 10.3
“Review Procedures.”
2. This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff
relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
3. Within sixty (60) days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the developer
shall submit the plat for recording. If the plat is not submitted for recording within this
sixty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void.
4. This is a Planning Commission recommendation to the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park.
Community Development Memo
Page 2
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend APPROVAL of the
amended condominium map application.
Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of the amended condominium map
application subject to the findings recommended by the Estes Valley Planning
Commission.
Page 1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Alison Chilcott, Director
Dave Shirk, Planner
Date: February 28, 2012
RE: AMENDED PLAT, LOTS 15 & 16 AND VACATED STREET ADJACENT
TO SAID LOTS, GRAND ESTATES ADDITION; 1258 & 1260 Big
Thompson Avenue; Wallace & Laurine Burke/Applicant.
Background: This is a request to adjust the property line between Lots 15 and 16,
Grand Estates subdivision.
The Best Western/Silver Saddle Motel
is located on Lot 16 and fronts Highway
34 (Big Thompson Avenue).
Lot 15 borders Lake Front Street and
contains a single-family dwelling.
This adjustment will make Lot 16 larger
and Lot 15 smaller. The increased lot
size will allow for a small addition to the
motel. Eight new units will be added to
the northeast portion of the main building; four units and a lower level meeting area will
be remodeled.
The applicant has submitted a development plan for staff-level review. Review will be
complete no later than March 6, 2012.
Budget: N/A
Planning Commission Recommendation: On Tuesday February 21, 2012, the Estes
Valley Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the amended plat. The
Planning Commission found:
1. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.9.E “Standards for Review” and 10.3 “Review
Procedures.”
Community Development Memo
Page 2
2. Approval will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other
property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this
Code.
3. This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff
relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
4. Within sixty (60) days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the developer
shall submit the plat for recording. If the plat is not submitted for recording within this
sixty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void.
5. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend APPROVAL of the
proposed amended plat CONDITIONAL TO:
1. Prior to submittal of plat mylars, a revised drainage memorandum shall be approved
by the Public Works Department. This amended must account for off-site flow and
ensure the proposed drainage easements on Lot 15A are sized correctly.
2. The plat shall be amended as follows:
a. The area transferred from Lot 15 to Lot 16 shall be designated as non-buildable.
b. Include a note stating the purpose of this plat is to transfer density from Lot 15 to
Lot 16 to allow for a small addition to the motel.
c. Include a note stating Lot 16A shall not be allowed to have commercial traffic
access from Lake Front Street.
d. Address any necessary changes to the drainage easements, as may be needed
following approval of the stormwater report.
(Note: These conditions have been completed)
Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of the amended plat application subject
to the findings and conditions recommended by the Estes Valley Planning Commission.
Page 1
Town Attorney Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Gregory A. White, Town Attorney
Date: February 22, 201
RE: Ordinance No. 02-12 An Ordinance Amending Section 2.04.050 Quorum
of the Municipal Code of the Town of Estes Park
Background:
Ordinance No. 02-12 provides that the Mayor shall not be counted for the purpose of
determining a quorum for the transaction of business by the Board of Trustees. This
Ordinance, if adopted, removes the possibility of two members of the Board of Trustees
approving an action of the Board of Trustees due to the fact that it is currently possible
for three members of the Board of Trustees plus the Mayor to constitute a quorum. The
adoption of Ordinance 02-12 would require, at a minimum, three Trustees to approve an
action of the Board.
Budget:
There are no budgetary implications for the approval of Ordinance No. 02-12.
Staff Recommendation:
No Staff recommendation.
Sample Motion:
I move to adopt/not adopt Ordinance No. 02-12 for the purpose of amending Section
2.04.050 of the Municipal Code.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 02-12
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.04.050
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
THE QUORUM FOR THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-4-302 C.R.S. and Section
2.12.030 of the Municipal Code, the Mayor shall have no vote upon any question,
except in the case of a tie vote; and
WHEREAS, Section 31-4-302 C.R.S. provides that the Mayor shall be
considered a member of the Board of Trustees; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.04.050 of the Municipal Code provides that four members
of the Board of Trustees shall be a quorum for the transaction of business which
includes the Mayor as a member of the Board of Trustees; and
WHEREAS, Section 31-4-302 C.R.S. provides that in the event the Mayor is not
entitled to vote except in the case of a tie vote, the Town may, by ordinance, provide
that the Mayor shall not be counted for purpose of determining a quorum; and
WHEREAS, Section 31-4-302 C.R.S. provides that any such ordinance may be
adopted only within sixty days preceding any election of a Mayor, to take effect upon the
Mayor’s assumption of office; and
WHEREAS, the regular municipal election of the Town of Estes Park will be held
on April 3, 2012, at which time the Mayor shall be elected; and
WHEREAS, as currently set forth in Section 2.04.050 Quorum of the Municipal
Code, it is possible that three Board members and the Mayor constitute a quorum, and
that the vote of two Trustees is sufficient to approve an action of the Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has determined that it is necessary to amend
Section 2.04.050 of the Municipal Code to provide that the Mayor shall not be counted
as part of a quorum for the transaction of business in order to remove the possibility of
two Trustees approving an action of the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:
2
1. Section 2.04.050 of the Municipal Code shall be amended to read as follows:
Section 2.04.050 Quorum
“Four (4) members of the Board of Trustees shall be a quorum for the
transaction of business. The Mayor shall not be counted for the purpose
of determining a quorum. No business shall be transacted except when a
quorum is present, but a smaller number may adjourn the meeting to
another time.”
2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon the new mayor’s assumption of office
following the regular municipal election of April 3, 2012.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park,
Colorado this day of , 2012.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a meeting of
the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2012 and
published in a newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado,
on the day of , 2012.
Town Clerk
ADMINISTRATION Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Lowell Richardson, Interim Town Administrator
From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Date: February 28, 2012
RE: Investment Services Contract Extension
Background:
The Town’s Investment Services contract with Cutwater Asset Management (Cutwater)
was approved at the Town Board meeting on March 8, 2011, and is attached for
reference. The contract was approved for a three-year period, renewable annually.
In addition to the annual extension, Cutwater has requested four amendments to the
contract, as stated in their attached letter. Staff and Town Counsel view the proposed
amendments as fairly benign/routine. A brief interpretation of said amendments:
Section 4: Cutwater will not be liable to the Town for any act or omission of any broker
or dealer selected by Cutwater in good faith (Cutwater annually provides the Town with
a list of recommended/selected brokers).
Section 11: Cutwater would like to be able to include the Town as a reference for RFPs
in which Cutwater is involved with other potential clients.
Section 13: Cutwater is seeking to provide disclosure information as required by law, as
well as other documents, to the Town in the form of email.
Section 14: Cutwater has changed its address.
Budget:
There are no budget ramifications per se. Investment fees are netted out with
investment income and spread over all funds in proportion to fund balances.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of extending the Investment Services Agreement, including
the requested Amendments, with Cutwater Asset Management, for the period March 01,
2012 through February 28, 2013.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of extending the Investment Services Agreement,
including the requested Amendments, to Cutwater Asset Management, for the period
March 01, 2012 through February 28, 2013.
Page 1
POLICE DEPARTMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: James D. Kenney, Sergeant
Date: February 28, 2012
RE: Remodel and Upgrade of Dispatch Communication Center
Background:
“PowerPoint Presentation on the current projects planned and in progress for 2012 in
the Estes Park Police Department Communication Center.” – REPORT ONLY
Summary:
This is a report on the ongoing and imminent projects for the Estes Park Police
Department Communications Center, projects that have been sponsored and paid for
by our local emergency telephone authority through the collection of $.45 911
surcharges throughout Larimer County. These projects serve to enhance our services
to all of our stakeholders yet don’t impact our budgets or adversely impact the
taxpayers. The entity responsible for these necessary projects is the Larimer
Emergency Telephone Authority or LETA.
The Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority supports 9-1-1 Emergency
Communications throughout Larimer County. It identifies through stakeholders current
and future 9-1-1 communication system needs and establishes sustainable equipment
standards. In order to carry out that mission, it collects, manages, and distributes
telephone surcharges collected by the Authority to its partners through an
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA).
Budget:
No budget implications.
2/24/2012
1
ESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENTESTES PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT
20122012 Communication Center ProjectsCommunication Center Projectsjj
New Projects for 2012New Projects for 2012
¾¾Ongoing Ongoing –– Dispatch Network Cabling CleanupDispatch Network Cabling Cleanup
¾¾February 28February 28--29, 2012 29, 2012 –– Installation of New Installation of New
Dispatch Console furniture Dispatch Console furniture
¾¾April 3April 3--4, 2012 4, 2012 –– Next Generation 911 Next Generation 911
capable telephone equipment installationcapable telephone equipment installation
2/24/2012
2
WHO IS LETA?WHO IS LETA?
LETA, the Larimer LETA, the Larimer
Emergency Telephone Emergency Telephone Emergency Telephone Emergency Telephone
Authority, is a partnership Authority, is a partnership
between 25 government and between 25 government and
public safety agencies of public safety agencies of
Larimer County. LETA Larimer County. LETA
supports 9supports 9--11--1 emergency 1 emergency
communications to make communications to make communications to make communications to make
Larimer County emergency Larimer County emergency
notification consistent and notification consistent and
effective. effective.
Network Cable Cleanup ProjectNetwork Cable Cleanup Project
Cost Cost ––$7,681$7,681
Paid by Larimer Paid by Larimer
Emergency Telephone Emergency Telephone
AuthorityAuthority
2/24/2012
3
Dispatch Console FurnitureDispatch Console Furniture
Cost Cost –– $14,565$14,565
Paid by Larimer Paid by Larimer
Emergency Emergency
Telephone AuthorityTelephone Authority
2/24/2012
4
CurrentCurrent
2/24/2012
5
Next Generation Capable 911Next Generation Capable 911
Telephone SystemTelephone System
Cost Cost –– $215,000$215,000
Paid by Larimer Paid by Larimer
Emergency Emergency
Telephone AuthorityTelephone Authority
Ethernet for NGEthernet for NG--911911
Cost Cost –– $56,235$56,235
Paid by Larimer Paid by Larimer
Emergency Emergency
Telephone AuthorityTelephone Authority
2/24/2012
6
Annual Ethernet & microDATA Annual Ethernet & microDATA
SupportSupport
Cost Cost –– $38,234$38,234
Paid by Larimer Paid by Larimer
Emergency Emergency
Telephone AuthorityTelephone Authority
Larimer Emergency Telephone Larimer Emergency Telephone
Authority Annual InvestmentAuthority Annual Investment
Provides $21,000 annually Provides $21,000 annually
through the $45 911 through the $45 911 through the $.45 911 through the $.45 911
monthly surcharge for monthly surcharge for
equipment, staffing, equipment, staffing,
overtime, and mostly overtime, and mostly
training.training.
Chief is on the Chief is on the
Board of DirectorsBoard of Directors
2/24/2012
7
QUESTIONSQUESTIONS
James D. Kenney, M.S.
Sergeant – Investigations/Support Services/Technology/Emergency Mgt.
170 MacGregor Ave. | Estes Park, CO 80517
Direct 970-577-3826 | Dispatch 970-586-4000 | Fax 970-586-4496
jkenney@estes.org | http://www.estesnet.com/pd/
“YPli OC it”“Your Police –Our Community”
Page 1
FINANCE Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Interim Town Administrator Richardson
From: Steve McFarland – Finance Officer
Date: February 28th, 2012
RE: 4th Quarter 2011 Sales Tax report
Background:
Attached is the 4th Quarter and Annual Sales Tax report for 2011. Comments are made
in synchronicity with the provided slides. Primary themes of the Powerpoint
presentation include:
• Sales tax collections reached a record level in 2011 ($7,422,537), surpassing
2007’s $7,233,707, and finishing nearly 6.0% ahead of 2010 and 2011 Budget.
• Estes Park’s year over year (2010 v 2011) increase compared favorably with the
other CAST communities, finishing 10th out of 23. This may be somewhat
misleading in that Estes Park’s 2010 was a decent year itself, whereas some of
the other communities may have had less than banner years in 2010.
• Annualized sales tax has been improving since May 2010, when the downward
trend reversed itself. Annualized sales tax is now increasing at a 5.93% rate.
• Of the large categories, lodging increased 9%, food 6%, and retail 4% (2010 vs.
2011). Since 2009, lodging has increased 15%, food 9%, and retail 3% (overall
sales tax has increased 8% from 2009-11).
• Slide 9 shows sales tax by month as a percent of the annual total (for example,
January is roughly 4% of the total year). The two lines represent 5-year avgs,
one from 10 years ago, and one current. Note that summer (specifically July) is
greater than it was 10 years ago. In other words, Estes Park’s summer is growing
faster than the other seasons.
• Slide 10 adds an important component to slide 9. While summer may be more
pronounced, one can also see the dramatic increase in revenues over 20 and 10
years ago. This slide shows gross revenue, not percentages. The message of
this slide is that sales tax revenues are more than double what they were 20
years ago and significantly more than they were 10 years ago.
• The data in slides 9 and 10 have interesting implications for several important
community topics, such as marketing, parking, etc.
Page 2
FINANCE Memo
• Slides 11-13 display the concept real revenues vs. CPI. The important question
here is to figure out how much of the 71% increase in revenues (1995-2011) is a
real increase, and how much is the result of inflation? Applying the base 1995
revenue to the CPI and Real revenue annual % increases (slide 12) results in
slide 13. Slide 13 clearly shows that a significant portion of the 71% increase is
in fact driven by CPI. The net gain is roughly 15%. While a 15% gain is good,
the important message of this slide is that the majority of the gain over the last 15
years is CPI-driven, and is therefore swallowed up by a corresponding increase
in costs for product and labor. This will be important to remember as discussions
resume on the Capital Asset Management Plan (CAMP) in the near future.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
N/A
Sample Motion:
N/A
Update:Update:
Sales Tax: 2011
S ld i OffiSteve McFarland –Finance Officer
SALES TAX FACTS
•2011 complete.
•YTD: 5.9% ahead of 2010 and budget.
•All‐time high of $7 422 537•All‐time high of $7,422,537.
•Compares very favorably with CAST
communitiescommunities:
CAST COMMUNITIES
2010 v 2011
9.9%
9.3%
10.6%
10.0%
12.0%2010 v 2011
8.2%
6.4%
7.0%
5.9%
6.6%
55%
8.5%
6.4%
6.0%
8.0%
2.6%
4.9%
3.6%
5 .5%
3.3%
4.5%4.4%
3.5%4.0%
2.1%
1.2%
1.7%
1.3%
0.0%
2.0%
‐1.1%
‐2.0%
SALES TAX RATE OF CHANGE
15%
20%
$600,000
$700,000
$618,545
$7,422,537
2010 = $7.01M
'2011r B = $7.32M
December-11
12 Mo Rev.
0%
5%
10%
$400,000
$500,000
of
A
v
e
R
e
v
.
me
-10%
-5%
$100 000
$200,000
$300,000
12
M
o
%
C
h
g
In
c
o
m
5.93%
12 Mo. ROC =December-11
-20%
-15%
$0
$100 ,000
12 Mo Ave 12 mo %Linear (12 Mo Ave)Linear (12 mo %)
SALES TAX COMPARISONS: 2009‐11
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
2011 SALES TAX CLASSIFICATION BREAKDOWN Prior Prd Prior Prd
2011 2010 2009
BRIEF TOTAL % +/‐% +/‐% of Jan‐Dec Jan‐Dec
DESCRIPTION YEAR 2010 2009 Total YEAR YEAR
AMUSEMENTS/RECREATION 54,965.69 22%‐2% 1% 45,002.87 56,256.08
AUTOMOTIVE 140,997.30 ‐6%‐1% 2% 150,698.25 141,995.13
FOOD 2,812,412.07 6% 9% 38% 2,643,977.57 2,573,159.90
RETAIL 1,454,555.09 4% 3% 20% 1,403,594.27 1,409,166.62
LODGING 1 931 214 90 9%15%26%1 768 187 36 1 675 091 85LODGING1,931,214.90 9%15%26%1,768,187.36 1,675,091.85
CONSTRUCTION 356,825.81 5% 5% 5% 339,944.21 338,363.77
PERSONAL/PROFESSIONAL 111,204.98 5% 8% 1% 105,718.52 102,582.33
UTILITIES 560,360.93 2% 1% 8% 549,970.49 555,958.19
GRAND TOTAL 7,422,536.77 6% 8% 100% 7,007,093.54 6,852,573.87
SALES TAX BY CATEGORY
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
1,800,742 1,635,091 1,568,005 1,554,316
1,620,726
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
AUTOMOTIVE GROUP
1,813,978 1,771,509 1,675,092 1,768,187
1,931,215
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
LUMBER & BUILDING GROUP
UTILITY GROUP
RETAIL/OTHER
LODGING GROUP
FOOD GROUP
2,449,330 2,602,655 2,573,160 2,643,978 2,812,412
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
SALES TAX – CATEGORIES AS A % OF TOTAL
35%
40%
25%
30%
Food
15%
20%
Lodging
Retail/Other
Utilities
Construction
Auto
5%
10%
0%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
SALES TAX –MONTHS AS % OF YEAR
16.00%
18.00%
1997-01
12.00%
14.00%
8.00%
10.00%
1997-01
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
0.00%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SALES TAX –MONTHS AS % OF YEAR
16.00%
18.00%
12.00%
14.00%
600%
8.00%
10.00%
1997-01
2007-11
2.00%
4.00%
6 .00%
0.00%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SALES TAX –TOTAL REVENUES BY MONTH
$7,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
1987-91
1997-01
2007-11
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SALES TAX BY YEAR
$8 000 000
$7,000,000
$8 ,000 ,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
REAL GROWTH VS CPI
CPI REAL NET
1995 4.30% 2.00%‐2.30%1996 350%370%020%1996 3 .50%3 .70%0 .20%1997 3.30% 4.72% 1.42%1998 2.40% 12.45% 10.05%1999 2.90% 4.56% 1.66%2000 4.00% 5.19% 1.19%2001 4.70% 4.04%‐0.66%2002 1.90%‐1.98%‐3.88%2003 1.10% 2.20% 1.10%2004 0.10% 2.13% 2.03%2005 2.09% 1.91%‐0.18%2006 3.60% 5.36% 1.76%2007 2.20% 6.89% 4.69%2008 3.90%‐0.69%‐4.59%2009 ‐0.65%‐4.61%‐3.96%2010 187%225%038%2010 1 .87%2 .25%0 .38%2011 3.83% 5.93% 2.10%
SALES TAX AND CPI
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000 Baseline
CPI #
4% TAX
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
SALES TAX SUMMARY
$•5.9% ahead of 2010. Record high of $7,422,537.
•Compares favorably State‐wide.
•Categories fairly stable year over year.
•Summer getting even busier relative to entire year.
•While revenues have increased, purchasing power
almost same as 1995.
•This information will be useful when reviewing CAMP and
CIP projections.