The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2010-01-12Prepared 12/31/09 *Revised -- TOWN oF ESTES PARIÂ© 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 12, 2010 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance). YULETIME LIGHTING CONTEST - PRESENTATION OF AWARDS. Mayor Pinkham. PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated December 8,2009. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development, December 3,2009. B. Utilities, December 10, 2009. C. Public Safety, December 17,2009. 4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 2009 (acknowledgement only). 5. Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority Minutes November 18, 2009 (acknowledgement only). 6. Resolution #01-10 - Public Posting Area Designation. 7. Resolution #02-10 - Schedule public hearing date of January 26, 2010 for a New Tavern Liquor License Application filed by Mountain Munchies LLC dba MOUNTAIN MUNCHIES, 189 & 191 Riverside Drive. 2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. COPLINK PRESENTATION. Detective Polucha & Dispatcher Purvis. . 2. THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland. 3. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. Town Administrator Halburnt. 3. ACTION ITEMS: 1. 2010 ENGAGEMENT LETTER FOR INVESTMENT SERVICES WITH MBIA. Finance Officer McFarland. 2. ORDINANCE #01-10 LEASE FOR PROSPECT MOUNTAIN RADIO SITE. Director Zurn and Superintendent Mahany. 3. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH LARIMER COUNTY FOR PLANNING SERVICES IN THE ESTES VALLEY. Attorney White. 4. BUSINESS LICENSES FEE WAIVER FOR PARK THEATER MALL BUSINESSES. Town Clerk Williamson. 5. RESOLUTION #03-10 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN. Commander Rose 6. 2010 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART. Administrator Halburnt. i 7. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: 24-6-402(4) (e) C.R.S. - For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters . that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators regarding Mary's Lake Water Treatment Plant. Motion: I move the Town Board go into Executive Session- For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators regarding Mary's Lake Water Treatment Plant, under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(E). 8. ADJOURN. NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. Jackie Williamson From: Admin iR3045 Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 5:07 PM To: Jackie Williamson Subject: Job Done Notice(Send) ***************************** *** Job Done Notice(Send) *** ***************************** JOB NO. 2262 ST. TIME 01/06 16:58 PGS. 2 SEND DOCUMENT NAME TX/RX INCOMPLETE ----- TRANSACTION OK 6672527 Greg White 5869561 KEPL 5869532 Trail Gazette 5861691 Channel 8 6353677 Reporter Herald 2247899 Coloradoan 5771590 EP News ERROR ----- 1 Town Board. January 12,2010 (#37) Good evening It's been a while and plenty ofnew stories and information have been found to back up my protest against God in the Pledge. You may have seen this graph from a Pew survey showing the percentage of people by state who say religion is very important in their lives. The highest of course is Mississippi with 82% and the lowest are Vermont and New Hampshire with about 40%. The national average is 56% and Colorado is ranked 419 at 44% which is probably a reflection of our free-thinking educated population Then we have Muslims in Malaysia burning Christian churches because the Christians were calling God, Allah. They say Allah is the one and only true God and no one else can use the word, especially the blasphemous Christians who say Jesus is God. I wonder which God is the Pledge God. On the science front there is a growing consensus that empty space is not empty. You may have heard the terms Dark Energy or Dark Matter or maybe Zero Point Energy. These refer to the enormous energy to be found in the vacuum of empty space and as we know, energy is on one side of that E = MCZequation, with mass on the other. So what does this have to do with God in the Pledge? Everything; because the main argument left for the existence of a God is that you can't get something from nothing as in the Big Bang, and now we find out there was more than enough energy in empty space to account for the universe. For some inexplicable reason, believers always use God as the default answer instead ofthe more reasonable, I don't know yet For instance, when observing the human eye, science can now show that its complexity can only have come from natural selection over billions of years, not some mystical creator. Would it surprise you that most Americans don't believe that last statement? God as the default answer stifles knowledge while the "I don't know yet" answer promotes knowledge, so it's no surprise that many of our children are failing at school. With absolutely no recognized scientific evidence for the existence of a God and overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, ith time we give up our primitive superstitious beliefs and recognize that we alone are responsible for our counties future. There is a dim future for a country where a large minority believes the likes of a Sarah Palin was sent by God to lead us to the Promised Land. I again ask that you refrain from reciting the 'under God' Pledge at our meetings. Sincerely, David Habecker A c, rk,~ drju Pew Forum: How Religious Is Your State? -- . Page 2 of 3 . ~ Importance Of Religion Next S./ORSHi PATTENDANCE Â·:= ~~ More than eight-inÂ·ten people in Mississippi (82%) say religion is very important in their lives, making lt:2!12!littillI the Magnolia State among the most religious according to this measure. In some other Southern states. including Alabama. Arkansas. Louisiana, Tennesee and South Carolina, at least seven-in-ten 101-~ people say religion is very important in their lives. At the other etid of the spectrum. fewer than four-in-ten i)eople living in New Hampshire/Vermont (36%) and Alaska (379'0) say religion is very important to them. Click the buttons below to view the other measures. -7 4 wotsh}6~'1â€¢~n..46;t 1 .:.pli,â€¢f':" RANK Percent who say rejigion is very important in their lives Attendaike if#rayet in God PEGEEEBEE Mississippi 111 Alabama 2 ~ 533 Arkansas 3 IZU'~ 875 Louisiana 426 Tennessee 5 ~ 6 64 South Carolina 6 ~ 342 Oklahoma 7.~ 7 12 11 North Carolina 8 Â¤2~ 999 Georgia 14 8 8 Kentucky 10 ~ 11 5 7 Texas 11 ~ 13 11 13 Utah 12 [Z~ 2 10 10 Kansas 13 ~ 10 14 14 Nebraska 14 ~ 12 22 23 West Virginia 15 IMCI~ 17 13 16 I ndiana 16 1?M'0~ 16 17 17 Mi ssouri 17 ~ 18 20 15 Virginia 18 ~ 20 19 18 Idaho 19 ~ 15 16 25 Aorida 20 ~ 26 18 20 Maryland/D.C. 21 ~ 27 21 22 National Average B......... N Dakota/& Dakota 22 ~ 19 27 12 Hawai i 23 ~ 30 15 33 Delaware 24 ~ 31 23 31 Ohio 25 ~ 28 24 19 Pennsylvania 26 1..~ 23 30 21 Michigan 27 ~. 24 29 27 Illinois 28 |3V'~ 22 31 30 New Mexico 29 ~ 32 28 26 New Jersey 30 -..--- 29 37 35 Minnesota 31 ~3;9~ 25 35 29 I owa 32 ~ 21 34 28 Ari zona 33 ~ 42 33 32 Nevada 347,~ 40 25 40 California 35 Elt.~ 35 36 41 Washington 36 ~- 34 32 36 Wisconsin 37 ~ 33 38 34 Montana/W~omirÂ¥; 38 .z..-m-------amme,E~ 38 26 24 New York 39 ~ 36 39 37 Oregon 40 ~ 37 41 38 Colorado 41 ~ 43 40 39 Connecticut/R.I. 42 Ett.~ 41 422 45 A' .717"NE."................ AA AG. AA http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=504&loc=interstitialskip 12/3 1/2009 January 12, 2010 To the Honorable Mayor Bill Pinkham and the Town Board of Trustees: On November 9,2009 the Larimer County Commissioners met in Estes Park to decide to reject or accept the Draft 9, Section 7.8 revision of the Wildlife Habitat Protection ofthe Estes Valley Development Code. The Commissioners heard many residents of Estes Park voice their concerns on this important issue. A significant number of signatures were submitted to the Commissioners well before the meeting asking them to maintain the original code language, keeping in the code the five types ofhabitat which trigger the requirement for a Wildlife Conservation Plan. There were also a significant number of signatures submitted requesting the Larimer County Commissioners approve and direct the completion of a comprehensive Estes Valley Open Space Study as promised to Estes Valley citizens during the January 2008 Joint Study Session. This was not discussed. However, there was discussion among the Commissioners which prompted them to ask Bob Josephs, Head o f the Planning Department, i f he could provide them with the recently completed Estes Valley Wildlife Assessment, September 2008 which mapped areas concerning critical and important wildlife habitat and riparian/wetlands areas. They also asked him if he could provide the earlier wildli fe habitat map (December 1996) in order for them to compare the maps and information before coming to a future final decision. Bob Josephs agreed to provide the requested information. Later, on December 16, at the Coffee with Commissioner Tom Donnelly, I asked him if he had received the maps and assessment materials from Bob Josephs. He had not. The Commissioners, who had shown sincere interest in the wildlife issue and who had asked intelligent questions, need the materials from Bob Josephs to make responsible final decisions. I ask that you find out if the Commissioners have received the information they requested by this time and, if not, it is my hope that you can arrange for them to receive it soon. On November 3,2009 prior to the Commissioners meeting in Estes Park, I sent a letter to them voicing my concerns that our wildlife are not adequately protected. I stated in that letter that I believe the interests of land developers and others who wish to build on land that is important or critical habitat for our wildlife is forcing undesirable changes in the Estes Valley Development Code. I provide here a copy o f that letter and my statement today and I ask that these be included in the public record. Respectfully submitted, 14-=3 d.4-23- Johanna Darden Full-time Resident of Estes Park 501 Mac Gregor Avenue, Estes Park, CO 80517 >n From: Johanna Darden 501 Mac Gregor Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 November 3, 2009 To the Honorable Larimer County Commissioners: I write to you today to ask that you reject the draft 9, Section 7.8 revision of the Wildlife Habitat Protection of the Estes Valley Development Code. After attending and voicing my concerns at Estes Park Board of Trustees and Planning Commission meetings over the past two and a half years, I believe the interests of land developers and others who wish to build on land that is important or critical habitat for our wildlife is forcing undesirable changes in the Estes Valley Development Code. The proposed changes, which would remove protection of raptor nesting sites, Big Horn lambing, deer fawning, and elk calving areas can only be detrimental to our valley. It is important to preserve and strengthen the beneficial co-existence with our wildlife so we, and generations to come, will have the pleasure of sharing this valley with them. If we continue to cut off the corridors our wildlife have used for many years and do away with the places they give birth or lay eggs, we are essentially driving the animals away. The Town of Estes Park encourages visitors from all parts of the country to come here to enjoy our wildlife. Visitors are awed by what they see here. You may have seen the picture of the Bald Eagle on the cover of the Estes Park News dated August 28, 2009. It was seen flying around Lakes Estes. And a young injured Bald Eagle was rescued from the shores of Lake Estes, nursed back to health, and released into the wild at Mac Gregor Ranch. This story was in the Estes Park News dated October 31, 2008. What a thrilling sight for those who saw the Bald Eagles. My husband and I are permanent, full-time residents of Estes Park. Since 1976 we came on vacations to the Estes Valley and surrounding area until we retired here three years ago. My children and grandchildren will also be very sad if you do not act to protect the wildlife in the Estes Valley. It would be wise for us to protect the animals, teach the residents and tourists appropriate behavior toward animals, and make enforceable laws for the protection of all. Therefore please reject the draft 9, section 7.8 revision of the Wildlife Habitat Protection of the Estes Valley Development Code. I am looking forward to seeing you at the Estes Park Town Hall on November 9. Respectfully yours, *04~-7~ 23 ReÂ» Johanna Darden Resident of Estes Park 013 n RLeÂ«of- 242<DE 04*-jul A Rb f - 4 lee f 3 Jh..1Â».~--0-0-21, 40-- 6.f t-LkÂ·~~-1.~2.0 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 8,2009 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 8th day of December, 2009. Meeting called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Levine. Present: Mayor Pro Tem Chuck Levine Trustees Eric Blackhurst Dorla Eisenlauer John Ericson Richard Homeier Jerry Miller Also Present: Greg White, Town Attorney Lowell Richardson, Deputy Town Administrator Jackie Williamson, Town Cldrk a Absent: William C. Pinkham, MAyor Jacquie Halburnt, Tdwh Administrator <4% m. 4 1 Mayor Pro Tem Levine called the meeting td<brder at 7:00 p.m. and:all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ROOFTOP RODEO PRESENTATION~J Special Events Manager Winslow * presented the Town Board with the 2009 Small Rodeo Award for the Rooftop Rodeo.1"~ThkiBoard thanked the Rooftop Rodeo Committee for their dedication and continlied effort ioinake the rodeo a success. PUBLIC COMMENT Pam Shaddotk/Regional Director for Senator Odall's Office thanked the Town for its efforts during Senator McCain and Sehator Udall's visit to Estes Park in August. She stated Town questions or concerns for Senator Udall should be addressed through her office. She requested the Board send any comments or items that should be included in job legislati6n. Amy Hamrick/Kind Coffee stated her business has withdrawn its application to move coffee roasting to thb "CH" Commercial Heavy zoning district located on Dunraven Street. Kind Coffee has the right to continue to roast coffee at the current location in the "CO" Commercial Outlying zoning district, which has been upheld by the Town Board at two separate meetings. She commented on her efforts to continue to grow her business in Estes Park and her inability to stop the dialog of her neighbors that find coffee roasting offensive. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS. Trustee Blackhurst reminded the public that the Estes Park Housing Authority meeting would be held on Wednesday, December 9th at 8:30 a.m. in Room 203 and the Utilities Committee meeting would be held on Thursday, December 1 0 at 8:00 a.m. in the Town Board Room. Trustee Ericson thanked Senator Udall for his efforts in passing the Wilderness designation for Rocky Mountain National Park. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated November 24, 2009 and Town Board Study Session Minutes dated November 24,2009. Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 2 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, November 19, 2009. 4. Appeal of Staffs determination that a commercial roasting operation is a use by right in the "CH" Commercial Heavy zoning district. Withdrawn by applicants. 5. Reappointment of Kathy Palmeri to the Estes Valley Local Marketing District for a 4-year term expiring on December 31, 2013. 6. Library Board Appointments - Reappointment of Amy Hamrick for a 4-year term expiring on December 31, 2013 and App6intment of John Kamprath to fill term of Lenie Gabridge, term expiring on.DeWRiber 31,2011. It was moved and seconded (BlackhursUMiller) to approve the consent agenda, and it passed unanimously. 2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1\V- -~ 1. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. , â€¢ The Colorado Liqugr Enforcement divisiol>hconducted atcompliance check in Estes Park on QNovember 14, . 2009 in which four local liquor establishments (fillhd. N.>. Liquor lic@nse renewals are conducted administratively by ttie Toth u Clerk's office,/however, the Board has requested the renewalstfor thkfour busineksds be reviewed by the full Board. Town Clerk Williamson stat@d the tehewals would be reviewed in January, February>March ah~August wheA each license comes due. %,t,>f ILL' 2. TOWN ATTORNEY UPDATE. I Noner<> 1 L I.*31 -I\Â« N . 3. PCANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff fort:Town Board Final Action. ' t>X '4 / 1. ACTION ITEMS: A A. Vacation Homes and Bed & Breakfast Amendments to the Estes Valley Developm6nt Code - First Reading/Public Hearing. Planner Chilcott reviewed the changes, including the definition of accommodation use, guest room, guest quarter, household living, and nightly rental in the EVDC Chapter 13, and revisions to the definition for Bed and Breakfast (B&B) versus vacation home uses and the districts in which these uses are permitted. B&Bs would only be allowed in the "RM" and "R-2" zoning districts with rental to multiple parties. Vacation homes would be allowed in all residential zoning districts as a principal use with rentals to only one party at a time. All land use regulations regarding vacation homes currently in the Municipal Code would be moved to the Development Code and apply to all vacation homes in the valley. The Estes Valley Planning Commission (EVPC) unanimously recommended the code revisions. As there were no public comments, the public hearing was continued to January 26, 2010 for a second reading. B. Accessory Kitchen Amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code - Public Hearing - First Reading. Planner Shirk reviewed the revisions that would allow a second kitchen in a single-family residential dwelling. The Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 3 kitchen would be for use by the family residing in the dwelling, accessory to the first kitchen, and approval of the accessory kitchen would not be approval of a second dwelling unit or accessory dwelling unit. A land use affidavit would be required and recorded to ensure the dwelling unit was maintained as one unit. EVPC unanimously recommended the revisions. The Board discussed the number of second kitchens that currently exist in the valley and questioned how staff would handle these units with regard to the land use affidavit. Staff would require a land use affidavit be completed for non-conforming dwelling units as the structures are identified, most likely through the building permit process, i.e. remodel permits. As there were no public comments, the public hearing was continued to January 26, 2010 for a second reading. 4. ACTION ITEMS: 1. ORDINANCE #11-09 EXTEND TEMPORARY MORATORIUM FOR WIND TURBINES. Attorney White reviewed Ordinance #11-09 to extend the current moratorium on the issuance of any building permits or review of any applications for building permits for wind turbines within_the Town for a period of 90 days. The additional time would allow the EVI:*16'make a recommendation to the Town Board and the Board of County Commissibners of amendments to the EVDC with regard to the construction, 16cation, and operation of wind turbines within the Estes Valley Planning area. 1*ttorne>White read the Ofdinance. After discussion, it was moved and seconded (Ericson/Homeier) to approve Ordinance #11-09 to extend the temborary moratorium for wind turbines for an additional 90 days (March 8, 2010) with an emergency clause, and it passed unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE.#12409 SECTIONS 9.40.010 & 9.40.020 POSSESSION OF FIREARMS ON TOWN PROPERTY. Chief Kufeld present6d Ordinance #12-09 amending Chapter 9 of the Municipal Cabt prohibiting firearths.on Town premises within Town Hall, Convention and Visitor's Bureau, Conference Center, Museum, Senior Center and Stanley Park Fairgrounds: 1-his change would ensure the safety of the Town Board, employees and citizens of Estes Park conducting business within the aforementioned buildings/areas. Signage would be placed within each facility:to notify the public; however, the code revision would not prevent an individuAlholding the proper permit from carrying a concealed weapon. Discussion followed on the need to add language that would allow the Town to authorize participants in special events at the fairgrounds to carry firearms, i.e. the Scotsfest. The Board also discussed the potential for including Bond Park. Attorney White informed the Board the state statute requires the area to be posted with controlled access; therefore, Bond Park could not be included. Attorney White read the Ordinance. It was moved and seconded (Homeier/Miller) to approve Ordinance #12-09 to add Section 9.40 Possession of Firearms on Town Property to the Municipal Code with the addition of language to allow special event participants to carry firearms through the special event permitting process, and it passed unanimously. 3 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH LARIMER EMERGENCY TELEPHONE AUTHORITY (LETA) FOR COPLINK INFORMATION SHARING SYSTEM. Chief Kufeld presented COPLINK, a seamless, integrated system of statewide information-sharing technology and services enabling agencies across the state to facilitate sharing data. Police officers would have internet access available from their patrol vehicles to allow quick access to other agency data, reducing the number of staff hours involved in investigations. LETA has Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 4 entered into an agreement with the Colorado Information and Sharing Consortium (CISC) to allow LETA and the participating agencies access to the system at a minimal cost to ' each agency. LETA has covered the costs associated with the conversion data, licensing fees and annual data maintenance. There would be no cost to the Police Department in 2010; however, a maintenance fee would be assessed in 2011 in the amount of $660.87. After discussion, it was moved and seconded (Eisenlauer/Ericson) to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with LETA for the use of COPLINK by the Estes Park Police Department, and it passed unanimously. 4. TRANSITIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ESTES VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT. Fire Chief Dorman presented two IGAs that were included in the Service Plan for the Estes Valley Fire Protection District. The purpose of the Agreements is to transfer the responsibility and authority for firÂ¢tesponse in the Service Area, including the Town, to the newly formed DistricÂ¢The.Transitional IGA provides that the Town would retain operational(coAtrol aRd responsibility for fire services until January 1, 2010. The IGAaddres*es the transfer of operational activities of the Estes Park Volunteer-Fire'bepartttlent from the Town to the District, leasing of the Fire Station,"payfrlent Of the Town's financial obligation to the District, and provision of ~dispatch sdrvices. Th@.IGA provides for the employment of three currentÂ· Fire~ Department employdhs by, the District, .... agreement by the District to honorjall pre-existing agreeTents related to provision of fire services, and the provision >of certain other services by the Town including suchtervices as accolinting, human resource and vehicle maintenance. The 16A trankers the Estes Park Volunteer Pension Fund from the Town to a new Voluriteer Pension Fund formed by the District, including pension liab~ities for all Ested.Park Volunteer Firefighters, retired and current. Item 5 of the continuing operation IGA should be amended to change August 15, 2010 *6*September 15, 201~ prior to'executing the agreement. After discussion, it'Â®as mot,bte,d seÂ¢bnded (Ericson/Eisenlauer) to approve the Transitional IntergoVernmental Agreement and the Intergovernmental S Y Agreement wiV' the Estes Valley Fire District, and it passed unanimously. %. 5. ORDINANCE #13-09 LEASING OF THE DANNELS FIRE STATION TO THE ESTES VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT. The Ordinance approves the lease of the Dannels Fire Station and fire training area on ElthkRoad<.frbm the Town to the District for 10 years with an option to renew for 2 addition@ 5 year terms. The District would maintain and repair the premises includin# the structure, parking lot, irrigation systems and mechanical systems. No rent would be payable pursuant to the terms of the Lease. The District would comply with the Special Use Permit between the United States Department of the Interior and the Town effective July 15, 1995. In the event the Special Use Permit is revoked by the government, the Lease would be terminated and the Town would not be liable to the District. Attorney White read the Ordinance. After discussion, it was moved and seconded (Miller/Eisenlauer) to approve Ordinance #13-09 for the leasing of the Dannels Fire Station to the Estes Valley Fire Protection District, and it passed unanimously. 6. RESOLUTION #24-09 EMERGENCY RESPONSE AUTHORITY DESIGNATION. Attorney White stated the Resolution designates the Estes Valley Fire Protection District as the Town's emergency response authority for the Town of Estes Park. The Town has in place several IGAs with Larimer County for Emergency Response Authority as it relates to fire protection, more specifically fire and hazardous materials, and this Resolution would transfer that Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 5 responsibility to the Estes Valley Fire Protection District. It was moved and seconded (BlackhursVHomeier) to approve Resolution #24-09, and it passed unanimously. 7 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH ESTES VALLEY LIBRARY DISTRICT FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES. Finance Officer McFarland stated the Town has provided financial service to the Library for the past 5 years through an IGA. This IGA expires on December 31, 2009 and the Library has requested renewal of the Agreement. The Agreement contains no material changes. The Town fee for service would be increase by 3% compounded annually on January 1 St of each year. The Agreement would be for 2 years with automatic renewal for additional one-year St periods commencing January 1 . It was moved and seconded (Miller/Homeier) to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Library District for financial services, and it passed unanimously. 8. ORDINANCE #14-09 SECTION 17.66 SIGNS, 17i88 BANNERS AND 17.89 TEMPORARY BANNERS. //0 ..4 Director Joseph reviewed the Municipal sigqpode amendments as drafted by a task force. The amendments address banners and the creation of new language to address temporary banners for Ousinesses located within Town limits. A business may apply for up to 4 banners pettalendar year with a maximum of 14 consecutive days to display and a maximum of 2 consecutive permits. The banners would be affixed tota building or a free standing sign structure and limited to 16 sq. ft. in the fCD"e Commerciall Downtown zoning district and 32 sq. ft. in all'other zoning di&tricts. The Community Development Committee recommended the code changes. Town Attorney White read the Ordinance. After discussion, it was moved e'Ad sedonded (Miller/Ericson) to approve Ordinance #14-09 to aMend Section* 17.66 Signs and 17.88 Banners and the addition Of SectionÂ«17.89 Temporary Banners with an emergency clause to allow the banners tÂ¢ 6e permitted immediately, and it passed unanimously. 9. RESOLUTION #25-09 RECERTIFICATION OF THE MILL LEVY. Finance Officer McFarland stated Resolution #21-09 was approved by the Town Board on November 24, 2009 setting the mill levy for 2010. The Assessor's office issued a revised Certification of Valuation on November 25, 2009 that decreased the assessed value, thereby increasing the mill levy from 1.738 to 1.752. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Miller) to approve Resolution #25-09 to recertify the 2010 Mill Levy set forth in Resolution #21-09, and it passed unanimously. 10. RESOLUTION #26-09 - 2009 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS. Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the supplemental appropriation resolution allowing a municipality to authorize additional money for a specific fund than was originally adopted. Eight funds are expected to exceed the original budget: the Community Reinvestment Fund by $1,346,387, Conservation Trust Fund by $20,100, Senior Center Fund by $3,102, Open Space Fund by $139,700, Fire Fund by $24,352, Water Fund by $267,222, Medical Fund by $7,520, and Fire Pension by $1,155. In addition, 2009 revenues have been down for many funds and are projected to be down $500,000 in large part due to a 5% decrease in sales tax, utilities fee collection, building permits and development fees. After discussion, it was moved and seconded (Miller/Blackhurst) to approve Resolution #26-09 adopting the supplemental appropriations for the 2009 budget, and it passed unanimously. Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 6 11.APPROVAL TO ATTEMPT RECOVERY OF COLORADO TRUST FUNDS THROUGH POLITICAL ACTION/TARP FUNDS. Finance Officer McFarland stated that 18 months ago the Town lost approximately $45,200 that was held by the Colorado Trust as a result of investments held in Lehman Brothers. Efforts have been make to recover the lost money. The Boulder County Treasurer's Office has begun efforts to petition the Congress and the appropriate Committees to use TARP funds to purchase the Lehman securities held by local governments. Staff requests permission to write letters in support to Rep. Markey and to Senators Bennett and Udall, and the expenditure of $226 from #101-1100-411-22-98 to cover additional efforts by Capitol Representatives to recover said funds. Other local districts affected, including the Hospital, Library, Sanitation and School have confirmed they support the course of action. The Board requested staff and Attorney White draft a letter for the Mayor's signature. 12. GRANDSTAND PROJECT - MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. Trustee Miller reviewed the approval of Town funds for.the grandstand project. He stated at the Special Joint meeting with EPURA on October 2,2009 the Town Board approved not to exceed Amount of $927,000 for the project. The IGA with EPURA for the project,indodbd $1 *million *to~allow for contingency funds. This was done in an effort to avoid 'changing theEIGA in the future. He stated the interpretation haslbeen that the IGA amoliht superseded the ' V approval of $927,000. The amountbtcontingency is also affected by the dollar amount approved ranging from $77,000 with Town dedicated funds of $927,000 to over $150,000 with $1 million dedicated for the project. The difference in continden* fu?id could be /ed for other projects including the tenant finishes in the concessi6n.stand. Discussion followed amongst the Board on whjat,dqllar amount was abproved for.ttle'broject; whether or not the contingencyjfunds*need the Â®proval of the Bohid; altering the IGA to change the dollar+Mount; ToWn Board tontrol of miscellaneous costs, including chairs, landscabiniand the sbund syst@m; the To*n's commitment of $1 million has beenused bli<El~URA to enter into a contract with Taylor-Kohrs; and the need fof.amember of'thd:Boardkto provide oversight on major capital expenditures. (After disc~ission>the Boardbr@ached consensus that the total Town funding for thh grandstand project was $1 million. Trust@6.Miller stat6d thejIGA with EPURA waived approximately $14,500 in developnhent fees and formal action has not been taken by the Board to waive the fees. *Trustee Blackhurst requested a fee schedule be presented to the Board prior tohval*ing any fees for the project. It was moved and seconded (Miller/Eisenlaudr)'to waive development fees for the Grandstand project at a cost of $14,413,Land it passed with Trustee Blackhurst and Trustee Ericson voting "No". Trustee Ericson suggested the EPURA and Town Board be informed of variances to the project in addition to a monthly report by Deputy Town Administrator/EPURA Director Richardson through the Ad Hoc Design Committee. He stated the Committee would be an appropriate group for Town Administration to involve in the daily discussions of the project in an informal manner. Trustee Miller commented the Committee could be an advisory board to the staff to discuss changes and costs related to changes. Discussion followed on what types of reports need to be present and to what Committees or Boards, and when the Committee would be involved in the project. It was the consensus of the Board that staff would convene the Ad Hoc Design Committee as needed when issues arise. Trustee Blackhurst commented on the lack of oversight past Boards have had on major capital expenditures and the issues related, including cost overruns, Board of Trustees - December 8,2009- Page 7 poor designing, and a lack of proper project management leading to additional costs later on. Staff suggested the Board consider the oversight of capital expenditures at a future Town Board Study Session. Whereupon Mayor Pro Tem Levine adjourned the meeting at 10:14 p.m. Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk 2/ \ *Ut.~t 0 1.>% /4/ - ... k . \L RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 3,2009 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 3rd day of December 2009. Committee: Chair Levine, Trustees Eisenlauer and Miller Attending: Chair Levine, Trustees Eisenlauer and Miller Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Directors Kilsdonk, and Joseph; Manager Mitchell, PIO Rusch, and Deputy Town Clerk Deats Absent None Chair Levine called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Chair Levine announced that the Rooftop Rodeo was named the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association (PRCA) Small Rodeo of the Year for 2009. This is the fourth time the Rodeo has received the honor, having also been named Small Rodeo of the Year in 2003, 2006, and 2008. Mgr. Winslow attended, and was a presenter at, the PRCA Annual Convention in Las Vegas. PUBLIC COMMENT. None COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. â€¢ Senior Center Monthly Report â€¢ Fairgrounds/Events Mgr. Mitchell reported that 60 blizzard boxes containing non-perishable food items for use during inclement weather were prepared and distributed to homebound seniors. Federal stimulus monies available through the Larimer County Office on Aging funded the project. Dir. Kilsdonk thanked staff for their work on the Catch the Glow Parade noting an estimated 28,000 to 30,000 people were in attendance at the parade on the Friday following Thanksgiving. She stated Thanksgiving weekend visitation numbers at the Visitors Center showed an increase over 2008. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. REVISIONS TO THE SIGN CODE - TEMPORARY BANNERS. Last spring staff was directed by the Community Development Committee to review the Sign Code, in particular, temporary banners. Subsequently, a Task Force was organized to study the entire Sign Code and make recommendations for revisions. One of the Task Force's recommendations is to allow temporary banners, which are currently prohibited. The Sign Code is part of the Town of Estes Park's Municipal Code and a revision, if enacted, will only pertain to properties inside the city limits. Dir. Joseph brought forward the draft revision for review and input from the Committee. The revision would permit temporary banners to be displayed for 14 days at a time, with a maximum of two consecutive permits per year, and a third permit obtainable after a RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development - December 3,2009 - Page 2 lapse of at least 30 calendar days. The proposed cost of the permit is $30. To facilitate code enforcement, the revision states that a tag or sticker, bearing the permit number and expiration date, be affixed to the front of the banner while it is displayed. The revision states temporary banners will be attached to the wall of a principal building or on the supporting structure of a permitted free-standing sign. Consequently, no structural regulation related to wind flaps, grommets, or ability to withstand wind gusts was included in the revision. Trustee Miller recommended increasing the number of permits granted per year to four to enable a business to display a banner once each quarter, and opposed attaching the permit information to the front of the banner. Following discussion, the Committee requested staff make changes to the code to increase the number of temporary banner permits granted per year from three to four; eliminate the attachment of a tag or sticker bearing permit number and expiration date to the front of the banner; and, for enforcement purposes, require temporary banner permit information be kept on the premises. Karen Steadman, Town resident, requested the Committee expedite the adoption of the temporary banner sign code changes. The Committee recommends approval of the Sign Code revisions related to temporary banners with the changes outlined above and requested the topic be included as an action item on the December 8, 2009 Town Board agenda. REPORTS. Reporls provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. â€¢ Community Development Financial Report â€¢ Monthly Building Permit Summary There being no further business, Chair Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:27 a.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 10, 2009. Minutes of a regular meeting of the UTILITIES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 10th day of December, 2009. Committee: Chairman Homeier, Trustees Blackhurst and Ericson Attending: All Also Attending: Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Utilities Engineer Bergsten, Recording Secretary Petrie Absent Town Administrator Halburnt, Utilitie& Dir. Goehring Chairman Homeier called the meeting to order at 8:00 aim. PUBLIC COMMENT. None. LIGHT & POWER DEPARTMENT Defer Renewable Energy Rate Increase to 2011 The Town of Estes Park began purchasing renewable energy from Platte River Power Authority in the late 1990s. Beginning i0 2010, Platte River will increase the base cost of renewable energy from .012 cents~ per kWh to .019 cents per kWh. The cost of conducting a rate increase for the Town of Estes Parkln 2010 would be $4,012.15 and the increased rate would net the Town $4,615.20. For 2010, the Water Department can be charged for the increase and Light *Powdr will autdmatically absorb the increase. The Committee recommends deferring the renewable energy rate increase to 2011, as it is expected raterstudies and*financial plans will recommend further increases for 2011, 2012 and 2013. Small Wind Incentive Program (SWIP) Discontinuance for 2010 In 2008 the Town of Estes Park contributed $25,000 to the Governor's Energy Office (GEO) to establish a ~total of $50,000 for the 2009 Small Wind Incentive Program (SWIP). Matching rebates were offered up to $5,000 to install residential small scale wind turbinbs. A total of six applications were received for the program, and to date two turbines have been commissioned and are operational. After one year approximately 47% of SWIP funds have not been used, and after December 31, 2009 the GEO portion of the funds will no loriger be available. Wind data collected has shown the small scale turbines may not perform as well as initially expected in Estes Park, and there has been some public contention regarding the installation of wind turbines within the Estes Valley. Staff recommends remaining funds in account 502-6501-560-26-25 be used towards weatherization and energy conservation efforts. The Committee recommends discontinuing the Small Wind Incentive Program in 2010 and utilizing remaining funds as recommended by Staff. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Utilities Committee - December 10, 2009 - Page 2 LIGHT AND POWER REPORTS. Marvs Lake Water Treatment Plant Undate Presently the plant is running intermittently. Testing of the new system is being done during the day and it is turned off at night, and it is projected the facility will be running continuously by the end of the month. GE continues their testing of the operation to work through last minute issues. Glacier Basin is still able to keep up with water production while the project is completed. The Committee stated they are pleased that the project is nearing completion and suggested a plant tour in January after the committee meeting. There being no further business Chairman Homeier adjourned the meeting at 8:34 a.m. Sandra J. Petrie, Recording Secretary 4% I L RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 17, 2009 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 17th of December, 2009. Committee: Chair Eisenlauer, Trustees Homeier and Ericson Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Chief Kufeld, and Recording Secretary Petrie Absent: None Chair Eisenlauer called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT None. POLICE DEPARTMENT ./ 4 Recommendation to Town Board .. None. REPORTS :-.#... . Larimer Countv Hazard Mitigation Plank y,3 /\2-.. Erik Nilsson, Emergency Manager for LarimereCounty, is in the process of rewriting the Hazard Mitigation Plan for Larimer County thht was originally written in 2003. The plan lists potential hazards or disasters that could occur within Larimer County (wildfires, severe winter storms, or floods) and what hah been done to mitigate such incidents. Currently Loveland and Fort Collins fiave their own mitigation plans in place, and Larimer County would like to integrate Estes'Park into their existing plan. Mr. Nilsson requested the Town submit specifics on hazards or disasters that have occurred or may occur, what has been done in the past during such incidents, and what mitigation plans are intended for the future. FEMA requires the new plan be filed by January 10, 2010 in order for Larimer County to continue receiving hazard mitigation funds. Mr. Nilsson suggested the Town also sign a waiver stating it will fall under the Larimer County hazard mitigatibn plan umbrella to ensure the Town can receive future hazard mitigation funds from FEMAÂ° as well. Town Administrator Halburnt requested a sample waiver be sent to the Town for review. The Committee commented it would be beneficial for the Town to be included in the Larimer County Hazard Mitigation Plan. There being no further business, Chair Eisenlauer adjourned the meeting at 8:27 a.m. Sandra Petrie, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission November 17, 2009, 6:00 p.m. Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl Attending: Chair Klink, Commissioners Fraundorf, Hull, Lane, Norris, Poggenpohl Also Attending: Director Joseph, Town Attorney White, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott, Town Board Liaison Richard Homeier, and Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: Commissioner Tucker The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed approximately 20 citizens to the meeting. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of minutes from the November 12, 2009 Special Planning Commission meeting. It was moved and seconded (Hull/Lane) that the consent agenda be approved, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. C - .1 3. AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE - WIND TURBINE REGULATIONS Planner Shirk stated the draft being presented allows Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems (SWECS) in all zoning districts, provided specific setback requirements are met. Based on public comment, the maximum height was reduced from 50 feet to 30 feet from existing grade to the top of the tallest blade. Setbacks from property lines are proposed to be five times the structure height, so a thirty-foot tall system would have a minimum setback of 150 feet. SWECS would be prohibited in ridgeline protection areas; however, property owners would have the opportunity to demonstrate to the Planning Commission, with photographic simulations, that a mapped ridgeline protection area is not actually a ridgeline. The current noise ordinance for the Town of Estes Park and Larimer County would apply. With a minimum setback of five times the SWECS height, code language addressing shadow flicker is no longer needed. Lighting and decorating of SWECS would be prohibited. SWECS would be required to be kept in safe operating conditions and to have at least 10 feet of ground clearance between the ground and the lowest part of a moving blade. Controls to limit the speed of the blade would be required; however, the language in the current draft concerning automatic and manual controls on blade speed would be removed. Planner Shirk also stated that language in the current draft referencing the International Standards Organization and International Energy Agency would be removed and replaced with a reference to a specific safety standard. Building permits would be required. Only one SWECS would be allowed per lot. For example, multi-family properties could have one per lot, not one per dwelling unit. Micro-wind systems would be exempt from these standards; however, there would be a five-square-foot swept area limit, which equates to an approximate 1.5 foot blade. Finally, a definition for a SWECS would read: "A wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower, and associated control and conversion electronics, which has a rated capacity of not more than 25kW and which is intended to primarily reduce on-site consumption of utility power. Such systems are accessory to the principal use or structure on a lot." Chair Klink stated that the Planning Commission has received public comment requesting a ban on wind turbines. He stated this is a political decision and is the putview of the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 2 November 17, 2009 elected officials, i.e., the Town Board and board of county Commissioners. Planning ) Commission's purview is to present draft regulations to the elected officials to adopt, reject, or modify. Public Comment: Todd Plummer/Town Resident stated the large setbacks would make it very difficult for property owners to install wind turbines and make it impossible for him to install any kind of wind generator on his property, and questioned the justification for the proposed setbacks. He believes this is a de facto ban. Chair Klink commented that utility providers in the Estes Valley have plans in place to eliminate above-ground power sources, including but not limited to electrical lines on 30-foot power poles. Mr. Plummer believes alternative energy generation is not supported by the Town. Amy Plummer/Town Resident stated that, as outlined, these restrictions are limiting innovation and creating policy at a time when the country should be moving away from fossil fuel products. She thought each wind turbine should be reviewed individually rather than have such sweeping restrictiohs. Tom Bergman/Town Resident stated the setbacks are too large, and the swept area for the micro-wind systems is too small. Smaller units could be attached to a house, could meet the 10-foot minimum ground clearance requirement, and could still generate enough energy to power home appliances and lights in an outage. Duve Rusk/County Resident appreciated the Planning Commission taking on this difficult task. He preferred a 50-foot height limit. He questioned why a setback five time the structure was being considered when the county requires a setback two times the height. He believed the vertical axis systems are superior to horizontal axis systems. As a property owner, he did not want property rights to be restricted by these setbacks. He also believed people opposing wind turbines are more vocal than the proponents, though the ,) recent renewable energy survey shows differently. Johanna Darden/Town Resident would like to see the moratorium extended. She thought it was important to determine the most efficient height before creating regulations. Kay Rusk/County Resident supported wind energy systems. She recommended not being too restrictive so residents can become less dependent on foreign oil and fossil fuels. She hoped that the Planning Commission would support using renewable wind energy. Jay Heinemann/County Resident stated the wind energy program through the Poudre River Power Authority (PRPA) is more efficient than small-scale wind turbines. He was concerned about the view impact of wind turbines in residential areas. He supported extending the moratorium. He recommended a modification in the code requiring input from adjacent property owners. Jim McCormick/County Resident previously worked with staff at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and believed their decision to discontinue the small-scale wind turbine research did not come without hesitation. He was concerned about potential noise and color issues, and Town Attorney White replied HOAs could be more restrictive with those requirements. Director Joseph stated the issue is not so much the actual color of the turbines but the amount of visual contract generated from the color of the equipment as contrasted to the background. He recommended to the Planning Commission that if they desire to regulate colors, it would make more sense to regulate setbacks instead, so color would be inconsequential. Mr. McCormick believes the manufacturer would be willing to use colors acceptable to customers and regulators. He agreed wind turbines are not efficient in turbulent wind. He believed the carbon footprint for manufacturing and transporting does not recover the cost of energy saved. He disagreed with Planning Commission not being able to recommend to Town Board a ban on wind turbines. Mr. McCormick thought the renewable energy survey was fatally flawed and unfortunate. He thought all property owners who could see or hear the intended wind turbine should consent to it. He distributed photos of areas in Estes Park with super-imposed wind RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 November 17, 2009 turbines demonstrating what the valley could look like if wind turbines are allowed. He supported purchasing wind power through the PRPA. Bob Clements/Town Resident brought his recently purchased micro-wind system to the podium, and believed the proposed code regulations may prohibit him from installing it. His system has a 45-inch diameter area and generates 400 watts of energy. He thought the sound of the wind would be louder than his wind turbine. He thought it would be wise to make the code consistent with what the industry calls micro-systems (500-600 watts or less). He was not aware of any micro-system on the market that would fit into the proposed five-square-foot swept area. He stated this proposed code penalizes the small property owner, and the proposed setbacks are too restrictive. Mr. Clements suggested the five-square-foot swept area be increased to 15 square feet, which would allow a four- foot diameter or smaller turbine to be considered a micro-turbine. He supports allowing residents to produce small amounts of electricity off the grid. Bill Darden/Town Resident suggested lowering variance fees for those who could clearly demonstrate their proposed wind turbine would not be visible or interfere in any way with their neighbors. Cory LaBianca/Town Resident supported continuing the moratorium. She believed the larger wind turbines belong in industrial neighborhoods rather than residential. Director Joseph clarified that only the Town Board has the power to declare, sustain, or retract a moratorium. The Planning Commission is the recommending body. Frank Theiss/County Resident is opposed to anymore new regulation. He believed the movement of wind turbines was a concern and would like to use the regulations currently in place instead of creating new ones. 1-h David Hemphill/County Resident believed the Commission needed to be thoughtful about value in the views. He thought increasing the height limit of structures after the purchase of a property would be taking without compensation. He supported 100% consent from adjacent property owners. Chair Klink closed public comment. Commissioner Lane stated the draft code language concerning micro-wind systems needs further review by the commission. He thought the swept area of micro-wind systems may need to be increased. Commissioner Poggenpohl stated that if the swept area is increased, Planning Commission needs to consider other issues such as the number of micro-wind systems allowed per lot and the safety of micro-wind systems. Chair Klink stated it is important to write the code so it will apply to current and future technology. Commissioner Hull stated the code language needs to be brief, to be as general as possible, and to cover coming technology. She thinks within a year or two, the current wind turbines are likely to be the dinosaurs of the industry. She supports the 30- foot height limit. She was concerned about allowing multiple micro-wind systems per lot if the allowable swept area is increased. Commissioner Lane sated the setbacks in the proposal prevent wind turbines on small lots, so he would support making the micro-wind systems exempt from the setback requirements. Commissioner Fraundorf stated that if the swept area is increased, micro-wind systems should only be exempt from the setback requirement. He would like to learn more about micro-wind systems prior to defining the allowable swept area. He is interested in further discussion about if, and how, to allow neighborhood input into siting of wind turbines. Town Attorney White stated it is not constitutionally permissible to require 100% consent from adjacent property owners. Chair Klink stated micro-wind turbines should be exempt from more than the setback requirement such as the safety from safety standards, which are not designed for micro- wind turbines, and possibly from the requirement to obtain a building permit. / 7 Director Joseph stated there is an option for the Planning Commission to take micro-wind systems out of this draft, move it forward to Town Board, and follow-up with micro-wind systems at a later date. The Commissioners could also decide to increase the square footage on the swept area for micro-wind systems. He thought the main issue with the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 4 November 17, 2009 Commission was how to minimize visual impact of all wind turbines, and how to determine a maximum size that could be exempt from the code requirements. Town Attorney White stated the Board of Adjustment cannot grant a variance to circumvent a general code requirement. Commissioner Norris recommended requesting a continuance of .the moratorium to the Town Board. Commissioner Lane would like to discuss micro-wind systems in next month's study session and include swept area, number of systems allowed per lot, structure height, setbacks, safety standards, etc. in the discussion. Chair Klink directed staff to work with Utilities Engineer Bergsten to compile a list of information and thoughts on micro-wind systems that could be distributed to the Planning Commissioners prior to the study session in December. Commissioner Norris summarized the discussion about the draft code language: Table 5- 1, no changes; (1)Height, shall be measured from natural grade; (2)SetbacksÂ· from Property Lines, include setbacks from road easements; (3)Ridgeline Protection Areas, delete "if the site contains an identified ridgeline protection area" from the second sentence; (4)Noise, no changes; (5)Shadow Flicker, delete; (6)Lighting Prohibited, no changes; (7)Operating Condition, no changes; (8)Ground Clearance, no changes; (9)Blade Speed, delete "both manual and automatic"; (1)Safety Standards, add "IEC standard 61400-1", delete "International Standards Organization (ISO), and International Energy Agency (IEA)"; (11)Permit Required, no changes; (12)Limit on Number, no changes; (13)Micro-wind, will require more review by the Planning Commission, and Chair Klink suggested deleting "...but shall not be exempt from setback, height, or other general development standards set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code." It was moved and seconded (Norris/Hull) to continue the Amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code concerning the regulation of small-scale residential and commercial wind turbines to the next regularly scheduled meeting, and the motion passed unanimously with one absent. \ It was moved and seconded (Poggenpohl/Norris) to request from the Utilities Department, a one-age informational document explaining the pros and cons of renewable energy systems. The motion passed with five voting in favor, one abstaining, and one absent. Commissioner Lane was the abstaining vote. 4. REPORTS Wildlife Habitat Code Revisions Director Joseph stated the Board of County Commissioners heard the EVDC Wildlife Habitat Amendment and continued their action on that item until March 8, 2010. They have recommended back to the Town Board to consider the preparation of revisions to the proposal to include raptor nesting as a trigger for a site-specific study. They would also like to see staff empowered to make decisions on the qualifications of qualified plan preparers. Kind Coffee Appeal of Staff Determination Staff received two appeals of staff determination that small-scale coffee roasting is a permitted use in CH-Commercial Heavy zoning district. The appeals will be heard at the Town Board meeting on December 8,2009. Director Joseph appreciated the task-oriented approach used by this Commission to create the wind turbine regulations. He said this is a good example of how a Planning Commission can work effectively. There being no further business, Chair Klink adjourned the meeting at 8:10 p.m. /- 1% Doug Klink, Chair Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town o f Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 18, 2009 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 18th day of November, 2009. Commissioners: Chairman Newsom, Commissioners Blume, Halburnt, Little, White and Wilcocks Attending: Chairman Newsom, Commissioners Blume, Halburnt, Little, White and Wilcocks Also Attending: EPURA Executive Director Richardson and Deputy Town Clerk Deats Absent None Chairman Newsom called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. COMMUNITY COMMENTS None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. None MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting held October 21, 2009, and the Special Meeting held October 29,2009, were approved. AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF ESTES PARK FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SERVICES. The Commissioners took official action to approve the appointment of Deputy Town Administrator Lowell Richardson as the Executive Director of the Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority. Action on a cooperation agreement between EPURA and the Town of Estes Park related to DTA Richardson's services, which was prepared by Attorneys Benedetti and White, will be considered at the December EPURA meeting. It was moved and seconded (White/Halburnt) to approve the appointment of Deputy Town Administrator Richardson as EPURA Executive Director, and it passed unanimously. GRANDSTANDS PROJECT CHANGE ORDER. Any change orders exceeding the approved budget for the Grandstands Project are to be brought before the EPURA Board for consideration. The Lions Club has requested that the cost of a four tub sinks required for completion of the concession stand be included in the project costs. In addition, the Lions Club is also asking that an air curtain ventilation system that is being required by the Larimer County Health Department, also be included in the project costs. The cost of the sinks is estimated at $6,000 including labor, and the cost of the ventilation system is estimated to be $10,000. Exec. Dir. Richardson said these items were not part of the final approved project and would therefore exceed the budget approved for the project. Asked if this would be covered by contingency funds, Public Works Dir. Zurn stated that contingency funds are to be used for unforeseen situations that arise throughout the course of the project not for items beyond the original scope of the project, and that the Lions Club requests are beyond the original scope. Exec. Dir. Richardson said that some of the contingency has already been spent in dealing with unexpected expenses related to the water service to the grandstands. Discussion is summarized as follows: notes from previous meetings and discussions indicate that the sinks are to be provided by the RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority - November 18, 2009 - Page 2 tenant, not the landlord; found nothing to suggest that the sinks are part of the final approved project; confusion exists related to who is responsible for providing the sinks and what constitutes a permanent installation of equipment; additional expenditures have resulted from redesign fees for winterized fire suppression system; if Commissioners approve must then ask for Town Board approval; additional budget information is required before making a decision; and concession stand could be last thing constructed to have a clear tally of expenses and remaining available funds. Larraine Darling, Lions Club concession stand manager, said that the first blueprint she reviewed indicated the sinks were part of the project. She stated she considers the sinks a part of the building since they would be necessary equipment for any concessionaire to operate the concession stand. She said paying for the sinks and the ventilation system would greatly reduce the amount of money the Lions Club can channel back into the community. Following discussion the Commissioners concurred that additional review was required related to the change order for the sinks and ventilation system. It was moved and seconded (White/Wilcocks) to table the change order until the December EPURA meeting, and it passed unanimously. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. â€¢ The League of Women Voters hosted a forum to discuss the January 12, 2010 ballot initiative related to the abolishment of EPURA. Exec. Dir. Richardson and John Nicholas represented opposing sides of the issue. â€¢ The Friends of EPURA are meeting regularly and encouraging a "No" vote in the election. â€¢ The League of Women Voters will host a forum on December 7th at 7:00 p.m. A panel will present both sides of the EPURA issue and take questions from the audience. UPDATE - GRANDSTANDS AT STANLEY PARK FAIRGROUNDS. The Grandstands Project is an EPURA project with financial participation by the Town of Estes Park. As EPURA representative, Exec. Dir. Richardson will coordinate roles between the contractor, Taylor Kohrs; the owner, the Town of Estes Park; and EPURA's construction representative, Architect Roger Thorp. Public Works Director Scott Zurn has been designated as the Town of Estes Park's representative on the project. Responsibilities for each party have been outlined. The first monthly project update was provided by Exec. Dir. Richardson. Demolition is complete and dirt work has begun which includes setting the grade for the grandstands and excavation for the building foundation. Utility work related to water, electric, and sewer lines is also underway. The initial locate for the water line was inaccurate resulting in a change to the original design and necessitating additional materials. Project meetings between the client, owner, and contractor will be held each week at the building site throughout the duration of the project. To date, $187,427 has been expended including architectural fees, demolition and miscellaneous expenses. Whereupon, Chairman Newsom adjourned the regular meeting at 8:45 a.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 01-10 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 ,2010. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk RESOLUTION #02-10 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, MOUNTAIN MUNCHIES LLC dba, Mountain Munchies, 189 & 191 Riverside Drive, Estes Park, Colorado, is December 23,2009. It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the Board Room of Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, January 26, 2010 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 3.84 miles, as measured from the center of the applicant's property. DATED this day of ,2010. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk TOWN oF ESTES PARKL 40'*KE,-:z:*~tÂ» 4**~'t'*Â·***=,92.' I *914*NINÂ·,6, â€žÂ·1 Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Steve McFarland - Finance Officer Date: January 12, 2010 RE: 3rd Quarter Financial Report Background: Attached please find the third quarter 2009 financial report. The financial report includes income and expense data through November 2009, and sales tax data through October 2009. The expenditure categories used in the General Fund box are not identical to the way items are reported in the budget, but are the same as the way expenditures are listed in the CAFR (per GFOA recommendations). The General Fund departments correspond to the attached report in the following manner: 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 Safetv: Police (2100, 2155, 2175), Protective Inspections (2300). Enaineerina/Public Works: Engineering (2400), Streets (3100). Culture/Recreation: Parks (5200). 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. Comments on Financial Statements/Attached Slides Overview comments on the "sales tax facts/forecasting" slides are relatively self-explanatory and will be reviewed at the Town Board meeting. Page 1 2 'I -4 TOWN or ESTES PARIL * **1.64 FINA~CE**2**41 Memo Sales Tax With 83% of the year complete, sales tax ($6.1 m) trails 2008 ($6.4m) by 5.4%. Sales tax was revised to $6.9m from the original budget of $7.2m. While staff is not pleased with a downturn in sales tax, the "Around Colorado" slide shows that 11. other mountain , communities in Colorado report an average decline of 10.8%, so perhaps we should consider ourselves fortunate. The first 3 sales tax slides report similar information in different formats. Food sales continue to outpace the other categories; the worst category (%) is construction - a decline of 26% from last year. The ripple effects of this are seen in the downturn in revenues in Community Development (building permits, etc.). The "sales tax rates of change" slide (a staff favorite) shows that the maroon 12-month MA rate of change (what direction sales tax is going) is moving forward at the rate of a 5.4%/yr decrease. Staff employs 2 long term and 1 short term forecasting mechanisms for sales tax. With 83% of the year complete, the 3 methods are all forecasting similar results; sales tax at around $6.84m for 2009. Financial performance The General Fund box reports revenues at 84% of revised budget, partially due to only 83% of the sales tax year being reporte,d. As the first 11 months of the calendar year is complete, the reference point for expenses is the 92% level. All major General Fund expenditure categories are under 86%, except for the transfers, which are prorated by month. Concerted effort has been made in 2009 to reduce/curtail expenditures due to the drop off in revenues. The Enterprise Funds box reports utility revenues at 90% of budget. Total expenditures are well below the 92% level. Like the General Fund, the shortfall in utility revenues is being. compensated for by reductions in expenditures. Utility revenues, expenditures, and capital activities are monitored in detail in the Utility Committee meetings, held the 2nd Thursday of each month. Capital proiects 1. The $7.9m Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant (Water Fund) upgrade project is currently built out at approximately 94%. Page 2 TOWN OF ESTES PARIÂ© #*1 4@1 4 #414- M 4 1 1.- - 7.4-1- ..L-4 Memo -4 9 - % I- - I . 2. The remaining $1.9m in the bond holding account (see investments) will be applied to the Distribution System Improvements (L&P Fund). The improvements are either in-progress or have gone out to bid. Investments The Investments box shows investments by type of fund. The pension funds are managed by a third party (actually, only the Fire Pension is managed by a third party, but accounts for over 99% of the Pension Funds' assets). At the time of this writing, it is assumed that the Fire Pension Fund assets will be transferred to the Fire District sometime in mid January 2010. EPURA investments reside in a ColoTrust money market account and are not mingled with Town investments. The bond issuance (L&P Fund) is listed separately due to its size. Benchmark indicators as well as the prevailing money market fund rate have been added for reference. Although the markets have made a dramatic charge since mid-March, it is unknown as to whether this portends a new bull market, or merely a relief rally. We continue to manage our reserves in the following priority order: safety - liquidity - yield. Concluding thoughts Staff continues to diligently monitor financial performance, both on a monthly (financial statements) and long term (Capital Improvement Plan) level. Budget: Not applicable. Staff Recommendation: Acceptance of Financial Report. Sample Motion: Formal motion not applicable/necessary. Page 3 t Financia Update: 3rd Quarter 2009 333!:tio aoueu!3 - puepejoIN aAals i ZI~ ... Jan-Oct 2009 complete. 83% of calendar year; Sa es tax facts 5.4% behind original 2009 budget. laBpnq 600Z pas!AaJ Pu!4aq %LT laBpnq pas!Aai JO %88 'l.UI'9$ Allualln) SanllaAabl traditionally 89% of fiscal year. 5.4% behind 2008. '(ll.16'9$) 152 \0 00 O 0 â„¢1 0 .. 3 9 (0 00 U O 00 4-) 61 (A ./.- 81 O. ro 0 0 U 10 0 0 4-ro O - ro ~ C 2 4-1 ro 71 (10) 2 2 -:6 0 -2 rocE>an ro> 0, RI< 23,900 . 4 f El I - 0.4 ?/ *.2 F: 324-1 #k Nt, L 04: tf Â¥4 0 32 LO 0 0003-+- 9NI9001 -LI- BEIH10/1IV13H %02 **Fl.: 1 '9%y!!13%1E1&*.U:Ne. 'Â·0.:,*. .i'f:J':0FT .DI -iÂ·'D}Â·:,cti~::.,i:*~~;:~;:.tt'y'22%t~''~'~t, . 401' Â·.,0:Â·t#fÂ·t',!Â¢Â·74111'Y~14Â¢Â·,â€¢â€¢,I>.tiÂ¥~+ I ...#:.., 53llillin - NOI-OnkllSNOD--*- oing i %9L 600Z 8001 ZOOZ 9001 900Z e it'tÂ¢â„¢Â¥35 Sales tax thru October 2009 Comparisons (% of Total) 40% 35% 30% %91 %0L 01 0 0 N 1- 4 CD L) e il- Â¥41 -C 0 0 2 Ill C r 0 9 6-9 ro E I O 0 7 9 00- r. "- r.- - - X ro ro &5*- ggo 0 2 00 o ~. 9 - g g 94; 0 ogo 0 8 8 8 tz 10 - te %42 84 - 4*41 te Â· 24'7*NÂ·* : 3 bNyrftmen >,93'91**92&11Â¢i~:G'KFW,34#:9fj~;*prl - 1, ' -I . ' ~ *~4 ky .. ~ 000=1 - DNI9001 - 1 IV1328 NOI13nbllSNOO - 3AllOWO1AV - Alillin - - $2,276,068 606'XEMB - 96â‚¬'8 L /$ 009'9 b L 209'oIL$ /9/'899'/$ ZZO'Lot' L$ 990762$ - 6001 8002 ZOOZ 0$ 11 0 0 0 9 00 10 00 \ 19.- Pr 0 6Â·.f-f + tete fie G " 8-% I f Ule ]CO) 0 r- X LO 0 S] f 0 1 Â£.I h .1 41 0- + 0 r- 1- â‚¬09 ta i OAUTOMOTIVE OCONSTRUCTI OUTILITY 11Â¥1323 0 SNI90010 809' L69' LS 0003â€¢ $530,111 $495,226 4.7 // /,hx / $325,997 $1,597,894 k.- Â·A.M JAVJ0 141 % OINfI y 2 . - tn O 1 1 1 1 i 1Â£ 1 % - 600 - %24 E 2. 1, U E i o Cl - <b '20 S 22 9 64. U O 30 4% A . 4 4, 60024% dbof:> %, - </b 02.., % 0 0 063 t/t gUIOjUI W b 700000 20% - 15% 21 Sa es tax rates of ciange October-09 12 Mo Rev. $6,836,917 ~ ~ ~SOM %/1.9- ~ (% OUI ZI)-IEOUIT- COAV OIN ZI).IEOU17- % OUI ZI- OAV OW ZI- ~ 0 19 19 49 600000 500000 00000t' 00000Â£ 00000E 000001 0 4 5 t 0 0 (A 6 O 2 {'0 :22 U 0 % 5 8 *iti ~ -- iZÂ·w CO Z a :* 5 31 6 * * * Â¥ y X y X 32 f w 00 moo DOODU-,00030 00 2 0 a, U 2 U-ILD.MNO m U Z Z 1.6 TARGETÂ» TARGET>> 92% Sales taxes* $5,578,856 $6,900,000 ($1,321,144) y Sales $12,988,116 $14,372,326 ($1,384,210) 90% Cnher 2,416,122 2,663,084 (246,962) ervices 268,925 338,309 (69,384) 79% Transfers from Other Funds 977,129 1,105,231 (128,102) 322,918 436,277 (113,359) 74% TOTAL REVENUES 8,972,107 10,668,315 (1,696,208) 13,579,959 15,146,912 (1,566,953) 90% 36SL *50'OSE'I 9I6'IL*'5 298'IZI'7 Aiddns Jo a]Jnos Z86'I8E ES*'5*5'2 005'EgI'Z luaLLIUU.A09 FyaU@9 )6Zg 909'SZI 090'969 45*'OLS uo!:e]91Jnd *6['EEV 92Â¢86['E ZEZ'59Â£'Z AleleS 1!lqnd %6L 886'66S 8ID'*58'Z OED'*SZ'Z UO!1nq!.*!0 ZL8'6ZL 89Z'559'I 96Â£'SZ6 9u!Jaau!9u3 %28 E99'L8I 89Â£'5Â£0'I SOL'L48 Sll,In O]Jv JaLLIO,sn) IIZ'I5I I89'L06 OLV'95L uoileajoak'-aimin) 36,IS *L9'L8* *6E'Z95'Z OZL'*LO'Z iejau@9/ 968'0EZ *SZ'ILO'Â£ 8SE'0*8'Z ;nO gaisueJl punitalul 3606 SOI'EOI DEZ'080'I 6ZI'LL6 ln~ SJ@#SUeil Pu 000'ooz 000'002 VklndE - 1110 Ja:JsuelL 3600I 9*9'65Z'I 9P9'65Z'I %Â£9 *Z6'092'Z I*8'*56'9 LI6'E69'D %LL VIO'SIT'S DI6'IZ E98'66L'9I S3SN3dX3 1V101 55I'LZ6'I III'BLS'I I 956'059'6 S3SN3dX3 1Â¥101 Year-to-Date Rev Budget Variance 8 Rev Budget Variance Budget 60-AoN 60-PO (anleA 1!ed) SlN)IN193ANI 1,1 60-PO sD E lsÂ·[ XV1 53145 588'IDZ'I EDL'OZZ'I 960'IZZ'I spund UO!Suad 468'8Â£6 9Z9'LEI'I 9ZE'VIO'I vklnda Â£16'LEÂ¢9 EZE 'Its t69'968'S 189png leu 3 !10 6002 9ZI'0Z6'I 059'6I6'I ZSI'6I6'I spuoR d'81 IDE'tâ‚¬I'9 ZSZ'OIS 650'DZ9'5 129png pa Aaki 6002 D60'650'IZ 6I8'ESL'OZ 260'SVS'OZ spund U/â€¢01 I8L'Z60'9 526'EIS 958'SL5'5 6002 EOO'OOZ'52 828'IEO'SE 999'666'DZ ' '59'6Â£42 ZSD'585 Z07'*58'S BOOZ I90'8*S'ES 'L9L'95) (*06'6IZ'ES) 3SV3kl)3 O/35V3 kl)NI L*6'OEZ$ (96L'606$) (6DS'8L9$) 3SV3kl)30/3SV3kl)NI 13N 3rd QUARTER (+OCT/NOV) 2009 GENERAL FUND ENTERPRISE FUNDS (L&P/WATER) 2009 2009 2009 2009 %*I+ OVC]SVN '%IZ+ 005diS '%8I+ VIra :60/OE/II r,141 eleP 6002 %0Â£-0+ :60/OE/II '%E6'0+ :80/IE/ZI 'ajeJ lualll ls@All! palood lenuue (60 130 nilll) LOOZ WOJ; %Â£ 5 '8OOZ u'04 50* S '36pnq 6!Jo woJJ %'.S UMOP 6OOZI REVENUES REVENUES EXPENSES EXPENSES IL5'65D'9 ZLE'ZES 66Z'LE6'S LOOZ *through September 09 MI TOWN of 8-TES PARIÂ© FINANCE Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Steve McFarland - Finance Officer Date: January 12, 2010 RE: MBIA Municipal Investors Service Corp. - Approval of 2010 Engagement Letter for Investment Services. Background: MBIA Municipal Investors Service Corporation and the Town of Estes Park have had an investment advisory agreement since February 2002. MBIA recommends and executes purchases and sales of U.S. Treasuries and Instrumentalities in accordance with Colorado Statutes and Town investment policy. MBIA is paid a monthly fee of 1/12 of .17 of 1 % of Adjusted Cost Value of our asset base. This equates out to about $12-15,000 per year. Staff has surveyed other investment firms and finds MBIA to be very competitive with their rates. Attached please find the MBIA Renewal of Investment Advisory Agreement document. MBIA requests to have these agreements extended annually. Refusal/failure to execute the agreement simply means that we by default enter into an agreement with MBIA on a monthly basis. The annual agreement protects us from fee increases except on an annual basis. Budget: G.A.A.P. allows for investment fees to be "netted" out of the investment income line items. This practice involves all funds with investment balances, and is displayed in respective revenue line items xxx-0000-361.00-00, where "xxx" equals each fund (ex: General Fund is 101-0000-361.00-00). For example, Fund A has $1,000 in investment income and $50 of investment fees. The line item (xxx-0000-361.00-00) for Fund A would read: $950. Staff Recommendation: I recommend extending the Investment Advisory Agreement with MBIA for 2010. Page 1 _mbia --1.Â¥. 4./l aa I CUSTOMIZED ASSET MANAGEMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT- 1700 Broadway, Suite 2050 Denver, Colorado 80290 888-637-2662 303-860-1100 www.mbia.com December 7,2009 Mr. Steve McFarland Finance Officer Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Mr. McFarland: Our investment advisory agreement with the Town of Estes Park contains TABOR language that requires a renewal each year. Enclosed are two copies of an Amendment of Investment Advisory Agreement that will renew our contract for calendar year 2010. If you approve, please have both copies of the Agreement signed and return one to me. Feel free to call me with questions or concerns. Sincerely, .6 9-bv*Â£Â» Emily J. Ferguson Client Services Manager 303-864-7426 Enclosures Ann Arbor Austin Denver New York Orlando San Diego Washington, D.C. MBIA MUNICIPAL INVESTORS SERVICE CORPORATION 1700 Broadway, Suite 2050 Denver, CO 80290 (303) 860-1100 RENEWAL OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT On February 1, 2002 MBIA Municipal Investors Service Corporation, ("the Advisor") and the Town of Estes Park, Colorado ("the Client") entered into an Investment Advisory Agreement ("the Agreement") for the Advisor to provide investment management services to the Client. Article 17 of the Agreement provides that the term of the Agreement, "......shall be for the period February 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002." Article 17 further provides that, "The Client may elect to renew the Agreement upon notice to Advisor for each of the fiscal years 2003, 2004,2005 and 2006." By mutual agreement, the term of the Agreement has been extended annually, with the most recent extension to December 31, 2009. At this time the Advisor and the Client desire to extend the Agreement for an additional one-year period. It is therefore agreed that the term of the Agreement is extended to December 31, 2010. It is further agreed that all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain unchanged. MBIA MUNICIPAL INVESTORS SERVICE CORPORATION lA- /2- 1-09 n Mary Donovan, Vice President Date TOWN OF ESTES PARK Bill Pinkham, Mayor Date TOWN or ESTES PARI<L Ne, 27 Â·Plf"f.-'~ItÂ·ft~Â·:,~â€ž .-**7:7ee#1 9.:EQ~:., 0 .3:jif@'SEâ€ž L Â·~Â· :) pÂ·'I ?'%292.PA~=f'Â£91. ~ ..42.~~PA.'.~ ~'.: 4- PUBLIC WORKS Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Dave Mahany, Public Works Superintendent Date: December 8,2009 RE: Ordinance #01-10 Lease for Prospect Mountain Radio Site. Budgeted (Police, Light & Power, Water, Public Works) Background: The lease agreement between the Town of Estes Park and Heron LLC (Land owner of Prospect Mountain) for the right to operate a two-way radio site and access to the mountain expired on December 31, 2009. The agreement has been in place for the past ten (10) years and has been renewed with Heron LLC on ten year increments since the Town installed its radio base units on Prospect Mountain many years ago. Renewal of the lease is on an annual basis with no promise to budget appropriate funds for each fiscal year, therefore the lease may be canceled by either party if the need becomes necessary. The current lease has expired, therefore the renewal of this lease agreement has been determined to be declared an emergency to maintain the health and welfare of the Towns citizens. The cost of the lease to use the Mountain property is $671.50 per radio uniVyear, the departments that use this as their radio base system have budgeted in their 2010 budget to cover the costs. Budget: 6 radio base units X $671.50 = $4029.00 (Police, Light & Power, Water, Public Works) Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the lease agreement between the Town of Estes Park and Heron LLC for the ten year term and annual cost listed above. Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny Ordinance 01-10 Lease Agreement for Prospect Mountain Radio Site. Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 01-10 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR PROSPECT MOUNTAIN RADIO SITE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park and Heron LLC have agreed in a Lease Agreement between the entities to lease the Prospect Mountain radio site and use of the access road for the operation of radio transmission and reception systems owned by the Town. WHEREAS, the previous lease agreement expired on December 31, 2009 that entitled the Town to non-exclusive use of the site for operation of radio communication systems listed in the lease, attached as Exhibit A. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lease by the Town of Estes Park of the Prospect Mountain Radio site between the Town of Estes Park and Heron LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved. The officials of the Town of Estes Park are hereby authorized to execute the Lease. - 2. The adoption of this ordinance is hereby determined to be declared an emergency in order for the lease to be in effect immediately for the preservation of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Town; and WHEREAS, in the opinion of the Board of Trustees an emergency exists, this ordinance shall take effect and be enforced immediately after its passage, adoption and signature of the Mayor. INTRODUCED, READ, AND PASSED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK on this day of ,2010. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO 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 2010, and published in a newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado on the day of ,2010. Town Clerk LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 2009, between JOHN A. HERON (Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT HERON, Lessor) and THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO (Lessee). The parties agree as follows: 1. LEASE OF PREMISES The Lessors do hereby lease to the Lessee the right to operate radio transmission and reception systems located in building and towers owned by the Town of Estes Park, the National Park Service and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation all located on land owned by the Lessor; and to use the access road across the Lessors' property for ingress and egress purposes, all located on the Prospect Mountain radio site near Estes Park, Larimer County, State of Colorado, and all subject to the following terms and conditions: 2. USE The Lessee shall be entitled to non-exclusive use of the site for operation of transmission and reception of radio communication systems listed in Exhibit "A" and access to the site. The site shall only be used for the installation, operation and maintenance of communication equipment. 3. TERM The term of this lease shall be for ten (10) one (1) year periods commencing on the first day of January 2010 and ending on the 31St day of December 2020. The Town shall have the right to terminate this lease agreement by giving Lessor sixty (60) days notice in writing prior to the end of any calendar year. In said event, this lease shall terminate on December 31 st of that year. The Lessee shall have the option to extend this lease for two (2) additional five (5) one (1) year periods. The Lessee shall give the Lessor written notice of its intent to extend this lease at least six (6) months prior to the base term, or any extended term, such notice to be in writing and delivered to Lessors at the address specified in Paragraph 8 hereof. In the event that this lease is extended for the additional period, all terms and conditions of this lease shall remain in force and effect. 4. RENT Upon the commencement date, and annually thereafter, the Lessee shall pay the Lessors, as rent, the sum of Four Thousand Twenty Nine Dollars and no/100 ($4,029.00) annually (rent). Rent shall be payable on the first day of each 12-month period, in advance, to the Lessors at the Lessors' address recited in Paragraph 8 hereof. The rent shall increase or decrease by $671.50 annually for each radio system installed or removed from the site in addition to those listed in Exhibit "AL Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 1 Unless otherwise mutually agreed, the annual rental increase shall be the percentage increase ' in the Consumer Price Index for Denver (City) Metropolitan Statistical Area. The Lessors shall be responsible for communicating the amount of the rental adjustment to the Lessee and shall provide supporting date, if any, upon which the adjustment is calculated. The percentage increase shall be payable on the next annual payment. If this Lease is terminated at any time as the result of Lessee's default, no rentals shall be prorated as the date of termination. The parties agree and acknowledge that this Lease Agreement does not constitute a multiple- fiscal year debt or financial obligation of the Lessee based upon the Lessee's ability to terminate this Lease Agreement pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the Lease. Lessor acknowledges that Lessee has made no promise to continue to budget and appropriate funds beyond each fiscal year and that Lessee's only obligation is to pledge adequate financial reserves for the fiscal year of 1994 and all subsequent calendar years in which Lessee has exercised its option to renew. Lessor understands and agrees that in the event that Lessee terminates this Agreement, pursuant to provisions of Paragraph 3, that the obligation of Lessee for any further payments to Lessor is terminated. 5. LIABILITY The Lessee shall provide the Lessors with certificates of liability insurance for general liability insurance in an amount of no less than One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) per person, and Six Hundred Thousand Dollars ($600,000) per occurrence, and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) property damage, naming Lessors as additional insured on the policy or policies. Lessee may satisfy this requirement by obtaining appropriate endorsement to any umbrella policy or liability insurance the Lessee may maintain. Lessee may provide for property insurance set forth above partially or wholly by means of a self insurance fun as provided by law. The parties understand and agree that the Lessee is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive, by any provision of this Lease, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any rights, immunities and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101, et seq. C.R.S., as from time to time amended or otherwise available to Lessee or any of its offices, agent or employees. The Lessors will not be responsible for any losses of any kind, including but not limited to, fire, theft, hazardous road or weather conditions, fluctuations of power voltage, wind or lightning. 6. INDEMNITY To the extent lawfully allowed, Lessee agrees to indemnify, protect and save harmless the Lessors from any and all claims, demands and liability for any loss, damage or injury, including death, or other like or different casualty to persons and property used by and growing out of, or happening in connection with Lessee's use and occupancy of the aforesaid premises, and any equipment located or to be located thereon, due to the negligence of Lessee, its agents, servants, or employees. Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 2 7. CONDITION OF SITE During the Initial Term and any Renewal Term, the Lessee shall be responsible for any and all damages to the site caused by or directly attributed to any actions by the lessee or its representatives. Upon termination or expiration of this Lease Agreement, the Lessee will surrender its use at the site in good condition except for damages due to causes beyond the Lessee's control or without its fault or negligence. The Lessee further agrees not to construct any additional improvements upon the site without the prior written approval of the Lessors. 8. NOTICES All notices required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given if personally delivered or mailed, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or sent by overnight carrier to the following addresses: If to Lessor, to: dohmMnHeron4fFewecable-Truat 1-jE20 4 L. L <1 Attn: John A. Heron, imstee 5'\pe #9, -3 -F M\ E-n be~c -â‚¬31-Meeker - Â»> \ . Cl. -2Â» x 11-7(4 Estes Park, CO 80517 If to Lessee, to: Town Administrator Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Or if a more current address, or name, has been given to the other party in writing, to such other address, or name. 9. WAIVER Failure or delay on the part of the Lessors to exercise any right, power or privilege hereunder shall not operate as a waiver thereof. 10. DEFAULT If either party is in default of any of its obligations hereunder and such default shall continue for a period of more than thirty (30) days after written notice thereof, either party may terminate this Lease Agreement for said default. In the event default is for non-payment of rent by Lessee, then the Lessor may terminate this Lease Agreement and declare the rent for the entire remaining term of this Lease Agreement immediately due and payable and proceed to collect the same. The defaulting party agrees to pay in addition to any other damages by reason of said default all of the non-defaulting party's costs in enforcing the Lease Agreement together with all attorney's fees, expert witness fees and court costs incurred by the non-defaulting party. Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 3 11. ASSIGNMENT ' The Lessee shall not assign its rights under this Lease Agreement or any interest hereinror, convey the whole or any portion of the leased area, without the prior written consent of the Lessors. 12. ENTIRE AGREEMENT The Lease Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereofand supersedes all prior offers, negotiations, and agreement, whether written or oral, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. 13. TAXES Lessee shall pay any personal property taxes assessed on, or any portion of such taxes attributable to, the facilities belonging to the Lessee. Lessors shall pay when due real property taxes and other fees and assessments attributable to the property in an amount not to exceed the amount of the 1998 taxes. Lessee shall pay as additional rent any increase in real property taxes levied against the property or towers in excess of the amount of taxes for the year 2009, payable in 2010, if it is determined that such increase is attributable to Lessee's use of the defined premises. 14. INTERFERENCE In the event that the Lessee causes any harmful interference to existing lessees, the Lessee must terminate or cure its operation within forty-eight (48) hours. The Lessee may then either remedy or remove its equipment. All responsibility and expenses related to interference shall be born by the Lessee and not the Lessors. If such interference cannot be eliminated, the Lessee may terminate this Lease by giving thirty (30) days notice prior to such termination. The Lessors will use their best efforts to prevent future lessees from causing harmful interference to the Lessee. All transmitters installed by the Lessees at the site shall be properly licensed and operated in accordance with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules and regulations, and a copy of the license shall be posted with the transmitting equipment. All licensing and any subsequent licenses shall be at the sole expense and responsibility of the Lessee, including any penalty or enforcement imposed by the FCC. 15. CANCELLATION OF LEASE This Lease Agreement may be canceled by mutual consent of the Lessee and the Lessors for non-payment of rent or any violations of the terms of this Lease Agreement. This Lease Agreement shall be irrevocable during its term and shall continue in force unless or until terminated by any of the partied hereto only in accordance with and as allowed under the terms of this Agreement. Thereupon, this Lease Agreement shall absolutely end. Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 4 16. IMPROVEMENT Lessee shall have the right, at its expense, to place and maintain at the site improvements, personal property, and facilities, which include radio transmitting and receiving antennas and electronic equipment, and in addition, attached structure, all with the approval of the Lessors during the term of this Lease, with notice to the Lessors. The property placed upon the premises by the Lessee shall remain the exclusive property at any time of the Lessee, and the Lessee shall have the right to remove its said property at any time in whole or in part and within any reasonable time following any termination of this Lease, if the Lessee shall not be in default at that time. 17. UTILITIES The Lessee will be responsible for the supply and payment of all AC and/or DC power used on the premises by the Lessee. 18. ACCESS Lessee agrees to keep the gate across the access road locked at all times. The Lessors are obliged to provide the Lessee with a key to said gate and will subsequently provide new keys as necessary when the lock to said gate is changed. It is agreed that the Lessors will not provide maintenance on the road during the winter months and that, therefore, the site may not be accessible. Inclement weather restricting access shall not impose a liability on the Lessors. LESSOR L <Trow L. L. E , -d@HN-++7~HERON1RREVOCABLE-q:-RUST- -Dri ki t~ l--9-2.p J By: John A. Heron, Fftletee-Â· ~M~+1Agi,Â·.Â·11 2'\EmbEC LESSEE TOWN OF ESTES PARK By: Mayor William C. Pinkham ATTEST Town Clerk Williamson Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 5 STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF LARIMER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2009, by WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF LARIMER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2-1 by WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public Lease Agreement 2009 Heron/Town of Estes Park 6 pages 6 EXHIBIT "A" TOWN OF ESTES PARK RADIO SYSTEMS ON PROSPECT MOUNTAIN ! SYSTEM FCC LICENSE FREQUENCY BUILDING LOCATION Municipal 9806A020392 159.315 Town Police CH 1 , 9607R142287 155.910 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation CV2 9607R142287 155.475 Nat'I Park Service Police Vehicle Data System 0001977831 4940-4990mhz U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Water Department 757759 952.35625 Nat'I Park Service Light & Power Dept. 9807C004644 159.645 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation i n.-r i .Tg -n-~1 -- pm I T. T,L_---I~l--1.1 - - 1r ~ 1 r.1- rr . ~n - 1 1- r -r- 1 TOWN oF ESTES PARL Town Attorney Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Date: January 7, 2010 RE: Intergovernmental Agreement with Larimer County for Planning Services in the Estes Valley Background: The Town and Larimer County entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement effective the 1 St day of February, 2000 (the "Intergovernmental Agreement") for the purpose of establishing the Estes Valley Planning Commission, providing for the administration of the Estes Valley Development Code within the Planning Area, allocating Town and County resources for the administration of EVPC, establishing procedures for annexing a property into the Town, and other necessary agreements for the efficient operation of the EVPC and administration of the Planning Area. The Intergovernmental Agreement expires by its terms on February 1, 2010. It is necessary to amend the Intergovernmental Agreement to continue the Estes Valley Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment and administer the Estes Valley Development Code. If the Intergovernmental Agreement is not amended, the Estes Valley Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment will cease to exist on February 1, 2010. The First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement accomplishes the following: â€¢ Extends the Intergovernmental Agreement for an additional ten year period commencing February 1, 2010. â€¢ Amends the Intergovernmental Agreement to provide for a two year term for the Chair and Vice-Chair of the EVPC. The current Intergovernmental Agreement provides for one year terms. The purpose of this amendment is to provide for more efficient operation of the Planning Commission. â€¢ Provides that the Town Administrator and the County Administrator agree on an appropriate sum to be paid by the County to the Town for administrative services provided for by the Town pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement. â€¢ Terminates the Transition provision in the Intergovernmental Agreement which is no longer relevant. Page 1 â€¢ Amends Section VII I (A) to be consistent with the Estes Valley Development Code. Budget: The First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement requires the Town Administrator and County Administrator to determine the appropriate sum necessary for the County to pay to the Town for administrative services provided by the Town for administration of the County's portion of the Planning Area. Said sum shall be reflected in the 2011 and future years' budgets. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement. Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny the First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Estes Park and the Board of County Commissioners, Larimer County, Colorado. DRAFT #2, 12/17/09 FIRST AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is effective this 1St day of February, 2010, by and between the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, hereinafter referred to as the "Town", and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, hereinafter referred to as the "County". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Town and the County entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement effective the 1st day of February, 2000 (the "Intergovernmental Agreement"), for the purpose of establishing the Estes Valley Planning Commission (the "EVPC"), providing for the administration of the Estes Valley Development Code (the "EVDC'D within the Planning Area, allocating Town and County resources for the administration of the EVI?C and related functions within the Planning Area, establishing a joint Zoning Board o f Adjustment for the Planning Area, establishing parameters and procedures for annexation o f property to the Town within the Planning Area, and other necessary agreements for the efficient operation of the EVPC and administrative procedures for the Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the term of the IGA (the "IGA") is for a period of ten (10) years from the effective date o f February 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the Agreement for another ten (10) year period; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to modify the Agreement as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the applicable statutes of the State of Colorado, the parties hereto are authorized to enter into this First Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the above stated purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE AND THE COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: The Intergovernmental Agreement is amended as follows: 1. Section III D. Officers shall be amended to read as follows: There shall be a Chair and a Vice-Chair for the EVPC. Each shall serve for a two year term, beginning the first meeting ofJanuary of every other year. The Chair shall be from a County appointee for 2011-2012. The Town and County appointees shall alternate the Chair in two year increments throughout the remainder of this Agreement. The Vice- DRAFT #2,12/17/09 Chair shall also alternate between the Town and the County appointees opposite that of the Chair for the two year term. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall be chosen by members of the Commission. The Vice-Chair shall serve as the Chir in absence of the Chair.~ The EVPC may appoint such other officers such as Secretary, as the EVPC deems necessary for the conduct of its business. Such other officers may be non-members of j the Commission. 2. Section VIII A. Recommendations of the EVPC shall be amended to read as follows: 1. "All land use decisions of the EVPC shall be advisory only unless specifically addressed in the EVDC. All final approvals of the recommendations of the EVPC shall be the responsibility and obligation of either the Board of Trustees or the Board of County Commissioners depending upon the geographic location of the land use proposal." 3. Section IX B. 3. Shall be amended to read as follows: "The Town shall provide the necessary personnel to provide professional staffing of the CDD and its responsibilities pursuant to this Agreement. In consideration of the Town's obligation to provide the services set forth in this Agreement, the County shall pay to the Town on or before July 1 of each calendar year, a sum agreed upon by the Town Administrator and County Administrator. 4. Section X A. Transition. This Section shall be deleted in its entirety. 5. Section X D. Term. The term of this Agreement shall remain in force and effect for a period of ten (10) years from the effective date of this First Amendment to the Agreement. However, either party may terminate the Agreement at any time by giving the other party nine months written notice of its intention to terminate the Agreement. Such notification shall be sent by certified letter with return receipt requested addressed to the other party as set forth in the notice provision of this Agreement. All of the other terms and conditions of the Intergovernmental Agreement not amended herein shall continue in force and effect. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO By: Mayor 2 DRAFT #2, 12/17/09 ATTEST: Town Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO By: ATTEST: 3 TOWN op ESTES PARIQ 1 ; Town Clerk's Offibe Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: January 6, 2010 RE: Business License Fee Waiver for Park Theater Mall Businesses Background: On October 19, 2009, the Park Theater Mall and the eleven businesses contained within the mall were destroyed by fire. The Estes Valley Partners of Commerce has held meetings with the mall owner and the businesses to provide support in identifying options and assistance. A suggestion from these meetings was to waive the 2010 business license fees for the f j businesses destroyed by the fire. At this time the Clerk's office is aware of only two businesses that have or would be relocating within Estes Park. All other business license accounts remain active. In addition, several neighboring business were also affected by the fire and some sustained significant water and smoke damages. In considering whether or not to waive the business license fees, staff requests the Board provide a policy to be implemented by the Town Clerk's office. This policy should address what businesses would qualify for the waiver, i.e. destroyed and/or affected, definition of affected businesses, i.e. water, smoke, etc., and for what years would the businesses be eligible for a business license fee waiver. 6 Budget: Business license revenue would be decreased by approximately $3,000 for just the businesses destroyed by the fire or 1 % of the total revenue collected from business licensing. The budget impact increases with the inclusion of other affected businesses. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board consider waiving the 2010 business licensing fee for businesses destroyed or forced to relocate due to the Park Theater Mall fire. Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny waiving the 2010 business license fee for the Park Theater Mall and the businesses that were located in the mall and destroyed by the fire. IC@Eli 14ERS CAFE MUSIC BOX COLLECTION, THE Paul Fishman Norman Duecker 116 E Elkhorn Avenue #16 116 E Elkhorn Avenue 321 Bighorn, #A-7 P.O. Box 4217 970-420-2565 970-586-4372 HOME FOR THE HOLIDAYS SPECTRUM GALLERY LLC Tom Bellmann Rick Bilstein Dana Kortokrax 116 E Elkhorn Avenue #11 116 E Elkhorn Avenue Units #8,9,10 3749 S Miller Court P.O. Box 1977 Lakewood, CO 80235 970-631-9925 303-763-7551 INTRIGUE GIFT SHOP WYNBRIER, LTD. Robin Parker Charles Fouts 112 E Elkhorn Avenue 120 E Elkhorn Avenue P.O. Box 2147 P.O. Box 2115 970-577-0092 or 970-586-2958 303-747-1138 KELLY NICOLE'S - Maybe out of MOUNTAIN BLOWN GLASS Business Dave & Jodi Clifton Shannon Frazier 116 E Elkhorn Avenue 116 E Elkhorn Avenue 665 Halbach Lane P.O. Box 4144 970-586-0284 970-215-2013 or 970-232-6349 HIKING HUT, THE Michele & Justin Riedesel 110 E Elkhorn Avenue P.O. Box 1318 970-586-6453 MADAME VERA Vera Durkovic 116 E Elkhorn Avenue P.O. Box 2595 970-586-8810 MEMORIES OLD TIME PORTRAITS Steve McNamara 213451st Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 970-330-1255 TOWN oF GTES PARL -*4*â‚¬*ate..4 i. 4.--GRLI-t, -JA'*,iÂ·Â·:%*C :ZE&34"~~41 --- - 4@I:rel El (A-*fiNEEN-Â®JLÂ¢it*kfi**~ Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Eric Rose, Commander 6,B* Date: January 6, 2010 RE: Resolution 03-10 Hazard Mitigation Plan Background: Erik Nillson, Larimer County Emergency Manager has requested the Town of Estes Park partner with Larimer County's Hazard Mitigation Plan. By signing and accepting this resolution, in the event that the Town of Estes Park experiences a disastrous type of event, the Town would be eligible for Federal Funding assistance through this plan. Budget No budget implications. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 03-10. Motion: I move to approve/deny Resolution 03-10 Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03-10 RESOLUTION FOR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATION TO AUTHORIZED THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AUTHOR TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park has limited capability to undertake extensive participation in the preparation of a hazard mitigation plan; and. WHEREAS, the Office of the Emergency Management for Larimer County is able to act on behalf of the Town of Estes Park in the analysis and development of a hazard mitigation plan; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Emergency Management for Larimer County shall prepare a hazard mitigation plan in accordance with 44 FEMA requirements at 44 C.F.R. 201.6; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Emergency Management for Larimer County shall deliver a draft copy of the Plan for public comment as well as the governing body's comment during the planning process and prior to adoption. NOW THEREFORE, the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees authorizes the Office of the Emergency Management for Larimer County on behalf of the Town of Estes Park to prepare the Larimer County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, which shall be reviewed and considered for adoption by the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees upon completion. ADOPTED this day of ,2010. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk 98 TOWN oF ESTES PARL Administration Memo TO: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Halburnt From: Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator Date: January 7, 2010 RE: 2010 Organizational Chart Background: The Estes Park Municipal Code (2.68.040) directs that the "Town Administrator shall present an administrative organizational chart to the Board of Trustees for approval." The board approved a revised organizational chart on October 14,2009 which included the newly formed Community Services Department. The accompanying chart is the proposed structure for 2010. It eliminates the Fire Department and Volunteer Firefighters as part of the town's organization due to the successful fire district election in 2009. The Town Administrator has overall supervisory authority for all departments, but specifically focuses on the following departments: Finance, Police, Public Works, Utilities, and Town Clerk. Deputy Town Administrator also deals with all departments on a daily basis, but has specifically focuses on the following departments: Community Development and Community Services. Community Services includes the Museum, Senior Center, Fairgrounds, Convention Center, Visitor's Center and Sales/Marketing. The DTA is also the EPURA executive director. Budget: No Budget Implications Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the 2010 Organizational Chart Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny the 2010 Town of Estes Park Organizational Chart Page 1 . . 05 9 8 e f : 1 1 4 6. A - OB BEE /1- .1 -Ct 15 ' 01 'C z y 08Â·9 *mT am . j. 2256 - O *1 *4" F- --1.-36.6 2.'. i 4""mls>.eb Â¢ Er'2751Rt u) of A .-2.48 6. U.10% J :c'St . 85â‚¬kke =! tuzE # e R 1- 0: S + 4 8,51 NS h - 6 40 4 05-3 G *N -5 94 u & id .0 0 ,Â§2*0 7 .,â€¢â€¢. ~ E .52.52.0 =5; 9% 5 9 01 U,lEM P 31 ~4 , 5 1 5 ~1*1% %15.#E I / 04. PIE a 11. 15 2 22 -RE *c RE#008 - 8 2 â‚¬ 6% & B 8 10 /1 0. / - 2 2 5 4 M & 4 E e Â§ E & b q 101 : 22 - 4 W ...1 @ NE - O WEE & b.2 5 3 - m 1 2.Â£ m 00~11 0#ma 1 0 he 0%8 40 &*f 8 0 0 ram D (9 DE@6028 .. - Mi>Kbeg: 02 4 i %2112.k 1-O Ii 00 .SKS O 26 TOWN AF IATIONS! TARDS & MISSI COM=UIES 60= uo!100,0 sjunooow Jaluej I TOWN ATTORNEY . MUNICIPAL JUDGE 1 Olland NOI1VMMO=INI ~ ~ ESTES PARK CITIZENS - 1 =131HO ~ MAYOR and TRUSTEES ~ ADVISORY BOARDS TOWN'ADMINISTRATOR rming Arts Theatre h1013380 N OF ESTES PARK NIZATIONAL CHART mTi~n HaM.L;=:ly 'AE]a 'ININOO BURJU 1110WeOJ UE epoo u0!loadsul-6 p NUARY 2010