HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board 2011-07-12Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 12, 2011
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town
of Estes Park on the 12th day of July, 2011. Meeting called to order by Mayor
Pinkham.
Present:
Also Present:
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Chuck Levine, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Eric Blackhurst
Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Jerry Miller
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jacquie Halburnt, Town Administrator
Lowell Richardson, Deputy Town Administrator
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
SWEARING -IN CEREMONY.
Officer Andrew Hart was officially sworn in as a Police Officer after completing required
training.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
Lindsay Lamson/Town citizen requested the Board consider the timing of agenda items,
especially during the peak tourist season, in an effort to allow the business community
to participate in the meetings. He also requested advance notice of items coming
forward to the Board to allow public comment.
Johanna Darden/Town citizen requested there be no more paving in Bond Park and
events needing more space should be moved to the fairgrounds. The Open Space
Initiative Funds should not be used to fund additional improvements to the property.
Information on funding related to the Elkhorn RTA project should be made available to
the public for review.
Lou Larek/Town citizen commented the neighborhood on 3rd and 4th streets have
requested new 15 mph speed limit signs. They also request the Town consider another
location for the proposed MPEC because of the increase in traffic to the neighborhood.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen stated the Town Administrator contract should be delayed
until after the town has received the current citizen survey results. The item should also
have adequate public notice and public comment should be heard.
Elizabeth Fogarty/County citizen suggested the item be postponed until October to
allow the business community the opportunity make public comment and review the
contract.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Elrod stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission agenda for July 19, 2011
has been posted.
Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 2
Mayor Pro Tem Levine stated the kickoff for the United Way campaign fundraising
efforts has begun and would support three local groups including EVICS, Kids Cafe and
the Learning Place. 100% of the donations remain in Estes Park to support the
nonprofits.
Trustee Miller stated the LMD held a contest to increase the number of Facebook fans
and the winner received a prize package. He reviewed recent statistics revealing
marketing efforts are moving in a positive direction.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
None.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated June 28, 2011 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated June 28, 2011.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes.
A. Community Development/Community Services, June 23, 2011.
4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated May 17, 2011
(acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Park Tree Board Minutes dated January 7, 2011 and February 4,
2011(acknowledgement only).
It was moved and seconded (Levine/Miller) the Consent Agenda be approved, and it
passed unanimously.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP — FROM HOSPITALITY SPECIALISTS, INC.
DBA MOLLY B RESTAURANT TO GAST HAUS ESTES PARK INC. DBA
MOLLY B RESTAURANT, 200 MORAINE AVENUE. Town Clerk Williamson
reviewed the application stating all required paperwork and r fees had been
submitted. The applicant has completed the required T.I.P.S. training on April
30, 2011. Mayor Pro Tem Levine reminded the applicant to uphold the liquor
laws and to not serve the underage or over serve the public. It was moved
and seconded (Blackhurst/Miller) to approve the transfer of the application
filed by Gast Haus Estes Park Inc. dba Molly B Restaurant for a tavern
liquor license.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION #09-11 AGAINST THE PROPOSED REVISION TO
REGULATION NUMBER 11, PART A TO EXPAND THE EMISSIONS &
INSPECTION PROGRAM TO THE ESTES PARK AREA. Town Administrator
Halburnt stated the town would be included in the emission testing beginning
January 2012. The Town has been working with the County on the issue to
address the concerns related to the required testing by the Air Quality Control
Commission. The IM240 emission testing would not be an efficient or effective
way to address ozone air pollution because of the small number of resident
vehicles in the area, the overwhelming number of tourist vehicles during the
summer ozone season, the far distance to drive to centeralized test stations,
and the hardship of driving to the test stations for the Town's older population.
Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 3
The Town has addressed the issue of pollution through the development of the
shuttle system and the new transportation hub.
Trustee Miller commented on what he thought was an inappropriate email by
Doug Decker/Colorado Public Health and Environment sent to local businesses
on the economic impact of testing requirements and requested staff send a
letter to the Governor's office in protest of the communication. Trustee
Blackhurst concurred and stated he would not be in support of the testing.
Town Administrator Halburnt stated Mr. Decker had done a good job of
keeping staff informed of his communications.
John Nicholas/Town citizen expressed appreciation to the Board for addressing
the issue and recommended public comment be solicited prior to the hearing in
September. He stated 42% of the residents are part-time and register their
vehicles in other states currently, and the number would increase and
additional revenue would be lost if mandatory emission testing is required.
Lindsay Lamson/County citizen stated alternate transportation would have
more impact than testing. Testing would be an undue burden on the citizens.
Charley Dickey/Town citizen would support the resolution and thanked the
Board for addressing the issue.
Town Administrator Halburnt confirmed the Board wanted staff to draft a letter
to the Governor about Mr. Decker's emails to the local auto businesses. After
further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Ericson) to
approve Resolution #09-11, and it passed unanimously.
4. REPORTS:
1. RAW WATER RIGHTS DISCUSSION.
Attorney White provided the Board with a review of the Town's water rights and
the Augmentation plan, an integral part of the Municipal water system designed
to maximize the use of the Town's water rights. The Town has two types of
water rights, contract (Bureau of Reclamation — 500 feet, Colorado Big
Thompson (CBT) allotment — 1217 units, Windy Gap allotment — 300 acre feet)
and direct flow (Glacier Creek — 2.0 cfs, Estes Park Town Company Pipeline
and Estes Park Water Company Pipeline — 2.0 cfs, Estes Park Cascade
Diversion — 1.55 csf, Estes Park Cascade Diversion Enlargement — 3.45 cfs).
The pros and cons of each water right was outlined and is summarized:
Bureau of Reclamation — Pro: Senior water right, firm yield, low cost
Con: Single use, Marys Lake treatment only
CBT
Windy Gap
Direct Flow Water
Pro: Senior water right, firm yield, low cost, can
be rented or transferred
Con: Variable yield, Marys Lake treatment only
Pro: Fully consumable, used for augmentation
plan, can be rented or transferred
Con: Variable yield, high cost, Marys Lake
treatment only
Pro: Glacier Creek treatment, used for
augmentation plan, no volumetric
limitation, low cost
Con: Very junior right
Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 4
Other notable comments are summarized: BOR water right must be used first;
up to 20% of CBT water can be carried over to the next year if an extra fee is
paid; CBT water has to be used first; Windy Gap water is too expensive to rent
for agriculture purposes; the bond for Windy Gap will be paid off in 2017; and
Direct Flow rights are not available if called by a senior right and are not
useable in the winter due to icing at the Glacier Creek plant.
An Augmentation Plan was conceived to address priority issues related to
Direct Flow rights. Windy Gap water is used to pay back the rivers for water
consumed during non -priority periods, not water taken from the river. This
allows the Glacier Creek plant to be operated during the summer months.
Integrated Operations or the in lieu program allows CBT water to be used in
place of Windy Gap water when it is not physically available for use in the
Augmentation Plan.
Attorney White stated the Town has adequate water rights for the system for
future water system demands with the use of the Augmentation Plan and
Integrated Operations. The Water department would conduct a study in the
future to determine water right needs through full build out of the valley.
Other issues for the Town's water supply include the Firming Project that would
remove water from the west slope for use on the east slope. The Town is not a
participant in the project; however, the Town has an interest in the Carriage
contract to ensure the Integrated Operations would be maintained. The
Colorado River issues could limit CBT water in the future. Other issues include
climate change and environmental concerns related to endangered species.
5. ADDITIONAL ACTION ITEMS:
Elizabeth FogartyNice President of EALA stated the membership was polled and
the members have requested the contract be considered in October.
Lindsay Lamson/County citizen stated the concern revolves around the process
and the community would like to review the criteria used to evaluate the
Administrator. The citizens would like to have the opportunity to have input on the
attributes that should be reviewed.
Mayor Pinkham stated the Town Administrator evaluation process has been
developed over the last few years and has been reworked to develop a
performance matrix established around the Town's goals. The Town Board is
responsible for establishing the contract. The Town Administrator contract
requires a semi-annual review to be completed in July. The time for public
comment would be during the development of Town goals.
1. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Trustee Miller questioned the need for an executive session because the
evaluation had already been delivered to the Town Administrator and the Town
Attorney. He recommended the Board consider an alternate process for
evaluating the Town Administrator that includes public and staff input. He
would not support reviewing the contract 6 months prior to the expiration and
suggested the Board review the contract in September or October. Trustee
Koenig concurred and offered a substitute motion.
Trustee Erlod also expressed concern with the delivery of the evaluation to the
Town Administrator and the Town Attorney. He would not support entering
executive session to discuss the evaluation or the contract.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Ericson) to enter Executive Session
for the discussion of a personnel matter; not involving any specific
Board of Trustees — July 12, 2011 — Page 5
employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session;
any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person
to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that do
not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees —
Town Administrator Annual Review, and the motion failed with Trustees
Koenig, Ericson and Blackhurst voting "Yes" and Trustees Miller, Elrod and
Levine voting "No" and Mayor Pinkham voting "No" to break the tie.
It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Levine) to enter Executive Session
for the discussion of a personnel matter; not involving any specific
employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session;
any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person
to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that do
not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees —
Town Administrator Annual Review and for the purpose of determining
positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations,
developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators
regarding Town Administrator Employment Contract, and the motion failed
with Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig and Miller voting "No".
Trustee Miller and Koenig both expressed the evaluation and the contract
should be discussed separately. The process for the reviewing the evaluation
should be established for both the Board and the public.
2. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT.
Trustee Blackhurst stated delaying the Administrator contractor until 60 days
before the expiration is patently unfair to the Administrator and is not good
policy for establishing goals and policies for 2012. He would recommend the
Board consider a contract within the next 60 days. It was moved and
seconded (Miller/Elrod) to continue the Town Administrator employment
contract until the first regular Town Board meeting in October, and it
passed with Trustees Blackhurst and Levine voting "No".
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the metin./19:34 p.m.
illiam C. Pinkham, Mayor
ie Williamson, Town Clerk