The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2025-05-13Town of Estes Park TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION May 13, 2025 from 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Town Hall Board Room 170 MacGregor Ave, Estes Park Accessing Meeting Translations (Accediendo a las Traducciones de la Reunión) can be found on the Town website at www.estes.org/boardsandmeetings Public comment is not typically heard at Study Sessions, but may be allowed by the Mayor with agreement of a majority of the Board. This study session will be streamed live and available at www.estes.org/videos AGENDA 5:00 p.m. Flock Safety Cameras. (Chief Stewart) 5:40 p.m. Noise Ordinance Enforcement. (Chief Stewart) 6:10 p.m. Off-Highway Vehicles/Golf Carts on Roads. (Chief Stewart) 6:30 p.m. Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions. 6:40 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items. (Board Discussion) 6:45 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting. Informal discussion among Trustees and staff concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this meeting at approximately 4:45 p.m. POLICE DEPARTMENT Report To: Honorable Mayor Hall Board of Trustees Through: Town Administrator Machalek From: Ian Stewart, Chief of Police Date: RE: May 13, 2025 Flock Safety Cameras. Purpose of Study Session Item: The purpose of the Study Session is to introduce the potential purchase and strategic deployment of License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology within key town ingress and egress locations. This session will provide an overview of the benefits and implications of using these LPR tools to enhance public safety, deter crime, and assist law enforcement efforts. Town Board Direction Requested: To provide policy input and direction regarding the use of LPR technology by the Police Department. Present Situation: The Town of Estes Park (Town) - gateway to the Rocky Mountain National Park - welcomes approximately four million visitors annually. As a result, there is a high volume of transient traffic into and out of Town on a daily basis. Most crimes involve the use of a vehicle, even when the vehicle is not a tool of the crime itself, but a mode of transportation for the suspected perpetrator(s). There are a number of communities and agencies within Boulder County and Larimer County - adjacent to Estes Park - that currently utilize LPR technology as an investigative tool. The Town does not currently have any technological resources such as LPR in place to assist in investigating the path of criminals and suspected criminals in their travels into and out of Town. Proposal: The Police Department proposes the purchase and deployment of LPR technology at predetermined strategic placements focused on the primary points of ingress and egress within Town. By implementing this technology, the Police Department will have the ability to identify vehicles of interest by make, color and decals thereby transforming video images into actionable evidence in apprehending suspected criminals. The goal of using this technology is to increase overall public safety in Estes Park. The technology is beneficial in locating missing persons and expediting the recovery of persons associated with “Amber Alerts” and “Silver Alerts”. From a crime reduction standpoint, LPRs help prevent or cut down on auto thefts and uncover investigative leads for all other types of crimes where video images have high evidentiary value. Recent examples in which this technology would have been valuable as an investigatory tool include: ●July 2024 Shots Fired incident at Stanley Avenue and US Highway 36: LPR would have been an invaluable resource in identifying the vehicle involved in an expedient manner. ●November 2024 Vehicle Trespassing and Auto Thefts: LPR would have been an invaluable resource in quickly identifying the stolen vehicles and suspected perpetrators. The Police Department proposes the use of the Flock Safety System (Flock) which has over 5,000 cameras deployed nationally, with over 75 Colorado communities within the Flock network including a number of agencies within both Boulder and Larimer Counties, respectively. The use of Flock would provide the Police Department access to the network of Flock LPR amongst jurisdictions that share the data - and allow the Town to reciprocally share data. The Flock system - which relies upon cellular network for transmission and is essentially infrastructure free - is subscription based in which Flock will own, service and maintain the cameras based on an annual subscription fee. Images within the Flock system are retained for a 30 day period unless there is an investigatory reason to maintain the images for a longer period. The Flock system allows for the auditing of its search function in order to ensure the use of the system for appropriate law enforcement purposes. Advantages: ●Enhanced Crime Detection and Prevention: LPR cameras help quickly identify stolen vehicles and track vehicles alleged to be involved in crimes, providing real- time alerts and information. This helps deter further criminal activities and apprehend suspects more efficiently. ●Increased Patrol Efficiency: LPR cameras do act as an extra set of eyes, enabling police resources to focus on other tasks while the system scans and checks license plates against databases of stolen vehicles, wanted individuals, and other alerts. These abilities allow patrol operations to be more productive and effective. ●Objective Evidence Collection: LPR systems provide objective, actionable evidence that can be used in investigations. Unlike eyewitness testimony, which can be biased or inaccurate, license plate data is precise and reliable. ●Improved Traffic Safety: By identifying unregistered and uninsured vehicles, LPR cameras can help remove potentially dangerous drivers from roadways, reducing the likelihood of accidents. ●Resource Optimization: As an automated system, LPR enables the optimization of police resource allocation. Resources can be deployed more strategically, focusing on areas and tasks that require individual intervention as cameras can handle routine monitoring. ●Increased officer awareness to overall public safety. Missing persons, Silver Alerts, Amber Alerts and other “Be on the Look Out” situations are efficient and thorough. Disadvantages: ●Privacy Concerns: The use of surveillance technology such as LPR raises privacy concerns based on the electronic capture of detailed images of vehicles. The Town does have the ability to adopt policies that limit the purposes for which the technology may be accessed. ●Potential Misuse: While policies and permissions can be put in place to minimize risk, there is a risk in which the LPR technology could be used for purposes beyond crime prevention. ●Financial Cost: Implementing and maintaining an LPR system can be costly, requiring annual ongoing operating costs. ●Dependence on Technology: While policies and procedures can be put into place regarding the use and access to LPR data, there is a risk that reliance on surveillance technology by law enforcement could reduce community trust. ●Legal and Ethical Issues: While the technology is not new and is widely used across the United States, the use of LPR systems can lead to legal challenges and ethical debates regarding the balance between security and individual rights. Finance/Resource Impact: Year One Costs: ●Subscription for 8 Flock Falcon Cameras covering four locations = $24,000 ●First Year Professional Service Fees and One Time Implementation Costs = $4,700 ●Year One Total Investment = $28,700 Year Two Costs ●Annual Recurring Subscription = $24,000 Total Contract Cost Two Year Contract Cost = $52,700 Funding for this initiative would be provided either through savings identified in Fiscal Year 2025 and/ or a budget decision package in Fiscal Year 2026. Grant funding support for initiatives such as this is typically available annually through the US Department of Justice. Town staff will continue to monitor the availability and timing of such grant cycles which typically involves a submission deadline in March of each year. From a purchasing perspective, the procurement of the Flock system does not require a competitive bid process for the following reasons: ●Flock is available through a State of Colorado contract that the Town has the ability to access services and products through that contract; ●Flock is available through a number of cooperative purchasing programs in which the Town participates such as OMNIA Partners cooperative; and ●Flock can be considered a sole source vendor. Level of Public Interest There is public interest in the Town’s ability to ensure that ‘Estes Park is a safe place to live, work, and visit within our extraordinary natural environment’ (Town of Estes Park 2025 Strategic Plan, Public Safety, Health and Environment Key Outcome Area). Attachments: 1.Map of Proposed LPR Locations 2. Presentation ATTACHMENT – Proposed LPR Camera Locations Map ATTACHMENT 1 1 License Plate Recognition Technology License Plate Recognition Technology Though we are a town of approximately 6,000 residents we have a high volume of transient traffic into and out of Town on a daily basis. Most crimes involve the use of a vehicle, even when the vehicle is not a tool of the crime itself, but a mode of transportation for the suspected perpetrator(s). We commonly see crimes perpetrated in Estes Park by individuals that are from outside the Estes Valley. Furthermore, on numerous occasions, we have apprehended individuals wanted from other jurisdictions who have chosen Estes Park to avoid apprehension. There are a number of communities and agencies within Boulder County and Larimer County ‐adjacent to Estes Park ‐that currently utilize LPR technology as an investigative tool. The Town does not currently have any technological resources such as LPR in place to assist in investigating the path of criminals and suspected criminals in their travels into and out of Town. 1 2 ATTACHMENT 2 2 License Plate Recognition Technology In 2024 there were 2 high profile cases in which this technology would have been extremely beneficial to aid in case investigation and case resolution: •July 2024 Shots Fired incident at Stanley Avenue and US Highway 36: LPR would have been an invaluable resource in identifying the vehicle involved in an expedient manner. Ultimately a major lead was developed in this case from Flock LPR in Boulder County. •November 2024 Vehicle Trespassing and Auto Thefts: LPR would have been an invaluable resource in quickly identifying the stolen vehicles and suspected perpetrators. 3 4 3 5 6 4 Advantages ●Enhanced Crime Detection and Prevention: LPR cameras help quickly identify stolen vehicles and track vehicles alleged to be involved in crimes, providing real‐time alerts and information. This helps deter further criminal activities and apprehend suspects more efficiently. ●Increased Patrol Efficiency: LPR cameras do act as an extra set of eyes, enabling police resources to focus on other tasks while the system scans and checks license plates against databases of stolen vehicles, wanted individuals, and other alerts. These abilities allow patrol operations to be more productive and effective. ●Objective Evidence Collection: LPR systems provide objective, actionable evidence that can be used in investigations. Unlike eyewitness testimony, which can be biased or inaccurate, license plate data is precise and reliable. Advantages ●Improved Traffic Safety: By identifying unregistered and uninsured vehicles, LPR cameras can help remove potentially dangerous drivers from roadways, reducing the likelihood of accidents. ●Resource Optimization: As an automated system, LPR enables the optimization of police resource allocation. Resources can be deployed more strategically, focusing on areas and tasks that require individual intervention as cameras can handle routine monitoring. ●Increased officer awareness to overall public safety. Missing persons, Silver Alerts, Amber Alerts and other “Be on the Look Out” situations such as the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) 7 8 5 9 10 6 Transparency and Regional Implementation 11 12 7 Neighboring Agencies Utilizing Flock •Boulder County Sheriff’s Office •Jackson County Sheriff’s Office •Larimer County Sheriff’s Office •Grand County Sheriff’s Office •Loveland Police Department •Lafayette Police Department •Denver Police Department •Over 75 Colorado Law Enforcement Agencies Disadvantages ●Privacy Concerns: The use of surveillance technology such as LPR raises privacy concerns based on the electronic capture of detailed images of vehicles. The Town does have the ability to adopt policies that limit the the technology may be accessed. However, these LPRs are already highly deployed throughout Colorado already. ●Potential Misuse: While policies and permissions can be put in place to minimize risk, there is a risk in which the LPR technology could be used for purposes beyond crime prevention. ●Financial Cost: Implementing and maintaining an LPR system can be costly, requiring annual ongoing operating costs. ●Dependence on Technology: There is a risk that reliance on surveillance technology by law enforcement could reduce community trust. ●Legal and Ethical Issues: While the technology is not new and is widely used across the United States, the use of LPR systems can lead to legal challenges and ethical debates regarding the balance between security and individual rights. 13 14 8 Questions for Staff or Flock Representatives? 15 TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION May 13, 2025 No packet material was provided. POLICE DEPARTMENT To: Honorable Mayor Hall Board of Trustees Through: From: Date: RE: Town Administrator Machalek Ian Stewart, Chief of Police May 13, 2025 Off-Highway Vehicles/Golf Carts on Roads Purpose of Study Session Item: The purpose of this study session is to review potential benefits and drawbacks of developing a town ordinance to allow golf carts, Low Speed Vehicles (LSVs), and/or Off-Highway Vehicles (OHVs) on town streets. Staff will review the potential use of these vehicles through the perspective of public safety impacts. It is acknowledged there are potential benefits and drawbacks outside of this lens for the Town Board to consider. Town Board Direction Requested: This is informational only. We anticipate this report may raise additional questions that could require staff research and follow-up. Present Situation: The Town of Estes Park currently does not permit public use of golf carts, LSVs, OHVs on town streets. Proposal: Staff is not proposing any change to town ordinances or regulations Advantages: •Smaller vehicles have the potential for reduced congestion during high traffic times. •Additional road capacity versus larger conventional vehicles •Potential reduction in noise complaints from LSVs Disadvantages: There are several disadvantages to potentially allowing either golf carts, OHVs or LSVs on the municipal streets in the Town of Estes Park. Staff concern would come from the difficulty of having several state highways in town. There is also concern from the existence of several major thoroughfares, and several neighborhoods, that exist both outside and inside town boundaries. This would also make an ordinance of this nature difficult for the public to comply with, and regional law enforcement to navigate. Other disadvantages include: • Misconception of the differences between a Golf Cart, an LSV, and an OHV. Any potential town ordinance would need to clearly identify exactly which is permitted. • Occupant Safety Concerns during any MVA. • Public education efforts for what would be required to be a street legal LSV (street legal vehicle). • Per CRS 33-14.5-110 OHVs will still have many including driver’s license, insurance, eye protection (helmets for minors), etc. • Traffic management issues inherent to our seasonal guests unfamiliar with these vehicles. • Paid parking and parking enforcement issues • Significance of 3 state highways which would be unable to have these vehicles travel on them in town despite any potential town ordinance. Finance/Resource Impact: Unknown Level of Public Interest Unknown Attachments: 1. PowerPoint Presentation titled “Study Session Golf Carts” Potential Use of Off Highway Vehicles (OHVs) and Low Speed Vehicles (LSVs) on Town Streets Background This evaluation is from PD staff through the lens of public safety. There will undoubtedly be significant Pros & Cons not related to public safety that are not addressed in this study session item. This is a complicated subject, very likely resulting in questions that will require some additional research by staff. ATTACHMENT 1 Pros Smaller vehicles have the potential for reduced congestion during high traffic times. Additional road capacity versus larger conventional vehicles Potential reduction in noise complaints from LSVs Cons Misconception of Golf Cart vs LSV vs OHV Any potential town ordinance would need to clearly identify exactly which is permitted. Public education efforts for what would be required to be a street legal LSV (street legal golf cart): Headlights, Tail Lights, Turn Signals, Mirror, Speedometer, etc. LSVs are limited to 35 mph, lower than some of our municipal streets. Per CRS 33-14.5-110 OHVs will still require many including driver’s license, insurance, eye protection (helmets for minors), etc. Cons Traffic management issues inherent to our seasonal guests Paid parking and parking enforcement issues Legal confusion concerns for the greater Estes Valley creating public frustration over citations and enforcement of state laws. Occupant Safety Concerns during any MVA Page 1 of 2 May 10, 2025 To: Mayor Hall & Trustees: Re: OHV’s & Noise Ordinance Study Session NO to OHV’s, ATVs, Golf carts, etc. on public streets. YES, to Noise Control No amount of tourism dollars, regulations, management, signage, or public education are worth the negative impacts to the community, especially; Environmentally, Safety Concerns, and Social & Community Impacts as I have stated below. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why OA-Highway Vehicles (OHVs), including ATVs, dirt bikes, and other recreational vehicles SHOULD NOT be allowed on public streets in the town of Estes Park or in the Estes Valley. The impacts of OA-Highway Vehicles (OHVs), including ATVs, dirt bikes, and other recreational vehicles, on public roads in mountain towns can be multifaceted, a Aecting the environment, safety, infrastructure, and community dynamics. Here's a detailed overview: Environmental Impacts: Erosion and Habitat Disruption: OHV’s can cause soil erosion, especially on unpaved roads and trails, disturbing local vegetation and habitats. Wildlife Disturbance: The noise and movement of OHVs can disturb local wildlife, aAecting feeding, breeding, and migration patterns. Pollution: Emissions from OHVs/ATVs contribute to air pollution, and improper disposal of oils and fuels can contaminate soil and water sources. Safety Concerns: Accidents and Injuries: OHVs used on or near public roads, increase the risk of collisions with other vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists, leading to injuries or fatalities. Road Damage: Heavy OHV use can cause wear and tear on road surfaces, leading to increased maintenance costs and hazards for all road users. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED 2025-05-10 Page 2 of 2 Social and Community EA ects:  Conﬂicts Between Users: Conﬂicts can arise between OHV riders, motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists regarding road and trail usage.  Noise Pollution: The noise from OHVs, especially ATVs, can disturb residents and visitors, diminishing the tranquil mountain environment that many seek.  Community Conﬂicts: OHV use near or on public roads can create conﬂicts or disputes that may arise over designated use areas, access rights, and safety concerns, and noise, impacting community cohesion Economic Impacts:  Tourism: OHVs/ATVs attract outdoor enthusiasts, which can boost local economies through tourism-related spending.  Infrastructure Costs: Increased wear on roads may lead to higher maintenance costs funded by local governments. Regulatory and Management Challenges:  Balancing access to recreational activities with conservation and safety requires eAective regulation, signage, and designated areas for OHV use.  Some towns implement restrictions or designated routes to mitigate negative impacts. Please DO NOT allow these on the public streets. Please help control the nuisance of noise for the tranquility of this beautiful town and for wildlife! Sincerely, Christy & Jerry Jacobs Residents/Citizens – Estes Park May 27, 2025 • High Impact Project Process • Outside Entity Funding (Policy 671) Edits June 10, 2025 • Cleave Street Redevelopment Update June 24, 2025 • Police Department Facility Update • State Wildfire Code July 25, 2025 • Curb and Gutter Philosophy Items Approved – Unscheduled: • Estes Park Health Update • Police Department Facility Financing • Overnight Parking • Liquor License Process Items for Town Board Consideration: • Water Master Plan – Collaborative Development of Treatment Alternatives Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items May 13, 2025