HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Study Session 2013-09-10
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado September 10, 2013
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 10th day of September,
2013.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod,
Ericson, Koenig, Norris and Phipps
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Richardson, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk
Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:33 p.m.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Elrod stated concern with the coordinated response to public comments
received by the Board. The Town Administrator would be responsible for providing a
coordinated response to the public. The Board agreed it would be appropriate for the
individual Board members to acknowledge receipt of the message and that staff would
be responding on behalf of the Board.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
Trustee Norris requested a debriefing on the Pro Cycle Challenge be added to an
upcoming study session.
Trustee Ericson suggested the Board discuss the order of agenda items with action
items coming earlier during the meeting. The study session items listed but not
scheduled should be reviewed by the Town Board to set a priority on bringing items
forward.
Trustee Phipps commented on the need for the Board to discuss the review process
used for the parking garage design. Town Administrator Lancaster stated the Town has
completed half of the process and suggested the process be reviewed once it has been
fully completed.
LIQUOR LICENSE HEARING PROTOCOL.
Mayor Pinkham stated concern with the questioning that took place during the liquor
hearings at that last meeting. The licensees were treated as defendants with excessive
probing and battering. Attorney White stated the licensee has agreed a violation has
occurred through the negotiated stipulation agreement, and therefore, the Board does
not need to find the licensee guilty of the violation. The Board’s responsibility is the
approval of the appropriate penalty for the violation that occurred. The Board may
consider any aggravating or mitigating measures when determining the penalty. Public
comment on liquor violations should not be taken or used to determine the appropriate
penalties.
The Board discussed the process and commented on the need to not repeat questions
asked of the licensee and to be an active listener; Board members need to request a
point of order when appropriate; and businesses passing the compliance check should
be published. Town Clerk Williamson stated a letter has been sent in the past to all
licensed establishments that pass a compliance check acknowledging their efforts to
continue training and education of their staff on the liquor code/laws.
Town Board Study Session – September 10, 2013 – Page 2
FINANCING OF INFRASTRUCTURE & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
Town Administrator Lancaster stated there are a number of capital and infrastructure
needs facing the Town for the next 10 to 15 years. The current revenue streams are
not sufficient to fund the projects. The Leadership team met to develop a list of needs
and a financing mechanism for the Board to consider. The list was developed from data
received at the community visioning sessions conducted this spring, past town citizen
surveys, past board comments and from the professional judgment of the Leadership
team. The top priorities included street/drainage, bike trails/trail connections,
community center/senior center, expanded transit, emergency AM radio, conference
center upgrades/expansions, museum expansion, museum storage, riverwalk
improvements, streetscapes, and fiber use optimization. Lower priority items identified
included performance park upgrades, upgrade/new restrooms downtown, pocket
park/neighborhood parks and public art. There were a number of other items identified
that were vetted as lower priority or should be completed by another entity.
The Town needs to provide efficient and effective services to the community prior to
considering additional funding options. The staff continues to identify methods to do
things better, cheaper and faster. Several funding options are available to address the
needs including the sale of excess Town property, formation of a storm water utility,
utility rates, charge for parking, impact fees, sales tax on water, increase in property tax,
increased business license fees, increase sales tax, grants, open space, lottery funds,
TIF financing, and reduce property tax combined with an increase in sales tax. It has
been estimated that 65% of sales tax revenue comes from visitors to Estes Park. A 1%
increase would generate approximately $2 million annually. The Leadership team
suggested a sales tax increase should be capped at 1% and sunset in 15 years. A
sunset would provide accountability to the voters and past experience has shown that
voters are more accepting of taxes that sunset.
Board discussion followed: it was suggested the Town consider a revenue bond to
generate immediate funds of approximately $21 million and use the sales tax increase
to pay the bond payment; any improvements made for the citizens of Estes Park are
going to benefit the visitors; a focused URA or DDA could be beneficial; reduction in the
property tax would affect TIFF financing in the future; concern raised over building
additional revenue generating project such as the MPEC and then asking the public to
approve additional taxation to generate revenue; the Town must prevent the decline of
infrastructure in order to maintain tourism base; the Town should continue to identify
grant opportunities and keep the sales tax package simply; remove fiber as the item is
nebulous; an increase in sales tax would affect other Town funded entities and
programs such as the Fire District and Community Services grants; the Board needs to
consider unintended consequences of each funding option; and infrastructure
improvements may require additional operating expenses to maintain.
The Board requested staff identify a timeline for a sales tax question for the April
election and an extended study session to discuss options in more detail to establish
the benefits and objectives of each funding mechanism.
MISCELLANEOUS
The parking structures preliminary design would be considered by the Board and then
the Planning Commission in October. Staff would bring the preliminary design forward
for the Board’s review prior to the Planning Commission meeting in October. Town
Administrator Lancaster reminded the Board they are the owner of the project and the
Board has the ability to review and change the project at anytime.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:34 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk