HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2014-10-14NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the
agenda was prepared.
The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high‐quality, reliable
services for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
PRESENTATION: America in Bloom Awards.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Internal Monitoring Report Policy 3.3 - Executive Limitations
1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of):
1. Town Board Minutes dated September 23, 2014 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated September 23, 2014.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development / Community Services, September 25, 2014.
4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated September 9, 2014
(acknowledgement only).
5. Energy Impact Assistance Fund grant for Estes Park Flood Recovery Staffing -
$392,512.
6. Resolution #21-14 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Everest Kitchen
LLC., dba Famous Eastside Groceries, 381 S. St. Vrain Avenue, 3.2% Beer Off
Premises Liquor License on November 11, 2014.
7. Resolution #22-14 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Rocky Mountain
Park Inn, LLC., dba Rocky Mountain Park Inn, 101-201 St. Vrain Avenue, Hotel &
Restaurant Liquor License on November 11, 2014.
Prepared 9/29/14
*Revised 10/9/14
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the
agenda was prepared.
8. Resolution #23-14 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Estes Valley
Recreation and Park District ETAL., dba Hangar Restaurant at the Estes Park Golf
Course, 1480 Golf Course Road, Hotel & Restaurant with Optional Premise Liquor
License on November 11, 2014.
9. Resolution #24-14 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Two Dolphins
Inc., dba The Grubsteak Restaurant., 134 W. Elkhorn Avenue, Hotel & Restaurant
Liquor License on November 11, 2014.
10. Resolution #25-14 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for M & S. Inc. and
La Sierra LLC., dba La Hacienda Bar & Grill , 165 Virginia Drive Unit #18-1 & 18-2,
Tavern Liquor License on November 11, 2014.
11. Resolution #26 -14 Setting Public Hearing date of October 28, 2014, for a new
Beer and Wine Liquor License Application filed by Murphy's Resort at Estes Park,
LLC dba Murphy's Resort, 1650 Big Thompson Avenue, Estes Park, CO.
12. Audit Committee minutes dates September 26, 2014 (acknowledgement only).
2. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS (Outside Entities):
1. MOUNTAIN STRONG FOR NONPROFITS. EPNRC Director Jill Lancaster.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. PARKS ADVISORY BOARD BYLAWS. Director Muhonen & Manager
McEachern.
2. RESOLUTION #27-14 SUPPORTING LARIMER COUNTY BALLOT 1A. K-Lynn
Cameron.
3. EASEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK AND
JOHN AND WINIFRED SPAHNLE. Administrator Lancaster.
4. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE INTERVIEW TEAM
APPOINTMENT. Town Clerk Williamson.
4. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. SINGLE AUDIT REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland.
5. ADJOURN.
*
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
970.577.3705
flancaster@estes.org
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 28th, 2014
TO: Board of Trustees
FROM: Frank Lancaster , Town Administrator
SUBJECT: INTERNAL MONITORING REPORT - EXECUTIVE LIMITATIONS
(QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT POLICY 3.3)
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for me to provide
information to the Board. Policy 3.3, Financial Planning and Budgeting requires
quarterly reporting of compliance in April, July, October and January.
Policy 3.3 states: “With respect for strategic planning for projects, services and activities
with a fiscal impact, the Town Administrator may not jeopardize either the operational or
fiscal integrity of Town government.”
This report constitutes my assurance that, as reasonably interpreted, these conditions
have not occurred and further, that the data submitted below are accurate as of this
date.
________________________
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
3.3.1. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which Deviates from
statutory requirements.
REPORT: The current budget and any proposed budget revisions have all been
prepared in compliance with applicable statutory requirements. I am
therefore reporting compliance.
3.3.2. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which Deviates
materially from Board-stated priorities in its allocation among competing
budgetary needs.
REPORT: The current budget and any proposed budget revisions have all been
prepared in following the Board stated priorities expressed during the budget
adoption process. I am therefore reporting compliance.
3.3.3. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which contains
inadequate information to enable credible projection of revenues and
expenses, separation of capital and operational items, cash flow and
subsequent audit trails, and disclosure of planning assumptions.
REPORT: The current budget was prepared with adequate information as
requested by the Board of Trustees. I am therefore reporting compliance.
3.3.4. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which plans the
expenditure in any fiscal year of more funds than are conservatively
projected to be received in that period, or which are otherwise available.
REPORT: At the current time there is likely probability that we will expend more
funds than we are projected to receive this fiscal year, due to considerable flood
recovery work being done in the fourth quarter of 2014 that is reimbursable from
FEMA and other sources. It is possible, and even likely that the work will not be
done in time for the reimbursements to be processed and received in the current
fiscal year. Staff is confident however, that we will receive the full reimbursement
due in 2015. I therefore cannot report compliance.
3.3.5. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which reduces fund
balances or reserves in any fund to a level below that established by the
Board of Trustees.
REPORT All Town funds, other than the General Fund, which are subject to this
provision are within the Board determined limits. The fund balance in the General
fund is anticipated to fall below the 25% level set by the board due to use of the
fund for emergency flood recovery expenditures. I have kept the Board informed
of the status of the fund balance and the use of funds for flood recovery and this
drop in fund balance is not unanticipated. I am therefore reporting conditional
compliance.
3.3.6. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which Fails to
maintain a Budget Contingency Plan capable of responding to significant
shortfalls within the Town’s budget.
REPORT: The current budget includes appropriate contingency funding. I am
therefore reporting compliance.
3.3.7. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which fails to
provide for an annual audit.
REPORT: The 2013 audit has been completed and presented to the board. I am
therefore reporting compliance.
3.3.8. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which fails to
protect, within his or her ability to do so, the integrity of the current or
future bond ratings of the Town.
REPORT: Nothing in the current budget as adopted fails to protect the integrity of
the current or future bond ratings of the Town. I am therefore reporting
compliance.
3.3.9. The Town Administrator shall not allow budgeting which results in new
positions to staffing levels without specific approval of the Board of Town
Trustees. The Town Administrator may approve positions funded by
grants, which would not impose additional costs to the Town in addition
to the grant funds and any temporary positions for which existing
budgeted funds are allocated.
REPORT: No new positions or additions to the staffing document have been
added without specific approval of the Board of Trustees other than temporary
positions or those grant positions that are 100% grant funded, as allowed by
adopted policy. I am therefore reporting compliance.
3.8.1. With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity of the Town. Accordingly,
pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not change his or her own
compensation and benefits.
REPORT: I have not changed my own compensation or benefits. I am therefore
reporting compliance.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 23, 2014
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 23rd day of September, 2014.
Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees John Ericson
Bob Holcomb
Ward Nelson
Ron Norris
John Phipps
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
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.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
None.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Norris stated the next Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee
meeting would be held on October 9, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board room. Visit Estes
Park has finalized their 2015 Operating Plan to be submitted to the Town Board by
September 30, 2014. The Larimer County Office of Aging would hold a focus meeting
on October 14, 2014 at the Good Samaritan. The Western Area Power Authority
(WAPA) has completed the draft environmental impact statement for the rebuild project
and public comment continues to be accepted within the next 45 days. The Museum
has a new book, Transformation of Rocky Mountain National Park: Effects of Climate
Change and Human Intervention, by local author Tom Gootz available in the gift shop.
The Museum’s latest exhibit opens on September 26, 2014 entitled Climb On, in
conjunction with the 100th anniversary celebration of Rocky Mountain National Park.
Trustee Holcomb commented the Tree Board has been renamed the Parks Advisory
Board to expand the scope of the Board to include public art. The new Board met and
approved bylaws that would be reviewed by the Town Board for final adoption at the
next board meeting. The Board has moved the meeting to the third Thursday of the
month at 12:30 p.m. in Town Hall. He thanked the volunteers of Autumn Gold for their
efforts in Bond Park this past weekend.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated the Community Service Grant Committee reviewed the
applications submitted for 2015 and have finalized the recommendations to be reviewed
by the Town Board at an upcoming Budget Study Session.
Trustee Phipps stated the next Planning Commission meeting on October 21, 2014
would include the resubmitted Falcon Ridge application, an amended plat application
and an update on the Comprehensive Plan. A joint meeting of the Town Board, County
Commissioners and the Planning Commission would be held on October 15, 2014 at
2:00 p.m. in the Museum meeting room. In addition to the 45 day comment period,
WAPA would be accepting written comments on October 30, 2014 and holding a public
meeting at the Conference Center. The first of many meetings to be held on the FLAP
(Downtown Loop project) would be held on October 8, 2014 from 12:00 pm. – 2:00 p.m.
for effected property owners and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. for the general public. The
Board of Trustees – September 23, 2014 – Page 2
Town would hold Budget Study Session meetings on October 3, 10 and 17, 2014 at
8:30 a.m. in the Board room.
Trustee Nelson commented he would attend the next Larimer County Open Lands
meeting on September 25, 2014.
Trustee Ericson stated the Community Development/Community Services Committee
meeting would be held on September 25, 2014 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board room. On
September 26, 2014 at 4:00 p.m. in the Administration conference room to review the
single audit.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Policy Governance Policy 3.8 Executive Limitations – Administrator Lancaster
reported full compliance.
Downtown Loop Project (FLAP grant project) – Administrator Lancaster reiterated
the first NEPA study step would take place for the project on October 8, 2014 to
gather public input. Additional public meetings would be held and provide the public
with other opportunities to comment.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated September 9, 2014 and Town Board Study
Session Minutes dated September 9, 2014.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
a. Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works, September 11, 2014:
1. Purchase of Light & Power Bucket Truck, Altec, $219,650 – Budgeted.
2. Purchase of THM Water Analyzer, Parker Hannifin, $35,537.50 –
Budgeted.
4. Transportation Advisory Committee dated August 20, 2014
(acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Valley Planning Commission dated August 19, 2014 (acknowledgement
only).
6. Estes Valley Library District re-appointment of Donald L. Bryson for a four
year term expiring December 31, 2018.
Trustee Holcomb requested Consent Item 1.1 be removed for discussion. It was
moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve the Consent Agenda Items 1.2-
1.6, and it passed unanimously.
CONSENT ITEM 1.1. – Trustee Holcomb requested a change to the Town Board Study
Session meeting minutes to reflect his suggested need for a liaison for the Economic
Development Corporation (EDC) Fiber committee and not the EDC Board. The change
was noted and would be reflected in the final minutes. It was moved and seconded
(Holcomb/Phipps) to approve Consent Agenda Item 1.1 with the amendment, and it
passed unanimously.
2. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS (Outside Entities):
1. MOUNTAIN STRONG FOR NONPROFITS. EPNRC Director Jill Lancaster
This item is rescheduled to the October 14, 2014 meeting.
Board of Trustees – September 23, 2014 – Page 3
3. LIQUOR ITEMS
1. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP - M&S, INC., DBA THE OVERLOOK BAR &
GRILLE, TO LA SIERRA, LLC, DBA LA HACIENDA BAR AND GRILL, 165
VIRGINIA DRIVE UNIT #18-1 AND #18-2, TAVERN LIQUOR LICENSE. Town
Clerk Williamson presented the application to transfer the current tavern
license. All required paperwork and fees were submitted and a temporary was
issued on July 24, 2014. It was moved and second (Koenig/Holcomb) to
approve the transfer from M&S, Inc., dba The Overlook Bar & Grille, to La
Sierra, LLC, dba La Hacienda Bar and Grill, 165 Virginia Drive Unit #18-1
and #18-2, Tavern liquor license, and it passed unanimously.
4. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
1. CONSENT ITEM:
1. AMENDED PLAT, Lots 1 & 2, Kenofer Addition, 582 Audobon Street,
Devin Jacobs/Applicant. Planner Kleisler.
2. CONDOMINIUM MAP, Supplemental Condominium Map, Phase XXVI,
Park River West Condominiums, 604, 606, & 608 Park River Place;
Crystal Wille/Applicant. Planner Kleisler.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to approve the Consent
Agenda with the Planning Commission recommendations, and it
passed unanimously.
5. ACTION ITEMS:
1. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR FLOOD RESTORATION PROJECTS.
Project Manager Zurn stated a request for bids was advertised by the Town
for a number of flood repairs across the community for roads and drainages.
The projects have been determined by FEMA and FHWA as damaged areas
eligible for reimbursement. The sites were bundled together to reduce
construction and administrative costs. After review of the bids, it was
determined that Osmun Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder at a cost of
$845,076.50 with a 10% contingency for a total of $929,600. The project
would be funded through reimbursements by FEMA, FHWA and the State of
Colorado and the Town contribution of 12.5% match. The project could be
substantially completed before winter if approved and awarded. RG
Engineering would provide construction management and oversight of the
projects through their current contract with the Town. Local contractors may
be used by Osmun when possible.
Joel Holtzman/Town citizen commented he bought his house just north of the
Carriage Hills pond because to the pond and the vistas. He encouraged the
Town to repair the dam as its current state affects his property value. He
would provide the necessary access from his property if needed and would be
willing to contribute to the cost to repair the dam.
After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to
approve the construction contract for flood repair projects to Osmun,
Inc. for a not-to-exceed of $929,600, and it passed unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION # 20-14 SUPPORTING BALLOT ISSUE #200 - THE
LARIMER HUMANE SOCIETY AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
ANIMAL SHELTER FOR LARIMER COUNTY. Holly Terry/Humane
Society’s Campaign Manager stated the current building was built in 1974 and
does not adequately support the population, the needs of the citizens or the
animals. The new building located of County Road 30 north of the airport
would provide for a multipurpose facility. The .01% sales tax increase would
Board of Trustees – September 23, 2014 – Page 4
raise $13 million for the new building and the financing needed; would sunset
in 6 years or sooner if the funds are raised prior; would follow standard
Larimer County sales tax exemptions such as gas and groceries; and provide
an opportunity for cost sharing. After further discussion, it was moved and
seconded (Phipps/Ericson) to approve Resolution #20-14, and it passed
unanimously.
3. ASSISTANT TOWN ADMINISTRATOR. Administrator Lancaster requested
the authorization to hire the vacant Assistant Town Administrator position.
This position has been left vacant since the resignation of the former
Assistant in September 2013 just prior to the flood. The position would
provide support with projects, assume risk management duties, and provide
assistance to the Town Administrator and department heads. It was moved
and seconded (Nelson/Holcomb) to authorize the Town Administrator to
refill the position of an Assistant Town Administrator at a time deemed
appropriate by the Town Administrator, and authorize the revisions to
the Administration department budget to fund said position, and it
passed unanimously.
6. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. EVENT CENTER & PAVILION CONSTRUCTION UPDATE. Project
Manager Zurn stated the roof on the silo has been completed. The electrical
has been completed enough for the system to be used in a majority of the
building. The second floor of the silo has been installed, metal roof materials
substantially completed, and bids are out for interior finishes, mechanical and
electrical. On the exterior the final stucco has been installed and decorative
stone elements have been completed.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 8:07 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 23, 2014
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION 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 23rd day of
September, 2014.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris, and Phipps
Attending: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris, and Phipps
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Town Attorney White, and
Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Ericson reported that an Audit Committee meeting will be held on Friday,
September 26th to prepare to bring the single audit findings and management letter
forward to the Town Board at the next Town Board meeting. Staff is expecting to
receive drafts of the documents from the auditors prior to the meeting. The single audit
must be filed with the State by September 30th. Attorney White advised the Board that
the Audit Committee, as well as all advisory committees formally constituted by the
Town of Estes Park, are required to adhere to the open meeting act. This requires that
public notice of the meeting is given, an agenda is prepared, and meeting minutes are
taken.
Trustee Norris informed the Board that the terms of two members of the Local
Marketing District (LMD) Board of Directors will expire at the end of the year. The
positions have been posted and interviews will be scheduled in October. As liaison to
Visit Estes Park, Trustee Norris will be part of the interview team. Trustee Holcomb
expressed interest in serving as well. The LMD has requested that a member of their
board be allowed to sit in on the interviews, however, this person would not be part of
the interview team nor be part of the decision-making process. He also noted that the
LMD is preparing their 2015 Operating Plan to bring forward to the Town Board.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig said the Community Service Grants (CSG) applications have
been reviewed and the recommendations will be included in the budget study session
packet materials. She suggested adding a discussion related to CSG to a future study
session agenda to give the Board an opportunity to talk about the grants in general, the
Town’s role and in what direction the Board wants to move related to the grants, and to
establish criteria for the individuals reviewing the applications.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
A discussion of Community Service Grants will be added to the list of topics for future
study session agendas. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig requested that the discussion be
completed by February or March of 2015 to provide time to inform local organizations of
any changes that may affect the 2015 grant program.
CONSIDER A LIAISON TO ESTES PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY.
Town Administrator Lancaster asked the Board for clarification related to appointing a
member of the Board as liaison to the Estes Park Housing Authority (EPHA).
Historically, a trustee has been a member of the EPHA Board of Directors, the last
being former Mayor Pro Tem Eric Blackhurst. With Mr. Blackhurst’s departure from the
Town Board Study Session – September 23, 2014 – Page 2
Town Board, that relationship no longer exists. Rita Kurelja, Executive Director of
EPHA, stated that she had not polled the members of the EPHA Board about this topic,
however, she personally felt it would be a good idea to have a liaison appointed. She
said the liaison would not be a voting member of the Board but would provide two-way
communication between the Town and the EPHA. The Trustees’ comments are
summarized: better communication sounds like a good idea; better communication
makes for better decisions; the EPHA is a separate entity from the Town; there has
always been communication between the two entities; EPHA serves a specific segment
of the population; their job is not to address every housing issue in the community; don’t
want the public perception to be that the Town has taken over the Housing Authority;
the physical presence of a liaison may be confusing to the public; give Director Kurelja
the opportunity to explore this topic with the EPHA Board; and Director Kurelja will
provide quarterly reports to the Town Board and communicate with the Board at any
time circumstances warrant that the Town Board be updated.
CONTINUE BOARD COMMUNICATION DISCUSSION.
Mayor Pinkham continued the review of a draft document dealing with a Code of
Conduct for elected officials that was started at the Town Board Study Session on
September 9, 2014. He reviewed the following topics: Trustee Conduct with Town
Staff, Trustee Conduct with the Public, and Conduct with the Media. The Mayor noted
that the Board’s role is to set policy and provide direction to the Town Administrator. He
said the Town Administrator’s responsibilities are to carry out policy and take direction
from the Town Board, as well as to oversee staff; and said that this direction must come
from the entire Board, not from individual members. Town Administrated Lancaster said
that items to be added or removed from meeting agendas must be the result of a
decision made by the full Board and requested that he be included in any
communication between the Board and Town staff. The following topics were also
discussed: job performance should not be evaluated in public; complementing an
organization/individual on a job well done is acceptable; no public criticism; coordinate
responses to correspondence with Town staff to ensure an accurate message; Town
Board meetings are not the appropriate place for cheerleading or applause; avoid public
debates; don’t make promises on behalf of the Board; be clear about representing the
Town or personal interests; and defer to the Mayor, Town Administrator or PIO when
dealing with the media. The Board said they were not interested in receiving media
relations training, however, they requested that PIO Rusch put together a check list of
media dos and don’ts for distribution.
Town Administrator Lancaster said the Code of Conduct document would be reviewed
and formatted and brought back to the next Town Board Study Session before moving
forward to the Board for formal adoption. He said the Code of Conduct will be inserted
in the appropriate section of Policy Governance.
Mayor Pinkham recessed the meeting for a dinner break at 5:08 p.m., and resumed the
meeting at 5:38 p.m.
REVIEW 2014 OBJECTIVES.
Town Administrator Lancaster reviewed the 2014 Board Objectives to be completed in a
one-year time frame. He noted that some projects have been delayed due to staff’s
continued involvement with flood recovery including paperwork related to applying for
grants and reimbursement documentation. He estimated that approximately 50% of
staff’s time is still devoted to the flood in some manner.
He reported that completed or nearly completed objectives include: brewery, winery,
and distillery code changes; the Event Center and Stall Barn construction are
substantially complete and in use; an AM public advisory radio station is on track to be
operational by the end of 2014; the Citizen’s Survey; and the approval and
implementation of an increase to the Town’s sales tax rate.
Town Board Study Session – September 23, 2014 – Page 3
Progress is ongoing on: code changes to support redevelopment, address vacation
home rentals, and the possible adoption of the dangerous building portion of the IBC;
local and regional economic development efforts; Visitor Center parking structure;
development of options for the Glacier Creek Water Treatment plant will be completed
as part of the Water Master Plan; participation in the EDC Fiber Committee; repairs to
flood damaged utilities; marketing of the Event Center; remediation of the landfill on Elm
Road; stream restoration and redefining of the flood plains; updating and revision of
policies; working with EVRPD on the Community Center; participating in preparations
for RMNP 100th anniversary; discussion of community housing issues; increasing
compliance in the operation of vacation homes; FLAP grant and preventive
maintenance on Town roadways.
Projects on hold include: environmental studies for the extension of the Fall River trail;
development of a funding plan for facility maintenance; evaluate potential required
changes in radio frequencies; Comprehensive Plan update; implementation of a capital
planning process; and implementation of Transportation Visioning Committee signage
recommendations.
Town Administrator Lancaster said he would continue to update the Board on a
quarterly basis; as well as provide summaries of the topics discussed at the many
meetings he attends.
FISH HATCHERY PROPERTY APPRAISAL.
Town Administrator Lancaster said that he is in the process of selecting an appraiser
and getting on schedule for an appraisal of the Town-owned property known as the Fish
Hatchery property. The historic Fall River Hydroplant museum, the picnic grounds, as
well as several Town-owned homes, and storage buildings are located on this property.
He noted that the Town will retain the approximate six-acre portion of the property which
houses the museum and the picnic grounds. He suggested that for purposes of the
appraisal, the property be sectioned off into several segments, rather than appraising
the entire property as a whole. That way if the Board chooses to separate portions of
the property for sale, the value of each separate area would be available. He said he
would formalize designation of the portions to be appraised and make sure that the
appraiser had specific information about these areas prior to beginning the appraisal
process. He noted that the appraisal would supply the Board with the current market
value of the property and the values of each section could be added together to come
up with a value for the property as a whole. He said he is hopeful that the appraisal can
be completed by the end of the year, however, it will be dependent upon the appraiser’s
schedule.
Town Administrator Lancaster said that the demolition of the Black Canyon Water
Treatment Plant is underway. Conversations about possibly offering this property for
sale can begin once the demolition is complete.
CONSIDER HIRING A MOUNTAIN URBAN PLANNING CONSULTANT.
With the implementation of the FLAP grant project, development/redevelopment
opportunities within the downtown core area may be on the horizon. The Trustees
discussed hiring a consultant to help provide ideas and a vision for how the Town of
Estes Park might evolve over the next ten to 20 years. Trustee Nelson said the FLAP
grant project, microbreweries, and the Event Center are all factors that may redefine the
character of Estes Park and provide an opportunity to shape the community’s future
related to aesthetics, citizen comforts, and the ability to attract businesses to the area.
He said a consultant may be able to provide ideas about successful development and
how to take advantage of the Town’s attributes. He said conversations with staff have
identified some topics to explore including the comprehensive plan; neighborhood
planning; design guidelines; mixed use areas; how to attract young people to the area to
retain vibrancy within the community; evaluation and revision of the codes to encourage
Town Board Study Session – September 23, 2014 – Page 4
rather than discourage redevelopment; utilization of natural attributes such as the rivers
and river walk; and pro-actively working with the Economic Development Corp (EDC).
Discussion is summarized: a mountain town planners conference could be organized to
bring planners to Estes Park; the 2017 team was provided with a report that addressed
the nature of mountain communities and how to expand their economies; this is the role
of the Community Development Department, have Director Chilcott and Town
Administrator Lancaster come back with recommendations; need a joint plan with the
EDC; where is commercial property located?; current code is protective and restrictive,
needs to be changed so it can be enhancing; and need to identify successful trends.
Town Administrator Lancaster proposed consideration of identifying the downtown core
as the first neighborhood to establish a neighborhood plan concept. The public
meetings related to the FLAP project including the NEPA study public input piece may
be utilized and discussions broadened to include ideas for redevelopment possibilities.
Additionally, a Downtown Development Authority (DDA) could be discussed where tax
increment financing (TIF) can be used for improvements. Discussion will continue and
staff will review the budget and identify reasonably priced organizations or individuals
who may be able to provide information before considering hiring a consultant or
commissioning a report at this point in time.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:45
p.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 25, 2014
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer
County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the
25th day of September, 2014.
Committee: Chair Ericson, Trustees Holcomb and Phipps
Absent: None
Also Attending: Administrator Lancaster, Directors Chilcott and Fortini,
Managers Mitchell and Lynch, Coordinators Jacobson and
Wells, Chief Building Official Birchfield, and Recording
Secretary Limmiatis
Trustee Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:05 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Senior Services Quarterly Report – Manager Mitchell updated the Committee on the
first Families and Seniors Together (F.A.S.T.) event, work completed with the
Larimer County Office on Aging, the United Way 211-To-Go program, increased
attendance and use of rental properties.
September & October Event Report - Coordinator Jacobson discussed the success
of the farmer’s market in Bond Park, flood recovery events, and the upcoming
events for the autumn season.
Shuttle Update – Coordinator Wells stated ridership was down by 2% overall in 2014
from 2013, but there was a significant increase in ridership of the Brown Route. The
Shuttle Committee would review the stops and routes, and create activities to
promote the 10th year anniversary of the Estes Park Free Shuttles.
Verbal Updates and Committee Questions –
Director Fortini informed the Committee the “Climb On!” exhibit would open
September 26, 2014 in conjunction with the celebration of Rocky Mountain
National Park’s 100th Anniversary. The exhibit showcases the local history of
rock climbing and features a temporary photography exhibit which explores
bouldering in the area.
Manager Lynch stated sales have been going great. The Event Center and all
venues throughout Town are being filled, new groups are interested in coming
to Town, and the Event Center/Pavilion website would be gong live soon.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
FALCON RIDGE FEE WAIVER.
Director Chilcott presented the request from the Estes Park Housing Authority for an
additional waiver of $760.00 for the development application and administrative costs
related to the Falcon Ridge project. A fee waiver was previously granted for
development review and building permit fees. The request falls within the Fee Waiver
Policy to support affordable housing within Town. The Committee recommended the
approval of the Falcon Ridge Fee Waiver to be included as an Action Item with the
Amended Plat at the November 25, 2014 Town Board meeting.
Community Development / Community Services – September 25, 2014 – Page 2
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Flood Recovery Update – Director Chilcott provided an overview of the Flood
Recovery efforts which have taken place within the past year and items that need to
be addressed including the Fall River and Fish Creek Master Plan, the possibility of
a Watershed Coalition, the grant funding of an Environmental Planner/Planner III,
future grant funding opportunities and the extension of the interim floodplain
regulations. The Committee requested Director Chilcott present a comprehensive
Flood Recovery report at the October 28, 2014 Town Board meeting in conjunction
with the Ordinance to extend interim floodplain regulations.
Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Chief Building Official Birchfield stated
stakeholders would be targeted to obtain feedback for specific dangerous building
code updates and multiple meetings would be held to identify public concerns prior
to the adoption of the International Building Codes. He currently has the authority to
act if the public is in eminent danger and does not foresee the need to rush the
public outreach process.
There being no further business, Trustee Ericson adjourned the meeting at 9:32 a.m.
Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
September 9, 2014 9:00 a.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board: Chair John Lynch, Vice-Chair Jeff Moreau, Members Wayne Newsom,
and Pete Smith; Alternate Member Chris Christian
Attending: Chair Lynch, Members Moreau and Newsom
Also Attending: Senior Planner Shirk, Planner Kleisler, Recording Secretary Thompson
Absent: Member Smith and one vacant position
Chair Lynch called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. There was a quorum in attendance.
He introduced the Board members and staff.
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence. There were three people in attendance.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT
Approval of minutes of the July 1, 2014 meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Moreau/Newsom) to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented and the motion passed 3-0, with one absent and one vacant position.
3. PORTION OF LOT 9, MOUNT VIEW PARK, 831 Big Horn
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. This request is for a variance from Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC) Section 4.3, Table 4-2, which sets a minimum building and
structure setback distance of 25 feet in the E-1–Estate zone district. The applicant
requests a variance to replace an existing unsafe concrete patio with a wood frame deck.
Approximately eight feet of the existing residence and the entire patio lies within the 25-
foot setback. The proposed deck would be two feet from the property line. Planner
Kleisler stated the home and patio were built in 1940, before the current setback
standards were in place. The deterioration of the patio has become a safety concern and
prevents adequate use of an exterior door.
Planner Kleisler stated normal repairs and maintenance could be made without a
variance, but replacement requires a variance. Adjacent property owners and affected
agencies were notified, with no significant concerns received.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 2
September 9, 2014
Staff Findings
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist. Staff found that the lot is 0.39 acres. The
minimum lot size in the E-1–Estate is one acre. The unique scattered rock
outcroppings throughout the site present exceptional difficulties in locating the deck to
the north. These topographic conditions were the likely reason for the location of the
house (far southeast partially in the setbacks).
2. In determining “practical difficulty’, staff found the following:
a. Residential use may continue without the variance.
b. The variance request was not substantial
c. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered with
the approval of this variance. Nearby homes are similar in size and character, with
many containing similar patios/decks. Adjoining properties would not suffer
substantial detriment as a result of this variance. The nearest property is a
residential dwelling approximately 66 feet to the northeast along Granite Lane. It
appears the view of the deck would remain the same from this property, while the
area below the deck would be naturally screened by rocks. Furthermore, replacing
the concrete patio with a wood frame deck would eliminate the concrete wall of the
existing patio along Big Horn Drive.
d. Affected agencies expressed no concerns relating to public services for this
variance.
e. The home was built in 1940, before the adoption of setback requirements. The
applicant purchased the home in 2002, after the adoption of the current setback
standards.
f. A variance is the only option to replace any portion of the existing patio, given
that it is entirely in the side setback.
3. Representing the least deviation from the regulations that will afford relief, the
applicant proposes to reduce the size of the deck to two feet from the property line.
The Board of Adjustment may, at its discretion, require that the deck be further
shortened.
4. If approved, staff determined verification of the location of the deck could be obtained
without a surveyor certificate.
Planner Kleisler stated staff recommended approval, with conditions listed below.
Public Comment
Mike Todd/applicant representative stated the current deck is in structural failure, and is
impeding the entry to the house. Repairs would be substantial, and the owner is requesting
replacement with a wood deck structure. The proposed wood frame deck would be less
imposing to the neighbors, and have less economic impact on the property owner. The
concrete wall would be removed.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 3
September 9, 2014
Public comment closed.
Staff and Board Member Discussion
None.
Condition of Approval
1. Compliance with the approved site plan.
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the variance request for a
Portion of Lot 9, Mount View Park, with the findings and conditions recommended
by staff and the motion passed 3-0, with one absent and one vacancy.
4. LOT 5, REPLAT OF LOT 26, BLOCK 1, FALL RIVER ESTATES; 1255 Fall River Court
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. This request is for a variance from EVDC
section 4.3, Table 4-2, which requires 25-foot setbacks in the E-1–Estate zone district.
The applicant requests to replace an existing deck, without expanding it further into the
setback. Planner Kleisler stated the home was built in 1999, and was zoned multi-family
with 25-foot setbacks. At the time of construction, red lines on the plans indicated the
deck could not be built in the setback. However; the permit was issued without revisions
to the plans, and a certificate of occupancy was issued. Due to this error, the home is
considered nonconforming. Planner Kleisler stated the application was routed to affected
agencies and adjacent property owners. No significant concerns were received. The
property borders Rocky Mountain National Park, and Park personnel did not oppose the
variance.
Staff Findings
1. Special circumstances exist relating to lot shape and the location of the house on the
lot. The long and narrow shape of the lot is due mainly to steep topography, street
layout and the nearby location of a Town water tank; for these reasons many lots in
the Fall River Estates subdivision are oddly shaped. The location and orientation of
the house also prevents any reasonably-sized deck from being constructed to the
south and east.
2. In determining “practical difficulty”, staff found:
a. Residential use of the property may continue without the variance
b. The variance is not substantial
c. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered with
the approval of this variance. Nearby homes are similar in size and character. The
nearest residential home is over 200 feet to the east. It appears that the portions of
the deck related to this variance are not visible to other properties in the Valley.
d. Affected agencies expressed no concerns relating to public services for this
variance.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 4
September 9, 2014
e. According to the Larimer County Tax Assessor, the home was built in 1999. The
property was zoned RM–Residential Multi-Family in 1999, which also required 25-
foot setbacks. The applicant purchased the home at the time of construction, which
was after the adoption of the setback standards.
f. Normal repairs and maintenance can be performed on the non-conforming
sections of the deck, but they cannot be fully replaced.
3. If approved, the variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that
will afford relief. The applicant has received a permit to construct the deck portions
outside of the setbacks. The applicant does not proposed expanding the deck beyond
the current location.
4. If approved, staff can verify the location of the deck without a surveyor certificate.
Planner Kleisler stated staff recommended approval of the requested variance, with
conditions listed below.
Staff and Member Discussion
Planner Kleisler stated there were notes on the original plans which stated the deck could
not be built in the setback. However, it was approved and permitted. Because of
situations like this, Setback Certificates are now required if they are near the setback.
Public Comment
None.
Condition of Approval
1. Compliance with the approved site plan.
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the variance request for
Lot 5, Replat of Lot 26, Block 1, Fall River Estates the findings and condition
recommended by staff and the motion passed 3-0 with one absent and one vacant
position.
5. SOMBRERO RANCH
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Sombrero Ranch, Inc., is
requesting to expand a nonconforming use on property that is zoned for low density
development. Planner Shirk stated the request is to stockpile materials being removed
from an existing pond at Lost Antlers Ranch, 2153 McGraw Ranch Road. The materials
being removed were washed into the pond from Rocky Mountain National Park during the
2013 flood. The proposal stated the stockpile on the Sombrero Ranch property would be
used over an estimated ten to twelve (10-12) years for normal repairs and maintenance of
existing roads and trails on Sombrero Ranch properties. The proposed stockpile site
location` is zoned RE-Rural Estate, with a minimum lot size of ten acres.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 5
September 9, 2014
Planner Shirk stated the stockpile would be approximately two acres in size and
approximately six feet deep. Approval of this variance would not allow an increase in
additional development on the property outside of this stockpile. The proposed stockpile
would be located behind mature trees, approximately 700 feet east of and 100 vertical
feet above the Stonegate Drive/Dry Gulch Road intersection. There would be several
hundred feet of vegetative buffer between the stockpile and road. Planner Shirk stated the
applicant (Cody Rex Walker) was in attendance to answer specific questions concerning
hours of operation, traffic control plan, erosion control, etc. Representatives from Van
Horn Engineering were also in attendance.
Planner Shirk stated the variance request was from EVDC Section 6.3.C.1
Alteration/Extension of Nonconforming Uses Prohibited, to expand a nonconforming use
to allow outdoor storage of fill materials for use on-site. The Board of Adjustment was the
decision-making body, with any appeals going to District Court.
Planner Shirk stated staff received various written comments from adjacent property
owners. These comments were included in the meeting packets. He stated the existing
commercial use in a residentially-zoned property is a legal nonconforming use. The EVDC
states nonconforming uses shall not be extended unless they come to the Board of
Adjustment for approval. The applicant could store the materials closer to the structures
on Big Thompson Avenue without a variance; however, the location would have a greater
visual impact.
Staff Findings
1. In determining whether special circumstances exist, staff found the Sombero Ranch
consists of 288 acres, and are zoned CO–Commercial Outyling. The majority of the
property, including the proposed storage area, is zoned for residential use (RE-1–
Rural Estate). This area includes the horse trails and hay storage area. This renders
the property nonconforming in terms of the development code, therefore necessitating
the variance request to expand the commercial use of the property. Section 6.1.C.1 of
the EVDC states “a nonconforming use shall not be altered or extended.” If located on
the commercially-zoned portion of the property, the proposed outdoor storage would
be a use-by-right, and would have to comply with screening requirements outlined in
Section 7.13 of the EVDC.
2. In determining “practical difficulty”, staff determined the following;
a. The existing commercial use may continue. Section 6.3.B allows for repair and
normal maintenance to keep a nonconforming use in safe condition. The proposed
stockpiling of materials is intended to provide for long-term maintenance of the
property.
b. The variance is substantial in that it would allow a two-acre area with several feet
of fill materials to be stockpiled for the next 10-12 years. The stockpile area is not
substantial in relation to the overall size of the property (nearly 300 acres).
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 6
September 9, 2014
c. Staff found the primary impact to the neighborhood would be temporary, during the
hauling operations. If the variance is approved with the recommended conditions of
approval, the long-term character of the neighborhood would not be substantially
altered with the approval of this variance. Many residents of the North End feel the
essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered, as
demonstrated by the volume of written comments submitted for review and
consideration by the Board.
i. The primary neighborhood concerns center on traffic impact, visual
impact of the stockpile, and potential environmental impacts such as
erosion and weed infestation.
ii. Because of the long-term nature of the use, the storage pile should be
vegetated with native grasses to mitigate visual impact, discourage
invasive weeds, and prevent windblow and stormwater erosion. The
temporary access should be reclaimed with native grasses after the
hauling operations cease.
ii. The proposed use would generate approximately 1,500 truck trips over the
course of several weeks. Once the hauling operations ceased and the access
road reclaimed, the overall impact on the neighborhood would be minimal.
Approval of the variance would reduce additional hauling activities to the
Sombrero property in the future because the materials would be available on-
site. Disapproval of the variance would not eliminate the use of McGraw
Ranch Road, Devils Gulch road, or Dry Gulch Road during the dredging operations
and hauling operation; the pond would still be dredged and materials removed from
the McGraw Ranch Road site.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as
water and sewer, staff found the proposed hauling operation could have a negative
impact on both the privately maintained McGraw Ranch Road and the publicly
maintained Devils Gulch and Dry Gulch Roads. The Larimer County Engineering
Department has recommended conditions of approval to mitigate such impact. If
approved, storing the materials on the Sombrero Ranch property would have the
least overall impact on the county road system because it would minimize the
travel distance of the materials. If disapproved, the materials would most likely be
hauled out of the Estes Valley, increasing the impact on the roads.
e. Staff found the applicant purchase the property in 1995, prior to the EVDC
regulations being adopted.
f. Staff found the applicant’s predicament could be mitigated through some method
other than a variance; the applicant could truck in construction materials as
needed.
3. Staff found, if the variance is approved, EVDC Section 7.2.C Restoration of Disturbed
Areas and Section 7.13 Outdoor Storage Areas, Activities and Mechanical should
apply.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 7
September 9, 2014
4. The Board of Adjustment may require such conditions as will, in its independent
judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standard so varied or modified.
Staff recommends several conditions to mitigate the impact of the variance request.
These conditions address traffic control, erosion control, site restoration, development
agreement, and form of credit. The variance request provides an opportunity to
impose operational requirements on the overall dredging process; without the
variance, there would be no opportunity for County Engineering review of the dredging
and hauling operations.
Planner Shirk showed photos of the proposed site, on the east side of trees between Dry
Gulch Road and the ridge. He stated staff did not require a visual simulation due to the
number of trees between the site and Dry Gulch Road. He clarified to the Board the
dredging operations were not a part of this request. The dredging will take place with or
without the approval of the variance. The variance is only related to the stockpiling of the
materials on the Sombrero Ranch property. Planner Shirk stated silt fencing would be
required, and the state would need to approve the drainage plan for the site. Staff would
require a development agreement and form of credit to ensure the site restoration at
Sombrero Ranch was completed satisfactorily. This agreement and credit would need to
be in place prior to the commencement of any site work.
Planner Shirk stated staff recommended approval of the variance request, with conditions
of approval, listed below.
Public Comment
Jim Fletemeyer/applicant representative stated the materials were needed on the
Sombrero Ranch properties for reconstruction of trails damaged by the flood and for long-
term maintenance. The ranch has always stockpiled materials for this use, just not on
their property. He stated the material coming from the site on McGraw Ranch Road has
an impressive consistency and will be excellent for rebuilding trails and corral operations.
There are four locations in the Estes Valley where the applicant would like to use the
materials. Sombrero Ranch employees use pack horses to distribute the materials on the
riding trails. Mr. Fletemeyer stated Sombrero Ranch would be the receiver of the
materials, and would not be involved with the dredging operation on McGraw Ranch
Road. He explained in detail the processes involved in maintaining McGraw Ranch Road
during the hauling operation, mentioning all the permits and plans required and obtained
from various agencies to complete the dredging, hauling, and reclamation process.
Keeping the material at the deposition site was considered, and it was determined it
would be more harmful to the environment to keep it at the site than to haul it away. He
stated the applicant has been working with Community Development staff to ensure
compliance with the EVDC. A contract has been signed with a seeding company for
reclamation of the area and revegetation of the stockpile. A stormwater management plan
was created and will be submitted to the state if the variance is approved.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 8
September 9, 2014
Mr. Fletemeyer submitted a document in response to the public comments received. This
memo has been included in the official meeting packet. He explained an agreement was
reached between the owners of Lost Antlers Ranch and Sombrero Ranch concerning the
dump fee.
Glenn Porzak/land use and water law attorney explained the easements, road
maintenance agreement, etc. concerning McGraw Ranch Road. NOTE: McGraw Ranch
Road is private, and the issues pertaining to the use of this road are not in the purview of
the Board of Adjustment for this variance request.
Ben Keeter/supervisor of hauling procedure explained the proposed hauling process.
NOTE: The hauling of the materials is not in the purview of the Board of Adjustment for this
variance request. He stated the hours of operation would be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., no
more than five days per week. The decision was made to begin the operation in the fall to
avoid conflicts with summer guests and part-time residents. The goal is to complete the
hauling in six weeks, weather dependent.
Fran Grooters/Road Association President for McGraw Ranch Road stated she wanted to
the plan to work, and shared several concerns. NOTE: McGraw Ranch Road is private,
and the issues pertaining to the use of this road are not in the purview of the Board of
Adjustment for this variance request.
Chair Lynch reviewed the variance request, which is only for the stockpiling of materials on
Sombrero Ranch property. There was brief discussion among the Board concerning the
variance application.
Peter Praut/County resident had concerns about the use of McGraw Ranch Road. NOTE:
McGraw Ranch Road is private, and the issues pertaining to the use of this road are not in
the purview of the Board of Adjustment for this variance request. Mr. Praut distributed a
document listing suggested additions to the conditions of approval. This document was
made part of the official meeting packet.
Senior Planner Shirk stated it was outside the Board’s purview to require specific approval
from property owners. It would, however, be appropriate for a condition of approval to
request Larimer County’s approval of the hauling plan. He stated Mr. Walker mentioned
using the stockpiled materials at locations other than the site where the material was
stored. If the Board was willing to allow this, they would need to make an amendment to
the Conditions of Approval.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 9
September 9, 2014
Betty Hull/County resident stated she understood this would be a temporary process. She
was concerned about blowing dust from the site during the windy winter months, noxious
weeds, and erosion of the stockpile. She was opposed to the variance request.
Nancy Hills/County resident was concerned about wildlife migration corridors, truck noise,
wind, dust, and the reclamation of the area. She referred to the Clean Water Act (EPA)
and was concerned about health issues from particulates. She asked the Board to
consider all the items brought up by the adjacent property owners.
Celine LeBeau/Van Horn Engineering stated an erosion control study was completed. A
state permit is required, which describes the details concerning erosion. Inspections will be
completed on a regular basis throughout the process. Silt moving outside the silt fence
would be in violation of the permit. Other measures will be in place to mitigate erosion. It
would be in violation of the permit to discharge sediment into the drainage. She stated
97.7% of the materials being moved are from Rocky Mountain National Park. Chemical
contaminants are very low. She stated it would have a greater adverse environmental
impact to leave the sediment on the property because it is a direct watershed area. This
would be detrimental to fish, aquatic habitat, and wildlife. Reseeding will take place
immediately, using a rye grass blend that will take hold very quickly.
Scott Beck/Lost Antlers Ranch owner stated he is not cutting corners or shaving expenses.
He was grateful there was a nearby landowner willing to take the material, as flood
recovery has been a significant expense. He assured the Board and the property owners
along McGraw Ranch Road the process would be handled correctly and appropriately.
Mr. Walker/applicant stated Sombrero Ranch did not own any trucks as large as those
doing the hauling, and the material would be used mostly for corral operations at their
liveries.
Public comment closed.
Staff and Board Discussion
There was discussion concerning the amendments to the Conditions of Approval as listed
in the staff report. Comments concerning the application included, but were not limited to:
“We need to realize this was a huge flood and leaving sediment in its deposited location is
not good for the environment,” “It seems like the applicant has covered all the bases.”
Conditions of Approval
1. Materials stored on Sombrero Ranches shall be used only on the Sombrero Ranch
site and other livery operations controlled by Sombrero Ranch for repairs and normal
maintenance of the existing trails and roads. Approval of this variance does not
provide approval for expansion of the existing trail and/or road system.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 10
September 9, 2014
2. The stockpiled material and access road shall be restored in accordance with EVDC
Section 7.2.C Restoration of Disturbed Areas no later than May 31 2015.
3. A development agreement and form of credit to ensure site restoration shall be
submitted for review and approval prior to any site work.
4. The modification of the access off of Dry Gulch Road shall require an Access Permit
from the Larimer County Engineering Department. The issuance of the access permit
shall include improving the access to meet the County access requirements and shall
also include the requirement to reclaim the access to the pre-construction condition.
5. A detailed construction plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Larimer
County Engineering Department. The plan shall detail the proposed access road on
the site to the location where the materials will be deposited. The temporary access
road shall be built to minimize disturbance and the potential for erosion. The plan shall
also address screening, as required by EVDC Section 7.13 Outdoor Storage Areas,
Activities and Mechanical Equipment.
6. A State Construction Activity Permit is required prior to commencement of the hauling
operation. The detailed stormwater management plan required with the State permit
shall also be submitted to the Larimer County Engineering Department and the Town
of Estes Park Planning Department for review and approval.
7. A traffic control plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Larimer County
Engineering Department prior to commencing the hauling operations. This plan shall
include management of traffic on McGraw Ranch Road.
8. A haul plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Larimer County
Engineering Department. The plan shall describe procedures for maintaining a safe
and functional road for the residents during the hauling operations. For example, dust
suppression may be needed, pull outs for passing, the requirement for only one truck
at one time on the road, where equipment would be stored overnight and during
weekends, vehicle tracking pad, etc.
9. All other necessary State permits shall be issued prior to the commencement of the
hauling operations.
10. The owner of the originating site shall maintain McGraw Ranch Road during the
hauling, and shall repair the road upon completion of the hauling.
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the variance request to
allow expansion of a nonconforming use to allow outdoor storage of fill materials on
a portion of the Sombrero Ranch property with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff and amended by the Board and the motion passed 3-0 with
one absent and one vacancy.
6. ESTES VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMENDMENT TO THE BYLAWS
Planner Shirk stated a formal adoption of the amendment to the bylaws was required by
the Board. He stated Town Administrator Lancaster has requested all policies and bylaws
be revised and reformatted to be as consistent as possible. In so doing, a few other
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment 11
September 9, 2014
revisions were made for consistency with the IGA with Larimer County. Examples include
specifying that the Chair and Co-Chair alternate between Town and County appointees
and clarification about attendance. The proposed amendments to the bylaws have been
approved by the Estes Park Town Board and the Larimer County Board of County
Commissioners. The final step is formal adoption by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment.
It was moved and seconded (Lynch/Moreau) to adopt the amendments to the Bylaws
as presented by staff and the motion passed 3-0 with one absent and one vacancy.
7. REPORTS
A. Planner Shirk reported the silo at the Multi-Purpose Event Center was raised
according to the approved variance in July. The height certificate has yet to be
submitted. The additional height will allow for additional office space, and the Town
Board approved a change order to proceed with the additional space.
B. Senior Planner Shirk reported revisions were made to the Sign Code section of the
Estes Park Municipal Code. Sign code variances will be coming to the Board of
Adjustment, as in past years. One of the revisions included the elimination of the
Creative Sign Design Review Board.
C. Senior Planner Shirk reported on the vacant position, and the new detailed job
description for a Board of Adjustment member. Hopefully, a new member will be
appointed soon.
D. Senior Planner Shirk reported he will begin educating the Board on the Estes Valley
Comprehensive Plan and the Estes Valley Development Code. This will take place in
brief training sessions as part of the regular Board of Adjustment meetings.
E. Member Newsom reported he was comfortable with the decisions the Board made
today.
There being no other business before Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45
a.m.
___________________________________
John Lynch, Chair
__________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
FINANCE Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Christy Crosser, Grant Specialist
Date: October 14, 2014
RE: Energy Impact Assistance Fund grant for Estes Park Flood Recovery
Staffing
Objective:
Hire two positions to assist with flood recovery efforts with funds from the Department of
Local Affairs (DOLA), Energy/ Mineral Impact Assistance Funds.
Present Situation:
As a result of the September 2013 floods, increased workload on Town employees has
resulted in a need for additional help. Staff submitted a grant application to DOLA to
help support the salaries and benefits of two employees at no cost to the Town for two
years.
Proposal:
Community Development proposed hiring an Environmental Planner III to assist with
flood recovery work including mitigation opportunities. Utilities Department is interested
in hiring a Project Manager to assist with their permanent repair work including Glen
Haven. This Project Manager position will also be available to Public Works. These
positions will be supported by the DOLA, Energy/ Mineral Impact Assistance Funds
through December 2016.
Advantages:
Current staff will be in a better position to continue their daily, non-flood
responsibilities.
Positions fully funded, salary and benefits, to support these positions from DOLA.
Disadvantages:
There are no significant disadvantages.
Action Recommended:
Recommend acceptance of the grant for the two fully funded positions.
Budget:
These positions will be added to the 2014 and 2015 budgets in the appropriate
departments/ funds. Funding and expenditures for these positions will appear in the
same departments/ funds (Community Development and Utilities).
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the grant funds awarded the Town of Estes Park by the
Department of Local Affairs Energy/Mineral Impact Fund for the Environmental Planner
and Project Manager.
Attachments:
Grant award letter from Reeves Brown dated September 8, 2014.
Setting Show Cause Hearing
Town Clerk’s Office Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: October 10, 2014
RE: Consent Items 6 - 10 – Setting Show Cause Hearings
Objective:
Schedule Show Cause Liquor Hearings for five liquor licensed establishment including
Eastside Food Store, Rocky Mountain Park Inn, Hanger Restaurant at the Estes Park
Golf Course, The Grubsteak Restaurant, and La Hacienda.
Present Situation:
The five liquor license establishments listed above failed a compliance check conducted
by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado Liquor Enforcement Division on
September 25, 2014. An employee of each of the establishments illegally sold and
served alcohol to an underage person and/or did not ask for identification and sold and
served the underage person alcohol.
Proposal:
Set Show Cause Liquor Hearing for each establishment for November 11, 2014. Once
the hearing is set an Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing will be issued to the
Licensee.
During the next few weeks the licensee will be given the opportunity to meet with staff to
discuss a stipulation agreement. A stipulation agreement allows the licensee to agree
to the violation as well as the penalty under the Town’s Liquor Violation Sentencing
Guidelines for Compliance and Non-Compliance Check Violations. This agreement
would be presented to the Town Board in lieu of a Show Cause Hearing on November
11, 2014.
Advantages:
Demonstrates to other liquor licensees the Town Board (Local Liquor Authority)
takes liquor laws seriously by completing administrative action locally rather than
through the State.
The Town can take action in a timely manner to ensure licensees are completing
any violations in a reasonable timeframe.
Disadvantages:
Setting Show Cause Hearing 2
Show Cause Hearing preparations and Stipulation meetings and negotiation require
significant staff time.
Action Recommended:
Approve the Resolutions for each establishment setting the Show Cause Hearing date
of November 11, 2014.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest
The community supports keeping alcohol out of the hands of the youth.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Resolutions # 21-14, 22-14, 23-14, 24-14 and 25-14 setting a
Show Cause Hearing Eastside Food Store, Rocky Mountain Park Inn, Hanger
Restaurant at the Estes Park Golf Course, The Grubsteak Restaurant, and La
Hacienda.
RESOLUTION NO. 21-14
WHEREAS, a complaint by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado
Liquor Enforcement Division was presented to the Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on
September 25, 2014 charging EVEREST KITCHEN LLC., dba FAMOUS EASTSIDE
GROCERIES, a 3.2% OFF-PREMISE LIQUOR LICENSE, LIQUOR LICENSE NO.
4600058 with certain violations of the statutes of the State of Colorado and Rules and
Regulations of the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement Division; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby determines that there is probable cause
that the aforementioned Licensee has violated one or more of the statutes and/or rules
and regulations governing the operations of the license as more fully set forth in the
complaint; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it is necessary to hold a hearing and issue an Order to
Show Cause why the aforementioned license should not be suspended or revoked due to
the violation(s) presented to the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a show cause hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 12-47-601,
C.R.S., and a Notice of Hearing be issued to the Licensee to appear and show cause why
the license should not be suspended or revoked. Said hearing shall take place at the
Town Board meeting scheduled Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board
Room of the Estes Park Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
Section 2. That the Town Clerk shall cause an Order to Show Cause and Notice of
Hearing on the aforementioned complaint to be mailed to the following:
MR. BIPIN SHRESTHA
EVEREST KITCHEN LLC
D/B/A FAMOUS EASTSIDE FOODSTORE
381 S. ST. VRAIN AVENUE
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF ____________, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 22-14
WHEREAS, a complaint by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado
Liquor Enforcement Division was presented to the Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on
September 25, 2014 charging ROCKY MOUNTAIN PARK INN, LLC., dba ROCKY
MOUNTAIN PARK INN, a HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE, LIQUOR
LICENSE NO. 26310900000 with certain violations of the statutes of the State of Colorado
and Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement
Division; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby determines that there is probable cause
that the aforementioned Licensee has violated one or more of the statutes and/or rules
and regulations governing the operations of the license as more fully set forth in the
complaint; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it is necessary to hold a hearing and issue an Order to
Show Cause why the aforementioned license should not be suspended or revoked due to
the violation(s) presented to the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a show cause hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 12-47-601,
C.R.S., and a Notice of Hearing be issued to the Licensee to appear and show cause why
the license should not be suspended or revoked. Said hearing shall take place at the
Town Board meeting scheduled Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board
Room of the Estes Park Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
Section 2. That the Town Clerk shall cause an Order to Show Cause and Notice of
Hearing on the aforementioned complaint to be mailed to the following:
MS. JANET BROWN
ROCKY MOUNTAIN PARK INN, LLC.
D/B/A ROCKY MOUNTAIN PARK INN
101-201 ST. VRAIN AVENUE
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF ____________, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 23-14
WHEREAS, a complaint by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado
Liquor Enforcement Division was presented to the Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on
September 25, 2014 charging ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT
ETAL., dba HANGAR RESTAURANT AT THE ESTES PARK GOLF COURSE, a
HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE, LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 06309720000
with certain violations of the statutes of the State of Colorado and Rules and Regulations
of the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement Division; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby determines that there is probable cause
that the aforementioned Licensee has violated one or more of the statutes and/or rules
and regulations governing the operations of the license as more fully set forth in the
complaint; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it is necessary to hold a hearing and issue an Order to
Show Cause why the aforementioned license should not be suspended or revoked due to
the violation(s) presented to the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a show cause hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 12-47-601,
C.R.S., and a Notice of Hearing be issued to the Licensee to appear and show cause why
the license should not be suspended or revoked. Said hearing shall take place at the
Town Board meeting scheduled Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board
Room of the Estes Park Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
Section 2. That the Town Clerk shall cause an Order to Show Cause and Notice of
Hearing on the aforementioned complaint to be mailed to the following:
MS. JANET CARABELL
ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ETAL.
D/B/A HANGAR RESTAURANT AT THE ESTES PARK GOLF COURSE
1480 GOLF COURSE ROAD
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF ____________, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 24-14
WHEREAS, a complaint by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado
Liquor Enforcement Division was presented to the Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on
September 25, 2014 charging TWO DOLPHINS INC., dba THE GRUBSTEAK
RESTAURANT., a HOTEL AND RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSE, LIQUOR LICENSE
NO. 42562400000 with certain violations of the statutes of the State of Colorado and
Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement
Division; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby determines that there is probable cause
that the aforementioned Licensee has violated one or more of the statutes and/or rules
and regulations governing the operations of the license as more fully set forth in the
complaint; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it is necessary to hold a hearing and issue an Order to
Show Cause why the aforementioned license should not be suspended or revoked due to
the violation(s) presented to the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a show cause hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 12-47-601,
C.R.S., and a Notice of Hearing be issued to the Licensee to appear and show cause why
the license should not be suspended or revoked. Said hearing shall take place at the
Town Board meeting scheduled Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board
Room of the Estes Park Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
Section 2. That the Town Clerk shall cause an Order to Show Cause and Notice of
Hearing on the aforementioned complaint to be mailed to the following:
MS. ALLIE JONES
TWO DOLPHINS, INC.
D/B/A GRUBSTEAK RESTAURANT
134 W. ELKHORN AVENUE
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF ____________, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 25-14
WHEREAS, a complaint by the Estes Park Police Department and the Colorado
Liquor Enforcement Division was presented to the Trustees of the Town of Estes Park on
September 25, 2014 charging M & S INC. AND LA SIERRA LLC DBA LA HACIENDA
BAR AND GRILL RESTAURANT., a TAVERN LIQUOR LICENSE, LIQUOR LICENSE
NO. 4701355 with certain violations of the statutes of the State of Colorado and Rules and
Regulations of the Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement Division; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees hereby determines that there is probable cause
that the aforementioned Licensee has violated one or more of the statutes and/or rules
and regulations governing the operations of the license as more fully set forth in the
complaint; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it is necessary to hold a hearing and issue an Order to
Show Cause why the aforementioned license should not be suspended or revoked due to
the violation(s) presented to the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. That a show cause hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 12-47-601,
C.R.S., and a Notice of Hearing be issued to the Licensee to appear and show cause why
the license should not be suspended or revoked. Said hearing shall take place at the
Town Board meeting scheduled Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board
Room of the Estes Park Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
Section 2. That the Town Clerk shall cause an Order to Show Cause and Notice of
Hearing on the aforementioned complaint to be mailed to the following:
MS. MICHELLE CARLYLE
MR. JOSE ALFREDO IBARRA
M & S. INC. AND LA SIERRA LLC
D/B/A LA HACIENDA BAR AND GRILL
165 VIRGINIA UNITS 18-1 & 18-2
ESTES PARK, COLORADO 80517
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED THIS DAY OF ____________, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
RESOLUTION #26-14
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 BEER AND WINE Liquor License,
filed by Murphy’s Resort at Estes Park, LLC, dba MURPHY’S RESORT, 1650 Big Thompson
Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado, is September 25, 2014.
It is hereby ordered that a public hearing on said application shall be held in the Board
Room of the Municipal Building, 170 MacGregor Avenue, on Tuesday, October 28, 2014, 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 4.26 miles, as measured from the center
of the applicant's property.
DATED this 14th day of October, 2014.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 26, 2014
Minutes of a meeting of the AUDIT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in
said Town of Estes Park on the 26th day of September, 2014.
Committee: Mayor Pinkham, Trustee Ericson, Town Administrator
Lancaster, Finance Officer McFarland
Attending: Committee: Mayor Pinkham, Trustee Ericson, Town
Administrator Lancaster, and Finance Officer McFarland
Non-Committee: Justin Petrone, CPA, of CliftonLarsenAllen
(CLA), was present by telephone conference call.
Absent: None.
Chairman Ericson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
2013 A-133 SINGLE AUDIT REVIEW
1. SINGLE AUDIT FINDINGS
The 2013 Single Audit (SA) was completed prior to the September 30, 2014 filing
deadline. The Single Audit is performed when the Town expends more than
$500,000 in Federal funds in one year. Some portions of the SA refer solely to the
Federal Awards, while other portions refer back to the 2013 Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report (CAFR). There are several sections to the SA. The key highlights
include:
a. Page 1 - CLA did not identify and deficiencies in internal control considered to be
material weaknesses.
b. Page 3 – CLA issued a clean opinion on the Town’s compliance with the SA that
could have a direct and material effect on its major federal program for the year
ending December 31, 2013.
c. Page 5 – CLA stated that the schedule of expenditures of federal awards is fairly
stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a
whole.
d. Page 6 shows the schedule of expenditures of Federal Awards.
e. Page 8 is the schedule of findings and questioned costs for 2013. The “Financial
Statements” section applies to the CAFR, whereas the Federal Awards applies to
the SA. There are no areas of concern on this page.
f. Pages 9-12 discuss significant deficiencies (defined on page 4). In all 3 cases,
corrective actions steps are included. These include:
Audit Committee – September 26, 2014 – Page 2
i. Misstatement of Grants receivables. Grants were not missing – they were
merely mis-posted on the financial statements.
ii. In grant expenditures, $512 was listed as a duplicate expenditure.
iii. Eligible payroll costs were not correctly stated - $448.
g. Pages 13-14 lists prior year (2012) Audit concerns that were corrected, and did
not reappear in 2013.
2. MANAGEMENT LETTER
CLA included a Management Letter for the Board of Trustees. The Letter covers
activity in both the CAFR and the SA. In the Letter, CLA identifies two areas where
controls may be improved upon (user access rights to the accounting software, and
capital asset classification). Neither of these items rises to the level of material
weaknesses or significant deficiencies, but staff is addressing both items. The
management letter is intended solely for the use of the Board of Trustees and
management, and is not intended to be used by anyone other than these specified
parties.
The Single Audit will be filed with appropriate authorities at the federal and state
levels by September 30, 2014.
ANNUAL RENEWAL OF CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN CONTRACT FOR 2014
CAFR/SINGLE AUDIT The Audit Committee discussed the relationship between CLA
and the Town. This is the 2nd year of a series of 5 1-year contracts with CLA. The Audit
Committee recommends that the Board of Trustees consider continuing to use CLA for
the 2014 CAFR/SA. It was decided that the most expedient way to convey this to the
Board of Trustees is through these minutes, through a report to be given by Finance
Officer McFarland at the October 14, 2014 Town Board meeting, and through the
Consent Agenda when CLA submits their 2014 engagement letter in the near future.
OTHER NEW BUSINESS
There was no other new business.
There being no further business, Chairman Ericson adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.
Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Mountain Strong for Nonprofits (MS4NP)
Mountain Strong for Nonprofits is a grant-funded endeavor of the Estes Park Nonprofit Resource
Center that allows local and out-of-state Estes Valley enthusiasts to donate directly to the
nonprofit(s) of their choice.
The Estes Park Nonprofit Resource Center board decided to pursue MS4NP as a means for local
nonprofits to recover from the financial implications of the flood and grow their donor base to help
ensure a brighter future. We are grateful to the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado for
believing in the concept and providing the grant funding that made MS4NP possible.
Key Points
MtnStrongNonprofits.org is the central location to learn about and donate to nonprofits serving
Estes and the surrounding communities.
All donations are made directly to the nonprofits. When you click on an organization’s donate
button you are linked to their secure payment processing system.
Only 501(c)(3) public charities are eligible to participate in MS4NP.
EPNRC appreciates how very generous our community’s residents and business owners are with their
support of local nonprofits. We also understand that with so many dealing with personal flood
recovery and helping with disaster relief, money is tight. That is why Mountain Strong for Nonprofits
was developed with the intent of reaching out beyond our Valley.
Just as people from around the country proudly wore Mountain Strong t-shirts in support of flood
recovery, we hope they will join in supporting our charitable organizations through MS4NP.
Any assistance you can provide with sharing this information and the website is greatly appreciated.
MtnStrongNonprofits.org
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager
Date: October 14, 2014
RE: Parks Advisory Board Bylaws
Background:
At the Town Board meeting on May 27, 2014, Resolution #12-14 was passed to
establish a Parks Advisory Board (PAB) and replace the Tree Board. The expanding
roles of the PAB include:
Advise the Board of Trustees regarding the establishment and implementation of
a Public Art Policy that guides the acceptance and placement of public art
memorials, donations, and purchases.
Advise the Public Works Parks Division Staff and the Board of Trustees on
content and implementation of technical standards of public and private parks,
trails, plantings, invasive plants, noxious weeds, and pest control.
Support the Community environmental/wetlands educational programs in the
schools and community efforts on river restoration, clean up, bank re-vegetation,
and water quality protection.
The new Parks Advisory Board met in July to help create the new bylaws. At the
September 18, 2014, meeting the PAB welcomed three new members, established a
quorum and voted to approve the new bylaws (attached)
Staff Recommendation:
Public Works staff and the Parks Advisory Board recommend approval and adoption of
the new Parks Advisory Board bylaws.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the Estes Park Parks Advisory Board bylaws.
Parks Advisory Board
BY-LAWS
I. ROLE
The role of the Parks Advisory Board includes four primary responsibilities:
A. Advise the Public Works Parks Division Staff on compliance with Tree City USA Standards
through the development of a tree care ordinance, a community forestry program with an
annual budget of at least $2 per Capita, and an annual Arbor Day observance and
proclamation.
B. Advise the Board of Trustees regarding the establishment and implementation of a Public
Art Policy that guides the acceptance and placement of public art memorials, donations, and
purchases.
C. Advise the Public Works Parks Division Staff and the Board of Trustees on content and
implementation of technical standards for public and private parks, trails, plantings, invasive
plants, noxious weeds, and pest control.
D. Support the Community environmental/wetlands educational programs in the schools and
community efforts on river restoration, clean up, bank revegetation, and water quality
protection.
In addition to these bylaws, the Parks Advisory Board operates under the terms of the Town of
Estes Park Volunteer Manual. A copy of that document, along with these bylaws, shall be
provided to each member at the time of their appointment.
II. MEETINGS
A. Regular Meetings shall be held at least one time per month. Any item on the agenda which
cannot be heard and considered by the conclusion of the meeting may be continued until and
heard at the next regularly scheduled meeting or a specially scheduled meeting and shall have
priority over any other matters to be heard and considered.
B. Special Meetings may be held at any time upon call by the Chairperson. The
Chairperson shall call a special meeting upon request by the Town Board or Town
Administrator, or upon request by three of the members of the Parks Advisory Board.
C. Cancellation of Meetings Regularly scheduled meetings of the Parks Advisory Board may be
canceled or rescheduled upon:
1. Approval by two-thirds of the members of the Board.
2. By the Staff Liaison in the event that no agenda items are scheduled at the meeting to
be cancelled.
D. Meeting Procedures for matters requiring action by the Board, parliamentary procedure shall
be followed in moving, discussion, and acting on such matters.
E. Open Meetings All meetings and action of the Board shall be in full compliance with
State Statutes governing open meetings as amended and incorporated herein by reference. It
is the responsibility of the Staff Liaison to be familiar with these statutes and regulations.
F. Attendance by Non-members Meetings may be attended by persons who are not members of
the Parks Advisory Board. At the discretion of the Chairperson, nonmembers may be allowed to
speak at meetings. However, in no event shall nonmembers be allowed to vote on matters for
which a vote is required.
III. MEMBERS AND QUORUM
A. Membership shall consist of citizens living in the Estes Valley for at least 2 years and have
experience with trees, weeds, public art, trails or park design. There shall be 7 members.
B. Terms Members shall be appointed to a 3 year term. The terms of the members shall be
staggered so that the terms of an equal number of the members expire each year.
C. Vacancies shall be filled by appointment by the Town Board for the unexpired portion of the
term of the position to be filled.
D. Recommendations for Appointment Upon request by the Town Board, the Parks Advisory
Board shall make recommendations for appointments to the Town Board.
E. Ex-officio members of the Board shall not vote on matters requiring a vote by the Board.
1. Ex-officio members shall receive copies of all notices, documents, and records of
proceedings of the Board.
2. Ex-officio members shall not be entitled to vote on motions before the Board.
F. Quorum
A Quorum shall be four or more members of the seven-member Board. A quorum must
be present in order to take a vote on any action items.
G. Action by the Parks Advisory Board shall be by majority vote of the members attending any
regular or special meeting at which a quorum is present, unless otherwise provided in these by-
laws
IV. OFFICERS
A. Officers shall include a chair person and a vice chair as selected by the Board.
B. Elections Officers shall be elected by the members annually, at the first regularly scheduled
meeting of each year. Officers shall be members of the Board. Notification of who is elected
Chair will be sent to the Town Clerk.
C. Chairperson responsibilities:
1. Preside at all meetings.
2. Insure that all meetings are conducted with decorum and efficiency.
3. Call special meetings in accordance with the by-laws.
4. Sign any documents prepared by the Parks Advisory Board for submission to the Town
Board or town departments.
5. See that decisions of the Board are implemented.
6. Represent the Board in dealings with the Town Board or other organizations.
7. The Chairperson has the same right as any other member of the Board to vote on
matters before the Board and to speak for or against proposals, provided, however, that
if the Chairperson desires to speak for or against a proposal which has been formally
moved and seconded at a public meeting, the Chairperson shall relinquish the chair to
the Vice-Chairperson while he or she is speaking.
D. Vice-Chairperson responsibilities:
1. Assist the Chairperson as requested.
2. Accept and undertake duties delegated by the Chairperson.
3. Preside over meetings or perform other duties of the Chairperson in the event the
Chairperson is absent or unable to act.
E. Removal from Office Any officer may be removed from office by a majority vote of the
members of the Parks Advisory Board in attendance at a meeting provided that at least thirty
days notice has been given to all members that removal of the officer will be considered at such
meeting.
F. Officer Vacancies If any office is vacant, the members of the Board shall elect a member to
fill the office for the remainder of the year.
V. ATTENDANCE
Regular attendance by the members of the Board is expected.
VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS
These by-laws may be amended at any regular or special meeting of the Parks Advisory Board
by a majority of the membership of the Board provided that notice of such possible amendments
is given to all members at least 20 days prior to the meeting at which action is to be taken: Any
amendments shall be subject to review and approval by the Town Board.
VII. COMPLIANCE WITH TOWN POLICIES
A. The Board shall operate in compliance with the adopted Town Board policy on Town
Committees, Policy 100 as amended. The terms of this policy are incorporated in these
bylaws by this reference and are attached herewith.
B. Volunteer members of the board will act in accordance to the adopted Town Volunteer
Manual.
VIII. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
A. A conflict of interest occurs when a person’s private, personal relationships or interests
diverge so that an independent observer may reasonably question whether the person’s
actions or decisions are determined by personal benefit, gain, or advantage.
B. Members of the Board shall not use their membership for private gain, and shall act
impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
C. A member of the Board who has a personal or private interest in a matter proposed or
pending shall disclose such interest to the committee; shall not vote on the item; and shall
not attempt to influence the decisions of other members voting on the matter.
Adopted the ___day of ___________, 2014
PARKS ADVISORY BOARD
By: ________________________________
Chairperson
Reviewed and approved the _____ day of __________________, 2014.
ESTES PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES
By: ___________________________________
Mayor
RESOLUTION #27-14
ENDORSING LARIMER COUNTY’S BALLOT ISSUE 1A
TO CONTINUE PROTECTING NATURAL AREAS,
OPEN SPACES, RIVERS AND WILDLILFE HABITAT
WHEREAS, The Larimer County Board of Commissioners have unanimously
referred Ballot Issue 1A Continue Protecting Our Natural Areas, Open Spaces, Rivers
and Wildlife Habitat to the toe voters of Larimer County in the election on November 4
2014, 2014 and;
WHEREAS, the Larimer County Open Space funds have been instrumental in
protecting open space and creating trails in the Estes Valley and;
WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Trails Advisory Committee and the Board of the
Estes Valley Recreation and Park District have endorsed the continued tax and;
WHEREAS, this is a continuation of an existing tax and will not increase the tax
burden on residents and guests in Estes Park;
WHEREAS, a portion of the Open Space tax is shared back with the Town of
Estes Park that can be used for Town priorities for protecting open space and building
trails.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO support and endorse Ballot Issue 1A Continue
Protecting Our Natural Areas, Open Spaces, Rivers and Wildlife Habitat.
DATED this day of 2014.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
Larimer County Issue 1AContinue Protecting Our Open Spaces
The Help Preserve Open Spaces Storyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S899H6exUsw
AccomplishmentsHermit Park Open Space
AccomplishmentsAdditions to HorsetoothMountain Park
AccomplishmentsRed Mountain Open Space
AccomplishmentsAmerican Legion PropertyChilders / Henning Conservation Easement
AccomplishmentsBikle and Knoll - Willows
AccomplishmentsEnos Mills Conservation EasementHomer Rouse Memorial Trail
AccomplishmentsLake Estes TrailLion Gulch Trailhead
AccomplishmentsLily Lake Water and Recreation RightsLily Lake/Roessler
AccomplishmentsSmitherman Conservation EasementRed Tail Ridge
AccomplishmentsDevil’s Backbone
AccomplishmentsSylvan Dale Easements
Citizen Values Toward Open SpaceLarimer County Citizen Survey (2013)When asked to list “the top three to five things Larimer County should focus on in the future,” protection of open spaces was seen as the single most important concern. Larimer County Plug In To Nature (2012)Parents in Larimer County would like their children to spend more time outdoors. Parents feel that mountains, trails, forests and water resources have the highest value for connecting families to nature.
Economic Benefits of Open Space*A major component in Quality of Life indices A survey of high-tech workers showed that a job’s attractiveness increases by 33 percent in communities with a high quality of life.Enhanced property valueA conservative estimate finds that property adjacent to natural areas and open spaces adds $750,000 - $3,000,000 each year in Larimer County property tax revenue. Visitor SpendingVisitor spending attributable to open space is $4.2 to $5.6 million annually.* From “Our Lands Our Future Final Report”, Oct. 2013
Larimer County Issue 1AReferred to ballot by County Commissioners.Measure is result of collaborative work by original HPOS citizens committee, staff, commissioners, and Open Lands Advisory Board.It is a continuationof the existing ¼ of one percent open space sales tax. It is nota new tax; it is nota tax increase.
Key Provisions of Issue 1ASharing between County and cities and towns:50% goes to Larimer County50% is split between the cities and townsaccording to their sales tax generation and population.
Key Provisions of Issue 1ACounty revenue expenditure requirements:35% of revenues must be spent on land acquisition, conservation, and restoration; 50% must be spent on management and improvements (e.g., trails) of open spaces 15% may be spent on either of the above…over the life of the continuation.
Key Provisions of Issue 1AAccountability ProvisionsA citizen’s committee will continue to oversee use of the funds. An annual report must be presented to the public. The funds may not be diverted to any other uses.
Key Provisions of Issue 1A25 year sunset Groceries and prescription drugs are nottaxed.Lands may be purchased from willing sellers only.
Why Now?Current Help Preserve Open Spaces sales tax expires in 2018.Need this time for planning for future conservation and management.Big Thompson River Corridor opportunitiesUpdate of Larimer County Open Lands Master PlanLarimer County is one of fastest growing counties in Colorado.
What Will Issue 1A Do?Larimer County and its cities and towns can continue to:Protect the most important open spaces, natural areas, wildlife habitat, and working farms and ranches in Larimer County.Protect and restore lands along rivers, lakes, and streams.
What Will Issue 1A Do?Larimer County and its cities and towns can continue to:Provide trails and other opportunities for walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing.Keep our open spaces and natural areas well-managed.
How Can I Help?Go to the website:www.HelpPreserveOpenSpaces.org…to donate or volunteer.Tell your friends and neighbors to vote YES on Larimer County Issue 1A!
How Can I Help?And most importantly….
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY!Thank You!Questions?
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
From: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Date: October 14th, 2014
RE: Spahnle Driveway Easement Agreement
Objective:
To provide an easement to Mr. and Ms. Spahnle for their existing parking and ingress
and egress to their garage and home in Elkhorn Club Estates.
Present Situation:
The Spahnle’s home at 840 Old Ranger Dr is adjacent to a vacant parcel of land owned
by the town near the Elkhorn Lodge. It’s unclear how this encroachment developed.
Proposal:
That the town grant an easement to the Spahnle’s to allow them to use a portion of the
vacant town parcel for ingress and egress to a garage and home located on the
Grantee’s property.
Advantages:
Formalizes an informal situation that has existed for a number of years
Codifies the use of the property for the current and future property owners
Specifies the allowed and prohibited uses of the Town property
Defines the liability for any incidents arising from the use of the easement.
Disadvantages:
Provides some minimal restrictions on the potential use of this part of the parcel
by the Town..
Action Recommended:
Recommend that the Board approve the easement agreement.
Budget:
insignificant
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT
With John C and Winifred E Spahnle.
DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT (‘Agreement’) is entered into this
______ day of _____________, 2014 by and between The Town of Estes Park, whose legal
address is P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517, of the County of Larimer, State of Colorado,
Grantor, and John C. Spahnle and Winifred E. Spahnle, whose legal address is 840 Old Ranger
Road, Estes Park, CO 80517 of the County of Larimer, and State of Colorado, Grantees.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantor owns real property located in Township 5, Range 73, Section 26,
Elkhorn Club Estates, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, Parcel No. 3526109901, as depicted
on the attached Exhibit “A” (Grantor’s Parcel), which Exhibit “A” is incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, Grantor’s Parcel includes an area containing a driveway and parking area
that provides Grantees parking and ingress and egress to a garage and home located on Grantees’
Parcel, said area being depicted on the attached Exhibit “A” as the “Subject Easement Area” (the
‘Easement Area’); and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth and define herein their respective rights,
restrictions and responsibilities with respect to the Easement Area,
NOW THEREFORE, for ten dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor has this
date conveyed and granted, and by these presents does convey and grant unto Grantees, their
heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, a non-exclusive easement for purposes of
parking and ingress and egress to Grantees’ existing garage and home, over the Easement Area
upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.
1. The easement granted herein is for the benefit of and appurtenant to Grantees’ Parcel.
2. Grantees, their guests and invitees, shall have the right to park on, and to use and
operate motor vehicles upon and across, the Easement Area and the driveway located
within the Easement Area for access to and from the existing garage and home on
Grantees’ Parcel. Except as provided for herein, Grantees, their guests and invitees,
shall have no right to place or store anything in or upon the Easement Area. Grantees
shall not erect any structures, including fencing, upon the Easement Area.
3. Grantor, its employees, contractors and agents, shall not park, place or store anything
in or upon the Easement Area which would prevent or hinder Grantees, their guests
and invitees, from being able to park thereon or to access Grantees’ existing garage
and home.
4. The easement granted herein is non-exclusive, and Grantor, its employees,
contractors, and agents, shall also be free to utilize the Easement Area and the
driveway located within the Easement Area so long as they do not unreasonably
interfere with Grantees’ parking and Grantees’ ingress and egress rights across the
Easement Area to Grantees’ existing garage and home.
5. Grantees shall be responsible to reasonably maintain the Easement Area and the
driveway thereon at all times in good, clean condition and repair and further shall be
responsible for adequate snow and trash removal thereon.
6. In using the Easement Area and the driveway thereon, and in exercising their rights
hereunder, Grantees will in no way hinder or prevent the proper and reasonable use of
Grantor’s Parcel, through which the easement is granted.
7. Any liability for death, personal injury, and/or damage to Grantor, its employees,
contractors, agents, guests and invitees, or any third persons, as a result of or arising
out of or relating to the use or occupancy of the Easement Area by Grantees, their
employees, contractors, agents, guests and invitees, shall be borne solely by Grantees.
Further, Grantees agree to and do indemnify and hold Grantor harmless from and
against any loss, including death and/or personal injury, or property damage which
results from, arises out of, or is attributable to, the use of the Easement Area by
Grantees, their employees, contractors, agents, guests and invitees.
8. The easement granted herein shall be perpetual, except that at such time and in the
event the Easement Area shall be abandoned by Grantees for a period of one (1) year,
or if Grantees’ existing garage and home shall be demolished and not rebuilt within a
period of one (1) year, or if Grantees’ existing garage and home shall be relocated
such that the Easement Area is no longer necessary to access Grantees’ garage, the
easement granted herein and the property interest of Grantees therein shall terminate
and shall thereafter revert to Grantor.
9. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be
binding on the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties
hereto. This Agreement shall run with the lands described herein and be binding on
all subsequent owners of the lands affected by this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantees have executed this Agreement
effective on the date set forth above.
GRANTOR: GRANTEES:
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
_________________________________ __________________________
By: Mayor John C. Spahnle
___________________________
Winefred E. Spahnle
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF LARIMER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of October, 2014
by Bill Pinkham, as Mayor of the Town of Estes Park.
Witness my hand and official seal.
[SEAL]
____________________________
Town Clerk
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF LARIMER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of October, 2014
by John C. Spahnle and Winifred E. Spahnle.
Witness my hand and official seal.
[SEAL]
____________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires:_________
Local Marketing District Interview Committee Appointments
Town Clerk Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: October 10, 2014
RE: Interview Committee for Local Marketing District Board
Objective:
To appoint Town Board members to the interview committee for the two positions open
on the Local Marketing District Board.
Present Situation:
The Local Marketing District Board is currently made up of seven volunteer community
members with five appointed by the Town and two appointed by the County
Commissioners. The Board currently has two Town positions open. Administrative
Services has posted the positions and will accept applications through October 20th.
Proposal:
Per Policy 101 Section 6 states all applicants for Town Committees/Boards are to be
interviewed by the Town Board, or its designee. Any designee will be appointed by the
Town Board. Therefore, Mayor Pinkham has requested the Board discuss the
appointments at the Study Session prior to the Town Board and bring forward a
recommendation to the Board meeting for approval.
Advantages:
To move the process forward and allow interviews to be conducted of interested
applicants.
Disadvantages: None.
Action Recommended:
To appoint two Trustees to be identified at the Study Session and recommended for
Board approval at the Town Board meeting.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest. Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the appointment of Trustees __________ and ___________ to
the Local Marketing District Board interview panel.
Page 1
FINANCE Report
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Steve McFarland – Finance Officer
Date: October 14, 2014
RE: Single Audit Report
Background:
Town staff and the Town auditors, CliftonLarsenAllen (CLA), annually complete a
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR is completed and
submitted to appropriate authorities (Government Finance Officers Association, Office
of the State Auditor) by June 30th of each year.
When the Town expends more than $500,000 of federal monies (grants) in a calendar
year, the Town is also required to file a Single Audit (OMB Circular A-133). The Single
Audit can be filed at the same time as the CAFR, but is not required to be filed until
September 30th. For 2013, staff and CLA determined that the extra time was needed to
complete the analysis, most of which resulted from the September 2013 Flood.
Rather than duplicate the information provided in the Audit Committee minutes dated
September 26, 2014, staff would ask that the Board of Trustees refer to said minutes
found elsewhere in this Board packet. A cursory summary is as follows:
The Town was found to be in compliance with required auditing standards, and a clean
opinion was issued. The SA discusses the Federal Awards granted the Town in 2013,
and lists 3 findings of which staff listed corrective action steps. None of the findings
rose to the level of material weakness. The SA has been filed with the appropriate
agencies and the Town is in compliance. Following this presentation, staff will include
the SA on the Town website along with the CAFR.
The Management Letter was issued with the SA, and is intended solely for the use and
digestion of the Town Board and management. The Letter discusses two minor areas
where controls may be improved upon.
Page 2
FINANCE Report
Following discussion of the above items, the Audit Committee discussed the
relationship between the Town and CLA, and decided to recommend engaging CLA for
year 3 of their 5 1-year bids. Staff and the Audit Committee believe that the best way to
manage this process will be for staff to submit CLA’s engagement letter for the 2014
CAFR as part of that Board meeting’s consent agenda, at the time when CLA submits
the engagement letter (probably December 2014).
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
N/A
Sample Motion:
N/A
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
FEDERAL AWARDS REPORT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE
SINGLE AUDIT ACT AND OMB CIRCULAR A-133
December 31, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Independent Auditors’ Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters
Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in
Accordance with Government Auditing Standards ........................................................... 1
Independent Auditors’ Report on Compliance with Requirements
That Could Have a Direct and Material Effect on Each Major Federal
Program, on Internal Control Over Compliance, and on the
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards in Accordance
with OMB Circular A-133 ...................................................................................................... 3
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ............................................................................... 6
Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ................................................................ 7
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs ................................................................................ 8
Summary Schedule of Prior Year Findings ................................................................................. 13
1
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED
ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
Board of Trustees
Town of Estes Park
Estes Park, Colorado
We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United
States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government
Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial
statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the discretely presented
component unit, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Town of
Estes Park, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2013, and the related notes to the
financial statements, which collectively comprise the Town of Estes Park’s basic financial
statements, and have issued our report thereon dated June 19, 2014.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the Town of
Estes Park's internal control over financial reporting (internal control) to determine the audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions
on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the
effectiveness of the Town of Estes Park’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an
opinion on the effectiveness of the Town of Estes Park’s internal control.
A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow
management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to
prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a
deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable
possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented,
or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a
combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet
important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.
Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph
of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be
material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or
significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. Given these limitations, during our
audit, we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material
weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. We did
identify a deficiency in internal control, described as 2013-001 in the accompanying schedule of
findings and questioned costs, that we consider to be a significant deficiency.
An independent member of Nexia International
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
Board of Trustees
Town of Estes Park
2
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Town of Estes Park's financial
statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with
certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with
which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement
amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an
objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our
tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported
under Government Auditing Standards.
The Town of Estes Park’s Response to Finding
The Town of Estes Park’s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the
accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. The Town of Estes Park’s response
was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements
and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it.
Purpose of this Report
The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and
compliance and the result of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of
the entity’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit
performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the entity’s
internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other
purpose.
a
Greenwood Village, Colorado
June 19, 2014
3
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS
THAT COULD HAVE A DIRECT AND MATERIAL EFFECT ON EACH MAJOR
FEDERAL PROGRAM, ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE, AND ON
THE SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH OMB CIRCULAR A-133
Board of Trustees
Town of Estes Park
Estes Park, Colorado
Report on Compliance for the Major Federal Program
We have audited the Town of Estes Park’s compliance with the types of compliance
requirements described in the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that could have a
direct and material effect on the Town of Estes Park’s major federal program for the year ended
December 31, 2013. The Town of Estes Park’s major federal program is identified in the
summary of auditors’ results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned
costs.
Management’s Responsibility
Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grants applicable to its federal programs.
Auditors’ Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance for the Town of Estes Park’s major
federal program based on our audit of the types of compliance requirements referred to above.
We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally
accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained
in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and
OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. Those
standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements
referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program
occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Town of Estes
Park’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances.
We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion on compliance for the
major federal program. However, our audit does not provide a legal determination of Town of
Estes Park’s compliance.
Opinion on the Major Federal Program
In our opinion, the Town of Estes Park complied, in all material respects, with the types of
compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on its
major federal program for the year ended December 31, 2013.
An independent member of Nexia International
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
Board of Trustees
Town of Estes Park Town of Estes Park
4
Other Matters
The results of our auditing procedures disclosed instances of noncompliance, which are
required to be reported in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and which are described in the
accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs as items 2013-002 and 2013-003. Our
opinion on the major federal program is not modified with respect to these matters.
The Town of Estes Park’s response to the noncompliance findings identified in our audit are
described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. The Town of Estes
Park’s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of compliance
and, accordingly, we express no opinion on the response.
Report on Internal Control Over Compliance
Management of the Town of Estes Park is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective
internal control over compliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above. In
planning and performing our audit of compliance, we considered the Town of Estes Park’s
internal control over compliance with the types of requirements that could have a direct and
material effect on each major federal program to determine the auditing procedures that are
appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing an opinion on compliance for
each major federal program and to test and report on internal control over compliance in
accordance with OMB Circular A-133, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the
effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on
the effectiveness of the Town of Estes Park’s internal control over compliance.
A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control
over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of
compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal
control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over
compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type
of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and
corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a
deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of
compliance requirement of a federal program that is less severe than a material weakness in
internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with
governance.
Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in
the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal
control over compliance that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and
therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. We
did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be
material weaknesses. However, we identified certain deficiencies in internal control over
compliance, as described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs as
items 2013-002 and 2013-003, that we consider to be significant deficiencies.
The Town of Estes Park’s response to the internal control over compliance findings identified in
our audit are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. The
Town of Estes Park’s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the
audit of compliance and, accordingly, we express no opinion on the response.
Board of Trustees
Town of Estes Park Town of Estes Park
5
The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of
our testing of internal control over compliance and the result of that testing based on the
requirements of OMB Circular A-133. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other
purpose.
Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by OMB Circular A-133
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type
activities, the discretely presented component unit, each major fund, and the aggregate
remaining fund information of the Town of Estes Park as of and for the year ended December
31, 2013, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the
Town of Estes Park’s basic financial statements. We issued our report thereon dated June 19,
2014, which contained unmodified opinions on those financial statements. Our audit was
conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively
comprise the basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal
awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133 and
is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of
management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other
records used to prepare the basic financial statements. The information has been subjected to
the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and certain additional
procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying
accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic
financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the schedule of
expenditures of federal awards is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic
financial statements as a whole.
a
Greenwood Village, Colorado
September 24, 2014
(except for the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards, as to which the date is June 19, 2014)
Federal Grantor/Pass-through Federal CFDA
Grantor Program Title Number Expenditures
U.S. Department of Justice
Direct Programs:
Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program 16.607 719$
Passed through Colorado Department of Public Safety
Division of Criminal Justice:
Juvenile Accountability Block Grant 16.523 8,538
Subtotal 9,257
U.S. Department of Transportation
Direct Programs:
Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in the Parks 20.520 271,227
Passed through Colorado Department of Transportation:
Highway Planning and Construction 20.205 236,120
State and Community Highway Safety 20.600 3,900
Subtotal 511,247
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Passed through Colorado Department of Public Safety
Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management:
Disaster Grants - Public Assistance
(Presidentially Declared Emergency) 97.036 610,855
Subtotal 610,855
Total Federal Awards 1,131,359$
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
See notes to schedule of expenditures of federal awards.
6
NOTE 1: BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards includes the federal grant activity
of the Town of Estes Park, and is presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The information in
this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133,Audits of
States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations.Therefore, some amounts presented in
this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial
statements.
NOTES TO SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
December 31, 2013
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
7
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
8
Section I—Summary of Auditors’ Results
Financial Statements
Type of auditors’ report issued: Unmodified
Internal control over financial reporting:
Material weakness(es) identified? yes no
Significant deficiency(ies) identified that are not
considered to be material weaknesses? yes none reported
Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? yes no
Federal Awards
Internal control over major programs:
Material weakness(es) identified? yes no
Significant deficiency (ies) identified that are not
considered to be material weakness(es)? yes none reported
Type of auditors’ report issued on compliance
for major program: Unmodified
Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be
reported in accordance with Section 510(a) of
Circular A-133? yes no
Identification of major programs:
CFDA Number(s) Name of Federal Program or Cluster
97.036 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disaster)
Dollar threshold used to distinguish between
type A and type B programs: $300,000
Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee? yes no
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
9
PART II–FINDINGS RELATED TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Finding 2013-001 Grant Receivables and Revenues
Significant Deficiency
Criteria: The Town of Estes Park (the Town) is required to track and maintain a
general ledger to account for grant related expenditures, receivables,
unearned revenue and revenues.
Condition: During our audit procedures performed over grant revenues, we noted the
Town did not account for or record all of the receivables, unearned
revenue and revenues for grant related expenditures incurred during
fiscal year 2013 surrounding the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) reimbursement grant. For certain projects, we also noted
the Town recorded grant revenue in excess of the federal reimbursement
threshold.
Cause: The Town was unaware expenditures were incurred for select projects
associated with the FEMA reimbursement grant.
Effect: The Town’s grant receivables were misstated, with corresponding
misstatements to either revenue or deferred revenue. As a result, we
proposed and the Town recorded adjustments of $112,172, $350,134 and
$33,014 in the General Fund, Light and Power Fund and Water Fund,
respectively.
Recommendation: We recommend the Town review and amend its existing procedures to
more accurately track grant expenditures and adjust for the related
receivables, unearned revenue and revenues when expenditures are
incurred.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action:
Actions Planned in Response to Finding: The Town will review and
accurately track grant related expenditures to ensure all grant related
transactions are properly recorded in the Town’s general ledger.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
10
PART III–FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Finding 2013-002 CFDA 97.036 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disaster)
Department of Homeland Security
Passed through Colorado Department of Public Safety
Allowable Activities and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles
Significant Deficiency, Noncompliance
Criteria: Under the FEMA program, equipment usage is restricted to eligible direct
costs for Town owned equipment used to perform eligible work to
reasonable rates that are established under State guidelines. Additionally,
duplicate expenditures are not allowed under the grant.
Condition: During our testing of non-payroll grant related expenditures, we selected
17 charges for equipment usage. For ten of the selections, we were able
to agree the charges to a summary schedule (Force Labor Equipment
spreadsheet) prepared by management. While such schedule was
prepared with the assistance of a FEMA representative, we were unable
to obtain documentation initiated by the equipment operated to verify
either that the equipment was used for the respective project, or that the
equipment was used for the number of hours indicated. Additionally,
during our testing over forty general disbursement transactions, we noted
one duplicate transaction included in the expenditure population.
Cause: The Town was unexpectedly impacted by floods in September 2013. The
equipment charges in question are related to the Town’s response to the
flooding and related cleanup and repair efforts. The Town’s existing
procedures were insufficient under the circumstances, as operations
personnel were unaware of the various documentation requirements at
the time of equipment usage, and finance personnel were unable to
accumulate sufficient documentation after the fact.
Effect: Invalid or undocumented equipment charges could be included in a
reimbursement request for a FEMA project.
Questioned Costs: $512, related to the duplicate transaction included in the expenditure
population.
Recommendation: We recommend the Town review and amend its processes to ensure all
equipment usage and general disbursements to be reimbursed under the
FEMA program is adequately documented. Documentation should include
the equipment used, number of hours, date of usage, description of the
related project, equipment operator and review and approval by the
operator’s supervisor. We also recommend the Town work with FEMA
prior to submitting its request for reimbursement, to verify that equipment
charges are adequately documented to ensure reimbursement for all
eligible expenditures.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
11
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions:
Actions Planned in Response to Finding: The Town is currently in the
process of reviewing and revising its financial policies and procedures.
The Town will specifically amend its process to ensure all equipment
usage and general disbursements will be adequately documented under
Federal disaster programs (ex: FEMA). Documentation will include
equipment used, number of hours, date of usage, description of the
related project, equipment operator and review and approval by the
operator's supervisor. The Town will work with Federal disaster agencies
(ex: FEMA) prior to submitting its request for reimbursement, to verify that
equipment charges are adequately documented to ensure reimbursement
for all eligible expenditures.
Responsible Party: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Planned Completion Date for Corrective Action Plan: December 31, 2014
Finding 2013-003 CFDA 97.036 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disaster)
Department of Homeland Security
Passed through Colorado Department of Public Safety
Allowable Activities and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles
Significant Deficiency, Noncompliance
Criteria: Straight- or regular-time salaries and benefits of the Town’s permanently
employed personnel are not eligible in calculating the cost of eligible work
for emergency protective services or debris removal. Only overtime hours
are eligible for such projects.
Condition: During our testing of 40 payroll transactions, we noted three transactions
for which regular salaries of permanently employed personnel were
charged to an emergency protective services project.
Cause: The Town was unexpectedly impacted by floods in September 2013. The
payroll charges in question are related to the Town’s response to the
flooding and related cleanup and repair efforts. The Town’s existing
procedures were insufficient under the circumstances, to ensure only
eligible expenditures were charged to the grants. In addition, there seems
to be confusion as to which eligible projects the Town may charge
straight- or regular-time salaries and benefits, versus those where only
overtime hours are eligible.
Effect: Ineligible payroll expenditures could be reimbursed for amounts that are
not eligible for reimbursement.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
12
Questioned Costs: $448.
Recommendation: We recommend the Town review and amend its processes to ensure only
eligible expenditures are charged to a grant. We also recommend the
Town work with FEMA prior to submitting its request for reimbursement,
to verify that all payroll charges are valid and not inappropriately
submitted for reimbursement.
Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions:
Actions Planned in Response to Finding: As part of reviewing and
revising its financial policies and procedures, the Town will review and
amend processes to ensure that only eligible expenditures are charged to
a grant. The Town will work with Federal disaster agencies (ex: FEMA)
prior to submitting its request for reimbursement, to verify that all payroll
charges are valid and not inappropriately submitted for reimbursement.
Responsible Party: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Planned Completion Date for Corrective Action Plan: December 31, 2014
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR YEAR FINDINGS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
13
PART II—FINDINGS RELATED TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Finding 2012-001 Claims Liability
Material Weakness
Summary: During our testing, we noted the Town had not recognized a liability for
IBNR claims as of December 31, 2012, as the Town was unaware of the
requirement to report a liability for its IBNR medical claims.
Status: Implemented.
Finding 2012-002 Debt Service Reserves
Material Weakness
Summary: The Town is required to establish and maintain a debt service reserve.
During our testing in the prior year, we noted the Town had not previously
established and maintained the debt service and operations and
maintenance reserves, as required by the respective debt agreements
described above.
Status: Implemented.
Finding 2012-003 Capital Assets
Significant Deficiency
Summary: The Town’s capital asset listing had not been reviewed in detail for a
number of years to identify and remove those assets that had either been
disposed or that no longer met the Town’s capitalization threshold
(recently increased to $5,000 per asset).
Status: Implemented.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR YEAR FINDINGS
Year Ended December 31, 2013
14
Finding 2012-004 Financial Statement Preparation
Significant Deficiency
Summary: In compiling the Town’s financial statements in the prior year, we were
required to identify, calculate and record certain information, as follows:
Assigned fund balance related to expenditures in excess of
revenues in the General Fund’s 2013 approved budget
Required debt service reserves of the utility funds.
Liabilities related to the Town’s IBNR claims.
Correction of grant revenue at the government-wide level (in the
statement of activities).
Allocation of net position and change in net position of the internal
service funds to governmental activities and business-type
activities.
Status: Implemented.
Larimer County Issue 1AContinue Protecting Our Open Spaces
The Help Preserve Open Spaces Storyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S899H6exUsw
AccomplishmentsHermit Park Open Space
AccomplishmentsAdditions to HorsetoothMountain Park
AccomplishmentsRed Mountain Open Space
AccomplishmentsAmerican Legion PropertyChilders / Henning Conservation Easement
AccomplishmentsBikle and Knoll - Willows
AccomplishmentsEnos Mills Conservation EasementHomer Rouse Memorial Trail
AccomplishmentsLake Estes TrailLion Gulch Trailhead
AccomplishmentsLily Lake Water and Recreation RightsLily Lake/Roessler
AccomplishmentsSmitherman Conservation EasementRed Tail Ridge
AccomplishmentsDevil’s Backbone
AccomplishmentsSylvan Dale Easements
Citizen Values Toward Open SpaceLarimer County Citizen Survey (2013)When asked to list “the top three to five things Larimer County should focus on in the future,” protection of open spaces was seen as the single most important concern. Larimer County Plug In To Nature (2012)Parents in Larimer County would like their children to spend more time outdoors. Parents feel that mountains, trails, forests and water resources have the highest value for connecting families to nature.
Economic Benefits of Open Space*A major component in Quality of Life indices A survey of high-tech workers showed that a job’s attractiveness increases by 33 percent in communities with a high quality of life.Enhanced property valueA conservative estimate finds that property adjacent to natural areas and open spaces adds $750,000 - $3,000,000 each year in Larimer County property tax revenue. Visitor SpendingVisitor spending attributable to open space is $4.2 to $5.6 million annually.* From “Our Lands Our Future Final Report”, Oct. 2013
Larimer County Issue 1AReferred to ballot by County Commissioners.Measure is result of collaborative work by original HPOS citizens committee, staff, commissioners, and Open Lands Advisory Board.It is a continuationof the existing ¼ of one percent open space sales tax. It is nota new tax; it is nota tax increase.
Key Provisions of Issue 1ASharing between County and cities and towns:50% goes to Larimer County50% is split between the cities and townsaccording to their sales tax generation and population.
Key Provisions of Issue 1ACounty revenue expenditure requirements:35% of revenues must be spent on land acquisition, conservation, and restoration; 50% must be spent on management and improvements (e.g., trails) of open spaces 15% may be spent on either of the above…over the life of the continuation.
Key Provisions of Issue 1AAccountability ProvisionsA citizen’s committee will continue to oversee use of the funds. An annual report must be presented to the public. The funds may not be diverted to any other uses.
Key Provisions of Issue 1A25 year sunset Groceries and prescription drugs are nottaxed.Lands may be purchased from willing sellers only.
Why Now?Current Help Preserve Open Spaces sales tax expires in 2018.Need this time for planning for future conservation and management.Big Thompson River Corridor opportunitiesUpdate of Larimer County Open Lands Master PlanLarimer County is one of fastest growing counties in Colorado.
What Will Issue 1A Do?Larimer County and its cities and towns can continue to:Protect the most important open spaces, natural areas, wildlife habitat, and working farms and ranches in Larimer County.Protect and restore lands along rivers, lakes, and streams.
What Will Issue 1A Do?Larimer County and its cities and towns can continue to:Provide trails and other opportunities for walking, hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, bird watching, and fishing.Keep our open spaces and natural areas well-managed.
How Can I Help?Go to the website:www.HelpPreserveOpenSpaces.org…to donate or volunteer.Tell your friends and neighbors to vote YES on Larimer County Issue 1A!
How Can I Help?And most importantly….
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY!Thank You!Questions?