Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Study Session 2013-11-12 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 12, 2013 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 12th day of November, 2013. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, Norris, and Phipps Attending: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, 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. None. FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS. Town Administrator Lancaster stated that a discussion of the Gooch Trust will be added to the November 26, 2013, Town Board Study Session agenda. He said late, longtime Estes Park resident Charmayne Gooch left a significant amount of money from her estate to be used for a performing arts facility. He explained that the will named the Town of Estes Park as the entity responsible for distribution of these funds. Also added to the November 26th agenda will be a discussion about the Sister Cities program, the organization’s accomplishments over the past ten years, and the level of interest in continuing the program. Due to revisions to the 2014 budget, Sign Code revisions will likely not be addressed in 2014. Strategic Planning will be scheduled for discussion during the second quarter of 2014, following the seating of the new Board. THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDIVISION DEED RESTRICTION ISSUES. Dir. Chilcott provided background on the Neighborhood Attainable Housing program and the advantages and disadvantages that have become evident over time. The Neighborhood is the only subdivision in the Estes Valley that targets entry-level buyers of single-family homes. 17 of the 32 single family residence lots in the subdivision are designated as “attainable” for households earning 100% or less of the Larimer County area median income. Once a home is built on one of these attainable lots, the property becomes “deed restricted” for 30 years. When an owner wants to sell the home, limitations are placed on the selling price and the deed restriction limits the pool of buyers to households earning 100% or less of the area median income, thereby substantially reducing the number of potential buyers. In addition, as a non-subsidized program, there are no soft-second mortgages available to incentivize buyers to purchase a deed restricted property. At this time, there is no provision requiring buyer counseling related to the deed restriction and the limitations on resale price. Staff noted that one or two owners in the subdivision currently have a need to relocate and are having difficulties selling their properties due to the deed restrictions and limitations. Rita Kurelja, Executive Director of the Estes Park Housing Authority (EPHA) stated that through an agreement with the Town, EPHA provides the services to income qualify potential buyers for these deed restricted properties. She and staff suggest considering modifications to the deed restrictions that would raise the income limits to 125% or possibly 150% of the area median income in order to expand the number of buyers in Town Board Study Session – November 12, 2013 – Page 2 . this market, and recommend mandatory buyer education/counseling about deed restrictions, re-sale limitations, and property improvements and modifications. Dir. Chilcott said staff will work with the current owners of the deed restricted properties related to proposed modifications as outlined, taking into consideration the local work force in determining income caps, and will bring specific recommendations forward at the November 26, 2013, Town Board meeting. REVIEW OF 2014 OBJECTIVES. The Town Board’s 2014 Objectives were formally adopted in August. However, in light of the September 2013 flood, some of the objectives may need to be revised or may no longer be feasible. Staff recently reviewed the 2014 Objectives previously adopted and presented proposed revisions based on current circumstances and changes that have been made to the 2014 budget. The recommendations are as follows:  Goals (5-7 years) – No Changes  2014 Board Objectives (1 year time frame) 2. Infrastructure o Begin the construction of the visitor’s center parking structure. Finalize design of the visitor’s center parking structure. o Complete repairs to utilities due to flood damage. 4. Public Safety, Health and Environment o Add stream restoration and redefinition of floodplains. 5. Outstanding Community Services o Revise the Sign Code. o Complete the next phase of the development of Bond Park. 6. Governmental Services and Internal Support o Consider going to the citizens with a sales tax election in 2014 for funding specifically to support streets, infrastructure and other community improvements. Present to the citizens a sales tax proposal at the April municipal election for funding specifically to support streets, infrastructure and other community improvements. 7. Transportation o Complete improvements to Dry Gulch Road. o Complete the flood damage repairs to the Fish Creek corridor. o Complete the flood damage repairs to other Town roads. Town Administrator Lancaster said that both the Sign Code Revisions, Bond Park Projects, and improvements to Dry Gulch Road have been removed from the proposed 2014 budget. He stated that temporary repairs to Fish Creek are underway and noted that the condition of Community Drive is deteriorating due to heavy, large truck traffic from flood recovery efforts. Trustee Koenig requested the addition of a line item to include minor road repairs and maintenance to sustain rating of Town roads, when such maintenance would protect against complete failure of the road. Staff will add the line item requested by Trustee Koenig and bring the revisions to the 2014 Objectives forward at the November 26, 2013, Town Board meeting for adoption. SALES TAX INITIATIVE Town Administrator Lancaster presented information regarding a proposed sales tax initiative which would be placed before the voters in April 2014. The proposal was developed by the Town Leadership Team based on identified unmet and underfunded infrastructure and community needs, public input received at community meetings, survey results, and direction from the Board. Staff’s recommendation is to seek a 1% sales tax that would sunset after 10 years. The funds would be used for pay-as-you-go capital projects that would not incur any borrowing or interest expenses. The increased sales tax would provide an estimated $2 million in revenue annually. Town Administrator Lancaster stated this is a first-draft proposal and welcomed comments from the Board. Town Board Study Session – November 12, 2013 – Page 3 . Recommendations for utilization of the funds are as follows: 60% annually for street repairs and maintenance – allowing for the streets to be raised to, and maintained at, a “fair” quality level. Comments are summarized: installation of fiber optic conduit would tie in with underground utilities; $1.2 million is the annual identified need to reach a stable maintenance program at a “fair” quality level; whether to include or exclude funds currently budgeted for roads to reach the $1.2 million is a budget discussion; and some funds should remain available for grant opportunities that may become available. 12.5% annually for trail continuation and expansion – this category was identified as a high priority by citizens in the community. The additional sales tax revenue in combination with Larimer County Open Space Funds, GoCo Funds, grants, and partnering with the Larimer County and the Estes Valley Recreation and Parks District (EVRPD) would be used to meet trail needs within the community. Comments are summarized: the trail to be addressed is not specific but could include the Big Thompson Trail Project; Fall River, connectivity on the east side of Town, and sidewalks near the school campus and on Moraine Avenue. 25% annually to a Community Center/Senior Center facility – to be defined more specifically once the EVRPD feasibility study results. Comments are summarized: potentially causes confusion by adding community center, museum, senior center; input heard from the citizens was for a community wellness center rather than a senior center; focus on facilities the Town is responsible for and explain connection with EVRPD and community center; make sure project is consistent with EVRPD so not perceived as two different proposals; and don’t make the issue overly complicated. 2.5% Emergency Radio Station – One-Time Expense. Comments are summarized: identified as a need during recent emergency situations; provide a source for information during emergencies such as the recent wildfire and flood; could be utilized during power outages by tuning in on automobile radio; and remove one-time expense and use funds for emergency communication upgrades. Trustee Ericson agreed that all of the proposed items are worthwhile, but cautioned against taking away from the focus on streets, and said adding too many topics will complicate the pitch made to get the sales tax increase approved. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst disagreed and said the proposal shows that the Town is focusing on issues identified by the citizens and staff. Town Administrator Lancaster said other areas of need are not included in the proposal including storm drainage infrastructure, and building maintenance and repair. Town Clerk Williamson provided a high level timeline for the election schedule. She said the April 1, 2014, election would be a mail ballot election and said staff would begin discussions with Larimer County in December to find out the County’s level of interest in helping with the election. She said ballot language would need to be set at the January 28, 2014, Town Board meeting, and a mail ballot election plan would be submitted to the Secretary of State no later than February 5, 2014, for approval. Town Administrator Lancaster suggested that a citizens committee be formed to champion the cause once the Board finalizes the sales tax use package. Trustee Ericson recommended that a separate fund be created for the 1% sales tax dollars so that the funds are not included in the General Fund. Town Administrator Lancaster concurred and said that the funds would be completely segregated from General Fund sales tax revenue. He said the funds would be utilized only in the defined percentages and only for the defined purposes stated in the ballot language. Trustee Ericson noted that the public should be aware of the implications of a “no” vote on the sales tax, not as a scare tactic but to emphasize that the funds are needed to maintain Town streets at an acceptable level. Town Board Study Session – November 12, 2013 – Page 4 . Town Administrator Lancaster said revisions will be made to the proposal per comments heard at the meeting. He publicly thanked the Leadership Team for their work on the sales tax initiative proposal and their focus on meeting the needs of the community as well as what makes sense from an operational standpoint. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 5:30 p.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk